Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3190; Rancho Sante Fe Road Bridge Replacement; Rancho Sante Fe Road Bridge Replacement; 1998-10-01RANCnO SANTA TE ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEI^ENT PROJECT ACOUSTICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Prepared for: CityofCarlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Carlsbad, California 92009 Prepared by: D U DEK &ASSOCIATES A Cali/oriua Corporation 605 Third Street Encinitas, California 92024 Tel:(760) 942»5147 Fax: (760) 632« 8710 October 1998 3190- Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad TABLE or CONTENTS Section Page No. SUMMARY iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION , 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 2.L Project Location and Setting 1 2.2 Project Characteristics 1 3.0 NOISE CRITERIA 4 3.1 City of Carisbad Noise Criteria 5 3.2 County of San Diego Noise Criteria 5 3.3 FHWA/Caltrans Noise Criteria 5 4.0 METHODOLOGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION 6 5.0 EXISTING CONDrTIONS 7 6.0 FUTURE CONDTTIONS 10 7.0 MTTIGATION 12 8.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE 14 9.0 REFERENCES 14 ATTACriMCNTS Attachment 1 Traffic Volume Summary Attachment 2 SOUND32 &ASSOCIATES A Cilljirili Ciifrlllt October 26, 1998 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad TABLE OF CONTENTS {Continued^ Page No. UST or FIGURES Figure 1 Regional Location 2 Figure 2 Vicinity Location 3 Figure 3 Noise Receptor Locations 8 Figure 4 ^ Sound Wall Locations .. . , 13 UST OF TABLES Table 1 Noise Abatement Criteria Hourly A-weighted Average Sound Level - Decibel (Db)^ 6 Table 2 Existing Measured Hourly Average Noise Levels 9 Table 3 Short-term Measured Average Noise Level and Concurrent Traffic Volumes ... 10 Table 4 Comparison of Existing and Future Peak (Noisiest) Hour Average Noise Level ..11 Table 5 Existing and Future Noise Levels with Various Barrier Heights 12 DUDEK &A.SSOCIATES A Clllflritli Ctjfrixti October 26, 1998 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad SUMMARY Noise sensitive receivers in the project vicinity include four residences located along the western portion of the project site along Rancho Santa Fe Road and approximately six residences located at the intersection of Melrose Drive and Corintia Street. Future noise levels generated by project traffic from the proposed road widening would exceed the Federal Highway Administration and California Department of Transportation's noise criteria at the four homes located along Rancho Santa Fe Road. A noise barrier constructed along the western right-of-way of Rancho Santa Fe Road, south of Meadowlark Ranch Road, would be required to mitigate the noise impact at the single family residences. Noise impacts at the remaining residences and adjacent land uses would be less than significant. IDUDEK I&ASSOCIATES A C.ll/.r.l. C.f.rlli October 26, 1998 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad 1.0 INTRODUCTION This noise study is provided for the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement project. The proposed project is located within the City of Carisbad and City of San Marcos. The City of Carlsbad is the lead agency for the project. The project would also be federally funded, therefore, Caltrans is a responsible agency. This study documents the existing noise level based on noise measurement and modeling. The future noise levels were calculated based on the proposed project's roadway design and traffic volume conditions. Noise sensitive receivers were identified and noise barriers have been evaluated where necessary to achieve applicable noise criteria. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Project Location and Setting The project site is located near the southeastern portion of the City of Carlsbad. The regional project location is depicted in Figure 1 and the project vicinity is shovwi in Figure Z. The area of potential effect associated with the project includes an approximate 450 linear foot distance along Rancho Santa Fe Road immediately south of Meadowlark Ranch Road. The engineering design along this 450-foot section of road was completed by the City of San Marcos as part of a separate road widening project. Adjacent to the project site are an industrial business park, undeveloped land and approximately ten residences located within two residential areas. One residential area is located along the western portion of the site near the intersection of Melrose Drive and Corintia Street. These residences are located vi^thin the City of Carlsbad. The second residential area consists of four homes located on the west side of Rancho Santa Fe Road immediately south of Meadowlark Ranch Road. These homes are located within the County of San Diego. An acoustical study was prepared evaluating noise impacts along this section of road as part of the City of San Marcos' Rancho Santa Fe Road widening project (RECON 1998). 2.2 Project Characteristics The City of Carlsbad's proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road improvement and bridge replacement project would realign and widen approximately 3,500-linear feet of Rancho Santa Fe Road (S-10) from two DUDEK &ASS0C1ATES ^ '•• October 26, 1998 Orange County San Diego Imperial Beach r -SMiles Tijuana Mexico Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement - Acoustical Assessment Report Regional Map FIGURE BASE MAP SOURCE: USGS 7.5 Minute Series, Rancho Santa Fe Quadrangle r-2000' Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement - Acoustical Assessment Report Vicinity Map FIGURE Rancho Santa Fe Road Project •Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad lanes to an ultimate six-lane Prime Arterial Roadway from just south of Questhaven Road to just north of Melrose Drive in northern San Diego County. Roadway Realignment The proposed widening and realigrmient project is part of the City of Carlsbad's General Plan to upgrade Rancho Santa Fe Road to meet its designation as a Prime Arterial Roadway. A Prime Arterial Roadway has a 126-foot right-of-way containing six travel lanes, a bike lane, an 18-foot raised median, sidewalks, curb, and gutter. The new bridge over San Marcos Creek is plarmed to accommodate the Prime Arterial Roadway. The bridge replacement project would involve construction of a new bridge in a location west of the existing bridge. The existing bridge will be demolished. The northerly roadway approach for the new bridge (s) will be approximately 2,200 feet long and includes the reconstruction of the La Costa Meadows Drive/P^ncho Santa Fe Road intersection, and reconstruction of approxiinately 300 feet of La Costa Meadows Drive east of the intersection. The realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road will be constructed to the full width on the east side of the median, with sidewalks, curb and gutter, and street lights from the bridge to north of Melrose Drive. The west side of the roadway will be constructed with 32 feet of paving adjacent to the median curb. The current alignment of Melrose Drive would be altered to accommodate the proposed widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road. The Melrose Drive/Rancho Santa Fe Road intersection would be moved approximately 400 feet to the north of the present intersection. Melrose Drive would be realigned from the Corintia Drive/Melrose Drive intersection where Melrose Drive would extend to the northwest to the realigned Melrose Drive/Rancho Santa Road intersection. Corintia Drive would be extended east to connect with the realigned Melrose Drive. 3.0 NOISE CRITERIA This report follows the noise criteria and policies established by the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, as well as the California Department ofTransportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). These guidelines establish procedures for noise studies regarding traffic noise prediction, noise analyses And noise abatement criteria. The proposed project is located within portions of the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego and City of San Marcos. The City of Carlsbad and the County of San Diego noise criteria are appUed within the applicable local jurisdiction area. Caltrans and FF^WA noise criteria are also used for land DU-DEK &ASSOCIATES October 26, 1998 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad uses adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road and where Rancho Santa Fe Road is the predominant noise source. There are no noise sensitive receivers along the project site that are located within the City of San Marcos. The City of Carlsbad describes commimity noise levels in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The CNEL is a 24-hour average A-weighted sound level with a ten decibel (dB) "penalty" added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., and a five dB penalty added to the evening hours of 7:00 p.m to 10:00 p.m The five and ten dB penalties are applied to account for increased noise sensitivity during the evening and nighttime hours. The A-weighted scale measures noise levels corresponding to the human hearing frequency response. All sound levels in this report are A-weighted. Noise levels at residences immediately adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road were also evaluated in terms of the peak hour average sound level. The peak hour average sound level is the noise descriptor typically used by the FFIWA and Caltrans when evaluating traffic noise. 3.1 City Of Carlsbad Noise Criteria The City of Carlsbad requires that the maximum acceptable exterior noise level for new residential development shall not exceed a CNEL of 60 dB. 3.2 County of San Diego Noise Criteria The County of San Diego's maximum acceptable exterior noise level for new residential development is that the CNEL should not exceed 60 dB. However, projects that are federally funded are to comply with applicable FFIWA standards. 3.3 FHWA/Caltrans Noise Criteria The FFIWA follows the noise abatement procedures established in the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR 772). Caltrans also follows the noise abatement procedures as well as policies established in Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1100. The FHWA noise abatement criteria categorizes different activities and land uses for the purposes of assessing noise impacts. Table i shows the FFiWA noise abatement criteria. The criteria are based on the peak hour (noisiest) average sound level which regularly occurs during a 24-hour period. The noise abatement criteria for outdoor noise exposure typically is applied where frequent human use occurs such as swimming pools and common use areas at multi-family residences and the backyards of single family homes. DUDEK &ASSQClATESi 'October 26, 1998 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project •Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad TABLE I Noise Abatement Criteria Hourly A-Weighted Average Sound Level - decibel [dB}' Adivity Caiegory L,„(h) DescripUon ol Activity Category A 57 (Exterior) 60 (Exterior) Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. B 67 (Exterior) 70 (Exterior) Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, activesports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries and hospitals. C 72 (Exterior) 75 (Exterior) Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above. D --Undeveloped Lands. E 52 (Interior) 55 (Interior) Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals and auditoriums. ^ Either Lio(h) or L^(h) (but not both) may be used on a project. The FHWA considers that a traffic noise impact occurs when the predicted traffic noise levels approach or exceed the Noise Abatement Criteria. The FFiWA specifies that the Noise Abatement Criteria, when approached or exceeded, requires the consideration of traffic noise abatement measures. The FHWA indicates that local State Highway Agencies should use a definition of approach that is at least one dB less than the Noise Abatement Criteria. Caltrans defines approach as being two dB lower than the Noise Abatement Criteria. 4.0 METHODOLOGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION To determine the existing noise levels and potential noise impacts, a 24-hour and short-term noise measurement were conducted adjacent to the project site. The 24-hour noise measurement was made to determine the peak hour average noise level associated with traffic noise from Rancho Santa Fe Road, and to determine the CNEL. Noise modeling was also conducted using Caltrans' SOUND32 traffic noise prediction model (Caltrans 1983). The SOUND32 noise model accepts as input the ^ASSOCIATES A Cillfirali CtifttI " October 26, 1998 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad number and types of vehicles on the roadway, vehicle speeds, and physical characteristics of the road and topography; as well as receiver and noise barrier heights and locations. The CALVENO vehicle noise emission levels were used in the noise model (Caltrans 1987). The noise measurements were conducted using calibrated Larson-Davis Laboratories Model 700 (S.N. 2132) andModel712 (S.N. 0231) digital integrating sound level meters. The sound level meters meet the current American National Standards Institute standard for a Type 1 (Model 700) and Type 2 (Model 712) sound level meters. Traffic counts were made during the short-term noise measurement. The truck percentage used in the noise model was 3.52% medium trucks and 1.24% heavy trucks for Rancho Santa Fe Road. The truck percentage used for Melrose Drive was 1.83% medium trucks and 0.28% heavy trucks. The truck percentages are based on vehicie mix surveys conducted by the City of Carlsbad (City of Carlsbad 1995). To verify the input used in the noise model, the same traffic volume and vehicle composition ratios counted during the noise measurements were used. The posted speed limit for both Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive is 45 miles per hour. This speed correlated well with the results of the noise measurement and were used in the noise modeling for these roads. The modeled values were within 1 dB of the measured noise levels which confirms the assumptions used in the noise model. 5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS Site A, as depicted on Figure 3, was monitored from 11:00 a.m on Tuesday, July 15, 1997 to 11:00 a.m. on Wednesday, July 16,1997. The primary noise source at the measurement site is traffic on P^cho Santa Fe Road. Site A was selected to provide an unobstructed view of the Rancho Santa Fe Road (i.e., no intervening walls, buildings, topography etc.). Table Z depicts the hourly average sound levels during the measurement period at Site A. The peak (noisiest hour) average noise level was 70 dB and occurred both during the morning commute and the evening commute hours. A short-term noise measurement was also conducted at the residential area located at the northwest intersection of Melrose Drive and Corintia Street (Site B, Figure 3). The traffic noise at these residences is primarily associated with Melrose Drive, and to a lesser extent, Rancho Santa Fe Road. The homes at this area have existing sound walls approximately 5 to 6-feet in height. The noise measurement, conducted approximately 10 feet in front of the sound walls resulted in an average sound level of 63 dB. The traffic noise level from Rancho Santa Fe Road was observed to typicaUy range from 52 to 58 dB at Site B. Table 3 depicts the results of the noise measurement adjacent to Mekose Drive. A Cillf.iuli Cut "October 26, 1998 '-•...^•i,.'"i,..'\:\.Ky:' Sf]^^^ oHgim^ba^ h this qreq ® Noise Measurement Location O Noise Modeling Receptor Location PROJECT GRADING SOURCE: Doj(j«^njjnMrinq^c^998 Scale in Feet Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement - Acoustical Assessment Report Noise Measurement and Receptor Locations FIGURE Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad TABLE 2 Existing Measured Hourly Average Noise Levels (Site A - Approximately 85 Feet from the Centeriine of Rancho Santa Fe Road) Day Start Time U 7/15/97 11:00 A.M. 68 dB 12:00 Noon 68 dB 1:00 P.M. 69 dB 2:00 P.M. 69 dB 3:00 P.M. 69 dB 4:00 P.M. 70 dB 5:00 RM. 70 dB 6:00 P.M. 69 dB 7:00 P.M. 68 dB 8:00 P.M. 67 dB 9:00 PM 67 dB 10:00 PM 55 dB 11:00 P.M. 62 dB 7/16/97 12:00 Midnight 60 dB 1:00 A.M. 56 dB 2:00 A.M. 55 dB 3:00 A.M. 55 dB 4:00 A.M. 58 dB 5:00 A.M. 64 dB 6:00 A.M. 69 dB 7:00 A.M. 70 dB 8:00 A.M. 69 dB 9:00 A.M. 69 dB 10:00 A.M. 68 dB CNEL 71 dB l&ASSOClATES A ClIlflTIIII Clir>Flll>I October 26, 1998 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad TABLES Short-Term Measured Average Noise Levei and Concurrent Traffic Volumes Site Description Date/nme Cars B Approximately 90' to center line of Melrose Drive. 7/16/97 10:40-11:00 am 63 dB 119" 1^ Notes: ' Equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (time-average sound level) ^ Medium Trucks ^ Heavy Trucks '^Vehicles on Melrose Drive 6.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS To determine future noise levels and the significance of potential noise impacts at land uses adjacent to the project site, future year 2015 "built" and future year not built noise levels were calculated using the SOUND32 model. The noise modeling included the future year 2015 traffic information and the physical improvements shown on the preliminary designs for the road widening and intersection improvements. The future year 2015 "not buUt" traffic volumes and existing roadway constituted the "no build" scenario. The future year 2015 buUt scenario included the built traffic volumes as well as the proposed roadway improvements. With implementation of the proj ect, the future peak one-hour average noise level is pro j ected to reach approximately 71 dB at the backyards of the residences located along the west side Rancho Santa Fe Road and south of Meadowlark Ranch Road (Sites 4, 5, and 6 on Figure 3). This noise level would exceed Caitrans/FHWA noise abatement criteria. These are the only residences located adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road that are within the project limits. Table 4 shows the existing, predicted future "buUt" and future "not built" peak one-hour average noise levels at the receivers. The future peak hour average noise level at the residences located along Melrose Drive would range fiom approximately 60 to 64 dB. The future noise levels at these residences would be similar with or without the project. This noise level would comply with the FHWA noise abatement criteria. DUDEK &ASS0CIAT1S A CiJIfiriila C»M"I' October 26, 1998 10 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project •Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad TABLE 4 Comparison of Existing and Future Peak (Noisiest) Hour Average Noise Level • 1 . BAtinq Nobs Level Futura Year 2015 Nosie Level . Approx No "1 1 Site Land Use ol Rsceplon PrapoRed Measured Calculated NolRuilt Praiecl 1 Residential 2 56 60 60 2 Residential 3 -58 63 62 3 Residential 3 58 64 64 4 Residential 1 70 72 71 5 Residential 2 70 71 71 6 Residential 1 70 71 71 7 Child Care Center 1 61 64 62 8 Office Lunch Area 1 66 69 66 A Noise Measurement Site — 70 70 72 69 B Nosie Measurement Site — 66 72 69 The peak hour average noise level at the homes located on the west side of Melrose Drive (Sites 1, 2 and 3 on Figure 3) would be approximately 60 to 64 dB associated with traffic noise. This includes the noise attenuation associated with the existing five to six-foot high sound wall at the residences. The CNEL would be approximately one dB greater than the peak hour average noise level. The noise level increase would primarily result from future traffic growth along Melrose Drive rather than noise impacts associated with the project. As indicated in the preliminary design plans for the project, Melrose Drive would be aligned farther away fiom the homes near the intersection of Melrose Drive and Corintia Street. The future noise level at the homes located near the intersection would be approximately one dB lower with the project as compared to the not built scenario. The noise impact associated with the project at these homes would be less than significant. The business industrial park includes several outdoor lunch areas. Most of the lunch areas are located along the east sides of the buildings which provide noise attenuation from the traffic noise. However, a limch area is located on the south side of the southern most building in the industrial complex. The peak one-hour average noise level at this location would be approximately 66 dB. This noise level complies with the FHWA/Caltrans noise criteria. DUDE:K &ASSOCIATES A C.llf.r.l. Clin October 26, 1998 11 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad A child care facility is located at the business industrial park along La Costa Meadows Drive east of Rancho Santa Fe Road. The facility is partially shielded from traffic noise by intervening buildings. The future peak hour average noise level at this location would be approximately 62 dB. This noise level would comply wkh. the FFWA/Caltrans noise criteria. 7.0 MITIGATION Future noise levels would exceed FF{WA/Caltrans noise criteria at four homes located along Rancho Santa Fe Road. Preliminary mitigation measures for the affected homes have been evaluated to provide noise abatement and design information. With an eight-foot high sound wall located along westem right-of-way, the future peak hour average noise level would be mitigated to 61 to 62 dB. The location of the proposed noise barrier is depicted on Figure 4. A comparison of the noise reduction provided by various barrier heights is shown in Table It should be noted that an eight- foot high sound wall is depicted in the engineering design plans as part of the City of San Marcos' Rancho Santa Fe Road widening proj ect. The eight-foot wall height shown in the engineering design plans is based on the acoustical assessment prepared for the City of San Marcos. Assuming the City of San Marcos constructs this segment of Rancho Santa Fe Road, the City of San Marcos will construct an eight-foot high sound wall at these residences. If the City of Carlsbad constructs the proposed project first, the City of Carlsbad has committed to constructing the noted sound wall proposed by the City of San Marcos (City of Carlsbad 1998). TABLE 5 Existing and Future Noise Levels with Various Barrier Heights (Peak Hour Average Sound Level, dB) Yfar 2015 Wilh Neise Barner PrujiufcedMee^ JioiSiMlt 8' 10 4 70 71 72 63 62 61 5 70 71 71 62 61 60 6 70 71 71 62 61 59 DUDEK &ASS0C1ATES October 26, 1998 12 ^^^^ PROXCT GRADING SOURCE: Dokken Enqineerinq, Oct. 1998 ^ in Feet Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Replacement - Acoustical Assessment Report Sound Wall Location FIGURE Rancho Santa Fe Road Project •Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad Noise impacts associated with the proposed project would be less than significant at the residences located along Melrose Drive, therefore, mitigation measures are not proposed by the City at these residences. 8.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE Noise generated by construction equipment on this proj ect would occur with varying intensities and durations during the different phases of construction: clear and grub, earthwork, base preparation, paving and cleanup. Equipment expected to be used would include tractors, backhoes, pavers and other related equipment. Maximum noise levels at 50 feet range from approximately 75 to 95 dB for the type of equipment normally used in a project such as this. Project construction will comply with applicable local requirements. Also, the contractor shall comply with all local sound control and noise level standards, regulations and ordinances which apply to any work performed pursuant to the conti-act. Each internal combustion engine, used for any purpose on the job or related to the job, shall be equipped with a muffler of a type recommended by the manufacturer. No intemal combustion engine shall be operated on the project without said muffler. 9.0 REFERENCES Linscott Law and Greenspan (LLG), April 15, 1998. Year ZOl $ Peak Hour Traffic Forecast Volumes (Fax data). • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), June 1983, User's Instructions for SOUND3Z (FHWA/CA/TL-83/06). California Department ofTransportation (Caltrans), 1987. California Vehicle Noise Emission Levels, FHWA/CA/TL-87/03. CityofCarlsbad, September, 1995. Noise Guidelines Manual. IDUDEK I&ASSOCIATES October 26, 1998 14 Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report City Of Carlsbad City of Carlsbad, October, 1998. Telephone Conversation betvc^een Mr. Doug Helming (City of Carlsbad) and Mr. Jim Harry. (DUDEK). Federal Highway Administration (FFIWA), December 1978. FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model. County of San Diego, December 17, 1980. San Diego County Noise Element. RECON, April 29, 1998. Noise Analysis for Rancho Santa Fe Road Improvements. IDUDEK ^ASSOCIATES """"""""October 26. 1998 15 ATTACriMENTS DUDEK &ASSOCIATES A Cali/ornia Corporation Attachment 1 Traffic Volume Summary (Existing and Future Peak Hour Volumes) DUDEK &ASSOCIATES A California Corporation JHK & Associates TurninQ Movement Count Analysb City: Carlsbad Intersection of: N/S Sfreet: Rancho Santa Fe Road E/W Street: Melrose Drive Count Dote: Day: Thursday 7/n/96(AM)&8/08/96(PM) Weather: Clear Page 1 of 3 South Approach tNB) North Approach CSB) File: CB9619.X15 Data Collected by T-M. & CM. Traffic Control: Signalized West Approach (EB) East Approoeh (WB) ISrnIn Total Left U-Trn Thru Right Peds Left U-Trn Thru Right Peds Left U-Tm Thru Rioht Peds Left U-Trn Thru Rioht Peds VeNcles Peds 6:16 AM 6:30 AM 6:45 AM IfXJfiM ^:"l5AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM jpom 8:16 AM 6:30 AM 6:45 AM 9:00 AM 8 6 14 15 12 13 16 27 28 32 16 26 0 46 0 0 0 0 133 13 0 28 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 72 0 0 0 0 177 22 0 30 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 113 0 0 0 0 256 44 0 36 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 147 0 0 0 0 269 38 0 69 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 168 0 0 0 0 235 43 0 60 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 185 0 0 0 0 290 43 0 70 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 161 0 0 0 0 221 41 1 79 0 0 29 1 0 0 0 0 227 0 0 0 0 261 68 0 80 0 0 37 0 0 D 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 263 116 0 123 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 226 53 0 87 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 142 0 0 0 0 200 36 0 40 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 206 0 0 0 0 194 42 0 63 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 227 0 0 0 0 290 116 1 123 1 0 39 1 0 0 0 0 794 0 0 0 0 irev> 267 1 362 0 0 140 1 0 0 n 239 319 466 566 632 636 667 700 769 664 454 646 Max. 15 min. Pk. Hr. Vol. 7:15 AM Peak 32 84 769 2672 Intersection Traffic In Pk. Hr. « 2672 6:IS AM Hour Intersection Pdstrns In Pk. Hr. - 3 Peak Hr. Factor 0.87 6- 3:46 PM • 33 0 295 0 0 0 0 187 36 0 55 1 0 4«)PM ' 32 0 297 0 0 0 0 199 27 0 60 0 0 4:16 PM • 38 0 279 0 0 0 0 172 42 0 64 0 0 4:30 PM • 30 0 262 0 0 0 0 160 67 0 51 0 0 4:45 PM 43 0 260 0 0 0 0 166 69 0 46 0 0 5:00 PM 35 0 262 0 0 0 0 186 65 0 67 0 0 '5:16 PM 34 0 273 0 0 0 0 182 66 0 64 0 0 6:30 PM 29 0 224 0 0 0 0 191 68 2 62 0 0 5:45 PM 28 0 224 0 0 0 0 176 76 0 62 0 0 ^00 PM 30 0 258 0 0 0 0 164 79 0 62 0 0 6:15 PM 28 0 212 0 0 0 0 147 58 0 44 0 0 6:30 PM 29 0 169 0 0 0 0 150 61 0 47 0 0 Max. 16 rr^n. 43 0 297 0 0 0 0 199 79 2 67 1 0 Pk. Hr. Vd. 133 0 1133 0 0 0 0 718 162 0 230 1 n 26 36 29 28 34 22 27 21 28 26 17 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 633 661 624 568 620 627 636 695 594 619 606 463 0 0 0 0 0 G 1 2 0 0 0 0 36 119 651 2496 3:30 PM Peak Intersection Traffic In Pk. Hr. - 2496 4:30 PM Hour Intersection Pdstrns In Pk. Hr. = 0 Peak Hr. Factor 0.96 so/ yo I r S 0 I r So J IL 4 •HO. '.4/5 >n «B ~ (Vij TO /* ??? P. 3 IP' Attachment 2 SOUND32 DUDEK &ASSOCIATES A Cali/ornia Corporation Rancho Santa Fe Road--Existing pm peak T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1 973 , 45 , 36 , 45 , 13 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2 1182 , 45 , 44 , 45 , 15 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3 1048 , 45 , 39 , 45 , 14 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4 826 , 45 , 31 , 45 , 11 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 5 750 , 45 , 28 , 45 , 10 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 6 776 , 45 , 29 , 45 , 10 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 7 2116 , 45 , 78 , 45 , 27 , 45 T-Melrose Drive, 8 345 , 45 , 6 , 45 , 1 , 45 T-Melrose Drive, 9 392 , 45 , 7 , 45 , 1 , 45 L-Northbound, 1 N,1365.,-644,350,U1 N,1136.,-328,339,U2 N,1036.,-182,338,U3 N, 945.,-51,336,04 N,778.,207,336,U5 L-Northbound, 2 N,778.,207,336,05 N,684.,386,336,U6 N,603. ,681,342,U7 L-Northbound, 3 N,603.,681,342,U7 N,584.,946,354,U8 L-Southbound, 4 N,1350.,-650,350,Dl N,1121.,-333,339,D2 N,1013.,-178,338,D3 N, 931.,-62,336,D4 N,756.,193,336,D5 L-Southbound, 5 N,756.,193,336,05 N,660.,369,335,06 N,570.,697,343,07 L-Southbound, 6 N,570.,697,343,07 N,550.,952,355,08 L-(North of Melrose) , 7 N,550.,952,355,08 N,565.,1175,370,0U9 N,567.,1411,380,OUlO N,567.,1644,390,OUll N,568. ,1841,400,0U12 N,568.,1999,410,0U13 L-Eastbound, 8 N, -331.,1708,375,Wl N,-245.,1597,370,W2 N,-96.,1372,360,W3 N,64.,1157,354,W4 N,209 . ,954,350,WW5 N,339.,768,346,WW6 N,421.,639,344,WW7 N,533.,571,342,WW8 Jj-Westbound, 9 N, -285.,1736,375,El N,-215.,1632,370,E2 N,-47.,1396,360,E3 N,110.,1189,354,E4 N,258.,981,350,EE5 N,392.,775,346,EE6 N,432.,703,344,EE7 B-Wall, 1 , 2 , 0 ,0 -112.,685,369,375,Bl -69. ,763,368,374,B2 7.,865,367,373,B3 88. ,939,367,373,64 100.,963,367,373,B5 104.,978,367,373,B6 60.,1044,366,372,B7 -20.,1164,365,371,68 -77.,1248,366,372,69 R, 1 , 67 ,500 -84,1242,371.,Rl R, 2 , 67 ,500 -16,1146,370.,R2 R, 3 , 67 ,500 62,1027,371.,R3 R, 4 , 67 ,500 89,975,372.,R4 R, 5 , 67 ,500 57,927,372.,R5 R, 6 , 67 ,500 0,870,372.,R6 R, 7 , 67 ,500 -75,767,373.,R7 R, 8 , 67 ,500 515,1845,401.,R8 R, 9 , 67 ,500 515,1744,395.,R9 R, 10 , 67 ,500 514,1647,390.,R10 R, 11 , 67 ,500 645,853,359.,R11 R, 12 , 67 ,500 641,660,349.,R12 R, 13 , 67 ,500 795,435,349.,R13 R, 14 , 67 ,500 1021,324,350.,R14 R, 15 , 67 ,500 1009,-12,345.,A R, 16 , 67 ,500 1091,-30,345.,R16 R, 17 , 67 ,500 508,1587,383.,R20 R, 18 , 67 ,500 502,1726,389.,R21 R, 19 , 67 ,500 505,1892,402.,R22 R, 20 , 67 ,500 92,1012,366.,B 0, 4.5 6 ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 P, 4.5 7 ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 0, 4.5 1 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 O, 4.5 2 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 0, 4.5 3 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 0, 4.5 4 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 O, 4.5 5 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 K,-3 ALL,14 K, -1 ALL,16 VC,C PC output option: 0 ,RSFREX.INP SOUND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91 TITLE: Rancho Sanat Fe Road--Existing pm peak BAR ELE EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS *************************** 1 0.* Bl 2 0 .* B2 3 0.* B3 4 0.* 64 5 0.* B5 6 0. * 66 7 0.* 67 8 0.* 68 6AR ELE BARRIER DATA ************ BARRIER HEIGHTS 2 3 4 5 BAR 10 LENGTH TYPE 1 6.* Bl 89.1 MASONRY 2 6.* B2 127.2 MASONRY 3 6.* B3 109.7 MASONRY 4 6.* 64 26.8 MASONRY 5 6.* 65 15 .5 MASONRY 6 6.* 66 79.3 MASONRY 7 6.* 67 144 .2 MASONRY 8 6 . * 68 101.5 MASONRY REC REC ID ONL PEOPLE LEQ(CAL) 1 Rl 67,-500. 62.0 2 R2 67. 500 . 57.7 Re^ 2 3 R3 67. 500 . 57.5 4 R4 67. 500 . 57.8 Rte 2_ 5 R5 67. 500 . 56.6 6 R6 67. 500. 55 .8 R «.<:- I 7 R7 67. 500. 54.9 8 R8 67 . 500. 70.9 9 R9 67. 500. 71.1 10 RIO 67. 500. 71.1 11 Rll 67. 500. 70.2 12 R12 67. 500. 73,1 13 R13 67. 500 . 67, 9 14 R14 67. 500. 60.9 15 A 67. 500. 69.5 Z^*-*- ^ 16 R16 67. 500. 66.0 ^ 17 R2 0 67. 500, 70,4 V 18 R21 67. 500. 69.6 'R-e.t, r 19 R22 67. 500, 69.5 p ^ 20 6 67. 500. 65.6 U ^ 6ARRIER TYPE COST 6ERM 0. MASONRY 36474. MASONRY/JERSEY 0. CONCRETE 0. TOTAL COST = $ 36000. BARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION 11111111 CORRESPONOING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. Rancho Santa Fe Road--Future pm peak X-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1 1467 , 45 , 54 , 45 , 19 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2 1419 , 45 , 52 , 45 , 18 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3 1943 , 45 , 72 , 45 , 25 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4 1857 , 45 , 69 , 45 , 24 , 45 T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 5 1362 , 45 , 50 , 45 , 18 , 45 T-Melrose Orive, 6 1733 , 45 , 32 , 45 , 5 , 45 T-Melrose Orive, 7 2173 , 45 , 41 , 45 , 6 , 45 L-Northbound, 1 N,1348,,-714,357,Nl N,1080.,-358,356,N2 N,797.,25,346,N3 N,704.,197,342,N4 N,618.,442,340,N5 N,592.,576,340,N6 N,583,,667,342,N7 N,580.,783,346,N8 N,584. ,870,350,N9 N,594,,993,357,NIO L-Northbound, 2 N,594.,993,357,N10 N,629.,1533,382,Nil N,625.,1635,386,N12 N,623.,1738,392,N13 N,619.,1941,405,N14 N,621.,2169,420,N15 L-Southbound, 3 N, 1292.,-740,372,51 N,1031.,-392,356,32 N, 714.,44,346,53 L-Southbound, 4 N,714.,44,346,53 N,624. ,227,342,54 N,558,,434,340,55 N,532. ,571,341,56 N,520.,753,346,57 - N, 523 . ,851,350,58 N,533.,994,357,59 L-Southbound, 5 N, 533.,994,357,59 N,581.,1537,382,510 N, 570.,1641,386,311 N,570.,1743,392,312 N,572.,1941,405,513 N,572.,2170,420,514 L-Eastbound, 6 N, -331.,1708,375,Wl N,-245.,1597,370,W2 N,-96.,1372,360,W3 N,64.,1157,354,W4 N,178.,1083,354,W5 N,257.,1039,354,W6 N,474,,975,356,W7 L-Westbound, 7 N,-285.,1736,375,El N, -215.,1632,370,E2 N, -47,,1396,360,E3 N,110.,1139,354,E4 N,185.,1136,354,E5 N,275.,1084,354,E6 N,480,,1024,356,E7 B-Wall, 1 , 2 , 0 ,0 -112.,685,369,375,61 -69.,763,368,374,62 7, ,865,367,373,63 88. ,939,367,373,64 100,,963,367,373,65 104.,978,367,373,66 60. ,1044,366,371,67 -20, ,1164,365,371,68 -77.,1248,366,372,69 6-Proposed Wall, 2 , 2 , 0 ,0 512.,1547,378,386,Fl 537.,1549,382,390,F2 539. ,1638,386,394,.F3 539.,1740,392,400,F4 538.,1944,405,413,F5 517.,1961,407,415,F6 R, 1 , 67 ,500 -84,1242,371.,Rl R, 2 , 67 ,500 -16,1146,370.,R2 R, 3 , 67 ,500 62,1027,371.,R3 R, 4 , 67 ,500 89,975,372.,R4 R, 5 , 67 ,500 57,927,372.,R5 R, 6 , 67 ,500 0,870,372.,R6 R, 7 , 67 ,500 -75,767,373.,R7 R, 8 , 67 ,500 515,1845,401.,R8 R, 9 , 67 ,500 515,1744,395.,R9 • R, 10 , 67 ,500 514,1647,390.,R10 R, 11 , 67 ,500 645,853,359.,Rll R, 12 , 67 ,500 641,660,349.,R12 R, 13 , 67 ,500 795,435,349.,R13 R, 14 , 67 ,500 1021,324,350.,R14 R, 15 , 67 ,500 1009,-12,345.,R15 R, 16 , 67 ,500 1091,-30,345.,R16 R, 17 , 67 ,500 508,1587,383.,R20 R, 18 , 67 ,500 502,1726,389..R21 R, 19 , 67 ,500 505,1892,402.,R22 R, 20 , 67 ,500 96,1013,366.,E O, 4,5 6 ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 O, 4.5 7 ,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 D, 4.5 1 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 0, 4,5 2 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 D, 4.5 3 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 O, 4.5 4 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 O, 4.5 5 ,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,20 K,-3 ALL,14 K,-l ALL,16 VC,C PC output option: 0 ,A:RSFRFUT.INP 50UND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91 TITLE: Rancho Sanat Fe Road--Future pm peak BAR ELE EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS *************************** 1 0.* Bl 2 0 .* 62 3 0.* 63 4 0.* 64 5 0.* 65 6 0,* 66 7 0 . * 67 8 0.* 68 9 0. * Fl 10 0.* F2 11 0.* F3 12 0,* F4 13 0 .* F5 BAR ELE BARRIER OATA ************ BARRIER HEIGHTS 2 3 4 5 BAR ID LENGTH TYPE 1 6.* 61 89.1 MASONRY 2 6 .* 82 127.2 MASONRY 3 6.* 63 109.7 MASONRY 4 6.* 64 26.8 MASONRY 5 6 . * 65 15,5 MASONRY 6 6 . * 66 79.3 MASONRY 7 6 . * 67 144 .2 MASONRY 8 6 . * 68 101.5 MASONRY 9 8 . * Fl 25,4 MASONRY 10 8 . * F2 89,1 MASONRY 11 8 . * F3 102 .2 MASONRY 12 8.* F4 204 .4 MASONRY 13 8.* F5 27.1 MASONRY REC REC ID DNL PEOPLE LEQ(CALI Rl R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 67. 500, 68.6 67. 500. 63.7 \i.<^c3 67. 500. 63.6 ffee^ 67. 500. 62,3 RtcZ 67. 500. 60.5 67. 500. 59.6 Rec 1 7 R7 67. 500. 58 .6 8 R8 67. 500. 61.7 9 R9 67. 500, 62.2 10 RIO 67. 500. 62.8 11 Rll 67. 500. 72 .1 12 R12 67. 500. 72,5 13 R13 67. 500. 68 .4 14 R14 67. 500. 62.4 7 15 R15 67. 500. 68.7 16 R16 67. 500. 66.3 17 R20 67. 500. 62.0 18 R21 67. 500. 60.7 19 R22 67, 500. 60.7 20 6 67, 500. 69.4 6ARRIER TYPE COST 6ERM 0. MASONRY 66797. MASONRY/JERSEY 0. CONCRETE 0. TOTAL COST = $ 67000, 6ARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH 6ARRIER SECTION lllliillllill CORRESPONOING eARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8.