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 Elem entary School summer break from June to August and would require approvals from the South Coast Ai r 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 conveyo r 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 Mets o Lokotrack (LT106) or a Lokotrack Urban Series (LT96). The Urban version of the LT96 is designed f or quieter operation, with up to 60 percent noise reduction compared to conventional crushers. The Ur ban LT96 uses noise covers that provide noise suppression across several points, including the ma in 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 p revent dust from spreading when aggregates are unloaded. For purposes of this analysis, it is cons ervatively 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 swe eper 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 de bris pile in 38 working days. Using bobtail dump trucks would require seven additional loaders on-si te and 400 daily trips (200 loaded trucks and 200 unloaded trucks) along Palm Avenue.
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-e nd 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 a n 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 br eak (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 de bris 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 bobt ail 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 an ticipated that ten single-end dump trucks with a maximum of ten daily loads per truck would haul 1,2 00 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.
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 effective 1:
• Regular 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 fro m 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 re quire 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 5 88 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 deterio rate, and were not properly maintained. Debris cove rings would be required for Alternative 2.2 but must be properly installed and maintained to remain effective.
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
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
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 amplitud e (loudness) and frequency (pitch). The standard un it of sound 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 t he human ear is not equally sensitive to a given so und level at all frequencies, a special frequency-depen dent rating scale has been devised to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel scale (dB A) 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 v arious 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, the se scales consider that the effect of noise on peop le is largely dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the noise as well as the time of day wh en the noise occurs. For example, the equivalent continuous sound level (L eq ) is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time; thus, the L eq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic ener gy to the ear during exposure. The Day-Night Sound Level (L dn ) is a 24-hour average L eq with a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a 24 - hour average L eq with a 10 dBA weighting added to noise from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 am. and an additional 5 dBA weighting 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 State 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
guidelines is to maintain acceptable noise levels i n 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 653 02(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.
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 ambien t noise level adjacent to noise-sensitive land uses provide appro priate 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 r elated 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 sensitiv e 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 feasib le 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 so urces 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, steam 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.
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 Operati ons 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 w eight 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 Construct ion 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 thro ugh 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 existing mobile noise sources in the Project ar ea are generated by motor vehicles traveling on Pal m 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 surr ounding residential uses, which include idling and moving vehicles, mechanical equipment (e.g., heatin g, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment), dogs barking, yard maintenance, and peo ple 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 types of land uses reflect varying noise sensitivi ties 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 .
kimley-horn.com 1100 W. Town and Country Rd., Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714-939-1030
Table 2: Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive Receptor 1 Distance 2 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 S T-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 t he 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 nea rest 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 L eq
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 .
Oxbow Debris Removal Project
Not to scale
Figure 3: Sensitive Receptors
Source: Google Earth, 2025
LEGEND
Sensitive Receptors
Disturbance Area
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 ##
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, exca vation, or paving). Noise generated by equipment, including earth movers and material handlers, can r each high levels. During debris removal operations, exterior noise levels could affect sensitive noise receptors nearest the site, herein referred to as t he disturbance area.
The Project activities would include site preparati on/grading and debris removal. Such activities woul d 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 sour ces of acoustical disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (s uch as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). Typical noi se levels associated with individual equipment anticipated to be used during Project operations are listed in Table 4: Project Equipment Noise Levels . 3 It should 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 st ructures or topography that may reduce noise levels.
Noise was calculated accounting for each piece of e quipment’s usage factor, or the fraction of time th at the equipment would be in use at full power over a specific period of time. 4 As the usage factor indicates the fraction 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 n oise 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.
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 Equipment 1 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 recepto rs nearest the disturbance area. Noise levels at ot her 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 equipm ent 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 City has not established quantitative short-ter m noise standards. For purposes of this analysis, t he criteria from the Federal Transit Administration (F TA) Transit Noise and Vibration Manual are used as significance thresholds to determine the noise impa ct 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 threshol d for institutional 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 l evel along a busy city street (California Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines, 201 7, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Noise Guidebook , 1985).
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 i s 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 : Studies on how different noise levels affect peop le'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 measure s effectively during operations.
This threshold considers the temporary nature of th e debris removal activity and recognizes that construction related equipment is a routine aspect of the urban environment. The City frequently issue s building permits for similar activities (e.g., cons truction projects), making such activities a common occurrence. As a result, the City’s threshold refle cts reasonable noise expectations while incorporati ng absolute noise limits designed to protect human hea lth. Although Project operations may cause a noticeable increase in ambient noise levels, the no ise 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 nois e 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 lev el at the nearest sensitive receptors. For Alternative 1.1, o peration activities would produce the highest noise levels compared to the other alternatives, as this alternative would require crushing equipment on-sit e and would require more daily haul trucks on-site th an Alternative 1.2. Alternative 3, which would only include the crushing activities associated with Alt ernative 1 and would not include a hauling operatio n, 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
threshold of 80 dBA L eq 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 activit ies would not result in a permanent increase in amb ient noise levels in the Project area. Pursuant to Munic ipal Code Section 8.54.070, construction related
8 Metso, Lokotrack Urban Series, Solutions for Populated Environments , 2023.
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 t he hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The City’s permi tted 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 L eq )1 Threshold (dBA L eq ) 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 Estimate d 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 from 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 c oncrete 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 bo btail 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 from the roadway centerline and would not exce ed the City’s residential exterior noise standard o f 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, vehicl e speed, night fraction of traffic, and distance from the roadway.
9 Daily haul trips based on input from CSG Consulta nts. 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.
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) access ing the disturbance area. 11 The maximum noise generated by using single-end dump trucks would be 62 CNEL at 50 feet from the roadway centerline 12 and would not exceed the City’s residential exterio r noise standard of 65 dBA. Noise level estimates d o not account for the presence of intervening structu res 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 li nes 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
Project-related increases in ground-borne vibration levels would be primarily associated with the operation of heavy-duty equipment. Project operatio ns would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary ground-borne vibration, depend ing on the specific equipment used, and the operations involved. The ground-borne vibration gen erated 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. Ordi nary buildings that are not particularly fragile wo uld 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 crit eria from the California Department of Transportations ( Caltrans) Transportation and Construction Vibration Manual are used as significance thresholds to determine th e 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.
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 disturban ce area were constructed around 2006. Caltrans does not specify the age of the building to be considere d older residential structures. For vibration impac t analyses, a building over 50 years old is typically considered an “older” residential structure. However, the
0.30 in/sec PPV older residential building structur al 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 (th e 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 equipme nt 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 from the disturbance area would generate vibration events on Palm Avenue. According to the FTA’s Trans it 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 vib ration include vehicle speed, vehicle suspension, 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 increase the frequency of vibration events but woul d 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.
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 exceed 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 t he general public’s sleeping. Potential human healt h 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 wo uld 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 no ise levels to the greatest extent feasible. As note d 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.
Appendix A
Noise Data
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
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
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
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:
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 )
Receptor (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 47.4 251 8.0 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 54.6 279 4.0 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 4 9.0 1175.0 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 9 53.0 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 5 2.7 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 4 9.0 1175.0 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 9 53.0 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 4 9.7 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 9 53.0 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 5 3.2 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 9 53.0 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 4 9.7 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 9 53.0 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 5 0.7 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 9 53.0 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 4 8.4 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
OXBOW DEBRIS REMOVAL PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
CSG CONSULTANTS
APPENDIX D
Truck Routing
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 Removal 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 pro posed project. The routing analysis applies to Alternatives 1 and 2.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves removal of approximat ely 41,496 cubic yards of debris material located at 6920 Palm Avenue in the City of San Bern ardino. The project site is located on an 18.45- acre property near the northwest corner of Palm Ave nue 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 Cr ushed 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 Belm ont 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 tot al (20 feet per lane) at the marked crosswalk with on-street parking prohibited, which is suffici ent width for trucks traveling through. Truck drivers should drive cautiously and be aware of their surroundings near the school and residential areas.
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 thro ugh. On-street parking is permitted along this segment. As such, truck drivers should drive cautio usly and be aware of parked vehicles along this segment of Palm Avenue.
From Belmont Avenue to the I-215 freeway interchang e, Palm Avenue has two lanes traveling in each direction. The street width is approximately 6 4 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 dri ve 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 o perations, 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 Practi ces (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 ha zards 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 Sa n 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 fr om queuing along Palm Avenue.
It is recommended that the hauling operation and an y 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 time s. Either bobtail dump trucks or single-end dump trucks could be used during this summer recess .
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 proh ibit 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 C ity 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 .
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. Alth ough 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-21 5 freeway. The applicant should coordinate with the C ity of San Bernardino to determine if approval and/or a permit is needed to use this segment of Pa lm Avenue.
The recommended truck route includes segments of Ri verside 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 truc k routes (Riverside Avenue and Santa Ana Avenue), the I-215 and I-10 freeways, and Palm Aven ue.
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 t he 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
ATTACHMENT A VICINITY MAP
MELVIN AVEPALM AVE
PROJECT SITEHUNTINGTON DRVERDEMONT DRGARFIELD AVEOHIO AVEMEYERS RDRIDGELINE AVEOFELIA DR
OLIVE AVE
BELMONT AVE
SOUTH
DRIVEWAY
NORTH
DRIVEWAY
ATTACHMENT BCITY OF SAN BERNARDINO TRUCK ROUTES MAP
ATTACHMENT CCITY OF RIALTO TRUCK ROUTES MAP
ATTACHMENT D PROPOSED TRUCK ROUTE FOR THE OXBOW DEBRIS REMOVAL PROJECT
PROJECT SITE
RIALTO RECYCLE YARDPALM AVERIVERSIDE AVEINTERSTATE-10INTERSTATE-215SANTA ANA AVE