HomeMy WebLinkAbout3190; Rancho Sante Fe Road Bridge Replacement; Rancho Sante Fe Road Bridge Replacement; 2001-03-01ACOLSTICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT
RANCnO SANTA EE ROAD
BRIDQE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
Pref?ared for.
CityofCarlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92009
Prep>ared hy:
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
March 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
TABLE or CONTENTS
Section Page No.
SUMMARY iv
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
2.1 Project Location and Setting 1
2.2 Project Characteristics 4
3.0 NOISE CRITERIA 5
3.1 City of Carlsbad Noise Criteria 5
3.2 County of San Diego Noise Criteria 5
. 3.3 FHWA/Caltrans Noise Criteria 6
4.0 METHODOLOGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION 7
5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 7
6.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS 11
7.0 NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES INCORPORATED
INTO THE PROJECT 13
8.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE 15
9.0 REFERENCES 16
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 Traffic Volume Summary
Attachment 2 SOUND32
March 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
TABLE Of CONTENTS (Continued^
Page No.
LIST or riGURES
Figure 1 Regional Map 2
Figure 2 Vicinity Map 3
Figure 3 Noise Receptor Locations 8
Figure 4 Soundwall Locations 14
LIST or TABLES
Table 1 Noise Abatement Criteria
Hourly A-weighted Average Sound Level - Decibel (dBA) 6
Table 2 Existing Measured Hourly Average Noise Levels
(Site A - Approximately 85 Feet from the Centeriine of
Rancho Santa Fe Road) 9
Table 3 Short-Term Measured Average Noise Level and
Concurrent Traffic Volumes 10
Table 4 Comparison of Existing and Future Peak (Noisiest)
Hour Average Noise Level 11
Table 5 Existing and Future Noise Levels with Various Barrier Heights 13
&,ASSOCUm.lNC.
March 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
SUMAAARY
Existing noise sensitive receivers in the project vicinity include four residences located along
the western portion of the project site along Rancho Santa Fe Road and approximately six
residences located at the intersection of Melrose Drive and Corintia Street. Future noise levels
generated by project traffic from the proposed road widening would exceed the Federal
Highway Administration and California Department of Transportation's noise criteria at the
four homes located along Rancho Santa Fe Road. A noise barrier constructed along the
western right-of-way of Rancho Santa Fe Road, south of Meadowlark Ranch Road, will be
constructed by the City of Carisbad as part of the proposed proj ect to reduce the noise impact
at the single family residences. It is possible that the City of San Marcos will construct this
section of Rancho Santa Fe Road north of Melrose Drive. If the City of San Marcos constructs
this segment, the City of San Marcos would construct the noted noise barrier.
Noise impacts at the remaining existing residences within the proj ect study area and adj acent
land uses would be less than significant. A single family development named the
Meadowlands proj ect is currently under construction at the northwest intersection of Rancho
Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive. As a condition of approval for the Meadowlands project,
noise barriers are to be constructed by the developer at the homes adjacent to Rancho Santa
Fe Road and Melrose Drive. The height and locations of the noise barriers are based on an
acoustical study prepared for that project.
March 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This noise study is provided for the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement
project. The proposed project is located within the City of Carlsbad and City of San Marcos.
The City of Carlsbad is the lead agency for the project. The project would also be federally
funded, therefore, Caltrans is a responsible agency.
This study documents the existing noise level based on noise measurement and modeling.
The future noise levels were calculated based on the proposed project's roadway design and
traffic volume conditions. Noise sensitive receivers were identified and noise barriers have
been evaluated where necessary to achieve applicable noise criteria.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Project Location and Setting
The project site is located near the southeastern portion of the CityofCarlsbad. The regional
project location is depicted in Figure 1 and the project vicinity is shown in Bgure Z. The area
of potential effect associated with the project includes an approximate 450 linear foot
distance along Rancho Santa Fe Road immediately south of Meadowlark Ranch Road. The
engineering design along this 450-foot section of road was completed by the City of San
Marcos as part of a separate road widening project.
Adjacent to the project site are an industrial business park, undeveloped land and
approximately ten residences located within two residential areas. One residential area is
located along the western portion of the site near the intersection of Melrose Drive and
Corintia Street. These residences are located within the City of Carlsbad. The second
residential area consists of four homes located on the west side of Rancho Santa Fe Road
immediately south of Meadowlark Ranch Road. These homes are located within the County
of San Diego. An acoustical study was prepared evaluating noise impacts along this section
of road as part of the City of San Marcos' Rancho Santa Fe Road widening project (RECON
1998).
In addition, lots for single family residences for the Meadowlands project are currently being
graded near the northwest intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive. An
j&A^pCIATES. INC.
March 2001
Ofange
County
Rjversjde County
Fallbrook
Camp
o
Oceanskte
Vista
San
Maicos
Cartsbad
Center
EscondidQ
O
o
-z. DelMar^
LaJoBa
Ran^
Santa Fs
Mha Uesa
Rancho
.Bemanio /
Poway
Ramonal
C3*
^ Samee
SI
r-suites
San Disgo J
Conmado
bnperial
Beach
Lemon
Grow
Katianal
(Stf
aula
Vista
Ot^Mesa
T^iana •ezlco
Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement - Acoustical Assessment Report
Regional Map
FIGURE
BASE MAP SOURCE: USGS 7.5 Minute Series, Rancho Santa Fe Quadrangle r=-2000'
Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement - Acoustical Assessment Report
Vicinity Map
FIGURE
di
m
m'
m
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
acoustical study has been previously prepared assessing noise impacts at these residences as
part of the permit application for the development of the site (Segal 1985).
2.2 Project Characteristics
The City of Carlsbad's proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road improvement and bridge replacement
project would realign and widen approximately 3,500-linear feet of Rancho Santa Fe Road
(S-10) from two lanes to an ultimate six-lane Prime Arterial Roadway from just south of
Questhaven Road to just north of Melrose Drive in northern San Diego County.
li Roadway Realignment
* The proposed widening and realigrmient project is part of the City of Carlsbad's General Plan
to upgrade Rancho Santa Fe Road to meet its designation as a Prime Arterial Roadway. A
m Prime Arterial Roadway has a 126-foot right-of-way containing six travel lanes, bike lanes,
to an 18-foot raised median, sidewalks, curb, and gutter. The new bridge over San Marcos Creek
is planned to accommodate the Prime Arterial Roadway. The bridge replacement project
would involve construction of a new bridge in a location west of the existing bridge. The
existing bridge will be demohshed.
*w The northerly roadway approach for the new bridge (s) will be approximately 2,200 feet long
^ and includes the reconstruction of the La Costa Meadows Drive/Rancho Santa Fe Road
intersection, and reconstruction of approximately 300 feet of La Costa Meadows Drive cast
~ of the intersection. The realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road will be constructed to the full width
— on the east side of the median, with sidewalks, curb and gutter, and street lights from the
• bridge to north of Melrose Drive. The west side of the roadway will be constructed with 32
^ feet of paving adjacent to the median curb.
m
The current alignment of Melrose Drive would be altered to accommodate the proposed
widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road. The Melrose Drive/Rancho Santa Fe Road intersection
would be moved approximately 400 feet to the north of the present intersection. Melrose
^ Drive would be realigned from the Corintia Drive/Melrose Drive intersection where Melrose
^ Drive would extend to the northwest to the realigned Melrose Drive/Rancho Santa Road
intersection. Corintia Drive would be extended cast to connect with the realigned Melrose
"* Drive. The potential exists that the City of San Marcos may construct some improvements.
However, for the purposes of the analysis conducted for this report it is assumed that these
m roadway improvements would be constructed by the City of Carlsbad.
March 2001
m
m
m
m
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project ^ Acoustical Assessment Report
^ 3.0 NOISE CRITERIA
^ This report follows the noise criteria and policies established by the City of Carlsbad, County
^ of San Diego, as well as the CaUfornia Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the
^ Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). These guidelines establish procedures for noise
studies regarding traffic noise prediction, noise analyses and noise abatement criteria.
The proposed project is located within portions of the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego
and City of San Marcos. The City of Carlsbad and the County of San Diego noise criteria are
applied within the applicable local jurisdiction area. Caltrans and FHWA noise criteria are
also used for land uses adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road and where Rancho Santa Fe Road
is the predominant noise source. There are no noise sensitive receivers along the project site
that are located within the City of San Marcos.
The City of Carlsbad describes community noise levels in terms of the Community Noise
Equivalent Level (CNEL). The CNEL is a 24-hour average A-weighted sound level with a ten
decibel (dBA) "penalty" added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., and a five
dBA penalty added to the evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. The five and ten dBA
penalties are applied to account for increased noise sensitivity during the evening and
nighttime hours. The A-weighted scale measures noise levels corresponding to the human
hearing frequency response. All sound levels in this report are A-weighted. Noise levels at
residences immediately adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road were also evaluated in terms of the
peak hour average sound level. The noise peak hour average sound level is the noise
descriptor typically used by the FHWA and Caltrans when evaluating traffic noise.
3.1 City of Carlsbad Noise Criteria
The City of Carlsbad requires that the maximum acceptable exterior noise level for new
residential development shall not exceed a CNEL of 60 dBA.
3.2 County of San Diego Noise Criteria
The County of San Diego's maximum acceptable exterior noise level for new residential
development is that the CNEL should not exceed 60 dBA. However, projects that are
federally funded are to comply with applicable FHWA standards.
March 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
m
m
m
m
m
3.3 FHWA/Caltrans Noise Criteria
The FHWA follows the noise abatement procedures estabhshed in the Code of Federal
Regulations (23 CFR 772). Caltrans also follows the noise abatement procedures as well as
policies established in Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1100.
The FHWA noise abatement criteria categorizes different activities and land uses for the
purposes of assessing noise impacts. Table i shows the FHWA noise abatement criteria. The
criteria are based on the .peak hour (noisiest) average sound level which regularly occurs
during a 24-hour period. The noise abatement criteria for outdoor noise exposure typically
is applied where frequent human use occurs such as swimming pools and common use areas
at multi-family residences and the backyards of single family homes.
TABLE 1
Noise Abatement Criteria
Houriy A-Weighted Average Sound Level - decibel (dBA)
Activity
Category LJh)
— :
Description of Activity Category
A 57
(Exterior)
Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important
public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to
continue to serve its intended purpose.
B 67
(Exterior)
Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels,
hotels, schools, churches, libraries and hospitals.
C 72
(Exterior)
Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above.
D — Undeveloped lands.
E 52
(Interior)
Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals and
auditoriums.
The FHWA considers that a traffic noise impact occurs when the predicted traffic noise levels
with project approach within 1 dBA, or exceed the Noise Abatement Criteria. The FFIWA
specifies that the Noise Abatement Criteria, when approached or exceeded, requires the
consideration of traffic noise abatement measures.
March 2001
ii
m
m
m
ii
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
4.0 METHODOLOGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION
To determine the existing noise levels and potential noise impacts, a 24-hour and short-term
noise measurement were conducted adjacent to the project site. The 24-hour noise
measurement was made to determine the peak hour average noise level associated with traffic
noise from Rancho Santa Fe Road, and to determine the CNEL. Noise modeling was also
conducted using Caltrans'SOUND32 traffic noise prediction model (Caltrans 1983). The
SOUND32 noise model accepts as input the number and t3^es of vehicles on the roadway,
W vehicle speeds, and physical characteristics of the road and topography; as well as receiver and
noise barrier heights and locations. The CALVENO vehicle noise emission levels were used
in the noise model (Caltrans 1987).
The noise measurements were conducted using calibrated Larson-Davis Laboratories Model
700 (S.N. 2132) and Model 712 (S.N. 0231) digital integrating sound level meters. The sound
level meters meet the current American National Standards Institute standard for a Type 1
(Model 700) and Type 2 (Model 712) sound level meters.
Traffic counts were made during the short-term noise measurement. The truck percentage
used in the noise model was 3.52% medium trucks and 1.24% heavy trucks for Rancho Santa
Fe Road. The truck percentage used for Melrose Drive was 1.83% medium trucks and 0.28%
heavy trucks. The truck percentages are based on vehicle mix surveys conducted by the City
of Cadsbad (City of Carlsbad 1995). To verify the input used in the noise model, the same
traffic volume and vehicle composition ratios counted during the noise measurements were
used. The posted speed limit for both Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive is 45 miles
per hour. This speed correlated well with the results of the noise measurement and were used
in the noise modeling for these roads. The modeled values were within 1 dBA of the
measured noise levels which confirms the assumptions used in the noise model.
5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Site A, as depicted onFigureS, was monitored from 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 15, 1997 to
11:00 a.m. on Wednesday, July 16,1997. The primary noise source at the measurement site
is traffic on Rancho Santa Fe Road. Site A was selected to provide an unobstructed view of
the Rancho Santa Fe Road (i. e., no intervening walls, buildings, topography etc.). Table z
depicts the hourly average sound levels during the measurement period at Site A. The peak
(noisiest hour) average noise level was 70 dBA and occurred both during the morning
commute and the evening commute hours.
^rajirtWwM TWiiM^<HHw|>i« ^^^^^
March 2001
Q Noise Measurement Location
O Noise Modeling Receptor
PROJBn'GRADMG SOUItCB
Dojdcm^&^neertn^^gM^^ Scde in Feet
Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement ^Acoustical Assessment Report
. Noise Measurement and Receptor Locations
FIGURE
m
m
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
TABLE 2
Existing Measured Hourly Average Noise Levels
(Site A - Approximately 85 Feet from the Centeriine of Rancho Santa Fe Road)
il
m
m
Day Start Tbiw _
L
7/15/97 11:00 A.M. 68 dBA
12:00 Noon 68 dBA
1:00 P.M. 69 dBA
2:00 P.M. 69 dBA
3:00 P.M. 69 dBA
4:00 P.M. 70 dBA
5:00 P.M. 70 dBA
6:00 P.M. 69 dBA
7:00 P.M. 68 dBA
8:00 P.M. 67 dBA
9:00 P.M. 67 dBA
10:00 P.M. 65 dBA
11:00 P.M. 62 dBA
7/16/97 12:00 Midnight 60 dBA
1:00 A.M. 56 dBA
2:00 A.M. 55 dBA
3:00 A.M. 55 dBA
4:00 A.M. 58 dBA
5:00 A.M. 64 dBA
6:00 A.M. 69 dBA
7:00 A.M. 70 dBA
8:00 A.M. 69 dBA
9:00 A.M. 69 dBA
10:00 A.M. 68 dBA
CNEL 71 dBA
|&A8SOClAm.lKC-^
March 2001
IM
m
m
AM
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project ^ Acoustical Assessment Report
A short-term noise measurement was also conducted at the residential area located at the
northwest intersection of Melrose Drive and Corintia Street (Site B, Figure Sj. The traffic
noise at these residences is primarily associated with Melrose Drive, and to a lesser extent,
Rancho Santa Fe Road. The homes at this area have existing sound walls approximately 5 to
6-feet in height. The noise measurement, conducted approximately 10 feet in front of the
sound walls resulted in an average sound level of 63 dBA. The traffic noise level from Rancho
Santa Fe Road was observed to typically range from 52 to 58 dBA at Site B. Tahle 3 depicts
the results of the noise measurement adjacent to Melrose Drive.
TABLE 3
Short-Term Measured Average Noise Level and Concurrent Traffic Volumes
m Site Description Date/Time I-' Cars
M
B Approximately 90' to center line of Melrose Drive. 7(16/97 63 dBA 119' 1" r
m 10:40-11:00 AM
Notes: ' Equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (time-average sound level)
^ Medium trucks
^ Heavy trucks
" Vehicles on Melrose Drive
The Meadowlands project has been constructed with single family homes adjacent to the
northwest intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive. An acoustical study
prepared for that project identified noise impacts exceeding the City's noise criteria for
approximately 25 residential lots located adjacent to Melrose Drive and Rancho Santa Fe
Road (Segal 1985). Noise barriers were recommended in the acoustical study to mitigate the
noise impact to meet the City's applicable noise criteria at the time the development permit
appHcation was approved (i.e., 65 dBA L^j. This noise level would comply with
FHWA/Caltrans noise criteria. As part of the City's conditions of approval for the
Meadowlands project, the developer has built the noise barriers at the residential lots adjacent
to Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive.
March 2001 10
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
6.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS
To determine future noise levels and the significance of potential noise impacts at land uses
adjacent to the project site, future year 2015 "built" and future year not built noise levels were
calculated using the SOUND32 model. The noise modeling included the future year 2015
traffic information and the physical improvements shown on the preliminary designs for the
road widening and intersection improvements. The future year 2015 "not built" traffic
volumes and existing roadway constituted the "no build" scenario. The future year 2015 built
scenario included the built traffic volumes as well as the proposed roadway improvements.
With implementation of the project, the future peak one-hour average noise level is projected
to reach approximately 71 dBA at the backyards of the residences located along the west side
Rancho Santa Fe Road and south of Meadowlark Ranch Road (Sites 4,5, and 6 on Figure 3).
This noise level would exceed Caltrans/FFIWA noise abatement criteria. These and the
recently constructed Meadowlands project discussed in the previous section, are the only
residences located adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road that are within the project limits. Tahle
4 shows the existing, predicted future "built" and future "not built" peak one-hour average
noise levels at the receivers.
TABLE 4
Comparison of Existing and Future Peak (Noisiest) Hour Average Noise Level
Site Land Use
Approx. Mo.
of Receptors
Existing Noisa Level
(dBA) Future Year 2015 Noisa Level
(dBA)
Site Land Use
Approx. Mo.
of Receptors Measured Calculated Not Built*
Proposad
Project
1 Residential 2 56 60 60
2 Residential 3 58 63 62
3 Residential 3 58 64 64
4 Residential 1 70 72 62
5 Residential 2 70 71 61
6 Residential 1 70 71 61
7 Child Care Center 1 61 67 62
8 Office Lunch Area 1 66 70 66
A Noise Measurement Site 70 70 72 69
B Noise Measurement Site 66 72 69
There is no 532 run for "Not Built."
March 2001 11
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
The future peak hour average noise levei at the residences located along Melrose Drive would
range from approximately 60 to 64 dBA. The future noise levels at these residences would
be similar with or without the proj ect. This noise level would comply with the FHWA noise
abatement criteria.
The peak hour average noise level at the homes located on the west side of Melrose Drive
(Sites 1, 2 and 3 on Figure 3) would be approximately 60 to 64 dBA associated with traffic
noise. This inciudes the noise attenuation associated with the existing five to six-foot high
sound wall at the residences.
The CNEL would be approximately one dBA greater than the peak hour average noise level.
The noise level increase would primarily result from future traffic growth along Melrose
Drive rather than noise impacts associated with the project. As indicated in the preliminary
design plans for the project, Melrose Drive would be aligned farther away from the homes
near the intersection of Melrose Drive and Corintia Street. The future noise level at the
homes located near the intersection would be approximately one dBA lower with the proj ect
as compared to the not built scenario. The noise impact associated with the project at these
homes would be less than significant.
The business industrial park includes several outdoor lunch areas. Most of the lunch areas
are located along the east sides of the buildings which provide noise attenuation from the
traffic noise. However, a lunch area is located on the south side of the southern most
building in the industrial complex. The peak one-hour average noise level at this location
would be approximately 66 dBA. This noise level complies with the FHWA/Caltrans noise
criteria.
A child care facility is located at the business industrial park along La Costa Meadows Drive
east of Rancho Santa Fe Road. The facility is partially shielded from traffic noise by
intervening buildings. The future peak hour average noise level at this location would be
approximately 62 dBA. This noise level would comply with the FHWA/Caltrans noise
criteria.
[& ASSOCIATES. INC.
March 2001 12
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
7.0 NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE
PROJECT
Future noise levels would exceed FFIWA/Caltrans noise criteria at four homes located along
Rancho Santa Fe Road. Preliminary mitigation measures for the affected homes have been
evaluated to provide noise abatement and design information. With an eight-foot high sound
wall located along western right-of-way, the future peak hour average noise level would be
mitigated to 61 to 62 dBA. The location of the proposed noise barrier is depicted on Figure
4. A comparison of the noise reduction provided by various barrier heights is shown in Tahle
5. It should be noted that an eight-foot high sound wall is depicted in the engineering design
plans as part of the City of San Marcos' Rancho Santa Fe Road widening project. The eight-
foot wall height shown in the engineering design plans is based on the acoustical assessment
prepared for the City of San Marcos. Assuming the City of San Marcos constructs this
segment of Rancho Santa Fe Road, the City of San Marcos will construct an eight-foot high
sound wall at these residences. If the City of Carisbad constructs the proposed project first,
the City of Carisbad has committed to constructing the noted sound wall proposed by the
City of San Marcos (City of Carisbad 1998).
TABLE 5
Existing and Future Noise Levels with Various Barrier Heights
(Peak Hour Average Sound Level, dBA)
She Existing
.
Year 2015
She Existing Praposed Project Not Built
With Noise Barrier
She Existing Praposed Project Not Built 6' 8' ID'
4 70 71 72 63 62 61
5 70 71 71 62 61 60
6 70 71 71 62 61 59
The proposed eight-foot high noise barrier identified in this study is subject to review under
FFIWA and Caltrans "reasonable and feasible" criteria. These criteria involve analysis of
economic and engineering considerations to determine if the barrier will be constructed with
Federal funds. The "reasonable" portion of this analysis includes a cost per allowance per
March 2001 13
MEADO\W&ti^OT
Sound Wall
O Receiver Location
PROJECT GRADING SOURCE;
^okker^ngmMnng^ct^^ Scole in Feet
Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment - Acoustical Assessment Report
Sound Wall Location
FIGURE
ii
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
benefitted residence, and has been calculated based on the noise attenuation associated with
an eight-foot high barrier. The calculation is provided in Attachment 3, and indicates that
the cost is $33,000 per benefitted residence. The total reasonable allowance for abatement
is $132,000. Utilizing a $14 per square foot construction cost for a noise barrier results in a
total cost of approximately $53,760 for the noise barrier. The estimated cost of the noise
barrier is less than the reasonable allowance per benefitted residence. Therefore, the cost of
the noise barrier is considered reasonable. Caltrans/FFfWA determination of barrier feasibility
will be constructed as part of the final project design process.
Noise impacts associated with the proposed project would be less than significant at the
existing residences located along Melrose Drive, therefore, mitigation measures are not
proposed by the City at these residences.
8.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE
Noise generated by construction equipment on this project wouid occur with varying
intensities and durations during the different phases of construction: clear and grub,
earthwork, base preparation, paving and cleanup.
Equipment expected to be used would include tractors, backhoes, pavers and other related
equipment. Maximum noise levels at 50 feet range from approximately 75 to 95 dBA for the
type of equipment normally used in a project such as this.
Project construction will comply with applicable local requirements. Also, the contractor
shall comply with ail local sound control and noise level standards, regulations and
ordinances which apply to any work performed pursuant to the contract. Each internal
combustion engine, used for any purpose on the job or related to the job, shall be equipped
with a muffler of a type recommended by the manufacturer. No internal combustion engine
shall be operated on the project without said muffler.
l&MSOCIAireS, INC.
March 2001 15
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
^ 9.0 REFERENCES
^ Linscott Law and Greenspan (LLG), April 15,1998. Year ZOl5 Peak Hour Traffic Forecast
• Volumes (Fax data).
m
^ Cahfornia Department of Transportation (Caltrans), June 1983. User's Instructions for
SOUND3Z (FHWA/CA/TL-83/06).
m
* Cahfornia Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 1987. California Vehicle Noise Emission
^ Levels, FHWA/CA/TL-87/03.
CityofCarlsbad, September, 1995. Noise Guidelines Manual.
«* City of Carisbad, October, 1998. Telephone Conversation hetween Mr. Doug Helming (City of
^ Carlshad) and Mr. jim Harry (DUDEK).
*" Federal Highway Administration (FFiWA), December 1978. FHWA HighvQay Traffic Noise
Prediction Model.
^ County of San Diego, December 17, 1980. San Diego County Noise Element.
RECON, April 29, 1998. Noise Analysis for Rancho Santa Fe Road Imfprovements.
Segal, A., July 1985. Acoustical Analysis Meadovcflands.
March 2001 16
m
m
ATTACriNCNT I
Traffic Volume Summary
(Existing and Future Peak Hour Volumes)
DUDEK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
ProfcMlcmal IcMnj/or Comfilex Prof ect*
IIII llll 11 IIIIIII III tl m § fti Ki fti B I • i t i i I
r."
JHK & Assodates Turning Movement Count Analysis
City: Corlsbad
Intersection of: N/S Street: Rancfio Santa Fe Rood
EAV Street: Melrose Orive
Count Date; Day; Thursday
7/11/96CAM) & 8/08/P6CPM) Weather: Clear
Page 1 of 3
End of 15
rtin. prd,
6:15 AM
6:30 AM
6^46 AM
7fflOAM
7:16 AM
7:30 AM
7J45AM
aoo AM
7:16 AM
8:30 AM
8Mt6AM
9:00 AM
South APDroach ^NB) North Approach (SB)
Hie: CBW19.XLS
Data Collected by T.M. & CM.
Trafflc Control: Signalized
West Approach ^EB) East Approach (WB) IBtnIn Total
left U-Tm Thru Right Peds left U-Trn Thru Right Peds Left U-Trn Thru Riaht Peda Uft U-Tm Thru RloM Peds Vehicles Peds
8
6
14
15
12
13
16
27
28
32
16
26
46
72
113
147
168
186
181
227
201
148
142
206
133
177
13
22
266 44
269 38
236 43
290 43
221
261
41
68
263 116
226 63
200 36
194 42
26
30
36
69
60
70
79
80
123
87
40
63
10
12
23
38
34
35
29
37
39
39
20
26
239
319
486
666
632
636
667
700
769
684
464
646
Max. 16 min. 32 0 227 0 0 0 0 290 116 1 123 1 0 39 1 0 0 0 0 1 769 3 Pk, Hr. Vd. 84 0 794 0 0 0 0 1035 267 1 35? 0 0 140 1 0 0 0 0 1 2672 3 7:16 AM Peak Intersectton Traffic In Pk. Hr. a 2672 Peak Hr. Factor 0.87 8:15 AM Hour Interaection Pdstms In Pk.Hr. -3
3>16PM • 33 0 296 0 0 0 0 187 36 0 55 1 0 26 0 D 0 0 0 0 633 0 4:roPM • 32 0 297 0 0 0 0 199 27 0 60 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 651 0 4:16 PM • 38 0 279 0 0 0 0 172 42-0 64 0 0 29 0 0 D 0 0 0 624 0 4:30PM • 30 0 262 0 0 0 0 160 67 0 61 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 668 0
4:46 PM 43 0 2B0 0 0 0 0 166 59 0 46 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 620 0 6:XPM 35 0 262 0 0 0 0 186 65 0 67 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 627 0
'6:16 PM 34 0 273 0 0 0 0 182 56 0 64 . 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 1 636 1
6:30 PM 29 0 224 0 0 0 0 191 66 2 62 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 696 2 6:46 PM 28 0 224 0 0 0 0 176 76 0 62 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 694 0
^flOPM 30 0 268 0 0 0 0 164 79 0 62 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 619 0
6:15 PM 28 0 212 0 0 0 0 147 68 0 44 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 606 0
6:30 PM 29 0 169 0 0 0 0 160 51 0 47 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 463 0
Max. 15 min. 43 0 297 0 0 0 0 199 79 2 67 1 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 1 661 2
Pk. Hr.Vot. 133 0 1133 0 0 0 0 718 162 0 230 1 0 119 0 0 0 0 0 0 2496 0 330 PM Peak Intersection Trafflc In Pk. Hr. - 2496
4:30 PM Hour Intefsedlon Pdstrns In Pk. Hr. = 0 Peak Hr. Factor 0.96
iiiiiiiliilitifti fti fti fti fti 11 fti 11 tl
o I o J /CO
( .
1'
o ^
0 1 so
-\ r
30 J /AA
son
'i '•
\3
I
II II II II II II 11 II li HI fti fti fti fti Bi fti ii tl Bi
5-
100/ o
0/ ^
«
tbCO ^
laHOlteo —
iof 10
^ /50/ l3o
111
^5
t
tS<f
I-\
i •
m
Attachment 2
iia
m SOUND32
L.i'
DUDEK
&ASSOCIATES
A California Corporatioa
Rancho Santa Fe Road--Existing pm peak
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1
-"73 , 45 , 36 , 45 , 13 , 45
1 Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2
1182 , 45 , 44 , 45 , 15 , 45
1 Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3
, 048 , 45 , 39 , 45 , 14 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4
^ ^Q26 , 45 , 31 , 45 , 11 , 45
^ 1 Rancho Santa Fe Road, 5
• 'iso , 45 , 28 , 45 , 10 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 6
* ^-'76 , 45 , 29 , 45 , 10 , 45
m 1 Rancho Santa Fe Road, 7
2116 , 45 , 78 , 45 , 27 , 45
in Melrose Drive, 8
^ ; :45 , 45 , 6 , 45 , 1 , 45
t-Melrose Drive, 9
fl92 , 45 , 7 , 45 , 1 , 45
^ i Northbound, 1
* ll^l365.,-644,350,01
N,1136.,-328,339,U2
m if 11036. ,-182,338,U3
g It-.945.,-51,336,U4 ^
1SI,778. ,207,336,U5
Ir:Northbound, 2
1 778.,207,336,U5
* N,684.,386,336,U6
ljf,603. ,681,342,07
Wi f ;Northbound, 3
^ li,^603. ,681,342,07
N,584.,946,354,08
^ H'Southbound, 4
4^1350.,-650,350,01
N;1121.,-333,339,02
If™1013.,-178,338,03
if 931. ,-62,336,04
^ M;756.,193,336,05
L - Southbound, 5
^ ft"?756. ,193,336,05
t 660. ,369,335,06
*• N,570. ,697,343,07
I; -Southbound, 6
ij ;570.,697,343,07
m N^550.,952,355,08
L-(North of Melrose) , 7
- i;.:550.,952,355,08
1&/565. ,1175,370,009
N,567. ,1411,380,0010
r .567.,1644,390,0011
IJ568.,1841,400,0012
m N,568.,1999,410,0013
I /Eastbound, 8
lt^-331.,1708,375,Wl
^ ir;-245.,1597,370,W2
N.-96. ,1372,360,W3
^ ;64. ,1157,354,W4
li;209. ,954,350,WW5
N,339. ,768,346,WW6
I 421.,639,344,WW7
m
m
m
N,533.,571,342,WW8
LtljWestbound, 9
IS: -285. ,1736,375,El
N,-215.,1632,370,E2
N,-47.,1396,360,E3
m I 110.,1189,354,E4
g I 258.,981,350,EES
N,392.,775,346,EE6
^ I? :432. ,703,344,EE7
^ ^ Wall, 1,2,0,0
-il2.,685,369,375,Bl
-69.,763,368,374,B2
^ ',865,367,373,B3
i tJ.,939,367,373,B4
100.,963,367,373,B5
m 3)4.,978,367,373,B6
d e i.,1044,366,372,B7
-20.,1164,365,371,B8
-.'77. ,1248, 366, 372, B9
i 1 , 67 ,500
• -^4,1242, 371. ,R1
R, 2 , 67 ,500
« -f 'e, 1146, 370. ,R2
gj 3 , 67 ,500
62,1027,371.,R3
^ E". 4 , 67 ,500
? +,975,372.,R4
R, 5 , 67 ,500
57,927,372.,R5
^ 6 , 67 ,500
6-; 870, 372 . ,R6
R, 7 , 67 ,500
4. •5,767,373. ,R7
4; 8 , 67 ,500
515,1845,401.,R8 '
&^ 9 , 67 ,500
^ 15,1744,395.,R9
10 , 67 ,500
514,1647,390.,RIO
f' ; 11 , 67 ,500
(Lis, 853,359. ,Rll
R, 12 , 67 ,500
f'cl,660,349. ,R12
il 13 , .67 ,500
il 795,435,349.,R13
14 , 67 ,500
«" i 1)21, 324, 350., R14
^ ±i 15 , 67 ,500
1009,-12,345.,A
^ f : 16 , 67 ,500
U)91,-30,345.,R16
•» R, 17 , 67 ,500
?T8,1587,383.,R20
- 18 , 67 ,500
502,1726,389.,R21
R. 19 , 67 ,500
«. H ;»5,1892,402.,R22
M 20 , 67 ,500
92,1012,366. ,B
I i 4.5
m
,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19
7^: tsfg, 10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18, 19
E, 4.5
1 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20
r- 4.5
; . ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20
D, 4.5
5, ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20
ll: 4.5
i ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20
D, 4.5
i--. ,1,2,2,A,5,6,7,20
i,-3
ALL,14
r-:-i
i JL,16
PC output option: 0 ,RSFREX.INP
m
m
m
m
~SOUND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91
fl'ITLE:
.lancho Sanat Fe Road--Existing pm peak
EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS
f'l.
|;SAR
"£:LE
***************************
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
V 1 0.* Bl
? 2 0.* 62
3 0.* B3
~ 4 0.* B4
5 0.* B5
6 0.* B6
7 0.* B7
h 8 0.* B8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
BARRIER DATA
************
^AR
'ELE
BARRIER HEIGHTS
2 3 4 5
BAR
ID LENGTH TYPE
Bl . 89.1 MASONRY
B2 127.2 MASONRY
B3 109.7 MASONRY
B4 26.8 MASONRY
B5 15.5 MASONRY
B6 79.3 MASONRY
B7 144.2 MASONRY
B8 101.5 MASONRY
6.*
6.*
6.*
6.*
6
6
6
6
1 . LEQ (CAL) Lme REC ID DNL PEOPLE LEQ (CAL)
i 1 Rl 67. 500. 62.0
R2
R3 .
67.
67.
500 .
500.
57.7 Re^ 3
57.5
^ 4 R4 67. 500. 57.8 Rte 2.
mm l\5 R5 67. 500. 56.6
^6 R6 67. 500. 55.8 RiL-C I
7 R7 67. 500. 54.9
• :8 R8 67. 500. 70.9
R9 67. 500. 71.1
Ml 10 RIO 67. 500. 71.1
.11 Rll 67. 500. 70.2
mm h2 R12 67. 500. 73.1
43 R13 67. 500. 67.9
^14 R14 67. 500. 60.9 9^"-
69.5 Z^^*- ^ «• f;-5 A 67. 500.
60.9 9^"-
69.5 Z^^*- ^
tx6 R16 67. 500 . 66.0 Ue-^ ^
17 R20 67. 500. 70.4.-^^(^
mm : .-8 R21 67. 500. 69.6 'R.-e*' S"
^iS R22 67. 500. 69.5
20 B 67. 500. 65.6
m
BARRIER TYPE COST
m : 5ERM 0.
MASONRY 36474.
mm .MASONRY/JERSEY 0.
1 CONCRETE 0.
m t •
mm I,. •
-f :
m ^;
">
m l'i
mm T-
m
r
fll li
m n m 1.;
m
m J J
m I ;
m y.
m Li
M
m u
IMT
mm
—
TOTAL COST ^ $ 36000.
iARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION
11111111
CORRESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION
6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6.
ii
Rancho Sanat Fe Road--Future No Build pm peak
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1
1400 , 45 , 52 , 45 , la , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2
1400 , 45 , 52 , 45 , IS , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3
1419 , 45 , 52 , 45 , 18 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4
1962 , 45 , 73 , 45 , 25 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 5
1876 , 45 , 69 , 45 , 24 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 6
1331 , 45 , 51 , 45 , 18 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Pe Road, 7
2800 , 45 , 103 , 45 , 36 , 45
T-Melrose Drive, 8
2203 , 45 , 41 , 45 , 6 , 45
T-Melrose Drive, 9
1713 , 4S , 32 , 45 , 5 , 45
L-Northbound, 1
N,1365.,-644,350,U1
N,1136.,-328,339,U2
N, 1036.,-182,338,U3
N, 945.,-51,336,U4
N,778.,207,336,U5
fl| L-Northbound, 2
g| N,778.,207,336,U5
N,684.,386,336,US
N,603.,681,342,U7
L-Northbound, 3
N,603.,681,342,U7
N, 584.,946,354,U8
L-Southbound, 4
il N,1350.,-650,350,Dl
N,1121.,-333,339,D2
N,1013.,-178,338,D3
N, 931.,-62, 336,D4
N,756.,193,336,D5
L-Southbound, 5
N,756.,193,336,D5
il N,660.,369,335,D6
N,570.,697,343,D7
L-Southbound, 6
Igl N,570.,697,343,D7
N,550.,952,355,D8
^ L-(North of Melrose), 7
N,550.,952,355,D8
N,565.,1175,370,DU9
N,567.,1411,380,DUlO
* N,567.,1644,390,DDll
^ N,568.,1841,400,DU12
N,568.,1999,410,DU13
IP* L-Eastbound, 8
N,-331.,1708,375,Wl
tm
N,-245.,1597,370,W2
N,-96.,1372,360,W3
m
N,64.,1157,354,W4
N,209.,954,350,WW5
N,339.,768,346,WW6 ^ N,421.,639,344,WW7
m
m
m
m
K,533 . ,571,342,WW8
L-Westbound, 9
N,-285 . ,1736,375,El
N,-215.,1632,370,E2
N,-47. ,1396,360,E3
N,110.,1189,354,E4
N,258.,981,350,EES
N,392.,775,346,EE6
N,432 . ,703,344,EE7
B-Wall, 1,2, 0 ,0
-112., 685,369,375,Bl
-69 . ,763,368,374,B2
7.,865,367,373,B3
88.,939,367,373,B4
100.,963,367,373,65
104.,978,367,373,86
60.,1044,366,372,B7
-20.,1164,365,371,B8
-77.,1248,366,372,89
R, 1 , 67 ,500
-84,1242,371.,R1
R, 2 , 67 ,500
-16,1146,370.,R2
R, 3 , 67 ,500
62,1027,371.,R3
R, 4 , 67 ,500
89,975,372.,R4
R, 5 , 67 ,500
57,927,372.,R5
R, 6 , 67 ,500
0,870,372.,RG
R, 7 , 67 ,500
-75,767,373.,R7
R, 8 , 67 ,500
515,1845,401.,R8
R, 9 , 67 ,500
515,1744,395.,R9
R, 10 , 67 ,500
514,1647,390.,RIO
R, 11 , 67 ,500
645,853,359.,Rll
R, 12 , 67 ,500
*• 641,660,349.,R12
R, 13 , 67 ,500
795,435,349.,R13
R, 14 , 67 ,500
1021,324,350.,R14
R, 15 , 67 ,500
1009,-12,345.,R15
R, 16 , 67 ,500
1091,-30,345.,R16
R, 17 , 67 ,500
508,1587,383.,R20
R, 18 , 67 ,500
502,1726,389.,R21
R, 19 , 67 ,500
505,1892,402.,R22
R, 20 , 67 ,500
96,1013,366.,B
D, 4.5
m
m
m
6 ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19
D, 4.5
7 ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19
D, 4.5
1 ,1,2,3,4,5,5,7,20
D, 4.5
2 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20
D, 4.5
3 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20
D, 4.5
4 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20
D, 4.5
5 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20
C,C
m
m
SOUND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91
TITLE;
Rancho Sanat Fe Road--Future No Build pm peak
EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS
BAR
ELE 0 1 2 3 4 5
1 0,
*•
Bl
IM 2 0, * B2
3 0. * B3
4 0, * B4
5 0. * 85
6 0, * B6
7 0. * B7
8 0, * 88
BARRIER DATA
ir***********
BAR
ELE
BARRIER HEIGHTS
2 3 4 5
BAR
ID LENGTH TYPE
1 6 * Bl 89 .1 MASONRY
2 6. * B2 127 .2 MASONRY
3 6. * B3 109. .7 MASONRY
m 4 6 B4 26. .8 MASONRY
m 5 6. * B5 15, .5 MASONRY
6 6 86 79. ,3 MASONRY
m 7 6. * B7 144 , .2 MASONRY
a 6. * B8 101. .5 MASONRY
REC REC ID DNL PEOPLE LEQ(CALi
Rl
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
R7
8 R8
9 R9
10 RIO
11 Rll
12 R12
13 R13
14 R14
15 R15
16 R16
17 R20
18 R21
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500 .
500 .
500 .
69.0
63.8 et. 7
63 .1
63.0 l^iC ~l.
61.2
60.4 (lt<- I
59.4
72.3
72.5
72.5
72.3
75.2
70.3
66.6 n
72.1 (ItC ^
69.7 p.^t. g
71.9 p.<.i, V
71.1 iX^.^ r
19 R22 67. 500. 70.9 C
20 8 67. 500. 72.4 j;^*-'. g
BARRIER TYPE COST
BERM 0-
MASONRY 36474.
MASONRY/JERSEY 0.
CONCRETE 0.
TOTAL COST = $ 36000.
BARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION
11111111
CORRESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION
6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6.
m
m
itancho Santa Fe Road--Future pra peak
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1
• .467 , 45 , 54 , 45 , 19 , 45
a-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2
1419 , 45 , 52 , 45 , 18 , 45
*] Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3
; .943 , 45 , 72 , 45 , 25 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4
f\857 , 45 , 69 , 45 , 24 , 45
Rancho Santa Fe Road, 5
'1362 , 45 , 50 , 45 , 18 , 45
TrMelrose Drive, 6
! .733 , 45 , 32 , 45 , 5 , 45
1 -Melrose Drive, 7
2173 , 45 , 41 , 45 , 6 , 45
I"-Northbound, 1
I .1348.,-714,357,Nl
N,1080.,-358,356,N2
ll?-797. ,25,346,N3
]| 704.,197,342,N4
l!r;618.,442,340,N5
N,592.,576,340,N6
lli^583.,667,342,N7
]|^580.,783,346,N8 s,
N,584.,870,350,N9
in594. ,993,357,N10
I --Northbound, 2
N,594.,993,357,NIO
IVT.629.,1533,382,Nil
i 625.,1635,386,N12
»r;623.,1738,392,N13
N,619.,1941,405,N14
I:621.,2169,420,N15
]|__irSouthbound, 3
N,1292.,-740,372,31
^1031.,-392,356,32
|714.,44,346,33
-Southbound, 4
N,714.,44,346,33
IS ;624.,227,342,34
iLi 558 . ,434,340,35
N,532,,571,341,36
r:.520.,753,346,37
^523 . ,851,350,38
N,533.,994,357,39
^•-Southbound, 5
1- 533.,994,357,39
581.,1537,382,810
N,570.,1641,386,311
I; ' 570, ,1743,392,312
i_i572. ,1941,405,313
N,572.,2170,420,314
J rEastbound, 6
ij-331.,1708,375,Wl
¥, -245. ,1597,370,W2
N,-96.,1372,360,W3
i ' 64.,1157,354,W4
i.\17B. ,1083,354,W5
N,257.,1039,354,W6
I 474.,975,356,W7
L-Westbound, 7
-285.,1736,375,El
-215.,1632,370,E2
• L,-47.,1396,360,E3
N,110. ,1189,354,E4
• r 185.,1136,354,E5
m 1 275.,1084,354,E6
N,480. ,1024,356,E7
- P^=rWall, 1 , 2 , 0 ,0
.12.,685,369,375,Bl
^69. ,763,368,374,B2
^ 7.,865,367,373,B3
f >.,939,367,373,B4
1, jo. ,963,367,373,65
104.,978,367,373,B6
O. ,1044, 366, 371,B7
. iO.,1164,365,371,68
-77.,1248,366,372,B9
^ Proposed Wall, 2,2,0,0
i;. ^2.,1547,378,386,Fl
^7. ,1549, 382, 390,F2
539.,1638,386,394,F3
pi9. ,1740, 392, 400, F4
^ £ :i8 . ,1944, 405, 413, F5
517.,1961,407,415,F6
- 1 , 67 ,500
•. ^4,1242,371. ,R1
R, 2 , 67 ,500
-16,1146,370.,R2
" I 3 , 67 ,500
m bii,1027,371. ,R3
R, 4 , 67 ,500
- g ),975,372.,R4
4i 5 , 67 ,500
57,927,372. ,R5
F^. 6 , 67 ,500
*• I-870, 372. ,R6
m Ri 7 , 67 ,500
-75,767,373.,R7
m (• 8 , 67 ,500
^ 1_5,1845,401.,R8
R, 9 , 67 ,500
J15,1744,395.,R9
• i i 10 , 67 ,500
li 5X4,1647,390.,RIO
B. 11 , 67 ,500
^ L5, 853,359. ,R11
^ ij 12 , 67 ,500
641,660,349.,R12
^ r : 13 , 67 ,500
U»5,435,349. ,R13
R, 14 , 67 ,500
:f'^21,324,350. ,R14
15 , 67 ,500
09,-12,345.,R15
R. 16 , 67 ,500
} •191, -30,345. ,R16
ij 17 , 67 ,500
508,1587,383.,R20
r ; 18 , 67 ,500
^1)2,1726,389.,R21
^ R^ 19 , 67 ,500
5 5,1892,402.,R22
* R, 20 , 67 ,500
96,1013,366.,B
* E 4.5
fll ^ ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19
D, 4.5
— T^^ ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19
r ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20
,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 m E, 4.5
3 ,1,2,3, 4,5,6,7,20
Ml IT" 4.5
m <; ,1,2,3, 4,5,6,7,20
D, 4.5
mm f /1 # 2, 3 , 4,5,6,7,20
K ^ - 3
m mL,i4
K,-1
aiL,16
«w ^l^,C
mm
PC output option: 0
c
y
n
u
f
i.
i': SOUND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91
P'lTLE:
\:ancho Sanat Fe Road--Future pm peak
EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS
***************************
0.*
0.*
0.*
0.*
0.*
Bl
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
Fl
F2
F3
F4
F5
- 1 BARRIER DATA
************
BARRIER HEIGHTS
2 3 4 5
BAR
ID LENGTH TYPE
• 1
3
4
fl5
LJ6
7
' : 8
13
6.*
6.*
6.*
6.*
6.*
6 .*
6.*
6.*
8.*
8.*
8.*
8.*
8.*
Bl 89.1 MASONRY
B2 127.2 MASONRY
B3 109.7 MASONRY
B4 26.8 MASONRY
B5 15.5 MASONRY
B6 79.3 I!4AS0NRY
B7 144.2 MASONRY
BB 101.5 MASONRY
Fl 25.4 MASONRY
F2 89.1 MASONRY
F3 102.2 MASONRY
F4 204.4 MASONRY
F5 27.1 MASONRY
Li 0
1
t^EC REC ID
Li"
DNL PEOPLE LEQ (CAL)
1
^4
5
6
Rl
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
67.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
500.
68.6
63.7
63
62
60
59
^•7 R7 67. 500 . 58.6
m R8 67. 500 . 61.7
R9 67. 500 . 62.2
RIO 67. 500. 62.8
m 11 Rll 67. 500. 72.1
2 R12 67. 500. 72.5
m i 3 R13 67. 500. 68.4 7 14 R14 67. 500. 62.4 7
r\5 R15 67. 500. 68.7 A
IHt lie R16 67. 500. 66.3 6
4:7 R20 67. 500. 62.0 .
mm R21 67. 500. 60.7
R22 67. 500. 60.7
ho B 67. 500. 69.4
iARRIER TYPE
r^ERM
flASONRY
¥lASONRY/JERSEY
CONCRETE
COST
0.
66797.
0.
0.
TOTAL COST = $ 6701^0
"IARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION
,1111111111111
(CORRESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH S^!CTION
,6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8.
b
L.;
t
1
TRAFRC NOISE ANALYSIS PROTOCOL - APPENDIX B
For New Highway Construction Highway Reconstruction Projects
September, 1998
WORKSHEET "A" FOR CALCULATING
REASONABLE ALLOWANCE PER RESIDENCE
PROJECT: Co. Rte. PM.
EA:
PROJECT LOCATION^ Page | of 2_
NOISE BARRIER LD. & LOCATION: .TU C^r^c/ 0"^ ^c/.4w So^k P
PROJECTENGINEER: <t P^^^J .^.R t^^.u. Date:
Base Allowance (1998 Dollars) CJ MSO feArr.^
Update for year 2
$15,000
1) Absolute Noise Levels (Choose One)
69 dBA or less:
70-74 dBA:
75-78 dBA:
More than 78 dBA:
Add $ 2,000
Add $ 4,000
Add $ 6,000
Add $ 8,000
2) "Build" VS Existing Noise Levels (Choose
One)
Less than 3 dBA:
3-7 dBA:
8-11 dBA:
12 dBA or more:
Add$
H OOP
Add $ 2,000
Add $ 4,000
Add $ 6,000
3) Achievable Noise Reduction (Choose One)
Less than 6 dBA:
6-8 dBA:
9-11 dBA:
12 dBA or more:
Add$
Add $ 2,000
Add $ 4,000
Add $ 6,000
4) Either New Construction Or Pre-date 1978?
YES on either one: Add $10,000 y
wm NO on both: Add$ 0
Unmodified Reasonable Allowance Per Residence 33 oo<^
m Continued on Worksheet B
B-2
I..,, I I II il II ftl ii ii
September, t99B
WORKSHEET "B" FOR CALCULATING REASONABLE ALLOWANCE PER RESIDENCE
TOTAL REASONABLE ALLOWANCE FOR
ABATEMENT (AT>
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST x O.S
SUBTRACT BOX 2 FROM BOX 1
• If result is zero or less, STOP. Use the
reasonable allowances per residence In
column (a) above.
• If result Is greater than zero, the amount
is TOTAL ALLOWANCE EXCESS (ET);
continue with columns (d) through (g).
(Boxl)
(Box3)
PROJECT: Co.: Rte: PM:
EA:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION: , , Page ^ of ^ PROJECT: Co.: Rte: PM:
EA:
Page ^ of ^
Don icr^T cuniMPPR*
Page ^ of ^
NOISE
BARRIER I.D.
(From
Worksheet A)
REASONABLE
ALLOWANCE
PER
BENEFITED
RESIDENCE,
Al
(Worksheet A)
(a)
NO. OF
BENEFITTED
RESIDENCES
N,
(b)
REASONABLE
ALLOWANCE
PER NOISE
BARRIER
(A, X N.)
(c)
(c aa X b)
FRACTION OF
TOTAL
REASONABLE
ALLOWANCE
(A,XN,VAT
(d)
(d =c/box1)
REDUCTION OF
REASONABLE
ALLOWANCE
PER NOISE
BARRIER
(e)
(e sd x box 3)
REDUCTION
OF
REASONABLE
ALLOWANCE
PER
BENEFITED
RESIDENCE
(t)
(f =e/b)
MODIFIED
REASONABLE
ALLOWANCE
PER
BENEFITED
RESIDENCE
(Am,)
(9)
(a =a - f)
1 H —
B-3