Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 05-10; State Street Mixed Use; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (3)ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT) CASE NO: DATE: ^/^^P^ BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: ^t)^ ^tfe^^ Ut-^^ 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: ^^SffX^tX^'fM'^ CPt(tl6^»K^^ ^^^ZOfOS 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: 4. PROJECT LOCATION: 5. PRQJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: 3^ '^T^^M'- ^fa»e 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: ^>l^t2I^^T^ ^^(VeA>$>gA?C> "T^^^fes!^^ :29ki^ 7. ZONING: 8. Rev. 07/26/02 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTL\LLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by diis project mvolvmg 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. • Aesthetics I I Agricultural Resources Air Quality I I Biological Resources Cultural Resources 0 Geology/Soils Q Noise 1 I Hazards/Hazardous Materials CH Population and Housing Q Hydrology/Water Quality Q Public Services I I Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance I I Recreation • Transportation/Circulation Utilities & Service Syst ems Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources), (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached,) I. II. III. 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? AGRICULTRAL RESOURCES - (In detennining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Califomia AgriculUiral 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 Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could resuh in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? 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 l^s Than Significant Impact No Impact • • • • • • • • • m • • • • • • • • ^ • • • ^ • • • 0 • • • B 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-attaioment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? rv. 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, vemal pool, cojistal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological intermption, 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 Impact • • • • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • • • • H • 0 • • 0 • • • EI • • Kf • • • 0" • W • Ef Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Infonnation 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 stmctures 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 Publication 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 defmed in Table 18 - l-B ofthe Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • ET • • • H • • • • KT • • • Kf • • • KT • • • El • • • • • • K • • • • • • 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 alteraative 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 public 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 £in adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or stmctures 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? Vin. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Potentially Significant Impact • • • • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact • • 0 • • • • • • K • m • • • s • • • ^ • ^ • 53 • • • ^ Rev, 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) b) Substantially 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 which 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 pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern 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 mnoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off- site? f) Create or contribute mnoff 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 stmctures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? j) Expose people or stmctures to a significant risk of loss injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? k) Inimdation 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 Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • ^ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • m • ^ • • • H • p • 0 • ^ • 1^ • • ® • • • 0 Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) n) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fi-esh or wetiand waters) during or following constmction? o) Increase in any pollutant to an aheady impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? p) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would tiie project: a) Physically divide an established conimunity? 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 thc 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 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 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 pubUc 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? xn. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would tiie project: a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectiy (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastmcture)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the constmction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the constmction of replacement housing elsewhere? xm. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered govemment facilities, a need for new or physically altered govemment facilities, the constmction 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 Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • P • • • ^ • p • • • P • • • ^ i) Fire protection? • • • ii) Police protection? • • • & iii) Schools? • • • iv) Parks? • • • V) Other public facilities? • • • 0 XIV. 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? • • • 1^ 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 constmction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would tiie project: a) 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)? • • • outs, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS project: Would tiie a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the constmction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the constmction of which would cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the constmction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the constmction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project fi'om existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? • • • • • • Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • • • EI • • • K • • KT • m nam e) Result in inadequate emergency access? • • • f) Result in insufficient parking capacity? • • • g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting altemative transportation (e.g., bus tura-• • • • ^ • ^ • • Kf • • • ^ 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 landfill 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? XVn. 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 wildlife 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 California 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 directiy or indirectly? XVni. EARLIER ANALYSES Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • • • ^ • • • 1^ • • • 0" • • ^ • • • 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 following 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 Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. Rev. 07/26/02 Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT Consultation Of Lists of Sites Related To Hazardous Wastes (Certification of Compliance with Government Code Section 65962.5) Pursuant to State of California Government Code Section 65962.5, I have consulted the Hazardous Wastes and Substances Sites List compiled by the California Environmental Protection Agency and hereby certify that (check one): ^ The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the State Government Code. • The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application arg contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the State Government Code. APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER Name:^^^^^ ^>^A/MO ^ A^/^ Name: ^OV"/ T/^QTlTcSZ LL^C^ Address: leO^STm^ sr. SOfVf C Address: C/jjU^i^;^ UtU-^ge, Phone Number: flC>o) ^?>^^&¥^ Phone Number: Address of Site: gr7^ S7 CA^'^Adj?^ ^'t'OoS Local Agency (City and Countv): ^^7Y C/\>fi^'S/iyiO Assessor's book, page, and parcel number: ^^7^ Specify list(s): V^^SS^^K^ gg^-tfrv^i/^^^fS^ ^^l^^L. ^ Regulatory Identification Number: Date of List- O^^^Oie^ ^>V^ V>J€te>Yr^ Applicant Signature/Date Propert^wnef Signature/Date Admin/Counter/HazWaste 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us ^ The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese List) Is a planning document used by the State, local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements In providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. Government Code section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency to develop at least annually an updated Cortese List Beiow is a list of agencies that maintain information regarding Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites. Department of Toxic Substances Control www.dtsc.ca.gov/database/calsltes Calsites Hotiine (916) 323-3400 State Water Resources Control Board www.swrcb.ca.qov/cwphome/lustls County of San Diego Certifled Unified Program Agency (CUPA) Mike Dorsey Chief, Hazardous Materials Division Departinent of Environmental Health Services Hazardous Materials Management Division Mailing address: P.O. Box 129261 San Diego, CA 92112-9261 (619) 338-2395 Call Duty Specialist for General Questions at (619) 338-2231 fax: (619) 338-2315 www.co.san-dieqo.ca.us Integrated Waste Management Board www.clwmb.ca.qov 916-255-4021 Environmental Protection Agency National Priorities Sites ("Superfund" or "CERCLIS") www.epa.qov/superfund/sites/cursites (800) 424-9346 National Priorities List Sites in the United States www.epa.qov/superfund/sites/npl/npl,htm 5/19/03 MftR-03-2005 li:ie BECEIVED HAR 27 2085 NOISE ANALYSIS FOR 3044 STATE STREET TOWNHOMES «5» CITY OF CARLSBAD DEPARTMENT Report #06-46 March 2,2006 Prepared For Anastasi Development Company^ LLC 1200 Aviation Boulevard Redondo Beach, CA 90278 Prepared By: Fred Greve, P.E. Bill Vasquez Mestre Greve Associates 27812 El Lazo Road Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Phone (949) 349-0671 FAX (949) 349-0679 MfiR-03-2006 11:1B K. B ^rs fstre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 2 of 14 SUMMARY NOISE ANALYSIS FOR 3044 STATE STREET TOWNHOMES CITYOFCARLSBAD EXTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION The exterior living areas in the project must comply with the City's 60 CNEL exterior noise standard. For the exterior living areas that are exposed to noise levels greater than 60 CNEL, some form of noise mitigation is required. An effective method of reducing the traffic noise to acceptable levels is with a noise barrier. The resulte of the analvsis indicate that in order to meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard, noise barriers will be required along State Street. Balconies are planned for the 3044 State Street Town homes. According to the City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual - Appendix J, any balconies greater than six feet deep are considered exterior living areas, and must also meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard. (Balconies six feet deep or less are not subject to the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard, and would not require balcony barriers). In order to meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard, balcony noise barriers will be required for any decks built adjacent to State Street The required balcony noise barriers necessary for the balconies to meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard are listed below in Table Sl and shown in Exhibits Sl and $2. Table Sl REQUIRED SECOND FLOOR EXTERIOR LIVING AREA NOISE BARRIER HEIGHTS AND LOCATIONS REQUIRED BARRIER LOCATION HEIGHT Along State Street. Units 1.2 and 3. 2^^ AND 3"^ FLOOR BALCONIES 5.0* * - wall heijsht relative to balcony floor MRR-03-2006 11:18 2nd Floor Balconies Requiring 5.0' Noise Barrier MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES Exhibit Sl - Balcony Barriers Required In Order To Meet Exterior Noise Standard MfiR-03-2006 11-IS 1^ — : \ 3rd Floor Balconies Reqniring 5.0' Noise Barrier X MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES Exhibit S2 - Balcony Barriers Required In Order To Meet Exterior Noise Standard MPlR-03-2006 11=19 P. 06/29 lestre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 3 of 14 The balcony noise barriers must have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The wall may be constructed of 3/8-inch plate glass, 5/8-inch plexiglass, stud and stucco construction, or a combination of these materials. The floors for the decks must be solid; slat floors are not acceptable. All exterior living areas in the project are projected to meet thc 60 CNEL outdoor noise standard with the balcony noise barriers listed in Table Sl. Thc noise barrier heights are relative to the balcony floor. INTERIOR NOISE The project must comply with the City of Carlsbad indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. To meet the interior noise standard, che buildings must provide sufficient outdoor to indoor building anenuation to reduce the noise to acceptable levels. The outdoor to indoor noise reduction characteristics of a building are determined by combining the transmission loss of each of the building elements that make up the building. Each unique building element has a characteristic transmission loss. For residential units, the critical building elements are the roof, walls, windows^ doors, attic configuration and insulation. The total noise reduction achieved is dependent upon the transmission loss of each element, and the siuface area of that element in relation to the total surface area of the room. Room absorption is the fmal factor used in determining the total noise reduction. Exierior building surfaces in die project will be exposed to noise levels of 63.1 CNEL, and therefore will require more than 18.1 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the City's 45 CNEL interior noise standard. Witb construction practices common in Califomia, residential buildings achieve outdoor to indoor noise reductions of at least 20 dB. Therefore, all rooms are projected to meet thc Citv_'s 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades. ADEQUATE VENTILATION Since the noise attenuation of a building falls to about 12 dB with windows open, all buildings exposed to noise levels greater than 57 C:NEL will meet thc 45 CNEL interior noise standard only with windows closed. In order to assume that windows can remain closed to achieve this required attenuation, adequate ventilation with windows closed must be provided per the applicable Uniform Building Code. Adequate ventilation will be required for those homes listed in Table S2 and shown in Exhibit S3. MAR-03-2006 11:19 r.xare.^ ^^stre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 4 of 14 Table S2 VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS BUILDING Along State Street Units 1,2,3 MfiR-03-2006 11:19 X Buildings Requiring Adequate Ventflation MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES Exhibit S3 - VentUation Requirements MfiR-03-2006 Ii:i9 FTEgT^T 0lstre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 5 of 14 NOISE ANALYSIS FOR 3044 STATE STREET TOWNHOMES CITYOFCARLSBAD LO INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to demonstrate compliance of the 3044 State Street Townhomes with thc noise related 'Conditions of Approval' placed on the project by thc City of Carlsbad. Thc project calls for the development of multi-family homes. The project is located in the City of Carisbad, as shown in Exhibit 1. The project will be impacted by traffic noise from State Street and from the Santa Fe Railroad line. This report specifies any mitigation measures necessary to meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard. Site plan and grading information was obtained from the ''State Street Mixed Use" plans by Kamak Planning and Design, February 28,2006. 2.0 CITY OF CARLSBAD NOISE STANDARDS The City of Carlsbad specifies outdoor and indoor noise limits for traffic noise levels at residential land uses. Both standards are based upon the CNEL index. CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) is a 24-hour time weighted annual average noise level based on the A- weighted decibel. A-weighting is a frequency correction that correlates overall sound pressure levels with the frequency response of the human ear. Time weighting refers to the fact that noise that occurs during certain noise-sensitive time periods is given more significance because it occurs at these times. In the calculation of CNEL, noise occurring in the evening time period (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) is weighted by 5 dB, while noise occurring in the nighttime period (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) is weighted by 10 dB. These time periods and weighting factors are used to reflect increased sensitivity to noise while sleeping, eating, and relaxing. The City ofCarlsbad has adopted an exterior noise standard of 60 CNEL for transportation noise. In addition, the City has decided upon an interior noise standard of 45 CNEL for residents, and 55 CNEL for General Office, Generai Conunercial, Heavy Commercial, etc. CARLSBAD CAHSBAD / W.ACE D :^ I cs u I ro o ro C3 MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES Exhibit 1 - Vicinity Map M(=lR-03-2006 11 = 20 r.ii/^^ istre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 6 of 14 3.0 METHODOLOGY Thc traffic noise levels projected in this report were computed using thc Highway Noise Model published by thc Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model", FHWA-RD-77-108, December 1978). The FHWA Model uses traffic volume, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute the ^'equivalent noise level". A computer code has been written which computes equivalent noise levels for each of the time periods used in CNEL. Weighting these noise levels and summing them results in the CNEL for the traffic projections used. Mitigation tiirough the design and construction of a noise barrier (wall, berm, or combination wall/berm) Is the most common way of alleviating traffic noise Impacts. The effect of a noise barrier is critically dependent upon the geometry between the noise source, the barrier, and the observer. A noise barrier effect occurs when the "iine of sight" between the noise source and the observer is interrupted by the barrier. As the distance that the noise must travel around the noise barrier increases, the amount of noise reduction increases. 4.0 NOISE EXPOSURE 4.1 Traffic Noise The existing traffic volume for State Street was obtained from Mr. Jim Gale at the City of Carisbad on February 16, 2006. A projected (year-2026) traffic volume was calculated using a 2% per year growth factor. The traffic volume, vehicle speed, and roadway grade used in the CNEL calculations are presented below in Table 1. Table 1 FUTURE TRAFHC VOLUME, SPEED, AND ROADWAY GRADE ROADWAY TRAFHC VOLUME SPEED GRADE State Street 5,068 25 <3% The traffic distribution for State Street that was used in the CNEL calculations is listed below in Table 2. This arterial traffic distribution estimate was compiled by the Orange County Environmental Management Agency, and is based on traffic counts at 31 intersections throughout the Orange County area. Arterial traffic distribution estimates can be considered typical for arterials in Southem California. MAR-03-2006 11 20 P. 12/^ lestre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 7 of 14 Table 2 TRAFHC DISTRIBUTION FER TIME OF DAY IN PERCENT OF ADT VEHICLETYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT Automobile 75.51 12.57 9.34 Medium Truck 1.56 0.09 0.19 Heavy Truck 0.64 0.02 0.08 Using the assumptions presented above, the future noise levels were computed. The results are listed in Table 3 in terms of distances to the 60,65, and 70 CNEL contours. These represent the distances from the centeriine of the roadway to the contour value shown. Note that the values given in Table 3 do not take into account the effect of intervening toix>graphy that may affect the roadway noise exposure. Table 3 DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOURS POR FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS DISTANCE TO CONTOUR (FT) ROADWAY -70 CNEL--65CNEI^ -60CNEL- State Street RW 16 34 RW - indicates noise contours falls within Roadway right of way. Tbe results in Table 3 and the site plan (Exhibit 2) indicate that first floor exterior observers along State Street would be exposed to a maximum unmitigated traffic noise level of 59.7 CNEL. ExUbit 2 • Site Plan MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES MftR-03-2006 11:21 mifrzT [estre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 8 of 14 4.2 Railroad Noise Exposure The Santa Fe Railroad line passes near the western boundary of the site. To determine train noise levels, the Wyle Model was used ("Assessment of Noise Environments Around Railroad Operations," Wyle Laboratories Report WCR-73-5, July, 1973). The noise generated by train operations can be divided into two components; noise generated by the engine or locomotive, and noise generated the railroad cars. The characteristic frequency of the engine is different than tiie characteristic frequency of tiie cars. The noise generated by tiie engine is die result of the mechanical movements of the engine parts, and to a lesser extent, the exhaust system. The noise generated by the cars is a result of the interaction between the wheels and the railroad track. A zero source height is used for tiic car noise, and a source height of 10 feet is utilized for the locomotive. It should be noted that railroads are free to change operations at their discretion. The total number of operations and the times at which they occur arc therefore subject to change. The railroad line will be used for freight and passenger train operations. The site was visited on February 21, 2006 to measure the noise levels from train operations and calibrate the train noise model. The noise monitor used to measure the noise levels was a Briiel &. Kjstr Type 2236 Sound Level Meter. The measurement system was calibrated before and after the measurements with a Briiel & Kjsr Type 4230 sound level calibrator, with calibration traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Mitigation through the design and construction of a noise barrier (wall, berm, or combination wall/berm) is tbe most common way of alleviating traffic and railroad noise impacts. The effect of a noise barrier is critically dependent upon the geometry between the noise source, the bartier, and the observer. A noise barrier effect occurs when the "line of sight'' between the noise source and the observer is broken by the barrier. As the path length that the sound travels around the barrier increases, the level of noise reduction increases. The Wyle Model was also used here in computerized format to determine barrier heights. Amtrak and Coaster information was based upon field observations and train schedules. Projected freight train operations were obtained from Mr. Edward Kasparik on July 26,2004. Thc projected future operational data presented in Table 4 was utilized in conjunction with the Wyle Model to project train noise levels on the project site. The train noise model used for Amtrak and commuter trains was calibrated in order to more closely match actual measured noise levels. Train noise levels were lower than the model predicts. This may be due to continuously welded rails and/or quieter engines. The modeled Amtrak noise levels were adjusted by 5.6 dB, Coaster noise levels were adjusted by 8.4 dB, and local freight noise levels were adjusted by 5.0 dB to reflect tiie lower measured noise levels. riPlR-03-2006 11:21 P • 15/29 istre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 9 of 14 Table 4 RAILROAD OPERATIONS MODELED OPERATION FREIGHT AMTRAK COASTER Day 3 18 18 Evening 1 2 1 Night 2 2 3 Number of Engines 2 1 1 Number of Cars 84 5 5 Speed 40 55 15 The worst case proposed exterior living area is assumed to be approximately 281 feet from the railroad tracks. At this location, if shielding is not present, the worst case noise levet associated with train operations was estimated to be 60.7 CNEL. 4.3 Totai Noise Exposure The west face of the project will be exposed to traffic noise and railroad noise. Projecting the noise levels from two noise sources and combining them logarithmically results in the total noise levels impacting the project site. Calculations have established that the first fioor railroad noise level at 281 feet from the railroad tracks is 60.7 CNEL. The traffic noise level (at tiiis location) from Statc Street is 59.7 CNEL. Summing these noise levels results in an unmitigated combined traffic/railroad noise level of 63.1 CNEL impacting the west face of the project. A summary of noise levels are shown in Table 5. MAR-03-2006 11:21 istre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 10 of 14 Tables SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL AND COMBINED NOISE LEVELS (CNEL) Location State Street Railroad TOTAL Level Balcony 61.5 4.5' 54.2 60.6 61.5 5.0' 53.2 55.6 57.6 5.5' 51.9 54.2 56.2 3"* Level Balconv 4.5' 52.7 60.6 61.3 5.0' 51.4 55.5 56.9 5.5^ 50.1 53.8 55.3 5.0 EXTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION The exterior living areas in thc project must comply with tiie City's 60 CNEL exterior noise standard. For the exterior living areas that are exposed to noise levels greater than 60 CNEL, some form of noise mitigation is required. An effective method of reducing the traffic noise to acceptable levels is with a noise barrier. The results of the analvsis indicate that in order to meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard, noise barriers ^ill be rcqBircd along §t^te Street. Balconies are planned for the 3044 State Street Town homes. According to the City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual - Appendix J, any balconies greater than six feet deep are considered exterior living areas, and must also meet tiie 60 CNEL exterior noise standard. (Balconies six feet deep or less are not subject to the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard, and would not require balcony barriers). In order to meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard, balcony noise barriers will be required for any decks bui|t adjacent to State Street. The required balcony noise barriers necessary for the balconies to meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard are lisied below in Table 6 and shown in Exhibit 3. MRR-03-2006 11:21 P.17/29 X - T 2nd Fioor Balconies Requiring 5.0' Noise Barrier MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIAIES Exhibit 3 - Balcony Barriers Required In Order To Meet Exterior Noise Standard MftR-03-2006 11:22 ^". lo/^ itre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 11 of 14 Table 6 REQUIRED SECOND FLOOR EXTERIOR LIVING AREA NOISE BARRIER HEIGHTS AND LOCATIONS REQUIRED BARRIER LOCATION HEIGHT Along State Street. Units 1.2 and 3. 2*^ AND 3"" FLOOR BALCONIES 5.0* * - wall height relative to balcony floor The balcony noise barriers must have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The wall may be constructed of 3/8-inch plate glass, 5/8-inch plexiglass, stud and stucco construction, or a combination of these materials. The fioors for the decks must be solid; slat fioors are not acceptable. All exterior living areas in the project are projected to meet the 60 CNEL outdoor noise standard with the balcony noise barriers listed in Table 5. The noise barrier heights are relative to the balcony fioor. MPlR-03-2006 11:22 FTT^Tgy ;stre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 12 of 14 6.0 INTERIOR NOISE The project must comply with thc City of Carisbad indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. To meet the interior noise standard, the buildings must provide sufficient outdoor to indoor building attenuation to reduce the noise to acceptable levels. The outdoor to indoor noise reduction characteristics of a building are determined by combining the transmission loss of each of the building elements tiiat make up tiie building. Each unique building element has a characteristic transmission loss. For residential units, the critical building elements are tiie roof, walls, windows, doors, attic configuration and insulation. The total noise reduction achieved is dependent upon the transmission loss of each element, and the surface area of tiiat element in relation to the total surface area of the room. Room absorption is the final factor used in determining the total noise reduction. Exterior building surfaces in the project will be exposed to noise levels of 63.1 CNEL, and therefore will require more than 18,1 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the City's 45 CNEL interior noise standard. With construction practices common in California, residential buildings achieve outdoor to indoor noise reductions of at least 20 dB. Therefore, all rooms are projected to meet the City's 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades. MflR-03-2006 11:22 »tre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 13 of 14 7.0 ADEQUATE VENTILATION Since the noise attenuation of a building falls to about 12 dB witii windows open, all buildings exposed to noise levels greater tiian 57 CNEL will meet tiie 45 CNEL interior noise standard only with windows closed. In order to assume that windows can remain closed to achieve this required attenuation, adequate ventilation with windows closed must be provided per the applicable Uniform Building Code. Adequate ventilation will be required for those homes listed in Table 7 and shown in Exhibit 4. Table? VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS BUILDING Along State Street Units 1,2,3 MfiR-03-2006 11:22 stre Greve Associates Report #06-46 Page 14 of 14 APPENDIX CALCULATION SPREADSHEETS DATA USED TO DETERMINE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS MfiR-03-2006 11:22 -J-J„.lr=:rj-zi:.Li BuUdings Requiring Adequate Ventilation MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES Exhibit 4 - Ventilation Requirements 3044 Slalc SI., Carlshad Anastasi Developmenl - John Simmons 760-729-6865 REPORT #06-46 FRED I BILL; F«bfii»r>- 2006 CNEL WORKSHEET - CALVENO OuTcnl AOT rnm Dale 2W-06 lim Coie,TnllicEiipncciinf Roadway Name Stale Sl. aiyalCKlshid Vehicles Pfcr Day 5.068 1-13-06 Speed (mph) 25 GndeAdj. <dB) 0.00 dB Vehicle Noi&eRcid<dB) OdB Koadway Grade 0.0% This is the CNEL at 15m Sofl Hard Aulo 55.4 56.6 Medium Truck 49.6 51.0 Heavy Tmck 51.7 52,9 TOIAJ 57.7 58L9 To get Olher noise levels (CNEL), Dist. Soft Hard 40 59.0 SM SO 57.6 SM 60 56.4 70 55.4 80 545 90 53.7 too 53.0 125 51.6 65 55.8 140 508 M=* 205 48.4 300 45.9 *W 350 449 iOOO 38.0 4M Standard Arterial Mk To gel olher distances <fl). (NO MACRO)-5 24-95.1 BajrCalcCNEL MASTE! Day Eve Nighl Equiv Auto 75.51% 12.57% 9J4% 208.6% 97.4J% m 1.56% 0.09% 0.19% 3.7% 1.84% KT 0.64% 0.02% 0.08% 1.5% 0.74% 7771% 9J6I% 3 D I U I ro o o cn f8 CNEL Hard 57 54 % 58 47 61^ 59 40 48 60 34 as 61 29 M 62 25 34 63 22 49 64 19 6S 16 66 14 67 12 8 68 10 i 69 9 S 70 7 4 Ro«d Oiilanoc Base Of Distance Obsener Observer CASE acvaUon To WaU Wall To Observer Bevation Height Wall Hdsht Barrier Redudion Auto MT HT IVaJBc Noise Soit Hard Ground Floor no tnit 0 33 0.0 36 0.0 5 *rilh 4.5'wall vilh 5.0'uiall with 5.5' woH 0.0 4S 5.0 SJ 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 O.Q 0.0 5.1 5.0 OO 6J 5.8 4.7 59.7 no mil »3 59.7 2nd Floor Balcony no mit 0 33 IOO 36 10.0 5 with 4.5'tvail with 5.0'\vall ivith 5.5' ti-afl 00 4.5 SO 5.5 0.0 90 0.0 58 5.4 50 7.0 6 6 5.5 8.4 7.9 6.8 59.7 no mil CM 542 M 51.9 StA Snt Floor Balcony no mit 0 S3 WJ) .«6 20,0 J wth4.5'HYtU wth 5.0' HO// mth 5.5' vall 0.0 4J 5.0 J.5 00 0.0 O.Q 7.4 7.1 6.1 8.7 8.4 7.4 10.0 96 8.7 59-7 no mit »^ 52.7 SM 5U a« 50.1 ^ BarrCalc CARLSBAD NEW BarrCalc CNEL MASTER Mac Train Barrier With Adjustments.xls With Adjustments v2.1 2.22.06 CMestre Greve Associaies X) I u 1 ro o cn The data below does Include the "Adiustment" Train Type Amtrak Coaster LdFghi # of Cars 5 5 84 Speed 55 15 40 #Oay 18 18 3 # Evening 2 1 1 # Night 2 3 2 TOTAL CarSEL® 100' 92.0 66.3 102.1 102.6 Engine SEL @ 100' 99.1 102.3 100.3 105.5 Train SEL @ got 87.9 87.7 92.5 Adjustment -5.6 -8.4 -5.0 This data does not include the 'Adjustment" Biter Distance To Get CNEL Level 281 64.9 55.4 57.2 60.7 281 54.9 55.4 57.2 60.7 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 ro Engine: Cars: f 1000 2000 X 1.76991 3.53962 where N=±x(A+B-d) or x=2/Wavelength Lot Rail Elevation uistance To Wall Base Of Wall Dist. To Observer Pad Elevation Observer Height Wall Height Barrier Reduction Car Engine ^CNEU Yard 2!ndl 10^01 Bffkxfny 20 20 Wi 281 25 35 281 284 2S 35 5 5 ol> ..':m-- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.7 ( 60.6 f ixi \ rvj KD Page 1 m With Adjustments v2.1 2.22.06 SMeslre Greve Associaies Mac Train Barrier With Adjustments.xis 3 D :^ I o u I ro o o cn Train lype Amtrak Coaster LdFght # of Cars 5 5 84 Speed 55 15 40 #Oay 18 18 3 # Evening 2 1 1 # Night 2 3 2 TOTAL CarSEL® 100' 92.0 SO.d 102.1 102.6 EngineSEL@100' 99.1 102.3 100.3 105.5 Train SEL ®dOl 87.7 92.5 Adjustment -5.6 -8.4 -5.0 ro OJ This data does not inciude the "Adjustment" Enter Distance To Get CNEL Level 281 54.9 55.4 67.2 60.7 f X where Ns5±x(A+B-d) 281 54.9 55.4 57.2 60.7 Engine: 1000 1.76991 or xs2/Wavelenglh 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 Cars: 2000 3.53982 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 The data below does include the "Adjustment" RaH Distance Base or Disilo Pad Observer Wall Banier Reduction Lot Eievation To Wall Wall Observer Elevation Height Height Car Engine Yard 20 281 2^ 281 2B S 0.0 0.0 60.7 i 20 281 35 284 35 5 5.3 5-0 55.6 ^ f Page 1 With Adjustments v2.1 2.22-06 CMeslie Greve Assodates Mac Train Barrier With Adjustments xls 3 D I o u I ro o o cn Train lype Amtrak Coasiter LdFght # of Cars 5 5 84 Speed 55 15 40 #Day 18 18 3 # Evening 2 1 1 # Night 2 3 2 TOTAL Car SEL @ 100' 92.0 86.3 102.1 102.6 Engine SEL @ 100* 99.1 102.3 100.3 105.5 frain SEL® 261 67.9 87.7 92.5 Adjustment -5.6 -8.4 -5.0 This data does not include the "Adjustment" Enter Distance To Get CNEL Level 281 54.9 55.4 57.2 60.7 281 54.9 55.4 57.2 60.7 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 10 70.6 70.9 73.2 76.5 The data below does include the "Adjustment" ro OJ Engine: Cars: f 1000 2000 X 1.76991 3.53982 where N=±x(A4B-d) or xs2/Wavelen9th Rail distanoe Base Of DisiTo Pad Observer Wall Barrier Reduction Lot Elevation To WBU Wsll Observer Elevation Height Height Car Engine Yard 20 281 2B 26i 25 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.7 1 iSndie^BaiGoify 20 281 35 284 35 5 7.4 6.1 54.2 -0 Page 1 Mac Train Barrier With Adjustments.xls With Adjustments v2.1 222.06 (SMestre Greve Associates K PO I O U I ro o cn Train Type Amtrak Coaster LdFght # of Cars 5 5 84 Speed 55 15 40 #Oay 18 18 3 # Evening 2 1 1 # Night 2 3 2 TOTAL CarSEL® 100' 92.0 fi6.d 102.1 102.6 Engine SEL ® 100' 99.1 102.3 100.3 105.5 Train SEL ® 261 67.9 67.7 92.5 Adjustment -5.6 -8.4 -5.0 ro This data does not include the "Adjustment" Enter Distance To Get CNEL Level 281 54.9 55.4 57.2 60.7 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 The data below does Inciude the "Adjustment" Engine: Cars: f 1000 2000 X 1.76991 3.53982 where N=±x(A+B->d) or xs2/Wavelength Rail Distance Base Of Dist. To Pad Observer Wail Barrier Reduction Lot Elevation To WaH Wall Observer Elevatton Height Height Car Engine Yard 20 281 25 2di 25 5 01> 0.0 0.0 60.7 3rd level Balcony 20 281 45 284 45 5 4.5 0.0 0.0 60.6 r ro \ Page 1 With A{^tments V2.1 2.22,06 iDMestre Greve Associates Mac Train Barrier With Adjustments.xls 2 I U I ro o CS) cn Train lype Amtrak Coaster LdFght # of Cars 5 5 84 Speed 55 15 40 #Day 18 18 3 # Evening 2 1 1 # Night 2 3 2 TOTAL CarSEL® lOO' 92.0 66.6 102.1 102.6 Engine SEL @ 100' 99.1 102.3 100.3 105.5 Train SEL ©281 67.6 87.7 92.5 Adjustment -5.6 -8.4 -5.0 ro u This data does not include the "Adjustment" Enter Distance To Get CNEL Level 281 54.9 55.4 57.2 60.7 f X where N=±x(A+B-d) 10 70.6 70.9 73.2 76.5 Engine: 1000 1.76991 0r x=2/Wave(engtli 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 Cars: 2000 3.53962 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 The data below does include the "Adjustment" Rail Distance Base Of Dist. To Pad Observer WaN Barr^ Reduction Lot Elsvation To Wail Wall Observer Elevation Height Height Car Engine Yard 20 2^1 25 28i 25 s 0.0 0.0 ao 60.7 3rd level Balcony 20 281 45 284 45 5 5.0 5.6 5.0 55.5 r CD \ Page 1 With Adjustments v2.1 2.22.06 (SMestre G^eve Associaies Mac Train Barrier With Adjustments.xls 3 D X) 1 (S U I ro o cn Train type Amtrak Coaster LdFght # of Cars 5 5 84 Speed 55 15 40 #Day 18 18 3 # Evening 2 1 1 # Night 2 3 2 TOTAL CarSEL® 100' 02.0 86.3 102.1 102.6 Engine SEL® 100 99.1 102.3 100,3 105.5 Train SEL ® 281 67.9 67.7 92.5 Adjustment -5.6 ^.4 -5.0 ro Xl This data does not Include the "Adjustment" Enter Distance To Get CNEL Level 28i 54.9 55.4 57.2 60.7 \ X where N-±x(A-i-B-d) 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 Engine: 1000 1.76991 or xs2/Wave length 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 Cars: 2000 3.53982 10 70.5 70.9 73.2 76.5 The data beiow does Include the "Adjustment" Ran Distance Base or Dist. To Pad Observer Wall Barrier Reduction Lot Eievation To Wall Wail Observer Eievation Height Height Car Engine Yard 20 281 2S 281 25 5 06 0.0 0.0 60.7 3rd level Balcony 20 281 45 284 45 5 5.5 7.9 6-4 53^ r -0 ro KD \ ro KD Page 1