Reso25 16295 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

114 muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule. • Utilize noise suppression devices and techniques to reduce noise levels for construction operations, air compressors, pumps, and fans), where the technology exists (per Policy PS-13.6 of the City’s General Plan). The Housing Component would not result in a substantial permanent noise level increase at receptors in the Housing Component site vicinity. Operational noise levels generated at this component site (e.g., project traffic increase, mechanical equipment, parking lot noise) would not exceed applicable standards at the noise-sensitive receptors in the project vicinity. (Illingworth & Rodkin, pp. 28-30) Construction-related vibration levels would not exceed applicable vibration thresholds at nearby sensitive land uses. (See discussion following in item [b].) (Illingworth & Rodkin, pp. 30-33) The noise environment attributable to aircraft is considered normally acceptable. (See discussion following in item [c].) (Illingworth & Rodkin, pp. 33-36) The Focused GPU program EIR (p. 4.13-40) determined that “…stationary and other sources of noise would be controlled by the General Plan goals and policies, and the Municipal Code, which limit allowable noise levels at adjacent properties. Therefore, future stationary noise sources would comply with City standards and would not expose people to a substantial permanent increase in noise levels.” Housing Component compliance with City municipal code regulations and General Plan Program PS-61, including the implementation actions described in the Illingworth & Rodkin acoustical analysis, as approved by City staff, shall be required as conditions of approval. These protocols would reduce the potential noise impacts of the Housing Component to less than significant. No additional mitigations would be required. The Focused GPU program EIR evaluated construction and operational noise under similar distances and conditions presented by the 920 Shasta Street project component. For the reasons discussed here, the Housing Component would not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. Recommended Noise Insulation Features to Reduce Future Interior Noise Levels (related informational item) To implement the California Building Code, the Housing Component would need to implement noise insulation features to meet the interior noise requirements set forth by the State of California of 45 dBA CNEL. Illingworth & Rodkin (pp. 21-22) recommended the following noise insulation features to reduce interior noise levels at residential interiors to 45 dBA CNEL or less: “Provide a suitable form of forced-air mechanical ventilation, as determined by the local building official, for all residential units on the project site, so that windows can be kept closed at the occupant’s discretion to control interior noise and achieve the interior noise standards. Standard construction materials with the incorporation of a suitable form of forced-air mechanical ventilation to meet the 45 dBA CNEL threshold.” Because the project will be conditioned to comply with all applicable law, the construction will be required to meet this interior noise requirement and may opt to implement the recommendation to achieve this result. b. The Focused GPU program EIR (p. 4.13-41) concluded that potentially significant temporary noise and vibration impacts could be generated by certain construction activities (e.g., pile drivers, other high-impact construction equipment) and also that the “need for such methods is usually determined through site-specific geotechnical investigations that identify the subsurface materials within the grading envelope, along with foundation design recommendations and the construction methods needed to safely permit development of a site.” As discussed above under item (a), Housing Component construction activities would not include pile driving. However, as also indicated in the Focused GPU program EIR (pp. 4.13- 41 and 4.13-42), other types of construction equipment could exceed the Federal Transit Administration’s vibration standard for infrequent events at residential sites, which at a distance of approximately 150 feet would be 80 VdB (vibration velocity levels in decibels). The site-specific noise study prepared for the Housing Component by Illingworth & Rodkin included an analysis of groundborne vibration. Illingworth & Rodkin (pp. 30-33) determined, “The nearest off-site building surrounding the project site would be a residence to the northwest, which is approximately 60 feet from the nearest project site boundary. This residence would be exposed to construction vibration levels at or below 0.080 in/sec PPV [peak particle velocity 28]. This would be well below Caltrans’ 0.3 in/sec PPV threshold for conventional buildings. All other off-site buildings would be farther from the 28 “Peak particle velocity” (PPV) is “the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave.” (Illingworth & Rodkin, p. 6) ATTY/RESO.0028/CC RESO CEQA GUIDLINES (920 SHASTA) - EXHIBIT A REV: 04-22-25 VR Page 114 of 148