these results generally fall between the rates identified by Code 938 and 937 in the morning peak hour but are higher than either rate in the evening peak hour.
It is our opinion that the trip generation associated with the proposed coffee use would be similar to that observed at Dutch Brothers standard kiosks. The effect of providing an outdoor patio is already included in the rates as that is a common feature of Dutch Brothers kiosks.
TABLE 1
TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATE
ITE
Code Description Quantity Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total
820
General Retail 1 ksf 37.75 62% 38% 0.94 48% 52% 3.81
Project 4.34 164 3 1 4 8 8 16
Pass-by 34% <56> - - - <3> <3> <6>
Primary trips 108 3 1 4 5 5 10
930
Fast Casual
Restaurant 1 ksf 315.17 67% 33% 2.07 55% 45% 14.13
Project 1.10 847 1 1 2 9 7 16
Pass-by 43% <364> - - - <3> <3> <6>
Primary 1 1 2 6 4 10
Coffee without indoor
seating 1 ksf 1,685.13 148.07 121.55
Project 1.01 1,705 76 73 149 59 64 123
Pass-by 75% <1,279> <56> <56> <112> <46> <46> <92>
Primary Trips 426 20 17 37 13 18 31
Total Gross Trips 2,716 80 75 155 76 79 155
Total Pass-by <1,699> <56> <56> <112> <52> <52> <104>
Total Primary 1,017 24 19 43 24 27 51
Peak Hour Trip Generation Forecasts. As indicated in Table 1, we have assembled trip generation estimates for the three components of the project. As shown, the project could generate 155 trips in the a.m. peak hour and evening peak hour.
Daily Trip Generation. Data specific to the Dutch Brothers restaurant is not available on a daily basis, and we have typically estimated the business’s daily trip generation based on the characteristics of other coffee related uses. The sum of a.m. and p.m. peak hour trip generation rates has been compared to the available daily trip generation rates to suggest a factor that can be applied to the available Dutch Brothers peak hour data. For Code 938 (small kiosks) the sum of peak hour rates represents 21.3% of the daily rate. For Code 937 (Coffee Shop with seating), the sum equals 16.2% of the daily traffic, while for Code 934 (Fast-Food with Drive-Thru), the sum is equal to 15.5 % of the daily trip generation. Based on these relationships we expect that the sum of Dutch Brothers a.m. and p.m. peak hour trip generation forecasts would be 16% of its daily traffic. We estimate that coffee use in the project could generate 1,705 daily trips (i.e., ½ inbound and ½ outbound) (i.e., 145+123) / 0.16 = 1,705). Combined with the other uses the total project could generate 2,716 daily trips.
942
Mr. Paul Deppe, Armet Davis Newlove & Associates
August 31, 2021
Pass-by Trips. A share of the trips generated by retail and service-related uses is often drawn from the stream of traffic already passing the business. These “pass-by” trips would be made by customers who simply turn into and out of the site as a part of another trip. The ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition presents pass-by trip rates based on interviews with patrons at various businesses, and this data was reviewed. In this case pass-by rates for three land use categories may be applicable. Pass-by rates are presented for Code 938, and pass-by trips comprised 89% of the p.m. peak hour trips made at the small coffee kiosks included in that study. Similarly, pass-by trip rates for Code 934 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru are 49% of the a.m. and 50% of the p.m. trips for that use. While no rates are available for Fast Casual Restaurants, ITE data is available for High Turnover Sit Down restaurants ( i.e., 43%), and this rate was assumed.
Recognizing that the pass-by trip characteristics of a coffee use such as Dutch Brothers likely fall somewhere between these two published rates, we anticipate that 75% of the trips generated by the coffee use will be pass-by trips drawn from the 15,300 AADT reported by Caltrans in 2019 on SR 180 east of SR 145, as well as persons already visiting the neighboring Walmart. Thus, 112 a.m. peak hour and 104 p.m. peak hour trips would be pass-by. The remaining 43 a.m. and 51 p.m. peak hour trips would be made by customers for the primary purpose of visiting the project.
CEQA / Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
Starting in July 2020 SB 743 required agencies to move from a Level of Service based impact analysis under CEQA to analysis based on regional Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Current direction regarding methods to identify VMT and comply with state requirements is provided by the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) December 2018 publication, Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA and the Del Norte Region SB 743 Implementation Plan (2020).
OPR provides this direction for retail projects:
Retail Projects. Generally, lead agencies should analyze the effects of a retail project by assessing the change in total VMT because retail projects typically re-route travel from other retail destinations. A retail project might lead to increases or decreases in VMT, depending on previously existing retail travel patterns.
However, OPR also identifies Screening thresholds for various types of development projects:
Many agencies use “screening thresholds” to quickly identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. (See e.g., CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15063(c)(3)(C), 15128, and Appendix G.) As explained below, this technical advisory suggests that lead agencies may screen out VMT impacts using project size, maps, transit availability, and provision of affordable housing.
Local-Serving Retail Uses. Local-serving retail developments would reduce trip lengths (and therefore VMT) by offering additional retail choices allowing customers to make shorter trips than they would make to more distant retail developments. This would apply to retail developments intended to serve customers in the immediate area.
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory provides that “because new retail development typically redistributes shopping trips rather than creating new trips, estimating the total change in VMT (i.e., the difference in total VMT in the area affected with and without the project) is the best way to analyze a retail project’s transportation impacts.” Local serving retail generally shortens trips as longer trips from regional 943
Mr. Paul Deppe, Armet Davis Newlove & Associates
August 31, 2021
retail are redistributed to new local retail. OPR Guidance suggests that retail uses of 50,000 sf or less can typically be considered locally serving.
The project provides retail and food services along SR 180 within the Kerman area, which in addition to motorists already on SR 180 is expected to provide a majority of its customer base. Based on the location of competing business, the most likely effect on regional travel associated with the development of the project is to offer another option for trips made by residents shopping along the SR 180 corridor. As the proposed project is relatively close to other restaurants and rerail centers, the regional effect on VMT is likely to be small, but VMT generally will be reduced by offering a closer option for some traffic.
Site Plan Review
Layout. The project is part of a larger commercial center being constructed west of Kerman Plaza (Walmart). Access to the overall center has been constructed on SR 180 under an encroachment permit from Caltrans District 6. A north-south aisle extends south for about 240 feet to an east west aisle that will provide direct access to the project. Those access points are about 35 feet and 200 feet from the SR 180 connection, respectively.
Drive-thru Queueing Statistics. To assess the coffee use’s drive-thru aisle we have assembled available information regarding the queuing characteristics of Dutch Brothers restaurants in order to confirm the adequacy of the proposed site plan. As shown in the attached site plan, the drive-thru is entered at a location adjoining the western site access. From that point the lane proceeds counterclockwise around the building.
The lane has roughly 350 feet of queuing area from the pick-up window around the site to the entrance. At 20 feet per vehicle the plan accommodates 18 vehicles that can be stored inside the designated queueing area. The lanes last 70 feet includes an exit pass-thru lane that allows customers who have been serviced while in line the opportunity to proceed around a time-consuming-order at the pick-up window.
As indicated in Table 2, peak drive-thru queues were measured at four Dutch Brothers kiosk restaurants.
Each is equipped with dual entry aisles, provides peak period in-line service to reduce headways and includes an exit pass-thru lane that allows customers who have been serviced in line to proceed. During peak period Dutch Brothers regularly positions staff with ordering tablets in line to expedite service, and this activity was observed.
Table 2 identifies the maximum queue observed behind the ordering board in each lane and the maximum number of vehicles queueing at one time. As shown, the largest number of concurrent vehicles was in a range of 13 to 15 vehicles, and the 18 vehicles accommodated in Multi-Tenants Building with end cap drive-thru has the capacity for those totals.
TABLE 2
DUTCH BROTHERS DRIVE-THRU QUEUE REPORTS WITH DUAL DRIVE-THRU Location
Peak Hour
Time Period
Pick Up
Window
Entry Aisle
#1 #2 Total Vehicles
Sacramento, CA AM 3 5 5 13
PM 3 7 5 15
Roseville, CA AM 2 6 5 13
PM 2 3 2 7
Stockton, CA AM - 6 9 15
PM - 7 6 13
Turlock, CA AM 7 3 2 12
PM 7 4 5 16
944
Mr. Paul Deppe, Armet Davis Newlove & Associates
August 31, 2021
Drive Thru Assessment. While the project layout does not match the Dutch Brothers standalone prototype, the drive-thru layout will be adequate assuming that operational strategies typically used by Dutch Brothers are incorporated into the plan. As noted earlier, in line service is likely to be needed during peak periods, and the site plan should be designed to provide a safe area for service employees to walk around the queue of waiting cars.
Dutch Brothers typically monitors the effects of peak period queuing near its drive thru entrances, and if excessive queues occur temporary traffic controls are implemented to direct incoming customers to alternative routes that stretch out the queue at an acceptable location. Temporary controls are preferable to permanent changes that limit access to all businesses at other times. The site layout can facilitate a temporary control plan by limiting access at the eastern access and directing arriving traffic to the west access about 200 feet away. From that point traffic to the drive-thru would turn into the southern aisle and any extra queue can be accommodated in this area (10 more cars). The area around the drive-thru entrance could be marked “KEEP CLEAR” to inform customers of the need to avoid queuing and to set the stage for the time periods when temporary control goes into effect. Because peak coffee sales typically occur in the morning when most retail businesses and casual dining restaurants are not open, a temporary control plan can be implemented without appreciably affecting the coffee business’s neighbors. However, traffic that was destined for other businesses can still access storefront parking via the northern aisle.
Overall Conclusions
The project’s impacts under CEQA based on VMT are not significant. The site plan will function acceptably with implementation of temporary peak period traffic control measures at the drive-thru entrance when needed.
Thank you for contacting our firm. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Kenneth D. Anderson, P.E.
President
Attachments: Tables A, Site Plan
Kerman Coffee.ltr
945
TABLE A
DUTCH BROTHERS TRIP GENERATION RATES
Location (sf)
Size
Daily
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Inbound Outbound Trips
Rate
per ksf
Pass-by
Rate Inbound Outbound Trips
Rate
per ksf
Pass-by
Rate
Dutch Brothers Data Specific to 800+ sf model with dual drive thru Stockton, CA1 810 53% 47% 120 148.10 44% 56% 70 86.42
Sacramento, CA2 865 48% 52% 120 138.72 47% 53% 112 129.48 Roseville, CA3 865 52% 48% 114 131.79 50% 50% 66 76.30
Turlock, CA4 835 52% 48% 145 173.65 50% 50% 162 194.01
Average 1682.13 51% 49% 125 148.07 48% 52% 103 121.55
Kerman Site based on other ITE rates
ITE 937 1.01 828 46 44 90 88.90 22 22 44 43.48
ITE 938 1.01 2,020 170 170 340 337.04 42 42 84 83.33
ITE Data
ITE Code 938
5 2,000.00 50% 50% 10 to 60 337.04 50% 50% 83.33 89%
ITE Code 937
6 820.38 51% 49% 88.90 50% 50% 43.48
ITE Code 934
7 470.95 40.19 49% 32.67 50%
1 Crane Transportation Group, survey of Stockton CA site 10/3/2019 2 4250 El Camino Avenue, Sacramento, CA 11/3/2020
3 2348 Sunrise Blvd, Roseville, CA 11/3/2020
4 1201 W. Monte Vista Ave, Turlock, CA
5 Coffee / Donut Shop with Drive-Thru and No Indoor Dining. All samples are Kiosks of 100 sf 6 Coffee / Donut Shop with Drive-Thru. Samples ranged from 500 to 5,500 sf 7 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru
8 assumed average of rates for Code 938 and Code 934 values 946
figure 1
SITE PLAN
0540-01 LT 08/27/2021
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc. Transportation Engineers - --- ' 0s - - -- M
I : ~ LL .1l = 1
~ "O ,,
'\ --------------------· - ------ ----'---'#--- -
·$, PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
947
Trip Generation Calculations
CURRENT SITE PLAN
948
January 11, 2024
Table 1A
New Project Trip Generation (Average Rates)
ITE Land Use Units
Traffic V
A.M. Peak Hour
olumes
Midday Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes Traffic Vo
P.M. Peak Hour
lumes
Weekday
Traffic Volume
Split
Rate
Enter Exit
Split
Rate
Enter Exit
Spl
Rate
it
Enter Exit Rate Total
Discount Club (857)
171,161
sq. ft.
0.80 61/39
84 54
4.62 50/50
396 396
4.19 50/50
359 359 42.46 7,268
Fast Food Restaurant with
(NEC o
Drive Through (934)
f site)
5,588
sq. ft.
44.61 51/49
128 122
5 50.94
1/49
145 140
52 33.03
/48
96 89 467.48 2,612
Automated Car Wash (948)
(Shops B)
1 lane
77.50+
50/50
39 39
77.50+
50/50
39 39
50/50
77.50 39 39 776++ 776
Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Through (934) (Panda)
2,540
sq. ft.
44.61 51/49
0** 0**
5 50.94
1/49
66 64
52 33.03
/48
44 40 467.48 1,188
High-Turnover Sit-Down
Restaurant (932) (Texas
Roadhouse)
7,646
sq. ft.
9.57 55/45
0*** 0***
17.41 52/48
0*** 0***
9.05 61/39
26 17 107.20 820
Coffee Shop without indoor
seating (Dutch Bros.)
810 sq. ft.
5 148.07
1/49
61 59
5 148.07
1/49
61 59
48 121.55
/52
48 51
1,
13 685.
1,366
Automobile Parts and Service
Center (943) (Les Schwab)
12,000
sq. ft.
1.91 72/28
17 6
2.76 54/46
18 15
2.06 39/61
10 15 16.60 200
Subtotals: - - 329 280 - 725 713 - 622 610 - 14,230
Internal Capture: - - -15 -15 - -36 -36 - -31 -31 -718
TOTAL EXTERNAL: - - 314 265 - 689 677 - 591 579 - 13,512 Reference: Trip Generation Manual, 11
th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2021. Rates are reported in trips per 1,000 square feet of building area and trips per lane, as applicable. Splits are reported as Entering/Exiting as a percentage of the total. + ITE does not provide data for the A.M. peak hour and midday peak hour, so P.M. peak hour data were applied. ++ ITE does not provide data for the daily volumes, so it was assumed that 10 percent of the daily volume occurs during the P.M. peak hour and the daily rate was estimated by multiplying the P.M. peak hour rate by 10. * ITE indicates that. “Some sites may include on-site fueling pumps.” ** Panda Express opens at 10:00 a.m. *** Texas Roadhouse opens at 3:00 p.m.
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
949
January 11, 2024
Table 2A
Alternate New Project Trip Generation (Using Increased Rates) ITE Land Use Units
Traffic V
A.M. Peak Hour
olumes
Midday Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes Traffic Vo
P.M. Peak Hour
lumes
Weekday Traffic
Volume
Split
Rate
Enter Exit
Split
Rate
Enter Exit
Spl
Rate
it
Enter Exit Rate Total
Discount Club (857)
171,161
sq. ft.
1.53 61/39
160 102
6.38 50/50
546 546
5.89 50/50
504 504 55.50 9,500
Fast Food Restaurant with
(NEC o
Drive Through (934)
f site)
5,588
sq. ft.
71.75 51/49
204 197
75.85 51/49
216 208
52 50.62
/48
147 136 706.10 3,946
Automated Car Wash (948)
(Shops B)
1 lane
77.50+
50/50
39 39
77.50+
50/50
39 39
50/50
77.50 39 39 776++ 776
Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Through (934) (Panda)
2,540
sq. ft.
44.61 51/49
0** 0**
5 50.94
1/49
66 64
52 33.03
/48
44 40 467.48 1,188
High-Turnover Sit-Down
Restaurant (932) (Texas
Roadhouse)
7,646
sq. ft.
9.57 55/45
0*** 0***
17.41 52/48
0*** 0***
9.05 61/39
26 17 107.20 820
Coffee Shop without indoor
seating (Dutch Bros.)
810 sq. ft.
5 148.07
1/49
61 59
5 148.07
1/49
61 59
48 121.55
/52
48 51 1,685.13 1,366
Automobile Parts and Service
Center (943) (Les Schwab)
12,000
sq. ft.
1.91 72/28
17 6
2.76 54/46
18 15
2.06 39/61
10 15 16.60 200
Subtotals: - - 481 403 - 946 931 - 818 802 - 17,796
Internal Capture: - - -22 -22 - -47 -47 - -41 -41 -888
TOTAL EXTERNAL: - - 459 381 - 899 884 - 777 761 - 16,908 Reference: Trip Generation Manual, 11
th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2021. Rates are reported in trips per 1,000 square feet of building area and trips per lane, as applicable. Splits are reported as Entering/Exiting as a percentage of the total. + ITE does not provide data for the A.M. peak hour and midday peak hour, so P.M. peak hour data were applied. ++ ITE does not provide data for the daily volumes, so it was assumed that 10 percent of the daily volume occurs during the P.M. peak hour and the daily rate was estimated by multiplying the P.M. peak hour rate by 10. * ITE indicates that. “Some sites may include on-site fueling pumps.” ** Panda Express opens at 10:00 a.m. *** Texas Roadhouse opens at 3:00 p.m.
Note: Rates for Discount Club and Fast-Food at NEC are average rate plus one standard deviation. Rates for Dutch Bros. are taken from KD Anderson report dated 8-31-21.
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
950
January 11, 2024
Table 3A
New Project Trip Generation (Average Rates – Saturday)
ITE Land Use Units
Saturday Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes Saturday Traffic Volume
Rate
Split Enter Exit Rate Total
Discount Club (857)
171,161
sq. ft.
6.37 49/51
534 556 53.75 9,200
Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Through (934)
(NEC of site)
5,588
sq. ft.
55.25 51/49
158 151 616.12 3,444
Automated Car Wash (948)
(Shops B) 1 lane 41.00
46/54
19 22 410++ 410
Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Through (934) (Panda)
2,540
sq. ft.
55.25 51/49
72 69 616.12 1,566
High-Turnover Sit-Down
Restaurant (932) (Texas
Roadhouse)
7,646
sq. ft.
11.19 51/49
44 42 122.40 936
Coffee Shop without indoor
seating (Dutch Bros.) 810 sq. ft. 148.0751/49 61 59 1,685.13 1,366 Automobile Parts and Service
Center (943) (Les Schwab)
12,000
sq. ft.
2.76 54/46 18 15 16.60 200
Subtotals: - - 906 914 - 17,122
Internal Capture: - - -45 -45 -858
TOTAL EXTERNAL: - - 861 869 - 16,264
Reference: Trip Generation Manual, 11
th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2021. Rates are reported in trips per 1,000 square feet of building area and trips per lane, as applicable.
Splits are reported as Entering/Exiting as a percentage of the total. ++ ITE does not provide data for the daily volumes, so it was assumed that 10 percent of the daily volume occurs during the peak hour and the daily rate was estimated by multiplying the peak hour rate by 10.
Rates for Dutch Bros. are taken from KD Anderson report dated 8-31-21. Saturday values were not available.
I I I I I I I I
951
January 11, 2024
Table 4A
New Project Trip Generation (Increased Rates – Saturday) ITE Land Use Units
Saturday Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes Saturday Traffic Volume
Rate
Split Enter Exit Rate Total
Discount Club (857)
171,161
sq. ft.
8.80 49/51
738 769 69.00 11,810
Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Through (934)
(NEC of site)
5,588
sq. ft.
79.87 51/49
228 219 937.02 5,236
Automated Car Wash (948)
(Shops B) 1 lane 41.00
46/54 19 22 410++ 410
Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Through (934) (Panda)
2,540
sq. ft.
55.25 51/49
72 69 616.12 1,566
High-Turnover Sit-Down
Restaurant (932) (Texas
Roadhouse)
7,646
sq. ft.
11.19 51/49
44 42 122.40 936
Coffee Shop without indoor
seating (Dutch Bros.) 810 sq. ft. 148.0751/49 61 59 1,685.13 1,366 Automobile Parts and Service
Center (943) (Les Schwab)
12,000
sq. ft.
2.76 54/46 18 15 16.60 200
Subtotals: - - 1,180 1,198 - 21,524
Internal Capture: - - -59 -59 - -1,070
TOTAL EXTERNAL: - - 1,121 1,139 - 20,455
Reference: Trip Generation Manual, 11
th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2021. Rates are reported in trips per 1,000 square feet of building area and trips per lane, as applicable. Splits are reported as Entering/Exiting as a percentage of the total. ++ ITE does not provide data for the daily volumes, so it was assumed that 10 percent of the daily volume occurs during the peak hour and the daily rate was estimated by multiplying the peak hour rate by 10.
Rates for Dutch Bros. taken from KD Anderson, 8-31-21. Saturday values were not available.
Note: Rates for Discount Club and Fast-Food at NEC are average rate plus one standard deviation.
Rates for Dutch Bros. are taken from KD Anderson report dated 8-31-21.
I I I I I I I I
952
Internal Capture Calculations
CURRENT SITE PLAN
953
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/9/2024 Time Period AM Peak
4.0% 4.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 3 2 2 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
50 Enter 84 6 78 2 2 2 Enter 39 3 36 36
78 Exit 54 4 50 Demand Balanced Demand 4.0% Exit 39 4 35 35 Total 138 10 128 4.0% 4.0% 2 Total 78 7 71
Enter from External % 100% 7% 93% Demand % 100% 9% 91% Exit to External 0% 0 2
Demand 4.0% Balanced
0 8
5.1% 3 4 5.1% Balanced Demand 4% 2 2 4%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
3 4 0% 0 0 0% 1 0
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
5.1% 10 9 5.1% 0 4% 1 0 4%
Demand Demand 2 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
2 4.0% 0 0%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 7 4.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 4% 4% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 174 Enter 189 5 184 8 0 0 Enter 17 1 16 16
184 Exit 181 7 174 Exit 6 0 6 6
Total 370 11 359 Total 23 2 21
Enter from External % 100% 3% 97% 7 1 1 % 100% 8% 92% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
4% 4%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 78 36 184 16 314 329 15 11 8 73 92
Exit 50 35 174 6 265 280 15 7 8 69 84
Total 128 71 359 21 579 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 138 78 370 23 609 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
954
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/9/2024 Time Period Mid-Day Peak
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 20 2 2 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
381 Enter 396 14 382 20 2 2 Enter 39 5 34 34
382 Exit 396 15 381 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 39 5 34 34 Total 792 29 763 5.0% 5.0% 2 Total 78 9 69
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% Demand % 100% 12% 88% Exit to External 5% 20 2
Demand 5.0% Balanced
1 14
4.4% 17 17 4.4% Balanced Demand 5% 2 2 5%
8 Demand Demand Demand Demand
12 12 5% 1 20 5% 1 1
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
4.4% 12 12 4.4% 1 5% 1 1 5%
Demand Demand 2 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
2 5.0% 1 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 13 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 249 Enter 272 15 257 14 1 1 Enter 18 3 15 15
257 Exit 263 14 249 Exit 15 2 13 13
Total 535 29 506 Total 33 5 28
Enter from External % 100% 5% 95% 13 1 1 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 382 34 257 15 689 725 36 95 17 102 214
Exit 381 34 249 13 677 713 36 95 17 99 211
Total 763 69 506 28 1365 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 792 78 535 33 1438 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
955
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/9/2024 Time Period PM Peak
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 18 2 2 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
346 Enter 359 12 347 18 2 2 Enter 39 5 34 34
347 Exit 359 13 346 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 39 4 35 35 Total 718 24 694 5.0% 5.0% 2 Total 78 9 69
Enter from External % 100% 3% 97% Demand % 100% 12% 88% Exit to External 5% 18 2
Demand 5.0% Balanced
1 11
4.7% 17 17 4.7% Balanced Demand 5% 2 2 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
10 9 5% 1 18 5% 1 1
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
4.7% 10 9 4.7% 1 5% 1 1 5%
Demand Demand 2 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
2 5.0% 1 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 10 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 185 Enter 214 13 201 11 1 1 Enter 10 2 9 9
201 Exit 197 12 185 Exit 15 2 13 13
Total 411 24 387 Total 25 4 21
Enter from External % 100% 6% 94% 10 1 1 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 347 34 201 9 591 622 31 86 17 80 183
Exit 346 35 185 13 579 610 31 86 17 74 177
Total 694 69 387 21 1170 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 718 78 411 25 1232 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
956
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/9/2024 Time Period Daily
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 182 19 19 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
3484 Enter 3634 150 3484 182 19 19 Enter 388 44 344 344 3484 Exit 3634 150 3484 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 388 44 344 344 Total 7268 300 6968 5.0% 5.0% 19 Total 776 88 688
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% Demand % 100% 11% 89% Exit to External 5% 182 19
Demand 5.0% Balanced
5 150
4.2% 153 153 4.2% Balanced Demand 5% 19 19 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
126 126 5% 5 182 5% 5 5
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
4.2% 126 126 4.2% 5 5% 5 5 5%
Demand Demand 19 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
19 5.0% 5 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 150 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 2843 Enter 2993 150 2843 150 5 5 Enter 100 15 85 85
2843 Exit 2993 150 2843 Exit 100 15 85 85
Total 5986 300 5686 Total 200 30 170
Enter from External % 100% 5% 95% 150 5 5 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 3484 344 2843 85 6756 7115 359 870 172 1137 2179
Exit 3484 344 2843 85 6756 7115 359 870 172 1137 2179
Total 6968 688 5686 170 13512 INTERNAL CAPTURE 14230 718.024 13511.976 Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 7268 776 5986 200 14230 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
957
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/9/2024 Time Period Saturday Peak
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 27 1 1 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
536 Enter 534 20 514 28 1 1 Enter 19 3 16 16
514 Exit 556 20 536 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 22 3 19 19 Total 1090 40 1050 5.0% 5.0% 1 Total 41 6 35
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% Demand % 100% 14% 86% Exit to External 5% 28 1
Demand 5.0% Balanced
1 17
5.5% 31 29 5.5% Balanced Demand 5% 1 1 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
18 18 5% 1 27 5% 1 1
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
5.5% 18 18 5.5% 1 5% 1 1 5%
Demand Demand 1 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
1 5.0% 1 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 16 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 301 Enter 335 20 315 17 1 1 Enter 18 3 15 15
315 Exit 321 20 301 Exit 15 2 13 13
Total 656 40 616 Total 33 5 28
Enter from External % 100% 6% 94% 16 1 1 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 514 16 315 15 861 906 45 128 8 125 261
Exit 536 19 301 13 869 914 45 133 9 120 262
Total 1050 35 616 28 1730 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 1090 41 656 33 1820 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
958
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/9/2024 Time Period Saturday Daily
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 230 10 10 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
4406 Enter 4600 194 4406 230 10 10 Enter 205 26 180 180 4406 Exit 4600 194 4406 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 205 26 180 180 Total 9200 389 8811 5.0% 5.0% 10 Total 410 51 359
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% Demand % 100% 12% 88% Exit to External 5% 230 10
Demand 5.0% Balanced
5 183
4.9% 225 225 4.9% Balanced Demand 5% 10 10 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
179 179 5% 5 230 5% 5 5
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
4.9% 179 179 4.9% 5 5% 5 5 5%
Demand Demand 10 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
10 5.0% 5 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 183 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 3462 Enter 3656 194 3462 183 5 5 Enter 100 15 85 85
3462 Exit 3656 194 3462 Exit 100 15 85 85
Total 7312 389 6923 Total 200 30 170
Enter from External % 100% 5% 95% 183 5 5 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 4406 180 3462 85 8132 8561 429 1101 89 1384 2574
Exit 4406 180 3462 85 8132 8561 429 1101 89 1384 2574
Total 8811 359 6923 170 16263 INTERNAL CAPTURE 17122 858.576 16263.424 Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 9200 410 7312 200 17122 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
959
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/11/2024 Time Period AM Peak (Increased)
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 8 2 2 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
95 Enter 160 9 151 5 2 2 Enter 39 4 35 35
151 Exit 102 7 95 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 39 5 34 34 Total 262 16 246 5.0% 5.0% 2 Total 78 9 69
Enter from External % 100% 6% 94% Demand % 100% 11% 89% Exit to External 0% 0 2
Demand 5.0% Balanced
0 13
4.6% 5 7 4.6% Balanced Demand 5% 2 2 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
5 7 0% 0 0 0% 1 0
Balanced Balanced 5 Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
4.6% 12 12 4.6% 0 5% 1 0 5%
Demand Demand 2 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
2 5.0% 0 0%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 13 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 246 Enter 265 7 258 13 0 0 Enter 17 2 15 15
258 Exit 256 10 246 Exit 6 1 5 5
Total 521 17 504 Total 23 2 21
Enter from External % 100% 3% 97% 13 1 1 % 100% 10% 90% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 151 35 258 15 459 481 22 22 8 103 133
Exit 95 34 246 5 381 403 22 14 8 98 120
Total 246 69 504 21 840 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 262 78 521 23 884 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
960
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/11/2024 Time Period Mid-Day Peak (Increased)
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 27 2 2 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
526 Enter 546 20 526 27 2 2 Enter 39 5 34 34
526 Exit 546 20 526 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 39 5 34 34 Total 1092 40 1052 5.0% 5.0% 2 Total 78 9 69
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% Demand % 100% 12% 88% Exit to External 5% 27 2
Demand 5.0% Balanced
1 17
5.1% 28 28 5.1% Balanced Demand 5% 2 2 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
17 17 5% 1 27 5% 1 1
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
5.1% 17 17 5.1% 1 5% 1 1 5%
Demand Demand 2 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
2 5.0% 1 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 17 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 311 Enter 343 20 323 17 1 1 Enter 18 3 15 15
323 Exit 331 20 311 Exit 15 2 13 13
Total 674 40 634 Total 33 5 28
Enter from External % 100% 6% 94% 17 1 1 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 526 34 323 15 899 946 47 131 17 129 277
Exit 526 34 311 13 884 931 47 131 17 124 272
Total 1052 69 634 28 1783 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 1092 78 674 33 1877 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
961
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/11/2024 Time Period PM Peak (Increased)
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 25 2 2 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
486 Enter 504 17 487 25 2 2 Enter 39 5 34 34
487 Exit 504 18 486 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 39 4 35 35 Total 1008 34 974 5.0% 5.0% 2 Total 78 9 69
Enter from External % 100% 3% 97% Demand % 100% 12% 88% Exit to External 5% 25 2
Demand 5.0% Balanced
1 13
5.7% 29 29 5.7% Balanced Demand 5% 2 2 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
15 14 5% 1 25 5% 1 1
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
5.7% 15 14 5.7% 1 5% 1 1 5%
Demand Demand 2 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
2 5.0% 1 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 12 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 228 Enter 265 18 247 13 1 1 Enter 10 2 9 9
247 Exit 244 16 228 Exit 15 2 13 13
Total 509 34 475 Total 25 4 21
Enter from External % 100% 7% 93% 12 1 1 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 487 34 247 9 777 818 41 121 17 98 236
Exit 486 35 228 13 761 802 41 121 17 91 229
Total 974 69 475 21 1539 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 1008 78 509 25 1620 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
962
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/11/2024 Time Period Daily (Increased)
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 238 19 19 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
4557 Enter 4750 193 4557 238 19 19 Enter 388 44 344 344 4557 Exit 4750 193 4557 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 388 44 344 344 Total 9500 386 9114 5.0% 5.0% 19 Total 776 88 688
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% Demand % 100% 11% 89% Exit to External 5% 238 19
Demand 5.0% Balanced
5 183
4.6% 219 219 4.6% Balanced Demand 5% 19 19 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
168 168 5% 5 238 5% 5 5
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
4.6% 168 168 4.6% 5 5% 5 5 5%
Demand Demand 19 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
19 5.0% 5 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 183 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 3467 Enter 3660 193 3467 183 5 5 Enter 100 15 85 85
3467 Exit 3660 193 3467 Exit 100 15 85 85
Total 7320 386 6934 Total 200 30 170
Enter from External % 100% 5% 95% 183 5 5 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 4557 344 3467 85 8454 8898 444 1139 172 1386 2697 Exit 4557 344 3467 85 8454 8898 444 1139 172 1386 2697
Total 9114 688 6934 170 16907 INTERNAL CAPTURE 17796 888.64 16907.36 Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 9500 776 7320 200 17796 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
963
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/11/2024 Time Period Saturday Peak (Increased)
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 37 1 1 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
742 Enter 738 26 712 38 1 1 Enter 19 3 16 16
712 Exit 769 27 742 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 22 3 19 19 Total 1507 54 1453 5.0% 5.0% 1 Total 41 6 35
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% Demand % 100% 14% 86% Exit to External 5% 38 1
Demand 5.0% Balanced
1 20
6.3% 48 46 6.3% Balanced Demand 5% 1 1 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
26 25 5% 1 37 5% 1 1
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
6.3% 26 25 6.3% 1 5% 1 1 5%
Demand Demand 1 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
1 5.0% 1 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 19 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 363 Enter 405 27 378 20 1 1 Enter 18 3 15 15
378 Exit 389 26 363 Exit 15 2 13 13
Total 794 54 740 Total 33 5 28
Enter from External % 100% 7% 93% 19 1 1 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 712 16 378 15 1121 1180 59 177 8 151 336
Exit 742 19 363 13 1136 1195 59 185 9 145 339
Total 1453 35 740 28 2257 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 1507 41 794 33 2375 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
964
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Visalia Parkway Site Plan A Date 1/11/2024 Time Period Saturday (Increased)
5.0% 5.0%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Discount Club 295 10 10 ITE LU Code Car Wash Enter from External Exit to External Size Size
Total Internal External Total Internal External
5658 Enter 5905 247 5658 295 10 10 Enter 205 26 180 180 5658 Exit 5905 247 5658 Demand Balanced Demand 5.0% Exit 205 26 180 180 Total 11810 495 11315 5.0% 5.0% 10 Total 410 51 359
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% Demand % 100% 12% 88% Exit to External 5% 295 10
Demand 5.0% Balanced
5 228
5.1% 301 301 5.1% Balanced Demand 5% 10 10 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
232 232 5% 5 295 5% 5 5
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
5.1% 232 232 5.1% 5 5% 5 5 5%
Demand Demand 10 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
10 5.0% 5 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 228 5.0% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size Demand 5% 5% Size
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 4305 Enter 4552 247 4305 228 5 5 Enter 100 15 85 85
4305 Exit 4552 247 4305 Exit 100 15 85 85
Total 9104 495 8609 Total 200 30 170
Enter from External % 100% 5% 95% 228 5 5 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 5658 180 4305 85 10227 10762 535 1414 89 1721 3224 Exit 5658 180 4305 85 10227 10762 535 1414 89 1721 3224 Total 11315 359 8609 170 20453 INTERNAL CAPTURE 21524 1070.608 20453.392 Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 11810 410 9104 200 21524 5.0% - I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
965
Trip Generation Calculations
ORIGINAL SITE PLAN
966
Table A.2
Phases 1 and 2 Project Trip Generation
ITE Land Use
Building
Area
Traffic V
A.M. Peak Hour
olumes
Midday Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes Traffic Vo
P.M. Peak Hour
lumes
Weekday
Traffic Volume
Split
Rate
Enter Exit
Split
Rate
Enter Exit
Spl
Rate
it
Enter Exit Rate Total
Shopping Center (820)
166,600
sq. ft.
FC1
62/38
146 90
FC2
50/50
408 408
FC3
48/52
381 413 FC4 8,508
Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Through (934)
18,000
sq. ft. 51
40.19 /49
369 355
5 51.36
1/49
472 453
32.67 52/48
306 283 470.95 8,478
High-Turnover Sit-Down
Restaurant (932) sq. ft.
7,200 9.94
55/45
40 32
17.41 52/48
66 60
9.77 62/38
44 27 112.18 808
Super Convenience
Market/Gas Station (960)
3,100
sq. ft.
FC5
50/50
81 81
FC6
50/50
90 90
50 69.28
/50
108 108 837.58 2,598
Automobile Parts and Service
Center (943)
12,000
sq. ft.
1.96 73/27
17 7
2.75 54/46
18 15
2.26 40/60
11 17 16.28 196
Subtotals: - - 653 565 - 1,054 1,026 - 850 848 - 20,588 Internal Capture - - -30 -30 - -52 -52 - -42 -42 -1,024 TOTALS: - - 623 535 - 1,002 974 - 808 806 - 19,564
Reference: Trip Generation Manual, 10
th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2017 Rates are reported in trips per 1,000 square feet of building area Splits are reported as Entering/Exiting as a percentage of the total.
FC1: Fitted curve: T = 0.50(X) + 151.78 FC2: Fitted curve: Ln(T) = 0.72Ln(X) + 3.02 FC3: Fitted curve: Ln(T) = 0.74Ln(X) + 2.89 FC4: Fitted curve: Ln(T) = 0.68Ln(X) + 5.57 FC5: Fitted curve: T = 137.38(X) – 264.53 FC6: Fitted curve: T = 99.90(X) – 130.36 Table A.4
Outlot 2 Trip Generation
ITE Land Use Units
Traffic V
A.M. Peak Hour
olumes
Midday Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes Traffic
P.M. Peak Hour
Volumes
Weekday
Traffic Volume
Split
Rate
Enter Exit
Split
Rate
Enter Exit
Spl
Rate
it
Enter Exit Rate Total
Senior Housing - Attached
(252)
100
35 0.20
/65
7 13
0.33 47/53
16 17
0.26 55/45
14 12 3.70 370
Reference: Trip Generation Manual, 10
th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2017 Rates are reported in trips per unit
Splits are reported as Entering/Exiting as a percentage of the total.
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
967
Table 4.4
Pass-By Trips and Primary Project Trips (Phases 1 and 2) Time Period Trips Entering
Site
Trips Exiting
Site Total Trips
A.M. Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 229 206 435
A.M. Peak Hour Primary Trips 394 329 723
Midday Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 344 334 678
Midday Peak Hour Primary Trips 658 640 1,298
P.M. Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 272 266 538
P.M. Peak Hour Primary Trips 536 540 1,076
Table 4.4 Plus Table A.4
Pass-By Trips and Primary Project Trips (Phases 1 and 2 and Outlot 2) Time Period Trips Entering
Site
Trips Exiting
Site Total Trips
A.M. Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 229 206 435
A.M. Peak Hour Primary Trips 401 342 743
Midday Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 344 334 678
Midday Peak Hour Primary Trips 674 657 1,331
P.M. Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 272 266 538
P.M. Peak Hour Primary Trips 550 552 1,102
Table X.2 (Not Previously Presented)
Original Site Plan Phases 1 and 2 Saturday Project Trip Generation ITE Land Use Building
Area
Saturday Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
Saturday Traffic
Volume
Rate
Split Enter Exit Rate Total
Shopping Center (>150k)
(820)
166,600
sq. ft.
FC1
52/48
510 471 FC2 12,844
Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Through (934)
18,000
sq. ft.
55.25 51/49 507 488 616.12 11,090
High-Turnover Sit-Down
Restaurant (932)
7,200
sq. ft.
11.19 51/49
41 40 122.40 882
Convenience Store/Gas
Station – VFP (9-15) (945)
3,100
sq. ft.
64.13 50/50 100 100 700.00 2,170
Automobile Parts and Service
Center (943)
12,000
sq. ft.
2.76*
54/46 18 16 16.60* 200
Subtotals: - - 1,176 1,115 - 27,186
Internal Capture - - -57 -57 - -1,024
TOTALS: - - 1,119 1,058 - 26,162
Reference: Trip Generation Manual, 11
th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2021 Rates are reported in trips per 1,000 square feet of building area Splits are reported as Entering/Exiting as a percentage of the total. * Weekend data not available. Used weekday data.
FC1: Fitted curve: Ln(T) = 0.76Ln(X) + 3.00 FC2: Fitted curve: T = 36.03(X) + 6840.22 968
Table X.4 (Not Previously Presented)
Original Site Plan Outlot 2 Saturday Trip Generation
ITE Land Use Units
Saturday Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
Saturday
Traffic Volume
Rate
Split Enter Exit Rate Total
Senior Adult Housing -
Multifamily (252)
100 0.32
54/46 17 15 2.74 274
Reference: Trip Generation Manual, 11
th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2021 Rates are reported in trips per unit
Splits are reported as Entering/Exiting as a percentage of the total.
Table Y.4 (Not Previously Presented)
Pass-By Trips and Primary Project Trips (Phases 1 and 2 and Outlot 2) Original Site Plan Saturday Project Trip Generation
Time Period Trips Entering
Site
Trips Exiting
Site Total Trips
Midday Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 375 358 733
Midday Peak Hour Primary Trips 761 715 1,476
I I
969
Internal Capture Calculations
ORIGINAL SITE PLAN
970
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Commons at Visalia Parkway Phases 1 and 2 Date 1/11/2024 Time Period Saturday Peak
5% 5%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Shopping Center 26 5 5 ITE LU Code Convenience Market/Gas Station Enter from External Exit to External Size 166,600 Size 3,100
Total Internal External Total Internal External
450 Enter 510 23 487 24 5 5 Enter 100 11 89 89
487 Exit 471 21 450 Demand Balanced Demand 5% Exit 100 11 89 89 Total 981 44 937 5% 5% 5 Total 200 22 178
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% Demand % 100% 11% 89% Exit to External 5% 24 5
Demand 5% Balanced
1 27
3.3% 16 17 3.3% Balanced Demand 5% 5 5 5%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
16 17 5% 1 26 5% 1 1
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
3.3% 18 17 3.3% 1 5% 1 1 5%
Demand Demand 5 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
5 5% 1 5%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 26 5% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size 25,200 Demand 5% 5% Size 12,000
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 505 Enter 548 21 527 27 1 1 Enter 18 3 15 15
527 Exit 528 23 505 Exit 16 2 14 14
Total 1076 44 1032 Total 34 5 29
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% 26 1 1 % 100% 15% 85% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
5% 5%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 487 89 527 15 1119 1176 57 121 44 210 375
Exit 450 89 505 14 1058 1115 57 112 44 202 358
Total 937 178 1032 29 2176 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 981 200 1076 34 2291 5.0%
- I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
971
MULTI-USE TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
Analyst JR Name of Development Commons at Visalia Parkway Phases 1 and 2 Date 1/11/2024 Time Period Saturday
4% 4%
A Demand Balanced Demand B
ITE LU Code Shopping Center 170 52 52 ITE LU Code Convenience Market/Gas Station Enter from External Exit to External Size 166,600 Size 3,100
Total Internal External Total Internal External
4061 Enter 4257 196 4061 170 52 52 Enter 1299 108 1191 1191 4061 Exit 4257 196 4061 Demand Balanced Demand 4% Exit 1299 108 1191 1191 Total 8514 393 8121 4% 4% 52 Total 2598 216 2382
Enter from External % 100% 5% 95% Demand % 100% 8% 92% Exit to External 4% 170 52
Demand 4% Balanced
4 186
3.3% 140 140 3.3% Balanced Demand 4% 52 52 4%
Demand Demand Demand Demand
140 140 4% 4 170 4% 4 4
Balanced Balanced Demand Demand Balanced Balanced
3.3% 153 153 3.3% 4 4% 4 4 4%
Demand Demand 52 Balanced Demand Demand
Demand
52 4% 4 4%
Balanced Demand
C D
ITE LU Code Restaurants 186 4% ITE LU Code Automotive Enter from External Exit to External Size 25,200 Demand 4% 4% Size 12,000
Total Internal External Demand Balanced Demand Total Internal External 4447 Enter 4643 196 4447 186 4 4 Enter 98 12 86 86
4447 Exit 4643 196 4447 Exit 98 12 86 86
Total 9286 393 8893 Total 196 24 172
Enter from External % 100% 4% 96% 186 4 4 % 100% 12% 88% Exit to External Demand Balanced Demand
4% 4%
Net External Trips for Multi-Use Development Pass-By Trips Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Land Use D Total ITE Totals Captured Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 4061 1191 4447 86 9785 10297 512 1015 595 1778 3388 Exit 4061 1191 4447 86 9785 10297 512 1015 595 1778 3388 Total 8121 2382 8893 172 19569 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 8514 2598 9286 196 20594 5.0% - I 1 1 1 1-.....-----------~- t------+-------+-------- - - : : j l : : ~ I ~'----- j l '-----
I I I I === I ~ ~
1111-
972
Trip Generation Comparisons
973
January 11, 2024
Table 1B
New Project Trip Generation (Average Rates)
Pass-By Trips and Primary Project Trips
Time Period Trips Entering
Site
Trips Exiting
Site Total Trips
A.M. Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 92 84 176
A.M. Peak Hour Primary Trips 222 181 403
Midday Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 214 211 425
Midday Peak Hour Primary Trips 475 466 941
P.M. Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 183 177 360
P.M. Peak Hour Primary Trips 408 402 810
Table 2B
Alternate New Project Trip Generation (Using Increased Rates) Pass-By Trips and Primary Project Trips
Time Period Trips Entering
Site
Trips Exiting
Site Total Trips
A.M. Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 133 120 253
A.M. Peak Hour Primary Trips 326 261 587
Midday Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 277 222 499
Midday Peak Hour Primary Trips 622 662 1,284
P.M. Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 236 229 465
P.M. Peak Hour Primary Trips 541 532 1,073
Table 3B
New Project Trip Generation (Average Rates – Saturday)
Pass-By Trips and Primary Project Trips
Time Period Trips Entering
Site
Trips Exiting
Site Total Trips
Midday Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 261 262 523
Midday Peak Hour Primary Trips 600 607 1,207
Table 4B
New Project Trip Generation (Increased Rates – Saturday) Pass-By Trips and Primary Project Trips
Time Period Trips Entering
Site
Trips Exiting
Site Total Trips
Midday Peak Hour Pass-By Trips 336 339 675
Midday Peak Hour Primary Trips 785 800 1,585
I I
I I
974
January 11, 2024
Table 1C
External Trip Generation Comparison 1 (Average Values)
Scenario
A.M. Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
Midday Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
P.M. Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
Weekday
Traffic Volume
Enter Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit
New Site Plan 314 265 689 677 591 579 13,512
Original Study 630 548 1,018 991 872 855 19,934
Difference: -316 -283 -329 -314 -281 -276 -6,422
Table 2C
External Trip Generation Comparison 2 (Increased Rates) Scenario
A.M. Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
Midday Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
P.M. Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
Weekday
Traffic Volume
Enter Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit
New Site Plan Increased Rates 459 381 899 884 777 761 16,908 Original Study 630 548 1,018 991 872 855 19,934
Difference: -171 -167 -119 -107 -95 -94 -3,026
Table 3C
External Trip Generation Comparison 3 (Average Saturday) Scenario
Peak Hour
Traffic
Volumes
24-Hour
Traffic Volume
Enter Exit
New Site Plan Saturday 861 869 16,264
Original Site Plan (Saturday) 1,136 1,076 26,436
Difference: -275 -207 -10,172
Note: Original traffic study did not include weekend analyses.
Table 4C
External Trip Generation Comparison 4 (Increased Saturday) Scenario
Peak Hour
Traffic
Volumes
24-Hour
Traffic Volume
Enter Exit
New Site Plan Saturday Increased Rates 1,121 1,139 20,455 Original Site Plan (Saturday) 1,136 1,076 26,436
Difference: -15 63 -5,981
Note: Original traffic study did not include weekend analyses.
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
975
January 11, 2024
Table 1D
Primary Trip Generation Comparison 1 (Average Values)
Scenario
A.M. Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
Midday Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
P.M. Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
Enter Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit
New Site Plan 222 181 475 466 408 402
Original Study 401 342 674 657 550 552
Difference: -179 -161 -199 -191 -142 -150
Table 2D
Primary Trip Generation Comparison 2 (Increased Rates)
Scenario
A.M. Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
Midday Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
P.M. Peak
Hour Traffic
Volumes
Enter Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit
New Site Plan Increased Rates 326 261 622 662 541 532
Original Study 401 342 674 657 550 552
Difference: -75 -81 -52 -5 -9 -20
Table 3D
Primary Trip Generation Comparison 3 (Average Saturday) Scenario
Peak Hour
Traffic
Volumes
Enter Exit
New Site Plan Saturday 600 607
Original Site Plan (Saturday) 761 715
Difference: -161 -108
Note: Original traffic study did not include weekend analyses.
Table 4D
Primary Trip Generation Comparison 4 (Increased Saturday) Scenario
Peak Hour
Traffic
Volumes
Enter Exit
New Site Plan Saturday Increased Rates 814 834
Original Site Plan (Saturday) 785 800
Difference: 29 34
Note: Original traffic study did not include weekend analyses.
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
976
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development Visalia, California
BAC Job # 2023-170
Prepared For:
Lars Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Prepared By:
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc.
Dario Gotchet, Principal Consultant
July 15, 2024
Attn: Ashley Nulick
4694 W Jacquelyn Avenue
Fresno, CA 93722
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. | P.O. Box 7968, Auburn, CA 95604 | Phone: (530) 537-2328 | bacnoise.com
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
977
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
CEQA Checklist
NOISE AND VIBRATION –
Would the Project Result in:
NA – Not
Applicable
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the project
in excess of standards established in
the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
X
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?
X
978
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Introduction
The SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development is located south of W. Visalia Parkway and west of S. Mooney Boulevard in Visalia, California. The components of the development included in this assessment are the proposed anchor tenant with fueling station and car wash land uses (project). Existing land uses in the immediate project vicinity consist of singlefamily residential to the south and west, commercial to the north and east. The project area and surrounding land uses are shown in Figure 1. The project preliminary site plan is presented in Figure 2.
The purposes of this assessment are to quantify the existing noise and vibration environments, identify potential noise and vibration impacts resulting from the project, identify appropriate mitigation measures, and provide a quantitative and qualitative analysis of impacts associated with the project. Specifically, impacts are identified if project-related activities would cause a substantial increase in ambient noise levels at existing sensitive land uses in the project vicinity (residential), generate excessive vibration levels at the nearby sensitive uses, or result in noise levels that would exceed applicable federal, state, or local standards at nearby sensitive uses.
Noise and Vibration Fundamentals
Noise
Noise is often described as unwanted sound. Sound is defined as any pressure variation in air that the human ear can detect. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), they can be heard and are designated as sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound and is expressed as cycles per second, or Hertz (Hz). Definitions of acoustical terminology are provided in Appendix A.
Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals of pressure) as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to the reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibel scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB. Another useful aspect of the decibel scale is that changes in decibel levels correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness. Noise levels associated with common noise sources are provided in Figure 3.
The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable and can be approximated by filtering the frequency response of a sound level meter by means of the standardized A-weighting network. There is a strong correlation between A-weighted sound levels (expressed as dBA) and community response to noise. For this reason, the A-weighted sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. All noise levels reported in this section are in terms of A-weighted levels.
979
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the all-encompassing noise level associated with a given noise environment. A common statistical tool to measure the ambient noise level is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq). The Leq is the foundation of the day-night average noise descriptor, DNL (or Ldn), and shows very good correlation with community response to noise. DNL is based on the average noise level over a 24-hour day, with a +10-decibel weighting applied to noise occurring during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). The nighttime penalty is based on the assumption that people react to nighttime noise exposures as though they were twice as loud as daytime exposures. Because DNL represents a 24-hour average, it tends to disguise short-term variations in the noise environment.
Vibration
Vibration is like noise in that it involves a source, a transmission path, and a receiver. While vibration is related to noise, it differs in that noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, while vibration is usually associated with transmission through the ground or structures. As with noise, vibration consists of amplitude and frequency. A person’s response to vibration will depend on their individual sensitivity as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source.
Vibration can be described in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration in terms of velocity in inches per second peak particle velocity (IPS, PPV) or root-mean-square (VdB, RMS). Standards pertaining to perception as well as damage to structures have been developed for vibration in terms of peak particle velocity as well as RMS velocities.
As vibrations travel outward from the source, they excite the particles of rock and soil through which they pass and cause them to oscillate. Differences in subsurface geologic conditions and distance from the source of vibration will result in different vibration levels characterized by different frequencies and intensities. In all cases, vibration amplitudes will decrease with increasing distance.
Human response to vibration is difficult to quantify. Vibration can be felt or heard well below the levels that produce any damage to structures. The duration of the event has an effect on human response, as does frequency. Generally, as the duration and vibration frequency increase, the potential for adverse human response increases.
According to the Transportation and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual (Caltrans, June 2004), operation of construction equipment and construction techniques generate ground vibration. Traffic traveling on roadways can also be a source of such vibration. At high enough amplitudes, ground vibration has the potential to damage structures and/or cause cosmetic damage. Ground vibration can also be a source of annoyance to individuals who live or work close to vibration-generating activities. However, traffic rarely generates vibration amplitudes high enough to cause structural or cosmetic damage.
980
Legend
Figure 1 0 150 300
Scale (Feet)
Ambient Noise & Vibration Survey Sites
Project Boundary (Approximate)
Visalia Pkwy
Residential – NW
S Mooney Blvd
Quince
Spruce
Maple
Olive
West Lake Dr
S Woodland St
W Midvalley Ave
Residential – W
Residential – SW Residential – SE
SWC W. Visalia Pkwy & S. Mooney Blvd
Visalia, California
Project Area
2 1
3 0
A
N
981
Legend
Figure 2 0 100 200
Scale (Feet)
Project Boundary
Anchor Tenant
Fueling Station
On
Existing 7’ Solid Wall (Noise Barrier)
-Site Delivery Truck Circulation Route (Assumed)
Loading Dock Area
SWC W. Visalia Pkwy & S. Mooney Blvd
Visalia, California
Project Preliminary Site Plan
Car Wash
-
., --~- . - - - . I . ·-. ·-:----"-•---
____ _____ .-._
'•' .,. '•' '•' '•' ·,·1·~ ; --: - r -: --- . -: T I l I I Tl I 1 • 1 I 1 t I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I ' '' ' '' : : :
• .. bi.
(
A
N
982
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Figure 3
Noise Levels Associated with Common Noise Sources
12-Gauge Shotgun 160
Chainsaw 110
Motorcycle 100
Lawn Mower 90
Vacuum Cleaner 80
ii Conversation 65
Floor Fan 50
I Refrigerator Hum 40
Rustling Leaves 30
Pin Falling 15
Decibel Scale (dBA)*
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
160
150
140
130 ◄ Jet Takeoff 140
120 Pneumatic Riveter 124
◄
Hammer Drill 114
Tractor/Hand Drill 97
City Traffic 78
Air Conditioning Unit 60
Electrical Transformer 45
•Sources:
www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/noise/noisemeter.html
http://e-a-r.com/hearingconservation/faq_main.cfm
983
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Environmental Setting – Existing Ambient Noise and Vibration Environment
Noise-Sensitive Land Uses in the Project Vicinity
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally defined as locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could adversely affect the primary intended use of the land. Places where people live, sleep, recreate, worship, and study are generally considered to be sensitive to noise because intrusive noise can be disruptive to these activities.
The existing noise-sensitive land uses which would potentially be affected by the project consist of residential uses. Specifically, single-family residential land uses are located to the south and west of the project. Commercial uses are located to the north and east of the project property; however, such uses aren’t typically considered to be noise-sensitive. The project area and surrounding land uses are shown in Figure 1.
Existing Overall Ambient Noise Environment within the Project Vicinity The existing ambient noise environment within the immediate project vicinity is defined primarily by traffic on W. Visalia Parkway and S. Mooney Boulevard, and by existing nearby commercial operations. To quantify the existing ambient noise environment within the immediate project vicinity, BAC conducted long-term (72-hour) ambient noise level surveys at three (3) locations February 14-16, 2024. The ambient noise survey locations are identified as sites 1-3 in Figure 1.
Photographs of the noise survey sites are provided in Appendix B.
Larson Davis Laboratories (LDL) Model 831 and LxT precision integrating sound level meters were used to complete the long-term noise level survey. The meters were calibrated immediately before use with an LDL Model CA200 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. The equipment used meets all specifications of the American National Standards Institute requirements for Type 1 sound level meters (ANSI S1.4). The results of the long-term ambient noise surveys are shown numerically and graphically in Appendices C and D (respectively) and are summarized in Table 1.
984
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 1
Summary of Long-Term Ambient Noise Survey Results – February 14-16, 2024 Site Description1 Date
DNL
(dB)
Average Measured Hourly Noise Levels (dB)2
Daytime3 Nighttime3
Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50
Site 1: Northwest project area in
backyard of W. Lake Dr residence
2/14/24 55 53 67 50 48 61 45
2/15/24 55 52 66 48 47 60 45
2/16/24 55 53 69 50 47 60 43
Site 2: Western project area in
backyard of Quince Ct residence
2/14/24 58 53 68 49 51 65 48
2/15/24 57 52 72 47 51 63 48
2/16/24 57 52 67 48 50 63 47
Site 3: Southeast project area in
backyard of Ash Ct residence
2/14/24 56 52 68 49 49 65 46
2/15/24 57 51 69 48 50 62 47
2/16/24 55 51 69 48 49 63 44
1 Noise monitoring locations are identified in Figure 1. Survey photos are presented in Appendix B. 2 Detailed summaries of the noise monitoring results are provided in Appendices C and D. 3 Daytime: 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM | Nighttime: 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM Source: BAC 2024
BAC ambient noise survey site 1, located along the northwest portion of the project property boundary, was selected to be representative of the ambient noise level environment at the closest residences to the northwest of the project. Noise level measurements obtained at site 2, located along the west/southwest project property boundary, are believed to be generally representative of the ambient noise level environments at the closest residences to the west/southwest of the project. Finally, noise level measurements obtained at site 3, located near the southeast project property line, are believed to be representative of the existing ambient noise level environments at the nearest residences to the south/southeast of the project.
As shown in Table 1, measured day-night average noise levels (DNL) and average measured hourly noise levels (Leq, L50, Lmax) were generally consistent at each survey site during the 72- hour monitoring period (i.e., relatively small range of measured values).
Existing Ambient Vibration Environment within the Project Vicinity During site visits on February 13th and 17th, 2024, vibration levels were below the threshold of perception within the project vicinity. Nonetheless, to quantify existing vibration levels within the project vicinity, BAC conducted three (3) short-term (15-minute) vibration measurement surveys on February 17th, 2024 at the locations shown in Figure 1.
A Larson-Davis Laboratories Model LxT precision integrating sound level meter equipped with a vibration transducer was used to complete the measurements. The results are summarized in Table 2.
985
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 2
Summary of Short-Term Ambient Vibration Survey Results – February 17th, 2024 Site Description1 Time
Average Measured Vibration
Level, PPV (in/sec)1
Site 1: Northwest project area in
backyard of W. Lake Dr residence 5:46 p.m. <0.001
Site 2: Western project area in backyard
of Quince Ct residence 5:16 p.m. <0.001
Site 3: Southeast project area in
backyard of Ash Ct residence 4:55 p.m. <0.001
1 PPV = Peak Particle Velocity (inches/second)
Source: BAC 2024
The Table 2 data indicate that measured average vibration levels within the project vicinity were less than 0.001 in/sec PPV (i.e., below the threshold of human perception).
Regulatory Setting: Criteria for Acceptable Noise and Vibration Exposure
Federal
There are no federal noise or vibration criteria which would be directly applicable to this project.
However, the City of Visalia does not currently have a policy for assessing noise impacts associated with increases in ambient noise levels from project-generated noise sources. As a result, the following federal noise criteria was applied to the project.
Federal Interagency Commission on Noise (FICON)
The Federal Interagency Commission on Noise (FICON) has developed a graduated scale for use in the assessment of project-related noise level increases. The criteria shown in Table 3 was developed by FICON as a means of developing thresholds for impact identification for project-related noise level increases. The FICON standards have been used extensively in recent years in the preparation of the noise sections of Environmental Impact Reports that have been certified in many California cities and counties.
The use of the FICON standards is considered conservative relative to thresholds used by other agencies in the State of California. For example, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) requires a project-related traffic noise level increase of 12 dB for a finding of significance, and the California Energy Commission (CEC) considers project-related noise level increases between 5 to 10 dB significant, depending on local factors. Therefore, the use of the FICON standards, which set the threshold for finding of significant noise impacts as low as 1.5 dB, provides a very conservative approach to impact assessment for this project. 986
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 3
Significance of Changes in Cumulative Noise Exposure
Ambient Noise Level Without Project (DNL) Change in Ambient Noise Level Due to Project <60 dB +5.0 dB or more
60 to 65 dB +3.0 dB or more
>65 dB +1.5 dB or more
Source: Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON)
Based on the FICON research, as shown in Table 3, a 5 dB increase in noise levels due to a project is required for a finding of significant noise impact where ambient noise levels without the project are less than 60 dB DNL. Where pre-project ambient conditions are between 60 and 65 dB DNL, a 3 dB increase is applied as the standard of significance. Finally, in areas already exposed to higher noise levels, specifically pre-project noise levels in excess of 65 dB DNL, a 1.5 dB increase is considered by FICON as the threshold of significance.
State of California
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines asks whether the project would result in any of the following to determine whether a significant noise or vibration impact would occur:
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 other applicable standards of other agencies; or B. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; or 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, the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
It should be noted that audibility is not a test of significance according to CEQA. If this were the case, any project which added any audible amount of noise to the environment would be considered significant according to CEQA. Because every physical process creates noise, the use of audibility alone as significance criteria would be unworkable. CEQA requires a substantial increase in noise levels before noise impacts are identified, not simply an audible change.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
The City of Visalia does not currently have adopted standards for groundborne vibration that would be applicable to this specific project. As a result, the vibration impact criteria developed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) was applied to the project. The Caltrans 987
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
guidance criteria for building structures and vibration annoyance are presented in Tables 4 and 5, respectively.
Table 4
Caltrans Guidance for Building Structure Vibration Criteria Structure and Condition Limiting PPV (in/sec)
Historic and some old buildings 0.5
Residential structures 0.5
New residential structures 1.0
Industrial buildings 2.0
Bridges 2.0
PPV = Peak Particle Velocity
Source: 2020 Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Table 14 Table 5
Caltrans Guidance for Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria Human Response
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Severe/very disturbing 2.0 0.4 to 3.6
Strongly perceptible 0.9 0.1
Distinctly perceptible 0.24 0.035
Barely/slightly perceptible 0.035 0.012
Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent sources include pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers and vibratory compaction equipment.
PPV = Peak Particle Velocity
Source: 2020 Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Tables 4 & 6 Local
Visalia General Plan
The Safety and Noise Element of the Visalia General Plan (Chapter 8) contains objectives and policies to ensure that city residents are not subjected to noise beyond acceptable levels. The General Plan objectives and policies which would be most applicable to this project are reproduced below.
Objectives
N-O-1 Strive to achieve an acceptable noise environment for present and future residents of Visalia.
N-O-2 Protect the City’s economic base by preventing the encroachment of incompatible land uses near known noise producing industries, railroads, airports and other sources. 988
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
N-O-3 Protect noise-sensitive land uses such as schools, hospitals, and senior care facilities from encroachment of and exposure to excessive levels of noise.
Policies
N-P-1 Update the City’s Noise Ordinance as needed to be in conformance with the General Plan.
N-P-2 Promote the use of noise attenuation measures to improve the acoustic environment inside residences where existing single-family residential development is located in a noise-impacted environment such as along an arterial street or adjacent to a noiseproducing use.
N-P-4 Where new development of industrial, commercial or other noise-generating land uses (including roadways, railroads, and airports) may result in noise levels that exceed the noise level exposure criteria established by Tables 8-3 and 8-4 (Tables 6 and 7 of this report), require a noise study to determine impacts, and require developers to mitigate these impacts in conformance with Tables 8-3 and 8-4 (Tables 6 and 7 of this report) as a condition of permit approval through appropriate means.
Noise mitigation measures may include but are not limited to:
Screen and control noise sources, such as parking and loading facilities, outdoor activities, and mechanical equipment;
Increase setbacks for noise sources from adjacent dwellings; Retain fences, walls, and landscaping that serve as noise buffers; Use soundproofing materials and double-glazed windows; Use open space, building orientation and design, landscaping and running water to mask sounds; and
Control hours of operation, including deliveries and trash pickup, to minimize noise impacts.
Alternative acoustical designs that achieve the prescribed noise level reduction may be approved, provided a qualified acoustical consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative designs will achieve and maintain the specific targets for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces. As a last resort, developers may propose to construct noise walls along state highways and arterials when compatible with aesthetic concerns and neighborhood character. This would be a developer responsibility, with no City funding.
N-P-5 Continue to enforce applicable State Noise Insulation Standards (California Administrative Code, Title 24) and Uniform Building Code (UBC) noise requirements.
989
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 6
Transportation Noise Sources
Noise-Sensitive Land Use
Outdoor Activity Areas, dBA Interior Spaces, dBA
DNL/CNEL2 DNL/CNEL2 Leq
3 Residential 65 45 --
Transient Lodging 65 45 --
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 65 45 --
Theatres, Auditoriums, Music Halls -- -- 35
Churches, Meeting Halls 65 -- 45
Office Buildings -- -- 45
Schools, Libraries, Museums -- -- 45
1 Outdoor activity areas generally include backyards of single-family residences and outdoor patios, decks or common recreation areas for multi-family developments. 2 The CNEL is used for quantification of aircraft noise exposure as required by CAC Title 21. 3 As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use.
Source: Visalia General Plan, Safety and Noise Element, Table 8-3 Table 7
Stationary Noise Sources1
Noise Level Descriptor
Daytime
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
Nighttime
(10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent Sound Level, Leq (dBA) 50 45
Maximum Sound Level, Lmax (dBA) 70 65
1 As determined as the property line of the receiving noise-sensitive use.
Source: Visalia General Plan, Safety and Noise Element, Table 8-4 Visalia Municipal Code
The provisions of the Visalia Municipal Code which would be most applicable to this project are reproduced below.
Chapter 8.36 Noise
8.36.040 Exterior noise standards – fixed noise sources.
A. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any noise, on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the exterior noise level, when measured at the property line of any affected noise-sensitive land use, to exceed any of the categorical noise level standards as set forth in the following table:
990
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Exterior Noise Level Standards, dBA
Category
Cumulative Number of Minutes in
Any 1-Hour Time Period
Evening and Daytime
(6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.)
Nighttime
(7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.)
1 30 (L50) 50 45
2 15 (L25) 55 50
3 5 (L8) 60 55
4 1 (L2) 65 60
5 0 (Lmax) 70 65
Source: Visalia Municipal Code, Section 8.36.040(A)
B. In the event the measured ambient noise level without the alleged offensive source in operation exceeds an applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.
C. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by 5 dB for pure tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.
8.36.050 Exterior noise standards – mobile noise sources prohibition against use.
It is unlawful to operate any of the below-listed devices, appliances, equipment or vehicles on public or private property abutting noise-sensitive land uses between the weekday hours of 7:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., and between the weekend hours of 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m.
C. Construction equipment including jackhammers, portable generators, pneumatic equipment, trenchers, or other such equipment, except for emergency repair purposes as provided in Section 8.36.070.
8.36.060 Residential interior noise standards.
A. It is unlawful for any person, at any location within the city, to operate or cause to be operated, any source of sound or to allow the creation of any noise which causes the noise level when measured inside a dwelling unit to exceed any of the categorized noise level standards as set forth in the following table:
Interior Noise Level Standards, dBA
Category
Cumulative Number of Minutes in
Any 1-Hour Time Period
Evening and Daytime
(6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.)
Nighttime
(7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.)
1 5 (L8) 45 35
2 1 (L2) 50 40
3 0 (Lmax) 55 45
Source: Visalia Municipal Code, Section 8.36.040(A)
991
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
B. In the event the measured ambient noise level without the alleged offensive source in operation exceeds an applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.
C. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by 5 dB for pure tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.
8.36.070 Noise source exemptions.
The following activities shall be exempted from the provisions of this chapter:
A. Noise sources associated with the collection of waste or garbage from commercially zoned or industrially zoned property by the city or its authorized franchisee.
17.36.50 Commercial and mixed-use zones.
The following standards shall apply to sites within a C-N, C-R, C-S, C-MU or D-MU zone:
A. Where a site in the C-N, C-R, C-S, C-MU, or D-MU zone adjoins an R-1 or R-M zone, either a concrete block masonry wall not less than seven (7) feet in height shall be located on the property line except in a required front yard and suitably maintained or a landscaped buffer be provided as approved by the planning commission.
B. A use not conducted entirely within a completely enclosed structure, on a site across a street or alley from an R-1 or R-M zone shall be screened by a concrete block or masonry wall not less than six (6) feet in height, if the city planning commission finds said use to be unsightly. A landscaped buffer can be approved by the planning commission in place of a required wall as an exception.
C. Open storage of materials and equipment, except commercial vehicles and used car sales lots, shall be permitted only within an area surrounded and screened by a concrete block or masonry wall not less than six (6) feet in height; provided, that no materials or equipment shall be stored to a height greater than that of the wall or fence.
D. No fence or wall shall exceed seven (7) feet in height if located in a required side or rear yard or three (3) feet in height if located in a required front yard. A fence or wall may be allowed in a required front yard to a height of four (4) feet provided that the additional one-foot height is not of a solid material, upon approval of the city planner.
Adjustments to Municipal Code Noise Standards Based on Ambient Conditions Section 8.36.040 of the Visalia Municipal Code states that if measured ambient noise levels exceed the established noise level limits, the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the measured ambient noise level.
Table 1 of this report contains the results from the BAC long-term ambient noise survey at sites 1-3, which are believed to be representative of the existing ambient noise environments at nearby 992
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
existing residential uses adjacent to the project. Based on the results from the BAC long-term noise level surveys, the Municipal Code noise level limits applicable to the project are summarized in Table 8.
Table 8
Adjusted Municipal Code Noise Level Standards Applied to the Project Nearest
Residences1
Average Measured
Noise Levels1 Unadjusted Standards
Adjustment for
Measured Ambient? Applied Standards2
Daytime Nighttime Day/Eve Nighttime Day/Eve Nighttime Day/Eve Nighttime L50 Lmax L50 Lmax L50 Lmax L50 Lmax L50 Lmax L50 Lmax L50 Lmax L50 Lmax Northwest 48 66 43 60 50 70 45 65 N N N N 50 70 45 65
West 47 67 47 63 50 70 45 65 N N Y N 50 70 47 65
Southwest 47 67 47 63 50 70 45 65 N N Y N 50 70 47 65
Southeast 48 68 44 62 50 70 45 65 N N N N 50 70 45 65
1 Lowest average measured hourly noise levels from Table 1. 2 Applied standards based on results from BAC ambient noise level surveys and pursuant to Section 8.36.040.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Thresholds of Significance
For the purposes of this assessment, noise or vibration impacts are considered significant if the project would 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 other applicable standards of other agencies; or Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; or 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, the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip, an airport land use plan, or within two miles of a public airport. Therefore, the last threshold listed above is not discussed further.
The following criteria based on standards established by the Federal Interagency Commission on Noise (FICON), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Visalia General Plan, and Visalia Municipal Code were used to evaluate the significance of environmental noise and vibration resulting from the project:
993
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
A significant noise impact would be identified if the project would expose persons to or generate noise levels that would exceed applicable noise standards presented in the Visalia General Plan or Visalia Municipal Code.
A significant impact would be identified if project-generated off-site traffic were to substantially increase noise levels at existing sensitive receptors in the vicinity. A substantial increase in off-site traffic noise levels would be identified relative to the FICON noise level increase significance criteria presented in Table 3.
In terms of determining the temporary noise increase due to project on-site operations at existing sensitive receptors in the vicinity, an impact would occur if those activities were to noticeably increase ambient noise levels above background levels at those locations.
The threshold of perception of the human ear is approximately 3 to 5 dB – a 5 dB change is considered to be clearly noticeable. For the analysis of increases in ambient noise levels associated with project on-site operations, a noticeable increase in ambient noise levels is assumed to occur where those activities would result in an increase by 5 dB or more over existing ambient noise levels at existing residences. A significant impact would be identified if project construction activities or proposed onsite operations were to expose existing sensitive receptors to excessive groundborne vibration levels. Specifically, an impact would be identified if groundborne vibration levels due to these sources would exceed the Caltrans vibration impact criteria presented in this report.
Noise Impacts Associated with Project-Generated Increases in Off-Site Traffic Impact 1: Increases in Existing Off-Site Traffic Noise Levels due to the Project Construction of this project would result in increased traffic on the local roadway network. BAC utilized the FHWA Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with provided project traffic data to determine whether traffic noise impacts (relative to the FICON increase significance criteria provided in Table 3) would occur as a result of this project.
The FHWA Traffic Noise Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) was used to quantify increases in existing traffic noise levels at the existing sensitive land uses nearest to the project area roadway network.
The FHWA Model predicts hourly Leq values for free-flowing traffic conditions. Estimates of the hourly distribution of traffic for a typical 24-hour period were used to develop DNL values from Leq values.
According to the provided site plan, the project site will be accessed from S. Mooney Boulevard and W. Visalia Parkway. As a result, the greatest impact from project-generated off-site traffic will be along these roadways. The nearest existing noise sensitive use along S. Mooney Boulevard has been identified as a single-family residence located ¼ mile south of the project site (27274 S.
Mooney Boulevard), which outdoor activity area (i.e., backyard) maintains a separation of approximately 150 feet from the roadway centerline. The closest existing noise-sensitive use along W. Visalia Parkway has been identified as a single-family residence located just west of the 994
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
project area (on W. Lake Drive), which outdoor activity area (i.e., backyard) maintains a separation of approximately 100 feet from the roadway centerline.
Existing traffic data in the form of peak hour intersection turning movements were obtained from the Proposed Commons at W. Visalia Parkway Shopping Center Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Peters Engineering Group. Those data were converted to Average Daily Traffic (ADT) segment volumes by applying a factor of 5 to the sum of AM and PM peak hour conditions. Other inputs were obtained from BAC observations and noise measurement data. Based on the results from the analysis, the segment of S. Mooney Boulevard adjacent to the closest existing residential use is calculated to have an existing ADT volume of approximately 17,000. The results further indicate that the segment of W. Visalia Parkway adjacent to the closest existing residential use is calculated to have an existing ADT volume of approximately 6,500.
Assuming vehicle speeds of 55 MPH, medium- and heavy-truck mix of 4%/2% (derived from Caltrans data), and an existing ADT of 17,000, the FHWA Model predicts S. Mooney Boulevard traffic noise levels of 66 dB DNL at distance of 150 feet from the centerline of the roadway (i.e., location of 27274 S. Mooney Boulevard residence backyard). Assuming vehicle speeds of 45 MPH, medium- and heavy-truck mix of 2%/2% (derived from BAC file data for similar roadways), and an existing ADT of 6,500, the FHWA Model predicts W. Visalia Parkway traffic noise levels of 62 dB DNL at distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the roadway (i.e., location of W. Lake Drive residence backyard).
According to the provided project trip generation data, the proposed anchor tenant with fueling station land use (discount club – ITE code 857) is estimated to generate a weekday traffic volume of 9,500, and a Saturday traffic volume of 11,810. The project trip generation also indicate that the proposed car wash land use (automated car wash – ITE code 934) is calculated to generate a weekday traffic volume of 776, and a Saturday traffic volume of 410. Given a combined ADT of 12,220 (11,810+410), project-generated traffic noise level exposure is predicted to be 60 dB DNL at the outdoor activity area (backyard) of the residence located at 27274 S. Mooney Boulevard.
Given the combined ADT of 12,220, project-generated traffic noise level exposure is also predicted to be 60 dB DNL at the outdoor activity area of the nearest existing residence located along W. Visalia Parkway (W. Lake Drive).
According to FICON criteria (presented in Table 3), where pre-project ambient conditions are between 60 and 65 dB DNL, a 3 dB increase is applied as the standard of significance. The FICON increase significance criterion of 3 dB would be applicable at the residence located along W. Visalia Parkway (W. Lake Drive), at which an existing W. Visalia Parkway traffic noise level environment 62 dB DNL was calculated. FICON criteria also indicate that in areas already exposed to higher noise levels, specifically pre-project noise levels in excess of 65 dB DNL, a 1.5 dB increase is considered by FICON as the threshold of significance. The FICON increase significance criterion of 1.5 dB would be applicable at the residence located at 27274 S. Mooney Boulevard, at which an existing traffic noise level environment of 66 dB DNL was calculated.
Based a predicted existing S. Mooney Boulevard traffic noise level environment of 66 dB DNL, and given a predicted project-generated traffic noise level of 60 dB DNL, the combined traffic noise level exposure is calculated to be 67 dB DNL, which would result in a 1 dB increase at the closest existing residential use along the roadway. The calculated project-generated increase of 995
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
1 dB along S. Mooney Boulevard would be below the applied FICON increase significance criterion of 1.5 dB. Given a predicted existing W. Visalia Parkway traffic noise level environment of 62 dB DNL, and a predicted project-generated traffic noise level of 60 dB DNL, the combined traffic noise level exposure is calculated to be 64 dB DNL, which would result in a 2 dB increase at the closest existing residential use along the roadway. The calculated project-generated increase of 2 dB along W. Visalia Parkway would be below the applied FICON increase significance criterion of 3 dB.
Because project-related traffic is not predicted to result in increases in ambient noise levels that would exceed the applicable FICON increase significance criteria at existing sensitive uses within the project vicinity, this impact is identified as being less than significant.
Noise Impacts Associated with Project On-Site Operations The project proposes the development of anchor tenant with fueling station and car wash land uses. The primary on-site operations noise sources associated with the anchor tenant / fueling station component of the project have been identified as on-site truck circulation (i.e., medium and heavy truck passbys), truck delivery activities (i.e., loading dock operations), parking lot activities, and rooftop mechanical equipment (HVAC). The primary on-site operations noise sources associated with the car wash component of the project have been identified as car wash tunnel operations and vacuum system equipment. Noise generated by operations of these land uses were quantified through a combination of reference noise level data and application of accepted noise modeling techniques.
The following section includes impact discussions for each of the above-identified on-site project noise sources at nearby residential uses. The locations of the nearby residential uses are shown in Figure 1. The Visalia General Plan exterior noise level standards provided in Table 7 of this report were applied to project on-site operations noise sources. Additionally, the applied Visalia Municipal Code exterior noise level limits presented in Table 8 of this report were also used in the assessment of on-site operations noise compliance. Finally, the residential interior noise level criteria established in Section 8.36.060 of the Visalia Municipal Code were also applied to project on-site operations noise generation.
In terms of determining the ambient noise increases due to project on-site operations, an impact would occur if those activities were to noticeably increase ambient noise levels above background levels at existing sensitive receptors. For the analysis of increases in ambient noise levels associated with project on-site operations, a noticeable increase is assumed to occur where those activities would result in an increase by 5 dB or more over ambient noise levels at existing nearby residences.
Impact 2: Parking Operations Noise Generation – Anchor Tenant Component As a means of determining potential noise exposure due to anchor tenant / fueling station parking lot activities, Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC) utilized specific parking lot noise level measurements conducted by BAC. Specifically, a series of individual noise measurements were conducted of multiple vehicle types arriving and departing a parking area, including engines starting and stopping, car doors opening and closing, and persons conversing as they entered 996
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
and exited the vehicles. The results of those measurements revealed that individual parking lot movements generated mean noise levels of approximately 70 dB SEL at a reference distance of 50 feet. The maximum noise level associated with parking lot activity typically did not exceed 65 dB Lmax at the same reference distance.
To compute hourly average (Leq) noise levels generated by parking activities, the approximate number of hourly operations in any given area and distance to the effective noise center of those activities is required. According to the provided site plan, the fueling station component of the project proposes 12 drive lanes for 12 fueling islands (total of 24 fuel dispensers). Further, it is estimated that a maximum of 8 vehicles could be in each drive lane at maximum capacity (total of 96 drive lane queue positions). Assuming each vehicle spends 5 minutes at either a fuel dispenser or queue position, a total of approximately 1,440 vehicle trips could occur on-site per hour at maximum capacity (considered to be worst-case). For the purpose of this analysis, it was conservatively assumed that 1,440 vehicle trips could occur at the fueling component of the project site during a worst-case busy daytime hour. It was further assumed that the nearest 350 stalls of the anchor tenant parking area could either empty or fill during a worst-case busy daytime hour nearest to a residential use. Finally, because parking area activity would be significantly reduced during nighttime hours, it was reasonably assumed that 50% of the above-identified daytime peak hour trips could occur during a nighttime peak hour. Parking lot noise exposure was determined using the following equation:
Peak Hour Leq = 70+10*log (N) – 35.6
Where 70 is the SEL for a single automobile parking operation, N is the number of parking lot operations in a peak hour, and 35.6 is 10 times the logarithm of the number of seconds in an hour.
Using the information provided above, and assuming standard spherical spreading loss (-6 dB per doubling of distance).
The Visalia General Plan noise standards are provided in terms of both hourly average (Leq) and individual maximum (Lmax) noise levels. Because parking activities would occur throughout the course of an hour (i.e., in excess of 30 minutes), the Visalia Municipal Code median (L50) noise level descriptor would be applicable. Based on the BAC file data, project trip generation estimates, and operations assumptions above, and assuming standard spherical spreading loss (-6 dB per doubling of distance), project parking area noise exposure at the property lines of existing nearby residential uses was calculated and the results of those calculations are presented in Tables 9 and 10.
997
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 9
Predicted Parking Area Noise Levels at Nearby Residential Uses – Daytime Hours Receiver1 Offsets (dB)2
Predicted Combined Parking Noise Level (dB)3,4
Leq Lmax L50
Residential – Northwest -8 46 53 41
Residential – West -8 36 45 31
Residential – Southwest -8 34 49 29
Residential – Southeast -8 40 57 35
1 Receiver locations shown in Figure 1.
2 An offset of -8 dB was applied to account for shielding that would be provided by an existing 7’ solid wall (noise barrier) constructed along the perimeter of the project property boundary. Existing 7’ wall illustrated in Figure 2.
Offset based on the result from a source specific barrier evaluation. 3 Predicted combined noise levels from anchor tenant parking area and fueling station stalls/lanes. 4 Predicted combined noise level also include screening from proposed intervening buildings where applicable.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 10
Predicted Parking Area Noise Levels at Nearby Residential Uses – Nighttime Hours Receiver1 Offsets (dB)2
Predicted Combined Parking Noise Level (dB)3,4,5
Leq Lmax L50
Residential – Northwest -8 43 53 38
Residential – West -8 33 45 28
Residential – Southwest -8 31 49 26
Residential – Southeast -8 37 57 32
1 Receiver locations shown in Figure 1.
2 An offset of -8 dB was applied to account for shielding that would be provided by an existing 7’ solid wall (noise barrier) constructed along the perimeter of the project property boundary. Existing 7’ wall illustrated in Figure 2.
Offset based on the results from a source specific barrier evaluation. 3 Predicted combined noise levels also include screening from proposed intervening buildings where applicable. 4 Predicted nighttime parking activity reasonably assumes 50% of daytime activity.
Source: BAC 2024
As indicated in Tables 9 and 10, project parking activity noise levels are predicted to satisfy the Visalia General Plan hourly average (Leq) and maximum (Lmax) daytime and nighttime noise level standards at the nearest existing residential uses. Tables 9 and 10 data also indicate that project parking activity noise levels are predicted to satisfy the applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime/evening and nighttime median (L50) exterior noise level limits at those nearest existing residential uses.
Standard residential construction (e.g., stucco siding, STC-27 windows, door weather-stripping, exterior wall insulation, composition plywood roof) typically results in an exterior to interior noise reduction of at least 20 to 25 dB with windows closed and approximately 15 dB with windows open (including manufactured homes). Based on this information, and after consideration of the predicted exterior property line noise levels presented in Tables 9 and 10, project parking area 998
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
noise levels are expected to satisfy the strictest Visalia Municipal Code interior noise level criteria within the nearest existing residences.
Table 1 of this report contains a summary of the results from the BAC long-term ambient noise survey at sites 1-3, which are believed to be representative of the existing ambient noise environments at nearby existing residential receivers adjacent to the project. Using the average measured hourly daytime and nighttime noise levels at each monitoring location during the BAC ambient noise survey shown in Table 1, and the predicted noise levels presented in Tables 9 and 10, ambient plus project parking area noise level increases were calculated at the nearby residential uses. The results of those calculations are provided in Tables 11 and 12 below. As indicated in Tables 11 and 12, the calculated increases in ambient noise levels at the nearby residential uses would be well below the applied increase significance criterion of 5 dB.
Table 11
Calculated Project Parking Increases in Ambient Noise Levels – Daytime Hours Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Combined
Parking Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Associated Noise
Level Increase (dB)4
Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50
Residential – NW 53 67 49 46 53 41 53.6 67.5 50.0 0.9 0.2 0.6 Residential – W 52 69 48 36 45 31 52.4 69.0 48.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 Residential – SW 52 69 48 34 49 29 52.4 69.0 48.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 Residential – SE 51 69 48 40 57 35 51.7 69.0 48.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted combined parking noise levels during daytime hours presented in Table 9 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus project-generated daytime noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 12
Calculated Project Parking Increases in Ambient Noise Levels – Nighttime Hours Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Combined
Parking Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Associated Noise
Level Increase (dB)4
Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50
Residential – NW 47 60 44 43 53 38 48.8 61.1 45.3 1.4 0.7 1.0 Residential – W 51 64 48 33 45 28 50.7 63.7 47.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 Residential – SW 51 64 48 31 49 26 50.7 63.8 47.7 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 Residential – SE 49 63 46 37 57 32 49.6 64.2 45.9 0.3 0.9 0.2 1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted combined parking noise levels during nighttime hours presented in Table 10 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus project-generated nighttime noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
999
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Because noise exposure from project parking area movements is predicted to satisfy applicable Visalia General Plan and Visalia Municipal Code noise level criteria at the nearest existing residential uses, and because noise exposure from those activities is not calculated to significantly increase ambient noise levels at those uses, this impact is identified as being less than significant.
Impact 3: Loading Dock Activity Noise Generation – Anchor Tenant Component Based on a review of the provided site plan, the anchor tenant use will receive truck deliveries of product at a loading dock area located on the south end of the building. The location of the anchor tenant building loading dock area is shown in Figure 2. The nearest existing residential use maintains a separation of approximately 135 feet from the anchor tenant loading dock area.
The primary noise sources associated with loading dock activities are trucks stopping (air brakes), trucks backing into position (back-up alarms), and pulling away from the dock area (revving engines). Once docked, it is expected that activities associated with unloading of the product would occur within the building. To quantify the noise generated by loading dock activities, BAC utilized noise level data obtained from BAC field measurements of a commercial warehouse facility. According to BAC measurement data, truck loading dock average and maximum noise levels are approximately 63 dB Leq and 75 dB Lmax at a reference distance of 50 feet (including back-up beepers). Median (L50) on-site truck delivery activity noise levels would be approximately 5 dB less than hourly average noise levels (Leq).
The Visalia General Plan noise standards are provided in terms of both hourly average (Leq) and individual maximum (Lmax) noise levels. Because loading dock activities could occur throughout the course of an hour (i.e., in excess of 30 minutes), the Visalia Municipal Code median (L50) noise level descriptor would be applicable. Based on the reference noise level data and operations assumptions cited above, and assuming standard sound wave spreading loss (-6 dB per doubling of distance), project loading dock noise level exposure at the property lines of existing nearby residential uses was calculated and the results of those calculations are presented in Table 13.
Table 13
Predicted Loading Dock Noise Levels at Nearby Residential Uses Receiver1 Offsets (dB)2
Predicted Loading Dock Noise Level (dB)3
Leq Lmax L50
Residential – Northwest -8 23 35 18
Residential – West -8 30 42 25
Residential – Southwest -8 46 58 41
Residential – Southeast -8 38 50 33
1 Receiver locations shown in Figure 1.
2 An offset of -8 dB was applied to account for shielding that would be provided by an existing 7’ solid wall (noise barrier) constructed along the perimeter of the project property boundary. Existing 7’ wall illustrated in Figure 2.
Offset based on the results of a source specific barrier evaluation. 3 Predicted noise level also include screening from proposed intervening buildings where applicable.
Source: BAC 2024
1000
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 13 data indicate that project loading dock activity noise levels are predicted to satisfy the Visalia General Plan hourly average (Leq) and maximum (Lmax) daytime noise level standards at the nearest existing residential uses, but would exceed the nighttime hourly average noise level limit of 45 dB Leq at the closest residential use to the southwest. Table 13 data also indicate that project loading dock activity noise levels are predicted to satisfy the applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime/evening and nighttime median (L50) exterior noise level limits at the nearest existing residential uses.
Based on the noise level reduction achieved with standard residential construction (minimum of 20 to 25 dB with windows closed, approximately 15 dB with windows open), and after consideration of the predicted exterior property line noise levels presented in Table 13, project loading dock noise levels are expected to satisfy the strictest Visalia Municipal Code interior noise level criteria within the nearest existing residences.
Using the average measured hourly daytime and nighttime noise levels at each monitoring location during the BAC ambient noise survey shown in Table 1, and the predicted noise levels presented in Table 13, ambient plus project loading dock noise level increases were calculated at the nearby residential uses. The results of those calculations are provided in Tables 14 and 15 below.
Table 14
Calculated Project Loading Dock Increases in Ambient Daytime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Loading
Dock Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Associated Noise
Level Increase (dB)4
Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50
Residential – NW 53 67 49 23 35 18 52.7 67.3 49.3 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Residential – W 52 69 48 30 42 25 52.4 69.0 48.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Residential – SW 52 69 48 46 58 41 53.3 69.4 48.9 1.0 0.4 0.9 Residential – SE 51 69 48 38 50 33 51.5 68.7 48.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project loading dock noise levels presented in Table 13 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
1001
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 15
Calculated Project Loading Dock Increases in Ambient Nighttime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Loading
Dock Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Associated Noise
Level Increase (dB)4
Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50
Residential – NW 47 60 44 23 35 18 47.4 60.3 44.3 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Residential – W 51 64 48 30 42 25 50.7 63.7 47.7 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Residential – SW 51 64 48 46 58 41 52.0 64.8 48.6 1.4 1.1 0.9 Residential – SE 49 63 46 38 50 33 49.6 63.5 45.9 0.3 0.2 0.2 1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project loading dock noise levels presented in Table 13 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
As shown in Tables 14 and 15, the calculated increases in ambient noise levels at the nearby residential uses would be well below the applied increase significance criterion of 5 dB. However, because project loading dock activity noise exposure is predicted to exceed the Visalia General Plan nighttime hourly average (Leq) noise level standard at the nearby existing residential use to the southwest (Table 13), this impact is identified as potentially significant.
Mitigation Measure 1:
To ensure for satisfaction of the Visalia General Plan nighttime hourly average (Leq) noise level standard at nearby existing residential uses, the following specific noise mitigation measure would be required of the project:
MM 1: All project loading dock activities shall be limited to daytime hours only (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.).
Significance of Impact with MM 1: Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Impact 4: On-Site Delivery Truck Circulation Noise – Anchor Tenant Component Based on review of the provided site plan, it is assumed that delivery trucks will utilize an access road located off W. Visalia Parkway at the northwest end of the project property. Once on-site, it is further assumed that trucks will travel along the west/southwest project property line behind the anchor tenant building to the loading dock area on the south side of the building. The assumed on-site truck circulation route is shown in Figure 2. The nearest existing residential uses maintain a separation of approximately 25 feet from the assumed anchor tenant on-site truck circulation route.
It is the experience of BAC that deliveries of product to the anchor tenant type uses occur primarily by heavy trucks. However, the fueling station will also receive deliveries from heavy fueling trucks 1002
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
for the purpose of refilling the underground storage tanks. According to the project applicant, the project is expected to receive a total of 20 heavy truck deliveries per day (15 – anchor tenant; 5 – fueling station). Based on a review of the site design (loading dock area), and for the purpose of this analysis, it is expected that no more than 3 heavy trucks could deliver products to the anchor tenant building during the same worst-case hour of deliveries. It is reasonably assumed that the fueling station would only have 1 heavy fueling truck delivery during a given worst-case hour of deliveries.
Heavy truck arrivals and departures, and on-site circulation will occur at low speeds. To predict noise levels generated by those activities, BAC utilized file data obtained from measurements conducted by BAC of heavy truck passbys. According to BAC file data, single-event heavy truck passby noise levels are approximately 74 dB Lmax and 83 dB SEL at a reference distance of 50 feet. Because the Visalia General Plan noise standards are provided in terms of both individual maximum noise levels and hourly average noise levels, it is necessary to identify the number of truck movements occurring during a typical busy hour of operations to assess compliance with the Leq-based standards. In addition, because on-site truck circulation could occur throughout the course of an hour (i.e., in excess of 30 minutes), the applicable Visalia Municipal Code noise level descriptor for on-site truck circulation would be the median noise level metric (L50).
Based on a 3 heavy truck trips per hour, and an SEL of 83 dB SEL per passby, the average hourly noise level generated by anchor tenant delivery truck circulation computes to 50 dB Leq at a reference distance of 52 feet from the passby route (maximum noise level of 74 dB Lmax). Given 1 heavy truck trip per hour, and an SEL of 83 dB SEL per passby, the average hourly noise level generated by fueling station delivery truck circulation computes to 48 dB Leq at a reference distance of 50 feet from the passby route (maximum noise level of 74 dB Lmax). Median (L50) onsite truck circulation noise levels would be approximately 5 dB less than calculated hourly average noise levels (Leq).
Based on the reference noise level data and operations assumptions above, project on-site truck circulation noise exposure at the property lines of existing nearby residential uses was calculated and the results of those calculations are presented in Table 16.
Table 16
Predicted On-Site Delivery Truck Circulation Noise Levels at Nearby Residential Uses Receiver1 Offsets (dB)2
Predicted Truck Circulation Noise Level (dB)3
Leq Lmax L50
Residential – Northwest -7 52 73 47
Residential – West -7 51 73 46
Residential – Southwest -7 43 64 38
Residential – Southeast -7 37 58 32
1 Receiver locations shown in Figure 1.
2 An offset of -7 dB was applied to account for shielding that would be provided by an existing 7’ solid wall (noise barrier) constructed along the perimeter of the project property boundary. Existing 7’ wall illustrated in Figure 2.
Offset based on the results of a source specific barrier evaluation. 3 Predicted noise level also include screening from proposed intervening buildings where applicable.
Source: BAC 2024
1003
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
As indicated in Table 16, project on-site truck circulation noise levels are predicted to exceed the Visalia General Plan daytime and nighttime hourly average (Leq) and maximum (Lmax) noise level standards at a portion of the nearest residential uses. The Table 16 data also indicates that project on-site truck circulation noise levels are predicted to exceed the applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime/evening and nighttime median (L50) exterior noise level limits at a portion of those nearest residential uses.
Based on the noise level reduction achieved with standard residential construction (minimum of 20 to 25 dB with windows closed, approximately 15 dB with windows open), and after consideration of the predicted exterior property line noise levels presented in Table 16, project on-site truck circulation noise levels are expected to satisfy the strictest Visalia Municipal Code interior noise level criteria within the nearest existing residences.
Using the average measured hourly daytime and nighttime noise levels at each monitoring location during the BAC ambient noise survey shown in Table 1, and the predicted noise levels presented in Table 16, ambient plus project on-site truck circulation noise level increases were calculated at the nearby residential uses. The results of those calculations are provided in Tables 17 and 18. As shown in Tables 17 and 18, the calculated increases in ambient noise levels would exceed the applied increase significance criterion of 5 dB at a portion of the closest residential uses.
Table 17
Calculated Project On-Site Truck Circulation Increases in Ambient Daytime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Truck Noise
Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Associated Noise
Level Increase (dB)4
Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50
Residential – NW 53 67 49 52 73 47 55.6 74.1 51.5 2.9 6.7 2.2 Residential – W 52 69 48 51 73 46 54.8 74.1 50.2 2.5 5.1 2.2 Residential – SW 52 69 48 43 64 38 52.8 70.2 48.4 0.5 1.2 0.4 Residential – SE 51 69 48 37 58 32 51.5 69.0 48.4 0.2 0.4 0.1 1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project on-site truck circulation noise levels presented in Table 16 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
1004
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 18
Calculated Project On-Site Truck Circulation Increases in Ambient Nighttime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Truck Noise
Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Associated Noise
Level Increase (dB)4
Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50
Residential – NW 47 60 44 52 73 47 53.7 73.2 49.2 6.3 12.9 4.9 Residential – W 51 64 48 51 73 46 54.0 73.1 50.0 3.3 9.4 2.4 Residential – SW 51 64 48 43 64 38 51.3 67.0 48.1 0.7 3.3 0.4 Residential – SE 49 63 46 37 58 32 49.6 64.5 45.8 0.2 1.2 0.2 1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project on-site truck circulation noise levels presented in Table 16 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Because project on-site truck circulation noise exposure is predicted to exceed Visalia General Plan and applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime and nighttime noise level criteria at nearby existing residential uses (Table 16), and because daytime and nighttime increases in ambient noise levels associated with those operations are also calculated to exceed the applied increase significance criterion (Tables 17 and 18), this impact is identified as potentially significant.
Mitigation Measure 2:
To comply with Visalia General Plan and applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime noise level criteria, reduce increases in ambient daytime and nighttime noise levels to below the applied increase significance criterion, and to avoid the potential for exceedances of Visalia General Plan and Municipal Code nighttime noise level criteria at nearby existing residential uses, the following two (2) specific noise mitigation measures would be required of the project:
MM 2A: A portion of the existing 7-foot-tall masonry wall along the project property line shall be increased to 8-feet in height. The location of the required 8-foot-tall wall portion is illustrated in Figure 4.
It should be noted that Section 17.36.050 of the Visalia Municipal Code limits the height of commercial walls to 7-feet-in-height when located in a rear yard, such as the existing 7-foot-tall wall adjacent to the project site. As a result, the project applicant would be required to file for an Administrative Adjustment to permit the additional 1-foot of wall required for compliance. As an alternative, an 8-foot-tall masonry wall may be constructed adjacent to the existing 7-foot-tall wall (i.e., off the property line).
MM 2B: All project on-site delivery truck circulation shall be limited to daytime hours only (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.).
Table 19 below shows predicted on-site truck circulation noise levels after implementation of Mitigation Measure 2A as outlined above. Table 19 data shows compliance with Visalia General 1005
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Plan and applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime noise level criteria at nearby residential uses.
In addition, Table 20 data shows calculated increases in ambient noise levels at the nearby residential uses after implementation of Mitigation Measure 2A. As shown in Table 20, the calculated mitigated increases in ambient noise levels at the nearby residential uses would satisfy the applied increase significance criterion of 5 dB.
Table 19
Mitigated Predicted On-Site Truck Circulation Noise Levels – Daytime Hours Receiver
Unmitigated Noise Levels (dB) Mitigated Noise Levels (dB)1 Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50
Residential – Northwest 52 73 47 49 70 44
Residential – West 51 73 46 48 70 43
Residential – Southwest 43 64 38 43 64 38
Residential – Southeast 37 58 32 37 58 32
1 Predicted noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure 2A.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 20
Mitigated On-Site Truck Circulation Increases in Ambient Daytime Noise Levels Receiver
Unmitigated Increases (dB) Mitigated Increases (dB)1
Leq Lmax L50 Leq Lmax L50
Residential – Northwest 2.9 6.7 2.2 1.7 4.6 1.2
Residential – West 2.5 5.1 2.2 1.4 3.3 1.3
Residential – Southwest 0.5 1.2 0.4 0.5 1.2 0.4
Residential – Southeast 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.1
1 Calculated increases in daytime ambient noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure 2A.
Source: BAC 2024
Significance of Impact with MM 2A & 2B: Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Impact 5: Rooftop Mechanical Equipment (HVAC) Noise – Anchor Tenant Component The provided rooftop mechanical plans for the proposed anchor tenant building indicate that a combination of rooftop units (RTUs), air-handing units (AHUs), exhaust fans (EFs), and exhaust fan handlers (EFHs) will be located on the building rooftop. This rooftop-mounted mechanical equipment would be shielded from view at ground level locations of adjacent residential land uses by the building envelope and/or rooftop parapets. The location of the anchor tenant building is shown in Figure 2. Brief descriptions of the proposed rooftop mechanical equipment are provided below.
Rooftop Units (RTUs)
The project proposes the installation of 25 rooftop units consisting of four (4) models manufactured by Enlight Lennox (Models LHT036H4, LHT060H4, LHT122H4E and 1006
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
LHT240H4M). According to equipment manufacturer specification documentation, provided in Appendix E of this report, the reference sound power levels for the proposed rooftop unit models range from 75 dB to 94 dB.
Air-Handling Units (AHUs)
The project proposes the installation of four (4) air-handling units on the building rooftop. The specific model proposed by the project is the HCUC8040AAD manufactured by Munters.
According to equipment manufacturer specification documentation, provided in Appendix E of this report, the reference sound pressure level for the proposed air-handling unit model is 73 dB at distance of 15 feet.
Exhaust Fans (EFs)
The project proposes the installation of three (3) exhaust fan handling units consisting of potentially four (4) models manufactured by Carnes, Acme, Pennbarry and Greenheck (Models VUDK12P2, PDU135RGG4, FX16R and CUE-101-A). According to equipment manufacturer specification documentation, provided in Appendix E of this report, the reference sound power levels for the exhaust fan models range from 13 sones to 20 sones.
Exhaust Fan Handlers (EFHs)
Based on the provided project mechanical equipment schedule, rooftop mechanical plan, and information obtained from the project applicant, the project proposes the installation of 11 exhaust fans consisting of two (2) models manufactured by CaptiveAire (Models DU50HFA and DU180HFA). According to equipment manufacturer specification documentation, provided in Appendix E of this report, the reference sound power levels for the DU50HFA and DU180HFA exhaust fan handler models are 18 sones and 30 sones, respectively.
For the purpose of this analysis, it was conservatively assumed that all identified rooftop-mounted mechanical equipment would be in operation concurrently (believed to be worst-case noise exposure). Based on this operations assumption, the provided rooftop mechanical plans and rooftop mechanical plan schedule, and using the cited equipment manufacturer reference sound level data above with accepted sound propagation (-6 dB per doubling of distance), combined project rooftop-mounted mechanical equipment noise exposure at the property lines of existing nearby residential uses was calculated and the results of those calculations are presented in Table 21. Because operation of the rooftop mechanical equipment is typically a steady state noise source, the equipment was assessed relative to the General Plan hourly average (Leq) and Municipal Code median (L50) noise level standard descriptors. 1007
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 21
Predicted Combined Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Noise Levels at Nearby Residential Uses Receiver1 Offsets (dB)2
Predicted Combined Rooftop Mechanical
Equipment Noise Level, Leq/L50 (dB)3,4
Residential – Northwest -7 40
Residential – West -7 42
Residential – Southwest -7 40
Residential – Southeast -7 41
1 Receiver locations shown in Figure 1.
2 An offset of -7 dB was applied to account for shielding that would be provided by an existing 7’ solid wall (noise barrier) constructed along the perimeter of the project property boundary. Existing 7’ wall illustrated in Figure 2.
Offset based on the results of a source specific barrier evaluation. 3 Predicted noise levels include a conservative offset of -10 dB to account for shielding that provided by building envelope and/or rooftop parapets that would break line of sight of equipment at adjacent ground level locations. 4 Predicted combined noise level exposure at each receiver conservatively assumes all of the identified rooftop mechanical equipment in operation concurrently (25-RTUs; 4-AHUs; 3-EFs; 2-EFHs).
Source: BAC 2024
Table 21 data indicate that worst-case project rooftop mechanical equipment noise levels are predicted to satisfy the Visalia General Plan daytime and nighttime hourly average (Leq) noise level standards at the nearest existing residential uses. Table 21 data also indicate that project rooftop mechanical equipment noise level exposure is predicted to satisfy the applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime/evening and nighttime median (L50) exterior noise level limits at the nearest existing residential uses.
Based on the noise level reduction achieved with standard residential construction (minimum of 20 to 25 dB with windows closed, approximately 15 dB with windows open), and after consideration of the predicted exterior property line noise levels presented in Table 21, project rooftop mechanical equipment noise levels are expected to satisfy the strictest Visalia Municipal Code interior noise level criteria within the nearest existing residences.
Using the average measured hourly daytime and nighttime noise levels at each monitoring location during the BAC ambient noise survey shown in Table 1, and the predicted noise levels presented in Table 21, ambient plus project rooftop mechanical equipment noise level increases were calculated at the nearby residential uses. The results of those calculations are provided in Tables 22 and 23. As indicated in Tables 22 and 23, the calculated mitigated increases in ambient noise levels at the nearby residential uses would satisfy the applied increase significance criterion of 5 dB.
1008
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 22
Calculated Project Rooftop Equipment Increases in Ambient Daytime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Equipment
Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Associated Noise
Level Increase (dB)4
Leq L50 Leq/L50 Leq L50 Leq L50
Residential – NW 53 49 40 52.9 49.8 0.2 0.5
Residential – W 52 48 42 52.8 49.1 0.4 1.1
Residential – SW 52 48 40 52.6 48.7 0.3 0.7
Residential – SE 51 48 41 51.8 49.1 0.4 0.8
1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project rooftop mechanical equipment noise levels presented in Table 21 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 23
Calculated Project Rooftop Equipment Increases in Ambient Nighttime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Equipment
Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Associated Noise
Level Increase (dB)4
Leq L50 Leq/L50 Leq L50 Leq L50
Residential – NW 47 44 40 48.1 45.7 0.7 1.4
Residential – W 51 48 42 51.3 48.8 0.6 1.1
Residential – SW 51 48 40 51.1 48.4 0.4 0.7
Residential – SE 49 46 41 50.0 47.0 0.6 1.4
1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project rooftop mechanical equipment noise levels presented in Table 21 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Because noise exposure from project rooftop mechanical equipment is predicted to satisfy applicable Visalia General Plan and Visalia Municipal Code noise level criteria at the nearest existing residential uses, and because noise exposure from those operations is not calculated to significantly increase ambient noise levels at those uses, this impact is identified as being less than significant.
Impact 6: Car Wash Drying Assembly Noise Generation – Car Wash Component It is the experience of BAC in the preparation of numerous car wash noise studies in recent years that noise levels generated by car washes are primarily due to the drying portion of the operation.
Based on information obtained from the project applicant, the car wash component of the project proposes the installation of a Sonny’s Enterprises 3-blower arch assembly (45 HP), Part # BL1- 45HP-1. According to equipment manufacturer noise specifications, provided as Appendix F of 1009
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
this report, the blower assembly generates a maximum noise level of 75 dB Lmax at a distance of 100 feet.
Based on BAC’s experience with noise level data collection at various existing car washes, the noise level generation of car wash drying assemblies vary depending on the orientation of the measurement position relative to the tunnel opening. Worst-case drying assembly noise levels occur at a position directly facing the car wash exit, considered to be 0 degrees off-axis. At offaxis positions, the building facade provides varying degrees of noise level reduction. At positions 45 degrees off-axis relative to the facade of the car wash exit and entrance, drying assembly noise levels are approximately 5 dB lower. At 90 degrees off-axis, drying assembly noise levels are approximately 10 dB lower.
Because project car wash operations could potentially be occurring off and on for the duration of an hour or more, car wash drying assembly noise level exposure was assessed relative to the General Plan hourly average (Leq) and Municipal Code (L50) noise level standard descriptors.
According to BAC conservations with Sonny’s representatives in recent years, the car wash cycle is approximately 1.5 minutes in duration, with the drying assembly in operation during the last 30 seconds (0.5 minutes) of the cycle. Based on this information, the car wash is calculated to go through 40 full cycles (60 minutes ÷ 1.5 minutes per cycle) and the dryer would operate for approximately 20 minutes (40 car wash cycles x 0.5 minutes of drying) during a busy hour of operations. Based on 20 minutes of dryer operations per hour, the resulting hourly average (Leq) or median (L50) drying assembly noise level is calculated to be approximately 5 dB lower than the equipment’s reference maximum (Lmax) noise level presented above.
Car wash drying assembly noise level exposure was calculated based on the orientation to tunnel entrance/exit, as discussed above. Noise attenuation due to distance was calculated based on standard spherical spreading loss from a point source (-6 dB per doubling of distance). Based on the operations assumptions above, car wash drying assembly noise exposure was calculated at the property lines of existing nearby residential uses was calculated and the results of those calculations are presented in Table 24.
Table 24
Predicted Car Wash Drying Assembly Noise Levels at Nearby Residential Uses Receiver1 Offsets (dB)2
Predicted Car Wash Drying Assembly
Noise Level, Leq/L50 (dB)3
Residential – Northwest -8 39
Residential – West -8 22
Residential – Southwest -8 26
Residential – Southeast -8 27
1 Receiver locations shown in Figure 1.
2 An offset of -8 dB was applied to account for shielding that would be provided by an existing 7’ solid wall (noise barrier) constructed along the perimeter of the project property boundary. Existing 7’ wall illustrated in Figure 2.
Offset based on the results of a source specific barrier evaluation. 3 Predicted noise levels include an additional offset of -10 dB to where the anchor tenant building would completely screen view of the car wash.
Source: BAC 2024
1010
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
As indicated in Table 24, project car wash drying assembly noise levels are predicted to satisfy the Visalia General Plan daytime and nighttime hourly average (Leq) noise level standards at the nearest existing residential uses. Table 24 data also show that project car wash drying assembly noise level exposure is predicted to satisfy the applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime/evening and nighttime median (L50) exterior noise level limits at the nearest existing residential uses.
Based on the noise level reduction achieved with standard residential construction (minimum of 20 to 25 dB with windows closed, approximately 15 dB with windows open), and after consideration of the predicted exterior property line noise levels presented in Table 24, project car wash drying assembly noise levels are expected to satisfy the strictest Visalia Municipal Code interior noise level criteria within the nearest existing residences.
Using the average measured hourly daytime and nighttime noise levels at each monitoring location during the BAC ambient noise survey shown in Table 1, and the predicted noise levels presented in Table 24, ambient plus project car wash drying assembly noise level increases were calculated at the nearby residential uses. The results of those calculations are provided in Tables 25 and 26.
Table 25
Calculated Project Car Wash Drying Assembly Increases in Ambient Daytime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Equipment
Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Daytime Noise Level
Increase (dB)4
Leq L50 Leq/L50 Leq L50 Leq L50
Residential – NW 53 49 39 52.9 49.8 0.2 0.4
Residential – W 52 48 22 52.3 48.0 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – SW 52 48 26 52.3 48.0 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – SE 51 48 27 51.4 48.4 <0.1 <0.1
1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project car wash drying assembly noise levels presented in Table 24 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
1011
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 26
Calculated Project Car Wash Drying Assembly Increases in Ambient Nighttime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Equipment
Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Daytime Noise Level
Increase (dB)4
Leq L50 Leq/L50 Leq L50 Leq L50
Residential – NW 47 44 39 48.0 45.6 0.7 1.2
Residential – W 51 48 22 50.7 47.7 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – SW 51 48 26 50.7 47.7 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – SE 49 46 27 49.4 45.7 <0.1 0.1
1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project car wash drying assembly noise levels presented in Table 24 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Because noise exposure from project car wash drying assembly operations is predicted to satisfy applicable Visalia General Plan and Visalia Municipal Code noise level criteria at the nearest existing residential uses, and because noise exposure from those operations is not calculated to significantly increase ambient noise levels at those uses, this impact is identified as being less than significant.
Impact 7: Vacuum System Noise Generation – Car Wash Component The car wash component of the project would also include the installation and operation of a central vacuum piping system offered by Vacutech (powered by turbine producers). According to the provided site plan, there will be a total of 20 vacuum bays.
After a review of the provided site plans, it appears as though the noise-generating vacuum turbine producers will be contained within either a fully-enclosed equipment room attached to the car wash tunnel or an outdoor CMU enclosure. Based on BAC’s experience and field observations with similarly configured car washes, noise impacts due to the operation of the vacuum turbine producers are not expected due to the transmission loss that would be provided either by the completely enclosed equipment room or the CMU enclosure. As a result, no further analysis would be warranted for the vacuum system turbine producers.
Based on noise level measurements conducted by BAC staff at recently completed car wash project sites, the primary noise-generating aspects of central vacuum piping systems are use of the suction nozzles located at each of the stalls – specifically, noise associated with active suction nozzles hanging off nozzle hangers. Reference sound level data obtained from the proposed vacuum system manufacturer (Vacutech) is provided as Appendix G. The sound level data provided in Appendix C show measured and projected sound levels from 19 vacuum hoses off their respective nozzle hangers at distances ranging from 45 to 85 feet.
For the purposes of this analysis, it was conservatively assumed that all proposed vacuum suction nozzles would be in concurrent operation (believed to be worst-case noise exposure). Based on 1012
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
the manufacturer sound level data in Appendix G and operations assumptions above, and assuming standard spherical spreading loss (-6 dB per doubling of distance from a stationary source), worst-case project vacuum equipment noise exposure at the property lines of existing nearby residential uses was calculated and the results of those calculations are presented in Table 27. Because the project vacuum system could potentially be in operation continuously for the duration of an hour during a busy hour of operations, vacuum equipment noise level exposure was assessed relative to the General Plan hourly average (Leq) and Municipal Code (L50) noise level standard descriptors.
Table 27
Predicted Vacuum Nozzle Noise Levels at Nearby Residential Uses Receiver1 Offsets (dB)2
Predicted Vacuum Nozzle Noise Level,
Leq/L50 (dB)3
Residential – Northwest -8 24
Residential – West -8 <20
Residential – Southwest -8 <20
Residential – Southeast -8 <20
1 Receiver locations shown in Figure 1.
2 An offset of -8 dB was applied to account for shielding that would be provided by an existing 7’ solid wall (noise barrier) constructed along the perimeter of the project property boundary. Existing 7’ wall illustrated in Figure 2.
Offset based on the results of a source specific barrier evaluation. 3 Predicted noise levels include an additional offset of -10 dB to where the anchor tenant building would completely screen view of the vacuum area.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 27 data indicate that project vacuum system operation noise levels are predicted to satisfy the Visalia General Plan daytime and nighttime hourly average (Leq) noise level standards at the nearest existing residential uses. Table 27 data also indicate that project vacuum equipment noise level exposure is predicted to satisfy the applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime/evening and nighttime median (L50) exterior noise level limits at the nearest existing residential uses.
Based on the noise level reduction achieved with standard residential construction (minimum of 20 to 25 dB with windows closed, approximately 15 dB with windows open), and after consideration of the predicted exterior property line noise levels presented in Table 27, project vacuum system noise levels are expected to satisfy the strictest Visalia Municipal Code interior noise level criteria within the nearest existing residences.
Using the average measured hourly daytime and nighttime noise levels at each monitoring location during the BAC ambient noise survey shown in Table 1, and the predicted noise levels presented in Table 27, ambient plus project vacuum equipment noise level increases were calculated at the nearby residential uses. The results of those calculations are provided in Tables 28 and 29. As indicated in Tables 28 and 29, the calculated mitigated increases in ambient noise levels at the nearby residential uses would satisfy the applied increase significance criterion of 5 dB.
1013
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 28
Calculated Project Vacuum Equipment Increases in Ambient Daytime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Equipment
Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Daytime Noise Level
Increase (dB)4
Leq L50 Leq/L50 Leq L50 Leq L50
Residential – NW 53 49 24 52.7 49.3 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – W 52 48 <20 52.3 48.0 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – SW 52 48 <20 52.3 48.0 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – SE 51 48 <20 51.3 48.3 <0.1 <0.1
1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project vacuum nozzle noise levels presented in Table 27 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 29
Calculated Project Vacuum Equipment Increases in Ambient Nighttime Noise Levels Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level1
Predicted Equipment
Noise Level2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level3
Daytime Noise Level
Increase (dB)4
Leq L50 Leq/L50 Leq L50 Leq L50
Residential – NW 47 44 24 47.4 44.4 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – W 51 48 <20 50.7 47.7 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – SW 51 48 <20 50.7 47.7 <0.1 <0.1
Residential – SE 49 46 <20 49.3 45.7 <0.1 <0.1
1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Predicted project vacuum nozzle noise levels presented in Table 27 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Because noise exposure from project vacuum equipment is predicted to satisfy applicable Visalia General Plan and Visalia Municipal Code noise level criteria at the nearest existing residential uses, and because noise exposure from those operations is not calculated to significantly increase ambient noise levels at those uses, this impact is identified as being less than significant.
Impact 8: Cumulative Project On-Site Operations Noise Generation The calculated cumulative (combined hourly average Leq and median L50) and highest predicted maximum (Lmax) noise levels from analyzed project operations at nearby residential uses are presented in Tables 30-35.
1014
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 30
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Daytime Hourly Average (Leq) Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, Leq (dB)
Calculated
Cumulative, Leq (dB)1
GP Daytime
Standard, Leq Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 46 23 52 40 39 24 54 50 Residential – W 36 30 51 42 22 13 52 50 Residential – SW 34 46 43 40 26 11 49 50 Residential – SE 40 38 37 41 27 22 45 50 1 Calculated cumulative noise levels from Impacts 2-7.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 31
Highest Predicted On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Daytime Maximum (Lmax) Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, Lmax (dB) Highest
L
Predicted,
max (dB)1
GP Daytime
Standard, Lmax
Applied MC
Daytime
Standard, Lmax Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 51 35 73 -- -- -- 73 70 70 Residential – W 43 42 73 -- -- -- 73 70 70 Residential – SW 47 58 64 -- -- -- 64 70 70 Residential – SE 55 50 58 -- -- -- 58 70 70 1 Highest predicted noise levels presented in Impacts 2-7.
Source: BAC 2024
1015
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 32
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Daytime Median (L50) Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, L50 (dB)
Calculated
Cumulative, L50 (dB)1
Applied MC
Daytime
Standard, L50 Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 41 18 47 40 39 24 49 50 Residential – W 31 25 46 42 22 13 48 50 Residential – SW 29 41 38 40 26 11 45 50 Residential – SE 35 33 32 41 27 22 43 50 1 Calculated cumulative noise levels using predicted noise levels from Impacts 2-7.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 33
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Nighttime Hourly Average (Leq) Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, Leq (dB)
Calculated
Cumulative, Leq (dB)1 Standard, L
GP Nighttime
eq Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 43 23 52 40 39 24 53 45 Residential – W 33 30 51 42 22 13 52 45 Residential – SW 31 46 43 40 26 11 49 45 Residential – SE 37 38 37 41 27 22 45 45 1 Calculated cumulative noise levels from Impacts 2-7.
Source: BAC 2024
1016
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 34
Highest Predicted On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Nighttime Maximum (Lmax) Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, Lmax (dB) Highest
L
Predicted,
max (dB)1 Standard, L
GP Nighttime
max
Applied MC
Nighttime
Standard, Lmax Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 51 35 73 -- -- -- 73 65 65 Residential – W 43 42 73 -- -- -- 73 65 65 Residential – SW 47 58 64 -- -- -- 64 65 65 Residential – SE 55 50 58 -- -- -- 58 65 65 1 Highest predicted noise levels presented in Impacts 2-7.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 35
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Nighttime Median (L50) Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, L50 (dB)
Calculated
Cumulative, L50 (dB)1
Applied MC
Nighttime
Standard, L50 Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 38 18 47 40 39 24 49 45 Residential – W 28 25 46 42 22 13 48 47 Residential – SW 26 41 38 40 26 11 45 47 Residential – SE 32 33 32 41 27 22 43 45 1 Calculated cumulative noise levels using predicted noise levels from Impacts 2-7.
Source: BAC 2024
1017
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
As indicated in Tables 30-35, cumulative and highest predicted noise levels from on-site operations are calculated to exceed the Visalia General Plan daytime and nighttime hourly average (Leq) and maximum (Lmax) noise level standards at a portion of the nearest residential uses. Further, cumulative and highest predicted noise levels from on-site operations are also calculated to exceed a portion of the applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime/evening and nighttime median (L50) and maximum (Lmax) exterior noise level limits at the nearest residential uses.
Based on the noise level reduction achieved with standard residential construction (minimum of 20 to 25 dB with windows closed, approximately 15 dB with windows open), and after consideration of the predicted exterior property line noise levels presented in Tables 30-35, cumulative and highest predicted project on-site operations noise levels are expected to satisfy the strictest Visalia Municipal Code interior noise level criteria within the nearest existing residences.
Using the average measured hourly daytime and nighttime noise levels at each monitoring location during the BAC ambient noise survey (Table 1), and the calculated cumulative/highest predicted noise levels presented in Tables 30-35, ambient plus combined project on-site operations noise level increases were calculated at the nearby residential uses. The results of those calculations are provided in Tables 36-41.
Table 36
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Daytime Hourly Average (Leq) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, Leq1
Calculated Cumulative
Noise Level, Leq2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, Leq3
Daytime Noise Level
Increase, Leq (dB)4
Residential – NW 53 54 56.3 3.6
Residential – W 52 52 55.1 2.8
Residential – SW 52 49 53.9 1.6
Residential – SE 51 45 52.3 1.0
1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Calculated cumulative on-site operations noise levels presented in Table 30 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus cumulative project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and cumulative project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
1018
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 37
Highest Predicted On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Daytime Maximum (Lmax) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, Lmax1
Highest Predicted
Noise Level, Lmax2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, Lmax3
Daytime Noise Level
Increase, Lmax (dB)4
Residential – NW 67 73 74.1 6.7
Residential – W 69 73 74.1 5.1
Residential – SW 69 64 70.2 1.2
Residential – SE 69 58 69.0 0.4
1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Highest predicted on-site operations noise levels presented in Table 31 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus highest predicted project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and highest project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 38
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Daytime Median (L50) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, L501
Calculated Cumulative
Noise Level, L502
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, L503
Daytime Noise Level
Increase, L50 (dB)4
Residential – NW 49 49 52.4 3.1
Residential – W 48 48 50.9 2.9
Residential – SW 48 45 49.7 1.7
Residential – SE 48 43 49.5 1.1
1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Calculated cumulative on-site operations noise levels presented in Table 32 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus cumulative project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and cumulative project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 39
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Nighttime Hourly Average (Leq) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, Leq1
Calculated Cumulative
Noise Level, Leq2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, Leq3
Nighttime Noise Level
Increase, Leq (dB)4
Residential – NW 47 53 54.4 7.0
Residential – W 51 52 54.3 3.6
Residential – SW 51 49 52.8 2.2
Residential – SE 49 45 50.6 1.3
1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Calculated cumulative on-site operations noise levels presented in Table 33 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus cumulative project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and cumulative project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
1019
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 40
Highest Predicted On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Nighttime Maximum (Lmax) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, Lmax1
Highest Predicted
Noise Level, Lmax2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, Lmax3
Nighttime Noise Level
Increase, Lmax (dB)4
Residential – NW 60 73 73.2 12.9
Residential – W 64 73 73.1 9.4
Residential – SW 64 64 67.0 3.3
Residential – SE 63 58 64.5 1.2
1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Highest predicted on-site operations noise levels presented in Table 34 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus highest predicted project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and highest project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 41
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Nighttime Median (L50) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, L501
Calculated Cumulative
Noise Level, L502
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, L503
Daytime Noise Level
Increase, L50 (dB)4
Residential – NW 44 49 50.4 6.0
Residential – W 48 48 50.7 3.0
Residential – SW 48 45 49.5 1.8
Residential – SE 46 43 47.4 1.8
1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Calculated cumulative on-site operations noise levels presented in Table 35 of this report. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus cumulative project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and cumulative project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
As shown in Tables 36-41, calculated increases in ambient noise levels would exceed the applied increase significance criterion of 5 dB at a portion of the closest residential uses.
Because cumulative/highest predicted project on-site operations noise exposure is predicted to exceed Visalia General Plan and applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime and nighttime noise level criteria at a portion of the nearby existing residential uses, and because daytime and nighttime increases in ambient noise levels associated with those operations are also calculated to exceed the applied increase significance criterion at a portion of those uses, this impact is identified as potentially significant.
Mitigation Measure 3:
To comply with Visalia General Plan and applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime and nighttime noise level criteria at nearby residential uses, and reduce project-generated increases in ambient daytime and nighttime noise levels to below the applied increase significance criterion at those uses, the following three (3) specific noise mitigation measures would be required of the project:
1020
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
MM 3A: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 (MM 1), as outlined in this report.
Specifically, all project loading dock activities shall be limited to daytime hours only (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.).
MM 3B: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 2A (MM 2A), as outlined in this report.
Specifically, the height of the existing 7-foot-tall masonry wall along the western project property boundary shall be increased to a minimum height of 8-feet. The location of the required 8-foot-tall masonry wall is illustrated in Figure 4. It should be noted that Section 17.36.050 of the Visalia Municipal Code limits the height of commercial walls to 7-feet-in-height when located in a rear yard, such as the existing 7-foot-tall wall adjacent to the project site. As a result, the project applicant would be required to file for an Administrative Adjustment to permit the additional 1-foot of wall required for compliance. As an alternative, an 8-foot-tall masonry wall may be constructed adjacent to the existing 7-foot-tall wall (i.e., off the property line).
MM 3C: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 2B (MM 2B), as outlined in this report.
Specifically, all on-site delivery truck circulation shall be limited to daytime hours only (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.).
Tables 42-47 below shows calculated cumulative on-site operations noise levels after implementation of Mitigation Measures 3A, 3B and 3C, as outlined above. Tables 48-53 data show the calculated cumulative/highest predicted on-site operations increases in ambient noise levels at the nearby residential uses after implementation of Mitigation Measures 3A, 3B and 3C. 1021
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 42
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Daytime Hourly Average (Leq) – Mitigated Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, Leq (dB)
Calculated
Cumulative, Leq (dB)1
GP Daytime
Standard, Leq Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 44 22 49 38 38 23 50 50 Residential – W 34 29 48 40 21 12 49 50 Residential – SW 34 46 43 40 26 11 49 50 Residential – SE 40 38 37 41 27 22 45 50 1 Calculated cumulative noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3B.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 43
Highest Predicted On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Daytime Maximum (Lmax) – Mitigated Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, Lmax (dB) Highest
L
Predicted,
max (dB)1
GP Daytime
Standard, Lmax
Applied MC
Daytime
Standard, Lmax Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 49 34 70 -- -- -- 70 70 70 Residential – W 41 41 70 -- -- -- 70 70 70 Residential – SW 47 58 64 -- -- -- 64 70 70 Residential – SE 55 50 58 -- -- -- 58 70 70 1 Highest predicted noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3B.
Source: BAC 2024
1022
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 44
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Daytime Median (L50) – Mitigated Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, L50 (dB)
Calculated
Cumulative, L50 (dB)1
Applied MC
Daytime
Standard, L50 Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 39 17 44 38 38 23 47 50 Residential – W 29 24 43 40 21 12 45 50 Residential – SW 29 41 38 40 26 11 45 50 Residential – SE 35 33 32 41 27 22 43 50 1 Calculated cumulative noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3B.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 45
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Nighttime Hourly Average (Leq) – Mitigated Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, Leq (dB)
Calculated
Cumulative, Leq (dB)1 Standard, L
GP Nighttime
eq Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 41 -- -- 38 38 23 44 45 Residential – W 31 -- -- 40 21 12 41 45 Residential – SW 31 -- -- 40 26 11 41 45 Residential – SE 37 -- -- 41 27 22 43 45 1 Calculated cumulative noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3A, 3B and 3C.
Source: BAC 2024
1023
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 46
Highest Predicted On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Nighttime Maximum (Lmax) – Mitigated Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, Lmax (dB) Highest
L
Predicted,
max (dB)1 Standard, L
GP Nighttime
max
Applied MC
Nighttime
Standard, Lmax Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 49 -- -- -- -- -- 49 65 65 Residential – W 41 -- -- -- -- -- 41 65 65 Residential – SW 47 -- -- -- -- -- 47 65 65 Residential – SE 55 -- -- -- -- -- 55 65 65 1 Highest predicted noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3A, 3B and 3C.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 47
Calculated Cumulative On-Site Operations Noise Levels – Nighttime Median (L50) – Mitigated Receiver
Predicted Noise Levels, L50 (dB)
Calculated
Cumulative, L50 (dB)1
Applied MC
Nighttime
Standard, L50 Parking
Loading
Dock
Truck
Circulation
Rooftop
Equipment
Car Wash
Dryers Vacuums
Residential – NW 36 -- -- 38 38 23 42 45 Residential – W 26 -- -- 40 21 12 40 47 Residential – SW 26 -- -- 40 26 11 40 47 Residential – SE 32 -- -- 41 27 22 42 45 1 Calculated cumulative noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3A, 3B and 3C.
Source: BAC 2024
1024
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 48
Mitigated Cumulative On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Daytime Hourly Average (Leq) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, Leq1
Calculated Cumulative
Noise Level, Leq2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, Leq3
Daytime Noise Level
Increase, Leq (dB)4
Residential – NW 53 50 54.7 2.0
Residential – W 52 49 54.0 1.7
Residential – SW 52 49 53.9 1.6
Residential – SE 51 45 52.3 1.0
1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Calculated cumulative noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3B. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus cumulative mitigated project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and cumulative mitigated project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 49
Mitigated Highest Predicted On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Daytime Maximum (Lmax) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, Lmax1
Highest Predicted
Noise Level, Lmax2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, Lmax3
Daytime Noise Level
Increase, Lmax (dB)4
Residential – NW 67 70 71.9 4.6
Residential – W 69 70 72.3 3.3
Residential – SW 69 64 70.2 1.2
Residential – SE 69 58 69.0 0.4
1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Highest predicted on-site operations with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3B. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus highest predicted mitigated project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and highest predicted mitigated project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 50
Mitigated Cumulative On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Daytime Median (L50) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, L501
Calculated Cumulative
Noise Level, L502
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, L503
Daytime Noise Level
Increase, L50 (dB)4
Residential – NW 49 47 51.3 2.0
Residential – W 48 45 49.8 1.8
Residential – SW 48 45 49.7 1.7
Residential – SE 48 43 49.5 1.1
1 Average measured daytime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Calculated cumulative on-site operations noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3B. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of daytime ambient noise level plus cumulative mitigated project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient daytime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and cumulative mitigated project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
1025
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Table 51
Mitigated Cumulative On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Nighttime Hourly Average (Leq) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, Leq1
Calculated Cumulative
Noise Level, Leq2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, Leq3
Nighttime Noise Level
Increase, Leq (dB)4
Residential – NW 47 44 49.1 1.7
Residential – W 51 41 51.1 0.4
Residential – SW 51 41 51.1 0.4
Residential – SE 49 43 50.2 0.9
1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Calculated cumulative on-site operations with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3A, 3B and 3C. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus cumulative mitigated project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and cumulative mitigated project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 52
Mitigated Predicted On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Nighttime Maximum (Lmax) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, Lmax1
Highest Predicted
Noise Level, Lmax2
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, Lmax3
Nighttime Noise Level
Increase, Lmax (dB)4
Residential – NW 60 49 60.6 0.3
Residential – W 64 41 63.7 <0.1
Residential – SW 64 47 63.8 0.1
Residential – SE 63 55 63.9 0.6
1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Highest predicted on-site operations noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3A, 3B and 3C. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus highest predicted mitigated project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and highest predicted mitigated project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
Table 53
Mitigated Cumulative On-Site Operations Ambient Increases – Nighttime Median (L50) Receiver1
Measured Ambient
Noise Level, L501
Calculated Cumulative
Noise Level, L502
Ambient Plus Project
Noise Level, L503
Daytime Noise Level
Increase, L50 (dB)4
Residential – NW 44 42 46.5 2.2
Residential – W 48 40 48.4 0.7
Residential – SW 48 40 48.4 0.7
Residential – SE 46 42 47.1 1.5
1 Average measured nighttime ambient noise levels assigned to receiver presented in Table 1 of this report. 2 Calculated cumulative on-site operations noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3A, 3B and 3C. 3 Calculated logarithmic sum of nighttime ambient noise level plus cumulative mitigated project-generated noise level. 4 Calculated increase in ambient nighttime noise level at each receiver location. Calculated increase is the result of the logarithmic addition of measured ambient noise level and cumulative mitigated project-generated noise level.
Source: BAC 2024
1026
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Tables 42-47 data shows compliance with Visalia General Plan and applied Visalia Municipal Code daytime and nighttime noise level criteria at nearby residential uses. As shown in Tables 48-53, the calculated mitigated increases in ambient noise levels at the nearby residential uses would satisfy the applied increase significance criterion of 5 dB.
Significance of Impact with MM 3A-3C: Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures 1027
Legend
Figure 4 0 100 200
Scale (Feet)
Project Boundary
Anchor Tenant
Fueling Station
Existing 7’ Solid Wall (Noise Barrier)
Required 8’ Solid Wall (Noise Barrier)
SWC W. Visalia Pkwy & S. Mooney Blvd
Visalia, California
Mitigation Measure 2A – 8’ Solid Wall
Car Wash
., --~- . - ·-, -.------~-----.____ • - •w
' ----------
I
I
I
I
I
1 '•' .,. '•' '•' '•' ·,·1·~ ; --: - r -: --- . -: T I l I I Tl I 1 • 1 I 1 t I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I ' '' ' '' : : :
... • .. ~.
(
A
N
1028
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Noise Impacts Associated with Project On-Site Construction Activities Impact 9: Project On-Site Construction Noise Generation During project construction, heavy equipment would be used for grading excavation, paving, and building construction, which would increase ambient noise levels when in use. Noise levels would vary depending on the type of equipment used, how it is operated, and how well it is maintained.
Noise exposure at any single point outside the project work area would also vary depending upon the proximity of equipment activities to that point.
Table 54 includes the range of maximum noise levels for equipment commonly used in general construction projects at full-power operation at a distance of 50 feet. The outdoor activity areas (i.e., backyards) of the residences located nearest to the project area maintain a separation of approximately 50 feet from where most construction activities could occur potentially within the project area.
Table 54
Typical Construction Equipment Noise
Equipment Description Maximum Noise Level at 50 Feet (dB) Air Compressor 80
Backhoe 80
Ballast Equalizer 82
Ballast Tamper 83
Compactor 82
Concrete Mixer 85
Concrete Pump 82
Concrete Vibrator 76
Crane, Mobile 83
Dozer 85
Generator 82
Grader 85
Impact Wrench 85
Loader 80
Paver 85
Pneumatic Tool 85
Pump 77
Saw 76
Scarifier 83
Scraper 85
Shovel 82
Spike Driver 77
Tie Cutter 84
Tie Handler 80
Tie Inserter 85
Truck 84
Source: FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Table 7-1
1029
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Visalia Municipal Code Section 8.36.050 states that the operation of construction equipment including jackhammers, portable generators, pneumatic equipment, trenchers, or other such equipment shall not be operated on the project site between the weekday hours of 7:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., and between the weekend hours of 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. It is reasonably assumed for the purpose of this analysis that all on-site project construction equipment and activities would occur pursuant to Visalia Municipal Code Section 8.36.050.
Based on the equipment reference noise levels in Table 54, worst-case on-site project construction equipment maximum noise levels at the outdoor activity areas of the nearest residential uses located 50 feet away are expected to range from approximately 76 to 85 dB (calculated average of 82 dB). Thus, it is possible that a portion of the project construction equipment could potentially result in substantial short-term increases over ambient daytime maximum noise levels measured at BAC sites 1-3 (data contained in Appendices C & D).
However, it should be noted that the reference construction noise levels at 50 feet shown in Table 54 are generally within the range of measured maximum noise levels at BAC sites 1-3.
Nonetheless, noise impacts associated with construction activities are identified as being potentially significant. As a result, the following specific noise mitigation measures should be incorporated into project on-site construction operations:
Mitigation Measure 4:
MM 4: To the maximum extent practical, the following measures should be incorporated into the project construction operations:
All on-site noise-generating construction activities should occur pursuant to Visalia Municipal Code Section 8.36.050.
All noise-producing project equipment and vehicles using internal-combustion engines shall be equipped with manufacturers-recommended mufflers and be maintained in good working condition.
All mobile or fixed noise-producing equipment used on the project site that are regulated for noise output by a federal, state, or local agency shall comply with such regulations while in the course of project activity. Electrically powered equipment shall be used instead of pneumatic or internalcombustion-powered equipment, where feasible. Material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas shall be located as far as practicable from noise-sensitive uses. Project area and site access road speed limits shall be established and enforced during the construction period.
Nearby residences shall be notified of construction schedules so that arrangements can be made, if desired, to limit their exposure to short-term increases in ambient noise levels.
Significance of Impact with MM 4: Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures 1030
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Vibration Impacts Associated with the Project
Impact 10: Vibration Generated by Project Construction and On-Site Operations During project construction, heavy equipment would be used for grading, excavation, paving, and building construction, which would generate localized vibration in the immediate vicinity of those activities. The nearest existing structures to the project area have been identified as residential buildings (i.e., not highly susceptible to damage by vibration) located to the south and west.
Table 55 includes the range of vibration levels for equipment commonly used in general construction projects at a distance of 25 feet. Table 55 also includes projected equipment vibration levels at the nearest off-site existing structures located approximately 30 feet away.
Table 55
Reference and Projected Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment Equipment
Reference PPV at 25 ft
(in/sec)1
Projected PPV at Nearest Receptor (in/sec)1
Residence – 30 ft
Hoe ram 0.089 0.068
Large bulldozer 0.089 0.068
Caisson drilling 0.089 0.068
Loaded trucks 0.076 0.058
Jackhammer 0.035 0.027
Small bulldozer 0.003 0.002
1 PPV = Peak Particle Velocity
Source: 2018 FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual and BAC calculations As indicated in Table 55, vibration levels generated from on-site construction activities at the nearest existing residences are projected to be well below the strictest Caltrans thresholds for damage to residential structures of 0.5 in/sec PPV shown in Table 4 of this report. Further, the projected vibration levels in Table 55 would range from imperceptible to just above slightly perceptible at the closest residential buildings located 30 feet away. Based on the analysis above, on-site construction within the project area is not expected to result in excessive groundborne vibration levels at nearby existing sensitive receptors.
Based on the results from the BAC ambient vibration survey (Table 2), measured vibration levels within the project vicinity were below the threshold of perception (less than 0.001 in/sec PPV).
Therefore, it is believed that persons within the project area (or proposed uses of the development) would not be exposed to excessive groundborne vibration levels. Finally, the project proposes the development of commercial uses. It is the experience of BAC that commercial uses do not typically have equipment that generates appreciable vibration.
Because vibration levels due to and upon the project are expected to be satisfactory relative to the applicable Caltrans vibration impact criteria for damage to structures and annoyance, this impact is considered to be less than significant.
1031
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
SWC Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Boulevard Development – Visalia, California
Conclusion
This concludes BAC’s noise and vibration assessment for the SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S.
Mooney Boulevard Development in Visalia, California. Please contact BAC at (530) 537-2328 or [email protected] if you have any comments or questions regarding this report. 1032
Appendix A
Acoustical Terminology
Acoustics The science of sound.
Ambient Noise The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given space consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre-project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.
Attenuation The reduction of an acoustic signal.
A-Weighting A frequency-response adjustment of a sound level meter that conditions the output signal to approximate human response.
Decibel or dB Fundamental unit of sound. A Bell is defined as the logarithm of the ratio of the sound pressure squared over the reference pressure squared. A Decibel is one-tenth of a Bell.
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level. Defined as the 24-hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 - 10 p.m.) weighted by a factor of three and nighttime hours weighted by a factor of 10 prior to averaging.
Frequency The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic signal, expressed in cycles per second or hertz.
IIC Impact Insulation Class (IIC): A single-number representation of a floor/ceiling partition’s impact generated noise insulation performance. The field-measured version of this number is the FIIC.
Ldn Day/Night Average Sound Level. Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.
Leq Equivalent or energy-averaged sound level.
Lmax The highest root-mean-square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.
Loudness A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.
Masking The amount (or the process) by which the threshold of audibility is for one sound is raised by the presence of another (masking) sound.
Noise Unwanted sound.
Peak Noise The level corresponding to the highest (not RMS) sound pressure measured over a given period of time. This term is often confused with the “Maximum” level, which is the highest RMS level.
RT60 The time it takes reverberant sound to decay by 60 dB once the source has been removed.
STC Sound Transmission Class (STC): A single-number representation of a partition’s noise insulation performance. This number is based on laboratory-measured, 16-band (1/3- octave) transmission loss (TL) data of the subject partition. The field-measured version of this number is the FSTC.
.-/]\\\\ BOLLARD
""J J)} Acoustical Consultants
1033
D: Site 3: Southeast project area, in backyard of Ash Ct residence C: Site 3: Southeast project area, in backyard of Ash Ct residence B: Site 2: Western project area, in backyard of Quince Ct residence A: Site 1: Northwest project area, in backyard of W. Lake Dr residence Legend
B
C
A
D
Appendix B
SWC W. Visalia Pkwy & S. Mooney Blvd
Visalia, California
BAC Field Survey Photographs
1034
Hour Leq Lmax L50 L90
1:00 AM 42 59 40 36
12:00 AM 44 67 39 35
High Low Average High Low Average
2:00 AM 45 60 43 39 Leq (Average) 57 48 53 52 42 483:00 AM 47 60 46 41 Lmax (Maximum) 78 61 67 67 59 614:00 AM 47 60 45 42 L50 (Median) 55 47 50 51 39 455:00 AM 49 59 47 44 L90 (Background) 52 45 47 47 35 417:00 AM 57 66 55 526:00 AM 52 62 51 47 Computed DNL (dB) 55
8:00 AM 57 74 54 50 % Daytime Energy 84%9:00 AM 54 71 49 46 % Nighttime Energy 16% 11:00 PM 47 61 46 4010:00 PM 47 61 46 42
9:00 PM 52 67 50 468:00 PM 52 63 51 487:00 PM 51 63 51 496:00 PM 55 78 52 495:00 PM 51 65 51 484:00 PM 50 61 49 473:00 PM 49 69 48 452:00 PM 48 63 47 451:00 PM 51 71 49 46 12:00 PM 51 65 50 4711:00 AM 50 64 48 4510:00 AM 51 68 49 45 GPS Coordinates 36°17'26.78"N 119°19'05.10"W
Nighttime (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) Daytime (7 a.m. - 10 p.m.) Statistical Summary
Appendix C-1
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 1
Wednesday, February 14, 2024
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1035
Hour Leq Lmax L50 L90
1:00 AM 44 54 42 37
12:00 AM 48 63 46 41
High Low Average High Low Average
2:00 AM 48 54 48 41 Leq (Average) 59 47 52 51 40 473:00 AM 40 57 39 36 Lmax (Maximum) 80 57 66 71 53 604:00 AM 44 53 42 38 L50 (Median) 50 46 48 50 39 455:00 AM 48 57 48 46 L90 (Background) 47 43 45 46 36 417:00 AM 50 57 50 476:00 AM 51 71 50 46 Computed DNL (dB) 55
8:00 AM 52 68 49 46 % Daytime Energy 83%9:00 AM 50 70 47 44 % Nighttime Energy 17% 11:00 PM 47 63 45 4210:00 PM 46 64 45 42
9:00 PM 47 62 46 438:00 PM 48 60 47 457:00 PM 50 69 48 466:00 PM 50 70 49 465:00 PM 48 68 47 444:00 PM 48 66 46 433:00 PM 51 64 48 442:00 PM 51 60 50 471:00 PM 51 65 50 45 12:00 PM 50 65 48 4511:00 AM 59 80 50 4510:00 AM 55 72 49 45 Statistical Summary
Daytime (7 a.m. - 10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) GPS Coordinates 36°17'26.78"N 119°19'05.10"W
Appendix C-2
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 1
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Thursday, February 15, 2024
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1036
Hour Leq Lmax L50 L90
1:00 AM 41 62 38 34
12:00 AM 43 64 40 36
High Low Average High Low Average
2:00 AM 40 54 38 31 Leq (Average) 58 49 53 52 40 473:00 AM 43 55 40 34 Lmax (Maximum) 77 62 69 70 54 604:00 AM 46 55 45 40 L50 (Median) 54 48 50 49 38 435:00 AM 48 57 46 42 L90 (Background) 51 44 47 45 31 387:00 AM 56 77 54 516:00 AM 52 70 49 45 Computed DNL (dB) 55
8:00 AM 54 65 52 48 % Daytime Energy 88%9:00 AM 58 71 53 48 % Nighttime Energy 12% 11:00 PM 46 61 45 4110:00 PM 49 67 47 43
9:00 PM 49 64 48 458:00 PM 49 62 49 467:00 PM 49 69 48 466:00 PM 50 71 49 465:00 PM 50 67 49 454:00 PM 53 70 48 443:00 PM 51 71 48 452:00 PM 51 70 48 451:00 PM 50 63 49 46 12:00 PM 53 68 51 4811:00 AM 55 66 53 4910:00 AM 55 76 53 49 Statistical Summary
Daytime (7 a.m. - 10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) GPS Coordinates 36°17'26.78"N 119°19'05.10"W
Appendix C-3
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 1
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Friday, February 16, 2024
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1037
Hour Leq Lmax L50 L90
1:00 AM 45 65 42 37
12:00 AM 48 70 42 36
High Low Average High Low Average
2:00 AM 50 63 46 39 Leq (Average) 59 47 53 55 45 513:00 AM 52 59 51 46 Lmax (Maximum) 83 61 68 70 59 654:00 AM 51 65 49 45 L50 (Median) 56 45 49 54 42 485:00 AM 52 61 51 47 L90 (Background) 53 41 46 50 36 437:00 AM 57 71 56 536:00 AM 55 70 54 50 Computed DNL (dB) 58
8:00 AM 54 77 51 46 % Daytime Energy 74%9:00 AM 49 63 46 43 % Nighttime Energy 26% 11:00 PM 50 67 48 4310:00 PM 50 65 48 44
9:00 PM 54 71 52 488:00 PM 54 64 53 507:00 PM 53 64 52 496:00 PM 56 72 53 505:00 PM 59 83 52 484:00 PM 50 61 49 453:00 PM 47 63 45 432:00 PM 48 65 45 421:00 PM 48 66 46 42 12:00 PM 49 66 47 4411:00 AM 50 69 45 4310:00 AM 49 71 45 41 Statistical Summary
Daytime (7 a.m. - 10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) GPS Coordinates 36°17'22.04"N 119°19'05.07"W
Appendix C-4
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 2
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Wednesday, February 14, 2024
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1038
Hour Leq Lmax L50 L90
1:00 AM 46 57 44 39
12:00 AM 48 66 46 41
High Low Average High Low Average
2:00 AM 48 61 47 42 Leq (Average) 57 46 52 54 42 513:00 AM 42 53 40 36 Lmax (Maximum) 88 64 72 70 53 634:00 AM 50 59 47 42 L50 (Median) 54 43 47 54 40 485:00 AM 54 60 54 52 L90 (Background) 52 41 45 52 36 447:00 AM 54 64 54 526:00 AM 54 70 53 49 Computed DNL (dB) 57
8:00 AM 53 71 51 47 % Daytime Energy 69%9:00 AM 48 71 45 43 % Nighttime Energy 31% 11:00 PM 53 70 51 4610:00 PM 51 67 49 46
9:00 PM 51 66 49 478:00 PM 52 70 50 477:00 PM 54 76 51 496:00 PM 52 69 51 495:00 PM 50 70 46 444:00 PM 50 69 44 413:00 PM 46 65 43 412:00 PM 49 64 44 411:00 PM 51 77 44 41 12:00 PM 50 74 45 4211:00 AM 57 88 47 4310:00 AM 54 85 46 43 Statistical Summary
Daytime (7 a.m. - 10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) GPS Coordinates 36°17'22.04"N 119°19'05.07"W
Appendix C-5
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 2
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Thursday, February 15, 2024
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1039
Hour Leq Lmax L50 L90
1:00 AM 45 64 41 35
12:00 AM 47 63 44 39
High Low Average High Low Average
2:00 AM 43 54 40 34 Leq (Average) 59 45 52 55 43 503:00 AM 47 59 45 38 Lmax (Maximum) 76 58 67 74 54 634:00 AM 49 59 48 44 L50 (Median) 58 43 48 53 40 475:00 AM 51 60 50 45 L90 (Background) 55 41 45 48 34 427:00 AM 59 76 58 556:00 AM 55 74 53 48 Computed DNL (dB) 57
8:00 AM 54 63 51 47 % Daytime Energy 69%9:00 AM 50 73 45 42 % Nighttime Energy 31% 11:00 PM 50 66 49 4610:00 PM 53 72 51 47
9:00 PM 53 69 52 498:00 PM 53 65 52 497:00 PM 50 71 49 476:00 PM 52 71 48 465:00 PM 51 67 49 464:00 PM 47 61 46 433:00 PM 50 66 46 432:00 PM 47 67 45 421:00 PM 46 66 43 41 12:00 PM 45 58 43 4111:00 AM 47 63 45 4210:00 AM 48 66 46 42 Statistical Summary
Daytime (7 a.m. - 10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) GPS Coordinates 36°17'22.04"N 119°19'05.07"W
Appendix C-6
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 2
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Friday, February 16, 2024
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1040
Hour Leq Lmax L50 L90
1:00 AM 44 62 40 37
12:00 AM 46 66 41 36
High Low Average High Low Average
2:00 AM 50 64 46 38 Leq (Average) 55 48 52 53 44 493:00 AM 50 64 48 43 Lmax (Maximum) 80 62 68 72 61 654:00 AM 50 72 45 42 L50 (Median) 53 46 49 52 40 465:00 AM 51 61 50 46 L90 (Background) 50 43 45 49 36 417:00 AM 55 80 53 506:00 AM 53 70 52 49 Computed DNL (dB) 56
8:00 AM 51 68 50 46 % Daytime Energy 77%9:00 AM 48 65 46 43 % Nighttime Energy 23% 11:00 PM 48 64 45 3910:00 PM 47 61 45 41
9:00 PM 51 69 49 458:00 PM 52 64 50 477:00 PM 51 67 50 476:00 PM 54 72 50 475:00 PM 50 66 49 454:00 PM 50 63 48 443:00 PM 48 62 47 442:00 PM 54 70 48 441:00 PM 52 67 48 43 12:00 PM 55 70 48 4311:00 AM 55 68 48 4310:00 AM 52 70 47 43 Statistical Summary
Daytime (7 a.m. - 10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) GPS Coordinates 36°17'18.47"N 119°18'54.99"W
Appendix C-7
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 3
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Wednesday, February 14, 2024
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1041
Hour Leq Lmax L50 L90
1:00 AM 46 57 42 39
12:00 AM 49 70 46 40
High Low Average High Low Average
2:00 AM 51 58 49 39 Leq (Average) 55 47 51 53 43 503:00 AM 43 56 40 36 Lmax (Maximum) 80 62 69 70 56 624:00 AM 48 61 47 41 L50 (Median) 52 46 48 51 40 475:00 AM 52 60 51 49 L90 (Background) 50 42 45 49 36 427:00 AM 54 80 52 496:00 AM 51 64 50 46 Computed DNL (dB) 57
8:00 AM 52 68 50 45 % Daytime Energy 69%9:00 AM 51 73 46 42 % Nighttime Energy 31% 11:00 PM 53 66 50 4610:00 PM 51 63 49 45
9:00 PM 51 64 50 478:00 PM 54 71 52 497:00 PM 55 79 52 506:00 PM 52 69 51 485:00 PM 49 65 48 454:00 PM 49 66 46 433:00 PM 47 62 46 432:00 PM 49 72 46 431:00 PM 49 64 46 44 12:00 PM 49 67 46 4311:00 AM 50 65 48 4410:00 AM 51 69 48 43 Statistical Summary
Daytime (7 a.m. - 10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) GPS Coordinates 36°17'18.47"N 119°18'54.99"W
Appendix C-8
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 3
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Thursday, February 15, 2024
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1042
Hour Leq Lmax L50 L90
1:00 AM 42 60 38 35
12:00 AM 44 56 42 38
High Low Average High Low Average
2:00 AM 41 64 38 33 Leq (Average) 55 47 51 54 41 493:00 AM 43 60 41 37 Lmax (Maximum) 83 59 69 77 56 634:00 AM 46 57 44 40 L50 (Median) 53 46 48 50 38 445:00 AM 48 59 47 42 L90 (Background) 51 42 45 46 33 407:00 AM 55 76 53 516:00 AM 52 71 50 46 Computed DNL (dB) 55
8:00 AM 50 66 49 45 % Daytime Energy 75%9:00 AM 47 66 46 43 % Nighttime Energy 25% 11:00 PM 49 62 47 4310:00 PM 54 77 50 46
9:00 PM 53 70 52 478:00 PM 53 73 52 487:00 PM 52 74 50 476:00 PM 52 71 50 485:00 PM 51 64 50 464:00 PM 49 60 48 453:00 PM 49 59 48 452:00 PM 53 83 47 441:00 PM 48 69 46 43 12:00 PM 47 64 46 4311:00 AM 48 68 46 4210:00 AM 48 64 46 42 Statistical Summary
Daytime (7 a.m. - 10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) GPS Coordinates 36°17'18.47"N 119°18'54.99"W
Appendix C-9
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 3
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Friday, February 16, 2024
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1043
55 dB
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 1
Wednesday, February 14, 2024
Appendix D-1
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Computed DNL =
2030405060708090
100
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 11:00 PM Sound Pressure Level, dBA
Time of Day
Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Median (L50) Background (L90) - - - -
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1044
55 dB
Appendix D-2
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 1
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Computed DNL =
Thursday, February 15, 2024
2030405060708090
100
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 11:00 PM Sound Pressure Level, dBA
Time of Day
Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Median (L50) Background (L90) - - - -
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1045
55 dB
Appendix D-3
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 1
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Friday, February 16, 2024
Computed DNL =
2030405060708090
100
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 11:00 PM Sound Pressure Level, dBA
Time of Day
Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Median (L50) Background (L90) - - - -
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1046
58 dB
Appendix D-4
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 2
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Wednesday, February 14, 2024
Computed DNL =
2030405060708090
100
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 11:00 PM Sound Pressure Level, dBA
Time of Day
Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Median (L50) Background (L90) - - - -
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1047
57 dB
Appendix D-5
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 2
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Computed DNL =
Thursday, February 15, 2024
2030405060708090
100
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 11:00 PM Sound Pressure Level, dBA
Time of Day
Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Median (L50) Background (L90) - - - -
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1048
57 dB
Appendix D-6
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 2
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Friday, February 16, 2024
Computed DNL =
2030405060708090
100
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 11:00 PM Sound Pressure Level, dBA
Time of Day
Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Median (L50) Background (L90) - - - -
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1049
56 dB
Appendix D-7
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 3
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Wednesday, February 14, 2024
Computed DNL =
2030405060708090
100
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 11:00 PM Sound Pressure Level, dBA
Time of Day
Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Median (L50) Background (L90) - - - -
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1050
57 dB
Appendix D-8
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 3
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Computed DNL =
Thursday, February 15, 2024
2030405060708090
100
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 11:00 PM Sound Pressure Level, dBA
Time of Day
Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Median (L50) Background (L90) - - - -
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1051
55 dB
Appendix D-9
Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results - Site 3
SWC W. Visalia Parkway & S. Mooney Blvd Development - Visalia, California Friday, February 16, 2024
Computed DNL =
2030405060708090
100
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 11:00 PM Sound Pressure Level, dBA
Time of Day
Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Median (L50) Background (L90) - - - -
BOLLARD
Acoustical Consultants
1052
Appendix E-1
Rooftop Unit Manufacturer Documentation
Enlight Lennox: Model LHT036H4, LHT060H4
OUT DOOR SOUIND DATA
' Unit
Octave IBand Sound Power- Leveil:S dBA, r,e 10 .. 2 W'atts Center Fr,equency- Hz 1 Sound R:a~ing Number llllodeill lNo_ 125 2§0 500 ·moo 2000 401()0 80011 dBA 024, 035, 04S 63 66 7[) 71 6S 62 53 75
06[) 67 72 77 76 73 68 61 82
OOTE - Thie ~1-e 500l1d jl(IWEI" !Eta ,11oes mctooe 11na1 CCUEd!oos_ ' Soolld R- ng i:.rnbEI" aooonl g ta,AJ-IRJ Slandailil 2111!-!!6 [melooes. pure 11111!!' pemally). Sound RaUng NLmber 16 Ille OI/Eral A-Vl'elg '.E!il Soond PCl!, .. "B" L! dEl!'. IO □ hlZ 1D 11l. 00
Wil),
WEIGHT DATA
N!e-t
Model Numbe,r lbs_
024 Base Unit 645
024 Max. U rut 765
036 Base Unit 645
036 Max. Unn 764
048 Base Unit 64 1
048 Max. Unit 76[)
000 Base Unit 685
000 Max. Urut 792
WEIGHT DAliA
EGON0M IIZER / OUliD00IR AIIR / IEXH.AUST
Eoonomiz,e;r
kg1
2{13
347
2{13
347
211 1
345
3 11
359
6conomizer. Includes Combjnalion O utdoor Alr Hood and Barometric Rel'ie.f Dam pers Outdoor Ai r Dampers
Mcitorra:ed
Manual
Power Exihaust
ELE GTR IIG HEAT
5 11.W
7.5lW
15kW
22.5 kW
30kW
HAIL GUARlilS
.All mod!ets
ROOF CURBS
~b:rii:d IRoofi Curibs., ll!lownftow·
8 in.. height
14 in . hei1fht
1S in . heig:tit
24 in . heigl7t
Adjustable ll?i tll:!h Cu rib, ll!lownftow·
14 in . heigl7t
CEILIING DIFFUSEl!IS
step-Down
Ausll
Transitions
RTD 11-Q5S
RD11-95S
T1 TRAN20N- 1
UNIT
Sliip;ping
lbs_ kg
600 311
800 365
68,5 311
804 365
6S1 309
800 363
727 33[)
833 3W
OPT IONS / ACCIESSORI ES
Shipping W'eiglit
libs_ I kg
131 59
18 30 14
35 31 14
31 14
31 14
35 16
35 16
31 14
50 23
70 32
80 36
100 45
11 3 51
11S 54
11S 54
2 1 10
1053
Appendix E-2
Rooftop Unit Manufacturer Documentation
Enlight Lennox: Model LHT122H4E
UNlli CLEARANCES
• Unit C 'eara:nce A B C ID mop
ilill. mm in. mm 1in. mm ini.. mm Clea..-ance
Service Clearance 6(1 1524 36 Q14 36 914 6(1 1524
U nobs!rueled Minimum Operaiion, Clea..-ance 36 914 36 g14 36 914 36 914 NOTE - E ..-e pEf11r12ter OI IH1l lllase req 5AJ~ 1.men e-tated all<JYe Ille ma1i1ang Elil'aQ:. ' Serldce OltlsaraM9 - Reqllred IOI al -.fceable par!!;.
Mlmlmam Op111'3tlon CIBar3f'IC8· - Req~IE!l ,cle-aance fa' proper ISi rp;ra'.Jon.
OUTDOOR SOUND DATA
u:nit
Octave Band Sound Powe.- Level s dBA, re 1ct" Watts Center F1reque-ncy - Hz • Sound 1Rarting1 INum'bE!ir Model N umbe..- 125 2511 5110 1000 20011 .,woo 8000 ldBA) 078. 092. 102 7(1 79 84 83 77 72 66 8B
122. 150 73 74 75 72 66 60 5(1 85
ote - T11£' octave ro.ritl po-AB dal ai doe6 111at ~ ID oorrectlom;. ' SIIUllll RaUng Nirnber ilOOO!lllng 1D AJiRil Slalldarll 27iil-!!6 ,or AHRI " ilndard .3711!-2001 (ilcll.D2S. ptre l lllle peflalty). SIIIJn.d Rat!i'lg Ni:rnber IS ltle av I A-Vl'elglf.E!:I SIIUllll PD'Mef Le El, (UA\3). ,113 [HE Hz to rn.)JOO ttz}. 1054
Appendix E-3
Rooftop Unit Manufacturer Documentation
Enlight Lennox: Model LHT240H4M
UNIT CLEARAINC ES
Unit With Economlze-r
No'e: 210-240-300 sizesshov.n
A B C D Top, • Unit Cleara11ce Cllearance in. 111111 in. mm in. mm in. llll111 Service Clearance 60 1524 36 914 36 9,34 66 11676
Uno'br.tructed
Minimum Operation Cleara11ce 45 1143 36 914 36 9•14 41 110411 NDTE - En • penmeter unit base requires. suppcri when elevated .abolre the roounmgi surface. • ServiceClecarance -R~ tor removal ' ·SErW:ea'l:te parts.. Minim..., Ope,-alion Ck>arance - Req.iired d earanoe far proper unil operation.
OUTDOO R SOUNID DATA
Unit Octave Band Sou II d Power Leve lls dBA, re 110-12 Watts - Center Frequency - Hz • Sound Rati11g Model Number Number 125 250 500 10011 21100 4000 80110 (dB.A) 156, 1180, 240 79 84 88 89 85 82 73 94
Noie- The oda!le sound power da1a does. not include tonal caredions. 1 Scutd Ra1ing1 umber aocording to AHRI stYldard 370-2001 fndude,s pure mne pen~ ).
Scutd Ra1ing1 Number is the overall P...Weviled Sound Rower l.e...el (LwA.), dBA (100 Hz to 10,000 1-!z). 1055
Appendix E-4
Air Handling Unit Manufacturer Documentation
Munters: Model HCUC8040AAD
dBA
hz
63 125
250
500
1k
2k
4!k
8k
Test Report: MLIR 06.008:C
Purpose:
Mu ters
To cfocume1111t the sound emitted from the unit at 15'.
Item Under Test:
l-lCUc8040 Air-Cooled
IEquipmeillt:
1 Larson Davis, LxT, Sound Meter
Test Setup,:
1 lhe unit is si • ing outsid'.e on stands., m m off the ground. 2 Reading were 'ken 4' from th e gromnd arn d 115' frmn the unit.
Data: Dateffime: 812/1 0 @ 8:00 am, Ambient: 84"F, 53% RIH, 1 Unit with 1 of the w rn dernsort.ms ru11ni11g (dBA & octave band levet) 2 Unit with both of ttie cond'ensor rans runn·n,g (dBA & ootave barnd leve ) 3 Unit with both of tile cond.enser farn s off (dEl.A & octave band level} 68 71 63
111Fan 2Fan Off
77 77 68
71 77 64 0
68 72 61
61 70 59 0
65 67 62
00 63 57 00 5@ 60 57
56 56 56
0 dBA. 15 78 ~
lhz 1Fan2Fan Olf
63 75 80 66
125 73 78 62
2:50 76 78 63
500 70 72 6-2
O; 67 61) 57
2k 63 64 57
4k ~ 5Q 57
Bk 58 5Q 56
Date: 8/2/2010
dBA 69 71 60
lhz '1 1Fan2Fan, Off
63 71 73 61
125 72 79i 61
25'1] 70 73 61
500 68 69i 58
1t; 61 64 57
2k 00 62 57
4l 57 5S 57
8l 56 56 56
1056
Appendix E-5
Exhaust Fan Manufacturer Documentation
Carnes: Model VUDK12P2
VUDK 12:
DIRECT DRIVE
DESIGN DATA
Tip Speed = 3.27 x RPM
Unit Weight (less Motor) = 45 Lbs.
Roof Opening = 13" Sq.
Ourb 0 . D. = 16" Sq.
PERFORMANCE DATA 1--11<1.- sq •I Damper Size = 12" Sq.
1RPM Rilnll~ - Mo.tor HP
1'4+ J3+ 1112+- P2+ .000 .125 .250
!.~ !1! !~ .!~ CFM BHP CFM BIIP CFM BIIP
RPII 501'1.ES SONES SON.ES
S!SO Sol .0 1 ,1.56 M
2.0 1,i;
700 841 .00 1657 .00 180 .02
~ 3.7 3.2 -3.1 ~ 001 .04 II04 .o5 593 .OS II) 111:10 a:: 5.0 4..S 4.2 0 82:5 f 891 .05 ,1138 .o5 642 .OS
S 5.2 408 4.4
8110 1051 .oil, 'l!'-41 .(16 782 .D7 :; 6.0 s.,i; S.2
w 875 1171 .05 1042 .08 900 .09 .J 6.8 ,6.S ,6.1
~ 1050 1~ ,l .09· 1141 .10 102:3 .11
.J 7.8 7.4 7.1
.J 1075 ' '"'"' .m U l l .;J, .11 ' """ .11 0 8.2 7a8 7.4 ~ 1175 1411 .13 1303 .14 11'!NI .1S
z 8.6 '9.2 ,8.8
0 12 5 1532 .17 1431 .18 13~ .1,8
(,) 11.2 10.8 10.4
0 13 5 1,002 .21 1559 .22 146"a .23
w 12s9 12.5 12.1
w 1soo, 1,800 .27 111-i; .28 1633 .29 El,. 15,.1 14.8 14.4 II) 1,892 .32 1810 .33 173'1 .34 1575 16,.5 16.3 16.0 11625 "' 1'11'52 $5 1873 .36 1795 .37
17.3 17.1 16.8
1 o• 13<19 .12 1258 .13 ,,so, .13
ALL OTHER 8.1 3.7 ,8.3
MOTORS 1725 • :.lll72 .42 1997 .43 1924 .44
18.7 18.4 18.1
Performance certi ed is for insla'lla ·,m ll:J>e A - • ree • le:I, re,e oolil>t.
Speed M) i!. oomi Pellormance is based CCI ac: al i;peea of :est. •• To b~ Speoel CClinlJoltable. motor must h;r.., 11511 ODP. Olhff voltil.ges arid "8Cl:Os.ml!'S are DDlll--spl!ed controlllabf.e. :1- Base it - As 111.1 n motor speeds..
+ RP M ra"!le ,caiia e •. solid state ~peed c.:mlrol
Performance ratin,gs oo oot inct de Ille eeeeis Cl accessories.
VUDK 12 AIR PERFORMANCE
5TAT1C P\R.E5SU,R:E. INC:H E5 W .G.
..37S .500 .625 .750 U IOO 1-250
CFM BIIP CFIIBIIP CFM B.HP CFM B.HP CFM BIIP CiFM BIIP
50NE5 50NE5 SON.ES SONES 50N E5 50NE5
S13 .06
S.2
716, .09
,6.0
11<12 .11 ,531 .10
16~'9 16jf1
,. ,u .12 I U '~ .11
72 72
1073 .15 '1124 .15 708 .15
3,i; 3.S 8.5
1238 .18 1110 .18 957 .20 734 .18
10.0 ,9,9 9-S 9.9
1379 .24 127S .24 1150 .24 100S .24
11.7 11.5 11.S 11.5
1551 .30 1469 ..31 13a4 .3 1 1248 .32 ,935 .3 1
14.1 13.8 13.7 13.7 13.9
1652 .35 1574 .36 1486 .J<I, 1382 _37 113-5 .3"7 525 .25-
15.5 15.3 1S.2 15.1 1S.2 1S.4
1719 3.8 1644 .38 1S65 .,4() 146S -~D 1235 .411 863 .37
16.3 16.1 1S.9 15.8 1S:9 1,1>.o
100!1 .14 ,855 .14 57:J .12
,8.• ,8.0 ,5 . QI
1852 .45 1781 .46 1710 .47 1627 .48 142.11 .48 1180 .48,
17.7 17.4 17.2 17.0 1,i;,9 17.1
Tl:e ro,oo1 er le.et ~ stmwn are in oecill!IB, retemlll ro 10 -u wa:is caleula1flll per AN£A. Stllmil 301. v sno,,n are tar iriet L,,,~ SOJl"l:I ~tor. lalioo Type A free • let. free OJ!let R1l~f"G$ 00 , 1nctuele o:e elfec1s Of ()Jct emUDrectioo.
TI:e SOJnO ramJS mo are d/le!:S values in sc:r:ies a, s ree; (1 .5m) in a renispteliCJJ tree flelO c.llCula:ed per MCASt.ln!la:JO, :JD1. Viilies SlnNn are ror ir=Jlarion T.,pe A. 1ilee • et rri~C<JJ sore IEM!IS.
VUDK 12 SOUND PERFORMANCE
SOUi/D POMIER RE 10 •U WATTS
OCTA.VE BANDS
RPII SP 1 2 3 4 5 8 7 B !.WA
JOC(J 65 64 60 54 59 55 45 35 62
825 .125 65 63 59 53 57 51 45 38 60
.375 ffl 61 59 51 52 51 46 42 58
.o:o 68 72 69 63 63 62 55 45 69
1075 .250 68 72 68 62 60 5'9 53 47 61 _5a)1 63 71 68 6,1 58 S7 54 48 66 .o:o 72 85 82 77 70 74 ,69 60 80
1625 _5a)1 71 85 81 76 68 72 ·66 60 79
U:OJ 73 86 81 76 67 68 •66 60 78
www.carne:..com C<ll:Blog at9 00-0•l l :'.I C-77
1057
Appendix E-6
Exhaust Fan Manufacturer Documentation
Acme: Model PDU135RGG4
PERFORMANCE DATA
Motor CFM alld SOIIN '4, Static Pnuu~
Fan .000" .125'' 250" 375'' .500'' £25" .7 50" 1,,000" 1.250" Max. Model HP RPM BHP CFM Son& CFM Son& CFM Son& OFM Son& CFM SOIi& CFM SOIi& CFM So ll& CFM So ll& CFM Sone 1600 385 9.7 368 9.5 350 9.2 323 8.8 253 8.5 .040
PDU080 1110
1300 313 7.4 292 7.7 26 1 11.0 .020
16~ 850 12Jl 788 11.8 735 11.3 68 1 10.6 625 9.6 573 8.9 .085 PDU100 1110
1300 678 8.3 M4 7.8 537 7.5 468 6.9 .042
1550 1017 10.1 951 10.2 885 10.6 816 9.6 73 1 9.5 617 9.5 506 9.5 .098 1300 853 8.1 774 8.3 693 7.6 588 7.5 454 7.5 270 7.5 .057 PDU11 0 1110
1050 689 6Jl 591 6.2 468 5.5 292 5.5 .030
BM 564 4.5 44 1 4.2 243 4.2 .016
1600 1753 13.8 1689 13.7 1611 13.6 1522 13.6 1433 13.5 1295 13.2 1155 13.1 .250 1550 1617 13.5 1548 13.5 1457 13.1 136 1 12.7 1233 12.4 1082 12.0 .200 PDU120E4 114 1300 1356 10.8 1269 9.9 1154 9.5 100 1 9.6 .11 0 11M 1210 9.0 1106 8.8 972 8.7 770 8.2 .080
BM 897 5.3 742 5.3 .030
11M 1840 11 .9 1718 11.6 1597 11.1 1470 11.0 1311 10.6 .164 PDU135F6 113 1050 1665 10.5 15.31 10.0 1397 9.7 1242 9.4 .122 BM 1364 8.5 120 1 8.1 1020 7.6 .067
1725 2736 20 2654 19.2 2572 19.2 2491 19.0 2410 18.5 2328 18.4 2243 18.3 2052 18.1 1782 17.5 .540 1550 2458 17.6 2367 17.1 2276 16.9 2186 16.5 2095 16.2 2000 16.1 1897 16.0 1614 15.0 .392 PDU135G4 112 1300 2062 14.0 1953 13.6 1845 13.1 1737 129 1619 12.7 1473 120 .23 1 1050 1665 10.5 1531 100 1397 9.7 1242 9.4 .122
BM 1364 8.5 120 1 8.1 1020 7.6 .067
11M 2230 11 .6 2073 10.9 1911 9.9 1748 10.0 1583 9.5 1353 8.9 .220 PDU150F6 113
BM 1652 8.0 1439 8.4 1218 8.5 909 7.9 .090
11M 3242 182 3087 18.5 2934 18.1 278 1 17.0 262 1 16.2 2439 16.1 2194 15.2 1692 15.9 .500 PDU165G6 112 1050 2935 15.9 2764 16.3 2595 16.0 2421 14.9 2227 13.7 1962 13.4 1680 13.8 .373 BM 2404 1L9 2196 12.4 1986 10.7 1725 10.6 1385 10.2 .205 PDU185G6 112 11M 4340 15Jl 4193 15.0 4047 14.5 3900 14.0 3751 13.3 3602 12.6 3426 12.7 .Mo PDU200J6 1 11M 5317 19.5 5155 18.2 4994 17.8 4830 17.8 4657 17.0 4483 17.0 4305 16.8 3898 16.1 34 15 15.4 1.215 1058
Appendix E-7
Exhaust Fan Manufacturer Documentation
Pennbarry: Model FX16R
P E N N B A R R y n,
FX16 - FX18 J DIRECT DRIVE
FX16
FX16V 1/6 485 1050 3788 1604 7.9 1358 6.5 11 28 5.5 951 5.8 801 6.3 FX16S 113 527 1300 4690 1874 10 .7 1693 9.5 1514 8.6 1326 8.0 1158 7.6 FX16R 113' '' 590 1550 5592 2140 12.8 1994 11.9 1849 11 .0 1709 10 2 1561 9.9 Fu:mex I FX
(FX Lh1i1s Only) Galv. Stefl! Base = 16 G<19e
Alunw,um Base = 0.064
IJ;sd,a!lje Apron = 0 .064
FX 16Q Estmaled Ship Waight = 71 lbs.
705 6.9 644 7.7 522 9.2 384 9.3
1023 7.7 913 8.2 735 9.6 572 9.7
1410 9.6 1269 9.4 1033 9.7 812 11 .1
230 9.7
379 9.9
583 10.8
FX16Q1 112 715 1650 5953 2531 15 .2 2432 14.7 2332 142 2232 13.7 2114 13.1 1992 12.5 1868 11 .9 1582 11.0 1320 115 1001 12. 1 FX16Q2 314 890 1725 6223 2822 17. 1 2753 16 .8 2684 165 2594 16 .1 2501 15.7 24 18 15.4 2331 15. 1 2119 14.2 1872 14. 1 1566 14.2 (1) TE mo.tor Is 112 /4p. See addifonal notes at bottom of page. 1059
Appendix E-8
Exhaust Fan Manufacturer Documentation
Greenheck: Model CUE-101-A
R_?o~ Up~last/Si~ewall Exhaust f§_ GREENHECK
Size 100. CUBE CUE BuildiJigV.111\Je irtAN".
Previously Size-101
I ~
fi32) --- 1 -- r~ LJ 17% j I 'l'' ...... /
J \.
I 19 ct" 22 1-------r _...__ (483! o,f.>59) ___.._ I
H,I, {44)
B-1140RPM
A-1725 Rl"-1
VG-1725RPM
.oil d-'"""" in in<f1e5 ~.,..-.). weig/n in poond• ogram,, _ • M"'f b,, 9-., do\ps,cirg on motor.
"'h'ei!#rt ohown &1""3""' •""-"'l,go,:l "f"'n dnp-f"""I """"'- Roo!M\:!1 1 (withou! brud:efj Opering
\'la.II ~ing 'Mlm Wal l
E!nicl<M
Wa.ll ~ing'M!ih • Cu'!,
11110"¢\'/a.ll
Motor HP'
:Sett Direct
-.. C-1/8
VG1/4
I B-1/6
1/.f .L ~I
,
-
A-1/4
113
Fan
1RPM 0
CfM 732
860 BltP 0.03
SOOes 4.6
1:111 811
9513 BltP 0•.041
sooas 5.5
CfM ,890
1046 BltP 0•.054
sooes 6.5
CfM 970
1 40 BltP 0.07
sooas 7.2
CfM 1066
1252 BltP 0•.092
sooas 8
CfM 1149
1350 BltP 0.12
sooes 8.9
1:111 1233
1448 BltP 0.U
sooas 10.3
CfM 1316
1546 BltP 0.17
SOO•s 11.8
CfM 1413
1660 BltP 0.22
sooes 12.7
1:111 1468
1725 BltP 0.2.f
sonas 13.3
1:111 15.f9
1820 BltP 0.28
sones U .3
0.125
6:25
0.005
2.1 717
0.047
4.2 607
0.061
6.2 897
0.078
1 1000
0.1 8
1089
0.113
8.9 1176
0.15 10.2
1264
0.19 11.5
1365
0-23
12.3 U22
0-26
12.9 1505
0.3 13.7
u
ODO , .•
..,, , .•
al .. ~
~ ..., .§, 0.8
e
I ... I 0.0 0..
.,, "-
i ,g
., <I) ;;; o.•
60 0.0
o ~00..._.e.:...._000.,___~.,,,,c---,-,L-..>.....,-'--.i.i-,--.J.l.---,-JO.,..,,'-'--'-' Q , VARI-GREEN. Volurm ~ m)
0 600 1D:IO 15Cll 200)
Vo\Jme (m'lhr)
Static Pressure in Inches wg
0.25 0.375 0.5 0..625 0.75 0.875 1 1.125
481
0.036 MAXIMUM BHP AT A
1.3 GIVEN RPM = (RPM/3099)3
6013 MAXIMUM RP = 1820
0.05 TIP SPEED ~ min) = RPM x 2.846
3.1 MAXIMU MOTOR FRAME SIZE = 56
AVERAGE DISOl-!ARGE VELOGITY
707 577 (FPM) = CFW 1.28
0.066 o,_o65
5.6 5.4
806 707 411
0.084 0.085 0.067
6.5 6 5 .. 5
920 634 732
0.11 0.11 0.11
7.6 6.9 6.5
1016 940 856 7.f5
0.13 0.U 0.14 0.14
8.6 8.1 7.5 7
1112 10.fO 966 886 763
0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17
9:9 9.5 9 as 8
1206 1139 1072 999 915 793
0-2 0.2 0-21 0.21 0.21 0.23
11.3 10:9 10.5 9.8 9.3 B.9
1313 1251 1189 1125 1056 974 861
0.24 0.25 0-26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0-25
12 11s6 11.3 10.8 10-2 9.6 9..4
1373 1315 1255 1195 1129 1062 970
0.27 0.28 0,-29 0.29 0.29 Q.29 0-29
12.5 12 11 .7 11 .3 10.8 10-2 9.7
1459 1406 1350 1293 1234 1171 1106 900
0.31 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.35, 0.35, 0.35 0.33
13.4 12.7 12.4 12 11,6 11-2 10.6 10.1
Perio:n:ncnae c~Jfiedl • • fm ins.1:DJL'!tion ype A:. Free in'let:,, Free ott'.Jet. lP CW1-er- rmirg (Bhp) doe,s. not indud'e tran5mizian I~ Rerfoonanc.e rating~ d::J not indud'e the .eu~ ol "l'f'U"""""""" I~-+ Tho oaund rmirgo !lhawn ro loudne-_.-. • . • in fan """°' ol S fL [1 li rn] in n homi,ph<rioal fr.., liel<I aolaul ps A.YCA. Swulord 9CtL Vdbeo •h:Jwn aro la- ino.1a.lbtior, """' A: Rn,e inl et hemi,phsicol o,:me lew<fs. ,-
,_
,-
,-
,-
1060
Appendix E-9
Exhaust Fan Handler Manufacturer Documentation
CaptiveAire: Model DU50HFA
DU50HFA Performanc.e Table
DUSOHFA
Statlc Pressu"' In Inches W.G.
D.DDD D.2SD D.5DD D,75D 1.DDD 1.25D 1,5DD
RPM I RPM I RPM RPM RPM RPM RPM
CFM Sone/BHP Sone/BHP Sone/BHP Sone/BHP Sone/BHP Sone/BHP Sone/BHP 6o0 459 774 993 1172 1322 1456 1575
1.2 / 0.01 4 .6 / 0 .05 7.3/0.11 10.0 / 0 .. 18 12.5/ 0 .26 15.0 / 0.35 17.4 / 0.44 900 687 933 1118 1278 1422 1554
3.5 / 0.04 6.5 / 0 .09 9.1 / 0.16 11 .8 / 0.24 14.4 / 0 .. 33 17.o / 0.43 1200 915 1117 1277 141 8 1548
6.3 / 0 .. 09 9.1 I 0 .1 6 11.7 / 0. 24 14.3 / 0 .. 32 16.8 / 0 .42 1500 1143 1315 1455 158 2
9.5 / 0. 17 12.4 / 0 . .2 6 15.0 / 0.35 17 .5 / 0.45
1800 1372 1519 1645
13.4 / 0. 29 16.3/ 0 .40 18.9 / 0.50
21 00 16o 1
17 .9/0.46
Max Slc>:ea b[e RPM o :Z•DD D RPM . Tab [e slilown extended beyond tlil T.s point for reference only.
Motor BMr 48•375I1· ES•M52·CA•50•115 11 s a rpm r!ll)Qe of 300 to 1800.
Motor BM 48· 375I1- ES -M52·CA·6o-115 nas a rpm ,a g e of 300 to 1800.
Motor B Mrl 48• 375 l 2• ES •M 52-CA-50- 2 30/ 277 t as .a rpm r.a g:e o r 300 to 1800.
Motor B Mr 48• 375 l 2• ES •M 52•CA-6o- 2 30/ 277 as a rpm r.a g,e o r 300 to 1800.
Motor ,t K48B520li F01•6o s .a rpm" .,. of 431 to 1725.
Motor CK48HF211"1Rl 1•50•115 r-pm rca or 1100 to 1425.
Motor CK48iiF211i Rll- 50- 230 rl)m rcaFL-gll or 1100 to 1425.
Motor CK48iiF211i fOl•o0•115
Motor CK48ii F21 Ii fO l •o0- 230
Motor CK48ii F211i fO 2• 50• 115
Motor CK48iiF211i Rl2- 50- 230
Motor •t K48HF211i Rl2-60- 115
Motor CK48ii F211i R12•6o· 230
·,. or 1100 to 1670.
rpm rn , or 1100 to 1670.
rpm rn or 1440 to 1625.
rpm raFL-gll Gr 1440 to 1625.
rpm ra FL-gll or 1440 to 16 25.
rpm ra ' or 1440 to 1625.
p.erforma ci:. s ow is ce rtihed ror lMtallatlo Typi:, A: Frei, inJet, Free -outlet. Perform.a ce l'll tl gs d!o ot I clu d!e H ., .. effects or appurtena ces i t "airstmam. T "s-ou d l'lltl g,s st t'iYI are loud i,ss va lua;s I Fa so es at 5 ft (1. 5m ) i a t emlsp ·rlca l free A-el-d c alculated pi,r AMtA Sta ar<I 301. Va lues s ow .am for ~ all atio Type A: Fm;; Inlet em l.sp erlcal so e le,..e ls.
Cata log # 1 lOt
April 2022.
1061
Appendix E-10
Exhaust Fan Handler Manufacturer Documentation
CaptiveAire: Model DU180HFA
DUUOHFA Perf.ormanoe, Table•
DU180HFA
.!itotlc P1t1•ure In lnd!M W.ll.
I G.11110 0.250 I 0.51111 G. 7511 I 1.11110 1.250 1.500 1.7511 I 2.11110 2.2-50 ltJ>N IIPN Rl'N 11P IIPN IIPN RP 11PM IIPN IIPN CFN Sone/SHP Sofle/SHP SollO/BHP Sone/BHP Sone/SHP Sofle/BHP SollO/BHP SollO/SllP Sone/SHP Sone/BHP 1000 ~9 774 99l 99g 109'1 lll91 ll!.3 1337
s.2 /O.ll9 11.21 olo 10 .2 / li.'l2 11.6 / ll.56 l:l.il / 0.71 14.9 / 11.115 16A/1 .01 17!1l/ 1.17 1500 fi9<1 11116 9 •119 lOl!H, 10% lll92 ll!.:l 1339
<.,.S /0.l!. !l.7/lll9 10.5 / II.S<I 11 .7 / 0.711 l:l.ll / 0.!17 14.9 / l .05 lf.A / 1 .24 17 .9/ lA:l 2-noo ,.,~ 7!14 !176 9~ 1047 1127 12<0:l 127!1 1349
7.:l / 11.25 9.2 /0.:l!I 10.2 /11.Sl llA I 11.f,9 12 .l / 0.87 l:l.ll / l .116 15.3 / l .l!. lf,.7 /1.47 111 .0 / l.f,!I 2500 700 !lo:l 831 9711 111'16 llll9 1111!1 1255 1321 nils !l.7 I o .2S 111.7 / OAII 11.7 / 11 . .!i!, 12.7 /11.72 12.l / 0.911 l:l ,f, / 1.09 15.>ll / 1.:lO H ,.:l / l.Sl 17.5 / 1.74 l!I .7 / 1.97 3aoa 939 92!1 11106 Hl77 114,q 120Y 12'.IID 1no 138!1 ]A,4(J
12.l/0.43 13.6 / IH, l 13.9 / ll. ?9 14.2 /0.9Y 15!1l / 1.1!1 17.::i/ ll9 17.!I / 1.61 1!1.6 / l.!l'l 19A /:2.0Y 211; 2.n 3500 9?9 MJS7 1127 1191 125:2 1309 1361. 1'120 1"17:2 152"1
14.9/0.6!1 1s.11 I 0.89 l!'l.6 / 1.lli 1!1.4 / 1.31 19.l / l.54 21i / 1.77 21 / :2.lil 21 / 2.26 22 / 2.Sl 23 I 2.111 4000 1119 1189 12S1 13111 1:3!,<., 1419 14'.IID 15211
17 A I 1.li2 19.3 I 1.2s 21 / 1 .49 22 I 1.73 22 / l.9Y 23 /2.24 24 I :2 .!i>il 24 / 2.77 4500 1259 1321 1379 14:l:l lo4!1'l 15:ll
22 / l.45 23/1.71 24 / 1.9!1 2.5 / 2.2.5 21', / 2.52 21', /2.1111 .!iMlfi 1399 14.!i!, lSOY l.!i!,!l
26 / l.99 27 /2 .2!1 27 / 2.59 211 I 2.1111
5500 1539 159>0 1539
30, 2.-... 30 /2.97 2 7 / 2.-...
point f,a,r l' ef'ete.nee Oft .,.
15. EllHl!i:2F V,'22 !',OD t<I 1150.
15201:lE 1971'-S ho
'" 145-2.ll
145-2.o
145-2.o
145-2.il
(I to 11.!iD.
0034 ill to 11100.
6'i1D 1:<J 14"111.
D l:<J lllilll.
6110 lb 12slil.
6 •a0 lb 125/Ji.
600 l:<J IJ91illil.
2..500 2.150 .3.11110 .3.2.50
RPN IIPN RPM JtPN Sofle/BHP Sone/llHP Sone/BHP Sone/BHI' s 140Y 1477 l!i'll J'-l!Q(I
19.2 / l.:l'l 21 / 1.52 22 / l .'.lla 2:l f 1.89 :
1411 lQI l l!i'lf, lf,09
19.3 / l .6:l 21/ l .li'l 22 / 2.1!15 2:l / 2.27 :
1417 14!1<1 l!i'l!I l'-11(1
19."l / l .91 21/2.l'l 22 / 2.:l!I 2:l/2.~ :
14,4!1 15'09 1.Y.!1 lf,25
2-D / 2:22 21 / 2...-1 22 / 2. 7:l 23 t 2.99
1502 1557
21 / :2.59 2:2 / 2.9/l
1062
Appendix F
Car Wash Drying Assembly Manufacturer Documentation
Sonny’s Enterprises: 45 HP Blower Assembly
Enviromental Noise with Dryer OFF: 70 dba
\
I I
I I I
I \
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
'-/ I I I
IJ..' 3 t;I I I C) JS ~ §? IJ..Qj/ 3 I I
I '(5 ar· ~ /J..Q.)'01 " / I ~ lo; rzx I IJ..<ll/ rr, / I / ' ~1/. § / I <::5 !0 / / i "
/ / I I / / I
/ / I / / I
/ I / /
/
/
SONNY'S ENTERPRISES
A N.T.S.
1063
Appendix G
Vacuum System Manufacturer Documentation
Vacutech: Manufacturer Noise Level Measurements
VA.CU C
o th _ _ Bal· o n th coll' •
pr n · •. lo . :
SOUND IUEV 11. M
H A YR QIJJ
Tlf '
NOliE: T. vacuum
th cusito.m r . ·cwrnl n
- ···[& AAP PRQV H S
M l-0 .4• C G
m ~ h 1,5 15' uumno I .(4
FO
1064
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
May 14, 2024
Mr. Jim Shehadey
Visalia Parkway Partners, LLC
405 N Palm Avenue
Fresno, CA 93701
RE: Sam’s Club Gas Station Health Risk Assessment / City of Visalia Dear Mr. Jim Shehadey:
JK Consulting Group prepared the following Health Risk Assessment for the proposed Sam’s Club Gas Station (Project) in the City of Visalia. The Project includes the development of a gas station with approximately twelve (12) multi-pump dispensers/fuel canopy along with a kiosk and underground storage tanks. The Project site is located at the southwest corner of Visalia Parkway and Mooney Boulevard (State Route 63). The Project location and site plan are depicted in Figures 1, 2, and 3.
Approximately 7.5 million gallons of gasoline and 1.2 million gallons of diesel fuel will be sold annually.
AIR QUALITY
Air quality in a region is determined by the region’s topography, meteorology, and existing air pollutant sources. These factors are discussed below, along with the current regulatory structure that applies to the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB), which encompasses the Project site, pursuant to the regulatory authority of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD).
Climate and Meteorology
Air quality is affected by the rate and location of pollutant emissions and by climatic conditions that influence the movement and dispersion of pollutants. Atmospheric conditions, such as wind speed, wind direction and air temperature gradients, along with local and regional topography, mediate the relationship between air pollutant emissions and air quality. As noted above, the Project is located within the SJVAB, which includes Fresno, Kern (western portion), Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare counties.
The SJVAB is approximately 250 miles long and 35 miles in width and is bordered by the Coast Range Mountains on the west, the Sierra Nevada mountains on the east, and the Tehachapi Mountains to the south. Marine air, which often enters the Basin from the San Joaquin River Delta, causes the wind patterns found inside the SJVAB. The Tehachapi Mountains block airflow in from the south, the Coastal Range blocks wind entry into the Valley from the west, and the tall Sierra Nevada Mountain Range acts as a formidable barrier to the east. Weak airflow caused by these topographical factors is vertically constrained by high atmospheric pressure above the Valley. The SJVAB is hence extremely vulnerable to pollutant buildup over time. The majority of the mountains in the area are higher than summer inversion layers.
[J
CONSULTING GROUP LLC
1065
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
The SJVAB has a Mediterranean climate, which is characterized by infrequent rainfall and hot, dry summers. The SJVAB offers ideal ozone generation conditions given an average of 260 sunny days per year. Precipitation and fog in the Winter create optimal circumstances for particulate matter generation, even though they shield sunlight and reduce ozone levels.
Sources of Air Pollution
Air pollutant emissions in the SJVAB are generally caused by man-made sources, which encompass stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources include point sources which are generally identified by an exhaust vent or stack (i.e., boilers). Area sources, such as residential and commercial water heaters, lawn mowers, and agricultural fields, are also categorized as stationary sources. Emissions from motor vehicles are characterized as mobile sources and include on-road (i.e., automobiles, trucks) and off-road (i.e., aircrafts, ships, trains) sources. Air pollutants can also be generated by natural means, such as the suspending of fine dust particles via high winds.
Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) refer to a broad category of air pollutants that could result in an increase in fatalities or serious illnesses, potential risk to human health, or any combination of these. TACs are both organic and inorganic chemical substances that can be released from a range of everyday sources, such as gasoline stations, automobiles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, painting operations, and research and educational facilities. TACs are considered either carcinogenic or noncarcinogenic based on the nature of the health effects associated with exposure to the pollutant. For regulatory purposes, carcinogenic TACs are assumed to have no safe threshold below which health impacts would not occur, and cancer risk is expressed as excess cancer cases per one million exposed individuals. Non-carcinogenic TACs differ in that there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed to occur.
Most of the estimated health risk from TACs, according to the California Air Resources Board's (CARB) California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality (2005), can be attributable to a small number of compounds. The most significant of which is PM from diesel-fueled engines, which is known as diesel particulate matter (DPM). Diesel exhaust has hundreds of different gaseous and particulate components, many of which are harmful, and has been classified as a human carcinogen. Diesel particles are so small that they penetrate deep into the lungs. According to studies, diesel PM concentrations are significantly greater near busy intersections and roads. The CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (2005) provides recommendations for siting new sensitive land uses within proximity to facilities known to generate TACs, as depicted in Table 1.
Acute diesel exhaust exposure may irritate the eyes, nose, throat, and lungs, as well as certain neurological consequences like lightheadedness. A cough or nausea may also be brought on by acute exposure, which can potentially make asthma worse. Experimental animal inhalation studies with chronic exposure have revealed a variety of dose-dependent lung cellular alterations, lung inflammation, and immunological consequences from diesel exhaust. There is substantial data, based on both human and laboratory studies, showing diesel exhaust is almost certainly carcinogenic. Studies on human epidemiology show a link between occupational exposure to diesel exhaust and a higher incidence of lung cancer.
C □ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1066
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
LIV llgS!On
A a er • ~
,. ®- M .~d anada
~ LeG nd
Madera Acres
Dos Palos
@_
Flrebaugn.J
CoarSeQOIO
Yosem e La esl
®
I
F ant
No n Fo,.
Sierra Na 1ona
Fores
Lakes oie
Stlav
Auber·y
Pratlle( ~
I ~
C□ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
Ne
H1ghwav c,<f!> 9ovis ,.,
" tyl hume
Ml ota ~ ~ - Fre no '---- __,,..- Dunlap Gran Grove Kerman :-@.. ___.r- V nage '>::::,, Sano @ M,r monte
ran Quill ,.. '7owier ,@
Reedley
es
)
,~a Omuba @ ~ ~ 1ngsburg
Q C ~-~~ Lelr_ '""'' ~-'@) ~ ... ""5'"""
I - • Exeter
v ® -- ) ® ~ ~~sac, y ~s (: Tula ®-c-ncsa, P ne Canyo _ _ •• uron l Sanlucas ' - coa nga ~ <p• Strathmore
,~ Co~OJan
~ / T p1o~o eJl'.l![e
San Ardo A nal Ke an c ,ty 99
Joton
Bryson
rarmony
Parkhe!d
Braaley
7 acImiento
Lake San lt1iQUel
ac1m1ento /
l ::-@}-srm,aon Pas<fRobles )
/, ® Temp•eton
,- ,Creston
Atascaelero @
Morro
~ Bax_ ~~ Image Source: Google Maps
• Project Location
FIGURE 1
Regional Location
fey Te Bella
~ E •1, tria
Defrno
Keoo'&lmer I McFa laM
a,c~
@)
Shafte•
~ • ildale
Bak~ - ~
1067
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
■ Project Location
FIGURE 2
Project Location
C□ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1068
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
ol..."l:IIOR "l lt."1 .1.NT
l?' l, IO l ff
~~-·-~---~~-----~~-+
,
6 1 11111111111111111 8-Ji 11111111111 'rn11,11 I •
-{Ht 1 #HlltH+HtH O I 1111 l 1111111111111 i 11 ll I I ,i ' M+I IHltH+H+HH#O 1i1ldllllllllllHl!lltll I . i , I r ··-------·------·..L. __ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ -; I 1+ ~ : 1 ~K+o 11 I l ~ _ ! , !
l++<>t+<>+-t<>I ~ I I I ( g !
·!
! II 11 11---1 ...._ _______ _ : ! ~--- -·-··---··-··-··-··- ··- ··-··- ··- ··- ··-··- ··- ··- ··-··- ·- ··-··- ··-··- ··- ··- ··- ··- ··- - - ·-··- ··-'-··- ··-··- ··- ··-··- ··-··- ··-··- ··- ··-··-··- ··....I Image Source: Lars Anderson & Associates, Inc.
FIGURE 3
Project Site Plan
C□ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1069
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
TABLE 1
RECOMMENDATIONS ON SITING NEW SENSITIVE LAND USES SUCH AS RESIDENCES, SCHOOLS, DAYCARE CENTERS, PLAYGROUNDS, OR MEDICAL FACILITIES*
SOURCE CATEGORY ADVISORY RECOMMENDATIONS
Freeways and HighTraffic Roads1
- Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day.
Distribution Centers
- Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (that accommodates more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week). - Take into account the configuration of existing distribution centers and avoid locating residences and other new sensitive land uses near entry and exit points.
Rail Yards
- Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard. - Within one mile of a rail yard, consider possible siting limitations and mitigation approaches.
Ports - Avoid siting of new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of ports in the most heavily impac ted zones. Consult local air districts or the ARB on the status of pending analyses of health risks.
Refineries - Avoid siting new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of petroleum refineries. Consult with local air districts and other local agencies to determine an appropriate separation.
Chrome Platers - Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a chrome plater.
Dry Cleaners Using
Perchloroethylene
- Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of any dry cleaning operation. For operations with two or more machines, provide 500 feet. For operations with 3 or more machines, consult with the local air distric t.
- Do not site new sensitive land uses in the same building with perchloroethylene dry cleaning operations.
Gasoline Dispensing
Facilities
- Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater). A 50 foot separation is recommended for typical gas dispensing facilities.
1: The recommendation to avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway was identified in CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook published in 2005. CARB recently published a technical advisory to the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook indicating that new research has demonstrated promising strategies to reduce pollution exposure along transportation corridors. *Notes: • These recommendations are advisory. Land use agencies have to balance other considerations, including housing and transportation needs, economic development priorities, and other quality of life issues.
• Recommendations are based primarily on data showing that the air pollution exposures addressed here (i.e., localized) can be reduced as much as 80% with the recommended separation. • The relative risk for these categories varies greatly (see Table 1-2). To determine the actual risk near a particular facility, a site-specific analysis would be required. Risk from diesel PM will decrease over time as cleaner technology phases in. • These recommendations are designed to fill a gap where information about existing facilities may not be readily available and are not designed to substitute for more specific information if it exists. The recommended distances take into account other factors in addition to available health risk data (see individual category descriptions).
• Site-specific project design improvements may help reduce air pollution exposures and should also be considered when siting new sensitive land uses. • This table does not imply that mixed residential and commercial development in general is incompatible. Rather it focuses on known problems like dry cleaners using perchloroethylene that can be addressed with reasonable preventative actions. • A summary of the basis for the distance recommendations can be found in the ARB Handbook: Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. Source: SJVAPC D 2024 C□ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1070
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the federal agency with significant influence on air quality policy and initiatives. The EPA regulates emission sources that are under the exclusive authority of the federal government, such as aircraft, ships, and certain locomotives. As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the EPA requires each state with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) describing a strategy for the means to attain the federal standards for ozone and particulate matter. The SIP must integrate federal, state, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution, using a combination of performance standards and market-based programs.
Clean Air Act
The Federal Clean Air Act, as amended, establishes the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for several pollutants. These standards are divided into primary standards and secondary standards.
Primary standards are designed to protect public health, and secondary standards are intended to protect public welfare from effects such as visibility reduction, soiling, nuisance, and other forms of damage. The Clean Air Act requires that regional plans be prepared for nonattainment areas that illustrate how the federal air quality standards could be met.
Regulation of TACs is achieved through federal and state controls on individual sources. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments offered a comprehensive plan for achieving significant reduction in both mobile and stationary source emissions of certain designated hazardous air pollutants, with a goal of achieving the EPA’s one in 1 million cancer risk from TACs.
1990 Amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act
The 1990 amendments to the federal Clean Air Act included a provision to address air toxics. Under Title III of the federal Clean Air Act, the U.S. EPA establishes and enforces National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, which are national uniform standards oriented toward controlling particular hazardous air pollutants. Section 112(b) of the federal Clean Air Act identifies 189 “Air Toxics” (hazardous air pollutants), directs U.S. EPA to identify sources of the 189 pollutants, and establishes a 10-year time period for the U.S. EPA to issue technology-based emissions standards for each source category. Title III of the federal Clean Air Act provides for a second phase under which the U.S. EPA is to assess residual risk after the implementation of the first phase of standards and impose new standards, when appropriate, to protect public health.
State
The State of California Air Resources Board (CARB) sets the laws and regulations for air quality on the state level. In this capacity, CARB conducts research and sets the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, and provides oversight of C□ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1071
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
local programs. CARB also establishes emissions standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products (i.e., hairspray, aerosol paints), and various types of commercial equipment.
California Clean Air Act
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) was enacted in 1988 (California Health & Safety Code Section 39000 et seq.) and amended in 1992. The CAAQS are generally more stringent than the corresponding federal standards and incorporate additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. Air basins or areas that exceed the CAAQS are designated non-attainment until compliance is disclosed in an attainment plan. In California, CARB is responsible for meeting the State requirements of the federal CAA, administering the California CAA, and establishing the California ambient air quality standards (CAAQS). The California CAA, as amended in 1992, requires all air districts in the State to endeavor to achieve and maintain the CAAQS. CARB oversees the functions of local air pollution control districts and air quality management districts, which in turn administer air quality activities at the regional and county level.
Regional
The SJVAPCD is the agency responsible for monitoring and regulating air pollutant emissions from stationary, area, and indirect sources within Tulare County and throughout the SJVAB. The SJVAPCD also has responsibility for monitoring air quality and setting and enforcing limits for source emissions. CARB is the agency with the legal responsibility for regulating mobile source emissions. The SJVAPCD is precluded from such activities under State law.
District Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibition)
The purpose of Regulation VIII (Reg. VIII) is to reduce ambient concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM10) by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate anthropogenic fugitive dust emissions. Reg.
VIII requires property owners, contractors, developers, equipment operators, farmers and public agencies to control fugitive dust emissions from specified outdoor fugitive dust sources. It specifies the following measures to control fugitive dust:
Apply water to unpaved surfaces and area
Use non-toxic chemical or organic dust suppressants on unpaved roads and traffic areas Limit or reduce vehicle speed on unpaved roads and traffic areas Maintain areas in a stabilized condition by restricting vehicle access Install wind barriers
During high winds, cease outdoor activities that disturb the soil. Keep bulk materials sufficiently wet when handling
Store and handle materials in a three-sided structure When storing bulk materials, apply water to the surface or cover the storage pile with a tarp Don’t overload haul trucks. Overloaded trucks are likely to spill bulk materials C□ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1072
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
Cover haul trucks with a tarp or other suitable cover. Or, wet the top of the load enough to limit visible dust emissions
Clean the interior of cargo compartments on emptied haul trucks prior to leaving a site Prevent trackout by installing a trackout control device Clean up trackout at least once a day. If along a busy road or highway, clean up trackout immediately Monitor dust-generating activities and implement appropriate measures for maximum dust control Regulation of TACs is achieved through federal and state controls on individual sources. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments offered a comprehensive plan for achieving significant reduction in both mobile and stationary source emissions of certain designated hazardous air pollutants, with a goal of achieving the EPA’s one in 1 million cancer risk from TACs.
Local
City of Visalia General Plan
The Air Quality & Greenhouse Gases section of the City of Visalia’s General Plan provides air quality policies and programs to achieve desired improvements to air quality. Listed below are objectives and policies from the City of Visalia General Plan Air Quality & Greenhouse Gases section that would be applicable to the Project:
Objective AQ-O-1 - Coordinate air quality planning efforts with other local, regional and State agencies.
Objective AQ-O-2 - Strive to improve air quality by implementing emissions reduction efforts targeting mobile sources, stationary sources and construction-related sources. Policy AQ-P-2 - Require use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce particulate emission as a condition of approval for all subdivisions, development plans and grading permits, in conformance with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Fugitive Dust Rule. Policy AQ-P-9 - Continue to mitigate short-term construction impacts and long-term stationary source impacts on air quality on a case-by-case basis and continue to assess air quality impacts through environmental review. Require developers to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce air pollutant emissions associated with the construction and operation of development projects.
C □ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1073
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
PROJECT RELATED AIR QUALITY IMPACTS
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Appendix G, are used to assess the potential significance of Project impacts pursuant to local General Plan policies, Municipal Code standards, or applicable standards of other agencies. Under CEQA, TAC’s associated with the Project would be considered significant if the Project exposed sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC)
Sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses.
Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. The SJVAPCD’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts identifies the need for projects to analyze the potential for adverse air quality impacts to sensitive receptors. From a health risk perspective, the Project is a Type A project in that it may potentially place toxic sources in the vicinity of existing sensitive receptors. The Project is located adjacent to the Westlake Village Community, the Oak Tree Estates, and the Visalia Estates. The SJVAPCD’s current thresholds of significance for TAC emissions from the operations of both permitted and non-permitted sources are presented below:
Carcinogens: Maximally Exposed Individual risk equals or exceeds 10 in one million Chronic: Hazard Index equals or exceeds 1 for the Maximally Exposed Individual Acute: Hazard Index equals or exceeds 1 for the Maximally Exposed Individual The characteristics of the proposed Project are consistent with the ‘Gasoline Dispensing Facilities’ TAC source categories presented in Table 1. The nearest sensitive receptor (residence) is located within 92 feet (28 meters) of the underground gasoline storage tanks. Table 1 indicates that a 50-foot separation is recommended for typical gas dispensing facilities and that siting ‘new’ sensitive land uses within 300 feet of a large gas station (facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater) should be avoided. While the Project is anticipated to sell 7.5 million gallons of gasoline and 1.2 million gallons of diesel fuel annually, the recommendation related to 300 feet is related to siting new sensitive receptors adjacent to exiting gasoline dispensing facilities. The fuel dispensing area is located approximately 200 feet (60 meters) from the nearest sensitive receptor (residence). Figure 4 depicts the sensitive receptor setback from the Project underground storage tanks and dispensing facilities.
VOC emissions from the operation of the gasoline service station in addition to diesel emissions from truck traffic and idling have the potential to emit TAC’s and impact sensitive receptors adjacent to the Project site. The Project will generate a maximum of three (3) daily truck trips, or approximately 20 truck deliveries per week for the purpose of refilling the underground storage tanks. Exposure to various TAC’s primarily occurs through inhalation. Cancer and non-cancer health risks are related to the exposure concentration of TACs that will be generated on the Project site. The ambient concentration of TACs at the Project site is influenced by factors such as the emission rate, the distance from the emission source, the local wind speed and direction, the local topography, the land use, etc.
C □ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1074
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
Vehicle DPM emissions were estimated using emission factors for particulate matter less than 10μm in diameter (PM10) generated with the 2017 version of the Emission Factor model (EMFAC) developed by the ARB. EMFAC 2017 is a mathematical model that was developed to calculate emission rates from motor vehicles that operate on highways, freeways, and local roads in California and is commonly used by the ARB to project changes in future emissions from on-road mobile sources. It incorporates regional motor vehicle data, information and estimates regarding the distribution of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by speed, and number of starts per day.
For this Project, annual average PM10 emission factors were generated by running EMFAC 2017 for vehicles in Tulare County. The EMFAC model generates emission factors in terms of grams of pollutant emitted per vehicle activity and can calculate a matrix of emission factors at specific values of temperature, relative humidity, and vehicle speed. The model was run for speeds traveled in the vicinity of the Project. To conservatively estimate air quality emissions associated with the Project, it was assumed that trucks idled for no more than five (5) minutes while onsite. In addition, it was assumed that trucks traveled at 10 miles per hour while performing onsite driving and maneuvering. Emissions estimates for diesel operated vehicles and other supporting documentation are provided in the appendices.
The emission rates provided in the California Air Resources Board and California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guide (February 18, 2022) were also used to estimate Project emissions associated with the operation of the gasoline service station. Evaporation losses due to vehicle refueling operations, underground tank breathing and emptying, and other processes were estimated for purposes of determining the Projects impact to nearby sensitive receptors. In addition, AB2588 methodology and the SJVAPCD’s emission factor(s) were used for diesel storage tank emission estimates.
The SJVAPCD Prioritization Calculator was used to determine the “Total Max Score” of Project specific toxic emissions as discussed above. Projects with a Prioritization score of 10 or higher require a Health Risk Assessment with dispersion modeling. Toxic emissions associated with the Project were used as inputs to the Prioritization Calculator which generated the prioritization score for the Project as shown in Table 2. Results indicate that toxic emissions associated with the Project will generate a max score of 8.62 for sensitive receptors within 0 to 100 meters (328 feet) of the Project. Project emissions associated with the Project will not trigger dispersion modeling since the Total Max Score is less than 10. As a result, dispersion modeling is not required for the Project considering the SJVAPCD’s methodology/threshold.
TAC emissions generated during Project operations would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, mitigation is not warranted since there is a less than significant impact from Project operational emissions.
C□ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1075
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
Image Source: Google Earth
FIGURE 4
Sensitive Receptor Setback
.\SCHOi~ TL'f.A.,':T
l'Y I.L 6 t -SP
. i
3 . • 1
Q.I • I
> \ • ·- . i I '- • :
C□ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
,0 1 ! ____ \i ' ~,---- '-··- ··- ··- ··- ··- ··- ··-··-··- ··---1..··-·· ~ -0 ¼~00 o◊ ~r1
?D [Ht+~
1 ?I o Q-+4 ◊ •
~~====~o IT l
~ & +-j I & ◊ 1•0-0 I
0 <> ◊ I ◊ o • -H yo I
0 ◊ 4 '-' ◊- 0D ?
01 Or r-c ◊ •◊ -tt◊ ◊o I?
1076
Mr. Jim Shehadey
May 14, 2024
JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
(559) 217-4763
TABLE 2
TOTAL MAX SCORE FOR PROJECT EMISSIONS
Should you have any further questions or comments, please contact me by phone at (559) 246-4204 or by email at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Jason Ellard, Principal
JK Consulting Group
Attachment
Diesel Storage
Tank Fugitives
Gasoline Storage
Tank Fugitives
Gasoline
Dispensing
Operations
Onsite Truck
Idling/Mobile
Sources
Max Score Max Score Max Score Max Score
0< R<100 1.000 0.00707 0.28136 8.32245 0.00716 8.61804
100≤R<250 0.250 0.00177 0.07034 2.08061 0.00179 2.15451 250≤R<500 0.040 0.00028 0.01125 0.33290 0.00029 0.34472 500≤R<1000 0.011 0.00008 0.00309 0.09155 0.00008 0.09480 1000≤R<1500 0.003 0.00002 0.00084 0.02497 0.00002 0.02585 1500≤R<2000 0.002 0.00001 0.00056 0.01664 0.00001 0.01724 2000<R 0.001 0.00001 0.00028 0.00832 0.00001 0.00862
Receptor Proximity
and Proximity Factors
Total Max
Score
NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1077
APPENDIX A
EMISSIONS ESTIMATES FOR DIESEL OPERATED VEHICLES
,,.
1078
Pollutant Vehicle Type
EMFAC
Vehicle Class Trips (trips/day)
Maximum Daily
Round-Trips
Total Annual
(trips/yr)
Round-Trip
Distance
(miles)
Factors
Emission
(1)
(gms/mile)
Emission
Factors
(lbs/VMT)
Annual
Emissions
(lbs/mile/yr)
Maximum Daily Emission
Estimate (lbs/day)
Average
Annual
(tons/yr)
Estimate
Emission lbs/year lbs/hr
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.25 0.066 1.462E-04 0.2 0.000110 0.000010 0.020011 1.1E-05
0.2 0.000110 0.000010 0.020011 1.1E-05
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.25 0.075 1.664E-04 0.2 0.000125 0.000011 0.022781 1.25E-05
0.2 0.000125 0.000011 0.022781 1.25E-05
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.25 0.028 6.216E-05 0.1 0.000047 0.000004 0.008509 4.66E-06
0.1 0.000047 0.000004 0.008509 4.66E-06
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.25 1.109 2.445E-03 2.7 0.001834 0.000167 0.334658 0.000183
2.7 0.001834 0.000167 0.334658 0.000183
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.25 7.608 1.677E-02 18.4 0.012580 0.001148 2.295902 0.001258
18.4 0.012580 0.001148 2.295902 0.001258
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.25 2984.576 6.580E+00 7,205.0 4.934898 0.450309 900.6189 0.49349 7,205.0 4.934898 0.450309 900.6189 0.49349
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.25 0.007 1.525E-05 0.0 0.000011 0.000001 0.002087 1.14E-06
0.0 0.000011 0.000001 0.002087 1.14E-06
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.25 0.007 1.459E-05 0.0 0.000011 0.000001 0.001997 1.09E-06
0.0 0.000011 0.000001 0.001997 1.09E-06
Maximum 3 Daily Truck Trips
Assumptions:
(1) Emission Factors source: EMFAC2017 for Tulare County Year 2023, for speed distribution of 10 mph References:
PM10
Exhaust Total PM10
Emissions
PM2.5
Exhaust Total PM2.5
Emissions
CO
Exhaust Total CO Emissions
NOX
Exhaust Total NOX
Emissions
CO2
Exhaust Total CO2
Emissions
Onsite On-Road Mobile Sources
ROG
Exhaust Total ROG Emissions
TOG
Exhaust Total TOG Emissions
SOx
Exhaust Total SOx
Emissions
I I I I I I I I I I
r ~ ~ ~ L L ~ + + t ~ L L ~ r .. t ~ L L ~
t ~ L L ~ r .. t ~ L L ~
t r ~ ~ ~ L L ~ + +
t r ~ ~ ~ L L ~ + +
t
L L r .. t
1079
Pollutant Vehicle Type
EMFAC
Vehicle Class Trips (trips/day)
Maximum Daily
Round-Trips
Total Annual
(trips/yr)
Idle Time per
Trip
(1)
(hrs/trip)
Idle Emission
Factors
(2)
(g/hr-veh)
Idle Emission
Factors (lbs/hrveh)
Maximum Daily Emission
Estimate (lbs/day)
Average
Annual
(tons/yr)
Estimate
Emission lbs/year lbs/hr
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.09 2.186 4.82E-03 0.001301 0.000119 0.237483 5.42198E-05
0.001301 0.000119 0.237483 5.42198E-05
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.09 2.489 5.49E-03 0.001481 0.000135 0.270356 6.17251E-05
0.001481 0.000135 0.270356 6.17251E-05
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.09 32.301 7.12E-02 0.019227 0.001754 3.508999 0.000801141
0.019227 0.001754 3.508999 0.000801141
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.09 25.833 5.70E-02 0.015377 0.001403 2.806316 0.000640711
0.015377 0.001403 2.806316 0.000640711
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.09 5648.173 1.25E+01 3.362065 0.306788 613.5768 0.140086024
3.362065 0.306788 613.5768 0.140086024
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.09 0.053 1.18E-04 0.000032 0.000003 0.005797 1.32346E-06
0.000032 0.000003 0.005797 1.32346E-06
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.09 0.009 2.05E-05 0.000006 0.000001 0.001011 2.3075E-07
0.000006 0.000001 0.001011 2.3075E-07
Product Trucks - Outside Sales T7 3 1095 0.09 0.009 1.96E-05 0.000005 0.000000 0.000967 2.20768E-07
0.000005 0.000000 0.000967 2.20768E-07
Maximum 3 Daily Truck Trips
Assumptions:
(2) Emission Factors source: EMFAC2017 for Tulare County Year 2023. (1) Assumes 5 minute idle time
References:
SOX
Total SOX Emissions
PM10
Total PM10 Emissions
PM2.5
Total PM2.5 Emissions
NOX
Total NOX Emissions
CO2
Total CO2 Emissions
Onsite Idling Sources
ROG
Total ROG Emissions
TOG
Total TOG Emissions
CO
Total CO Emissions
I I I I I I I I I
r ~ ~ ~ L L L t +
~ L L L t r
~ L L L t
L L l t r
~ L L l t r ~ ~ ~ L L L t +
r ~ ~ ~ L L l t +
L L l t r
1080
APPENDIX B
SAM’S CLUB SERVICE STATION EMISSIONS ESTIMATES
,,.
1081
8,800 Gallon Tank Trucks (Typical Size) - Gasoline
52,000 Gallon Storage Tank - Gasoline 8,800 Gallons/Hr MAX* (Phase I Loading Operation) 625,000 Gallons Sold Per Month 2,680 Gallons/Hr MAX* (Phase II Dispensing Operations) 7,500,000 Gallons Sold Per Year
Emission Rate
lb/1,000 Gal
Resulting lbs/year Resulting lbs / hr
Filling Underground Tank
Submerged Filling/Loading 0.150 1,125 1.3200
Underground Tank Breathing and Emptying 0.024 180 0.0643 Vehicle Refueling Operations
Displacement Losses (Controlled)/Refueling 0.356 2,670 0.9541 Spillage 0.240 1,800 0.6432
Hose Permeation 0.009 68 0.0241
* Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidance - Mega Blitz Data Gasoline Dispensing Operations
LB/HR LB/YR
Benzene 71432 0.015344049 31.20251
Ethyl Benzene 100414 0.010825155 27.54601
Hexane 110543 0.05496102 107.0626
Naphthalene 91203 0.001129681 3.149991
Propylene (propene) 115071 8.5693E-05 0.147501
Toluene 108883 0.06243591 146.2173
Xylenes 1330207 0.052049505 135.1559
Storage Tank Gasoline Fugitives
LB/HR LB/YR
Benzene 71432 0.0004501 1.26
Toluene 108883 0.000643 1.8
Xylenes 1330207 0.000643 1.8
Bakersfield Sam's Club Hours 6am - 9pm M-Sa 15 hrs
9am - 7pm Sun 10 hrs
14.3 hrs/day X 365 = 5,220 hrs/yr
7,500,000 Gallons Sold Per Year
1082
8,800 Gallon Tank Trucks (Typical Size) - Diesel
8,000 Gallon Storage Tank - Diesel
3,300 Gallons Sold Per Day
100,000 Gallons Sold Per Month
1,200,000 Gallons Sold Per Year
Emission Rate
lb/1,000 Gal lbs/hr lbs/day lbs / yr
Hourly 0.030 0.004
Daily 0.030 0.099
Annual 0.030 36.000
Storage Tank Diesel Fugitives
LB/HR LB/YR
Benzene 71432 3.52E-06 0.03168
Toluene 108883 1.93E-05 0.17352
Xylenes 1330207 1.68E-05 0.1512
1,200,000 Gallons Sold
1083
APPENDIX C
SJVAPCD EMISSION FACTOR/CALCULATION WORKSHEETS
,,.
1084
Name
Applicability
Author or updater Last Update
Facility: Sam's Club City of Visalia
Inputs
Project #:
ID#:
lb /hr lb /yr
Benzene
VOC Rate 4.00E-03 36
71432 8.80E-04 3.52E-06 3.17E-02
Toluene 108883 4.82E-03 1.93E-05 1.74E-01
Xylenes 1330207 4.20E-03 1.68E-05 1.51E-01
oil storage tanks in the southern region.
* The emission factors are from the 1993 District memo "Diesel Storage Weight Fractions", test data from source tests of 75 crude References:
Formula
Emissions are calculated by the multiplication of VOC
Rates and Emission Factors.
Storage Tank Diesel Fugitives
Substances CAS# lbs/ lb VOC LB/HR LB/YR
Use this spreadsheet for VOC fugitive emission from Diesel Storge Tanks. Entries required in yellow areas, output in grey areas.
Matthew Cegielski February 23, 2022
1085
Name
Applicability
Author or updater Last Update
Facility: Sam's Club City of Visalia
Inputs
Project #:
ID#:
lb /hr lb /yr
Benzene
VOC Rate 6.43E-02 180
71432 7.00E-03 4.50E-04 1.26E+00
Toluene 108883 1.00E-02 6.43E-04 1.80E+00
Xylenes 1330207 1.00E-02 6.43E-04 1.80E+00
References:
March 11, 2016
Weight Fractions"
* The emission factors are from the 1995 District memo "Toxic Emissions Inventory Plan Regarding Diesel and Gasoline Storage Storage Tank Gasoline Fugitives
Substances CAS# lbs/ lb VOC LB/HR LB/YR
Formula
Emissions are calculated by the multiplication of VOC
Rates and Emission Factors.
Use this spreadsheet for VOC fugitive emission from Gasoline Storge Tanks. Entries required in yellow areas, output in grey areas.
Matthew Cegielski
1086
Name
Applicability
Author or updater Last Update
Facility: Sam's Club City of Visalia
Inputs
Project #:
ID#:
lb /hr lb /yr
Benzene
VOC Rate 1.32E+00 1.13E+03
71432 4.57E-03 6.03E-03 5.14E+00
Ethyl Benzene 100414 1.07E-03 1.41E-03 1.20E+00
Hexane 110543 1.82E-02 2.40E-02 2.05E+01
Naphthalene 91203 4.45E-06 5.87E-06 5.01E-03
Propylene (propene) 115071 3.59E-05 4.74E-05 4.04E-02
Toluene 108883 1.11E-02 1.47E-02 1.25E+01
Xylenes 1330207 4.09E-03 5.40E-03 4.60E+00
References:
Matthew Cegielski April 28, 2022
Winter/Summer) in CARB’s 2022
*These emission factors are from table 11, "Content of Gasoline for Substances with OEHHA Chronic Health Factor (Combined Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidanc e.
Formula
Emissions are calculated by the multiplication of VOC
Rates and Emission Factors.
Gasoline Dispensing Operations VOC from Vapor Tank
Filling Loss
Substances CAS# lbs/ lb VOC LB/HR LB/YR
Use this spreadsheet for vapor VOC emissions from Vapor Tank Filling Loss. Entries required in yellow areas, output in gray areas.
1087
Name
Applicability
Author or updater Last Update
Facility: Sam's Club City of Visalia
Inputs
Project #:
ID#:
lb /hr lb /yr
Benzene
VOC Rate 2.41E-02 6.80E+01
71432 4.57E-03 1.10E-04 3.11E-01
Ethyl Benzene 100414 1.07E-03 2.58E-05 7.28E-02
Hexane 110543 1.82E-02 4.39E-04 1.24E+00
Naphthalene 91203 4.45E-06 1.07E-07 3.03E-04
Propylene (propene) 115071 3.59E-05 8.66E-07 2.44E-03
Toluene 108883 1.11E-02 2.68E-04 7.55E-01
Xylenes 1330207 4.09E-03 9.86E-05 2.78E-01
References:
Substances CAS# lbs/ lb VOC LB/HR LB/YR
Winter/Summer) in CARB’s 2022
*These emission factors are from table 11, "Content of Gasoline for Substances with OEHHA Chronic Health Factor (Combined Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidanc e.
Gasoline Dispensing Operations VOC from Vapor Hose
Permeation Loss
Use this spreadsheet for vapor VOC emissions from Vapor Hose Permeation Loss.
Entries required in yellow areas, output in gray areas.
Matthew Cegielski April 28, 2022
Formula
Emissions are calculated by the multiplication of VOC
Rates and Emission Factors.
1088
Name
Applicability
Author or updater Last Update
Facility: Sam's Club City of Visalia
Inputs
Project #:
ID#:
lb /hr lb /yr
Benzene
VOC Rate 9.54E-01 2.67E+03
71432 4.57E-03 4.36E-03 1.22E+01
Ethyl Benzene 100414 1.07E-03 1.02E-03 2.86E+00
Hexane 110543 1.82E-02 1.74E-02 4.86E+01
Naphthalene 91203 4.45E-06 4.25E-06 1.19E-02
Propylene (propene) 115071 3.59E-05 3.43E-05 9.60E-02
Toluene 108883 1.11E-02 1.06E-02 2.96E+01
Xylenes 1330207 4.09E-03 3.90E-03 1.09E+01
References:
Substances CAS# lbs/ lb VOC LB/HR LB/YR
Winter/Summer) in CARB’s 2022
*These emission factors are from table 11, "Content of Gasoline for Substances with OEHHA Chronic Health Factor (Combined Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidanc e.
Gasoline Dispensing Operations VOC from Vapor Vehicle
Refueling
Use this spreadsheet for vapor VOC emissions from Vapor Vehicle Refueling. Entries required in yellow areas, output in gray areas.
Matthew Cegielski April 28, 2022
Formula
Emissions are calculated by the multiplication of VOC
Rates and Emission Factors.
1089
Name
Applicability
Author or updater Last Update
Facility: Sam's Club City of Visalia
Inputs
Project #:
ID#:
lb /hr lb /yr
Benzene
VOC Rate 6.43E-02 1.80E+02
71432 4.57E-03 2.94E-04 8.23E-01
Ethyl Benzene 100414 1.07E-03 6.88E-05 1.93E-01
Hexane 110543 1.82E-02 1.17E-03 3.28E+00
Naphthalene 91203 4.45E-06 2.86E-07 8.01E-04
Propylene (propene) 115071 3.59E-05 2.31E-06 6.47E-03
Toluene 108883 1.11E-02 7.14E-04 2.00E+00
Xylenes 1330207 4.09E-03 2.63E-04 7.36E-01
References:
Substances CAS# lbs/ lb VOC LB/HR LB/YR
Winter/Summer) in CARB’s 2022
*These emission factors are from table 11, "Content of Gasoline for Substances with OEHHA Chronic Health Factor (Combined Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidanc e.
Gasoline Dispensing Operations VOC from Vapor
Breathing Loss
Use this spreadsheet for vapor VOC emissions from Vapor Breathing Loss. Entries required in yellow areas, output in gray areas.
Matthew Cegielski April 28, 2022
Formula
Emissions are calculated by the multiplication of VOC
Rates and Emission Factors.
1090
1 JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
RESUME
Jason Ellard
Owner/Principal
Jason Ellard is an engineering professional who is devoted to the success of clients and their objectives. Since receiving his BS Degree in Civil Engineering from Fresno State University, he has worked in the environmental planning and traffic engineering/planning industry for 20+ years and uses that invaluable experience to prepare air quality and greenhouse gas, energy, health risk, and noise impact assessments to the satisfaction of CEQA and NEPA requirements. At a previous firm, Jason completed numerous (300+) environmental assessments, including traffic, throughout the San Joaquin Valley in addition to the successful creation of traffic signal and signal interconnect design drawings. Jason has completed impact assessments in Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Riverside, Stanislaus, San Joaquin, Sacramento, Tulare, and other Counties.
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
Education
California State University, Fresno 2000‐2005, Bachelor of Science in Engineering (Civil Engineering) Years of Experience
Twenty (20) Years; Seventeen (17) Years with VRPA Technologies, Inc. in Fresno, CA Computer Program Proficiency
Environmental Planning: CalEEMod, HARP, AermodView, TNM2.5 Traffic Operations: Synchro, HCS, LOSPLAN
Travel Demand Forecasting: Viper
Others: AutoCAD, MicroStation, CorelDraw, Microsoft Office
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Josan Development – Noise Impact Assessment / City of Selma Nebraska Truck Parking Development – Greenhouse Gas Assessment / Fresno County Nightpeak Matador BESS Development – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Imperial County West‐Shields Gas Station Development – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / City of Fresno Dairy Expansion Project – Air Quality Impact Assessment / Fresno County 76 Gas Station Development – Noise Impact and VMT Assessment / City of Fresno CV Alliance Event Center – Air Quality Impact Assessment / Fresno County Peach Avenue Starbucks Development – Air Quality Impact Assessment and Indirect Source Review Application / City of Fresno
Central Point III Industrial Development – Indirect Source Review Application / City of Visalia Waterfly Express Carwash Development – VMT‐Driveway Assessment / City of Indio C□ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1091
2 JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
Yosemite Commercial Development – Noise Impact Assessment / Madera County Sunny Market (Grocery Store) – Air Quality Impact Assessment / Fresno County H2B2 USA Solar Field – Air Quality Impact Assessment / Fresno County Gill Truck Parking Development – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Fresno County Evergreen Development – Energy Assessment / City of Lake Elsinore Rally’s Fast‐Food Restaurant – Noise Impact Assessment / City of Visalia Duplex Development – Noise Impact Assessment / City of Fresno Woodville Landfill Expansion – Noise Impact Assessment / Tulare County Kaiser Permanente Medical Office Building – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / City of Fresno Iron Ridge Development – Air Quality Impact Assessment / City of Visalia Avila Packing House – Air Quality and Health Risk Assessment / Stanislaus County Yosemite West Development – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Mariposa County Reedley Health Clinic Annexation Project – Air Quality Impact Assessment / City of Reedley Sessions Family Foundation Development – Air Quality Impact Assessment / City of Chowchilla Surf Ranch Development – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Kings County Miles Chemical Expansion – Air Quality and Health Risk Assessment / Madera County Lindsay Well Site Project – Air Quality Impact Assessment / City of Lindsay Deer Creek Rock Co. Expansion – Noise Impact Assessment / Tulare County Cutler‐Orosi Community Plan Update – Noise Impact Assessment / Tulare County Wastewater Facility Improvement Project – Air Quality Impact Assessment / Planada Community Services District
Portola Avenue & I‐10 Interchange Project – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Riverside County
Indian Canyon Road Widening – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Riverside County Running Horse Development – Noise Impact Assessment / City of Fresno Stonefield Development – Air Quality, Health Risk, and Noise Impact Assessment / City of McFarland UP Imperial County Transfer Facility – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Imperial County Hanford Downtown East Precise Plan – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / City of Hanford Golden State Corridor Development – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Fresno County Kern River Valley Specific Plan – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Kern County Fairfax Union School District – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Kern County North Fork Hotel and Casino – Noise Impact Assessment / Madera County Peach Avenue Road Widening – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / City of Fresno Grant Line Road Improvement Project – Noise Impact Assessment / City of Elk Grove Madera School – Noise Impact Assessment / City of Madera Zinkin’s Fresno 40 Development – Noise Impact Assessment Home Depot Development – Noise Impact Assessment / City of Visalia Fig Garden Corporation Center – Air Quality Impact Assessment / City of Fresno Gettysburg & Willow Multi‐Family Development – Noise Impact Assessment / City of Clovis Strathmore High School – Air Quality Impact Assessment / City of Strathmore Eastgate Estates – Air Quality Impact Assessment / Fresno County Avenue 13 & Raymond Road – Air Quality Impact Assessment / City of Madera Cal‐Kern III Development – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Kern County C □ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1092
3 JK Consulting Group, LLC
www.Jkconsultinggroupllc.com
Bond Road Improvement Project – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / City of Elk Grove West McFarland Annexation – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / City of McFarland Paladino and Morning Development – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Kern County San Joaquin Gardens Development – Noise Impact Assessment / City of Fresno Stallion Springs Development – Air Quality Impact Assessment / Kern County Tract 5558 Development – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / City of Fresno Baker Lawson Development – Air Quality Impact Assessment / Fresno County Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) 2015/2018 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Fresno County Madera County Transportation Commission (MCTC) 2015/2018 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) – Air Quality and Noise Impact Assessment / Madera County Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG) 2011 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) – Air Quality Impact Assessment / Tulare County C □ NSULTINEi EiR UP
LLC
1093
Name
Applicability
Author or updater Last Update
Facility: Sam's Club City of Visalia
Inputs
Project #:
ID#:
lb /hr lb/yr
Benzene
VOC Rate 6.43E-01 1.80E+03
71432 7.07E-03 4.55E-03 1.27E+01
Ethyl Benzene 100414 1.29E-02 8.30E-03 2.32E+01
Hexane 110543 1.86E-02 1.20E-02 3.35E+01
Naphthalene 91203 1.74E-03 1.12E-03 3.13E+00
Propylene (propene) 115071 1.22E-06 7.85E-07 2.20E-03
Toluene 108883 5.63E-02 3.62E-02 1.01E+02
Xylenes 1330207 6.59E-02 4.24E-02 1.19E+02
References:
Use this spreadsheet for liquid VOC emissions from gasoline dispensing operations' spillage processes. Entries required in yellow areas, output in gray areas.
Matthew Cegielski April 28, 2022
Winter/Summer) in CARB’s 2022
*These emission factors are from table 11, "Content of Gasoline for Substances with OEHHA Chronic Health Factor (Combined Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidanc e.
Gasoline Dispensing Operations VOC from Liquid
Substances CAS#
lbs/ liquid
vapor LB/HR LB/YR
Formula
Emissions are calculated by the multiplication of VOC
Rates and Emission Factors.
1094
ARCHAEOLOGICAL LETTER REPORT
IN CONSIDERATION
OF THE SWC VISALIA PARKWAY AND MOONEY BLVD.
DEVELPMENT PROJECT
SW ¼ of Section 7, T19 S, R 21E
Visalia 7.5
Presented to
Lars Andersen & Associates, Inc.”
Name: LARS ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Address: 4694 W JACQUELYN AVENUE, FRESNO, CA 93722
Phone: (559) 276-2790
Fax: (559) 276-0850
Representative: DANIEL J. ZOLDAK
by
August 2024
1095
1 6182 Carter Road
Mariposa Ca. 95338
(209) 966-3327
Cell (209) 769-1095
Fax (209) 966-6435
[email protected]
Culture Resource Survey and Archaeological Survey Report for a Proposed Sams Club, Visalia, California.
In partial fulfillment of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Culturescape has concluded a survey for historic resources on an undeveloped area of approximately 22.5 acres plotted in the SW ¼ of Section 7, T19 S, R 21E Visalia 7.5 Quadrangle 1990. Visalia, Tulare County, California (Appendix A: Maps)..
The results of this survey were Negative for any historic or prehistoric cultural materials.
The location is within a partially developed parcel that has infrastructure that includes electrical conduit for streetlights and sewer drains. The largest portion of the parcel has been used to stockpile and mix imported fill soils. There are several rows of soil that exceed 6 feet in height A second example of this is at the south side of the parcel where the parcel meets a developed parking lot. There are two large piles located near one of the access roads that appears to have been used recently. Other fill material includes discarded concrete sewer man ways and pipe (Appendix C: Photos)
The parcel had 85% surface visibility with 15% covered in tumble weed on the imported fill piles. The portion along Visalia Avenue has been impacted by road construction. and mechanized land alteration for strip mall development. The soil is for the majority, Tagus, 85% Hanford, 5% Tujunga, 5% all located as silt deposited on alluvial fans and flood plains.
The project area has a low potential for buried cultural materials, however, there is always the possibility that buried deposits may be located as a result of subsurface construction. If buried materials are encountered during construction, then work must stop in that area until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the find.
Part 1: Project Information
Project Size: Approximately 22.5 acres
Name of Landowner: Sams club
Legal Location: plotted on the SW ¼ of Section 7, T19 S, R 21E Visalia 7.5 Quadrangle 1990.
Tulare County, California (Appendix A: MAPS).
Project Description: Proposed Sams Club
Part 2: Archaeological Records Check Information
Date of Records Check 11/27/2023.
Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
Information Center File Number: 23-476
Summary of Records Check Results: The records search indicated that three previous studies have occurred within the project area, TU-01078, 01079, and 01080 with two more occurring within .5 miles, including TU-01085 and 01904. No sites were located within the project area. A description of these surveys and sites can be found in Appendix B: Records Search.
Records Check access agreement and Records Search Map are attached, Justification: No studies were available prior to survey.. *
1096
2 6182 Carter Road
Mariposa Ca. 95338
(209) 966-3327
Cell (209) 769-1095
Fax (209) 966-6435
[email protected]
Culture Resource Survey and Archaeological Survey Report for a Proposed Sams Club, Visalia, California.
Part 3: Native American Correspondence Information
A sacred lands search request was conducted on 10/26/2023. The NAHC returned an e-mail on 10/27/23 stating that information would be delayed by at least 4 weeks. No information has been received at the time of this report. This was carried out to solicit information and did not constitute formal consultation as provided by AB52 (Appendix C:Native American Correspondence).
Part 4: Pre-Field Research
The methodology included a records search conducted by the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center for the property owner and records that had close cultural affiliations.
Maps on file were included. The list of the National Register of Historic Places was consulted as was the California Register of Historic Resources, the California Inventory of Historic Resources (1976), the California Historical Landmarks (1996), and the California Points of Historical Interest listing (May 1992 and updates) and the Historic Property Data File (Office of Historic Preservation current computer list, dated 6/12/2006), the Survey of Surveys (1989), and other information pertinent to the project.
Part 5: Training and Experience of Archaeological Surveyors Name of current Archaeological Surveyor(s): M. C. Kile M.A. (Appendix E:Qualifications) Part 6: Survey Methods and Procedures
A survey was conducted within the project area and opportunistically where access allowed. method included a ten meter transects throughout the project area.
Time spent conducting archaeological field survey: 4 hours.
Date or dates the survey was conducted on November 16, 2023.
Survey coverage intensity: Intense: see above
Ground visibility/other limitations: The entire project is within a partially developed parcel that includes stockpiles of imported fill soils. This includes electrical infrastructure, sewer lines and a developed roads and parking areas. The area has very limited sensitivity.
Part 7: Survey Results
List and description of all sites found: No sites found within the site survey area.
Part 8: Evaluation of Significance
Preliminary determination of significance of listed sites (if required): N/A Part 9: Protection Measures
Specific enforceable protection measures: The current project does not threaten any resources.
Part 10: Implementation of Protection Measures
Discuss actions taken to carry out protection measures: None needed.
Part 11: Other Applicable Information
NA
*
1097
3 6182 Carter Road
Mariposa Ca. 95338
(209) 966-3327
Cell (209) 769-1095
Fax (209) 966-6435
[email protected]
Culture Resource Survey and Archaeological Survey Report for a Proposed Sams Club, Visalia, California.
Part 12: List of Appendices
(X ) A: Project Maps
(X ) B: Archaeological Records Search Results
( X) C: NAHC Correspondence
(X) D: Photos
(X) E: Qualifications
Part 13: Professional Review and Approval
Signature of Archaeologist_ ( Appendix D: Qualifications) Date Signed: December 2023 Printed name: M. C. Kile M.A.
Title: Owner,
Culturescape Location: 6182 Carter Rd Mariposa
*
1098
4 6182 Carter Road
Mariposa Ca. 95338
(209) 966-3327
Cell (209) 769-1095
Fax (209) 966-6435
[email protected]
Culture Resource Survey and Archaeological Survey Report for a Proposed Sams Club, Visalia, California.
APPENDIX A: MAPS
*
1099
5 6182 Carter Road
Mariposa Ca. 95338
(209) 966-3327
Cell (209) 769-1095
Fax (209) 966-6435
[email protected]
Culture Resource Survey and Archaeological Survey Report for a Proposed Sams Club, Visalia, California. *
Project Location
Proposed Sams Club
c::::J Sams Project Boundary
Visalia 7 .5 Quadrangle 1990.
Section 7, T19 S, R 21E
Visalia, Tulare County
20 acres
."'-
'f, ~\,----+---'-------'---r--"-~_~~-1
100
.____I Mil-e - -'
tap
1100
100
Miles
F
Project Location
Visalia 7.5 Quadrangle 1990.
Section 7, T19 S, R 21E
Visalia, Tulare County
18.75 acres
Proposed Sams Club
Survey Area
Project Location
0 125 250 500
Feet
D
1101
6 6182 Carter Road
Mariposa Ca. 95338
(209) 966-3327
Cell (209) 769-1095
Fax (209) 966-6435
[email protected]
Culture Resource Survey and Archaeological Survey Report for a Proposed Sams Club, Visalia, California.
APPENDIX B: RECORD SEARCH
*
1102
_________________________________________________________________________________________ California Historical Resources Information System
CHRIS Data Request Form
ACCESS AND USE AGREEMENT NO.:_______________ IC FILE NO.:________________________ To: ___________________________________________________________________ Information Center Print Name: ____________________________________________________ Date: _____________________ Affiliation: ________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________________________________________________________ City: _________________________________________ State: ________________ Zip: __________________ Phone: __________________ Fax: __________________ Email: ____________________________________ Billing Address (if different than above): _________________________________________________________ Billing Email: _______________________________________________ Billing Phone: ___________________ Project Name / Reference: ___________________________________________________________________ Project Street Address: ______________________________________________________________________ County or Counties: ________________________________________________________________________ Township/Range/UTMs: _____________________________________________________________________ USGS 7.5’ Quad(s): ________________________________________________________________________ PRIORITY RESPONSE (Additional Fee): yes / no
TOTAL FEE NOT TO EXCEED: $___________________________
(If blank, the Information Center will contact you if the fee is expected to exceed $1,000.00) Special Instructions:
Information Center Use Only
Date of CHRIS Data Provided for this Request: ___________________________________________________ Confidential Data Included in Response: yes / no
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________ 1 of 3
2-29-2020 Version
72.00 Southern San Joaquin Valley M. C. Kile 10/19/2023 Culturescape 6182 Carter Road Mariposa Ca 95338 (209) 966-3327 (209) 966-6435 [email protected] Sams Club Visalia Parkway and Mooney Blvd. Visalia Tulare SW ¼ of Section 7, T19 S, R 21E. Visalia ■ B
□ □
□
1103
California Historical Resources Information System
CHRIS Data Request Form
Mark the request form as needed. Attach a PDF of your project area (with the radius if applicable) mapped on a
7.5’ USGS topographic quadrangle to scale 1:24000 ratio 1:1 neither enlarged nor reduced and include a shapefile of your project area, if available. Shapefiles are the current CHRIS standard for submitting digital spatial data for your project area or radius. Check with the appropriate IC for current availability of digital data products.
• Documents will be provided in PDF format. Paper copies will only be provided if PDFs are not available at the time of the request or under specially arranged circumstances. • Location information will be provided as a digital map product (Custom Maps or GIS data) unless the area has not yet been digitized. In such circumstances, the IC may provide hand drawn maps. • In addition to the $150/hr. staff time fee, client will be charged the Custom Map fee when GIS is required to complete the request [e.g., a map printout or map image/PDF is requested and no GIS Data is requested, or an electronic product is requested (derived from GIS data) but no mapping is requested].
For product fees, see the CHRIS IC Fee Structure on the OHP website.
1. Map Format Choice:
Select One: Custom GIS Maps GIS Data Custom GIS Maps and GIS Data No Maps Any selection below left unmarked will be considered a "no. " Location Information:
Within project area Within ______ radius
ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Locations1 yes / no yes / no
NON-ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Locations yes / no yes / no Report Locations1 yes / no yes / no
“Other” Report Locations2 yes / no yes / no
3. Database Information:
(contact the IC for product examples, or visit the SSJVIC website for examples) Within project area Within radius ______ ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Database1 List (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Detail (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Excel Spreadsheet yes / no yes / no
NON-ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Database
List (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Detail (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Excel Spreadsheet yes / no yes / no
Report Database1
List (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Detail (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Excel Spreadsheet yes / no yes / no
Include “Other” Reports 2 yes / no yes / no
4. Document PDFs (paper copy only upon request):
Within project area Within radius ______
ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Records1 yes / no yes / no
NON-ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Records yes / no yes / no
Reports1 yes / no yes / no
“Other” Reports2 yes / no yes / no
2 of 3
2-29-2020 Version
1/4 ■ ■
■
1/4 mi. ■ ■
■
■ ■
1/4 mi. ■ ■
■ ■
■
mi.
1000
1104
California Historical Resources Information System
CHRIS Data Request Form
5. Eligibility Listings and Documentation:
Within project area Within radius ______
OHP Built Environment Resources Directory3:
Directory listing only (Excel format) yes / no yes / no Associated documentation4 yes / no yes / no
OHP Archaeological Resources Directory1,5:
Directory listing only (Excel format) yes / no yes / no Associated documentation4 yes / no yes / no
California Inventory of Historic Resources (1976):
Directory listing only (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Associated documentation4 yes / no yes / no
6. Additional Information:
The following sources of information may be available through the Information Center. However, several of these sources are now available on the OHP website and can be accessed directly. The Office of Historic Preservation makes no guarantees about the availability, completeness, or accuracy of the information provided through these sources. Indicate below if the Information Center should review and provide documentation (if available) of any of the following sources as part of this request.
Caltrans Bridge Survey yes / no
Ethnographic Information yes / no
Historical Literature yes / no
Historical Maps yes / no
Local Inventories yes / no
GLO and/or Rancho Plat Maps yes / no
Shipwreck Inventory yes / no
Soil Survey Maps yes / no
1 In order to receive archaeological information, requestor must meet qualifications as specified in Section III of the current version of the California Historical Resources Information System Information Center Rules of Operation Manual and be identified as an Authorized User or Conditional User under an active CHRIS Access and Use Agreement. 2 “Other” Reports GIS layer consists of report study areas for which the report content is almost entirely non-fieldwork related (e.g., local/regional history, or overview) and/or for which the presentation of the study area boundary may or may not add value to a record search.
3 Provided as Excel spreadsheets with no cost for the rows; the only cost for this component is IC staff time. Includes, but not limited to, information regarding National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, California State Historical Landmarks, California State Points of Historical Interest, and historic building surveys. Previously known as the HRI and then as the HPD, it is now known as the Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD). The Office of Historic Preservation compiles this documentation and it is the source of the official status codes for evaluated resources. 4 Associated documentation will vary by resource. Contact the IC for further details. 5 Provided as Excel spreadsheets with no cost for the rows; the only cost for this component is IC staff time. Previously known as the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, now it is known as the Archaeological Resources Directory (ARD).
The Office of Historic Preservation compiles this documentation and it is the source of the official status codes for evaluated resources.
3 of 3
2-29-2020 Version
1/4 mi.
■
■
■
■
■
B B 8 8
B B B B
8 B 8 8
1105
11/27/2023
M. C. Kile
Culturescape
6182 Carter Road
Mariposa, CA 95338
Re: Sams Club
Records Search File No.: 23-476
The Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center received your record search request for the project area referenced above, located on the Visalia USGS 7.5’ quad. The following reflects the results of the records search for the project area and the 0.25 mile radius:
As indicated on the data request form, the locations of archaeological resources and reports are provided in the following format: ☐ custom GIS maps ☐ GIS data
Archaeological resources within project area: None
Archaeological resources within 0.25 mile radius: None
Reports within project area: TU-01078, 01079, 01080
Reports within 0.25 mile radius: TU-01085, 01904
NOTE: Report location information was omitted per the CHRIS Data Request Form.
Resource Database Printout (list): ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Resource Database Printout (details): ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Resource Digital Database Records: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Database Printout (list): ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Database Printout (details): ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Digital Database Records: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Resource Record Copies: ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed ☐ not available Report Copies: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed ☐ not available Note:
OHP Built Environment Resources Directory: ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility: ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed CA Inventory of Historic Resources (1976): ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Note: P-15-007046 is not listed in the BERD. The 2013 HPD page was included for this resource.
California
Historical
R esources
Information
~ ys t e rn
Fresno
Kern
King s
Mader a
Tular e
Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
California State University, Bakersfield
Mail Stop: 72 DOB
9001 Stockdale Highway
Bakersfield, California 93311-1022
(661) 654-2289
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.csub.edu/ssjvic
1106
Caltrans Bridge Survey: Not available at SSJVIC; please see https://dot.ca.gov/programs/environmental-analysis/cultural-studies/california-historical-bridges-tunnels Ethnographic Information: Not available at SSJVIC
Historical Literature: Not available at SSJVIC
Historical Maps: Not available at SSJVIC; please see
http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/
Local Inventories: Not available at SSJVIC
GLO and/or Rancho Plat Maps: Not available at SSJVIC; please see http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/search/default.aspx#searchTabIndex=0&searchByTypeIndex=1 and/or http://www.oac.cdlib.org/view?docId=hb8489p15p;developer=local;style=oac4;doc.view=items Shipwreck Inventory: Not available at SSJVIC; please see https://www.slc.ca.gov/shipwrecks/
Soil Survey Maps: Not available at SSJVIC; please see
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx Please forward a copy of any resulting reports from this project to the office as soon as possible. Due to the sensitive nature of archaeological site location data, we ask that you do not include resource location maps and resource location descriptions in your report if the report is for public distribution. If you have any questions regarding the results presented herein, please contact the office at the phone number listed above.
The provision of CHRIS Data via this records search response does not in any way constitute public disclosure of records otherwise exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act or any other law, including, but not limited to, records related to archeological site information maintained by or on behalf of, or in the possession of, the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, State Historic Preservation Officer, Office of Historic Preservation, or the State Historical Resources Commission.
Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical resource reports and resource records that have been submitted to the Office of Historic Preservation are available via this records search. Additional information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical resource management work in the search area. Additionally, Native American tribes have historical resource information not in the CHRIS Inventory, and you should contact the California Native American Heritage Commission for information on local/regional tribal contacts.
Should you require any additional information for the above referenced project, reference the record search number listed above when making inquiries. Invoices for Information Center services will be sent under separate cover from the California State University, Bakersfield Accounting Office.
Thank you for using the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS).
Sincerely,
Celeste M. Thomson
Coordinator
-nium
1107
Report No.
Report List
Year Title Affiliation Author(s) Resources Other IDs
TU-01078
SSJVIC Record Search 23-476
2000
Visalia and Vicinity, Tulare County
Phase I Regional Retail Development, City of
South Packwood Creek Specific Plan and
Archaeological Evaluation Report for the
Inc.
Basin Research Associates, Busby, Colin I.
TU-01079 2001
Tulare County
Development, City of Visalia and Vicinity,
Plan and Phase I Regional Retail
Report - South Packwood Creek Specific
Supplement to Archaeological Evaluation Basin Research Associates Busby, Colin I.
TU-01080 2000
City of Visalia, Tulare County, California
Dairy Farm, 4004 South Mooney Boulevard,
Historic Evaluation Report for the Freitas
Associates, Inc.
Ward Hill / Basin Research Hill, Ward 54-003650
TU-01085 1999
Tulare County
State Route 63 Between Tulare and Visalia,
Rehabilitation and Intersection Upgrades on
Resource Evaluation Report for Roadbed
Historical Architectural Survey Report/Historic
Transportation, District 6
California Department of Dodd, Douglas W.
TU-01904 2021
California
Project, City of Visalia, Tulare County,
Marketplace Master Conditional Use Permit
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Oaks Taylored Archaeology Sauls, Consuelo Y.