appendix q - noise and vibration technical report

8/10/2019 Appendix Q - Noise and Vibration Technical Report

1/60

Draf Environmental Impact Statement

VIRGINIA BEACH TRANSIT

EXTENSION STUDY

Cover image: courtesy of the City of Virginia Beach

November 2014

Preliminary

Review Draf

A p p e n d i x Q

Noise and Vibraon Technical

Report


2/60

VirginiaBeachTransitExtensionStudy September2014

NoiseandVibrationTechnicalReport i

TableofContents

1.0 Introduction.............................................................................................................................1

1.1 Noise............................................................................................................................................. 2

1.2 Vibration....................................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 NoiseImpactAssessmentMethodology...................................................................................4

2.1 Approach....................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.1 InventoryofNoiseSensitiveSites......................................................................................... 6

2.1.2 MeasurementofExistingNoiseConditions........................................................................ 18

2.2 PredictionsofProjectRelatedNoise.......................................................................................... 19

2.2.1 LRTAlternatives.................................................................................................................. 20

2.2.2 BRTAlternatives.................................................................................................................. 22

2.2.3 FeederBusRoutes.............................................................................................................. 23

3.0 NoiseImpactAssessment.......................................................................................................23

3.1 LRTNoiseAnalysis....................................................................................................................... 23

3.2 BRTNoiseAnalysis...................................................................................................................... 29

3.3 FeederBusNoiseAnalysis........................................................................................................... 343.4 NoiseAnalysisSummary............................................................................................................. 38

4.0 NoiseMitigation.....................................................................................................................39

4.1 LRTNoiseMitigation................................................................................................................... 39

4.2 BRTNoiseMitigation.................................................................................................................. 42

4.3 FeederBusNoiseMitigation....................................................................................................... 42

5.0 VibrationImpactAssessmentMethodology............................................................................42

5.1 Approach..................................................................................................................................... 42

5.1.1 MeasurementofExistingVibrationConditions.................................................................. 43

5.2 PredictionsofProjectRelatedVibration.................................................................................... 43

5.2.1 LRTVibrationAnalysis......................................................................................................... 44

5.2.2

BRTVibration

Analysis

........................................................................................................

46

5.2.3 FeederBusVibrationAnalysis............................................................................................. 47

5.3 VibrationImpactCriteria............................................................................................................. 47

6.0 VibrationImpactAssessment.................................................................................................48

6.1 LRTVibrationAnalysis................................................................................................................. 48

6.2 BRTVibrationAnalysis................................................................................................................ 56

6.3 FeederBusVibrationAnalysis..................................................................................................... 56

7.0 VibrationMitigation...............................................................................................................56

7.1 LRTVibrationMitigation............................................................................................................. 56

7.2 BRTVibrationMitigation............................................................................................................. 57

7.3 FeederBusVibrationMitigation................................................................................................. 57

8.0 ConstructionNoiseandVibration...........................................................................................57

8.1 ConstructionRelatedNoise........................................................................................................ 57

8.2 ConstructionRelatedVibration.................................................................................................. 58

8.3 ConstructionRelatedNoiseandVibrationMitigation............................................................... 58

9.0 References..............................................................................................................................58


3/60


4/60


NoiseandVibrationTechnicalReport 2

1.1

Noise

Noiseisunwantedorundesirablesound.Soundtravelsthroughtheairaswavesoftinyairpressure

fluctuationscausedbyvibration.Theintensityorloudnessofasoundisdeterminedbyhowmuchthe

soundpressurefluctuates.Forconvenience,soundpressureisexpressedindecibel(dB)notation.Most

soundsconsistofabroadrangeofsoundfrequencies,fromlowfrequenciestohighfrequencies.The

averagehumaneardoesnotperceiveallfrequenciesequally.Therefore,theAweightingscalewas

developedtoapproximatethewaythehumanearrespondstosoundlevels;itmathematicallyapplies

lessweighttofrequencieswedonothearwell,andappliesmoreweighttofrequencieswedohear

well.TypicalAweightednoiselevelsforvarioustypesofsoundsourcesaresummarizedinFigure1.

Figure1|CommonNoiseSources

Source: FTA,2006

Theequivalentaveragesoundlevel(Leq)isoftenusedtodescribesoundlevelsthatvaryovertime,

usuallyaonehourperiod.TheLeqisoftendescribedastheconstantsoundlevelthatisanequivalent

exposureleveltotheactualtimevaryingsoundlevelovertheperiod(hour).Using24consecutive

onehourLeqvalues,itispossibletocalculatedailycumulativenoiseexposure.Acommoncommunity

noiseratingistheDayNightAverageSoundLevel(DNLorLdn).TheLdnisthe24hourLeqbutincludesa

tendBApenaltyonnoisethatoccursduringthenighttimehours(between10p.m.and7a.m.)when

sleepinterferencemightbeanissue.The10dBApenaltymakestheLdnusefulwhenassessingnoisein

residentialareas,

or

land

uses

where

overnight

sleep

occurs.

1.2

Vibration

Vibrationconsistsofrapidlyfluctuatingmotions.However,humanresponsetovibrationisafunctionof

theaveragemotionoveralonger(butstillshort)time,suchasonesecond.Therootmeansquare(RMS)

amplitudeofamotionoveraonesecondperiodiscommonlyusedtopredicthumanresponseto

vibration.Forconvenience,decibelnotationisusedtodescribevibrationrelativetoareference


5/60



quantity.TheFTAhasadoptedthenotationVdB(forvibrationdecibels),whichisdecibelsrelativetoa

referencequantityofonemicroinchpersecond(10 in/s).

Groundbornevibration(GBV)canbeaseriousconcernforresidentsoratfacilitiesthatarevibration

sensitive,suchaslaboratoriesorrecordingstudios.Theeffectsofgroundbornevibrationinclude

perceptiblemovement

of

building

floors,

interference

with

vibration

sensitive

instruments,

rattling

of

windows,andtheshakingofitemsonshelvesorhangingonwalls.Additionally,GBVcancausethe

vibrationofroomsurfacesresultingingroundbornenoise(GBN).Groundbornenoiseistypically

perceivedasalowfrequencyrumblingsound.

Incontrasttoairbornenoise,groundbornevibrationisnotaneverydayexperienceformostpeople.

Thebackgroundvibrationlevelinresidentialareasisusually50VdBorlowerwellbelowthethreshold

ofperceptionforhumans,whichisaround65VdB.Levelsatwhichvibrationinterfereswithsensitive

instrumentation,suchasmedicalimagingequipmentorextremelyhighprecisionmanufacturing,canbe

muchlowerthanthethresholdofhumanperception.Mostperceptibleindoorvibrationiscausedby

sourceswithinabuildingsuchastheoperationofmechanicalequipment,movementofpeople,or

slammingofdoors.Typicaloutdoorsourcesofperceptiblegroundbornevibrationareconstruction

equipment,steelwheeledtrains,andtrafficonroughroads,thoughinmostsoilsGBVdissipatesvery

rapidly.Figure2illustratescommonvibrationsourcesandthehumanandstructuralresponseto

groundbornevibration.

Figure2|TypicalVibrationLevels

Source: FTA,2006

*RMS Vibration Velocity Level in VdB

Relative to 106 inches/second


6/60



2.0

NoiseImpactAssessmentMethodology

2.1

Approach

HDRusedtheFederalTransitAdministration(FTA)screeninglevelapproachtodeterminetheimpactof

noisefromtheproposedlightrailtransit(LRT)andbusrapidtransit(BRT)systemsofthefourbuild

alternatives. TheFTAscriteriaforthenoisescreeninglevelassessmentarebasedonthelandusecategoryofthebuildingorreceptor,existingnoiselevels,andchangeinnoiseexposureduetothe

project. Theapproachconsistsof:

1. Identifyinglandusecategoriesandlocationsofnoisereceptorsalongthealignments

2. Measuring/modelingexistingnoiselevelsforthevariouslandusecategoriesandreceptors

3. Modelingthefuturetransitoperationalnoiseexposureforeachbuildalternative

4.

Verifyingthatthemodelreasonablypredictstheoperationalnoiseexposure

Table1summarizesTable32fromtheFTAmanual,whichdescribesthelandusecategoriesandthe

appropriatenoisemetrics.

Table1|NoiseAssessmentLandUseCategories

LandUse

Category

Noise

Metric,dBADescriptionofLandUseCategory

1 Leq(h)*

Quietisanessentialelement:amphitheaters,concert

pavilions,outdoorhistoriclandmarks,recording

studios,andconcerthalls

2 LdnResidencesandbuildingswherepeoplenormally

sleep

3 Leq(h)*Institutionallanduseswithprimarilydaytimeand

eveninguse

*Leqforthenoisiesthouroftransitrelatedactivityduringhoursofnoisesensitivity

Source: FTA,2006

Notethatdifferentnoisemetricsareuseddependingonthelandusecategory. Existingnoiselevels,

projectnoiselevels,andcriteriaareLdnlevelsforcategory2andLeq(h)levelsforcategories1and3.

Figure3illustratesthecurvesusedtodeterminenoiseimpactsbasedonthelandusecategory,existing

noiselevels,andprojectnoiseexposure(Figure31oftheFTAmanual).


7/60



Figure3|ProjectNoiseImpactCurves

Source: FTA,2006

AccordingtotheFTA,moderatenoiseimpactsareconsideredtobenoticeablebymostpeople,and

severenoiseimpactsareconsideredtobeanannoyancetoasignificantpercentageofpeople. The

equationsforthemoderateandsevereimpactcurvesaregiveninAppendixBoftheFTAmanual.

Figure3presentsthenoiseimpactcriteriaintermsofprojectrelatednoise;thecurvesarebasedon

increasesincumulativenoiselevels. Asexistingnoiselevelsincrease,theamountofadditionalnoise

necessaryto

adversely

affect

the

receptor

decreases.

To

illustrate

how

existing

and

cumulative

noise

levelsareusedtoassessimpacts,FTAcreatedFigure4(Figure32oftheFTAmanual).

Figure4|CumulativeNoiseImpactCurves

Source: FTA,2006


8/60



VirginiaBeachCityCodeSection2369statesthemaximumsoundlevelsforresidentialbuildings. The

soundlevelmeasuredinsidearesidencecannotexceed55dBAatnight(10pmto7am)and65dBA

duringtheday(7amto10pm). Themeasurementshallbemadeatleastfourfeetfromthewall

nearestthesoundsourcewithallwindowsanddoorsclosed. However,Section2369(d)(8)statesthat

publictransportationisexemptfromthedaytimemaximumsoundlevel.Modelingofindoornoise

levelswasnotdoneaspartofthisassessment.

2.1.1 InventoryofNoiseSensitiveSites

HDRusedthreetechniquestoidentifynoisesensitivelandusesinthestudyarea. First,HDRreviewed

aerialphotographswiththealternativealignmentsoverlaiduponthem. Second,HDRreviewedpublicly

availableandreasonablyobtainableinformationonlinetolookforspeciallanduses(i.e.recording

studios,broadcaststudios,certainmedicalfacilities,etc.). Third,HDRperformedavisual/windshield

surveyofthestudyareaandspokewithindividualsinthestudyarea. Thegoalofthesethree

techniqueswastoidentifynoisesensitivelandusesthatcanbeusedtorepresentothernoisesensitive

landusesintheirimmediatevicinity. Anothergoalofthesetechniqueswastodetermineifthereare

anylandusesthatareespeciallysensitivetonoise(i.e.recordingstudios,broadcaststudios,etc.)inthe

studyarea. Basedonthisreview,numerousnoisesensitivelanduseswereidentifiedinthestudyarea

foruseinthisassessment.

Table2presentsthelistofnoisesensitivereceptors,thelandusecategorytheyarein,andwhich

alternativestheyareapartof.Figures5through8alsoshowthelocationsofthesenoisesensitive

receptorsrelativetotheproposedalternativealignments.


9/60



Table2|NoiseSensitiveReceptorsfortheLRT/BRTAlternatives

Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Alts. Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Alts. Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Alts.

R1 2 1A,1B,2,3 R19 2 1B,2,3 R41 2 2

R2 2 1A,1B,2,3 R20 2 1B,2,3 R42 2 2

R3 3 1A,1B,2,3 R21 2 1B,2,3 R43 2 2

R4 2 1A,1B,2,3 R22 2 1B,2,3 R44 2 2

R5 2 1A,1B,2,3 R23 3 1B,2,3 R45 3 2

R5a 3 1A,1B,2,3 R24 2 1B,2,3 R46 2 2

R6 2 1A,1B,2,3 R25 2 2,3 R47 2 2

R7 3 1A,1B,2,3 R26 2 2,3 R48 2 2,3

R8 2 1A,1B,2,3 R27 2 2,3 R49 2 2,3

R9 3 1A,1B,2,3 R28 3 2,3 R50 2 2,3

R10a 1 1A,1B,2,3 R29 2 2,3 R51 2 2,3

R10b 1 1A,1B,2,3 R30 3 2,3 R52 2 2,3

R10c 3 1A,1B,2,3 R31 2 2,3 R53 2 2,3

R10d 1 1A,1B,2,3 R32 3 2,3 R54 2 2,3

R11 2 1A,1B,2,3 R33 2 2,3 R56 2 2,3

R12 2 1A,1B,2,3 R34 3 2,3 R58 2 3

R13 3 1A,1B,2,3 R35a 2 2 R59 2 3

R14 2 1A,1B,2,3 R35b 2 2,3 R60 2 3

R15 2 1B,2,3 R36 2 2 R61 2 3

R16

2

1B,2,3

R37

3

2

R62

2

3

R17a 2 1B,2,3 R38 2 2 R63 2 3

R17b 2 1B,2,3 R39 2 2

R18 2 1B,2,3 R40 2 2

Source: HDR,Inc.

ReceptorsarenotincludedfortheareaaroundtheNewtownRoadstation,asthestationisconsidereda

partoftheexistingconditions. ThestationispartofTheTidelightrailsystemthatHRTcurrently

operatesinNorfolk.Whiletheproposedprojectwouldincreasetransitvehicletrafficandfeederbus

trafficattheNewtownRoadstation,asoundbarrieriscurrentlylocatedbetweenthestationandnearby

noisesensitivereceptors. Thisbarrierisexpectedtohandleincreasedsoundlevelsfromtheproposed

project.


10/60

264

Norfolk

Vir

ginia

Beach

R02

R01

R03

R04

R05

R05a

R07a

R07

R10a

R10d

R10b

R10c

PRINCESS

ANNERD

VIRGINIABEACHBLVD

NW

ITCHDU

CKRD

R08

R09

.0 0.250.125 Miles

1 inch = 0.24 miles

Legend

Locations of Receptors

n Proposed Station Location

Build Alternatives

Norfolk LRT "The Tide"

Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDONBRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIABE

ACHBLVD

PRINCESSAN

NERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

AL

BOOTHBL

VD

OCEANA

BLV

D

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

NWIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NE

CK

RDB

AKERRD

SP

LAZATR

L

S

ROSEM

ONT

RD

IND

EPENDENCE

BLV

D

Figure 5 | Receptor Locations for LRT/BRT Alignmen


11/60

264

58

UV225

UV190

R13 R16

R15

R19

R20R21

R22

264

VIRGINIA BEACH BLVD

R11 R12 R14 R15 R17b

R18

.0 0.250.125 Miles

1 inch = 0.24 miles

Legend



Build Alternatives


Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDONBRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIABE

ACHBLVD

PRINCESSAN

NERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

ALBOOTHBL

VD

OCEANA

BLV

D

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

NWIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NE

CK

RDB

AKERRD

SP

LAZATR

L

S

ROSEM

ONT

RD

IND

EPENDENCE

BLV

D



12/60

58

UV279

R23

R24

R25 R26 R29 R31

R30

R28

R32 R33

R58

VIRGINIA

BEACHBL

VD

SPLAZATRL

NGREATNECK

RD

LON

DON

BRIDGE

RD

R27

.0 0.250.125 Miles

1 inch = 0.38 miles

Legend



Build Alternatives


Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDONBRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIAB

EACHBL

VD

PRINCESSAN

NERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

ALBOOTHBL

VD

OCEANA

BLV

D

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

NWIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NE

CK

RDB

AKERRD

SP

LAZATR

L

S

ROSEM

ONT

RD

INDEPENDENCE

BLV

D

264



13/60

264

LASKIN

RD

R41

R53

R43

R52R48

R49

R50

R5

R54

R51R34

R35b

R36 R38 R39

R37R35a

R59

R40

R60

R61 R62

R63

R47

R44

R45

R46R42

PACIFICAVE

.0 0.250.125 Miles

1 inch = 0.35 miles

Legend



Build Alternatives


Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDO

N

BRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIABE

ACHBLVD

PRINCESS

ANNERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

AL

BOOTHBL

VD

OCEANABLVD

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

N

WIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NE

CK

RDB

AKERRD

S

PLAZATR

L

S

ROSEM

ONT

RD

INDEPENDENCE

BLV

D

VIRGINIA BEACH BLVD

Figure 8 | Receptor Locations for LRT/BRT Alignme


14/60



Table3liststhenoisesensitivereceptorsidentifiedalongfeederbusRoute38. Figure9showsthe

locationsofthesereceptors.

Table3|NoiseSensitiveReceptorsforFeederBusRoute38

Receptor

LandUse

CategoryReceptor

Land

Use

CategoryReceptor

Land

Use

Category

38R01 3 38R22 3 38R43 2

38R02 2 38R23 2 38R44 2

38R03 2 38R24 3 38R45 3

38R04 2 38R25 3 38R46 2

38R05 2 38R26 2 38R47 2

38R06 3 38R27 2 38R48 3

38R07 2 38R28 2 38R49 2

38R08 3 38R29 2 38R50 2

38R09 3 38R30 2 38R51 3

38R10 2 38R31 2 38R52 3

38R11 2 38R32 3 38R53 3

38R12 2 38R33 2 38R54 2

38R13 2 38R34 3 38R55 3

38R14 2 38R35 2 38R56 2

38R15 2 38R36 3 38R57 1

38R16 2 38R37 2 38R58 2

38R17 3 38R38 2 38R59 2

38R18 2 38R39 2 38R60 2

38R19 3 38R40 2 38R61 3

38R20 2 38R41 2

38R21 2 38R42 2Source: HDR,Inc.


15/60

n n

Norfolk

Vir

ginia

Beach

UV409

UV190

38-R57

38-R61

38-R46

38-R49

38-R45

38-R35

38-R3338-R32

SEE INSET MAP (38-R01 - 38-R27)

38-R44

38-R28

38-R29 38-R30

38-R31 38-R34

38-R36

38-R37

38-R3838-R39

38-R4038-R41

38-R42 38-R43

38-R44

38-R47

38-R4838-R50

38-R5138-R52

38-R53

38-R54

38-R55

38-R5938-R56

38-R60

38-R58

PROVIDENCE

RD

LYNNHAVEN PKWY

FERREL

L PKWY

PRINCESS

ANNERD

KEMPSVILLE

RD

SMILITARY

HWY

.

0 0.50.25 Miles

1 inch = 0.63 miles

Legend

Route 38

Feeder Bus Route 38 Noise Receptor Locations

n

38-R17

38-R20

38-R22

38-R23

38-R24

38-R21

38-R25

38-R2638-R27

38-R19

38-R0638-R07

38-R0838-R09

38-R01

38-R02

38-R03

38-R0438-R05

38-R10

38-R11

38-R1238-R13

38-R14

38-R15 38-R16

38-R18

64

VirginiaBeach

INDIANRIVERRD

264

CENTERVILLE

TPKE

Chesap

eake

Virg

iniaBeach

Chesap

eake

VOLVOPKWY

GREENBRIERPKW

Y

RINGRD

GreenbrierMall

KEMPSVIL

LE

RD

SMILITARYHW

Y

Proposed Witchduck Station

Build Alternativ

Figure 9 | Receptor Locations

for Feeder Bus Route 38


16/60






Receptor

LandUse

CategoryReceptor

Land

Use

CategoryReceptor

Land

Use

Category

39R01 3 39R16 2 39R31 2

39R02 2 39R17 2 39R32 2

39R03 2 39R18 2 39R33 2

39R04 2 39R19 2 39R34 2

39R05 3 39R20 2 39R35 2

39R06 2 39R21 2 39R36 2

39R07 2 39R22 2 39R37 2

39R08 2 39R23 2 39R38 3

39R09 2 39R24 2 39R39 2

39R10 2 39R25 2 39R40 2

39R11 2 39R26 3 39R41 2

39R12 3 39R27 2 39R42 2

39R13 3 39R28 3 39R43 3

39R14 2 39R29 3

39R15 2 39R30 2

Source: HDR,Inc.


17/60

n n

nn

n

n n

n

nn n

nn

Naval AirStation

Oceana

58

UV411UV414

UV279

UV615

LASKIN

RD

35-R40

FIRST

COL

ON

IALRD

SR

OSEM

ONTRD

LYN

NHAVEN

PKWY

Rosemont

LONDON

BRIDGERD

VIRGINIABEACHBLVD

UPTON

DR

GE

NERALBOOTH

BLVD

DAMNECKRD

22NDST

LONDONBRIDGE

RD

OCEANABLVD

NBIR

DNECKRD

PACIFICAVE

SBIRDNECKRD

39-R18

39-R1939-R20

39-R2139-R22

39-R2339-R24

39-R32

39-R34

39-R37 39-R38

39-R42

39-R3939-R40

39-R41

39-R43

.0 10.5 Miles

Legend

Route 39



Build Alternatives

264

SPLAZATRL

1 inch = 0.95 miles

n

INSET MAP 139-R2539-R26 39-R27

39-R2939-R28

39-R3039-R32 39-R33

39-R34

39-R3539-R31

39-R36

39-R01

39-R0239-R03

39-R04 39-R05

39-R06

39-R0739-R09

39-R08

39-R10

39-R13

39-R1239-R11 39-R15

39-R14

39-R17

39-R16

264

INSET MAP 2

SEE INSETMAP 1

SEE INSETMAP 2

SROSEM

ONTR

D

LYNNHAVENPKWY

HOLLAND

SINDEPENDE

NCEBLV

D

PRINCESSANNERD

LYNNHAVEN

PKW

Y

264


forFeeder Bus Route 39


18/60






Receptor

LandUse

CategoryReceptor

Land

Use

CategoryReceptor

Land

Use

Category

35R01 2 35R15 2 35R29 2

35R02 2 35R16 2 35R30 2

35R03 2 35R17 2 35R31 2

35R04 3 35R18 2 35R32 2

35R05 2 35R19 2 35R33 3

35R06 2 35R20 2 35R34 2

35R07 2 35R21 2 35R35 2

35R08 2 35R22 2 35R36 2

35R09 2 35R23 2 35R37 2

35R10 2 35R24 2 35R38 2

35R11 2 35R25 2 35R39 2

35R12 2 35R26 2 35R40 2

35R13 2 35R27 3

35R14 2 35R28 3Source: HDR,Inc.

Amajorityofthenoisesensitivereceptorswereresidential,butmanyinstitutionallandusesandfour

recordingstudios(R10a,R10b,R10d,and38R57)wereidentified.


19/60

nn

n

n n

n

n

Naval Air

Station

Oceana

58UV279

UV408

UV615

60

LASKIN

RD

35-R40

FIRST

COLONIALRD

GREATNECKRD

35-R01

35-R02

35-R03

35-R0435-R06

35-R05

35-R10

35-R11

35-R13

35-R16

35-R1735-R18

35-R2135-R20

35-R22

35-R2335-R24

35-R25

35-R26

35-R27

35-R28

35-R29

35-R30

35-R31

35-R3235-R33

35-R35

35-R36

35-R3735-R39

35-R07

35-R08

35-R09

35-R12

35-R14

35-R15

35-R19

35-R34 35-R38

LONDON

BRIDGERD

VIRGINIABEACHBLVD

UPTON

DR

GENERAL

BOOTH

BLVD

DAMNECKRD

22NDST

LONDONBRIDGE

RD

OCEANABLVD

NBIR

DNECKRD

PACIFICAVE

SBIRDNECKRD

.

0 0.50.25 Miles

1 inch = 0.79 miles

Legend

Route 35


n Proposed Station LocationBuild Alternatives

264


for Feeder Bus Route 35


20/60



2.1.2 MeasurementofExistingNoiseConditions

Forthisstudy,noisesensitivereceptorsidentifiedaboveweregroupedintoreceptorclustersperFTA

guidance. Areceptorclusterisagroupofreceptorslocatedincloseproximitytoeachotherandthe

proposedalignment;theoutdoornoiseenvironmentisassumedtobethesamethroughoutthecluster.

ExistingnoiselevelswerethenmeasuredatlocationsalongtheLRT/BRTalignmentstoofferaccurate

representationofthereceptorclusters. Theproposedfeederbusrouteswereidentifiedafterthe

measurementswerecompleted. AICUZmappingforOceanaNavalAirStationwasusedtodetermine

theexistingnoiseexposuresforamajorityofthereceptorsalongfeederbusroutes39and35because

aviationnoisedominatesthesoundscapeintheseareas. Theexistingnoiseexposureestimation

methodofSection5.4oftheFTAmanualwasusedforallotherreceptors(alongfeederbusroute38

andafewreceptorsnotwithintheAICUZmappingarea).

HDRmeasuredexistingnoiselevelsat13locationsalongtheformerNSRRrightofwayandthe

Alternative2alignmenteastofBirdneckRoadinJuly2009,providingrepresentationfornoisesensitive

receptors. Four1hourmeasurementswereperformedateachlocation,withanhourforeachofthe

peakmorning,midday,peakevening,andnighttimeconditions. Table6describestheinstrumentused

toperformthesemeasurements.

Table6|MonitoringEquipmentforFormerNSRRROWandAlternative2EastofBirdneckRd.

Analyzer Microphone PreampDateofLast

Calibration

LD820(SN1413) LD2541(SN7546)LDPRM828

(SN2158)7/13/2009

Source: HDR,Inc.

ThecalculatedLdnsfromtheseshorttermmeasurementsrangedfrom61to76dBA. AccordingtoAmericanNationalStandardsInstitute(ANSI)S12.9Part3(reaffirmedin2008),anLdnof60dBAistypical

foranurbanornoisysuburbanresidentialenvironmentand70dBAistypicalforaverynoisyurban

environment.

Alternative3wasaddedtotheprojectin2012. InSeptember2013,HDRmeasuredexistingnoiselevels

foracontinuous24hourperiodatsixadditionallocationsthatareassociatedwiththisalignment

outsideoftheformerNSRRROW. Thelocationsweredeterminedtoberepresentativeoftheir

surroundingsbasedonareviewofaerialphotographsandawindshieldsurveyofthestudyarea.Table7

describestheinstrumentsusedtoperformthesemeasurements.


21/60



Table7|MonitoringEquipmentforAlternative3outsideofFormerNSRRROW

Analyzer Microphone PreampDateofLast

Calibration

LD824(SN3204)PCBPiezotronics

377B41(SN

1004)

LDPRM902

(SN3380)

6/22/2011

LD824(SN2636) LD2541(SN7490)LDPRM902

(SN2618)5/10/2012

LD824(SN0764) LD2541(SN4185)LDPRM902

(SN1207)5/1/2013

Source: HDR,Inc.

Table8presentsthedatesandtimesofthemeasurementstakenalongtheAlternative3alignment

outsideoftheformerNSRRROW.

Table8|Alternative3MonitoringPeriods

Measurement

LocationStart(date/time) End(date/time)

M14 9/18/2013 11:44AM 9/19/2013 12:08PM

M15 9/18/2013 10:45AM 9/19/2013 11:09AM

M16 9/17/2013 9:00AM 9/18/2013 9:13AM

M17 9/18/2013 9:39AM 9/19/2013 10:52AM

M18 9/17/2013 10:14AM 9/18/2013 11:14AM

M19 9/17/2013 9:43AM 9/18/2013 10:12AM

Source: HDR,Inc.

ThemeasuredLdnsfromthese24hourmonitoringlocationsrangedfrom69to77dBA. Accordingto

ANSIS12.9Part3,thisrangeofvaluesistypicalforaverynoisyurbanenvironment.

TheexistingnoiseexposureestimationmethodfromSection5.4oftheFTAmanualisbasedupon

distancesfrommajornoisesourcesandpopulationdensities. Table57oftheFTAmanualprovides

individualnoiseexposurelevelsbaseduponthedistancefrominterstatehighways,distancefromother

majorroadways,distancefromrailroadlines,andpopulationdensity. Themaximumnoiseexposure

fromthefourmethodsisthenusedastheexistingnoiseexposurelevelforthereceptor. Thedistances

weremeasuredusingaerialphotos,andthepopulationdensitieswereidentifiedbycensustract.

2.2

Predictionsof

Project

Related

Noise

HDRusedtheFTAnoiseimpactassessmentspreadsheetmodel(FTA2006)toevaluateprojectrelated

noiseforboththeLRTandBRToptionsoneachalternativealignment. Thespreadsheetmodelwas

applieddirectly,withoutmodification. Forthesimplerfeederbusroutes,equationsfromtheFTA

manualwereusedtocalculatethemoderateandsevereimpactthresholds,calculatetheprojectrelated

noiselevels,anddetermineifimpactsoccurred.


22/60


23/60



secondsofCrossingSignalnoisewasmultipliedbythedaytimeandnighttimeeventsperhourboth

directions. Thisresultedindurationsof284and60secondsperhourforthedaytimeandnighttime

CrossingSignalnoiseexposures,respectively. LRTvehiclesapproachthecrossoversfromboth

directions,sothedoubleddaytimeandnighttimeeventsperhourbothdirectionswereagainused.

Amajority

of

the

at

grade

crossings

would

be

gated.

Astationary

gate

bell

isused

at

these

crossings,

andthevehiclehornisappliedtwotothreetimesbeginningatthe10secondapproachdistance. Non

gatedcrossingsareusedfortheAlternative2andAlternative3alignmentsfromBirdneckRoadtothe

easternterminuson19thStreetattheOceanfrontstation. Onlyavehiclebellisusedatnongated

crossings,asnostationaryaudiblewarningsystemsarepresent. Boththevehiclehornandvehiclebell

areclassifiedasFixedGuidewayTransitWarningDeviceontheFTAnoiseimpactassessment

spreadsheet.

Table10providesthenumberofvehiclesdepartingfromandreturningtotheVehicleStorageand

MaintenanceFacility(VSMF),whichwasusedtocalculatethedaytimeandnighttimeeventsperhour.

Table10

|Events

per

Hour

for

the

VSMF

TimePeriodNumberofEvents

LRT BRT

4:45am6:00amDeparture 8 5

5:45am6:25amDeparture 4 2

2:45pm3:25pmDeparture 4 2

9:15am9:55amReturn 4 2

7:15pm7:55pmReturn 4 2

10:15pm10:55pmReturn 4 2

12:15am12:55amReturn 4 3

TotalEvents

per

Day

32

18

DaytimeEventsperHour 0.80 0.40

NighttimeEventsperHour 2.22 1.33Source: HDR,Inc.

ThenumberofVSMFeventsperhourwasusedatreceptorsneartheVSMF. Additionally,theHilltop

alignmentrequiresasectionofaccesstrackalongtheformerNSRRROWtoreachtheVSMF. The

numberofVSMFeventsperhourfortheRailTransitVehiclesourceforAlternative3wasusedto

evaluatenoiseatreceptorsalongtheaccesstrack.

Table11providesthefeederbusservicefrequenciesusedtocalculatethedaytimeandnighttimeevents

perhour.


24/60



Table11|EventsperHourfortheFeederBuses

TimePeriodServiceFrequency,

minutesNumberofEvents

6:00am7:00am 30 2

7:00am10:00pm 30 30

10:00pmmidnight(Friday) 30 4

TotalEventsperDay 36

DaytimeEventsperHour 2.00

NighttimeEventsperHour 0.67Source: HDR,Inc.

FortheLRTanalysis,feederbusesidlingatstationsweremodeledusingtheStationarySourceBus

StorageYardsource.WhilenottechnicallyaBusStorageYard,thissourcehasthesameSELrefasthe

BusesIdlingsourcefromtheFTAsdetailednoiseassessment. Thestationswherefeederbusidlingwas

includedareasfollows:

TownCenter(Alternatives1A,1B,2,and3)

Rosemont(Alternatives1B,2,and3)

HilltopWest(Alternative3)

HilltopEast(Alternative3)

FeederbusnoiseatreceptorsneartheproposedfeederbusalignmentswasmodeledusingtheHighway

TransitBuses(Hybrid)source. TheBuses(Hybrid)sourcewasselectedbecauseitistheloudestbus

source,andthereforeitwouldprovidethemostconservativeresults.

2.2.2 BRTAlternatives

TheanalysisofnoisefromtheBRToptionincludedthefollowingnoisesources:

Highway/TransitBuses(Hybrid)

StationarySourceBusStorageYard

UndertheBRTalternatives,noaudiblewarningswillbeusedforatgradecrossings,andthereareno

additionalsourceswithapavedroad. TheexactBRTvehiclehadnotbeenselected,sothemost

conservativeHighway/TransitBuses(Hybrid)wasused. TheBuses(Hybrid)sourcewasusedto

accountforBRTvehiclesontheLRT/BRTalignmentandfeederbusesontheproposedfeederbus

routes. Table9showstheBRTeventsperhourduringboththedaytimeandnighttimeinboth

directions. Table11showsthefeederbuseseventsperhourinboththedaytimeandnighttime. The

BusStorageYardsourcewasusedtoaccountfortheVSMF,BRTidlingatallstations,andfeederbus

idlingatthesamestationsidentifiedfortheLRTanalysis. TheBRTidling,VSMF,andfeederbusidling

usedtheservicefrequenciesshowninTable9,Table10,andTable11,respectively.


25/60



2.2.3 FeederBusRoutes

FeederbusnoisewasmodeledusingtheHighway/TransitBuses(Hybrid)asthenoisesource. A

maximumspeedof35mphwasassumedforallproposedfeederbusroutes. EquationsgiveninTable5

4oftheFTAmanualwereusedtocalculatetheprojectrelatedlevelsat50feet. Thelevelswere

adjustedfordistanceandbuildingshielding,whereapplicable,asdiscussedinSection5.3oftheFTA

manual.

3.0

NoiseImpactAssessment

UsingthestatedFTAcriteria,measuredexistingnoiselevels,andprojectrelatednoiseestimates,the

alignmentsandmodeswereassessedfornoiseimpacts.

3.1

LRTNoiseAnalysis

Table12containsthenoiseassessmentresultsfortheLRTmodeforAlternative1A.

Table12

|LRT

Noise

Assessment

Results

Alternative

1A

Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Existing

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Moderate

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Severe

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Project

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Impact

R1 2 61 58 63 57 None

R2 2 61 58 63 56 None

R3 3 53 59 65 50 None

R4 2 61 58 63 56 None

R5 2 61 58 63 51 None

R5a 3 61 63 68 55 None

R6 2 61 58 63 61 Moderate

R7 3 61 63 68 59 None

R8 2 62 59 64 69 Severe

R9 3 55 60 66 67 Severe

R10a 1 60 58 63 57 None

R10b 1 55 55 61 49 None

R10c 3 55 60 66 49 None

R10d 1 55 55 61 49 None

R11 2 62 59 64 66 Severe

R12 2 62 59 64 66 Severe

R13 3 64 65 70 69 Moderate

R14 2 64 60 65 66 Severe

Source: HDR,Inc.


26/60



AnalysisresultsindicatepotentialmoderateandseverenoiseimpactsundertheLRToptionforthe

Alternative1Aalignment. ThecontributionoftheindividualsourcesisdiscussedintheNoiseMitigation

section.

Table13containsthenoiseassessmentresultsfortheLRToptionfortheAlternative1Balignment.

Table13|LRTNoiseAssessmentResultsAlternative1B

Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Existing

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Moderate

NoiseImpact

Threshold

(Ldn/LeqdBA)

SevereNoise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/LeqdBA)

Project

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Impact

R1 2 61 58 63 57 None

R2 2 61 58 63 56 None

R3 3 53 59 65 50 None

R4 2 61 58 63 56 None

R5 2 61 58 63 51 NoneR5a 3 61 63 68 55 None

R6 2 61 58 63 61 Moderate

R7 3 61 63 68 59 None

R8 2 62 59 64 69 Severe

R9 3 55 60 66 67 Severe

R10a 1 60 58 63 57 None

R10b 1 55 55 61 49 None

R10c 3 55 60 66 49 None

R10d 1 55 55 61 49 None

R11 2 62 59 64 66 Severe

R12 2 62 59 64 66 Severe

R13 3 64 65 70 69 Moderate

R14 2 64 60 65 66 Severe

R15 2 64 60 65 67 Severe

R16 2 64 60 65 54 None

R17a 2 61 58 64 56 None

R17b 2 61 58 64 71 Severe

R18 2 61 58 64 67 Severe

R19 2 61 58 64 55 None

R20 2 61 58 64 52 None

R21 2 61 58 64 59 Moderate

R22 2 61 58 64 59 Moderate

R23 3 71 70 75 48 None

R24 2 70 64 69 53 None

Source: HDR,Inc.


27/60




Alternative1Balignment. ThecontributionoftheindividualsourcesisdiscussedintheNoiseMitigation

section.

Table14containsthenoiseassessmentresultsfortheLRToptionfortheAlternative2alignment.

Table14|LRTNoiseAssessmentResultsAlternative2

Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Existing

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Moderate

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Severe

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Project

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Impact

R1 2 61 58 63 57 None

R2 2 61 58 63 56 None

R3 3 53 59 65 50 None

R4 2 61 58 63 56 None

R5 2 61 58 63 51 None

R5a 3 61 63 68 55 None

R6 2 61 58 63 61 Moderate

R7 3 61 63 68 59 None

R8 2 62 59 64 69 Severe

R9 3 55 60 66 67 Severe

R10a 1 60 58 63 57 None

R10b 1 55 55 61 49 None

R10c 3 55 60 66 49 None

R10d 1 55 55 61 49 None

R11 2 62 59 64 66 Severe

R12 2 62 59 64 66 Severe

R13 3 64 65 70 69 Moderate

R14 2 64 60 65 66 Severe

R15 2 64 60 65 67 Severe

R16 2 64 60 65 54 None

R17a 2 61 58 64 56 None

R17b

2

61

58

64

71

Severe

R18 2 61 58 64 67 Severe

R19 2 61 58 64 55 None

R20 2 61 58 64 52 None

R21 2 61 58 64 59 Moderate

R22 2 61 58 64 59 Moderate

R23 3 71 70 75 48 None


28/60



R24 2 70 64 69 53 None

R25 2 67 61 67 59 None

R26 2 70 64 69 53 None

R27 2 70 64 69 72 Severe

R28 3 76 70 78 71 Moderate

R29 2 70 64 69 56 None

R30 3 76 70 78 55 None

R31 2 70 64 69 57 None

R32 3 52 59 65 44 None

R33 2 72 65 71 66 Moderate

R34 3 79 70 80 52 None

R35a 2 76 65 73 70 Moderate

R35b 2 76 65 73 55 None

R36 2 76 65 73 56 None

R37 3 75 70 78 51 None

R38 2 76 65 73 70 Moderate

R39 2 76 65 73 66 Moderate

R40 2 71 65 70 70 Moderate

R41 2 71 65 70 73 Severe

R42 2 71 65 70 69 Moderate

R43 2 71 65 70 73 Severe

R44 2 71 65 70 50 None

R45 3 61 63 69 59 None

R46

2

69

64

69

52

None

R47 2 69 64 69 63 None

R48 2 66 61 66 68 Severe

R49 2 66 61 66 76 Severe

R50 2 66 61 66 75 Severe

R51 2 66 61 66 70 Severe

R52 2 66 61 66 74 Severe

R53 2 66 61 66 73 Severe

R54 2 66 61 66 76 Severe

R56 2 66 61 66 75 Severe

Source: HDR,Inc.

AnalysisresultsindicatepotentialforbothmoderateandseverenoiseimpactsfortheLRToptionforthe

Alternative2alignment. ThecontributionoftheindividualsourcesisdiscussedintheNoiseMitigation

section.

Table15containsthenoiseassessmentresultsfortheLRToptionfortheAlternative3alignment.


29/60



Table15|LRTNoiseAssessmentResultsAlternative3

Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Existing

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Moderate

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/LeqdBA)

Severe

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/LeqdBA)

Project

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Impact

R1 2 61 58 63 57 None

R2 2 61 58 63 56 None

R3 3 53 59 65 50 None

R4 2 61 58 63 56 None

R5 2 61 58 63 51 None

R5a 3 61 63 68 55 None

R6 2 61 58 63 61 Moderate

R7 3 61 63 68 59 None

R8 2 62 59 64 69 Severe

R9 3 55 60 66 67 Severe

R10a 1 60 58 63 57 None

R10b 1 55 55 61 49 None

R10c 3 55 60 66 49 None

R10d 1 55 55 61 49 None

R11 2 62 59 64 66 Severe

R12 2 62 59 64 66 Severe

R13 3 64 65 70 69 Moderate

R14 2 64 60 65 66 Severe

R15 2 64 60 65 67 Severe

R16 2 64 60 65 54 None

R17a 2 61 58 64 56 None

R17b 2 61 58 64 71 Severe

R18 2 61 58 64 67 Severe

R19 2 61 58 64 55 None

R20 2 61 58 64 52 None

R21 2 61 58 64 59 Moderate

R22

2

61

58

64

59

Moderate

R23 3 71 70 75 48 None

R24 2 70 64 69 53 None

R25 2 67 61 67 59 None

R26 2 70 64 69 53 None

R27 2 70 64 69 72 Severe

R28 3 76 70 78 71 Moderate


30/60



R29 2 70 64 69 56 None

R30 3 76 70 78 55 None

R31 2 70 64 69 57 None

R32 3 52 59 65 33 None

R33 2 72 65 71 64 None

R34 3 79 70 80 42 None

R35b 2 76 65 73 55 None

R48 2 66 61 66 68 Severe

R49 2 66 61 66 76 Severe

R50 2 66 61 66 75 Severe

R51 2 66 61 66 70 Severe

R52 2 66 61 66 74 Severe

R53 2 66 61 66 73 Severe

R54 2 66 61 66 76 Severe

R56 2 66 61 66 75 Severe

R58 2 74 65 72 61 None

R59 2 69 64 69 56 None

R60 2 69 64 69 62 None

R61 2 73 65 72 56 None

R62 2 77 65 75 71 Moderate

R63 2 77 65 75 51 None

Source: HDR,Inc.


Alternative3alignment. ThecontributionoftheindividualsourcesisdiscussedintheNoiseMitigationsection.


31/60



3.2

BRTNoiseAnalysis

Table16containsthenoiseassessmentresultsfortheBRToptionfortheAlternative1Aalignment.

Table16|BRTNoiseAssessmentResultsAlternative1A

Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Existing

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

ModerateNoise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

SevereNoise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Project

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Impact

R1 2 61 58 63 55 None

R2 2 61 58 63 54 None

R3 3 53 59 65 48 None

R4 2 61 58 63 54 None

R5 2 61 58 63 49 None

R5a

3

61

63

68

53

None

R6 2 61 58 63 59 Moderate

R7 3 61 63 68 57 None

R8 2 62 59 64 57 None

R9 3 55 60 66 55 None

R10a 1 60 58 63 45 None

R10b 1 55 55 61 47 None

R10c 3 55 60 66 47 None

R10d 1 55 55 61 47 None

R11 2 62 59 64 54 None

R12 2 62 59 64 54 None

R13

3

64

65

70

56

None

R14 2 64 60 65 52 NoneSource: HDR,Inc.

AnalysisresultsindicatepotentialforasinglemoderatenoiseimpactfortheBRToptionforthe

Alternative1Aalignment. ThecontributionoftheindividualsourcesisdiscussedintheNoiseMitigation

section.


32/60



Table17containsthenoiseassessmentresultsfortheBRToptionfortheAlternative1Balignment.

Table17|BRTNoiseAssessmentResultsAlternative1B

ReceptorLand

Use

Category

Existing

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Moderate

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Severe

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Project

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Impact

R1 2 61 58 63 55 None

R2 2 61 58 63 54 None

R3 3 53 59 65 48 None

R4 2 61 58 63 54 None

R5 2 61 58 63 49 None

R5a 3 61 63 68 53 None

R6 2 61 58 63 59 Moderate

R7 3 61 63 68 57 NoneR8 2 62 59 64 57 None

R9 3 55 60 66 55 None

R10a 1 60 58 63 45 None

R10b 1 55 55 61 47 None

R10c 3 55 60 66 47 None

R10d 1 55 55 61 47 None

R11 2 62 59 64 54 None

R12 2 62 59 64 54 None

R13 3 64 65 70 56 None

R14 2 64 60 65 52 None

R15 2 64 60 65 54 NoneR16 2 64 60 65 52 None

R17a 2 61 58 64 54 None

R17b 2 61 58 64 57 None

R18 2 61 58 64 54 None

R19 2 61 58 64 53 None

R20 2 61 58 64 50 None

R21 2 61 58 64 57 None

R22 2 61 58 64 57 None

R23 3 71 70 75 46 None

R24 2 70 64 69 58 None

Source: HDR,Inc.

AnalysisresultsindicatepotentialforasinglemoderatenoiseimpactfortheBRToptionforthe

Alternative1Balignment. ThecontributionoftheindividualsourcesisdiscussedintheNoiseMitigation

section.


33/60


34/60



R32 3 52 59 65 42 None

R33 2 72 65 71 55 None

R34 3 79 70 80 40 None

R35a 2 76 65 73 57 None

R35b 2 76 65 73 44 None

R36

2

76

65

73

54

None

R37 3 75 70 78 50 None

R38 2 76 65 73 55 None

R39 2 76 65 73 55 None

R40 2 71 65 70 55 None

R41 2 71 65 70 55 None

R42 2 71 65 70 54 None

R43 2 71 65 70 55 None

R44 2 71 65 70 48 None

R45 3 61 63 69 44 None

R46 2 69 64 69 50 None

R47

2

69

64

69

49

None

R48 2 66 61 66 43 None

R49 2 66 61 66 51 None

R50 2 66 61 66 49 None

R51 2 66 61 66 48 None

R52 2 66 61 66 53 None

R53 2 66 61 66 50 None

R54 2 66 61 66 51 None

R56 2 66 61 66 64 ModerateSource: HDR,Inc.

AnalysisresultsindicatepotentialformoderatenoiseimpactsfortheBRToptionfortheAlternative2

alignment. ThecontributionoftheindividualsourcesisdiscussedintheNoiseMitigationsection. The

numberofimpactsisgreatlyreducedfromtheLRToptionduetotheabsenceofaudiblewarning

systems. ThemoderateimpactatR6issolelytheresultofwaysideBRTvehiclenoise,andthemoderate

impactatR56isduetoBRTidlingattheOceanfrontstation.


35/60



Table19containsthenoiseassessmentresultsfortheBRToptionfortheAlternative3alignment.

Table19|BRTNoiseAssessmentResultsAlternative3

ReceptorLand

Use

Category

Existing

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Moderate

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Severe

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Project

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Impact

R1 2 61 58 63 55 None

R2 2 61 58 63 54 None

R3 3 53 59 65 48 None

R4 2 61 58 63 54 None

R5 2 61 58 63 49 None

R5a 3 61 63 68 53 None

R6 2 61 58 63 59 Moderate

R7 3 61 63 68 57 NoneR8 2 62 59 64 57 None

R9 3 55 60 66 55 None

R10a 1 60 58 63 45 None

R10b 1 55 55 61 47 None

R10c 3 55 60 66 47 None

R10d 1 55 55 61 47 None

R11 2 62 59 64 54 None

R12 2 62 59 64 54 None

R13 3 64 65 70 56 None

R14 2 64 60 65 52 None

R15 2 64 60 65 54 NoneR16 2 64 60 65 52 None

R17a 2 61 58 64 54 None

R17b 2 61 58 64 57 None

R18 2 61 58 64 54 None

R19 2 61 58 64 53 None

R20 2 61 58 64 50 None

R21 2 61 58 64 57 None

R22 2 61 58 64 57 None

R23 3 71 70 75 46 None

R24 2 70 64 69 58 None

R25 2 67 61 67 57 None

R26 2 70 64 69 51 None

R27 2 70 64 69 58 None

R28 3 76 70 78 58 None

R29 2 70 64 69 54 None

R30 3 76 70 78 53 None

R31 2 70 64 69 51 None


36/60



R32 3 52 59 65 28 None

R33 2 72 65 71 52 None

R34 3 79 70 80 27 None

R35b 2 76 65 73 44 None

R48 2 66 61 66 43 None

R49

2

66

61

66

51

None

R50 2 66 61 66 49 None

R51 2 66 61 66 48 None

R52 2 66 61 66 53 None

R53 2 66 61 66 50 None

R54 2 66 61 66 51 None

R56 2 66 61 66 64 Moderate

R58 2 74 65 72 53 None

R59 2 69 64 69 43 None

R60 2 69 64 69 45 None

R61 2 73 65 72 52 None

R62

2

77

65

75

49

None

R63 2 77 65 75 46 NoneSource: HDR,Inc.

AnalysisresultsindicatepotentialformoderatenoiseimpactsfortheBRToptionfortheAlternative3

alignmentsimilartothoseidentifiedforAlternative2. Thecontributionoftheindividualsourcesis

discussedintheNoiseMitigationsection.

3.3

FeederBusNoiseAnalysis

Alternatives2and3includeallthreenewfeederbusroutes,whileAlternatives1Aand1Bonlyincludes

Route38andRoute39. Table20containsthenoiseassessmentresultsforfeederbusRoute38.

Table20|FeederBusNoiseAssessmentResultsRoute38

Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Existing

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Moderate

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Severe

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Project

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Impact

38R01 3 65 66 71 45 None

38R02 2 55 55 61 40 None

38R03

2

65

61

66

48

None

38R04 2 55 55 61 43 None

38R05 2 60 58 63 47 None

38R06 3 65 66 71 45 None

38R07 2 65 61 66 48 None

38R08 3 55 60 66 36 None

38R09 3 60 63 68 44 None

38R10 2 60 58 63 46 None


37/60



38R11 2 55 55 61 42 None

38R12 2 55 55 61 43 None

38R13 2 65 61 66 49 None

38R14 2 65 61 66 48 None

38R15 2 65 61 66 48 None

38R16

2

60

58

63

46

None

38R17 3 60 63 68 44 None

38R18 2 55 55 61 44 None

38R19 3 55 60 66 41 None

38R20 2 55 55 61 44 None

38R21 2 65 61 66 48 None

38R22 3 55 60 66 41 None

38R23 2 65 61 66 48 None

38R24 3 65 66 71 45 None

38R25 3 55 60 66 40 None

38R26 2 65 61 66 48 None

38R27

2

60

58

63

42

None

38R28 2 65 61 66 49 None

38R29 2 65 61 66 50 None

38R30 2 65 61 66 50 None

38R31 2 65 61 66 50 None

38R32 3 60 63 68 44 None

38R33 2 65 61 66 49 None

38R34 3 60 63 68 44 None

38R35 2 65 61 66 49 None

38R36 3 60 63 68 44 None

38R37 2 65 61 66 48 None

38R38

2

60

58

63

40

None

38R39 2 60 58 63 45 None

38R40 2 65 61 66 50 None

38R41 2 65 61 66 50 None

38R42 2 65 61 66 50 None

38R43 2 65 61 66 49 None

38R44 2 55 55 61 38 None

38R45 3 65 66 71 46 None

38R46 2 65 61 66 38 None

38R47 2 65 61 66 48 None

38R48 3 55 60 66 41 None

38R49

2

65

61

66

49

None

38R50 2 65 61 66 48 None

38R51 3 60 63 68 44 None

38R52 3 65 66 71 45 None

38R53 3 55 60 66 41 None

38R54 2 55 55 61 42 None

38R55 3 60 63 68 39 None

38R56 2 60 58 63 45 None


38/60


39/60



39R29 3 75 70 78 43 None

39R30 2 75 65 73 43 None

39R31 2 75 65 73 39 None

39R32 2 75 65 73 46 None

39R33 2 75 65 73 48 None

39R34

2

75

65

73

47

None

39R35 2 75 65 73 46 None

39R36 2 75 65 73 42 None

39R37 2 70 64 69 49 None

39R38 3 65 66 71 49 None

39R39 2 65 61 66 55 None

39R40 2 65 61 66 55 None

39R41 2 65 61 66 55 None

39R42 2 65 61 66 55 None

39R43 3 65 66 71 49 NoneSource: HDR,Inc.

AnalysisresultsindicatethatnoiseimpactsarenotprojectedtooccurunderfeederbusRoute39. Table

22containsthenoiseassessmentresultsforfeederbusRoute35.

Table22|FeederBusNoiseAssessmentResultsRoute35

Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Existing

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Moderate

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Severe

Noise

Impact

Threshold

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Project

Level

(Ldn/Leq

dBA)

Impact

35R01 2 70 64 69 49 None35R02 2 70 64 69 49 None

35R03 2 70 64 69 51 None

35R04 3 70 69 74 43 None

35R05 2 70 64 69 49 None

35R06 2 70 64 69 49 None

35R07 2 70 64 69 49 None

35R08 2 70 64 69 49 None

35R09 2 70 64 69 49 None

35R10 2 65 61 66 46 None

35R11 2 70 64 69 49 None

35R12 2 70 64 69 49 None35R13 2 75 65 73 50 None

35R14 2 75 65 73 49 None

35R15 2 75 65 73 49 None

35R16 2 75 65 73 49 None

35R17 2 75 65 73 43 None

35R18 2 75 65 73 43 None


40/60



35R19 2 75 65 73 48 None

35R20 2 75 65 73 49 None

35R21 2 75 65 73 49 None

35R22 2 75 65 73 51 None

35R23 2 75 65 73 51 None

35R24

2

75

65

73

50

None

35R25 2 75 65 73 47 None

35R26 2 75 65 73 47 None

35R27 3 75 70 78 41 None

35R28 3 75 70 78 43 None

35R29 2 75 65 73 43 None

35R30 2 75 65 73 44 None

35R31 2 75 65 73 49 None

35R32 2 75 65 73 46 None

35R33 3 70 69 74 41 None

35R34 2 70 64 69 49 None

35R35

2

70

64

69

46

None

35R36 2 65 61 66 49 None

35R37 2 65 61 66 47 None

35R38 2 65 61 66 50 None

35R39 2 65 61 66 46 None

35R40 2 65 61 66 48 NoneSource: HDR,Inc.

AnalysisresultsindicatethatnoiseimpactsarenotprojectedtooccurunderfeederbusRoute35.

3.4

NoiseAnalysisSummary

Table23

provides

asummary

of

the

LRT

and

BRT

noise

impacts.

Table23|SummaryofLRTandBRTNoiseImpacts

LandUse

Category

LRT BRT

Alt.1A Alt.1B Alt.2 Alt.3 Alt.1A Alt.1B Alt.2 Alt.3

Numberof

Moderate

Impacts

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 1 3 9 4 1 1 2 2

3 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0

Numberof

Severe

Impacts

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 4 7 18 16 0 0 0 0

3 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0Source: HDR,Inc.

TheLRTalternativesresultedinmoreimpactslargelyduetouseoftheaudiblewarningsystems. No

impactswerefoundforCategory1buildings,whichwereallrecordingstudios.


41/60



4.0

NoiseMitigation

4.1

LRTNoiseMitigation

TheLRTtransitmodehassevennoisesourcesincludedintheFTAspreadsheetmodel. Todeterminethe

mosteffectivenoisemitigationapproach,thecontributionoftheindividualsourcesmustbeknown.

Table24liststheindividualsourcesoundlevelsforeachaffectedreceptor,ascalculatedusingtheFTA

spreadsheetmodel.

Table24|LRTNoiseImpactsAttributionbySource

Receptor

Land

Use

Category

Impact

SoundLevel(Ldn/LeqdBA)

Mo

derateImpact

Threshold

SevereImpact

Threshold

T

otalProject

Level

RailTransit

Vehicle

TransitWarning

Device

Cr

ossingSignal

Spe

cialTrackwork

(

Crossovers)

VSMF

Fee

derBusIdling

FeederBus

R6 2 Moderate 58 63 61 61 0 0 0 0 0 0

R8 2 Severe 59 64 69 59 69 0 0 0 0 0

R9 3 Severe 60 66 67 57 66 0 0 0 0 0

R11 2 Severe 59 64 66 56 65 58 42 0 0 0

R12 2 Severe 59 64 66 56 65 54 0 0 35 0

R13 3 Moderate 65 70 69 58 69 0 0 0 32 0

R14 2 Severe 60 65 66 55 65 55 42 0 0 0

R15 2 Severe 60 65 67 56 67 0 0 0 0 0

R17b 2 Severe 58 64 71 59 70 63 0 0 0 0

R18 2 Severe 58 64 67 56 67 57 0 0 0 0R21 2 Moderate 58 64 59 59 0 0 0 0 0 0

R22 2 Moderate 58 64 59 59 0 0 0 0 0 0

R27 2 Severe 64 69 72 60 71 49 52 0 0 0

R28 3 Moderate 70 78 71 59 70 65 0 0 0 0

R33 2 Moderate 65 71 66 56 66 0 0 0 0 47

R35a 2 Moderate 65 73 70 59 69 64 48 0 0 42

R38 2 Moderate 65 73 70 57 70 0 0 0 0 45

R39 2 Moderate 65 73 66 56 66 0 0 0 0 42

R40 2 Moderate 65 70 70 57 70 51 0 0 0 0

R41 2 Severe 65 70 73 58 73 0 0 0 0 0

R42 2 Moderate 65 70 69 56 69 0 0 0 0 0R43 2 Severe 65 70 73 58 73 0 0 0 0 0

R48 2 Severe 61 66 68 45 68 0 0 0 0 0

R49 2 Severe 61 66 76 53 76 0 0 0 0 0

R50 2 Severe 61 66 75 52 74 0 0 0 0 0

R51 2 Severe 61 66 70 50 70 0 0 0 0 0

R52 2 Severe 61 66 74 54 74 0 0 0 0 0


42/60



R53 2 Severe 61 66 73 53 73 0 0 0 0 0

R54 2 Severe 61 66 76 53 76 0 0 0 0 0

R56 2 Severe 61 66 75 55 75 0 0 0 0 0

R62 2 Moderate 65 75 71 54 71 0 0 0 0 0Source: HDR,Inc.

Theindividualsourcesoundlevelsindicatethetransitwarningdeviceyieldsthehighestlevelsandisa

contributingfactortoeverysevereimpact. ReceiversR6,R21,andR22experiencenoisefromthe

transitvehiclealone;wheelskirts(panelsthatcoverthewheels)mayofferpotentialnoisereduction.

ReceiversR8andR17baremostinfluencedbythetransitwarningdevice;however,noisefromthe

transitvehicleorcrossingsignalwouldcausemoderateimpactsevenwithoutthetransitwarningdevice

considered. ReceiversR9,R11,R12,R18,andR35ahavetransitvehicleorcrossingsignallevelswithin3

dBAofthemoderateimpactthreshold. Evenifthetransitwarningdevicelevelswerereduced,the

summedcontributionscouldyieldimpacts.Whileimportanttonotethesespecificcontributions,a

majorityoftheimpactswereduetothetransitwarningdevicealone.

HDRdeterminedthattheFTAspreadsheetmodeloverestimatesthenoiseemissionsoftheHRTvehiclebell. AccordingtoHRT,theprojectLRTvehiclewillhaveavehiclebellwhichproducesalevelof75dBA

at100feet. Thevehiclebellwouldbeusedforungatedcrossingsinthemedianrunningsegmentsnear

theOceanfrontstation(R41R56,R62,andR63). Assumingfreefieldconditions(meaningtheareais

freefromobstructionsthatcouldaffectthewaysoundtravelsawayfromthenoisesource),thislevel

becomes81dBAat50feetforthevehiclebell. ReferencingTable63fromthedetailednoiseanalysisof

theFTAguidancedocument(FTA2006),atransitcarwhistlewithaSELrefof81dBAhasanapproximate

Lmaxof78dBA(bothat50feetand50milesperhour). Theprojectvehiclelevelsarenotcomparableto

theFTASELrefs,sothemostcomparablelevelsaretheLmaxvalues. TheFTAspreadsheetmodelhasa

transitwarningdevicecategory,whichhasaSELrefof93dBAat50feetand50mph. Asindicatedby

Table63oftheFTAmanual,areferenceSELof93dBAequatestoanapproximateLmaxof90dBA,which

islouderthanthelevelidentifiedbyHRT. Table25providesasummaryofthecomparisonbetweenthe

projectvehiclelevelsandthelevelsusedbytheFTAmethod.

Table25|TransitWarningDeviceLevelComparison

SourceEstimatedProject

Levelat50ft

ApproximateLmaxat50ft

(Table63,FTA2006)

ApproximateLmaxat50ft

(FTASpreadsheetModel)

VehicleBell 81dBA 78dBA 90dBASource: HDR,Inc.

Thetable

indicates

the

FTA

spreadsheet

model

overestimates

the

noise

from

the

vehicle

bell.

Although

theprojectvehiclebellis3dBAlouderthanthesourcelevelfromTable63oftheFTAmanual,theFTA

spreadsheetoverestimatestheprojectvehiclebellnoiseby9dBA. Thisoverestimateofnoiseprojected

forthevehiclebellcontributestosomeofthecalculatednoiseimpacts. Inareaswherevehiclebelluse

isprojected,thebellnoisealonewouldcause2moderateimpactsand10severeimpacts. Toevaluate

theeffectoftheFTAspreadsheetmodelsoverestimateofbellnoise,thetransitwarningdevicesource

waschangedtoalower,morerealistic,valueatreceptorswhereonlythevehiclebellisusedinnormal


43/60



operations. Theestimatedprojectlevelof81dBAat50feetforthevehiclebellcanbeapproximatedto

haveaSELrefof84dBA(baseduponthe3dBAdifferencebetweentheLmaxandSELrefvaluesforthe

transitcarwhistlessourcefromTable63oftheFTAmanual). Thetransitwarningdevicewastherefore

replacedbyasourcewithanSELrefof85dBA(theclosestavailablenoiselevel). Table26showsthe

changeinimpactswhenthemorerealisticnoiselevelisusedforthevehiclebell.

Table26|VehicleBellSourceImpacts

ReceptorLandUse

Category

ProjectLevel(Ldn,dBA) Impact

Overestimated

BellNoise

Realistic

BellNoise

Overestimated

BellNoise

Realistic

BellNoise

R41 2 73 64 Severe None

R42 2 69 59 Moderate None



R49 2 76 64 Severe Moderate

R50

2

74

63

Severe

Moderate






R62 2 71 60 Moderate NoneSource: HDR,Inc.

Whenarealisticvalueforvehiclebellnoiseisusedthenumberandseverityofimpactsarereduced.

Table27summarizestheremainingreceiverswithsevereimpacts.

Table27

|Receptors

with

Severe

Impacts

ReceptorLandUse

CategoryImpact

SoundLevel(Ldn/Leq),dBA

Moderate

Impact

Threshold

Severe

Impact

Threshold

Transit

Warning

Device

Reduction

Crossing

Signal

Reduction

Project

Levelwith

Reductions

R8 2 Severe 59 64 8 63

R9 3 Severe 60 66 2 65

R11 2 Severe 59 64 6 0 63

R12 2 Severe 59 64 4 0 63

R14 2 Severe 60 65 3 0 64R15 2 Severe 60 65 3 64

R17b 2 Severe 58 64 11 6 63

R18 2 Severe 58 64 6 0 63

R27 2 Severe 64 69 4 0 68Source: HDR,Inc.


44/60


45/60



Table28describesthelandusecategoriesforageneralvibrationassessment.

Table28|VibrationAssessmentLandUseCategories

LandUseCategory/

BuildingTypeDescriptionofLandUseCategory

1Buildingswherevibrationwould

interferewithinterioroperations

2Residencesandbuildingswherepeople

normallysleep

3Institutionallanduseswithprimarily

daytimeuse

SpecialConcerthalls,TVstudios,recording

studios,auditoriums,andtheaters

Source: FTA,2006

Thegeneralvibrationassessmentconsideredeachbuildingindividually. Allbuildingswithintheproject

areawerescreenedtoidentifycategory2andcategory3buildings. Category1buildingsandspecial

buildingswereidentifiedonanindividualbasis.

5.1.1 MeasurementofExistingVibrationConditions

HDRdidnotperformanymeasurementsofexistingvibrationconditions,asexistingvibrationlevelsare

notneededfortheFTAsgeneralvibrationassessment.

5.2

PredictionsofProjectRelatedVibration

Figure12illustratesthecurvesusedtodeterminethelevelsofprojectrelatedvibration(Figure101of

theFTAmanual).


46/60



Figure12|GeneralVibrationCurves

Source: FTA,2006

Eachcurverepresentsatypeoftransitsystem;themiddlecurveisappliedtotheLRToptionandthe

bottomcurveisappliedtotheBRToption. Eachcurveisbasedonacertainspeedandcertain

conditions,soadjustmentfactorsaregiveninTable101oftheFTAmanual.

5.2.1 LRTVibrationAnalysis

Vibrationistypicallyassessedinoneoftwoways:determinethelevelofprojectrelatedvibrationat

individualbuildingsorbuildingclusters,andthenapplyappropriateadjustmentsonanindividualbasis;

oralternatively,determinethedistanceatwhichimpactswouldoccurforeachlandusecategory,and

thencountthebuildingswithintherespectivedistances. HDRselectedthesecondapproachforthe

corridoranalysis.

BuildingsweregroupedtogetherbasedonthelandusecategoriesstatedinTable28,andadjustment

factorswereappliedinaccordancewithFTAguidelinesbasedonbuildingstypicalofeachlanduse

category. Thisprocessdidrelyongeneralization,butconservativeapplicationoftheadjustmentfactors

minimizedinaccuraciesforuniquebuildings. Table29providestheadjustmentfactorsused,givenin

VdB1.

1TheFTAmanualdefinesitsgroundbornevibration(GBV)criteriausingadecibelnotationoftherootmean

squarevelocityamplitude. Thelevelsarecalculatedusingareferencevelocityamplitudeof1x106inches/second,

andaregiventheunitsVdB.


47/60



Table29|LRTAdjustmentFactorsforGroundBorneVibration(VdB)

LandUse

Category Speed

V

ehicle

Parameter

Track

Conditions

Propagation

G

eology

Couplingto

Building

Fou

ndation

Floorto

Floor

Attenuation

Floor

Amp

lification

1 Varied 0 0/+10 0 7 0 0

2:SingleFamily Varied 0 0/+10 0 5 0 0

2:MultiFamily Varied 0 0/+10 0 5 2 +6

3 Varied 0 0/+10 0 7 0 0

Special:Studios Varied 0 0/+10 0 7 0 0

Special:Theaters Varied 0 0/+10 0 7 0 0Source: HDR,Inc.

Thetrackalignmentsweredividedintosectionsbasedonstationtostationmaximumspeeds. The

calculationprocesswasduplicatedforspeedsof20,25,35,40,and45milesperhour. Theproject

wouldusenewvehicles,sonoadjustment(0Vdb)wasmadeforvehicleparameters. Twotrack

conditionswereconsideredfortheLRToption:noadjustment(0VdB)wasmadeforstraighttrack

(waysidevibration);while10VdBwasaddedforcrossovers(specialtrackworkvibration). Local

geologicaldatawasobtainedandreviewed(SmithandHarlow,Jr.2002). Loosequartzsandandquartz

sandweretheprevalenttypesofunderlyingsoil. Asthesetypesofsoildonotpropagategroundborne

vibrationefficiently,noadjustmentwasapplied.

Forcouplingtothebuildingfoundation,residentialbuildingswereconsideredtohaveresidential

constructionandallotherbuildingswereconsideredtobe12storymasonry.Whilemanybuildings

largerthan12storyandbuildingswithmoresubstantialconstructionareinthestudyarea,theywouldhavefurtherreductionsinthecalculatedvibrationvelocitylevel. Theseassumptionsleadtoa

conservativeoverestimationofvibrationlevelsforlargerbuildings.Multifamilydwellingshaveunits

abovegrade,sofloortofloorattenuationof 2VdB,andflooramplificationof6VdBwereapplied. All

otherbuildingswereconsideredtobeongrade.

Thetotalnetadjustmentforvibrationlevelswasdeterminedforeachcategoryandappliedtothe

appropriateimpactcriterion. Thedistancetopotentialimpactwasdeterminedfromtheadjusted

impactcriteriaforeachlandusecategoryandforvariouslevelsofspeed. UsingArcMapGeographic

InformationSystems(GIS)software,thedistancestoimpactwereplottedascontours(shadedareas

aroundthe

alignment).

Contours

were

created

for

categories

1and

2for

the

straight

track,

and

categories1,2,and3forthecrossovers. Thefurthestdistancetoacategory3impactfromthestraight

trackwas5.3feet,soplottingcontourswasunnecessaryforcategory3. Contourswerenotneededfor

thespecialbuildingsasthedistancestoimpactwereidenticaltodistancesforcategories1and2.

Buildingspotentiallyaffectedbyvibrationwerelocatedbyidentifyingthebuildingswithinthe

appropriatecontours.


48/60



5.2.2 BRTVibrationAnalysis

TheBRToptionisbaseduponthesamecriteriaastheLRToption,buttheprojectrelatedvibration

levelsarecalculatedusingadifferent,muchlower,generalvibrationcurve. Thesameadjustment

factorsareapplied,withtheexceptionofnoadjustmentforspecialtrackwork. AsseeninFigure12,the

bottomcurveusedfortheBRTisbelowthemiddlecurveusedfortheLRT. Thedifferencebetweenthe

twocurvesisgreaterthan5VdBatalldistances. Bothofthesecurvesaretreatedwiththesame

adjustmentfactors;however,theyarebasedondifferentreferencespeeds. Thefollowingequationis

usedtoadjustfordifferentspeedsusingthereferencespeedofthecurve.

20 log

WhetheradjustingtheBRTcurveupto50mphfrom30mphoradjustingtheLRTcurvedownto30mph

from50mph,theadjustmentlevelis4.4VdB. Asthedifferencebetweenthecurvesisatleast5VdB,it

wasdeterminedtheBRTwillproducelessvibrationthantheLRTwhentheremainingadjustmentfactors

areequivalent.

Based

on

this

determination,

the

LRT

contour

methodology

was

used

as

ascreening

processfortheBRTgeneralvibrationassessment.

TheBRTgeneralvibrationassessmentbeganwiththeimpactedbuildingsfromtheLRTassessment. No

specialtrackworkispresentfortheBRToption,sothebuildingsonlyimpactedbythetrackcrossovers

wereremovedfromfurtherconsiderationforBRTvibrationimpacts. Bydoingso,onlybuildings

impactedbywaysidevibrationfromthealignmentremained. TheBRTrelatedvibrationlevelswere

thencalculatedforeachbuildingindividually. Table30containstheadjustmentfactorsusedfortheBRT

option.

Table30|BRTAdjustmentFactorsforGroundBorneVibration(VdB)

Receptor

Speed,mph

Vehicle

Parameter

Track

Conditions

Propagation

Geology

Couplingto

Building

Foundation

Floorto

Floor

Attenuation

Floor

Amplification

R6:SingleFamily 45 0 0 0 5 0 0

R17b:SingleFamily 40 0 0 0 5 0 0

R21:SingleFamilyWest 40 0 0 0 5 0 0

R21:SingleFamilyEast 40 0 0 0 5 0 0

DominionTestInstruments 40 0 0 0 7 0 0Source: HDR,Inc.

SimilartotheLRTvibrationanalysis,therewerenoadjustmentsrequiredfornewvehicles,pavedroads,

andsoilconditions. ThewoodframesinglefamilyhomesshowninTable30haveabuildingfoundation

adjustmentof 5VdB,andDominionTestInstruments,aonestorymasonrybuilding,hasanadjustment


49/60



of 7VdB. DominionTestInstrumentsisanatgradestructure,andthesinglefamilyhomesareassumed

tobeatgrade,sonofloortofloorattenuationorflooramplificationisapplied.

5.2.3 FeederBusVibrationAnalysis

ThefeederbusvibrationanalysismethodologygenerallyfollowedtheBRTmethodology. Usingthe

sameadjustmentfactorsfoundinTable29

(with0VdBadjustmentsfortrackconditions),theLRT

methodswereusedtodetermineimpactdistancesfromthebusroutes. Thefurthestdistancetoimpact

acrossthelandusecategorieswasfoundtobe36.6feet,sobuildingswithin36.6feetofthebusroutes

wereanalyzedindividually. Table31containstheadjustmentfactorsusedforthereceptorswithin36.6

feetofthebusroutes.

Table31|FeederBusAdjustmentFactorsforGroundBorneVibration(VdB)

Receptor

Speed

,mph

Veh

icle

Parameter

Track

Cond

itions

Propa

gation

Geo

logy

Couplingto

Building

Foundation

Floor

t

oFloor

Atten

uation

Floor

Amplification

39R07:TownHomes 35 0 0 0 5 0 0

39R40:Hotels 35 0 0 0 7 2 6

39R41:Hotels 35 0 0 0 7 2 6

39R42:Hotels 35 0 0 0 7 2 6

39R43:Hotels 35 0 0 0 7 2 6Source: HDR,Inc.

Thetownhomesof39R07aretypicalresidentialconstruction(5VdBforcouplingtobuilding

foundation),and

are

assumed

to

be

at

grade

(0

VdB

for

floor

to

floor

attenuation

and

floor

amplification). Thehotelreceptorsaregenerallyseveralstorieshigh,butthe12storymasonry

adjustmentof 7VdBisconservativelyappliedtoaccountforroomsonthesecondfloor. Thesecond

floorisagainconservativelyconsideredforfloortofloorattenuation(2VdB)andflooramplification(6

VdB). Higherlevelswouldhavefurtherreductionsinvibrationlevel.

5.3

VibrationImpactCriteria

Thevibrationimpactcriterialevelsarebaseduponlandusecategoryandfrequencyofvibrationevents.

TheservicefrequenciesdescribedinthenoiseassessmentresultedinatotalnumberofdailyLRTand

BRTvibrationeventsof80perdirection,or160totalevents. Thefeederbusservicefrequenciesresult

inatotalnumberof36dailyvibrationevents.

Withatotalnumberofvibrationeventsexceeding70eventsper24hourperiod,theLRTandBRTfall

withinFTAsFrequentEventsclassification(FTA2006). ThefeederbusesfallwithinFTAsOccasional

Eventsclassification. Table32statestherelevantvibrationimpactcriteriafromChapter8oftheFTA

manual.


50/60


51/60

.0 0.20.1 Miles

1 inch = 0.12 miles

Legend

Locations of Impacted Buildings

Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDO

N

BRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIABE

ACHBLVD

PRINCESS

ANNERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

AL

BOOTHBL

VD

OCEANA

BLVD

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

N

WIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NE

CK

RDB

AKERRD

S

PLAZATR

L

SROSEM

ONT

RD

INDEPENDENCE

BLV

D

264

PRIN

CESSANNERD

Figure 13 | Locations of Buildings with

Potential Vibration Impacts


52/60

.0 0.20.1 Miles

1 inch = 0.12 miles

Legend


Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDO

N

BRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIABE

ACHBLVD

PRINCESS

ANNERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

AL

BOOTHBL

VD

OCEANA

BLVD

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

N

WIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NE

CK

RDB

AKERRD

S

PLAZATR

L

SROSEM

ONT

RD

INDEPENDENCE

BLV

D

264

VIRGINIA BEACH BLVD

INDEPENDENC

E

BLVD




53/60

.0 0.20.1 Miles

1 inch = 0.12 miles

Legend


Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDO

N

BRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIABE

ACHBLVD

PRINCESS

ANNERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

AL

BOOTHBL

VD

OCEANA

BLVD

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

N

WIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NE

CK

RDB

AKERRD

S

PLAZATR

L

SROSEM

ONT

RD

INDEPENDENCE

BLV

D

VIRGINIABEACHBLVD




54/60


55/60

.0 0.20.1 Miles

1 inch = 0.12 miles

Legend


Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDO

N

BRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIABE

ACHBLVD

PRINCESS

ANNERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

AL

BOOTHBL

VD

OCEANA

BLVD

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

NWIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NECK

RDB

AKERRD

S

PLAZATR

L

SROSEM

ONT

RD

INDEPENDENCE

BLV

D

264264

VIRGINIA BEACH BLVD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY




56/60

.0 0.20.1 Miles

1 inch = 0.12 miles

Legend


Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDO

N

BRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIABE

ACHBLVD

PRINCESS

ANNERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

AL

BOOTHBL

VD

OCEANA

BLVD

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

N

WIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NE

CK

RDB

AKERRD

S

PLAZATR

L

SROSEM

ONT

RD

INDEPENDENCE

BLV

D

VIRGINIA BEACHBLVD

264

FIRSTCOLONIALRD




57/60

.0 0.20.1 Miles

1 inch = 0.12 miles

Legend


Naval Air

Station

Oceana

LASKIN

RD

264

264

264

LONDO

N

BRIDGE

RD

LYNNHAVEN

PKWY

PACIFICAVE

VIRGINIABE

ACHBLVD

PRINCESS

ANNERD

LITTLENECK

RD

GENER

AL

BOOTHBL

VD

OCEANA

BLVD

NEWTOWN

RD

PROVIDENCERD

N

WIT

CHDUC

K RD

NG

REAT

NE

CK

RDB

AKERRD

S

PLAZATR

L

SROSEM

ONT

RD

INDEPENDENCE

BLV

D

VIRGINIA

BEACHB

LVD

PACIFIC

AVE

21STST

22NDST

SBIRDNECK

RD




58/60



6.2

BRTVibrationAnalysis

Table34containstheresultsofthegeneralvibrationassessmentfortheBRToption.

Table34|BRTGeneralVibrationAssessmentResults

LandUse

Category

Number

of

Building

Impacts

Alternative1A Alternative1B Alternative2 Alternative3

1 0 0 0 0

2 0 0 0 0

3 0 0 0 0

Special:Studios 0 0 0 0

Special:Theaters 0 0 0 0Source: HDR,Inc.

TherearenovibrationimpactsfromanyoftheBRTalternatives.

6.3 FeederBusVibrationAnalysis

Table35containstheresultsofthegeneralvibrationassessmentforthefeederbusroutes.

Table35|FeederBusGeneralVibrationAssessmentResults

LandUseCategoryNumberofBuildingImpacts

Route38 Route39 Route35

1 0 0 0

2 0 0 0

3 0 0 0

Special:Studios 0 0 0

Special:Theaters

0

0

0

Source: HDR,Inc.

Therearenovibrationimpactsforthefeederbusroutes,sonoimpactsareaddedtothealignment

alternativetotals.

7.0

VibrationMitigation

7.1

LRTVibrationMitigation

FortheLRTalternatives,Table36providesabreakdownoftheimpactsbywaysidevibrationfromthe

tracksandspecialtrackworkvibrationfromtheturnoutsandcrossovers.


59/60



Table36|LRTVibrationImpactsAttributionbySource

LandUse

Category

Alternative1A Alternative1B Alternative2 Alternative3

Wayside

Impacts

Special

Trackwork

Impacts

Wayside

Impacts

Special

Trackwork

Impacts

Wayside

Impacts

Special

Trackwork

Impacts

Wayside

Impacts

Special

Trackwork

Impacts

1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0

2 1 6 4 6 4 16 4 16

3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Special:

Studios0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Special:

Theaters0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Source: HDR,Inc.

FromTable36,itisclearthatspecialtrackwork(turnoutsandcrossovers)yieldedamajorityofthe

vibrationimpacts. Specialtrackworkvibrationcouldbemitigatedbymovingthecrossoversawayfrom

vibrationsensitivereceivers. Othermethodsofmitigationcouldincludehighresiliencefasteners,

ballastmats,floatingslabtrackbeds,andresilientlysupportedties.

7.2

BRTVibrationMitigation

NovibrationimpactswerefoundfortheBRToption,somitigationmeasuresarenotneeded.

7.3

FeederBusVibrationMitigation

Novibrationimpactswerefoundforthefeederbusroutes,somitigationmeasuresarenotneeded.

8.0

Construction

Noise

and

Vibration

Constructionrelatedactivitiesproduceshorttermnoiseandvibration. Typicalnoiseemissionlevelsfor

constructionequipmentaregiveninTable121oftheFTAmanual,andtypicalvibrationsourcelevelsfor

constructionequipmentaregiveninTable122oftheFTAmanual(FTA2006).

8.1

ConstructionRelatedNoise

Forgeneralassessmentpurposes,theFTAoffers

appendix q - noise and vibration technical report

Documents