kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Alternative 1: Crushing
Alternative 1 would occur over the Palm Avenue Elementary School summer break from June to August and would require approvals from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), relevant local agencies, and the affected utility providers. Site preparation and grading activities would be completed before the summer break begins.
Breakers, front-end loaders, and crushers would be required to crush the concrete on-site. The breaker would move around the Project site and break up the concrete into smaller pieces. The loader would transport the broken concrete into the crusher. If necessary, the crusher (crushing device and conveyor belt) would be located on level ground, away from the debris pile. The crushing device would process the concrete, and the conveyor belt would discharge the processed concrete into a pile. The crusher would be moved to a different location when the processed concrete pile is too high for the conveyor belt to empty. The crusher would either be a Quinn Cat Metso Lokotrack (LT106) or a Lokotrack Urban Series (LT96). The Urban version of the LT96 is designed for quieter operation, with up to 60 percent noise reduction compared to conventional crushers. The Urban LT96 uses noise covers that provide noise suppression across several points, including the main conveyor beneath the crushing mechanism. The Urban LT96 also includes a dust suppression system that includes high-pressure water sprays inside the crusher chamber and at the end of the conveyor to prevent dust from spreading when aggregates are unloaded. For purposes of this analysis, it is conservatively assumed that an LT106 would be used and would process 560 tons of concrete per hour. Based on the average compaction factor of 80 percent, it is anticipated that the crusher would produce approximately 33,600 CY of processed concrete.
A bobcat breaker and street sweeper would be used on-site. The bobcat breaker would break the concrete to fit more easily into the loaders. The street sweeper would remove debris from Palm Avenue directly adjacent to the Project site.
Front-end loaders and haul trucks would be required to transport the processed concrete off-site. The loaders would move the processed concrete into the trucks at the same time as the crushing operations.
It is assumed that one loader would load a truck in 15 minutes. The trucks would be staged on-site away from the debris pile, off-site along the north end of Palm Avenue, or off-site on the vacant lot at the end of Palm Avenue. The trucks would either be bobtail dump trucks (Alternative 1.1) or single-end dump trucks (Alternative 1.2).
Alternative 1.1: Bobtail Dump Trucks. A bobtail dump truck can haul approximately 4.5 CY of concrete. It is anticipated that 20 bobtail dump trucks with a maximum of 10 daily loads per truck would haul 900 CY of processed concrete daily and would remove the debris pile in 38 working days. Using bobtail dump trucks would require seven additional loaders on-site and 400 daily trips (200 loaded trucks and 200 unloaded trucks) along Palm Avenue.
Packet Page. 850
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Alternative 1.2: Single-End Dump Trucks. A single-end dump truck can haul 12 CY of concrete. It is anticipated that nine single-end dump trucks with a maximum of nine daily loads per truck would haul 972 CY of processed concrete daily and would remove the debris pile in 35 working days. Using single-end dump trucks would require three additional loaders on-site and 162 daily haul truck trips (81 loaded an 81 unloaded) along Palm Avenue. However, the single-end dump trucks would be larger and more difficult to maneuver on-site than the bobtail dump trucks.
Alternative 2: Non-Crushing
Alternative 2 would either occur over one summer break (Alternative 2.1: One Summer) or two summer breaks (Alternative 2.2: Two Summers). Site preparation and grading activities would be completed before the first summer break begins in either alternative.
A bobcat breaker, street sweeper, front-end loaders, and haul trucks would be used to complete the removal operation. The bobcat breaker would break the concrete to fit more easily into the loaders. The street sweeper would remove debris from Palm Avenue directly adjacent to the Project site. The loaders would transport the concrete to the trucks. It is assumed that one loader would load a truck in 15 minutes.
The trucks would be staged on-site away from the debris pile, off-site along Palm Avenue, or off-site on the vacant lot at the north end of Palm Avenue. The trucks would either be bobtail dump trucks (Alternative 2.1.1 and Alternative 2.2.1) or single-end dump trucks (Alternative 2.1.2 and Alternative
2.2.2). As stated above under Alternative 1, a bobtail dump truck would haul 4.5 CY of concrete, and a single-end dump truck would haul 12 CY of concrete. However, single-end dump trucks would be larger and more difficult to maneuver on-site than bobtail dump trucks. The concrete would be unloaded at the Rialto Recycle Yard and processed according to the existing regulations and permits.
Alternative 2.1: One Summer
The debris would be completely removed during one summer break.
Alternative 2.1.1: Bobtail Dump Trucks. It is anticipated that 20 bobtail dump trucks with a maximum of 13 daily loads per truck would haul 1,170 CY of concrete daily and would remove the concrete debris pile in 36 working days. Using bobtail dump trucks would require nine loaders on-site and 520 daily haul truck trips (260 loaded and 260 unloaded) along Palm Avenue.
Alternative 2.1.2: Single-End Dump Trucks. It is anticipated that ten single-end dump trucks with a maximum of ten daily loads per truck would haul 1,200 CY of concrete daily and would remove the concrete debris pile in 36 working days. Using single-end dump trucks would require four loaders on-site and 200 daily haul truck trips (100 loaded and 100 unloaded) along Palm Avenue.
Packet Page. 851
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Alternative 2.2: Two Summers
The debris that would remain on-site between the first and second summer would be covered to reduce dust emissions. The debris should be covered with a durable heavy-duty plastic sheeting or geotextile fabric and the following actions should be taken to ensure that the debris covers remain effective1:
• Regula
r Inspections: Regularly inspect the covering for damage or wear and tear and make repairs as needed, particularly after periods of heavy rain or high winds. • Ensure Secure Coverage : Properly secure the coverings to prevent them from blowing away or becoming damaged, especially during windy conditions.
• Adjust Covering: Adjust the covering as necessary to accommodate any changes in the debris pile or weather conditions.
Alternative 2.2.1: Bobtail Dump Trucks. It is anticipated that 12 bobtail dump trucks with a maximum of 11 daily loads per truck would haul 594 CY of concrete daily and would remove the concrete debris pile in 71 working days. Using bobtail dump trucks would require five loaders on-site and 264 daily haul truck trips (132 loaded and 132 unloaded) along Palm Avenue.
Alternative 2.2.2: Single-End Dump Trucks. It is anticipated that seven single-end dump trucks with a maximum of seven daily loads per truck would haul 588 CY of concrete daily and would remove the concrete debris pile in 72 working days. Using single-end dump trucks would require two loaders on-site and 98 daily haul truck trips (49 loaded and 49 unloaded) along Palm Avenue.
Table 1: Truck Hauling Summary compares the truck trips and hauling quantities for each alternative and hauling option.
Table 1: Truck Hauling Summary
Alterna-ve 1: Crushing
Alterna-ve 2: Non-Crushing
Alterna-ve 2.1
One Summer Op-on
Alterna-ve 2.2
Two Summers Op-on
Bobtail Single-End Bobtail Single-End Bobtail Single-End Trucks 20 9 20 10 12 7
Loads/Truck/Day 10 9 13 10 11 7
Trucks/Day 200 81 260 100 132 49
Truck Trips/Day 400 162 520 200 264 98
Capacity (CY/Truck) 4.5 12 4.5 12 4.5 12
CY Removed/Day 900 972 1,170 1,200 594 588
Approximate Days 38 35 36 35 71 72
CY = cubic yards
1 It is noted that the debris was previously covered with tarps that ultimately became ineffective. The coverings appeared to have been left in place for several years, allowed to deteriorate, and were not properly maintained. Debris coverings would be required for Alternative 2.2 but must be properly installed and maintained to remain effective.
Packet Page. 852
Not to scaleOxbow Debris Removal Project
Figure 1: Regional Map
LEGEND
Disturbance Area
Source:Google Earth, 2025
Lake Arrowhead Lake Arrowhead
San BernardinoSan Bernardino
Rialto AirportRialto Airport
San Bernardino San Bernardino
National Forest National Forest
Packet Page. 853
Not to scaleOxbow Debris Removal Project
Figure 2: Local Vicinity Map
Source: Google Earth, 2025
LEGEND
Disturbance Area
Palm AvenuePalm Avenue
N Huntington DriveN Huntington Drive
N Melvin AvenueN Melvin Avenue
Escena Street NEscena Street NRidgeline AvenueRidgeline Avenue Packet Page. 854
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Noise Background
Sound is technically described in terms of amplitude (loudness) and frequency (pitch). The standard unit of sou
nd amplitude measurement is the decibel (dB). The decibel scale is a logarithmic scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that make up any sound. The pitch of the sound is related to the frequency of the pressure vibration. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to a given sound level at all frequencies, a special frequency-dependent rating scale has been devised to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) provides this compensation by discriminating against frequencies in a manner approximating the human ear's sensitivity.
Noise, on the other hand, is typically defined as unwanted sound. A typical noise environment consists of a base of steady ambient noise that is the sum of various distant and indistinguishable noise sources.
Superimposed on this background noise is the sound from individual local sources. These can vary from an occasional aircraft or train passing by to virtually continuous noise from traffic on a major highway.
Several rating scales have been developed to analyze the adverse effects of community noise on people.
Since environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise on people is largely dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the noise as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. For example, the equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) is the average acoustic energy conte
nt of noise for a stated period of time; thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are th
e same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. The Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn) is a 24-hour average Leq with a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to acc
ount for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a 24- hour average Leq with a 10 dBA weighting added to noise from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 am. and an additional 5 dBA w
eighting from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime.
Regulatory Setting
State of California Noise Standards
The S
tate of California does not have standards for environmental noise, but the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (Governor’s Office) has established general plan guidelines for evaluating the compatibility of various land uses as a function of community noise exposure. 2 The purpose of these guidelin
es is to maintain acceptable noise levels in a community setting for different land use types. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of “normally acceptable,” “conditionally acceptable,” “normally unacceptable,” and “clearly unacceptable” noise levels for various land use types.
In addition, California Government Code Section 65302(f) mandates that the legislative body of each county and city adopt a noise element as part of its comprehensive general plan. The local noise element must recognize the land use compatibility guidelines established by the Governor’s Office.
2 State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines, Appendix D: Noise Element Guidelines, page 374, 2017, https://opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_COMPLETE_7.31.17.pdf, accessed March 2025.
Packet Page. 855
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
City of San Bernardino General Plan
The City General Plan includes a Noise Element that contains goals and policies to protect residents from potentially adverse noise impacts.
Noise Element
The following goals and policies are applicable to the Project:
Goal 14.2 Encourage the reduction of noise from transportation related noise sources such as motor vehicles, aircraft operations, and railroad movements.
Policy 14.2.3 Require that development that increases the ambient noise level adjacent to noise-sensitive land uses provide appropriate mitigation measures. (LU-1)
Policy 14.2.8 Minimize noise attributable to vehicular travel in residential neighborhoods by inhibiting through trips by the use of cul-de-sacs, one- way streets, and other traffic controls.
Policy 14.2.9 Enforce sections of the California Vehicle Code related to mufflers and modified exhaust systems.
Policy 14.2.19 As may be necessary, require acoustical analysis and ensure the provision of effective noise mitigation measures for sensitive land uses, especially residential uses, in areas significantly impacted by noise.
Goal 14.3 Protect residents from the negative effects of “spill over” or nuisance noise.
Policy 14.3.1 Require that construction activities adjacent to residential units be limited as necessary to prevent adverse noise impacts. (LU-1) Policy 14.3.2 Require that construction activities employ feasible and practical techniques that minimize the noise impacts on adjacent uses. (LU-1) City of San Bernardino Municipal Code
The City regulates temporary and excessive noise sources through Municipal Code Chapter 8.54: Noise Control.
Municipal Code 8.54.020 Prohibited Acts prohibits the following:
• Loud and excessive noise associated with loading or unloading vehicles; and • the use of pile driver, steam shovel, pneumatic hammers, derrick, st eam or electric hoist, power driven saw or any other tool or apparatus that causes loud and excessive noise between hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., except with the City’s approval.
Packet Page. 856
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Municipal Code 8.54.050 Controlled Hours of Operations limits the following activities to the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. in residential zones:
• The loading or unloading of vehicles and the use of dollies, carts, forklifts or other wheeled equipment that causes any impulsive or unnecessary noise within 1,000 feet of a residence; and • the use of any motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating in excess of 10,000 pounds or of any auxiliary equipment attached to such a vehicle for a period longer than 15 minutes in any hour while the vehicle is stationary and on a public right-of-way or public space.
Municipal Code 8.54.070 Disturbances from Construction Activity establishes that the demolition construction, or improvement of any building or structure is restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
City of San Bernardino Development Code
The City regulates residential noise standards through the Development Code, Chapter 19.20: Property Development Standards. Section 19.20.030.15 establishes that no exterior noise level in residential areas shall exceed 65 dBA.
Environmental Setting
Mobile noise sources, especially cars and trucks, are the City's most common and significant noise sources.
The e
xisting mobile noise sources in the Project area are generated by motor vehicles traveling on Palm Avenue, adjacent to the Project site. Other noise sources within the City are generated by the various land uses (i.e., residential, commercial, institutional, and recreational). The primary stationary noise sources in the Project area are those associated with the surrounding residential uses, which include idling and moving vehicles, mechanical equipment (e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment), dogs barking, yard maintenance, and people talking. The noise associated with these stationary sources may represent a single-event noise occurrence or short-term noise.
Sensitive Noise Receptors
Noise exposure standards and guidelines for various type s of land uses reflect varying noise sensitivities
associated with uses. Sensitive noise receptors are defined as residences, schools, childcare centers, long- term health facilities, and houses of worship. The nearest sensitive receptors to the disturbance area are listed in Table 2: Sensitive Receptors and shown in Figure 3: Sensitive Receptors.
Packet Page. 857
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Table 2: Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive Receptor1 Distance2 and Direction from the Disturbance Area 1 – Residential Uses (represented by ST-4) 40 feet to the east 2 – Residential Uses (represented by ST-3) 114 feet to the southeast 3 – Residential Uses (represented by ST-2) 600 feet to the south 4 – Residential Uses (represented by ST-2) 893 feet to the southwest 5 – Palm Avenue Elementary School (represented by ST-1) 2,425 feet to the south
1. The residential uses listed above are the nearest sensitive receptors surrounding the disturbance area and are representative of the existing environment between the disturbance area and the Palm Avenue Elementary School.
2. Distance measured from the disturbance area to the nearest sensitive receptor property line.
Source: Google Earth, 2025.
Noise Measurements
To quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project site, Kimley-Horn conducted four short-term (10- minute) noise measurements on March 5, 2025; see Appendix A: Noise Data for additional details regarding how the ambient noise measurements were taken. The noise measurement sites were selected to represent the existing noise exposure at the nearest sensitive noise receptors to the disturbance area within the Project site. The 10-minute daytime measurements were taken between 10:03 a.m. and 11:01 a.m. Measurements of L eq are considered representative of the noise levels throughout the day. The average
noise levels measured at each location are listed in Table 3: Existing Noise Measurements. The noise measurement locations are shown on Figure 4: Noise Measurement Locations.
Table 3: Existing Noise Measurements
Site Location Measurement Period Duration dBA Leq
ST-1 Within the Palm Avenue Elementary School parking
lot, south of the Project site 10:11 a.m. - 10:21 a.m. 10 minutes 50.7 ST-2
Southwest corner of Palm Avenue and West
Verdemont Drive, adjacent to the residential use and
south of the Project site
10:29 a.m. - 10:39 a.m. 10 minutes
48.0 ST-3 Cul-de-sac on North Zachary Court, adjacent to residential uses and southeast of the Project site 10:43 a.m. – 10:33 a.m. 10 minutes
61.4 ST-4 6961 North Melvin Avenue, adjacent to the
residential uses and east of the Project site 10:59 a.m. - 11:09 a.m. 10 minutes
45.0 Source: Noise measurements taken by Kimley-Horn and Associates, March 5, 2025. See Appendix A for the noise measurement results.
Packet Page. 858
Oxbow Debris Removal Project
Not to scale
Figure 3: Sensitive Receptors
Source: Google Earth, 2025
LEGEND
Sensitive Receptors
Disturbance Area
Packet Page. 859
Not to scaleOxbow Debris Removal Project
Not to scale
Figure 4: Noise Measurement Locations
Source: Google Earth, 2025
LEGEND
Noise Measurement
Locations
Disturbance Area
11 22 33
44 ##
Packet Page. 860
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Noise Impacts
On-Site Operations Noise
Heavy-
duty equipment noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or phase of the activity (e.g., land clearing, grading, excavation, or paving). Noise generated by equipment, including earth movers and material handlers, can reach high levels. During debris removal operations, exterior noise levels could affect sensitive noise receptors nearest the site, herein referred to as the disturbance area.
The Project activities would include site preparation/grading and debris removal. Such activities would require graders for grading and loaders, tractors, hoe rams, crushers, and dump trucks for debris removal.
Alternative 3 would require only one loader and would not include dump trucks.
Typical equipment operating cycles may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full-power operation followed by 3 to 4 minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). Typical noise levels associated with individual equipment anticipated to be used during Project operations are listed in Table 4: Project Equipment Noise Levels.3 It sh
ould be noted that the values shown in Table 4 account for the equipment operating at full power at 50 feet from the source, without any intervening structures or topography that may reduce noise levels.
Noise was calculated accounting for each piece of equipment’s usage factor, or the fraction of time that the equipment would be in use at full power over a specific period of time.4 As the usage factor indicates the frac
tion of time the equipment operates at full power, the remaining fraction of time the equipment may be operating at lower power settings. The usage factors are derived from empirical data and are essential for calculating the overall noise levels generated by debris removal activities.5 Usage factors are used
alongside other parameters such as equipment noise emission levels and acoustical propagation formulas to provide a detailed prediction of noise that represents activities occurring under normal operating conditions during a full workday.
3 Federal Highway Association, Roadway Construction Noise Model, User Guide, 2005. 4 Ibid.
5 Federal Highway Administration, Construction Noise Handbook , 2017, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/ construction_noise/handbook/handbook00.cfm accessed April 2025.
Packet Page. 861
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Table 4: Project Equipment Noise Levels
Operations Phase Equipment1 Typical Noise Level (dBA
Lmax) at 50 feet from Source Usage Factor (%)2
Grading Grader 85 40
Alternative 1: Crushing
Removal
Hoe Ram (Breaker)
Crusher
Street Sweeper
Loader
Dump Truck
90 85
82 79
77 20
50 10
40 40
Alternative 2: Non-Crushing
Removal
Hoe Ram (Breaker)
Street Sweeper
Loader
Dump Truck
90 82
79 77
20 10
40 40
Alternative 3; Crushing Onsite and Retaining Onsite
Removal
Hoe Ram (Breaker)
Street Sweeper
Loader
90 82
79 20
10 40
1. Equipment based on input from CSG Consultants.
2. The usage factor represents the fraction of time that the equipment would be in use at full power over a specific period.
Source: Federal Highway Association, Roadway Construction Noise Model, User Guide, 2005.
The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) was used to calculate the noise levels at the sensitive receptors nearest the disturbance area. Noise levels at other receptors surrounding the disturbance area would be located further away and would experience lower noise levels than the modeled receptors. When calculating noise, the street sweeper and the loudest piece of anticipated equipment is conservatively assumed to operate at the property line nearest to the modeled receptor while all other anticipated equipment for each phase is assumed to operate at the center of the disturbance area. In addition, it is conservatively assumed the equipment would operate in a simultaneous manner. This methodology represents a worst-case noise scenario, as this accounts for the known street sweeper location and the equipment operating throughout the area at different intervals and not at a fixed location for extended periods of time.6 The C
ity has not established quantitative short-term noise standards. For purposes of this analysis, the criteria from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Manual are used as significance thresholds to determine the noise impact on the nearest sensitive receptors. The FTA’s residential use noise threshold is 80 dBA L eq.7 As the FTA has not included a recommended threshold for institu
tional uses, this analysis uses the residential use noise threshold as the significance threshold. The
6 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. 7 For reference, 80 dBA is comparable to the noise level along a busy city street (California Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines, 2017, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Noise Guidebook, 1985).
Packet Page. 862
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
FTA’s 80 dBA daytime construction noise threshold is designed to balance the need for temporary operation activities with the protection of public health and welfare. It considers factors such as:
• Human response to noise: Stu dies on how different noise levels affect people's comfort, health, and productivity.
• Environmental impact: The potential effects of noise on wildlife and natural habitats. • Technical feasibility : The ability to implement noise mitigation measures effectively during operations.
This threshold considers the temporary nature of the debris removal activity and recognizes that construction related equipment is a routine aspect of the urban environment. The City frequently issues building permits for similar activities (e.g., construction projects), making such activities a common occurrence. As a result, the City’s threshold reflects reasonable noise expectations while incorporating absolute noise limits designed to protect human health. Although Project operations may cause a noticeable increase in ambient noise levels, the noise would be temporary and would occur during daytime hours (outside of the sensitive sleeping hours).
Crushing activities associated with Alternatives 1 and 3 would involve a crushing device that would process the concrete, and a conveyor belt would discharge the processed concrete into a pile. The urban version of the LT96 is designed for quieter operation, with up to 60 percent noise reduction compared to conventional crushers.8 The Urban LT96 uses noise covers that provide noise suppression across several points
, including the main conveyor beneath the crushing mechanism. This analysis conservatively did not apply the noise reduction from the Urban LT96.
Table 5: Maximum Project Noise Levels summarizes the maximum estimated Project noise level at the nearest sensitive receptors. For Alternative 1.1, operation activities would produce the highest noise levels compared to the other alternatives, as this alternative would require crushing equipment on-site and would require more daily haul trucks on-site than Alternative 1.2. Alternative 3, which would only include the crushing activities associated with Alternative 1 and would not include a hauling operation, would produce lower noise levels than alternatives 1.1 and 1.2. See Appendix A for the estimated noise for each alternative.
As shown in Table 5 , the highest anticipated noise level of 73.6 dBA L eq would not exceed the FTA’s thres
hold of 80 dBA Leq for residential uses. Project-related noise would be temporary, lasting only as long as the
activities occur. Therefore, it would not be appropriate to evaluate the ambient noise increase attributable to Project activities. Project activities would not result in a permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project area. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 8.54.070, construction related
8 Metso, Lokotrack Urban Series, Solutions for Populated Environments, 2023.
Packet Page. 863
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
activities within the City would be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The City’s permitted hours of operation are required in recognition that operational activities undertaken during daytime hours are a typical part of living in an urban environment and do not cause a significant impact. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Table 5: Maximum Project Noise Levels
Receptor Maximum Noise Level
at Receptor (dBA Leq)1 Threshold (dBA Leq) Exceeded?
1 – Residential Uses 73.8 80 No
2 – Residential Uses 67.1 80 No
3 – Residential Uses 58.8 80 No
4 – Residential Uses 56.1 80 No
5 – Palm Avenue Elementary School 56.4 80 No
1. The maximum noise level at the residential uses assumes an 8 dBA reduction, as the residential uses would be shielded by a solid barrier.
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Appendix A: Best practices for Calculating Estimated Shielding for Use in RCNM , https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Environment/noise/construction_noise/rcnm/rcnm10.cfm#appa, accessed March 2025.
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model, 2006. Refer to Appendix A for the noise modeling results for each alternative.
Off-Site Noise
Project activities would generate mobile source noise fro m haul trucks (Alternatives 1 and 2) and workers traveling to and from the disturbance area (all Alternatives). Haul trucks and worker vehicles would travel to and from the disturbance area using Palm Avenue. Haul trucks would continuously arrive and leave during debris removal activities to transport the concrete debris off-site. Workers are expected to arrive at the disturbance area before operations begin and leave when operations end.
The noise level associated with haul truck trips on Palm Avenue was calculated using the Housing and Urban Development Day/Night Noise Level Calculator, which accounts for the vehicle type, average speed, distance from centerline, and traffic volumes. Alternative 2.1.1 would require the highest number of daily bobtail (medium duty) dump truck trips, with 260 bobtail dump trucks (520 truck trips) accessing the disturbance area.9 The maximum noise generated by using bobtail dump trucks would be 54 CNEL at 50 feet fr
om the roadway centerline and would not exceed the City’s residential exterior noise standard of 65 dBA. On-road truck noise levels were calculated with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Day/Night Noise Level Assessment Tool,10 which calculates roadway noise based on HUD’s
Noise Assessment Guidelines. Noise levels are based on vehicle type, daily vehicle trips, vehicle speed, night fraction of traffic, and distance from the roadway.
9 Daily haul trips based on input from CSG Consultants. 10 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Day/Night Noise Level Assessment Tool https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/dnl-calculator/, accessed February 2025.
Packet Page. 864
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Alternative 2.2.1 would require the highest number of daily single-end (heavy-duty) dump truck trips, with 132 single-end dump trucks (264 truck trips) accessing the disturbance area. 11 The maximum noise gener
ated by using single-end dump trucks would be 62 CNEL at 50 feet from the roadway centerline 12 and wo
uld not exceed the City’s residential exterior noise standard of 65 dBA. Noise level estimates do not account for the presence of intervening structures or topography; however, the closest sensitive receptors nearest the disturbance area would be shielded by a solid barrier (i.e., concrete masonry block walls are located along the residential property lines across Palm Avenue adjacent to the project site).
Therefore, the noise levels herein represent a conservative, worst-case estimation of the haul truck noise on Palm Avenue. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Vibration Impacts
On-Site Operations Vibration
Proje
ct-related increases in ground-borne vibration levels would be primarily associated with the operation of heavy-duty equipment. Project operations would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary ground-borne vibration, depending on the specific equipment used, and the operations involved. The ground-borne vibration generated by equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with increases in distance.
The types of vibration impacts include human annoyance and building damage. Human annoyance occurs when vibration rises significantly above the threshold of human perception for extended periods of time.
Building damage can be cosmetic or structural. Ordinary buildings that are not particularly fragile would not experience cosmetic damage (e.g., plaster cracks) at distances beyond 30 feet. This distance can vary substantially depending on the soil composition and underground geological layer between the vibration source and receiver. In addition, not all buildings respond similarly to vibration generated by equipment.
The City has not established quantitative vibration standards. For purposes of this analysis, the criteria from the California Department of Transportations (Caltrans) Transportation and Construction Vibration Manual are used as significance thresholds to determine the noise impact on the nearest sensitive receptors. Caltrans identifies the following building damage criteria:
• Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments: 0.08 • Fragile buildings: 0.1 PPV
• Historic buildings: 0.25 PPV
• Older residential structures: 0.3 PPV
• New residential structures: 0.5 PPV
11 Daily haul trips based on input from CSG Consultants. 12 Traffic noise calculated with HUD’s Day/Night Noise Level Assessment Tool.
Packet Page. 865
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
• Modern industrial/commercial buildings: 0.5 PPV
The residential structures closest to the disturbance area were constructed around 2006. Caltrans does not specify the age of the building to be considered older residential structures. For vibration impact analyses, a building over 50 years old is typically considered an “older” residential structure. However, the
0.30 in/sec PPV older residential building structural damage standard is conservatively used for this analysis. Additionally, Caltrans’ 0.10 in/sec standard is used to evaluate human annoyance.
The nearest sensitive receptor and structure would be located 68 feet to the east of the disturbance area.
Vibratory equipment with the greatest PPV levels that are anticipated to be used at the disturbance area would include loaded trucks and a hoe ram. Table 6: Typical Equipment Vibration Levels lists the vibration levels for the anticipated equipment at 25 feet (the reference distance) and 68 feet (the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor and structure).
Table 6: Typical Equipment Vibration Levels
Equipment Peak Particle Velocity
at 25 feet (in/sec)
Peak Particle Velocity
at 68 feet (in/sec)
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.017
Hoe Ram (Breaker) and Crusher 0.089 0.020
Rock Breaker 0.059 0.013
Jackhammer 0.035 0.008
Small Bulldozer/Tractor 0.003 0.0007
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018.
As shown in Table 6, the vibration from anticipated heavy-duty equipment would range from 0.0007 to
0.020 in/sec at the nearest sensitive receptor and structure. Therefore, vibration associated with Project activities would not exceed the Caltrans’ threshold of 0.10 in/sec PPV for human annoyance or 0.30 in/sec PPV for older residential uses. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Off-Site Vibration
Under Alternative 1 and 2, haul trucks traveling to and fro m the disturbance area would generate vibration
events on Palm Avenue. According to the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, a truck rarely creates vibration levels that exceed 70 VdB (equivalent to 0.012 inches per second PPV) when on a roadway.13 The factors influencing levels of ground-borne vibration include vehicle speed, vehicle suspe
nsion, and wheel condition and type. The frequency of vibration events is not listed as an influencing factor for vibration velocity by the FTA.14 Therefore, multiple haul trucks traveling on the roadway would increas
e the frequency of vibration events but would not affect the vibration velocity experienced by receptors. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
13 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. 14 Ibid.
Packet Page. 866
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Conclusion
The crushing, debris removal, and hauling noise and vibration levels for all Project alternatives would not excee
d the applicable standards. The proposed debris removal/hauling would increase noise levels above existing conditions. However, these activities would be temporary and would occur during daytime hours only. Daytime activities would not affect most of the general public’s sleeping. Potential human health impacts are addressed by the FTA’s thresholds used in this analysis. Also, daytime noise is reduced within buildings by noise insulation standards, which has the effect of reducing operation noise within habitable structures. Project noise and vibration impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
However, due to the proximity of receptors, use of the Metso Lokotrack Urban LT96, for crushing under Alternatives 1 and 3, is recommended to minimize noise levels to the greatest extent feasible. As noted above, the Urban LT96 is designed for quieter operation, with up to 60 percent noise reduction compared to conventional crushers. The Urban LT96 uses noise covers that provide noise suppression across several points, including the main conveyor beneath the crushing mechanism.
This analysis conservatively did not apply the noise reduction from the Urban LT96; however, this crusher with additional noise suppression is recommended to minimize nuisances for nearby receptors.
Packet Page. 867
Appendix A
Noise Data
Packet Page. 868
Noise Measurement Field Data
Project: Job Number: 194739001
Site No.: Date: 3/5/2025
Analyst: Time: 10:11 a.m. - 10:21 a.m.
Location:
Noise Sources:
Comments:
Results (dBA):
Leq: Lmin: Lmax: Peak:
50.7 40.9 64.6 79.7
Sound Level Meter: LD SoundExpert LxT Temp. (degrees F): 57 Calibrator: CAL200 Wind (mph): 7
Response Time: Slow Sky: Partly Cloudy
Weighting: A Bar. Pressure: 29.93
Microphone Height: 5 feet Humidity: 52%
Photo:
Equipment Weather
Oxbow Debris Removal
1 Dharma Truong and Jin Choi
Palm Avenue Elementary School parking lot
traffic, birds chirping, kids playing, HVAC, truck idling Packet Page. 869
Summary
File Name on Meter ST-1.130.s
File Name on PC
Serial Number 0007061
Model SoundExpert® LxT
Firmware Version 2.404
User
Location
Job Description
Note
Measurement
Description
Start 2025-03-05 10:11:31
Stop 2025-03-05 10:21:31
Duration 00:10:00.0
Run Time 00:10:00.0
Pause 00:00:00.0
Pre-Calibration 2024-07-11 10:35:45
Post-Calibration None
Calibration Deviation ---
Overall Settings
RMS Weight A Weighting
Peak Weight A Weighting
Detector Slow
Preamplifier PRMLxT1L
Microphone Correction FF:90 2116
Integration Method Linear
OBA Range Normal
OBA Bandwidth 1/1 and 1/3
OBA Frequency Weighting A Weighting
OBA Max Spectrum At LMax
Overload 122.2 dB
A C
Under Range Peak 78.7 75.7
Under Range Limit 24.1 25.1
Noise Floor 15.0 16.0
First Second
Instrument Identification 1100 W. Town&Country Rd, #700 Results
LAeq 50.7 dB
LAE 78.5 dB
EA 7.833 µPa²h
LApeak (max) 2025-03-05 10:16:39 79.7
LASmax 2025-03-05 10:15:09 64.6
LASmin 2025-03-05 10:13:23 40.9
SEA -99.9 dB
Exceedance Counts
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0.0
Duration
LxTse_0007061-20250305 101131-ST-1.130.ldbin
Packet Page. 870
Community Noise Ldn LDay 07:00-22:00
50.7 50.7
LCeq 63.0 dB
LAeq 50.7 dB
LCeq - LAeq 12.3 dB
LAIeq 52.7 dB
LAeq 50.7 dB
LAIeq - LAeq 2.0 dB
dB Time Stamp
Leq 50.7
LS(max) 64.6 2025/03/05 10:15:09
LS(min) 40.9 2025/03/05 10:13:23
LPeak(max) 79.7 2025/03/05 10:16:39
Overload Count 0
Overload Duration 0.0 s
OBA Overload Count 0
OBA Overload Duration 0.0 s
Statistics
LA 5.00 56.5 dB
LA 10.00 54.0 dB
LA 33.30 48.7 dB
LA 50.00 46.7 dB
LA 66.60 45.5 dB
LA 90.00 43.3 dB
Calibration History
Preamp Date dB re. 1V/Pa
PRMLxT1L 2024-07-11 10:35:45 -28.41
Direct 2023-11-08 12:10:28 -28.52
Direct 2023-11-08 12:09:58 -28.53
A
Packet Page. 871
Noise Measurement Field Data
Project: Job Number: 194739001
Site No.: Date: 3/5/2025
Analyst: Time: 10:29 a.m - 10:39 a.m.
Location:
Comments:
Results (dBA):
Leq: Lmin: Lmax: Peak:
48.0 37.5 65.0 84.8
Sound Level Meter: LD SoundExpert LxT Temp. (degrees F): 57 Calibrator: CAL200 Wind (mph): 7
Response Time: Slow Sky: Partly Cloudy
Weighting: A Bar. Pressure: 29.93
Microphone Height: 5 feet Humidity: 52%
Photo:
Equipment Weather
Oxbow Debris Removal
2 Dharma Truong and Jin Choi
Southwest corner of Palm Avenue and West Verdemont Drive, adjacent to the residential use cars passing by and power tools Noise Sources:
Packet Page. 872
Summary
File Name on Meter ST-1.131.s
File Name on PC
Serial Number 0007061
Model SoundExpert® LxT
Firmware Version 2.404
User
Location
Job Description
Note
Measurement
Description
Start 2025-03-05 10:29:35
Stop 2025-03-05 10:39:35
Duration 00:10:00.0
Run Time 00:10:00.0
Pause 00:00:00.0
Pre-Calibration 2024-07-11 10:35:45
Post-Calibration None
Calibration Deviation ---
Overall Settings
RMS Weight A Weighting
Peak Weight A Weighting
Detector Slow
Preamplifier PRMLxT1L
Microphone Correction FF:90 2116
Integration Method Linear
OBA Range Normal
OBA Bandwidth 1/1 and 1/3
OBA Frequency Weighting A Weighting
OBA Max Spectrum At LMax
Overload 122.2 dB
A C
Under Range Peak 78.7 75.7
Under Range Limit 24.1 25.1
Noise Floor 15.0 16.0
First Second
Instrument Identification 1100 W. Town&Country Rd, #700 Results
LAeq 48.0 dB
LAE 75.8 dB
EA 4.206 µPa²h
LApeak (max) 2025-03-05 10:30:03 84.8
LASmax 2025-03-05 10:39:32 65.0
LASmin 2025-03-05 10:31:16 37.5
SEA -99.9 dB
Exceedance Counts
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0.0
Duration
LxTse_0007061-20250305 102935-ST-1.131.ldbin
Packet Page. 873
Community Noise Ldn LDay 07:00-22:00
48.0 48.0
LCeq 59.5 dB
LAeq 48.0 dB
LCeq - LAeq 11.5 dB
LAIeq 49.7 dB
LAeq 48.0 dB
LAIeq - LAeq 1.7 dB
dB Time Stamp
Leq 48.0
LS(max) 65.0 2025/03/05 10:39:32
LS(min) 37.5 2025/03/05 10:31:16
LPeak(max) 84.8 2025/03/05 10:30:03
Overload Count 0
Overload Duration 0.0 s
OBA Overload Count 0
OBA Overload Duration 0.0 s
Statistics
LA 5.00 53.1 dB
LA 10.00 49.0 dB
LA 33.30 42.3 dB
LA 50.00 41.1 dB
LA 66.60 40.1 dB
LA 90.00 38.7 dB
Calibration History
Preamp Date dB re. 1V/Pa
PRMLxT1L 2024-07-11 10:35:45 -28.41
Direct 2023-11-08 12:10:28 -28.52
Direct 2023-11-08 12:09:58 -28.53
A
Packet Page. 874
Noise Measurement Field Data
Project: Job Number: 194739001
Site No.: Date: 3/5/2025
Analyst: Time: 10:43 a.m. - 10:53 a.m.
Location:
Noise Sources:
Comments:
Results (dBA):
Leq: Lmin: Lmax: Peak:
61.4 38.0 78.3 94.2
Sound Level Meter: LD SoundExpert LxT Temp. (degrees F): 57 Calibrator: CAL200 Wind (mph): 7
Response Time: Slow Sky: Partly Cloudy
Weighting: A Bar. Pressure: 29.93
Microphone Height: 5 feet Humidity: 52%
Photo:
Equipment Weather
Oxbow Debris Removal
3 Dharma Truong and Jin Choi
Cultasac on North Zachary Court, adjacent to residential uses dogs barking, birds chirping, yardwork (lawn mower and shoveling soil), train horn, hand tools, recreational airplane, and traffic
Packet Page. 875
Summary
File Name on Meter ST-1.132.s
File Name on PC
Serial Number 0007061
Model SoundExpert® LxT
Firmware Version 2.404
User
Location
Job Description
Note
Measurement
Description
Start 2025-03-05 10:43:56
Stop 2025-03-05 10:53:56
Duration 00:10:00.0
Run Time 00:10:00.0
Pause 00:00:00.0
Pre-Calibration 2024-07-11 10:35:45
Post-Calibration None
Calibration Deviation ---
Overall Settings
RMS Weight A Weighting
Peak Weight A Weighting
Detector Slow
Preamplifier PRMLxT1L
Microphone Correction FF:90 2116
Integration Method Linear
OBA Range Normal
OBA Bandwidth 1/1 and 1/3
OBA Frequency Weighting A Weighting
OBA Max Spectrum At LMax
Overload 122.2 dB
A C
Under Range Peak 78.7 75.7
Under Range Limit 24.1 25.1
Noise Floor 15.0 16.0
First Second
Instrument Identification 1100 W. Town&Country Rd, #700 Results
LAeq 61.4 dB
LAE 89.2 dB
EA 92.026 µPa²h
LApeak (max) 2025-03-05 10:45:22 94.2
LASmax 2025-03-05 10:45:23 78.3
LASmin 2025-03-05 10:44:58 38.0
SEA -99.9 dB
Exceedance Counts
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0.0
Duration
LxTse_0007061-20250305 104356-ST-1.132.ldbin
Packet Page. 876
Community Noise Ldn LDay 07:00-22:00
61.4 61.4
LCeq 64.0 dB
LAeq 61.4 dB
LCeq - LAeq 2.6 dB
LAIeq 70.5 dB
LAeq 61.4 dB
LAIeq - LAeq 9.1 dB
dB Time Stamp
Leq 61.4
LS(max) 78.3 2025/03/05 10:45:23
LS(min) 38.0 2025/03/05 10:44:58
LPeak(max) 94.2 2025/03/05 10:45:22
Overload Count 0
Overload Duration 0.0 s
OBA Overload Count 0
OBA Overload Duration 0.0 s
Statistics
LA 5.00 68.6 dB
LA 10.00 65.5 dB
LA 33.30 48.1 dB
LA 50.00 42.6 dB
LA 66.60 41.1 dB
LA 90.00 39.4 dB
Calibration History
Preamp Date dB re. 1V/Pa
PRMLxT1L 2024-07-11 10:35:45 -28.41
Direct 2023-11-08 12:10:28 -28.52
Direct 2023-11-08 12:09:58 -28.53
A
Packet Page. 877
Noise Measurement Field Data
Project: Job Number: 194739001
Site No.: Date: 3/5/2025
Analyst: Time: 10:59 a.m. - 11:09 a.m.
Location:
Noise Sources:
Comments:
Results (dBA):
Leq: Lmin: Lmax: Peak:
45.0 37.5 61.0 81.0
Sound Level Meter: LD SoundExpert LxT Temp. (degrees F): 57 Calibrator: CAL200 Wind (mph): 7
Response Time: Slow Sky: Partly Cloudy
Weighting: A Bar. Pressure: 29.92
Microphone Height: 5 feet Humidity: 51%
Photo:
Equipment Weather
Oxbow Debris Removal
4 Dharma Truong and Jin Choi
6961 North Melvin Avenue, adjacent to the residential use delivery truck starting, cars passing by, recreational airplane, and airplane Packet Page. 878
Summary
File Name on Meter ST-1.133.s
File Name on PC
Serial Number 0007061
Model SoundExpert® LxT
Firmware Version 2.404
User
Location
Job Description
Note
Measurement
Description
Start 2025-03-05 10:59:04
Stop 2025-03-05 11:09:04
Duration 00:10:00.0
Run Time 00:10:00.0
Pause 00:00:00.0
Pre-Calibration 2024-07-11 10:35:45
Post-Calibration None
Calibration Deviation ---
Overall Settings
RMS Weight A Weighting
Peak Weight A Weighting
Detector Slow
Preamplifier PRMLxT1L
Microphone Correction FF:90 2116
Integration Method Linear
OBA Range Normal
OBA Bandwidth 1/1 and 1/3
OBA Frequency Weighting A Weighting
OBA Max Spectrum At LMax
Overload 122.2 dB
A C
Under Range Peak 78.7 75.7
Under Range Limit 24.1 25.1
Noise Floor 15.0 16.0
First Second
Instrument Identification 1100 W. Town&Country Rd, #700 Results
LAeq 45.0 dB
LAE 72.8 dB
EA 2.108 µPa²h
LApeak (max) 2025-03-05 10:59:05 81.0
LASmax 2025-03-05 11:01:03 61.0
LASmin 2025-03-05 11:09:01 37.5
SEA -99.9 dB
Exceedance Counts
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0.0
Duration
LxTse_0007061-20250305 105904-ST-1.133.ldbin
Packet Page. 879
Community Noise Ldn LDay 07:00-22:00
45.0 45.0
LCeq 59.9 dB
LAeq 45.0 dB
LCeq - LAeq 14.9 dB
LAIeq 48.0 dB
LAeq 45.0 dB
LAIeq - LAeq 3.0 dB
dB Time Stamp
Leq 45.0
LS(max) 61.0 2025/03/05 11:01:03
LS(min) 37.5 2025/03/05 11:09:01
LPeak(max) 81.0 2025/03/05 10:59:05
Overload Count 0
Overload Duration 0.0 s
OBA Overload Count 0
OBA Overload Duration 0.0 s
Statistics
LA 5.00 49.8 dB
LA 10.00 47.1 dB
LA 33.30 43.0 dB
LA 50.00 40.9 dB
LA 66.60 39.9 dB
LA 90.00 38.7 dB
Calibration History
Preamp Date dB re. 1V/Pa
PRMLxT1L 2024-07-11 10:35:45 -28.41
Direct 2023-11-08 12:10:28 -28.52
Direct 2023-11-08 12:09:58 -28.53
A
Packet Page. 880
Project: Oxbow Debris Removal
Construction Noise Impact on Sensitive Receptors
Parameters
Construction Hours: Daytime hours (7 am to 7 pm) 8
Evening hours (7 pm to 10 pm) 0
Nighttime hours (10 pm to 7 am) 0
Leq to L10 factor 3
Construction Noise Levels by Phase (L eq)
Recept
or (Land Use)
Average
Distance
(feet)
Distance
to
Property
Line (feet) Shielding Direction Grading Alternative 1.1 Alternative 1.2 Alternative 2.1.1 Alternative 2.1.2 Alternative 2.2.1 Alternative 2.2.2 Maximum 1 Residential Uses 306 68 8 E 71.8 73.8 73.5 73.7 73.3 73.3 73.1 73.8 2 Residential Uses 502 162 8 SE 65.4 67.1 66.6 66.8 66.0 66.2 65.8 67.1 3 Residential Uses 893 635 8 S 58.0 58.8 57.5 58.2 56.1 56.6 55.1 58.8 4 Residential Uses 1175 953 8 SW 54.6 56.1 54.7 55.5 53.1 53.7 52.0 56.1 5 Palm Avenue Elementary School 2794 2518 0 S 55.7 56.4 54.9 55.7 53.1 53.8 51.9 56.4 RTCRPEEO 1 RTCRPEEO 2 RTCRPEEO 3 RTCRPEEO 4 RTCRPEEO 5 Construction Phase Equipment Type
No. of
Equip.
Acoustical
Usage
Factor
Reference
Noise Level at
50ft per Unit,
Lmax
Distance
(feet)
Noise Level at
Receptor 1,
Lmax
Noise Level at
Receptor 1, Leq
Distance
(feet)
Noise Level at
Receptor 2, Lmax
Noise Level at
Receptor 2, Leq
Distance
(feet)
Noise Level at
Receptor 3, Lmax
Noise Level at
Receptor 3,
Leq
Distance
(feet)
Noise Level at
Receptor 4,
Lmax
Noise Level at
Receptor 4,
Leq
Distance
(feet)
Noise Level at
Receptor 5,
Lmax
Noise Level at
Receptor 5,
Leq
Grading
rGader 1 40% 85 68 74.3 70.3 162.0 66.8 62.8 635.0 54.9 50.9 953.0 51.4 47.4 2518.0 51.0 47.0 rGader 8 40% 85 306 70.3 66.3 502.0 66.0 62.0 893.0 61.0 57.0 1175.0 58.6 54.6 2794.0 59.1 55.1 Combined LEQ 71.8 65.4 58.0 54.6 55.7
Alternative 1.1
Mount tHed Impaacmmer (hoe ram) 1 20% 90 79.6 68 72.6 162.0 72.1 65.1 635.0 60.2 53.2 953.0 56.7 49.7 2518.0 56.3 49.3 Mount tHed Impaacmmer (hoe ram) 1 20% 90 66.6 306 59.6 502.0 62.3 55.3 893.0 57.3 50.3 1175.0 54.9 47.9 2794.0 55.4 48.4 therpmen Ot >qui E 5l HPlA 1 50% 85 61.3 306 58.3 502.0 57.0 54.0 893.0 52.0 49.0 117 5.0 49.6 46.6 2794.0 50.1 47.0 uutrm SacVweet Seeper 1 10% 82 68 70.9 60.9 162.0 63.4 53.4 635.0 51.5 41.5 953.0 48.0 38.0 2518.0 47.6 37.6 Frnodn Lt oEader 8 40% 79 306 64.4 60.4 502.0 60.1 56.1 893.0 55.1 51.1 1175.0 52.7 48.7 2794.0 53.2 49.2 Dump Trkuc 25 40% 77 306 66.7 62.8 502.0 62.4 58.5 893.0 57.4 53.5 1175.0 55.1 51.1 2794.0 55.5 51.6 Combined LEQ 73.8 67.1 58.8 56.1 56.4
Alternative 1.2
Mount tHed Impaacmmer (hoe ram) 1 20% 90 79.6 68 72.6 162.0 72.1 65.1 635.0 60.2 53.2 953.0 56.7 49.7 2518.0 56.3 49.3 Mount tHed Impaacmmer (hoe ram) 1 20% 90 66.6 306 59.6 502.0 62.3 55.3 893.0 57.3 50.3 1175.0 54.9 47.9 2794.0 55.4 48.4 therpmen Ot >qui E 5l HPlA 1 50% 85 61.3 306 58.3 502.0 57.0 54.0 893.0 52.0 49.0 117 5.0 49.6 46.6 2794.0 50.1 47.0 Vacuum Street Sweeper 1 10% 82 68 70.9 60.9 162.0 63.4 53.4 635.0 51.5 41.5 953.0 48.0 38.0 2518.0 47.6 37.6 Front End Loader 4 40% 79 306 61.4 57.4 502.0 57.1 53.1 893.0 52.1 48.1 1175.0 49.7 45.7 2794.0 50.2 46.2 Dump Truck 10 40% 77 306 62.8 58.8 502.0 58.5 54.5 893.0 53.5 49.5 1175.0 51.1 47.1 2794.0 51.6 47.6 Combined LEQ 73.5 66.6 57.5 54.7 54.9
Alternative 2.1.1
Mounted Impact Hammer (hoe ram) 1 20% 90 68 79.6 72.6 162.0 72.1 65.1 635.0 60.2 53.2 953.0 56.7 49.7 2518.0 56.3 49.3 Vacuum Street Sweeper 1 10% 82 68 70.9 60.9 162.0 63.4 53.4 635.0 51.5 41.5 953.0 48.0 38.0 2518.0 47.6 37.6 Front End Loader 9 40% 79 306 64.9 60.9 502.0 60.6 56.6 893.0 55.6 51.6 1175.0 53.2 49.2 2794.0 53.7 49.7 Dump Truck 33 40% 77 306 68.0 64.0 502.0 63.7 59.7 893.0 58.6 54.7 1175.0 56.3 52.3 2794.0 56.7 52.8 Combined LEQ 73.7 66.8 58.2 55.5 55.7
Alternative 2.1.2
Mounted Impact Hammer (hoe ram) 1 20% 90 68 79.6 72.6 162.0 72.1 65.1 635.0 60.2 53.2 953.0 56.7 49.7 2518.0 56.3 49.3 Vacuum Street Sweeper 1 10% 82 68 70.9 60.9 162.0 63.4 53.4 635.0 51.5 41.5 953.0 48.0 38.0 2518.0 47.6 37.6 Front End Loader 4 40% 79 306 61.4 57.4 502.0 57.1 53.1 893.0 52.1 48.1 1175.0 49.7 45.7 2794.0 50.2 46.2 Dump Truck 13 40% 77 306 63.9 59.9 502.0 59.6 55.6 893.0 54.6 50.6 1175.0 52.2 48.2 2794.0 52.7 48.7 Combined LEQ 73.3 66.0 56.1 53.1 53.1
Alternative 2.2.1
Mounted Impact Hammer (hoe ram) 1 20% 90 68 79.6 72.6 162.0 72.1 65.1 635.0 60.2 53.2 953.0 56.7 49.7 2518.0 56.3 49.3 Vacuum Street Sweeper 1 10% 82 68 70.9 60.9 162.0 63.4 53.4 635.0 51.5 41.5 953.0 48.0 38.0 2518.0 47.6 37.6 Front End Loader 5 40% 79 306 62.4 58.4 502.0 58.1 54.1 893.0 53.1 49.1 1175.0 50.7 46.7 2794.0 51.1 47.2 Dump Truck 17 40% 77 306 65.1 61.1 502.0 60.8 56.8 893.0 55.8 51.8 1175.0 53.4 49.4 2794.0 53.9 49.9 Combined LEQ 73.3 66.2 56.6 53.7 53.8
Alternative 2.2.2
Mounted Impact Hammer (hoe ram) 1 20% 90 68 79.6 72.6 162.0 72.1 65.1 635.0 60.2 53.2 953.0 56.7 49.7 2518.0 56.3 49.3 Vacuum Street Sweeper 1 10% 82 68 70.9 60.9 162.0 63.4 53.4 635.0 51.5 41.5 953.0 48.0 38.0 2518.0 47.6 37.6 Front End Loader 3 40% 79 306 60.1 56.2 502.0 55.8 51.9 893.0 50.8 46.9 1175.0 48.4 44.5 2794.0 48.9 44.9 Dump Truck 6 40% 77 306 60.5 56.6 502.0 56.2 52.3 893.0 51.2 47.3 1175.0 48.9 44.9 2794.0 49.3 45.4 Combined LEQ 73.1 65.8 55.1 52.0 51.9
Maximum Noise Level 73.8 67.1 58.8 56.1 56.4
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: RCNM, 2005
* source for any user defined equipment/data
Note: each alternative would include
grading prior to removal activities
Packet Page. 881
APPENDIX D
Truck Routing
Packet Page. 882
kimley-horn.com 3801 University Avenue, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868
MEMORANDUM
To: Gabriel Elliott
Director of Community Development and Housing
City of San Bernardino
From: Jason Melchor, P.E.
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Date: May 14, 2025
Subject: Truck Route Memorandum for the Proposed Oxbow Debris Remov al Project in the City
of San Bernardino
Kimley
-Horn and Associates, Inc. has prepared a truck route memorandum for the proposed Oxbow Debris Removal project located in the City of San Bernardino. The memorandum has been prepared to outline the recommended truck routes for the proposed project. The routing analysis applies to Alternatives 1 and 2.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves removal of approximately 41,496 cubic yards of debris material located at 6920 Palm Avenue in the City of San Bernardino. The project site is located on an 18.45- acre property near the northwest corner of Palm Avenue and Huntington Drive in the City of Bernardino. The site is bounded by Palm Avenue to the east and vacant land to the north, south, and west. A vicinity map is provided in Attachment A.
The debris will be hauled to the Rialto Recycle Yard located at 250 East Santa Ana Avenue in the City of Rialto, which is owned and operated by ARCOSA Crushed Concrete, in an industrial area in southern Rialto.
PALM AVENUE DESCRIPTION
Palm Avenue is a north-south undivided roadway with residential uses to the east and west from the north end of Palm Avenue to the Interstate 215 (I-215) freeway. Palm Elementary School is located on Palm Avenue between Meyers Road and Belmont Avenue. There is a marked school- crossing crosswalk near the north side of the school at the intersection of Palm Avenue and Meyers Road. The street width is approximately 40 feet total (20 feet per lane) at the marked crosswalk with on-street parking prohibited, which is sufficient width for trucks traveling through. Truck drivers should drive cautiously and be aware of their surroundings near the school and residential areas.
Packet Page. 883
Mr. Elliott , May 14, 2025, Page 2
kimley-horn.com 3801 University Avenue, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868
From the north end of Palm Avenue near the project site to Belmont Avenue, Palm Avenue has one lane traveling in each direction. The street width is approximately 40 feet total (20 feet per lane), which is sufficient width for trucks traveling through. On-street parking is permitted along this segment. As such, truck drivers should drive cautiously and be aware of parked vehicles along this segment of Palm Avenue.
From Belmont Avenue to the I-215 freeway interchange, Palm Avenue has two lanes traveling in each direction. The street width is approximately 64 feet total (12-20 feet per lane), which is sufficient width for trucks traveling through. On-street parking is permitted from Washington Street to Kendall Drive. As such, truck drivers should drive cautiously and be aware of parked vehicles along this segment of Palm Avenue.
SITE ACCESS
Trucks should enter the site via the north driveway on Palm Avenue near the north side of the project site. Truck staging should be completely on-site in order to prevent any truck queuing from spilling out onto Palm Avenue and affecting nearby residents using Palm Avenue. Trucks should circulate on-site and exit the site via the south driveway on Palm Avenue near the south side of the project site. In order to accommodate the project operations, the two existing driveway access points would need to be graded and/or leveled with adequate width to allow for both ingress and egress of trucks and hauling of equipment.
PROJECT TRUCK SAFETY MEASURES
The project plans to provide Best Management Practices (BMPs) in the form of traffic control measures at the existing site access, at minimum, to prevent traffic safety hazards. Safety signage for the site would be subject to Cal/OSHA regulations. Additionally, safety measures would be implemented along Palm Avenue to minimize safety hazards associated with adjacent uses and traffic along Palm Avenue. Signage, flagmen, cones, and temporary stop signs would be placed at the driveways of the project site when hauling trucks and other equipment enter and exit the site.
The applicant should coordinate with the City of San Bernardino to temporarily add truck restriction signs that prohibit trucks from parking and stopping along Palm Avenue adjacent to the project site. This would help prevent trucks from queuing along Palm Avenue.
It is recommended that the hauling operation and any crushing operation take place during the school’s summer recess for Palm Elementary School to prevent truck traffic interaction along Palm Avenue during school peak drop-off and pick-up times. Either bobtail dump trucks or single-end dump trucks could be used during this summer recess.
Packet Page. 884
Mr. Elliott , May 14, 2025, Page 3
kimley-horn.com 3801 University Avenue, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868
RECOMMENDED PROJECT TRUCK ROUTE
The City of San Bernardino City-Wide Truck Route Study (November 2022) provides designated routes for commercial and industrial trucks. A copy of the City of San Bernardino Proposed Regulatory Truck Routes map is provided on Attachment B.
The City of Rialto Ordinance No. 1684 (February 2023) provides designated truck routes within the City of Rialto and established a moratorium to prohibit truck traffic on all other streets except as otherwise provided by law. A copy of the City of Rialto Truck Routes map is provided on Attachment C.
Trucks traveling to and from the project site to the Rialto Recycle Yard would be using the Interstate 215 (I-215) and Interstate 10 (I-10) freeways. Trucks accessing the project site would use the I-215 freeway at the Palm Avenue interchange. Trucks accessing the Rialto Recycle Yard would use the I- 10 freeway at the Riverside Avenue interchange.
Based on review of the City of San Bernardino and City of Rialto truck routes, the following truck route is recommended for the project:
Project Site to Rialto Recycle Yard
• Head southwest on Palm Avenue
• Turn left to merge onto I-215 South
• Take exit 40 on I-215 South to merge onto I-10 West
• Take exit 68 on I-10 West for Riverside Avenue
• Turn left onto Riverside Avenue
• Turn left onto Santa Ana Avenue
• Turn left into the project site via the west driveway
Rialto Recycle Yard to Project Site
• Head west on Santa Ana Avenue
• Turn right onto Riverside Avenue
• Turn right to merge onto I-10 East
• Take exit 72 on I-10 East to merge onto I-215 North
• Take exit 50 on I-215 North for Palm Avenue
• Turn right onto Palm Avenue
• Turn left into the project site
A map of the recommended truck route is provided on Attachment D.
Packet Page. 885
Mr. Elliott , May 14, 2025, Page 4
kimley-horn.com 3801 University Avenue, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868
The project site is located along Palm Avenue. Although this segment of Palm Avenue is not classified as a truck route, it is the most direct street for trucks to use to travel to/from the I-215 freeway. The applicant should coordinate with the City of San Bernardino to determine if approval and/or a permit is needed to use this segment of Palm Avenue.
The recommended truck route includes segments of Riverside Avenue and Santa Ana Avenue, which are classified as truck routes in the City of Rialto. As such, there are no other streets that trucks would need to use other than classified truck routes (Riverside Avenue and Santa Ana Avenue), the I-215 and I-10 freeways, and Palm Avenue.
CONCLUSION
For Alternatives 1 and 2, trucks moving debris from the project site to the Rialto Recycle Yard would be using the I-215 and I-10 freeways. Trucks accessing the project site from the I-215 freeway would use the Palm Avenue interchange. Trucks accessing the Rialto Recycle Yard from the I-10 freeway would use the Riverside Avenue interchange. Within the City of San Bernardino, trucks would use Palm Avenue to enter and exit the project site. Within the City of Rialto, trucks would use Riverside Avenue and Santa Ana Avenue to enter and exit the Rialto Recycle Yard.
ATTACHMENT A – Vicinity Map
ATTACHMENT B – City of San Bernardino Truck Routes Map
ATTACHMENT C – City of Rialto Truck Routes Map
ATTACHMENT D – Proposed Truck Route for the Oxbow Debris Removal Project Packet Page. 886
ATTACHMENT A
VICINITY MAP
MELVIN AVE
PALM AVE
PROJECT SITE
HUNTINGTON DR
VERDEMONT DR
GARFIELD AVE
OHIO AVE
MEYERS RD
RIDGELINE AVE
OFELIA DR
OLIVE AVE
BELMONT AVE
SOUTH
DRIVEWAY
NORTH
DRIVEWAY
Packet Page. 887
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO TRUCK ROUTES MAP
Packet Page. 888
ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF RIALTO TRUCK ROUTES MAP
Packet Page. 889
ATTACHMENT D
PROPOSED TRUCK ROUTE
FOR THE OXBOW DEBRIS REMOVAL PROJECT
PROJECT SITE
RIALTO RECYCLE YARD
PALM AVE
RIVERSIDE AVE
INTERSTATE-10
INTERSTATE-215
SANTA ANA AVE
Packet Page. 890
October 26, 2020
Mr. Jonathan Jackson
Mr. Tim Greenleaf
TIM GREENLEAF ENGINEERING
16652 Burke Ln
Huntington Beach CA 92647
RE: Sample report for concrete samples collected from 2255 W. Lugonia Avenue, Redlands, CA Dear Sirs:
On October 19, 2020 Mr. Jonathan Jackson, Greenleaf Engineering, submitted three samples of crushed concrete from the above referenced site. ENCORP’s NVLAP PLM laboratory analyzed these samples for the presence of asbestos. In addition, these concrete samples were submitted to Envirochem Laboratory in Pomona CA to be analyzed for the presence of CAM Metals and VOC’s.
Sample results indicate that no asbestos was present in the submitted concrete samples. In addition, sample analysis indicates that no VOC’s were present, and that the CAM metal analysis shows that the concrete samples do not contain hazardous levels of CAM metals. Therefore, the crushed concrete can then be used as fill base for future construction.. I have included sample results as a attachment to this report.
Please let me know if you need anything further. Thank you.
Respectfully,
William Bohning
Certified Associate Industrial Hygienist
Packet Page. 891
ATTACHMENTS
Packet Page. 892
Packet Page. 893
Packet Page. 894
Packet Page. 895
Packet Page. 896
Packet Page. 897
Packet Page. 898
Packet Page. 899
Packet Page. 900
Packet Page. 901
Packet Page. 902
Packet Page. 903
Packet Page. 904
Packet Page. 905
Packet Page. 906
Packet Page. 907
Packet Page. 908
Packet Page. 909
Packet Page. 910
Title: OXBOW DEBRIS REMOVAL
PROJECT
Presented by: Gabriel Elliott, Director of
Community Development and Housing
Packet Page. 911
TENTATIVE TRACT 16794
Packet Page. 912
Background
In 2009, the Oxbow de velopment was approved by the City of San Bernardino under Tentative Tract Map 16794 which subdivided an existing 18.45-acre parcel into 44-single family lots with minimum lot size of 10,882 square feet, at 6920 Palm Avenue.
On July 2020, the then pr oject owner submitted a Temporary Use Permit (TUP) to allow stockpile of materials for future grading of the site. The materials comprised of approximately 60,000 tons of concrete in 3,000 truckloads, which originated from the demolition of a fire damaged Amazon warehouse building located at 2255 W. Lugonia Avenue in Redlands, which burned down in June 2020.
Packet Page. 913
Background
On August 4, 2020, t he Public Works Department issued a Haul Permit (Permit # H20-002) to Oxbow and their associate Greenleaf Engineering to transport the 60,000-ton stockpile to the project site at 6920 Palm Avenue. In 2020, based on concerns about the safety of the stockpile, the debris was tested and found to be clean. A 2025 test of the stockpile and surrounding soil has since been conducted and will be included with the staff report. On July 2020, the then p roject owner submitted a Temporary Use Permit (TUP) to allow stockpile of materials for future grading of the site. The materials comprised of approximately 60,000 tons of concrete in 3,000 truckloads, which originated from the demolition of a fire damaged Amazon warehouse building located at 2255 W. Lugonia Avenue in Redlands, which burned down in June 2020.
Packet Page. 914
Background
City Council adopte d Resolution No. 2020-265 on October 21, 2020, regarding San Bernardino Municipal Code (SBMC) Section 19.70.020(2) under which the TUP was allowed. The Resolution permits the issuance of a TUP for on-and off- site contractors’ construction yard in conjunction with an approved development project. The Resolution also declared that City Staff should not issue any Temporary Use Permits allowing the crushing or grinding of unfinished materials, such as concrete, within 1,000 feet of residentially zoned properties. On July 2020, the the n project owner submitted a Temporary Use Permit (TUP) to allow stockpile of materials for future grading of the site. The materials comprised of approximately 60,000 tons of concrete in 3, 000 truckloads, which originated from the demolition of a fire damaged Amazon warehouse building located at 2255 W. Lugonia Avenue in Redlands, which burned down in June 2020.
Packet Page. 915
Background
The City entered into a contract with CSG Consultants in March 2025, to provide a comprehensive analysis of the options available to the city for the removal of the Oxbow debris. The report considered all the options discussed over the years that had not been environmentally vetted for their impact. In May of 2025, CSG, in collaboration with Kimley-Horn, completed the report (Attachment 4) and proposed three alternatives for the removal of the debris. The report included an executive summary which summarized the analyses conducted by the firm and provided recommendations based on air quality, health risk, noise, and truck routing impacts for the three alternatives analyzed. The City will engage with the new project owner to present the conclusions of the CSG report and discuss the details of the crushing activities on site.
Packet Page. 916
Background
The environmental study considered three main alternatives: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in the material being hauled offsite as either processed or unprocessed concrete, which would require truck hauling trips to occur along Palm Avenue. Due to the proximity of Palm Avenue Elementary School, the report recommended that the hauling operation for Alternatives 1 and 2 occur during the school’s summer recess period (approximately early June to early August), to limit safety concerns associated with truck travel along Palm Avenue.
Packet Page. 917
Alternative 1
Alternative 1 involv es crushing the concrete debris onsite, then hauling the processed concrete offsite to a recycling center. This alternative would require the use of a crusher, breaker, front-end loader, street sweeper, loaders, and hauling trucks. The breaker would be used to break the concrete debris into smaller chunks for placement in the crusher, the front-end loader would load the material into the crusher, and the loaders would move the processed concrete from the pile created by the crusher, into the hauling trucks. It is anticipated that the processed concrete would be approximately 33,600 cubic yards of material.
Packet Page. 918
Alternative 1.1
Alternative 1.1 includes the use of bobtail dump trucks for the hauling operation. In order to complete the removal process during one summer recess period using bobtail dump trucks, Alternative 1.1 would require 400 truck trips per day along Palm Avenue ( 200 loaded, 200 empty) and would take approximately 38 working days to complete.
Alternative 1.2 includes the use of single-end dump trucks, which would take approximately 35 working days to complete and would require 162 hauling trips per day on Palm Avenue (81 loaded, 81 empty) Packet Page. 919
Alternative 1.2
Alternative 1.2 includes the use of single-end dump trucks, which would take approximately 35 working days to complete and would require 162 hauling trips per day on Palm Avenue (81 loaded, 81 empty) Packet Page. 920
Alternative 2
Alternative 2 involv es hauling the unprocessed concrete debris offsite to be processed at the Rialto Recycle Yard. This alternative would require the use of a street sweeper, loaders, hauling trucks, and possibly a small bobcat breaker to break the debris into smaller pieces to fit in the hauling trucks. The unprocessed concrete is anticipated to contain approximately 42,000 cubic yards of material. Therefore, it would take longer to remove from the Project site than the processed concrete, which would contain approximately 33,600 cubic yards of material.
Packet Page. 921
Alternatives 2.1; 2.1.1;2.1.2
Alternative 2.1 Alternat ive 2.1 involves removing the entire concrete debris pile over one summer recess period.
Alternative 2.1.1 Alternat ive 2.1.1 includes the use of bobtail dump trucks, which would require 520 hauling truck trips per day along Palm Avenue ( 260 loaded, 260 empty) and would take approximately 36 working days to complete.
Alternative 2.1.2 includes th e use of single-end dump trucks, which would require 200 hauling truck trips per day (100 loaded, 100 empty) and would take approximately 35 working days to complete.
Packet Page. 922
Alternatives 2.2; 2.2.1;2.2.2
Alternative 2.2 invol ves removing the concrete debris pile over two summer recess periods, to decrease the number of required truck trips along Palm Avenue during each summer. Between the two summer recess periods, the remaining concrete debris pile would have to be covered in order to limit the potential for fugitive dust and debris in the surrounding area. Alternative 2.2.1 invo lves the use of bobtail dump trucks, which would require 264 hauling trips per day on Palm Avenue (132 loaded, 132 empty) and would take approximately 71 working days to complete.
Alternative 2.2.2 inc ludes the use of single-end dump trucks, which would require 98 hauling truck trips per day (49 loaded, 49 empty) and would take approximately 72 working days to complete.
Packet Page. 923
Alternative 3
Alternative 3 consi dered by the consultant, is a variation of Alternative 1, with the crushing operation occurring onsite, and no hauling operation. Under Alternative 3, the crushed material would remain onsite for future use as onsite infill for residential development on the property. Alternative 3 would require the use of a breaker, front-end loader, and crusher. The breaker would be used to break the concrete pieces into smaller pieces for processing. The loader would move the debris into the crusher, which would create piles of processed concrete material around the project site. Alternative 3 would require a Containment Plan to ensure that the processed concrete is contained between the time it is processed and when it is used for filling, in order to limit dust emissions. It is anticipated that it would take approximately three to four months to crush the entire concrete debris pile, assuming no equipment breakdowns or delays occur. It is important to note that this alternative will require the use of specialized crushing equipment compatible with residential settings.
Packet Page. 924
Alternative 3
If Alternative 3 is sel ected as the preferred alternative, a Containment Plan to mitigate and assure that crushed material does not result in dust emission nuisance to area residents will be required. The Containment Plan shall be prepared by the Project Applicant for development of the Project site and is subject to approval by the City of San Bernardino, prior to starting site preparation for the crushing operation. The Containment Plan may include, but not be limited to, the following requirements:
The debris should be cover ed with a durable heavy-duty plastic sheeting or geotextile fabric and the following actions should be taken to ensure that the debris cover remains effective:
Regular inspections: Regu larly inspect the covering for damage or wear and tear and make repairs as needed, particularly after periods of heavy rain or high winds. Ensure Secure Cover age: Properly secure the coverings to prevent them from blowing away or becoming damaged, especially during windy conditions.
Adjust Covering: Adjust t he covering as necessary to accommodate any changes in the debris pile or weather conditions.
Packet Page. 925
Analysis
Air Quality
Based on the air qual ity modeling analyzed in Section 3.1 and Tables 7 and 11 of the report, none of the proposed alternatives would exceed a SCAQMD threshold regarding emissions of criteria pollutants. Using single-end dump trucks for the crushing operation (Alternative 1) would result in lesser emissions of every criteria pollutant compared to the use of bobtail dump trucks. For Alternative 2, if the removal operation was completed during one summer recess period, using single-end dump trucks would result in less overall pollutant emissions than using bobtail dump trucks.
Packet Page. 926
Analysis
Health Risk
Based on th
e calcu lations in the Health Risk Assessment and the results in Table 16, Carcinogenic Risk Assessment, none of the alternatives would generate TAC exposure-related cancer risk in exceedance of the SCAQMD’s thresholds. All of the alternatives would result in a negligible increase in cancer risk levels at nearby sensitive receptors compared to existing conditions. As noted in the Health Risk Assessment, the cancer risk levels analyzed do not imply that an exposed individual would contract cancer; rather, the cancer risk is a probability of developing cancer if other factors (i.e., heredity, exposure to environmental or workplace risks that compromise the immune system, and overall health) would result in an increased susceptibility to developing cancer.
Packet Page. 927
Analysis
Noise
Alternatives 1 and 3 woul d inherently result in higher noise levels from operation activities due to the use of a crusher and associated equipment onsite, compared to Alternative 2. Based on the noise measurements and calculations included in Section 3.3 and the results in Table 21, Maximum Operation Noise Levels, Alternatives 1 and 3 would not generate noise levels in exceedance of the Federal Transit Administration’s thresholds for residential noise levels. It is concluded that Alternative 2 would result in lower noise levels overall, however, Alternatives 1 and 3 would not result in significant impacts related to noise.
Packet Page. 928
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Impact
FINANCIAL
DATA
Current Fiscal Year: Next Fiscal Year: Total Cost: Ongoing Cost:
COST $ 78,000 +
$13,500
$ $ 91,500+
cost for
community
outreach
$
GENERAL
FUND
SHARE
$ 91,500 +
cost for
community
outreach
$ $ $
Packet Page. 929
Conclusion
It is recommended that t he Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, take the following actions:
1. Adopt Resolu tion No. 2025-XX of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, rescinding Resolution No. 2020-265, which prohibits the crushing of concrete on site within 1,000 feet of residentially zoned property; and 2. Review the thre e alternatives in the Oxbow Debris Removal Project Environmental Study dated May 22, 2025, select Alternative 3 which is concluded to result in least levels of impact among the three alternatives, and adopt Resolution No. 2025-xx memorializing that decision; and
3. Direct the City Manag er or his designee to prepare a public outreach program for the residents of Ward 5, regarding the removal of the Ox Bow Debris.
Packet Page. 930
Questions
Packet Page. 931