Attachment D - Appendix G - Noise Analysis — San Marcos City Council, June 25, 2024

ATTACHMENT D

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

APPENDIX G

NOISE & VIBRATION ANALYSIS

TECHNICAL REPORT

APPENDIX G
Noise and Vibration Analysis Technical Report

Noise and Vibration Analysis
Technical Report
for the
Hughes Circuits Project
City of San Marcos, California
Prepared for:

Hughes Circuits
546 S. Pacific Street
San Marcos, California 92078
Contact: Joe Hughes
Prepared by:

605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Contacts: Mark Storm, INCE Bd. Cert.

JANUARY 2023

Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.
13383
i March 2022
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. III 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 1 2 REGULATORY SETTING ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 8 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 13 4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 15 5 IMPACT DISCUSSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 17 6 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 25 7 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 27 8 REFERENCES CITED ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 29

FIGURES
Figure 1 Project Location ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2 Site Plan .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 3 Predicted Stationary Source Operations Noise - with Idling Truck ................................................... 21 TABLES
Table 1. City of San Marcos Exterior Noise Standards ................................................................................................. 11 Table 2. February 25, 2022 Measured Outdoor Ambient Sound Environment Samples .......................................... 13 Table 3. Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels .............................................................................. 17 Table 4. Predicted Construction Noise Levels per Activity Phase ................................................................................ 18 Table 5. Off-site Roadway Traffic Noise Modeling Results ........................................................................................... 19

APPENDICES
A. Baseline Noise Measurement Field Data (Dudek Forms)
B. Construction Noise Prediction Model Worksheet
C. Traffic Noise Modeling Input and Output
D. Operational Noise Model Input Worksheets

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT

13383
ii March 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
13383
iii March 2022
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
Project Hughes Circuits proposed project
ACC air-cooled condenser
ADT average daily traffic
AUF acoustical usage factor
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
City City of San Marcos
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HVAC heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning
ips inches per second
Ldn day–night average noise level
Leq equivalent noise level
Lmax maximum sound level
Lmin minimum sound level
PPV peak particle velocity
RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model
SF square feet
SLM sound level meter
SPL sound pressure level
veh/hr vehicles per hour

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT

13383
iv March 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

13383
1 March 2022
1 Introduction and Background
This technical noise report evaluates the potential noise and vibration impacts during construction and operation of the proposed Hughes Circuits project (proposed Project). This assessment utilizes the significance thresholds in Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.).

Project Description
The approximately 14-acre Project site is located within the City of San Marcos (City), California. The vacant Project site is comprised of Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 219-223-20-00 and 219-223-22-00 and sits north of South Pacific Street on one side and east of South Pacific Street on the other. The project location is shown on Figure 1.

The project consists of development of a 67,410-square foot (SF) manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the Project site to the south, at 546 S. Pacific Street. The 67,410 SF manufacturing building includes a 56,310 SF first floor, and a 11,100 SF mezzanine. The proposed manufacturing building would be located at the western-most portion of the Project site, and the disturbance area associated with Project construction would be limited to approximately 113,877 SF or

2.6 acres of the 14 -acre project site. Proposed develo pment would only occur within APN 219 -223-20-00. The proposed manufacturing building would include a fire control room, MPOE room, trash enclosure, outdoor amenity area, electrical room, and grade level loading dock. Parking for the proposed building would include 72 parking spaces, including 4 electric vehicle charging stations, 9 carpool and zero emission parking stalls, 4 accessible stalls, and 1 USPS parking stall. Additionally, 4 short-term bicycle parking spaces and 4 long-term bicycle parking spaces would be provided. Access to the proposed building would be provided via two new driveways along S. Pacific Street, one at the northwestern boundary of the proposed building site, and the other at the southeastern boundary of the proposed building site, as shown in Figure 2, Project Site Plan. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. Approximately 60 employees would work out of the proposed manufacturing building.

The Project site is currently designated as Light Industrial (L-I) under the City’s General Plan, and the Project proposes a Light Manufacturing land use, consistent with the City’s General Plan. Adjacent land uses include mixed commercial development to the north and south, a public recreational park (Bradley Park) to the west, and undeveloped land to the east. The nearest noise-sensitive receivers are approximately 500 feet west-southwest of the Project and represented by multi-family homes along Beverly Way in the Lake Park Terrace community that is zoned Residential R-3-10 (City of San Marcos 2022).

Noise Characteristics
Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium, such as air. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired. The sound pressure level (SPL) has become the most common descriptor used to characterize the loudness of an ambient sound level. The unit of measurement of sound pressure is a decibel (dB). Under controlled conditions in an acoustics laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear is able to discern changes in sound levels of 1 dB when exposed to steady, single -frequency signals in the mid - frequency range. Outside such controlled conditions, the train ed ear can detect changes of 2 dB in normal environmental noise. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear, however, can barely perceive noise level changes of 3 dB. A change of 5 dB is readily perceptible, and an upward change of 10 dB is perceived as twice as loud (Caltrans 2013). A doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dB increase in sound, which means that a doubling

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
2 March 2022
of sound energy (e.g., doubling the number of ground vehicle daily trips along a given road segment) would result in a barely perceptible change in sound level.

Sound may be described in terms of level or amplitude (measured in dB), frequency or pitch (measured in hertz [Hz] or cycles per second), and duration (measured in seconds or minutes). Because the human ear is not equally sensitive to sound at all frequencies, a special frequency-dependent rating scale is used to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel (dBA) scale performs this compensation by discriminating against low and very high frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear.

Several descriptors of noise (noise metrics) exist to help predict average community reactions to the adverse effects of environmental noise, including traffic-generated noise. These descriptors include the equivalent noise level over a given period (Leq), the day–night average noise level (Ldn), and the community noise equivalent level (CNEL). Each of these descriptors uses units of dBA.

Leq is a decibel quantity that represents the constant or energy-averaged value equivalent to the amount of variable sound energy received by a receptor during a time interval. For example, a 1 -hour L eq measurement of 60 dBA would represent the average amount of energy contained in all the noise that occurred in that hour. L eq is an effective noise descriptor because of its ability to assess the total time -varying effects of noise on sensitive receptors, which can then be compared to an established Leq standard or threshold of the same duration. Another descriptor is maximum sound level ( Lmax), which is the greatest sound level measured during a des ignated time interval or event. The minimum sound level (Lmin) is often called the floor of a measurement period.

Unlike the Leq, Lmax, and Lmin metrics, Ldn and CNEL descriptors always represent 24-hour periods and differ from a 24-hour Leq value because they apply a time-weighted factor designed to emphasize noise events that occur during the non-daytime hours (when speech and sleep disturbance is of more concern). Time-weighted refers to the fact that Ldn and CNEL penalize noise that occurs during certain sensitive periods. In the case of CNEL, noise occurring during the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) receives no penalty. Noise during the evening (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) is penalized by adding 5 dB, and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise is penalized by adding 10 dB. Ldn differs from CNEL in that the daytime period is longer (defined instead as 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.), thus eliminating the dB adjustment for the evening period. Ldn and CNEL are the predominant criteria used to measure roadway noise affecting residential receptors. These two metrics generally differ from one another by no more than 0.5–1 dB, and are often considered or actually defined as being essentially equivalent by many jurisdictions.

Vibration Fundamentals
Vibration is oscillatory movement of mass (ty pically a solid) over time. It is described in terms of frequency and amplitude and, unlike sound, can be expressed as displacement, velocity, or acceleration . For environmental studies, vibration is often studied as a velocity that, akin to the discussion of sound pressure levels, can also be expressed in dB as a way to cast a large range of quantities into a more convenient scale. These vibration velocity decibels (VdB) are based upon the root -mean-square (RMS) of a vibration velocity signal, and often us ed in the context of assessing building occupant detection or annoyance towards received groundborne vibration. Potential vibration impacts to buildings, on the other hand, are usually discussed in terms of inches per second (ips) peak particle velocity (PPV). Both of these vibration velocity descriptors will be used herein to discuss predicted Project- attributed groundborne vibration levels and their comparison with relevant standards.

Common sources of vibration within communities include construction activities and railroads. Groundborne vibration generated by construction projects is usually highest during pile driving, rock blasting, soil compacting, jack hammering, and demolition -related activities where sudden releases of subt erranean energy or powerful

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
3 March 2022
impacts of tools on hard materials occur. Depending on their distances to a sensitive receptor, operation of l arge bulldozers, graders, loaded dump trucks, or other heavy construction equipment and vehicles on a construction site also have the potential to cause high vibration amplitudes. The maximum vibration level standard used by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the prevention of structural damage to typical residential buildings is 0.3 ips PPV (Caltrans 2020).

Date: 1/9/2023 - Last saved by: jgreenstein - Path: Z:\Projects\j1338301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Noise\Figure1_ModeledSensitiveRece ptors.mxd Noise Measurement Locations
Hughes Circuits Project Environmental Impact Report
SOURCE: Bing Maps 2022; SanGIS 2022
0 200 100
Feet
Project Boundary
Impact Footprint
Noise Measurement Locations
Short-term
FIGURE 1

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
5 March 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
EXISTING LOTS TO BERECONFIGURED BYPARCEL MAPMATCH LINE SEE SHEET 3

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
7 March 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

13383
8 March 2022
2 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
With regard to noise exposure and workers, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) establishes regulations to safeguard the hearing of workers exposed to occupational noise (29 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 1910.95). OSHA specifies that sustained noise that is louder than 85 dBA (8 -hour time - weighted average) can be a threat to workers’ hearing and if worker exposure exceeds this amount, the employer must develop and implement a monitoring program (29 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 1910.95(d)(1)).

Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
In its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidance manual, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) recommends a daytime construction noise level threshold of 80 dBA L eq over an 8-hour period (FTA 2018) when detailed construction noise assessments are performed to evaluate potential impacts to community residences surrounding a project. Although this FTA guidance is not a regulation, it can serve as a quantified standard in the absence of such limits at the state and local jurisdictional levels.

The same aforementioned FTA guidance manual also includes recommended groundborne vibration thresholds for building damage risk that depend on the receiving structure type and condition. By way of example, it indicates that for “non-engineered timber and masonry buildings”, the criterion would be 0.2 ips PPV or 94 VdB when this value is converted to an RMS signal by a crest factor of 4 (FTA 2018). For “engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster)” buildings, the threshold is less stringent: 0.3 ips PPV or 98 VdB.

For purposes of assessing building occupant annoyance, FTA guidance suggests that r esidences would be “Category 2” receivers (i.e., “where people normally sleep”) for which 72 VdB to 80 VdB would be an appropriate standard depending on the frequency of vibration occurrence (FTA 2018).

State
California Code of Regulations
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 State De partment of Health Services. 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. Single -family homes are “normally acceptable” in exterior noise environments up to 60 dBA CNEL and “conditionally acceptable” up to 70 dBA CNEL. Multiple-family residential uses are “normally acceptable” up to dBA 65 CNEL and “conditionally acceptable” up to dBA 70 CNEL.

Schools, libraries, and churches are “normally acceptable” up to 70 dBA CNEL, as are office buildings and business, commercial, and professional uses.

California Department of Transportation
In its Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Caltrans recommends a vibration velocity threshold of 0.2 ips PPV (Caltrans 20 20) for assessing annoying vibration impacts to occupants of residential

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
9 March 2022
structures. Although this Caltrans guidance is not a regulation, it can serve as a quantified standard in the absence of such limits at the local jurisdictional level . Similarly, thresholds to assess building damage risk due to construction vibration vary with the type of structure and its fragility, but tend to range between 0.2 ips and 0.3 ips PPV for typical residential structures (Caltrans 2020).

For office building occupants, the same Caltrans guidance manual refers to International Organization of Standardization (ISO) 2631 that indicates 0.016 ips RMS (80 VdB) would be an appropriate threshold in the context of “detection or discomfort”. Converted to PPV using the FTA-recommended crest factor of 4 (FTA 2018), this value translates to 0.04 ips. A building with workshops (or similar interior uses) would have a recommended vibration criteria of 0.08 ips PPV per the same guidance based on ISO 2631, or an rms value of 0.032 ips (86 VdB). The Caltrans guidance manual also refers to the aforementioned FTA impact criteria for Category 3 land uses that ranges between 75 VdB and 83 VdB depending on frequency of vibration occurrence (Caltrans 2020).

Local
City of San Marcos Noise Level Compatibility Standards
The Noise Element of the City of San Marcos General Plan (City of San Marcos 2012) establishes target maximum noise levels in the City. Exhibit A (Table 7-3 of the Noise Element) depicts “acceptable,” “conditionally acceptable,” and “unacceptable” transportation-related exterior noise levels for the indicated land use designations.

With respect to commercial/industrial developments like the proposed Project, the Noise Element states: “the City should consider noise generation and potential impacts to surrounding development. New development can be made compatible with the noise environment by using noise and land use compatibility standards and the Future Noise Contour Diagram (see Figure 7 -2) as a guide for planning and development decisions. During the project design review process, the City can work with the project applicant to identify of potential impacts and reasonable mitigation measures. For example, the City can require an acoustical analysis for projects that will potentially generate noise that would affect sensitive receptors. These mitigation measures can include, but not be limited to, acoustically treated and/or quiet designs for furnaces, fans, motors, compressors, valves, pumps and other mechanical equipment. The City may also require limited delivery hours and/or hours of operation in order to reduce impacts to adjacent sensitive uses. In addition, all City departments must comply with State and federal OSHA standards. Any new equipment or vehicles purchased by the City will comply with local, State and federal noise standards.”

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
10 March 2022
Exhibit A. Reproduction of Tale 7-3 from the City of San Marcos General Plan Noise Element Source: City of San Marcos (2012)

Relevant City General Plan Noise Element policies include as follows:
• Policy N-1.1: Address the potential for excessive noise levels when making land use planning decisions in accordance with Table 7-3 Land Use Compatibility Noise Standards. • Policy N-1.2: Ensure that acceptable noise levels are maintained near noise-sensitive uses.

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
11 March 2022
• Policy N-1.4: Require new development projects to provide barriers to reduce noise levels, or provide sufficient spatial buffers to separate excessive noise generating land uses and noise-sensitive land uses. • Policy N-1.5: Require an acoustical study for proposed developments in areas where the existing and projected noise level exceeds or would exceed the Normally Acceptable levels identified in Table 7-3. • Policy N-3.4: Avoid excessive noise of commercial and industrial land uses through site and building design features.

City of San Marcos Noise Ordinance
The City of San Marcos Municipal Code Chapter 10.24: Noise (San Marcos 2017) addresses construction noise. Erection and demolition of buildings is exempt between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and on Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The Municipal Codes does not set noise limits on construction activities. Commonly, the City has utilized the County of San Diego’s Noise Ordinance construction noise limit of 75 dBA (8-hour average) as received by occupied properties.

Chapter 20.300 (Site Planning and General Development Standards) of the City’s Municipal Code includes noise regulations in the form of noise standards by zone (Section 20.300.070, Performance Standards). It should be noted that Municipal Code noise standards typically pertain to stationary (i.e., non-transportation-related) noise sources. The relevant portions of these noise standards are provided below:

1. Noise shall be measured with a sound-level meter that meets the standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) (Section S1.4-1979, Type 1 or Type 2). Noise levels shall be measured in decibels at the property line of the receptor property, and at least five (5) feet above the ground and ten (10) feet from the nearest structure or wall. The unit of measure shall be designated as an A -weighted decibel (dBA) Leq standard. A calibration check shall be made of the instrument at the time any noise measurement is made (Ord. No. 2017- 1446, 7-25-2017)

2. No person shall create or allow the creation of exterior noise that causes the noise level to exceed the noise standards established by Table 20.300-4 (shown in this report as Table 1). Increases in exterior noise levels listed in Table 20.300-4 are permitted but depend on cumulative duration of the increase within the measured hour. For instance, a 5 dB increase is allowed for up to fifteen (15) minutes within the hour, but a 10 dB increase above the limit is allowed for up to 5 cumulative minutes within that hour.

3. Use of compressors or other equipment, including vents, ducts, and conduits, but excluding window or wall- mounted air conditioners, that are located outside of the exterior walls of any building, shall be enclosed within a permanent, non-combustible, view-obscuring enclosure to ensure that the equipment does not emit noise in excess of the ANSI standards.

Table 1. City of San Marcos Exterior Noise Standards
Zone Applicable Limit (decibels) Time Period
Single-Family Residential (A, R-1, R-2) 1, 2 60
50 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

Multifamily Residential (R-3) 1, 2 65
55 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
12 March 2022
Table 1. City of San Marcos Exterior Noise Standards
Zone Applicable Limit (decibels) Time Period
Commercial (C, O-P, SR) 3 65
55 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

Industrial 65
60 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

Source: San Marcos 2017 (Table 20.300-4)
Notes:

1. For single-family detached dwelling units, the "exterior noise level" is defined as the noise level measured at an outdoor living area which adjoins and is on the same lot as the dwelling, and which contains at least the following minimum net lot area: (i) for lots less than 4, 000 square feet in area, the exterior area shall include 400 square feet, (ii) for lots between 4,000 square feet to 10 acres in area, the exterior area shall include 10 percent of the lot area; (iii) for lots over 10 acres in area, the exterior area shall include 1 acre.

2. For all other residential land uses, "exterior noise level" is defined as noise measured at exterior areas which are provided for private or group usable open space purposes. "Private Usable Open Space" is defined as usable open space intended for us e of occupants of one dwelling unit, normally including yards, decks, and balconies. When the noise limit for Private Usable Open Space cannot be met, then a Group Usable Open Space that meets the exterior noise level standard shall be provided. "Group Usable Open Space" is defined as usable open space intended for common use by occupants of a development, either privately owned and maintained or dedicated to a public agency, normally including swimming pools, r ecreation courts, patios, open landscaped area s, and greenbelts with pedestrian walkways and equestrian and bicycle trails, but not including off -street parking and loading areas or driveways.

3. For non-residential noise sensitive land uses, exterior noise level is defined as noise measured at the exterior area provided for public use.

13383
13 March 2022
3 Existing Conditions
SPL measurements were conducted near the Project site on February 25, 2022 , to quantify and characterize samples of the existing (a.k.a., baseline or pre-project) outdoor sound environment. Table 2 provides the location (and adjoining land use) and time at which these baseline noise level measurements were taken. The SPL measurements were performed by an attending Dudek field investigator using a Rion NL-52 sound level meter equipped with a 0.5-inch, pre-polarized condenser microphone with pre-amplifier. The sound level meter meets the current American National Standards Institute standard for a Type 1 (Precision Grade) sound level meter (SLM).

The accuracy of the SLM was verified in the field using a reference sound signal (i.e., field calibrator) before and after the measurements, and the measurements were conducted with the microphone positioned approximately 5 feet above the ground.

Three short-term noise level measurement locations (ST1–ST3) are depicted on Exhibit B and include one of each receiving land use (multi-family, public-institutional, and light industrial). Table 2 presents Leq, Lmax, and Lmin values for these surveyed positions, which were affected by the investigator-noted acoustical contributors as follows:
• ST1 – Heating, ventilating, and air -conditioning (HVAC) equipment on nearby building, birdsong, distant aircraft, distant conversations, yelling, distant industrial, distant roadway traffic; • ST2 – Birdsong, distant aircraft, distant conversations, yelling, distant industrial, rustling leaves, backup alarms, HVAC;
• ST3 – roadway traffic, birdsong, construction saw across street, distant car wash tunnel.

As shown in Table 2, the measured sound levels ranged from approximately 43.1 dBA Leq at ST1 to 64.0 dBA Leq at ST2. Noise measurement data and photographs of the survey locations appear in Appendix A, Baseline Noise Measurement Field Data. These samples of daytime Leq measured at the three representative receptor positions in Table 2 can be interpreted as approximations of CNEL, since evening SPL would likely be 5 dBA less, and nighttime SPL would be 10 dBA less than the daytime values (FTA 2018).

Table 2. February 25, 2022 Measured Outdoor Ambient Sound Environment Samples Survey
Position Location/Address
Start and End Time
(hh:mm)
Leq
(dBA)
Lmax
(dBA)
Lmin
(dBA)
ST1 Tennis and basketball courts near
501 Beverly Place 10:00 AM to 10:15 AM 43.1 47.7 39.3
ST2 542 S. Pacific Street (Hughes
Circuits existing facility) 10:45 AM to 11:00 AM 64.0 79.7 51.4 ST3 Bradley Park baseball diamond
across from 1520 Linda Vista Drive 10:30 AM to 10:45 AM 61.0 70.4 52.2 Source: Appendix A.

Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time -averaged sound level); L max = maximum sound level during the measurement interval; dBA = A-weighted decibels; ST = short-term noise measurement locations.

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
14 March 2022
Exhibit B. Baseline Outdoor Ambient Sound Level Measurement Positions Sources: Google Earth 2022, Dudek 2022

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
15 March 2022
4 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria are based on Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) and will be used to determine the significance of potential noise impacts. Impacts to noise would be significant if the proposed project would result in the following:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applica ble standards of other agencies
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels c. Expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels (for a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport) In light of these above significance criteria, this analysis uses the following standards to evaluate potential noise and vibration impacts.
• Construction noise – the City has adopted the County’s construction noise threshold of not exceeding 75 dBA for an eight-hour period, between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., when measured at any occupied property where the noise is being received.
• Off-site project-attributed transportation noise – For purposes for this analysis, a direct roadway noise impact would be considered significant if increases in roadway traffic noise levels attributed to the proposed project were greater than 3 dBA CNEL at an existing noise-sensitive land use. • Off-site project -attributed stationary noise – For purposes for this analysis, a noise impact would be considered significant if noise from typical operation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning and other electro-mechanical systems associated with the proposed Project exceeded 65 dBA hourly L eq at the property line from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and 55 dBA hourly Leq from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. • Construction vibration – A variety of thresholds are utilized herein for purposes of impact significance assessment:
o Guidance from Caltrans indicates that a vibration velocity level of 0.2 ips PPV received at a structure would be considered annoying by occupants within residential buildings (Caltrans 2020), which for purposes of this analysis would apply during normal daytime hours. For occupants of office buildings, the criterion would be 80 VdB; and for occupants of workshops (or comparable uses, such as factories), the criterion would be 86 VdB. Both of these non-residential receiving land use types presume occupants only during normal daytime business hours. o If construction activity needed to occur during nighttime hours, such as to accommodate a concrete pour or other activity for which the City may permit at its discretion, for purposes of residential building occupant annoyance during such times (i.e., when occupants would normally be sleeping) an FTA guidance threshold of 78 VdB (or 0.033 ips PPV) would be applied. o For typical receiving residential structures, aforementioned Caltrans guidance from Section 3.11.2, Regulatory Setting, recommends that a vibration level of 0.2 ips PPV would represent the threshold

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
16 March 2022
for building damage risk. For commercial and industrial buildings having more robust structure, Caltrans guidance recommends a threshold of 0.3 ips PPV.

13383
17 March 2022
5 Impact Discussion
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Short-Term Construction
Construction noise and vibration are temporary phenomena, varying from hour to hour and day to day, depending on the equipment in use, the operations performed, and the distance between the source and receptor. Equipment that would be in use during construction would include, in part, graders, scrapers, backhoes, rubber-tired dozers, loaders, cranes, forklifts, cement mixers, pavers, rollers, and air compressors. The typical maximum noise levels for various pieces of construction equipment at a distance of 50 feet are presented in Table 3. Usually, construction equipment operates in alternating cycles of full power and low power, which the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) User’s Guide (FHWA 2006) characterizes as “acoustical usage factor” (AUF) and thereby produces energy-average noise levels over time (Leq) that are less than the listed maximum noise level (Lmax). The average sound level of construction activity also depends on the amount of time that the equipment actually operates onsite.

Table 3. Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels FHWA RCNM Equipment Type
Acoustical Usage
Factor (%)
Typical Equipment Lmax
(dBA at 50 Feet)
Typical Equipment Leq
(dBA at 50 Feet)
all other equipment > 5 HP 50 85 82
backhoe 40 78 74
compressor (air) 40 78 74
concrete mixer truck 40 79 75
crane 16 81 73
dozer 40 82 78
generator 50 72 69
grader 40 85 81
man lift 20 75 68
paver 50 77 74
roller 20 80 73
scraper 40 84 80
welder / torch 40 73 69
Source: FHWA 2006.

Note: Lmax = maximum sound level; where L eq = energy -equivalent sound level and can be calculated here with L eq = L max + 10*LOG(AUF); dBA = A-weighted decibels.

Aggregate noise emission from proposed Project construction activities, broken down by sequential phase, was predicted at the closest distance between the Project construction zone and the nearest occupied building — consistent with the City’s adoption of the County of San Diego construction noise standard. In a manner comparable to the “general assessment” technique per Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidance (FTA 2018), and because the exact positions of onsite equipment activity vary over the course of a typical construction day, all construction equipment for a given phase were treated as emitting noise from a common origin point located at the geographic “acoustic centroid” of the Project site. For purposes of this analysis, two noise source-to-receptor distance values were studied as follows:

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
18 March 2022
• With respect to the existing Hughes Circuits buildings on the south side of South Pacific Street, the acoustical centroid of the Project site appears to be approximately 275 feet from the nearest existing building facade.
• To the north of the Project is an occupied commercial structure, apparently 345 feet from the Project acoustical centroid.

A Microsoft Excel –based noise prediction model emulating and using reference data from the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (FHWA 2008) was used to estimate construction noise levels at the nearest occupied structure. (Although the RCNM was funded and promulgated by the Federal Highway Administration, it is often used for non-roadway projects, because the same types of construction equipment used for roadway projects are often used for other types of construction.) Input variables for the predictive modeling consist of the equipment type and number of each , the afore-mentioned AUF, the expected duration (in hours) of onsite activity, and the distance from the receiver . Conservatively, no topographical or structural shielding was assumed in the modeling. Appendix B presents these input parameters that yield the summarized prediction results presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Predicted Construction Noise Levels per Activity Phase Construction Phase (and Equipment Types Involved)
8-Hour Leq at Nearest
Existing Hughes
Circuits Building (dBA)
8-Hour Leq at Northern
Offsite Occupied
Structure (dBA)
Site preparation (scraper, backhoe, grader) 64.8 62.6
Grading (grader, dozer, backhoe) 64.5 62.3
Building construction (crane, man-lift, generator, backhoe, welder/torch)

59.9 57.7
Architectural finishes (air compressor) 53.6 51.4
Paving (paver, roller, concrete mixer truck, backhoe, other equipment)

65.3 63.1
Notes: Leq = equivalent noise level; dBA = A-weighted decibels.

As presented in Table 4, the estimated construction noise exposure levels for each of the five expected sequential phases are not predicted to exceed 75 dBA Leq over an 8 -hour period at the nearest occupied properties to the north and south of the Project site. The predicted construction noise levels ranging from 54 to 65 dBA Leq over an 8-hour period at the nearest Hughes Circuits existing building façade are also comparable to (or less than) the measured baseline outdoor sound level of 64 dBA at survey position “ST2” shown in Table 2. For these reasons, temporary construction-related noise impacts would be considered less than significant.

Long-Term Operational
Increase of Off-Site Roadway Traffic Noise
The proposed Project would result in the creation of additional vehicle trips on local roadways (i.e., Linda Vista Drive and South Pacific Street), which could result in increased traffic noise levels at adjacent noise-sensitive land uses.

Appendix C, Traffic Noise Modeling Input and Output, contains a set of FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM, version 2.5 [FHWA 2004]) input/output spreadsheets showing studied traffic volume data (average daily traffic [ADT] expressed as vehicles per hour [veh/hr]) for the existing and existing-plus-Project modeled scenarios. Information used in the TNM model included the roadway geometry and posted traffic speeds.

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
19 March 2022
According to acoustical principles, the increase in traffic noise level relates directly to the increase in volumes by the following expression: 10*LOG(Vf/Ve), where Vf is the future traffic volume, Ve is the existing traffic volume, and vehicle speeds and proportion of vehicle types are essentially unchanged. The Project would therefore have to roughly double the traffic volumes on nearby studied roadway segments in order to increase traffic by 3 dBA, which would be considered a barely perceptible increase (Caltrans 2013).

Traffic noise levels were modeled at the same geographic positions ST1, ST2, and ST3 as shown in Exhibit B. The receivers were modeled to be five feet above the local ground elevation. The traffic noise model results are summarized in Table 5, and represented by CNEL values. The predicted CNEL values for existing conditions shown in Table 5 for ST1 and ST3 are each within +/-3 dB of the measurement-based CNEL (approximated by the daytime Leq value samples, per FTA guidance [FTA 2018] ) listed in Table 2, which suggests good agreement between empirical data and the estimation model, since a 3 dB difference is barely perceptible to human hearing outdoors.

Validated by this value agreement for existing conditions , the same TNM -based model was used to predic t the future “existing plus Project” traffic noise level associated with the studied Project -attributed changes to local roadway traffic.

Table 5. Off-site Roadway Traffic Noise Modeling Results Modeled Receiver Tag (and Location Description)
Existing (2022)
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Existing Plus
Project Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
Project-Related
Noise Level
Increase (dB)
ST1 (Tennis and basketball courts near 501 Beverly
Place) 44.1 44.4 0.3
ST2 (542 S. Pacific Street [Hughes Circuits existing
facility]) 57.1 57.8 0.7
ST3 (Bradley Park baseball diamond across from 1520
Linda Vista Drive) 64.0 64.0 < 0.1
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel; CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; dB = decibel.

Table 5 shows that at all three listed representative receivers, with particular attention to ST1 that adjoins noise - sensitive residential receptors, the addition of proposed Project traffic to the local roadway network would result in a CNEL increase of less than 1 dB, which is below the discernible level of change for the average healthy human ear. Thus, a less-than-significant impact is expected for proposed project-related off-site traffic noise increases affecting existing residences in the vicinity.

Stationary Project Operations Noise
The completion of a new manufacturing building on the Project site will add a variety of noise-producing mechanical equipment that include those presented and discussed in the following paragraphs. Most of these noise-producing equipment or sound sources would be considered stationary, or limited in mobility to a defined area. Using a Microsoft Excel–based outdoor sound propagation prediction model, Project-attributed operational noise at nearby community receptors was predicted on the assumption that noise-producing equipment are point-type sources with point-source geometric divergence (i.e., 6 dB noise reduction per doubling of distance) that conservatively ignores acoustical absorption from atmospheric and ground surface effects. Please see Appendix D for quantitative details of the modeling inputs.

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
20 March 2022
The proposed Projec t building would be served by air -conditioning equipment that includes outdoor -exposed packaged air -handling units or —at a minimum —air-cooled condensers (ACC) that provide the expected cooling demand (expressed as refrigeration “tonnage”) for the building. For a building of 67,410 total square feet that could be described as largely having a “factory -assembly area” intended interior usage, this cooling demand can be estimated with industry check figures (Loren Cook 1999). Based on the available architect plans of the proposed Project, the roof deck is expected to be 43 feet above grade and would feature a typical parapet (assumed to be 3 feet in height, measured from its top edge to the roof deck ). The roof plan depicts two potential ACC equipment locations, which this analysis will treat as two point-source positions for rooftop noise emission behind the aforesaid parapet.

The operation noise model also includes noise emission from the idling engine of a single truck parked along the north façade of the proposed Project building. For this assessment, the analysis conservatively assumes that over the course of an hour onsite, an average of one truck would be present and idling for up to five minutes as allowed by California emission regulations . This noise emission contributor, described as a point -type source, was also considered a point-type source.

Sound propagation from these two rooftop HVAC noise emission sources and the idling truck engine near grade was predictively modeled with a three -dimensional technique based on pertinent International Organization of Standardization (ISO) 9613 -2 algorithms and reference data. Assuming all the HVAC equipment is operating simultaneously for a minimum period of 1 hour, the predicted noise levels at each of three afore-studied locations are as follows: ST1 = 32.4 dBA, ST2 = 42.5 dBA, and ST3 = 33.1 dBA. These predicted levels are all less than the City’s exterior noise limits per Table 1. Figure 3 displays predicted operation noise levels across a horizontal plane five feet above grade, and visually helps support the assertion of compliance with City standards. Hence, under such conditions, predicted Project stationary noise source emission would result in a less-than-significant noise impact.

Hughes Circuits Project (Project No.: 13383)
Predicted Stationary Source Operations Noise - with Idling Truck SOURCE:Dudek 2022
0 189 378 Feet
FIGURE 3
ColorHighLow8580807575707065656060555550504545404035dBA rangePredicted Aggregate Hourly Sound Pressure Level (SPL)STX= Studied Offsite Receptor Idling Truck(up to 5 minutes within an hour)
Rooftop HVAC Units(continuous for full hour)
ST3
ST1
ST2

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
22 March 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
23 March 2022
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Construction activities may expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise, causing a potentially significant impact. Caltrans has collected groundborne vibration information related to construction activities (Caltrans 2020). Information from Ca ltrans indicates that continuous vibrations with a PPV of approximately 0.2 ips generates a human response of annoyance . For context, h eavier pieces of construction equipment, such as a bulldozer that may be expected on the project site , have peak particle velocities of approximately 0.089 ips or less at a reference distance of 25 feet (FTA 2018).

Groundborne vibration attenuates rapidly, even over short distances. The attenuation of groundborne vibration as it propagates from source to receptor through intervening soils and rock strata can be estimated with expressions found in FTA and Caltrans guidance. By way of example, for a vibratory roller operating on site and as close as the southern project boundary (i.e., 65 feet from the nearest occupied building) when involved in the paving phase of Project construction, the estimated vibration velocity level would be 0.05 ips PPV per the equation as follows (FTA 2018):

PPVrcvr = PPVref * (25/D)^1.5 = 0.05 = 0.21 * (25/65)^1.5 In the above equation, PPVrcvr is the predicted vibration velocity at the receiver position, PPVref is the reference value at 25 feet from the vibration source (the roller), and D is the actual horizontal distance to the receiver. For purposes of assessing building damage risk, this estimated 0.05 ips PPV at the nearest commercial structure would be less than the 0.3 ips PPV limit for commercial buildings as presented in the preceding Section 3.11.3. Because the predicted vibration level at 65 feet is less than this guidance criterion, the risk of vibration damage to such nearby structures is considered less than significant.

To assess human annoyance for occupants of these nearest buildings, in which office functions are assumed, this

0.05 ips PPV value can be converted to an RMS-based Lv decibel value (VdB) per the following expression:

Lv = 20 * LOG(PPVrcvr/(4*Vref)) = 20 * LOG(0.05/0.000004) = 82 VdB In the above expression, Vref is reference vibration amplitude of one micro-inch per second, and it is multiplied by a “crest factor” of 4 per FTA guidance (FTA 2018). The calculated RMS vibration velocity of 82 VdB is what impinges upon the foundation of the receiving building, afte r being attenuated via groundborne propagation through intervening soils and rock strata as estimated by the previous expression to calculate PPV exposure at the receptor distance from the source. Then, at the interface of the receiving building foundation, there is an additional “coupling loss” relating to further energy dissipation as the vibration transfers to the mass and form of the building foundation and connected structure. According to FTA guidance, this coupling loss is -5 VdB for wood-framed houses, -7 VdB for 1-2 story masonry structures, and -10 dB for 3-4 story masonry buildings (FTA 2018). Hence, with the receiving commercial building to the south being a representative of at least this 1 -2 story masonry type, the predicted vibration velocity exposure to office occupants would only be 75 VdB (i.e., the difference of 7 from 82) and thus compliant with the afore -stated Caltrans-based guidance threshold of 80 VdB per Section 3.11.3. Therefore, the potential impact on nearby commercial building occupants would be considered less than significant.

Residential buildings are much further from the Project site than the buildings on these nearby commercial land uses, so their exposures to potential groundborne Project-attributed construction vibration would be much less than the 0.05 ips PPV and 82 VdB values discussed in the preceding paragraphs. For example, the closest multi-family residences near ST1 are over 450 feet from the Project boundary, which means the calculated PPV at this distance

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
24 March 2022
from a vi bratory roller would 0.003 ips and yield only 57 VdB. Hence, daytime (or potential nighttime) vibration impacts at nearest receiving offsite residential buildings and their occupants would be less than significant.

Construction vibration, at sufficiently high levels, can also present a building damage risk. However, anticipated construction vibration associated with the proposed project would yield levels of 0.05 ips, which do not surpass the guidance limit of 0.2 to 0.3 ips PPV for preventing damage to residential structures (Caltrans 2020). Because the predicted vibration level at 65 feet is less than this guidance limit, the risk of vibration damage to nearby structures is considered less than significant.

Once operational, the proposed project would not be expected to feature major producers of groundborne vibration.

Anticipated mechanical systems like heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning units are designed and manufactured to feature rotating (fans, motors) and reciprocating (compressors) components that are well-balanced with isolated vibration within or external to the equipment casings . On this basis, potential vibration impacts due to proposed project operation would be less than significant.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? There are no private airstrips within the vicinity of the project site. The closest airport to the project site is the McClellan Palo mar Airport, approximately 4 miles west of the site. According to the Comprehensive Land Use for McClellan -Palomar Airport (SDCRAA 2011) the Project site is not located within a noise exposure contour and would therefore not expose people residing or worki ng in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Impacts from aviation overflight noise exposure would be less than significant .

13383
25 March 2022
6 Mitigation Measures
The results indicate that potential impacts during construction and operation would be less than significant . No mitigation is required with proper implementation of the proposed project design features.

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
26 March 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

13383
27 March 2022
7 Summary of Findings
This noise report was conducted for the proposed Project. The results indicate that potential noise and vibration impacts during construction would be less than significant, and no noise or vibration mitigation is required.

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
28 March 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

13383
29 March 2022
8 References Cited
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental- analysis/documents/env/tens-sep2013-a11y.pdf
Caltrans. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Division of Environmental Analysis, Environmental Engineering, Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Sacramento, California.

April. tps://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm- apr2020-a11y.pdf
City of San Marcos. 2012. City of San Marcos General Plan, Noise Element. https://www.san- marcos.net/home/showpublisheddocument/8475/636573113849130000 City of San Marcos. 2017. City of San Marcos Noise Ordinance (Chapter 10.24 and 20.300.070(F)). https://library.municode.com/ca/san_marcos/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT10PUSAMOWE_C H10.24NO
City of San Marcos. 2022. Zoning Map. http://maps2.san- marcos.net/mapgallery/map.html?webmap=0d07611e9fc64aefab39468b1f459409 FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2004. FHWA Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5.

Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. September. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transitnoise-and- vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pd FHWA. 2008. Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Software Version 1.1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Environmental Measurement and Modeling Division. Washington, D.C.

December 8, 2008.

Loren Cook. 1999. Engineering Cookbook. Second Edition.

San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. 2011. McClellan-Palomar Compatibility Factor Maps. https://www.san.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/API/Entries/Download?Command=Core_Downl oad&EntryId=2979&language=en-US&PortalId=0&TabId=225

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT
13383
30 March 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Appendix A
Baseline Noise Measurement Field Data (Dudek Forms)

Field Noise Measurement Data
Record: 1411
Project Name Hughes
Observer(s) Connor Burke
Date 2022-02-25

Monitoring
Record # 1
Site ID ST1
Site Location Lat/Long 33.135970, -117.201887
Begin (Time) 10:00:00
End (Time) 10:15:00
Leq 43.1
Lmax 47.7
Lmin 39.3
Other Lx? L90, L50, L10
L90 41.7
L50 42.7
L10 44.7
Other Lx (Specify Metric) L
Primary Noise Source Hvac on nearby building
Other Noise Sources (Background) Birds, Distant Aircraft, Distant Conversations / Yelling, Distant Industrial, Distant Traffic Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes

Description / Photos

Site Photos

Page 1 ends

Photo

Monitoring
Record # 2
Site ID ST3
Site Location Lat/Long 33.139243, -117.203404
Begin (Time) 10:30:00
End (Time) 10:45:00
Leq 61
Lmax 70.4
Lmin 52.2
Other Lx? L90, L50, L10
L90 56.2
L50 59.7
L10 62.4
Other Lx (Specify Metric) L
Primary Noise Source Traffic
Other Noise Sources (Background) Birds, Distant Traffic Other Noise Sources Additional Description Construction saw across street. Car wash tunnel Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes

Description / Photos

Page 2 ends

Site Photos
Photo

Monitoring
Record # 3
Site ID ST2
Site Location Lat/Long 33.135450, -117.199590
Begin (Time) 10:45:00
End (Time) 11:00:00
Leq 64
Lmax 79.7
Lmin 51.4
Other Lx? L90, L50, L10
L90 52.4
L50 55
L10 65.7
Other Lx (Specify Metric) L
Primary Noise Source Industrial
Other Noise Sources (Background) Birds, Distant Aircraft, Distant Conversations / Yelling, Distant Industrial, Rustling Leaves Other Noise Sources Additional Description Backup alarms. Hvac Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes

Description / Photos

Page 3 ends

Site Photos
Photo

Page 4 ends

Appendix B
Construction Noise Prediction Model Worksheet

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT Appendix B -- Construction Noise Prediciton Model Worksheet To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae 75 allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged = 8 = temporary barrier (TB) of input height inserted between source and receptor Construction Activity Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from

FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data
Source and/or Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft) Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) Heff (with
barrier)
Heff (wout
barrier)
G (with
barrier)
G (without
barrier) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation grader 1 40 85 275 0.1 65.8 8 480 62 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 scraper 1 40 84 275 0.1 64.8 8 480 61 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 backhoe 1 40 78 275 0.1 58.8 7 420 54 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Site Preparation Phase: 64.8
Grading grader 1 40 85 275 0.1 65.8 8 480 62 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 dozer 1 40 82 275 0.1 62.8 8 480 59 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 backhoe 2 40 78 275 0.1 58.8 7 420 57 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Grading Phase: 64.5
Building Construction crane 1 16 81 275 0.1 61.8 8 480 54 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 man lift 2 20 75 "forklift" 275 0.1 55.8 7 420 51 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 generator 1 50 72 275 0.1 52.8 8 480 50 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 backhoe 1 40 78 275 0.1 58.8 6 360 54 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 welder / torch 3 40 73 275 0.1 53.8 8 480 55 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Building Construction Phase: 59.9
Architectural Coating compressor (air) 1 40 78 275 0.1 58.8 6 360 54 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Architectural Coating Phase: 53.6
Paving paver 1 50 77 275 0.1 57.8 8 480 55 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 roller 2 20 80 275 0.1 60.8 8 480 57 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 backhoe 1 40 78 275 0.1 58.8 8 480 55 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 all other equipment > 5 HP 1 50 85 "paving equipment" 275 0.1 65.8 8 480 63 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 concrete mixer truck 1 40 79 275 0.1 59.8 8 480 56 5 5 0 270 5 275 270.0 7.1 275.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Paving Phase: 65.3
noise level limit for construction phase at residential land use, County of San Diego = RCNM-emulator-with-barrier_mcs032422 Dudek Project No. 13383 existingHC_allAC TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT Appendix B -- Construction Noise Prediciton Model Worksheet To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae 75 allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged = 8 = temporary barrier (TB) of input height inserted between source and receptor Construction Activity Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from

FHWA RCNM)
Reference
Lmax @ 50 ft.
from FHWA
RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data
Source and/or Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft) Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) Heff (with
barrier)
Heff (wout
barrier)
G (with
barrier)
G (without
barrier) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation grader 1 40 85 345 0.1 63.6 8 480 60 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 scraper 1 40 84 345 0.1 62.6 8 480 59 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 backhoe 1 40 78 345 0.1 56.6 7 420 52 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Site Preparation Phase: 62.6
Grading grader 1 40 85 345 0.1 63.6 8 480 60 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 dozer 1 40 82 345 0.1 60.6 8 480 57 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 backhoe 2 40 78 345 0.1 56.6 7 420 55 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Grading Phase: 62.3
Building Construction crane 1 16 81 345 0.1 59.6 8 480 52 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 man lift 2 20 75 "forklift" 345 0.1 53.6 7 420 49 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 generator 1 50 72 345 0.1 50.6 8 480 48 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 backhoe 1 40 78 345 0.1 56.6 6 360 51 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 welder / torch 3 40 73 345 0.1 51.6 8 480 52 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Building Construction Phase: 57.7
Architectural Coating compressor (air) 1 40 78 345 0.1 56.6 6 360 51 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Architectural Coating Phase: 51.4
Paving paver 1 50 77 345 0.1 55.6 8 480 53 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 roller 2 20 80 345 0.1 58.6 8 480 55 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 backhoe 1 40 78 345 0.1 56.6 8 480 53 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 all other equipment > 5 HP 1 50 85 "paving equipment" 345 0.1 63.6 8 480 61 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 concrete mixer truck 1 40 79 345 0.1 57.6 8 480 54 5 5 0 340 5 345 340.0 7.1 345.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 Total for Paving Phase: 63.1
noise level limit for construction phase at residential land use, County of San Diego = RCNM-emulator-with-barrier_mcs032422 Dudek Project No. 13383 northernOB_allAC

Appendix C
Traffic Noise Modeling Input and Output

INPUT: ROADWAYS Hughes Circut
Dudek 24 March 2022
CB TNM 2.5
INPUT: ROADWAYS Average pavement type shall be used unless PROJECT/CONTRACT: Hughes Circut a State highway agency substantiates the use RUN: Existing of a different type with the approval of FHWA Roadway Points
Name Width Name No. Coordinates (pavement) Flow Control Segment X Y Z Control Speed PercentPvmt On
Device ConstraintVehiclesType Struct?
Affected
ft ft ft ft mph %
Linda Vista Dr 60.0 point1 1 6,808,263.5 1,509,383.2 0.00 Average point2 2 6,808,064.0 1,509,445.9 0.00 Average
point3 3 6,807,754.0 1,509,572.1 0.00 Average
point4 4 6,807,338.5 1,509,745.9 0.00 Average
point5 5 6,806,973.0 1,509,892.9 0.00
S Pacific St 60.0 point9 9 6,807,552.5 1,507,752.0 0.00 Average point10 10 6,807,484.0 1,507,948.1 0.00 Average
point11 11 6,807,367.5 1,508,320.9 0.00 Average
point12 12 6,807,316.5 1,508,445.9 0.00 Average
point13 13 6,807,289.0 1,508,500.9 0.00 Average
point14 14 6,807,238.0 1,508,538.6 0.00 Average
point15 15 6,807,166.5 1,508,569.9 0.00 Average
point16 16 6,806,967.5 1,508,649.1 0.00 Average
point17 17 6,806,759.0 1,508,737.9 0.00 Average
point18 18 6,806,588.0 1,508,811.2 0.00 Average
point19 19 6,806,553.0 1,508,829.2 0.00 Average
point20 20 6,806,539.5 1,508,847.5 0.00 Average
point21 21 6,806,539.5 1,508,872.0 0.00
Linda Vista Dr-2 60.0 point24 24 6,806,973.0 1,509,892.9 0.00 Average point6 6 6,806,453.5 1,510,109.2 0.00 Average
point7 7 6,805,995.5 1,510,306.0 0.00 Average
point8 8 6,805,634.5 1,510,456.2 0.00
S Pacific St-2 60.0 point25 25 6,806,539.5 1,508,872.0 0.00 Average point22 22 6,806,558.5 1,508,915.6 0.00 Average
point23 23 6,806,959.5 1,509,870.4 0.00
C:\TNM25\Projects\Hughes\cal\existing 1 24 March 2022 INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes Hughes Circut
Dudek 24 March 2022
CB TNM 2.5
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes
PROJECT/CONTRACT: Hughes Circut
RUN: Existing
Roadway Points
Name Name No. Segment
Autos MTrucks HTrucks Buses Motorcycles

V S V S V S V S V S
veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph
Linda Vista Dr point1 1 1445 35 29 35 14 35 0 0 0 0
point2 2 1445 35 29 35 14 35 0 0 0 0
point3 3 1445 35 29 35 14 35 0 0 0 0
point4 4 1445 35 29 35 14 35 0 0 0 0
point5 5
S Pacific St point9 9 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point10 10 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point11 11 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point12 12 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point13 13 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point14 14 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point15 15 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point16 16 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point17 17 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point18 18 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point19 19 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point20 20 145 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point21 21
Linda Vista Dr-2 point24 24 1880 35 38 35 19 35 0 0 0 0 point6 6 1880 35 38 35 19 35 0 0 0 0
point7 7 1880 35 38 35 19 35 0 0 0 0
point8 8
S Pacific St-2 point25 25 494 35 10 35 5 35 0 0 0 0
C:\TNM25\Projects\Hughes\cal\existing 1 24 March 2022 INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes Hughes Circut
point22 22 494 35 10 35 5 35 0 0 0 0
point23 23
C:\TNM25\Projects\Hughes\cal\existing 2 24 March 2022 INPUT: RECEIVERS Hughes Circut
Dudek 24 March 2022
CB TNM 2.5
INPUT: RECEIVERS
PROJECT/CONTRACT: Hughes Circut
RUN: Existing
Receiver
Name No. #DUsCoordinates (ground) Height Input Sound Levels and Criteria Active X Y Z above ExistingImpact Criteria NR in
Ground LAeq1hLAeq1hSub'l Goal Calc.
ft ft ft ft dBA dBA dB dB
ST1 1 1 6,806,084.0 1,508,863.8 0.00 4.92 43.10 66 10.0 8.0 Y ST2 2 1 6,806,794.5 1,508,676.8 0.00 4.92 64.00 66 10.0 8.0 Y ST3 3 1 6,806,350.0 1,510,051.0 0.00 4.92 61.00 66 10.0 8.0 Y C:\TNM25\Projects\Hughes\cal\existing 1 24 March 2022 RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS Hughes Circut
Dudek 24 March 2022
CB TNM 2.5
Calculated with TNM 2.5
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS
PROJECT/CONTRACT: Hughes Circut
RUN: Existing
BARRIER DESIGN: INPUT HEIGHTS Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use
ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA.

Receiver
Name No. #DUs ExistingNo Barrier With Barrier
LAeq1hLAeq1h Increase over existing TypeCalculatedNoise Reduction CalculatedCrit'n CalculatedCrit'n Impact LAeq1h CalculatedGoal Calculated Sub'l Inc minus
Goal
dBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB
ST1 1 1 43.1 44.1 66 1.0 10 ---- 44.1 0.0 8 -8.0
ST2 2 1 64.0 57.1 66 -6.9 10 ---- 57.1 0.0 8 -8.0
ST3 3 1 61.0 64.0 66 3.0 10 ---- 64.0 0.0 8 -8.0
Dwelling Units # DUs Noise Reduction
Min Avg Max
dB dB dB
All Selected 3 0.0 0.0 0.0
All Impacted 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
All that meet NR Goal 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
C:\TNM25\Projects\Hughes\cal\existing 1 24 March 2022 INPUT: ROADWAYS Hughes Circut
Dudek 24 March 2022
CB TNM 2.5
INPUT: ROADWAYS Average pavement type shall be used unless PROJECT/CONTRACT: Hughes Circut a State highway agency substantiates the use RUN: Existing + Project of a different type with the approval of FHWA Roadway Points
Name Width Name No. Coordinates (pavement) Flow Control Segment X Y Z Control Speed PercentPvmt On
Device ConstraintVehiclesType Struct?
Affected
ft ft ft ft mph %
Linda Vista Dr 60.0 point1 1 6,808,263.5 1,509,383.2 0.00 Average point2 2 6,808,064.0 1,509,445.9 0.00 Average
point3 3 6,807,754.0 1,509,572.1 0.00 Average
point4 4 6,807,338.5 1,509,745.9 0.00 Average
point5 5 6,806,973.0 1,509,892.9 0.00
S Pacific St 60.0 point9 9 6,807,552.5 1,507,752.0 0.00 Average point10 10 6,807,484.0 1,507,948.1 0.00 Average
point11 11 6,807,367.5 1,508,320.9 0.00 Average
point12 12 6,807,316.5 1,508,445.9 0.00 Average
point13 13 6,807,289.0 1,508,500.9 0.00 Average
point14 14 6,807,238.0 1,508,538.6 0.00 Average
point15 15 6,807,166.5 1,508,569.9 0.00 Average
point16 16 6,806,967.5 1,508,649.1 0.00 Average
point17 17 6,806,759.0 1,508,737.9 0.00 Average
point18 18 6,806,588.0 1,508,811.2 0.00 Average
point19 19 6,806,553.0 1,508,829.2 0.00 Average
point20 20 6,806,539.5 1,508,847.5 0.00 Average
point21 21 6,806,539.5 1,508,872.0 0.00
Linda Vista Dr-2 60.0 point24 24 6,806,973.0 1,509,892.9 0.00 Average point6 6 6,806,453.5 1,510,109.2 0.00 Average
point7 7 6,805,995.5 1,510,306.0 0.00 Average
point8 8 6,805,634.5 1,510,456.2 0.00
S Pacific St-2 60.0 point25 25 6,806,539.5 1,508,872.0 0.00 Average point22 22 6,806,558.5 1,508,915.6 0.00 Average
point23 23 6,806,959.5 1,509,870.4 0.00
C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\HUGHES\CAL\E+P 1 24 March 2022
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes Hughes Circut
Dudek 24 March 2022
CB TNM 2.5
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes
PROJECT/CONTRACT: Hughes Circut
RUN: Existing + Project
Roadway Points
Name Name No. Segment
Autos MTrucks HTrucks Buses Motorcycles

V S V S V S V S V S
veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph veh/hr mph
Linda Vista Dr point1 1 1479 35 29 35 14 35 0 0 0 0
point2 2 1479 35 29 35 14 35 0 0 0 0
point3 3 1479 35 29 35 14 35 0 0 0 0
point4 4 1479 35 29 35 14 35 0 0 0 0
point5 5
S Pacific St point9 9 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point10 10 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point11 11 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point12 12 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point13 13 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point14 14 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point15 15 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point16 16 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point17 17 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point18 18 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point19 19 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point20 20 179 35 3 35 1 35 0 0 0 0
point21 21
Linda Vista Dr-2 point24 24 1914 35 38 35 19 35 0 0 0 0 point6 6 1914 35 38 35 19 35 0 0 0 0
point7 7 1914 35 38 35 19 35 0 0 0 0
point8 8
S Pacific St-2 point25 25 528 35 10 35 5 35 0 0 0 0
C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\HUGHES\CAL\E+P 1 24 March 2022
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeq1h Volumes Hughes Circut
point22 22 528 35 10 35 5 35 0 0 0 0
point23 23
C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\HUGHES\CAL\E+P 2 24 March 2022
INPUT: RECEIVERS Hughes Circut
Dudek 24 March 2022
CB TNM 2.5
INPUT: RECEIVERS
PROJECT/CONTRACT: Hughes Circut
RUN: Existing + Project
Receiver
Name No. #DUsCoordinates (ground) Height Input Sound Levels and Criteria Active X Y Z above ExistingImpact Criteria NR in
Ground LAeq1hLAeq1hSub'l Goal Calc.
ft ft ft ft dBA dBA dB dB
ST1 1 1 6,806,084.0 1,508,863.8 0.00 4.92 43.10 66 10.0 8.0 Y ST2 2 1 6,806,794.5 1,508,676.8 0.00 4.92 64.00 66 10.0 8.0 Y ST3 3 1 6,806,350.0 1,510,051.0 0.00 4.92 61.00 66 10.0 8.0 Y C:\TNM25\PROJECTS\HUGHES\CAL\E+P 1 24 March 2022
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS Hughes Circut
Dudek 24 March 2022
CB TNM 2.5
Calculated with TNM 2.5
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS
PROJECT/CONTRACT: Hughes Circut
RUN: Existing + Project
BARRIER DESIGN: INPUT HEIGHTS Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use
ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA.

Appendix D
Operational Noise Model Input Worksheets

TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT Appendix D -- Operational Noise Model Input Worksheets Source 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
grid scale ft Source Tag York1 York2 Trk1 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 x 18.9 Source X-coordinate 1305.405 1267.56757 1210.811 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 y 18.9 Source Y-coordinate 1172.973 1172.97297 964.8649 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 -18.91892 Source Z-coordinate 46 46 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Source Type (enter abbrev.) AGZE AGZE TRUCK
Source Reference SPL 87 87 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
87 87 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Source Reference Distance (ft.) 3.28 3.28 50 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 Source Height Above Grade (ft.) 46 46 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 aside from "Custom" input series, below from FHWA RCNM User's Guide (2006) Equipment Description
Equipment
Abbrev.

SPL
(Leq, dBA)
Lesser of or
available
Lmax
Spec. 721
Lmax
Measured
Lmax @50ft
(dBA, slow)
Impact
Device?
Acoustical
Use Factor
(%)
AGZE 87 based on Daikin AGZ-E chiller--see "rooftopACC" worksheet, SPL at 1m TRUCK 61 based on FHWA RCNM dump truck, but only 5 minutes idling in one hour (i.e., = 72+10*LOG[5/60]) CUS3 1
CUS4 1
CUS5 1
CUS6 1Custom #6 (user input)
Custom #1 (user input)
Custom #2 (user input)
Custom #3 (user input)
Custom #4 (user input)
Custom #5 (user input)
OASPL_120x90_PP-VV_mcs032522 Dudek Project No. 13383 Sources TECHNICAL NOISE REPORT FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS PROJECT Appendix D -- Operational Noise Model Input Worksheets ACCs (air-cooled chillers on rooftops): tons PWL
Bryant BH16 018 1.5 67
Bryant BH16 024 2 71
Trane CGA 040 4 72
Trane CGA 080 8 74
Trane Flex 155Z 16 79
Trane Flex 1110Z 30 86
Daikin AGZ-E 60 (w/out sound insulation) 60 91
Daikin AGZ-E 120 (w/out sound insulation) 120 95
Daikin AGZ-E 240 (w/out sound insulation) 241 100
Phase Unit Tag GSF facility function GSF per ton tons of refrig.

Approx. Qty. of
ACCs
tons per
ACC
Approx. Total
PWL (dBA)
Bldg Rooftop Units 67410 "factory - assembly areas" ("lo" SQ per refrigeration ton, per Loren Cook "Engineering Cookbook" page 59) 240 280.9 2 140 98 OASPL_120x90_PP-VV_mcs032522 Dudek Project No. 13383 rooftopACC

San Marcos City CouncilJune 25, 2024

San Marcos City Council
June 25, 2024