Storm Drain Signage
Description
SD-13
Design Objectives
Maximize Infiltration
Provide Retention
Slow Runoff
Minimize Impervious Land
Coverage
0 Prohibit Dumping of Improper
Materials
Contain Pollutants
Collect and Convey
Waste materials dumped into storm drain inlets can have severe impacts on receiving and ground waters. Posting notices regarding discharge prohibitions at storm drain inlets can prevent waste dumping. Storm drain signs and stencils are highly visible source controls that are typically placed directly adjacent to storm drain inlets.
Approach
The stencil or affixed sign contains a brief statement that prohibits dumping of improper materials into the urban runoff conveyance system. Storm drain messages have become a popular method of alerting the public about the effects of and the prohibitions against waste disposal.
Suitable Applications
Stencils and signs alert the public to the destination of pollutants discharged to the storm drain.
Signs are appropriate in residential, commercial, and industrial areas, as well as any other area where contributions or dumping to storm drains is likely.
Design Considerations
Storm drain message markers or placards are recommended at all storm drain inlets within the boundary of a development project. The marker should be placed in clear sight facing toward anyone approaching the inlet from either side. All storm drain inlet locations should be identified on the development site map.
Designing New Installations
The following methods should be considered for inclusion in the project design and show on project plans:
■ Provide stenciling or labeling of all storm drain inlets and catch basins, constructed or modified, within the project area with prohibitive language. Examples include "NO DUMPING January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook
New Development and Redevelopment
www.cabmphandbooks.com
1 of 2
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies SD-13 Storm Drain Signage
- DRAINS TO OCEAN" and/or other graphical icons to discourage illegal dumping. ■ Post signs with prohibitive language and/or graphical icons, which prohibit illegal dumping at public access points along channels and creeks within the project area.
Note - Some local agencies have approved specific signage and/or storm drain message placards for use. Consult local agency storm water staff to determine specific requirements for placard types and methods of application.
Redeveloping Existing Installations
Various jurisdictional stormwater management and mitigation plans (SUSMP, WQMP, etc.) define "redevelopment" in terms of amounts of additional impervious area, increases in gross floor area and/ or exterior construction, and land disturbing activities with structural or impervious surfaces. If the project meets the definition of "redevelopment", then the requirements stated under " designing new installations" above should be included in all project design plans.
Additional Information
Maintenance Considerations
■ Legibility of markers and signs should be maintained. If required by the agency with jurisdiction over the project, the owner/operator or homeowner's association should enter into a maintenance agreement with the agency or record a deed restriction upon the property title to maintain the legibility of placards or signs.
Placement
■ Signage on top of curbs tends to weather and fade.
■ Signage on face of curbs tends to be worn by contact with vehicle tires and sweeper brooms.
Supplemental Information
Examples
■ Most MS4 programs have storm drain signage programs. Some MS4 programs will provide stencils, or arrange for volunteers to stencil storm drains as part of their outreach program.
Other Resources
A Manual for the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, May 2002.
Model Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for San Diego County, Port of San Diego, and Cities in San Diego County, February 14, 2002.
Model Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District, and the Incorporated Cities of Orange County, Draft February 2003.
Ventura Countywide Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures, July 2002.
2 of 2 California Stormwater BMP Handbook
New Development and Redevelopment
www.cabmphandbooks.com
January 2003
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Consultants in Acoustics | Noise | Vibration | AV | IT
ASSESSMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT LA SIERRA AND VICTORIA
NOISE REPORT
May 3, 2024
By
Veneklasen Associates, Inc.
1711 16th Street
Santa Monica, CA 90404
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Consultants in Acoustics | Noise | Vibration | AV | IT
Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Description ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Characteristics of Noise ............................................................................................................................ 2
1.3 Characteristics of Vibration ...................................................................................................................... 4
2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................................................ 5
2.1 Applicable State Noise Standards ............................................................................................................ 5
2.2 City of Riverside General Plan Noise Element .......................................................................................... 6
2.3 City of Riverside Code of Ordinances ....................................................................................................... 9
2.4 City of Riverside – Ground-Borne Vibration ........................................................................................... 11
2.5 Project Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 13
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS and significance ................................................................................................... 13
3.1 Significance Thresholds .......................................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Impact 1. Noise levels in excess of standards ........................................................................................ 13
3.2.1 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 14
3.2.2 Existing Ambient Monitored Noise Levels .................................................................................. 14
3.2.3 Future Exterior Project Noise Levels ........................................................................................... 16
3.2.4 Operational Noise ....................................................................................................................... 16
3.2.5 Temporary Increase in Ambient Noise Levels............................................................................. 17
3.3 Impact 2. Excessive ground-borne vibration .......................................................................................... 22
3.4 Impact 3. Airport noise exposure ........................................................................................................... 24
4.0 Summary ........................................................................................................................................................... 25
4.1 Summary of Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................................... 25
4.2 Summary of significance of impacts ....................................................................................................... 26
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 1 of 44
M
1 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report evaluates potential impacts associated with the construction and operation noise of the proposed single family residential project at La Sierra and Victoria in Riverside, California.
1.1 Project Description
The proposed development consists of a two-story, 49-unit single-family residential project with an attached garage located at La Sierra and Victoria. The project is bounded by La Sierra Ave to the southwest, Victoria Avenue to the northwest, Millsweet Place to the northeast, and existing residential uses to the southeast .
Figure 1 – Areal Image of the Proposed Project Site
LEGEND
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 2 of 44
M
2 1.2 Characteristics of Noise
Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound and can be an undesirable by -product of society’s normal day-to-day activities. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, causes actual physical harm, or ha s an adverse effect on health.
People judge the relative magnitude of sound sensation in subjective terms such as “noisiness” or “loudness.” However, the sound pressure magnitude can be objectively measured and quantified using a logarithmic ratio of pressures which yields the level of sound, utilizing the measurement scale of decibels (dB). The decibel is generally adjusted to the A-weighted level (dBA) which de-emphasizes very low frequencies to better approximate the human ear’s range of sensitivity. In practice, the noise level of a sound source is measured using a sound level meter that includes an electronic filter corresponding to the A -weighting curve. Table A.1 in Appendix A of this report defines the decibel along with other technical terms used in this analysis.
Even though the A-weighted scale accounts for the relative loudness perceived by the human ear and, therefore, is commonly used to quantify individual events or general community sound levels, the degree of annoyance or other response effects also depends on several other perceptibility factors, including:
• Ambient (background) sound level
• Magnitude of the event sound level relative to the background noise • Spectral (frequency) composition (e.g. presence of tones) • Duration of the sound event
• Number of event occurrences, repetitiveness, and intermittency • Time of day the event occurs.
In determining the daily level of environmental noise, it is important to account for the difference in human responses to daytime and nighttime noises. At night, exterior background noise levels are generally lower than daytime levels. However, most household noise also decreases at night, and exterior noise may become increasingly noticeable. Further, most people sleep at night and have greater sensitivity to noise intrusion. To account for human sensitivity to nighttime noise levels, a 24 -hour descriptor, the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) , has been developed. The CNEL divides the 24 -hour day into a daytime period of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., an evening period from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and a nighttime period of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. In determining the CNEL, n oise levels occurring during the evening period are increase by 5 dB, while noise levels occurring during the nighttime period are increased by 10 dB to account for the greater sensitivity during the evening and nighttime periods . ¾\
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 3 of 44
M
3 The effects of noise on people fall into three general categories:
• Subjective effects of annoyance and nuisance.
• Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, and learning. • Physiological effects such as hearing loss.
In most cases, the levels associated with environmental noise produce effects only in the first two categories.
However, workers in industrial plants may experience noise effects in the last category. There is no completely effective way to measure the su bjective effects of noise or the corresponding reactions of annoyance, because of the wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance and degrees to which people become acclimated to noise.
Thus, an important way of determining a person's subjective reaction to a new noise source is by comparison to the existing environment to which they are accustomed (the “ambient environment”). In general, the more the level of a noise event exceeds the prevailing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the noise source will be to those exposed to it.
With regard to increases in A-weighted noise levels, the following relationships are applicable to this analysis:
• Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a 1 dB change cannot be perceived. • Outside of a laboratory, a 3 dBA change will be generally perceivable by most people. • A change in level of at least 5 dBA is considered a noticeable change by most people. • A 10 dBA change will result in the perception of doubling or halving the loudness of the noise.
Common noise levels associated with various activities are shown on Figure 2, Common Noise Levels.
Figure 2 – Common Noise Levels
Venek&asen
Assodates
Uh,-,,
•
Jr.'ijkeof'f~lOO
~UrblnC...,.i.lll"lf
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 4 of 44
M
4 Noise sources are either “point sources ”, such as stationary equipme nt or individual motor vehicles , or “line sources”, such as a roadway with a large number of mobile point sources (motor vehicles). Sound generated by a stationary point source typically diminishes (attenuates) at a rate of 6 dBA for each doubling of distance from the source to the receptor at acoustically “hard” sites, and at a rate of 7.5 dBA at acoustically “soft” sites. 1 For example,
a 60 dBA noise level measured at 50 feet from a point source at an acoustically hard site would be 54 dBA at 100 feet from the source and it would be 48 dBA at 200 feet from the source. Sound generated by a line source typically attenuates at a rate of 3 dBA and 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance from the source to the receptor for hard and soft sites, respectively.
2 Man-made or natural barriers can also attenuate sound levels.
The minimum attenuation of exterior to interior noise provided by typical structures is provided in Table 1, Outside to Inside Noise Attenuation.
Table 1 – Outside to Inside Noise Attenuation (dBA)
Building Type
Open
Windows
Closed
Windows1
Residences
Schools
Churches
Hospitals/Convalescent Homes
Offices
Theaters
Hotels/Motels
17 17
20 17
17 20
17 25
25 30
25 25
30 25
Source: Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Highway Noise: A Design Guide for Highway Engineers, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 117. 1 As shown, structures with closed windows can attenuate exterior noise by a minimum of 25 to 30 dBA.
1.3 Characteristics of Vibration
Vibration is minute variation in pressure through structures and the earth, whereas, noise is minute variation in pressure through air. Some vibration effects can be caused by noise; e.g., the rattling of windows from truck pass - bys. This phenomenon is related to the coupling of the acoustic energy at frequencies that are close to the resonant frequency of the material being vibrated. Ground-borne vibration attenuates rapidly as distance from the source of the vibration increases. Vibration amplitude can be measured as peak particle velocity (PPV), the maximum
1 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Highway Noise Fundamentals , (Springfield, Virginia:
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, September 1980), p. 97. A "hard" or reflective site does not provide any excess ground-effect attenuation and is characteristic of asphalt, concrete, and very hard packed soils.
An acoustically "soft" or absorptive site is characteristic of normal earth and most ground with vegetation. 2 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Highway Noise Fundamentals , (Springfield, Virginia:
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, September 1980), p. 97.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 5 of 44
M
5 instantaneous peak amplitude in inches per second, or root -mean-square (RMS) velocity in inches per second or as vibration level in decibels (VdB) referenced to 1 micro-inch per second. The ratio between the PPV and the maximum RMS amplitude is termed the “crest factor.” According to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the PPV level for construction equipment is typically 1.7 to 6 times greater than the RMS vibration level. The FTA uses a crest factor of 4 for the conversion of PPV levels to RMS vibration levels. For the purposes of ground-borne vibration analysis of impacts to existing structures, vibration velocity is described in terms of PPV. For the analysis of the human response to vibration, VdB is utilized.
The vibration velocity threshold of perception for humans is approximately 65 VdB, and a vibration velocity of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels for many people 3 .
Most perceptible indoor vibration is caused by sources within buildings such as operation of mechanical equipment, movement of people, or the slamming of doors. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground -borne vibration are construction equipment, s teel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. Common ground -induced vibrations related to roadway traffic and construction activities pose no threat to buildings or structures. If a roadway is smooth, the ground-borne vibration from traffic is barely p erceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB, which is typically the background vibration velocity, to 94 VdB. This 94 VdB vibration level corresponds to
0.2 PPV, which is the general threshold where minor damage can occur in non-engineered timber and masonry buildings.
2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Many government agencies have established noise regulations and policies to protect citizens from potential hearing damage and various other adverse physiological and social effects associated with noise and ground-borne vibration.
The City of Riverside has adopted the Noise Element section, which is based in part on Federal and State regulations and is intended to control, minimize, or mitigate environmental noise effects. The regulations and policies that are relevant to project construction and operation noise are discussed below.
2.1 Applicable State Noise Standards
The State of California has adopted noise compatibility guidelines for general land use planning. The types of land uses addressed by the State standards and the acceptable noise categories for each land use are included in the State of California General Plan Guidelines, which is published and updated by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. The level of acceptability of the noise environment is dependent upon the activity associated with the particular land use. According to the State, an exteri or noise environment up to 65 CNEL is “normally acceptable” for single and multi-family residential uses, up to 75 CNEL is “conditionally acceptable” with special noise insulation
3 – U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment , (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, May 2006), p. 7-8.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 6 of 44
M
6 requirements, while 75 CNEL and above is identified as "clearly unacceptable" noise levels for residential and hotel uses, respectively.
4 The maximum allowable interior noise level for residential structures is 45 CNEL.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines establishes guidelines for the evaluation of significant impacts of environmental noise attributable to a proposed project. The guidelines ask whether the project would result in:
1. Would the project generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
2. Would the project generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground born noise levels ?
3. 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?
2.2 City of Riverside General Plan Noise Element
The project site is located in the City of Riverside and therefore would potentially affect receptors within the city from onsite and offsite sources. The City Noise Element of the General Plan is a comprehensive program for including noise management in the planning process, providing a tool for planners to use in achieving and maintaining land uses that are compatible with existing and future environmental noise levels. The Noise Policy identifies noise - sensitive land uses and noise sources and defines areas of noise impact for the purpose of developing programs to ensure that residents in Riverside, and other noise sensitive land uses, will be protected from excessive noise intrusion.
As development proposals are submitted to the City, each is evaluated with respect to the provisions in the Noise Element to ensure that noise impacts are reduced through planning and project design. Through implementation of the policies of the Noise Elem ent, Riverside seeks to reduce or avoid adverse noise impacts for the purposes of protecting the general health, safety, and welfare of the community. The most basic planning strategy to minimize adverse impacts on new land uses due to noise is to avoid designating cert ain land uses at locations within the city that would negatively affect noise sensitive land users. Users such as schools, hospitals, childcare, senior care, congregate care, churches, and all types of residential use should be located outside of any area anticipated to exceed acceptable noise levels as defined by the Land Use Compatibility Matrix or should be protected from noise
4 – State of California, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines, (Sacramento, CA: State of California, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, October 2003), p. 250.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 7 of 44
M
7 through sound attenuation measures such as site and architectural design and sound walls. The City of Riverside has adopted guidelines as a basis for planning decisions based on noise considerations. These guidelines are shown in Figure 3.
In the case that the noise levels identified at a proposed project site fall within levels considered normally acceptable, the project is considered compatible with the existing noise environment.
Figure 3 – Noise/Land Use Compatibility Matrix
Community Noise
Equlvalenl Level (ONEL)
Nature r;,f the noise
envi .ronment where the
CNEL o,- Llln level Ill:
Land U'$<i! Ca1egory
or Day,Nighl Lelle! (Ldn), dB
55 60 65 70 75 80 85 Below 55dB
Single FE1mily Re<sidenlial"
Infill Single Family ResidB'J1lia1•
Commerdal• Molels, Hotels,
Ttansiont Lodging
Sd uxils, Libra ries , Cl1urch e5,
H0$j]ila. 5, Nursing Home$
Amphkhealers, Conceft Hall,
Audllotlum, Meelirlg Hall
Sports Arenas, Oul.ooor
Spectator Sports
Pl~raun,;1$,
Neighbomood Pad<s
Golf CourS8S, Ridir'IQ Slallles,
Walet Rec.. Ceme1el'l8s
Office BulJdlnQS. Business,
Commercial, f>tofesslonal
lriduslri , Manufactu ring
U ltles, AgriaJlture
Freeway Adjacent Commercial,
Office, and lnduslrial Uses.
D Normally
Acci,ptable
Specific land use is
salilactof)', based an the
BSSUffljltion that E>ny
building is of noomal
conventiona l cons1ruction .
without :any :6.pecial noise
insula.tion requirements..
P771 Cond illonally
ILLLl Acc•ptable
New cons.truction or
developme .nt should be
undertaken only after e
detailed analys.i51 of noise
redud io.n requirement!i is
m8de and needed nois:e
insu1a1ion fee lure51
irldu ded in des.ign.
Convention al construction ,
but wilh closed windoWB
and fresh air supply
system s: or air condilion
in,g, will normally suffice.
11 Notma 1Jy
L.......J unacc•ptable
Now eont,!ruetion or
<l"""lopment should
{19netally be disooutaged.
Flelatively quiet s1.1IJ;urba,, or
:urban .areas:, no arterial
s1ree1,; willlin 1 block, no
freswayS wilhin 1/4 mile.
55-65dB
Mosl somewhal noisy
urba.n areas, near but nol
directly adjacen1 to high
volumes of lraffic.
65-75 dB
Very rioisy urban areas near
arterials, freeways or
airports.
75+ dB
Extremety noisy urMn
areas adjacont 10 freeways
or oooor alrpol'I traffic
pauems. Hearing damage
with constant exposure
ollldoors .
D Cond ltl onally
Unacceptable
11 n;,w construction or
<l!W<!lopment dOes prooeed,
a dstailed analy&i& of nois&
reduction Nl(IUir&ments
mu11 be made and needed
noi&e in&ulation f&alure&
lncllded in de&ign.
New cons1tuction or develOp
ment sholl!d generally not be
undertaken, u:nl= It can be
c1emons1tated' 1ha1 noise
reduellon requlreme11ts can De
ef!ll)loyed 10 reduce noise
fmpacls to an acee?table lev.!I
If new ccnslrucllon or
clevelopmenl does proceed, a
cletalled lysls or noise
redtJcilon requ~ements must be
made and needed oolse
fnsulation re u es Included in
the cleslg n.
Thi;! Comrno.mi(y NoiijE! laqllivalenl l.eVE!I (CNEI.) 11nd Oay-Ni¢, t ~ Level (1.#1) ar1;1 meawres of lhe i4-hQl.lr ni;,ise environment . They represent the QOA$1.,nl A-w eighted flQi,;e level that would be measured if all the sourid energy receiYed over the day were ...,e,a!JBd. In orcler to, a.ca,unt for the 11realer ssnsitivity of people to noise E>t night, the CNEL weighting inducles a 5-clecibel penalty on noise t:>etween 7:00 p.rn. and 10:00 p.m. and a l lklecit:>el penalty on nOise t:>etween 1oc00 :p.m. and 7:00 a.m. of the Mxt day. The Ldn incklcles ,only the 1 lklecibel weighting for late•nlghl noise rwenls. For practical putposes. th two measures are equilr.ll .nl for lyploal urban noise onvlron n1S .
.,. For properti es located within airport influence areas, acceptable noise limits for singl'e family reside.ntial u~ are establlshed mi t_h Rlver1lde Couni, Almon lal'ld U$al' Compallbl!lty Plan, SOlJRCI.: 5TSTE DE!'M« '1['<T Of m ,11.Ttt,
M ,"MJIJ1hll-Ull'I ' 11-ffCI IYOI- H:f\lY.:Sltn-
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 8 of 44
M
8 The goals, policies and implementation actions of the Noise Element address three major issues related to noise.
These include:
1) Objective N-1: Minimize noise levels from point sources throughout the community and, wherever possible, mitigate the effects of noise to provide a safe and healthful environment. 2) Objective N–2: Minimize the adverse effects of airportrelated noise through proper land use planning . 3) Objective N–3: Ensure the viability of March Air Reserve Base/March Inland Port . 4) Objective N–4: Minimize ground transportation-related noise impacts.
Objective N-1: Minimize noise levels from point sources.
Policy N –1.1: Continue to enforce noise abatement and control measures particularly within residential neighborhoods.
Policy N–1.2: Require the inclusion of noise-reducing design features in development consistent with standards in Figure N –10 (Noise/Land Use Compatibility Criteria), Title 24 California Code of Regulations and Title 7 of the Municipal Code.
Policy N–1.3: Enforce the City of Riverside Noise Control Code to ensure that stationary noise and noise emanating from construction activities, private developments/residences and special events are minimized.
Policy N–1.4: Incorporate noise considerations into the site plan review process, particularly with regard to parking and loading areas, ingress/egress points and refuse collection areas.
Policy N–1-5: Avoid locating noise-sensitive land uses in existing and anticipated noise-impacted areas.
Policy N–1.6: Educate the public about City noise regulations.
Policy N –1.7: Evaluate noise impacts from roadway improvement projects by using the City’s Acoustical Assessment Procedure.
Policy N–1.8: Continue to consider noise concerns in evaluating all proposed development decisions and roadway projects.
.
Objective N–2: Minimize the adverse effects of airport related noise:
Policy N –2.1: Ensure that new development can be made compatible with the noise environment by using noise/land use compatibility standards (Figure N–10 – Noise/Land Use Noise Compatibility Criteria) and the airport noise contour maps (found in the Riversi de County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans) as guides to future planning and development decisions.
Policy N–2.2: Avoid placing noise-sensitive land uses (e.g., residential uses, hospitals, assisted living facilities, group homes, schools, day care centers, etc.) within the high noise impact areas (over 60 dB CNEL) for Riverside Municipal Airport and Flabob Airport in accordance with the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Policy N–2.3: Support efforts of the Federal Aviation Administration and other responsible agencies to require the development of quieter aircraft.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 9 of 44
M
9 Policy N–2.4: Work with the Federal Aviation Administration and neighboring airport authorities to minimize the noise impacts of air routes through residential neighborhoods within the City.
Policy N–2.5: Utilize the Airport Protection Overlay Zone, as appropriate, to advise landowners of special noise considerations associated with their development.
Objective N–3: Ensure the viability of March Air Reserve Base Policy N–3.1: Avoid placing noise-sensitive land uses (e.g., residential uses, hospitals, assisted living facilities, group homes, schools, day care centers, etc.) within the high noise impact areas (over 65 dB CNEL) for March Air Reserve Base/March Inland Port in accordance with the Riverside County 2014 March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Policy N–3.2: Work with the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission and the March Joint Powers Authority to develop noise/land use guidelines and City land use plans that are consistent with ALUC policies .
Policy N–3.3: Carefully consider planned future operations of the March Air Reserve Base and March Inland Port in land use decisions for properties located within the airport influenced area.
Objective N–4: Minimize ground transportation-related noise impacts.
Policy N–4.1: Ensure that noise impacts generated by vehicular sources are minimized through the use of noise reduction features (e.g., earthen berms, landscaped walls, lowered streets, improved technology).
Policy N–4.2: Investigate and pursue innovative approaches to reducing noise from railroad sources.
Policy N–4.3: Identify and aggressively pursue funding sources to provide grade separations and sound walls along train routes as noise reduction measures.
Policy N–4.4: Prioritize locations for implementing road/rail grade separations.
Policy N–4.5: Use speed limit controls on local streets as appropriate to minimize vehicle traffic noise .
2.3 City of Riverside Code of Ordinances
The City of Riverside Noise Element establishes noise/land u se compatibility criteria. The city uses land use compatibility standards when planning and marking development decisions to ensure that noise producers do not adversely affect sensitive receptors. Per Chapter 7.25 Nuisance Exterior Sound Level Limit, Section 7.25.010 – Exterior Sound Level Limit, Table 7-25.0101 summarizes the City’s noise standards for varies type of land uses (Table 2 Below). The standards represent the maximum acceptable noise levels and are used to determine potential noise impact.
Table 2 – The City of Riverside Noise Standard
Land Use Category Time Period Noise Level
Residential Night (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Day (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
45 dBA
55 dBA
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 10 of 44
M
10 Office/commercial Any time 65 dBA
Industrial Any time 70 dBA
Community support Any time 60 dBA
Public recreation facility Any time 65 dBA
Nonurban Any time 70 dBA
Chapter 7.30 – Nuisance Interior Sound Level Limits, section 7.30.015 Interior Sound Level Limit Table 7.30.015 summarize the interior noise standard (Table 3 below).
Table 3 – The City of Riverside Interior Noise Limits
Land Use Category Time Period Noise Level
Residential Night (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.)
Day (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.)
35 dBA
45 dBA
School 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. (while school is in
session)
45 dBA
Hospital Any time 45 dBA
Per Section 7.35.020 the following activities shall be exempt from the provisions of this title.
A. Emergency work . The provisions of this title shall not apply to the emission of sound for the purpose of alerting persons to the existence of an emergency or in the performance of emergency work.
B. School events . Sanctioned school activities conducted on public or private school grounds including but not limited to school athletic and entertainment events are exempt from the provisions of this chapter conducted between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m.
C. Federal or State preempted activities . The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to any other activity the noise level of which is regulated by state or federal law.
D. Minor maintenance to residential property . The provisions of this title shall not apply to noise sources associated with minor maintenance to property used for residential purposes, provided the activities take place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
E. Right-of-way construction . The provisions of this title shall not apply to any work performed in the City rights- of-way when, in the opinion of the Public Works Director or his designee, such work will create traffic congestion and/or hazardous or unsafe conditions.
F. Public health, welfare and safety activities . The provisions of this title shall not apply to construction maintenance and repair operations conducted by public agencies and/or utility companies or their contractors which are deemed necessary to serve the best interests of the public and to protect the public health, welfare and safety, including but not limit ed to, trash collection, street sweeping, debris and limb removal, removal of downed wires, restoring electrical service, repairing traffic signals, unplugging sewers, PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 11 of 44
M
11 vacuuming catch basins, repairing of damaged poles, removal of abandoned vehicles, repairing of water hydrants and mains, gas lines, oil lines, sewers, storm drains, roads, sidewalks, etc.
G. Construction . Noise sources associated with construction , repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property; provided a permit has been obtained from the City as required; and provided said activities do not take place between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, between the hours of 5:00 p.m. an d 8:00 a.m. on Saturdays, or at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday.
H. Warning devices. Warning devices necessary for the protection of public safety, as for example fire, police, and ambulance sirens, including the testing of such devices, are exempted from the provisions of this title.
I. Agriculture. Any agricultural activity, operation, or facility, or appurtenances thereof (e.g., wind machines), conducted or maintained for commercial purposes, and in a manner consistent with proper and accepted customs and standards as allowed under California Civil Code Section 3482 as amended from time to time .
2.4 City of Riverside – Ground-Borne Vibration
The City of Riverside does not establish criteria for maximum vibration thresholds.
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) provides standards and guidelines for perceptibility and annoyance for ground-borne vibration as well as construction vibration impact criteria for building damage. As discussed in the Characteristics of Vibration section above, in most circumstances common ground -induced vibrations related to roadway traffic and construction activities pose no threat to buildings or structures, and for smooth roadways, the ground-borne vibration from traffic is barely perceptible.
The FTA has published a technical manual titled, “Transit Noise and Vibration Impacts Assessment,” that provides ground-borne vibration impact criteria with respect to building damage and human response during construction activities. As discussed above, b uilding vibration damage is measured in peak particle velocity described in the unit of inches per second. Table 4, below, provides the Federal Transit Administration vibration criteria applicable to construction activities. According to Federal Transit Administration guidelines, a vibration criterion of 0.20 inch per second should be considered as the significant impact level for non -engineered timber and masonry buildings.
Furthermore, structures or buildings constructed of reinforced -concrete, steel, or timber, have vibration damage criteria of 0.50 inch per second pursuant to the FTA guidelines.
Table 4 - Federal Transit Administration Construction Vibration Impact Criteria for Building Damage Building Category Peak Particle Velocity
(inch per second)
I. Reinforced-concrete, steel or timber (no plaster) 0.5 II. Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3
III. Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2
IV. Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 Source: Federal Transit Administration, 2006.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 12 of 44
M
12 Impacts for the human response to vibration levels are given in VdB by the FTA in Table 8-1 of the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment manual
5 , as shown in Table 5 below. The FTA Land Use Category 1 impact criteria is intended for vibration-sensitive research and manufacturing facilities, hospitals with vibration-sensitive equipment, and university research operations. These Category 1 impact criteria vibration levels are well below those associated with human annoyance but are equal to the threshold of perceptibility. The FTA vibration criteria for Category 2, residential impact, indicate impacts occur at a 72 VdB vibration level for frequent events occurring more than 70 times per day, at 75 VdB for occasional events occur ring between 30 and 70 times per day, and at 80 VdB for infrequent events occurring less than 30 times per day.
Table 5 - Federal Transit Administration Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria for General Assessment Land Use Category
GBV Impact Levels
(VdB re 1 micro-inch /sec)
Frequent Events1 Occasional Events2 Infrequent Events3
Category 1:
Buildings where vibration would interfere
with interior operations
65 VdB4 65 VdB4 65 VdB4
Category 2:
Residences and buildings where people
normally sleep
72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB
Category 3:
Institutional land uses with primarily
daytime use
75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB
Notes:
1. "Frequent Events" is defined as more than 70 vibration events of the same source per day. Most rapid transit projects fall into this category.
2. “Occasional Events” is defined as between 30 and 70 vibration events of the same source per day. Most commuter trunk lines have these many operations.
3. "Infrequent Events" is defined as fewer than 30 vibration events of the same kind per day. This category includes most commuter rail branch lines.
4. This criterion limit is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment such as optical microscopes. Vibration-sensitive manufacturing or research will require detailed evaluation to define the acceptable vibration levels. Ensuring lower vibration levels in a building often requires special design of the HVAC systems and stiffened floors.
Source: Federal Transit Administration, 2006.
5 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment , (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, May 2006), p. 8-3 PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 13 of 44
M
13 2.5 Project Requirements
The above requirements are summarized in the following Table 6.
Table 6 - Project Requirements
Activity Standard
Residential (General Plan) Zone A – 50-60 CNEL (Normally Acceptable) Zone B – 60-65 CNEL (Conditionally Acceptable)
Exterior Noise at Residential Zones 45 dBA (Night 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) 55 dBA (Daytime 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
Interior Noise at Residences 35 dBA (Night 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) 45 dBA (Daytime 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
Construction Noise Prohibited between 7:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. Monday thru Saturday, and anytime Sunday and public holidays
Operational Noise
At residential property, one-hour average sound level:
55 dBA from 7:00 a.m. to1 0:00 p.m.
45 dBA from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
Vibration
At residences where people normally sleep:
72 VdB – greater than 70 events per day.
75 VdB – between 30-70 events per day.
80 VdB – less than 30 events per day.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND SIGNIFICANCE
3.1 Significance Thresholds
The following significance thresholds are used in this report to evaluate the significance of the project noise impacts:
• Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
• Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground born noise levels. • 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.
3.2 Impact 1. Noise levels in excess of standards
Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 14 of 44
M
14 3.2.1 Methodology
Analysis of the existing and future noise environments presented in this section is based on technical reports, noise monitoring, and noise pre diction modeling. CNEL predictions are based on short-term measured ambient sound levels and statistical analysis “ LoVerde, John; Dong, Wayland; Rawlings, Samantha. Noise Prediction of Traffic on Freeways and Arterials from Measured Data, (Fort Lauderdale, Florida: Noise -Con 2014) ” method (see published paper on Appendix B for further information ). This was accomplis hed using the Federal Highway Administration Highway Noise Prediction Model (TNM Version 2.5) within SoftNoise Predictor V2023 modeling program . TNM Version 2.5 is required to be used on all Federal-aid highway projects. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) published the “Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS)” in October of 1998 which defines how to predict traffic noise for projects in California. The TeNS, Section N-5520 requires that any traffic noise study conducted after March 30, 2000 utilize the calculation methods used by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) TNM. This model calculates the average noise level at specific locations based on traffic volumes, average speeds, roadway geometry, and site conditions. The off-site traffic noise is analyzed on an increase in CNEL basis to determine the project’s impact.
3.2.2 Existing Ambient Monitored Noise Levels
Traffic on La Sierra Avenue and Victoria Avenue was the primary source of noise affecting the site. Veneklasen visited the site on Friday, February 16, 2024 and placed sound level meters at locations shown in Figure 4 to capture the hourly sound levels on the site. During the measurement, Veneklasen observed frequent propeller planes, helicopters, and commercial planes flying over the project site. Figure 4 and Table 7 show the location and summary of the noise measurements . Noise readings were measured over 1 -second intervals with “A” frequency fast time weighting. The weather conditions were normal, and no anomalies were present during the survey periods.
Table 7, Existing Ambient Monitored Noise Levels, provides the noise level data associated with each monitoring period for each location. As shown, noise levels range from 54 dBA to 68 dBA, dependent on the road traffic activity and the relative distance between the noise source and the measurement positions. Appendix C shows the collected data from the noise monitoring equipment at each location.
¾\
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 15 of 44
M
15 Figure 4 – La Sierra and Victoria Site and Noise Monitoring Locations
Table 7 – Existing Ambient Monitored Noise Levels
Position Measurement
Time Length
Average Sound
Level, Leq dBA
Predicted
CNEL
Pos S1 4 hours 67 69
Pos S2 4 hours 68 70
Pos S3 4 hours 66 67
Pos S4 4 hours 54 54
Notes:
Noise measurements taken on February 16, 2024.
Source: Veneklasen Associates, 2024.
As mentioned before Veneklasen also utilized the 2023 version of the SoftNoise Predictor TNM 2.5 modeling software to verify and predict vehicular noise levels at locations shown in Figure 4 due to traffic conditions. The primary purpose of the computer model was to determine how the noise environment will change due to traffic and site changes. Traffic counts were obtained by the Riverside Transportation Department. The roadway parameters for the calculations are presented in Table 8 below.
LEGEND
Site Boundary
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 16 of 44
M
16 Table 8 – Roadway Parameters
Rodway Segment ADT
Volume
Speed
(mph)
La Sierra Avenue 25,457 45
Victoria Avenue 5,857 45
The analysis assumes that medium trucks represent two percent of the total vehicle distribution, heavy trucks represent one percent of the total vehicle distribution, and the remaining ninety-seven percent was assumed to be standard automobiles.
3.2.3 Future Exterior Project Noise Levels
The anticipated traffic flow resulting from the proposed project is unlikely to significantly impact the ambient noise levels in neighboring areas. A barely perceptible change will need an increment of at least 3 CNEL decibels and such a change in sound level will require doubling the volume of traffic in the area, which is unlikely to be caused by the existence of the proposed project. Therefore, the resultant off-site noise levels are deemed less than significant, and no additional analysis is required.
3.2.4 Operational Noise
Veneklasen understands that t he project will include outdoor mechanical equipment, such as split -system outdoor condensing units. Veneklasen has utilized sound power data for typical air conditioning condensing units which range between 2 to 5 tons. In order to represent the worst -case scenario, Veneklasen modeled the operation of multiple condensing units operating 24-hours a day at a minimum distance of 75 feet which represent the closest distance from the mechanical equipment and the nearest residences. The software AIM by Pottorff was utilized to model this noise condition which considers the distance sound attenuation as well as the height of the mechanical equipment relative to the receiver height.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 17 of 44
M
17 Figure 5 – Calculated Outdoor Equipment
As is shown in the figure above, t he predicted mechanical equipment noise level at the nearest receiver will be 42 dBA. These levels comply with the Riverside’s Noise Standards for day and nighttime hours. Therefore, the impact is less than significant.
3.2.5 Temporary Increase in Ambient Noise Levels
To minimize potential impact from construction activities, t he City of Riverside Municipal Code under Section
7.35.020(G) exempts construction noise from its stationary -source noise level limits provided said activities do not take place between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. on Saturdays, or at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday.
The construction noise impact was analyzed considering the type and amount of equipment used at each phase of construction. An itemized list of the equipment used at each construction phase was provided by the developer and is shown in Table 9.
Based on the equipment list provided, n oise predictions were performed according to the Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) calculation method. Samples of the calculations are included in Appendix D.
Element Pro rtie.s NC 63 1'5 250 500 1000
. Space(0) Criteria:NC.-65 36 46 46 42 39 37
. Outdoo r ... Criteria:NC-65 36 46 46 42 39 37
8 Cond .. , 78 78 74 71 69
8 Cond .. , 78 78 74 71 69
Outd .. , -35 -35 -35 -35 -35
0 0 0
2000 4000 dB(A)
34 28 42
34 28 42
66 60
66 60
-35 -35
0 Element Viewer
Value
25'
6'
75'
rz=
Vertical Reflecting Surface
Vertical Reflecting Surface? D
Source to Surface Distanc ... 3'
Barrier Effect
Barrier Wall? D
Source to Barrier Distanc ... 3'
Height of Barrier (It) 6'6"
NoiseCriteria(NC) NC RC
Space (0)
NC-36
1o+----~-~~-~--~--~-4,-j
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000
0ct'7Vl!' Mid-Band Frequency, Hz
- Space (0) - Running l.w - Outdoor Noise (1)
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 18 of 44
M
18 Table 9 – Proposed Equipment used in Construction Phases Phase Name Equipment Type
Sound Level at
Reference Distance
(dBA at 50-feet)
Total number of
Equipment
Allowed to be use
at each Phase
Load Factor
Noise Data
Source
Phase 1-Site Clearance
Chain saw 85 3 20% FHWA
Tractor 88 2 100% FTA
Shovel 82 4 100% FTA
Phase 2-Grading
Dozer 85 3 40% FHWA
Grader 85 3 40% FHWA
Phase 3-Site Utility
Delivery Truck 88 2 100% FHWA
Excavators 85 3 40% FHWA
Forklifts 80 4 40% FHWA
Phase 4-Foundation &
Slab Pouring
Excavators 85 3 40% FHWA
Concrete Truck
Mixture 85 3 40% FHWA
Phase 5-Paving
Dozer 85 3 40% FHWA
Paver 88 2 50% FHWA
Roller 85 3 20% FHWA
Phase 6-Building
Construction
Pneumatic tools 85 3 50% FHWA
Air Compressor 80 4 100% FHWA
Veneklasen understands that the equipment will be moving through the site and multiple construction equipment will operate simultaneously. To represent the average noise levels at each construction phase, Veneklasen assumed that the equipment will be moving between the center of the site and near all property lines.
The nearest off-site residential sensitive receivers are located to the northeast, east, and southeast of the project site. The distance to the property lines of the nearest sensitive receivers from the perimeter of the project site is shown in Table 10 below.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 19 of 44
M
19 Table 10 – Distance to the Sensitive Receivers from the Center of Project Site and Property Line Receiver Address of the Location
Direction from the
Project Site
Distance from the
Project Property line
(feet)
Receiver 1 2551 Wildcat Ln Southwest 119
Receiver 2 2550 Wildcat Ln Southwest 121
Receiver 3 11115 Old Fashion Way South 159
Receiver 4 11081 Kayjay St South 95
Receiver 5 11037 Kayjay St Southeast 133
Receiver 6 11015 Kayjay St Southeast 175
Receiver 7 2615 Millsweet Pl East 60
Receiver 8 2675 Millsweet Pl East 64
Receiver 9 10980 Stonehenge Pl North 167
Receiver 10 10998 Stonehenge Pl Northwest 176
The maximum predicted hourly average noise levels at these sensitive receptors due to construction operations are shown in Table 11 below. Figure 6 shows the location of sensitive receivers adjacent to the site.
Figure 6 - Sensitive Receiver Locations
LEGEND
Site Boundary
D Residential
• Rec_location
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 20 of 44
M
20 Table 11 - Construction Noise Levels at the Boundary of Receiver Locations Project Phase Receptor Construction Noise
Level (dBA)
Site Clearance
REC-1 80
REC-2 80
REC-3 78
REC-4 80
REC-5 78
REC-6 76
REC-7 80
REC-8 82
REC-9 77
REC-10 77
Phase 2-Grading
REC-1 75
REC-2 74
REC-3 72
REC-4 75
REC-5 73
REC-6 71
REC-7 78
REC-8 77
REC-9 72
REC-10 72
Phase 3-Site Utility
REC-1 78
REC-2 78
REC-3 77
REC-4 80
REC-5 78
REC-6 76
REC-7 83
REC-8 83
REC-9 76
REC-10 76
Phase 4-Foundation & Slab
Pouring
REC-1 76
REC-2 75
REC-3 74
REC-4 77
REC-5 75
REC-6 73
REC-7 80
REC-8 79
REC-9 73
REC-10 73
Phase 5-Paving
REC-1 77
REC-2 77
REC-3 75
REC-4 77
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 21 of 44
M
21 REC-5 75
REC-6 73
REC-7 81
REC-8 79
REC-9 74
REC-10 74
Phase 6-Building
Construction
REC-1 73
REC-2 72
REC-3 70
REC-4 73
REC-5 71
REC-6 69
REC-7 76
REC-8 75
REC-9 70
REC-10 70
According to the equipment list provided by the developer, the construction noise level will range between 69 to 83 dBA at the nearest receptors.
To assess potential short-term noise impacts of the Project at nearby receiver locations, Veneklasen uses an 80 dBA Leq threshold for the daytime construction hours. The a nalysis confirms that this threshold is met at all closest receiver locations except for locations REC-7 and REC-8 during Phase 3 which exceeds the threshold by 3 decibels.
Such exceedance in sound level is barely perceived. Therefore , the project construction noise is deemed less than significant.
Mitigation 1. The impact is less than significant and t he following mitigation measures have been identified to further minimize potential effects of construction noise on adjacent properties. • Limit construction activity to the hours listed in Table 6 (7:00 am to 7:00 pm). • Schedule highest noise-generating activity and construction activity away from noise-sensitive land uses. • Equip internal combustion engine-driven equipment with original factory (or equivalent) intake and exhaust mufflers which are maintained in good condition.
• Prohibit and post signs prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. • Locate all stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors and portable generators as far as practicable from noise-sensitive land uses.
• Utilize “quiet” air compressors and other stationary equipment where feasible and available. • Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would respond to neighborhood complaints about construction noise by determining the cause of the noise complaints and require implementation of reasonable measures to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 22 of 44
M
22 3.3 Impact 2. Excessive ground-borne vibration
Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground -borne vibration or ground - borne noise levels?
Construction equipment associated with building the project would be the only vibration -generating source introduced by the project, as there are no vibration sources from operations that will introduce vibration into the environment. Vibration generated by construction equipment, unless specified otherwise through permitting, would only occur during approved work hours per the City of Riverside, 7:00 am – 7:00 pm, six days a week, excluding holidays. Table 9 shows the equipment used in each construction phase.
Table 12 below, shows the construction equipment proposed by the project planning group and the typical vibration levels generated during operation . It is understood that for this project, pile drivers will not be used. The vibration levels for the equipment used in the construction phase are unavailable, therefore, Veneklasen utilized the vibration levels provided by the FTA Manual . Calculations were performed according to the FTA manual method. Samples of the calculations are included in Appendix E.
Table 12 –Vibration Levels (Lv, VdB) of Typical Construction Equipment at 25 ft Equipment Reference RMS Velocity (Lv) at 25 ft. (VdB)
Vibratory roller 94
Large bulldozer 87
Caisson drilling 87
Loaded trucks 86
Jackhammer 79
Small bulldozer 58
Source: Federal Transit Administration (except Hanson 2001 for Vibratory rollers), 1995.
Based on the reference vibration levels generated by typical construction equipment and analysis carried out by Veneklasen, construction equipment vibration levels at the project site boundary will not exceed the criteria per FTA guidelines shown in Table 4. Therefore, the impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. The predicted vibration levels of the proposed construction equipment at the boundary of the project site are shown in Table 13.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 23 of 44
M
23 Table 13 – Construction Vibration Levels at the Boundary of Project Site Project Phase Receptor Construction
Vibration Level, PPV
Construction Vibration
Level, Lv, dB
Site Clearance
REC-1 0.005 63
REC-2 0.005 63
REC-3 0.004 60
REC-4 0.007 65
REC-5 0.005 62
REC-6 0.003 59
REC-7 0.015 71
REC-8 0.011 69
REC-9 0.004 59
REC-10 0.003 59
Phase 2-Grading
REC-1 0.0004 39
REC-2 0.0004 38
REC-3 0.0003 35
REC-4 0.001 40
REC-5 0.0004 37
REC-6 0.0003 34
REC-7 0001 46
REC-8 0.001 44
REC-9 0.0003 34
REC-10 0.0003 34
Phase 3-Site Utility
REC-1 0.006 63
REC-2 0.006 63
REC-3 0.004 60
REC-4 0.007 65
REC-5 0.005 61
REC-6 0.003 59
REC-7 0.015 71
REC-8 0.011 69
REC-9 0.004 59
REC-10 0.003 59
Phase 4-Foundation & Slab
Pouring
REC-1 0.006 63
REC-2 0.006 63
REC-3 0.004 60
REC-4 0.007 65
REC-5 0.005 62
REC-6 0.003 59
REC-7 0.015 71
REC-8 0.011 69
REC-9 0.004 59
REC-10 0.003 59
Phase 5-Paving
REC-1 0.0004 39
REC-2 0.0004 38
REC-3 0.0003 35
REC-4 0.001 40
REC-5 0.0004 37
REC-6 0.0003 34
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 24 of 44
M
24 REC-7 0.001 46
REC-8 0.001 44
REC-9 0.0003 34
REC-10 0.0003 34
Phase 6-Building
Construction
REC-1
The equipment used at this stage of construction is
mainly handheld tools and low vibration equipment
which produces very low levels of vibration
compared to the equipment used at previous
phases.
REC-2
REC-3
REC-4
REC-5
REC-6
REC-7
REC-8
REC-9
REC-10
3.4 Impact 3. Airport noise exposure
For a project located within 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?
The project is not within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, there is no impact.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 25 of 44
M
25 4.0 SUMMARY
4.1 Summary of Mitigation Measures
Mitigation 1. The impact is less than significant without mitigation measures. The following measures are identified to further minimize the potential effects of construction noise on adjacent properties. • Limit construction activity to the hours listed in Table 4 (6:00 am to 7:00 pm). • Schedule highest noise-generating activity and construction activity away from noise-sensitive land uses. • Equip internal combustion engine-driven equipment with original factory (or equivalent) intake and exhaust mufflers which are maintained in good condition.
• Prohibit and post signs prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. • Locate all stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors and portable generators as far as practicable from noise-sensitive land uses.
• Utilize “quiet” air compressors and other stationary equipment where feasible and available. • Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would respond to neighborhood complaints about construction noise by determining the cause of the noise complaints and require implementation of reasonable measures to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site.
¾\
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 26 of 44
M
26 4.2 Summary of significance of impacts
CEQA Noise Impact Question No Impact Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Potentially
Significant
1 Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies.
X
2 Generation of excessive ground borne vibration
or ground born noise levels.
X
3 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 pr oject area to excessive noise
levels
X
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 27 of 44
M
27 APPENDIX A
Table A.1 – Definitions of Noise-Related Terms
Term
Definition
Decibel, dB
A unit describing the amplitude of sound equivalent to 20 times the logarithm, to the base 10, of the ratio of the pressure of the sound to the reference pressure of 20 Pa.
Frequency, Hz
The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure.
A-Weighted Sound
Level, dBA
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured in an A-weighting filter network. The A-weighting de-emphasizes the very low frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. All sound levels in this report are in the A-weighted scale.
L0 (Lmax ), L2, L8, L25,
L50
The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 0 percent (maximum noise level), 2 percent, 8 percent, 25 percent, and 50 percent of the time during the measurement period.
Equivalent Noise
Level, Leq
The average A-weighted noise level during the stated measurement period.
Community Noise
Equivalent Level,
CNEL
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M., and after addition of 10 decibels to noise levels in the night between 10:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M.
Day-Night Noise
Level, DNL, Ldn
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 10 decibels to levels measured in the night between 10:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M.
Ambient Noise Level
The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
Impulsive Noise
Sound of short duration. Typically associated with an abrupt onset and rapid decay (i.e., gun-shots, etc.).
Pure Tones
A sound wave, residing over a small range of frequencies, which has a sinusoidal behavior over time.
VdB
Unit of measurement used by FHWA to describe ground-borne vibration. Equivalent to 20 times the logarithm, to the base 10, of the ratio of the root mean square ground - borne velocity to the reference of reference of 1x10-6 in/sec.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 28 of 44
M
28 APPENDIX B
Fort Liliu:denla'le, Fllorida
NOISE-CON 2014
201.4 Septe mbe,r 8-10
Noise prediction of traffirc on freeways and arteria ls from me.a.sured sound dla.ta.
JohlllaVerde
Wa}i'EndD'olilg
Samanlha Rs; ng5
Venellasen Asso ciaies
1711 16:lh Street
Santa Manics
CA904D4
jkM!m e@venek lasen .com
.ABSTRACT
Evaluation and rnirt:igati.on of noise .limn exrerim: noise smm:e~ is common as a build.mg de-5ign. •crite.ruJn, Dd bas long ~ en pm of federal !illiil. California bu.ildling design req11.m:e.me:nt,i; for resid.e-ntial b.mmng . CriteriOOJ is included in LEED building design standards fo:r school and healthcare facilities. and 'i.U be ind l.l.ded fur all buildings types in LEED rer i.on . The.,se criteria 1eqmre that fue noise level be qu.antifie-d pI,ec:isely. but do not prnv:ide a m.ethod for defi.ni.Jillg the noise .e,;"el gi,--en lhe nmmal "3riations m exterior sound level that occur. This paper a:nal)2eS-1.ong teJDI t:raffi.c no:iM> measUJemen ,ihla to de refap statistically meaningful. definitions of exterior noise friom. vehicular wuroes. Methods fur predic-ting the Ill.Oise le,re] usiRg data ft-om refati rely short mearuremem period,, are evaluated.. md m.inim1un smvey requirements to detemnne specirfic exterior noise parameters are suggested.
1. INJ RODUCTI ON
Traffic noise i~ a oollmlon nois.e somce-impactin'!!" all bn.i.l.ding type.s and has been the s11bj ec • of con.siderable stud}'- Previous measmement ~urue:,-11 - have primarily exami.necl fue spatial vm:iati.ons~ ra:riatiom: m vehide type or speed, or variations: dmmg a Scllgle day. Long-,1ienn m.e,asurement programs to docmnent the day-to-day ,'mi.ations m level lb.ave been pecfomred . lmre been focused on avemge or _4..furur hour metrics hic.b. are normally used for re-sidenti.all n.oi.&e criteria. Howe 'er recent criteria llave required e ..-a1umion of the loudest i.n.stead of the a'ii'erage le -~ - EvaluatiDg the maximum le,·ei requires a different le--~l of 1:ype of am1ly"&is fuan have previously been. documented_
2. BUILJi}ING CODES AND :REGULATIONS
A.. DailiJ 1metrtcs
Noire &om transportation source.s has long been a pm:t of ,codes and giridelmes for residential projects, and the ooise leYel has been e 'llhlaied in tenn~ of daily .mettics such as LJn and CNE:[ (01 LL,,,). The- U.S. Department of Housing and Llroan Deve opment defines an .acceptable a.coustie.a.l ,environment in tams of L.in 4 . In Cahlomiai lhe slate l:milding cod.es, 11.s ·well as the Geneial Pl.ans of many m1l!lliic.ip.atiti.e-Ji .;;i:m.ibrly defines noise le 1 Fequiremeots in tem1..s of CNE.Lor
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 29 of 44
M
29 Traffic .Vorss Predic o .from ."4: rm1 ; Lo Vel'rie, Dong &: Roll hngs B. Hourly metrics
Recentl there ha -e been an increased number of design requirements and guidelines for non re • dential projects. many associated ith green building guidelines. The California Green Building Standards require tha lhe • erior noise e 'el "'does not exceed an hourly equi,·alent o • le ·el (Leq-lBr) of 50 dBA in occupied area!> dunng an • hour of operatio This app ·es ro mos non-residential projt>e s.
Green building guidelines for schools, such as the California Co borati,·e for High Perfo~ Schools. reference ANSI SL .60. The requirement~ for noise from exterior sources are defined in terms of ''the noisiest continuom one-hour period during times ·hen learning actnities take place.''' LEED 4 BD+C: Schools "requires mitig;ition for high-noise sites (peak- our l..eq abo -e 60 dBA during school hours r .
C. DaHy Average vs. Maximum Hour
While criteria for residennal projects has histoncally been in terms of _ 4-hour a, -eraged metrics., recent requirements for commercial md chool projet"ts is framed in terms of the oudest houri • Leq during the period of operation. Ho ·ever none o the criteria docmnents pro ide or descn an • procedmes or guidance regarding ho • the •• oudest hour" sho d be defined, gi ·en the da - to-day ,-ariarions in noise le • E ·en if gi ·en a large data set encompassing the full range of vanation, ·hich le\-e does the a oustician define to be ··typical''? Further, fule it is straightfon ·ard to determine the loud r hour of an measurement period. ho • 'ould one kno ,· that the loud .. st hour of the da •, or the loudest day of the -eek, had been captured. lbat about longer erm \-ariations , ith the sc ool -ear or the se ons. Ho • much information regarding ·ariations c~ the designer be expected to obtain? Curren . acousticiaru faced ;ith these questions ha ·e simply measured o,·er a single day and used the loud hour to perform calcula ·om. In our ,ie ·, there been insufficient co11S1deration of the ·ariation of the sound le~-et and ·he er the measurement constiru es adequate sampling to ha,·e confidence that the reponed sound le ·el is acrura e.
3. MEASUREMENT PROGRAM
In order o begin o addrer.s these questions and clarify procedme. ·e performed long-term no· e 1>1.l!Yeys of roadways, ith an aim ode ermine not jus the le -el bu the temporal distribution of le -els. Based on the measured 'llriation m noise le..-el, hour-to-hour and day-to.day. a reasonable definition of me "loudest hour'' can be extracted.. Finally ·e ish to detelllllll" the minimum length of measmement required determine the loude' hour o the desired accuracy.
A. Long term traffic noise survey
:Measurements -ere performed on se ·eral arterial road :rays and free "llys . The rerul~ from one anenal are presenred here. The arterial in questions is a 4-lane road ith a ide median and a 40 mile per hour speed limit. A microphone -as moun ed to the rooftop of a building a the f.ai;ade facing the stree This location had unobstructed exposure to all four lanes in both directions at an approximate ele 'atio of _O feet. A Brue! Kjaer l)pe _260 sound le •e meter logged the noise le ·e at high time resolution from February 1 through 1arch , _014.
The da 11s reduced to hourly interval!. syn ed o the clock for this analysir.. The ·eek.ends ,ere significantly quieter than the ·eekda . and the weekends ·ere excluded from the analy is. The hourly Leq's for all -eekdays are sho nm Figure 1. The dashed lines sho • February 1 , inch -as the President Day hohday. and had sligh y reduced noise le ·els. The do ed line silo -s a day hen ·ork ere -s •·ere conducting tree trimming on the stree Although .Yo -€-Con 101 , Fon Lrwdmia/ e, Florida, ~ emb S-10, :01 PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 30 of 44
M
30 Ti c .Vorsa Predicnonfrom Jfea;unm1 ; Lo'V'mie, Dong &Ro11hrig:; this as not a traffic source and this day -as excluded from the data for this analysis, it bears coilSldering ·ha effec such an e ·ent might ha,-e on nnmauued measuremen . 5 T re-e trim.ming
70 •
:i5
50 Hoor
Fi~e L Hamly Leg's fur all days ll'.12arured.
B. Analysis
During the daytime ours (from 7:00 ,LM to 7:00 PM). there is \'el} li e -anation in en~l both da •.to-da and from hour-t0-hour -ithiu a day for a free flo • ~ arterial. In fact. o,·er the ! _ ·eekda $ m the measurem0 period. the daytime hourly Leq ranged from 66-69 dBA. Became the spre d in the dara ·as so small ·e analyzed the data at a resolution of a enth of a dB in orde o reduce rounding errors. The a -erage hourly Leq :-as 67.0 dBA. and the standard de 'iation ·as 0.5 dB.
It is the authors' opmion that the ''max.im.wn·· e -el of a distribution. assuming that it is approximately normal, should be defined as _ standard de 'iations abo ·e the mean. This is an arbitrary but common con 'ention in many branches of science and engineering, corresponding to approximate 95 percent confidenc~ inten-al about the mean. I is the 9 .S percentile of the cbstribution. For the mt-.1~ured data. :! standard de 'iations are 1.0 dB and the .. oudest om·• is therefore defined to be 68.0 dBA. . ote that the me.'lll and maximum ,·a s ha ·e tenth-dB resolution and are no rounded. It is coincidence that they happened to end up on zero tenths.)
4. REQUIRED LENGTH OF MEASUREMENT
We bani de emuned that the ··true·, a ;-erage hourl_ • le •. as 67 dB and the loud hourly le ·e is 68 dBA GiYeu the mon -long measurement period. we are confident that these \'lllues .\oi,;.r -Cori .JOJ , Fon Laudmio/11, Florida , Sep bsrS-10 , ::01 PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 31 of 44
M
31 .icmrately encompass tire normal daily ,·ari.atinn in le\<el. {Seasonal variations may remain.) For a typical proj ec.t the me.asurement period, ill be mm:Ji. shorte.r. Hor long doe'8 the measureme:nt peciod need to be o enmre an accurate resl'ilt?
A. Mm111,te Carl o Met hod
Mon~e Crufo method is ide.al fo1 this arutlj sis. Vi e use a random uumber generatror to randomly select a slart hour from the data set From the 'Start how-, ·e calculate fue iwaage noise le ee] (Leq) that rnuld be achieved. after measming for ,1 hours so that ,i is the length of the me.asurement. Fo:r each. ri1. , <e repeat for at leas 1000 trials andl plot the results. The distribution. of the re.im1ts gi·ves the probability of me-as.ming iliat e,;-e,l after a measmement lhat is n hours long. The proce.ss is repeated ·i.th mffe1,ent ,-alnes o,f "· Repre?..mati,·e rentlts are cSho,ivn in f igure 2.
F:igme 1 shmYs tti.at the m"m of the dis,tnl:mnon is the same as the mean of the me.irsurement data, as expected. Also as ,expecied. the dislr.i:lmti.on narrov;s (,.iariation become smaller) as tib.e measuremel!llt time increasecS. Howe,-er, the. narro ing ~il.eyels off' and the:re is no further improvement after 4 or :5 hours. Measuring for 8 hours or L hoill"S (the en.tire daJ1ime) '011.ldl. 1W yield a m.ore accurate measurement (compared to, the monthly aYe1age) tha.n fu.e le -e1 me-asuredl afrer :5 hmm, _
100%
.9or;,;
,80 .
70%
'60%
50%
40%
3011;,
20%
mo
C"fi
5 66 SJ 68
Number of Hours
MeHuredf
- 1
- 3
- ~
- 7
Figu:n 2. iR.!!51.ills ofYo:ut~ C:wo aJl.1!lysis vith . 11=1, 3, 5, hours-, H .. Length of 1Measu rem e nt Pred ictions
0 Gi 1eI1 the abo ·e mfmmation, ·e can evaluate methods fo:r etermilling fue level of the loudest hom "'or aiu act1J1.aJ P•of ect on this or a similar mad vay. \Vlll1e aconstical o\'--erdesigu srnmld be avoided, a slightly con~m'llfu:e e.stimate i~ aw,opria1te. R is important to avoid underestin:ia'ring tire m.easmed leYel which could lead to mf:eri01 levels. ilia e}:!cee,d the criteria. For Ibis roadi,.;.ray, lhe loudeist hom- is 168. dBA and a level of 69' dB iVould be 11coe:pla'ble. Ho 'eveJ, the measurement method should not result in a level belo 68 dBA For this roadway. a one-hom measmemem ;ill usual.Iy result in a level of 67 dBA, so adding 1 dB ,-rould re-.rulit in the correct loudest hour. How-ever, 1,6 pe:rccent of the tim.~ this Noo&!-Cari :NJ14. Frn I-tlua"'mYiala: Fl't'Jrliia, Sep18l11bsrS-UJ, 1'0.i PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 32 of 44
M
32 I1·qfffc .Voi:.B Predimonfrorn Jfsa; Lo Ymie. Dong & Ro'II • ·,ig:
estima e TI'ill be too lo •. 1easunng for'.! 01m ·ould reduce tlus to 10 percent of the time. and a 4 our measurement uld reduce this to percent. A be-tter method may be to add 2 dB to the measured le ·el. This ·ould be oo high percen of the rime. but ill pre ·ent erring on the lo • side.
5. CONCLUSIONS
The method d cribed is in.tended o optimize measurement tDnes mle Dllllllllizing ris • This IS accomplished b_- und tan.ding the emporal behavior of the source. For anerial road, 11 rs similar o the free flo 'ing one in this study. the loude levels are in the daytime ours from 7:00 AM to 7:00 P. . There is rematkab y little \'mation in noise le ·el both our-to-hour and day o-da •. Follo ing common science and engineering practice, ,e define the ··loudest our:• ai; _ standard de -iations abo ·e the mean (97.5 percentile).
Ir is possib e to accura e y estimate e ''true'· long-term rn.a.'illlnnn hom:ty le ·e to withm .0 dB ·th short term measurements. For this road ·ay. the method ould be o dd 1 or 2 dB to the measured :a ue, depending on the length of the meuurement and ho • con.sen-ati -c a resul is desired.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authon ish to thank eneklMen . ociate!> for their assistance.
REFERENCES
' J. E. Wesler. ·-Comn:nmiiy noise s11m~y of .1edford., ~sacbusetts ;' J . .:',.coast. Soc. Am. ~ , 9S5 ( 973). ? •. Olion., --Surrey of Motor "ebicle. ois •· J. AcOUst. Soc. Am. 51, 1291 (19 2). 1 Rolili!U et ll -Spam! sampling for night . ~ls e;timatio:c in urban ennronments." J. AcOUSt. Soc. Am. 110 . .:.00
··Toe ·oisl! Reguhrio:c, ~ Tit ~ • Code offederal Regulations. 51B. ' California Bwlding St:mdardi ode. T -~ '.!-t Califumia C.ode ofR.egulmo Part , section 110 California GreenBui! •• ~ S1md:m:ls, T~ -4. Catifomia Code ofRe~tiom, Pm 11. 1 Am-mean "ational Sumdard Ac_ou.sncal TmutDOlogy . . .\JJEricm . :rtiooal Standards lnstmlle A: iSI Sl ::.60-:!010 (Acoustical Society of America . . ·e York. :!010) .
.Vou,,...Con ::01 , Fo 1 Lamimia/$, Flon·da, SBpr ber -10. JOJ PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 33 of 44
M
33 APPENDIX C
Measurement Data from Noise Monitoring Equipment (Position S1)
~
~ 50
~
84 82
"'
78 76
72 70
68 66
" 62
60 58
56 54
52 50
48 46
16k
4k
1k
~ 250
63 16
16Feb12:00:00 13:00:00 14:00:00 15:00:00
,1NTi
~---------------------------------------------------~-----------~ 16Feb12:00:00 13:00:00 14:00:00 15:00:00
16Feb12:00:00 13:00:00 14:00:00 15:00:00
Position 16 Feb lS:06:00
TimeResoh.rtion 00:00:20
LAeq_dt 60.4d8
ProjedResult
Start 16 Feb 11:44:24
'"' Duration
LASmax
LASmin
LAFmax
LAFmin
LAlmax
lAlmm
lA,q
lAleq
LAPKmax
lAITT,q
LAffieq
LCSma.
LCSrmn
LCFmax
LCFmm
LClmax
LClm,
LC,q
LCltq
LCPKmax
04:10:01
88.3dB
43.2d8
94.ldB
41.6d8
96.4dB
44.4dB
66.odB
69.6dB
110,ldB
70.0dB
71.ldB
97:dB
57.5dB
99.2dB
~.2dB
1012dB
,r.4dB
75Ad8
78JdB
112.6dB
lZFmax 99.4dB
lZfr,io ~ dB
lAFmaxZ0-200 83.ldB
100
.,
~ 60
40 20
Cursor L.Zeq
16 632501k 4k 16k
H,
Xl2A2A-20198-E0 Swrt2024-02-1611:44:20 End:2024-02-1615:54:40 Samples:751/15,003 PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 34 of 44
M
34 Measurement Data from Noise Monitoring Equipment (Position S2)
~
'!l 50
'13
" 82
00 78
7£
74 72
70 68
66 64
62 60
58 56
54 52
50 48
46 16k
4k
1k
,' 250
63 16
Xl2A2A-11119-E0
16Feb12:00:00 13:00:00 14:00:00 15:00:00
16Feb12:00:00 13:00:00 14:00:00 15:00:00
16Feb12:00:00 13:00:00 14:00:00 15:00:00
.1NTi
Cursor
Position 16 Feb 14:33:40
Time Resolution 00:00:20
LAeq_dt 71.SdB
Project Result
Start 16 Feb 11:37:58
'"' Duration
LASmax
LASmin
LAFmax
LAFmtn
LA,q
LAPKmax
LCSmu
LCSmin
LCFm-'X
LCFmin
LCeq
LCPKmn
LZFmax
LZFmin
16 Feb 15:42:13
04:04:13
94.3dB
47.7dB
97.0dB
46.6dB
68.0dB
108.4dB
~.iidB
61.3dB
100.9dB
59.SdB
78.ldB
110.SdB
100.9d8
fi1.4dB
LZeq63Hz
LZeq12SHi
72.6dB
75.ldB
100
.,
~ 60
40 2D
Cursor LLeq
16632501k 4k 16k
H,
Start2024-02-161H7:40 End:2024-02-1615:42:20 Samples:734/14,655 PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 35 of 44
M
35 Measurement Data from Noise Monitoring Equipment (Position S3)
8 8
s
8 8
8 el
H, dB
~ t:, ~ t;,/;;,'lRJl<'!/l!il!!lRl~Sl~~~~;,1,a~~,e
! ~ ~~ ~ ~ !~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
dB
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 36 of 44
M
36 Measurement Data From Noise Monitoring Equipment (Position S4)
8 8
8 8
"'
.i~aa1:; ~t;,j;; gJRJ\08l~~Rl~Sli!laaCJ:l!aaaae'l~ie
z :!
8 8
8 8
8 8
dB
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 37 of 44
M
37 APPENDIX D
Construction Equipment Noise Calculation Samples
Phase 1 Site Clearence
Phase 2 Grading
Project Cit1 of Riverside
Project N 5798 - 010 j Projt:et critc:ria (dBA)
Date 412312 024
C;alcul;ation of sound le-vels - ,mer 0011 edOs emit:G! c;ci!eria ma, level t:PHiernenl l ■ Pt: aod m1an!it ■ and ha[[itc distaoc;es If ot:f:df:d rnam1aH1 adinst distaoc;«:s helwet:o somc;e and rt:uivt:r m c;eott:c eoint at emi T ruck
ShoYol
Not"Ui !Mnt
Not.,uir>mtn t
Not,:iui mtnt
Notaui mtnt
Receptor R4
Oi:::;h,acc: to So••d
n, (ftJ
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105 Pro ject
Pro ject N
Date
Pre:::;:::;•re
Le.,el M R4
12 81
16 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
83 ••
Cit)' of River side
5798-0 10
4t231202 4
Rdueace So••d Pnss•n lnel @> 50 ft (dBA re: 20p.Pa) Refueace Utilizatioa ft) Receptor R1 Receptor R2 Recept o r R3 .. ,
Clint FTA l!YA (Predicle ltYA (Mnnre VA Used Clint FHYA Und Oisnace to Rl(ft)
" "
Receptor R5
Oi:::;h,acc: to SoHd
Pre:::;:::;•re R5 (ft) Le.,el M R5
1'3 60
1'3 ,.
1'3 13
1'3 0
1'3 0
1'3 0
1'3 0
1'3 0
1'3 0
1'3 0
80 ••
Receptor R6
Oi:::;h,acc: to So••d
Pre:::;:::;•re R6 (ft) Le.,el M R6
185 61
185 H
185 11
185 0
185 0
185 0
185 0
185 0
185 0
185 0
18 " 0
85 88
" NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
20% 20% 120
NIA 100% 120
NIA 100% 120
NIA NIA 120
NIA NIA 120
NIA NIA 120
NIA NIA 120
NIA NIA 120
NIA NIA 120
NIA NIA 120
Tot~ Soaa4 Pr1:ss•r1: L1:,1:I at R1:c1:H'1:r NO BarriH
jotal 1•••4 Pr1:ss ... 1: L1:,1:I .t R1:c1:i,u YrJN Barrid Receptor RT Receptor R8
Oi:::;h,acc: to SoHd Oi:::;h,acc: to So••d
Pre:::;:::;•re Pre:::;:::;•re Rl (ft) Le.,el a RT R8 (ft) Le.,el M R8 •• 12 80
" •• 82 80 8.
•• 16 80 18
•• 0 80 0
•• 0 80 0
•• 0 80 0
•• 0 80 0
•• 0 80 0
•• 0 80 0
•• 0 80 0
83 85
•• 11
75 So••d Oi sta•c e to So••d Dish,• ce to Pre ss are
lnel•RI R2(ft)
TO ...
80 131
,. 131
0 131
131
131
131
131
131
131
........!!!,.._
c::::E::J
Press•re
luel•R2
TO
80 ,.
0 ........!!!,.._
c::::E::J
R3(h)
160
160
160
160
160
160
160
160
160
160
Press•re
ltHIAR3
11 11
........ll,.._
c::::n:::::J
Receptor RSI Receptor R10
Oi:::;h,acc: to So••d Oi:::;h,acc: to So••d
Pre:::;:::;•re Pre:::;:::;•re RO (ft) Le.,el a RSI R10 (ft) Le,el M R10 111 61 186 61
111 H 186 H
111 11 186 11
111 0 186 0
111 0 186 0
111 0 186 0
111 0 186 0
111 0 186 0
111 0 186 0
111 0 186 0
18 18
Calculation of sound le vel s - user only edi!s nrniecl mileria maa level eauinmenl lune and auanmv and harrier dislance:; H needed manually adiusl dislance:; helween :;nume and receiver ljl center nninl at g R•len•nc• Sou nd Pre,ssur• l •v•I @> 50 It (dBA ••= 20p.P;a) R•l•r•nc• Utili ntio n (X) R•c•ptorRI R•c•pto r R2 R•c•ptorR3 Equipment o,, Dist;anc e, to Sound Disunc• to Sound Dist;anc• to Sound Client FTA .-ivA (Predict• iVA (M•asur VA Use d Cli•nt FHVA Us•d Rl(ft) Pre,s sure R2(ft) Pre,ssur• R3(ft) Pressure, l•v•l8R1 l•v•l8R 2 l•v•l8 R3
0 02€11 1 0
"
85 82 0 85 NIA 40¼ 40¼ 120 73 131 73 169 70
Gr.ader 1 0 85 85 0 0 85 NIA 40¼ 40¼ 129 73 131 73 169 70 NoE>o:i1Ji mE>nt 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 120 0 131 0 169 0 NoE>-:iuiomE>nt 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 Noeoui ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 NOE'OUi mE>nt 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 120 0 131 0 169 0 Noeou i ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 NoE'"U i mE>nt 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 120 0 131 0 169 0 NOE'"Ui ffiE'J'lt 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 120 0 131 0 169 0 No e1;1ui ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 ot.i So.a4 Prl' HWI' Lirffl .t ~INWfl NO e. ,. ______!L_ ______!L_ ---2L....l c:::::!!::J c:::::::!!::]
Receptor R4 Receptor R5 Receptor AG Receptor R7 Receptor RB Receptor R9 Receptor R10 Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound R4 (ft) Pressure R5(ft) Pressure R6(ft) Pressure R7(ft) Pressure R8(ft) Pressure R9(ft) Pressure RIO(ft) Pressure Level a R4 Level a R5 Level a R6 Level Iii) R7 Level Iii) RB Level Iii) R9 Level Iii) 105 75 143 72 185 70 57 80 74 78 177 70 186 70
105 75 143 72 185 70 57 80 74 78 177 70 186 70
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
78 75 73 83 81 73 73
64 Ci SY Ci 66 Si 69
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 38 of 44
M
38 Phase 3 Site Utility
Phase 4 Foundation & Slab
Proj ect
P roj ect N
D ate
Cit)' of R ive rside
57!18- 010
412312024
j15
Calc ulalion of sound levels - user onlu edit s prnject miteria ma¥ level equipment t!ne and quantity and barrier distances If needed mam,aHu adjust distance s between source and receiver (jf center point at g Equipm ent
Tr1Jcl<.
EHca ... a1or
Front End Loader
NoeQui ment
Noeaui ment
Noeaui ment
NoeQui ment
Noeaui ment
Noeaui ment
Noeaui ment
Receptor Rf
Distance to Sound
R4(1t)
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
Pro ject
Pro ject N
Da te
Pre ssure
Level fi) Rf
81 75
70 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
83 68
Cit)' of River side
5798- 010
41231202 4
R e-fe-re·nce- Sound Pre-ssure- l e-vel @I 50 ft (dB A re-: 20p.P;ii) R e-fe-re-nce- Utili zalion (X) Receptor R1 Re-ce-ptor R 2 Recept or R J Q,, Di stan ce to Sound Di st;iince- to Sound Di sta nce to Sound Clie-nt FTA -IVA(Pre-di cte- -IVA (Me-asurt VA Use-d Cli e-nt FHVA Use-d Rl(ft) P ressure- R 2 (ft) Press ure- R J(ft) Pr ess ure- Le- ve-18R1 Le-ve-18R2 le-ve-18 RJ
1 0 84 0 0 88 88 NIA NIA 100¾ 129 80 131 80 163 11
1 0 0 85 81 0 85 NIA 40¾ 40¾ 129 73 131 73 163 70
1 0 80 80
"
78 80 NIA 40¾ 40X 129 68 131 68 163 65
1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 163 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 163 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 163 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 163 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 163 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 123 0 131 0 163 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0
otal SCHlll4 Pr.ssw • L...a M Rff ....., NO B arrtl' ----!L_ ----!L_ ---l!..._ c::::::rr:::::J c::::::rr:::::J c::::!!::J
Receptor R5 Receptor RG Receptor R7 Receptor R8 Receptor R9 Receptor R10 Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance lo Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound R5(1t) Pre ssure R6(1t) Pressure R7(1t) Pressure R8(1t) Pre ssure R9(1t) Pre ssure R10(1t) Pre ssure Level fi) R5 Level fi) RG Level fi) R7 Level fi) R8 Level fi) R9 Level fi) 143 79 185 11 57 87 74 85 177 11 186 11
143 72 185 70 57 80 74 78 177 70 186 70
143 67 185 65 57 75 74 73 177 65 186 65
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
80 78 88 86 78 78
66 C4 /J C4 C4
j Pro jec t criteriil (dBA) 75
Calcul ation of sound le ve ls user nnlu edils nroiecl mileria maw level enuinrnenl lune and nuanlilu and banier distances H needed manuaHu adiud didances belween sourne and receiver 01 center point at p1 R e- fe-re-nce- Sound Pr e-ssure- Le-ve-1 @I 50 ft (dBA re-: 20p.Pa) Re-fe-re-nce- Utili zat ion (X) R e-ce-ptorRI R e-ce-ptorR 2 R e-ce-ptor R J Equipm ent Q ,, Di sta nce- to Soun d Dist;iince- to Sound Distance- to Sound Clie-nt FTA fiVA (Pr e-dicte- -IVA (M e-asuu VA Use-d Clie-nt FHVA Use-d R1(ft) Press ure R2 (ft ) P ressure RJ (ft) P re-ssure l e-ve-lllilRI l e-ve-lllilR 2 lev e-1 llil R J
ConoreteMiKerTr1Jcl<. 1 0 85 85
"
82 85 NIA 40X 40¾ 129 73 131 73 169 70
Exca ... ator 1 0 0 85 81 0 85 NIA 40X 40¾ 129 73 131 73 169 70 Tractor 1 0 0 .. 0
" "
NIA 40X 40X 129 74 131 74 169 71
No e 1Ji ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 Noe ui ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 Noe 1Ji ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 Noe ui ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 Noe ui ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 Noe 1Ji ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 Noe ui ment 1 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 0 169 0 ot..a So.Ml Pre-ssw e L...a M Rec...., NOB• •~ ___LL_ ___LL_ _____lL_ IO«il So.ii Press•• Liiil ii Riiitiii VI I A Oarrij c::::!!::J c::J!::J c::JL:J Receptor Rf Receptor R5 Receptor R6 Receptor R7 Receptor R8 Receptor R9 Receptor R10 Distance to Sound Distance lo Sound Distance to Sound Distance lo Sound Distance to Sound Distance lo Sound Distance to Sound R4(11) Pressure R5 (It) Pressure R6(1t) Pressure R7 (It) Pressure R8(1t) Pres sure R9(1t) Pressure R10(11) Pres sure Level fi) Rf Level fi) R5 Level fi) R6 Level fi) R7 Level fi) R8 Level fi) R9 Level fi) 105 75 143 72 185 70 57 80 74 78 177 70 186 70
105 75 143 72 185 70 57 80 74 78 177 70 186 70
105 75 143 73 185 71 57 81 74 79 177 71 186 71
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
80 11 75 85 83 75 75
cc C3 Ci Ii Ci Ci Ci
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 39 of 44
M
39 Phase 5 Paving
Phase 6 Building Construction
Proj ect
Proje c t N
Date
Cit,- of Riv e rside
579 8-010
412312024
75 Calc ulation o f sound level s - user onlu edits prnject criteria maH level equipment tune and quantitu and hanier distances If needed manuaHu adjust distances between sm11ce and receiver Iii center point alp Equi pm•nt
Oole-r
Pave-r
Rolle-r
Noe-aui me-nt
Noe,aui me-nt
NoE>aui mE>nt
Noe.iui ment
Noe.iui ment
NoeQui ment
NoeQui ment
,-
Receptor R4
Distance to Sound
R4(ft)
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
105
Pro je ct
Pro je ct N
Dat e
Pressure
Level Iii) R4
75 78
72 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
81 cc
Cit)' o f Riv erside
5798-010
412312024
R •f•r•nc• Sound Pr•ssur• l •v•I • 50 ft (dBA r•: 20•P •J R •f•r•nc• Utilil-iilion (X) R•c•ptor RI R •c•ptorR 2 R•c•pto r R3 Q,, Oi st •nc•to Sound Oi st •nc•to Sound Oist -ilnc• to So und Cli•nt FTA ~YA (Pr •dict• iYA(M••suu VA Un d Cli•nt FHYA Us•d Rl(ft) Pr•ssur• R2 (ft) Pr•ssur• R 3 (ft) Pr•ssur• l •v•l•RI l •v•l•Rz l•v•I Iii) R J
I 0 85 85 82 0 85 NIA 401/. 401/. 129 73 131 73 169 70
I 0 85 85 77 88 88 NIA 501/. 501/. 129 77 131 77 169 74 I 0 85 85 80 74 85 NIA 201/. 201/. 129 70 131 70 169 67 I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 • 169 • I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 • 169 • I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 • 169 • I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 • 169 • I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 • 169 • I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 • 169 • I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 0 131 • 169 • otal Sa.Ml Pf•ss•• l--' Al n.c...., NOB• •• .......lL_ .......lL_ .......lL_ fo!ii So..a PrHs•• UHi .. Rioitiii VI I H e., .. c:::!!::::J c:::!!::::J c::::::!!::J Receptor R5 Receptor R6 Receptor R7 Receptor RS Receptor R9 Receptor R10 Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound R5 (ft) Pressure R6(ft) Pressure R7 (ft) Pressure R8(ft) Pressure R9 (ft) Pressure R10(ft) Pressure Level Iii) R5 Level Iii) R6 Level Iii) R7 Level Iii) R8 Level Iii) R9 level Iii) 143 72 185 70 57 80 74 78 177 70 186 70
143 76 185 74 57 84 74 81 177 74 186 73
143 69 185 67 57 77 74 75 177 67 186 67
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
78 76 86 84 76 76
64 CZ /1 6§ CZ CZ
75 Calculation ol sound level s - user onlu edits prnject crileria maH level equipment tune and quantitu and hanier distances If needed manuaHu adjust distances between sm11ce and receiver Iii center point al pr R•f •r•nc• Sound Pr•ssur• l •v•I • 50 ft (dBA ' "' 20p.P•) R•f•r•nc• Utili H tion (X) R•c•pto rR1 R •c•ptor R2 R•c•ptor R J Equipm•nt m, Dist•nc• t o Sound Dist •nc• t o Sound Disunce to Sound Client FTA f-lVA (Pr edict e ~YA(Me u un VA Used Cli•nt FHYA Used R1(ft) Pr•ssur• R2 (ft ) Pr•ssure RJ (ft) P r•ssure Level aR1 l ev •I a R2 l•v•laRJ
Pneumatic Tool:s: I 0 85 85 85 85 85 NIA 50¾ 50¾ 129 74 131 74 169 71 Air Com fE':S:SOI I 0 80 0 0 0 80 NIA NIA 1001/. 129 72 131 72 169 69 Noeaui me,nt I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 • 131 • 169 • Noe.iui me-nt I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 • 131 • 169 • Noe.iui men! I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 • 131 • 169 • Noe,.,ui me-nt I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 • 131 • 169 • NoeQui me,nt I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 • 131 • 169 • NOMUi ment I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 • 131 • 169 • Noe,::iui menl I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 • 131 • 169 • Noeaui me-nl I 0 0 0 0 0 NIA NIA NIA NIA 129 • 131 • 169 • olal Sa.Ml PrHs•• l--' at n.c...., NO B • •'-' .......lL_ .......lL_ ___lL_ UIStalh!b lftl DftWEIE'li a tlE'lillE'I
@ii srm PrHs•• c;;;:a .. Hffitiii VIIH e. ,y c::::::!!::J c::::::!!::J c::::x::::J t- t-
Receptor R4 Receptor R5 Receptor R6 Receptor R7 Receptor R8 Receptor R9 Receptor RIO Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound Distance to Sound R4(ft) Pressure R5(ft) Pressure R6(ft) Pressure R7(ft) Pressure R8(ft) Pressure R9 (ft) Pressure R10(ft) Pressure Level Iii) R4 Level Iii) R5 Level Iii) R6 Level Iii) R7 Level Iii) R8 level Iii) R9 level Iii) 105 76 143 73 185 71 57 81 74 79 177 71 186 71
105 74 143 71 185 69 57 79 74 77 177 69 186 69
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
105 0 143 0 185 0 57 0 74 0 177 0 186 0
78 75 73 83 81 73 73
64 Ci 6§ 69 cc gg gg
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 40 of 44
M
40 APPENDIX E
Construction Equipment Vibration Calculation Samples
Phase 1 Site Clearence
Phase 2 Grading
u:::::::::::::
l, .. c, ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0.0 0.0
cM• 01
• ore, -eoncr•t•.•t••ortrn 0<no u m
Dis lilnce (IIJ lo A2 PPV •••'• ill A2
'"
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
00 00
00 00
00 00
00 00
o ..
o ..
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Buildin Cilteqor, Criteriil PPV inl s• Buildinq Cilte Ofl Criteriil PPY inlse Buil dinq Cilteqo r C riter iil PPY inlse BuildinQ Cilteqor Criler iil PPY inlse e,n ore"' -conoret€', sree or r,m er no aster e,n ore€' -conorete, stee or tom ,;-r no aster ,cm ore€' -conc,.,.re. st,;-e or r,m "'' no astocr €-lrt orce -concr€-te. st€->c or t,m er no ast€-r Disu,nce (ft) to R4 PP Y ••• ;, ill R4
'" '" 125 0.000
125 0000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
Receotor RS
0.0 00
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
Disu,nce (ft) to R5 PP Y . ,.;, ill R5
"' '" 163 0.000
153 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
1'3 0.000
163 0.1)00
163 0.000
Oisunce (I t) to R6 PPY .,.:, ill R6
0.0 0 0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
Receotor R9
205
205
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.1)00
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
Buildinq cateqor, I Criteria PPY (inlse Buildinq cateqor, Criteria PPY (inlse . Hein orcea-concre1e, s1ee or t1moer no 01aster 11 "- . Hein orcea-concrete, stee or ,,moer no 01aster "-i_.ategon,1111:1nst1tut1ona ano uses w11n nmany oayt1me use '--ategor 1 111: nst1tut1ona ano uses w1tn p11ma11y oa time use Distance (ft) to RS PPY .... ;. at R8
94 0.010
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
0.011
t.i., cols inY•"° "'
Lv at RS Distance (ft) to R9
68.7 40.7
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
68.8 l, ... c, ...
,..:::::::::::::
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
PPV •. ,M25fl l . M25fl(V,E Dis1•nce(h)10A1
0.OOl 58 149 ,.,
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
PPY .... i . at R9
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
Lv at R9
59.1 31.1
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
59.1 Disunc•(fl)10R2
"' "' "' "' "' "' "'
"' "'
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
Oisunce (f t) to R7 PPY ••••• ill R7
11 11 ' 77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.1)00
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
Receotor R10
•.
0.0 0 0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
Buildinq cateqor, Criteria PPY (inlsec)
. Hem orcea-concrete, stee or 11moer no 01aster
'--ale or : CiUI mgs wnere VI r at1on wou10 mter ere wit U1stan!: .. (HJ to
206
206
206
206
206
206
206
206
206
206
PPY .... i . at RIO
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
'' , ..
ti u
0.003
"-" interior oper at1ons
Lv at RIO
58.5 30.5
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
58.5 -t
Disr•nce (fl) to R3 PPV ••• ,. •t R3
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
, ..
"' IH 0.000
IH 0.000
IH 0.000
IH 0.000
IH 0.000
119 0,000
119 0,000
' "
0.0 0.0
Bui ld inu CilU•uor Crit.,ia PPY inls• Bui ldinu cat•uor Crit.,ia PPY inls• Buildinu Cilt•uo r Crit.,iil PPY inls • Bui ldin Cilt• o u Crit•ria PPY inl s• ,. neon 0Ice11-concreie, stee or !ImoeI no 01aster eIn orce -concrete. stee or tIm er no 01asteI eon orce11-concrete. stee 01 Umoer no o,aster eon orce -concrete. stee or tIm er no 01asteI OiStil nc• (ft) to R4 PPV .•. :, ill R4
125
125
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
lv ilt R4
0.0 00
0.0 00
0.0 0.0
OiSlilnc• (ft) 10 R5 ppy .•. ,. ill R5
'" '" 163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
lviltR5
0.0 0 0
0.0 00
0.0 0.0
Disunc• (ft) to R6 PPV . •. :. ill R6
205
205
205 0.000
205 0 000
205 0.000
205 0 000
205 0.000
205 0.000
lva1R6
0.0 00
0.0 00
0.0 0.0
Dis t ilnc• (ft ) t o R7 PPY . •. ,. ill R7
77 nm1
77 u.uv1
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
lviltR7
0.0 00
0.0 0 0
0.0 0.0
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 41 of 44
M
41 Phase 3 Site Utility
Phase 4 Foundation & Slab
Recentor R8 Recentor R9
Buildinq c ateqor, Cri teria PPV (inlse Buildinq cateqor, I Criteria PPV (inlse . Hem orcea-concrete, stee o r t1moer no piaster u.3 Hem orcea-co ncrete, stee o r t1moer no p1aster11 u . ate oru 111: nstitutIona1 1ana uses wit rImanu a time use ate or 1 111: nstitut Iona an uses wItn urImarm autIme use Distance (ft) to R8 PPV .•.•• at R8
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
0.001
P 1ojO'el N ;,m.,
~:~!O'el N umbO'•
Lv at R8
40.7 40.7
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
43.8 Distance (ft) to R9
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
...::::::::::
1• .. c• ...
PPV •• , •I 25 II L. •I 2511 (V"8 Disl.nc.. (fl) l o Al
0.003 58 149
0. 58 M 9
0.o76 86 M 9
NIA NIA M9
NIA NIA M9
NIA NIA M 9
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
PPV .•. •• at R9
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0003
Lv at R9
31.1 31.1
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
34.1 Recentor RIO
Buildinq c ateqor, Criteria PPV (inlse c )
. Hem orcea-concrete, stee or t1m er no piaster u .3
ate oru 1: 1::1uI mas wnere v1 r at1on wou mte1 ere w1tn 1nte11or o oer at1ons ,stan::n tttJ to ppy · •·•• at R10 Lv at R10
206 0.000 30.5
206 0.000 30.5
206 0.000 0.0
206 0.000 0.0
206 0.000 0.0
206 0.000 0.0
206 0.000 0.0
206 0.000 0.0
206 0.000 0.0
206 0.000 0.0
0.0003 33.5
i
B uildin111 cat•uor C rit .. ia PPV inl s• B uildin111 cat•1110 1 C rit .. ia PPV inl s• B uildin 111 c at•111 0 1 C rit .. ia PPV inl s• Buildin 111 cat•111 0 1 C rit .. ia PPV inl s•c
1. neon orte •tontrete. stee or t1m er no i,,~ster eon orte<J•tontrete. stee or tom er no i,,~ster eon orte<J•tontrete. stee or tom er no i,,~ster eon orte<J•tontrete. stee or tom er no i,,~ster Dis taM• (ft ) to R 4 PP V., .: , at R4
125
125
125 0.007
125 0.000
12!5 0000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
12!5 0 000
125 0.000
0.007
l v atR 4
6!5.0
0.0 00
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 6!5.0
Recen t or R8
163
163
163 0.00!5
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
0.005
Dis tanc• (ft) t o R6 PPV .•. :. at R6
'" 0.0
0 0
0.0 0.0
0.0 00
00 Rec entor R9
205
205
205 0.00:3
20!5 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
0.003
Buildinq cateqor1 Criteria PPV (inlse Buildinq cateqor1 Criteria PPV (inlse . Hein orcea-co ncrete, stee or tIm er no piast er u.o Hem o rcea-co ncrete, stee o r t1moer no piaster ate oru 111: nstItutIona 1 Ian uses wit , 011marm aa time use ate □ o r 111: nstitutIona ana uses wit , orImarm □ a time use Distance (ft) to R8
94 94
94 94
94 94
94 94
94 94
P1 o j..c 1Numb O'I
Dau I
P••l•"N•m•
PPV .•. ;. at R8
0.000
0.000
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.011
Rtcommended Val!Hsol E:lpOl'lfnt"n"faPf' Vcalcs
~;:t::..-
Lv at R8 Distan ce (ft) to R9
40.7 197
40.7 197
68.7 197
0.0 197
0.0 197
0.0 197
0.0 197
0.0 197
0.0 197
0.0 197
68.8 t
,.,::::::::::::
1••"C'"'
PPY .. , ac Z5fl L. •IHfl(Vd B Dista nc•(ll)lo Rl
0.003 58 149
' 0.076 86 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
NIA NIA 149
PPV ••••• at R9
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
0.004
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
Lv at R9
31.1 31.1
59.1 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
59.1 u.
lvatR6
"·' 0.0
0 0
0.0 0.0
0.0 00
0.0 Ois tanc• (ft) t o R7 PPV .•. :. at R7
77 noo1
77 u.uul
77 O.OM
17 0.000
17 0.000
17 0.000
17 0.000
17 0.000
17 0.000
71 0.000
lv atR7
71.3 0.0
0 0
0.0 0.0
0.0 00
0.0 58.6 0.015
Rec e ntor R10
Buildinq cateqor, I Criter ia PPV (inl s ec)
. Hem o rcea-concrete, stee or t1moer no pIaster 11
ate o r : t::1U ll □ ln SW
U1stan!: .. tHJ to
206
206
206
206
206
206
206
206
206
206
0.000
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
ere v1 ration wouIa inter ere wit
PPV ••••• at R10
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.003
.... ... ... ... o ... o ... o ... o ...
u.
mte11or o oer at1o ns
Lv at R10
30.5 30.5
58.5 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
58.5 59.6
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 -I.
I
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
Veneklasen Associates
Single Family Residence at La Sierra and Victoria; Riverside, California
CEQA Noise Report
April 25, 2024
Month Day, Year; Page 42 of 44
M
42 Phase 5 Paving
Disl•nc• (fl) lo R4 PP V . ,.,. •I R4
125
125
125 0.007
125 0.1)00
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
Receotor RS
Buildina cateaor•
65.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 . H em orce, -conc rete,, sto?I? o r timb er no olaster R•c•,.,o,R5 R•c•,.,o,R7
Buildin c•t• 0 1• C1il••i• PPV inls• Buildinn c•I• or• Cril •1i• PPV ints• Buildinn c•t•-01• C1it••i• PPV inls• Dislanc• (fl) lo R5 PPV ·••'• •I R5
163
163
163 0.005
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
61.6 0.0
0.0 0.0
00 0.0
0.0 0.0
Disl•nc• (fl) lo R6 PPV ·•·'• •I R6
205
205
205 0.003
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
Receotor R9
Criteria PPY inlse Buildina cateaon Criteria PPY inlse
u. . Hein orce,d-con crete, ste,e, 01 timber no olaste,111 u.
Disl•nc• (fl) lo R7 PPV ·••'• al R7
"' 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
77 □ IIl1
77 n.m1
77 0.0M
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
Receotor R10
Buildina cateaor•
Hem o rce d-conc rete. stee or timber no olasterll
.,.,
71.3 0.0
0.0 0.0
00 0.0
0.0 0.0
Criteria PPY inlsec)
U.>
i_:ateaon.1111: nstItutIona ana uses wItri 011mam1 aa'.ltIme use i_:ateaor Ill: nstItutIona ana uses wItn nmarIy aa'.ltIme, use ._.ateaor :t::;i:UI masw ere vI r .atIon wouIa mte,r ere wItn mte,rIor ooer atIons Distance (ft) to RS PPY .•. :. at RS
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.010
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
94 0.000
0.011
~;~t:1:i¥nsi d•
412312024
Dist•nc• (fl) lo R4 P P V ·•·'• •I R 4
'" 125
125 0.008
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
125 0.000
Recentor R8
Buildinq cateqor,
66.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
00 0.0
0.0 0.0
Hl?m orcea-concrete , stee or tImoer no piaster
Lv at RS Distance (ft) to R9 PPY .•. :. at R9 Lv at R9 u1stan~~- t•tJ to
40.7 197 0.000 31.1 206
40.7 197 0.000 31.1 206
68.7 197 0.003 59.1 206
0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206
0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206
0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206
0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206
0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206
0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206
0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206
68.8 0.004 58.1
PPV .. , M25 11 l.•t25h(VdB Dis1.nce (h)1 a A1 PPV . •. ,. M AI
0.003 58 149
. "' 87 0.006
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
Buildin cat•nor• Cri t• ria PPV iols•
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 63.8
, , orco -cor><:r•to. s••• or lm or rtO Ht•r
•••or ,nit,lUlton •n u,uw rrrn•r
Dis l•nce (fl) l a A2 PPV •••'• •I A2
"' '" o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
,0
,0
,0
,0
,0
63.6 Buildi o cat•nor• Cri t•ria PPV iols•
PPY ••• :. at R10 Lv at R10
0.000 30.5
0.000 30.5
0.003 58.5
0.000 0.0
0.000 0.0
0.000 0.0
0.000 0.0
0.000 0.0
0.000 0.0
0.000 0.0
0.003 58.5
R
-cor><:r•••• SI•• or um •r rtO u,,,
,. n,wor• vr r>'tonwo ,nm•ro w,t ,nunor
Disunce (fl) la A3 P P V •••'• •I A3
, ..
"'
o ...
o ...
o ...
o ...
Disl•nce (fl) lo R5 PPV · •·'• •I R5 Disl•nce (fl) lo R6 PP V ·•· '• •I R6 Disl•nce (fl) lo R7 PP V ·•·'• •I R7 163
163
163 0.005
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
163 0.000
"' 0.0
0.0 0.0
00 0.0
0.0 0.0
Recentor R9
205
205
205 0.1)04
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
205 0.000
5S.6
0.0 0.0
0.0 00
0.0 0.0
0.0 77 1001
77 1_m1
77 0.016
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
77 0.000
Recentor R10
n,
0.0 0.0
0.0 00
0.0 0.0
0.0 i
I
Criteria PPY [inlsei Buildinq cateqor, Criteria PPY (inlse Buildinq cateqor, I Criteria PPY (inlsec U.> 1. H em orcea-conc rete, stee or tImPer no piast er u. . Hein orce -concre te, stee or tImPer no 0Iaster11 u .
L.ateqor 1 111:Inst1tutIonaI Iana use s wit I orima11~ aa time use i_.ateqor 1 111: nstItutIona ana uses wItn rima11~ aa time use i_.ateqor~ 1: 1:1uI mqs w ere vI r atIon wouIa inter ere w,tn mterior oper atIons Distance (ft) to RS PPY ...... at RS Lv at R8 Distance (ft) to R9 PPY ...... at R9 Lv at R9 u1stan!~- (HJ to PPY .... ,. at R10 Lv at R10 94 0.000 40.7 197 0.000 31.1 206 0.000 30.5
94 0.000 40.7 197 0.000 31.1 206 0.000 30.5
94 0.012 69.7 197 0.004 60.1 206 0.004 59.5
94 0.000 0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206 0.000 0.0
94 0.000 0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206 0.000 0.0
94 0.000 0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206 0.000 0.0
94 0.000 0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206 0.000 0.0
94 0.000 0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206 0.000 0.0
94 0.000 0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206 0.000 0.0
94 0.000 0.0 197 0.000 0.0 206 0.000 0.0
0.013 69.8 0.0043 60.1 0.0040 59.5 ~
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies TJW Engineering, Inc.
9841 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
949-878-3509
La Sierra and Victoria
Southeast corner of La Sierra Avenue and Victoria Avenue, City of Riverside 49 single-family detached dwelling units
Warmington Residential
3090 Pullman Street
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
DP-2023-01292
Public Works Department
C11,,1 ,/,Irr,&_ ln n01·<111on
Traffic Analysis Scoping Form
This scopin g form shall be submitted to the City of Riverside Traffic Engineering Division Projec t Identificati on:
Case Number:
Related Cases:
SP No.
EIR No.
GPA No.
CZ No.
Project Name:
Proiect Add ress:
Project Open ing
Year:
Project
Description:
Consultant: Developer:
Name:
Address:
Telephone:
Fax/Email:
Scoping & Study Fees:
Fees to be made payable to "City of Riverside" and delivered to Land Development.
City Hall 3rd Floor, 3900 Main Street, Riverside, CA 92522 1) Scoping Agreement Fee (For all projects not screened from analysis): $271.00 2) TIA Review (For projects with both LOS & VMT analysis of any sca le, or standa lone LOS analyses with over 100 vehicle trips per hour): $2671.02 3) TIA Review (For standalone VMT analysis, or standa lone LOS ana lyses with under 100 vehicle trips per hour): $1288.20
36 3900 Main Street, Riverside, CA 92522 I Phone: (951) 826-53661 RiversideCA.gov PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Public Works Department
Ci1J <>/,In,&.. lnno1m1on
Trip Generation Information:
Trip Generation Data Source: ____ _
Current General Plan Land Use: Proposed General Plan Land Use:
Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning:
Existing Trip Generation
In
AM Trips
PM Trips
Trip Internalization:
Pass-By Allowance:
Out
D Yes
D Yes
Total
0 No
0 No
Potential Screening Checks
Proposed Trip Generation
In Out
{ __ % Trip Discount)
, __ % Trip Discount)
Total
Is your project screened from specific analyses in accordance with City Guidelines? Is the project screened from LOS assessment? D Yes
37 3900 Main Street, Riverside, CA 92522 I Phone: (951) 826-53661 RiversideCA.gov ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021)
LDR - Low Density Residential (4.1 du/ac)
9 25 34
29 17 46
X
X
X
R-1-1/2 Acre - Single Family Residential
LDR - Low Density Residential (4.1 du/ac)
R-1-1/2 Acre - Single Family Residential
The proposed pr oject does not require a zone change or General Plan amendment. LDR permits up to 4.1 dwelling units per acre. The zoning is R-1-1/2 Acre. The project has a density of 4.95 units
per acre which is in line with the General Plan when the state density bonus law (SDBL) is applied.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Based on the proposed project's
land use, the project is expected to generate 34 AM and 46 PM Peak Hour trips. Per the City of Riverside Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (July 2020), any project generating less than 100 peak hour trips is not expected to affec the LOS significanlty and therefore do not require a TIA that includes a LOS analysis.
As the proposed project will generate less than 100 peak hour trips a LOS analysis is
not needed. The project does not require a zone change or General Plan Amendment.
Based on the City of
Riverside Traffic Impact Study Guidelines (July 2020) guidelines the proposed project does not screen for VMT assessment as, per the WRCOG VMT Tool, it is not in a transit priority area (TPA) or low VMT traffic analysis zone (TAZ), and it does not match any of the land use types that screen.
N/A N/A N/A N/A
X
Public Works Department
CiCJ of, Ire_,&_ lnn 01·a11un
LOS screening justification {see Page 6 of the guidelines): ____ ____ _ Is the project screened from VMT assessment? O Yes □ No VMT screen ing justification (see Pages 23-25 of the guidel ines): ______ _ Level of Service Scop ing
• Proposed Trip Distribution {Attach Graphic for Detailed Distribution):
North South East West
% % % %
• Attach list of Approved and Pending Projects that need to be considered (provided by the lead agency and adjacent agencies)
• Attach list of study intersections/roadway segments
• Attach legible site plan
• Note other specif ic items to be addressed:
o Site acce ss
o On-site circulation
o Parking
o Consistency with Plans supporting Bikes/Peds/Transit
o Other ______ __ _
• Date of Traffic Cou nts _ ______ _
• Attach proposed analysis scenarios {years plus proposed forecasting approach) • Attach proposed phasing approach {if the project is phased) 3900 Main Street. Riverside, CA 92522 I Phone: (951) 826-53661 RiversideCA .gov PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Public Works Department
C11y ,j, Ir/.\&. /11nrwa1 ion
VMT Scoping
For projects that are not screened, identify the following:
• Travel Demand Forecasting Model ________ _
• Attach WRCOG Screening VMT Assessment output or describe why it is not appropriate for use
• Attach proposed Model Land Use Inputs and Assumed Conversion Factors (attach)
Specific Issues to be addressed in the Study (in addition to the standard analysis described in the Guidelines) (To be filled out by the Public Works Traffic Engineering Division) 39 3900 Main Street Riverside, CA 92522 I Phone: (951) 826-53661 RiversideCA.gov RIVCOM
The site's general land-use designation is low-density residential, which permits up to 4.1 dwelling units per acre. The zoning designation for the site is R-1-1/2 Acre. Our project is designed to have a density of 4.95 units per acre, which is in line with the general plan when we apply the state density bonus law (SDBL).
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Table
: Trip Generation
Proposed Land Use1 ITE
Code Qty Unit2
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Volume Rate In:Out
Split
Volume Rate In:Out
Split
Volume
In Out Total In Out Total
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 49.0 DU 9.43 462 0.7 26:74 9 25 34 0.94 63:37 29 17 46 1: Trip generation and pass-by rates from ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). 2: DU = Dwelling Units.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Proposed Project Site TAZ Location
WRCOG VMT Tool (arcgis.com)
Ci (n) ~ htt ps:/ / fehrandpee rs.maps.a rcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/ind ex.htm l?id;::;4e34ad3196464c8086c881 189237b 25c G Google ; ; My outlook ribbon',.. □ City Websites r:J Maps l'.j Projects ~ References O HR Show search results for la Sierra Ave ..
'V>-// ~ )
Complete #1-4, Then Click 'Run" x
lr'lput
~ OutpuLParcels
The result is d rawn o n the map.
Selected Project Area
The result is drawn on the map.
Low VMT Generating TAZs
The result is d r,awn o n t he map.
~
PIIM+tiSMNJ.l+W
Output
. .. X
... X
... X
..
Completely No (Fail}
within a TPA?
With n a low No (Fail)
VMT generat;ng
TAZ?
Community
Reg·ons have
different
thresholds
(1=Yes, 0=No}
Screening results ere
based on location of parcel
centro•ds. If res ults are
desired considering the full
parcel, please refer to the
associated map layers to
visually review parcel and
TAZ boundary relationship
[JJ @J
LayerUst ;:e x
Layers
► la O utput_Perce!s
► m Selected Project Area
► m Low VMT Gen erating TAZs
► m TAZ Boundaries (Zoom in to view)
► m Parcels (Zoom in to view)
► m Transit Priority Area
► □ WRCOG Cities
► 0 W RCOG Boundary
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies S S
S
S S
S
SS
S
S
S
S
SSSS
40 W/4 W/4 •
20 11 111
I : 111
I : 111
I : 111
I : 111
I: Ill S
ii Ill 11
1,1---ttr
I : 111
libs·
Ill
WA
80 120
M
'
SCALE, I" = 40'
,.
GS [ 11
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I II
I I
I I
,. I I
GS I I
I I
I II
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I II
s. I I
GS I I
I II
I I
I I
I
I I
I
I
"' x w
"' x w
"'
X w
"' x w
5'
II
~ 11 1 I
GS 11 1 I
II I I
II I I
,J
160
41.4'
TRACT 6761
NOT A PART
---- ~
! STREET "C." r - -- ll'RIVA,e) --
I
p I
~;
I I
I I I
I
! I I
l'l'
15.0' ,;,----
40 7
CiO.O' [\-J/--;:2;::;0'' ,-I
Q
iii
l'l'
18'
• 20'
CfO.O'
7 :34
14.T
7 15.0'
2s 1
CfO.O'
2b
2e I
- ~ Q ...
•iii
I
1--"-<l
ill
18'
18 I -[ Q
- it
_ q
I !;;"
- - -r--L '----=;::== =2,:--\;/P.ry 15.4' ·
' _____ ,,,
51D' 215'
2 PROP. RET. Y'W.L
1.5' MAX EXPOSED
i-- L 5.1'
N
=12. 28.5'
11 - r-r. ..Q
:3 ,t::J- 4 .,.
PROP. RET. 1-<ALL
1.5' MAX EXPOSED
I I I
43.0' 41.0'
43.O'
43.0'
PROP.RET.1-<ALL
4' MAX EXPOSED
41.0'
41D'
TRACT 9991
NOT A PART
31.5'
~
43.0'
___ .,,
8 I '
==5.8'
L=l.5'
11 41.0'
23'
18'
IN THE C.IT'r' OF RIVERSIDE, C.OUNT'r' OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SITE PLAN
TENTATIVE TRAGT NO. 38Cf21
QriNEB
LA SIERRA VICTORIA DEVELOPMENT LLG
1'1215 1-<ILD MUSTANG GOURT
APPLE VALLEY, GA '12301
APPLICANT
l-<ARMIN6TON RESIDENTIAL
3O'lO PULLMAN ST
GOSTA MESA, GA '12626
GONTAGT, MATTHEW ESQUIVEL
EMAIL, MESGIUIVEL@l-<ARMIN6TON6ROUP .GOM
-~- - - UTILIT'r' PURVEYORS
- !-<ATER, GITY OF RIVERSIDE
GITY OF RIVERSIDE
adkan
ENGINEERS
6820 AIRPORT DRIVE
RIVERSIDE, GA. '12504
'151-f>llll-0241
ZONIN5/LAND USE
EXISTIN6 ZONIN6, R-l-l/ 2 AGRE
PROPOSED ZONIN6, R-1-1/2 AGRE
EXISTIN6 LAND USE, LDR
PROPOSED LAND USE, LDR
SEl-<ER, SOGAL 6AS COMPANY
- ~ [~TRIGITY, GITY OF RIVERSIDE
- TELEPHONE, SBC, - -----1/'---r- EX_._
8 _" _1-<TR--=-----_- -=-- M- _X-3 ------- -- 1r-X: ------- M ·xa _ SE_l-<E_ R_P_OG ~~L, ~x~~RU~r~ M "X3 -
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER
136-220-016
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT 6 IN BLOGK 12 OF THE RESUBDIVISION
OF LANDS OF J. F. MOUL TON AND H. B.
PRAED AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN
BOOK I PA6ES ¥1 AND 50 OF MAPS, IN
THE OFFIGE OF THE GOUNTY RECORDER
24 20'
llf==t-,--l qs.o•
~ 7 2:3
20'
PROP.
INFILTRATION
BASIN
81.T
I Cl
•x I •
I ,a
EX. AG BERM
EX.R/W
VINYL
FENGE
PROP
P/L
SITE SUMMARY
6ROSS PROJECT SIZE, 10.8 AGRES
NET PROJECT SIZE, 1.ll5 AGRES
RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ¥1
OPEN SPAGE LOTS, 2
PROJECT DENSITY, 6.2 DU/AG
INFILTRATION BASIN, 0.08 AGRES
LOT SETBACKS,
FRONT,
HOUSE, 10 FT MIN
6ARA6E FAGE, 18 FT MIN
SIDE, 4 FT
REAR 15 FT
LOT DEPTH, 'lO FT MIN
LOT HIDTH, 41 FT MIN.
LOT AREA, 3f>'lO SGl. FT MIN ' '
PARALLEL PARKING ON STREET (8X2 4 ), 12
FOOTPRINT MA TRIX,
PLAN I, l'l
PLAN 2, 11
PLAN 3, 13
PROP
P/L
~BLD6 SETBACK
4'
FAD NO.
ir,
4'
VINYL
FENGE
OF THE GOIJNTY OF RIVERSIDE.
BASIS OF 6EARIN5
THE CENTERLINE OF VICTORIA AVENUE
BEIN6 NORTH 55'35'00" EAST PER TRAGT
NO. 21'l1'l, FILED IN BOOK 115 MAPS, AT
PA6ES 46 AND 41, RECORDS OF THE
RIVERSIDE GOUNTY, !-<AS HELD AS
BASIS OF BEARIN6 FOR THIS MAP.
_J
.---,, VINYL
FENGE I
PROP P/L
PROP P/L
'---- PROP SM
PROP. Rl6HT
TURN ONLY f
STOP Sl6N
THOMAS BROS. MAP PG 144 GRID 6-3
,_
~(j,
.,~
' ~~ Q
VIC.INllY MAP
=: N.T.S.
SEG. 24 T.:35. Rbl'l
LEGEND
_____ BOUNDARY
_____ Rl6HT OF 1-<AY
_____ CENTERLINE
_____ PROPERTY LINE
___ - - - EASEMENT
===== PROP. GIJRB 4 6l/TTER
= = = = = = EX. GURB 4 6UTTER
_____ PROP. SIDEl-<ALK
___ - - - EX. SIDEY'W.K
_____ IJNDER6ROUND STORA6E
__ • __ PROP. DOMESTIC !-<ATER
--a•-- EX. DOMESTIC !-<ATER
__ • __ PROP. REGYGLED !-<ATER
__ , -- PROP. SEl-<ER
--a,-- EX. s&,l,ER
===== PROP. STORM DRAIN
---
I
EX. STORM DRAIN
--- EX. MAJOR CONTOUR
___ EX. MINOR CONTOUR
---- 6' BLOGK Y'W.L
~-6' STEEL lUBULAR FENGE
----c- 4' STEEL lUBULAR FENGE
__ 6' VINYL FENGE
=~=RETAINING !-<ALL
EX.
PROP.
SM
R/W
RfR
P/L
G4G
o.s.
EVA
Sl-<R
!-<TR
SD
GB
TBR
TYP.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
SIDE:1-<ALK
Rl6HT OF 1-<AY
REPLACE AND
REPAIR
PROPERTY LINE
G1JRB 4 6UTTER
OPENSPAGE
EMER6ENGY
VEHICLE AGGESS
SEl-<ER
!-<ATER
STORM DRAIN
GATGH BASIN
TO BE REMOVED
TYPICAL
Q
J;; T'r'PIC.AL LOT DETAIL CHANNELIZING ISLAND DETAIL
N.T.S. SC.ALE: 111 -20 1
83.5'
535'
EX.
- 41.0' /.0'
~
PROP. RET. Y'W.L
2' MAX EXPOSED
I
I
I R/W~==~==~F===IOO'L=~~=f~~~:~ 41' R/W DEDICATED 13'
60' EX. IMP TO 10' TRAIL PER
REMIAN LANDSCAPE
EX.
R/W
PROP.
R/W
_I L
Q
ll' 20
Ii
<n \ 41.O' 53.6' ';' I f--__:45~.o~• :;--2-+-,\ c.,4oc:3.0'=:';;,;:;;-1-7-"'-=----1143;---GTii/fR1" n 55.3' 43.0' 84.3' L=I.I I
41.4'
dl
43.0'
~--- ,-AL'\1-l.EY "A"
7i-RJVA,e/
PROP. RET. 1-<ALL
6' MAX EXPOSED
41.0'
10 43.0' 41.0'
N
43.0'
11 43.0'
EX. GONGRETE TO
BE REMOVED
14 82.2'
, _ -41.8' - a
--11..i
'
41 12
41.0'
Ii
I
I I
'
1:3
62.8'
PROP.
R/W
I
HOA I
23' 1.5' 16' 13.5' 2'l'
2%
VIC.TOR.IA AVENUE
EX. '><
R/W 110'
y~--------.:;;:;,----=E~===~5~5~•====~ HOA
t"f--=====-~5~5''__-===-==;:::;;.:;:;:;;:-----=----==:---1 MAINT. 1-- EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS SLOPE
ll'
EX.
RM
11 6.51 32.5'
30' R/W DEDICATED
12' Ill'
MEDIA I'
LA SIE8iM_ AVENUE
EX. R/1-<
<t_
60'
43' 10'
30' EX. IMP
2'
EX.
R/W
J
I
24' 6' I
I
I I
2% 2!. 2% 2%
r
MAINT.
SLOPE
PAD ,<_'
-
V ~ ," ~~ ~ ;;;:-\~ ':j;A~ ~ »-
/ " 7' , / .tS.:'.< - , 'X -·~:::;· v " \ " ' , ~ I )
-7M V~ %- ~ l✓v ~~~~ ~
,~~~~~~<"~~<"~~~~®'~~~ ''<,'0~~~~'5Y,>~)>)7)>)7>0~/«<0(0(0,1/, MILLS~ PLAc.E
N.T.S.
PROP. 6'
G~ !-<ALL
. If>'
Pl
5'
If>'
N.T.S.
18'
10'
k20•.J
FIRE DEPARTMENT TUl<NIN5 RADIUS
GITY OF RIVERSIDE FIRE DEPARTMENT
TURNIN6 RAIDUS PER RIVERSIDE MUNICIPAL
GODE CHAPTER lf>.32 AND 2022 CALIFORNIA
FIRE GODE SECTION 503.
P/L
18' 5'
P/L
Ill' 5'
aakan
ENGINEERS
c· ·1 Engineering. Surveying. Planning 1
~~79 Airport Drive, Rive_r(s9i5de1 )' ~~8 ~%~~i Tel:(951) 688-0241- Fax.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
9841 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200 | Irvine, California 92618 | t: (949) 878-3509 www.tjwengineering.com
July 16, 2024
Matthew Esquivel
WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL
3090 Pullman Street
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
SUBJECT: La Sierra and Victoria Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
Matthew Esquivel,
TJW Engineering, Inc. ( TJW) is pleased to submit this Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis for the proposed project located at the corner of La Sierra and Victoria in the City of Riverside. The purpose of this memorandum is to satisfy the requirements for disclosure of potential impacts and mitigation measures per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This analysis has been conducted using guidance from the City of Riverside Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment (July 2020).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is located at the corner of La Sierra and Victoria in the City of Riverside. The proposed project includes 49 townhome dwelling units with access from La Sierra Avenue. The project site plan is attached for reference.
BACKGROUND
Senate Bill 743 (SB-743), which was codified in Public Resources Code section 21099, was signed by the Governor in 2013 and directed the Governor’s OPR to identify alternative metrics for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA. Based on this, delay-based analysis (level of service) has been replaced by VMT. Pursuant to Section 21099, the criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts must “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” Recently adopted changes to the CEQA Guidelines in response to Section 21099 include a new section (15064.3) that specifies that VMT is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. A separate Technical Advisory issued by OPR provides additional technical details on calculating VMT and assessing transportation impacts for various types of projects.
TJW ENGINEERING, INC.
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING &
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
CONSULTANTS
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Matthew Esquivel
La Sierra and Victoria VMT Analysis
July 16, 2024
TJW Engineering, Inc.
WRI24002 La Sierra and Victoria VMT Analysis 07162024
THRESHOLDS
The City guidelines outline two thresholds for determination of a significant impact. For residential projects, the following thresholds of significance are identified:
1. The baseline or cumulative project-generated VMT per capita exceeds 15% below the current jurisdictional baseline VMT per capita.
2. For projects inconsistent with the General Plan, the baseline or cumulative link-level boundary VMT per capita (City) increase under the plus project condition compared to the no project condition.
As the project is consistent with the General Plan, a link-level boundary VMT analysis is not applicable to this project. However, the project-generated VMT per capita was conducted following the City guidelines.
METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS
A VMT analysis was prepared using the City’s guidelines for VMT analysis. The analysis was prepared using the Riverside County Travel Demand Model (RIVCOM).
The project is located within Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 1956. The potential population generated by the project was calculated using a factor of 3.34 persons per household as noted in the County of Riverside General Plan, Appendix E – Socioeconomic Build-Out Assumptions and Methodology (2017). 1 Based on this data, the proposed residential project would have a population of 164 people (49 dwelling units x
3.34 persons per household). The existing base socioeconomic data moved from the project TAZ and added to adjacent TAZ’s. The project TAZ was then populated with the project population.
VMT data for years between 2018 and 2045 can be extrapolated using linear interpolation between the 2018 and 2045 model outputs. The model was completed for base year 2018 and plan year 2045 without and with project conditions (total four model runs). Based on the residential land use and as per City guidelines, project VMT/resident was compared to the County’s VMT/capita threshold for project opening year 2028.
1 Lake Mathews/Woodcrest Plan Area was utilized due to the project’s close proximity and similar characteristics to the Plan Area.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Matthew Esquivel
La Sierra and Victoria VMT Analysis
July 16, 2024
TJW Engineering, Inc.
WRI24002 La Sierra and Victoria VMT Analysis 07162024
Table 1: VMT Analysis of Project Impact
2018 2045 2028
Project VMT 2,494 2,513 2,498
Project Population 164 164 164
Project VMT/Resident 15.2 15.4 15.3
City of Riverside VMT 3,951,373 5,021,447 4,189,167
City Population 323,856 404,570 341,792
City VMT/Resident 12.2 12.4 12.3
City 15% Threshold 10.4 10.6 10.4
VMT Threshold Project
VMT/Resident
% Above/Below
Threshold VMT Impact?
10.4 15.3 46.15% Yes
MITIGATION MEASURES
The City of Riverside outlines for residential projects an impact would occur for residential projects if the VMT per resident exceeds 15% below the citywide VMT per resident. In this case, the project exceeds the threshold by 4.9 VMT per resident (approximately 47% over the City threshold).
To mitigate the project VMT impacts and per the City guidelines, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equality (December 2021) was considered. The CAPCOA manual includes various measures to reduce VMT. Among the various measures identified, three (3) measures were deemed applicable to the proposed project.
Measure T-1: Increase Residential Density
This measure accounts for the VMT reduction achieved by a project that is designed with a higher density of dwelling units. The relevant pages from the CAPCOA manual are attached.
The VMT reduction resulting from a project that is designed with a higher density of dwelling units is calculated using the following equation: A=((B-C)/C)*D, where A is the percent reduction in VMT, B is the residential density of the project development, C is the residential density of a typical development, and D is the elasticity of VMT with respect to residential density (constant of -0.22). The project proposes a density of 4.94 dwelling units per acre and the general plan land use designation of 1-½ acre Single Dwelling is up to 2 dwelling units per acre. The resulting reduction in VMT is determined to exceed the CAPCOA greenhouse gas emissions maximum potential of 30%. Therefore, the T-1 mitigation is shown to result in a 30% VMT reduction, shown in Table 2.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Matthew Esquivel
La Sierra and Victoria VMT Analysis
July 16, 2024
TJW Engineering, Inc.
WRI24002 La Sierra and Victoria VMT Analysis 07162024
Measure T-3: Provide Transit-Oriented Development
This measure accounts for VMT reduction in the study area relative to the same project sited in a non- transit oriented (TOD) development location. To qualify as a TOD, the proposed project must be a residential project near a high frequency transit station. The project falls within these parameters, as the project provides a 10-minute pedestrian friendly pathway to a high frequency transit station. The high frequency transit station is the nearby Metrolink station that provides access to Los Angeles and Orange County, two major employment centers.
The VMT reduction resulting from a project that qualifies as a TOD is calculated using the following equation: A=(B*C)/(-D), where A is the percent reduction in VMT, B and D are respectively the transit and vehicle mode share in the surrounding city as calculated by the National Household Travel Survey of the Federal Highway Administration (2017), and C is the ratio of transit mode share for TOD area with measure compared to existing transit mode share in the surrounding city (constant is 4.9). The resulting VMT reduction is determined to be 6.93%, shown in Table 2.
Measure T-4: Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing This measure accounts for VMT reduction achieved with projects that provide affordable housing units.
The relevant pages from the CAPCOA manual are attached.
The VMT reduction resulting from a project that is designed with affordable housing units is calculated using the following equation: A=B*C, where A is the percent reduction in VMT, B is the percent of affordable housing units, and C is the percent reduction in VMT for qualified units compared to market rate units (constant of -28.6%). The project proposes 3 out of 49 units at affordable and below market rate. The resulting reduction in VMT is determined to be 1.75%, shown in Table 2.
Measure T-15: Limited Residential Parking Supply
This measure addresses VMT reduction by limiting the amount of available parking, thus disincentivizing driving as a mode of transportation.
The VMT reduction resulting from a project that limits the amount of available parking spaces is calculated using the following equation: A=(-(B-C)/B)D*E*F, where A is the percent reduction in VMT, B is the residential parking demand (constant of 2.6 spaces/unit for single family homes, multiplied by the number of units proposed), C is the proposed number of parking spaces on the site (2 garage spaces per unit, plus 12 spaces along the project’s private streets) 2, D is the percentage of project VMT generated by residents (100% for the proposed residential projects), E is the percent of household VMT that is commute based (constant of 37%), and F is the percent reduction in commute mode share by driving among households in areas with scarce parking (also constant of 37%). The resulting reduction in VMT is determined to be 1.93%, shown in Table 2.
2 Due to subpar street widths, the project will not be providing on-street parking throughout the community as is typical with residential developments. Therefore, the project would provide limited residential parking.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Matthew Esquivel
La Sierra and Victoria VMT Analysis
July 16, 2024
TJW Engineering, Inc.
WRI24002 La Sierra and Victoria VMT Analysis 07162024
Measure T-18: Provide Pedestrian Network Improvement
This measure is described as increasing the sidewalk coverage to improve pedestrian access. The relevant pages from the CAPCOA manual are attached.
The VMT reduction resulting from construction of additional sidewalks is calculated using the following equation: A = ((C/B)-1) x D, where A is the percent reduction in VMT, B is the existing sidewalk length in the study area, C is the sidewalk length in the study area with measure, and D is the elasticity of household VMT with respect to the ratio of sidewalks-to-streets (constant of-.0.05). The study area used for this calculation is within the boundaries of TAZ 1956. There are approximately 1,288 linear feet of existing sidewalk along La Sierra Avenue between Cleveland Avenue and Victoria Avenue and the project would construct 2,295 linear feet within the project site. Exhibit 1 shows the location of these sidewalks.
The resulting reduction in VMT comes out to be 8.9%, however, based on the CAPCOA manual, there’s a maximum of a 6.4% reduction. Therefore, the project would result in a decrease in VMT of 6.40%, shown in Table 2.
Table 2: VMT Analysis with Mitigation
Project % Above City Threshold 46.15%
CAPCOA VMT Reductions
T-1 – Increase Residential Density -30.00%
T-3 – Provide Transit-Oriented Development -6.93%
T-4 – Integrate Affordable Housing -1.75%
T-15 – Limited Residential Parking Supply -1.93%
T-18 – Pedestrian Network Improvement -6.40%
Sub-Total -47.01%
Project % Above/Below Threshold -0.85%
POTENTIAL VMT REDUCING FEATURES
Additional improvements not covered in the CAPCOA Manual will encourage residents to utilize alternative means of transportation.
Currently, along the project’s northern border, Victoria Boulevard provides eastbound access to passenger vehicles and trucks only. A current trail on this side of the street and east of the project ends just before the project site around Millsweet Place. The project proposes that the trail end be extended to the intersection of La Sierra Avenue and Victoria Boulevard. As the trail is shared by pedestrians and bicycles, this extension will expand the multi-modal network, thus encouraging residents to walk and/or bicycle instead of drive.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies