ATT 2.b.vi. - Noise Impact Analysis — Murrieta City Council, May 20, 2025 (part 1 of 2)

Whitewood I

NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS

CITY OF MURRIETA

P
REPARED BY:

Bill Maddux
[email protected]
(619) 788-1971

M
ARCH 4, 2024

14984-07-Noise_Study.docx

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. .............. I APPENDICES .................................................................................................................... .................. II LIST OF EXHIBITS .............................................................................................................. ................. III LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ ................. III LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS ..................................................................................................... ...... IV EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. .......... 1 Off-Site Traffic Noise ................................................................................................................................ 3 Operational Noise .................................................................................................................................... 3 Construction Noise Analysis .................................................................................................................... 4 Construction Vibration Analysis............................................................................................................... 4 Summary of Significance Findings ........................................................................................................... 4 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. ....... 5

1.1 Site Location .................................................................................................................................. 5

1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 5 2 FUNDAMENTALS .................................................................................................................. ..... 9

2.1 Range of Noise .............................................................................................................................. 9

2.2 Noise Descriptors ........................................................................................................................ 10

2.3 Sound Propagation ...................................................................................................................... 10

2.4 Noise Control .............................................................................................................................. 12

2.5 Noise Barrier Attenuation ........................................................................................................... 12

2.6 Land Use Compatibility With Noise ............................................................................................ 12

2.7 Vibration ..................................................................................................................................... 12 3 REGULATORY SETTING ............................................................................................................ . 15

3.1 State of California Noise Requirements ...................................................................................... 15

3.2 State of California Building Code ................................................................................................ 15

3.3 City of Murrieta General Plan Noise Element ............................................................................. 15

3.4 Operational Noise Standards ...................................................................................................... 17

3.5 Construction Noise Standards .................................................................................................... 18

3.6 Construction Vibration Standards ............................................................................................... 19 4 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ......................................................................................................... .. 21

4.1 CEQA Guidelines Not Further Analyzed (Threshold C) ............................................................... 22 5 EXISTING NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS .................................................................................. 23

5.1 Measurement Procedure and Criteria ........................................................................................ 23

5.2 Noise Measurement Locations ................................................................................................... 23

5.3 Noise Measurement Results ....................................................................................................... 24 6 TRAFFIC NOISE METHODS AND PROCEDURES ........................................................................... 27

6.1 FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model ........................................................................................ 27

6.2 Off-Site Traffic Noise ................................................................................................................... 28 7 ON-SITE TRANSPORTATION NOISE IMPACTS ............................................................................ 31

7.1 Exterior Noise Analysis ................................................................................................................ 31

7.2 Interior Noise Analysis ................................................................................................................ 32 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
ii
8 OFF-SITE TRANSPORTATION NOISE IMPACTS ............................................................................. 37

8.1 Traffic Noise Contours ................................................................................................................ 37

8.2 Existing Project Traffic Noise Levels ............................................................................................ 40

8.3 Opening Year Cumulative (2024) Traffic Noise Level Increases ................................................. 40

8.5 Cumulative Traffic Noise Level Increases .................................................................................... 40 9 SENSITIVE RECEIVER LOCATIONS .............................................................................................. 45 10 OPERATIONAL NOISE IMPACTS ................................................................................................ 49

10.1 Operational Noise Sources .......................................................................................................... 49

10.2 Reference Noise Levels ............................................................................................................... 49

10.3 CadnaA Noise Prediction Model ................................................................................................. 52

10.4 Project Operational Noise Levels ................................................................................................ 52

10.5 Project Operational Noise Level Compliance .............................................................................. 53

10.6 Project Operational Noise Level Increases ................................................................................. 54 11 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS ........................................................................................................ 5 7

11.1 Construction Noise Levels ........................................................................................................... 57

11.2 Construction Reference Noise Levels ......................................................................................... 57

11.3 CadnaA Noise Prediction Model ................................................................................................. 57

11.4 Typical Construction Noise Analysis............................................................................................ 59

11.5 Typical Construction Noise Level Compliance ............................................................................ 60

11.6 Typical Construction Vibration Impacts ...................................................................................... 61 12 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... ........ 63 13 CERTIFICATION ................................................................................................................. ....... 65

APPENDICES
APPENDIX 3.1: CITY OF MURRIETA MUNICIPAL CODE
APPENDIX 4.1: PROJECT SITE PLAN
APPENDIX 5.1: NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENT PHOTOS
APPENDIX 5.2: NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENT WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX 7.1: ON-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS APPENDIX 8.1: OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS APPENDIX 10.1: OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX 11.1: CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
iii

LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT ES-A: MITIGATION SUMMARY .............................................................................................. . 2 EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP .................................................................................................... ......... 6 EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN ....................................................................................................... ............... 7 EXHIBIT 2-A: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS ............................................................................................ ....... 9 EXHIBIT 2-B: TYPICAL LEVELS OF GROUND-BORNE VIBRATION ......................................................... 14 EXHIBIT 3-A: LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS .......................... 17 EXHIBIT 3-B: CITY OF MURRIETA EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR NOISE LIMITS ........................................... 18 EXHIBIT 3-C: CITY OF MURRIETA CONSTRUCTION NOISE STANDARDS ................................................ 19 EXHIBIT 5-A: NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS .............................................................................. 25 EXHIBIT 8-A: RECEIVER LOCATIONS .............................................................................................. .... 47 EXHIBIT 9-A: OPERATIONAL NOISE SOURCE LOCATIONS ................................................................... 50 EXHIBIT 11-A: CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY .......................................................................................... 58

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS .......................................................................... 4 TABLE 3-1: CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION STANDARDS ........................................................................ 19 TABLE 4-1: SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA SUMMARY ................................................................................. 22 TABLE 5-1: 24-HOUR AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS ......................................................... 24 TABLE 6-1: ON-SITE ROADWAY PARAMETERS .................................................................................. 28 TABLE 6-2: TIME OF DAY VEHICLE SPLITS ........................................................................................ .. 28 TABLE 6-3: DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFIC FLOW BY VEHICLE TYPE (VEHICLE MIX) ................................... 28 TABLE 6-4: OFF-SITE ROADWAY PARAMETERS ................................................................................. 30 TABLE 6-5: AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................................................................................ 30 TABLE 7-1: EXTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS (DBA CNEL) .................................................................. 31 TABLE 7-2: FIRST-FLOOR INTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS (CNEL) .................................................. 34 TABLE 7-3: SECOND-FLOOR INTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS (CNEL) ............................................. 35 TABLE 8-1: EXISTING WITHOUT PROJECT NOISE CONTOURS ............................................................. 38 TABLE 8-2: EXISTING WITH PROJECT NOISE CONTOURS .................................................................... 38 TABLE 8-3: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2024) WITHOUT PROJECT NOISE CONTOURS .................... 39 TABLE 8-4: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2024) WITH PROJECT NOISE CONTOURS ........................... 39 TABLE 8-5: EXISTING WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE INCREASES ....................................................... 41 TABLE 8-6: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2024) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE INCREASES .............. 42 TABLE 8-9: HORIZON YEAR (2045) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE INCREASES .................................... 43 TABLE 10-1: REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS ........................................................................................... .. 49 TABLE 10-2: DAYTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS ............................................................ 53 TABLE 10-3: NIGHTTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS ......................................................... 53 TABLE 10-4: OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE ..................................................................... 54 TABLE 10-5: DAYTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES ........................................... 55 TABLE 10-6: NIGHTTIME OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES ...................................................... 55 TABLE 11-1: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS ...................................................... 59 TABLE 11-2: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVEL SUMMARY ..................................... 60 TABLE 11-3: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE ..................................................... 61 TABLE 11-4: VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ...................................... 61 TABLE 11-5: PROJECT CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION LEVELS ................................................................ 62 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
(#) Reference
ANSI American National Standards Institute
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA A-weighted decibels
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
INCE Institute of Nois e Control Engineering
L
eq Equivalent continuous (average) sound level
Lmax Maximum level measured over the time interval
Lmin Minimum level measured over the time interval
mph Miles per hour
PPV Peak Particle Velocity
Project Whitewood I
RMS Root-mean-square
VdB Vibration Decibels

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Urban Crossroads, Inc. has prepared this noise study to identify noise impacts and any necessary noise mitigation measures, for the proposed Whitewood I development (“Project”) located north of Clinton Keith Road, east of Whitewood Road, and west of Arendt Lane, in the City of Murrieta.

The proposed Project would consist of 243 multi-family residential dwelling units. This study has been prepared to satisfy applicable City of Murrieta standards and thresholds of significance based on Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. (1) E

XTERIOR NOISE ABATEMENT
Based on the traffic noise modeling, noise levels predicted in the outdoor uses area (pool area) would range from 49.7 to 60.9. Thus, the Project will satisfy the City of Murrieta 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level standard for residential land uses at outdoor usable spaces. Therefore, no exterior noise mitigation would be required an d impacts are less than significant. However, based on the exterior noise levels are the façades of buildings fronting Clinton Keith Road, an interior analysis was completed to demonstrate the Project will comply with the City of Murrieta’s interior noise level standards.

NTERIOR NOISE ABATEMENT
Typical building construction will provide a Noise Reduction (NR) of approximately 12 dBA with "windows open" and a minimum 25 dBA noise reduction with "windows closed." (2) (3) To satisfy the City of Murrieta 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level criteria, first and second story receivers of residential dwelling units adjacent to Whitewoo d Road will require a Noise Reduction (NR) of ranging from 15 to 25 dBA, which will require a windows-closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air conditioning). First and second story receivers of residential dwelling units adjacent to Clinton Keith Road w ill require a Noise Reduction (NR) ranging from

27.4 to 30.4 dBA and a windows-closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air conditioning). To meet the City of Murrieta 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standards for residential land use the Project shall provide the following or equivalent noise abatement measures:
 Windows & Glass Doors: All dwelling units adjace nt to roadways will require windows and glass doors with well-fitted, well-weather-stripped assemblies with minimum sound transmission class (STC) ratings of 27. In addition, first-floor dwe lling units of Buildings 6 through 8, adjacent to Clinton Keith Road, would require windows with a minimum STC 27, Building 15 would require windows with a minimum STC 29, Buildings 13 and 14 would require windows rated at STC 30, Building 10 would require windows rated at STC 31, Building 17 would require windows rated at STC 31, Buildings 11 and 16 would require windows rated at STC 33, and Building 12 would require windows with a rating of STC 34. Second-floor dwelling units of Building 5, adjacent to Clinton Keith Road, would require windows with a minimum STC 30, Building 6 would require windows with a minimum STC 31, Buildings 7 through 9, 13 and 17 would require windows rated at STC 32, Building 11, and 14 through 16 would require windows with a minimum rating of STC 33, and Building 12 would require windows with a rating of STC 34 to satisfy City of Murrieta interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
2 EXHIBIT ES-A: MITIGATION SUMMARY

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
3  Doors (Non-Glass): All exterior doors shall be well weather-stripped. Well-sealed perimeter gaps around the doors are essential to achieve the optimal STC rating. (4)  Walls: At any penetrations of exterior walls by pipes, ducts, or conduits, the space between the wall and pipes, ducts, or conduits shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal.  Roof: Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be per manufacturer’s specification or caulked plywood of at least one-half inch thick. Ceilings shall be per manufacturer’s specification or well- sealed gypsum board of at least one-half inch thick. Insulation with at least a rating of R-19 shall be used in the attic space.
 Ventilation: Arrangements for any habitable room shall be such that any exterior door or window can be kept closed when the room is in use and still receive circulated air. A forced air circulation system (e.g. air conditioning) or active ventilation system (e.g. fresh air supply) shall be provided which satisfies the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.

With the interior noise abatement measures prov ided in this study, the proposed Project is expected to satisfy the City of Murrieta 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level standards for residential development.

OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE
Traffic generated by the operation of the proposed Project will influence the traffic noise levels in surrounding off-site areas. To quantify the traffic noise increases on the surrounding off-site areas, the changes in traffic noise levels on nineteen roadway segments surrounding the Project site were calculated based on the change in the average daily traffic (ADT) volumes. The traffic noise levels provided in this analysis ar e based on the traffic forecasts found in Whitewood I Traffic Analysis . (5) To assess the off-site noise leve l impacts associated with the proposed Project, noise level contour boundaries were developed for Existing 2022 traffic conditions and Opening Year Cumulative (2024) traffic conditions with and without Project traffic. Land uses along analyzed roadway segments would experience Project related traffic noise level increases of less than 0.1 to 0.3 dBA CNEL. Therefore, the analysis shows that the Project-related traffic noise level increases would be less than significant.

OPERATIONAL NOISE
The Project would include specific type of operational noise attributable to the Project, including swimming pool activities, parking lot activities, and air conditioners. Project operational noise levels during the daytime hours at off-site receiver locations are expected to range from 35.3 to

49.9 dBA L
eq. Project operational noise levels during the nighttime hours at off-site receiver locations are expected to range from 30.5 to 38.8 dBA L eq. Project operational noise levels will satisfy Section 16.30.090 of the City of Murrieta Municipal Code daytime and nighttime noise standards of 50 dBA and 45 dBA L
eq, respectively, at all residential receivers. Therefore, potential operational noise impacts for the residential land use are anticipated to result in less than significant impacts.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
4 CONSTRUCTION NOISE ANALYSIS
Construction noise levels are expected to create temporary and intermittent high noise levels at receivers surrounding the Project site when activities occur at the closest point to the nearby receiver locations from the edge of Project construction activity. Using reference noise levels to represent the construction activities at the Project site, this analysis estimates the Project-related construction noise levels at nearby sensitive receiver locations. The results of the analysis show the highest construction noise levels at the potentially impacted receiver locations are expected to approach 62.8 dBA L
eq.

The Project related construction equipment noise levels are anticipated to satisfy the City of Murrieta Municipal Code construction noise level standards of 75 dBA for mobile equipment during typical Project construction activities at all receiver locations. Therefore, the short-term Project construction impacts are considered a less than significant.

CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION ANALYSIS
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. It is expected that ground-borne vibration from Project construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion. Project construction vibration velocity levels are expected to approach 0.02 in/sec PPV at the nearby receiver locations, and will therefore, not exceed the City of Murrieta vibration threshold of 0.04 in/sec PPV. Therefore, construction related vibration impacts would be less than significant.

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS
The results of this Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis are summarized below based on the significance criteria in Section 4 of this report. Table ES-1 shows the findings of significance for each potential noise and/or vibration impact before and after incorporation of Project design features.

TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE FINDINGS
Analysis Report
Section
Significance Findings
Unmitigated Mitigated
On-Site Traffic Noise 7 Significant Less Than Significant Off-Site Traffic Noise 8 Less Than Significant -
Operational Noise 10 Less Than Significant -
Construction Noise 11 Less Than Significant -
Construction Vibration Less Than Significant -

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
5 1 INTRODUCTION
This noise analysis has been completed to de termine the noise impacts associated with the development of the proposed Whitewood I (“Project”). This noise study describes the Project, provides information regarding noise and vibration fundamentals, outlines the local regulatory setting, provides the study methods and procedures for performing noise analysis, evaluates potential noise impacts from the project, and identifies mitigation measures to reduce impacts, as necessary.

1.1 S ITE LOCATION
The Project is located north of Clinton Keith Road, east of Whitewood Road, and west of Arendt Lane in the City of Murrieta. The Project’s location in relation to the surrounding area is shown on Exhibit 1-A. The surrounding land use designations are Multi-Family Residential to the north, south, and west, Single-Family Residential to the east, and Civic/Institutional to the southwest.

1.2 P ROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project consists of a Development Plan Permit and Tentative Tract Map for a 17.26-acre site.

The Project would provide for the development of 243 multi-family residential dwelling units at a density of 15.1 dwelling units per acre. The Project also includes construction of a recreational pool area with a ±900sf restroom and pool equipment building, tot lot and 65,120 SF of total common open space areas throughout the site.

The proposed 243 dwelling units comprise 2- and 3-story townhomes. A total of 629 parking spaces would be provided with 10% of spaces designated as future electric vehicle (EV) spaces.

Access to the Project would be provided by two (2) full access driveways, one located on Arendt Lane, and the other located on Whitewood Road.

Grading proposed by the Project would result in disturbance to 16.64 acres of the Project with the balance of the site remaining undisturbed. The project will preserve 0.62 acres of sensitive area including 33 mature Oaks and 0.35 acres of County of Riverside riparian/riverine features.

The project will construct a ±12” offsite EMWD master plan sewer line within Arendt Lane, continuing easterly within Clinton Keith Road and terminating near the northwest corner of Clinton Keith Road and Menifee Road.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
6 EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
7 EXHIBIT 1-B: SITE PLAN

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
8 This page intentionally left blank.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
9 2 FUNDAMENTALS
Noise has been simply defined as “unwanted sound.” Sound becomes unwanted when it i n t e r f e r e s w i t h n o r m a l a c t i v i t i e s , w h e n i t c a u s e s a c t u a l p h y s i c a l h a r m o r w h e n i t h a s a d v e r s e effects on health. Noise is measured on a loga rithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). A-weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to broad frequency noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which are audible to the human ear. Exhibit 2-A presents a summary of the typical noise levels and their subjective loudness and effects that are described in more detail below.

E
XHIBIT 2-A: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
Source: Environmental Protection Agency Office of Noise Abatement and Control, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (EPA/ONAC 550/9-74-004) March 1974.

2.1 R ANGE OF NOISE
Since the range of intensities that the human ear can detect is so large, the scale frequently used to measure intensity is a scale based on multiple s of 10, the logarithmic scale. The scale for measuring intensity is the decibel scale. Each interval of 10 decibels indicates a sound energy ten times greater than before, which is perceived by the human ear as being roughly twice as loud. (6) The most common sounds vary between 40 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Normal conversation at three feet is roughly at 60 dBA, while loud jet engine noises equate to 110 dBA

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
10 at approximately 100 feet, which can cause serious discomfort. (7) Another important aspect of noise is the duration of the sound and the way it is described and distributed in time.

2.2 N OISE DESCRIPTORS
Environmental noise descriptors are generally based on averages, rather than instantaneous, noise levels. The most commonly used figure is the equivalent level (L eq). Equivalent sound levels
are not measured directly but are calculated from sound pressure levels typically measured in A- weighted decibels (dBA). The equivalent sound level (L eq) represents a steady state sound level
containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period and is commonly used to describe the “average” noise levels within the environment.

To describe the time-varying character of environmental noise, the statistical or percentile noise descriptors L
50, L25, L8 and L2, are commonly used. The percentile noise descriptors are the noise levels equaled or exceeded during 50 percent, 25 percent, 8 percent, and 2 percent of a stated time. Sound levels associated with the L2 and L8 typically describe transient or short-term events, while levels associated with the L50 describe the steady state (or median) noise conditions. While the L50 describes the median noise levels occurring 50 percent of the time, the L eq accounts for the total energy (average) observed for the entire hour. Therefore, the L eq noise descriptor is generally 1-2 dBA higher than the L50 noise level.

Peak hour or average noise levels, while useful, do not completely describe a given noise environment. Noise levels lower than peak hour may be disturbing if they occur during times when quiet is most desirable, namely evening and nighttime (sleeping) hours. To account for this, the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), representing a composite 24-hour noise level is utilized. The CNEL is the weighted average of the intensity of a sound, with corrections for time of day, and averaged over 24 hours. The time-of-day corrections require the addition of 5 decibels to dBA L
eq sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and the addition of 10 decibels to dBA L eq sound levels at night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. These additions are made to account for the noise sensitive time periods during the evening and night hours when sound appears louder. CNEL does not represent the actual sound level heard at any time, but rather represents the total sound exposure. The City of Murrieta relies on the 24-hour CNEL level to assess land use compatibility with transportation related noise sources.

2.3 S OUND PROPAGATION
When sound propagates over a distance, it changes in level and frequency content. The way noise reduces with distance depends on the following factors.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
11 2.3.1 G EOMETRIC SPREADING
Sound from a localized source (i.e., a stationary point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates (or decreases) at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a point source. Highways consist of several localized noise sources on a defined path and hence can be treated as a line source, which approximates the effect of several point sources. Noise from a line source propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source. (6)

2.3.2 G

ROUND ABSORPTION
The propagation path of noise from a highway to a receptor is usually very close to the ground.

Noise attenuation from ground absorption and reflective wave canceling adds to the attenuation associated with geometric spreading. Traditionally, the excess attenuation has also been expressed in terms of attenuation per doubling of distance. This approximation is usually sufficiently accurate for distances of less than 200 ft. For acoustically hard sites (i.e., sites with a reflective surface between the source and the receptor, such as a parking lot or body of water), no excess ground attenuation is assumed. For acou stically absorptive or soft sites (i.e., those sites with an absorptive ground surface between the source and the receptor such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an excess ground attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When added to the cylindrical spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall drop-off rate of 4.5 dB per doubling of distance from a line source. (8)

2.3.3 A

TMOSPHERIC EFFECTS
Receptors located downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative to calm conditions, whereas locations upwind can have lowered noise levels. Sound levels can be increased at large distances (e.g., more than 500 feet) due to atmospheric temperature inversion (i.e., increasing temperature with elevation). Ot her factors such as air temperature, humidity, and turbulence can also have significant effects. (6)

2.3.4 S

HIELDING
A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receptor can substantially attenuate noise levels at the receptor. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends on the size of the object and the frequency content of the noise source. Shielding by trees and o t h e r s u c h v e g e t a t i o n t y p i c a l l y o n l y h a s a n “ o u t o f s i g h t , o u t o f m i n d ” e f f e c t . T h a t i s , t h e perception of noise impact tends to decrease when vegetation blocks the line-of-sight to nearby resident. However, for vegetation to provide a substantial, or even noticeable, noise reduction, the vegetation area must be at least 15 feet in height, 100 feet wide and dense enough to completely obstruct the line-of sight between the source and the receiver. This size of vegetation may provide up to 5 dBA of noise reduction. The FHWA does not consider the planting of vegetation to be a noise abatement measure. (8)
Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
12 2.4 N OISE CONTROL
Noise control is the process of obtaining an ac ceptable noise environment for an observation point or receptor by controlling the noise source, transmission path, receptor, or all three. This concept is known as the source-path-receptor concept. In general, noise control measures can be applied to these three elements.

2.5 N OISE BARRIER ATTENUATION
Effective noise barriers can reduce noise levels by 10 to 15 dBA, cutting the loudness of traffic noise in half. A noise barrier is most effective when placed close to the noise source or receptor.

Noise barriers, however, do have limitations. For a noise barrier to work, it must be high enough and long enough to block the path of the noise source. (8)

2.6 L AND USE COMPATIBILITY WITH NOISE
Some land uses are more tolerant of noise than others. For example, schools, hospitals, churches, and residences are more sensitive to noise intrusion than are commercial or industrial developments and related activities. As ambient noise levels affect the perceived amenity or livability of a development, so too can the mismanagement of noise impacts impair the economic health and growth potential of a community by reducing the area’s desirability as a place to live, shop and work. For this reason, land use compatibility with the noise environment is an important consideration in the planning and design process. The FHWA encourages State and Local government to regulate land development in such a way that noise-sensitive land uses are either prohibited from being located adjacent to a highway, or that the developments are planned, designed, and constructed in such a way that noise impacts are minimized. (9)

2.7 V IBRATION
Per the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (10), vibration is the period ic oscillation of a medium or object. The rumbling sound caused by the vibration of room surfaces is called structure-borne noise. Sources of ground- borne vibrations include natural phenomena (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides) or human-made causes (e.g., explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment). Vibration sources may be continuous, such as factory machinery, or transient, such as explosions. As is the case with airborne sound, ground-borne vibrations may be described by amplitude and frequency.

Additionally, in contrast to airborne noise, ground-borne vibration outdoors is not a common environmental problem and annoyance from ground-borne vibration is almost exclusively an indoor phenomenon (11). Therefore, the effects of vibrations should only be evaluated at a structure and the effects of the building structure on the vibration should be considered. Wood- frame buildings, such as typical residential structures, are more easily excited by ground vibration than heavier buildings. In contrast, large masonr y b u i l d i n g s w i t h s p r e a d f o o t i n g s h a v e a l o w response to ground vibration (11). In general, the heavier a building is, the lower the response Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
13 will be to the incident vibration energy. Howeve r, all structurers reduce vibration levels due to the coupling of the building to the soil.

There are several different methods that are used to quantify vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal (11). The PPV is most frequently used to describe vibration im pacts to buildings but is not always suitable for evaluating human response (annoyance) because it takes some time for the human body to respond to vibration signals. Instead, the human body responds to average vibration amplitude often described as the root mean square (RMS). The RMS amplitude is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the signal and is most frequently used to describe the effect of vibration on the human body (11). However, the RMS amplitude and PPV are related mathematically, and the RMS amplitude of equipment is typically calculated from the PPV reference level. The RMS amplitude is approximately 70% of the PPV (12). Thus, thus either can be used on the description of vibration impacts.

While not universally accepted, vibration decibel notation (VdB) is another vibration notation developed and used by the FTA in their guidance manual to describe vibration levels and provide a background of common vibration levels and set vibration limits (10). Decibel notation (VdB) serves to reduce the range of numbers used to describe vibration levels and is used in this report to describe vibration levels.

As stated in the FTA guidance manual, the background vibration-velocity level in residential areas is generally 50 VdB. Ground-borne vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For most people, a vibration-velocity le vel of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels (11). Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground-borne vibration are construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth, the ground-borne vibration is rarely perceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB, which is the typical background vibration-velocity level, to 100 VdB, which is the general threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings. Exhibit 2-B illustrates common vibration sources and the human and structural response to ground-borne vibration.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
14 EXHIBIT 2-B: TYPICAL LEVELS OF GROUND-BORNE VIBRATION

Source: Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise Impact and Vibration Assessment.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
15 3 REGULATORY SETTING
To limit population exposure to physically and/or psychologically damaging as well as intrusive noise levels, the federal government, the State of California, various county governments, and most municipalities in the state have established standards and ordinances to control noise. In most areas, automobile and truck traffic is the major source of environmental noise. Traffic activity generally produces an average sound level that remains constant with time. Air and rail traffic, and commercial and industrial activities are also major sources of noise in some areas.

Federal, state, and local agencies regulate different aspects of environmental noise. Federal and state agencies generally set noise standards fo r mobile sources such as aircraft and motor vehicles, while regulation of stationary sources is left to local agencies.

3.1 S TATE OF CALIFORNIA NOISE REQUIREMENTS
The State of California regulates freeway noise, sets standards for sound transmission, provides occupational noise control criteria, identifies noise standards and provides guidance for local land use compatibility. State law requires that each county and city adopt a General Plan that includes a Noise Element, which is to be prepared according to guidelines adopted by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. (13) The purpose of the Noise Element is to limit the exposure of the community to excessive noise levels. In addition, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all known environmental effects of a project be analyzed, including environmental noise impacts.

3.2 S TATE OF CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE
The State of California’s noise insulation standa rds for all residential units are codified in the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Chapter 12, Section 1206.4, Allowable interior noise level. These noise standards are applied to new construction that contains dwelling units or sleeping units, such as residential and hotel or motel uses, in California for controlling interior noise le vels resulting from exterior noise sources. For new buildings, the acceptable interior noise limit is 45 dBA CNEL in habitable rooms (14).

3.3 C ITY OF MURRIETA GENERAL PLAN NOISE ELEMENT
The City of Murrieta has adopted a Noise Element of the General Plan to control and abate environmental noise, and to protect the citizens of the City of Murrieta from excessive exposure to noise. (15) The Noise Element specifies the exterior noise levels allowable for new developments impacted by transportation noise sources such as arterial roads, freeways, airports and railroads. In addition, the Noise Element identifies noise polices designed to protect, create, and maintain an environment free from noise that may jeopardize the health or welfare of sensitive receivers, or degrade quality of life. To protect City of Murrieta residents from excessive noise, the Noise Element contains the following four goals related to the Project:

N-1 Noise sensitive land uses are properly and effectively protected from excessive noise generators.

N-2 A comprehensive and effective land use planning and development review process that Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
16 ensures noise impacts are adequately addressed.

N-3 Noise from mobile noise sources is minimized.

N-4 Reduced noise levels from construction activities.

The noise policies specified in the City of Murrieta Noise Element provide the guidelines necessary to satisfy these three goals. To protect new land uses from excessive noise generators (N-1), Table 11-2 of the City of Murrieta General Plan Noise Element, shown on Exhibit 3-A, identifies a 65 dBA CNEL as a normally acceptable and 70 dBA CNEL as conditionally acceptable noise level for multi-family residential land uses impacted by transportation noise sources.

According to the General Plan, noise levels in excess of normally acceptable levels requires that a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise- insulation features must be included in the design.

The Noise Element also provides several policies to reduce noise impacts to new developments (N-2) that include integrating noise considerations into planning decisions, noise mitigation measures as development requirements, and compliance with the standards of the Noise Element and Noise Ordinance. To ensure noise from mobile sources is minimized (N-3), noise mitigation measures must be considered in the design of all future streets and highways such as the construction and maintenance of noise barriers located along the I-215 Freeway.

The policies included in the General Plan Noise Element consider land use compatibility and identify exterior noise level compatibility standards for transportation related noise. The Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments matrix shown on Exhibit 3-A provides the City of Murrieta with a planning tool to gauge the compatibility of land uses relative to existing and future exterior noise levels.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
17 EXHIBIT 3-A: LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS

3.4 O PERATIONAL NOISE STANDARDS
To analyze noise impacts originating from the oper ation of the Project, noise from operational activities are typically limited to the hours of operation established under the Municipal Code.

The Municipal Code noise standards for operational sources are described below for the City of Murrieta to determine the potential noise impacts at the nearby sensitive receiver locations. The operational-related noise standards are summarized in Exhibit 3-B.

The City of Murrieta has established maximum exterior and interior noise levels for Project operational noise sources. Section 16.30.090 of the Municipal Code identifies limits on noise levels from operational activities as shown on Exhibits 3-C for exterior and interior. The nearest noise-sensitive receivers to the Project site consist of existing multi- and single-family residential homes. For residential development, operational exterior noise levels may not exceed 50 dBA during the daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and may not exceed 45 dBA during the nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). (16) The City of Murrieta Municipal Code is included in Appendix 3.1.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
18 EXHIBIT 3-B: CITY OF MURRIETA EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR NOISE LIMITS

Section 16.30.090(B) of the Development Code further restricts noise levels. Section 16.30.090(B) states, in part:

No person shall operate or cause to be operated any source of sound at any location within the city or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by a person that causes the noise level, when measured on any other property to exceed the following exterior noise standards:

1. Standard No. 1 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour. Standard No. 1 may be the applicable noise level from Table 11-4 above.

2. Standard No. 2 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15) minutes in any hour. Standard No. 2 shall be the applicable noise level from Table 11-4 above, plus five dB.

3. Standard No. 3 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour. Standard No. 3 shall be the applicable noise level from Table 11-4 above plus ten dB.

4. Standard No. 4 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour. Standard No. 4 shall be the applicable noise level from Table 11-4 above plus fifteen (15) dB.

5. Standard No. 5 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for any period of time. Standard No. 5 shall be the applicable noise level from Table 11-4 above plus twenty (20) dB.

3.5 C ONSTRUCTION NOISE STANDARDS
To analyze noise impacts originating from the construction of the Project, noise from construction activities are typically limited to the hours of operation established under the Municipal Code. The Municipal Code noise standards for construction are described below for

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
19 the City of Murrieta to determine the potential noise impacts at the nearby sensitive receiver locations. The construction-related noise standards are summarized in Exhibit 3-C.

The City of Murrieta has established maximum noise levels for mobile and stationary construction equipment. Section 16.30.130 of the Municipal Code identifies limits on noise levels from construction activities as shown on Exhibits 3-C for mobile and stationary equipment. The nearest noise-sensitive receivers to the Project site consist of existing multi-family residential homes. For multi-family residential development, mobile equipment noise levels may not exceed 80 dBA and stationary equipment noise levels may not exceed 64 dBA during the daytime hours. (16) In addition, the Municipal Code identifies hours during which mobile and stationary equipment may operate, between 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. daily, with no activity allowed on Sundays or holidays (City of Murrieta Municipal Code, Section 16.30.130(A)(2)(a)(1)). The City of Murrieta Municipal Code is included in Appendix 3.1.

E
XHIBIT 3-C: CITY OF MURRIETA CONSTRUCTION NOISE STANDARDS

3.6 C ONSTRUCTION VIBRATION STANDARDS
The City of Murrieta Municipal Code, Section 16.30.130 (K), states that operating or permitting the operation of any device that creates a vibration that is above the vibration perception threshold of an individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source if on private property or at one hundred fifty feet from the source if on public space or public right-of-way is prohibited.

The Municipal Code defines the vibration perception threshold to be a motion velocity of 0.01 RMS in/sec (in/sec) over the range of one to 100 Hz. (16) An RMS of 0.01 in/sec is equivalent to

0.04 PPV in/sec. Table 3-1 shows the City of Murrieta Municipal Code vibration level standards.

TABLE 3-1: CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION STANDARDS
Jurisdiction Root-Mean-Square Velocity Standard
(in/sec)
City of Murrieta1 0.01
1 Source: City of Murrieta Municipal Code, Section 16.30.130 (K) (Appendix 3.1).

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
20 This page intentionally left blank.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
21 4 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
The following significance criteria are based on currently adopted guidance provided by Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA ) Guidelines. (17) For the purposes of this report, impacts would be potentially significant if the Project results in or causes:

A. Generation of a substantial temporary or perm anent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
B. Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels? C. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? While the City of Murrieta General Plan Guidelin es provide direction on noise compatibility and establish noise standards by land use type that ar e sufficient to assess the significance of noise impacts, they do not define the levels at which increases are considered substantial for use under Guideline A. CEQA Appendix G Guideline C applies to nearby public and private airports, if any, and the Project’s land use compatibility. Tabl e 4-1 shows the significance criteria summary matrix.

ON-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE
 If the on-site noise levels:
 exceed the conditionally acceptable exterior land use compatibility criteria of the City of Murrieta General Plan Noise Element at an exterior use area, Table 11-2, for Project land uses; and
 exceed an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL for residential uses within the Project site (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Part 2 as discussed in Section 3.2).

OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE
 If the off-site traffic noise levels:
 are less than 60 dBA CNEL and the Project creates a readily perceptible 5 dBA CNEL or greater Project-related noise level increase; or
 range from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL and the Project creates a barely perceptible 3 dBA CNEL or greater Project-related noise level increase; or
 already exceed 65 dBA CNEL, and the Project creates a community noise level increase of greater than 1.5 dBA CNEL (FICON, 1992).

OPERATIONAL NOISE
 If the Project operational noise levels
 exceed the exterior noise standards of th e City of Murrieta Municipal Code 16.30.090, Exhibit 3-C, for adjacent land uses; and
Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
22 CONSTRUCTION NOISE AND VIBRATION
 If Project-related construction activities:
 occur anytime other than between the permitted hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. daily, with no activity allowed on Sundays or holidays (City of Murrieta Municipal Code, Section

16.30.130(A)(2)(a)(1)); or
 create noise levels which exceed the mobile 75 dBA L max or stationary 60 dBA L max equipment noise level limits at an affected structure (City of Murrieta Municipal Code, Section 16.30.130 (A)).
 If short-term Project generated construction vibration levels could exceed the City of Murrieta maximum acceptable vibration standard of 0.01 RMS in/sec (0.04 in/sec PPV) at sensitive receiver locations (City of Murrieta Municipal Code, Section 16.30.130 (K)). For clarity this report uses the PPV threshold to be consistent with the reference levels.

TABLE 4-1: SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA SUMMARY
Analysis Land Use Condition(s) Significance Criteria
Daytime Nighttime
On-Site All Land Uses
Exterior Noise Compatibility1 See Exhibit 3-A
Interior Noise Level Standard3 45 dBA CNEL
Off-Site
Noise-
Sensitive
< 60 dBA 5 dBA or more
60 – 65 dBA 3 dBA or more
> 65 dBA 1.5 dBA or more
Non-Noise-
Sensitive
=< 70 dBA 5 dBA or more
> 70 dBA 3 dBA or more
Operational All Land Uses Daytime See Exhibit 3-B Nighttime Construction
Noise &
Vibration
All Land Uses
Mobile Construction4 75 dBA Leq
Stationary Construction5 60 dBA Leq
Vibration Level Threshold4 0.04 PPV in/sec
1 Source: City of Murrieta General Plan Noise Element, Table 11-2. 2 Source: California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Part 2. 3 Source: California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Part 11. 4 Source: City of Murrieta Municipal Code, Section 16.30.130 (A) (Appendix 3.1). 5 Source: City of Murrieta Municipal Code, Section 16.30.130 (K) (Appendix 3.1). 6 Daytime” = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; “Nighttime” = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

4.1 CEQA GUIDELINES NOT FURTHER ANALYZED (THRESHOLD C) The Project site is not located within two miles of an airport or airstrip. The closest major airport is the French Valley Airport located roughly 2.3 miles southeast of the Project site. As such, the Project site would be located outside the 55 dB A CNEL airport noise contour, and therefore, impacts are considered less than significant, and no further noise analysis is conducted in relation to Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines, Noise Threshold C.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
23 5 EXISTING NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
To assess the existing noise level environment, four 24-hour noise level measurements were taken at sensitive receiver locations in the Project study area. The measurement locations were selected to describe and document the existing noise environment within the Project study area.

Exhibit 5-A provides the boundaries of the Proj ect study area and the noise level measurement locations. To fully describe the existing no ise conditions, noise level measurements were collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on Wednesday, August 3, 2022.

5.1 M EASUREMENT PROCEDURE AND CRITERIA
To describe the existing noise environment, the hourly noise levels were measured during typical weekday conditions over a 24-hour period. By collecting individual hourly noise level measurements, it is possible to describe the daytime and nighttime hourly noise levels and calculate the 24-hour CNEL. The long-term noise readings were recorded using Piccolo Type 2 integrating sound level meter and dataloggers. The Piccolo sound level meters were calibrated using a Larson-Davis calibrator, Model CAL 150. All noise meters were programmed in “slow” mode to record noise levels in “A” weighted form. The sound level meters and microphones were equipped with a windscreen during all measurements. All noise level measurement equipment satisfies the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard specifications for sound level meters ANSI S1.4-2014/IEC 61672-1:2013. (18)

5.2 N OISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS
The long-term noise level measurements were po sitioned as close to the nearest sensitive receiver locations as possible to assess the existing ambient hourly noise levels surrounding the Project site. Both Caltrans and the FTA recognize that it is not reasonable to collect noise level measurements that can fully represent any part of a private yard, patio, deck, or balcony normally used for human activity when estimating impacts for new development projects. This is demonstrated in the Caltrans general site location guidelines which indicate that, sites must be free of noise contamination by sources other than sources of interest. Avoid sites located near sources such as barking dogs, lawnmowers, pool pumps, and air conditioners unless it is the express intent of the analyst to measure these sources . (6) Further, FTA guidance states, t hat it is not necessary nor recommended that existing noise exposure be determined by measuring at every noise-sensitive location in the project area. Rather, the recommended approach is to characterize the noise environment for clusters of sites based on measurements or estimates at representative locations in the community. (10)
Based on recommendations of Caltrans and the FTA, it is not necessary to collect measurements at each individual building or residence, because each receiver measurement represents a group of buildings that share acoustical equivalence. (10) In other words, the area represented by the receiver shares similar shielding, terrain, and geometric relationship to the reference noise source. Receivers represent a location of nois e sensitive areas and are used to estimate the future noise level impacts. Collecting reference ambient noise level measurements at the nearby sensitive receiver locations allows for a comparis on of the before and after Project noise levels Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
24 and is necessary to assess potential noise impacts due to the Project’s contribution to the ambient noise levels.

5.3 N OISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS
The noise measurements presented below focus on the average or equivalent sound levels (Leq).

The Leq represents a steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. Table 5-1 id entifies the hourly daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise levels at each noise level measurement location. Appendix 5.1 shows photos at each measurement site and Appendix 5.2 provides a summary of the existing hourly ambient noise levels.

Table 5-1 provides the (energy average) noise levels used to describe the daytime and nighttime ambient conditions. These daytime and nighttim e energy average noise levels represent the average of all hourly noise levels observed during these time periods expressed as a single number. Appendix 5.2 provides summary worksheets of the noise levels for each hour as well as the minimum, maximum, L
1, L2, L5, L8, L25, L50, L90, L95, and L 99 percentile noise levels observed during the daytime and nighttime periods.

TABLE 5-1: 24-HOUR AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
Location1 Description
Energy Average
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)2
Daytime Nighttime
L1 Located west of the Project site near single-
family residence at 35960 Lindstrand Avenue. 68.1 64.6
L2
Located northwest of the Project site near
single-family residence at 35842 Meadowlark
Lane.

58.7 54.0
L3 Located south of the Project site across Clinton
Keith Road. 66.2 63.0
L4 Located east of the Project site near single-
family residence at 35960 Arendt Lane. 51.9 48.4
1 See Exhibit 5-A for the noise level measurement locations. 2 Energy (logarithmic) average levels. The long-term 24-hour measurement worksheets are included in Appendix 5.2.
"Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

The background ambient noise levels in the Project study area are dominated by the transportation-related noise associated with the arterial roadway network. The 24-hour existing noise level measurements shown on Table 5-1 present the existing ambient noise conditions.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
25 EXHIBIT 5-A: NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
26 This page intentionally left blank.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
27 6 TRAFFIC NOISE METHODS AND PROCEDURES
The following section outlines the methods and procedures used to model and analyze the future traffic noise environment.

6.1 FHWA TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL
The estimated roadway noise impacts from vehicular traffic were calculated using a computer program that replicates the Federal Highway Ad ministration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model- FHWA-RD-77-108. (19) The FHWA Model arrives at a predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level (REMEL). In California the national REMELs are substituted with the California Vehicle Noise (Calveno) Emission Levels. (20) Adjustments are then made to the REMEL to account for: the roadway classification (e.g., collector, secondary, major or arterial), the roadway active width (i.e., the distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway), the total average daily traffic (ADT), the travel speed, the percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the traffic volume, the roadway grade, the angle of view (e.g., whether the roadway view is blocked), the site condition“ (“hard” or “soft” relates to the absorption of the ground, pavement, or landscaping), and the percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24-hour period.

6.2 O

N-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL INPUTS
The on-site roadway parameters including the ADT volumes used for this analysis are presented on Table 6-1. Based on the City of Murrieta General Plan Circulation Element Map, Clinton Keith Road is classified as a six (6) lane Urban Highway, Whitewood Road is classified as a four (4) lane Major, and Arendt Lane is classified as a two (2) lane Collector. (21) To predict the future on-site noise environment at the Project site, the maximum two-way traffic volumes at a level of service C, shown on Table 6-1, and reflect future long-range traffic conditions needed to assess the on- site traffic noise environment and to identify the appropriate noise mitigation measures that address the worst-case future noise conditions.

Tables 6-2 presents the time-of-day vehicle splits by vehicle type and roadway classification, and Table 6-3 presents the total traffic flow distributi ons (vehicle mixes) used for this analysis. The vehicle mix provides the hourly distribution percentages of automobile, medium trucks, and heavy trucks for input into the FHWA Model based on roadway types. The vehicle splits shown on Table 6-2 are reported as a percentage of the overall percentage.

For the purposes of this analysis, soft site conditions were used to analyze the on-site traffic noise impacts for the Project study area. Soft site conditions account for the sound propagation loss over natural surfaces such as normal earth and ground vegetation. Research by Caltrans has shown that the use of soft site conditions is appropriate for the application of the FHWA traffic noise prediction model used in this analysis. (22)

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
28 TABLE 6-1: ON-SITE ROADWAY PARAMETERS
Roadway
Segment Lanes Classification1 Future ADT
Volume2
Speed
(mph)3
Clinton Keith Road 6 Urban Highway 42,000 55
Whitewood Road 4 Major 28,000 45
Arendt Lane 2 Collector 14,000 25
1 City of Murrieta General Plan Circulation Element.
2 Future ADT volumes calculated assuming LOS C design capacity. 3 Posted speed limit.

TABLE 6-2: TIME OF DAY VEHICLE SPLITS
Time Period Vehicle Type
Autos Medium Trucks Heavy Trucks
Daytime (7am-7pm) 77.5% 84.8% 86.5%
Evening (7pm-10pm) 12.9% 4.9% 2.7%
Nighttime (10pm-7am) 9.6% 10.3% 10.8%
Total: 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Typical Southern California vehicle mix.

TABLE 6-3: DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFIC FLOW BY VEHICLE TYPE (VEHICLE MIX) Roadway
Classification
Total % Traffic Flow1 Total Autos Medium Trucks Heavy Trucks All Roadways 97.42% 1.84% 0.74% 100.00%
1 Source: Typical Southern California vehicle mix.

To predict the future noise environment at each building within the Project site, coordinate information was collected to identify the noise transmission path between the noise source and receiver. The coordinate information is based on the Project site plan showing the location of each building and common outdoor activity area, as shown in Exhibit 1-B. The site plan is used to identify the relationship between the roadway centerline elevation, the pad elevation and the centerline distance to any intervening noise barriers, and the building façade. The first-floor receivers were placed five feet above the finished floor elevation at the outdoor living areas and proposed building façades. Second-floor receivers were located 14 feet above the finished floor elevation. Appendix 4.1 shows the scaled site plan.

6.2 O FF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE
Table 6-4 presents the roadway parameters used to assess the Project’s off-site transportation noise impacts. Table 6-4 identifies the eight (8) study area roadway segments, the distance from the centerline to adjacent land use based on the functional roadway classifications per the City of Murrieta General Plan. For this analysis, soft site conditions are used to analyze the traffic noise impacts within the Project study area. Soft site conditions account for the sound Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
29 propagation loss over natural surfaces such as normal earth and ground vegetation. Caltrans’ research has shown that the use of soft site co nditions is appropriate for the application of the FHWA traffic noise prediction model used in this analysis. (23) The Existing (2022) and Opening Year Cumulative (2024) average daily traffic volumes used in this analysis are shown on Table 6-5 based on the Whitewood I Traffic Analysis. (24)
 Existing (2022) Conditions
 Opening Year Cumulative (2024) Without Project Conditions  Opening Year Cumulative (2024) With Project Conditions The average daily traffic (ADT) volumes used for this study are presented on Table 6-5. Table 6-2 and Table 6-3 provide the time of day (daytime, ev ening, and nighttime) vehicle splits used for calculating CNEL values.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
30 TABLE 6-4: OFF-SITE ROADWAY PARAMETERS
ID Roadway Segment Receiving
Land Use1 Classification2
Centerline Distance
to Receiving Land
Use2
Vehicle
Speed
(mph)
1 Clinton Keith Rd. w/o I-215 SB Ramps Commercial Urban Arterial Highway 67' 50 2 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o I-215 NB Ramps Com mercial/Public Urban Arterial Highway 67' 45 3 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Warm Springs Pkwy. Residential/Public Urban Arterial Highway 67' 45 4 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Whitewood Rd. Reside ntial/Public Urban Arterial Highway 67' 55 5 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Arendt Lane Residential Urban Arterial Highway 67' 55 6 Whitewood Rd. s/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential/Public Major Highway 50' 45 7 Whitewood Rd. n/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential Major Highway 50' 45 8 Whitewood Rd. n/o Driveway 1 Residential Major Highway 50' 45 1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses. 2 City of Murrieta General Plan, Circulation Element.

TABLE 6-5: AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
ID Roadway Segment Average Daily Traffic Volumes1
Existing EAP EAC EAPC
1 Clinton Keith Rd. w/o I-215 SB Ramps 44,400 44,950 59,150 59,700 2 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o I-215 NB Ramps 42,150 43,350 59,250 62,800 3 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Warm Spri ngs Pkwy. 33,600 34,800 49,800 51,000 4 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Whitewood Rd. 30,950 31,500 39,100 39,650 5 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Arendt Lane 30,950 31,300 39,100 40,350 6 Whitewood Rd. s/o Clinton Keit h Rd 17,800 18,000 22,300 22,500 7 Whitewood Rd. n/o Clinton Keit h Rd 17,150 17,950 29,700 30,500 8 Whitewood Rd. n/o Driveway 1 17,250 18,150 29,800 29,900 Source: Urban Crossroads, Inc., Whitewood I Traffic Analysis, 2022.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
31 7 ON-SITE TRANSPORTATION NOISE IMPACTS
An on-site exterior noise impact analysis has been completed to determine the noise exposure levels that would result from adjacent traffic noise sources in the Project study area, and to identify potential noise mitigation measures that would achieve acceptable Project exterior and interior noise levels. The primary source of traffic noise affecting the Project site is anticipated to be from Whitewood Road, Clinton Keith Road , and Arendt Lane. The Project will experience some background traffic noise from the Project’ s internal local streets, however, due to low traffic volume/speed, traffic noise from these roads will not make a significant contribution to the noise environment. Additionally, since the Project site is located outside the 55 dBA CNEL aircraft noise level contour boundaries of French Valley Airport, the aircraft noise level impacts are considered less than significant.

7.1 E XTERIOR NOISE ANALYSIS
Using the FHWA traffic noise prediction model and the parameters outlined in Tables 6-1 to 6-3, the expected future exterior noise levels were calculated at the common open space/pool area and at the residential building façades. Table 7-1 presents a summary of future exterior noise levels at the outdoor use are (pool area) and at the residential building façades. The on-site transportation analysis indicates that the unmitigated exterior noise levels for outdoor use spaces are estimated to range from 36.7 to 54.9 dBA CNEL. The Exterior traffic noise analysis calculations are provided in Appendix 7.1.

The Project would satisfy the normally acceptable City of Murrieta exterior noise level standard at the pool area with future exterior noise levels ranging from 36.7 to 54.9 dBA CNEL. Thus, the Project satisfies the City of Murrieta normally acceptable exterior noise level standard at exterior usable space for multi-family residential land uses such as the Project. As such, the future on- site traffic noise impacts at the exterior uses areas are considered less than significant impacts.

TABLE 7-1: EXTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS (DBA CNEL)
Receiver Location
(Building Number) Source
Unmitigated
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Land Use
Compatibility4

Pool Clinton Keith Road 54.9 Normally Acceptable
Pool Whitewood Road 52. 7 Normally Acceptable
Pool Arendt Lane 36.7 Normally Acceptable
1 See Exhibit 1-B for the analysis locations.
2 Exterior noise calculations are included in Appendix 7.1. 4 City of Murrieta General Plan Noise Element (Exhibit 3-A).

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
32 7.2 I NTERIOR NOISE ANALYSIS
To ensure that the interior noise levels comply with the City of Murrieta interior noise level standard of 45 dBA CNEL, future noise levels we re calculated at the estimated building façade locations to calculate the required noise level reduction to comply with the City of Murrieta interior noise level standards.

7.2.1 N OISE REDUCTION METHODOLOGY
The interior noise level is the difference between the predicted exterior noise level at the building facade and the noise reduction of the structure. Typical building construction will provide a Noise Reduction (NR) of approximately 12 dBA with "windows open" and a minimum 25 dBA noise reduction with "windows closed." (3) However, sound leaks, cracks and openings within the window assembly can greatly diminish its effectiveness in reducing noise. Several methods are used to improve interior noise reduction, including: (1) weather-stripped solid core exterior doors; (2) upgraded dual glazed windows; (3) mechanical ventilation/air conditioning; and (4) exterior wall/roof assembles free of cut outs or openings.

7.2.2 I

NTERIOR NOISE LEVEL ASSESSMENT
Tables 7-2 to 7-3 shows that the buildings adjacent to Whitewood Road, Clinton Keith Road, and Arendt Lane will experience future unmitigated noise levels ranging from 55.6 to 76.9 dBA CNEL at first-floor building façades and 58.1 to 76.8 dBA CNEL at second-floor building façades. The interior noise level analysis shows that for units adjacent to Whitewood Road and Ardent Lane the City of Murrieta 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard can be satisfied using standard windows with a minimum STC rating of 27 with a windows closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air conditioning), for all first-floor locations.

First-floor building facades adjacent to Clinton Keith Road would require a windows closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air conditioning) and windows with a minimum STC ratings of 27 to 34 to satisfy City of Murrieta interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Specifically, first-floor dwe lling units of Buildings 6 through 8, adjacent to Clinton Keith Road, would require windows with a minimum STC 27, Building 15 would require windows with a minimum STC 29, Buildings 13 and 14 would require windows rated at STC 30, Building 10 would require windows rated at STC 31, Building 17 would require windows rated at STC 31, Buildings 11 and 16 would require windows rated at STC 33,and Building 12 would require windows with a rating of STC 34.

Second-floor building facades adjacent to Clinton Keith Road would require a windows closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air conditioning) and windows with a minimum STC ratings of 30 to 34 to satisfy City of Murrieta interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Specifically, second-floor dwelling units of Building 5, adjacent to Clinton Keith Road, would require windows with a minimum STC 30, Building 6 would require windows with a minimum STC 31, Buildings 7 through 9, 13 and 17 would require windows rated at STC 32, Building 11, and 14 through 16 would require windows with a minimum rating of STC 33, and Building 12 would require windows with a rating of STC 34. The interior noise analysis shows that with the Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
33 recommended interior noise abatement measures for first- and second-floor facades adjacent to Whitewood Road, Clinton Keith Road, and Arendt Lane described in the Executive Summary, the Project will satisfy the City of Murrieta 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level standard for residential development.

White
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
34 TABLE 7-2: FIRST-FLOOR INTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS (CNEL) Lot
Number
Noise
Level
at Façade1
Required
Interior
NR2
Typical
Interior
NR3
Interior
Noise
Level5
Threshold6 Threshold
Exceeded?
Upgraded
Windows4
Recommended
STC Rating
Nois
Reco
1 56.1 11.1 25.0 31.1 45.0 No No 27.0
2 55.6 10.6 25.0 30.6 45.0 No No 27.0
3 55.8 10.8 25.0 30.8 45.0 No No 27.0
4 57.2 12.2 25.0 32.2 45.0 No No 27.0
5 56.9 11.9 25.0 31.9 45.0 No No 27.0
5 61.4 16.4 25.0 36.4 45.0 No No 27.0
6 64.4 19.4 25.0 39.4 45.0 No No 27.0
7 67.2 22.2 25.0 42.2 45.0 No No 27.0
8 68.6 23.6 25.0 43.6 45.0 No No 27.0
9 70.8 25.8 25.0 45.8 45.0 Yes Yes 28.0
10 73.8 28.8 25.0 48.8 45.0 Yes Yes 31.0
11 75.2 30.2 25.0 50.2 45.0 Yes Yes 33.0
12 76.9 31.9 25.0 51.9 45.0 Yes Yes 34.0
13 72.4 27.4 25.0 47.4 45.0 Yes Yes 30.0
14 72.3 27.3 25.0 47.3 45.0 Yes Yes 30.0
15 71.2 26.2 25.0 46.2 45.0 Yes Yes 29.0
16 75.2 30.2 25.0 50.2 45.0 Yes Yes 33.0
17 74.3 29.3 25.0 49.3 45.0 Yes Yes 32.0
17 58.2 13.2 25.0 33.2 45.0 No No 27.0
18 58.2 13.2 25.0 33.2 45.0 No No 27.0
19 60.0 15.0 25.0 35.0 45.0 No No 27.0
1 Exterior noise level at the facade with a windows closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air conditioning). 2 Noise reduction required to satisfy the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standards. 3 Estimated minimum interior noise reduction.
4 Does the required interior noise reduction trigger upgraded with a minimum STC rating of greater than 27? 5 Estimated interior noise level with minimum STC rating for all windows. "NR" = Noise reduction
Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
35 TABLE 7-3: SECOND-FLOOR INTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS (CNEL) Lot
Number
Noise
Level
at Façade1
Required
Interior
NR2
Typical
Interior
NR3
Interior
Noise
Level5
Threshold6 Threshold
Exceeded?
Upgraded
Windows4
Recommended
STC Rating
Interior
Noise Level with
Recommended
STC5
1 64.1 19.1 25.0 39.1 45.0 No No 27.0 39.1
2 62.1 17.1 25.0 37.1 45.0 No No 27.0 37.1
3 62.3 17.3 25.0 37.3 45.0 No No 27.0 37.3
4 65.4 20.4 25.0 40.4 45.0 No No 27.0 40.4
5 64.7 19.7 25.0 39.7 45.0 No No 27.0 39.7
5 72.8 27.8 25.0 47.8 45.0 Yes Yes 30.0 44.8
6 73.3 28.3 25.0 48.3 45.0 Yes Yes 31.0 44.3
7 74.6 29.6 25.0 49.6 45.0 Yes Yes 32.0 44.6
8 74.3 29.3 25.0 49.3 45.0 Yes Yes 32.0 44.3
9 74.3 29.3 25.0 49.3 45.0 Yes Yes 32.0 44.3
10 76.8 31.8 25.0 51.8 45.0 Yes Yes 34.0 44.8
11 75.1 30.1 25.0 50.1 45.0 Yes Yes 33.0 44.1
12 76.6 31.6 25.0 51.6 45.0 Yes Yes 34.0 44.6
13 75.0 30.0 25.0 50.0 45.0 Yes Yes 32.0 45.0
14 75.2 30.2 25.0 50.2 45.0 Yes Yes 33.0 44.2
15 75.1 30.1 25.0 50.1 45.0 Yes Yes 33.0 44.1
16 75.1 30.1 25.0 50.1 45.0 Yes Yes 33.0 44.1
17 74.2 29.2 25.0 49.2 45.0 Yes Yes 32.0 44.2
17 58.2 13.2 25.0 33.2 45.0 No No 27.0 33.2
18 58.1 13.1 25.0 33.1 45.0 No No 27.0 33.1
19 59.7 14.7 25.0 34.7 45.0 No No 27.0 34.7
1 Exterior noise level at the facade with a windows closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air conditioning). 2 Noise reduction required to satisfy the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standards. 3 Estimated minimum interior noise reduction.
4 Does the required interior noise reduction trigger upgraded with a minimum STC rating of greater than 27? 5 Estimated interior noise level with minimum STC rating for all windows. "NR" = Noise reduction
Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
36 This page intentionally left blank.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
37 8 OFF-SITE TRANSPORTATION NOISE IMPACTS
To assess the off-site transportation CNEL noise level impacts associated with the proposed Project, noise contours were developed based on the Whitewood I Traffic Analysis (24). Noise contour boundaries represent the equal levels of noise exposure and are measured in CNEL from the center of the roadway. Noise contours were developed for the following traffic scenarios:
 Existing (2022) Conditions: This scenario refers to the existing present-day noise conditions without the proposed Project.
 Existing plus Project Conditions: This scenario refers to noise conditions based on a comparison of the Existing (2022) traffic co nditions to Existing (2022) plus Project conditions.
 Opening Year Cumulative (2024) Without Project Conditions: This scenario refers to cumulative noise conditions without the proposed Project.  Opening Year Cumulative (2024) With Project Conditions: This scenario refers to the potential near-term cumulative noise conditions with the proposed Project.

Based on the Whitewood I Traffic Analysis, the Project is anticipated to generate an average of 1,826 new trips daily (24)

8.1 T RAFFIC NOISE CONTOURS
Noise contours were used to assess the Project' s incremental 24-hour dBA CNEL traffic-related noise impacts at land uses adjacent to roadways conveying Project traffic. The noise contours represent the distance to noise levels of a constant value and are measured from the center of the roadway for the 70, 65, and 60 dBA CNEL noise levels. The noise contours do not consider the effect of any existing noise barriers or topography that may attenuate ambient noise levels.

In addition, because the noise contours reflect modeling of vehicular noise on area roadways, they appropriately do not reflect noise contributions from the surrounding stationary noise sources within the Project study area.

Tables 8-1 through 8-4 present a summary of the exterior dBA CNEL traffic noise levels. Roadway segments are analyzed in each of the following timeframes: Existing without and with Project conditions and Opening Year Cumulative (2024) without and with Project conditions. Appendix

8.1 includes a summary of the dBA CNEL traffic noise level contours for each of the traffic scenarios.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
38 TABLE 8-1: EXISTING WITHOUT PROJECT NOISE CONTOURS
ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at
Nearest
Receiving
Land Use
(dBA)2
Distance to Contour from
Centerline (Feet)
65 dBA
CNEL
60 dBA
CNEL
55 dBA
CNEL
1 Clinton Keith Rd. w/o I-215 SB Ramps Commercial 73.5 248 533 1149 2 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o I-215 NB Ramps Commercial/Public 72.1 200 432 930 3 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Warm Springs Pkwy. Residential/Public 71.2 172 371 800 4 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Whitewood Rd. Residential/Public 73.0 229 493 1061 5 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Arendt Lane Residential 73.0 229 493 1061 6 Whitewood Rd. s/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential/Public 71.7 140 302 651 7 Whitewood Rd. n/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential 71.6 137 295 635 8 Whitewood Rd. n/o Driveway 1 Residential 71.6 137 296 638 1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses. 2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use. "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road.

TABLE 8-2: EXISTING WITH PROJECT NOISE CONTOURS
ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at
Nearest
Receiving
Land Use
(dBA)2
Distance to Contour from
Centerline (Feet)
65 dBA
CNEL
60 dBA
CNEL
55 dBA
CNEL
1 Clinton Keith Rd. w/o I-215 SB Ramps Commercial 73.6 250 538 1158 2 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o I-215 NB Ramps Commercial/Public 72.3 204 440 948 3 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Warm Springs Pkwy. Residential/Public 71.3 176 380 819 4 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Whitewood Rd. Residential/Public 73.1 231 498 1074 5 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Arendt Lane Residential 73.0 230 496 1069 6 Whitewood Rd. s/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential/Public 71.8 141 305 656 7 Whitewood Rd. n/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential 71.8 141 304 655 8 Whitewood Rd. n/o Driveway 1 Residential 71.8 142 306 660 1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses. 2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use. "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
39 TABLE 8-3: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2024) WITHOUT PROJECT NOISE CONTOURS ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at
Nearest
Receiving
Land Use
(dBA)2
Distance to Contour from
Centerline (Feet)
65 dBA
CNEL
60 dBA
CNEL
55 dBA
CNEL
1 Clinton Keith Rd. w/o I-215 SB Ramps Commercial 74.8 300 646 1391 2 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o I-215 NB Ramps Commercial/Public 73.6 251 542 1167 3 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Warm Springs Pkwy. Residential/Public 72.9 224 483 1040 4 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Whitewood Rd. Residential/Public 74.0 267 576 1240 5 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Arendt Lane Residential 74.0 267 576 1240 6 Whitewood Rd. s/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential/Public 72.7 163 351 757 7 Whitewood Rd. n/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential 73.9 197 425 916 8 Whitewood Rd. n/o Driveway 1 Residential 74.0 198 426 918 1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses. 2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use. "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road.

TABLE 8-4: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2024) WITH PROJECT NOISE CONTOURS ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at
Nearest
Receiving
Land Use
(dBA)2
Distance to Contour from
Centerline (Feet)
65 dBA
CNEL
60 dBA
CNEL
55 dBA
CNEL
1 Clinton Keith Rd. w/o I-215 SB Ramps Commercial 74.8 302 650 1400 2 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o I-215 NB Ramps Commercial/Public 73.9 261 563 1213 3 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Warm Springs Pkwy. Residential/Public 73.0 228 490 1056 4 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Whitewood Rd. Residential/Public 74.1 270 581 1252 5 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Arendt Lane Residential 74.1 273 588 1267 6 Whitewood Rd. s/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential/Public 72.7 164 353 761 7 Whitewood Rd. n/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential 74.1 201 433 933 8 Whitewood Rd. n/o Driveway 1 Residential 74.0 198 427 920 1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses. 2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the nearest receiving land use. "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the road.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
40 8.2 E XISTING PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS
Table 8-1 shows the Existing without Project conditions CNEL noise levels. The Existing without Project exterior noise levels are expected to range from 71.2 to 73.5 dBA CNEL, without accounting for any noise attenuation features such as noise barriers or topography. Table 8-2 shows the Existing plus Project conditions will range from 71.3 to 73.6 dBA CNEL. Table 8-5 shows that the Project off-site traffic noise level increases will range from less than 0.1 to 0.2 dBA CNEL.

Based on the significance criteria for off-site tr affic noise presented in Section 4.2, land uses adjacent to the study area roadway segments would experience less than significant noise level increases due to unmitigated Project-related traffic noise levels.

8.3 O PENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2024) TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES Table 8-3 presents the Opening Year Cumulative (2024) without Project conditions CNEL noise levels. The Opening Year Cumulative (2024) without Project exterior noise levels are expected to range from 72.7 to 74.8 dBA CNEL, without accounting for any noise attenuation features such as noise barriers or topography. Table 8-4 shows the Opening Year Cumulative (2024) with Project conditions will range from 72.7 to 74.8 dBA CNEL. Table 8-6 shows that the Project off- site traffic noise level increases will range from less than 0.1 to 0.3 dBA CNEL. Based on the significance criteria for off-site traffic noise pres ented in Section 4.2, land uses adjacent to the study area roadway segments would experience less than significant noise level increases due to unmitigated Project-related traffic noise levels.

8.5 C UMULATIVE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES
Table 8-7 shows that the Project off-site contribution to cumulative traffic noise level increases range from less than 0.1 to 0.3 dBA CNEL. Based on the significance criteria for off-site traffic noise presented in Section 4.2, land uses adjacent to the study area roadway segments would experience substantial noise level increases due to Project-related traffic noise level increases and would be considered a less than significant impact.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
41 TABLE 8-5: EXISTING WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE INCREASES ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at Receiving
Land Use (dBA)2
Incremental Noise Level
Increase Threshold3
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Addition Limit Exceeded?
1 Clinton Keith Rd. w/o I-215 SB Ramps Commercial 73.5 73.6 0.1 1.5 No 2 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o I-215 NB Ramps Commercial/Public 72.1 72.3 0.1 1.5 No 3 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Warm Springs Pkwy . Residential/Public 71.2 71.3 0.2 1.5 No 4 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Whitewood Rd. Residential/Public 73.0 73.1 0.1 1.5 No 5 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Arendt Lane Residential 73.0 73.0 0.0 1.5 No 6 Whitewood Rd. s/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential/Public 71.7 71.8 0.0 1.5 No 7 Whitewood Rd. n/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential 71.6 71.8 0.2 1.5 No 8 Whitewood Rd. n/o Driveway 1 Residential 71.6 71.8 0.2 1.5 No 1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses. 2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the receiving land use. 3 Does the Project create an incremental noise level increase exceeding the significance criteria (Table 4-1)?

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
42 TABLE 8-6: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2024) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE INCREASES ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at Receiving
Land Use (dBA)2
Incremental Noise Level
Increase Threshold3
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Addition Limit Exceeded?
1 Clinton Keith Rd. w/o I-215 SB Ramps Commercial 74.8 74.8 0.0 1.5 No 2 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o I-215 NB Ramps Commercial/Public 73.6 73.9 0.3 1.5 No 3 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Warm Springs Pkwy . Residential/Public 72.9 73.0 0.1 1.5 No 4 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Whitewood Rd. Residential/Public 74.0 74.1 0.1 1.5 No 5 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Arendt Lane Residential 74.0 74.1 0.1 1.5 No 6 Whitewood Rd. s/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential/Public 72.7 72.7 0.0 1.5 No 7 Whitewood Rd. n/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential 73.9 74.1 0.2 1.5 No 8 Whitewood Rd. n/o Driveway 1 Residential 74.0 74.0 0.0 1.5 No 1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses. 2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the receiving land use. 3 Does the Project create an incremental noise level increase exceeding the significance criteria (Table 4-1)?

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
43 TABLE 8-9: HORIZON YEAR (2045) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE INCREASES ID Road Segment Receiving
Land Use1
CNEL at Receiving
Land Use (dBA)2
Incremental Noise
Level Increase
Threshold3
Existing
Without
Project
OY 2024
Without
Project
OY 2024
with
Project
Cumulative
Increase
Project
Contribution Limit Exceeded?
1 Clinton Keith Rd. w/o I-215 SB Ramps Commercial 73.5 74.8 74.8 1.3 0.0 1.5 No 2 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o I-215 NB Ramps Com mercial/Public 72.1 73.6 73.9 1.8 0.3 1.5 No 3 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Warm Springs Pkwy. Re sidential/Public 71.2 72.9 73.0 1.8 0.1 1.5 No 4 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Whitewood Rd. Residential/Public 73.0 74.0 74.1 1.1 0.1 1.5 No 5 Clinton Keith Rd. e/o Arendt Lane Residential 73.0 74.0 74.1 1.1 0.1 1.5 No 6 Whitewood Rd. s/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential/Public 71.7 72.7 72.7 1.0 0.0 1.5 No 7 Whitewood Rd. n/o Clinton Keith Rd Residential 71.6 73.9 74.1 2.5 0.2 1.5 No 8 Whitewood Rd. n/o Driveway 1 Residential 71.6 74.0 74.0 2.4 0.0 1.5 No 1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses. 2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the receiving land use. 3 Does the Project create an incremental noise level increase exceeding the significance criteria (Table 4-1)? s/o = south of; e/o = east of; w/o = west of

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
44 This page intentionally left blank.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
45 9 SENSITIVE RECEIVER LOCATIONS
To assess the potential for long-term operational and short-term construction noise impacts, the following sensitive receiver locations, as shown on Exhibit 9-A, were identified as representative locations for analysis. Sensitive receivers are generally defined as locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could otherwise adversely affect the use of the land.

Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include schools, hospitals, single-family dwellings, mobile home parks, churches, libraries, and recreation areas. Moderately noise- sensitive land uses typically in clude multi-family dwellings, hotels, motels, dormitories, out- patient clinics, cemeteries, golf courses, country clubs, athletic/tennis clubs, and equestrian clubs. Land uses that are considered relatively insensitive to noise include business, commercial, and professional developments. Land uses that are typically not affected by noise include:
industrial, manufacturing, utilities, agriculture, undeveloped land, parking lots, warehousing, liquid and solid waste facilities, salvage yards, and transit terminals.

To describe the potential off-site Project noise leve ls, six receiver locations in the vicinity of the Project site were identified. All distances are measured from the Project site boundary to the outdoor living areas (e.g., private backyards) or at the building façade, whichever is closer to the Project site. The selection of receiver locations is based on FHWA guidelines and is consistent with additional guidance provided by Caltrans and the FTA, as previously described in Section 5.2.

Other sensitive land uses in the Project study area that are located at greater distances than those identified in this noise study will experience lower noise levels than those presented in this report due to the additional attenuation from distance and the shielding of intervening structures. Distance is measured in a straight line from the project boundary to each receiver location.

R1: Location R1 represents existing noise sensitive single-family residence at 35960 Lindstrand Avenue, approximately 130 feet west of the Project site. Receiver R1 is placed near the private outdoor living area (backyar d) adjacent to Whitewood Road facing the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L1, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.

R2: Location R2 represents the existing noise sensitive single-family residence at 35842 Meadowlark Lane, approximately 59 feet north of the Project site. Receiver R2 is placed near the private outdoor living area (backyard). A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L2, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.

R3: Location R3 represents the existing noise sensitive single-family residence at 35815 Arendt Lane, approximately 64 feet north of the Project site. Receiver R3 is placed near the private outdoor living area (backyard) facing the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L4, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.

R4: Location R4 represents the existing noise sensitive single-family residence at 35820 Arendt Lane, approximately 114 feet northeast of the Project site. Receiver R4 is placed near the private outdoor living area (backyard) facing the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L4, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
46 R5: Location R5 represents the existing noise sensitive single-family residence at 35960 Arendt Lane, approximately 122 feet east of the Project site. Receiver R5 is placed near the private outdoor living area (backyard) facing the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L4, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.

R6: Location R6 represents the existing noise sensitive Vista Murrieta High School at 28251 Clinton Keith Road, approximately 551 feet wouthwest of the Project site. Since there are no private outdoor living areas (backyards) facing the Project site, receiver R6 is placed at the building façade. A 24-hour noise measurem ent was taken near this location, L3, to describe the existing ambient noise environment.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
47 EXHIBIT 8-A: RECEIVER LOCATIONS

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
48 This page intentionally left blank.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
49 10 OPERATIONAL NOISE IMPACTS
This section analyzes the potential stationary-source operational noise impacts at the nearest receiver locations, identified in Section 9, resulting from the operation of the proposed Whitewood I Project. Exhibit 10-A identifies the representative noise source locations used to assess the operational noise levels.

10.1 O PERATIONAL NOISE SOURCES
This operational noise analysis is intended to describe noise level impacts associated with the expected typical of daytime and nighttime activities at the Project site. To present the potential worst-case noise conditions, this analysis assumes the Project would be operational 24 hours per day, seven days per week. The on-site Project-related noise sources are expected to include:
pool/spa activity, playground activity, parking lot vehicle movements, and air conditioning units.

10.2 R EFERENCE NOISE LEVELS
To estimate the Project operational noise impact s, reference noise level measurements were collected from similar types of activities to represent the noise levels expected with the development of the proposed Project. This section provides a detailed description of the reference noise level measurements shown on Table 10-1 used to estimate the Project operational noise impacts. It is important to note that the following projected noise levels assume the worst-case noise environment with the pool/spa activity, playground activity, parking lot vehicle movements, and air conditioning units all operating at the same time. These sources of noise activity will likely vary throughout the day.

TABLE 10-1: REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS
Noise Source
Noise
Source
Height
(Feet)
Min./Hour3 Reference Noise
Level (dBA Leq)
'@ 50 Feet
Sound Power
Level (dBA)4 Day Night
Pool/Spa Activity1 8' 60 0 63.0 94.6
Playground Activity1 5' 60 0 59.9 91.5
Parking Lot Vehicle Movements1 5' 60 60 42.7 74.3
Air Conditioning Units2 5' 45 30 44.4 76.0
1 As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc.
2 Carrier
3 Anticipated duration (minutes within the hour) of noise activity during typical hourly conditions expected at the Project site. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m. 4 Sound power level represents the total amount of acoustical energy (noise level) produced by a sound source independent of distance or surroundings. Sound power levels calculated using the CadnaA noise model at the reference distance to the noise source.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
50 EXHIBIT 9-A: OPERATIONAL NOISE SOURCE LOCATIONS

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
51 MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES
The reference noise level measurements presented in this section were collected using a Larson Davis LxT Type 1 precisions sound level meter (serial number 01146). The LxT sound level meter was calibrated using a Larson-Davis calibrator, Model CAL 200, was programmed in "slow" mode to record noise levels in "A" weighted form and was located at approximately five feet above the ground elevation for each measurement. The sound level meters and microphones were equipped with a windscreen during all measurements. All noise level measurement equipment satisfies the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard specifications for sound level meters ANSI S1.4-2014/IEC 61672-1:2013. (18)
P

OOL/SPA ACTIVITY
To represent the noise levels associated with pool activities, a reference noise level measurement was collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. The pool activity noise levels include kids playing, running, yelling, splashing, playing with a ball, and parents talking. The Pool/spa activity reference noise level is used to model activities during the daytime. The reference noise level at 50 feet is 63.0 dBA Leq for pool activity. The Pool activities are assumed to end at 10:00 PM and no nighttime activities are modeled.

PLAYGROUND ACTIVITY
To represent the noise levels associated with playground activities, a reference noise level measurement was collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. The playground activities noise levels include kids playing, running, shouting, playing on swings and a jungle gym, and parents talking.

The playground activity reference noise level is used to model activities during the daytime. The reference noise level at 50 feet is 59.9 dBA L
eq for pool activity. The Pool activities are assumed
to end at 10:00 PM and no nighttime activities are modeled.

PARKING LOT ACTIVITY
To describe the noise levels associated with th e parking lot activities, a reference noise level measurement was collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. The parking lot activities describe vehicle navigating the parking lot, vehicles parking with drivers and passengers entering and exiting the vehicle. At a uniform 50-foot reference distance, the reference noise level measured 42.7 dBA L
eq. The parking lot activity reference noise level is used to model parking activities during the daytime and the reference level is reduce by 50 percent (3 dBA) to represent reduced activities during the evening hours.

IR CONDITIONING UNITS
To assess the noise levels created by the air conditioning units, reference noise levels were taken from equipment specifications for a 1 to 5-ton residential packaged air conditioning unit (Carrier 48VGB24). Each air conditioning unit was modeled as operating at full power for 45 minutes per hour during the daytime and 30 minutes during the nighttime. For this noise analysis, the air conditioning units are expected to be ground mounted adjacent to the proposed buildings. The air conditioning units are anticipated to be located 3 feet above the ground level. According to Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
52 the manufacture’s specification sheets, the Carrier 48VGB24 generates a sound power level of 76 dBA Lw, or approximately 44.4 dBA Lmax at 50 feet.

10.3 C ADNAA NOISE PREDICTION MODEL
To fully describe the exterior operational noise levels from the Project, Urban Crossroads, Inc. developed a noise prediction model using the CadnaA (Computer Aided Noise Abatement) computer program. CadnaA can analyze multiple types of noise sources using the spatially accurate Project site plan, georeferenced Nearmap aerial imagery, topography, buildings, and barriers in its calculations to predict outdoor noise levels.

Using the ISO 9613 protocol, CadnaA will calculate the distance from each noise source to the noise receiver locations, using the ground absorption, distance, and barrier/building attenuation inputs to provide a summary of noise level at each receiver and the partial noise level contributions by noise source. Consistent with the ISO 9613 protocol, the CadnaA noise prediction model relies on the reference sound power level (L w) to describe individual noise
sources. While sound pressure levels (e.g., L eq) quantify in decibels the intensity of given sound sources at a reference distance, sound power levels (Lw) are connected to the sound source and are independent of distance. Sound pressure levels vary substantially with distance from the source and diminish because of intervening obstacles and barriers, air absorption, wind, and other factors. Sound power is the acoustical energy emitted by the sound source and is an absolute value that is not affected by the environment.

The operational noise level calculations provided in this noise study account for the distance attenuation provided due to geometric spreading, when sound from a localized stationary source (i.e., a point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. A default ground attenuation factor of 0.5 was used in the CadnaA noise analysis to account for mixed ground representing a combination of hard and soft surfaces. Appendix 10.1 includes the detailed noise model inputs used to estimate the Project operational noise levels presented in this section.

10.4 P ROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS
Using the reference noise levels to represent the proposed Project operations that include pool/spa activity, playground activity, parking lot vehicle movements, and air conditioning units, Urban Crossroads, Inc. calculated the operational source noise levels that are expected to be generated at the Project site and the Project-related noise level increases that would be experienced at each of the sensitive receiver locations. Table 10-2 shows the Project operational noise levels during the daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The daytime hourly noise levels at the off-site receiver locations are expected to range from 35.3 to 49.9 dBA L eq.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
53 TABLE 10-2: DAYTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS Noise Source1 Operational Noise Levels by Receiver Location (dBA Leq) R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Pool/Spa Activity 32.6 35.6 29.8 39.5 49.1 40.9
Playground Activity 29.8 33.6 25.8 32.2 33.4 33.1
Parking Lot Vehicle Movements 17.6 26.8 11.5 19.9 29.0 22.6 Air Conditioning Units 40.2 40.6 33.1 40.8 41.1 37.6
Total (All Noise Sources) 41.2 42.5 35.3 43.6 49.9 43.1 1 See Exhibit 10-A for the noise source locations. CadnaA noise model calculations are included in Appendix 10.1.

Table 10-3 shows the Project operational noise levels during the nighttime hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. The nighttime hourly noise levels at the off-site receiver locations are expected to range from 30.5 to 38.8 dBA Leq. The differences between the daytime and nighttime noise levels are largely related to the duration of noise activity (Table 10-1).

TABLE 10-3: NIGHTTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS
Noise Source1 Operational Noise Levels by Receiver Location (dBA Leq) R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
Pool/Spa Activity 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Playground Activity 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Parking Lot Vehicle Movements 17.6 26.8 11.5 19.9 29.0 22.6 Air Conditioning Units 37.4 37.9 30.4 38.1 38.3 34.9
Total (All Noise Sources) 37.4 38.2 30.5 38.2 38.8 35.2 1 See Exhibit 10-A for the noise source locations. CadnaA noise model calculations are included in Appendix 10.1.

10.5 P ROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE
To demonstrate compliance with local noise regulations, the Project-only operational noise levels are evaluated against exterior noise level thresholds based on the City of Murrieta exterior noise level standards at nearby noise-sensitive receiver locations. Table 10-4 shows the operational noise levels associated with Whitewood I Project will satisfy the City of Murrieta 50 dBA L eq
daytime and 45 dBA L eq nighttime exterior noise level standards at all nearby noise sensitive receiver locations. Therefore, the operational noise impacts are considered less than significant at the nearby noise-sensitive receiver locations.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
54 TABLE 10-4: OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE
Receiver
Location1
Project Operational
Noise Levels (dBA Leq)2
Noise Level Standards
(dBA Leq)3
Noise Level Standards
Exceeded?4
Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime
R1 41.2 37.4 50 45 No No
R2 42.5 38.2 50 45 No No
R3 35.3 30.5 50 45 No No
R4 43.6 38.2 50 45 No No
R5 49.9 38.8 50 45 No No
R6 43.1 35.2 50 45 No No
1 See Exhibit 8-A for the receiver locations.
2 Proposed Project operational noise levels as shown on Tables 10-2 and 10-3. 3 Exterior noise level standards for source (commercial) land use, as shown on Table 4-1. 4 Do the estimated Project operational noise source activities exceed the noise level standards? "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m.

10.6 P ROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES
To describe the Project operational noise level increases, the Project operational noise levels are combined with the existing ambient noise levels measurements for the nearby receiver locations potentially impacted by Project operational noise sources. Since the units used to measure noise, decibels (dB), are logarithmic units, the Projec t-operational and existing ambient noise levels cannot be combined using standard arithmetic equations. (6) Instead, they must be logarithmically added using the following base equation:

SPLTotal = 10log10[10SPL1/10 + 10SPL2/10 + … 10 SPLn/10] Where “SPL1,” “SPL2,” etc. are equal to the sound pressure levels being combined, or in this case, the Project-operational and existing ambient noise levels. The difference between the combined Project and ambient noise levels describes the Project noise level increases to the existing ambient noise environment. As indicated on Tables 10-5 and 10-6, the Project will generate daytime and nighttime operational noise level increases ranging from less than 0.1 to 2.1 dBA L eq
at the nearest receiver locations. Project-related operational noise level increases will satisfy the operational noise level increase significance crit eria presented on Table 4-1. Therefore, the incremental Project operational noise level increase is considered less than significant at all receiver locations.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
55 TABLE 10-5: DAYTIME PROJECT OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES Receiver
Location1
Total Project
Operational
Noise Level2
Measurement
Location3
Reference
Ambient
Noise
Levels4
Combined
Project
and
Ambient5
Project
Increase6
Increase
Criteria7
Increase
Criteria
Exceeded?
R1 41.2 L1 68.1 68.1 0.0 3 No
R2 42.5 L2 58.7 58.8 0.1 5 No
R3 35.3 L4 51.9 52.0 0.1 5 No
R4 43.6 L4 51.9 52.5 0.6 5 No
R5 49.9 L4 51.9 54.0 2.1 5 No
R6 43.1 L3 66.2 66.2 0.0 3 No
1 See Exhibit 10-A for the receiver locations.
2 Total Project daytime operational noise levels as shown on Table 10-2. 3 Reference noise level measurement locations as shown on Exhibit 5-A. 4 Observed daytime ambient noise levels as shown on Table 5-1. 5 Represents the combined ambient conditions plus the Project activities. 6 The noise level increase expected with the addition of the proposed Project activities. 7 Significance increase criteria as shown on Table 4-1.

TABLE 10-6: NIGHTTIME OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL INCREASES Receiver
Location1
Total Project
Operational
Noise Level2
Measurement
Location3
Reference
Ambient
Noise
Levels4
Combined
Project
and
Ambient5
Project
Increase6
Increase
Criteria7
Increase
Criteria
Exceeded?
R1 37.4 L1 64.6 64.6 0.0 3 No
R2 38.2 L2 54.0 54.1 0.1 5 No
R3 30.5 L4 48.4 48.5 0.1 5 No
R4 38.2 L4 48.4 48.8 0.4 5 No
R5 38.8 L4 48.4 48.9 0.5 5 No
R6 35.2 L3 63.0 63.0 0.0 3 No
1 See Exhibit 10-A for the receiver locations.
2 Total Project nighttime operational noise levels as shown on Table 10-3. 3 Reference noise level measurement locations as shown on Exhibit 5-A. 4 Observed nighttime ambient noise levels as shown on Table 5-1. 5 Represents the combined ambient conditions plus the Project activities. 6 The noise level increase expected with the addition of the proposed Project activities. 7 Significance increase criteria as shown on Table 4-1.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
56 This page intentionally left blank.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
57 11 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS
This section analyzes potential impacts resulting from the short-term construction activities associated with the development of the Project. Exhibit 11-A shows the construction noise source locations in relation to the nearby sensitive receiver locations previously described in Section 9.

11.1 C ONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS
Noise generated by the Project construction equipment will include a combination of trucks, power tools, concrete mixers, and portable generators that when combined can reach high levels. The number and mix of construction equipment is expected to occur in the following stages:
 Site Preparation
 Grading
 Building Construction
 Paving
 Architectural Coating

11.2 C ONSTRUCTION REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS
To describe peak construction noise activities, this construction noise analysis was prepared using reference noise level measurements published in the Road Construction Noise Model (RCNM) by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) (25). The FHWA model provides a comprehensive source of reference construction noise levels. Table 11-1 provides a summary of the RCNM construction reference noise level measurements expressed in hourly average dBA L max using the
estimated RCNM usage factors (25) to describe the construction activities for each stage of Project construction.

11.3 C ADNAA NOISE PREDICTION MODEL
To fully describe the construction noise levels from the Project, Urban Crossroads, Inc. developed a noise prediction model using the CadnaA (Computer Aided Noise Abatement) computer program. CadnaA can analyze multiple types of noise sources using the spatially accurate Project site plan, georeferenced Nearmap aerial imagery, topography, buildings, and barriers in its calculations to predict outdoor noise levels.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
58 EXHIBIT 11-A: CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
59 TABLE 11-1: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS Construction
Stage
Reference
Construction
Equipmnet1
Reference Noise
Level @ 50 Feet
(dBA Leq)
Composite Reference
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
Reference
Power Level
(dBA Lw)
Site
Preparation
Dozer 78.0

83.4 115.1 Front End Loader 75.0
Grader 81.0
Grading
Excavator 77.0

84.0 115.6 Tractor 80.0
Scraper 80.0
Building
Construction
Crane 73.0

77.4 109.1 Backhoe 74.0
Generator (<25kVA) 70.0
Paving
Paver 74.0

77.8 109.5 Dump Truck 72.0
Roller 73.0
Architectural
Coating
Man Lift 68.0

76.2 107.8 Compressor (air) 74.0
Generator (<25kVA) 70.0
1 FHWA Road Construction Noise Model.

The construction noise level calculations provided in this noise study account for the distance attenuation provided due to geometric spreading, when sound from a localized stationary source (i.e., a point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. A default ground attenuation factor of 0.5 was used in the noise analysis to account for mixed ground representing a combination of hard and soft surfaces.

11.4 T YPICAL CONSTRUCTION NOISE ANALYSIS
Using the reference construction equipment noise levels and the CadnaA noise prediction model, calculations of the Project construction noise level impacts at the nearby sensitive receiver Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
60 locations were completed. For construction noise assessment, construction equipment can be considered to operate in two modes: stationary and mobile. As defined, stationary equipment operates in a single location for one or more days at a time, with either fixed-power operation (e.g., pumps, generators, and compressors) or variable-power operation (e.g., pile drivers, rock drills, and pavement breakers). Mobile equipm ent moves around the construction site with power applied in cyclic fashion, such as bulldozers, graders, and loaders (FTA 2018). The FTA and FHWA recommend noise impacts from stationary equipment be assessed from the center of the equipment location, while noise impacts from mobile construction equipment should be assessed from the center of the equipment activity area (e.g., construction site). Thus, to assess a more realistic and reasonable worst-case co nstruction scenario while accounting for the dynamic nature of construction activities, this Project construction noise analysis models the equipment combination with the highest reference combined level as a single moving point within the construction area (Project site boundary). Construction impacts are based on the highest noise level calculated at each receiver location. As shown on Table 11-2, the construction noise levels are expected to range from 45.1 to 62.8 dBA L eq, and the highest construction levels
are expected to range from 52.9 to 62.8 dBA Leq at the nearest receiver locations. Appendix 11.1 includes the detailed CadnaA construction noise model inputs.

TABLE 11-2: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVEL SUMMARY Receiver
Location1
Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Site
Preparation Grading Building
Construction Paving Architectural
Coating
Highest
Levels2
R1 59.4 59.9 53.3 53.8 52.1 59.9
R2 61.9 62.4 55.8 56.3 54.6 62.4
R3 52.4 52.9 46.3 46.8 45.1 52.9
R4 59.8 60.3 53.7 54.2 52.5 60.3
R5 62.3 62.8 56.2 56.7 55.0 62.8
R6 57.9 58.4 51.8 52.3 50.6 58.4
1 Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 11-A.
2 Construction noise level calculations based on distance from the construction activity, which is measured from the Project site boundary to the nearest receiver locations. CadnaA construction noise model inputs are included in Appendix 11.1.

11.5 T YPICAL CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE
To evaluate whether the Project will generate pote ntially significant short-term noise levels at nearest receiver locations, a construction-related daytime noise level threshold of 75 dBA L eq is used as a reasonable threshold to assess the da ytime construction noise level impacts. The construction noise analysis shows that the neares t receiver locations will satisfy the reasonable daytime 75 dBA L eq significance threshold during Project construction activities as shown on Table 11-3. Therefore, the noise impacts due to Project construction noise is considered less than significant at all receiver locations.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
61 TABLE 11-3: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVEL COMPLIANCE Receiver
Location1
Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Highest Construction
Noise Levels2 Threshold3 Threshold
Exceeded?4
R1 59.9 75 No
R2 62.4 75 No
R3 52.9 75 No
R4 60.3 75 No
R5 62.8 75 No
R6 58.4 75 No
1 Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 11-A.
2 Highest construction noise level calculations based on distance from the construction noise source activity to the nearest receiver locations.
3 Construction noise level thresholds as shown on Table 4-1. 4 Do the estimated Project construction noise levels exceed the construction noise level threshold?

11.6 T YPICAL CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION IMPACTS
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. It is expected that ground-borne vibration from Project construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion. Ground-borne vibration levels resulting from typical construction activities occurring within the Project site were estimated by data published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). (22) However, while vehicular traffic is rarely perceptible, construction has the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary ground vibration, depending on the specific construction activities and equipment used. Ground vibration levels associated with various types of construction equipment are summarized on Table 11-4. Based on the representative vibration levels presented for various construction equipment types, it is possible to estimate the potential Project construction vibration levels using the following vibration assessment methods defined by the FTA. To describe the human response (annoyance) associated with vibration impacts the FTA provides the following equation: PPV equip = PPV ref x
(25/D)1.5
TABLE 11-4: VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Equipment PPV (in/sec)
at 25 feet
Small bulldozer 0.003
Jackhammer 0.035
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Large bulldozer 0.089
Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
62 Using the vibration source level of construction equipment provided on Table 11-4 and the construction vibration assessment methodology published by the FTA, it is possible to estimate the Project vibration impacts. Table 11-5 presents the expected Project related vibration levels at the nearby receiver locations. At distances ranging from 59 to 567 feet from the Project construction activities to the nearest adjacent o ff-site structure, construction vibration velocity levels are estimated to range from less than 0.01 to 0.02 in/sec PPV. Based on maximum acceptable continuous vibration threshold of 0.04 in/sec PPV, the typical Project construction vibration levels will not exceed the vibration thre sholds at any local receiver. Therefore, the Project-related vibration impacts associated with construction activities are considered less than significant.

TABLE 11-5: PROJECT CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION LEVELS
Receiver
Location1
Distance to
Const.

Activity
(Feet)2
Typical Construction Vibration Levels
PPV (in/sec)3 Thresholds
PPV
(in/sec)4
Thresholds
Exceeded?5 Small
bulldozer
Jack-
hammer
Loaded
Trucks
Large
Bulldozer
Highest
Vibration
Level
R1 130' 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 No
R2 59' 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 No
R3 64' 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 No
R4 114' 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 No
R5 137' 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 No
R6 567' 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 No
1 Construction receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 11-A. 2 Distance from receiver location to Project construction boundary. 3 Based on the Vibration Source Levels of Construction Equipment (Table 11-4). 4 City of Murrieta Municipal Code, Section 16.30.130 (K) (Appendix 3.1) 5 Does the peak vibration exceed the acceptable vibration thresholds? "PPV" = Peak Particle Velocity

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
63 12 REFERENCES

1. State of California. California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G. 2019.

2. California Department of Transportation Environmental Program. Technical Noise Supplement - A Technical Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Sacramento, CA : s.n., September 2013.

3. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Noise Abatement and Control. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. March 1974. EPA/ONAC 550/9/74-004.

4. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Environment and Planning, Noise and Air Quality Branch. Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance. June, 1995.

5. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Highway Traffic Noise in the United States, Problem and Response. April 2000. p. 3.

6. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. May 2006. FTA-VA-90-1003-06.

7. —. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, FTA Report No. 0123. September 2018.

8. California Department of Transportation. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. April 2020.

9. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, FTA-VA-90-1003-06. May 2006.

10. Office of Planning and Research. State of California General Plan Guidlines 2003. October 2003.

11. —. State of California General Plan Guidelines. October 2017.

12. State of California. C a l i f or n i a C od e of R e g u l a t i on s , T i t l e 24 , Pa r t 2 , V ol u m e 1, C h a p t e r 12, S e c t i on 1206.4, Allowable Interior Noise Level. ICC Digital Coes. [Online] 2019. https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CABCV12019/chapter-12-interior-environment.

13. —. 2019 California Green Building Standards Code. January 2020.

14. City of Murrieta. General Plan Noise Element. July 2011.

15. —. Municipal Code, Chapter 16.30 Noise.

16. State of California. California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G. 2018.

17. American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Specification for Sound Level Meters ANSI S1.4- 2014/IEC 61672-1:2013.

18. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model. December 1978. FHWA-RD-77-108.

19. California Department of Transportation Environmental Program, Office of Environmental Engineering. Use of California Vehicle Noise Reference Energy Mean Emission Levels (Calveno REMELs) in FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction. September 1995. TAN 95-03.

20. City of Murrieta. General Plan Circulation Element. July 2011.

21. Urban Crossroads, Inc. Wh itewood I (PRE-2022-2506) Traffic Analysis. July 2022.

22. California Department of Transportation. Traffic Noise Attenuation as a Function of Ground and Vegetation Final Report. June 1995. FHWA/CA/TL-95/23.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
64 23. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Environment and Planning, Noise and Air Quality Branch. Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance. December 2011.

24. California Department of Transportation. Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. May 2011.

25. Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers. Casa Loma Residential Traffic Impact Analysis Report. March 2019.

26. Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affiars (Defra). Update of Noise Database for Prediction of Noise on Construction and Open Sites. 2004.

27. FHWA. Roadway Construction Noise Model. January 2006.

28. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September 2018.

29. State of California. California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G. 2016.

30. Harris, Cyril M. Noise Control in Buildings. s.l. : McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1994.

31. International Society of Explosives Engineer's. Blasters' Handbook, 18th Edition. 2014.

32. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Environment and Planning. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model. January, 2006.

33. Ldn Consulting. University District Rock Crusher Conditional Use Permit, San Marcos. San Marcos : Ldn Consulting, 2011.

34. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipmnet, and Home Appliances. 1971.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
65 13 CERTIFICATION
The contents of this noise study report represent an accurate depiction of the noise environment and impacts associated with the proposed Whitewood I Project. The information contained in this noise study report is based on the best available data at the time of preparation. If you have any questions, please contact me directly at (619) 788-1971.

William Maddux
Senior Associate
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
(619) 788-1971
[email protected]

EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science in Urban and Regional Planning
California Polytechnic State University, Pomona • June 2000

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
ASA – Acoustical Society of America
AEP – Association of Environmental Planners
AWMA – Air and Waste Management Association
INCE – Institute of Noise Control Engineers

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS
Approved Acoustical Consultant • County of San Diego
FHWA Traffic Noise Model of Training • November 2004
CadnaA Basic and Advanced Training Certificate • October 2008.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-07-Noise_Study.docx
66 This page intentionally left blank.

Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

APPENDIX 3.1:

CITY OF MURRIETA MUNICIPAL CODE
67 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

This page intentionally left blank
68 16.30 Noise
Sections:

16.30.010 Purpose.

16.30.020 Declaration of Policy.

16.30.030 Definitions.

16.30.040 Enforcement of Regulations.

16.30.050 Initial Violations.

16.30.060 Activities Exempt from Regulations.

16.30.070 Decibel Measurement.

16.30.080 Noise Zones Designated.

16.30.090 Exterior Noise Standards.

16.30.100 Interior Noise Standards for Multi-family Residential.

16.30.110 Correction for Certain Types of Sounds.

16.30.120 Measurement Methods.

16.30.130 Acts Deemed Violations of Chapter.

16.30.140 Modification of Standards.

16.30.010 Purpose.

The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards to protect the health, safety, and welfare of those living and working in the city and to implement policies of the general plan noise element. (Ord. 182 § 2 (part), 1997)

16.30.020 Declaration of Policy.

Excessive noise levels are detrimental t
o the health and safety of individuals. Noise is considered a public nuisance and the city discourages unnecessary, excessive or annoying noises from all sources. Creating, maintaining, causing or allowing to be created. caused or mainta ined any noise
or vibration in a manner prohibited by the provisions of this chapter is a public nuisance and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor.
(Ord. 182 § 2 (part), 1997)

16.30.030 Definitions.

The following words. terms and phrases. when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this chapter, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:

A-Weighted Sound Level.

The sound level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using Firefox https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/aeab62b6-2793-43ce-a4... 1 of 9 7/19/2022, 3:29 PM
69 the A-weighting network. The level so read is designated dB(A) or dBA.

Ambient Noise Histogram. The composite of all noise from sources near and far, excluding the alleged intrusive noise source. In this context, the ambient noise histogram shall constitute the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

Cumulative Period. An additive period of time composed of individual time segments which may be continuous or interrupted.

Decibel. A unit for measuring the amplitude of a sound, equal to twenty (20) times the logarithm to the base of ten of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is twenty (20) micropascals.

Emergency Machinery, Vehicle or Alarm. Any machinery, vehicle or alarm used, employed, performed or operated in an effort to protect, provide or restore safe conditions in the community, or work by private or public utilities when restoring utility service.

Emergency Work. Work performed for the purpose of preventing or alleviating the physical trauma or property damage threatened or caused by an emergency.

Fixed Noise Source. A stationary device which creates sounds while fixed or motionless, including, but not limited to, residential, agricultural, industrial and commercial machinery and equipment, pumps, fans, compressors, air conditioners and refrigeration equipment.

Impulsive Noise. A sound of short duration, usually less than one second and of high intensity, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay.

Intrusive Noise. The alleged offensive noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at the receptor property.

Mobile Noise Source. A noise source other than a fixed noise source.

Noise Disturbance. An alleged intrusive noise that violates an applicable noise standard of this chapter. Noise Histogram. A graphical representation of the distribution of frequency of occurrence of all noise levels near and far measured over a given period of time.

Noise Level (L
N). The noise level expressed in decibels that exceeds the specified (L,) value a percentage of total time measured. For example, an L25 noise level means that noise level that is exceeded twenty-five (25) percent of the time measured.

Noise-Sensitive Area. An area designated for the purpose of ensuring exceptional quiet (e.g.. around hospitals, nursing homes, libraries, and similar uses).

Noise Zone. A defined area of a generally consistent land use.

Pure Tone Noise. A sound that can be judged as audible as a single pitch or a set of single pitches by the code enforcement officer. For the purposes of this chapter, a pure tone shall exist if the one- third octave band sound pressure level in the band with the tone exceeds the arithmetic average of the sound-pressure levels of the two contiguous one-third octave bands by five dB for center frequencies of five hundred (500) Hertz and above, and by eight dB for center frequencies between one hundred sixty (160) and four hundred (400) Hertz, and by fifteen (15) dB for center frequencies less than or equal to one hundred twenty-five (125) Hertz.

Sound Level Meter. An instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter and frequency weighting network, for the measurement of sound levels, that satisfies the requirements pertinent for Type S2A meters in American National Standards Institute specifications for sound Firefox https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/aeab62b6-2793-43ce-a4... 2 of 9 7/19/2022, 3:29 PM
70 level meters.

Vibration. The minimum ground or structure-borne vibrational motion necessary to cause a normal person to be aware of the vibration including, but not limited to, sensation by touch or visual observations of moving objects. The perception threshold shall be presumed to be a motion velocity of 0.01 in/sec over the range of one to one hundred (100) Hertz.

Weekday. Any day. Monday through Friday, that is not a legal holiday. (Ord. 182 § 2 (part), 1997)

16.30.040 Enforcement of Regulations.

The code enforcement officer shall have primary responsibility for the enforcement of the noise regulations contained in this chapter. The code enforcement officer shall make all noise-level measurements required for the enf
orcement of this chapter.
(Ord. 182 § 2 (part), 1997)

16.30.050 Initial Violations.

In the event of an initial violation of the provisions of this chapter, a written notice of violation shall be given the alleged violator. specifying the time by which the condition shall be corrected or an application for a permit or variance shall be filed. No further action shall be take n if the cause of the
violation has been removed, the condition abated, or fully corrected within the time period specified in the written notice.
(Ord. 182 § 2 (part), 1997)

16.30.060 Activities Exempt from Regulations.

The following activities shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter:

A. Emergency Exemption. The emission of sound for the purpose of alerting persons to the existence of an emergency
, or the emission of sound in the performance of emergency work.

B. Warning Device. Warning devices necessary for the protection of public safety, (e.g., police, tire and ambulance sirens, and train horns).

C. Outdoor Activities. Activities conducted on public playgrounds and public or private school grounds. including, but not limited to, school athletic and school entertainment events.

D. Motion Picture Production and Related Activities. Activities in connection to production of motion pictures.

E. Railroad Activities. All locomotives and rail cars operated by any railroad which is regulated by the state Public Utilities Commission.

F. Federal or State Pre-Exempted Activities. Any activity, to the extent regulation thereof has been pre-empted by state or federal law,
G. Public Health and Safety Activities. All transportation, flood control, and utility company maintenance and construction operations at any time on public right-of-way, and those situations that may occur on private real property deemed necessary to serve the best interest of the public and to protect the public's health and well being, including, but not limited to, street sweeping, debris and limb removal, removal of downed wires, restoring electrical service, repairing traffic Firefox https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/aeab62b6-2793-43ce-a4... 3 of 9 7/19/2022, 3:29 PM
71 signals, unplugging sewers, house moving, vacuuming catchbasins, removal of damaged poles and vehicles, repair of water hydrants and mains, gas lines, oil lines, sewers, etc.

H. Motor, Vehicles on Public Right-of-Way and Private Property. Except as provided in this chapter, all vehicles operating in a legal manner in compliance with local, state, and federal vehicle noise regulations within the public right-of-way or on private property.

1. Minor Maintenance to Residential Real Property. Noise sources associated with the minor maintenance of residential real property, provided the activities take place between the hours of seven a.m. and eight p.m. on any day except Sunday, or between the hours of nine a.m. and eight p.m. on Sunday.
(Ord. 182 § 2 (part), 1997)

16.30.070 Decibel Measurement.

Decibel measurements made in compliance with the provisions of this chapter shall be based on a reference sound-pressure of twenty (20) micropascals, as measured with a sound level meter using the A-weighted network (scale) at slow response, or
at the fast response when measuring
impulsive sound levels and vibrations.
(Ord. 182 § 2 (part). 1997)

16.30.080 Noise Zones Designated.

Receptor properties described in this chapter are hereby assigned to the following noise zones:

A. Noise zone I, noise-sensitive area:

B. Noise zone II, residential properties;
C. Noise zone Ill, commercial properties: and
D. Noise zone IV, industrial properties.
(Ord. 182 §
2 (part), 1997)

16.30.090 Exterior Noise Standards.

A. Standards for Noise Zones. Unless otherwise provided in this chapter, the following exterior noise levels shall apply to all receptor properties within a designated noise zone:

TABLE 3-6

EXTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS
Noise Zone
Designated Noise Zone
Land Use
(Receptor Property)
Time Interval Allowed Exterior
Noise Level (dB)
I
Noise-sensitive area Anytime 45
II
Residential properties
Residential properties within
five hundred (500) feet of a
kennel(s)
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (nighttime)
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (daytime)
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
45 50
70 Firefox https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/aeab62b6-2793-43ce-a4... 4 of 9 7/19/2022, 3:29 PM
72 III Commercial properties 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (nighttime) 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (daytime)
55 60
IV Industrial properties Anytime 70
B. Noise Standards. No person shall operate or cause to be operated. any source of sound at any location within the city or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by a person that causes the noise level, when measured on any other property to exceed the following exterior noise standards:

1. Standard No. 1. Standard No. 1 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour. Standard No. 1 may be the applicable noise level from Table 3-6 above.

2. Standard No. 2. Standard No. 2 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15) minutes in any hour. Standard No. 2 shall be the applicable noise level from Table 3-6 above, plus five dB.

3. Standard No. 3. Standard No. 3 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour. Standard No. 3 shall be the applicable noise level from Table 3-6 above plus ten dB.

4. Standard No. 4. Standard No. 4 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour. Standard No. 4 shall be the applicable noise level from Table 3-6 above plus fifteen (15) dB.

5. Standard No. 5. Standard No. 5 shall be the exterior noise level which shall not be exceeded for any period of time. Standard No. 5 shall be the applicable noise level from Table 3-6 above plus twenty (20) dB.

C. Noise at Zone Boundaries. If the measurement location is on a boundary property between two different zoning districts, the exterior noise level utilized in subsection B of this chapter to determine the exterior standard shall be the arithmetic mean of the exterior noise levels. as specified in Table 3-6, of the subject zones.

D. Measurement of Ambient Noise Histogram. The ambient noise histogram shall be measured at the same location along the property line utilized in subsection B. above, with the alleged intruding noise source inoperative. If the alleged intruding noise source cannot be turned off, the ambient noise histogram shall be estimated by performing a measurement in the same general area of the alleged intruding noise source but at a sufficient distance so that the noise from the alleged intruding noise source is at least ten dB below the ambient noise histogram.

E. Abatement Notice in Lieu of Citation. If the intrusive noise exceeds the exterior noise standards provided in subsections A and B above, at a specific receptor property and the code enforcement officer has reason to believe that this violation was unanticipated and due to abnormal conditions, the code enforcement officer shall issue an abatement notice in lieu of a citation. lithe specific violation is abated, no citation shall be is-sued. If the specific violation is not abated, the code enforcement officer shall issue a citation.
(Ord. 182 § 2 (part), 1997)

16.30.100 Interior Noise Standards for Multi-Family Residential.

A. Noise Standards for Residential Units. No person shall operate or cause to be operated within a residential unit. any source of sound, or allow the creation of any noise, that causes the Firefox https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/aeab62b6-2793-43ce-a4... 5 of 9 7/19/2022, 3:29 PM
73 noise level when measured inside a neighboring receiving residential unit to exceed the following standards:

1. Standard No. 1. The applicable interior noise level for cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour;

2. Standard No. 2. The applicable interior noise level plus five dB for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour; or

3. Standard No. 3. The applicable interior noise level plus ten dB for any period of time.

B. Interior Noise Levels for Multi-Family Residential. The following interior noise levels shall apply within multi-family dwellings with windows in their normal seasonal configuration.

Noise Zone Designated Land Use Time Interval Allowable Interior Noise Level(dBl
All Multi-family
Residential
10:00 p.m.—7:00 a.m.
7:00 a.m.—10:00 p.m.
40 45
If the measured ambient noise level reflected by the L50 exceeds that permissible within the interior noise standards in subsection A above. the allowable interior noise level shall be increased in five dB increments to reflect the ambient noise level (L5„ ). (Ord. 182 § 2 (part), 1997)

16.30.110 Correction for Certain Types of Sounds.

For any source of sound that emits a pure tone or impulsive noise, the allowed noise levels provided in Sections 1 6.30.090 (Exterior Noise Standards) and 16.30.100 (Interior Noise Standards for Multi-family Residential) shall be reduced by five decibels. (Ord. 182 §
2 (part). 1997)

16.30.120 Measurement Methods.

A. A-weighting Scale. The noise level shall be measured at a position(s) at any point on the receiver's property utilizing the A-weighting scale of the sound-level meter and the slow meter response (use fast response for impulsive type sounds). Calibration of the measurement
equipment, utilizing an acoustic calibrator, shall be performed immediately prior to recording any noise data.

B. Microphone Location. The microphone shall be located four to five feet above the ground and ten feet or more from the nearest reflective surface except in those cases where another elevation is deemed appropriate.

C. Interior Noise. Interior noise measurements shall be made within the affected residential unit. The measurements shall be made at a point at least four feet from the wall, ceiling or floor nearest the noise source, with windows in the normal seasonal configuration. (Ord. 182 § 2 (part), 1997)

16.30.130 Acts Deemed Violations of Chapter.

Firefox https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/aeab62b6-2793-43ce-a4... 6 of 9 7/19/2022, 3:29 PM
74 The following acts are a violation of this chapter.

A. Construction Noise.

1. Operating or causing the operation of tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work between weekday hours of eight p.m. and seven a.m., or at any time on Sundays or holidays so that the sound creates a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial property line, except for emergency work of public service utilities.

2. Construction activities shall be conducted in a manner that the maximum noise levels at the affected structures will not exceed those listed in the following schedule:
a. Residential Structures:
1) Mobile Equipment. Maximum noise levels for nonscheduled, intermittent, short-term operation (less than ten days) of mobile equipment:

Single-family
Residential
Multi-family
Residential Commercial
Daily, except Sundays and legal
holidays, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. 75 dBA 80 dBA 85 dBA
Daily, 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and all day
Sunday and legal holidays 60 dBA 64 dBA 70 dBA
2) Stationary Equipment. Maximum noise level for repetitively scheduled and relatively long-term operation periods (three days or more) of stationary equipment:

Single-family
Residential
Multi-family
Residential Commercial
Daily, except Sundays and legal
holidays, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. 60 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA
Daily, 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and all day
Sunday and legal holidays 50 dBA 55 dBA 60 dBA
b. Business Structures. Maximum noise levels for nonscheduled, intermittent, short-term operation of mobile equipment: daily. including Sundays and legal holidays, all hours: maximum of eighty-five (85) dBA.

3. All mobile or stationary internal combustion engine powered equipment or machinery shall be equipped with suitable exhaust and air-intake silencers in proper working order.

B. Loading and Unloading Operations. Loading, unloading, opening, closing or other handling of boxes. crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans or similar objects between the hours of ten p.m. and six am. in a manner to cause a noise disturbance is prohibited.

C. Noise Disturbances in Noise-Sensitive Zones. Creating or causing the creation of a noise disturbance within a noise-sensitive zone is prohibited, provided that conspicuous signs are displayed indicating the presence of the zone. Noise-sensitive zones shall be indicated by the display of conspicuous signs in at least three separate locations within five hundred (500) feet of Firefox https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/aeab62b6-2793-43ce-a4... 7 of 9 7/19/2022, 3:29 PM
75 the institution or facility (e.g., health care facility) D. Places of Public Entertainment. Operating, playing, or permitting the operation or playing of a radio, television. phonograph, drum, musical instrument, sound amplifier or similar device that produces, reproduces, or amplifies sound in a place of public entertainment at a sound level greater than ninety-five (95) dBA, (read by the slow response on a sound level meter) at any point that is normally occupied by a customer is prohibited, unless conspicuous signs are located near each public entrance stating, "Warning: Sound Levels Within May Cause Hearing Impairment." E. Emergency Signaling Devices.

1. The intentional sounding or permitting the sounding outdoors of an emergency signaling device, including fire, burglar or civil defense alarm, siren, whistle, or similar stationary emergency signaling device, except for emergency purposes or for testing is prohibited.

2. Testing of a stationary emergency signaling device shall not occur before seven a.m. or after seven p.m. Testing shall use only the minimum cycle test time. Test time shall not exceed sixty (60) seconds. Testing of the complete emergency signaling system, including the functioning of the signaling device, and the personnel response to the signaling device, shall not occur more than once in each calendar month. Testing shall not occur before seven a.m. or after ten p.m.

3. Sounding or permitting the sounding of an exterior burglar or fire alarm, or motor vehicle burglar alarm
is prohibited, unless the alarm is terminated within fifteen (15) minutes of activation.

F. Stationary Nonemergency Signaling Devices. Sounding or permitting the sounding of an electronically amplified signal from a stationary bell, chime, siren. whistle, or similar device intended primarily for nonemergency purposes, from any place, for more than ten consecutive seconds in any hourly period is prohibited.

G. Refuse Collection Vehicles.

1. Operating or permitting the operation of the compacting mechanism of any motor vehicle that compacts refuse and that creates, during the compacting cycle, a sound level in excess of eighty-six (86) dBA when measured at fifty (50) feet from any point of the vehicle is prohibited.

2. Collecting refuse, or operating or permitting the operation of the compacting mechanism of any motor vehicle that compacts refuse between the hours often p.m. and six a.m. the following day in a residential area or noise-sensitive zone is prohibited.

H. Sweepers and Associated Equipment. Operating or permitting the operation of sweepers or associated sweeping equipment (i.e., blowers) between the hours often p.m. and six a.m. the following day in, or adjacent to, a residential area or noise-sensitive area is prohibited.

I. Residential Air Conditioning.or Refrigeration Equipment. Operating or permitting the operation of air conditioning or refrigeration equipment in a manner that exceeds the following sound levels is prohibited:

Measurement Location Maximum Noise level
Any point on neighboring property line, five feet above grade level, no closer than three feet from any wall. 55
Center of neighboring patio, five feet above grade level, no closer than three feet from any wall. 50
Firefox https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/aeab62b6-2793-43ce-a4... 8 of 9 7/19/2022, 3:29 PM
76 Outside the neighboring living area window nearest the equipment location, not more than three feet from the window opening, but at least three feet from any other surface.
50 J. Vehicle or Motorboat Repairs and Testing. Repairing, rebuilding, modifying or testing any motor vehicle, motorcycle or motorboat in a manner as to cause a noise disturbance across property lines or within a noise-sensitive zone is prohibited.

K. Vibration. Operating or permitting the operation of any device that creates vibration that is above the vibration perception threshold of an individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source if on private property, or at one hundred fifty (150) feet from the source if on a public space or public right-of-way is prohibited. The perception threshold shall be a motion velocity of 0.01 in/sec over the range of 1 to 100 Hertz.
(Ord. 544 § 3, 2019; Ord. 182 §2 (part), 1997)

16.30.140 Modification of Standards.

Modifications to the requirements of this chapter may be granted by the director for a period of up to two years, subject to any terms, conditions, or requirements to minimize adverse effects on the surrounding neighborhood reasonable. Modifications may b e granted only if one of the following
findings can be made:

A. Additional time is necessary for the applicant to alter or modify the activity, operation, or noise source to comply with this chapter: or
B. The activity, operation, or noise source cannot feasibly be done in a manner that would comply with the provisions of this chapter. and no other reasonable alternative is available to the applicant.

Firefox https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/aeab62b6-2793-43ce-a4... 9 of 9 7/19/2022, 3:29 PM
77 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

This page intentionally left blank
78 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

APPENDIX 4.1:

PROJECT SITE PLAN
79 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

This page intentionally left blank
80 SD SD
SD

SD SD SD
SD
SD
SDSD

W W W W
W
W
WW

W W W W W
W
W
W
WWWWW

W W W W W W W W W
S
S

S S S S S
S
S S
S
S

SSSS SSSS
S
SSS
S
FF
F F
F F F

F F F F
F
F
F F
EVEV
VAN
VAN
6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1X
6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1X
6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1X
6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1X
6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1X
6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1 6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
32 3'-0"
3'-0"
1X
6'-0"6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
3'-0"
1X
6'-0" 6'-0"
3'-0"
3 2
3'-0"
6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 6'-0"
3'-0"
2 3'-0"
2X
3'-0"
1 RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW
S

S S S S S
W W

W W W W W
PAD= 1477.0
PAD= 1475.0
PAD= 1474.2
PAD= 1475.2
PAD= 1477.2
PAD= 1472.5
PAD= 1473.5
PAD= 1471.5
PAD= 1470.5
PAD= 1469.5
PAD= 1467.5
PAD= 1466.5
PAD= 1465.5
PAD= 1464.5
PAD= 1460.5
PAD= 1456.0
PAD= 1454.5
PAD= 1452.5
PAD= 1452.0 PAD= 1453.5
PAD= 1454.0PAD= 1453.5
PAD= 1454.0
PAD= 1455.0
PAD= 1465.0
PAD= 1466.2
PAD= 1466.5
PAD= 1468.2
PAD= 1469.2
PAD= 1470.2
PAD= 1471.2
PAD= 1471.8
PAD= 1472.2
PAD= 1473.5 PAD= 1477.6
PAD= 1477.3
PAD= 1476.8
PAD= 1475.4
PAD= 1474.3
PAD= 1473.7
PAD= 1473.2
PAD= 1471.5
PAD= 1470.3
PAD= 1470.2
PAD= 1455.0

VERY HIGH FIRE

SEVERITY ZONE

VERY HIGH FIRE

SEVERITY ZONE

VERY HIGH FIRE

SEVERITY ZONE
1485
1480
1478
1477
1476
1475
1474
1472 1471 1470 1469 1468 1467 1466 1465 1464 1463 1460
1455 1453 1451
1455
1454
1453
1452
1451
14401445
1455
1460
146514701475 1474 1473 1472 1471147614771478
H=4'
H=10'
H=3' H=10' H=12'
H=13'
H=10'
H=2'
H=3'
H=8'H=8'H=6'
H=5'
H=5'
H=8'
H=9'
H=6'H=6'
H=3'
H=4'
H=5'H=5'
H=4'
H=6'H=3'
H=6' H=6'
H=10'
25'
TYP.
12'
TYP.
12'
TYP.

R=12'
TYP.
25'
TYP.

R=12'
TYP.

R=28'
R/W
R/W
R/W
PL
25'
TYP. 25'
TYP.
25'
TYP.
25'
TYP.

TELEPHONE EASEMENT
(EXISTING) ELECTRIC EASEMENT
(EXISTING)

ROAD EASEMENT

ROAD EASEMENT
(EXISTING)

SLOPE EASEMENT
(EXISTING)SLOPE EASEMENT
(EXISTING)

SLOPE EASEMENT
(EXISTING)

SLOPE EASEMENT
(EXISTING) SLOPE EASEMENT
(EXISTING)R/W
R/W
R/W
R/W

EXISTING BUILDING

EXISTING

BUILDING

EXISTING
BUILDINGQ100=180.7 CFS
PL
R/W

AC BERM

SD EASEMENT

SD EASEMENT
R/W

SD EASEMENT

UTILITY POLE
(EXISTING)

UTILITY POLE
(EXISTING)UTILITY POLE
(EXISTING)

UTILITY POLE
(EXISTING)

UTILITY POLE
(PROPOSED)

CORPORATION

WILSON MIKAMI

SANCERRA
TENTATIVE TRACT 38579

GRADING PLAN

CITY OF MURRIETA

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

WHITEWOOD I

GRADING PLAN
SD
S
W
81 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

This page intentionally left blank
82 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

APPENDIX 5.1:

NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENT PHOTOS
83 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

This page intentionally left blank
84 14984 - Whitewood I Neighborhood
14984_L1_G 1.North
33, 35' 56.110000"117, 9' 46.810000"
14984_L1_G 2.South
33, 35' 55.970000"117, 9' 46.780000"
14984_L1_G 3.East
33, 35' 56.030000"117, 9' 46.780000"
14984_L1_G 4.West
33, 35' 56.050000"117, 9' 46.940000"
85 14984 - Whitewood I Neighborhood
14984_L2_Y 1.North
33, 35' 58.880000"117, 9' 44.880000"
14984_L2_Y 2.South
33, 35' 58.900000"117, 9' 44.970000"
14984_L2_Y 3.East
33, 35' 58.910000"117, 9' 44.880000"
14984_L2_Y 4.West
33, 35' 58.950000"117, 9' 44.970000"
86 14984 - Whitewood I Neighborhood
14984_L3_A 1.North
33, 35' 51.740000"117, 9' 43.210000"
14984_L3_A 2.South
33, 35' 51.700000"117, 9' 43.180000"
14984_L3_A 3.East
33, 35' 51.640000"117, 9' 43.130000"
14984_L3_A 4.West
33, 35' 51.600000"117, 9' 43.290000"
87 14984 - Whitewood I Neighborhood
14984_L4_U 1.North
33, 35' 55.970000"117, 9' 31.120000"
14984_L4_U 2.South
33, 35' 56.040000"117, 9' 31.040000"
14984_L4_U 3.East
33, 35' 56.040000"117, 9' 31.040000"
14984_L4_U 4.West
33, 35' 56.070000"117, 9' 31.210000"
88 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

APPENDIX 5.2:

NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENT WORKSHEETS
89 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

This page intentionally left blank
90 Date: Location: Meter: Piccolo II JN: 14984
Project: Whitewood I Neighborhood Source: Analyst: B. Maddux Timeframe Hour L eq L max L min L1% L2% L5% L8% L25% L50% L90% L95% L99% L eq Adj. Adj. L eq 0 58.7 72.3 38.1 71.8 70.8 66.6 62.9 51.7 42.7 39.3 38.8 38.3 58.7 10.0 68.7 1 57.9 71.6 38.7 71.0 69.9 65.8 62.1 51.1 41.9 39.5 39.1 38.8 57.9 10.0 67.9 2 56.7 70.3 37.6 69.8 68.9 65.2 61.2 46.4 40.6 38.3 38.0 37.7 56.7 10.0 66.7 3 61.7 74.7 40.0 74.2 73.4 70.4 67.1 53.2 43.1 40.4 40.3 40.1 61.7 10.0 71.7 4 66.1 77.7 43.9 77.0 76.1 73.6 72.0 64.7 54.2 45.2 44.6 44.0 66.1 10.0 76.1 5 67.6 78.3 42.5 77.7 76.9 74.8 73.3 67.6 58.8 44.9 43.5 42.7 67.6 10.0 77.6 6 69.0 78.7 47.0 78.2 77.4 75.4 74.2 69.7 64.0 51.1 49.0 47.3 69.0 10.0 79.0 7 68.4 76.2 49.1 75.8 75.3 74.1 73.2 70.0 65.1 54. 6 51.7 49.4 68.4 0.0 68.4 8 68.3 76.7 46.7 76.3 75.7 74.2 73.2 69.7 65.0 51. 9 49.1 47.1 68.3 0.0 68.3 9 68.0 76.7 48.4 76.2 75.4 73.6 72.8 69.2 65.1 53. 4 51.2 48.9 68.0 0.0 68.0 10 66.9 75.4 48.2 74.9 74. 2 72.5 71.5 68.4 63.8 53. 1 50.8 48.5 66.9 0.0 66.9 11 67.4 78.3 49.2 77.5 75. 7 72.9 71.5 68.0 63.9 54. 1 52.3 49.6 67.4 0.0 67.4 12 68.8 80.6 49.1 79.8 79. 1 75.1 72.1 68.3 64.5 53. 8 51.7 49.6 68.8 0.0 68.8 13 66.6 75.2 48.8 74.7 74. 0 72.3 71.4 67.9 63.7 53. 5 51.5 49.6 66.6 0.0 66.6 14 66.8 75.3 46.8 74.8 74. 2 72.8 71.8 68.1 63.6 51. 8 49.0 47.1 66.8 0.0 66.8 15 66.7 75.2 49.8 74.8 74. 2 72.6 71.2 67.8 64.1 55. 1 52.9 50.2 66.7 0.0 66.7 16 68.8 78.2 52.7 77.7 76. 9 74.5 72.8 69.4 66.3 57. 8 55.9 53.1 68.8 0.0 68.8 17 69.2 78.5 54.0 78.0 77. 3 74.8 73.2 70.1 66.7 57. 6 55.7 54.3 69.2 0.0 69.2 18 69.6 80.5 47.9 79.9 79. 3 76.4 73.9 69.6 65.1 54. 0 51.3 48.2 69.6 0.0 69.6 19 68.8 79.6 47.9 79.0 78. 1 75.2 73.3 69.1 64.5 52. 2 49.7 48.1 68.8 5.0 73.8 20 68.5 80.3 44.9 79.4 78. 5 75.1 72.8 68.2 62.7 49. 1 47.0 45.3 68.5 5.0 73.5 21 66.4 76.7 42.9 76.3 75. 5 73.2 71.9 66.6 59.9 46. 2 44.2 43.1 66.4 5.0 71.4 22 64.0 75.1 41.6 74.6 73.7 71.3 69.7 63.4 55.8 42.9 42.1 41.7 64.0 10.0 74.0 23 64.2 77.0 40.3 76.4 75.6 72.1 69.0 60.5 50.1 41.3 40.8 40.4 64.2 10.0 74.2 Timeframe Hour L
eq L max L min L1% L2% L5% L8% L25% L50% L90% L95% L99% Min 66.4 75.2 42.9 74.7 74.0 72. 3 71.2 66.6 59.9 46.2 44.2 43.1 Max 69.6 80.6 54.0 79.9 79.3 76. 4 73.9 70.1 66.7 57.8 55.9 54.3

68.1 77.0 76.2 74.0 72.4 68.7 64.3 53.2 50.9 48.8
Min 56.7 70.3 37.6 69.8 68.9 65. 2 61.2 46.4 40.6 38.3 38.0 37.7 Max 69.0 78.7 47.0 78.2 77.4 75. 4 74.2 69.7 64.0 51.1 49.0 47.3

64.6 74.5 73.6 70.6 68.0 58.7 50.1 42.5 41.8 41.2
Day
Night
Energy Average
Energy Average Average:

Average:
24‐Hour Daytime
(7am‐10pm)
Nighttime
(10pm‐7am)

67.1 68.1 64.6
24‐Hour Noise Level Measurement Summary
Hourly L eq dBA Readings (unadjusted)
L eq (dBA)
Night
Wednesday, August 3, 2022 L1 ‐ Located west of the Project site near single‐family residence at 35960 Lindstrand Avenue.

Night
Day

58.7 57.9

56.7 61.7

66.1 67.6

69.0 68.4

68.3 68.0

66.9 67.4

68.8 66.6

66.8 66.7

68.8 69.2

69.6 68.8

68.5 66.4

64.0 64.2

35.0 40.0

45.0 50.0

55.0 60.0

65.0 70.0

75.0 80.0

85.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 01 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 92 02 12 22 3 Hourly Leq(dBA)
Hour Beginning
C:\Urban Crossroads\1. Projects\14984 Whitewood\Fieldwork\Measurements\14984_L1_G 91 Date: Location: Meter: Piccolo II JN: 14984
Project: Whitewood I Neighborhood Source: Analyst: B. Maddux Timeframe Hour L eq L max L min L1% L2% L5% L8% L25% L50% L90% L95% L99% L eq Adj. Adj. L eq 0 48.5 56.7 39.5 56.5 56.2 55.2 53.8 48.5 44.4 41.3 40.5 39.6 48.5 10.0 58.5 1 47.8 56.1 38.8 55.8 55.6 54.5 53.1 47.8 43.5 40.7 39.8 38.9 47.8 10.0 57.8 2 47.5 55.7 38.9 55.4 55.1 53.6 51.9 47.0 45.0 42.4 41.0 39.2 47.5 10.0 57.5 3 51.3 61.0 39.0 60.8 60.4 58.9 57.6 49.7 44.7 40.6 39.9 39.2 51.3 10.0 61.3 4 54.1 63.1 42.0 62.8 62.4 60.7 59.2 54.6 50.4 43.6 42.7 42.1 54.1 10.0 64.1 5 55.6 62.5 44.0 62.2 62.0 61.2 60.3 56.7 53.2 46.5 45.1 44.2 55.6 10.0 65.6 6 59.3 69.6 46.0 69.2 68.6 65.9 64.2 58.9 55.7 48.6 47.2 46.2 59.3 10.0 69.3 7 57.7 65.2 48.8 64.8 64.4 63.1 61.8 58.7 55.4 50. 5 49.7 49.1 57.7 0.0 57.7 8 57.2 64.3 47.0 64.0 63.6 62.4 61.4 58.2 55.5 49. 5 48.2 47.3 57.2 0.0 57.2 9 57.0 64.5 47.0 64.3 63.8 62.3 61.2 58.0 55.2 49. 6 48.3 47.2 57.0 0.0 57.0 10 55.6 63.3 44.8 63.0 62. 6 61.2 59.9 56.6 53.4 47. 4 46.0 45.0 55.6 0.0 55.6 11 56.1 64.2 45.7 63.8 63. 4 61.9 60.5 56.8 53.5 48. 0 46.9 45.9 56.1 0.0 56.1 12 56.6 65.6 45.2 65.3 64. 8 62.9 61.3 56.6 53.6 47. 7 46.6 45.4 56.6 0.0 56.6 13 56.0 64.0 45.0 63.7 63. 4 62.0 60.6 56.7 53.5 47. 6 46.4 45.3 56.0 0.0 56.0 14 56.4 65.5 45.5 65.1 64. 7 62.3 61.1 56.5 53.2 47. 8 46.7 45.8 56.4 0.0 56.4 15 57.7 66.6 48.7 66.1 65. 5 63.4 61.8 58.1 55.0 50. 3 49.5 48.8 57.7 0.0 57.7 16 60.5 70.6 50.6 70.3 69. 7 66.5 64.0 60.1 57.4 52. 9 51.7 50.8 60.5 0.0 60.5 17 60.7 70.8 50.3 70.3 69. 7 66.8 64.2 60.5 57.8 52. 5 51.2 50.5 60.7 0.0 60.7 18 63.4 75.6 49.0 75.3 74. 5 71.1 67.7 60.4 56.9 51. 2 50.1 49.2 63.4 0.0 63.4 19 58.8 68.6 48.3 67.8 67. 0 64.9 63.2 59.0 55.9 50. 3 49.3 48.5 58.8 5.0 63.8 20 61.0 71.7 47.5 71.3 71. 0 68.1 66.2 59.8 55.8 49. 2 48.3 47.6 61.0 5.0 66.0 21 56.3 66.0 44.8 65.5 64. 6 62.2 60.6 56.6 53.2 46. 7 45.8 45.0 56.3 5.0 61.3 22 54.0 63.2 42.8 62.9 62.4 60.5 58.8 54.3 50.4 44.4 43.5 42.9 54.0 10.0 64.0 23 53.2 62.4 40.4 62.2 61.8 60.3 58.8 52.9 47.9 42.2 41.4 40.5 53.2 10.0 63.2 Timeframe Hour L
eq L max L min L1% L2% L5% L8% L25% L50% L90% L95% L99% Min 55.6 63.3 44.8 63.0 62.6 61. 2 59.9 56.5 53.2 46.7 45.8 45.0 Max 63.4 75.6 50.6 75.3 74.5 71. 1 67.7 60.5 57.8 52.9 51.7 50.8

58.7 66.7 66.2 64.1 62.4 58.2 55.0 49.4 48.3 47.4
Min 47.5 55.7 38.8 55.4 55.1 53. 6 51.9 47.0 43.5 40.6 39.8 38.9 Max 59.3 69.6 46.0 69.2 68.6 65. 9 64.2 58.9 55.7 48.6 47.2 46.2

54.0 60.9 60.5 59.0 57.5 52.3 48.4 43.4 42.3 41.4
Day
Night
Energy Average
Energy Average Average:

Average:
24‐Hour Daytime
(7am‐10pm)
Nighttime
(10pm‐7am)

57.5 58.7 54.0
24‐Hour Noise Level Measurement Summary
Hourly L eq dBA Readings (unadjusted)
L eq (dBA)
Night
Wednesday, August 3, 2022 L2 ‐ Located northwest of the Project site near single‐family residence at 35842 Meadowlark Lane.

Night
Day

48.5 47.8

47.5 51.3

54.1 55.6

59.3 57.7

57.2 57.0

55.6 56.1

56.6 56.0

56.4 57.7

60.5 60.7

63.4 58.8

61.0 56.3

54.0 53.2

35.0 40.0

45.0 50.0

55.0 60.0

65.0 70.0

75.0 80.0

85.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 01 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 92 02 12 22 3 Hourly Leq(dBA)
Hour Beginning
C:\Urban Crossroads\1. Projects\14984 Whitewood\Fieldwork\Measurements\14984_L2_Y 92 Date: Location: Meter: Piccolo II JN: 14984
Project: Whitewood I Neighborhood Source: Analyst: B. Maddux Timeframe Hour L eq L max L min L1% L2% L5% L8% L25% L50% L90% L95% L99% L eq Adj. Adj. L eq 0 57.5 68.2 41.2 67.9 67.5 65.3 63.1 56.4 49.1 42.3 41.8 41.3 57.5 10.0 67.5 1 56.1 67.5 40.4 67.3 66.7 64.2 61.6 53.4 45.7 40.9 40.5 40.4 56.1 10.0 66.1 2 58.9 72.3 40.1 72.1 71.2 66.7 62.6 52.1 44.8 40.4 40.2 40.0 58.9 10.0 68.9 3 57.6 67.7 42.2 67.5 67.0 65.0 62.9 56.9 51.2 43.6 42.8 42.2 57.6 10.0 67.6 4 65.4 76.3 47.7 76.0 75.6 73.5 70.9 63.2 57.0 49.8 48.8 48.0 65.4 10.0 75.4 5 63.3 72.8 50.6 72.4 71.9 69.7 68.2 63.5 58.8 52.5 51.6 50.7 63.3 10.0 73.3 6 66.4 77.1 50.8 76.8 76.2 74.2 71.9 65.0 59.9 52.9 51.8 51.0 66.4 10.0 76.4 7 65.9 77.6 51.4 76.8 75.6 72.7 69.8 65.3 61.5 53. 9 52.4 51.6 65.9 0.0 65.9 8 65.6 76.4 50.5 75.9 75.2 72.5 70.5 64.9 60.7 53. 2 51.7 50.7 65.6 0.0 65.6 9 63.9 73.8 49.9 73.5 72.9 70.6 68.4 64.2 60.0 52. 4 51.2 50.1 63.9 0.0 63.9 10 72.0 86.1 48.2 85.7 84. 9 79.9 74.5 63.5 59.1 50. 9 49.6 48.5 72.0 0.0 72.0 11 62.6 71.7 49.4 71.2 70. 5 68.3 67.1 63.7 59.7 51. 6 50.4 49.6 62.6 0.0 62.6 12 65.4 76.9 49.5 76.3 75. 6 72.9 68.7 64.5 60.5 52. 0 50.7 49.7 65.4 0.0 65.4 13 63.7 73.9 49.1 73.5 72. 7 70.0 68.1 64.0 59.8 51. 4 50.1 49.3 63.7 0.0 63.7 14 63.0 72.6 48.8 72.2 71. 5 69.1 67.6 63.6 59.5 51. 4 50.2 49.0 63.0 0.0 63.0 15 63.9 73.7 51.2 73.4 72. 6 69.9 68.2 64.2 60.7 53. 9 52.8 51.4 63.9 0.0 63.9 16 65.7 78.0 50.6 77.1 75. 9 72.0 69.3 64.9 60.9 52. 8 51.5 50.8 65.7 0.0 65.7 17 68.7 81.8 51.2 81.4 80. 3 75.8 72.0 65.7 62.4 54. 1 52.5 51.4 68.7 0.0 68.7 18 67.1 79.6 49.5 78.9 78. 1 74.2 71.1 65.4 59.7 51. 7 50.6 49.6 67.1 0.0 67.1 19 64.2 73.7 50.0 73.2 72. 5 70.2 68.7 65.3 60.3 52. 6 51.4 50.2 64.2 5.0 69.2 20 65.1 74.3 49.2 74.0 73. 4 71.5 70.2 65.7 61.1 51. 7 50.3 49.4 65.1 5.0 70.1 21 63.9 74.9 47.3 74.3 72. 9 70.0 68.7 64.1 58.9 49. 7 48.4 47.4 63.9 5.0 68.9 22 65.5 79.0 43.3 78.7 77.7 72.8 68.5 60.4 53.4 44.8 43.9 43.3 65.5 10.0 75.5 23 63.2 75.8 42.3 75.4 74.7 70.9 67.6 60.0 52.2 44.5 43.3 42.4 63.2 10.0 73.2 Timeframe Hour L
eq L max L min L1% L2% L5% L8% L25% L50% L90% L95% L99% Min 62.6 71.7 47.3 71.2 70.5 68. 3 67.1 63.5 58.9 49.7 48.4 47.4 Max 72.0 86.1 51.4 85.7 84.9 79. 9 74.5 65.7 62.4 54.1 52.8 51.6

66.2 75.8 75.0 72.0 69.5 64.6 60.3 52.2 50.9 49.9
Min 56.1 67.5 40.1 67.3 66.7 64. 2 61.6 52.1 44.8 40.4 40.2 40.0 Max 66.4 79.0 50.8 78.7 77.7 74. 2 71.9 65.0 59.9 52.9 51.8 51.0

63.0 72.7 72.1 69.1 66.4 59.0 52.4 45.7 45.0 44.4
24‐Hour Noise Level Measurement Summary
Hourly L eq dBA Readings (unadjusted)
L eq (dBA)
Night
Wednesday, August 3, 2022 L3 ‐ Located south of the Project site across Clinton Keith Road.

Night
Day
Day
Night
Energy Average
Energy Average Average:

Average:
24‐Hour Daytime
(7am‐10pm)
Nighttime
(10pm‐7am)

65.3 66.2 63.0

57.5 56.1

58.9 57.6

65.4 63.3

66.4 65.9

65.6 63.9

72.0 62.6

65.4 63.7

63.0 63.9

65.7 68.7

67.1 64.2

65.1 63.9

65.5 63.2

35.0 40.0

45.0 50.0

55.0 60.0

65.0 70.0

75.0 80.0

85.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 01 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 92 02 12 22 3 Hourly Leq(dBA)
Hour Beginning
C:\Urban Crossroads\1. Projects\14984 Whitewood I\Fieldwork\Measurements\14984_L3_A 93 Date: Location: Meter: Piccolo II JN: 14984
Project: Whitewood I Neighborhood Source: Analyst: B. Maddux Timeframe Hour L eq L max L min L1% L2% L5% L8% L25% L50% L90% L95% L99% L eq Adj. Adj. L eq 0 42.4 50.5 34.2 50.1 49.6 48.7 47.7 43.0 39.0 35.2 34.7 34.4 42.4 10.0 52.4 1 42.0 50.8 33.8 50.4 49.9 49.0 48.1 41.6 37.3 34.7 34.4 33.9 42.0 10.0 52.0 2 41.0 49.9 33.0 49.6 49.0 48.2 47.0 40.7 36.0 33.9 33.6 33.2 41.0 10.0 51.0 3 45.1 54.2 34.7 53.9 53.3 52.4 51.0 44.8 39.9 35.6 35.1 34.8 45.1 10.0 55.1 4 51.4 62.3 39.5 61.5 60.2 58.9 57.3 49.5 46.4 41.5 40.6 39.7 51.4 10.0 61.4 5 50.4 57.9 40.4 57.5 56.9 55.9 55.0 51.3 48.5 42.3 41.4 40.6 50.4 10.0 60.4 6 53.4 63.9 40.6 63.3 62.7 60.6 58.1 52.8 49.3 42.7 41.5 40.8 53.4 10.0 63.4 7 51.6 57.8 41.9 57.4 56.9 55.9 55.2 52.8 50.5 44. 9 43.5 42.2 51.6 0.0 51.6 8 54.1 64.2 40.8 63.6 63.1 61.5 60.0 53.2 49.5 43. 5 42.2 41.0 54.1 0.0 54.1 9 50.5 57.5 40.6 57.2 56.7 55.4 54.6 51.6 48.7 43. 2 41.9 40.8 50.5 0.0 50.5 10 49.6 56.8 40.1 56.4 56. 0 54.9 54.0 50.4 47.7 42. 4 41.4 40.3 49.6 0.0 49.6 11 51.2 58.8 40.2 58.5 58. 1 57.1 56.3 52.2 48.3 42. 4 41.4 40.4 51.2 0.0 51.2 12 49.7 59.7 41.1 58.6 57. 5 55.3 53.3 50.0 47.6 42. 9 42.1 41.2 49.7 0.0 49.7 13 48.5 55.9 39.8 55.5 55. 1 53.8 52.6 49.4 46.8 41. 9 40.9 39.9 48.5 0.0 48.5 14 50.5 59.4 41.1 59.0 58. 7 56.7 54.5 50.5 48.0 43. 4 42.3 41.3 50.5 0.0 50.5 15 53.0 59.0 45.8 58.6 58. 1 57.1 56.3 54.0 52.0 48. 0 47.0 46.0 53.0 0.0 53.0 16 53.9 59.5 47.3 59.1 58. 7 57.7 57.1 55.0 52.9 49. 1 48.4 47.6 53.9 0.0 53.9 17 54.5 63.0 46.5 62.4 61. 4 59.4 58.3 55.1 53.0 48. 4 47.5 46.8 54.5 0.0 54.5 18 53.1 59.5 44.1 59.1 58. 7 57.7 56.8 54.4 51.8 46. 2 45.3 44.3 53.1 0.0 53.1 19 52.6 60.6 43.3 60.1 59. 4 57.6 56.4 53.7 50.7 45. 5 44.5 43.5 52.6 5.0 57.6 20 51.6 58.8 42.5 58.4 57. 9 56.8 55.6 52.7 49.9 44. 9 43.8 42.8 51.6 5.0 56.6 21 47.9 55.1 39.3 54.9 54. 4 53.1 52.1 48.8 46.1 41. 1 40.3 39.5 47.9 5.0 52.9 22 46.5 57.3 36.0 56.4 55.6 53.4 50.5 46.1 42.5 37.3 36.7 36.2 46.5 10.0 56.5 23 45.6 54.2 35.5 53.8 53.3 51.9 50.7 46.0 41.9 36.6 36.1 35.6 45.6 10.0 55.6 Timeframe Hour L
eq L max L min L1% L2% L5% L8% L25% L50% L90% L95% L99% Min 47.9 55.1 39.3 54.9 54.4 53. 1 52.1 48.8 46.1 41.1 40.3 39.5 Max 54.5 64.2 47.3 63.6 63.1 61. 5 60.0 55.1 53.0 49.1 48.4 47.6

51.9 58.6 58.0 56.7 55.5 52.3 49.6 44.5 43.5 42.5
Min 41.0 49.9 33.0 49.6 49.0 48. 2 47.0 40.7 36.0 33.9 33.6 33.2 Max 53.4 63.9 40.6 63.3 62.7 60. 6 58.1 52.8 49.3 42.7 41.5 40.8

48.4 55.2 54.5 53.2 51.7 46.2 42.3 37.7 37.1 36.6
Day
Night
Energy Average
Energy Average Average:

Average:
24‐Hour Daytime
(7am‐10pm)
Nighttime
(10pm‐7am)

50.9 51.9 48.4
24‐Hour Noise Level Measurement Summary
Hourly L eq dBA Readings (unadjusted)
L eq (dBA)
Night
Wednesday, August 3, 2022 L4 ‐ Located east of the Project site near single‐family residence at 35960 Arendt Lane.

Night
Day

42.4 42.0

41.0 45.1

51.4 50.4

53.4 51.6

54.1 50.5

49.6 51.2

49.7 48.5

50.5 53.0

53.9 54.5

53.1 52.6

51.6 47.9

46.5 45.6

35.0 40.0

45.0 50.0

55.0 60.0

65.0 70.0

75.0 80.0

85.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 01 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 92 02 12 22 3 Hourly Leq(dBA)
Hour Beginning
C:\Urban Crossroads\1. Projects\14984 Whitewood I\Fieldwork\Measurements\14984_L4_U 94 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

APPENDIX 7.1:

ON-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS
95 Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

This page intentionally left blank
96 FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 1
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,487.7
Barrier Elevation: 1,487.7
Pad Elevation: 1,471.3
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.80
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-12.664 -15.664
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.80 -1.20 -12.240 -15.240
-18.67 -2.85 -1.20 -10.880 -13.880

2.28 1.97

1.29 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,487.70
1,490.00
1,495.71

75.599

75.648

76.195
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.2 58.1 67.466.8

58.9 60.4

57.4 51.0 49.5 58.258.0

59.0 50.0 51.2 59.759.6
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.6 59.4 68.568.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

55.2 53.3 51.5 45.5 54.754.1

46.7 49.5

45.2 38.8 37.2 45.945.7

48.1 39.1 40.3 48.848.7
Vehicle Noise: 56.7 54.9 52.0 47.1 56.155.7

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
97 FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 2
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,486.8
Barrier Elevation: 1,486.8
Pad Elevation: 1,469.4
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.84
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-13.145 -16.145
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.85 -1.20 -12.703 -15.703
-18.67 -2.89 -1.20 -11.440 -14.440

2.65 2.31

1.57 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,486.80
1,489.10
1,494.81

76.130

76.179

76.726
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.8 65.9 64.2 58.1 67.366.7

58.9 60.4

57.4 51.0 49.4 58.157.9

59.0 49.9 51.2 59.659.5
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.5 59.4 68.467.9
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

54.7 52.8 51.0 45.0 54.253.6

46.2 48.9

44.6 38.3 36.7 45.445.2

47.5 38.5 39.7 48.248.1
Vehicle Noise: 56.2 54.4 51.5 46.6 55.655.1

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
98 FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 3
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,485.8
Barrier Elevation: 1,485.8
Pad Elevation: 1,468.7
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.83
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-13.002 -16.002
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.83 -1.20 -12.560 -15.560
-18.67 -2.88 -1.20 -11.260 -14.260

2.54 2.20

1.48 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,485.80
1,488.10
1,493.81

75.967

76.017

76.564
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.8 65.9 64.2 58.1 67.366.7

58.9 60.4

57.4 51.0 49.5 58.257.9

59.0 49.9 51.2 59.759.5
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.5 59.4 68.568.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

54.8 52.9 51.2 45.1 54.353.7

46.3 49.1

44.8 38.4 36.9 45.645.4

47.7 38.7 39.9 48.448.3
Vehicle Noise: 56.3 54.6 51.6 46.7 55.855.3

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
99 FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 4
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,483.2
Barrier Elevation: 1,483.2
Pad Elevation: 1,468.5
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.73
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-11.680 -14.680
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.73 -1.20 -11.160 -14.160
-18.67 -2.78 -1.20 -9.910 -12.910

1.69 1.43

0.87 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,483.20
1,485.50
1,491.21

74.774

74.824

75.371
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.3 58.2 67.466.8

59.0 60.5

57.5 51.1 49.6 58.358.0

59.1 50.0 51.3 59.859.6
Vehicle Noise: 69.1 67.3 64.6 59.5 68.668.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.3 54.4 52.6 46.5 55.855.2

47.8 50.6

46.3 39.9 38.4 47.146.9

49.2 40.1 41.4 49.949.7
Vehicle Noise: 57.8 56.0 53.1 48.2 57.256.7

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
100
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 5
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,483.8
Barrier Elevation: 1,483.8
Pad Elevation: 1,468.7
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.74
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-11.960 -14.960
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.75 -1.20 -11.400 -14.400
-18.67 -2.79 -1.20 -10.180 -13.180

1.83 1.55

0.96 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,483.80
1,486.10
1,491.81

74.959

75.009

75.556
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.3 58.2 67.466.8

59.0 60.5

57.5 51.1 49.5 58.258.0

59.1 50.0 51.3 59.759.6
Vehicle Noise: 69.1 67.3 64.6 59.5 68.568.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.0 54.1 52.3 46.2 55.554.9

47.6 50.3

46.1 39.7 38.1 46.846.6

48.9 39.8 41.1 49.649.4
Vehicle Noise: 57.5 55.7 52.8 47.9 56.956.4

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
101
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 5
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

94.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
111.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,482.5
Barrier Elevation: 1,482.5
Pad Elevation: 1,468.7
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.50
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

17.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-11.540 -14.540
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -2.51 -1.20 -11.060 -14.060
-17.78 -2.55 -1.20 -9.910 -12.910

1.62 1.38

0.87 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,482.50
1,484.80
1,490.51

72.246

72.296

72.846
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.8 62.7 71.971.3

62.3 63.3

60.8 54.5 52.9 61.661.4

61.9 52.8 54.1 62.562.4
Vehicle Noise: 73.3 71.5 69.0 63.7 72.872.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

60.9 59.0 57.2 51.2 60.459.8

51.3 53.4

49.8 43.4 41.8 50.550.3

51.9 42.9 44.2 52.652.5
Vehicle Noise: 62.0 60.2 57.6 52.4 61.460.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
102
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 6
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
106.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,478.5
Barrier Elevation: 1,478.5
Pad Elevation: 1,466.7
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-1.74
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

21.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-9.500 -12.500
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -1.75 -1.20 -8.750 -11.750
-17.78 -1.82 -1.20 -6.800 -9.800

0.75 0.55

0.20 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,478.50
1,480.80
1,486.51

64.323

64.385

65.075
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.2 71.3 69.5 63.5 72.772.1

63.1 64.0

61.6 55.2 53.7 62.462.1

62.6 53.6 54.8 63.363.2
Vehicle Noise: 74.0 72.2 69.8 64.4 73.573.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

63.7 61.8 60.0 54.0 63.262.6

54.3 57.2

52.8 46.5 44.9 53.653.4

55.8 46.8 48.0 56.556.4
Vehicle Noise: 65.0 63.2 60.4 55.4 64.463.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
103
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 7
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

95.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,474.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,474.0
Pad Elevation: 1,465.9
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.45
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

10.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-7.900 -10.900
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.46 -1.20 -7.360 -10.360
-17.78 -0.54 -1.20 -6.000 -9.000

0.38 0.28

0.10 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,474.00
1,476.30
1,482.01

52.719

52.781

53.471
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.5 72.6 70.8 64.8 74.073.4

64.4 65.3

62.9 56.5 55.0 63.663.4

63.9 54.8 56.1 64.664.4
Vehicle Noise: 75.3 73.5 71.1 65.7 74.874.3
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

66.6 64.7 62.9 56.9 66.165.5

57.0 59.3

55.5 49.1 47.6 56.356.1

57.9 48.8 50.1 58.658.4
Vehicle Noise: 67.7 65.9 63.3 58.1 67.266.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
104
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 8
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

93.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,471.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,471.0
Pad Elevation: 1,464.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.17
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

8.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-6.870 -9.870
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.18 -1.20 -6.320 -9.320
-17.78 -0.26 -1.20 -5.300 -8.300

0.21 0.14

0.03 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,471.00
1,473.30
1,479.01

50.495

50.558

51.247
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.8 72.9 71.1 65.0 74.373.7

64.6 65.6

63.1 56.8 55.2 63.963.7

64.1 55.1 56.4 64.864.7
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.4 66.0 75.174.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.2 58.2 67.466.8

58.3 60.3

56.8 50.5 48.9 57.657.4

58.8 49.8 51.1 59.559.4
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.6 59.4 68.467.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
105
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 9
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

93.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,469.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,469.0
Pad Elevation: 1,463.5
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.14
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

8.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.100 -8.100
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.15 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-17.78 -0.44 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.01 0.00
-0.03
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,469.00
1,471.30
1,477.01

50.265

50.327

52.625
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.8 72.9 71.1 65.1 74.373.7

64.7 65.4

63.2 56.8 55.3 64.063.7

64.0 54.9 56.2 64.764.5
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.4 66.0 75.174.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

69.7 67.8 66.0 60.0 69.268.6

59.8 65.4

58.3 51.9 50.4 59.158.8

64.0 54.9 56.2 64.764.5
Vehicle Noise: 71.4 69.6 66.5 61.8 70.870.4

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
106
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 10
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,468.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,468.0
Pad Elevation: 1,461.6
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

3.39 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.400 -8.400
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 3.35 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-17.78 1.42 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.04 0.00
-0.09
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,468.00
1,470.30
1,476.01

29.243

29.428

39.553
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

78.3 76.4 74.7 68.6 77.877.2

68.2 67.3

66.7 60.3 58.8 67.567.2

65.8 56.8 58.0 66.566.4
Vehicle Noise: 79.0 77.2 74.9 69.4 78.578.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.9 71.0 69.3 63.2 72.471.8

63.3 67.3

61.8 55.4 53.9 62.662.3

65.8 56.8 58.0 66.566.4
Vehicle Noise: 74.3 72.6 69.7 64.7 73.873.3

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
107
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 11
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,463.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,464.0
Pad Elevation: 1,460.9
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.06
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.08 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.02
-0.09
-0.54
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,463.00
1,465.30
1,471.01

49.653

49.572

49.830
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
108
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 12
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,461.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,461.9
Pad Elevation: 1,459.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.59 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 1.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 1.56 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.07
-0.17
-0.60
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,461.00
1,463.30
1,469.01

38.536

38.425

38.744
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.9 66.8 76.075.4

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.6 57.0 65.765.5

66.0 56.9 58.2 66.766.5
Vehicle Noise: 77.4 75.6 73.1 67.8 76.976.3
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.9 66.8 76.075.4

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.6 57.0 65.765.5

66.0 56.9 58.2 66.766.5
Vehicle Noise: 77.4 75.6 73.1 67.8 76.976.3

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
109
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 13
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,457.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,461.6
Pad Elevation: 1,458.3
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.52 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.300 -8.300
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.07 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.03 0.00
-0.20
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,457.00
1,459.30
1,465.01

38.965

49.730

49.597
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.8 66.7 76.075.4

64.8 65.8

63.2 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.4 55.3 56.6 65.164.9
Vehicle Noise: 77.1 75.2 73.0 67.4 76.676.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.2 69.3 67.5 61.4 70.770.1

64.8 65.8

63.2 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.4 55.3 56.6 65.164.9
Vehicle Noise: 73.0 71.2 68.1 63.4 72.471.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
110
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 14
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,454.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,459.6
Pad Elevation: 1,456.4
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

3.15 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.100 -8.100
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 1.56 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 1.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.01 0.00
-0.18
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,454.00
1,456.30
1,462.01

30.351

38.756

38.424
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

78.1 76.2 74.4 68.4 77.677.0

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 78.7 76.9 74.6 69.0 78.277.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.0 71.1 69.3 63.3 72.571.9

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.7 73.0 69.9 65.2 74.273.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
111
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 15
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,451.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,459.2
Pad Elevation: 1,455.7
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.92 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.900 -8.900
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 3.13 -1.20 -5.200 -8.200
-17.78 1.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.09 0.02
-0.05
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,451.00
1,453.30
1,459.01

31.453

30.432

38.456
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

77.9 76.0 74.2 68.1 77.476.8

68.0 67.4

66.4 60.1 58.5 67.267.0

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 78.6 76.8 74.4 69.0 78.177.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.3 62.2 71.570.9

62.8 67.4

61.2 54.9 53.3 62.061.8

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.9 68.8 64.1 73.172.6

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
112
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 16
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,456.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,456.3
Pad Elevation: 1,453.8
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.06
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.08 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.06
-0.18
-0.72
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,456.00
1,458.30
1,464.01

49.647

49.571

49.841
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
113
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 17
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,454.5
Barrier Elevation: 1,453.8
Pad Elevation: 1,453.1
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.06
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.07 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.27
-0.49
-1.26
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,454.50
1,456.80
1,462.51

49.699

49.585

49.764
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.8

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.6 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.8

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.6 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
114
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 17
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

95.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,452.5
Barrier Elevation: 1,450.3
Pad Elevation: 1,453.1
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
25 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-3.86
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

11.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -3.85 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -3.85 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-2.29
-2.50
-3.05
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,452.50
1,454.80
1,460.51

88.974

88.859

88.830
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.4 54.5 52.8 46.7 56.055.3

50.9 54.1

49.4 43.0 41.4 50.149.9

52.6 43.6 44.9 53.353.2
Vehicle Noise: 59.1 57.4 53.7 49.6 58.558.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.4 54.5 52.8 46.7 56.055.3

50.9 54.1

49.4 43.0 41.4 50.149.9

52.6 43.6 44.9 53.353.2
Vehicle Noise: 59.1 57.4 53.7 49.6 58.558.1

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
115
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 18
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

95.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,440.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,448.1
Pad Elevation: 1,452.8
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
25 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-3.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

11.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -3.94 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -3.88 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-2.27
-2.49
-3.06
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,440.00
1,442.30
1,448.01

90.564

90.141

89.336
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.3 54.4 52.7 46.6 55.855.2

50.8 54.0

49.3 42.9 41.4 50.049.8

52.6 43.6 44.8 53.353.2
Vehicle Noise: 59.0 57.4 53.6 49.5 58.458.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.3 54.4 52.7 46.6 55.855.2

50.8 54.0

49.3 42.9 41.4 50.049.8

52.6 43.6 44.8 53.353.2
Vehicle Noise: 59.0 57.4 53.6 49.5 58.458.0

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
116
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 19
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

70.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,433.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,448.1
Pad Elevation: 1,453.6
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
25 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.17
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
-14.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -2.09 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -1.92 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-27.41
-27.82
-28.81
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,433.00
1,435.30
1,441.01

68.668

67.846

66.103
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

58.1 56.2 54.5 48.4 57.657.0

52.6 56.0

51.1 44.8 43.2 51.951.7

54.6 45.5 46.8 55.355.1
Vehicle Noise: 60.9 59.2 55.4 51.4 60.359.9
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

58.1 56.2 54.5 48.4 57.657.0

52.6 56.0

51.1 44.8 43.2 51.951.7

54.6 45.5 46.8 55.355.1
Vehicle Noise: 60.9 59.2 55.4 51.4 60.359.9

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
117
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
593.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,451.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,455.0
Pad Elevation: 1,461.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
55 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-15.73
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
508.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.700 -8.700
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -15.73 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-17.78 -15.84 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.07 0.00
-0.22
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,451.00
1,453.30
1,459.01
550.557
550.403
560.130
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

59.2 57.3 55.5 49.5 58.758.1

49.1 50.0

47.6 41.2 39.7 48.448.1

48.6 39.5 40.8 49.349.1
Vehicle Noise: 60.1 58.2 55.8 50.4 59.559.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

53.5 51.6 49.8 43.8 53.052.4

44.2 50.0

42.7 36.3 34.8 43.543.2

48.6 39.5 40.8 49.349.1
Vehicle Noise: 55.4 53.7 50.4 45.9 54.954.4

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
118
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
28,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
881.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,486.8
Barrier Elevation: 1,455.0
Pad Elevation: 1,461.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
45 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-18.61
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
796.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -18.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-18.67 -18.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-7.56
-8.59
-11.34
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,486.80
1,489.10
1,494.81
855.888
855.947
856.120
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

52.1 50.2 48.4 42.3 51.651.0

43.1 44.7

41.6 35.2 33.7 42.442.1

43.2 34.2 35.5 43.943.8
Vehicle Noise: 53.2 51.4 48.8 43.6 52.752.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

52.1 50.2 48.4 42.3 51.651.0

43.1 44.7

41.6 35.2 33.7 42.442.1

43.2 34.2 35.5 43.943.8
Vehicle Noise: 53.2 51.4 48.8 43.6 52.752.2

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
119
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Backyard No Wall
14,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
416.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 1,430.0
Barrier Elevation: 1,455.0
Pad Elevation: 1,461.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
25 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-13.87
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
331.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-12.833 -15.833
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -13.86 -1.20 -12.200 -15.200
-19.13 -13.84 -1.20 -10.320 -13.320

2.41 1.95

1.01 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,430.00
1,432.30
1,438.01
413.827
413.161
411.767
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

46.4 44.5 42.8 36.7 45.945.3

40.9 44.1

39.3 33.0 31.4 40.139.9

42.6 33.6 34.9 43.343.2
Vehicle Noise: 49.1 47.4 43.7 39.6 48.548.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

33.6 31.7 29.9 23.9 33.132.5

28.7 33.8

27.1 20.8 19.2 27.927.7

32.3 23.3 24.5 33.032.9
Vehicle Noise: 37.3 35.7 31.2 27.9 36.736.4

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
120
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 1
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.80
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-12.664 -15.664
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.80 -1.20 -12.240 -15.240
-18.67 -2.85 -1.20 -10.880 -13.880

2.28 1.97

1.29 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,487.70
1,490.00
1,495.71

75.599

75.648

76.195
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.2 58.1 67.466.8

58.9 60.4

57.4 51.0 49.5 58.258.0

59.0 50.0 51.2 59.759.6
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.6 59.4 68.568.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

55.2 53.3 51.5 45.5 54.754.1

46.7 49.5

45.2 38.8 37.2 45.945.7

48.1 39.1 40.3 48.848.7
Vehicle Noise: 56.7 54.9 52.0 47.1 56.155.7

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
121
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 2
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.84
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-13.145 -16.145
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.85 -1.20 -12.703 -15.703
-18.67 -2.89 -1.20 -11.440 -14.440

2.65 2.31

1.57 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,486.80
1,489.10
1,494.81

76.130

76.179

76.726
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.8 65.9 64.2 58.1 67.366.7

58.9 60.4

57.4 51.0 49.4 58.157.9

59.0 49.9 51.2 59.659.5
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.5 59.4 68.467.9
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

54.7 52.8 51.0 45.0 54.253.6

46.2 48.9

44.6 38.3 36.7 45.445.2

47.5 38.5 39.7 48.248.1
Vehicle Noise: 56.2 54.4 51.5 46.6 55.655.1

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
122
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 3
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.83
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-13.002 -16.002
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.83 -1.20 -12.560 -15.560
-18.67 -2.88 -1.20 -11.260 -14.260

2.54 2.20

1.48 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,485.80
1,488.10
1,493.81

75.967

76.017

76.564
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.8 65.9 64.2 58.1 67.366.7

58.9 60.4

57.4 51.0 49.5 58.257.9

59.0 49.9 51.2 59.759.5
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.5 59.4 68.568.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

54.8 52.9 51.2 45.1 54.353.7

46.3 49.1

44.8 38.4 36.9 45.645.4

47.7 38.7 39.9 48.448.3
Vehicle Noise: 56.3 54.6 51.6 46.7 55.855.3

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
123
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 4
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.73
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-11.680 -14.680
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.73 -1.20 -11.160 -14.160
-18.67 -2.78 -1.20 -9.910 -12.910

1.69 1.43

0.87 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,483.20
1,485.50
1,491.21

74.774

74.824

75.371
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.3 58.2 67.466.8

59.0 60.5

57.5 51.1 49.6 58.358.0

59.1 50.0 51.3 59.859.6
Vehicle Noise: 69.1 67.3 64.6 59.5 68.668.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.3 54.4 52.6 46.5 55.855.2

47.8 50.6

46.3 39.9 38.4 47.146.9

49.2 40.1 41.4 49.949.7
Vehicle Noise: 57.8 56.0 53.1 48.2 57.256.7

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
124
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 5
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.74
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-11.960 -14.960
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.75 -1.20 -11.400 -14.400
-18.67 -2.79 -1.20 -10.180 -13.180

1.83 1.55

0.96 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,483.80
1,486.10
1,491.81

74.959

75.009

75.556
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.3 58.2 67.466.8

59.0 60.5

57.5 51.1 49.5 58.258.0

59.1 50.0 51.3 59.759.6
Vehicle Noise: 69.1 67.3 64.6 59.5 68.568.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.0 54.1 52.3 46.2 55.554.9

47.6 50.3

46.1 39.7 38.1 46.846.6

48.9 39.8 41.1 49.649.4
Vehicle Noise: 57.5 55.7 52.8 47.9 56.956.4

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
125
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 5
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

94.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
111.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.50
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

17.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-11.540 -14.540
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -2.51 -1.20 -11.060 -14.060
-17.78 -2.55 -1.20 -9.910 -12.910

1.62 1.38

0.87 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,482.50
1,484.80
1,490.51

72.246

72.296

72.846
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.8 62.7 71.971.3

62.3 63.3

60.8 54.5 52.9 61.661.4

61.9 52.8 54.1 62.562.4
Vehicle Noise: 73.3 71.5 69.0 63.7 72.872.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

60.9 59.0 57.2 51.2 60.459.8

51.3 53.4

49.8 43.4 41.8 50.550.3

51.9 42.9 44.2 52.652.5
Vehicle Noise: 62.0 60.2 57.6 52.4 61.460.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
126
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 6
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
106.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-1.74
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

21.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-9.500 -12.500
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -1.75 -1.20 -8.750 -11.750
-17.78 -1.82 -1.20 -6.800 -9.800

0.75 0.55

0.20 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,478.50
1,480.80
1,486.51

64.323

64.385

65.075
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.2 71.3 69.5 63.5 72.772.1

63.1 64.0

61.6 55.2 53.7 62.462.1

62.6 53.6 54.8 63.363.2
Vehicle Noise: 74.0 72.2 69.8 64.4 73.573.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

63.7 61.8 60.0 54.0 63.262.6

54.3 57.2

52.8 46.5 44.9 53.653.4

55.8 46.8 48.0 56.556.4
Vehicle Noise: 65.0 63.2 60.4 55.4 64.463.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
127
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 7
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

95.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.45
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

10.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-7.900 -10.900
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.46 -1.20 -7.360 -10.360
-17.78 -0.54 -1.20 -6.000 -9.000

0.38 0.28

0.10 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,474.00
1,476.30
1,482.01

52.719

52.781

53.471
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.5 72.6 70.8 64.8 74.073.4

64.4 65.3

62.9 56.5 55.0 63.663.4

63.9 54.8 56.1 64.664.4
Vehicle Noise: 75.3 73.5 71.1 65.7 74.874.3
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

66.6 64.7 62.9 56.9 66.165.5

57.0 59.3

55.5 49.1 47.6 56.356.1

57.9 48.8 50.1 58.658.4
Vehicle Noise: 67.7 65.9 63.3 58.1 67.266.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
128
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 8
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

93.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.17
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

8.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-6.870 -9.870
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.18 -1.20 -6.320 -9.320
-17.78 -0.26 -1.20 -5.300 -8.300

0.21 0.14

0.03 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,471.00
1,473.30
1,479.01

50.495

50.558

51.247
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.8 72.9 71.1 65.0 74.373.7

64.6 65.6

63.1 56.8 55.2 63.963.7

64.1 55.1 56.4 64.864.7
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.4 66.0 75.174.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.2 58.2 67.466.8

58.3 60.3

56.8 50.5 48.9 57.657.4

58.8 49.8 51.1 59.559.4
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.6 59.4 68.467.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
129
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 9
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

93.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.14
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

8.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.100 -8.100
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.15 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-17.78 -0.44 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.01 0.00
-0.03
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,469.00
1,471.30
1,477.01

50.265

50.327

52.625
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.8 72.9 71.1 65.1 74.373.7

64.7 65.4

63.2 56.8 55.3 64.063.7

64.0 54.9 56.2 64.764.5
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.4 66.0 75.174.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

69.7 67.8 66.0 60.0 69.268.6

59.8 65.4

58.3 51.9 50.4 59.158.8

64.0 54.9 56.2 64.764.5
Vehicle Noise: 71.4 69.6 66.5 61.8 70.870.4

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
130
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 10
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

3.39 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.400 -8.400
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 3.35 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-17.78 1.42 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.04 0.00
-0.09
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,468.00
1,470.30
1,476.01

29.243

29.428

39.553
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

78.3 76.4 74.7 68.6 77.877.2

68.2 67.3

66.7 60.3 58.8 67.567.2

65.8 56.8 58.0 66.566.4
Vehicle Noise: 79.0 77.2 74.9 69.4 78.578.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.9 71.0 69.3 63.2 72.471.8

63.3 67.3

61.8 55.4 53.9 62.662.3

65.8 56.8 58.0 66.566.4
Vehicle Noise: 74.3 72.6 69.7 64.7 73.873.3

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
131
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 11
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.06
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.08 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.02
-0.09
-0.54
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,463.00
1,465.30
1,471.01

49.653

49.572

49.830
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
132
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 12
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.59 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 1.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 1.56 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.07
-0.17
-0.60
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,461.00
1,463.30
1,469.01

38.536

38.425

38.744
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.9 66.8 76.075.4

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.6 57.0 65.765.5

66.0 56.9 58.2 66.766.5
Vehicle Noise: 77.4 75.6 73.1 67.8 76.976.3
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.9 66.8 76.075.4

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.6 57.0 65.765.5

66.0 56.9 58.2 66.766.5
Vehicle Noise: 77.4 75.6 73.1 67.8 76.976.3

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
133
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 13
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.52 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.300 -8.300
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.07 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.03 0.00
-0.20
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,457.00
1,459.30
1,465.01

38.965

49.730

49.597
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.8 66.7 76.075.4

64.8 65.8

63.2 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.4 55.3 56.6 65.164.9
Vehicle Noise: 77.1 75.2 73.0 67.4 76.676.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.2 69.3 67.5 61.4 70.770.1

64.8 65.8

63.2 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.4 55.3 56.6 65.164.9
Vehicle Noise: 73.0 71.2 68.1 63.4 72.471.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
134
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 14
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

3.15 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.100 -8.100
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 1.56 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 1.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.01 0.00
-0.18
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,454.00
1,456.30
1,462.01

30.351

38.756

38.424
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

78.1 76.2 74.4 68.4 77.677.0

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 78.7 76.9 74.6 69.0 78.277.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.0 71.1 69.3 63.3 72.571.9

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.7 73.0 69.9 65.2 74.273.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
135
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 15
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.92 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.900 -8.900
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 3.13 -1.20 -5.200 -8.200
-17.78 1.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.09 0.02
-0.05
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,451.00
1,453.30
1,459.01

31.453

30.432

38.456
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

77.9 76.0 74.2 68.1 77.476.8

68.0 67.4

66.4 60.1 58.5 67.267.0

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 78.6 76.8 74.4 69.0 78.177.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.3 62.2 71.570.9

62.8 67.4

61.2 54.9 53.3 62.061.8

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.9 68.8 64.1 73.172.6

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
136
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 16
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.06
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.08 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.06
-0.18
-0.72
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,456.00
1,458.30
1,464.01

49.647

49.571

49.841
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
137
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 17
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.06
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.07 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.27
-0.49
-1.26
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,454.50
1,456.80
1,462.51

49.699

49.585

49.764
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.8

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.6 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.8

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.6 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
138
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 17
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

95.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-3.86
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

11.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -3.85 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -3.85 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-2.29
-2.50
-3.05
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,452.50
1,454.80
1,460.51

88.974

88.859

88.830
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.4 54.5 52.8 46.7 56.055.3

50.9 54.1

49.4 43.0 41.4 50.149.9

52.6 43.6 44.9 53.353.2
Vehicle Noise: 59.1 57.4 53.7 49.6 58.558.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.4 54.5 52.8 46.7 56.055.3

50.9 54.1

49.4 43.0 41.4 50.149.9

52.6 43.6 44.9 53.353.2
Vehicle Noise: 59.1 57.4 53.7 49.6 58.558.1

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
139
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 18
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

95.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-3.97
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

11.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -3.94 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -3.88 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-2.27
-2.49
-3.06
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,440.00
1,442.30
1,448.01

90.564

90.141

89.336
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.3 54.4 52.7 46.6 55.855.2

50.8 54.0

49.3 42.9 41.4 50.049.8

52.6 43.6 44.8 53.353.2
Vehicle Noise: 59.0 57.4 53.6 49.5 58.458.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.3 54.4 52.7 46.6 55.855.2

50.8 54.0

49.3 42.9 41.4 50.049.8

52.6 43.6 44.8 53.353.2
Vehicle Noise: 59.0 57.4 53.6 49.5 58.458.0

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
140
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 19
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

70.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.17
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
-14.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -2.09 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -1.92 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-27.41
-27.82
-28.81
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,433.00
1,435.30
1,441.01

68.668

67.846

66.103
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

58.1 56.2 54.5 48.4 57.657.0

52.6 56.0

51.1 44.8 43.2 51.951.7

54.6 45.5 46.8 55.355.1
Vehicle Noise: 60.9 59.2 55.4 51.4 60.359.9
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

58.1 56.2 54.5 48.4 57.657.0

52.6 56.0

51.1 44.8 43.2 51.951.7

54.6 45.5 46.8 55.355.1
Vehicle Noise: 60.9 59.2 55.4 51.4 60.359.9

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
141
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
593.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -15.73 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-17.78 -15.84 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.07 0.00
-0.22
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,451.00
1,453.30
1,459.01
550.557
550.403
560.130
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

59.2 57.3 55.5 49.5 58.758.1

49.1 50.0

47.6 41.2 39.7 48.448.1

48.6 39.5 40.8 49.349.1
Vehicle Noise: 60.1 58.2 55.8 50.4 59.559.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

53.5 51.6 49.8 43.8 53.052.4

44.2 50.0

42.7 36.3 34.8 43.543.2

48.6 39.5 40.8 49.349.1
Vehicle Noise: 55.4 53.7 50.4 45.9 54.954.4

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
142
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
28,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
881.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-18.61
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
796.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -18.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-18.67 -18.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-7.56
-8.59
-11.34
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,486.80
1,489.10
1,494.81
855.888
855.947
856.120
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

52.1 50.2 48.4 42.3 51.651.0

43.1 44.7

41.6 35.2 33.7 42.442.1

43.2 34.2 35.5 43.943.8
Vehicle Noise: 53.2 51.4 48.8 43.6 52.752.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

52.1 50.2 48.4 42.3 51.651.0

43.1 44.7

41.6 35.2 33.7 42.442.1

43.2 34.2 35.5 43.943.8
Vehicle Noise: 53.2 51.4 48.8 43.6 52.752.2

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
143
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Backyard With Wall
14,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
416.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -13.86 -1.20 -12.200 -15.200
-19.13 -13.84 -1.20 -10.320 -13.320

2.41 1.95

1.01 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,430.00
1,432.30
1,438.01
413.827
413.161
411.767
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

46.4 44.5 42.8 36.7 45.945.3

40.9 44.1

39.3 33.0 31.4 40.139.9

42.6 33.6 34.9 43.343.2
Vehicle Noise: 49.1 47.4 43.7 39.6 48.548.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

33.6 31.7 29.9 23.9 33.132.5

28.7 33.8

27.1 20.8 19.2 27.927.7

32.3 23.3 24.5 33.032.9
Vehicle Noise: 37.3 35.7 31.2 27.9 36.736.4

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
144
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 1
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.80
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-12.664 -15.664
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.80 -1.20 -12.240 -15.240
-18.67 -2.85 -1.20 -10.880 -13.880

2.28 1.97

1.29 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,487.70
1,490.00
1,495.71

75.599

75.648

76.195
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.2 58.1 67.466.8

58.9 60.4

57.4 51.0 49.5 58.258.0

59.0 50.0 51.2 59.759.6
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.6 59.4 68.568.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

55.2 53.3 51.5 45.5 54.754.1

46.7 49.5

45.2 38.8 37.2 45.945.7

48.1 39.1 40.3 48.848.7
Vehicle Noise: 56.7 54.9 52.0 47.1 56.155.7

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
145
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 2
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.84
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-13.145 -16.145
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.85 -1.20 -12.703 -15.703
-18.67 -2.89 -1.20 -11.440 -14.440

2.65 2.31

1.57 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,486.80
1,489.10
1,494.81

76.130

76.179

76.726
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.8 65.9 64.2 58.1 67.366.7

58.9 60.4

57.4 51.0 49.4 58.157.9

59.0 49.9 51.2 59.659.5
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.5 59.4 68.467.9
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

54.7 52.8 51.0 45.0 54.253.6

46.2 48.9

44.6 38.3 36.7 45.445.2

47.5 38.5 39.7 48.248.1
Vehicle Noise: 56.2 54.4 51.5 46.6 55.655.1

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
146
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 3
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.83
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-13.002 -16.002
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.83 -1.20 -12.560 -15.560
-18.67 -2.88 -1.20 -11.260 -14.260

2.54 2.20

1.48 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,485.80
1,488.10
1,493.81

75.967

76.017

76.564
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.8 65.9 64.2 58.1 67.366.7

58.9 60.4

57.4 51.0 49.5 58.257.9

59.0 49.9 51.2 59.759.5
Vehicle Noise: 69.0 67.2 64.5 59.4 68.568.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

54.8 52.9 51.2 45.1 54.353.7

46.3 49.1

44.8 38.4 36.9 45.645.4

47.7 38.7 39.9 48.448.3
Vehicle Noise: 56.3 54.6 51.6 46.7 55.855.3

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
147
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 4
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.73
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-11.680 -14.680
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.73 -1.20 -11.160 -14.160
-18.67 -2.78 -1.20 -9.910 -12.910

1.69 1.43

0.87 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,483.20
1,485.50
1,491.21

74.774

74.824

75.371
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.3 58.2 67.466.8

59.0 60.5

57.5 51.1 49.6 58.358.0

59.1 50.0 51.3 59.859.6
Vehicle Noise: 69.1 67.3 64.6 59.5 68.668.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.3 54.4 52.6 46.5 55.855.2

47.8 50.6

46.3 39.9 38.4 47.146.9

49.2 40.1 41.4 49.949.7
Vehicle Noise: 57.8 56.0 53.1 48.2 57.256.7

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
148
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 5
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.74
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-11.960 -14.960
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.75 -1.20 -11.400 -14.400
-18.67 -2.79 -1.20 -10.180 -13.180

1.83 1.55

0.96 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,483.80
1,486.10
1,491.81

74.959

75.009

75.556
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

67.9 66.0 64.3 58.2 67.466.8

59.0 60.5

57.5 51.1 49.5 58.258.0

59.1 50.0 51.3 59.759.6
Vehicle Noise: 69.1 67.3 64.6 59.5 68.568.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.0 54.1 52.3 46.2 55.554.9

47.6 50.3

46.1 39.7 38.1 46.846.6

48.9 39.8 41.1 49.649.4
Vehicle Noise: 57.5 55.7 52.8 47.9 56.956.4

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
149
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 5
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

94.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
111.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.50
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

17.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-11.540 -14.540
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -2.51 -1.20 -11.060 -14.060
-17.78 -2.55 -1.20 -9.910 -12.910

1.62 1.38

0.87 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,482.50
1,484.80
1,490.51

72.246

72.296

72.846
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.8 62.7 71.971.3

62.3 63.3

60.8 54.5 52.9 61.661.4

61.9 52.8 54.1 62.562.4
Vehicle Noise: 73.3 71.5 69.0 63.7 72.872.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

60.9 59.0 57.2 51.2 60.459.8

51.3 53.4

49.8 43.4 41.8 50.550.3

51.9 42.9 44.2 52.652.5
Vehicle Noise: 62.0 60.2 57.6 52.4 61.460.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
150
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 6
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
106.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-1.74
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

21.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-9.500 -12.500
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -1.75 -1.20 -8.750 -11.750
-17.78 -1.82 -1.20 -6.800 -9.800

0.75 0.55

0.20 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,478.50
1,480.80
1,486.51

64.323

64.385

65.075
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.2 71.3 69.5 63.5 72.772.1

63.1 64.0

61.6 55.2 53.7 62.462.1

62.6 53.6 54.8 63.363.2
Vehicle Noise: 74.0 72.2 69.8 64.4 73.573.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

63.7 61.8 60.0 54.0 63.262.6

54.3 57.2

52.8 46.5 44.9 53.653.4

55.8 46.8 48.0 56.556.4
Vehicle Noise: 65.0 63.2 60.4 55.4 64.463.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
151
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 7
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

95.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.45
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

10.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-7.900 -10.900
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.46 -1.20 -7.360 -10.360
-17.78 -0.54 -1.20 -6.000 -9.000

0.38 0.28

0.10 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,474.00
1,476.30
1,482.01

52.719

52.781

53.471
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.5 72.6 70.8 64.8 74.073.4

64.4 65.3

62.9 56.5 55.0 63.663.4

63.9 54.8 56.1 64.664.4
Vehicle Noise: 75.3 73.5 71.1 65.7 74.874.3
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

66.6 64.7 62.9 56.9 66.165.5

57.0 59.3

55.5 49.1 47.6 56.356.1

57.9 48.8 50.1 58.658.4
Vehicle Noise: 67.7 65.9 63.3 58.1 67.266.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
152
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 8
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

97.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.65
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

12.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-6.240 -9.240
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.66 -1.20 -5.700 -8.700
-17.78 -0.74 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900

0.13 0.07

0.00 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,471.00
1,473.30
1,479.01

54.415

54.477

55.167
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.3 72.4 70.6 64.6 73.873.2

64.2 65.1

62.7 56.3 54.7 63.463.2

63.7 54.6 55.9 64.464.2
Vehicle Noise: 75.1 73.3 70.9 65.5 74.674.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

68.0 66.1 64.4 58.3 67.566.9

58.5 60.2

57.0 50.6 49.0 57.757.5

58.8 49.7 51.0 59.559.3
Vehicle Noise: 69.1 67.3 64.7 59.5 68.668.0

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
153
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 9
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

97.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.64
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

12.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.100 -8.100
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.92 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.98 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.01 0.00
-0.06
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,469.00
1,471.30
1,477.01

54.260

56.646

57.213
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.3 72.4 70.6 64.6 73.873.2

63.9 64.8

62.4 56.0 54.5 63.263.0

63.4 54.4 55.6 64.164.0
Vehicle Noise: 75.1 73.3 70.9 65.5 74.674.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

69.2 67.3 65.5 59.5 68.768.1

63.9 64.8

62.4 56.0 54.5 63.263.0

63.4 54.4 55.6 64.164.0
Vehicle Noise: 71.4 69.7 66.3 61.9 70.870.4

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
154
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 10
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

3.39 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.400 -8.400
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 3.35 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-17.78 1.42 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.04 0.00
-0.09
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,468.00
1,470.30
1,476.01

29.243

29.428

39.553
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

78.3 76.4 74.7 68.6 77.877.2

68.2 67.3

66.7 60.3 58.8 67.567.2

65.8 56.8 58.0 66.566.4
Vehicle Noise: 79.0 77.2 74.9 69.4 78.578.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.9 71.0 69.3 63.2 72.471.8

63.3 67.3

61.8 55.4 53.9 62.662.3

65.8 56.8 58.0 66.566.4
Vehicle Noise: 74.3 72.6 69.7 64.7 73.873.3

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
155
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 11
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.06
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.08 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.02
-0.09
-0.54
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,463.00
1,465.30
1,471.01

49.653

49.572

49.830
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
156
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 12
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.59 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 1.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 1.56 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.07
-0.17
-0.60
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,461.00
1,463.30
1,469.01

38.536

38.425

38.744
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.9 66.8 76.075.4

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.6 57.0 65.765.5

66.0 56.9 58.2 66.766.5
Vehicle Noise: 77.4 75.6 73.1 67.8 76.976.3
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.9 66.8 76.075.4

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.6 57.0 65.765.5

66.0 56.9 58.2 66.766.5
Vehicle Noise: 77.4 75.6 73.1 67.8 76.976.3

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
157
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 13
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.52 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.300 -8.300
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.07 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.03 0.00
-0.20
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,457.00
1,459.30
1,465.01

38.965

49.730

49.597
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.8 66.7 76.075.4

64.8 65.8

63.2 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.4 55.3 56.6 65.164.9
Vehicle Noise: 77.1 75.2 73.0 67.4 76.676.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.2 69.3 67.5 61.4 70.770.1

64.8 65.8

63.2 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.4 55.3 56.6 65.164.9
Vehicle Noise: 73.0 71.2 68.1 63.4 72.471.9

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
158
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 14
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

89.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.80 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

22.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.400 -8.400
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 1.92 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-17.78 0.28 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.04 0.00
-0.15
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,454.00
1,456.30
1,462.01

37.317

36.631

47.174
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.7 74.8 73.1 67.0 76.275.6

66.7 66.1

65.2 58.9 57.3 66.065.8

64.7 55.6 56.9 65.465.3
Vehicle Noise: 77.5 75.7 73.3 67.8 77.076.4
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.3 69.4 67.7 61.6 70.870.2

61.8 66.1

60.3 54.0 52.4 61.160.9

64.7 55.6 56.9 65.465.3
Vehicle Noise: 72.8 71.1 68.1 63.3 72.371.8

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
159
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 15
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

89.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.61 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

22.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-6.640 -9.640
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 1.79 -1.20 -5.700 -8.700
-17.78 0.27 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.18 0.07
-0.03
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,451.00
1,453.30
1,459.01

38.429

37.408

47.200
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.5 74.6 72.9 66.8 76.175.4

66.6 66.1

65.1 58.7 57.2 65.965.7

64.7 55.6 56.9 65.465.2
Vehicle Noise: 77.3 75.5 73.1 67.7 76.876.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

69.9 68.0 66.2 60.2 69.468.8

60.9 66.1

59.4 53.0 51.5 60.260.0

64.7 55.6 56.9 65.465.2
Vehicle Noise: 71.8 70.1 66.8 62.2 71.270.8

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
160
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 16
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.06
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.05 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.08 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.06
-0.18
-0.72
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,456.00
1,458.30
1,464.01

49.647

49.571

49.841
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.9 73.0 71.2 65.2 74.473.8

64.8 65.7

63.3 56.9 55.4 64.163.8

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.5 66.1 75.274.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
161
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 17
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

97.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.92
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

30.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.91 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.93 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.21
-0.41
-1.20
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,454.50
1,456.80
1,462.51

56.692

56.592

56.749
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.0 72.1 70.3 64.3 73.572.9

63.9 64.9

62.4 56.0 54.5 63.263.0

63.5 54.4 55.7 64.264.0
Vehicle Noise: 74.9 73.1 70.6 65.2 74.373.8
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.0 72.1 70.3 64.3 73.572.9

63.9 64.9

62.4 56.0 54.5 63.263.0

63.5 54.4 55.7 64.264.0
Vehicle Noise: 74.9 73.1 70.6 65.2 74.373.8

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
162
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 17
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

99.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-4.14
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -4.14 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -4.13 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-1.73
-1.93
-2.49
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,452.50
1,454.80
1,460.51

92.975

92.865

92.837
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.2 54.3 52.5 46.4 55.755.1

50.6 53.8

49.1 42.7 41.2 49.949.6

52.4 43.3 44.6 53.052.9
Vehicle Noise: 58.8 57.2 53.4 49.3 58.257.8
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.2 54.3 52.5 46.4 55.755.1

50.6 53.8

49.1 42.7 41.2 49.949.6

52.4 43.3 44.6 53.052.9
Vehicle Noise: 58.8 57.2 53.4 49.3 58.257.8

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
163
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 18
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

98.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-4.18
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

14.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -4.15 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -4.10 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-1.71
-1.91
-2.46
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,440.00
1,442.30
1,448.01

93.514

93.104

92.325
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.1 54.2 52.5 46.4 55.655.0

50.6 53.8

49.1 42.7 41.1 49.849.6

52.4 43.4 44.6 53.153.0
Vehicle Noise: 58.8 57.1 53.3 49.3 58.257.8
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.1 54.2 52.5 46.4 55.655.0

50.6 53.8

49.1 42.7 41.1 49.849.6

52.4 43.4 44.6 53.153.0
Vehicle Noise: 58.8 57.1 53.3 49.3 58.257.8

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
164
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 19
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

73.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.43
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
-11.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -2.36 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -2.20 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-22.44
-22.81
-23.73
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,433.00
1,435.30
1,441.01

71.473

70.683

69.011
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

57.9 56.0 54.2 48.2 57.456.8

52.4 55.7

50.8 44.5 42.9 51.651.4

54.3 45.2 46.5 55.054.9
Vehicle Noise: 60.6 59.0 55.1 51.1 60.059.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

57.9 56.0 54.2 48.2 57.456.8

52.4 55.7

50.8 44.5 42.9 51.651.4

54.3 45.2 46.5 55.054.9
Vehicle Noise: 60.6 59.0 55.1 51.1 60.059.6

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
165
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
593.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -15.73 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-17.78 -15.84 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.07 0.00
-0.22
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,451.00
1,453.30
1,459.01
550.557
550.403
560.130
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

59.2 57.3 55.5 49.5 58.758.1

49.1 50.0

47.6 41.2 39.7 48.448.1

48.6 39.5 40.8 49.349.1
Vehicle Noise: 60.1 58.2 55.8 50.4 59.559.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

53.5 51.6 49.8 43.8 53.052.4

44.2 50.0

42.7 36.3 34.8 43.543.2

48.6 39.5 40.8 49.349.1
Vehicle Noise: 55.4 53.7 50.4 45.9 54.954.4

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
166
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
881.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-18.61
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
796.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -18.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-18.67 -18.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-7.56
-8.59
-11.34
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,486.80
1,489.10
1,494.81
855.888
855.947
856.120
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

52.1 50.2 48.4 42.3 51.651.0

43.1 44.7

41.6 35.2 33.7 42.442.1

43.2 34.2 35.5 43.943.8
Vehicle Noise: 53.2 51.4 48.8 43.6 52.752.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

52.1 50.2 48.4 42.3 51.651.0

43.1 44.7

41.6 35.2 33.7 42.442.1

43.2 34.2 35.5 43.943.8
Vehicle Noise: 53.2 51.4 48.8 43.6 52.752.2

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
167
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: First Floor With Wall
14,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
416.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -13.86 -1.20 -12.200 -15.200
-19.13 -13.84 -1.20 -10.320 -13.320

2.41 1.95

1.01 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,430.00
1,432.30
1,438.01
413.827
413.161
411.767
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

46.4 44.5 42.8 36.7 45.945.3

40.9 44.1

39.3 33.0 31.4 40.139.9

42.6 33.6 34.9 43.343.2
Vehicle Noise: 49.1 47.4 43.7 39.6 48.548.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

33.6 31.7 29.9 23.9 33.132.5

28.7 33.8

27.1 20.8 19.2 27.927.7

32.3 23.3 24.5 33.032.9
Vehicle Noise: 37.3 35.7 31.2 27.9 36.736.4

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
168
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 1
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.53
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-6.080 -9.080
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.54 -1.20 -5.500 -8.500
-18.67 -2.71 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.11 0.05

0.00 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,487.70
1,490.00
1,495.71

72.593

72.642

74.614
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

68.1 66.2 64.5 58.4 67.667.0

59.2 60.6

57.7 51.3 49.8 58.458.2

59.1 50.1 51.3 59.859.7
Vehicle Noise: 69.3 67.5 64.8 59.7 68.768.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

62.1 60.2 58.4 52.3 61.661.0

53.7 60.6

52.2 45.8 44.3 52.952.7

59.1 50.1 51.3 59.859.7
Vehicle Noise: 64.7 63.1 59.2 55.2 64.163.7

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
169
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 2
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.55
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-6.940 -9.940
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.55 -1.20 -6.320 -9.320
-18.67 -2.60 -1.20 -5.100 -8.100

0.22 0.14

0.01 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,486.80
1,489.10
1,494.81

72.743

72.793

73.340
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

68.1 66.2 64.5 58.4 67.667.0

59.2 60.7

57.6 51.3 49.7 58.458.2

59.2 50.2 51.5 59.959.8
Vehicle Noise: 69.3 67.5 64.8 59.7 68.768.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

61.2 59.3 57.5 51.5 60.760.1

52.8 55.6

51.3 45.0 43.4 52.151.9

54.1 45.1 46.4 54.854.7
Vehicle Noise: 62.7 60.9 58.0 53.1 62.161.7

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
170
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 3
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.54
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-6.720 -9.720
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.55 -1.20 -6.080 -9.080
-18.67 -2.59 -1.20 -5.100 -8.100

0.19 0.11

0.01 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,485.80
1,488.10
1,493.81

72.693

72.742

73.289
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

68.1 66.2 64.5 58.4 67.667.0

59.2 60.7

57.7 51.3 49.7 58.458.2

59.3 50.2 51.5 59.959.8
Vehicle Noise: 69.3 67.5 64.8 59.7 68.768.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

61.4 59.5 57.7 51.7 60.960.3

53.1 55.6

51.6 45.2 43.7 52.452.1

54.2 45.1 46.4 54.854.7
Vehicle Noise: 62.9 61.1 58.2 53.3 62.361.9

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
171
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 4
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.52
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.100 -8.100
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.65 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-18.67 -2.69 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.01 0.00
-0.07
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,483.20
1,485.50
1,491.21

72.454

73.946

74.396
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

68.1 66.2 64.5 58.4 67.767.0

59.1 60.6

57.5 51.2 49.6 58.358.1

59.2 50.1 51.4 59.859.7
Vehicle Noise: 69.3 67.5 64.8 59.7 68.768.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

63.0 61.1 59.4 53.3 62.661.9

59.1 60.6

57.5 51.2 49.6 58.358.1

59.2 50.1 51.4 59.859.7
Vehicle Noise: 66.0 64.3 60.4 56.5 65.465.0

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
172
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 5
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
103.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.52
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

19.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.200 -8.200
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -2.53 -1.20 -4.900 -7.900
-18.67 -2.70 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.02 0.00
-0.04
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,483.80
1,486.10
1,491.81

72.473

72.523

74.444
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

68.1 66.2 64.5 58.4 67.767.0

59.2 60.6

57.7 51.3 49.8 58.558.2

59.2 50.1 51.4 59.859.7
Vehicle Noise: 69.3 67.5 64.8 59.7 68.768.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

62.9 61.0 59.3 53.2 62.561.8

54.3 60.6

52.8 46.4 44.9 53.653.3

59.2 50.1 51.4 59.859.7
Vehicle Noise: 65.3 63.6 60.0 55.8 64.764.3

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
173
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 5
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

94.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
111.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.50
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

17.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -2.50 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -2.54 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.00 -0.02
-0.13
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,482.50
1,484.80
1,490.51

72.229

72.259

72.649
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.8 62.7 71.971.3

62.3 63.3

60.8 54.5 52.9 61.661.4

61.9 52.8 54.1 62.662.4
Vehicle Noise: 73.3 71.5 69.0 63.7 72.872.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.8 62.7 71.971.3

62.3 63.3

60.8 54.5 52.9 61.661.4

61.9 52.8 54.1 62.662.4
Vehicle Noise: 73.3 71.5 69.0 63.7 72.872.2

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
174
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 6
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
106.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-1.99
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

21.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -1.98 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -2.01 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.08
-0.16
-0.48
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,478.50
1,480.80
1,486.51

66.760

66.723

66.975
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.9 71.1 69.3 63.2 72.571.9

62.8 63.8

61.3 55.0 53.4 62.161.9

62.4 53.4 54.6 63.163.0
Vehicle Noise: 73.8 72.0 69.5 64.2 73.372.8
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.9 71.1 69.3 63.2 72.571.9

62.8 63.8

61.3 55.0 53.4 62.161.9

62.4 53.4 54.6 63.163.0
Vehicle Noise: 73.8 72.0 69.5 64.2 73.372.8

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
175
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 7
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

95.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.68
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

10.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.65 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.64 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-1.31
-1.52
-2.13
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,474.00
1,476.30
1,482.01

54.588

54.387

54.309
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.3 72.4 70.6 64.5 73.873.2

64.2 65.2

62.7 56.3 54.8 63.563.2

63.8 54.7 56.0 64.564.3
Vehicle Noise: 75.1 73.3 70.9 65.5 74.674.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.3 72.4 70.6 64.5 73.873.2

64.2 65.2

62.7 56.3 54.8 63.563.2

63.8 54.7 56.0 64.564.3
Vehicle Noise: 75.1 73.3 70.9 65.5 74.674.1

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
176
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 8
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

97.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.96
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

12.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.93 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.91 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-1.48
-1.73
-2.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,471.00
1,473.30
1,479.01

57.009

56.773

56.586
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.0 72.1 70.3 64.3 73.572.9

63.9 64.9

62.4 56.0 54.5 63.262.9

63.5 54.5 55.7 64.264.1
Vehicle Noise: 74.8 73.0 70.6 65.2 74.373.8
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.0 72.1 70.3 64.3 73.572.9

63.9 64.9

62.4 56.0 54.5 63.262.9

63.5 54.5 55.7 64.264.1
Vehicle Noise: 74.8 73.0 70.6 65.2 74.373.8

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
177
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 9
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

97.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.98
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

12.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.95 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.91 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-2.11
-2.41
-3.23
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,469.00
1,471.30
1,477.01

57.212

56.916

56.580
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.0 72.1 70.3 64.2 73.572.9

63.9 64.9

62.4 56.0 54.5 63.262.9

63.5 54.5 55.7 64.264.1
Vehicle Noise: 74.8 73.0 70.6 65.2 74.373.8
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.0 72.1 70.3 64.2 73.572.9

63.9 64.9

62.4 56.0 54.5 63.262.9

63.5 54.5 55.7 64.264.1
Vehicle Noise: 74.8 73.0 70.6 65.2 74.373.8

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
178
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 10
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.49 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 1.55 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 1.61 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-1.21
-1.58
-2.66
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,468.00
1,470.30
1,476.01

39.163

38.783

38.421
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.4 74.5 72.8 66.7 75.975.3

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 77.3 75.5 73.0 67.7 76.876.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.4 74.5 72.8 66.7 75.975.3

66.4 67.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 77.3 75.5 73.0 67.7 76.876.2

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
179
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 11
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.23
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.17 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.07 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-1.16
-1.57
-2.86
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,463.00
1,465.30
1,471.01

50.977

50.490

49.721
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.7 72.8 71.0 65.0 74.273.6

64.7 65.8

63.2 56.8 55.2 63.963.7

64.3 55.3 56.6 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.3 66.0 75.174.5
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.7 72.8 71.0 65.0 74.273.6

64.7 65.8

63.2 56.8 55.2 63.963.7

64.3 55.3 56.6 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.3 66.0 75.174.5

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
180
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 12
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

82.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

1.31 Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 1.41 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 1.58 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-2.20
-2.70
-4.12
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,461.00
1,463.30
1,469.01

40.249

39.625

38.626
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.2 74.3 72.6 66.5 75.875.1

66.2 67.4

64.7 58.4 56.8 65.565.3

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 77.1 75.3 72.9 67.5 76.676.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

76.2 74.3 72.6 66.5 75.875.1

66.2 67.4

64.7 58.4 56.8 65.565.3

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 77.1 75.3 72.9 67.5 76.676.1

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
181
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 13
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.34
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.26 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.12 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.61
-0.92
-1.95
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,457.00
1,459.30
1,465.01

51.876

51.245

50.102
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.6 72.7 70.9 64.9 74.173.5

64.6 65.7

63.1 56.7 55.1 63.863.6

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.5 73.7 71.2 65.8 75.074.4
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.6 72.7 70.9 64.9 74.173.5

64.6 65.7

63.1 56.7 55.1 63.863.6

64.3 55.3 56.5 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.5 73.7 71.2 65.8 75.074.4

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
182
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 14
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

89.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.10
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

22.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 0.00 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 0.17 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.63
-0.92
-1.93
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,454.00
1,456.30
1,462.01

49.940

49.233

47.911
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.8 72.9 71.2 65.1 74.373.7

64.8 66.0

63.3 57.0 55.4 64.163.9

64.6 55.5 56.8 65.365.2
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.4 66.1 75.274.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.8 72.9 71.2 65.1 74.373.7

64.8 66.0

63.3 57.0 55.4 64.163.9

64.6 55.5 56.8 65.365.2
Vehicle Noise: 75.7 73.9 71.4 66.1 75.274.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
183
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 15
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

89.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.20
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

22.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.10 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 0.11 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-0.33
-0.55
-1.35
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,451.00
1,453.30
1,459.01

50.741

49.941

48.367
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.7 72.8 71.1 65.0 74.273.6

64.7 65.9

63.2 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.5 55.5 56.7 65.265.1
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.3 66.0 75.174.6
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.7 72.8 71.1 65.0 74.273.6

64.7 65.9

63.2 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.5 55.5 56.7 65.265.1
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.3 66.0 75.174.6

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
184
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 16
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

91.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.23
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

24.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -0.16 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.07 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-1.41
-1.87
-3.26
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,456.00
1,458.30
1,464.01

50.953

50.471

49.713
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.7 72.8 71.0 65.0 74.273.6

64.7 65.8

63.2 56.8 55.2 63.963.7

64.3 55.3 56.6 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.3 66.0 75.174.5
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

74.7 72.8 71.0 65.0 74.273.6

64.7 65.8

63.2 56.8 55.2 63.963.7

64.3 55.3 56.6 65.064.9
Vehicle Noise: 75.6 73.8 71.3 66.0 75.174.5

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
185
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 17
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

97.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-1.07
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

30.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -1.01 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -0.93 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-1.58
-2.09
-3.64
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,454.50
1,456.80
1,462.51

57.963

57.508

56.764
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.9 72.0 70.2 64.2 73.472.8

63.8 64.9

62.3 55.9 54.4 63.162.9

63.5 54.4 55.7 64.264.0
Vehicle Noise: 74.8 72.9 70.5 65.1 74.273.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.9 72.0 70.2 64.2 73.472.8

63.8 64.9

62.3 55.9 54.4 63.162.9

63.5 54.4 55.7 64.264.0
Vehicle Noise: 74.8 72.9 70.5 65.1 74.273.7

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
186
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 17
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

99.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-4.21
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

15.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -4.19 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -4.15 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-6.28
-6.69
-7.78
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,452.50
1,454.80
1,460.51

93.948

93.618

93.040
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.1 54.2 52.4 46.4 55.655.0

50.5 53.8

49.0 42.7 41.1 49.849.6

52.3 43.3 44.6 53.052.9
Vehicle Noise: 58.8 57.1 53.3 49.3 58.257.8
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.1 54.2 52.4 46.4 55.655.0

50.5 53.8

49.0 42.7 41.1 49.849.6

52.3 43.3 44.6 53.052.9
Vehicle Noise: 58.8 57.1 53.3 49.3 58.257.8

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
187
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 18
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

98.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-4.33
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

14.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -4.29 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -4.20 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-5.83
-6.23
-7.30
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,440.00
1,442.30
1,448.01

95.636

95.018

93.708
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.0 54.1 52.3 46.3 55.554.9

50.4 53.7

48.9 42.6 41.0 49.749.5

52.3 43.3 44.5 53.052.9
Vehicle Noise: 58.7 57.0 53.2 49.2 58.157.7
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

56.0 54.1 52.3 46.3 55.554.9

50.4 53.7

48.9 42.6 41.0 49.749.5

52.3 43.3 44.5 53.052.9
Vehicle Noise: 58.7 57.0 53.2 49.2 58.157.7

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
188
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: 19
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
14,000
10%

84.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

73.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-2.76
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
-11.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -2.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-19.13 -2.46 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-25.86
-26.47
-28.01
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,433.00
1,435.30
1,441.01

75.168

74.138

71.835
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

57.5 55.6 53.9 47.8 57.156.4

52.0 55.4

50.5 44.2 42.6 51.351.1

54.0 45.0 46.2 54.754.6
Vehicle Noise: 60.3 58.6 54.8 50.8 59.759.3
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

57.5 55.6 53.9 47.8 57.156.4

52.0 55.4

50.5 44.2 42.6 51.351.1

54.0 45.0 46.2 54.754.6
Vehicle Noise: 60.3 58.6 54.8 50.8 59.759.3

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
189
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Clinton Keith Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
42,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,200 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
593.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 64 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.41 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-15.73
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
508.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-5.300 -8.300
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-13.83 -15.85 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-17.78 -15.85 -1.20 0.000 0.000

0.03 0.00
-0.31
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,451.00
1,453.30
1,459.01
550.832
560.507
560.315
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

59.2 57.3 55.5 49.5 58.758.1

49.0 50.0

47.5 41.1 39.6 48.348.0

48.6 39.5 40.8 49.349.1
Vehicle Noise: 60.0 58.2 55.8 50.4 59.559.0
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

53.9 52.0 50.2 44.2 53.452.8

49.0 50.0

47.5 41.1 39.6 48.348.0

48.6 39.5 40.8 49.349.1
Vehicle Noise: 56.3 54.6 51.1 46.7 55.755.3

79.85 83.81

72.73 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
190
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Whitewood Road
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
28,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
881.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 50 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.52 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-18.60
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
796.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-14.72 -18.60 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-18.67 -18.60 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-7.90
-8.95
-11.77
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,486.80
1,489.10
1,494.81
855.716
855.751
855.864
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

52.1 50.2 48.4 42.3 51.651.0

43.1 44.7

41.6 35.2 33.7 42.442.1

43.2 34.2 35.5 43.943.8
Vehicle Noise: 53.2 51.4 48.8 43.6 52.752.2
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

52.1 50.2 48.4 42.3 51.651.0

43.1 44.7

41.6 35.2 33.7 42.442.1

43.2 34.2 35.5 43.943.8
Vehicle Noise: 53.2 51.4 48.8 43.6 52.752.2

77.62 82.14

69.34 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
191
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CALVENO) - v10/31/19

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14984
Analyst: B. MadduxLot No: Pool
Road Name: Arendt Lane
Scenario: Second Floor With Wall
14,000
10%

85.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,400 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:
416.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 12 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.06 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-13.88
Finite Road
-1.20
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations
331.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0
-12.220 -15.220
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType
-15.18 -13.87 -1.20 -11.400 -14.400
-19.13 -13.85 -1.20 -9.420 -12.420

1.96 1.55

0.73 Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 1,430.00
1,432.30
1,438.01
414.247
413.582
412.188
Grade Adjustment: 1.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

46.4 44.5 42.8 36.7 45.945.3

40.8 44.1

39.3 33.0 31.4 40.139.9

42.6 33.6 34.9 43.343.2
Vehicle Noise: 49.1 47.4 43.6 39.6 48.548.1
Mitigated Noise Levels (with Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

34.2 32.3 30.5 24.5 33.733.1

29.4 34.6

27.9 21.6 20.0 28.728.5

33.2 24.2 25.4 33.933.8
Vehicle Noise: 38.1 36.5 31.9 28.6 37.537.1

71.09 77.24

59.44 Road Grade: 2.0%
feet
Friday, March 1, 2024
192
Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

APPENDIX 8.1:

OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS
193
Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

This page intentionally left blank
194
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
44,400

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,440 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Highway Data
feet
feet
vehicles
Road Elevation: 0.0
Road Grade: 0.0%
Pad Elevation: 0.0
Site Data
Site Conditions (Hard = 10, Soft = 15)
Medium Trucks (2 Axles): 15
Heavy Trucks (3+ Axles): 15
Autos: 15
Vehicle Mix
feet
feet Lane Equivalent Distance (in feet)
Barrier Height: 0.0
Observer Height (Above Pad): 5.0 feet
feet
50 mphVehicle Speed:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.07 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -13.17 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -17.13 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.7 62.7 71.971.3

66.0 66.4

64.4 58.1 56.5 65.265.0

65.0 55.9 57.2 65.765.5
Vehicle Noise: 74.1 72.3 69.3 64.5 73.5 73.0
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
107 230 1,069496
115 248 1,149533
Friday, November 11, 2022
195
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
44,400

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,440 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.07 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -13.17 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -17.13 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.7 62.7 71.971.3

66.0 66.4

64.4 58.1 56.5 65.265.0

65.0 55.9 57.2 65.765.5
Vehicle Noise: 74.1 72.3 69.3 64.5 73.5 73.0
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
107 230 1,069496
115 248 1,149533
Friday, November 11, 2022
196
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
44,400

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,440 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.07 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -13.17 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -17.13 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.7 62.7 71.971.3

66.0 66.4

64.4 58.1 56.5 65.265.0

65.0 55.9 57.2 65.765.5
Vehicle Noise: 74.1 72.3 69.3 64.5 73.5 73.0
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
107 230 1,069496
115 248 1,149533
Friday, November 11, 2022
197
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
42,150

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,215 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.30 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.94 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.90 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.9 69.0 67.2 61.1 70.469.8

64.6 65.5

63.1 56.8 55.2 63.963.7

64.1 55.0 56.3 64.864.6
Vehicle Noise: 72.7 71.0 67.8 63.1 72.1 71.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
87 187 867403
93 200 930432
Friday, November 11, 2022
198
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
42,150

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,215 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.30 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.94 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.90 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.9 69.0 67.2 61.1 70.469.8

64.6 65.5

63.1 56.8 55.2 63.963.7

64.1 55.0 56.3 64.864.6
Vehicle Noise: 72.7 71.0 67.8 63.1 72.1 71.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
87 187 867403
93 200 930432
Friday, November 11, 2022
199
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
42,150

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,215 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.30 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.94 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.90 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.9 69.0 67.2 61.1 70.469.8

64.6 65.5

63.1 56.8 55.2 63.963.7

64.1 55.0 56.3 64.864.6
Vehicle Noise: 72.7 71.0 67.8 63.1 72.1 71.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
87 187 867403
93 200 930432
Friday, November 11, 2022
200
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
33,600

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,360 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.31 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -13.93 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -17.88 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

69.9 68.0 66.2 60.2 69.468.8

63.7 64.5

62.1 55.8 54.2 62.962.7

63.1 54.0 55.3 63.863.6
Vehicle Noise: 71.7 70.0 66.8 62.2 71.2 70.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
75 161 746346
80 172 800371
Friday, November 11, 2022
201
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
33,600

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,360 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.31 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -13.93 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -17.88 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

69.9 68.0 66.2 60.2 69.468.8

63.7 64.5

62.1 55.8 54.2 62.962.7

63.1 54.0 55.3 63.863.6
Vehicle Noise: 71.7 70.0 66.8 62.2 71.2 70.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
75 161 746346
80 172 800371
Friday, November 11, 2022
202
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
33,600

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,360 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.31 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -13.93 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -17.88 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

69.9 68.0 66.2 60.2 69.468.8

63.7 64.5

62.1 55.8 54.2 62.962.7

63.1 54.0 55.3 63.863.6
Vehicle Noise: 71.7 70.0 66.8 62.2 71.2 70.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
75 161 746346
80 172 800371
Friday, November 11, 2022
203
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
30,950

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,095 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.08 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.15 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.3 62.3 71.570.9

65.4 65.4

63.9 57.5 56.0 64.764.4

64.0 55.0 56.2 64.764.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.8 68.8 64.0 73.0 72.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
99 213 987458
106 229 1,061493
Friday, November 11, 2022
204
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
30,950

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,095 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.08 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.15 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.3 62.3 71.570.9

65.4 65.4

63.9 57.5 56.0 64.764.4

64.0 55.0 56.2 64.764.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.8 68.8 64.0 73.0 72.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
99 213 987458
106 229 1,061493
Friday, November 11, 2022
205
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
30,950

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,095 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.08 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.15 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.3 62.3 71.570.9

65.4 65.4

63.9 57.5 56.0 64.764.4

64.0 55.0 56.2 64.764.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.8 68.8 64.0 73.0 72.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
99 213 987458
106 229 1,061493
Friday, November 11, 2022
206
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
30,950

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,095 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.08 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.15 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.3 62.3 71.570.9

65.4 65.4

63.9 57.5 56.0 64.764.4

64.0 55.0 56.2 64.764.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.8 68.8 64.0 73.0 72.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
99 213 987458
106 229 1,061493
Friday, November 11, 2022
207
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
30,950

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,095 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.08 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.15 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.3 62.3 71.570.9

65.4 65.4

63.9 57.5 56.0 64.764.4

64.0 55.0 56.2 64.764.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.8 68.8 64.0 73.0 72.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
99 213 987458
106 229 1,061493
Friday, November 11, 2022
208
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022
30,950

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,095 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.08 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.15 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.3 62.3 71.570.9

65.4 65.4

63.9 57.5 56.0 64.764.4

64.0 55.0 56.2 64.764.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.8 68.8 64.0 73.0 72.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
99 213 987458
106 229 1,061493
Friday, November 11, 2022
209
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: s/o Clinton Keith Rd
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: 2022
17,800

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,780 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

0.55 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -16.69 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -20.64 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.4 68.5 66.8 60.7 69.969.3

64.2 65.1

62.7 56.4 54.8 63.563.3

63.7 54.6 55.9 64.464.2
Vehicle Noise: 72.3 70.6 67.4 62.7 71.7 71.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
61 131 607282
65 140 651302
Friday, November 11, 2022
210
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: n/o Clinton Keith Rd
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: 2022
17,150

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,715 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

0.39 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -16.85 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -20.80 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.3 68.4 66.6 60.6 69.869.2

64.1 64.9

62.6 56.2 54.7 63.463.1

63.5 54.5 55.7 64.264.1
Vehicle Noise: 72.1 70.4 67.2 62.6 71.6 71.1
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
59 128 592275
64 137 635295
Friday, November 11, 2022
211
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: n/o Driveway 1
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: 2022
17,250

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,725 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

0.42 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -16.82 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -20.78 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.3 68.4 66.6 60.6 69.869.2

64.1 65.0

62.6 56.2 54.7 63.463.2

63.5 54.5 55.7 64.264.1
Vehicle Noise: 72.2 70.4 67.3 62.6 71.6 71.1
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
59 128 595276
64 137 638296
Friday, November 11, 2022
212
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
44,950

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,495 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.12 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -13.12 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -17.08 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.8 62.7 71.971.3

66.0 66.4

64.5 58.1 56.6 65.365.1

65.0 56.0 57.2 65.765.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.1 72.4 69.3 64.6 73.6 73.1
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
108 232 1,078500
116 250 1,158538
Friday, November 11, 2022
213
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
44,950

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,495 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.12 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -13.12 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -17.08 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.8 62.7 71.971.3

66.0 66.4

64.5 58.1 56.6 65.365.1

65.0 56.0 57.2 65.765.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.1 72.4 69.3 64.6 73.6 73.1
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
108 232 1,078500
116 250 1,158538
Friday, November 11, 2022
214
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
44,950

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,495 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.12 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -13.12 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -17.08 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.4 70.5 68.8 62.7 71.971.3

66.0 66.4

64.5 58.1 56.6 65.365.1

65.0 56.0 57.2 65.765.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.1 72.4 69.3 64.6 73.6 73.1
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
108 232 1,078500
116 250 1,158538
Friday, November 11, 2022
215
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
43,350

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,335 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.42 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.82 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.78 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.0 69.1 67.3 61.3 70.569.9

64.8 65.6

63.3 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.2 55.1 56.4 64.964.8
Vehicle Noise: 72.8 71.1 67.9 63.3 72.3 71.8
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
88 190 884410
95 204 948440
Friday, November 11, 2022
216
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
43,350

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,335 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.42 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.82 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.78 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.0 69.1 67.3 61.3 70.569.9

64.8 65.6

63.3 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.2 55.1 56.4 64.964.8
Vehicle Noise: 72.8 71.1 67.9 63.3 72.3 71.8
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
88 190 884410
95 204 948440
Friday, November 11, 2022
217
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
43,350

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,335 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

4.42 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.82 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.78 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.0 69.1 67.3 61.3 70.569.9

64.8 65.6

63.3 56.9 55.3 64.063.8

64.2 55.1 56.4 64.964.8
Vehicle Noise: 72.8 71.1 67.9 63.3 72.3 71.8
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
88 190 884410
95 204 948440
Friday, November 11, 2022
218
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
34,800

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,480 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.46 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -13.77 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -17.73 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.0 68.1 66.4 60.3 69.568.9

63.8 64.7

62.3 55.9 54.4 63.162.9

63.2 54.2 55.4 63.963.8
Vehicle Noise: 71.9 70.1 67.0 62.3 71.3 70.8
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
76 164 763354
82 176 819380
Friday, November 11, 2022
219
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
34,800

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,480 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.46 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -13.77 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -17.73 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.0 68.1 66.4 60.3 69.568.9

63.8 64.7

62.3 55.9 54.4 63.162.9

63.2 54.2 55.4 63.963.8
Vehicle Noise: 71.9 70.1 67.0 62.3 71.3 70.8
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
76 164 763354
82 176 819380
Friday, November 11, 2022
220
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
34,800

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,480 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.46 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -13.77 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -17.73 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.0 68.1 66.4 60.3 69.568.9

63.8 64.7

62.3 55.9 54.4 63.162.9

63.2 54.2 55.4 63.963.8
Vehicle Noise: 71.9 70.1 67.0 62.3 71.3 70.8
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
76 164 763354
82 176 819380
Friday, November 11, 2022
221
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
31,500

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,150 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.16 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.08 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.03 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.1 70.2 68.4 62.3 71.671.0

65.5 65.5

63.9 57.6 56.0 64.764.5

64.1 55.0 56.3 64.864.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.9 68.9 64.0 73.1 72.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
100 215 998463
107 231 1,074498
Friday, November 11, 2022
222
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
31,500

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,150 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.16 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.08 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.03 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.1 70.2 68.4 62.3 71.671.0

65.5 65.5

63.9 57.6 56.0 64.764.5

64.1 55.0 56.3 64.864.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.9 68.9 64.0 73.1 72.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
100 215 998463
107 231 1,074498
Friday, November 11, 2022
223
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
31,500

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,150 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.16 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.08 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.03 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.1 70.2 68.4 62.3 71.671.0

65.5 65.5

63.9 57.6 56.0 64.764.5

64.1 55.0 56.3 64.864.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.9 68.9 64.0 73.1 72.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
100 215 998463
107 231 1,074498
Friday, November 11, 2022
224
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
31,300

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,130 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.13 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.06 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.4 62.3 71.570.9

65.4 65.5

63.9 57.6 56.0 64.764.5

64.0 55.0 56.3 64.764.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.8 68.9 64.0 73.0 72.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
99 214 994461
107 230 1,069496
Friday, November 11, 2022
225
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
31,300

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,130 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.13 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.06 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.4 62.3 71.570.9

65.4 65.5

63.9 57.6 56.0 64.764.5

64.0 55.0 56.3 64.764.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.8 68.9 64.0 73.0 72.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
99 214 994461
107 230 1,069496
Friday, November 11, 2022
226
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
31,300

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,130 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.13 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -15.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -19.06 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.0 70.1 68.4 62.3 71.570.9

65.4 65.5

63.9 57.6 56.0 64.764.5

64.0 55.0 56.3 64.764.6
Vehicle Noise: 73.6 71.8 68.9 64.0 73.0 72.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
99 214 994461
107 230 1,069496
Friday, November 11, 2022
227
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: s/o Clinton Keith Rd
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
18,000

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,800 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

0.60 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -16.64 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -20.59 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.5 68.6 66.8 60.8 70.069.4

64.3 65.1

62.8 56.4 54.9 63.663.3

63.7 54.7 55.9 64.464.3
Vehicle Noise: 72.3 70.6 67.4 62.8 71.8 71.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
61 132 612284
66 141 656305
Friday, November 11, 2022
228
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: n/o Clinton Keith Rd
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
17,950

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,795 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

0.59 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -16.65 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -20.60 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.5 68.6 66.8 60.8 70.069.4

64.3 65.1

62.8 56.4 54.9 63.663.3

63.7 54.7 55.9 64.464.3
Vehicle Noise: 72.3 70.6 67.4 62.8 71.8 71.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
61 132 611283
65 141 655304
Friday, November 11, 2022
229
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: n/o Driveway 1
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: 2022 + P
18,150

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 1,815 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

0.64 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -16.60 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -20.56 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

70.5 68.6 66.9 60.8 70.069.4

64.3 65.2

62.8 56.5 54.9 63.663.4

63.8 54.7 56.0 64.464.3
Vehicle Noise: 72.4 70.6 67.5 62.8 71.8 71.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
62 133 615286
66 142 660306
Friday, November 11, 2022
230
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
59,150

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,915 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.31 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -11.93 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -15.88 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.6 71.7 70.0 63.9 73.172.5

67.2 67.6

65.7 59.3 57.8 66.566.2

66.2 57.2 58.4 66.966.8
Vehicle Noise: 75.3 73.6 70.5 65.7 74.8 74.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
129 279 1,295601
139 300 1,391646
Friday, November 11, 2022
231
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
59,150

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,915 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.31 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -11.93 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -15.88 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.6 71.7 70.0 63.9 73.172.5

67.2 67.6

65.7 59.3 57.8 66.566.2

66.2 57.2 58.4 66.966.8
Vehicle Noise: 75.3 73.6 70.5 65.7 74.8 74.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
129 279 1,295601
139 300 1,391646
Friday, November 11, 2022
232
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
59,150

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,915 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.31 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -11.93 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -15.88 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.6 71.7 70.0 63.9 73.172.5

67.2 67.6

65.7 59.3 57.8 66.566.2

66.2 57.2 58.4 66.966.8
Vehicle Noise: 75.3 73.6 70.5 65.7 74.8 74.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
129 279 1,295601
139 300 1,391646
Friday, November 11, 2022
233
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
59,250

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,925 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.78 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -11.46 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -15.42 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.3 70.4 68.7 62.6 71.971.2

66.1 67.0

64.6 58.2 56.7 65.465.2

65.5 56.5 57.8 66.266.1
Vehicle Noise: 74.2 72.4 69.3 64.6 73.6 73.2
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
109 234 1,088505
117 251 1,167542
Friday, November 11, 2022
234
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
59,250

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,925 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.78 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -11.46 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -15.42 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.3 70.4 68.7 62.6 71.971.2

66.1 67.0

64.6 58.2 56.7 65.465.2

65.5 56.5 57.8 66.266.1
Vehicle Noise: 74.2 72.4 69.3 64.6 73.6 73.2
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
109 234 1,088505
117 251 1,167542
Friday, November 11, 2022
235
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
59,250

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,925 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.78 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -11.46 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -15.42 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.3 70.4 68.7 62.6 71.971.2

66.1 67.0

64.6 58.2 56.7 65.465.2

65.5 56.5 57.8 66.266.1
Vehicle Noise: 74.2 72.4 69.3 64.6 73.6 73.2
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
109 234 1,088505
117 251 1,167542
Friday, November 11, 2022
236
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
49,800

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,980 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.02 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.22 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.17 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.6 69.7 67.9 61.9 71.170.5

65.4 66.2

63.9 57.5 55.9 64.664.4

64.8 55.7 57.0 65.565.4
Vehicle Noise: 73.4 71.7 68.5 63.9 72.9 72.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
97 209 969450
104 224 1,040483
Friday, November 11, 2022
237
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
49,800

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,980 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.02 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.22 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.17 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.6 69.7 67.9 61.9 71.170.5

65.4 66.2

63.9 57.5 55.9 64.664.4

64.8 55.7 57.0 65.565.4
Vehicle Noise: 73.4 71.7 68.5 63.9 72.9 72.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
97 209 969450
104 224 1,040483
Friday, November 11, 2022
238
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
49,800

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,980 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.02 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.22 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.17 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.6 69.7 67.9 61.9 71.170.5

65.4 66.2

63.9 57.5 55.9 64.664.4

64.8 55.7 57.0 65.565.4
Vehicle Noise: 73.4 71.7 68.5 63.9 72.9 72.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
97 209 969450
104 224 1,040483
Friday, November 11, 2022
239
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
39,100

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,910 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.10 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.14 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -18.09 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.0 71.1 69.3 63.3 72.571.9

66.4 66.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

65.0 56.0 57.2 65.765.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.8 69.9 65.0 74.0 73.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
115 248 1,153535
124 267 1,240576
Friday, November 11, 2022
240
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
39,100

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,910 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.10 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.14 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -18.09 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.0 71.1 69.3 63.3 72.571.9

66.4 66.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

65.0 56.0 57.2 65.765.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.8 69.9 65.0 74.0 73.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
115 248 1,153535
124 267 1,240576
Friday, November 11, 2022
241
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
39,100

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,910 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.10 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.14 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -18.09 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.0 71.1 69.3 63.3 72.571.9

66.4 66.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

65.0 56.0 57.2 65.765.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.8 69.9 65.0 74.0 73.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
115 248 1,153535
124 267 1,240576
Friday, November 11, 2022
242
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
39,100

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,910 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.10 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.14 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -18.09 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.0 71.1 69.3 63.3 72.571.9

66.4 66.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

65.0 56.0 57.2 65.765.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.8 69.9 65.0 74.0 73.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
115 248 1,153535
124 267 1,240576
Friday, November 11, 2022
243
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
39,100

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,910 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.10 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.14 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -18.09 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.0 71.1 69.3 63.3 72.571.9

66.4 66.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

65.0 56.0 57.2 65.765.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.8 69.9 65.0 74.0 73.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
115 248 1,153535
124 267 1,240576
Friday, November 11, 2022
244
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
39,100

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,910 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.10 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.14 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -18.09 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.0 71.1 69.3 63.3 72.571.9

66.4 66.4

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.765.4

65.0 56.0 57.2 65.765.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.8 69.9 65.0 74.0 73.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
115 248 1,153535
124 267 1,240576
Friday, November 11, 2022
245
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: s/o Clinton Keith Rd
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
22,300

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,230 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

1.53 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -15.71 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -19.66 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.4 69.5 67.8 61.7 70.970.3

65.2 66.1

63.7 57.4 55.8 64.564.3

64.6 55.6 56.9 65.365.2
Vehicle Noise: 73.3 71.5 68.4 63.7 72.7 72.2
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
71 152 706328
76 163 757351
Friday, November 11, 2022
246
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: n/o Clinton Keith Rd
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
29,700

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,970 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.78 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -14.46 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -18.42 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.7 70.8 69.0 62.9 72.271.6

66.5 67.3

65.0 58.6 57.1 65.765.5

65.9 56.9 58.1 66.666.5
Vehicle Noise: 74.5 72.8 69.6 64.9 73.9 73.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
85 184 854396
92 197 916425
Friday, November 11, 2022
247
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: n/o Driveway 1
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024
29,800

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,980 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.79 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -14.45 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -18.40 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.7 70.8 69.0 63.0 72.271.6

66.5 67.3

65.0 58.6 57.1 65.865.5

65.9 56.9 58.1 66.666.5
Vehicle Noise: 74.5 72.8 69.6 65.0 74.0 73.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
86 184 856397
92 198 918426
Friday, November 11, 2022
248
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
59,700

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,970 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.35 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -11.89 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -15.84 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.7 71.8 70.0 63.9 73.272.6

67.2 67.7

65.7 59.4 57.8 66.566.3

66.2 57.2 58.5 66.966.8
Vehicle Noise: 75.4 73.6 70.6 65.8 74.8 74.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
130 281 1,303605
140 302 1,400650
Friday, November 11, 2022
249
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
59,700

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,970 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.35 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -11.89 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -15.84 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.7 71.8 70.0 63.9 73.272.6

67.2 67.7

65.7 59.4 57.8 66.566.3

66.2 57.2 58.5 66.966.8
Vehicle Noise: 75.4 73.6 70.6 65.8 74.8 74.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
130 281 1,303605
140 302 1,400650
Friday, November 11, 2022
250
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: w/o I-215 SB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
59,700

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,970 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.35 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

81.00 -11.89 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

85.38 -15.84 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

70.20 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.7 71.8 70.0 63.9 73.272.6

67.2 67.7

65.7 59.4 57.8 66.566.3

66.2 57.2 58.5 66.966.8
Vehicle Noise: 75.4 73.6 70.6 65.8 74.8 74.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
130 281 1,303605
140 302 1,400650
Friday, November 11, 2022
251
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
62,800

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 6,280 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

6.03 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -11.21 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -15.17 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.6 70.7 68.9 62.9 72.171.5

66.4 67.2

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.665.4

65.8 56.8 58.0 66.566.4
Vehicle Noise: 74.4 72.7 69.5 64.9 73.9 73.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
113 244 1,131525
121 261 1,213563
Friday, November 11, 2022
252
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
62,800

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 6,280 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

6.03 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -11.21 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -15.17 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.6 70.7 68.9 62.9 72.171.5

66.4 67.2

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.665.4

65.8 56.8 58.0 66.566.4
Vehicle Noise: 74.4 72.7 69.5 64.9 73.9 73.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
113 244 1,131525
121 261 1,213563
Friday, November 11, 2022
253
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o I-215 NB Ramps
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
62,800

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 6,280 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

6.03 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -11.21 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -15.17 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.6 70.7 68.9 62.9 72.171.5

66.4 67.2

64.9 58.5 57.0 65.665.4

65.8 56.8 58.0 66.566.4
Vehicle Noise: 74.4 72.7 69.5 64.9 73.9 73.4
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
113 244 1,131525
121 261 1,213563
Friday, November 11, 2022
254
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
51,000

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,100 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.12 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.07 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.7 69.8 68.0 62.0 71.270.6

65.5 66.3

64.0 57.6 56.1 64.764.5

64.9 55.9 57.1 65.665.5
Vehicle Noise: 73.5 71.8 68.6 64.0 73.0 72.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
98 212 985457
106 228 1,056490
Friday, November 11, 2022
255
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
51,000

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,100 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.12 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.07 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.7 69.8 68.0 62.0 71.270.6

65.5 66.3

64.0 57.6 56.1 64.764.5

64.9 55.9 57.1 65.665.5
Vehicle Noise: 73.5 71.8 68.6 64.0 73.0 72.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
98 212 985457
106 228 1,056490
Friday, November 11, 2022
256
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Warm Springs Pkwy.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
51,000

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 5,100 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

5.12 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -12.11 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -16.07 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.7 69.8 68.0 62.0 71.270.6

65.5 66.3

64.0 57.6 56.1 64.764.5

64.9 55.9 57.1 65.665.5
Vehicle Noise: 73.5 71.8 68.6 64.0 73.0 72.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
98 212 985457
106 228 1,056490
Friday, November 11, 2022
257
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
39,650

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,965 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.16 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.08 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -18.03 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.1 71.2 69.4 63.3 72.672.0

66.5 66.5

64.9 58.6 57.0 65.765.5

65.1 56.0 57.3 65.865.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.9 69.9 65.0 74.1 73.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
116 251 1,164540
125 270 1,252581
Friday, November 11, 2022
258
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
39,650

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,965 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.16 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.08 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -18.03 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.1 71.2 69.4 63.3 72.672.0

66.5 66.5

64.9 58.6 57.0 65.765.5

65.1 56.0 57.3 65.865.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.9 69.9 65.0 74.1 73.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
116 251 1,164540
125 270 1,252581
Friday, November 11, 2022
259
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Whitewood Rd.

Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
39,650

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,965 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.16 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.08 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -18.03 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.1 71.2 69.4 63.3 72.672.0

66.5 66.5

64.9 58.6 57.0 65.765.5

65.1 56.0 57.3 65.865.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.9 69.9 65.0 74.1 73.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
116 251 1,164540
125 270 1,252581
Friday, November 11, 2022
260
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
40,350

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,035 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.24 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.00 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -17.96 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.1 71.2 69.5 63.4 72.672.0

66.5 66.6

65.0 58.7 57.1 65.865.6

65.1 56.1 57.4 65.865.7
Vehicle Noise: 74.7 72.9 70.0 65.1 74.1 73.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
118 254 1,177547
127 273 1,267588
Friday, November 11, 2022
261
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
40,350

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,035 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.24 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.00 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -17.96 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.1 71.2 69.5 63.4 72.672.0

66.5 66.6

65.0 58.7 57.1 65.865.6

65.1 56.1 57.4 65.865.7
Vehicle Noise: 74.7 72.9 70.0 65.1 74.1 73.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
118 254 1,177547
127 273 1,267588
Friday, November 11, 2022
262
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: e/o Arendt Lane
Road Name: Clinton Keith Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
40,350

10.00%

67.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 4,035 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

67.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 78 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

3.24 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%
-0.69
Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

82.40 -14.00 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000

86.40 -17.96 -0.67 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.71
-4.88
-5.29
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

71.78 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

54.708

54.546

54.562
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

73.1 71.2 69.5 63.4 72.672.0

66.5 66.6

65.0 58.7 57.1 65.865.6

65.1 56.1 57.4 65.865.7
Vehicle Noise: 74.7 72.9 70.0 65.1 74.1 73.7
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
118 254 1,177547
127 273 1,267588
Friday, November 11, 2022
263
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: s/o Clinton Keith Rd
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
22,500

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,250 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

1.57 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -15.67 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -19.62 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

71.5 69.6 67.8 61.7 71.070.4

65.3 66.1

63.8 57.4 55.8 64.564.3

64.7 55.6 56.9 65.465.3
Vehicle Noise: 73.3 71.6 68.4 63.7 72.7 72.3
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
71 153 710329
76 164 761353
Friday, November 11, 2022
264
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: n/o Clinton Keith Rd
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
30,500

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 3,050 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.89 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -14.35 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -18.30 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.8 70.9 69.1 63.1 72.371.7

66.6 67.4

65.1 58.7 57.2 65.965.6

66.0 57.0 58.2 66.766.6
Vehicle Noise: 74.6 72.9 69.7 65.1 74.1 73.6
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
87 187 869404
93 201 933433
Friday, November 11, 2022
265
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL

SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA
Project Name: Whitewood I
Job Number: 14894
Road Segment: n/o Driveway 1
Road Name: Whitewood Rd.

Scenario: OY 2024 + P
29,900

10.00%

50.0 NOISE MODEL INPUTS
Average Daily Traffic (Adt):

Peak Hour Percentage:

Peak Hour Volume: 2,990 vehicles
Centerline Dist. to Barrier:

50.0Centerline Dist. to Observer:

Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 feet
REMEL Traffic Flow Distance

2.81 VehicleType Day Evening Night Daily
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42%

84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84%

86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74%

2.63 Finite Road
-1.20
Left View: -90.0
Right View: 90.0
degrees
degrees
Barrier Atten
FHWA Noise Model Calculations

0.0Barrier Distance to Observer: feet
Barrier Type (0-Wall, 1-Berm): 0.0

0.000 0.000
Fresnel Berm Atten
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType

79.45 -14.43 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000

84.25 -18.39 2.68 -1.20 0.000 0.000
-4.65
-4.87
-5.43
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

68.46 Noise Source Elevations (in feet)
Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos: 0.000

2.297

8.006

32.879

32.608

32.635
Grade Adjustment: 0.0
Unmitigated Noise Levels (without Topo and barrier attenuation) Medium Trucks:

Heavy Trucks:

Autos:

VehicleType Leq Peak Hour Leq Day Leq Evening Leq Night CNELLdn

72.7 70.8 69.0 63.0 72.271.6

66.5 67.3

65.0 58.6 57.1 65.865.5

65.9 56.9 58.1 66.666.5
Vehicle Noise: 74.5 72.8 69.6 65.0 74.0 73.5
Centerline Distance to Noise Contour (in feet)
CNEL:

Ldn:
70 dBA 65 dBA 55 dBA60 dBA
86 185 858398
92 198 920427
Friday, November 11, 2022
266
Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

APPENDIX 10.1:

OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS
267
Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

This page intentionally left blank
268
14984 - Whitewood I - Operation
CadnaA Noise Prediction Model: 14984-03_Operation.cna
Date: 04.03.24
Analyst: B. Maddux
Calculation Configuration
Configuration
Parameter Value
General
Max. Error (dB) 0.00
Max. Search Radius (#(Unit,LEN)) 2000.01
Min. Dist Src to Rcvr 0.00
Partition
Raster Factor 0.50
Max. Length of Section (#(Unit,LEN)) 999.99
Min. Length of Section (#(Unit,LEN)) 1.01
Min. Length of Section (%) 0.00
Proj. Line Sources On
Proj. Area Sources On
Ref. Time
Daytime Penalty (dB) 0.00
Recr. Time Penalty (dB) 5.00
Night-time Penalty (dB) 10.00
DTM
Standard Height (m) 0.00
Model of Terrain Triangulation
Reflection
max. Order of Reflection 2
Search Radius Src 100.00
Search Radius Rcvr 100.00
Max. Distance Source - Rcvr 1000.00 1000.00
Min. Distance Rvcr - Reflector 1.00 1.00
Min. Distance Source - Reflector 0.10
Industrial (ISO 9613)
Lateral Diffraction some Obj
Obst. within Area Src do not shield On
Screening Incl. Ground Att. over Barrier
Dz with limit (20/25)
Barrier Coefficients C1,2,3 3.0 20.0 0.0
Temperature (#(Unit,TEMP)) 10
rel. Humidity (%) 70
Ground Absorption G 0.50
Wind Speed for Dir. (#(Unit,SPEED)) 3.0
Roads (TNM)
Railways (FTA/FRA)
Aircraft (???)
Strictly acc. to AzB
Receiver Noise Levels
Name M. ID Level Lr Limit. Value Land Use Height Coordinates Day Night CNEL Day Night CNEL Type Auto Noise Type X Y Z (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) R1 R1 41.2 37.5 44.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 x Total 5.00 r 6283637.35 2162664.63 5.00 R2 R2 42.6 38.2 45.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 x Total 5.00 r 6283916.91 2163117.50 5.00 R3 R3 35.3 30.4 37.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 x Total 5.00 r 6283320.55 2162168.10 5.00 R4 R4 43.6 38.2 45.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 x Total 5.00 r 6285121.58 2162706.87 5.00 R5 R5 49.8 38.8 48.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 x Total 5.00 r 6284604.85 2163116.41 5.00 R6 R6 43.1 35.1 43.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 x Total 5.00 r 6285099.64 2163106.65 5.00 Point Source(s)
Name M. ID Result. PWL Lw / Li Operating Time Height Coordinates Day Evening Night Type Value norm. Day Special Night X Y Z (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) dB(A) (min) (min) (min) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) AC002 AC002 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 g 6284521.78 2163011.57 17.00 AC003 AC003 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 g 6284576.03 2163018.25 17.00 AC004 AC004 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283814.62 2162801.11 3.00 AC005 AC005 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283837.19 2162801.54 3.00 AC006 AC006 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283859.32 2162801.54 3.00 AC007 AC007 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283896.65 2162803.71 3.00 AC008 AC008 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283920.09 2162802.85 3.00 AC009 AC009 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283929.63 2162784.18 3.00 AC010 AC010 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283906.20 2162784.18 3.00 AC011 AC011 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283865.40 2162780.71 3.00 AC012 AC012 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283845.00 2162780.71 3.00 AC013 AC013 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283822.00 2162780.28 3.00 AC014 AC014 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283814.18 2162646.16 3.00 AC015 AC015 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283836.32 2162646.16 3.00 Urban Crossroads, Inc.
269
Name M. ID Result. PWL Lw / Li Operating Time Height Coordinates Day Evening Night Type Value norm. Day Special Night X Y Z (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) dB(A) (min) (min) (min) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) AC016 AC016 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283858.89 2162645.73 3.00 AC017 AC017 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283895.78 2162647.03 3.00 AC018 AC018 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283919.65 2162646.60 3.00 AC019 AC019 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283814.27 2162627.07 3.00 AC020 AC020 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283835.54 2162627.50 3.00 AC021 AC021 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283873.73 2162625.33 3.00 AC022 AC022 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283896.74 2162624.90 3.00 AC023 AC023 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283919.74 2162625.76 3.00 AC024 AC024 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283817.22 2162486.74 3.00 AC025 AC025 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283843.05 2162488.48 3.00 AC026 AC026 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283866.05 2162488.48 3.00 AC027 AC027 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283888.62 2162488.48 3.00 AC028 AC028 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283909.45 2162487.18 3.00 AC029 AC029 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283995.65 2162484.57 3.00 AC030 AC030 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283994.78 2162506.28 3.00 AC031 AC031 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283940.53 2162643.43 3.00 AC032 AC032 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283994.35 2162550.98 3.00 AC033 AC033 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283994.35 2162573.55 3.00 AC034 AC034 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283995.65 2162596.12 3.00 AC035 AC035 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284134.71 2162598.29 3.00 AC036 AC036 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284134.28 2162576.15 3.00 AC037 AC037 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284134.71 2162552.72 3.00 AC038 AC038 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284133.84 2162523.20 3.00 AC039 AC039 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284134.28 2162499.77 3.00 AC040 AC040 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284135.58 2162485.44 3.00 AC041 AC041 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284021.79 2162678.83 3.00 AC042 AC042 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284045.66 2162678.88 3.00 AC043 AC043 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284069.08 2162677.64 3.00 AC044 AC044 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284092.09 2162677.71 3.00 AC045 AC045 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284115.96 2162677.33 3.00 AC046 AC046 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284139.82 2162676.52 3.00 AC047 AC047 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283943.74 2162801.76 3.00 AC048 AC048 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283952.42 2162784.83 3.00 AC049 AC049 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283989.31 2162895.08 3.00 AC050 AC050 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283989.31 2162915.91 3.00 AC051 AC051 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283988.45 2162941.08 3.00 AC052 AC052 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6283988.88 2162964.96 3.00 AC053 AC053 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284144.32 2162944.35 3.00 AC054 AC054 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284120.03 2162943.55 3.00 AC055 AC055 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284099.89 2162945.02 3.00 AC056 AC056 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284077.78 2162945.19 3.00 AC057 AC057 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284046.94 2162944.77 3.00 AC058 AC058 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284033.66 2162945.76 3.00 AC059 AC059 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284138.89 2162926.42 3.00 AC060 AC060 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284114.58 2162926.49 3.00 AC061 AC061 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284092.02 2162925.28 3.00 AC062 AC062 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284066.83 2162926.20 3.00 AC063 AC063 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284045.12 2162926.74 3.00 AC064 AC064 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284019.52 2162926.35 3.00 AC065 AC065 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284140.07 2162821.12 3.00 AC066 AC066 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284113.16 2162821.45 3.00 AC067 AC067 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284091.90 2162821.71 3.00 AC068 AC068 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284067.59 2162821.58 3.00 AC069 AC069 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284045.46 2162822.72 3.00 AC070 AC070 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284021.16 2162823.45 3.00 AC071 AC071 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284148.35 2162783.02 3.00 AC072 AC072 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284124.93 2162784.61 3.00 AC073 AC073 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284100.62 2162784.91 3.00 AC074 AC074 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284077.62 2162785.19 3.00 AC075 AC075 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284054.63 2162785.91 3.00 AC076 AC076 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284029.45 2162786.22 3.00 AC077 AC077 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284176.47 2162960.53 3.00 AC078 AC078 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284176.90 2162936.66 3.00 AC079 AC079 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284176.90 2162913.22 3.00 AC080 AC080 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284175.60 2162890.22 3.00 AC081 AC081 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284175.60 2162867.21 3.00 AC082 AC082 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284174.73 2162841.17 3.00 AC083 AC083 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284286.36 2162957.14 3.00 AC084 AC084 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284286.80 2162932.40 3.00 AC085 AC085 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284286.80 2162908.97 3.00 AC086 AC086 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284285.49 2162886.83 3.00 AC087 AC087 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284285.49 2162862.53 3.00 AC088 AC088 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284285.49 2162838.22 3.00 AC089 AC089 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284175.42 2162785.88 3.00 AC090 AC090 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284182.72 2162763.05 3.00 AC091 AC091 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284183.15 2162738.31 3.00 AC092 AC092 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284182.28 2162716.17 3.00 Urban Crossroads, Inc.
270
Name M. ID Result. PWL Lw / Li Operating Time Height Coordinates Day Evening Night Type Value norm. Day Special Night X Y Z (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) dB(A) (min) (min) (min) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) AC093 AC093 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284181.85 2162692.73 3.00 AC094 AC094 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284181.41 2162667.13 3.00 AC095 AC095 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284280.89 2162777.63 3.00 AC096 AC096 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284283.24 2162763.91 3.00 AC097 AC097 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284283.67 2162741.78 3.00 AC098 AC098 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284284.97 2162718.78 3.00 AC099 AC099 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284283.67 2162694.47 3.00 AC100 AC100 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284283.67 2162669.73 3.00 AC101 AC101 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284159.37 2162600.29 3.00 AC102 AC102 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284159.80 2162578.58 3.00 AC103 AC103 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284159.80 2162556.88 3.00 AC104 AC104 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284158.93 2162518.69 3.00 AC105 AC105 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284159.37 2162496.99 3.00 AC106 AC106 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284159.80 2162474.85 3.00 AC107 AC107 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284300.08 2162587.35 3.00 AC108 AC108 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284299.64 2162566.52 3.00 AC109 AC109 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284299.21 2162542.65 3.00 AC110 AC110 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284297.47 2162508.36 3.00 AC111 AC111 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284297.91 2162485.36 3.00 AC112 AC112 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284297.47 2162463.65 3.00 AC113 AC113 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284453.20 2162881.46 3.00 AC114 AC114 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284438.00 2162882.40 3.00 AC115 AC115 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284415.44 2162881.48 3.00 AC116 AC116 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284382.47 2162884.04 3.00 AC117 AC117 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284358.59 2162884.40 3.00 AC118 AC118 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284333.41 2162884.30 3.00 AC119 AC119 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284302.59 2162794.12 3.00 AC120 AC120 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284299.99 2162769.82 3.00 AC121 AC121 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284300.42 2162745.08 3.00 AC122 AC122 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284300.42 2162722.94 3.00 AC123 AC123 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284300.42 2162699.07 3.00 AC124 AC124 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284300.42 2162675.63 3.00 AC125 AC125 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284406.15 2162787.44 3.00 AC126 AC126 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284404.50 2162767.13 3.00 AC127 AC127 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284404.50 2162744.12 3.00 AC128 AC128 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284404.07 2162721.12 3.00 AC129 AC129 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284404.07 2162698.55 3.00 AC130 AC130 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284404.50 2162673.38 3.00 AC131 AC131 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284318.57 2162595.69 3.00 AC132 AC132 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284318.57 2162573.55 3.00 AC133 AC133 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284318.57 2162551.85 3.00 AC134 AC134 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284318.57 2162515.39 3.00 AC135 AC135 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284318.13 2162493.69 3.00 AC136 AC136 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284319.87 2162469.82 3.00 AC137 AC137 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284457.65 2162467.10 3.00 AC138 AC138 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284455.05 2162483.16 3.00 AC139 AC139 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284454.62 2162505.30 3.00 AC140 AC140 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284454.18 2162542.19 3.00 AC141 AC141 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284455.48 2162564.76 3.00 AC142 AC142 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284458.52 2162579.52 3.00 AC143 AC143 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284705.37 2162786.22 3.00 AC144 AC144 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284709.80 2162760.62 3.00 AC145 AC145 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284709.80 2162738.48 3.00 AC146 AC146 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284708.93 2162715.04 3.00 AC147 AC147 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284709.80 2162692.47 3.00 AC148 AC148 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284709.37 2162666.87 3.00 AC149 AC149 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284647.13 2162780.71 3.00 AC150 AC150 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284646.82 2162765.91 3.00 AC151 AC151 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284646.82 2162742.47 3.00 AC152 AC152 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284646.00 2162712.27 3.00 AC153 AC153 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284645.56 2162690.56 3.00 AC154 AC154 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284645.91 2162677.98 3.00 AC155 AC155 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284418.34 2162787.79 3.00 AC156 AC156 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284420.85 2162766.34 3.00 AC157 AC157 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284420.85 2162743.34 3.00 AC158 AC158 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284421.29 2162719.04 3.00 AC159 AC159 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284420.42 2162696.90 3.00 AC160 AC160 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284421.29 2162671.29 3.00 AC161 AC161 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284528.75 2162781.97 3.00 AC162 AC162 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284525.37 2162758.01 3.00 AC163 AC163 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284526.67 2162734.57 3.00 AC164 AC164 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284526.23 2162712.00 3.00 AC165 AC165 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284525.37 2162688.57 3.00 AC166 AC166 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284524.93 2162662.96 3.00 AC167 AC167 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284476.15 2162595.42 3.00 AC168 AC168 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284476.58 2162572.86 3.00 AC169 AC169 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284477.02 2162550.29 3.00 Urban Crossroads, Inc.
271
Name M. ID Result. PWL Lw / Li Operating Time Height Coordinates Day Evening Night Type Value norm. Day Special Night X Y Z (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) dB(A) (min) (min) (min) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) AC170 AC170 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284476.58 2162515.13 3.00 AC171 AC171 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284475.28 2162493.86 3.00 AC172 AC172 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284476.15 2162470.86 3.00 AC173 AC173 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284617.16 2162588.52 3.00 AC174 AC174 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284617.16 2162568.12 3.00 AC175 AC175 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284616.73 2162543.82 3.00 AC176 AC176 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284612.39 2162508.66 3.00 AC177 AC177 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284614.56 2162481.75 3.00 AC178 AC178 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284614.13 2162460.05 3.00 AC179 AC179 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284709.31 2162940.22 3.00 AC180 AC180 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284709.31 2162915.48 3.00 AC181 AC181 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284709.74 2162892.47 3.00 AC182 AC182 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284709.31 2162869.90 3.00 AC183 AC183 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284708.87 2162846.47 3.00 AC184 AC184 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284708.87 2162821.73 3.00 AC185 AC185 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284542.55 2162787.96 3.00 AC186 AC186 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284542.12 2162762.35 3.00 AC187 AC187 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284542.99 2162739.35 3.00 AC188 AC188 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284542.55 2162716.78 3.00 AC189 AC189 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284542.12 2162692.91 3.00 AC190 AC190 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284542.55 2162668.17 3.00 AC191 AC191 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284638.82 2162591.00 3.00 AC192 AC192 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284639.69 2162567.99 3.00 AC193 AC193 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284638.39 2162548.46 3.00 AC194 AC194 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284637.95 2162509.83 3.00 AC195 AC195 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284637.95 2162490.30 3.00 AC196 AC196 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284639.26 2162466.87 3.00 AC197 AC197 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284777.80 2162585.18 3.00 AC198 AC198 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284777.80 2162563.48 3.00 AC199 AC199 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284776.93 2162542.65 3.00 AC200 AC200 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284779.10 2162507.49 3.00 AC201 AC201 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284779.97 2162487.53 3.00 AC202 AC202 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284778.67 2162464.96 3.00 AC203 AC203 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284503.36 2162825.23 3.00 AC204 AC204 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284528.36 2162824.54 3.00 AC205 AC205 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284552.67 2162824.88 3.00 AC206 AC206 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284581.79 2162823.36 3.00 AC207 AC207 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284605.40 2162823.36 3.00 AC208 AC208 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284617.94 2162822.97 3.00 AC209 AC209 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284507.53 2162926.27 3.00 AC210 AC210 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284518.12 2162926.92 3.00 AC211 AC211 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284541.03 2162926.58 3.00 AC212 AC212 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284574.76 2162926.75 3.00 AC213 AC213 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284597.33 2162926.40 3.00 AC214 AC214 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284614.95 2162925.79 3.00 AC215 AC215 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284796.76 2162591.68 3.00 AC216 AC216 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284797.46 2162569.46 3.00 AC217 AC217 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284797.46 2162547.93 3.00 AC218 AC218 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284797.28 2162512.51 3.00 AC219 AC219 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284796.94 2162490.29 3.00 AC220 AC220 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284796.94 2162467.37 3.00 AC221 AC221 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284852.75 2162933.61 3.00 AC222 AC222 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284953.97 2162928.14 3.00 AC223 AC223 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284850.02 2162659.78 3.00 AC224 AC224 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284850.71 2162680.61 3.00 AC225 AC225 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284850.02 2162702.83 3.00 AC226 AC226 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284849.85 2162734.87 3.00 AC227 AC227 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284849.50 2162754.66 3.00 AC228 AC228 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284850.54 2162778.27 3.00 AC229 AC229 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284851.15 2162807.35 3.00 AC230 AC230 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284850.80 2162830.26 3.00 AC231 AC231 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284850.80 2162854.22 3.00 AC232 AC232 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284847.94 2162890.33 3.00 AC233 AC233 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284848.28 2162913.25 3.00 AC234 AC234 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284949.93 2162904.65 3.00 AC235 AC235 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284950.19 2162882.78 3.00 AC236 AC236 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284950.06 2162848.92 3.00 AC237 AC237 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284951.10 2162828.09 3.00 AC238 AC238 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284951.10 2162804.13 3.00 AC239 AC239 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284952.20 2162776.49 3.00 AC240 AC240 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284952.46 2162753.84 3.00 AC241 AC241 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284953.24 2162731.96 3.00 AC242 AC242 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284950.73 2162696.80 3.00 AC243 AC243 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284951.51 2162674.15 3.00 AC244 AC244 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284952.03 2162653.05 3.00 AC245 AC245 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284935.78 2162593.06 3.00 AC246 AC246 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284936.30 2162570.67 3.00 Urban Crossroads, Inc.
272
Name M. ID Result. PWL Lw / Li Operating Time Height Coordinates Day Evening Night Type Value norm. Day Special Night X Y Z (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) dB(A) (min) (min) (min) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) AC247 AC247 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284936.30 2162546.45 3.00 AC248 AC248 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284936.74 2162511.73 3.00 AC249 AC249 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284936.21 2162490.89 3.00 AC250 AC250 76.0 76.0 76.0 Lw 76 675.00 0.00 270.00 3.00 a 6284935.95 2162467.19 3.00 PLAY1 PLAY1 91.5 91.5 91.5 Lw 91.5 900.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 a 6284488.62 2162978.99 5.00 POOL1 POOL1 94.6 94.6 94.6 Lw 94.6 900.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 a 6284581.01 2162978.24 5.00 POOL2 POOL2 94.6 94.6 94.6 Lw 94.6 900.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 a 6284609.46 2163015.97 5.00 Line Source(s)
Name M. ID Result. PWL Result. PWL' Lw / Li Operating Time Moving Pt. Src Height Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Type Value norm. Day Special Night Number Speed (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) dB(A) (min) (min) (min) Day Evening Night (mph) (ft) Name ID Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z Ground
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
Area Source(s)
Name M. ID Result. PWL Result. PWL'' Lw / Li Operating Time Height Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Type Value norm. Day Special Night (ft) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) dB(A) (min) (min) (min) PARK1 PARK1 74.3 74.3 74.3 46.9 46.9 46.9 Lw 74.3 0. a PARK1 PARK1 74.3 74.3 74.3 52.9 52.9 52.9 Lw 74.3 0. a PARK1 PARK1 74.3 74.3 74.3 56.0 56.0 56.0 Lw 74.3 0. a PARK1 PARK1 74.3 74.3 74.3 54.2 54.2 54.2 Lw 74.3 0. a PARK1 PARK1 74.3 74.3 74.3 52.2 52.2 52.2 Lw 74.3 0. a PARK1 PARK1 74.3 74.3 74.3 52.5 52.5 52.5 Lw 74.3 0. a Name ID Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z Ground
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
PARK1 PARK1 0.00 a 6283968.72 2163030.84 0.00 0.00
6283992.16 2163039.95 0.00 0.00
6284018.99 2163042.51 0.00 0.00
6284211.70 2163041.46 0.00 0.00
6284232.00 2163032.92 0.00 0.00
6284244.50 2163024.85 0.00 0.00
6284255.18 2163013.13 0.00 0.00
6284263.51 2162983.18 0.00 0.00
6284245.81 2162983.96 0.00 0.00
6284239.03 2163002.97 0.00 0.00
6284228.88 2163012.87 0.00 0.00
6284221.85 2163018.08 0.00 0.00
6284211.69 2163021.27 0.00 0.00
6283996.07 2163023.21 0.00 0.00
6283978.10 2163016.25 0.00 0.00
PARK1 PARK1 0.00 a 6284676.25 2163009.45 0.00 0.00
6284685.27 2163017.44 0.00 0.00
6284703.85 2163023.86 0.00 0.00
6284721.72 2163025.70 0.00 0.00
6284758.02 2163020.56 0.00 0.00
6284756.93 2163001.49 0.00 0.00
6284720.17 2163006.50 0.00 0.00
6284702.11 2163004.07 0.00 0.00
6284687.18 2162996.95 0.00 0.00
PARK1 PARK1 0.00 a 6284667.74 2162810.66 0.00 0.00
6284648.99 2162810.66 0.00 0.00
6284649.34 2162849.55 0.00 0.00
6284668.09 2162848.51 0.00 0.00
PARK1 PARK1 0.00 a 6283948.81 2162898.76 0.00 0.00
6283949.41 2162961.87 0.00 0.00
6283967.37 2162961.60 0.00 0.00
6283965.69 2162898.29 0.00 0.00
PARK1 PARK1 0.00 a 6284910.14 2163000.15 0.00 0.00
6284808.97 2163000.93 0.00 0.00
6284808.58 2163017.90 0.00 0.00
6284909.05 2163017.46 0.00 0.00
PARK1 PARK1 0.00 a 6284679.54 2162990.18 0.00 0.00
6284673.99 2162981.85 0.00 0.00
6284667.04 2162965.18 0.00 0.00
6284666.00 2162902.68 0.00 0.00
6284649.68 2162903.37 0.00 0.00
6284650.03 2162969.00 0.00 0.00
6284653.15 2162980.11 0.00 0.00
6284666.35 2163000.60 0.00 0.00
Urban Crossroads, Inc.
273
Barrier(s)
Name Sel. M. ID Absorption Z-Ext. Cantilever Height Coordinates left right horz. vert. Begin End x y z Ground
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
BARRIERPLANNED 0 0.00 a 6284734.69 2162450.23 0.00 0.00 6284960.25 2162455.27 0.00 0.00
6284968.24 2162454.92 0.00 0.00
6284976.92 2162461.52 0.00 0.00
6284973.10 2162551.80 0.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 0.00 a 6283769.68 2162500.35 0.00 0.00 6283769.85 2162487.35 0.00 0.00
6283793.70 2162461.69 0.00 0.00
6284092.91 2162458.35 0.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 0.00 a 6284092.91 2162458.35 0.00 0.00 6284125.88 2162457.98 0.00 0.00
6284227.21 2162441.01 0.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 0.00 a 6284227.21 2162441.01 0.00 0.00 6284512.14 2162439.57 0.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 0.00 a 6284512.14 2162439.57 0.00 0.00 6284734.69 2162450.23 0.00 0.00
BARRIERPLANNED 0 6.00 a 6284528.13 2163026.31 6.00 0.00 6284587.77 2163025.79 6.00 0.00
6284588.03 2163029.44 6.00 0.00
6284629.17 2163028.66 6.00 0.00
6284629.43 2163023.45 6.00 0.00
Building(s)
Name Sel. M. ID RB Residents Absorption Height Coordinates Begin x y z Ground
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
BUILDING BUILDING00001 x 0 14.00 a 6284565.37 2163025.99 14.00 0.00 6284587.77 2163025.79 14.00 0.00
6284588.55 2163000.79 14.00 0.00
6284565.37 2163000.53 14.00 0.00
BUILDING BUILDING00002 x 0 14.00 a 6284506.04 2163026.31 14.00 0.00 6284528.13 2163026.31 14.00 0.00
6284528.12 2163007.56 14.00 0.00
6284505.73 2163007.56 14.00 0.00
Ground Absorption(s)
Name Sel. M. ID G Coordinates
x y
(ft) (ft)
Contour(s)
Name Sel. M. ID OnlyPts Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
Vertical Area Source(s)
Name ID Height Coordinates
Begin End x y z Ground
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
Rail
Name Sel. M. ID Lw' Train Class Correct. Vmax
Day Night Track
(dBA) (dBA) (dB) (km(mph)
Sound Level Spectra
Name ID Type Oktave Spectrum (dB) Source
Weight. 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 A lin
Roads
Name Sel. M. ID Lme Count Data exact Count Data Speed Limit SCS Surface Gradient Mult. Reflection Day Evening Night DTV Str.class. M p (%) Auto Truck Dist. Dstro Type Drefl Hbuild Dist. (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night (mph) (mph) (dB) (%) (dB) (ft) (ft) RoadsGeo
Urban Crossroads, Inc.
274
Name Height Coordinates Dist LSlope
Begin End x y z Ground (ft) (%)
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
Urban Crossroads, Inc.
275
Whitewood I Noise Impact Analysis
14984-05-Noise_Study.docx

Murrieta City CouncilMay 20, 2025

Murrieta City Council
May 20, 2025