HomeMy WebLinkAbout3190; Rancho Sante Fe Road Realignment; Rancho Sante Fe Road Realignment; 2001-11-01AC0L8TICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT
RANCnO SANTA EE ROAD REALIGNMENT
(Phase 1)
Prepared for:
CITY OE CARLSBAD
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carisbad, California 92009
Prepared by:
StASSOOAtmO^C
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
NOVEMBER 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
TABLC or CONTENTS
" Section Page No.
tm
SUMMARY iii
2 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
^ 2.0 FROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
to 2.1 Project Location and Setting 1
2.2 Proiect Characteristics 1
P ^
ito
3.0 NOISE CRITERIA 4
^ 3.1 City of Carisbad Noise Criteria 4
Itf 3.2 FHWA/Caltrans Noise Criteria 5
to
k
to
k
z
4.0 METHODOLOGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION 6
5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 6
6.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS 8
7.0 NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES INCORPORATED
INTO THE PROJECT 11
8.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE 13
9.0 REFERENCES 13
ATTACriMCNTS
Attachment 1 Traffic Volume Summary
Attachment 2 SOUND32
1576-01
November 2001 '
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
TABLC Of CONTENTS iContlnued^
to Page No.
LIST or riGURES
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Regional Map 2
Project Location 3
Noise Measurement and Receptor Locations 7
City Proposed Sound WaU Location 12
Construction Equipment Noise Leveis 14
LIST or TABLES
Table 1 Noise Abatement Criteria
Houriy A-weighted Average Sound Level - Decibel (Dba) 5
Table 2 Short-term Measured Average Noise Level
and Concurrent Traffic Volumes 8
Table 3 Existing Noise Levels 9
Table 4 Predicted Traffic Noise Impacts 10
& A^WClATEiv LNC.
P^Kii'm^ T—« iff! <*mt^.* iVufn*!
1576-01
November 2001
it
te
to
k
te
•I
to
m
k
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
SUMMARY
Existing noise sensitive receivers in the project vicinity include approximately 50 residences
located along the western portion of the project site along Rancho Santa Fe Road. Existing
noise levels currently exceed the Federal Highway Administration's Noise Abatement Criteria
at some of the residences aiong Rancho Santa Fe Road.
The proposed project would realign Rancho Santa Fe Road east of the existing residences.
Future noise levels generated by project traffic from the proposed road realignment and
widening would comply with the Federal Highway Administration and Cahfornia
Department of Transportation's Noise Abatement Criteria.
1576-01
November 2001
te
m
te
rm
to
to
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This noise study is provided for the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment (Phase 1)
project located within the City of Carisbad. The City of Carisbad is the lead agency for the
project. The project would also be federally funded, therefore, Caltrans is a responsible
k agency. Phase 2 of the project consists of the Rancho Santa Fe Bridge Replacement project
^ located north of the Phase 1 area. A noise study for the Phase 2 project has been previously
prepared (Dudek & Associates July 2001)
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 impacts have
^ been evaluated relative to the applicable noise criteria.
^ 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
^ 2.1 Project Location and Setting
The proj ect site is located near the southeastern portion of the City of Carisbad. The regional
project location is depicted in Figure 1. The area ranges from relatively flat ground to sloping
hUlsides. There are approximately 50 single family homes located adjacent to the existing
^ Rancho Santa Fe Road alignment and undeveloped land in the vicinity of the project site
<i* {Figure 2). The homes along Rancho Santa Fe Road are situated below, above and at-grade
with the elevation of Rancho Santa Fe Road, and generally have existing four to six-foot high
m^
^ wood fences along the backyards.
*• 2.2 Project Characteristics
PM The City of Carisbad's proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment project would realign
te and widen approximately 9,000-linear feet of Rancho Santa Fe Road (S-10) from two lanes
to an ultimate six-lane Prime Arterial Roadway from approximately La Costa Avenue to j ust
J south of San Elijo Road (previously named Questhaven Road).
to
|& ASSOCIATE |NC.
1576-01
November 2001
IHl
to
Orange
County
Camp
Pendleton
Fallbrook
Riverside County
pi
to
z
to
to
n
Oceansitle Vista
Valley
Center
O
1"-8 Miles
San
Marcos
Escondido
O
O
-Z-
O i
Project Site
Rancho
Santa Fe
Ranclio
Bernardo
Del Mar'.
Mira Mesa
Poway
1 Santee
Ramona
LaJolla t
San Diego,
LaMesa
Lemon
Grove
Coronado \
Imperial
Beach
National /
City
Chula
Vista f >
Otay Mesa
Alpine
Mexico
Tijuana
te
k
to
Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment (Phase 1) - Acoustical Assessment Report
Regional Map
FIGURE
1 r*^ 1 Existing Corintia Dr. Existing Single Family Residential CITY OF OCEANSIDE Existing Light Industrial Park La Costa Meadows Dr. Existing Bridge Questhaven Rd. Phase 1 Impact Area La Costa Ave. Scale In Feet Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment (Phase 1) • Acoustical Assessment Report Project Vicinity FIGURE 2
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project ^ Acoustical Assessment Report
te Roadway Realignment
m
te
The proposed widening and realignment proj ect is part of the City of Carisbad's General Plan
to upgrade Rancho Santa Fe Road to meet its designation as a Prime Arterial Roadway. The
pi realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road wiU be constructed with six lanes, a median, sidewalks, curb
il and gutter, and street lights. As part of the realignment project, a coUector road would be
constructed to connect realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road with a portion of existing Rancho
Santa Fe Road to provide temporary access to Cadencia Street. k
te
3.0 NOISE CRITERIA
This report foUows the noise criteria and poUcies established by the City of Carisbad, as weU
as th e C aUfornia Department of Transportation (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 the City of Carlsbad. The City of Carlsbad noise
criteria are applied within the local jurisdiction area. Caltrans and FHWA noise criteria are
also used for land uses adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road and where Rancho Santa Fe Road
^ is the predominant noise source, te
3.1 City of Carlsbod Noise Criteria
te
^ The City of Carisbad describes community 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 (dBA) "penalty" added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., and a five
I dBA penalty added to the evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. The five and ten dBA
penalties are apphed 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
adjacent residences were also evaluated in terms of the peak hour average sound level. The
noise peak hour average sound level is the noise descriptor typically used by the FFIWA and
to Caltrans when evaluating traffic noise.
2 The City of Carisbad requires that the maximum acceptable exterior noise level for new
residential development shaU not exceed a CNEL of 60 dBA.
r 1576-01
W November 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Rood Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
te
P
k
3.2 FHWA/Caltrans Noise Criteria
The FHWA foUows the noise abatement procedures established in the Code of Federal
Regulations (23 CFR 772). Caltrans also foUows the noise abatement procedures as weU 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 1 shows the FHWA noise abatement criteria. The
criteria are based on the peak hour (noisiest) average sound level which regularly occurs
during a 24-hour period. The noise abatement criteria for outdoor noise exposure typically
is 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.
TABLE 1
Noise Abatement Criteria
Hourly A-Weighted Average Sound Level - decibel (dBA)
Activity
Category LJh)
—
Description of Activity Category
A 57
(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)
Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels,
hotels, schools, churches, libraries and hospitals.
C 72
(Exterior)
Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above.
D — Undeveloped lands.
E 52
(interior)
Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals and
auditoriums.
te A traffic noise impact occurs when the predicted traffic noise levels with project approach
withm 1 dBA, or exceed the Noise Abatement Criteria. Noise Abatement Criteria, when
approached or exceeded, requires the consideration of traffic noise abatement measures. Also,
a traffic noise impact occurs if there is a substantial noise increase. A noise increase is
te
&A^OCUTTE,S.INC.j 1576-01
November 2001
*• Rancho Santa Fe Rood Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
m '
m
te substantial when the predicted noise level within the project exceeds the existing hourly
average noise level by 12 dBA.
m
^ 4.0 METHODOLOGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION
E
• To determine the existing noise levels and potential noise impacts, noise measurement were
conducted adjacent to the project site. Noise modeling was also conducted using Caltrans'
^ SOUND32 traffic noise prediction model (Caltrans 1983). This model is based on the FHWA
traffic noise prediction model (FHWA-RD-77-108). The SOUND32 noise model accepts as
G input the number and types of vehicles on the roadway {i.e., heavy trucks, medium trucks,
and automobUes), vehicle speeds, and physical characteristics of the road and topography; as
weU as receiver and noise barrier heights and locations. The CALVENO vehicle noise
L emission levels were used in the noise model (Caltrans 1987).
z
P
k
The noise measurements were conducted using calibrated Larson-Davis Laboratories Model
700 (S.N. 2132) digital integrating sound level meter. The sound level meter meets the
current American National Standards Institute standard for a Type 1 sound level meter.
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 percentages are based on vehicle 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 Rancho Santa Fe Road is 45 mUes per hour. This speed
correlated weU with the results of the noise measurements and was used in the existing noise
modeling for the road. The modeled values were within 1 dBA of the measured noise levels
which confirms the assumptions used in the noise model. Existing and future traffic volume
information is provided in Attachment 1.
5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
pi Three noise measurements were conducted at the residential area located along the western
k portion of Rancho Santa Fe Road (Sites Ml, M2 and M3, Figure 3). The primary noise source
at the measurement sites is traffic on Rancho Santa Fe Road. The noise measurement sites
were selected to provide an unobstructed view of the Rancho Santa Fe Road {i.e., no
intervening walls, buUdings, topography etc.). The measured average sound levels were 73
km
1576-01
& AmXnATES. LNCJ
November 2001
te
CiD Noise Measurement Location O Noise Receptor Location GRADING PLAN SOURCE: Dokken Engineering. February 2000 Scole In Feet Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment (Phase 1) - Acoustical Assessment Report Noise Measurement and Receptor Locations FIGURE
to
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
r
to
dBA at Site 1, 70 dBA at Site 2 and 71 dB at Site 3. Tahle Z depicts the results of the noise
measurements adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road.
TABLE 2
Short-Term Measured Average Noise Level and Concurrent Traffic Volumes
E
Site Description DatejTime Cars HT^
M1 Approximately 30' to center line of road 10/18/01
12:50 •1:10 PM
73 dBA 446 7 1
M2 Approximately 45' to center line of road 10/18101
12:20-12:40 PM
70 dBA 466 g 3
M3 Approximately 40' to center line of road 10/18/01
11:40 AM-12:00 PM
71 dBA 505 7 1
Notes: ' Equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (time-average sound level)
^ Medium trucks
^ Heavy trucks
k
k
The existing noisiest hourly average sound level was determined based on the existing peak
hour traffic volume (City of Carisbad, 2001a). When adjusted to the peak hourly average
noise level, the modeled noise level ranges from approximately 53 to 73 dBA at the backyards
of the existing homes (i.e.. Sites 4-14). The existing (noisiest) one-hour average sound levels
for various receiver locations are depicted in Tahle 3. The noise level at the homes adjacent
to Rancho Santa Fe Road varies. Due to factors such as the amount of noise attenuation
associated with intervening topography (i.e., graded slopes) as well as the distances from the
homes to the road. The intervening topography is generally more effective at shielding the
traffic noise for the homes located at the bottom of the slopes.
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 peak hour buUdout (assumed to occur in the year 2020)
k
1576-01
November 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project ^ Acoustical Assessment Report
noise levels were calculated using the SOUND32 model. The noise modeling included the
future peak hour buildout traffic information (City of Carisbad, 2001b) and the physical
improvements shown on the design plan for the road widening and realignment
improvements.
TABLE 3
Existing Noise Levels
z
IF
te
hi
Siti< Lociition
Numbpr ot
Umts
Ri'prc^anted
EiiMing Wurst Hour
Noi'-.e Li'vH Lciiihi, ilBA
Activity
Ciiteijury ami
NAC Lonihi
Impact Typo
Ml Rancho Santa Fe Road (right-of-way) 76 D(") None
M2 Rancho Santa Fe Road (Utility
easement)
73 D(") None
M3 Rancho Santa Fe Road (Undeveloped
Land)
73 D(-) None
4 Cuesta PI. (Backyard) 2 53 B(67) None
5 Cuesta PI. (Backyard) 2 54 B{67) None
6 Dehesa Ct. (Backyard) 4 54 B(67) None
7 Dorado PI. (Backyard) 3 55 B(67) None
8 Dulce Ct. (Backyard) 3 57 B(67) None
9 Del Rio Ct. (Backyard) 6 65 B(67) None
10 Trigo Lane (Backyard) 5 68 B(B7) None
11 Trigo Lane (Backyard) 6 73 B(67) None
12 Muslo Lane (Backyard) 8 70 B(671 None
13 Casca Way (Backyard) 5 67 B(67) None
14 Esfera Ct. (Backyard) 3 64 B(67) None
15 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 51 D(") None
16 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 51 D(") None
17 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 49 D(") None
18 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 48 D(-) None
r
If
&A^<XIAT1ES,_INCJ
November 2001
1576-01
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
k
z
The proposed project would realign the road away from the existing homes, thereby reducing
the traffic noise exposure at the residences. With implementation of the project, the future
peak one-hour average noise level is projected to range from approximately 49 to 58 dBA at
the backyards of the existing residences located along the west side Rancho Santa Fe Road.
This noise level would comply with the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria. The predicted
future buUdout peak one-hour average noise levels at the receivers is depicted in Table 4-
TABLE 4
Predicted Traffic Noise Impacts
to
r
k
Sito Lncalioii
Nnise Aclivity
Dcvplnprnsnt Existing PrnlictPd Ineruasu Calugury
Prrdatof Nnise Nnnn or iindlUAC
1978 Li'vi'l LPVPI DtwriMW Lnnli)
Impact
Typo
Ml Rancho Santa Fe Road (right-of-
way)
76 63 •13 D(") None
M2 Rancho Santa Fe Road (Utility
easement}
73 55 -18 D(-) None
M3 Rancho Santa Fe Road
(Undeveloped Land)
73 54 -19 D(^) None
4 Cuesta Pl. (Backyard) Yes 53 57 +4 B[67) None
5 Cuesta PI. (Backyard) Yes 54 56 + 2 B(67) None
6 Dehesa Ct. (Backyard) Yes 54 53 -1 B(67} None
7 Dorado PI. (Backyard) Yes 55 51 -4 B(67| None
8 Dulce Ct. (Backyard) Yes 57 49 -B B(67) None
9 Del Rio Ct. (Backyard) Yes 65 58 -7 B(67) None
10 Trigo Lane (Backyard) Yes 68 58 -10 B(67| None
11 Trigo Lane (Backyard) Yes 73 56 -17 B(67} None
12 Muslo Lane (Backyard) Yes 70 53 •17 B(67) None
13 Casca Way (Backyard) Yes 67 53 -14 B(67) None
14 Esfera Ct. (Backyard) Yes 64 53 -11 B(67) None
15 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 51 57 +6 D(-) None
16 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 51 55 +4 D(") None
17 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 49 53 +A D(") None
18 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 48 54 •t-6 D(") None
te
& ASSOCWTE.^. INC,
November 2001
1576-01
10
HI
ll
I
z
r k
Rancho Santa Fe Rood Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
Future residential development has been approved for singie famUy homes along the east side
of Rancho Santa Fe Road (Sites 15-18). The tentative map for these homes indicates that the
residences would be located approximately 15 to 30 feet below the elevation of Rancho Santa
Fe Road. The future peak hour average noise level at these future residences would range
from approximately 53 to 58 dBA.
The future worst-case one-hour average noise level at the homes located near the northwest
corner of Rancho Santa Fe Road and La Costa Avenue (Sites 4-7) would range from
approximately 51 to 55 dBA. This noise level complies with ¥HWA/Ca\tians Noise Abatement
Criteria of 67 dBA, Leq(h) for Activity Category B land uses.
It should also be noted that the future noise levels at the existing homes wUI comply with
the City of Carlsbad's noise criteria. Thus, the noise impact would be less than significant
as compared to the City's noise criteria.
7.0 NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE
PROJECT
m Future noise levels would comply with the FHWA/Caltrans noise criteria at aU the existing
L homes located along Rancho Santa Fe Road Phase 1 project area. Therefore, noise abatement
features are not required to comply with the Noise Abatement Criteria. However, as part of
the engineering design plans for the proj ect, the City wiU construct a six-foot high sound wall
along the west side of Rancho Santa Fe Road at the southern portion of the project site. The
location of the proposed noise barrier is depicted on Figure 4.
The homes adjacent to the proposed sound wall are located at the bottom of a slope and
would be approximately 25 to 50 feet below the elevation of reaUgned Rancho Santa Fe Road.
The intervening slope wiU provide significant noise attenuation at the adjacent residences.
As previously stated, the proposed sound wall is not required to comply with the
FHWA/Caltrans criteria, but, is a design feature of the project. The City recognizes that the
sound waU is not required per FHWA/Caltrans criteria. Therefore, the City wiU not seek
reimbursement from the FHWA for construction of this sound waU (City of Carlsbad 2001).
1576-01
fm November 2001 11
te
r Proposed 6' Sound Wall Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment (Phase 1) - Acoustical Assessment Report Sound Wall Location FIGURE
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
k
8.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE
Noise generated by construction equipment on this project would occur with varying
intensities and durations during the different phases of construction: clear and grub,
earthwork, base preparation, paving and cleanup.
Equipment expected to be used would include tractors, backhoes, pavers and other related
equipment. Maximum noise levels at 50 feet range from approximately 75 to 95 dBA for the
type of equipment normally used in a project such as this. The noise levels associated with
various types of construction equipment are shown in Figure 5- Noise produced by
construction equipment would be reduced by approximately six dB per doubling distance.
Thus, the noise level would be about 6 dB less at 100 feet as compared to 50 feet from the
equipment.
Project construction wiU comply with applicable local requirements. Also, the contractor
shall comply with aU local sound control and noise level standards, regulations and
ordinances which apply to any work performed pursuant to the contract. Each internal
combustion engine, used for any purpose on the job or related to the job, shaU be equipped
with a muffler of a type recommended by the manufacturer. No internal combustion engine
shall be operated on the project without said muffler.
9.0 REFERENCES
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), June 1983. User's In structions for
SOUND32 (FHWA/CA/TL-83/06).
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 1987. California Vehicle Noise Emission
Levels, FHW/VCA/TL-87/03.
City of Carlsbad, September, 1995. Noise Guidelines Manual.
City of Carisbad, October 10, 2001a. Future Buildout Peak Hour Traffic Forecast Volumes (Fax
data).
City of Carisbad, October 9, 2001b. Existing Peak Hour Traffic Count Volumes (Fax data).
mmmmMm 1576-01
&ASS<ra/nt:s,iN^ November 2001 13
COMPACTERS (ROtLERS)
FRONT LOADERS
BACKHOES
TRACTORS
SCRAPERS, GRADERS
PAVERS
TRUCKS
NOISE LEVEL (dBAl AT 50 FEET
CONCRETE MIXERS
CONCRETE PUMPS
CRANES (MOVABLE)
CRANES (DERRICK)
it
-a
Ul
PUMPS
GENERATORS
COMPRESSORS
PNEUMATIC WRENCHES
JACK HAMMERS AND ROCK DRILLS
PILE DRIVERS (PEAKS)
VIBRATORS
SAWS
NOTE: Based on limited avaiiabte data samples.
SOURCE: EPA PB 206717, Environmental Protection Agency, Dec. 31,1971, "Noise from Construction Equipment & Operations"
Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment (Phase 1) - Acoustical Assessment Report
Typical Construction Noise Generation Levels
FIGURE
te
k
m
te
te
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
City of Carisbad, October 22, 2001. Telephone Conversation v(^ith Ms. Carrie Loya-Smalley.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), December 1978. FHWA Highv(^ay Traffic Noise
Prediction Model.
to
A^OCIATE-S. INC.
1576-01
November 2001 15
ATTACHMENT I
Traffic Volume Summary
(Existing and Future Peak Hour Volumes]
to
k
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Pro/essional learns for Complex Projects
to
te
Rancho Santa Fe Road
Existing Peak Hour Vehicles
Cars
1199/905
MI
44/33
Future Peak Hour Vehicles
HT
16/12
to
to
to
Rancho Santa Fe Road
(n/o future coUector road)
(s/o future coUector road)
(Northbound/Southbound)
Cars
1695/2206
1418/1989
MT
63/82
52/74
HI
22/29
18/26
Ml
to
to
to l':
to I:
Attachment 2
m
k
SOUND32
t.S
to
DUDEK
&ASSOCIATES
A California Corporation
Rancho Santa Fe existing (rsfrple>:.s32)
^-Rancho Santa Fe Road. 1
1199 , 45 , 44 , 45 , 16 , 45
'"'!'-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2
905 , 45 , 33 , 45 , 12 , 45
m
•-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3
Mll905 , 45 , 33 , 45 , 12 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4
^1199 , 45 , 44 , 45 , 16 , 45
^^-Northbound existing segment 1, 1
N, 10, 70, 300,Nl
170,270,310,N2
1,245,360,315,N3
,578,820,330,N4
N,719,965,332,N5
902, 1140, 334,K6
liti, 1040, 1275, 340,N7
N,1170,1400,350,N8
f,1350,1571,366,N9
r,1710,1920,392,NIO
1750,1960,396,Nil
L-SOOTHBOUND EXISTING SEGMENT 1, 2
C, -40, 90, 300,Sl
,130,310,310,52
N,200,400, 315,S3
1*1,551,825,330,S4
^,719,982,332,S5
N,900,1160,334,56
^, 1038,1290, 340,37
-1,1160,1410,350,S8
,1349,1588,366,S9
N,1700,1930,392,310
^-740,1972,396,311
te'-SOUTBOUND EXISTING 2, 3
N, 1740,1972,396,Sll
pti, 2 048, 2453, 436, S12
• •1,2223,2749,460,313
,2280,2840,468,514
N,2398,3040,484,315
•1,2525,3249, 500,516
tmi,2663,3480,510,517
N,2728,3580,512,318
^,2859, 3806, 510,519
^058,4145,508,320
L-NORTHBOUND EXISTING 2, 4
^,1750, 1960,396, Nil
T,2060,2440,435,N12
,2242,2732,460,N13
N,2300,2828,468,N14
E,2422,3019,484,N15
,2550,3226,500,N16
N,2676,3447,510,N17
r,2739,3545,512,N18
1,2385,3795,£10,N19
3083,4140,508,M20
B-Top of Slope, 1,1,0,0
H.2a,418,314,314,81
to.73,419,316,316,62
295,560,322,322,B3
>R99,689,326,326,84
te
450,750,329,329,65
(•»45,850,330, 330,B6
78,979,332,332,87
830,1170,334,334,88
1020,1308,340,340,69
,145, 1429,350, 350,810
te-Top of Slope, 2,1,0,0
1327,1600,366,366,Cl
^i397, 1670,372,372, C2
te^3 0,1705,374,374,C3
1657,1915,390,390,C4
^726,1993,398,398,C5
847,2160,412,412,C6
™-Top of Slope, 3,1,0,0
1815,2385,442,442,01
fM
925,2351,442,442,02
tesSO,24 00,442,442,03
2031,2485,445,445,04
f»»14 0,2679, 464,464,05
^ 210,2800,476,476,06
lw
2249,2858,476,476,07
^390,3 070,492,492,08
447,3160,492,492,09
te4 50,3200,504,504,010
2500,3277,504,504,011
^-Top of Slope, 4,1,0,0
1^530,3495,528,528,El
2590,3465,528,528,E2
ipi645,354 0,525,525,E3
703,3630,525,525,E4
*?78 0,3750,525,525,E5
2835,3815,525,525,E6
., 1 , 67 ,500
11129,556,298,Rl
R, 2 , 67 ,500
P»90,650,300,R2
j^, 3 , 67 ,500
390,780,299,R3
R, 4 , 67 ,500
1^22,1033,295,R4
to, 5 , 67 ,500
821,1220,296,R5 I, 6 , 67 ,500
98,1335,336.,R6
R, 7 , 67 ,500
^339, 1630,369. , R7
8 , 67 ,500
™689,1965,401,R8
R, 9 , 67 ,500
1223,2831,481,R9
, 10 , 67 ,500
2390,3113,497,RIO
E, 11 , 67 ,500
649,3580,530,Rll
R, 12 , 67 ,500
—360,1240,341.,M1
13 , 67 ,500
tegOO,2280,425.,M2
R, 14 , 67 ,500
^890, 3910, 518 . ,M3
R, 15 , 67 ,500
H(ii070, 1032, 371. , RFl
'., 16 , 67 ,500
'"5250,1080,373.,RF2
R, 17 , 67 ,500
Mi
:590,1205,376.,RF3
Mt, 18 , 67 ,500
2820,1310,333.,RF4
nm, 4.5
g^L, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12,13, 14, 15, 16, 17,18
C,C
te
U
i;
to
to
m
10
11
12
14
m
^15
16
^19
20
•122
23
to
25
. 27
to28
29
0.* 88 196 . 7 BERM
0 .* 89 174 . 3 BERM
0.* Cl 99. 2 BERM
0.* C2 48 . .1 BERM
0. * C3 309. .7 BERM
0 .* C4 104 . .4 BERM
0 .* 05 206, .7 8ERM
0.* 01 115 . ,1 BERM
0.* 02 60. ,2 BERM
0.* 03 110 ,8 BERM
0 .* D4 223 . .3 BERM
0 .* 05 14 0 .3 BERM
0 .* 06 69 , 9 BERM
0.* 07 255 . 1 BERM
0.* D8 106 . 5 BERM
0.* D9 41 .9 BERM
0. * DIO 91 .8 BERM
0 .* El 67 .1 BERM
0.* E2 93 .1 BERM
0.* E3 107 . 1 BERM
0.* E4 142 .6 BERM
0 .* E5 85 . 1 BERM
to
1
REC ID DNL PEOPLE LEQ((
•«1 Rl H 67. 500 . 52. 9
2 R2 S 67. 500 . 53. 9
R3 67. 500. 53. 8
te 4 R4 67. 500. 55 . 0
5 R5 67. 500. 56 . 5
te 6 R6 67. 500. 64 . .5
y 7 R7 (O 67 . 500. 68 . 3
* 8 R8 U 67 . 500. 72. .8
9
i 10
R9
RIO
l^
13
67.
67.
500.
500 .
70.
66,
.4
,6
tell Rll 57. 500 . 63. .5
12 Ml 67. 500. 75, .5
<*13 M2 67 . 500. 73 . ,0
k^" M3 67. 500. 73 . .1
15 RFl 67. 500. 51. ,4
RF2 67. 500. 50. .5
17
im
^18
RF3
RF4
n 67.
67.
500 .
500.
49.
48
.2
.4
I6ARRIER TYPE COST
i
to
•BERM
MASOWRY
MASONRY/JERSEY
CONCRETE
0.
0 .
0.
0.
TOTAL COST = $
^BARRIER HEIGHT INDEX POR EACH BARRIER SECTION
RANCHO SANTA FE FUTURE-(rsfrplfu)
(pJ-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1
1418 , 50 , 52 , 50 , 18 , 50
*^-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2
1695 , 50 , 63 , 50 , 22 , 50
•-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3
1(^1695 , 50 , 63 , 50 , 22 , 50
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4
PWtl989 , 50 , 74 , 50 , 26 , 50
^'-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 5
2206 , 50 , 82 , SO , 29 , 50
J'-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 6
2206 , 50 , 82 , 50 , 29 , 50
^L-NORTHBOUND FUTURE SEGMENT 1, 1
N,10,73,300,Nl
''^, 172,275,310,N2
tel.243,365,315,N3
N,390,530,326,NN4
(pfir,555,680,336,NN5
r,735,815,344,NN6
'''R,995, 950,352,NN7
N,1201,1022,356,NN8
T,1423,1070,360,NN9
tar,1655.,1100,366,NNIO
N,1822.,1128,372,NNll
("•^-NORTHBOUNO FUTURE SEGMENT 2, 2
^J,1822.,1128,372,NNll
N,1930.,1150,375,NN12
^,2085. ,1180, 382,NN13
],2330.,1270,392,NN14
tei,2570.,1378,4 02,NN15
N,2792 . ,1515,412,NN16
•"•j, 3000. , 1678, 422, NN17
Jigl, 3190. , 1858. 432, NN18
N, 336 0.,2058,442,NN19
pa^4e2 . ,2230, 450, NN20
i '^-NORTHBOUNO FUTURE 3, 3
TI,34 82.2230,450,NN20
N, 3634,2510,462,NN21
E, 3755, 2852,476, NN22
,3833,3275,506,NN23
N,3863,4025,524,NN24
[, 3905 . ,4520, 530,NN25
-SOUTHBOUND FUTURE 1, 4
N, -40,90,300,331
S,130,310,310,332
,200,400,315,553
,332,549,326,554
N,SOO, 710,336,335
1,730,880,346,336
1,935,982,352,337
N,1125,1055,355,338
1,1360,1113,360,359
J, 1645.,1150,366,5310
~H,1315.,1180,372,SSll
L-SOUTHBOUND FUTURE 3, 5
EJ, 1815 . , 1180, 372,3311
^,1920.,1195,376,SS12 '
N,2070.,1235,382,3313
^,2310. ,1318,3 92,5514
i
te
N,2540.,1420,402,3515
2760. ,1568,412,5515
,2970.,17 20,422,SS17
m
N,3150.,18 98,432,5518
N, 3325.,2 090,442,5519
im
430.,2253,450,3320
te-50UTHBOUNO FUTURE 3, 5
N,3430,2253,450,5520
fff,3580,2538,462,3321
te.3'^00'286 9,476,5322
N,3779,3282,506,5523
(,3805,4025,524,SS24
^853,4538,530,3325
'-Top of Slope, 1,1,0,0
128 . ,418,314,314,61
f73 . ,419,316,316,B2
H-Top of Slope, 2,1,0,0
398.,690,332,332,64
C50 . ,750, 336, 336,35
45.,850,330,330,86
578.,979,332,332,67
^80. , 1170, 334, 334, B8
"• 020. ,1308,340,340,89
145 . ,1429,350,350,810
B-Top of Slope, 3,1,0,0
f*327,16 00,366,366,Cl
1^397,1570, 372,372, C2
1430,1705,374,374,C3
1(^657,1915,390,390,C4
.726,1993,398,398,C5
"''[847,216 0,412.412,06
B-Top of Slope, 4,1,0,0
^.815,23 85,442,442.01
|M»925,2351,442,442,02
1950,2400,442,442,03
IPt031,2485,445,445,04
; ;i40,2679,464,464,05
2210,2800,476,476,06
2249,2858,476,476,07
i;390,3070,492,492.08
te447,3160,4 92,492,D9
2450,3200,504,504,010
^2500,3277,504,504,011
^-Top of Slope, 5,1,0,0
2530,3495,528,528,61
|p£590,3465,528,528,E2
i645,3540,525,525,E3
"'^703, 363 0, 525, 525, E4
2780,3750,525,525,E5
!e35.3815,525,525,E6
iBft-Top of Slope (New), 6 , 1 , 0 ,0
2050 . ,960,370,370,FTl
^998 . ,1035, 377, 377, FT2
^002 . , 1070, 380, 380, FT3
2262.,1145,390,390,FT4
jp^540.,1260,400,400,FT5
•765.,13 90,410,410,FT6
'•^980.,1555,420.42 0,FT7
B-New Wall, 7,2, 0,0
^_74.,418,317,323,BF2
296..559,327,333,8F3
IH498 . , 690,332, 338,BF4
75 . ,815, 342,348,BF5
*^4 0.,985,351,357,BF6
R, 1 , 67 ,500
itm
:29,556,298,R1
W, 2 , 67 ,500
290,650,300,R2
m., 3 , 67 ,500
^90,780,299,R3
R, 4 , 67 ,500
_£22,1033.295,R4
!, 5 , 67 ,500
^21, 1220,296,R5
R, 5 , 67 ,500
*''*)98,1335,336 . , R6
' S'' '500
1339,1630,369.,R7
jpl, 8 , 67 ,500
. .689,1965,401,R8
to
R, 9 , 67 ,500
2223,2831,481,R9
i, 10 , 67 ,500
11*390,3113,497,RIO
R, 11 , 67 ,500
•"•,649, 3580, 530,RU
12 , 67 ,500
2070,1032,371.,RFl
13 , 67 ,500
5250,1080.373,,RF2
toi, 14 . 67 ,500
2590,1205,376.,RF3
^i, 15 , 67 ,500
^820, 1310,383 . ,RF4
R, 15 , 67 ,500
p^eO,1240,341.,M1
17 , 67 ,500
1910,2280,420.,M2
R, 18 , 67 ,500
J890,3910,518.,M3
IK, 4.5
ALL.7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18
^J,0
E
te
'BAR BARRIER HEIGHTS BAR
ELE 01234567 ID LENGTH TYPE
0. • 81 45 .1 BERM
•I 2 0 .* B4 79.5 BERM
3 0.* B5 133.1 eERM
*• 4 0. * B6 185.3 BERM
m s 0 .* 67 278.0 BERM
6 0.* B8 196 .7 BERM
0.* 69 174 .3 BERM
8 0.* 01 99 ,2 BERM
9 0.* C2 48 .1 BERM
0.« 03 309.7 BERM
toll 0. * 04 104 .4 BERM
12 0.* C5 206 .7 BERM
^13 0.* 01 115.1 BERM
14 0 .* D2 60 .2 BERM
0.* 03 110 .8 BERM
• 16 0. * 04 223 .3 BERM
*-17 0. * 05 140.3 BERM
18 0 .* D6 69. 9 BERM
'-19 0.* 07 255.1 6ERM
^20 0.* 08 105 . 5 BERM
21 0.* 09 41.9 BERM
^22 0. * DIO 91.8 BERM
*-23 0 . * El 67. 1 BERM
24 0 .* E2 93 . 1 BERM
PM
25 0.* E3 107 . 1 BERM
IB26 0.* E4 142 .6 BERM
27 0.* E5 85.1 BERM
fW
0. * FTl 91.5 BERM
29 0 .* FT2 35.4 BERM
0.* FT3 270.8 BERM
31 0 . * FT4 301. 0 BERM
0.* FT5 260. 0 BERM
33 0.* FT6 271 .2 BERM
r*
te ^4 6. * eF2 186 .7 MASONRY
35 6 . * 6F3 166 .1 MASONRY
P*36 6 .* BF4 216 .9 MASONRY
to" 6. * BF5 315.0 MASONRY
k
0 1 2 3 4 ;
lEC REC ID ONL PEOPLE LEQ(I
1 Rl 67. 500. 54 .5
2 R2 67 . 500. 53.4
3 R3 67. 500 . 51.9
4 R4 67. 500. 50.3
5 R5 QJ 67. 500. 49.1
6 R6 67. SOO. 57.9
7 R7 lo 67. 500. 57.7
8 R8 11 67. 500. 56 .3
9 R9 I "I 67. 500. 53 , .4
M 10 RIO 67. 500. 53. .2
11 Rll 67. 500. 53. .4
lm 12 RFl IS" 67. 500. 57. .3
13 RF2 i h 67. 500. 55. .4
14 RP3 n 57. 500. 52, .5
l»15 RP4 67 . 500. 53 , ,9
16 Ml 67. 500. 63. ,2
ffl 17 M2 67. 500. 54. .8
2.3 M3 67. 500. 54 .4
fm
BARRIER TYPE OOST
BERM 0.
MASONRY 46536 .
ig MASONRY/JERSEY 0.
CONCRETE 0.
IP,
„ TOTAL COST = S 47000.
fei
BARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION
! lililillliillliliiiilllii
to llllllllllll
CORRESPONOING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION
ff 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. 6. 6. 5. 6.
m
to
ff
to
to
to
ff
k