Table City of Glendora Predicted Vibration Levels for Residential (Category 2) Land Uses

Similar documents
Chapter 1 Project Description

Attachment E3 Vibration Technical Memorandum

Pomona Rotary December 19, 2017

Delta Kappa Gamma January 22, 2018

Figure 2-14: Existing Bus Routing at Irwindale Station

CHAPTER 2 PROPOSED BUS ROUTE MODIFICATIONS

CLAREMONT METROLINK STATION STUDY Claremont Town Hall Meeting December 11, 2017

Appendix I Noise Background and Modeling Data

Countdown to the Closure Extended 53-Hour Closure of I-405 Freeway Between U.S. 101 and I-10 Planned in Mid-July for Mulholland Bridge Demolition

Definitions of Acoustical Terms

Capital Improvement Program (CIPs) City of Industry FY 2017/18 Adopted Budget

PAPER FOR AREMA 2006 ANNUAL CONFERENCE LOS ANGELES UNION STATION RUN-THROUGH TRACKS UNION STATION TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS. Paul Mak, PE, SE HDR Inc

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. The following is an outline of the traffic analysis performed by Hales Engineering for the traffic conditions of this project.

Characterization of Combined Use of County Road Segment

Develop ground transportation improvements to make the Airport a multi-modal regional

RAILYARDS SUPPORT A VARIETY OF OPERATIONS INCLUDING: LOCOMOTIVES, ON-ROAD AND OFF-ROAD TRUCKS, CARGO-HANDLING EQUIPMENT, TRANSPORTATION

Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report APPENDIX T

Sound Transit East Link: Bus/LRT System Integration Study

Executive Summary. Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report ES-1

TIMBERVINE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY FORT COLLINS, COLORADO JANUARY Prepared for:

NOISE ANALYSIS TECHNICAL REPORT. Route 58 Martin Luther King Freeway. Portsmouth Virginia

Noise and Vibration Analysis Technical Report (Final)

Blue Ribbon Committee

FLAMBOROUGH QUARRY HAUL ROUTE STUDY HAUL ROUTE VIBRATION REPORT. itrans Consulting Inc 100 York Boulevard Richmond Hill, Ontario L4B 1J8

West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor. Informational Briefing Gateway Cities Service Council April 13, 2017

Mobility Corridor Updates. Transit & Active Transportation Projects

Transit Project Delivery Status Report. Significant Issues

Project Location. I-80 Toll Plaza at I-480/I-80 Interchange, Lorain County, Ohio

3.0 TRANSPORTATION ISSUES AND ANALYSIS

2. Valley Circle Boulevard/Andora Avenue/Baden Avenue and Lassen Street

NEWS RELEASE November 8, 2017

Mobility Corridor Updates. Transit & Active Transportation Projects

Report of Registration County Summary

Reduction of Vehicle Noise at Lower Speeds Due to Quieter Pavement. By Paul R Donavan

TRANSPORTATION STUDY FOR THE 8899 BEVERLY BOULEVARD PROJECT

PROPOSED HELICOPTER LANDING PAD 85 MILL ROAD LARA

Station Evaluation Summary

Lower River Floodplain Restoration and Levee/Towne Road Re-Alignment Noise Analysis

Pier B On-Dock Rail Support Facility Project Rail Grade Crossings Analysis

Chapter 7: Corridor Visions

East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor. TAC Briefing December 4, 2013

Tunney s Pasture to Dominion Station Traffic and Transit Detours. April 4, 2017 C. Wheeler/ C. Swail

2.0 Development Driveways. Movin Out June 2017

Location Concept Plan Amendment Recommendation Approved 2011 Concept Plan

IMPROVEMENT CONCEPTS

FRESNO COUNTY SUBSECTION OF THE CALIFORNIA HIGH- SPEED TRAIN (HST)

Purpose and Need for Proposed Action

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS N. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

East Area 1 Specific Plan Noise Study

Here is a map from the LBNL gate to Bldg. 55:

LOTUS RANCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. LLG Ref Senior Transportation Engineer & Charlene Sadiarin Transportation Engineer II

Report Addendum. Terry Keller, SDDOT. Noise Study Technical Report I-29 from Tea Interchange to Skunk Creek Sioux Falls, South Dakota

PAPER FOR AREMA 2004 ANNUAL CONFERENCE LOS ANGELES UNION STATION RUN-THROUGH TRACKS. Paul Mak, PE, SE - DMJM HARRIS

Pacific Electric Right-of-Way / West Santa Ana Branch Corridor Alternatives Analysis

LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (LACMTA) AND FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA)

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

4.5 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

IV. REVISIONS TO THE DRAFT IS/MND

STREET LIGHTING AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEM UNDERGROUNDING

LOTUS RANCH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. LLG Ref Senior Transportation Engineer & Charlene Sadiarin Transportation Engineer II

Hastings Ranch Dr. Sierra Madre Bl. Sierra Madre Villa Av. Foothill Bl b. Sierra 4 Madre F187. Michillinda Av. Rosemead Bl. 487 Santa Anita Av

Proposed location of Camp Parkway Commerce Center. Vicinity map of Camp Parkway Commerce Center Southampton County, VA

CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS STAFF REPORT

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS B. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION

Clearlake Road (State Road 501) Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Study

1.1 Purpose of This Environmental Impact Report EIR Process Use of This Report Report Organization...

TRAFFIC SIGNAL DESIGN REPORT KING OF PRUSSIA ROAD & RAIDER ROAD RADNOR TOWNSHIP PENNSYLVANIA

3.1 Introduction Transportation Elements and Study Area Meeting the Need for the Project

Impacts to street segments were analyzed based on procedures detailed in the Highway Capacity Manual for levels of service related to roadways.

Table Existing Traffic Conditions for Arterial Segments along Construction Access Route. Daily

7 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT

Clifton Corridor Transit Initiative. Briefing to Great Lakes Community February 11, 2016

8.6 NOISE Environmental Consequences

Appendix G: Transportation/Traffic

Figure 1 Map of intersection of SR 44 (Ravenna Rd) and Butternut Rd

Green Line Extension to Torrance Supplemental Alternatives Analysis. 2. Purpose and Need 2. PURPOSE AND NEED

Chapter 9 Recommended Locally Preferred Alternative and Alternatives for Evaluation in Draft SEIS/SEIR

Los Angeles Mission College Facilities Master Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13 TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC

Southern Windsor County 2016 Traffic Count Program Summary April 2017

APPENDIX H. Transportation Impact Study

2.4 Build Alternatives

Appendix C Noise and Vibration Worksheets

Environmental Assessment Derry Road and Argentia Road Intersection

APPENDIX C-2. Traffic Study Supplemental Analysis Memo

Northwest Rail Environmental Evaluation. Governments Team. September 13, 2007

Transportation & Traffic Engineering

Oakbrook Village Plaza City of Laguna Hills

MTA Post 1989 Retrofit Soundwall Projects Phase I, Priority 1

FASTRACKS SYSTEM MAP: ALL CORRIDORS

Bi-County Transitway/ Bethesda Station Access Demand Analysis

Parks and Transportation System Development Charge Methodology

County State Aid Highway 30 (Diffley Road) and Dodd Road Intersection Study

Why coordinate the Van Nuys and Sepulveda Pass project studies together?

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR. McDONALD S RESTAURANT IN CARMICAEL Sacramento County, CA. Prepared For:

DUFFERIN AGGREGATES ACTON QUARRY EXTENSION PROJECT

Welcome. Please Sign In

East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor. Information Session, October 10, 2017

DULLES AIRPORT ACCESS/TOLL ROAD CONNECTOR ROUTE 267, FROM ROUTE 123 TO I-66 NOISE ABATEMENT DESIGN STUDY. Noise Analysis Technical Report

APPENDIX C NOISE AND VIBRATION CONTENTS

I-405 Sepulveda Pass Improvements Project

Transcription:

Table 3.11-11. City of Glendora Predicted Vibration Levels for Residential (Category 2) Land Uses Cluster Number 1 Cross Streets Direction Distance (feet) 2 Train Speed (mph) Threshold (VdB) Predicted Band Max. (VdB) 3 1/3 Octave Band (Hz) 4 Impact Number of Impacts 5 Westbound WB1 Citrus Ave/Barranca Ave North 156 65 72 68 31.5 WB1a Barranca Ave/Grand Ave North 162 65 72 68 31.5 WB1b Barranca Ave/Grand Ave North 156 65 72 68 31.5 WB1c Barranca Ave/Grand Ave North 150 65 72 69 31.5 WB1d Barranca Ave/Grand Ave North 114 65 72 71 31.5 WB2 Grand Ave/Carroll Ave North 54 65 72 76 50.0 Yes 5 WB3 Carroll Ave/Vermont Ave North 198 65 72 67 31.5 WB3a 6 Vermont Ave/Glendora Ave North 95 55 72 71 31.5 WB4 Glendora Ave/Pasadena Ave North 34 55 72 81 50.0 Yes 12 WB5 Glendora Ave/Pasadena Ave North 22 55 72 87 50.0 Yes 8 WB6 Pasadena Ave/Glenwood Ave North 12 65 72 96 50.0 Yes 20 WB7 Pasadena Ave/Glenwood Ave North 28 65 72 85 50.0 Yes 20 WB8 Pasadena Ave/Glenwood Ave North 34 65 72 82 50.0 Yes 9 WB9 Glenwood Ave/Elwood Ave North 30 65 72 84 50.0 Yes 4 WB10 Glenwood Ave/Elwood Ave North 34 65 72 82 50.0 Yes 4 WB11 Elwood Ave/Lorraine Ave North 16 65 72 93 50.0 Yes 5 WB12 Elwood Ave/Lorraine Ave North 50 65 72 77 50.0 Yes 6 WB13 Elwood Ave/Lorraine Ave North 46 65 72 78 50.0 Yes 4 WB14 Lorraine Ave/Route 66 North 46 65 72 88 50.0 Yes 6 WB15 Lorraine Ave/Route 66 North 44 65 72 89 50.0 Yes 7 WB16 Lorraine Ave/Route 66 North 52 65 72 77 50.0 Yes 12 WB17 Lorraine Ave/Route 66 North 50 65 72 77 50.0 Yes 5 WB18 Lorraine Ave/Route 66 North 44 65 72 79 50.0 Yes 7 WB19 Route 66/210 Freeway North 50 65 72 77 50.0 Yes 17 WB20 Route 66/210 Freeway North 54 65 72 76 50.0 Yes 10 3.11-23 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Cluster Number 1 Cross Streets Direction Distance (feet) 2 Train Speed (mph) Threshold (VdB) Predicted Band Max. (VdB) 3 1/3 Octave Band (Hz) 4 Impact Number of Impacts 5 Eastbound EB1 Citrus Ave/Barranca Ave South 66 65 72 74 31.5 Yes 26 EB2 Citrus Ave/Barranca Ave South 50 65 72 77 50.0 Yes 11 EB3 Citrus Ave/Barranca Ave South 68 65 72 74 31.5 Yes 6 EB4 Barranca Ave/Grand Ave South 54 65 72 76 50.0 Yes 5 EB5 Barranca Ave/Valencia St South 58 65 72 75 31.5 Yes 7 EB5a 6 Valencia St/Grand Ave South 75 65 72 74 31.5 Yes 13 EB6 Ada Ave/Vermont Ave South 110 45 72 68 31.5 EB7 Pasadena Ave/Glenwood Ave South 86 65 72 73 31.5 Yes 4 EB8 Pasadena Ave/Glenwood Ave South 112 65 72 71 31.5 EB9 Lorraine Ave/Route 66 South 52 65 72 77 50.0 Yes 6 EB10 Route 66/210 Freeway South 94 65 72 72 31.5 Yes 4 EB11 Route 66/210 Freeway South 84 65 72 73 31.5 Yes 4 EB12 Lone Hill Ave/Gladstone St South 94 65 72 72 31.5 Yes 2 Total Impacts in Glendora: 249 1 The cluster numbers correspond to the labels in Figure 3.11 7 through Figure 3.11 15. The clusters are labeled from west to east in ascending order. Westbound (WB) clusters are located north of the right-of-way and Eastbound (EB) clusters are located south of the right-of-way. 2 The distance in feet from the closest sensitive receptor in the cluster to the nearest proposed light-rail track. 3 Maximum predicted vibration level in any one-third octave band. 4 The one-third octave band in which the highest predicted vibration level occurs. 5 Number of dwelling units in the cluster. 6 This cluster is a proposed development. 3.11-24 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Figure 3.11 7. Glendora Clusters EB 1 2 Figure 3.11 8. Glendora Clusters WB 1 1d, EB 3 5a Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-25

Figure 3.11 9. Glendora Clusters WB 1d 3, EB 5a Figure 3.11 10. Glendora Clusters WB 4 5, EB 6 3.11-26 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Figure 3.11 11. Glendora Clusters WB 5 10, EB 7 8 Figure 3.11 12. Glendora Clusters WB 10 15 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-27

Figure 3.11 13. Glendora Clusters WB 16 18, EB 9 10 Figure 3.11 14. Glendora Clusters WB 19 20, EB 11 3.11-28 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Figure 3.11 15. Glendora Cluster EB 12 City of San Dimas The light-rail tracks in the City of San Dimas run in the southern portion of the right-of-way, closer to the eastbound clusters. The predicted noise levels are presented in Table 3.11-12. Severe noise impact is predicted at clusters WB1 and EB1 (Red Roof Inn). The primary noise source at cluster WB1 is horn noise from the BNSF trains. The BNSF tracks would be located closer to residences along the westbound (north) side of the right-of-way in San Dimas, increasing the horn noise at those residences. Cluster EB1 is located on the edge of the right-of-way, only 14 feet from the eastbound light-rail track. Moderate noise impact is predicted at clusters WB2, WB3, WB7, WB8, EB3 and EB3a. The predicted vibration levels are presented in Table 3.11-13. Vibration impacts are predicted at cluster EB1 (Red Roof Inn) and cluster WB1 (one single-family residence). Both clusters are within 50 feet of the light-rail tracks, which would result in high vibration levels. Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-29

Table 3.11-12. City of San Dimas Predicted Noise Levels for Residential (Category 2) Land Uses Cluster Number 1 Cross Streets Direction Distance (feet) 2 Train Speed (mph) Existing L dn (dba) Predicted L dn (dba) Threshold 3 Moderate Severe Impact Number of Impacts 4 Westbound WB1 Gladstone Street/57 Freeway North 50 65 64 69.3 1.5 3.9 Severe 3 WB2 57 Freeway/Amelia North 56 65 64 66.8 1.5 3.9 Moderate 3 WB3 57 Freeway/Amelia North 76 65 60 63.5 2.0 5.0 Moderate 3 WB4 57 Freeway/Amelia North 176 65 60 60.7 2.0 5.0 WB5 San Dimas /Walnut North 76 45 65 65.2 1.5 3.9 WB6 San Dimas Ave/Walnut North 94 65 64 5 64.9 1.5 3.9 WB7 Walnut / North 104 65 61 5 63.8 1.9 4.7 Moderate 5 San Dimas Canyon Road WB8 Walnut / North 122 65 60 5 62.9 2.0 5.0 Moderate 5 San Dimas Canyon Road Eastbound EB1 57 Freeway/Amelia South 14 65 60 69.6 2.0 5.0 Severe 20 EB2 Amelia /Eucla South 142 65 60 61.3 2.0 5.0 EB3 Amelia /Eucla South 82 65 60 64.0 2.0 5.0 Moderate 8 EB3a Cataract /Monte Vista South 86 55 60 63.1 2.0 5.0 Moderate 5 Total Moderate Impacts 29 Total Severe Impacts 23 1 The cluster numbers correspond to the labels in Figure 3.11 16 through Figure 3.11 19. The clusters are labeled from west to east in ascending order. Westbound (WB) clusters are located north of the right-of-way and Eastbound (EB) clusters are located south of the right-of-way. 2 The distance in feet from the closest sensitive receptor in the cluster to the closest proposed light-rail track. 3 The threshold is the allowable increase in noise from the existing L dn. The FTA designates two threshold levels: moderate and severe. 4 Number of dwelling units in the cluster. 3.11-30 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Table 3.11-13. City of San Dimas Predicted Vibration Levels for Residential (Category 2) Land Uses Cluster Number 1 Cross Streets Direction Distance (feet) 2 Train Speed (mph) Threshold (VdB) Predicted Band Max (VdB) 3 1/3 Octave Band, (Hz) 4 Impact Number of Impacts 5 Westbound WB1 Gladstone Street/57 Freeway North 50 65 72 73 31.5 Yes 3 WB2 57 Freeway/Amelia North 56 65 72 71 31.5 WB3 57 Freeway/Amelia North 76 65 72 66 31.5 WB4 57 Freeway/Amelia North 176 65 72 55 12.5 WB5 San Dimas /Walnut North 76 45 72 63 31.5 WB6 San Dimas /Walnut Ave North 94 65 72 62 31.5 WB7 Walnut /San Dimas North 104 65 72 61 31.5 Canyon Road WB8 Walnut /San Dimas North 122 65 72 58 31.5 Canyon Road Eastbound EB1 57 Freeway/Amelia South 14 65 72 96 63 Yes 20 EB2 Amelia /Eucla South 142 65 72 56 12.5 EB3 Amelia /Eucla South 82 65 72 65 31.5 EB3a Cataract /Monte Vista South 86 55 72 62 31.5 Total Impacts 23 1 The cluster numbers correspond to the labels in Figure 3.11 16 through Figure 3.11 19. The clusters are labeled from west to east in ascending order. Westbound (WB) clusters are located north of the right-of-way and Eastbound (EB) clusters are located south of the right-of-way. 2 The distance in feet from the closest sensitive receptor in the cluster to the closest proposed light-rail track. 3 Maximum predicted vibration level in any one-third octave band. 4 The one-third octave band in which the highest predicted vibration level occurs. 5 Number of dwelling units in the cluster. Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-31

Figure 3.11 16. San Dimas Clusters WB 1 4, EB 1 Figure 3.11 17. San Dimas Clusters EB 2 3 3.11-32 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Figure 3.11 18. San Dimas Clusters WB 5 6, EB 3a Figure 3.11 19. San Dimas Clusters WB 7 8 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-33

City of La Verne The light-rail tracks in the City of La Verne would be located in the southern portion of the right-of-way, closer to the eastbound clusters, and the BNSF track would be in the northern portion of the right-of-way. The noise predictions are presented in Table 3.11-14. Moderate impact is predicted at clusters WB2 through WB8. The light-rail tracks will be within 100 feet of the residences. The vibration predictions are presented in Table 3.11-15. No significant vibration impact is predicted in La Verne. Predicted vibration levels are below the impact threshold because most residences would be at least 70 feet from the light-rail tracks and the vibration testing showed that vibration propagation is relatively inefficient (vibration levels decrease relatively quickly) in La Verne. 3.11-34 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Table 3.11-14. City of La Verne Predicted Noise Levels for Residential (Category 2) Land Uses Cluster Number 1 Cross Streets Direction Westbound WB1 San Dimas Canyon Road/ Wheeler WB2 Wheeler /Park WB3 Wheeler /Park Distance (feet) 2 Speed (mph) Existing L dn (dba) 3 Predicted L dn (dba) Threshold 4 Moderate Severe Impact Number of Impacts 5 North 142 65 60 62.0 2.0 5.0 North 80 65 63 65.0 1.6 4.1 Moderate 5 North 86 65 62 65.0 1.7 4.4 Moderate 5 WB4 Park /A Street North 74 65 63 65.4 1.6 4.1 Moderate 8 WB5 A Street/B Street North 76 65 62 65.3 1.7 4.4 Moderate 5 WB6 A Street/B Street North 78 65 62 65.1 1.7 4.4 Moderate 4 WB7 D Street/E Street North 98 65 62 63.8 1.7 4.4 Moderate 6 WB8 E Street/White North 80 65 60 62.0 2.0 5.0 Moderate 5 Eastbound EB1 San Dimas Canyon Road/ South 204 65 58.9 59.7 2.2 5.4 Wheeler EB2 White /Fulton South 240 55 59 61.1 2.2 5.4 EB3 White /Fulton South 128 65 60 61.0 2.0 5.0 EB4 White Ave/Fulton Ave South 132 65 60 61.7 2.0 5.0 Total Moderate Impacts 33 Total Severe Impacts 0 1 The cluster numbers correspond to the labels in Figure 3.11 20 through Figure 3.11 24. The clusters are labeled from west to east in ascending order. Westbound (WB) clusters are located north of the right-of-way and Eastbound (EB) clusters are located south of the right-of-way. 2 The distance in feet from the closest sensitive receptor in the cluster to the closest proposed light-rail track. 3 The dominant noise source in the existing L dn was the BNSF horn noise. The measured existing noise level was adjusted for each cluster to account for the distance from the cluster to the existing BNSF track. 4 The threshold is the allowable increase in noise from the existing L dn. The FTA designates two threshold levels: moderate and severe. 5 Number of dwelling units in the cluster. Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-35

Table 3.11-15. City of La Verne Predicted Vibration Levels for Residential (Category 2) Land Uses Cluster Number 1 Cross Streets Direction Distance (feet 2 Train Speed (mph) Threshold (VdB) Predicted Band Max (VdB) 3 1/3 Octave Band (Hz) 4 Impact Number of Impacts 5 Westbound WB1 San Dimas Canyon Road/ North 142 65 72 56 12.5 Wheeler WB2 Wheeler /Park North 80 65 72 65 31.5 WB3 Wheeler /Park North 86 65 72 64 31.5 WB4 Park /A Street North 74 65 72 66 31.5 WB5 A Street/B Street North 76 65 72 66 31.5 WB6 A Street/B Street North 78 65 72 65 31.5 WB7 D Street/E Street North 98 65 72 62 31.5 WB8 E Street/White North 80 65 72 65 31.5 Eastbound EB1 San Dimas Canyon Road/ South 204 65 72 54 12.5 Wheeler EB2 White /Fulton South 240 55 72 61 12.5 EB3 White /Fulton South 128 65 72 57 31.5 EB4 White /Fulton South 132 65 72 57 31.5 Total Impacts 0 1 The cluster numbers correspond to the labels in Figure 3.11 20 through Figure 3.11 24. The clusters are labeled from west to east in ascending order. Westbound (WB) clusters are located north of the right-of-way and Eastbound (EB) clusters are located south of the right-of-way. 2 The distance in feet from the closest sensitive receptor in the cluster to the closest proposed light-rail track. 3 Maximum predicted vibration level in any one-third octave band. 4 The one-third octave band in which the highest predicted vibration level occurs. 5 Number of dwelling units in the cluster. 3.11-36 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Figure 3.11 20. La Verne Cluster EB 1 Figure 3.11 21. La Verne Clusters WB 1 5 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-37

Figure 3.11 22. La Verne Clusters WB 6 7 Figure 3.11 23. La Verne Clusters WB 8, EB 2 3 3.11-38 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Figure 3.11 24. La Verne Clusters EB 3 4 City of Pomona There is a proposed flyover at Towne in the City of Pomona, moving the light-rail tracks to the north side of the right-of-way. All of the noise-sensitive receptors in Pomona are located east of Towne. The noise predictions are presented in Table 3.11-16. Moderate noise impact is predicted at cluster WB2, which is 62 feet from proposed location of the nearest light-rail track. Existing noise levels in Pomona are relatively high. The dominant existing noise sources in the area are local vehicular traffic and noise from Metrolink commuter trains operating on tracks just south of the project right-of-way. Vibration predictions are presented in Table 3.11-17. Vibration impact is predicted at cluster WB2, a multi-family residence at the Pomona/Claremont city boundaries. Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-39

Table 3.11-16. City of Pomona Predicted Noise Levels for Residential (Category 2) Land Uses Cluster Number 1 Cross Streets Direction Distance (feet) 2 Train Speed (mph) Existing L dn (dba) Predicted L dn (dba) Threshold 3 Moderat e Severe Impact Number of Impacts 4 Westbound WB1 Towne /Cambridge North 84 65 62 63.0 1.7 4.4 WB2 Towne /Cambridge North 64 65 62 65.3 1.7 4.4 Moderate 6 Eastbound EB1 Garey /Towne South 164 65 62 63.5 1.7 4.4 EB2 Garey /Towne South 130 65 62 63.1 1.7 4.4 EB3 Towne /Cambridge South 218 65 62 62.7 1.7 4.4 Total Moderate Impacts 6 Total Severe Impacts 0 1 The cluster numbers correspond to the labels in Figure 3.11 25 and Figure 3.11 26. The clusters are labeled from west to east in ascending order. Westbound (WB) clusters are located north of the right-of-way and Eastbound (EB) clusters are located south of the right-of-way. 2 The distance in feet from the closest sensitive receptor in the cluster to the closest proposed light-rail track. 3 The threshold is the allowable increase in noise from the existing L dn. The FTA designates two threshold levels: moderate and severe. 4 Number of dwelling units in the cluster. 3.11-40 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

Table 3.11-17. City of Pomona Predicted Vibration Levels for Residential (Category 2) Land Uses Cluster Number 1 Cross Streets Direction Distance (feet) 2 Speed (mph) Threshold (VdB) Predicted Band Max (VdB) 3 1/3 Octave Band (Hz) 4 Impact Number of Impacts 5 Westbound WB1 Towne /Cambridge North 86 65 72 60 31.5 WB2 Towne /Cambridge North 64 65 72 72 31.5 Yes 6 Eastbound EB1 Garey /Towne South 158 65 72 67 31.5 EB2 Garey /Towne South 136 65 72 58 31.5 EB3 Towne /Cambridge South 238 65 72 65 31.5 Total Impacts 6 1 The cluster numbers correspond to the labels in Figure 3.11 25 and Figure 3.11 26. The clusters are labeled from west to east in ascending order. Westbound (WB) clusters are located north of the right-of-way and Eastbound (EB) clusters are located south of the right-of-way. 2 The distance in feet from the closest sensitive receptor in the cluster to the closest proposed light-rail track. 3 Maximum predicted vibration level in any one-third octave band. 4 The one-third octave band in which the highest predicted vibration level occurs. 5 Number of dwelling units in the cluster. Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-41

Figure 3.11 25. Pomona Clusters EB 1 2 Figure 3.11 26. Pomona Clusters WB 1 2, EB 3; Claremont Clusters WB1, EB1 3.11-42 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report

City of Claremont Chapter 3 Environmental Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation The light-rail tracks in the City of Claremont would be located in the northern half of the right-of-way, and two Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) tracks would be relocated to the southern half of the right-of-way. Metrolink trains and BNSF trains operate on the SCRRA tracks. The noise predictions are presented in Table 3.11-18. Severe noise impact is predicted at clusters WB3 through WB6. The dominant noise source for westbound clusters would be light-rail operations. Severe noise impact is predicted at clusters EB2 through EB7. The increases in predicted noise levels at the eastbound clusters would be due to relocation of the SCRRA tracks approximately 20 feet closer to the residences. Severe noise impact at eastbound clusters was predicted only at residences located near at-grade crossings, caused by the increase in Metrolink and BNSF horn noise resulting from the proposed relocation of the SCRRA tracks, as well as the addition of LRT train noise. The vibration predictions for light-rail operations are presented in Table 3.11-19. Vibration impact is predicted at clusters WB3, WB5, and WB6. The proposed location of the LRT tracks is within 50 feet of the nearest residence in each cluster where impact is predicted. The vibration predictions for Metrolink operations are presented in Table 3.11-20. Vibration impact is assessed if the future predicted vibration level exceeds the current level by three db and, at the same time, the future predicted level exceeds the 72 VdB threshold for light-rail operations. The Metrolink tracks would be relocated south from their current location, so there would be potential for impact only at eastbound clusters. At clusters EB1, EB2, and EB3, the Metrolink tracks would remain at the same location within the right-of-way, so there would be no potential for new impact. Vibration impact is predicted at clusters EB4 and EB7, multi-family residential complexes. The vibration levels at both of these clusters would exceed 72 VdB and increase by at least three db as a result of the project. Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.11-43

Table 3.11-18. Claremont Predicted Noise Levels for Residential (Category 2) Land Uses Threshold 3 Number Cluster Number 1 Cross Streets Direction Distance (feet) 2 Speed (mph) Existing L dn (dba) Predicted L dn (dba) Moderate Severe Impact of Impacts 4 Westbound WB1 Towne Ave/Cambridge Ave 5 North 128 65 62 61.6 1.7 4.4 WB2 Towne Ave/Cambridge North 82 65 62 63.7 1.7 4.4 Ave WB3 Towne Ave/Cambridge North 40 65 62 69.1 1.7 4.4 Severe 5 Ave WB4 Cambridge Ave/Indian Hill North 96 65 62 66.8 1.7 4.4 Severe 4 Blvd WB5 Cambridge Ave/Indian Hill North 26 65 62 69.0 1.7 4.4 Severe 12 Blvd WB6 Claremont Blvd/Monte North 38 65 64 71.2 1.5 3.9 Severe 3 Vista Ave Eastbound EB1 Towne Ave/Cambridge South 170 65 62 63.4 1.7 4.4 Ave EB2 Towne Ave/Cambridge South 146 65 62 68.0 1.7 4.4 Severe 6 Ave EB3 Towne Ave/Cambridge South 160 65 62 67.4 1.7 4.4 Severe 3 Ave EB4 Indian Hill Blvd/College South 94 55 64 68.7 1.5 3.9 Severe 5 Ave EB5 College Ave/Claremont South 110 65 64 70.0 1.5 3.9 Severe 6 Blvd EB6 College Ave/Claremont South 108 65 64 70.1 1.5 3.9 Severe 8 Blvd EB7 Claremont Blvd/Monte Vista Ave South 80 65 64 70.6 1.5 3.9 Severe 4 Total Moderate Impacts 0 Total Severe Impacts 56 1 The cluster numbers correspond to the labels in Figure 3.11 27 through Figure 3.11 29. The clusters are labeled from west to east in ascending order. Westbound (WB) clusters are located north of the right-of-way and Eastbound (EB) clusters are located south of the right-of-way. 2 The distance in feet from the closest sensitive receptor in the cluster to the proposed closest light-rail track. 3 The threshold is the allowable increase in noise from the existing L dn. The FTA designates two threshold levels: moderate and severe. 4 Number of dwelling units in the cluster. 5 The project includes relocating SCRRA/Metrolink tracks farther from the residence and thus lowering the noise level at this location. 3.11-44 Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Azusa to Montclair Draft Environmental Impact Report