Loading...
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