HomeMy WebLinkAbout3190; Rancho Sante Fe Road Realignment; Rancho Sante Fe Road Realignment; 2001-12-01ACOUSTICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT
RANCnO SANTA EE ROAD REALIGNMENT
(Phase 1)
Prepared for:
CITY OE CARLSBAD
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92009
Prepared by:
ILV .\SSCK:IATI-;S. INC.;
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
December 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
TABLE or CONTENTS
Section Page No.
SUMMARY iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
2.1 Project Location and Setting 1
2.2 Project Characteristics 1
3.0 NOISE CRITERIA 4
3.1 City of Cadsbad Noise Criteria 4
3.2 FFiWA/Caltrans Noise Criteria 5
4.0 METHODOLOGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION 6
5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 6
6.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS 8
7.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE 11
8.0 REFERENCES 13
ATTACriMENTS
Attachment 1 Traffic Volume Summary
Attachment 2 SOUND32
1576-01
idl .ASStXriATlUS. INC. December 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
TABLE Of CONTENTS iContlnuedS
List of rigures Page No.
Figure 1 Regional Map 2
Figure 2 Project Location 3
Figure 3 Noise Measurement and Receptor Locations 7
Figure 4 City Proposed Privacy WaU Location 12
Figure 5 Construction Equipment Noise Levels 14
List Of Tabies Page No.
Table 1 Noise Abatement Criteria
Hourly 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
1576-01
t:^''^.. December 2001
Rancho Santo 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 California Department of
Transportation's Noise Abatement Criteria at some of the residences along Rancho Santa Fe
Road.
The proposed project would realign Rancho Santa Fe Road east of the existing residences.
Future noise leveis generated by project traffic from the proposed road realignment and
widening wouid comply with the Federal Highway Administration and California
Department of Transportation's Noise Abatement Criteria.
1576-01
December 2001
ii
m
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 Cadsbad. The City of Carlsbad and the Federal Highway
Administration are the lead agencies for the project. The CaUfornia Department of
Transportation has oversight responsibility for the project. 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 project site is located near the southeastern portion of the City of Carlsbad. The regional
project location is depicted in Figure i. The area ranges from relatively flat ground to sloping
hillsides. 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
{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
wood fences along the backyards.
2.2 Project Characteristics
The City of Carlsbad's proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment project would realign
and widen approximately 2743 linear meters (9,000 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 just south of San Elijo Road (previously named Questhaven Road).
1576-01
t''^:^:'^!^^^. December 2001 1
Orange
County
San Diego,
Imperial
Beacti
r-8Miles Tijuana Mexico
Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment (Phase 1) - Acoustical Assessment Report
Regional Map
FIGURE
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
Rancho Santo Fe Road Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
Roadway Realignment
The proposed widening and realignment 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. The
realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road wUl be constructed with six lanes, a median, sidewalks, curb
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.
3.0 NOISE CRITERIA
This report follows the noise criteria and policies established by the City of Carlsbad, as well
as the California Department of Transportation (The Department) 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. The Department 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.
3.1 City of Carlsbod Noise Criteria
The City of Carlsbad 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
dBA penalty added to the evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. The five and ten dBA
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
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 FHWA and
The Department when evaluating traffic noise.
The City of Carlsbad requires that the maximum acceptable exterior noise level for new
residential development shall not exceed a CNEL of 60 dBA.
: . 1576-01
>._.._j,.„....„u„^..„„ December 2001 4
Rancho Santa Fe Rood Project • Acoustical Assessment Report
3.2 FHWA/The Department Noise Criteria
The FHWA follows the noise abatement procedures established in the Code of Federal
Regulations (23 CFR 772). The Department also follows the noise abatement procedures as
weU as policies established in The Department 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-famUy residences and the backyards of single family homes.
TABLE 1
Noise Abatement Criteria
Hourly A-Weighted Average Sound Level - decibel (dBA)
mm
Activity
Category KM Description of Activity Category
mm A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an
m (Exterior) importanl public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the
area is to continue to serve its intended purpose.
m B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences,
(Exterior) motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries and hospitals.
m C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above.
m (Exterior)
-i D Undeveloped lands.
mt E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, pubiic meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries.
mt (Interior) hospitals and auditoriums.
A traffic noise impact occurs when the predicted traffic noise levels with project approach
within 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
substantial when the predicted noise level within the project exceeds the existing hourly
average noise level by 12 dBA.
1576-01
December 2001
Rancho Santa Fe Road Project ^ Acoustical Assessment Report
4.0 METHODOLOGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION
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 The
Department' SOUND32 traffic noise prediction model (The Department 1983). This model
is based on the FHWA traffic noise prediction model (FHWA-RD-77-108). The SOUND32
noise model accepts as 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 well as receiver and noise barrier heights and locations. The
CALVENO vehicle noise emission levels were used in the noise model (The Department
1987).
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 voiume
information is provided inAttachment 1.
5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Three noise measurements were conducted at the residential area located along the western
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
dBA at Site 1, 70 dBA at Site 2 and 71 dB at Site 3. Table 2 depicts the results of the noise
measurements adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe Road.
1576-01
t!:^!"^^, December 2001
n <uD Noise Measurement Location O Noise Receptor Location GRADING PLAN SOURCE: Dokken Engineering, February 2000 400 Scale in Feet Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment (Phase 1) • Acoustical Assessment Report Noise Measurement and Receptor Locations FIGURE
Rancho Santa Fe Rood Project ^ Acoustical Assessment Report
TABLE 2
Short-Term Measured Average Noise Level and Concurrent Traffic Volumes
tm Site Description Date/Time Leo Cars lyiT' 1 HT^
m
Ml Approximately 30' to center line of road 10/18/01
12:50-1:10 PM
73 dBA 446 7 . 1
m
M2 Approximately 45' to center line of road 10/18/01
12:20 -12:40 PM
70 dBA 466 9 3
mm
MM
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
The existing noisiest hourly average sound level was determined based on the existing peak
hour traffic volume (City of Cadsbad, 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 Table 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 weU 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)
noise levels were calculated using the SOUND32 model. The noise modeling included the
future peak hour buUdout traffic information (City of Cadsbad, 2001b) and the physical
improvements shown on the design plan for the road widening and realignment
1576-01
December 2001
Rancho Santo Fe Rood Project ^ Acoustical Assessment Report
improvements.
TABLE 3
Existing Noise Levels
Number of
Units Existing Worst Hour
Activity
Category and
Site Location Represented Noise Level Leq(ti),dBA NAC Leq(h) Impact Type
tm M1 Rancho Santa Fe Road (right-of-
way)
76 D(-) None
M2 Rancho Santa Fe Road (Utility 73 D(--) None
tm easement)
-M3 Rancho Santa Fe Road
(Undeveloped Land)
73 D(-) None
4 Cuesta PL (Backyard) 2 53 None
— 5 Cuesta PI. (Backyard) 2 54 B{67) None
-> 6 Dehesa Ct. (Backyard) 4 54 B(67) None
7 Dorado Pl. (Backyard) 3 55 B(67) None
8 Dulce CL (Backyard) 3 57 B(67) None
9 Del Rio Ct. (Backyard) 6 65 B(67) None
10 Trigo Lane (Backyard) 5 68 'B(67)" None
m 11 Trigo Lane (Backyard) 6 73 8(67) None
mn 12 Muslo Lane (Backyard) 8 70 0(67) None
M 13 Casca Way (Backyard) 5 67 B(67) None
14 Esfera Ct. (Backyard) 3 64 8(67) None
15 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 51 D(--) None
i« 16 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 51 D(-) None
ttt 17 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 49 D(-) None
m 18 Undeveloped (Zoned Residential) 48 D(--) None
December 2001
1576-01
Rancho Santa Fe Rood Project ^ Acoustical Assessment Report
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
Site
1 1 j
j Location
Development
Predates
1978
Existing
Noise
Level
Predicted
Noise
Level
Noise
Increase
or
Decrease
Activity
Category
and NAC
Leq(ti)
Impact
Type
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 PI. (Backyard) Yes 53 57 -h4 B(67) None
Ml 5 Cuesta PI. (Backyard) Yes 54 56 +2 8(67) None
m 6 Dehesa Ct. (Backyard) Yes 54 53 -1 8(67) None
mt 7 Dorado PL (Backyard) Yes 55 51 -4 8(67) None
m 8 Dulce Ct. (Backyard) Yes 57 49 -8 8(67) None
9 Del Rlo Ct. (Backyard) Yes 65 58 -7 B(67) None
m 10 Trigo Lane (Backyard) Yes 68 58 -10 8(67) None
m 11 Trigo Lane (Backyard) Yes 73 56 -17 8(67) None
•m 12 Muslo Lane (Backyard) Yes 70 53 -17 B(67) None
13 Casca Way (Backyard) Yes 67 53 -14 8(67) None
14 i Esfera Ct. (Backyard) Yes 64 53 -11 8(67) None
mt 15 Undeveloped (Zoned
Residential)
51 57 -F6 D (-) None
mt 16 Undeveloped (Zoned
Residential)
51 55 +4 ^ D (-) None
M
Mb
17 Undeveloped (Zoned
Residential)
49 53 +A . D (-) None
m 18 Undeveloped (Zoned
! Residential)
48 54 -h6 1 D (--) None
tm 1576-01
December 2001 10
Rancho Santa Fe Rood Project # Acoustical Assessment Report
Future residential development has been approved for single family 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 levei 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 FHWA/The Department 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 wUl 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.
Future noise levels would comply with the FHWA/The Department noise criteria at all the
existing homes located along Rancho Santa Fe Road Phase 1 project area. Therefore, noise
abatement is not considered. However, as part of the engineering design plans for the
project, the City wUl construct a six-foot high privacy waU along the west side of Rancho
Santa Fe Road at the southern portion of the project site. The location of the proposed waU
is depicted on Figure 4. The privacy waU is a project feature wall in which the city wiU not
seek reimbursement from the FHWA for construction of this waU (City of Carlsbad 2001).
7.0 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.
1576-01
.t':r.!:'''!r;,l''\ December 2001 11
Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment (Phase 1) - Acoustical Assessment Report Privacy Wall Location FIGURE
Rancho Santo Fe Rood Project ^ Acoustical Assessment Report
Project construction wUl 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.
8.0 REFERENCES
California Department of Transportation (The Department), June 1983. User's Instructions
for SOUND32 (FHWA/CA/TL-83/06).
California Department of Transportation (The Department), 1987. California Vehicle Noise
Emission Levels, FHWA/CA/TL-87/03.
CityofCarlsbad, September, 1995. Noise Guidelines Manual.
City of Carlsbad, 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).
City of Carlsbad, October 22, 2001. Telephone Conversation vc^ith Ms. Carrie Loya-Smalley.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), December 1978. FHWA Highvc^ay Traffic Noise
Prediction Model.
1576-01
^^Z'-::^!^"'"!!:-'.^^" December 2001 13
COMPACTERS (ROLLERS)
FRONT LOADERS
BACKHOES
TRACTORS
SCRAPERS, GRADERS
PAVERS
TRUCKS
NOISE LEVEL MBA) AT 50 FEET
•:+:
il)
CONCRETE MIXERS
CONCRETE PUMPS
CRANES (MOVABLE)
CRANES (DERRICK)
PUMPS
GENERATORS
COMPRESSORS
si
-o
u
PNEUMATIC WRENCHES
JACK HAMMERS AND ROCK DRILLS
PILE DRIVERS (PEAKS)
VIBRATORS
SAWS
NOTE: Based on limited available 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
ATTACIIMENT I
Traffic Volume Summary
(Existing and Future Peak Hour Volumes}
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Prafessional Teams for Complex Projecis
Rancho Santa Fe Road
Existing Peak Hour Vehicles
Cars
1199/905
MT
44/33
HI
16/12
Future Peak Hour Vehicles
Rancho Santa Fe Road
(n/o future collector road)
(s/o future collector road)
Cars MT
1695/2206 63/82
1418/1989 52/74
HI
22/29
18/26
(Northbound/Southbound)
ATTACriMENT2
SOUND32
&ASSOCL\TES, INC.
Professionul Teams for Complex Projects
^Rancho Santa Fe existing (rsfrplex.s32)
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1
mm 1199 , 45 , 44 , 45 , 16 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2
905 , 45 , 33 , 45 , 12 , 45
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 3
mm
905 , 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,N1
N,170,270,310,N2
^N,245,360,315,N3
N,578,820,330,N4
'''''N,719,965,332,N5
N, 902,1140, 334,N6
N,1040,1275,340,N7
iptN,1170,1400,350,N8
N,1350, 1571,366,N9
•^N, 1710, 1920, 392,NIO
1750,1960,396,Nil
mt
L-SOUTHBOUND EXISTING SEGMENT 1, 2
^N. -40, 90, 300,S1
N,130,310,310,32
**N,200,400,315,S3
N,551,825,330,84
"*N,719,982,332,55
^N, 900,1160,334,56
N, 1036,1290,340,S7
~»N, 1160,1410,350, S8
N,1349,1586,366,59
N,1700,1930, 392,SlO
_^174D,1972,396,Sll
L-SOUTBOUND EXISTING 2, 3
"«N, 1740,1972,396,Sll
N,2048,2453,436,312
"*N,2223,274 9,4 60,513
^N, 2280, 284 0,46 8,514
N,2398,3040,484,515
^^|H.2525,3249,500,516
N,2663,3480,510,517
"N,2728, 3580, 512,518
N,2859,3806,510,519
IMI
3058,4145,508,520
diL-NORTHBOUND EXISTING 2, 4
N, 1750,1960,396,Nil
^N, 206 0,2440, 436, N12
^N, 2242, 2732, 460, N13
N,2300,2828,468,N14
j,^N,2422,3 019,4B4,N15
N,2550,3226,500,N16
*"N,2676, 3447,510,N17
N,2739,3545,512,NIB
^N, 2885, 3795, 510,N19
^3083,4140,508,N20
B-Top of Slope, 1 , 1 , 0,0
""128,418,314,314,61
173,419,316,316,B2
MM
295,560,322,322,83
^ 399,689,326,326,84
(||i50,750,329,329,85
545,850,330,330,86
•*78,979,332,332.87
80,1170,334,334,88
mm
1020,1308,340,340,89 1145,1429,350,350,810 mm
i-Top of Slope, 2,1,0,0
•t327,1600,366,366, Cl
1397,1670,372,372,C2
***.43 0, 1705, 374, 374, C3
^657, 1915,390,390,04
1726,1993,398,398,05
•»184 7, 216 0,412,412,06
t-Top of Slope, 3,1,0,0
'''?815. 2385, 442,442,01
1925,2351,442,442,D2 MM
'.960,2400,442,442,03
H*031,24 8 5,445,445,04
2140,2679,464,464,05
^.210,2800,476,476,06
^249.2858,476,476,07
2390,3070,492,492,08
^447,316 0.4 92,492,09
>450,3200,504,504,DIO
''''!^500, 3277, 504, 504,011
B-Top of Slope, 4,1,0,0
mm
;530,3495,528,528,El
1^590,3465,528, 528,E2
2645,3540,525,525,E3
•^703,3630,525,525,E4
>780,3750,525,525,E5
2835,3815,525,525,E6
1 , 67 ,500
^29,556,298,R1
2 , 67 ,500
290,650,300,R2
"^i, 3 , 67 ,500
^90.780,299,R3
R, 4 , 67 ,500
^22,1033,295,R4
I, 5 , 61 ,500
*^21, 1220,296,R5
R, 6 , 67 ,500 Ml
^98,1335,336.,R6
mk, 1 , 67 ,500
1339,1630,369.,R7
8 , 67 ,500
^689,1965,401,R8
R, 9 , 67 .500
,|lli2223,2831,481,R9
\. 10 , 67 ,500
*f2390,3113,497,RIO
R, 11 , 67 ,500
MH
2649,3580,530,Rll
«ft, 12 , 67 , 500
960,1240,341.,M1
13 , 67 ,500
1900,2280,425.,M2 lm
R, 14 , 67 ,500
^890,3910,518 . , M3
15 , 67 ,500
2070,1032,371.,RFl
4MR, 16 , 67 ,500
2250,1080,373.,RF2
R, 17 , 67 ,500
2590,1205,376.,RF3
R, 18 , 67 ,500
mi2B20, 1310, 383 . , RF4
0, 4.5
•^ALL, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, IS
tm s 0 . * 88 196 , 7 BERM
9 0 . * B9 174 . ,3 BERM
m*
10 0 . 01 99 . ,2 BERM
tm 11 0, It 02 48 . .1 BERM
mm^^ 0 . lr 03 309 . .7 BERM
13 0, * 04 104 , ,4 BERM
«»14 0 . * 05 206 , ,7 BERM
*"l5 0 . Dl 115 . .1 BERM
^ 16 0, * D2 60. ,2 BERM
17 0 . * D3 110. ,8 BERM
18 0 . * 04 223 . ,3 BERM
19 0 . •fr 05 140 . ,3 BERM
*'20 0 . 06 69. , 9 BERM
21 0 , * D7 255 . ,1 BERM
Ml
22 0 , * 08 106 . .5 BERM
mt 23 0 , it 09 41. . 9 BERM
24 0 . DIO 91. .8 BERM
*•
«• 25 0 . El 67. .1 BERM
26 0. E2 93 . .1 BERM
Mi 27 0 * E3 107. . 1 BERM
28 0 * E4 142 ,6 BERM
HV
29
0 * E5 85. .1 BERM
4M>
0 1 2 3 4 1
M
REC REC ID ONL PEOPLE LEQ{i
tm
1 Rl 67. 500. 52 , 9 ml s 2 R2 s 67 . 500. 53 . . 9
— 3 R3 67 . 500. 53 . . B
4 R4 1 67 . 500. 55. . 0
mm 5 R5 i,. 67 . 500. 56 ,5
6 R6 'I 67 . 500. 64 . .5
™« ^ R7 67 . 500. 68 . ,3
^ 8 R8 U 67 . 500. 72 . ,8
9 R9 67 . 500. 70. .4
<M 10 RIO 13 67 . 500. 66 .6
11 Rll 67. 500. 63 ,5
mt
12
Ml 67. 500 . 75 . .5
13 M2 67 . 500 . 73 . . 0
14 M3 67. 500 . 73 . ,1
* 15 RFl ir 67. 500 . 51. .4
16 RF2 67. 500 . 50. .5
••17 RF3 n 67. 500 . 49. .2
^ IB RF4 it 67. 500 . 48 . ,4
BARRIER TYPE COST
BERM
MASONRY
• MASONRY/JERSEY
OONCRETE
TOTAL COST = $ 0.
BARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION
^iANCHO SANTA FE FUTURE-(rsfrplfu!
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 1
mm 1418 , 50 , 52 , 50 , 18 , 50
r-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 2
1695 , 50 , 63 , 50 , 22 , 50
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road. 3
MM
1695 , 50 , 63 , 50 , 22 , 50
mff-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 4
1989 , 50 , 74 , 50 , 26 , 50
^^-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 5
1^ 2206 , 50 , 82 , 50 , 29 , 50
T-Rancho Santa Fe Road, 6
^ 2206 , 50 , 82 , 50 , 29 , 50
-..-NORTHBOUND FUTURE SEGMENT 1, 1
n, 10,73,300.Nl
N,172,275,310,N2
mm
1-1,243,365,315,N3
B|»J,390,530,326,NN4
N,555,680,336,NN5
*»J,735,815,344,NN6
995, 950, 352,NN7
N,1201,1022,356,NN8
J. 1423.1070. 36 0.NN9
^, 1655.,1100,36S,NNIO
1822 . , 1128, 372, NNll
L-NORTHBOUND FUTURE SEGMENT 2, 2
1822 . , 1128, 3 72, NNll
^,1930. , 1150, 376, NN12
N,20e5.,1180,382,NN13
'-'*J,2330. ,1270,3 92.NN14
NJ, 2570 . , 1378,402,NN15
N,2792.,1515,412,NN16
N,3 000.,1678,422,NN17
N,3190.,1858,432,NN18
••N,336 0.,2058,442,NN19
3482.,2230,450,NN20
NORTHBOUND FUTURE 3, 3
^^,34 82,223 0,450,NN20
N,3634,2510,462,NN21
3755, 2852, 476, NN22
N,3833,3275,506,NN23
"•"tj, 3863,4025, 524, NN24
N,3905.,4520,530,NN25
L-SOUTHBOUND FUTURE 1, 4
^,-40,90,300,SSI
N,130,310,310,SS2
"^,200,400,315,SS3
N,332, 549,326,554
mm
N,500,710,336,555
^,730,880,346,556
N,935,982,352,557
1125,1055,356,558
N,1360,1113,360,559 mm.
N, 1645., 1150,366,SSIO
^"4,1815. ,1180, 372, SSll
L-SOUTHBOUNO FUTURE 3, 5
•«ii*I,1815 . , 1180, 372,5511
N, 1920 . ,1195,376,5512
N,2070.,1235,382,SS13
__N,2310.,1318,3 92,SS14
^N,2540 . , 1420,402,5515
N,2760.,1568.412,5516
«HN,2970.,172 0, 422,5517
N, 3150.,1898,432,5518
tm
N, 3 325.,2090,442,5519
3430.,2253,450,5520
L-SOUTHBOUND FUTURE 3, 6
••N,34 30,2253,450,5520
N,3580,2538,462,3521
"•N, 3700,2869,476, SS22
^N. 3779. 3282 . 506 .5523
N,3805,4025,524,3524
^3853,4538, 530,5525
B-Top of Slope, 1,1,0,0
128 . ,418,314,314,81
173.,419,316,316,82
B-Top of Slope, 2,1,0,0
||03 9e . ,6 90, 332, 332, 84
450.,750,336,336,B5
^545. ,850,330,330,86
678. ,97 9,332,332,B7
880..1170,334,334,88
^1020. ,1308,34 0, 340,89
1145.,1429,350,350,810
••B-TOP of Slope, 3,1,0,0
1327,1600,366,366, Cl
"^13 97,1670,372,372, C2
^14 30,1705,374,374,03
1657,1915,390,390,04
-^1726,1993.39B,398,C5
1847,2160,412,412,06
mm
B-Top of Slope, 4 , 1 , 0,0
1815,2385,442,442,01
1925,2351,442,442,02
••'1960,2400,442,442,03
2031,2485,445,445,04
•*"2140, 2679, 464,464,05
^2210,2800,476,476,06
2249,2858,476,476,07
rt»,2390, 3070,4 92,492,08
2447,3160,492,492,09
'"•'24 50,3200,504,504,010
2500,3277,504,504,011
B-Top of Slope, 5,1,0,0
*M2530,34 95,528,528,E1
2590,3465,528,528,E2
"^2645, 3540, 525, 525, E3
2703,3630,525,525,E4
m
2780,3750,525,525,E5
.^2835, 3815, 525, 525, E6
B-Top of Slope (New), 6 , 1 , 0 ,0
"•'2050.,960,370,370,FTl
1998.,1035,377,377,FT2
•M
2002. ,1070,380,38 0,FT3
^2262. , 1145, 3 90, 3 90, FT4
2540.,126 0,4 00,4 00,FT5
^2165. , 1390, 410, 410, FT6
298 0.,1555,420,420,FT7
B-New Wall, 7,2,0,0 174..418,317,323,BF2
^^96. ,559, 327, 333, BF3
398 . , 690,332,338,BF"
—1575. , 815, 342, 34 8, BF5
840.,985,351,357,BF6
""R, 1 , 67 ,500
229,556,298,Rl
R, 2 , 67 ,500
••290,650,300,R2
R, 3 , 67 ,500
**390,780,299,R3
^R, 4 , 67 ,500
622.1033.295, R4
«HiR, 5 , 67 ,500
821.1220.296, R5
n. 6 , 67 ,500
998,1335,336.,R6
mm
R, 7 , 67 ,500
lBfl339,1630,369.,R7
R, 8 , 67 ,500
*»1589,1965,401,R8
R, 9 , 67 ,500
2223,2831.481,R9
10 , 67 ,500
2390,3113,497,RIO
•*R, 11 . 67 .500
2649.3580,530,Rll
R, 12 , 67 ,500
^2 070, 1032, 3 71. , RFl
R, 13 , 67 ,500
'M2250,1080,373.,RF2
R, 14 , 67 ,500
M»
2590,1205,376.,RF3
_^R, 15 , 67 ,500
2820,1310,383.,RF4
"KR, 16 , 67 ,500
960,1240,341.,M1
""R, 17 , 67 ,500
^1910,2280,420, ,M2
R, 18 , 67 ,500
^2890, 3910, 518 . ,M3
D, 4.5
"""ALL,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18
C,C
BAR BARRIER HEIGHTS BAR
ELE 01234567 ID LENGTH TYPE
tm
1 0 . * Bl 45 . .1 BERM
2 0 84 79 . .5 BERM
tm 3 0. * B5 138 . ,1 BERM
4 0. * B6 185 , ,3 BERM
5 0. * 87 278 . .0 BERM
6 0 . * 88 196 . ,7 BERM
7 0. * B9 174 . ,3 BERM
om
8 0. • 01 99 . .2 BERM
9 0 . * C2 48 . .1 BERM
10 0 . * C3 309 . ,7 BERM
•M 11 0 . * C4 104 . .4 BERM
W 12 0. * CS 206 . ,7 BERM
*• 13 0 . * Dl 115 . ,1 BERM
^14 0 .* 02 60 . ,2 BERM
15 0. -03 110 ,8 BERM
1^ 0 . -D4 223 . .3 BERM
17 0. • 05 140 ,3 BERM
•l8 0. • D6 69 . . 9 BERM
19 0. • 07 255 . ,1 BERM
mm 20 0. • 08 106 . ,5 BERM
«tf 21 0. * 09 41 . , 9 BERM
22
MM
0. • DIO 91. . B BERM
23 0 El 67 . ,1 BERM
mm 24 0." E2 93 . ,1 BERM
25 0. • E3 107. .1 BERM
26 0 . * E4 142 , ,6 BERM
27 0 . • E5 85 . .1 BERM
28 0 . * FTl 91. .5 BERM
«V 29 0 .* FT2 35 . .4 BERM
30 0. • FT3 270 . ,8 BERM
-I 31 0.-FT4 301, ,0 BERM
32 0 . * FTB 260 . , 0 BERM
mm
33 0. • FT6 271 . .2 BERM
34 6. * 8F2 186 . ,7 MASONRY
Mi 35 6. • 8F3 166 . ,1 MASONRY
36 6 . -BF4 216 . .9 MA50NRY
37 6 .* 8F5 315 . .0 MASONRY
•Ml
REC
m
REC
0
ID
1 2
DNL
3
PEOPLE
4 !
LEQ[i
1 Rl 67. 500. 54 . ,5
Ml 2 R2 67. 500. 53 . .4
•M 3 R3 67. 500. 51. . 9
4 R4 n 67. 500. 50. ,3
m. 5 R5 Q, 67. 500. 49. . 1
R6 67. 500. 57 , . 9
7 R7 67 . 500. 57 . ,7
R8 ll 67. 500. 56, ,3
tm 9 R9 I 1 67. 500 . 53 .4
10 RIO 67 . SOO. 53 .2
mm 11 Rll 67. 500 . 53 .4
12 RFl If 67 . 500. 57 .3
mm If
13 RF2 67. 500. 55 .4
mm* 14 RF3 n 67. 500 . 52 . .5
15 RF4 67. 500. 53 , , 9
tm 16 Ml 67. 500. 63, .2
17 M2 67 . SOO. 54 , . 8
mmt 18 M3 67. 500 . 54 . 4
I BARRIER TYPE OOST
BERM 0.
MASONRY 46536.
MASONRY/JERSEY 0.
CONCRETE 0.
TOTAL OOST = $ 47000.
BARRIER HEIGHT INDEX POR EACH BARRIER SECTION
^lllllllllllllillllllllll
llllllllllll
CORRESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION
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. 6. 6.