HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix E - Noise Impact AnalysisHemlock Warehouse Development Project Appendix
City of Fontana
Draft Subsequent EIR
APPENDIX E: NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS
11115 Hemlock Avenue
NOISE AND VIBRATION ANALYSIS
CITY OF FONTANA
PREPARED BY:
Bill Lawson, PE, INCE
blawson@urbanxroads.com
(949) 584-3148
MARCH 2, 2023
15100-02 Noise Study
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
ii
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................... III
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................ IV
LIST OF EXHIBITS ................................................................................................................................. IV
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................... V
LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS ............................................................................................................. VI
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 1
1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 Site Location .................................................................................................................................. 3
1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 3
2 FUNDAMENTALS ......................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Range of Noise .............................................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Noise Descriptors .......................................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Sound Propagation ........................................................................................................................ 8
2.4 Noise Control ................................................................................................................................ 9
2.5 Noise Barrier Attenuation ............................................................................................................. 9
2.6 Land Use Compatibility With Noise ............................................................................................ 10
2.7 Community Response to Noise ................................................................................................... 10
2.8 Vibration ..................................................................................................................................... 11
3 REGULATORY SETTING .............................................................................................................. 13
3.1 State of California Noise Requirements ...................................................................................... 13
3.2 City of Fontana General Plan Noise Element .............................................................................. 13
3.3 Operational Noise Standards ...................................................................................................... 15
3.4 Construction Noise Standards..................................................................................................... 15
3.5 Construction Vibration Standards ............................................................................................... 16
4 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ............................................................................................................ 17
4.1 Noise Level Increases (Threshold A) ........................................................................................... 17
4.2 Vibration (Threshold B) ............................................................................................................... 18
4.3 CEQA Guidelines Not Further Analyzed (Threshold C) ............................................................... 18
4.4 Significance Criteria Summary .................................................................................................... 19
5 EXISTING NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS ................................................................................... 21
5.1 Measurement Procedure and Criteria ........................................................................................ 21
5.2 Noise Measurement Locations ................................................................................................... 21
5.3 Noise Measurement Results ....................................................................................................... 22
6 TRAFFIC NOISE METHODS AND PROCEDURES ............................................................................ 25
6.1 FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model ........................................................................................ 25
7 OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................ 29
7.1 Traffic Noise Contours ................................................................................................................ 29
7.2 Existing Project Traffic Noise Level Increases ............................................................................. 31
7.3 OYC 2025 Traffic Noise Level Increases ...................................................................................... 32
8 RECEIVER LOCATIONS................................................................................................................ 35
9 OPERATIONAL NOISE ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 37
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
iv
9.1 Operational Noise Sources .......................................................................................................... 37
9.2 Reference Noise Levels ............................................................................................................... 37
9.3 CadnaA Noise Prediction Model ................................................................................................. 40
9.4 Project Operational Noise Levels ................................................................................................ 41
9.5 Project Operational Noise Level Compliance .............................................................................. 42
9.6 Project Operational Noise Level Increases ................................................................................. 42
10 CONSTRUCTION ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 45
10.1 Construction Noise Levels ........................................................................................................... 45
10.2 Construction Reference Noise Levels ......................................................................................... 45
10.3 Construction Noise Analysis ........................................................................................................ 47
10.4 Construction Noise Level Compliance ........................................................................................ 48
10.5 Nighttime Concrete Pour Noise Analysis .................................................................................... 48
10.6 Construction Vibration Analysis .................................................................................................. 50
11 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 53
12 CERTIFICATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 55
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 3.1: CITY OF FONTANA DEVELOPMENT CODE
APPENDIX 5.1: STUDY AREA PHOTOS
APPENDIX 5.2: NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENT WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX 7.1: OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE CONTOURS
APPENDIX 9.1: CADNAA OPERATIONAL NOISE MODEL INPUTS
APPENDIX 10.1: CADNAA CONSTRUCTION NOISE MODEL INPUTS
APPENDIX 10.2: CADNAA CONCRETE POUR NOISE MODEL INPUTS
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP .............................................................................................................. 4
EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN........................................................................................................................ 5
EXHIBIT 2-A: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS .................................................................................................... 7
EXHIBIT 2-B: NOISE LEVEL INCREASE PERCEPTION ............................................................................. 10
EXHIBIT 2-C: TYPICAL LEVELS OF GROUND-BORNE VIBRATION .......................................................... 12
EXHIBIT 3-A: LAND USE NOISE COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA ................................................................... 14
EXHIBIT 5-A: NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS ............................................................................... 23
EXHIBIT 8-A: RECEIVER LOCATIONS ................................................................................................... 36
EXHIBIT 9-A: OPERATIONAL NOISE SOURCE LOCATIONS .................................................................... 38
EXHIBIT 10-A: CONSTRUCTION NOISE SOURCE AND RECEIVER LOCATIONS ........................................ 46
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
v
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF CEQA SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS .................................................................. 1
TABLE 3-1: OPERATIONAL NOISE STANDARDS ................................................................................... 15
TABLE 4-1: SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA SUMMARY .................................................................................. 19
TABLE 5-1: AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS ......................................................................... 22
TABLE 6-1: OFF-SITE ROADWAY PARAMETERS................................................................................... 26
TABLE 6-2: AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................................................................................. 27
TABLE 6-3: TIME OF DAY VEHICLE SPLITS ........................................................................................... 27
TABLE 6-4: WITHOUT PROJECT VEHICLE MIX ..................................................................................... 27
TABLE 6-5: EXISTING WITH PROJECT VEHICLE MIX ............................................................................. 28
TABLE 6-6: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE 2025 WITH PROJECT VEHICLE MIX ..................................... 28
TABLE 7-1: EXISTING WITHOUT PROJECT CONTOURS ........................................................................ 29
TABLE 7-2: EXISTING WITH PROJECT CONTOURS ............................................................................... 30
TABLE 7-3: OYC 2024 WITHOUT PROJECT CONTOURS ........................................................................ 30
TABLE 7-4: OYC 2024 WITH PROJECT CONTOURS ............................................................................... 31
TABLE 7-5: EXISTING WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES .............................................. 32
TABLE 7-6: OYC 2024 WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES .............................................. 33
TABLE 9-1: REFERENCE NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS ...................................................................... 39
TABLE 9-2: DAYTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS .............................................................. 41
TABLE 9-3: NIGHTTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS ........................................................... 42
TABLE 9-4: OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE ....................................................................... 42
TABLE 9-5: DAYTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES .............................................. 43
TABLE 9-6: NIGHTTIME OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES ........................................................ 43
TABLE 10-1: CONSTRUCTION REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS .................................................................... 47
TABLE 10-2: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVEL SUMMARY ................................................... 48
TABLE 10-3: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE ...................................................... 48
TABLE 10-4: NIGHTTIME CONCRETE POUR NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE ............................................... 49
TABLE 10-5: VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ...................................... 50
TABLE 10-6: PROJECT CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION LEVELS ................................................................. 51
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
(1) Reference
ADT Average Daily Traffic
ANSI American National Standards Institute
Calveno California Vehicle Noise
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA A-weighted decibels
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
INCE Institute of Noise Control Engineering
Leq Equivalent continuous (average) sound level
Lmax Maximum level measured over the time interval
Lmin Minimum level measured over the time interval
mph Miles per hour
OPR Office of Planning and Research
PPV Peak Particle Velocity
Project 11115 Hemlock Avenue
REMEL Reference Energy Mean Emission Level
RMS Root-mean-square
VdB Vibration Decibels
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Urban Crossroads, Inc. has prepared this noise study to determine the potential noise impacts
and the necessary noise mitigation measures, if any, for the proposed 11115 Hemlock Avenue
development (“Project”). The proposed Project includes the development of 661,506 square feet
of warehousing use (75% of the total square footage) and 220,502 square feet of high-cube cold
storage warehousing use (25% of the total square footage), for a total of 882,008 square feet.
This study has been prepared to satisfy applicable City of Fontana standards and thresholds of
significance based on guidance provided by Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) Guidelines. (1)
The results of this 11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis are summarized below
based on the significance criteria in Section 4 of this report. Table ES-1 shows the findings of
significance for each potential noise and/or vibration impact under CEQA before and after any
required mitigation measures.
TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF CEQA SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS
Analysis Report
Section
Significance Findings
Unmitigated Mitigated
Off-Site Traffic Noise 7 Less Than Significant -
Operational Noise 9 Less Than Significant -
Construction Noise
10
Less Than Significant -
Concrete Pour Noise Less Than Significant -
Construction Vibration Less Than Significant -
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
2
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
3
1 INTRODUCTION
This noise analysis has been completed to determine the noise impacts associated with the
development of the proposed 11115 Hemlock Avenue (“Project”). This noise study briefly
describes the proposed Project, provides information regarding noise fundamentals, sets out the
local regulatory setting, presents the study methods and procedures for transportation related
CNEL traffic noise analysis, and evaluates the future exterior noise environment. In addition, this
study includes an analysis of the potential Project-related long-term stationary-source
operational noise and short-term construction noise and vibration impacts.
1.1 SITE LOCATION
The proposed project is located south of Santa Ana Avenue and east of Hemlock Avenue in the
City of Fontana as shown on Exhibit 1-A.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project consists of 661,506 square feet of warehousing use (75% of the total square
footage) and 220,502 square feet of high-cube cold storage warehousing use (25% of the total
square footage), for a total of 882,008 square feet as shown on Exhibit 1-B. The on-site Project-
related noise sources are expected to include: loading dock activity, roof-top air conditioning
units, trash enclosure activity, parking lot vehicle movements, and truck movements. This noise
analysis is intended to describe noise level impacts associated with the expected typical
operational activities at the Project site.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
4
EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
5
EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
6
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
7
2 FUNDAMENTALS
Noise is simply defined as "unwanted sound." Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with
normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm or when it has adverse effects on health.
Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). A-
weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to broad
frequency noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the
audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which are audible to the
human ear. Exhibit 2-A presents a summary of the typical noise levels and their subjective
loudness and effects that are described in more detail below.
EXHIBIT 2-A: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
Source: Environmental Protection Agency Office of Noise Abatement and Control, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise
Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (EPA/ONAC 550/9-74-004) March 1974.
2.1 RANGE OF NOISE
Since the range of intensities that the human ear can detect is so large, the scale frequently used
to measure intensity is a scale based on multiples of 10, the logarithmic scale. The scale for
measuring intensity is the decibel scale. Each interval of 10 decibels indicates a sound energy ten
times greater than before, which is perceived by the human ear as being roughly twice as loud.
(2) The most common sounds vary between 40 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Normal
conversation at three feet is roughly at 60 dBA, while loud jet engine noises equate to 110 dBA
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
8
at approximately 1,000 feet, which can cause serious discomfort. (3) Another important aspect
of noise is the duration of the sound and the way it is described and distributed in time.
2.2 NOISE DESCRIPTORS
Environmental noise descriptors are generally based on averages, rather than instantaneous,
noise levels. The most used metric is the equivalent level (Leq). Equivalent sound levels are not
measured directly but are calculated from sound pressure levels typically measured in A-
weighted decibels (dBA). The equivalent sound level (Leq) represents a steady state sound level
containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period and is
commonly used to describe the “average” noise levels within the environment.
Peak hour or average noise levels, while useful, do not completely describe a given noise
environment. Noise levels lower than peak hour may be disturbing if they occur during times
when quiet is most desirable, namely evening and nighttime (sleeping) hours. To account for
this, the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), representing a composite 24-hour noise level
is utilized. The CNEL is the weighted average of the intensity of a sound, with corrections for time
of day, and averaged over 24 hours. The time-of-day corrections require the addition of 5
decibels to dBA Leq sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and the addition of
10 decibels to dBA Leq sound levels at night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. These additions
are made to account for the noise sensitive time periods during the evening and night hours
when noise can become more intrusive. CNEL does not represent the actual sound level heard
at any time, but rather represents the total sound exposure. The City of Fontana relies on the
24-hour CNEL level to assess land use compatibility with transportation related noise sources.
2.3 SOUND PROPAGATION
When sound propagates over a distance, it changes in level and frequency content. The way noise
reduces with distance depends on the following factors.
2.3.1 GEOMETRIC SPREADING
Sound from a localized source (i.e., a stationary point source) propagates uniformly outward in a
spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates (or decreases) at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling
of distance from a point source. Highways consist of several localized noise sources on a defined
path and hence can be treated as a line source, which approximates the effect of several point
sources. Noise from a line source propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to
as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of 3 dB for each doubling of distance
from a line source. (2)
2.3.2 GROUND ABSORPTION
The propagation path of noise from a highway to a receiver is usually very close to the ground.
Noise attenuation from ground absorption and reflective wave canceling adds to the attenuation
associated with geometric spreading. Traditionally, the excess attenuation has also been
expressed in terms of attenuation per doubling of distance. This approximation is usually
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
9
sufficiently accurate for distances of less than 200 ft. For acoustically hard sites (i.e., sites with a
reflective surface between the source and the receiver, such as a parking lot or body of water),
no excess ground attenuation is assumed. For acoustically absorptive or soft sites (i.e., those
sites with an absorptive ground surface between the source and the receiver such as soft dirt,
grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an excess ground attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling
of distance is normally assumed. When added to the cylindrical spreading, the excess ground
attenuation results in an overall drop-off rate of 4.5 dB per doubling of distance from a line
source. (4)
2.3.3 ATMOSPHERIC EFFECTS
Receivers located downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative to
calm conditions, whereas locations upwind can have lowered noise levels. Sound levels can be
increased at large distances (e.g., more than 500 feet) due to atmospheric temperature inversion
(i.e., increasing temperature with elevation). Other factors such as air temperature, humidity,
and turbulence can also have significant effects. (2)
2.3.4 SHIELDING
A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receiver can substantially
attenuate noise levels at the receiver. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends
on the size of the object and the frequency content of the noise source. Shielding by trees and
other such vegetation typically only has an “out of sight, out of mind” effect. That is, the
perception of noise impact tends to decrease when vegetation blocks the line-of-sight to nearby
residents. However, for vegetation to provide a substantial, or even noticeable, noise reduction,
the vegetation area must be at least 15 feet in height, 100 feet wide and dense enough to
completely obstruct the line-of-sight between the source and the receiver. This size of vegetation
may provide up to 5 dBA of noise reduction. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) does
not consider the planting of vegetation to be a noise abatement measure. (5)
2.4 NOISE CONTROL
Noise control is the process of obtaining an acceptable noise environment for an observation
point or receiver by controlling the noise source, transmission path, receiver, or all three. This
concept is known as the source-path-receiver concept. In general, noise control measures can
be applied to these three elements.
2.5 NOISE BARRIER ATTENUATION
Effective noise barriers can reduce noise levels by 10 to 15 dBA, cutting the loudness of traffic
noise in half. A noise barrier is most effective when placed close to the noise source or receiver.
Noise barriers, however, do have limitations. For a noise barrier to work, it must block the line-
of-sight path of sound from the noise source.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
10
2.6 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY WITH NOISE
Some land uses are more tolerant of noise than others. For example, schools, hospitals,
churches, and residences are more sensitive to noise intrusion than are commercial or industrial
developments and related activities. As ambient noise levels affect the perceived amenity or
livability of a development, so too can the mismanagement of noise impacts impair the economic
health and growth potential of a community by reducing the area’s desirability as a place to live,
shop and work. For this reason, land use compatibility with the noise environment is an
important consideration in the planning and design process. The FHWA encourages State and
Local government to regulate land development in such a way that noise-sensitive land uses are
either prohibited from being located adjacent to a highway, or that the developments are
planned, designed, and constructed in such a way that noise impacts are minimized. (6)
2.7 COMMUNITY RESPONSE TO NOISE
Approximately sixteen percent of the population has a very low tolerance for noise and will object
to any noise not of their making. Consequently, even in the quietest environment, some
complaints may occur. Twenty to thirty percent of the population will not complain even in very
severe noise environments. (7 pp. 8-6) Thus, a variety of reactions can be expected from people
exposed to any given noise environment.
Surveys have shown that community response to noise varies from no reaction to vigorous action
for newly introduced noises averaging from 10 dB below existing to 25 dB above existing. (8)
According to research originally published in the Noise Effects Handbook (7), the percentage of
high annoyance ranges from approximately 0 percent at 45 dB or less, 10 percent are highly
annoyed around 60 dB, and increases rapidly to approximately 70 percent being highly annoyed
at approximately 85 dB or greater. Despite this variability in behavior on an individual level, the
population can be expected to exhibit the following responses to changes in noise levels as shown
on Exhibit 2-B. A change of 3 dBA is considered barely perceptible, and changes of 5 dBA are
considered readily perceptible. (4)
EXHIBIT 2-B: NOISE LEVEL INCREASE PERCEPTION
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Just Perceptible
Barely Perceptible
Readily Perceptible
Twice as Loud
Noise Level Increase (dBA)
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
11
2.8 VIBRATION
Per the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise Impact and Vibration Impact
Assessment Manual (8) , vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object. The rumbling
sound caused by the vibration of room surfaces is called structure-borne noise. Sources of
ground-borne vibrations include natural phenomena (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea
waves, landslides) or human-made causes (e.g., explosions, machinery, traffic, trains,
construction equipment). Vibration sources may be continuous, such as factory machinery, or
transient, such as explosions. As is the case with airborne sound, ground-borne vibrations may
be described by amplitude and frequency.
There are several different methods that are used to quantify vibration. The peak particle
velocity (PPV) is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal. The PPV is
most frequently used to describe vibration impacts to buildings but is not always suitable for
evaluating human response (annoyance) because it takes some time for the human body to
respond to vibration signals. Instead, the human body responds to average vibration amplitude
often described as the root mean square (RMS). The RMS amplitude is defined as the average of
the squared amplitude of the signal and is most frequently used to describe the effect of vibration
on the human body. Decibel notation (VdB) is commonly used to measure RMS. Decibel notation
(VdB) serves to reduce the range of numbers used to describe human response to vibration.
Typically, ground-borne vibration generated by man-made activities attenuates rapidly with
distance from the source of the vibration. Sensitive receivers for vibration include structures
(especially older masonry structures), people (especially residents, the elderly, and sick), and
vibration-sensitive equipment and/or activities.
The background vibration-velocity level in residential areas is generally 50 VdB. Ground-borne
vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For most people, a
vibration-velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and
distinctly perceptible levels. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground-borne vibration are
construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth,
the ground-borne vibration is rarely perceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50
VdB, which is the typical background vibration-velocity level, to 100 VdB, which is the general
threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings. Exhibit 2-C illustrates common
vibration sources and the human and structural response to ground-borne vibration.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
12
EXHIBIT 2-C: TYPICAL LEVELS OF GROUND-BORNE VIBRATION
Source: Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
13
3 REGULATORY SETTING
To limit population exposure to physically and/or psychologically damaging as well as intrusive
noise levels, the federal government, the State of California, various county governments, and
most municipalities in the state have established standards and ordinances to control noise. In
most areas, automobile and truck traffic is the major source of environmental noise. Traffic
activity generally produces an average sound level that remains constant with time. Air and rail
traffic, and commercial and industrial activities are also major sources of noise in some areas.
Federal, state, and local agencies regulate different aspects of environmental noise. Federal and
state agencies generally set noise standards for mobile sources such as aircraft and motor
vehicles, while regulation of stationary sources is left to local agencies.
3.1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA NOISE REQUIREMENTS
The State of California regulates freeway noise, sets standards for sound transmission, provides
occupational noise control criteria, identifies noise standards, and provides guidance for local
land use compatibility. State law requires that each county and city adopt a General Plan that
includes a Noise Element which is to be prepared per guidelines adopted by the Governor’s Office
of Planning and Research (OPR). (9) The purpose of the Noise Element is to limit the exposure of
the community to excessive noise levels. In addition, the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) requires that all known environmental effects of a project be analyzed, including
environmental noise impacts.
3.2 CITY OF FONTANA GENERAL PLAN NOISE ELEMENT
The City of Fontana General Plan was updated on November 13, 2018. (10) To protect residents
from the negative effect of “spillover” noise (Goal #10), the City of Fontana has identified the
following policies in the General Plan Noise and Safety Element:
Policy
Residential land uses and areas identified as noise-sensitive shall be protected from excessive noise from
non-transportation sources including industrial, commercial, and residential activities and equipment.
Actions
A. Projects located in commercial areas shall not exceed stationary- source noise standards
at the property line of proximate residential or commercial uses.
B. Industrial uses shall not exceed commercial or residential stationary source noise
standards at the most proximate land uses.
C. Non-transportation noise shall be considered in land use planning decisions.
D. Construction shall be performed as quietly as feasible when performed in proximity to
residential or other noise sensitive land uses.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
14
The City of Fontana has adopted a Noise and Safety Element of the General Plan to protect
existing and planned land uses from excessive noise. The Noise Element typically provides the
standards for land use compatibility for community noise exposure. However, the City of Fontana
General Plan does not include specific transportation-related noise land use compatibility
guidelines. While the General Plan outlines the primary noise source activities, it does not
identify criteria to assess the impacts associated with transportation-related noise impacts.
Therefore, for this analysis, the transportation noise criteria are derived from standards
contained in the California Office of Planning and Research (OPR) General Plan Guidelines. (9)
The OPR land use noise compatibility criteria used by many California cities and counties specify
the maximum noise levels allowable for new developments impacted by transportation noise
sources. The OPR General Plan Guidelines land use noise compatibility criteria are found in Figure
2 of the General Plan Guidelines, Appendix D: Noise Element Guidelines as shown on Exhibit 3-A.
EXHIBIT 3-A: LAND USE NOISE COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA
Source: OPR General Plan Guidelines, Appendix D: Noise Element Guidelines, Figure 2.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
15
The Land Use Noise Compatibility Criteria describes categories of compatibility and not specific
noise standards. As shown on Exhibit 3-A, non-noise sensitive land use is generally considered
as normally acceptable with unmitigated exterior noise levels of less than 70 dBA CNEL based.
3.3 OPERATIONAL NOISE STANDARDS
To analyze noise impacts originating from a designated fixed location or private property such as
the 11115 Hemlock Avenue Project, stationary-source (operational) noise such as the expected
loading dock activity, roof-top air conditioning units, trash enclosure activity, parking lot vehicle
movements, and truck movements are typically evaluated against standards established under a
jurisdiction’s municipal code.
The City of Fontana noise control guidelines for determining and mitigating non-transportation
or stationary noise source impacts from operations in neighboring residential areas are found in
the Zoning and Development Code [Section 30-543], provided in Appendix 3.1. For industrial
zoning districts, Section 30-543 indicates that no person shall create or cause to be created any
sound which exceeds the noise levels in this section as measured at the property line of any
residentially zoned property. The performance standards found in Section 30-543 limit the
exterior noise level to 70 dBA Leq during the daytime hours, and 65 dBA Leq during the nighttime
hours at sensitive receiver locations as shown on Table 3-1. (11)
TABLE 3-1: OPERATIONAL NOISE STANDARDS
Jurisdiction Land use Noise Level Standards (dBA Leq)2
Daytime Nighttime
City of Fontana1 Residential 70 65
1 Section 30-543 of the City of Fontana Development Code (Appendix 3.1).
2 Leq represents a steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period.
"Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
3.4 CONSTRUCTION NOISE STANDARDS
The City of Fontana has set restrictions to control noise impacts associated with the construction
of the proposed Project. According to Section 18-63[b][7] of the city’s Municipal Code,
Construction or repairing of buildings or structures, construction activity is limited: between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
on Saturdays except in the case of urgent necessity. (12) Project construction noise levels are,
therefore, considered exempt from municipal regulation if activities occur within the hours
specified in the City of Fontana Municipal Code, Section 18-63[7] of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on
weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. However, neither the
General Plan nor the Municipal Code establish numeric maximum acceptable construction source
noise levels at potentially affected receivers for CEQA analysis purposes. Therefore, a numerical
construction threshold based on Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration
Impact Assessment Manual is used for analysis of daytime construction impacts, as discussed
below.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
16
According to the FTA, local noise ordinances are typically not very useful in evaluating
construction noise. They usually relate to nuisance and hours of allowed activity, and sometimes
specify limits in terms of maximum levels, but are generally not practical for assessing the impact
of a construction project. Project construction noise criteria should account for the existing noise
environment, the absolute noise levels during construction activities, the duration of the
construction, and the adjacent land use. Due to the lack of standardized construction noise
thresholds, the FTA provides guidelines that can be considered reasonable criteria for
construction noise assessment. The FTA considers a daytime exterior construction noise level of
80 dBA Leq as a reasonable threshold for noise sensitive residential land use with a nighttime
exterior construction noise level of 70 dBA Leq (8 p. 179).
3.5 CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION STANDARDS
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground-borne vibration, depending on the
equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. Construction
vibration is generally associated with pile driving and rock blasting. Other construction
equipment such as air compressors, light trucks, hydraulic loaders, etc., generates little or no
ground vibration (8). To analyze vibration impacts originating from the operation and
construction of the 11115 Hemlock Avenue, vibration-generating activities are appropriately
evaluated against standards established under the Municipal Code, if such standards exist.
However, the City of Fontana does not identify specific construction vibration level limits.
Therefore, for analysis purposes, the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration
Guidance Manual, (13 p. 38) Table 19, vibration damage are used in this noise study to assess
potential temporary construction-related impacts at adjacent building locations. The nearest
noise sensitive buildings adjacent to the Project site can best be described as “older residential
structures” with a maximum acceptable continuous vibration threshold of 0.3 PPV (in/sec).
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
17
4 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
The following significance criteria are based on currently adopted guidance provided by Appendix
G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. (1) For the purposes of this
report, impacts would be potentially significant if the Project results in or causes:
A. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
B. Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels?
C. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would
the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
4.1 NOISE LEVEL INCREASES (THRESHOLD A)
Noise level increases resulting from the Project are evaluated based on the Appendix G CEQA
Guidelines described above at the closest sensitive receiver locations. Under CEQA,
consideration must be given to the magnitude of the increase, the existing baseline ambient
noise levels, and the location of noise-sensitive receivers to determine if a noise increase
represents a significant adverse environmental impact. This approach recognizes that there is no
single noise increase that renders a noise impact significant. (14) This is primarily because of the
wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance and differing individual experiences with
noise. Thus, an important way of determining a person’s subjective reaction to a new noise is
the comparison of it to the existing environment to which one has adapted—the so-called
ambient environment. In general, the more a new noise level exceeds the previously existing
ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise level will typically be judged.
4.1.1 NOISE-SENSITIVE RECEIVERS
The Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) (15) developed guidance to be used for the
assessment of project-generated increases in noise levels that consider the ambient noise level.
The FICON recommendations are based on studies that relate aircraft noise levels to the
percentage of persons highly annoyed by aircraft noise. Although the FICON recommendations
were specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts, these recommendations are often
used in environmental noise impact assessments involving the use of cumulative noise exposure
metrics, such as the average-daily noise level (CNEL) and equivalent continuous noise level (Leq).
As previously stated, the approach used in this noise study recognizes that there is no single noise
increase that renders a noise impact significant, based on a 2008 California Court of Appeal ruling
on Gray v. County of Madera. (14) For example, if the ambient noise environment is quiet (<60
dBA) and the new noise source greatly increases the noise levels, an impact may occur if the noise
criteria may be exceeded. Therefore, for this analysis, a readily perceptible 5 dBA or greater
project-related noise level increase is considered a significant impact when the without project
noise levels are below 60 dBA. Per the FICON, in areas where the without project noise levels
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
18
range from 60 to 65 dBA, a 3 dBA barely perceptible noise level increase appears to be
appropriate for most people. When the without project noise levels already exceed 65 dBA, any
increase in community noise louder than 1.5 dBA or greater is considered a significant impact if
the noise criteria for a given land use is exceeded, since it likely contributes to an existing noise
exposure exceedance. The FICON guidance provides an established source of criteria to assess
the impacts of substantial temporary or permanent increase in baseline ambient noise levels.
Based on the FICON criteria, the amount to which a given noise level increase is considered
acceptable is reduced when the without Project (baseline) noise levels are already shown to
exceed certain land-use specific exterior noise level criteria. The specific levels are based on
typical responses to noise level increases of 5 dBA or readily perceptible, 3 dBA or barely
perceptible, and 1.5 dBA depending on the underlying without Project noise levels for noise-
sensitive uses. These levels of increases and their perceived acceptance at noise sensitive
receiver locations are consistent with guidance provided by both the Federal Highway
Administration (4 p. 9) and Caltrans (16 p. 2_48).
4.1.2 NON-NOISE-SENSITIVE RECEIVERS
The OPR General Plan Guidelines were used to establish the satisfactory noise levels of
significance for the non-noise-sensitive land uses in the Project study area. As previously shown
on Exhibit 3-A, the normally acceptable exterior noise level for non-noise-sensitive land uses is
greater than or equal to 70 dBA CNEL. (9)
To determine if Project-related traffic noise level increases are significant at off-site non-noise-
sensitive land uses, a barely perceptible 3 dBA criteria is used. When the without Project noise
levels are greater than the normally acceptable 70 dBA CNEL land use noise compatibility criteria,
a barely perceptible 3 dBA or greater noise level increase is considered a significant impact since
the noise level criteria is already exceeded. The noise level increases used to determine
significant impacts for non-noise-sensitive land uses is generally consistent with the FICON noise
level increase thresholds for noise-sensitive land uses but instead rely on the OPR General Plan
Guidelines normally acceptable 70 dBA CNEL exterior noise level.
4.2 VIBRATION (THRESHOLD B)
As described in Section 3.5, the vibration impacts originating from the construction of 11115
Hemlock Avenue, vibration-generating activities are appropriately evaluated using the Caltrans
vibration damage thresholds to assess potential temporary construction-related impacts at
adjacent building locations. The nearest noise sensitive buildings adjacent to the Project site can
best be described as “older residential structures” with a maximum acceptable continuous
vibration threshold of 0.3 PPV (in/sec).
4.3 CEQA GUIDELINES NOT FURTHER ANALYZED (THRESHOLD C)
CEQA Noise Threshold C applies when there are nearby public and private airports and/or air
strips and focuses on land use compatibility of the Project to nearby airports and airstrips. The
Project site is not located within two miles of an airport or airstrip. The closest airport is the
Ontario International Airport located roughly 7.6 miles west of the Project site. As such, the
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
19
Project site would not be exposed to excessive noise levels from airport operations, and
therefore, impacts are considered less than significant, and no further noise analysis is conducted
in relation to Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines, Noise Threshold C.
4.4 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA SUMMARY
Noise impacts shall be considered significant if any of the following occur as a direct result of the
proposed Project. Table 4-1 shows the significance criteria summary matrix that includes the
allowable criteria used to identify potentially significant incremental noise level increases.
TABLE 4-1: SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA SUMMARY
Analysis Receiving
Land Use Condition(s) Significance Criteria
Daytime Nighttime
Off-Site
Noise-
Sensitive
if ambient is < 60 dBA CNEL1 ≥ 5 dBA CNEL Project increase
if ambient is 60 - 65 dBA CNEL1 ≥ 3 dBA CNEL Project increase
if ambient is > 65 dBA CNEL1 ≥ 1.5 dBA CNEL Project increase
Non-Noise-
Sensitive If ambient is > 70 dBA CNEL2 ≥ 3 dBA CNEL Project increase
Operational Noise-
Sensitive
At residential land use3 70 dBA Leq 65 dBA Leq
If ambient is < 60 dBA Leq1 ≥ 5 dBA Leq Project increase
If ambient is 60 - 65 dBA Leq1 ≥ 3 dBA Leq Project increase
If ambient is > 65 dBA Leq1 ≥ 1.5 dBA Leq Project increase
Construction Noise-
Sensitive
Exempt from the exterior noise level standards between the hours 7:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
on Saturdays4
Noise Level Threshold5 80 dBA Leq 70 dBA Leq
Vibration Level Threshold6 0.3 PPV (in/sec)
1 FICON, 1992.
2 OPR General Plan Guidelines Normally Acceptable exterior noise level.
3 Based on Section 30-543 of the City of Fontana Municipal Code.
4 Based on Sections 18-63[7] of the City of Fontana Municipal Code.
5 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.
6 Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020, Table 19.
"Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
20
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
21
5 EXISTING NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
To assess the existing noise level environment, 24-hour noise level measurements were taken at
three locations in the Project study area. The receiver locations were selected to describe and
document the existing noise environment within the Project study area. Exhibit 5-A provides the
boundaries of the Project study area and the noise level measurement locations. To fully
describe the existing noise conditions, noise level measurements were collected by Urban
Crossroads, Inc. on Thursday, August 18, 2022. Appendix 5.1 includes study area photos.
5.1 MEASUREMENT PROCEDURE AND CRITERIA
To describe the existing noise environment, the hourly noise levels were measured during typical
weekday conditions over a 24-hour period. By collecting individual hourly noise level
measurements, it is possible to describe the equivalent daytime and nighttime hourly noise
levels. The long-term noise readings were recorded using Piccolo Type 2 integrating sound level
meter and dataloggers. The Piccolo sound level meters were calibrated using a Larson-Davis
calibrator, Model CAL 150. All noise meters were programmed in "slow" mode to record noise
levels in "A" weighted form. The sound level meters and microphones were equipped with a
windscreen during all measurements. All noise level measurement equipment satisfies the
American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard specifications for sound level meters ANSI
S1.4-2014/IEC 61672-1:2013. (17)
5.2 NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS
The long-term noise level measurements were positioned as close to the nearest sensitive
receiver locations as possible to assess the existing ambient hourly noise levels surrounding the
Project site. Both Caltrans and the FTA recognize that it is not reasonable to collect noise level
measurements that can fully represent every part of a private yard, patio, deck, or balcony
normally used for human activity when estimating impacts for new development projects. This
is demonstrated in the Caltrans general site location guidelines which indicate that, sites must be
free of noise contamination by sources other than sources of interest. Avoid sites located near
sources such as barking dogs, lawnmowers, pool pumps, and air conditioners unless it is the
express intent of the analyst to measure these sources. (2) Further, FTA guidance states, that it is
not necessary nor recommended that existing noise exposure be determined by measuring at
every noise-sensitive location in the project area. Rather, the recommended approach is to
characterize the noise environment for clusters of sites based on measurements or estimates at
representative locations in the community. (8)
Based on recommendations of Caltrans and the FTA, it is not necessary to collect measurements
at each individual building or residence, because each receiver measurement represents a group
of buildings that share acoustical equivalence. (8) In other words, the area represented by the
receiver shares similar shielding, terrain, and geometric relationship to the reference noise
source. Receivers represent a location of noise sensitive areas and are used to estimate the
future noise level impacts. Collecting reference ambient noise level measurements at the nearby
sensitive receiver locations allows for a comparison of the before and after Project noise levels
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
22
and is necessary to assess potential noise impacts due to the Project’s contribution to the
ambient noise levels.
5.3 NOISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS
The noise measurements presented below focus on the equivalent or the energy average hourly
sound levels (Leq). The equivalent sound level (Leq) represents a steady state sound level
containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. Table 5-1
identifies the hourly daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
noise levels at each noise level measurement location.
TABLE 5-1: AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
Location1 Description
Energy Average
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)2
Daytime Nighttime
L1 Located southwest of the Project site near the
residence at 15002 Astor Lane. 66.0 69.8
L2 Located southwest of the Project site near the
residence at 15064 Astor Lane. 65.1 67.6
L3 Located southeast of the Project site near the residence
at 11328 Fremontia Way. 61.6 64.0
1 See Exhibit 5-A for the noise level measurement locations.
2 Energy (logarithmic) average levels. The long-term 24-hour measurement worksheets are included in Appendix 5.2.
"Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
Table 5-1 provides the equivalent noise levels used to describe the daytime and nighttime
ambient conditions. These daytime and nighttime energy average noise levels represent the
average of all hourly noise levels observed during these time periods expressed as a single
number. Appendix 5.2 provides summary worksheets of the noise levels for each hour as well as
the minimum, maximum, L1, L2, L5, L8, L25, L50, L90, L95, and L99 percentile noise levels observed
during the daytime and nighttime periods.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
23
EXHIBIT 5-A: NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
24
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
25
6 TRAFFIC NOISE METHODS AND PROCEDURES
The following section outlines the methods and procedures used to estimate and analyze the
future traffic noise environment. Consistent with the Land Use Compatibility Criteria, all
transportation related noise levels are presented in terms of the 24-hour CNEL’s.
6.1 FHWA TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL
The expected roadway noise level increases from vehicular traffic were calculated by Urban
Crossroads, Inc. using a computer program that replicates the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model- FHWA-RD-77-108. (18) This methodology is commonly
used to describe the off-site traffic noise levels throughout California and is consistent with the
City of Fontana General Plan Noise Element.
The FHWA Model arrives at a predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the
Reference Energy Mean Emission Level (REMEL). In California the national REMELs are
substituted with the California Vehicle Noise (Calveno) Emission Levels. (19) Adjustments are
then made to the REMEL to account for: the roadway classification (e.g., collector, secondary,
major or arterial), the roadway active width (i.e., the distance between the center of the
outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway), the total average daily traffic (ADT), the
travel speed, the percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the traffic
volume, the roadway grade, the angle of view (e.g., whether the roadway view is blocked), the
site conditions ("hard" or "soft" relates to the absorption of the ground, pavement, or
landscaping), and the percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24-hour
period. Research conducted by Caltrans has shown that the use of soft site conditions is
appropriate for the application of the FHWA traffic noise prediction model used in this analysis.
(20)
6.1.1 OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL INPUTS
Table 6-1 presents the roadway parameters used to assess the Project’s off-site transportation
noise impacts. Table 6-1 identifies the ten off-site study area roadway segments, the distance
from the centerline to adjacent land use based on the functional roadway classifications per the
City of Fontana General Plan, and the posted vehicle speeds. The ADT volumes used in this study
area presented on Table 6-2 are based on 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Study by Urban
Crossroads, Inc. for the following traffic scenarios. (21)
1. Existing (E)
2. Existing with Project (EP)
3. Opening Year Cumulative (2024) without Project (OYC)
4. Opening Year Cumulative (2024) with Project (OYCP)
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
26
The ADT volumes vary for each roadway segment based on the existing traffic volumes and the
combination of project traffic distributions. This analysis relies on a comparative evaluation of
the off-site traffic noise impacts at the boundary of the right-of-way of the receiving adjacent
land use, without and with project ADT traffic volumes from the Project traffic study.
TABLE 6-1: OFF-SITE ROADWAY PARAMETERS
ID Roadway Segment Receiving
Land Use1 Classification2
Distance from
Centerline to
Receiving
Land Use
(Feet)3
Vehicle
Speed
(mph)
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. Non-Sensitive Major 66' 45
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive Collector 34' 35
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive Collector 34' 35
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive Primary 52' 45
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Sensitive Secondary 46' 40
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. Non-Sensitive Primary 52' 45
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive Primary 52' 45
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive Secondary 46' 45
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. Non-Sensitive Secondary 46' 45
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. Sensitive Secondary 46' 40
1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to adjacent residential land uses.
2 City of Fontana General Plan Community Mobility and Circulation Element roadway functional classification.
3 Distance to receiving land use is based upon the right-of-way distances.
To quantify the off-site noise levels, the Project related truck trips were added to the heavy truck
category in the FHWA noise prediction model. The addition of the Project related truck trips
increases the percentage of heavy trucks in the vehicle mix. This approach recognizes that the
FHWA noise prediction model is significantly influenced by the number of heavy trucks in the
vehicle mix.
Table 6-3 provides the time of day (daytime, evening, and nighttime) vehicle splits. Table 6-4
shows the traffic flow by vehicle type (vehicle mix) used for all without Project traffic scenarios,
and Tables 6-5 and 6-6 show the vehicle mixes used for the with Project traffic scenarios. Due to
the added Project truck trips, the increase in Project traffic volumes and the distributions of
trucks on the study area road segments, the percentage of autos, medium trucks and heavy
trucks will vary for each of the traffic scenarios. This explains why the existing and future traffic
volumes and vehicle mixes vary between seemingly identical study area roadway segments.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
27
TABLE 6-2: AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
ID Roadway Segment
Average Daily Traffic Volumes1
Existing OYC (2024)
Without
Project
With
Project
Without
Project
With
Project
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. 36,061 36,677 36,061 36,677
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. 1,142 1,810 1,142 1,810
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. 1,757 2,396 1,757 2,396
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. 4,005 4,597 4,005 4,597
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. 12,814 13,242 12,814 13,242
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. 17,728 17,780 17,728 17,780
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. 19,852 20,519 19,852 20,519
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. 1,895 1,923 1,895 1,923
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. 3,293 3,772 3,293 3,772
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. 5,511 5,511 5,511 5,511
1 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
TABLE 6-3: TIME OF DAY VEHICLE SPLITS
Vehicle Type Time of Day Splits1 Total of Time of
Day Splits Daytime Evening Nighttime
Autos 72.01% 9.31% 18.68% 100.00%
Medium Trucks 83.26% 2.46% 14.29% 100.00%
Heavy Trucks 66.49% 9.25% 24.26% 100.00%
1 Based on the December 1, 2022, 24-hour directional vehicle classification count collected on Cherry Avenue south of Slover Avenue
(11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc.)
"Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; "Evening" = 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
TABLE 6-4: WITHOUT PROJECT VEHICLE MIX
Classification Total % Traffic Flow1 Total Autos Medium Trucks Heavy Trucks
All Segments 87.85% 2.01% 10.14% 100.00%
1 Based on the December 1, 2022, 24-hour directional vehicle classification count collected on Cherry Avenue south of Slover Avenue (11115
Hemlock Avenue Traffic Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc.)
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
28
TABLE 6-5: EXISTING WITH PROJECT VEHICLE MIX
ID Roadway Segment
With Project1
Autos Medium
Trucks
Heavy
Trucks Total2
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. 87.36% 2.13% 10.51% 100.00%
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. 78.36% 4.34% 17.30% 100.00%
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. 81.71% 3.54% 14.75% 100.00%
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. 83.30% 3.10% 13.60% 100.00%
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. 86.97% 2.23% 10.81% 100.00%
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. 87.88% 2.01% 10.11% 100.00%
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. 87.01% 2.22% 10.77% 100.00%
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. 86.57% 2.30% 11.13% 100.00%
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. 84.92% 2.74% 12.34% 100.00%
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. 87.85% 2.01% 10.14% 100.00%
1 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
2 Total of vehicle mix percentage values rounded to the nearest one-hundredth.
TABLE 6-6: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE 2025 WITH PROJECT VEHICLE MIX
ID Roadway Segment
With Project1
Autos Medium
Trucks
Heavy
Trucks Total2
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. 87.41% 2.12% 10.47% 100.00%
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. 82.64% 3.29% 14.07% 100.00%
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. 81.89% 3.49% 14.62% 100.00%
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. 83.51% 3.05% 13.44% 100.00%
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. 87.10% 2.20% 10.71% 100.00%
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. 87.88% 2.01% 10.11% 100.00%
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. 87.10% 2.20% 10.71% 100.00%
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. 87.13% 2.17% 10.69% 100.00%
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. 87.85% 2.01% 10.14% 100.00%
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. 87.85% 2.01% 10.14% 100.00%
1 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
2 Total of vehicle mix percentage values rounded to the nearest one-hundredth.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
29
7 OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS
To assess the off-site transportation CNEL noise level impacts associated with the proposed
Project, noise contours were developed based on the 11115 Hemlock Avenue Traffic Study. (21)
Noise contour boundaries represent the equal levels of noise exposure and are measured in CNEL
from the center of the roadway.
7.1 TRAFFIC NOISE CONTOURS
Noise contours were used to assess the Project's incremental traffic-related noise impacts at land
uses adjacent to roadways conveying Project traffic. The noise contours represent the distance
to noise levels of a constant value and are measured from the center of the roadway for the 70,
65, and 60 dBA noise levels. The noise contours do not consider the effect of any existing noise
barriers or topography that may attenuate ambient noise levels. In addition, because the noise
contours reflect modeling of vehicular noise on area roadways, they appropriately do not reflect
noise contributions from the surrounding stationary noise sources within the Project study area.
Tables 7-1 to 7-4 present a summary of the exterior traffic noise levels for each traffic condition.
Appendix 7.1 includes the traffic noise level contours worksheets.
TABLE 7-1: EXISTING WITHOUT PROJECT CONTOURS
ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at
Nearest
Receiving
Land Use
(dBA)2
Distance to Contour from
Centerline (Feet)
70 dBA
CNEL
65 dBA
CNEL
60 dBA
CNEL
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. Non-Sensitive 79.4 279 600 1293
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 65.8 RW 38 82
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 67.6 RW 51 110
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 70.7 58 125 270
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Sensitive 75.6 108 233 503
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. Non-Sensitive 77.2 157 337 727
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 77.7 169 364 784
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 68.1 RW 75 161
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. Non-Sensitive 70.5 50 108 232
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. Sensitive 71.9 62 133 287
1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses.
2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use.
"RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
30
TABLE 7-2: EXISTING WITH PROJECT CONTOURS
ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at
Nearest
Receiving
Land Use
(dBA)2
Distance to Contour from
Centerline (Feet)
70 dBA
CNEL
65 dBA
CNEL
60 dBA
CNEL
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. Non-Sensitive 79.6 287 619 1334
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 69.9 RW 72 155
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 70.4 36 78 169
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 72.4 75 162 350
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Sensitive 76.0 115 248 533
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. Non-Sensitive 77.2 157 337 727
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 78.0 179 385 829
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 68.6 RW 79 171
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. Non-Sensitive 71.9 61 132 284
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. Sensitive 71.9 62 133 287
1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses.
2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use.
"RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road.
TABLE 7-3: OYC 2024 WITHOUT PROJECT CONTOURS
ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at
Nearest
Receiving
Land Use
(dBA)2
Distance to Contour from
Centerline (Feet)
70 dBA
CNEL
65 dBA
CNEL
60 dBA
CNEL
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. Non-Sensitive 79.9 300 647 1393
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 69.4 RW 67 144
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 67.8 RW 52 113
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 71.0 60 130 279
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Sensitive 76.3 121 260 560
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. Non-Sensitive 77.8 172 370 798
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 78.1 182 391 843
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 70.7 RW 110 238
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. Non-Sensitive 72.3 65 141 304
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. Sensitive 72.2 65 139 300
1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses.
2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use.
"RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
31
TABLE 7-4: OYC 2024 WITH PROJECT CONTOURS
ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at
Nearest
Receiving
Land Use
(dBA)2
Distance to Contour from
Centerline (Feet)
70 dBA
CNEL
65 dBA
CNEL
60 dBA
CNEL
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. Non-Sensitive 80.0 309 665 1433
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 71.6 44 94 203
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 70.5 37 80 171
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 72.6 77 166 358
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Sensitive 76.6 127 273 588
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. Non-Sensitive 77.8 172 371 798
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 78.5 191 411 886
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 70.9 53 114 246
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. Non-Sensitive 72.3 65 141 304
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. Sensitive 72.2 65 139 300
1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses.
2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use.
"RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road.
7.2 EXISTING PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES
An analysis of existing traffic noise levels plus traffic noise generated by the proposed Project has
been included in this report for informational purposes and to fully analyze all the existing traffic
scenarios identified in the Traffic Study. However, the analysis of existing off-site traffic noise
levels plus traffic noise generated by the proposed Project scenario will not actually occur since
the Project would not be fully constructed and operational until 2024 conditions. Table 7-1
shows the Existing without Project conditions CNEL noise levels. The Existing without Project
exterior noise levels range from 65.8 to 79.4 dBA CNEL, without accounting for any noise
attenuation features such as noise barriers or topography. Table 7-2 shows the Existing with
Project conditions ranging from 68.6 to 79.6 dBA CNEL. Table 7-5 shows that the Project off-site
traffic noise level increases range from 0.0 to 4.1 dBA CNEL on the study area roadway segments.
Based on the significance criteria for off-site traffic noise presented in Section 4.1, land uses
adjacent to the study area roadway segments would experience less than significant noise level
impacts due to unmitigated Project-related traffic noise levels.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
32
TABLE 7-5: EXISTING WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES
ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at Receiving
Land Use (dBA)2
Incremental Noise
Level Increase
Threshold3
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Increment Limit Exceeded?
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. Non-Sensitive 79.4 79.6 0.2 3.0 No
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 65.8 69.9 4.1 n/a No
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 67.6 70.4 2.8 n/a No
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 70.7 72.4 1.7 3.0 No
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Sensitive 75.6 76.0 0.4 1.5 No
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. Non-Sensitive 77.2 77.2 0.0 3.0 No
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 77.7 78.0 0.3 3.0 No
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 68.1 68.6 0.5 n/a No
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. Non-Sensitive 70.5 71.9 1.4 3.0 No
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. Sensitive 71.9 71.9 0.0 1.5 No
1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses.
2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the receiving land use.
3 Does the Project create an incremental noise level increase exceeding the significance criteria (Table 4-1)?
"n/a" A barely perceptible 3 dBA or greater noise level increase is considered a significant impact when the ambient non-noise sensitive noise level is
greater than the normally acceptable 70 dBA CNEL land use noise compatibility criteria.
7.3 OYC 2025 TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES
Table 7-3 presents the OYC 2024 without Project conditions CNEL noise levels. The OYC 2024
without Project exterior noise levels range from 67.8 to 79.9 dBA CNEL, without accounting for
any noise attenuation features such as noise barriers or topography. Table 7-4 shows that the
OYC 2024 with Project conditions will range from 70.5 to 80.0 dBA CNEL. Table 7-6 shows that
the Project off-site traffic noise level increases range from 0.0 to 2.7 dBA CNEL on the study area
roadway segments.
Based on the significance criteria for off-site traffic noise presented in Section 4.1, land uses
adjacent to the study area roadway segments would experience less than significant noise level
impacts due to unmitigated Project-related traffic noise levels.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
33
TABLE 7-6: OYC 2024 WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES
ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at Receiving
Land Use (dBA)2
Incremental Noise
Level Increase
Threshold3
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Increment Limit Exceeded?
1 Cherry Av. n/o Slover Av. Non-Sensitive 79.9 80.0 0.1 3.0 No
2 Hemlock Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 69.4 71.6 2.2 n/a No
3 Hemlock Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 67.8 70.5 2.7 n/a No
4 Beech Av. s/o Santa Ana Av. Non-Sensitive 71.0 72.6 1.6 3.0 No
5 Citrus Av. n/o Santa Ana Av. Sensitive 76.3 76.6 0.3 1.5 No
6 Slover Av. w/o Cherry Av. Non-Sensitive 77.8 77.8 0.0 3.0 No
7 Slover Av. w/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 78.1 78.5 0.4 3.0 No
8 Santa Ana Av. e/o Hemlock Av. Non-Sensitive 70.7 70.9 0.2 3.0 No
9 Santa Ana Av. e/o Beech Av. Non-Sensitive 72.3 72.3 0.0 3.0 No
10 Santa Ana Av. e/o Citrus Av. Sensitive 72.2 72.2 0.0 1.5 No
1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses.
2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the receiving land use.
3 Does the Project create an incremental noise level increase exceeding the significance criteria (Table 4-1)?
"n/a" A barely perceptible 3 dBA or greater noise level increase is considered a significant impact when the ambient non-noise sensitive noise level is
greater than the normally acceptable 70 dBA CNEL land use noise compatibility criteria.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
34
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
35
8 RECEIVER LOCATIONS
To assess the potential for long-term operational and short-term construction noise impacts, the
following sensitive receiver locations, as shown on Exhibit 8-A, were identified as representative
locations for analysis. Sensitive receivers are generally defined as locations where people reside
or where the presence of unwanted sound could otherwise adversely affect the use of the land.
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include schools, hospitals, single-family
dwellings, mobile home parks, churches, libraries, and recreation areas. Moderately noise-
sensitive land uses typically include multi-family dwellings, hotels, motels, dormitories, out-
patient clinics, cemeteries, golf courses, country clubs, athletic/tennis clubs, and equestrian
clubs. Land uses that are considered relatively insensitive to noise include business, commercial,
and professional developments. Land uses that are typically not affected by noise include:
industrial, manufacturing, utilities, agriculture, undeveloped land, parking lots, warehousing,
liquid and solid waste facilities, salvage yards, and transit terminals.
To describe the potential off-site Project noise levels, four receiver locations in the vicinity of the
Project site were identified. The selection of receiver locations is based on FHWA guidelines and
is consistent with additional guidance provided by Caltrans and the FTA, as previously described
in Section 5.2. Other sensitive land uses in the Project study area that are located at greater
distances than those identified in this noise study will experience lower noise levels than those
presented in this report due to the additional attenuation from distance and the shielding of
intervening structures. Distance is measured in a straight line from the project boundary to each
receiver location.
R1: Location R1 represents existing noise sensitive residence at 15002 Astor Lane,
approximately 1,107 feet southwest of the Project site. Receiver R1 is placed in the
private outdoor living area (backyard) facing the Project site. A 24-hour noise
measurement was taken near this location, L1, to describe the existing ambient noise
environment.
R2: Location R2 represents existing noise sensitive residence at 15064 Astor Lane,
approximately 918 feet southwest of the Project site. Receiver R2 is placed in the private
outdoor living area (backyard) facing the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was
taken near this location, L2, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
R3: Location R3 represents existing noise sensitive residence at 11328 Fremontia Way,
approximately 943 feet southeast of the Project site. Receiver R3 is placed in the private
outdoor living area (backyard) facing the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was
taken near this location, L3, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
R4: Location R4 represents existing noise sensitive residence at 15348 Brandon Lane,
approximately 955 feet southeast of the Project site. Receiver R4 is placed in the private
outdoor living area (backyard) facing the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was
taken near this location, L3, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
36
EXHIBIT 8-A: RECEIVER LOCATIONS
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
37
9 OPERATIONAL NOISE ANALYSIS
This section analyzes the potential stationary-source operational noise impacts at the nearest
receiver locations, identified in Section 8, resulting from the operation of the proposed 11115
Hemlock Avenue Project. Exhibit 9-A identifies the noise source locations used to assess the
operational noise levels. The operational noise analysis includes the planned 14-foot-high screen
walls surrounding the western and eastern loading dock areas. The screenwall shown on Exhibit
9-A is designed for screening, privacy, noise control, and security.
9.1 OPERATIONAL NOISE SOURCES
This operational noise analysis is intended to describe noise level impacts associated with the
expected typical of daytime and nighttime activities at the Project site. Consistent with similar
warehouse uses, the Project business operations would primarily be conducted within the
enclosed building, except for traffic movement, parking, as well as loading and unloading of
trucks at designated loading bays. The on-site Project-related noise sources are expected to
include: loading dock activity, roof-top air conditioning units, trash enclosure activity, parking lot
vehicle movements, and truck movements.
9.2 REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS
To estimate the Project operational noise impacts, reference noise level measurements were
collected from similar types of activities to represent the noise levels expected with the
development of the proposed Project. This section provides a detailed description of the
reference noise level measurements shown on Table 9-1 used to estimate the Project operational
noise impacts. It is important to note that the following projected noise levels assume the worst-
case noise environment with the loading dock activity, roof-top air conditioning units, trash
enclosure activity, parking lot vehicle movements, and truck movements all operating at the
same time. These sources of noise activity will likely vary throughout the day.
9.2.1 MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES
The reference noise level measurements presented in this section were collected using a Larson
Davis LxT Type 1 precision sound level meter (serial number 01146). The LxT sound level meter
was calibrated using a Larson-Davis calibrator, Model CAL 200, was programmed in "slow" mode
to record noise levels in "A" weighted form and was located at approximately five feet above the
ground elevation for each measurement. The sound level meters and microphones were
equipped with a windscreen during all measurements. All noise level measurement equipment
satisfies the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard specifications for sound level
meters ANSI S1.4-2014/IEC 61672-1:2013. (17)
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
38
EXHIBIT 9-A: OPERATIONAL NOISE SOURCE LOCATIONS
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
39
TABLE 9-1: REFERENCE NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
Noise Source1
Noise
Source
Height
(Feet)
Min./
Hour2
Reference
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
@ 50 Feet
Sound
Power
Level
(dBA)3 Day Night
Loading Dock Activity 8' 60 60 65.7 111.5
Roof-Top Air Conditioning Units 5' 39 28 57.2 88.9
Trash Enclosure Activity 5' 60 30 57.3 89.0
Parking Lot Vehicle Movements 5' 60 60 52.6 81.1
Truck Movements 8' 60 60 59.8 93.2
1 As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc.
2 Anticipated duration (minutes within the hour) of noise activity during typical hourly conditions expected at the Project
site. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m.
3 Sound power level represents the total amount of acoustical energy (noise level) produced by a sound source
independent of distance or surroundings. Sound power levels calculated using the CadnaA noise model at the reference
distance to the noise source.
9.2.2 LOADING DOCK ACTIVITY
The reference loading dock activities are intended to describe the typical outdoor operational
noise activities associated with the Project. This includes truck idling, reefer activity (refrigerator
truck/cold storage), deliveries, backup alarms, trailer docking including a combination of tractor
trailer semi-trucks, two-axle delivery trucks, and background operation activities. The reference
noise level measurement was taken in the center of the loading dock activity area and represents
multiple concurrent noise sources resulting in a combined noise level of 65.7 dBA Leq at a uniform
distance of 50 feet. Specifically, the reference noise level measurement represents one truck
located approximately 30 feet from the noise level meter with another truck passing by to park
roughly 20 feet away, both with their engines idling. Throughout the reference noise level
measurement, a separate docked and running reefer truck was located approximately 50 feet
east of the measurement location. Additional background noise sources included truck pass-by
noise, truck drivers talking to each other next to docked trucks, and air brake release noise when
trucks parked.
9.2.3 ROOF-TOP AIR CONDITIONING UNITS
The noise level measurements describe a single mechanical roof-top air conditioning unit. The
reference noise level represents a Lennox SCA120 series 10-ton model packaged air conditioning
unit. At the uniform reference distance of 50 feet, the reference noise levels are 57.2 dBA Leq.
Based on the typical operating conditions observed over a four-day measurement period, the
roof-top air conditioning units are estimated to operate for and average 39 minutes per hour
during the daytime hours, and 28 minutes per hour during the nighttime hours. These operating
conditions reflect peak summer cooling requirements with measured temperatures approaching
96 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) with average daytime temperatures of 82°F. For this noise analysis,
the air conditioning units are expected to be located on the roof of the Project buildings.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
40
9.2.4 TRASH ENCLOSURE ACTIVITY
To describe the noise levels associated with a trash enclosure activity, Urban Crossroads collected
a reference noise level measurement at an existing trash enclosure containing two dumpster
bins. The trash enclosure noise levels describe metal gates opening and closing, metal scraping
against concrete floor sounds, dumpster movement on metal wheels, and trash dropping into
the metal dumpster. The reference noise levels describe trash enclosure noise activities when
trash is dropped into an empty metal dumpster, as would occur at the Project Site. The measured
reference noise level at the uniform 50-foot reference distance is 57.3 dBA Leq for the trash
enclosure activity. The reference noise level describes the expected noise source activities
associated with the trash enclosures for the Project’s proposed building.
9.2.5 PARKING LOT VEHICLE MOVEMENTS
To describe the on-site parking lot activity, a long-term 29-hour reference noise level
measurement was collected in the center of activity within the staff parking lot of an Amazon
warehouse distribution center. At 50 feet from the center of activity, the parking lot produced a
reference noise level of 52.6 dBA Leq. Parking activities are expected to take place during the full
hour (60 minutes) throughout the daytime and evening hours. The parking lot noise levels are
mainly due cars pulling in and out of parking spaces in combination with car doors opening and
closing.
9.2.6 TRUCK MOVEMENTS
The truck movements reference noise level measurement was collected over a period of 1 hour
and 28 minutes and represents multiple heavy trucks entering and exiting the outdoor loading
dock area producing a reference noise level of 59.8 dBA Leq at 50 feet. The noise sources included
at this measurement location account for trucks entering and existing the Project driveways and
maneuvering in and out of the outdoor loading dock activity area.
9.3 CADNAA NOISE PREDICTION MODEL
To fully describe the exterior operational noise levels from the Project, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
developed a noise prediction model using the CadnaA (Computer Aided Noise Abatement)
computer program. CadnaA can analyze multiple types of noise sources using the spatially
accurate Project site plan, georeferenced Nearmap aerial imagery, topography, buildings, and
barriers in its calculations to predict outdoor noise levels.
Using the ISO 9613-2 protocol, CadnaA will calculate the distance from each noise source to the
noise receiver locations, using the ground absorption, distance, and barrier/building attenuation
inputs to provide a summary of noise level at each receiver and the partial noise level
contributions by noise source. Consistent with the ISO 9613-2 protocol, the CadnaA noise
prediction model relies on the reference sound power level (Lw) to describe individual noise
sources. While sound pressure levels (e.g., Leq) quantify in decibels the intensity of given sound
sources at a reference distance, sound power levels (Lw) are connected to the sound source and
are independent of distance. Sound pressure levels vary substantially with distance from the
source and diminish because of intervening obstacles and barriers, air absorption, wind, and
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
41
other factors. Sound power is the acoustical energy emitted by the sound source and is an
absolute value that is not affected by the environment.
The operational noise level calculations provided in this noise study account for the distance
attenuation provided due to geometric spreading, when sound from a localized stationary source
(i.e., a point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. A default ground
attenuation factor of 0.5 was used in the CadnaA noise analysis to account for mixed ground
representing a combination of hard and soft surfaces. Appendix 9.1 includes the detailed noise
model inputs including the planned 14-foot high screenwall used to estimate the Project
operational noise levels presented in this section.
9.4 PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS
Using the reference noise levels to represent the proposed Project operations that include
loading dock activity, roof-top air conditioning units, trash enclosure activity, parking lot vehicle
movements, and truck movements, Urban Crossroads, Inc. calculated the operational source
noise levels that are expected to be generated at the Project site and the Project-related noise
level increases that would be experienced at each of the sensitive receiver locations. Table 9-2
shows the Project operational noise levels during the daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
The daytime hourly noise levels at the off-site receiver locations are expected to range from 40.3
to 42.7 dBA Leq.
TABLE 9-2: DAYTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS
Noise Source1 Operational Noise Levels by Receiver Location (dBA Leq)
R1 R2 R3 R4
Loading Dock Activity 40.1 41.3 42.5 42.1
Roof-Top Air Conditioning Units 21.7 23.2 23.8 23.5
Trash Enclosure Activity 11.1 12.2 16.5 16.2
Parking Lot Vehicle Movements 25.6 27.5 27.4 27.0
Truck Movements 14.9 15.1 14.5 14.6
Total (All Noise Sources) 40.3 41.6 42.7 42.3
1 See Exhibit 9-A for the noise source locations. CadnaA noise model calculations are included in Appendix 9.1.
Tables 9-3 shows the Project operational noise levels during the nighttime hours of 10:00 p.m. to
7:00 a.m. The nighttime hourly noise levels at the off-site receiver locations are expected to
range from 40.3 to 42.7 dBA Leq. The differences between the daytime and nighttime noise levels
are largely related to the estimated duration of noise activity as outlined in Table 9-1 and
Appendix 9.1.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
42
TABLE 9-3: NIGHTTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS
Noise Source1 Operational Noise Levels by Receiver Location (dBA Leq)
R1 R2 R3 R4
Loading Dock Activity 40.1 41.3 42.5 42.1
Roof-Top Air Conditioning Units 19.3 20.8 21.4 21.1
Trash Enclosure Activity 7.1 8.2 12.5 12.2
Parking Lot Vehicle Movements 25.6 27.5 27.4 27.0
Truck Movements 14.9 15.1 14.5 14.6
Total (All Noise Sources) 40.3 41.5 42.7 42.3
1 See Exhibit 9-A for the noise source locations. CadnaA noise model calculations are included in Appendix 9.1.
9.5 PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE
To demonstrate compliance with local noise regulations, the Project-only operational noise levels
are evaluated against exterior noise level thresholds based on the City of Fontana exterior noise
level standards at nearby noise-sensitive receiver locations. Table 9-4 shows the operational
noise levels associated with 11115 Hemlock Avenue Project will not exceed the City of Fontana
daytime and nighttime exterior noise level standards. Therefore, the operational noise impacts
are considered less than significant at the nearby noise-sensitive receiver locations.
TABLE 9-4: OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE
Receiver
Location1
Project Operational
Noise Levels
(dBA Leq)2
Noise Level Standards
(dBA Leq)3
Noise Level Standards
Exceeded?4
Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime
R1 40.3 40.3 70 65 No No
R2 41.6 41.5 70 65 No No
R3 42.7 42.7 70 65 No No
R4 42.3 42.3 70 65 No No
1 See Exhibit 8-A for the receiver locations.
2 Proposed Project operational noise levels as shown on Tables 9-2 and 9-3.
3 Exterior noise level standards, as shown on Table 4-1.
4 Do the estimated Project operational noise source activities exceed the noise level standards?
5 Receiver locations do not include any noise sensitive nighttime use.
"Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m.
9.6 PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES
To describe the Project operational noise level increases, the Project operational noise levels are
combined with the existing ambient noise levels measurements for the nearby receiver locations
potentially impacted by Project operational noise sources. Since the units used to measure noise,
decibels (dB), are logarithmic units, the Project-operational and existing ambient noise levels
cannot be combined using standard arithmetic equations. (2) Instead, they must be
logarithmically added using the following base equation:
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
43
SPLTotal = 10log10[10SPL1/10 + 10SPL2/10 + … 10SPLn/10]
Where “SPL1,” “SPL2,” etc. are equal to the sound pressure levels being combined, or in this case,
the Project-operational and existing ambient noise levels. The difference between the combined
Project and ambient noise levels describes the Project noise level increases to the existing
ambient noise environment. Noise levels that would be experienced at receiver locations when
Project-source noise is added to the daytime and nighttime ambient conditions are presented on
Tables 9-5 and 9-6, respectively. As indicated on Tables 9-5 and 9-6, the Project will generate a
daytime operational noise level increases ranging from 0.0 to 0.1 dBA Leq at the nearest receiver
locations. Project-related operational noise level increases will not exceed the operational noise
level increase significance criteria presented in Table 4-1, and, therefore, the increases at the
sensitive receiver locations will be less than significant.
TABLE 9-5: DAYTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES
Receiver
Location1
Total
Project
Operational
Noise Level2
Measurement
Location3
Reference
Ambient
Noise
Levels4
Combined
Project
and
Ambient5
Project
Increase6
Increase
Criteria7
Increase
Criteria
Exceeded?
R1 40.3 L1 66.0 66.0 0.0 1.5 No
R2 41.6 L2 65.1 65.1 0.0 1.5 No
R3 42.7 L3 61.6 61.7 0.1 5.0 No
R4 42.3 L3 61.6 61.7 0.1 5.0 No
1 See Exhibit 8-A for the receiver locations.
2 Total Project daytime operational noise levels as shown on Table 9-2.
3 Reference noise level measurement locations as shown on Exhibit 5-A.
4 Observed daytime ambient noise levels as shown on Table 5-1.
5 Represents the combined ambient conditions plus the Project activities.
6 The noise level increase expected with the addition of the proposed Project activities.
7 Significance increase criteria as shown on Table 4-1.
TABLE 9-6: NIGHTTIME OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES
Receiver
Location1
Total
Project
Operational
Noise Level2
Measurement
Location3
Reference
Ambient
Noise
Levels4
Combined
Project
and
Ambient5
Project
Increase6
Increase
Criteria7
Increase
Criteria
Exceeded?
R1 40.3 L1 69.8 69.8 0.0 1.5 No
R2 41.5 L2 67.6 67.6 0.0 1.5 No
R3 42.7 L3 64.0 64.0 0.0 5.0 No
R4 42.3 L3 64.0 64.0 0.0 5.0 No
1 See Exhibit 8-A for the receiver locations.
2 Total Project nighttime operational noise levels as shown on Table 9-3.
3 Reference noise level measurement locations as shown on Exhibit 5-A.
4 Observed nighttime ambient noise levels as shown on Table 5-1.
5 Represents the combined ambient conditions plus the Project activities.
6 The noise level increase expected with the addition of the proposed Project activities.
7 Significance increase criteria as shown on Table 4-1.
8 Receiver locations do not include any noise sensitive nighttime use.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
44
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
45
10 CONSTRUCTION ANALYSIS
This section analyzes potential impacts resulting from the short-term construction activities
associated with the development of the Project. Exhibit 10-A shows the construction activity
boundaries in relation to the nearest sensitive receiver locations previously described in Section
8. The City of Fontana Municipal Code Section 18-63[7], states that project construction noise
levels are considered exempt between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the
hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays.
In addition, neither the General Plan nor the Municipal Code establish numeric maximum
acceptable construction source noise levels at potentially affected receivers for CEQA analysis
purposes. Therefore, a numerical construction threshold based on Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual is used for analysis
of daytime construction impacts. The FTA considers a daytime exterior construction noise level
of 80 dBA Leq as a reasonable threshold for noise sensitive residential land use with a nighttime
exterior construction noise level of 70 dBA Leq (8 p. 179).
10.1 CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS
The FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual recognizes that construction
projects are accomplished in several different stages and outlines the procedures for assessing
noise impacts during construction. Each stage has a specific equipment mix, depending on the
work to be completed during that stage. As a result of the equipment mix, each stage has its own
noise characteristics; some stages have higher continuous noise levels than others, and some
have higher impact noise levels than others. The Project construction activities are expected to
occur in the following stages:
• Demolition
• Site Preparation
• Grading
• Building Construction
• Paving
• Architectural Coating
10.2 CONSTRUCTION REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS
To describe construction noise activities, this construction noise analysis was prepared using
reference construction equipment noise levels from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
published the Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), which includes a national database
of construction equipment reference noise emission levels. (22) The RCNM equipment database,
provides a comprehensive list of the noise generating characteristics for specific types of
construction equipment. In addition, the database provides an acoustical usage factor to
estimate the fraction of time each piece of construction equipment is operating at full power
(i.e., its loudest condition) during a construction operation.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
46
EXHIBIT 10-A: CONSTRUCTION NOISE SOURCE AND RECEIVER LOCATIONS
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
47
10.3 CONSTRUCTION NOISE ANALYSIS
Using the reference construction equipment noise levels and the CadnaA noise prediction model,
calculations of the Project construction noise level impacts at the nearby sensitive receiver
locations were completed. Consistent with FTA guidance for general construction noise
assessment, Table 10-1 presents the combined noise levels for the loudest construction
equipment, assuming they operate at the same time. As shown on Table 10-2, the construction
noise levels are expected to range from 48.1 to 55.6 dBA Leq at the nearby receiver locations.
Appendix 10.1 includes the detailed CadnaA construction noise model inputs.
TABLE 10-1: CONSTRUCTION REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS
Construction
Stage
Reference
Construction Activity
Reference Noise
Level @ 50 Feet
(dBA Leq)1
Combined
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)2
Combined Sound
Power Level
(PWL)3
Demolition
Demolition Equipment 82
83 115 Backhoes 74
Hauling Trucks 72
Site
Preparation
Crawler Tractors 78
80 112 Hauling Trucks 72
Rubber Tired Dozers 75
Grading
Graders 81
83 115 Excavators 77
Compactors 76
Building
Construction
Cranes 73
81 113 Tractors 80
Welders 70
Paving
Pavers 74
83 115 Paving Equipment 82
Rollers 73
Architectural
Coating
Cranes 73
77 109 Air Compressors 74
Generator Sets 70
1 FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM).
2 Represents the combined noise level for all equipment assuming they operate at the same time consistent with FTA Transit Noise and
Vibration Impact Assessment guidance.
3 Sound power level represents the total amount of acoustical energy (noise level) produced by a sound source independent of distance or
surroundings. Sound power levels calibrated using the CadnaA noise model at the reference distance to the noise source.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
48
TABLE 10-2: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVEL SUMMARY
Receiver
Location1
Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Demolition Site
Preparation Grading Building
Construction Paving Architectural
Coating
Highest
Levels2
R1 54.1 51.1 54.1 52.1 54.1 48.1 54.1
R2 55.6 52.6 55.6 53.6 55.6 49.6 55.6
R3 55.4 52.4 55.4 53.4 55.4 49.4 55.4
R4 55.2 52.2 55.2 53.2 55.2 49.2 55.2
1 Construction noise source and receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A.
2 Construction noise level calculations based on distance from the construction activity, which is measured from the Project site boundary
to the nearest receiver locations. CadnaA construction noise model inputs are included in Appendix 10.1.
10.4 CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE
To evaluate whether the Project will generate potentially significant short-term noise levels at
nearest receiver locations, a construction-related daytime noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq is
used as a reasonable threshold to assess the daytime construction noise level impacts. The
construction noise analysis shows that the nearest receiver locations will not exceed the
reasonable daytime 80 dBA Leq significance threshold during Project construction activities as
shown on Table 10-3. Therefore, the noise impacts due to Project construction noise are
considered less than significant at all receiver locations.
TABLE 10-3: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE
Receiver
Location1
Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Highest Construction
Noise Levels2 Threshold3 Threshold
Exceeded?4
R1 54.1 80 No
R2 55.6 80 No
R3 55.4 80 No
R4 55.2 80 No
1 Construction noise source and receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A.
2 Highest construction noise level calculations based on distance from the construction noise source activity to
the nearest receiver locations as shown on Table 10-2.
3 Construction noise level thresholds as shown on Table 4-1.
4 Do the estimated Project construction noise levels exceed the construction noise level threshold?
10.5 NIGHTTIME CONCRETE POUR NOISE ANALYSIS
It is our understanding that nighttime concrete pouring activities will occur as a part of Project
building construction activities. Nighttime concrete pouring activities are often used to support
reduced concrete mixer truck transit times and lower air temperatures than during the daytime
hours and are generally limited to the actual building pad area. Since the nighttime concrete
pours will take place outside the permitted City of Fontana Municipal Code, Section 18-63(b)(7)
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
49
on Saturdays the Project Applicant will be required to obtain authorization for nighttime work
from the City of Fontana. Any nighttime construction noise activities are evaluated against the
FTA nighttime exterior construction noise level threshold of 70 dBA Leq for noise sensitive
residential land use (8 p. 179).
10.5.1 NIGHTTIME CONCRETE POUR REFERENCE NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
To estimate the noise levels due to nighttime concrete pour activities, sample reference noise
level measurements were taken during a nighttime concrete pour at a construction site. Urban
Crossroads, Inc. collected short-term nighttime concrete pour reference noise level
measurements during the noise-sensitive nighttime hours between 1:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. at
27334 San Bernardino Avenue in the City of Redlands. The reference noise levels describe the
expected concrete pour noise sources that may include concrete mixer truck movements and
pouring activities, concrete paving equipment, rear mounted concrete mixer truck backup
alarms, engine idling, air brakes, generators, and workers communicating/whistling. To describe
the nighttime concrete pour noise levels associated with the construction of the 11115 Hemlock
Avenue, this analysis relies on reference sound pressure level of 67.7 dBA Leq at 50 feet
representing a sound power level of 100.3 dBA Lw. While the Project noise levels will depend on
the actual duration of activities and specific equipment fleet in use at the time of construction,
the reference sound power level of 100.3 dBA Lw is used to describe the expected Project
nighttime concrete pour noise activities.
10.5.2 NIGHTTIME CONCRETE POUR NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE
As shown on Table 10-4, the noise levels associated with the nighttime concrete pour activities
(paving) are estimated to range from 39.4 to 40.9 dBA Leq and will not exceed FTA nighttime
exterior construction noise level threshold of 70 dBA Leq for noise sensitive residential land use
(8 p. 179). Based on the results of this analysis, all nearest noise receiver locations will experience
less than significant impacts due to the Project related nighttime concrete pour activities.
Appendix 10.2 includes the CadnaA nighttime concrete pour noise model inputs.
TABLE 10-4: NIGHTTIME CONCRETE POUR NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE
Receiver
Location1
Concrete Pour Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Exterior
Noise Levels2
Nighttime
Threshold3
Threshold
Exceeded?4
R1 39.4 70 No
R2 40.9 70 No
R3 40.7 70 No
R4 40.5 70 No
1 Construction noise source and receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A.
2 Nighttime Concrete Pour noise model inputs are included in Appendix 10.2.
3 Construction noise level thresholds as shown on Table 4-1.
4 Do the estimated Project construction noise levels exceed the nighttime construction noise level
threshold?
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
50
10.6 CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION ANALYSIS
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the
equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. Construction
vibration is generally associated with pile driving and rock blasting. However, no pile driving, or
rock blasting activities are planned for the Project. It is expected that ground-borne vibration
from Project construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion. Ground
vibration levels associated with various types of construction equipment are summarized on
Table 10-7. Based on the representative vibration levels presented for various construction
equipment types, it is possible to estimate the potential Project construction vibration levels
using the following vibration assessment methods defined by the FTA. To describe the vibration
impacts the FTA provides the following equation: PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5
TABLE 10-5: VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Equipment PPV (in/sec)
at 25 feet
Small bulldozer 0.003
Jackhammer 0.035
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Large bulldozer 0.089
Vibratory Roller 0.210
Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual
Table 10-6 presents the expected Project related vibration levels at the nearby receiver locations.
At distances ranging from 918 to 1,107 feet from Project construction activities, construction
vibration velocity levels are estimated to range from 0.000 to 0.001 in/sec PPV. Based on
maximum acceptable continuous vibration threshold of 0.3 PPV (in/sec), the typical Project
construction vibration levels will fall below the building damage thresholds at all the noise
sensitive receiver locations. Therefore, the Project-related vibration impacts are considered less
than significant during typical construction activities at the Project site.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
51
TABLE 10-6: PROJECT CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION LEVELS
Receiver1
Distance
to
Const.
Activity
(Feet)2
Typical Construction Vibration Levels
PPV (in/sec)3 Thresholds
PPV
(in/sec)4
Thresholds
Exceeded?5 Small
bulldozer Jackhammer Loaded
Trucks
Large
bulldozer
Vibratory
Roller
Highest
Vibration
Level
R1 1,107' 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.3 No
R2 918' 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.3 No
R3 943' 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.3 No
R4 955' 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.3 No
1 Receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A.
2 Distance from receiver location to Project construction boundary (Project site boundary).
3 Based on the Vibration Source Levels of Construction Equipment (Table 10-4).
4 Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020, Table 19, p. 38.
5 Does the peak vibration exceed the acceptable vibration thresholds?
"PPV" = Peak Particle Velocity
Moreover, the vibration levels reported at the sensitive receiver locations are unlikely to be
sustained during the entire construction period but will occur rather only during the times that
heavy construction equipment is operating adjacent to the Project site perimeter.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
52
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
53
11 REFERENCES
1. State of California. California Environmental Quality Act, Environmental Checklist Form Appendix G.
2021.
2. California Department of Transportation Environmental Program. Technical Noise Supplement - A
Technical Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Sacramento, CA : s.n., September 2013.
3. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Noise Abatement and Control. Information on Levels of
Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of
Safety. March 1974. EPA/ONAC 550/9/74-004.
4. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Environment and
Planning, Noise and Air Quality Branch. Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and
Guidance. December 2011.
5. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Highway Noise Barrier Design
Handbook. 2001.
6. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Highway Traffic Noise in the
United States, Problem and Response. April 2000. p. 3.
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Noise Abatement and Control. Noise Effects
Handbook-A Desk Reference to Health and Welfare Effects of Noise. October 1979 (revised July 1981).
EPA 550/9/82/106.
8. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact
Assessment Manual. September 2018.
9. Office of Planning and Research. State of California General Plan Guidlines. 2017.
10. City of Fontana. General Plan Noise Element. November 2018.
11. —. Zoning and Development Code, Section 30, Article V - Residential Zoning Districts, Division 6 -
Performance Standards.
12. —. Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Article II - Noise.
13. California Department of Transportation. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance
Manual. April 2020.
14. California Court of Appeal. Gray v. County of Madera, F053661. 167 Cal.App.4th 1099; - Cal.Rptr.3d,
October 2008.
15. Federal Interagency Committee on Noise. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis
Issues. August 1992.
16. California Department of Transportation. Technical Noise Supplement. November 2009.
17. American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Specification for Sound Level Meters ANSI S1.4-
2014/IEC 61672-1:2013.
18. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. FHWA Highway Traffic Noise
Prediction Model. December 1978. FHWA-RD-77-108.
19. California Department of Transportation Environmental Program, Office of Environmental
Engineering. Use of California Vehicle Noise Reference Energy Mean Emission Levels (Calveno REMELs)
in FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction. September 1995. TAN 95-03.
20. California Department of Transportation. Traffic Noise Attenuation as a Function of Ground and
Vegetation Final Report. June 1995. FHWA/CA/TL-95/23.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
54
21. Urban Crossroads, Inc. 1115 Hemlock Avenue. February, 2023.
22. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Environment and
Planning. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model. January, 2006.
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
55
12 CERTIFICATIONS
The contents of this noise study report represent an accurate depiction of the noise environment
and impacts associated with the proposed 11115 Hemlock Avenue Project. The information
contained in this noise study report is based on the best available data at the time of preparation.
If you have any questions, please contact me directly at (949) 584-3148.
Bill Lawson, P.E., INCE
Principal
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
260 E. Baker Street, Suite 200
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
(949) 336-5979
blawson@urbanxroads.com
EDUCATION
Master of Science in Civil and Environmental Engineering
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo • December, 1993
Bachelor of Science in City and Regional Planning
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo • June, 1992
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
PE – Registered Professional Traffic Engineer – TR 2537 • January, 2009
AICP – American Institute of Certified Planners – 013011 • June, 1997–January 1, 2012
PTP – Professional Transportation Planner • May, 2007 – May, 2013
INCE – Institute of Noise Control Engineering • March, 2004
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
ASA – Acoustical Society of America
ITE – Institute of Transportation Engineers
PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS
Certified Acoustical Consultant – County of Orange • February, 2011
FHWA-NHI-142051 Highway Traffic Noise Certificate of Training • February, 2013
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
56
This page intentionally left blank
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
APPENDIX 3.1:
CITY OF FONTANA DEVELOPMENT CODE
57
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
58
Created: 2022-11-01 10:44:48 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6)
Page 1 of 2
Sec. 30-543. Noise and vibration.
(a) Noise levels. No person shall create or cause to be created any sound which exceeds the noise levels in this
section as measured at the property line of any residentially zoned property:
(1) The noise level between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. shall not exceed 70 db(A).
(2) The noise level between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. shall not exceed 65 db(A).
(b) Noise measurements. Noise shall be measured with a sound level meter that meets the standards of the
American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Section SI4-1979, Type 1 or Type 2. Noise levels shall be
measured using the "A" weighted sound pressure level scale in decibels (reference pressure = 20
micronewtons per meter squared).
(c) Vibration. No person shall create or cause to be created any activity which causes a vibration which can be
felt beyond the property line with or without the aid of an instrument.
Sec. 18-63. Scope, enumeration of prohibited noises.
(a) This article shall apply to loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive interior and exterior sound or noise that
annoys or disturbs persons of ordinary sensibilities emanating from any type of property or source within the
city.
(b) The following acts, which create loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive sound or noise that annoys or
disturbs persons of ordinary sensibilities from a distance of 50 feet or more from the edge of the property,
structure or unit in which the source is located, are declared to be in violation of this article, but such
enumeration shall not be deemed to be exclusive, namely:
(1) Horns, signaling devices, etc. The sounding of any horn or signaling device on any automobile,
motorcycle, streetcar or other vehicle on any street or public place of the city, except as a danger
warning; the creation by means of any such signaling device of any unreasonably loud, excessive,
impulsive or intrusive noise; and the sounding of any such device for an unnecessary and unreasonable
period of time; the use of any signaling device except one operated by hand or electricity; the use of
any horn, whistle or other device operated by engine exhaust; and the use of any such signaling device
when traffic is for any reason held up.
(2) Sound amplifying equipment. The use or operation of any radio receiving set, musical instrument,
phonograph, loudspeaker, sound amplifier or any other machine or device in a manner that creates
loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive noise that annoys or disturbs a person of ordinary sensibilities.
Such sound amplifying equipment shall not be construed to include electronic devices, including, but
not limited to, radios, tape players, tape recorders, compact disc players, MP3 players, electric
keyboards, music synthesizers, record players or televisions, which are designed and operated for
personal use, or used entirely within a building and are not designed or used to convey the human
voice, music or any other sound to an audience outside such building, or which are used in vehicles and
heard only by occupants of the vehicle in which installed.
(3) Animals, birds, etc. Keeping any animal or allowing any animal to be kept or suffering, or permitting
any animal to remain upon the premises under the control of a person, when such animal habitually
barks, whines or makes loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive noises in such a manner as to disturb the
peace and quiet of the neighbors surrounding or in the vicinity of such premises, or whose barking or
howling or other sound or cry interferes with any person of ordinary sensitiveness in the reasonable
and comfortable enjoyment of life and property.
(4) Exhausts. The discharge into the open air of the exhaust of any steam engine, stationary internal
combustion engine, motorboat or motor vehicle, except through a muffler or other device which will
59
Created: 2022-11-01 10:44:48 [EST]
(Supp. No. 6)
Page 2 of 2
effectively prevent loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive noises therefrom; provided, however, that
the provisions of this section and article do not apply to any raceway, racetrack or drag strip which is
being operated in accordance with the provisions of chapter 17, article IX.
(5) Defect in vehicle or load. The use of any automobile, motorcycle or vehicle so out of repair or loaded or
used in such manner as to create loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive and unnecessary grating,
grinding, rattling or other noise.
(6) Loading, unloading or opening boxes. The creation of a loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive and
excessive noise in connection with loading or unloading of any vehicle or the opening and destruction
of bales, boxes, crates and containers.
(7) Construction or repairing of buildings or structures. The erection (including excavating), demolition,
alteration or repair of any building or structure other than between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00
p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, except in case of
urgent necessity in the interest of public health and safety, and then only with a permit from the
building inspector, which permit may be granted for a period not to exceed three days or less while the
emergency continues and which permit may be renewed for periods of three days or less while the
emergency continues. If the building inspector should determine that the public health and safety will
not be impaired by the erection, demolition, alteration or repair of any building or structure or the
excavation of streets and highways within the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., and if he shall further
determine that loss or inconvenience would result to any party in interest, he may grant permission for
such work to be done on weekdays within the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., upon application being
made at the time the permit for the work is awarded or during the progress of the work.
(8) Noise near schools, courts, place of worship or hospitals. The creation of any loud, excessive, impulsive
or intrusive noise on any street adjacent to any school, institution of learning, places of worship or
court while the premises are in use, or adjacent to any hospital which unreasonably interferes with the
workings of such institution or which disturbs or unduly annoys patients in the hospital; provided
conspicuous signs are displayed in such streets indicating that the street is a school, hospital or court
street.
(9) Transportation of metal rails, pillars and columns. The transportation of rails, pillars or columns of iron,
steel or other material over and along streets and other public places upon carts, drays, cars or trucks,
or in any other manner so loaded as to cause loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive noise or as to
disturb the peace and quiet of such streets or other public places.
(10) Piledrivers, hammers, etc. The operation between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. of any
piledriver, steamshovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, steam or electric hoist or other appliance, the use
of which is attended by loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive noise.
(11) Blowers. The operation of any noise-creating blower or power fan or any internal combustion engine
other than from the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on a weekday and the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m. on a Saturday, the operation of which causes noise due to the explosion of operating gases
or fluids, unless the noise from such blower or fan is muffled and such engine is equipped with a
muffler device sufficient to deaden such noise.
(Code 1968, § 17-3; Ord. No. 1460, § 2, 10-5-04; Ord. No. 1560, § 2, 9-11-07)
60
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
APPENDIX 5.1:
STUDY AREA PHOTOS
61
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
62
JN:15100
15100_L1_D_E
34, 2' 52.690000"117, 28' 38.840000"
15100_L1_D_N
34, 2' 52.690000"117, 28' 38.840000"
15100_L1_D_S
34, 2' 52.690000"117, 28' 38.840000"
15100_L1_D_W
34, 2' 52.690000"117, 28' 38.840000"63
JN:15100
15100_L2_M_E
34, 2' 52.660000"117, 28' 34.720000"
15100_L2_M_N
34, 2' 52.660000"117, 28' 34.720000"
15100_L2_M_S
34, 2' 52.660000"117, 28' 34.720000"
15100_L2_M_W
34, 2' 52.660000"117, 28' 34.720000"64
JN:15100
15100_L3_B_E
34, 2' 52.690000"117, 28' 38.840000"
15100_L3_B_N
34, 2' 52.690000"117, 28' 38.840000"
15100_L3_B_S
34, 2' 52.690000"117, 28' 38.840000"
15100_L3_B_W
34, 2' 52.690000"117, 28' 38.840000"65
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
66
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
APPENDIX 5.2:
NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENT WORKSHEETS
67
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
68
Date:Location:Meter:Piccolo II JN:15100
Project:1115 Hemlock Av.Source:Analyst:B. Lawson
Timeframe Hour L eq Lmax Lmin L1%L2%L5%L8%L25%L50%L90%L95%L99%L eq Adj.Adj. Leq
0 69.3 80.6 52.8 80.0 79.2 76.3 73.8 68.7 64.3 55.9 54.1 53.0 69.3 10.0 79.3
1 67.3 76.2 52.3 75.8 75.2 73.3 72.1 68.3 63.9 55.6 54.2 52.6 67.3 10.0 77.3
2 69.6 80.8 52.9 80.0 79.2 76.3 74.5 69.0 64.5 56.0 54.5 53.1 69.6 10.0 79.6
3 72.8 85.6 53.4 85.3 84.6 81.2 76.2 68.5 64.0 56.4 54.9 53.6 72.8 10.0 82.8
4 68.7 79.2 52.5 78.7 78.0 75.6 73.4 68.7 64.2 55.6 53.8 52.7 68.7 10.0 78.7
5 70.2 83.6 53.6 82.8 81.3 76.8 72.1 68.5 64.5 56.5 55.1 53.8 70.2 10.0 80.2
6 69.6 81.3 54.2 80.9 80.0 76.3 73.6 68.7 64.3 56.7 55.3 54.4 69.6 10.0 79.6
7 68.3 77.9 55.5 77.5 76.8 74.4 72.8 68.8 65.1 58.0 56.6 55.6 68.3 0.0 68.3
8 67.3 76.6 53.4 76.3 75.6 73.3 71.7 67.9 64.1 56.2 54.9 53.6 67.3 0.0 67.3
9 67.6 79.5 52.4 78.3 77.3 73.9 71.7 67.4 63.2 55.1 53.6 52.6 67.6 0.0 67.6
10 66.0 76.6 49.4 76.2 75.4 73.1 70.9 65.7 60.9 52.3 50.7 49.6 66.0 0.0 66.0
11 63.4 74.3 48.3 73.6 72.6 70.2 68.2 63.3 58.0 50.1 49.1 48.5 63.4 0.0 63.4
12 62.3 73.5 47.2 73.1 72.4 69.7 67.3 61.1 56.2 48.7 47.9 47.3 62.3 0.0 62.3
13 58.6 69.6 46.0 69.0 68.3 66.0 63.9 57.4 52.0 46.8 46.4 46.1 58.6 0.0 58.6
14 57.5 69.1 45.2 68.7 68.1 65.7 62.9 54.3 48.6 45.7 45.5 45.3 57.5 0.0 57.5
15 59.8 71.6 46.2 71.3 70.7 67.9 65.1 56.3 52.5 47.4 46.8 46.3 59.8 0.0 59.8
16 59.7 69.5 47.8 69.2 68.7 67.2 65.5 59.2 53.8 48.6 48.3 48.0 59.7 0.0 59.7
17 62.8 72.3 52.8 71.8 71.2 69.3 67.9 63.0 58.6 53.8 53.3 53.0 62.8 0.0 62.8
18 67.1 76.5 55.9 76.1 75.5 73.5 71.8 67.5 63.5 57.4 56.6 56.0 67.1 0.0 67.1
19 67.6 77.4 56.6 76.8 76.0 73.7 72.1 67.7 64.4 58.3 57.4 56.8 67.6 5.0 72.6
20 69.1 77.4 59.4 76.9 76.3 74.5 73.2 69.9 66.7 61.3 60.4 59.6 69.1 5.0 74.1
21 70.1 78.3 60.3 77.8 77.1 75.4 74.1 70.8 68.0 62.8 61.6 60.5 70.1 5.0 75.1
22 69.2 77.6 58.2 76.9 76.2 74.7 73.5 70.1 66.9 60.6 59.4 58.4 69.2 10.0 79.2
23 68.9 77.7 56.7 77.3 76.8 74.8 73.5 69.5 66.0 59.7 58.3 56.9 68.9 10.0 78.9
Timeframe Hour L eq Lmax Lmin L1%L2%L5%L8%L25%L50%L90%L95%L99%
Min 57.5 69.1 45.2 68.7 68.1 65.7 62.9 54.3 48.6 45.7 45.5 45.3
Max 70.1 79.5 60.3 78.3 77.3 75.4 74.1 70.8 68.0 62.8 61.6 60.5
66.0 74.2 73.5 71.2 69.3 64.0 59.7 53.5 52.6 51.9
Min 67.3 76.2 52.3 75.8 75.2 73.3 72.1 68.3 63.9 55.6 53.8 52.6
Max 72.8 85.6 58.2 85.3 84.6 81.2 76.2 70.1 66.9 60.6 59.4 58.4
69.8 79.7 79.0 76.1 73.6 68.9 64.7 57.0 55.5 54.3
24-Hour Noise Level Measurement Summary
Hourly Leq dBA Readings (unadjusted)
Night
Thursday, August 18, 2022 L1 - Located southwest of the Project site near the residence
at 15002 Astor Lane.
Night
Day
Leq (dBA)24-Hour
CNELDay
Night
Energy Average
Energy Average Average:
Average:
Daytime
(7am-10pm)
Nighttime
(10pm-7am)
76.0 66.0 69.869.367.369.672.868.770.269.668.367.367.666.063.462.358.657.559.859.762.867.167.669.170.169.268.935.040.045.050.055.060.065.070.075.080.085.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23Hourly Leq(dBA)Hour Beginning
Z:\Shared\UcJobs\_15100-15500\_15100\15100\04_Noise\Fieldwork\Measurements\15100_L1_D 69
Date:Location:Meter:Piccolo II JN:15100
Project:1115 Hemlock Av.Source:Analyst:B. Lawson
Timeframe Hour L eq Lmax Lmin L1%L2%L5%L8%L25%L50%L90%L95%L99%L eq Adj.Adj. Leq
0 67.4 80.0 51.1 79.4 78.1 74.0 71.0 66.0 61.9 53.9 52.5 51.3 67.4 10.0 77.4
1 64.8 73.5 50.2 73.2 72.5 70.5 69.3 65.8 61.7 53.3 51.6 50.4 64.8 10.0 74.8
2 67.6 79.0 51.9 78.5 77.8 74.4 72.4 66.3 62.2 54.4 53.2 52.2 67.6 10.0 77.6
3 69.8 82.7 51.4 81.7 80.7 78.8 74.1 65.6 61.4 53.9 52.7 51.6 69.8 10.0 79.8
4 66.3 77.7 50.2 77.2 76.1 73.0 70.7 65.7 61.6 53.1 51.5 50.3 66.3 10.0 76.3
5 65.2 75.0 51.8 74.5 73.8 71.1 69.2 65.7 62.1 54.4 53.2 52.0 65.2 10.0 75.2
6 66.5 78.2 52.3 77.7 76.6 72.7 70.4 65.9 61.9 54.6 53.4 52.5 66.5 10.0 76.5
7 65.6 75.9 52.6 75.3 74.3 71.5 69.9 65.9 62.3 55.2 53.8 52.8 65.6 0.0 65.6
8 64.6 74.2 51.4 73.8 73.1 70.7 69.1 65.1 61.4 53.6 52.4 51.5 64.6 0.0 64.6
9 64.2 75.3 50.3 74.6 73.2 70.1 68.3 64.4 60.5 52.7 51.4 50.5 64.2 0.0 64.2
10 65.2 76.5 48.4 76.0 75.1 72.7 70.5 63.9 59.1 50.5 49.4 48.6 65.2 0.0 65.2
11 61.2 71.5 46.7 71.1 70.4 67.8 66.0 61.5 56.3 48.0 47.4 46.9 61.2 0.0 61.2
12 61.0 73.3 45.7 72.8 71.6 67.8 65.2 59.5 54.3 46.8 46.3 45.9 61.0 0.0 61.0
13 57.4 68.6 45.0 68.2 67.5 64.6 62.5 56.0 50.4 45.7 45.4 45.1 57.4 0.0 57.4
14 56.1 68.0 45.0 67.7 67.1 64.2 61.2 52.4 47.5 45.4 45.3 45.1 56.1 0.0 56.1
15 59.0 71.5 46.4 71.1 70.2 66.6 63.7 55.5 51.5 47.1 46.8 46.5 59.0 0.0 59.0
16 59.7 71.2 47.3 70.9 70.1 67.6 65.2 57.3 52.1 47.9 47.6 47.4 59.7 0.0 59.7
17 62.5 72.0 54.5 71.7 71.0 68.9 67.4 62.6 58.4 55.1 54.8 54.6 62.5 0.0 62.5
18 66.6 76.4 56.4 75.9 75.2 72.8 71.1 66.8 63.0 57.6 57.0 56.6 66.6 0.0 66.6
19 67.6 78.5 55.7 78.0 76.9 73.6 71.6 67.3 63.9 57.6 56.7 55.9 67.6 5.0 72.6
20 68.7 76.9 58.4 76.5 75.9 74.2 73.0 69.6 66.4 60.5 59.5 58.6 68.7 5.0 73.7
21 70.4 78.5 61.2 78.0 77.3 75.6 74.5 71.2 68.6 63.6 62.5 61.4 70.4 5.0 75.4
22 69.4 77.5 58.6 77.0 76.5 74.8 73.8 70.3 67.1 61.5 60.3 59.0 69.4 10.0 79.4
23 68.8 78.2 56.7 77.6 76.8 74.6 73.2 69.3 66.0 59.4 58.2 56.9 68.8 10.0 78.8
Timeframe Hour L eq Lmax Lmin L1%L2%L5%L8%L25%L50%L90%L95%L99%
Min 56.1 68.0 45.0 67.7 67.1 64.2 61.2 52.4 47.5 45.4 45.3 45.1
Max 70.4 78.5 61.2 78.0 77.3 75.6 74.5 71.2 68.6 63.6 62.5 61.4
65.1 73.4 72.6 69.9 67.9 62.6 58.4 52.5 51.7 51.2
Min 64.8 73.5 50.2 73.2 72.5 70.5 69.2 65.6 61.4 53.1 51.5 50.3
Max 69.8 82.7 58.6 81.7 80.7 78.8 74.1 70.3 67.1 61.5 60.3 59.0
67.6 77.4 76.6 73.8 71.6 66.7 62.9 55.4 54.1 52.9
24-Hour Noise Level Measurement Summary
Hourly Leq dBA Readings (unadjusted)
Night
Thursday, August 18, 2022 L2 - Located southwest of the Project site near the residence
at 15064 Astor Lane.
Night
Day
Leq (dBA)24-Hour
CNELDay
Night
Energy Average
Energy Average Average:
Average:
Daytime
(7am-10pm)
Nighttime
(10pm-7am)
74.1 65.1 67.667.464.867.669.866.365.266.565.664.664.265.261.261.057.456.159.059.762.566.667.668.770.469.468.835.040.045.050.055.060.065.070.075.080.085.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23Hourly Leq(dBA)Hour Beginning
Z:\Shared\UcJobs\_15100-15500\_15100\15100\04_Noise\Fieldwork\Measurements\15100_L2_M 70
Date:Location:Meter:Piccolo II JN:15100
Project:1115 Hemlock Av.Source:Analyst:B. Lawson
Timeframe Hour L eq Lmax Lmin L1%L2%L5%L8%L25%L50%L90%L95%L99%L eq Adj.Adj. Leq
0 63.1 74.0 48.6 73.6 73.0 70.6 68.8 61.7 56.6 50.7 49.6 48.8 63.1 10.0 73.1
1 61.0 69.8 49.0 69.4 69.0 67.4 66.0 61.4 57.2 51.0 50.0 49.2 61.0 10.0 71.0
2 67.0 78.1 50.4 77.7 77.0 74.6 72.5 65.3 57.9 52.0 51.2 50.6 67.0 10.0 77.0
3 64.3 76.3 49.3 75.5 74.4 71.3 69.4 62.5 57.0 51.5 50.4 49.4 64.3 10.0 74.3
4 63.6 74.7 50.5 74.2 73.4 70.9 68.9 62.0 57.7 52.1 51.3 50.6 63.6 10.0 73.6
5 64.2 75.1 54.3 74.1 73.0 70.1 68.5 64.0 60.7 56.0 55.3 54.5 64.2 10.0 74.2
6 62.0 72.3 51.4 71.7 71.0 69.1 67.0 61.3 57.6 53.0 52.2 51.6 62.0 10.0 72.0
7 62.0 71.1 52.0 70.8 70.1 68.4 67.2 62.0 58.2 53.6 52.9 52.2 62.0 0.0 62.0
8 62.4 72.6 51.0 72.2 71.5 69.3 67.6 61.7 57.3 52.5 51.8 51.2 62.4 0.0 62.4
9 64.4 79.1 50.1 77.1 75.3 70.9 68.4 61.5 57.4 52.0 51.1 50.3 64.4 0.0 64.4
10 62.6 74.3 48.0 73.7 72.9 70.0 67.6 61.1 56.0 49.6 48.8 48.2 62.6 0.0 62.6
11 59.3 70.5 46.6 70.1 69.4 66.6 64.3 57.9 53.5 48.1 47.4 46.7 59.3 0.0 59.3
12 57.4 68.3 46.9 67.8 67.1 64.7 62.5 56.3 51.9 47.8 47.4 47.0 57.4 0.0 57.4
13 60.8 73.9 46.9 73.3 72.5 68.6 64.9 56.2 49.8 47.4 47.2 47.0 60.8 0.0 60.8
14 52.5 62.3 45.5 62.0 61.5 59.6 57.7 51.3 47.9 45.9 45.8 45.6 52.5 0.0 52.5
15 55.2 65.4 47.2 65.0 64.4 62.6 60.7 53.1 50.0 47.7 47.5 47.3 55.2 0.0 55.2
16 55.5 64.5 48.4 64.2 63.9 62.4 61.1 54.6 51.0 48.9 48.7 48.5 55.5 0.0 55.5
17 58.5 67.5 50.1 67.1 66.7 64.9 63.3 58.9 54.4 50.8 50.5 50.2 58.5 0.0 58.5
18 61.0 70.6 52.0 70.2 69.6 67.7 65.9 60.7 57.3 53.2 52.7 52.1 61.0 0.0 61.0
19 62.1 71.8 52.6 71.4 70.8 68.6 67.0 61.8 58.3 53.9 53.2 52.7 62.1 5.0 67.1
20 63.9 72.2 56.2 71.8 71.3 69.7 68.4 64.6 61.0 57.2 56.7 56.3 63.9 5.0 68.9
21 66.1 77.7 54.6 77.2 76.1 72.9 70.4 65.1 61.4 56.1 55.4 54.8 66.1 5.0 71.1
22 63.2 71.5 53.0 71.2 70.6 69.0 67.9 64.0 60.3 54.5 53.8 53.2 63.2 10.0 73.2
23 64.8 76.0 52.5 75.5 74.6 71.9 69.6 63.8 59.8 54.3 53.5 52.8 64.8 10.0 74.8
Timeframe Hour L eq Lmax Lmin L1%L2%L5%L8%L25%L50%L90%L95%L99%
Min 52.5 62.3 45.5 62.0 61.5 59.6 57.7 51.3 47.9 45.9 45.8 45.6
Max 66.1 79.1 56.2 77.2 76.1 72.9 70.4 65.1 61.4 57.2 56.7 56.3
61.6 70.3 69.5 67.1 65.1 59.1 55.0 51.0 50.5 50.0
Min 61.0 69.8 48.6 69.4 69.0 67.4 66.0 61.3 56.6 50.7 49.6 48.8
Max 67.0 78.1 54.3 77.7 77.0 74.6 72.5 65.3 60.7 56.0 55.3 54.5
64.0 73.6 72.9 70.6 68.7 62.9 58.3 52.8 51.9 51.2
Night
Day
Leq (dBA)24-Hour
CNELDay
Night
Energy Average
Energy Average Average:
Average:
Daytime
(7am-10pm)
Nighttime
(10pm-7am)
70.4 61.6 64.0
24-Hour Noise Level Measurement Summary
Hourly Leq dBA Readings (unadjusted)
Night
Thursday, August 18, 2022 L3 - Located southeast of the Project site near the residence at
11328 Fremontia Way.63.161.067.064.363.664.262.062.062.464.462.659.357.460.852.555.255.558.561.062.163.966.163.264.835.040.045.050.055.060.065.070.075.080.085.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23Hourly Leq(dBA)Hour Beginning
Z:\Shared\UcJobs\_15100-15500\_15100\15100\04_Noise\Fieldwork\Measurements\15100_L3_B 71
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
72
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
APPENDIX 7.1:
OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE CONTOURS
73
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
74
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Slover Av.
Road Name:Cherry Av.
Scenario:Existing
36,061
7.44%
66.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:2,683 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
66.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:90 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
1.89
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
0.09
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -14.52 0.11 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -7.49 0.11 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.30
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
48.539
48.356
48.374
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
69.2 68.3 65.4 63.7 71.371.0
63.8
75.7
63.5 54.3 57.1 65.064.9
74.4 71.8 71.3 78.478.2
Vehicle Noise:76.8 75.6 72.8 72.1 79.479.1
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
267 576 2,6741,241
279 600 2,7851,293
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Slover Av.
Road Name:Cherry Av.
Scenario:E+P
36,677
7.44%
66.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:2,729vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
66.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:90feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
1.94
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.36%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.13%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.51%
0.09
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -14.20 0.11 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -7.26 0.11 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.30
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
48.539
48.356
48.374
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
69.3 68.4 65.5 63.7 71.471.1
64.2
75.9
63.9 54.6 57.5 65.365.2
74.6 72.1 71.5 78.778.4
Vehicle Noise:77.0 75.8 73.0 72.3 79.679.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
276 594 2,7591,281
287 619 2,8741,334
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Slover Av.
Road Name:Cherry Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
40,334
7.44%
66.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:3,001 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
66.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:90 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
2.37
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
0.09
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -14.03 0.11 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -7.00 0.11 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.30
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
48.539
48.356
48.374
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
69.7 68.8 65.9 64.2 71.871.5
64.3
76.2
64.0 54.7 57.6 65.565.4
74.9 72.3 71.8 78.978.7
Vehicle Noise:77.3 76.1 73.3 72.6 79.979.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
288 621 2,8811,337
300 647 3,0011,393
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Slover Av.
Road Name:Cherry Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
40,950
7.44%
66.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:3,047vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
66.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:90feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
2.42
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.41%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.12%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.47%
0.09
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -13.74 0.11 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -6.80 0.11 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.30
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
48.539
48.356
48.374
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
69.8 68.8 66.0 64.2 71.871.5
64.6
76.4
64.3 55.0 57.9 65.865.7
75.1 72.5 72.0 79.178.9
Vehicle Noise:77.5 76.3 73.5 72.8 80.079.8
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
296 638 2,9631,375
309 665 3,0871,433
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
75
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Hemlock Av.
Scenario:Existing
1,142
7.44%
34.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:85 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
34.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
35 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:34 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-12.01
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
3.25
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
75.75 -28.42 3.32 -1.20 0.000 0.000
81.57 -21.39 3.31 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.53
-4.86
-5.67
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
64.30
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
29.866
29.569
29.598
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
54.3 53.4 50.5 48.8 56.456.1
49.5
62.3
49.1 39.9 42.7 50.650.5
61.0 58.5 57.9 65.164.8
Vehicle Noise:63.1 61.9 59.2 58.5 65.865.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
17 37 17079
18 38 17782
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Hemlock Av.
Scenario:E+P
1,810
7.44%
34.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:135vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
34.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
35mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:34feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-10.51
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%78.36%
83.3%2.5%14.3%4.34%
66.5%9.3%24.3%17.30%
3.25
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
75.75 -23.08 3.32 -1.20 0.000 0.000
81.57 -17.07 3.31 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.53
-4.86
-5.67
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
64.30
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
29.866
29.569
29.598
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
55.8 54.9 52.0 50.3 57.957.6
54.8
66.6
54.5 45.2 48.1 56.055.9
65.3 62.8 62.2 69.469.1
Vehicle Noise:67.2 66.0 63.2 62.6 69.969.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
32 69 320148
33 72 333155
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Hemlock Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
2,633
7.44%
34.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:196 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
34.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
35 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:34 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-8.39
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
3.25
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
75.75 -24.79 3.32 -1.20 0.000 0.000
81.57 -17.77 3.31 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.53
-4.86
-5.67
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
64.30
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
29.866
29.569
29.598
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
58.0 57.0 54.2 52.4 60.059.7
53.1
65.9
52.8 43.5 46.4 54.254.1
64.6 62.1 61.5 68.768.4
Vehicle Noise:66.8 65.6 62.8 62.1 69.469.1
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
30 64 297138
31 67 309144
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Hemlock Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
3,300
7.44%
34.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:246vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
34.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
35mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:34feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-7.67
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%82.64%
83.3%2.5%14.3%3.29%
66.5%9.3%24.3%14.07%
3.25
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
75.75 -21.67 3.32 -1.20 0.000 0.000
81.57 -15.36 3.31 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.53
-4.86
-5.67
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
64.30
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
29.866
29.569
29.598
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
58.7 57.7 54.9 53.1 60.860.4
56.2
68.3
55.9 46.6 49.5 57.457.3
67.0 64.5 63.9 71.170.8
Vehicle Noise:69.0 67.8 65.0 64.4 71.671.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
42 91 420195
44 94 438203
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
76
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:s/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Hemlock Av.
Scenario:Existing
1,757
7.44%
34.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:131 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
34.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
35 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:34 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-10.15
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
3.25
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
75.75 -26.55 3.32 -1.20 0.000 0.000
81.57 -19.52 3.31 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.53
-4.86
-5.67
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
64.30
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
29.866
29.569
29.598
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
56.2 55.3 52.4 50.7 58.358.0
51.3
64.2
51.0 41.7 44.6 52.552.4
62.9 60.3 59.7 66.966.7
Vehicle Noise:65.0 63.8 61.0 60.4 67.667.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
23 49 227105
24 51 236110
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:s/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Hemlock Av.
Scenario:E+P
2,396
7.44%
34.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:178vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
34.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
35mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:34feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-9.11
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%81.71%
83.3%2.5%14.3%3.54%
66.5%9.3%24.3%14.75%
3.25
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
75.75 -22.75 3.32 -1.20 0.000 0.000
81.57 -16.55 3.31 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.53
-4.86
-5.67
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
64.30
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
29.866
29.569
29.598
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
57.2 56.3 53.4 51.7 59.359.0
55.1
67.1
54.8 45.5 48.4 56.356.2
65.9 63.3 62.7 69.969.6
Vehicle Noise:67.8 66.6 63.8 63.2 70.470.2
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
35 75 350162
36 78 364169
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:s/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Hemlock Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
1,828
7.44%
34.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:136 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
34.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
35 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:34 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-9.97
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
3.25
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
75.75 -26.38 3.32 -1.20 0.000 0.000
81.57 -19.35 3.31 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.53
-4.86
-5.67
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
64.30
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
29.866
29.569
29.598
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
56.4 55.4 52.6 50.8 58.558.1
51.5
64.3
51.2 41.9 44.8 52.752.6
63.0 60.5 59.9 67.166.8
Vehicle Noise:65.2 64.0 61.2 60.5 67.867.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
23 50 233108
24 52 242113
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:s/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Hemlock Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
2,467
7.44%
34.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:184vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
34.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
35mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:34feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-8.98
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%81.89%
83.3%2.5%14.3%3.49%
66.5%9.3%24.3%14.62%
3.25
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
75.75 -22.67 3.32 -1.20 0.000 0.000
81.57 -16.46 3.31 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.53
-4.86
-5.67
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
64.30
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
29.866
29.569
29.598
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
57.4 56.4 53.6 51.8 59.559.1
55.2
67.2
54.9 45.6 48.5 56.456.3
65.9 63.4 62.8 70.069.7
Vehicle Noise:67.9 66.7 63.9 63.3 70.570.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
35 76 354165
37 80 369171
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
77
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:s/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Beech Av.
Scenario:Existing
4,005
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:298 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-7.66
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -24.06 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -17.04 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
60.6 59.6 56.8 55.0 62.762.3
55.2
67.0
54.9 45.6 48.5 56.456.3
65.7 63.2 62.6 69.869.5
Vehicle Noise:68.1 67.0 64.1 63.4 70.770.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
56 120 558259
58 125 581270
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:s/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Beech Av.
Scenario:E+P
4,597
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:342vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-7.29
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%83.30%
83.3%2.5%14.3%3.10%
66.5%9.3%24.3%13.60%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -21.59 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -15.16 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
60.9 60.0 57.1 55.4 63.062.7
57.7
68.9
57.4 48.1 51.0 58.858.7
67.6 65.1 64.5 71.771.4
Vehicle Noise:69.8 68.6 65.8 65.2 72.472.2
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
72 156 724336
75 162 753350
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:s/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Beech Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
4,225
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:314 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-7.43
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -23.83 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -16.80 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
60.8 59.9 57.0 55.3 62.962.6
55.4
67.2
55.1 45.8 48.7 56.656.5
66.0 63.4 62.8 70.069.8
Vehicle Noise:68.4 67.2 64.4 63.7 71.070.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
58 124 578268
60 130 602279
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:s/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Beech Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
4,817
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:358vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-7.08
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%83.51%
83.3%2.5%14.3%3.05%
66.5%9.3%24.3%13.44%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -21.45 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -15.01 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
61.2 60.2 57.4 55.6 63.262.9
57.8
69.0
57.5 48.2 51.1 59.058.9
67.8 65.2 64.6 71.871.6
Vehicle Noise:70.0 68.8 65.9 65.3 72.672.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
74 160 741344
77 166 772358
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
78
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Citrus Av.
Scenario:Existing
12,814
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:953 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
40 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-2.10
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
77.72 -18.50 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
82.99 -11.47 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
66.51
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
64.9 63.9 61.1 59.3 66.966.6
59.7
72.0
59.4 50.1 53.0 60.960.8
70.7 68.2 67.6 74.874.5
Vehicle Noise:73.0 71.8 69.0 68.3 75.675.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
104 224 1,040483
108 233 1,083503
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Citrus Av.
Scenario:E+P
13,242
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:985vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
40mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-2.00
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%86.97%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.23%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.81%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
77.72 -17.92 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
82.99 -11.05 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
66.51
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
65.0 64.0 61.2 59.4 67.066.7
60.3
72.4
60.0 50.7 53.6 61.461.3
71.1 68.6 68.0 75.274.9
Vehicle Noise:73.3 72.2 69.4 68.7 76.075.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
110 238 1,103512
115 248 1,149533
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Citrus Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
15,042
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,119 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
40 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-1.40
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
77.72 -17.80 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
82.99 -10.78 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
66.51
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
65.5 64.6 61.8 60.0 67.667.3
60.4
72.7
60.1 50.8 53.7 61.661.5
71.4 68.9 68.3 75.575.2
Vehicle Noise:73.7 72.5 69.7 69.0 76.376.0
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
116 249 1,157537
121 260 1,206560
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:n/o Santa Ana Av.
Road Name:Citrus Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
15,469
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,151vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
40mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-1.32
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.10%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.20%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.71%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
77.72 -17.30 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
82.99 -10.42 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
66.51
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
65.6 64.7 61.8 60.1 67.767.4
60.9
73.0
60.6 51.3 54.2 62.162.0
71.8 69.2 68.6 75.875.6
Vehicle Noise:74.0 72.8 70.0 69.3 76.676.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
122 262 1,217565
127 273 1,268588
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
79
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:w/o Cherry Av.
Road Name:Slover Av.
Scenario:Existing
17,728
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,319 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-1.20
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -17.60 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -10.57 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
67.0 66.1 63.2 61.5 69.168.8
61.6
73.5
61.3 52.1 54.9 62.862.7
72.2 69.7 69.1 76.376.0
Vehicle Noise:74.6 73.4 70.6 69.9 77.276.9
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
150 324 1,503698
157 337 1,566727
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:w/o Cherry Av.
Road Name:Slover Av.
Scenario:E+P
17,780
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,323vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-1.18
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.88%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.11%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -17.60 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -10.57 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
67.0 66.1 63.2 61.5 69.168.8
61.6
73.5
61.3 52.1 54.9 62.862.7
72.2 69.7 69.1 76.376.0
Vehicle Noise:74.6 73.4 70.6 69.9 77.276.9
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
150 324 1,504698
157 337 1,566727
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:w/o Cherry Av.
Road Name:Slover Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
20,402
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,518 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-0.59
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -16.99 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -9.96 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
67.6 66.7 63.8 62.1 69.769.4
62.3
74.1
62.0 52.7 55.6 63.463.3
72.8 70.3 69.7 76.976.6
Vehicle Noise:75.2 74.0 71.2 70.5 77.877.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
165 356 1,651766
172 370 1,719798
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:w/o Cherry Av.
Road Name:Slover Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
20,454
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,522vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-0.58
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.88%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.11%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -16.99 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -9.96 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
67.7 66.7 63.9 62.1 69.769.4
62.3
74.1
62.0 52.7 55.6 63.463.3
72.8 70.3 69.7 76.976.6
Vehicle Noise:75.2 74.0 71.2 70.5 77.877.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
165 356 1,651766
172 371 1,720798
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
80
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:w/o Hemlock Av.
Road Name:Slover Av.
Scenario:Existing
19,852
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,477 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-0.71
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -17.11 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -10.08 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
67.5 66.6 63.7 62.0 69.669.3
62.1
74.0
61.8 52.6 55.4 63.363.2
72.7 70.1 69.6 76.776.5
Vehicle Noise:75.1 73.9 71.1 70.4 77.777.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
162 349 1,621752
169 364 1,688784
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:w/o Hemlock Av.
Road Name:Slover Av.
Scenario:E+P
20,519
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,527vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-0.60
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.01%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.22%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.77%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -16.54 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -9.68 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
67.6 66.7 63.8 62.1 69.769.4
62.7
74.4
62.4 53.1 56.0 63.963.8
73.1 70.5 70.0 77.176.9
Vehicle Noise:75.4 74.3 71.5 70.8 78.077.8
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
171 369 1,715796
179 385 1,786829
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:w/o Hemlock Av.
Road Name:Slover Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
22,134
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,647 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-0.23
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -16.64 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -9.61 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
68.0 67.1 64.2 62.5 70.169.8
62.6
74.4
62.3 53.0 55.9 63.863.7
73.2 70.6 70.0 77.277.0
Vehicle Noise:75.6 74.4 71.6 70.9 78.177.9
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
174 375 1,743809
182 391 1,815843
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:w/o Hemlock Av.
Road Name:Slover Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
22,801
7.44%
52.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:1,696vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
52.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:61feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-0.14
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.10%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.20%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.71%
0.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -16.13 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -9.24 1.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.66
-4.87
-5.41
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
42.412
42.203
42.223
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
68.1 67.2 64.3 62.5 70.269.9
63.1
74.8
62.8 53.5 56.4 64.364.2
73.5 71.0 70.4 77.677.3
Vehicle Noise:75.9 74.7 71.9 71.2 78.578.2
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
183 395 1,833851
191 411 1,910886
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
81
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Hemlock Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:Existing
1,895
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:141 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-10.91
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -27.31 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -20.28 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
58.0 57.1 54.2 52.4 60.159.8
52.6
64.4
52.3 43.0 45.9 53.853.7
63.2 60.6 60.0 67.267.0
Vehicle Noise:65.6 64.4 61.6 60.9 68.167.9
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
33 72 332154
35 75 346161
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Hemlock Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:E+P
1,923
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:143vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-10.91
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%86.57%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.30%
66.5%9.3%24.3%11.13%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -26.66 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -19.82 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
58.0 57.1 54.2 52.4 60.159.8
53.3
64.9
53.0 43.7 46.6 54.454.3
63.6 61.1 60.5 67.767.4
Vehicle Noise:66.0 64.8 62.0 61.3 68.668.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
35 76 354164
37 79 368171
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Hemlock Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
3,416
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:254 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-8.35
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -24.75 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -17.73 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
60.5 59.6 56.8 55.0 62.662.3
55.2
67.0
54.9 45.6 48.5 56.356.2
65.7 63.2 62.6 69.869.5
Vehicle Noise:68.1 66.9 64.1 63.4 70.770.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
49 106 492228
51 110 512238
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Hemlock Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
3,444
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:256vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-8.35
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.13%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.17%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.69%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -24.38 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -17.46 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
60.5 59.6 56.8 55.0 62.662.3
55.5
67.3
55.2 46.0 48.8 56.756.6
66.0 63.4 62.9 70.069.8
Vehicle Noise:68.3 67.2 64.3 63.7 70.970.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
51 110 510237
53 114 531246
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
82
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Beech Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:Existing
3,293
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:245 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-8.51
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -24.91 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -17.89 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
60.4 59.5 56.6 54.8 62.562.2
55.0
66.8
54.7 45.4 48.3 56.256.1
65.6 63.0 62.4 69.669.4
Vehicle Noise:68.0 66.8 64.0 63.3 70.570.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
48 103 480223
50 108 500232
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Beech Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:E+P
3,772
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:281vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-8.07
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%84.92%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.74%
66.5%9.3%24.3%12.34%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -22.98 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -16.44 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
60.8 59.9 57.0 55.3 62.962.6
56.9
68.3
56.6 47.4 50.2 58.158.0
67.0 64.5 63.9 71.170.8
Vehicle Noise:69.3 68.1 65.3 64.6 71.971.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
59 127 588273
61 132 612284
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Beech Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
4,928
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:367 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-6.76
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -23.16 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -16.13 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
62.1 61.2 58.3 56.6 64.263.9
56.8
68.6
56.5 47.2 50.1 57.957.8
67.3 64.8 64.2 71.471.1
Vehicle Noise:69.7 68.5 65.7 65.0 72.372.0
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
63 135 628292
65 141 654304
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Beech Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
4,928
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:367vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
45mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-6.76
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
79.45 -23.16 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
84.25 -16.13 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
68.46
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
62.1 61.2 58.3 56.6 64.263.9
56.8
68.6
56.5 47.2 50.1 57.957.8
67.3 64.8 64.2 71.471.1
Vehicle Noise:69.7 68.5 65.7 65.0 72.372.0
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
63 135 628292
65 141 654304
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
83
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Citrus Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:Existing
5,511
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:410 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
40 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-5.76
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
77.72 -22.16 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
82.99 -15.14 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
66.51
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
61.2 60.3 57.4 55.6 63.363.0
56.0
68.3
55.7 46.4 49.3 57.257.1
67.0 64.5 63.9 71.170.8
Vehicle Noise:69.3 68.1 65.3 64.7 71.971.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
59 128 593275
62 133 617287
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Citrus Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:E+P
5,511
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:410vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
40mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-5.76
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
77.72 -22.16 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
82.99 -15.14 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
66.51
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
61.2 60.3 57.4 55.6 63.363.0
56.0
68.3
55.7 46.4 49.3 57.257.1
67.0 64.5 63.9 71.170.8
Vehicle Noise:69.3 68.1 65.3 64.7 71.971.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
59 128 593275
62 133 617287
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Citrus Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)
5,901
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:439 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
40 mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-5.46
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
77.72 -21.87 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
82.99 -14.84 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
66.51
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
61.5 60.6 57.7 55.9 63.663.3
56.3
68.6
56.0 46.7 49.6 57.557.4
67.3 64.8 64.2 71.471.1
Vehicle Noise:69.6 68.4 65.6 64.9 72.271.9
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
62 134 620288
65 139 646300
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (9/12/2021)
SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name:11115 Hemlock Av.
Job Number:15100
Road Segment:e/o Citrus Av.
Road Name:Santa Ana Av.
Scenario:OYC(2024)+P
5,901
7.44%
46.0
NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):
Peak Hour Percentage:
Peak Hour Volume:439vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
46.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:
Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation:0.0
Road Grade:0.0%
Pad Elevation:0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles):15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles):15
Autos:15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height:0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad):5.0 feet
feet
40mphVehicle Speed:
Near/Far Lane Distance:52feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance
-5.46
VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:72.0%9.3%18.7%87.85%
83.3%2.5%14.3%2.01%
66.5%9.3%24.3%10.14%
1.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View:-90.0
Right View:90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
0.0Barrier Distance to Observer:feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm):0.0
0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType
77.72 -21.87 1.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
82.99 -14.84 1.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.63
-4.87
-5.47
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
66.51
Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:0.000
2.297
8.004
38.275
38.043
38.066
Grade Adjustment:0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation)
Medium Trucks:
Heavy Trucks:
Autos:
VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn
61.5 60.6 57.7 55.9 63.663.3
56.3
68.6
56.0 46.7 49.6 57.557.4
67.3 64.8 64.2 71.471.1
Vehicle Noise:69.6 68.4 65.6 64.9 72.271.9
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:
Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
62 134 620288
65 139 646300
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
84
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
APPENDIX 9.1:
CADNAA OPERATIONAL NOISE MODEL INPUTS
85
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
86
15100 - 11115 Hemlock Avenue
CadnaA Noise Prediction Model: 15100-02.cna
Date: 02.03.23
Analyst: B. Lawson
Calculation Configuration
Configuration
Parameter Value
General
Max. Error (dB)0.00
Max. Search Radius (#(Unit,LEN))2000.01
Min. Dist Src to Rcvr 0.00
Partition
Raster Factor 0.50
Max. Length of Section (#(Unit,LEN))999.99
Min. Length of Section (#(Unit,LEN))1.01
Min. Length of Section (%)0.00
Proj. Line Sources On
Proj. Area Sources On
Ref. Time
Reference Time Day (min)960.00
Reference Time Night (min)480.00
Daytime Penalty (dB)0.00
Recr. Time Penalty (dB)5.00
Night-time Penalty (dB)10.00
DTM
Standard Height (m)0.00
Model of Terrain Triangulation
Reflection
max. Order of Reflection 2
Search Radius Src 100.00
Search Radius Rcvr 100.00
Max. Distance Source - Rcvr 1000.00 1000.00
Min. Distance Rvcr - Reflector 1.00 1.00
Min. Distance Source - Reflector 0.10
Industrial (ISO 9613)
Lateral Diffraction some Obj
Obst. within Area Src do not shield On
Screening Incl. Ground Att. over Barrier
Dz with limit (20/25)
Barrier Coefficients C1,2,3 3.0 20.0 0.0
Temperature (#(Unit,TEMP))10
rel. Humidity (%)70
Ground Absorption G 0.50
Wind Speed for Dir. (#(Unit,SPEED))3.0
Roads (TNM)
Railways (FTA/FRA)
Aircraft (???)
Strictly acc. to AzB
Receiver Noise Levels
Name M.ID Level Lr Limit. Value Land Use Height Coordinates
Day Night CNEL Day Night CNEL Type Auto Noise Type X Y Z
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
RECEIVERS R1 40.3 40.3 47.0 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6189722.99 2327107.28 5.00
RECEIVERS R2 41.6 41.5 48.2 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6190123.07 2327101.09 5.00
RECEIVERS R3 42.7 42.7 49.4 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6191893.98 2327048.28 5.00
RECEIVERS R4 42.3 42.3 49.0 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6192019.94 2327079.00 5.00
Point Source(s)
Name M.ID Result. PWL Lw / Li Operating Time Height Coordinates
Day Evening Night Type Value norm.Day Special Night X Y Z
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)dB(A)(min)(min)(min)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
POINTSOURCE AC01 88.9 88.9 88.9 Lw 88.9 585.00 0.00 252.00 5.00 g 6190833.54 2329151.67 50.00
POINTSOURCE AC02 88.9 88.9 88.9 Lw 88.9 585.00 0.00 252.00 5.00 g 6191410.98 2329150.40 50.00
POINTSOURCE AC03 88.9 88.9 88.9 Lw 88.9 585.00 0.00 252.00 5.00 g 6191450.24 2328161.40 50.00
POINTSOURCE AC04 88.9 88.9 88.9 Lw 88.9 585.00 0.00 252.00 5.00 g 6190757.56 2328165.20 50.00
POINTSOURCE TRASH01 89.0 89.0 89.0 Lw 89 900.00 0.00 270.00 5.00 a 6190638.52 2328234.85 5.00
POINTSOURCE TRASH02 89.0 89.0 89.0 Lw 89 900.00 0.00 270.00 5.00 a 6191587.00 2328225.99 5.00
Line Source(s)
Name M.ID Result. PWL Result. PWL'Lw / Li Operating Time Moving Pt. Src Height
Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Type Value norm.Day Special Night Number Speed
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)dB(A)(min)(min)(min)Day Evening Night (mph)(ft)
LINESOURCE TRUCK01 93.2 93.2 93.2 67.4 67.4 67.4 Lw 93.2 8 a
Urban Crossroads, Inc.87
Name ID Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z Ground
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
LINESOURCE TRUCK01 8.00 a 6190434.64 2329218.85 8.00 0.00
6190701.84 2329218.78 8.00 0.00
6190780.35 2329241.58 8.00 0.00
6191429.98 2329236.51 8.00 0.00
6191555.35 2329201.06 8.00 0.00
6191672.24 2329207.34 8.00 0.00
Area Source(s)
Name M.ID Result. PWL Result. PWL''Lw / Li Operating Time Height
Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Type Value norm.Day Special Night (ft)
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)dB(A)(min)(min)(min)
AREASOURCE DOCK01 111.5 111.5 111.5 66.9 66.9 66.9 Lw 111.5 8 a
AREASOURCE DOCK02 111.5 111.5 111.5 69.7 69.7 69.7 Lw 111.5 8 a
AREASOURCE CAR01 93.2 93.2 93.2 51.7 51.7 51.7 Lw 93.2 5 a
Name ID Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z Ground
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
AREASOURCE DOCK01 8.00 a 6190461.24 2329173.20 8.00 0.00
6190625.86 2329170.66 8.00 0.00
6190627.13 2329097.22 8.00 0.00
6190780.26 2329094.72 8.00 0.00
6190768.96 2328220.92 8.00 0.00
6190714.50 2328218.39 8.00 0.00
6190615.73 2328219.65 8.00 0.00
6190615.73 2328115.81 8.00 0.00
6190448.58 2328118.35 8.00 0.00
AREASOURCE DOCK02 8.00 a 6191460.82 2329085.84 8.00 0.00
6191647.79 2329088.35 8.00 0.00
6191638.92 2328208.26 8.00 0.00
6191451.51 2328209.52 8.00 0.00
AREASOURCE CAR01 5.00 a 6190467.08 2328067.75 5.00 0.00
6190467.68 2328109.10 5.00 0.00
6190621.85 2328107.02 5.00 0.00
6190689.56 2328111.18 5.00 0.00
6190693.03 2328103.89 5.00 0.00
6190700.32 2328097.64 5.00 0.00
6190717.93 2328097.14 5.00 0.00
6190718.19 2328114.07 5.00 0.00
6191504.86 2328104.07 5.00 0.00
6191504.86 2328087.72 5.00 0.00
6191654.64 2328096.79 5.00 0.00
6191654.03 2328058.64 5.00 0.00
6191582.03 2328058.67 5.00 0.00
6191582.94 2328042.33 5.00 0.00
6191601.10 2328042.33 5.00 0.00
6191602.92 2327988.76 5.00 0.00
6191583.85 2327986.94 5.00 0.00
6191584.76 2327970.60 5.00 0.00
6190469.80 2327980.59 5.00 0.00
6190468.90 2328003.28 5.00 0.00
6190447.11 2328004.19 5.00 0.00
6190450.74 2328052.31 5.00 0.00
6190466.17 2328051.40 5.00 0.00
Barrier(s)
Name Sel.M.ID Absorption Z-Ext.Cantilever Height Coordinates
left right horz.vert.Begin End x y z Ground
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
BARRIERPLANNED 0 12.00 a 6190780.28 2329095.72 12.00 0.00
6190720.32 2329096.70 12.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 12.00 a 6190669.67 2329097.52 12.00 0.00
6190627.14 2329098.22 12.00 0.00
6190625.88 2329171.66 12.00 0.00
6190461.25 2329174.20 12.00 0.00
6190448.56 2328117.35 12.00 0.00
6190615.72 2328114.81 12.00 0.00
6190615.72 2328218.65 12.00 0.00
6190652.63 2328218.18 12.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 12.00 a 6190692.93 2328217.66 12.00 0.00
6190714.49 2328217.39 12.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 12.00 a 6191512.29 2328208.26 12.00 0.00
6191541.07 2328208.92 12.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 12.00 a 6191582.73 2328207.64 12.00 0.00
6191639.91 2328207.25 12.00 0.00
Urban Crossroads, Inc.88
Name Sel.M.ID Absorption Z-Ext.Cantilever Height Coordinates
left right horz.vert.Begin End x y z Ground
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
6191648.80 2329089.37 12.00 0.00
6191572.28 2329088.34 12.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 12.00 a 6191522.78 2329087.67 12.00 0.00
6191460.80 2329086.84 12.00 0.00
Building(s)
Name Sel.M.ID RB Residents Absorption Height Coordinates
Begin x y z Ground
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
BUILDING BUILDING00001 x 0 45.00 a 6190781.62 2329199.79 45.00 0.00
6191459.10 2329197.26 45.00 0.00
6191461.64 2329163.07 45.00 0.00
6191451.51 2328209.52 45.00 0.00
6191512.29 2328208.26 45.00 0.00
6191509.76 2328120.88 45.00 0.00
6191480.63 2328117.08 45.00 0.00
6190709.44 2328118.35 45.00 0.00
6190714.50 2328218.39 45.00 0.00
6190768.96 2328220.92 45.00 0.00
Urban Crossroads, Inc.89
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
90
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
APPENDIX 10.1:
CADNAA CONSTRUCTION NOISE MODEL INPUTS
91
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
92
15100 - 11115 Hemlock Avenue
CadnaA Noise Prediction Model: 15100-02_Construction.cna
Date: 02.03.23
Analyst: B. Lawson
Calculation Configuration
Configuration
Parameter Value
General
Max. Error (dB)0.00
Max. Search Radius (#(Unit,LEN))2000.01
Min. Dist Src to Rcvr 0.00
Partition
Raster Factor 0.50
Max. Length of Section (#(Unit,LEN))999.99
Min. Length of Section (#(Unit,LEN))1.01
Min. Length of Section (%)0.00
Proj. Line Sources On
Proj. Area Sources On
Ref. Time
Reference Time Day (min)960.00
Reference Time Night (min)480.00
Daytime Penalty (dB)0.00
Recr. Time Penalty (dB)5.00
Night-time Penalty (dB)10.00
DTM
Standard Height (m)0.00
Model of Terrain Triangulation
Reflection
max. Order of Reflection 2
Search Radius Src 100.00
Search Radius Rcvr 100.00
Max. Distance Source - Rcvr 1000.00 1000.00
Min. Distance Rvcr - Reflector 1.00 1.00
Min. Distance Source - Reflector 0.10
Industrial (ISO 9613)
Lateral Diffraction some Obj
Obst. within Area Src do not shield On
Screening Incl. Ground Att. over Barrier
Dz with limit (20/25)
Barrier Coefficients C1,2,3 3.0 20.0 0.0
Temperature (#(Unit,TEMP))10
rel. Humidity (%)70
Ground Absorption G 0.50
Wind Speed for Dir. (#(Unit,SPEED))3.0
Roads (TNM)
Railways (FTA/FRA)
Aircraft (???)
Strictly acc. to AzB
Receiver Noise Levels
Name M.ID Level Lr Limit. Value Land Use Height Coordinates
Day Night CNEL Day Night CNEL Type Auto Noise Type X Y Z
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
RECEIVERS R1 54.1 54.1 60.8 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6189722.99 2327107.28 5.00
RECEIVERS R2 55.6 55.6 62.3 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6190123.07 2327101.09 5.00
RECEIVERS R3 55.4 55.4 62.1 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6191893.98 2327048.28 5.00
RECEIVERS R4 55.2 55.2 61.9 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6192019.94 2327079.00 5.00
Point Source(s)
Name M.ID Result. PWL Lw / Li Operating Time Height Coordinates
Day Evening Night Type Value norm.Day Special Night X Y Z
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)dB(A)(min)(min)(min)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
CONSTRUCTION01 115.0 115.0 115.0 Lw 115 8.00 a 6191613.57 2328009.72 8.00
CONSTRUCTION02 115.0 115.0 115.0 Lw 115 8.00 a 6190445.07 2328012.93 8.00
Area Source(s)
Name M.ID Result. PWL Result. PWL''Lw / Li Operating Time Height
Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Type Value norm.Day Special Night (ft)
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)dB(A)(min)(min)(min)
SITEBOUNDARY CONSTRUCTION 115.0 115.0 115.0 63.2 63.2 63.2 Lw 115 8 a
Name ID Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z Ground
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
SITEBOUNDARY CONSTRUCTION 8.00 a 6191673.37 2329279.02 8.00 0.00
Urban Crossroads, Inc.93
Name ID Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z Ground
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
6191652.47 2327960.20 8.00 0.00
6190414.05 2327971.87 8.00 0.00
6190435.82 2329290.28 8.00 0.00
Urban Crossroads, Inc.94
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
APPENDIX 10.2:
CADNAA CONCRETE POUR NOISE MODEL INPUTS
95
11115 Hemlock Avenue Noise and Vibration Analysis
15100-02 Noise Study
This page intentionally left blank
96
15100 - 11115 Hemlock Avenue
CadnaA Noise Prediction Model: 15100-02_Concrete.cna
Date: 02.03.23
Analyst: B. Lawson
Calculation Configuration
Configuration
Parameter Value
General
Max. Error (dB)0.00
Max. Search Radius (#(Unit,LEN))2000.01
Min. Dist Src to Rcvr 0.00
Partition
Raster Factor 0.50
Max. Length of Section (#(Unit,LEN))999.99
Min. Length of Section (#(Unit,LEN))1.01
Min. Length of Section (%)0.00
Proj. Line Sources On
Proj. Area Sources On
Ref. Time
Reference Time Day (min)960.00
Reference Time Night (min)480.00
Daytime Penalty (dB)0.00
Recr. Time Penalty (dB)5.00
Night-time Penalty (dB)10.00
DTM
Standard Height (m)0.00
Model of Terrain Triangulation
Reflection
max. Order of Reflection 2
Search Radius Src 100.00
Search Radius Rcvr 100.00
Max. Distance Source - Rcvr 1000.00 1000.00
Min. Distance Rvcr - Reflector 1.00 1.00
Min. Distance Source - Reflector 0.10
Industrial (ISO 9613)
Lateral Diffraction some Obj
Obst. within Area Src do not shield On
Screening Incl. Ground Att. over Barrier
Dz with limit (20/25)
Barrier Coefficients C1,2,3 3.0 20.0 0.0
Temperature (#(Unit,TEMP))10
rel. Humidity (%)70
Ground Absorption G 0.50
Wind Speed for Dir. (#(Unit,SPEED))3.0
Roads (TNM)
Railways (FTA/FRA)
Aircraft (???)
Strictly acc. to AzB
Receiver Noise Levels
Name M.ID Level Lr Limit. Value Land Use Height Coordinates
Day Night CNEL Day Night CNEL Type Auto Noise Type X Y Z
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
RECEIVERS R1 39.4 39.4 46.1 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6189722.99 2327107.28 5.00
RECEIVERS R2 40.9 40.9 47.6 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6190123.07 2327101.09 5.00
RECEIVERS R3 40.7 40.7 47.4 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6191893.98 2327048.28 5.00
RECEIVERS R4 40.5 40.5 47.2 70.0 65.0 0.0 5.00 a 6192019.94 2327079.00 5.00
Point Source(s)
Name M.ID Result. PWL Lw / Li Operating Time Height Coordinates
Day Evening Night Type Value norm.Day Special Night X Y Z
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)dB(A)(min)(min)(min)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
CONSTRUCTION01 100.3 100.3 100.3 Lw 100.3 8.00 a 6191613.57 2328009.72 8.00
CONSTRUCTION02 100.3 100.3 100.3 Lw 100.3 8.00 a 6190445.07 2328012.93 8.00
Area Source(s)
Name M.ID Result. PWL Result. PWL''Lw / Li Operating Time Height
Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Type Value norm.Day Special Night (ft)
(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)(dBA)dB(A)(min)(min)(min)
SITEBOUNDARY CONSTRUCTION 100.3 100.3 100.3 48.5 48.5 48.5 Lw 100.3 8 a
Name ID Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z Ground
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
SITEBOUNDARY CONSTRUCTION 8.00 a 6191673.37 2329279.02 8.00 0.00
Urban Crossroads, Inc.97
Name ID Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z Ground
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)
6191652.47 2327960.20 8.00 0.00
6190414.05 2327971.87 8.00 0.00
6190435.82 2329290.28 8.00 0.00
Urban Crossroads, Inc.98