HGJHGJH

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR
Noise
4.9 - Noise 4.9.1 - Introduction This section describes the existing noise setting and potential effects from project implementation on the site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information contained in the Environmental Noise Assessment for the Diamond Dorado Retail Center Project (Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. 2010), which is included in this EIR as Appendix J, Noise. This section summarizes the information included in that technical report. 4.9.2 - Environmental Setting
Acoustical Terminology
In order to properly understand the current environmental setting as it relates to sound, it is important to understand the general technical considerations taken into account during noise analysis. Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium such as air. Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound. Various parameters characterize sound that describe the rate of oscillation of sound waves, the distance between successive troughs or crests, the speed of propagation, and the pressure level or energy content of a given sound wave. In particular, the sound pressure level has become the most common descriptor used to characterize the loudness of an ambient sound level. The unit of sound pressure, a ratio of the faintest sound detectable by a keen human ear, is called a decibel (dB). A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement that indicates the relative intensity of a sound. The zero point on the dB scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Changes of 3 dB or fewer are only perceptible in laboratory environments. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dB or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. Sound levels in dB are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 dB represents a 10-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 dB is 100 times more intense, and 30 dB is 1,000 times more intense. Each 10-dB increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness. Because sound or noise can vary in intensity by over 1 million times within the range of human hearing, a logarithmic loudness scale similar to the Richter scale used for earthquake magnitude is used to keep sound intensity numbers at a convenient and manageable level. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to all sound frequencies within the entire spectrum, noise levels at maximum human sensitivity are factored more heavily into sound descriptions in a process called A-weighting, written as dBA. This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Any further reference to decibels in this report written as dB should be understood to be A-weighted values. Many methods have been developed for evaluating community noise to account for, among other things:
Michael Brandman Associates
H:\Client (PN-JN)\3337\33370001\EIR\3 - DEIR\33370001 Sec04-09 Noise.doc
4.9-1
Noise
Variation in noise levels over time. Influence of periodic individual loud events. Community response to changes in the community noise environment.
Several methods have been developed to measure sound over a period of time, including:
Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) Day/Night Average Sound Level (Ldn)
These methods are described and defined below.

Leq
Time variations in noise exposure are typically expressed in terms of a steady-state energy level equal to the energy content of the time-varying period (called Leq), or, alternately, as a statistical description of the sound pressure level that is exceeded over some fraction of a given observation period. For example, the noise levels exceeded on 10 percent of readings is called L10, the median (50th percentile) reading is called L50, etc.
CNEL
Because community receptors are more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during the evening and at night, State law requires that, for planning purposes, an artificial dB increment penalty be added to quiet time noise levels in a 24-hour noise descriptor called Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL).
Ldn
Another commonly used method is the day/night average level or Ldn. The Ldn is a measure of the 24hour average noise level at a given location. It was adopted by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for developing criteria for the evaluation of community noise exposure. It is based on a measure of the average noise level over a given time period, called the Leq. The Ldn is calculated by averaging the Leqs for each hour of the day at a given location after penalizing the sleeping hours (defined as 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) by 10 dBA to account for the increased sensitivity of people to noises that occur at night. The maximum noise level recorded during a noise event is typically expressed as Lmax. The sound level exceeded over a specified time can be expressed as Ln (e.g., L90, L50, L10, etc.). L50 equals the level exceeded 50 percent of the time, L10 equals the level exceeded 10 percent of the time, etc. As previously mentioned, people respond to changes in sound pressure, which are measured on a noise scale in a logarithmic manner. In general, a 3-dB change in sound pressure level is considered a just detectable difference in most situations. A 5-dB change is readily noticeable, and a 10-dB change is considered a doubling (or halving) of the subjective loudness. A 3-dB increase or decrease
4.9-2

Noise
in the average traffic nose level is realized by a doubling or halving of the traffic volume, or by about a 7-mile-per-hour increase or decrease in speed. For each doubling of distance from a point noise source, the sound level will decrease by 6 dB. In other words, if a person is 100 feet from a machine and moves 200 feet from that source, sound levels will drop by approximately 6 dB. Moving 400 feet away, sound levels will drop approximately another 6 dB. For each doubling of distance from a line source, such as a roadway, noise levels are reduced 3 to 5 decibels, depending on the ground cover between the source and the receiver.
Noise Exposure
An interior CNEL maximum noise level of 45 dB is mandated by the State of California Noise Insulation Standards (CCR, Title 24, Part 6, Section T25 28) for multiple-family dwellings and hotel and motel rooms. In 1988, the State Building Standards Commission expanded that standard to include all habitable rooms in residential use, including single-family dwelling units. Since normal noise attenuation within residential structures with closed windows is about 20 dB, an exterior noise exposure of 65 dB CNEL allows the interior standard to be met without any specialized structural attenuation (e.g., dual-paned windows). A noise level of 65 dB is also the level at which ambient noise begins to interfere with ones ability to carry on a normal conversation at reasonable separation without raising ones voice. Table 4.9-1 summarizes typical noise sources, levels, and responses.
Table 4.9-1: Noise Levels and Human Response
Noise Source Noise Level (dBA) Response
Library Refrigerator humming Quiet office Normal conversation Vacuum cleaner Freight train at 50 feet Heavy-duty truck at 50 feet Jet takeoff at 2,000 feet Unmuffled motorcycle Jet takeoff at 200 feet Shotgun firing Carrier jet operation
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Very quiet Quiet Quiet Intrusive Telephone use difficult Interferes with conversation Annoying Very annoying; hearing damage at sustained exposure levels Maximum vocal effect; physical discomfort Regular exposure over one minute risks permanent hearing loss Pain threshold Harmfully loud
Source: Melville C. Branch and R. Dale Beland, 1970.

4.9-3
Noise
Noise Attenuation over Distance
For a source of noise which radiates from a fixed location, such as the noise generated by stationary mechanical equipment, sound levels decrease at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance (spherical spreading or divergence). This sound decay rate also applies to maximum noise levels (Lmax) generated by both stationary and mobile noise sources, such as the airbrake release of a heavy truck. For example, a hypothetical reference level of 70 dB measured at a distance of 50 feet from a fixed location would decrease to a level of approximately 64 dB at a distance of 100 feet from that location (6 dB decrease per doubling of distance), and further decrease to approximately 58 dB at a distance of 200 feet (another 6 dB per doubling of distance from 100 to 200 feet). For mobile noise sources, such as truck pass-bys, the sound decay rate used for computation of average noise levels (Leq) is 4.5 dB per doubling of distance from the source. For example, a hypothetical reference level of 60 dB measured at a reference distance of 50 feet from a truck pass-by route would decrease to a level of approximately 55.5 dB at a distance of 100 feet from that fixed location (4.5 dB decrease per doubling of distance), and further decrease to 51 dB at a distance of 200 feet (another 4.5 dB per doubling of distance from 100 to 200 feet).
Groundborne Vibration Fundamentals
Groundborne vibrations consist of rapidly fluctuating motions within the ground that have an average motion of zero. The effects of groundborne vibrations typically only cause a nuisance to people, but at extreme vibration levels, damage to buildings may occur. Although groundborne vibration can be felt outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors where the associated effects of the shaking of a building can be notable. Groundborne noise is an effect of groundborne vibration and only exists indoors, since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room and may consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves.
Vibration Descriptors
Several different methods are used to quantify vibration amplitude, such as the maximum instantaneous peak in the vibrations velocity, which is known as the peak particle velocity (PPV) or the root mean square (rms) amplitude of the vibration velocity. Because of the typically small amplitudes of vibrations, vibration velocity is often expressed in decibels; it is denoted as (Lv) and is based on the rms velocity amplitude. A commonly used abbreviation is VdB, which in this text, is used when Lv is based on the reference quantity of 1 microinch per second.
Vibration Perception
Typically, developed areas are continuously affected by vibration velocities of 50 VdB or lower. These continuous vibrations are not noticeable to humans, whose threshold of perception is around 65 VdB. Offsite sources that may produce perceptible vibrations are usually caused by construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads, while smooth roads rarely produce perceptible groundborne noise or vibration. Exhibit 4.9-1 illustrates typical vibration levels and the associated human response.
4.9-4 Michael Brandman Associates
Noise
Vibration Propagation
The propagation of groundborne vibration is not as simple to model as airborne noise. This is because noise in the air travels through a relatively uniform medium, while groundborne vibrations travel through the earth, which may contain significant geological differences. There are three main types of vibration propagation: surface, compression, and shear waves. Surface waves, or Rayleigh waves, travel along the grounds surface. These waves carry most of their energy along an expanding circular wave front, similar to ripples produced by throwing a rock into a pool of water. P-waves, or compression waves, are body waves that carry their energy along an expanding spherical wave front. The particle motion in these waves is longitudinal (i.e., in a push-pull fashion). P-waves are analogous to airborne sound waves. S-waves, or shear waves, are also body waves that carry energy along an expanding spherical wave front. However, unlike P-waves, the particle motion is transverse or side-to-side and perpendicular to the direction of propagation. As vibration waves propagate from a source, the vibration energy decreases in a logarithmic nature and the vibration levels typically decrease by 6 VdB per doubling of the distance from the vibration source. As stated above, this drop-off rate can vary greatly, depending on the soil, but has been shown to be effective enough for screening purposes, in order to identify potential vibration impacts that may need to be studied through actual field tests.
Construction-Related Vibration Level Prediction
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment used on the site. Operation of construction equipment causes ground vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in strength with distance. Buildings in the vicinity of the construction site respond to these vibrations with varying results ranging from no perceptible effects at the low levels to slight damage at the highest levels. Table 4.9-2 gives approximate vibration levels for particular construction activities. The data in the table provides a reasonable estimate for a wide range of soil conditions.
Table 4.9-2: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity (inches/second) Approximate Vibration Level (Lv) at 25 feet
Equipment
Pile driver (impact) Pile driver (sonic) Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) Hydromill (slurry wall) Large bulldozer Caisson drill
1.518 (upper range) 0.644 (typical) 0.734 (upper range) 0.170 (typical) 0.202 0.008 (in soil) 0.017 (in rock) 0.089 0.089
112 104 105 93 94 66 75 87 87

4.9-5
Noise
Table 4.9-2 (cont.): Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment

Peak Particle Velocity (inches/second) Approximate Vibration Level (Lv) at 25 feet
Equipment
Loaded trucks Jackhammer Small bulldozer

Source: Federal Transit Administration, 1995.
0.076 0.035 0.003
86 79 58
4.9.3 - Existing Noise Environment To determine the existing noise level environment, 24-hour noise measurements were taken at two locations in the project study area representing the sensitive receptors nearest to the project site. Exhibit 4.9-2 depicts the noise measurement locations.
Existing Noise Environment at Nearby Sensitive Receptors
The existing ambient noise environment in the immediate project vicinity is defined primarily by noise from Diamond Road (SR-49) and the industrial uses in the area, including the Material Recovery Facility (MRF). To quantify existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity, two continuous (24-hour) ambient noise level surveys were conducted on February 7 and 8, 2008 at 4150 Lime Kiln Road (Site 1) and 4000 SR-49 (Site 2). As shown in Exhibit 4.9-2, measurements were collected at Site 1 from within the backyard patio and at Site 2 from within the front yard landscaping, approximately 40 feet from the centerline of SR-49. The noise measurement sites were selected to represent the potentially affected residential land uses adjacent to the project site. Table 4.9-3 provides the results of the 24-hour ambient noise level surveys.
Table 4.9-3: Ambient Noise Measurement Results
Average Noise Levels (Range), dB Daytime (7 a.m.-7 p.m.) Site CNEL Hourly Leq Hourly Lmax Evening (7 p.m.-10 p.m.) Hourly Leq Hourly Lmax Nighttime (10 p.m.-7 a.m.) Hourly Leq Hourly Lmax
1 2
64 70
54 (52-56) 71 (66-77)
73 (67-81) 90 (83-109)
48 (45-49) 64 (63-65)
61 (58-63) 83 (82-83)
58 (39-63) 60 (52-66)
66 (54-83) 82 (78-86)
Note: Refer to Exhibit 4.9-2 for noise measurement locations. Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc.
As shown in Table 4.9-3, Site 1 experiences elevated nighttime/early morning noise exposure due to operations at the adjacent MRF. Otherwise, noise exposure at Site 1 residence was relatively typical for a residential setting. The existing noise conditions at Site 2 are elevated due to significant Diamond Road (SR-49) traffic and MRF related traffic on Bradley Drive.
4.9-6

Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Federal Transit Administration, 2004.
Michael Brandman Associates 33390001 08/2010 | 4.9-1_typical_vibration.pdf
Exhibit 4.9-1 Typical Vibration Levels

EL DORADO COUNTY DIAMOND DORADO RETAIL CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. 2010. NOT TO SCALE
Exhibit 4.9-2 Site Plan and Noise Measurement Sites

FOOTER EL DORADO COUNTY DIAMOND DORADO RETAIL CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
33370001 08/2010 | 4.9-2_Site Plan and Noise Measurement Sites.pdf
NORTH
Noise
`Existing Traffic Noise Environment
Table 4.9-4 shows the existing traffic noise levels in terms of Ldn at a reference distance of 50 feet from the centerlines of existing project area roadways. Table 4.9-4 also includes the distances to existing traffic noise level contours. Detailed analysis inputs and modeling information are presented in Appendix J.
Table 4.9-4: Existing Traffic Noise Levels and Contour Distances
Distance to Noise Contour (feet) 70 dB Ldn 65 dB Ldn 60 dB Ldn
Roadway
Section
Ldn (dB) at 50 feet
North of Plaza Drive Plaza Drive to WB US-50 Ramps WB US-50 Ramps to EB US-50 Ramps EB US-50 Ramps to Mother Lode Drive Mother Lode Drive to Forni Road Forni Road to Golden Center Drive Missouri Flat Road Golden Center Drive to Diamond Springs Parkway Diamond Springs Parkway to China Garden Road China Garden Road to Industrial Drive Industrial Drive to Enterprise Drive Enterprise Drive to Pleasant Valley Road (SR-49) North of Pacific Street Pacific Street to Fiske Street Fiske Street to Skyline Drive Skyline Drive to Truck Street Truck Street to Bradley Drive SR-49 Bradley Drive to Diamond Springs Parkway Diamond Springs Parkway to Project Driveway #3 Project Driveway #3 to Black Rice Road Black Rice Road to Pleasant Valley Road Pleasant Valley Road to China Garden Road China Garden Road to Missouri Flat Road
66 70 71 73 72 71 71 69 70 70 70 65 69 69 69 68 68 68 68 68 72 73
28 49 58 74 70 62 57 44 47 53 50 24 41 41 42 38 39 39 39 38 69 74
60 106 125 159 150 134 123 94 101 114 108 52 88 88 91 82 84 84 84 82 148 160
129 228 269 342 324 290 265 203 217 245 233 112 190 189 196 176 181 181 181 176 318 344

4.9-11
Noise
Table 4.9-4 (cont.): Existing Traffic Noise Levels and Contour Distances
Distance to Noise Contour (feet) 70 dB Ldn 65 dB Ldn 60 dB Ldn
Roadway
Section
Ldn (dB) at 50 feet
Missouri Flat Road to Patterson Drive Patterson Drive to Oro Lane/Koki Lane SR-49 (cont.) Oro Lane/Koki Lane to Forni Road Forni Road to Pleasant Valley Road South of Pleasant Valley Road SR-49 to Racquet Way Pleasant Valley Road Racquet Way to Canyon Valley Road East of Canyon Valley Road Mother Lode Drive Forni Road West of Missouri Flat East of Missouri Flat West of Missouri Flat North of Pleasant Valley Road Golden Center Drive Industrial Drive Enterprise Drive Oro Lane Koki Lane Patterson Drive China Garden Road Lime Kiln Road Black Rice Road Racquet Way Throwita Way Truck Street Bradley Drive East of Missouri Flat West of Missouri Flat West of Missouri Flat North of SR-49 South of SR-49 South of SR-49 Missouri Flat Road to SR-49 West of SR-49 East of SR-49 North of Pleasant Valley Road North of Diamond Springs Parkway South of Diamond Springs Parkway West of SR-49 West of SR-49 Missouri Flat Road to Project Driveway #1 Diamond Springs Parkway Project Driveway #1 to Project Driveway #2 Project Driveway #2 to Throwita Way Throwita Way to SR-49
71 71 70 70 69 67 67 66 62 61 63 62 59 56 59 48 62 60 60 55 51 54 N/A N/A 52 55 N/A N/A N/A N/A
62 57 51 53 44 32 29 29 16 12 18 15 10 6 9 2 15 11 11 5 3 4 N/A N/A 3 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A
134 122 110 113 94 68 63 62 34 27 39 32 21 12 20 4 32 23 24 12 5 9 N/A N/A 7 11 N/A N/A N/A N/A
289 264 237 244 203 147 136 134 73 58 85 69 46 26 43 8 68 49 51 25 12 19 N/A N/A 14 23 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants Inc. using FHWA RD-77-108 with inputs from the project TIA (KHA, June 24, 2010).
Noise
4.9.4 - Regulatory Framework

Federal
The adverse impact of noise was officially recognized by the federal government in the establishment of the Noise Control Act of 1972, which serves three purposes:
Promulgating noise emission standards for interstate commerce. Assisting state and local abatement efforts. Promoting noise education and research.
The Federal Office of Noise Abatement and Control (ONAC) was initially tasked with implementing the Noise Control Act. However, the ONAC has since been eliminated, leaving the development of federal noise policies and programs under the auspices of other federal agencies and interagency committees. For example, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) agency prohibits exposure of workers to excessive sound levels. The Department of Transportation (DOT) assumed a significant role in noise control through its various operating agencies. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulates noise of aircraft and airports. Surface transportation system noise is regulated by a host of agencies, including the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Transit noise is regulated by the Federal Transit Administration, while freeways that are part of the interstate highway system are regulated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Furthermore, the federal government actively advocates that local jurisdictions use their land use regulatory authority to arrange new development in such a way that noise sensitive uses are either prohibited from being sited adjacent to a highway or, alternately, that the developments are planned and constructed in such a manner that potential noise impacts are minimized. Since the federal government has preempted the setting of standards for noise levels that can be emitted by the transportation sources, the County of El Dorado is restricted to regulating the noise generated by the transportation system through nuisance abatement ordinances and land use planning.
State
Established in 1973, the California Department of Health Services Office of Noise Control (ONC) was instrumental in developing regularity tools for local agencies to implement in the control and abatement of noise. One significant model is the Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Matrix, which allows the local jurisdiction to clearly delineate compatibility of sensitive uses with various incremental levels of noise. Article 4 of the California Administrative Code (California Noise Insulation Standards, Title 25, Chapter 1) requires noise insulation in new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings (other than single-family detached housing) that provides an annual average noise level of no more than 45 dBA CNEL. When such structures are located within a 60-dBA CNEL (or greater) noise contour, an

4.9-13
Noise
acoustical analysis is required to ensure that interior levels do not exceed the 45-dBA CNEL annual threshold. In addition, Government Code Section 65302 mandates that the legislative body of each county and city in California adopt a noise element as a component of their comprehensive general plans. The local noise element must recognize the land use compatibility guidelines published by the State Department of Heath Services. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, normally unacceptable, and clearly unacceptable.
Caltrans Vibration Guidance
Construction vibration is regulated in accordance with standards established by the Transportation and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual, issued by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Table 4.9-5 presents these standards. Transient sources create a single, isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop-ball impacts. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include multiple impacts from pile drivers, the use of vibratory compaction equipment, and other construction equipment that creates vibration other than in single events.
Table 4.9-5: Groundborne Vibration Exposure Standards
Maximum Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) (inches/second) Structure and Condition Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic building, ruins, ancient monuments Fragile buildings Historic and older residential structures with plaster walls and ceilings New residential structures with gypsum board walls and ceilings Modern commercial and industrial buildings
Source: California Department of Transportation, 2004.
0.12 0.20 0.50 1.00 2.00
0.08 0.10 0.25 0.50 0.50
Local
El Dorado County General Plan
The El Dorado County General Plan was adopted in July 2004 and serves as the overall guiding policy document for land use, development, and environmental quality for the County. The Public Health, Safety, and Noise Element of the General Plan (amended March 2009) contains noise standards for transportation, non-transportation (stationary), and construction noise sources. As part of the Proposed Project, a proposed General Plan Amendment and rezone would designate the site for commercial uses. As such, the Project, if approved, would be required to comply with the General Plan policies pertaining to the new Commercial designation listed in Table 4.9-6.
4.9-14

Noise
Table 4.9-6: Consistency with Applicable 2004 General Plan Policies

General Plan Policy Consistency Determination
Policy 6.5.1.2: Where proposed non-residential land uses are likely to produce noise levels exceeding the performance standards of Table 62 at existing or planned noise-sensitive uses, an acoustical analysis shall be required as part of the environmental review process so that noise mitigation may be included in the project design. Policy 6.5.1.3: Where noise mitigation measures are required to achieve the standards of Tables 61 and 6-2, the emphasis of such measures shall be placed upon site planning and project design. The use of noise barriers shall be considered a means of achieving the noise standards only after all other practical design-related noise mitigation measures have been integrated into the project and the noise barriers are not incompatible with the surroundings.
Consistent: As a part of this Draft EIR, an Environmental Noise Assessment which includes recommended noise mitigation has been completed for the Proposed Project (refer to Appendix J). Recommended mitigation will be incorporated into the Proposed Project. Consistent: Noise impacts requiring mitigation to achieve applicable standards include the construction of a noise barrier to reduce sound levels at a single residence, as discussed under Impact NOI-1. Mitigation regarding site design changes to reduce noise levels at the single residence would require the relocating the MRF access, and the Major 1 building and or its loading dock, resulting in significant changes to the Project as proposed. It is not guaranteed that such design considerations would be feasible or effective in reducing noise levels of the Proposed Project to an acceptable level. Accordingly, Mitigation Measure NOI-1 requiring the implementation of a noise barrier along the single residences property line has been included in this Draft EIR. Consistent: Mitigation proposed in this Draft EIR ensures stationary noise created by the Proposed Project would not exceed noise level standards as presented in the General Plans Table 6-2 (included here as Table 4.9-7). Consistent: Mitigation proposed in this Draft EIR ensures stationary noise created by the Proposed Project would not exceed noise level standards as presented in the General Plans Table 6-1 (included here as Table 4.9-7). Consistent: The standards included in this policy have been used to determine impacts resulting from offsite traffic noise on nearby residences. Mitigation included in this Draft EIR would ensure noise levels are reduced to less than significant levels.
Policy 6.5.1.7: Noise created by new proposed non-transportation noise sources shall be mitigated so as not to exceed the noise level standards of Table 6-2 for noise-sensitive uses. Policy 6.5.1.9: Noise created by new transportation noise sources, excluding airport expansion but including roadway improvement projects, shall be mitigated so as not to exceed the levels specified in Table 6-1 at existing noise-sensitive land uses. Policy 6.5.1.12: When determining the significance of impacts and appropriate mitigation for new development projects, the following criteria shall be taken into consideration. A. Where existing or projected future traffic noise levels are less than 60 dBA Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of residential uses, an increase of more than 5 dBA Ldn caused by a new transportation noise source will be considered significant; B. Where existing or projected future traffic noise levels range between 60 and 65 dBA Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of residential uses, an increase of more than 3 dBA Ldn caused by a new transportation noise source will be considered significant; and

4.9-15
Noise
Table 4.9-6 (cont.): Consistency with Applicable 2004 General Plan Policies
General Plan Policy Consistency Determination
C. Where existing or projected future traffic noise levels are greater than 65 dBA Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of residential uses, an increase of more than 1.5 dBA Ldn . Policy 6.5.1.13: When determining the significance of impacts and appropriate mitigation to reduce those impacts for new development projects, including ministerial development, the following criteria shall be taken into consideration: A. In areas in which ambient noise levels are in accordance with the standards in Table 6-2, increases in ambient noise levels caused by new nontransportation noise sources that exceed 5 dBA shall be considered significant; and B. In areas in which ambient noise levels are not in accordance with the standards in Table 6-2, increases in ambient noise levels caused by new nontransportation noise sources that exceed 3 dBA shall be considered significant.
Source: El Dorado County General Plan, 2004; MBA, 2010.
Consistent: The standards included in this policy have been used to determine impacts resulting from onsite operational (non-transportation) noise on nearby residences. Mitigation included in this Draft EIR would ensure noise levels are reduced to less than significant levels.
The transportation noise standards included in Table 6-1 of the El Dorado County General Plan, and shown here in Table 4.9-7, apply to offsite traffic on public roadways. The non-transportation noise criteria included in Table 6-2 of the General Plan, and shown here in Table 4.9-8, apply to all onsite noise sources such as loading dock activities. The construction criteria included in Table 6-3 of the General Plan, and shown here in Table 4.9-9, apply to the construction phase(s) of the Project.
Table 4.9-7: Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure for Transportation Noise Residential Receivers
Center of Outdoor Activity Areas, dB Ldn Interior Spaces, dB Ldn
60 (65)
45
Notes: Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied at the property line of the noise-sensitive uses. For residential uses with front yards facing the noise source, a standard of 65 dB Ldn will be applied at the building faade. Source: Table 6-1 of the El Dorado County General Plan (Public Health, Safety, and Noise Element).
4.9-16

Noise
Table 4.9-8: Non-Transportation Noise Level Performance Protection Standards Community Residential Receivers
Daytime (7 a.m.-10 p.m.) Evening (7 p.m.-10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m.-7 a.m.)
Noise Level Descriptor
Hourly Leq, dB Maximum Level, dB Lmax
55 70
50 60
45 55
Notes: As determined at the residential property line. Each of the levels shall be reduced by 5 dB for simple-tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises. Source: Table 6-2 of the El Dorado County General Plan (Public Health, Safety, and Noise Element).
Table 4.9-9: Maximum Allowable Construction Noise Exposure Community Residential Receivers
Time Period Hourly Leq, dB Maximum Level, dB Lmax
7 am to 7 pm
55
75
Notes: As determined at the residential property line. Each of the levels shall be reduced by 5 dB for simple-tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises. Source: Table 6-3 of the El Dorado County General Plan (Public Health, Safety, and Noise Element).
El Dorado County Ordinance Code
Chapter 9.16, Noise, of the El Dorado County Ordinance Code defined and prohibits loud and raucous noise. Under this chapter, the production of loud and raucous noise that unreasonably interferes with the peace and quiet of private property is prohibited. 4.9.5 - Methodology Bollard Acoustical Consulting (BAC), Inc. completed an Environmental Noise Assessment, dated August 10, 2010, which evaluates the Proposed Projects potential noise impacts, including ambient noise level surveys, reference noise measurements for project components, and modeling of offsite traffic noise.
Ambient Noise Level Surveys
The existing ambient noise environment in the immediate project vicinity is defined primarily by noise from Diamond Road (SR-49) and the industrial uses in the area, including the Material Recovery Facility (MRF). To quantify existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity, two continuous (24-hour) ambient noise level surveys were conducted on Thursday, February 7, 2008 and Friday, February 8, 2008 at 4150 Lime Kiln Road (Site 1) and 4000 SR-49 (Site 2). As shown on Exhibit 4.9-2, noise measurements were collected at Site 1 within the backyard patio and at Site 2 within the front yard landscaping, approximately 40 feet from the centerline of SR-49. The noise measurement sites were selected to represent the potentially affected residential land uses adjacent to the project site.
4.9-17
Noise
Larson-Davis Laboratories (LDL) Model 820 precision integrating sound level meters equipped with LDL Model 2560 -inch microphones were used for the ambient noise level measurement surveys. The meters were calibrated before use with an LDL Model CAL200 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. The equipment used meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 (precision) sound level meters (ANSI S1.4).
Reference Noise Measurements
The major noise-producing components of the Project include offsite traffic increases due to the Project (including MRF access relocation), onsite truck circulation, loading dock activities (e.g., airbrakes, trucks backing into dock bays with back-up beepers, trailer coupling and decoupling), rooftop mechanical equipment, and parking lot sweeping activities. The locations of the primary truck turnaround area and loading dock for Major 1 are identified in Exhibit 4.9-2. The reference noise levels associated with each of the identified noise sources are described separately below.
Reference Heavy Truck Pass-by Noise Levels & Frequency Content
To quantify the noise generation of slow-moving, tractor-trailer truck pass-bys (and turnarounds), such as those which will occur on the south side of the project site near the closest residences, BAC conducted single-event pass-by noise tests at the West El Camino truck stop in Sacramento, California on June 25, 2008 (mid-afternoon) and on August 12, 2008 (morning). The June measurements focused on heavy truck pass-bys without refrigeration units on their trailers, whereas the August measurements focused on trucks, which had refrigeration units operating on their trailers. Both sets of measurements were conducted at a reference distance of 50 feet perpendicular to the pass-by route, at a location suitable for isolation of individual pass-by events (relatively low background noise exposure). The truck stop measurement site in Sacramento was an ideal location for the collection of this single-event data. LDL Model 820 and 2900 sound level meters were used to quantify overall noise levels and frequency content for each truck pass-by event, respectively. Heavy truck pass-by events resulted in noise exposure of 69 to 77 dB Lmax with a mean of 74 dB Lmax. Truck pass-by levels measured in terms of Single Event Level/Sound Exposure Level (SEL) ranged from 77 to 85 dB with a mean of 84 dB SEL at a perpendicular distance of 50 feet. This data does not include noise from air brakes, back-up alarms (beepers), or truck docking noise. These sources are included within the reference noise level data for loading docks (see below), and would not be expected for normal truck movements on the project site. To convert the SEL for an individual truck pass-by into an hourly average noise level (Leq), the number of hourly truck pass-bys must be known. Based on information provided by the applicant and operations data used for similar projects, daily truck activity at the proposed Major 1 store would consist of as many as 10 tractor-trailer truck deliveries per day. Based on this level of daily activity and the assumed limit of the loading docks for the Major 1 store, it was conservatively assumed that a busy hour would include the arrival and departure of two semi-trailer trucks (four truck trips).
4.9-18

Noise
Using the average SEL data per heavy truck pass-bys with the operational assumptions cited above, the average hourly noise level associated with onsite heavy truck circulation during a typical busy hour was calculated to be 51 dB Leq at a reference distance of 50 feet from the truck lane.
Reference Medium Duty (Vendor) Truck Pass-by Noise Levels
Medium duty truck pass-bys typically generate SEL and Lmax values of approximately 5 dB lower than heavy truck noise levels. Specifically, SEL and Lmax noise levels for medium duty trucks were assumed to be 79 dB and 69 dB, respectively, at a reference distance of 50 feet. As noted above, to convert the SEL for an individual truck pass-by into an hourly average noise level (Leq), the number of hourly truck pass-bys must be known. Based on information for similar projects, as many as 12 daily medium truck deliveries may service the Major 1 store. Based on this level of service, it was conservatively assumed that a busy hour would consist of the arrival and departure of three medium duty trucks (six trips) during a given hour. Using the SEL data per heavy and medium truck pass-bys with the operational assumptions cited above, the reference average noise level associated with onsite, medium-duty truck circulation during a typical busy hour on the south side of the Project was computed to be 51 dB Leq at a reference distance of 50 feet.
Reference Loading Docks Noise Levels
The primary noise sources associated with the loading dock area of the Project, which is located on the south side of the proposed Major 1 store (refer to Exhibit 4.9-2) would be the heavy trucks stopping (air brakes), backing into the loading docks (back-up alarms), trailer coupling and decoupling, pulling out of the loading docks (engines accelerating) and refrigeration unit operation (alone or with truck idling). Trailer unloading would occur directly from the inside of the trailer while docked in the recessed bay, and sealed rubber gaskets would be provided at the truck docks to reduce noise from those inside loading and unloading activities. Medium-duty truck unloading would be accomplished at all store sites with dollies or hand-carts. To determine typical loading dock noise levels associated with the Proposed Project, noise level measurement data collected for a similar loading dock were used. Specifically, noise level data was collected at the Citrus Heights Super Walmart during continuous noise level measurement surveys spanning August 15, 2008 to August 18, 2008. These noise level measurements were conducted at a distance of 100 feet from the effective noise center of the truck unloading area, although pass-bys of trucks to and from the unloading area were within 50 feet of the noise measurement site. During the loading dock noise level surveys, typical daytime and nighttime loading dock activities were monitored, including truck arrivals and departures, trucks backing into the docks (with beepers), trailer uncoupling, refrigerated trailer units, etc. The results of the loading dock-noise-level
4.9-19
Noise
measurements indicate that typical busy daytime hour activities generated a maximum level of approximately 75 dB Lmax and an average noise level of 55 dB Leq at a reference distance of 100 feet (center of dock activity). A typical busy nighttime hour of loading dock activities yielded average noise levels 5 dB lower than those measured during daytime hours, or approximately 50 dB Leq at 100 feet for nighttime activity. Maximum noise levels measured during nighttime hours were similar to those measured during daytime hours, as expected.
Reference Mechanical Equipment Noise Levels
The heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems for maintaining comfortable shopping temperatures within the Major 1 store would consist of packaged rooftop air conditioning systems. It is expected that the HVAC units would be relatively evenly distributed across the roof of the building, typically starting about 30 feet from the edges. These HVAC units, which typically stand about 4 to 5 feet tall, would be shielded from view of nearby sensitive uses by the buildings parapet. Such rooftop HVAC units were measured at a reference distance of 100 feet from the building faade of the Red Bluff Walmart store to be approximately 45 dB Leq, including shielding by the building parapet. At the Citrus Height Walmart, where the loading reference noise level data was collected, rooftop HVAC equipment was not audible or distinguishable over daytime background noise exposure.
Reference Parking Lot Sweeper Noise Levels
The proposed parking lot areas would require the use of a sweeper truck for routine cleaning. As a means of determining the noise levels associated with sweeper truck activities, Bollard Acoustical Consultants conducted field measurements of a sweeper truck during normal operation at a Home Depot Store on Howe Avenue in Sacramento, California. Sweeper truck noise levels were measured to be up to 75 dB Lmax at a reference distance of 50 feet. This noise exposure confirmed the noise level measurements documented for the City of Redding Walmart Expansion Project in 2005. Noise exposure from their April 26, 2005 reference noise level measurement session was 76 dB Lmax and approximately 72 dB Leq at a distance of 50 feet from the sweeper route. In this case, the hourly average noise level (Leq) associated with parking lot sweeping operations is difficult to predict, since it depends on the location of the sweeper truck throughout the hour, which tends to be highly variable. Since the parking lot/pavement area of the project site near the closet residence to the south would be relatively small, and would require little time to clean, it is expected that the Lmax criteria would be most applicable to this noise source.
Reference Construction Noise Levels
During the construction of the Proposed Project, noise from construction-related activities would add to the noise environment in the immediate project vicinity. Activities involved in construction would generate maximum noise levels, as indicated in Table 4.9-10, ranging from 77 to 85 dB at a distance of 50 feet.
4.9-20

Noise
Table 4.9-10: Construction Equipment Noise Levels at 50 Feet

Type of Equipment Lmax, dB Hourly Leq, dB/% Use
Backhoe Concrete Mixer Truck Dump Truck Front End Loader Pneumatic Tools Air Compressor
78 79 77 79 85 78
74/40% 75/40% 73/40% 75/40% 82/50% 74/40%
Source: Federal Highway Administrations Construction Noise Model, V1.1, December 8, 2008.
Traffic Noise Modeling
To describe existing noise levels due to traffic, the Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used. The Model is based on the Calveno reference noise factors for automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks, with consideration given to vehicle volume, speed, roadway configuration, distance to the receiver, and the acoustical characteristics of the site. The Model was developed to predict hourly Leq values for free-flowing traffic conditions. The hourly traffic volume input to the Model can be adjusted to reflect the weighted day/night distribution of traffic in order to estimate Ldn noise exposure. A day/night traffic distribution of 83 percent/17 percent was assumed for the computation of traffic noise levels in terms of Ldn. No traffic noise modeling calibration measurements were completed for this portion of the project analysis, since there are no significant characteristics of the project area roadways and receiver lands that would be expected to affect the accuracy of traffic noise modeling. The following project traffic noise modeling does not account for shielding from existing noise barriers or other structures, and is specific to a source to receiver distance of 50 feet. Traffic volumes for existing conditions were obtained from the July 2010 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for the Project by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA). Truck usage on the area roadways was estimated from field observations and assumptions based on roadway type. The data within the TIS is in the form of AM/PM peak-hour intersection turning movements, which was converted to (ADT) by Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc., assuming ADT equals 5(AM peak hour divided by PM peak hour). 4.9.6 - Noise Impact Assessment Distances from the major onsite project noise sources to the nearest potentially affected noisesensitive uses (residences) were scaled using both project site plans and aerial photographs. Those distances, were used to project the previously discussed reference noise level data for each source to the locations of the sensitive receivers to the south and southeast of the project site. The previously
4.9-21
Noise
discussed reference noise levels were projected to the noise-sensitive areas of the nearest residences to the project site using the appropriate decay rates cited above. Those levels were then compared to the project standards of significance as outlined previously under the El Dorado County General Plan regulatory discussion and below under Standards of Significance. Where project-generated noise levels were found to exceed those standards, or where noise levels with the Project would substantially exceed noise levels without the Project, a finding of significant noise impact was made. Noise mitigation options were developed for each identified significant noise impact associated with the Diamond Dorado Retail Center (DDRC) Project. 4.9.7 - Standards of Thresholds of Significance According to Appendix G, Environmental Checklist, of the CEQA Guidelines, noise impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed project would be considered significant if the project would cause: a.) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b.) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c.) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d.) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e.) For a project located within 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? (Refer to Section 6.5, Effects Found Not To Be Significant.) f.) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Refer to Section 6.5, Effects Found Not To Be Significant.)
Standards of Significance
Criteria for Assessing Significance of Offsite Traffic Noise Level Increases
Based on studies of test subjects reactions to changes in environmental noise levels for similar noise sources, the Federal Interagency Commission on Noise (FICON) developed the following recommendations for thresholds to be used in assessing the significance of project-related noise level increases for transportation noise sources. These criteria are repeated as Policy 6.5.1.12 in the El Dorado County General Plan.
4.9-22

Noise
Where background noise levels without the Project would be less than 60 dB Ldn, a 5 dB or
greater noise level increase due to the Project would be considered significant.
Where background noise levels without the Project would be in the range of 60-65 dB Ldn, a 3
dB or greater noise level increase due to the Project would be considered significant.
Where background noise levels without the Project would exceed 65 dB Ldn, a 1.5 dB or
greater noise level increase due to the Project would be considered significant. This graduated scale is based on findings that people in quieter noise environments would tolerate larger increases in noise levels without adverse effects, whereas people already exposed to elevated noise levels exhibited adverse reactions to noise for smaller increases. Because the project area noise environment is already defined by noise from existing traffic, any additional increase in traffic noise levels that results from the Project would not affect the tonal character of that existing noise environment. As a result, the use of more restrictive noise level thresholds to account for changes in the tonal character of the ambient noise environment are not warranted for this Project.
Criteria for Assessing Significance of Noise Generated by Onsite Activities
As presented in El Dorado Countys General Plan Policy 6.5.1.13, project-related noise exposure increases of 5 dB or more above the ambient, where the ambient is below the thresholds presented in Table 4.9-8 (Table 6-2 of the General Plan), are considered significant. Project-related noise exposure increases of 3 dB or more above the ambient, where the ambient exceeds the thresholds presented in Table 4.9-8 are considered significant. The standards presented in Table 4.9-8 represent established limits as well as thresholds of significance, for determination of significant project-related increase relative to the measured ambient noise level.
Criteria for Assessing Significance of Groundborne Vibration
Groundborne vibration impact thresholds were based on the Transportation Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis, prepared by the Federal Transit Administration, May 2004. The report recommends a threshold of 0.01 inch per second or 80 VdB (dB re: 1 microinch per second) as the significance level for infrequent events, which is defined as less than 30 events (e.g., truck deliveries) per day. 4.9.8 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the Proposed Project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate. Included are construction (short-term) and operational (long-term) impacts of onsite improvements, as well as construction impacts of offsite improvements.

4.9-23
Noise
Noise Levels in Excess of Standards

Impact NOI-1: The Project has the potential to result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
Impact Analysis
This impact evaluates the Proposed Projects potential to result in noise levels in excess of established noise standards. This analysis considers individual impacts associated with onsite operational, offsite operational and sensitive receptor noise impacts.
Onsite Improvements
Onsite Operational Noise

Onsite Truck Circulation
As described in Section 3, Project Description, trucks delivering to the Major 1 building would enter the project site from the separately proposed and approved Parkway via the main entrance opposite Throwita Way, utilize the truck turn area to access the loading docks, and then return to the Parkway via the same route. Trucks delivering to the Major 2, Building P1, P2, P3, and P4 would enter the site at the westernmost access point from the separately proposed Parkway and continue south along the sites western boundary to access the loading areas. Trucks would then exit the DDRC site via the main entrance. The nearest existing residential property line (Assessors Parcel Number [APN] 054-341-04) to the onsite truck turn-around area is located approximately 140 feet to the south. The future Major 1 building pad is expected to be approximately 10 feet below the pad elevation of the residence. Noise generated by Combined Heavy and Medium Trucks (such as those that would be utilizing the future Major 1 loading dock) have been recorded at a volume of 47 dB Leq and 65 dB Lmax at 50 feet. The truck pass-by data was extrapolated to the distance of the nearest residence (140 feet) and is presented in Table 4.9-11. Data presented in Table 4.9-11 are based on two heavy truck arrivals and departures, and three medium truck arrivals and departures in any given hour, and do not account for any shielding of onsite truck circulation which may result from future noise barriers. However, the Lmax and SEL values shown in Table 4.9-11 are not considered additive as the likelihood that the noise generation of one truck pass-by would coincide exactly with the noise generation of another is very minute. As a result, the reported levels for the combined Lmax and SEL of medium and heavy trucks are the noise levels generated by a single heavy truck operation.
4.9-24

Noise
Table 4.9-11: Predicted Noise Levels at Residence Near Proposed Loading Dock (APN 054-341-04)
Noise Sources and Criteria Leq, dB Lmax, dB SEL, dB
Heavy Trucks Medium Trucks Combined Heavy and Medium Trucks Average Measured Ambient (Day/Evening/Night) Project Standard of Significance (Day/Evening/Night) Ambient + Project (Day/Evening/Night)
44 44 47 54/48/58 59/53/61 55/51/58
65 60 65 73/61/66 76/64/69 73/65/66
75 70 75 N/A 90 N/A
Notes: An exterior SEL of 90 dB would be reduced to the 65 dB SEL objective within residences through normal building faade noise level reduction with windows and exterior doors closed (25 dB exterior-to-interior noise level reduction assumed). Bold level represents significant noise impact. Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc., 2010.
As shown above in Table 4.9-11, the predicted noise levels associated with a typical busy hour of onsite truck circulation would be below the applicable noise exposure limits with the exception of the evening Lmax, which exceeds the criterion by 1 dB during the evening hours. Accordingly, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to evening onsite truck circulation noise at the Major 1 loading area. Mitigation is proposed that would require the construction of a permanent noise barrier that would provide approximately 8 to 9 dB of noise reduction, thereby reducing delivery truck related noise below the acceptable noise exposure limit at the nearby residence. Accordingly, impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Loading Dock As shown on Exhibit 3-5, the proposed loading dock area for the Major 1 building would be located approximately 240 feet from the closest residence (APN 054-341-04). The primary noise sources associated with loading docks are the heavy trucks air brakes, back-up alarms, engine acceleration during movement, and short-term refrigeration unit operation. Heavy truck unloading and loading activities would occur directly from the truck to the building, and sealed rubber gaskets would be provided at the truck docks to reduce noise from such activities. Medium-truck unloading may be conducted using hand-carts, which would also contribute to unloading noise levels, and those operations are included in the reference noise levels. Noise generated by loading dock activities have been recorded at a volume of 75 dB Lmax and 55 dB Leq at 100 feet. This noise level was extrapolated to the distance of the nearest residence (240 feet) and is present in Table 4.9-12. Data presented in Table 4.9-12 are based on a typical busy hour of loading dock activity, and do not account for any shielding of loading dock activities, which may result from future noise barriers. Noise generated by the unloading of medium duty trucks using handcarts is not included in Table 4.9-12.
4.9-25
Noise
Table 4.9-12: Predicted Noise Levels at Residence (APN 054-341-04) Near Proposed Loading Dock
Noise Sources and Criteria Leq, dB Lmax, dB
Loading Dock Sources (Day/Evening/Night) Average Measured Ambient (Day/Evening/Night) Project Standard of Significance (Day/Evening/Night) Ambient + Project (Day/Evening/Night)
Note: Bold represents noise impact. Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc., 2010.
47/47/42 54/48/58 59/53/61 55/51/58
67 73/61/66 76/64/69 73/67/67
As shown in Table 4.9-12, the predicted noise levels associated with a typical busy hour of loading dock activity at the Major 1 building could exceed the applicable evening Lmax criterion by 3 dB during the evening hours. Accordingly, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to evening loading dock noise at the Major 1 building. Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce impacts to less than significant. Rooftop Mechanical Equipment The Proposed Project would include the use of rooftop mechanical equipment such as HVAC systems. Rooftop HVAC systems tend to generate noise of approximately 45 dB Leq at 100 feet from the project building faades, accounting for shielding provided by the buildings parapet. This noise level data was extrapolated to the distance of the nearest residence (190 feet between the edge of project building to residential property line) and is presented in Table 4.9-13. Noise levels in presented in Table 4.9-13 assume continuous steady-state operation of the HVAC equipment for an entire hour.
Table 4.9-13: Predicted Noise Levels at Residence (APN 054-341-04) resulting from Rooftop Mechanical Equipment at Major 1 Building
Noise Sources and Criteria Leq, dB Lmax, dB
Rooftop HVAC Equipment Average Measured Ambient (Day/Evening/Night) Project Standard of Significance (Day/Evening/Night) Ambient + Project (Day/Evening/Night)
Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc., 2010.
39 54/48/58 59/53/61 54/49/58
39 73/61/66 76/64/69 73/61/66
As shown in Table 4.9-13, the Proposed Projects rooftop mechanical equipment is not expected to exceed applicable noise exposure limits. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required.
4.9-26

Noise
Offsite Operational Noise
Traffic Circulation Noise Project-related traffic noise levels were predicted in terms of the Day/Night Average Level (Ldn) at a representative distance (50 feet from roadway centerlines) for the Near-Term (2015) and Long-Term (2025) project and no-project conditions using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Model. These predictions used the same modeling methodology used for the existing scenario described earlier in this report with one major change. Each assessment was completed in two parts: (1) traffic without the MRF trucks, and (2) the MRF trucks alone. The two parts were then added together to determine total noise exposure. Results of these analyses are summarized in Table 4.9-14 and Table 4.9-15 for the Near-Term (2015) and Long-Term (2025) conditions, respectively. Detailed inputs for the analyses are included in Appendix J.
Table 4.9-14: Predicted Near-Term Traffic Noise Levels at 50 feet from Roadway Centerlines
Ldn, dB Roadway Section NT (2015) NT (2015) +Project Change
North of Plaza Drive Plaza Drive to WB US-50 Ramps WB US-50 Ramps to EB US-50 Ramps EB US-50 Ramps to Mother Lode Drive Mother Lode Drive to Forni Road Forni Road to Golden Center Drive Missouri Flat Road Golden Center Drive to Diamond Springs Parkway Diamond Springs Parkway to China Garden Road China Garden Road to Industrial Drive Industrial Drive to Enterprise Drive Enterprise Drive to Pleasant Valley Road (SR-49) North of Pacific Street Pacific Street to Fiske Street SR-49 Fiske Street to Skyline Drive Skyline Drive to Truck Street Truck Street to Bradley Drive
68 71 72 72 73 72 73 69 69 70 70 66 69 69 70 70
68 71 72 73 74 73 73 69 70 71 71 66 69 69 70 70
0 0 0 0 0 +1 0 0 0 +1 +1 0 0 0 0 0

4.9-27
Noise
Table 4.9-14: (cont.): Predicted Near-Term Traffic Noise Levels at 50 feet from Roadway Centerlines
Bradley Drive to Diamond Springs Parkway Diamond Springs Parkway to Project Driveway #3 Project Driveway #3 to Black Rice Road Black Rice Road to Pleasant Valley Road SR-49 (cont.) Pleasant Valley Road to China Garden Road China Garden Road to Missouri Flat Road Missouri Flat Road to Patterson Drive Patterson Drive to Oro Lane/Koki Lane Oro Lane/Koki Lane to Forni Road Forni Road to Pleasant Valley Road South of Pleasant Valley Road Pleasant Valley Road Mother Lode Drive Forni Road SR-49 to Racquet Way Racquet Way to Canyon Valley Road East of Canyon Valley Road West of Missouri Flat East of Missouri Flat West of Missouri Flat North of Pleasant Valley Road Golden Center Drive Industrial Drive Enterprise Drive Oro Lane Koki Lane Patterson Drive China Garden Road Lime Kiln Road Black Rice Road Racquet Way East of Missouri Flat West of Missouri Flat West of Missouri Flat North of SR-49 South of SR-49 South of SR-49 Missouri Flat Road to SR-49 West of SR-49 East of SR-49 North of Pleasant Valley Road
70 70 72 72 70 70 71 71 70 71 70 68 67 67 63 62 64 63 60 56 59 48 62 60 60 55 54 54
70 71 73 73 71 71 71 71 71 71 70 68 66 66 63 62 64 63 60 56 59 50 62 60 60 67 54 54
0 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1 0 0 0 +12 0 0
4.9-28

Noise
Table 4.9-14: (cont.): Predicted Near-Term Traffic Noise Levels at 50 feet from Roadway Centerlines
Throwita Way Truck Street Bradley Drive
North of Diamond Springs Parkway South of Diamond Springs Parkway West of SR-49 West of SR-49 Missouri Flat Road to Project Driveway #1
54 67 50 44 70 70 70 68
55 61 50 44 70 71 71 69
0 -6 0 0 0 +1 +1 +1
Diamond Springs Parkway
Project Driveway #1 to Project Driveway #2 Project Driveway #2 to Throwita Way Throwita Way to SR-49
Note: Bold level represents potential noise impact. Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants Inc., 2010, using FHWA RD-77-108 with inputs from the KHA, 2010, project TIA.
Table 4.9-15: Predicted Long-Term Traffic Noise Levels at 50 feet from Roadway Centerlines
Ldn, dB Roadway Section LT (2025) LT (2025) +Project Change
North of Plaza Drive Plaza Drive to WB US-50 Ramps WB US-50 Ramps to EB US-50 Ramps EB US-50 Ramps to Mother Lode Drive Mother Lode Drive to Forni Road Forni Road to Golden Center Drive Missouri Flat Road Golden Center Drive to Diamond Springs Parkway Diamond Springs Parkway to China Garden Road China Garden Road to Industrial Drive Industrial Drive to Enterprise Drive Enterprise Drive to Pleasant Valley Road (SR-49)
69 72 73 73 74 74 74 70 71 71 71
69 72 74 74 74 74 74 70 71 72 72
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1 +1

4.9-29
Noise
Table 4.9-15 (cont.): Predicted Long-Term Traffic Noise Levels at 50 feet from Roadway Centerlines
North of Pacific Street Pacific Street to Fiske Street Fiske Street to Skyline Drive Skyline Drive to Truck Street Truck Street to Bradley Drive Bradley Drive to Diamond Springs Parkway Diamond Springs Parkway to Project Driveway #3 SR-49 Project Driveway #3 to Black Rice Road Black Rice Road to Pleasant Valley Road Pleasant Valley Road to China Garden Road China Garden Road to Missouri Flat Road Missouri Flat Road to Patterson Drive Patterson Drive to Oro Lane/Koki Lane Oro Lane/Koki Lane to Forni Road Forni Road to Pleasant Valley Road South of Pleasant Valley Road SR-49 to Racquet Way Pleasant Valley Road Mother Lode Drive Forni Road Racquet Way to Canyon Valley Road East of Canyon Valley Road West of Missouri Flat East of Missouri Flat West of Missouri Flat North of Pleasant Valley Road Golden Center Drive Industrial Drive Enterprise Drive Oro Lane Koki Lane Patterson Drive East of Missouri Flat West of Missouri Flat West of Missouri Flat North of SR-49 South of SR-49 South of SR-49
67 70 70 71 71 71 71 73 73 71 71 71 72 71 72 70 69 68 68 65 63 66 66 61 57 60 49 63 61
67 70 70 71 71 71 71 73 73 72 72 71 72 71 72 70 69 68 68 65 63 66 66 61 57 60 49 63 61
0 0 0 0 0 0 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4.9-30

Noise
Table 4.9-15 (cont.): Predicted Long-Term Traffic Noise Levels at 50 feet from Roadway Centerlines
China Garden Road Lime Kiln Road Black Rice Road Racquet Way Throwita Way Truck Street Bradley Drive
Missouri Flat Road to SR-49 West of SR-49 East of SR-49 North of Pleasant Valley Road North of Diamond Springs Parkway South of Diamond Springs Parkway West of SR-49 West of SR-49 Missouri Flat Road to Project Driveway #1
61 56 55 55 55 67 51 45 71 71 71 69
61 67 55 55 56 61 51 45 71 71 71 70
0 +12 0 0 0 -6 0 0 0 0 0 +1
Diamond Springs Parkway
Project Driveway #1 to Project Driveway #2 Project Driveway #2 to Throwita Way Throwita Way to SR-49
Note: Bold level represents potential noise impact. Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants Inc. using FHWA RD-77-108 with inputs from the KHA, 2010, project TIA.
As presented in Table 4.9-14, the Proposed Projects offsite traffic would result in near-term (2015) noise level increases on individual roadway segments from 0 to 12 dB over existing local roadway noise levels without the Proposed Project. Similarly, as shown in Table 4.9-15, offsite traffic would result in long-term (2025) noise level increases on individual roadway segments from 1 to 12 dB over existing local roadway noise levels without the Proposed Project. In both the scenarios, resulting traffic noise levels at a reference distance of 50 feet would be approximately 67 dB Ldn along Lime Kiln Road between Diamond Road (SR-49) and the MRF access point. This noise exposure exceeds the applicable 60 dB Ldn criterion and the applicable +5 dB significance threshold. Accordingly, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts related to offsite operational noises. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would require the construction of a permanent, 8-foot-tall noise barrier along 265 feet of the proposed Material Recovery Facility access road (see Appendix J for location details). Construction of the noise barrier would reduce offsite noise impacts to less than 60 dB Ldn and the applicable +5 dB significance threshold. As such, implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce impacts to less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.

4.9-31
Noise
Mitigation Measures
MM NOI-1
Prior to the issuance of grading permits for the construction of the new Material Recovery Facility access route, the Project applicant shall retain a qualified noise consultant to design an appropriate noise barrier to be constructed along the northern property line of Assessors Parcel Number (APN) 054-341-04 that is shared with Project applicants adjoining property (APNs 051-250-12 and 051-250-46). The noise barrier shall be constructed within APNs 051-250-12 and 051-250-46, on the southwestern side of the proposed Material Recovery Facility access road along the top of the road cut. The wall shall not exceed 8 feet in height and be approximately 265 feet in length as recommended by the supplemental analysis performed in conjunction with the Environmental Noise Assessment for the Diamond Dorado Retail Center Project. The final design of the noise barrier shall be based on industry-accepted standards and practices proven to effectively attenuate roadway noise and as applicable to existing conditions at the residence. The design shall be submitted to El Dorado County Planning Services for review and shall be incorporated into the Proposed Project. Within the first month of project operation, noise monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified noise consultant to determine if the noise barrier is providing appropriate noise attenuation. If the appropriate level of noise attenuation is not being provided by the noise barrier, it shall be revised and/or augmented to achieve the required noise attenuation as recommended by the qualified noise consultant.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Offsite Improvements
As discussed in the introduction to the Impact NOI-1 analysis, this analysis considers individual impacts associated with onsite operational, offsite operational and sensitive receptor noise impacts. The noise generated by offsite project circulation of operational-generated traffic is addressed above. This impact discussion is limited to the construction activities associated with the offsite improvements. Construction activities for offsite improvements would not result in additional operational noise impacts. Therefore, the construction activities would not have the potential to result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
No impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
4.9-32

Noise
No impact.
Excessive Groundborne Vibrations
Impact NOI-2: The Project would not result in the exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
Impact Analysis
This analysis evaluates the Proposed Projects potential to cause a substantial groundborne vibration from onsite construction and operational activities, as well as offsite construction. Implementation of the Proposed Project may result in groundborne vibrations related to construction, delivery trucks, and trucks accessing the MRF. Each is discussed below.
Onsite Improvements
Construction Construction activities can produce vibrations that may be felt by adjacent uses. The construction of the Proposed Project would not require the use of equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to generate substantial construction vibration levels. The primary sources of vibration during construction would be from bulldozers, backhoes, crawler tractors, and scrapers. As shown in Table 4.9-2, a large bulldozer would be the piece of equipment that would produce the largest amount of vibration on the project site, at 87 VdB or 0.089 PPV at 25 feet. This vibration level exceeds the vibration exposure standards for extremely fragile historic buildings as shown in Table 4.9-5. However, no such buildings are located onsite or within the project vicinity and would not be negatively affected. The closest vibration sensitive land uses are the nearby residences, with the nearest residential structure located approximately 100 feet from the proposed MRF access realignment and 140 feet from the proposed DDRC project site. Because the MRF access realignment would occur nearest the residential structure, it will be used as a proxy for the DDRCs potential construction vibration impacts. Vibration levels caused by a large bulldozer operating on the edge of the area to be graded and filled during road realignment construction at the nearest structure would be approximately 75 VdB (vibration levels typically decrease by 6 VdB per doubling of the distance from the vibration source). This vibration level would not exceed the 80 VdB threshold. Therefore, because the road realignments construction vibration would not exceed 80 VdB, it can be assumed that the DDRCs construction vibration would also not exceed that threshold. Accordingly, construction-related groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant. Operational Vibration As with construction vibration, the MRF access realignment would be the closest portion of the project site to a nearby receptor (100 feet) and, therefore, will be used as a proxy for evaluating operation vibrations from the Proposed Project. A truck on a road would typically produce a vibration level of 63 VdB at 50 feet (Federal Transit Administration 2006). This would result in a
4.9-33
Noise
vibration level of 57 VdB at the nearest home to the MRF access realignment. Therefore, because the MRF access realignments operation vibration would not exceed 80 VdB, it can be assumed that the DDRCs operational vibration would also not exceed that threshold. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures

As discussed under Onsite Improvements, above, construction activities of offsite roadway improvements can produce vibrations that may be felt by adjacent uses. The construction of the offsite roadway improvements would not require the use of equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to generate substantial construction vibration levels. In addition, it is anticipated that the primary sources of vibration during construction would be from bulldozers, backhoes, crawler tractors, and scrapers. The closest vibration sensitive land uses are the nearby residences, with the nearest residential structure located approximately 30 feet from the planned improvements at Pleasant Valley Road/ Forni Road intersection. Because the Pleasant Valley Road/Forni Road intersection improvements would occur nearest the residential structure, it will be used as a proxy for the offsite construction vibration impacts. Construction activities at the Pleasant Valley Road/Forni Road intersection will be primarily surficial in nature, and may include minor amounts of pavement removal. However, it is not anticipated that the improvements would require the use of large bulldozers or other large earthmoving equipment. Jackhammers may be utilized during construction, and would likely produce the largest amount of vibration on the project site, at 79 VdB or 0.035 PPV at 25 feet, as shown in Table 4.9-2. This vibration level would not exceed the vibration exposure standards for extremely fragile historic buildings as shown in Table 4.9-5. In addition, no such buildings are located onsite or within the vicinity of the offsite improvements, and therefore, would not be negatively affected. Vibration levels caused by a jackhammer operating on the edge of the area to be improved during offsite construction at the nearest structure would be approximately 79 VdB (vibration levels typically decrease by 6 VdB per doubling of the distance from the vibration source). This vibration level would not exceed the 80 VdB threshold. Therefore, because the Pleasant Valley Road/Forni Road intersection improvements construction vibration would not exceed 80 VdB, it can be assumed that the offsite improvements construction vibration would also not exceed that threshold. Furthermore, construction hours are limited by General Plan Policy 6.5.1.11 and would ensure a jackhammer is not
Noise
used at an inappropriate time of the day thereby ensuring vibration would only occur during acceptable construction hours. Accordingly, construction-related groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures

Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels
Impact NOI-3: The Project has the potential to result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the Project.
Impact Analysis Onsite Improvements
Long-term impacts would result from both on- and offsite operational noises associated with the Proposed Project. As discussed in Impact NOI-1, project-related traffic noise level changes on Lime Kiln Road between Diamond Road (SR-49) and the proposed MRF access would impact a single residence. Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would ensure impacts are reduced to less than significant. The Proposed Project is not expected to result in a significant substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels at any other location in the study area. In fact, offsite operation noise on roadways would actually decrease in several locations due to the rerouting of MRF access trips.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure NOI-1.


The offsite improvements construction activities would not result in long-term noise impacts, as construction activity would cease at the end of construction. Therefore, the offsite improvements construction has no potential to generate a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels.
No impact.

4.9-35
Noise
Mitigation Measures
No impact.
Temporary or Periodic Increase in Ambient Noise Levels
Impact NOI-4: The Project has the potential to result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the Project.
Impact Analysis Onsite Improvements
During construction and operation of the Proposed Project, construction noise could cause short-term increase in noise levels at existing residences adjacent to construction areas. Each is discussed below. Construction Noise As indicated in the Environmental Noise Assessment, (Bollard Acoustical Consulting 2010) construction of the Proposed Project could result in maximum noise levels as high as 80 dB Lmax at the nearest residence. Accordingly, noise exposure at this residence is likely to significantly exceed the existing ambient noise exposure (Table 4.9-3) and the criteria presented in Table 4.9-9. Although project construction activities would be temporary in nature and are anticipated to occur during normal daytime working hours, temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels would result in potentially significant impacts. Accordingly, mitigation is proposed requiring the construction of a temporary noise barrier along the north property line of the residential parcel at APN 054-341-04 until a permanent barrier can be constructed in accordance with Mitigation Measure NOI-1. Implementation of this mitigation would provide approximately 7 to 8 dB reduction for most construction noise sources, thereby satisfying the applicable construction noise exposure. As such, impacts would be less than significant. Operational Noise Re-routed MRF trucks on Lime Kiln Road west of Diamond Road (SR-49) would be expected to produce an SEL of approximately 75 dB at the closest residential building faade (APN 054-341-04). Assuming a minimum building faade noise level reduction of 25 dB with windows and doors closed, exterior single event levels of 75 dB SEL would be reduced to 50 dB SEL within the residence. The estimated 25 dB noise level reduction within the interior of the existing residence is based on testing of similar residential building noise attenuation by Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. staff in recent years. Accordingly, single-event noise levels within the residence during pass-bys of heavy trucks at the new MRF access are predicted to be approximately 50 dB SEL within the nearby residence. Interior SEL values in excess of 65 dB SEL are considered unacceptable (Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay Com. v. Bd of Port Comrs. of Oakland, 2001); however, the Project would not exceed this
4.9-36

Noise
threshold. Furthermore, implementation of Impact NOI-1 would further reduce noise emanating from heavy trucks. As such, impacts would be less than significant. It is assumed that regular parking lot sweeping would occur at the proposed DDRC. Sweeper trucks generate noise levels of approximately 76 dBmax at 50 feet. It is expected that during the Proposed Projects operational phase, parking lot sweeping would periodically occur within 100 feet of the closest residence to the south of the project site. After the application of a 6-dB reduction due to distance of the nearest residence from a paved area of the Proposed Project, it would be expected that noise resulting from parking lot sweeping activities would be approximately 70 dB Lmax at the residential property line. This noise exposure would be expected to exceed the applicable evening and nighttime noise exposure criteria of 64 dB Lmax and 69 dB Lmax, (ambient noise levels of 61 dB Lmax and 66 dB Lmax plus 3 dB), respectively. As such, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in increased noise levels due to parking lot sweeping activities and impacts would be potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures
MM NOI-4a
Prior to start of construction the Project applicant shall retain a qualified noise consultant to design an appropriate temporary noise barrier to be constructed along the northern property line of APN 054-341-04 that is shared with the Project applicants adjoining property. The temporary noise barrier shall remain in place until a permanent barrier can be constructed in accordance with Mitigation Measure NOI-1. The design shall be submitted to El Dorado County Planning Services for review and shall be implemented by the Project applicant or its contractors. Within in the first week of the start of project construction, noise monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified noise consultant to determine if the temporary noise barrier is providing appropriate noise attenuation. If the appropriate level of noise attenuation is not being provided by the temporary noise barrier, it shall be revised and/or augmented to achieve the required noise attenuation as recommended by the qualified noise consultant. This temporary barrier shall remain in place until the permanent noise barrier required under Mitigation Measure NOI-1 is constructed.

As indicated in offsite improvements construction impact analysis contained in Impact NOI-2, construction of the offsite improvements could result the use of jackhammers and small bulldozers, but would not likely utilize heavy equipment or large bulldozers. Assuming that a jackhammer and

4.9-37
Noise
small bulldozer would operate at the same time at the Pleasant Valley Road/Forni Road intersection improvements (the improvements nearest to residences), the construction would result in a maximum noise levels as high as 79 dB Lmax at the nearest residence (FTA 2006). Accordingly, noise exposure at this residence is likely to significantly exceed the existing ambient noise exposure (Table 4.9-3) and the criteria presented in Table 4.9-9. Although project construction activities would be temporary in nature and are anticipated to occur during normal daytime working hours, temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels would result in potentially significant impacts. Accordingly, mitigation is proposed requiring the individual review of construction noise impacts and implementation of measures to reduce the impact to less than significant prior to the start of construction activities in accordance with Mitigation Measure NOI-4a. Implementation of this mitigation would provide review of each offsite improvements construction activity, location of the nearest sensitive receptor, and implementation of measures to reduce the impact to less than the criteria presented in Table 4.9-9. As such, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
MM NOI-4b
Prior to start of construction the for each roadway improvement section, Project applicant shall retain a qualified noise consultant to review proposed construction activity, the location of the nearest sensitive receptor, and design an appropriate temporary noise barrier for each roadway improvement section that would exceed El Dorado Countys maximum allowable construction noise exposure-community residential receivers criteria. The design of each measure shall be submitted to El Dorado County Planning Services for review and shall be implemented by the Project applicant or its contractors. Within in the first week of the start of project construction, noise monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified noise consultant to determine if temporary noise barriers are providing appropriate noise attenuation. If the appropriate level of noise attenuation is not being provided by the temporary noise barriers, they shall be revised and/or augmented to achieve the required noise attenuation as recommended by the qualified noise consultant.
4.9-38


HGJHGJH

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

HGJHGJH

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

These methods are described and defined below.

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

Source: Melville C. Branch and R. Dale Beland, 1970.

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Noise Attenuation over Distance

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

112 104 105 93 94 66 75 87 87

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Table 4.9-2 (cont.): Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment

Loaded trucks Jackhammer Small bulldozer

0.076 0.035 0.003

Michael Brandman Associates

Michael Brandman Associates 33390001 08/2010 | 4.9-1_typical_vibration.pdf

Exhibit 4.9-1 Typical Vibration Levels

Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. 2010. NOT TO SCALE

Exhibit 4.9-2 Site Plan and Noise Measurement Sites

33370001 08/2010 | 4.9-2_Site Plan and Noise Measurement Sites.pdf

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

`Existing Traffic Noise Environment

Ldn (dB) at 50 feet

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Ldn (dB) at 50 feet

71 71 70 70 69 67 67 66 62 61 63 62 59 56 59 48 62 60 60 55 51 54 N/A N/A 52 55 N/A N/A N/A N/A

62 57 51 53 44 32 29 29 16 12 18 15 10 6 9 2 15 11 11 5 3 4 N/A N/A 3 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

4.9.4 - Regulatory Framework

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

0.12 0.20 0.50 1.00 2.00

0.08 0.10 0.25 0.50 0.50

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Table 4.9-6: Consistency with Applicable 2004 General Plan Policies

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Noise Level Descriptor

Hourly Leq, dB Maximum Level, dB Lmax

El Dorado County Ordinance Code

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Table 4.9-10: Construction Equipment Noise Levels at 50 Feet

74/40% 75/40% 73/40% 75/40% 82/50% 74/40%

Traffic Noise Modeling

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Michael Brandman Associates

El Dorado County - Diamond Dorado Retail Center Draft EIR

Noise Levels in Excess of Standards

Onsite Operational Noise