The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRP 05-09; Casa Cobra; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (3)ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT) CASE NO: DATE: BACKGROUND 1. CASENAME: 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: 4. PROJECT LOCATION: 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: 7. ZONING: 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, fmancing approval or participation agreements): PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: Rev. 07/26/02 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 1 1 Aesthetics 1 1 Geology/Soils 1 1 Noise 1 1 Agricultural Resources 1 1 Hazards/Hazardous Materials 1 1 Population and Housing 1 1 Air Quality 1 1 Hydrology/Water Quality 1 1 Public Services 1 1 Biological Resources 1 1 Land Use and Plaiming 1 1 Recreation 1 1 Cultural Resources 1 1 Mineral Resources 1 1 Transportation/Circulation 1 1 Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 1 Utilities & Service Systems Rev. 07/26/02 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. • A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impacf appUes where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not significantly adverse, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. • "Potentially Significant Impacf is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significantly adverse. • Based on an "EIA-Part I", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the environment, but aU potentially significant adverse effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required. • When "Potentially Significant Impacf is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant adverse effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. • A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant adverse effect on the environment. • If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. Rev. 07/26/02 • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impacf is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; or (4) through the EIA-Part I analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially sigmficant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined significant. Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTRAL RESOURCES - (In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model-1997 prepared by the Califomia Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Califomia Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a WiUiamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? IIL AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.) Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • • • S • • • H • • • ><. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • B • H • E • H • El Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone preciu-sors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by Califomia Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by Califomia Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? g) Impact tributary areas that are environmentally sensitive? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • H • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ra • • • s • • • • H • • • • • • Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi- cance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paieontologi- cal resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special PubUcation 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 - 1-B ofthe Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? Potentially Significant Impact • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • Less Than Significant Impact • • • • No Impact • • • S • • • • • • • • • • • • H • • • • • • H Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altemative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govemment Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or environment? e) For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or pubUc use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • • • • • • • • • H • • m • • • E • • • H • • • H • H • m • ^ • • • 0 Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) b) Substemtially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level wiiich would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Impacts to groundwater quality? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a maimer, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off- site? f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? h) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? i) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure ofa levee or dam? k) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 1) Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters. m) Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash) into receiving surface waters or other alteration of receiving surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • H • • • • • H • H • • • E • • • E • • H 13 13 H • • H Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) n) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or wetland waters) during or following construction? o) Increase in any pollutant to an ah-eady impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Ust? p) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would die project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would die project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundboume vibration or groundboume noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Potentially Significant Impact • • • • • • • • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • • • • Less Than Significant Impact • • No Impact m nam uum u m • m u m • B • El • m u 10 Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would die project: a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substeuitial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, a need for new or physically altered govemment facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Potentially Significant Impact • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • • • • a • m u \K u 0 i) Fire protection? • • • ii) Police protection? • • • m iii) Schools? • • • H iv) Parks? • • • H V) Other public facilities? • • • ra xrv. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? • • • H 11 Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC a) Would the project: Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic pattems, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in insufficient parking capacity? g) Conflict Avith adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting altemative transportation (e.g., bus tum- outs, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would die project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitiements needed? Potentially Significant Impact • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • m u u m u • H • E • H • • • 1^ • • • m • • • • • • m • • • m • • • a • • • 12 Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfiU with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildUfe species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of Califomia history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumula- tively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • • • E • El • H • • • H • • • E • m Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the foUowing on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less Than Sigruficant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earUer document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 13 Rev. 07/26/02 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AIR QUALITY—Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a federal and state non-attainment area for ozone (O3), and a state non-attainment area for particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PMio). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the San Diego Association of Govemments (SANDAG). A plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the 1991 state- mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other Califomia non-attainment areas having serious ozone problems and used to create the Califomia State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9th through 10th in 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996. The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each city's and the County's general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its appUcable General Plan, then the project presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality pleuming process. Such consistency would ensure that the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact. Section 15125(B) of the State of Califomia Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The Califomia Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms with the RAQS which include the following: • Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area? • Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan? The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions of the City's General Plan and the RAQS. Therefore, the project is consistent with the regional air quality plan and will in no way conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional plan. b) Violate any air quaUty standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is in the City of Oceanside. Data available for this monitoring site through April, 2002 indicate that the most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (one day in both 2000 and 2001) and one day in 2001 for the federal 8-hour average for ozone and one day for the 24-hour state standard for suspended particulates in 1996. No violations of any other air quality standards have been recorded recently. If there is grading associated with the project, the project would involve miiumal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust control. Long-term emissions associated with travel to and from the project will be minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria poUutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? 14 Rev. 07/26/02 Less Than Significant Impact. The Air Basin is currently in a non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended fine particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with the proposed project would be ininimal. Given the limited emissions potentially associated with the proposed project, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 (a)(4), the proposed project's contribution to the cumulative impact is considered de minimus. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia, 92008. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01). City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994. 15 Rev. 07/26/02 LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) 16 Rev. 07/26/02 mm* Jifiimmmimm ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS REPORT Casa Cobra Mixed Use 3190 Roosevelt Street Carlsbad, California 92008-3017 C»Slt^«Am Wajor Redevelopment Permit No. RP05-09 Pre ared For J^l^''^^iip^#iff*^*Ploh ^ .S3 firei>ared By Eilar Associates Acoustical & Environmental Consulting 539 Encinitas Boulevard, Suite 206 Encinitas, Galifornia 92024 www.eilarassociates.com Phone 760-753-1865 Fax 760-753-2597 January 31, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2 2.1 Project Location 2.2 Project Description 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 2 3.1 Existing Noise Environment 3.2 Future Noise Environment 4.0 METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT 5 4.1 Methodology 4.2 Measurement Equipment 5.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 7 5.1 Exterior 5.2 Interior 6.0 CERTIFICATION 10 7.0 REFERENCES 11 FIGURES 1. Vicinity Map 2. Assessor's Parcel Map 3. Satellite Aerial Photograph 4. Topographic Map 5. Planned Land Use Map 6. Site Plan Showing Current Overall Combined CNEL Contours and Noise Measurement Location 7. Site Plan Showing Future Overall Combined CNEL Contours and Noise Measurement Location 8. Site Plan Showing Future Overall Combined CNEL at Proposed Building Facades APPENDICES A. Traffic Noise Model Data and Results B. Railway Noise Analysis C. Exterior-to-lnterior Noise Analysis D. Sound Insulation Prediction Results E. Recommended Products F. Excerpts of Typical Building Plans, Elevations, and Cross-Sections 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed project, Casa Cobra Mixed Use, consists of the construction of one new 2-story building designed for commercial/retail and residential mixed use. The building will contain 1,500 square feet of retail space on the first floor and four multi-family, single story residential units on the second floor. The project site is located at the northeast intersection of Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue in the City of Carisbad, California. The primary noise sources in the vicinity of the project site include automobile and truck traffic noise from Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue along with commuter and freight train noise associated with the Southern Pacific railroad tracks located approximately 680 feet west of the project site. The current combined calculated on-site overall noise level at the southwestern corner of the project site is 59.8 CNEL. Due to a projected increase in traffic volume, the future (year 2030) combined noise level at the southwestern corner of the project site is expected to increase to 62.1 CNEL. Calculations show that future combined noise levels at the building facades will range from 58.1 CNEL at the second level eastern fagade of residential Unit D to 61.3 at the first level western fagade of the southern commercial unit. Since future exterior on-site noise levels will exceed 60 CNEL at some of the building facades, an exterior-to-interior noise analysis was conducted to evaluate the sound reduction properties of proposed exterior wall, window, and sliding glass door construction designs. Due to the elevated future exterior noise levels to impact the proposed building facades, unmitigated future interior noise levels in many of the habitable rooms could exceed the 45 CNEL interior noise limit for habitable residential space. Representative worst-case exterior-to-interior calculations show that the future interior noise levels will meet the minimum requirements of 55 CNEL or less in the retail space and 45 CNEL or less in residential spaces, with windows in an opened position. No mechanical ventilation system is required for this project as a result of this acoustical study. For further details, please refer to Section 5.0 of this report. Eilar Associates Job#A51207N1 January 31,2005 Pagel 2.0 INTRODUCTION This acoustical analysis report is submitted to satisfy the acoustical requirements of the City of Carisbad for a redevelopment/coastal development permit. Its purpose is to assess noise impacts from nearby roadway traffic, along with commuter and Southern Pacific freight train noise, and to identify project features or requirements necessary to achieve interior noise levels of 55 CNEL in retail space and 45 CNEL or less in habitable residential space, in compliance with the City of Carisbad and State of California noise regulations. All noise level or sound level values presented herein are expressed in terms of decibels, with A-weighting to approximate the hearing sensitivity of humans. Time-averaged noise levels are expressed by the symbol LEQ, for a specified duration. The CNEL is a 24-hour average, where sound levels during evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. have an added 5 dB weighfing, and sound levels during nighttime hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. have an added 10 dB weighfing. This is similar to the Day-Night sound level, LDN, which is a 24-hour average with an added 10 dB weighfing on the same nighttime hours but no added weighfing on the evening hours. Sound levels expressed in CNEL are always based on A-weighted decibels. These metrics are used to express noise levels for both measurement and municipal regulations, for land use guidelines, and for enforcement of noise ordinances. Further explanation can be provided upon request. 2.1 Project Location The project site is located between Interstate 5 and the Coast Highway at 3190 Roosevelt Street, in the City of Carisbad, California. The mixed use development consists of a single building with two stories. The Assessor's parcel number (APN) for the property is 204-084-09-00. The overall property is rectangular in shape with an overall site area of approximately 0.24 acres. Neighboring land use in the proximity of the project is predominantly residential. The project location is shown on the Thomas Guide Map, Figure 1, following this report. An Assessor's Parcel Map, Satellite Aerial Photograph, Topographic Map, and Planned Land Use Map of this area are also provided as Figures 2 through 5. 2.2 Project Description The proposed project consists of the construcfion of a single story building consisfing of 1,500 square feet of retail space on the first fioor and four mulfi-family, single story residential units on the second fioor. The building is proposed to be constructed on a 0.24 acre lot located at 3190 Roosevelt Street, in the City of Carisbad, California. 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3.1 Existing Noise Environment The primary noise sources in the vicinity of the project site include automobile and truck traffic noise from Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue along with commuter and freight train noise associated with the Southern Pacific railroad tracks located approximately 680 feet west of the project site. Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue are located in the immediate vicinity of the project site. After research through the City of Carisbad and the San Diego Association of Governments (SanDAG), it Eilar Associates Job#A51207N1 January 31,2005 Page 2 was determined that no current or future traffic volume information is available because of the low traffic volume on these small residenfial roadways. However, Brandon Miles, an Associate Engineer for the Engineering Department of the City of Carisbad, did have traffic data for similar, nearby, residential roads in the vicinity of the project site from a traffic study completed several years ago. This available traffic data was compounded 2% annually to yield worst-case current traffic volumes. There are no bus stops located in the immediate vicinity of the project site, therefore, bus stop noise is determined to be negligible. No other noise sources are considered to be significant. 3.1.1 Vehicle Traffic Noise Roosevelt Street is a two-lane, two-way Residential Collector roadway running north-south in the vicinity of the project site. The paved roadway width is approximately 43 feet, curb to curb. The posted speed limit is 30 mph. Roosevelt Street, in the vicinity of the project site, currently carries a traffic volume of approximately 1,040 Average Daily Trips (ADT), according to Brandon Miles, Associate Engineer for the Engineering Department of the City of Carisbad. Pine Avenue is a two-lane, two-way Residential Road running east-west in the vicinity of the project site. The paved roadway width is approximately 38 feet curb to curb. The posted speed limit is 25 mph. Pine Avenue, in the vicinity of the project site, currently carries a traffic volume of approximately 520 ADT, according to Brandon Miles. No current or future truck percentages were available for Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue. However, based on neighboring and surrounding land use, roadway classification, and our professional experience during on-site observations, a truck percentage mix of 2.0% medium and 0.5% heavy trucks was used for Roosevelt Street and a percentage mix of 1.0% medium and 0.5% heavy was used for Pine Avenue. The current calculated on-site traffic noise level at the southwestern corner of the project site is 53.4 CNEL. Current and future traffic volumes for the roadway sections near the project site are shown in Table 1. For further roadway details and projected future ADT traffic volumes, please refer to Appendix A: Traffic Noise Model Data and Results. Table 1. OveraH Roadway Traffic Information Roadway Name Speed Limit (mph) Current ADT Future (2030) ADT Roadway Name Current Future Current ADT Future (2030) ADT Roosevelt Street 30 30 1,040 5,400 Pine Avenue 25 25 520 1,500 3.1.2 Measured Noise Level An on-site inspection and traffic noise measurement were made on the afternoon of Friday, January 13, 2006. The weather conditions were as follows: mostly cloudy skies, low humidity, temperatures in the upper 50's with winds from the west at 2-4 mph. A "one-hour" equivalent measurement was made at the southwestern corner of the project site. The microphone position was placed approximately five feet above the existing project site grade. Traffic volumes for Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue were recorded for automobiles, medium-size trucks, and large trucks during the measurement period. After a continuous 15-minute sound level measurement, there was no change in the LEQ and results were then recorded. The measured noise level and related weather conditions Eilar Associates Job #A51207N1 January 31, 2005 Page 3 are found in Table 2. The calculated equivalent houriy vehicle traffic count adjustment and a complete tabular listing of all traffic data recorded during the on-site traffic noise measurement are found in Appendix A: Traffic Noise Model Data and Results. Table 2. On-Site Noise Measurement Conditions and Results Date Friday, January 13, 2006 Time 12:55 p.m. - 1:10 p.m. Conditions Mostly Cloudy Skies, Winds from the West @ 2-4 mph. Temperature Upper 50's with Low Humidity Measured Noise Level 56.2 dBA LEG 3.1.3 Calculated Noise Level Noise levels were calculated for the site using the methodology described in Secfion 4.1 (see next page) for the location, conditions, and traffic volumes counted during the noise measurements. The calculated noise levels (LEQ) were compared with the measured on-site noise level to determine if adjustments or correcfions (calibration) should be applied to the traffic noise prediction model, Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5. Adjustments are intended to account for site-specific differences, such as reflection and absorption, which may be greater or lesser than accounted for in the model. The measured noise level of 56.2 dBA LEQ for Roosevelt Street was compared to the calculated (modeled) noise level of 56.0 dBA LEQ, for the same conditions and traffic fiow. As there was only a 0.2 dB difference between the measured and the calculated noise level, no adjustment was deemed necessary to model future noise levels for this locafion. Please refer to Table 3, for further evaluafion. Table 3. Caiculated versus Measured Traffic Noise Data Roadways Calculated Measured Difference Correction Roosevelt Street 56.0 dBA LEG 56.2 dBA LEG 0.2 dB none 3.1.4 Commuter and Freight Train Noise A single Southern Pacific railroad track system is located approximately 680 feet to the west of the project site. Railway traffic includes Coaster, Amtrak, and freight train traffic, which travels north- south in the vicinity of the project site. A worst-case analysis of the railway traffic determined that weekday operafions result in greater noise impacts than weekend operafions. Each weekday, a total of 22 Coaster trains, 29 Amtrak trains, and 6 freight trains pass near the project site. Coaster information was obtained at http://www.sdcommute.com. Amtrak at http://www.amtrak.com. and freight train traffic information was obtained through Walt Stringer, Light Rail Manager with NCTD (North County Transit District). Please refer to Appendix B: Railway Noise Analysis. The current combined calculated on-site noise level at the southwestern corner of the property line is 59.8 CNEL 3.2 Future Noise Environment As stated eariier within this report, Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue traffic volume informafion is unavailable, so the future traffic data was projected to a worst-case ADT for level of service (LOS) Eilar Associates Job #A51207N1 January 31, 2005 Page 4 "C" for both residential roads. The future (year 2030) traffic volume for Roosevelt Street is projected to be 4,500 ADT. The future (year 2030) traffic volume for Pine Avenue is projected to be 1,500 ADT. The same truck percentages from the existing traffic volumes were used for future traffic volume modeling. The roadway classificafion, speed limit, alignment and roadbed grade elevations are expected to remain the same for these secfions of roadways. For further roadway details and projected future ADT traffic volumes, please refer to Appendix A: Traffic Noise Model Data and Results. By the year 2008, the Escondido-Oceanside line will have a restriction lifted which will allow for more train traffic to travel along the southern portion of the Southern Pacific railway track system, through the City of Carisbad. According to Walt Stringer, Light Rail Manager, NCTD (North County Transit District), the lift of the restriction will allow for 5 more freight trains during the night time hours. Approximately half of these trains will be traveling directly in front of the project site because of the diversion in Oceanside. Also, freight trains will be carrying more cars due to increased activity and popularity of the freight train system, according to Walt Stringer. In the future, these freight trains could carry as many as 120 cars. The future train traffic volume for the railway system directly to the west of the project site is projected to be 22 Coaster trains, 29 Amtrak trains, and 8 freight trains. 4.0 METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT 4.1 Methodology 4.1.1 Field Measurement Typically, a "one-hour" equivalent sound level measurement (LEG, A-Weighted) is recorded for at least one noise-sensitive location on the site. During the on-site noise measurement, start and end times are recorded, vehicle counts are made for cars, medium trucks (double-fires/two axles), and heavy trucks (three or more axles) for the corresponding road segment(s). Supplemental sound measurements of one hour or less in durafion are often made to further describe the noise environment of the site. For measurements of less than one hour in duration, the measurement time is long enough for a representative traffic volume to occur and the noise level (LEQ) to stabilize; 15 minutes is usually sufficient for this purpose. The vehicle counts are then converted to one-hour equivalent volumes by using the appropriate multiplier. Other field data gathered includes measuring or estimating distances, angles-of-view, slopes, elevations, roadway grades, and vehicle speeds. This data was checked against the available maps and records. 4.1.2 Roadway Noise Calculation The Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5 program released by the U.S. Department of Transportation was used for calculate the future daytime average houriy noise level (HNL) at various locafions at the project site. The daytime average hourly traffic volume is calculated as 0.058 times the ADT, based on the studies made by Wyle Laboratories (see reference). The HNL is equivalent to the LEQ, and both are converted to the CNEL by adding 2.0 decibels, as shown in the Wyle Study. Future CNEL is calculated for desired receptor locations using future road alignment, elevafions, lane Eiiar Associates Job#A51207N1 January 31,2005 Page 5 configurafions, projected traffic volumes, estimated truck mixes, and vehicle speeds. Noise attenuafion methods may be analyzed, tested, and planned with TNM, as required. Further explanation can be supplied on request. 4.1.3 Railway Noise Calculafion The railway noise analysis is based on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Noise Guidebook, distributed by the Office of Community Planning and Development. The railway noise calculations examine the combinafion of diesel engine noise and railway car noise. The HUD Guidelines treat electric trains, such as trolleys, as railroad cars with no engine. The HUD Guidelines provide for the separate evaluation of diesel locomotives and railroad cars, and then the combination of the two, in order to obtain the overall CNEL train noise impact to the project site. The results of the railway noise analysis are provided in DNL, which is synonymous with CNEL The evaluafion of a site's exposure to railway noise requires the considerafion of the distance from the site to the railroad track centeriine, the number of diesel and electric trains in both directions during an average 24-hour day, the fraction of trains that operate during the night, the average number of diesel locomotives, the average number of railway cars per diesel train, the average train speed past the site, whether the rails are bolted or welded, and whether the site is nearby crossings where train whistles or horns are sounded. For detailed railway noise calculations please refer to Appendix B: Railway Noise Analysis. 4.1.3 Exterior-to-lnterior Noise Calculation The State Building Code, local municipalities, and other agencies (such as HUD) require an acoustical analysis for any multi-unit residenfial facility proposed in an area that has or will have exterior noise levels in excess of 60 CNEL. This analysis must demonstrate building features and mitigation that will provide interior noise levels of 45 CNEL or less for residential units, classrooms, or other habitable interior areas and 50 CNEL or less in office space. CNEL is considered synonymous with LDN- Analysis for the interior noise levels requires consideration of: Number of unique assemblies in the wall (doors, window/wall mount air condifioners, sliding glass doors, and windows) Size, number of units, and sound transmission data for each assembly type Length of sound impacted wall(s) Depth of sound impacted room Height of exterior wall of sound impacted room Exterior noise level at wall assembly or assemblies of sound impacted room The Composite Sound Transmission data is developed for the exterior wall(s) and the calculated noise exposure is converted to octave-band sound pressure levels (SPL) by addifion of an octave data curve for typical traffic noise. The reduction in room noise due to absorption is calculated and subtracted from the interior octave noise levels, and the octave noise levels are logarithmically added to produce the overall interior room noise level. When interior noise levels exceed 45 CNEL, the noise reduction achieved by each element is reviewed to determine what changes will achieve the most cost-effective compliance. Windows are usually the first to be reviewed, followed by the doors, and then the walls. Eilar Associates Job#A51207N1 January 31,2005 Page 6 4.2 Measurement Equipment Some or all of the following equipment was used at the site to measure existing noise levels: Larson Davis Model 720 Integrafing Sound Level Meter, Serial # 0219 Larson Davis Model CAI 50 Calibrator, Serial # 0198 Hand-bearing magnetic compass, microphone with windscreen, tripods Distance measurement wheel, digital camera The sound level meter was field-calibrated immediately prior to the noise measurement and checked aftenA/ard, to ensure accuracy. All sound level measurements conducted and presented in this report, in accordance with the regulations, were made with a sound level meter that conforms to the American National Standards Institute specificafions for sound level meters ANSI SI.4-1983 (R2001). All instruments are maintained with National Bureau of Standards traceable calibration, per the manufacturers' standards. 5.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 5.1 Exterior The future noise environment is primarily the result of vehicle traffic traveling on Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue, and railway traffic on the Southern Pacific railway system. Without mitigation or proposed project structures, the future 61 CNEL combined noise contour will be located approximately 50 feet east of the Roosevelt Street centeriine. The future 60 CNEL combined contour will be located approximately 83 feet east of the Roosevelt Street centeriine. The future 59 CNEL combined contour will be located approximately 147 feet east of the Roosevelt Street centeriine. For a graphical representafion of these contours, please refer to Figure 7: Site Plan Showing Future Overall Combined CNEL Contours and Noise Measurement Location. Calculations show that future combined noise levels at the building facades will range from 58.1 CNEL at the 2"^ level eastern fagade to 61.3 CNEL at the 1'^ level western fagade of the building. Table 4 summarizes the future combined noise impacts to the proposed exterior building facades. Please refer to Figure 8: Site Plan Showing Future Overall Combined CNEL at Exterior Building Facades. Eilar Associates Job#A51207N1 January 31,2005 Page 7 Table 4. Future Combined Exterior Building Facade Impacts Receiver Fioor Receiver Location Exterior Traffic CNEL Exterior Train CNEL Combined Noise Level (CNEL) R-1 2 South Fagade 55.1 58.9 60.4 R-2 2 South Fagade 53.1 58.5 59.6 R-3 2 South Fagade 52.1 58.2 59.2 R-4 2 East Fagade 44.4 58.0 58.2 R-5 2 East Fagade 42.2 58.0 58.1 R-6 2 North Fagade 44.9 58.3 58.5 R-7 2 North Fagade 47.5 58.6 58.9 R-8 2 North Fagade 51.3 58.9 59.6 R-9 2 West Facade 56.4 59.1 61.0 R-10 2 West Fagade 56.9 59.1 61.1 R-11 1 North Fagade 41.5 58.9 59.0 R-12 1 West Fagade 56.6 59.1 61.0 R-13 1 West Fagade 57.2 59.1 61.3 R-14 1 South Fagade 55.2 58.9 60.4 5.2 Interior The State of California requires buildings to be designed in orderto attenuate, control, and maintain interior noise levels to below 45 CNEL in habitable multi-family residenfial space. The City of Carisbad requires 55 CNEL or less in retail space. Current exterior building construction is generally expected to achieve at least 15 decibels of exterior-to-interior noise attenuation, with windows opened. Therefore, proposed project building structures exposed to exterior noise levels greater than 60 CNEL could be subject to interior noise levels exceeding the 45 CNEL noise limit for residenfial habitable space. Future combined noise levels will exceed 60 CNEL at most ofthe western and southwestern facing exterior building facades. Due to the elevated worst-case future combined exterior noise level impacts at these building facades, an exterior-to-interior noise analysis was conducted to evaluate the sound reduction properties of proposed exterior wall, window, and sliding glass door construction designs. Please referto Appendix C: Exterior-to-lnterior Noise Analysis. Eilar Associates Job #A51207N1 January 31, 2005 Page 8 The architectural building plan specificafions for the typical exterior wall assembly incorporated into this acoustical analysis are: Single layer of 7/8-inch thick stucco Single layer of 1/2-inch thick shear plywood 2-inch wide by 6-inch deep wood studs, placed 18-inches on-center Single layer of 3 1/2-inch thick faced fiberglass (R-13) batt insulation Single layer of 5/8-inch thick gypsum board INSUL evaluation of the exterior wall proposed for this project resulted in an approximate STC rafing of 45, which was incorporated into our analysis. Please refer to Appendix C: Sound Insulation Predicfion Results. Our exterior-to-interior analysis also incorporates a minimum STC 28, 1/2-inch thick, dual insulating windows and sliding glass doors, as the minimum recommended configuration. The STC 28 window assembly is constructed as follows: 1/8-inch glass, 1/4-inch air gap, 1/8-inch glass The listed STC value is based on "Center-of-Glass" test data. Any window and frame configuration may be used as long as it meets or exceeds the minimum STC rating and corresponding octave band performance for the above window. Window "Center-of-Glass" performance for the recommended window is provided in Appendix D: Sound Insulation Predicfion Results. With the proposed exterior wall assembly, window, and glass door configurations specified above, all rooms will comply with the City of Carisbad interior noise code regulafions, with windows and doors in an opened position. Please refer to Table 5, showing future interior noise levels with the recommendations made herein. Tabte 5. Future interior Noise Levels with Mitigation Recommendations Location Room Exterior Facade (CNEL) Minimum Window Rating (STC) interior CNEL (windows open) Interior CNEL (windows closed) Mechanicai Ventiiation UnitB Master Bedroom 60.4 28 41.1 28.6 Not Required Unit B Living Room 61.1 28 42.2 29.2 Not Required Unit A Kitchen 61.0 28 45.0 29.5 Not Required 1''Floor- West Facade Commercial Space 61.3 28 36.6 28.0 Not Required The proposed residential homes were analyzed for worst-case exterior noise impacts. All rooms will have satisfactory interior noise levels, if built according to the wall, window, sliding glass door, and mechanical ventilation plans reviewed for this acoustical analysis. No mechanical venfilation system is required for this project as a result of this acoustical study. The exterior-to-interior calculations and recommendations will satisfy the acousfical requirements necessary to meet the California Code of Regulations, Title 24. Eilar Associates Job#A51207N1 January 31, 2005 Page 9 Exterior residential entrance doors must include all-around weather-tight door stop seals and an improved threshold closure system. The additional hardware will improve the doors' overall sound reduction properties. The transmission loss (TL) of an exterior door without weather-tight seals is determined mostiy by sound leakage, particulariy at the bottom of the door if excessive clearance is allowed for air transfer. By equipping the exterior door with all-around weather-tight seals and a threshold closure at the bottom, the STC rating can be increased by approximately 10 points. It is imperative to seal and caulk between the door's rough opening and the finished door frame, using an acoustically resilient, non-skinning butyl caulking compound. This should be used as generously as possible, to ensure effective sound barrier isolation. The OSI Pro Series SC-175 acoustic sound sealant is a product specifically designed for this purpose. Head and jamb door seals are to be applied to the door frame stops. If the acoustical door stop seals are applied on top of the stops in the frame, the height and width of the opening is reduced, and the handle may require an extended offset for ease of operation. For more informafion, please refer to Appendix E: Recommended Products. Also, refer to Appendix F: Excerpts of Typical Building Plans, Elevafions, and Cross-Sections. 6.0 CERTIFICATION The findings and recommendafions of this acousfical analysis report are based on the information available and are a true and factual analysis of the potential acoustical issues associated with the Casa Cobra Mixed Use project in the City of Carisbad, California. This report was prepared by Kyle Matthis, Michael Burrill, and Douglas Eilar. fC6 /^ttLk Kyle flatthis, /toustical Co Consultant ichael Burrill, Senior Acousfical ConsuTtant Eilar Associates Job#A51207N1 January 31, 2005 Page 10 7.0 REFERENCES 1. 2001 California Building Code, Based on the 1997 Uniform Building Code, Appendix Chapter 12, Division II - Sound Transmission Control, Secfion 1208 - Sound Transmission Control. 2. 2001 California Building Code, Based on the 1997 Uniform Building Code, Chapter 12, Secfion 1203.3 - Venfilation. 3. 2001 California Noise Insulation Standards, efifective 11/01/02, Based on 1997 Uniform Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24. 4. City of Carisbad Noise Element to the General Plan. 5. Harris, Cyril M., Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, 3'^ Edition, Acoustical Society of America, 1998. 6. Heeden, Robert A., Compendium of Materials for Noise Control, U.S. Department of Health, Educafion and Welfare, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, November 1978. 7. Irvine, Leland K., Richards, Roy L., Acousfics and Noise Control Handbook for Architects and Builders, Kreiger Publishing Company, 1998. 8. NBS Building Sciences Series 77, Acoustical and Thermal Performance on Exterior Residential Walls, U.S. Department of Commerce/National Bureau of Standards, November 1976. 9. Western Electro-Acoustic Laboratory, Inc., 1711 Sixteenth Street, Santa Monica, California 90404, 213-80-9268, Sound Transmission Loss Vs. Glazing Type, Window Size and Air Filtration, January 1985. The research described in this report was prepared forthe California Association of Window Manufacturers, 823 North Harbor Boulevard, Suite E, Fullerton, California 92632, 714-525-7088. Eilar Associates Job#A51207N1 January 31,2005 Pageil wiiiiiiKtmmmmmiimmmmmmmmm FIGURES O) iZ a o o o OJ "5 (O (0 . 0) -o (0 <o o > o ® 0) o < DQ M jg a-I u c UJ o> CO IO CM o CM O) IS O ^ . o tn CD (0 1^ "E o c UJ Eilar Associates 539 Encinitas Boulevard, Suite 206 Encinitas, California 92024 760-753-1865 Satellite Aerial Photograph Job#A51207N1 Figure 3 a o o o o o CM 0) 3 (O (A . 0) -o o > o ® W o < m M iS o c LU Oi CO in CM O CM o> (0 in •- to £ 00 It CO o 'r o (fi <D •*-> "E o c UJ l2'-0" 60 CNEL Contour 59 CNEL Contour 58 CNEL Contour No Scale 37'-6" 80.42" 51-SlF.G. 51 516.6- Noise Measurement Location 24'-0'' 37'-0" RN S L J . J . J E 65'-0' lO'-Q-lO'-O" (t PINE AVE. Eilar Associates 539 Encinitas Boulevard, Suite 206 Encinitas, California 92024 760-753-1865 Site Plan Showing Current Overall Combined CNEL Contours and Noise Measurement Location Job#A51207N1 Figure 6 l2'-0" 80.42' II o EXIST. CURB AND GUTTER EXIST POWER POLE : EXIST WATEPj- METER I EXISTING PLAMTER Future Combined Exterior Building Facade Impacts Receiver R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 R-6 R-7 R-8 R-9 R-10 R-11 R-12 R-13 R-14 Floor Receiver Location South.Fagade. South Paga de South Fagade East Fagade East Fagade Nort h Fagade North Fagade Nort h Fagade West Facade West Fagade North Fagade West Fagade West.Fagade South Fagade Exterior Traffic CNEL 55. 53. 52.1 44.4 42.2 44.9 47.5 51.3 56.4 56.9 41.5 56.6 57.2 55.2 Exterior Train CNEL 58,9 58.5 58.2 58.0 58.0 58.3 58.6 58.9 59.1 59.1 58.9 59.1 59.1 58.9 Combined Noise Levei (CNEL) 60.4 59.6 •HIGH STUCCO SH BLOCK WAU. 59.2 58.2 58.1 58.5 58.9 59.6 61.0 61.1 59.0 61.0 61.3 60.4 No Scale Eilar Associates 539 Encinitas Boulevard, Suite 206 Encinitas, Califomia 92024 760-753-1865 Site Plan Showing Future Overall Combined CNEL at Proposed Building Facades Job#A51207N1 Figure 8 Appendix A Traffic Noise Model Data and Results TNM Traffic Data and Results Casa Cobra Mixed Use On-Site No^is%|MeasiJ^^^ Conditions and Results Friday, January 13, 2006 Time 12:55 p.m. - 1:10 p.m. Conditions Mostly Cloudy Skies, Winds from the West @ 2-4 mph, Temperature Upper 50's with Low Humidity Measured Noise Level 56.2 dBA LEQ <^^\.»^^:i#0n-Site Noise Measurement Traffic Count During^.S^K Roadways Duration Autos Medium Truck Heavy Truck Roosevelt Street-15 minutes 81 0 0 Roosevelt Street- Overall 60 minutes 324 0 0 : . ; ' Table 3. Calculated versus Measured Traffic Noise Datav lx^'- . Roadways Calculated Measured Difference Correction Roosevelt Street 56.0 dBA LEQ 56.2 dBA LEQ 0.2 dB none Current Traffic Reference Information Current traffic data for Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue: After research through the City of Carlsbad and the San Diego Association of Governments (SanDAG) it was determined that no current or future traffic volume information is available for these residential roadways because of the low traffic volume on these small residential roadways, however, Brandon Miles, an Associate Engineer for the Engineering Department of the City of Carlsbad, did have traffic data for similar, nearby, residential roads in the vicinity from a study done several years ago. This data was then compounded 2% annually to give approximate current traffic volumes. Future Traffic Reference Information Future traffic data for Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue: Roosevelt Street and Pine Avenue traffic volume infonnation is unavailable, so future traffic data was gathered from the Public Road Standards of the County of San Diego Department of Public Works and based on neighboring and surrounding land use and roadway classification. The future (year 2030) traffic volume for Roosevelt Street (Residential Collector) is projected to be 4,500 ADT. The future (year 2030) traffic volume for Pine Avenue (Residential Road) is projected to be 1,500 ADT. Table 3. Current Traffic Conditions Eoadway Hourly Percentage Total % "AOT"' (Hourly) J\Jedium. (Hourly) ^Heayx., (Hourly) Roosevelt St. 5.80% 100.00% 1,040 97.50% 59 2.00% 1 0.50% 0 Pine Ave. 5.80% 100.00% 520 98.50% 30 1.00% 0 0.50% 0 Table 3* Future Traffic Conditions Roadway Hourly : Percentage Total % ADT Autos (Hourly) Medium (Hourly) Heav^^ (Hourly) Roosevelt St. 5.80% 100.00% 4,500 97.50% 254 2.00% 5 0.50% 1 Pine Ave. 5.80% 100.00% 1,500 98.50% 86 1.00% 1 0.50% 0 loo 800 600 400 1200 I I I I '.00 Casa Cobra Mixed Use Calibration Plan View Run name: A51207N1. Scale; I CALIBRATE Sheet 1 of 1 131 Jan 2006 Eilar Associates Project/Contract No. Casa Cobra Mixed Use TNM Version 2.5. Feb 2004 200 feAnalysis By: Kyle Matthis Roadway: Receiver: Barrier: Building Row: Terrain Line: Ground Zone: polygon Tree Zone: dashed polygon Contour Zone: polygon Parallel Barrier: — Skew Section: — -600 -400 -200 200 400 600 800 o o rs vt (Q O O _l tu > UJ -I Q z ZD O tn CO tn UJ oc Ul » o z o tn UJ Q a: UJ a: z Z) < a: m a C CQ O U. V T3 cn UJ J2 c O) c 1 a 600 1200 I I 6 I I I f I I I I IOC I I I r I I 300 *00 -400 -200 L !! Casa Cobra Mixed Use Calibration Plan View Run name: A51207N1 FUTURECONTOURS Sheet 1 of 1 31 Jan 2006 Eilar Associates Project/Contract No. TNM Version 2.5, Feb 2004 Scale: Roadway: Receiver: Barrier: Building Row: Terrain Line: 200 200 feAnalysis By: Kyle Matthis Ground Zone: polygon Tree Zone: dashed polygon Contour Zone: polygon Parallel Barrier: = Skew Section: —^ 400 600 800 o o <M re 3 C re O 3 O tn tn h-_l (0 UJ CC UJ o UJ -3 O o c — re re *i > O a a re .Q 3 OT >. O .C c (U > CO > re V re £ c CD o ^ !t It-re o o o CQ a: O |0 IO od CO I od co Icvi CO CJ IN- CO iCN CO I o (U > 9) o |o CD O Qi a: oo I CO o o CD d a: CO CD 1- i<0 CO jcd > o OT OC O H-Z O o UJ Q: I-3 U. 5 s o CL O !0 cj Id o CM re 3 C re tD tn m a cc [UJ z Q: cc ICQ l| V) X B £ ro *-s o c — ro re 1 2 3 a w a. >, ™ c § re 0) >, o-re >• > •*-< x: c O) g) 2 0) 0) E ro -o tn Z re o o o cd CO cd cd cd CO o CO CO C i o .2iO CQ z o o o d O jO d i 'CQ ro 3 ro < O c (U ro a: z ica ICQ Q; cc s o o cc Q. o o oc a. 6 o CO 5 s tD O Q. 800 ,700 600 ,500 400 300 I 200 100 100 JOO 500 Casa Cobra Mixed Use Calibration Plan View Run name: A51207N1. Scale: I—- .DEVELOPED 1 100 feet Sheet 1 of 1 31 Jan 2006 Eilar Associates Project/Contract No. TNM Version 2.5, Feb 2004 Roadway: Receiver: Barrier: Building Row: Terrain Line: Analysis By: Kyle Matthis Ground Zone: polygon Tree Zone: dashed polygon Contour Zone: polygon Parallel Barrier: — Skew Section: —/ -300 -200 -100 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 o o re (0 re O tn -I Ul > UJ -J a z 3 O tn in h--1 3 tn UJ oc Ui re « 0) OT w X re 3 Q. OT Q. >, « ^ i re Q) re © £ w ^ re o CQ O cr < CQ CO U UJ ! (A 3 IQ • cr < •5 12 o i c a> I ro Q:: IZ CC cc cc 8 Q; J2 E 3 D) C 1 Q in 5 s o o oc Q. Z tn m -J 2 O O OC a. 6 in o E 3 O > Ol 0) LU 01 V3 V) ffi CO tfi CO oo oo oo oo CNJ CM CD o o CD CD 3 O 4-1 c o O o Z o CM m 3 o c o o z O CM U) E (0 k. o U) CM E (0 k. o a. 6 0) (A i (« .o o o (9 tfl ns O CO o o CM (Q 3 C (0 (0 o E 3 O > or a: o u. o U- li. I- Q. O O tn < w in o o- o < o u. u. Q. o o o o o o tn tfi in in 3 QQ u 3 (fi in u 3 05 (/) 3 O C o o •*-> c x: CL E CI. £ (U > x: E x: > a. £ > O CO o CO o CO o CO CM in CM CO CD CM in CD CM in CM m CO CM in CM in c o CO c o Q. c o CL CO c o Q. O CM CM C O Cl. CM C o CL CO c 'o CL o in CM c o CL CD Csl c o CL >. CO TJ o oc •o c o X3 o (O CO > <D CO O O c 3 o X2 x: •c o c w 0) > < tu c CL T: c o (U > < C T3 C O cu 5 ai > < < 0) c 12 3 O C o o z o CM IO E (0 k. O) o CM z W O iZ E R] cn o li. D. 6 0) m 3 « X JQ O o re w re O tn > t o < o oc 3 Q. Z UJ re i o N CO CO 12 3 O c o o 0) 3 U. c o ^1 Z o IO E re I- O) o L. Q. in CM z u. E 2 O) o o N >->- in CO >->- in m CO >- in > in CM CM >• CM 3 O 4-1 c o o o L. 3 4-> 3 Z h-O CM lO s in 3 O 4^ C o o. z O CM E n O) o a. V) CM S E ra Ui o k. Q. 6 in Q) •o ra u ra u. - O) c 3 CQ 4-1 ra w o > -1 o M "5 z CO o o CM ra 3 C ra -J •a c 3 o (O 4-> 3 a c J: "S X in o T3 ra u ra U- O) c io 3 CQ 4-> ra JO cu > -J 0) in "5 c o ra k. JD "ra O V in 3 "O a> X ra i_ J3 O O ra (0 ra O TJ C 3 O D) (0 0) 4-> ra c '•5 o o o_ in 3 D (0 UJ > o UJ DC 3 Q. Z w !E t! ra fl) >. o < cc H z o o p o UJ o DC a. 0) > 'S u fl) 0) E ra z _d >-> > >-> >-> > >-> > > > > ra c O q o o o q o o o q o q q q q o6 CO cd od od od od od od od od od od od Q:: "ra Q:: o m z (!) TJ o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ci CD c> CD CD CD CD ci CD ci CD CD CD CD ra JQ 3 CD 0) (0 T3 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CD CO CO CO CD o CO CO CO CO CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 4-> x: u ra a fl) < c < CQ T3 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o D) C x: C3 CD CD ci CD CD CD CD CD CD CD ci CD CD 45 w (/) o < X < CQ UJ -J T3 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o T3 in iri iri iri iri iri iri iri iri iri iri iri iri iri o C > 3 o O X3 i_ ra O *: o o CM T— r--T— o o o o in cq in o o iq o CO in o CO cvi CM T-CM c\i CM T— cd cvi T— CO CM CM m in in in in in in in in in in in in in N it: o o o o o o o o o o o o o o cd CM iri iri iri iri ai iri cji CO CO CO CO in 00 o o o CO m o 00 in CO X— >- o CO in in in in o o o o o o o o ci in CD CO CD •r-iri CD iri iri CD iri iri CD CD o CO CO CO CO CJ) CO CO CO CO CO CO CO T— T— X CM CO in CO Oi o T-CM CO in CO oo CO CO CO CO CO CO M-"sr CM CO m CO Oi o CM CO m CO oo c2 CO *2 S2 CO "2: •2; 0) o 03 a3 0) 0) 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 o O O O O O O O O O O O O O 03 03 <D 03 03 03 Q !>«-O CM IO E ra k. Ui o IO CM z h: in 0) E ra k. Ui o I- a. 6 > > > > > q o q O q od od od cd od o o o O o CD CD d ci CD T— T— CO CO CO CD CO CD CD CO CO CO o o o O o o o o O o CD CD CD CD CD CM CM CM CM CM O) O) O) Oi O) •«t T— CM CM T— in T-T— lf3 in •r-cvi CM T- m in in in in m in in in in CO CD T— CD o CO m CO o T— o o q q q CO T— m 00 00 00 00 T— T— CO 00 o CM CM CM CM CO CO 00 Oi o •if CM u-<^ CO L-03 03 0 03 0) > > > > > 03 •fl) '03 •fl) •fl) O O O O o 03 03 03 03 03 DC OC CC CC CC 3 O 4-> C o o fl) 3 U- z o CM T-lO s in lm 3 o 4-> c o o. Z o CM io 5 E 2 Ui o IO CM E ra O) o Q. 6 Appendix B Railway Noise Analysis Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 1 Noise Assessment Guidelines List All Railways within 3000 feet of the site: Note: Future Railway Activity 1. Amtrak Passenger Trains 2. Coaster Passenger Trains 3. Southern Pacific Freight Trains Necessary Infornnation: Railway No. 1 709 Railway No. 2 709 Railway No. 3 709 2. Number of trains in 24 hours: a. diesel 29 22 6 b. electrified 0 0 0 3. Fraction of operations occurring at night 7% 0% 50% (10 p.m.. - 7 a.m.): 4. Number of diesel locomotives per train: 1 1 5 5. Number of rail cars per train: a. diesel trains 6 5 120 b. electrified trains 0 0 0 6. Average train speed: 40 40 40 7. Is track welded or bolted? bolted bolted bolted 8. Are whistles or homs required yes yes yes ror graae crossings^ Rail Templet-developed R1 & R8 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 2 Noise Assessment Guidelines Adjustments for Diesel Locomotives 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. of Average Night-No. of Locomotives Speed Homs time Trains Adj. No. DNL Barrier Partial 1 Table 9 (enter 10) Table 5 (line 2a) of Opns. Workchart 3 Attn. DNL Railway No. 1 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.69 X 29 = 8 50.0 0 = 50.0 Railway No. 2 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.43 X 22 = 4 46.7 0 = 46.7 Railway No. 3 2.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 2.35 X 6 = 26 55.4 0 = 55.4 Adjustments for Railway Cars or Rapid Transit Trains 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Number Average Bolted Night-No. of of Cars Speed Rails time Trains (Line Adj. No. DNL Barrier Partial bU Table 10 (enter 4) Table 5 2a or 2b) of Opns. Workchart4 Attn. DNL Railway No. 1 0.12 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.69 X 29 = 17 42.6 0 = 42.6 Railway No. 2 0.1 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.43 X 22 = 7 38.5 0 = 38.5 Railway No. 3 2.4 X 1.78 X 4 X 2.35 X 6 = 240 54.0 0 = 54.0 Combined Locomotive and Railway Car DNL Railway No. 1 50.7 Railway No. 2 47.3 Railway No. 3 57.8 Total DNL for all Railways 58.9 Signature Date Rail Templet-developed R1 & R8 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 1 Noise Assessment Guidelines List All Railways within 3000 feet of the site: Note: Future Railway Activity 1. Amtrak Passenger Trains 2. Coaster Passenger Trains 3. Southern Pacific Freight Trains ror graae crossings;' Necessary Information: Railway No. 1 Railway No. 2 Railway No. 3 1. Distance in feet from the NAL to the railway track: 754.75 754.75 754.75 2. Number of trains in 24 hours: a. diesel 29 22 6 b. electrified 0 0 0 3. Fraction of operations occurring at night 7% 0% 50% (10 p.m.. - 7 a.m.): 4. Number of diesel locomotives per train: 1 1 5 5. Number of rail cars per train: a. diesel trains 6 5 120 b. electrified trains 0 0 0 6. Average train speed: 40 40 40 7. Is track welded or bolted? bolted bolted bolted 8. Are whistles or horns required yes yes yes Rail Templet-developed R2 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 2 Noise Assessment Guidelines ^Sjus^nentsTo^iese^ocom^^ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. of Locomotives 2 Average Speed Table 9 Horns (enter 10) Night- time Table 5 No. of Trains (line 2a) Adj. No. of Opns. DNL Workchart 3 Barrier Attn. Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.69 X 29 = 8 49.6 0 = 49.6 Railway No. 2 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.43 X 22 = 4 46.3 0 = 46.3 Railway No. 3 2.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 2.35 X 6 = 26 55.0 0 = 55.0 Adjustments for Railway Cars or Rapid Transit Trains 18 Number of Cars bO 19 Average Speed Table 10 20 Bolted Rails (enter 4) 21 Night- time Table 5 22 No. of Trains (Line 2a or 2b) 23 Adj. No. of Opns. 24 DNL Workchart4 25 Barrier Attn. 26 Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.12 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.69 X 29 17 42.2 0 = 42.2 Railway No. 2 0.1 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.43 X 22 = 7 38.1 0 38.1 Railway No. 3 2.4 X 1.78 X 4 X 2.35 X 6 = 240 53.6 0 = 53.6 Combined Locomotive and Railway Car DNL Railway No. 1 50.3 Railway No. 2 46.9 Railway No. 3 57.4 Total DNL for all Railways 58.5 Signature Date Rail Templet-developed R2 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 1 Noise Assessment Guidelines List All Railways within 3000 feet of the site: Note: Future Railway Activity 1. Amtrak Passenger Trains 2. Coaster Passenger Trains 3. Southern Pacific Freight Trains Necessary Information: Railway No. 1 Railway No. 2 Railway No. 3 1. Distance in feet from the NAL to the railway track: 785.5 785.5 785.5 2. Number of trains in 24 hours: a. diesel 29 22 6 b. electrified 0 0 0 3. Fraction of operations occurring at night 7% 0% 50% (10 p.m.. - 7 a.m.): 4. Number of diesel locomotives per train: 1 1 5 5. Number of rail cars per train: a. diesel trains 6 5 120 b. electrified trains 0 0 0 6. Average train speed: 40 40 40 7. Is ti-ack welded or bolted? bolted bolted bolted 8. Are whisties or horns required yes yes yes Rail Templet-developed R3 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 2 Noise Assessment Guidelines ASjustiTTentsToTDiese^^ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. of Locomotives 2 Average Speed Table 9 Horns (enter 10) Night- time Table 5 No. of Trains (line 2a) Adj. No. of Opns. DNL Woricchart 3 Barrier Attn. Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.69 X 29 = 8 49.3 0 = 49.3 Railway No. 2 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.43 X 22 = 4 46.0 0 = 46.0 Railway No. 3 2.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 2.35 X 6 = 26 54.8 0 = 54.8 Adjustments for Railway Cars or Rapid Transit Trains 18 Number of Cars bO 19 Average Speed Table 10 20 Bolted Rails (enter 4) 21 Night- time Table 5 22 No. of Trains (Line 2a or 2b) 23 Adj. No. of Opns. 24 DNL Workchart4 25 Barrier Attn. 26 Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.12 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.69 X 29 = 17 41.9 0 = 41.9 Railway No. 2 0.1 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.43 X 22 = 7 37.9 0 = 37.9 Railway No. 3 2.4 X 1.78 X 4 X 2.35 X 6 = 240 53.4 0 = 53.4 Combined Locomotive and Railway Car DNL Railway No. 1 50.0 Railway No. 2 46.7 Railway No. 3 57.1 Total DNL for all Railways 58.2 Signature Date Rail Templet-developed R3 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 1 Noise Assessment Guidelines List All Railways within 3000 feet of the site: Note: Future Railway Activity 1. Amtrak Passenger Trains 2. Coaster Passenger Trains 3. Southem Pacific Freight Trains Necessary Information: Railway No. 1 Railway No. 2 Railway No. 3 1. Distance in feet from the NAL to the railway track: 815.5 815.5 815.5 2. Number of trains in 24 hours: a. diesel 29 22 6 b. electrified 0 0 0 3. Fraction of operations occurring at night 7% 0% 50% (10 p.m.. - 7 a.m.): 4. Number of diesel locomotives per train: 1 1 5 5. Number of rail cars per train: a. diesel trains 6 5 120 b. electrified trains 0 0 0 6. Average train speed: 40 40 40 7. Is track welded or bolted? bolted bolted bolted 8. Are whisties or homs required yes yes yes Rail Templet-developed R4 & R5 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 2 Noise Assessment Guidelines Adjustments for Diesel Locomotives 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. of Locomotives 1 Average Speed Table 9 Horns (enter 10) Night- time Table 5 No. of Trains (line 2a) Adj. No. of Opns. DNL Workchart 3 Barrier Attn. Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.69 X 29 = 8 49.1 0 = 49.1 Railway No. 2 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.43 X 22 = 4 45.8 0 = 45.8 Railway No. 3 2.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 2.35 X 6 = 26 54.5 0 = 54.5 Adjustments for Railway Cars or Rapid Transit Trains 18 Number of Cars bO 19 Average Speed Table 10 20 Bolted Rails (enter 4) 21 Night- time Table 5 22 No. Of Trains (Line 2a or 2b) 23 Adj. No. of Opns. 24 DNL Workchart4 25 Barrier Attn. 26 Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.12 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.69 X 29 = 17 41.7 0 = 41.7 Railway No. 2 0.1 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.43 X 22 = 7 37.6 0 = 37.6 Railway No. 3 2.4 X 1.78 X 4 X 2.35 X 6 = 240 53.1 0 = 53.1 Combined Locomotive and Railway Car DNL Railway No. 1 49.8 Railway No. 2 46.4 Railway No. 3 56.9 Total DNL for all Railways 58.0 Signature Date Rail Templet-developed R4 & R5 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 1 Noise Assessment Guidelines List All Railways within 3000 feet of the site: Note: Future Railway Activity 1. Amtrak Passenger Trains 2. Coaster Passenger Trains 3. Soutiiem Pacific Freight Trains Necessary Information: Railway No. 1 Railway No. 2 Railway No. 3 1. Distance in feet from the NAL to the railway ti-ack: 780.5 780.5 780.5 2. Number of trains in 24 hours: a. diesel 29 22 6 b. electrified 0 0 0 3. Fraction of operations occurring at night 7% 0% 50% (10 p.m.. - 7 a.m.): 4. Number of diesel locomotives per train: 1 1 5 5. Number of rail cars per train: a. diesel trains 6 5 120 b. electrified trains 0 0 0 6. Average train speed: 40 40 40 7. Is track welded or bolted? bolted bolted bolted 8. Are whistles or horns required yes yes yes Rail Templet-developed R6 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 2 Noise Assessment Guidelines T3]u5bTTen^^^ies^TSco^ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. of Locomotives 1 Average Speed Table 9 Horns (enter 10) Night- time Table 5 No. of Trains (line 2a) Adj. No. of Opns. DNL Workchart 3 Barrier Attn. Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.69 X 29 = 8 49.3 0 = 49.3 Railway No. 2 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.43 X 22 = 4 46.1 0 46.1 Railway No. 3 2.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 2.35 X 6 = 26 54.8 0 = 54.8 Adjustments for Railway Cars or Rapid Transit Trains 18 Number of Cars bO 19 Average Speed Table 10 20 Bolted Rails (enter 4) 21 Night- time Table 5 22 No. of Trains (Line 2a or 2b) 23 Adj. No. of Opns. 24 DNL Workchart4 25 Bamer Atin. 26 Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.12 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.69 X 29 = 17 41.9 0 = 41.9 Railway No. 2 0.1 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.43 X 22 = 7 37.9 0 37.9 Railway No. 3 2.4 X 1.78 X 4 X 2.35 X 6 = 240 53.4 0 = 53.4 Combined Locomotive and Railway Car DNL Railway No. 1 50.1 Railway No. 2 46.7 Railway No. 3 57.2 Total DNL for all Railways 58.3 Signature Date Rail Templet-developed R6 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 1 Noise Assessment Guidelines List All Railways within 3000 feet of the site: Note: Future Railway Activity 1. Amtrak Passenger Trains 2. Coaster Passenger Trains 3. Southem Pacific Freight Trains Necessary Information: Railway No. 1 Railway No. 2 Railway No. 3 1. Distance in feet from the NAL to the railway track: 744 744 744 2. Number of trains in 24 hours: a. diesel 29 22 6 b. electrified 0 0 0 3. Fraction of operations occurring at night 7% 0% 50% (10 p.m.. - 7 a.m.): 4. Number of diesel locomotives per train: 1 1 5 5. Number of rail cars per train: a. diesel trains 6 5 120 b. electrified trains 0 0 0 6. Average train speed: 40 40 40 7. Is track welded or bolted? bolted bolted bolted 8. Are whistles or horns required yes yes yes Rail Templet-developed R7 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 2 Noise Assessment Guidelines ASjus^nentsl^^iese^oc^^ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. of Locomotives 2 Average Speed Table 9 Horns (enter 10) Night- time Table 5 No. of Trains (line 2a) Adj. No. of Opns. DNL Workchart 3 Barrier Attn. Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.69 X 29 = 8 49.7 0 49.7 Railway No. 2 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.43 X 22 4 46.4 0 = 46.4 Railway No. 3 2.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 2.35 X 6 26 55.1 0 = 55.1 Adjustments for Railway Cars or Rapid Transit Trains 18 Number of Cars 50 19 Average Speed Table 10 20 Bolted Rails (enter 4) 21 Night- time Table 5 22 No. of Trains (Line 2a or 2b) 23 Adj. No. of Opns. 24 DNL Workchart4 25 Barrier Attn. 26 Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.12 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.69 X 29 = 17 42.3 0 = 42.3 Railway No. 2 0.1 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.43 X 22 = 7 38.2 0 38.2 Railway No. 3 2.4 X 1.78 X 4 X 2.35 X 6 = 240 53.7 0 = 53.7 Combined Locomotive and Railway Car DNL Railway No. 1 50.4 Railway No. 2 47.0 Railway No. 3 57.5 Total DNL for all Railways 58.6 Signature Date Rail Templet-developed R7 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 1 Noise Assessment Guidelines List All Railways witiiin 3000 feet of the site: Note: Future Railway Activity 1. Amb-ak Passenger Trains 2. Coaster Passenger Trains 3. Southem Pacific Freight Trains Necessary Information: Railway No. 1 Railway No. 2 Railway No. 3 1. Distance in feet from tiie NAL to the railway track: 684 684 684 2. Number of trains in 24 hours: a. diesel 29 22 6 b. electrified 0 0 0 3. Fraction of operations occurring at night 7% 0% 50% (10 p.m.. - 7 a.m.): 4. Number of diesel locomotives per train: 1 1 5 5. Number of rail cars per train: a. diesel trains 6 5 120 b. electrified trains 0 0 0 6. Average train speed: 40 40 40 7. Is track welded or bolted? bolted bolted bolted 8. Are whisties or horns required yes yes yes Rail Templet-developed R9 & 10 Worksheet D Railway Noise Page 2 Noise Assessment Guidelines ASjustment^o^ieseTLoc^^ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. of Locomotives 1 Average Speed Table 9 Horns (enter 10) Night- time Table 5 No. of Trains (line 2a) Adj. No. of Opns. DNL Workchart 3 Barrier Attn. Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.69 X 29 = 8 50.2 0 = 50.2 Railway No. 2 0.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 0.43 X 22 = 4 46.9 0 = 46.9 Railway No. 3 2.5 X 0.75 X 1 X 2.35 X 6 26 55.7 0 = 55.7 Adjustments for Railway Cars or Rapid Transit Trains 18 Number of Cars 50 19 Average Speed Table 10 20 Bolted Rails (enter 4) 21 Night- time Table 5 22 No. of Trains (Line 2a or 2b) 23 Adj. No. of Opns. 24 DNL Workchart4 25 Barrier Attn. 26 Partial DNL Railway No. 1 0.12 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.69 X 29 = 17 42.8 0 = 42.8 Railway No. 2 0.1 X 1.78 X 4 X 0.43 X 22 = 7 38.8 0 = 38.8 Railway No. 3 2.4 X 1.78 X 4 X 2.35 X 6 = 240 54.3 0 54.3 Combined Locomotive and Railway Car DNL Railway No. 1 50.9 Railway No. 2 47.6 Railway No. 3 58.0 Total DNL for all Railways 59.1 Signature Date Rail Templet-developed R9 & 10 Future Calculations at Proposed Building Facades Receiver Receiver dB CNEL Train Noise Overall Floor 2-1 53.1 55.1 58.9 60.4 2 51.1 53.1 58.5 59.6 3 50.1 52.1 58.2 59.2 4 42.4 44.4 58 58.2 5 40.2 42.2 58 58.1 6 42.9 44.9 58.3 58.5 7 45.5 47.5 58.6 58.9 8 49.3 51.3 58.9 59.6 9 54.4 56.4 59.1 61.0 10 54.9 56.9 59.1 61.1 Floor 1-11 39.5 41.5 58.9 59.0 12 54.6 56.6 59.1 61.0 13 55.2 57.2 59.1 61.3 14 53.2 55.2 58.9 60.4 Appendix C Exterior-to-lnterior Noise Analysis 0) < z < z o o o UJ QL LU CO O z o LU h-Z or o LU X LU IS N in o csi CSI tvj E q .2 9- (1) ^ •e < > § 0) o UJ UJ UJ Ul zzzz u o u u ,S A A A it < < < S z z z h- V V V T- N «0 V = tt « « a P P P P oooo CO CO CO CO a (O o v E E o o 3 O CO o vt 3 •o o X is 2 .Q O "5 = 58 ^ 5 ™ o > O Ol ffl .. X- —J Q> IO .. E< ® re •• c Z « 4J 4J Z U U e. ffl ffl C i- k. o Q. Q. a£ X m OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOO -ioooooooop 2 d o ci d ci d o o d CSlT-OOOOOOOOO o o « « I °"<eoooooooooo intoooooooooo >->-ZZZ2ZZZZZ 3 S S 5 5 CO c: S S § f "n" CT cn o .= 9 w « !> 5 5 ;i«)«JAAAAAAAAA (0 (0 < CO CO OO OO OO oo OO 25 CSI CSI IO O O z < < ^ ^ zzzz vvvvvvvvv •5 s UJ I- z < •5 o c Z .2 = S 'S p 1 <^ e- > « •0 « C -1 tt -1 » dl .s-« ine IOS tt w Oo 0 M Z $ w 0 0 0 0 •0 -c •a c a> C tt i c tt ^ a > o B E (0 (0 >--I < z < z g I-o D Q LU Q: LU (0 o z O tx: LU o I- g m f-X LU I "O CO 5c: C-J « lO CD csi " csi CO CO CSI X lO CD csi CO a. o >. tt) E tt •S < 5 E ?| "o lU UJ IU UI zzzz oooo 9 o o o »- V V V T- CM CO ««• — tt tt tt o S ^ ^ ^ U tt 3 3 = 3 n oooo tJ CO CO CO CO c ffl JZ < 4-1 "E 3 ffl Vt 3 "O ffl X i n k. X) o , ^ rsl « Z — !8 ^ S ™ o > O CM ffl ffl U) .. E< « m •• E Z % ra 4-f 4-* Z U U r-ffl ffl C Q. CL Q: X m OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO Q*-: OOOOOOOOOO o ^ d d d d d d d d d d '5 o S •7 P I 5 § = S " > n (D O O 1 0^ l •r- u» OJ ^ CO C'l tf) rr V'l CC) CO csj CD J; VO CM ^ T~ [ CO CO m CO CM ' d ai iti ^ !8 lo CO »- •<- •<r CO T- ^ CM OOOOOOOOOO moooooooooo >- Z 2 Z Z Z -J _l IU UJ z z o o q IO IO oi CSI « « > > tt •o tt C -1 tt -J tt o> 5-« los as Oo o o w Z z 5 w w o o o o •o "C T3 C tt c tt 5 c c — 2 ? 00 £ II ;;«AAAAAAAAAA Q S s s " $ $ ^ ^ zzzz <c ^ ^ ^ zzz vvvvvvvvvv (3 S2 CO CO W CSI in O I- co (0 (0 >- -I < z < z g \-o D Q UJ DC Ui to O Z g on UJ H Z o h-a: g QC UJ H X LU I oo CO 00 CO d i2 oo fO O M oo <5 tt XI £ < ? E -J -J -J -J UJ UJ UJ UJ zzzz oooo CSI CO ^ tt tt O tt ^ u u u 3 3 3 3 OOOO CO CO CO CO E o o TJ ffl m ffl c 3 • CM ffl vt 3 T3 ffl >< s 5 .Q o o ra «. — (Q ro ffl O S ffl. .. ^ _J ffl to .. E < « (0 •• fc Z :» « 4-< 4-1 Z O U r-ffl ffl C k_ i_ o Q. Q. Q: I T- r- lo OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO 00 ^ d d d d d d d d d d OOOOOOOOOO ra tt £ E < = = o 2 > tt ^moooooooooo •o^cooooooooooo s Z >- 2 Z Z Z Z Z Z 2 Z « 1 a s 1 2 r; -i X 2 o o E CO O) ^ s.' C7> od lh csj • i T CM CM T •>- O) v' lfi CO d CM m CSI CN cr? H m CO 1- CN T- CO CN T- CO CM m tt 0) O o .E is in 2 a, o ^? o o C tt 5 = g = v^^ttAAAAAAAAAA "^^^^^$^$<< (^ZZZZZZZZZZ 'vvvvvvvvvv CO CO 25 CSI lo O I- o CO (0 55 < z < Z o o D O UJ QC UJ cn O z QC o UJ H-Z o QC O UJ UJ E o o ffl "O (A ffl 3 ffl ffl 2 X • S ffl ™ z — •2 ^ ffl O CM ffl . . T- —J ffl to .. E< « m •• c Z % « 4-I 4.J Z OOf. ffl ffl c 0. Q. a: ooo ooo UJ UJ UJ UJ zzzz oooo !C < < < S z z z T- CN CO — tt tt tt tt w tJ U U U tt 3 3 3 3 OOOO o CO CO CO CO I T- T- X in Tl-OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO I m X -"T eo OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO C3C)OO C300000 d d d d d d d d d d OOOOOOOOOO ^oooooooooooo OOOOOOOOOO Z>-ZZ222ZZZZZ 3 5 1^ s ttAAAAAAAAAA "'^^^^^$^<"<< W222ZZZZZ2Z "•"vvvvvvvvvv CO lO o cn 1^ <3> d CO CM CN lO CN CN TT CO C» d CO CN csi m CN CN CM r-- ,ri T- £0 00 25 CN m O •<r I- o <^ h-CO (0 (0 >--i < z < z g H O D Q LU QC LU O Z Qi: g QC UJ o QC g QC Ul X LU CM CSI tt I •a IO O <s| «^ 2! • CO E i- c _ .9 Qi 2 S V XI •S < > I tt o UJ UJ UJ UJ zzzz oooo £ < < < H V V v T- CN CO — e « tt tt 2 U U U P tt CSJ X I •E ffl o o « _ o S ffl .. T- —J ffl IO .. E< « n •• c Z % « 4J 4-1 Z U O r-ffl ffl C a. Q. a: I T- X m TJ- X CO •»f X -"T OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO S d d d d d d d d d d X ~ CN o tM 5C S oi d S CM O «N S o S CM O fM oi d j;; c to tt) 0) c to •S 2 o O CM CN d CD -"T csi in ^ CN CM t- T| CM m CM vl CD cji I-.; J^l if) CO •r- CN CM O m T-lO CO CN 5 O) K_ r- ^ CO o o « X CSJOOOOOOOOOO ^COOOOOOOOOOO S! E < = 1^ ^COOOOOOOOOOO z z z z z O Q 5 I-o o 5.S g = 5 S £ M i 2 ttAAAAAAAAAA ^ < < < < < z z z z z z VVVVVVVVVV ^ $ ^ zzz (3 SS CO CO 25 Ol m O •<r H O « I-co CO (0 >-< z < z g H O D Q LU QC UJ (0 O Z QC g QC UJ H- z o H QC g QC UJ h-X UJ o CSI 1 E o o oc 11 S CO o =? <^-c; Z — (fl p: ffl O S ffl .. ^ —J E< g ro •• c Z «: ™ 4-> ^ Z U U c ffl ffl fc •2"2'§ a. OL a: UJ UJ Ul UJ zzzz oooo T- CM »0 ^ = tt tt tt tt 2 p (£ P ^ tt 3 3 3 3 ^ OOOO o CO CO CO CO X T- m Tt OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO p o C3 o q c> C) o o o u) a-' OOOOOOOOOO gt o '« X ^OOOOOOOOOOOO Sj^U^oooooooooo z>-zzzzzz 2 S CO o TI" ? o II Q- c ;ittAAAAAAAAAA 3<^Z22ZZZZZZZ ".'vvvvvvvvvv o E E <^ t 1^ m •<r CN d CN •«r csi •<r -«r CM CN m CM CN r-- in ^ CM in lfi 1-.^ in CO T- CM •r- lO 1^ T-m CM CM m O > o K-O H Q LU QC Ul (0 O z QC g QC UJ K Z o QC g QC UJ I-X Ul E o o tc ? I X I ii ffl o =? «'-<^ z — S ^ 8 O S ffl (D IO .. E< g CO C Z « 4J ^ U O c OOC k. h. o Q. Q. Q£ UJ UJ UJ UJ zzzz oooo I- v V V 1- CM CO Tt = tt tt tt tt ^ U l£ O OOOO CO CO CO CO ooooooooooo ooooooooooo ooooooooooo ooooooooooo ooooooooooo ooooooooooo ooooooooooo d d d d d d d d d d d ooooooooooo 51 ° tt X "ooooooooooo '•ooooooooooo Z2ZZ2Z2Z2Z2Z AAAAAAAAAA . ^ < < 5 2 Z 2 ^ 5 ^ ^ 2 2 2 2 Z 2 o ° c ;^ -J o O 0) CM CO CO TT csi m •<»• CM CM ^ O 0> CM CO ui i6 T-^ lO TT CM CM = s « jp .2 3 ^ S 1 "i: e- •C »l ID B <a n m H •S 2 o J3 •>r o o> CM 5c: Jo 5 <» m (D _: TT TT CM CM f CN CM ^ CO T- CN q o> CN ci lfi cd m CM CM •>r q cn csj oi ui cd T- ir TT CM CM Ol O CT) CN <d r-' oi •<T V oi CM •<r o o) CM T-^ ui cd TT CO T- CM VVVVVVVVV Appendix D Sound Insulation Prediction Results Sound Insulation Prediction (v6.0) Program copyright Marshall Day Acoustics 2004 i Margin of error is generally within +/- 3STC JobName:Casa Cobra Mixed Use JobNo.:A51207N Page No: Date: 25 Jan 06 lnitials:KJM Notes: Typical exterior wall assembly File name:Exterior to Interior wall.ins 1 X 0.6 in Gypsum Board 7.5 in 1 X 0.9 in Fibre Cement 1 X 0.5 in Plywood STC 45 c 0 ctr 0 Surf, mass 7.1 Ib/ft2 Surf, mass 1.5 Ib/ft2 Crit. freq 1350 Hz Crit. freq 1828 Hz damping 0.01 tnTtrt Frequency (Hz) TL(dB) TL(dB) 50 20 63 24 23 80 30 100 32 125 35 35 160 38 200 39 250 41 41 315 43 400 44 500 45 ' 45 630 46 800 48 1000 47 45 1250 43 1600 41 2000 43 43 , 2500 46 3150 49 4000 52 51 5000 55 5.5 in y Studs @ 18 in Surf, mass 2.3 Ib/ft2 Crit. freq 2231 Hz damping 0.01 mnil ffcerglass (0.6 Ib/ft3) thickness 5.5 in fo =54 Hz ffl 60; 55^ 50; 45; 40; 35: 30; 25; 15; 10- 5: 0- 1 : / / : S / _ s / : : : ; : — 63 125 250 500 1000 frequencv (Hz) 2000 4000 Sound Reduction Index(dB) STC ARC-CN7C National Research Council Canada Element Description 1 13 mm thick regular gypsum board 2 140 mm deep wood stud at 406 mm on centre 3 152 mm thick glass fibre insulation in cavity 4 11 mm thick oriented strand board 5 0.7 mm thick building paper 6 9.5 mm of cement stucco TU-99-091a G13_WS140(406)_GFB152_OSB11_BPAP0.7_STUC9.5 Construction Type: wall x X X element 1 element 2 element 3 element 4 element 5 element 6 type gypsum board studs insulation sheathing paper stucco material regular wood glass fibre OSB buiMmg paper cement thickness (mm) 13 140 152 11 0.7 9.5 spacing (mm) • 406 * • • • total mass (kg) 71 95 13 58 52 139 linear density (ig/m) * 2.8 * • * « surtace density (kg/m^) 7.9 « 1.4 6.5 0.6 16 fastener spacing #1 (mm) 406 * 152 edges * * fastener spacing #2 (mm) * « 305 fiekl ' indicates not applicabie TL, dB 100 Freq, Hz TL, dB 100 50 23 90 63 21 90 80 21 100 18 80 125 16 160 24 70 200 37 CQ T3 250 37 S~60 315 38 3 400 44 c J° 50 500 46 CO 500 630 48 E 800 52 g 40 CO 1000 54 J— 1250 57 30 1600 59 2000 59 20 2500 55 3150 50 10 4000 51 10 5000 56 0 STC 40 OITC 29 63 500 Frequency, Hz Page 98 Table 3.1b Glass Sound Transmission Loss Data' Glass Configuration Insulating 30 10dB@400H2 32 9dB@315Hz in CO M X o o CO .® m T3 o 1^ CO Ta- CO CSJ CO CSJ 00 CSJ CM o CO m CO CO CSJ CO in - CO in CO CO LO CO Td- oo in LO CO in CM in Ta-co CO CO CSJ in CO to o in CJ5 CO • CO TT o Ta-CO Ta- CM CD , Tcr CO CD CO 00 CO CO in CO CO CD CO CD o . T3-CD CO CO TT in CO CO CD CO o T3- CM o in CO CO un 00 CD CO o in , o CO CSJ CO CD CO CD CO CD CO o in CSJ CD CSJ Ta-co CO CO CO CO CO Ta- TS-CSI CM CM CO CD CO in CO Ta- CD CO CSJ CO CO CO in CO co CO cn in CSI CO CM o CO 00 CO CD CSI CO CSJ LO CM CD CSJ CO o CO CO CSJ o CSJ oo 1— CO CM CO 00 CO CSJ CO CSJ CO CM 00 CM o CO csj CO CSJ CM CSJ in CM CD oo CM CO CSI CO CM crt CM o CM CM CM TT CM 1/8" -1/4" AS" • 1/8" (SEALED) RAL-TL85-212 CO E2 < ?3 Is Q S CO LU _J . —1 h- = < _j < CM SJ Q S •f- UJ _l i —1 t— = < _j CD c5 * in <n ^ < CM ^qS , UJ —i . _l 1— CO _J 5= UJ ^ * CO W Q S < y in ^ < 3 CO CO * * CD fn < Q CM = y in T < 3 ' UJ pl CO -T^ 1 ^ ci CC CD d « s "s; CO CO Q. 6u!}e|nsu| uoiiBjnBiiuoo ssB|9 3.4 CO * * in < 00 z g < a: g u. Z o o S o Q Z g 50001 in 4000 CO 3150 Ui CO 2500 CD 2000 1600 o 1250 CD CO 1000 CO CO -cl-eo o o oo o CO o CO CD r»- CNJ O o in 'cr CNI CNJ o o CD in CO CNJ o in CNI CD CNJ CNJ o o CNJ CO CNJ o CD CO CNJ in CNJ X— CNJ CNJ O O CD CNI 1 Freq [Hz] o O LL z g < g u. Z o o soooj in in 4000 CNJ in CO in 3150 Ui 0093 CD 0003 CO 1600 1250 CO 1000 CD o o CO CO o CO CD CD o o in in in o o in T— CO CO o in CNI o o CNJ Ui CO 091. CO CO in CNJ in CO CD CO o o CNJ CO 1 Freq [Hz] 1/3 oct Full Oct mm Appendix E Recommended Products TECHNICAL DATA ACOUSTICAL SOUND SEALANT, Non-Flammable DESCRIPTION Pro-Series® SC-175™ Acoustical Sound Sealant is a one-part, non- flammable, latex base product de- signed specially for the reduction of sound transmission in all types of wall partition systems. Its primary function is to achieve and maintain the specific STC (Sound Transmission Class) value of the system designed. Sealant remains permanently flexible and adheres firmly to wood or metal studs, concrete, gypsum board and most other types of building substrates. Maintains a tough rubber-like seal against air-bome sound, air infiltration and moisture. SC-175™ offers fast, smooth, easy application without difficulty in extrusion. Clean up is also quick and easy with just soap and water. Field tested and field proven, Pro- Series® SC-175™ is recognized across the country by drywall manufac- turers and architects as an effective means of reducing sound transmission. FEATURES • UL tested and classified • Non-flammable fonnulation • Easy application and easy clean up • Will not harden, crack or separate • Non-staining and non-migrating • High degree of adhesive and cohesive strength USES Pro-Series® SC-175™ was developed primarily for commercial construction utilizing light weight cavity walls and PHYSICAL PROPERTIES Type Synthetic Latex Rubber Vehicle Water Color White Solids by Weight 75% Flash Point 200°F. TCC (minimum amount of solvent present) Flammability Non-Flammable Toxicity Toxic only if swallowed. Refer to MSDS. Tooling/Open Time 15 minutes Tack Free Time 30 minutes Cure Time 2-7 days Application temperature 40°F. minimum Service Temperature -5°F. to 170°R Freeze-Thaw Stability Freeze-thaw stable for at least 3 cycles. Unaffected by freezing after curing. Sag or Slump Nil (ASTM D2202) Shore "A" Hardness 45 +/- 5 (Cured 30 days at room temperature) Elongation 200% AcceleratedWeathering No cracks, no discoloration, no chalking: 1000 hrs. in Xenon Arc Weatherometer Shelf Life 1 year from date of manufacture at 75°F. Clean Up Soap and Water floor systems. The sealant is used for exposed and unexposed applications at perimeter joints, floor and ceiling runners (either wood or metal), cut- outs in gypsum board, veneer plaster systems and other areas where a sound rated assembly is required. The sealant is also applied or buttered around all electrical boxes and outlets, cold air retums, heating and air conditioning ducts, and other utility equipment penetrating wall surfaces for increased acoustical performance. Tfie product is also excellent for perimeter sealing in residential construction around base and sill plates to help reduce air infiltration and unwanted moisture. SC-175™ is used successfully in office buildings, sound studios, hospitals, hotels, motels, schools, apartment complexes and other types of commercial and residen- tial constnjction where sound ratings are required. SPECIFICATIONS UL Classified - 48S9 (R9732). Tested in accordance with and conforms to: UL 723: U.B.C. Standard No. 42-1 Class I. ASTM E84: Surface Burning Charac- teristics of Building Materials. ASTM E90-85: Laboratory Measure- ment of Airborne-Sound Transmis- sion Loss of Building Materials. ASTM D217: Testing Standard for Consistency. ASTM C919-79: Standard Practice for Use of Sealants in Acoustical Applications. LIMITATIONS Do not use below freezing tempera- ture. When temperatures are below 40°F, it is recommended that product be kept at a minimum tem- perature of 45°F or higher when using. PACKAGING 29 oz. cartridges - 12/case Item # 17529 1 gallon pail - 4 pail Item # 17591 5 gallon pail -1 pail Item # 17595 STORAGE Keep from freezing. Store in cool, dry place at room temperature, preferably at 75°F. +/- 5° for maximum shelf life and performance. CO o O W Cl 33 O (J) O m 3 m w H m o X z o > 03 ro o o o COVERAGE 29 oz. cartridge: 3/8" bead - approx. 40 lin. ft. 1/4" bead - approx. 89 lin. ft. 5 gallon pail: 3/8" bead - approx. 174 lin. ft./gal. 1/4" bead - approx. 392 lin. ft./gal. PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS 1. Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Classified 48S9 (R9732). UL 723: Sealant tested for surface burning characteristics. Applied to Inorganic Reinforced Cement Board* Flame Spread 5 Smoke Developed 5 *Tested as applied in two 1/2 in. beads, 8 in. on center. The sealant covered 5.6 percent of the exposed sample area. 2. ASTM E90-85: STC Value - Effect of sealing the opening on a test wall partition. APPLICATION PROCEDURES 1. All surfaces must be clean, dry and free of dirt, dust, oil, moisture and other foreign substances which could interfere with the bond of the Test partition consisted of metal studs 24" O.C. with double layer gypsum board, Rrecode "C" and attached with screws on both sides. Inside of partition was filled with sound insulation. Partition system was erected and shimmed out 4.75 mm (0.1875 in.) at top, bottom and edges. Results: Sound Transmission Class Value. sealant. 2. Cut spout on tube to desired bead size (3/8" round bead recom- mended) and puncture seal inside spout. 3. Sealant should be applied as specified in the souncj-rated system being installed (either wood or metal studs). A. Bottom Runners: Apply a continuous 3/8" round bead of sealant at each side of the runners before setting gypsum board. Gypsum board shall be set into sealant to form complete contact with adjacent materials. Repeat procedure for double layer applica- tions. B. Top Runners: Apply sealant at top of gypsum board into the joint to provide full contact between the board and the structure above. C. Cut-Outs and Perimeter Joints: Backs of electrical boxes, pipes, duct systems and other types of utility equipment penetrating wall surfaces shall be buttered with sealant All joints at perimeter edges including abutting surfaces and corner joints formed by components shall be sealed with sealant. 4. Maximum joint sizes should not exceed 5/8" x 1/2". 5. Clean tools and excess sealant immediately after application with soap and water. 6. If necessary, sealant can be painted as applicable to meet project requirements after 24 hours. CAUTIONS CONTAINS ETHYLENE GLYCOL and MINERAL SPIRITS. Do not take internally. If swallowed may cause abdominal discomfort, dizziness or malaise. Use with adequate ventila- tion. KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN. FIRST AID In case of eye contact, flush immedi- ately with plenty of clean water for at least 15 minutes. Consult a physician. If swallowed, give water and induce vomiting. Call physician. If dizziness occurs, remove to fresh air. For skin contact, wash with soap and water. NOTICE TO PURCHASER OSI Sealants, Inc. warrants the quality of this product when used according to directions. User shall determine suitability of product for use and assumes all risk. THE FOREGOING WARRANTIES ARE IN LIEU OF ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRAN- TIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE NOT EXPRESSLY SET FORTH HEREIN. If not satisfied with the product's perfor- mance when used as directed, return sales receipt and used container to OSI Sealants, Inc., 7405 Production Drive, Mentor, Ohio 44060 for product replacement. The seller will not accept liability for more than product replace- ment. 1. Un-sealed partition - Arrows show sound o o CVJ >. STC=15 ca 2. Single bead of sealant used at top and bottom runners only • both sides of partition system. STC=24 FOR COMMERCIAL USE CONTACT OSI SEALANTS TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE AT viaviv.os/sea/a/7fs.co/n. I-z < < UJ tf) Q Z 3 o tf) < o I-tf) ^ o tf) o 6< oc in tf) 6 O tf) Metal Stud Partition Door/window frame in a hollow partition 3. Single bead of sealant used at top, bottom and perimeter joints - both sides of system. y STC=45 4. Double bead of sealant used at top, bottom and all perimeter edges. Both sides of partition system. STC=55 OSI Sealants, Inc. 7405 Production Drive Mentor, OH 44060 U.S.A. Phone: (800) 624-7767 (440) 255-8900 Fax: (440) 974-8358 8011175 Appendix F Excerpts of Typical Building Plans/ Elevations, and Cross-Sections I CARLSB D VILLA iE DRIVE srrE VICINITY MAP i J i J c C) EXIST. POWER POtE l2'-0" 16'-0' 37'-6' 80.42' lO'-O- 16.92' • EXIST. CURB AND (SUTTER 65'-0- 1^ lO'-O" PINE AVi;^ SITE PLAN SCLAE: iy8"-l'-0" u IB o O VI u O • I I • 9 «t If 91 SS DC tf\ IU 0 0 • < w< > ffl luiq < to J oir 0 ft 0 OMBCKBO A ROOFING: MISSION CLAYTILE ROOF ROOF SLOPE: 4:12 PITCH PROPERTY UNE SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE; 1/8"-r-o- I 1 41 91 oil u < % O K OSS CMBCKBO l/8--l"-0" CLAD WINDOWS WCX30 RAIUNGS 51.51 E.G. ^ STONE VENEER ^CLAD WINDOWS CANVAS AWNINGS 52.12 E.CS. LAD WINDOWS ili it mm " I I Y I h « T sf Si O (OSS % OK OSS CMBCKBO c VIEW 1 VIEW 2 VIEWS