The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3190; Rancho Sante Fe Road Bridge Replacement; Rancho Sante Fe Road Bridge Replacement; 2000-11-01p ta ta p m p ta p ta p ta ACOUSTICAL ASSESSNENT REPORT RANCnO SANTA EE ROAD BRIDQE REPLACEMENT PROJECT Prepared for: CityofCarlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Carlsbad, California 92009 Prepared hy: 605 Third Street Encinitas, California 92024 Tel: (760) 942-5147 Fax: (760) 632-8710 m ta p k m ta November 2000 IP p p ta p Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad TABLE or CONTENTS Section Page No. SUMMARY iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 P 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 IM 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 p 4.0 METHODOLOGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION 7 ^ 5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 7 P ^ 6.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS 10 7.0 NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT .12 H 8.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE 14 ta 9.0 REFERENCES 15 2 ATTACnMIENTS ta Attachment 1 Traffic Volume Summary 11 Attachment 2 SOUND32 ta H DUDEK &MSOCIATES,Jr>^ November 14.2000 p ta p ii Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad k w ta m m m p ta ta TABLE Of CONTENTS {Continued^ Paee No. LIST or riGLRES Figure 1 Regional Map 2 Figure 2 Vicinity Map 3 Figure 3 Noise Receptor Locations 8 Figure 4 Soundwall Locations 13 LIST or TABLES TABLE 1 Noise Abatement Criteria Hourly A-Weighted Average Sound Level - decibel (dB)^ 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 Levei ..11 TABLE 5 Existing and Future Noise Levels with Various Barrier Heights 14 PI ta November 14,2000 ta p k ta p ta M ta m ta ta p ta Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad SUMMARY 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 Carlsbad as part of the proposed project 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 project study area and adjacent land uses would be less than significant. A single family development named the Meadowlands project is currently under construction at the northwest intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive. As a condition of approvai 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. DUDEK & ASSOCIATES. INC. November 14,2000 p ta p» Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report in City of Carlsbad p ^ 1.0 INTRODUCTION m • This noise study is provided for the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Repiacement 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 wouid also be federally funded, therefore, Caltrans is a responsible agency. m m 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 voiume conditions. Noise sensitive receivers were identified and noise barriers have been evaluated where necessary to achieve applicable noise criteria. 2 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ^ 2.1 Project Location and Setting ta PK The project site is located near the southeastern portion of the City of Carlsbad. The regional project ^ location is depicted in Figure 1 and the project vicinity is shown in Figure Z. The area of potential effect associated with the project includes an approximate 450 linear foot distance along Rancho I* Santa Fe Road immediately south of Meadowlark Ranch Road. The engineering design along this ta 450-foot section of road was completed by the City of San Marcos as part of a separate road widening project. P Adjacent to the project site are an industriai business park, undeveloped iand and approximately ten m residences located within two residential areas. One residential area is located along the western jl 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 J project (RECON 1998). ta In addition, lots for single family residences for the Meadowlands project are currently being graded in near the northwest intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive. An acoustical study has been previously prepared assessing noise impacts at these residences as part of the permit J application for the development of the site (Segai 1985). m ta m l&ASSoaATmmc November 14,2000 Orange County r-SMiles TfiaiH Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Repiacement - 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 ta Hi ta p il ta tar lil <•* PI «» Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad 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 Ouesthaven Road to just north of Melrose Drive in northern San Diego County, p ll Roadway Realignment f* The proposed widening and realignment project is part of the City of Carisbad's General Plan to upgrade Rancho Santa Fe Road to meet its designation as a Prime Arterial Roadway. A Prime Arterial C Roadway has a 126-foot right-of-way containing six travel lanes, bike lanes, 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. 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 p, 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. 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 Pl 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 roadway improvements would be constructed by the City of Carlsbad. ;DUDBK November 14,2000 m pi k m ffl III ff( ilt ffl ffl p» PI p» ffl m* ffl P ta PI Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad 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 California Department ofTransportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). These guidelines establish procedures for noise studies regarding traffic noise prediction, noise analyses and noise abatement criteria. HI 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 ffl within the applicable local jurisdiction area. Caltrans and FHWA noise criteria are also used for land ill uses adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road and where Rancho Santa Fe Road is the predominant noise source. There are no noise sensitive receivers aiong the project site that are located within the City ^' of San Marcos, ffl p» The City of Carlsbad describes community noise levels in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent ff» Level (CNEL). The CNEL is a 24-hour average A-weighted sound level with a ten decibel (dB) "penalty" added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., and a five dB penalty added to the evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. The five and ten dB 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 immediateiy adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road were also evaluated in terms of the peak hour average sound level. The peak hour average sound ievei 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 Carisbad requires that the maximum acceptable exterior noise level for new residential development shail not exceed a CNEL of 60 dB. 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 shouid not exceed 60 dB. However, projects that are federally funded are to comply with applicable FHWA standards. &it^SOCIAm,INC November 14,2000 pi ta p Rancho Santa Fe Road Projea • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad 3.3 FHWA/Caltrans Noise Criteria p ta p p ip p ta ta The FHWA follows the noise abatement procedures established in the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR 772). Caltrans also foiiows the noise abatement procedures as well as poiicies estabhshed 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 1 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 appiied 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 Hourly A-Weighted Average Sound Level - decibel (dB)^ Activity Category Uh) — Description ef Activity Category A 57 (Exterior) 60 (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) 70 (Exterior) Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries and hospitals. C 72 (Exterior) 75 (Exterior) Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above. D __ Undeveloped lands. E 52 (Interior) 55 (Interior) Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals and auditoriums. Either L,Q(h) or l.^(h) (but not both) may be used on a project. lb p ta 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 FHWA specifies that the Noise Abatement Criteria, when approached or exceeded, requires the consideration of traffic noise abatement measures. November 14,2000 ta PI Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report ta City of Carlsbad PI ta p p ta 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 CaItrans'SOUND32 traffic noise prediction model (Caltrans 1983). The SOUND32 noise model accepts as input the number and types of vehicles on the roadway, vehicle speeds, and physical characteristics of the road and topography; as well as receiver and noise barrier heights and locations. The CALVENO vehicie 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. 1^ 2132) and Model 712 (S.N. 023 1) digital integrating sound level meters. The sound level meters meet the current American Nationai Standards Institute standard for a Type 1 (Model 700) and Type 2 (Model 712) sound levei 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 vehicie mix surveys conducted by the City of Carlsbad (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 weli with the results of the noise measurement and were used in the noise modeling for these roads. The modeled values were within 1 dB of the measured noise levels which confirms the assumptions used in the noise model. 5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS Site A, as depicted on Figure 3, 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.). Tahle Z depicts the hourly average sound levels during the measurement period at Site A. The peak (noisiest hour) average noise level was 70 p dB and occurred both during the morning commute and the evening commute hours. il p ta |&ASSOaATBS.PjC. November 14,2000 p ta p k p ll p li k m k ta it • « I iff ii ® Noise J^leasurement LX>CS O Noise Modeling Receptor LocatioiK PROJECT GRAOMG SOURCE: Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement ^^ Acoustical Assessment Report , Noise Measurement and Receptor Locations FIGURE p ii p il Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad ta p p k k k p k p ta p k p ta p • ta TABLE 2 Existing Measured Hourly Average Noise Levels (Site A - Approximately 85 Feet from the Centeriine of Rancho Santa Fe Road) Day Start Time — 7115/97 11:00 A.M. 68 dB 12:00 Noon 68 dB 1:00 P.M. 69 dB 2:00 P.M. 69 dB 3:00 P.M. 69 dB 4:00 P.M. 70 dB 5:00 P.M. 70 dB 6:00 P.M. 63 dB 7:00 P.M. 68 dB 8:00 P.M. 67 dB 9:00 P.M. 67 dB 10:00 P.M. 65 dB 11:00 P.M. 62 dB 7/18/97 12:00 Midnight 60 dB 1:00 A.M. 56 dB 2:00 A.M. 55 dB 3:00 A.M. 55 dB 4:00 A.M. 58 dB 5:00 A.M. 64 dB 6:00 A.M. 69 dB 7:00 A.M. 70 dB 8:00 A.M. 69 dB 9:00 A.M. 69 dB 10:00 A.M. 68 dB CNEL 71 dB z |&ASSOaATES,INC November 14,2000 ta ll Pi ta p k k Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad 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 3). 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 dB. The traffic noise level from Rancho Santa Fe Road was observed to typically range from 52 to 58 dB at Site B. Tahle 3 depicts the results of the noise measurement adjacent to Melrose Drive. P P li Iff ta TABLES Short-Term Measured Average Noise Level and Concurrent Traffic Volumes Site Description Datefrime Cars MT' HV k B Approximately 90' to center line of Melrose Drive. 7/16/97 10:40-11:00 AM 63 dB 119* 1* 1 Notes: ' Equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (time-average sound level) ^ Medium trucks ^ Heavy truclcs " Vehicles on Melrose Drive ta P P The Meadowlands project is currently grading lots for singie 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 (Segai 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 application was approved (i.e., 65 dB 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 is required to construct the noise barriers at the residential lots adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive. 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 DUDEK & ASSOCIATES, INC November 14,2000 10 p iff p k Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad P k 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 weli as the proposed roadway improvements. With implementation of the project, the future peak one-hour average noise level is projected to reach approximately 71 dB 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 Caitrans/FHWA noise abatement criteria. These are the only residences located adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road that are within the project limits. Table 4 shows the existing, predicted future "built" and future "not built" peak one-hour average noise levels at the receivers. pi P TABLE 4 Comparison of Existing and Future Peak (Noisiest) Hour Average Noise Level Existing Noise Level (dB) Future Year 2015 Noise Lovol (dB) Site land Use Approx. No. ol Receptors Measured Calculated Not Built Proposod Project 1 Residential 2 56 60 60 2 Residential 3 58 63 62 3 Residential 3 58 64 64 4 Residential 1 70 72 71 5 Residential 2 70 71 71 6 Residential 1 70 71 71 7 Child Care Center 1 61 64 62 8 Office Lunch Area 1 66 69 66 A Noise Measurement Site 70 70 72 69 B Noise Measurement Site 66 72 69 p DUDEK !&j^$OCIAHES,INa November 14,2000 11 k ta P ii p itt ta p ta P ta Rancho Santa Fe Road Projert • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad The future peak hour average noise level at the residences located along Melrose Drive would range from approximately 60 to 64 dB. The future noise levels at these residences would be similar with or without the project. 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 dB associated with, traffic noise. This includes the noise attenuation associated with the existing five to six-foot high sound wall at the residences. The CNEL would be approximately one dB greater than the peak hour average noise level. The noise level increase wouid 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 r and Corintia Street. The future noise level at the homes located near the intersection would be approximately one dB lower with the project 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 dB. This noise level complies with the FFIWA/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 ievei at this location would be approximately 62 dB. This noise level would comply with the FHWA/Caltrans noise criteria. 7.0 NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT Future noise levels would exceed FHWA/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 dB. 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 Table 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 DUDETC m November 14. 2000 12 m PROJECT GRADING SOURCE: \ Scde in Feet Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement - Acoustical Assessment Report Sound Wail Location FIGURE Rancho Santa Fe Road Projert • Acoustical Assessment Report City of Carlsbad 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 Carlsbad 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, dB) Site Existing ——.—_- — Year 2015 Site Existing Proposed Project Not Buih Witli Noise Barrier Site Existing Proposed Project Not Buih 6' 8" 10' 4 70 71 72 63 62 61 5 70 71 71 62 61 60 6 70 71 71 62 61 59 Pi P tt Noise impacts associated with the proposed project would be less than significant at the existing residences located aiong 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 would 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 wouid include tractors, backhoes, pavers and other related equipment. Maximum noise levels at 50 feet range from approximately 75 to 95 dB for the type of equipment normally used in a project such as this. P DUDIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. ^li^MimnJ Tallinn pfwfiw November 14,2000 14 « Rancho Santa Fe Road Projert • Acoustical Assessment Report PI City of Carlsbad Project construction wiil comply with applicabie local requirements. Also, the contractor shall complywith all 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. 9.0 REFERENCES p Linscott Law and Greenspan (LLG), April 15,1998. Year ZOl^ Peak Hour Traffic Forecast Volumes (Fax data). California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), June 1983. User's Instructtons for SOUND3Z (FHWA/CA/TL-83/06). California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 1987. California Vehicle Noise Emission Levels, FHWA/CA/TL-87/03. City of Carlsbad, September, 1995. Noise Guidelines Manual. CityofCarlsbad, October, 1998. Telephone Conversation betvceen Mr. Doug Helming (CityofCarlsbad) and Mr. Jim Harry (DUDEK). Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), December 1978. FHWA Highway 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 Improvements. Segal, A., July 1985. Acoustical Analysis Meadowlands. DUDEK November 14,2000 15 P ta ta ATTACriMCNT I Traffic Volume Summary (Existing and Future Peak Hour Volumes) ltt ta P DUDEK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Pro/euumal Teonu fm Comphx Projtctt f ff i M 1 iiijrififiritiriii i I ffi li ffl il ti ll JHK & Associates Turning Movement Count Analysis City; Carlsbad Intersection of: N/S Street: Ranctio Santa Fe Rood E/W Street: Melrose Drive Counf Date: Day: Ttiursday 7/n/96(AM)&e/08/96CPM) Weather: Clear Page 1 of 3 File: CB9619.XLS Data Collected by T-M, & CM. Traffic Control: Signalized /Ind of 15 I \mln. prd. / Soutti Aooroac^ [NB) Nortti Aporoadi (SB) WBstAoDroach(EB) East Aooroach (WB) 16 min Total /Ind of 15 I \mln. prd. / Left U-Trn Thru Rlf^t 'eds Left U-Trn Thru Right Peds left U-Trn Thru Riflht Peds left U-Trn Thru Rlohf >eda VahlHat PaH* 6:15 AM e 0 46 0 0 0 0 133 13 0 28 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 239 0 6:30 AM 6 0 72 0 0 0 0 177 22 0 30 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 319 0 6:46 AM 14 0 113 0 0 0 0 266 44 0 36 0>^' 0 23 0 0 D 0 0 0 486 0 7.-00AM 15 0 147 0 0 0 0 269 38 0 69 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 666 0 7:16 AM 12 0 158 0 0 0 0 235 43 0 60 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 632 0 7:30 AM ' 13 0 185 0 0 0 0 290 43 0 70 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 636 0 7:46AM " 16 0 181 0 0 0 0 221 41 1 79 0 0 29 1 0 0 0 0 1 667 3 8:00 AM ' a:15AM ' 27 0 227 0 0 0 0 261 68 0 80 0 0 37 0. 0 0 0 0 0 700 0 8:00 AM ' a:15AM ' 28 0 201 0 0 0 0 263 116 0 123 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 769 0 8:30 AM 32 0 146 0 0 0 0 226 53 0 67 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 684 0 8:45 AM 16 0 142 0 0 0 0 200 36 0 40 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 454 0 9«)AM 26 0 206 0 0 0 0 194 42 0 53 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 646 0 Max. 15 min. 32 0 227 0 0 0 0 290 115 1 123 1 0 39 1 0 0 0 0 1 769 3 Pk. Hr, Vol. 84 0 794 0 0 0 0 ]m 267 1 35? 0 0 140 1 0 0 0 0 1 2672 3 7:16 AM Peak Intersection Traffic In Pk. Hr. - 2672 Peak Hr , Factor 0.87 8:15 AM Hour Intersection Pdstms In Pk. Hr - 3 0.87 3:45 PM • 33 0 296 0 0 0 0 187 36 0 55 1 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 633 0 4:00 PM • 32 0 297 0 0 0 0 199 27 0 60 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 661 0 4:15 PM • 38 0 279 0 0 0 0 172 42 0 64 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 624 0 4:30 PM • 30 0 262 0 0 D 0 160 67 0 61 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 588 0 4^45 PM 43 0 280 0 0 0 0 166 69 0 48 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 620 0 6:00 PM 35 0 262 0 0 0 0 186 55 0 67 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 627 0 '6:15 PM 34 0 273 0 0 0 0 182 66 0 64 . 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 1 636 1 6:30 PM 29 0 224 0 0 0 0 191 68 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 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 594 0 Ji:00 PM 30 0 268 0 0 0 0 164 79 0 62 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 619 0 6:16 PM 28 0 212 0 0 0 0 147 68 0 44 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 506 0 6:30 PM 29 0 169 0 0 0 0 160 61 0 47 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 463 0 Max. 16 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. Vol. 133 0 1133 0 0 0 0 718 162 0 230 1 0 119 0 0 0 0 0 0 2496 0 3:30 PM Peak Intersection Traffic In Pk, Hr. - 2496 PeakHr Factor 0.96 4:30 PM Hour Intersection Pdstrns In Pk, Hr = 0 6 ii ti ffl I) riti ffl if ffl ffl ffi Bl ffi ffl ffl 4 1 I I t I sto 1 eo — /070/ /.fi/O r '^^/ s^o o 1 0 J llbO //330 _ Ol 1 r 8 6?o/430 J ^/eio ^ 30 J I ••J "U 3 v_ yto SOQ ^ uso] QOO , 1 L .._J m 1 mm « Jl-../ JL^t 1 -t V-.-/ ,L» Ji^ ffl ffl ffl ffl 5- 1 lOO/ O |4 0 w \bOO ^ ^ ISOJ l3o Mr 1^1 t t o 4^ TJ M P mi ta ta Attachment 2 SOUND32 ta ta r 1 ta_ DUDEK .SLASSOCIATES A Cali/«rnia Corfiortftion ta- ll ^iancho Santa Fe Road--Existing pm peak T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1 • 73 , 45 , 36 , 45 , 13 , 45 L Ranclio Santa Fe Road, 2 taii82 , 45 , 44 , 45 , 15 , 45 T Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3 P 048 , 45 , 39 , 45 , 14 , 45 if-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4 r-n26 , 45 , 31 , 45 , 11 , 45 Rancho Santa Fe Road, 5 ^750 , 45 , 28 , 45 , 10 , 45 ^-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 6 ^ ''76 , 45 , 29 , 45 , 10 , 45 Rancho Santa Fe Road, 7 ta 2116 , 45 , 78 , 45 , 27 , 45 T Melrose Drive, 8 » 145 , 45 , 6 , 45 , 1 , 45 Hf-Melrose Drive, 9 f-i92 , 45 , 7 , 45 , 1 , 45 ^ Nortlibound, 1 1^1365.,-644,350,Ul •IJ,1136.,-328,339,U2 if ?1036.,-182,338,U3 ^.945.,-51,336,U4 liiJ,778. ,207,336,U5 I--,Northbound, 2 778. ,207,336,U5 ^^,684.,386,336,U6 Tjl,603 . , 681,342,U7 I Northbound, 3 ^W603 . , 681,342,U7 tar,584. ,946,354,U8 K ^Soutfibound, 4 i«|;i350. ,-650,350,Dl ^NT; 1121. ,-333, 339, D2 ia-..1013. ,-178,338,D3 Jl 931.,-62,336,D4 "7756.,193,336,D5 ^-Southbound, 5 lh":756. ,193,336,D5 ta: 660.,369,335,D6 IP,570.,697,343,07 I-Southbound, 6 570.,697,343,D7 ;550. ,952,355,D8 -(North of Melrose), 7 550.,952,355,08 ;565.,1175,370,DU9 ,567.,1411,380,DUlO I .567.,1644,390,DUll ;568.,1841,400,DU12 ,568.,1999,410,DU13 I ^Eastbound, 8 I:-331.,1708,375,Wl K-245. ,1597,370,W2 H,-96.,1372,360,W3 U i64.,1157,354,W4 ^,,'209. ,954,350,WW5 il,339. ,768,346,WW6 r 421.,639,344,WW7 J,533.,571,342,WW8 T^-Westbound, 9 J -285.,1736,375,El \,-215.,1632,370,E2 «tl,-47.,1396,360,E3 I 110.,1189,354,E4 m 258.,981,350,EE5 lil,392.,775,346,EE6 I?:432.,703,344,EE7 pi Wall, 1,2,0,0 -112.,685,369,375,Bl -69. ,763,368,374,B2 ' ,865,367,373,63 ^.J.,939,367,373,34 fftOO.,963,367,373,35 J )4.,978,367,373,36 m 1.,1044,366,372,37 ^20. ,1164,365,371,38 7'77. ,1248,366,372,39 , 1 , 67 ,500 ^4,1242,371. ,R1 2 , 67 ,500 •f'.e,1146,370.,R2 3 , 67 ,500 ta52,1027,371.,R3 m 4 , 67 ,500 td t,975,372.,R4 5 , 67 ,500 ^7,927,372.,R5 i 6 , 67 ,500 *V;870,372.,R6 fci^, 7 , 67 ,500 '5, 767,373 . ,R7 l4i 8 , 67 ,500 ^15,1845,401.,R8 9 , 67 ,500 A .5,1744,3 95. ,R9 Tl; 10 , 67 ,500 %14,1647,390.,RIO i] 11 , 67 ,500 tai,;5, 853,359. ,R11 H^, 12 , 67 ,500 r=1,660,349.,R12 13 , .67 ,500 i7§5,435,349. ,R13 14 , 67 ,500 i ^21,324,350.,R14 i.j 15 , 67 ,500 t009,-12,345. ,A 1 ^ 16 , 67 ,500 :)91,-30,345.,R16 17 , 67 ,500 .^T8,1587,383.,R20 18 , 67 ,500 ^02,1726,389.,R21 . 19 , 67 ,500 B ;I5,1892,402.,R22 20 , 67 ,500 Ita2,1012,366.,3 I ; 4.5 m ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 ^ 4.5 7 ; ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 \, 4.5 •IL ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 T 4.5 «^ . ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 Hp, 4.5 J... ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 4.5 ^- ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 , 4.5 J_- ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 C-, -3 ta^L,14 ^1 JL, 16 ^9 output option: 0 ,RSFREX.INP tal H tai^j.. i ^^^^^ k ta. k ta ^SOUND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91 I H'lTLE: .lancho Sanat Fe Road--Existing pm peak ta EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS k *************************** ta :JAR elLE 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 f PK ' 1 2 0.* 0.* 31 32 ta 3 ^ 4 0.* 0.* 33 34 5 0.* 35 ta f •4 6 0 .* 36 ta f •4 » 7 0.* B7 ta f •4 } 8 0.* 38 ta 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BARRIER DATA ^ ta ************ ta iAR BARRIER HEIGHTS BAR ta ELE 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ID LENGTH TYPE • 1 _ 6.* 31 89.1 MASONRY -2 -6.* 32 127.2 MASONRY 3 -6.* 33 109.7 MASONRY ^4 -6.* 34 26.8 MASONRY 4 r5 -6.* 35 15.5 MASONRY ^ 6 -6.* 36 79.3 MASONRY tan 7 -6 .* 37 144.2 MASONRY :8 -6.* 38 101.5 MASONRY IPLIEC REC ID DNL PEOPLE LEQ(CAL) ta ; 1 Rl 67. 500. 62.0 ^—^ ^ R2 R3 . 67, 67. 500. 500. 57.7 Re<- 3 57.5 ^SS^ R4 67. 500 . 57.8 R^LC -2. [ •: 5 R5 67. 500 . 56.6 ft'"' ^ R6 67. 500. 55.8 R«-C 1 • 7 R7 67. 500. 54.9 • ;8 R8 67. 500. 70.9 ||_; 9 R9 67. 500. 71.1 lio RIO 67. 500. 71.1 •ll Rll 67. 500. 70.2 R12 67. 500. 73 .1 R13 67. 500. 67.9 R14 67. 500. 60.9 ^^-^ i -.s A 67. 500. 69.5 l^*-^ ^ IP J.6 R16 67. 500. 66.0 U^-"- il7 R20 67. 500. 70.4 ^.cc_ V : .8 R21 67. 500. 69 . 6 '^^.t- ta-' il U9 R22 67. 500. 69.5 G •20 B 67. 500. 65.6 \^<^^g ta BARRIER TYPE COST 1^ iERM 0. ^MASONRY 36474. ^MASONRY/JERSEY 0. CONCRETE 0. TOTAL COST - $ 36000. ^ iARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION ta 11111111 -CORRESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. ta ta •4 m id k taj k m jkiancho Santa Fe Road--Future pm peak Tl^Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1 ^ .467 , 45 , 54 , 45 , 19 , 45 .-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2 <*1419 , 45 , 52 , 45 , 18 , 45 •3 -Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3 ^ -943 , 45 , 72 , 45 , 25 , 45 ita-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4 fl857 , 45 , 69 , 45 , 24 , 45 ffl: Rancho Santa Fe Road, 5 ^1362 , 45 , 50 , 45 , 18 , 45 Melrose Drive, 6 ^ .733 , 45 , 32 , 45 , 5 , 45 , -Melrose Drive, 7 ta2173 , 45 , 41 , 45 , 6 , 45 f -Northbound, 1 ta .1348.,-714,357,Nl 1^,1080.,-358,356,N2 B?'797. ,25,346,N3 ^ 70^.,197,34.2,m T;618.,442,340,N5 %,592.,576,340,N6 rf; 583.,667,342,N7 •*;, 580. ,783,346,N8 m,584.,870,350,N9 ir 594.,993,357,NIO ipl Northbound, 2 ^il,594., 993,357,NIO "T-629. ,1533,382,Nil l; 625. ,1635,386,N12 623 . , 1738, 392,N13 taJ,619. ,1941,405,N14 ^ ^ 621.,2169,420,N15 •^i;Southbound, 3 ^•1,1292. ,-740,372,31 F^1031.,-392,356,32 Ji714.,44,346,53 n-Southbound, 4 %.,714. ,44,346,33 Lr;624. ,227,342,34 ta-558.,434,340,35 111,532. ,571,341,36 F,520.,753,346,37 k ,523.,851,350,38 Ei;533.,994,357,39 * • -Southbound, 5 1- 533.,994,357,39 £^581.,1537,382,310 ,570.,1641,386,311 I '570.,1743,392,312 HfU 572 . , 1941,405,313 ||T,572. ,2170,420,314 I rEastbound, 6 ^i-331.,1708,375,Wl .r;-245.,1597,370,W2 -96.,1372,360,W3 1 64.,1157,354,W4 P.;l78. ,1083,354,W5 liiJ,257. ,1039,354,W6 I 474.,975,356,W7 m " m :-Westbound, 7 %, -285.,1736,375,El I, ' -215. ,1632,370,E2 -47.,1396,360,E3 ^,110.,1189,354,E4 r 185.,1136,354,E5 # 275.,1084,354,E6 yi,480. ,1024, 356, E7 "yWall, 1 , 2 , 0 ,0 ^ >12.,685,369,375,31 -69.,763,368,374,32 •ta?,,865,367,373,B3 f:K ,939,367,373,34 ^..JO. ,963,367,373,B5 lta.04.,978,367,373,36 O. ,1044,366,371,37 m 20.,1164,365,371,38 ^77. ,1248,366,372,39 ^-rproposed Wall, 2,2,0,0 J. -2.,1547,378,386,Fl 5^7. ,1549,382,390,F2 •639.,1638,386,394,F3 I'i9. ,1740,392,400,F4 P4 :i8. ,1944, 405, 413, F5 1^17. , 1961, 407, 415, F6 1 , 67 ,500 pi M,1242,371. ,R1 r, 2 , 67 ,500 %16,1146,370. ,R2 I 3 , 67 ,500 ^^2,1027,371. ,R3 4 , 67 ,500 J,975,372.,R4 ! 5 , 67 ,500 57,927,372. ,R5 6 , 67 ,500 870,372.,R6 \'; 7 , 67 ,500 i-r75,767,373.,R7 l- 8 , 67 ,500 '-*._.5,1845,401.,R8 ^, 9 , 67 ,500 T1.5,1744,395. , R9 J , 10 , 67 ,500 rL4,1647,390. ,R10 •S.. 11 , 67 ,500 (! 15,853,359. ,R11 12 , 67 ,500 11^41,660,349. ,R12 r : 13 , 67 ,500 pL.»5, 435,349. ,R13 |1, 14 , 67 ,500 " 021,324,350. ,R14 T ; 15 , 67 ,500 K)09,-12,345.,R15 m, 16 , 67 ,500 } ^31,-30,345.,R16 ta.; 17 , 67 ,500 1^08,1587,383.,R20 F 18 , 67 ,500 k 302,1726,389.,R21 kL^ 19 , 67 ,500 5 5,1892,402.,R22 20 , 67 ,500 y»6,1013,366. ,B r 4.5 ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 4.5 ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 4 4.5 ' ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 tai, 4.5 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 ir 4.5 : ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 J), 4.5 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 -3 jL,14 iiC,-1 4f.L, 16 y>C output option: 0 ,A:RSFRFUT. INP li" ta ^"SOUND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91 J 'ITLE: ".;ancho Sanat Fe Road--Future pm peak EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS *************************** 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 V 1 -0.* 31 m: 2 -0.* 32 ta 3 -0.* B3 r 4 -0.* 34 m ; 5 -0.* 35 ta ^ 7 — 0.* 0.* 36 37 taL ^ -0.* 38 ^ 9 -0.* Fl JUo -0.* F2 ^ i 11 -0. * I: F3 k 12 -0.* F4 r 13 -0.* F5 " 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BARRIER DATA ************ BARRIER HEIGHTS 2 3 4 5 BAR ID LENGTH TYPE 1 2 3 *» 4 • ;5 6 ll 7 i ^ ••I -i " 9 :io .1 ii3 ta 6.* Bl 89.1 MASONRY 6.* 32 127.2 MASONRY 6.* B3 109.7 MASONRY 6.* B4 26.8 MASONRY 6.* 35 15.5 MASONRY 6.* 36 79.3 MASONRY 6.* 37 144.2 MASONRY 6. * 38 101.5 MASONRY 8.* Fl 25.4 MASONRY 8 .* F2 89.1 MASONRY 8.* F3 102.2 MASONRY 8 . * F4 204 .4 MASONRY 8.* F5 27.1 MASONRY 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 'aEC REC ID DNL PEOPLE LEQ (CAL) 67. 67. 67. 67. 67. 67. 500. 500. 500. 500. 500. 500. 68 63 63 62 60 59 ^0 ta_ii 2 ^ 3 to 14 5 •6 ^^17 • :„0 R7 67. 500. 58.6 R8 67. 500. 61.7 R9 67. 500. 62.2 RIO 67. 500. 62.8 Rll 67. 500. 72.1 R12 67. 500. 72.5 R13 67. 500. 68.4 R14 67. 500. 62.4 R15 67. 500. 68.7 R16 67. 500. 66.3 R20 67. 500. 62.0 R21 67. 500. 60.7 R22 67. 500. 60.7 3 67. 500. 69.4 7 A 6 M lARRIER TYPE COST jl, f^ERM 0. l4 ilASONRY 66797. PljlASONRY/JERSEY 0. • CONCRETE 0. TOTAL COST = $ 670q^0. ta CARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION .lllliillllill ^ CORRESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION .6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. £ 9 m I F ••• ta.; k