HomeMy WebLinkAboutApndx H_Noise
APPENDIX H
ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE TECHNICAL
REPORT
Prepared by
Ramboll Environ US Corporation
San Francisco, California
Date
November 2017
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN
UPDATE, ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE
TECHNICAL REPORT
OYSTER POINT
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Contents ii Ramboll Environ
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 2017 Oyster Point Specific Plan (OPSP) Update (proposed “Project”) spans from 377 to
389 Oyster Point Boulevard and is bounded by Oyster Cove to the west and the San
Francisco Bay to the east in South San Francisco, California. The property is an
approximately 30-acre lot. The proposed plan for the Project includes approximately
1,042,000 square feet of research and development, 1,450,000 square feet of residential
area, 50,000 square feet of retail area, as well as underground and surface parking. The
construction of the Project includes the demolition of the five structures currently on the
site, which total approximately 403,827 square feet. The construction will take place over
three phases. Phases III and IV contain all of the residential area and a portion of the retail
and parking, while Phase II contains all of the research and development and the remainder
of the retail and parking. The phases analyzed here are part of the existing OPSP that was
approved in 2011. The Precise Plan for the initial phase (Phase I) was approved in 2011, so
that phase is not being reanalyzed.
This report provides a summary of noise and vibration impacts expected from the Project.
Construction noise impacts are anticipated during some construction phases at some noise-
sensitive receiver locations. Environmental Design Features include adherence to
construction timing restrictions and employment of common and best available control
strategies for reducing construction noise emissions.
Operational noise impacts may result from on-site equipment, including HVAC or parking
garage exhaust fans, at residential terraces or interior areas. Exterior and interior impacts
shall be mitigated through appropriate design or through use of HVAC units to ensure
windows and doors could remain closed during warm weather. Parking garage ventilation
fan noise shall be mitigated by strategically orienting these fans away from noise sensitive
receiving areas and/or through use of noise control equipment such as exhaust fan
silencers.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Contents iii Ramboll Environ
CONTENTS
Executive Summary .................................................................................... ii
Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................... v
1. Introduction ......................................................................................... 7
1.1 Project Description ...................................................................................... 7
1.2 Objective and Methodology .......................................................................... 7
2. Common Descriptors ............................................................................ 8
2.1 Environmental Noise .................................................................................... 8
2.2 Vibration .................................................................................................. 10
3. Applicable Noise Regulations ............................................................. 14
3.1 State of California ..................................................................................... 14
3.1.1 California Building Code ................................................................... 14
3.2 City of South San Francisco Municipal Code .................................................. 14
3.2.1 Maximum Noise Level Limits ............................................................. 14
3.3 Noise Considerations in the City’s General Plan ............................................. 16
4. Existing Environment ......................................................................... 18
4.1 Sound Level Measurement Locations ........................................................... 18
4.2 Existing Sound Sources .............................................................................. 18
4.3 Sound Level Measurement Data .................................................................. 18
4.4 Existing Noise Sensitive Land Uses .............................................................. 19
4.4.1 Residential Uses .............................................................................. 19
4.4.2 Hotels ............................................................................................ 19
4.4.3 Commercial .................................................................................... 19
4.5 New Development ..................................................................................... 20
4.5.1 New Residential .............................................................................. 20
4.5.2 New Commercial ............................................................................. 20
5. Noise Impact Assessment .................................................................. 21
5.1 Significance Criteria ................................................................................... 21
5.1.1 Approach to Analysis ....................................................................... 21
5.2 Operational Impacts of the Specific Plan....................................................... 22
5.2.1 Impact NOI-1: On-Site Impacts From Operational Equipment and
Traffic ............................................................................................ 22
5.2.2 Impact NOI-2: Permanent Increases From Operational Noise and
Traffic ............................................................................................ 26
5.2.3 Impact NOI-3: Cumulative Increases From Project Traffic Sources ....... 27
5.3 Construction Impacts of the Specific Plan ..................................................... 28
5.3.1 Impact NOI-4: Construction Vibration Impacts of the Project ............... 28
5.3.2 Impact NOI-5: Construction Noise Impacts of the Project .................... 29
5.4 Impact NOI-6: Exposure to Aircraft Noise .................................................... 35
6. References ......................................................................................... 36
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Contents iv Ramboll Environ
TABLES
Table 1: Sound Levels Produced by Common Noise Sources ....................................... 10
Table 2: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ..................................... 12
Table 3: Effects of Construction Vibration ................................................................ 13
Table 4: South San Francisco Maximum Permissible Sound Levels .............................. 15
Table 5: Land Use Criteria for Noise-Impacted Areas ................................................. 17
Table 6: Sound Level Measurement Data ................................................................. 18
Table 7: Summary of Land Uses ............................................................................. 20
Table 8: Future Traffic Noise Levels at On-site Sensitive Receivers .............................. 23
Table 9: Off-Site Traffic Noise: Existing No Build and Build......................................... 27
Table 10: Traffic Noise: Off-Site Future No Build and Build (Cumulative) ....................... 28
Table 11: Construction Equipment Noise Levels .......................................................... 30
Table 12: Construction Noise at Existing and Future Sensitive Receivers ....................... 31
Table 13: Construction Traffic Noise: Existing and Existing Plus Construction Traffic ....... 33
FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Boundaries and Sound Level Measurement Locations ......................... 49
Figure 2. Building Construction Phasing .................................................................... 50
Figure 3. Traffic Noise Modeling Results .................................................................... 51
APPENDICIES
APPENDIX A: Tables
APPENDIX B: Figures
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Acronyms and Abbreviations v Ramboll Environ
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Acoustically neutral ............... A description of equipment or material such as a wind screen
used over a sound level meter microphone that, due to its
composition, has little or no effect on the sound pressure
levels reaching the microphone
Day-night sound level (Ldn) .... A 24-hour sound level metric similar to a 24-hour Leq, except
the Ldn includes an additional 10 dBA added to sound levels
in each hour between 10 PM and 7 AM to account for
increased sensitivity to noise during times when people are
typically trying to sleep
Community Noise Exposure Level (CNEL) A 24-hour sound level metric similar to the Ldn,
except the CNEL includes an additional 5 dBA added to sound
levels in each hour between 7 PM and 10 PM to account for
sensitivity to noise during times when people are typically at
rest or relaxing
dB ....................................... decibel, referring to a unit measured on the decibel scale
used to quantify sound levels
dBA ..................................... A-weighted decibel, a system for weighting measured sound
levels to reflect the frequencies that people hear best
Distance attenuation .............. the rate at which sound levels decrease with increasing
distance from a noise source based on the dissipation of
sound energy as the sound wave increases in size (think of a
balloon getting thinner as it becomes more inflated)
Equivalent sound level (Leq) ... A sound level metric that is the level that if held constant
over the same period of time would have the same sound
energy as the actual, fluctuating sound (i.e., an energy-
average sound level)
Leq ...................................... Equivalent sound level (see above)
Ln ........................................ Statistical noise level, the level exceeded during n percent of
the measurement period, where n is a number between 0
and 100 (for example, L50 is the level exceeded 50 percent
of the time)
Noise criteria ........................ A set of definitions establishing the conditions under which a
noise impact is determined to have occurred.
Noise impact......................... A measured or model-calculated condition in which the
absolute (i.e., total) sound level and/or a project-related
sound level increase exceed a defined noise impact criterion.
Noise metric ........................ One of a number of measures used to quantify noise (e.g.,
Leq, or Lmax)
SLM ..................................... Sound level measurement
Sound level ......................... Sound pressure level (see below)
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Acronyms and Abbreviations vi Ramboll Environ
Sound power level ................. A measure of the sound energy emitted by noise source
expressed as energy per unit of time. Not to be confused
with sound pressure level.
Sound pressure level ............ Ten times the base-10 logarithm of the square of the ratio of
the mean square sound pressure, in a stated frequency band
(often weighted), and the reference mean-square sound
pressure of 20 μPa (micro pascals, a standard reference unit
of pressure), which is approximately equal to the threshold
of human hearing at 1 kilohertz. Sound pressure level is
expressed in decibels.
Type I meter ........................ A type of sound level meter defined by American National
Standards Institute as being to measure sound pressure
levels to an accuracy within 0.5 dBA
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Introduction 7 Ramboll Environ
1. INTRODUCTION
This Environmental Noise Assessment Technical Report covers noise and vibration emissions
associated with the construction and operation of the Project. This report describes
common noise and vibration descriptors, regulatory criteria that are applicable to this
project, estimates of construction and operational noise and vibrati on, and a summary of
environmental design features intended to reduce the potential for noise-related impacts.
At the request of Lamphier-Gregory, Ramboll Environ US Corporation (Ramboll Environ) has
prepared this technical report evaluating environmental noise and vibration in the
surrounding area (referred to as the “technical report”) associated with the proposed mixed
use development that is the 2017 Oyster Point Specific Plan (OPSP) Update in South San
Francisco, California (referred to as the “Project”). Analyses applied the most current
regulatory noise limits established by the City of South San Francisco, as well as relevant
state and federal guidance.
1.1 Project Description
The proposed Project spans from 377 to 389 Oyster Point Boulevard and is bounded by
Oyster Cove to the west and the San Francisco Bay to the east in South San Francisco,
California. The property is an approximately 30-acre lot. The proposed location and
boundary are shown in Appendix B, Figure 1. The proposed plan for the Project includes
approximately 1,042,000 square feet of research and development, 1,450,000 square feet
of residential area, 50,000 square feet of retail area, as well as underground and surface
parking. The construction of the Project includes the demolition of the five structures
currently on the site, which total approximately 403,827 square feet. The construction will
take place over three phases. Phases III and IV contain all of the residential area and a
portion of the retail and parking, while Phase II contains all of the research and
development and the remainder of the retail and parking. The phases ana lyzed here are
part of the existing OPSP that was approved in 2011. The Precise Plan for the initial phase
(Phase I) was approved in 2011, so that phase is not being reanalyzed.
1.2 Objective and Methodology
As noted above, impacts are compared to the thresholds identified in the City of South San
Francisco Municipal Code, as well as regulatory guidance provided within the Noise Element
of the City of South San Francisco General Plan.
The following areas are included in this technical report: on -site and off-site construction
noise emissions; long-term operational emissions; long-term off-site (i.e., traffic)
operational noise emissions. This report also includes an assessment of construction and
operational vibration.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Common Descriptors 8 Ramboll Environ
2. COMMON DESCRIPTORS
2.1 Environmental Noise
Noise is sometimes defined as unwanted sound. This report makes no such distinction, and
the terms noise and sound are used more or less synonymously.
The human ear responds to a very wide range of sound intensities. The decibel scale (dB)
used to describe sound is a logarithmic rating system which accounts for the large
differences in audible sound intensities. This scale accounts for the human perception of a
doubling of loudness as an increase of 10 dB. Therefore, a 70-dB sound level will sound
about twice as loud as a 60-dB sound level. People generally cannot detect differences of 1
or 2 dB. In ideal laboratory situations, differences of 2 or 3 dB can be detected by people,
but such a change probably would not be noticed in a typical outdoor environment. A 5-dB
change probably would be clearly perceived by most people under normal listening
conditions.
On the logarithmic decibel scale used to describe noise, a doubling of sound-generating
activity (i.e., a doubling of the sound energy) causes a 3-dB increase in average sound
produced by that source, not a doubling of the loudness of the sound (which requires a 10-
dB increase). For example, if traffic along a road is causing a 60 dB sound level at some
nearby location, twice as much traffic on this same road would cause the sound level at this
same location to increase to 63 dB. Such an increase might not be discernible in a complex
acoustical environment.
When addressing the effects of noise on people, it is useful to consider the frequency
response of the human ear. Sound-measuring instruments are therefore often programmed
to “weight” measured sounds based on the way people hear. The frequency-weighting most
often used is A-weighting because it approximates the frequency response of human
hearing and is highly correlated to the effects of noise on people. Measurements from
instruments using this system are reported in "A-weighted decibels" or dBA. All sound levels
in this evaluation are reported in A-weighted decibels.
Relatively long, multi-source “line” sources, such as roads with continuous traffic, emit
cylindrical sound waves. Due to the cylindrical spreading of these sound waves, sound levels
from such sources decrease with each doubling of distance from the source at a rate of
about 3 dBA. Sound waves from discrete events or stationary “point” sources, such as a car
horn, spread as a sphere, and sound levels from such sources decrease 6 dBA per doubling
of the distance from the source. Conversely, moving half the distance closer to a source
increases sound levels by 3 dBA and 6 dBA for line and point sources, respectively.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Common Descriptors 9 Ramboll Environ
In addition to distance from the source, the frequency of the sound, the absorbency of the
intervening ground, the presence or absence of intervening obstructions, and the duration
of the noise-producing event all affect the transmission and perception of noise. The degree
of the effect on perception also depends on who is listening (individual physiological and
psychological factors) and on existing sound levels (background noise). Typical sound levels
of some familiar noise sources and activities are presented in Table 1.
When assessing potential community response to noise, it is helpful to have a metric that
averages varying noise exposure over time and quantifies the result in terms of a single
number descriptor. Several such metrics have been developed that address community
noise levels. Those applicable to this analysis are the Equivalent Noise Level (Leq), the Day-
Night Noise Level (Ldn), and the Community Noise Exposure Level (CNEL).
The Leq is the level of a constant sound that has the same sound energy as the actual
fluctuating sound. As such, it can be considered an energy-average sound level for a given
period of time (e.g., 15 minutes, 1 hour, 24 hours, etc.).
The Ldn is a 24-hour Leq with a 10-decibel penalty added to sound levels that occur between
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in consideration of potential for sleep disturbance.
The CNEL is a 24-hour sound level metric similar to the Ldn, except the CNEL includes an
additional 5 dBA added to sound levels in the evening hours between 7:00 and 10:00 p.m.
to account for sensitivity to noise during times when people are typically at rest or relaxing.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Common Descriptors 10 Ramboll Environ
Table 1: Sound Levels Produced by Common Noise Sources
Thresholds / Noise Sources Sound
Level (dB)
Subjective
Evaluations
Possible Effects
on Humans
Human Threshold of Pain 140
Deafening
Continuous
Exposure Can
Cause Hearing
Loss
Carrier jet takeoff (50 ft) 130
Siren (100 ft) 120
Chain saw
Noisy snowmobile 110
Lawn mower (3 ft)
Noisy motorcycle (50 ft) 100
Very Loud
Heavy truck (50 ft) 90
Pneumatic Drill (50 ft)
Busy urban street, daytime 80
Loud
Normal automobile at 50 mph
Vacuum cleaner (3 ft) 70
Speech
Interference Large air conditioning unit (20 ft)
Conversation (3 ft) 60
Moderate
Quiet residential area
Light auto traffic (100 ft) 50
Sleep Interference
Library
Quiet home 40
Faint
Soft whisper (15 ft) 30
Slight Rustling of Leaves 20
Very Faint Broadcasting Studio 10
Threshold of Human Hearing 0
Note that both the subjective evaluations and the physiological responses are continuums without
true threshold boundaries. Consequently, there are overlaps among categories of response that
depend on the sensitivity of the noise receivers.
Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and others.
2.2 Vibration
Equipment that creates blows or impacts on the ground surface produces vibrational
waves, called groundborne vibration, that radiate along the surface of the earth and
downward into the earth, potentially resulting in effects that range from annoyance to
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Common Descriptors 11 Ramboll Environ
structural damage. As vibrations travel outward from the source, they excite the
particles of rock and soil through which they pass and cause them to oscillate by a few
ten-thousandths to a few thousandths of an inch. Differences in subsurface geologic
conditions and distance from the source of vibration will result in different vibration
levels characterized by different frequencies and intensities. In all cases, vibration
amplitudes will decrease with increasing distance. The maximum rate or velocity of
particle movement is the commonly accepted descriptor of the vibration “strength.” This
is referred to as the peak particle velocity (ppv) and is typically measured in inches per
second.
Vibration energy spreads out as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration level
to diminish with distance away 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. Discontinuities in the soil strata can also
cause diffractions or channeling effects that affect the propagation of vibration over long
distances. 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 due to structural
resonances of the floors and walls.
Human response to vibration is difficult to quantify. Vibration can be felt or heard well
below a level that would result in damage to a structure. Human response to vibration
often is described as the root-mean-square velocity level and is denoted in the decibel
scale, or VdB. The typical background level in residential areas is about 50 VdB, and
most people generally cannot detect levels below about 65 VdB, and generally do not
consider levels below 70 VdB to be of significance. However, note that the duration of a
vibration event has an effect on human response, as does frequency. Generally, as the
duration of a vibration event increases, the potential for adverse human response
increases. In addition, while people have varying sensitivities to vibrations at different
frequencies, in general they are most sensitive to low-frequency vibration.
Vibration in buildings caused by construction activities may be perceived as motion of
building surfaces or rattling of windows, items on shelves, and pictures hanging on
walls. Vibration of building components can also take the form of an audible low-
frequency rumbling noise, which is referred to as groundborne noise. Groundborne noise
is usually only a problem when the originating vibration spectrum is dominated by
frequencies in the upper end of the range of vibration frequencies (i.e., 60 to 200 Hz),
or when the structure and the construction activity are connected by foundations or
utilities, such as sewer and water pipes.
Table 2 provides a summary of vibration levels from typical construction equipment.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Common Descriptors 12 Ramboll Environ
Table 2: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment
Equipment PPV at 25 ft
(in/sec)
Approx. VdB
at 25 ft
Pile Driver (impact) Upper range 1.518 112
Typical 0.644 104
Pile Drive (sonic) Upper range 0.734 105
Typical 0.170 93
Clam shovel Drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94
Hydromill (slurry wall)
In soil 0.008 66
In rock 0.017 75
Vibratory Roller 0.210 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson Drilling 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
RMS velocity in decibels (VdB) re 1 mirco-inch/second
Source: FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2006
Table 3 summarizes the average human response to vibration that may be anticipated
when a person is at rest in quiet surroundings. If the person is engaged in any type of
physical activity, vibration tolerance increases considerably.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Common Descriptors 13 Ramboll Environ
Table 3: Effects of Construction Vibration
Peak Particle Velocity
(in/sec) Effect on Humans Effect on Buildings
<0.005 Imperceptible No effect on buildings
0.005 to 0.015 Barely perceptible No effect on buildings
0.02 to 0.1 Barely to distinctly perceptible No effect on buildings
0.1 to 0.5
Distinctly perceptible to strongly
perceptible; Vibrations
considered unacceptable for
people exposed to continuous or
long term vibration
Minimal potential for
damage to weak or
sensitive structures
0.5 to 1.0
Strongly perceptible to mildly
unpleasant; Vibrations
considered bothersome by most
people, however tolerable if
short-term in length
Threshold at which there is
a risk of architectural
damage to buildings with
plastered ceilings and walls.
Some risk to ancient
monuments and ruins.
1.0 to 2.0
Mildly unpleasant to distinctly
unpleasant; Vibrations
considered unpleasant by most
people
U.S. Bureau of Mines data
indicates that blasting
vibration in this range will
not harm most buildings.
Most construction vibration
limits are in this range.
>2.0 Distinctly unpleasant to
intolerable
Potential for architectural
damage and possible minor
structural damage.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Applicable Noise Regulations 14 Ramboll Environ
3. APPLICABLE NOISE REGULATIONS
3.1 State of California
California Government Code Section 65302 encourages each local government entity to
implement a noise element as part of its general plan. In addition, the California
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research has developed guidelines for preparing noise
elements, which include recommendations for evaluating the compatibility of various
land uses as a function of community noise exposure. The City of South San Francisco
has developed guidelines that are described in Section 3.3 of this report.
3.1.1 California Building Code
Title 24, Part 2 of the California Code of Regulations contains requirements for the
construction of new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings other than
detached single-family dwellings, intended to limit the extent of noise transmitted into
habitable spaces from exterior noise sources. These requirements are collectively
known as the California Noise Insulation Standards. The Standards set forth an interior
standard of 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room with all doors and windows closed, and
they require an acoustical analysis demonstrating how dwelling units have been
designed to meet this interior standard in situations where units are proposed in areas
subject to transportation noise levels greater than 60 dBA CNEL.
3.2 City of South San Francisco Municipal Code
3.2.1 Maximum Noise Level Limits
The City of South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC) contains all ordinances for the
City. The SSFMC is organized by Title, Chapter, and Section. Chapter 8.32 of the SSFMC
identifies base noise level standards, allowable increases above these standards, and
exemptions or restrictions that are specific to certain types of activities or events . The
noise level standards are based on Land Use Categories as defined by the City’s zoning
Code (Title 20).
Table 4 is a summary of the maximum permissible noise levels for residential,
commercial, and industrial receiving properties.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Applicable Noise Regulations 15 Ramboll Environ
Table 4: South San Francisco Maximum Permissible Sound Levels
Land Use Category Time Maximum Noise Level (dBA)
R-E, R-1 and R-2 zones
or any single-family or
duplex residential in a
specific plan district
10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. 50
7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 60
R-3 and D-C zones or
any multiple-family
residential or mixed
residential/commerical in
any specific plan district
10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. 55
7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 60
C-1, P-C, Gateway and
Oyster Point Marina
specific plan districts or
any commerical use in
any specific plan district
10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. 60
7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 65
M-1, P-1 Anytime 70
Source: From the South San Francisco Municipal Code, Chapter 8.32, Table 8.32.030, as adapted
from “The Model Community Noise Control Ordinance”, Office of Noise Control, California
Department of Health.
As stated in SSFMC 8.32.030, the limits found in Table 4 are not to be exceeded
according to the following:
Limit (in Table 4) for a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in any hour
Limit +5 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes in any hour
Limit +10 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes in any hour
Limit +15 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 1 minute in any hour
Limit +20 dBA for any period of time
In addition to the noise level standards identified in Table 4, Chapter 8.32.050, titled
Special Provisions, identifies provisions that relate to noise emitted from events such as
performances, vehicle horns, utilities, and construction. SSFMC 8.32.050(d) states tha t
construction is permitted between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. on weekdays, between 9 a.m. and
8 p.m. on Saturdays, and between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Sundays and holidays,
provided at least one of the following noise limitations is met:
8.32.050(d)(1): No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level
exceeding ninety dB at a distance of twenty-five feet. If the device is housed
within a structure or trailer on the property, the measurement shall be made
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Applicable Noise Regulations 16 Ramboll Environ
outside the structure at a distance as close to twenty-five feet from the
equipment as possible.
8.32.050(d)(2): The noise level at any point outside of the property plane of the
project shall not exceed ninety dB (Ord. 1088 § 1, 1990).
Therefore, the SSFMC allows for construction noise to exceed the Noise Level Standards
identified in Table 4 provided construction equipment meets the criteria outlined in
8.32.050(d).
3.3 Noise Considerations in the City’s General Plan
As required under the California Government Code, the City of South San Francisco has
established noise compatibility guidelines, found within the Chapter 9, Noise Element of
the city’s General Plan. The project is consistent with the following guiding policies:
9-G-1: Protect public health and welfare by eliminating or minimizing the effects
of existing noise problems, and by preventing increased noise levels in the future.
9-G-2: Continue efforts to incorporate noise considerations into land use
planning decisions, and guide the location and design of transportation facilities
to minimize the effects of noise on adjacent land uses.
The Chapter establishes a number of implementing policies in support of both guiding
policies. Note that the following summarizes policies that are relevant to the
construction and operation of the Project:
Policy 9-I-6: Require that applicants for new noise-sensitive development in areas
subject to noise generators producing noise levels greater than 65 dB CNEL, obtain the
services of a professional acoustical engineer to provide a technical analysis and design
of mitigation measures.
Policy 9-I-7: Where site conditions permit, require noise buffering for all noise-
sensitive development subject to noise generators producing noise levels greater than
65 dB CNEL. This noise attenuation method should avoid the use of visible sound walls,
where practical.
Policy 9-I-8: Require the control of noise at source through site design, building
design, landscaping, hours of operation, and other techniques, for new developments
deemed to be noise generators.
As part of the implementation of goal 9-G-1, 9-G-2, and of the above policies, the City
of South San Francisco has identified compatibility guidelines for various types of land
uses, as provide in Table 5.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Applicable Noise Regulations 17 Ramboll Environ
Table 5: Land Use Criteria for Noise-Impacted Areas
Land Use CNEL Range General Land Use Criteria
Residential
Less than 65 Satisfactory; no special insulation
requirements
65 to 70
Development requires analysis of
noise reduction requirements and
noise insulation as needed
Over 70 Development should not be
undertaken
Commercial
Less than 70 Satisfactory; no special insulation
requirements
70 to 80
Development requires analysis of
noise reduction requirements and
noise insulation as needed
Over 80
Airport related development only;
special noise insulation should be
provided
Industrial
Less than 75 Satisfactory; no special insulation
requirements
75 to 85
Development requires analysis of
noise reduction requirements and
noise insulation as needed
Over 85
Airport-related development only;
special noise insulation should be
provided
Open
Less than 75 Satisfactory; no special insulation
requirements
Over 75 Avoid uses involving concentrations
of people or animals
Source: City of South San Francisco General Plan Noise Element, SFO Airport Land Use Plan
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Existing Environment 18 Ramboll Environ
4. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
4.1 Sound Level Measurement Locations
Long-term (i.e., multiple day) and short-term (i.e., 15 minute) sound level
measurements were made by Charles M. Salter Associates, Inc. (Salter) between March
13 and March 16, 2017. Measurements were made at several locations within the
Project vicinity to quantify the acoustic environment and provide qualitative descriptions
of the dominant and minor sources of noise at each location. An illustration of the
locations for long-term (LT) and short-term (ST) sound level measurements is found in
Figure 1.
4.2 Existing Sound Sources
The existing acoustic environment within the Project vicinity included traffic noise from
Oyster Point Boulevard and US-101, as well as noise from overhead aircraft. Note that
the nearest runway of the San Francisco International Airport is located approximatel y
2.2 miles south of Oyster Point.
4.3 Sound Level Measurement Data
Table 6 summarizes sound level measurement data collected by Salter. Review of
historical weather conditions during measurements suggest dry ground, relatively calm
winds, and daytime temperatures ranging between approximately 55 °F and 75 °F.
Conditions during the measurement program were considered suitable for noise
measurements. A full list of all hourly sound level data are found in Appendix A, Table
9.
Table 6: Sound Level Measurement Data
Measurement
ID# Dates
Range of
CNEL
levels (a)
Quietest
Hourly Leq
Daytime Evening Nighttime
L1
3/13 – 3/16
61-65 55 56 45
L2 68-69 65 61 57
L3 58-61 53 54 40
S1
3/16,
12pm –
12:15pm
n/a 58 n/a n/a
(a) Because the measurement period was longer than 24-hours, the CNEL is presented as a
range of CNEL levels calculated over rolling 24-hour periods. At L1 and L2, the CNEL
calculations did not include the hours between 6:00 and 10:00 a.m. on March 15th due to
the excessive influence of local landscaping activities.
Source: Measurements by Charles M. Salter Associates, Inc. Summary of measurement data
produced by Ramboll Environ.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Existing Environment 19 Ramboll Environ
4.4 Existing Noise Sensitive Land Uses
Human response to noise varies considerably from one individual to another. Effects of
noise at various levels can include interference with sleep, concentration, and
communication; physiological and psychological stress; and hearing loss. Given these
effects, some land uses are considered more sensitive to ambient noise levels than
others. Land uses are considered “noise sensitive” where low noise levels are necessary
for these uses in order to preserve their intended goals such as relaxation, recreation,
education, health, and general state of well-being. Residential uses are considered most
sensitive to noise because people spend extended periods of time and sleep at home.
Other noise sensitive receivers typically include schools, hotels/motels, churches,
libraries, and hospitals.
The following summarizes the existing off-site noise-sensitive receiving areas identified
for this study.
4.4.1 Residential Uses
Existing residential uses within the vicinity of the Project include live-in boats located in
the Oyster Cove Marina, located adjacent to the west of the Project area. Further away
and to the east of the Project site are boats located within the Oyster Point Marina. It is
not known which boats included live-in occupants, however for the purposes of this
assessment, it was assumed that the nearest boats to the Project area could include
residential occupants. The deck areas of the boats were assumed to be outdoor use
areas.
4.4.2 Hotels
There are at least four (4) hotels located along Gateway Blvd, between Oyster Point Blvd
to the north and Grand Blvd to the south. All four hotels are located along the east side
of the roadway, including the Larkspur Landing, Hilton Garden Inn, Hampton Inn, and
the Embassy Suites. A fifth hotel, the Comfort Inn and Suites, is located along the south
side of Grande Ave, west of Gateway Blvd. These hotels have been identified for
potential exposure to increases in Project-related traffic noise, including cumulative
impact, as well as exposure to noise from truck haul routes. Note that only the Comfort
Inn and Suites along Grande Ave includes a designated outdoor use area (pool).
4.4.3 Commercial
A large number of commercial buildings are located in the project vicinity and along
major routes to the facility. Commercial uses include mainly office spaces, biotech and
bioscience facilities, and others.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Existing Environment 20 Ramboll Environ
4.5 New Development
4.5.1 New Residential
New residential development is proposed for the Project, including both apartments and
condominiums proposed to be located within Phases III and IV and generally located in
the northern two-thirds of the Project site. Buildings within Phase III would include
Marina North, as well as Parkview. Buildings within Phase IV would include Marina
South, Oyster Point North, and Oyster Point South. A summary of the number of rental
units and for sale units proposed for each is provided in Table 7. As noted, Phase I has
been approved and therefore is not included in this tabulation.
4.5.2 New Commercial
The Project includes new retail development on ground floors of the Phase III and Phase
IV residential buildings, including Parkview, Marina North, Marina South, and potentially
Oyster Point Noise and Oyster Point South. Specific retail uses are not known at this
time, but likely would include cafes and small stores.
Research and Development (R&D) are proposed for buildings to be constructed under
Phase II of the Project. A total of five (5) buildings are proposed for Phase II. Details on
building height, specific use, and other details will be provide at a later date. It is
expected that three (3) emergency generators will be constructed within the R&D
development of Phase II.
Table 7: Summary of Land Uses
Phase (a)
Name/
Description
Residential Commericial
Rental
Units
For Sale
Units Retail Research &
Develpment
Phase II R&D, 5 Buildings - - - Yes
Phase III
Marina North - 150 Yes -
Parkview 330 - Yes -
Phase IV
Marina South 215 - - -
Oyster Pt. North - 346 - -
Oyster Pt. South 150 - - -
Total 695 496
Notes:
(a) The precise phasing and amount of construction in each phase is conceptual at this time.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 21 Ramboll Environ
5. NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
5.1 Significance Criteria
This section summarizes the criteria of significance that are used to establish the
thresholds for determining whether a project noise impact is beneficial, less-than-
significant, or significant and unavoidable.
In accordance with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and General Plan, the project
would have a significant noise impact if it resulted in:
1. Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards
established in the General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies
2. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project
3. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project
4. Exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive levels of groundborne vibration
or noise
5. For a project located within 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, exposure of
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
6. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, exposure of people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
5.1.1 Approach to Analysis
The following criteria were used as thresholds of significance for noise and vibration
impacts considered in this assessment:
Noise Exposure in Excess of Standards
Generation of on-site operational noise exceeding the levels identified in Chapter
8.32 of the SSFMC at nearby receiving properties
Exposure of existing or planned future residential uses and other noise-sensitive
outdoor use space (e.g., parks, outdoor terraces) to sound levels above 65 dBA CNEL
Exposure of existing or planned future commercial land uses (e.g., office, retail) to
sound levels above 70 dBA CNEL
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 22 Ramboll Environ
Exposure of existing or future residential interior spaces to levels that exceed 45 dBA
CNEL
Permanent Noise Increase
At the exterior space of noise-sensitive land uses (residential, other recreational
open spaces), an increase in traffic noise of 3 dBA CNEL over existing sound levels
At the exterior space of noise-sensitive land uses (residential, other recreational
open spaces), a cumulative traffic noise increase of 1 dBA CNEL over future baseline
noise levels
Temporary Construction Noise Increase
Construction noise levels that exceed 60 dBA Leq (hourly) at noise-sensitive
residential land uses, or that exceed 70 dBA Leq (hourly) at commercial land uses,
and exceed the ambient noise environment by 5 dBA Leq (hourly), for a period
exceeding one (1) year
Temporary Construction Vibration
During construction vibration levels in excess of 0.20 in/sec PPV (peak particle
velocity)
5.2 Operational Impacts of the Specific Plan
5.2.1 Impact NOI-1: On-Site Impacts From Operational Equipment and Traffic
On-site traffic noise is not expected to exceed the compatibility requirements at
proposed new residential and commercial receivers. However, operational equipment
pursuant to implementation of the Project would generate noise at proposed new
residential and commercial receivers and may exceed the residential noise compatibility
requirements within the Noise Element of the General Plan . This is a less than
significant impact with mitigation.
5.2.1.1 Traffic
Traffic noise emissions along Oyster Point Blvd within the Project site were computed
using the TNM Lookup program, which is based on standard noise model results of the
FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM) Version 2.5. Traffic data used for this assessment are
included in Appendix A, Table 14. For this assessment, traffic noise was evaluated at
the nearest facades of residential units within Phases III and IV, estimated to be 50 feet
from the centerline of Oyster Point Boulevard. The 2040 calculated traffic sound level at
a distance of 50 feet from the centerline of Oyster Point Blvd is 65 dBA CNEL. 65 dBA
CNEL would not exceed the City of South San Francisco land use compatibility
requirements for residential use (compatibility requirement is 65 dBA CNEL).
Operational traffic would result in no significant impacts at on-site receivers.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 23 Ramboll Environ
Table 8: Future Traffic Noise Levels at On-site Sensitive Receivers
Source of
Traffic Noise Receivers
Distance to
Centerline of
Oyster Point
Blvd (ft) CNEL (a)
Impact
Criteria
CNEL (b)
Significant
Impact?
Oyster Point Blvd,
North of Marina
Blvd
Phase III and
Phase IV
Apartments
and Condos
50 65 >65 No
Notes:
(a) Computed using TNM Lookup, CNEL based on comparison with existing measurements at SLM L2.
(b) Based on City of South San Francisco General Plan Land Use Criteria for Noise-Impacted Areas
Source: Ramboll Environ, 2017. CNEL estimated based on hourly data measured by Charles M.
Salter Associates, Inc.
At locations further from the Oyster Point development, sound levels from Project-
related traffic along Oyster Point Blvd, as well as other roadways, are anticipated to be
much lower, and residential units within Phase III and Phase IV that are farther than 50
feet from the centerline of Oyster Point Boulevard would be exposed to CNEL levels of
65 dBA or less, which would not result in significant noise impacts to these units.
Measured sound levels at the north end of the Project, as represented by L1 (see
Appendix B, Figure 1), indicate the existing CNEL levels range from 61-65 dBA. The
main noise source at this location is traffic along Highway 101, which is anticipated to
continue to dominate the noise environm ent at this location. Receivers exposed to noise
emissions at this location include live-in boats at the Oyster Cove Marina. No change is
expected at these receivers due to on-site noise associated with the Project.
At the south end of the Project, sound levels represented by L3 are exposed to ambient
levels ranging from 58-61 dBA CNEL. The main noise source at this location is distant
traffic sources and activity within the existing Oyster Point development. Noise from on-
site traffic sources is not expected to greatly affect the ambient noise environment at
this location. Receivers exposed to noise emissions at this location include li ve-in boats
at the Oyster Point Marina. No change is expected at these receivers due to on -site
noise associated with the Project.
5.2.1.2 Air Handling Equipment
Residential and R&D air handling equipment generate continuous levels of noise in a
given environment. Such equipment will need to be selected and designed to comply
with the noise limits established in Chapter 8.32 of the SSFMC, and the overall levels of
noise from such equipment is anticipated to be relatively low at sensitive receivers in the
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 24 Ramboll Environ
Project vicinity. Adequate consideration of equipment sound levels can ensure that the
contribution to the overall noise environment can be minimized by locating them such
that nearby noise-sensitive uses are shielded from exposure to these equipment or by
fitting them with appropriate air intake and exhaust silencers. Buildings proposed for
the R&D area within Phase II are anticipated to require substantial air handling and
cooling equipment. During final development of plans for all residential and R&D
buildings, consideration regarding the strategic location of air handling equipment, as
well as selection of equipment that are considered low-noise options or that are fitted
with silencers, would ensure that air handling equipment noise emissions do not result in
impact at nearby noise-sensitive uses.
5.2.1.3 Emergency Generators
Emergency generators are proposed at the R&D buildings within Phase II. Currently,
generators are proposed to be located within the center of the five-building R&D
complex. Generators may be located approximately 250 feet or farther from the nearest
residential development to the north, Marina North, located within Phase IV. Standard
generators for like-sized buildings typically emit noise levels ranging from 65 to 75 dBA
at 25 feet. At 250 feet, this estimated range of generator noise levels is reduced to 45
to 55 dBA. Except during emergency power outage use, generators are typically only
operated for short-periods during routine testing, typically 30 minutes. Noise from these
equipment are not expected to result in impacts at nearby future on-site residential
buildings. Note that existing live-in boats in both Oyster Cove Marina and Oyster Point
Marina would be located farther than 250 feet to the nearest proposed generators, and
no significant noise impact would be expected.
At the commercial uses within the R&D buildings, noise from generators would be
higher, but given the short-duration testing schedule, are not anticipated to measurably
influence the 24-hour 70-dBA CNEL compatibility criteria at these buildings. In addition,
it is anticipated that design of new R&D buildings would be sensitive to the location of
emergency generators relative to proposed noise-sensitive R&D spaces within the
buildings.
5.2.1.4 Retail Facilities
Proposed retail services and amenities would be provided for residential, retail, and
other uses within the Project. Most amenities would be located at ground level within the
Marina North and Parkview buildings in Phase III. Typical retail amenities, such as
coffee stands, bakeries, etc., as well as clothing or similar type stores, typically do not
operate during nighttime hours, and typically do not generate acoustically-significant
levels of operational noise. Therefore noise from new retail facilities are not expected to
result in significant noise impacts.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 25 Ramboll Environ
5.2.1.5 Parking
Parking garages are proposed within select residential buildings to be built under Project
Phases III and IV. Current Project design includes up to two levels of above-ground
parking in some buildings, located on the first and second floors and completely
enclosed within the building envelope. Noise from traffic within enclosed parking
garages is not anticipated to affect overall noise levels received at residential and
commercial receiving properties.
Noise from ventilation fans for parking garages can be directed away from potentially
affected residential receiving properties. Therefore, depending on the ultimate
configuration and sizing of the ventilation fans, significant noise impacts can be avoided.
At the R&D facilities in Phase II, the parking area would be located outside, within the
center of the C-shape of these building, and potentially at other locations around the
R&D buildings. Noise from outdoor parking areas are typically low due to low travel
speeds, and noise from these parking areas i s not anticipated to results in significant
noise impacts at adjacent commercial or nearby new residential uses.
5.2.1.6 Outdoor Use Areas
Select residential buildings proposed for the Project would include outdoor terraces or
gathering areas, designed as locations for residents to gather and socialize. Noise from
elevated voices may at times increase overall noise levels received at residential units
that overlook or are adjacent to these outdoor use areas, however noise from outdoor
use areas is not expected to exceed residential compatibility standards.
5.2.1.7 Mitigation Measure NOI-1
An acoustical assessment shall be completed to ensure that h eating and cooling (e.g.,
HVAC) equipment are selected, designed, and installed such that exterior noise levels
comply with the noise limits established in Chapter 8.32 of the SSFMC (65 dBA CNEL)
and interior noise levels comply with the interior noise compatibility requirements within
Title 24, Part 2 of the California Code of Regulations (45 dBA CNEL). The acoustical
assessment shall include specific recommendations for acoustic enclosures, noise
barriers, or other noise-mitigating measures, if warranted. The same study also shall
evaluate parking garage ventilation fans to ensure that they are designed and installed
to comply with the same noise limits. If warranted, the assessment shall comment on
the required orientation (i.e., acoustic directionality) of ventilation fans at parking
garages, so that they are directed away from new on-site noise sensitive areas and
existing off-site live-in boats. Mitigation options for reducing interior noise levels may
include installation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems to
ensure that windows can remain closed during warm weather, and/or use of building
materials (walls, windows, door) with STC ratings above code requirement.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 26 Ramboll Environ
Implementation of recommendations provided within the acoustic assessment are
anticipated to result in less than significant noise impacts from these equipment.
5.2.2 Impact NOI-2: Permanent Increases From Operational Noise and
Traffic
Noise emissions from traffic pursuant to implementation of the Project would generate
noise levels that could be received at existing off-site noise-sensitive receivers. This is
a less than significant impact.
Existing noise-sensitive receivers in the vicinity of the Project site include receivers at
the live-in boats located in the Oyster Cove Marina to the west of the Project and in
Oyster Point Marina to the east of the Project. Farther from the site, existing noise-
sensitive receivers include the hotels along Gateway Blvd and Grand Ave, as well as the
child care facility on Gateway Blvd. West of Highway 101 are residential receivers
located along the north and south sides of Sister Cities Blvd. Existing commercial
receivers are located along all area roadways between Highway 101 and the Project.
Existing sound levels measured at the north end of the Project area, north of the
proposed Phase IV development area, ranged from 61 to 65 dBA CNEL over the multi-
day measurement period (see Table 6). The lowest measured hourly sound level during
daytime hours (hourly Leq) was 55 dBA at this same location. At the south end of the
proposed Parkview residential building, approximately 290 feet east of the centerline of
Oyster Point Blvd and adjacent to the bay of the Oyster Point Marina, existing sound
levels ranged from 58 to 61 dBA CNEL, and the lowest hourly sound level during daytime
hours was 53 dBA Leq. Noise from operational traffic along Oyster Point Blvd is not
expected to significantly influence the ambient noise environment at either marina due
to distance from the this roadway and due to the expected shielding provided by the
new residential and commercial buildings.
West of the Project site, existing and existing plus Project traffic sound levels were
computed using the TNM Lookup program.
Along Oyster Point Blvd, there are only commercial receivers and no noise-sensitive
uses. Traffic-related sound level increases over existing conditions along this road are
projected to be approximately 1 dBA CNEL or lower. Commercial receivers are generally
less sensitive to increases in ambient noise because there tend to be few or no outdoor
use areas.
Along Gateway Blvd, Grand Blvd, and Sisters Cities Blvd, where there exist noise-
sensitive receivers (i.e., hotels, daycare, residences), noise increases are expected to be
less than 1 dB and acoustically negligible. Table 9 summarizes off-site traffic noise
increases over existing noise condi tions.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 27 Ramboll Environ
Table 9: Off-Site Traffic Noise: Existing No Build and Build
Segment
Description Land Use
Existing Sound Level
(CNEL, dBA) (a, b) Significant Impact (c)
Without
Project
With
Project Change (d)
Increase
Criteria
(dBA)
Significant
Impact?
Oyster Point Blvd Commercial 67 69 1.4 3 No
Gateway Blvd Daycare,Hotels 64 64 0 3 No
Sister Cities Blvd (e) Residential 71 71 0 3 No
Grand Ave Hotel 68 68 0 3 No
Notes:
(a) Noise levels calculated using TNM Lookup based on traffic volumes provided within the Project traffic
assessment report. CNEL computed through comparison with existing sound level measurement at
L2.
(b) Traffic composition assumes 97% light duty vehicles, 2% medium duty vehicles, and 1% heavy duty
vehicles.
(c) Impact criteria levels based on an increase over existing sound levels of 3 dBA CNEL or more.
(d) Apparent calculation errors are the result of numeric rounding.
(e) The noise barrier and berms along Sister Cities Blvd were not included in the modeling; actual noise
levels are likely lower than presented
Source: Ramboll Environ, 2017
The assessment of potential increases in traffic sound levels due to the Project indicate
that very low or no increases in noise would occur. This impact is a less than significant.
5.2.3 Impact NOI-3: Cumulative Increases From Project Traffic Sources
Noise from traffic pursuant to implementation of the Project would generate cumulative
noise that could be received at existing off-site residential and commercial receivers.
This is a less than significant impact.
Cumulative increases in Project-related traffic noise are calculated by comparing future
2040 baseline traffic (i.e., future traffic with inclusion of reasonably foreseeable
projects) with 2040 baseline plus Project traffic. Increases in noise levels of greater
than 1 dBA CNEL are considered “cumulatively considerable” and a significant impact.
In general, noise impacts of this nature are evaluated at noise-sensitive locations only.
However for completeness and comparison with Section 5.2.2, this study evaluated off-
site increases in 2040 cumulative traffic noise at all roadways in the immediate vicinity
of the Project, including those where there are adjacent noise-sensitive receptors and
those where there are adjacent commercial receptors.
Along Oyster Point Blvd, the calculated increase in 2040 cumulative traffic sound level is
estimated to be 0.9 dBA CNEL. The increase does not exceed the impact threshold and,
therefore no impacts are identified. Along all other are roadways, including Gateway
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 28 Ramboll Environ
Blvd, Grand Ave, and Sister Cities Blvd, where there existing noise-sensitive uses,
cumulative increase in noise are 1 dBA or less.
Table 10: Traffic Noise: Off-Site Future No Build and Build (Cumulative)
Segment
Description Land Use
2040 Sound Level
(CNEL, dBA) (a, b) Significant Impact (c)
Without
Project
With
Project Change
Increase
Criteria
(dBA)
Significant
Impact?
Oyster Point Blvd Commercial 69 70 0.9 1 No
Gateway Blvd Daycare, Hotels 66 66 0 1 No
Sister Cities Blvd (d) Residential 72 72 0 1 No
Grand Ave Hotel 70 70 0 1 No
Notes: The levels shown have generally been rounded to the nearest whole number.
(a) Noise levels calculated using TNM Lookup based on traffic volumes provided within the Project
traffic assessment report. CNEL computed through comparison with existing sound level
measurement at L2.
(b) Traffic composition assumes 97% light duty vehicles, 2% medium duty vehicles, and 1% heavy
duty vehicles.
(c) Cumulative impact criteria levels based on an increase over baseline 2040 sound levels of 1 dBA
CNEL or more.
(d) The noise barrier and berms along Sister Cities Blvd were not included in the modeling; actual
noise levels likely lower than presented
Source: Ramboll Environ, 2017
The assessment of cumulative noise increases indicate that increases in noise at noise-
sensitive uses (i.e., hotels, daycare, and residences) would be 1 dBA or less. This
impact is less than significant.
5.3 Construction Impacts of the Specific Plan
5.3.1 Impact NOI-4: Construction Vibration Impacts of the Project
Construction of uses pursuant to implementation of the Project result in temporary
exposure of existing off-site and future on-site persons to groundborne vibration. This
is a less than significant impact.
Vibration levels will be generated by a range of construction equipment activities.
Typical construction activity will involve use of equipment that generates levels between
approximately 0.003 PPV and 0.21 PPV, when measured at 25 feet.
Construction activities could operate within close proximity to the existing boats west of
the Project area, at the Oyster Cove Marina. However, because these residential
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 29 Ramboll Environ
receivers are located on water (boats), groundborne-vibration would be dissipated
through water and negligible at boats.
Construction activities could operate within close proximity to newly constructed and
inhabited residential units located within the Project area during construction of later
Project phases. Heavy equipment is not expected to operate closer than up to 15 feet
from the future residential uses, which would result in vibration levels of 0.150 PPV or
less, with other typical equipment such as bulldozers and loaders resulting in vibration
levels of 0.064 PPV or less. These levels are below the 0.2 PPV threshold established
for this assessment for potential cosmetic damage (see Section 5.1.1). During most
construction activities, vibration levels at new residential units are expected to be much
lower. Vibration impacts are expected to be less than significant.
5.3.2 Impact NOI-5: Construction Noise Impacts of the Project
Construction of uses pursuant to implementation of the Project would result in
temporary exposure of persons to noise from construction equipment and construction -
related traffic. This is a significant and unavoidable impact.
5.3.2.1 Construction Equipment
Construction of the Specific Plan would include a wide range of equipment and activities,
would occur over a period of several years, and would result in elevated levels of
construction noise as received at existing off-site and future on-site noise sensitive
receiving locations.
The assessment of construction noise was based on noise predictions using noise levels
from standard equipment and activities. Table 11 provides a summary of typical
construction equipment that are anticipated at the Project. Data provided in Table 11
are based on anticipated construction activities as provided in the Oyster Point Specific
Plan Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Accidental Hazardous Releases Technical Report,
estimated using methodologies consistent with the California Emissi ons Estimator Model
(CalEEMod®).
Noise emissions summarized in Table 11 are based on the FHWA Roadway Noise
Construction Model (RCNM), which provides sound level data from standard construction
equipment at user-defined distances. The construction schedule was provided by the
Project developer.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 30 Ramboll Environ
Table 11: Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Equipment Construction Activities
Hourly Leq by
Distance (dBA) (a)
25' 100' 250'
Air Compressor Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 80 68 60
Backhoe
Demolition, Grading & Utility Construction, Paving & Street
Improvements, Landscape Improvements 80 68 60
Berm Machine Paving & Street Improvements, Landscape Improvements 86 74 66
Bulldozer Demolition 84 72 64
Concrete Pump Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 80 68 60
Concrete Truck Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 81 69 61
Crane
Grading & Utility Construction, Residential/Commercial Site
Preparation 79 67 59
Drill Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 80 68 60
Dump Truck
Demolition, Grading & Utility Construction, Paving & Street
Improvements, Landscape Improvements,
Residential/Commercial Site Preparation 78 66 58
Excavator
Grading & Utility Construction, Residential/Commercial Site
Preparation 83 71 63
Forklift Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 81 69 61
Hi-Lift Forklift Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 81 69 61
Loader Demolition 81 69 61
Paver Paving & Street Improvements, Landscape Improvements 80 68 60
Pickup Paving & Street Improvements, Landscape Improvements 77 65 57
Pile Hammer Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 100 88 80
Roller Paving & Street Improvements, Landscape Improvements 79 67 59
Rubber Tired
Loader Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 81 69 61
Scraper Demolition 86 74 66
Temp
Generators Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 84 72 64
Trencher Grading & Utility Construction 83 71 63
Water Truck Demolition, Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 77 65 57
Welder Residential/Commercial Construction, Foundation 76 64 56
Notes:
(a) Hourly Leq by Distance based on RCNM with default usage factors.
Noise predictions were based on noise modeling completed using the Datakustik
Cadna/A noise prediction model, based on ISO 9613-2 noise propagation algorithms.
The Cadna/A model allows for consideration of ground type, meteorological conditions,
and most relevant to this assessment, the presence or absence of intervening buildings.
As summarized in Section 5.1.1, the noise assessment criteria for construction noise
impacts are:
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 31 Ramboll Environ
Construction noise levels that exceed 60 dBA, Leq for residential receivers, and 70
dBA, Leq for commercial receivers,
Construction noise that exceeds ambient conditions by more than 5 dBA, Leq , and
Construction activities that occur for more than a one year period
Table 12 provides a summary of the construction equipment assessment results. Note
that all existing off-site receivers are included, as well as future on-site receivers that
may be exposed to later phases of construction. As noted above, the construction noise
impact criteria require that construction noise exposure occur for more than one year.
Therefore, Table 12 summarizes only those receivers that could be exposed to more
than one year of construction by a single nearby construction phase, or by a
combination of overlapping phases (see Appendix A, Table 16 and Appendix B,
Figure 2). The full list of results, by construction phase and receptor location, are
provided in Appendix A, Table 21.
Note that existing ambient noise levels at nearby off-site and future on-site receivers
were based on existing noise measurements, as summarized in Table 6.
Table 12: Construction Noise at Existing and Future Sensitive Receivers
Location
Loudest
Construction
Phase(s) (a)
Existing
Daytime
Leq (dBA)
Modeled
Sound
Level
(Leq, dBA)
Increase
over
Existing
Leq (b)
Significant
Impact? (c)
Oyster Cove
Marina
Phase III Condo and
Phase IV Apartment
Construction
56 (d) 82 26 Yes
Oyster Point
Marina
Phase III Apartment
Construction 55 (e) 74 19 Yes
Marina View
North
Phase IV Condo 2
Construction 62 (f) 84 22 Yes
Marina View
South
Phase IV Condo 1 and
Phase II Commercial
Construction
62 (f) 71 9 Yes
Park View
Apartments
Phase III Apartment
Construction 62 (f) 84 22 Yes
Notes:
(a) The loudest construction phase or phases resulting in the highest overall noise level at each location is
summarized here. Each phase of construction expected to last more than 1 year was evaluated and
combined with other phases that were expected to occur at the same time.
(b) Increase over lowest daytime Leq based on comparison with existing sound level measurements.
(c) Significant impact criteria based on construction noise exceeding 60 dBA, exceeding of ambient noise
levels by 5 dBA or greater, and continuous operation for a period of 1 year or greater.
(d) Existing daytime Leq based on 3-day average measurements from SLM L1 between 7 am and 10 pm.
(e) Existing daytime Leq based on 3-day average measurements from SLM L3 between 7 am and 10 pm.
(f) Existing daytime Leq based on 3-day average measurements from SLM L2 between 7 am and 10 pm.
Source: Ramboll Environ, 2017.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 32 Ramboll Environ
As noted in Table 12, at noise sensitive locations that may be exposed to prolonged
construction activity, construction noise levels could exceed ambient conditions by up 26
dBA Leq during worst-case construction hours. This is a significant noise impact.
5.3.2.2 Construction Traffic
Traffic associated with construction of the Project would include light-duty vehicles (i.e.,
cars and pickups) carrying workers to and from the site, medium -duty vendor and
contractor vehicles, and heavy-duty vehicles for materials supply and removal of on-site
debris and fill. Construction traffic would occur over the entire duration of the Project,
and continuously during all construction Phases.
The expected haul traffic route for heavy duty truck trips and most medium-duty truck
trips would be from northbound Highway 101, exiting east at Grand Ave, north along
Gateway Blvd, and east along Oyster Point Blvd to the Project. The route leaving the
Project site is expected to travel west from the Project along Oyster Point Blvd and onto
Highway 101 southbound. For this assessment, all worker and vendor traffic were
assumed to travel the same route to and from the Project site.
Many commercial properties, several hotels, and a daycare exist along the anticipated
haul route. At these receivers, noise emissions from construction traffic would be subject
to the same construction noise impact thresholds as identified for on-site construction
equipment (see Section 295.3.2.1).
A summary of construction-related traffic, summarized by project phase, and during the
peak-hour construction period, is provided in Appendix A, Table 17 and Table 18.
The assessment of construction traffic noise was based on the worst-case hour over an
assumed 8-hour work day. To compute construction traffic volumes during this worst-
case hour, it was assumed that all worker traffic and half of all vendor traffic would
travel during the AM or PM peak hour period. And it was assumed that the daily heavy
duty haul traffic would be evenly distributed over the 8-hour construction period.
The highest volume of construction traffic, generated during a single construction phase,
would occur during construction of the Phase II commercial buildings. However, the
construction phase schedule indicates some phases of construction would overlap.
Therefore, each construction phase was reviewed for overlapping periods and
construction traffic for overlapping phases was combined to determine the absolute
worst case combined traffic volumes generated by construction. Appendix A, Table 6
summarizes the combined, worst-case peak period traffic volumes. Note that this period
is anticipated to occur during the combined construction of Phase II commercial
buildings and Phase IV Oyster Point North residential building.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 33 Ramboll Environ
Table 13 summarizes projected noise emissions, based on TNM Lookup modeling, for
existing (ambient) traffic conditions and existing conditions plus construction traffic.
Noise levels along all construction traffic routes near the project are expected to be 67
dBA (Leq) or less during construction. The increase over existing ambient conditions
along these roadways is estimated to be 1 to 2 dBA. Although construction haul traffic
is anticipated to occur for longer than one year in duration, the increase over ambient
conditions is negligible (less than 5 dBA). Therefore, construction noise impacts due to
haul traffic are anticipated to be less than significant, provided haul traffic adhere to
assigned haul routes.
Table 13: Construction Traffic Noise: Existing and Existing Plus Construction Traffic
Segment
Description Land Use
Dist. (ft)
From
Road (a)
Sound Level (Leq, dBA) (b)
Significant
Impact (c) Existing
Existing
Plus
Haul
Traffic Change
Grand Ave Hotel 100 61 63 2 No
Gateway Blvd
Daycare,
Hotels,
Commercial
100 61 64 2 No
Oyster Point
Blvd Commercial 60 66 67 1 No
Notes:
(a) Approximate distance measured between receiver and centerline of nearest roadway
(b) Traffic sound levels calculated with TNM lookup and the following traffic composition:
97% light duty (LDV), 2% medium duty (MDV), and 1% heavy duty vehicles (HDV). Note that
construction traffic assumes all worker trips as LDV, all vendor trips as MDV, all haul trips as
HDV. Results rounded to nearest whole decibel. Apparent errors in calculations are due to
rounding. Traffic volumes used in modeling can be found in Appendix A, Table 7.
(c) Significant impact criteria based on construction noise exceeding 60 dBA, exceeding of ambient
noise levels by 5 dBA or greater, and continuous for a period of 1 year or greater.
Source: Ramboll Environ, 2017
5.3.2.3 Mitigation Measure NOI-4
To reduce the potential for noise impacts during Project construction, the project
Applicant will be required to adhere to the construction noise limits of the SSFMC, in
addition to specific construction-related provisions aimed at ensuring construction noise
does not result in undue impacts at nearby sensitive uses. The following summarize
these additional requirements identified in the SSFMC:
SSFMC 8.32.050(d): Construction activities will be limited to the permitted
construction hours, defined as between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. on weekdays, between 9
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 34 Ramboll Environ
a.m. and 8 p.m. on Saturdays, and between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Sundays and
holidays.
SSFMC 8.32.050(d)(1): no individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level
exceeding 90 dB at a distance of 25 feet.
SSFMC 8.32.050(d)(2): The noise level at any point outside of the property plane of
the project shall not exceed 90 dB
The following items are additionally required to reduce to the potential for high levels of
noise from construction equipment or activities, and to ensure that noise complaints are
addressed promptly and, if necessary, corrective action is taken:
• Require that all equipment be fitted with properly sized mufflers, and if necessary,
engine intake and exhaust silencers.
• Require that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines be prohibited.
• Require that all equipment be in good working order.
• Use quieter construction equipment models if available, and whenever possible use
pneumatic tools rather than diesel or gas-powered tools.
• Place portable stationary equipment as far as possible from occupied residential
areas, and if necessary, place temporary barriers around stationary equipment.
• For mobile equipment that routinely operate near residential areas (i.e., within
approximately 200 feet), consider replacement of typical fixed, pure-tone backup
alarms with ambient-sensing and/or broadband backup alarms.
• Assign a noise control officer to ensure that the above requirements are being
implemented, and to respond to noise complaints.
• Post notices on construction property line fencing that includes contact information
for the assigned noise control officer, including the noise complaint hotline number.
• Prepare a construction plan for approval by the City of South San Francisco. The
Plan shall include the proposed construction schedule, a list major construction
equipment and activities that are anticipated during construction, contact information
for the noise control officer, and noise complaint response procedures.
• Where feasible during use of pile hammers, pre -drill pile holes using auger piling
equipment. Also, if feasible, employ the use of multiple pile ha mmers to expedite
this construction activity, thereby limiting the duration of exposure to high-impact
noise emissions, as received at nearby noise-sensitive areas.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Noise Impact Assessment 35 Ramboll Environ
• Ensure that the construction haul traffic follows assigned routes to minimize the
potential for impact along other area roadways.
Due to the elevated noise levels expected during some construction activities (see
Table 12), and due to the duration of the construction program, implementation of the
above measures is unlikely to reduce construction noise impacts to less than significant.
Therefore, significant and unavoidable noise impacts are expected, intermittently, during
some construction activities, and during use of some equipment.
5.4 Impact NOI-6: Exposure to Aircraft Noise
The Project area would be exposed to intermittent noise from aircraft accessing the San
Francisco International Airport. Noise from aircraft is not expected to result in
cumulative noise levels that exceed compatibility requirements. This is a less than
significant impact.
As provided in the Noise Element of the City’s General Plan, Figure 9-1 illustrates that
that Project are lies outside of SFO’s 65 dBA CNECL contour area. The General Plan
projections are based on 2006 estimates of activity at SFO. However, review of SFO’s
noise exposure forecast map for 2019, created in 20151, illustrates that the Project area
continues to remains outside of the 65 dBA CNEL contours area.
As observed during ambient noise measurements made at the Project site, intermittent
aircraft flights are audible, and may contribute to the cumulative noise environment.
However, aircraft noise contribution is expected to result in a less than significant noise
impact.
1 SFO Noise Exposure Map. https://www.flysfo.com/community/noise-abatement/sfo-part-
150-study/noise-exposure-map-report
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
References 36 Ramboll Environ
6. REFERENCES
City of South San Francisco. 2002. General Plan, Chapter 9, Noise. Available online at:
http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=474.
City of South San Francisco. 1990. South San Francisco Municipal Code. Available online at:
http://qcode.us/codes/southsanfrancisco/.
U.S. Department of Transportation. 2004. FHWA Traffic Noise Model Lookup Tables, Version
2.5.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2014. Appendix G: Environmental Checklist
Form. Available online at:
http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/2014_CEQA_Statutes_and_Guidelines.pdf.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
APPENDIX A: TABLES
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Table 14: Existing and Future Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Speed for
Offsite Traffic Assessment
Roadway Segment
Distance to
Receiver
(feet) (a)
PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (b)
Speed
(mph)
(c) Existing
Existing
with
Project
Future
(2040)
Future
(2040)
with
Project
Oyster Point Blvd
west of Gull Dr 55 1412 1933 2328 2871 35
Gateway Blvd north of
Grand Ave 98 1121 1203 2071 2114 35
Sister Cities Blvd west
of Airport Blvd 70 2931 3054 3531 3643 40
Grand Ave west of
Gateway Blvd 105 3209 3327 4903 4987 35
(a) Distance to receiver measured between center of nearest roadway and nearest sensitive
receiver (Residence, Hotel, or Daycare).
(b) Peak Hour traffic volumes from Crane Transportation Group traffic study. Roadways
modeled assuming 97% light duty vehicles, 2% medium duty vehicles, and 1% heavy
duty vehicles.
(c) Speed based on existing speed limits.
Table 15: Future Peak Hour Traffic Volumes for Onsite Traffic Assessment
Roadway Segment
Distance to
Receiver
(feet) (a)
PM Peak Future (2040) + Project
Traffic Volumes (b) Speed (mph)
(c) LDV (c) MDV (c) HDV (c)
Oyster Point Blvd
north of Marina Blvd 50 1222 16 8 30
(a) Distance to receiver measured between center of nearest roadway and nearest sensitive
receiver.
(b) Peak hour traffic volumes east of Gull Drive from Crane Transportation Group traffic
study. Traffic volumes north of Marina Blvd calculated assuming percent of trips to/from
Phase I development (25%) would be diverted south.
(c) Traffic composition assumed 2040 Traffic Volumes without project are 97% light duty
vehicles (LDV), 2% medium duty vehicles (MDV), and 1% heavy duty vehicles (HDV).
Project-only traffic volumes assumed to be 100% LDV.
(d) Speed based on existing speed limits.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Table 16: Construction Phase Schedule
Phase Activity Start End
Phase II
Demolition 6/29/2018 8/9/2018
Commercial Site Preparation 8/10/2021 10/11/2021
Commercial Foundation 10/15/2021 2/3/2022
Commercial Construction 2/4/2022 3/30/2023
Phase
III & 4
Demolition 12/23/2017 2/2/2018
Grading & Utility Construction 2/20/2018 7/26/2018
Landscape Improvements 4/30/2018 10/12/2018
Paving & Street Improvements 6/15/2018 10/18/2018
Phase
III
Residential Site Preparation 4/5/2018 7/25/2018
Phase III Residential Building Construction (Apartments) 6/3/2018 1/21/2020
Phase III Residential Building Construction (Condos) 8/9/2019 6/8/2021
Phase IV
Residential Site Preparation 4/5/2019 6/27/2019
Residential Building Construction (Apartments) 6/17/2019 3/21/2021
Residential Building Construction (Condo 1) 1/9/2022 11/8/2023
Residential Building Construction (Condo 2) 11/9/2023 9/8/2025
Source: Construction Schedule from Project Developer.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Table 17: Construction Traffic Trip Generation, by Phase and Activity
Phase Activity Workdays
Trips Per Day (a)
Worker Vendor Hauling
Phase II
Demolition 30 33 0 7
Commercial Site Preparation 45 28 0 12
Commercial Foundation 80 98 0 3
Commercial Construction 300 447 176 3
Phase
III
&
Phase
IV
Demolition 30 33 0 60
Grading & Utility Construction 113 53 0 32
Paving & Street Improvements 90 18 0 10
Landscape Improvements 120 18 0 0
Phase
III
Residential Site Preparation 80 15 0 2
Residential Building Construction (Apartments) 427 220 34 8
Residential Building Construction (Condos) 478 108 17 8
Phase
IV
Residential Site Preparation 60 25 0 1
Residential Building Construction (Apartments) 460 246 38 2
Residential Building Construction (Condo 1) 478 132 20 2
Residential Building Construction (Condo 2) 478 132 20 2
Notes:
(a) Represents one-way trips to and from the Project site.
(b) Worker, Vendor, and Haul trips determined using CalEEMod.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Table 18: Peak Period Construction Traffic Volume Composition, by Phase
Phase and Activity
Total Peak Period Trips (veh/hr)
LDV MDV HDV
Phase II Demolition 17 0 1
Phase II Commercial Site Preparation 14 0 2
Phase II Commercial Foundation 49 0 1
Phase II Commercial Construction 224 44 1
Phase III & IV Demolition 17 0 8
Phase III & IV Grading & Utility Construction 27 0 4
Phase III & IV Landscape Improvements 9 0 0
Phase III & IV Paving & Street Improvements 9 0 2
Phase III Residential Site Preparation 8 0 1
Phase III Residential Building Construction
(Apartments)
110 9 1
Phase III Residential Building Construction (Condos) 54 5 1
Phase IV Residential Site Preparation 13 0 1
Phase IV Residential Building Construction
(Apartments)
123 10 1
Phase IV Residential Building Construction (Condo 1) 66 5 1
Phase IV Residential Building Construction (Condo 2) 66 5 1
Notes:
Peak period trips assume all workers and half of the daily vendor trips would arrive or leave during
the AM or PM peak periods, respecitvely. Haul truck trips were evenly distributed during the 8-hour
work day.
All worker trips were assumed to be light duty vehicles (LDV).
All vendor trips were assumed to be medium duty vehicles (MDV).
All haul trips were assumed to be heavy duty vehicles (HDV).
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Table 19: Combined Worst-Case Peak Period Construction Traffic
Phase and Activity
Total Peak Period Trips (veh/hr)
LDV MDV HDV
Combined Phase II Commercial Construction and
Phase IV Residential Building Construction (Condo 1) 290 49 2
Notes:
All worker trips were assumed to be light duty vehicles (LDV).
All vendor trips were assumed to be medium duty vehicles (MDV).
All haul trips were assumed to be heavy duty vehicles (HDV).
Table 20: PM Peak Existing + Construction Traffic Volumes and Speed
Roadway Segment
Peak Period
(a)
Peak Existing + Construction Traffic
Volumes (b) Speed
(mph)
(c) LDV MDV HDV
Grand Ave west of
Gateway Blvd AM 1150 67 11 35
Gateway Blvd north of
Grand Ave AM 1104 66 10 35
Oyster Point Blvd west
of Gull Dr PM 1660 77 16 35
(a) Peak Period based on construction route. Assumed all AM peak period construction trips would
exit Hwy 101 at exit 425A to Grand Ave West, take Gateway Blvd north to Oyster Point Blvd,
and Oyster Point Blvd east to the Project. During the PM peak, all departing traffic would travel
west along Oyster Point Blvd.
(b) Existing peak hour traffic volumes from traffic study. Traffic composition assumes existing
volumes are composed of 97% light duty vehicles (LDV), 2% medium duty vehicles (MDV), and
1% heavy duty vehicles (HDV). Construction traffic volumes assume all worker trips are LDV, all
vendor trips are MDV, and all haul trips are HDV.
(c) Speed based on existing speed limits
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Table 21: Phased Construction Activity Model Results
Receptor
Location
Repr.
SLM
Lowest
Daytime
Leq
(dBA) (a)
Model-Calculated Results, by Construction Scenario
(Leq, dBA) (b)
P3A
P4A
+
P3C
P4 Condo 1 with …
P4
C2 P2C1 P2C2 P2C3
P2C
4
P2C
5
Oyster Cove
Marina 1 L1 56 72 78 80 80 80 80 80 78
Oyster Cove
Marina 2 L1 56 74 82 73 73 72 72 72 50
Oyster Point
Marina L3 55 74 54 54 56 59 56 58 44
Park View
Apartments 1 L2 62 - 81 75 75 75 75 75 83
Park View
Apartments 2 L2 62 - 84 70 70 72 71 71 75
Marina View
South
Apartments
L2 62 - - 63 67 71 61 59 44
Marina View
North Condo L2 62 - - 77 77 77 77 77 84
Oyster Point
North Condo L2 62 - - - - - - - 84
Commercial,
Northeast L1 56 73 76 80 80 80 80 80 80
Commercial,
East 1 L3 55 80 49 73 73 73 73 73 59
Commercial,
East 2 L3 55 84 49 47 47 48 48 57 48
Commercial,
South 1 L3 55 68 74 71 68 66 68 66 38
Commercial,
South 2 L3 55 69 74 65 64 61 69 62 38
Notes:
(a) Lowest daytime Leq from lowest average Leq measured at representative SLM between 7 AM
and 10 PM.
(b) Model calculated results based on modeling completed with CadnaA. Assumed construction
activity of two loudest equipment (with up to one impact device) operating at the centroid of
the constructed building. Receptors were modeled at a typical listening height of 1.5 m above
ground.
Model results with dashes ( - ) indicate the receptor location would not be exist under the given
model scenario.
Scenarios modeled as follows:
P3A – Phase III Apartment Building Construction
P4A + P3C – Phase IV Apartment and Phase III Condo Building Construction
P4 Condo 1 with … P2C1 through P2C5 – Phase IV Condo 1 (Oyster Point North) with… Phase II
Commercial Building Construction for Building 1 through Building 5
P4C2 – Phase IV Condo 2 (Oyster Point South) Building Construction
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Table 22: Hourly Leq Measurements at Each SLM Location
Date Time Hourly Leq (a)
L1 L2 L3 S1
3/13/2017 13:00 - 67 - -
3/13/2017 14:00 64 67 - -
3/13/2017 15:00 63 66 60 -
3/13/2017 16:00 61 67 58 -
3/13/2017 17:00 60 68 58 -
3/13/2017 18:00 59 66 56 -
3/13/2017 19:00 62 65 58 -
3/13/2017 20:00 61 64 55 -
3/13/2017 21:00 60 63 56 -
3/13/2017 22:00 61 62 56 -
3/13/2017 23:00 59 61 55 -
3/14/2017 0:00 55 59 50 -
3/14/2017 1:00 53 58 49 -
3/14/2017 2:00 53 58 49 -
3/14/2017 3:00 53 57 49 -
3/14/2017 4:00 55 59 49 -
3/14/2017 5:00 60 62 57 -
3/14/2017 6:00 59 64 54 -
3/14/2017 7:00 58 67 57 -
3/14/2017 8:00 57 68 58 -
3/14/2017 9:00 58 67 63 -
3/14/2017 10:00 59 66 56 -
3/14/2017 11:00 58 66 57 -
3/14/2017 12:00 56 69 54 -
3/14/2017 13:00 56 66 55 -
3/14/2017 14:00 56 65 57 -
3/14/2017 15:00 58 68 53 -
3/14/2017 16:00 58 68 54 -
3/14/2017 17:00 57 68 57 -
3/14/2017 18:00 59 66 56 -
3/14/2017 19:00 61 65 57 -
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Date Time Hourly Leq (a)
L1 L2 L3 S1
3/14/2017 20:00 59 63 55 -
3/14/2017 21:00 59 62 55 -
3/14/2017 22:00 59 60 55 -
3/14/2017 23:00 57 60 54 -
3/15/2017 0:00 58 60 54 -
3/15/2017 1:00 54 58 49 -
3/15/2017 2:00 53 58 48 -
3/15/2017 3:00 53 57 48 -
3/15/2017 4:00 56 63 51 -
3/15/2017 5:00 55 64 50 -
3/15/2017 6:00 (b) (b) 55 -
3/15/2017 7:00 (b) (b) 56 -
3/15/2017 8:00 (b) (b) 56 -
3/15/2017 9:00 (b) (b) 57 -
3/15/2017 10:00 63 66 56 -
3/15/2017 11:00 59 66 57 -
3/15/2017 12:00 60 66 57 -
3/15/2017 13:00 61 67 58 -
3/15/2017 14:00 60 67 56 -
3/15/2017 15:00 60 66 56 -
3/15/2017 16:00 61 67 57 -
3/15/2017 17:00 58 67 54 -
3/15/2017 18:00 56 66 53 -
3/15/2017 19:00 58 64 56 -
3/15/2017 20:00 58 63 55 -
3/15/2017 21:00 57 61 54 -
3/15/2017 22:00 56 60 53 -
3/15/2017 23:00 55 60 51 -
3/16/2017 0:00 49 58 46 -
3/16/2017 1:00 48 58 44 -
3/16/2017 2:00 45 57 40 -
3/16/2017 3:00 47 58 47 -
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Date Time Hourly Leq (a)
L1 L2 L3 S1
3/16/2017 4:00 47 59 41 -
3/16/2017 5:00 49 61 45 -
3/16/2017 6:00 54 64 50 -
3/16/2017 7:00 56 68 53 -
3/16/2017 8:00 55 68 54 -
3/16/2017 9:00 58 67 55 -
3/16/2017 10:00 57 66 57 -
3/16/2017 11:00 57 69 56 -
3/16/2017 12:00 59 - 58 58
(a) Hourly Leq data from Charles M. Salter Associates, Inc.
(b) These hours were removed due to noise from landscaping
activities.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix A: Tables Ramboll Environ
Table 23: Average Hourly Leq at Each Long-term Measurement Location
Hour of Day
Average Leq
L1 L2 L3
0:00 54 59 50
1:00 52 58 47
2:00 50 57 45
3:00 51 57 48
4:00 53 60 47
5:00 55 62 50
6:00 56 64 52
7:00 57 67 55
8:00 56 68 56
9:00 58 67 55
10:00 58 66 57
11:00 58 67 57
12:00 58 68 57
13:00 59 67 56
14:00 60 67 57
15:00 60 67 56
16:00 60 67 56
17:00 59 68 56
18:00 58 66 55
19:00 60 65 57
20:00 59 63 55
21:00 59 62 55
22:00 59 61 55
23:00 57 60 54
Hourly measurement data from Charles M.
Salter Associates, Inc. (2017).
Average Leq represents the linear average Leq
over all days of measurement.
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix B: Figures Ramboll Environ
APPENDIX B: FIGURES
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix B: Figures Ramboll Environ
Figure 1. Project Boundaries and Sound Level Measurement Locations
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix B: Figures Ramboll Environ
Figure 2. Building Construction Phasing
2017 OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, Environmental Noise Technical Report
Oyster Point
Appendix B: Figures Ramboll Environ
Figure 3. Traffic Noise Modeling Results