HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-01-16; City Council; 10458; Planing Commission Noise Subcommittee ReportCIT" OF CARLSBAD — AGEND BILL
ao•H
c
•H
cd
C
O
13
T3<a
S-l
O
cfl
4-J
CD
0) ^
! |
g I
n)"O
s-l
0)
e
CU
CD
4-1
4-1
CO
CO
O§
o
ou
AR# /0,U£
MTG. )-)(*-
nFPT PLN
AAJ7\fr TiTLE: PLANNING COMMISSION NOISE
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT AND
ADMINISTRATIVE NOISE POLICY
DEPT. HD.VV^T:
CITY MGRJS£>_
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that the City
Council review the Report prepared by the Planning Commission
Noise Subcommittee and concur with the use of an interim
administrative noise policy.
ITEM EXPLANATION
As part of the 1988 Planning Commission Goals and Work Plan, the
City Council approved the formation of a Planning Commission
Subcommittee to review the issue of noise. Specifically, the
Subcommittee was charged with three tasks: 1) reformatting and
bringing into consistency the City's existing Noise Element; 2)
making recommendations regarding a complete, future revision of
the Noise Element; and 3) developing an interim policy regarding
transportation corridor noise elements which would be used until
a complete revision of the Noise Element could be done.
The Subcommittee (McFadden, Erwin & Schlehuber) has now
completed its work. It's report, which was reviewed by the
Planning Commission on December 6, 1989, is attached for City
Council review as Exhibit 2.
The only action required by the City Council at this time is to
concur with the use of an administrative noise policy. The
Planning Commission approved the policy 6-1 (Hall). The policy
as revised and approved by the Planning Commission is attached
as Exhibit 1. The major elements of the policy are: 1) requires
a noise study for residential projects with more than four units
which are located within a specified distance of major
transportation corridors (1-5, Highway 78, Circulation Element
roads, the railroad and the airport); 2) requires the exterior
noise level for residential use to be mitigated to 60 dBA CNEL
at specified measurement points; and 3) requires stringent
disclosure to future homeowners impacted by transportation
noise.
Planning Commission discussion focused on three items regarding
the policy: 1) mitigation to 60 CNEL vs. 65 CNEL; 2) mitigation
above the first story; 3) interior mitigation when window
openings are proposed. Regarding these items, the Commission
determined to retain the requirement for mitigation to 60 CNEL
exterior noise level, to delete the requirement for mitigation
above the first story unless usable area (i.e, balconies) are
proposed and allowing windows to be opened as long as the
interior noise level when the windows are closed is mitigated to
45 CNEL and interior forced air circulation is provided.
EXHIBITS
1. Administrative Noise Policy
2. Noise Subcommittee Report w/attachments
3. Letter to Planning Commission from Rick Engineering
4. Letter from Hofman Planning Associates
POUCY NO:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
PAGE 1 OF 2
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE POUCY
According to the Noise Control Act of 1973 Health & Safety Code 46000 et.seq., the Planning
and Zoning Law Government Code 65302(f) and CEQA Public Resources Code 2100 et.seq.,
and until the City of Carlsbad's Noise Element is updated and amended a "Noise" Study shall
be submitted with all discretionary applications for residential projects of five or more dwelling
units within:
1. 2,000 feet from the right-of-way of Interstate 5
2. 1,000 feet from the right-of-way of Highway 78
3. 500 feet from the railroad right-of-way
4. 500 feet from the right-of-way of an existing or future Circulation Element
Roadway as identified on the Carlsbad General Plan
5. Within the McClellan Palomar Airport influence area as depicted on the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan Palomar Airport.
This study shall be prepared by an acoustical professional and document the projected noise
level at buildout of Carlsbad's General Plan and mitigate the projected buildout noise level to
a maximum of 60 dBA CNEL at:
1. Five feet inside the proposed project's property line at six feet above finished
grade level, and
2. Above the first floor/story if usable exterior space is provided.
Interior noise levels shall be mitigated to 45 dBA CNEL when openings to the exterior of the
residence are closed. If openings are provided, mechanical ventilation shall be provided.
If the acoustical study shows that exterior noise levels cannot be mitigated to 60 dBA CNEL
or less, the development should not be approved without the following findings:
1. It shall be the responsibility of the developer of the project to prove to the satisfaction
of the Planning Commission or Design Review Board why it is not feasible to comply
with the 60 dBA CNEL standard.
2. No interior CNEL shall exceed 45 dBA when openings to the exterior are closed.
EXHIBIT "1"
3. The Planning Commission or Design Review Board must find that there are specifically
identified overriding social and economic considerations which warrant approval of the
development even though it does not meet the noise standard.
4. All purchasers of the impacted property shall be notified in writing prior to purchase, and
by deed disclosure in writing, that the property they are purchasing is noise impacted
and does not meet Carlsbad noise standards for residential property.
5. If the acoustical study shows that the exterior mitigated noise level exceeds 65 dBA
CNEL, the development should not be approved.
In addition, the following appropriate mitigations and/or conditions of approval shall be
incorporated into projects:
1. For residential projects near existing or future transportation corridors - Prior to
recordation of the first final tract/parcel map or issuance of building permits, whichever
is first, the owner shall prepare and record a notice that this property may be subject
to impacts from the proposed or existing Transportation Corridor in a manner meeting
the approval of the Planning Director and City Attorney (see Noise, Form #1 attached).
2. For residential projects within 3 miles of McClellan-Palomar Airport as shown on the
August 1988 County of San Diego Noise Control Plan for Palomar Airport - Prior to the
recordation of the first final tract/parcel map or the issuance of residential building
permits, whichever is first, the owner of record of the property within the boundaries of
this tentative tract/parcel map shall prepare and record a notice (see Noise, Form #2
attached) that this property is subject to overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft operating
from Palomar Airport in a manner meeting the approval of the Planning Director and the
City Attorney.
The applicant shall post aircraft noise notification signs in all sales and/or rental offices
associated with the new development. The number and locations of said signs shall
be approved by the Planning Director. (See Noise, Form # 3 attached.)
3. For potential noise generating projects - Prior to approval of any permits, an acoustical
analysis report and appropriate plans shall be submitted describing the noise generation
potential of the proposed project and proposed attenuation measures to assure that an
environment which is free from excessive or harmful noise is achieved and maintained.
The report shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. The
approved attenuation features shall be incorporated into the plans and specifications of
the proposed project.
APPROVED BY:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
arb
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2944
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN ADMINISTRATIVE
NOISE POLICY.
CASE NO: PI 89-6 - NOISE SUBCOMMITTEE WORK PLAN
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission Noise Subcommittee has
completed its work; and
WHEREAS, one of its task was to develop an interim policy
to analyze and mitigate adverse noise on residential projects;
and
WHEREAS, the Subcommittee recommended an Administrative
Policy to become one of the Planning Department policies; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed the policy at
it's meeting of November 15, 1989.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the meeting,
the Commission APPROVES the Administrative Noise
Policy and forwards the report of the Noise
Subcommittee to the City Council for concurrence.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held
on the 15th day of November, 1989, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, Erwin,
McFadden, Holmes and Marcus.
Chairman Hall.
MAT'
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J.^HOLZMZLLER
Planning Director
DISCUSSION ITEM
DECEMBER 6, 1989
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Noise Subcommittee (McFadden, Schlehuber, Erwin)
PI 89-6 - REPORT ON COMPLETION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION NOISE
SUBCOMMITTEE WORK PROGRAM
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2944, APPROVING the Planning
Department Administrative Policy regarding interim noise mitigation measures and forward
the Subcommittee's report to the City Council for concurrence.
n. DISCUSSION
This item has been continued twice from the Planning Commission meetings of September
6 and October 4, 1989 in order to obtain additional input and allow additional
Subcommittee analysis.
The Subcommittee was charged with three tasks. The first task was to develop an interim
noise policy which would be used until a complete revision of the City's Noise Element
could be done. The Subcommittee chose to develop an administrative noise policy to
govern the identification and mitigation of noise impacts on future residential development.
The policy would become a Planning Department Administrative Policy and would be
implemented during the CEQA analysis of any proposed project. A copy of the
Administrative Policy is provided as attachment "A". The major implications of the Policy
are: 1) the requirement for a noise study when the project is located within a specified
distance of a noise source; 2) exterior mitigation to 60 dBA CNEL; and 3) disclosure
requirements.
The second charge of the subcommittee was to reformat and bring into consistency the
City's existing Noise Element. This involved a variety of minor clerical and technical
updates along with reformatting the text. The new reformatted consistency version of the
existing noise element is attached as Exhibit "B". It will be considered and reviewed as
part of the complete General Plan Update which will be coming to the Planning
Commission within the next couple of months.
EXHIBIT W2"
DECEMBER 6, 1989
PLANNING COMMISSION
PAGE TWO
The last charge of the subcommittee was to make potential recommendations to staff for
the complete, future revision of the City's noise element. These recommendations would
be presented to the consultant hired to work with staff to develop a new draft noise
element. These recommendations are based on the subcommittee's review of a variety of
noise elements throughout the state of California and are attached as Exhibit "C".
The only action required by the Planning Commission at this time is the approval of the
Administrative Noise Policy (Exhibit "A"). The subcommittee is recommending approval
of the policy although two items in the policy were not approved unanimously by the
subcommittee members. Subcommittee member Schlehuber does not agree with requiring
the 60 CNEL to be measured immediately above the highest window or door opening in
a dwelling unit. He believes that requiring the 60 CNEL to be met at five feet inside the
proposed project's property line at six feet above finished grade is sufficient providing that
there are no balconies or roof decks making usable space above the first floor level.
Secondly, Mr. Schlehuber feels that while windows impacted by a noise source should be
constructed to reduce the interior noise level to 45 CNEL when closed, the windows
should not be sealed closed and the homeowner should have the option to open the
windows.
Attachments
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2944
2. Administrative Policy Concerning Noise - Exhibit "A"
3. Consistency Version of Existing Noise Element - Exhibit "B"
4. Recommendations for Revised Noise Element - Exhibit "C"
arb
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO
FORM: NOISE 1: 1 of 2
RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE
NOTICE CONCERNING PROXIMITY
OF THE PLANNED OR EXISTING
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR(S)
This Notice Concerning Environmental Impacts is made by
hereinafter referred to as the "Owner" is developer of
certain real property situated in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego,
State of California.
RECITALS
A. The purpose of this notice is to disclose to the fullest extent
possible present and future potential impacts of noise generated by all manner
of vehicles including public and private vehicles which will generate noise and
other environmental impacts. Purchaser acknowledges and accepts these existing
and future impacts and forever waives any and all causes of action and covenants
not to sue the City of Carlsbad, its agents, servants or employees as to any
damages or injuries resulting from said impacts.
B. The Owner is the developer and/or holder of the title to certain real
property in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, California, more fully
described as:
C. The property is located adjacent to the .Transportation
Corridor (hereafter described as corridor) on which transportation vehicles such
as automobiles, trucks, motorcycles and/or vehicles for rail and transit are
proposed to travel.
D. The property has been developed in compliance with City and State
Noise criteria which may include mitigation in the form of setbacks, earthen
berms, masonry walls and/or structure upgrades.
E. Owner has no control over the operations of the corridor including
the types of vehicles, trips and traffic, nor the frequency of the trips.
F. It is the desire of Owner to give notice to any potential purchaser
of the real property of its proximity to the corridor and the fact that purchases
may be subject to the impacts of said proposed transportation corridor.
Noise Form
FORM: NOISE 1: 2 of 2
NOW, THEREFORE, in light of the above Recitals, owner does, for itself, and its
successors and assigns, give the following notice:
1. Owner has and shall develop
Subdivision Tract/Parcel Map (CT/PM -
which approval includes the requirement
development of the property is consistent with the Land Use & Noise Element of
the General Plan of the City of Carlsbad.
the property in accordance with a
_) approved by the City of Carlsbad,
of the City of Carlsbad, that the
2. That Owner has no responsibility or control over the operation of the
corridor, including without limitation, the types or number of vehicles operating
on the corridor.
3. That the vehicle operations on the corridor may create significant
impacts affecting the purchasers, tenants and occupants of the property and that
purchasers, tenants and occupants of the property reside there subject to sight
and sound of vehicle operation.
4. The property shall be held, conveyed, hypothecated, encumbered, leased,
rented, used, occupied and improved subject to this Notice. This Notice shall
run with the property and shall be binding upon all parties having or acquiring
any right, title or interest in the property.
5. The purpose of this notice is to disclose to the fullest extent
possible present and future potential impacts of noise generated by all manner
of vehicles including public and private vehicles which will generate noise and
other environmental impacts. Purchaser acknowledges and accepts these existing
and future impacts and forever waives any and all causes of action and covenants
not to sue the City of Carlsbad, its agents, servants or employees as to any
damages or injuries resulting from said impacts."
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Declaration of Notice of corridor traffic, sight and
sound is made this day of , .
By:
By:
CORPORATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
or
PARTNERSHIP ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
or
INDIVIDUAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
WITNESS my hand and official seal
Notary Public in and for said
County and State
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO
FORM: NOISE 2: 1 of 3
RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE CONCERNING AIRCRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
This Declaration and Notice Concerning Aircraft Environmental Impacts is
made by , hereinafter referred to as the "Owner",
as developer of certain real property situated in the City of Carlsbad, County
of San Diego, State of California.
RECITALS
A. The Owner is the developer and holder of the title to certain real
property in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, California,
more fully described as:
B. The property is located approximately miles from the
McCellan-Palomar Airport, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County (the
"Airport"), operated by the County of San Diego, through which are
conducted certain aircraft operations on and about said Airport and
over real property in the vicinity of the Airport.
C. Owner has no control over the operations of the Airport, including
the types of aircraft, flight, the flight patterns of the aircraft,
nor the frequency of the flights.
D. It is the desire of Owner to give notice to any potential purchaser
of the real property of the air flight operation and the fact that
purchasers may be subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft
operating from the Airport
E. The purpose of this notice is to disclose to the fullest extent
possible present and future potential impacts of noise generated by
all manner of aircraft including public and private aircraft which
will generate noise and other environmental impacts.
Noise Form +2
FORM: NOISE 2: 2 of 3
NOW, THEREFORE, in light of the above Recitals, as developer and owner of
the property, does, for itself, and its successors and assigns, give the
following notice:
1. Owner has and shall develop the property in accordance with
Subdivision Tract Parcel Map (CT/PM- ) approved by the City of
Carlsbad, which approval includes the requirement of the City of
Carlsbad, that the development of the property is consistent with
the Land Use Element and Noise Element of the General Plan of the
City of Carlsbad.
2. That Owner has no responsibility or control over the operation of
the Airport, including without limitation, the types or number of
flight operations, types of aircraft (including jet aircraft), timing
of flight operation, or frequency of flights.
3. That the flight operations to the Airport may create significant
aircraft environmental impacts affecting the purchasers, tenants and
occupants of the property and that purchasers, tenants and occupants
of the property reside there subject to such overflight, sight and
sound.
4. The property shall be held, conveyed, hypothecated, encumbered,
leased, rented, used, occupied and improved subject to this
Declaration and Notice. This Notice shall run with the property and
shall be binding upon all parties having or acquiring any right,
title or interest in the property.
5. The purpose of this notice is to disclose to the fullest extent
possible present and future potential impacts of noise generated by
all manner of aircraft including public and private aircraft which
will generate noise and other environmental impacts.
FORM: NOISE 2: 3 of 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Declaration of Notice of aircraft overflight,
sight and sound is made this day of , 19
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ) ss.
On , 19 , before me, a Notary Public in and for said_County
and State, personally appeared and personally known
to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persons
who executed the within instrument as
President and Secretary, on
behalf of , the
corporation herein named, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed
the within instrument pursuant to its by-laws or a resolution of its Board of
Directors.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said
County and State
FORM: NOISE 3: 1 of 2
AIRCRAFT NOISE IMPACT AREA
New residential development property included within tract(s) and offered
for sale by this office is located approximately mile(s) (north,
south, east, west) of McCellan-Palomar Airport, City of Carlsbad.
The property is within 3 miles of McCellan-Palomar Airport as shown on the
attached map which was prepared using the August 1988 County of San Diego Noise
Control Plan for McCellan-Palomar Airport (see page 2 of this notice). Residents
of this area may frequently see, hear, and have interference of certain
activities by aircraft operating to and or from McCellan-Palomar Airport.
McCellan-Palomar Airport has the following normal hours of operation for
aircraft:
Monday through Saturday:
Sunday:
A Notice Concerning Aircraft Environmental Impacts has been recorded for this
project.
The purpose of this notice is to disclose to the fullest extent possible present
and future potential impacts of noise generated by all manner of aircraft
including public and private aircraft which will generate noise and other
environmental impacts.
For more information, please see your sales office representative at
Noise Form
Form Noise 3 2 of 2
PD Admin Policy
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GENERAL PLAN
NOISE ELEMENT
UPDATED: 1989
EXHIBIT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOE MX
I. INTRODUCTION
A. BACKGROUND IV-1
B. STATE LAW IV-1
C. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ELEMENTS IV-2
II. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND IMPLEMENTING POLICIES
AND ACTION PROGRAMS
1. GENERAL IV-2
2. CIRCULATION IV-3
ROADS IV-3
AIRPORT IV-4
TRAIN IV-4
3. LAND USE IV-5
III. SOURCES OF NOISE
A. CIRCULATION IV-6
ROADS IV-6
AIRPORT IV-7
TRAIN IV-7
B. LAND USE IV-9
C. MOBILE IV-9
IV. NOISE CONTOUR MAP IV-IO
I. INTRODUCTION
A. BACKGROUND
The goal of the Noise Element is to achieve and maintain an
environment which is free from excessive or harmful noise.
The Noise Element
Identifies and maps Noise Contours from sources of noise within
or adjacent to the City of Carlsbad.
Establishes goals and objectives to mitigate these noise
impacts.
Provides policies and action programs to implement these
policies.
B. AUTHORITY-STATE LAW
Section 65302(f) of California's Planning and Zoning Laws requires
a Noise Element which shall identify and appraise noise problems in
the community. The Noise Element shall recognize the guidelines
established by the Office of Noise Control in the State Department
of Health Services and shall analyze and quantify, to the extent
practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and
projected noise levels for all of the following sources:
1. Highways and freeways.
2. Primary arterial and major local streets.
3. Passenger and freight online railroad operations and ground
rapid transit systems.
4. Commercial, general aviation, heliport, helistop, and military
airport operations, aircraft overflights, jet engine test
stands, and all other ground facilities and maintenance
functions related to airport operation.
5. Local industrial plants, including, but not limited to,
railroad classification yards.
6. Other ground stationary noise sources identified by local
agencies as contributing to the community noise environment.
Noise contours shall be shown for all of these sources and stated
in terms of comunity noise equivalent level (CNEL) or day-night
average level (Ldn). The noise contours shall be prepared on the
basis of noise monitoring or following generally accepted noise
modeling techniques for the various sources identified in paragraphs
(1) to (6), inclusive.
IV-1
The noise contours shall be used as a guide for establishing a
pattern of land uses in the Land Use Element that minimizes the
exposure of community residents to excessive noise.
The Noise Element shall include implementation measures and possible
solutions that address existing and foreseeable noise problems, if
any. The adopted Noise Element shall serve as a guideline for
compliance with the state's Noise Insulation Standards.
C. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN
The Noise Element is correlated with the Land Use, Circulation,
Scenic Highways and Housing Elements of the General Plan. The Land
Use Element is related to the Noise Element in that noise can have
a significant impact on land use. The Circulation Element and Scenic
Roadways Elements are related to the Noise Element in that the
majority of the noise created in Carlsbad is created by trains,
planes or automobiles. The Housing Element relates to the Noise
Element by promoting desirable residential environments which buffer
existing and future residents from undesirable noise impacts.
Consistent with state law, it is the policy of the City that the
Noise Element be consistent with all General Plan Elements.
II. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND IMPLEMENTING POLICIES AND ACTION PROGRAMS
1. GENERAL
A. GOAL
Achieve and maintain an environment which is free from
excessive or harmful noise through identification, control and
abatement.
B. OBJECTIVE
To create an ongoing noise identification and control program
consistent with this Noise Element.
C. IMPLEMENTING POLICIES AND ACTION PROGRAMS
C.I The City shall protect the hearing and well being of
Carlsbad's residents by controlling and abating harmful
or undesirable sounds through the planning and regulatory
process.
C.2 The City shall adopt a noise ordinance to prohibit
unwanted and unnecessary sounds of all types within the
community.
C.3 The City shall develop a noise enforcement and regulation
program and consider assigning an existing staff member
IV-2
or creating an administrative position within the City
to be concerned with noise problems.
C.4 The City shall review existing ordinances which relate
to noise control for compatibility with goals and
policies of this Element.
C.5 The City shall enforce building codes to ensure adequate
sound insulation between dwellings and to ensure adequate
sound insulation of interior areas from loud external
noise sources.
C.6 The City shall attempt to control noise primarily at its
source. Where this is not feasible, controls along the
transmission path of the noise shall be encouraged.
C.7 The City shall take into consideration the acceptability
of noise levels in approving or granting a permit or
entitlement for any public or private project.
C.8 The City shall control noise generated through its own
functions and activities.
C.9 The City shall review City operations to make sure that
noise generated by construction, maintenance activities,
and street sweeping has reduced to the lowest possible
1evel.
C.10 The City shall include maximum noise level requirements
in specifications for equipment purchases, construction
contracts, and refuse collection. Where specific noise
levels cannot be set, specification should require that
vendors state maximum noise levels expected to be
produced by their equipment and/or operations.
2. CIRCULATION
ROADS
A. GOAL
Provide a roadway system that does not subject surrounding land
uses to inappropriate noise levels.
B. OBJECTIVE
To design and manage all roadways to maintain acceptable noise
levels.
IV-3
IMPLEMENTING POLICIES AND ACTION PROGRAMS
C.I The City shall take measures to reduce traffic noise on
streets throughout Carlsbad.
C.2 The City shall consider noise impacts in the design of
road systems. Giving special consideration to those road
corridors in scenic or noise sensitive areas.
C.3 The City shall review traffic flow systems and
synchronize signalization, wherever possible to avoid
traffic stops which produce excessive noise, and to
adjust traffic flow to achieve noise levels acceptable
to surrounding areas.
C.4 Develop noise standards for use in reviewing the
construction or improvement of any roadway, railroad,
transit system or noise producing facility.
AIRPORT
A. GOAL
Assure the continued long-term compatibility between the
airport and surrounding land use.
B. OBJECTIVE
To adopt and enforce an airport noise disclosure and control
program that provides noise compatibility.
C. IMPLEMENTING POLICIES AND ACTION PROGRAMS
C.I The City shall encourage the development of compatible
land uses surrounding airport facilities.
C.2 The City shall utilize the noise standards contained in
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Palomar Airport.
TRAINS
A. GOAL
Assure railroad travel through Carlsbad is not disruptive.
B. OBJECTIVE
To develop, maintain and manage mitigation of railroad noise
and vibration.
IV-4
C. IMPLEMENTING POLICY AND ACTION PROGRAM
C.I Develop noise standards for use in reviewing the
construction or improvement of any railroad.
LAND USE
A. GOALS
A.I Develop and maintain industrial/commercial land uses
which do not produce noise impacts.
A.2 Develop and maintain a land use pattern that provides
for noise impact compatibility.
A.3 Control mobile sources of noise to help assure mobile
noise sources do not substantially contribute to the
noise environment.
B. OBJECTIVES
B.I To achieve noise compatibility between
industrial/commercial and surrounding land uses and
achieve an acceptable noise environment in industrial
commercial areas.
B.2 To achieve noise impact compatibility between land uses
through the land use planning/development review process.
B.3 To actively control mobile noise violations.
C. IMPLEMENTING POLICIES AND ACTION PROGRAMS
C.I The City encourages the development of compatible land
uses in areas which are subject to noise hazards.
C.2 The City shall develop specific noise standards for use
in reviewing development in noise sensitive land use
areas.
C.3 The City shall utilize a site plan review process for
all residential or other noise sensitive construction
in areas subject to ambient noise levels in excess of
adopted standards. This site plan review should
incorporate measures for mitigating noise impacts, such
as setbacks, construction of barriers and sound
insulation.
C.4 The City shall enforce the Motor Vehicle Code as it
applies to excessive noise.
IV-5
C.5
C.6
III. SOURCES OF NOISE
Develop noise standards for use in reviewing the
construction or improvement of any noise producing
facility.
Until a permanent noise mitigation ordinance is adopted
to be utilized in the review of residential development
projects impacted by transportation corridors, an
administrative policy shall be adopted. The policy shall
require that a "Noise" Study be submitted with all
discretionary applications for residential projects of
five or more dwellings within:
1. 2,000 feet from the right-of-way of Interstate 5.
2. 1,000 feet from the right-of-way of Highway 78.
3. 500 feet from the railroad right-of-way.
4. 500 feet from the right-of-way of an existing or
future Circulation Element Roadway as identified
on the Carlsbad General Plan.
5. Within the McClellan Palomar Airport influence area
as depicted on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for
McClellan Palomar Airport.
The policy establishes 60 dba CNEL as the exterior noise
level that residential units must be mitigated to and
requires disclosure requirements (easements, deed
restrictions, recorded notice, etc.) for purchasers.
A. CIRCULATION
1. ROADS
Roadway traffic noise is the most extensive noise problem faced
by Carlsbad. Barring any dramatic changes in automobile usage
patterns, it is likely that the amount of traffic in Carlsbad
will grow with the City's population. New development is
occurring adjacent to major roadways throughout the City.
Unless precautionary measures are taken, serious noise problems
could result.
Vehicular noise has three main component sources: engine
noise, exhaust noise and tire noise. The intensity of noise
emissions for any given automobile may also vary with other
factors, such as speed, acceleration, braking, grade and
conditions of the roadway surface. Thus a busy downtown
arterial with stop and go traffic is often noisier than an open
highway with comparable traffic volumes.
IV-6
Noise contours have been prepared for the following roadways:
1. Interstate 5
2. State Highway 78
3. El Camino Real
4. Palomar Airport Road
Of these four routes, 1-5 has the greatest existing and
projected noise emissions. In addition, 1-5 impacts the
greatest number of existing dwellings. There are a
considerable number of existing single family and multi-family
dwellings which are impacted by freeway noise levels in excess
of 65 dba). For these existing dwellings, noise attenuation
is difficult. Construction of solid barriers along the freeway
is possible, but cost may be prohibitive. The City can,
however, educate property owners as to the methods of
insulating residential units from freeway noise through the
use of barriers and insulation materials.
For Highway 78, Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real,
existing noise problems are not so severe. Virtually no
dwellings in Carlsbad front on either Highway 78 or Palomar
Airport Road.
It is important that new development fronting on major roadways
be compatible with the recommendations of this Element. The
action plan section of this Element contains the measures
intended to avert future problems caused by traffic noise.
2. AIRPORT
Palomar Airport is presently operating as a general aviation
facility at El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road. The
airport's current annual operation of approximately 200,000
aircraft is expected to increase at the airport's ultimate
buildout condition. In general, land in the immediate vicinity
of the airport or under the take off or landing approach is
subject to noise levels which are unsuitable for residential
development, schools, hospitals and other similar noise
sensitive uses. Projected noise contours around the airport
are provided in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for
Palomar Airport. In 1989 the FAA will begin a detailed noise
study for Palomar Airport. However, all new development in
the vicinity of the Airport should be reviewed to ensure
compliance to the noise standards contained in this element
and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Palomar Airport.
3. TRAIN
The AT&SF Railroad runs parallel to the coastline through its
6 1/2 mile length in Carlsbad. The railroad right-of-way is
100 feet wide throughout most; of the area south of Tamarack
Avenue and expands to 200 feet in width as it travels north
IV-7
of Tamarack through the downtown beach area and central
business district.
AMTRACK operates nine daily passenger trains from San Diego
to Los Angeles. Additionally, a number of freight trains pass
through Carlsbad daily, some after 5 P.M. These nighttime
freight trains are of particular concern because they run
during the evening hours. By the end of 1992, it is projected
that a commuter trail will run at least four daily trips from
Oceanside to San Diego with two stops in Carlsbad.
There are several sources of railroad noise. The majority of
the noise emanates from the locomotive (and its component
systems, such as exhaust devices and cooling fans) and from
the interaction between the rail and train wheels. The
rhythmic clacking noise emitted by trains result from friction
of the wheel at rail joints. Roughness on either the rail or
wheel can also contribute to increased noise emissions.
Safety devices such as warning whistles and wig-wags with bells
used at grade crossings can contribute significantly to
railroad noise. The State of California Public Utilities
Commission requires these warning signals as trains approach
grade crossings to warn motorists and pedestrians. The
"bulges" in the noise contour for the railroad indicate points
at which warning whistles are sounded.
For existing units, noise reduction is a problem. It is often
difficult and expensive to install sound insulation materials
on existing structures. Also, the state Uniform Building Code
standards for sound insulation apply only to new structures.
Construction of noise barriers along the railroad right-of-
way could attenuate ambient noise levels significantly.
However, the railroad right-of-way is owned by the AT&SF
Railroad, whose consent would be necessary before any barrier
could be constructed. Also cost and aesthetic impact may be
prohibitive factors in the construction of a noise barrier.
The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates a
substantial amount of land bordering along the railroad right-
of-way for residential use. New residential development and
nonresidential development will occur adjacent to the railroad.
The City does have the ability to regulate site design and
requires sound insulation for new development in the vicinity
of the railroad. A combined program of noise effective design
and sound insulation can help control future noise problems
near the railroad.
IV-8
Project design should stress the orientation of units away from
the railroad, limiting window openings onto the right-of-way,
and construction of noise barriers such as solid walls or
earthen berms.
B. LAND USE
Land Use can generate noise and noise impacts. The Carlsbad
Municipal Code, and in particular, Chapter 21.34, addresses the most
significant Land Use Generated Noise.
C. MOBILE
C.I OFF ROAD MOTORCYCLE NOISE
Motorcycle noise has been a problem in Carlsbad. In
particular, complaints have been registered against
recreational use of dirt bikes or two-cycle engine motorcycles.
In 1975 the California Motor Vehicle Code sets limits on
motorcycle noise at 32 dB(A) for speeds under 35 MPH and 86
dB(A) at speeds over 35 MPH, measured at a distance of 50 feet.
One drawback of these regulations was that although testing
and instrumentation procedures were established, no provision
was made for enforcement or penalties. Only "private cause
of action" against the vehicle manufacturer is allowed.
Local jurisdictions have the authority to control loud or
faulty mufflers, horn blowing, off-road vehicles and vehicle
speed. Although noise limits may be set for off-road vehicles,
they are rarely necessary since statutes against trespassing
nearly always apply.
Control of recreational motorcycle riding is difficult because
of the mobility of the offenders and requirements for police
enforcement. The Carlsbad Police Department currently has off
road patrols with four wheel drive vehicles and motorcycles.
Most trail bikes are not outfitted with the necessary lights,
fenders, mufflers, spark arresters or baffles required by law.
Consequently they are not licensed and cannot be legally
operated on public streets. Stepping up police enforcement
against these unlicensed vehicles would likely reduce
motorcycle noise on public streets.
C.2 In the past, motorboat noise has been the most frequent noise
complaint registered with the Carlsbad Police Department.
Although the problem does not affect very many of Carlsbad's
residents, it has been a considerable annoyance to persons
living along the north shore of the inner Agua Hedionda Lagoon.
The City has adopted a maximum speed limit for boats on the
lagoon and has purchased a boat; for enforcement. The reduction
in speed does reduce noise somewhat. If further control
IV-9
appears warranted, the City should set curfews on the use of
the lagoon or limit the types of boats which could use the
lagoon.
IV. NOISE CONTOUR NAP
The noise contour map which is included as part of this Element shows 1975
noise contours for the following transportation systems:
(1) Interstate 5
(2) Highway 78
(3) El Camino Real
(4) Palomar Airport Road
(5) Atcheson, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad
(6) Palomar Airport
It is recommended that the noise contours contained in this Element be
reviewed and revised, if necessary, every five years. Substantial changes
in traffic patterns or the availability of new noise contour data may
require more immediate revision.
The City may compute noise contours for additional roadways by formula
prepared by Wyle Laboratories: Development of Ground Transportation Systems
Noise Contour for the San Diego Region, CPO, December, 1973; utilizing
existing data on traffic volume and speed, roadway grade, surface
condition, and percentage truck traffic.
Noise level for Palomar Airport are expressed in terms of California Noise
Equivalent Level (CNEL), measured at 5 dB(A) increments and continued down
to 60 dB(A). All other transportation modes shown on the contour map are
expressed as 65 dB(A) Day-Night Average Level (Ldn). Both are based upon
A-weighted noise measurements, and are further corrected for single event
durations and frequency of occurrence throughout the 24 hour day. The CNEL
measurement weights noise occurrences in the evening and nighttime greater
than those in the daytime. The Ldn measurement provides similar weighting,
but groups daytime and evening noise occurrences together. Normally the
Ldn and CNEL measurement will agree within decibel and for all practical
purposes be considered synonymous.
The airport's projected noise contours identified in the 1986 Comprehensive
Land Use Plan for McCelIan-Palomar Airport are included in this element.
IV-10
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISED NOISE ELEMENT
Ask that a Noise Element consultant and City staff address the issue of
development of a comprehensive Noise Ordinance concurrent with the
development and adoption of a revised Noise Element.
Ask that a Noise Element consultant and City staff address development of
a comprehensive definition of "noise".
Development of a clearly understandable and uniform method to measure noise
and noise impacts.
Development of a certificate process for noise consultants working in the
City of Carlsbad.
Evaluation of the appropriateness and feasibility of Planning Department
Administrative Policy No. 17, which deals with noise. This evaluation
should clearly indicate whether the policy is adequately identifying and
mitigating noise impacts. Evaluate the pro's and con's.
Review the conclusions and requirements of the FAA, Part 150 study being
conducted for Palomar Airport.
Attempt to develop a land use/noise compatibility matrix consistent with
Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
Provide both a clearly understandable noise contour map and noise impact
table indicating distances of noise impact from existing and ultimate
potential noise sources.
Provide a Revised Noise Element which clearly communicates the City's noise
environment, policies and standards.
Explore the creation of new public works standards for circulation element
roadways based on noise impacts generated by such roadways. New public
work standards could explore expanded right-of-way and require a
incorporation of noise mitigation for such roadways.
Explore the possibility of creating funding mechanisms, such as assessment
districts when requested by existing neighborhoods that can be utilized
by existing noise impacted neighborhoods to pay for noise mitigation.
LBS:af
EXHIBIT mC*
1959PalomarOak,Way RlCK ENGINEERING COMPANY
Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92009
(619)431-8200
FAX: (619) 931-1551
/:/ MW IQftQ.' • -.» f' ,-•.•;, -AvU\y
November 21, 1989 \ci r^'k^F.
Mr. Matthew Hall
Chairman
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
2075 La Palmas
Carlsbad, California 92009
SUBJECT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY ON NOISE
Dear Matt:
The Planning Commission is scheduled to review the Interim Noise
Policy on December 6, 1989. We are generally in support of the
policy and its intent to protect future homeowners from excessive
noise. We do, however, have three concerns. These concerns are
described below.
1. The change in acceptable levels of noise from 65 CNEL down to
60 CNEL.
We feel that the 60 CNEL level is overly stringent and, in many
cases, mitigation will be visually unacceptable or infeasible.
It may create a situation where "the medicine is worse than the
sickness." Mitigation would add an abundance of walls and berms
to the streetscape, create a tunnel effect on many streets, and
noise barriers eliminating or reducing views. We would
recommend a return to the 65 CNEL level or, at a minimum,
reinstate the provision allowing possible approval for non-
complying units 150 feet from the noise source.
2. Noise levels measured above the highest window or door opening
in a dwelling unit.
Mitigation to the point of the highest windows or door openings
could also create aesthetic problems as builders will design
their product type to meet this specific standard. Two-story
units may be created with virtually no doors or windows on the
side or rear planes. Where single-story units are utilized as
mitigation, future homeowners may be upset when they find out
they can not add on a second story, particularly if their lot
size would allow for a single-story addition.
EXHIBIT "3
Mr. Matthew Hall
November 21, 1989
Page Two
3. No interior CNEL shall exceed 45 DBA.
This finding originally applied only "with the windows closed."
This wording should be reinstated. The homeowners should have
the option to let in fresh air. Also, the peak traffic hours
and maximum noise generation times are morning and evening. The
early morning and late evening hours, along with weekends, are
generally quiet traffic times and no conflicts would exist. If
the noise is too great, the owner can simply shut the window,
mitigating noise to 45 DEL. This wording will keep most owners
from having to pay to have a professional make their windows
functional.
With the above modifications we feel the interim policy will be
stringent but functional. Attached is data previously distributed
to the noise subcommittee. Should you have any questions, please
feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
Robert C. Ladwig
RCL:CDG:rab
Attachment
Copy of attachment to:
Mr. Michael Holzmiller
Planning Commissioner
CITY OF CARLSBAD
cc: Mr. Richard Putman
CUSTOM LIVING HOMES
Mr. Barry Bender
Mr. Robert E. Wilkinson
RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY
OY "rCXTV~¥\ fLLbluM
M O M E 5 AND 0 O V. M U N ! T I £ 5September 20, 1989
Ms. Jeanne McFadden
Chairperson
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Noise Subcommittee
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, California 92009
RE: CARLSBAD POLICY 17 - INTERIM NOISE ELEMENT
Dear Ms. McFadden:
We at Custom Living Communities of Southern California wish to
express ourselves on the pending adoption of Administrative
Policy 17, the Noise Element Policy. Presently, we are
processing two pieces of land in the LFM Zone 20.
We were fortunate enough to be allowed to voice some of our
concerns at an early morning meeting May 16th of this year.
Through our civil engineer, Mr. Bob Ladwig of Rick Engineering
Co., we have tried to be aware of the progress of Policy 17 with
your Committee and the Planning Commission. Finding the October
date just around the corner, we think that it is prudent for
Custom Living to once again point out how some of the proposed
design conditions effect a project.
The first standard proposed is the 60 dB requirement at:
1) Five feet inside the proposed project's property line at
six feet above finished grade; and,
2) Immediately above the highest window, or door opening, in a
dwelling unit.
Custom Living has had a noise report prepared for one of its
projects to submit with its tentative map application. Applying
your standard to the project, the noise mitigation for the first
floor will require a 9-foot wall at the top of a 15- to 17-foot
high slope. Mitigation for 60.dB at the second story requires a
17-foot high wall on top of the same high slope. This structure
must be solid and continuous wall or combination of wall and berm
to the 17-foot height above the slope.
Custom Unnsj Horr.es & Commurcncs oi southern California. Inc.
Newport Seach. California 92660
7i4 r=2 9C09
Ms. Jeanne McFadden
September 19, 1989
Page 2
Our consultant also calculated the same solution using instead
65 dB and only a 6-foot wall could be used for first floor
mitigation and an 11-foot wall for the second floor. With these
mitigations, the homeowner would still be required to have fixed
glass on the side of the home with the wall and air-conditioning.
We know, as developers, that we do not want the massive structure
adjacent to a public thoroughfare, nor do we think that the City
wants this great wall appearance.
Additionally, for your consideration, we have included a letter
from Mr. John Van Houten of J. J. Van Houten & Associates, our
noise consultant. The letter is intended for the Commission's
information. At Custom Living's request, we had Mr. Van Houten
review your standards and to compare them with his experience in
other communities.
We are proposing that there are alternatives: It only depends
upon the community in which you want to build. We will be glad,
along with our consultants, to help provide information to
develop the kind of noise element needed for Carlsbad. We have
been talking to other builders and developers within Carlsbad,
trying to promote some awareness of your proposed standards, so
that they will be aware of the criteria for building homes in the
city. We can make ourselves available to the committee before
October, at the Committee's behest.
We will have Mr. Ladwig contact you, or Mr. Schlehuber, to see if
we can meet, or you may call me at: (714) 752-9009, to let us
know if it is possible to once again talk to the Committee.
Thank you for your consideration and we hope to hear from you
soon.
Sincerely,
itman
"Director of Planning
DP:dw
Enclosure
, u r _ 9NIH33NI9N3 >iOIUcc: John Van Houten
Bob Ladwig» coci Q 7 d3S
Bud Schlehutoer''11'''1 ""nv? ^ C<.'i"inuni!k::-oi ^mtivm Ciiiiii'mia. liv uowr u i»
• Q3AI3D3H
.-100 C.in:pi:.- : "".v \oxport RcjJ-.. ^JIT.TT
RECEIVED
SEP 21 1969
JJ. VAN HOUTEN& ASSOCIATES, Inc CUSTOM UV.NGHOMESCA
1260 EAST KATELLA AVENUE, ANAHEIM CAUBORI§i9t'$2$?10N
(714) 978-7018 (714) 635-9520 FAX (714) 939-0648
JOHN J. VAN HOUTEN, PE, Principal Consultant
DAVID L WIEIAND, Principal Engineer
ROBERT WOO, Associate Engineer
ALLEN MASHOOF, Associate Engineer
September 19, 1989 Project File 2043-89
CUSTOM LIVING HOMES
5100 Campus Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attention: Mr. Richard Putman, Director of Planning
Subject: Exterior Noise Control Standards, Mariners Point in
the City of Carlsbad
Gentlemen:
To mitigate the exterior noise exposure at the Mariners Point
development, the City of Carlsbad has applied its administrative
policy number 17. This policy states:
The community noise equivalent . level (CNEL) should not
exceed 60 dB at a position 6' above grade and 5' from the
property line, and also at a position immediately above the
highest window or door opening in a dwelling unit.
For units located more than 150' from the arterial right-
of-way, if it is determined by the Planning Commission or
the Design Review Board that it is infeasible to mitigate
the noise levels to the standards, then purchasers of the
lots must be notified of the noise impact.
This latter requirement implies that the project may be relieved
from compliance with the standards at units more than 150' from
an arterial. However, there is no provision for similar relief
for units located within ISO7 of the right-of-way..
The City's standard is similar in some respects to the policies
identified in the County of San Diego's Noise Element of the
General Plan. Policy 4b of the Noise Element indicates that the
exterior noise level should be mitigated to a CNEL of 60 dB un-
less it is technically infeasible to do so and a finding has been
made that there are specifically identified overriding social or
economic considerations which warrant approval of the develop-
ment. Under no circumstances is the exterior CNEL permitted to
exceed 75 dB.
CUSTOM LIVING HOMES PROJECT FILE 2043-89
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Compared with other communities in the southern California area,
the City's 60 dB standard is extremely stringent and for some
locations is not feasible to implement, particularly as it per-
tains to mitigating noise at upper floor locations. The City of
Westminster also has a 60 dB standard but it is loosely enforced
due to its infeasibility, particularly at developments adjacent
to major and secondary arterials. The county of Santa Barbara
applied a 60 dB standard for three years but abandoned it in
favor of a more technically feasible standard of 65 dB. The
majority of communities in the southern California area with ex-
terior noise exposure standards apply a 65 dB criteria. With
this in mind, it is recommended that the following conditions of
approval be applied to the subject project:
All residential lots and dwelling units shall be sound
attenuated against present and projected noise, which
shall be the sum of all noise impacting the project, so
as not to exceed an exterior standard of 65 dB CNEL in
outdoor living areas and an interior standard of 45 dB
CNEL in all habitable rooms.
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, an acous-
tical analysis report describing the acoustical design
features of the structures required to satisfy the ex-
terior and interior noise standards shall be submitted
to the Planning Director for approval along with satis-
factory evidence which indicates that the sound attenua-
tion measures specified in the approved acoustical
report(s) have been incorporated into the design of the
project.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION
As an alternative to the above recommendation, the City may wish
to consider the noise control policy of the City of Fullerton
which indicates a standard of 60 dB but provides for relief up to
65 dB if compliance with the standard is not feasible. The
City's ordinance number 2104 is stated as follows:
All residential developments proposed within a projected
annual CNEL contour (as defined in Title 4, Subchapter 6
of the California Administrative Code) of 60 dB or
greater shall require an acoustical analysis (as defined
in Title 25, Chapter 1, Article 4 of said Administrative
Code) demonstrating and certifying that all required
usable open space areas other than visual open space
shall be provided with noise mitigating measures suffi-
cient to reduce the noise levels therein to 60 CNEL;
provided however, that the Planning Commission,
Redevelopment Agency, or City Council, as appropriate,
J. J. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, Inc.
CUSTOM LIVING HOMES PROJECT FILE 2043-89
pursuant to approval of a Development Project or Tenta-
tive Tract Map, whichever is applicable, or in cases
where neither is applicable, a Site Plan Use Permit, may
approve projected exterior levels of not to exceed 65
CNEL for those areas in which said acoustical analysis
demonstrates that achieving a level of 60 CNEL is
clearly not feasible.
If you have questions or we can be of further assistance, please
call the undersigned at 714/635-9520.
Very truly yours,
J. 3\ VAN HOUffEN &> ASSOCIATES ,^-INC.
J. Vafti Houten, P.E.
nsulting Engineer in Acoustics
KJJVH/DLW/rrp
C:\WS2000\REPORTS\2000-49\20439-19
David L. Wieland
Principal Engines
x.
J. J. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, Inc.
Lot* 9
SOUND ATTENUATION TO 60 db
-as shown on plan
Second Story Projection
Ftrat Story
SOUND ATTENUATION TO 65 db
-as shown on plan
if Second Story Projection
First Story
I
| SOUND ATTENUATION TO 60 db
- proposed modification to plan
100' pad depth
Second Story Projection
Flr»t Story
60' Typical Setback/
>pen Space Easement
• malntalnanoe end appearance
to be controlled by • dletrtot
•Sound attenuation wa»-
helghta ahown are per iludy
by XJ. VAN HOUTEN &
A83OC, dated March 20, 1089
L. second story attenuation
Collee*
'Blvd.
• receptor location*
second story attenuation
2 1/2 to 1 ratio
note: Propoaed ratio la 4:1.
Thla exoeeda the propoaed ratio.
125' mln. lot depth
second story attenuation
.Mariners Point
ON CPD) 10701
City of Carlsbad
:Ootober:17.1889
Arterial Street Right-of-Way 50' Typical Setback/
Open Space Easement
-maintalnance and appearanceto be controlled by • dtatrtot
8' (maxj acouatical we!
(where needed)
Residential Land Uae
air conditioned(where needed)
Proposed sound attenuation standards:
1. Where the noise-report Indicates the need for a sound attenuation wall to be greater
than 6*. a 4:1 ratio shall determine the maximum height required for attenuation
measures (both berm and wad).
2. Where the maximum height of attenuation measures do not mitigate the noise to 60 db.
exterior, exterior noise standards should revert to Interior standards of 45 db, and the
unit shall be equlpted with air conditioning.
Attenuation proposals
City of Carlsbad
JNOf» •10701 October 17. 1080
1/4 3/4
r
propoMd standard -
currant standard •
1/4 3/4
Proposed alterations to receptor locations:
flat
1/4
\
rear yard
uaaibto arai
L 3/4
.
1
/
» ,S~
1. 6' receptor height Instead of 8'. 5* Is a more standard ear height
2. Exterior receptor location varies with depth of yard/common arec
3/4 of the distance Instead of 6' from property line.
Receptor location*
Ctty of Carlsbad
JN (TO) 10701 Octobor 17,11089
CUSTOM LIVING
HOMES A .'; D ; o M v. u N : r : 2 i
October 11, 1989
Ms. Jeanne McFadden
Chairperson
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Noise Subcommittee
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, California 92009
RE: CARLSBAD POLICY 17 - INTERIM NOISE ELEMENT
Dear Ms. McFadden:
Custom Living Homes appreciates the subcommittee's consideration
of our material related to the Noise Element Policy for the City
of Carlsbad.
In our letter to you dated September 20, 1989, prior to the
planned October 4th Planning Commission Meeting, we had enclosed
copies of a letter from our consultant, John Van Houten. We were
told by Anita of the Planning Department to send any material we
wanted presented to the subcommittee for the meeting of October
18th today, and to send enough for the members of the committee
and Mr. Michael Holzmiller.
Our attached packet includes the above letter, plus we have
included the preliminary noise study report for our proposed
project and photos of a wall in the City of Fullerton that uses
the same 60 dB criteria presently proposed for Carlsbad.
RECEIVED
OCT 1 2 1989Custom Living Homes & Communities of Southern California. Inc.
•RICK ENGINEERING
5100 Campus Drrce Me-iport Beach. California 92660
.0\714 752 9009
Ms. Jeanne McFadden
October 11, 1989
Page 2
We are hoping to have Mr. Van Houten present, in case the
subcommittee has any questions about our report and his
experience with present noise ordinances in other jurisdictions.
Again, thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
ick Putman
^Director of Planning
DPtdw
Enclosures
cc: Bud Schlehuber
Tom Erwin
Michael Holzmiller
John Van Houten
Bob Ladwig
Cuiiom Linnv Home- & Commuiiitk'* ot Southern California Inc.
MOO Campii* Dncc Newport Beach, Cdlikirnui '>.YV-J
714 7509009
September 20, 1989
Ms. Jeanne McFadden
Chairperson
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Noise Subcommittee
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, California 92009
RE: CARLSBAD POLICY 17 - INTERIM NOISE ELEMENT
Dear Ms. McFadden:
We at Custom Living Communities of Southern California wish to
express ourselves on the pending . adoption of Administrative
Policy 17, the Noise Element Policy. Presently, we are
processing two pieces of land in the LFM Zone 20.
We were fortunate enough to be allowed to voice some of our
concerns at an early morning meeting May 16th of this year.
Through our civil engineer, Mr. Bob Ladwig of Rick Engineering
Co., we have tried to be aware of the progress of Policy 17 with
your Committee and the Planning Commission. Finding the October
date just around the corner, we think that it is prudent for
Custom Living to once again point out how some of the proposed
design conditions effect a project.
The first standard proposed is the 60 dB requirement at:
t
1) Five feet inside the proposed project's property line at
six feet above finished grade; and,
2) Immediately above the highest window, or door opening, in a
dwelling unit.
Custom Living has had a noise report prepared for, one of its
projects to submit with its tentative map application. Applying
your standard to the project, the noise mitigation for the first
floor will require a 9-foot wall at the top of a 15- to 17-foot
high slope. Mitigation for 60 dB at the second story requires a
17-foot high wall on top of the same high slope. This structure
must be solid and continuous wall or combination of wall and berm
to the 17-foot height above the slope.
'.V/yc?r. ;<:.!C~. '..I.'. rr.:.i -PCicC
••- '••- -:;j
Ms. Jeanne McFadden
September 19, 1989
Page 2
Our consultant also calculated the same solution using instead
65 dB and only a 6-foot wall could be used for first floor
mitigation and an 11-foot wall for the second floor. With these
mitigations, the homeowner would still be required to have fixed
glass on the side of the home with the wall and air-conditioning.
We know, as developers, that we do not want the massive structure
adjacent to a public thoroughfare, nor do we think that the City
wants this great wall appearance.
Additionally, for your consideration, we have included a letter
from Mr. John Van Houten of J. J. Van Houten & Associates, our
noise consultant. The letter is intended for the Commission's
information. At Custom Living's request, we had Mr. Van Houten
review your standards and to compare them with his experience in
other communities.
We are proposing that there are alternatives: It only depends
upon the community in which you want to build. We will be glad,
along with our consultants, to help provide information to
develop the kind of noise element needed for Carlsbad. We have
been talking to other builders and developers within Carlsbad,
trying to promote some awareness of your proposed standards, so
that they will be aware of the criteria for building homes in the
city. We can make ourselves available to the committee before
October, at the Committee's behest.
We will have Mr. Ladwig contact you, or Mr. Schlehuber, to see if
we can meet, or you may call me at: (714) 752-9009, to let us
know if it is possible to once again talk to the Committee.
Thank you for your consideration and we hope to hear from you
soon.
Sincerely,
Putman
"Director of Planning
DP: dw
Enclosure
cc: John Van Houten
Bob Ladwig
Bud Schlehuber"^
REC0NRegional Environmental Consultants
September 22,1989
Mr. Matthew Hall
Planning Commission
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009^859
Reference: Noise Subcommittee Report Dated September 6,1989 (RECON Number 0400)
Dear Mr. Hall:
I am writing with some comments regarding the proposed Planning Department Administrative Policy concerning
noise effects. The proposed policy provides a clear protocol for the evaluation of noise impacts and need
for mitigation.
I would like clarification of two points in the policy, however. Item 1 of the second paragraph of the
proposed policy states that noise levels should be mitigated to 60 decibels at:
"Five feet inside the proposed project's property line at six feet above finished grade level, and..."
This point could, technically, be nowhere near a potentially sensitive receptor, and while, I am sure, that
those implementing the regulation will apply reason, a clarified statement, such as the following, will
help avoid misunderstandings.
A point 15 feet from a dwelling, for a rear yard, or five feet from a dwelling for a side or front
yard, 5 feet above the level of the ground.
Where the unit is proposed at some distance from the noise source, this would avoid potentially mitigating
impacts to non-use areas. I used five feet above the ground because this is the common height assumed for
ear level receptors.
Item 3 of the last paragraph on the first page of the policy references "multi-paned windows". If this
refers to dual glazing. I would suggest changing the wording. Perhaps it would be appropriate to have an
interior study completed to demonstrate that interior noise levels will be below 45 dBA CNEL for units that
are subject to this paragraph. If demonstration of design sufficient to achieve the 45 dBA standard were
required, then the requirement for dual glazing or other structural insulation could be made conditional on
the results of that study. The following wording might be appropriate.
3. For units which could be exposed to noise levels in excess of 60 dBA CNEL, an acoustical analysis
should be completed demonstrating that the proposed construction technique achieves an interior
noise level of 45 dBA CNEL or less. This interior level should be demonstrated for any floor where
the exterior level exceeds the standard.
This closely parallels the building code requirements for multi-family units. '
I would like to point out the stringency of the 60 dBA standard proposed, particularly when applied to
exterior receptors above the first floor. The City of San Diego uses a 65 dBA standard and only applies it
1276 Morena Boulevard • San Diego, CA 92110-3815 • (619) 275-3732 • FAX (619) 275-3619
2922 N. 70th Street • Scottsdale, AZ 85251 • (602) 947-8042 3050 Chicago Avenue • Riverside, CA 92507 • (714) 784-9460
Mr. Matthew Hall -2-September22,1989
to receptors above the second floor when there are balconies and those balconies are being considered part
of the open space requirements for the project The County of San Diego uses a 60 decibel standard, but
only applies it to upper floors when balconies are present Caltrans ignores second-floor receptors
entirely. Because of the heights of barriers necessary to interrupt the line of sight, the application of
a second-floor exterior standard will make mitigation through the construction of barriers difficult and
often impossible. With the requirement for interior receptors to meet a certain standard, and the absence
of an exterior receptor, an exterior mitigation standard seems unnecessary.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this policy. If I can provide any additional information,
please let me know.
Sincerely,
C—'
Charles Bun
President
CSB:db
Oio
•o
re
'S J"N *J
i oiCU rn
-» 3rere uQJ<o xi
X? 3x»
5«"go.
:Vg5u. o co£§2
«-> X)9 ™
B01
° § «•§ ° B •«•
o « k. 2 re
52 '-3 >>'S. "> 3P- o> o
-a
B £
5 S
aj •<! M
gl^a«|K ,•= k, M <u EU re oi
01.B^»*o
o
•ore
•acre
.5 " .flj "O
to 're
w
° §
S -ai t-i
«•ai ooo o
^-^CB||| *'lf.a-S—«2_<uoiui*'sajt!
B o Ol
§>• o *j
f - B gre re tfO. u :
oi
kl£;§ 3 o. o eg a) k- t^ o a
CX. *-» co •—* «*5 -*-»
r=•tso .2i i: 3 £J> *« CQ (•
a§SS|i»5 f-f TZ Prl CJ^ £5 t/1 k1*^ ryi •P O O) .—.p] 5J f\fl -Q
01
o."
OlCJ tl>C JSo —•o ..
U ;3
rea..13 Ooi re
re 01
.a>B'*-> o re c
-g x: 3
cu JOre
>_
m «^g 8)
BO2 §•" o
.•a"Sr
-*-» o —^ ai*- ""re p.22
§•§-
o S «
T! 'S a?
oo. -,r
cre
o .i oi00 CO "JCB a> «
« - <-••Sk^
.2 §
-°-«ns j
; 2o
'1-2p £'«
co CU ^Ol CH3 O
"7? re "^ o oi 2 o
m B•*•* to
oT " 3
fe.2 E
<2 fc MS Js oo^—i TO f-«
c "S oore . B coi co ;s **"S1H
T3Olk<3co3
o> S:
•re -Si""*"* o>
CO'
—
uu
.5 re,
g'o
to
E
't 2re^xi t,
T3 Ǥss-r
•g o -o ;re!^ § !O) **^ (
•o-S* •=-'re ^ ao-"xi 5 Z
>-
*
ooE o•- COi SP
00 ™ 3
«g
o.Sv
£ BO. >
,ll
tsoo
S £1s-•3 re
xi -a
— -SJ0 re-s eS'-ga, <"
. J= CO
Ol: 5
:"S
! Sx01
(-C^2
^3;
So
SI-I;
k. re
Si
a
.S -tn .£
"re B -
£ Z„ o
S OJ
.2 S S
M .5Lo c z: U re .5 TOa. c
«-^reH§cu S- S
sa.
oo
oo
o•+-*0o
c
3
CO
rrr/,
HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES
Planning • Project Management • fiscal Analysis
December 6, 1989
Matt Hall, Chairman
Planning Commission
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92009
SUBJECT: Concerns with the Noise Policy as Recommended by the Planning Commission
Noise Subcommittee.
Dear Chairman Hall:
This letter is co-written with Vince Mestre of Mestre Greve, a noise expert, to express
concerns with the noise policy being recommended by the Planning Commission Noise
Subcommittee. Also, this letter will suggest other approaches that should be considered by
the Planning Commission before a final measure is adopted.
Although the intent of the policy is good, that is to ensure that future homeowners are not
subjected to hazardous noise levels, the policy will create significant problems with project
design when it is implemented. The two major concerns we have with the policy are:
1. Measurement of noise levels "immediately above the highest window or door
opening in a dwelling unit;" and
2. The reduction of acceptable exterior noise levels from 65 CNEL to 60 CNEL.
Implications of the "Highest Window" Measurement
To understand the impact of the requirement for measuring at the "highest window," it is
important to have a basic understanding of how roadway noise levels are reduced by either
introduction of a noise barrier or setback from the roadway. Noise travels in a straight line.
When using a noise barrier to reduce noise levels, the top of the barrier must break the
"line of sight" between the noise source and the noise receiver. The higher the noise source
or the receiver, the higher the noise barrier needs to be to reduce the noise.
EXHIBIT a4'
2386 Faraday, Suite 120 • Carlsbad » CA 92008 • [619] 438-1465
When using setbacks to reduce noise levels, the home would have to be setback far enough
from the road so that the noise level is less than 60 CNEL. For a major arterial (40,000
Average Daily Trips) the setback would need to be approximately 350 feet from the
centerline of the road. For a secondary arterial (20,000 ADT) the setback would have to
be approximately 225 feet from the centerline of the road.
What are the alternative mitigation measures to reduce noise to the levels specified by the
proposed noise policy? For a typical situation1 they can be described as follows:
1. A 14.5 foot noise barrier at the rear property line for all 2 story units.
2. An 8.5 foot noise barrier at the rear property line and no 2 story units.
3. An 8.5 foot noise barrier at the rear property line and no windows on the 2
story face of the home facing the street.
4. A 6 to 8 foot high glass or plexiglass noise barrier on balconies placed
continuously along the second story or around each window or door of the
second story.
Each of these alternatives would have a major impact on the planning and design of a
project.
The measurement of noise levels outside the second story window disregards the fact that
a homeowner has an option to open or close his windows. This choice is supported by the
majority of California cities which require that noise levels be reduced to 45 dBA within
the interior of the unit. In this way, noise can be reduced by the use of double pane
windows, mechanical ventilation, etc., thus not requiring the design compromises that
otherwise would be required.
60 CNEL versus 65 CNEL
The intent of the proposed 60 CNEL standard is fundamentally good. Certainly the lower
the noise level, the less annoyance will be created to any individual. It is important to note,
however, we are talking about annoyance; not adverse impacts on peoples health. The
question that must be addressed is how much better is 60 CNEL relative to the costs
created to good design, aesthetics and planning flexibility.
It is not easy to describe the acoustical difference between 60 and 65 CNEL. CNEL is a
24 hour weighted average so you cannot record it and then play back a 60 or 65 CNEL
level for comparison. We can describe a 5 dB difference, however, in terms of how people
will perceive this change, if indeed it is a change. Generally, a 10 dB change in noise level
is perceived as a doubling or halving of the loudness. A 3 dB change would be perceived
Based on a secondary arterial roadway (20,000 ADT),
average speed of 45 mph, an 84 foot right of way, a 5
foot high slope to the rear property line and a 30 foot
rear yard setback to the home.
as a barely detectable change. A 5 dB change is recognizable as a change, and the starting
point at which people will acknowledge that the noise is noticeably different. Mestre
Greve's experience is that a 5 dB improvement is not enough to justify the significant
economic, aesthetic and design costs to achieve this change.
Since a CNEL level is a 24 hour weighted average, an important discussion is the difference
in noise levels between the peak traffic hours and the nighttime hours. Nighttime noise
levels are significantly lower than daytime hours (up to 20 dBA difference between the
daytime peak, 65 dBA, and nighttime low, 47 dBA). 20 dBA would be perceived as one
fourth the loudness. In the case of 2 story dwellings, most people do not use the second
story rooms (typically bedrooms) during the peak noise hours.
The vast majority of California cities use 65 CNEL as the standard for outside
measurement. For second story mitigation, a 45 dBA interior measurement is the typical
standard. This can be achieved by double pane windows and mechanical ventilation. The
City of Santa Barbara experimented with the 60 CNEL as an exterior limit but reverted
back to 65 CNEL because they did not want to "wall the City in."
Summary
As demonstrated herein, implementation of the proposed noise policy will require
extraordinary mitigation measures that will effect the overall design of a residential project.
The major planning concern is that 'noise' will become the predominant planning factor in
the design of a residential project. Circulation patterns, grading and architectural aesthetics
will take on a secondary level of importance in the design of a project if this policy is
adopted.
We believe that the costs to subdivision design significantly exceed the benefits that would
be created by the implementation of this proposed policy. Some of these costs include: 1)
the aesthetic degradation of higher noise walls along major streets creating a walled in
corridor appearance, 2) the visual monotony of continuous one story roof lines along the
exterior of a project and continuous two story roof lines within the interior of the project,
3) the increased grading required to sufficiently elevate building pads above major
roadways, and 4) the bleak appearance of two story units which have no windows facing the
roadway. These are just a few design costs that were not considered during the formulation
of the noise policy.
Recommendation
As an alternative to the proposed noise policy, we would recommend that it be amended
as shown on the Exhibit A attached to this report and summarized as follows:
1. Paragraph 2 - Change 60 dBA CNEL to 65 dBA CNEL.
2. Paragraph 2, subheading 2 - delete this sentence and replace with:
"Interior noise levels shall be mitigated to a maximum level of 45 dBA CNEL
by the use of double pane windows, mechanical ventilation and/or any other
measures as approved by the Planning Director."
Respectfully submitted,
Bill Hofman Vince Mestre
Hofman Planning Associates Mestre Greve
Attachments
cc: Planning Commission
Michael Holzmiller
t/7
EXHIBIT A
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY
According to the Noise Control Act of 1973 Health & Safety Code 46000 ET.
SEQ., the Planing and Zoning Law Government Code 65302 (f) and CEQA Public
Resources Code 2100 ER.SEQ. and until the City of Carlsbad's Noise Element
is updated and amended a "Noise" Study shall be submitted with all
discretionary applications for residential projects of five or more
dwellings within:
1. 2,000 feet from the right-of-way of Interstate 5
2. 1,000 feet from the right-of-way of Highway 78
3. 500 feet from the railroad right-of-way
4. 500 feet from the right-of-way of an existing or future Circulation
Element Roadway as identified on the Carlsbad General Plan.
5. Within the McClellan Palomar Airport influence area as depicted on the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan Palomar Airport.
This study shall be prepared by an acoustical professional and document the
projected noise level at buildout of Carlsbad's General Plan and mitigate the
projected buildout noise level to a maximum of 65 dba CNEL at:
1. Five feet inside the proposed project's property line at six feet
above finished grade level, and
2. Interior noise levels shall be mitigated to a maximum level of 45 dba
CNEL by the use of double pane windows, mechanical ventilation and/or
any other measures as approved by the Planning Director.
If the Planning Commission or Design Review Board find that it is infeasible
and/or undesirable to mitigate the noise level to the above mentioned
standards then the following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
1. It shall be the responsibility of the developer of the project to
prove to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission or Design Review
Board why it is not feasible to comply with the above mentioned
standards.
2. All purchasers of the impacted properties shall be notified by a deed/\ii purcnasers or me impacted properties snail oe
disclosure in writing of the noise impact to these properties.
•\ 6
cc
LU
I-DC
0zoo
HI
cc
Ul
DC
CL
zo
O
_J
Q.
Q.
1 O
DC
O
CO
UJ
Z
D
en
iu_i
(D
oi
CC
O
(0
COo
a.O
CD
ooZ
IXttgg
OC
O
o£
S«Q
UJ
Q.
O
UJ
UJ
OQ>
COO.
1959 Palomar Oaks Wa>
Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92009
(619)431-8200
FAX: (619) 931-1551
RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY
January 15, 1990
Council Members
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION NOISE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT AND
ADMINISTRATIVE NOISE POLICY (ITEM NO. 7 ON THE JULY 16,
1990 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA)
Dear Council Members:
We participated with the Noise Committee and the Planning
Commission in the review of Item No. 7. We were not aware that
this would be coming to the Council on such short notice. We would
appreciate some time to prepare our presentation to the Council
and ask that you continue this item. A suggested date would be
February 13th. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Robert C. Ladwig
RCL:kd.001
,777 l /
CITY
ANAHEIM
BAKERSFIELD
CHULA VISTA
COSTA MESA
DEL MAR
ENCINITAS
FRESNO
HEMET
LA MESA
LOS ANGELES, CITY OF
NATIONAL CITY
OCEANSIDE
POWAY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
RIVERSIDE
SAN CLEMENTE
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
SAN DIEGO, CITY OF
SAN MARCOS
SANTA ANA
SOLANA BEACH
VISTA
EXTERIOR
NOISE LEVEL
NOISE ANALYSIS
INTERIOR
NOISE LEVEL
MEASURING
POINT
TIME OF
DAY
65 CNEL
65 CNEL
65 CNEL
65 CNEL
65 CNEL
60 CNEL
60 CNEL
60 CNEL
65 CNEL
65 CNEL
65 CNEL
65 CNEL
60 CNEL
60 CNEL
60 dBA Ldn
65 CNEL
60 CNEL
65 CNEL
65 CNEL
65 CNEL
60 CNEL
65 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 dBA
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 dBA
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 dBA
45 dBA Ldn
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
45 CNEL
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
USEABLE AREA
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPCIFIED
UNSPCIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
PROPERTY LINE
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFED
UNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIED
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS
24 HOURS