Many factors will influence the design of the R-Tank°
system. While this list is not intended to be all-inclusive, the following design considerations are worth
highlighting:
1. PRE-TREATMENT
Removing pollutants from runoff before they enter
an underground detention system is the smart way to
design & build a system. Trash Guard Plus° (see page 6) is a great tool for this. Be sure the system you select will remove, heavy sediments, gross pollutants (trash) and
biodegradable debris.
2. BACKFILL MATERIALS
Backfill materials should be stone ( 1.75 is required when designing an R-Tank System using the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications. It is also necessary to run your own
loading model with specific site requirements. Example
models can be found in our Tech Note on loading
capabilities, and minimum cover requirements can be
found in the specs on the back of this brochure.
TOTAL COVER: 20" MINIMUM AND 84" MAXIMUM, FIRST 12" MUST BE NOTES:
FREE DRAINING BACKFILL (SPEC SECTION 2.03B): STONE <1.5' OR SOIL
1. FOR COMPLETE MODULE DATA, SEE APPROPRIATE R-TANKHD MODULE SHEET (USCS CLASS GW, GP, SW OR SP). ADDITIONAL FILL MAY BE
2, INSTALLATIONS PER THIS DETAIL MEET GUIDELINES OF HL-93 LOADING PER THE AASHTO LRFD STRUCTURAL FILL (SPEC SECTION 2.03C): STONE OR SOIL (USCS BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS, CUSTOMARY U.S. UNITS, 7TH EDITION, 2014 WITH 2O15 AND CLASS SM. SP, SW, GM, GP OR GW) WITH MAX CLAY CONTENT<10%, 2016 INTERIM REVISIONS.
MAX 25% PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE, AND MAX PLASTICITY INDEX OF 4.A 3, PRE-TREATMENT STRUCTURES NOT SHOWN.
MIN. 12" COVER MUST BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN BACKFILL
4. FOR INFILTRATION APPLICATIONS, GEOTEXTILE ENVELOPING R-TANK SHALL BE ACE M200 (PER EQUIPMENT AND THE TOP OF THE R-TANK'^' SYSTEM AT ALL TIMES.
SPEC SECTION 2.02A) AND BASE SHALL BE 4" MIN. UNCOMPACTED FREE DRAINING BACKFILL TOTAL HEIGHT OF TOP BACKFILL SHOULD NOT EXCEED 7'. CONTACT (SPEC SECTION 2.03A) TO PROVIDE A LEVEL BASE. SURFACE MUST BE SMOOTH, FREE OF LUMPS ACE ENVIRONMENTAL IF MORE THAN TOR LESS THAN 20" OF TOP OR DEBRIS, AND EXTEND 2' BEYOND R-TANKHD FOOTPRINT.
BACKFILL IS REQUIRED (FROM TOP OF TANK TO TOP OF PAVEMENT).
GEOGRID (ACF BX-12 OR EQUAL) PLACED 12" ABOVE THE R-TANKHD SYSTEM. OVERLAP ADJACENT PANELS BY 18" MIN. GEOGRID
SHOULD EXTEND S BEYOND THE EXCAVATION FOOTPRINT.
UTILITY
PAVED
SURFACE 36"(0.91 m)MIN. COVER FROM FINISH
NERS(SAT
CORNERS (TVP.)
GRADE TTOP OF TANK:
i� 20" (0.51 m) MIN.
i= II�
=11 mll�
12'(0,30
OPTIONAL
=11 11=1I111=1111=
III -II III -II '� OVERFLOW
PIPE
INLET PIPE
OPTIONAL
OUTLET
-III
-III
II -III
-III II III II- III-TI=111�11=III=1KI11=11
rlll=TrlII=III=III- -II III -II III- PIPE
MM
R-TANK- UNITS WRAPPED IN 8 OZ.
NONWOVEN GEOTEXTILE (OR EQUAL)
LOAD RATING: 33.4 PSI (MODULE ONLY)
SUBGRADE / EXCAVATION LINE: COMPACT PER
SPEC SECTION 3.02 D. A BEARING CAPACITY
OF 2,000 ESE MUST BE ACHIEVED PRIOR TO
INSTALLING R-TANKHD
24"(0.61 m)- \
BASE: 3" MIN. BEDDING MATERIAL (SPEC SECTION
2.03A) MAY BE STONE (<1.5') OR SOIL (USCS CLASS GW,
GP, SW OR SP). MUST BE FREE OF LUMPS AND DEBRIS,
AND EXTEND Z BEYOND R-TANKHD. COMPACT PER
SPEC SECTION 3.03 A. NATIVE SOILS MAYBE USED IF
THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SPEC SECTION
2.03A AND ARE ACCEPTED BY OWNER'S ENGINEER.
SIDE BACKFILL. 24" MIN. OF FREE DRAINING
BACKFILL (SPEC SECTION 2.03B): STONE <1.5"
OR SOIL (USCS CLASS GW, GP, SW OR SP),
MUST BE FREE FROM LUMPS, DEBRIS AND
OTHER SHARP OBJECTS. SPREAD EVENLY TO
PREVENT R-TANKHD MOVEMENT. COMPACT
SIDE BACKFILL WITH POWERED MECHANICAL
COMPACTOR IN 12" LIFTS (PER SPEC SECTION
3.05 A2).
4 U
ro
R-TANK MAINTENANCE
TECHNICAL
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Designing an underground stormwater detention system with future maintenance in mind is a simple process that includes three primary objectives: PREVENT debris from entering the system by using good pre-treatment systems, ISOLATE debris and sediments that manage to enter the system, and PROTECT the body of the system by providing backflush mechanisms to ensure longevity.
1.PREVENT
Keeping debris and sediment out of the system by pre -treating runoff is one of the smartest things an engineer can do when designing underground detention systems. It makes no sense to allow trash and sediments to flow unrestricted into an underground system where removal will be expensive. Instead, capture pollutants simply and inexpensively in the inlets, where removal is easy. There are several ways this can be accomplished with minimal cost impacts to your project.
Trash Guard Plus®
Trash Guard Plus is a patented stormwater pretreatment device that traps debris, sediment and floatables in the inlet. It helps extend maintenance cycles by using the full volume of the inlet structure for sediment capacity. And it is easy to maintain by accessing pollutants through the manhole lid.
Trash Guard Plus works by both screening debris out of the runoff and by slowing the flow of runoff, causing sediments to fall to the bottom of the inlet. Testing at NC State has shown the Trash Guard to be effective at removing trash, sediment, nutrients, and metals.
Gratemaster
To treat a single inlet that serves as ajunction for a larger drainage area, consider an insert like the Gratemaster. Ideal for capturing sediment and trash, it makes clean-up a snap by holding all the pollutants right near the surface for easy extraction.
Trash Guard Plus®
Gratemaster
R-TankScreening
For a more centralized approach, some engineers prefer to create an opening in the inlet structures to allow the R-Tank modules to penetrate the structure to act as a trash screen. This works best with a structure that includes a sump (see drawing below).
BACKFILL COMPACTED TO 11
Ef STRUCTURE TYPE AND
STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY �PAVEO SURFACE �TO BE DETERMINED BY ENGIP
:1►1►�1'11:11►1 I ai1:1►
2. ISOLATE
Some pollutants may elude the pre-treatment systems. Trap these materials inside the maintenance row (see drawing to right). Consolidating sediments in a single location makes them easy to remove. Maintenance rows are formed by using maintenance modules, which have open internal components that are fully accessible by conventional jet -vac systems. These modules are set in a row (or multiple rows) to your desired length. Longer maintenance rows should include an access structure on both ends. Extremely long rows may require access from the middle of the row, as well.
The maintenance row is always wrapped in geotextile independently from the rest of the system. The geotextile retains trash, sediments, and other solids, preventing contamination of the rest of the system.
The maintenance row should be sized to treat the first
flush (usually 1") of runoff. Use a bypass structure to divert that flow into the maintenance row, and allow
larger flows to continue to a downstream inlet where
they can enter the R-Tank outside of the maintenance
row.
The maintenance row is only available in LID, HD, and
UD modules. For SD and XD modules, consider
creating a forebay around the inlet locations to collect sediment. This is done by using a taller module
installed at a lower invert. Geotextile baffles between the forebay and the rest of the system can help retain
sediments. Concentrate Maintenance Ports
(see PROTECT below) in the forebay to ensure access
to sediment for removal.
3. PROTECT
Every good system has a fall -back plan. You can
ensure a long system life by including maintenance
ports throughout the system footprint to remove any
pollutants that evade the pretreatment system and
maintenance row. Maintenance ports should be
specified within 10' of inlet and outlet connections,
and roughly 50' on center (see maintenance port
detail to right).
TES e DARD
DE E-R v ar
.'=D1y.'.'�'Y2AR . �4 ER IS AT
SkEDUaRSHI-N)
E DEPTH SUMMARY
—NI
;ARC
5•
�EAI(IOIEENGIT-)
PiPINC-IIrvc i13.5'
"YAW.'",.��....�..
...... 444,44V
<.....
111111:111
LET'S GET IT DONE
800.448.3636
acfenvironmental.com
22018
8`
C(
PLANT PROVIDED B
TREE FIR
CAST II
3"
21"
SDR 35 OUTLET
FBI r" TVD
PLAN VIEW
SECTION A -A
NOTES:
1. TREATMENT FLOW CAPACITY OF 1.45 GPM/SF OF MEDIA SURFACE AREA IS
BASED ON WASHINGTON ECOLOGY GUILD APPROVAL FOR BASIC AND
PHOSPHOROUS
2. OTHER SIZES AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
3. INTERNAL PIPE CONFIGURATION MAY VARY DEPENDING UPON OUTLET LOCATION
4. ALTERNATE LAYOUT ORIENTATION AVAILABLE
'ER
M
v
CURB INLET DETAIL
FLOW -
EXTERNAL BYPASS CONFIGURATION
r----------------------
- I I
I I
I I
000 00�
I I
I I
J
OPTIONAL THROAT LOCATIONS
STANDARD HEIGHT CONFIGURATION
DESIGNATION
VAULT SIZE
TREATMENT FLOW
CAPACITY (GPM/CFS)
TREE GRATE
QTY & SIZE
OUTLET PIPE
DIA (SDR35)
[A]
[B]
SGT-0404
4'
4'
23.3 / 0.052
(1) 3' x 3'
4"
SGT-0406
4'
6'
34.8 / 0.078
(1) 3' x 3'
4"
SGT-0408
4'
8'
46.4 / 0.104
(1) 3' x 3'
4"
SGT-0410
4'
10'
58.0 / 0.130
(1) 3' x 3'
4"
SGT-0412
4'
12'
69.6 / 0.156
(2) 3' x 3'
4"
SGT-0606
6'
6'
52.2 / 0.117
(1) 3' x 3'
4"
SGT-0608
6'
8'
69.6 / 0.156
(1) 3' x 3'
4"
SGT-0610
6'
10'
87.0 / 0.195
(1) 3' x 3'
6"
SGT-0612
6'
12'
104.4 / 0.234
(2) 3' x 3'
6"
SGT-0713
7'
13'
132.0 / 0.295
(2) 3' x 3'
6"
SGT-0816
8'
16'
185.6 / 0.425
(2) 3' x 3'
6"
STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS:
--PRECAST CONCRETE MINIMUM (28-DAY) STRENGTH 5000 PSI.
--REINFORCING BARS CONFORMING TO ASTM A 615 (FY=60 KSI). --DESIGN LOAD: AASHTO HS-20
—STRUCTURE DESIGN TO MEET ACI 318
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
—CONTRACTOR TO GROUT WITH NON -SHRINK GROUT (MINIMUM 3,000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH) BENEATH TOP SLAB TO MATCH FINISHED GRADES.
BYPASS INLET
Storm -. den
HIGH RATE BIOFILTER
Maintenance Procedures
Maintaining the StormGarden system is necessary to continue the effective pollutant removal from stormwater runoff prior to discharge into the stormdarin system. Ongoing maintenance will also extend the life of the filter media and the StormGarden system. As the StormGarden filters stormwater runoff, pollutants accumulate within the filter media and floating debris such as silt, trash and leaves accumulate on top of the media underneath the concrete slab. When an excessive amount of silt and trash build up on top of the media, the flow -through rate of the media is reduced, thus decreasing the capacity of the system. Regular replacement of the top mulch layer helps stop the accumulation of such sediment and debris and maintaining the overall performance of the system.
The manufacturer or manufacturer's representative includes a 1-year maintenance plan with each StormGarden purchase. The included maintenance plan consists of a maximum of 2 scheduled visits. If additional visits are required due to excessive sediment and trash loading, they can be performed by the manufacturer/representative for an additional charge. The start of the maintenance plan begins when the system is activated for full operation. Full operation is defined as the unit installed, curb and gutter and transitions in place, and the unit activated by installation contractor, which includes the mulch and plant installed and the temporary throat protection removed.
Activation cannot occur until the site is fully stabilized, which means full landscaping, grass cover, final paving and sweeping is complete. Maintenance visits are scheduled seasonally. The spring visit cleans up after winter loads which include salts and sands, and the fall visit is to remove excessive leaves and debris.
It is the responsibility of the owner to provide adequate irrigation when necessary to the plant of the StormGarden system. Cleanup due to major contamination such as oils, chemicals, toxic spills, etc. will result in additional costs and are not covered under the 1- year maintenance plan provided by manufacturer/representative. Should a major contamination event occur, the owner must block off the outlet pipe to the StormGarden unit (where the cleaned runoff drains to from the StormGarden, such as the bypass inlet) and block off the throat of the StormGarden. All appropriate regulatory parties as well as the manufacturer/representative should be informed immediately.
Each maintenance visit consists of the following tasks:
• Visual inspection of StormGarden unit and surrounding area • Removal of tree grate and erosion control stones
• Removal of sediment, trash, debris and mulch
• Mulch replacement
• Clean and replace erosion control stones
• Evaluation of plant and pruning or replacement if necessary • Clean area around StormGarden unit
• Maintenance report
rotondo-es.com
StormGarden Maintenance Checklist
System
Problem
Conditions to Check
Condition that Should Exist
Actions
Component
Inlet should be free of
Excessive sediment
Accumulated sediments or trash
obstructions allowing free
Sediment and/or trash
Inlet/Forebay
or trash
impair free flow of water into
distributed flow of water into
should be removed.
Area
accumulation.
StormGarden.
StormGarden.
Trash and floatable debris
Excessive trash and/or debris
Minimal trash or other debrison
Trash and debris should be removed,
Mulch Cover
accumulation.
accumulation.
mulch cover.
and mulch cover rakedlevel.
"Ponding" could indicate
clogging due to excessive fine
Stormwater should drain freely
Replace mulch and/or media as
Mulch/Media
"Ponding" of water
sediment loading or spill of
and evenly through system
necessary.
petroleum oils.
"Ponding" could indicate the
Flush the underdrain piping using the
Underdrain
Not draining/ponding of
drain rock or perforated piping
Stormwater should drain freely and
cleanout provided. Worse case
water above
is clogged.
evenly through system
scenario is you replace all internal
components if terminally failed.
Soil/mulch too wet, evidence ofspill.
Replant with plants suitable to for system.
Vegetation
Plants not growing or
Incorrect plant selection. Pest
Plants should be healthy
Contact qualified landscape professional
in poor condition.
infestation. Vandalism to plants.
and pest free.
or arborist.
Plant growth
g
Plants should be appropriate to the
Plants should not be overgrown or
Trim/prune plants in accordance with
typical landscaping and safety
Vegetation
g
excessive.
re ion/climate of the site.
g
be excessive for the system.
y
needs.
Structure
Structure has visible
Cracks wider than 1/2 inch
Vault should be repaired.
cracks.
Maintenance frequency will depend on site specific characteristics and will generally need to occur 1-2 times per year StormGarden Inspection & Maintenance Log
StormGarden System Size/Model: Location:
Date
Mulch &
Debris
Removed
Depth of
Mulch
Added
Mulch
Brand
Height of
Vegetation
Above
Grate
Vegetation
Species
Issues with
System
Comments
StormGarden Activation Checklist
Project Name: Company:
Site Contact Name: Site Contact Phone/Email:
Site Owner/End User Name: Site Owner/End User Phone/Email:
Final Pavement
Landscaping
Construction
Throat
Site
System Size
/Top Coat
Complete/
materials /
Opening
Plant Species
Designation
Complete
Soil Stabilized
Piles / Debris
Measures
Requested
Removed
According to
Plan
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ Y
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
❑ N
APN 166-280-18, 166-280-60, 166-280-61
ATTACHMENT 4 - REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION PLANS
Section 8.2.2 of the BMP Design Manual identifies minimum requirements for storm drain construction plan sheets. Use this checklist to ensure project construction plans submitted for review include necessary information for storm drain improvements. Construction plans must include the following:
❑X All items identified in Section 8.2.2 of the BMP Design Manual.
LEGEND
ITEM
SYMBOL ABBREVIATIONS
PROJECT BOUNDARY
AB
AGGREGATE BASE
IE
LOT LINE
AC
ASPHALT CONCRETE
MH
ADA
AMERICAN WITH DISABILITIES
ACT MIN
EASEMENT LINE
- - - - -
BFD
BACKFLOW DEVICE
PA
BUILDING SETBACK LINE
- -
BLDG
BUILDING
PIL
B$
BOTTOM OF STAIRS
POC
CENTERLINE
-
BW
BOTTOM OF WALL
POT
CB
CATCH BASIN
PP
EXISTING CITY BOUNDARY
ti O O
CF
CURB FACE
PROP
CO
C
RAN
EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL
OE
CONIC
COONCRETENCRETE
SCO
EXISTING WATERLINE
W -
DEMO
DEMOLITION
SD
D$
DOWNSPOUT
SDCO
EXISTING SEWER MAIN
S
ELEC
ELECTRICAL
SDMH
EX
EXISTING
SL
EXISTING GAS LINE
G
FF
FINISH FLOOR
SMH
FG
FINISHED GRADE
TC
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
= =
FL
FLOW LINE
TFW
7 FM
FORCE MAI N
TG
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
,�,
�'�j
FS
FINISHED SURFACE
TRW
GB
GRADE BREAK
TW
EXISTING FENCE
X
GFF
GARAGE FINISH FLOOR
TYP
DAYLIGHT LINE
w w
HP
HIGH POINT
WAR
CUT/FILL LINE
HT
HEIGHT
WM
WV
FINISHED GROUND CONTOUR
----440-
EXISTING GROUND CONTOUR
-----440--
PROPOSED CUTIFILL SLOPE
:::y 2:1
TOP/TOE GRADING LINE
-
RETAINING WALL (PER SEPARATE PERMIT)
EXISTING SPOT ELEV.
(400,50) FG
FUTURE SPOT ELEVATIONS
400.50 FG
PROPOSED V CURB & GUTTER
PROPOSED 6" ROLLED CURB & GUTTER
PROPOSED STREET LIGHT
E-0
PROPOSED STORM DRAIN
ED -
I
PROPOSED CURB INLET
El=
G
PROPOSED STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT
a O
e
PROPOSED MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM
PROPOSED RTANK
PROPOSED CURB OUTLET
PROPOSED PUBLIC SEWER MAIN
S -
PROPOSED PUBLIC SEWER MANHOLE
O
0 100
PROPOSED PUBLIC WATER MAIN
W
SCAI
PROPOSED BROW DITCH
EX.
EX.
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
INVERT ELEVATION MELROSEMANHOLE & M ATAG U A L
MINIMUM
PLANTER AREA
PROPERTY LINE
POINT OF CONNECTION 1
PATH OF TRAVEL PROPERTY BNDY _
POWER POLE �-- EX
PROPOSED PM 18463 APN 166
RIGHT-OF-WAY
E
SEWER DRAIN CLEANOUT 1PN 166-150 67 J,I
STORM DRAIN
STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE - _ r -� 21 1 I API
STREETLIGHT �r �y i3 x I 33 all I L\
SEWER MANHOLE iti11 5 y I
TOP OF CURB
TOP OF FREE STANDING WALL II 'i 11 - REET
TOP OF GRATE �Ii 1 II A 1� RIVATE �_ , 32 t
TOP OF RETAINING WALL
TOP OF WALL PM 21324-r- w
TYPICAL 1 II �� `'r - 1 29 30 L
APN. 166-150-97 I 7 1 28 � 4 1
WATER METER EASE 1 I
AIR i e
i
WATER METER
WATER VALVE,-
-- POR LOT 18 1 '�
r 1r �1 r MAP 2131 1 X
IL 1r s z5 24 r23 r22� APN: 166-280-03 1
d
E%. PROPERTY -- --
BNDY
ULT MATE RIW10
EX. RNdn` ` l
66 111 1 91 POR LOT 18 I
APN M
I l 1 11 B 1A MAP 2131
l L11 12` 13 14 ��£ it APN'. 166-280-04
�'� C r I
1 POP
LOT 19 1 J 120
1 ; MAP12131 1
- -- -- T 19
APN: 166-280-22
1 POR
AP LOT PR/
M238 79
APN 18E260-23 15 - i
1 T*---_ -- �- 17
i 1 --- PM 475 PROP.
Z
1 1 APN: 166-280-40
1 1 T
PN
I PM 475 � � T APN:1
1 I P APN: 168-ON LOT
280:34 �� PMAP 11319 /
I 7 APN_ 1fi6 280-33
1 200 PM 8977
APN: 1fifi-fi81
1nm
W/ GLASS RAILING ON TOP
SECTION A -A
HORIZ. SCALE: V=30'
VERT. SCALE: V=20'
P/L
PIL
EX.
65.00' PUBLIC UTILITY I
PIL PIL
EASEMENT P/L
PIL
6.00'
53.00' PRIVATE STREET 6.00'
E%.PROP.BNDY
HOA I
EASEMENT HOA
EX. RM PROP. R/W I
I
�
5ww I
I I I
I
DEDIC. I
I
I I
LOT 22
S. MELROSE
I
LOT PAD=363.00
LOT23.00
DRIVE
I I I I
LOT 24
P
I I
LOT 5
PAD=356.50
_
0 I 5% LOT9 I
PAD=31.50=
5% MIN.
5% MIN. 5' MAX WALL
344.24 TC PAD=348.00 2% J-
-7..0v- 2.0%
5'MAX WALL 5% MIN.
VARIES 343.74 FL
/
%MIN.
5% MIN.
EX. GRADE
5' MAX WALL
-
5% MIN.
5% MIN,
2:1 SLOPE
T RETAINING WALL, 3' FREESTANDING WALL (6' MAX COMBINED HEIGHT) 5' MAX WALL
W/TGLASS RAILING ON TOP
SECTION B-B
HORIZ. SCALE: V=30'
VERT. SCALE: 1"=20'
E%.RAN PROP. RIW
V RAN
ph � DEDIC.
3' GLASS RAILING
LOT 20
LOT Y FREE STANDING WALL
APN: 166-280-03 1 PA0 39350 1 339.65 BW
1 PROR SURFACE
:362.1 FG 1 VA EX. SURFACE
F
�. z380.3 FG PROP GRADE 339.E
21 MAx SLOPE EX. GRADE 3'RETAINING WALL
5' MAx WALL 339.0 FL
;ONC. DITCH EX. WALL
MIN.
SECTION C-C SECTION D-D
HORIZ. SCALE: V=30' HORIZ. SCALE: V=30'
VERT. SCALE: V=20' VERT. SCALE: V=20'
PASCO LARET SUITER BUBMIT"`"DNHER MYzpzR
& ASSOCIATES
San Diego I Encinitas I Orange County
Phone 949.661.66951 www.pisaengineering.com
OWNER/SUBDIVIDER
WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT WE ARE THE RECORD OWNERS
OF THE PROPERTY SHOWN ON THIS TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION
MAP AND THAT SAID MAP SHOWS OUR ENTIRE CONTIGUOUS
OWNERSHIP (EXCLUDING SUBDIVISION LOTS). WE
UNDERSTAND THAT PROPERTY IS CONSIDERED
CONTIGUOUS EVEN IF IT IS SEPARATED BY ROADS, STREETS,
UTILITY EASEMENTS OR RAILROADS RIGHTS -OF -WAY.
OWNER/SUBDIVIDER
TTLC VISTA MELROSE, LLC
CONTACT: GORDON JONES
4350 VON KARMAN AVENUE
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
ADONJONNES&
CAI!]IAII=CD OC IAIODW
Ell
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PARCEL 1: (APN: 166-280-60-00 & 166-280-61-00)
PARCELS AAND B, OF PARCEL MAP NO, 18360, IN THE CITY OF VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DI EGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 22, 1999 AS FILE NO. 1999-710328.
PARCEL 2: (APN: 166-280.18-00)
LOT 19 OF ORLEAVO HEIGHTS UNIT NO. 15, IN THE CITY OF VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 2131, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1928.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DEVELOP A 34-UNIT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SMALL LOT
SUBDIVISION
AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY
AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY PHOTO GEODETIC CORP.
SUPPLIED BY: 2806 ALPHINE BLVD., SUITE C
ALPINE, CA 91901
619-637-1366
�yOFESS/pA,-
PN' J BGA
FLOWN ON 7-7-2021
1 No RCE 68964 A
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER
xP. 12 31 23
s Civil O2s
T9�
166-280-18, 166-280-60,166-280-61
of CAVE
TAX RATE AREA: 012236
GENERAL NOTES:
1. APN:166-280-18,166-280-60,166-280-61
2. GROSS ACREAGE: 5.55 AC
3. NET ACREAGE: 3.91 AC
4. NUMBER OF LOTS: 37 (34 RESIDENTIAL, 2 HOA/PARKS, 1 PRIVATE STREET) 5, NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS: 34
6, EXISTING ZONING: 0-P (OFFICE PROFESSIONAL), R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) PROPOSED ZONING: R-1-13 RESIDENTIAL
7. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN: CO (COMMERCIAL OFFICE), MILD- MEDIUM LOW DENSITY 5 DUTAC)
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN: MD - MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (10 DUTAC)
8. FINISH GRADES SHOWN HEREON ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE IN FINAL DESIGN.
9. PROPOSED DENSITY: 6.1 DU/AC (FROM NET ACREAGE)
10. CUT AND FILL SLOPES NO STEEPER THAN 2:1
11. PUBLIC SERVICES AND DISTRICTS:
GAS & ELECTRIC: SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC
TELEPHONE: AT&T
WATER: VISTA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SEWER: CITY OF VISTA
FIRE DISTRICT: CITY OF VISTA
SCHOOL DISTRICT: VISTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
12. NO SPECIAL DISTRICTS ARE PROPOSED
13. PROPOSED SETBACK: FRONT YARD = MIN. 20TO GARAGE, MIN. 1O TO
RESIDENTIAL
SIDE YARD = MINIMUM 5'
REAR YARD= MINIMUM 10'
14. SEE STORM WATER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED BY:
PA CO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES DATED: MAY 2022
15. SEE PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY PREPARED BY:
PA CO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES DATED: MAY 2022
16. SEE GEOTECHNICAL AND INFILTRATION EVALUATION PREPARED BY:
GEOTEK, INC DATED: AUGUST 3, 2021 (PROJECT NO.3706-SD)
17. PROPOSED STREET LIGHTS WILL BE PER CITY STANDARDS
EARTHWORK QUANTITIES
CUT: 16,000 CY
FILL: 10,000 CY
NET (EXPORT): 6,000 CY
THE ABOVE RAW EARTHWORK QUANTITIES ARE ESTIMATES ONLY.
CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT RELY UPON QUANTITIES FOR BID PURPOSES.
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EARTHWORK QUANTITIES TO THEIR SATISFACTION PRIOR TO START OF WORK.
NOTE: QUANTITIES DO NOT INCLUDE ANY EARTHWORK FOR REMEDIAL PURPOSES. EARTHWORK ESTIMATES ARE BASED ON IN PLACE VOLUMES AN
DO NOT ACCOUNT FORANY SHRINKAGE OR SWELL OF THE SOIL THAT MAY OCCUR DURING GRADING.
SHEETINDEX
SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION
16 CIVIL TITLE SHEET
17 REZONING PLAN
18 SLOPE ANALYSIS
19 DETAIL & SECTIONS
20 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
21 PRELIMINARY RETAINING WALL PLAN
22 EXISTING MAP
23 PROPOSED MAP
24 BMP SITE PLAN
SAVE GATE: 11I210- PLOT DATE:--- FILE NAME: J:WCTIVE JOBSOOM MELROSE AND MATAGUMUCIVIUDRAWINODISCRETIONARY PLANSITENTATIVE MAPAYd4-TM TBLOCKAw CIVIL TITLE SHEET 16
PM 18463 I
APN: 166-150-67 I
A-
1,1
PM 20141
APN: 16.6-150-89
I
I
I I, ,R9512156
I II 41N, 166-250.21
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
MELROSE & MATAGUAL
PM 18360./
APN. 166-280-61
EXISTING ZONING: 0-P (OFFIALV
PROPOSEDZ©NING'. R-1-11(RESIDENTIAL)',
EXISTING GENERALPLAN: COICOMMERCIALOgFPEY
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN: MO (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIA/Lri / /
a N
PM16Aoo I l r /� / / ///
I/--APN':168=280-SOJ �t kip/ // // ///r / \/� ,®/ ® MAP 213l EXIONIIZ;lNNjGZNG 0 (RF1IB (RESIDFESDENSAOLI A4 /, � / _� AIN. 1�-28U-03 PROPOS
I vzjI, EXISTING GENERAL PLA :CO (COMINE:;RCIAL OFFICE) S I // / // / / rll 11yy,y�'+•- / // // X I /P/ROPOSED GENERAL PLAN. M (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENT L) (
/ /
P LOT
I
___--� MAP 2137
I f---r APN: 1Q8-280
/ X\
/---------------------,
PORL0T19�,
MR
A 168280-22
POR LOT 19
MAP 2131
�ORILQT ti9 APN 16628018
/§XI9TIN6Z0NING: R-1 (SINGLE-FAMILY REST[
�I III MA1PROPOSED ZONING R18(RESIDENTIR
I I APN 16B-T 612 I / / / EY11SIMINJG'GENERAL PLAN: MLD (MEDIUM LOW DENSII l \ I I I III I)— /PR9POJ E15,PENERAL PLAN: MD (MEDIUM DENSITY �I ;
//N89'25'32"NI
I f �
/
I
---APN: 166-28040---- PM 475
I rr
I I II I T S fT .16fi- 0 1, // �.... FOR LOT 191 .L j �III�'r PM
1 1_ 1 ), / //" MAP 2131//////
( , IN: 166-280.39 — — J La/ / / / / �r APN= 166-280 33 Al
qS
IV
LEGEND
ITEM
PROJECT BOUNDARY
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 6-280-61
TAX RATE AREA: 012236
ENGINEER OF WORK
DRAFT
WILLIAM J. SUITER RCE 68964
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
�FEssI�,
J. y�GI
w 3
� No. RCE 68964
XP. 12-31-23
OF CAUF�
PARCEL 1: (APN: 166-280.60.00 & 166-280-61.00)
PARCELS A AND B, OF PARCEL MAP NO, 18360, IN THE CITY OF VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 22, 1999 AS FILE NO. 1999-710328.
PARCEL 2: (APN: 166-280-18-00)
LOT 19 OF ORLEAVO HEIGHTS UNIT NO. 15, IN THE CITY OF VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 2131, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1928.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DEVELOP A 34-UNIT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SMALL LOT
AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY
AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY PHOTO GEODETIC CORP.
SUPPLIED BY: 2806 ALPHINE BLVD., SUITE C
ALPINE, CA 91901
619-637.1366
FLOWN ON 7-7-2021
!'_CAICDAI AInTCC-
SYMBOL
\ 1. APN:i66-280-10, 166-280-60, i66-280-61
\ 2. TOTAL ACREAGE: 5.55 AC.
\
\ 3. EXISTING ZONING: O-P (OFFICE PROFESSIONAL), R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) \ PROPOSED ZONING: R-1-13 RESIDENTIAL
\ 4. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN: CO (COMMERCIAL OFFICE), MILD - MEDIUM LOW DENSITY 5 CLANG)
S PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN: MD - MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (10 DUTAC)
PASCO LARET SUITER
& ASSOCIATES
San Diego I Encinitas I Orange County
Phone 949.661.66951 www.pisaengineering.com
SAVE DATE: 11I210- PLOT DATE:--- FILE NAME: J:WCTIVE JOBS13684 MELROSE AND MATAGUALICIVILIORAWINODISCRETIONARY PLANSITENTATIVE MAPAYd4-TM TBLOCKAw REZONING PLAN 17
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
MELROSE & MATAGUAL
PM18463 I I / II I % )III 4P 66-250-21 ( �— _ / 1—/-�/� A E APN: 166.150-87mow= — _► / / / CAE O
a ,
_ __-_----------- I - / qp> , , — Ir R / I I ; LOT 17
MAP 2131
APN: 188-280-06
/
_ v
D=86'32'05'(
R=25.00' /
21324
AP 66-150-
MAP 213
IIf I I I— APN: 16E-28
PM70141
APN: 1U-150�9
AF
e 5,
�6
-- --`� -22
0�23'
i
I 11 PM 475 i I _ / N 89'25 32" APN: 166-28040 L /41.51' I II f� .166- 0 1./ 'LIT 191/> / \ �I)III/
PM475 I I ( > / // Cj / A21�1y//
APN: 166-280-39 La/ / / / / PN: 8418,0-
IV
r1-1 \ I
LOT 18 A�
/ a�/—�
(82i/ ���
ENGINEER OF WORK
DRAFT
WILLIAM J. SUITER RCE 68964
AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY
AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY PHOTO GEODETIC CORP.
SUPPLIED BY: 2806 ALPHINE BLVD., SUITE C
ALPINE, CA 91901
619-637-1366
FLOWN ON 7-7-2021
0FESSI-
w 3 p
� No. RCE 68964 A
XP. 12-31-23
srgT Ci 11 p23
f OF CAUL
SLOPE
ANALYIS TABLE
SLOPE RANGE
(MIN -MAX)
AREA (AC)
PERCENTAGE
OF SITE
COLOR
LEGEND
0%-5%
1.82 34.4%
❑
5%-10%
1.84 34.7%
■
10%-15%
0.43 8.2%
15%-25%
0.92 17.0%
25%+
0.34 5.7%
\
\
04 \
0 5o 100 15C
SCALE: 1' = 50'
PASCO LARET SUITER
San Diego I Encinitas I Orange County
Phone 949.661.66951 www.pisaengineering.com
SAVE DATE: 11I 10- PLOT OATS:--- FILE NAME: J:WCTIVE JOBS13664 MELROSE AND MATAGUA-101VILIORAWINODISCRETIONARY PLANSITEN—VE MAPAYd4-TM TBLOCKAw SLOPE ANALYSIS 18
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
MELROSE & MATAGUAL
R R
65' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT (P.U.E.)
6.0' 5T PRIVATE ROAD EASEMENT 6.0'
HOA I HOA
10.5' 42'
CIL
9'PARKING 12' 12' 9'PARKING
I PKWVJI' I SWLK SWLK I PKWY I
I I
I2%MAX �% I 2% 2%MAX
PROP. 5' WIDE SIDEWALK PER SDRSD / PROP. AC PAVEMENT SECTION ` PROP. 5' WIDE SIDEWALK PER SDRSD G-7 OVER 6' CLASS 2 BASE J/ MINIMUM 3" AC OVER 8' CLASS 2 G-7 OVER 6" CLASS 2 BASE PROP. 6' CURB & GUTTER BASE (PER SOILS ENGINEER PROP. 6- CURB & GUTTER PER SDRSD G-2 RECOMMENDATION) PER SDRSD G-2
TYPICAL SECTION - PRIVATE STREET A
SCALE: NTS
EX. PROPERTY PROJECT EX.
RIW BNDY BNDY RMJ
(60')
(5') (50') (5.0')
PROJECT
(20') CIL SITE
20' 10, I I
(t 11.5') (t 8.5') 5.5' 4.5'
12' mo
z SWLK PKWY SVpQ�
EX. GROUND CROWNLINE
o w
m
VARIES
— — _
�3 am
VARIES ti 2%
w o
m 2%M 11
U �—
w
2.X
s www.pisaengineering.com
m88�®0
m80�®0
m80�®0
�80�®
RUN=
:M-i>aoNn OmwM Nm rB.
,
mau.lwWv xmo rs mPmssK sP.-
r Rra to uNTm BMaNB muLa
.SYO�II
I YNIUAL 5 I UKMUAKULN Ut I AIL
SCALE: NTS
NOTES,
DRAINING BACI(FILL(SPEC SECTION 203S): STONE<1.S OR SOIL 1. FORCOMPLETEMOUILE MTA,SEEAPPROPRIATER-TANKAMODULESHEET. (USCSCLASSGWGP, SWORSP).—TIONALFILLMAYBE 2. INSTALLATIONS PER THIS DETAIL MEET GUIDELINES OF IL G LOADING PER THE AASHTO LRFD STRUCTURAL FILL (SPEC SECTION 2mC): STONE OR SOIL(USC9 BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS, CUSTOMARY U.S. UNITS, 7TH EDITION, 2014 WITH 2O15 AND ,SP,SW. ON. GP OR GW) WITH MAX CLAY CONTENT<10%, — NTERIM REVISIONS. 2259M
5%PASSING N� SI-EMUST BE AND
MN P STICITWEINDEX
C FlA 3. PRETREATMENT STRUCTURES NOT SHOWN,
UIPMEIN I2 ETOPOFTBE R-k—NEYSTEMAEN BACMES. FOR INFILTRATION NPPUGIONS, MOTEMILE ENVELOPING R-TANK SHALL BE ACF M2m(PER
6. SPEC SECTION 2.02A) AND BASE SHALL BE C MIN. UNCOMPACTED FREE DRAINING BACKFILL AL HEIGHT GFTOP BACKFILL SHOULD NOT EXCEED T. CONTACT (SPEC SECTION 2ASA) TO PROVIDE A LEVEL WE. SURFACE MUST BE SMOOTH, FREE OF LUMPS 1CF ENVIRONMENTAL IF MORE THAN T OR LESS THAN 20' OF TOP OR DEBRI% AND EMEND T BEYOND R-TAHK FOOTPRINT. :KFILL IS REWIRED (FROM TOP OF TANK TO TOP OF PAVEMENT).
GEOGRID ACE 1 -12 OR ECUALI RACED I ABOVE THE ft-TANMP
EE
ELS BY
RID
SHOULD BMEND S' BEYONDTXE E%GVATION FOOTPRINI
U1ILNYMMKERSAT PAVED �y(0 B1 m)MIN. COVER FROM FINISH
WRERSR PI BDRFADE r / , GRADETGTOPOFTAN I
20' (O.St m) MIN.
I2"(0.30 m1 f .
OPH—
PIPE
II
II — - / OVERFLOW
wIET PIPE
I III I"T FI
OPTILINAL
L.OUT ET
7(OOBm)MIN = �� T = III -� PI
11 PE
yDs1 ml
IN
R-TOVEN UNITS WRAP BO2.
L
NON
ONLY)
LOAD RAING: 33�PSI(MODULE ONLY)
MATERIAL fCSECTION ILAS
2034)MAY BE STONE (e1.5.1 OR SOIL (USCS ClAS3
VGA) MAY
SIDEBILL(SPECSECTION FREE DRAINING
GW, BACKFILL (SPEC SECTION 2.mBk STONE c1.5'
SUBGRADEIEXCAVATION LINE: COMPACT PER
SPEC SECTION 3.02 D. A BEARING CAPACITY
GPOSW ORS TE"lZI. MUST BE FREE OF LUMPS AND DEBRIS,
E. SECTONSm0. NAIVEEYOND I Na "'BEUSED
ORSOILE(USCS CLASS OW. GP, SW OR 3P).
I OTIER FREE FRECTS.OM P%DEBRISAND
OTXER SKARP OBJECTS. SPREAD EVENLY TO
OF 2,000 PSF MUST BE ACHIEVED PRIOR TO
INSTALLING R-TANK'^
THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SPEC S—I0NF
03A AND ARE ACCEPTED BY OWNERS ENGINEER.
PREVENT R-TANKro MOVEMEM.COMPACT
SIDE BACKFILL WTTH POWERED MECHANICAL
COMPACTOR IN 1T LIM (PER SPEC SECTION
TYPICAL R-TANK DETAIL
3.—).
SCALE: NTS
SAVE DATE: 11G1122- PLOT DATE:--- FILE NAME: J:WCTIVE JOBSMP MELROSE AND MATAGUALICIVILIDRNNINODISCRETIONARY PLANSITENTATIVE MAPLYdN-TMTBLOCKAAg DETAILS & SECTIONS 19
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
MELROSE & MATAGUAL
OH a^ VCP S PER Ao3wOD 838-58
L—I I 4 TCI MP OP TREA" /� L UI `I VP TM GONNEC`INE PROP. CURB Out PE % ` pTERDI
PM 18483 I .� A PROE exP 8 RCP SD PEWOD 1895 W _ o W 55. FG OE RA U
w _
APN 166-150-67 1 EX. B' ASP W 30.99 FL SWELL 0 " BIAW - - O I — L.�. : 33T PR
I 329.1 IE qg INLET -.. o W
EXA ACE NPER � b. 24"RCP � N w `, ggpR=CU-----t15g418)RIM � W _ ;,DRIVEWAY TO REMAIN r; 0 LSD LAT—
±.0 IF
W � m
Q. S H #5+(554.04'�jE(33 M �qp en „•-yt - �, 5Ao' ��� T34 $I MAP 2131 I LETn - 2 RI ,,,yyy,,, rn
W FH / S szxs PPD
RELOCATR E711E � W RE TE EX. �� 1 $ I j661 S� =11I I� , APN: ifi6-280-Ofi �- X. TRAF - Y 2 6959 PSD
�S,I�PIAL-POSES
S"" - ���;44�ttNN--E--C__T fO EX. SO _ 3 34y oo PAD 2g. rvNEON I 529531E �L>: gnW 33
CTI33381
4i 56 PAD SF
I 2000 I 46is PAD 345o SF 18.00' I 5z00 PAD I
� � � C NEC7 TO EWER ESM 6 4s ss psF I s459 5F � R=2' dcos sF p11Op, BROW DITCH Ex. SD LAT. . 338.8 F 3545 \
1,QA 655p PAD o 1 R=70' tJi1 ' ROAMS F MENT TO
PROP. CURB INLET H pAD $N 4119 SF / \ I AINTAIN PROP: BROW PROP. RTANK
'50.00' �IIIII (JsJ5DES; ITS,
WELL. lNP
IIIIITC,
DETENTIOU SYSTEM I 5.0Did
¢P33RF
T=32
/
S PRpW F� W 32 -I III w \
13 21324 fib-15097 PROP TREE WELL \ q-70' W S _ 5yj5 PSo / 141
AP 1— 5125 PAD L'
M1ll - I Dj I R=28' 49T5 6 x.y6`V�
PROPERT" BNDY _ �1 Z,H ,3dgi5 PAD 47g5 SF ,11`L
LI EX RIIN I 96 PAD 27 825 PAD 90 SF \' I
PROP. R/W I 3452 BF 26 465p PAD 4.565 SF I % 1 N
/ PROP. RE STRPN a 625 PAD q g160
s" THIRD LANE AND I ' 3959 sF L_- �Rg INLETS IB _ _I I 'VOQ�� / PROP. BROW DITCH ]-335. 5 ORMGARDE / ,4S / /
""— �I 'L ya / 5' HOA EASEMENT TO 11 EX.B
�-- BI KE LAN
RELOCAT Ex. SL _ - - - 2:1 SLOPE CY / / MI PROP. BROW( 1 IBEHINDP OP. CU _- aaaa Ps� I sD - s sD 35680 �, / I Ht" j \ 11 EX. SMH"8 _ (PROP TP€E WELL I I I 337.001E - - 35430 ! / \� �/ 1 ±(37140)RIM I I ±3583 F \ '® � P(i�R \ LOT JB/\ II }(36044)IE
II I I 25 5 HOA 8E T TO ' MAP 2131
9 352 zs Pao 24 23� 22MAINTA P. BROW
IIP""' x go0 PaD I ss ]5 PqD s90o PqD 630o PAD APN: i6-260-03 / I 3,611 SF 3,263 SF ` DTDH /
72 I
A Iw yp I )�}Y Y APN: 65
m o z I W I 3sss1 _PROP. LBO°/ \ J 'd✓ k.. _�.y``y . I
r— c s TREIItWELL ` APN: 66-2 04 1
I�r I s � � At�ROT3� 1
ti W W \ R-70 ✓ 1 i AO PC
Y2-70' 354. 0 FS � ) PROP. BROW DITCH� I
Ex. RAISED L _ �yy\ �c`{
CURB MEDIA I �y I I ✓ \ G.B. �? - (TYP , r ''
PM3-0141 (PROPERTY BNDV V I \Illiirv�ai
APN: ifi6-150-89 I 18100, �' f'IOA EX. PP ME16. EX. OH UTILITIEB fl X
EX RIIN P. R=28' \
PROP. R/W� — — - PAD TO BE ELECA UNDERGROUND 1/
_ +x SMH a44 c 1 11 lz 13 14 I 6,36] SF j/ EX. WALLT�y^��RMAIN , -J� �� _
352 ]5 PAD 370. FL \ EYE PP TO BE REMOVED. EX. OH UTILITIES
EX SMH.7
_(34845J RIM III 4629 SF 3]426 so 3644 sAo 3,7M SF I BLDG S�BK g \ / 1 a S S ±(X UTI) IF I I I� �, II IT_ YP 13 ± 371.3 FG TO BE RELOCATED UNDE RGROUND EX. U M CABINETS _ _L
_ ° F r P. FH �±411.1 FG ""5 E
m ITO REMAIN ` 2 P 0"� 26 94 X.SMH#38
PROP. CURB OUTLET \ — — 3fi1 00 FL I r % RIM=±(412.26)
L POP OFFSITE \ -405.531E
�OR OFFSITE V-0ITCHI 35 .4 G'� I - Il V ITS * 362.5 FG I I 21 o ISY /� 0 FSITE PERMISSION
yI T GRADE LETTER TO I 6,26] SF I 20
I
B TAINED. `� R=28J 39350 PAD 1 / Q� 1 Ne °ry \
I I I PER LOT( _ CONC. DITCH
MAP 2— 131 - :1 SLOPE / zz,]z qD o/ -,€X' 8'VCP SPERD\1466 e ° \ I \
PER LOT 19 — PROP. SL \ `-'/ T W` /���o'm /, �/ / /// �YSe \✓\ ✓ AP 2131 II — (REEVJELL
-0-2� i�P.I
I I IS 9.'' J e
±414.6 FG
HP.
PROP. SL
X�SMH#44B �. �/ / i y1 \) _ i ±372.2
1 I II EX. 8 SEWER PER D1917A 7M _ - ss/ Q- PM 8977
I" PM 475 VAC�i E IA7 F TO THB BENEFIT OF \APN'. ifi6-68/0/-A3 I APN: 166-280-40 APN 11 - 1. ACCESIS ^'v www.pisaengineering.com c�
Im
I I I I EX. BIKE LANE
I
EX. OPINE LANE
10'
( EX.
-LANE E DUAL DRIVE
EX. DRIVE LA
I
pIOA 4550 PAD
PAD 4.119 SF
6i6! SF
I
I I BIKE LANE I / I
11 pRIVEII-A I I \\ /
DRIVEIANE
1' 7
i DRIV LANE I I I
11' e1 da.so PAD I
1 I 3652 SF
LEFT R LA E I _
I I I I 33 d59 PAD I
I
I 860 PAD
I 3]72 SF
I
I I 1
I I
0 1 I I I I V
11 m l I 15 PAD pp
4,529 SF 3)4;
� I I
G I I
E
m I I I 1 E LAN
11'
I II I EX. DR15 E LANE
I I EX. BIKE 6NE
t I I I EX. SHOULDER LANE
1 I I III, I I l
S. MELROSE DRIVE STRIPING
NOTE
1. SEESHEET21 FOR PROPOSED RETAINING WALL HEIGHT INFORMATION.
2. MINIMUM PRIVATE OPEN SPACE OF 200 S. F. PROVIDED PER UNIT (WITH MINIMUM 10-FOOT DIMENSIONi SAVE )ATE: 11I210- PLOT DATE:--- FILE NAME: J:WCTIVE JOBS13664 MELROSE AND MATAGUALICIVILIORAWINODISCRETIONARY PLANSITENTATIVE MAPAYd4-TM TBLOCNAw PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN 20
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
MELROSE & MATAGUAL
NOTE
1. ALL RETAINING WALLS TO BE SLUMP -STONE CMU WITH BRICK CAP (COLOR: SAND).
SEE PLAN FOR WALL HEIGHTS.
2. SEE SHEET 20 FOR PROPOSED GRADING INFORMATION.
3. SEE SHEET 27 FOR NON -RETAINING SITE WALL TYPES, COLORS, FINISHES AND LOCATIONS.
/ -- — -.1:
34900 PAD
46fiS SF
�4 4i 3 PA 3pso sF
II I 6 a559 PPD 34`A sF— — — -- r
3fi45 SF r / 1
HOA a55fi PAD � 4�
- PP➢ 4119 SF — —
fiT15 SF
'PROPERTY BNO
EX. R/W
PROP. RIW
51?5 PAD
^gyp LJ v 49i5 PA�.
% .y {..0 3d6.i5 PAD a�fl5 SF
PET. WALL I HT-TM34W PSD 2• 48?5 PAD 4910 SF I A
O AX I 26 665o PAD a5d5 sF
�_ I � II I I � - I T ➢ m 13959 — —I�T-v4 {� + � � r / ` a.asb 3.49
9F www.pisaengineering.com
SAVE DATE: 11I210- PLOT DATE:--- FILE NAME: J:WCTIVE JOBS1366d MELROSE AND MATAGUADCIVILIDRAWINODISCRETIONARY PLAN$ITEN—VE MAPAYdd-TM TBLOCKA A PRELIMINARY RETAINING WALL PLAN 21
-_I
PM 18463 I
APN: 166-150-67
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
MELROSE & MATAGUAL
I� I R=25.00'
I / /
GPM 16,360 I
—APN: 18fi-280-60 J t II �r L, _r--- /
/A—
I
.,111
10 —
�\\ J_—_— _— _
I� N89.25 --_--
N89"25'20"W-/
/ / 7.as' / // ///
LOT 1s
_ /_ / / 1// 1 �//// MAP2131
I APN 16828018/yl//ll//l
,:--F- QRLQTti9
I I MA 1i1 11 1 II � I l j 11 / l/ 4
jaB2 0/Y
/—
_/KI8p-�5321W
-
A
I PM 475 —S 7 ,,��/''j
I APN:166-28040 _--� ��// / / /+ 7/ //C/-// //' /AI "">�' it
I 1
}
f� ass- 6 / C PORLOTI9 Ali/�I
I PMa7s I 1_ 1 � / // ,MAa2131
APN.166-280-39 J L�/ / / / APN_166-28033
/ ///// PM� 9
I � ,, . ApPJr 166
IV
\
\
\
PASCO LARET SUITER
San Diego I Encinitas I Orange County
Phone 949.661.66951 www.pisaengineering.com
EXISTING EASEMENTS
O
ACCESS EASEMENT "PARCEL B-1- PER DEED,
2006-0368438, O.R. REC. 05/24/2006
©
ACCESS EASEMENT"PARCEL B-2'PER DEED,
2006-0368438, O.R. REC. 05/24/2006
©
PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT'PARCEL B-3' PER
DEED, 2006-0368438, O.R. REC. 05/24/2006
AFFECTS PARCEL A OF PARCEL 1:
3O
AN EASEMENT FOR PIPE LINES AND
INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, IN FAVOR OF VISTA
IRRIGATION DISTRICT, RECORDED APRIL 6,
19261N BOOK 1208 OF DEEDS, PAGE 84. THE
LOCATION OF THE EASEMENT CANNOT BE
DETERMINED FROM RECORD INFORMATION.
4O
AN EASEMENT FOR SCENIC TREE AND
INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, IN FAVOR OF CITY OF
VISTA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
RECORDED MARCH 3, 1976 AS INSTRUMENT
NO.76-62951 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS TO BE
QUITCLAIMED.
AFFECTS PARCEL B OF PARCEL 1:
©
AN EASEMENT FOR PRIVATE WATER LINE AND
INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN THE DOCUMENT
RECORDED MARCH 22, 1962 AS INSTRUMENT
NO. 62-48758 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS TO BE
QUITCLAIMED.
AFFECTS PARCELS A AND B OF PARCEL 1:
8O
AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES AND
INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, IN FAVOR OF SAN
DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,
RECORDED OCTOBER 25, 19491N BOOK 3363,
PAGE 74 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
9O
AN EASEMENT FOR A PUBLIC HIGHWAY AND
INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, IN FAVOR OF CITY OF
VISTA, RECORDED JANUARY 18, 19571N BOOK
6423, PAGE 364 AND MARCH 3, 1976 AS
INSTRUMENT NO.76-062952, BOTH OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS. SAID INSTRUMENT ALSO GRANTS
THE PRIVILEGE AND RIGHT TO EXTEND AND
MAINTAIN DRAINAGE STRUCTURES AND
EXCAVATION AND EMBANKMENT SLOPES
BEYOND THE LIMITS OF SAID RIGHT OF WAY
WHERE REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE THEREOF.
10 AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES, INGRESS,
EGRESS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, IN
FAVOR OF SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC
COMPANY RECORDED MAY 30, 1989 AS
INSTRUMENT N0. 89-282480 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS TO BE QUITCLAIMED.
AFFECTS PARCEL 2:
12 AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES INGRESS,
EGRESS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN
FAVOR OF SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC
COMPANY RECORDED OCTOBER 25 1949 AS
BOOK 3363, PAGE 126 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
THE LOCATION OF THE EASEMENT CANNOT BE
DETERMINED FROM RECORD INFORMATION.
13 AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR
ROAD PURPOSES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES,
IN FAVOR OF GILBERT T. HINTHORNE AND
ESTHER M. HINTHORNE, RECORDED OCTOBER
28,1955 AS BOOK 5848, PAGE 71 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS TO BE QUITCLAIMED.
DC
C C D C A I/`CC
ROS 13648
PM 18360
MAP 2131
SAVE DATE: 11I210- PLOT DATE:--- FILE NAME: J:WCTIVE JOBS13684 MELROSE AND MATAGUALICIVIUDRANNODISCRETIONARY PLANSITENTATIVE MAPAYd4-TM TBLOCKAw EXISITING MAP 22
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
MELROSE & MATAGUAL
I 'I
1 I 1 _
0?UAL DRIVE
PM18463 APN166250.Gg—Np9°6531"W
—
IVI Sna
APN: 166-150-67-
----�_L-xp-fi
R=2250' g �9S9a fi2.4T I 20_
D=86°3705" LOT 17
R=25.00 N80°1516E —_ I I
I L=3176' pp445' _ � 610p' zI LOT 34 MAP 2131
— �= 3,661 IF
_ I APN: 166-280-06
' I ^�'
- — Nax04° NBp•�st5E� —a9A3' LOT & LOT1 , �� N09°6344'W _ $ f 3,668 BF , N09°43'M'W
D=06°3205" — — i— LOT3 3,450 SF L=OW I 5.00
R-21.p9 o > & LDT4 34505E
1.41.7Y I I ) a LOT 5 4 1411 IF y J/ I -36LOT 33 I
I2 .2 & LOT6 4 J,6a5 IF f S—
I � u 18 W'
II I 4,1195ES Npy4 4,6055F i' I
Ig R LOT I 8 —4arNy �d6 D=51°p3'2r -22 5., N �; 1B 1p
I I . N80°16'1fi"E R=2005 /B v q 11.pg
6,7156F
II N, // D=26°3l'28' Qo- ❑1 0 '$❑p:x3°23'3T
ssaea" / " . 3$ o G LOT 32
3 k\S- sh, BO.o9 ,yam, �S.oT— i
150.00I \ p=22°09'13' E - - g 5,0825E I
fi3.00' N80°16'18'951A—�� S /
MIN,' N83°44'11'E �, 4 /
PM 21324 ( 5B 28'
LOT 7 L=44sa' �.6AT� z p 8 g LOT 31 /
APN: 166.150-97 1 I II 3,1525E ( 0=afi°32'05' / > S `� £ 4.337 F (= D=19°26'Cb" R B &° LOT 30 / 1
1 I I• L4ssr I L=33. �•15.ng.w I LOT 29 m
LOT 28 4,]85 SF I ,1 N83°a4'11'E L-AT4' e LOT 27 4,9308F & I I 70.50 4,545 IF
r II I 3./54 SF I .n- 'Rc�r — 1-1605F— m— —_ ---- N B� & O$ I m L3,,959 IF
GT 8
T
— __-- I q 52]5' 48.]5' 46.75' 48.]5' 3.1
189°25'2YW 58.95' 46.00' 46.00' m 48.01' I ON 3H 2628 E FORLOT 02 316
moo® I
v , II 1' LOT 9 I g1 APN: 166-280-03
m LOT 25 LOT 24 o LOT 23 LOT 22 I
3,T725F"' NO6°15'49•W I 3,611 IF 3,2638E 3,94]SF 5,0240E
5.00' I
I I N83°44'it" D=21°54%' 1n3 LOT 17
1 ( 3108=28.88' MAP 2131
1 I 1 ,.g 28.Sb 18.3T (c9Z�4r I —
I I 1 n9 n� LOT Nag°zs p•w 1791' S P — — — �I APN: ifi6-260-05
83.WI D=22.. 1" L*72 T50' z 9 —
1 LOT 10 5I,121 IF R=22.59- L=21.2T 66R .pC�
m I 3,615 IF =32.66' D=28°33' 4" �.a ti s g
D=21°28'09" D=83°10'JI' L=3755'
L=28.25' R=22.50' " D=17°08'56- L I
I a ry�0° 0 \�° 1 N8925'20 W 4I.81' �O 6�L=2260' I
PM 20141 I y�:°y I �.17,28 30.38'
APN: 166-150-89 a N22
L=1°OB'0o^E 1 P° a O 8.1T \ I POR LOT 18
I D=z1°3azo• w 6.00' z MAP 2131—
I z4o3' 65.00' LOT B
I8 LOT 11 A LOT 12 R LOT 13 g $ APN ifi6-280-04 1
I I 4,5295E i 3742 IF z 3,8118E g^ LOT 14 �m >� 3
1 3,756 IF I I
I I I I N09°25'N'W
� S1 j399,,12' 2.52' I N 89°25'34^ W �{.8
1 i N09°25'20'W 2° 520W _ �28.Jb 61,90' 61�3' gyp. —8-7 LOT 21 \
I I 2518'25W W f� I 8,201 IF \
I FOR LOT 19 , D=68°OP05" LOT 20 \
MAP 2131 R=26.7r$ s,44p IF m \ \
APN: 166-280-22 s
LOT 19
8°&97' N+°7IB'3p f�56� \ L=366a•
D-J, I PM 8977 t2,z325R APN: 166-680-04 \ \
R=]5.50'
Lapsp' �S fp f'�/' �\ \
I \
2B'
D-03°53'49' D=87°35'45• \
1 I 1 FMAP4319 1 Nl4•i6'Sq'W `u� L=22 B0 Lxx0.56'
I 1 ��szf 1
I APN: 116-280-23 LOT 15
I I 6,5875E
(=1f71q
�\
N74.18'64'W I
L=5.68'
D43°53'49' Y
I
I
�
R=22.50' J3�Ob3•
=17.24'
I 32.18'
LOT
16 \
/
---1
— — — — — — — —
4,094SF D41.351Y
L=25.08
I I PM16fi-280-00 475 PR OP. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT TO
I I VACATE 147 SF TO THE BENEFIT OF /
APN:
rys7,
>s\+7
'ry-
= m LOT 17 :�
3,9263E ,'�`�$
$.
L=e1.zr :18977
PM
APN: fi6-680-03
LOT 18
I I APN 166.28041. ACCESS EASEMENT
TO BE GRANTED TO 166-280-33
I
_
8,367 6E
BASED OFF LLA. /
12892'2592•W
I I
/
1 I I 1
I PM 475 /
a PM 8977
I I APN: ifi6-280-01 /
I
FOR LOT 19
APN: 16&680-02
I PM 475
APN: 166-280.39 /
MAP 2131
APN: ifi6-280-33
I I
I
I
PM 8977
/l�
APN: 166-680-01
�
�SORjVF
PASCO LARET SUITER
I
��
aSSogoaTEty
San Diego I Encinitas I Orange County
I
Phone 949.661.66951 www.pisaengineering.com
PROPOSED EASEMENTS
l ] INDICATES PRIVATE ROAD AND PUBLIC SEWER
EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF VISTA.
0 INDICATES ACCESS AND PUBLIC SEWER
EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF VISTA.
3� INDICATES EASEMENT TO THE HOMEOWNER'S
ASSOCIATION.
INDICATES PRIVATE STORM DRAIN EASEMENT
TO THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
�5 INDICATES PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT TO THE
CITY OF VISTA.
LOT MATRIX
LOT INFORMATION
LOT NO.
LOT AREA (S.F.)
LOT USE TYPE
1 3,668
RESIDENTIAL
2 3,450
RESIDENTIAL
3 3,450
RESIDENTIAL
4 3,450
RESIDENTIAL
5 3,645
RESIDENTIAL
6 4,119
RESIDENTIAL
7 3,452
RESIDENTIAL
8 3,454
RESIDENTIAL
9 3,772
RESIDENTIAL
10 3,655
RESIDENTIAL
11 4,529
RESIDENTIAL
12 3,742
RESIDENTIAL
13 3,644
RESIDENTIAL
14 3,756
RESIDENTIAL
15 6,587
RESIDENTIAL
16 4,094
RESIDENTIAL
17 3,926
RESIDENTIAL
LEGEND
TRACT BOUNDARY — —
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY
PROPOSED LOT LINE
PROPOSED EASEMENT LINE — — — — — — — —
ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE — — — —
LOT INFORMATION
LOT NO.
LOT AREA (S.F.)
LOT USE TYPE
18 8,367
RESIDENTIAL
19 12,232
RESIDENTIAL
20 6,440
RESIDENTIAL
21 8,207
RESIDENTIAL
22 5,024
RESIDENTIAL
23 3,947
RESIDENTIAL
24 3,263
RESIDENTIAL
25 3,611
RESIDENTIAL
26 3,959
RESIDENTIAL
27 4,160
RESIDENTIAL
28 4,545
RESIDENTIAL
29 4,930
RESIDENTIAL
30 4,785
RESIDENTIAL
31 4,337
RESIDENTIAL
32 5,082
RESIDENTIAL
33 005
RESIDENTIAL
34 3,661
RESIDENTIAL
AVERAGE LOT AREA CALCULATIONS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL LOT AREA (LOTS 1-34) = 157,857 SF (LOTS 1-34) SMALLEST LOT/AREA = LOT 24 (3,263 SF)
LARGEST LOT/AREA = LOT 19 (12,232 SF)
AVERAGE LOT AREA = (157,857 SF - 3,263 - 12,232)132 LOTS = 4,448 SF/LOT
LOT INFORMATION
LOT NO.
LOT AREA (S.F.)
LOT USE TYPE
A
6,715
HOA
B
6,367
HOA
C
57,121
PRIVATE STREET
SAVE DATE: 11I21R2-PLOT DAM: --- FILE NAME:J:WCTIVE JOBS13684 MELROSE AND MATAGUALICIVILIORAWINODISCRETIONARY P-$N TENTATIVE MAPAYd4-TM TBLOCK.wg PROPOSED MAP 23
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PROJECT FILE NUMBER: P22-0218
MELROSE & MATAGUAL
L_ RESPONSIBLE PARTY INFORMATION GENERAL INFORMATION SOIL INFORMATION PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE VISTA H.S.A. (904.22) OF BUENA VISTA CREEK H.A. OF TTLC VISTA MELROSE, LLC CARLSBAD H.U. HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP: TYPE D (- L �� �/ �y` 2942 CENTURY PLACE SUITE 121 POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN- BENTHIC COMMUNITY EFFECTS, BIFENTHRIN, SELENIUM, GROUND WATER INFORMATION
AND TOXICITY
- - - - 1j��/AI TA I �- y - , \ COSTA MESA, CA 92626 �+ > f- AAI/`G._� -- / / ` Ok- I � LEGEND LID SITE DESIGN BMPSS GROUND PREPARED B :GEOTEOT OUNTERED AT THE SITE. SEE
I ° REPORT AUGUST
,2021 PROJECT
INC
\ -= O ./8 G �C DATED: AUGUST 3, 2021 PROJECT N0. 3706-SD � � 3J 1. STORMGARDEN BIOFILTRATION SYSTEMS
D K K ' I / / DESCRIPTION SYMBOL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD
-�18D a RCP SD K / ,�O 2. RTANK DETENTION SYSTEM
V INFEASIBLE AREA..-� TE EX 24 ELOCATED K LOT NUMBER
TO BE TREATED REP EX SIR�B MLETTOB K I 34 I III 3. ROOF DRAIN TO LANDSCAPING REFER TO ATTACHEMENT 2B OF THIS REPORT FOR CRITICAL '--I (5,844 SF) K DRAINAGE DIRECTION COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS WITHIN THIS PROJECT SITE. ° DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA 4. MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES O J 5. PROTECT SLOPES AND CHANNELS BMP NOTES
o 2 0 50 100 150 STORMGARDEN
PROP Jr 3�O ya O Iy''p1 j 1. THESE BMPS AREA MANDATORY TO BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S SDMH I r r QO MO 33 III I / / RTANK 99
SOURCE CONTROL BMP'J RECOMMENDATIONS OR THERE PLANS
I I O SCALE: 1• =40' 2. NO CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED BMPS ON THIS SHEET WITHOUT PRIOR O IMPERVIOUS AREA (PUBLIC ROW)- ® 1. STORM DRAIN STENCILING APPROVAL FORM THE CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT j1r n / EXISTING/REPLACED 3. NO SUBSTITUTIONS TO THE MATERIAL TYPES OR PLANTING TYPES WITHOUT
2. EMPLOY INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER SC - I II g ( ° FT / / li I - I / / /I IMPERVIOUS AREA (PUBLIC ROW)- 4. NO OCCUPANCY WILL BE GRANTED UNTIL THE CITY INSPECTOR STAFF HAS EX!�CURB DMA 1 I�H.�E CTRE` _ ��1 J / / )L EXISTING/REMOVED 3. EMPLOY EFFICIENT IRRIGATION AND DROUGHT TOLERANT LANDSCAPE DESIGN INSPECTED THIS PROJECT FOR APPRORIATE BMP CONSTRUCTION AND ` J tiC INSTALLATION.
PD / / / �/ / // /� IMPERVIOUS AREA (PUBLIC ROW) - NEW
n J / l
BELOCATEO O T. BEII ° - 0°�� AC O /// / ) (/ TREE WELL O 3� BMP SUMMARY
r ^ - - - - - _ 31 1 O / / /r DMA NO. BMP # BMP TYPE BMP AREA/ BMP OUTLET _ L / c ARCHITECT NOTE QUANTITY OUTLET PIPE
O 30 MO� / ( OA STORMGARDEN (1)SGT-0608 - 18"
D I
m I �O I D _ / 28 29 O l� / / MY ARCHITECT'S SEAL AND SIGNATURE IS TO VERIFY THAT KTGY ARCHITECTURAL PLANNING HAS 1 O TREE WELLS (2) 20' DIA. TREE WELL M
27 O� //Jr^ = DESIGN OFTHE BUILDINGEARCHDBY THE TECTURE AICIL ENGINEER CORDINGy AND HAS COORDINATED THE SCHEMATIC 2 O SGT-0406 T A 1 26 M I O I I �% y\ / / I _ C STORMGARDEN (1)SGT-0408 18 0 I E �� I�•L- D MA L / �qR'// ,�/ / / Qp TREE WELLS (2) 20 DIA. TREE WELL \/I E F$ AC GAO �./ / %y/ ( / - // // 3 OE STORMGARDEN (1)SGT 0612 1 -I - �' / / / , I F TREE WELLS (3) 20 DIA TREE WELL - - cc) H$D , -� $D $D / ��e / i �v c�¢i v / LANDSCAPE NOTE STORMGARDEN (2)SGT0408 - 18"
I HAVE REVIEWED THE STORMGARDEN BIOFILTRATION SYSTEMS SHOWN ON THE CIVIL PLAN AND CONFIRM 4 H TREE WELLS 3 20' DIA. TREE WELL G I F 25� 24 / r A J i THAT THE CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLANS ARE COORDINATED AND APPROPRIATE PLANTING AND O m / 9 - --- 23 2 / / - / /� /// / V / / / i�_�_ IRRIGATION WILL BE DESIGNED IN THOSE SYSTEMS. 2.5-INCH ORIFICE, O I I I O M O O 18-INCH WIDE 5-INCH
M / / / 1, 2, 384 J HIGH ORIFICE 4' HIGH, 24"
/' % O RTANK DETENTION 3,200 SF
�/ j SYSTEM 6.75 FT HIGH 20-FT WIDE 6-INCH HIGH
J ( \ J \ / ///// / // / j / WEIR ® 6.25-FT HIGH
EX. R/W \ - F- 1 / / //// / //// // // // i - - - / ` 5 OK TREE WELLS (7) 20' DIA. TREE WELL - PROP. R/W
GEOTECHNICAL NOTE 6 © TREE WELLS (2)20'DIA. TREE WELL
VY / I/`= �� , a" / /� __��ii iii /%//%/i -� _ ROOFDRAINTO I Y DMA 6 MO 7�/ / / J f% �� �j j� / j// i I HAVE REVIEWED THE SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS FOR THIS PROJECT AND CONFIRM THE SELECTED - O LANDSCAPING 68 (2 PER PAD) _ - _ DMA 3 y O / / / / j /%/ 1 I / + POST CONSTRUCTION BMPS HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED, COORDINATED AND JUSTIFIED AS REQUIRED BY THE p / + v / / / /// /�///i % // / / / \ L� / C.O.V. BMP DESIGN MANUAL.
0.38 Ali \ / / /// / / / ' POST -CONSTRUCTION PERMANENT BMP OPERATION & l 1.60 AC - o �� / /////� , /
�12
DMA 4/�I��MAINTENANCE PROCEDURE DETAILS
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND DISCHARGE CONTROL MAINTENANCE //I�/AGREEMENT APPROVAL NO11 L- 13 14 - + II 1.58 AC J ( / ` l 1/ ' !i I l \ / / `%' 08M RESPONSBILE PARTY DESIGNEE: PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS, INC / O O L MO %s i�� j'/� INSPECTION MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE METHOD QUANTITY SHEET L J L T / / ✓/ �� ! FREQUENCY FREQUENCY NUMBER(S)
- - - - - I c su IND �� %��
BMP DESCRIPTION
2r
M 0
gm
=�� o '�R/�q
� I `r r / / / / / �
15 �^� � I ��
UNDISTURBED `
\ I I I ) ) ) \ O \ OFFSITE AREIR A / g
IN T
BMP
I sus _ 16
EDUCATION PROGRAM (SOURCE CONTROL)
ANNUAL
AS NEEDED
EMPLOYEE EDUCATION PROGRAM
-
N/A
SIGNAGE & STENCILING
ANNUAL
AS NEEDED
REPAIR AND/OR REPLACE AS
NECESSARY
-
N/A
REPAIR AND/OR REPLACE ASGARDEN
STORM
ANNUAL
AS NEEDED
NECESSARY
6 N/A
REPAIR AND/OR REPLACE AS
DETENTION VAULT -RTANK
ANNUAL
AS NEEDED
NECESSARY
1 N/A
INSPECT TREE HEALTH MAINTENANCE,
TREE WELLS
MONTHLY
AS NEEDED
LOOSEN/REPLACE SOIL, DISPERSE
19 N/A
STANDING WATER, RESTORE DRAINAGE
CITY of VISTA
GP AMEND (GO, MLD TO MD), ZONE CHANGE (OP, Ri TO R-1-B), AND TSM (34 LOTS) - FILE # P22-0218 OWNER: TTLC VISTA MELROSE, LLC CONTACT: MICHAEL TORRES PHONE: 949645-5370 ADDRESS: 4350 VON KARMAN AVENUE, SUITE 200, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
ARCHITECT, ENGINEER
OR DESIGNER PASCO LARET SUITER& ASSOCIATES INC. PHONE: 949-661-6695 _ ADDRESS: 27127 CALLE ARROYO, SUITE 1904 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CA 92675 l ( ) ) 1 �j �_ _ 1 /7 �l/ 11 E TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT: 34 SMALL LOT SUBDIVISION AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN �// -ELoar Taw- xove S PaouEoerrxEnaaxavxnTE EXIST. ZONE: G-P, R-1 PROP. ZONE: R-1-B APN(S): 166-280-18, 166-280-60, 166-280-61 IN I j / / F Z MO / //// /// 7 j///// �. - SITE DATA DWELLING UNITS COMMON OPEN SPACE //6q o ".a: AREA (SQ. FT.) COVERAGE% 2FORM PROVIDED REQUIRED / �/
L - / / � / I % \V// (/ / / / /' / / // // (\�� /,% LOT'. 227,752 10D% 3BORM 13,0825F fi,BW SF \ / /
I , � � /� / / � GN�R /\ O �,l/// � L/� `� PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE BLDG: 47,ew 21% 4BDRM 17 PRIVATE OPEN SPACE / / / ( fiDl$TURBE \\ PARMH-.T: 72,1 fi 3. SBDRM 17 PROVIDED REQUIRED OFF�$(I,T�E AREA \\\\ SUBMITTAL NUMBER WE CHANGES ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DATE LANDSCAPE: 107,376 47% TOTAL UNITS 34 ,e,7aSS' S.
SF
DRIN6 T9� \ \\\ \ PASCO LARET SUITER MI 2D22 INITIAL BOBMITTAL DRIVEWAY BM ,,/ �� /�[�[� (ry� /�5�F�[� - - - DRD.RED. 136 (,.-LOPE) SETBACWeJeJOI�rOW11 LSc�J FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE GARAGENI u LOADING - REC. VEH. 1WAY 12•MIN. FRONT 10W IREARKBIV M San Diego I Encinitas I OrangeCouMy s7o.B
/ Phone 949.661.6695I WWW.pisaengineering.com - - - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DATE GUEST ee HANDICAP - SPACES 1WAY 21MIN. L. SIDE 5' SPECUL WA OPEN 36 TOTAL 171 NA SLOPE VARIES 1 R. SIDE I IACCES. BLDG WA
DMA DATA TABLE
DMA N0.
DRIVEWAY
AREA (S.F.)
HOUSE AREA
(S.F.)
SIDEWALK
AREA (S.F.)
ROAD AREA
(S.F.)
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS
AREA (S.F.)
PERVIOUS
AREA (S.F.)
UNDIST. PERVIOUS
OFFSITE AREA (S.F.)
TOTAL
AREA (S.F.)
TOTAL
AREA (AC)
1 2,536
9,870
2.156
8,276
22,838
19,383
-
42,221
0.97 2
3,546
12,690
2.178
8.290
26,704
22,809
-
49,513
1.14 3
4,995
15,510
2,897
14,738
38,140
30,073
1,651
69,864
1.60 4
3,471
9,870
3,565
14,173
31,079
35,125
2,846
69,050
1.58 5
-
-
2,305
9,487
11,792
3,388
-
15,1"
0.35 6
-
-
1,869
13,841
15,710
1,015
-
16725
038
SAVE DATE, 1100-PLOT DATE: ---FILE NAME: J:VICTIVE JOB513684 MELROSE AND MATAGUALICIVILIDRAW ODISCRETIONARY PLANSITENTATIVE MAPAYd4-TM TBLOCKAg BMP SITE PLAN 24
P22-0218
TTL C MANAGEMENT TTLC VISTA - MELROSE, LLC
1NC 4350 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200
Newport Beach, CA 92660
MATAGUAL
CALIFORNIA
-I
MELROSE SUBDIVISION
SITE PLAN LANDSCAPE KEY
OPARKWAY PLANTING
(LOW, DROUGHT TOLERANT GROUNDCOVER)
OSIDEWALK
OENTRY DRIVE
® HABITAT AND HERITAGE GARDEN
O40' DIA PLAY AREA WITH STRUCTURE AND LOW SEAT WALLS/
RETAINING WALLS. PLAY AREA TO BE ACCESSIBLE WITH ENTRY
RAMP, FIBAR SURFACING, AND ACCESSIBLE EQUIPMENT
(per 11 b-1008 of the 2019 CBC)
© SHORT TREE BUFFER
ORECREATION LAWN
®20'-0" WIDE SEWER EASEMENT, UNOBSTRUCTED. PATH DOUBLES AS ALL-WEATHER 6' WIDE ACCESS ROAD TO MANHOLE.
OSEATING AREA WITH ACCESSIBLE SEATING
(per 1 1-b division 9 of the 2019 CBC)
0 CONCRETE WALKWAY
1 1 LAWN AND DOG RUN OVER UNDERGROUND WATER CISTERN
LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS
SEE COVER SHEET FOR SITE CALCULATIONS.
DUPLICATED BELOW FOR REFERENCE
SITE DATA
AREA(SQ.FT)
DWELLING UNITS
COMMON OPEN SPACE
CUVERACE%
28DRM
PROVIDED
REQUIRED
LOT:
227,752
100%
3 BDRM
-
13,682 SF
6.800 SF
BLDG
47,940
21%
4 BDRM
17 PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
PARKINGlPVMT:
72,436
32%
5 BDRM
17 PROVIDED
REQUIRED
LANDSCAPE:
107,376
47%
TOTAL UNITS
34 18,700 SF
6,800 SF
DRIVEWAY
{SIZE &SLOPE)
PARKING
ORD.REO.
130
SETBACKS
GARAGE
68 LOADING
-
REC, VEH.
STORAGE
SPACES
N(A
1WAY 12'MIN.
FRONT 10'!20'
REAR 10'
GUEST
66 HANDICAP
-
2 WAY 24' MIN-
L SIDE 5'
SPECIAL NIA
OPEN
35 TOTAL
171
SLOPE VARIES
R. SIDE 5'
1 ACCES, BLDG WA
TREE LEGEND
SYMBOL
SPECIES
i
EVERGREEN STREET TREE
i
GEIJERA PARVIFLORA / AUSTRALIAN WILLOW
EVERGREEN ACCENT TREE
RHUS LANCEA / AFRICAN SUMAC
DECIDUOUS FLOWERING TREE
CHILOPSIS LINEARIS / DESERT WILLOW
SEWER NOTES:
PROVIDE ROOT BARRIER WHERE TREES ARE WITHIN I D' OF
SEWER EASEMENT. TREES SELECTED DO NOT HAVE INVA-
SIVE ROOT SYSTEMS. NO OBSTRUCTIONS (TREES, SHRUBS,
OR FENCES) TO OCCUR IN PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENT "
0' 40' 80' 120' 160'
SCALE 1 " = 40' NORTH
CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE
November 22, 2022
25 P22-0218
� AMENITY AREA 1
TTL C MANAGEMENT TTLC VISTA - MELROSE, LLC
>NC 4350 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200
Newport Beach, CA 92660
AMENITY AREA 1 KEYNOTES
ORETAINING WALLS
OSEAT WALL
OCURVING CONCRETE PATH
® RECREATION LAWN
OHABITAT AND HERITAGE GARDEN
6 40' DIA PLAY AREA WITH STRUCTURE AND
LOW SEAT WALLS/RETAINING WALLS.
PLAY AREA TO BE ACCESSIBLE WITH
ENTRY RAMP, FIBAR SURFACING, AND
ACCESSIBLE EQUIPMENT
(per 11 b-1008 of the 2019 CBC)
OSHORT TREE BUFFER
® PICNIC TABLES
OPEN SPACE: 6,715 SF
AMENITY AREA 2
SEWER EASEMENT
CLEAR OF OBSTRUCTIONS
20'-0"
GRASS SIDEWALK GRASS
EASEMENT SECTION SKETCH
0' 10' 20' 30' 40'
SCALE 1"=10' NORTF
MATAGUAL & MELROSE SUBDIVISION
VIJIA, %.AUrVRIVIN
AMENITY AREA 2
AMENITY AREA 1
AMENITY AREA 2 KEYNOTES
OSHORT TREE BUFFER
OCONCRETE WALKWAY
O20'-0" WIDE SEWER EASEMENT,
UNOBSTRUCTED. PATH DOUBLES AS
ALL-WEATHER 6' WIDE ACCESS ROAD
TO MANHOLE.
® BENCHES AND SEATING AREA
(per 11-b division 9 of the 2019 CBC)
OLAWN AND DOG RUN
© UNDERGROUND WATER CISTERN
OPEN SPACE: 6,367 SF
CONCEPTUAL SPACE ENLARGEMENTS
266 1-U I -K52 1 November 22, 2U22
KEY PLAN: NTS
k
MpTAGUA� �R1�1E
t
I � �
I� L
SITE ENCLOSURE LEGEND
5'-0" SLUMP -STONE CMU WALL WITH BRICK CAP COLOR: SAND
-NEIGHBORHOOD WALLS
6' 0"SLUMP-STONE CMU WALL WITH BRICK CAP COLOR: SAND
- PERIMETER WALL
111111111 6'-0" SLUMP -STONE CMU WALL WITH 3'-0" GLASS SCREEN, i w BRICK CAP COLOR: SAND - PERIMETER WALL ADJ. TO ROAD
3'-0" SLUMP -STONE CMU WALL WITH BRICK CAP COLOR: SAND
TTL C MANAGEMENT TTLC VISTA - MELROSE, LLC
ANC 4350 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200
Newport Beach, CA 92660
t �
,s \.
1,—
I
Finish
To Order
• 1 —,or h
012
s 0�' Product Modifications
y.
r
. Warranty
- -
Certifications
►"
G
o KHS . 0 I
SLUMP -STONE BLOCK WALL • BLOCK AND GLASS
----------------
■1■=======■■1
Elm =NEI
. . .
-------------------------------------------------------- .1.--------------■.1
-----------------
mmm
■1■=======■ ■1
IN mmm
r i mmmm
■1■������������==■■1
■1■= =■■1
mm
MATAGUAL & MELROSE SUBDIVISION
V IJIP•1, <.P•4LIr%jKvum
ENCLOSURE DIAGRAM
L66 I -U 1 -KJ1 1 NovemiDer 22, LULL
27 P22-0218
PRODUCT IMAGERY
TTL C MANAGEMENT TTLC VISTA - MELROSE, LLC
ANC 4350 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Decomposed Granite Trail
MATAGUAL
CALIFORNIA
LANDSCAPE NOTES
PLANTING DESIGN CRITERIA
BASED ON THE CITY OF VISTA CITYWIDE DESIGN GUIDELINES, THE PLANT PALETTE
BELOW IS COMPRISED OF PLANT MATERIALS AND TREES KNOWN TO THRIVE IN THE LOCAL CLIMATE AND SOIL CONDITIONS. THE PLANT PALETTE IS COMPRISED OF PLANTS NATIVE TO MEDITERRANEAN CLIMATES. 20% OR LESS OF THE PLANT MATERIAL WILL
REQUIRE MODERATE WATER, AND THE REMAINDER WILL REQUIRE LOW TO VERY LOW WATER ONCE ESTABLISHED. THIS PLANT PALETTE COUPLE WITH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM
DESCRIBED AT THE LEFT WILL MEET OR EXCEED THE STATE AND LOCAL STANDARDS FOR WATER CONSERVATION THROUGH WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION DESIGN. 90% OF ORNAMENTAL SHRUBS AND GRASSES BY AREA WILL BE 1 GALLON CONTAINERS SPACED ON AVERAGE 30" O.C. 10% OF PLANTING BY AREA WILL BE 5 GALLON CONTAINERS, AND WILL BE UTILIZED FOR SPECIMEN PLANTING AND SCREENING.
ALL ABOVE UTILITIES WILL BE SCREENED WITH VEGETATION.
IRRIGATION DESIGN CRITERIA
A WEATHER SENSING, 'SMART CONTROLLER' WILL BE USED TO MONITOR THE
IRRIGATION WATER AND MANAGE DAILY WATER CONSUMPTION TO THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH HYDROZONE.
ALL TREES, POTTERY, SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS WILL BE IRRIGATED ON
SEPARATE HYDROZONES WITH DRIP OR BUBBLER IRRIGATION, SO THAT ONCE ESTABLISHED, WATER CAN BE REGULATED IN A MORE EFFICIENT MANNER.
I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLANT PALETTE COUPLED WITH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESCRIBED
ABOVE WILL MEET OR EXCEED THE STATE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE (MWELO).
SCOT NEIMAN
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT I CA LICENSE NUMBER 6104
MELROSE SUBDIVISION
CONCEPTUAL
November 22, 2022
P22-0218
" ryptCONCEPTUAL PLANT PALETTE
x i
TREES TYPE SIZE
ARBUTUS `MARINA' TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL TREE 15 GAL
CHILOPSIS LINEARIS ACCENT DECIDUOUS TREE 15 GAL
r^fit GEIJERA PARVIFLORA STREET TREE 15 GAL
RHUS LANCEA MULTI -TRUNK EVERGREEN 24" BOX
SHRUBS COMMON NAME SIZE
ACCASELLOWIANA PINEAPPLE GUAVA 1 GAL
N
�• '. ACHILLEA 'MOONSHINE' FIREFLY DIAMOND YARROW 1 GAL AGAVE ATTENUATA FOX TAIL AGAVE 1 GAL
ARBUTUS'MARINA' CHILOPSIS LINEARIS GEIJERA PARVIFLORA RHUS LANCEA ALYOGYNE HUEGELII BLUE HIBISCUS 1 GAL ARCTOSTAPHYLOS EDMUNDSII 'CARMEL SUR' CARMEL SUR MANZANITA 1 GAL i ARISTIDA PURPUREA PURPLE THREE AWN GRASS 1 GAL
do ARTEMISIA ARBORESCENS SILVER WORMWOOD 1 GAL
a.
It
I ,
BOUTELOUA GRACILIS BLONDE AMBITION BLUE GRAMA 1 GAL
CEANOTHUS `DARK STAR' DARK STAR CEANOTHUS 1 GAL
�Zr�� I� DODONAEA VISCOSA GREEN HOPSEED BUSH 1 GAL
y.
ECHIUM CANDICANS PRIDE OF MADEIRA 1 GAL
=^ ENCELIA CALIFORNICA CALIFORNIA BRITTLEBUSH 1 GAL
ACCA SELLOWIANA ACHILLEA 'MOONSHINE' AGAVE ATTENUATA ALYOGYNE HUEGELII ARCTOSTAPHYLOS EDMUNDSII ARTEMISIA ARBORESCENS BOUTELOUA GRACILIS "•"— ERIOGONUM UMBELLATUM SULFUR FLOWER 1 GAL
I FESTUCA MAIREI ATLAS FESCUE 1 GAL
FESTUCA 'SISKYOU BLUE' SISKYOU BLUE FESCUE 1 GAL
- I GREVILLEA ALPINA 'MT. DANDENONG' MOUNTAIN GREVILLEA 1 GAL - JUSTICIA SPICIGERA MEXICAN HONEYSUCKLE 1 GAL
LAVATERA MARITIMA MEDITERRANEAN TREE MALLOW 1 GAL
LEONOTIS LEONURUS LION'S TAIL 1 GAL
CEANOTHUS 'DARK STAR' DODONAEA VISCOSA ECHIUM CANDICANS ENCELIA CALIFORNICA ERIOGONUM UMBELLATUM FESTUCA MAIREI FESTUCA'SISKYOU BLUE' LESSINGIA FILAGINIFOLIA `SILVER CARPET' SILVER CARPET BEACH ASTER 1 GAL ^� MUHLENBERGIA DUBIA PINE MUHLY 1 GAL
f? a rani L+
PENSTEMON MARGARITA BOP BEARDTONGUE 1 GAL
PEROVSKIA 'BLUE JEAN BABY' BLUE JEAN BABY RUSSIAN SAGE 1 GAL PEROVSKIA 'LITTLE SPIRE' RUSSIAN SAGE 1 GAL
PHLOMIS FRUTICOSA JERUSALEM SAGE 1 GAL
SALVIA CHAMAEDRYOIDES GERMANDER SAGE 1 GAL
` SALVIA `POZO BLUE' CLEVELAND SAGE 1 GAL
GREVILLEA ALPINA'MT. DANDENONG' JUSTICIA SPICIGERA LAVATERA MARITIMA LEONOTIS LEONURUS LESSINGIA FILAGINIFOLIA'SILVER CARPET' MUHLENBERGIA DUBIA PENSTEMON MARGARITA BOP SALVIA LEUCANTHA 'SANTA BARBARA' MEXICAN BUSH SAGE 1 GAL SANTOLINA CHAMAECYPARISSUS SANTOLINA 1 GAL
TEUCRIUM FRUTICANS BUSH GERMANDER 1 GAL
WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA COAST ROSEMARY 1 GAL
u �
i
PEROVSKIA 'BLUE JEAN BABY' PEROVSKIA 'LITTLE SPIRE' PHLOMIS FRUTICOSA SALVIA CHAMAEDRYOIDES SANTOUNA CHAMAECYPARISSUS TEUCRIUM FRUTICANS WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA 'GREY BOX' TTLC�"""G"� TTLCVISTA-MELROSE,LLC •- . MATAGUAL & MELROSE SUBDIVISION PLANTING PALETTE INC 4350 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200
Newport Beach, CA92660 • • • VISTA, CALIFORNIA 2661-01-RS21 November22, 2022 29
--- -- OVERFLOW & OUTLET WEIR STRUCTURE
(SEE CIVIL PLANS)
-- RTANK BACKFILL PERIMETER
2 FT FROM MODULES TYPICAL
r
w
9"p�42 sw
P L.9y pa'.n
�w,�y�°3caig
-1,003 RTANK HD PENTA MODULES
H
J
O Q
i�
J
Q
w Q U
H � Q
co C'6
j w cn
cn
� O
Z J
Q W
H 2i
DRAWN BY
KCR
DATE
11/21/22
SHEET NO.
1 of 1
Products Distributed by:
California Filtration Specialists
/
Contact us for information and pricing:
[email protected]
Alpine Way
(CFA
Esc
Escondido, CA 92029
(858)705-6483 Fax: (858) 487-8355
` '
R-TANK DETAILS
REF.
DESCRIPTION
DETAIL
R-TANK MODULE TYPE
HD
R-TANK MODULE SIZE
PENTA
# OF R-TANK MODULES
1003
A
MODULE HEIGHT (IN)
83.46 B
SYSTEM LENGTH (FT)
C
SYSTEM WIDTH (FT)
� � /�
�y.q
7 INDIVIDUAL R-TANK MODULE
REFER TO TABLE TO LFET FOR ACTUAL MODULE HEIGHT.
GRAPHIC DOES NOT REPRESENT SPECIFIC MODULE USED)
SYSTEM DETAILS
REF.
DESCRIPTION
DETAIL
TOTAL SYSTEM STORAGE (CF)
21,788
R-TANK STORAGE VOLUME (CF)
20,401
STONE STORAGE VOLUME (CF)(40% V.R.)
1,387
D
MAXIMUM FINAL GRADE ELEV.
113.95
MINIMUM FINAL GRADE ELEV.
108.62
E
GEOGRID ELEV.
107.46
F
TOP OF R-TANK ELEV.
106.96
G
TANK INVERT
100.00
H
INVERT OF STONE BASE
99.75 8 OZ NON WOVEN
GEOTEXTILE AROUND RTANK
MODULES (TOP, BOTTOM &
SIDES)
R-TANK PLAN VIEW
(FOR ACTUAL MODULE COUNT, REFER TO
TABLE TO LEFT. GRAPHIC DOES NOT
REPRESENT ACTUAL SYSTEM LAYOUT)
R-TANK SECTION VIEW
(GRAPHIC DOES NOT REPRESENT
ACTUAL HEIGHT OF SYSTEM)
ENGINEER OF
RECORD TO
REVIEW, APPROVE
AND ENDORSE
FINAL SITE
SPECIFIC DESIGN.
Fen ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT:
1CF ENVIRONMENTAL 1-800-448-3636
wvw.acfenvironmental.com
AGF
LET'S GET IT DONE
30 MM IMPERMEABLE
LINER W/ 4 OZ NON
WOVEN GEOTEXTILE ON DATF
EACH SIDE FOR 11SHEET NO
BOTTOM) ION (SIDES & 1 of 1
LOW GROUND PRESSURE DOZER
(10 TON MAX, SEE NOTE 2)
ROLLER, STATIC MODE
(6 TON MAX, SEE NOTE 1)
R-TANKHD OR R-TANKSD UNITS
HD: LOAD RATING: 33.4 PSI (MODULE ONLY)
SD: LOAD RATING: 40 PSI (MODULE ONLY)
NOTES:
1. FOLLOWING PLACEMENT OF SIDE BACKFILL, A UNIFORM 12" LIFT OF THE FREELY DRAINING MATERIAL (SPEC SECTION 2.03 B) SHALL BE PLACED OVER THE R-TANK AND LIGHTLY COMPACTED USING A WALK -BEHIND TRENCH ROLLER. ALTERNATELY, A ROLLER (MAXIMUM GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT OF 6 TONS) MAY BE USED.
ROLLER MUST REMAIN IN STATIC MODE UNTIL A MINIMUM OF 24" OF COVER HAS BEEN PLACED OVER THE MODULES. SHEEP FOOT ROLLERS SHOULD NOT BE USED. SPEC SECTION 3.05 A
2. ONLY LOW PRESSURE TIRE OR TRACK VEHICLES (LESS THAN 7 PSI AND OPERATING WEIGHT OF LESS THAN 20,000 LBS) SHALL BE OPERATED OVER THE R-TANK SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION. SPEC SECTION 3.05 B
3. DUMP TRUCKS AND PANS SHALL NOT BE OPERATED WITHIN THE R-TANK SYSTEM AT ANY TIME. WHERE
NECESSARY, THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT SHOULD UNLOAD IN AN AREA ADJACENT TO THE R-TANK SYSTEM AND THE MATERIAL SHOULD BE MOVED OVER THE SYSTEM WITH TRACKED EQUIPMENT. SPEC SECTION 3.05 B
4. ENSURE THAT ALL UNRELATED CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC IS KEPT AWAY FROM THE LIMITS OF EXCAVATION UNTIL THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE AND FINAL SURFACE MATERIALS ARE IN PLACE. NO NON -INSTALLATION
RELATED LOADING SHOULD BE ALLOWED OVER THE R-TANK SYSTEM UNTIL THE FINAL DESIGN SECTION HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED (INCLUDING PAVEMENT). SPEC SECTION 3.05 C
5. SEE R-TANK INSTALLATION GUIDE OR CONTACT YOUR LOCAL ACF REPRESENTATIVE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
SUBGRADE / EXCAVATION LINE: COMPACT PER SPEC
SECTION 3.02 D. A BEARING CAPACITY OF 2,000 PSF
MUST BE ACHIEVED PRIOR TO INSTALLING R-TANKHD
OR R-TANKSD
ROLLER, VIBRATORY MODE
(6 TON MAX, SEE NOTE 1)
GEOGRID
REINFORCEMENT
LAYER (TENSAR
BX-1200 OR EQUAL)
I DATE I REVISION
FOR ADDITIONAL o' CALIFORNIA FILTRATION
SPECIALISTS
858-705-6483
w Safiltr tionspecialists.com
Aff JUS
N
EDQ
DATE
08/07/17
EHEEI NO
NOT TO SCALE 1 1 of 1
END VIEW OF PIPE/FABRIC CONNECTION.
CUT AN "X" IN THE FABRIC SLIGHTLY
LARGER THAN PIPE, PULL THE FABRIC
AROUND THE PIPE TO CREATE THE "BOOT"
AND THEN SECURE WITH A HOSE -CLAMP.
"X" CUT I..
FABRIC TO
ALLOW
PIPE/TANK
INTERFACE
NON -CORROSIVE HOSE
CLAMP OR TAPE USED TO
FASTEN FABRIC TO PIPES
TO PREVENT BACKFILL
FROM ENTERING
STRUCTURE
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
OVER ACF R-TANKTM
1 N LET/OUTLET
PIPE
GEOTEXTILE
FABRIC
CALI(CFS)
161'
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
OVER ACF R-TANKTM
NON -CORROSIVE HOSE
CLAMP OR TAPE USED TO
FASTEN FABRIC TO PIPES
TO PREVENT BACKFILL
FROM ENTERING
STRUCTURE
RJANKTM TYPICAL TANK INLET/OUTLET DETAIL
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT: California Filtration Specialists, 858-705-6483, www.cafiltrationspecialists.com
BACKFILL COMPACTED TO
95% STANDARD PROCTOR
NOTES DENSITY
• THIS PORT IS USED TO PUMP WATER INTO THE SYSTEM
AND RE -SUSPEND ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SO THAT IT
MAY BE PUMPED OUT.
• MINIMUM REQUIRED MAINTENANCE INCLUDES A
QUARTERLY INSPECTION DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF
OPERATION AND A YEARLY INSPECTION THEREAFTER.
FLUSH AS NEEDED.
• ONLY R-TANKHD AND R-TANKSD MAY BE USED IN TRAFFIC
APPLICATIONS.
R-TAN K
(REGULAR SHOWN)
DEPTH SUMMARY
TYPE
A
B
R-TANK
12" MIN - 36" MAX
AS SHOWN
ON PLANS
R-TAN KHD
20" MIN - 6.99' MAX
12"
R-TANKSD
18" MIN - 9.99' MAX
12"
PIPE NOTCHING
PATTERN
ENVIRONMENTAL
8" NOTCHES CUT IN SHADED
AREAS (8 OPENINGS TOTAL)
--�3.511
tCFSI
C,k.1HANY4 FLW"rCIM SPECLLLM3TE
n
12" DIA. PVC
MAINTENANCE
PORT
7.1 ® • 4-
FRAME AND
COVER OR SLIP REINFORCED
ON GATE CAP CONCRETE COLLAR
WHERE REQUIRED
PAVED SURFACE
GEOGRID
NON -CORROSIVE HOSE CLAMP
1" +/- VENTING PERFORATIONS
GEOTEXTILE
PLASTIC, SLATE 5EE F'A I I ERN
OR EQUIVALENT
MAINTENANCE PORT
FOR R-TAN K LD , R-TAN KHD, AND R-TANKSD
I� I FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT: California Filtration Specialists, 858-705-6483, www.cafiltrationspecialists.com 6/16
R-Tank Stage -Storage Chart
Project Name:
Project Location:
MELROSE & MATAGUAL
VISTA, CA
Bottom Elevation of R-Tank: 100 ft
Top Elevation of R-Tank: 106.95 ft
*System Capacity: 21788.24 cf
`INCLUDES MODULE + SIDE STONE
STORAGE VOLUME @ 40% VOID RATIO
Stage
Storage
100.00 ft
0.0 cf
100.10 ft
313.5 cf
100.20 ft
627.0 cf
100.30 ft
940.5 cf
100.40 ft
1,254.0 cf
100.50 ft
1,567.5 cf
100.60 ft
1,881.0 cf
100.70 ft
2,194.5 cf
100.80 ft
2,508.0 cf
100.90 ft
2,821.5 cf
101.00 ft
3,135.0 cf
101.10 ft
3,448.5 cf
101.20 ft
3,762.0 cf
101.30 ft
4,075.5 cf
101.40 ft
4,389.0 cf
101.50 ft
4,702.5 cf
101.60 ft
5,016.0 cf
101.70 ft
5,329.5 cf
101.80 ft
5,643.0 cf
101.90 ft
5,956.5 cf
102.00 ft
6,270.0 cf
102.10 ft
6,583.5 cf
102.20 ft
6,897.0 cf
102.30 ft
7,210.5 cf
102.40 ft
7,524.0 cf
102.50 ft
7,837.5 cf
102.60 ft
8,151.0 cf
102.70 ft
8,464.5 cf
102.80 ft
8,778.0 cf
102.90 ft
9,091.5 cf
103.00 ft
9,405.0 cf
103.10 ft
9,718.5 cf
103.20 ft
10,032.0 cf
103.30 ft
10,345.5 cf
103.40 ft
10,659.0 cf
103.50 ft
10,972.5 cf
103.60 ft
11,286.0 cf
103.70 ft
11,599.5 cf
103.80 ft
11,913.0 cf
103.90 ft
12,226.5 cf
104.00 ft
12,540.0 cf
104.10 ft
12,853.5 cf
104.20 ft
13,167.0 cf
104.30 ft
13,480.5 cf
Total Number of R-Tank Units: 1003 HD PENTA
Square Footage of System: 3560 sf
Square Footage of RTANK: 3,061 sf
Stage
Storage
104.40 ft
13,794.0 cf
104.50 ft
14,107.5 cf
104.60 ft
14,421.0 cf
104.70 ft
14,734.5 cf
104.80 ft
15,048.0 cf
104.90 ft
15,361.5 cf
105.00 ft
15,675.0 cf
105.10 ft
15,988.5 cf
105.20 ft
16,302.0 cf
105.30 ft
16,615.5 cf
105.40 ft
16,929.0 cf
105.50 ft
17,242.5 cf
105.60 ft
17,556.0 cf
105.70 ft
17,869.5 cf
105.80 ft
18,183.0 cf
105.90 ft
18,496.5 cf
106.00 ft
18,810.0 cf
106.10 ft
19,123.5 cf
106.20 ft
19,437.0 cf
106.30 ft
19,750.5 cf
106.40 ft
20,064.0 cf
106.50 ft
20,377.5 cf
106.60 ft
20,691.0 cf
106.70 ft
21,004.5 cf
106.80 ft
21,318.0 cf
106.90 ft
21,631.5 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
106.95 ft
21,788.2 cf
Appendix I
Noise Technical Report
Noise Technical Report
Vista Melrose Residential
Project
FEBRUARY 2023
Prepared for:
MICHAEL TORRES
2777 Paradise Road, Suite 3406
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Prepared by:
DV DE K
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Contact: Connor Burke, INCE
Printed on 30% post -consumer recycled material.
Table of Contents
SECTION
PAGE NO.
1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Report Purpose and Scope....................................................................................................................1
1.2 Regional and Local Setting....................................................................................................................1
1.3 Project Description.................................................................................................................................1
1.4 Fundamentals of Noise and Vibration...................................................................................................1
1.4.1 Sound, Noise, and Acoustics....................................................................................................2
1.4.2 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels......................................................................................2
1.4.3 A -Weighted Sound Level...........................................................................................................7
1.4.4 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels.......................................................................8
1.4.5 Noise Descriptors......................................................................................................................8
1.4.6 Sound Propagation...................................................................................................................8
1.4.7 Groundborne Vibration Fundamentals....................................................................................9 2 Regulatory Setting.............................................................................................................................................11
2.1 Federal.................................................................................................................................................11
2.2 State.....................................................................................................................................................11
2.2.1 California Code of Regulations, Title 24............................................................................... 11
2.2.2 California Department of Health Services Guidelines......................................................... 11
2.2.3 California Department of Transportation............................................................................. 11
2.3 Local ..................................................................................................................................................... 12
2.3.1 Noise Ordinance.................................................................................................................... 12
2.3.2 General Plan Noise Element................................................................................................. 12 3 Existing Conditions............................................................................................................................................ 17 4 Thresholds of Significance............................................................................................................................... 21 5 Impact Discussion............................................................................................................................................. 23 6 Summary of Findings........................................................................................................................................33 7 References Cited............................................................................................................................................... 35 TABLES
1 Typical Sound Levels in the Environment and Industry.....................................................................................7 2 City of Vista Exterior Noise Standards............................................................................................................. 12 3 Noise and Land Use Compatability Matrix...................................................................................................... 13 4 Interior and Exterior Noise Guidelines............................................................................................................. 13 5 Measured Baseline Outdoor Ambient Noise Levels........................................................................................ 17 D U D E K 20 13
FEBRUARY 23 �
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT 6 Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels............................................................................... 23 7 Estimated Distances between Construction Activities and the Nearest Noise -sensitive Receptors........... 24 8 Predicted Construction Noise Levels per Activity Phase................................................................................ 25 9 Roadway Traffic Noise Modeling Results........................................................................................................ 27 10 Future Ambient Noise Levels at Residential Fagade..................................................................................... 28 11 Predicted Net Sound Transmission Class of Occupied Room fagade........................................................... 29
FIGURES
1 Project Location...................................................................................................................................................2 2 Site Plan................................................................................................................................................................F 3 Noise Measurement Locations.............................................................................................................................
APPENDICES
A Baseline Noise Measurement Field Data
B Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output
C Traffic Noise Modeling Input and Output
D Transmission Loss Prediction
E Residential HVAC Noise Prediction
DUDEK 20 13
FEBRUARY 23 ii
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/AbbreviationDefinition
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CEQA
California Environmental Quality Act
City
City of Vista
CNEL
Community Noise Equivalent Level
dB
decibel
dBA
A -weighted decibel
FTA
Federal Transit Administration
ips
inches per second
Ldn
day -night average noise level
Leq
equivalent noise level
Lmax
maximum sound level
Lmin
minimum sound level
Vista Melrose
proposed project
PPV
peak particle velocity
RCNM
Roadway Construction Noise Model
SLM
Sound level meter
SPL
Sound pressure level
ST
Short-term
STC
Sound Transmission Class
TL
Transmission Loss
VdB
Velocity Decibel
DUDEK
14613
FEBRUARY 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
DUDEK 20 13
FEBRUARY 23
1 Introduction
1.1 Report Purpose and Scope
This technical noise report evaluates the potential noise impacts during construction and operation of the proposed Vista Melrose Residential project (proposed project). This assessment utilizes the significance thresholds in Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.).
1.2 Regional and Local Setting
The project site is located in the central portion of the City of Vista in San Diego County, CA at 560 S. Melrose Drive and 622 S. Melrose Drive. The project site is bound by Matagual Drive to the north, S. Melrose Drive to the West, commercial and residential development to the south and residential development to the east (Figure 1, Project Location). A portion of the project site is vacant with the Thriving Life Church and associated parking lot on the western portion of the site, and a single residence in the southeastern portion of the site. The approximately 5.55- acre site includes Assessor's Parcel Numbers designated Commercial Office (APNs 166-280-60-00 and 166-280- 61-00) and Medium Low Density Residential (APN 166-280-18-00) in the City's General Plan and zoned R-1 (APNs 166-280-60-00 and 166-280-18-00) and commercial (APN 166-280-61-00).
1.3 Project Description
The proposed Vista Melrose Residential Project (Project) consists of a residential development within the City of Vista (City) at 560 S. Melrose Drive, 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN#166-280-61-00. The approximately 5.55-acre site includes Assessor's Parcel Numbers [APNs] 166-280-60-00, 166-280-61-00, and 166-280-18-00. The properties at 560 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00 are both currently zoned 0-P (Office Professional) and a corresponding General Plan designation of Commercial Office (CO). The property at 622 S. Melrose Drive is currently zoned R-1 (Residential) and has a corresponding General Plan designation of Medium Low Density Residential (MLD). The applicant, TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC, proposes to rezone all three properties to R-1-13 (Residential) with a corresponding General Plan change to Medium Density Residential (MD). Furthermore, the applicant proposes a thirty-seven (37) lot Tentative Subdivision Map to redevelop the site to include thirty-four (34) single-family residences, which would result in a proposed density of 6.1 dwelling units per acre, a private street, private park with a tot lot and a dog park (Figure 2, Site Plan).
The project would include a total of 108,911 square feet of open space, of which 12,526 square feet is common open space. The project would include landscaping throughout the project site and alongthe project boundary Each residence would be two stories, contain 4 bedrooms with 5th optional bedroom or loft and would have a 2- car garage. The project will utilize the City of Vista Small Lot Subdivision standards per Vista Development Code Section
18.33 to achieve their project design. The proposed project would also include landscaping and offsite street and utility improvements.
1.4 Fundamentals of Noise and Vibration
The following is a brief discussion of fundamental noise concepts and terminology.
DUDEK 20 13
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
1.4.1 Sound, Noise, and Acoustics
Sound is actually a process that consists of three components: the sound source, sound path, and sound receiver.
All three components must be present for sound to exist. Without a source to produce sound, there is no sound.
Similarly, without a medium to transmit sound pressure waves, there is no sound. Finally, sound must be received; a hearing organ, sensor, or object must be present to perceive, register, or be affected by sound or noise. In most situations, there are many different sound sources, paths, and receptors rather than just one of each. Acoustics is the field of science that deals with the production, propagation, reception, effects, and control of sound. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired.
1.4.2 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels
The amplitude of a sound determines its loudness. Loudness of sound increases with increasing amplitude. Sound pressure amplitude is measured in units of micronewton per square meter, also called micropascal. One micropascal is approximately one -hundred billionth (0.00000000001) of normal atmospheric pressure. The pressure of a very loud sound may be 200 million micropascals, or 10 million times the pressure of the weakest audible sound. Because expressing sound levels in terms of micropascal would be very cumbersome, sound pressure level in logarithmic units is used instead to describe the ratio of actual sound pressure to a reference pressure squared. These units are called Bels. To provide a finer resolution, a Bel is subdivided into 10 decibels (dB).
DUDEK 20 13
FEBRUARY 33
Lake Forest Lake Canyon Lake Palm Springs La
Coachella
s 'NL
Z Luz
6 Orange Elsinore Wildomar Riverside Quinla
o
sq Duran T
nge',:s Dr o.
ti
County Murrieta County
Park w
pDr
Sm ith or n
Dana Point Temecula
Ic
'i
San Clemente,
Project Site
Oceanside
Spites S1 �_
Nevada Ave c
Vi scar
'},.
Tatum Sl
at k`�h 01
0 an Marcos
d m
ocapah SF :. Ave
„� E`
/3f/AuO.
Carlsbad S A N D I E G O
Encinitas'
Solana Beach COUNTY
`T
_
1 ..
Hea!her Dr
Del Mar Poway �. � `
IY,
Ced
Lanear
-
Park ..
,St3
trk
Olwe AVe
San , Santee
rj
o
C
AN-V,sla t
Diego La Mesa
Vista Magner
P
a
cinc
Lemon Grove
In _
-
- Camino
C' VNa Mktdle School
f Technology.
Center
National City
_ C ,
o Science, and Math
Park
Coronado Chula .,_...
—
9\ �n a
a�
Vista
o
Imperial Beach\qS1
Pnao°
�
!,r
!L
cN
sta
Z?'
"Kati
No ePn r
C) �
C
hjor Avr.
Y
G
Nash In Q
Q Strancis
- . Franciss
arai o -
a S� •Germ
1'oJ °°`e Jee (Jr
es
3 Crescent Dr
on Jthar a
-
a osoreR o
-' \a
Srerra 1/
- o
reek 4
z (� m Si
Vons
vN �`sa
1daii FLess4
/ro VsyqVe
^m
�C`
1r
/r AJ d� m
n f.fy�
51-I Alta
Breeze Hill
yjp I:
v
h°aO
Pos'/ J/ y}'ay
P'Utrg0 PI
Q� g
Ro
moo`
❑ "
NF
N
Z%
agzJo > o o
P
e?E L .O`
? Crr
f
�z�' 'e:> 9eLca Via Santa Paulo °
� �
C/,ery
'Or
5!
z�' - - Alirnto Ct
a BreaI
Gan
Hill P.,
ereeaa Hill
- Elementary
7. s a Ct h1ei,.,e Vy 3y
c
Sun —I I
-
r ti
'y
', 1e5010F -
u� Trl
4 1:,e4agdre dare. R:1
mr,9 "On Dr
S"le.
'✓ra
?o. Pa � uiiir
(�
tiFa�Vsta Ur
- rya
..Pk
h/hit -.
. 1 — `-'r+Ii•1
\
L` U,
C
P P,inyoh�-._vmVP
ry
Viet'
rmo yay
y F*\anC v
N S �a
Rd
nda \
La° aV eyP 7
N p1LG
viz
0Hillcrest
sun Cur Fdn,t Wa)
r,parkan Normou`l� ¢ti o
Park
\''
'
aJC -°
Cr -
Madison -.
Middle
0\
1 ake glvn _
Lake Lake.
Elementary
Southr:f e S^
9 !ay
Park Fern PI
-'aG/ornta Oak DI
n Arnom
Pod
for Or
polling Hill, Rd
z Os Madrid Or
c C
'9 :•r,
n�<
Pita°' kh
R
p� x om t',
Thibodo
Park
9ry9e
Rd °''o/
1Nc�
wr/oma Dr S o aPy
Vhlywood
�
J
o
Ln
y
Eiafq
y`a oh
?o
shadowridge
San Francisco Peak
ah
_
A°
P q
Club
5,r•,\na S
6 �'ia las L (j
DOdega 4 4
�
3 Prlgosway
Pf0
v� monforyp
•Wfir ay
\� Ln
3 haD g
°�c\.
oR�
acz'N Snadov;ndge or
[IPA_
.,
V �a G �.•n Dr `
111..rhf...
C lac
,yfrnE!/m, Rancho
i
Rancho
Buena
��ay
Buena
j aID, U Vista High
Vista
?"lay
'rJar O
HighMd
pepanL
., LWrrE/r.,,
O Project Boundary
,h aY
c
o ADNg[,.
Buena
narkista
m
ra
.3
'N 'don• Ridgep � � _
BalHietls �,
� CprOhatlo
.,
Co'.' HE ..
.�a
SOURCE: Esri (Accessed 2022) FIGURE 1
D D E K © 0 1,000 2,000 Project Location
Feet
Vista Melrose
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
DUDEK 20 13
FEBRUARY 33
i
SOURCE: KTGY2022
DUDEK
MpTAGUA� DRIVE �_
TYP. LOT
ENLARGEMENT
Scale:1"=10'
FIGURE 2
Site Plan
Vista Melrose
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
DUDEK 20 13
FEBRUARY 33
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
1.4.3 A -Weighted Sound Level
Sound pressure level alone is not a reliable indicator of loudness. The frequency, or pitch, of a sound also has a substantial effect on how humans will respond. Although the intensity (energy per unit area) of the sound is a purely physical quantity, the loudness, or human response, is determined by the characteristics of the human ear.
Human hearing is limited not only in the range of audible frequencies, but also in the way it perceives the sound in that range. In general, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 and 5,000 hertz, and it perceives a sound within that range as more intense than a sound of higher or lower frequency with the same magnitude. To approximate the frequency response of the human ear, a series of sound level adjustments is usually applied to the sound measured by a sound level meter. The adjustments (referred to as a weighting network) are frequency -dependent.
The A -scale weighting network approximates the frequency response of the average young ear when listening to ordinary sounds. When people make judgments about the relative loudness or annoyance of a sound, their judgments correlate well with the A -scale sound levels of those sounds. Other weighting networks have been devised to address high noise levels or other special situations (e.g., B-scale, C-scale, D-scale), but these scales are rarely used in conjunction with most environmental noise. Noise levels are typically reported in terms of A -weighted sound levels. All sound levels discussed in this report are A -weighted decibels (dBA). Examples of typical noise levels for common indoor and outdoor activities are depicted in Table 1.
Table 1. Typical Sound Levels in the Environment and Industry Common Outdoor Activities
—
Noise Level (dB) Common Indoor Activities
110 Rock band
Jet fly over at 300 meters
(1,000 feet)
100
—
Gas lawn mower at 1 meter (3 feet)
90 —
Diesel truck at 15 meters (50 feet),
at 80 kilometers per hour
(50 miles per hour)
80 Food blender at 1 meter (3 feet); garbage
disposal at 1 meter (3 feet)
Noisy urban area, daytime; gas lawn
mower at 30 meters (100 feet)
70 Vacuum cleaner at 3 meters (10 feet)
Commercial area; heavy traffic at
90 meters (300 feet)
60 Normal speech at 1 meter (3 feet)
Quiet urban, daytime
50 Large business office; dishwasher next room
Quiet urban, nighttime
40 Theater; large conference room (background)
Quiet suburban, nighttime
30 Library
Quiet rural, nighttime
20 Bedroom at night; concert hall (background)
—
10 Broadcast/Recording studio
Lowest threshold of human hearing
0 Lowest threshold of human hearing
Source: Caltrans 2020.
DUDEK 20 13
FEBRUARY 33
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
1.4.4 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels
Under controlled conditions in an acoustics laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear is able to discern changes in sound levels of 1 dBA when exposed to steady, single -frequency signals in the mid -frequency range. Outside such controlled conditions, the trained ear can detect changes of 2 dBA in normal environmental noise. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear, however, can barely perceive noise level changes of 3 dBA. A change of 5 dBA is readily perceptible, and a change of 10 dBA is perceived as twice (if a gain) or half (if a loss) as loud. A doubling of sound energy results in a 3-dBA increase in sound, which means that a doubling of sound energy (e.g., doubling the volume of traffic on a road) would result in a barely perceptible change in sound level.
1.4.5 Noise Descriptors
Additional units of measure have been developed to evaluate the long-term characteristics of sound. The energy - equivalent sound level (Leq) is also referred to as the time -average sound level. It is the equivalent steady-state or constant sound level that in a stated period of time would contain the same acoustical energy as the time -varying sound level during the same time period. For instance, the 1-hour A -weighted equivalent sound level, Leq(h), is the energy average of the A -weighted sound levels occurring during a 1-hour period, and is the basis for most of the County Noise Ordinance standards.
People are generally more sensitive to and thus potentially more annoyed by noise occurring during the evening and nighttime hours. Hence, another noise descriptor used in community noise assessments —the community noise equivalent level (CNEL)—represents a time -weighted, 24-hour average noise level based on the A -weighted sound level. However, unlike an unmodified 24 hour Leq value, the CNEL descriptor accounts for increased noise sensitivity during the evening (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) and nighttime (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) by adding 5 dBA and 10 dBA, respectively, to the average sound levels occurring during these defined hours within a 24-hour period.
1.4.6 Sound Propagation
Sound propagation (i.e., the traverse of sound from a noise emission source position to a receiver location) is influenced by multiple factors that include geometric spreading, ground absorption, atmospheric effects, and occlusion by natural terrain and/or features of the built environment.
Sound levels attenuate (or diminish) geometrically at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance from an outdoor point -type source due to the spherical spreading of sound energy with increasing distance travelled. The effects of atmospheric conditions such as humidity, temperature, and wind gradients are typically distance - dependent and can also temporarily either increase or decrease sound levels measured or perceived at a receptor location. In general, the greater the distance the receiver is from the source of sound emission, the greater the potential for variation in sound levels at the receptor due to these atmospheric effects. Additional attenuation can result from sound path occlusion and diffraction due to intervention of natural (ridgelines, dense forests, etc.) and built features (such as solid walls, buildings and other structures).
DUDEK 20 13 $
FEBRUARY 33
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
1.4.7 Groundborne Vibration Fundamentals
Groundborne vibration is fluctuating or oscillatory motion transmitted through the ground mass (i.e., soils, clays, and rock strata). The strength of groundborne vibration attenuates rapidly over distance. Some soil types transmit vibration quite efficiently; other types (primarily sandy soils) do not. Several basic measurement units are commonly used to describe the intensity of ground vibration. The descriptors used by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) are peak particle velocity (PPV), in units of inches per second (ips), and velocity decibel (VdB) that is based on a root -mean square (RMS) of the vibration signal magnitude. The calculation to determine PPV at a given distance is as follows:
PPVdistance = PPVret*(25/D)^1.5
Where:
PPVdistance = the peak particle velocity in inches per second of the equipment adjusted for distance PPVret = the reference vibration level in inches per second at 25 feet D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver
DUDEK 20 13 9
FEBRUARY 33
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
D U D E K 20 13 10
FEBRUARY 23
2 Regulatory Setting
2.1 Federal
In its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidance manual, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) recommends a daytime construction noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq over an 8-hour period (FTA 2018) when detailed construction noise assessments are performed to evaluate potential impacts to community residences surrounding a project. Although this FTA guidance is not a regulation, it can serve as a quantified standard in the absence of such noise limits at the state and local jurisdictional levels.
2.2 State
2.2.1 California Code of Regulations, Title 24
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations sets standards that new development in California must meet.
According to Title 24, interior noise levels are not to exceed 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room (ICC 2019).
2.2.2 California Department of Health Services Guidelines The California Department of Health Services has developed guidelines of community noise acceptability for use by local agencies (OPR 2017). Selected relevant levels are listed here:
■ Below 60 dBA CNEL: normally acceptable for low -density residential use ■ 50 to 70 dBA: conditionally acceptable for low -density residential use ■ Below 65 dBA CNEL: normally acceptable for high -density residential use and transient lodging ■ 60 to 70 dBA CNEL: conditionally acceptable for high -density residential, transient lodging, churches, educational, and medical facilities
The normally acceptable exterior noise level for high -density residential use is up to 65 dBA CNEL. Conditionally acceptable exterior noise levels range up to 70 dBA CNEL for high -density residential use.
2.2.3 California Department of Transportation
In its Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (Caltrans 2013b), the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) recommends 0.5 ips PPV as a threshold for the avoidance of structural damage to typical newer residential buildings exposed to continuous or frequent intermittent sources of groundborne vibration. For transient vibration events, such as blasting, the damage risk threshold would be 1.0 ips PPV (Caltrans 2013b) at the same type of newer residential structures. For older structures, these guidance thresholds would be more stringent: 0.3 ips PPV for continuous/intermittent vibration sources, and 0.5 ips PPV for transient vibration events.
With respect to human annoyance, Caltrans guidance indicates that building occupants exposed to continuous groundborne vibration in the range of 0.2-0.6 ips PPV would find it "unpleasant or "annoying" and thus a likely significant impact. Although these Caltrans guidance thresholds are not regulations, they can serve as quantified standards in the absence of such limits at the local jurisdictional level.
D U D E K 20 13 11
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
2.3 Local
2.3.1 Noise Ordinance
The City's noise control ordinance (Municipal Code, Chapter 8.32) is wholly adopted from the County of San Diego's regulations relating to the control of noise, excepting therefrom the table set out in Section 36.404 and replacing it with the City's Table 8.32.040 (see Table 2 below). The ordinance legally sets exterior property line noise limits for various land uses in terms of 1-hour Leq value, unless a variance has been applied for (citing mitigation circumstances as applicable) and granted. As specified therein, commercial areas (zone C-3) are restricted in the amount of noise that can legally be generated at the property at the property line to 60 A -weighted decibels (dBA) between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 55 dBA between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (see Table 2 below). Moreover, in the event that the alleged offensive noise contains music or speech conveying informational content, the 1-hour Leq limit is reduced by 5 dB.
Table 2. City of Vista Exterior Noise Standards
Applicable Limit
Z. -
(decibels)
..
A-1, E-1, 0 & OSR
50 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
R-1B, MHP
45 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
R-M
55 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
50 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
C-1, C-2, 0-3, C-T, OP, M-IJ and Downtown Specific
60 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Plan
55 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
M-1, I-P, all areas of the Vista Business Park
70 Anytime
Specific Plan and Specific Plan 14
Source: City of Vista Municipal Code, Chapter 8.32.
In addition, a person cannot operate construction equipment that exceeds an average sound level of 75 dBA for an 8-hour period, between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., when measured at the boundary line of the property where the noise source is located or on any occupied property where the noise is being received. Construction equipment cannot be operated between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., or on Sundays and holidays.
2.3.2 General Plan Noise Element
The Noise Element of the City of Vista General Plan 2030 (City of Vista 2011) establishes target maximum noise levels in the City. Table 3 (Table NE-3 of the Noise Element) provides guidance for the acceptability of certain types of developments, which acts as criteria for assessing the compatibility of proposed land uses in corresponding land use designations. Table 3 depicts "normally acceptable," "conditionally acceptable," "normally unacceptable," and "clearly unacceptable" exterior noise levels for those uses and land use designations. The matrix is typically used at the General Plan or zoning levels of approval, as well as for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis.
Table 4 (reproducing Table NE-4 of the Noise Element) provides the interior and exterior guidelines for various uses and developments. The noise guidelines function as City policyfor new land uses and acceptable noise levels for development of new land uses. In addition, the provisions of the State of California Noise Insulation Standards (California D U D E K 20 13 12
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT Administrative Code, Title 24) are enforced to specify that the indoor noise levels for multifamily residential living spaces shall not exceed 45 dB CNEL (or day -night average sound level (Ldn)) due to the combined effect of all noise sources. The state requires implementation of this indoor standard when the outdoor noise levels exceed 60 dB CNEL (or Ldn). Title 24 requires that this standard be applied to all new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings otherthan detached single-family dwellings. As a matter of policy, the City also applies this standard to new single-family developments, mixed - use developments, and condominium conversions where appropriate.
Table 3. Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix
General Plan
.
.Vista
,
Land Use Designations
Uses
Rural Residential (RR)
Residential Single Family
_ 75
Open Space Residential (OSR)
Low Density (LD)
Medium Low Density (MILD)
Medium Density (MD)
Medium Density (MHD)
Multiple Family, Duplex, Mobile
_ 75
High Density (HD)
Home Park
Mixed Use (MU)
Mixed -Use Residential,
_ 80
Commercial, and Office
Development
Commercial Office (CO)
Professional and Private Offices,
_ 72.5
Commercial Neighborhood (CN)
Daycare, Neighborhood -Serving
Retail and Restaurants, Board
Rooms, Conference Rooms,
Theatres, Auditoriums, Concert
Halls, Meeting Halls
Civic Activity (CA)
Schools, Parks, Playgrounds, Fire
_ 80
Stations, Courthouses, Libraries,
Municipal Storage Yards
Commercial Service (CS)
Community Serving Retail and
_ 75
General Commercial (GC)
Restaurants
Commercial Industrial Service
Manufacturing, Kitchen,
_ 75
(CIS)
Warehousing
Industrial General (IG)
Research Light Industrial (RLI)
Open Space/Parks (OS)
Golf Courses, Outdoor Spectator
_ 75
Sports, Amusement Parks
A = Normally Acceptable, B = Conditionally Acceptable, C = Normally Unacceptable, D = Clearly Unacceptable Source: Based on California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (2003); Modified for the City of Vista Table 4. Interior and Exterior Noise Guidelines
D U D E K 20 13 13
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT Table 4. Interior and Exterior Noise Guidelines
Notes:
i Noise standard with windows closed. Mechanical ventilation shall be provided per Uniform Building Code requirements to provide a habitable environment.
2 Indoor environment excluding bathrooms, toilets, closets, and corridors. 3 Outdoor environment limited to rear yard of single-family homes, multifamily patios and balconies (with a depth of 6 feet or more) and common recreation areas.
4 Outdoor environment limited to playground areas, picnic areas, and other areas of frequent human use.
The City's Noise Element outlines general goals, objectives, and relevant noise policies that include the following:
■ NE Goal 1: Protect people who live, work, and recreate in the City from excessive transportation noise with an emphasis on protecting residential neighborhoods and other noise -sensitive receptors (i.e., picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, golf courses, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals).
o NE Policy 1.1: Discourage new noise -sensitive land uses from locating, and existing noise -sensitive land uses from expanding, in areas adjacent to roadways where noise levels are 65 dB CNEL or above. o NE Policy 1.2: Require California Title 24 building code noise insulation with minimum 25 dB noise reduction for new development where existing/future roadway noise levels are 65 db CNEL or above. o NE Policy 1.3: Encourage the use of open and green spaces between noise sensitive land uses and roadways that create noise levels of 65 dB or above.
o NE Policy 1.4: Require developers to implement noise abatement that meets Caltrans' acoustical criteria if new developments cause increases in traffic volumes that result in roadway or rail noise levels of 65 dB CNEL or above at existing or planned future noise -sensitive receptors. ■ NE Goal 2: Protect people who live, work, and recreate in the City from unwarranted and excessive levels of noise, with special emphasis on protecting residential neighborhoods from intrusive noise. o NE Policy 2.2: Adopt and apply the Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and the Interior and Exterior Noise Guidelines as guidelines to establish acceptable noise standards for various uses throughout the City. o NE Policy 2.3: Require new development to minimize noise impacts upon adjacent uses through site and building design, setbacks, berms, landscaping, and/or other noise abatement techniques. o NE Policy 2.5: Require that an acoustical analysis be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer in instances where noise -sensitive uses are proposed in noise impacted areas.
D U D E K 20 13 14
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT o NE Policy 2.7: Encourage residential developments within mixed -use developments and located adjacent to commercial or retail and entertainment -related uses to notify potential residents that they may be affected by noise from these uses.
D U D E K 20 13 15
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
D U D E K 20 13 16
FEBRUARY 23
3 Existing Conditions
SPL measurements were conducted near the project site on July 27, 2022, to quantify and characterize the existing outdoor noise levels. Table 5 provides the location, date, and time at which these baseline noise level measurements were taken. The SPL measurements were performed by an attending Dudek field investigator using a Rion NL-52 sound level meter equipped with a 0.5-inch, pre -polarized condenser microphone with pre -amplifier.
The sound level meter meets the current American National Standards Institute standard for a Type 1 (Precision Grade) sound level meter (SLM). The accuracy of the SLM was verified using a reference sound signal (i.e., field calibrator) before and after the measurements, and the measurements were conducted with the microphone positioned approximately 5 feet above the ground.
Three short-term noise level measurement locations (ST1-ST3) that represent the vicinities of existing sensitive receivers were selected on and near the project site. These locations are depicted as receivers ST1-ST3 on Figure 3, Noise Measurement and Modeling Locations. The Leq and Lmax noise levels are provided in Table 5. The primary noise sources at the sites identified in Table 5 consisted of traffic along adjacent roadways, distant aircraft, and birdsong. As shown in Table 5, the measured sound levels ranged from approximately 50.3 dBA Leq at ST1 to 66.8 dBA Leq at ST3. Noise measurement data is also included in Appendix A, Baseline Noise Measurement Field Data.
These samples of daytime Leq measured at the three representative receptor positions in Table 5 can be interpreted as approximations of CNEL, since evening SPL would likely be 5 dBA less, and nighttime SPL would be 10 dBA less than the daytime values (FTA 2006).
Table S. Measured Baseline Outdoor Ambient Noise Levels Site
Location/Address
I Date/Time Leq (dBA)
Lmax (dBA)
ST1
Eastern property line of proposed project
2022-07-27, 12:20 PM 51.1
58.2 boundary, adjacent to 824 Matagual Dr.,
to 12:30 PM
Vista, CA 92081
ST2
Southern property line of proposed
2022-07-27, 12:45 PM
50.3 57.7
project boundary, adjacent to 620 S
to 12:55 PM
Melrose Dr., Vista, CA 92081
ST3
Western property line of proposed project
2022-07-27, 12:00 PM
66.8 72.8
boundary, adjacent to S Melrose Dr.
to 12:10 PM
Source: Appendix A.
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time -averaged sound level); Lm = maximum sound level during the measurement interval; dBA = A -weighted decibels; ST = short-term noise measurement locations.
D U D E K 20 13 17
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
D U D E K 20 13 18
FEBRUARY 23
u
Rd
A
v
a-
1011, AA
>r
1 e
rr
" `° �• ` r' = r ri+ Las Palmas Dr
CD
• 10` I III � � �
. 1 .� I I , ''. �. i� /'s= • , ' .- �' S. � /1' . . � � as ....- - � -
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
D U D E K 20 13 20
FEBRUARY 23
4 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria are based on Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) and will be used to determine the significance of potential noise and vibration impacts.
Impacts associated with noise and vibration would be significant if the proposed 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 applicable standards of other agencies.
■ Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. ■ Expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels (for a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport).
In light of these above significance criteria, this analysis uses the following standards to evaluate potential noise and vibration impacts.
• Construction noise - the City's noise ordinance states noise from construction equipment operation shall not exceed 75 dBA for an eight -hour period, between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., when measured at the boundary line of the property where the noise source is located or on any occupied property where the noise is being received. It shall be unlawful for any person to operate or cause to be operated, construction equipment on a Sunday or a holiday.
• Off -site project -attributed transportation noise - For purposes for this analysis, a direct roadway noise impact would be considered significant if increases in roadway traffic noise levels attributed to the proposed project were greater than 3 dBA CNEL at an existing noise -sensitive land use. • Off -site project -attributed stationary noise - For purposes for this analysis, a noise impact would be considered significant if noise from typical operation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning and other electro-mechanical systems associated with the proposed project exceeded the following:
- 55 dBA hourly Leq at the property line from 7:00 a.m. to 9:59 p.m., and 50 dBA hourly Leq from 10:00 p.m. to 6:59 a.m.
- The project line is zoned as Office -Professional (0-P), but the adjoining property parcels to the south and west which are zoned as R-1 and E-1 respectively. At such boundaries of dissimilar zoning, the arithmetic average of the two limits apply, meaning that 50 dBA hourly Leq (i.e., [55+451/2) would be the nighttime threshold along most of the project's southern and western boundaries. ■ Construction vibration - Guidance from Caltrans indicates that a vibration velocity level of 0.2 ips PPV received at a structure would be considered annoying by occupants within (Caltrans 2013b). As for the receiving structure itself, aforementioned Caltrans guidance from Section 2 recommends that a vibration level of 0.3 ips PPV would represent the threshold for building damage risk.
For purposes of disclosure, since current CEQA noise criteria listed above do not consider it, this analysis also evaluates compatibility of on -site traffic noise exposure levels with the City of Vista exterior and interior noise standards of 65 dBA CNEL and 45 dBA CNEL, respectively.
D U D E K 20 13 21
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
D U D E K 14613 22
FEBRUARY 2023
5 Impact Discussion
Potential noise and vibration impacts attributed to project construction and operation are studied in the following subsections that are categorized by the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G significance for noise. a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Short -Term Construction
Construction noise and vibration are temporary phenomena, with emission levels varying from hour to hour and day to day, depending on the equipment in use, the operations performed, and the distance between the source and receptor. Equipment that would be in use during construction would include, in part, graders, backhoes, rubber -tired dozers, loaders, cranes, forklifts, pavers, rollers, and air compressors. The typical maximum noise levels at a distance of 50 feet from various pieces of construction equipment and activities anticipated for use on the proposed project site are presented in Table 6. Note that the equipment noise levels presented in Table 6 are maximum noise levels. Usually, construction equipment operates in alternating cycles of full power and low power, producing average noise levels over time that are less than the maximum noise level. The average sound level of construction activity also depends on the amount of time that the equipment operates and the intensity of construction activities during that time.
Table 6 Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels Equipment .-
All Other Equipment > 5 HP
.:A at 50 Feet)
85 Backhoe
78 Compressor (air)
78 Concrete Saw
90 Crane
81 Dozer
82 Excavator
81 Flat Bed Truck
74 Front End Loader
79 Generator
72 Grader
85 Man Lift
75 Paver
77 Roller
80 Scraper
84 Welder / Torch
73 Source: DOT 2006.
Note: Lmax = maximum sound level; dBA = A -weighted decibels.
D U D E K 20 13 23
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT Aggregate noise emission from proposed project construction activities, broken down by sequential phase, was predicted at two evaluation distances to the nearest existing noise -sensitive receptor: 1) from the nearest position of the construction site boundary and 2) from the geographic center of the construction site, which serves as the time -averaged location or geographic acoustical centroid of active construction equipment for the phase under study. The intent of the former distance is to help evaluate anticipated construction noise from a limited quantity of equipment or vehicle activity expected to be at the boundary for some period of time, which would be most appropriate for phases such as site preparation, grading, and paving. The latter distance is used in a manner similar to the general assessment technique as described in the FTA guidance for construction noise assessment, when the location of individual equipment for a given construction phase is uncertain over some extent of (or the entirety of) the construction site area. In this studied scenario, because of the equipment location uncertainty, all the equipment for a construction phase is assumed to operate —on average —from the acoustical centroid position. Table 7 summarizes these two distances to the apparent closest noise -sensitive receptor for each of the seven sequential construction phases. At the site boundary, this analysis assumes that up to only one piece of equipment (conservatively, the loudest) of each listed type per phase will be involved in the construction activity for up to half of the 8- hour period at this closest distance to the receptor. In other words, at such proximity, the operating equipment cannot "stack" or crowd the vicinity and still operate. For the acoustical centroid case, which intends to be a geographic average position for all equipment during the indicated phase, this analysis assumes that the equipment may be operating up to all 8 hours per day.
Table 7. Estimated Distances between Construction Activities and the Nearest Noise -sensitive Receptors
Distance from Nearest Noise- Distance from Nearest Noise - Construction Phase
Sensitive Receptor to Sensitive Receptor to
(and Equipment
Construction Site Boundary .. of Site
Types-.
-
Demolition (concrete saw/industrial
180 290
saw, dozer, excavator)
Site preparation (dozer, tractor,
12.5 190
front end loader, backhoe)
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper,
12.5 190
track dozer, tractor, front end
loader, backhoe)
Utilities (excavator)
50 165
Streets (grader, paver)
100
105
Building construction (crane, forklift,
50 165
generator, tractor, front end loader,
backhoe, welder/torch)
Paving (paver, paving equipment,
85 165
roller)
Architectural coating (air
50 165
compressor)
A Microsoft Excel -based noise prediction model emulating and using reference data from the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (FHWA 2008) was used to estimate D U D E K 20 13 24
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT construction noise levels atthe nearest occupied noise -sensitive land use. (Although the RCNM was funded and promulgated bythe Federal Highway Administration, it is often used for non -roadway projects, because the same types of construction equipment used for roadway projects are often used for other types of construction.) Input variables forthe predictive modeling consist of the equipmenttype and number of each (e.g., two graders, a loader, a tractor), the duty cycle for each piece of equipment (e.g., percentage of time within a specific time period, such as an hour, when the equipment is expected to operate at full power or capacity and thus make noise at a level comparable to what is presented in Table 6), and the distance from the noise -sensitive receiver. The predictive model also considers how many hours that equipment may be on site and operating (or idling) within an established work shift. Conservatively, no topographical or structural shielding was assumed in the modeling. The RCNM has default duty -cycle values for the various pieces of equipment, which were derived from an extensive study of typical construction activity patterns.
Those default duty -cycle values were used for this noise analysis, which is detailed in Appendix B, Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output, and produce the predicted results displayed in Table 8.
Table 8. Predicted Construction Noise Levels per Activity Phase Leq at Nearest Noise- 8-Hour Leq at Nearest Noise-
Receptor8-Hour
-..
Construction Phase (and
Construction Site Boundary Acoustical Centroid of Site
Equipment Types Involved*)
(d BA) (d BA)
Demolition (concrete saw/industrial
65.1 67.1
saw, dozer, excavator)
Site preparation (dozer, tractor, front
89.0 71.0
end loader, backhoe)
Grading (excavator, grader, scraper,
90.0 72.5
track dozer, tractor, front end loader,
backhoe)
Utilities (excavator)
73.9 66.0
Streets (grader, paver)
69.7 72.9
Building construction (crane, forklift,
76.9 68.8
generator, tractor, front end loader,
backhoe, welder/torch)
Paving (paver, paving equipment,
72.8 72.1
roller)
Architectural coating (air
70.9 58.8
compressor)
Notes: 6q = equivalent noise level; dBA = A -weighted decibels. *italicized equipment types are the loudest and used singularly to evaluate noise for the "nearest' assessment scenario.
As presented in Table 8, the estimated construction noise levels are predicted to be as high as 90 dBA Leq over an 8-hour period at the nearest occupied property (as close as 12.5 feet away) when grading activities take place near the southeastern project boundaries. Note that these estimated noise levels at a source - to -receiver distance of 12.5 feet are conservatively high, in that they presume the noted pieces of heavy equipment would each operate, on average at this distance, for a cumulative period of four hours a day.
The reality of construction progress on -site would likely be different. By way of example, a grader might make multiple passes on site that are this close to a receiving occupied property; but, for the remaining D U D E K 20 13 25
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT time during the day, the grader may be sufficiently farther away and either performing work at a more distant location or simply not operating.
Underthe studied conditions, construction activity noise levels associated with site preparation and grading phases are expected to exceed an 8 hour Leq value of 75 dBA Leq and thereby exceed the City's adopted daytime threshold for construction noise exposure at an occupied property. Therefore, the following suggested practices would be incorporated into the project's construction program as mitigation measures (N01-1):
■ Administrative controls (e.g., reduce operating time of equipment and/or prohibit usage of equipment type[s] within certain distances).
■ Engineering controls (upgrade noise controls, such as install better engine exhaust mufflers). ■ Install noise abatement on the site boundary fencing (or within, as practical and appropriate) in the form of sound blankets or comparable temporary barriers (e.g., stacked sheets of plywood supported with framing) to occlude construction noise emission between the site (or specific equipment operation as the situation may define) and offsite noise -sensitive receptor(s) of concern. ■ At the outset of a project construction activity, an unattended noise level monitor might be deployed onsite to measure and document that noise exposure levels attributed to project construction activity at adjacent offsite sensitive receptors are in conformance with the 75 dBA 8 hour Leq threshold.
As an example of the noise abatement option for N01-1 listed above, Appendix B includes a worksheet that exhibits City -compliant noise levels (i.e., less than 75 dBA 8-hour Leq) when an 8-foot tall temporary barrier is positioned to intervene the sound path between the equipment noise source and the receptor position.
Although nearby occupied properties such as residential to the east would be exposed to elevated construction noise levels, the increased noise levels would typically be relatively short term. It is anticipated that construction activities associated with the proposed project would take place only within the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, in compliance with the City's noise ordinance.
In summary, construction noise during allowable daytime hours would have the potential to exceed the 75 dbA Leq 8-hour threshold at the adjacent property lines on occasion. Thus, temporary construction -related noise impacts would be considered potentially significant without application of N01-1 as part of the construction program. With proper implementation of N01-1, anticipated construction noise impact status would remain less than significant with mitigation.
Long -Term Operational
Off -Site Traffic Noise Exposure
The proposed project would result in the creation of additional vehicle trips on local arterial roadways (i.e., Melrose Drive), which could result in increased traffic noise levels at adjacent noise -sensitive land uses.
Appendix C, Traffic Noise Modeling Input and Output, contains a spreadsheet with traffic volume data (average daily traffic) for Melrose Drive. In particular, the proposed project would create additional traffic along Melrose Drive, which according to the Traffic Impact Assessment prepared for the proposed project (Linscott Law & Greenspan, 2022) would add 340 total average daily trips to adjacent to the project site.
D U D E K 20 13 26
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT According to Caltrans, a three-dBA change in sound is the beginning at which humans generally notice a barely perceptible change in sound, a five-dBA change is generally readily perceptible, and a 10-dBA increase is perceived by most people as a doubling of the existing noise level (Caltrans 2013a). Due to the existing and proposed urban setting of the project area, a readily perceptible change in noise (five dBA) would be the appropriate threshold to determine significant increases in traffic noise.
Potential noise effects from vehicular traffic were assessed using the Federal Highway Administration's Traffic Noise Model version 2.5 (FHWA 2004). Information used in the model included the roadway geometry, existing (year 2022), and existing plus project traffic volumes and posted traffic speeds. Noise levels were modeled at representative noise -sensitive receivers ST1 through ST4, as shown in Figure 3.
The receivers were modeled to be 5 feet above the local ground elevation. The noise model results are summarized in Table 9. Based on results of the model, implementation of the proposed project would not result in readily perceptible increases in traffic noise.
Table 9. Roadway Traffic Noise Modeling Results
ST1
68.3 68.3
0.0 ST2
69.0 69.2
0.2 ST3
66.5 66.7
0.2 Source: Appendix C.
Notes: dBA = A -weighted decibel; CNEL = community noise equivalent level; dB = decibel.
Table 9 shows that at all three listed representative receivers, the addition of proposed project traffic to the roadway network would result in an increase in the CNEL of less than 3 dB, which is below the discernible level of change for the average healthy human ear. Thus, a less -than -significant impact is expected for proposed project -related off -site traffic noise increases affecting existing residences in the vicinity.
On -site Traffic Interior Noise Exposure
Aside from exposure to aviation traffic noise, current CEQA noise -related guidelines at the state level do not require an assessment of exterior -to -interior noise intrusion, environmental noise exposure to occupants of newly -created project residences, or environmental noise exposure to exterior non-residential uses attributed to the development of the proposed project. Nevertheless, the City's General Plan and the California Building Code requires that interior background noise levels not exceed a CNEL of 45 dB within habitable rooms. Hence, the following predictive analysis of traffic noise exposure at the exteriors of occupied residences and outdoor living areas is provided below.
In addition to the prediction results presented in Table 9, the FHWA TNM software was also used to predict the Horizon -with -project scenario traffic noise levels at multiple on -site exterior areas, as listed in Table 10.
These on -site modeled receptor locations, which appear in Appendix C, include representative positions for the exteriors of multiple floors and positions of three of the proposed project building facades. Predicted exterior sound levels presented in Table 11 that are higher than 65 dBA CNEL indicate locations where an D U D E K 20 13 27
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT exterior -to -interior noise analysis should be performed for the proximate occupied residential unit.
Individual Modeling locations appear in Appendix D.
Table 10. Future Ambient Noise Levels at Residential Facades Modeled Receptor
M
oise Level (A -weighted CNEL)
1st Floor 2nd Floor
69.7 69.7
M2
62.3 62.4
M3
55.3 58.2
OS-1
52.5 Dog Park
51.9 The prediction results from Table 10 indicate that future traffic noise levels would not exceed 70 dBA CNEL.
With the 45 dBA CNEL interior background sound level limit, this means the minimum composite sound transmission class (STC) rating for the exterior shell separating the habitable interior space from the outdoor sound level should be at least 25. The composite STC rating for the portion of a building shell that separates an interior space from the outdoors is calculated from the area -dependent contributions of its elements: windows, wall assemblies, and doors.
This study assumes an exterior wall assembly includes: one layer of 5/8" gypsum wallboard (GWB) on the interior -facing side, 2"x4" wood studs, glass fiber batt insulation in the stud cavities, and a dual -layer of 5/8" GWB on the exterior -facing side. Acoustical transmission loss (TL) data is available on this representative assembly (Halliwell 1998) and is used as part of estimating the composite STC ratings reported herein. For purposes of this analysis, the dual -layer GWB on the exterior surface approximates the mass and solidity of what may be other approved material options as determined by the Project architect, such as cement fiber siding panels, brick masonry veneer, or cement plaster attached to layers of fiberglass mat sheathing and plywood sheathing.
With respect to windows, dual -pane glazing systems are commonplace in the construction of modern homes and characterized by two 1/8"-thick glass panes separated by a 3/8" wide airgap. Viracon data indicates that such glazing should demonstrate, on its own and assuming no air leaks or gaps, an STC rating of 31 (Viracon 2019). Similarly, panels of sliding doors are typically constructed with a similar assembly so as to help maintain expected levels of thermal insulation; hence, these two would reasonably feature the same STC rating on their own (and when fully closed) as a sound -insulating element of a larger fapade area to be evaluated for net STC performance.
Using the above wall and window component assumptions, Table 11 summarizes the calculated noise levels after applying the STC ratings for a set of sample occupied room facades that are anticipated to be exposed to predicted exterior noise levels greater than 60 dBA CNEL. Details of these calculations that account for the fapade surface area and its composite areas of exterior wall assembly and windows appear in Appendix D.
Clearly, an open window greatly compromises the sound insulation performance of the fapade wall assembly, as presented for the sample units appearing in Table 11. However, when such windows and doors are closed, D U D E K 20 13 28
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT all facades are anticipated to exhibit a predicted STC rating of at least 35, and thus would provide sufficient exterior -to -interior sound insulation from outdoor traffic noise to yield interior background sound levels that are less than 45 dBA CNEL and thus compliant with the City and state standards. Recall that none of the predicted exterior traffic noise levels at the studied receptor locations exceeded 70 dBA CNEL; thus, the STC rating value (for closed windows and doors) subtracted from these exterior noise values must result in interior noise levels of less than 45 dBA CNEL (e.g., 70 - 35 = 35 dBA CNEL, which is less than 45). This apparent requirement for closed windows and doors means that the design of these habitable rooms should feature mechanical ventilation or an air-conditioning system to provide interior comfort of the occupants. Detailed transmission loss data is included in Appendix D, Transmission Loss Predictions. Thus, the City's threshold of 45 dB CNEL within habitable rooms would not be exceeded and thus demonstrates expected project compliance with this standard.
Table 11. Predicted Net Sound Transmission Class of Occupied Room faSade Open Window(s) & Closed
Closed Window(s) and Door * French Door*
1st floor living room w/ porch, 35 6
western facade
2nd floor living room, western Fagade 35 6
n/a = not applicable
* Doors are only modeled for scenarios that contain the balcony door.
Onsite Open Spaces
As analyzed herein, shared outdoor project spaces such as "OS-1" and the Dog Park are expected to experience noise levels that are compliant with the City's General Plan Noise Element guidance of 65 dBA CNEL for "parks" and "playgrounds". For residential unit yards that may be used as outdoor spaces, and if sufficiently proximate to roadway traffic noise exposures where predicted exterior noise levels potentially exceed 65 dBA CNEL, feasible noise reduction techniques should be analyzed and incorporated to yield compliance with this standard. With the implementation of mitigation measure NOI-2, the resultant exterior noise levels would meet the City's exterior noise expectation of 65 dBA CNEL.
N0I-2: Where exterior noise levels are predicted to exceed 65 dBA CNEL at useable open space areas, the project should install noise -reducing features external to or upon the useable open space areas (or within, as practical and appropriate) in the form of sound walls, fencing, landscape berms, or similarly performing barriers of at least 6 feet in height to occlude incoming roadway traffic noise.
Stationary Noise Sources
The incorporation of new multi -family homes and a mix of open space uses attributed to development of the proposed project will add a variety of noise -producing electro-mechanical equipment that include those presented and discussed in the following paragraphs. Most of these noise -producing equipment or sound sources would be considered stationary, or limited in mobility to a defined area. Using a Microsoft Excel- D U D E K 20 13 29
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT based outdoor sound propagation prediction model, project -attributed operational noise at nearby community receptors was predicted using several assumptions:
■ Treatment of exposed at -grade air-cooled condensing units as point -type sound emission sources; and, ■ Point -source sound propagation (i.e., 6 dB per doubling of distance) that conservatively ignores acoustical absorption from atmospheric and ground surface effects.
Please see Appendix E for quantitative details of the inputs and outputs that form the basis of the following assessment presentations.
Residential Unit Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Noise For purposes of this analysis, each of the new occupied residential units would be expected to feature a split -system type air-conditioning unit, with an air-cooled refrigeration (2-ton capacity) condenser unit.
Assuming each condenser unit has an SPL of 68 dBA at 3 feet based on available data from a likely manufacturer (Carrier 2012), and the units would generally be installed nearthe apparent "front porch" areas.
Therefore, the closest existing noise -sensitive residential receptor to the west of the proposed project's eastern unit would be as close as 50 horizontal feet to the nearest of these condenser units. The predicted sound emission level from the combination of all 34 operating condenser units as received by this offsite single-family home would be 45 dBA Leq and thus be compliant with the City's nighttime threshold of 50 dBA hourly Leq. Under such conditions, the operation of residential air-conditioning units would result in a less - than -significant noise impact.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Construction activities may expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration, causing a potentially significant impact. Caltrans has collected groundborne vibration information related to construction activities (Caltrans 2013b). Information from Caltrans indicates that continuous vibrations with a PPV of approximately 0.2 ips is considered "annoying." For context, heavier pieces of construction equipment, such as a bulldozer that may be expected on the project site, have peak particle velocities of approximately
0.089 ips or less at a reference distance of 25 feet (DOT 2006).
Groundborne vibration attenuates rapidly —even over short distances. And when groundborne vibration encounters a building foundation, a coupling loss occurs depending on its mass and design. For typical wood - framed houses, like those near the proposed project, this coupling loss is expected to be 5 vibration velocity decibels (VdB) according to FTA guidance (FTA 2006).
The attenuation of groundborne vibration as it propagates from source to receptor through intervening soils and rock strata can be estimated with expressions found in FTA and Caltrans guidance. By way of example, for a front-end loader operating onsite and as close as the eastern project boundary (that is 12.5 feet from the nearest receiving sensitive land use) the estimated groundborne vibration velocity level would be 0.25 ips as received by the residential structure, and would be compliant with the 0.3 ips PPV threshold per Caltrans guidance with respect to building damage risk.
Then, the foundation of this residential structure would, per the coupling loss, cause a reduction in the vibration as received by the building occupant. Hence, instead of the 96 VdB received at the interface of the D U D E K 20 13 30
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT structure foundation and the surrounding soil/strata, the occupant would experience 91 VdB (i.e., 5 VdB less) that equates to a PPV level of 0.13 ips that is less than the Caltrans guidance threshold for annoyance.
Therefore, vibration -induced annoyance to occupants of nearby existing homes would be considered less than significant.
Once operational, the proposed project would not be expected to feature major producers of groundborne vibration. Anticipated mechanical systems like heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning units are designed and manufactured to feature rotating (fans, motors) and reciprocating (compressors) components that are well-balanced with isolated vibration within or external to the equipment casings. On this basis, vibration due to proposed project operation should be less than significant.
C) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? There are no private airstrips within the vicinity of the project site. The closest airport to the proposed project site is the McClellan -Palomar Airport, approximately 5 miles southwest of the site and would therefore not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Impacts would be less than significant.
D U D E K 20 13 31
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
D U D E K 20 13 32
FEBRUARY 23
6 Summary of Findings
This noise report was conducted for the proposed project. The results indicate that potential impacts during construction would be less than significant; nevertheless, construction best practices that incorporate noise reduction techniques would be incorporated into the project construction process. Noise impacts due to operation of the proposed project (including traffic noise) would be less than significant, with mitigation measures N01-1 and N01-2 offered to reduce construction noise and post -construction exterior noise intrusion to project outdoor spaces, respectively. No noise and vibration mitigation measures are anticipated at this time.
D U D E K 20 13 33
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
D U D E K 14613 34
FEBRUARY 2023
7 References Cited
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2013a. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September.
Caltrans. 2013b. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Division of Environmental Analysis, Environmental Engineering, Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Sacramento, California. September 2013.
Caltrans. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Division of Environmental Analysis, Environmental Engineering, Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Sacramento, California. April.
Carrier. 2012. CA16NA 018-061 Single -Stage Air Conditioner w/ Puron Refrigerant. Catalog No: CA16NA-06PD. https://resou rce.carrierenterprise.com/is/content/Watscocom/carrier_ca 16na036OOg_articIe_1404816 230548_en_ss?_ga=2.123164302.489492439.1570570581-792571132.1570570581 City of Vista. 2011. City of Vista General Plan 2030, Noise Element.
City of Vista. 2000. City of Vista Municipal Code, Section 8.32, Noise Control.
DOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). 2006. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model: User's Guide. Final Report. FHWA-HEP-06-015. DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-06-02. Cambridge, Massachusetts: DOT, Research and Innovative Technology Administration. August 2006.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2004. FHWA Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5.
FHWA. 2008. Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Software Version 1.1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Environmental Measurement and Modeling Division. Washington, D.C.
December 8, 2008.
FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Final Report. FTA-VA- 90-1003-06. May 2006.
FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. FTA Report No. 0123. September.
Halliwell, R.E., Nightingale, T.R.T., Warnock, A.C.C., Birta, J.A. 1998. "Gypsum Board Walls: Transmission Loss Data". Internal Report IRC-IR-761. NRC-CNRC. March.
Linscott Law & Greenspan. 2022. Local Transportation Assessment. TTLC Vista, Melrose, LLC Project.
OPR (Governor's Office of Planning and Research). 2003. State of California General Plan Guidelines. October 2003.
Viracon. 2019. http://www.viracon.com/pdf/ViraconAcousticPerfDataTables.pdf .
D U D E K 20 13 35
FEBRUARY 23
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
D U D E K 20 13 36
FEBRUARY 23
Appendix A
Baseline Noise Measurement Field Data
Meteorological
Temp (F)
77 Humidity % R.H.
56 Wind
Light
Wind Speed MPH
5 Wind Direction
East
Sky
Sunny
Instrument and Calibrator Information
Instrument Name List
(ENC) Rion NL-52
Instrument Name
(ENC) Rion NL-52
Instrument Name Lookup Key
(ENC) Rion NL-52
Manufacturer
Rion
Model
NL-52
Serial Number
553896
Calibrator Name
ENC LD CAL150
Calibrator Name
(ENC) LD CAL150
Calibrator Name Lookup Key
ENC LD CAL150
Calibrator Manufacturer
Larson Davis
Calibrator Model
LD CAL150
Calibrator Serial #
5152
GPS Assistance Used
No
Pre -Test (dBA SPL
94 Post -Test (dBA SPL
94 Windscreen
Yes
Weighting?
A-WTD
Slow/Fast?
S/ow
ANSI?
Yes
Monitoring
Record #
1 Site ID
ST3
Site Location Latil-ong
33.187894,-117.252974
Begin Time
12:00:00
End Time
12:10:00
Leq
66.8 Lmax
72.8 Lmin
54.6 Other Lx?
L90, L50, L10
L90
55.6 L50
66.2 1-10
70.3 Other Lx(Specify Metric
L
Primary Noise Source
Traffic
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previous) noted?
Yes
Monitoring
Record #
2 Site ID
ST1
Site Location LatfLong
33.188002,-117.251963
Begin Time
12:20:00
End Time
12:30:00
Leq
51.1 Lmax
58.2 Lmin
44.9 Other Lx?
L90, L50, L10
L90
45.5 L50
48.8 L10
54.5 Other Lx (Specify Metric
L
Primary Noise Source
Distant traffic
Other Noise Sources (Background)
Birds, Distant Aircraft, Distant Traffic, Rustling Leaves Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previous) noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previous) noted?
Yes
Monitoring
Record #
3 Site ID
ST2
Site Location Lat/Long
33.186459,-117.252550
Begin Time
12:45:00
End Time
12:55.00
Leg
50.3 Lmax
57.7 Lmin
43.9 Other Lx?
L90, L50, L10
L90
45.2 L50
49.6 L10
52.8 Other Lx(Specify Metric
L
Primary Noise Source
Distant traffic
Other Noise Sources (Background)
Birds, Distant Aircraft, Distant Traffic
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previous) noted?
Yes
Appendix B
Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output
Vista Melrose Residential Project
Noise Technical Report
To User: bordered rells are inputs, -bordered mIh Mu floe C«aquNgnwW M gNm°^I R:@SoM1
S LIIeM Fqulpnent Ueecrlpibn,GM
quZ Ory F LNM) Squr«aMlgrN-
Dertallll, on-uw 1 20 BLNM 90 Concrele'Intlusldd saws
doer o 4o az
eacevdor o ao e1
Sld Preperdlen doer o 40 N
u hr 1 84 b
honreM loatler 0 b T8
BackMe o 40 78
Gwmg exwvdor 0 b 81
gatler 1 40 85
uroper o
dour 0 b 82 rak tlozers
trador 0 b mfront end loatler o 40 T9
Backhoe o 40 ]8
UriliBae excavaror 1 w 810
Streed der 1 b 85
9arer o W n
Builtling CaraW 0 16 81
man IM o 20 ]5 faMlfl
generahr o W n
trador 1 b 84
honreM loatler 0 b T8
t a. 0 b 78
welder) dreh 0 40 70
Appendix B -- Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output se leve11-for consdudwn hose tresidential land use, p, City -me allowable hours over which Leq Ie to be averaged =
YER 1mry9urNr Olerance almeE6 Rlbxabla6 Receirer erMre°iO'roBem. 9oumro LengN NMwI1M1 Hell„our GOvM G�Mout aYra6«Tro. o«rm«Th. "" 9aw.r.-, rB-,Hgda. B«r.rL� •.•mt re mt <•m1 od wbantd9l . Lbanm9l xi « «erd&i 6eB«ggB«" ayq.ddLm.. mo�1 trei«roa1 hovrL.q G,ereB�`m1 B«,6onm� MYI9Mnq Hgd=.9n mr HM..Ip .P9n B.rden r er1 b.rden rNer1 A0.1� W1 4 240 60 5 5 0 W 90 1W 90.1 90.1 189.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0..7 0.
Trialfor0emdlllgn Ph 8&1
o
125I 0.1� 8 0 4 240 0 5 5 0 8.25 a. 125 B.0 &0 12.5 0.00 0.1 5.0 SO 0.7 0..7 0.
Tdalhr Side arena. Phase
125 0.1 90.0 4 m 0 5 5 0 6.25 6.25 125 8.0 8.0 12.5 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0..7 0. 125 0.1 9].0 4 240 9D 5 5 0 8.25 &25 125 8.0 &0 12.5 0.00 0.1 5.0 SO 0.7 0..7 0. 125 0.1 9&0 4 240 0 5 5 0 8.25 a. 125 B.0 &0 12.5 0.00 0.1 5.0 SO 0.7 0..7 0. 125 0.1 No 4 m 0 5 5 0 6.25 6.25 125 8.0 8.0 125 0.00 0.1 5.0 0. 125 0.1 96.0 4 240 0 5 5 0 6.25 6.25 125 8.0 8.0 125 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.] 0.] 0. 125 0.1 91.0 4 240 0 5 5 0 6.25 a. 125 B.0 &0 12.5 0.00 0.1 &o SO 0.7 O.T 0. 125 0.1 90.0 4 240 0 5 5 0 6.25 a. 125 B.0 &0 12.5 0.00 0.1 &o SO 0.7 0..7 0.
Tdalhr Grading Ph
W` M W.9O4 240 7
4 5 5 0 25 25 W 25.5 25.5 W.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0..7 0.
Toll for UtH, Phxe: 7&9
10D� 0.1� WT 4 M0 5 5 0 W W 10O W.2 W.2 100.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0..7 0.
Toll far5lread Ph 69.7
W 0.1 W.9 4 m 0 5 5 0 25 25 W 35 25.5 W.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0..7 0.
W 0.1 74.9 4 1 0 5 5 0 25 25 W 25.5 ..5 W.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 SO 0.7 0..7 0.
W 0.1 71.9 4 240 0 5 5 0 25 25 W .5 ..5 W.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 SO 0.7 0..7 0.
W 0.1 8&9 4 m n 5 5 0 25 25 W 35 25.5 W.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0..7 0.
W 0.1 7&9 4 240 0 5 5 0 25 25 W 35 25.5 W.0 OW 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0..7 0.
W 0.1 7.9 4 2. 0 5 5 0 25 25 W 35 25.5 W.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0..7 0.
W 0.1 M 4 240 0 5 5 0 25 25 W 25.5 2&5 W.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 &0 0.7 0..7 0.
Trial hr Building Condra ,,Phase'
RCNM-emulator_14613_mcs-rvw-100322 Dudek Project No. 14613 NBL_loudest_only
Vista Melrose Residential Project
Noise Technical Report
To User: bordered rells are inputs, -bordered mlls Mu f-l- C«alrugegnwW M gNm°^I R:@SoM1
S LIIeM Fqulpnent Ueecrlplbn,UM
qupmam Gty F LNM) Sgw«aMlgrN-
BLNM
Dertallll, on- uw 1 20 90 Concrele'Intlusldd saws
dbrer o 4o az
axcevdor 0 d0 81
Slte Preperdlm doer 0 40 82�
Tratar 1 b 84
honteM loatler 0 b R
BackMe 0 40 78
Gwmg exwvdor 0 b 81
gatler 1 40 85
caper o 40 84
dour 0 b 821ak tlozers
trador 0 b 84
Iront entl loatler o 40 n
Backhoe o 40 ]8
UtiliBee excavaror 1 w 810
Streets der 1 b 85
garer o 5o n
Building Carew 0 16 81
man Its o N ]5 faMlfl
genera"r o w n
trador 1 b 84
honteM loatler 0 b R
t a. 0 b 78
welder l torch 0 40 73
Appendix B -- Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output se levelliait for co -dwn hose t residential land use, er City -me allowable hours over which Leq Ie to be averaged =
YER 1 mry9urler Olerance almeE6 Rlbxabla
G«an«Troa o«r+6«r"e
"" 6 Receirer erM re°rO
eert.r<�
'roBem.
(a-,..d:.
M-r.1 '4•ml
m1 « «ardBi 6ad«ggtl«" Byq.ladLm.. mo�1 trei«"a1
0p xel9mnq
hggrL.q G,areB�`mt B«,6 Nod=.mt
mr
MMa. 1m
80 163' 0.1
%..1 4 240
1 51
51 ol
90 1&3 90.1
w
Trialfor Demdlllan Ph
6&1
5�2
10.1�
]0
80.0 6
125I
4 290
5 0
6.25 a.
125 8.0
Trial hr BileP aatim Phmw
T9A
125 8.0
125 8.9
125 8.0
125 8.0
125 8.0
25 8.0
25 8.0
Trial for Grading Ph 74.8
50JEL 0.10 W..90 2. 74 5 5 0 25 25 50 25.5
Told for UtH, Phxe: YJ.9
6&] 4 240 0 5 5 0 50 50 100 50.2
Tolal far 8laeb Ph 0.7
50 0.1 &0.9 4 240 0 5 5 0 25 25 50 35
50 0.1 74.9 4 240 0 5 5 0 25 25 50 25.5
50 0.1 71.9 4 2. 0 5 5 0 25 25 50 25.5
50 8.6 ]5.3 4 240 68 5 5 25 25 50 32
50 0.1 ]&9 4 240 0 5 5 0 25 25 50 35
50 0.1 n.9 4 240 0 5 5 0 25 25 50 35
50 0.1 n9 4 2. 0 5 5 0 25 25 50 25.5
Trial for Building Con ra .,Phase: 6&3
r�
r�
I r�
i rr�
re•Oq 'L•ml OM Leos" -(d.l xmlwnh H..(- GOvin G�Inom ILmrr(dB) wman r 1 wrd.n 1
90.1 1..0 &00 0.1 5.0 50 0.7 01 0.1
..1 -0 0.00 0.1 5.0 10 0.7 0.7 0.1
W..1 1&3.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1
&0 12.5 0.00 0.1 5.0 &0 0.7 0.7 0.1
6.9 12.5 1.37 14.3 13.0 5.0 0.5 0.7 15.2
&0 12.5 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1
&0 12.5 0.00 0.1 &0 &0 0.7 0.7 0.1
&0 12.5 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1
&9 12.5 1.37 14.3 13.0 &0 0.5 0.7 1&2
&0 12.5 0.00 0.1 &0 &0 0.7 0.7 0.1
&0 12.5 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1
8.0 12.5 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1
&0 12.5 0.00 0.1 &0 &0 0.7 0.7 0.1
&0 12.5 0.00 0.1 &0 &0 0.7 0.7 0.1
25.5 50.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1
W..2 10D.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1
W..2 10D.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.1
25.5 50.0 ow 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.] 0.] 0.1
..5 50.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 &0 0.7 0.7 0.1
..5 50.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 &0 0.7 0.7 0.1
25.2 50.0 0.% 8.6 13.0 5.0 0.5 0.7 8.6
25.5 50.0 ow 0.1 5.0 S..0 0.7 0.7 0.1
25.5 50.0 ow 0.1 5.0 S. 0.7 0.7 0.1
2&5 50.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 &0 0.7 0.7 0.1
RCNM-emulator_14613_mcs-rvw-100322 Dudek Project No. 14613 NBL_loudest_only_mit
Vista Melrose Residential Project
Noise Technical Report
To User: bordered rells are inputs -bordered mlls hDv f-l- se level limit for construction hose t residential land use, er City DdIDordinance= allowable hours over which Leq Ie to be averaged =
1 C«alrvNonwW
M
E H4YAR ID-FHWw. Lllem FqulPnent OaecrllNbn,BM
gagm.rov f LwB1 mm Gow«a4r«Bova
NLXX
DII roA)
DIM A)
Dertallll,
arcrele uw
1 20 11 Concrele'Intlusldd saws
290
Borer
z
4o az
290
excevabr
3 d0 81
NO
Slte Prepardlm
Borer
3 40 82
190
Tadar
2 b IN
honteM loatler
1 b R
19D
BackMe
1 40 78
190
Gwmg
exwvabr
1 b 81
19D
gatler
2 40 85
190
caper
1 40 84
190
domr
1 b 821ak dYeB
19D
tractor
1 b 84
19D
Mt eM loetler
1 40 n
190
BackMe
1 40 ]8
190
Ulllltrae
exceva"r
2 40 810
165
Stree6
der
1 b 85�
105
parer
1 5G n
1g5
Builtling C-dDD
1 16 81
165
man IM
3 N ]5 faMlfl
1fi5
genera"r
1 50 n
1s5
tractor
1 b IN
IN
front ni loatler
1 b R
1m
welder l torch
1 40 73
165
Appendix B -- Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output 1 mry9urler Dlegnce al ` Rlbxabla
G«an«Taaa o«ra6«raae
Re Md6
RecUrer
erM
rev 10
B-rnI
-Bam. -
rB'r BOda. 0«r. rC1
•n•Oq
« «ardBi Bed«aed«" wawdLm.. t6ow.1 lmioo"a1
haarL.g
oeo.s�`ml B«,s gn
xelgm 00
Bode
mr Boda.lm
Di
661.3 8 dB0
62 1 51
51 01
145
145
m
145.1
Tdal for Demdihan Phxe.
67.1 6340
9 0.1�
�5 8 460
5 5
0 %
.
1. %.1
Tdalfgrsil, aatian Phma
]1.0
ImFm
N.1
1W e.1
19D e5.1
190 95.1
190 95.1
Tdal hr Grading Phma MIS
0.11 9..00 480 66 1 51 51 01 U.51 U.51 165 82.]
Told fa UIIN, Phxe: 860
DF- a J. 480 65 5 5 0 52.5 52.5 105 52.]
Tdalfar8lreeb Ph . M
0.1 8].0 ] 420 58
0.1 11.0 8 460 1
0.1 No 8 460 55
0.1 ]0.0 ] 420 m
0.1 a..0 ] 420 60
0.1 A. ] 420 %
0.1 59.0 8 460 55
165 82.]
85 B2.]
85 B2.]
165 82.]
165 82.]
165 82.]
1. B2.]
Tdel for Builtling Con&rDl,, Phase: m
•B•Op 'C•ml p"Leog" w6arrtael xmlwnh B..(- GOvin G�I"om B6arrteal .'P'm� samara r l wrd.n )
145.1 290.0 000 0.1 SA 60 0.7 07 0.
145.1 M.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 30 0.7 0.7 0.
MA 290.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.
.1 1- 0.00 0.1 5D So 0.7 0.7 0.
I %..1 WO 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.
%..1 WD 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.
.1 1W.0 0.00 0.1 5D SO 0.7 0.7 0.
85.1 IWO 0.00 0.1 5.0 S. 0.7 0.7 0.
931 W.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 SO 0.7 0.7 0.
.1 1W.0 0.00 0.1 5D SO 0.7 0.7 0.
%..1 100.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.
%..1 100.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.
..1 1W.0 0.00 0.1 5D SO 0.7 O.] 0.
..1 1W.0 0.00 0.1 5D SO 0.7 0.7 0.
W IMD 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.
527 IND 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.
527 IND 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.
827 IMD 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.] 0.] 0.
.7 1- 0.00 0.1 5.0 SO 0.7 0.7 0.
.7 1- 0.00 0.1 5.0 SO 0.7 0.7 0.
827 10.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 5.0 0.] 0.] 0.
8V 10.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 S. 0.7 0.7 0.
8V IMD 0.00 0.1 5.0 S. 0.7 0.7 0.
.7 165.0 0.00 0.1 5.0 DO 0.7 0.7 0.
RCNM-emulator_14613_mcs-rvw-100322 Dudek Project No. 14613 Centroid
Appendix C
Traffic Noise Modeling Input and Output
INPUT. ROADWAYS
Vista Melrose
Dudek
28 September 2022
CB
TNM 2.5
(INPUT: ROADWAYS
Average pavement type! shall be used unless
(PROJECT/CONTRACT:
Vista Melrose
a State highway agency substantiates the use
RUN:
Existing
of a different type with lthe approval of FHWA
Roadway
Points
Name
Width
Name
No.
(Coordinates
(pavement)
Flow Control Segment
X
Y Z
Control Speed (Percent Pvmt On
Device Constraint (Vehicles Type Struct?
Affected
ft
ft
ft ft
mph
Melrose south
45.0 point1
1 6,254,604.0
2,013,833.4
0.00 Average
point2
2 6,254,625.0
2,013,655.0
0.00 Average
point3
3 6,254,648.5
2,013,470.9
0.00 Melrose North
45.0 point9
9 6,254,700.0
2,012,645.8
0.00 Average
point10
10 6,254,683.5
2,012,745.8
0.00 Average
point1l
11 6,254,668.5
2,012,875.4
0.00 Average
point12
12 6,254,641.5
2,013,088.5
0.00 Average
point13
13 6,254,619.0
2,013,299.5
0.00 Average
point14
14 6,254,604.0
2,013,472.4
0.00 Matagual Drive
35.0 point16
16 6,255,415.5
2,013,720.2
0.00 Average
point17
17 6,255,397.5
2,013,683.1
0.00 Average
point18
18 6,255,373.5
2,013,644.8
0.00 Average
point19
19 6,255,354.5
2,013,622.6
0.00 Average
point20
20 6,255,324.5
2,013,599.5
0.00 Average
point21
21 6,255,258.0
2,013,573.2
0.00 Average
point22
22 6,255,187.5
2,013,566.0
0.00 Average
point23
23 6,255,060.0
2,013,546.0
0.00 Average
point24
24 6,254,837.0
2,013,506.0
0.00 Average
point25
25 6,254,677.0
2,013,480.8
0.00 Melrose North-2
45.0 point26
26 6,254,604.0
2,013,472.4
0.00 Average
point15
15 6,254,561.5
2,013,820.8
0.00 Melrose south-2
45.0 point27
27 6,254,648.5
2,013,470.9
0.00 Average
point4
4 6,254,652.5
2,013,429.6
0.00 Average
point5
5 6,254,677.0
2,013,238.9
0.00 Average
point6
6 6,254,698.0
2,013,010.2
0.00 Average
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\Existing 1 28 September
INPUT. ROADWAYS
Vista Melrose
point7
7 6,254,717.5 2,012,802.4 0.00
Average
point8
8 6,254,742.5 2,012,646.4 0.00
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\Existing 2 28 September
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeal h Volumes
Vista Melrose
Dudek
28 September 2022
CB
TNM 2.5
(INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeg1h Volumes
(PROJECT/CONTRACT: Vista Melrose
RUN:
Existing
Roadway
Points
Name
Name
No. Segment
(Autos
MTrucks
HTrucks
Buses
Motorcycles
I
S
S
S
V S
V
S
v
veh/hr mph eh/hr mph veh/hr
mph
veh/hr mph
veh/hr
mph
Melrose south
point1
1 1623
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point2
2 1623
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point3
3 Melrose North
point9
9 1599
40 32
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point10
10 1599
40 32
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point11
11 1599
40 32
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point12
12 1599
40 32
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point13
13 1599
40 32
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point14
14 Matagual Drive
point16
16 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point17
17 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point18
18 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point19
19 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point20
20 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point21
21 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point22
22 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point23
23 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point24
24 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point25
25 Melrose North-2
point26
26 1623
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point15
15 Melrose south-2
point27
27 1599
40 32
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point4
4 1599
40 32
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\Existing 1 21
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAW h Volumes
Vista Melrose
point5 5
1599
40 32 40
16 40 0 0 0 0
point6 6
1599
40 32 40
16 40 0 0 0 0
point7 7
1599
40 32 40
16 40 0 0 0 0
point8 8
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\Existing 2 21
INPUT. RECEIVERS
Vista Melrose
(Dudek
28 September 2022
CB
TNM 2.5
INPUT: RECEIVERS
(PROJECT/CONTRACT:
Vista Melrose
RUN:
Existing
Receiver
Name
No. #DUs Coordinates (ground)
Height
Input Sound Levels and Criteria
Active
X Y
Z above
Existing
Impact Criteria NR
in
Ground
LAeg1 h
LAeg1 h Sub'I Goal
Calc.
ft ft
ft ft dBA dBA dB dB
ST1
1 1 6,255,162.5 2,013,395.5
0.00 4.92
51.10 66 10.0
8.0 Y
ST2
2 1 6,255,014.5 2,012,889.8
0.00 4.92
50.30 66 10.0
8.0 Y
ST3
3 1 6,254,710.5 2,013,256.0
0.00 4.92
66.80 66 10.0
8.0 Y
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\Existing 1 21
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS
Vista Melrose
(Dudek
28 September 2022
CB
TNM 2.5
Calculated with TNM 2.5
(RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS
(PROJECT/CONTRACT:
Vista Melrose
(RUN:
Existing
(BARRIER DESIGN:
INPUT HEIGHTS
Average pavement type shall be used unless
a State highway agency substantiates the use
ATMOSPHERICS:
68 deg F, 50% RH
of a different type with approval of FHWA.
Receiver
Name
No. #DUs
(Existing
No Barrier
With Barrier
LAeg1h
LAeg1h
Increase over existing
Type Calculated Noise Reduction
Calculated Crit'n
Calculated Crit'n
Impact LAeg1h Calculated Goal Calculated
Sub'I Inc
minus
Goal
dBA
dBA
dBA
dB dB
dBA dB dB dB
ST1
1 1
51.1 52.6
66 1.5 10
---- 52.6 0.0 8 -8.0
ST2
2 1
50.3 56.6 66
6.3 10
---- 56.6 0.0 8 -8.0
ST3
3 1
66.8 71.0 66
4.2 10
Snd Lvl 71.0 0.0 8 -8.0
Dwelling Units
# DUs
Noise Reduction
Min
Avg Max
dB
0.0 dB dB
0.0 0.0
All Selected 3
All Impacted
1 0.0
0.0 0.0
All that meet NR Goal
0 0.0
0.0 0.0
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\Existing 1 28 September 2022
INPUT. ROADWAYS
Vista Melrose
Dudek
28 September 2022
CB
TNM 2.5
(INPUT: ROADWAYS
Average pavement type! shall be used unless
(PROJECT/CONTRACT:
Vista Melrose
a State highway agency substantiates the use
RUN:
Existing + Project
of a different type with lthe approval of FHWA
Roadway
Points
Name
Width
Name
No.
(Coordinates
(pavement)
Flow Control Segment
X
Y Z
Control Speed (Percent Pvmt On
Device Constraint (Vehicles Type Struct?
Affected
ft
ft
ft ft
mph
Melrose south
45.0 point1
1 6,254,604.0
2,013,833.4
0.00 Average
point2
2 6,254,618.0
2,013,710.0
0.00 Average
point3
3 6,254,647.5
2,013,479.1
0.00 Melrose North
45.0 point9
9 6,254,700.0
2,012,645.8
0.00 Average
point10
10 6,254,683.5
2,012,745.8
0.00 Average
point1l
11 6,254,668.5
2,012,875.4
0.00 Average
point12
12 6,254,641.5
2,013,088.5
0.00 Average
point13
13 6,254,619.0
2,013,299.5
0.00 Average
point14
14 6,254,606.0
2,013,471.4
0.00 Matagual Drive
35.0 point16
16 6,255,415.5
2,013,720.2
0.00 Average
point17
17 6,255,397.5
2,013,683.1
0.00 Average
point18
18 6,255,373.5
2,013,644.8
0.00 Average
point19
19 6,255,354.5
2,013,622.6
0.00 Average
point20
20 6,255,324.5
2,013,599.5
0.00 Average
point21
21 6,255,258.0
2,013,573.2
0.00 Average
point22
22 6,255,187.5
2,013,566.0
0.00 Average
point23
23 6,255,060.0
2,013,546.0
0.00 Average
point24
24 6,254,837.0
2,013,506.0
0.00 Average
point25
25 6,254,677.0
2,013,480.8
0.00 Melrose south-2
45.0 point26
26 6,254,647.5
2,013,479.1
0.00 Average
point4
4 6,254,652.5
2,013,429.6
0.00 Average
point5
5 6,254,677.0
2,013,238.9
0.00 Average
point6
6 6,254,698.0
2,013,010.2
0.00 Average
point7
7 6,254,717.5
2,012,802.4
0.00 Average
point8
8 6,254,742.5
2,012,646.4
0.00 C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\cal\E+ P 1 28 September
INPUT. ROADWAYS
Vista Melrose
Melrose North-2 45.0
point27
27 6,254,606.0 2,013,471.4 0.00
Average
point15
15 6,254,561.5 2,013,820.8 0.00
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\cal\E+ P 2 28 September
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeal h Volumes
Vista Melrose
Dudek
28 September 2022
CB
TNM 2.5
(INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAeg1h Volumes
(PROJECT/CONTRACT: Vista Melrose
RUN:
Existing + Project
Roadway
Points
Name
Name No.
Segment
(Autos
MTrucks
HTrucks
Buses
Motorcycles
I
S
S
S
V S
V
S
v
veh/hr mph eh/hr mph veh/hr
mph
veh/hr mph
veh/hr
mph
Melrose south
point1
1 1633
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point2
2 1633
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point3
3 Melrose North
point9
9 1604
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point10
10 1604
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point11
11 1604
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point12
12 1604
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point13
13 1604
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point14
14 Matagual Drive
point16
16 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point17
17 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point18
18 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point19
19 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point20
20 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point21
21 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point22
22 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point23
23 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point24
24 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
point25
25 Melrose south-2
point26
26 1604
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point4
4 1604
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point5
5 1604
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
point6
6 1604
40 33
40 16
40 0
0 0 0
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\cal\E+ P 1 21
INPUT: TRAFFIC FOR LAW h Volumes
Vista Melrose
point7 7
1604
40 33 40
16 40 0 0 0 0
point8 8
Melrose North-2
point27 27
1633
40 33 40
16 40 0 0 0 0
point15 15
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\cal\E+ P 2 21
INPUT. RECEIVERS
Vista Melrose
(Dudek 28 September 2022
CB TNM 2.5
INPUT: RECEIVERS
(PROJECT/CONTRACT: Vista Melrose
RUN: Existing + Project
Receiver
Name
No.
I#DUs Coordinates (ground)
(Height
Input Sound
Levels and Criteria
Active
X Y
above
in
Z
Existing
Impact Criteria
NR
(Ground
LAeg1h
Goal
Calc.
LAeg1h
Sub'I
�ft ft
ft
ft
dBA
dBA
dB
dB
ST1
1 1 6,255,162.5 2,013,395.5
0.00 4.92
51.10 66
10.0 8.0
Y
ST2
2 1 6,255,014.5 2,012,889.8
0.00 4.92
50.30 66
10.0 8.0
Y
ST3
3 1 6,254,710.5 2,013,256.0
0.00 4.92
66.80 66
10.0 8.0
Y
M1-1
5 1 6,254,715.0 2,013,318.6
0.00 4.92
0.00 66
10.0 8.0
Y
M1-2
6 1 6,254,715.0 2,013,318.6
0.00 14.92
0.00 66
10.0 8.0
Y
M2-1
7 1 6,254,787.5 2,013,434.2
0.00 4.92
0.00 66
10.0 8.0
Y
M2-2
8 1 6,254,787.5 2,013,434.2
0.00 14.92
0.00 66
10.0 8.0
Y
M3-1
9 1 6,254,915.5 2,013,450.8
0.00 4.92
0.00 66
10.0 8.0
Y
M3-2
10 1 6,254,915.5 2,013,450.8
0.00 14.92
0.00 66
10.0 8.0
Y
Dog Park
12 1 6,255,041.5 2,013,260.5
0.00 4.92
0.00 66
10.0 8.0
Y
OS-1
14 1 6,255,037.0 2,013,309.2
0.00 4.92
0.00 66
10.0 8.0
Y
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\cal\E+ P 1 21
INPUT: BARRIERS
Vista Melrose
(Dudek
28 September 2022
CB
TNM 2.5
(INPUT: BARRIERS
(PROJECT/CONTRACT:
Vista Melrose
RUN:
Existing + Project
Barrier
Points
Name
Type Height
If Wall
If Berm Add'tnl
Name
No.
Coordinates
(bottom)
Height
Segment
Min
Max
$ per
$ per Top Run:Rise $ per
X
Y Z
at
Seg Ht Perturbs
On Important
Unit
Unit Width Unit
Point
Incre- #Up
#Dn
IStruct? Reflec-
Area
Vol. Length
ment
tions?
ft
ft
$/sq ft$/cu
yd ft ft:ft $/ft
ft
ft ft
ft
ft
Barrier1
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point1
1 6,254,736.5
2,013,377.4
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point2
2 6,254,733.5
2,013,388.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point3
3 6,254,742.0
2,013,390.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point4
4 6,254,744.5
2,013,381.5
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point5
5 6,254,763.0
2,013,386.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point6
6 6,254,755.5
2,013,426.5
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point7
7 6,254,729.5
2,013,422.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point8
8 6,254,731.0
2,013,415.0
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point9
9 6,254,721.0
2,013,413.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point10
10 6,254,728.0
2,013,373.9
0.00 20.00
Barrier2
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point11
11 6,254,804.5
2,013,433.6
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point12
12 6,254,811.5
2,013,393.4
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point13
13 6,254,774.0
2,013,387.5
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point14
14 6,254,768.5
2,013,419.0
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point15
15 6,254,780.0
2,013,421.1
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point16
16 6,254,777.5
2,013,430.0
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point17
17 6,254,804.5
2,013,433.6
0.00 20.00
Barrier3
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point18
18 6,254,811.5
2,013,435.0
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point19
19 6,254,819.5
2,013,393.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point20
20 6,254,855.0
2,013,398.4
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point21
21 6,254,850.0
2,013,432.6
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point22
22 6,254,840.0
2,013,432.1
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point23
23 6,254,839.0
2,013,438.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point24
24 6,254,811.5
2,013,435.0
0.00 20.00
Barrier4
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point25
25 6,254,861.0
2,013,441.0
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point26
26 6,254,864.5
2,013,401.9
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point27
27 6,254,899.5
2,013,405.9
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point28
28 6,254,895.5
2,013,438.5
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point29
29 6,254,884.5
2,013,436.6
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point30
30 6,254,884.0
2,013,444.0
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point31
31 6,254,861.0
2,013,441.0
0.00 20.00
Barrier5
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point32
32 6,254,903.0
2,013,446.4
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point33
33 6,254,910.0
2,013,407.5
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point34
34 6,254,944.5
2,013,414.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point35
35 6,254,940.0
2,013,446.9
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\cal\E+ P 1 28 September 2022
INPUT: BARRIERS
Vista Melrose
point36
36 6,254,930.0
2,013,444.9
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point37
37 6,254,929.5
2,013,451.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point38
38 6,254,903.0
2,013,446.4
0.00 20.00
Barrier6
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point39
39 6,254,957.0
2,013,413.6
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point40
40 6,254,993.0
2,013,419.5
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point41
41 6,254,986.0
2,013,453.4
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point42
42 6,254,976.5
2,013,451.4
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point43
43 6,254,974.5
2,013,455.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point44
44 6,254,952.0
2,013,451.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point45
45 6,254,957.0
2,013,413.6
0.00 20.00
Barrier7
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point46
46 6,254,994.5
2,013,460.6
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point47
47 6,255,003.0
2,013,422.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point48
48 6,255,037.0
2,013,428.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point49
49 6,255,033.0
2,013,461.0
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point50
50 6,255,021.0
2,013,457.6
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point51
51 6,255,018.5
2,013,465.6
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point52
52 6,254,994.5
2,013,460.6
0.00 20.00
Barrier8
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point53
53 6,254,715.5
2,013,332.9
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point54
54 6,254,717.5
2,013,308.0
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point55
55 6,254,725.0
2,013,307.9
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point56
56 6,254,725.5
2,013,297.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point57
57 6,254,762.0
2,013,301.1
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point58
58 6,254,761.0
2,013,311.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point59
59 6,254,752.5
2,013,311.1
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point60
60 6,254,751.5
2,013,316.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point61
61 6,254,758.5
2,013,316.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point62
62 6,254,756.5
2,013,337.4
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point63
63 6,254,715.5
2,013,332.9
0.00 20.00
Barrier9
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point64
64 6,254,720.5
2,013,286.0
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point65
65 6,254,722.0
2,013,262.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point66
66 6,254,729.5
2,013,263.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point67
67 6,254,729.5
2,013,253.4
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point68
68 6,254,764.0
2,013,255.9
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point69
69 6,254,759.5
2,013,289.1
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point70
70 6,254,720.5
2,013,286.0
0.00 20.00
Barrier10
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point7l
71 6,254,725.0
2,013,244.5
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point72
72 6,254,727.5
2,013,218.1
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point73
73 6,254,735.5
2,013,219.5
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point74
74 6,254,736.0
2,013,208.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point75
75 6,254,769.5
2,013,212.9
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point76
76 6,254,767.5
2,013,248.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point77
77 6,254,725.0
2,013,244.5
0.00 20.00
Barrierl1
W 0.00
99.99 0.00
0.00 point78
78 6,254,731.5
2,013,171.8
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point79
79 6,254,739.5
2,013,172.6
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point80
80 6,254,740.0
2,013,161.1
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point81
81 6,254,775.5
2,013,165.5
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point82
82 6,254,771.5
2,013,200.2
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point84
84 6,254,730.0
2,013,197.4
0.00 20.00
0.00 0 0
point83
83 6,254,731.5
2,013,171.8
0.00 20.00
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\cal\E+ P 2 28 September 2022
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS
Vista Melrose
(Dudek
28 September 2022
CB
TNM 2.5
Calculated with TNM 2.5
(RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS
(PROJECT/CONTRACT:
Vista Melrose
(RUN:
Existing + Project
(BARRIER DESIGN:
INPUT HEIGHTS
Average pavement type shall be used unless
a State highway agency substantiates the use
ATMOSPHERICS:
68 deg F, 50% RH
of a different type with approval of FHWA.
Receiver
Name
No.
#DUs
(Existing
No Barrier
With Barrier
LAeg1h
LAeg1h
Increase over
existing
Type Calculated
Noise Reduction
Calculated Crit'n
Calculated
Crit'n
Impact LAeg1h
Calculated Goal
Calculated
Sub'I Inc
minus
Goal
dBA
dBA
dBA
dB
dB
dBA
dB dB
dB
ST1
1 1
51.1 49.0
66 -2.1
10 ---- 49.0
0.0 8 -8.0
ST2
2 1
50.3 55.9
66 5.6
10 ---- 55.9
0.0 8 -8.0
ST3
3 1
66.8 71.0
66 4.2
10 Snd Lvl 71.0
0.0 8 -8.0
M1-1
5 1
0.0 69.7
66 69.7
10 Snd Lvl 69.7
0.0 8 -8.0
M1-2
6 1
0.0 69.7
66 69.7
10 Snd Lvl 69.7
0.0 8 -8.0
M2-1
7 1
0.0 62.3
66 62.3
10 ---- 62.3
0.0 8 -8.0
M2-2
8 1
0.0 62.4
66 62.4
10 ---- 62.4
0.0 8 -8.0
M3-1
9 1
0.0 55.3
66 55.3
10 ---- 55.3
0.0 8 -8.0
M3-2
10 1
0.0 58.2
66 58.2
10 ---- 58.2
0.0 8 -8.0
Dog Park
12 1
0.0 52.5
66 52.5
10 ---- 52.5
0.0 8 -8.0
OS-1
14 1
0.0 51.9
66 51.9
10 ---- 51.9
0.0 8 -8.0
Dwelling Units
# DUs
Noise Reduction
Min
Avg
Max
dB
dB dB
All Selected
11 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
All Impacted 3
0.0 0.0
All that meet NR Goal 0
0.0 0.0
C:\TNM25\Projects\Vista Melrose\cal\E+ P 1 28 September 2022
:W.
�..' 14 •- l�—
l
ubb
Dog Park
�1 lq�M
C ('91W
OKI
j; 4-
Appendix C: Modeled
Receptor Locations
.v�
Appendix D
Transmission Loss Prediction
Project #: 14613 Vista Melrose
Appendix D
Interior Space Studied: Extenor-to-Interior Sconano: Cakulation per Owens Corning NCDG (pg. 16):
Living Room Closed Window(s) and Doors) 68.5 = anterior noise level (dBA CNEL) 35 = approximate net STC of assembly
Room dimensions: Room absorption conditions. 3 ° incidence adj. ("G+3') per OC NCDG Table 3 length width (hard, standard, soft, very soft?) 4 =source adj. ("F") per OC NCDG Table 4 151 0.8 -1 ° absorption adj. per OC NCDG Table 5
39.3 ° interior noise level (dBA CNEL)
Calculation of net STC:
gty width height
material or element #1
material orelement#2 1 3 5
material orelement#3 2 3 7
material or element #4
total surface 10 9
TL Data Source
NRGCNRC IGIR-761 (p. 25: G16 WS90(406)_MFB90_2G16)
2 x 5l8" GWB, 2'x4" woad, 24" o.c., fiber battflll, 1 x 5l8" GWB available TL data for comparable assembly:
Drawn 5/8" overall -1/8" glass+ 3r8" airspace+ 118" glass available TL data for comparable assembly:
Umcon 5/8" overall -118" glass+ 318" airspace+ 1/8" glass enter desired STC value 35
sum of negative differentals -11
square feet description
33 exteriorwall assembly
15 vinyl window (dual pane)
42 lentry door glaing(dual pane)
0 opening
90 arbitrary total surface area
Octave Band Center Frequency (OBCF, Hz)
125 250
500 1000
2000 40M
exterior wall assembly
1 161 401
411 48
43 52
materWIt1i
0,02512 0.0001
7.9E-05 1.6E-05
5E-05 6.3E-06
vinyl window(dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
material#2i
0.00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
entry door gleting(dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
materia1#3z
0,00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
opening
1 01 01
0 0
0 0
material #4 z
1 1
1 1
1 1
composite TL 19 25 29 37 45 38
prospect. STC curve 19 28 35 38 39 39
differentials 0 -3 -6 -1 6 -1
Interior Space Studied: Extericka Interfur Scenano: Cakulation per Owens Corning NCDG (pg. 16):
Living Room Open Window 68.5 = exterior noise level (dBA CNEL) 14 = approximate net STC of assembly
Room dimensions: Room absorption conditions: 3 = incidence adj. ("G+3') per OC NCDG Table 3 length width (hard, standard, soft, very soft?) 4 = source adj. (7) per OC NCDG Table 4 15 10 0.8 -1 = absorption adj. per OC NCDG Table 5
60.3 = interior noise level (dBA CNEL)
Calculation of net STC:
&
width height
material
or element #1
material
orelement#2
1 3
4 material
orelement#3
2 3
7 material
or element #4
1 3
1 total surface
10 9
TL Data Source
NRGCNRC IC-761 (p. 25: G16_WS90(406)_MFB90-2G16)
2 x 5l8" GWB, 2'x4" wood, 24" o.c., fiber battflll, 1 x 5/8" GWB available TL data for comparable assembly:
Vmcon 518" overall -118" glass+ 3W airspace+ 1/8" glass available TL data for comparable assembly:
Mmcon 518" overall - I/W glass+ 3/8" airspace+ 1/8" glass enter desired STC value 14
sum of negative differentials -9
Interior Space Studied:
Living Room
Room dimensions:
length width
151 10
Calculation of net STC:
gty
width hei h
material
or element #1
material
orelement#2
1 3
5 material
orelement#3
1 3
7 material
or element#4
1 3
7 total surface
10 square feet descripfion
33 exteriorwall assembly
12 vinyl Wndow (dual pane)
42 entry doorgiming(dual pane)
3 opening
90 arbitrary total surface area
Octave Band Center Frequency (OBCF, Hz)
125 250
MO1000
2000 4000
exterior wall assembly
16 40
41 48
43 52
material #1c
0.02512 0.0001
7.9E-05 1.6E-05
5E-05 6.3E-06
vinyl window (dual pane)
23 23
27 35
47 36
materia1#2z
0,00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
entry door gleting(dual pane)
23 23
27 35
47 36
material #3z
0,00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
opening
0 0
0 0
0 0
material #4 z
1 1
1 1
1 1
composite TL 13 14 15 15 15 15
prospect. STC curve -2 7 14 17 18 18
differentials 15 7 1 -2 -3 -3
ExterioNa4ulenar Scenario: Cakulation per Owens Corning NCDG (pg. 16):
Open Door 68.5 = exterior noise level (dBA CNEL)
6 = approximate net STC of assembly
Room absorption conditions: = incidence adj. ("G+3') per OC NCDG Table 3 (hard, standard, soft, very soft?),
adj.("F") per OC NCDG Table
0.8 -1 = absorption adj. per OC NCDG Table 5
= interior noise level (dBA CNEL)
�t I souan: feet descripfion
33 exteriorwall assembly
15 vinyl window (dual pane)
21 entry door glazing(dual pane)
21 opening
9 90 arbitrary total surface area
TL Data Source
NRGCNRC I1-IR-761 (p. 25:
G16_WS90(4a06f_llMFxB2GW16)
2 x 5/8" GWB, 2'x4"wod, 4" o.c., flier btt,15/_Gavailable TL data for comparable assembly:
Vmcon 518" overall - I/W glass+ TV airspace+ 1/8" glass available TL data for comparable assembly:
Vmcon 518" overall - I/W glass+ 3/8" airspace+ 1/8" glass enter desired STC value©
sum of negative differentials -10
Octave Band Center Frequency (OBCF, Hz)
125 250
500 1000
2000 4000
exterior wall assembly
1 161 401
411 481
43 52
materia1#1z
0.02512 0.0001
7.9E-05 1.6E-05
5E-05 6.3E-06
vinyl window(dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
material #2 z
0.00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
entry door gleting(dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
material #3z
0,00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
opening
1 01 01
0 0
0 0
material #4 z
1 1
1 1
1 1
composite TL 6 6 6 6 6 6
prospective STC curve -10 -1 6 9 10 10
differentials 16 7 0 -3 -4 -4
printed 9/28/2022 Acoustical Assessment DRAFT Appendix D prepared by Dudek
Project #: 14613 Vista Melrose
Appendix D
Interior Space Studied:
Living Rao.
Room dimensions:
length width
5 0
Calculation of net STC:
Sty width het h
material or element #1
mataralorelement#2 1 3 5
material or element#3 2 3 7
material or element #4
total surface 10
Exterior -to -Interior Scenario:
t
9 Calculation per Owens Coming NCDG(pg. 16):
Closed Window(s) and Door(s)
68.5 ° exterior noise level (dBA CNEL)
35 ° approximate net STC of assembly
Room absorption conditions,
incidence anti. ("G+3') per OC NCDG Table 3
(hard, standard, soft, very soft?) 4 = source adj. ("F") per OC NCDG Table 4 �
0.8 -1 ° absorption adj. per OC NCDG Table 5
39.3 = interior noise level (dBA CNEL)
square
feet
2description
to
33 exteriorwall assembly
15 vinyl window (dual pane)
42 entry door gluing (dual pane)
0 opening
90 arbitrary total surface area
TL Data Source
NRGCNRC 161R-761 (p. 25: G16_WS90(406)_MFB90�G16)
2 x 5l8" GWB, 2'x4" wood, 24" o.c., fiber haft fill, 1 x 5l8" GWB available TL data for comparable assembly:
Vmwn 5l8" overall -118" glass+ 318" airspace+ 1/8" glass available TL data for comparable assembly:
Vmwn 518" overall -118" glass+ 3r8" airspace+ 1/8" glass enter desired STC value 35
sum of negative differentials -11
Octave Band Center Frequency (OBCF, Hz)
124 2
54144
244Q 44ffi
exterior wall assembly
16 40 40
41 481
43 52
material #iz
0.02512 0.0001
7.9E-05 1.6E-05
5E-05 6.3E-06
vinyl window (dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
material #2z
0,00501 0.00601
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
entry door glazing (dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
material #3z
0,00501 0.00601
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
opening
1 01 01
0 0
0 0
material #4 i
1 1
1 1
1 1
composite TL 19 25 29 37 45 38
prospective STC curve 19 28 35 38 39 39
differentials 0 -3 -6 -1 6 -1
Interior Space Studied: Edanior-to-Interior Scenario: Calulation per Owens Corning NCDG(pg, 16):
Living Rao. Open Window 68.5 = exterior noise level (dBA CNEL) 13 = approximate net STC of assembly
Room dimensions: Room absorption wndnions: = incidence adj. ("G+3') per OC NCDG Table 3 length width (hard, standard, soft, very soft?) 4 =source adj. ("F") per OC NCDG Table 15 10 0.8 -1 = absorption adj. per OC NCDG Table 5
61.3 = interior noise level (dBA CNEL)
Calculation of net STC:
912
width height
material
or element #1
material
or element#2
1 3
4 material
orelement#3
2 3
7 material
or element #4
1 3
1 total surface
10 9
TL Data Source
NRGCNRC IC-IR-761 (p. 25: G16_WS90(406)_MFB90�G16)
2x5/8"GWB,2'x4"wnod,24"o.c.,fiberbattfill,1x N GWB
available TL data for comparable assembly:
Vmwn 518" overall -118" glass+ 3I8" airspace+ 1/8" glass available TL data for comparable assembly:
Urewn 5/8" overall -1/8" glass+ 303" airspace+ 118" glass enter desired STC value 13
sum of negative differentials -6
square is deed
33 exterior ..It assembly
12 vinyl window (dual pane)
42 entry door glazing (dual pane)
3 opening
90 arbitrary total surface area
Octave Band Center Frequency (OBCF, Hz)
125 250
500 1000
2000 4000
exterior wall assembly
1 161 401
411 48
43 52
materia1#1z
0,02512 0.0001
7.9E-05 1.6E-05
5E-05 6.3E-06
vinyl window (dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
material #2z
0,00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
entry door glazing (dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
material#3i
0.00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
opening
1 01 01
0 0
0 0
material#4i
1 1
1 1
1 1
composite TL 13 14 15 15 15 15
prospective STC curve -3 6 13 16 17 17
differentials 16 8 2 -1 -2 -2
Interior Space Studied: Extariorto-Interior Scenario: Calculation per Owens Coming NCDG (pg, 16):
Living Room Open Door ii = exterior noise level (dBA CNEL) 6 = approximate net STC of assembly
Room dimensions: Room absorption wnd#ions: J incidence adj. ("G+3') per OC NCDG Table 3 length width (hard, standard, soft, very soft?) 4 =source adj. ("F") per OC NCDG Table4 -15F 10 1 0.8 -1 = absorption adj. per OC NCDG Table 5
68.3 = interior noise level (dBA CNEL)
Calculation of net STC:
Sty
width height
material
or element #1
material
orelement#2
1 3
5 material
or element#3
1 3
7 material
or element #4
1 3
7 total surface
10 9
TL Data Source
NRGCNRC IC-IR-761 (p. 25: G16_WS90(406)_MFB90_2Gi6)
2 x 5/8" GWB, 2'x4" wood, 24" o.c., fiber battfll, 1 x 51W GWB available TL data for comparable assembly:
Drawn 5/8" overall -1/8" glass+ 3/8" airspace+ 118" glass available TL data for comparable assembly:
Drawn 5/8" overall -1/8" glass+ 3r8" airspace+ 118" glass enter desired STC value©
sum of negative differentials -10
square is deed
33 exteriorwall assembly
15 vinyl window (dual pane)
21 entry door glazing (dual pane)
21 opening
90 arbitrary total surface area
Octave Band Center Frequency (OBCF, Hz)
125 250
500 1000
2000 40M
exterior wall assembly
1 161 401
411 48
43 52
materia1#1z
0,02512 0.0001
7.9E-05 1.6E-05
5E-05 6.3E-06
vinyl window (dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
material#2i
0,00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
entry door glazing (dual pane)
1 231 231
27 35
47 36
material #3i
0.00501 0.00501
0.002 0.00032
2E-05 0.00025
opening
1 01 01
0 0
0 0
material #4 s
1 1
1 1
1 1
wmposBe TL 6 6 6 6 6 6
prospective STC curve -10 -1 6 9 10 10
differentials 16 7 0 -3 -4 -4
printed 9/28/2022 Acoustical Assessment DRAFT Appendix D prepared by Dudek
Appendix E
Residential HVAC Noise Prediction
Lot
b -7
w
�/M.��fna�.]'� � rtl• � r _ '�. � � Jam'' ^!"
1 Predicted Aggregate Sound
Pressure Level (SPL)
dBA range
Color High Low
- 70 65
65 60
60 55
55 50
50 45
SOURCE, Dudek2021 FIGURE 1
DUDEK
it
135 270 Feet
HVAC Noise Levels
Vista Melrose
Appendix J-1
Local Transportation Assessment
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT
TTLC VISTA MELROSE, LLC PROJECT
Vista, California
August 18, 2022
LLG Ref. 3-22-3573
Prepared by: Under the Supervision of.-
Zahira Chayeb John Boarman, P.E.
Transportation Engineer I Principal
Linscott, Law &
Greenspan, Engineers
4542 Ruffner Street
Suite 100
San Diego, CA 92111
858.300.8800 r
858.300.8810 F
www.Ilgengineers.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................ I
2.0 Project Description.................................................................................................................... 2
3.0 Existing Conditions.................................................................................................................... 6
3.1 Existing Transportation Conditions.................................................................................... 6
3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes.................................................................................................... 7
4.0 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Assessment...........................................................................10
5.0 Local Transportation Assessment Approach and Methodology.........................................11
5.1 Analysis Approach............................................................................................................ 11
5.2 Analysis Methodology...................................................................................................... 11
5.2.1 Intersections.......................................................................................................... 11
5.2.2 Street Segments..................................................................................................... 11
6.0 Substantial Effect Criteria...................................................................................................... 12
6.1 Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections....................................................................... 12
6.2 Street Segments................................................................................................................. 12
7.0 Analysis of Existing Conditions.............................................................................................. 13
7.1 Intersection Analysis......................................................................................................... 13
7.2 Street Segment Analysis................................................................................................... 13
8.0 Trip Generation/Distribution/Assignment............................................................................ 15
8.1 Trip Generation................................................................................................................. 15
8.2 Trip Distribution/Assignment........................................................................................... 15
9.0 Analysis of Existing + Project Conditions.............................................................................18
9.1 Intersection Analysis......................................................................................................... 18
9.2 Street Segment Analysis................................................................................................... 18
10.0 Access........................................................................................................................................ 21
11.0 Active Transportation............................................................................................................. 22
11.1 Pedestrian Mobility........................................................................................................... 22
11.1.1 Existing Pedestrian Mobility................................................................................. 22
11.1.2 Future Pedestrian Mobility................................................................................... 22
11.2 Bicycle Mobility............................................................................................................... 23
11.2.1 Existing Bicycle Mobility..................................................................................... 23
11.2.2 Future Bicycle Mobility........................................................................................ 23 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
\_ ,5-z R2po111 A_;5--lo"
11.3 Transit Mobility................................................................................................................ 23
12.0 Conclusions...............................................................................................................................24
APPENDICES
APPENDIX
A. Intersection and Segment Manual Count Sheets; Signal Timing Plans B. Intersection Methodology
C. City of Vista Roadway Classification Table
D. Existing Peak Hour Intersection Analysis Worksheets
E. Proposed Improvement Conceptual Plan
F. Existing + Project Peak Hour Intersection Analysis Worksheets G. Bus Route Map and Schedule
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 II TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
LIST OF FIGURES
SECTION —FIGURE
#
FOLLOWING PAGE
Figure2-1
Vicinity Map................................................................................................................... 3 Figure2-2
Project Area Map............................................................................................................ 4 Figure2-3
Site Plan.......................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3-1
Existing Conditions Diagram.......................................................................................... 8 Figure 3-2
Existing Traffic Volumes................................................................................................ 9 Figure 8-1
Project Traffic Distribution........................................................................................... 16 Figure 8-2
Project Traffic Volumes................................................................................................ 17 Figure 9-1
Existing + Project Traffic Volumes.............................................................................. 20 LIST OF TABLES
SECTION —TABLE #
PAGE
Table 3-1 Existing Traffic Volumes..................................................................................................... 7 Table 7-1 Existing Intersection Operations........................................................................................ 13 Table 7-2 Existing Street Segment Operations.................................................................................. 14 Table 8-1 Project Trip Generation..................................................................................................... 15 Table 9-1 Existing + Project Intersection Operations........................................................................ 19 Table 9-2 Existing + Project Street Segment Operations................................................................... 19 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 III TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
\_ ,5-z R2po111 A_;5-,_,lu"
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT
TTLC VISTA MELROSE, LLC PROJECT
Vista, California
August 18, 2022
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) has prepared this Local Transportation Assessment (LTA) to assess the impacts to the street system as a result of the proposed TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC Project. The Project proposes to develop 34 single-family homes on the southeast corner of the Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive intersection in the City of Vista.
The traffic analysis presented in this report includes the following:
■ Project Description
■ Existing Conditions Decription
■ CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Assessment
■ Local Transportation Assessment Approach and Methodology ■ Substantial Effect Criteria
■ Analysis of Existing Conditions
■ Trip Generation/Distribution/Assignment
■ Analysis of Existing + Project Scenario
■ Access Assessment
■ Active Transportation Discussion
■ Conclusions
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project site consists of 34 single-family homes on 5.55 acres, located on the southeast corner of the Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive intersection. Site access is proposed via one full access driveway located on Matagual Drive.
The proposed Project site is General Plan designated Commercial Office (CO) and Medium Low Density Residential (MD), and zoned Office Professional (O-P) and Single Family Residential (R-1).
The proposed Project site will require a General Plan Amendment to Medium Density Residential (MD) and a rezone to R-M (10) Multifamily Residential.
Figure 2-1 shows the Project vicinity and Figure 2-2 illustrates, in more detail, the site location.
Figure 2-3 shows the Project site plan.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
OCEANSIDE
Project Site
do
SAN MARCOS
ESCONDIDO
CARLSBAD
S.D.
COUNTY
1 ENCINITAS
S.D. COUNTY
S.D. COUNTY
SOLANA
BEACH POWAY
± SANTEE
._
SAN DIEGO'
EL CAJON
LA MESA%P
i
LEMON
GROV
CORONADO
s"
NATIONAL
CITY_L ^ i
JL
CHULAVISTA
I
,j
I %'- w 40kollit;
L
N:\3573\Figures Figure 2-1
Date: 8/9/2022
Time: 8:41 AM
Vicinity Map
TTLC VISTA MELROSE, LLC
■■ _
I"( ,.'may_ ' �w'{
lob,w
► ` !' 'x
. Vq 41MW
•� F}< i {
' + Project
Site
Ile
Tv '-• �'
♦ i I � I
, i
'�• *1+ L+ �'w �� �+�� '� � � � �# '�" � �++a... ram'- -
LINSCOTT
LAW &
GREENSPAN
engineers
100 200 300
N:134801Figures
Date: 08108122
I! t
PM 184631 I \
%PN: L '
L —
w
w• w,
i
i r
1j1
V1r r �
I
APN: 6-1
m
O
I A
s G
— '� ��, - r,
9 25 i i 24 ri i
EX. PROPERTY 1 --
BNDY 1
ULTIMATE RIW 1 10 r w w
EX. RA I ✓ —�
PM 20141
APN: 166-150-89
r � 1 1 11 12 13 14 i it
�r
RI�QT'19
d
— j P 80=22 ` A
i��P��r1 I
1 A N: 1G6 80-23
r
,
P P.
PM,475
APN: 166-28p`39, -40
rl r
1 � r
I
W ,y
AllS�Ri�f \
POR LOT 19 />
MAP 2131 i
APN: 166-280-3
l
Al
/PM 8977,—
APN: 1 M,
PM 8977`
APN:166,680-02
Figure 2-3
Site Plan
TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Effective evaluation of the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Project requires an understanding of the existing transportation system within the project area. Figure 3-1 shows an existing conditions diagram, including signalized intersections and lane configurations.
The study area includes the following intersections and street segments:
INTERSECTIONS
1. South Melrose Drive / County Complex
2. South Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive / Breeze Hill Road
3. South Melrose Drive / Melrose Way
STREET SEGMENTS
1. South Melrose Drive between County Complex and Matagual Drive
2. South Melrose Drive between Matagual Drive and Melrose Way
3.1 Existing Transportation Conditions
The following is a description of the existing street network in the study area.
South Melrose Drive is classified as a 6-Lane Urban Major in the City of Vista Circulation Plan. It is currently constructed as a six -lane roadway separated by a raised median between County Complex and Las Palmas Drive. From Las Palmas Drive to Melrose Way, South Melrose Drive is built as a four -lane undivided roadway. South of Melrose Way, the roadway is currently constructed as a four -lane undivided roadway with a two-way left -turn lane. There is a Class II bike lane along the east side of South Melrose Drive. A Class III bike route with sharrows is provided on the west side of the roadway, north of Las Palmas Drive. South of Las Palmas Drive, Class II bike lanes are provided on both sides of roadway. Contiguous sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadway.
Curbside parking is not permitted. The posted speed limit is 40 mph.
County Complex is an unclassified roadway in the City of Vista Circulation Plan. It is currently constructed as a two-lane roadway separated by a raised median. Bike lanes are not provided.
Contiguous sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadway. Curbside parking is permitted intermittently along the roadway. There is no posted speed limit.
Breeze Hill Road is an unclassified roadway in the City of Vista Circulation Plan. It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway. Bike lanes are not provided. Contiguous sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadway. Curbside parking is permitted. The posted speed limit is 25 mph.
Matagual Drive is an unclassified roadway in the City of Vista Circulation Plan. It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway. Bike lanes are not provided. Sidewalks are provided LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
on the north side of the roadway for about 500 feet from the South Melrose Drive and Matagual Drive intersection. Curbside parking is not permitted. The posted speed limit is 25 mph.
Melrose Way is classified as a 2-Lane Light Collector in the City of Vista Circulation Plan. It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway. Bike lanes are not provided. Contiguous sidewalks are provided on the north side of the roadway between South Melrose Drive and Centennial Drive, and on the south side of the roadway for only about 300 feet from the South Melrose Drive and Melrose Way intersection. Curbside parking is permitted intermittently along the roadway. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes
Table 3-1 is a summary of the average daily traffic volumes conducted on Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at the study area street segments. Peak hour intersection turning movement volume counts were conduct at the study area intersections on either Wednesday, June 8, 2022 while schools were in session.
Figure 3-2 shows the Existing Traffic Volumes. Appendix A contains the existing count sheets.
TABLE 3-1
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Street Segment
ADTa
South Melrose Drive
County Complex to Matagual Drive
33,480
Matagual Drive to Melrose Way
32,985
Footnotes:
a. Average Daily Traffic Volumes.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
County Complex
o
0 O
Matagual Dr
Breeze Hill Rd
10 0
0 Melrose Wy
0 d
0 d
U5
®
Study Intersection
0 Traffic Signal
Stop Sign
1ir
Turning Movements
2/4/6
Number of Travel Lanes
35mph
Posted Speed Limit
UID
Divided / Undivided Roadway
.
Two -Way Left -Turn Median
BL
Class II Bike Lane
BR
Class III Bike Route
N:\3573\Figures
Date: 8/9/2022
Time: 3:36 PM
O 2U
� W
nmph Mata9ual or
Breeze Hill Rd 2U (2
W
C
O
Q
h�
U Melrose Wa mr '�
y G
X
r
Figure 3-1
Existing Conditions Diagram
TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
O co
co
M �
^(0M
� N
� 0/32
�
f— 0/1
0/8
County Complex
f
28/198
10/26
O
N
� O
N
pCD
CO 7
N
�
y
O
O
M
O
M � O
�2 M
(0Mv
40/15
�— 2/5
17/4
Breeze Hill Rd
MalagualDr
83 / 122
r
7/6 —►
CO
124/101 o
� CO
d
C
rri
rn
O
M 00
Ln 7
oo O
N
Melrose Wy
167/31
170/26
rn
p`
M O
M
o
N
on
O
N to
�
N
O
4 Study intersections
�Tr" Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
N:\3573\Figures
Date: 8/9/2022
Time: 8:57 AM
Breeze Hill Rd
Melrose Way
U
Mata9ual of
N
Figure 3-2
Existing Traffic Volumes
TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
4.0 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ASSESSMENT
An assessment was conducted to determine the impacts on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for the Project. This assessment utilizes methodologies presented within the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory developed to assist with implementation of Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), which resulted in a shift in the measure of effectiveness for determining transportation impacts from Level of Service (LOS) and vehicular delay to VMT. VMT analyses are required for use in all California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents no later than July 1, 2020.
The VMT analysis thresholds are based on the City of Vista's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, December 2020.
As stated in the City guidelines, "Some projects for CEQA purposes qualify as screened out. If a project is screened out, that means the project has VMT reducing characteristics and is assumed to decrease VMT. SB 743 eliminates the need for these projects to be analyzed for CEQA purposes since they support VMT reduction. Screened out is defined as projects not needed to be analyzed for CEQA purposes that already support VMT reduction.".
Per the City of Vista's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, projects that are considered inconsistent with the General Plan and generate an average daily traffic volume (ADT) of 500 trips or less are "screened out" and do not need a VMT analysis.
As discussed in Section 8.0, the Project is calculated to generate approximately 340 ADT.
Based on the Project's trip generation, the Project is "screened out" and does not require a VMT analysis.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 11E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
5.0 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
5.1 Analysis Approach
Per the City of Vista Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, an LTA is required for projects generating 200 to 400 ADT that analyzes existing conditions and existing conditions plus project traffic to determine the project specific traffic effects within the study.
5.2 Analysis Methodology
Level of service (LOS) is the term used to denote the different operating conditions which occur on a given roadway segment under various traffic volume loads. It is a qualitative measure used to describe a quantitative analysis taking into account factors such as roadway geometries, signal phasing, speed, travel delay, freedom to maneuver, and safety. LOS provides an index to the operational qualities of a roadway segment or an intersection. LOS designations range from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F representing the worst operating conditions. LOS designation is reported differently for signalized and unsignalized intersections, as well as for roadway segments.
5.2.1 Intersections
Signalized intersections were analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions. Average vehicle delay was determined utilizing the methodology found in Chapter 19 of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition, with the assistance of the Synchro (version 11) computer software. The delay values (represented in seconds) were qualified with a corresponding intersection LOS.
Signalized intersection calculation worksheets and a more detailed explanation of the methodology are attached in Appendix B.
Unsignalized intersections were analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions. Average vehicle delay and LOS was determined based upon the procedures found in Chapters 20 and 21 of the HCM 6th Edition, with the assistance of the Synchro (version 11) computer software. Unsignalized intersection calculation worksheets and a more detailed explanation of the methodology are attached in Appendix B.
5.2.2 Street Segments
Street segment analysis is based upon the comparison of ADTs to the City of Vista's Roadway Classification, LOS, and ADT Table. This table provides segment capacities for different street classifications, based on traffic volumes and roadway characteristics. The City of Vista's Roadway Classification, LOS, and ADT Table is attached in Appendix C.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 11E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
6.0 SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT CRITERIA
6.1 Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections
A project will need to implement improvements to operation of an intersection when one of the following occurs:
1. In either the Existing Conditions Plus Project and Existing Conditions Plus Near -Term Cumulative Projects scenarios, the addition of project traffic results in a service drop from LOS D or better to LOS E or F. Under this condition, the project is responsible for improvements necessary to restore the intersection to LOS D conditions or better.
2. In either the Existing Conditions Plus Project and Existing Conditions Plus Near -Term Cumulative Projects scenarios, an intersection is operating at LOS E or F under the no - project scenario and the project adds more than an additional two seconds of average vehicle delay. Under this condition, the project is responsible for improvements necessary to restore the intersection LOS to pre -development conditions or better.
3. In the longer -range cumulative condition, if the addition of project traffic results in a service drop from LOS D or better to LOS E or F, or if an intersection is operating at LOS E or F and the project contributes to the average vehicle delay (regardless of time), the project is determined to have a cumulative impact. Under this condition, the project applicant is responsible for mitigating the intersection LOS to pre -development conditions or better.
Identified cumulative transportation related impacts can be mitigated by participation in the City of Vista's Impact Fees for Arterials Streets and Traffic Signals program.
6.2 Street Segments
Typically, the performance and LOS of a roadway segment is heavily influenced by the ability of the intersections to accommodate peak hour volumes. The more detailed peak hour intersection analysis explicitly accounts for factors that affect roadway capacity. Therefore, roadway segment widening is typically only recommended if the peak hour intersection analysis indicates the need for additional through lanes and/or to meet the street cross sections in the Circulation Element adjacent to the project boundary. Within the City of Vista and the region as a whole, intersection performance, rather than roadway segment performance, is a more accurate and realistic indicator of true traffic operations and is used as the basis for defining traffic impacts.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 11E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
7.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
The analysis of existing conditions includes the assessment of the study area intersections and street segments using the methodologies described in Section 5.0.
7.1 Intersection Analysis
Table 7-1 summarizes the existing peak hour intersection operations. As shown in Table 7-1, all of the study area intersections are calculated to currently operate at LOS D or better.
Appendix D contains the Existing intersection analysis worksheets.
TABLE 7-1
EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection
Control
Type
Peak
Hour
Existing
Delay'
LOSb
1. South Melrose Drive / County Complex
Signal
AM
8.5 A
PM
18.3 B
2. South Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive / Breeze
AM
23.5 C
Hill Road
Signal
PM
23.6 C
3. South Melrose Drive / Melrose Way
Signal
AM
38.7 D
PM
9.6 A
Footnotes:
a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle
b. Level of Service
SIGNALIZED UNSIGNALIZED
DELAY/LOS THRESHOLDS
Delay LOS
0.0 80.1
F
DELAY/LOSTHRESHOLDS
Delay LOS
0.0 50.1
F
7.2 Street Segment Analysis
Table 7-2 summarizes the existing street segment operations. As shown in Table 7-2, all of the study area street segments are calculated to currently operate at LOS D or better.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers
LLG Ref. 3-22-3573
■�■
TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
TABLE 7-2
EXISTING STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Street Segment
Classification
Capacity
(LOS E) a
ADT b
LOS c
V/C d
South Melrose Drive
County Complex to Matagual Drive
6-Lane Urban Major
(divided)
50,000
33,480
B
0.670
Matagual Drive to Melrose Way
4-Lane Major (divided)
40,000
32,985
D
0.825
Footnotes:
a. Capacities based on the City of Vista Roadway Classification Table. b. Average Daily Traffic Volumes.
c. Level of Service.
d. Volume to Capacity.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 11E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
8.0 TRIP GENERATION/DISTRIBUTION/ASSIGNMENT
8.1 Trip Generation
Trip generation rates for the multi -family residential land use were taken from the SANDAG (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002, to determine the traffic generated by the proposed Project. The trip generation rate for Single Family Detached (10 / dwelling units) was utilized. Table 8-1 shows the forecast trip generation for the project. As shown in Table 8-1, the Project is calculated to generate 340 ADTs, with 27 trips during the AM peak hour (8 inbound and 19 outbound), and 34 trips during the PM peak hour (24 inbound and 10 outbound).
TABLE 8-1
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Daily Trip Ends
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
(ADTs)
Land Use
Size
of
In:Out
Volume
% of
In:Out
Volume
Rates
Volume
ADT
Split
ADT
Split
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Single Family
34 dwelling units
10/DU
340
8%
30:70
8 19
27 7100/0
70:30
24 10
34 Detached
Footnotes:
a. Rate is based on SANDAG's (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002
8.2 Trip Distribution/Assignment
The Project traffic was distributed and assigned based on the site location, access to SR 78, existing traffic patterns in the area, the locations of retail, employment, and school opportunities, and anticipated traffic patterns to and from the site.
Figure 8-1 shows the Project traffic distribution. Figure 8-2 shows the Project traffic volumes.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 11E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
0 County Complex i I or-2%
0 000
o N rL N
d
y
O
0 00
`n
58%
l
10%
30%
Breeze Hill Rd
MatagualDr
10% —►
o
o
�
o
d
M
oU
N
V
Melrose Wy
5%
t
Q
o
LO
N
®
Study Intersection
Inbound Trip Distribution
Outbound Trip Distribution
xx%
Regional Trip Distribution
N:\3573\Figures
Date: 8/17/2022
Time: 1:23 PM
off°
CO°42
Co
0 U
Ln
00 0
i 0% Breeze Hill Rd O2
5% Melrose
Way
2%
Matagual of
O
O`O
nn
V
Figure 8-1
Project Traffic Distribution
TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
1 County Complex
O 11/6
2/1
6/3
Breeze Hill Rd
MatagualDr
1/2
N
N
M
1 Melrose Wy
0/1 I
o �
N
4 Study intersections
�J r" Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
N:\3573\Figures
Date: 8/17/2022
Time: 1:28 PM
R
N
O
O
Breeze Hill Rd 30 OZ
20 Melrose Way
U)
CD
O
10 N
Mata9ual or
c
0 1�
Figure 8-2
Project Traffic Volumes
TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
9.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING + PROJECT CONDITIONS
In assessing the Project's impacts to the street system, it was necessary to review nearby planned, on -going and future roadway improvements in the study area. A review of future roadway improvements indicates that there is a proposal to add an additional northbound shared through -right lane at the South Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive / Breeze Hill Road intersection. For the purposes of this traffic study, the implementation of these improvements was assumed in the Existing + Project scenario as construction is anticipated to commence pre -Project.
Appendix E contains the proposed improvement conceptual plan.
9.1 Intersection Analysis
Table 9-1 summarizes the Existing + Project and Existing + Project with Improvements intersection operations. As shown in Table 9-1, with the addition of Project traffic volumes, all of the study area intersections are calculated to operate at LOS D or better.
Appendix F contains the Existing + Project and Existing + Project with Improvements intersection analysis worksheets. Figure 9-1 shows the Existing + Project traffic volumes.
9.2 Street Segment Analysis
Table 9-2 summarizes the Existing + Project street segment operations. As shown in Table 9-2, with the addition of Project traffic volumes, all of the study area street segments are calculated to operate at LOS D or better.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 11E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
TABLE 9-1
EXISTING + PROJECT INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection
Control
YP
Type
Peak
Hour
Existing
Existing + Project
Ae
Existing + Project
(with improvement)
A�
Delay'
LOSe
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS
1. South Melrose Drive /
AM
8.5 A
8.5 A
0.0 N/A d
N/A
County Complex
Signal
PM
18.3 B
18.4 B
0.1 N/A
N/A
_
2. South Melrose Drive /
AM
23.5 C
25.0 C
1.5 23.1
C
(0.4)
Matagual Drive / Breeze
Signal
PM
23.6 C
24.9 C
1.3 21.5
C
(2.1)
Hill Road
3. South Melrose Drive /
AM
38.7 D
38.8 D
0.1 N/A
N/A
-
Melrose Way
Signal
PM
9.6 A
9.6 A
0.0 N/A
N/A
Footnotes:
a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle
b. Level of Service
C. A denotes an increase in delay due to project
d. N/A = Non -Applicable
SIGNALIZED UNSIGNALIZED
DELAY/LOS THRESHOLDS DELAY/LOS THRESHOLDS
Delay LOS
0.0 80.1 F
TABLE 9-2
EXISTING + PROJECT STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Delay LOS
0.0 50.1 F
Street Segment
Existing
Capacity
(LOS E)a
Existing
Existing + Project
ADTb
LOS`
V/Cd
ADT
LOS
V/C
South Melrose Drive
County Complex to Matagual Drive
50,000
33,480
B
0.670
33,680
B
0.674
Matagual Drive to Melrose Way
40,000
32,985
D
0.825
33,085
D
0.827
Footnotes:
a. Capacities based on the City of Vista Roadway Classification Table b. Average Daily Traffic
C. Level of Service
d. Volume to Capacity ratio
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers
LLG Ref. 3-22-3573
■�■
TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
O 0
0 7 N �
M � �
� N
� 0/32
�
f— 0/1
0/8
County Complex
f
28/198
10/26
o
CO
� m
d
oCO
CO v
M
rri
o
O M
0 M
�2 V
M
51 / 21
�— 4/6
23/7
Breeze Hill Rd
MalagualDr
83 / 122
8/8 —►
am
124/101 o
cl N
d
rn cc
�
rri
rn
(M
7 °0
7 °D
m rn
0 O
N
Melrose Wy
167/32
170/26
u�
M �
N
on
N
N n
M
4 Study intersections
�J r" Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
NA3573\Figures
Date: 8/9/2022
Time: 8:54 AM
Breeze Hill Rd
Melrose Way
U
N
Mata9ual of
Figure 9-1
Existing + Project Traffic Volumes
TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
10.0 ACCESS
As described in Section 2.0, the Project's access would be via one full access driveway located on Matagual Drive on the north side of the Project site. This driveway is located an adequate distance from Melrose Drive and will operate well. No access is provided to Melrose Drive which is desirable.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 IIC TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
11.0 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
11.1 Pedestrian Mobility
11.1.1 Existing Pedestrian Mobility
South Melrose Drive / County Complex: Intersection provides a controlled crossing location with pedestrian push buttons and crosswalks. However, pedestrian crossing is prohibited across the north leg.
South Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive: Intersection provides a controlled crossing location with pedestrian push buttons and crosswalks.
South Melrose Drive / Melrose Way: Intersection provides a controlled crossing location with pedestrian push buttons and high visibility crosswalks. However, pedestrian crossing is prohibited across the south leg.
South Melrose Drive — Within the study area, South Melrose Drive currently provides contiguous sidewalks on both sides of the roadway.
County Complex — Within the study area, County Complex currently provides contiguous sidewalks on both sides of the roadway.
Breeze Hill Road — Within the study area, Breeze Hill Road currently provides contiguous sidewalks on both sides of the roadway.
Matagual Drive — Sidewalks are only provided on the north side of the roadway for about 500 feet from the South Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive intersection. Sidewalks are missing along both sides of the remainder of the roadway.
Melrose Way — Contiguous sidewalks are provided on the north side of the roadway between South Melrose Drive and Centennial Drive, and on the south side of the roadway for only about 300 feet from the South Melrose Drive / Melrose Way intersection. Sidewalks are missing on the south side along of the remainder of the roadway.
11.1.2 Future Pedestrian Mobility
Per the City of Vista General Plan, no future pedestrian facilities are planned within the study area.
However, LLG recommends to add sidewalks to the south side of Matagual Drive along the project frontage.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 11E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
11.2 Bicycle Mobility
11.2.1 Existing Bicycle Mobility
South Melrose Drive — Within the study area, South Melrose Drive currently provides Class II bike lane along the east side of the roadway. A Class III bike route with sharrows is provided on the west side of the roadway, north of Las Palmas Drive. South of Las Palmas Drive, Class II bike lanes are provided on both sides of roadway.
No other bicycle facilities are provided within the study area.
11.2.2 Future Bicycle Mobility
Per the City of Vista General Plan, a Class II Bicycle Lane is planned to be constructed along South Melrose Drive from Hacienda Drive to Matagual Drive.
11.3 Transit Mobility
The North County Transit District (NCTD) operates within the study area. A description of the transit services within the Project vicinity are as follows:
North County Transit District (NCTD)
Route 332
Route 332 begins at the Vista Transit Center to the Buena Creek Sprinter Station. There are 63 stops along this route. It operates on the weekdays and weekends from approximately 4:30 AM to 9:30 PM. Services are at 30-minute frequencies.
Stops at the above route are located along South Melrose Drive. The nearest bus stop at the project site is at the Melrose Dr / Breeze Hill Rd intersection, approximately 600 feet in walking distance from the project site access driveway.
Appendix G contains the most current public transit route schedules and maps for the above - mentioned bus route.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 11E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
12.0 CONCLUSIONS
The Project site consists of 34 single-family homes on 5.55 acres, located the southeast corner of the Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive intersection. Site access is proposed via one full access driveway located on Matagual Drive on the north side of the Project site.
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
The Project is calculated to generate 340 ADT. Per the City of Vista's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for projects inconsistent with the Adopted General Plan, a VMT analysis is not required as the project would generate less than 500 ADT.
Local Mobility Analysis (LMA)
The study area intersections are calculated to operate acceptably at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours under Existing, Existing + Project and Existing + Project with Improvements scenarios. Based on the City of Vista's improvement thresholds, no substantial effects are identified Therefore, improvements are not required under this analysis.
As mentioned in Section IL 0, sidewalks are only provided on the north side of Matagual Drive for about 500 feet from the South Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive intersection. LLG recommends to add sidewalks to the south side of Matagual Drive along the project frontage.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 11E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC project
N:\3573\Report\LTA.3573.docx
Appendix J-2
Vehicle Miles Travelled Study
Prepared by.-
Zahira Chayeb
Transportation Engineer I
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED STUDY
TTLC VISTA MELROSE, LLC
Vista, California
February 1, 2023
LLG Ref. 3-22-3573
Under the Supervision of.-
John Boarman, P.E.
Principal
Linscatt, Law &
Greenspan, Engineers
4542 Ruffner Street
Suite 100
San Diego, CA 92111
858.300.8800 T
858.300.8810 F
www.ligengineers.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................ 2
2.0 Project Description.................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Trip Generation................................................................................................................... 3
3.0 Vehicle Miles Traveled: Overview and Background.............................................................. 7
3.1 VMT Background............................................................................................................... 7
3.2 Senate Bill 743.................................................................................................................... 7
4.0 VMT Analysis............................................................................................................................. 8
5.0 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................9
LIST OF FIGURES
SECTION —FIGURE # PAGE
Figure2-1 Vicinity Map................................................................................................................... 4 Figure2-2 Project Area Map............................................................................................................ 5 Figure2-3 Site Plan.......................................................................................................................... 6
LIST OF TABLES
SECTION —TABLE # PAGE
Table 2-1 Project Trip Generation....................................................................................................... 3 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3601 TTLC Vista Palomar, LLC
\ _15 Rcpoo A'MT Jum :'0",_does
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED STUDY
TTLC VISTA MELROSE, LLC
Vista, California
February 1, 2023
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) has prepared this Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) study to determine the VMT impacts for the TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC Project (hereafter referred to as "Project"). The Project proposes to develop 34 single-family homes on 5.55 acres, located on the southeast corner of the Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive intersection in the City of Vista.
This study includes the following:
■ Project Description
■ Trip Generation Calculations
■ Vehicle Miles Traveled: Overview and Background
■ VMT Significance Criteria and Methodology
■ VMT Analysis
■ Conclusions
LINScoTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
N:\3573\Report\VMT.3573 January 2023.docx
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project site consists of 34 single-family homes on 5.55 acres, located on the southeast corner of the Melrose Drive / Matagual Drive intersection. Site access is proposed via one full access driveway located on Matagual Drive.
Figure 2-1 shows the Project vicinity and Figure 2-2 illustrates, in more detail, the site location.
Figure 2-3 shows the Project site plan.
2.1 Trip Generation
Trip generation rates for the multi -family residential land use were taken from the SANDAG (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002, to determine the traffic generated by the proposed Project. Because the Project proposes the development of 34 single-family homes, the trip generation rate for single-family detached (10 / dwelling units) was utilized. Table 2-1 shows the forecast trip generation for the project. As shown in Table 2-1, the Project is calculated to generate 340 ADTs, with 27 trips during the AM peak hour (8 inbound and 19 outbound), and 34 trips during the PM peak hour (24 inbound and 10 outbound).
TABLE 2-1
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Daily Trip Ends
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
(ADTs)
Land Use
Size
of
In:Out
Volume
% of
In:Out
Volume
Rates
Volume
ADT
Split
ADT
Split
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Single Family
34 dwelling units
10/DUb
340
8%
30:70
8 19
27 10%
70:30
24 10
34 Detached
Footnotes:
a. Rate is based on SANDAGs (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002 b. Rate is based on single family detached rate of 10/DU LINScoTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
N:\3573\Report\VMT.3573 January 2023.docx
OCEANSIDE
Project Site
do
SAN MARCOS
ESCONDIDO
CARLSBAD
S.D.
COUNTY
ENCINITAS
S.D. COUNTY
S.D. COUNTY
SOLANA
BEACH POWAY
± SANTEE
._
SAN DIEGO'
EL CAJON
LA MESA%P
i
LEMON
GROV
CORONADO
s"
NATIONAL
CITY_L ^ i
JL
CHULAVISTA
I
,j
I %'- w 40kollit;
L
N:\3573\Figures Figure 2-1
Date: 8/9/2022
Time: 8:41 AM
Vicinity Map
TTLC VISTA MELROSE, LLC
■■ _
I"( ,.'may_ ' �w'{
lob,w
► ` !' 'x
. Vq 41MW
•� F}< i {
' + Project
Site
Ile
Tv '-• �'
♦ i I � I
, i
'�• *1+ L+ �'w �� �+�� '� � � � �# '�" � �++a... ram'- -
LINSCOTT
LAW &
GREENSPAN
engineers
100 200 300
N:134801Figures
Date: 08108122
I! t
PM 184631 I \
%PN: L '
L —
w
w• w,
i
i r
1j1
V1r r �
I
APN: 6-1
m
O
I A
s G
— '� ��, - r,
9 25 i i 24 ri i
EX. PROPERTY 1 --
BNDY 1
ULTIMATE RIW 1 10 r w w
EX. RA I ✓ —�
PM 20141
APN: 166-150-89
r � 1 1 11 12 13 14 i it
�r
RI�QT'19
d
— j P 80=22 ` A
i��P��r1 I
1 A N: 1G6 80-23
r
,
P P.
PM,475
APN: 166-28p`39, -40
rl r
1 � r
I
W ,y
AllS�Ri�f \
POR LOT 19 />
MAP 2131 i
APN: 166-280-3
l
Al
/PM 8977,—
APN: 1 M,
PM 8977`
APN:166,680-02
Figure 2-3
Site Plan
TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
3.0 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED: OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND
This section presents background on an evaluation of potential transportation impacts of the Project per the California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to implement California State Law Senate Bill (S.B.) 743 and the City's adopted Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, December 2020.
3.1 VMT Background
VMT is a measurement of miles traveled by vehicles within a specified region and for a specified time period. VMT measures the efficiency of the transportation network. VMT is calculated based on individual vehicle trips generated and their associated trip lengths. VMT accounts for two-way (round trip) travel and is often estimated for a typical weekday to measure transportation impacts.
3.2 Senate Bill 743
In September 2013, the Governor's Office signed SB 743 into law, starting a process that fundamentally changes the way transportation impact analysis is conducted under CEQA. These changes include the elimination of auto delay, level of service (LOS), and similar measurements of vehicular roadway capacity and traffic congestion as the basis for determining significant impacts.
The guidance identifies VMT as the most appropriate CEQA transportation metric, along with the elimination of Auto Delay/LOS for CEQA purposes statewide. The justification for this paradigm shift is that Auto Delay/LOS impacts lead to improvements that increase roadway capacity and therefore induce more traffic and greenhouse gas emissions.
In December 2018, after over five years of stakeholder -driven development, the California Natural Resource Agency certified and adopted the CEQA Statute. As of July 1, 2020, the VMT guidelines are applicable statewide.
LINScoTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
N:\3573\Report\VMT.3573 January 2023.docx
4.0 VMT ANALYSIS
Per the City of Vista Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (dated December 2020), a VMT analysis for CEQA purposes will be required if a project equals to or exceeds 1,000 average daily trips (ADT) and is consistent with the adopted General Plan. If a project is inconsistent with the adopted General Plan, a VMT analysis will be required if the project is 500 or more ADT. As shown in Table 2-1, the Project is calculated to generate approximately 340 ADT. Therefore, based on the City's TIA Guidelines, a VMT analysis is not required as the project would generate less than 500 ADT. VMT impacts are presumed to be less than significant.
LINScoTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
N:\3573\Report\VMT.3573 January 2023.docx
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
As noted above, the Project is considered a "small project" based on the trip generation calculations shown in Table 2-1, and is therefore presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact and will not require further evaluation.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3573 E TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC
N:\3573\Report\VMT.3573 January 2023.docx
Appendix K
Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program
Mitigation, Monitoring, and
Reporting Program
Vista Melrose
Residential Project
APRIL 2023
Prepared for:
CITY OF VISTA
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, California 92084
Prepared by:
DUDEK
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Printed on 30% post -consumer recycled material.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
PROJECT NAME: Vista Melrose Residential Project
DESCRIPTION: The proposed Vista Melrose Residential Project (Project) consists of a residential development within the City of Vista (City). The approximately 5.55-acre site includes Assessor's Parcel Numbers [APNs] 166-280-60-00, 166-280-61-00, and 166-280-18-00. The properties at 560 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00 are both currently zoned 0-P (Office Professional) and a corresponding General Plan designation of Commercial Office (CO). The property at 622 S. Melrose Drive is currently zoned R-1 (Residential) and has a corresponding General Plan designation of Medium Low Density Residential (MLD). The applicant, TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC, proposes to rezone all three properties to R-1-13 (Residential) with a corresponding General Plan change to Medium Density Residential (MD). Furthermore, the applicant proposes a thirty- seven (37) lot Tentative Subdivision Map to redevelop the site to include thirty-four (34) single- family residences, which would result in a proposed density of 6.1 dwelling units per acre, a private street, private park with a tot lot and a dog park. The project will utilize the City of Vista Small Lot Subdivision standards per Vista Development Code Section 18.33 to achieve their project design. The proposed project would also include landscaping and offsite street and utility improvements.
LOCATION: 560 S. Melrose Drive, 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN#166-280-61-00, within the city of Vista. 14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
%iUVLUldl nUbUU1UWb
MM-CUL-1 Cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be conducted on the site to provide for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and protection of any cultural resources that are affected by or may be discovered during the construction of the proposed project. The monitoring shall consist of the full-time presence of a Qualified Archaeologist and a traditionally and culturally affiliated (TCA) Native American Monitor associated with a TCA tribe for, but not limited to, any clearing or grubbing of vegetation, tree removal, demolition and/or removal of remnant foundations, pavements, abandonment and/or installation of infrastructure; grading or any other ground disturbing or altering activities, including the placement of any imported fill materials (note: all fill materials shall be absent of any and all cultural resources); and any related road improvements, including, but not limited to, the installation of infrastructure, realignments, and/or expansions to parking lots. Other tasks of the monitoring program shall include the following:
■ The requirement for cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc.
■ The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American Monitor shall attend at least one pre -construction meeting with the Contractor and/or associated Subcontractors (e.g., Grading Contractor) and a representative from the City of Vista's Engineering or Community Development departments to
present the archaeological monitoring program as presented in these measures.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
City of Vista Community
Development
Department, qualified
archeologist, TCA
Native American
Monitor
During construction
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The Qualified Archaeologist shall maintain ongoing
collaborative consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor during all ground disturbing or altering activities, as identified above. The Contractor or Grading Contractor shall notify the Director of Community Development & Engineering, preferably through e-mail, of the start and end of all ground - disturbing activities.
The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA Native American
Monitor may halt ground -disturbing activities if archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features are discovered. In general, ground -disturbing activities shall be directed away from these deposits for a short time to allow a determination of potential significance, the subject of which shall be determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Native American Monitor. If a determination is made that the
unearthed artifact deposits or tribal cultural resources are considered potentially significant, the consulting TCA Tribe(s) shall be notified and consulted in regards to the respectful and dignified treatment of those resources. Ground disturbing activities shall not resume until the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor, deems the cultural resource or feature has been appropriately
documented and/or protected. At the Qualified
Archaeologist's discretion, the location of ground disturbing activities may be relocated elsewhere on the project site to avoid further disturbance of cultural resources.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
■ The avoidance and protection of discovered unknown and significant cultural resources and/or unique archaeological resources is the preferable mitigation for the proposed project. If avoidance is not feasible, culturally appropriate treatment of those resources, including but not limited to funding an ethnographic or ethnohistoric study of the
resource(s), and/or developing a data recovery plan may be authorized by the City as the Lead Agency under CEQA. If data recovery is required, then the consulting TCA Tribe(s) shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan.
■ Should any cultural resources be found on the project site during construction of the project, consultation with the TCA Tribal Monitor shall occur. Based upon consultation with the TCA monitor, the cultural resources will be relocated for reburial to a portion of the existing site that will remain as open landscaped area (not active recreation areas).
MM-CUL-2 Prior to the submission of a grading plan to City staff City of Vista Community
Prior to construction
for review, the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor shall enter Development
into a Pre -Excavation Agreement with a Traditionally and Culturally Department, qualified
Affiliated Native American Tribe ("TCA Tribe"). A copy of the archeologist, TCA
agreement shall be included in the grading plan submission. The Native American
purpose of this agreement shall be to formalize protocols and Monitor
procedures between the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor, and the TCA tribe for the protection and treatment of, including but not limited to, Native American human remains, funerary objects, cultural and religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas and cultural items, located and/or discovered through a monitoring program in conjunction with the construction of the proposed project, including additional archaeological surveys and/or studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, off -site infrastructure installation, grading, and all other ground disturbing activities.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Date .
Mitigation Measure
Staff Monitor
Timing of -
Completion
MM-CUL-3 Prior to the release of the Grading Bond, a Monitoring City of Vista Community
After construction and prior to
Report and/or Evaluation Report, which shall comply with Development
issuance of occupancy permits.
Government Code Section 6254(r), shall be submitted by the Department, qualified
Qualified Archaeologist, along with the TCA Native American archeologist, TCA
Monitor's notes and comments, to the City Planner for the project Native American
administrative record.
Monitor
MM-CUL-4 All cultural materials that are associated with burial City of Vista Community
During and post construction
and/or funerary goods shall be repatriated to the Most Likely Development
Descendant as determined by the Native American Heritage Department, qualified
Commission (NAHC) per California Public Resources Code Section archeologist, TCA
5097.98.
Native American
Monitor
MM-CUL-5 Recovered cultural material of historic significance, but City of Vista Community
During and post construction
not of tribal significance, shall be curated with accompanying Development
catalog, photographs, and reports to a San Diego curation facility Department, qualified
that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79. If cultural archeologist, TCA
material will be returned to the Tribe(s) rather than curated, Native American
diagnostic artifacts or particularly good examples of specific tool Monitor
types, if such are recovered, should be scanned for 3D printing, with the permission of the Tribe(s). The data from 3D scanning would be curated at an appropriate repository, such as the San Diego Archaeological Center. The cultural material can then be returned to the Tribe(s) for reburial or other treatment. Recovered cultural material of tribal cultural significance shall be repatriated as stipulated in the pre -excavation agreement as described in M M-CUL-2
MM-CUL-6 As specified by California Health and Safety Code Qualified archeologist,
During construction
Section 7050.5, if human remains are found on the project site TCA Native American
during construction or during archaeological work, the person monitor, San Diego
responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized County Corner
representative, shall immediately notify the San Diego County Coroner's office by telephone. No further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains (as determined by the 14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American monitor) shall occur until the Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery occurs, a temporary construction exclusion zone shall be established surrounding the area of the discovery so that the area would be protected (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American monitor), and consultation and treatment could occur as prescribed by law. As further defined by State law, the Coroner would determine within two working days of being notified if the remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission would then make a determination as to the Most Likely Descendent. If Native American remains are discovered, the remains shall be kept in situ ("in place"), or in a secure location in close proximity to where they were found, until after the Medical Examiner makes its determination and notifications, and until after the Most Likely Descendant is identified. The analysis of the remains shall only occur on -site in the presence of a Most Likely Descendant. The specific locations of Native American burials and reburials will be proprietary and not disclosed to the general public. According to California Health and Safety Code, six or more human burials at one location constitute a cemetery (Section 8100), and
disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052). In the event that the project proponent and the MLD are in disagreement regarding the disposition of the remains, State law will apply, and the mediation process will occur with NAHC. In the event that mediation is not successful, the landowner shall rebury the remains at a location free from future disturbance (see Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(e) and 5097.94(k)).
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Geology and Soils
MM GEO-1 Unanticipated Paleontological Resources. If an City of Vista Community
inadvertent discovery of paleontological resources (e.g., fossilized Development
plant, shell, or animal bone) is made during project -related Department, Qualified
construction activities, ground disturbance in the area of the find Paleontologist
shall be halted; the discovered resource shall be roped off; and the City of Vista and a qualified professional paleontologist shall be contacted. The qualified paleontologist shall be assigned to determine whether the resource is potentially significant as per the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 2010 and County of San Diego (2009) guidelines for mitigation and develop appropriate treatment measures.
Nois
MM-NOI-1 Construction Noise Reduction The following
City of Vista Community
recommendations from Appendix I shall be implemented by the Development
construction contractor to reduce construction noise onsite, to the Department
satisfaction of the City of Vista Community Development Department, to ensure that project construction would not exceed the City's adopted daytime threshold for construction noise exposure of 75 dBA for an eight -hour period:
Administrative controls (e.g., prohibit usage of equipment type[s] within certain distances).
Engineering controls (upgrade noise controls, such as install better engine exhaust mufflers).
Install noise abatement on the site boundary fencing (or within, as practical and appropriate) in the form of sound blankets or comparable temporary barriers (e.g., stacked sheets of plywood supported with framing) to occlude
construction noise emission between the site (or specific equipment operation as the situation may define) and offsite noise -sensitive receptor(s) of concern.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
During
Prior to and during construction
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
■ At the outset of a project construction activity, an unattended noise level monitor shall be deployed onsite to measure and document that noise exposure levels attributed to project construction activity at adjacent offsite sensitive receptors are in conformance with the 75 dBA 8-hour Leq threshold.
MM-N01-2 Traffic Noise Reduction. Where exterior noise levels are City of Vista Community
During construction
predicted to exceed 65 dBA CNEL at useable open space areas, Development
the contractor should install noise -reducing features external to or Department
upon the useable open space areas (or within, as practical and appropriate) in the form of sound walls, fencing, landscape berms, or similarly performing barriers of at least 6 feet in height to occlude incoming roadway traffic noise, to the satisfaction of the City of Vista Community Development Department, to ensure that there is no exceedance of the 65 dBA CNEL threshold..
esources
See Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-5 above.
See above.
See above.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
ADD TO PACKET
June 13, 2023
Mayor John B. Franklin
City of Vista City Council
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, CA 92084
Sent via email to rmangassarian(d),ci.vista.ca.us
Re: TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC — Letter of Support
Dear Mayor Franklin and City Council:
I reside at 683 Matagual Drive, and have been a proud resident of this community for 38 years. I love this area so much, I hope to be buried in my front yard.
Although many project concepts could have been chosen and implemented, this concept presented by TTLC Vista Melrose is "Cinderella's Slipper" - it fits seamlessly in, and will be a beautiful addition to, our neighborhood.
My career has kept me involved in the construction industry, so I am knowledgeable with the cyclical nature of development costs. Currently, we have experienced a significant spike in construction costs, driving home prices up everywhere. Thus, the anticipated home price for this development will not be for first-time home buyers. However, this residential housing development is perfect for move -up buyers, providing much -needed opportunity for nearby residents, to remain in City boundaries.
I would also like to voice my concern over the Planning Commission's suggestion to consider a pedestrian access through the development's HOA lot. The Commissioner's point was to provide quicker access to local transit locations. This is highly unnecessary, as the nearest bus stops are only —715' to the northbound route, and —366' to the southbound route. Additionally, the route through the HOA property would require a security gate, and we all know gates just become a problem.
I support this proposed development and urge the City Council to approve the project so that the benefits of this neighborhood can be realized.
Sincerely,
Sal Paruolo
Cc:
Michael Torres, The True Life Companies
Brent Little, TK Consulting, Inc.
PH1
Appendix K
Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program
Mitigation, Monitoring, and
Reporting Program
Vista Melrose
Residential Project
APRIL 2023
Prepared for:
CITY OF VISTA
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, California 92084
Prepared by:
DUDEK
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Printed on 30% post -consumer recycled material.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
PROJECT NAME: Vista Melrose Residential Project
DESCRIPTION: The proposed Vista Melrose Residential Project (Project) consists of a residential development within the City of Vista (City). The approximately 5.55-acre site includes Assessor's Parcel Numbers [APNs] 166-280-60-00, 166-280-61-00, and 166-280-18-00. The properties at 560 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00 are both currently zoned 0-P (Office Professional) and a corresponding General Plan designation of Commercial Office (CO). The property at 622 S. Melrose Drive is currently zoned R-1 (Residential) and has a corresponding General Plan designation of Medium Low Density Residential (MLD). The applicant, TTLC Vista Melrose, LLC, proposes to rezone all three properties to R-1-13 (Residential) with a corresponding General Plan change to Medium Density Residential (MD). Furthermore, the applicant proposes a thirty- seven (37) lot Tentative Subdivision Map to redevelop the site to include thirty-four (34) single- family residences, which would result in a proposed density of 6.1 dwelling units per acre, a private street, private park with a tot lot and a dog park. The project will utilize the City of Vista Small Lot Subdivision standards per Vista Development Code Section 18.33 to achieve their project design. The proposed project would also include landscaping and offsite street and utility improvements.
LOCATION: 560 S. Melrose Drive, 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN#166-280-61-00, within the city of Vista. 14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
%iUVLUldl nUbUU1UWb
MM-CUL-1 Cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be conducted on the site to provide for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and protection of any cultural resources that are affected by or may be discovered during the construction of the proposed project. The monitoring shall consist of the full-time presence of a Qualified Archaeologist and a traditionally and culturally affiliated (TCA) Native American Monitor associated with a TCA tribe for, but not limited to, any clearing or grubbing of vegetation, tree removal, demolition and/or removal of remnant foundations, pavements, abandonment and/or installation of infrastructure; grading or any other ground disturbing or altering activities, including the placement of any imported fill materials (note: all fill materials shall be absent of any and all cultural resources); and any related road improvements, including, but not limited to, the installation of infrastructure, realignments, and/or expansions to parking lots. Other tasks of the monitoring program shall include the following:
■ The requirement for cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc.
■ The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American Monitor shall attend at least one pre -construction meeting with the Contractor and/or associated Subcontractors (e.g., Grading Contractor) and a representative from the City of Vista's Engineering or Community Development departments to
present the archaeological monitoring program as presented in these measures.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
City of Vista Community
Development
Department, qualified
archeologist, TCA
Native American
Monitor
During construction
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The Qualified Archaeologist shall maintain ongoing
collaborative consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor during all ground disturbing or altering activities, as identified above. The Contractor or Grading Contractor shall notify the Director of Community Development & Engineering, preferably through e-mail, of the start and end of all ground - disturbing activities.
The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA Native American
Monitor may halt ground -disturbing activities if archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features are discovered. In general, ground -disturbing activities shall be directed away from these deposits for a short time to allow a determination of potential significance, the subject of which shall be determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Native American Monitor. If a determination is made that the
unearthed artifact deposits or tribal cultural resources are considered potentially significant, the consulting TCA Tribe(s) shall be notified and consulted in regards to the respectful and dignified treatment of those resources. Ground disturbing activities shall not resume until the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor, deems the cultural resource or feature has been appropriately
documented and/or protected. At the Qualified
Archaeologist's discretion, the location of ground disturbing activities may be relocated elsewhere on the project site to avoid further disturbance of cultural resources.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
■ The avoidance and protection of discovered unknown and significant cultural resources and/or unique archaeological resources is the preferable mitigation for the proposed project. If avoidance is not feasible, culturally appropriate treatment of those resources, including but not limited to funding an ethnographic or ethnohistoric study of the
resource(s), and/or developing a data recovery plan may be authorized by the City as the Lead Agency under CEQA. If data recovery is required, then the consulting TCA Tribe(s) shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan.
■ Should any cultural resources be found on the project site during construction of the project, consultation with the TCA Tribal Monitor shall occur. Based upon consultation with the TCA monitor, the cultural resources will be relocated for reburial to a portion of the existing site that will remain as open landscaped area (not active recreation areas).
MM-CUL-2 Prior to the submission of a grading plan to City staff City of Vista Community
Prior to construction
for review, the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor shall enter Development
into a Pre -Excavation Agreement with a Traditionally and Culturally Department, qualified
Affiliated Native American Tribe ("TCA Tribe"). A copy of the archeologist, TCA
agreement shall be included in the grading plan submission. The Native American
purpose of this agreement shall be to formalize protocols and Monitor
procedures between the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor, and the TCA tribe for the protection and treatment of, including but not limited to, Native American human remains, funerary objects, cultural and religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas and cultural items, located and/or discovered through a monitoring program in conjunction with the construction of the proposed project, including additional archaeological surveys and/or studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, off -site infrastructure installation, grading, and all other ground disturbing activities.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Date .
Mitigation Measure
Staff Monitor
Timing of -
Completion
MM-CUL-3 Prior to the release of the Grading Bond, a Monitoring City of Vista Community
After construction and prior to
Report and/or Evaluation Report, which shall comply with Development
issuance of occupancy permits.
Government Code Section 6254(r), shall be submitted by the Department, qualified
Qualified Archaeologist, along with the TCA Native American archeologist, TCA
Monitor's notes and comments, to the City Planner for the project Native American
administrative record.
Monitor
MM-CUL-4 All cultural materials that are associated with burial City of Vista Community
During and post construction
and/or funerary goods shall be repatriated to the Most Likely Development
Descendant as determined by the Native American Heritage Department, qualified
Commission (NAHC) per California Public Resources Code Section archeologist, TCA
5097.98.
Native American
Monitor
MM-CUL-5 Recovered cultural material of historic significance, but City of Vista Community
During and post construction
not of tribal significance, shall be curated with accompanying Development
catalog, photographs, and reports to a San Diego curation facility Department, qualified
that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79. If cultural archeologist, TCA
material will be returned to the Tribe(s) rather than curated, Native American
diagnostic artifacts or particularly good examples of specific tool Monitor
types, if such are recovered, should be scanned for 3D printing, with the permission of the Tribe(s). The data from 3D scanning would be curated at an appropriate repository, such as the San Diego Archaeological Center. The cultural material can then be returned to the Tribe(s) for reburial or other treatment. Recovered cultural material of tribal cultural significance shall be repatriated as stipulated in the pre -excavation agreement as described in M M-CUL-2
MM-CUL-6 As specified by California Health and Safety Code Qualified archeologist,
During construction
Section 7050.5, if human remains are found on the project site TCA Native American
during construction or during archaeological work, the person monitor, San Diego
responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized County Corner
representative, shall immediately notify the San Diego County Coroner's office by telephone. No further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains (as determined by the 14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American monitor) shall occur until the Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery occurs, a temporary construction exclusion zone shall be established surrounding the area of the discovery so that the area would be protected (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American monitor), and consultation and treatment could occur as prescribed by law. As further defined by State law, the Coroner would determine within two working days of being notified if the remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission would then make a determination as to the Most Likely Descendent. If Native American remains are discovered, the remains shall be kept in situ ("in place"), or in a secure location in close proximity to where they were found, until after the Medical Examiner makes its determination and notifications, and until after the Most Likely Descendant is identified. The analysis of the remains shall only occur on -site in the presence of a Most Likely Descendant. The specific locations of Native American burials and reburials will be proprietary and not disclosed to the general public. According to California Health and Safety Code, six or more human burials at one location constitute a cemetery (Section 8100), and
disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052). In the event that the project proponent and the MLD are in disagreement regarding the disposition of the remains, State law will apply, and the mediation process will occur with NAHC. In the event that mediation is not successful, the landowner shall rebury the remains at a location free from future disturbance (see Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(e) and 5097.94(k)).
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Geology and Soils
MM GEO-1 Unanticipated Paleontological Resources. If an City of Vista Community
inadvertent discovery of paleontological resources (e.g., fossilized Development
plant, shell, or animal bone) is made during project -related Department, Qualified
construction activities, ground disturbance in the area of the find Paleontologist
shall be halted; the discovered resource shall be roped off; and the City of Vista and a qualified professional paleontologist shall be contacted. The qualified paleontologist shall be assigned to determine whether the resource is potentially significant as per the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 2010 and County of San Diego (2009) guidelines for mitigation and develop appropriate treatment measures.
Nois
MM-NOI-1 Construction Noise Reduction The following
City of Vista Community
recommendations from Appendix I shall be implemented by the Development
construction contractor to reduce construction noise onsite, to the Department
satisfaction of the City of Vista Community Development Department, to ensure that project construction would not exceed the City's adopted daytime threshold for construction noise exposure of 75 dBA for an eight -hour period:
Administrative controls (e.g., prohibit usage of equipment type[s] within certain distances).
Engineering controls (upgrade noise controls, such as install better engine exhaust mufflers).
Install noise abatement on the site boundary fencing (or within, as practical and appropriate) in the form of sound blankets or comparable temporary barriers (e.g., stacked sheets of plywood supported with framing) to occlude
construction noise emission between the site (or specific equipment operation as the situation may define) and offsite noise -sensitive receptor(s) of concern.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
During
Prior to and during construction
VISTA MELROSE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT / MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
■ At the outset of a project construction activity, an unattended noise level monitor shall be deployed onsite to measure and document that noise exposure levels attributed to project construction activity at adjacent offsite sensitive receptors are in conformance with the 75 dBA 8-hour Leq threshold.
MM-N01-2 Traffic Noise Reduction. Where exterior noise levels are City of Vista Community
During construction
predicted to exceed 65 dBA CNEL at useable open space areas, Development
the contractor should install noise -reducing features external to or Department
upon the useable open space areas (or within, as practical and appropriate) in the form of sound walls, fencing, landscape berms, or similarly performing barriers of at least 6 feet in height to occlude incoming roadway traffic noise, to the satisfaction of the City of Vista Community Development Department, to ensure that there is no exceedance of the 65 dBA CNEL threshold..
esources
See Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-5 above.
See above.
See above.
14613
CITY OF VISTA -APRIL 2023
City Council Public Hearing
June 27, 2023
PH1: Vista Melrose Residential Project – P22-0218
General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development
Plan, Summary Vacation and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 34-lot subdivision at 560 S. Melrose Drive
Project Location
•Project area: 5.55 acres
•3 legal parcel’s
•Mostly vacant land with
one existing single-
family residence and a
church building with
associated parking lot.
Project Site
560 and 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00
Small Lot Subdivision
Small Lot Residential Development – requirements adopted May 10, 2022 by City Council •Promote homeownership, single-family development, and expand owner-occupied housing opportunities for individuals trying to buy a home in Vista. •Applicable in the R-1-B and R-M (up to 15 dwelling units/acre) residential zones. •Minimum lot size: 3600 SF
•Minimum lot width of 45 feet
•Minimum lot width in a cul-de-sac: 20 feet
•Sidewalks and landscaped parkways on both sides of the street •On-street parking required on both sides of the private cul-de-sac streets, curb to curb street width minimum of 40 feet to accommodate on-street parking
•Common Open Space: 200 square feet per unit
•Private Open Space: 200 square feet per unit with a minimum 10-foot dimension. •Driveways: straight-in access from a private street or public street to a garage shall be at least 20 feet long •Storage: minimum 160 cubic feet enclosable storage for each dwelling unit
Proposed Project
•Proposed project would provide for the development of 34 residential lots on 5.55 gross acres •Zone Change: O-P (Office Professional) and R-1 (Residential) to R-1-B (Residential) •General Plan Amendment: Commercial Office (CO) and Medium Low-Density Residential (MLD) to Medium Density Residential (MD)
•Average lot sizes: 4,442 sq.ft. (the smallest lot approximately 3,263 sq.ft. and the largest lot approximately 12, 628 sq.ft.)
•Floor Plan: Two types of floor plans proposed
–Plan 1: 2,315 square feet with 4-bedroom floor plans with an optional 5th bedroom –Plan 2: 2,529 square feet with 5-bedroom floor plans
•Parking: 171 space provided (2-car garage + 2-car driveway per lot + 35 on-street parking spaces) where 136 spaces is required plus available on-street parking
•Common Open Space: 13,082 square feet (SF) provided between two amenity areas, where 6800 SF is required •Amenity Area 1: 6,700 square feet with a tot-lot, recreation lawn and heritage garden •Amenity Area 2: 6,400 square feet with an open lawn, dog park and picnic / seating area.
Aerial Photo / Existing Uses
CITY OF
CARLSBAD
MELROSE WAY
MULTI -FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL
MULTI -FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL
BREEZE HILL
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
PROJECT SITE
COUNTY COURT COMPLEX
PROJECT SITE
General Plan
General Plan (Existing):
•560 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-
61-00 currently designated Commercial
Office (CO)
•622 S. Melrose Drive currently
designated Medium Low-Density
Residential (MLD)
Allows for:
•Low density residential uses up to 5
dwelling units per acre in the MLD
designation
•Office / commercial uses in the CO
designation.
Project Site
560 and 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00
General Plan (Proposed)
General Plan (Proposed):
Medium Density Residential (MD)
Allows for:
•Medium Density residential uses
up to 10 dwelling units per acre
•Single-family residential
Zoning
Zoning(Existing):
•560 S. Melrose Drive and APN
166-280-61-00 currently
zoned O-P (Office
Professional)
•622 S. Melrose Drive
currently zoned R-1
(Residential)
Permitted Uses:
•Single-family residence
•Commercial / office uses Project Site
560 and 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00
O-P
Zoning (Proposed)
Zoning (Proposed):
R-1-B (Residential)
Permitted Uses:
•Single-family residential
Site Plan
Private Street “A”
Single-family lots
Amenity 2
Amenity 1
Typical Lot Design and Average Lot Size
•Minimum lot size required is 3,600 square feet as an
average of the proposed lot sizes after deducting the
smallest and largest lot sizes from the average calculation. •Average lot area for this development would be 4,442
square foot lots.
Landscape Plan
•Landscaping: The site will be landscaped with native and non-native plant materials that require low or moderate water use.
Landscape Plan
•Trees will include Evergreen street trees (Australian Willow) and Deciduous Flowering trees (Desert Willow)•Planting along S. Melrose Drive and Matagual Drive will enhance the street frontages with slump stone block walls with glass panels, shrubs and trees.
Open Space•Common Open Space: 6,800 square feet required; 13,082 square feet provided between two amenity areas •Amenity Area 1: 6,700 square feet with a tot-lot, recreation lawn and heritage garden•Amenity Area 2: 6,400 square feet with an open lawn, dog park a picnic / seating area.
Wall Plan
•Walls will include 5-foot slump-stone
CMU walls between dwelling units.
•6-foot slump-stone walls around the
perimeter of the site along the
eastern and southern boundaries.
Architecture
•Architecturally,
the development
will include a
total of four
different styles
and colors;
Contemporary,
Ranch and two
styles of
farmhouse.
Floor Plan – Plan 1
•Homes in Plan 1 will range in
size between 2,227 square
feet and 2,315 square feet.
•Units will have 4 bedrooms + a
loft for an optional 5th
bedroom and a total of 3
bathrooms.
•Each unit will have 210 cubic
feet of storage within the
garage space (minimum
required is 160 cubic feet).
Floor Plan – Plan 2
•Homes in Plan 2 will range in
size between 2,407 square
feet and 2,529 square feet.
•Units will have 5 bedrooms
and a total of 3 bathrooms.
•Each unit will have 300 cubic
feet of storage within the
garage space (minimum
required is 160 cubic feet).
Traffic Analysis
•CEQA threshold for a traffic study for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): 1,000 average daily trips (ADT) and is consistent with the adopted General Plan. If a project is inconsistent with the adopted General Plan, a VMT analysis will be required if the project is 500 or more ADT. •City of Vista Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (TIA) –Projects that generate less than 500 daily vehicle trips are not required to conduct a VMT impact analysis.
–The proposed project can be implemented without impacting the operations of the surrounding roadway system.
–The proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 340 ADT at full buildout (i.e., when all 34 homes are built). Thus, a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis was not required for this project.
Summary Vacation
•Project proposes to vacate a public easement recorded March 3, 1976 per County of San Diego Record No. 76-062951, for a Scenic Tree Easement. •Scenic Tree Easement was recorded per Site Development Plan 75-5, for First Church of Religious Science.
•Easement is approximately 10-feet wide and overlaps the existing sidewalk and landscaped areas (shrubs) along S. Melrose Drive.
•Present condition of this easement has existed for at least the past five consecutive years. Therefore, the easement has not been used for the purpose for which it was dedicated as a scenic tree easement.
•Following aerial photos will confirm the above statements.
Summary Vacation
Summary Vacation
Summary Vacation
Summary Vacation
Basis for Approval
-The proposed use, in the manner to be conducted, is permitted in the applicable zone and will conform to applicable federal, state, and local laws or regulations.
-The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan.
-Goal 1 of the Land Use and Community Identity (LUCI) element of the General Plan promotes the preservation and enhancement of neighborhoods that share common development patterns, topography, major streets, and zoning patterns.
-Goal 2 of the LUCI element of the General Plan promotes a range of housing types and sizes for a variety of incomes and ages.
-Proposed density of 6.1 dwelling units per acre is below the maximum allowed of 10 dwelling units per acre permitted by the proposed General Plan designation MD – Medium Density Residential (10 du/ac). -Project meets the requirements of small lot development within the R-1-B zone. -Summary Vacation of the Scenic Tree Easement has not been utilized for the past five years for its intended purpose. -Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and available for public review April 12, 2023 through May 1, 2023 (No comment letters received for this MND).
Planning Commission Recommendation
A public hearing was held at the Planning Commission on May 16, 2023, to consider the project.
At the completion of the hearing, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the project as outlined in the Planning Commission Resolution 2023-16, with the following additional Conditions of Approval (Vote: 4-0)
•The applicant shall prepare a feasibility study regarding the installation of a pedestrian access gate along the western boundary of the project site. Conclusion of said study shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner.
•Plans submitted for Building plan check shall illustrate enhanced elevations with various architectural features on all four sides of each home within the approved development. Final exterior design of each home shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits.
Staff Recommendation
1.Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2023- , approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for 34 single-family dwelling units located at 560 and 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00 with Exhibit A and B.
2.Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2023- , authorizing and approving the summary vacation of a scenic tree easement on APN 166-280-60.
3.Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2023- , amending the General Plan land use designation from Commercial Office (CO) and Medium Low Density Residential (MLD) to Medium Density Residential (MD) on three parcels located at 560 and 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00 with Exhibit A.
4.Adopt City Council Ordinance No. 2023- , approving a Zone Change from O-P Office Professional and R-1 Residential Zones to R-1-B Residential Zone Small Lot Development to allow for 34 single-family homes on a 5.55-acre site located at 560 and 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00 with Exhibit A
5.Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2023- , approving a Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map for 34 single-family homes located at 560 and 622 S. Melrose Drive and APN 166-280-61-00 with Exhibits A and B.
City Council Public Hearing
June 27, 2023
PH1: Vista Melrose Residential Project – P22-0218
General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development
Plan, Summary Vacation and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 34-lot subdivision at 560 S. Melrose Drive
Landscape Plan
This is a view from Matagual Drive looking west towards S. Melrose Drive
Landscape Plan
This is the view from S. Melrose Drive looking north towards Matagual Drive
Private Street “A”
•Minimum Required: 40-feet curb-to-curb
•Provided: 42-feet curb-to-curb
Architecture
•Units that face a
public / private
street, or other
residential units will
have enhanced
elevations.
Architecture
•Contemporary:
Architecture (Enhanced Elevations)
•Contemporary:
Architecture
•Ranch:
Architecture (Enhanced Elevations)
•Ranch:
Architecture
•Farmhouse 1:
Architecture (Enhanced Elevations)
•Farmhouse 1:
Architecture
•Farmhouse 2:
Architecture (Enhanced Elevations)
•Farmhouse 2:
•Looking south
towards S.
Melrose Drive
•Looking south
towards S.
Melrose Drive
•Looking east from
across the street
from CVS.
•Palm trees along
Matagual Drive.
1 Melrose -Vista
By TTLC Vista - Melrose, LLC
2 L O C A T I O N
3 P R O P E R T Y
5 P L A N N I N G
6 Consistency With General Plan
G E N E R A L P L A N
Land Use Element
•LUCI 4 – Promote smart growth land use patterns.
•LUCI 5 – Complete street design that compliments
land uses.
•LUCI 6 – Redevelop under utilized properties.
•LUCI 7 – Support economic development with mix of
land uses.
•LUCI 9 – Promote range of housing types for variety
of incomes.
Housing Element
•Goal 2.0 – Encourage wide range of housing types for
existing and future residents.
•Goal 2.6 – Require community involvement in design.
•Goal 2.7 – Achieve energy conservation through new
construction techniques.
•Goal 3.0 – Provide increased opportunities for home
ownership.
•Goal 5.0 – Removal of constraints to new housing.
12 S T Y L E & C O L O R P L O T T I N G
16 A P P E N D I X
Melrose -Vista
By TTLC Vista - Melrose, LLC
Artistic Rendering A-1
M E L R O S E S T R E E T V I E W
Artistic Rendering A-2
M A T A G U A L S T R E E T V I E W
Existing Condition A-3
L A S P A L M A S W A T E R S Y S T E M
Proposed Condition A-4
L A S P A L M A S W A T E R S Y S T E M
Alternate Condition A-5
L A S P A L M A S W A T E R S Y S T E M
Map A-6
E X I S T I N G S E W E R E A S E M E N T
Satellite Imagery A-7
E X I S T I N G S E W E R E A S E M E N T
Vista Sewer System A-8
E X I S T I N G S E W E R E A S E M E N T
A-9
O F F S I T E G R A D I N G
A-
PC ARCHITECTURE MODIFICATION
A-
PC ARCHITECTURE MODIFICATION
A-
PC ARCHITECTURE MODIFICATION
A-
ACCESS STUDY