Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix I: Noise TRAppendix I: Noise Technical Report FINAL NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT INFINITE 101 PROJECT P REPARED FOR: City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department 315 Maple Street South San Francisco, California 94080 Contact: Billy Gross Billy.Gross@ssf.net P REPARED BY: ICF 201 Mission Street, Suite 1500 San Francisco, CA 94105 M AY 2023 ICF. 2023. Noise Technical Report, Infinite 101 Project. Final. May. (ICF 104667.) Prepared for City of South San Francisco. Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report i May 2023 Contents Chapter 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Project Description .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Project Location and Site Description .............................................................................. 1-1 Chapter 2 Noise Fundamentals .......................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Frequency, Amplitude, and Decibels ............................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Noise Descriptors ............................................................................................................. 2-3 2.3 Sound Propagation .......................................................................................................... 2-4 2.4 Human Response to Noise ............................................................................................... 2-5 2.5 Noise-Sensitive Land Uses ............................................................................................... 2-7 Chapter 3 Ground-borne Vibration Fundamentals ............................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Displacement, Velocity, and Acceleration ....................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Frequency and Amplitude ................................................................................................ 3-2 3.3 Vibration Descriptors ....................................................................................................... 3-2 3.4 Vibration Propagation ...................................................................................................... 3-3 3.5 Effects of Ground-borne Vibration .................................................................................. 3-3 3.6 Vibration-Sensitive Land Uses ......................................................................................... 3-5 Chapter 4 Existing Noise Environment ............................................................................................... 4-1 Chapter 5 Regulatory Framework ...................................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Federal ............................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 State ................................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.3 Local ................................................................................................................................. 5-2 Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Methodology .................................................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................................... 6-7 6.3 Project Impacts ................................................................................................................ 6-9 Chapter 7 References ........................................................................................................................ 7-1 Appendix A Noise and Vibration Data and Modeling Results Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report ii May 2023 Tables Table Page 2-1 Rules for Combining Sound Levels by Decibel Addition ............................................................... 2-2 2-2 Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels ................................................................................................. 2-3 4-1 Measured Existing Noise Levels in the Project Vicinity, Long-Term ............................................. 4-2 4-2 Measured Existing Noise Levels in the Project Vicinity, Short-Term ............................................ 4-2 5-1 Caltrans Vibration Guidelines for Potential Damage to Structures .............................................. 5-2 5-2 Caltrans Guidelines for Vibration Annoyance Potential ............................................................... 5-2 5-3 Noise Level Standards for the City of South San Francisco .......................................................... 5-3 5-4 Noise Exposure – Land Use Requirements and Limitations ......................................................... 5-4 5-5 Land Use Compatibility Noise Standards for New Development ................................................. 5-5 6-1 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels .................................................................................... 6-3 6-2 Noise from Equipment Proposed for Project Construction (Leq) ................................................ 6-10 6-3 Combined Noise Levels for Each Construction Phase at 50 Feet ............................................... 6-11 6-4 Weekday Daytime Construction Noise Levels at Nearby Land Uses for Rough Grading/Site Demolition ............................................................................................................. 6-12 6-5 Non-Daytime Construction Noise Levels at Nearest Sensitive Land Uses .................................. 6-14 6-6 Haul Truck Traffic Noise Analysis ................................................................................................ 6-17 6-7 Example Combined Mechanical Equipment Noise ..................................................................... 6-21 6-8 Modeled Traffic Noise Levels ...................................................................................................... 6-25 6-9 Detailed Traffic Noise Evaluation for Potentially Affected Segment .......................................... 6-27 6-10 Cumulative Traffic Noise Evaluation for Potentially Affected Segments .................................... 6-29 6-11 Vibration Levels for Project Construction Equipment at Various Distances............................... 6-32 Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report iii May 2023 Figures Figure Page 1 Site Plan ........................................................................................................................................ 1-2 2 Project Location Map .................................................................................................................... 1-3 3 Sensitive Receptor and Noise Measurement Location Map ........................................................ 4-3 Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report iv May 2023 Acronyms and Abbreviations ADT average daily traffic ALUCP Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan APN assessor’s parcel number Caltrans California Department of Transportation CEQA California Environmental Quality Act City City of South San Francisco CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level dB decibel dBA A-weighted decibel DOAS direct outside air system FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration General Plan Shape SSF 2040 General Plan HVAC heating, ventilation, air-conditioning Hz Hertz in/sec inch per second kHz kilohertz kW kilowatt Ldn day-night sound level Leq equivalent sound level Lmax maximum sound level Lmin minimum sound level LV vibration velocity level Lxx percentile-exceeded sound level PPV peak particle velocity project sponsor US Terminal Court Owner, LLC proposed project Infinite 101 Project R&D research and development rms root mean square SEL sound equivalent level sf square feet SFO San Francisco International Airport SLM sound level meter SOG slab on grade SOMD slab on metal deck SPL sound pressure level VdB vibration decibel µPa micropascals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 1-1 May 2023 Chapter 1 Introduction The purpose of this noise technical report is to identify potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the proposed Infinite 101 Project (proposed project), which is to be developed by US Terminal Court Owner, LLC (project sponsor). The analysis provided in this report evaluates the potential for short- and long-term noise and vibration impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed project. The analysis includes a description of the environmental setting for the proposed project, including existing noise conditions, as well as a discussion of applicable laws and regulations. It also documents the assumptions, methodologies, and findings used to evaluate the impacts. 1.1 Project Description The proposed project includes demolition of a small vehicle maintenance garage and pay booth, totaling approximately 6,000 square feet (sf), along with a 1,274-stall surface parking lot, which is currently used for temporary parking. In their place, the proposed project would construct approximately 696,343 sf of research-and-development (R&D) uses and amenities within two six-story buildings (known as T101N and T101S), along with a seven-story, approximately 339,354 sf parking garage. In addition, there would be three emergency generators with Tier 2 engines on the project site. The generators would be located on the ground floor in separate generator rooms within the T101N and T101S buildings. Landscaping would also be provided. Figure 1 is a conceptual site plan of the proposed project. 1.2 Project Location and Site Description The approximately 8.69-acre project site comprises one parcel at 101 Terminal Court in the city of South San Francisco. Refer to Figure 2 for a map of the project location. The project site, assessor’s parcel number (APN) 015-113-240, is bounded by Terminal Court to the north, U.S. 101 (known as Bayshore Freeway) to the east, a navigable slough1 to the south, and existing commercial and industrial development to the west. Surrounding land uses include industrial, commercial, and mixed uses. Specifically, a large Park N’ Fly surface parking lot is north of the project site, Bayshore Freeway is adjacent to the eastern portion of the project site, a navigable slough that feeds into San Bruno Canal is south of the project site, and the Golden Gate Produce Terminal is west of the project site. In addition, the project site is approximately 1 mile west of San Francisco Bay and 0.20 mile west of a portion of the San Francisco Bay Trail that runs along San Bruno Canal. San Francisco International Airport (SFO) is approximately 1 mile northwest of the project site. 1 The navigable slough is a remnant tidal channel that cuts through a commercial district in the city of South San Francisco and is connected to San Francisco Bay. (ESA. 2019. Navigable Slough Flood Management Study, Prepared for County of San Mateo, City of South San Francisco, and City of San Bruno. Available: https://oneshoreline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Navigable-Slough-Flood-Management-Study.pdf. Accessed: February 20, 2023). Source: SOM LLP, 2023.Graphics … 104667 (05-01-2023) JCFigure 1 Site Plan Figure 2 Project Location Map\\PDCCITRDSGIS01\Projects_1\City_of_South_San_Francisco\104667_Terminal_101\Figures\Land_Use.aprx; User: 58303; Date: 5/5/2023South San FranciscoSan Bruno0 500250 Feet Project Site City Limits Colma Tiburon Alameda Pacifica Millbrae BerkeleySausalito Daly City Burlingame San Francisco South San Francisco [N 1:5,000 Source: ESRI Chapter 1 Introduction Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 1-4 May 2023 The project site is currently developed with a small vehicle maintenance garage and pay booth, totaling approximately 6,000 sf. The pay booth and maintenance garage were constructed by 1974 and 1984, respectively. In addition, the project site includes an approximately 1,274-stall surface parking lot that is currently being used for short-term parking. Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 2-1 May 2023 Chapter 2 Noise Fundamentals 2.1 Frequency, Amplitude, and Decibels Continuous sound can be described by its frequency (pitch) and amplitude (loudness). A low-frequency sound is perceived as low in pitch; a high-frequency sound is perceived as high-pitched. Frequency is expressed in terms of cycles per second, or Hertz (Hz) (e.g., a frequency of 250 cycles per second is referred to as 250 Hz). High frequencies are sometimes more conveniently expressed in kilohertz (kHz), or thousands of Hz. The audible frequency range for humans is generally between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. The amplitude of pressure waves generated by a sound source correlate with the loudness of that source. The amplitude of a sound is typically described in terms of sound pressure level (SPL), also referred to simply as the sound level. The SPL refers to the root-mean-square (rms)2 pressure of a sound wave and is measured in units called micropascals (µPa). One μPa is approximately one hundred-billionth (0.00000000001) of normal atmospheric pressure. Sound pressure amplitudes for different kinds of noise environments can range from less than 100 to more than 100,000,000 μPa. Because of this large range of values, sound is rarely expressed in terms of μPa. Instead, a logarithmic scale is used to describe the SPL in terms of decibels, abbreviated dB. The decibel is a logarithmic unit that describes the ratio of the actual sound pressure to a reference pressure (20 µPa is the standard reference pressure level for acoustical measurements in air). Specifically, an SPL, in dB, is calculated as follows:   ×=Pa XSPLµ20log2010 where X is the actual sound pressure and 20 µPa is the reference pressure. The threshold of hearing for young people is about 0 dB, which corresponds to 20 μPa. Decibel Calculations Because decibels represent noise levels on a logarithmic scale, SPLs cannot be added, subtracted, or averaged through ordinary arithmetic. On the dB scale, a doubling of sound energy corresponds to a 3 dB increase. In other words, when two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, their combined sound level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than one source under the same conditions. For example, if one bulldozer produces an SPL of 80 dB, two bulldozers would not produce a combined sound level of 160 dB. Rather, they would combine to produce 83 dB. The cumulative sound level of any number of sources, such as excavators, can be determined using decibel addition. The same decibel addition is used for A-weighted decibels, described below. Similarly, the arithmetic mean (average) of a series of noise levels does not accurately represent the 2 Root mean square (rms) is defined as the square root of the mean (average) value of the squared amplitude of the noise signal. Chapter 2 Noise Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 2-2 May 2023 overall average noise level. Instead, the values must be averaged using a linear scale before converting the result back into a logarithmic (dB) noise level. This method is typically referred to as calculating the “energy average” of the noise levels. Table 2-1 demonstrates the general results of adding noise from multiple sources. (Note that the examples summarized in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number.) Table 2-1. Rules for Combining Sound Levels by Decibel Addition When two decibel values differ by… …add the following amount to the higher decibel value Example 0 to 1 dB 3 dB 60 dB + 61 dB = 64 dB 2 to 3 dB 2 dB 60 dB + 63 dB = 65 dB 4 to 9 dB 1 dB 60 dB + 69 dB = 70 dB 10 dB or more 0 dB 60 dB + 75 dB = 75 dB Source: California Department of Transportation. 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/ tens-sep2013-a11y.pdf. Accessed: August 2, 2021. A-Weighting The dB scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. The dominant frequencies of a sound have a substantial effect on the human response to that sound. Although the intensity (i.e., energy per unit area) of the sound is a purely physical quantity, the loudness or human response is determined by characteristics of the human ear. Human hearing is limited in the range of audible frequencies as well as in the way it perceives the SPL in that range. In general, people are most sensitive to the frequency range of 1,000 to 5,000 Hz and perceive sounds within that range better than sounds of the same amplitude at higher or lower frequencies. To approximate the response of the human ear, sound levels of individual frequency bands are weighted (i.e., adjusted), depending on human sensitivity to those frequencies. The resulting SPL is expressed in A-weighted decibels, or dBA. The A-weighting scale approximates the frequency response of the average young ear when listening to most ordinary sounds. When people make judgments regarding the relative loudness or annoyance of a sound, their judgments correlate well with the A-weighted sound levels of those sounds. Table 2-2 describes typical A-weighted sound levels for various noise sources. Chapter 2 Noise Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 2-3 May 2023 Table 2-2. Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels Common Outdoor Noise Source Sound Level (dBA) Common Indoor Noise Source — 110 — Rock band Jet flying at 1,000 feet — 100 — Gas lawn mower at 3 feet — 90 — Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 mph Food blender at 3 feet — 80 — Garbage disposal at 3 feet Noisy urban area, daytime Gas lawn mower at 100 feet — 70 — Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet Commercial area Normal speech at 3 feet Heavy traffic at 300 feet — 60 — Large business office Quiet urban, daytime — 50 — Dishwasher in next room Quiet urban, nighttime — 40 — Theater, large conference room (background) Quiet suburban, nighttime — 30 — Library Quiet rural, nighttime Bedroom at night — 20 — Broadcast/recording studio — 10 — Lowest threshold of human hearing — 0 — Lowest threshold of human hearing Source: California Department of Transportation. 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/ tens-sep2013-a11y.pdf. Accessed: March 10. 2023. 2.2 Noise Descriptors Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, various descriptors or noise “metrics” have been developed to quantify environmental and community noise. These metrics generally describe either the average character of the noise or the statistical behavior of the variations in the noise level. Some of the most common metrics used to describe environmental noise, including those metrics used in this report, are described below.  Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) is the most common metric used to describe short-term average noise levels. Many noise sources produce levels that fluctuate over time; examples include mechanical equipment that cycles on and off or construction work, which can vary sporadically. The Leq describes the average acoustical energy content of noise for an identified period of time, commonly 1 hour. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustical energy over the duration of the exposure. For many noise sources, the Leq will vary, depending on the time of day. A prime example is traffic noise, which rises and falls, depending on the amount of traffic on a given street or freeway. Chapter 2 Noise Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 2-4 May 2023  Maximum Sound Level (Lmax) and Minimum Sound Level (Lmin) refer to the maximum and minimum sound levels, respectively, that occur during the noise measurement period. More specifically, they describe the rms sound levels that correspond to the loudest and quietest 1-second intervals that occur during the measurement.  Percentile-Exceeded Sound Level (Lxx) describes the sound level exceeded for a given percentage of a specified period. For example, the L50 is the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time (such as 30 minutes per hour), and L25 is the sound level exceeded 25 percent of the time (such as 15 minutes per hour).  Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a measure of the 24-hour average A-weighted noise level, which is also time weighted to “penalize” noise that occurs during the evening and nighttime hours when noise is generally recognized to be more disturbing (because people are trying to rest, relax, and sleep during these times). Specifically, 5 dBA is added to the Leq during the evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and 10 dBA is added to the Leq during the nighttime hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. The energy average is then taken for the whole 24-hour day.  Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn) is very similar to the CNEL described above. Ldn is also a time-weighted average of the 24-hour A-weighted noise level. The only difference is that no “penalty” is applied to the evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. However, 10 dBA is added to the Leq during the nighttime hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. The energy average is then taken for the whole 24-hour day. It is noted that various federal, state, and local agencies have adopted CNEL or Ldn as the measure of community noise. Although not identical, CNEL and Ldn are normally within 1 dBA of each other when measured in typical community environments, and many noise standards/regulations use the two interchangeably. 2.3 Sound Propagation When sound propagates over a distance, it changes in both level and frequency content. The manner in which noise is reduced with distance depends on the factors described below. In general, noise attenuates (decreases) with distance. Roadway noise sources tend to be arranged linearly. Therefore, noise from roadway vehicular traffic attenuates at a rate of approximately 3.0 to 4.5 dB per doubling of distance from the source, depending on the intervening surface (paved or vegetated, respectively).3 Point sources of noise, such as stationary equipment or construction equipment, typically attenuate at a rate of approximately 6.0 to 7.5 dB per doubling of distance from the source.4 For example, a sound level of 80 dBA at 50 feet from the noise source will be reduced to 74 dBA at 100 feet, 68 dBA at 200 feet, and so on. Noise levels can also be attenuated by shielding the noise source or providing a barrier between the source and the receptor.  Geometric Spreading. Sound from a single source (i.e., a “point” source) radiates uniformly outward as it travels away from the source in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates (or drops off) at a general rate of 6 dBA for each doubling of distance. Highway noise is not a single 3 Ibid. 4 The 1.5 dB variation in attenuation rate (6 dB versus 7.5 dB) can result from ground-absorption effects, which occur as sound travels over soft surfaces such as earth or vegetation (7.5 dB attenuation rate) versus hard surfaces such as pavement or hard-packed earth (6 dB rate). Chapter 2 Noise Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 2-5 May 2023 stationary point source of sound. The movement of vehicles on a highway makes the source of the sound appear to emanate from a line (i.e., a “line” source) rather than from a point. This results in cylindrical spreading rather than the spherical spreading that results from a point source. The change in sound level (i.e., attenuation or decrease) from a line source is generally 3 dBA per doubling of distance.  Ground Absorption. The noise path between the source and the observer is usually close to the ground. The excess noise attenuation from ground absorption occurs because of acoustic energy losses on sound wave reflection. For acoustically “hard” sites (i.e., sites with a reflective surface, such as a parking lot or a smooth body of water, between the source and the receptor), no excess ground attenuation is assumed because the sound wave is reflected without energy losses. For acoustically absorptive or “soft” sites (i.e., sites with an absorptive ground surface, such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an excess ground attenuation value of 1.5 dBA per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When added to the geometric spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall drop-off rate of 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance for a line source and 7.5 dBA per doubling of distance for a point source.  Atmospheric Effects. Research by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and others has shown that atmospheric conditions can have a major effect on noise levels. Such factors include wind; air temperature, including vertical temperature gradients; humidity; and turbulence. Receptors downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative to calm conditions, whereas receptors upwind can have lower noise levels. Increased sound levels can also occur over relatively large distances because of temperature inversion conditions (i.e., increasing temperatures with elevation).  Shielding by Natural or Human-Made Features. A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receptor can substantially attenuate noise levels at the receptor. The amount of attenuation provided by this shielding depends on the size of the object, proximity to the noise source and receptor, surface weight, solidity, and the frequency content of the noise source. Natural terrain features (such as hills and dense woods) and human-made features (such as buildings and walls) can substantially reduce noise levels. Walls are often constructed between a source and a receptor with the specific purpose of reducing noise. In addition to the noise that diffracts over the top of a barrier, noise will also diffract around the ends of the barrier, resulting in “flanking” noise that can reduce the overall efficacy of the barrier. Assuming it is long enough to minimize the effects of flanking noise, a barrier that breaks the line of sight between a source and a receptor will typically result in at least 5 dB of noise reduction. A higher barrier may provide as much as 20 dB of noise reduction. 2.4 Human Response to Noise Noise can have a range of effects on people, including hearing damage, sleep interference, speech interference, performance interference, physiological responses, and annoyance. Each of these is briefly described below.  Hearing Damage. A person who is exposed to high noise levels can suffer either gradual or traumatic hearing damage. Gradual hearing loss occurs with repeated exposure to excessive noise levels. It is most commonly associated with occupational noise exposures involving heavy industry or other very noisy work environments. Traumatic hearing loss is caused by a sudden Chapter 2 Noise Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 2-6 May 2023 exposure to an extremely high noise level, such as a gunshot or explosion at very close range. The potential for noise-induced hearing loss is not generally a concern in typical community noise environments. Noise levels in neighborhoods, even in very noisy airport environs, are not loud enough to cause hearing loss.  Sleep Interference. Exposure to excessive noise levels at night has been shown to cause sleep disturbance. Sleep disturbance refers not only to awakening from sleep but also effects on the quality of sleep, such as alterations to the patterns and stages of sleep. World Health Organization guidelines recommend noise limits of 30 dBA Leq (8-hour average) for continuous noise and 45 dBA Lmax for single sound events inside bedrooms at night to minimize sleep disturbance.5  Speech Interference. Speech interference can be a problem in any situation where clear communication is desired. It is often of particular concern in learning environments (such as schools) or situations where poor communication could jeopardize safety. Normal conversational speech inside homes is typically in the range of 50 to 65 dBA.6 Any noise in that range or louder may interfere with speech. As background noise levels rise, the intelligibility of speech decreases and the listener fails to recognize an increasing percentage of the words spoken. A speaker may raise his or her voice in an attempt to compensate for higher background noise levels, but this, in turn, can lead to vocal fatigue for the speaker.  Performance Interference. Excessive noise has been found to have various detrimental effects on human performance, including information processing, concentration, accuracy, reaction times, and academic performance. Intrusive noise from individual events can also cause distraction. These effects are of obvious concern for learning and work environments.  Physiological Responses. Acute noise has been shown to cause measurable physiological responses in humans, including changes in stress hormone levels, pulse rate, and blood pressure. The extent to which these responses cause harm, or are signs of harm, is not clearly defined, but it has been postulated that they could contribute to stress-related diseases, such as hypertension, anxiety, and heart disease. However, research indicates links between environmental noise and permanent health effects are generally weak and inconsistent. Statistically significant health risks have been found for extended exposure to very high noise levels, such as the risks for workers who are exposed to high levels of industrial noise for 5 to 30 years.7 5 World Health Organization. 1999. Guidelines for Community Noise. April. London, United Kingdom. Available: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/a68672. Accessed: March 10. 2023. 6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. Speech Levels in Various Noise Environments. EPA 600/1-77-025. May. Prepared by: Bolt, Beranek, and Newman. Prepared for: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. Available: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P100CWGS.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument& Client=EPA&Index=1976+Thru+1980&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5Czyfiles%5CIndex%20Data%5C76thru80%5CTxt%5C00000021%5CP100CWGS.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonymous&SortMethod=h%7C-&MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0& ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Display=hpfr&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%20page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=1&SeekPage=x&ZyPURL#. Accessed: March 10, 2023. 7 World Health Organization. 1999. Guidelines for Community Noise. April. London, United Kingdom. Available: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/a68672. Accessed: March 10. 2023. Chapter 2 Noise Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 2-7 May 2023  Annoyance. The subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction are possibly the most difficult to quantify, and no accurate method exists to measure the effects. This difficulty arises primarily from differences in individual sensitivity and habituation to sound, which can vary widely from person to person. What one person considers tolerable can be unbearable to another of equal hearing acuity. An important tool in estimating the likelihood of annoyance due to a new sound is a comparison to the existing baseline or “ambient” environment to which a person has adapted. In general, the more the levels or tonal (frequency) variations of a sound exceed the previously existing ambient sound level or tonal quality, the less acceptable the new sound will be. In most cases, effects from sounds typically found in the natural environment are limited to annoyance or interference. Physiological effects and hearing loss are more commonly associated with human-made noise, such as that in an industrial or occupational setting. Studies have shown that, under controlled conditions in an acoustics laboratory, a healthy human ear is able to discern changes in sound levels of 1 dBA. In the normal environment, the healthy human ear can detect changes of about 2 dBA; however, it is widely accepted that a doubling of sound energy, which results in a change of 3 dBA in the normal environment, is considered just noticeable to most people. A change of 5 dBA is readily perceptible, and a change of 10 dBA is perceived as being twice as loud. Accordingly, a doubling of sound energy (e.g., doubling the volume of traffic on a highway) resulting in a 3 dBA increase in sound would generally be barely detectable. 2.5 Noise-Sensitive Land Uses The project site is surrounded primarily by commercial and industrial uses to the south, west, and north. Such uses are generally not considered to be noise sensitive. To the east, the project site is bounded by U.S. 101. The nearest noise-sensitive land uses are two hotels (Travelodge and Best Western) located east of the project site, across U.S. 101 in the city of South San Francisco. The Travelodge hotel is approximately 230 feet from the project site, or 260 feet from the nearest portion of a proposed project structure. The Best Western hotel is approximately 530 feet east of the project site. The nearest residences are approximately 1,700 feet (0.3 mile) southwest of the project site (southwest of the intersection of Hermann Street and Tanforan Avenue) in the city of San Bruno. Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 3-1 May 2023 Chapter 3 Ground-borne Vibration Fundamentals This chapter describes basic concepts related to ground-borne vibration. Ground-borne vibration is a small, rapidly fluctuating motion transmitted through the ground. The effects of ground-borne vibration are typically limited to nuisance or annoyance for people, but, at extreme vibration levels, damage to buildings may also occur. In contrast to airborne sound, ground-borne vibration is not a phenomenon that most people experience every day. The ambient ground-borne vibration level in residential areas is usually much lower than the threshold of human perception. Most perceptible indoor vibration is caused by sources within buildings, such as mechanical equipment while in operation, people moving, or doors slamming. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground-borne vibration are heavy construction activities, such as blasting, pile driving, or earthmoving; trains with steel wheels; and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth, the ground-borne vibration from traffic is rarely perceptible, even in locations close to major roads. The strength of ground-borne vibration from typical environmental sources diminishes (or attenuates) fairly rapidly over distance. For the prediction of ground-borne vibration, the fundamental model consists of a vibration source, a receptor, and the propagation path between the two. The power of the vibration source and the characteristics and geology of the intervening ground, which affect the propagation path to the receptor, determine the ground-borne vibration level and the characteristics of the vibration perceived by the receptor. The following sections provide an explanation of key concepts and terms used in the analysis of environmental ground-borne vibration. 3.1 Displacement, Velocity, and Acceleration When a vibration source (e.g., blasting, dynamic construction equipment, a train) impacts the ground, it imparts energy to the ground, creating vibration waves that propagate away from the source along the surface and downward into the earth. As vibration waves travel outward from a source, they excite the particles of rock and soil through which they pass and cause them to oscillate. The distance that these particles move is referred to as the displacement, which is typically very small, usually only a few ten-thousandths to a few thousandths of an inch. Velocity describes the instantaneous speed of the motion, and acceleration is the instantaneous rate of change in the speed. Each of these measures can be described further in terms of frequency and amplitude, as discussed below. Although displacement is generally easier to understand than velocity or acceleration, it is rarely used to describe ground-borne vibration because most transducers used to measure vibration measure velocity or acceleration directly, not displacement. Chapter 3 Ground-borne Vibration Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 3-2 May 2023 3.2 Frequency and Amplitude The frequency of a vibrating object describes how rapidly it is oscillating. The unit of measurement for the frequency of vibration is Hz (the same as used in the measurement of noise), which describes the number of cycles per second. The amplitude of displacement describes the distance that a particle moves from its resting (or equilibrium) position as it oscillates and can be measured in inches. The amplitude of vibration velocity (the speed of the movement) can be measured in inches per second (in/sec). The amplitude of vibration acceleration (the rate of change in the speed) can be measured in in/sec per second. 3.3 Vibration Descriptors As noted above, there are various ways to quantify ground-borne vibration, based on its fundamental characteristics. Because vibration can vary markedly over a short period of time, various descriptors have been developed to quantify vibration. The two most common descriptors used in the analysis of ground-borne vibration are the peak particle velocity (PPV) and vibration velocity level (Lv), each of which is described below.  PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak amplitude of the vibration velocity. The unit of measurement for PPV is in/sec. Unlike many quantities used in the study of environmental acoustics, PPV is typically presented using linear values; it does not employ a dB scale. Because it is related to the stresses that are experienced by buildings, PPV is generally accepted as the most appropriate descriptor for evaluating the potential for building damage. Both Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Caltrans guidelines recommend using PPV for that purpose. It is also used in many instances to evaluate the human response to ground-borne vibration. Caltrans guidelines recommend using PPV for that purpose.  LV describes the rms vibration velocity. Because of the typically small amplitudes of ground-borne vibration, vibration velocity is often expressed in decibels, calculated as follows:      ×= ref V V VL10log20 where V is the actual rms velocity amplitude and Vref is the reference velocity amplitude. It is important to note that there is no universally accepted value for Vref, but the accepted reference quantity for vibration velocity in the U.S. is 1 micro-inch per second (1×10-6 in/sec). The abbreviation VdB is commonly used for vibration decibels to distinguish them from noise-level decibels. LV is often used to evaluate human response to vibration levels. FTA guidelines recommend using LV for that purpose. Chapter 3 Ground-borne Vibration Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 3-3 May 2023 3.4 Vibration Propagation Vibration energy spreads out as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration level to diminish with distance from the source. High-frequency vibrations reduce much more rapidly than low frequencies so that low frequencies tend to dominate the spectrum at large distances from the source. The propagation of ground-borne vibration is not as simple to model as airborne noise. This is because noise in the air travels through a relatively uniform medium, while ground-borne vibrations travel through the earth, which may contain significant geological differences. Geological factors that influence the propagation of ground-borne vibration include the following:  Soil Conditions. The type of soil is known to have a strong influence on the levels of ground-borne vibration. Among the most important factors are the stiffness and internal damping of the soil. Hard, dense, and compacted soil; stiff clay soil; and hard rock transmit vibration more efficiently than loose, soft soils; sand; or gravel.  Depth to Bedrock. Shallow depth to bedrock has been linked to the efficient propagation of ground-borne vibration. One possibility is that shallow bedrock acts to concentrate the vibration energy near the surface, reflecting vibration waves back toward the surface that would otherwise continue to propagate farther down into the earth.  Soil Strata. Discontinuities in the soil strata (i.e., soil layering) can also cause diffractions or channeling effects that affect the propagation of vibration over long distances.  Frost Conditions. Vibration waves typically propagate more efficiently in frozen soils than in unfrozen soils. Propagation also varies, depending on the depth of the frost.  Water Conditions. The amount of water in the soil can affect vibration propagation. The depth of the water table in the path of the propagation also appears to have substantial effects on ground-borne vibration levels. Specific conditions at the source and receiver locations can also affect vibration levels. For instance, how the source is connected to the ground (e.g., direct contact, through rails, by a structure) will affect the amount of energy transmitted into the ground. There are also notable differences when the source is underground, such as in a tunnel, versus on the surface. At the receiver, vibration levels can be affected by variables such as the foundation type, building construction, and acoustical absorption inside the rooms where people are located. When vibration encounters a building, a ground-to-foundation coupling loss will usually reduce the overall vibration level. However, under certain circumstances, the ground-to-foundation coupling may also amplify the vibration level because of structural resonances from the floors and walls. 3.5 Effects of Ground-borne Vibration Vibration can result in effects that range from annoyance to structural damage. Annoyance or disturbance for people may occur at vibration levels that are substantially below those that would pose a risk of damage to buildings. Each of these effects is discussed below. Chapter 3 Ground-borne Vibration Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 3-4 May 2023 Potential Building Damage When ground-borne vibration encounters a building, vibrational energy is transmitted to the structure, causing it to vibrate. If the vibration levels are high enough, damage to the building may occur. Depending on the type of building and the vibration levels, this damage could range from cosmetic architectural damage (e.g., cracked plaster, stucco, tile) to more severe structural damage (e.g., cracking of floor slabs, foundations, columns, beams, wells). Buildings can typically withstand higher levels of vibration from transient sources than from continuous or frequent intermittent sources. Transient sources are those that create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or the use of drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include pile drivers (impact or vibratory), crack-and-seat equipment, and vibratory compaction equipment. Older fragile buildings, which may include important historic buildings, are of particular concern. Modern commercial and industrial buildings can generally withstand much higher vibration levels before potential damage occurs. Human Disturbance or Annoyance Ground-borne vibration can be annoying for people and cause serious concern for nearby neighbors, even when vibration is well below the level that could cause physical damage to structures. Ground-borne vibration is almost exclusively a concern inside buildings. It is rarely perceived as a problem outdoors where the motion may be discernible but the reaction is less adverse without the effects associated with a shaking building. The normal frequency range at which most ground-borne vibration starts to be felt is generally from less than 1 Hz to about 200 Hz. When ground-borne vibration waves encounter a building, vibrational energy is transmitted to the building foundation. It then propagates throughout the remainder of the structure, causing surfaces (e.g., walls, floors, ceilings) to vibrate. This movement may be felt directly by building occupants. It may also generate a low-frequency rumbling noise as sound waves are radiated by the vibrating surfaces. At higher frequencies, building vibration can cause other audible effects, such as the rattling of windows, building fixtures, or items on shelves or hanging on walls. These audible effects due to ground-borne vibration are referred to as ground-borne noise. Ground-borne vibration levels that result in ground-borne noise are often experienced as a combination of perceptible vibration and low-frequency noise. However, sources that have the potential to generate ground-borne noise are likely to produce airborne noise impacts that mask the radiated ground-borne noise. Any perceptible effect (i.e., vibration or ground-borne noise) can lead to annoyance. The degree to which a person is annoyed depends on the activity in which they are participating at the time of the disturbance. For example, someone sleeping or reading will be more sensitive than someone who is engaged in physical activity. Reoccurring vibration effects often lead people to believe that vibration is damaging their homes, even though the vibration levels are well below the minimum thresholds for damage potential.8 Numerous studies have been conducted to characterize the human response to vibration. Over the years, numerous vibration criteria and standards have been suggested by researchers, organizations, and governmental agencies. These studies suggest that the thresholds for perception and annoyance vary, according to duration, frequency, and amplitude of vibration. For a continuous or frequent intermittent vibration source, such as construction activity, including the use of pile 8 California Department of Transportation. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Final. CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01. April. Sacramento, CA. Chapter 3 Ground-borne Vibration Fundamentals Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 3-5 May 2023 drivers or vibratory compaction equipment, the human response to vibration varies from barely perceptible at a PPV of 0.01 in/sec to distinctly perceptible at a PPV of 0.04 in/sec, strongly perceptible at a PPV of 0.1 in/sec, and severe at a PPV of 0.4 in/sec. 9 3.6 Vibration-Sensitive Land Uses As noted above, the potential effects of ground-borne vibration can be divided into two categories: building damage and potential human annoyance. Because building damage would be considered a permanent negative effect at any building, regardless of land use, any type of building would typically be considered sensitive to this type of impact. Fragile structures, which often include historic buildings, are most susceptible to damage and of particular concern. The closest land uses surrounding the project site have structures that would be categorized as a mix of modern industrial/commercial buildings and older residences. Human annoyance effects from ground-borne vibration are typically considered only inside occupied buildings and not at outside areas such as residential yards, parks, or open spaces. Buildings that would be considered sensitive to human annoyance caused by vibration are generally the same as those that would be sensitive to noise. These typically include residences, schools, hospitals, assisted-living facilities, mental care facilities, places of worship, libraries, performing arts facilities, and hotels and motels. Nearby vibration-sensitive buildings include hotels and motels, located about 230 to 530 feet east of the project site, and residences, located approximately 1,700 feet southwest of the project site. 9 Ibid. Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 4-1 May 2023 Chapter 4 Existing Noise Environment A number of transportation- and industrial-related noise sources contribute to the ambient noise environment in the project vicinity. Traffic on major roadways, such as U.S. 101, South Airport Boulevard, and San Mateo Avenue, heavily influence the ambient noise levels in this area. In addition, aircraft noise from planes taking off and landing at nearby SFO, along with Caltrain’s passenger trains running north and south parallel to Hermann Street in San Bruno, influence the ambient noise environment. Ambient noise is often measured to help characterize existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of a given project. To quantify existing ambient noise levels near the project site, long- (24-hour) and short-term (15-minute) ambient noise measurements were conducted between Wednesday, March 1, and Thursday, March 3, 2023. On these days, weather conditions ranged from clear to overcast, with no precipitation. Winds were mild, with wind speeds averaging approximately 1 to 2 miles per hour. Long- and short-term monitoring locations were selected to capture noise levels in areas with representative ambient noise levels throughout the day and night near the project site, including areas that have noise-sensitive receptors, such as the hotel uses east of the project site and the residences to the southwest. The long-term measurements were conducted using a Piccolo Type 2 sound-level meter (SLM). The SLM measured 1-hour Leq for a period of approximately 24 hours. The recorded 1-hour data were used to generate 24-hour average Ldn, 24-hour CNEL, and average 12-hour Leq noise levels for the daytime hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. In addition, the highest and lowest 1-hour Leq noise level recorded during the measurement window was noted. Five long-term noise measurement locations near the project site were selected. Day-night noise levels from the long-term measurements ranged from 69.6 to 77.2 dBA Ldn, with higher noise levels generally corresponding to areas near busier roadways and a passenger rail line (i.e., U.S. 101 and Caltrain tracks parallel to Hermann Street). In addition, four short-term noise measurements were conducted near the project site. Short-term measurements were conducted using a Larson Davis 831 Type 1 SLM, which measured Leq every 10 seconds for 15 minutes as well as overall Leq averaged over the 15-minute measurement interval. The measured short-term noise levels ranged from 57.8 to 73.0 dBA Leq. The relevant noise data from the noise measurement survey are shown in Tables 4-1 and 4-2 for the long- and short-term noise measurements, respectively. All noise measurement locations are shown in Figure 3. Refer to Appendix A for the complete dataset of noise measurement data from the field survey. Chapter 4 Existing Noise Environment Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 4-2 May 2023 Table 4-1. Measured Existing Noise Levels in the Project Vicinity, Long-Term Site Site Description Ldn CNEL Highest Recorded 1-Hour Leqa Lowest Recorded 1-Hour Leqb 12-Hour Daytime Leqc LT-1 San Mateo Avenue, between Peking Handi-Craft and W.M. Dickerson 77.2 77.4 74.7 64.6 73.6 LT-2 Within the parking lot between Best Western hotel and Travelodge hotel, ~120 feet south of electrical tower 69.6 69.9 69.8 58.7 65.8 LT-3 Corner of Pacific Avenue and Hermann Street 76.5 77.0 76.2 54.9 74.1 LT-4 On project site, approximately 450 feet south of Terminal Court 74.9 75.2 75.4 65.0 70.3 LT-5 Southeast corner of IHOP parking lot 73.2 73.5 69.9 63.3 68.8 LT = long-term (24-hour) ambient noise measurement. All noise levels are reported in A-weighted decibels (dBA). a. Highest Leq is the highest calculated Leq level during a 24-hour period. b. Lowest Leq is the lowest calculated Leq level during a 24-hour period. c. The 12-hour average Leq from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Table 4-2. Measured Existing Noise Levels in the Project Vicinity, Short-Term Site Site Description Measurement Start Time Leq Lmax Lmin Dominant Noise Source ST-1 Travelodge parking lot, adjacent to U.S. 101 9:20 a.m. 73.0 87.2 68.9 Highway traffic ST-2 Parking lot between Bay Badminton Center and Peking Handicraft, Inc. 10:35 a.m. 68.0 76.9 63.5 Mechanical equipment, related to table saw ST-3 Parking lot between Peninsula Autobody and SF Elite Volleyball Club 9:03 a.m. 62.6 75.3 50.8 Roadway traffic ST-4 Approximately 570 feet west from the southwest corner of the project site 11:39 a.m. 57.8 71.5 53.7 HVAC equipment hum from produce facility ST = long-term (15-minute) ambient noise measurement. All noise levels are reported in A-weighted decibels (dBA). HVAC = heating, ventilation, air-conditioning Littlefield A v e Littlefield A v e Utah AveUtah Ave Harbor WayHarbor WayBeacan StBeacan StTanforanTanforanAtantic A v e Atantic A v e Pacific A v e Pacific A v e Tanfora n A v e Tanfora n A v e Shaw RdShaw Rd Navigable S l o u g h Navigable S l o u g h LINDENVILLELINDENVILLE Victory A v e Victory A v e S Linden AveS Linden AveS Maple AveS Maple AveMitchell AveMitchell Ave Terminal C t Terminal C t Bayshore FwyBayshore FwyLawerence AveLawerence Ave Produce AveProduce AveLowrie AveLowrie AveSan Br un o Can al San Br un o Can al N Acces s R d N Acces s R dS A i rpo r t B l vdS A i rpo r t B l vd 101 LT-1LT-1 LT-2LT-2 LT-5LT-5 LT-3LT-3 LT-4LT-4 ST-3ST-3 ST-2ST-2 ST-4ST-4 ST-1ST-1 Feet 7003000N Image: ©Google 2022. Google Earth Pro,Version 7.3. Mountain View, CA.Image date: 4/4/2022. Accessed: 3/20/2023. LTLT STST Short Term Measurement (15-Minute) Long Term Measurement (24-hour) Project Boundary Legend Graphics … 104667 (03-20-2023) JCFigure 3 Sensitive Receptor and Noise Measurement Location Map Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 5-1 May 2023 Chapter 5 Regulatory Framework 5.1 Federal No federal laws, regulations, or policies for construction-related noise and vibration apply directly to the proposed project. However, FTA has developed general assessment criteria for analyzing construction noise. Although FTA standards are intended for federally funded mass-transit projects, the impact assessment procedures and criteria included in FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual10 are routinely used to evaluate a variety of projects proposed by local jurisdictions (i.e., not exclusively transit projects). The FTA construction guidelines state that each A-weighted sound level increase of 10 dB corresponds to an approximate doubling of subjective loudness. As a result, a 10 dB increase in the ambient noise level is often used as the threshold in determining if an increase in ambient noise levels because of construction would be considered substantial. 5.2 State Governor’s Office of Planning and Research The State of California General Plan Guidelines, published and updated by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, provides guidance for evaluating the compatibility of various land uses with respect to community noise exposure. These guidelines for general land use planning describe noise acceptability categories for the different types of land uses considered by the state. California also requires each local government entity to perform noise studies and implement a noise element as part of its general plan. The purpose of the noise element is to limit the exposure of the community to excessive noise levels; the noise element must be used to guide decisions concerning land use. Section 5.3 of this document examines noise guidelines found in the Shape SSF 2040 General Plan (General Plan). California Department of Transportation Caltrans provides guidelines regarding vibration associated with construction and operation of transportation infrastructure. Table 5-1 provides Caltrans’ vibration guidelines for potential damage to different types of structures. Generally, people are more sensitive to vibration during nighttime hours, when sleeping, rather than daytime hours. Numerous studies have been conducted to characterize the human response to vibration. Table 5-2 provides Caltrans’ guidelines regarding vibration annoyance potential (expressed here as PPV). 10 Federal Transit Administration. 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, FTA Report No. 0123. September. Available: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed: February 17, 2023. Chapter 5 Regulatory Framework Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 5-2 May 2023 Table 5-1. Caltrans Vibration Guidelines for Potential Damage to Structures Structure Type and Condition Maximum Peak Particle Velocity (PPV, in/sec) Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources Extremely fragile historic buildings 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.2 0.1 Historic and some old buildings 0.5 0.25 Older residential structures 0.5 0.3 New residential structures 1.0 0.5 Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.0 0.5 Source: California Department of Transportation. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Final. CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01. April. Sacramento, CA. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/ environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf. Accessed: February 3, 2023. Note: Transient sources create a single, isolated vibration event (e.g., blasting or the use of drop balls). Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment. Table 5-2. Caltrans Guidelines for Vibration Annoyance Potential Human Response Maximum PPV (in/sec) Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources Barely perceptible 0.04 0.01 Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04 Strongly perceptible 0.9 0.10 Severe 2.0 0.4 Source: California Department of Transportation. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Final. CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01. April. Sacramento, CA. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/ environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf. Accessed: February 3, 2023. Note: Transient sources create a single, isolated vibration event (e.g., blasting or the use of drop balls). Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment. 5.3 Local South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.32 of the South San Francisco (City) Municipal Code contains noise regulations for the city of South San Francisco. The code includes noise limits for sound that constitutes a noise disturbance, measured as the maximum permissible sound level at any receiving property. The City Municipal Code’s quantitative noise limits and construction noise regulations are described below. Table 5-3 outlines the specific noise criteria that apply to various land uses in South San Francisco. Although these exact zoning/district designations are no longer in effect, the City generally applies the guidelines to the corresponding current zoning districts. Chapter 5 Regulatory Framework Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 5-3 May 2023 Table 5-3. Noise Level Standards for the City of South San Francisco Land Use Category Time Period Noise Level (dBA)a R-e, R-1, and R-2 zones or any single-family or duplex residential use in a specific plan district 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 50 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 60 R-3 and D-C zones or any multi-family residential or mixed residential/commercial use in any specific plan district 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 55 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 60 C-1, P-C, Gateway, and Oyster Point Marina Specific Plan districts or any commercial use in any specific plan district 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 60 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 65 M-1, P-1 Anytime 70 Notes: • Noise levels are identified as maximum permissible sound levels for a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in an hour. • If the measured ambient noise level for any area is higher than the standard set listed above, the ambient level shall be the base noise level standard for purposes of identifying a noise disturbance. • If the measurement location is on a boundary between two different zones, the applicable noise level standard shall be the more stringent noise zone plus 5 dBA. a. The noise level standard for each land use for a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in any hour (L50). Standards increase for durations of less than 15 minutes per hour. Under the City Noise Ordinance, it is unlawful for any person to operate or cause to be operated any source of sound at any location within the city, or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, that causes the noise level, when measured on any other property, to exceed the limits specified in Table 5-3, with limited exceptions (including permitted construction activity). If the measured ambient level for any area is higher than the standard in the City Municipal Code for a particular use, then the applicable threshold for that use is 5 dB above the measured ambient level.11 The City Municipal Code also identifies special provisions for activities related to construction, alterations, and landscaping. With a valid permit, such activities may occur from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Other hours may be authorized by the permit if at least one of the following noise limitations is met: 1. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding 90 dBA at a distance of 25 feet. 2. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane of the project shall not exceed 90 dBA. Exception permits may be issued if an applicant can show that a diligent investigation of available noise abatement techniques indicates that immediate compliance with the requirements of Chapter 8.32 of the City Municipal Code would be impractical or unreasonable. Exception permits may contain conditions to minimize the public detriment caused by such exceptions. In addition, performance standards related to noise and vibration can be found in Chapter 20.300.010 of the City Municipal Code. Section E, Noise, states that no use or activity shall create ambient noise levels that exceed the levels of the standards established in Chapter 8.32, Noise Regulation. Section 20.300.010(F) 11 South San Francisco Municipal Code, Section 8.32.030(a), (b). Chapter 5 Regulatory Framework Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 5-4 May 2023 states that vibration shall not be transmitted through the ground that is discernible without the aid of instruments by a reasonable person at the lot lines of a site. Vibration from temporary construction, demolition, and vehicles that enter and leave the subject parcel (e.g., construction equipment, trucks) is exempt from this standard. Section 20.300.010 also lists noise exposure requirements and limitations for new development, based on various land use types, which can be found below in Table 5-4. In these cases, noise levels at a new land use must meet the requirements for that designated land use. Table 5-4. Noise Exposure – Land Use Requirements and Limitations Land Use CNEL Range (dB) Requirements and Limitations Residential and other noise-sensitive uses (e.g., schools, hospitals, churches) Less than 65 Satisfactory 65 to 70 Acoustic study and noise attenuation measures required More than 70 Not allowed, with the exception of projects deemed appropriate by the City Council and, to the extent necessary, approved through the local agency override process, consistent with Public Utilities Code Section 21670 et seq. Commercial Less than 70 Satisfactory 70 to 80 Acoustic study and noise attenuation measures required More than 80 Airport-related development only; noise attenuation measures required Industrial Less than 75 Satisfactory 75 to 85 Acoustic study and noise attenuation measures required More than 85 Airport-related development only; noise attenuation measures required Open Less than 75 Satisfactory More than 75 Avoid uses involving concentrations of people or animals 2040 South San Francisco General Plan The General Plan, adopted in October of 2022, contains a noise element (Chapter 16) that sets goals, policies, and implementing programs related to the goal of achieving acceptable noise levels in the city. In addition, the noise chapter sets land use compatibility noise standards for new developments. The following General Plan goals, policies, and programs adopted to avoid or minimize environmental noise are applicable to the project: Goal NOI-1: Residents and Employees of South San Francisco Are Exposed to Acceptable Noise Levels. Policy NOI-1.1: Ensure New Development Complies with Noise Compatibility Guidelines. Ensure that all new development within the city complies with the land use/noise compatibility guidelines shown in Table 11 (Table 5-5 of this report). Chapter 5 Regulatory Framework Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 5-5 May 2023 Table 5-5. Land Use Compatibility Noise Standards for New Development Land Use Categories Compatible Uses CNEL Interiora Exteriorb Residential Single-family, duplex, multi-family, mobile home, residence care uses 45c 65d Commercial Hotel, motel, transient lodging uses 45c 65 Commercial, retail, bank, restaurant, health club uses 55 — Office building, R&D, professional office uses 50 — Amphitheater, concert hall, auditorium, meeting hall, movie theater uses 50 — Manufacturing, warehousing, wholesale, utility uses 65 — Open Space Park, neighborhood park, playground uses — 65 Institutional/Public Facility Hospital, school, classroom uses 45c 65 Church, library uses 45c — Interpretation: a. Interior environment excludes bathrooms, toilets, closets, and corridors. b. Outdoor environment limited to private yard of single-family residential, multi-family residential, and mobile home park outdoor common space area; hospital patio; park picnic area; school playground; and hotel and motel recreation area. c. Noise-Level Requirement with Closed Windows: Mechanical ventilating system or other means of natural ventilation shall be provided pursuant to Uniform Building Code requirements. d. Multi-family developments with private balconies that would not meet the 65 dB CNEL standard are required to provide occupancy disclosure notices to all future tenants regarding potential noise impacts. Action NOI-1.1.1: Enforce Exterior and Interior Noise Limits. Enforce the standards of Table 11, Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix (Table 5-5), which specify acceptable exterior and interior noise limits for various land uses throughout the city. Action NOI-1.1.2: Incorporate Noise Compatibility Conditions of Approval. Continue to assess projects through subdivision, site plan, conditional use permit, and other development review processes and incorporate conditions of approval and mitigation measures that ensure noise compatibility where appropriate. Action NOI-1.1.3: Require Noise Study in Applicable Areas. Require a noise study to be performed and appropriate noise attenuation to be incorporated to reduce interior noise levels to 45 dB CNEL or less prior to approving any multi-family or mixed-use residential development in an area with a CNEL of 65 dB or greater. Action NOI-1.1.5: Require Noise Control for New Developments. Require the control of noise at the source through site design, building design, landscaping, hours of operation, and other techniques for new developments deemed to be noise generators. Policy NOI-1.2: Enforce Noise Performance Standards. The City enforces the noise ordinance noise performance standards. Action NOI 1.2.1: Update Municipal Code Section Related to the Noise Ordinance. Update the noise ordinance in the South San Francisco Municipal Code to establish standards for permissible construction hours and controls related to other potential nuisances, such as music, dogs, special Chapter 5 Regulatory Framework Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 5-6 May 2023 events, and mechanical/sound equipment, and encourage enforcement and penalties for violations of the noise ordinance. The update should not interfere with the regular course of business in commercial and industrial zones. • General Activity Noise Performance Standards: Establish general noise performance standards for the city’s established land use zones. • Construction Noise: Continue to restrict construction activities to acceptable time periods. Consider constructing temporary sound walls surrounding construction sites during construction. • Special Event Noise: Allow single-event occurrences at specific sites, subject to special permit conditions, which alleviate noise to the greatest extent possible. Limit the permissible hours for special single events and the number of special single events that are allowed to take place each year. Goal NOI-2: Prevent the Exposure of Residents and Employees of South San Francisco to Unacceptable Vibration Levels. Policy NOI-2.1: Require Vibration Analysis for Sensitive Receptors. A vibration analysis shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant for any construction-related activities within 100 feet of residential or other sensitive receptors that require the use of pile driving or other construction methods that have the potential to produce high vibration levels. Policy NOI-2.2: Require Vibration Analysis for Rail Lines. A vibration analysis shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant for new land uses located within 200 feet of existing rail lines. Goal NOI-3: Historic Structures Are Not Exposed to Unacceptable Vibration Levels. Policy NOI-3.1: Require Vibration Analysis for Historic Structure Protection. Prior to issuance of grading permits for any development project within 150 feet of a historic structure, if construction activities will require either (1) pile driving within 150 feet the historic structure or (2) utilization of mobile construction equipment within 50 feet of the historic structure, the property owner/developer shall retain an acoustical engineer to conduct a vibration analysis of potential impacts from construction-related vibration on the historic structure. The vibration analysis shall determine the vibration levels created by construction activities at the historic structure and, if necessary, develop mitigation to reduce vibration to the Caltrans threshold for historic buildings (PPV of 0.12 in/sec). San Bruno Municipal Code Although the project site is located in the city of South San Francisco, project construction and operation have the potential to cause noise impacts at nearby sensitive land uses in the neighboring city of San Bruno. The nearest residences to the project site are the single-family residences west of the intersection of Hermann Street and Tanforan Avenue. Therefore, relevant portions of the San Bruno Municipal Code are summarized below. The San Bruno Municipal Code contains regulations in Section 6.16 (San Bruno Noise Ordinance) pertaining to noise. This section discusses noise limits for various noise sources in the jurisdiction. The relevant guidelines from the San Bruno Noise Ordinance are included below. Chapter 5 Regulatory Framework Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 5-7 May 2023 6.16.030, Ambient Noise Level Limits Where the ambient noise level is less than designated in this section, the respective noise level shall govern (Sound Level A, decibels). Residential zone: 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., 45 dB; 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., 60 dB (Ordinance 1354, Section 1; prior code: Section 16-4.3). 6.16.050, Noise Levels Exceeding Ambient Base Level Any noise level exceeding the zone ambient base level at the property plane of any property, or exceeding the zone ambient base level on any adjacent residential area zone line or at any place of other property (or, if a condominium or apartment house, within any adjoining apartment), by more than 10 dB shall be deemed to be prima facie evidence of a violation of the provisions of this chapter. However, during the period of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., the ambient base level may be exceeded by 20 dB for a period not to exceed 30 minutes during any 24-hour period (Ordinance 1354, Section 1; prior code: Section 16-4.1-5). 6.16.060, Machinery Noise Levels No person shall operate any machinery, equipment, pump, fan, air-conditioning apparatus, or similar mechanical device in any manner so as to create any noise that would cause the noise level at the property plane of any property to exceed the ambient base noise level by more than 10 dB. However, during the period of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., the ambient base level may be exceeded by 20 dB for a period not to exceed 30 minutes during any 24-hour period (Ordinance 1354, Section 1; prior code: Section 16-4.6). 6.16.070, Construction of Buildings and Projects No person shall, within any residential zone, or within a radius of 500 feet therefrom, operate equipment or perform any outside construction or repair work on any building, structure, or other project or operate any pile driver, power shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, power hoist, or any other construction-type device that shall exceed between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. a noise level of 85 dB, as measured at 100 feet, or exceed between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. a noise level of 60 dB, as measured at 100 feet, unless such person shall have first obtained a permit from the director of public works. No permit shall be required to perform emergency work (Ordinance 1354, Section 1; prior code: Section 16-4.7). Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-1 May 2023 Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures 6.1 Methodology A combination of existing literature and accepted noise and vibration prediction and propagation algorithms was used to predict short-term construction and long-term operational noise levels and evaluate ground-borne vibration impacts. The specific methodology used for each analysis topic is described below. Construction Noise and Vibration The evaluation of potential noise and vibration impacts associated with project construction was based on the construction schedule, phasing, and equipment assumptions provided by the project applicant. Using the construction assumptions derived for the proposed project, noise and vibration levels were estimated using the methods described below. Construction Noise Daytime Hours Noise from construction of a given project varies, depending on the type of equipment in use, how many pieces of equipment are operating at any one time, the proximity of the equipment to a noise receptor, and the duration of equipment use. Estimates of combined construction and demolition noise levels for the proposed project were based on reference noise levels from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) roadway construction noise model, the FTA general assessment construction noise analysis method, and information provided by the project sponsor.12,13 The FTA recommends combining noise levels from the two loudest pieces of equipment expected to operate simultaneously in roughly the same location. For the purposes of this analysis, and to provide a reasonably conservative assessment, the analysis included an evaluation of the three loudest pieces of equipment expected to operate during a given construction phase, assuming simultaneous operation in roughly the same location on the project site. This approach ensures a conservative analysis. Consideration was also given to overlapping phases in the analysis. The FHWA noise source data used in the construction noise model include A-weighted Lmax noise levels, measured at 50 feet from the construction equipment, along with utilization factors for the equipment. The utilization factor is the percentage of time each piece of equipment is typically 12 Federal Highway Administration. 2006. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. FHWA-HEP-05-054. January. Available: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ENVIRonment/noise/construction_noise/rcnm/rcnm.pdf. Accessed: February 17, 2023. 13 Federal Transit Administration. 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, FTA Report No. 0123. September. Available: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed: February 17, 2023. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-2 May 2023 operated at full power over a specified time period. It is used to estimate Leq values from Lmax values. For example, the Leq value for a piece of equipment that operates at full power over 50 percent of the time is 3 dB less than the Lmax value.14 Modeled construction noise levels were compared to applicable construction noise standards for daytime hours. Specifically, for South San Francisco, construction noise generated between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday (8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturday or 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays) was analyzed to determine if all individual equipment proposed for use would result in a noise level below 90 dBA at 25 feet or if combined construction noise levels would be below 90 dBA Leq at the property plane. Daytime construction noise generated within 500 feet of a sensitive use in the city of San Bruno would be limited to 85 dBA Leq at a distance of 100 feet. However, because project construction would take place more than 500 feet from any sensitive uses in San Bruno, this threshold does not apply. Construction noise levels at the nearest residential land uses in San Bruno (1,700 feet from the project site) were modeled and compared to the existing ambient noise level to determine if a substantial temporary increase in noise would occur. Non-Daytime Hours Construction activities proposed for non-daytime hours would be those taking place outside of the specified daytime hours for construction identified in the City Municipal Code. As identified by the project sponsor, such activities would include concrete pours, crane work, drilling, and interior buildout work, all of which would take place inside the buildings during early-morning hours. For non-daytime construction activities, modeled estimates of combined construction noise levels were based on reference noise levels from the FHWA roadway construction noise model, the FTA general assessment construction noise analysis method, and information provided by the project sponsor. Combined construction noise levels for activities occurring outside of daytime hours were compared to the maximum permissible sound level for surrounding noise-sensitive land uses. The nearest sensitive land uses to the project in South San Francisco are the nearby hotel uses. During non-daytime hours, project construction noise must comply with the general local noise standards (included in Table 5-3) at the nearest sensitive land uses; the less stringent daytime construction-specific noise thresholds in South San Francisco would not apply. The City nighttime noise standard for transient lodging (mixed-use/commercial land uses, according to Table 5-3) is 55 dBA between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., unless the existing ambient noise level exceeds this criterion. According to the City Municipal Code, if measured ambient noise levels are higher than the standard, generated noise levels may exceed measured ambient noise levels by up to 5 dB. For purposes of the non-daytime construction noise analysis, the lowest 1-hour Leq noise levels at the nearest sensitive uses are used to establish non-daytime construction noise thresholds because measured ambient noise levels would exceed the aforementioned standards. The lowest measured noise nighttime noise level at the nearest hotel (Travelodge) was 63.3 dBA Leq. Non-daytime construction noise may be up to 5 dBA greater than this measured noise level at this land use, according to City Municipal Code standards. Therefore, non-daytime construction noise is evaluated to determine if combined equipment noise would be expected to exceed approximately 68 dBA at the Travelodge hotel. 14 Federal Highway Administration. 2008. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Software Version 1.1. December 8. Prepared by: U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Environmental Measurement and Modeling Division. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-3 May 2023 For nighttime and early-morning construction noise experienced by receptors in the city of San Bruno, because construction noise would take place more than 500 feet from the nearest sensitive uses, the nighttime (between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.) noise criterion of 60 dBA, as measured at 100 feet, does not apply. Noise levels at the nearest residence are presented and compared to the existing ambient noise level (based on project-specific noise measurements) to determine if a substantial temporary increase in noise would be expected to occur. Noise – Construction Haul Trucks The municipal codes of South San Francisco and San Bruno do not include specific thresholds pertaining to construction haul truck noise. Anticipated daily haul truck noise was assessed to determine if a 3 dB increase over modeled ambient traffic noise levels, which is considered to be “barely perceptible,” would occur as a result of hauling activity. Note that, in some cases, modeled traffic noise levels do not fully characterize the existing noise environment along a given roadway segment. For example, traffic noise from an adjacent larger-capacity roadway segments may dominate the overall noise environment in some areas. Therefore, along roadway segments where overall noise levels are influenced by traffic on other roadway segments, measured noise levels (when available) are also considered when evaluating potential haul truck noise impacts. Construction Vibration Building/Structure Damage The operation of heavy-duty construction equipment can generate localized ground-borne vibration at buildings adjacent to the construction areas. Ground-borne vibration rarely causes damage to normal buildings. However, a structure’s susceptibility to vibration-induced damage depends on its age, condition, distance from the vibration source, and the vibration level. Construction-related vibration resulting from the proposed project was analyzed using data and modeling methodologies provided by Caltrans’ Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual.15 This guidance manual provides typical vibration source levels for various types of construction equipment as well as methods for estimating the propagation of ground-borne vibration over distance. Table 6-1 provides the PPV levels of the most vibration-intensive construction equipment expected to be used for the proposed project at a reference distance of 25 feet. All of the analyzed equipment is classified as continuous/frequent intermittent vibration sources. Table 6-1. Construction Equipment Vibration Levels Equipment Item Reference PPV at 25 feet, in/seca Auger drill 0.089 Large bulldozerb 0.089 Small bulldozerc 0.003 Source: California Department of Transportation. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. April. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/ documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf. Accessed: February 13, 2023. a. Obtained from Caltrans 2020. b. Considered representative of other heavy earthmoving equipment such as excavators, graders, backhoes, etc. c. Considered representative of smaller equipment such as a small backhoe and front-end loader. 15 California Department of Transportation. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Final. CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01. April. Sacramento, CA. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-4 May 2023 The following equation from the guidance manual was used to estimate the change in PPV levels over distance: PPVrec = PPVref ×(25/D)n where PPVrec is the PPV at a receptor; PPVref is the reference PPV at 25 feet from the equipment; D is the distance from the equipment to the receiver, in feet; and n is a value related to the vibration attenuation rate through ground (the default recommended value for n is 1.5). This equation was used to estimate the PPV at each of the closest vibration-sensitive receivers, based on an estimated worst-case distance between sources and receivers. Annoyance/Sleep Disturbance Regarding the potential for annoyance-related vibration impacts to occur, residential and transient lodging land uses (e.g., hotels and motels) are considered most sensitive to vibration during nighttime hours when people generally sleep. For the purposes of this analysis, should strongly perceptible vibration levels, per the Caltrans guidelines for vibration annoyance potential (PPV of 0.1 in/sec), occur at nearby homes, hotels, or motels during nighttime hours, sleep disturbance could occur, and annoyance-related vibration impacts would be considered significant. Operational Noise Noise associated with project operations was evaluated for individual operational noise sources, as described below. Primary sources of operational noise associated with the project include heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment; emergency generators (during testing); loading docks; and operational traffic. Note that no planned events or large gatherings are proposed for the project courtyard, and there would be no amplified music or speech in this area. Therefore, noise from gatherings in the project courtyard was not evaluated in this analysis. Mechanical Equipment The evaluation of operational noise impacts associated with proposed on-site mechanical equipment was based on the available equipment information for the project, as provided by the project applicant. Noise at various distances from point sources (e.g., stationary operational equipment such as generators and heating and cooling equipment) was estimated using commonly accepted source noise data and a point-source attenuation of 6 dB per doubling of distance. Although final equipment numbers, makes, models, and locations have not been determined, an example case was modeled to estimate combined noise levels from project mechanical equipment. The potential for noise to exceed allowable levels was also evaluated. Regarding the applicable operational equipment noise threshold, according to City Municipal Code noise thresholds, mechanical equipment shall not result in noise levels at nearby residential-type uses (assumed to include hotel land uses) in excess of 60 dBA during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. or in excess of 55 dBA during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., unless the existing ambient noise level exceeds these criteria. According to the City Municipal Code, if measured ambient noise levels are higher than the standards, generated noise levels may exceed measured ambient noise levels by up to 5 dB. For purposes of the operational equipment Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-5 May 2023 analysis, the lowest 1-hour Leq at the nearest sensitive uses is used to establish operational equipment noise thresholds because measured ambient noise levels would exceed the aforementioned standards. To establish a conservative baseline noise level for the purposes of this analysis, the lowest recorded hourly Leq was used. The lowest measured noise nighttime noise level at the nearest land use (Travelodge) was 63.3 dBA Leq. The lowest measured noise nighttime noise level at the Best Western was 58.7 dBA Leq. Operational equipment noise may be up to 5 dBA greater than this measured noise level at these uses, according to City Municipal Code standards. Therefore, operational equipment noise was evaluated to determine if combined equipment noise would be expected to exceed approximately 68 dBA at the Travelodge or approximately 64 dBA at the Best Western. Estimated equipment noise levels at the nearest residences in San Bruno are also presented. Under applicable San Bruno thresholds, mechanical equipment must not result in a noise level of 10 dB above ambient at the nearest property plane of a sensitive use. The lowest measured hourly Leq noise level at the nearest residences in San Bruno was 54.9 dBA Leq; therefore, operational equipment noise at these residences was analyzed to determine if combined noise would exceed approximately 65 dBA Leq. Emergency Generator Testing The project would incorporate diesel generators, which would be used during power disruptions. Although use of the generators would be limited to primarily emergency circumstances, periodic testing would be required. The evaluation of noise from the testing of emergency generators was based on assumptions about the generation installations for the proposed project. Note that noise from the operation of generators during an emergency is considered exempt from local noise thresholds in South San Francisco. However, the testing of emergency generators is required to comply with applicable local noise limits for operational equipment. Note that emergency generators would not be tested during nighttime hours. Noise from emergency generator testing at various distances was estimated using site plans, equipment specification data, and equipment layout information provided by the project sponsor, along with the general point-source attenuation equation of 6 dB per doubling of distance. The City Municipal Code establishes daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise limits according to the receiving land use. These can be applied to noise generated by stationary equipment in South San Francisco (as presented in Table 5-3). According to the City Municipal Code, if measured ambient noise levels are higher than the standards, generated noise levels may exceed measured ambient noise levels by up to 5 dB. For purposes of the generator noise analysis, because generator testing would take place during daytime hours, generator noise would be limited to 5 dB above the 12-hour average daytime Leq at the nearest sensitive land uses. The nearest sensitive land use is the Travelodge, which had a measured daytime 12-hour Leq noise level of 68.8 dBA Leq(12); 5 dB above this noise level would be approximately 74 dBA Leq. Although the generators would not be located in San Bruno, and therefore not required to comply with noise limits for equipment in San Bruno, an analysis was done to determine if noise from the generators in South San Francisco would result in a substantial increase in noise levels at nearby Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-6 May 2023 homes in San Bruno. Noise from emergency generator testing experienced in San Bruno was evaluated to determine if a 20 dB increase over the daytime ambient noise level, consistent with San Bruno Municipal Code noise limits, would occur (because the noise would not last longer than 30 minutes in a given hour and because testing would not occur during nighttime hours). Loading Dock Noise The potential for loading dock noise to result in substantial noise increases in the project area was analyzed qualitatively to determine the potential for a substantial temporary increase in noise at nearby sensitive land uses; a quantitative analysis of loading noise would be necessary only if the development was a loading-intensive use, such as a distribution center. Operational Traffic Noise Traffic noise levels along nearby roadway segments resulting from project development were quantitatively modeled using traffic volumes and existing vehicle-mix assumptions (i.e., the proportion of automobiles, trucks, buses, and other vehicles) provided by the project traffic engineer (Fehr & Peers). Provided daily turn movements were converted into average daily traffic (ADT) volumes and posted speeds were determined using Google Street View. Traffic volumes were provided for Existing, Existing-with-Project, Future, and Future-with-Project conditions. Quantitative modeling of traffic noise from the project was conducted using a spreadsheet that was based on the FHWA Traffic Noise Model, version 2.5, for the following conditions:  Existing  Existing with Project  Future (2040)  Future (2040) with Project The spreadsheet calculates the traffic noise level at a fixed distance from the centerline of a roadway, according to the traffic volume, roadway speed, and vehicle mix predicted to occur under each condition. The evaluation of potential direct traffic noise impacts compared traffic noise modeling for the Existing condition to the Existing-with-Project traffic scenario; potential effects on existing noise-sensitive land uses along major project traffic access roadways were assessed. In addition, a comparison of Existing traffic noise to Future-with-Project traffic noise was conducted to determine if cumulative traffic noise impacts would occur. If cumulative traffic noise impacts were modeled to occur, the project contribution to these impacts was assessed by comparing traffic noise from the Future-No-Project scenario to the Future-with-Project scenario. In some cases, modeled traffic noise levels do not accurately characterize the existing noise environment along a given roadway segment; for example, traffic noise from an adjacent larger-capacity roadway segment may dominate the overall noise environment in some areas. Therefore, along roadway segments where overall noise levels are influenced by traffic on other roadway segments (e.g., U.S. 101), measured noise levels (when available) are also considered when evaluating potential traffic noise impacts. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-7 May 2023 Parking Garage Noise Noise sources in parking garages include moving vehicles, along with doors closing, cars starting, tires squealing, car alarms sounding, and other automotive noises occurring. Noise from the parking garage associated with the proposed project was evaluated qualitatively to determine if a substantial increase in noise at nearby sensitive uses would occur. 6.2 Thresholds of Significance In accordance with Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the proposed project would have a significant effect if it would result in any of the conditions listed below. a) Generate 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. b) Generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels. 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 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. The following thresholds were used to evaluate the significance of impacts, based on applicable regulations, ordinances, and policies. 6.2.1 Short-Term Construction Noise Criteria Daytime Construction Noise The City identifies criteria for daytime construction noise in Chapter 8.32 of its municipal code. Based on those requirements, for the purpose of this assessment, construction noise is considered significant, if it: • Occurs during the daytime allowable hours and exceeds the provisions of City Municipal Code Section 8.32.050(d) (i.e., any individual piece of equipment exceeding a noise level exceeding 90 dB at a distance of 25 feet or 90 dB at any point outside of the property plane); or • Occurs outside of daytime hours and causes ambient noise levels to exceed maximum permissible sound levels at nearby noise receptors (based on land use category of the receiving property, as identified in Table 5-3). In the city of San Bruno, daytime construction noise generated within 500 feet of a sensitive use is limited to 85 dBA Leq at a distance of 100 feet. Nighttime construction noise at that distance is limited to 60 dBA Leq. However, because project construction would take place more than 500 feet from residences, this threshold does not apply. Construction noise levels at the nearest residential land uses in San Bruno were modeled and compared to the existing ambient noise level to determine if a substantial temporary increase in noise would occur. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-8 May 2023 Non-Daytime (Night and Early-Morning) Construction Noise Because the nearest noise-sensitive land use to the project site is a hotel, construction noise outside of the standard daytime hours in South San Francisco must comply with the nighttime noise standard for transient lodging (mixed-use/commercial land uses, according to Table 5-3) of 55 dBA at the nearest hotel-type land use between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., unless the existing ambient noise level exceeds this criterion. According to the City Municipal Code, if measured ambient noise levels are higher than the standards, generated noise levels may exceed measured ambient noise levels by up to 5 dB. As described in the Methodology section, based on the lowest measured hourly noise level (63.3 dBA Leq) at the nearby sensitive land use, the Travelodge, non-daytime construction noise in South San Francisco was evaluated to determine if combined equipment noise would exceed approximately 68 dBA. The lowest measured noise nighttime noise level at the Best Western was 58.7 dBA Leq; therefore, non-daytime construction noise was also evaluated to determine if it would exceed approximately 64 dBA at the Best Western. Construction Haul Trucks The General Plan does not include specific thresholds pertaining to construction haul truck noise. Anticipated daily haul truck noise was assessed to determine if a 3 dB increase over ambient noise levels, which is considered to be “barely perceptible,” would occur as a result of hauling activity. 6.2.2 Long-Term Operational Noise Criteria Mechanical Equipment Noise City Municipal Code Section 8.32.030 outlines maximum permissible sound levels, as measured at specified land uses. As shown in Table 5-3, maximum permissible sound levels are determined by the land use category of the receiving property. As described in the Methodology section, because generated noise levels may exceed measured ambient noise levels by up to 5 dB if the applicable municipal code noise standard is already exceeded, operational noise was compared to a threshold of 68 dBA at the nearest hotel (Travelodge), based on the lowest hourly ambient noise measurement of approximately 64 dBA Leq at that location. Emergency Generator Noise For the reasons described above pertaining to noise from mechanical equipment, because all emergency generator testing would take place during daytime hours, emergency generator testing noise was compared to a threshold 5 dB greater than the daytime 12-hour Leq noise level of 68.8 dBA Leq(12) at the nearest sensitive use (the Travelodge). Because a 5 dB increase above this noise level would be approximately 74 dBA Leq, the threshold was applied to the assessment of emergency generator noise. Traffic Noise In general, an increase of 3 dBA in traffic noise is considered just noticeable, a change of 5 dBA in traffic noise is clearly noticeable, and a change of 10 dBA in traffic noise is perceived as a doubling of noise. This report applies the following thresholds of significance for direct traffic-related noise increases: Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-9 May 2023 • A project-generated increase of 5 dBA in traffic noise if the resulting traffic noise would remain below the satisfactory range at noise-sensitive receivers, as found in Table 5-4. • A 3 dBA or greater increase in traffic noise resulting from project implementation occurs when the future noise level is above the satisfactory range for a noise-sensitive land use. Regarding potential cumulative traffic noise impacts, a comparison of Existing traffic noise to Future-with-Project traffic noise was conducted to determine if a 3 dB or 5 dB increase (as described in the bullets above) would occur. In instances where cumulative traffic noise impacts were modeled to occur, the project contribution to these impacts was assessed by comparing traffic noise from the Future-No-Project scenario to the Future-with-Project scenario. Specifically, a cumulative impact and cumulatively considerable contribution related to traffic noise would be identified if:  A project-generated increase of more than 1 dB is attributable to the project where a cumulative traffic noise increase of 3 dBA or more occurs (and where cumulative traffic noise levels would be above the satisfactory range at a noise-sensitive land use).  A project-generated increase of more than 1 dB is attributable to the project where a cumulative traffic noise increase of 5 dBA or more occurs (and where cumulative traffic noise levels would remain within the satisfactory range at a noise-sensitive land use). 6.2.3 Ground-borne Vibration Criteria The previously cited Caltrans vibration criteria included in the Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual are routinely used to evaluate a variety of projects (not merely transit projects) proposed by local jurisdictions, as outlined below. That guidance is used in this analysis. • Generation of continuous/frequent intermittent construction-related ground-borne vibration levels that exceed the modern industrial/commercial building damage standard (PPV of 0.5 in/sec) at off-site commercial/industrial buildings or exceed the “older residential structure” damage criterion (PPV of 0.3 in/sec) at nearby older residential structures. • Generation of continuous/frequent intermittent construction-related ground-borne vibration levels that exceed the “strongly perceptible” level (PPV of 0.1 in/sec) at off-site sensitive receptors (e.g., residences, hotels/motels) during nighttime hours when people normally sleep. 6.3 Project Impacts 6.3.1 Noise Impacts Construction Noise Construction for the proposed project has the potential to generate noise that could exceed applicable noise thresholds at nearby sensitive uses. The proposed project would be constructed in eight phases (i.e., rough grading/site demolition, deep foundations, foundations, superstructure, building enclosure, interior buildout, sitework, startup/building commissioning/final inspections). Demolition and construction activities are anticipated to begin in 2023 and be completed by Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-10 May 2023 February 2027, lasting approximately 33 months. According to the project applicant, utility tie-ins are expected to occur in the street adjacent to the site, limiting the need for any off-site work. Therefore, most construction activities would be expected to occur on the project site. As a result, construction equipment would generally be operating no closer than 1,700 feet from the nearest single-family residences in San Bruno and 230 feet from the nearest hotel in South San Francisco (assuming equipment could operate anywhere on the project site). Estimated noise levels for individual construction equipment proposed for use with the project are shown in Table 6-2, based on the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model. Table 6-2. Noise from Equipment Proposed for Project Construction (Leq) Equipment Type Noise at 25 Feet (Leq) Drill rig 83 Crane 79 Excavator 83 Dozer 84 Scraper 86 Gradall 85 Concrete pump truck 80 Front-end loader/forklift 81 Welder 76 Man lift/scissor lift/glass manipulator 74 Noise levels are based on source noise levels from the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model. Source: Federal Highway Administration. 2006. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. FHWA-HEP-05-054. January. Available: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ENVIRonment/noise/construction_noise/rcnm/rcnm.pdf. Accessed: February 20, 2023. Daytime Construction Noise In South San Francisco, construction activities are allowed between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. weekdays, 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays, provided they meet one of two noise limitations. Construction is allowed during the daytime hours specified on the permit if noise from each individual piece of equipment is limited to 90 dB at a distance of 25 feet or if combined construction noise does not exceed 90 dB at any point outside of the property plane of the project. Table 6-2 demonstrates that noise levels for each individual piece of equipment proposed for the project would not exceed 90 dBA Leq at a distance of 25 feet. For that reason, construction that takes place during daytime hours, as defined by the City Municipal Code, would not conflict with the City’s construction noise regulations. Combined construction noise is also assessed. To provide a reasonable worst-case analysis of potential combined noise levels from project construction, it was assumed that the three loudest pieces of equipment from each phase of construction would be operating simultaneously and close to one another anywhere on the project site. This ensures a conservative analysis because many construction phases (e.g., deep foundations, foundations, superstructure, building enclosure, interior buildout) would most likely be limited to the project building footprint. A screening analysis was conducted to compare noise levels from the three loudest pieces of equipment used during each phase of construction to see which phase would produce the highest noise levels. These results are shown in Table 6-3. Of the eight phases, the rough grading/site Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-11 May 2023 demolition phase was determined to be the loudest. This phase would include the use of two scrapers and a gradall. Table 6-3. Combined Noise Levels for Each Construction Phase at 50 Feet Construction Phase Average Composite Hourly Noise Level (Leq) at 50 feet, dBA Rough grading/site demolition 84 Deep foundations 83 Foundations 83 Superstructure 83 Building enclosure 83 Interior buildout 82 Site work 81 Startup/building commissioning/final inspection 76 Source: Construction assumptions were provided by the project applicant. See Appendix A for modeling data. Modeling was conducted using data from: Federal Highway Administration. 2006. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. FHWA-HEP-05-054. January. Available: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ENVIRonment/ noise/construction_noise/rcnm/rcnm.pdf. Accessed: February 20, 2023. At a reference distance of 50 feet, the combined noise level of two scrapers and a gradall operating simultaneously and close to one another during rough grading and site demolition is estimated to be 84 dBA Leq. Table 6-4 identifies the anticipated worst-case combined noise levels from the operation of these three pieces of equipment at the closest nearby noise-sensitive land uses. The closest noise-sensitive land uses in South San Francisco are the Travelodge and Best Western hotels east of U.S. 101. The Travelodge is about 230 feet from the project site, and the Best Western is approximately 530 feet from the project site. At a distance of 230 feet (i.e., at the nearby Travelodge), the rough grading/site demolition construction phase could result in a combined noise level of approximately 71 dBA Leq. At the Best Western, located 530 feet from the project site, the noise level would be approximately 64 dBA Leq. The 12-hour average ambient daytime noise levels in the vicinity of these two hotels were measured to be 68.8 and 65.8 dBA Leq, as shown in Table 6-4. Combined construction noise levels are therefore anticipated to exceed the existing ambient noise level at the Travelodge by approximately 2 dB. In addition, modeled construction noise would be approximately 2 dB lower than the average ambient noise level during daytime hours at the Best Western. Noise effects would therefore not be considered substantial. Table 6-4. Weekday Daytime Construction Noise Levels at Nearby Land Uses for Rough Grading/Site Demolition Receiver (distance from project site, feet) Construction Phase Average Construction Noise Level (Leq), dBA Average Daytime Ambient Noise Level (Leq), dBAa Increase over Daytime Ambient (Leq), dBA Travelodge (230 feet) Rough Grading/Site Demolition 71 68.8b 2.2 Best Western (530 feet) 64 65.8c -1.8 Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-12 May 2023 Receiver (distance from project site, feet) Construction Phase Average Construction Noise Level (Leq), dBA Average Daytime Ambient Noise Level (Leq), dBAa Increase over Daytime Ambient (Leq), dBA Single-family residential (San Bruno, 1,700 feet) 54 74.1d -20.1 Source: Appendix A. a. Modeled noise levels for construction activities were compared to the average daytime ambient noise levels (12-hour Leq) measured between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. b. 12-hour Leq was calculated from LT-5 data. c. 12-hour Leq was calculated from LT-2 data. d. 12-hour Leq was calculated from LT-3 data. Note: Combined construction noise levels from overlapping phases were also estimated, with nearly identical results. Because modeled construction noise from overlapping phases was comparable to modeled construction noise from individual phases, this analysis focuses on construction noise from individual phases. Refer to Appendix A for modeling files for overlapping construction phases. Although modeling demonstrates that construction activities may result in a relatively small increase in noise over the daytime average ambient noise level (i.e., an estimated 2.2 dB increase at the Travelodge), the increase would be temporary, with construction lasting for 31 months, and intermittent. Construction activities would not occur at the perimeter of the project site closest to sensitive receptors. In addition, it would often occur at greater distances from noise-sensitive uses as work moves throughout the project site. In addition, the estimated increase in noise would be less than 3 dB, and a 3 dB change in noise is generally considered to be “barely perceptible.” Therefore, although there may be temporary increases in ambient noise levels as a result of construction activities during daytime hours, noise increases at sensitive uses in South San Francisco would be temporary and intermittent, and the increase in noise of less than 3 dB would not be considered substantial. In addition, construction noise in South San Francisco would comply with the applicable City Municipal Code threshold (i.e., no piece of equipment proposed for project construction would exceed the 90 dB threshold at 25 feet). The nearest residential land uses to the project site are the residences in San Bruno, which are located approximately 1,700 feet southwest of the project site. At that distance, noise from rough grading and site demolition on the project site was modeled to be 54 dBA Leq, without accounting for shielding (and the associated attenuation) from intervening buildings. The 12-hour average daytime ambient noise near these homes was approximately 74 dBA Leq. Therefore, ambient noise at the nearest residences was an estimated 20 dB higher than construction noise would be at these homes. When noise sources are more than 10 dB different from one another, the combined noise level is equal to the louder noise level. Therefore, construction noise from the project site, as experienced at the nearby residences in San Bruno, would not be considered substantial. Non-Daytime Construction Noise In addition to typical daytime construction activities, certain activities may occur during nighttime and early-morning hours. These would include concrete pours, crane and/or large equipment (e.g., drill) work (due to the typical high winds in South San Francisco), and interior building work. Regarding concrete pours, there would be an estimated five mat slab pours, starting between the hours of 12:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m., and 22 slab-on-metal-deck (SOMD) and slab-on-grade (SOG) Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-13 May 2023 pours, starting between the hours of 4:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. The applicant has stated that crane work, including drilling, may start as early as 5:00 a.m., with a total of 105 days of steel erection (crane work) and 40 days of drilling. In addition, once the proposed building is constructed and enclosed, interior work may start before 8:00 a.m. The nighttime and early-morning construction activities are discussed in more detail below. During non-daytime hours, project construction noise would not be compared to construction-specific daytime noise thresholds in the city; rather, it would need to comply with the general City Municipal Code noise standards (included in Table 5-3) for South San Francisco. The South San Francisco nighttime noise level standard for transient lodging (mixed-use/commercial land uses, according to Table 5-3) is 55 dBA between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., unless the existing ambient noise level exceeds this criterion. According to the City Municipal Code, if measured ambient noise levels are higher than the standards, generated noise levels may exceed measured ambient noise levels by up to 5 dB. For purposes of the non-daytime construction noise analysis, the lowest 1-hour Leq noise levels at the nearest sensitive uses are used to establish operational equipment noise thresholds because measured ambient noise levels would exceed the aforementioned standards. The lowest measured noise nighttime noise level at the nearest land use (Travelodge) was 63.3 dBA Leq. The lowest measured noise nighttime noise level at the Best Western was 58.7 dBA Leq. Non-daytime construction noise may be up to 5 dBA greater than the measured noise levels at these land uses, according to the City Municipal Code standards. Therefore, non-daytime construction noise was evaluated to determine if combined equipment noise would be expected to exceed approximately 68 dBA at the Travelodge or 64 dBA at the Best Western. Modeling was conducted for nighttime or early-morning concrete pours, crane work/steel erection, and drilling. It was conservatively assumed that concrete pours could occur anywhere on the project site and that drilling and crane work could occur anywhere within the footprint of proposed project buildings or structures. Therefore, concrete pours and crane/drill work could occur as close as 230 feet and 260 feet, respectively, from the nearby Travelodge. Concrete pours and crane/drill work could occur as close as 530 feet and 590 feet, respectively, from the Best Western. Modeling for early-morning and nighttime construction activities was conducted to estimate the combined noise level by activity at the nearby noise-sensitive land uses. Based on the construction equipment list provided by the project applicant, early-morning or nighttime crane work could require the use of two cranes at one time. Similarly, early-morning drilling activities could involve the use of two drills simultaneously. Finally, early-morning concrete pours could involve the use of two concrete pumps simultaneously and near one another on the project site. Limited interior work may be conducted once the building has been constructed. However, equipment for this work would be located inside the structure. Noise from this activity was not quantitatively evaluated because it would generate less noise than the other analyzed phases. Table 6-5 shows estimated noise levels for activities that may occur during nighttime or early-morning hours. As shown in this table, crane work (i.e., two cranes operating simultaneously) could result in an estimated noise level of approximately 62 dBA Leq at the nearby Travelodge. Drilling activities (i.e., two drill rigs operating simultaneously) could result in an estimated noise level of approximately 66 dBA Leq at the Travelodge. Concrete pours would result in an estimated noise level Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-14 May 2023 of 64 dBA Leq at this hotel. These noise levels are all below the established non-daytime construction noise threshold of 68 dBA for this location. Table 6-5. Non-Daytime Construction Noise Levels at Nearest Sensitive Land Uses Receiver Distance (feet) Non-Daytime Construction Activity Construction Noise Levels (Leq), dBA Leq Lowest Hourly Ambient Noise Level (Leq), dBA 1,2 Threshold Based on 5 dB Increase over Ambient1,2 Exceeds Threshold? Travelodge (South San Francisco) 230 (distance to project site) Concrete pours – mat slabs 64 63.3 68 No Concrete pours – SOMD/SOG 64 No 260 (distance to project building) Drilling 66 No Crane work 62 No Best Western (South San Francisco) 530 (distance to project site) Concrete pours – mat slabs 56 58.7 64 No Concrete pours – SOMD/SOG 56 No 590 (distance to project building) Drilling 59 No Crane work 55 No Residential (San Bruno) 1,700 Concrete pours – mat slabs 46 54.9 60 No Concrete pours – SOMG/SOG 46 No 1,700 Drilling 49 No Crane work 45 No Source: Appendix A. The lowest ambient noise level is conservatively used to establish a baseline noise level. In the city of South San Francisco, if existing noise exceeds the applicable noise threshold, a 5 dB increase in noise over the existing noise level is allowed. a. The noise threshold for construction noise at the Travelodge was based on the lowest hourly Leq from LT-5. b. The noise threshold for construction noise at residential land uses in San Bruno was based on the lowest hourly Leq from LT-3, even though these land uses are outside of South San Francisco. The thresholds for South San Francisco are more stringent and therefore more protective of these uses during non-daytime hours. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-15 May 2023 At the Best Western, crane work could result in an estimated noise level of approximately 55 dBA Leq, drilling activities could result in an estimated noise level of approximately 59 dBA Leq, and concrete pours could result in an estimated noise level of 56 dBA Leq. These noise levels are all below the established non-daytime construction noise threshold of 64 dBA for this location. Regarding the nearest homes (located approximately 1,700 feet from the project site in the city of San Bruno), estimated noise levels from crane work would be 45 dBA Leq, drilling work would be 49 dBA Leq, and concrete pours would be 46 dBA Leq at this location, as shown in Table 6-5. The lowest hourly ambient noise level near these residences was measured to be 54.9 dBA Leq. In addition, numerous intervening buildings are located between the project site (where construction would occur) and these homes, reducing the level of construction noise audible at the residences. Because modeled noise from construction activities was below the measured existing noise level, and because construction noise would be further reduced by intervening buildings, construction noise impacts at the nearest residences in San Bruno would not be considered substantial. As demonstrated in this analysis, noise from limited early-morning and nighttime construction would not be expected to exceed the applicable thresholds. Construction Traffic Noise Demolition and construction activities would require the use of haul trucks to remove debris and excavated materials. Based on available information, excavation for the mat slab may require up to 2,500 cubic yards of material to be removed per day, which would result in a peak of 550 one-way truck trips on a worst-case day. No other site deliveries (vendor drop-offs) would occur while hauling activities take place; therefore, the maximum number of daily truck trips during project construction would be 550 one-way trips. Neither the municipal code nor the General Plan includes specific thresholds pertaining to construction haul truck noise. Therefore, anticipated worst-case daily haul truck noise was assessed to determine if a 3 dB increase over ambient noise levels, which is considered to be “barely perceptible,” would occur. The project applicant identified two northbound and two southbound haul routes, depending on which end of the project site trucks are accessing. Trucks would exit the site from the north side of the project site via Terminal Court. At Produce Avenue, trucks would turn right to access southbound U.S. 101 or turn left and follow Produce Drive north before turning right onto South Airport Boulevard. Trucks would follow on South Airport Boulevard as it continues south, then make one more right turn before accessing the U.S. 101 northbound ramp. Haul trucks leaving the south end of the project site would use the proposed project driveway to access Shaw Road and San Mateo Avenue west of the project site. Trucks would travel north until the point where San Mateo Avenue intersects Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard. To access southbound U.S. 101, haul trucks would turn right on Produce Avenue and continue to the entrance ramp. Trucks headed northbound would turn left at San Mateo Avenue onto Airport Boulevard and access the northbound U.S. 101 ramp near Grand Avenue. Trucks would use these same routes to return to the project site. Daily turn movements and vehicle mix percentages provided by Fehr & Peers were used to model existing traffic noise along the haul truck routes. In addition, traffic noise modeling was completed for an Existing-plus-Haul-Truck condition by adding the worst-case daily haul truck volumes to the Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-16 May 2023 existing daily traffic volumes along roadway segments where hauling would occur. This would be a worst-case Existing-plus-Haul-Truck condition because it would be based on the worst-case daily haul truck volumes. Traffic noise modeling for the Existing scenario and Existing-plus-Haul-Truck scenario was conducted using a spreadsheet that was based on the FHWA Traffic Noise Model, version 2.5. Modeled noise levels were then compared to determine if a project-related haul truck noise impact would occur. Table 6-6 shows the modeled traffic noise levels under both conditions for roadway segments where hauling would occur. Although project haul trucks were modeled to result in a traffic noise increase of more than 3 dB along some roadway segments (with the largest modeled increase being 14.2 dB over existing conditions), the measured CNEL noise level along these roadway segments is also considered. As an example, along the roadway segment where a 14.2 dB increase was modeled to occur (i.e., Terminal Court west of the Produce Avenue/U.S. 101 southbound on-ramp), resulting in an Existing-plus-Haul-Truck noise level of 67.4 dBA CNEL, the measured noise level was 75.2 dBA CNEL.16 Therefore, measured noise levels were actually greater than the modeled Existing-plus-Haul-Truck noise level. Existing ambient noise levels along this segment are such that the addition of haul trucks would not result in a meaningful increase in the overall ambient noise level. As shown in Table 6-6, measured noise levels along all roadway segments where a haul-truck-related noise increase of 3 dB or more was modeled to occur actually exceed modeled Existing-plus-Haul-Truck noise levels. As a result, existing ambient noise levels from other sources (e.g., U.S. 101 noise) would mask any haul-truck-related noise increase along these roadway segments. In addition, most of the roadways where hauling would occur are surrounded by commercial and industrial land uses, which are not considered to be noise sensitive. For example, San Mateo Avenue (where a 5 dB increase was modeled to occur from haul trucks north of South Linden Avenue) is lined with various commercial and industrial land uses. Ambient noise along this corridor was measured to be 77.4 dBA CNEL.17 In addition, there are hotel land uses along some haul route segments; however, because measured ambient noise was greater than the modeled Existing-plus-Haul-Truck noise level along roadway segments where a 3 dB increase (or greater) was modeled to occur, actual noise increases from haul trucks would be less than significant at these locations. In conclusion, although Existing-plus-Haul-Truck noise levels were modeled to exceed Existing traffic noise levels by 3 dB or more along several roadway segments, all of these segments have measured noise levels greater than the modeled Existing-plus-Haul-Truck noise levels. Actual noise from haul truck activity would not result in a substantial increase over the existing ambient noise level, and noise impacts from project haul truck activity would not be considered substantial. 16 LT-4 (75.2 dBA CNEL). 17 Compared to LT-1 (77.4 dBA CNEL). Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-17 May 2023 Table 6-6. Haul Truck Traffic Noise Analysis Roadway Segment dB CNEL, at 50 feet Modeled Delta dB Measured Noise if 3 dB Increase Modeled Modeled Existing- plus-Haul-Truck Noise Level Exceeds Measured? Significant Impact? Existing Noise Levels Existing-plus-Haul-Truck Noise Levels Airport Boulevard North of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 65.4 68.1 2.7 N/A No No Produce Avenue North of Terminal Court 68.2 70.2 2 N/A No No Produce Avenue North of U.S. 101 SB Off-Ramp 67.6 68.4 0.8 N/A No No Produce Avenue South of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 66.5 68.4 1.8 N/A No No Produce Avenue South of U.S. 101 SB Off-Ramp 68.2 70.2 2 N/A No No San Mateo Avenue North of South Linden Avenue 65.3 70.4 5.1 77.4e No No San Mateo Avenue North of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 65.6 66.8 1.2 N/A No No San Mateo Avenue South of South Linden Avenue 65.7 65.2 -0.4 N/A No No San Mateo Avenue West of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 64.3 67.8 3.6 77.4a No No Shaw Road East of San Mateo Avenue 57.1 59.6 2.6 N/A No No South Airport Boulevard East of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 67 69.3 2.3 N/A No No South Airport Boulevard North of U.S. 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane 67.8 71.4 3.6 73.5d No No South Airport Boulevard South of South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue 68.8 68.3 -0.5 N/A No No South Airport Boulevard West of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 67.9 69.3 1.4 N/A No No Terminal Court West of Produce Avenue/U.S. 101 SB On-Ramp 53.23 67.4 14.2 75.2c No No U.S. 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp West of South Airport Boulevard 67.1 68.4 1.2 N/A No No U.S. 101 SB Off-Ramp East of Produce Avenue 65.7 71.8 6.1 75.2b No No U.S. 101 SB On-Ramp South of Terminal Court 73.3 74.7 1.4 N/A No No Notes: a. Measured ambient noise level near this segment is 9.6 dB higher than modeled Existing Plus Haul Truck results (LT-1, 77.4 dBA CNEL). b. Measured ambient noise level near this segment is 3.4 dB higher than modeled Existing Plus Haul Truck results (LT-4, 75.2 dBA CNEL). c. Measured ambient noise level near this segment is 7.8 dB higher than modeled Existing Plus Haul Truck results (LT-4, 75.2 dBA CNEL). d. Measured ambient noise level near this segment is 2.1 dB higher than modeled Existing Plus Haul Truck results (LT-5, 73.5 dBA CNEL). e. Measured ambient noise level near this segment is 7.0 dB higher than modeled Existing Plus Haul Truck results (LT-1, 77.4 dBA CNEL). Bold formatting denotes modeled 3 dB or greater increase attributable to project haul trucks NB = northbound; SB = southbound Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-19 May 2023 Summary of Construction Noise Impact Conclusions Based on the construction noise modeling results, estimated noise levels for both daytime and non-daytime (i.e., early-morning and nighttime) construction activities would be below the applicable significance thresholds. In addition, construction haul truck noise impacts would not be expected to result in a 3 dB increase in noise along evaluated roadway segments. Therefore, construction noise impacts for daytime and non-daytime hours on sensitive uses in South San Francisco would not be considered substantial. Project Operation Stationary Noise Sources Mechanical Equipment Noise Although general information regarding the project heating, cooling, and ventilation equipment, as well as other operational mechanical equipment for the project, is available, final equipment makes and models have not been selected. In addition, the proposed locations for project equipment are also not final. However, it is known that project mechanical equipment would include multiple air handling units, air-source heat pumps, make-up air units, chillers, split-system air-conditioners, direct outside air systems, cooling towers, electric water boilers, pumps, and fans. In general, air handling units, standard heating and cooling package units, and split-system air-conditioners can produce sound levels in the range of about 70 to 75 dBA at 50 feet, depending on the size of the unit.18 With regard to cooling towers, a typical 100-horsepower propeller-driven cooling tower generates a noise level of approximately 74 dBA at 50 feet. Depending on cooling capacity, a chiller generates a sound power level of 97 to 103 dBA, which equates to a noise level of 65 to 71 dBA at 50 feet.19 A typical boiler generates a sound power level in the range of 96 to 99 dBA,20 which equates to a noise level of 64 to 67 dBA at 50 feet. Pumps generate noise levels at 50 feet of approximately 81 dBA, and exhaust/ventilation fans generate noise levels at 50 feet of approximately 79 dBA.21 Although exact numbers, makes, models, sizes, and locations for the proposed mechanical equipment are not known at this time, an example case of combined noise levels was modeled, based on the equipment information available at that time. The analysis evaluated combined noise from a select number of units that could be installed under the project and conservatively assumed that all modeled pieces of equipment in each building would be located relatively close to one another. Although more equipment than evaluated could be installed under the project, overall noise levels would be generally dominated by the closest and loudest equipment. In addition, equipment located farther from the edge of the project roof would be somewhat blocked by equipment located closer to the equipment roof, resulting in noise attenuation. Finally, the edge of the roof itself would also reduce equipment noise experienced by noise-sensitive uses 18 Hoover and Keith. 2000. Noise Control for Buildings, Manufacturing Plants, Equipment, and Products. Houston, TX. 19 Ibid. 20 Ibid. 21 Federal Highway Administration. 2006. Roadway Construction Noise Model User Guide. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-20 May 2023 located closer to the ground level of the 114-foot-tall project building. As a result, the example analysis provides a reasonable estimate of combined noise levels from project equipment experienced at the nearest sensitive use. According to the project applicant, chillers and pumps would be located inside buildings. As a result, and because walls would somewhat reduce noise, an estimated 10 dB reduction in noise levels is assumed in the model for these types of equipment. In addition, all rooftop equipment would be located behind a solid screen. As a result, a noise reduction of approximately 5 dB was assumed for equipment located behind a mechanical screen in the model. As described in the Methodology section, operational equipment noise was evaluated to determine if combined equipment noise would be expected to exceed approximately 68 dBA at the Travelodge or approximately 64 dBA at the Best Western, based on a 5 dB allowable increase over the lowest recorded hourly ambient noise level. Equipment noise experienced at the residences in San Bruno was evaluated to determine if it would exceed approximately 65 dBA Leq, which would constitute a 10 dB increase over the lowest recorded hourly ambient noise level at that location. Note that using the lowest recorded hourly noise level (which occurred during nighttime hours) to establish the operational equipment threshold is conservative because more of the equipment would be operating during daytime hours (i.e., air-conditioning equipment) than during nighttime hours. In addition, the project buildings would be six stories tall and an estimated 114 feet in height. The Travelodge is one or two stories and an estimated 15 to 30 feet in height. Therefore, the edge of the project roof would block the line of sight between most mechanical equipment and this nearby hotel. Combined noise levels from two boilers, two chillers (in an equipment room), two cooling towers, four pumps (in an equipment room), two air handlers or direct outside air system (DOAS) units, and two exhaust fans would result in an estimated noise level of 81.5 dBA Leq at a standard distance of 50 feet. At the nearby Travelodge, located approximately 290 feet from the project building, without accounting for the height difference between the rooftop equipment and this hotel, noise would be approximately 66.3 dBA Leq. At the Best Western, located approximately 590 feet from the project building, the estimated combined equipment noise would be reduced to 60.1 dBA Leq from the example case described above. Refer to Table 6-7 for a summary of equipment noise modeling for this example case. For the reasons described above, and based on the modeling results shown in Table 6-7, it is unlikely that combined mechanical equipment noise would result in a 5 dB increase over the existing ambient noise level at the nearby land uses. Specifically, modeled noise levels would not exceed the established 68 dBA Leq standard at the Travelodge or the 64 dBA Leq standard at the Best Western (based on a 5 dB allowable increase over the lowest recorded hourly ambient noise level). Regarding noise impacts on residences in San Bruno, which are 1,700 feet southwest of the project site, noise from the example case above would be reduced to approximately 50.9 dBA Leq. It would be reduced further by the edge of the roof upon which the equipment would be located and the presence of intervening buildings between the project site and the residences. In addition, this noise level would be well below the conservatively established 65 dBA noise limit at for location (based on the lowest hourly Leq recorded). For these reasons, noise from project mechanical equipment would not be expected to result in noise in excess of thresholds at the residential land uses located 1,700 feet from the project site in the city of San Bruno. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-21 May 2023 Table 6-7. Example Combined Mechanical Equipment Noise Type of Equipment dBA Leq Noise at 50 Feet (assuming 100% utilization) Number of Pieces of Equipment Assumed Combined Noise Level Attenuated Noisea Source for Estimated Equipment Noise Boiler 67 2 70 65 H&K Chiller 71 5 78 68 H&K Cooling tower 74 3 79 74 H&K Pump 81 4 87 77 FHWA Air handling unit 75 2 78 73 H&K Exhaust fan 79 5 86 81 FHWA Combined Equipment Noise at 50 feet 81.5 Combined Equipment Noise at 290 feet (Travelodge) 66.3 Combined Equipment Noise at 590 feet (Best Western) 60.1 Combined Equipment Noise at 1,700 feet (San Bruno Residences) 50.9 Source: Hoover and Keith, 2000; FHWA 2006. a. Assumes 10 dB of attenuation if equipment is located internal to the building and 5 dB of reduction if equipment is located behind a solid screen. H&K = Hoover and Keith Although modeled estimated equipment noise levels would be below the applicable thresholds at nearby sensitive uses, final equipment has not yet been selected. Therefore, actual mechanical equipment noise levels could differ from the levels cited above. However, compliance with General Plan policies and actions would ensure that noise from rooftop mechanical equipment would be reduced such that compliance with applicable thresholds would occur. Specifically, Action NOI-1.1.5 from the General Plan requires all new developments that are considered to be noise generators to control noise at the source through site designs, building designs, and other techniques. Although the City Municipal Code noise standards still reflect previous land use designation terminology, these standards are applied to comparable land uses under the current General Plan, according to the City. Therefore, project mechanical equipment compliance with the noise standards in Table 8.32.030 from the current City Municipal Code (or comparable, once the Action NOI 1.2.1, Update Municipal Code, section related to the noise ordinance is implemented) would be demonstrated prior to the issuance of building permits once the final makes, models, sizes, and locations of all mechanical equipment for the project have been determined. For these reasons, noise impacts from project mechanical equipment would not be considered substantial. Emergency Generator Noise Emergency generators included in the project could result in the generation of audible noise during testing. Generator testing for the project would be conducted on a monthly basis for 30 minutes. Noise from the operation of emergency generators during an emergency is typically exempt from local ordinances. However, even though the testing of emergency generators is a short-term (e.g., less than 1 hour) and intermittent process (usually once or twice per month), noise resulting from generator testing must comply with local noise limits for operational equipment noise. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-22 May 2023 The project applicant has specified that the project would involve the installation of three emergency generators, including one 2,500-kilowatt (kW) generator and two 1,500 kW generators. All three generators would be located indoors, at grade, in separate generator rooms. Two 1,500 kW generators would be located in the south building, while the 2,500 kW generator would be located in the north building. All three generators would be located indoors, at grade, in generator rooms. Although the final makes and models of the generators have not been selected, generator specification data for similar generators were provided by the project applicant and can be used to estimate generator noise. Based on example generator specification data, a 2,500 kW generator (Cummins DQKAN)22 could produce an unattenuated noise level of 101.9 dBA at 50 feet, including both engine and exhaust noise, and a 1,500 kW generator (Cummins DQGAB)23 could produce unattenuated noise levels of 103.8 dBA at 50 feet (also including both engine and exhaust noise). The City Municipal Code establishes daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise limits, based on the receiving land use, which can be applied to stationary equipment noise generated in the city (as presented in Table 5-3). As described in the Methodology section, if measured ambient noise levels are higher than the standards, generated noise levels may exceed measured ambient noise levels by up to 5 dB. For purposes of the generator noise analysis, and because generator testing would take place during daytime hours, generator noise would be limited to 5 dB above the 12-hour average daytime Leq at the nearest sensitive land uses. The nearest sensitive land use is the Travelodge hotel, which had a measured daytime 12-hour Leq noise level of 68.8 dBA; 5 dB above this noise level would be approximately 74 dBA Leq. Note that specific details about generator shielding and attenuation features for project generators are not known with certainty at this time, although it is expected that the generators would be located indoors. This could reduce some noise from generator engines but would be unlikely to reduce noise from exhaust, which is typically piped out of a building/generator enclosure. Such noise usually dominates overall generator noise levels. Note that to result in meaningful attenuation from shielding, all walls must be solid, with no gaps or open louvers. Although it is expected that the generator rooms would result in some noise reduction, the precise noise reduction cannot be estimated at this time. Because the type and sound rating of future shielding or exhaust mufflers is unknown, this analysis is conservatively based on unattenuated generator noise levels. The nearest sensitive land use to both generator locations is the Travelodge, which is located on the east side of U.S. 101. This hotel is approximately 310 feet from the proposed north building generator room and approximately 420 feet from the south building generator room. At these distances, unattenuated noise from the testing of the north and south generators is estimated to be 94.0 dBA and 94.6 dBA, respectively, assuming one generator is tested at a time. In both cases, unattenuated generator noise levels are estimated to exceed City noise level standard of 5 dB over the ambient noise level of 68.8 dBA, or approximately 74 dBA Leq. 22 Cummins, Inc. 2017a. Cummins Power Generation. Sound Data, 2,500 DQKAN. August. Provided by the project sponsor and included in Appendix A. 23 Cummins, Inc. 2017b. Cummins Power Generation. Sound Data, 1,500 DQGAB. August. Provided by the project sponsor and included in Appendix A. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-23 May 2023 Regarding noise effects on residential land uses, San Bruno noise standards allow for a 20 dB increase over ambient conditions during daytime hours for noise that occurs for no more than 30 minutes in an hour. Although generator testing would not take place in San Bruno, and therefore would not be required to comply with the San Bruno Municipal Code noise limits, generator noise experienced at the nearest sensitive uses in San Bruno was evaluated to determine if substantial noise increases would occur. As described in the Methodology section, generator noise was evaluated to determine if a 20 dB increase in ambient noise would occur at residences in San Bruno, based on the noise guidance in that jurisdiction. The average ambient daytime (12-hour) noise level measured during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) near the homes was 74.1 dBA Leq. Therefore, if generator testing noise were to exceed 94.1 dBA at these homes, impacts would be considered significant. The closest generators to these residential land uses would be the two 1,500 kW generators in the south building generator room, which would be approximately 1,970 feet away from the nearest homes. At that distance, generator testing noise associated with the proposed 1,500 kW generators is estimated to be 87.9 dBA Leq. The north building generators would be approximately 2,240 feet from these homes. At that distance, unattenuated noise from a 2,500 kW generator is estimated to be 85.4 dBA. These noise levels do not account for attenuation from intervening buildings, which would further reduce noise. Because estimated noise levels from generator testing would be below the allowable limits at the residences in San Bruno, generator noise in San Bruno would not be considered substantial. Although modeled estimated equipment noise levels from temporary and intermittent generator testing could exceed the applicable thresholds, no attenuation is accounted for in this model. Attenuation measures would be evaluated and included in the generator design prior to installation in order to comply with applicable General Plan policies and actions. Compliance with General Plan policies and actions would ensure that noise from generator testing would be reduced to less-than-significant levels for the project. Specifically, Action NOI-1.1.5 from the General Plan requires all new developments that are considered to be noise generators to control noise at the source through site designs, building designs, and other techniques. Although City Municipal Code noise standards still reflect previous land use designation terminology, the standards are applied to the comparable land uses under the current General Plan, according to the City. Therefore, project emergency generator compliance with the noise standards in Table 8.32.030 from the current City Municipal Code (or comparable, once the Action NOI 1.2.1, Update Municipal Code, section related to the noise ordinance is implemented) would be demonstrated prior to the issuance of building permits once the final makes, models, sizes, and locations of project emergency generators have been determined. For these reasons, noise effects from project mechanical equipment on nearby sensitive uses would not be considered substantial. Loading Dock Noise Two loading dock areas are proposed for the project, one at each end of the project site. It is anticipated that these would be used for waste collection, including typical trash, paper recycling, compacted container recycling, and compost. On a worst-case day, approximately six trucks would visit the two loading docks on the site. The nearest sensitive land use to both the northern and southern loading docks would be the Travelodge. This hotel could be as close as 290 feet from the north loading dock and approximately 300 feet from the south loading dock. Although there would be direct line of sight between the north loading dock and the Travelodge, the temporary loading and unloading activities associated with the project would typically be short term and intermittent throughout the day (with a maximum of six trucks expected on a given day), occurring only during daytime hours when people are less sensitive to noise. In addition, loading and unloading activities Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-24 May 2023 already occur at the existing commercial and industrial uses on the site; therefore, project implementation would not result in an increase in this type of activity at the site. Furthermore, U.S. 101, which generates high levels of traffic noise, is located between the project loading docks and the nearby hotels. For these reasons, impacts from temporary and short-term increases in noise from project loading activity would not be considered substantial. Operational Traffic Noise – Direct Impact Evaluation Once operational, the project would result in an increase in traffic in the vicinity of the project site. Project-specific traffic data, including daily turning movements and existing vehicle-mix assumptions (i.e., the proportion of automobiles, trucks, buses, and other vehicles) were provided by the project traffic engineer (Fehr & Peers). Posted speeds were determined using Google Street View. Daily turning movements were converted to ADT volumes for Existing, Existing-with-Project, Future, and Future-with-Project conditions (noting the future scenarios are evaluated separately below). To evaluate direct traffic noise impacts associated with the project, modeling was conducted for Existing and Existing-with-Project conditions to estimate traffic noise increases resulting from project implementation along roadway segments in the project vicinity. When assessing traffic noise impacts, the following thresholds are applied to determine the significance of project-related traffic noise increases: 1. An increase of more than 5 dBA is considered a significant traffic noise increase, regardless of the modeled existing noise level, and 2. In places where the existing or resulting noise environment exceeds the land use compatibility standards and/or allowable noise level for the adjacent land uses (e.g., existing or existing-plus-project noise levels are greater than 65 dBA for sensitive land uses), any noise increase greater than 3 dBA is considered a significant traffic noise increase. The General Plan Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix (Table 5-5, above) outlines acceptable CNEL noise levels for various land uses in the city. Prior to completing the quantitative traffic noise modeling, an initial screening analysis was conducted to determine which roadway segments would have a 10 percent increase in vehicle traffic resulting from project implementation. A 10 percent increase in traffic volumes would typically result in a 0.4 dB increase in traffic noise, which is much smaller than the 3 and 5 dB increase thresholds mentioned above. Therefore, these roadways need not be quantitatively modeled to confirm a 3 dB or greater increase would not occur. Traffic noise modeling along segments with at least a 10 percent increase in volumes attributable to the project was conducted using a spreadsheet that was based on the FHWA Traffic Noise Model, version 2.5, as described in the Methodology subsection of this report. Traffic noise was evaluated in terms of how project-related traffic noise increases could affect existing noise-sensitive land uses in the project area (refer to Table 6-8). Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-25 May 2023 Table 6-8. Modeled Traffic Noise Levels Roadway Segment Location Modeled Existing Conditions (dBA CNEL) Modeled Existing Plus Project Conditions (dBA CNEL) Change (dB) Potential Impact (3 dB Increase) Airport Boulevard North of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 65.4 66.4 1.1 No Project Driveway a North of Shaw Road DNEa 52.6 N/A N/A San Mateo Avenue North of South Linden Avenue 65.3 66.3 1 No San Mateo Avenue North of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 65.6 66.2 0.6 No San Mateo Avenue South of South Linden Avenue 65.7 66.2 0.6 No San Mateo Avenue South of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 64.2 65 0.9 No San Mateo Avenue West of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 64.3 65.3 1.1 No South Airport Boulevard North of U.S. 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane 67.8 68.4 0.6 No South Linden Avenue West of San Mateo Avenue 62.4 63.9 1.5 No Terminal Court West of Produce Avenue/U.S. 101 SB On-Ramp 53.2 60.4 7.2 Yes Refer to Appendix A for the complete traffic noise modeling results. Note: Modeled noise levels at a fixed distance of 50 feet from the roadway centerline DNE = does not exist; NB = northbound; SB = southbound Bold formatting denotes potentially significant impact a. The project driveway does not currently exist. Note that adjacent land uses along this segment are not considered to be noise sensitive (i.e., adjacent uses are commercial and industrial). b. Existing conditions traffic data were not available for this roadway segment. According to the project traffic engineer (Fehr and Peers), existing conditions for Shaw Road east of San Mateo Avenue can be substituted in for this segment. NB = northbound; SB = southbound Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-26 May 2023 One of the modeled roadway segments, Project Driveway north of Shaw Road, does not currently exist, and modeled with-project traffic noise cannot be compared to existing noise conditions. However, it should be noted that all surrounding land uses along this segment are commercial and industrial, which are not considered to be noise sensitive. Therefore, although project-related increases along this segment cannot be quantified, traffic noise impacts along this segment would not be considered significant. The only roadway segment with a modeled potentially significant 3 dB or greater increase in traffic noise is Terminal Court west of the Produce Avenue/U.S. 101 southbound on-ramp. As noted above under Methodology, it is important to take into considered measured existing noise levels in certain areas (e.g., in areas where the roadway segment evaluated is not the dominating noise source in the area) in conjunction with modeled traffic volumes. The modeling approach assumes that each roadway is isolated and not affected by surrounding roads; however, certain roadway segments may be influenced by traffic noise from adjacent roads and other noise sources. To add more contextualization to the traffic noise analysis, the modeled noise levels can be supplemented with measured noise levels where ambient noise measurements are available. The Existing-plus-Project traffic noise level for the segment where a potentially significant impact was identified during modeling was compared to the measured ambient noise level along Terminal Court west of the Produce Avenue/U.S. 101 southbound on-ramp. As shown in Table 6-8, the modeled Existing traffic noise level on Terminal Court west of the Produce Avenue/U.S. 101 southbound on-ramp is 53.2 dBA CNEL, and the modeled Existing-plus-Project traffic noise level along this segment is 60.4 dBA CNEL. However, ambient noise near this roadway was measured to be 75.2 dBA CNEL. Therefore, measured existing noise levels along this segment are already almost 15 dBA higher than the modeled Existing-plus-Project traffic noise level as a result of the nearby U.S. 101 freeway. Refer to Table 6-9 for a comparison of the modeled and measured noise levels along the potentially affected roadway segment identified above. As shown in Table 6-9, measured ambient noise along this segment is substantially greater than the modeled existing and Existing-plus-Project traffic noise levels because of the proximity of this roadway segment to U.S. 101. When adding decibels, if the difference between two noise sources is 10 dBA or more, the higher noise source will dominate and the resultant noise level will be equal to the noise level of the higher noise source. Therefore, because measured existing ambient noise levels are 15 dB higher than modeled Existing-plus-Project noise levels, the project-related traffic increase would not result in a perceptible increase in noise along this roadway segment. The project-related traffic noise impact along this segment, and along all other evaluated segments (as discussed above and shown in Table 6-8), would not be considered substantial. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-27 May 2023 Table 6-9. Detailed Traffic Noise Evaluation for Potentially Affected Segment Roadway Segment Location Modeled Existing Conditions (dBA CNEL) Modeled Existing-plus-Project Conditions (dBA CNEL) Increase in Modeled Conditions (dB) Measured Noise Level (dBA CNEL) Nearest Most-Sensitive Land Use Increase over Measured Ambient Noise (dB) Terminal Court West of Produce Avenue/ U.S. 101 SB On-Ramp 53.2 60.4 7.2 75.2a Commercial -14.8 Refer to Appendix A for the complete traffic noise modeling results, including modeling results for the Cumulative-No-Project and Cumulative-plus-Project condition (which are not used in this analysis). Note: Modeled noise levels at a fixed distance of 50 feet from the roadway centerline. a. Measured ambient noise level were used from LT-4 (75.2 dBA CNEL). SB = southbound Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-28 May 2023 Operational Traffic Noise – Cumulative Impact Evaluation To evaluate potential cumulative traffic noise impacts in the project area, traffic volumes from the Existing scenario were compared to the Future-with-Project scenario. A cumulative traffic noise impact is anticipated along a given roadway segment if a 3 dB increase in noise would occur in areas where existing and resulting noise levels are above the applicable land use compatibility standard or if a 5 dB increase in noise would occur in areas where existing and resulting noise levels are below the applicable land use compatibility standard. To provide a conservative assessment, the initial screening analysis evaluated for a 3 dB increase along all segments. If a cumulative impact was identified, then the proposed project’s contribution to that impact must be assessed to determine if it would contribute 1 dB to the overall increase. If it would contribute 1 dB or more to the overall increase, the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact would be considered cumulatively considerable. Traffic noise modeling was conducted using a spreadsheet that was based on the FHWA Traffic Noise Model, version 2.5, as described in the Methodology subsection of this report. Modeling results are included in Appendix A for all roadway segments where at least a 10 percent increase in traffic volumes (or 0.4 dB increase in noise) would occur from Existing to Future-with-Project conditions. Table 6-10 shows all roadway segments where an at least 3 dB increase from Existing to Future-with-Project conditions was modeled to occur. As shown in Table 6-10, a potential cumulative traffic noise impact (i.e., 3 dB increase or greater from Existing to Future-with-Project conditions) would occur along nine of the evaluated roadway segments. However, when comparing Future-No-Project and Future-with-Project conditions, the greatest project-related increase is 0.1 dB. Therefore, project-related increases to cumulative traffic noise impacts would be below 1 dB. As a result, although cumulative traffic noise impacts may exist along evaluated roadway segments, the project contribution to cumulative traffic noise impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-29 May 2023 Table 6-10. Cumulative Traffic Noise Evaluation for Potentially Affected Segments Roadway Segment Location Existing Conditions (dBA CNEL) Future (2040) Conditions (dBA CNEL) Future-with-Project Conditions dBA CNEL Increase from Existing to Future- with-Project Conditions (dB) Potential Cumulative Impact? (3 dB or greater increase?) Increase from Future-No-Project to Future-with- Project Conditions (dB) Cumulatively Considerable Project Contribution? Mitchell Avenue East of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 62.3 66.5 66.5 4.2 Yes 0.0 No San Mateo Avenue West of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 64.3 68.8 68.8 4.6 Yes 0.0 No San Mateo Avenue North of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 65.6 68.8 68.8 3.1 Yes 0.0 No San Mateo Avenue North of South Linden Avenue 65.3 69.4 69.5 4.2 Yes 0.1 No San Mateo Avenue South of South Linden Avenue 65.7 68.8 68.8 3.2 Yes 0.0 No South Airport Boulevard South of U.S. 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane 67.2 70.1 70.1 3.0 Yes 0.0 No South Linden Avenue West of San Mateo Avenue 62.4 68.4 68.4 6.0 Yes 0.0 No Tanforan Avenue West of San Mateo Avenue 53.6 60.2 60.2 6.6 Yes 0.0 No Wondercolor Lane East of South Airport Boulevard 58.8 64.2 64.2 5.4 Yes 0.0 No Refer to Appendix a for the complete traffic noise modeling results. Note: Modeled noise levels at a fixed distance of 50 feet from the roadway centerline. NB = northbound Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-31 May 2023 Parking Garage Noise Noise sources in parking garages include moving vehicles, along with doors closing, cars starting, tires squealing, car alarms sounding, and other automotive noises occurring. Although parking area noise is difficult to predict because of the many variables (e.g., parking structure design, the number of vehicles moving through the structure at any given time), noise from parking areas is temporary and periodic. The nearest noise-sensitive uses are the hotel land uses across U.S. 101. The hotels would be more than 260 feet from the proposed parking structure. The nearest residences are located in San Bruno at a distance of 1,700 feet from this garage. According to FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual,24 1,000 cars in a peak activity hour would generate a sound equivalent level (SEL) of 92 dBA at 50 feet, which can be converted to an hourly Leq (average) noise level of 56.4 dBA Leq at 50 feet. Although it is not known at this time how many vehicles would use this garage during a peak hour, conservatively assuming 1,000 vehicles would be using the 1,025-space garage at once, parking garage noise at a distance of 260 feet would be approximately 42 dBA Leq. This would be well below the measured ambient noise levels at the nearest hotel land uses (with a daytime 12-hour Leq noise level of 68.8 dBA). In addition, because U.S. 101 is located between the nearest hotels and the location of the proposed parking structure, and because the time of day when the parking structure would be most heavily used (daytime hours) would align with the time of day when traffic on U.S. 101 would be heaviest, noise from U.S. 101 would overshadow intermittent nuisance noise from the proposed parking structure. At the nearest residences, which are located 1,700 feet away (and without accounting for attenuation), the noise level from 1,000 vehicles using the garage simultaneously would be approximately 25 dBA Leq (without accounting for attenuation from intervening buildings). This noise level would be well below the measured 12-hour daytime noise level at these residences (i.e., 74.1 dBA Leq). In addition, vehicle noise is currently generated on and around the project site, given the existing use at and adjacent to the site; therefore, noise from vehicle parking activities would be similar to noise under existing conditions. Because of the distance between the parking structure and nearby sensitive land uses, temporary and periodic noise from the parking structure would not be considered substantial. Vibration and Ground-borne Noise Impacts Damage to Structures Construction of the proposed project would involve the use of equipment that could generate ground-borne vibration. PPV levels associated with heavy-duty construction equipment proposed for use with the project at a distance of 25 feet, and at other project-specific distances, are shown in Table 6-11. Note that project construction would not involve the use of pile drivers. The most vibration-intensive construction equipment proposed for use with the project are an auger drill rig and an excavator. For the purpose of this analysis, a large bulldozer is considered to be representative of heavy earthmoving equipment, such as an excavator. 24 Federal Transit Administration. 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. FTA Report No. 0123. Available: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed: February 17, 2023. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-32 May 2023 Table 6-11. Vibration Levels for Project Construction Equipment at Various Distances Equipment PPV at 25 Feeta PPV at 60 Feet PPV at 230 Feet PPV at 560 Feet PPV at 1,700 Feet Auger drill rig 0.089 0.024 0.003 0.001 > 0.001 Large bulldozerb 0.089 0.024 0.003 0.001 > 0.001 Small bulldozerc 0.003 0.001 > 0.001 > 0.001 > 0.001 Note: Bold text indicates values that are used in the analysis below. Source: Federal Transit Administration. 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, FTA Report No. 0123. Available: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/ transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed: February 17, 2023. a. Obtained from FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018. b. Considered representative of other heavy earthmoving equipment such as excavators, graders, backhoes, etc. c. Considered representative of smaller equipment such as a small backhoe and front-end loader. The potential for structural damage to occur at adjacent or nearby buildings can be evaluated by estimating vibration levels from construction equipment at nearby uses and comparing those levels to the Caltrans damage criteria for that type of building. The nearest off-site structures to the project site are the produce market buildings located west of the project site. The closest of these structures is located approximately 60 feet west of the project site. Conservatively assuming that a drill or excavator could be used anywhere on the project site, the vibration level from an auger drill rig or an excavator at this structure (i.e., distance of 60 feet) would have a PPV of approximately 0.024 in/sec. The produce market buildings were constructed between 1962 and 2005. The two primary buildings were constructed with pre-cast concrete slabs and have undergone a series of window and door replacements over the past three decades to include more modern features. These buildings would be categorized as Historic and Some Old Buildings, according to the Caltrans vibration guidelines for damage to structures. The applicable damage criterion for these buildings from the Caltrans vibration damage guidelines is a PPV of 0.25 in/sec.25 Because the estimated vibration level from an auger drill rig or an excavator at 60 feet would be below the applicable criterion, vibration-related damage would not be expected to occur at this structure. Furthermore, the vibration levels at other buildings located more than 60 feet from the project site would be even lower, and vibration-related damage would therefore also not be expected to occur at these other buildings. Regarding residential structures, the nearest residences are approximately 1,700 feet southwest of the project site. These structures would be categorized as older residential structures under the Caltrans vibration damage guidelines, with an applicable PPV damage criterion of 0.3 in/sec. At a distance of 1,700 feet, an auger drill rig or an excavator would produce a PPV level of less than 0.001 in/sec. This would be well below the damage criterion for older residential structures. Therefore, vibration-related damage is also not expected to occur at the nearest residential land uses. 25 California Department of Transportation. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Final. CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01. April. Sacramento, CA. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/ programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf. Accessed: February 14, 2023. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-33 May 2023 Because the estimated vibration levels at all nearby structures would be well below the applicable Caltrans vibration damage criteria, vibration-related damage impacts from the proposed project would not be considered substantial. Vibration-Related Annoyance Regarding annoyance-related vibration impacts, vibration-related annoyance is typically considered to be substantial if it results in sleep disturbance at nearby residences. For the purposes of this analysis, should vibration from project construction exceed the Caltrans “strongly perceptible” criterion (i.e., PPV of 0.1 in/sec) at residential land uses during nighttime hours, impacts would be considered significant. Note that most construction activities would occur during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays (the City’s standard hours for construction). However, some construction activities are proposed for nighttime and early-morning hours. Specifically, the applicant has identified activities that would require the use of a crane, which does not generate meaningful vibration, or large equipment, such as an auger drill rig, and could start as early as 5:00 a.m. to avoid some of the high winds that occur during the day in South San Francisco. Therefore, the use of a drill rig during the early-morning hours is assessed to determine if vibration-related annoyance impacts would be significant. The closest sensitive use is the Travelodge hotel, which is approximately 230 feet east of the project site; additional hotels are located farther to the east. Residential land uses are located southwest of the project site at a distance of approximately 1,700 from the project perimeter. Assuming that vibration-intensive equipment could be used anywhere on the project site, an auger drill rig operating at the perimeter of the site closest to the Travelodge could result in a PPV level of approximately 0.003 in/sec. At the next closest hotel (the Best Western, located approximately 530 feet east of the project site), an auger drill rig would result in a PPV of approximately 0.001 in/sec. At the nearest residences (located approximately 1,700 feet southwest of the project site), an auger drill rig would have a PPV of less than 0.001 in/sec. These vibration levels are all well below the Caltrans “strongly perceptible” criterion for vibration-related annoyance (i.e., PPV of 0.1 in/sec).26 Based on the estimated vibration levels of project equipment presented above, early-morning or nighttime project construction activities would not be expected to result in sleep disturbance at nearby sensitive land uses. In addition, project construction equipment would typically be operating even farther from the off-site sensitive land uses than the distances assessed in this analysis, resulting in even lower vibration levels. Therefore, because the estimated vibration levels would not exceed the strongly perceptible criterion during early-morning or nighttime hours when people typically sleep, annoyance-related vibration impacts from project construction would not be considered substantial. 26 California Department of Transportation. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Final. CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01. April. Sacramento, CA. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/ programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf. Accessed: February 14, 2023. Chapter 6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 6-34 May 2023 Impacts Associated with Airport Noise and Consistency with Airport Land Use Plan The closest airport to the project site is SFO, which is approximately 1 mile to the southeast. Portions of the project site fall within the 65 dBA noise contour for this airport, according to the 2012 Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport. No portion of the project site is located within the 70 or 75 dBA CNEL noise contours.27 Land uses proposed under the project include commercial, office, and/or R&D land uses. The 2012 ALUCP designates commercial and industrial/production land uses as compatible with all airport-related noise levels, according to Table IV-1, Noise/Land Use Compatibility Criteria, of the ALUCP document.28 Although residential land uses are designated as conditionally compatible within the 65 dBA CNEL contour, no residential land uses are proposed as part of the project. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the land use restrictions for the 65 dBA noise contour in the ALUCP. 27 City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. 2012. Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport. November. Redwood City, CA. Available: https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Consolidated_CCAG_ALUCP_November-20121.pdf. Accessed: March 10, 2023. 28 Ibid. Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 7-1 May 2023 Chapter 7 References California Department of Transportation. 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Final. CT-HWANP-RT-13-069.25.2. September. Sacramento, CA. California Department of Transportation. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Final. CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01. April. Sacramento, CA. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/ tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf. Accessed: February 14, 2023. City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. 2012. Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport. November. Redwood City, CA. Available: https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ Consolidated_CCAG_ALUCP_November-20121.pdf. Accessed: March 10, 2023. Cummins, Inc. 2017a. Cummins Power Generation. Sound Data, 2,500 DQKAN. August. Cummins, Inc. 2017b. Cummins Power Generation. Sound Data, 1,500 DQGAB. August. Federal Highway Administration. 2006. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. FHWA-HEP-05-054. January. Available: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ENVIRonment/noise/ construction_noise/rcnm/rcnm.pdf. Accessed: February 17, 2023. Federal Highway Administration. 2008. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Software Version 1.1. December 8, 2008. Prepared by: U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Environmental Measurement and Modeling Division. Federal Transit Administration. 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, FTA Report No. 0123. September. Available: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/ research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed: February 17, 2023. Hoover and Keith. 2000. Noise Control for Buildings, Manufacturing Plants, Equipment, and Products. Houston, TX. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. Speech Levels in Various Noise Environments. EPA-600/1-77-025. May, 1977. Prepared by: Bolt, Beranek, and Newman. Prepared for: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. Available: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ ZyNET.exe/P100CWGS.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index=1976+Thru+1980&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5Czyfiles%5CIndex%20Data%5C76thru80%5CTxt%5C00000021%5CP100CWGS.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonymous&SortMethod=h%7C-&MaximumDocuments=1& FuzzyDegree=0&ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Display=hpfr&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%20page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=1&SeekPage=x&ZyPURL#. Accessed: March 10, 2023. Chapter 7 References Infinite 101 Project Noise Technical Report 7-2 May 2023 World Health Organization. 1999. Guidelines for Community Noise. April. London, United Kingdom. Available: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/a68672. Accessed: March 10. 2023. Appendix A Noise and Vibration Data and Modeling Results Terminal 101 Project LT‐1 Time History Number Start Date Start Time End Time Duration LAeq LASmax LASmin LAS1% LAS5% LAS10% LAS25% LAS50% LAS90% LAS95% LAS99% 1 3/1/2023 2:38:33 PM 3:00:00 PM 0:21:27 77.5 100 46.2 89.2 81.2 79.8 76 70.8 60.7 58.3 48.2 2 3/1/2023 3:00:02 PM 4:00:00 PM 0:59:58 73.4 96.7 56.1 81.7 78.6 76.8 74 70.2 60.7 59.3 57.3 3 3/1/2023 4:00:02 PM 5:00:00 PM 0:59:58 73.1 93.4 56.5 81.3 78.1 76.7 73.9 70.2 61.1 59.5 57.5 4 3/1/2023 5:00:02 PM 6:00:00 PM 0:59:58 73.3 86.5 56.6 81.1 78.5 77.1 74.4 70.7 62 60.4 58.3 5 3/1/2023 6:00:02 PM 7:00:00 PM 0:59:58 72.8 92.7 54.3 82 78.2 76.4 73.1 68.4 58.9 57.1 55.1 6 3/1/2023 7:00:02 PM 8:00:00 PM 0:59:58 70.6 85.1 54.1 80.4 76.9 74.7 70.6 65.2 57.3 56.5 55.3 7 3/1/2023 8:00:02 PM 9:00:00 PM 0:59:58 69.4 85 53.9 79.5 76 73.6 68.6 63.1 56.7 56 54.9 8 3/1/2023 9:00:02 PM 10:00:00 PM 0:59:58 68.7 85.3 53.4 79.7 75.8 72.9 66.8 59.7 55.6 55 54.2 9 3/1/2023 10:00:02 PM 11:00:00 PM 0:59:58 68.6 85.9 53.2 80.5 75.1 72.1 66.2 59.9 56.2 55.5 54 10 3/1/2023 11:00:02 PM 12:00:00 AM 0:59:58 67.5 88 51.1 80 73.5 69.9 63.8 57.7 54.8 54.1 52.8 11 3/2/2023 12:00:02 AM 1:00:00 AM 0:59:58 67.6 87.4 50 80.3 74.2 69.7 61 55.2 52.1 51.7 50.9 12 3/2/2023 1:00:02 AM 2:00:00 AM 0:59:58 64.6 85.5 50 77.1 70.7 66.4 58.4 54.3 51.3 50.8 50.3 13 3/2/2023 2:00:02 AM 3:00:00 AM 0:59:58 67.6 86.8 51 80.6 73.5 69.4 62.5 56.3 53 52.5 51.9 14 3/2/2023 3:00:02 AM 4:00:00 AM 0:59:58 67.4 84.1 51.3 78.8 74 71.3 65.6 58.8 53.9 53.4 52.5 15 3/2/2023 4:00:02 AM 5:00:00 AM 0:59:58 71 89.6 52.4 83 77.2 74.4 69.1 64 56.7 55.4 53.8 16 3/2/2023 5:00:02 AM 6:00:00 AM 0:59:58 73.6 97.8 56 83.2 79 76.6 72.8 68.7 61.7 60.2 58.3 17 3/2/2023 6:00:02 AM 7:00:00 AM 0:59:58 74 87 58.7 82.9 79.8 78.2 74.5 70.9 62 61.2 60 18 3/2/2023 7:00:02 AM 8:00:00 AM 0:59:58 73.9 89.1 57.9 83 79.7 77.8 74.4 70 61.8 60.7 59.6 19 3/2/2023 8:00:02 AM 9:00:00 AM 0:59:58 74.3 88.9 55 83.3 80 78.1 74.9 71 61.8 60.3 58.4 20 3/2/2023 9:00:02 AM 10:00:00 AM 0:59:58 73.3 91.1 55.2 82.3 78.9 77.1 74 69.8 59.2 57.4 56 21 3/2/2023 10:00:02 AM 11:00:00 AM 0:59:58 73.7 88.7 54.1 83.3 79.6 77.3 74.1 69.7 59.6 58.1 55.6 22 3/2/2023 11:00:02 AM 12:00:00 PM 0:59:58 74.7 96.1 56.8 84.9 80.3 78.2 74.5 70.3 62.4 60.4 58.1 23 3/2/2023 12:00:02 PM 1:00:00 PM 0:59:58 73.7 91.7 56.3 83.3 79.3 77.5 74 69.8 61.8 59.9 58.1 24 3/2/2023 1:00:02 PM 2:00:00 PM 0:59:58 74.3 91.9 57.6 84.8 79.1 77.1 73.8 69.7 62.5 60.7 58.5 25 3/2/2023 2:00:02 PM 3:00:00 PM 0:59:58 74.6 95.6 56.6 83.7 79.2 77.2 74.1 70.1 61.2 59.7 57.9 26 3/2/2023 3:00:02 PM 4:00:00 PM 0:59:58 72.8 85.6 56.4 80.7 78.2 76.8 73.9 69.9 61 59.2 57.6 27 3/2/2023 4:00:02 PM 5:00:00 PM 0:59:58 73.9 96 57.5 82.3 78.9 77.1 74.5 70.9 62.4 60.6 58.5 28 3/2/2023 5:00:02 PM 6:00:00 PM 0:59:58 74.3 89.3 58.2 83.4 79.3 77.8 75 71.4 64 62.4 59.8 29 3/2/2023 6:00:02 PM 7:00:00 PM 0:59:58 72.2 87.4 55.7 81 77.9 76.1 72.9 68.2 59.7 58 56.4 30 3/2/2023 7:00:02 PM 8:00:00 PM 0:59:58 71.8 92.5 55 81.8 77.9 75.7 71.3 65.7 58.2 57.3 56.1 31 3/2/2023 8:00:02 PM 9:00:00 PM 0:59:58 70.6 94.6 54.9 81.1 76.6 74 68.6 62.5 56.8 56.2 55.4 32 3/2/2023 9:00:02 PM 10:00:00 PM 0:59:58 71.3 90 54.6 83.8 77.5 74.2 68.6 62.7 57.3 56.5 55.7 33 3/2/2023 10:00:02 PM 11:00:00 PM 0:59:58 69.6 89.6 53.7 81.3 76.1 72.8 66.7 60.7 55.8 55 54.2 34 3/2/2023 11:00:02 PM 12:00:00 AM 0:59:58 69.4 86.6 52.2 82 75.9 72.2 66.7 59.7 54.1 53.4 52.7 35 3/3/2023 12:00:02 AM 1:00:00 AM 0:59:58 71.1 88.6 50.8 83.9 78.5 73.9 65.1 57.8 53.3 52.7 52 36 3/3/2023 1:00:02 AM 2:00:00 AM 0:59:58 65.5 86.3 51.5 77.9 71.8 67.1 60 55.7 53.2 52.8 52.2 37 3/3/2023 2:00:02 AM 3:00:00 AM 0:59:58 67.4 89.6 51.1 79.3 73.5 69.9 63.2 57.4 53.9 53.3 52.3 38 3/3/2023 3:00:02 AM 4:00:00 AM 0:59:58 70.2 90.6 52.2 82.3 76.2 72.8 66.6 61 55.4 54.5 53.3 39 3/3/2023 4:00:02 AM 5:00:00 AM 0:59:58 71.3 89.6 54.9 83.1 77.9 74.6 68.7 62.4 57 56.4 55.7 40 3/3/2023 5:00:02 AM 6:00:00 AM 0:59:58 74.1 90.8 55.2 83.9 79.7 77.6 73.8 71.1 60.1 58.4 56.6 41 3/3/2023 6:00:02 AM 7:00:00 AM 0:59:58 73.2 88.7 55.5 83.1 79.7 77.5 73.3 67.8 60.5 59.2 57.4 42 3/3/2023 7:00:02 AM 8:00:00 AM 0:59:58 74.4 88 55.2 83.7 80.4 78.5 74.9 70 60.8 59.5 57.2 43 3/3/2023 8:00:02 AM 9:00:00 AM 0:59:58 74.4 90.3 56.9 83.6 80.2 78.3 75 70.4 61.2 59.8 58 44 3/3/2023 9:00:01 AM 9:47:02 AM 0:47:01 76.3 96.7 57.4 85.4 81.6 80.2 76.5 72.2 62.1 60.7 59.1 Terminal 101 Project LT‐2 Time History Number Start Date Start Time Duration LAeq LASmax LASmin LAS1% LAS5% LAS10% LAS25% LAS50% LAS90% LAS95% LAS99% 1 3/1/2023 1:25:50 PM 0:34:10 70.2 96.4 48.5 80.5 74.5 70.1 65.2 63.6 60.4 55.6 50.3 2 3/1/2023 2:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66.4 83 60.6 79.3 68.9 65.6 64.2 63.3 62 61.8 61.2 3 3/1/2023 3:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66.5 83.6 60.5 78.3 69.6 66.1 64.4 63.5 62.2 61.9 61.3 4 3/1/2023 4:00:02 PM 0:59:58 65.5 81.1 61.2 73.7 67.5 66.3 65.1 64.3 62.9 62.6 62.2 5 3/1/2023 5:00:02 PM 0:59:58 65.2 79.8 60.1 75 68.2 65.9 64.5 63.4 61.7 61.2 60.6 6 3/1/2023 6:00:02 PM 0:59:58 65 81.2 60.4 74.1 66.1 65.4 64.6 64 62.7 62.2 61.5 7 3/1/2023 7:00:02 PM 0:59:58 65.6 83.7 61 76.8 67.3 65.2 64.2 63.5 62.5 62.2 61.6 8 3/1/2023 8:00:02 PM 0:59:58 64.1 83 58.9 72.8 65.2 63.8 63 62.3 61 60.5 59.8 9 3/1/2023 9:00:02 PM 0:59:58 64.3 84.1 58.2 75.5 64.9 63.5 62.5 61.6 60.1 59.6 59 10 3/1/2023 10:00:02 PM 0:59:58 62.4 71.9 57.5 68.8 64.4 63.7 62.8 61.8 59.8 59.2 58.5 11 3/1/2023 11:00:02 PM 0:59:58 62.1 80.8 56.5 73.2 63.3 62.1 60.8 59.8 58.1 57.7 57.1 12 3/2/2023 12:00:02 AM 0:59:58 63.5 83.3 53.8 76.9 68 61.2 59 57.8 56.1 55.6 54.8 13 3/2/2023 1:00:02 AM 0:59:58 58.7 80.7 51.5 68.9 59.3 57.9 56.6 55.6 54 53.5 52.6 14 3/2/2023 2:00:02 AM 0:59:58 60.5 83.4 52.3 66.1 58.9 58.1 57 56 54.2 53.8 53 15 3/2/2023 3:00:02 AM 0:59:58 58.9 69.3 52.4 63.5 61.5 60.8 59.7 58.5 55.7 55 53.7 16 3/2/2023 4:00:02 AM 0:59:58 62.2 69.5 56.6 65.3 64.1 63.7 63.1 62.2 59.6 59.1 58.3 17 3/2/2023 5:00:02 AM 0:59:58 64.3 78.4 60.4 70.4 65.9 65.2 64.4 63.7 62.4 62 61.3 18 3/2/2023 6:00:02 AM 0:59:58 65.9 78.4 61.3 71 67.5 66.9 66.2 65.5 63.7 63 62 19 3/2/2023 7:00:02 AM 0:59:58 64 75 59.3 68 66.3 65.8 65 63.9 60.7 60.4 60 20 3/2/2023 8:00:02 AM 0:59:58 63.3 81.6 58.8 74.5 64.1 63 62.1 61.4 60.2 59.8 59.3 21 3/2/2023 9:00:02 AM 0:59:58 63.7 81.5 56.4 77.3 65.2 62.3 60.4 59.4 58 57.7 57.3 22 3/2/2023 10:00:02 AM 0:59:58 62.2 78.4 55.6 74.9 66 61.6 59.3 58.2 57.1 56.8 56.3 23 3/2/2023 11:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.8 90.2 55.3 84.1 72 64.3 60.9 59.4 57.6 57.3 56.7 24 3/2/2023 12:00:02 PM 0:59:58 64.7 85.8 55.6 78.3 64.9 62.6 61.1 60.2 58.4 57.9 57.1 25 3/2/2023 1:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66 84.8 58.9 78.7 69.4 65 62.8 61.8 60.4 60.1 59.6 26 3/2/2023 2:00:02 PM 0:59:58 67.2 87.6 59.4 80.3 69.9 65.2 63.2 62.3 61.1 60.7 60.2 27 3/2/2023 3:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66.7 84.7 58.9 79.2 70.6 65.7 63.6 62.7 61.3 60.9 60.1 28 3/2/2023 4:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66.2 84.2 61.3 77.9 67.8 65.9 64.8 64 62.7 62.4 61.9 29 3/2/2023 5:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66.5 83.1 61 77.2 69.8 66.6 65.1 64.1 62.6 62.3 61.8 30 3/2/2023 6:00:02 PM 0:59:58 64.4 79.9 60.1 73.4 67 65.3 63.8 63 61.8 61.5 61 31 3/2/2023 7:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66.1 82.4 60.6 77.4 69.7 65.9 64.3 63.4 62 61.6 61.2 32 3/2/2023 8:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66 85 60.2 78.3 69.5 65 63.6 62.8 61.8 61.5 61 33 3/2/2023 9:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.1 88.6 61.5 82.4 69.6 66.3 65.1 64.3 63 62.7 62.2 34 3/2/2023 10:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66 85.1 57.9 78.6 66.3 64.8 63.9 62.9 60.5 60 58.9 35 3/2/2023 11:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.1 89 56.8 82.4 67.9 63.3 61.3 60.3 58.9 58.6 57.8 36 3/3/2023 12:00:02 AM 0:59:58 71.1 90.6 54.1 85.4 76.5 65.7 59.8 58.4 56.8 56.4 55.5 37 3/3/2023 1:00:02 AM 0:59:58 58.9 74 54 67.9 61 59.7 58.6 57.6 56 55.6 54.8 38 3/3/2023 2:00:02 AM 0:59:58 58.4 73.8 54.3 64.9 60.4 59.6 58.6 57.7 56.1 55.7 55 39 3/3/2023 3:00:02 AM 0:59:58 65.1 88.2 55.3 78.2 62.9 61.9 60.8 59.7 57.8 57.2 56.5 40 3/3/2023 4:00:02 AM 0:59:58 62 75.1 58.3 65.7 63.8 63.3 62.5 61.7 60.2 59.8 59 41 3/3/2023 5:00:02 AM 0:59:58 63.1 78.2 58.4 66.8 65.2 64.7 63.8 62.7 60.7 60.2 59.4 42 3/3/2023 6:00:02 AM 0:59:58 64.8 79.3 60.8 73.4 66.5 65.4 64.5 63.7 62.5 62.1 61.3 43 3/3/2023 7:00:02 AM 0:59:58 63.4 76.3 59.8 67.5 65 64.4 63.7 62.9 61.5 61.2 60.5 44 3/3/2023 8:00:02 AM 0:43:52 67.5 97.2 55.5 79.4 67.1 63.2 61.6 60.7 59.3 59 58.4 45 3/3/2023 8:51:28 AM 0:00:15 44.4 47.4 42.9 47.2 46.1 45.6 45.1 44.5 43.2 42.9 42.9 Terminal 101 Project LT‐3 Time History Number Start Date Start Time Duration LAeq LASmax LASmin LAS1% LAS5% LAS10% LAS25% LAS50% LAS90% LAS95% LAS99% 1 3/1/2023 3:12:24 PM 1.0 hour73.39545.68677747063575553 2 3/1/2023 4:12:24 PM 1.0 hour74.396.753.28776737064585755 3 3/1/2023 5:12:24 PM 1.0 hour73.498.150.78677736962545352 4 3/1/2023 6:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 74.5 102.7 51.1 86 76 72 68 59 53 52 52 5 3/1/2023 7:12:24 PM 1.0 hour72.998.8508574716456535251 6 3/1/2023 8:12:24 PM 1.0 hour72.999.350.68574716357535352 7 3/1/2023 9:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 73.5 101.6 50.5 86 73 69 60 55 53 52 51 8 3/1/2023 10:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 69.9 100.2 48.9 77 70 63 56 53 51 50 49 9 3/1/2023 11:12:24 PM 1.0 hour68.293.447.78269605452504948 10 3/1/2023 12:12:24 AM 1.0 hour 72.8 101.1 43.3 84 74 65 54 50 47 46 45 11 3/1/2023 1:12:24 AM 1.0 hour54.978.142.46856504645444342 12 3/2/2023 2:12:24 AM 1.0 hour66.893.642.57360534847444443 13 3/2/2023 3:12:24 AM 1.0 hour60.386.245.47364575149474746 14 3/2/2023 4:12:24 AM 1.0 hour 6491.2487464575351494948 15 3/2/2023 5:12:24 AM 1.0 hour71.310150.68271665856535251 16 3/2/2023 6:12:24 AM 1.0 hour71.391.653.68575726458555554 17 3/2/2023 7:12:24 AM 1.0 hour72.598.552.68675726659545453 18 3/2/2023 8:12:24 AM 1.0 hour 76.2 104.4 51.3 87 76 73 68 61 55 54 52 19 3/2/2023 9:12:24 AM 1.0 hour 74.6 100.9 49.3 86 75 72 65 57 52 52 50 20 3/2/2023 10:12:24 AM 1.0 hour73.610149.88474716559545351 21 3/2/2023 11:12:24 AM 1.0 hour74.697.349.88677736861545351 22 3/2/2023 12:12:24 PM 1.0 hour70.592.150.58374726760545351 23 3/2/2023 1:12:24 PM 1.0 hour71.993.352.38476736861565554 24 3/2/2023 2:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 75.4 103.7 53 86 77 73 69 62 56 56 55 25 3/2/2023 3:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 74.4 100.4 54 86 76 73 69 62 57 56 55 26 3/2/2023 4:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 75.6 100.9 54.1 89 76 73 69 63 58 57 56 27 3/2/2023 5:12:24 PM 1.0 hour74.698.751.98778747064565553 28 3/2/2023 6:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 75.8 104.1 53 87 75 72 67 61 55 55 53 29 3/2/2023 7:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 73.7 100.1 52.9 86 77 72 65 58 54 54 53 30 3/2/2023 8:12:24 PM 1.0 hour73.499.152.78773696157545453 31 3/2/2023 9:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 74.6 101.3 52.2 87 74 70 62 57 54 54 53 32 3/2/2023 10:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 7196.147.48472655652494948 33 3/2/2023 11:12:24 PM 1.0 hour 7397.345.88773645551484747 34 3/2/2023 12:12:24 AM 1.0 hour73.599.643.88776665349464544 35 3/2/2023 1:12:24 AM 1.0 hour57.58042.37158534846444343 36 3/3/2023 2:12:24 AM 1.0 hour54.676.942.46857534946444443 37 3/3/2023 3:12:24 AM 1.0 hour 7196.343.68068625550474645 38 3/3/2023 4:12:24 AM 1.0 hour65.496.545.97364575250484847 39 3/3/2023 5:12:24 AM 1.0 hour70.899.946.38371665551484747 40 3/3/2023 6:12:24 AM 1.0 hour73.398.848.28674706254505049 41 3/3/2023 7:12:24 AM 1.0 hour 75.2 101.5 46.6 87 75 72 66 57 50 49 48 42 3/3/2023 8:12:24 AM 1.0 hour 7599.151.68876736760545352 43 3/3/2023 9:12:24 AM 1.0 hour 75 101.7 35.6 87 79 74 68 60 54 53 38 44 3/3/2023 10:12:24 AM 4 2 min79.293.735.69381716351383735 Terminal 101 Project LT‐4 Time History Number Start Date Start Time Duration LAeq LASmax LASmin LAS1% LAS5%LAS10% LAS25% LAS50% LAS90% LAS95% LAS99% 1 3/1/2023 2:17:14 PM 0:42:46 71 89.1 49.7 81.9 76.7 73.1 68.4 66.5 64.4 63.3 53.7 2 3/1/2023 3:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.3 88.4 63.2 78.9 73.3 70.4 68.1 66.7 64.9 64.6 64.1 3 3/1/2023 4:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.6 84.3 62.8 76.2 71.6 70 68.5 67.4 65.7 65.3 64.2 4 3/1/2023 5:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68 83.4 62.8 75.2 71.5 69.6 68.1 66.9 65.2 64.8 64 5 3/1/2023 6:00:02 PM 0:59:58 70 93.8 63.5 76.9 73.6 71.4 68.8 67.6 65.8 65.2 64.3 6 3/1/2023 7:00:02 PM 0:59:58 71.2 95.6 63.2 78.3 73.9 71.9 69.4 67.9 66.3 65.8 64.7 7 3/1/2023 8:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.1 82.6 61.7 74.7 70.6 69.5 68.3 67.2 65.3 64.7 63.7 8 3/1/2023 9:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.4 88.1 62.4 77.3 70.1 68.9 67.7 66.7 65 64.6 63.8 9 3/1/2023 10:00:02 PM 0:59:58 67.7 84.9 62.1 73.1 69.5 68.8 67.8 67 65.3 64.8 63.6 10 3/1/2023 11:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66.1 80.2 59.2 73.7 68.8 67.6 66.2 65 62.9 62.3 61.1 11 3/2/2023 12:00:02 AM 0:59:58 66.7 81 57.6 76.6 70.9 68.7 66.5 64.1 61.4 60.8 59.9 12 3/2/2023 1:00:02 AM 0:59:58 65.4 80 54.5 76.3 69.5 67.3 64.6 62.7 58.9 58 56.3 13 3/2/2023 2:00:02 AM 0:59:58 66.7 89.2 54.7 75.7 70.2 68.4 67 64.9 59.5 58.3 56.4 14 3/2/2023 3:00:02 AM 0:59:58 65 82.3 55.7 72.5 68.4 66.9 65.3 63.6 60.5 59.6 57.5 15 3/2/2023 4:00:02 AM 0:59:58 67.7 81.6 59.8 74.2 71.4 69.9 68.2 66.6 64.1 63.4 62.4 16 3/2/2023 5:00:02 AM 0:59:58 71 90.1 63 77.9 73.5 72.3 70.8 69.6 67.7 67.1 65.8 17 3/2/2023 6:00:02 AM 0:59:58 71.3 83.8 66 76.9 73.9 72.7 71.5 70.6 69.1 68.6 67.5 18 3/2/2023 7:00:02 AM 0:59:58 70.8 81.8 65.6 75.6 73.4 72.5 71.3 70.3 68.7 68.3 67.1 19 3/2/2023 8:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.5 84.1 64 75.4 72.8 71.5 69.9 68.6 66.7 66.1 65.2 20 3/2/2023 9:00:02 AM 0:59:58 70.4 89.1 64.4 77.9 73.4 71.9 70.3 69.2 67.3 66.9 65.7 21 3/2/2023 10:00:02 AM 0:59:58 71.1 85.8 63.9 78.3 75.2 73.4 71 69.7 67.7 67.1 66.3 22 3/2/2023 11:00:02 AM 0:59:58 75.4 92.2 60.2 88.6 82 75.7 70.7 68.5 64 63.2 61.8 23 3/2/2023 12:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66.9 84.4 59.2 77.4 69.4 67.5 65.9 64.6 62.5 61.9 61 24 3/2/2023 1:00:02 PM 0:59:58 67.5 83.2 61.2 77.2 71.4 68.6 66.6 65.1 63.1 62.7 62 25 3/2/2023 2:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.2 84.6 60.7 78.9 71.9 69.4 67 65.6 63.9 63.5 62.7 26 3/2/2023 3:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.5 84.9 60.8 78.7 72.8 69.7 67.2 65.9 64.1 63.7 62.9 27 3/2/2023 4:00:02 PM 0:59:58 67.7 83.1 62.5 77.4 70.2 68.6 67.2 66.3 64.6 64.2 63.4 28 3/2/2023 5:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.2 89.5 62.7 77.9 73.4 70.8 68 66.6 65 64.6 63.8 29 3/2/2023 6:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.1 84.3 62.6 77.2 73.8 71.8 69 67 65 64.5 63.8 30 3/2/2023 7:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.1 80.6 62.1 77.1 73.5 71.6 68.9 67.4 65.4 65 64.1 31 3/2/2023 8:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.5 86 61.3 78.3 72.4 69.1 67.6 66.5 64.5 64.1 63.1 32 3/2/2023 9:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.5 86.9 62.7 81.3 71.8 69 67.5 66.6 65.2 64.7 63.9 33 3/2/2023 10:00:02 PM 0:59:58 67.6 83.4 60.5 78.1 69.8 68 66.7 65.8 64.2 63.6 62.3 34 3/2/2023 11:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.5 86.9 57.7 81.3 71.8 68.5 66 64.5 62 61.5 59.8 35 3/3/2023 12:00:02 AM 0:59:58 71.7 90.8 57.5 84.1 76.5 72.9 70.2 66.2 61.2 60.4 59 36 3/3/2023 1:00:02 AM 0:59:58 66.6 87.8 55.6 76.4 70.2 68.1 66.1 62.8 59 58.2 57.1 37 3/3/2023 2:00:02 AM 0:59:58 70.7 92.5 56.3 81.4 75.1 73.6 69.7 63.8 59.3 58.6 57.3 38 3/3/2023 3:00:02 AM 0:59:58 68.8 87.3 57.6 78.6 73.4 70.6 68.4 66.3 61.9 61 59.8 39 3/3/2023 4:00:02 AM 0:59:58 67.7 89.8 60.3 75 71.2 69.6 67.9 66.2 63.7 63.1 61.9 40 3/3/2023 5:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.2 82 62.2 76.8 72.5 70.9 69.4 67.9 65.7 65.1 64.1 41 3/3/2023 6:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.8 81.9 63.1 77 73.1 71.5 70.1 68.8 66.6 65.8 64.8 42 3/3/2023 7:00:02 AM 0:59:58 70 82.9 63.9 75.6 72.7 71.7 70.5 69.2 67.3 66.9 66 43 3/3/2023 8:00:02 AM 0:59:58 71.8 93.3 65.5 78.5 75.3 73.1 71.6 70.6 68.8 68.3 67 44 3/3/2023 9:00:01 AM 0:27:46 73.1 96.2 50.8 81.7 77 74.1 71.9 70.8 69.1 68.4 66.1 Terminal 101 Project LT‐5 Time History Number Start Date Start Time Duration LAeq LASmax LASmin LAS1% LAS5% LAS10% LAS25% LAS50% LAS90% LAS95% LAS99% 1 3/1/2023 1:46:06 PM 0:13:54 72.5 91.7 46.4 83.5 77.7 74.2 70.4 68.2 58.5 54.1 49.5 2 3/1/2023 2:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.6 83.2 63.7 78.3 73 71.2 69.6 68.2 66.4 65.8 64.9 3 3/1/2023 3:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.8 85.7 64 78.7 73.3 70.9 69.3 68 66.3 65.8 65.1 4 3/1/2023 4:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.3 85.2 63.8 76.1 72.1 70.8 69.4 68.3 66.7 66.2 65.5 5 3/1/2023 5:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.2 87.5 62.3 75.8 70.9 69.6 68.2 66.8 64.5 64 63.2 6 3/1/2023 6:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.4 84.9 63 75.4 70.6 69.7 68.5 67.6 65.8 65.1 64.1 7 3/1/2023 7:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.4 80.7 63.5 76.7 71.1 69.9 68.4 67.3 65.6 65.2 64.4 8 3/1/2023 8:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68 84.9 61.2 77.1 70.9 69.1 67.5 66.3 64.4 63.8 62.8 9 3/1/2023 9:00:02 PM 0:59:58 66.2 83.9 60.1 74.9 69 67.4 65.9 64.3 62 61.5 60.8 10 3/1/2023 10:00:02 PM 0:59:58 65.8 77.7 58.2 71.5 68.4 67.5 66.3 65.2 63.3 62.8 61.6 11 3/1/2023 11:00:02 PM 0:59:58 65.5 83.1 58.2 74.3 68.9 67.2 65.3 63.7 61.2 60.5 59.5 12 3/2/2023 12:00:02 AM 0:59:58 66 87.8 55.4 76.5 70.8 67.6 64.3 62.4 59 58.1 56.5 13 3/2/2023 1:00:02 AM 0:59:58 64 82.3 52.5 76.9 67 64.5 62 59.7 56.1 55.1 53.8 14 3/2/2023 2:00:02 AM 0:59:58 63.3 86.2 52.3 72.1 66.3 64.4 61.8 59.6 56.1 55.3 53.8 15 3/2/2023 3:00:02 AM 0:59:58 64.1 86.1 53.4 71.2 67.8 66.4 64.2 62 58.3 57.4 56.1 16 3/2/2023 4:00:02 AM 0:59:58 65.6 74.9 58 71.3 68.8 67.9 66.4 64.8 62.3 61.5 59.5 17 3/2/2023 5:00:02 AM 0:59:58 68.3 83.3 61.5 73.9 71.1 70.2 68.8 67.5 64.9 64.2 63.3 18 3/2/2023 6:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.9 81 64.1 75.2 72.4 71.5 70.4 69.3 67.2 66.7 65.4 19 3/2/2023 7:00:02 AM 0:59:58 68.9 81.9 61.8 75.5 72 71 69.5 68.2 65.1 64.3 63.4 20 3/2/2023 8:00:02 AM 0:59:58 68.1 80.5 62.4 74.8 70.8 69.9 68.4 67.2 65.4 65 64 21 3/2/2023 9:00:02 AM 0:59:58 67.9 82.1 62.5 76.3 72.2 70 67.7 66.1 64.2 63.8 63.1 22 3/2/2023 10:00:02 AM 0:59:58 66.9 79.1 59.9 74.6 70.5 69.2 67.4 65.6 63 62.4 61.5 23 3/2/2023 11:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.8 86.8 59.7 82.3 73.3 70 67.9 66.1 63.4 62.6 61.1 24 3/2/2023 12:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.7 91.8 60.5 80 72.2 70.1 68.1 66.7 64.5 63.9 62.7 25 3/2/2023 1:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69 87 62.8 77.8 72.4 70.3 68.5 67.2 65.3 64.9 63.7 26 3/2/2023 2:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.5 85.5 63.1 78.2 72.8 70.8 69.1 68 66 65.6 64.8 27 3/2/2023 3:00:02 PM 0:59:58 70.5 91.3 63.4 80.1 73.7 71.3 69.6 68.2 66.2 65.8 65 28 3/2/2023 4:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.8 86.5 65.2 78.2 72.8 71.1 69.6 68.5 67 66.6 66.1 29 3/2/2023 5:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.2 83.6 62.6 76.8 72.5 71 69.3 67.9 65.2 64.6 63.6 30 3/2/2023 6:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.7 84.6 62.5 76.6 72.4 70.6 68.7 67.2 64.9 64.4 63.5 31 3/2/2023 7:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.2 82 63.4 78.3 73.1 70.7 68.8 67.6 65.7 65.3 64.6 32 3/2/2023 8:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.6 87.9 62.4 77.5 71.7 69.9 68.2 67 65.1 64.5 63.6 33 3/2/2023 9:00:02 PM 0:59:58 69.6 84.8 63.3 80.5 72.7 70.2 68.5 67.4 65.8 65.3 64.6 34 3/2/2023 10:00:02 PM 0:59:58 67.9 84.5 60.9 77.5 70.9 69.2 67.5 66.1 63.9 63.3 62.3 35 3/2/2023 11:00:02 PM 0:59:58 68.3 86.9 58.6 80.8 71.4 68.1 66.1 64.5 62 61.3 59.9 36 3/3/2023 12:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.8 88 55.2 83.5 75.2 69.3 64.9 62.9 59.7 58.8 57.5 37 3/3/2023 1:00:02 AM 0:59:58 63.3 80.7 53.9 71.5 67.2 65.6 63.3 61.4 58.4 57.7 56.4 38 3/3/2023 2:00:02 AM 0:59:58 63.3 82.5 54.4 70.9 66.8 65.1 63.1 61.3 58.2 57.4 56.4 39 3/3/2023 3:00:02 AM 0:59:58 67.5 87.1 56.8 78.7 71.2 68.9 66.1 63.9 60.4 59.6 58.1 40 3/3/2023 4:00:02 AM 0:59:58 66.4 77.1 58.7 72.2 69.6 68.5 67 65.6 63 62.4 61 41 3/3/2023 5:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.1 87.2 61.2 75.6 72 70.8 69.3 67.8 65 64.2 63.1 42 3/3/2023 6:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.8 88.8 64 76.1 73 71.7 70.1 68.8 66.8 66.1 65.2 43 3/3/2023 7:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.1 82.6 64 74.9 72.2 71.2 69.6 68.2 66.2 65.7 65 44 3/3/2023 8:00:02 AM 0:59:58 69.2 80.5 62.9 76.2 72.5 71.5 69.8 67.9 65.6 65 64 45 3/3/2023 9:00:00 AM 0:05:33 72.1 87.3 54.8 82.6 77.4 74.6 70.8 69.1 64.8 64.2 56.5 Noise Appendix Short Term Measurement Data Terminal 101 Project ST‐1 Summary Summary File Name on Meter 831_Data.066.s File Name on PC Serial Number 0003785 Model Model 831 Firmware Version 2.403 User Location Job Description Note Measurement Description Start 2023‐03‐02  09:20:00 Stop 2023‐03‐02  09:35:00 Duration 00:15:00 0 Run Time 00:15:00 0 Pause 00:00:00 0 Pre‐Calibration 2023‐03‐02  09:13:16 Post‐Calibration None Calibration Deviation ‐‐‐ Overall Settings RMS Weight A Weighting Peak Weight A Weighting Detector Slow Preamplifier PRM831 Microphone Correction Off Integration Method Linear OBA Range Normal OBA Bandwidth 1/1 and 1/3 OBA Frequency Weighting A Weighting OBA Max Spectrum Bin Max Gain 0 0 dB Overload 144.7 dB A Under Range Peak 77.1 Under Range Limit 26.7 Noise Floor 17 5 First Instrument Identification     831_0003785‐20230302 092000‐831_Data.066.ldbin Terminal 101 Project ST‐1 Summary Results LAeq 73 0 dB LAE 102 5 dB EA 1 995 mPa²h LApeak (max)2023‐03‐02  09:27:55 98.7 dB LASmax 2023‐03‐02  09:27:55 87.2 dB LASmin 2023‐03‐02  09:22:54 68.9 dB SEA ‐99 9 dB Exceedance Counts LAS > 65.0 dB 1 899.9 s LAS > 85.0 dB 11.8s LApeak > 135.0 dB 00.0s LApeak > 137.0 dB 00.0s LApeak > 140.0 dB 00.0s Community Noise Ldn 73 0 LCeq 82 3 dB LAeq 73 0 dB LCeq ‐ LAeq 9 3 dB LAIeq 74.4 dB LAeq 73 0 dB LAIeq ‐ LAeq 1.4 dB dB       Time Stamp Leq 73 0 LS(max)87 2  2023/03/02  9:27:55 LF(max)90 8  2023/03/02  9:27:55 LI(max)91.7  2023/03/02  9:27:55 LS(min)68 9  2023/03/02  9:22:54 LF(min)67 9  2023/03/02  9:34:56 LI(min)68 3  2023/03/02  9:34:56 LPeak(max)98.7  2023/03/02  9:27:55 Overload Count 0 Overload Duration 0 0 s OBA Overload Count 0 OBA Overload Duration 0 0 s Statistics LA 1.00 80 0 dB LA 10.00 74 8 dB LA 25.00 72 9 dB LA 50.00 71 8 dB LA 90.00 70 3 dB LA 99.00 69.4 dB Duration A Terminal 101 Project ST‐1 Summary Calibration History Preamp Date dB re. 1V/Pa   PRM831 2023‐03‐02  09:13:09 ‐27.14 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  08:35:21 ‐27.11 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  08:34:52 ‐27.12 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  12:44:14 ‐26 92 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  12:25:57 ‐26 91 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  12:13:44 ‐26 88 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  11:55:57 ‐26 98 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  11:45:31 ‐26 87 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  11:33:11 ‐27 01 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  11:12:47 ‐26.77 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  11:05:29 ‐26 90 Terminal 101 Project ST‐2 Summary Summary File Name on Meter 831_Data.067.s File Name on PC Serial Number 0003785 Model Model 831 Firmware Version 2.403 User Location Job Description Note Measurement Description Start 2023‐03‐02  10:35 00 Stop 2023‐03‐02  10:50 00 Duration 00:15:00.0 Run Time 00:15:00.0 Pause 00 00:00.0 Pre‐Calibration 2023‐03‐02  10:32:11 Post‐Calibration None Calibration Deviation ‐‐‐ Overall Settings RMS Weight A Weighting Peak Weight A Weighting Detector Slow Preamplifier PRM831 Microphone Correction Off Integration Method Linear OBA Range Normal OBA Bandwidth 1/1 and 1/3 OBA Frequency Weighting A Weighting OBA Max Spectrum Bin Max Gain 0.0 dB Overload 144.7 dB A Under Range Peak 77.2 Under Range Limit 26.7 Noise Floor 17.6 First Instrument Identification     831_0003785‐20230302 103500‐831_Data.067.ldbin Terminal 101 Project ST‐2 Summary Results LAeq 68.0 dB LAE 97.5 dB EA 630.958 µPa²h LApeak (max)2023‐03‐02  10:44:28 100.5 dB LASmax 2023‐03‐02  10:44:28 76.9 dB LASmin 2023‐03‐02  10:43:34 63.5 dB SEA ‐99.9 dB Exceedance Counts LAS > 65.0 dB 1 LAS > 85.0 dB 0 LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 Community Noise Ldn 68.0 LCeq 76.6 dB LAeq 68.0 dB LCeq ‐ LAeq 8.6 dB LAIeq 72.6 dB LAeq 68.0 dB LAIeq ‐ LAeq 4.6 dB dB       Time Stamp Leq 68.0 LS(max)76.9  2023/03/02  10:44:28 LF(max)84.1  2023/03/02  10:44:28 LI(max)87.8  2023/03/02  10:44:28 LS(min)63.5  2023/03/02  10:43:34 LF(min)62.8  2023/03/02  10:43:39 LI(min)63.1  2023/03/02  10:37:26 LPeak(max)100.5  2023/03/02  10:44:28 Overload Count 0 Overload Duration 0.0 s OBA Overload Count 0 OBA Overload Duration 0.0 s Statistics LA 1.00 74.7 dB LA 10.00 71.1 dB LA 25.00 68.2 dB LA 50.00 66.3 dB LA 90.00 64.4 dB LA 99.00 63.8 dB A Terminal 101 Project ST‐2 Summary Calibration History Preamp Date dB re. 1V/Pa   PRM831 2023‐03‐02  10:31:47 ‐27.19 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  09:40:19 ‐27 35 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  09:13 09 ‐27.14 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  08:35:21 ‐27.11 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  08:34:52 ‐27.12 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  12:44:14 ‐26 92 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  12:25:57 ‐26 91 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  12:13:44 ‐26 88 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  11:55:57 ‐26 98 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  11:45:31 ‐26 87 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  11:33:11 ‐27 01 Terminal 101 ST‐3 Summary Results LAeq 62.6 dB LAE 92.1 dB EA 181.970 µPa²h LApeak (max)2023‐03‐03  09:05:36 91.7 dB LASmax 2023‐03‐03  09:12 05 75.3 dB LASmin 2023‐03‐03  09:10:52 50.8 dB SEA ‐99.9 dB Exceedance Counts LAS > 65.0 dB 14 128.1 s LAS > 85.0 dB 000s LApeak > 135.0 dB 00.0s LApeak > 137.0 dB 00.0s LApeak > 140.0 dB 00.0s Community Noise Ldn 62.6 LCeq 73.4 dB LAeq 62.6 dB LCeq ‐ LAeq 10.8 dB LAIeq 64.3 dB LAeq 62.6 dB LAIeq ‐ LAeq 1.7 dB dB       Time Stamp Leq 62.6 LS(max)75.3  2023/03/03  9:12:05 LF(max)77.4  2023/03/03  9:12:05 LI(max)78.9  2023/03/03  9:12:05 LS(min)50.8  2023/03/03  9:10:52 LF(min)49.9  2023/03/03  9:10:58 LI(min)50.8  2023/03/03  9:10:52 LPeak(max)91.7  2023/03/03  9:05:36 Overload Count 0 Overload Duration 0.0 s OBA Overload Count 0 OBA Overload Duration 0.0 s Statistics LA 1.00 72.6 dB LA 10.00 65.8 dB LA 25.00 61.9 dB LA 50.00 58.9 dB LA 90.00 53.2 dB LA 99.00 51.2 dB Duration A Terminal 101 ST‐3 Summary Calibration History Preamp Date dB re. 1V/Pa   PRM831 2023‐03‐03  09:21:55 ‐27.25 PRM831 2023‐03‐03  09:00:21 ‐27.12 PRM831 2023‐03‐03  08:58:57 ‐27.18 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  15:54 00 ‐27.30 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  14:58:50 ‐27.15 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  14:10:49 ‐27.19 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  11:58:17 ‐27.20 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  11:33:12 ‐27.23 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  10:54:22 ‐27.26 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  10:31:47 ‐27.19 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  09:40:19 ‐27.35 Terminal 101 Project ST‐4 Summary Summary File Name on Meter 831_Data.068.s File Name on PC Serial Number 0003785 Model Model 831 Firmware Version 2.403 User Location Job Description Note Measurement Description Start 2023‐03‐02  11:39:00 Stop 2023‐03‐02  11:54:00 Duration 00:15:00.0 Run Time 00:15:00.0 Pause 00 00:00.0 Pre‐Calibration 2023‐03‐02  11:33:21 Post‐Calibration None Calibration Deviation ‐‐‐ Overall Settings RMS Weight A Weighting Peak Weight A Weighting Detector Slow Preamplifier PRM831 Microphone Correction Off Integration Method Linear OBA Range Normal OBA Bandwidth 1/1 and 1/3 OBA Frequency Weighting A Weighting OBA Max Spectrum Bin Max Gain 0.0 dB Overload 144.8 dB A Under Range Peak 77.2 Under Range Limit 26.7 Noise Floor 17.6 First Instrument Identification     831_0003785‐20230302 113900‐831_Data.068.ldbin Terminal 101 Project ST‐4 Summary Results LAeq 57.8 dB LAE 87.3 dB EA 60.256 µPa²h LApeak (max)2023‐03‐02  11:45:27 89.9 dB LASmax 2023‐03‐02  11:43:26 71.5 dB LASmin 2023‐03‐02  11:52:39 53.7 dB SEA ‐99.9 dB Exceedance Counts LAS > 65.0 dB 4 31.4 s LAS > 85.0 dB 00.0s LApeak > 135.0 dB 00.0s LApeak > 137.0 dB 00.0s LApeak > 140.0 dB 00.0s Community Noise Ldn 57.8 LCeq 69.9 dB LAeq 57.8 dB LCeq ‐ LAeq 12.1 dB LAIeq 59.5 dB LAeq 57.8 dB LAIeq ‐ LAeq 1.7 dB dB       Time Stamp Leq 57.8 LS(max)71.5  2023/03/02  11:43:26 LF(max)73.5  2023/03/02  11:43:21 LI(max)76.1  2023/03/02  11:43:21 LS(min)53.7  2023/03/02  11:52:39 LF(min)53.1  2023/03/02  11:52:39 LI(min)53.5  2023/03/02  11:44:58 LPeak(max)89.9  2023/03/02  11:45:27 Overload Count 0 Overload Duration 0.0 s OBA Overload Count 0 OBA Overload Duration 0.0 s Statistics LA 1.00 70.1 dB LA 10.00 57.5 dB LA 25.00 55.8 dB LA 50.00 55.1 dB LA 90.00 54.4 dB LA 99.00 53.9 dB Duration A Terminal 101 Project ST‐4 Summary Calibration History Preamp Date dB re. 1V/Pa   PRM831 2023‐03‐02  11:33:12 ‐27.23 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  10:54:22 ‐27.26 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  10:31:47 ‐27.19 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  09:40:19 ‐27.35 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  09:13:09 ‐27.14 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  08:35:21 ‐27.11 PRM831 2023‐03‐02  08:34:52 ‐27.12 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  12:44:14 ‐26.92 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  12:25:57 ‐26.91 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  12:13:44 ‐26.88 PRM831 2022‐10‐21  11:55:57 ‐26.98 Terminal 101 ST‐1 Time History Record # Record Type Date Time LAeq LASmax LASmin 1 Calibration Change 2023‐03‐02 9:13:16 2 Run 2023‐03‐02 9:20:00 3 2023‐03‐02 9:20:00 72.1 74.3 69.8 4 2023‐03‐02 9:20:10 73.1 74.9 71.1 5 2023‐03‐02 9:20:20 72.2 73.2 71.6 6 2023‐03‐02 9:20:30 71.8 73.5 70.6 7 2023‐03‐02 9:20:40 70.8 72.2 69.4 8 2023‐03‐02 9:20:50 71.0 71.6 70.0 9 2023‐03‐02 9:21:00 75.9 78.2 71.4 10 2023‐03‐02 9:21:10 72.9 75.6 71.6 11 2023‐03‐02 9:21:20 73.6 76.6 71.7 12 2023‐03‐02 9:21:30 72.7 75.2 70.9 13 2023‐03‐02 9:21:40 73.6 75.7 72.1 14 2023‐03‐02 9:21:50 71.9 72.7 70.9 15 2023‐03‐02 9:22:00 71.0 72.6 69.9 16 2023‐03‐02 9:22:10 72.0 72.8 70.8 17 2023‐03‐02 9:22:20 74.1 77.8 70.8 18 2023‐03‐02 9:22:30 71.8 77.3 70.2 19 2023‐03‐02 9:22:40 70.7 71.2 70.0 20 2023‐03‐02 9:22:50 72.4 76.0 68.9 21 2023‐03‐02 9:23:00 72.6 76.3 70.6 22 2023‐03‐02 9:23:10 71.6 72.4 71.0 23 2023‐03‐02 9:23:20 71.0 72.2 69.3 24 2023‐03‐02 9:23:30 72.6 74.3 71.0 25 2023‐03‐02 9:23:40 73.4 75.2 72.2 26 2023‐03‐02 9:23:50 70.5 72.2 69.9 27 2023‐03‐02 9:24:00 72.7 73.6 70.4 28 2023‐03‐02 9:24:10 71.8 73.5 70.8 29 2023‐03‐02 9:24:20 71.8 73.4 71.1 30 2023‐03‐02 9:24:30 72.1 74.2 69.8 31 2023‐03‐02 9:24:40 70.9 71.9 70.2 32 2023‐03‐02 9:24:50 72.3 73.0 70.5 33 2023‐03‐02 9:25:00 71.5 73.6 70.3 34 2023‐03‐02 9:25:10 70.8 71.7 70.2 35 2023‐03‐02 9:25:20 70.3 70.8 69.7 36 2023‐03‐02 9:25:30 72.3 72.9 70.0 37 2023‐03‐02 9:25:40 71.8 72.8 70.9 38 2023‐03‐02 9:25:50 71.4 72.5 70.6 39 2023‐03‐02 9:26:00 72.0 73.5 70.7 40 2023‐03‐02 9:26:10 76.8 81.2 70.7 41 2023‐03‐02 9:26:20 73.5 76.5 70.8 42 2023‐03‐02 9:26:30 73.6 76.2 72.2 43 2023‐03‐02 9:26:40 71.8 73.4 70.5 44 2023‐03‐02 9:26:50 70.8 72.0 69.8 45 2023‐03‐02 9:27:00 72.1 73.1 70.8 46 2023‐03‐02 9:27:10 73.9 75.5 72.5 Terminal 101 ST‐1 Time History 47 2023‐03‐02 9:27:20 71.9 73.0 71.0 48 2023‐03‐02 9:27:30 71.3 72.8 69.7 49 2023‐03‐02 9:27:40 71.9 73.7 69.6 50 2023‐03‐02 9:27:50 80.5 87.2 70.4 51 2023‐03‐02 9:28:00 75.3 78.9 72.9 52 2023‐03‐02 9:28:10 73.3 76.7 71.2 53 2023‐03‐02 9:28:20 72.8 76.8 71.3 54 2023‐03‐02 9:28:30 71.2 72.8 69.4 55 2023‐03‐02 9:28:40 73.6 75.9 71.5 56 2023‐03‐02 9:28:50 73.1 75.4 71.8 57 2023‐03‐02 9:29:00 70.6 72.1 69.9 58 2023‐03‐02 9:29:10 72.4 74.1 69.6 59 2023‐03‐02 9:29:20 73.8 76.2 71.9 60 2023‐03‐02 9:29:30 70.9 71.9 69.7 61 2023‐03‐02 9:29:40 70.4 71.1 69.5 62 2023‐03‐02 9:29:50 70.4 71.1 69.1 63 2023‐03‐02 9:30:00 70.7 72.8 69.5 64 2023‐03‐02 9:30:10 72.9 75.9 69.2 65 2023‐03‐02 9:30:20 72.2 73.1 70.4 66 2023‐03‐02 9:30:30 72.9 75.3 71.4 67 2023‐03‐02 9:30:40 71.9 72.9 70.6 68 2023‐03‐02 9:30:50 71.5 72.9 70.4 69 2023‐03‐02 9:31:00 71.3 72.7 69.5 70 2023‐03‐02 9:31:10 70.6 71.8 69.4 71 2023‐03‐02 9:31:20 70.2 71.2 69.5 72 2023‐03‐02 9:31:30 73.5 75.6 70.4 73 2023‐03‐02 9:31:40 71.9 73.6 71.3 74 2023‐03‐02 9:31:50 72.8 73.5 70.9 75 2023‐03‐02 9:32:00 72.2 73.9 70.6 76 2023‐03‐02 9:32:10 73.4 75.2 71.3 77 2023‐03‐02 9:32:20 74.4 79.1 70.5 78 2023‐03‐02 9:32:30 77.6 82.5 70.8 79 2023‐03‐02 9:32:40 75.2 79.1 70.5 80 2023‐03‐02 9:32:50 77.5 81.9 72.8 81 2023‐03‐02 9:33:00 71.7 75.4 71.0 82 2023‐03‐02 9:33:10 71.6 72.7 70.5 83 2023‐03‐02 9:33:20 75.2 78.5 71.3 84 2023‐03‐02 9:33:30 71.6 73.8 70.9 85 2023‐03‐02 9:33:40 69.8 71.1 69.0 86 2023‐03‐02 9:33:50 72.3 73.7 70.7 87 2023‐03‐02 9:34:00 71.6 72.3 71.0 88 2023‐03‐02 9:34:10 74.5 78.2 71.1 89 2023‐03‐02 9:34:20 70.8 71.7 70.2 90 2023‐03‐02 9:34:30 75.7 79.2 71.7 91 2023‐03‐02 9:34:40 74.1 77.4 70.6 92 2023‐03‐02 9:34:50 70.6 71.4 69.1 93 Stop 2023‐03‐02 9:35:00 Terminal 101 Project ST‐2 Time History Record # Record Type Date Time LAeq LASmax LASmin 1 Calibration Change 2023‐03‐02 10:32:11 2 Run 2023‐03‐02 10:35:00 3 2023‐03‐02 10:35:00 66.8 69.8 64.0 4 2023‐03‐02 10:35:10 70.6 75.4 64.4 5 2023‐03‐02 10:35:20 66.4 69.6 64.2 6 2023‐03‐02 10:35:30 66.4 68.6 64.0 7 2023‐03‐02 10:35:40 66.0 67.6 65.3 8 2023‐03‐02 10:35:50 65.6 67.0 64.7 9 2023‐03‐02 10:36:00 67.3 71.0 65.0 10 2023‐03‐02 10:36:10 69.4 73.6 64.8 11 2023‐03‐02 10:36:20 73.9 76.3 67.7 12 2023‐03‐02 10:36:30 66.8 72.2 65.3 13 2023‐03‐02 10:36:40 65.5 70.7 64.6 14 2023‐03‐02 10:36:50 71.0 75.0 64.6 15 2023‐03‐02 10:37:00 67.6 71.4 64.9 16 2023‐03‐02 10:37:10 66.9 69.7 65.0 17 2023‐03‐02 10:37:20 66.8 70.1 63.9 18 2023‐03‐02 10:37:30 69.1 74.9 64.2 19 2023‐03‐02 10:37:40 66.7 70.1 64.5 20 2023‐03‐02 10:37:50 68.2 71.0 65.1 21 2023‐03‐02 10:38:00 65.8 68.8 64.3 22 2023‐03‐02 10:38:10 65.8 70.9 64.3 23 2023‐03‐02 10:38:20 64.3 64.8 63.9 24 2023‐03‐02 10:38:30 64.0 64.7 63.8 25 2023‐03‐02 10:38:40 65.5 69.2 63.6 26 2023‐03‐02 10:38:50 68.9 72.1 64.3 27 2023‐03‐02 10:39:00 72.4 74.3 69.3 28 2023‐03‐02 10:39:10 70.9 74.2 66.3 29 2023‐03‐02 10:39:20 65.6 66.7 65.1 30 2023‐03‐02 10:39:30 69.5 71.8 65.3 31 2023‐03‐02 10:39:40 69.5 74.4 65.3 32 2023‐03‐02 10:39:50 66.0 69.2 64.7 33 2023‐03‐02 10:40:00 65.7 66.4 64.2 34 2023‐03‐02 10:40:10 69.0 72.0 65.2 35 2023‐03‐02 10:40:20 66.0 68.0 63.9 36 2023‐03‐02 10:40:30 67.9 69.6 65.5 37 2023‐03‐02 10:40:40 70.9 74.8 66.2 38 2023‐03‐02 10:40:50 72.4 74.9 69.9 39 2023‐03‐02 10:41:00 71.4 73.3 70.0 40 2023‐03‐02 10:41:10 67.9 71.0 66.3 41 2023‐03‐02 10:41:20 66.3 68.0 65.0 42 2023‐03‐02 10:41:30 67.3 69.8 64.5 43 2023‐03‐02 10:41:40 65.7 67.7 64.8 44 2023‐03‐02 10:41:50 66.4 70.2 64.4 45 2023‐03‐02 10:42:00 65.4 69.7 64.2 46 2023‐03‐02 10:42:10 64.4 65.4 63.8 Terminal 101 Project ST‐2 Time History 47 2023‐03‐02 10:42:20 64.9 66.8 63.6 48 2023‐03‐02 10:42:30 65.8 68.0 63.9 49 2023‐03‐02 10:42:40 64.6 67.7 63.9 50 2023‐03‐02 10:42:50 66.7 69.9 63.8 51 2023‐03‐02 10:43:00 65.9 70.0 64.1 52 2023‐03‐02 10:43:10 65.6 69.9 64.1 53 2023‐03‐02 10:43:20 64.4 65.2 64.1 54 2023‐03‐02 10:43:30 67.4 72.5 63.5 55 2023‐03‐02 10:43:40 71.8 75.5 65.8 56 2023‐03‐02 10:43:50 72.9 75.6 70.0 57 2023‐03‐02 10:44:00 70.7 75.4 64.6 58 2023‐03‐02 10:44:10 69.0 72.5 64.6 59 2023‐03‐02 10:44:20 70.7 76.9 66.0 60 2023‐03‐02 10:44:30 66.1 72.6 64.4 61 2023‐03‐02 10:44:40 67.3 71.1 64.4 62 2023‐03‐02 10:44:50 69.9 74.4 64.4 63 2023‐03‐02 10:45:00 67.5 73.3 64.6 64 2023‐03‐02 10:45:10 66.2 68.6 64.9 65 2023‐03‐02 10:45:20 67.1 68.9 64.8 66 2023‐03‐02 10:45:30 67.4 70.7 64.9 67 2023‐03‐02 10:45:40 67.5 70.6 65.7 68 2023‐03‐02 10:45:50 67.7 70.3 65.3 69 2023‐03‐02 10:46:00 65.0 66.2 64.4 70 2023‐03‐02 10:46:10 65.5 67.1 64.1 71 2023‐03‐02 10:46:20 64.3 67.1 63.8 72 2023‐03‐02 10:46:30 65.9 69.8 63.7 73 2023‐03‐02 10:46:40 67.9 71.6 64.7 74 2023‐03‐02 10:46:50 72.4 75.2 70.5 75 2023‐03‐02 10:47:00 68.2 72.0 64.9 76 2023‐03‐02 10:47:10 67.6 70.4 65.2 77 2023‐03‐02 10:47:20 68.0 70.6 66.3 78 2023‐03‐02 10:47:30 65.9 69.1 64.2 79 2023‐03‐02 10:47:40 67.7 70.0 64.8 80 2023‐03‐02 10:47:50 67.1 69.6 64.7 81 2023‐03‐02 10:48:00 67.8 70.0 66.2 82 2023‐03‐02 10:48:10 66.5 69.1 64.3 83 2023‐03‐02 10:48:20 66.4 67.9 64.6 84 2023‐03‐02 10:48:30 66.2 68.6 64.1 85 2023‐03‐02 10:48:40 65.0 65.8 64.5 86 2023‐03‐02 10:48:50 66.4 69.7 64.5 87 2023‐03‐02 10:49:00 66.9 70.7 64.1 88 2023‐03‐02 10:49:10 66.3 70.4 64.7 89 2023‐03‐02 10:49:20 66.1 70.8 64.3 90 2023‐03‐02 10:49:30 65.1 66.0 64.4 91 2023‐03‐02 10:49:40 65.4 68.6 64.1 92 2023‐03‐02 10:49:50 65.1 66.6 64.0 93 Stop 2023‐03‐02 10:50:00 Terminal 101 Project ST‐3 Time History Record #Record Type Date Time LAeq LASmax LASmin 1 Calibration Change 2023‐03‐03 8:58:59 2 Calibration Change 2023‐03‐03 9:00:22 3 Run 2023‐03‐03 9:03:00 4 2023‐03‐03 9:03:00 53.3 55.7 52.0 5 2023‐03‐03 9:03:10 64.4 71.1 53.1 6 2023‐03‐03 9:03:20 60.9 71.1 56.8 7 2023‐03‐03 9:03:30 57.1 58.7 56.4 8 2023‐03‐03 9:03:40 59.3 61.5 55.3 9 2023‐03‐03 9:03:50 62.8 67.2 54.6 10 2023‐03‐03 9:04:00 54.6 56.9 53.1 11 2023‐03‐03 9:04:10 58.9 60.7 56.9 12 2023‐03‐03 9:04:20 58.9 61.4 56.8 13 2023‐03‐03 9:04:30 59.8 61.7 58.3 14 2023‐03‐03 9:04:40 58.0 62.5 52.9 15 2023‐03‐03 9:04:50 52.5 53.6 51.7 16 2023‐03‐03 9:05:00 53.7 55.2 51.3 17 2023‐03‐03 9:05:10 56.6 58.7 54.9 18 2023‐03‐03 9:05:20 57.5 61.0 52.9 19 2023‐03‐03 9:05:30 54.3 56.7 52.2 20 2023‐03‐03 9:05:40 58.4 60.5 56.1 21 2023‐03‐03 9:05:50 60.5 65.1 55.0 22 2023‐03‐03 9:06:00 65.7 69.3 59.7 23 2023‐03‐03 9:06:10 60.7 63.4 58.8 24 2023‐03‐03 9:06:20 57.9 63.3 55.2 25 2023‐03‐03 9:06:30 55.4 57.6 53.7 26 2023‐03‐03 9:06:40 63.0 64.9 57.6 27 2023‐03‐03 9:06:50 62.4 64.5 60.6 28 2023‐03‐03 9:07:00 60.0 65.5 54.9 29 2023‐03‐03 9:07:10 56.1 57.5 54.4 30 2023‐03‐03 9:07:20 60.4 62.2 56.0 31 2023‐03‐03 9:07:30 61.9 64.1 59.2 32 2023‐03‐03 9:07:40 67.3 70.2 62.9 33 2023‐03‐03 9:07:50 72.3 73.7 67.3 34 2023‐03‐03 9:08:00 69.5 72.6 64.8 35 2023‐03‐03 9:08:10 58.6 64.8 56.4 36 2023‐03‐03 9:08:20 54.8 57.1 53.3 37 2023‐03‐03 9:08:30 62.2 64.4 56.9 38 2023‐03‐03 9:08:40 61.3 63.9 59.7 39 2023‐03‐03 9:08:50 62.4 64.0 60.4 40 2023‐03‐03 9:09:00 55.2 60.4 53.5 41 2023‐03‐03 9:09:10 65.2 71.3 55.7 42 2023‐03‐03 9:09:20 70.8 75.2 67.5 43 2023‐03‐03 9:09:30 64.9 68.2 63.2 44 2023‐03‐03 9:09:40 62.3 64.9 61.4 45 2023‐03‐03 9:09:50 62.8 65.0 60.3 46 2023‐03‐03 9:10:00 63.5 67.1 56.5 47 2023‐03‐03 9:10:10 60.2 64.0 56.2 Terminal 101 Project ST‐3 Time History 48 2023‐03‐03 9:10:20 51.7 56.5 51.0 49 2023‐03‐03 9:10:30 56.6 60.3 51.8 50 2023‐03‐03 9:10:40 51.7 55.1 51.2 51 2023‐03‐03 9:10:50 51.1 51.5 50.8 52 2023‐03‐03 9:11:00 55.8 59.7 51.2 53 2023‐03‐03 9:11:10 60.6 64.1 54.5 54 2023‐03‐03 9:11:20 52.0 54.5 51.2 55 2023‐03‐03 9:11:30 57.2 60.7 51.3 56 2023‐03‐03 9:11:40 65.5 67.8 60.8 57 2023‐03‐03 9:11:50 70.0 72.0 66.6 58 2023‐03‐03 9:12:00 71.6 75.3 67.1 59 2023‐03‐03 9:12:10 60.0 67.1 57.4 60 2023‐03‐03 9:12:20 58.5 59.6 56.6 61 2023‐03‐03 9:12:30 55.2 56.6 54.3 62 2023‐03‐03 9:12:40 62.2 65.8 56.0 63 2023‐03‐03 9:12:50 53.8 59.1 52.1 64 2023‐03‐03 9:13:00 55.1 58.8 52.0 65 2023‐03‐03 9:13:10 62.2 65.5 58.4 66 2023‐03‐03 9:13:20 53.8 58.4 52.5 67 2023‐03‐03 9:13:30 57.2 59.0 53.8 68 2023‐03‐03 9:13:40 65.1 70.4 57.3 69 2023‐03‐03 9:13:50 57.8 68.9 55.1 70 2023‐03‐03 9:14:00 59.6 61.3 57.3 71 2023‐03‐03 9:14:10 68.2 71.4 61.2 72 2023‐03‐03 9:14:20 59.3 63.2 56.4 73 2023‐03‐03 9:14:30 56.2 58.5 53.8 74 2023‐03‐03 9:14:40 59.8 62.4 58.5 75 2023‐03‐03 9:14:50 61.7 63.3 58.5 76 2023‐03‐03 9:15:00 61.3 63.2 59.7 77 2023‐03‐03 9:15:10 60.0 62.4 58.1 78 2023‐03‐03 9:15:20 59.6 60.8 58.4 79 2023‐03‐03 9:15:30 58.0 61.9 55.4 80 2023‐03‐03 9:15:40 58.4 60.6 55.3 81 2023‐03‐03 9:15:50 54.5 56.2 53.1 82 2023‐03‐03 9:16:00 55.4 58.3 53.7 83 2023‐03‐03 9:16:10 64.8 70.1 55.5 84 2023‐03‐03 9:16:20 57.7 63.5 52.9 85 2023‐03‐03 9:16:30 53.2 54.6 51.7 86 2023‐03‐03 9:16:40 58.0 59.0 54.6 87 2023‐03‐03 9:16:50 60.4 61.4 58.7 88 2023‐03‐03 9:17:00 62.4 64.9 60.2 89 2023‐03‐03 9:17:10 59.9 61.8 57.9 90 2023‐03‐03 9:17:20 58.0 59.0 57.4 91 2023‐03‐03 9:17:30 58.0 59.3 56.6 92 2023‐03‐03 9:17:40 63.9 67.3 58.9 93 2023‐03‐03 9:17:50 62.2 64.1 61.2 94 Stop 2023‐03‐03 9:18:00 95 Calibration Change 2023‐03‐03 9:21:56 Terminal 101 Project ST‐4 Time History Record # Record Type Date Time LAeq LASmax LASmin 1 Calibration Change 2023‐03‐02 11:33:21 2 Run 2023‐03‐02 11:39:00 3 2023‐03‐02 11:39:00 54.9 56.3 54.4 4 2023‐03‐02 11:39:10 54.6 54.9 54.2 5 2023‐03‐02 11:39:20 54.5 55.2 54.0 6 2023‐03‐02 11:39:30 54.9 55.3 54.7 7 2023‐03‐02 11:39:40 54.5 54.8 54.3 8 2023‐03‐02 11:39:50 54.6 55.1 54.2 9 2023‐03‐02 11:40:00 54.4 54.7 54.0 10 2023‐03‐02 11:40:10 59.1 66.4 54.2 11 2023‐03‐02 11:40:20 56.9 61.2 55.3 12 2023‐03‐02 11:40:30 54.7 55.4 54.3 13 2023‐03‐02 11:40:40 55.0 55.3 54.6 14 2023‐03‐02 11:40:50 54.8 56.0 54.1 15 2023‐03‐02 11:41:00 54.8 55.4 54.4 16 2023‐03‐02 11:41:10 56.4 57.5 54.8 17 2023‐03‐02 11:41:20 57.4 58.6 56.3 18 2023‐03‐02 11:41:30 56.6 58.7 55.4 19 2023‐03‐02 11:41:40 55.6 56.8 55.2 20 2023‐03‐02 11:41:50 55.2 55.5 55.0 21 2023‐03‐02 11:42:00 55.0 55.3 54.8 22 2023‐03‐02 11:42:10 55.0 55.7 54.7 23 2023‐03‐02 11:42:20 55.3 56.4 54.6 24 2023‐03‐02 11:42:30 63.2 66.8 56.4 25 2023‐03‐02 11:42:40 64.1 66.7 60.1 26 2023‐03‐02 11:42:50 62.2 66.9 59.4 27 2023‐03‐02 11:43:00 62.4 63.6 59.6 28 2023‐03‐02 11:43:10 68.5 70.6 62.9 29 2023‐03‐02 11:43:20 70.0 71.5 65.5 30 2023‐03‐02 11:43:30 59.5 65.5 57.5 31 2023‐03‐02 11:43:40 56.4 57.6 56.0 32 2023‐03‐02 11:43:50 56.1 57.4 55.4 33 2023‐03‐02 11:44:00 55.2 55.7 54.5 34 2023‐03‐02 11:44:10 55.0 55.2 54.3 35 2023‐03‐02 11:44:20 55.6 58.4 54.6 36 2023‐03‐02 11:44:30 55.1 58.4 54.6 37 2023‐03‐02 11:44:40 54.1 54.7 53.9 38 2023‐03‐02 11:44:50 54.3 55.1 53.9 39 2023‐03‐02 11:45:00 54.5 55.1 54.2 40 2023‐03‐02 11:45:10 54.8 55.2 54.4 41 2023‐03‐02 11:45:20 56.2 61.1 54.5 42 2023‐03‐02 11:45:30 55.1 56.0 54.9 43 2023‐03‐02 11:45:40 55.7 56.4 55.2 44 2023‐03‐02 11:45:50 55.5 56.0 55.2 45 2023‐03‐02 11:46:00 55.0 55.4 54.6 46 2023‐03‐02 11:46:10 55.6 56.5 55.1 Terminal 101 Project ST‐4 Time History 47 2023‐03‐02 11:46:20 55.5 55.9 55.0 48 2023‐03‐02 11:46:30 55.5 55.9 55.2 49 2023‐03‐02 11:46:40 55.6 56.3 54.9 50 2023‐03‐02 11:46:50 55.3 55.6 54.9 51 2023‐03‐02 11:47:00 55.4 56.2 55.1 52 2023‐03‐02 11:47:10 55.2 55.5 54.8 53 2023‐03‐02 11:47:20 55.0 55.4 54.8 54 2023‐03‐02 11:47:30 54.7 55.0 54.4 55 2023‐03‐02 11:47:40 54.6 55.0 54.3 56 2023‐03‐02 11:47:50 55.0 55.4 54.5 57 2023‐03‐02 11:48:00 54.7 55.1 54.4 58 2023‐03‐02 11:48:10 55.2 55.6 54.8 59 2023‐03‐02 11:48:20 55.9 56.3 55.2 60 2023‐03‐02 11:48:30 56.0 56.4 55.6 61 2023‐03‐02 11:48:40 57.0 57.7 55.9 62 2023‐03‐02 11:48:50 56.9 57.6 55.8 63 2023‐03‐02 11:49:00 56.7 57.7 55.6 64 2023‐03‐02 11:49:10 56.3 57.5 55.6 65 2023‐03‐02 11:49:20 55.3 56.2 55.0 66 2023‐03‐02 11:49:30 55.1 55.4 54.8 67 2023‐03‐02 11:49:40 54.9 55.2 54.6 68 2023‐03‐02 11:49:50 55.0 55.4 54.7 69 2023‐03‐02 11:50:00 55.8 57.0 54.9 70 2023‐03‐02 11:50:10 55.3 56.1 54.9 71 2023‐03‐02 11:50:20 54.7 55.0 54.5 72 2023‐03‐02 11:50:30 54.4 54.8 54.1 73 2023‐03‐02 11:50:40 54.6 54.8 54.3 74 2023‐03‐02 11:50:50 54.7 55.0 54.5 75 2023‐03‐02 11:51:00 54.8 55.1 54.5 76 2023‐03‐02 11:51:10 55.0 55.4 54.7 77 2023‐03‐02 11:51:20 54.6 54.9 54.4 78 2023‐03‐02 11:51:30 54.7 55.3 54.2 79 2023‐03‐02 11:51:40 54.2 54.7 53.8 80 2023‐03‐02 11:51:50 54.6 55.4 54.1 81 2023‐03‐02 11:52:00 54.7 55.0 54.4 82 2023‐03‐02 11:52:10 54.3 54.6 54.1 83 2023‐03‐02 11:52:20 54.3 54.6 53.8 84 2023‐03‐02 11:52:30 54.1 54.5 53.7 85 2023‐03‐02 11:52:40 54.4 55.0 53.8 86 2023‐03‐02 11:52:50 54.6 54.9 54.4 87 2023‐03‐02 11:53:00 54.8 55.5 54.4 88 2023‐03‐02 11:53:10 56.4 57.5 55.1 89 2023‐03‐02 11:53:20 57.6 60.3 55.7 90 2023‐03‐02 11:53:30 55.6 57.0 55.0 91 2023‐03‐02 11:53:40 55.1 56.1 54.6 92 2023‐03‐02 11:53:50 55.8 56.5 54.5 93 Stop 2023‐03‐02 11:54:00 Noise Appendix Field Sheets Noise Appendix Field Pictures Noise Measurement Photographs LT-1 Looking West LT-1 Looking North LT-1 Looking East Noise Measurement Photographs LT-2 Looking West LT-2 Looking South LT-2 Looking North Noise Measurement Photographs LT-3 Looking South LT-3 Looking North LT-3 Looking East Noise Measurement Photographs LT-4 Looking West LT-4 Looking South LT-4 Looking North Noise Measurement Photographs LT-5 Looking West LT-5 Looking South LT-5 Looking North Noise Measurement Photographs ST-1 Looking South ST-1 Looking East ST-1 Looking West ST-1 Looking North Noise Measurement Photographs ST-2 Looking North ST-2 Looking West ST-2 Looking South ST-2 Looking East Noise Measurement Photographs ST-3 Looking Northeast ST-3 Looking East ST-3 Looking South ST-3 Looking West Noise Measurement Photographs ST-4 Looking North East ST-4 Looking West ST-4 Looking West ST-4 Looking South Construction Noise Modeling Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 1. Applicant Supplied Construction Phase List Phase Start Date (day/month/year) End Date (day/month/year) Days ROUGH GRADING / SITE DEMO 8/15/2023 10/1/2023 34 DEEP FOUNDATIONS 9/1/2023 2/28/2024 129 FOUNDATIONS 1/8/2024 5/1/2024 83 SUPERSTRUCTURE 4/1/2024 4/9/2025 268 BUILDING ENCLOSURE 2/1/2025 8/21/2025 144 INTERIOR BUILDOUT 7/23/2024 10/1/2025 312 SITEWORK 8/1/2025 2/15/2026 141 STARTUP/CX/FINAL INSPECTIONS 7/15/2025 3/1/2026 164 Table 2. Applicant Supplied Equipment List Phase Equipment Type Number/day Hours/day Scraper 2 8 Loader 2 8 Excavator 4 8 Gradall 2 8 Loader / Bobcat 2 8 Concrete Pump 1*CUSTOM / INTERMITTENT Drill Rig 2 12 Gradall 2 12 Gradall 2 10 Concrete Pump 1*CUSTOM / INTERMITTENT Mobile Crane (Potential)1*CUSTOM / INTERMITTENT Mobile Crane 2 8 Welders 8 8 Gradall 2 10 Concrete Pump 1*CUSTOM / INTERMITTENT Manlift (double manlift)2 10 Gradall / Forklift 2 10 Mobile Crane 1 8 Glass Manipulator 4 8 Scissor Lift 8 8 Manlift (double manlift)2 10 Scissor Lift 20 8 Gradall / Forklift 2 10 Manlift (double manlift)2 10 Concrete Pump 1*CUSTOM / INTERMITTENT Mobile Crane (Potential Trees)1*CUSTOM / INTERMITTENT Gradall / Forklift 1 10 Scissor Lift 4 8 Forklift 1 10STARTUP/CX/FINAL INSPECTIONS INTERIOR BUILDOUT ROUGH GRADING / SITE DEMO DEEP FOUNDATIONS FOUNDATIONS SUPERSTRUCTURE BUILDING ENCLOSURE SITEWORK Terminal 101 ProjectConstruction NoiseTable 3. Construction Noise Summary, Individual PhasesDistance (ft)Attenuation (dB) Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax25691 94 89 94 89 93 89 93 89 93 88 92 87 93 82 8850084 88 83 88 83 87 83 87 83 87 82 86 81 87 76 82100‐678 82 77 82 77 81 77 81 77 81 76 80 75 81 70 76150‐1075 79 73 79 73 78 73 78 73 78 73 77 71 77 67 72200‐1272 76 71 76 71 75 71 75 71 75 70 74 69 75 64 70230‐1371 75 69 75 69 74 69 74 69 74 69 73 68 73 63 68250‐1471 74 69 74 69 73 69 73 69 73 68 72 67 73 62 68300‐1669 73 67 73 67 72 67 72 67 72 67 71 65 71 61 66260‐1470 74 68 74 68 73 68 73 68 73 68 72 67 72 62 67400‐1866 70 64 70 65 69 65 69 64 69 64 68 63 68 58 63500‐2064 68 63 68 63 67 63 67 63 67 62 66 61 67 56 62530‐2164 68 62 68 62 67 62 67 62 67 62 66 60 66 56 61590‐2163 67 61 67 61 66 61 66 61 66 61 65 60 65 55 60800‐2460 64 58 64 59 63 59 63 58 63 58 62 57 62 52 571000‐2658 62 57 62 57 61 57 61 57 61 56 60 55 61 50 561700‐3154 58 52 58 52 57 52 57 52 57 52 56 50 56 46 512000‐3252 56 51 56 51 55 51 55 51 55 50 54 49 55 44 50Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. ROUGH GRADING / SITE DEMO DEEP FOUNDATIONS FOUNDATIONS SUPERSTRUCTURE BUILDING ENCLOSURE INTERIOR BUILDOUT SITEWORKSTARTUP / CX / FINAL INSPECTIONS Terminal 101 ProjectConstruction NoiseTable 4. Construction Noise Summary, Overlapping PhasesDistance (ft)Attenuation (dB) Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax25690 95 89 94 89 93 89 93 89 9350084 89 83 88 83 87 83 87 83 87100‐678 83 77 82 77 81 77 81 77 81150‐1074 79 73 79 73 78 73 78 73 77200‐1272 77 71 76 71 75 71 75 71 75230‐1371 76 69 75 69 74 69 74 70 74250‐1470 75 69 74 69 73 69 73 69 73300‐1668 73 67 73 67 72 67 72 67 71260‐1470 74 68 74 68 73 68 73 68 72400‐1866 71 64 70 65 69 65 69 65 69500‐2064 69 63 68 63 67 63 67 63 67530‐2163 68 62 68 62 67 62 67 62 66590‐2163 67 61 67 61 66 61 66 61 65800‐2460 65 58 64 59 63 59 63 59 631000‐2658 63 57 62 57 61 57 61 57 611700‐3153 58 52 58 52 57 52 57 52 562000‐3252 57 51 56 51 55 51 55 51 55Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. BUILDING ENCLOSURE,INTERIOR BUILDOUT,SITEWORK, ANDSTARTUP/CX/FINAL INSPECTIONROUGH GRADING / SITE DEMOandDEEP FOUNDATIONSDEEP FOUNDATIONSandFOUNDATIONSFOUNDATIONSandSUPERSTRUCTURESSUPERSTRUCTURE,BUILDING ENCLOSURE, andINTERIOR BUILDOUT Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 5. Construction Noise Summary, Non‐Daytime Construction Activities Distance  (ft) Attenuation  (dB) dBA Leq dBA Lmax dBA Leq dBA Lmax dBA Leq dBA Lmax 25 6 83 90 86 93 82 90 50 0 77 84 80 87 76 84 100 ‐6 71 78 74 81 70 78 150 ‐10 67 74 70 77 67 74 200 ‐12 65 72 68 75 64 72 230 ‐13 64 71 67 74 63 71 250 ‐14 63 70 66 73 62 70 300 ‐16 61 68 64 71 60 68 260 ‐14 63 70 66 73 62 70 400 ‐18 59 66 62 69 58 66 500 ‐20 57 64 60 67 56 64 530 ‐21 57 64 60 67 56 64 590 ‐21 56 63 59 66 55 63 800 ‐24 53 60 56 63 52 60 1000 ‐26 51 58 54 61 50 58 1700 ‐31 46 53 49 56 45 53 2000 ‐32 45 52 48 55 44 52 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Concrete Pouring Drilling Crane Work Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 6. Detailed Construction Noise Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Rough Grading / Site Demo Source 1: Scraper - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 40% 80.0 Source 2: Scraper - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 40% 80.0 Source 3: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 88 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =84 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 94 91 50 0 0.0 88 84 100 -6 0.0 82 78 150 -10 0.0 79 75 200 -12 0.0 76 72 230 -13 0.0 75 71 250 -14 0.0 74 71 300 -16 0.0 73 69 260 -14 0.0 74 70 400 -18 0.0 70 66 500 -20 0.0 68 64 530 -21 0.0 68 64 590 -21 0.0 67 63 800 -24 0.0 64 60 1000 -26 0.0 62 58 1700 -31 0.0 58 54 2000 -32 0.0 56 52 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 7. Detailed Construction Noise Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Deep Foundations Source 1: Drill Rig - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 20% 77.0 Source 2: Drill Rig - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 20% 77.0 Source 3: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 88 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =83 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 94 89 50 0 0.0 88 83 100 -6 0.0 82 77 150 -10 0.0 79 73 200 -12 0.0 76 71 230 -13 0.0 75 69 250 -14 0.0 74 69 300 -16 0.0 73 67 260 -14 0.0 74 68 400 -18 0.0 70 64 500 -20 0.0 68 63 530 -21 0.0 68 62 590 -21 0.0 67 61 800 -24 0.0 64 58 1000 -26 0.0 62 57 1700 -31 0.0 58 52 2000 -32 0.0 56 51 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 8. Detailed Construction Noise Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Foundations Source 1: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 2: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 3: Concrete Pump - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 81 20% 74.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 87 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =83 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 93 89 50 0 0.0 87 83 100 -6 0.0 81 77 150 -10 0.0 78 73 200 -12 0.0 75 71 230 -13 0.0 74 69 250 -14 0.0 73 69 300 -16 0.0 72 67 260 -14 0.0 73 68 400 -18 0.0 69 65 500 -20 0.0 67 63 530 -21 0.0 67 62 590 -21 0.0 66 61 800 -24 0.0 63 59 1000 -26 0.0 61 57 1700 -31 0.0 57 52 2000 -32 0.0 55 51 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 9. Detailed Construction Noise Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Superstructure Source 1: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 2: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 3: Concrete Pump - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 81 20% 74.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 87 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =83 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 93 89 50 0 0.0 87 83 100 -6 0.0 81 77 150 -10 0.0 78 73 200 -12 0.0 75 71 230 -13 0.0 74 69 250 -14 0.0 73 69 300 -16 0.0 72 67 260 -14 0.0 73 68 400 -18 0.0 69 65 500 -20 0.0 67 63 530 -21 0.0 67 62 590 -21 0.0 66 61 800 -24 0.0 63 59 1000 -26 0.0 61 57 1700 -31 0.0 57 52 2000 -32 0.0 55 51 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 10. Detailed Construction Noise Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Building Enclosure Source 1: Gradall / Forklift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 2: Gradall / Forklift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 3: Mobile Crane - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =81 16% 73.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 87 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =83 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 93 89 50 0 0.0 87 83 100 -6 0.0 81 77 150 -10 0.0 78 73 200 -12 0.0 75 71 230 -13 0.0 74 69 250 -14 0.0 73 69 300 -16 0.0 72 67 260 -14 0.0 73 68 400 -18 0.0 69 64 500 -20 0.0 67 63 530 -21 0.0 67 62 590 -21 0.0 66 61 800 -24 0.0 63 58 1000 -26 0.0 61 57 1700 -31 0.0 57 52 2000 -32 0.0 55 51 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 11. Detailed Construction Noise Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Interior Buildout Source 1: Gradall / Forklift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 2: Gradall / Forklift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 3: Manlift (double manlift) - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =75 20% 68.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 86 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =82 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 92 88 50 0 0.0 86 82 100 -6 0.0 80 76 150 -10 0.0 77 73 200 -12 0.0 74 70 230 -13 0.0 73 69 250 -14 0.0 72 68 300 -16 0.0 71 67 260 -14 0.0 72 68 400 -18 0.0 68 64 500 -20 0.0 66 62 530 -21 0.0 66 62 590 -21 0.0 65 61 800 -24 0.0 62 58 1000 -26 0.0 60 56 1700 -31 0.0 56 52 2000 -32 0.0 54 50 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 12. Detailed Construction Noise Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Sitework Source 1: Concrete Pump - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 81 20% 74.0 Source 2: Mobile Crane (Potential Trees) - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =81 16% 73.0 Source 3: Gradall / Forklift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 87 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =81 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 93 87 50 0 0.0 87 81 100 -6 0.0 81 75 150 -10 0.0 77 71 200 -12 0.0 75 69 230 -13 0.0 73 68 250 -14 0.0 73 67 300 -16 0.0 71 65 260 -14 0.0 72 67 400 -18 0.0 68 63 500 -20 0.0 67 61 530 -21 0.0 66 60 590 -21 0.0 65 60 800 -24 0.0 62 57 1000 -26 0.0 61 55 1700 -31 0.0 56 50 2000 -32 0.0 55 49 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 13. Detailed Construction Noise Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Startup/CX/Final Inspections Source 1: Scissor Lift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 75 20% 68.0 Source 2: Scissor Lift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 75 20% 68.0 Source 3: Forklift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 79 40% 75.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 82 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =76 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 88 82 50 0 0.0 82 76 100 -6 0.0 76 70 150 -10 0.0 72 67 200 -12 0.0 70 64 230 -13 0.0 68 63 250 -14 0.0 68 62 300 -16 0.0 66 61 260 -14 0.0 67 62 400 -18 0.0 63 58 500 -20 0.0 62 56 530 -21 0.0 61 56 590 -21 0.0 60 55 800 -24 0.0 57 52 1000 -26 0.0 56 50 1700 -31 0.0 51 46 2000 -32 0.0 50 44 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 14. Detailed Construction Noise - Overlapping Phases Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Source 1: Scraper - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 40% 80.0 Source 2: Scraper - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 40% 80.0 Source 3: Drill Rig - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 20% 77.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 89 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =84 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 95 90 50 0 0.0 89 84 100 -6 0.0 83 78 150 -10 0.0 79 74 200 -12 0.0 77 72 230 -13 0.0 76 71 250 -14 0.0 75 70 300 -16 0.0 73 68 260 -14 0.0 74 70 400 -18 0.0 71 66 500 -20 0.0 69 64 530 -21 0.0 68 63 590 -21 0.0 67 63 800 -24 0.0 65 60 1000 -26 0.0 63 58 1700 -31 0.0 58 53 2000 -32 0.0 57 52 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Construction Condition: Rough Grading/Site Demo and Deep Foundation Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 15. Detailed Construction Noise - Overlapping Phases Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Source 1: Drill Rig - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 20% 77.0 Source 2: Drill Rig - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 20% 77.0 Source 3: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 88 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =83 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 94 89 50 0 0.0 88 83 100 -6 0.0 82 77 150 -10 0.0 79 73 200 -12 0.0 76 71 230 -13 0.0 75 69 250 -14 0.0 74 69 300 -16 0.0 73 67 260 -14 0.0 74 68 400 -18 0.0 70 64 500 -20 0.0 68 63 530 -21 0.0 68 62 590 -21 0.0 67 61 800 -24 0.0 64 58 1000 -26 0.0 62 57 1700 -31 0.0 58 52 2000 -32 0.0 56 51 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Construction Condition: Deep Foundation and Foundations Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 16. Detailed Construction Noise - Overlapping Phases Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Source 1: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 2: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 3: Concrete Pump - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 81 20% 74.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 87 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =83 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 93 89 50 0 0.0 87 83 100 -6 0.0 81 77 150 -10 0.0 78 73 200 -12 0.0 75 71 230 -13 0.0 74 69 250 -14 0.0 73 69 300 -16 0.0 72 67 260 -14 0.0 73 68 400 -18 0.0 69 65 500 -20 0.0 67 63 530 -21 0.0 67 62 590 -21 0.0 66 61 800 -24 0.0 63 59 1000 -26 0.0 61 57 1700 -31 0.0 57 52 2000 -32 0.0 55 51 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Construction Condition: Foundations and Superstructure Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 17. Detailed Construction Noise - Overlapping Phases Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Source 1: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 2: Gradall - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 3: Concrete Pump - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 81 20% 74.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 87 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =83 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 93 89 50 0 0.0 87 83 100 -6 0.0 81 77 150 -10 0.0 78 73 200 -12 0.0 75 71 230 -13 0.0 74 69 250 -14 0.0 73 69 300 -16 0.0 72 67 260 -14 0.0 73 68 400 -18 0.0 69 65 500 -20 0.0 67 63 530 -21 0.0 67 62 590 -21 0.0 66 61 800 -24 0.0 63 59 1000 -26 0.0 61 57 1700 -31 0.0 57 52 2000 -32 0.0 55 51 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Construction Condition: Superstructure, Building Enclosure, and Interior Building Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 18. Detailed Construction Noise - Overlapping Phases Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Source 1: Gradall / Forklift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 2: Gradall / Forklift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 83 40% 79.0 Source 3: Forklift - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 79 40% 75.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 87 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =83 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 93 89 50 0 0.0 87 83 100 -6 0.0 81 77 150 -10 0.0 77 73 200 -12 0.0 75 71 230 -13 0.0 74 70 250 -14 0.0 73 69 300 -16 0.0 71 67 260 -14 0.0 72 68 400 -18 0.0 69 65 500 -20 0.0 67 63 530 -21 0.0 66 62 590 -21 0.0 65 61 800 -24 0.0 63 59 1000 -26 0.0 61 57 1700 -31 0.0 56 52 2000 -32 0.0 55 51 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Construction Condition: Building Enclosure, Interior Building, Sitework, and Startup/CX/Final Inspections Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 19. Detailed Construction Noise - Non-Daytime Construction Activitie Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Concrete Pours Source 1: Concrete Pump - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 81 20% 74.0 Source 2: Concrete Pump - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 81 20% 74.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =77 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 90 83 50 0 0.0 84 77 100 -6 0.0 78 71 150 -10 0.0 74 67 200 -12 0.0 72 65 230 -13 0.0 71 64 250 -14 0.0 70 63 300 -16 0.0 68 61 260 -14 0.0 70 63 400 -18 0.0 66 59 500 -20 0.0 64 57 530 -21 0.0 64 57 590 -21 0.0 63 56 800 -24 0.0 60 53 1000 -26 0.0 58 51 1700 -31 0.0 53 46 2000 -32 0.0 52 45 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 20. Detailed Construction Noise - Non-Daytime Construction Activitie Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Drilling Work Source 1: Drill Rig - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 20% 77.0 Source 2: Drill Rig - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 20% 77.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 87 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =80 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 93 86 50 0 0.0 87 80 100 -6 0.0 81 74 150 -10 0.0 77 70 200 -12 0.0 75 68 230 -13 0.0 74 67 250 -14 0.0 73 66 300 -16 0.0 71 64 260 -14 0.0 73 66 400 -18 0.0 69 62 500 -20 0.0 67 60 530 -21 0.0 67 60 590 -21 0.0 66 59 800 -24 0.0 63 56 1000 -26 0.0 61 54 1700 -31 0.0 56 49 2000 -32 0.0 55 48 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Terminal 101 Project Construction Noise Table 21. Detailed Construction Noise - Non-Daytime Construction Activitie Source Data: Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Construction Condition: Crane Work Source 1: Mobile Crane - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 81 16% 73.0 Source 2: Mobile Crane - Sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 81 16% 73.0 Calculated Data: All Sources Combined - Lmax sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 84 All Sources Combined - Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet =76 Distance Between Source and Receiver (ft.) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Lmax Sound Level (dBA) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 25 6 0.0 90 82 50 0 0.0 84 76 100 -6 0.0 78 70 150 -10 0.0 74 67 200 -12 0.0 72 64 230 -13 0.0 71 63 250 -14 0.0 70 62 300 -16 0.0 68 60 260 -14 0.0 70 62 400 -18 0.0 66 58 500 -20 0.0 64 56 530 -21 0.0 64 56 590 -21 0.0 63 55 800 -24 0.0 60 52 1000 -26 0.0 58 50 1700 -31 0.0 53 45 2000 -32 0.0 52 44 Geometric attenuation based on 6 dB per doubling of distance. Note: This calculation does not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography or other barriers which may reduce sound levels further. Construction Haul Truck Noise Modeling Terminal 101 ProjectConstruction Haul Truck Noise Modeling - InputsRoadway SegmentSpeed Limit (mph) Existing ADT Vehicle MixExisting Heavy TrucksProposed Hauling trucksTotal Trucks During ConstructionTotal Vehicles During ConstructionNew vehicle mix %Airport Boulevard North of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 25 16100 4% 579 550 1129 17229 7%Produce Avenue South of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 25 20860 4% 862 550 1412 22272 6%Produce Avenue North of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 25 21240 5% 1164 550 1714 22954 7%Produce Avenue South of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 35 17680 4% 739 550 1289 18969 7%Produce Avenue North of Terminal Court 35 17940 3% 549 550 1099 19039 6%San Mateo Avenue West of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 30 7840 5% 416 550 966 8806 11%San Mateo Avenue North of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 30 6800 11% 749 550 1299 8099 16%San Mateo Avenue North of South Linden Avenue 30 6230 11% 704 550 1254 7484 17%San Mateo Avenue South of South Linden Avenue 30 6790 10% 678 550 1228 8018 15%Shaw Road East of San Mateo Avenue 25 1790 6% 113 550 663 2453 27%South Airport Boulevard East of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 30 18440 4% 802 550 1352 19792 7%South Airport Boulevard West of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 30 18210 6% 1085 550 1635 19845 8%South Airport Boulevard South of South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue 35 13210 7% 952 550 1502 14712 10%South Airport Boulevard North of US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane35 13500 5% 675 550 1225 14725 8%Terminal Court West of Produce Avenue/US 101 SB On-Ramp 15 620 6% 38 550 588 1208 49%US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp West of South Airport Boulevard 10 11780 6% 739 550 1289 13069 10%US 101 SB Off-Ramp East of Produce Avenue 10 4080 12% 490 550 1040 5120 20%US 101 SB On-Ramp South of Terminal Court 55 17600 3% 536 550 1086 18686 6%Haul truck traffic noise is assessed along the routes provided by the Project Applicant. Terminal 101Construction Haul Truck Traffic Noise Modeling - OutputsExisting Noise Levels (modeled at 50 feet)gTrucks Noise Levels (modeled at 50 feet)Increase over Modeling ExistingdB CNEL dB CNEL dBAirport Boulevard North of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 25 65.4 68.1 2.7Produce Avenue South of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 25 66.5 68.4 1.8Produce Avenue North of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 25 67.6 68.4 0.8Produce Avenue South of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 35 68.2 70.2 2.0Produce Avenue North of Terminal Court 35 68.2 70.2 2.0San Mateo Avenue West of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 30 64.3 67.8 3.6San Mateo Avenue North of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 30 65.6 66.8 1.2San Mateo Avenue North of South Linden Avenue 30 65.3 70.4 5.1San Mateo Avenue South of South Linden Avenue 30 65.7 65.2 -0.4Shaw Road East of San Mateo Avenue 25 57.1 59.6 2.6South Airport Boulevard East of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 30 67.0 69.3 2.3South Airport Boulevard West of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 30 67.9 69.3 1.4South Airport Boulevard South of South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue 35 68.8 68.3 -0.5South Airport Boulevard North of US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane 35 67.8 71.4 3.6Terminal Court West of Produce Avenue/US 101 SB On-Ramp 15 53.2 67.4 14.2US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp West of South Airport Boulevard 10 67.1 68.4 1.2US 101 SB Off-Ramp East of Produce Avenue 10 65.7 71.8 6.1US 101 SB On-Ramp South of Terminal Court 55 73.3 74.7 1.4Haul truck traffic noise is assessed along the routes provided by the Project Applicant.RoadwaySpeed Limit (mph) Segment Mechanical Equipment Noise Modeling Terminal 101 ProjectMechanical Equipment ‐  SummaryEquipment TypeRaw Noise @ 50 ft(Leq) Quantity Combined Noise Level (dB)Screen or Room? Attenuation (dB)Attenuated Noise Level (dB)Data Source Sound EnergyBoiler67270Screen5.065H&K3169786.385Chiller71274Room10.064H&K2517850.824Cooling Tower74277Screen5.072H&K15886564.69pump81487Room10.077FHWA50357016.47AHU75278Screen5.073H&K20000000Exhaust Fan79282Screen5.077FHWA50237728.63Land UseDistance (ft)Combined Noise Level (dB)81.581.581.5Travelodge290Distance to Receiver (ft)2905901700Best Western590Distance Attenuation  (dB)15.321.430.6San Bruno Residential1700Noise Level at Receiver (dB)66.360.150.9 Generator Noise Modeling Terminal 101 ProjectEmergency Generator Testing Noise ‐ SummaryGenerator Location Generator SizeSound Pressure at 50 Feet(combined Engine & Exhuast)Nearest Receptor Distance*What is the closest Sensative Receptor?Decibel Attenuation (dB)Sound Pressure a nearest Receptor310 Travelodge ‐ Hotel‐7.9 94.02240 Residential Homes‐16.5 85.4420 Travelodge ‐ Hotel‐9.2 94.61970 Residential Homes‐16.0 87.9*google earth overlay of the generator locations, and measured to the nearest off‐site receptorNorth Building Generator 2500 kW 101.9South Building Generators 1500 kW 103.8 Traffic Noise Modeling Terminal 101 ProjectOperational Traffic Noise Modeling ‐ InputsRoadway SegmentExisting Heavy Truck Percentage Speed LimitExistingAverage Daily TrafficExisting with Project Average Daily TrafficFuture (Year 2040) Average Daily Traffic Future (Year 2040) with ProjectAverage Daily TrafficAirport Boulevard North of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 4%25 16100 20554 29240 30027Existing Drive Way (Not Project Related) South of Shaw Road 8% 15DNE150 331 332Gateway Bouleard North of South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue 5%35 9900 10289 16534 16514Mitchell Avenue East of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 6%30 4920 4084 13236 13196Produce Avenue South of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 4%25 20860 20079 26778 27517Produce Avenue North of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 5% 2521240 20175 26329 27068Produce Avenue South of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 4%35 17680 18803 26329 27068Produce Avenue North of Terminal Court 3%35 17940 18821 31121 32138Project Driveway North of Shaw Road 8%25DNE489 915 668San Mateo Avenue West of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 5%307840 10011 22376 22596San Mateo Avenue North of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 11%30 6800 7772 14051 14092San Mateo Avenue South of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 12%25 5510 6738 9735 9857San Mateo Avenue North of South Linden Avenue 11%306230 7878 16203 16395San Mateo Avenue South of South Linden Avenue 10%30 6790 7772 14051 14093Shaw Road West of Project Driveway 8%25DNE1413 2831 2590Shaw Road East of Project Driveway 8%25DNE774 1789 1822Shaw Road East of San Mateo Avenue 6%25 1790 1341 3489 3244South Airport Boulevard East of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 4%3018440 14890 25686 25566South Airport Boulevard West of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 6%30 18210 14956 24671 24549South Airport Boulevard South of South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue 7%35 13210 14395 22755 22973South Airport Boulevard North of US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane 5% 3513500 15376 25198 25494South Airport Boulevard South of US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane 4%35 14060 14903 27699 28013South Linden Avenue West of San Mateo Avenue 9%25 3700 5194 14700 14774Tanforan Avenue West of San Mateo Avenue 9%25 440 413 2199 2201Terminal Court West of Produce Avenue/US 101 SB On-Ramp 6%15 620 3708 0 0US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp West of South Airport Boulevard 6% 1011780 8807 19990 19981US 101 SB Off-Ramp East of Produce Avenue 12% 104080 2024 0 0US 101 SB On-Ramp South of Terminal Court 3%55 17600 18915 31121 32138Wondercolor Lane East of South Airport Boulevard 10% 10820 776 2965 2968DNE - Does Not Exist. Under current existing conditions, these roadway segment ADTs would equal zero. Terminal 101 ProjectOperational Traffic Noise Modeling ‐ Direct Impact Evaluation OutputRoadway SegmentExisting Heavy Truck PercentageSpeed LimitExistingCNELExisting with ProjectCNELDelta dBAirport Boulevard North of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 4%25 65.466.41.1Exisitng Drive Way (Not Project Related) South of Shaw Road 8% 25DNE48.6 N/AGateway Bouleard North of South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue 5%35 66.566.60.2Mitchell Avenue East of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 6%30 62.361.5‐0.8Produce Avenue South of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 4%25 66.566.3‐0.2Produce Avenue North of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 5% 2567.667.4‐0.2Produce Avenue South of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 4%35 68.2 68.4 0.3Produce Avenue North of Terminal Court 3%35 68.268.40.2Project Driveway North of Shaw Road 8%25DNE52.6N/ASan Mateo Avenue West of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 5%30 64.365.31.1San Mateo Avenue North of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 11%30 65.666.20.6San Mateo Avenue South of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 12%25 64.265.00.9San Mateo Avenue North of South Linden Avenue 11%30 65.366.31.0San Mateo Avenue South of South Linden Avenue 10%30 65.766.20.6Shaw RoadWest of Project Driveway 18%25 57.156.8‐0.3Shaw RoadEast of Project Driveway 18%25 57.154.4‐2.7Shaw Road East of San Mateo Avenue 6%25 57.155.9‐1.2South Airport Boulevard East of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 4%30 67.066.1‐0.9South Airport Boulevard West of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 6%30 67.967.0‐0.9South Airport Boulevard South of South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue 7%35 68.869.20.4South Airport Boulevard North of US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane5% 3567.868.40.6South Airport Boulevard South of US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane4%35 67.267.40.3South Linden Avenue West of San Mateo Avenue 9%25 62.463.91.5Tanforan Avenue West of San Mateo Avenue 9%25 53.653.3‐0.2Terminal Court West of Produce Avenue/US 101 SB On-Ramp 6%15 53.260.47.2US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp West of South Airport Boulevard 6% 1067.165.9‐1.2US 101 SB Off-Ramp East of Produce Avenue 12% 1065.762.7‐3.0US 101 SB On-Ramp South of Terminal Court 3%55 73.373.60.3Wondercolor Lane East of South Airport Boulevard 10% 1058.858.6‐0.2DNE - Does Not Exist. Under current existing conditions, these roadway segment ADTs would equal zero. 1. Existing conditions traffic data was not available for this roadway segment. According to the project traffic engineer (Fehr and Peers), existing conditions for Shaw Road east of San Mateo Avenue can be substituted in for this segment. Terminal 101 ProjectOperational Traffic Noise Modeling ‐ Cumulative Impact Evaluation OutputRoadway SegmentExisting Heavy Truck PercentageSpeed LimitExistingCNELYear 2040 Without ProjectCNELYear 2040 with ProjectCNELFuture with Project (Year 2040) minus Existing Delta dBFuture (Year 2040) with Project minus Future (Year 2040)Delta dBAirport Boulevard North of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 4%25 65.4 68.0 68.1 2.7 0.1Exisitng Drive Way (Not Project Related South of Shaw Road 8% 15DNE51.2 51.2 N/A 0.0Gateway Bouleard North of South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue 5%35 66.5 68.7 68.7 2.2 0.0Mitchell Avenue East of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 6%30 62.3 66.5 66.5 4.2 0.0Produce Avenue South of San Mateo Avenue/South Airport Boulevard 4%25 66.5 67.6 67.7 1.2 0.1Produce Avenue North of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 5% 2567.6 68.5 68.7 1.0 0.1Produce Avenue South of US 101 SB Off-Ramp 4%35 68.2 69.9 70.0 1.8 0.1Produce Avenue North of Terminal Court 3%35 68.2 70.6 70.7 2.5 0.1Project Driveway North of Shaw Road 8%25DNE55.1 53.8 N/A‐1.2San Mateo Avenue West of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 5%30 64.3 68.8 68.8 4.6 0.0San Mateo Avenue North of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 11%30 65.6 68.8 68.8 3.1 0.0San Mateo Avenue South of Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road 12%25 64.2 66.6 66.7 2.5 0.1San Mateo Avenue North of South Linden Avenue 11%30 65.3 69.4 69.4 4.2 0.1San Mateo Avenue South of South Linden Avenue 10%30 65.7 68.8 68.8 3.2 0.0Shaw RoadWest of Project Driveway 18%25 57.1 59.8 59.4 2.3‐0.4Shaw RoadEast of Project Driveway 18%25 57.1 57.8 57.9 0.8 0.1Shaw Road East of San Mateo Avenue 6%25 57.1 59.9 59.6 2.5‐0.3South Airport Boulevard East of Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue 4%30 67.0 68.5 68.4 1.4 0.0South Airport Boulevard West of South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard 6%30 67.9 69.2 69.2 1.3 0.0South Airport Boulevard South of South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue 7%35 68.8 71.2 71.2 2.4 0.0South Airport Boulevard North of US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane 5% 3567.8 70.5 70.6 2.8 0.1South Airport Boulevard South of US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp/Wondercolor Lane 4%35 67.2 70.1 70.1 3.0 0.0South Linden Avenue West of San Mateo Avenue 9%25 62.4 68.4 68.4 6.0 0.0Tanforan Avenue West of San Mateo Avenue 9%25 53.6 60.2 60.2 6.6 0.0Terminal Court West of Produce Avenue/US 101 SB On-Ramp 6%15 53.2 44.9 44.9‐8.4 0.0US 101 NB On- and Off-Ramp West of South Airport Boulevard 6% 1067.1 69.4 69.4 2.3 0.0US 101 SB Off-Ramp East of Produce Avenue 12% 1065.7 46.7 46.7‐19.0 0.0US 101 SB On-Ramp South of Terminal Court 3%55 73.3 75.8 75.9 2.6 0.1Wondercolor Lane East of South Airport Boulevard 10% 1058.8 64.2 64.2 5.4 0.0DNE - Does Not Exist. Under current existing conditions, these roadway segment ADTs would equal zero. 1. Existing conditions traffic data was not available for this roadway segment. According to the project traffic engineer (Fehr and Peers), existing conditions for Shaw Road east of San Mateo Avenue can be substituted in for this segment.