HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix L - Noise and VibrationFebruary 2025
NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS
14970 JURUPA AVENUE PROJECT
FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
February 2025
NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS
14970 JURUPA AVENUE PROJECT
FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
Submitted to:
Megan Rupard
EPD Solutions, Inc.
3333 Michelson Drive, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92612
Prepared by:
LSA
157 Park Place
Richmond, California 94801
(510) 236-6810
Project No. ESL2201.97
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C A LIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FIGURES AND TABLES ............................................................................................................................ iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................ iv
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1
Project Location and Description .................................................................................................. 1
Existing Land Uses in the Project Area .......................................................................................... 4
Southwest Industrial Park Specific Plan ........................................................................................ 4
NOISE AND VIBRATION FUNDAMENTALS .................................................................... 7
Characteristics of Sound ................................................................................................................ 7
Measurement of Sound................................................................................................................. 7
Physiological Effects of Noise ..................................................................................................... 8
Fundamentals of Vibration .......................................................................................................... 10
REGULATORY SETTING .............................................................................................. 12
Applicable Noise Standards ......................................................................................................... 12
City of Fontana .......................................................................................................................... 12
State of California Green Building Standards Code .................................................................. 13
Federal Transit Administration ................................................................................................. 13
Applicable Vibration Standards ................................................................................................... 14
Federal Transit Administration ................................................................................................. 14
OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT .................................................. 15
Ambient Noise Measurements ................................................................................................... 15
Long-Term Noise Measurements .............................................................................................. 15
Existing Aircraft Noise ................................................................................................................. 15
Existing Traffic Noise ................................................................................................................... 17
PROJECT IMPACTS .................................................................................................... 18
Short-Term Construction Noise Impacts ..................................................................................... 18
Short-Term Construction Vibration Impacts ............................................................................... 21
Long-Term Off-Site Traffic Noise Impacts ................................................................................... 23
Long-Term Traffic-Related Vibration Impacts ............................................................................. 23
Long-Term Off-Site Stationary Noise Impacts ............................................................................. 23
Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Equipment ............................................................ 26
Trash Bin Emptying Activities .................................................................................................... 26
Cold Storage Fan Units .............................................................................................................. 26
Truck Loading and Unloading Activities .................................................................................... 26
Cumulative Operations Noise Assessment ............................................................................... 27
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 28
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C A LIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) ii
FIGURES AND TABLES
FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Location ....................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2: Site Plan ................................................................................................................................... 3
Figure 3: Noise Monitoring Locations .................................................................................................. 16
TABLES
Table A: Summary of Analysis Distances by Impact Category ................................................................ 4
Table B: Definitions of Acoustical Terms ................................................................................................ 9
Table C: Common Sound Levels and Their Noise Sources .................................................................... 10
Table D: Operational Noise Standards ................................................................................................. 13
Table E: Detailed Assessment Daytime Construction Noise Criteria.................................................... 13
Table F: Interpretation of Vibration Criteria for Detailed Analysis ...................................................... 14
Table G: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria ................................................................................ 14
Table H: Long-Term 24-Hour Ambient Noise Monitoring Results ........................................................ 15
Table I: Existing Traffic Noise Levels ..................................................................................................... 17
Table J: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ........................................................................ 19
Table K: Potential Construction Noise Impacts at Nearest Receptor ................................................... 20
Table L: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment .................................................... 21
Table M: Potential Construction Vibration Annoyance Impacts at Nearest Receptor ........................ 22
Table N: Potential Construction Vibration Damage Impacts at Nearest Receptor .............................. 22
Table O: Existing (2024) Traffic Noise Levels Without and With Project ............................................. 24
Table P: Opening Year (2027) Traffic Noise Levels Without and With Project .................................... 25
Table Q: Daytime Exterior Noise Level Impacts ................................................................................... 27
Table R: Nighttime Exterior Noise Level Impacts ................................................................................. 27
APPENDICES
A: NOISE MONITORING DATA
B: FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE MODEL PRINTOUTS
C: CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS
D: SOUNDPLAN NOISE MODEL PRINTOUTS
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C A LIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ADT average daily trips
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CALGreen Code California Green Building Standards Code
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City City of Fontana
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
EV electric vehicle
ft foot/feet
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
FTA Manual Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
I-10 Interstate 10
I-15 Interstate 15
in/sec inches per second
Ldn day-night average noise level
Leq equivalent continuous sound level
Lmax maximum instantaneous sound level
Lw sound power level
Noise Element City of Fontana General Plan Noise Element
ONT ALUCP Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C A LIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) iv
PPV peak particle velocity
project 14970 Jurupa Avenue Project
RCALUC Riverside Couty Airport Land Use Commission
RMS root-mean-square
sf square foot/feet
SWIP Southwest Industrial Park
VdB vibration velocity decibels
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 1
INTRODUCTION
This noise and vibration impact analysis has been prepared to evaluate the potential noise and
vibration impacts and reduction measures associated with the 14970 Jurupa Avenue Project
(project) in Fontana, California. This report is intended to satisfy the City of Fontana’s (City)
requirement for a project-specific noise impact analysis by examining the impacts of the project site
and evaluating noise reduction measures that the project may require.
PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The project site is located within the southwest portion of the City of Fontana at 14970 Jurupa
Avenue, between Live Oak Avenue and Hemlock Avenue. The project site lies within the boundaries
of the City’s Southwest Industrial Park (SWIP) area. Regional access to the project site is provided via
Interstate 10 (I-10), located approximately 1.5 miles north of the project site, and Interstate 15 (I-
15), located approximately 4.5 miles east of the project site. Local access to the project site is
provided by Jurupa Avenue (see Figure 1, Project Location and Vicinity, and Figure 2, Site Plan).
The project proposes to remove the existing structures from the site and to construct a new 492,240
square-foot (sf) logistics and distribution facility, inclusive of a 10,000 sf ground floor office and a
10,000 sf mezzanine. The proposed building would be single-story and a maximum height of 60 feet
(ft). The project also includes the construction of associated parking, landscaping, and frontage
improvements to serve the site.
A total of 234 passenger vehicle stalls, including 110 standard stalls, 7 accessible stalls, and 117
electric vehicle (EV) capable stalls, would be provided in surface lots along the east and west sites of
the proposed building. The project also includes 60 dock doors along the northern side of the
building. The project includes 128 trailer stalls located along the northern project boundary,
opposite the truck court.
The truck court to the north of the building would be secured with 8 ft tall concrete tilt-up screen
walls and two 8 ft tall steel rolling gates, one on the east entrance and one on the west entrance.
Additionally, an 8 ft tall concrete tilt-up screen wall would be located along the northern property
boundary.
The project would maintain and operate a logistics and distribution facility and is expected to
operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. It is assumed that 25 percent of the proposed building’s
floor space would be dedicated to cold storage. Typical operational characteristics include
employees traveling to and from the site, delivery of materials and supplies to the site, truck loading
and unloading, and distribution.
Construction is expected to begin in December 2025 and occur over 22 months. Construction would
occur within the hours allowable by the Fontana Municipal Code Section 18.63, which states that
construction shall occur only 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.
El Co nte nt o
A
v
e
C
h
e
r
r
y
A
v
e
Kaiser High
School
Southridge
Middle School
B
e
e
c
h
A
v
e
H
e
m
l
o
c
k
A
v
e
Santa Ana Ave
E
l
m
A
v
e
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
A
v
e
L
i
v
e
O
a
k
A
v
e
M anila St
Aliso Dr
R
e
s
e
d
a
A
v
e
Southwest
Industrial Park
B
e
e
ch
Av
e
H
e
m
l
o
c
k
A
v
e
Liv
e
Oa
k
Av
e
El
m
A
v
e
E
l
m
A
v
e
Villa ge
D
r
Col een StWoodlandDr
Woodlan d
D
r
Ca nyon
C
rest
D
r
Ca mel lia Dr
Da
ybreak
L
n
L
o
y
o
l
a
C
t
R
e
dw
o
o
d
A
v
e
Jurupa Ave
Southridge
Plaza
Southridge Park
Southridge
Village
Ca
rdin
a
lCt
Alcala
Ct
Ovar
St
R
e
d
G
u
m
L
n
App
l
e
t
r
e
e
Ln
Stets o n Ct
Su
l
t
a
n
a
Av
e
Ja
s
m
i
n
e
Pl
S
u
l
t
a
n
a
Wa
y
O
s
u
m
a
R
d
Az
u
r
e
C
t
Al
a
b
aste
r
Ct
A
u
r
o
r
a
C
t
Fr
e
m
o
n
t
i
a
Wa
y Melb
a
Ct
Aq
u
a
C
t
La
u
r
e
e
n
Ct
Argent i n eCt
Chaparral
Ave
Z
i
n
n
i
aWa
y
Do
g
w
o
o
d
C
t
Oc
o
t
i
l
l
o
Dr
Sh
e
r
w
o
o
d
Ct
Blacksto
n
e
Ct
Wi
n
e
r
y
D
r
Rose Ct
Yu
c
c
a
Dr
Re
d
w
o
o
d
Ct
C
a
r
a
w
a
y
Ct
H
o
l
l
y
o
a
k
D
r
Astor Ln
L
o
y
o
l
a
C
t
Hillcre st
D
r Te rracina
Ln
West ward
Dr
Brandon
Ln
S h ado
w
D
r
Autu
m
n
Pl
V
e
r
o
n
aD
r
RockridgeLn
Co n ife
r
Ct
C
i
t
a
d
e
l
A
v
e
Colby Pl
Ridge c rest
Dr
Sil k tr ee
Dr Old
C a stle
R
d
Colt
Ave
Sou t h wo o d
D r S hadow Dr
Tr
o
tt
er
Ln
ChapsLn Si
l
v
e
r
S
p
u
r
A
v
e
M
artos
R
d
Be
l
l
T
o
w
e
r
D
r
G o ld enrain
Dr
A u tumn Pl
El
d
e
r
w
o
o
d
D
r
Oa
kKn
o
l
l
C
t
T
e
a
b
e
r
r
y
Ct
Live
O
a
k
A
ve
Cinnamon Dr
Wi
n
e
r
y
Dr
Rustic
P
l
Av
eiroRd
Belmo
n
t
e
RdVillaba
Rd
Woodland D r
C h err y A v e E
Santa Ana Ave
TobarraRd
Manila St
Aliso Dr
Camellia
D
r
B ole r o D r
Coleen
St
M o untain High Dr
Vill a ge
Dr E
el Con
t
ento
Ave
Lon g Vie w Dr
Santa Ana Ave
Canyon Crest Dr
W o o dl a n d Dr
Elm
Av
e
Live Oak A v e
LiveOakAve
Villag
e
D
r
Santa Ana Ave
Li
v
e
O
a
k
A
v
e
Re
d
w
o
o
d
A
v
e
El
m
A
v
e
He
m
l
o
c
k
A
v
e
Jurupa Ave
C
h
e
rry
A
v
e
Beech
A
v
e
SOURCE: Esri Street Map (2025)
I:\E\ESL2201.97\GIS\Pro\14970 Jurupa Ave, Fontana\14970 Jurupa Ave, Fontana.aprx (2/4/2025)
FIGURE 1
S A N
B E R N A R D I N O
C O U N T Y
R I V E R S I D E
C O U N T Y
189
91
210
60
71
259
138
18
10
21515
Ontario
San
Bernardino
Riverside
Project Vicinity
0 500 1000
FEET
Project Location
14970 Jurupa Avenue Project
Project Location
SOURCE: Herdman Architecture + Design
FEET
180900
FIGURE 2
I:\E\ESL2201.97\G\Site_Plan.ai (2/3/2025)
14970 Jurupa Avenue Project
Site Plan
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 4
EXISTING LAND USES IN THE PROJECT AREA
The project site is surrounded primarily by residential and light industrial uses. The areas adjacent to
the project site include the following uses.
• North: Existing car rental agency (Fontana Rent A Car).
• East: Existing light industrial opposite Hemlock Avenue.
• South: Existing single-family residences opposite Jurupa Avenue.
• West: Existing industrial uses opposite Live Oak Avenue.
A summary of analysis distances relative to sensitive receptors for noise and structures for vibration
damage is provided in Table A.
Table A: Summary of Analysis Distances by Impact Category
Activity
Nearest Receptor or
Structure Points of Analysis
Distance
(feet)
Construction Noise –
Construction Vibration
Annoyance
Single-family residences south
of Jurupa Avenue
Center of project site to façade
of single-family residence 500
Construction Vibration
Damage
Warehouse west of Live Oak
Avenue
Perimeter of construction
activities to nearest structure 100
Off-Site Operational Noise and
Vibration
Single-family residences south
of Jurupa Avenue
Perimeter of project site to
property line of residence 145
SOUTHWEST INDUSTRIAL PARK SPECIFIC PLAN
As identified above, the project site is within the SWIP area. The SWIP Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) identified the following mitigation measures that would apply to the proposed project and that
would help to reduce and avoid potential impacts related to noise and vibration:
Mitigation Measure 4.7-1a The following measures shall be implemented when construction is
to be conducted within 500 feet of any sensitive structures or has
the potential to disrupt classroom activities or religious functions:
• The City shall restrict noise intensive construction activities to
the days and hours specified under Section 18-63 of the City of
Fontana Municipal Code. These days and hours shall also apply
to any servicing of equipment and to the delivery of materials to
or from the site.
• All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and
sound control devices (e.g., intake silencers and noise shrouds)
no less effective than those provided on the original equipment
and no equipment shall have an unmuffled exhaust.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 5
• The City shall require that the contractor maintain and tune-up
all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions.
• Stationary equipment shall be placed so as to maintain the
greatest possible distance to the sensitive use structures.
• All equipment servicing shall be performed so as to maintain
the greatest possible distance to the sensitive use structures.
• If construction noise does prove to be detrimental to the
learning environment, the City shall allow for a temporary
waiver thereby allowing construction on weekends and/or
holidays in those areas where this construction is to be
performed in excess of 500 feet from any residential structures.
• The construction contractor shall provide an on-site name and
telephone number of a contact person. Construction hours,
allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job
superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction
entrances to allow for surrounding owners and residents to
contact the job superintendent. If the City or the job
superintendent receives a complaint, the superintendent shall
investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the
action taken to the reporting party. In the event that
construction noise is intrusive to an educational process, the
construction liaison will revise the construction schedule to
preserve the learning environment.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-1b Should potential future development facilitated by the Proposed
Project require off-site import/export of fill material during
construction, trucks shall utilize a route that is least disruptive to
sensitive receptors, preferably major roadways (Interstate 10,
Interstate 15, State Route 60, Siena Avenue, Beech Avenue, Jurupa
Avenue, and Slover Avenue). Construction trucks should, to the
extent practical, avoid the weekday and Saturday a.m. and p.m.
peak hours (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.)
Mitigation Measure 4.7-2a No new industrial facilities shall be constructed within 160 feet of
any existing sensitive land use property line without the preparation
of a dedicated noise analysis. This analysis shall document the
nature of the industrial facility as well as “noise producing”
operations associated with that facility. Furthermore, the analysis
shall document the placement of any existing or proposed noise-
sensitive land uses situated within the 160-foot distance. The
analysis shall determine the potential noise levels that could be
received at these sensitive land uses and specify very specific
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 6
measures to be employed by the industrial facility to ensure that
these levels do not exceed those City noise requirements of 65 dBA
CNEL. Such measures could include, but are not limited to, the use
of enclosures for noisy pieces of equipment, the use of noise walls
and/or berms for exterior equipment and/or on-site truck
operations, and/or restrictions on hours of operations. No
development permits or approval of land use applications shall be
issued until the noted acoustic analysis is received and approved by
the City Staff.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-3a With respect to the proposed land uses, developers may specify
increased setbacks such that they do not lie within the 65 dBA CNEL
overlay zone residential and noise sensitive land uses depicted in
the Proposed General Plan or the distances to both the MetroLink
and Union Pacific Railroad tracks discussed in Section 5.4.3 (Railroad
Noise Impacts on New, Proposed Land Uses) [Section 5.4.3 of the
General Plan EIR]. This would ensure that any proposed land uses
do not exceed the goals of the City General Plan Noise Element and
would also ensure that any railroad vibration is reduced to less than
a significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-3b Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a developer shall contract for
a site-specific noise study for the parcel. The noise study shall be
performed by an acoustic consultant experienced in such studies
and the consultant’s qualifications and methodology to be used in
the study must be presented to City staff for consideration. The site-
specific acoustic study shall specifically identify potential noise
impacts upon any proposed sensitive uses (addressing General Plan
buildout conditions), as well as potential project impacts upon off-
site sensitive uses due to construction, stationary and mobile noise
sources. Mitigation for mobile noise impacts, where identified as
significant, shall consider facility siting and truck routes such that
project-related truck traffic utilizes existing established truck routes.
Mitigation shall be required if noise levels exceed 65 dBA as
identified in Section 30-182 of the City's Municipal Code.
This noise and vibration impact analysis calculates the potential impacts and incorporates Mitigation
Measures 4.7-1a and 4.7-1b related to construction noise impacts. Additionally, this noise and
vibration impact analysis provides an operations assessment, as required by Mitigation Measures
4.7-2a and 4.7-3b. Mitigation Measure 4.7-3a is not applicable to the proposed project due to the
distance to surrounding residential land uses and distance from the 65 A-weighted decibel (dBA)
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contour of the residential overlay zone and the MetroLink
and Union Pacific Railroad tracks within Fontana.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 7
NOISE AND VIBRATION FUNDAMENTALS
CHARACTERISTICS OF SOUND
Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce
physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation,
and sleep.
To the human ear, sound has two significant characteristics: pitch and loudness. Pitch is generally an
annoyance, while loudness can affect the ability to hear. Pitch is the number of complete vibrations,
or cycles per second, of a sound wave, which results in the tone’s range from high to low. Loudness
is the strength of a sound, and it describes a noisy or quiet environment; it is measured by the
amplitude of the sound wave. Loudness is determined by the intensity of the sound waves
combined with the reception characteristics of the human ear. Sound intensity is the average rate of
sound energy transmitted through a unit area perpendicular to the direction in which the sound
waves are traveling. This characteristic of sound can be precisely measured with instruments. The
analysis of a project defines the noise environment of the project area in terms of sound intensity
and its effect on adjacent sensitive land uses.
MEASUREMENT OF SOUND
Sound intensity is measured with the A-weighted decibel (dBA) scale to correct for the relative
frequency response of the human ear. That is, an A-weighted noise level de-emphasizes low and
very high frequencies of sound, similar to the human ear’s de-emphasis of these frequencies.
Decibels (dB), unlike the linear scale (e.g., inches or pounds), are measured on a logarithmic scale
representing points on a sharply rising curve.
For example, 10 dB is 10 times more intense than 0 dB, 20 dB is 100 times more intense than 0 dB,
and 30 dB is 1,000 times more intense than 0 dB. Thirty decibels (30 dB) represents 1,000 times as
much acoustic energy as 0 dB. The decibel scale increases as the square of the change, representing
the sound pressure energy. A sound as soft as human breathing is about 10 times greater than 0 dB.
The decibel system of measuring sound gives a rough connection between the physical intensity of
sound and its perceived loudness to the human ear. A 10 dB increase in sound level is perceived by
the human ear as only a doubling of the sound’s loudness. Ambient sounds generally range from
30 dB (very quiet) to 100 dB (very loud).
Sound levels are generated from a source, and their decibel level decreases as the distance from
that source increases. Sound levels dissipate exponentially with distance from their noise sources.
For a single point source, sound levels decrease approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance
from the source. This drop-off rate is appropriate for noise generated by stationary equipment.
If noise is produced by a line source (e.g., highway traffic or railroad operations), the sound
decreases 3 dB for each doubling of distance in a hard site environment. Line source sound levels
decrease 4.5 dB for each doubling of distance in a relatively flat environment with absorptive
vegetation.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 8
There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient
noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. The equivalent continuous
sound level (Leq) is the total sound energy of time-varying noise over a sample period. However, the
predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the Leq and
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) or the day-night average noise level (Ldn) based on
A-weighted decibels. CNEL is the time-weighted average noise over a 24-hour period, with a
5 dBA weighting factor applied to the hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.
(defined as relaxation hours) and a 10 dBA weighting factor applied to noises occurring from
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping hours). Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale but without the
adjustment for events occurring during the relaxation. CNEL and Ldn are within 1 dBA of each other
and are normally interchangeable. The City uses the CNEL noise scale for long-term traffic noise
impact assessment.
Other noise rating scales of importance when assessing the annoyance factor include the maximum
instantaneous noise level (Lmax), which is the highest sound level that occurs during a stated time
period. The noise environments discussed in this analysis for short-term noise impacts are specified
in terms of maximum levels denoted by Lmax, which reflects peak operating conditions and addresses
the annoying aspects of intermittent noise. It is often used together with another noise scale, or
noise standards in terms of percentile noise levels, in noise ordinances for enforcement purposes.
For example, the L10 noise level represents the noise level exceeded 10 percent of the time during a
stated period. The L50 noise level represents the median noise level. Half the time the noise level
exceeds this level, and half the time it is less than this level. The L90 noise level represents the noise
level exceeded 90 percent of the time and is considered the background noise level during a
monitoring period. For a relatively constant noise source, the Leq and L50 are approximately the
same.
Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The first category includes audible impacts,
which are increases in noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally
refer to a change of 3 dB or greater because this level has been found to be barely perceptible in
exterior environments. The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change in the noise
level between 1 dB and 3 dB. This range of noise levels has been found to be noticeable only in
laboratory environments. The last category includes changes in noise levels of less than 1 dB, which
are inaudible to the human ear. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels
are considered potentially significant.
Physiological Effects of Noise
Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to sound levels higher than
85 dBA. Exposure to high sound levels affects the entire system, with prolonged sound exposure in
excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby affecting blood pressure and functions of the
heart and the nervous system. In comparison, extended periods of sound exposure above
90 dBA would result in permanent cell damage. When the sound level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling
sensation occurs in the human ear, even with short-term exposure. This level of sound is called the
threshold of feeling. As the sound reaches 140 dBA, the tickling sensation is replaced by a feeling of
pain in the ear (i.e., the threshold of pain). A sound level of 160–165 dBA will result in dizziness or a
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 9
loss of equilibrium. The ambient or background noise problem is widespread and generally more
concentrated in urban areas than in outlying, less developed areas.
Table B lists definitions of acoustical terms, and Table C shows common sound levels and their
sources.
Table B: Definitions of Acoustical Terms
Term Definitions
Decibel, dB A unit of sound measurement that denotes the ratio between two quantities that are
proportional to power; the number of decibels is 10 times the logarithm (to the base 10) of
this ratio.
Frequency, Hz Of a function periodic in time, the number of times that the quantity repeats itself in 1
second (i.e., the number of cycles per second).
A-Weighted Sound
Level, dBA
The sound level obtained by use of A-weighting. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the
very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the
frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise.
(All sound levels in this report are A-weighted unless reported otherwise.)
L01, L10, L50, L90 The fast A-weighted noise levels that are equaled or exceeded by a fluctuating sound level
1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of a stated time period, respectively.
Equivalent Continuous
Noise Level, Leq
The level of a steady sound that, in a stated time period and at a stated location, has the
same A-weighted sound energy as the time-varying sound.
Community Noise
Equivalent Level, CNEL
The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the
addition of 5 dBA to sound levels occurring in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and
after the addition of 10 dBA to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and
7:00 a.m.
Day/Night Noise Level,
Ldn
The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the
addition of 10 dBA to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted sound levels measured on a sound level meter,
during a designated time interval, using fast time averaging.
Ambient Noise Level The all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment at a specified time. Usually a
composite of sound from many sources from many directions, near and far; no particular
sound is dominant.
Intrusive The noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The
relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, time of
occurrence, and tonal or informational content, as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.
Source 1: Technical Noise Supplement (Caltrans 2013)
Source 2: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018).
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 10
Table C: Common Sound Levels and Their Noise Sources
Noise Source A-Weighted Sound
Level in Decibels Noise Environments Subjective
Evaluations
Near Jet Engine 140 Deafening 128 times as loud
Civil Defense Siren 130 Threshold of Pain 64 times as loud
Hard Rock Band 120 Threshold of Feeling 32 times as loud
Accelerating Motorcycle at a Few Feet Away 110 Very Loud 16 times as loud
Pile Driver; Noisy Urban Street/
Heavy City Traffic 100 Very Loud 8 times as loud
Ambulance Siren; Food Blender 95 Very Loud —
Garbage Disposal 90 Very Loud 4 times as loud
Freight Cars; Living Room Music 85 Loud —
Pneumatic Drill; Vacuum Cleaner 80 Loud 2 times as loud
Busy Restaurant 75 Moderately Loud —
Near Freeway Auto Traffic 70 Moderately Loud Reference level
Average Office 60 Quiet One-half as loud
Suburban Street 55 Quiet —
Light Traffic; Soft Radio Music in Apartment 50 Quiet One-quarter as loud
Large Transformer 45 Quiet —
Average Residence without Stereo Playing 40 Faint One-eighth as loud
Soft Whisper 30 Faint —
Rustling Leaves 20 Very Faint —
Human Breathing 10 Very Faint Threshold of Hearing
— 0 Very Faint —
Source: Compiled by LSA (2022).
FUNDAMENTALS OF VIBRATION
Vibration refers to ground-borne noise and perceptible motion. Ground-borne vibration is almost
exclusively a concern inside buildings and is rarely perceived as a problem outdoors, where the
motion may not be discernible, but without the effects associated with the shaking of a building
there is less adverse reaction. Vibration energy propagates from a source through intervening soil
and rock layers to the foundations of nearby buildings. The vibration then propagates from the
foundation throughout the remainder of the structure. Building vibration may be perceived by
occupants as the motion of building surfaces, the rattling of items sitting on shelves or hanging on
walls, or a low-frequency rumbling noise. The rumbling noise is caused by the vibration of walls,
floors, and ceilings that radiate sound waves. Annoyance from vibration often occurs when the
vibration exceeds the threshold of perception by 10 dB or less. This is an order of magnitude below
the damage threshold for normal buildings.
Typical sources of ground-borne vibration are construction activities (e.g., blasting, pile-driving, and
operating heavy-duty earthmoving equipment), steel-wheeled trains, and occasional traffic on rough
roads. Problems with both ground-borne vibration and noise from these sources are usually
localized to areas within approximately 100 ft from the vibration source, although there are
examples of ground-borne vibration causing interference out to distances greater than 200 ft
(Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2018). When roadways are smooth, vibration from traffic,
even heavy trucks, is rarely perceptible. It is assumed for most projects that the roadway surface will
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 11
be smooth enough that ground-borne vibration from street traffic will not exceed the impact
criteria; however, construction of the project could result in ground-borne vibration that may be
perceptible and annoying.
Ground-borne noise is not likely to be a problem because noise arriving via the normal airborne path
will usually be greater than ground-borne noise.
Ground-borne vibration has the potential to disturb people and damage buildings. Although it is
very rare for train-induced ground-borne vibration to cause even cosmetic building damage, it is not
uncommon for construction processes such as blasting and pile-driving to cause vibration of
sufficient amplitudes to damage nearby buildings (FTA 2018). Ground-borne vibration is usually
measured in terms of vibration velocity, either the root-mean-square (RMS) velocity or peak particle
velocity (PPV). The RMS is best for characterizing human response to building vibration, and PPV is
used to characterize the potential for damage. Decibel notation acts to compress the range of
numbers required to describe vibration. Vibration velocity level in decibels is defined as
Lv = 20 log10 [V/Vref]
where “Lv” is the vibration velocity in decibels (VdB), “V” is the RMS velocity amplitude, and “Vref” is
the reference velocity amplitude, or 1 x 10-6 inches/second (in/sec) used in the United States.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 12
REGULATORY SETTING
APPLICABLE NOISE STANDARDS
The applicable noise standards governing the project site include the criteria in the City’s Noise
Element of the General Plan (Noise Element) and the City of Fontana Municipal Code.
City of Fontana
Noise Element of the General Plan
The Noise Element provides the City’s goals and policies related to noise, including the land use
compatibility guidelines for community exterior noise environments. The City has identified the
following policies in the Noise 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.
City of Fontana Municipal Code
Operational Noise Standards. The City’s noise control guidelines for determining and mitigating
non-transportation or stationary noise source impacts from operations in neighboring residential
areas are found in Section 30-543. 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 in Table D. Construction
Noise Standards. The City has set restrictions to control noise impacts associated with the
construction of the proposed project. According to Section 18-63(b)(7), 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.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 13
Table D: Operational Noise Standards
Noise Level Descriptor Daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) Nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent Level (Leq), dBA 70 65
Source: City of Fontana (2024).
Notes:
a These standards apply to new or existing noise-sensitive land uses affected by new or existing non-transportation noise sources,
as determined at the outdoor activity area of the receiving land use. However, these noise level standards do not apply to
residential units established in conjunction with industrial or commercial uses (e.g., caretaker dwellings).
b Each of the noise levels specified above should be lowered by 5 dB for simple-tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or
music, or for recurring impulsive noises. Such noises are generally considered by residents to be particularly annoying and are a
primary source of noise complaints. These noise level standards do not apply to residential units established in conjunction with
industrial or commercial uses (e.g., caretaker dwellings).
c No standards have been included for interior noise levels. Standard construction practices that comply with the exterior noise
levels identified in this table generally result in acceptable interior noise levels.
d The City of Fontana may impose noise level standards that are more or less restrictive than those specified above based on
determination of existing low or high ambient noise levels. If the existing ambient noise level exceeds the standards listed in this
table, then the noise level standards shall be increased at 3 dB increments to encompass the ambient environment. Noise level
standards incorporating adjustments for existing ambient noise levels shall not exceed a maximum of 70 dBA Leq.
dBA = A-weighted decibels
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
State of California Green Building Standards Code
The State of California’s Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code) contains mandatory
measures for non-residential building construction in Section 5.507 on Environmental Comfort.
These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for controlling interior noise
levels resulting from exterior noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be
prepared when non-residential structures are developed in areas where the exterior noise levels
exceed 65 dBA CNEL, such as within a noise contour of an airport, freeway, railroad, and other noise
source. If the development falls within an airport or freeway 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, buildings
shall be constructed to provide an interior noise level environment attributable to exterior sources
that does not exceed an hourly equivalent level of 50 dBA Leq in occupied areas during any hour of
operation.
Federal Transit Administration
Although the City does not have daytime construction noise level limits for activities that occur with
the specified hours of Section 18-63(b)(7), to determine potential California Environmental Quality
Act noise impacts, construction noise was assessed using criteria from the Transit Noise and
Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018) (FTA Manual). Table E shows the FTA’s Detailed
Assessment Construction Noise Criteria based on the composite noise levels per construction phase.
Table E: Detailed Assessment Daytime Construction Noise Criteria
Land Use Daytime 1-hour Leq (dBA)
Residential 80
Commercial 85
Industrial 90
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018).
dBA = A-weighted decibels
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 14
APPLICABLE VIBRATION STANDARDS
Federal Transit Administration
Vibration standards included in the FTA Manual are used in this analysis for ground-borne vibration
impacts on human annoyance. The criteria for environmental impact from ground-borne vibration
and noise are based on the maximum levels for a single event. Table F provides the criteria for
assessing the potential for interference or annoyance from vibration levels in a building.
Table F: Interpretation of Vibration Criteria for Detailed Analysis
Land Use Max Lv
(VdB)1 Description of Use
Workshop 90 Vibration that is distinctly felt. Appropriate for workshops and
similar areas not as sensitive to vibration.
Office 84 Vibration that can be felt. Appropriate for offices and similar areas
not as sensitive to vibration.
Residential Day 78 Vibration that is barely felt. Adequate for computer equipment and
low-power optical microscopes (up to 20×).
Residential Night and
Operating Rooms 72
Vibration is not felt, but ground-borne noise may be audible inside
quiet rooms. Suitable for medium-power microscopes (100×) and
other equipment of low sensitivity.
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018).
1 As measured in 1/3-octave bands of frequency over the frequency range 8 to 80 hertz.
FTA = Federal Transit Administration Max = maximum
LV = velocity in decibels VdB = vibration velocity decibels
Table G lists the potential vibration building damage criteria associated with construction activities,
as suggested in the FTA Manual. FTA guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 0.5 in/sec in PPV
is considered safe for buildings consisting of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster), and
would not result in any construction vibration damage. For non-engineered timber and masonry
buildings, the construction building vibration damage criterion is 0.2 in/sec in PPV.
Table G: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria
Building Category PPV (in/sec)
Reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.50
Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.30
Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.20
Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018).
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
in/sec = inch/inches per second
PPV = peak particle velocity
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 15
OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT
The primary existing noise sources in the project area are traffic on Jurupa Avenue and other local
roadways and industrial uses in the vicinity of the project site.
AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS
Long-Term Noise Measurements
To assess existing noise levels, LSA conducted two long-term noise measurements in the vicinity of
the project site. The long-term (24-hour) noise level measurements were conducted on December 4,
2024, through December 5, 2024, using two Larson Davis Spark 706RC dosimeters. Table H provides
a summary of the measured hourly noise levels and calculated CNEL level from the long-term noise
level measurements. As shown in Table H, the calculated CNEL levels range from 62.5 dBA CNEL to
76.4 dBA CNEL. Hourly noise levels at surrounding sensitive uses are as low as 51.8 dBA Leq during
nighttime hours and 57.3 dBA Leq during daytime hours. Noise measurement sheets are provided in
Appendix A. Figure 3 shows the long-term monitoring locations.
Table H: Long-Term 24-Hour Ambient Noise Monitoring Results
Location
Daytime
Noise Levels1
(dBA Leq)
Evening
Noise Levels2
(dBA Leq)
Nighttime
Noise Levels3
(dBA Leq)
Daily Noise
Levels
(dBA CNEL)
LT-1
Near 15008 Astor Lane, just north of
property wall, on a tree. Approximately
68 ft away from the Jurupa Avenue
centerline.
72.2-75.4 70.1-71.7 65.1-71.9 76.4
LT-2
North end of Redwood Court, on a light
pole. Approximately 100 ft from the
Jurupa Avenue centerline.
57.3-59.4 57.2-57.3 51.8-58.0 62.5
Source: Compiled by LSA (2025).
Note: Noise measurements were conducted from December 4 to December 5, 2024, starting at 12:00 a.m.
1 Daytime Noise Levels = noise levels during the hours from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
2 Evening Noise Levels = noise levels during the hours from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.
3 Nighttime Noise Levels = noise levels during the hours from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A-weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
EXISTING AIRCRAFT NOISE
Aircraft flyovers may be audible on the project site due to aircraft activity in the vicinity. The nearest
airports to the project are Flabob Airport, Ontario International Airport, and Riverside Municipal
Airport, located approximately 5.5 miles southeast, 6.0 miles west, and 6.6 miles south of the
project, respectively. The project site is well outside the 55 dBA CNEL noise contours of Flabob
Airport and Riverside Municipal Airport based on the Riverside County Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan (RCALUC 2004). The project site is within the 60–65 dBA CNEL Noise Impact Zone
of the Ontario International Airport based on the Compatibility Policy Map: Noise Impact Zones in
the Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ONT ALUCP 2018). Because the
project site includes office and warehouse uses and is within the 60–65 dBA CNEL noise contour, no
further analysis associated with aircraft noise impacts is necessary.
SOURCE: Google Earth 2025
FEET
3801900
FIGURE 3
Noise Monitoring Locations
I:\E\ESL2201.97\G\Noise_Locs.ai (2/3/2025)
14970 Jurupa Avenue Project
Li
v
e
O
a
k
A
v
e
Jurupa Ave
He
m
l
o
c
k
A
v
e
Li
v
e
O
a
k
A
v
e
Re
d
w
o
o
d
A
v
e
Jurupa Ave
He
m
l
o
c
k
A
v
e
Be
e
c
h
A
v
e
Re
d
w
o
o
d
A
v
e
Be
e
c
h
A
v
e
LEGEND
Project Site Boundary
Long-term Noise Monitoring LocationLT-1LT-1
LT-2LT-2 LT-1LT-1
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 17
EXISTING TRAFFIC NOISE
The United States Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model
(FHWA RD-77-108) was used to evaluate traffic-related noise conditions along roadway segments in
the project vicinity. This model requires various parameters, including traffic volumes, vehicle mix,
vehicle speed, and roadway geometry, to compute typical equivalent noise levels during daytime,
evening, and nighttime hours. The resulting noise levels are weighted and summed over 24-hour
periods to determine the CNEL values. The existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were
obtained from the Traffic Impact Analysis for the project (EPD 2025). The standard vehicle mix for
Southern California roadways was used for roadways in the project vicinity. Table I lists the existing
traffic noise levels on roadways in the project vicinity. These noise levels represent the worst-case
scenario, which assumes that no shielding is provided between traffic and the location where the
noise contours are drawn. Table I indicates that the existing traffic noise levels in the project vicinity
range from 55.6 to 70.3 dBA CNEL. The specific assumptions used in developing these noise levels
and the model printouts are provided in Appendix B.
Table I: Existing Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment ADT
Centerline
to 70 CNEL
(ft)
Centerline
to 65 CNEL
(ft)
Centerline
to 60 CNEL
(ft)
CNEL (dBA) 50 ft
from Centerline of
Outermost Lane
Cherry Avenue between I-10 Ramps 31,190 101 287 897 70.3
Cherry Avenue I-10 EB Ramps to Slover
Avenue
31,080 102 287 894 70.1
Live Oak Avenue between Slover Avenue
and Project Driveway 1
3,250 < 50 < 50 70 61.0
Live Oak Avenue between Project
Driveways 1 and 2
4,380 < 50 < 50 95 62.3
Live Oak Avenue between Project
Driveway 2 and Jurupa Avenue
3,415 < 50 < 50 74 61.2
Hemlock Avenue between Slover Avenue
and Project Driveway 3
1,505 < 50 < 50 < 50 56.2
Hemlock Avenue between Project
Driveways 3 and 4
1,310 < 50 < 50 < 50 55.6
Hemlock Avenue between Project
Driveway 4 and Jurupa Avenue
1,335 < 50 < 50 < 50 55.7
Slover Avenue between Cherry Avenue
and Live Oak Avenue
16,010 < 50 148 462 68.2
Slover Avenue between Live Oak Avenue
and Hemlock Avenue
17,328 < 50 160 500 68.5
Slover Avenue east of Hemlock Avenue 17,540 56 162 506 68.6
Jurupa Avenue west of Live Oak Avenue 19,280 68 180 556 68.4
Jurupa Avenue between Live Oak Avenue
and Hemlock Avenue
25,395 83 234 731 69.6
Jurupa Avenue east of Hemlock Avenue 24,620 81 227 709 69.4
Source: Compiled by LSA (2025).
Note: Traffic noise within 50 ft of the roadway centerline should be evaluated with site-specific information.
ADT = average daily traffic
CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A-weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 18
PROJECT IMPACTS
SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS
Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during the construction of the proposed project.
First, construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and materials to
the site for the proposed project would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading
to the site. Although there would be a relatively high single-event noise-exposure potential causing
intermittent noise nuisance (passing trucks at 50 ft would generate up to 84 dBA Lmax), the effect on
longer-term ambient noise levels would be small compared to existing daily traffic volumes on
Jurupa Avenue. The results of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) for the
proposed project indicate during the demolition phase the acoustical equivalent traffic volume
would be 12,046 passenger car equivalent vehicles. Based on the Traffic Impact Analysis for the
project (EPD 2025), the traffic volume on Jurupa Avenue, assumed to be the main construction
access, is 18,865 vehicles. When comparing 12,046 to the existing ADT, the increase is 2.1 dBA. A
noise level increase of less than 3 dBA would not be perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor
environment. Therefore, short-term, construction-related impacts associated with worker commute
and equipment transport to the project site would be less than significant.
The second type of short-term noise impact is related to noise generated during construction, which
includes demolition of the existing structures and other site improvements, site preparation,
grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating on the project site. Construction is
completed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own
noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise
generated on the site and, therefore, the noise levels surrounding the site as construction
progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the
dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction-related noise ranges to be
categorized by work phase. Table J lists typical construction equipment noise levels recommended
for noise impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 ft between the equipment and a noise
receptor, taken from the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA 2006).
In addition to the reference maximum noise level, the usage factor provided in Table J is used to
calculate the hourly noise level impact for each piece of equipment based on the following
equation:
−+=50log20.).log(10..)(DFULEequipLeq where: Leq (equip) = Leq at a receiver resulting from the operation of a single
piece of equipment over a specified time period.
E.L. = noise emission level of the particular piece of equipment at
a reference distance of 50 ft.
U.F. = usage factor that accounts for the fraction of time that the
equipment is in use over the specified period of time.
D = distance from the receiver to the piece of equipment.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 19
Table J: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Equipment Description Acoustical Usage Factor (%)1 Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) at 50 Feet2
Auger Drill Rig 20 84
Backhoes 40 80
Compactor (ground) 20 80
Compressor 40 80
Cranes 16 85
Dozers 40 85
Dump Trucks 40 84
Excavators 40 85
Flat Bed Trucks 40 84
Forklift 20 85
Front-end Loaders 40 80
Graders 40 85
Impact Pile Drivers 20 95
Jackhammers 20 85
Paver 50 77
Pickup Truck 40 55
Pneumatic Tools 50 85
Pumps 50 77
Rock Drills 20 85
Rollers 20 85
Scrapers 40 85
Tractors 40 84
Trencher 50 80
Welder 40 73
Source: FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide, Table 1 (FHWA 2006).
Note: Noise levels reported in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number.
1 Usage factor is the percentage of time during a construction noise operation that a piece of construction equipment is operating at
full power.
2 Maximum noise levels were developed based on Specification 721.560 from the Central Artery/Tunnel program to be consistent with
the City of Boston’s Noise Code for the “Big Dig” project.
FHWA = Federal Highway Administration
Lmax = maximum instantaneous sound level
Each piece of construction equipment operates as an individual point source. Using the following
equation, a composite noise level can be calculated when multiple sources of noise operate
simultaneously: 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝐿𝐿)=10 ∗log10 ��10𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿10𝐿𝐿
1 �
Using the equations from the methodology above, the reference information in Table J, and the
construction equipment list provided, the composite noise level of each construction phase was
calculated. The project construction composite noise levels at a distance of 50 ft would range from
74 dBA Leq to 88 dBA Leq, with the highest noise levels occurring during the site preparation and
grading phases.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 20
Once composite noise levels are calculated, reference noise levels can then be adjusted for distance
using the following equation: 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 (𝑎𝑎𝑐𝑐 𝑑𝑑𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑎𝑎𝑑𝑑𝑐𝑐𝐿𝐿 𝑋𝑋)=𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 (𝑎𝑎𝑐𝑐 50 𝑓𝑓𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝑐𝑐)−20 ∗lo g10 �𝑋𝑋50�
In general, this equation shows that doubling the distance would decrease noise levels by 6 dBA
while halving the distance would increase noise levels by 6 dBA.
Table K shows the nearest sensitive uses to the project site, their distance from the center of
construction activities, and composite noise levels expected during construction. These noise level
projections do not consider intervening topography or barriers. Construction equipment calculations
are provided in Appendix C
Table K: Potential Construction Noise Impacts at Nearest Receptor
Receptor (Location) Composite Noise Level (dBA Leq)
at 50 ft1 Distance (ft) Composite Noise
Level (dBA Leq)
Residential (South)
88
500 68
Commercial (North) 600 66
Industrial (West) 760 64
Industrial (East) 840 63
Source: Compiled by LSA (2025).
1 The composite construction noise level represents the site preparation and grading phases which are expected to result in the
greatest noise level as compared to other phases.
2 The reference distance is associated with the average condition, identified by the distance from the center of construction activities
to surrounding uses
dBA Leq = average A-weighted hourly noise level
ft = foot/feet
While construction noise will vary, it is expected that composite noise levels during construction at
the nearest sensitive residential uses to the south would approach 68 dBA Leq and noise levels at the
nearest commercial uses to the north would approach 66 dBA Leq during daytime hours. These
predicted noise levels would only occur when all construction equipment is operating
simultaneously and, therefore, these levels are assumed to be rather conservative in nature. While
construction-related short-term noise levels have the potential to be higher than existing ambient
noise levels in the project area under existing conditions, the noise impacts would no longer occur
once project construction is completed.
As stated above, the City’s Noise Ordinance regulates noise impacts associated with construction
activities. The proposed project would comply with the construction hours specified in the City’s
Noise Ordinance, which states that construction activities are allowed between the hours of 7:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays.
As it relates to off-site uses, construction-related noise impacts would remain below the 80 dBA Leq,
85 dBA Leq, and 90 dBA Leq 1-hour construction noise level criteria for daytime construction noise
level criteria as established by the FTA for residential, commercial, and industrial land uses,
respectively; therefore, the impact would be considered less than significant.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 21
SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION IMPACTS
This construction vibration impact analysis discusses the level of human annoyance using vibration
levels in RMS (VdB) and assesses the potential for building damages using vibration levels in PPV
(in/sec). This is because vibration levels calculated in RMS are best for characterizing human
response to building vibration, while vibration level in PPV is best for characterizing potential for
damage.
Table L shows the PPV and VdB values at 25 ft from the construction vibration source. As shown in
Table L, bulldozers, and other heavy-tracked construction equipment (expected to be used for this
project) generate approximately 0.089 PPV in/sec or 87 VdB of ground-borne vibration when
measured at 25 ft, based on the FTA Manual. The distance to the nearest buildings for vibration
impact analysis is measured between the nearest off-site buildings and the project construction
boundary (assuming the construction equipment would be used at or near the project setback line).
Table L: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment
Equipment Reference PPV/LV at 25 ft
PPV (in/sec) LV (VdB)1
Pile Driver (Impact), Typical 0.644 104
Pile Driver (Sonic), Typical 0.170 93
Vibratory Roller 0.210 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large Bulldozer2 0.089 87
Caisson Drilling 0.089 87
Loaded Trucks2 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small Bulldozer 0.003 58
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018).
1 RMS vibration velocity in decibels (VdB) is 1 µin/sec.
2 Equipment shown in bold is expected to be used on site.
µin/sec = microinches per second
ft = foot/feet
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
in/sec = inch/inches per second
LV = velocity in decibels
PPV = peak particle velocity
RMS = root-mean-square
VdB = vibration velocity decibels
The formulae for vibration transmission are provided below, and Tables M and N below provide a
summary of off-site construction vibration levels.
LvdB (D) = LvdB (25 feet) – 30 Log (D/25)
PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 22
Table M: Potential Construction Vibration Annoyance Impacts at
Nearest Receptor
Receptor (Location)
Reference
Vibration Level
(VdB) at 25 ft1
Distance (ft) 2 Vibration Level
(VdB)
Residential (South)
87
500 48
Commercial (North) 600 46
Industrial (West) 760 43
Industrial (East) 840 41
Source: Compiled by LSA (2025).
1 The reference vibration level is associated with a large bulldozer, which is expected to be
representative of the heavy equipment used during construction.
2 The reference distance is associated with the average condition, identified by the distance from the
center of construction activities to surrounding uses.
ft = foot/feet
VdB = vibration velocity decibels
Table N: Potential Construction Vibration Damage Impacts at
Nearest Receptor
Receptor (Location)
Reference
Vibration Level
(PPV) at 25 ft1
Distance (ft)2 Vibration Level
(PPV)
Residential (South)
0.089
145 0.006
Commercial (North) 175 0.005
Industrial (West) 100 0.011
Industrial (East) 190 0.004
Source: Compiled by LSA (2025).
1 The reference vibration level is associated with a large bulldozer, which is expected to be
representative of the heavy equipment used during construction.
2 The reference distance is associated with the peak condition, identified by the distance from the
perimeter of construction activities to surrounding structures.
ft = foot/feet
PPV = peak particle velocity
Based on the information provided in Table M, vibration levels are expected to approach 48 VdB at
the closest residence to the south and 46 VdB at the closest commercial use to the north and would
not exceed the annoyance thresholds of 84 VdB for office type uses and 78 VdB for daytime
residential uses as shown in Table F, above.
Based on the information provided in Table N, vibration levels are expected to approach 0.011
in/sec PPV at the nearest surrounding structures to the west and would not exceed the FTA
threshold of 0.2 in/sec PPV for building damage potential as shown in Table G. Vibration levels at all
other buildings would be lower. Therefore, construction would not result in any vibration damage,
and impacts would be less than significant.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 23
Because construction activities are regulated by the City’s Municipal Code, which states that
construction activities are allowed between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, vibration impacts would not occur during the more
sensitive nighttime hours.
LONG-TERM OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS
The FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used to evaluate traffic-
related noise conditions along street segments in the project vicinity. This model requires various
parameters, including traffic volumes, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry, to
compute typical equivalent noise levels during daytime, evening, and nighttime hours. The resulting
noise levels are weighted and summed over 24-hour periods to determine the CNEL values. The
Existing (2024) and Opening Year (2027) Without and With Project ADT volumes were obtained from
the Traffic Impact Analysis for the project (EPD 2025). The standard vehicle mix for Southern
California roadways was used for roadways in the project vicinity. Tables O and P list the traffic noise
levels for the Existing (2024) and Opening Year (2027) Without and With Project scenarios,
respectively. These noise levels represent the worst-case scenario, which assumes that no shielding
is provided between the traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn. The specific
assumptions used in developing these noise levels and the model printouts are provided in
Appendix B.
The results of the calculations show that an increase of up to 0.5 dBA CNEL is expected along the
road segments in the vicinity of the project. A noise level increase of less than 3 dBA would not be
perceptible to the human ear; therefore, the traffic noise increase in the vicinity of the project site
resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant.
LONG-TERM TRAFFIC-RELATED VIBRATION IMPACTS
The proposed project would not generate vibration levels related to on-site operations. In addition,
vibration levels generated from project-related traffic on the adjacent roadways are unusual for on-
road vehicles because the rubber tires and suspension systems of on-road vehicles provide vibration
isolation. Based on a reference vibration level of 0.076 in/sec PPV, structures greater than 20 ft from
the roadways that contain project trips would experience vibration levels below the most
conservative standard of 0.12 in/sec PPV; therefore, vibration levels generated from project-related
traffic on the adjacent roadways would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are
required.
LONG-TERM OFF-SITE STATIONARY NOISE IMPACTS
Adjacent off-site land uses would be potentially exposed to stationary-source noise impacts from
the proposed on-site heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, cold storage fan
units, trash bin emptying activities, and truck deliveries and loading and unloading activities. To
provide a conservative analysis, it is assumed that operations would occur equally during all hours
of the day and that half of the loading docks would be active at all times. Additionally, it is
assumed that within any given hour, 12 heavy trucks, including three-axle and four-axle trucks
during the peak period, would maneuver to park near or back into one of the proposed loading
docks.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 24
Table O: Existing (2024) Traffic Noise Levels Without and With Project
Roadway Segment
Without Project Traffic Conditions With Project Traffic Conditions
ADT
Centerline
to 70 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to 65 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to 60 dBA
CNEL (ft)
CNEL (dBA)
50 ft from
Centerline of
Outermost
Lane
ADT
Centerline
to 70 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to 65 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to 60 dBA
CNEL (ft)
CNEL (dBA)
50 ft from
Centerline of
Outermost
Lane
Increase
from
Baseline
Conditions
Cherry Avenue between I-10 Ramps 31,190 101 287 897 70.3 31,520 102 290 907 70.3 0.0
Cherry Avenue I-10 EB Ramps to Slover
Avenue 31,080 102 287 894 70.1 31,780 104 293 914 70.2 0.1
Live Oak Avenue between Slover
Avenue and Project Driveway 1 3,250 < 50 < 50 70 61.0 3,670 < 50 < 50 79 61.5 0.5
Live Oak Avenue between Project
Driveways 1 and 2 4,380 < 50 < 50 95 62.3 4,530 < 50 < 50 98 62.4 0.1
Live Oak Avenue between Project
Driveway 2 and Jurupa Avenue 3,415 < 50 < 50 74 61.2 3,455 < 50 < 50 75 61.3 0.1
Hemlock Avenue between Slover
Avenue and Project Driveway 3 1,505 < 50 < 50 < 50 56.2 1,645 < 50 < 50 < 50 56.6 0.4
Hemlock Avenue between Project
Driveways 3 and 4 1,310 < 50 < 50 < 50 55.6 1,440 < 50 < 50 < 50 56.0 0.4
Hemlock Avenue between Project
Driveway 4 and Jurupa Avenue 1,335 < 50 < 50 < 50 55.7 1,405 < 50 < 50 < 50 55.9 0.2
Slover Avenue between Cherry Avenue
and Live Oak Avenue 16,010 < 50 148 462 68.2 16,740 < 50 154 483 68.4 0.2
Slover Avenue between Live Oak
Avenue and Hemlock Avenue 17,328 < 50 160 500 68.5 17,228 < 50 159 497 68.5 0.0
Slover Avenue east of Hemlock Avenue 17,540 56 162 506 68.6 17,540 56 162 506 68.6 0.0
Jurupa Avenue west of Live Oak Avenue 19,280 68 180 556 68.4 19,320 68 180 557 68.4 0.0
Jurupa Avenue between Live Oak
Avenue and Hemlock Avenue 25,395 83 234 731 69.6 25,395 83 234 731 69.6 0.0
Jurupa Avenue east of Hemlock Avenue 24,620 81 227 709 69.4 24,650 81 228 710 69.4 0.0
Source: Compiled by LSA (2025).
ADT = average daily traffic
CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A-weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 25
Table P: Opening Year (2027) Traffic Noise Levels Without and With Project
Roadway Segment
Without Project Traffic Conditions With Project Traffic Conditions
ADT
Centerline
to 70 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to 65 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to 60 dBA
CNEL (ft)
CNEL (dBA)
50 ft from
Centerline of
Outermost
Lane
ADT
Centerline
to 70 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to 65 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to 60 dBA
CNEL (ft)
CNEL (dBA)
50 ft from
Centerline of
Outermost
Lane
Increase
from
Baseline
Conditions
Cherry Avenue between I-10 Ramps 33,080 106 304 951 70.5 33,410 106 307 961 70.6 0.1
Cherry Avenue I-10 EB Ramps to Slover
Avenue
32,975 107 304 948 70.4 33,675 109 310 968 70.5 0.1
Live Oak Avenue between Slover
Avenue and Project Driveway 1
3,475 < 50 < 50 75 61.3 3,895 < 50 < 50 84 61.8 0.5
Live Oak Avenue between Project
Driveways 1 and 2
4,670 < 50 < 50 101 62.6 4,820 < 50 < 50 104 62.7 0.1
Live Oak Avenue between Project
Driveway 2 and Jurupa Avenue
3,650 < 50 < 50 79 61.5 3,690 < 50 < 50 80 61.6 0.1
Hemlock Avenue between Slover
Avenue and Project Driveway 3
1,610 < 50 < 50 < 50 56.5 1,750 < 50 < 50 < 50 56.9 0.4
Hemlock Avenue between Project
Driveways 3 and 4
1,400 < 50 < 50 < 50 55.9 1,530 < 50 < 50 < 50 56.3 0.4
Hemlock Avenue between Project
Driveway 4 and Jurupa Avenue
1,430 < 50 < 50 < 50 56.0 1,500 < 50 < 50 < 50 56.2 0.2
Slover Avenue between Cherry Avenue
and Live Oak Avenue
17,000 < 50 157 490 68.5 17,730 56 163 511 68.6 0.1
Slover Avenue between Live Oak
Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
18,395 58 169 530 68.8 18,295 58 168 528 68.8 0.0
Slover Avenue east of Hemlock Avenue 18,620 59 171 537 68.8 18,620 59 171 537 68.8 0.0
Jurupa Avenue west of Live Oak Avenue 20,470 71 190 590 68.6 20,510 71 191 591 68.6 0.0
Jurupa Avenue between Live Oak
Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
26,940 87 248 775 69.8 26,940 87 248 775 69.8 0.0
Jurupa Avenue east of Hemlock Avenue 26,120 85 241 752 69.7 26,150 85 241 753 69.7 0.0
Source: Compiled by LSA (2025).
ADT = average daily traffic
CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A-weighted decibel
ft = foot/feet
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 26
To determine the future noise impacts from project operations to the noise sensitive uses, a 3-D
noise model, SoundPLAN, was used to incorporate the site topography as well as the shielding from
the proposed building on-site and the existing 8 ft wall at the northern boundary of the project site.
Appendix D presents a graphic representation of the operational noise impacts.
Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Equipment
The project would have various rooftop mechanical equipment, including HVAC units, atop the
proposed buildings. Based on the project site plan, the project is assumed to have 12 rooftop HVAC
units atop the proposed building and assumed to operate 24 hours per day. The HVAC equipment
could operate 24 hours per day and would generate a sound power level (Lw) of up to 87 dBA Lw or
72 dBA Leq at 5 ft, based on manufacturer data (Trane n.d.).
Trash Bin Emptying Activities
The project is estimated to have two trash dumpsters near the center of the project site between
the two proposed buildings. The trash emptying activities would take place for a period of less than
1 minute and would generate a sound power level of up to 118.6 dBA Lw or a sound pressure level
of 84 dBA Leq at 50 ft, based on reference information within SoundPLAN.
Cold Storage Fan Units
According to the Project Location and Description section, approximately 25 percent of the project
site would be cold storage. Noise levels generated by cold storage fan units would be similar to
noise readings from previously gathered reference noise level measurements, which generate a
noise level of 57.5 dBA Leq at 60 ft based on measurements taken by LSA (Operational Noise Impact
Analysis for Richmond Wholesale Meat Distribution Center [LSA 2016]).
Truck Arrival and Departure Activities
Noise levels generated by delivery trucks would be similar to noise readings from truck loading and
unloading activities, which generate a noise level of 75 dBA Leq at 20 ft based on measurements
taken by LSA (Operational Noise Impact Analysis for Richmond Wholesale Meat Distribution Center
[LSA 2016]). Shorter term noise levels that occur during the docking process taken by LSA were
measured to be 76.3 dBA L8 at 20 ft. Delivery trucks would arrive on site and maneuver their trailers
so that trailers would be parked within the loading docks. During this process, noise levels are
associated with the truck engine noise, air brakes, and back-up alarms while the truck is backing into
the dock. These noise levels would occur for a shorter period of time (less than 5 minutes). After a
truck enters the loading dock, the doors would be closed, and the remainder of the truck loading
activities would be enclosed and therefore much less perceptible. It is assumed that truck arrivals
and departure activities could occur at 12 spaces at for a period of less than 5 minutes each.
Truck Loading and Unloading Activities
Noise levels taken by LSA for delivery trucks being loaded and unloaded for a similar type of project
(Operational Noise Impact Analysis for Richmond Wholesale Meat Distribution Center [LSA 2016]),
generated a noise level of 75 dBA Leq at 20 ft. Noise levels generated by delivery trucks being loaded
and unloaded for the proposed project are also assumed to be 75 dBA Leq at 20 ft because they are
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 27
similar types of projects. Based on prior analysis experience, it is reasonable to assume that
unloading activities could occur at half of the total docks (30 docks) simultaneously for a period of
30 minutes in a given hour.
Cumulative Operations Noise Assessment
The results in Tables Q and R show that the noise levels at the closest sensitive uses (single-family
residences) to the south of the project site would experience noise level impacts that would not
exceed the residential use daytime and nighttime noise standard of 70 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Leq,
respectively. A graphic representation of the operational noise impacts is presented in Appendix D.
Therefore, the impact would be less than significant, and no noise reduction measures are required.
Table Q: Daytime Exterior Noise Level Impacts
Receptor Direction
Existing Quietest
Daytime Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
Project Generated
Noise Levels
(dBA Leq)
Potential
Operational Noise
Impact?1
Residence South 72.2 41.7 No
Source: Compiled by LSA.
1 A potential operational noise impact would occur if (1) the quietest daytime ambient hour is less than 70 dBA Leq and project noise
impacts are greater than 70 dBA Leq, OR (2) the quietest daytime ambient hour is greater than 70 dBA Leq and project noise impacts
are 3 dBA greater than the quietest daytime ambient hour.
dBA = A-weighted decibels
Leq = equivalent continuous noise level
Table R: Nighttime Exterior Noise Level Impacts
Receptor Direction
Existing Quietest
Nighttime Noise
Level (dBA Leq)
Project Generated
Noise Levels
(dBA Leq)
Potential
Operational Noise
Impact?1
Residence South 65.1 41.7 No
Source: Compiled by LSA.
1 A potential operational noise impact would occur if (1) the quietest nighttime ambient hour is less than 65 dBA Leq and project
noise impacts are greater than 65 dBA Leq, OR (2) the quietest nighttime ambient hour is greater than 65 dBA Leq and project noise
impacts are 3 dBA greater than the quietest nighttime ambient hour.
dBA = A-weighted decibels
Leq = equivalent continuous noise level
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx (02/06/25) 28
REFERENCES
City of Fontana. 2010. General Plan Noise Element. April.
_______. 2024. Municipal Code. June 20. Website: https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fontana
(accessed February 2025).
EPD Solutions, Inc. (EPD). 2025. Traffic Impact Analysis for the 14970 Jurupa Avenue Project.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s
Guide. January. Washington, D.C. Website: www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/
construction_noise/rcnm/rcnm.pdf (accessed December 2024).
Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.
Office of Planning and Environment. Report No. 0123. December.
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA). 2016. Operational Noise Impact Analysis for Richmond Wholesale Meat
Distribution Center. May.
Ontario International Airport Inter Agency Collaborative. 2011. Ontario International Airport Land
Use Compatibility Plan (ONT ALUCP). April 19, 2011.
Riverside Couty Airport Land Use Commission (RCALUC). 2004. Riverside County Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan. October 14.
State of California. 2020. 2019 California Green Building Standards Code.
Trane. n.d. Fan Performance - Product Specifications RT-PRC023AU-EN.
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx «02/06/25»
APPENDIX A
NOISE MONITORING DATA
Noise Measurement Survey – 24 HR
Project Number: ESL2201.97 Test Personnel: Corey Knips
Project Name: 14970 Jurupa Avenue Equipment: LD Spark 706RC (SN: 17814)
Site Number: LT-1 Date: 12/4/2024 Time: From 12:00 a.m. To 12:00 a.m.
Site Location: Near 15008 Astor Lane, just north of property wall, on a tree. Approximately
38 feet from the Jurupa Avenue centerline.
Primary Noise Sources: Traffic on Jurupa Avenue.
Comments: The property wall is approximately 5.5 feet high.
Photo:
Long-Term (24-Hour) Noise Level Measurement Results at LT-1
Start Time Date Noise Level (dBA)
Leq Lmax Lmin
12:00 AM 12/4/2024 67.0 91.3 49.6
1:00 AM 12/4/2024 65.1 84.7 48.0
2:00 AM 12/4/2024 65.4 84.0 48.3
3:00 AM 12/4/2024 67.5 88.4 48.7
4:00 AM 12/4/2024 68.2 89.5 51.8
5:00 AM 12/4/2024 70.6 92.6 55.8
6:00 AM 12/4/2024 71.9 93.6 56.3
7:00 AM 12/4/2024 72.9 86.4 55.1
8:00 AM 12/4/2024 72.9 91.2 47.8
9:00 AM 12/4/2024 72.2 90.2 48.0
10:00 AM 12/4/2024 72.4 93.7 44.9
11:00 AM 12/4/2024 72.3 84.7 49.5
12:00 PM 12/4/2024 73.1 89.2 53.2
1:00 PM 12/4/2024 73.9 93.8 51.2
2:00 PM 12/4/2024 74.8 96.8 50.8
3:00 PM 12/4/2024 74.9 94.9 53.7
4:00 PM 12/4/2024 75.4 94.0 55.5
5:00 PM 12/4/2024 74.7 92.4 51.7
6:00 PM 12/4/2024 73.6 90.6 52.3
7:00 PM 12/4/2024 71.7 91.5 51.4
8:00 PM 12/4/2024 71.7 96.5 51.0
9:00 PM 12/4/2024 70.1 85.5 50.3
10:00 PM 12/4/2024 68.2 84.0 50.4
11:00 PM 12/4/2024 68.3 90.1 52.0
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2024).
dBA = A-weighted decibel
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level
Lmin = minimum measured sound level
Noise Measurement Survey – 24 HR
Project Number: ESL2201.97 Test Personnel: Corey Knips
Project Name: 14970 Jurupa Avenue Equipment: LD Spark 706RC (SN: 18571)
Site Number: LT-2 Date: 12/4/2024 Time: From 12:00 a.m. To 12:00 a.m.
Site Location: North end of Redwood Court, on a light pole. Approximately 100 feet from the
Jurupa Avenue centerline.
Primary Noise Sources: Traffic on Jurupa Avenue.
Comments: The wall between the noise meter and Jurupa Avenue is approximately 5.3 feet
high and is atop an approximately 5-foot berm.
Photo:
Long-Term (24-Hour) Noise Level Measurement Results at LT-2
Start Time Date Noise Level (dBA)
Leq Lmax Lmin
12:00 AM 12/4/2024 51.8 68.4 42.8
1:00 AM 12/4/2024 51.8 70.2 42.6
2:00 AM 12/4/2024 52.5 68.4 43.5
3:00 AM 12/4/2024 54.8 72.0 43.7
4:00 AM 12/4/2024 55.6 66.5 45.0
5:00 AM 12/4/2024 57.5 74.5 47.2
6:00 AM 12/4/2024 58.0 76.1 47.6
7:00 AM 12/4/2024 59.3 70.0 47.7
8:00 AM 12/4/2024 58.3 70.2 44.6
9:00 AM 12/4/2024 57.3 69.8 43.4
10:00 AM 12/4/2024 58.2 72.5 40.8
11:00 AM 12/4/2024 57.9 74.4 41.3
12:00 PM 12/4/2024 57.6 71.5 41.3
1:00 PM 12/4/2024 58.5 74.7 44.3
2:00 PM 12/4/2024 58.8 72.1 41.8
3:00 PM 12/4/2024 59.4 75.4 43.7
4:00 PM 12/4/2024 59.1 69.8 44.1
5:00 PM 12/4/2024 58.9 75.6 42.3
6:00 PM 12/4/2024 57.9 71.2 43.8
7:00 PM 12/4/2024 57.2 79.5 43.6
8:00 PM 12/4/2024 57.3 70.5 45.2
9:00 PM 12/4/2024 57.2 71.4 44.5
10:00 PM 12/4/2024 55.4 69.6 44.3
11:00 PM 12/4/2024 53.6 69.0 43.8
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2024).
dBA = A-weighted decibel
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level
Lmin = minimum measured sound level
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx «02/06/25»
APPENDIX B
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE MODEL PRINTOUTS
Phase: Demolition
Lmax Leq
Concrete Saw 1 90 20 50 0.5 90 83
Excavator 3 81 40 50 0.5 81 82
Dozer 2 82 40 50 0.5 82 81
Combined at 50 feet 91 87
Combined at Receptor 500 feet 71 67
Combined at Receptor 600 feet 70 65
Combined at Receptor 760 feet 67 63
Combined at Receptor 840 feet 67 62
Phase: Site Preparation
Lmax Leq
Tractor 4 84 40 50 0.5 84 86
Dozer 3 82 40 50 0.5 82 83
Combined at 50 feet 86 88
Combined at Receptor 500 feet 66 68
Combined at Receptor 600 feet 65 66
Combined at Receptor 760 feet 62 64
Combined at Receptor 840 feet 62 63
Phase: Grading
Lmax Leq
Grader 1 85 40 50 0.5 85 81
Dozer 1 82 40 50 0.5 82 78
Scraper 2 84 40 50 0.5 84 83
Tractor 2 84 40 50 0.5 84 83
Excavator 2 81 40 50 0.5 81 80
Combined at 50 feet 90 88
Combined at Receptor 500 feet 70 68
Combined at Receptor 600 feet 69 67
Combined at Receptor 760 feet 67 65
Combined at Receptor 840 feet 66 64
Phase:Building Construction
Lmax Leq
Man Lift 3 75 20 50 0.5 75 73
Crane 1 81 16 50 0.5 81 73
Generator 1 81 50 50 0.5 81 78
Tractor 3 84 40 50 0.5 84 85
Welder / Torch 1 74 40 50 0.5 74 70
Combined at 50 feet 87 86
Combined at Receptor 500 feet 67 66
Combined at Receptor 600 feet 66 65
Combined at Receptor 760 feet 64 63
Combined at Receptor 840 feet 63 62
Phase: Paving
Lmax Leq
Paver 2 77 50 50 0.5 77 77
Roller 2 80 20 50 0.5 80 76
All Other Equipment > 5 HP 2 85 50 50 0.5 85 85
Combined at 50 feet 87 86
Combined at Receptor 500 feet 67 66
Combined at Receptor 600 feet 65 65
Combined at Receptor 760 feet 63 62
Combined at Receptor 840 feet 62 62
Phase:Architectural Coating
Lmax Leq
Compressor (air) 1 78 40 50 0.5 78 74
Combined at 50 feet 78 74
Combined at Receptor 500 feet 58 54
Combined at Receptor 600 feet 56 52
Combined at Receptor 760 feet 54 50
Sources: RCNM Combined at Receptor 840 feet 53 50
1- Percentage of time that a piece of equipment is operating at full power.
dBA – A-weighted Decibels
Lmax- Maximum Level
Leq- Equivalent Level
Equipment Ground Effects
Distance to
Receptor (ft)
Usage
Factor1
Reference (dBA) 50 ft
LmaxQuantity
QuantityEquipment
Noise Level (dBA)
Ground Effects
Distance to
Receptor (ft)
Usage
Factor1
Reference (dBA) 50 ft
LmaxQuantityEquipment
Noise Level (dBA)
Ground Effects
Distance to
Receptor (ft)
Usage
Factor1
Reference (dBA) 50 ft
Lmax
QuantityEquipment
Noise Level (dBA)
Construction Calculations
Equipment Quantity
Reference (dBA) 50 ft
Lmax
Usage
Factor1
Distance to
Receptor (ft) Ground Effects
Noise Level (dBA)
Noise Level (dBA)
Ground Effects
Distance to
Receptor (ft)
Usage
Factor1
Reference (dBA) 50 ft
Lmax
Ground Effects
Noise Level (dBA)Equipment Quantity
Reference (dBA) 50 ft
Lmax
Usage
Factor1
Distance to
Receptor (ft)
Construction Traffic Noise Calculator
Construction Phase
One-Way
Worker
Trip/Day
One Way
Vendor
Trip/Day
One Way
Hauling
Trip
Number Total
Phase
Number Phase Name Number of Days
Demolition 15 0 317 332 1 Demolition 30
Site Preparation 17.5 0 0 17.5 2 Site Preparation 10
Grading 20 0 39.6 59.6 3 Grading 25
Building Construction 207 80.7 0 287.7 4 Building
Construction 350
Paving 15 0 0 15 5 Paving 20
Architectural Coating 41.3 0 0 41.3 6 Architectural
Coating 35
Maximum 332
Speed MT Factor HT Factor
25 16 83.3
Roadway Speed Existing Volume MT Factor HT Factor 30 15 65
Jurupa Avenue 45 18,865 12.6 38 35 14 53.3
40 13.2 45
45 12.6 38
Worker
Trip/Day
Vendor
Trip/Day
Hauling
Trip
Number Total
Overlap?50 12 33
Demolition 15 0 12,046 12061 55 11.5 29
Site Preparation 18 0 0 18 60 11.1 26
Grading 20 0 1,505 1525 65 10.8 23
Building Construction 207 2,042 0 2249
Paving 15 0 0 15
Architectural Coating 41 0 0 42
Overlap?N
Total Equivalent Vehicles 12,061
Noise Increase (dBA)2.1
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx «02/06/25»
APPENDIX C
CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS
TABLE Existing -01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Cherry Avenue Between I-10 Ramps
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 31190 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 46 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 70.27
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
100.7 287.0 897.1 2833.3
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Cherry Avenue I-10 EB Ramps to Slover Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 31080 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 50 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 70.13
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
102.3 286.6 893.8 2822.1
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway 1
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3250 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 61.00
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 70.3 221.7
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Project Driveways 1 and 2
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 4380 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 62.30
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 94.6 298.7
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -05
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Project Driveway 2 and Jurupa
Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3415 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 61.22
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 73.9 232.9
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -06
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway 3
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1505 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 56.24
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 74.2
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -07
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Project Driveways 3 and 4
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1310 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 55.63
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 64.7
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -08
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Project Driveway 4 and Jurupa
Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1335 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 55.72
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 65.9
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -09
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue Between Cherry Avenue and Live Oak Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 16010 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.19
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 147.8 461.8 1458.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -10
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue Between Live Oak Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 17328 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.53
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 159.7 499.8 1578.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -11
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue East of Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 17540 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.59
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
55.9 161.6 505.8 1597.8
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -12
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue West of Live Oak Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 19280 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.37
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
68.4 179.8 555.7 1752.9
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -13
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue Between Live Oak Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 25395 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 69.57
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
83.2 234.3 731.1 2308.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing -14
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue East of Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 24620 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 69.44
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
81.3 227.4 708.8 2238.2
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Cherry Avenue Between I-10 Ramps
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 31520 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 46 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 70.31
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
101.6 290.0 906.6 2863.3
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Cherry Avenue I-10 EB Ramps to Slover Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 31780 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 50 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 70.23
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
104.1 292.9 913.8 2885.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway 1
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3670 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 61.53
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 79.4 250.3
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Project Driveways 1 and 2
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 4530 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 62.44
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 97.9 308.9
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-05
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Project Driveway 2 and Jurupa
Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3455 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 61.27
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 74.7 235.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-06
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway 3
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1645 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 56.62
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 81.1
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-07
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Project Driveways 3 and 4
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1440 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 56.05
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 71.1
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-08
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Project Driveway 4 and Jurupa
Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1405 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 55.94
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 69.3
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-09
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue Between Cherry Avenue and Live Oak Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 16740 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.38
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 154.4 482.8 1525.1
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-10
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue Between Live Oak Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 17228 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.51
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 158.8 496.9 1569.5
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-11
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue East of Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 17540 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.59
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
55.9 161.6 505.8 1597.8
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-12
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue West of Live Oak Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 19320 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.38
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
68.4 180.1 556.8 1756.5
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-13
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue Between Live Oak Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 25395 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 69.57
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
83.2 234.3 731.1 2308.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Existing With Project-14
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue East of Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Existing With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 24650 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 69.44
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
81.4 227.6 709.7 2240.9
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Cherry Avenue Between I-10 Ramps
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 33080 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 46 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 70.52
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
105.6 304.0 951.3 3004.9
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Cherry Avenue I-10 EB Ramps to Slover Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 32975 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 50 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 70.39
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
107.1 303.6 948.1 2994.1
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway 1
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3475 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 61.29
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 75.2 237.0
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Project Driveways 1 and 2
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 4670 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 62.57
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 100.9 318.5
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-05
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Project Driveway 2 and Jurupa
Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3650 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 61.50
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 78.9 248.9
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-06
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway 3
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1610 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 56.53
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 79.4
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-07
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Project Driveways 3 and 4
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1400 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 55.92
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 69.1
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-08
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Project Driveway 4 and Jurupa
Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1430 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 56.01
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 70.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-09
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue Between Cherry Avenue and Live Oak Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 17000 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.45
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 156.7 490.3 1548.8
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-10
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue Between Live Oak Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 18395 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.79
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
58.2 169.3 530.4 1675.7
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-11
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue East of Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 18620 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.85
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
58.8 171.3 536.9 1696.1
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-12
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue West of Live Oak Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 20470 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.63
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
71.2 190.3 589.8 1861.0
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-13
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue Between Live Oak Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 26940 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 69.83
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
87.2 248.2 775.4 2449.0
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year-14
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue East of Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 26120 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 69.69
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
85.1 240.8 751.9 2374.5
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-01
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Cherry Avenue Between I-10 Ramps
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 33410 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 46 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 70.57
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
106.4 307.0 960.8 3034.9
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-02
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Cherry Avenue I-10 EB Ramps to Slover Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 33675 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 50 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 70.48
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
108.9 309.8 968.2 3057.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-03
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway 1
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3895 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 61.79
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 84.2 265.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-04
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Project Driveways 1 and 2
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 4820 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 62.71
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 104.1 328.7
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-05
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Live Oak Avenue Between Project Driveway 2 and Jurupa
Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3690 SPEED (MPH): 40 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 61.55
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 79.8 251.7
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-06
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway 3
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1750 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 56.89
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 86.3
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-07
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Project Driveways 3 and 4
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1530 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 56.31
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 75.5
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-08
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Hemlock Avenue Between Project Driveway 4 and Jurupa
Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1500 SPEED (MPH): 35 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 56.22
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
0.0 0.0 0.0 74.0
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-09
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue Between Cherry Avenue and Live Oak Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 17730 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.63
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
56.4 163.3 511.3 1615.1
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-10
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue Between Live Oak Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 18295 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.77
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
57.9 168.4 527.5 1666.6
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-11
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Slover Avenue East of Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 18620 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 24 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.85
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
58.8 171.3 536.9 1696.1
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-12
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue West of Live Oak Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 20510 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 68.64
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
71.2 190.7 590.9 1864.7
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-13
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue Between Live Oak Avenue and Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 26940 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 69.83
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
87.2 248.2 775.4 2449.0
______________________________________________________________________
TABLE Opening Year With Project-14
FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS
RUN DATE: 01/27/2025
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Jurupa Avenue East of Hemlock Avenue
NOTES: 14970 Jurupa Avenue - Opening Year With Project
______________________________________________________________________
* * ASSUMPTIONS * *
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 26150 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS
75.51 12.57 9.34
M-TRUCKS
1.56 0.09 0.19
H-TRUCKS
0.64 0.02 0.08
ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 40 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD
______________________________________________________________________
* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *
CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 69.70
DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
85.2 241.1 752.8 2377.2
______________________________________________________________________
N OISE AND V IBRATION I MPACT A NALYSIS
F EBRUARY 2025
14970 J URUPA A VENUE P ROJECT
F ONTANA, C ALIFORNIA
P:\A-E\ESL2201.97\PRODUCT\NoiseAndVibrationReport_ESL2201.97.docx «02/06/25»
APPENDIX D
SOUNDPLAN NOISE MODEL PRINTOUTS
14970 Jurupa Avenue Industrial Project
Project No. ESL2201.97
Project Operational Noise Levels - Daytime
Hourly Noise
Level (dBA Leq)
<= 49.0
49.<<= 51.0
51.<<= 53.0
53.<<= 55.0
55.<<= 57.0
57.<<= 59.0
59.<<= 61.0
61.<<= 63.0
63.<<= 65.0
65.<<= 67.0
67.<<= 69.0
69.<
Scale
050100 200 300 400
feet
Signs and symbols
Point source
Main building
Wall
Limit line - 70 dBA Leq (Daytime)
Point receiver
C:\Users\MAbushanab\OneDrive -LSA Associates\Documents\Desktop\SoundPLAN\ESL2201 97 -14970 Jurupa Avenue Industrial Project\Ops-Day sgs -last edit 1/31/2025
14970 Jurupa Avenue Industrial Project
Project No. ESL2201.97
Project Operational Noise Levels - Nighttime
Hourly Noise
Level (dBA Leq)
<= 49.0
49.<<= 51.0
51.<<= 53.0
53.<<= 55.0
55.<<= 57.0
57.<<= 59.0
59.<<= 61.0
61.<<= 63.0
63.<<= 65.0
65.<<= 67.0
67.<<= 69.0
69.<
Scale
050100 200 300 400
feet
Signs and symbols
Point source
Main building
Wall
Limit line - 65 dBA Leq (Nighttime)
Point receiver
C:\Users\MAbushanab\OneDrive -LSA Associates\Documents\Desktop\SoundPLAN\ESL2201 97 -14970 Jurupa Avenue Industrial Project\Ops-Night sgs -last edit 12/13/2024