General Plan Amendments
Commission Study Session Comments
Planning Commission, August 24, 2020
Daniel Howard (Chair)
No comments
David Simons (Vice Chair) - absent
Ken Olevson, Commissioner
Sunnyvale doesn’t have EJ issues per state regula�ons, so why should we address it in the project? In the survey, the top two responses are shown. Does the survey show how much each measure would cost? Ken Rheume, C ommissioner
Not sure how we can reduce noise beyond advoca�ng for a reduc�on of aircra� flights and specifying hours of opera�on. Caltrain horns – when they go electric, will there be a reduc�on of train horn noise? Air Quality – aware of issues with traffic along Hwy 237 and US 101. What would improve traffic is beter syncing of traffic lights, such as what is being done on Mathilda. However, the lights don’t appear to be synced up through different areas, for example not on Mathilda through Moffet Park. We should ensure all traffic lights are synced up. Supports measures to plant trees. For open space provided in a project, we should specify the percentage of it that is green space. There should be more plan�ng of trees in the right-of-way park strips. Prohibit paving over front yards and park strips.
John Howe, Commissioner
How can we create policies to reduce airplane noise? We should measure traffic noise, and base the policies on quan�fiable measures, like how we do TDM.
Sue Harrison, C ommissioner
More open space and trees will help address all three issues. Would any of the items from the urban forestry plan help address these issues? It would be helpful for the commission to know when they review projects if a site is within a low-income community, or in an area of higher noise levels or poor air quality. Supports a mixed-use noise reduc�on policy
Carol Weiss, Commissioner
The maps in the presenta�on were useful. Heard during the presenta�on that aerosols are a source of pollu�on. Where are they coming from? Include lea�lower noise in the noise chart. Doesn’t see lea�lower noise addressed in City policies. Advocates for lower decibel limits on lea�lowers.
Public Comments
No comments from the public
Attachment 15
Sustainability Commission, April 17, 2023
Kristel Wickham, Chair
How do you decide when the General Plan elements need to be updated? Goals seem too general.
Would like to see measurable targets. For example, how are we doing with the safety goals in Safety elements? The electrifica�on concept in the General Plan should be expanded beyond including lawn equipment before the rules go into effect in 2027 and 2029. As there is a new policy on retrofi�ng homes to improve ven�la�on there should be a policy to include changing from gas to electric heater.
Douglas Kunz, Vic
e Chair
Will asking new housing developments to mi�ga�ng noise and air quality, contradict with our efforts to address housing crisis by allowing housing closer to major transit? Happy to see that we are voluntarily adding the EJ policies, though they are not required for Sunnyvale. With Caltrain electrifica�on and grade separa�on, will the new policies saddle the housing developments along the railroads? How will we balance quality of living vs promo�ng housing? Which EJ goal will be the most impac�ul? How do you promote ‘access to healthy food’ goal?
Kris�na Pistone,
Commissioner
What are the two regulated major industrial pollutant sources in Sunnyvale? Do toxic air contaminants listed in the updated language include nitrogen oxides? Why Policy SN-8-8 (Avoid construc�on of new residen�al uses where the outdoor noise level is over 70 dbA as a result from Train Noise) is not changed? How will electrifica�on impact the development? How is indoor noise from leaf blowers measured and regulated? How is indoor air quality measured or quan�fied? Tonya Veitch, Commissioner
For public outreach, did we coordinate with any community organiza�ons? How adaptable or flexible are we with the dra� changes currently? Are we up to date with the new BAAQMD requirements? Can BAAQMD’s March 2023 amendment on Nitrogen oxide emissions from natural gas fired water heaters be part of the General Plan amendment?
Public Comments
Received public comments about aircra� noise from Mike Janete, John Hauzler, Richard Kidler, and Evelyn Brakestone.
Council Member Linda Sell talked about her atendance at Na�onal Leagues of Ci�es conference in Washington DC with Council Member Melton and Council Member Srinivasan and met with FAA and congress member about aircra� noise to have dialogue with the airports.
Attachment 15
Housing and Human Services Commission, April 19, 2023
Elinor Stetson, Chair
When noise and vibra�on are asked to be accessed and mi�gated, will they add to the cost and slow down housing development? The informa�on that Moffet Field has 24,000 flight opera�ons is outdated.
Leesa Riviere, Vice Chair
Do we have low-income communi�es in Sunnyvale? How are disadvantaged communi�es iden�fied? How are the elements priori�zed between the required and not required ones? Do we have dra� update informa�on on the website?
Jim Davis, Commissioner
Will the safety policies address public safety issues, or will they protect the levees that are facing a big danger in our city because they are going below sea level? If we are adding open space, where are we going to find the money for this lo�y goal? We are not seeing open space in Peery Park. Walkways and pathways for recrea�on are not found. Why are policies talking about adding schools when there is school closure prevalent everywhere? There is no place to put new school in Moffet Area. With regards to elimina�ng pollu�on through transporta�on, why are the goals so lo�y and provide no basis as to how they can be achieved?
Ken Hiremath, Commissioner
Why are transporta�on issues not addressed in the update? Why are EJ policies focusing only on certain areas? Why don’t we apply all EJ policies broadly throughout the City? Why do we have transporta�on related goals when Sunnyvale has no control over traffic issues? Scot Duncan, Commissioner
In Noise sec�on, why do we retain the exis�ng policy that says support the right of private ci�zens to sue airports for noise impacts? Assessing and mi�ga�ng noise from transit sources will contradict with our goal to promote transit.
Public Comments
No comments from the public
Attachment 15
From:
To: Mary Jeyaprakash
Cc:
Subject: Draft update for "Sunnyvale General Plan Update" regarding Commercial Flights Date: Sunday, April 9, 2023 11:21:36 AM
ATTN: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Hi Mary,
RE: Sunnyvale General Plan Update
https://www.sunnyvale.ca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/4429 I would like to give you some thoughts on the Sunnyvale General Plan Update in regards to commercial aircraft noise.
Before 2014 the FAA dispersed commercial
aircraft over Sunnyvale on the days where south-flow was used. After 2014 the FAA implemented the NextGEN program. The NextGEN program concentrated aircraft on a "rail" over specific neighborhoods. Although this change impacted fewer neighborhoods, those impacted hear an increase in screeching jets, sounds bouncing off of clouds, and extremely loud noises. The Sunnyvale General Plan Update does not highlight the past change to south flow and possible future changes to commercial aircraft flying over Sunnyvale. The current Sunnyvale General Plan understates the impact of commercial aircraft (Southwest, Alaska Airlines, etc.) noise flying into SJC over Sunnyvale.
The Sunnyvale General Plan Update states that "Major roadways cause most of the transportation noise in Sunnyvale."
This very much depends upon where you live.
For some people who live under the FAA south-flow to SJC road noise is not a problem.
That sentence is vague and can be misinterpreted. I think a restatement of that sentence is required to clarify what is intended. To whom do the roadways cause noise? This sentence underrepresents those living next to the Caltrans or those living under the SJC south-flow commercial air traffic.
The Sunnyvale General Plan Update states that "Roadways are the major source of transportation noise, followed by Moffett Federal Airfield, the Caltrain corridor and San Jose International Airport." Again this is not very clear.
What data is used to
justify this ordering of the transportation noise? For most people impacted by the SJC south-flow the Moffett Federal Airfield nor Caltrain are not at the top of their list.
Ordering the annoyance and impact of sounds in this way underrepresents some neighborhoods.
I've found that the analysis by the FAA regarding the impact of sound on individuals is lacking.
They have recently admitted that the impact of noise that they used for the last 30+ years is understated and needs updating. Having the FAA regulate sound on the ground is like having the Foxes guard the Henhouse. There are independent studies about the impact of aircraft noise on individuals living under the flight path.
One such study is the "2017 Study by National Institute of Health (NIH)"" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5437751/
Attachment 15
The Sunnyvale General Plan Update states "For ambient or transportation related noise (except for single-event train horns), an average noise (Ldn) is used (the average sound Level for Day and Night). An Ldn measurement (day/night average sound level) is a weighted average sound level in decibels during a 24- hour period. "
The Ldn measurement (day/night average sound level) might be applicable to automobiles which have a relatively equal db per vehicle.
The Ldn measurement
(day/night average sound level) is flawed when it comes to aircraft.
Waking up to
screeching aircraft every minute when there is relatively little sound between flights skews the average sound level.
Reading the Sunnyvale General Plan Update you would think that the SJC south-flow is not a major contributor to sound annoyance in Sunnyvale. In the "2017 Study by National Institute of Health (NIH)" there
are discussions on:
"The derivation of exposure–response curves based on data from many individual studies[7] yielded different curves for aircraft, road traffic, and railway noise, with higher annoyance for aircraft noise than for road traffic or railway noise at the same exposure level."
HIGHER ANNOYANCE FOR AIRCRAFT NOISE THAN FOR ROAD
TRAFFIC AND RAILWAY NOISE.
The "2017 Study by National Institute of Health (NIH)" study also points out:
"Recent reviews of how noise, and in particular aircraft noise, affect children’s learning have concluded that aircraft noise exposure at school or at home is associated with children having poorer reading and memory skills. There is also an increasing evidence base which suggests that children exposed to chronic aircraft noise at school have poorer performance on standardized achievement tests, compared with children who are not exposed to aircraft noise." "Two large studies have found associations between aircraft noise and heart disease and stroke; ..."
"Two meta-analyses[47,48] relating to seven epidemiological studies in total have found associations between chronic aircraft noise exposure and hypertension in adults."
The Sunnyvale General Plan Update states "To establish existing community noise levels and assist in future land use planning decisions, a citywide ambient noise survey and traffic noise modeling was conducted."
I will point out that a study for commercial aircraft noise was conducted but not mentioned in the "Sunnyvale General Plan Update".
The Sunnyvale General Plan Update states "If the noise source is aircraft, the overhead noise is impractical to mitigate for outdoor residential areas."
The word
"impractical" needs clarification.
Using the word impractical implies that there is
nothing to be done about aircraft noise.
Or it is not worth the effort. Before 2014
aircraft noise was less impactful.
Because of the change by the FAA "outdoor
residential areas" were impacted.
It is practical to mitigate outdoor noises from
commercial aircraft, but this requires working with the FAA and that needs to be part of the "Sunnyvale General Plan".
Attachment 15
The "Sunnyvale General Plan Update" states "Residents in northeast Sunnyvale are affected by San Jose International Airport flight patterns; noise levels will stabilize and decrease as quieter aircraft become prevalent. Current and future noise levels are below state limits. "
This is incorrect.
There is no source for where the information "flight patterns noise levels will stabilize and decrease". Can you provide the source for this statement? SJC has added new runways. In 2023 Ro Khanna provided SJC with 10 million in funding with no monies for noise impact resolution. In fact commercial flights will only become more frequent causing more noise. Flight patterns noise levels will not stabilize, they will increase in frequency.
There are possibly fewer residents impacted by the SJC south-flow than road noise.
This does not make it less of an annoyance.
This does not mean that commercial
flight noise should not be highlighted as a major issue. I hope more thought will be given to the commercial aircraft noise issue in the Sunnyvale General Plan Update.
Sincerely,
Attachment 15
From:
To: Mary Jeyaprakash
Cc: Madeline Khair; ESD AP;
Subject: Re: Sunnyvale General Plan Update
Date: Tuesday, April 25, 2023 12:32:49 PM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
ATTN: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Hi Mary
Thanks for approaching me to provide my comments which I provide you before your deadline on this date, on Tuesday 25, 2023 around 12:30pm.
As indicated in my previous message that I sent on February 8, 2021:
Gas operated Leaf blowers are probably the most serious hearing environmental hazard.
Specifically as these are operated daily in residential areas. This issue is exasperated as more people are working from home.
Many cities across California already implemented a ban on using leaf blowers. Please review this link and go over the information.
Per my previous message, my focus was on banning use of gas operated leaf blowers. As the documents are quite lengthy, I did my best to identify the sections referencing my request.
Here is what I found:
1. SN-9.1a Regulate leaf blower noise including but not limited to hours of operation limits, in the Sunnyvale municipal code.
2. POLICY EM-11.8 ENCOURAGE THE USE OF ELECTRIC LANDSCAPING EQUIPMENT (E.G., LEAF BLOWERS, HEDGERS, MOWERS).
3. POLICY EM-11.9 CONTINUE TO PHASE OUT THE USE OF GAS-POWERED LANDSCAPING EQUIPMENT IN CITY OPERATIONS.
I didn't find any elaboration on the above. If there are any, please send them to me referencing the
specifics.
Here are my comments:
I suggest to modify the above sections as follows:
1. SN-9.1a Entirely ban the use of gas operated leaf blower noise including but not limited to hours of operation limits, in the Sunnyvale municipal code.
2. Remove "POLICY EM-11.8 ENCOURAGE THE USE OF ELECTRIC LANDSCAPING EQUIPMENT (E.G., HEDGERS, MOWERS)".
3. POLICY EM-11.9
Entirely ban the use of gas operated leaf blowers. PHASE
OUT THE USE OF OTHER
GAS-POWERED LANDSCAPING EQUIPMENT
SUCH AS HEDGERS, MOWERS IN THE CITY OF SUNNYVALE WITHIN 2 Attachment 15
YEARS
4. Proactively ( as opposed to relying on citizens filing complaints) enforce the above regulations with routine inspections resulting in tickets and deterring fines Please reply with your response to my comments and the code proposed following my comments.
Thanks,
On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 9:49
AM Mary Jeyaprakash <[email protected]>
wrote:
Good Morning!
Thank you for your interest in the Environmental Justice, Noise, Safety, and Air Quality General Plan Amendments. The draft General Plan Amendments to Chapter 1: Introduction, Chapter 6: Safety and Noise, and Chapter 7: Environmental Management are available for public review here
and on the City’s website:
Air Quality and Noise Element Update | Sunnyvale, CA
Comments on the draft documents may be sent to Mary Jeyaprakash in writing via email, [email protected]
, or by mail, 456 W. Olive Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086, by Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 5 p.m.
The draft document contains:
1. General Plan Chapters 1 (Environmental Justice), 6 (Noise), and 7 (Air Quality) with track changes showing the differences between the currently adopted sections and the updates;
2. A clean copy of the Chapters mentioned in item 1 showing only the proposed updates; and
3. General Plan Chapter 6 (Safety) with track changes showing the differences between the currently adopted sections and the updates.
The draft document is currently scheduled for comments and consideration at the following public hearings (if hearing dates are modified, an email will be sent to all interested parties):
Sustainability Commission – Monday, April 17, 2023 (Study Session) Housing and Human Services Commission – Wednesday, April 19, 2023 (Study Session)
Attachment 15
Planning Commission – Monday, June 12, 2023 (Adoption Hearing) City Council – Tuesday, June 27, 2023 (Adoption Hearing) Thank you,
Follow us on:
Mary Jeyaprakash, AICP
Senior Planner
Community Development Department
Phone:
408-730-7449
Sunnyvale.ca.gov/virus
* The Sunnyvale Planning Division continues to provide virtual services, such as electronic permit submittals and virtual meetings. In-person services are also available at the One Stop Permit Center, located on the second floor of the new City Hall building at 456 W. Olive Avenue. Underground parking is available and can be accessed on W. Olive Avenue. Masks and appointments ([email protected]) are strongly encouraged.
General zoning information is also available on the Planning Division webpage. Due to high call/email volumes, a Planner will respond to you within 4 business days, please be patient with us during this time.
Attachment 15