Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.06 NOISE ELEMENT OCTOBER 1974 *NEW FILE* 70.06 NOISE ELEMENT OCTOBER 1974 RESOLUTION NO . 8366 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS , a phase of the City ' s General Plan Program has involved the preparation of a Noise Element; and WHEREAS , this Element sets forth objectives and supporting policies which will serve as a guide for the future planning and development of the City; and WHEREAS , the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach , pursuant to Section 707 of the Newport Beach City Charter, has held a public hearing to consider the adoption of the Noise Element as a part of the City ' s General Plan and has adopted and has recommended that the City Council adopt said element; and WHEREAS , the City Council has conducted a public hearing to consider the adoption of the Noise Element as a part of the City ' s General Plan ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby adopt the Noise Element described above , a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. ADOPTED this 15th day of October 1974. Mayor ATTEST: — G�Gri1GL City Clerk CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH NEWPORT BEACH , CALIFORNIA EIR/NB 74-047 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN . Ifii % L . I . R . hat, been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the C . F . Q. A. and thr guidelines of the City of Newport Beach . It is the intent of this report to explore and evaluate the significant city-wide environmental impacts of the Noise Element of the Newport Beach General Plan . The Noise Element provides a survey of the current noise environment and concludes with a proposed noise control program. It is intended that this Noise Element satisfy the State requirement that local General Plans contain a Noise Element (Section 65302 of the Government Code ) . SCOPE OF REPORT This "project" is not a development project in the normal sense, but rather a plan for control of noise. As such , there will be no immediate effect on the physical environment of the City. Therefore, this E . I . R. discusses the probable long-term environmental impacts resulting from the adoption and implementation of this Element. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The City of Newport Beach is blessed with 'a unique geographical setting, located on the Pacific Ocean and containing Newport Bay. NOISE CONTROL OBJECTIVES The proposals contained in the Noise Element are based on the General Plan Policy report adopted by the City Council on March 13 , 1972 . Following is the policy relating to the Noise Element excerpted from the General Plan Policy report : the Lity .hall identify and measure the chief sourcos of noise and air pollutants within the community , and their impact upon the local environment. The . City shall also encourage and promote the development of a comprehensive air and noise quality program to ensure adequate regulations and controls •for the preservation and enhancement of the environment. " THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The Noise Element proposes a program of noise control which can only be beneficial to the future environment. ANY ADVEkSE LNVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSAL IS_IMPLCMENTLU No adverse environmental effects will result from the adoption of this Element. MITIGATION MEASURES PROPOSED TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT No mitigation measures can be proposed , since there will be no adverse environmental impact. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION One alternative is simply not to adopt a Noise Element. This would be in violation of the State Government Code which requires cities to adopt a Noise Element. A second alternative would be to adopt a Noise Element which does not include proposals for a noise control program. This alternative would result in the adverse impact of uncontrolled noise. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAWS ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM-PRODUCTIVITY The Noise Element is a long- range plan for noise control . ANY IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSED ACTION SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED No irreversible changes will result. THE GROWTH. INDUCING IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED ACTION No growth-inducing impact will result. SUMMARY The adoption and implementation of the Noise Element will result in no adverse environmental effects . Conversely , the adoption and imple- mentation of this Element will result in environmental improvement. Cm�nr GeV �•a� GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH -.7 Dv0=rt' Q 4 ro i.. 11.00 TENTH STREET C} Z. SACRAMENTO 95814 F`� U' Nr •� RONALD oREAGAN GOVERNOR ( '•• CG• f' I� December 4, 1974 ellNam. o ",N. Mr. Tim Cowell Advance Planning Administrator City of Newport Beach City Hall 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Re: Completion of General Plan Elements Dear Mr. Cowell: The California Council on Intergovernmental Relations granted an extension of the completion deadline for your jurisdiction~s— Noise Element to December 20, 1974 . That deadline is now approaching, and this office must receive a formal indication that the element has been adopted in accord- ance with the work program you submitted to this office. A letter from your office certifying adoption of the required elements and the date of adoption will serve this purpose. If you have any questions or if we can be of any further assis- tance, please do not hesitate to contact me at (916) 445-1114. S cere , r go Harding Co ni Assistanc Officer f P . ning and agement GWH:kh /o o x1f &1ifor ntin ' GOVERNOR'S OFFICE i'°CD Ya OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH Sl !•• 1400 TENTH STREET RECEIVED Oj SACRAMENTO 95814 CGS'10pMe�t 0,VU Pt. RONALD oREAGAN 09 19jqP" to GOVERNOR September 30, 1974 2 Of vapo c' ti Mr. Tim Cowell Advance Planning Administrator City of Newport Beach City Hall 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Re: Approval of General Plan Element Time Extension Request Dear Mr. Cowell : I am pleased to inform you that at its meeting on September 26, 1974, the California Council on Intergovernmental Relations unanimously approved the City of Newport Beach's request for time extensions for the completion of the Seismic Safety, Safety and Noise Elements of the General Plan. The required completion date for these elements has been extended from September 20, 1974, to March 20, 1975, for the Seismic Safety and Safety Elements, and to December 20, 1974, for the Noise Element. If you have any questions or if we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at (916) 445-1 14. Sinc ely, Gre ry W H ding- Co nity s stance Off! e o Pla i g and Manag t GWH/PRD:kh COUP DO)NOT REPROVE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH -- DEPARTMENT OF COPMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO : R. V. Hogan, Director FROM: Carl Neuhausen , Advance Planning Administrator SUBJECT: Status of the Noise Element Since the introduction of a mandatory Noise Element under State planning law, the Staff has investigated several alternative means for including the new element as part of the City' s General Plan . The Noise Element essentially requires local cities to quantita- tively measure , analyze and control various noise levels associ - ated with existing and future transportation facilities , inclUd ing highways , freeways , mass transit systems , and ground/air facilities. (See attached bill . ) Due to the additional time , equipment and technical expertise needed to complete the noise studies , I have excluded the first possible alternative of utilizing the present City Staff. In reviewing the' various consultant firms which are now under con- tract to assist in developing the General Plan , the present scope of their work and/or the background capabilities of each firm would also preclude them from successfully completing a Noise Element. The Staff is now completing investigations 'into the probable. means and costs of utilizing an additional outside consultant to develop the Noise Element of the Plan . Two leading ' acous- tical consultants have been requested to submit proposals to the City, including : Paul S. Veneklasen and Associates , Santa Monica , and Wyle Laboratories , El Segundo . We have asked that each pro- posal be designed around a three-phase work program which coin- cides with other studies and programs now underway-as part of the General Plan . The three phases will include : i Phase I The measurement and analysis of noise levels associated with existing transportation facilities . Phase II The projection and analysis of future noise levels associated with proposed transporta- tion facilities . J i Phase III The development of a comprehensdve . and ' quantitative noise_ordinance to,.control ' existing and future noise levels . In view of the existing noise studies related to air- transporta- tion facilities , both consultants were asked to limit their proposals to the study of vehicular traffic and mass transit i 1 Status of the Noise Element - Page 2. systems as outlined under the State law. It appears that sufficient data would be made 'available from the Parsons report ,and Wilsey-Ham study on noise levels to satisfy the Sta'te' s criteria. For any further studies related to air traffic, the estimated time and costs outlined in each pro- posal would have to be increased accordingly. The Staff has received a preliminary proposal from Paul S. Veneklasen and Associates .which estimates the following costs i for the three phases of the noise study program: Phase I Existing Noise Level Analysis $13 ,500 Phase II Projected Noise Level Analysis 2 ,500 Phase III Development of Noise Ordinance 3 ,000 Total Program Cost $199000 The second proposal from Wyle Laboratories is being completed by the firm and will be submitted to the City by the end of April . j During the present fiscal year , 1971 -72 , the City Council had I , appropriated $104,000 for various consultant studies in con- nection with the General Plan Program. The amount of $79 ,0.00 has now been encumbered either by contract or payment to the following consultants : f Transportation Consultant $399,000 Economic Consultant ' 25 ,000 Housing Consultant 10, 000 i Geologic Consultant 5 ,000 The remaining $25,00.0 has generally been earmarked for matching funds which would be used in developing the Coastal Element of the General Plan . A preliminary amount of these funds , esti - mated to include up to $10,000, will likely be needed in the coming month to develop various feasibility studies in connection with the Coastal Element. The remaining amount , $15 ,000 , would continue to provide a reserve fund for additional studies which will bg necessary to complete this element of the Plan . With the introduction of the 'Noise Element , it appears that addi - tional funds will likely be needed this coming fiscal year, 1972-73 , to incorporate the .element as part of the General Plan . The Staff would recommend that a total amount of $20 ,000 be requested to complete the necessary work related to the Noise Element. April 14, 1972 ' SIGNATURE Carl M. Neuhausen � MN%kk "��'�':• '1 ,; (`�•;I��ai; •,�. ' Senate Bill `t''•'} - „! ,_ .w . I•j(1J(i•, 1b.. .'p,l ri. { ., r .i, .l•i,i}.,. • . , f,. j; ,} ; Iq iiJt..p,, a � '' "�:f .. • t•I CHAPTrm 776 i'. An act to amend Section 05302 of the Governmeni,; . . , 1 ', �i,:;':�'r•� , I.. •5 ., Coda,relating to planning. ,, t:,• _ ' �• r .,� •', w . ,''•• •1' ' • [Approved by Governor September 22,•1971. Filed with^ ,• j ( •„:.'•l•' .i', Secretary of State September 28, 1071.] •:' i ' J Tito people o t1 a State o California do enact as follows: p p f 4 f f f , SUTTON 1. Section 65302 of the Government Code is ''" • ' , ;. . ;amended to read:` '.1 65302. The a ,':;:' ,;,,'`. , : ,'ti : ,�• . general plan shall consist of statement of de, • I '• •• l �+>+.tJ;l, ;, ,. ,.1,;;1_r•, A,5, ,, � '•velopment policies And 6hA11 1riC1lldC a diagram or diagrams ' ;,�;,-, ''and text setting forth objectives, principles,:standards, and ,, ':' plan proposals. The plan shall include the followin elements:: 1"' i;,,y •. 1 ' ., r • J, ,P P P P 1 g. , ;''``I• •: J,�•. ',,;� ,.p',',',. I:,'r1' ' ..'' ' (a) Aland use element vthictA designates the proposed ' "},,"• " iio::f1 `"' ; eral distribution and general location and extent of the uses, "J ,l, p 4 ;A,J a.} :: , }.::• •'t IA' ,= . ;• of the land for housing, business, industry, open space, includ. ltt'i, I agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and enjoyment 4 rr = I :'' of scenic beauty, education,public buildings and grounds, solid r 4`;•and liquid waste'disposal facilities, and other categories of ; (,}.i • ,' ,'' ' '1 tip" ''•' �"; .,.. •'>`i;,.,�tf'ti d:. .../ ,..r: •Y „; • •a`••• s •. '•f. , !.: '• public and private uses of land. The land use element-shall in. elude a statement of the standards of population density and "'Ir+:1%'t ;:'"i„J•: ` ? :l i";`; � building intensity recommended for the various districts and ;,I vi; ',: Is;:It:.. :f '�'' other territory.covered by the plan. The land use element shall .? It -t'' , i c ,.,.: f ' ••I• •'t'; '=-• ' si,• • , , .• :. `., ,' -also identify areas covered by the plan which are subject to '• ` flooding'and shall be reviewed annually with respect to such areas. r (`jtiw:; •i€,: „ :,g;J L:3,: ,i_,1,+,''�} •r ;• ;•,c,'J (b) A circulation element consisting of the general location' ' i;.',t:':••^,.' I:.i•;: ,,.,;;..: r;' , :•:and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares; ' "'' " ` ,,'•, "„'',°i "' ` '' i ' t'"'.•',' transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utili- t ••' } ; ,:' ''' ; •n}; ?;•-;,'''; ' ties and facilities, all correlated with the land use element of J''•' '','• a•• ,r ? 'the plan. i.. �''' ,,;,, ;' : ' '. �t"i'�^ ':•" • (c) A housing element consisting of standards and plans for ' • ,;:,• :' a, ?i,l,�• • :,,,•, . ^ .,,� :;,:�.{ :' ' �: ,the improvement of-housing and for provision of A(lCgnatC, C • , 1'' 'sites for housing. This element of the plan shall endeavor to , 't i, ,•f,, „ �,.° ' make.adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic at:-'';r4rr';""','i',:",;; :,•'....4"�r. '�, +';ter ; :.,.segments of the community;' '.; , '. `•;;},:; ' , '"``'- (d) A conservation element for the conservation, develop- "" '" '1' •+ Mont and utilization of natural resources including water and 'h' ' Jf:,?,. .+l�;l,�. •:. i. : '!•,�.•.•`.t i.t. •,'•''i.t; .=6 J.t. J ('a ,!,, J�•'', .,1 i,l its hydraulic-force, forests, Soils, rivers and other waters, har-' �. ' i %� • �.. ;h^. .I :•1), •-,' �,, bom, fisheries, wildlife,.mincrals, and other natural,resourees.' A, That portion of the conservation element including waters ;IM1 �� °'• •', .:;'; 1r �'••"•Ir• ' ':: ','•,•`'J;- " ;i;"`' ;'r'•. 'shall be developed iri coordination with any countywide wateroil "' •.; 1 r`•'�. ! 1t. •i�, .r 1 '� ,'. i.., f 1p; ';•• " rl f 1. '',, !i •'' ,'. I I.. ,,t •) l'. ie' +•' �°.AY. ,'- ••'1• J•1L,• ' ;,�•'. •11,. :, ' � ., . 'Si;tfynr •S _ ,}'" ' .,Jy '� .1'; ,: •'),',�• •i`. •t a v: I � . 1 . ` .L.- , ;ii'r,,:a' r';i;,.:, �' s,•,a)J"'.i.,.'. •''fl'' r3`. {d.' . t • ?- :i �y' 'r' ' V'' ' .It::=' _ ,:. '�.S('fr:t,./; •:�:. r .r,:,,r'y•rf 1' "'1 :,.•� .: Jr', ' t, ' .. , ' =ram,. `s•:V'tii :,;,; .,i4s:;.,, i ,C.;+:.,, d5:, .'�r`•1 P., ,'�,•••, .'•`J Y•, i ''•e. '•1. •r ' it: WI-•..,1N.YLi:'Y ta,.,_rie, ..4 ' •4,.•l +}.jj:.. ( • ' ,r�...,,ll. •yr ;';r +S.? lr •'• . . ;� .,.,,s,l. .i''i •'`.t ,;f, ' h"bi ,l T. I a<); V'•' . t1 ';,, 1'f„!, {, '1"t j,P l':l •r,J°IC' •iyr 'i:l:.l'• I}ir ;i' ', •,!I r,l(r f'.,l+ulr}'''`in` 1!',�I Ll�liii,rd'• rr', I, I J'I'i I: • ..(; ''15 ` , i _ !% I I!•' 1.J ''It" i'1':•, I �r I(!1 + 1 7 I. 1 { I,' 1 , I' L' ill, l„I S :a. ':ti, j :7jAt.4 llli'f+/11IIIii ,1'4 It 1'I:. n' {y, 1' Ijlr rl lr71'!ry),Itly�'1•}'1i4,11'11,}.,, .Illlill rr rrl, 1 I r r I a ,, 1r. I}. • �I}ti!:� I{�d�'f{ Il"51v 1115d r I"•(ell I:+I+I !,r51'l�r.il,��4t1; ,,:�:F'rY.'' i- (.k.(t.' , . •'•:�,', ,.','•r 1'I,Ir1, },ISb{'1,5�'+"i'rt r'P. b; r'i'rl. 1 'I l;.'I r�'' 44G i'1 ltl ll ll'11, r1Y •, =a•.r•.� . •. i' - 1,/.,.fit. ,1l,ll(:I,I•/II; A{i;�'i!.I,',}i,'' tl';:Il:tit,., ��lilt,'!�t,i,'�..,u lllflp.irl'�jI�I, 1114{5�1�} '•'11'' �•:`3iY••,.(: {: vtr �'. ,,`. .•'r,,'rr ,(.{, t,i.,;nlr�f r.�'S �1;,141,.•;IJ), .l:i Y(l�¢•q �=II; .,}�II'll,�!"'' 1'!•1.,II,I I ,}'7� ��0" _ ? .:p ., :r::5. _,i, ' I!)•,i 1 , 1'e r �, , 1 I' 1 rl 1 t,l 01''I11. 1. I. 4�1 I� .1., it :J1".f;.,,• .3':^�1�, ./n• �(:'`(�1,�• LJ; 1' ( !};uJI('.L•,r•, Jr 1�1!!r r1 r {tl ri V ^,�l p .Ilfl;l•,. 1; 1 li/ '+:t. ',M1y ;1 .`n. .., :M- a,.• +' :r'J;il4 'i'i1,;,r4•f 1. 'it+• •,, ''i ''I;:f4,q•11 1' ' "r+ •'J,'i(.::,,P I:°,,'y.,:L.(•.,.r.:•r{•l..rni i1,I.•}:,;'!'LC r 'r,1.tlll+{y'1.1y'1Y"'•.,.1"r@l 1.,r•{�,�'!1t:�'1v;1''n and�il'lyR�'�'+!',r�'Ji.',:r.rh!�I='l/1i�IrJIIq{l�,J{1/.lp�:;',y{1l 1A�1I},lrt'J€i II'.I/'iI1 ll1�i1 11./,1(ri';'if11 ri lr ii 'l tll,rl'l'riI 1l:..r.,,1� ipinA}' 11 �1�1,. , i'[I.'1,1 .• ❑I. tit, tr ' ::'.:••, .,. , ,.. in ,r =. 1 .1,7,1111.3;1 C41 ILI,I r(rl,i. �J�Ir,trr,�'t•, ,1!Ilril,�i11•+ Ii�'i � ' „ ^+i.".:(,' r:n",'I"''I,;: 711..1.• r'r°r '1 rr I I r! +I 7'1� 111 'I rd 1• . 1:;` �r,pl t + .r 1 1, ti• r •,�r:'„',,,.di:S' •( r,.�. ;1?S;'.Ir {'I r;.N�tr r,..(l ii'it I' ill l'.1('v14, !Jl'll'I�r LII �11 ,1 1,ti.'r i', .i O.S r•rl�lr IrJ SjLlh• 11`I/•l:rla +l+l li .lull('{�L,f.11lp 1 1'r•. Ira.•I1Q,- •II , L' 1 11 rl , } ft,I l'II4 rl l ' n''.I"i Ij IIIr r 1!J �{•r:;�l. h'4,.}J.,��i.'.r�rr ljjrrrniriO�,I''V},, •la '' :�' 1e 11 fll,�ln �,�{,Il• 'Ir�Ir,.Ilr 11,11'I,r lllr,i 1 ..1 . i, :i _' �' t(•,j, b rl,i;'.I I'1,1} ,I, . l,i,,. ir.,•t,'I'''r �`,,l�1il.tiii,+''I'IJ�tlb,ir�l.' L, ri l�ll'1 Ii�II'i..l r 4(• , , } yr '� .,:p` , J .1• 1''1'''i l, I flirJ,lJ 16u• r+l N•'+} I' I '•I ql,!;!� n d 'li ,. ` �{t'r rltr i;€• { n'14 h.1 Il r 1 rL'I 'dr+J1I r,. rI':r.•',''1';r l ' ,VI !� ._' , .� 1'`r .:� .. ','' I,i•I '!I• rlir„+ jtl•'r,aa,l, !','r1tr• ri ll;iil;u..1:1!r' 7i ,' I;1' 'lit J,(I' Ijh rJ} Ir•t 7 .1'I I,r( ''i i ••b = ,,,, ,l NI ;I',': �} y,,i p Y,}: n J:n.. , i;)II' '4!I J 0 1 tt ! (' I I , y' ,1J -1'. '/ .I . •, • rr , ,}n T.. Y�r�5,5�r�' .14'r 'ibi.!•l,.f"•,I�h'.ily' !Iry ;4•�41ha 'I,Ii1:,A�'n`J4:i{� 41��It' 1.11,;iiliv4d .S' ''f llrlJr� I n, I',t• li II ,. ,1•. .1 •, 1r' r :Ilh. II r �, :'I I o r ,. , 1 .d•` . ')', ..I, d, 1.0.• I• ,r,5i t. ,t,,' , 7 NR.•11 , l�. ,r lr I t�•t..,,I ., r l ',.5.+� f y,r} ii.hii, '`nLpy '�t 4`a 1'': ,.l V,!'1II' .1 1�"'' 1.' •5.'q!�5.� 1 r'i Ir"ild`il �'I,I I!.,�'Ali'1:LI lrrllil J.li rr+ r , il'.�, ^• „ '•; .' y'r;• a '}• •:: ,agency and with all district and city agencies which have r; • ' , . developed, served,'controlled or conserved water for any pur- pose for the county or city for which the plan is prepared. The conservation element may also cover: " (1) The reclamation of land and waters. +1 `S i !'• (2) Flood control.' /;� i, ti y{] :Y ?`• ' (3) Prevention and control of the pollution of streams and "",;'.other waters. ( ; 4) Regulation of.the use of land in 'stream channels and ' '.''::• ' other areas required for the accomplishment of the conserva- ,. . ; Lion plan. ' k' „• (5) Prevention, control, and correction of the erosion of soils,beaches,and shores. ' 4; +•' :' :' "'' '1 , (6) Protection of watersheds. ' •'•' Al.,` (7) The location, quantity and quality of the rock, sand'and P r v yl•,,,• gravel resources. } !'•''t1 -:i (e) An open-space element as provided in Article 10.5 ` ; ,r�; ";'': ';':; Sfi„ ;, ;•;' '(commencing with Section 65560) of this chapter. 1,'.' "r': y' : , '% • :• (f) A seismic safety element consisting of an identification . ;;�a1- ''.'.' : �'' , " • ''' and appraisal of seismic hazards such as, susceptibility to surface ruptures from faulting, to ground shaking, to ground }_ • r; failures, or to effects of seismically induced waves such as • „ . t;•' ,- ,' :;' ' 'tsunamis and seiches. s ? . 'C. •'.I 'I ..:. ' "' ,'r.. .,?'vial,:;,�I':1:'•„'! o rl „••� .•,� ,s Go„ ;,',,•,;: `.:?'r ;•.. •,,Fill (d) A noise element in.qunntitative, numerical terms, sholwng contours of present and projected noise levels associated ith all existin and ro osed major trans ortation elements.hese include but are not limited to the following: (1) Highways and freeways, 1 '£:•„ "2'Y" ' (2) Ground rapid transit systems, }i+' �I 'r:. ;;: , (3) Ground facilities associated with all airports operating }, { ,J. =�• ' : ' - '1 ; , • J: ', 1: , ry.+ ::•;r ;; ", under a permit from the State Department of Aeronautics. !, . J}fZ • $,4A; 1';!+I•, These noise contours may' be expressed in any standard ,Ki' �''Y?'''• '•:1••:""s+;,'''!'+•••"•.••:••�•�': ••'I";'° 1,'" acoustical scale which includes both the magnitude of noise ' „•.,1•,;ar,r;;•a j''' -and frequency of its occurrence. The recommended scale is )' +'.'' • ' ',; sound level A, as measured with A-weighting network of a ! -! .;` •'i.";;•; ,',, •;,; - standard sound level meter, with corrections,added for the , r time duration per event and the total number of "events per ' '.: ,, t •_, . • . r I#: .:,,,,•.,',;r '`:f�•'�•1:" : ''s,. ,:• '.. :,..� �'•;' ', :24•hourlperiod. 'w 1 ; '� ':.��,,, •? ;y' i`f;,,'''' '' Noise contours shall be shown in minimum increments of. •::i. � . , .• J •,; •• +,;;,,; , ,,,,,• •1;.'. �, ', :. five decibels and shall be continued down to 65 db(A). For �':'t "'''" 't•' ''• :;:`,•' ' ' regions involving hospitals, rest homes, long-term medical or ?f'i:' -mental care, or outdoor recreational areas, the contours shall ,y,.i• „e,.,'ll'tt f ..:';( ';.M,i, ;>." ' "'rJ ' '..,`'.! be continued down to 45 db(A). ,, .,,Il . a,r',tt, , ,",•••. , ,•,} .� , ,' :, ' •"t�',,' -;'a •' : Conclusions regarding appropriate'Hite or 'rqute selection y a i• .',;! r`7 ; ,'.r•' . � ',''; alternatives-or noise impact upon compatible land uses shall bo'ineluded'iu the general plan."r' ... 'jtl,� i,a •, i! ,r' •+,'}iV, •.!' •:i., '0{`r'' .,I t.;,,,1 f •, :,. ;,, qn•r rrl± la ii t•'i'; •••' , .)r •'2,'•,�,lyf ,,,i, ' .: r :I`•• `_ .•' '• '1 !.. �:ir.��.' 1 r v. ,'y:i n I:,u i 11%4dG}! nl £, 11'•%':; �i lli:i• ' ',��ji.,Y. ' ''•".}. ::"'� I'•,.•' •:'4'.:" t' •d'..i• '1' I'•• �;Y�St: r Ii�:,q�b t, ,I• 1. it •f. ' 1` 'Al Y',,.I'i L 1 .. • 1'. k.i ,. ,f:' . .� , y� ' ,:il • ;l:•n i•i ljj , 'r' . a"'''9a•iG•.af��f. fLi.'.{L�.7.:I;JF .Y'�.i;�, r�b a•,...�.. ` J•rn•5t-' i•I'r.,�, .'• t ^ •' a,tp „'•"1;y _ „ .. t ,. , I• , , jl' I if.• .R. ,fn"q:r"1'd. Ji!„ "1/^�q} ,.r• ' ';a t.'• .•.,, ,i,.•:. it •I r :7ir1 1.:ii'�' 'J) I{:' �l� } '• ..: '1 :,i''':v,,, i) 1 )'� 1',Ili.Il,�•fill I1' 71r fill i,f ,J 11�}' 111� 11•,1 elf,i l,lr'•''I' 'lyli�,L. ,.`•',,; "{1. :, _ "., ' ,I /',1:. I ;i C'1 ).� , II !!4j 1!•'1 1�1•"1 J)1' ,l4 ff4'., III ( y`I, 1'll Ilp, , . ' ,. :.i;�, °• .I:"I 1 I,•., .11 7Pyi J•I• IS74 y l 41'I :t ,i,• .,.. .•j �, , t• Ijli.!Ili,' 1 Ii }/ III, ,/, ,(;l: :j•'w'•i?. • rr.,•.{ IJ! I }: I r I�' 1•: '' 11`f"' Ir, J , I (d,I,' , , fj (:• I, I• f :i,a:. :.v.a 1. 5,'• '„� ..}Y .!d''J„ r•,�,Il i,,yr",1.11�"r4; �,'fl: yl:;,.l;i,•,l 'I}il'1' il: ;i `,•l •.f�- ,r.j, '•'�': ''.i••ear i.� I� 1.•I „�i�, ,,1. dii, ,ill'P•j�� ' li:'llrli 11,11,1. f1,)fl llf l}'I�p�f�,' li tI III 1 II 11r1 ii;�. .. ,. +'.Ir ., .M1'% f; i,,. 7 't':�' ;,�, rr• f•n I' 1•, f'11, i{I; 1. Iv,i•Jir �r -.fr'n ',qa I'q , r•. f '.p(��`,{!"iJ', 11 ,7i , I,i {}II.1 I I 1 .t, I: ,•r, ,i5� J, tit"J•i I; .,n. '''N.'' ' ;!!'II •l',', i�. I',Vv;';.I�,'b. „i;'��,•ti,i, 1, ,I'j ,1.. I• ri:,•,�IJ, 7 N 1 Ilr1I• ,I I'•.. ,.1}��. f' '•J '' !i fr;'H;li it!. 1•I i , f1 Yi (• 'I. I' I ,1+11 }J 1 1' iJ '.i.'♦ °I' ice' � ' if,�Il''::i'II•i'f:i•r!!•:':''t•i4)!,'i'').'IY'iilllj '+'�,i.i,'I„'}�:':lf/1 �r},y i'j'�JJ hltll(Ili,rtl�il;r'�jflfi�r'�I��If.•I,,I'ilii%fi rl^ill'll'1 II '�' 'r' . .A �•w J.. ,%:�f ..i,i- , I ,, jifri IiJ!'•}'il)„I,•111171 i,,?i•„t ,'JII,.f 4�1 +i.11l III;T'!.'1•, I�!'d,,;•'r, '•1y. 1 !',: '1 , I Ir I, Illd � li. i. II r ") ' .V� " . ,,'••p•1 '1'i',':: ':' ,;''''d:i,';�!'J.,I,, . !•I: '1�.,1.1, I �'1',�'":'M1q I`i�.�;,�r rrj' I ^1'i'1'II f1�� I ' ill ,. ',�, .v. . "ir;'•i {.:i••i�17,„1 Jlr ! 1, I}ll rJlry !; If r'll , Llnll ll, r. 'I tll o. •r )l i I' r I+ r I j 1, , I,I ) 1:q,.,l ) V I I lia5 I i!'llj:l t1 '),i l u'q } .I ;�• .t�," LI�', 7' �� 1'll ) II ,1'• I'' II 1'I., IA , ^.i�1fI i}"I !1'I y f ',r.' , P 11 '� +'.'ll L 1 I L' i• ,7; Il.' I I II' •. ;r •. • r ,4'.7';;, , u„ �ij• ;dlr♦ Yltili� 1;1� J•I,'il}.I ui.'n t'.Gti' I Ir•if•., ,I, 1 ,''� 1,} ,. •f �, il'i',,, J,r�. If, LII:''I ' II: 1 , , I J} li'1., h`IJ''I1••'Ib1, I" I '•, ' Il ';f , ,,,,,};..;r 'I , ,'� :f';�.I;:. ,1;,,' I,I; '„ 15 , ii•.�r,M1l I I'}'i rrl',q ,jl ,II Itl I, 1�; I. i„ '• ',�'. I,r.a � r i4',':' iNq�,,•,',lr'",•? I ' If;. 11,}•11. ,L.: 1'j Iit.I,IM1L}7 '1 � , L, J," . „' rj,I ;,. I ,I�i,' i17'•I I'1.. Ir �' pl:" ,ffr 1"',! i pit k ' ! r`' � . . a ''? .. 'il,:•t Ir 1"v'�: ,,�, ,' lii l:j, II 'I., I' 'f 4 1 ' '^ .i"ll• 1 'J''I� L'.;J, Nh. 11 „n Il,1 ,. 11" ,4• i 1, ei".Ia ,;!���'I I��IJ' 'q y :r' , � {• ' r'(�7i�''I.Y• j'i:•t�f.i I, ,l.I� , i:: l lll, ilr:,l.11 I ilf l�'/'l1efP'�' I'lll�ii�l i�i • � '' ' P,1' '! , Il: I 11 �.{,P• f i' 'l,,r•,'1' J,1 7oi1, (f' �i I)tii''1 Il l"l'I)�• 1 ' }Y 1, i•'`".14 . ' {'r PI,••„LI' '',"�1 i{'1• ,•i' r ii �• :r +'C ':J( •li 'I '+• j r, ..,'rl^' :�,�. r rr t11i;, i I )) tti,';`'i; Ln qI, 1,., i , •:•11, r• 'i• .I �� { •"11 ' � ,i I'' '(� •.,.;..y: o;in!!v'-Ar.•.'J rt 1.1 I''i�r •1iI I:Ih}�•Vl IIq•11:,ti}I''.'' It'I,, I '' ., r I:, ' I'1 S I i Ip.ii• I ry); �•� j,rl + Ii1 i1 liti; r ..•^' .���. I tI',1':ila it. I'i,^•:ti jl r;?.{ I ''illi�)1•;� 1'. 1'I (•,•, ,i., f I 1 • f'I J I pq'll,l' 1LdGi'„ 1{!•,�i 11 111'll,I / ill,lj„'1, ,:y,' ,ii• •t1;1,1 S ...'.__.�.._. _-1.,L•'" •ri. • .� ":ly� ,f lll.":Il,r'"ly 1.'�" , 1 'I"'rrll',',�I,111 n�'.I"' ' f.'' iillif•I�f''ll", IIII'l:{'liild 1r: — 3 The state, local, or private agency responsible for the con. :? struction or maintenance of such transportation facilities shall ;{ provide to the local agency producing the general plan, a statement of the. present and projected noise levels of the r+`"•'' facility, and any information which was used in the;develop- ' `ment•of such levels, I_ "" • � 1 'If'.1 r.r .T' •)•;�;i f' :�, lii: .r ;,'}r• � ''VI• {• 'r� T1 t ^. _ . R ,�'•�j; .;;,. '•'sl„� .=t3`•' ;�, .,;'fit;., ' 1' : ,, ' H''!IJ T• '�t rt,n'.`•;" d'!•4'+ S �:'••,t:•'•'..1•' , :', •.:1'' .•1 I'11' '',3 s' ,,h.f• ,�•., �r' r 'r,,• hr .f• ,�,i., , •ifvr♦ .1' ' r', .i:.'r;,{`t'.1T r',f. .''i', 1 '11 i!•'j I.S�•:1,, ''.; J; , i, `;.r h.:i ,.r; ., r • I. ,ali. :ii" I,`f i' .,:.,..1, '•'t:; ..�'.' ."' ',.f i It • '•' ,,'{•' (' .r Ifl I'.4f4V'j. .i• '..I ., Jl�', . ri�r;•• ,'0' - •I, h' ..•F u. �r ,..15'`. ,,: {. I "'�,.ll, ':%. '+i `t': ''I,'i;� •`" !''• Y,'����•'��••- f, ' tl,.•r,. 'il•. .'I�', � r� 'I♦kft„//tEa . t: r� . .. 'j, . �:}• R ,'It .. .VJ,V •'fV`�l(•�, f „1•• •.•i. d,. { •i'r. , �l ♦ lY"�" ,•t1•'+'";1• 'i?,a i�' V' T I.i.". '� ',�lV•. 1` ^fl .IJ,,, ••i%''• , �' �i . '.ii. �,�r `.1('t ':?• ..•!1'd,• !3,'J: �: .' , :, ••�� �, �t�":P" _ :i :'I! :i•',•.r„•.J'; .Ji ."n y r.i�4}. r , ..p,1 �3�; T.i. �;','. '!:�.r' V' •5 •I,'l': !', •t. • ° " `r , i••.f ' �' I•/: 'j' ••1 II,iV'r .!:1 1.r 'I: •• •t I;,.i„ .1 �rI r w • V,•e ,'J !,'"^ ;its.. �( • b• :, .'�',.,',.,' '• e3• ';1', 1 . j1,), ( :ii ;'ri' ••, '1•, .}'..)!r!'.^•aa I1 ••P' �•1 ' rl 'i�11.,' \•'• ' Z. tLt ',�'i'� .11�'i'•n� af; ''f.Ry.( 1, 'iV h, �•1 n . •�I _ `Ir J : �,n .!!. o:,'r ,, . ,;,i Y •Jr:,i'' ` Ljr "'b••'a� .f ,s r.. .' ^':,, .yi''- ,, ,t.�::jHq,' _�i�:'i' ,n } •.r •`r! ..... •.i 1' ' ,r1. . •.I, ''N.-' �t:t•• iq Y�y;h•itr.l ri•,. }:'•lR " .�.;• ',•. 'j• ..3. t ,',t�'• ''1'i„•' :,r .ir. ., , �V • ,1tJ "I >!,':,a:l t`�•`c• .I. ti.;ty ti'h, , ,•^ '.) ;�, .'Vi:, • ... i 111 •'' t�•:I�r' ''N°,n^.: '�' ll ,,: i• �/�•.,`. '• ,'. `'.: '+j '+.: 1,l. •1. •t'. ' I.. ...I., IP ' icQ, •.1'''.• ,l ,1•• r'i' II .3'•' .:t '7. R,r , r It _ t, IL .;. pl .Y.t" 1R+1 •, i 'i,!i pr•. ',/ ',�It I', '(•� � '.�, •�1�r lY 33:. I;q�.`:• ' .1\In r : .t, h'; •' is i„ i '! ,', ' ,i•�. ,p `I"' ,,,,'• . ,j. •', , •1. .5t,f!1;p'1 : :1.r. r .• • '',t Si %'. ., . , ' 1, `i 'r yi: :' I. i�fi, !!ill. 1' •�t„h a.'i r•• '! . •• it S 1 •A' ;. 1 �•i' , ', ', ••( 1,., , , 1, 'i , V.I. ,. l•' •r.'LI•" .ti •�.'1 i't:�. ' ,, •t jry<3 r' •tl, r. .i111 ?�?':I"�'1 ,' It 'i ,p, x 1,t •• ;,r ` ),' r ' ' ', ♦ ''•'1: ,r r,ttl P., (•, •....... !}, j'S !�i'!I I'l lrli '44i'S I'V'''i'll 1 V''!''Itly'i•Vt7"•lt ,'C''h'�I 'I'1I'. ,•}i'r: yi RiY.}._';•.t, .;.i, .t ' 1t,i•! a5�$;;.I n11_�11,1,,11:{•I• :,ltl,Vre,ll '':'lWyl1„il�l'ilJll}IIt�1(il'11,ti.I11}fidli+ll'I,Iii!ill'tGl!'I�f!hr lll,r��lll!II', 'i'' 1• u. 1 II , ! Yid' 1 t.' ,',11 '!'}L'•).'1 i. ' ',,. :'rl .ri�r'Str• I7(r•:(4,J•.1:1,,.Sga'i°V�I '�5,! l:d,.,,;'�{, ''� ' 1I !ai„7;j'{ 1 11 ir, I1 III 1, R •1. ,•!r - .,I',II .,I ,'.1 VIi`'!;i !,� 1{'.t� i 1r IIJt 1;!I { {il I '�• n J� .. .. ,� �. ' '1 „•I 1, ,, � I ',I I'IS L..hl!" I I,I;Ii{I�i'Ir, 1.11, i i„Is r• y,I II '4. 37• a ' •�" •,r r.„•+ . ' ,'ir r,�. '.I,'i r•i r•, II I}Y J`yl 1 1 I•RilyJ r ,r.17 r41,1 rll I' 11,� I 1,1 • .Il a >•' '/'. ` u,'�I' 'J:I,1•'i'I,�..n..:' {,;:,. ,, r" I I�Id 1t ,ir.p II I, I I;fi I. Ill' I, 1.� II jl��I 1•, II;,I:;r r � tti'{;,..t ri�5'�I^'s,... '•I, :,�':;{, ,i. ,... 'll,.y,c.,dli; f;(!!{i�r•.I II' II/a;i I , It �;, 011+ {Il; �,,.,1 �t'I� 1'1 f I li''1; , ,r. 1'fl;l 11Y(. ,� �a• '1 .l 1. �" �.,: 'Illl!11,1,.1. `,Ia,y11(LfIII:Jill,l�''i,l�'�,..I ,I�Ir'jil'�',I :If�I? 11,1Ii�!'h y.!•I , Ih(,h/I 11 II 1,r 11'I{I a�, 4'' ";1: L, ',i ' 1•.I• .Iil In hr'�Vai t l'4•I�II I�Irj.J I:'fii;;lt' '1 •tl,( {{II III 1 I'll L;I{�Il er.. l' F• 1'' „11{(Ill 1'IVI (f 1' 1°1 I I,1 •t,11 '. !,.'n flit ''' 'f 1 . 11 11.•'. 775 rf�lr ' �t)11�'j lllf R.I 1„ '�{' l; rll I! 1.•i�' ' + 'I �I Ir,.I",I; I�. J;�. rt.,t,LU'I• .;., �r" � it ,�li(.I ,;,�I rtUll, � 1 r.r '{• I• 1. I'' I ' I It , I 15 , r f' 1 4w'E o f 11,r 1 1 f 1 1 Il • A. ' :f::''•, .,i.i{�',�(4i•rj31{1;1.I L.'jl '1j.;. .1 i !ri•! in!I I«.l,r pj ili ;I,II,a, I'' II IIPII;1 I 1 1l llipillr I�,'p�;;,:1 1 •'ll �' •I { i f ,I�' '1� I 1'I' I I j11'( s:: II'u'11I II.1' I IhJ, 1' • '• 't 1 {. o' S�'i, I .1 j � 1'b;.5 f 1{,I I IIIL 1 ''lJr ll5''I',I!11' ylr U. 1 I t 1'�,11 I. ILI•p„ V,1 ' !';I ',,�'•:Ipl ,/j.,hi,rtt')�^:.''1�i',111'�'� i',i'n''yl'I' I I .l, Il,lrlll5 N1i11 ,,, 1'I 1 ' Ith III Ilr IIn,• 1'l ll�tl '1 ',(, {{ � 7 , ,• � r .I III h'' i.,l:' rr'4 ' '1',!`,{.inl''i� I'tL(,SI!'•II!1, In'1'I!'; 11 p• I . ' " 1. i.' •.iyl ,.!yri 5'.' •ly'.y,Ilr Jn { 1 i'/Ji•„lal 1�1...I,!Y' I•ej "�/ li•I''' II III I�,,i ,'I11 /III r. III 1 { ! r •�1'.I;I. .I„ rh,'i' ,J•i!',�. Ltl ,' i.ri 1., I I,11 °•, IJ; I 11!,( i I I!^{ 1 1 5y'I, 1', , � 1;.I'.' :.ii.,. ,l• r 1,. I ,M1I,,,.7;r 'I':+l'A' , (,4 I��'! , I u �' 5 •u w' 1:,' I �'h, i I•II'II L 'I•I ! t 1' .Ir 1 J/' i.. „lu 1.•'Ay r:ilr r l,i.l 1 IVI' lil�ill�..11 t�f ' IIL,�lli ht' ' 1 �l '.{,' I ♦ ,• L1'11' i'' p,!'I 1' ,';r'j1 I,V, ,.. II 'j 11,Y'1 l;' I I ' I h• u' I 1 I , il1 Vl� ( r i f I •Yrl liJ' ,,r'" 'I,,'.1�, I'li�l ��I�,,;{I'",I'.1.'I'llill,dl,l;h 'i }' II II I,iIII''11�r',{(Ii f;. I�II Vb ' ., ,:I � , V$,. .t" 4h ''.,• •,• S;i •''/ 't',Iln,�r:',j�'� r ";.+�(,1'•di!511I,,,,�''i', .;��:lili:l',j,;l}J'l'Ijli) I%'1"II l!y,'ll(A14, t •a, .i Ii^ !�'jri r:,t1 ' , L',ILU If:,r 'I''li.11,�tll,�{(, If 1.4}r1. 41' Iti,n • ::1� rVj P'i� Ili.. 'rl lt'i. 1'i' 1 u II: t,l I 1'I '�''1, r I n . . •t.. •'r �, 'I, 'h tir l'•u;d' l,lp•.!r' 4�'v l,a;y` tr'Jl i 'I., rl li 'I'.N l .,l l '' ,I I ��� l'• 1 1 h'U� � r I p• , ' 1' ,.�i� .. ._ .. ._�.__-__s_,_. __..•,4� 'n •' ri i'"rY '' '.1�, d;�4,II'i '''.,,;1.1 II!! 1 56.i IJ,{''(1},,1' 11I � Ii IPI�r:l;t' I 1 b" :.i :i".'I , 1{ .1 .td•'1'a, .1�1.11 I', .t 4•'I I !i , 1 ' NOISE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN ' ADOPTED AND RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ' AUGUST 29 , 1974 ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 15 , 1974 RESOLUTION NO . 8366 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS , a phase of the City ' s General Plan Program has involved the preparation of a Noise Element ; and WHEREAS , this Element sets forth objectives and ' supporting policies which will serve as a guide for the future planning and development of the City ; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach , pursuant to Section 707 of the Newport Beach ' City Charter, has held a public hearing to consider the adoption of the Noise Element as a part of the City ' s General Plan and has adopted and has recommended that the City Council adopt said element; and WHEREAS , the City Council has conducted a public hearing to consider the adoption of the Noise Element as a part of the City ' s General Plan ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby adopt the Noise Element described above , a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk . ' ADOPTED this 15th day of October 1974. ATTEST: Mayor i ty Clerk ' RESOLUTION NO . 895 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ' OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS , a phase of the City ' s General Plan Program ' has involved the preparation of the Noise Element ; and ' WHEREAS, said Noise Element sets forth objectives _ and supporting policies which will serve as a guide for the future planning and development of the City; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 707 of the City Charter of the City of Newport Beach , the Planning Commission has ' held public hearings to consider the adoption of the Noise Element of the Newport Beach General Plan . NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby adopt and recommend to the City Council ' the Noise Element of the Newport Beach General Plan described above , a copy of which is on file in the Newport Beach Community Development Department. ' Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission _ of the City of Newport Beach held on the 29th day of August , 1974. AYES : Agee , Beckley , Hazewinke1 , Heather , Parker , Seely NOES : None ' ABSENT: Williams W ' c hairman William C. Hazewinkel S cretary dames M. Parker 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 Introduction----------------------------------------- 1 Purpose and Scope------------------------------------ 2 1 Quantification of Noise----------- ------------------- 4 Section 1 - Highway Noise---------------------------- 18 1 Section 2 - Aircraft Noise- -------------------------- 30 1 Section 3 - Stationary Sources-- --------------------- 45 Section 4 - Noise Control Program---------- ---------- 46 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 y INTRODUCTION Urban noise is becoming a serious environmental problem in all urbanized areas of the United States . We are frequently subjected to intrusive and offensive sounds from such sources 1 as : highway vehicles , aircraft , construction equipment, and the neighbor ' s lawnmower, air conditioner, or stereo. These noises produce annoyance , speech interference , sleep dis- turbance, mental anguish , and , in some cases , adverse physiological effects . Noise also has an adverse economic effect; in many 1 noise-impacted areas , property values have fallen drastically. The Orange County Health Department has stated that noise levels will increase as the County continues to grow, and that noise will become a wide-spread health problem by the year 1990, unless steps are taken to control noise and its ' impact. III 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This Element of the Newport Beach General Plan provides a v survey of the current noise environment, indicating the major contributors to the noise problem, and concludes with a proposed "noise control program" , which includes all practicable _ City actions towards reduction of noise and mitigation of its adverse effects . 1 Noise is discussed in terms of three different categories of noise sources : 1 ) Motor Vehicles 2 ) Aircraft 3 ) Stationary Sources It is intended that this Element satisfy the State requirement that local General Plans contain a Noise Element. Section 65302 of the Government Code states , in part , that General Plans shall Iinclude: `'A noise element in quantitative , numerical terms , showing contours of present and projected noise levels associated with all existing and proposed major transportation elements . These include but are not limited to the following : ( 1 ) Highways and freeways , 2 ) Ground rapid transit systems , (3) Ground facilities associated with all airports operating under a permit from the State Depart- ment of Aeronautics . These noise contours may be expressed in any standard acoustical scale which includes both the magnitude of noise and frequency of its occurrence. The recommended scale is sound level A, as measured with A-weighting network of a standard sound level meter, with corrections added for the time duration per event and the total number of events -2- ' per 24-hour period . Noise contours shall be shown in minimum increments of five decibels and shall be continued down to 65 db (A) . For regions involving hospitals , rest homes , long-term medical or mental care , or outdoor recreational areas , the contours shall be continued down to 45 db (A) . Conclusions regarding appropriate site or route selection alternatives or noise impact upon compatible land uses shall be included in the general plan . The state , local , or private agency responsi - ble for the construction or maintenance of such transportation facilities shall provide to the local agency producing the general plan ; a statement of the present and projected noise levels of the facility, and any information which was used in the development of such levels . " Additionally , this Element is intended to further the accomplishment of the policy on noise and air pollutants contained in the General Policy Report (Pg. 20, Policy i ) adopted March 13 , 1972: 1 The City shall identify and measure the chief sources of noise and air pollutants within the community , and their impact upon the local environment. The City shall also encourage and promote the development of a comprehensive air and noise quality program to ensure adequate regulations and controls for the preservation and enhancement of the environment. " -3- QUANTIFICATION OF NOISE This section of the Noise Element was provided by Wyle Laboratories , as part of their report "Analysis of Highway Traffic Noise in Newport Beach , California" , prepared under contract with the City of Newport Beach . It is reprinted here in order to assist in the understanding of the several terms utilized in this Element for the description and measurement of noise levels . -4- i Generation of Sound �T Sound in the air is generated by forces acting on the air mole- cules . This may result from a complicated interaction of air leaving an exhaust pipe or something as simple as a panel vibrating against the air. Whatever the mechanism, the result is that at any one instant, the air will be slightly compressed at one point and will be rarified at another point. This pattern of pressure disturbance moves through the air as a sound wave . Figure I presents this concept in the case of the vibrating panel driven by an eccentric shaft and rod. As the panel moves to the right, air is compressed and as it moves to the left, air is decompressed or rarified. This effect continues with time and a pressure wave is transmitted into the air. Thus , a rare- faction wave progresses, to the right as a result of the panel moving to the left . As the panel moves again to the right , another compressional wave is generated and the distance between two successive compressional waves is called the wavelength . Noise - How Do We Describe It? Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. One person ' s music may be nothing but noise to another. For example , the sound of — rock music from your teenager' s hi -fi may be music to him or her, but noise to you , if you are trying to converse or relax in an adjoining room. To describe noise and its effect on people in a quantitative way, we must include human factors related to the way we perceive noise . These factors include differences in the • way our ears hear sounds at different frequencies , whether -5- i Direction of Sound Wave -- Compression- — .—Rarefaction-.r I r I Wavelength Figure 1 Illustration of Generation of an Acoustic Wave the sound contains any irritating "screech " like squeaky chalk �— on the blackboard and how long the sound lasts . Applying all these factors enables us to translate from a physical measurement of a sound to its value on a subjective , "perceived noise ," scale . �T Acoustic levels that we normally experience are very small compared to the usual static (or barometric) pressure in the atmosphere . An acoustic pressure of 1 microbar would be average for normal conversational speech tones . This pressure is equal to 1 /1 ,000 ,000 of the .usual barometric pressure of 14. 7 psi . Thus , at a time and place where the atmospheric pressure was exactly 14. 7 psi , the total peak pressure during average speech would be 14. 700021 and the minimum pressure would be 14. 699979 psi . The decibel scale ( discussed below) would specify this very small pressure fluctuation as 74 decibels . At 134 decibels , a sound level much higher than normal experience , these two pressure extremes would be 14. 721 and 14. 679 , respectively. In this example , the acoustic pressures have changed by a factor of 1000 with an insignificant variation in the total atmospheric pressure . The Decibel An explanation is in order regarding some basic properties of any scale for stating the magnitude of a sound. The ear responds to sound pressure fluctuations with an increased sensory response for an increase in pressure. The range between the smallest sound pressure which is sensed by the human ear and the highest sound pressure physically tolerable covers a ratio of approximately 11000 ,000 to 1 . If we assign the number 1 to the sound pressure corresponding to the smallest sound that we can hear, then the -7- sound pressure from our voice in quiet conversational tones would correspond to the number 1 ,000. A loud voice would be ap proxi - mately 30 ,000 , and physical pain would be felt in the ear at a sound pressure over 1 ,000 ,000. While our brains have no trouble handling the range of sounds sensed by our ears , it is inconvenient for us to think in terms of numbers with all these zeros . It becomes more convenient , therefore , if we base our scale on the number of zeros rather Ithan the actual number. The logarithm to the base 10 does just this . Thus , we may assign the zero on our scale to the number we can just hear , since the logarithm of 1 is zero . Our quiet conversational tones will then be assigned the number 3, since the logarithm of 1 ,000 is 3, and the highest pressure mentioned above (1 , 000,000) would receive the number 6. All of the numbers assigned -- 1 , 3, and 6 -- are equal to the logarithm of the actual numbers , and the quantity measured in such a scale is called a level . Engineers and scientists prefer to work in terms of energy , which is proportional to sound pressure squared instead of sound pressure . Thus , all the above numbers for sound pressures must be squared. Making this adjustment, 1 squared becomes 1 ; 1 ,000 squared becomes 1 , 000,000; and 1 ,000 ,000 squared becomes 1 , 000,000,000,000. Fortunately, the logarithm of a squared number is just two times the logarithm of the number; so , instead of the level ranging from 0 to 6 , it ranges from 0 to 12. This scale is similar to the famous Richter scale for measuring earthquake magnitude , which is also logarithmic . In the fields of electronics and acoustics , the unit on this scale is called the Bel in honor of Alexander Graham Bell . For -8- convenience , the Bel is divided up into 10 smaller units , so that the scale of level now extends from 0 to 120 decibels or tenths of Bels . Figure 2 provides an illustration of these concepts for converting from an inconvenient magnitude scale ( linear pressure) to a more convenient scale of level (logarithmic) with decibels as the units . Utilizing this basic idea of a level scale, acousticians have invented a profusion of different kinds of levels , all in decibels , abbreviated dB. The most common of these is the 11sound pressure level " defined by: Sound Pressure Level (SPL) = 10 log10 (p/preference) 2 in dB Preference is the reference pressure equal to . 00002 newtons per square meter which is the same as 0. 000 ,000 ,002,9 pounds per square inch . This reference pressure was chosen as being near the smallest sound pressure that we can hear. It sets the location of the zero on our basic SPL scale. 10.000 100.000.000 p 1.00U 1.000.000 w i•For.Exanpt. Id1• Ji aumr•I l;:n 11)01 ; .• In 000 AM. 10 Luy Qj(g01•�''.40 3 0 too 20 OCcAwI $CJ12 SgJ1N Sca1C $C AC Figure 2, The Logarithmic Nature of the Decibel -9- The Frequency Content or Pitch of Noise While the magnitude of a sound pressure is of primary importance , its frequency or pitch is also a primary consideration . The frequency or pitch of a sound represents the rate of oscillations of the acoustic pressure . The human ear is less sensitive to low frequency sounds and very high frequency sounds than it is to mid- frequency sounds . The frequency limits of audible sounds extend from 20 to 20 ,000 Hz (cycles per second) . The moving panel of Figure I-1 may move back and forth 20 times or cycles _ each second to create a 20 Hz acoustic signal or 1000 times each second to create a 1000 Hz signal . The lowest note on a moderately large pipe organ will be 32 Hz , and the highest note from a piccolo will be around 4700 Hz. Overtones from each of these instruments will extend to beyond audibility. As mentioned above, however , the ear is not equally sensitive to all these frequencies . The ear is 50 dB less sensitive at 20 Hz than it is at 1000 Hz . Figure 3 demonstrates the different sensitivity of the ear at different frequencies and shows how it affects a given sound spectrum , happily reducing the annoyance caused by low frequency noise. Figure I-3 (b ) , showing the allowance for human hearing , has been defined as the "A" weighting scale . Electronic filters having this frequency response have been incorporated in most sound measuring equipment. When such filters are used , the resulting reading is said to be "A" weighted or "A" scale. Use of these filters allows us to determine a single decibel number which , to some extent, represents human 1_ response to a given noise. 'Y -10- 1 Time Factors in Defining Noise Environments So far we have talked only about the magnitude and frequency of noise along with the decibel scale with which we measure the magnitude. The perceived level (that is - the way our brains react to it) that we subjectively apply to a noise seems to depend upon its duration also. In addition , the actual annoying effect of the sound may depend on the time of day as well . This time of day sensitivity simply relates to our daily cycle of activity. In other words , a short loud blast of a whistle announcing noon (and lunch ) would not be found so irritating as a less intense noise sounding over a period of several hours during the day. The same short blast , or even the long duration _ " less intense noise" might be found quite irritating during the middle of the night when we are trying to sleep. Thus , in order to produce a rating scale for the annoying effect of noises we consider , in addition to the level and frequency content, the duration of the sound. Further, we attempt, in a crude way , _ to account for varying interferences with our daily life. We therefore consider the time of day during which the noise is generated. Sound waves are a form of energy just like electricity and light. The rate of release of energy or power may be measured in terms of kilowatts just as electrical power is . The power associated with acoustics within our normal experience is quite small compared with the power available from the electric lines . Where _ a very small electric light bulb will use 25 to 30 watts of 1 electricity, normal conversational speech power will be around 2711 , 000 ,000 watt 10 and where a powerful hi -fi is pouring 100 -11 - 0 -10 -20 - G� . ' �►iIj!!1 ti -30 Sound Spectrum -40 - -•. --..�� (a) _ u c, -10 - m o -20 - a„ Allowance for 1 Ce � - _30� Hearing -40 - � O o o _._ O y � ,-�----- Original -10 / 1 / Spectrum i r -20 -30 / ---4--- Spectrum -40 - tt Weighted for Human Hearing t 50 100 200 500 1K 2K 5K 10K Frequency, Hz (c) Figure 3. Weighting the Measured Spectrum to Account for the Frequency Response of the Human Ear -12- I � Itotal acoustic energy found at a given point over a one-hour period divided by the number of seconds in the hour. Again , the decibel scale is used and it is defined such that the HNL of a steady tone is the same as the SPL (sound pressure level ) . The end result of all this is just to say that a loud noise for a short time may receive the same rating as a soft noise over a long period of time . The same HNL reading would be obtained if one truck passed by and generated a noise level of 88 dB for 10 seconds or 78 dB for 100 seconds . If ten trucks , each making 88 dB for 10 seconds , went by during the hour , an HNL meter would read 73 dB - a tenfold increase in noise energy represented by a 10 dB increase in the Hourly Noise Level . Thus , 100 such trucks would give a reading of 83 ~ dB and 1000 of them would increase the level to 93 dB , and Iso forth . Community Noise Equivalent Level_ (CNEL ) So far in our example, nothing has been said about the time Iof day the trucks were going by . The time-integrated measure of noise which attempts to account for this time of day sensitivity is called the Community Noise Equivalent Level . It is developed in the following way. Early studies of - community noise exposure indicated that one intruding sound during the evening hours will be approximately as annoying I as three occurrences of the same sound during the day. During sleeping hours at night, this time-of-day penalty seems to be about 10. The factors of 3 and 10 are only approximate , but they seem to give a reasonable accounting of the weighting that -14- 1 should be applied for evening and nighttime noises . The times -- have been customarily specified for daytime , evening and night- time and are 7: 00 a. m. to 7: 00 p .m. , 7 : 00 p .m. to 10: 00 p . m. and 10: 00 p. m. to 7: 00 a.m. respectively. Therefore , if 33 trucks passed by during the evening hours , they would be counted as 100 trucks and given the same effective HNL value of 83 dB as the 100 trucks during the daytime hours (add 5 dB for three times as many and 10 dB for 10 times as many) . During nighttime hours , only 10 trucks would be counted as equivalent to 100 trucks and would yield the same HNL effective value of 83 dB . Thus , the noise energy is defined in terms of the Hourly Noise Level for each hour of the day. This Ienergy for each hour over the entire day, after having been - appropriately weighted to account for the time of day as above, would be added together and divided by 24 to give the weighted average noise level for the day. When expressed in decibel form, this number is called the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL ) . It provides a single number to show the relative noisiness of a given location on a given day. Generally , this number does not vary substantially at a given community location over a period of weeks . In areas where there are large variations in seasonal. traffic, there will be seasonal variations in the CNEL . When the CNEL is dominated — by highway traffic , as it often is , the traffic must double to effect a 3 dB change in the CNEL . An annual average of the daily CNELs for a given area would tend to exhibit little change from year to year , providing the nearby land use and traffic flow do not change markedly. -15- watts into a loudspeaker , little more than 1/4 to 1 watt of acoustic power is being generated. Even so , this little bit of power is more than adequate to shake the windows and rouse �- the neighbors . The acoustic power generated by earlier models of commercial jet aircraft far exceeds the output of the hi -fi or even the 80 or so watts produced by an energetic orchestra in concert . _ These craft will generate as much as 40 ,000 watts at full take- off throttle . It is possible for a person to briefly generate as much as 1 /10 watt and a trained singer can approach a full 1 watt acoustic output for a short time . It is possible to convert acoustic power into a flow of heat and this may be accumulated as heat energy . If this energy can be contained so ,that it can be accumulated over a long period of time , the normal conversational talker can heat up a cup of tea in 39 years or 100 ,000 football fans could, conceivably , do it in 4 seconds . The point is that it - is possible to meas-ure noise in terms of the time integrated ( accumulated ) measure of noise intensity . This will result in a measure of total acoustic energy . The reasoning behind this measurement is that people seem to react to the total Ienergy of noise environments rather than to only the power generated by single events . Thus , it is desirable to define fluctuating noise environments in terms of the constant noise level which generates the same energy . This is done to obtain _ an average level over a given period of time , nominally one hour. The Hourly Noise Level (HNL) can thus be defined as the i -13- Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL ) y The Single Event Noise Exposure Level is also dependent upon _ time , but it is somewhat different in its application . Essentially, it is designed to determine the total acoustic _ energy associated with a single event such as would be generated by the passage of a single vehicle or aircraft. 1— A flyby of a single aircraft will cause the acoustic level y to gradually rise , reach a peak and then fall . The total area under a curve representing this flyby is proportional _ to the SENEL . The SENEL differs from the other measures discussed above in that they are averaged in time . That — is , the total energy is divided by the total number of seconds _ required to make the record. The main difference between these two records , then , is that an SENEL will always result _ in a number that is higher than the peak level measured and will represent a single event, while an HNL (or CNEL) will _ always result in a number that is lower than the peak levels measured and will represent the integrated energy-average level for all of the events that occurred during the time _ period specified by the measurement (one hour, one day, or one year) . An approximation of SENEL may be obtained by the following procedure : 1 . Obtain a level versus time trace of the sound pressure �— level (SPL ) . 2. Determine the time duration in seconds that the SPL is within 10 dB of the peak SPL . ' 3. Determine the logarithm to the base 10 of this duration -16- (characteristic and mantissa) ; multiply this logarithm by 10 . 4 . Add the number found in step 3 to the peak SPL. Subtract 3 dB . This is the approximate SENEL . If a stopwatch is used to measure the time that the level , as seen by a sound level meter, drops from its maximum value to 10 dB below that level , a rough approximation of SENEL may be obtained by adding 10 times the logarithm of the number of seconds to the maximum noise level . -17- SECTION 1 - HIGHWAY NOISE ' Existing Highway Noise Existing highway noise levels and contours were measured and calcu- lated by Wyle Laboratories as a major portion of their consultant study : Analysis of Highway Traffic Noise in Newport Beach , California" . Wyle Laboratories ' major findings are included herein in the form of a map entitled " Existing CNEL Contours " , several charts , and a general discussion of the existing highway noise environment. ( Please refer to the Wyle Laboratories report for a more-detailed discussion of their methodology and findings . ) COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVEL CONTOURS The Existing CNEL Contours map (Figure 4) illustrates the ' penetration of highway noise into adjacent neighborhoods . Each contour line represents the measured and calculated maximum penetration of noise at each particular "Community Noise Equivalent Level " (CNEL ) . As previously discussed , CNEL is a time-integrated measure of noise , over a 24-hour period , with a weighted Average which accounts for greater sensitivity to noise in the evening hours . CNEL numbers indicate the relative noisiness of various locations over a 24-hour period . ' An examination of Figure 4 shows that CNEL values above 60 decibels ( dB ) may be found at most locations within a block of any major arterial street. CNEL values in the area of 60 dB will interfere with some activities and may result in sporadic complaints . More critical are those areas where the 65 or 70 dB CNEL contours extend into residential neighborhoods , such as : 1 ) Coast Highway in the -18- ' West Newport , Bayshores , and Corona del Mar areas ; 2) Balboa Boulevard on the Balboa Peninsula ; 3 ) Dover Drive , and 4) Irvine Avenue. ' -19- rr r r r r r r r r r r r ■Ir �r r �■r r� r r ����`� `s' ���" ���='.04... mil•, q s� ,_'� =.... .Y ,/ � n \� �;l ems?• r..tf `y � ' � \ �`dY•JrV^�1'�j�� \\� si �l'�v��'��' [s �."i�••.` � -..o''`-•i a' �r a"'i 6\:r AM .rj` '�' .fKt�-`.•bp✓, 4 l ��'� F L,` ti.�,,�`•''.—,g.:! "° '[- —l` '`n.^ a. _ _ ti-:;;'r' ✓.''� )y""\�, �;q r � r 'ire. --�.. t y .��; Yftr� _ _ ..�- - r ��� g-��-�_ygiy+•,. �;" 1 ��---�l.nisan:7 � -eJ_ e FCE.-•L. .+... gin. l ya�'t F! I1;11`PG!(t G•lu.. �ag.-9. :.::✓i'- �,:... ��.�• ~a 't``=,ls.,_ �Y _� C J •T•:Y j tl —�� civ OF MEWPOflT BE ' F FIGURE-4 EXISTING CNEL CONTOURS C _Ao~ E '' n a - ' FOR HIGHWAYS SOURCE: WYLE LABORATORIES HOURLY NOISE LEVELS Another useful measure of highway noise is the "Hourly Noise Level " (HNL ) which represents the average noise level for a one-hour period , as previously discussed in the "Quantification of Noise" section of this Element. Figures 5 through 13 illustrate the Hourly Noise Levels (HNL ) at various curbside locations within the City during a single 24-hour period. Busy areas such as ' Pacific Coast Highway at Dover Drive and Newport Boulevard ( Figures 5 and 6 ) show constant levels throughout the 24-hour ' day with less than a 10 dB total variation . Figure 7 , Pacific Coast Highway at Bayside Drive , shows some variation with traffic decreases between 1 :00 and 6 : 00 a. m. , but even here there is ' only 13 dB variation between the low and high points during the day. Greater variation is seen at Jamboree and Ford Roads and Irvine and Francisco (Figures 8 and 9) . These locations become quieter at night and only an occasional vehicle will pass by during the early morning hours . Variations above 15 or 16 dB are common on these streets . Figures 10 through 13 , showing calculated noise levels derived from traffic data , indicate similar ' results . These latter figures contain noise levels calculated from both summer and winter traffic . They graphically illustrate the tendency for lower traffic levels and hence less noise at ' night in the winter. This i ; particularly obvious at Balboa - Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway , as reported in Figure 10. ' -21 - 90 1 — --- - — - - — — CNEL = 77 dB 80 70 60 50 ' Figure 5 , Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels — Pacific Coast Highway at _ Z Dover Drive ZL ' eq 90 - - coCNEL = 81.5d8 ' 80 - -' 70 0 � 60 c 0 o - ' V! a 50 s rn Figure 6 . Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels — Newport Boulevard at ' 3 Hospital Road ` Q 90 ' CNEL = 78 dB 80 -- — 70 60 ' 50 24 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Time of Day in Hours Figure 7. Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels — Pacific Coast Highway at Boyside Drive SOURCE : WYLE LABORATORIES -22- ' 90 - - - - ------I- --+— - CNEL = 75dB 80 - - - - ' 70 60 - - - - - -- -- - -- �E ' Figure 8. Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels —Jamboree Road at Ford Road z ZL 0 90 v ICNEL = 76dB ' a 80 v 70 ` -� -o 60 c 0 0 ' 50 w _ s rn ' 3 Figure 9 . Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels — Irvine Avenue at Francisco Drive Q 90 ' - CNEL = 69 dB - Writer ----- _ 73.5 dB - Summer 80 - '- 70 - - _ — -- - -- - - 60 - ' 5024 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Time of Day in Hours ' Figure 10. Computed Curbside Hourly Noise Levels Based on Highway Traffic Data (Reference 5) — Balboa Boulevard at Pacific Coast Highway ' -23- SOURCE : WYLE LABORATORIES YU CNEL = 72 dB - Winter CNEL = 75 dB - Summer 80 -- - - 70 -�------ 60 - - -- -- -- ---- ,- N 50 Figure 11 Computed Curbside Hourly Noise Levels Based on Highway Traffic Data �- z. (Reference 5) - Newport Boulevard at 30th Street CN 90 m _ -- CNEL = 70 dB - Winter m —CNEL = 73 dB - Summer c 80 - -- - -- Uv - - - - - w 0) 70 - — - - — — - 60 M i 0 w ,— 50 a' Figure 12. Computed Curbside Hourly Noise Levels Based on Highway Traffic Data 3 (Reference 5) - Balboa Boulevard at Adams 90 - ----- CNEL = 74,5,dB - Winter CNEL = 77 dB - Summer 70 % -- 60 - - --- - 50 24 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 '- Time of Day in Hours Figure 13. Computed Curbside Hourly Noise Levels Based on Highway Traffic Data ,- (Reference 5) - Newport Boulevard at Arches Bridge -24- SOURCE : WYLE LABORATORIES PROPAGATION OF TRAFFIC NOISE INTO THE COMMUNITY '— All the levels reported in Figures 5 thr6ugh113 were measured i or calculated at cuNbside. According to Wy'le 'Laboratories , where there are no barriers to the sound fields , such as store fronts , walls , hills , or other solid partitions , the sound levels may be expected to attenuate by approximately 5 to 7 '— dB in the first 50 feet of distance. The existence of barriers ' may reduce the nearby levels , by an additional 10 to 15 dB. At distances beyond 200 feet, the effects of such barriers are small . However , the normal spreading losses at 200 feet will generally reduce the traffic noise to less than 60 dB , thus , ,— normally removing any cause for concern . COMPARISON OF NEWPORT BEACH NOISE LEVELS WITH OTHER AREAS Figure 14 illustrates the HNL values found in Newport Beach '— as compared to other areas throughout the United States , '— including rural farming communities and downtown locations in Los Angeles and New York City. This chart indicates that the noise levels near major arterials in Newport Beach are substantially lower than those found in large cities . The noise levels in the ,_. Newport Beach residential neighborhoods are average , falling within the range of those found in residential neighborhoods in ,— other parts of the country. -25- I 9080 T1-T'TT— Near Main Arterials ' 70 Near Arterials (Newport Beach) N ZL 0.e6N L ` 04 60 ;; Residential (Newport Beach). :•::'�.. ...n: .n. 50 _ v v v 40 — 'o Z a. 30 3 .20 1_ 10 AM PM ' 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 Time of Day ' - Figure 14. Comparison of HNL Values in Newport Beach with Corresponding Values Measured in Several Areas Throughout the United States SOURCE : WYLE LABORATORIES '_ -26- lmi I i I � i i i i 90 80 135,000 Vehicles/Day z 40,000 Vehicles/Day 25,000 Vehicles,/Day v0 20,000 Vehicles/Day 70 C) a y 60 0 Z 1 0 50 ro = to o For 48 miles per hour, Subtract 3 dB rn For 75 miles per hour, Add 3 dB .0 Q40 30 10 100 1000 10,000 Distance from Center of Roadway, feet Figure 16. predicted Decay of Sound from Roadways Having Various Average Daily Traffic Counts at 60 mph -•\� _ham' , �- - %` '\ _ �� � '\` ✓/ "u� `vim� _, ? 1'`—.'. � �;: _—_ \\ Ilk l N fy�~&`\^ "�'`" E� �� f gyp ,.!'".J � ('o' `v«.- •,:.�7 _ _ 4 - ✓%•�,.✓ `@, a!''Q' �4@9 Inc' �'/ ,. .Y ` .�t�rE�4•?S�.<s�-r ,r a �;GJ�`' �Ctaf,`n�7a-�'-•�s•`�'��•. i' ' "3 ,,. r � i im i!ti?.,--_--_-�y�•, :d'i}- �'t..��. �-�':- aou'4?' `' t --;� rF11�i �.__ c�� .-;�,'"`k<F';{ ..'°':.3=.% �, rc.+4. �•F}_'+- - ooc��^ �s �_�"' f``i� i •.� `\ q C > i•.7 y� v CITY OF NE PCNF SF w FIGURE-15 PROJECTED CNEL CONTOURS c e C e -^ ^ FOR HIGHWAYS _ - — - SOURCE: WYLE LABORATORIES Projected Highway Noise '— Future highway noise levels and contours were projected by ' Wyle Laboratories , based on roadway capacities . These noise levels and contours are illustrated on the map entitled "Projected Future CNEL Contours " (Figure 15 ) . It is anticipated that ' these noise levels and contours will be reached at approximately the same time as the City of Newport Beach is "built-out" (all vacant land being developed ) , which should occur by 1990. ' The noise levels and contours shown in Figure 15 are based on current and assumed typical highway configurations and current automotive design . A change in these factors could reduce noise levels at the source and reduce the propagation of ' noise , thus pulling the contour lines in closer to the roadway . ' An average propagation loss , as shown in Figure 16 , has been used to determine the actual placement of each contour line where _ the roadway is level with the surrounding ground level (or assumed to be ) . If a roadway is elevated , the high level contours ( 70 and 65 dB curves ) will shrink in . This is because the ' edge of the road will shield some of the noise of the cars from residences very close to the road . At greater distances (such as ' the 60 decibel contour) , this shielding is non-existent and the raised roadway does not offer any reduction . In areas where a ' — roadway is depressed , there will be a 5 or 6 dB reduction of all levels . Short sections of depressed roadway do not offer much advantage , but a long section would give this desirable effect. t ' -27- L rr, r� �r r� ri r r r r � � r rs r r rr u■i �r �. it— '.._ a.�.. •mot Y1 ty t i1 • t p; 11 i _� 5 i• �; +�t f' (rjl �'r 1• •'_"T� f { - �.-,t ss dBAt m t 11 t j j 11/I L 3 00 y w n• f F rri Y Y 2 60 r 14 0 �.: V e ib 1. ., o�y 8 65 Flight Path i _SN, i rrrir ♦¢ \, :r♦ 18 J R o y-5 i 28* 6o y t _1 -T'� r ',"--„'• sip+r+r + - 7 4 '-y•r, M1� ��+L , :���y i ` - 5$ -BA 5 — ra�ir •++�r'ZTT ` C c� Sil— -..'."�_� ' _ f ',t. 1 t yt � a C ° ^ 6 ,�„ Nu�m¢ers on Flight Path Denote Ois- 7 ten0 tande from Start of Takeoff Rotl (Thousands of Fee[) l8 Number of Aircraft Operations Type of Day Evening Night ' Aircraft (0700-I900) (1900-2200) (2200-0700) Boeing 737 or Douglas DC-9 17 4 0 2' Engine Bus. Legend; 2 En 9 Normal Takeoff Parer Jets 4 O 0 -- ' - -- Power Cutback at 1,500 Ft. Altitude - _ Source; Paul S. Veneklasen L Associates, 1970. FIGURE-17 CNEL CONTOU?S FOR 1970 OPERATIONAL LEVEL with and without power cutback procedures . In their report Veneklasen & Associates strongly recommended that a CNEL value of 60dBA be used as a boundary defining the noise impact area around Orange County Airport. Veneklasen based �— this recommendation upon the results of studies which have quantified certain aspects of noise which may have a bearing on the psychological state of individuals or of a large population exposed to high levels of aircraft noise. The noise impact area as defined by Veneklasen (within the 60 dBA CNEL contour) includes several residential neighborhoods designated for continued residential land use in the Residential Growth Element , including portions of Santa Ana Heights , Dover Shores , and the Bluffs . A more recent study conducted by Veneklasen & Associates , "Aircraft Noise Level Study" , October 18, 1972 , measured aircraft take-off noise levels at ten residential sites in Newport Beach. This study concluded that the measured noise levels found were consistent with the earlier CNEL contours , and that speech inter- ference and sleep disturbance are frequent occurences . The purpose of this study was to provide support data for the larger report — illustrating the adverse effect of aircraft noise on property _ values : "Studies Related to Jet Aircraft-Originated Noise Levels and the Economic Impact Upon Residential Property Values Associated with Orange County Airport" , February 12 , 1974 , Manhinney & Long , and Veneklasen & Associates . This study concluded that the aircraft noise has caused a relative decline in property values in excess of 14% for those homes located under or near the flight path . -32- STATE REQUIREMENTS The State of California has adopted the following noise criteria for defining airport noise impact boundaries (Orange County Airport falls into the " (b )" category) : " Limitations on airport noise in residential communities are hereby established. (a ) The criterion community noise equivalent level (CNEL ) is 65 dB for proposed new airports — and for vacated military airports being converted to civilian use . (b ) Giving due consideration to economic and technological feasibility , the criterion community noise equivalent level (CNEL ) for existing civilian airports (except as follows ) is 70 dB until December 31 , 1985, and 65 dB thereafter. (c ) The criterion CNEL for airports which have 4-engine turbojet or turbofan air carrier air- craft operations and at least 25 ,000 annual air carrier operations (takeoffs plus landings ) is as follows : Date CNEL in decibels — Effective date of regulations to12-31 -75----86 1 -1 - 76 to 12-31 -80-------------- -------------75 1 -1 -81 to 12-31 -85---------------------------70 1 -1 -86 and thereafter------------------------651, r_ -33- SECTION 2 - AIRCRAFT NOISE Since the appearance of turbojet and turbofan propulsion systems _ in the field of commercial aviation , a significant noise intrusion has invaded many homes located near flight paths within the City of Newport Beach . In addition , military heli - copters from the nearby marine airfield and police helicopters contribute to the overall noise levels in some parts of the I_ City . j_ It is not the intent of this section of the Noise Element to attempt a comprehensive survey of aircraft noise conditions which _ are covered in depth in many other studies , but to indicate the noise impact areas and general effects of aircraft noise as identified by others . Commercial Jets In 1970, the City of Newport Beach contracted with the consulting ,— firms of Wilsey & •Ham, Planners , Paul S . Veneklasen & Associates , Acoustical Engineers , and Darley/Gobar Associates , Economists , to study the impact of Orange County Airport on the City of �_. Newport Beach . This study culminated in the report : "Orange County Airport Impact Study" , January , 1972 . As part of this study , Paul S . Veneklasen & Associates conducted a noise measurement survey and then constructed noise level contours . These contours are shown in Figure 17. The contours shown are based on level of operations which were determined by observation during the noise measurement survey and on the , then , current 1972 airline schedules . In order to illustrate the _ benefits from noise abatement takeoffs , Veneklasen drew contours '— -30- Section 5005 of the California Administrative Code lists the findings of the state in adopting these airport noise standards : _ "Citizens residing in the vicinity of airports are exposed to the noise of aircraft operations . There have been numerous instances wherein — individual citizens or organized citizen groups have complained about airport noise to various authorities . The severity of these complaints has ranged from a few telephone — calls to organized legal action . Many of these cases have been studied by acoustics research workers under sponsorship of governmental 1_ and private organizations . These studies have generally shown that the severity of the complaint is principally associated with a combination of the following factors : (a ) Magnitude and duration of the noise from aircraft operations ; — (b ) Number of aircraft operations ; and — (c ) Time of occurrence during the day (daytime , evening or night) . There are many reasons given by residents for _ their complaints ; however , those most often cited are interference with speech communication , TV and sleep . A number of studies have been �— made related to speech interference and hearing damage , and some studies have been made related to sleep disturbance and other physiological effects . These studies provide substantial evidence for the relationship between noise level and its interference with speech communi - cation and its effect relative to hearing r— loss . Significantly less information is available from the results of sleep and physiological studies . �._ In order to provide a systematic method for evaluating and eventually reducing noise incompatibilities in the vicinity of airports , y it is necessary to quantify the noise problem. For this purpose , these regulations establish a procedure for defining a noise impact area sur- rounding an individual airport . The criteria and noise levels utilized to define the boundaries of the noise impact area have been based on existing evidence from studies of community noise reaction , noise interference with speech and sleep , and noise induced hearing loss . ,, Y The purpose of the state regulations and a methodology for controlling and reducing noise problems are also listed within �_ -34- 1 the California Administrative Code: The purpose of these regulations is to provide a positive basis to accomplish resolution of existing noise problems in communities surrounding airports and to prevent the development of new noise problems . To accomplish this purpose , these regulations establish a quantitative framework within which the various interested parties ( i . e. , airport proprietors , aircraft operators , local communities , counties and the state) can work together effectively to reduce and prevent airport noise problems . The methods whereby the impact of airport noise shall be controlled and reduced include but are not limited to the following : (a ) Encouraging use of the airport by aircraft 1 classes with lower noise level characteristics and discouraging use by higher noise level aircraft classes ; (b ) Encouraging approach and departure flight paths and procedures to minimize the noise in residential areas ; r ( c ) Planning runway utilization schedules to take into account adjacent residential areas , 1 noise characteristics of aircraft and noise sensitive time periods ; ( d ) Reduction of the flight frequency , par- ticularly in the most noise sensitive time periods and by the noisier aircraft; (e) Employing shielding for advantage , using natural terrain , buildings , etcetera ; and ' (f) Development of a compatible land use within the noise impact boundary. _ Preference shall be given to actions which reduce the impact of airport noise on existing communities . Land use conversion involving existing residential communities shall normally be considered the least desirable action for achieving compliance with these regulations . " Section 5062 of the California Administrative Code probides that : "No airport proprietor shall operate his airport with a noise impact area of other than zero unless said operator has a variance as prescribed in Article 11 of this subchapter of these regulations " . -35- Orange County Airport does currently have a noise impact area of ' greater than zero (since the 70 dB CNEL contour includes residential neighborhoods ) and has submitted an application for variance , as contained in the " Report to the State of California Director of Aeronautics on the Compliance of Orange County Airport with the Adopted Noise Regulations for California Airports" , January 26 , 1974. This variance request is currently under consideration by the California Department of Aeronautics . 1 I t 1 i_ i � -36- EXISTING CITY POLICY ON ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT The current City of Newport Beach policy regarding Orange County Airport was adopted by the City Council on February 14 , 1972 and states : " In developing its position regarding issues related to Orange County Airport , the Newport _ Beach City Council has always carefully examined pertinent aviation technical studies ; has weighed the desires of citizens of the County for commercial air transportation ; the assumed benefits in employment — and trade from business and industry attracted to the airport and adjacent airport industrial development ; the continuing commitment of the _ County of Orange to preserve viable general aviation facilities ; and finally , the responsibility of public officials to protect and enhance the comfort , well -being and quality of residential living for the citizens they serve. ' After considering these factors , the Newport Beach City Council has concluded that it is in the I best interest of the City and an important responsibility to assure its citizens , and the tens of thousands of patrons of its water-oriented recreation attractions , a continuation and enhance- ment of the residential and outdoor recreational environment. Therefore , it is essential that effective measures be employed so that the noise and pollution emanating from jet aircraft operations at Orange County Airport can be constrained and abated . To accomplish such objectives , the City of Newport Beach offers the following findings and recommendations for operation of Orange County Airport. Control of Commercial Jet Departures The control of commercial jet departures through I terminal lease restrictions appears to be the most productive technique for immediate management by local authorities of the noise problem. The following conditions should govern the con- tinuance of terminal access privileges by com- mercial carriers at Orange County Airport : I (a ) The hours of operation should be from 7: 00 a. m. to 10 :00 p . m. only . ' (b ) The type of jet aircraft should be limited to those no louder than the Boeing 737 or Douglas DC-9 and with a gross weight not to exceed 95 ,000 pounds . -37- EXISTING CITY POLICY (Continued) _ ( c) The permitted number of daily operations should be restricted to a number not to exceed the average daily level for the twelve months — immediately preceding expiration of the present leases . — (d ) Noise abatement flight procedures should be vigorously enforced by airport management. To aid in this effort and to provide a reliable and scientific basis for assessing the noise problem, _ suitable measurement equipment and competent operators should continue to be maintained at the airport. 1— (e ) No terminal access privileges should be granted to any new carrier who proposes to use �— jet aircraft , or who may receive authority to serve any point where the ultimate destination is more than 400 miles from Orange County. No expanded terminal facilities should be permitted , _ nor should any commercial carrier be allowed to construct terminal facilities which would be independent of the County ' s regulatory controls . (f) No commercial carrier should be permitted to use aircraft not equipped with the latest smoke reduction retrofit equipment. ' General Aviation Operations — Piston-driven private and commercial aircraft do not appear to constitute a serious environmental pollution problem. However , the uncontrolled operation of privately owned jet powered aircraft poses an increasingly serious noise problem . The County should maintain strict measures to limit times of operation , flight procedures and noise abatement patterns for such aircraft. If the Director of Aviation cannot attest to a significant improvement in this problem within a 1_ reasonable period of time , the use of such jet powered aircraft should be banned from the airport. New Facilities The Orange County Board of Supervisors has elected to be the local agency providigg commercial airline facilities for this metropolitan area . The Board should acknowledge that the Orange County Airport is not , and in all probability will never be , an acceptable facility for jet powered aircraft. Further , _ numerous technical studies have demonstrated that the only sensible solution to the county ' s aviation facilities needs is the development of an alternate ,— jet capable airport . The City Council urges the Board of Supervisors and all aviation authorities to make a strong commitment to this objective. t_ -38- EXISTING CITY POLICY ( Continued ) Until such time as such a facility is available for use , strong measures must be employed to control the environmental problems created by Orange County Airport. " The City of Newport Beach has filed a complaint, on May 16 , 1974 , against the County of Orange which seeks to abate the public nuisance caused by aircraft noise. This lawsuit asks that the court order the county to provide assurances that effective noise abatement actions will be taken . It is hoped that this lawsuit will provide the vehicle by which the City df Newport Beach and the County of Orange can agree ; by way of a written , binding document ; to the elements which are necessary to provide said effective aircraft noise abatement. t I IL IL IL t t t t t -39- HELICOPTERS Helicopters , both police and military , are another significant source of aircraft noise within Newport Beach . This subsection on heli - copter noise is based on the helicopter noise section of the Wyle Laboratories Study : "Analysis of Highway Traffic Noise in Newport Beach , California" . 1 ' POLICE HELICOPTERS The City of Newport Beach operates two police helicopters for surveillance of areas sensitive to crime. These craft have no set pattern of operation and might be found at any point at- any time. During emergency situations when the helicopter is moving to a scene of action , noise generation is quite high , but duration and frequency (as received by a given resident under the flight path ) are very low. Figure 18, below, lists the three different operating altitudes together with a progression to CNEL figures under some different assumed flight patterns . Fig . 18 - Noise Levels for Operation bf Police Helicopter Height Above Ground Level in Feet Noise Measurement 500 800 1500 "A" Weighted Sound Pressure Levels 70 65 60 in dB (re: 20 µ N/m2) SENEL Under Flight Track Assuming 85 82 80 Cruise Speed of 30 mph CNEL Under Flight Track Assuming 49 43 41 One Fl ight/Day and Two Flights/ Night CNEL Under Craft Assuming a 55 50 48 10 Minute Hover at One Location Source : Wyle Laboratories -40- Figure 18 indicates that the police helicopter , though quite noticea- ble during the time when it is flying over , generates relatively tow total acoustic energy averages over a day. Helicopter overflights are very singular , relatively nonrepetitive events . The foregoing data therefore tends to confirm a conclusion that can be drawn from everyday experience , that during the day such events will not usually cause extended annoyance and complaints . At night , however , repetition throughout the night is not a necessary condition for annoyance. A single event which produces complete awakening or even adequate recall can produce severe annoyance. ,— Continuous night-after-night repetition will lead to inevitable complaint and in some cases only a few repetitions will arouse vigorous action. MILITARY HELICOPTERS Military helicopters flying over the City of Newport Beach are usually from the Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS ) in Santa Ana in support of operations at Camp Pendleton . The FAA has assigned a total of eight routes for their use over populated areas . These routes are used when visual flight is possible. The military helicopters are permitted to fly under any weather conditions wherein the pilots can maintain ground contact. The normal minimum altitude requirements are 600 feet above sea level for inbound , and 800 feet for outbound craft. All aircraft are trequired to fly 500 feet below cloud banks under special Visual Flight Rule conditions , but the military helicopters are permitted �• the additional allowance of being able to fly if they can maintain ground contact . Under clear skies , these craft fly at about 1800 �_ -41 - ' feet above sea level , leaving considerably more clearance with less noise. The one route for military helicopters that affects the City of Newport Beach is called the "Palisades Route" . This route is ' used to fly from MCAS to the sea , and may be described as running due south from the Big Canyon Reservoir and 30 degrees east from that reservoir. The assigned path is 1 /4 mile wide . Figure 19 indicates this flight path and the60 and 55 dB(A) CNEL contours . Populated areas within the city limits , directly under the flight path , include sections of Corona del Mar and the Harbor View Hills areas . A flight path 600 feet above sea level is only 300 feet above the Big Canyon Reservoir. The developments being constructed around Spyglass Hill are even higher and could , conceivably , be within 120 feet of a helicopter if a craft used the eastern-most edge of the path. The whole of Surrey Drive in the Cameo• Highlands is approximately 400 feet below this flight path minimum altitude . The helicopter CNEL contours were developed by Wyle Laboratories based on an average sound level generation of four types of military helicopters operating in this flight path and an assumed altitude of 1 ,000 feet. I � Maximum sound pressure levels that may be expected along this 60 dB CNEL contour will approximate 83 dBA. Flyovers of military heli - copters may cause some annoyance , possibly leading to complaints , lwhere residences are less than 2400 feet from the flight path I• -42- U within the 60 dB (A) CNEL contour. At greater distances , the _ annoyance will decrease to levels below those of traffic noise. The Harbor View Elementary School and the Intermediate School on San Joaquin Hills Road are the most potentially sensitive r` recipients of military helicopter noise . '` -43- 1 SECTION 3 - STATIONARY SOURCES Existing Conditions This category of noise impacts includes such sources as : 1 . Industrial Operations 2 . Air Conditioning and Swimming Pool Motors ' 3. Maintenance and Construction Operations ' While no research studies have been conducted on stationary noise sources in Newport Beach , it is apparent that this category of noise has a relatively minor impact. Few complaints of continuing ' noise from stationary sources have been received. Most of the industry in the City of Newport Beach could be classified ' as "light" industry involving mostly research and development activities ; no major "heavy" industries (with large noise-producing machinery ) are located in the City. ' In view of the large amount of building activity in the City , periodic noise impacts from operation of construction equipment must be expected. 'However , these noise impacts are temporary in nature and generally occur only in the daytime. Future Conditions It is anticipated that noise from stationary sources will not become a major problem in the future. All of the developing industrial areas are of the " industrial park" type , consisting of "light" lindustrial operations . As the City becomes more fully developed , noise from construction activity should taper off. -45- malicopTER �n .- GO Godb .+ '' : �,EY�'� �• 7 T uEucoarFR XBLIGOPTE �� � ��o�� ��.•it �, _% � � � •\ 1` /�, 0 �� i � `°::°^. . •�ice, .. -- r"�. aly PawcopTER V.0 PJ _ � i. / © �40©G�� >h: _ - �/:. •'"�� � :e' °3@9gL�:3�C����p� rz iYiPf`:i + l _ IiT i�tlr:uit:::ia::,`+i:. � d >t• o.-�< -'�ov' BB _f�.f„�W ; _ � ` - — -- C h�i- mo 0i �✓ CRY OF NEWPoRl BF FIGURE-19 CONTOURS OF CONSTANT CNEL o J c s ^ '� m'^ °" FOR MILITARY HELICOPTERS -- _ SOURCE: WYLE LABORATORIES I SECTION 4 - NOISE CONTROL PROGRAM In order to protect the citizens of the City from the adverse effects of an uncontrolled noise environment, the City of Newport Beach will undertake a "noise control program" , including the control of noise at its source , and the attenuation of noise between the source and the receiver. The City will : 1 . Extend the California Administrative Code requirements for noise mitigation in the design and construction of new multi - family residential developments (Article 4 of the CAC) to include all types of residential development. (It is recognized that revisions to the CAC requirements will be necessary to assure reasonability and practicability in their application to single-family residential development. ) 2. Exert all possible influence on the design of the Corona del Mar freeway to assure that it will be constructed as a "depressed" roadway and that all other practical noise mitigation measures will be implemented. 3. Consider the adopt4on of a local noise control ordinance. 4. Continue to require that noise impact analysis be included in Environmental Impact Reports , including Lthe noise impact of the proposed development on other properties , and the effect of existing or projected lnoise levels on the future users or residents of the l -46- i ' proposed development. 5 . Continue to enforce the California Vehicle Code ' Provisions relating to modified muffler systems . 6. Consider noise impacts when purchasing City vehicles ' and other City-owned equipment. ' 7 . Continue to vigorously oppose the expansion of Orange County Airport and work towards imple- mentation of the City ' s airport policy , as stated in Section 2 of this Element. In addition the City will : ' A. Encourage the reinstatement of the "Preferential Runway Program" . This program, which involved scheduling " takeoffs in a northerly direction ' during morning hours when wind condi- tions were favorable , had a definite bene- ficial effect in reducing jet aircraft ' noise over the City of Newport Beach. The program was terminated by the ' Board of Supervisors contrary to the advice of the airport noise abatement ' staff. ' B. Encourage the County Board of Supervisors to initiate a program of economic incentives I � for airlines to reduce the levels of noise generated by their aircraft. ' C. Support the implementation of programs for reduction of noise emissions from aircraft , as retrofit devices . -47- 1 ' 8. Support the development and enforcement of more stringent State and Federal vehicle and Aircraft Noise Control Legislation . 1 1 ' -48- COUNCILMEN C OF N E W P O R T B AC H MINUTES � m POn p3S'9'AN mm�o `��2 m�'m o ROLL CALL PN T 9f 'a 1 A%O November 11 1974 INDEX Referred to Planning Commission for on-going study, Noise letter from Metropolitan Transportation Engineering Standards Board regarding Federal Noise Standards and Regula- tions. Referred to Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission State for review and comment, letter from the State Trails/ Department of Parks and Recreation regarding a Hostels statewide Trails and Hostels Plan. Referred to staff with Council's commendation, letter Fire Dept from The Broadway commending Capt. Pendleton, Engi- neer Dunlap and Fireman Stator of the Newport Beach Fire Department Rescue Squad for their quick respons to an emergency call at the Newport, Center store. Referred to staff with Council's commendation, letter Fire Dept from Don I. Huddleston commending the Newport Beach Fire Department, and particularly Capt. Jerry Strom and his crew, for their speedy and efficient emer- gency treatment when he suffered a coronary throm- bosis on the Irvine Coast golf course. R erred to staff for review, letter from Phyllis Police Dept Rit er lodging a complaint against the Police Depa ment in connection with investigation of burgle. es in the Cameo Shores area. Referred staff for reply, letter from Carolyn Police Dept Yeager rega ing the news media and the Police Blotter. Referred to staf for reply, letter from Wileeta Outrigger Philbrick thanking the Council for moving the Out- Club rigger Golub from 19 to 18th Street for their summer activities. 3. The following communicate ns were referred to the City Clerk for filing and clusion in the records: Letter from Senator Carpenter o Mayor McInnis regarding earlier correspondent with California Highway Commission in effort to a edite necessary studies and approvals for replacem t of Coast Highway Bridge over Upper Newport Ba . Copy of letter from Ancient Mariner-Rus Pelican, Inc. in support of the proposed new sign dinance. Letter from Supervisor Clark to Mayor McInnis regarding Refuse Disposal Fees. Letter from Supervisor Clark to Mayor McInnis stating that the Intergovernmental Coordinating Council of Orange County is interested in obtaining a Chairman for its Public Protection and Safety Advisory Committee. Letter from the Director of the Orange County League regarding the 1974-75 officers of the League. Volume 28 - Page 268 FOrpn L VO �v© DO$NOT RLMOV COUNCILMEN CIO' OF NEWPORT BACH MINUTES ROLL CALL BAN%9f \O t \A0 October 15, 1974 INDEX Councilman Ryckof£ stated for the record that he had p ed the Tentative Map when it first came up and he still Opp d e project, but that he would support the revision because le phased development. Ayes x x x x A vote was taken on Councilman S` to' r—o'tiron which motion carried. 3. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding General the adoption of the Noise Element of the Newport Plan Beach General Plan and the acceptance of an Environ- ments mpact sport (EIR/NB- - A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. Milton Crane addressed the Council regarding the air- port noise. William Lindmeyer addressed the Council in support of the Noise Element. Jack Swing, representing Wyle Laboratories, addressed the Council and summarized their analysis. Motion x The hearing was closed. Ayes K x x x x x Motion x Environmental Impact Report EIR/NB 74-047 was accepted, Ayes K x x x x x x and the following- r�'eso'�ut on w� as a'Tbpted:-"—`"""" Resolution No. 8366 adopting the Noise Element R-8366 o- a Newport BeadfFGeneraY Plan. 4. Mayor McInnis opened the public hearing regarding Alley consideration of alley paving in Block 10, East New- Pavi / port (City block bounded by 6th Street, Island Avenue, B1 10 Balboa Boulevard and Ocean Front) using the procedure of Chapter 27 of the Improvement Act of 1911. A report was presented from the Public Works Dir tor. Mrs. Jane Lamar, representing the Ebell Club addressed the Council and protested the a ey paving. Motion x The hearing was closed after it was ermined that Ayes x x x x x no one else desired to be heard. Motion The staff was directed to hav subject alley paved Ayes x x x x x per plane as submitted, un the procedures of Chapter 27 of the Imp ent Act of 1911; and the staff was directed to ke a special agreement with the Ebell Club to s ead their assessment payments over a ten year p iod. 5. Mayor McInni opened the public hearing regarding Alley con at on of alley paving in Block 331, Lan- Paving/ caster' Addition (City block bounded by 30th Street, Blk 331 31at reet, Villa Way and Newport Boulevard) using th94rocedure of Chapter 27 of the Improvement Act 1911. Volume 28 - Page 247 ' o[LEE C® '2 117 DO NOT REMOVE RESOLUTION NO. t"i 36 6 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, a phase of •the City' s General Plan Program has involved the preparation of a Noise Element; and WHEREAS, this Element sets forth objectives and supporting policies which will serve as a guide for the future planning and development of the City; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach, pursuant •to Section 707 of the Newport Beach City Charter, has held a public hearing to consider the adoption of the Noise Element as a part of the City' s General Plan and has adopted and has recommended that the City Council adopt said element; and WHEREAS, •the City Council has conducted a public hearing to consider the adoption of •the Noise Element as a part of the City' s General Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED •that •the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby adopt the Noise Element described above, a copy of which is on File in •t-he office of •the City Clerk. ADOPTED this 15th day of October 1974. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk DDO/bc 10/9/74 0 INVOICE ©"D �10. 23078-1 DATE June 28, 1974 _ WYLE LABORATORIES 02304, I YOUR P. O. NO. P. O. Box 1008, Huntsville, Alabama, Phone 837-4441 OUR .108 No. 59131 FCity of Newport Beach REPORT NO. WCR 74-2 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92660 LI CONTRACT NO. C1482. Resolution 8250 ATTENTION OF Mr. Tim Cowell, Dept. of Community Development Final billing for completion of Phase II of revised contract C1482 dated June 11, 1974. 2 145 00 COMPLETE j+ 61 do Form WL 208•H DO SNOT REMOVE 1. /0- 0/ y, INVOICE No. 23078 P _ June 28, 1974 .71 DATE t . WYLE LABORATORIES t YOUR P. O. NO. 8770 P. O. Box 1008, Huntsville, Alabama, Phone 837.4441 OUR .los No. 59131 ' City of Newport Beach REPORT NO. wcR 74-2 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92660 CONTRACT NO.0 1482, Resolution 7790 ATTENTION OF Mr. Tim Cowell, Dept. of Community 'Development Billing for work performed on Phase II of original contract C1482 dated September 26, 1973 for project ion and analysis of future noise levels. Wk (^1, PARTIAL �. 1 z _qqq ,y Form WL 203-H 4 0LL`7 ®tl a DO NOT REMOVE . 1o. :. DATB D/ia 31. - 1973 L '4�k-4 WYLF UBORAT Rv# YOUD P. O. NO. 8770 l 1 ys ) �o+ '•{.•`a P. O. Box 1000"I'lo svillc, Alabama, Phone II37-4441 J/B OUR JOB N No. R59130 City of N wport Beach REPORT NO. 59130 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 CONTRACT NO. �•' • s�1L�` .a}�ausa�lf�xoxx��x ATTENTION OF Accounts Payable --- Billing for Phase I of Noise Study Task 1, "2 and 3 $ 8, 900. 00 Task 4 2, 300. 00 $11, 200. 00P— :.ti�y' �::in�s lh�w � •t Q � Form WL 208•H ' City Council Meeting May 13, 1974 _ Agenda Item No. H-2 (f) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FILE COPY April 29 , 1974 TO : City Council 00 NOT REMOVE FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJ : Amendment to Wyle Laboratories Noise Study Contract In reviewing the draft of the Noise Study Report prepared by Wyle Laboratories , it was discovered that the section on projected highway noise levels was not based on the best current information . During the time the study was in preparation , the only information available consisted of proposed highway capacities based on service level "D" . Since then , the Circulation Element has been adopted and better projection of traffic volumes has been completed. In order to complete the Wyle Laboratories Report (which will be the major input to the Noise Element) , the highway noise level projections must be recalculated , based on the new traffic volume projections . These noise level projections also become critical in view of a recently-adopted section of the California Administrative Code which requires special sound insulation design and construction for residential structures located near major noise sources (highways and aircraft flight patterns ) ; the determination of where sound insulation is required is to be based on the noise level contours contained in local General Plan Noise Elements . (This subject will be discussed in detail with the Noise Element) . Staff would suggest that , since the discrepancy in the Wyle Report is due to the traffic data supplied by the City, based on information that was available at the time , an amendment to the contract with Wyle Laboratories be authorized for the recalculation of projected noise level contours along major highways . Wyle Laboratories has indicated that the cost of such services will be $2 , 145. 00. Funding Since the original noise study was initiated in FY 1972-73 , there is no fund in the current budget for Noise Element studies , per se. However, a "Noise Ordinance Studies" fund is included , for which the sum of $1 ,500,00 has been authorized. Staff would suggest that the Noise Ordinance Studies fund be increased I'� TO: • City Council - 2 to $2 ,145. 00 by transferring $645. 00 to this fund from the "Community Design Studies" fund ( for which $10,000. 00 is currently authorized) and that the utilization of this fund for the additional Noise Study work by Wyle Laboratories be authorized. (Per' Budget Amendment BA- 58 ) • Recommended Action If desired : 1 . Adopt the attached Resolution , authorizing execution of an amendment to the Wyle Laboratories Contract. kespectfully submitted , DEPARTME OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT r KV V. Ho , q c t o r �. RVH :TC :jmb Att. Resolution authorizing execution of an amendment to the Wyle Laboratories Contract. ��WPLj�T m` CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA s:aeo - �c9 oRN��' city Hall 3300 Newport lkvd. (714) 073-2110 June 13, 1974 Wyle Laboratories 128 Maryland Street El Segundo, CA 90245 Attention: Mr. John Stearns Subject: Revised Consultant Services Agreement for Study of Noise Levels in Connection with the General Plan Enclosed is a fully executed copy of the revised agreement for subject services. The City Council authorized the revision on May 13 by the adoption of Resolution No. 8250. 'Ice- Vile Laura Lagios, CM� City Clerk LL Encl. 1'1/cc. Community-Development Department �n, oer p ti�9 AA241 ro .1 GF�P6 • 0 COUNCILMEN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH , MINUTES , a SLE � Fo INDEX CALL N " a Z Resolution No. 8250 authorizing execution of an General amendment_ to noise study agreement between the Plan City of Newport Beach and Wyle Laboratories for R-8250 additional_studiesjn connection with the Noise ly Element of the General Plan. (A report from o Community Development Department was presented. ) ea Resolution No. 8251 authorizing execution of an Newportt/ agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Bus L�''fie Qa��ca the Orange County Transit District for the estab- R-8 51 lishment of a reciprocal transfer system in connec- tion with bus services during the period June 17 - September 6, 1974. (A report from City Manager was presented. ) Resolution No. 8252 authorizing execution of an Police agreement between the City of Newport Beach a d Radios the City of Garden Grove in connection with the R-8252 Council on Criminal Justice grant for the pvo�vision of pack-set radios. (A report from the P ice Chief to the City Manager was presented. ) 3. The following communications wer referred as indicated: Referred to staff, letters fro/State Department of FAU Transportation regarding t e FAU program. Program Referred to Planning C mmission for inclusion in Sign study, letter from E 'ronmental Coalition of Ord Orange County encl sing copy of Costa Mesa sign ordinance. Referred to s aff for reply, letter from John K. Open Hopkins rep ding open space in Newport Beach and Space Promonttoory Point. Referz/d to staff for reply, letter from Laughlin E. Grand Wat s regarding the deteriorating sea walls on both Canal si s of the Grand Canal. Referred to staff for reply, letter from Harvey Paeden Noise regarding noise. Referred to staff for reply, letter from Mr. and Mrs. Stop Lear Hastings protesting removal of the stop sign Sign at 36th and Balboa to 38th and Balboa. Referred to staff for reply, letter from Mrs. W. Animals Philbrick regarding parking, beaches and dogs. on Beaches Volume 28 - Page 120 •' `�' COMMUNITY RESOLUTION NO. 8 25 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO A NOISE STUDY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND WYLE LABORATORIES FOR ADDITIONAL STUDIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is desirable and necessary to develop studies related to the noise levels generated by major transportation facilities throughout the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS , the City Council, by Resolution No. 7790 adopted on August 28, 1972 , authorized the execution of an agreement between the City and Wyle Laboratories to conduct a noise study; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that additional analysis and noise level projections based on recently-generated traffic projection data are required to complete such noise study. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by .the City Council a of the City of Newport Beach that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute an amendment to the above-described noise study agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Wyle Laboratories for the required additional studies, in an amount not to exceed $2 ,145.00, at such time as the agreement is approved by the City Attorney as to form. ADOPTED this day of MAY 13 1974. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk DDO/bc 5/9/74 RESOLUTION NO. 8 25 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO A NOISE STUDY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND WYLE LABORATORIES FOR ADDITIONAL STUDIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is desirable and necessary to develop studies related to the noise levels generated by major transportation facilities throughout the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by Resolution No. 7796 adopted on August 28, 1972 , authorized the execution of an agreement between the City and Wyle Laboratories to conduct a noise study; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that additional analysis and noise level projections based on recently-generated traffic projection data are required to complete such noise study. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by .the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute an amendment to the above-described noise study agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Wyle Laboratories for the required additional studies, in an amount not to exceed $2 ,145.00, at such time as the agreement is approved by the City Attorney as to form. ADOPTED this day of MAY 13 1974. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk DO NOT REMOVE DDO/bc , . 5/9/74 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REQUESTS FOR FUNDS Date April 29 , 1974 TO: Finance Director FROM: SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR FUNDS Request for additional funds, $ Funds are not available in the current budget. Additional appropriation to Account # is. requested. Additional funds are needed for: Request for transfer of funds, $ 645. 00 Transfer from Account # 022997020 to # 022997021 Funds are available in the current budget. - Transfer of funds is needed for: Additional Noise Study work by Wyle Laboratories , at a total cost of $2, 145. 00. Department Head Approved: City Manager ■ Y Copy VO NOT REMOVE Finance Director n �_. - "" v i' r" /. - w>` ' � "" 1 �is-,:Y evlk ,f' 1 55 d8 I ,�I'll I , uCOPTER » , tee C -� a11 kt " - to rc„ £ � �,� zt s ,� - �' ,t '< ° :� ,t. - - a5 , _ of. �,r " i ., < _4\ - M - r _1 I,,fI,�III-1-.'"'"",.,I_1�,,-I,IIriI,-,�,_�,_,"I-1 I-II<I,I,II I�I,I k,I�,I I-,I I",�01II,,I�',,",I�,--"�-�I,,:�-,I��,--�1,1,l I,1\1I��I1-':,I.,1!,)II,I.I1-,,,"I 1 qI1I-,I T--1_1,,,�"If1I-,�-:--.I l�,(::,-�I�I-z�,I'I'-,,-_z"I-,I�,�,I-I--,0,I,I---/�,,1,F.--,�,II'�"q-,.I_-1�I.II­�I_I1 I,,,I,"1,I,"-_��'1.-/.�-I,-_,,-,I�",,1 I"�I�--�,,I,1,",-�I I t-I 1,,,,-,,,�I-II1,5 1 I1,-,�1,,',,-.."I--,I 1,,;��.-I­I1,:'1,-�-,,�I 1�,,I.,1,,-I I I-'�7l_I",,'Il��.k,�"I�,;I,�,II,1�,:�II,I_�,,,I­"�,-I,�, J e ° }, Y i II-,�,-II'�K,,l�,"-I_I",b--,.�l�.1".,,I-,,-,F�,-I I,�.�,,,�,"��,­-I,1.�:­I-�I�,I,1,,I-_- i - .r Q tiF ,I1 III , m j 11 1 , -V .,, - [! x F'i - p , - i £ ', ,y ,< .. - t - - - __ dB FF' < f -1 i 1 - - - -_- µ _ _ r m �a _ w� HEL TE t � r. �. 6 � ,,<• � � coP R ' u „ = �y� ss£<V. - - - - 'd�^a° 3 w'^"✓^' °.ate, �� { - i 1 _ - ', t , " ri -," - _ - " I q ,, .+as `x.,, h./ �A I/ t ' - / r� N IAI,-llI,,",q1I""', f - ....r - r,. - ,/r 2I - , ,- 7 �v - 65 - ,/„ .x " I - 11 , , I , , - � " 11 . I I , -I I'I, I / i"I � 11 \ I - �,� r t - j < _" i ^ ' ' .. V art ti §§p ^-..7 bI, 8$ ° K t S .{ r .v ._ .. _ v r «\ - _ .��" Y ' g - - gam"" _ , " • 7; I, -a ,_ - s = . k, .. - - j7I - 3 , a"� - ; ,s / r _ I , .{ "T , > k k _f ' , p 'F ` 1 .t r V `1I ,.,i k - "- cs< _ 4Q ;��jdJj ­II I,�'I,,V�1��IV'�-I1'I1",,,-1,-I:,I,".1v,,I,,���OI I""�1,,,I-"�,_�iI,l I.;,g"iI,.�,-�'I�,N"���',Ik.I1'�l,,��-"I",-,�!I II,,,,,I,�v,P�",I,I,`I,","�1�1�,'I,,��,',-"�,I*-I�I6 I 1,­"",I,I'�,1'��,��I�,,I I I I�:�,�,�II,.I��s�,I",L,-,I'I,,I,�.1�,',��"tI,,-'.l 1�"I,,�,�,..�,I,4I�.,5�II,,1�-1 lI,,I-1-.-,,"-,.1�I-II,,-1I��4 I-III,!�I�,�-,I I_vI_,,�_�1,I�vIII��I II l�I,I,4 III II-.-I�,�;II,_,III II�I I II I I I II,1 I'�I,Ie I�-,I1.I�,1"",1;-I,I I,III I,I"I",,,��I,II,"�1I,II7 II14I�II-1."I-IIII,,"I�I�IIIIIII�II��II1�II�,1,I-,�,1,,,III,I I��,-I,I I-III,-1�,�,-I I,,�-�-��,1 I I_I�I1�II�I;�1 I,�_Ik�1"-_I 1 I I11 I I I,I"I Ix II_I I-I I,�I II I�,��\�I"I,_II�'�IIII­I-I.,I,,-II,�I,-,I I,I I",1Z I,I�I­I I,"I I,,I I z,I�,I 1If,I,,I--I,1 II�,,-,I�-�II-I1_,�I��I,._I--I-"_1I�III:I I,,II.,I II 1��I,,I I I-,,_.,I�I,I-",-II I I,-I1.I-III",I I I",".I I I��I I�I1I,'I"II 1 I�I,",,\-�,l,�I,lII,�I,,"�II I I:-lI�-�"I1I�II�,I Is�I1�I I I",�,I II1 II>I1I,1,I��II","�Il-,I�1"I-I�-7"�,I I I I",1II,,�1 I�,I I I-,II�,�,,I II,IIII I-,'II�I,­k lI,,I II\,II\,lI I,�',I II l",",I l��,I II"I�"l-"'I IiI I"I,\,III,-�Il�I_,,I,,�--��l,I"P-�­I,,�I�-III,'o"�,I-IIl�:\-Ir,",I--���,,�j I",I-I II"III _ ` .-_at ,;- '"- x _ _s.K,-.g { - �KI ,v, ..T, x' - I ,,, �+ _ " S �L-: � rr 'k, srt. i t, , ,.. j,< II�I,,-�\,-1"�,II I,I,�,"IIII",I'I�I�",I,�,I_,,I�I�,;--I".III-,,I�.-,I I%,,.,,I,II�"I�.,��I�,,I\,�,-I.Z"1 r�,II��I-1I��1I�1,I'I I,,"I%�",,,I I,:%I-,�,1I-I,-",'�,I I,-,",,�\-I,,,1 I I_1I�I I,II I I I,"�_,,�,_�,'��,�,"�I I'��,III t,�II��z,l,,,0,I,I,I�,l�-I,:l�<1 II",:".,,1,,',I I,1II I I'',e A,,��,1I,,,_I I l k"I-,��,�1-I,,I 1-1 I�,,",��,5,�'�I--,�I I,,��",I"I�1,',I I" �,ii' "A' 't err r' _ _ _ �'.' \ 4 _ M>:.�,�,.. y RN _ _ 3 i:. _ _ 4 _ _ _ - } 1 L '%Y . J { t<G. ,h y. ., ,. - .. .. . .. _ - ti. < _ e _. x . - _ jj / a t r'� N. 1 t, ?d 7 $ y w _ a r.£ .,. .. '_ _r -r ., >_ �, , ,. _ .. . ._ / :.- _ 1 ,. '"; - - ��.3 _ Al ,.. ... _, E- , , < _ _.. A - < , . . ,., b .,c .,, .., ., r t .� -, .. - < .. .. i .S , ,. - - . PS ,. Y c .. ... .. .-- .Ys- 'S 1, i .y v- L_ ,.rs , ., ., a. -. , a ,• _ s .- ( V; ...I .a , r a '.) i - .. - vr : f} - - ( s '1v ._ _ 5, x}n-, ., . . - x . .rr, ¢ .. :.t. .. ' ,, ., 'i k.-. - . . `ry 4`.J ,.,r. - - < '�. - - , G t ,y 1 _ n�... 4- 74 r.r, ., '?;.z . , - v. A' is `.', 3. h- it ,. - ? " .: " ni . r ., r'_k { „ ". ,.y . :tt - - .Nit, z _ _ -:Zl " - - PS .W p +} ✓^"` W .- < < x ,Y v ." - - M '<x. - )0 , r, P , & ' " > - of 4 a ,.<- \ . rt n.,,' art " t „ a65 " ,,I�. i' " , ._,< 1 a g Yee- . 't / .t �,_ ';"t. .. - `` i> 0 `ti �`, ..-A ,., )0 t - / u. 65 65 45 m etT. n .,,r �< - - - x A , - SQ, �� <� { -k :C-h ,. x / m ¢ "K, v" �\ C ✓' p^ J � 7� - F r.63%S'(.dfs fS � , //A> 1 '' , fr 1 x e _ Jr' S ae.S...,an..✓ ' / h^. 7p 6S. ; 9 ,.,.� t,_,, y r' g�, ,�,,,,.,, 6 70 6S / -,h , i „ "P,,',- -s,.„ \ <'` _ \ %.......s r<` ._ i$ .:y `ate',.: / .., , _ .` ' - /✓, �y /., C . , �., :✓: ,t 9 �nr. 'i5 &' "' a0 f \' { §c" ✓' a t y Y' ' _ - , x ; .,„i Y.-.q .. s ..` - _ .- p ,, '?.'`t __-6, x>. - %.w'✓�,it %l:'v- ` Y "'\',� \'m\ I a�'�" 5 �� - - - .. ,>,",.. , , „_. ' i E-X'-,,,- / 50 - �'+ SNf%h , / S5- �' 1 b.y { „o ,\ ^y' ";",- _1i O � �`.,��,' ""-1 <\ f ' v k,f ?: A, t,., �" S ,.'' / f 70 _ _ _ t� 1 „rw e :.'M..'„a':J 5' <s...$ `1' 11 I .\ 90 B5, ,a' ,:,.r z a' 0 G � - # , / ., s �, 70 /4 x w,,{ .§Cr`'%, NE;. - f$' yJ, ;. , "A.oa`r'✓. \," -L - k ' a .a 3'r £ ,�: '"' Z ' b .".bc ..�•' 1 v`0y. 'A _.... _ `�' '`tsY., k � „'" 'o * w ,4J,'1'+€' „4, 'cam, , 7 J .v".x„^ 0 - , :.<B" ";' , <*```e l ..., ... . Z' 1;ze ,._ ... , \ a, r �*�• ;w ,sa/.�` . 1 tig' -1 ,. ( A r- a 'i s...-,.: >6,S ' ,- _ , .< .;.,< #_,, . ,4d - '/" , v ;5 Y' `l r ° r�' Nr''. ''`°_., c, "v:e :#. - fir,, - _ 'e, , , s ..._ - cy,s .':'S;"s§e',a:` ``;, ,� `t-ti: , 'a3.� .`,,, ",' -a;»,-'- ,v ',\_ cI ,r / ",.t�= ' �,;/:. �_. - =r' , e , ...9 { µ i r ,�'�`, zi' .�i �.�m".ems."•-Lr;}C ;SLG ' _ x - '�'. '3` \. " ` _ -c�'/ ;+"ao *c`@ _; - 6 x ,'#, _ _ - ,_ , <, ,,,, tit'.- / x.- I �� j•, , F, S, <r�., y¢` <", - r^^"b 'r _." >nv Fi,''S':'r, �-r, ' ' .F.�, ' w y �. ,^ ,/ ! J�'p>' Grp - ✓` f , f .. s--� K+, {. a.^ ' - -::, y.."P .� � �E: ., nF . E -3«^- y ;'Gi$ p{", ,•`.'3,... c,.�' t� -`7y�,"o d .,a.,� z .42 {� .<°• _, _ - YYEH II ,�', .� vn .£'+^ \ CONTOUR OF CONSTANT CNEL �� oF�y w PALL 1972 �� o�o�fi F // ;a ARTER/AL AUTOMOTIVE AND M/LlrARY HELICOPTERS . - u.,, i < x ///✓/ 'N J./YK/ 1411 � �� / // � � ° <. - - . - - - � �i/f/��A- �e y. x.jt .1 ':.- - F _ . . a.s -i r ' N ty , :c. , _ry -.. r3. - -. l E ..S -, .,v ,. './ '_ + `, v _. '.- .. L .,i._ ,..<r,ti tom_,�.. _ .�, .�t'm:?F�,.�r _ -- ._.. < .�,a �„� - `__ ___,. .�-ti .� n, �. ._��_.<� �.mx„�f .tx . _�. , :. __ _,. . _ . _.. _.:. . .. . _ -. , �,. s�..�. _ -��.., - 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Rod Gunn DATE: October 25, 1973 FROM: Al Krier JOB: 256. 000 SUBJECT: Roadway Capacity Map Enclosed is the "Composite Road Network" map with the capacities (in 1, 0001s) plotted in red for those roads within the study area boundaries. Please note that: 1) Two secondary roadways, Campus Drive around the Airport and the second crossing of Upper Bay, have a capacity of 22, 000 rather than 14, 000. This is because some or all of the on-street parking is pro- hibited, allowing the roadways to operate similar to four-lane divided roadways. 2) Coast Highway between Newport Boulevard and Dover Drive is shown with a capacity of 36, 000. This is a modified primary road with five lanes on the westerly end, restricted access on the easterly end, and part-time parking prohibitions. 3) Coast Highway in Corona del Mar is shown with a capacity of 32, 000, as a result of part-time parking prohibitions. The capacities shown are based on approximate service level "D". In general this means that the roadways are capable of handling more traffic, but only with considerable adverse affects. AHK/pb W l� Encl: (1) S IREeEIVED Community �} poveloPmant DoPt, g `ot, 2 g19731" E CI4 T"EAOH. NEWP Cp1.lF Z �! " N Do)NOT REMOVE AMV-F-75-4 FILE C(apy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DO NOTREMOYE POLICE DEPARTMENT February 14f 1973 TO: Mr. Rod Gunn, Community Development Department FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: NOISE LEVEL STUDIES Enclosed please find a report from my staff relative to noise level testing which we conducted on February 13th and 14th, 1973. The tests included dba readings for Newport Beach Police Department helicopters at altitudes of 500 ` (normal daytime patrol) , 800 ' (normal nighttime patrol) , and 1500 ' (simulated low-light level viewing system patrol) . Information relative to ambient noise levels and jet take-offs etas included for whatever value it might be to you. We have included a tape recording of the tests for your information. Please do not hesitate to call us if we may be of further assistance. AB os Gla' va hie f Police Attachment COUNCILMEN CIO OF NEWPORT BACH MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING pi v a Place: Council Chambers Fora m 2 o N�o Time: 7:30 P. M. BOLL CALL v N N< c Pm Date: August 27, 1973 INDEX Present x x x x x x x Roll Call. Bob Decker, representing the Automobile Club of Southern California, presented Mayor McInnis with a Special Citation for Pedestrian Program Activities for the City's outstanding efforts in the area of pedestrian safety. Letters were received after the agenda was printed from OrCo George. and Jeanette Greene, Rollie and Beth Brousard, Airport Mary Taylor Shepard, West Newport Beach Improvement Association, Pegasus Homeowners Association,' Plaza Homeowners Association and the Bluffs Home Owners Association opposing an Orange, County Airport and asking the Council to give full support to the- citizens' effort to ban the jets from the Airport. The following people addressed the Council and• urged.the City to, support the citizens in their lawsuit against the Orange County Airport: Marshall Duffield, Richard Stevens representing Newport Harbor Chamber of Com- merce, Ed Hirth representing Bluffs Association, Suzanne Rudd representing West Newport Improvement Association, Mary Shepard representing Upper Bay Association,, Doris Wood representing Pegasus Homeowners, Association, Edward Cook representing- Lido Island Association, Walter-J.. Koch representing Mariners' Homeowners Association and Mr. Devries. Resolution No. 8072, expressing a total commitment to R-8072 Motion x containing and reducing the noise and pollution from Ayes x x x x x x x Orange County Airport, was adopted.. The reading of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Motion x August13, 1-973 was waived,. said Minutes were approved Ayes x x x x x x x as written and ordered filed. Motion x The reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions under Ayes x x x x x x x consideration was waived, and the City Clerk was directed to read by titles only. HEARINGS: 1. Mayor McInnis opened the`publichearing regarding 'Master the. proposed Master Plan of Bicycle Routes within Plan/ the City of Newport Beach. Bicycle -- Routes Volume 27 - Page 203 DO SNOT REMOVE Y March 5, 1973 Mr. F. M. Murray Mylt Laboratories 128 Maryland Street Do'NOt REMOVE f El Segundo, California 90246 ' Dear Mr. Murrays This letter is to confirm our conversation on February 8, 1973 regarding the scope of consultant's services with respect to police and military helicopters. Our " understanding of. the agreement is as follows : 1 . Information to be provided by the' City of Newport Beach includes : r ' A. Using the A weighted scale, take noise level readings of the Newport Beach police helicopter at various altitudes including . (1 ) 500' feet (representing daytime operations ) , (2) 8DD feet (representing nighttime operations) , and (3) 1 ,500 feet (representing nighttime operations with viewing device) . 2. Work to be performed by Wyte Labs includes : A. Take ambient noise readings in Corona Highlands , Baiboa Island, and Newport Heights fo-r each. time of day, i . e. , day, evening, and night. , B. Take A weighted noise level reading-s of military 'helicopters in Harbor View Hills and Corona ?~ Highlands. C, Contact Lt. Col . 44-rrans 0perations Officers at El Tmrro Marine Station ( (AC 714) 544-2400, ext. 361 ) and Capt. Hamilton, Newport Beach Police Department, H i Mr. P. M. Murray March 5, 1973 €3 Wyle Laboratories Page Two t for any additional data needed regarding the type of equipment utilized and operation data. At the conclusion of the tasks as outlined above, the consultant shall present a memorandum report on the noise generated by hell - copter operations In the City of Newport Beach utilizing the data obtained under items 1 and 2 abovr. This report shalt include: (a) A map showing the routes followed by military helicopters ; (b) Protected CNEL contours for military helicopters in Newport Beach ; (c) An analysis of the impact of police helicopters on the residential noise environment, and (d) Suggested procedures for zoning and building construction to make the 1-and i-mpact-ad by noise compatible for its intended use. Attached is a copy of the information to be provided by the City of Newport Beach as outlined in item 1 above. We have also included a tape recording of the tests for your information. Please do .not h-esitate to call us if you have questions . ' Very truly yours , COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEsiT ,DEPARTMENT ' R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTOR By iry RODREY ADVANCE PLANNIA4 ADMINISTRATOR' RLG/ddb Encls . (2) z' A,. $l1 .�► NEWPORT.BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT OR EMPLOYEE'S REPORT • ' SUBJECT Helicopter Noise Level measurements DATE AND TIME OCCURRED LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE REPORTING DISTRICT February 13 & 14, 1973 • see below TOI (RANK, NAME, ASSIGNMENT, DIVISION), DATE AND TIME REPORTED Capt. R. S, Hamilton, Commander, Administrative Division DETAILS A series of noise level readings were made of the Newport Beach Police Heli- copter at various altitudes. The results of these readings are as follows: Tuesday, 2-13-73, wind velocity 3 knots from the North/Northwest. a. 16th Street and Dover Dr. (open area) Ambient noise level 54 dba, NBPD Helicopter 500 feet altitude 69 dba NBPD Helicopter 800 feet altitude 65 dba Air California jet on take-off 70 dba Air California jet on take-off 78 dba b. Shorecliffs Dr. @ East. end, (residential area, close in and near the canyon. ) Ambient noise level 55 dba NBPD Helicopter 500 feet altitude 70 dba NBPD Helicopter 800 feet altitude 66 dba Wednesday, 2-14-73 , wind velocity 4 knots from the Southwest. a, 16th Street and Dover Dr. Ambient noise level 55 dba NBPD Helicopter 500- feet altitude 71 dba NBPD Helicopter 800 feet altitude 65 dba NBPD Helicopter . 1500 feet altitude 61 dba b. Shorecliffs Dr. @ East End. Ambient noise level 52 dba NBPD Helicopter 500 feet altitude 71 dba NBPD Helicopter 800 feet altitude 64 dba NBPD • Helicopter 1500 feet altitude 60 dba Both days had scattered clouds, however clear skys in the immediate area of the tests. All dba readings were taken on a General Radio Company, Type 1561A Precision sound level meter using the A weighting scale. , SUP jiV(SOR A V (N(pp¢¢ t a BADGE NO. EMMOYEEIS) EPOR ING BADGE NO(S). e DATE ANO TIME REPAOOUCEO AND OISTR BUTED CLERK I Ion raRN I5.7 (PEv.Nov.1967) COUNCILMEN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES p� F�Pp \rlro-Ap� NSp 2i p'� 22OROLL CALL T� �p I'm October 24, 1972 INDEX Park & Recreation Fund. (A report from the Parks, eaches and Recreation Director to City Manager Robe n regarding the establishment of a special fund for cer s equipment was presented.) BA-17, $8, 000 increase in et Appropriation and Revenue Estimates for Contributi by Others for consultant services in connection with t oastal Element of the General Plan, Resolution No. from Unappropriated Surplus to Community Develop- ment, Prepare Shoreline Studies, General Fund. BA-18, $4, 000 transfer of Budget Appropriations for additional funds to cover Resolution No. 7790 autho-' rizing consultant services agreement for NOISE Element Study for .General Plan, from Prepare Corh- munity Design Studies to Prepare NOISE Element Study, General Fund. BA-19, $22, 100 increase in Budget Appropriations for construction of Spyglass Hill Reservoir, from Unap- propriated Surplus to Construction Spyglass Hill Reservoir, Water Fund. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR: Motion x A letter from Kermit Dorius offering solutions to Coast Hwy Ayes x x x x x x traffic backup at back bay bridge was ordered filed. Bridge Absent x 2. A cop f a letter from Dr. H. Ward Bissonnette to Parking/ the Harb District Clerk of the Municipal Court Harbor regarding a itation and impropertly posted parking High signs in the H bor High School area was presented. Motion x The staff was direc d to report back with recom- Ayes x x x x x x mendations on how to leviate the situation. ,absent x 3. A copy of a letter to the Boar of Supervisors from Recycled the Citizens Environmental Qua Control Advisory Paper Committee thanking the Board for ssage of its resolution calling for purchase of rec led paper was presented. Motion x The Mayor was directed to write to the Boar f Ayes x x x x x x Supervisors commending them on their resoluti Absent x Volume 26 - Page 313 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA E + Sspt4nb6r 28► 1972 t u1yle' Laboratories 128 FI LE COPY Wayland Street 'I Segundoo rA 90245 Attentions Mr. John Stearns DO SNOT REMOY9 Subject: Consultant Services Agreement for Study of Noise Lawls in C omection :with the Genew na°n awiceed in a lttUy expeutad copy of subject dr.raemezt. °rhe Cit9t *0*1 authorized the vreement cn August 28 by tho aft of loselutic n No. 7790. Laurn Lin> c:M(-' City Me* r' LL:cwk Ent. f �y cc n Com=ity beveloph ent Departs ment V r tr s wVLE LABORRIMES September 1, 1972 City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, California 92600 Attention: Mr, Carl M. Neuhausen Advance Planning Administrator Gentlemen: Wyle Laboratories is pleased to submit a nroDoosal for additional helicopter noise studies for the City of Newport Beach, The enclosed Work Statement outlines the scope of work. Our fixed price quotation for performance of the described task is $2, 300. 00. Assuming a starting date of September 15, 1972 the project will be completed on or before November 15, 1972. This is to correct our letter of August 29, 1972. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal. If you require additional technical information, please contact Yr. John Stearns. For contractural matters, please contact the undersigned, Very truly yours, WYLE LABORATORIES Robert A. Nord uist FILE C®■ Y q � Contract Administrator DO NOT REMOVE RAN:kn ___ __ _ __ .f'9 S- ''4 om . ;1 'CiQ0 T 3 1'l SCIENTIFIC SERVICES 6 SYSTEMS GROUP —a 128 Maryland Street,El Segundo,California 90245 213322-1763 213.678-4251 TWX 910.348-669 Cable W • • PROPOSAL FOR HELICOPTER NOISE STUDY FOR THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Wyle Laboratories proposes to perform an additional study for the City of Newport Beach which will involve the following tasks: I. Study of the flight operations of police and military helicopters operating within j the city limits to determine the type of equipment utilized and the details of the fl qy' operational procedures. This task assumes operational data will be made available by the appropriate city and military agencies. +II 2. Measurement of helicopter noise under controlled conditions. A series of noise F measurements will be made of typical equipment utilized by the police and 2 military to determine the noise characteristics. The controlled conditions include takeoff, hover, flight and landing. Measurements will be made• at three typical locations for the police helicopters and three locations for the military helicopters. Wyle assumes assistance will be given by the necessary appropriate city or military personnel in this measurement program. 3. A letter report on the noise generated by helicopter operations.in the City of Newport Beach will be prepared based on the data obtained in Tasks I and 2. This report will include: I, a. A map showing the routes followed by military helicopters and some I ✓ typical routes followed by police helicopters. b. Projected CNEL contours for military helicopters in South Newport Beach. C. Typical A-weighted sound pressure levels associated with both military and police operations. d. Recommendation as to possible alternate operational procedures which could be followed by helicopters in order to reduce the noise impact. e. Suggested procedures for zoning and building construction to make the land impacted by noise compatible for its intended use. y PROPOSAL FOR HELICOPTER NOISE STUDY FOR THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Fh le Laboratories proposes to perform an additional study for the City of Newport Beach ich will involve the following tasks: I. Study of the flight operations of police and military helicopters operating within j the city limits to determine the type of equipment utilized and the details of the J operational procedures. This task assumes operational data will be made available by the appropriate city acid military agencies. 2. Measurement of helicopter noise under controlled conditions. A series of noise measurements will be made of typical equipment utilized by the police and military to determine the noise characteristics. The controlled conditions include i+ takeoff, hover, flight and landing. Measurements will be made at three typical f locations for the police helicopters and three locations for the military helicopters: Wyle assumes assistance will be given by the necessary appropriate city or military personnel in this measurement program. + 3. A letter report on the noise generated by helicopter operations in the City of Newport Beach will be prepared based on the data obtained in Tasks I and 2. This report will include: a. A map showing the routes followed by military helicopters and some +� typical routes followed by police helicopters. b. Projected CNEL contours for military helicopters in South Newport Beach. C. Typical A-weighted sound pressure levels associated with both military and police operations. j d. Recommendation as to possible alternate operational procedures which could be followed by helicopters in order to reduce the noise impact. e. Suggested procedures for zoning and building construction to make the land impacted by noise compatible for its intended use. Helicopter Noise Survey • • �i� ER��N�� It is suggested that the Heliport be used for measurements of the police `�oito - helicopters. If Newport Beach can induce the military helicopters to fly a specific pattern over the city this should also be done at the heliport for safty reasons. It is i expected, however, that it will only be possible to obtain information about where and when a military helicopteo will be over and measurements must be mtasm made as best we can. DATA: This will be taken at a slant distance of 500 feet. Altitude and distance may be adjusted to keep the microphone free of prop blast. It is suggested that this be accomplished with a distance of 353 feet and an altitude of 353 feet, making a slant angle of 450 above horizontal. HOVER: The acoustic output of the helicopter will vary from time to time. with changes in wind velocity and direction and it is suggested that measurements be made for a full 5 minutes while the craft is held as motionless in the air as possible. TAKEOFF AND LANDING: Again a statistical average is needed. A minimum of 5 takeoffs and landings xiii are desired. Microphone is to be placed at a distance of 353 feet from ground zero and the craft should rise to a height of 353 feet. FLYBY: The helicopter should pass over a given pram point 5 times running in one direction in a line perpendicular to the line *m#mk$n joining the point to the microphone. Then the microphone should i be moved 900 around the ground zero point.andxkhaxfiyhysxpkxfaxmsd againx The measurements should be repeated at this posibion to reduce the effects of local protuberances. The 10 flyby data points will then be averaged. •^ • the followif The city of Newport Beach will xhsata supply/operational data Max concerning the police and military helicoptere.so that it may be incorporated into maps defining the levels expected over the city from each of these Max two sources of noise; 1..Routes traveled by the aircraft 2. Time schedules used ty the aircraft 3. Altitudes 4. Speed 5. Modela numbers of each aircraft type to be sx studied. It is expected that some of the above information will not be available, but computation of the average levels expected over the city at ai any given point manx will requireil as much of this information as possible. For the military aircraft, slant distances of routine overflights will be determined optically if it is not possible to make controlled flight measurements of this craft. The taxagiansxfax location for measurement of the military matsa aircraft will be determined in conference with Newport Beach personnel. Data taken a during this dxsMxdyxhxikn brief study will be compared with published data taken xiMh on other helicopters to correct local anom9lies. {P4 DAY viN,N4 N/ HT Z IJ 8 4 • Q V -TT V 6Q go ,Ti1MBoREE .�Jr jaeo ,idOAO C/j/6L = ��;,3 701 6a � /f1Cif/C Co.�tf !/idH�ilY ilr 6AYJ/OP r'/I�EL = 77, 9 gB . y0 ' • 60 FAri-/4 i 'O fsr 1114/Xa9Y 8o 90 TN- O O O \ d \ \ \ A � M Y tl O o 0 o p C Nsov,Omr 4Lva a'Ncs/° CNE` = 800' 80 I T a, a yo • I 01 -izd \ b \ Pl\ \ d K tl D o o O o 0 O FFF �' /�,���,�. Ar F�aA.��is�o •GN£L = T5,` City Council Me* ng August 28, 1972 Agenda Item No . _ F-1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 23, 1972 TO : City Council FROM : Department of Community Development SUBJECT: Proposed Studies for Noise Element of the General Plan Attached is a copy of a report from Carl M. Neuhausen , Advance Planning Administrator, responding to Council ' s request that the City of Inglewood be contacted regarding the development of a model noise ordinance for SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments ) , and the additional request that a study of helicopter noise be included within the program. Respectfully submitted , V . 0 , Di cto RVH/kk • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH -- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO : Richard V. Hogan , Director FROM: Carl M. Neuhausen , Advance Planning Administrator SUBJECT: Proposed Studies for Noise Element of the General Plan Model Noise Element At the last regular meeting of the City Council on August 21 , 1972 , several questions were raised regarding the various noise studies of the General Plan . The staff was asked to investigate the possibility of utilizing the model noise element being de- veloped by the City of Inglewood as a means of saving any of the proposed costs or study efforts required to complete the City s Noise Element. I have learned through conversations with Mr. Randy Herlbert of the Environmental Planning Division , City of Inglewood , that their division is working on two separate noise elements : one - their own city noise element , and second - the model noise ele- ment being developed for the SCAG study committee. They are at least four months away from completing the city noise element and over six to eight months away from completing the model noise element for SCAG. To utilize either of these elements would mean a delay in our own study efforts which have now been programmed for completion within the next five to six months . The majority of work under our own program actually centers around the development and mapping of various noise contours from field measurements taken along the City ' s highway network and at various other points throughout the Newport Beach commun- ity. This embodies the major work efforts of the Consultant and accordingly, accounts for over three-fourths of the costs of the noise studies leading to the final noise element. Such costs would be incurred regardless of the opportunity to utilize any of the guidelines set forth in a model noise element. Study of Helicopter Noise Other questions raised by Council concerned the scope 'of the noise studies , and particularly the study of noise as generated by helicopter flights over the City. In following the State requirements for local noise elements , we have 'not to date in- cluded the study of helicopter noise within the program. I have asked each consultant to consider adding these studies to their scope of work and to report back on any additional costs which i 2 _ may be incurred. I would hope that such additional studies could be added by separate contractor a future expansion of any existing contracts we would have underway. With less than a week' s time to the next Council meeting , I will attempt to gain an answer regarding the study of helicopter noise from our consultants . August 22, 1972 SIGNATURE C. M. Neuhausen � uHit CMN/kk COUNCILMEN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES FILE COPY np Na N.1 •fp � pF yy pG0 ROLL CALL T P o a r9c Pm August 28, 1972 INDEX CONTINUED BUSINESS: 1. A report was presented from the Community Develop- General ment Department regarding noise element ordinance Plan/ of the City of Inglewood in connection with consultant Noise services for a comprehensive City-wide noise ordi- nance. Councilman Dostal made a motion to adopt the reso- lution authorizing execution of a consultant services agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Wyle Laboratories for study of noise levels in con- nection with the General Plan, not to exceed $16, 100. Mayor McInnis made a substitute motion to direct the staff to call for rebids on the three phases of the study so the phases could be done separately. Councilman Store made a substitute motion to direct the staff to renegotiate with the successful bidder for separate amounts for each of the three phases; and Resolution No. 7790, authorizing execution of a R-7790 consultant services agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Wyle Laboratories for study of Motion x noise levels in connection with the General Plan,. was Ayes xxx x x x adopted, and staff was directed to proceed with Phases Noes x 1 and 2. 2. A report was presented from the City Manager re- Heli- garding a one-year $3, 000, 000 combined single limit copter Police helicopter liability and non-owned aircraft Ins liability insurance contract to the firm of Milum/ Garvey, and United States Aviation Insurance Under- writers. Motion x Resolution No. 7791, awarding a contract for heli- R-7791 Ayes x x x x x x x c ter and non_ aircraft liability insurance. cove ge. 3. A report w presented from the Community Develop- Off-site ment Departm t regarding Use Permit Application Prkg/ 1562, request of . my G. Ratliff to amend the con- Galley ditions of approval a to permit off-site parking in conjunction with "The ey" restaurant, located at 810 East Balboa Boulevar the north side of the boulevard between Main Stree nd "A" Street on the Balboa Peninsula, zoned C-1. Lynn Strauss, new owner of The Galley, tated he planned on keeping a parking attendant on t lot. Volume 26 - Page 237 C(Zpy ' Richard V,, Hoga-n, Director D041 sr RWOye a Cart M. Neuhausen, Advance Planning Administrator Proposed Studies for Noise Element of the General Plan Model Noise Element At the last regular meeting of the City Council on August 21 , 1972, several questions were raised regarding the various noise studies of the General Plan. The staff was asked to investigate ' the possibility of utilizing the model noise element being de- valoped by the City of Inglewood as a means of saving any of the proposed costs or study efforts required to complete the City s Noise Element. I have learned through conversations with Mr. Randy Herlbert of the Environmental Planning Division ,' City of Inglewood, that their division is working on two separate noise elements , one their own city noise element, and second - the model noise ele- ment being developed for the SCAG study committee, They are at least four months away from completing the city noise element and over six to eight months away from completing the model noise element for SCAG. To utilize either of these .elements �_ • would mean a delay in our own stu-dy efforts which have now been programmed for completion within the next five to six months. The majority of work under our own program actually centers around the development a-nd mapping of various noise contours • from field measurements taken along the City's highway; network and at various other points throughout the Newport Beach commun- ity. This embodies the major work efforts of the Consultant and accordingly, accounts for over three}fourths of the costs , of the noise studies leading to the final noise element, Such costs would be incurred regardless of the opportunity to ; utitize any of the guidelines set forth in a model, noise element. � . Study of Helicopter Noise Other questions raised by Council concerned the scope of the noise studies , and particularly the study of noise as generated by helicopter flights over the City. In following the State requirements for local noise elements , we' have not to date in- eluded the study, of helicopter noise within the p-rogram., I have asked each consultant to consider adding these studies to their scope of work and to report back on any additional costs which p I 1 s � 2 W ^ I may be incurred. I would hope that such additional studies 1 could be added by separate contract or a future expansion I of any existing contracts we would have underway. With less than a week' s time to the next Council meeting, I will attempt to gain an answer regarding the study of helicopter noise from our consultants. Au ust 22 1972 N O C. M. Neuhausen CMN/kk t COUNCILMEN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES �Lo,Ao o3 mpk � �nZZ0 r o ROLL CALL T�v Pa S vV vm August 21, 1972 INDEX one parcel of land into four residential lots, located on the southwesterly side of Cliff Drive, westerly of Fullerton Avenue and easterly of El Modena Avenue in Newport-Heights, portion of Lot A, Tract 919, zoned R-1, Carl Arthofer owner. Motion x The matter was continued to September 25 to provide Ayes x x x x x - time to negotiate with the property owner for the City's acquisition of the property for a view park site. 4. A report was presented from the Community Develop- Tract ent Department regarding the Final Map of Tract 7167 71 request of George and William Hostein. Co. , Inc. , o subdivide 7. 022 acres into 40 residential lots and one ndscape lot, located at the northeast corner of Eastblu Drive and Vista Del Oro in "Northbluff, " zoned R-3-B. Motion x The Final Map of act 7167 was approved,. subject Ayes x x x x x x to the conditions rec mended by the Planning Com- mission; and Resolution o. 7779, authorizing R-7779 execution of an agreement ith George and William Holstein Co. , Inc. , subdivi for the construction of improvements in Tract No. 67, was adopted. 5. A report was presented from the C7,\Y,00 unity Develop- Off-site ment Department regarding Use Permi pplication Parking/ 1562, request of Jimmy G. Ratliff to ame the Galley conditions of approval and to permit off.-site arking in conjunction with "The Galley" restaurant, to ated at 810 East Balboa Boulevard on the north side o the boulevard between Main Street and "A" Street on the Balboa Peninsula, zoned C-1. Motion x The matter was diaried to August 28, 1972. Ayes xxxxxxx 6. A report was presented from the Community Develop- Gen Plan ment Department regarding consultant proposal of Noise WYle Laboratories, in connection with the Noise Element Element of the General Plan and a comprehensive City-wide noise ordinance. Councilman Dostal made a motion to authorize the execution of a consultant services agreement_ Motion x Councilman Ryckoff made a substitute motion-to diary Ayes x x x x x x x the matter to August 28, at which time a draft of the City of Inglewood's noise element ordinance should be presented for Council's consideration of a similar ordinance, which motion carried. Volume 26 - Page 221 Z, i3 * City Council Ming August 14 , 1972 Agenda Item No . G-6 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FILE C®PY August 9 , 1972 DO NOT REMOVE TO : City Council FROM : Department of Community Development SUBJECT : Consulting Services for Noise Element of the General Plan Since the introduction of a mandatory Noise Element under State planning law , the Staff has investigated several alternative means for including the new element as part of the City ' s General Plan . The Noise Element essentially requires local cities to quantita- tively measure , analyze , and control various noise levels associated with existing and future transportation facilities , including high- ways , freeways , mass transit systems , and ground air facilities . (See attached Senate Bill 691 . ) Due to the additional time , equipment , and technical expertise needed to complete the noise studies , the Staff had solicited pro- posals from various consultant firms for assistance in developing the Noise Element of the Plan . On May 22 , 1972 , the Council author- ized a joint consultant study between the firms Mawhinney & Long and Paul S. Veneklasen & Associates to undertake the first portion of studies related to aircraft noise and the Orange County Airport. These studies are now underway and scheduled for completion by November 1 , 1972 . In reference to Senate Bill 691 , further studies are also required , specifically in regards to noise associated with highways , freeways and mass transit systems . Two consultant firms have submitted additional study proposals to the City ; these being Paul S . Venek- lasen and Associates , Santa Monica , and Wyle Laboratories , El Segundo . We had asked that each proposal be designed around a three-phase work program which coincides with other studies and programs now underway as part of the General Plan . These three phases include : Phase I The measurement and analysis of noise levels associated with existing transpor- tation facilities . Phase II The projection and analysis of future noise levels associated with proposed transportation facilities . TO : City Council - 2 . Phase III The development of a comprehensive and quantitative noise ordinance to control existing and future noise levels . The costs for developing all three phases of the study as out- lined in the consultant proposals have varied from $13 ,600 to $21 ,500. The monies allocated under the fiscal year 1972-1973 budget for such studies total $20 ,000 . After detailed review of each proposal , the Staff wishes to recommend the appointment of Wyle Laboratories to undertake such studies leading to a Noise Element of the General Plan and a comprehensive City-wide noise ordinance. Through extensive experience in the acoustical research field and their past and present work in similar projects , the firm is fully qualified to carry out the study. The Staff would further recommend that the City Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Wyle Laboratories to perform such services in an amount not to exceed $13 ,600 . Respectfully submitted , DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R . V . HOGAN , Director CARL( Ml NEUHAUSEN Advance Planning Administrator CMN/kk Attachments to Council Only : Copies of State Senate Bill 691 Copies of Noise Study Proposal submitted by Wyle Laboratories , May 5 , 1972 A 6 FILE Copy MU LABORATORIES DO SNOT REMOVE July 28, 1972 R/35018-1/RN City of Newport Beach Department of Community Development 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92600 Attention: Mr. Carl M. Neuhausen Advance Planning Administrator Gentlemen: Wyle Laboratories is pleased to submit this revised proposal covering noise consulting services. This proposal supersedes our letter of May 5, 1972 and is the result of a revision in the anticipated scope of the project. We are enclosing our work statement defining the project as it is now conceived. Following is our fixed price quotation for each of the three phases: Phase I - Noise study of traffic on existing highways $8, 900. 00 Phase II - Noise study of projected traffic on existing and proposed highways $3, 200. 00 Phase III - Development of City Noise Ordinance $1, 500. 00 Total Program Price $13, 600. 00 Completion times are shown in the attached technical discussion. We are also enclosing our current consulting rates which could be incorporated into any resultant contract to cover any services requested by the City of Newport Beach which fall outside of the scope of work defined above. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this revised proposal. If you require additional technical information, please contact Mr. John Stearns. For contractural matters, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, WYLE LABORATORIES Robert A. Nordquist Contract Administra o SCIENTIFIC SERVICES 8 SYSTEMS GROUP RAN:kn 128 Maryland Street,El Segundo,California 90245 213.322-1763 213.678.4251 TWX 910.348.6699 Cable WYLAS • EXHIBIT "B" • Wyle Laboratories El Segundo, California RESEARCH STAFF CONSULTING RATES LABOR Hourly Rate A5 Technical Director $50. 00 A4 Consulting Principal $35. 00 A3 Consulting Advisor $30. 00 A2 Senior Consulting Specialist $27. 00 Al Consulting Specialist $23. 00 1 Senior Engineer $20. 00 2 Engineer $17. 00 3 Senior Technician, Associate $13. 50 4 Technician A, Engineering Aide $11. 00 5 Technician B, Assistant $ 9. 50 MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS When required, materials such as photographic supplies, art work, reproduction expenses and any other purchased services will be billed at invoice cost plus 20%. TRAVEL Time spent to and from client's facility as necessary in performance of services will be invoiced at above stated labor rates. Travel expenses will be billed as follows: Air Travel At cost, utilizing tourist class fare when available. Auto Travel At cost at prevailing rental rates or 12�/mile for private auto. Lodging At cost for all normal expenses for lodging and food, etc, related to travel required by client. BILLING AND PAYMENT TERMS Billing for work performed will be submitted monthly. Payment terms are net 30 days, based on normal credit approval. 2-1-72 WYLE LABORATORIES• • R/35018-1/RN REVISED APPROACH - STUDIES RELATING TO THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN Subsequent to the submission of Wyle's proposal on May 5, 1972, discussions were held with the representative of Newport Beach which resulted in a modification of the level of effort originally proposed by Wyle. As a result of these modifications, we are pro- posing to perform all three phases under the terms defined in the cover letter. The revised program is defined in the following paragraphs. Unless otherwise specified, the operational details of the program will be in accordance with our previous proposal. Phase I - Noise Study of Traffic on Existing Highways - To Be Accomplished Between September 1, 1972 and November 15, 1972 This.phase will involve three tasks. The first task will be to determine and map noise contours according to the guidelines contained in Senate Bill 691 for the following major highways in the City of Newport Beach. These highways are indicated by the heavy lines on Figure 1 . The second task will be•to determine ambient noise levels in the community for various types of land uses. The final task will be to make recommendations on how to minimize the noise impact of highways on various land uses within the City of Newport Beach. Wyle's approach to Phase I will be in accordance with the Program Plan set forth in our proposal of May 5, with the following exceptions: • Wyle will make the necessary field measurements and analytical studies to develop actual highway noise levels in Newport Bench, however the noise contours will be based on hourly highway traffic flow data supplied by the client. Y There will be a reduction in the number of highway sites (ref - page 5 of pro- posal) to approximately 15; we believe this will be sufficient for developing noise contours for the highway configuration depicted in Figure 1 , o A data base sufficient for estimating noise contours in accordance with Senate Bill 691 and projecting noise levels associated with the projected highway system for Phase II. The data developed in Phase I wi II be summarized in a matrix type format comparing land use, highway type, vehicle type, traffic conditions, terrain characteristics, and 4 other factors necessary for predicting noise levels associated with the.highway system of Newport Beach. Phase II - Noise Study of Projected Traffic on Existing and Proposed Highways - Complete January 1, 1973 This phase will be to "determine and map the noise contours for projected levels of traffic on all existing (per Figure I ) and proposed-highways and freeways. Con- clusions regarding appropriate site or route selection alternatives or noise impact upon land uses shall be made for inclusion into the General Plan. " The Phase II study will be in relation to'transportation studies currently in process fqr: ()) Newport Freeway (2) Corona Del Mar Freeway (3) San Joaquin Hills Road I (4) Dover Drive { (5) Bayside Drive Wyle will use the traffic noise matrix developed in Phase I, plus additional published information to develop noise contours associated with projected transportation systems. Phase III - Development of City Ordinance - Complete March 1, 1973 As a final phase, a noise ordinance will be developed for ultimate adoption as part of the Municipal Code. This ordinance would reflect relevant elements of other city noise ordinances - such as the California League of Quiet Cities Model Noise Ordinance. It would also reflect the results of the investigation of Phase I and Phase II. Wyle will act in advisory capacity to the City of Newport Beach in this phase of the ` program. In this capacity, we will perform the following tasks: i • Submit an outline of our recommendations relevant to current and projected noise levels which we believe should be included in the Ordinance. i • Advise, as required, in the preparation of the draft Ordinance. 9 o Review and comment on the draft version of the Ordinance which will be prepared by the City of Newport Beach. y gg- i Q'' \ '' 8 jLq _ r MkMl x It VE IL "//��{��f� J �V p �Ipf; {r'rkjl��{a,��l . �"-;�.•. _,� r lr.``.//.C�;;�{� �b���.,�, �ji cam- ��t�'�—���_"�' �r hr��•;+�..�i' 1 _ •`, /..,� \d � ! ��+}iJ�r-t,T .ill( 1 ��• -- � � �v'.<" , �� , ! y<: ��lur � t-•lft7�In� _�f r�aa�p 1`/1 1 11.��r.� ci=� ��'�`i• /• m� — - v� �` � CCla� _' f 3� ' ,, s �,.:.. �! 4� oa5p vmrn n \;: .;.N ^'`y�• (a�,�� Q}a�•(•�.: sv ,e"t'{ f©� ,�uG naGr T\ A•.,_ ', , �, C .�co nI v. ".v. ��"' ao'7I'tYC%" Ni dEq`y 'i� �j. Al. ��r:�l�.t at .cS• \.. _ - _ I(' k,— - , u''� l •�°� {E7_ y e a,n .i � i A + r frtlt�� /:,r_.•{I ��r,r.......,...v���"[[[...•f� \J�'•I.1' 1 �- �!` �y � `� ��' -_��•% '�" � � � e i iir•'�+fY fs %E +�",� clrr oFxexeoxr ecaex -- � / Figure 1. Newport Beach Highway Network (Revised) t . s COSY M LABORA70[�IFS DO NOT RCMQV4 July ,;8,' 197t R/35018-1/RN City of Newport ,Beach Department of Community Development 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 9L600 :x Attention: ' Mr. Carl M. Neuhausen °• Advance Planning Administrator • a Gentlemen: V yle Laboratories is pleased to submit this revised proposal covering noise consulting services. This proposal supersedes our letter of y May 5, 1974 and is the result of a revision in the anticipated scope of the project. We are enclosing our work statement defining the • ; - project as it is now conceived. ` Following is our fixed price quotation for each of the three phases: 1 .. Phase I - Noise study of traffic on existing highways •$8, 900: 00 Phase H - Noise study of projected traffic on existing and proposed highways $3, G00. 00 Phase III - Development of City Noise Ordinance 1, 500. 00 Total Program Price $13, 600. 00 Completion times art shown in the attached technical dtsLus-s.ion. VN a are also enclosing our current consulting rates which could be incorporated into any resultant contract to cover any services requested by the City of Newport Beach which fail outside of the scope of work defined above. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this revised proposal. If you require additional technical information, please 'contact Mr. John Stearns. For contractural matters, please contact the undersigned. r Very truly yours, , W YLE LABORATORIES Robert A. Nordquist Contract Admimstraio� SCIENTIFIC SERVICES G SYSTEMS GROUP t, RAN:kn 128 Maryland'Street,El Segundo,Callfornla 90245 � 213.322�1763 213.676.4261 TWX 910.349.6690 Cable WYLAS [:J HN STE NRA S • 7/7/72^ � To Carl Neuhausen Dear Carl: I am forwarding the attached summary work statement and figure for your review. I "think" we can squeeze this work in for something close to your budget. If the format and content of these documents meet with your approval, I will have our Contract Administrator issue you a revised price quotation. Your patience with my delay in getting this document out has been appreciated. i John R. Stearns Q S RECEIVED CommOmty DeveloPntent Dept. �uL 10191'L� -9 OF CITY - NBWPCAIIu'r.A 'Ju JJ 4 � FILE COPY DO NOT REMOVE r • •• EO HN STEARNS 7/7/72 . ,. To Carl Neuhausen Dear Carl: I am forwarding the attached summary work statement and figure for your review. I "think" we can squeeze this work in for something close to your budget: If the format and content of these documents meet with your approval, I will have•our Contract Administrator issue you a revised price quotation. I Your patience with my delay in getting this document out has been appreciated. i )John R. Steams Q RECEI V EDP JUL 1 01912c • 91 OF • �Z kxwpaoZ BEAChg, CALIF. N t ' 1 i REVISED APPROACH — STUDIES RELATING TO THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN f Subsequent to the submission of Wyle's proposal on May 5, 1972, discussions were held with the representative of Newport Beach which resulted in a modification of the level of effort originally proposed by Wyle. As a result of these modifications, we are pro- posing to perform all three phases under the terms defined in the cover-letter. The revised program is defined in the following paragraphs. Unless otherwise specified, the operational details of the program will be in accordance with our previous proposal. Phase I — Noise Study of Traffic on Existing Highways—To Be Accomplished Between September 1, 1972 and November 1, 1972 This phase will involve three tasks. The first task will be to determine and map noise contours according to the guidelines contained in Senate Bill•691 for the following major highways in the City of Newport Beach. These highways are indicated by the heavy lines on Figure 1. The second task will be to determine ambient noise levels in the community for various types of land uses. ,The final task will be to make recommendations on how to minimize the noise impact of highways on various land uses within the City of Newport Beach. Wyle's approach to Phase I will be in accordance with the Program Plan set forth in our proposal of May 5, with the following exceptions: • 'All calculations of noise levels due to highway traffic will be based on hourly traffic estimate to be supplied by the City of Newport Beach. i There will be a reduction in the number of highway and community measurement sites to a level sufficient for developing noise contours for the highway configuration depicted in Figure 1. • A data base sufficient for estimating noise contours in accordance with Senate Bill 691 and projecting noise levels associated with the projected highway system for Phase II. J The data developed in Phase I will be summarized in a matrix type format comparing land use, highway type, vehicle type, traffic conditions, terrain characteristics, and other factors necessary for predicting noise levels associated with the highway system of Newport Beach. Phase II — Noise Study of Projected Traffic on Existing and Proposed Highways —To Be Accomplished Between January 1, 1973 and March 11 1973 This phase will be to "determine and map the noise contours for projected levels of traffic on all existing and proposed highways and freeways. Conclusions regarding_appropriate site or route selection alternatives or noise impact upon land uses shall be made for inclusion into the General Plan. " The Phase II study will be in relation to the highway pattern depicted in heavy dashed lines on Figure 1. Wyle will use the traffic noise matrix developed in Phase I, plus additional published information to develop noise contours associated with projected transportation systems. Phase III — Development of City Ordinance — (Exact Schedule not Specified) As a final phase, a noise ordinance will be developed for ultimate adoption as a part of the Municipal Code. This ordinance would reflect relevant elements:of other city noise ordinances - such as the California League of Quiet Cities Model Noise Ordinance. It' would also reflect the results of the investigation of Phase I and Phase II. Wyle will act in an advisory capacity to the City of Newport Beach in this phase of the program. In this capacity, we will perform the following tasks: • Submit an outline of our recommendations relevant to current and projected noise . levels which we believe should be included in the Ordinance. • Advise, as required, in the preparation of the draft Ordinance. • Review and comment on the draft version of the Ordinance which will be prepared by the City of Newport Beach. t x. Wl � 1.7 \���G�y`��``\\y� �� �' ,.;._ .9ry#f.�� . `" lC�i\`�•'}ter- \%+� \ `M1 -;>.' � \a, ram r4; 'r •" �; ��,, - �._1 � rye' CC��yt\.\sjn+�' h}J— - 1�tµ�, � r :�' 1� r.'i'1 I��� —.. �-• V7 �- / ,vs / [� IJ�� "'�G-. `w.•� �Jr6�4 I r ;C i i _ __ f_��'`�y7T�_. 1 I !'• ! .3 ��r� /� e�� ,7�1�4�II111.�1l�I '��\���l � � � � ` �� �_� _ * r{°(LY i� I'u ��I. 6- .fF+�:• �s+"''' p �e'i: GCIpQ . 7AA �pflA� u •Y�:i� {a\�`:r ��'=(�T- �� 771i C.34 �C,IOC�Grt._ ?) r1. -._- y,L .�.... 1 e _..• e.l.w•.. er,. JQ�.i J (J�`r"' 1 'i^ yf`•- i Illleluuiiiiii;��...';'y 't.,l�'�Wj>,,,,�,,i"ice a�. '. �1,d;x��• ..:_,, �.�, � --- . _ J T � Y`tAv`• -_•� -\ a_ �T°...`•x`�S?�;.,,.n.v"�;__:��cc-"`-J•./�.' :� �V;V 1 �lY � N �i A 71jlljTij�. ''�l ... '� �R ,rnu•_.- .'1� 1- '---._�.�',^'�.!_ _'___\ \_\ � _� 1 ��ar_ Y 1 r -Pt+Tyw,• �,>f E��—•� an or Hewrortr eewm w A IV Figure 1, Newport Beach Highway Network 1 � W 2 wnE LABORATORIES HLE12 C(C-PY DO NOT REMOVE Apri 1 14, 1972 Mr. Carl M. Neuhausen City Plan Administrator 3300 Newport Boulevard City of Newport Beach, California 92660 Dear Carl: I find that the only copies of our Community Noise Report available are the library copy I showed you, and my personal copy. I am forwarding you my copy for review. I will pick it up sometime in the next 2 or 3 weeks. If you want to order a copy, send $1 .75 to the Superintendent of /. Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Ask for EPA Report NTID 300.3 "Community Noise, " December 31, 1971 . Very truly yours, WYLE LABORATORIES California Res rch Staff ohn . Ste ns Member of the Research Staff r �QR ! of cN, 1Lr ( P GY d� L �7 el � /d SCIENTIFIC SERVICES&SYSTEMS GROUP 128 Maryland Street,El Segundo,California 90245 213.322-1763 213-678-4251 TWX 910-348.6699 Cable WYLAB z. , 13 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH -- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FILE COPY TO : R. V. Hogan, Director DO SNOT REMOVE FROM: , Carl Neuhausen , Advance Planning Administrator SUBJECT: Status of the Noise Element Since the introduction of a mandatory Noise Element under State planning law, the Staff has investigated several alternative means for including the new -element as part of the City ' s General Plan . The Noise Element essentially requires local cities to quantita- tively measure , analyze and control various noise levels associ - ated with existing and future transportation faciliti"es , includ- ing highways , freeways , mass transit systems , and ground/air facilities. (See attached bill . ) Due to the additional time , equipment and technical expertise needed to complete the noise studies , I have excluded the first possible alternative of utilizing the present City Staff. In reviewing the' various consultant firms which are now under con- tract to assist in developing the General Plan , the present scope of their work and/or th,e background capabilities of each firm would also preclude them from successfully completing a Noise Element. The Staff is now completing investigations 'into the probable means and costs of utilizing an additional outside consultant to develop the Noise Element of the Plan . Two leadidg'' acous•- tical consultants have been requested to submit proposals to the City , including : Paul S. Veneklasen and Associates , Santa Monica , and Wyle Laboratories , E1 Segundo. We have asked that each pro- posal be designed around a three-phase work program which coin- cides with other studies and programs now underway as . part of the General Plan. The three phases will include : Phase I The measurement and analysis of noise levels associated with existing transportation facilities . Phase II The projection and analysis of future noise levels associated with proposed transporta- tion facilities . Phase III The development of a comprehensive and quantitative noise ordinance to control existing and future noise levels . j In view of the - existing noise studies related to air transporta- tion facilities , both consultants were asked to limit their , proposals to the study of vehicular traffic and mass transit • • I Status of the Noise Element - Page 2 . systems as outlined under the State law. It appears that sufficient data would be made available from the Parsons report and Wilsey-Ham study on noise levels to satisfy the State ' s critgria. For any further studies related to air traffic, the estimated time and costs outlined in each pro- posal would have to be increased accordingly. The Staff has received a preliminary proposal from Paul S. Veneklasen and Associates which estimates the following costs for the three phases of the noise study program: Phase I Existing Noise Level Analysis $13 ,500 Phase II Projected Noise Level Analysis 2 ,500 Phase III Development of Noise Ordinance 3 ,000 Total Program Cost $190.000 The second proposal from Wyle Laboratories is being completed by the firm and will be submitted to the City by the end of April . During the present fiscal year , 1971 -72 , the City Council had appropriated $104 ,000 for various consultant studies in - con- nection with the General Plan Program. The amount of $79 ,000 has now been encumbered either by contract or payment ,tg.; the following consultants : Transportation Consultant $39 ,000 Economic Consultant ' 25 ,000 Housing Consultant 10 ,000 Geologic Consultant 5 ,000 The remaining $25,000 has generally been earmarked for matching funds which would be used i-n developing the Coastal Element of the General Plan . A preliminary amount of these funds , esti - mated to include up to $10,000, will likely be needed in the , coming month to develop various feasibility studies in connection with the Coastal Element. The remaining amount , $15 ,000 , would continue to provide a reserve fund for additional studies which will bg necessary to complete this, element of the -Plan:. With the introduction of the Noise Element, it appears that addi- tional funds will likely be needed this coming fiscal year, 1972-73, to incorporate the .element as part of the General. Plan . The Staff j would recommend that a total amount of $20 ,000 be requested to complete the necessary work related to the Noise.-Element. April 14, 1972 SIGNATURE Carl M.' Neuhausen T CCMN/kk Senate Bill No,;691 : .p,:•i :: r � " , ,u• t: 'N:if ll fi•, In, .y,1 ; rti. ,. I • '' ... I, 11. d, ,, I „t +,:''• CHAPTER 775 An act to amend Section G5302 of the Government x' ;{' ','..:,;', ,.' ': ,\'''t:,:•: Code,relating/ to planning. ' t• ',,,'•' "!.'•>';': ' : ' • [Approved by Governor September 28,4271. Flied with :•: ' tip,••.• +,,.• , ,, Secretary of State September 28, 1e71.] 'ti<i,,` ,:•' The people of tAc State of California do enact as follows: , "1 ,;1• SncTioN 1. Section ' 65302 of the Government Code is :amended to read: ',• . "It" t•r : •`" 65302. The general plan shall consist of u statement of de, "•• '' `af R'; ` `. "i;Y;• -•velopment policies and shall include a diagram or diagrams „r ; and text setting forth objectives principles standards and �r •;,�, ,' . 't'f,�71o:•,. 1•'• ,:;. yl,!•,`•?';i.� •'t g objectives, r' r ;,,;, <' • ; 'IS: plan proposals. The plan shall include the following,elements:: i• .• •;' >';; i' i' (a) A land use element which. designates the proposed-gen. ; .q.It.L;.:• "'•h;'+:: ; +"„' ! '''. eral distribution and general location and extent of the uses, . �" of the land-for housing,business, industry, open space, includ• i ', ,.s ; 't';;'r'�'; r'l •r�"',;,i'' ' ing agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and enjoyment ; t':"] :: .•i' ' ky" :. %i ;, of scenic beaut education ublic buildin a and rounds solid ' t ] Sit... ;:. and li uid waste'dis osal facilities and other categories of `•S public and private uses of land.,The land use element-shall in- 1;• a,.1• elude a statement of the standards of population density and "'t'• %a Y': i; `: ia';" " •,"',., building intensity recommended for the various districts and :r ' other territory,covered by the plan. The land use element shall 4�,+' ,.' 'P. also identify areas covered by the plan which are subject to ",;; ! ' ` 1;•• '>+ ;.;. -flooding and shall be reviewed 'annually with respect to such ,"•".fo; .,.: .I'e; ,;; ;.•i.:'.. :;�. AI,- y :u`: `•. ` areas. , ,; 'i ? (b) A circulation element consisting of the general location it e j „1, :h7 .:and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares,' transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utili. ; ,ties and facilities, all correlated with the land use element of ! ' r . '.; • :,.. ;; t'' ;'; ' ' the plan: +'.`` '`:f� !' ;;:.• ,.,;;;! ;y (c) A housing element consisting of standards and plans for " l : . ., f.,,.;. ;: t ':g•''"' ,the improvement of housing and for provision of adequate j •• (1,','"',.' ;! .^� •;,;; :;•°:�. ,�`, :• r : ' , ;'ri; :',.:, , ;sites for housing. This element of the plan shall endeavor to'•„'., • �' '(' "'rfj- •`'1" !°'r'I' r;t,''',•'• �;"• .!i 5•:; ,make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic i!1►" : _:'• •,z': ": : , ' ;.r,segments of the community.-' P. ',•`,:,; ,i`,ii1 { r^, ,'+•7i' `"G 41 i ' ,• (d) A conservation element for the conservation, develop- ` , „t , ��,t•:,;'� „ +, ?;' (( '•' .t,.; ment and utilization of natural resources includingwater and J�!' ,•,I'1]'" ;' °•, yl�,' 1,,. iyl ,;''i' +," r its hydraulic force, forests!, soils, rivers and other waters, bar. � 1.,• ' y'�+' ''` '�y ;i', '".' : •, "�, , :�,; a, ' , born, fisheries, wildlifo,.mincrals, and other natural,resources. I I( , ': .: That portion of the conservation' cloment including waters • " M{ F;�'• ;', •y ,:= ='• t^ ; '{; '', ''shall be'developed in coordination_with any countywido water ' r '�fi Vt ' !. .',' ?,w'•.,.,'r � ..,. F L1,•r,•',It.l ^ .',•1•, J � , I . :'r ;� .l' " .li, !I r•• . },a .•! • � r' ,rrr, %?` �,iT'.,.'�,•' r ,f•'.•''f:'.. ",7;.; . d' •.;., .L: •, ;'r. i " ;1.1 rr'• lLLlsa`,..:["ii'1".'1,q: -a1:'(:.t.,,...'!.. L�., �f.�n�,,.lt• ,. ,,..., •r- •'•t n 1$;S: •>r , .,• t4 0,• :.I:. •`f>ili,il, :I,i:� ,i.,;;! I ,)'Il..._ 1..'151Tri1;�(i7:i'!'l lJ':'I]f7lld:fi�l;{'".1 If'+it'il. �Il,i;.l• I, :'' I 1 �a!,• rq , �,1{nlr 1pgll,l�f f i, i Ijil,l•1' ,f:l l fI i �F,i. / L I•,.' II { 'S'L 1 I 1 I I r;1 tF ,hS .•4r.. •y: 'r.i 'j.',.I i'.(l I ill• I. •''' {'.ti!';!lu,a'r: t 1 IIf i;r ll� h." , II, 1 III, 1 ,I i,ISt ;1't�� d < Is.'I!,i/ 11 I i I 1,1'. 1' • 4 ft ,! I' I:i141, L . : (. „ ."1• '�.•. •, I JV IT •I, nJ Lf�l• •i'd II' hSti" ;d,f11 , I I'gi•1,1 .1Y. ':� $.I� .;j, .'i. ,,., ,II Ip ,1��'. 't•, ), 1/'1 IV1,4�. 11,1i r�r , li.r '.�''' ,.1, n`f;•". r.,'r,r ,i •f�'� :I�,il l' I,'ai {iI I,IG•li,' ,II,,Ili4}r1, (�.Iillh�lh�r�.lrl iil�Il.lrl'r!t.ly�t 11111,,t yrl t l l tl .1• 1,,tIII, + r•I,, I t.,ll L ,I!, ,5!''ii a I I i, ,I .�ile IU,'1. I,'�,i' 1I611�,•''" , (•;'�'i, I II'f, 41 r nr III 1,1 li f t, I'{ 1 it, tI '4•VI. i J,; f•I!'fpnr'. Ui:7 r j1 (d,t l I{�I 11`` ,, �:. •t•yi. 1, +•,1;Y„ I II, 1' IfYi NI!! t .ltf• , '•a. fplti', ,1 i ,, d I , 4..: 1' ,I ::li a,[ ry,l' II,{lu .{p . ,, :'S �} 7'•1,11 15'. , LI 'I'.)I'.1 II Jl' r -5 , t ' '.r,iM01M1• ..p' Y, ,�i';; •In1Ii!f:l'il,li', P�iV'�11)Iill, I,I , ,t:•1 :I /IPI •I I I' \' fill , i:' 1 1l,, • y; r, ��: ,t,•,'.' 1. 1 � I ,711. '1 ' , . . .r',• �:ylil l,i!,I;n1�!'11, 1 f1'�1''II I,I'.�tyt I,A'.!•!�,I,'r/ IiiliI•I!(!.{ ,1! PY I'nll ♦) . •i N , '' .r.l.::�•. 11n� ,! 'i 11, I{lltrl l'0 !1J!I f I'1 fl{i. ! ,(� i"' / Jril l,'I lfl'tu,Iil 111 Itrli I'.. t I .I�:'1:4 �'•U:: I,u�l/ji r. l ,1'•"`�1 1�� !I!' o.y { II , + n'.' S•''fi!'(r.�.,l::;',p i' !''''1' 1. ' fl II'I till l'i'''d'{l ll)'ll';r,i 1•i}. i. .�);i�r 1�11',I'Ipi 1 ! ' ' ] ',, r •,', ,j,.'''i i! P 5 f, ( '1+4 , ,• ,�4 h';il•i' I !,: 1 I I ,: 1' f II,.R + 15{t' „ ll^.{tl,•1, I,{''. ,i, r. I r,1 , Lq I•�1 �t'i !11. I I). ! I II',:I tl":':,�"II' 1 Ir/':i.i' I '1;., 1 , •rrlL7 4?•1., II, ' t +I r, '1"il, lt;lhl, 'f' SI11 ' Ij I y,,. .r ,,i, ,,, r".• '' { i;r .Y'',v.^r,,di 1,•.L.'l, • nil {{1", lett ll 11 ' ' rl' Ir,' ,,.. .. 1'•+ i, l ir. yi.li'''� „ Irl,,,�{' lyn t 1, ,.,.L;I{,,I'p11''ll Ill ''I'" Ilrl II' I ��',, I�� :.}',, .:Q , ` • , 1 ,{. iir.SB;:r' I i"i I"r! r I 1,r. Il" ,S Ill.-. rla' In 1'I In. Ir, ,! �,j rll�l, f, " nl;'. �:�' I 1 ,Q I�•, (.y .P., '"•Ift ';It II I InI li; 1'll I I Irr�i f �.,,.I, 11• I f � � •,; '''l r' :}:i]' r „ il:I�l•.;'':'reyl '+. Irrll�rd,i l[1 r', �.,i tlirf:,l ail"hrt'il,� 1,'Ir ( I,I h II ' llti{t•',1::,'. , III 1 •. . 1 t '1^• t 1 ;, P, ,JI111' 11 lla I b4(IS ' 'i Ylr I I! p], 'I i . 4 ,�,, , ',{I°.•;:•, !1''i/,';(:(i ilIi l/i.1� ,pr Y•• n ,•' i;} i ' ib, tYi;.r}�II',IS�'I l l. e ly '' J• , It j., .r ,t , ,, , .;, fl ,� i !r':'•ri' ll'I!, ,./ P,l,r `I „�1 I'lil, Y l llt..tl'lil i�'l ll .d•.iill i'y I', i .' q,l" ,:',"..!'I�•II F,,,.tj !.. Li' .,y ..t•�,!,,.11.I i7 1 5I I I , • . Y , � ��hi!•iS'r.ii„ I•,I!14 ? f ', Ill.-':'.'?!,•iY � " ,..Yt 111'i•111!i'I r; /� I:'• I'y'.IVrli tl dill!h I„I it '' ,'' %•' ,Agency and with all district and city agencies which have develo ed served 'controlled or conserved water for any pur• �`I:;! , pose for the county or city for which the plan is prepared., ' The conservation element may also cover: (1) The reclamation of land and waters. ,:'`,A, , (2) Flood control.' r;f I i "xl. i;;;'•• (3) Prevention and control of the pollution of streams and :'. r , } r,' t,f,, ;l':' • other waters. T•'1:,'. • ,; (4) Regulation of.the use of land in stream channels and '' other areas required for the accomplishment of the conserva• tion plan. ,4 ' ' ; llr•r•.•'•;'• (5) Prevention, control, and correction of the erosion of soils,beaches,and shores. f >, �., l (6) Protection of watersheds. �', { y , {.''•; :`,•j, (7) The location, quantity and quality of the rock, sand'and 'l ravel resources. J •� - ;e>a: ,` cr i't'• '"; .'" ',;, a • (e) An open-spa element as provided in Article 10.5 ' Ol "`l. ` ;; 'Y'' I % ':': '(commencing with Section 65560) of this chapter. }' ;'t"J' , .:' .a'., .•' 7i; " ' (f) A seismic safety element consisting of an identification +i:t:^I • •; ':;"',.;,.,. and appraisal of seismic hazards such as susceptibility to , kin to.r I ground shaking,o faulting, to ground fr m g'•._'� rface ru tunes ,su gl bn { .•i '''r "'1'it"'' `''' '! 'failures or to effects of seismically induced waves such as 1• ."+ P. i and seiches. it I' tsunamis (g) A nurse element m,quantitative, numerical terms, shows I'�, ; 5f. "�'.',•` "' + :!. 'ing contours of present and projected noise levels associated } 4,+(, ,, : :•i ' , + I y ;i •;` ,,`!•,` ,;;. ,with all existing and proposed major transportation elements. These include'but are not limited to the following: r', V •''1`a<` ;il'! .",i >"�'•n, • ,. (1) Highways and freeways, (2) Ground rapid transit systems, Fli• �'GY�t:fr ",': • ;,rl•; (3) Ground facilities associated with all airports operating •!•• . k .j; ,;-."•"" °', '. " ' '.•,' ' ' 1 ! under a permit from the State Department of Aeronautics. These noise contours may' be expressed in any standard /• K•. , ^•';.,,';:i,; ,.•,1• • •"t• .%I ' °. , .,• . ' acoustical scale which includes both the magnitude of noise Ill. ,'I , , V'Ji ,•.. A{.-I .fr. •. , ., 1 ` ,:,! .,;,:.:,•••\.; •:1•..,;•:_,\ • ;:.••;•• •and frequency •of its occurrence. The recommended scale is sound level A, as measured with A-weighting network of a ' standard sound level meter, with corrections,added for the y' "Ir i• '• '"r;.;'` y%°'I, °, fJ�t';!;;"r! time duration per event and the total number of events per c ' 1. "I;;r''i:• hi:i r '` 11? J o.c :24-hourlperiod. + T"'r ?' `�' '• r•: "`' r. ;`J:; ' Noise contours shall be shown in minimum increments of t(. ' !; "" '`+ I ' '' `:;X'•''`` p •''•''i" five decibels and shall be continued down to 65 db(A). For 'i�' '{;r:1 , • n ; �;•�, '•• • •.'"„T• � .. � _ ' regions involving hospitals, rest homes, long-term medical or 'I. " ! ,: 1r' ' •mental care or outdoor recreational arena the contours shall 14'r ." f• I 'il.�li'�1..w•'4.,:,i ,Ile" �'r�'ti 1 -�.rl. 'l,• t •r .., / •, II, t,f„' „1 1',i• ,,,',. - r,.(I}:,� : ,.,'('t•/ ' , ,' ' be continued down to 45 db(A). It ' ' , ,1: 1;,{ + ' i II. !•, Conclusions regarding appropriate'site or 'rqute selection r •', , ,,• ;} :, '':' �";'; Ua ternatives•or noise impact upon compatible,land uses shall 'in the 'general plan.VI {, u:, .,•,. . ,•r "I". :'pl ' �f'.� '!r,! '.•5 Y'N.: •'/, � . (.i,• •, ry +nl i ,,1,•. 1 .I e,.,,. I•o'(p lo. rl,tf ;Ift I r. 1'ri,; ,•n,i ! lIl ` .+`,r " ,,\ '• '' ^'•: :r�;•',' ' '..I• .1 .' ni r�rr ,hR i• i rii 1 :: Il.:i• ' 1.'h' '+ i ':' ,.1:i. Y. ,.._ :`•, .i.t:1:S.r,•,1.,q •i,i;<,ire 'r�� r lfq•II htt9. -'lii r•r%. •�I.r^fl :\: •l .• . A' { 1,1', I'f.1. 1 I 1 1•,14'lit,;i;•I tier e�.,.,1„II `' .f ••�:.' L:: . ... •{ , ' .I• .. . 1}:S' Is' .i ;yr•�ia •,.r.•. ••i' 'Ii. •.n', L � :. . , 4n;• :Q'% rl' 1 i,, `,14 • : ': L''•t .' i, ��. 1.;. , 11'.C. 1 f•r-• ro Pr• ,Y)r.. 'I••'i jw:i' . , .4'.i' • ,3. -_Gfr-:!:'•!2i^;.L�.J::ya�':. �.,t»•, .;h.. r 1.. q'(�"j�q j'n,.t. '''':(y a<, •'r, I. nr:.!;:•'. "f .I li{t •(lr i ! r �j,l'jfl r,! IIq,Sf,�I1t'1�I: I' i;;�i�l I ,�� :•s. • , r•. i y/i i l ll II r Ir}J� h'I! I{�,L t1i1��f PIN, ll.l rl' i.l lf�; •!' II' li'll if�u,l' In j r''1•�,! .1:. .,ri { 'I 1rI/ II•r 11r,lilll it � l 11 I I,' r r. } ' i 3 :r :'pj• ' •rr� r Jt l.,l..r;yll .f.'1;�:1 IpI i r, �y7,•• rllt r,1\.r111j:}:4irl y� fr'l llll I II' ll.l•�:.JI„ I( I", r .1'} - .•d r'�f t„j .,I,1111 1•I .lrli.iy 11al' li'�' ':I 1 f ,lie i 111, A�I '1,111 /1,I (1Ir � I 1;•V�,r, 'iF d, '�\.,..i; �, � •.,' ,, '!I'.r I,.. IGI•v ,I, I'{�•II I f7.,,1 ,'.I•.IJ.IIr,I; (I�ti1ls, ,¢ lI,�:I"Pit •'�(',:,L,r i�l.I}I 1;•ill;lr llfl 11;!Il�iii'ul••. rd: qt ' 1. •' :i•� '.a •I) .4• ., ,nil rit•1 ,I i'; ^I P;I,) �'i'l it' 1 rlr • .A •.p ,.l I„ '!i +• I I 1' I I' 1 !nf J, I •ril '. ,r...i�{': I'ti'1'J'i''�•"1i'll' 'r;l f'11}'.„{I!I� ,IJl,1.,:u''j1 r�''I'I�{t'1i1,1A1.11111f11�"'i' 1 41, •l ' •M•• •it.�:''. 111 rJ:1 1 'rii{!i•!'.•4'},I r•.1 t,{�'il(i ��jrii :� 1 1.) II'I 1 I'Ir I I�i!I I• L,a: 1! 1 !t 11' 1 1 I ( n1�n, 1 � - ' , I I ': i ,>''•' .!1 1 I' I, .i 1.• ,. 1• y .t 1:• .f ! I /• ',', "' la�i .))! I:•!11 fr •, I V::1' Jr 1, _', L• ;! .rl'G•�: .i� ,.r,,,: '!:,'f I�yl"1••%•II„(.. ll�: ,IJ �I:1 r,I��IF�illfy.r lli i t l i.•111,1 ' rJ'lllliJl.{II•Il li I II ''•'I '''I 1 r r y. '• ..nj I•I, •rr i 1n'�'',i 1',:';.,•.w' I'd r^�r';'ii dii") •) "1' `• '+' '1 ' ,i,.,.5' qk I rf;•„i',1, .i'If f.i;l,, l �.I,`, I {y ,•}:',II Ir'I'I'n 14 r ' 11 t � , , • a • 1. r'5.,,.;i. •i',.. 1 `' If , li.'i'd'I'e 7e1') I f il•Il ' 1 Il,i .II 1•,II r f, 1r.,, ,I. I, ,I r 11f tl o ;,r;F,.,; ' r• i! 1 jrl: 111'I r''j f IiPll l Ihl {I151 r.15/ 11'llj:i 11i 1'n I r i' ' " ,• :7",•;N• } /; Iyjl'fll�a,:rl:l;ryi!'Srr11'!'.!,l Nlifljl5llrl�'y 1'I}ylrrlrn+'; LI,I,:Iw7,?II�IL,p;,lrh!'11 'lll� 'd ,'b i, rl�' ''i}r •}all; r' 4 11 ''11 !'r},; '1JI' I i I �':, "fill^I ;' , I• .. ,`1 ,;I q'' JI 4'S' {'II',111 , 111 I.71•S'' A'll';'I��II•i rl'�.ll;Pl alp S! J111t; f iP 'r rl`fP9l ttin'b,h:', ,I,, , -rl , ; ,�" 111i l.1�" ,7 , :•I"} I{�'!Ir. ', i�•!jj';:'.rji�y!,�I: ,I:, {il' ill !�'r ill,ll l�ln+' llir ,i,l; 14', :1l1 ,,h,, IY r' u , .1, :i, Ir.l„,l f�i,((j•�'!�I' I, r11. Illt i Ill it + 1 ` �'I 1 ,•( In I Idi''�. !iL "4i'r 1 ' 'ii!; ,If llel:'1/1.1 iI 1f�', ,I,..., I I',II l , I ''',•"lil I'e hI ,1, i li t�'•, I:1',,pa , •I I�4�, 1:'Ji ',":1 LJ 14,{,, L1'l ei ljA�,, V rli!'i.ay'I.1 •�i'I1i"' liiPl,l,l {r:'1 � ,,, ,',,t. .,r .I'41 i'::'Ati!•i ht'"I,�,n� l�.l.l.,l ,.it.�:lrlyu; ll�lai.l l,r{,•,L'I;'iJnl, l�,l'I J,I{'. �I,I!', ','li"�I rl t r ''1`1 ''�• '1' �a • "' `',�r 1':'1.'J:1 rl,'Ri:.'l ip:rj�,'t i,., 1;P 1pr 1 i''A .( ja fl"1}IJ r; •II•l!,il ti I: 11�,1.1L!:' ,y l• I`'�:'1 • ,'• 't !' v,' . ,' ,il' Lil"'. ' r( ,6.11 pf'I'i1 I� f }'''/ 4,'',PI,1.{'1! Its' I "I,'!,,I. y r� r,.. j l,• , •.l. •r:i f,+'" 1•'t ,;fail•({,r! I i �;i.+,If.il, 'liJ:it ,i �7i4:1,.1'�1�1'+ I':', ,,. . 7 •1 .fit,. •1 I;:,Ir { inn Il,..ii 1 IIINi.l llldsi 111 11' 'P 1, Il,yi 1i,ny�i, . 1''f Ji I. 1'I ! I llj• l ,11�1';1 1\ • ,,: . ,d '.11t'• rrl'It„1Y.i, �rh al;l",. 11„1.6,• I �':1�1}.1A'�rl'IIP'I ,Ipli',�tiLLif , .n. ..'LI%..___'__�"'Ll ,«�• •.,.a ,'� •',1, Id�A f'I,:, ; I;.Iri•�}.• 1 iIr•.,i{•'.,i;"1'1 1 rI, r - 3 The state, local, or private agency responsible for the con- I struction or maintenance of such transportation facilities shall provide to the local agency producing the general plan, a I statement of the. present and projected noise levels of the , I ;• ?^`c tl ;t facility, and any information which was psed in the'develop -went of such levels . �l ' , ;t �l) -"'• _ •l.r L, ' ijir: 'J•`A rr,•'_, _ .4�.' ''lf'' ,•'• ,'' _ � _ .?5VpY1 .�')" �+''�. 6'�•. Y•."':; •:'P`•:t ' �!'�r,,, j' r 't: ':" ••1' � '.:J� ,1 ' '�' I J' '' �:I • t' ;A. I,.11' a��� 1•'!' ' � y¢g e �.i •ll '''•�p t,.,'. .y'� '!, 1 ti • 'i ) "J •;�++M I••1f.,'\�, '1, t.51�, "'•o •.N'd'.':I,IrF`,Ji.: ,�� `,t,. �• V• .'•rj; rl, "'f' �iQ:i•'!a(.'r: 'tip '.i 1�>> l.. ",7•',f S, f tt:,• ,• 'fy I •iA �1. ' r. ''it 1' I�,,'i r�f�. 4 '4• i.. •f•� .' ... :�1.• 'il �. r�.. - i ' r;.t .:11i •`,I,l:�v�..,• I' :4`"�f PY(.I :r,•. . .'', •,M .t .•�t,' •I. r�l�' it. lj: 'xi. d.; i• ,�• e.. •t1.1, .r•, +1%�r'i. i.'.t,. �.i'•t .1 7e.,.. ,•:n'�n'• Fs' .•'f•.':, '. n..I, �•�, , :f ra•.rqi, •"I, .fT.• •''f'I. ,f 4J.' •'t ,'.. •.{r 4Slfl' ,fT t•r+ i,f: •""i.` •�,f'., ;`,: .t A�"�,.,rr •:r' •t` _1r. 4. fry''1'l;wj •I . .Y '�!'1•• J 1 �\,:'�: f`lry,•. ,'� It• nl�t ' yy .at 1 •. I.,i ;• � .,•: l ,1 :. •,fir• ;1: rrRl. 1 . '• ':•,' `:• . t 11Vf .,x�•L'• ;I• >'rl. q ,�.fii f,il ',,' ' yr• r. I i,:'t: •,. •1,' f, �l•'. .•,a . ;.711!• ''.r :"'. Ill1l. 1• .1�•'. r.l .., it:'•�•. �• ,•w .. � ',"f. P.' 1,.1 , .!', 14 •r'f••.J.ir ',5•'..,,: .:':jq, 'f5;• �l'•� ,t::' •', •'I�r ,,: `�II t• . - r ,."ti LA}i '"`,• '1 ,fix. J'`t" „A' , •'}) ' 'tiY .M1r !e I, .t •,5' ..� .. 'r . 'r' .r '1 ' �i:4i.i,fe'' "'i�,�r,� ter. .t,,( .t.. •'•'j. '1'y� '} '•i• •.I.• •f 'p• ° 'rf• .r !'r ..ilt�tir,�i i'`'.7:'Jt',`i• (F' rf1.I dJ• i!yF,. ,ir y'. ,�)'r ildri:! ,.ti+• 'rl,.: :..V,: 't ' ,.t..-• • in J: ''i rill ii. .l; f , :,L: •' :){ ' �' '1' ` 7,r)I'' '.1•I. .v• a ,t,• ' r i1f Y.'l lli ' 4-r ,' ,.Si 1,`,. ,±: r ••., '� x • ^�I :y' = .. r itl f'�i,x.:,SSr 'i A1,•y0';: ' ,'}�..: l..' ,,J r�,•Y .f.,.:I' :.t:r r•, , ;\: .:r :.r': :,1, .1 ' ;r! 'r. ..�•l,',' M ,,yi �'} :'iy/ 1 •�� ;�,'�':•'•. ';. •l l' i• 'r' .: 1: r 51: ':1 fib ,A (1 ,:a��.. r, t j.` .. :��'•` , _ �•.'• '.! :'. ,�'ti:f"`7+ " 'S' 'i• '�1 �',, T' i•i•' ,;ts`a .J+• `5'i4'F:'''rn'••4'°• �l•, f t , •:f,. fir. . I 'r ` '.v 'f• t•', " •t• iYr",l;i:;x.t;'i: JI''. t ,C. A,•. ;,,t}'.: i!9•, , .A Is'. .. :�,• •1' i , , fi7 c'f J. l.^ •.Y'..;�,n• ,) eK)..,' '1. j'.�.i^ t' ' , .. ' f li 'r`I ''x Y r f' U�'. ': .t1.1'i 1 •}�1•� I'( I,,` P?t ' , t .. ,t , . � I, 't' .. f,S�f ' '' f �.' '�.5( kt f$1•;�',. � li,'� ,� ;''' •f ' '•l: ',., r ,•,. _ _ _ _ _-.. ai„' S.,r'",.`}'i)' i 1•, ;r r V'".•t".•t, .-• - r, -- 1^-=:;, r:;,il:- i i:.i'i..: , 'Ir i ..:;� .i�, �, . ',r,', , I � 'i I1I,..i• I.:✓ I(.:li'�I �I , 1• ' i t,a. •1 L'r I '1, li„^ )"1 4 411 IL ` ' 1 1 I n i rF; _ it ti• ' t. ., '.l 1 't ) v•1lII! I J k'1 ;Y Ir p I`l IIffr li:•i' !1 •' II�,11 I' I r�'. •`lr.!^ .l. 4• 's r i' 99 L,.,r.�� Ir, 1'E. 1''' '1�: f11i,,r 1'1 Alai lrl•Y 1�I i.II Ihl t Ir'I ll, ' i t %) ' .i _ '.:`,:•r' ,,',4IV,L�,11{1'',If; I)I .1 'V 1'4L'. I I �,ii ll t l; Il' r Ir i l )f 1;1�I•II,i i'},'I� Ilrl V x , i i :1 r,; 1 I;1 l,. ro',If"r;,t rJr,li} I {:,i I h,pl, I;IId�• I'r+ rlll I11', r u p'.f• 51' et\'a11 1 . '"�+i: •1, ' :1' •,! vr,i,!,.li )II) 1 �•rr/ 1• Ire•, IJ, I'Iil r i' h NPIj llll li !f VIP'7 (1;'',.1 lli 'ILI l.rr I,:n I 41l' Illr�"1 1 ++II I! '4..rr!' i'{• + \4• '},:B )� ' ,, 'h•''.'�','. :4�:;.r. ".r:4.�' .r:i'S1;lI'r 1 ' 1' tl'' I�It I,11,I:Illy,i Ili Il�!n IL 1'l ,r V'1�8: i}'il' , - !'yr' {t" }' •1},I •f, ri.:. ldi Pi( li l•'•rll dl'ir.; ;,•,..III I• �;(f('A / 1��.v.1.11Vl1 gfl,�'l •,L II Ilt,P 1:`I• ,'f h.� ,� • ti i..1.;. . •.1 n�' r � ! 1 i`' 1. ' i I�.r1.1, 1" i'r '1'; ,in II 1 lu 1 II I '1 I' ,f.:if::,'! r;: . ; ':,, f ii P'7 it:)I• ituc i, dr !I r ,! ' },• I, I I 'I;64'al; r rr ''i;•r, Ira., •x t ' f' :1:,'rd:J-' r Yt.+� -;1 r';: f, •l.:i 11' It ! 1 ,ri:{ all '44 iib'IJ'IiIP�L I�i l'li):' rJl ij'I '.III r'�I, 11,Ir1 `/l°Il ltl I,1 fan :',. .ild`y ir';11"rl '''rl J Illt, lUl 7r lJilll'lg,;l; .I ii 17V l,lI,I i,Illlllll,�IIi1�I1�1,:I':I I,ItSr'� ( �. .t� ' ' A1: (I Pi.;,,1 � .t. I ' .! I •'r I ♦IL'r�, ) � •f1 . .r' .•f.r;;` ',i„'� .',,i,, I ,,tri' !i•, 1 I).r' I lI1 1'i r 1 �1 r IJ, ' I !, I� 11,1 I'I,;i', ; I ♦ , 'x 'i.:)•1 r.'1• Sill;.... y;,F1'ra. 1,+. ,i,.l ,,r•1 ;. 111'!`,l. 'II'tl . II;rr1 i";'IVI•INiI r �'i.l Jr' ':r • .r I t'7". „',,f}'4. J .S' .ire,"1 I, .,, t ,.�u }Itl 11'1'f'll,l(il+',,I'q. Id"lyll' ,Lil�. I I ,1.{�tr'll l' )'�4i'1 t i I 1 •'I ° . :71.' t •'Id 1. P'I:fyiY,: nl1.1: ` 't•M1 I",.;I',.f.•�pl III J rl r I 11511 i ,lp{rl I. l�' t� C 1,�r.✓,,:• I; lj'rV .1 •It rli•,i '1'i7, .;1.111, I � i7y1piild,: I�fiq;l Ii�.IRI. II P'I 111�'It �� I " '.j• , r•" Ir, 'J.}f 1• , .'I,.hl'Ilr r , , I n !�.I•i' 1i.1 )` .•il.✓); I' I I I I'•l: J11II 15' i�j,l It rl III � li .r � ll. II'} i'I'IS;1'li •11.,� 4r"'1"4' ' ill�!`� Ly 1. Il; •i.l;A Illrl,,�•Ir, Ira ht all III„Q; I�ir.'1 i I I,'I' ' i,, i,l(II '''" i: 'i I r'1 '4•, � ,� 1 1 I��1 1 I ,I, 7 I'r ', t I i ;,aJl' 11 "�r'll,li.4 l':.,ri' !I'l;f'' Pli lll'I.1}l�'I}}.IIi'. Ir�•�' i:;ltl l' 11" Ir,dI�41.I I, 1,, rIII r .Ir .,,, •'!. I:•f r 4, r, (. L, Ir. I r4 " �': r�'i. , �;ll,,,l i. 1 J' Pr'(JC'Ij 1 •lr1^I'i�(, ., I t.i 11�;'I') 1' Ir rl�' , � •1.1 , 't tl ) •V• f :.:i}• e rP' 1' 1:! r ''�",'•'�L� r^.• Ir� i� Ildi'i '' .Ilri 7 �i�lli S'I d il' '��1./ rr,' ♦ " •. •1' f�;r' r,)i�' Sir ��,,I I r,�i !I! (sir r1 fr11i I:1:5 r1�:I'll lt' pi1 1I , 'li q, , r i., :i :f, r. 'r t�. .�•r,.r l', 1• ,,,,:•i l r t r,l�'1 P I�:�j.,l,r,it�,'I ) ± '' 1,li•it I �f; n� rL,lalh +iJ�ll'' , ,JSI'{'1 1 ! . 1 , ql .. �"rl..'i' ':''� I I i' i. LI LI f' I 1. ; 11 , � �•. ,•'. •"• is;ll yl) I, i'il r.flJlie•�i'S.,VII,,I,� frl d,r. J1 r9'I P+ 1.;r111 , r I! Ln I'('ll 1'.r •[ 1 5. . r i G 1:.11 r ry j (' 11 1(t I'•,'1 I lilrl '11"t S ❑',r'I i F �' ' r."•f: x .. � 11�'>i I' ll ,,,1)d r'u I:•1'J :l„ ,Ii AI ''Jlt, Il f 1•.w r. �'r rl 111' i1P l.i, r,i:j.;r'`I .. r,• . :r. •„•,1,'.... ,r.-:.�., -_,.-- ':ir.'i„r;y,'n(4r ; 1! I;'�,.I,rl: . ;a.,. ,Ar.l,I. Ir. ),II, °Ilia ,r, , T • m CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA 92im City Hall G4FORr�* 3300 Newport Blvd. (714) 073•2110 April 13', 1972 FILE, COPY DO NOT REMOVE Lou Sutherland Wyle Labs 128 Maryland Street E1 Segundo , California Dear Lou , The City of Newport Beach is presently soliciting proposals to perform studies leading to the Noise .Element' of the General Plan . Attache-d 'is a copy of the General Plan Time Schedule which covers the period between January , 1972 and July , 1973 , the f anticipated completion date for the General Plan . Several 1 . of these dates are critical to the noise study and dictate that the study be done in three distinct phases . i Phase One would consist of determining the ambient noise levels in various areas in the community for different types of land uses . In addition , the consultant would determine and map the noise contours according to the guidelines contained in Senate Bill No. 691 for all"exi'sti"n major highways . (See attached map. ) At the conclusion of this phase the consultant would make, recommendations on how to minimize the noise impact on various land uses . In order to include these recommendations in the General Plan Specific Policy Report, this phase should be completed by August 1 , 1972. j The second phase would be to determine and map the noise contours for ro 'ected '1'evels of traffic on all existing ah9 ' rp_ opdsed igmaor ways and freeways . Conclusions re ar in appropriate site. or route selection alternatives or noise impact upon land uses should be made for inclusion in .the General Plan . This phase will begin approximately j January 1 , 1,973 'and should be completed' by March 1 , 1973 . ` The time delay is due to the fact that the transportation consultant will not start developing alternative highway systems until October, 19.72 with completion' expected in December, 19.7.Z. r i 1 I Lou Sutherland -2- ' April 13 , 1972 Phase Three would consist of developing a• noise ordinance for ultimate adoption as part of the- Municipal Code . i We hope that this brief discussion will answer any questions that you may have . We are not presently budgeted for an acoustical consultant. Therefore , we would appreciate receiving your proposal as soon as possible in order that we can take this matter to the City Council during the course ' of their budget hearings to take place in May. Very truly yours , DEPARTMENT Of COMMUNITY .DEVELOPMENT Carl M. Neuhausen, Advance Planning Administrator ,CMN/RL"G/,sm q , f l r i i . ..•...-gym r .y v ...nrnnn rm fl+. a rt 9m91YA1T.'dYTT"'Ol.'tT' P 1`df^,^ : .;�((%\\•ice \`�����C'_C���� � _ r ', _ iI Will" /, iy ��1` ` , � � \L � 'tC.�� may` , _M_ • . Mz 10 �r '�` "".s. r �'se..� •ii i_siii illi j�f:.�a-_ :�-r-r:�_9• r �:o.• -06�.% ' 7 — --.. yw:.�t ,p o. :�..• _` ' .hs}_ y' 4: r ,.._� J1.De�1,,., 1 tsiissisua:r?,, :.; —�u:a, t-�'Ro� 1 wo Q ti' 4 .-i a ernOF llf Po BEAn p 1-711 r„ f JOSS 0. OETECA PAVL S.VENEKLASEN k ASSOCIATES CONSULTANTS IN ACOUSTICS 11 1711 SIXTEENTH STREET SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90404 (2701 070.9268 / 095.0700 ' DO'NOt REMOve March 16 , 1972 " Jose to Ortega Paul S, Venekl-asen 6 Associates , 1711 Sixteenth Street ' Santa Monica, California 90404 Dear Joe In order to prepare a proposal for the Noise Element of the General Plan, you will need to know how the noise study relates to the total General Plan 'Program. ';✓'' Attached is a copy of the General Plan Time Schedule which covers the period between January, 1972 and July, 1973 , the anticipated completien. date for the General Plan. Several of these dates are critical to the noise study and dictate ` that the study be done In three distinct phases. ^ ' Phase One would consist of determining the ambient noise levels ' . , in various areas 1n the community for different types of land uses . In addition, the consultant would determine and map the noise contours according to the guidelines contained in Senate Bill No, 691 for all existing major highways . (See attached map. ) At the conclus�-ien —To this phase the consultant would make recommendations on how to minimize the noise impact on various land uses ., In order to include these recommendations In the General Plan Specific Policy Report, this phase should be completed by August 1 , 1972, ; w> The second phase would be to determine and map the noise ' contours for projected levels of traffic on all exiS� and ro os d major highways and freeways . Conclusions regarding , appropriate site or rou•to selection alternatives or noise Impact upon lend uses should be made for inclusion in the General Plan. This phase will begin approximately January 1 , A1973 and should be completed by March 1 , 1973. The time delay is due to the fact that the transportation consultant will not start developing alternative highway systems until October , 1972 with completion expected in December, 1972. y t Jose C. Or toga .2- March 16 , 1972 Phase Three would consist of developing a noise ordinance, for ultimate adoption as part of the, Municipal Code. We hope that this brief discussion will answer any questions that you may have. As we have stated before, we are not presently budgeted for 'an acoustical consultant. Therefore, •, we would appreciate receiving your proposal 'as soon as possible in order that we can take this matter to the City Council during the course of their budget hearings to take place in April or May. Very truly yours, DEPARTMENT CP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ' Carl M. Neuhausen,, Advance Planning Administrator CMN/RLG/sm CC: James D. Hewicke.r George Dawes :•1a :♦'p i1 Ali r6 R •1, 1^ • Yk ; a n �I• l r t 3 HLFum no NOT REMOVE March 2, 1972 Mr. Jose C. Ortega Paul S. Veneklasen & Associates 1711 Sixteenth ' Street Santa Monica , Californi-a 904-04 Dear Mr. Ortega:.. Attached is the material whic-h was promised you with regard to the Noise Element proposal which you are submitting on the City of Newport Beach r General Plan . , We are sorry it has been so long in coming. Should you have any further .questions , please contact us. We are looking forward to hearing from you. Very truly yours , DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY -DEVELOPMENT CARL M. NEUHAUSEN, Administrator Advance Planning Division g.Y Senior Planner CMNJRLGJk J 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND WYLE' LABORATORIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITY ' S GENERAL PLAN . WHEREAS , the City Council has determined that it is desirable and necessary to develop studies related to the noise levels generated by major transportation facilities throughout the City of Newport Beach ; and WHEREAS , such studies will serve to satisfy State planning requirements for including a Noise Element as part of the City' s General Plan and will assist in the develop- ment of a comprehensive City-wide noise ordinance ; and WHEREAS , Wyle Laboratories is qualified to under- take and complete such studies , and have offered to perform such services for the City , NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that Wyle Laboratories is hereby appointed as consultant for purposes of undertaking and completing the studies described above ; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute an agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Wyle Laboratories for the above services in an amount not to exceed $ at such time as the agreement is approved by the City Attorney as to form. Adopted this day of 1972 . Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk DO NOT REMOVE f r �' "' t 0;":;':�• I Cr•--VELOPMENT ' ' x' • ' RESOLUTION NO. 7790 1 1 , : A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A ' CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE • " _ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND WYLE LABORATORIES ' FOR THE STUDY OF NOISE LEVELS IN CONNECTION WITH THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport' ,` �• Beach has determined that it; is desirable and necessary to develop studies related to the noise levels generated by major , 1 transportation' facilities throughout the City of Newport Beach,­ and WHEREAS, such studies will serve to satisfy State "r planning requirements for inbluding a. Noise Element as part of the City's General Plan and will assist in the development of a comprehensive City,-wide noise ordinance; and t {5 { ' WHEREAS, Wyle I,aborafories is qualified to undertake and' complete such studies, a'd has offered to perform such services for the City; •.and WHEREAS, there hasibeen presented to the City Council " IVY� of the City of Newport .teach a certain agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Wyle Laboratories for such services; 4 ' , and WHEREAS, the .City Council has considered the terms and conditions of said ,contract and found them to be fair and Ly . equitable; ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport' Beach± that Wyle Laboratories is hereby t appointed as consultant for purposes of undertaking and completing • I the studies described above•; rl- ; r FIL DO-'NOT REMOVE d ._..,.--. • '_ -.-- •a•.-rc-n•.- -,,..,-....-.•.-..,., - .r•�..r "T',,^Ti•tl`,-.n,.,tr;..... �T'rr I:YiT.w.n r,rmn:••--•...^i • . �' ''p 41 ',r, tli•�,11 { ' : •�I {• I� {' Llil'll�jl�lli,) � t . to ''�, a ri• I ''' I t • BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk , are hereby authorized to execute an agreement between the "City of Newport Beach and Wyle Laboratories for the above services" in an 'amount not to exceed $13,600 at such time as the agree- ' I r � ment is approved by the CitylAttorney as to form and the Director of Community Development as to the scope of services. ADOPTED this h day of August 1972. t Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk �y . t DON dm 8/8/72 -2- • ......_ _..+-..-_... -,+•.----+.-/'f'^".-'M'T-++",^',^'+^r• ,..-•;r,}nl"?Yti'r}P•:rt,�y.,`t 1.•1-�i}r 11"117 1rRrr,il r,M^r-r••f,''.rI•a t'}r ll�•I•'•;r qfi+•q^ , (( m'ri'1'n. � 1 il1'��tJ'�il}'!'„}i! ' , AGREEMENT FOR STUDIES NECESSARY TO DEVELOP A NOISE ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN AND A CITY-WIDE NOISE ORDINANCE This Agreement, made and entered into on the day of , 1972, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and WYLE LABORATORIES, a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as CONSULTANT. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, CITY has determined that it is desirable and necessary to develop studies related to the noise levels generated by major transportation facilities throughout Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, such studies will serve to satisfy State planning requirements for including a noise element as part of the City's General Plan, and assist in the development of a comprehensive city-wide noise ordinance; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is qualified to undertake and complete such studies, and have offered to perform such services for the CITY: NOW, THEREFORE, the CITY and CONSULTANT, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, do hereby agree, each with the other, as follows: d. OBJECTIVES the objectives of the study are twofold: 1 . To quantitatively measure, analyze and make recommendations as to the various noise levels associated with existing and future transportation facilities, including highways, freeways, mass transit systems, helicopters and ground air facilities in accordance with the guidelines contained in Senate Bill 691 (California Government Code 65302). 2. To assist in the development of a comprehensive and quantitative noise ordinance to control existing and future noise levels throughout the City of Newport Beach. II. SCOPE OF SERVICES The work to be carried out by CONSULTANT under this Agreement is set forth in Exhibit "A" , attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. FOR `� DO,NOT REMOVE IU. PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT agrees that it shall commence work on the project within ten (10) days following the execution of this Agreement, and shall diligently continue the same to completion in accordance with the following: Scope, of Study Date of Completion Phase I Measurement and Analysis Tasks 1 ) of Existing Noise Levels 3) November 15, 1972 Task 4 December 1 , 1972 Phase II Projection and Analysis February 1 , 1973 of Future Noise Levels CONSULTANT further agrees that it shall provide twenty-five (25) copies of three (3) separate reports. The first report shall cover Phase I (Tasks 1 , 2 and 3, the second Phase I ,(Task 4) , and the third report Phase II of the study. Said reports shall contain all findings, analyses, and recommendations (both in written and graphic form) of the work as outlined in Phase I and Phase II as set forth in Exhibit "A" - Scope of Services. CONSULTANT further agrees that it shall provide oral presentations on said reports to CITY'S Planning Commission and City Council . Said oral reports shall not exceed a total of two (2) in number. CITY agrees to notify CONSULTANT of the time and place of said oral presentations at least ten (10) days prior to the date on which the presentations are to take place. Beyond these oral presentations CONSULTANT will meet regularly, with authorized representatives of the Community Development Department Staff, in order to facilitate coordination and to dutifully carry out the study to completion. IV. BILLING AND PAYMENT For furnishing the services specified under Exhibit "A" of this Agreement, CITY agrees that it shall pay CONSULTANT the sum of Fourteen Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($14,400.00). Partial payments for work performed under this Agreement shall be made upon the completion of each Phase of Study in accordance with the following amounts: Phase I Measurement & Analysis of Tasks 1 ) Existing Noise Levels 2) $ 8,900.00 3) Task 4 $ 2,300.00 Phase II Projection and Analysis of $ 3,200.00 Future Noise Levels -2!r Each amount shall be paid to CONSULTANT upon demand within thirty (30) days after the successful completion of each Phase of work, including the presentation and acceptance by CITY of the reports which cover Phase I and Phase II of the study. The total payment of Fourteen Thousand four Hundred Dollars ($14,400.00) shall include all costs incurred by CONSULTANT for salary and out-of-pocket costs for travel and miscellaneous expenses necessary to perform all phases of work out- lined in the Scope of Study, attached as Exhibit "A" hereto. Any specific additional assignments, salary expenses, authorized travel and appearances not provided for in the Scope of Study set forth under Exhibit "A" must be approved by CITY. Payment for said approved and designated additional work and reimbursable expenses shall be made on a calendar month basis and at monthly intervals , on the basis of the Standard Fee Schedule dated 2-1-72, marked Exhibit "B", and attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof. Each payment shall be made within ten (10) days after presentation to CITY of a state- ment setting forth in detail the additional work performed and all costs incurred by CONSULTANT, together with supporting vouchers, for the period covered by each said statement. V. DESIGNATION OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES •CONSULTANT hereby agrees , upon the signing of this Agreement that it shall furnish to CITY in Writing the name of an individual who will be authorized to act in person or through his designee for CONSULTANT in all matters pertaining to the study. Such individual shall be approved by the CITY'S Community Development Director. CITY agrees , upon signing of this Agreement, that it shall furnish to CONSULTANT the name of an individual who, as the CITY'S Project Representative, will be authorized to act in person or through his designee as representative for the CITY in all matters pertaining to this study. It is understood and agreed by said parties that the authorized representatives may be changed, provided that either party to this Agreement so desiring the change shall give at least five (5) days' prior notice in writing to the other party, naming its new authorized representative, and that CONSULTANT'S said representative shall be approved by CITY'S Community Development Director. -3- VI. COOPERATION All departments of the CITY shall assist CONSULTANT in the performance of this study. CONSULTANT agrees to provide general guidance and direction to CITY staff personnel who are to -assist CONSULTANT in the collection of data and the prepa- ration of said reports. CITY shall provide letters of introduction to assist CONSULTANT in obtaining required data from other personsy firms, or governmental entities as is necessary. The use of CITY records and personnel by CONSULTANT shall be coordi- nated through the CITY'S representative. VII , ' OWNERSHIP OF REPORTS AND DATA Copies of all reports, exhibits, data, and other work or materials prepared in compliance with this Agreement shall be and shall remain the property of the CITY, to be used by CITY as may be required. VIII. CHANGES IN WORK CITY may, at any time, by written request of the CITY'S Project Representative, make any minor changes in the services to be provided hereunder and at an additional cost not to exceed One Thousand Dollars ($1 ,000.00). If such changes cause any increase in the cost of doing the work under this Agreement or in the time required for its performance, an adjustment as mutually agreed upon will be made by CONSULTANT and the CITY, and the Agreement shall be modified in writing accordingly. Any claim for adjustment under this article must be made in writing to the CITY's Project Representative within ten (10) days from the date the . ' change is requested. IX. TERMINATION This Agreement is subject to termination by the CITY at any time by serving written notice to CONSULTANT, and the CITY shall thereafter be liable to CONSULTANT only for fees and costs accrued to the date of receipt by CONSULTANT, of such notice. X. NOTICES All notices to CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall be deemed valid and effective upon deposit in the United States Mail , postage prepaid, by certified -4- and/or registered mail , addressed to Wjyle Laboratories at 128 Maryland Street, El Segundo, California 90245. All notices to the CITY under this Agreement shall be deemed valid and effective when personally served upon the Director of Community Development or upon deposit in the United States Mail , postage prepaid, by certified and/or registered mail , addressed to the Director of Community Development, City Hall , 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92660. XI. GENERAL PROVISIONS In this Agreement, whenever the context so requires, the masculine gender includes the feminine and/or neuter and the singular includes the plural . This Agreement represents the complete understanding between the parties with respect to matters set forth herein. No amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless evidenced in writing and signed by the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first written above. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH By: Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: By: By City Attorney Ci ty Clerk APPROVED AS TO SCOPE OF SERVICES: WYLE LABORATORIES By: By Director of Community Development Contract Administrator By Assistant Secretary CONSULTANT -5- _EXHIBIT "A" - SCOPE OF SERVICES The study shall consist of two principal phases of work, Phase I The Measurement and Analysis of Existing Noise Levels Phase II - The Projection and Analysis of Future Noise Levels PHASE I ^ MEASUREMENT AND ANALYSIS OF EXISTING NOISE LEVELS This phase will involve four tasks. The first task shall be to determine and map noise contours in accordance with the standards and guidelines contained in Senate Bill 691 (California Government Code 65302) for the following major highways within the City of Newport Beach: Pacific Coast Highway Mac Arthur Boulevard Jamboree Road Newport Boulevard Balboa Boulevard (between Balboa Pier and Pacific Coast Highway) Irvine Avenue Campus Drive (between Mac Arthur Boulevard and Irvine Avenue) Bristol Street (between Mac Arthur Boulevard and Irvine Avenue) Cliff Drive (between Irvine Avenue and Riverside Avenue) Riverside Avenue (between Pacific Coast Highway and Cliff Drive) The noise contours shall be derived from actual field measurements and analytical studies by consultant of the selected highway network. Such characteristics as daily and seasonal traffic flow, traffic mix, highway width and grades, property grades, and adjacent land uses, together with traffic noise measurements from selected highway field stations shall be reviewed and analyzed by the Consultant and summarized into a series of noise profiles for various highway locations. From these noise profiles , the Consultant shall develop CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) contours for the total highway network and all adjacent properties in con- formance with the standards and guidelines outlined in Senate Bill 691 . To assist the Consultant in calculating the various noise levels due to highway traffic, the City staff shall provide hourly traffic estimates for those major highways listed above. The second task under Phase I shall be to determine ambient noise levels in various areas of the community for different types of land uses. Community noise field stations shall be established for such purposes and shall be so located throughout the City as to measure a representative cross-section of varying land use types and conditions within Newport Beach. The Consultant shall confer with City staff as to the most appropriate location for the field noise measurement stations. The third task under Phase I shall be to make recommendations on how to minimize the �T noise impact of existing highway traffic on various existing and future land uses within the City of Newport Beach. Report At the conclusion of the first three tasks outlined under Phase I, a report shall be presented by the Consultant. This report shall contain the following items: • Map of Newport Beach highway system with the annual CNEL contours • Seasonal variation of the CNEL contours • Typical values for A-weighted sound levels on contours • Representative ambient noise levels for the various land use categories • The backup field measurement data and associated procedures • Sufficient explanatory text to set forth the goals, techniques and results of the program • Methods and effects of reducing noise exposure near highways by varying the local correction factors (highway grade, property grades, buffering and traffic start/stop variations) characterizing the highway. The report will also summarize a general step-by-step noise reduction program encompassing the definition, monitoring, and eventual alleviation of transportation noise in the Newport Beach area. The final task under Phase I shall be to measure, analyze and make recommendations as to the impact of local police and military helicopter operations on the City of Newport Beach. The task shall include: a. A study of the flight operations of police and military helicopters -2- operating within the city limits to determine the type of equipment utilized and the details of the operational procedures. (The task assumes operational data will be made available by the pppropriate city and military agencies.) b. The measurement of helicopter noise under controlled conditions. A series of noise measurements will be made of typical equipment utilized by the police and military to determine the noise characteristics. The controlled conditions include takeoff, hover, flight and landing. Measurements will be made at three typical locations for the police helicopters and three locations for the military helicopters. (The task assumes assistance Will be given by the necessary and appropriate city and military personnel . ) Report At the conclusion of the fourth or final task as outlined under Phase I , the Consultant shall present a memorandum report on the noise generated by helicopter operations in the City of Newport Beach utilizing the data obtained under items a. and b, above. This report shall include: • A map showing the routes followed by military helicopters and some typical routes followed by police helicopters. • Projected CNEL contours for military helicopters in Newport Beach. • Typical A-weighted sound pressure levels associated with both military and police operations. • Recommendation as to possible alternate operational procedures which could be followed by helicopters in order to reduce the noise impact. • Suggested procedures for zoning and building construction to make the land impacted by noise compatible for its intended use. PHASE II - THE PROJECTION AND ANALYSIS OF FUTURE NOISE LEVELS This phase will be to determine and map noise contours for projected levels of traffic on existing and proposed transportation facilities, including highways, freeways , mass transit systems, and ground air facilities. The specific highways -3- to be studied in this phase include those previously listed under Phase I, and the following major highways and freeways: San Joaquin Hills Road Dover Drive (between Pacific Coast Highway and 17th Street) Superior Avenue Bayside Drive Corona del Mar Freeway (Route 57) Newport Freeway (Route 55) Conclusions regarding appropriate site or route selection alternatives and noise impact upon adjacent land uses shall be made for inclusion into the City's General Plan. In part, the Phase II calculations shall be made utilizing the data base on noise profiles established for Phase I and the development of projected noise profiles for field stations representative of highways and adjacent property and land use characteristics for projected highway expansions and new freeways. A computerized model shall be developed and manipulated by inputting changes in traffic flow, traffic mix, and new topographic characteristics for adjacent properties to obtain projected CNEL (and noise) levels. Report At the conclusion of Phase II , the Consultant shall present a report containing the following data: • A matrix showing noise reduction to be achieved in various land use areas associated with potential alternate traffic and highway conditions. • A series of recommendations relating to proposed highways and traffic conditions which would optimize reduction of the Newport Beach noise environment. • A map of Newport Beach with the CNEL contours for the recommended projected traffic on existing and proposed highways and freeways. • Recommendations relating to zoning, types of building construction, and techniques for shielding private residential and public facilities to reduce the noise impact of future transportation facilities on Newport Beach residents. i -4- EXHIBIT "B" Wyle Laboratories E1 Segundo, California RESEARCH STAFF CONSULTING RATES LABOR Hourly Rate A5 Technical Director $50.00 A4 Consulting Principal 35.00 A3 Consulting Advisor 30.00 A2 Senior Consulting Specialist 27.00 Al Consulting Specialist 23.00• 1 Senior Engineer 20.00 2 Engineer T7.00 3 Senior Technician, Associate 13.50 4 Technician A, Engineering Aide 11 .00 5 Technician B, Assistant 9.50 MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS When required, materials such as photographic supplies, art work, reproduction expenses and any other purchased services will be billed at invoice cost plus 20%. TRAVEL Time spent to and from client's facility as necessary in performance of services will be invoiced at above stated labor rates. Travel expenses will be billed as follows: Air Travel At cost, utilizing tourist class fare when available. Auto Travel At cost at prevailing rental rates or 12t/mile for private auto Lodging At cost for all normal expenses for lodging and food, etc. related to travel required by client. BILLING AND PAYMENT TERMS Billing for work performed will be submitted monthly. Payment terms are net 30 days, based on normal credit approval . FIM � y 2-1-72 DO NOT REMOVE i EXHIBIT "B" Wyle Laboratories E1 Segundo, California RESEARCH STAFF CONSULTING RATES LABOR Hourly Rate A5 Technical Director $50.00 A4 Consulting Principal 35.00 A3 Consulting Advisor 30.00 A2 Senior Consulting Specialist 27.00 Al Consulting Specialist 23.00 1 Senior Engineer 20.00 2 Engineer 17.00 3 Senior Technician, Associate 13.50 4 Technician A, Engineering Aide 11 .00 5 Technician B, Assistant 9.50 MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS When required, materials such as photographic supplies , art work, reproduction expenses and any other purchased services will be billed at invoice cost plus 20%. TRAVEL Time spent to and from client's facility as necessary in performance of services will be invoiced at above stated labor rates. Travel expenses will be billed as follows: Air Travel At cost, utilizing tourist class fare when available. Auto Travel At cost at prevailing rental rates or 12t/mile for private auto Lodging At cost for all normal expenses for lodging and food, etc. related to travel required by client. BILLING AND PAYMENT TERMS Billing for work performed will be submitted monthly. Payment terms are net 30 days, based on normal credit approval . 2-142 it • AGREEMENT • FOR STUDIES NECESSARY TO DEVELOP A NOISE ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN AND A CITY-WIDE NOISE ORDINANCE This Agreement, made and entered into on the day of 1972, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and WYLE LABORATORIES, a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as CONSULTANT. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, CITY has determined that it is desirable and necessary to develop studies related to the noise levels generated by major transportation facilities throughout Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, such studies will serve to satisfy State planning requirements for including a noise element as part of the City's General Plan, and assist in the development of a comprehensive city-wide noise ordinance; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is qualified to undertake and complete such studies, and have offered to perform such services for the CITY: NOW, THEREFORE, the CITY and CONSULTANT, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, do hereby agree, each with the other, as follows: .I. OBJECTIVES The objectives of the study are twofold: 1 . To- quantitatively measure, analyze and make recommendations as to the various noise levels associated with existing and future transportation facilities, including highways , freeways , mass transit systems, helicopters and ground ai'r facilities in accordance with the guidelines contained in Senate Bill 691 (California Government Code 65302). 2. To assist in the development of a comprehensive and quantitative noise ordinance to control existing and future noise levels throughout the City of Newport Beach. II. SCOPE OF SERVICES The work to be carried out by CONSULTANT under this Agreement is set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and b;: this reference made a part hereof. I 1. PERFOEMAN E • CONSULTANT agrees that it shall commence work on the project within ten (10) days following the execution of this Agreement, and shall diligently continue the same to completion in accordance with the following: Sconce of Study Date of Completion Phase I Measurement and Analysis Tasks 1) � of Existing Noise Levels 2) Novv ber 15<, 1972 1 2 3) Task 4 December Phase II Projection and Analysis Febru 1 3 of Future Noise Levels CONSULTANT further agrees that it shall provide twenty-five (25) copies of three (3) separate reports. The first report shall cover Phase I (Tasks 1 , 2 and 3, the second Phase I ,(Task 4) , and the third report Phase II of the study. Said reports shall contain all findings, analyses, and recommendations (both in written and graphic form) of the work -as outlined in Phase I and Phase II as set forth in Exhibit "A" - Scope of Services. CONSULTANT further agrees that it shall provide oral presentations on said reports to CITY'S Planning Commission and City Council . Said oral reports shall not exceed a total of two (2) in number. CITY agrees to notify CONSULTANT of the time and place of said oral presentations at least ten (10) days prior to the date on which the presentations are to take place. Beyond these oral presentations CONSULTANT will meet regularly, with authorized representatives of the Community Development Department Staff, in order to facilitate coordination and to dutifully carry out the study to completion. IV. - BILLING AND PAYMENT For furnishing the services specified under Exhibit "A" of this Agreement, CITY agrees that it shall pay CONSULTANT the sum of Fourteen Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($14,400.00). Partial payments for work performed under this Agreement shall be made upon the completion of each Phase of Study in accordance with the following amounts: Phase I Measurement & Analysis of Tasks 1) Existing Noise Levels 2) $ 8,900.00 3) Task 4 $ 2,300.00 Phase II Projection and Analysis of $ 3,200.00 Future Noise Levels -2- Each amount shall be paid to CONSULTANT upon demand within thirty .(30) days after the successful completion of each Phase of work, including the presentation and acceptance by CITY of the reports which cover Phase I and Phase II of the study. The total payment of Fourteen Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($14,400.00) shall include all costs i-ncurred by CONSULTANT for salary and out-of-pocket costs for travel and miscellaneous expenses necessary to perform all phases of work out- lined in the Scope of Study, attached as Exhibit "A" hereto. Any specific additional assignments, salary expenses, authorized travel' and appearances not provided for in the Scope of *Study set forth under Exhibit "A" must be approved by CITY. Payment for said approved and designated additional work and reimbursable expenses shall be made on a calendar month basis and at monthly intervals, on the basis of the Standard Fee Schedule dated 2-1-72, marked Exhibit "B" and attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof. Each payment shall be made within ten (10) days after presentation to CITY of a state- ment setting forth in detail the additional work performed and all costs incurred by CONSULTANT, together with supporting vouchers, for the period covered by each said statement. V. DESIGNATION OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES CONSULTANT hereby agrees, upon the signing of this Agreement that it shall furnish to CITY in writing the name of an individual who will be authorized to act in person or through his designee for CONSULTANT in all matters pertaining to the study. Such individual shall be approved by the CITY'S Community Development Director. CITY agrees, upon signing of this Agreement, that it shall furnish to CONSULTANT the name of an individual who, as the CITY'S Project Representative, will be authorized to act in person or through his designee as representative for the CITY in all matters pertaining to this study. It is understood and agreed by said parties that the authorized representatives may be changed, provided that either party to this Agreement so desiring the change shall give at least five (5) days' prior notice in writing to the other party, naming its new authorized representative, and that CONSULTANT'S said representative shall be approved by CITY'S Community Development Director. -3- VI . COOPERAT1 1 All departments of the CITY shall assist CONSULTANT in the performance of this study. CONSULTANT agrees to provide general guidance and direction to CITY staff personnel who are to assist CONSULTANT in the collection of data and the prepa— ration of said reports. CITY shall provide letters of introduction to assist CONSULTANT in obtaining required data from other persons , firms, or governmental entities as is necessary. The use of CITY records and personnel by CONSULTANT shall be coordi- nated through the CITY'S representative. VII.. OWNERSHIP OF REPORTS AND DATA Copies of all reports , exhibits, data, and other work or materials prepared in compliance with this Agreement shall be and sha1T remain the property of the CITY, to be used by CITY as may be required. VIII. CHANGES IN WORK CITY may, at any time, by written request of the CITY'S Project Representative, make any minor changes in the services to be provided hereunder and at an. additional cost not to exceed One Thousand Dollars ($1 ,000.00). If such changes cause any increase in the cost of doing the work under this Agreement or in the time required for its performance, an adjustment as mutually agreed upon will be made by CONSULTANT and the CITY, and the Agreement shall be modified in writing accordingly. Any claim for adjustment under this article must be made in writing to the CITY's Project Representative within ten (10) days from the date the . change is requested. IX. TERMINATION This Agreement is subject to termination by the CITY at any time by serving written notice to CONSULTANT, and the CITY shall thereafter be liable to CONSULTANT only for fees and costs accrued to the date of receipt by CONSULTANT of such notice. X. NOTICES All notices to CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall be deemed valid and effective upon deposit in the United States Mail , postage prepaid, by certified -4- _ .ems r+wWYvl. ' {a yti,w .-ray and/or registered mail , addressed to 1yle Laboratories at 1,28 Maryland Street, El Segundo, California 90245. All notices to the CITY under this Agreement shall be deemed valid and effective when personally -served upon the Director of Community Development or upon deposit in the United States Mail , postage prepaid, by certified and/or registered mail , addressed to the Director of Community Development, City Hall , 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92660. XI. GENERAL PROVISIONS In this Agreement, whenever the context so requires, the masculine gender includes the feminine and/or neuter and the singular includes the plural. This Agreement represents the complete understanding between the parties with respect to matters set forth herein. No amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless e-videnced in writing and signed by the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first written above. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH By: Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: By: By: City Attorney ity Clerk APPROVED AS TO SCOPE OF SERVICES: WYLE LABORATORIES By: By Director of Community Development Contract Administrator By: Assistant Secretary CONSULTANT -5- • A G R E E M E N T • This Agreement , made and entered into on the day of , 1974, represents an amendment to the previous Agreement , entered into on the 26th day of September , 1972 , by and between the City of Newport Beach , a municipal corporation , hereinafter referred to as CITY , and Wyle Laboratories , a California corporation , hereinafter referred to as CONSULTANT . W I T N E S S E T H : WHEREAS , City has determined that the traffic capacities furnished Consultant under the original Agreement led to con- clusions which were not entirely valid ; and WHEREAS , more accurate traffic volume projections are now available , based on recent traffic studies ; and WHEREAS , Phase II of the original Agreement, involving the projection and analysis of future noise levels , must be revised , based on the new traffic volume projections ; NOW, THEREFORE , the City and Consultant, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, do hereby agree , each with the other , as follows : A. Phase II , the projection and analysis of future noise levels , as described in the original Agreement which was entered into on the 26th day of September 1972 , shall be revised in the following manner: 1 . The Noise Level Contours for the highway system described in the original Agreement shall be recalculated . 2 . The conclusions and recommendations shall be revised as necessary to reflect the new noise level contours . B. Phase II shall then be completed , as described in the original Agreement , including the preparation of the final report and the presentation of said report to the Planning Commission and City Council ., FILE q;'h®PY DO'NOT REMOVE C. For furnishing the bove services , the City agrees that it shall pay Consultant the sum of twenty-one hundred and forty-five dollars ($2 , 145. 00) upon completion of said services . This payment shall be made in addition to the payment stipulated in the original agreement . D. All of the provisions of the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. E. This Agreement represents the complete understanding between the parties with respect to matters set forth herein . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first written above . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH By: Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST : By: BY: City Attorney City Clerk APPROVED AS TO SCOPE OF WYLE LABORATORIES SERVICES : BY: By; Contract Administrator Director of Community ' Development By: Assistant Secretary CONSULTANT -2- I M 4_ ; v( - - - - _ - - .$ - - - -- _ - "I' - - - II F 1. 3 4: t ,'., %- m ::alzr'rs. ,,- r- it T '»"J,` ,I , - , E ro a b: .rt �. nY, rr?' -;: ' ;�----1,,,-I;---I�"�"--,�--.-��I---".-"I-;:�-61 1-j-,-.-,,-l nL,1,,�-<4,--,-,-��1 1-F1-V---11:\-,I-,t--;-%:;\-],.-I-----­-:1 I-��-j�.s L-,1-*-"\,---�.-,�&-!I�",L,�,--,.',I�AC-.,--',I-----I-,1��'-jt-��-X,,;---I1\\.�---!,�-�1�--I-1�.�--'--�;1,,:L�,-r`--�-,,-I-I1-,7-1-I,�-'--1---1 I--7-,-1��"--�II-------:,-'-,,�I-I-�--?"-�.�--,-4,--I,k-�o;---- i ,I-1-I I-�-----I,I-,,�',I,I--A,II 11,Il-��1 I I",-,-"I\,n,I�,�I,,�I�1,-1,�I�,,'"I��,1 I,",I�,I�I'-,,,",I,II:�,I1�1 I�I,I�-���-�"�e�I1�1,��I�,I,,,I,I,�l--I"��,-,,�t II I11,",l 1 1-II%-,,-',,,,"1l,II,.",I-I--1,-�I�<--1 I,,\,%"F�,��,-.I1--�,,1 I",,.,,,I,�,I�I,,,I I.,��-,'"I\,1,I�,"ll.,I-,1-,I t-�,,.1l",�1�",�,"�.1-,1-I��1��I�1,I1',1Z l,Il1�"��,I-,11-"/,�,,,�"1 11I,',,!\�,�,)11%"',-,,'-�I%,I"* 16�1 M�,11�1��I-�-,,.,1 I'�,I��I.,,I 1-,I,,"-�1,,,,�1I I,1-1 I,,I,\:F�I I�,",1-;"I,,,,�II-,,�,-,It,"�1,.��'I II�I-�,,,I,,1,-�I��\�I,'I,"II,I"��I'�;.\,",l,�-"l1;Il�",',..,I,It;,'�l;����,,,,�l"I��,I\,,\�l-,,-�,,�k,,I",,,t,,`,I<-,,I I"'�'I,"-,I-",,,,I_-l�,���1 t->M',",I�<1-,,!,"�I-m ItI-�,,-�t,".I,,I II",�I��I1�I\F�-3II I',�I,,,,1,-:,,,-,,I'',-�,�,-,l,-,-���I"�?,I,,.,,�,IDl,,,,I,I�C I-1�I,-,I1 eI,,,t,1-)I,�Z�:,-�,�1-,.,,-�,�X�-i,,,,�I,,"LI-,1',1 I\.�*�i"�1 lI,,�/I-,�,I-"�,,1,�,"I-\I",,�:"",��?�,-.I.'I�,,�,.,-o-%�!I.,,�I,,tt I-,,���I�11:.,-r�`,,,�/1-"���,;�II.,-�I 1I-,.I,,I"t11/I,�Ft11..,�-,,,I-,;,..,��k,,�,-11.�%`,��1"1 0�>I,;�'I-I1I�"\�:,,.,FI,I I��,"".,I 11;��,,,- :"I�,'I�-�1,�.I�-I,,-",,-i,,,,,�,,",II�,'���,F 1'�-1I,1 1F-,,-F--z-%,":,,1"',,I�"��,,I.,*,-.:'I-,-,,t.--,I.�-��,I-I'4i,-1,(�,-,�1,-",,-���,,;--II-,.,�-,�I,�,,1,�-'1�-i:-"--�,,l-,"-,,,�`"--'�",,I,"--::',,.zI��,--I."--"F-,-�-,1�I,-I':--,--�,,,1-,�--1-"I�,,-��I,,,,,,.-I 5,�-�,�,:1-F,-1,"--""-,,,,�-",-I I,.I,4,,"';I1-4,I II,-,I;-I-,",",,;I--1,-��1 I,,,-,I,I!5�--,"I,'1I,-I--t,'-"�-,-1';.-II,-�1,I'I 1'-%l.-1-"--1-1 1F:1,;�',-,I".:-1�-",I,1,-�-',�I,:-1--,i��-71#I�,4-�,"t"f-,,9"1�-:%II,-I--�-,�-,l,,,Tr,',,I I-,,,-I eI1lF�,�---f-I�,'I-l-1,"I�--,-"I.--,-,-�t--�-,-�,",-I,�,:�I,_-,��,-I.,---.,,-.�-l�I,\�S':,lI,�-I-II:;,I--�1,--,I:11-,-kI 1-1IF--,'1"�,1I-,--4-,,"I,-"t-,,-,Z1,I.�..,I'--1,"."I�-,1��,,�'i�Il,I-t,-j-,�1I I�,-4.�1";-lI-_-I i-,,�I-I.,.,I,1,,F F��'!,I..1F-:--��----I,'I-,,''-.-�I.I-l-,-T!,�\,-.�----.,-I>---- x, v < A J t sY`f--- .9, �4�;i^` t,``,`i ,&c .{!v '','�j>\ _ ,i ', \'� \ 4 / _ -,?", C, ., [ .'\� .rye'.. ;Yt:a?' ,,\ I�' - �r!",s. ,� \< ' 7I�1�III1 Fi,�II-�--- < k, . a, ��3�,...i"'z. `6 ,r s'' '<r,.' #.c' _ }:Fa - \ r�'•' y /� \ \«-� ve" '"�xz - _ 1, \)\'' las'�%• a •,€« _ ` ,< „4..:x,.�. " :t •• \ .k r 111 .'1'. 'k _ f _ _ 2 "117I"II 77 11. fI N% k, .x .& , , x "< - a_ ' t r i _ .'x ...Z° .`' -,?y. ,k' ':-K<o .RR14^ 'x`: b� \' '..r _ tI • ^au.�... 'y♦ �t - - ,<i / ✓t,s',' w `u h 1' ' G., 3 a 'i _ T . ({ t -Y - > 3` 4.>= - £. .. `Y - t,#`.. �£ •s,, _{xs _ 'triz I ie II rr ..,k. 4` 6l. N_. _ _ __A'' -C _ 'J' ,1' Po ^ X �,/Q -7 \, « , ' n fi<•, r L' _ v.,..a I . .w ..g _ r ,f_ a. „' _a_ r5 _...,�..`-a•-. _ , p 'f a �.$ 60" 60 NU -A -,±... -4.. '- „P. >. "% _ 1 „Y. ., 'ti „ .. ,. _ cY" --x.,..�,-,-'rv<=.'�' S.. =W - t'h r b _. It, A. $,,.i`I t .. `& r^: .'» ,.- may`^^' .,. _ _ ^ .� - Y' _ ',L\P1', _ r,g3, ,14„' .,a ,. \ ;. .^ a %"Y'' �".,."'.. R4£,` r< B. "'k" _ - , _ . e' : , % . c a`-^ ., , . ; � Aso\' L CoPTER ,. . HE l ,.. _. ° ., ,_' \"' ' F \ F _ u I .. \' , q o , ' ,, < l=k'= <g>c dt _ - v aril - .N. .4,y <tI^:. ",: ,, _ Lt'v„a; >;sfv ,i€d'x<S r - t y. 2 o > 'g.' .:A s.-'rPT; ,j!i: ,.4'- p4 b, !✓g.<-'i1 - Pit �>Y1. > �,t < _ :.>,....a: 'S f 't"" `:e _ - [g " ' yY', Mgt_,!, F'ip�:7"l' `r' '1°' ''�.� ' &? "; I ar \� .,< i .:i :d/ ' .`I`s Fi>5 • - ..t..,AV - r, // -K' s I k,. z C' . .df< l '., :I��,',"�-:-I l�-,'z,I,�III--l I�,�"I`I,;�,��II-I�(�I,,��,�I�,,-I,,"I�1,�,I",I��1,1,,I�,;�,"..,IF,-I,,-I I,"-,��,;,-.F 1-,I,-,I",I",,FI,I�--,1�"-1�,�",1",�-l��,��I-�,,-,"I t,Ir.�.,xI I-t",,1I.-t-,,�,�--,�i"�I�,I,I-,1,,I III,!�\�-;I I,\,I j,-.II�-4",,1�".�.,1��,I,f',,-,t�II"�-�I1,,,1-�,.,I�--�""I,�lI`-"'��"I�,�l,-'�1-",-�,l I I1",,F"I�1-I 1--,-`I Ie,I�.,1,I",--�1It,-I-1"-/1'I�II1"�-1��--F1�I,�,"��,,1'I III�,II�,�,I1�,II'�"��1:""�:Il"PI,,,.�,I-,\,,,F�I,I,I,-,�1,"I�1,,-,"II,.'�''�-�-",�Q����1,,",,,�.�I>v�:,�-�,,I,l�,.I1,IZ'11I��1 I�1,,I�.I,1,.N-",,,,,l,�z,,r-,�`.1,A�,I-I�,,��'�I�l�-�-� d _ .4 J" r%,` u l, w�,fWF-a A q�,// /V .l> E 1, ,- l'` i 5` / ` `b J\< , X < tea, � � , - _ _ t� t _ - ♦_ .. , / ' I a j"", �, x - t . . �r ra` z ''v '. '. , : , . _ „ , _ - " #- �: J; `o f > . jj)) r a 4 ". __ �yyyg'�, Y N ,, .t.,t 'z _ j($jj-.+./w d, i li ^';f'7/' �Z" �. _ `S_ FF,-r w S� jfy y'� » T, , i-' _ "V e{'= <,ar,!(' K (�">\tn V(S Y / -2rn,,.A,)* \ ."' , y 1 r... «, 1 ya, `I ,W .,'. ") \\\ _ O `n. i <r+`` .x , d. N„ f \, L- /V+E" 5a i o- .,, E .. i 50 `\ 65 _ .rh` .t* ...=x.>_ >�` \ dpw y \y x " - ., _ - _ �A v, _ C d- ` " r � I '\ u, t♦ , e ._ .?. ,:L`a - Y"-'. rv. :....,. ..<- .y-�'[. ",er*,♦���-�,a....+'.... .arc..ar �. ., .l, , " aiY.r 'F, Y' �M1(' . . .�q,�<. ram.--.._, tr f' x. .,. .., „.>'."_.„ ,♦ -,i'. .a�<$ - .)"i - .. 'Y. x'' > \ /'. q 4. :S rti ' _ _ _ , ri { \ � ,J,s _ .i ..£ - _ `v f fi \ Y /u E - :4 y :5 , - is /'It r. - C- `dN _- .-„yam;;- s �. l r- r" n c, , z _ \ „ - b: Yr. c. - :,, Q " - E . ,r -' t -. /; @.. 4� `r :'< ,.mom. - r,., ,: .. - ,..`i< l •,n-� i`\ 48 ,4[e t.i 1 '`% < .r�' ... -. r , / ,'; x' . x .. r ,. .,.c,., -` - •i"„E` Lti -, / i� / ,\ `Y ; x _ ra ;, \\ . f t 5. l ` - F d" �y '�,' ,,a, ,f}� :\ .; j /`- d. - 7,� (i(t of ? ,>Ap .. .,%^a>wE:`a, -^ - .i' , 1* 9, Y� ,„ \: w't,'yy _, kY.g' ../ .>. . .-. ,,. � � .. /., ova-' T' SC , ,S" :S ,n I r x . y�'p, Y .r _ - - ,r3', -x i'Y P - 'ti c/r 5� y FiC /-,2 w' i,a `L t1, -\ -'.` " nBr.'_ _ 2 )''. .N \\ '-\ s: ,..,. ti,,.. _ ., ,r,z, " 1. ' 'a fi Ty ,.,. . ,: rs",.m- , 2;„' -, d- Sr ''"NY 65 t 1 .. ' E< J \ _Aa r ,> ♦ x n _:`. , . ,- - '=i...,i „ :`„ ,L,a �\ Jdzx zf . „a N. < 2 - 5 ., ..,. - k < , 65 ,.: e p �.: s._ \ 4. .N'; - ";# ti. "t,' \ '„<, ,_ I,-..; !}$ of , "rz ,. 0 i/ 9y V i w<: qp q{ 4 h- /, \y" , - i ,yx ,,t; .;P d .t�. .s _ ` hT,= .sY/,L-�y . , r<_ ,� .Y s, ` Kro k r f ^S'T SO �l",F.,I—^jI--l,-I1-�l1-I-�e1�,�l-,-;:-F�1-,-'---,�/,-1,--��-I I_11',--,1,-I,,,�11,-,I�--�'--�,-,-,',�1-F�,-,1II�'.I I,�-,-F- 1I-�I'5 1.,l�,6,-I:.:-��,;",I 1/�tr,���:�,�"I",---,-,,I,--'".I1.N-1�---;)I,�;I.,-I,I,t--.�-�""-,�, i.1 FI;--I�,�--',--;-I:l,,�I o I--�-I�,,-1-t'I.,I,1I,,,-�--f II,fI I:I,,�:.,,,- ../`$ ✓3 ;. •[, 9 $mom_ ?'., $,5• %^ ., -i.. ,f, `xA :, ✓`=r _ - j,,; /t9tl,>~,tT'�TA✓' _. @ `�' # `<' `,<aa°:f , 1., ti 'YT.'_ ." `{\r ' ,j -'�.i .w^ _i _ - itDES \-<` ``xy", /, nrz�.- v z , b' i 4 _ '('^j i4i .<.WFNF,:'° - 4=' f k„' 65 }; * rya _ " �_ ,/ ,i/ w ._ *'./ ate, _ �., `1 _ a�, ` g w',,4 : 1 as... - M1~ S ,:,;.< -:�. dJ: 'E1 I `\ / `9d' rv. \'<€�' :-✓%5 " :� +\<,: r •1r,. � { ,,I - ?"% ' ) 1' - \- ,l d"-=' "r r 'o ' ' _ '#� 3 a>,� 'k1'a+ q i ._, ;j ¢ _ _ 70 - ,,� /!+ _ 65 ', & F •.d �'JH ^, "fix K'a rr�� W y { jj 7 '....,ra \'Y h>,t J iNo, „dam' _" / k,', S 5 ♦ f$'. Q"` 65'\' ..::heel-m _ .-,,,J :. •Tv - k SY N ♦- �e g' J. p f- M 4 O P >. u, , Y 4 _ eY ' � - 4 ' i 1 rr .t Y,.' ..m. ., .. 0 _ \ > ,. .h < .- _. , ( n a „ / -..>„ : r< y. t"'� �.. .<W.i Y Y. / c x h`� Q . <. `\ _ _ - ! .� s mot. � Y b' .,. .. .I>•P , , 4 • ' .- . . .. a .Q , ,� <_ .4 ''`\ - .: G . .Aa,. .5, .f' ..1v rV ,•ffi.. .. A^"",..Y : ._ , , I\ ,,/ l .�.. .._ ,5 , a t e 'V i >t ,. , C �1 , ,n. ®}�,, "�; >-T J' ¢t•.,- YJ r -, ,< a _. _ ., ./ . . .. ,r ,. ..2� '. 9 w , ,r'ai ,. ,., Y =„i ., a ,W .0 />' i0 ` ,"t''i' - , ..j,£ : g ti ♦ .., ._ 5� 5 i� a �t v -- } -i rtEWF 50 -x '�. �..s..�: `,_^, _'�-' .II° .<'<' \,.,,.,t ,k''..,f., :;�'' - ..,«h.r { "=y�y. �\v\ \ S'lfo,?F ' _ _ 1 i� _% t .. _ __ 'p,. ,A t`:� '', `) F#" a z ^"ae;-'^.". ``/b z '•i 54+5 /xsa/ - v.: ...r._. ,»+^"" _, ^.�.50< _ 70 ..l', S L r .r ?• ,-f., 1' 'i�,'`` :3' ',7 _ - .r/, :o' - _ - ,..,. , .. /,,r// 3t - •`ilk _ _ p h K Rsl. r q. 'y`r .•�•` 1 f&�i ,G 3i rl` �. i�:; e ,yam �%. Lr: 0 4 o T.., i b �A} % i \ a , e , _ _ 5 i s3,SAIVR.4' £ . q ry qp _ i4j _ p',c,•';1f - t1 n �: A '/ ''s : is R, N N- - ^k >-r^- �'(%)':: H>. . V <;+. _ _ G .. --.. .r. v< b' .. r � 4'l L) . ram - _Y<!, )�'2 'I '3 ,'Pp, >° A /` .1i5 `bl g°: `.•�,•?'' �.Fz '4y��.-,-:j , . <..„-„ 70 -x..x "*, .. <.� .__-.,'.,- .., r at s"'E, `� ,$,r� . .i, �.�.' z''" .k- <as... r - F:a, sy . ¢ - ... <_ r_ • �' '. ' - , ,.^r, ^._ ,- ?2 , .<•�" �'�.... t. . '�. �'. '. , .�a',.. �' z - x 'fl. i;:r' . �'a.i'� �,;i^. �._. -:p w� F• ;sue,` `gd',:. , - ,' - . -d>a3 a--'i' 8' S>.-• R� U- \.r oil"�\\, ./Y a' - _ q3. <ae :. , _ a, •6S,^ �\< fir.<d,. ,�^ ,d f.c�_. _ o> �.y: $,.ry<. Ki\ x _a ... '- Y- >' ,,-", v. „�2 ,,. ^- <✓ `:. - , x°`<` S.' f¢ £. alp, ;✓ _ i� �` `i�„ < _ _ ._ _ ,:. 46'., ,.. J" ,.f .+,f „h, ♦ s d, 1,. -f,T ., , c_@n ^� "�\ < f, `fir S - r.,.+.I z - a,., =a..,_. ,_.> _ CYF a tl , /`` .§s lx<.' .✓,•" q^ \ ,=z. ^. aT. - _^_ - x ` _ ..._,,. #m n 'S^ ,dd,, , "d\`•. -.-'".? ", C? 0' \ < r rC: // _�g,➢L _ C 3`',- 1�R \ { %j}~ \ ktkt'F' - y- `Y,&„.. _ "--c2 (-. Y : "°^ .i..- `6, ,` £'^.+w r-314 �T.x 'II. O \ ,'1 '�, - ::$' 1- :, c -,__ . . J:-•:_.J ,.�. _ ny; ,•'. 'f •♦was -/ '�_ _.'Y a 'S. F 1 .++L R . .c.. \" �g ;x c-i 1 ` - \ a, Y l 6 tl, _ F \ Uwe+ _ .1 m�~ _ v',<_ p a l ' - y _. T m t ♦ ` , , \ f 9' - \ ., r. C ° " -, ., ""K-', aSwF r s e ':. ` .. - , `,. <:,4. "'.tY, .. 3. ' esr°--- �� - ,;' m «sz. �x a. .fo x , ,,,./,� ,-Y r, <'G3� , .},\ >Po §" ,K,<-•w fep$A y ' 'Yt i \."\ e , „ " , w <o- „ yr , , J. , ,, t�<,,, . .. q: f :\\� I.' . .., „ .R:'. ) v .n , ,, :- ^� f,_ i Y•"'^w. "°"e+• F ['6'/1 "��"Wi�gg .� �=]P.?J' < _ - ,�„ sg `2�,. v Y w f%c,:✓ 111 : _ �'^' LGV,, ;- '7 L' }yam - -6,- _ - _ -- z�a- '['' - _ \ A \R t _ Y • < - - . 'r ,.vrr?<°e^' ter-': c^�, }a_£ A,-: , , _ - TDURS O� CONSTAN:f CN�E'L �_ �.. a PALL - /9720 m. "I" r- }, t �r? A� Cfl1SiY GALIDFCd9A v o : .< . ARTERIAL , AUTOMOTIVE AND MILmARY HELICOPTER Z ¢ ✓ C _ - Y .wst' - v F:7' >" L`Pfv h4�Nria 7.ii€QS-`S .EN" - - - ^ u Ii a� w_ ,` Figure 4 1 s, _ - - i- f' _ �,�ry k fa n 7 - = 77i , r r fj ;'` t c3 60 1 70-1 GS 65 60 - a6 i� o ^ o ( r. Fc f 6o eS p- 1.5 co F , €a 1 1_ f .. ffp W 7Q 65- - _ 's a Fff••^^"""" g /F _ 8 '1 : j - - - } I a I-I cs„ "\ 70 , 65 V l\ ~ ✓ V V yF��aa°(T�(f( � ) _ _ i , - r , b i O �• � �:z�" •3 N + i �.- tF�;"�">"" r,u+•�ti a t^" - -� � c _� 'r � - rl �� � �� 0 - ' 's••' Gs 60 + so - s tj VG- - "��- - _i, _ ,. � �`-> �.. it / - - A I ,3 _ ! _- �^F _f DYI;'� 1.+11•�bi✓� .-•.ate _ � -�'{ ..- � r,��_. � .,. � - 1 i w^ �y3\ 4r//'�^� }j �`n d ' �-�•�'���;s�� . . `. t _ i _ - �" � ��Y �l3 � �+' 11 >., I T'% ' " ��` � >` t\\ `�'\ ' - �. +' .•+,= _ _ fR GQr>i �'' !* _ e :� sip �s� s so - _ "2�1 ro ro ' S1 - _ �' ♦ _ }k" �� .. � �.\' � -1 f - � � _ _ s<°' __ 6 a Coo - - GO 60 44 • . � z o t % 1 � r< N / r t -)� � i ! � �... :tip �: - x-s.' a :'t', A, o, "�< ' . _ •� ✓j ` SS o C � ` _ � � ~ ' _ j(j!/J'jj _J ad �~ • � � � Y\ � `I',_< _ ( v h Ji :'Y � < - E •.t �, - rF O- '` - I-- 55 � � $O �-� ("� ,�'-� � -� -t 60 -�s -,ea x � ���". 3 Pon -. - - =-,.. � + :":--- - � :__' ,' .. .. _ - � 1 - ':`�'--�`t0 :✓pa 55`� .;;>r,q, . _ - -�� � - fir.• 1 ' � - _ a- 3 '� ro5 ^3'c•J:>,c,r � � !♦�_ t/ �� °f �_ ,,� r� �"�r _ s t `p fy�_ "'.:a,,r'<"' _ _ '/.� tt - � r1�.�_/.,"/�f� � 1 W _ <,t•• t= � ,. �,.�� y i - r�-' `f' 65' �—_ 6S J )'t'L.£ _ c� f ,� - 4 ��kf�"�t♦•e•' 1 R r. V �f $g 4 Y x 0 4- 'F af t " $ wi �:,a.,:;•.. 6 .J f � _ .< .1-•--"_.' a-r.. d:At^ _ram"" '3 ' b _ 1- _ w=w - .. �., t. .:�'�., ei 7 - ar, � _ ''ry. ,f' ' _ -.ate' �l .. - � d. `c� _ '` '<\ __ ;c•' - > 6� ax t •- 6 5 3 i.%�<:Sy.,i '.3:x va�Ru'�+ �-p'Z _ _ n � ' �� LL Go - s- i - `fb �y -c.M _ _ - _ to �.. /, � {'•�:} xZ _ '/.- a`i, `` a. e A :lam '1T�t \ , /, '"�`•C` d' \X'_✓' 1 \ _ _ -'d•,�••` , r - - a > (r4 _ ,n \ i e ` i �y , ' s - �/ t.�--'�,. .mow+ ..o - -[7'v �'�•\ _. \. 1 .. - CITY fit-.2 NE"$ PO tiI 0E.s'^'C : - 1 J .., CONTDURS OF CO N5 TANT CIVEL G C .,j:',"a, CALi�i°ir$'itV.l`t _ - - z FUTJ9,E FREEWAY AND ARTEWAL AUTOMOTIVE IV015E PRELIMINARI DO NOT R MOv@ t WVLE AAB MMRIES r o o WYLE RESEARCH ' El Segundo, California 0 R 1 WYLE LABORATORIES b 0111 C ✓U411 <rF Eacy . , P � ' WYLE RESEARCH Q REPORT WC R 74-2 ' ANALYSIS OF HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE IN NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA O 1 1 ' BY Wyle Research ' El Segundo, California For Q ' City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California June 1974 ill ' WYLE LABORATORIES L PR E L ""3NARY ' TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ' SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . 1 ' 1.0 INTRODUCTION . 4 2.0 MEASUREMENTS OF PRESENT DAY HIGHWAY NOISE IN ' NEWPORT BEACH . 5 2. 1 Some Typical Traffic Noise Levels in the City — ' Measured and Calculated . 7 2.2 Propagation of Traffic Noise into the Community . 11 ' 3.0 NOISE ENVIRONMENT COMPARISONS AND APPLICATION OF NOISE CRITERIA TO NEWPORT BEACH . . . 14 ' 3. 1 Levels Found in Other Parts of the United States 14 3.2 Levels Causing Community Response . 17 3.3 Levels Causing Speech Interference . . 21 ' 4.0 FUTURE SOUND PRESSURE LEVELS IN NEWPORT BEACH . 23 4.1 Projection Criteria. . • . . 23 ' 4.2 Discussion of Noise Contours 25 ' 5.0 HELICOPTER NOISE IN NEWPORT BEACH . . 28 5.1 Police Helicopters . . 28 ' 5.2 Military Helicopters . 30 6.0 ABATEMENT OF NOISE . 33 REFERENCES . 35 t APPENDIX I —A SHORT PRIMER ON NOISE AND COMMUNITY NOISE SCALE I-1 WYLE LABORATORIES 1 PRELIMINARY ' LIST OF TABLES Number Page 2-1 One Hour Noise Measurements at Curbside 13 ' 3-1 Measured Community Noise Equivalent Levels in the City 16 Newport Beach 1 3-2 Corrections to be Added to the Measured Community Noise 19 Equivalent Level (CNEL) to Obtain Normalized CNEL 3-3 Two Examples of Calculation of Normalized Community 20 Noise Equivalent Level and Prediction of Corresponding ' Community Response 5-1 Noise Levels for Operation of Police Helicopter 28 5-2 Operating Parameters for Helicopters Over Newport Beach 31 1 1 1 ' iii WYLE LABORATORIES 1 NEL11 'W11NAR 1 LIST OF FIGURES Number Page III 1 2-1 Contours of Constant CNEL - Fall 1972 - Arterial 6 Automotive and Military Helicopters 1 2-2 Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels - Pacific Coast 8 Highway at Dover Drive 1 2-3 Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels - Newport 8 1 Boulevard at Hospital Road 2-4 Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels - Pacific Coast 8 1 Highway at Bayside Drive 2-5 Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels - Jamboree Road 9 at Ford Road 1 2-6 Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels - Irvine Avenue 9 1 at Francisco Drive 2-7 Computed Curbside Hourly Noise Levels Based on 9 1 Highway Traffic Data (Reference 5) - Balboa Boulevard at Pacific Coast Highway 1 2-8 Computer Curbside Hourly Noise Levels Based on Highway 10 Traffic Data (Reference 5) - Newport Boulevard at 30th Street 1 2-9 Computed Curbside Hourly Noise Levels Based on Highway 10 Traffic Data (Reference 5) - Balboa Boulevard at Adams 1 2-10 Computed Curbside Hourly Noise Levels Based on Highway 10 Traffic Data (Reference 5) - Newport Boulevard at Arches 1 Bridge 2-11 Measured Attenuation of Simulated Highway Traffic 12 1 Noise with Distance in Open Generally Flat Areas (Several Sites Located Throughout Newport Beach). 1 3-1 Comparison of HNL Values in Newport Beach with Corresponding 15 Values Measured in Several Areas Throughout the United States (Reference 3) 1 1 iv I WYLE LABORATORIES 1 PRELIIJINAR7 LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) Number Page 3-2 Community Reaction to Intrusive Noises of Many Types as a 18 ' Function of the Normalized Community Noise Equivalent Level ' 3-3 Speech Interference Levels and Talker-to-Listener Separation 22 Distance for Various Degrees of Vocal Effort (Reference 4) ' 4-1 Contours of Constant CNEL - Future Freeway and Arterial 24 Automotive Noise ' 4-2 Predicted Decay of Sound from Roadways Having Various Average 26 Daily Traffic Counts at 60 mph I t ' v WYLE LABORATORIES 1 . PRELli'"AINARY SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1 1 . Present California Administrative Code requires that an interior noise level with 1 windows closed, attributable to outside sources not exceed an annual CNEL of 45 dB. Further, proposed residential buildings located within CNEL contours of ' 60 dB must show by acoustical analysis that this requirement will be satisfied. Since a typical structure transmission loss of about 20 dB is reasonably character- istic of California residential construction houses located outside the 60 d6 CNEL contour (where the CNEL is less than 60 dB) should thus have a nominal 1 safety margin of 5 dB. Residential locations significantly removed from major arterials in Newport Beach are generally quite satisfactory in this regard with 1 only a moderate degree of helicopter noise intrusion. The attached maps demon- strate the intrusion of the 60 dB CNEL contour into the community in the vicinity of any given arterial. An average penetration range of 200 to 500 feet is 1 characteristic. 1 In general this range will not change significantly in the future although noise penetration from a larger proportion of the arterials will then fall in the upper ipart of this range. An interesting special future case will be the projection of 60 dB CNEL contour 900 feet into the community from the Corona Del Mar 1 Freeway especially in the vicinity of the Bay View Intermediate School. 1 2. On a comparative basis relative to a range of hourly noise levels characteristic of other urban residential areas in the United States, Newport Beach could be 1 considered as quite average or representative. If a worst case comparison is made based on the hourly noise levels near the main arterials of Newport Beach 1 in contrast to values obtained near major arterials nationally, Newport Beach is significantly lower. 1 3. Field experience appears to indicate that acoustic shielding of the first row of 1 houses, as well as cumulative distance, results in a satisfactory noise climate around most major arterials beyond the first row of houses. 1 1 WYLE LABORATORIES PtEL1NP, 1, NAR\ ' 4. Noise intrusion from military helicopters may cause some annoyance and resultant complaints when resident gore located within 2400 feet of the flight path. How- , ever, the fact that there are no evening and night military flights significantly reduces the impact. Police helicopters operate until 2:00 a.m. and complaints have been received. The Police Department records indicate that complaints greatly decreased in ' 1972 from the level of 1971 and further decreased in 1973, such that record keeping was then discontinued, r ' --.. ' 5. Highway traffic can be expected to rre�maiinpa major source of noise pollution in Newport Beach oog." cons ideration'�rmaFil be given to the following abatement ' measures: a. Enactment of a focal use type vehicular noise ordinance patterned after California State law and its local enforcement to supplement the state program. New vehicle performance is presently adequately controlled by ' State law. However, experience indicates that during the summer especially, Newport Beach experiences a signficant influx of inadequately muffled auto- mobiles (such as "dune-buggies"). A local use law would aid in the abatement ' of this nuisance. b. Encouragement of the use of depressed highways or barriers especially in the ' vicinity of potential problem areas with new construction, for example, near Bay View Intermediate School on the proposed Corona Del Mar Freeway. ' c. Promotion of enforcement of the California Administrative Code demanding assurance of adequate acoustical attenuation provisions (basic structure ' transmission loss, use of special topology, adequate forced ventilation and air conditioning to permit constant window closure, etc.) for a]liresidential ' construction proposed within any 60 dB CNEL contour so that an interior con- dition of 45 dB CNEL will be assured. kklta CtTf sF{uj�z C,0"11teiz- ' Lyt'[LtJD1NCr 1r%4WM Av=.&JST1cA' Ac'I'ftNJv0M0W l�i t/IR.L3F z1 X3 ^rr� C-CK4d4af_ t SroeanPe�- �tiu7 Svc-TIaN� it+RAVGti ..ckx'rtwor� 2 WYLE LABORATORIES P ELIK ,NARY 6. Th. ht industry in Newport Beach should ecome a problem. However, ' proper zoning regu a ' n 'ncluding pr ision for adequate buffer zones should be applied and enforced in the ' I areas between Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard a/lo� Campus Drive. Esp cull for industrial develop- ' ment in the Jambo�csRoad area adequate noise control assured for the residences of the/Back Bay area and the Corona Del Mar High School. V� 1 t 1 ' 3 WYLE LABORATORIES fiii' R P R E U . Y ± 1 .0 INTRODUCTION With the passage of Senate Bill No. 691, Chapter 775, the State Government Code was amended to require that a noise element be included in local general plans. This noise element was to quantify, in numerical terms, noise levels associated with all existing and proposed major transportation elements. This act specifies that con- tours be constructed to show noise levels being generated by these transportation ' elements and also to show how this noise is propagated into the community. It was further specified that the contours be quantified to reflect the time duration of the -' noises being measured as well as the magnitude of the noises. A survey has been conducted to determine the actual noise levels and corre- sponding time durations that exist in the City of Newport Beach. A composite noise scale, called the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), has been used to report the levels measured at various locations within the community. This document reviews some of the literature to develop criteria against which these measurements may be evaluated to place them in their proper perspective. Some of the basic con- cepts of acoustics are presented in an Appendix in a way designed to aid the average citizen in understanding noise in a community. Current traffic studies of the arterials in Newport Beach have been utilized to show the present and future expected noise levels along these arterials. These have shown that potentially annoying ground vehicle noises do exist within 50 to ■ 100 feet of the arterials. Soundnpropagating further into the community are usually rendered inaudible by typical noises inside most homes. Overpowered and under- muffled vehicles provide an inevitable exception to this desirable condition. Another major noise source is commerical jet aircraft operating from Orange 1 County Airport. This topic is covered in a previous report (Wilsey and Ham, Project Consultant, "Orange County Airport Impact Study, April 1970). ' � 4 WYLE LABORATORIES Wgf�,JARY PRI HELICOPTER r� Film f14- 60 dB -� 1 � � � i so = HELICOPTER �J1 �S It .• �� 4\�`J'�� �� � � �� � �Q �`�F � � �VV- � `I�C�S ���� +•' yad`� ����0 j �n � \ l i fr� 'rCsj,Fc:e `f'"^2� _ —� 551 �r � °4 I'�4.ht tS lli.l�� �s ti�4{Si%` ••ss \- 6 'vd`'�� \�� 1 w.w. I �e� � Q000c'�®y9 wh!• .�{ r�lr d'\i>__ --= ,r 't�\� �� � � 1�� `�— _ Sl��cs �lal' � ' •'.� ij �.e� `• , 'mac. O �� � nz w 1 � $n 2. a "a� - •-�-,,,r�,•�o°av°` ���r'�'Y\� „1� ` '>''! �(e���3 i3L �' Gt'i5' ,<.�J-'\\ <.- z \ s�ro+¢ ,r..._l 'ICY ® .o•f nn'� d "` dr.n'1 'I+ a �6es` - ' ' a � " 1•i� ti t t._NN. L~v� t rx .• � a5+�7;'1Ji.t�Li ' /^Q�1 - _ _ \�,..w�s�'�7FC�j,�� ;irj^t�i1-i 11,1 7i��-. I; •("'iq d s�Y___ - __ o A ^"=C'�as'� -^�'"'la ^,y.,v;AL_ hf� I �{ t #-{,'f` � ii _� ��" '•'�+ , .�1'zm-�c,'�e1{'t'r:Sj'�'✓��ii� -3§� _ L�l /ate-t � i 1��, s +c _ >•'( " __'—.___�-- ��'1�` tag.g,- _ _ -` '��_x�_.L78t_7„ - o �,<' �'=��"`c ^^���.':i, I `I'�i�J..e" iWd_C.:Y, _•�'_ ,{JiJ�' cr - � f °�; '�;� � _��--'i_, /q�" �' �1, - '`�3 7 � -"--- -��- - ;•- •r�:<>+' `r,�rl,vy,si: - - - ` �a { C�i�,l1�^ � - �"—^'�£`�.�-.�6.`.;o,X �^' _ �..j ...'�, i / {:i�ii :�'-i.ii'.r ii�'_1•_`�z!` \i'>J '�y[.g�,�ee`�. _.:p> \ ... "��� =-- r _y-4-^�_ _ ___ l � _ '� + - - - _ _ __- \ Fi CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH jam 2-1 CONTOUR5 OF CONSTZ NT CNEL ss f /f�7-\k ,I V C, } C F" oaM,c c:mt. tv!coaua AMKIAL AUTOMOTIVE AND MILITARY NEUCoaTEMS 6 1 • 1 1 PRELIMINARY 2.0 MEASUREMENTS OF PRESENT DAY HIGHWAY NOISE IN NEWPORT BEACH To comply with the standards and guidelines contained in Senate Bill 691 (California Government Code 65302), measurements have been made of the sound 1 pressure levels found at curbside at several locations within the City of Newport Beach. 1 Noise from highway vehicles can be specified in several ways: 1 • The maximum noise level during passby of a single vehicle • The time-integrated noise level during such a passby known as Single 1 Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL) • The average (on an energy basis) noise level over an hour known as the 1 Hourly Noise Level (HNL) 1 • The composite 24-hour measure of noise known as the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) 1 The first two measures are useful when considering general annoyance to dis- turbing single intruding sounds. The lost measure, which utilizes the third (HNL) 1 measure, is more often used for evaluating long-term response of a community to intruding noises. All of these measures of noise will be utilized, where appropriate, 1 in this report. A more detailed definition of community noise scales is given in Appendix A. 1 The current noise levels existing along the highways of Newport Beach have 1 been reported in Reference 1 and are briefly reviewed here. Figure 2-1 is a map showing contours of constant CNEL derived from measurements of HNL during the 1 Fall of 1972. The conversion to CNEL from HNL has been accomplished through the use of traffic distributions measured during the Summer of 19721 and older traffic 1 studies completed in 1968 5 The new map is quite similar to Figure 1 of Reference 1, since the conversion between HNL and CNEL amounted to 0 to 2 dB, the difference 1 depending on the relative levels between nighttime and daytime levels. Where the nighttime levels were 10 dB or so lower than the daytime levels (Irvine and Francisco, i 1 5 WYLE LABORATORIES 1 ' P ELIMINARY * for example), the CNEL is approximately equal to the daytime HNL. Where nighttime levels are high (Pacific Coast Highway and Dover), the CNEL is approximately 2 dB tabove the daytime HNL. Examination of the map will show that CNEL values above 60 decibels may be ' found at most locations within one block of any of the main arterials. ' The Pacific Coast Highway exposes large numbers of residences in the Corona Del Mar and Irvine Terrace areas to relatively high traffic noise. All of this area is also between the 55 and 60 dB range for the military helicopters from El Toro U.S. Marine Corps Air Station. Contours from the two noise sources (highway and helicopter) ' are separated on the map, but it must be realized that these contours actually contribute to each other. Thus, at the corner of Pacific View Drive and MacArthur Boulevard, ' the automotive 55 dB contour intersects the helicopter 60 dB contour. These levels add together to produce an actual level of 61 dB CNEL. (Noise levels add on a logarith- mic basis as explained in Appendix I.) Two equal noise levels, added together, add to a level 3 dB above either one alone. This condition occurs where both levels are ' identical such as at Morning Canyon Drive where two 60 dB CNEL contours intersect. 2.1 Some Typical Traffic Noise Levels in the City—Measured and Calculated Figures 2-2 through 2-6 illustrate the Hourly Noise Levels (HNL) at various t locations within the City during a single 24-hour period during the Summer of 1972. Figures 2-7-through 2-10 show calculated traffic noise levels from traffic measurements ' made during 19685 The levels reported in Figures 2-2 through 2-6 represent the sound pressures found at the curb of the streets listed on the figures. Again, busy areas such as Pacific Coast Highway at Dover Drive and Newport Boulevard (Figures 2-2 and 2-3) show constant levels throughout the 24-hour day with less than a 10 dB total variation. Figure 2-4 shows some variation with traffic decreases between 1:00 and 6:00 a.m., but even here there is only 13 dB variation between the low and high points during the day. Greater variation is seen at Jamboree and Ford Roads and Irvine and Francisco .1 7 WYLE LABORATORIES 90 g ' CNEL = 77dB y 80 ' 70 60 50 ' E Figure 2-2. Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels — Pacific Coast Highway at _Z Dover Drive ' n 90 W CNEL = 81.5dB ' c 80 � 70 H N a 60 c N °ar 50 s Figure 2-3. Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels — Newport Boulevard at Hospital Road a 90 ' CNEL = 78 dB ' 80 ' 70 ' 60 t 50 24 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 ' Time of Day in Hours Figure 2-4. Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels— Pacific Coast Highway at Bayside Drive 8 90 CNEL = 7 d6 80 ' 70 1 60 50 ' NE ZFigure 2-5. Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels —Jamboree Road at Ford Road ZL ' 4 90 N ' CO CNEL = 76dB 80 w 70 1 � 60 c 1 50 s Figure 2-6. Measured Curbside Hourly Noise Levels — Irvine Avenue at Francisco Drive a 90 CNEL = 69 dB —Winter 73,5 dB — SIIIummer ----- 80 -Hil fill 70 -------------- 60 ' 5024 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Time of Day in Hours Figure 2-7, Computed Curbside Hourly Noise Levels Based on Highway Traffic Data (Reference 5)— Balboa Boulevard at Pacific Coast Highway 9 :. ■■■■■■■■■■Obi■ ; ■■■■■■■ : ,, flRI Nslam LIF is Us EMNON Rio M■■■■■Il■MEMO■■■■moil , ■■■■■■■ME■■■■M■■■■■■■■■■ :. - . . . .. :. -7. . . IRMIM MENNEN MONSOON MENNEN ■■■■■■■00■pl . ■•0M Poll 1/Ill Mo..®M� ���■E�►��■MMOMM■EOM■EEC■■ ' ■■■■■■ ■■■OEM■■ ■■■■E■ ■m■■E■■O :■■■■■■■■mm_■m■■■■������� i■■Ei■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ PIELIMINARY * ' (Figures 2-5 and 2-6). These locations become quieter at night and only an occasional vehicle will pass by during the early morning hours. Variations above 15 or 16 dB are ' common on these streets. Figures 2-7 through 2-10, showing calculated noise levels derived from traffic data, indicate similar results. These latter figures contain noise ' levels calculated from both summer and winter traffic. They graphically illustrate the tendency for lower traffic levels and hence less noise at night in the winter. This is ' particularly obvious at Balboa Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway, as reported in Figure 2-7. 2.2 Propagation of Traffic Noise into the Community All the levels reported in Figures 2-2 through 2-10 were measured or calculated at curbside. Where there are no barriers to the sound fields, such as store fronts, walls, hills, or other solid partitions, the sound levels may be expected to attenuate by approxi- mately 4 to 6 dB in the first 50 feet of distance. (This is commonly known as spreading loss.) The existence of barriers may reduce the nearby levels, by an additional 10 to 15 dB. At distances beyond 200 feet, the effects of such barriers are small. However, the normal spreading losses at 200 feet will generally reduce the traffic noise to less than 60 dB, thus, normally removing any cause for concern. Other effects, such as temperature inversions and winds, will tend to cause fluctuations in the noise levels. Measurements were made to determine the decay of sound as it propagated into City residential areas from the arterials. Most of these measurements were conducted with an artificial noise generator which simulated the frequency content of traffic noise from a single simulated vehicle rather than through measurement of the actual traffic noise. This allowed measurement of the sound signal at much greater distances than would have been possible using the traffic noise alone. Figure 2-11 illustrates the sound attenuation characteristics of the simulated traffic noise at site where no obstacles were present. When shallow hills existed between the source and receiver, ' considerably more attenuation was measured. Buildings and other sharp obstacles in the source-receiver path effectively reduce annoyance from noises generated at curbside. 11 WYLE LABORATORIES +20 +10 8 8 n y a, 04 Q i U \ ' N C -10 Q d �cwsa N H O v °L -20 .t . D +� _- 0 cfh D a N _ Q a ❑ -30 ❑ g e ° ❑ W -40 $ D r 0 R o -50 1 10 100 7000 a Distance from Source in Feet i 0 Figure 2-11. Measured Attenuation of Simulated Highway Traffic Noise with Distance in Open Generally Flat Areas (Several Sites Located Throughout Newport Beach). Each Point Symbol Corresponds yto a Separate Measurement Site. Delineated Region is to be Used for Design Purposes. P ELIMINA RY One hour recordings were made at several locations and times of day in November and December of 1972. These wintertime, curbside results are reported ' in Table 2-1. Table 2-1 ' One Hour Noise Measurements at Curbside ' Time HNL Location Date 24 Hour Decibels Remarks ' Pacific Coast Highway 11/22/72 0800 74 2 percent grade and Marigold Pacific Coast Highway 11/22/72 1030 76.8 Level ' and Patolita Pacific Coast Highway 11/17/72 1700 73.6 Level ' and Bayside Pacific Coast Highway 11/17/72 1110 76.2 3.5 percent climb and Dover ' Pacific Coast Highway 11/17/72 1430 73.3 Level and Lugonia ' Balboa and 14th Street 12/1/72 1415 70.4 Level Balboa and 38th Street 11/22/72 0930 72.4 Near playground ' Newport Boulevard 11/21/72 1200 79.8 Start on 4% grade and Hospital Road Heavy traffic ' Irvine and Francisco 11/20/72 1500 73.7 Level — in town Jamboree and San 11/21/72 0830 73.2 100 feet from traffic ' Joaquin Hills Dover and 16th Street 11/20/72 1330 69.6 Level — low speed ' Mac Arthur and Port 12/1/72 1600 78.2 Top of grade —high Westbourne speed 1 1 1 ' 13 WYLE LABORATORIES 1 • ELIMI ►,1 1 3.0 NOISE ENVIRONMENT COMPARISONS AND APPLICATION OF NOISE CRITERIA TO NEWPORT BEACH 1 A measure of the noise found at a given location takes on meaning only when it can be related to some criteria for acceptable levels or to noise data from other 1 locations as a basis for comparison. Different noise criteria are recognized for the following purposes: maximum 1 noise levels safe for human hearing —damage prevention; maximum noise levels to avoid interference with speech communication and sleep; and the varying degree of 1 community response to an integrated 24-hour measure of noise exposure (i.e., CNEL). 1 The concern here is only with the last two criteria, since there is no evidence that outdoor noise exposure in any residential area in Newport Beach approaches 1 levels potentially damaging to hearing. 1 3.1 Levels Found in Other Parts of the United States Hourly Noise Level (HNL) measurements4n the City of Newport Beach are 1 plotted as cross-hatched areas in Figure 3-1, where they are compared with shaded areas representing the approximate range of Hourly Noise Levels over a 24-hour 1 period found at several locations in the United States as reported in Reference 3. The general noise levels from Reference 3 are restricted to normal public places so that 1 extremely noisy environments have been left out. The area labeled "arterials" includes HNLs measured over a range from a point 100 feet from the San Diego Free- way to busy through-streets in downtown Los Angeles and New York City. The area labeled "urban residential " is an envelope of the Hourly Noise Levels found in a wide 1 range of typical urban residential areas. The rural area includes noise levels for close-ended streets in small towns, as 1 well as actual farm land during a time when agricultural machinery is not operating. The bottom limit of the rural area was measured in a wilderness area away from almost 1 all man-made noise other than occasional overflights of planes. The extremely low 1 noise levels in this wilderness area were heavily affected by the noises of nature. Iil 1 14 WYLE LABORATORIES 1 ELIMINAily 1 1 90 i ""'Near Main Arterials U.S. 1 70 Near Arterials (New ort Be h 1 :: N E N 60 �esa Residential (Newport Beach) 50 i v d a ' 1 0 40 0 Z 1 -o °�' 30 1 3 4 20 1 1 10 AM PM 1 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 1 Time of Day Figure 3-1. Comparison of HNL Values in Newport Beach with 1 Corresponding Values Measured in Several Areas Throughout the United States (Reference 3) i 1 1 15 PRETIMINA' i Y The Hourly Noise Levels observed in eight locations, in each case covering a 24-hour period, in Newport Beach are superimposed upon this figure. The locations near arterials in Newport Beach are seen as the cross-hatched area falling between the two upper areas of the figure. This demonstrates that the noise levels near busy arterials in Newport Beach are substantially lower than those in large cities. The hatched areas representing the residential areas of the City fall directly in the full range of residential ' areas for other parts of the United States and are, thus, no better or worse. None of the areas in Newport Beach are as quiet as the rural areas. ' These eight locations in Newport Beach at which the data was taken which formed the basis for the comparisons made in Figure 3-1, are listed in Table 3-1, ' together with their daily CNEL levels. The CNEL levels for the arterials have been corrected from the levels actually measured near the curb to correspond to a uniform tdistance of 50 feet from the curb. Table 3-1 Measured Community Noise Equivalent Levels in the City of Newport Beach ' CNEL Location Date Measured Decibels ' Near Arterials ' Corner of Jamboree Road at Ford Road November 1, 1972 69.8 Pacific Coast Highway at Bayside Drive 72.4 Pacific Coast Highway at Dover Drive 71.7 ' Newport Boulevard at Hospital Road 75.0 Irvine at Francisco Drive 70.1 ' Near Residential Streets 15th Street at San Bernardino Avenue February 19, 1973 63.8 Isabella Terrace 59.5 ' Amethyst Avenue, South 60.4 16 WYLE LABORATORIES PRE11MIN& 0..Y tl ' The correction from curb level to a position 50 feet away results in the level that would be found just outside the homes of many people living near arterials such ' as Irvine Boulevard. ' 3.2 Levels Causing Community Response An additional indication of the relative acceptance of the normal outdoor ' noise levels measured in Newport Beach can be gained by comparing these levels with the levels which produce varying levels of community response. An indication of the ' community response level versus CNEL is reproduced from Reference 4 as Figure 3-2. This figure gives a scale of normalized CNEL. The normalization procedure consists ' of adding correction factors to the measured CNEL to obtain the normalized CNEL. These factors are given in Table 3-2. Two examples of the application of these ' factors to the measured values of the Average Hourly Noise Levels of the intruding noise are given in Table 3-3. The examples are drawn from the results at two actual locations in Newport Beach and illustrate an approximate procedure for calculating CNEL from the measured averages of HNL in the daytime, evening, and nighttime ' periods, accounting both for the weightings of 0, 5, and 10 dB, respectively, and for the duration of each of the periods. In the case of the first example at Hospital ' Road, there are no residences within 50 feet of this location so the widespread com- plaints mentioned would not be expected to occur. ' The data of Figure 3-2 show no observed reaction for normalized CNEL values ' from 50 to 60 dB with a median at 55. However, an average normalized CNEL of 60 dB may cause sporadic complaints. This apparent discrepancy may be resolved by ' reference to the ambient noise in a given community. When the intruding noise does not significantly exceed the ambient noise, few complaints are heard. When the ' intruding noise exceeds the ambient by about 17 dB, complaints may be expected. It is easy to see where a CNEL of 60 dB might be 17 dB above the ambient in one locale and at the ambient noise level in another. In the case of traffic noise on an established arterial, such as Irvine Avenue, the traffic noise is the ambient noise and 1 , ' 17 WYLE LABORATORIES Community Reaction A Vigorous community action r:;;:: Mean ..........: ... /!:"'•i�iiiiiiiii''_iii::.�`'<Et:E::3iiii i'EF:i:y B Several threats of legal Envelope of 90% of Data I°• .;.<' ' i_`; y'' action or strong appeals e�. +' to local officials to stop +'::``€ '•€' = ?ii"€€'•€; noise �!'€€i�'':�€€°'i`:::.'"': €'€'•'��`•€; €€: C Widespread complaints or single threat of legal action !€::€::::€€€€€'• :: :::::: :: : 0o Data Normalized to: D Sporadic complaints f :€€";€€f:€ €'si '::: .;:::::a :a:::::::: .- '-' Urban Residential Residual Noise" Some Prior Exposure Windows Partially Open ram+ No Pure Tone or Impulses E No reaction,•although """ `"` '" noise is generally noticeable 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 Normalized Community Noise Equivalent Level in dB Figure 3-2. Community Reaction to Intrusive Noises of Many Types as a Function of the Normalized Community Noise Equivalent Level ' MELIMINAR ' Table 3-2 ' Corrections to be Added to the Measured Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) to Obtain Normalized CNEV ' Amount of Correction Type of to be Added to Measured Correction Description CNEL in dB Seasonal Summer(or year-round operation) 0 Correction Winter only (or windows always closed) -5 Correction Quiet suburban residential or rural com- +10 ' for Outdoor munity (remote from large cities and Residual from industrial activity and trucking) Noise Level Normal suburban residential community +5 ' (not located near industrial activity) Urban residential community (not 0 Immediately adjacent to heavily traveled ' roods and industrial areas) Noisy urban residential community (near -5 relatively busy roads or industrial areas) ' Very noisy urban residential community -10 Correction No prior experience with the intruding +5 for Previous noise ' Exposure & Community has had some previous exposure 0 Community to intruding noise but little effort is being Attitudes made to control the noise. This correction ' may also be applied in a situation where the community has not been exposed to the noise previously, but the people are aware that bona fide efforts are being made to ' control the noise. Community has had considerable previous -5 exposure to the intruding noise and the ' noisemaker's relations with the community are good. Community aware that operation causing -10 noise is very necessary and it will not con- tinue indefinitely. This correction can be applied for an operation of limited duration and under emergency circumstances. ' Pure Tone No pure tone or impulsive character 0 or Impulse Pure tone or impulsive character present +5 *"Supporting Information for the Adopted Noise Regulation for California Airports," Wyle Laboratories Report WCR 70-3(R), January 29, 1971. 19 WYLE LABORATORIES PRELIMINARY ' Table 3-3 Two Examples of Calculation of Normalized Community Noise Equivalent Level and Prediction of Corresponding Community Response Newport Boulevard at ' Hospital Road Isabella Terrace Factor Day Eve. Night Day Eve. Night ' Average Hourly Noise 73 72 69 53 54 52 Levels in dB for ' Time Period Duration and Time of Day -3 -4 +6 -3 -4 +6 Correction Factor ' Subtotals Which are Added 70 68 75 50 50 58 Logarithmically to Obtain ' CNEL Community Noise 77 59 ' Equivalent Level Additional Corrections from ' Table 3-2 Seasonal 0 0 ' Residual Noise Level -5 +5. Experience and Attitude 0 -5 ' Pure Tone or Impulse 0 0 Total Additional Corrections -5 0 Normalized CNEL 72 59 ' Predicted Reaction] Widespread Complaints No Reaction ' IFrom Figure 3-2. 1 20 WYLE LABORATORIES MELIMINARY 1 1 complaints are few, occurring only when particularly noisy vehicles cause loss of sleep or other similar circumstance. Figure 3-2 suggests that if noise complaints within the community are to be held to occasional or sporadic complaints, then the mean normalized CNEL values should be held to 60 dB or lower. It is seen that levels below 55 decibels will not elicit complaints from the general public (mean values on the curve), but that some people will be dis- turbed by even this low level. It may be concluded, therefore, that it is desirable to limit traffic noise in a residential community to CNEL values between 55 and 60 dB, with preference given to CNEL 55. In Newport Beach, this criteria is currently met only in the quiet resi- dential areas well separated from arterial traffic. A community oriented to industry ' and the attendant heavy traffic might determine that a CNEL of 70 dB would be accept- able to the general populace. 3.3 Levels Causing Speech Interference ' A third criteria that may be applied to noise may be obtained by consideration of the speech interference caused by a given level of A-weighted noise. Figure 3-3 again taken from Reference 4, shows the allowable distance between a talker and listener as a function of the interferring background noise level for various degrees of ' vocal effort. Thus, if the background noise level is 70 dBA, normal conversation may be carried out at a distance of 3 feet or less. Shouting will extend this communication distance to about 17 feet. At higher noise levels and/or greater distances, communica- becomes difficult, with the loss of large percentages of the word syllables. The levels ' of this figure are not time averages, but actual levels existing at the time speech com- munication is going on. If two persons were standing at the curb at Pacific Coast ' Highway and Dover Drive, they would find the A-weighted levels exceeding 87 dB 10 percent of the time.1 Thus, they would find it necessary to stand within 3 feet of ' each other and use a loud voice to communicate. 21 WYLE LABORATORIES O�.•.O❖s. p.Q�.QQQ�QQQpOi�i�iMiiiMi�ii�i'.-�ME ELIMINARY's i 1 4.0 FUTURE SOUND PRESSURE LEVELS IN NEWPORT BEACH Sound pressure levels in the City of Newport Beach and environs for the future 1 are reported in Figure 4-1 as contours superimposed upon a map similar to Figure 2-1 . Projections of noise levels from the various streets and freeway rights-of-way are based 1 upon a map of projected traffic volumes provided by the Advanced Planning Division of the Community Development Department of the City of Newport Beach. 1 4.1 Projection Criteria 1 Since the "Traffic Volume " map does not break down traffic into hourly incre- ments, it has been necessary to make several assumptions about future traffic in order 1 to predict CNEL levels. These assumptions are: 1 1. Truck traffic will be approximately 10 percent of the total traffic on the streets of Newport Beach, both day and night. 1 2. Given an Average Daily Traffic Count, it is assumed that 87 percent of the vehicle count occurs between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. with 1 the remaining 13 percent during the other 9 hours of the day. (These percentages represent averages taken over many areas of the U.S. at 1 different times of the year.) The noise measurements conducted in Newport Beach by Wyle Research indicate that truck traffic should be weighted approximately three times as heavily as automobile 1 traffic in determining its relative importance as a noise generating mechanism in the City. The weighting factor of 3 is much lower than usual due to an unusually high 1 incidence of relatively poorly muffled recreation type vehicles such as "dune buggies" especially in summer. This is actually an unnecessary nuisance as adequate muffling 1 in no way deteriorates performance to a point of inadequate safety. The preponderance of data taken in other areas of California and in other states has indicated that a factor 1 of 10 would be more appropriate so that serious thought should be given to the enact- ment and enforcement of a local use law on vehicle noise emissions which can follow 1 ,644 1 23 WYLE LABORATORIES PRELIMINARY t (To be Included In Final Issue) ' Figure 4-1 . Contours of Constant CNEL (Future Freeway and Arterial Automotive Noise) 24 WYLE LABORATORIES iPRELIMINARY State law. The calculations which result in Figure 4-1 assume that in the future this anomaly will be abated and the more common ratio will hold. 1 One other aspect of noise studies in the City of Newport Beach concerns the assumed percentage of vehicles traveling during daytime hours. As was shown in Figures 2-7 through 2-10, this percentage changes between summer and winter. The 87 percent represents averages taken over many areas of the United States at different 1 times of the year. Reference 2, Table I, lists hourly traffic at various locations in the City for both winter and summer. This table indicates that the daytime usage during the winter is about 91 percent, and that it drops to around 83 percent during the summer. Again, however, the average for all locations for both winter and summer is 87.7 per- cent.. so that the "national " average of 87percent seems well justified for use in Newport Beach. 1 4.2 Discussion of Noise Contours 1 Figure 4-2 indicates the way A-weighted Hourly Noise Levels decay with distance. This data has been used to determine the actual location of each contour 1 when the roadway is assumed to be level with the surrounding ground. If a roadway is elevated, the high level contours (70 and 65 dB curves) will move in. This is because 1 the edge of the road will shield some of the car noise very close to the road. At greater distances (such as the 60 decibel contour), this shielding does not occur and the raised 1 roadway does not offer any reduction. 1 In areas where a roadway is depressed, there will be a 5 or 6 dB reduction of all levels. Short sections of depressed roadway do not offer much advantage, but a long 1 section would give this desirable effect. For instance, the entire campus of the Bay View Intermediate School would be outside the 55 dB contour instead of inside it if the 1 Corona Del Mar Freeway were depressed within the city limits. Residents around the San Joaquin Reservoir could be given similar advantages by a depressed freeway. 1 i ' 25 WYLE LABORATORIES 90 80 135,000 Vehicles/Day z 40,000 Vehicles/Day N 25,000 Vehicles/Day 20,000 Vehicles/Day c 70 v J a 60 N_ 0 Z L 7 =0 50 For 48 miles per hour, Subtract 3 dB °' For 75 miles per hour, Add 3 dB.a Q40 30 LJ 10 100 1000 10,000 Distance from Center of Roadway, feet Figure4-2. Predicted Decay of Sound from Roadways Having Various Average Daily Traffic Counts at 60 mph (Based in Part on the Measured Sound Attenuation Illustrated in Figure 2-1) I 1 PRELIMINARYI 1 Contours of helicopter noise, shown on Figure 2-1, are nol"shown on Figure 4-1, but would still exist when this corridor is used for flights to the sea, 1 It may be noted that contours on Figure 4-1 have been extended to 60 dB rather than the 65 required by the California statute. This was done because some complaints may arise at the 60 dB level. Also, California Administrative Code requires an acoustical analysis for approval of residential construction within 60 dB CNEL contours. 1 Some areas outside the city limits are also treated because of the effects these areas will have upon the City. 1 The map scale used for these contours is small, and it is impossible to determine 1 close details from the map. Figure 4-2 has been prepared to show the variation of CNEL with distance from a roadway for several different traffic levels ranging from 20,000 to 135,000 vehicles per day. The curves are valid at a speed of 60 miles per hour. Each level will drop 3 dB at 48 miles per hour or increase 3 dB at 75 miles per 1 hour. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 27 WYLE LABORATORIES 1 PRELIMINARY 1 5.0 HELICOPTER NOISE IN NEWPORT BEACH 1 5.1 Police Helicopters The City of Newport Beach operates two police helicopters for surveillance of 1 areas sensitive to crime. These craft have no set pattern of operation and might be found at any point at any time. During emergency situations when the helicopter is 1 moving to a scene of action, noise generation is quite high, but duration and frequency (as seen by an given resident under the flight path) are very low. 1 Reference 1 lists the measured sound pressure levels at ground surface for 500, 800, and 1500 feet at four different locations in the City. The measured A-weighted 1 sound pressure levels average 70, 65, and 60 dB respectively at these flight heights. 1 Table 5-1 lists the three different operating conditions together with,a pro- gression to CNEL figures under some different assumed flight patterns. 1 Table 5-1 ' Noise Levels for Operation of Police Helicopter Height Above Ground Level 1 in Feet Quantity and Associated Condition 500 800 1500 1 Measured Sound Pressure Levels Under 70 65 60 Craft in dBA (re: 20 pN/m2) 1 SENEL Under Flight Track Assuming 85 82 80 Cruise Speed of 30 mph 1 CNEL Under Flight Track Assuming 49 43 41 One Flight/Day and Two Flights/ Night 1 CNEL Under Craft Assuming a 55 50 48 10 Minute Hover at One Location 1 1 28 I'I 1 WYLE LABORATORIES RELINIVARY 6.0 ABATEMENT OF NOISE Noise abatement can follow several procedures. There are, of course, certain ' procedures which have been preempted by the State and Federal Governments so that the City cannot use them. The most obvious of these is aircraft noise, which is con- trolled by the Federal Government. ' The major methods of noise abatement open to the City are: 1. Enact and enforce use laws on vehicle noise ' 2. Encourage the use of depressed roadways or barriers ' 3. Enforce zoning regulations 4. Enforce building regulations Vehicular Noise Controls There are presently state laws limiting the maximum noise that may be radiated by vehicles. A truck may not generate more than 90 dBA at a distance of 50 feet on any state-controlled roadway such as the interstate freeway system. The California Highway Patrol presently has five teams in the State operating sound level meters to determine sound levels from trucks and cars on the freeways. These teams have, on occasion been used in individual cities where loud vehicles are found, and warning' A citations have been issued. However, this does not preempt the right of the municipality to enact and enforce local use laws. Since, continuous support by the state police is fie S not practical, the feasibility of local enforcement of an equally strict code should be considered. ' Barriers A roadway may be depressed to allow cross streets to maintain their previous elevation and appearance. Such a depression of the roadway also assists in reducing the ' noise level'in nearby residential areas, and should be utilized to the fullest practical ' 33 WYLE LABORATORIES NELIMINAR? ' extent. Reductions of up to 20 dB may be obtained, but 10 dB is the usual attenuation of reasonably sized barriers. Zoning Regulations ' Zoning to assure compatible use of land within the City will always remain the most forceful noise abatement tool in the hands of the city planners. Potentially noisy ' areas that may be controlled through zoning regulations include industrial areas between Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard and along Campus Drive near the airport. Where industry is placed in the Jamboree Road area, assurances of noise control must be obtained for the Back Bay area and the Corona Del Mar High School. The light ' industry characteristic of the Newport Beach area will generally not pose any problem to these areas. The attenuation characteristics of Figure, 4-2 for highway noise suggest ' that distances of the order of 1000 feet will severely attenuate a given noise source without barriers or any other noise control measures. If high intensity noise, such as would be found with power saws or large steam or air valves were present, more atten- uation would be required. Individual installations should be examined by persons trained ' to evaluate noise control problems. ' Building Regulations Application of improved building code requirements for higher outdoor-to- indoor noise reduction for homes or multifamily dwellings very near highways should be recognized as one practical element of noise abatement. Well established technology ' is available for implementing this technique of noise abatement. Present California Administrative Code demands an acoustical analysis for all Hu�T t-FAMI� proposed residential construction to be performed within 60 dB CNEL contours. The contractor must show that employment of techniques such as use of special topological features and provision for adequate structure transmission loss by use of a forced ventilation system (with permanently closed windows) will assure year-round achieve- ment of an interior CNEL of 45 dB. 34 WYLE LABORATORIES RELIMINAR . REFERENCES 1. Murray, F.M., "Noise Element Study of Highway Traffic Noise in Newport Beach, California," Wyle Laboratories Report WCR 73-3. May 1973. 2. "Supporting Information for the Adopted Noise Regulations for California Airports - Final Report to the California Department of Aeronautics," Wyle Laboratories Report WCR 70-3(R), January 29, 1971. ' 3. "Community Noise," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., Report NTID 300.3, December 1971. 4. "Report to the President and Congress," U.S. Senate Document 92-63, February 1972. 5. "Newport Beach Traffic Planning, Parking and Operations Study," Wilbur Smith and Associates, March 1968. ' 6. "City of Newport Beach, California Topics," VTN, Engineers, Architects, Planners, August 1972. 7. Lukas, J.S. and Kryter, K.O., "Awakening Effects of Simulated Sonic Booms and Subsonic Aircraft Noise, " presented at the 134th Meeting of AAS, ' Boston, December 1969. 8. Thiessen, G.J., "Effects of Noise During Sleep, presented at the 134th Meeting of AAS, Boston, December 1969. 35 WYLE LABORATORIES 1 T LIM INARY * ' 1 APPENDIX I A SHORT PRIMER ON NOISE AND COMMUNITY NOISE SCALE 1 For the benefit of the reader, this Appendix provides a short primer on noise and 1 defines, qualitatively, the noise scales used in the report. Generation of Sound 1 Sound in the air is generated by forces acting on the air molecules. This may result from a complicated interaction of air leaving an exhaust pipe or something as simple as a panel vibrating against the air. Whatever the mechanism, the result is 1 that at any one instant, the air will be slightly compressed at one point and will be rarified at another point. This pattern of pressure disturbance moves through the air as a sound wave. Figure I-1 presents this concept in the case of the vibrating panel driven by an eccentric shaft and rod. As the panel moves to the right, air is com- pressed and as it moves to the left, air is decompressed or rarified. This effect continues with time and a pressure wave is transmitted into the air. Thus, a rare- faction wave progresses to the right as a result of the panel moving to the left. As the panel moves again to the right, another compressional wave is generated and the distance between two successive compressional waves is called the wavelength. ' Noise — How Do We Describe It? Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. One person's music may be nothing 1 but noise to another. For example, the sound of rock music from your teenager's hi-fi may be music to him or her, but noise to you, if you are trying to converse or 1 relax in an adjoining room. To describe noise and its effect on people in a quanti- tative way, we must include human factors related to the way we perceive noise. 1 These factors include differences in the way our ears hear sounds at different fre- quencies, whether the sound contains any irritating "screech" like squeaky chalk on 1 the blackboard and how long the sound lasts. Applying all these factors enables us 1 . ' I-1 WYLE LABORATORIES 1 . 1 1 Direction of Sound Wave 1 ' — Compression— Rarefaction ' p o 0 1 I I ' Wavelength ' Figure I-1 . Illustration of Generation of an Acoustic Wave 1 1 1 I-2 �I to translate from a physical measurement of a sound to its value on a subjective, "perceived noise," scale. Acoustic levels that we normally experience are very small compared to the usual static (or barometric) pressure in the atmosphere. An acoustic pressure of 1 ' microbar would be average for normal conversational speech tones. This pressure is equal to 1/1,000,000 of the usual barometric pressure of 14.7 psi. Thus, at a time and place where the atmospheric pressure was exactly 14.7 psi, the total peak pres- sure during average speech would be 14.700021 and the minimum pressure would be ' 14.699979 psi. The decibel scale (discussed below) would specify this very small pressure fluctuation as 74 decibels. At 134 decibels, a sound level much higher ' than normal experience, these two pressure extremes would be 14.721 and 14.679, respectively. In this example, the acoustic pressures have changed by a factor of 1000 with an insignificant variation in the total atmospheric pressure. The Decibel An explanation is in order regarding some basic properties of any scale for stating the magnitude of a sound. The ear responds to sound pressure fluctuations with an increased sensory response for an increase in pressure. The range between the smallest ' sound pressure which is sensed by the human ear and the highest sound pressure physically tolerable covers a ratio of approximately 1,000,000 to 1. If we assign the number 1 tto the sound pressure coresponding to the smallest sound that we can hear, then the sound pressure from our voice in quiet conversational tones would correspond to the number 1,000. A loud voice would be approximately 30,000, and physical pain would be felt in the ear at a sound pressure over 1,000,000. ' While our brains have no trouble handling the range of sounds sensed by our ears, it is inconvenient for us to think in terms of numbers with all these zeros. It becomes more convenient, therefore, if we base our scale on the number of zeros rather than ' the actual number. The logarithm to the base•10 does just this. Thus, we may assign ' I-3 WYLE LABORATORIES ' the zero on our scale to the number we can just hear, since the logarithm of 1 is zero. Our quiet conversational tones will then be assigned the number 3, since the logarithm ' of 1,000 is 3, and the highest pressure mentioned above (1,000,000) would receive the number 6. ' All of the numbers assigned -- 1, 3, and 6 -- are equal to the logarithm of the ' actual numbers, and the quantity measured in such a scale is called a level. Engineers and scientists prefer to work in terms of energy, which is proportional to sound pressure squared instead of sound pressure. Thus, all the above numbers for sound pressures must be squared. Making this adjustment, 1 squared becomes 1; 1,000 squared becomes 1,000,000; and 1,000,000 squared becomes 1,000,000,000,000. Fortunately, the logarithm of a squared number is just two times the logarithm of the number; so, instead ' of the level ranging from 0 to 6, it ranges from 0 to 12. This scale is similar to the famous Richter scale for measuring earthquake magnitude, which is also logarithmic. ' In the fields of electronics and acoustics, the unit on this scale is called the Bel in honor of Alexander Graham Bell. For convenience, the Bel is divided up into 10 ' smaller units, so that the scale of level now extends from 0 to 120 decibels or tenths of Bels. ' Figure I-2 provides an illustration of these concepts for converting from an incon- venient magnitude scale (linear pressure) to a more convenient scale of level (loga- rithmic) with decibels as the units. Utilizing this basic idea of a level scale, acousticians have invented a profusion of different kinds of levels, all in decibels, ' abbreviated dB. The most.common of these is the "sound pressure level" defined by: ' Sound Pressure Level (SPL) = 10 log10 (p/Preference)2 in dB Preference is the reference pressure equal to .00002 newtons per square meter which is the same as 0.000,000,002,9 pounds per square inch. This reference pressure was chosen as being near the smallest sound pressure that we can hear. It sets the location of the zero on our basic SPL scale. 't I-4 WYLE LABORATORIES 10,000 100.000.000 Eo 1,0W •1,000,000 So ExamPle 100:f Squarinq•(100x100) <10,000 t4 And,10 Log(10_ M1• .40: _•." 10 100 20 -- I 1 0 Pressure Pressure Decibel _—Style_—_- Squared Seale Style ' Figure I-2. The Logarithmic Nature of the Decibel ' The Frequency Content or Pitch of Noise While the magnitude of a sound pressure is of primary importance, its frequency ' or pitch is also a primary consideration. The frequency or pitch of a sound represents the rate of oscillations of the acoustic pressure. The human ear is less sensitive to low ' frequency sounds and very high frequency sounds than it is to mid-frequency sounds. The frequency limits of audible sounds extend from 20to 20,000 Hz (cycles per second). The moving panel of Figure I-1 may move back and forth 20 times or cycles each second to create a 20 Hz acoustic signal or 1000 times each second to create a 1000 Hz signal. ' The lowest note on a moderately large pipe organ will be 32 Hz, and the highest note from a piccolo will be around 4700 Hz. Overtones from each of these instruments will ' extend to beyond audibility. As mentioned above, however, the ear is not equally sensitive to all these frequencies. The ear is 50 dB less sensitive at 20 Hz than it is at III ' 1000 Hz. Figure I-3 demonstrates the different sensitivity of the ear at different frequencies and shows how it affects a given sound spectrum, happily reducing the ' annoyance caused by low frequency noise. Figure I-3(b), showing the allowance for t I-5 WYLE LABORATORIES 1 O -10 _20 -30 7 Sound Spectrum -40 U N c -20 Allowance for `_-- - _30 Hearing d a -40 i (b) 0000 l- �-� ---- Original lc, -10 ! Spectrum _20PHuman I -30 Spectrum 0jWeighted for Hearing i 50 100 200 500 lK 2K 5K 10K Frequency, Hz Figure I-3. Weighting the Measured Spectrum to Account for the Frequency Response of the Human Ear I-6 WYLE LABORATORIES I ' human hearing, has been defined as the "A" weighting scale. Electronic filters having this frequency response have been incorporated in most sound measuring equip- ment. When such filters are used, the resulting reading is said to be "A" weighted or "A" scale. Use of these filters allows us to determine a single decibel number which, to some extent, represents human response to a given noise. Time Factors in Defining Noise Environments So far we have talked only about the magnitude and frequency of noise along with the decibel scale with which we measure the magnitude. The perceived level (that is - the way our brains react to it) that we subjectively apply to a noise seems ' to depend upon its duration also. In addition, the actual annoying effect of the sound may depend on the time of day as well. This time of day sensitivity simply relates to ' our daily cycle of activity. In other words, a short loud blast of a whistle announcing noon (and lunch) would not be found so irritating as a less intense noise sounding over ' a period of several hours during the day. The some short blast, or even the long duration "less intense noise" might be found quite irritating during the middle of the night when ' we are trying to sleep. Thus, in order to produce a rating scale for the annoying effect of noises we consider, in addition to the level and frequency content, the duration ' of the sound. Further, we attempt, in a crude way, to account for varying inter- ferences with our daily life. We therefore consider the time of day during which the ' noise is generated. Sound waves are a form of energy just like electricity and light. The rate of release of energy or power may be measured in terms of kilowatts just as electrical ' power is. The power associated with acoustics within our normal experience is quite small compared with the power available from the electric lines. Where a very small ' electric light bulb will use 25 to 30 watts of electricity, normal conversational speech power will be around 27/1,000,000 watt10 and where a powerful hi-fi is pouring 100 watts , into a loudspeaker, little more than 1/4 to 1 watt of acoustic power is I-7 WYLE LABORATORIES 1 ' being generated. Even so, this little bit of power is more than adequate to shake the windows and rouse the neighbors. ' The acoustic power generated by earlier models of commercial jet aircraft far exceeds the output of the hi-fi or even the 80 or so watts produced by an energetic ' orchestra in concert. These craft will generate as much as 40,000 watts at full take- off throttle. It is possible for a person to briefly generate as much as 1/10 watt and a trained singer can approach a full I watt acoustic output for a short time. It is possible to convert acoustic power into a flow of heat and this may be accumulated as heat energy. If this energy can be contained so that it can be ' accumulated over a long period of time, the normal conversational talker can heat up a cup of tea in 39 years or 100,000 football fans could, conceivably, do it in 4 seconds. The point is that it is possible to measure noise in terms of the time inte- grated (accumulated) measure of noise intensity. This will result in a measure of ' total acoustic energy. The reasoning behind this measurement is that people seem to react to the total energy of noise environments rather than to only the power generated ' by single events. Thus, it is desirable to define fluctuating noise environments in terms of the constant noise level which generates the some energy. This is done to obtain an average level over a given period of time, nominally one hour. The Hourly Noise Level (HNL) can thus be defined as the total acoustic energy found at a given point over a one hour period divided by the number of seconds in the hour. Again, the decibel scale is used and it is defined such that the HNL of a steady tone is the same as the SPL (sound pressure level). The end result of all this is just to say that a loud noise for a short time may treceive the same rating as a soft noise over a long period of time. The some HNL reading would be obtained if one truck passed by and generated a noise level of 88 dB for 10 seconds or 78 dB for 100 seconds, If ten trucks, each making 88 dB for 10 seconds, went by during the hour, an HNL meter would read 73 dB — a tenfold I-8 WVLE LABORATORIES ' increase in noise energy represented by a 10 dB increase in the Hourly Noise Level. Thus, 100 such trucks would give a reading of 83 dB and 1000 of them would increase the level to 93 dB, and so forth. ' Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) So far in our example, nothing has been said about the time of day the trucks ' were going by. The time-integrated measure of noise which attempts to account for this time of day sensitivity is called the Community Noise Equivalent Level. It is '. developed in the following way. Early studies of community noise exposure indicated that one intruding sound during the evening hours will be approximately as annoying ' as three occurrences of the same sound during the day. During sleeping hours at night, this time-of-day penalty seems to be about 10. The factors of 3 and 10 are only ' approximate, but they seem to give a reasonable accounting of the weighting that should be applied for evening and nighttime noises. The times have been customarily specified for daytime, evening and nighttime and are 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., 7:00 p.m, to 10:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. respectively. Therefore, if 33 ' trucks passed by during the evening hours, they would be counted as 100 trucks and given the some effective HNL value of 83 dB as the 100 trucks during the daytime hours (add 5 dB for three times as many and 10 dB for 10 times as many). During night- time hours, only 10 trucks would be counted as equivalent to 100 trucks and would yield the some HNL effective value of 83 dB. Thus, the noise energy is defined in terms of the Hourly Noise Level for each hour of the day. This energy for each hour over the entire day, after having been appropriately weighted to account for the time of day as above, would be added together and divided by 24 to give the weighted ' average noise level for the day. When expressed in decibel form, this number is called the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). It provides a single number to show the relative noisiness of a given location on a given day. Generally, this number does not vary substantially at a given community location over a period of weeks. In areas where there are large variations in seasonal traffic, there will be ' seasonal variations in the CNEL. When the CNEL is dominated by highway traffic, ' I-9 WYLE LABORATORIES ' as it often is, the traffic must double to effect a 3 dB change in the CNEL. An annual average of the daily CNELs for a given area would tend to exhibit little change from ' year to year, providing the nearby land use and traffic flow do not change markedly. Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL) ' The Single Event Noise Exposure Level is also dependent upon time, but it is somewhat different in its application. Essentially, it is designed to determine the total acoustic energy associated with a single event such as would be generated by the ' passage of a single vehicle or aircraft. A flyby of a single aircraft will cause the acoustic level to gradually rise, reach a peak and then fall. The total area under a ' curve representing this flyby is proportional to the SENEL. The SENEL differs from the other measures discussed above in that they are averaged in time. That is, the total ' energy is divided by the total number of seconds required to make the record. The main difference between these two records, then, is that an SENEL will always result ' in a number that is higher than the peak level measured and will represent a single event, while an HNL (or CNEL) will always result in a number that is lower than the ' peak levels measured and will represent the integrated energy-average level for all of the events that occurred during the time period specified by the measurement (one hour, ' one day, or one year). An approximation of SENEL may be obtained by the following procedure: 1. Obtain a level versus time trace of the sound pressure level (SPL). 2. Determine the time duration in seconds that the SPL is within 10 dB of the peak SPL. 3. Determine the logarithm to the base 10 of this duration (characteristic and mantissa), multiply this logarithm by 10. ' 4. Add the number found in step 3 to the peak SPL. Subtract 3 dB. ' This is the approximate SENEL. ' I-10 WYLE LABORATORIES ' If a stopwatch is used to measure the time that the level, as seen by a sound level meter, drops from its maximum value to 10 dB below that level, a rough approxi- mation of SENEL may be obtained by adding 10 times the logarithm of the number of seconds to the maximum noise level. 1 1 1 1 WYLE LABORATORIES ' Wyle Laboratories Research Staff ' Report WCR 73-3 NOISE ELEMENT STUDY OF HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE IN ' NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA ' Prepared By: ' Fancher M. Murray Wyle Laboratories ' 128 Maryland Street El Segundo, California 90245 1 ' Prepared For; t CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Newport Beach, California May 1973 ' Wyle Laboratories Research Staff ' Report WCR 73-3 ' NOISE ELEMENT STUDY OF HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE IN ' NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA ' Prepared By: ' Fancher M. Murray Wyle Laboratories ' 128 Maryland Street El Segundo, California 90245 ' Prepared For: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ' Newport Beach, California ' May 1973 1 ' TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SUMMARY 1 ' ENABLING LEGISLATION . 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES . 2 ' INTRODUCTION . 4 MEASUREMENT AND ANALYSIS OF HOURLY NOISE DATA 5 TYPICAL A-WEIGHTED LEVELS . 10 ' MEASURED COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE LEVEL . 11 ' SEASONAL VARIATION OF COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE LEVEL 11 AMBIENT NOISE IN QUIET AREAS . 13 ' PROPAGATION OF HIGHWAY NOISE INTO THE COMMUNITY 14 ' HELICOPTER NOISE . 25 ' Police Helicopter . 25 Military Helicopter 27 ' METHODS AND EFFECTS OF NOISE REDUCTION . 27 1 . Barriers . 27 ' 2. Vehicular Control . 28 3. Zoning Changes 29 REFERENCES . 30 APPENDIX A . A-1 ' ii I ' SUMMARY ' This program was sponsored by the City of Newport Beach in compliance with the stan- dards and guidelines contained in Senate Bill 691 (California Government Code 65302). ' This code required that any new general plan of incorporated cities include a noise ele- ment to consist of weighted noise level contours generated to show transportation noise related to the various highways, freeways, rapid transit systems and airport ground facilities. The data is to be weighted to show total energy; that is, a scale must be ' used which includes duration of sound as well as amplitude. This report provides the required noise contours due to highway vehicles for the major ' streets in the City of Newport Beach. The contour s have been developed, in part, with the support of measurements of the integrated "A" weighted sound levels taken at curbside for a number of locations within the city. These are augmented by two different types of measurements to determine level versus distance from the roadway. The largest number of these measurements was made using an impulse noise generator capable of simulating the spectrum of vehicle noise and radiating very high sound pressure levels so ' that measurements could be made at reasonable distances. This impulse generator was supplemented by a measurement of the integrated "A" weighted traffic noise using five- minute samples. The principal results of the study are illustrated in Figure I by the estimated noise contours for highway vehicles only. ' Some helicopter noise measurements have been made for both police and military fly- avers, but routes flown by these vehicles are sufficiently variable that predictions of noise produced in certain locations is not possible. ' 1 ' ENABLING LEGISLATION ' This report is to fulfill the acoustic requirements of Senate Bill 691 (California Govern- ment Code 65302). The specific requirements of this bill are as follows: ' (g) A noise element in quantitative, numerical terms, showing contours of present and projected noise levels associated with all existing and proposed major transportation elements. These include but are not I imited to the ' following: (1) Highways and freeways, (2) Ground rapid transit systems, (3) Ground facilities associated with all airports operating under a per- mit from the State Department of Aeronautics. These noise contours may be expressed in any standard acoustical scale ' which includes both the magnitude of noise and frequency of its occurrence. The recommended scale is sound level A, as-measured with A-weighting net- work of a standard sound level meter, with corrections added for the time ' duration per event and the total number of events per 24-hour period. Noise contours shall be shown in minimum increments of five decibels and shall be continued down to 65 dB(A). For regions involving hospitals, ' rest homes, long-term medical or mental care, or outdoor recreational areas, the contours shall be continued down to 45 dB(A). Conclusions regarding appropriate site or route selection alternatives or ' noise impact upon compatible land uses shall be included in the general plan. The state, local, or private agency responsible for the construction or maintenance of such transportation facilities shall provide'to the local agency ' producing the general plan, a statement of the present and projected noise levels of the facility, and any information which was used in the develop- ment of such levels. ' SCOPE OF SERVICES ' The scope of services reported upon in this document include those of Phase I of Exhibit "A" of the services agreement between Wyle Laboratories and the City of Newport Beach dated November 26, 1972. Excerpts from this scope of services are repeated here for reference: PHASE I — MEASUREMENT AND ANALYSIS OF EXISTING NOISE LEVELS ' This phase will involve four tasks. The first task shall be to determine and map noise contours in accordance with the standards and guidelines contained in ' 2 ' Senate Bill 691 (California Government Code 5302) for the following major highways within the City of Newport Beach: Pacific Coast Highway MacArthur Boulevard ' Jamboree Road Newport Boulevard ' Balboa Boulevard (between Balboa Pier and Pacific Coast Highway) Irvine Avenue Campus Drive (between MacArthur Boulevard and Irvine Avenue) Bristol Street (between MacArthur Boulevard and Irvine Avenue) Cliff Drive (between Irvine Avenue and Riverside Avenue) Riverside Avenue (between Pacific Coast Highway and Cliff Drive) ' The noise contours shall be derived from actual field measurements and analy- tical studies by consultant of the selected highway network. Such character- istics as daily and seasonal traffic flow, traffic mix, highway width and grades, property grades, and adjacent land uses, together with traffic noise measure- ments from selected highway field stations shall be reviewed and analyzed by the Consultant and summarized into a series of noise profiles for various high- way locations. From these noise profiles, the Consultant shall develop CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) contours for the total highway network ' and all adjacent properties in conformance with the standards and guidelines outlined in Senate Bill 691. To assist the Consultant in calculating the various noise levels due to high- way traffic, the City staff shall provide hourly traffic estimates for those major highways listed above. The second task under Phase I shall be to determine ambient noise levels in various areas oT the community for different types of land uses. Community noise field stations shall be established for such purposes and shall be so located throughout the City as to measure a representative cross-section of varying land use types and conditions within Newport Beach. The Consultant shall confer with City staff as to the most appropriate location for the field ' noise measurement stations. The third task under Phase I shall be to make recommendations on how to minimize tie noise impact of existing highway traffic on various existing and ' future land uses within the City of Newport Beach. il , 3 1 1 INTRODUCTION 1 The following report details the procedures and results of Wyle's efforts to accomplish the objectives of the foregoing tasks. A map of Newport Beach has been generated to 1 show the hourly noise levels expected on the main highways of the City forming a rough triangle around the Upper Newport Bay. Additional highways surround the lower Bay. 1 These levels have been specifically related to traffic count taken at the time the levels were measured so that any given traffic data, at any time of day or year, may be trans- lated into average noise levels covering any specific period covered by the traffic data. Such conversions are detailed by both first and second order approximation techniques. 1 Correction factors are developed which will predict traffic noise conditions for streets other than those studied when the proper criteria are applied to those streets. A term 1 has been used to define the acoustic average energy that a given location will exper- ience when an average car or average truck passes that location once each hour. This 1 term has been shown to be relatively constant with reasonably small correction factors for high speed, starting on a hill, long periods of idle in traffic jams, etc., to make it 1 even more closely approximate the average automobile at a given location. It is called HNL* and is mathematically defined. Typical A-weighted noise levels at curb- side have been tabulated. The daily Community Noise Exposure Level has been measured by a sampling technique in five noisy locations and three quiet locations 1 within the City. Seasonal variation of the Community Noise Exposure Level has not been established 1 because of lack of information on traffic variation, but methods are shown to accomplish estimates of this variation. 1 Measurements of the decay of sound from the highways into the community have been 1 accomplished by pulse techniques. Information is given to demonstrate the validity of these techniques as applied to the environs of Newport Beach. i 1 1 4 ' MEASUREMENT AND ANALYSIS OF HOURLY NOISE DATA ' Several different types of noise measurements were made during this program to establish the noise levels in various areas of the City of Newport Beach. The first measurements ' made consisted of one hour recordings of curbside noise levels as shown in Table I Table I ' One Hour Noise Measurements Time HNL Location Date 24 Hour Decibels Remarks Pacific Coast Highway 11/22/72 0800 74 2% Grade and Marigold Pacific Coast Highway 11/22/72 1030 76.8 Level ' and Patolita Pacific Coast Highway 11/17/72 1700 73.6 Level ' and Bayside Pacific Coast Highway 11/17/72 1110 76.2 3.5% Climb ' and Dover Pacific Coast Highway 11/17/72 1430 73.3 Level ' and Lugonia Balboa and 14th Street 12/1/72 1415 70.4 Level ' Balboa and 38th Street 11/22/72 0930 72.4 Near playground ' Newport Boulevard 11/21/72 1200 79.8 Start on 4% grade and Hospital Road Heavy traffic ' Irvine and Francisco 11/20/72 1500 73.7 Level — in town ' Jamboree and San 11/21/72 0830 73.2 100 Feet from traffic Joaquin Hills ' Dover and 16th Street 11/20/72 1330 69.6 Level — low speed Mac Arthur and Port 12/1/72 1600 78.2 Top of grade —high ' Westboume speed ' 5 1 The Hourly Noise Levels (HNL) shown in Table I were derived by use of a computer to determine the time in tenths of a second that the sound pressure level was at any given level. The levels were divided into one-decibel increments so that a count was made 10 times per second and the total was stored at a memory location representing the particular level of interest. A total of fifty different levels were examined and totaled. At the end of one hour, the total in each level was multiplied by the sound intensity corresponding to that level and all these products were added together. This total was then divided by the total number of counts (nominally 36,000) and the logarithm of the resulting number was multipled by 10 to give the HNL. In algebraic form, the HNL is given as: 50 SPL. HNL = 10 Log E 10 �1 Ni /ENij, dB re 20 µN/m2 Ii = 0 where Ni = Number of counts at the ith level SPL. = Sound pressure level of ith level i Thus, the HNL is a measure of the average noise level over one hour, which will . ' produce the some noise energy as the actual environment. The HNL measurements of Table I form the basis for the map contours of Figure 1. Traffic data for the highways under study does not give annual totals nor does it give daily or seasonal variations for the total highway system. Therefore, the annual CNEL cannot be derived from HNL measurements. A few daily CNEL ,estimates were made from sampled ' data: Thes&measurements, described in a later section, were insufficient for defining detailed CNEL contours for current conditions. Hourly estimates of traffic noise (i.e., HNL), coupled with daily average traffic counts, will enable computation of. CNEL data from Equation 2 in the appendix. 6 4 1 I 9 m 1 � � a i 1 r � 0, o oNML MFASOloIfl1i5r_ =✓ ./Q / --r'— oan ruvOM �\ City of Newport Beach Rpm I s A 7 ' Traffic counts were made during the recording of the noise levels of Table I in order that the data might be used for determining further information for projection of future ' noise levels. Table II is a tabulation of this traffic count. ' Table II Traffic Count — Vehicles Per Hour During Measurements ' HNL (dB re 2 Location 20 MN/m j Automobiles Trucks Motorcycles Buses ' Pacific Coast Highway 74 1526 168 10 11 and Marigold ' Pacific Coast Highway 76.8 2081 280 18 7 and Patolito ' Pacific Coast Highway 73.6 3778 357 13 7 and Bayside ' Pacific Coast Highway 76.3 1366 207 2 3 and Dover ' Pacific Coast Highway 73.3 1814 242 3 9 and Lugonia Balboa and 14th Street 70.4 890 105 14 14 Balboa and 38th Street 72.4 452 85 9 1 Newport Boulevard 79.8 2866 383 17 6 1 and Hospital Road Irvine and Francisco 73.7 1328 169 16 7 ' Jamboree and 76.8 2653 247 17 30 Ford Road ' Jamboree and San 73.2 2497 231 7 3 Joaquin Hills Dover and 16th Street 69.2 1351 170 5 2 MacArthur and Port 78.2 2004 183 6 10 Westboume ' 8 The total number of buses and motorcycles compared with the numbers of cars and trucks is quite small even on the main arterial so that they do not constitute a significant contribution to the total noise environment. Of the trucks counted, most of these are of the pickup variety of less than 1-1/2 tons so that the noise attributable to an average truck could not be placed at more than twice that attributable to an average car. Thus, the data of Table II was used to obtain Table III wherein the number of cars is added to ' two times the number of trucks. Table III Hourly Noise Level Per Event (dB re 20 4N/m2) ' HNL HNL*I Location dB dB ' Pacific Coast Highway and Marigold 74 40.3 ' Pacific Coast Highway and Patolita 76.8 42.6 Pacific Coast Highway and Bayside 73.6 40.1 ' Pacific Coast Highway and Dover 76.2 41.7 Pacific Coast Highway and Lugonia 73.3 39.7 ' Balboa and 14th Street 70.4 40.0 Balboa and 38th Street 72.4 2 Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road 79.8 42.2 Irvine and Francisco 73.7 41.5 ' Jamboree and Ford Road 76.8 40.8 Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills 73.2 38.5 Dover and 16th Street 69.6 39.3 MacArthur and Port Westboume 78.2 42.5 Average 40.7 IHNL* = HNL - 10 Log N N = Nc + 2 Nt, Nc = No. of Cars/Hour, Nt = No. of Trucks/Hour 2Data disregarded because of playground noise ' The data of Table III is discussed in detail in the Appendix. TYPICAL A-WEIGHTED LEVELS The averaged levels described above do not give information about the peak levels that may be experienced by a person standing on the curb as traffic passes. Statistical ' analysis of the maximum levels may be used to determine those levels that are exceeded any given percentage of the total time of measurement. Thus, the symbol LIO may be used to give the level that is exceeded 10 percent of the time. This level has been found to be representative of the maximum levels that might be measured by a person ' holding a sound level meter using the "A" weighted scale with fast meter response. Table IV lists L10 for each of the sites studied above. Table IV A-Weighted Levels Exceeded Ten Percent of the Time (L10) ' at Curbside in Decibels (re 20 µN/m2) L10 1 Location dB 1 Pacific Coast Highway and Marigold 84.0 Pacific Coast Highway and Patolita 86.0 Pacific Coast Highway and Bayside 83.0 Pacific Coast Highway and Dover 87.5 Pacific Coast Highway and L•ugonia 82.5 Balboa and 14th Street 82.5 Balboa and 38th Street 83.5 Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road 89.0 1 Irvine and Francisco 82.5 Jamboree and Ford Road 88.0 ' Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills 92.5 Dover and 16th Street 78.5 MacArthur and Port Westbourne 85.5 10 MEASURED COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE LEVEL A brief program was conducted to show daily variation of the Hourly Noise Levels at five locations within the City of Newport Beach. For this study, measurements were made for approximately five minutes at each of several sites in the City at each of several different times during one day. The data was recorded and analyzed in five minute samples in the some manner as was used for the hour long sample studies in pre- vious sections. Figure 2 illustrates the results of these measurements for the five locations. It is immediately seen from this data that the daytime levels for the whole day at every location monitored was between 70 and 80 decibels and each location is reasonably stable within its own range. It may also be seen that areas where heavy traffic does not decrease during the evening and nighttime hours, the noise does not drop as it does in the outlying and residential areas. Thus, while the hourly levels at the comer of Pacific Coast Highway and Dover are never extremely high, the heavy ' weighting applied to nighttime noise causes a high daily average or CNEL. Conditions at Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road, high traffic, many trucks, and all night ' operation, combine to produce a very high CNEL at curbside for that location. SEASONAL VARIATION OF COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE LEVEL The seasonal variation of the CNEL cannot be evaluated without extensive measure- ments of the seasonal variations of the traffic data. It is possible to make good esti- mates of seasonal variations where estimates of traffic flow may be compared with the traffic flow tabulated in Table II and by use of the data of Table V taken from Refer- ence 1. Table V Residual Noise Level With Changes in Traffic Flow Change in Residual Noise Level dB(A) Increase density of heavy trucks by factor of 4 +2 Increase passenger car density by factor of 2 +4 ' Increase density of all sources by factor of 2 +5 Increase passenger car density by factor of 4 +8 11 ' BO 1 70 44 L L I I 60 Jamboree at Ford Road CNEL=75.3 80 70 N 60 Z Pacific Coast Highway at Bayside CNEL= 77.9 Z 0 w 80 V W 0 70 a N W J 60 v Pacific Coast Highway at Dover CNEL=77.2 a 1 c y 80 70 60 Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road CNEL=80.5 80 70 co60 O O O ^ O ^ N N N N N O O O O O O LTime of Day in Hours Irvine at Francisco CNEL=75.6 1 Figure 2. Daily Variations of Noise at Five Locations 12 These data indicate that drastic increases of traffic flow must occur before large changes can occur in the residual noise levels. Not so obvious is the fact that if all sources increased by a factor of 2, there would be no 45 decibel contour between Jamboree Road and Irvine Avenue except as the noise was attenuated by the bluffs. ' Isabella Terrace would be exposed to the 59 decibel contour and traffic noise would be clearly audible above other ambient sounds. ' AMBIENT NOISE IN QUIET AREAS ' Three "quiet" locations within the City were chosen for monitoring of ambient noise levels. These locations were chosen as being deep in residential areas not affected by traffic on the main aerterials. The three locations chosen were: (1) San Bernardino at 15th Street, (2) Seaward Road at Isabella Terrace, and (3) Amethyst Avenue along the south Bayfront walkway. In these areas, one hour measurements were made during the daytime, evening, and nighttime hours to produce a total of nine hours of data. This data was analyzed in the some manner as was done for all other data reported above and the results are tabulated in Table VI. ' Table VI A-Weighted Ambient Noise Level in Quiet Locations (dB re 20 µN/m ) 15th Street and Isabella Amethyst San Bernardino Terrace Avenue, South Ddytime 65 53.1 62.3 ' Evening 60.5 53.9 53.3 Nighttime 49 52.4 49.9 ' CNEL 63.8 59.5 60.4 ' The area at Isabella Terrace shows a constant sound level throughout the day while the other areas show the normal nighttime reduction. This is due to large numbers of crickets and other animal noises throughout the measurement periods. ' 13 II PROPAGATION OF HIGHWAY NOISE INTO THE COMMUNITY The decay of traffic noise with distance from the highway has been extensively studied and reported upon in Reference 1. Figure 3 is taken from that report and shows the expected attenuation of A-weighted noise levels with distance for sounds propagating over level ground. This figure shows considerably heavier weighting associated with I diesel trucks than has been used in this report for Newport Beach. This is because of the small number of such heavy trucks traveling the highways of the City. With the exception of Newport Boulevard and, to a lesser extent, the Pacific Coast Highway, heavy diesel trucks are relatively rare in the City, since through traffic of this type uses the San Diego Freeway. Figure 3 shows a decay of 6 decibels per doubling of distance for decay of noise sources of this type for the first 500 feet. At greater dis- tances,. excess attenuation due to ground absorption, refraction, air absorption and other factors causes an increase in the decay rote. It must be noted that the data of Figure 3 has been extrapolated to very low levels (30 decibels) and that measurements of actual noise cannot be made at such low levels because other noises in the vicinity of the microphone mask the traffic noise. The Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL) can be derived from the data of Figure 3 by use of Equation 4. jSENEL = LA(R) + 10 Log L2 V.1 dB (4) where LA(R) = A-weighted noise level at the distance R R = Distance in feet 1 V = Speed of vehicle in feet/second Since, for a given vehicular speed, the ratio of R/V doubles every time R doubles, the second term of Equation 4 increases by 3 decibels with each doubling of distance. I � II � 14 r r 90 * Z 80 IIIIIIIIIu Light Helicopter ■ Z o d III. N jil` • Diesel II� II� illl Truck �auJi; W .a 70 hUt4 5B '^ C tl',.hail , J ��� p III II w 60 Z 'nt''„G ''!pw, Newport IIII!1'1161, 0 Passenger Car Blvd, s ;',; f' 'vtdi 50 N 40 r " I eli, 10 100 1000 Distance in Feet Figure 3. Variation in Typical Noise Levels vs. Distances For Several Transportation System Categories 15 ' The first term decreases by 6 decibels in this same doubling of distance so that the net result is a 3 decibel decrease in SENEL for each doubling of distance. Thus, the total energy intercepted by a receiver at distance does not decay as rapidly as does the sound pressure. Decay measurements were conducted within the City to verify the known data repre- sented by Figure 3 and to evaluate the effects of perturbations imposed on the sound path by buildings, hills, and cliffs characteristic to Newport Beach. Measurements of of real traffic noise are difficult as mentioned above because of local noise sources masking the street noise. However, one such measurement was made at the corner of Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road, moving west on Hospital Road. Figure 4 is a photograph of the area studied and it shows a second branch of Newport Boulevard I approximately 160 feet west of the main highway. The measurements were made by recording five-minute samples of noise at varying distances from the curb of the main highway and performing the same integration technique to obtain the total energy level as has been used before. This technique tends to minimize the contributions of local noise sources so that the traffic noise under study dominates to greater distances. This data is also imposed upon Figure 3 and shows general agreement with the other data of that figure except at 160 feet where the secondary road becomes a major source of interference. The interference caused by local noise sources necessitated the use of another tech- nique for studying attenuation of sound from traffic noise. Accordingly, an impulse noise source was constructed to simulate the traffic noise. This source was designed to periodically discharge a high voltage capacitor through the voice coil of a standard 1 horn loudspeaker. The size of the capacitor and voltage applied was adjusted to produce a pulse having a spectral output which closely approximates the spectrum of L automobile traffic when it is modified by "A" weighting of the sound level meter. Figure 5 shows a comparison of the one-third octave spectrum of the pulse generated with the octave spectrum of automobile traffic as modified by A-weighting. Both spectra have been matched at 1000 Hertz. The actual level radiated by the impulse ' 16 I S .S; ,~ 1 --- '" St • FIME DAIRY F0006 y - Figure 4. Intersection of Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road ' 17 Auto Traffic (Octaves) 10 dB Impulse Generator (1/3 Octaves) x s 100 2 5 1000 2 e 10 00 9 Frequency in Hertz Figure 5. Spectral Output of Impulse Sound Generator Compared with A Weighted Automobile Traffic 1 VVYLE LABORKIMM � 18 r r . ' generator is considerably higher than the traffic noise with peak levels of 146 decibels (re: 20 µ 2N/m ) four feet from the source. Such levels are sufficiently high so that a rmeter designed to respond to impulse noise is fully capable of tracing the signal from 146 to 80 or even 70 decibels. It is thus possible to determine decay rates at many rlocations where traffic noise would be lost in the ambient noise. A total of 32 differ- ent locations within the City were examined by this method to determine decay rates rin the presence of various obstacles. Table VII lists these locations with remarks concerning them. The results of the impulse noise tests are illustrated in Figures 6, 7, and S. The 32 sites have been subjectively divided into three general groups to reflect three differ- ent types of terrain. Figure 6 includes all sites judged to be flat and straight so that there was no obstruction of line-of-sight between the source and receiver. Figure 7 rgroups those sites where the source could not always be seen from the receiver, but ' there were no abrupt changes. A gentle hill or curve would be reported in this group. Figure 8 shows the results of tests which included going around a sharp comer or over the brow of a sharp embankment or behind a building. Thus, site 19 (Crown Drive at rMacArthur Boulevard) involved an embankment at the road and two wooden fences r quite close to MacArthur so the sound from the generator decreased 60 decibels between four feet and 100 feet. On the other extreme, it was possible to trace the r signal for 1000 feet north on Marigold Street from the Pacific Coast Highway. The band average shown in Figure 6 was converted to a. SENEL average by use of rEquation 4 and this was used to plot most of the contours on Figure 1. Where geo- graphical features such as highway cuts (such as MacArthur Boulevard at Port West- rbbume and Newport Boulevard at Hospital Road) dictated that more severe attenuation was in order, the curves of Figures 7 and 8 were used to modify the contours. ' The contours for high levels are seen to be very close to the road. Lower level contours spread.on an antilogarithmic scale as would be expected so that the distance between r45 and 50 dB contours is much greater than the distance between 65 and 70 dB contours. r � r19 +20 +10 9 o o L09 8 0 N s -10 N L O , a p Design Curve N > -20 a N � Site # � D ❑ 4 A, B a o -30 ❑0 3 q 0 2 A, B g n o 0 1 A, B ❑ 00 0 17 A, B v_� D p 12 A, B E v 11 a 10 A, B -50 1 10 100 1000 Distance, Feet Figure b. Attenuation of Simulated A-Weighted Traffic Noise in Open Generally Flat Areas mow M s~ I•! . s■s � � � � ! ! ,�■. +20 _ o $ o 0 +10 El O v D O Design Curve N m 'a -10 U N i Site # ❑] ° v� ❑ -20 o 5 A, B o .a a D ❑ 6A, B ° ° v A 7A A D 15 0 -30 0 o 0 13 ❑ D 16 A, B v v 0 0 -40 v 14 A, B OE VO d 18 g 0 9A, B o a ® 0 0 v D -50 1 10 100 1000 Distance, Feet Figure 7. Attenuation of Simulated A-Weighted Traffic Noise in Gently Sloping or Curving Areas i i i i i r• i i i i � i i i i i i i i +20 0 8 0 +10 g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q o Design Curve o -10 m n 0 c N a O N .4 -20 O m K n 0 O -30 Site p El ❑ 7B Q n 0 0 8 -40 o n 19 n n 0 20 0 -50 1 10 100 1000 Distance, Feet Figure 8. Attenuation of Simulated A-Weighted Traffic Noise in.Areas Having Sharp Curves and Bluffs Table VII List of Sites Chosen for Measurement of Sound Decay in Newport Beach Site Location Remarks IA Balboa Boulevard and Alvarado Street, going south 1B Balboa Boulevard and Alvarado Street, going north 2A Balboa Boulevard at 14th Street, Near grammar school going south 2B Balboa Boulevard at 14th Street, going north 3 City Hall — Newport Boulevard at • Near City Hall 32nd Street, going west 4A Balboa Boulevard at 38th Street, going southwest 4B Balboa Boulevard at 38th Street, going northeast 5A Pacific Coast Highway at Lugonia, going south 5B Pacific Coast Highway at Lugonia, Near edge of town going north 6A Hospital Road and Newport Boulevard, 1 going east 6B Hospital Road and Newport Boulevard, Near hospital going west 7A Cliff Drive at Irvine, going north Includes knoll ' 7B Cliff Drive at King Road, going south Right angle turn 8 Irvine Avenue and Francisco Drive, Residential southwest 9A Morning Canyon Road and Pacific Residential —curves Coast Highway, going south 9B Morning Canyon Road and Pacific Residential — curves Coast Highway, going north l0A Marigold and Pacific Coast Highway, 1000 foot measurement north 23 Table VII (Continued) Site Location Remarks 10B Marigold and Pacific Coast Highway, south 11 Pacific Coast Highway and Begonia, Residential going south 12A Pacific Coast Highway and Patolita, Open plowed ground going north 12B Pacific Coast Highway and Patolita, Residential going south 13 Dover at 17th Street, going east Parking lot 14A Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills, Apartment going east ' 14B Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills, Climbing Hill going west 15. Pacific Coast Highway and Do"r, going north 16A Bayside and Pacific Coast Highway, going south 16B Bayside and Pacific Coast Highway, Trailer park going north 17A Jamboree and Eastbluff Drive, Residential going north 17B Jamboree and Ford Road, going west Open space 18 Jamboree and Bison Avenue, Residential going east 19 Mac Arthur Boulevard and Crown Residential Drive, going west 20 Mac Arthur Boulevard and Port Clear, then residential Westbourne, going west 24 ' Thus, while the data of Figure 2 show very high levels at curbside, the levels only a few feet from the roadways becomes quite tolerable so that the contours of the highway . noise near Isabella Terrace drop to as low as 50 decibels while the animal noises are ' slightly higher (Table V). The noise contours are continued on a theoretical basis down to 45 decibels near ' schools and hospitals. These contours are extended well beyond any actual measure- ment capability, but they represent reasonably good extrapolations of the noise that ' might be expected. These theoretical spreading losses have also been modified where large geographical perturbations exist. The contours near the Corona del Mar High School are unmodified by geographical •considerations; until the 45 decibel contour intersects the backbay bluff and then the curve follows the-bluff line. A similar ' situation exists at the Hoag Memorial Hospital where the 60 decibel curve tends to ' follow the top edge of the bluff there. Beyond this edge, the contours are seen to show a rapid reduction in noise level. Thus, the hospital grounds are protected from the full impact of the heavy traffic on Newport Boulevard. The upper stories of the hospital are exposed to this noise, however. ' Contours between Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, north of Ford Road, have been continued down to 55 decibels to illustrate, in a small area, the natural exten- sion of contours for the entire area. It is also illustrated that there is no point within this area where the traffic noise drops to as low as 50 decibels. It is probable that ' isolated points within the area may be found where traffic noise does become inaudible, but the general area is all above 50 dB. ' HELICOPTER NOISE ' Police Helicopter The Newport Beach Police Department operates a helicopter in the normal course of police duties over the City. The helicopter patrols a varying route at varying speeds, 25 with occasional high speed runs for emergency work. For this reason, it is not possible to determine accurate duration weighted sound pressure levels over any given area of the City. Table WI tabulates data taken by the Newport Beach Police Department at several different locations in the City and at several different altitudes. This parti- cular helicopter has been treated for reduced noise emission so that the levels measured are considerably lower than those reported in Figure 3 for average unmuffled light ' helicopters. 1 Table VIII A-Weighted Noise Measurements from Police Helicopter Tuesday, 2/13/73, Wind Velocity 3 Knots from the North/Northwest a. 16th Street and Dover Drive (open area). Ambient Noise Level 54 dB(A) NBPD Helicopter 500 feet altitude 69 dB(A) NBPD Helicopter 800 feet altitude 65 dB(A) b. Shorecliffs Drive at East End (residential area, close in and near We canyon). Ambient Noise Level 55 dB(A). NBPD Helicopter 500 feet altitude 70 dB(A) NBPD Helicopter 800 feet'altitude 66 dB(A) Wednesday, 2/14/73, Wind Velocity 4 Knots from the Southwest a, 16th Street and Dover Drive. Ambient Noise Level 55 dB(A) ' NBPD Helicopter 500 feet altitude 71 dB(A) NBPD Helicopter 800 feet altitude 65 dB(A) NBPD Helicopter 1500 feet altitude 61 dB(A) b. Shorecliff Road at East End. Ambient Noise Level 52 dB(A) NBPD Helicopter 500 feet altitude 71 dB(A) NBPD Helicopter 800 feet altitude 64 dB(A) NBPD Helicopter 1500 feet altitude 60 dB(A) ' Both days had scattered clouds, however clear skies in the immediate area of the tests. All dB(A) readings were taken on a General Radio Company, Type 1561A Precision Sound Level Meter using the A-weighting scale. 26 1 The data of Table VHI shows a consistent roll-off with distance. For example, if the helicopter passed over a given point at a height of 800 feet at a speed of ' 60 miles per hour once per hour, it would produce a SENEL of 80.5 or an HNL of 45 dB. If more flights were made, the HNL would increase by 3 decibels each time the ' number of flights was doubled. Such a flight during nighttime hours would carry a 10 decibel penalty bringing the line directly below the flight path to an HNL of 55 dB. This is.comparable with the ambient levels found in many areas of the City. A point one-half mile from the flight path would experience a weighted HNL of 50 dB and a SENEL of 75 dB. This is comparable with that of an automobile passing once each hour. Military Helicopter An attempt was made to determine the effects of military helicopters flying over the ' City. Contact was made with the military authorities with the intention that several military helicopters would fly over a specified location within the City in a specified ' time period. A monitoring station was set up under the planned flight path at the northwest comer of Big Canyon Reservoir. During the appointed two-hour period, a single military helicopter flew within range of the microphone, but on a path that was several hundred yards to the east of the monitoring point. Distance and speed could not be estimated. This one recording showed a peak level of 78 decibels and a duration of 13 seconds (at the 10 dB down points) for a SENEL of approximately 86 decibels. One flight per hour would contribute 51 decibels to the local HNL. This would not be a large contribution to the HNL of even the quieter areas of the City (Table VI), but 10 flights in one hour would contribute a great deal. If these flights occurred at nighttime, they would be cause for great concern. METHODS AND EFFECTS OF NOISE REDUCTION 1. Barriers ' It has been seen during this program that the consideration of barriers as a method of reducing the intrusion of highway noise into residential areas can be 1 27 L of some use. At points where highways go through narrow deep cuts, the con- tours of Figure 1 are sharply compressed, and this has been particularly true around the Hoag Memorial Hospital. Reference 2 has investigated barriers to traffic noise and has shown that considerable reductions may be gained through the use of such barriers. However, the actual reductions obtained were any- where from b to 10 decibels less than those which might be expected from theo- retical considerations. This is because of scattering of sound by wind turbulence and other atmospheric conditions which affect sound propagation. Again, barriers comparable in size with the embankments described would have con- siderable effect, but, unfortunately would be quite unsightly and prohibitively expensive. Some rock walls have been placed along residential areas on ' Jamboree Road and other places where such areas are exposed directly to traffic noise, and these are undoubtedly having a good effect. 2. Vehicular Control The problems presented by roads such as Irvine Avenue, where high speed traffic is passing directly through residential areas, do not lend themselves to the use of barriers. For areas such as Irvine Avenue, it is recommended that ' the noise sources be more effectively controlled. This might be accomplished by stringent enforcement of existing speed limits or even through reduction,of ' these limits, but the correction factors listed in Table III do not indicate that large reductions of noise can be accomplished through reduced speeds. It is ' suggested, though, that strict enforcement of speed laws, combined with close supervision of sound control devices on the individual vehicles, would reduce the noise significantly. It was noted during the gathering of noise data within the City that large numbers of vehicles have modified exhaust systems which radiate noise levels in excess of 90 dB(A) and sometimes even 100 dB(A) at ' curbside. Conversations with homeowners who volunteered information at the time of data gathering indicate that these people are more sensitive to the high ' 28 ' peaks than their time duration would indicate. Even the levels that are exceeded 10 percent of the time (L10, Table IV) are excessive, but the 1 percent levels ' represent, to the homeowners, noise generated by persons who have I ittle or no regard for the environment. Many of these high peaks are the result of the t modification of exhaust systems in an effort to squeeze the last bit of power from small engines. Such vehicles attract attention. A primary recommendation ' for reduction of present noise level would be more strict control of the small minority of vehicles generating the highest noise levels. Heavy diesel trucks ' might well be restricted from Irvine Avenue to reduce peak levels even though average levels would be little affected. 3. Zoning Changes ' Most construction along the heaviest traveled streets, such as the Pacific Coast Highway, is commercial. Residences behind this commercial construction are ' therefore protected from the higher noise levels of these streets. However, it would be considered a drastic step to encourage commercialism along these ' streets and it is not compatible with overall land use plans. A more practical zoning approach to transportation noise reduction is possible by requiring ' sufficient noise reduction in external wall construction of single and multi-family dwellings facing on busy highways. ' 29 REFERENCES 1 . Wyle Laboratories, "Transportation Noise and Noise From Equipment Powered by Internal Combusion Engines, " for the Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., NTID 300. 13, December 31, 1971 . ' 2. Scholes, W.E., et al, 'Barriers and Traffic Noise Peaks," Applied Acoustics, Vol. 5, 1972, pp 205-222. 1 30 � i ' APPENDIX A ' DERIVATION OF THE HOURLY NOISE LEVEL PER AUTOMOBILE Table III of the report does not clearly indicate the process used for progressing from the HNL data measured to the levels that may be expected to be generated by a single automobile passing once in each hour or HNL*. The physical process involved is to ' accumulate the total acoustic energy emitted by the cars passing a given point (really the energy intercepted by a given microphone) and divide the total number by the number of cars passing the point to normalize the level to that of a single vehicle. it must be admitted that this average does not represent any of the possible extremes, but it has been found to be useful. When a number is given as a "level," it has been converted to a decibel scale. That is, the figure given is equal to ten times the logarithm of the total energy involved. • Thus, a Sound Pressure Level or an Hourly Noise Level has been "logged." A quick review of logarithms will reveal that if a level is divided by a number of events, the nth root of the total energy will result, rather than a simple factor. It is necessary, therefore, either to convert the level back into a number, or convert the number of ' events into a level. If we have a traffic count of 1000 cars, then we may say that we have a traffic level of ten times the logarithm of 1000 or TL = 10 Log TC = 30 dB ' (spoken as traffic level equals 10 Log traffic count). Given the traffic level, then, it may be simply subtracted from the sound level to obtain the level that would result from a single automobile. it can be shown that a heavy diesel truck traveling at freeway speeds will generate almost ten times the acoustic energy that an automobile will generate under similar conditions. However, for traffic conditions existing in Newport Beach, most trucks ' are small and speeds are low. For these reasons, an arbitrary factor of two is used to relate the noise of a truck to that of a standard automobile. That is, one truck equals two cars. At this point, it is possible to obtain a traffic count consisting of the number of cars plus two times the number of trucks, take the logarithm of it, and multiply by ' ten. An equation may be written to describe this action: 0 ' A-1 HNL* = HNL - 10 Log (Nc + 2Nt) + CI (1) ' where HNL* = Normalized HNL corrected for the number of events ' N c = Number of automobiles passing a given point Nt = Number of trucks passing a given point CI = Constant chosen to normalize road conditions (see Table A-1 and notes) Table A-1 is an expansion of Table III, listing the HNL, 10 Log(Nc + 2Nt), the corrections (CI) applied, and the final HNL* obtained. The correction factor (CI) would be zero if all the sites were similar; however, some of the sites involved stop signs, hills, high speed, and other conditions that would dictate change. Thus, a set of correction factors was derived to increase the average if it represented cars operating at less than normal speeds on level ground, or to decrease the average if it represented cars operating at high speeds, climbing grades, or otherwise generating ' more than normal noise. ' These correction terms are listed in the notes of Table A-1 and are applied as Column 5 of Table A-1 to the averages of Column 4, giving Column 6. A simple average of the numbers obtained in Column 6 gives the final value of 40.7 or approximately 41 decibels representing the HNL* that would result from passage of a single car in the one hour under standard conditions. Under the assumptions of this derivation, one truck passing each two hours would give the same average level. ' The data of Table A-1 may be used in reverse to obtain the HNL for any given hour of traffic count. It may be used in either of two different ways. It is possible to use the ' location data of Column 4, Table A-1, to determine the HNL*. This column would be used where a location listed corresponded closely to the location under investigation. ' A-2 1 Table A-1 Derivation of HNL* HNL HNL CI HNL*1 ' Location dB 10 Log (Nc+2 Nt) dB dB dB Pacific Coast Highway and 74 32.7 41.3 -1 40.3 ' Marigold Pacific Coast Highway and 76.8 34.2 41.3 0 42.6 Patolita Pacific Coast Highway and 73.6 36.5 37. 1 +3 40.1 Bayside Pacific Coast Highway and 76.2 32.5 43.7 -2 41.7 Dover Pacific Coast Highway and 73.3 33.6 39.7 0 39.7 Lugonia Balboa and 14th Street 70.4 30.4 40.0 0 40.0 ' Balboa and 38th Street 72.4 27.9 44.5 Out - Newport Boulevard and 79.8 35.6 44.2 -2 42.2 Hospital Road Irvine and Francisco 73.7 32.2 41.5 0 41.5 ' Jamboree and Ford Road 76.8 35.0 41.8 -1 40.8 Jamboree and Son Joaquin Hills 73.2 34.7 38.5 0 38.5 ' Dover and 16th Street 69.6 32.3 . 37.3 +2 39.3 MacArthur and Port Westbourne 78.2 33.7 44.5 -2 42.5 ' Average 41.4 40.7 1HNL* = HNL - 10 Log (Nc + 2 Nt) Nc = Number of Cars, Nt = Number of Trucks ' Corrections CI = +2 dB for low speed or downhill C1 = -1 dB if cars are climbing a 2% ' +3 dB for cars idling for long periods grade +10 Log d/20 where distance to traffic -2 dB if many trucks is greater than 20 feet -1 dB if cars are starting -2 dB for high speed 1 ' A-3 L ' Then, using information from Column 4, an HNL* would then be added to 10 times the logarithm of the number of cars (and trucks, if applicable) to obtain the expected Hourly Noise Level for that location at the time of the traffic count. The CNEL or daily noise level may then be obtained by determining the hourly traffic counts and HNL's for the entire day, using the proper weighting constants for HNL's obtained during evening and night hours. The 24-hour total of HNL data is added in accordance ' with Equation 2. CNEL = 10 Log 1 Log-1 H-1NLD + 3 E Log-I H—NLE + 10 E Log-I H—fl N (2) ' where HNLD = HNL during daytime hours (0700-1900) HNLE = HNL during evening hours (1900-2200) HNLN = HNL during nighttime hours (2200-0700) ' Annual CNEL data would, of course, be based upon annual traffic counts and would consist of adding all daily CNEL's together and subtracting 25.6 (10 Log 365). The second method would be to use the average number of 40.7 as the HNL* and add the correction factors of Column 5 (using the opposite algebraic sign) that apply to the ' area under study and add 10 times the logarithm of the traffic count. If Hourly Noise Levels are not desired, it is only necessary to determine the total traffic counts for the daytime hours. (0700-1900), the evening hours (1900-2200), and the nighttime hours (2200-0700). These counts may then be multiplied by one, three, ' and ten respectively and then added together to obtain the total weighted count. This total may then be operated upon to obtain 10 times the logarithm and this added to the ' HNL*. This result must then have 13.8 decibels (10 Log 24) subtracted to give the CNEL for the day. This operation is detailed in Equation 3. ' A-4 CNEL = HNL* + 10 Log IN + 3 Ne + 10 NJ - 13.8 +Corrections (3) ' where ' Nd = Number of cars + 2 times number of trucks during day N = Number of cars + 2 times number of trucks during evening e ' Nn = Number of cars + 2 times number of trucks during night ' It must be noted that the levels of Columns 4 and 6 of Table A-1, and especially their averages, do not show great variability from point to point, with or without correc- tions. Thus, for first order approximations of the traffic noise represented by these measurements, an HNL* may be taken around 41 decibels at curbside. Even truck ' counts may be included as cars if the total number of axles is divided by two to obtain traffic count. This is considered possible because of the small truck mix obtained. ' if trucks become a large percentage of total traffic, they would, of course, have to be figured separately. ' The use of the foregoing data will serve to estimate hourly, daily, and annual noise ' levels at curbside along the main streets of Newport Beach through the use of supple- mentary traffic data. ' A-5 1 FILE COPY t DO SNOT REMOVE WUM LABORATORIES ' PROPOSAL ' STUDIES LEADING TO THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN ' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA ' ATTENTION: CARL M. NEUHAUSEN ADVANCE PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR WYLE LABORATORIES PROPOSAL NO. R/350T8/RN ' MAY 5, 7972 Submitted By: ' Wyle Laboratories Research Staff ' El Segundo, California +X •I �I �� /y f' � •r /// I 1'I N�� �� I + • 6 d dIr Y •�r�� P��� � � ��� `q� '. .� � 1 Via O CRY W NIWPW BFi1CN O G H A N m,nr,auvaw� Figure 1, Newport Beach Highway Network MU LAB0RA7111MES P/35018/RN May 5, 1972 City of Newport Beach Department of Community Development so` 3300 Newport Boulevard 8 ao 4Q � A��tL� �11 Newport Beach, California 92600 — y of Poi L ��P 5 Attention: Mr. Carl M. Neuhausen Advance Planning Administrator Gentlemen: — Wyle Laboratories is pleased to submit the enclosed proposal, "Studies Leading to the Noise Element of the City of Newport Beach General Plan," as requested in your letter of April 13, 1972. The proposal outlines our planned approach to all three phases of the project. A firm fixed price has been established for Phase 1; pricing for Phases II and III is budgetary only, and will be firmed up as the project progresses and firm schedule information becomes available. Pricing for each phase follows: Phase I — Noise Study of Traffic on Existing Highways $13,600.00 Phase II — Noise Study of Projected Traffic on Existing $4,000.00 to $6,000.00 and Proposed Highways Phase III — Development of City Noise Ordinance $2,000.00 to $3,500.00 The proposed work will be completed within your scheduled dates. The proposal defines a comprehensive study of the noise environment associated with the Newport Beach highway and freeway systems. It is intended to be completely responsive to the requirements set forth in your request letter. However, we are also prepared to submit an alternate proposal outlining a reduced level of effort directed solely toward satisfying the basic elements of Senate Bill 691. This reduced level of effort would, of course, result in a lower price for the subject program. C SERVICES&SYSTEMS GROUP reet,EI Segundo,California 90245 213.322.1763 213.678.4251 WX 910.348.6699 Cable WYLAB City of Newport Beach R/35018/RN May 5, 1972 Page 2 Thank you for your consideration of Wyle Laboratories as your noise consultant. We are confident you will find our qualifications well suited to the needs of the City of Newport Beach and that our proposed plans will satisfy your requirements for the Noise Element portion of the City's General Plan. Should you desire additional information regarding any aspect of this proposal, we are available at your convenience to further discuss the project. Very truly yours, WYLE LABORATORIES California Research Staff I"Z vk w� R.A. Nordquist Contract Administrator RAN:mb j PROPOSAL STUDIES LEADING TO THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH tGENERAL PLAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA ' ATTENTION: CARL M. NEUHAUSEN ADVANCE PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR WYLE LABORATORIES PROPOSAL NO. R/35018/RN MAY 5, 1972 1 . Submitted by: ,± Wyle Laboratories Research Staff El Segundo, California 1 INTRODUCTION Wyle Laboratories is pleased to provide the City of Newport Beach with a proposal to " 1 perform studies relating to the noise element defined in Senate Bill 691 and the develop- ment of a city noise ordinance. The proposed work would be performed by the Wyle -Laboratories California.Research Staff. ' We believe our qualifications in the area of community noise measurement, measure- ment of transportation-noise sources and-experience with the development of noise 1 ordinances .constitute the necessary credentials for the performance of the subject program. These qualifications include: 1 • Consultants to the California Department of Aeronautics for the development of the Noise Standards for California Airports (Assembly Bill 645) and the associated 1 technical backup. 1 • A community noise study-for the Environmental Protection Agency addressed to that overall portion associated with outdoor noise in the community. This study ' -involved the analysis of data taken on a continuous 24-hour basis from 18•com- munity locations —two of those were in Newport Beach. Site descriptions and 1 noise data on these two locations are .included .in the Related Experience Section -of this proposal. • Consultants in the preparation of a comprehensive noise ordinance for the City of Torrance. 'Wyle subsequently.delivered a training program to.city personnel rela- tive to the noise ordinance and the development of an enforcement manual. 1 The following paragraphs contain a restatement of the program requirements in accord- ance with the communication received from the City of Newport Beach on April 13, 1 and a subsequent meeting with city personnel on April 14, 1972. This section is fol- lowed by a Program Plan which sets forth Wyle's proposed method for satisfying the 1 program requirements. 1 . ' 1 1 1 Phase I— Noise Study of Traffic on Existing Highways— Completion• by August 1, 1972 This phase will involve three tasks. The first task will be to determine and map noise 1 contours according to the guidelines contained in Senate Bill 691 for all existing major highways. Noise associated with the operation of*Orange County %port is not rele- ' vant to this program. The major highways of interest to the City of Newport Beach are indicated on Figure I. 1 The referenced Senate bill requires that noise contours be expressed in an acoustical standard based on A-weighted sound level measurements and that these measurements 1 contain corrections for the duration of individual single events and the total number 1 of events in a 24-hour period. It is evident that the Community Noise Equivalent Level rating scale (CNEL) would best satisfy this requirement. This rating scale was developed by Wyle Laboratories for the Department of Aeronautics. 1 The second task will be to determine ambient noise levels in various areas in the com- munity for different types of land uses. A final task will be to make recommendations 1 •on how to minimize the noise impact of-highways on various land uses within the City _ 1 of Newport Beach. 1 Phase II— Noise Study of Projected Traffic on Existing and Proposed Highways — To Be Accomplished Between January 1, 1973and March 1, 1.973 ' This phase will be to "determine and map the noise contours for projected levels of traffic on all existing and proposed highwaysand freeways. Conclusions regarding 1 appropriate site or route selection alternatives or noise impact upon land uses shal l be made for inclusion into the General Plan". 1 i It is desirable to organize .the data for Phase .I and II into a format that would permit a computer file to be established for all relevant highway noise data for Newport 1 Beach. This file could be updated on a regular basis to reflect changes and additions 1 to the transportation system. 1 1 2 I • • 1 " '1 Phase III—Development of City Noise Ordinance — (Exact Schedule Not Specified) As a final phase, a noise ordinance will be developed for ultimate adoption as a part 1 of the Municipal Code. This ordinance would reflect relevant elements of other city Noise ordinances— such as the California League of Quiet Cities Model Noise ' Ordinance. It would also reflect the results of the investigation of Phase I and II. 1 1 1 1 I I 1 � 1 1 3 F�4'A6Ce Z i .A-III±P ''FYi 1 \ +, ..:. '�i .'§�lll ..rwV� a\Ci.lt'1►�.. � Cam• i�a /J y `�Jl -d r �, I!r i i ,�,.�l-e•. ��./ 40 s •'"` t„" 1 uu �,4 to s RS '�' '}.t�3 :,�,. . ;�;v I f 1 4; �xkULi�h]IW oil" y1_{i1r' VI r yr �•�'I I I +J�� � �Y � ' e rrr��Ii4CR F�"^:-f�„(?�-� �. >r�1A-'=':.,^' _•,••_—� e•� .:,�_ �— ��r----- �� _ t9j�'.�s- `'�.,•- cm a eteroty eats — — - Siea where Wyla \�% i F r i ycs.,,..— _ performed continuous • ��� j / C O f: E A �' e...n°'.'^. ar.es 24-hour community \ �_� / _ •••� "�' noise studies Figure 1 . Newport Beach Highway Network ' PROGRAM PLAN - PHASE ONE Our approach to Phase I will be to develop annual CNEL contours based on field ' measurements and analytical studies of the Newport Beach highway network. One result of these studies will be a computer file containing the noise profiles at a series ' of representative highway locations. These profiles will be a basis for developing CNEL contours for the highway network and the adjacent property. The noise contours ' will be contained in a report summarizing supporting data and providing recommenda- tions for a noise reduction program. The following specific steps will be involved in implementing Phase I: ' Site Inspection ' Aconsultant and an engineering aide wi II drive over the complete highway network depicted in Figure i to determine the general characteristics of the Newport Beach highways, and the associated residential and commercial properties. Appro;cimately M highway sites, typical of the local land use categories and sideline property char- acteristics, will be selected during this examination. A detailed description of each of these sites will be compiled. Typical data obtained will be: • -Nature of highway-single-lane, double-lane, four-lane, grade, etc. • Traffic flow characteristics-this includes factors which govern the basic speed of traffic on this artery such as frequency of stop signs, placement of signals, speed regulations and other factors- in addition to traffic flow- which would ' influence vehicle speed and hence noise exposure. ' • Sideline property characteristics- this would include the elevation of sideline property, i.e., road level above, below or on a level with nearby property, characteristics and density of building construction on sideline property and changes in sideline property characteristics at increasing distances back from ' highways. 5 ' These descriptions of representative sites will be analyzed to select a number of field stations. A highway field station is defined as a site where physical measurements of ' noise levels, traffic flow and traffic mix will be made by Wyle personnel. The field stations will be representative of the range of highway, sideline property and land use ' conditions found in Newport Beach. In addition to the highway field stations selected, we will select a representative set ' of community field stations. A community field station is defined as a site where measurements of ambient community noise levels will be made. The community field ' stations will be representative of the range of land use conditions in Newport Beach. ' Measurement and Analysis Noise measurement at the highway field stations will be made to obtain input data for ' the Wyle Highway CNEL Computer Program. This program calculates the CNEL at sideline distances from highways based on traffic flow and vehicle characteristics. It ' contains correction factors to account for the effect of highway grade, sideline terrain, shielding and start/stop variations in vehicle noise. Data defining these correction ' factors will be obtained through a series of measurements at the highway field stations. Based on existing data of the daily and seasonal changes in traffic flow and mix in the Newport Beach area, and the data measured at the highway field stations, the com- puter program will provide annual and seasonal CNEL levels. The format of the processed data will be a series of sideline noise profiles showing the variation in CNEL with distance from the highway at representative stations. A sufficient number of pro- files will be developed for each field station to establish CNEL levels for the existing and projected range of traffic flow and mix conditions. The data gathered from the highway field measurement stations can, of course, also be used to calculate CNEL ' levels at other highway locations having similar characteristics. This procedure, together with interpolation between highway locations, will allow contours to be con- structed joining points of equal CNEL along the major highways. 6 . ' A sufficient number of ambient noise level measurements at each of the community noise field stations will be taken to accurately define the central tendency of'these levels. The ambient noise levels at these stations will be sampled over a 24-hour ,period, the number and the frequency of the samples depending upon the variation ' in the measurement levels. In this manner, the variations of ambient noise in both space and time can be determined for each of the land-use categories. Report ' At the conclusion of the measurement and analysis tasks, the Phase One report will be finalized. This report will contain the -following data: ' • Map of Newport Beach highway system with the annual CNEL contours • Seasonal variation of the CNEL contours • Typical values for A-weighted sound levels on the contours ' • Representative ambient noise levels for the various land use categories ' • The backup field measurement data and associated procedures • Sufficient explanatory text to set forth the goals, techniques and results of the program • Methods and effects of reducing noise exposure-near highways by varying the local correction factors characterizing the highway. ' The report will also summarize a general step-by-step noise reduction program encom- passing the definition, monitoring, and eventual alleviation of transportation noise tin the Newport Beach area. PHASE TWO ' The Phase II calculations will'be made utilizing the data base of sideline noise profiles ' established for Phase I and the development of projected noise profiles for field stations representative of highways and sideline property characteristics for projected highway 7 expansions and new freeways. The "computerized Newport Beach Highway/Community Noise File" will constitute a model which may be manipulated by inputting changes in ' traffic mix and new sideline terrain property characteristics to obtain projected CNEL (and noise) levels. ' The technique proposed for these calculations will greatly simplify the task of project- ing noise contours for the new freeways and highways. In other words, this will provide a practical tool for optimizing alternate plans for the expansion of the Newport Beach ' transportation system. The report submitted at the end of Phase Two will contain: ' s A matrix presentation showing noise reduction to be achieved in various land use areas associated with potential alternate traffic and highway conditions. a Aseries of recommendations relating to proposed highways and traffic conditions ' which would optimize reduction of the Newport Beach noise environment. a .Map of Newport Beach with the CNEL contours for the recommended projected -traffic on existing and proposed highways and freeways. t • .Recommendations relating to zoning, types of building construction, and technique for shielding recreational facilities which would reduce the noise input on Newport ' -Beach residents. PHASE THREE The municipal noise ordinance for Newport Beach — if properly drafted and adequately enforced — can be a key element in controlling and reducing the amount of noise which reaches the inhabitants of the city. It must be a working document and, as such, should be written to provide the maximum feasible amount of noise protection at the least pos- sible enforcement cost. The noise ordinance should: • Treat all the types of noise sources within the city's jurisdiction (a city cannot directly control overflying aircraft; direct control of motor vehicle noise has been ' preempted by the state). 8 ' • Provide protection to•all portions of the city,but in differing degrees according to the relative need for quiet connected with various uses of land and according to the achievable limits as related to the current background noise levels in the various regions. ' Provide particular protection for residential areas, and increased protection at ' night in those areas. • Place more stringent limits upon long-lasting noise than on noise of brief duration. ' • Place more stringent limits on noise of extraordinarily irritating quality (such as noise containing a whine or pure tone, or noise which is•a repetitive hammering). 0 Be based upon a simple, reliable acoustic scale which will result in the simplest possible enforcement (measurement) procedures and the least expensive measuring Equipment consistent with necessary standards of accuracy. ' • Be numerically specific, to serve as a guide for new industry and new develop- ments, making clear the noise limits which must be met if they wish to locate in the city, • -Be in a form which lends itself to integration with other elements the city may ' later adopt as part of a comprehensive noise control program. • Be unmistakably clear, legally fair and technically feasible. Wyle proposes to develop an ordinance meeting these criteria for the City of Newport Beach which also reflects consideration of data developed in the Phase I and Phase II programs. The tasks associated with the development of this ordinance are: ]. Review of all background data on Newport Beach noise problems— sources, time ' of occurrence, duration, levels, complaint history. 2. Consider the legal limits of control which the city of Newport Beach may ' exercise over noise sources. 1 9 ' 3. Develop specific criteria and objectives for the Newport Beach ordinance. 4. Review relevant city- noise ordinances— i.e., the California League of Cities ' Model Noise Ordinance— for application to the Newport Beach ordinance. ' 5. Draft of preliminary noise ordinance by Wyle for review by Newport Beach. 6. -Review of draft ordinance and incorporation of appropriate supporting text by ' Newport Beach Planning and Legal Departments. 7. Revision of Wyle text as required by Newport Beach. 1 1 10 1 • • I 1 I ' TENTATIVE SCHEDULE Elapsed times for Phases One and Two is based on the time constraints set forth in the ' request for proposal. Elapsed time for Phase Three is based on experience with similar projects. ' -Phase One (Assumes 12 Elapsed Weeks Total) Tasks Elapsed Weeks • Program Planning I t • Site Inspection I • Select Field Stations I ' • Perform Field Measurements 2 • Analyze Data 3 ' • Prepare Contours I • Compile Final Report 3 Phase Two (Assumes 8 Elapsed Weeks Total) ' • Review Data on Projected Traffic and I Proposed Highways ' • Integrate Data into Data File 1 • Analyze Alternate Approaches 2 • Develop Projected Noise Contours 2 • Compile Report and Recommendations 2 Phase Three (Assumes 12 Elapsed Weeks) • Review Background Data on Newport Beach 2 • Establish Criteria for Ordinance 2 ' • Review Relevant Ordinance Data for 1 Other Cities • Prepare Preliminary Ordinance for Review 4 ' • Prepare Final' Ordinance and Report on 3 Backup Data ' 11 1 ' PROGRAM MANAGEMENT The proposed program will be under the direction of Ben Sharp. Dr. Sharp has ' extensive experience in the analysis of noise from transportation sources, and has played a key role in Wyle Programs relating to community noise. In addition to Dr. Sharp, the following persons will participate in this program: Ken Eldred Lou Sutherland 'John Stearns ,Carroll Bartel Resumes for these personnel are included at the end of this proposal. ' RELATED EXPERIENCE The following pages contain a summary of the capabilities of Wyle's Research Staff and abstract description of relevant experience. The two community noise studies performed by Wyle in Newport Beach are inserted following the abstract entitled, 'Study on The Effects of Noise Pollution. " 12 WYLE LABORATORIES RESEARCH STAFF - A SYNOPSIS ' Wyle Laboratories was established in 1949 to provide environmental testing services to industry and government, utilizing its capabilities for testing in all the natural environments such as wind, rain and temperature, and in the vehicle-related environ- ments such as vibration, shock and noise. Throughout the years, Wyle has grown to ' provide a wide spectrum of technical services including testing, engineering and research in various environments. In addition, Wyle has diversified into other fields and has grown to a level of gross sales of approximately $100,000,000 per year. ' Wyle Laboratories' Research Staff was established in 1963 in Huntsville, Alabama, with an initial objective of supporting the NASA space effort. From the beginning, ' the principal emphasis in the Research Staff has been acoustics and dynamics, supple- mented with a variety of related disciplines including physics, aerodynamics, fluid dynamics, electronics, systems engineering, mathematics and computer software. ' The staff has the support of Wyle's extensive environmental testing facilities and instrumentation for both laboratory experiments and field measurements. This sup- porting experimental capability gives the staff a unique flexibility in approaching a research project with an optimum balance between experiment and analysis. ' Since 1963, the staff has grown significantly, and today there are three (3) major centers of research and engineering skills within the company. These are located at El Segundo, California (Wyle Headquarters); Huntsville, Alabama; and Hampton, ' Virginia. Accompanying this growth, there has been a continuous diversification in the clients served by Wyle and in the types of problems which have been solved. ' Wyle serves many agencies of the government including four (4) NASA centers; the Federal Aviation Administration; Department of Transportation; Department of Housing and Urban Development, United States Air Force, Army and Navy; Federal Railroad ' Administration and many others. Typical research problems undertaken include the following: ' • Investigating basic mechanisms of noise sources such as jets, compressors and heli- copter rotors with theoretical models and experimental validation. ' • Determining human subjective response to noise, determined by extensive psycho- acoustic experiments. ' • Examining structural dynamic response to noise, blast and earthquakes, including development of methods for prediction of vibration response of both buildings and vehicles. t ' • Developing advanced experimental facilities such as an acoustic chamber large enough to take a major section of the Apollo vehicle, and a facility which will ' subject a railroad car to all of the dynamic forces it will experience when traveling 300 miles per hour over the track. ' • Developing structures for better noise control such as high-transmission-loss, low- cost wall systems. ' • Investigating the mechanisms affecting propagation of noise through the atmosphere, developing more accurate and practical prediction techniques. ' • Developing advanced computer-based instrumentation systems and software for on- line real-time measurement and control of noise, vibration and other physical ' phenomena. • Determining the properties of pressure fluctuation fields resulting from turbulence and other unsteady aerodynamic flows through combined theoretical and experi- mental studies. ' • Development of new methods for simulation or testing to seismic and blast loads. Wyle Laboratories' Research Staff is also engaged in numerous consulting projects for ' state and local government agencies, industry, architects, planners and others. Through these activities, Wyle has become heavily involved in: ' • Establishing criteria for environmental noise. • Development of noise codes and regulations for both airports and cities. • Inclusion of noise considerations in urban planning. ' 9 Soundproofing of homes, schools and industrial buildings. • Architectural acoustics design of buildings for various uses. ' • Measurements of aircraft and city noise. ' • Development of new concepts of systems for monitoring the noise environment. • Development of practical devices and design for the reduction of noise at the ' source. • Measurement and control of industrial noise. j ' TYPICAL CONSULTING PROGRAMS IN COMMUNITY NOISE TYPICAL LARGE-SCALE PROGRAMS ' • Noise Standards for California Airports. Wyle served as acoustical consultant to the California Department of Aeronautics in development of the first state- wide airport noise regulations in the nation, adopted November 10, 1970, for all existing and future airports in the state requiring a state permit. Pro- gram has involved a close working relationship with the Department of Aero- nautics, their advisory committee, their legal counsel plus interactions and explanatory meetings with the public and various affected groups, to provide an innovative and integrated acoustical-legal document responsive to the ' problem of controlling airport noise by regulation at the state level. • Community Review Program for City of Inglewood (California) under their ' HUD grant. Wyle served as acoustical consultant to Urban Design CollaZ orative, to provide the acoustical advisement required for long-range planning of a city which lies under the approach path of a major metropolitan ' airport and which has the traffic noise and other problems typical of most urban areas. Program involves working with an interdisciplinary consulting team and the city's staff, to develop performance criteria for noise limitation, land use plans, building code amendments, ordinances and other planning/ legal/political tools for reducing the noise exposure of the citizens. ' • Environmental Impact Study on Potential Commercial Use of Oxnard Air Force Base, Ventura County, California. Wyle served as acoustical consultant to Adrian Wilson Associates, airport planners, to predict the potential noise environments associated with various postulated uses of the air base as a civilian airport, to recommend numerical aircraft noise/land'use compatibility guide- lines and apply them to an assessment of the compatibility of the proposed airport with existing land uses, and to recommend specific operational restrictions on the airport and legal means for their enforcement, together with compatible land use development guidelines. The program involved extensive coordination with affected communities and numerous public presentations in a controversial atmosphere. t • Phase II Master Plan for Air Transportation for the County of Orange (California). Wye served as acoustical consultant to the Ralph M. Parsons Company in a ' planning program to assess alternative means for meeting the air transportation needs of Orange County, working within a set of environmental quality guide- lines for noise limitation, and internalizing the costs of noise abatement measures. The program required the establishment of noise limits, numerous predictions of airport noise environments (using Wyle's airport noise prediction computer program and data bank), and close coordination with the client in evaluation and public ' presentations of the findings. ' WYLE LABORATORIES I • ' • Home Soundproofing Pilot Project for the Los Angeles Department of Airports. ' Wye served as prime contractor and acoustical consultant in t e experimental soundproofing of twenty inhabited homes around the Los Angeles Intemational Airport. The program involved the assessment of technical performance, actual ' cost, and degree of homeowner satisfaction achieved by various degrees of { acoustical modification. Wyle's responsibilities included experiment design, acoustical and architectural design of modifications, supervision of construction ' by subcontractors, field acoustical performance tests of the homes before and after modification, and design and administration of questionnaire/interview methods for assessing homeowner opinions. ' TYPICAL SMALL-SCALE PROGRAMS ' • Development of a Comprehensive Noise Ordinance for the City of'Torrance, California. ' • Development and presentation of a 3-hour educational presentation (with audio demonstration) to the City of Montclair (and representatives from nearby cities) on the prediction and alleviation of airport noise and community noise in general, ' and on the criteria bases for establishment of noise limitations.' .• Submittal of an invited position paper on community noise as related to public ' health (Elizabeth Cuadra serving as consultant to the Task Force for Develop- ment of a Health Plan for the State of California). ' • Determination of expected community annoyance factors for pavement reclaiming machinery. ' • Numerous educational lectures on community noise, its effects, and means for its control (for agencies of local government, for universities, for the State Department of Public Health, for professional groups, and for education of the ' public and those who teach in educational institutions). • Evaluation of noise environment in vicinity of French Brothers Ready Mix Cement ' Plant. • Evaluation of acoustical aspects of residential oil drilling operations, Humble ' Oil and Refining Company, California. • Control of jet engine runup noise in airline maintenance area, Los Angeles ' Intemational Airport. l ' • Acoustical evaluation of Sawtelle Substation, Tucson Gas, Electric Light and Power Company. ' WYLE LABORATORIES ' Environmental Protection Agency Contract No. 68-04-0046 ' STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF NOISE POLLUTION Two studies on the effects of noise pollution were undertaken in this program. These studies ' were part of a major program by the Office of Noise Abatement and Control of the Environmental Protection Agency and are summarized in the recent EPA Report to Congress. ' The first study related to "Noise From Transportation Systems and Small Internal Combustion Engines." It involved an in-depth evaluation of the noise characteristics of commercial aircraft, V/STOL aircraft, general aviation aircraft, highway vehicles, rail systems, ships, ' recreation vehicles, small generators, lawn care equipment and other devices powered by small internal combustion engines. ' In pursuing this study, Wyle first made a survey of the manufacturers of these sources to determine the status of all current and projected noise abatement programs: In parallel with this survey, a Iiterature search —supplemented by a noise measurement program — ' was conducted to establish the noise levels generated by these devices for both the operator and an observer. In addition to these studies, the actual noise generating mechanisms of each source was studied in order to properly evaluate the various noise abatement techniques. ' The results of this study were summarized in a report which considered: • Nature and economic significance of the industry associated with the source. ' * Basic noise characteristics of each type of source. • Environmental noise attributes of each source. ' * Past and present industry efforts toward noise reduction. • Estimated potential noise reduction for the future with today's technology. ' The second study addressed that part of the overall pollution problem which is associated with outdoor noise in the community. The basis for the community noise study was a survey ' of IS different community sites — divided into categories ranging from a noisy downtown environment to a quiet countryside environment. Continuous 24-hour noise level recordings were made at each of these locations. An extensive computer analysis of these data were ' subsequently performed to provide a detailed statistical analysis over a 24-hour period for each site. The result of this study was a comprehensive report developing a preliminary baseline for today's noise environment in a typical range of communities. Specific topics presented in this report included: • The variation of noise at a single location throughout a 24-hour day. ' • A comparison or test of the various community noise measurement scales. • The nature of constant and intermittent sounds and the constraints these sounds place on speech and other human activities. 9 Correlations between physical measures of an intruding noise and community reaction. ' • The growth of noise pollution over the past two decades. ' WYLE LABORATORIES _ y ' Corona 08 W, del Mar 79 \ \\r \ lot JD L,ght 42 grch Rocko 140 89 ` ' Community Description: Major recrea- tion beach state park; large parking area but no major high speed arterials or streets nearby. 0,5 mile to Pacific Coast Highway; channel entrance to a ' very large recreational boating and — M --- bay area. The beach and parking ' area is about 0.2 mile wide and '` Nq located at base of a 75-foot bluff. fr Noise Environment: Major intruding ' ~ events were due to a variety of air vehicles; several helicopters and small propeller aircraft at close range, and commercial jets at greater distances. Con- siderable noise during the day came from recreational activity on the beach and in the refreshment stand area. The residual noise during the evening was dominated by the surf which varied from 50 to 60 dB(A) with the breaking of the waves. During the day the recreational activity raised the residual level to the 56 to 58 dB(A) range and no surf noise pattern is noticeable on the record. An unusual intruding event was the beach sand cleaner at 7:30 a.m. The microphone was located about ' 100 yards from the surf at the junction of the sand and parking lot. It was placed 20 feet above ground level and above a partially covered breezeway about 75 feet from the refreshment stand. ' Figure A-5a. Location E — Popular Beach on Pacific Ocean — ' Corona Del Mar, California III ' A-21 D Figure A-56. Time History 7 N LOCATION E-0000 Hours to 1200 Hares N I 80 _ _ - _ __- - _. ___ - _ _- _ 7- - - - - - _ 0100 30--t -- - - _ ---- - -- ---- _ - -- -- -------- - -- -- -�_ 80 _ -- '- - - --- - --- - -- -- - - - --- - -- - - - 200 30 - -- -- - - - - so - - - _ - -- - - - -- - 0300 30. ---- -- - - - - -- - - -- - -- -- - --- - --- 80 04 - -- - - - -- -- $ 80 0600 m 30� _ 80 _ _ z 80 - _ o so 30 - - -- -- -_--- - _- --- - -- - - - - - - - — - - - - 80 1000 30=-- - -- - - ---- - - - - - - - - - ---------- - ----- 80 _ - - --_- --- --+ 30- - - -- -- - -- -- --- - - - -- - - - --- - _ ---- --- -- 60 — - I- - ---- - -- - - - - 3D 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Minuta • • 11 . li :1 - - ia �i�£IL-�.St�...— a "[ 1 £9R'rII1/ri�irTT.n• PTT9sx.�T'TT•i,.,�a_S._ _ 1 :1 _ 11 1 _ WWROWN :1 ... ••--" �, nd!w'.... _ .. . . rim F.p rR7• 11e�. RR. .. 'PI�rar ..ram.. R •rT^,ER!¢Si1 . 11 fl _ - FT1II�rf"'ir-�;�_�a�L'*rdF'1G1 . C3a..,.a� 1�^\�1^�.'1�7�4"'If• �t{7@14.�RRRw�'.?Iowl.7�nr!Pt\IIF.YP=^_�.�'r.'�.+',�1 .11 1 it 1 it .xTryrl4Rfr.:m.r!{`RPIi`i l R rn r R71r{44����•7� r�f]r 1i SA9QRn�aVgfTr�tJpR�•RT�T:T,u .w#s;��xa�i :I I 1 :1 e£si�i'.a,gt�'�!:+ttSAr •:^NFi+^;�r�.,nT,nrm_ � �"`�r•n:lr Tmp .Q7.Ali£ZF1�r '1•f�•��A•ItF1.7^.R'�l1�IT1Rr"1^wiRTll .q.•�iFT�--:r r..A11 •11 1 a S3iq'T'i r+1F�{�I•. rrirr'f 11 511,\ffl'r<£r�+,.r.ATR{4.'T.1`rrt�'+xlf.2t<nr"rr'••r}TRTr�rnr mT'r�} ir Prrm.wrr'nlrr•:••ngrR"•�•rT:TTl�iiflri�IT..�'1!!C'�Ttlilr..�.� - 111 1 :1 R.FVR"=<!R•.•.'9"31R1F iR!"tauRtllr�. Rlir ,f' *�'+s�6•Ir4SFr ..i;rS\+-sr GSiIrR�91F' r. €.•F " w 11 :1 `r.-r-.x„mi'... � �en m7R7a•mn'FI•S}r wi �s'�i.\�'Y 54Fs".t3.�.nr�.mfir.s,"IRre�"I\iw1.T•.,I�1�,�i"r'r'�t=���fir� 11 :1 :1 �+���.:W✓. �y m.m..r. ,rrw^'•ir F+r,nww•r.T nS3 r•r.Rra rT.fii".uu... 'F rw'n+aT_cr' r��rtc..- --�� -•wnF"•enrt�,^c%,rlr!^�, 11 1 100 Hourly Values O Residual Noise Level Arithmetic • Maximum Noise Level Average of the (Read from graphic level recordings) Hourly Values 90 During Period NE Z 80 • • • • • • • • • • • o • • • • ' N t0 • • • /�/^\\\ 70 \ • • • • L 60 1 ID i �..• , L 0 r .� eq 0150 O 00000 � 99L ' 3 a 40 ' �- AM PM ' 30 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 Day Eve Night Beginning of Hour 100 Day Evening Night E 80 ' i= 0 0 60 w 40 2 'a 20 0 30 40 50 60 70 30 40 50 60 70 30 40 50 60 70 t A-Weighted Noise Level in dB re 2011N/m2 Figure A-5c. Summary of the 24-Hour Outdoor Noise Levels at Location E — Popular Beach on Pacific Ocean ' A-24 ' .47 O .�4' Z ., '�*y •l,, .��•.I CProna rlcl Ainr s ,•}f .?. �� I rt High sdar ft HerPar I sdh �� •� Mp INER� 4 fJj�J\ .;',•` °W \ r ' ,l �+0.1 F / y ' i •a D mere � �� mP •elg . ' Community Description: Suburban resi- dential; large single family dwellings only; 36-foot wide street serving only local traffic for a 2-block length; 0.49 mile to Dover Drive, a four-lane ' arterial; 1.4 miles to Newport Boule- vard, 1.3 miles to Pacific Coast High- "r ' way, 1.8 miles to McArthur Boulevard, all major four-lane arterials; 3.5 miles to a major general aviation airport ' which has approximately 30 commer- cial jet flights daily; 0.3 mile from climbout ground track; 3,5 miles from ' takeoff brake release; 3.6 miles to the San Diego Freeway. Noise Environment: Major intruding noise sources were created by commercial jet aircraft in their climbout pattern, a few helicopter events, propeller airplanes and ' some automobile noise. Other intruding events results from dogs barking, lawn mowers, hammering, a car revving up across the street, a garbage can rolling down a driveway, and jet engine thrust reversals at the airport. The residual noise levels ' were relatively low and seemed uninfluenced by the presence of crickets at this location. Cricket activity is noticeable on the 24-hour record during the 0100 hour when one or more crickets were relatively close to the microphone. The residual noise levels were apparently dominated by neighborhood activity and distant traffic. The microphone was located 45 feet from the curb and 20 feet above ground level. ' Figure A-1 la. Location K— Urban Residential, Near Small Airport — Newport Beach, California 1 ' A-45 Figure A-1 lb. Time History D LOCATION K-0000 Houn to 1200 Hours 80 "— - _ - -- - - -- — 0100 30 80 80 0300 30� 80 70 R 2D r 05M 80 2 0600 e 30Z_ - - ----- - - ---- _ _--- --- -- -- - . _ ww F 30 90 O wo 40— O 90 40 1000 40— 7 100 12M •� � I _ I 1 I I � 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Minutes • • 11 11 .1 T. •—_ ,_.. Fla.r r..___., _ � '„ 1 - •1 - -- s�rtrszr' . - 11 '1 ��: �21 Tl��i�1lr•�igEe_a� ^.e` .."' T.F7'�11}•'.:..as'arn -MIL�A'RIRI�r.�,9s7ii15.a1p CIS n3L,7 #R^' d — n, r•ri� 11 1 mom •1 rl 9 �I�e1�T1 1 m-r�+�!�,+,��_.'• �,ln FA?I�wfiP'+f —...".�5.'FTV:rgT.'R+^�,IFTf�w16�4aFw.-M1 I .11 1 �.__ .. . 1`ilEr•�l .s, ! ern � r,n , T!TK�n ® n; i'i9tR3c.1 .. ,.... .. !14� I rm R�1!li?7!if��.n,•�rn r.^ w. 1� 11 1 1 - iaN1f'^'ie.:T('.s4•��'f.-Fd!_�IGR+1l�� .11��_r.�r`s_ :11 1 .1 '-..,-_•• �sr7�� .�-=r;�.�zs^^�_.a}�snasl�amll..ls.�s+sue _ •��a*.>e�+•e7'ms�r�nt '�s,�it•:+�...•�,=�.v 1 _ .1 :__•�•..m l)I�•^� r ��'i^�r�ib�o•••�F'+•.�.,. -.,.! .. 1�-.._ ,:; �a^�,..- Fi �'�r�T^.. 111 :1 .== 34�;T� •�S _G � `m'RI'id.J:Y:- �• ��l9'T' f� C'T4F�•.117 ,L -- Rl Tr wk :1 im :1 _ __ "e�.�^�Ca_���.-.. - _ ���P�+e•ii+.Ti`�ti �41 _ CP4:.rel.1T'�.�^;alai. .11 1 a) Various Measures of the Outdoor Noise Level ' 90 Hourly Values • • • • Arithmetic ' • • • Average of the • • • Hourly Values • • •80 During Period • • • 'N 70 • ZL N ' 60 v • r i . r �____ ., r •v • • i rr i `r ,� L10 ,r Leg 50 0 , Z o o L50 S L9 3 40 r L99 , a o Residual Noise Level • Maximum Noise Level , 30 (Read from graphic level recordings) AM j PM 20 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 Day Eve Night Beginning of Hour b) Histograms of the Percentage of Time Noise Was in Each 5 dB interval for Three Time Periods 100 Day Evening Night E 80 ' I= 0 w 60 ' at 40 a 20 0 30 40 50 60 70 30 40 50 60 70 30 2 40 50 60 70 ' A-Weighted Noise Level in dB re 20 µ N/m Figure A-11c. Summary of the 24-Hour Outdoor Noise Levels at Location K— Urban Residential, Near Small Airport A-48 ' Environmental Committee ' City of Torrance (California) ' COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR NOISE ORDINANCE & TRAINING PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF TORRANCE The Wyle Laboratories Research Staff served as acoustical consultants to The City of Torrance in the preparation of a comprehensive noise ordinance tailored to the city's needs. Wyle first performed a limited noise measurement survey to determine the spatial and temporal distribution of background noise levels in the city and the nature of specific noise problems. A draft originated by the city's staff was then expanded and made quantitative, so that the resulting ordinance covers al I kinds of noise sources within the legal domain of cities, and applied quantitative noise limits tailored to specific regions and land uses within the city. ' An accompanying final report was prepared, presenting the underlying rationale, sum- marizing the results of the noise survey, and placing the recommended ordinance in perspective with other recommended actions to achieve a quieter city. The ordinance was adopted by the City Council, becoming effective in May, 1971. Wyle is continuing to assist the city in other elements of its noise control program, including the training of enforcement personnel. In early 1972, Wyle prepared and presented a Noise Ordinance Training Program to indoctrinate Torrance City personnel in technical and practical aspects of noise. This program consisted of the following tasks: • Introduction to noise ordinance • Basic coverage of measurement terminology and techniques • Maintenance and calibration of sound level meters Develop a 'Standard Operating Enforcement Manual " (in process) 1 ' ' WYLE LABORATORIES City of Inglewood (California) via Urban Design Collaborative Los Angeles, California ' COMMUNITY REVIEW PROGRAM ' The City of Inglewood was awarded a grant by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to perform a citywide study to • Identify and document physical, social and economic problems. • Clarify community objectives in view of these facts. ' • Define and schedule a program of improvement activity to be implemented by the City. The City selected a planning team which included Wyle Laboratories as the acous- tical consultant, acting as subcontractor to Urban Design Collaborative. ' The total Community Review Program was performed by a concerted effort of the City staff and the team of contracted consultants. This contracted interdisciplinary team has as its nucleus Urban Design Collaborative, which is composed of two urban planning and architectural fines, an economics research firm, and a social science research firm. The major problems in Inglewood include an old central business district in which most of the buildings fail to meet earthquake codes, and a noise ' problem resulting from the fact that Inglewood lies under the aircraft approach paths to Los Angeles International Airport. Therefore, the subcontracted consultants include specialists in acoustics, building structures, law, and preventive psychiatry. During this one-year study, Wyle Laboratories established environmental quality criteria for noise, provided the other members of the team with inputs to assess the ' resources needed to achieve the desired environment, and recommended specific physical and legal steps the City could take (within the available resources) toward achieving the environmental goal. WYLE LABORATORIES County of Orange (California) ' via The Ralph M. Parsons Company Los Angeles, California ' AIR TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN (PHASE II) FOR ORANGE COUNTY Wyle Laboratories served as acoustical consultant to The Ralph M. Parsons Company in an air transportation master planning effort for Orange County. In this six-month pro- gram, the objective was to provide the County with a definitive plan for a system of i airports which would provide the necessary level of air service to the citizens of ' Orange County while minimizing the environmental noise impact to existing communi- ties. ' Wyle Laboratories utilized their computer program to predict airport noise environments associated with various proposed operational modes for each airport. Airports involved in the study included the existing Orange County Airport, three potential new airports (one general aviation, one metroport, and one recreational airport) and three military air fields with possibilities of joint civilian use. Based on Wyle's recommendations on noise limit criteria for various land uses, the various sites were evaluated, recommendations made as to their relative suitability, and the potential costs of land use conversions and.building modifications internalized ' as a cost to the aviation activity. Site selections, limitations of service, noise abate- ment measures and noise monitoring systems were affected by the acoustical consultant's recommendations. ' The project final report is: The Ralph M. Parsons Company, "Air Transportation Plan (County of Orange, California), Master Plan, Phase II," prepared for the Orange County Board of Supervisors, Santa Ana, California, October 15, 1970. ill WYLE LABORATORIES 0 ' Mr. Steven Yee, Department of Airports No. I World Way, Los Angeles, California 90009 (213) 646-4267 HOME SOUNDPROOFING PILOT PROJECT ' The Los Angeles Department of Airports, deluged by homeowner complaints and law- suits due to community noise problems from aircraft operations at Los Angeles Inter- national Airport, funded a pilot project involving the soundproofing of twenty existing homes against aircraft noise. The purpose of the project was to determine whether the soundproofing of large groups of homes would be suitable as one portion of an overall system solution, in terms of homeowner satisfaction and cost. The Home Soundproofing Pilot Project was conducted in several sequential phases. In Phase I, the design of the entire experiment was laid out in such a way as to obtain a 1 representative sample of the numerous Southern California house construction types and of the various geographic, political, and noise exposure regions around the airport. Phase II included all the actual soundproofing experimentation. First, a series of tests ' were conducted in three uninhabited houses owned by the City and located roughly under a takeoff path; these three houses were used as test sites in which to evaluate whole series of house elements in terms of acoustical performance and actual cost for ' materials and installation labor. Using aircraft flyby noise, the acoustical performance of each test element was evaluated by comparing simultaneously recorded signals from indoor and outdoor microphones. Modifications to all major exterior elements of houses were tested: roofs, walls, ceilings, floors, windows, doors and exterior vents -- some ' sixty modifications in all -- plus the effects of acoustical reflection and shielding by patio walls and the house itself. From these results, the most cost-effective modifi- cations were selected for use in owner occupied homes. ' Finally, twenty inhabited homes (volunteered by their owners for the project)were modified and subjected to acoustical field performance tests. Three different degrees of soundproofing were utilized, corresponding to reductions in noise level (from an ' outdoor microphone to an indoor microphone)of 25, 35 and 45 dBA respectively. Before and after the modifications, the residents of the homes were interviewed using an extensive questionnaire. This satisfaction assessment revealed that the lowest de- gree of soundproofing was insufficient; that the intermediate degree provided a high degree of satisfaction in most cases; and that in areas where the highest degree of soundproofing is warranted, the homeowners tend to judge the region unsuited to resi- dential use because of the outdoor environment. These results combine to indicate that the intermediate degree of soundproofing is promising. The complete experiment description, acoustic performance and cost results, interview results and details of how to modify homes against exterior noise are provided in a two- volume report, copies of which must be obtained from the Department of Airports: • "Final Report on the Home Soundproofing Pilot Project for the Los Angeles ' Department of Airports," Wyle Laboratories Research Staff, WCR 70-1, March 1970. ' • "Guide to the Soundproofing of Existing Homes Against Exterior Noise," Wyle Laboratories Research Staff, WCR 70-2, March 1970. Department,of Aeronautics State of California ' NOISE STANDARDS FOR CALIFORNIA AIRPORTS By passage of Assembly Bill 645 (1969), the California Legislature mandated the State Department of Aeronautics to adopt noise standards to govern the operation of aircraft and aircraft engines at airports operating under a permit from the Department. This covers all but military airports and some small private airports which do not invite the ' general public. The Wyle Laboratories Research Staff served as the acoustical con- sultant to assist the Department of Aeronautics in drafting the regulations. A seven-member Advisory Committee on Noise Standards, whose members were ' appointed by the Governor in accordance with AB 645, assisted the Department in selecting an acoustical consultant and in reviewing and recommending modifications as the consultant's work progressed. In a series of meetings of the Committee, the Department, the consultant and legal counsel from the Office of the Attorney General, a proposed noise standard was developed and agreed upon by vote of the Advisory Committee for purposes of the public hearings. On April 1, 1970, the Department of Aeronautics provided copies of the proposed noise standard to all members of the Legis- lature, and thereafter to all persons requesting copies, in a document entitled, "Report to the Legislature on Proposed Noise Standards for California Airports Pursuant to Pub- lic Utilities Code Section 21669." Public hearings on the proposed standard were held in Los Angeles and San Francisco on May 19 and 20, under the auspices of the California Aeronautics Board. Subsequent to these hearings, additional working sessions were held with the Department, their ' consultants, the Advisory Committee and the Aeronautics Board to revise and improve the noise standard on the basis of testimony received in the public hearings. On Nov- ember 10, 1970, the California Aeronautics Board formally adopted the revised noise standard, and this adopted regulation is scheduled to go into effect December 1, 1971. The regulation itself is contained in California Public Utilities Code, Section 21669 at seq., Title 4, California Administrative Code, Chapter 9, Subchapter 6, com- mencing with Paragraph 5000. There is also available a background information report intended for reference by all I interested parties including the lay public: Wyle Laboratories Research Staff, "Supporting Information for the Adopted Noise Regulations for California Airports," Final Report to the California Department of Aeronautics, Report No. WCR 70-3(R), January 29, 1971. This report provides an introduction to the basic concepts involved in solving or pre- venting a community noise problem, describes the basic physical and human factors concepts required for quantitative description of a noise environment, presents the underlying rationale for the structure of the noise regulations, presents the back- ground data underlying the selection of the numerical limits for cumulative noise ' and for single flyby events, describes techniques for controlling and reducing airport noise, and discusses the noise monitoring systems required for implementation of the regulations at airports with existing noise problems. r, 1 BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE IN AIRPORT NOISE ENVIRONMENT PLANNING A comprehensive and valid definition and analysis of noise impact for any airport requires ' the application, in depth, of technical competence in several areas. The extensive back- ground and experience of Wyle Laboratories in these areas is briefly summarized in the following: ' 0 Planning Methodology The application or development of innovative planning techniques has been a contin- uing part of the activity of the Research Staff of Wyle Laboratories as consultants for goverriment agencies and industrial concerns on acoustic environments. This work has included the development of long range research plans for evaluation of environ- ments, the development of new standards for noise monitoring, participation with A and E firms on complete turnkey programs for planning and construction of environ- mental test facilities. • Prediction of Aircraft Noise Looking to the future, substantial changes from current conditions will occur in the type and mix of the commercial jet aircraft fleet. Therefore, for planning purposes, ' it is often necessary to anticipate the noise exposure from new aircraft yet to be built. Wyle Laboratories is uniquely equipped to provide this capability by virtue of our nationally recognized position as one of the major contributors to the state- . of-the-art of aircraft noise prediction. This posture has been achieved through results from a number of research and consulting studies for various NASA agencies, the U.S. Air Force and aircraft manufacturers. For example,-we acted as con-sultants on noise environment for the SST aircraft to the Office of Supersonic Development, Department of Transportation. • Airport Noise Monitoring I ' Installation of portable or fixed noise monitoring systems is now required at some airports in the State of California as a result of legislative action and is being utilized elsewhere as a practical tool for the airport manager to effect significant control of his operations to minimize community noise problems near his airport. Wyle Laboratories have been involved for many years in 'instrumentation system design and development and have supported the Los Angeles Department of Airports ' in their planning procurement and checkout of a noise monitoring system. This type of background, coupled with our own extensive field experience in noise measure- ments, provides a wide range of supporting capability to airports who need to plan or conduct airport noise measurements. ' WYLE LABORATORIES • Prediction of Sound Propagation ' Typical weather conditions at any given airport site are not necessarily representa- tive of average conditions throughout the country. The weather can influence the ' sound propagation by changing the atmospheric attenuation for the temperature- humidity conditions which are characteristic for the airport. Wyle has carried out original research on the topic of sound propagation losses to advance the basic state-of-the-art in this area and are continuing this effort under contract to the Army Research Office, Durham, North Carolina. Accurate assessment of the aver- age atmospheric propagation loss can, in some cases, significantly reduce'the size ' of the noise impact footrpint at an individual airport. • Community Response to Noise The response of a community near an airport to noise is a composite of many factors, some of which can be measured or defined in terms of a subjective reaction scale and related to an objective measure of the noise. Wyle has been responsible for several basic studies on subjective and objective reaction of people to noise. These studies have been carried out under contract to the FAA and NASA and have pro- vided basic data, previously unavailable, on noise scales for STOL and general aviation aircraft as well as providing additional detailed data on noise scales for commercial aircraft and community reaction to noise. ,. • Noise Control for Buildings Planning for noise environments around•a given airport includes consideration of noise reduction requirements for residences, commercial installations or industrial ' buildings so as to minimize internal noise levels from ground and takeoff operations of jet aircraft. Whatever noise exposure exists can often be attenuated by the building structure to achieve acceptable internal noise levels. Wyle personnel ' have carried out several studies involving noise reduction for residential and commercial buildings near major airports. We have also conducted studies on sound transmission loss through building structure under a government contract and, as consultants, have evaluated sound transmission loss of building components for a variety of commercial clients. This background will aid in making practical engineering evaluation of any required noise control for buildings or residences near airports. ' WYLE LABORATORIES ' CARROLL BARTEL ' POSITION: Member of the Research Staff ' JOINED WYLE: July 1971 PRINCIPAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: ' - Perform research on the environmental noise contribution of various types of transporta- tion and recreational vehicles. Responsible for acoustic data analysis and applications ' programming. BACKGROUND: - Wyle Research Staff, El Segundo. July 1971 to present.- developed a series of com- puter programs for the statistical analysis of 24 hour community noise data. These ' programs were written in Fortran IV for operation on a CDC 6600 computer. These programs process data from a distribution analyzer and produce outputs that include: 1) Raw data, 2) Normalized data, 3) Analysis data - arithmetic mean, energy mean, approximation to energy mean, standard deviation, decile levels (0.01, 0.1, 0.5, 0.9, 0.99) hourly noise level, approximation to Noise Pollution Level, Noise Pollution Level, Traffic Noise Index, 4) Cumulative CNEL calculations by decibel band, and 5) ' Cumulative distribution data. All of these, except (4), are performed for each of 24 hours, daytime period (0700- 1900), evening period (1900-2200), nighttime period (2200-0700), and entire day (0000-2400). A variety of support programs as needed for the analysis of community , noise data were also written and utilized on a timesharing network. ' - Wyle Laboratories Systems Division, El Segundo. Eighteen months systems programmer and analyst. Designed and implemented systems programs for custom data acquisition, reduction and control systems. Also performed program analysis and system analysis for proposal efforts. Designed real-time programs to control the spectral analysis of digitized analog data. ' The system performed Fourier analyses, auto- and cross-correlations, power spectral densities, real-time and block convolutions, etc. ' Assisted in the design and implementation of real-time programs to control an acoustic test facility. These programs were capable of accepting and reproducing spectral shapes in any of four test cells, acquiring and analyzing test data, and on-line spectrum shaping. ' Designed and developed real-time programs for the acquisition and analysis of 1600 channels of calibration data from tests on the Apollo Short Stack. The programs calculated the mean, variance, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis for all channels as well as indicating which channels exceeded preset limits for three calibration levels. Designed and developed real-time programs for the acquisition and reduction of ordnance ' test data. The reduction included integration, rms calculation, averaging and delta time calculation. These programs are capable of completely controlling the pretest count-down sequence, test initiation and test termination, normal or abnormal. ' CARROLL BARTEL ' Instructor at Wyle Systems for the SEL 840-A, PDP-9, PDC-808 and DDP-416 computer programming classes. ' Instructor at the Naval Weapons Laboratory, Dahlgren, Virginia, for advanced pro- gramming techniques for the SEL 840-A computer. North American Rockwell, Rocketdyne Division, Santa Susana, California. Three years ' systems programmer for the Data Systems Engineering Unit. Responsible for the develop- ment of systems programs for the DDP-24 and DDP-116 special purpose digital computers. ' Significant contributions in the design and development of real-time on-line programs utilizing the DDP-24 computer as a test performance analyzer and controller. These programs acquired calibration and test data and with these calculated and displayed ' on-line performance parameters. These parameters included volumetric propellant flow with temperature/density corrections, net positive suction head, isentropic head, turbopump speed, etc. Through multi-level limit checking, these programs are capable tof-terminating a test under preset abnormal conditions. Designed and developed real-time on-line programs to completely control, acquire and t record instrumentation calibration and test data. These programs performed calibration and test data displays as well as multi-level limit checking providing test performance control. ' Designed and developed man-machine communication programs to assist test-oriented personnel in system operation. These programs significantly reduced the possibility of human input errors through the simplification of the data input procedures and through ' the incorporation of internal self-checking logic. These programs also reduced the training period required to produce competent machine operators. ' Assisted in the development of a propellant analysis program for several of the more common rocket propellants. ' EDUCATION: - Northrop Institute of Technology, Inglewood, California. B.S. magna cum laude, ' Applied Mathematics with emphasis in Electronics. - San Fernando Valley State College, Northridge, California. Undergraduate studies ' in Mathematics. - Los Angeles Valley College, Van Nuys, California. Undergraduate studies in Mathematics. 1 - University of California at Los Angeles Extension. Undergraduate studies in Mathematics. PUBLICATIONS: ' ' - "Instrumentation and Parameter Surveillance and Display with an On-line Computer," 1 presented at Instrument Society of America, Aerospace Division Symposium, May 1966, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. KENNETH McK. ELDRED ' POSITION: Vice President and Technical Director, , I, Scientific Services and Systems Group ' JOINED WYLE: February 1963 PRINCIPAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: ' - Responsible for directing the technical efforts of the Wyle Laboratories Scientific Services and Systems Group, which includes a wide range of scientific disciplines including acoustics, dynamics, aerodynamics, hydrodynamics, biodynamics, structures, applied mathematics, electronics, reliability, computer applications, and architectural acoustic consulting. ' BACKGROUND: Six years, Western Electro Acoustic Laboratory. Vice President and Consultant in Acoustics and Vibration. Consulting included missile and aircraft noise and vibration, simulation of environment in model scale, sonic fatigue, investigation of basic factors controlling aerodynamic generation of noise in jets, rockets, boundary layers and wakes, evaluation and design of jet noise control devices, investigation of vibration transmission in complex vehicle structure, development of dynamically similar structural models, prediction of vibration and acoustic environments for structure and equip- ment, evaluation of community and factory noise and vibration problems, acoustical design of audi- toriums, office buildings, schools, design of high transmission loss and absorbing structures, et cetera. ' - Two and one-half years, Bio-Acoustics Branch, Wright Air Development Center, USAF, as Chief, Physical Acoustics Section. Directed research for evaluation and control of major USAF noise sources, including extensive measurements of rocket and jet noise, investigation of noise radiated from aircraft, development of methods to predict total acoustic environment of aircraft and missiles, determination of basic principles of jet noise reduction devices, evaluation of community air base problems, development of methods for predicting community reaction to noise from air base oper- ations, evaluation of engine test cell treatments, studies on effects of atmospheric conditions on propagation of noise from aircraft in flight, development of prototype ground runup noise suppressors for jet aircraft, et cetera. Four years, Boston Naval Shipyard, as Engineer in charge of Vibration and Sound Laboratory. ' Responsibilities included evaluation of shipboard vibration and noise problems of all types, evalu- ation of underwater noise radiated by submarine auxiliary machinery, research to determine fundamental sources of vibration in rotating machinery, and development of precision portable balancing instrumentation and techniques, et cetera. EDUCATION: ' - Massachusetts Institute of Technology, B.S., General Engineering, 1950 - Massachusetts Institute of Technology, graduate courses in acoustics - University of California at Los Angeles, graduate courses in mathematics WYLE LABORATORIES MEMBER: , - Acoustical Society of America (Fellow). Active in committees and standards' writing groups. - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics t - Air Force Association - American Association for Advancement of Science , - American Society for Testing and Materials - Audio Engineering Society , - Institute of Environmental Sciences, Technical Committee on Acoustics - Chairman - International Oceanographic Foundation - National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Committee on Hearing, Bioacoustics, & , Biomechanics, "CHABA;" Subcommittee - Noise &Vibration Levels - National Council on Noise Abatement , - Society of Automotive Engineers, Committee A-21 on Aircraft Exterior Noise Measurement - Alabama Society of Professional Engineers ' - California Society of Professional Engineers PUBLICATIONS: ' - "Resume of Applications of Vibration Engineering to Solution of Marine Operational Problems," 1953 Trans, of SNAME. Co-author. ' - "Results of Experience in Balancing Submarine Auxiliaries," Summary of USN Underwater Sound Symposium, May 1954. - "Criteria for Short Time Exposure of Personnel to High Intensity Jet Aircraft Noise," WADC TN , 55-355. Co-author. - "Noise Radiation from Jet Aircraft in Flight," JASA Vol. 28, P 519 (A) Co-author. ' - "Prediction of Rocket and Turbojet Noise," presented at ASA Fall Meeting, 1956. - Comments on "Noise Characteristics of the Carovelle Jet Airliner," Noise Control, Vol. 4, No. 3, P 46-48. May 1938. ' - "Measurement of Industrial Noise," Noise Control, Vol. 4, No. 4, P 40-46. July 1958. - "Acoustical Factors in Jet Airport Design," JASA Vol. 32, No. 5, P 547-557. May 1959. ' - "Prediction of Sonic Exposure Histories," WADC TR 59-507, September 1959. - "Review of the Noise Generation of Rockets and Jets," JASA Vol. 32, No. 11, P 1502. (A) - "Bose Pressure Fluctuations," JASA Vol. 33, No. 1, P 59-63. January 1961. - "Structural Vibration in Space Vehicles," WADD TR 61-62, 1961. Cc-author. - "Structural Vibration in Space Vehicles," AIA-ONR Symp. Struct. Dynamic High Speed Flight, , P 649-685, ACR-62. April 1961. - "Empirical Prediction of Space Vehicle Vibration," DOD, Shock, Vibration and Associated Environ. Bulletin 29, Part 4. June 1961. ' KENNETH McK. ELDRED 1 PUBLICATIONS: ' - "Noise Generated by Aircraft in Flight," JASA Vol. 33, No. 6, P 845, June 1961. (A) ' - "Acoustical Evaluation of the (various) Ground Runup Noise Suppressor," ASD TR Nos. 61-540, 61-541, 61-542, 61-544, October 1961 and Tech. Documentary Reports Nos. 62-21, 62-22, 62-23, 62-24, and 62-25, Aerospace Med. Research Div., April 1962. Co-author. ' - "Utilization of Dynamically Similar Structural Models in Predicting Vibration Responses of Flight Vehicles," Shock, Vibration and Associated Environments, Part III, Bulletin No. 31, April 1963. Co-author. - "Noise Radiation In and Near a Jet Flow," JASA Vol. 35, May 1963. Co-author. (A) "Investigation of a Method for the Prediction of Vibratory Response and Stress in Typical Flight Vehicle Structure," ASD-TDR-62-801, August 1963. Co-author. - "Suppression of Jet Noise with Emphasis on the Near Field," ASD TR 62-578, September 1963. Co-author. - "Problems in the Laboratory Qualification of Structures and Equipment Exposed to Intense Acoustic ' Environments," Published in the 1964 Proceedings of the IES. - "Noise and Aerodynamic Pressure Fluctuations Anticipated for Space Vehicles," or "Laboratory Simulation of an Acoustic Environment for Qualification Testing," Presented at the Second Inter- national Conference on Acoustic Fatigue, 1964.- "Noise Reduction of Jets by Multiple Nozzles and Turbo Fans," JASA, Vol. 36, P 1035, 1964. (A) - "Empirical Correlation of Excitation Environment and Structural Parameters with Flight Vehicles Vibration Response," WPAFB TR-64160. Co-author. - "High Intensity Acoustic Testing - Reverberant or Progressive Waves," Presented at the Fifth Con- gress D'Acoustique, Liege, Belgium, September 1965. - "Estimating the Acoustic Loading on Building Structures Near Launch Sites," Presented at the Acoustical Society of America, Washington, D.C., June 1965. (A) ' - "Basic Model for the Correlation and Prediction of Flight Vehicle Vibration," Presented at the 35th Symposium on Shock & Vibration, October 1965. Co-author. - "Performance of a New 100,000 Cubic Foot Reverberation Room," Presented at the 71st ASA Meeting, ' Boston, June 1966.- "No Sonic Barrier To The Moon," Test Engineering, 1966. ' - "Gas Turbine Noise Control," Presented at the 1967 Annual Meeting of the SAE, January 1967. Co-author. - "Large Acoustic Facilities for Environmental Simulation," Presented at the 1967 Annual Meeting of ' the IES. Co-author.- "Development of Acoustic Test Conditions for Apollo Lunar Module Flight Certification," Shock & Vibration Bulletin No. 37, Part 5, January 1968. Also presented at the 37th Shock & Vibration ' Symposium, Orlando, Florida, 1967. Co-author.- "Concept, Design„ and Performance of the Spacecraft Acoustic Laboratory," Shock & Vibration Bulletin No. 37, Part 5, January 1968. Also presented at the 37th Shock & Vibration Symposium, ' Orlando, Florida, 1967. Co-author.- "Large Vibroacoustic Test Facilities -Vibroacoustic Environmental Simulation for Aerospace Vehicles," Shock & Vibration Bulletin No. 37, Part 5, January 1968. Also presented at the 37th Shock & ' Vibration Symposium, Orlando, Florida, 1967. WYLE LABORATORIES PUBLICATIONS: , - "Coupling of Finite Sized Sources to a Modal Reverberant Sound Field," Presented at the 76th ASA Meeting, Cleveland, Ohio, 1968. Co-author. ' - "Vibration and Acoustic Test Techniques," Presented at the IES 15th Annual Technical Meeting & Equipment Exposition, Anaheim, California, April 1969. " Simulation of Space Vehicle Launch Environment, with Emphasis on Acoustics," Presented at the ' 77th ASA Meeting, Philadelphia, Pa., April 1969. Co-author. "Some Technical Aspects of Noise Abatement Regulations," Presented at the 1970 Annual Meeting of the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), Hartford, Conn., September 1970. , "High Transmission Loss Wall Panels," Presented at the Both ASA Meeting, Houston, Texas, November 1970. Co-author. "Theoretical and Experimental Results for Coaxial Flow Jet Noise," Presented at the Both ASA , Meeting, Houston, Texas, November 1970. Co-author. "Standards for Noise Monitoring Systems for Industrial or Community Noise," Presented at the ' ASME 1970 Winter Annual Meeting, New York, December 1970. Co-author. And numerous research and consulting reports. ' t BEN H. SHARP POSITION: Senior Research and Consulting Specialist JOINED WYLE: January 1968 PRINCIPAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: ' - Responsible for the direction of research and consulting programs in architectural acoustics, noise control and surface transportation noise. ' BACKGROUND: - Wyle Laboratories, El Segundo, California. Manager of a major program for the Department of Housing and Urban Development to conduct basic research, develop- ment and practical design of building structures providing high transmission loss at ' low cost. Monager'of a program for the California Highway Patrol to develop methods of site ' selection for highway noise measurements. Task Manager - characteristics of noise sources associated'with trains and ships. An element of a program for the Environmental Protection Agency. ' - General Consulting and Research Responsibilities: Evaluation of noise sources and noise reduction techniques in railroad and rail rapid ' transit systems. Feasibility study on the methods for soundproofing homes in the vicinity of Los ' Angeles International Airport against aircraft noise. Evaluation of existing noise reduction and the determination of methods and costs of increasing the noise reduction•in residences, schools, commercial buildings, churches, etc. Research on the radiation and coupling of acoustic sources into enclosures, including ' experimental modal studies of reverberant chambers. Architectural acoustic design of high-intensity acoustic testing facilities, and the design of associated noise source horn systems. ' Research into, and design of acoustic attenuators applicable for use in reverberant and shock-wave conditions. Developing methods for predicting the internal noise levels in aircraft cabins. General consulting in architectural acoustics and noise control together with field ' and laboratory acoustic measurements. Author of a section on architectural acoustics in a NASA design manual for rocket ' test ground facilities. ' WYLE LABORATORIES BEN H. SHARP EDUCATION: ' - University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, England, B.Sc. Tech. Hans. Physics, 1961. - University of Manchester, Ph.D. Acoustics, 1965. MEMBERSHIP: ' - Acoustical Society of America - American Society for Testing and Materials - Assembly Technical Advisory Panel on Vehicle Noise Abatement (California Legislature) PUBLICATIONS: - "The Application of Artificial Reverberation to a Large Lecture Theater, " 5th International Congress on Acoustics, Liege, Belgium, 1965. - "Artificial Reverberation, " Ph.D. Thesis, Manchester University, 1965. ' - "The Measurement of Flanking Transmission, " Internal Note IN 138/67, Building Research Station, England, 1967. 1 - "The Effect of Damping Treatments on the Transmission Loss of Panels, " Conference on the Damping of Vibrations, Louvain, Belgium, 1967. - "On the Transmission of Airborne Sound Through Panels, " (ao-author), External Note ' EN 119/67, pp:1-95, Building Research Station, England, 1967. - "Architectural Acoustics for Ground Facilities, " chapter in Sonic and Vibration Environments for Ground Facilities -- A Design Manual, prepared L ra- tories Research Staff, Wyle Report WR 68-2, 1968. - 'Study of Attenuators for Acoustic Testing of Missile and Space Vehicles, " Wyle Laboratories Research Report WR 68-17, 1968. - "Coupling of Finite Sized Sources to a Modal Reverberant Sound Field, " (co-author), ' 76th meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Cleveland, November, 1968. - "The Transmission Loss of'Multi-layer Structure, " Journal Sound and Vibration (1969) 9(3), pp. 383-392. - "Development of Practical Attenuators for Acoustic Testing of Aerospace Structures, " Wyle Laboratories Research Report WR 69-12, 1969 ' - "Final Report on the Home Soundproofing Project for the Los Angeles Department of Airports, " (co-author), Wyle Laboratories Consulting Report WCR 70-1, 1970. ' WYLE LABORATOR/Es BEN H. SHARP - "Guide to the Soundproofing of Existing Homes Against Exterior Noise, " Wyle Laboratories Consulting Report WCR 70-2, 1970. ' - "High Transmission Loss Wal I Panels, " 80th meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Houston, November 1970. - "New Wall Designs for High Transmission Loss, " Proceedings of the Purdue Noise Control Conference, Purdue University, July 1971. ' - Author of Section on Rail Systems in "Transportation Noise and Noise from Equipment Powered by Internal Combustion Engines, "'EPA Technical Information Document NTID 300. 13, EPA, Office of Noise Abatement and Control (December 31, 1971). ' - "Effect of Shear on the Transmission Loss of Thick Panels, " 82nd meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Denver, 1971 . ' - "Research on Highway Noise Measurement Sites, "Wyle Laboratories Consulting Report WCR 72-1, 1972, for the Department of California Highway Patrol. - "Are Present Horns, Whistles and Sirens Necessary for Communications?" (co-author) to be presented at the International Conference on Transportation and the Environment, May 31 through June 2, 1972, Washington, D.C. 1 I ' i ' ' WYLE LABORATORIES tJOHN R. STEARNS ' POSITION: Member of the Research Staff JOINED WYLE: June 1961 PRINCIPAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: - Responsible for management of programs related to community noise, airport noise and systems for monitoring and analyzing noise and other associated environments. ' Typical program management responsibilities include: • Study on the Effects of Noise Pollution — for the Environmental Protection Agency. ' Two studies were involved in this program. The first related "Noise from Trans- portation Systems and Small Internal Combustion Engines. " The second study addressed that part of the overall pollution problem which is associated with out- door noise in the community. These studies were part of a major program by the Office of Noise Abatement and Control and are summarized in the recent EPA report to Congress. • Consulting relative to the installation and-checkout of an aircraft noise monitor- ing system— for the Los Angeles Department of Airports. This program encompassed ' the following services in support of the design, installation and checkout of a computer based aircraft noise monitoring system: 1) Preparation of system specifi- cations, 2) Technical evaluation of proposals, 3) Technical surveillance of.system installation, and 4) Develop operating procedures. BACKGROUND: Three years, Manager of Wyle Systems. Directed the activities of a division engaged in the development, production and marketing of logic cards, CRT data terminals, systems software and analog-digital data acquisition and processing systems. Projects included a fully automatic computer controlled system for control and monitoring 16 III , high intensity acoustic generators and the acquisition and reduction of sound pressure levels and vibration data at the Lockheed facility at Sunnyvale, California. Three years, Wyle Laboratories, Manager, Dynamics-Instrumentation Department. i ' Supervised the performance of vibration and instrumentation testing at Wyle Labora- tories' El Segundo Facility. Responsible for testing performed on several types of vibration exciters, shock machines and centrifuges. Responsible for quoting, cost control, technical concurrence, customer liaison, and all aspects related to the control of departmental programs and the maintenance and ' utilization of equipment. WYLE LABORATORIES JOHN R. STEARNS ' Additional responsibilities included technical assistance and supervision on various out—of—plant projects. Typical projects included the design and installation of a 200,000 force—pound hydraulic shaker system for the Wyle—Huntsville Facility and a noise generation and control instrumentation system for a 160,000 acoustic watt test facility at the NASA Manned Space Center in Houston, Texas. ' — One year, Wyle Laboratories, Section Head, Instrumentation Section. Supervised engineering and maintenance service for all operating departments. Specific areas ' included responsibility for Standards and Calibration Laboratory and the maintenance of all vibration equipment. - Nine months, Wyle Laboratories, Instrumentation Engineer. Directed personnel ' engaged in the calibration and operation of vibration data acquisition and analysis instrumentation. Designed specialized instrumentation as required for the perform— ance of all types of dynamics test programs. — Five years, Western—Electro Acoustic Laboratory. Instrumentation Engineer. Super— vised instrumentation production facilities. Directed production personnel and acted as Project Engineer on several acoustic instruments. Specific responsibilities included design of 6—channel automatic 1/6 octave filter, an octave—band spectrum shaper, and a variety of custom acoustic measurement and analysis instruments. ' Assisted in acoustic consulting projects involving the 1) evaluation of jet engine noise suppressors, 2) noise surveys of jet aircraft, and 3) sound transmission char— acteristics of building structures. EDUCATION: ' — University of California at Los Angeles, California, B.A. Geophysics — 1960. ' MEMBER: — Acoustical Society of America ' — IEEE Society of Exploration Geophysicists ' — Institute of Environmental Sciences ' WYLE LABORATORIES LOUTS SUTHERLAND - ' POSITION: Manager, California Research Staff, El Segundo , ' JOINED WYLE: April 1964 PRINCIPAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: t - Responsible for directing the California Research Staff of Wyle Laboratories, providing specific technical guidance and consulting in the areas of applied vibro-acoustics, psycho- acoustics and electro-acoustics. ' BACKGROUND: ' - Wyle Laboratories, Engaged in research and consulting in noise control, sound propoga- tion, structural dynamics, human response to noise, and related areas in the environ- mental sciences. Responsible for technical and editorial management for a comprehen- sive and unique engineering design manual for NASA on sonic and vibration environment problems for rocket test ground facilities. Provided technical guidance and input to Research Staff effort on NASA research programs on vibro-acoustics of space vehicle ' structure and related engineering problems. Provided technical guidance or assistance on psycho-acoustics studies for response of humans to low frequency noise and vibration. Carried out research studies on propagation of low frequency sound waves and ground ' vibration, dynamic response of hydraulic shaker system and acoustic fatigue character- istics of structure. Provided consultation to local clients on architectural acoustics. - Eight and three-fourths years. The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington, Research ' Specialist. Acoustics and Vibration Group. Lead engineer responsible for acoustic and vibration environment for Dyna-Soar, Saturn C-5 (during proposal stage), and most recently, an ARPA-funded program to test high acceleration booster concepts (Hi-Bex). ' Duties included planning and supervision of small engineering group effort involving pre- diction and analysis of acoustic and vibration environment, preparation of environmental test specification, conduction of wind tunnel tests on aerodynamic noise, development of acoustic and vibration structural loads, and coordination with project designers on ' environmental design and testing. Other work included technical support on WADC- funded study on acoustic modeling techniques, lead acoustics engineer on development of B-52 engine noise suppressor, consultation with preliminary design and research ' groups on acoustics and vibration environment problems, development of structural impedance testing techniques for equipment packages, and technical direction for six months of acoustics laboratory. - Five years, Department of Speech, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, as Research Engineer. Responsible for design, construction and maintenance of electro- acoustic equipment employed in speech and hearing instruction, testing and research. Participated in execution of numerous studies related to auditory testing and in psycho- acoustics research programs. Designed and constructed speech audiometer system for Children's Orthopedic Hospital, Seattle, Washington. ' - Two years, Engineering Experiment Station, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash- ington, as Research Assistant. Responsible for planning and conduction of experimental and theoretical program on heat transfer to buried evaporator coils for a ground heat pump system. WYLE LABORATORIES EDUCATION:: - B.S. in Electrical Engineering, University of Washington, 1946. - M.S. in Electrical Engineering, University of Washington, 1954. ' - Graduate Courses: Structural Dynamics, Boeing, 1962 Boolean Algebra, 1962 , Computer Programming, 1960 MEMBER- - Acoustical Society of America, technical committee on shock and vibration,Co-founder ' and past chairman of Northwest Regional Chapter. - Institute of Electrical Engineers - Member , Interagency Chemical Rocket Propulsion Group - Audio Engineering Society - Member ' - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics - Member ' - Institute of Environment Sciences - Member - Registered Professional Engineers - State of Alabama ' PUBLICATIONS: "Cumulative Peak Distributions of Non-Stationary Random Environments". Paper ' before ASA Seattle, October 1962. - "The Use of Acoustic Scale Models for Investigating Near Field Noise of Jet and Rocket ' Engines" (co-author) - WADD TR 62-198, April 1961, - "Future Trends in Acoustic Environment of Manned Space Vehicles". Paper before ASA ' San Francisco, October 1960. - "Use of Model Jets for Studying Acoustic Fields Near Jet and Rocket Engines" (co- t author) Noise Control, May/June 1960. - "Analysis of Dyna-Soar (X-20) Vibration and Acoustic Environment"(co-author) Boeing Documents D2-8109, 8109-1. , - "Preliminary Analysis of Acoustic and Vibration Environments, SATURN S-IB"Boeing Document D2-12955, December 1961. ' - "Estimating the Acoustic Loading on Building Structures Near Launch Sites" (co-author) Invited paper before Acoustic Society of America, Washington, D.C. , June 1965. LOUIS SUTHERLAND - "The Effects Upon Shock Measurements of Limited Frequency Response Instrumentation", Research Report WR 65-1, January 1965. - "A Brief Review of the Impedance of Soils, " Wyle Laboratories Research Staff Report WR 65-39, 1965. ' - "Mathematical Model of a Hydrashaker, " Wyle Laboratories Research Staff Report WR 66-5, 1966. L. C. Sutherland, P. Doty. ' - "Analysis of Hydraulic Exciters and Servo Amplifier Systems with Multiple Feedback Control Driving Complex Dynamic Loads, " Wyle Laboratories Research Report WR 68-19. L. C. Sutherland, V. Conticelli. - "Some Fatigue Analyses of CSA SCD Cooler, " Wyle Laboratories Research Staff Memo TM 66-14, 1966. _ "Forces Acting on Stationary and Moving Solid Obstacles in Plane Wave Sound Fields, " Wyle Laboratories Research Report WR 68-12, October 1968. ' - "Mechanical and Acoustic Mobility of Saturn Instrumentation Unit, " Wyle Laboratories Research Staff Report WR 66-38, 1966. L. C. Sutherland, D. J. Bozich. - Fourier Spectra of Transient Excitations and Maximum Residual Response of an Undamp- ed Single Degree of Freedom System - A Generalized Approach, " Wyle Laboratories Research Staff Technical Memorandum TM 67-4, (1967). ' - Sonic and Vibration Environments for Ground Facilities - A Design Manual" (editor and principal author), Wyle Laboratories Research Staff Report WR 68-2, (1968). - "Instrumentation Requirements for Measurement of Sonic Boom and Blast Waves - A Theoretical Study, " Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 7, No. 3, (1968). L. C. Sutherland, M. J. Crocken. ' - "Development of Equivalent One-Dimensional Acoustic Force Spectra by Impedance Measurement Techniques, It L. Sutherland and G. Kao (May 1969). - "Preliminary Criteria for Internal Acoustic Environments of Orbiting Space Stations, " ' Wyle Laboratories Technical Memorandum TM 69-2. L. Sutherland and E. Cuadra, May 1969. ' - "Review of the Molecular Absorption Anomaly. " Paper before 77th Meeting of Acous- tical Society of America, Philadelphia, Pa. , April 1969. ' - "Response of Ground Structures to Sonic Loads. " Invited paper before 78th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, San Diego, Calif. , November 1969. WYLE LABORATORIES