4.12 Noise and Vibration - Altamont Corridor Express · Similar to FRA, the Federal Transit...
Transcript of 4.12 Noise and Vibration - Altamont Corridor Express · Similar to FRA, the Federal Transit...
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-1
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
4.12 Noise and Vibration
4.12.1 Introduction
This section describes the regulatory setting and environmental setting for noise and vibration in
the vicinity of ACEforward’s near-term and longer-term improvements. It also describes the impacts
from noise and vibration on sensitive land use that would result from implementation of
ACEforward and mitigation measures that would reduce significant impacts, where feasible and
appropriate.
Cumulative impacts from noise and vibration, in combination with planned, approved, and
reasonably foreseeable projects, are discussed in Chapter 5, Other CEQA-Required Analysis.
4.12.1.1 Noise Fundamentals and Descriptors
Noise from transit systems is expressed in terms of a source-path-receiver framework. The source
generates noise levels that depend on the type of source (e.g., a commuter train) and its operating
characteristics (e.g., speed). The receiver is the noise-sensitive land use (e.g., residence, hospital, or
school) exposed to noise from the source. In between the source and the receiver is the path, where
the noise is reduced by distance, intervening buildings, and topography. Environmental noise
impacts are assessed at the receiver. Noise criteria are established for the various types of receivers
because not all receivers have the same noise sensitivity.
Noise is unwanted sound. Sound is measured in terms of sound pressure level and is usually
expressed in decibels (dB). The human ear is less sensitive to higher and lower frequencies than it is
to mid-range frequencies. All noise ordinances, and this noise analysis, use the A-weighted decibel
(dBA) system, which measures what humans hear in a more meaningful way because it reduces the
sound levels of higher and lower frequency sounds—similar to what humans hear. Figure 4.12-1
shows typical maximum A-weighted sound pressure levels (Lmax) for transit and non-transit
sources.
Analysts use three primary noise measurement descriptors to assess noise impacts from traffic and
transit projects. They are the equivalent sound level (Leq), the day-night sound level (Ldn), and the
sound exposure level (SEL).
Leq: The level of a constant sound for a specified period of time that has the same sound energy
as an actual fluctuating noise over the same period of time. The peak-hour Leq is used for all
traffic and commuter rail noise analyses at locations with daytime use, such as schools and
libraries.
Ldn: The Leq over a 24-hour period, with 10 dB added to nighttime sound levels (between 10
p.m. and 7 a.m.) to account for the greater sensitivity and lower background sound levels during
this time. The Ldn is the primary noise-level descriptor for rail noise at residential land uses.
Figure 4.12-2 shows typical Ldn noise exposure levels.
SEL: The SEL is the primary descriptor of a single noise event (e.g., noise from a train passing a
specific location along the track). SEL is an intermediate value in the calculation of both Leq and
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-2
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Ldn. It represents a receiver's cumulative noise exposure from an event and the total A-
weighted sound during the event normalized to a 1-second interval.
In addition to the Leq, Ldn, and SEL, another descriptor is used to describe noise. The loudest 1
second of noise over a measurement period, or Lmax, is used in many local and state ordinances for
noise emitted from private land uses and for construction noise impact evaluations.
4.12.1.2 Vibration Fundamentals and Descriptors
Vibration from a transit system is also expressed in terms of a source-path-receiver framework. The
source is the train rolling on the tracks, which generates vibration energy transmitted through the
supporting structure under the tracks and into the ground. Once the vibration gets into the ground,
it propagates through the various soil and rock strata—the path—to the foundations of nearby
buildings—the receivers. Ground-borne vibrations are generally reduced with distance depending
on the local geological conditions. A receiver is a vibration-sensitive building (e.g., residence,
hospital, or school) where the vibrations may cause perceptible shaking of the floors, walls, and
ceilings and a rumbling sound inside rooms. Not all receivers have the same vibration sensitivity.
Consequently, vibration criteria are established for the various types of receivers. Ground-borne
noise occurs as a perceptible rumble and is caused by the noise radiated from the vibration of room
surfaces.
Vibration above certain levels can damage buildings, disrupt sensitive operations, and cause
annoyance to humans within buildings. The response of humans, buildings, and equipment to
vibration is most accurately described using velocity or acceleration. In this analysis, vibration
velocity (VdB) is the primary measure to evaluate the effects of vibration.
Figure 4.12-3 illustrates typical ground-borne vibration velocity levels for common sources and
thresholds for human and structural response to ground-borne vibration. As shown, the range of
interest is from approximately 50 to 100 VdB in terms of vibration velocity level (i.e., from
imperceptible background vibration to the threshold of damage). Although the threshold of human
perception to vibration is approximately 65 VdB, annoyance does not usually occur unless the
vibration exceeds 70 VdB.
4.12.2 Regulatory Setting
This section summarizes federal, state, regional, and local regulations related to noise and vibration
and applicable to ACEforward.
4.12.2.1 Federal
Noise Control Act of 1972
The Noise Control Act of 1972 (42 United States Code § 4910) was the first comprehensive
statement of national noise policy. The Noise Control Act declared, “it is the policy of the U.S. to
promote an environment for all Americans free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare.”
Although the Noise Control Act, as a funded program, was ultimately abandoned at the federal level,
it served as the catalyst for comprehensive noise studies and the generation of noise assessment and
mitigation policies, regulations, ordinances, standards, and guidance for many states, counties, and
municipal governments. For example, the noise elements of community general plan documents and
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-3
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
local noise ordinances considered in this analysis were largely created in response to the passage of
the Noise Control Act.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Railroad Noise Emission Standards
Interstate rail carriers must comply with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (40 Code of
Federal Regulation [C.F.R.] § 201) noise emission standards, which are expressed as maximum
measured noise levels and applicable to locomotives manufactured after 1979.
100 feet from geometric center of stationary locomotive, connected to a load cell and operating
at any throttle setting except idle—87 dBA (at idle setting, 70 dBA).
100 feet from geometric center of mobile locomotive—90 dBA.
100 feet from geometric center of mobile railcars, at speeds of up to 45 miles per hour (mph)—88
dBA—or speeds greater than 45 mph (93 dBA).
Federal Railroad Administration Guidelines and Noise Emission Compliance Regulation
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has developed a guidance manual for assessing noise
and vibration impacts from major rail projects. Although not at the level of a rule or a standard, FRA
guidance is intended to satisfy environmental review requirements and assist project sponsors in
addressing predicted construction and operation noise and vibration during the design process.
FRA also has a regulation governing compliance of noise emissions from interstate railroads. FRA’s
Railroad Noise Emission Compliance Regulation (49 C.F.R. § 210) prescribes compliance
requirements for enforcing railroad noise emission standards adopted by USEPA (40 C.F.R. § 201).
Federal Transit Administration Guidelines
Similar to FRA, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has developed a guidance manual for
assessing noise and vibration impacts from major rail projects intended to satisfy environmental
review requirements and assist project sponsors in addressing predicted construction and
operation noise and vibration during the design process. The FTA guidance manual noise and
vibration impact criteria for rail projects and their associated fixed facilities, such as storage and
maintenance yards, passenger stations and terminals, parking facilities, and substations are
described in Section 4.12.4.2, Thresholds of Significance, and are the primary noise criteria used for
the ACEforward. FTA guidance is accepted by FRA.
4.12.2.2 State
California Noise Control Act
At the state level, the California Noise Control Act, enacted in 1973 (Health and Safety Code § 46010
et seq.), requires the Office of Noise Control in the Department of Health Services to provide
assistance to local communities developing local noise control programs. The Office of Noise Control
also works with the Office of Planning and Research to provide guidance for preparing required
noise elements in city and county general plans, pursuant to Government Code Section 65302(f). In
preparing the noise element, a city or county must identify local noise sources and analyze and
quantify, to the extent practicable, current and projected noise levels for various sources, including
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-4
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
highways and freeways; passenger and freight railroad operations; ground rapid transit systems;
commercial, general, and military aviation and airport operations; and other ground stationary
noise sources. These noise sources also would include commuter rail alignments. The California
Noise Control Act stipulates the mapping of noise-level contours for these sources, using community
noise metrics appropriate for environmental impact assessment as defined in Section 4.12.4.2. Cities
and counties use these as guides to making land use decisions to minimize the community residents’
exposure to excessive noise.
4.12.2.3 Regional and Local
The San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC), a state joint powers agency, proposes
improvements located within and outside of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) right-of-way (ROW).
The Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA) affords railroads engaged in
interstate commerce1 considerable flexibility in making necessary improvements and modifications
to rail infrastructure, subject to the requirements of the Surface Transportation Board. ICCTA
broadly preempts state and local regulation of railroads and this preemption extends to the
construction and operation of rail lines. As such, activities within the UPRR ROW are clearly exempt
from local building and zoning codes and other land use ordinances. ACEforward improvements
outside of the UPRR ROW, however, would be subject to regional and local plans and regulations.
Though ICCTA does broadly preempt state and local regulation of railroads, SJRRC intends to obtain
local agency permits for construction of facilities that fall outside of the UPRR ROW even though
SJRRC has not determined that such permits are legally necessary and such permits may not be
required.
Appendix H, Regional Plans and Local General Plans, provides a list of applicable goals, policies, and
objectives from regional and local plans of the jurisdictions in which ACEforward improvements are
proposed. Section 15125(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to discuss “any inconsistencies
between the proposed project and applicable general plans, specific plans, and regional plans.”
These plans were considered during the preparation of this analysis and were reviewed to assess
whether ACEforward would be consistent2 with the plans of relevant jurisdictions. Noise and
vibration impacts and mitigation requirements for ACEforward are based on FRA and FTA
standards; therefore, are some inconsistencies between ACEforward and applicable goals, policies,
and objectives related to noise and vibration identified in Appendix H.
Table 4.12-1 provides a summary of the county and city general plans that have been identified,
reviewed, and considered for the preparation of this analysis. For a list of applicable noise and
vibration goals, policies, and objectives from these county and city general plans, please see
Appendix H.
1 Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) operates within a right-of-way (ROW) and on tracks owned by the UPRR, which
operates interstate freight rail service in the same ROW and on the same tracks. 2 An inconsistency with regional or local plans is not necessarily considered a significant impact under CEQA,
unless it is related to a physical impact on the environment that is significant in its own right.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-5
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-1. Local General Plans Regarding Noise and Vibration
Policy Title Summary
Santa Clara County
Santa Clara County General Plan (1994)
Sets noise limits based on land use and requires mitigation for noise impacts. Policy C-HS 24: Promotes noise and land use compatibility to provide for public health. Policy C-HS 25: Noise impacts should be mitigated.
Envision San Jose 2040 (2011)
Sets acceptable exterior noise levels and minimizes increased noise levels. Policy EC-1.1: Sets the City’s exterior noise level objective at 60 dBA or less for residential and institutional land use. Policy EC-1.2: Requires new developments to have a minimal noise impact on sensitive land use areas.
Policy EC-2: Sets vibration limits to FTA guidelines.
City of Santa Clara 2010–2035 General Plan (2010)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California.
Alameda County
Alameda County General Plan (1994)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Requires projects to prevent and minimize noise impacts.
City of Fremont General Plan 2030 (2011)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Encourages the establishment of Railroad Quiet Zones. Requires vibration to follow FTA guidelines. Policies: 10-8.2: Limit the allowed increase in noise level due to new projects. 10-8.3: Require evaluation of mitigation if Ldn increases by 5 dBA but remains below 60 dBA, increases by 3 dBA and exceeds 60 dBA, or if the project has the potential to generate significant adverse community response. 10-8.6: Protects noise-sensitive land uses other than residential. 10-8.10: Sets standards for vibration as provided by FTA.
Newark California General Plan (2013)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Follows vibration standards set by FTA guidelines. Policies: EH-6.3: Use mitigation to reduce noise-impacts on new public transit projects. EH-6.4: Coordinate with transportation service providers during planning and design of proposed rail projects to minimize and mitigate noise.
2002 General Plan Policy Document (Union City: 2002)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Policy HS-C.1: Identifies and sets noise limits for noise-sensitive land uses, and requires mitigation to reduce interior noise level to a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL. Policy HS-C.1.3: The City requires a detailed noise impact analysis for current and futures noise sources. Policy HS-C.1.6: Requires new projects that are impacted by noise to use barriers for mitigation, inclusion of noise mitigation measures and ensure the enforcement of city, state and federal noise levels.
Hayward General Plan
(2014)
Follows the noise standards set by the State of California. Policies HAZ-8.1: Minimize exposure to excessive noise and ground vibration by locating noise-sensitive land uses. Policies HAZ 8-2: Conduct a noise study and perform noise mitigation measures based on land use compatibility. Policies HAZ 8-5: The maximum acceptable interior noise levels shall be an Ldn of 45 dBA with closed windows. Maximum instantaneous level of 50 dBA at night (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), and the maximum instantaneous noise level in all interior rooms shall not exceed 55 dBA during the day (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) with windows closed. The maximum exterior noise level shall be an Ldn of 60 dBA for the primary open space area in a single family, Ldn of 65 dBA for multifamily residence, and Ldn 70 dBA for urban residential infill and mix-use projects.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-6
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Policy Title Summary
San Leandro General Plan
(2016)
Follows the Noise Element from the San Leandro General Plan 2002. Policies: 35.02: Interior noise levels in new residential conditions not to exceed 45 dBA Ldn, 35.03: Exterior noise level of no more than 60 dBA Ldn in residential areas. 35.07: Responding effectively to complaints and enforce city codes and ordinances. 36.02: Develop and implement noise reduction measures when changes in San Leandro streets. 36.05: Work with parties an agencies to reduce or mitigate horn noise if there are exceedances. 36.06: Develop measures to reduce and mitigate freeway noise. 37.01: Pursue mitigation of airport noise with operational changes, aircraft changes and others to reduce the properties affected by airport activities.
City of Oakland General Plan, Noise Element
(2005)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. The standards establish a threshold of 45 dBA CNEL for noise from exterior sources in any occupied room with doors and windows closed. Follows the Noise Element of Oakland General Plan. Policy 1: Ensure the compatibility of existing land uses but also with its surrounding noise environment. Policy 2: Protect the noise environment by controlling mobile and stationary sources. Policy 3: Reduce the community’s exposure by lowering noise levels on the residents.
Follows Oakland’s Municipal Code, 17.120.050 (Performance Standards—Noise); and 8.18.010 (Excessive and annoying noises prohibited) and 8.18.020 (Persistent noises a nuisance).
Pleasanton General Plan 2005–2025 (2009)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Policy 1: Requires new projects to meet acceptable exterior noise levels. Policy 4.6: Require developers to mitigate noise impacts. Policy 8.1: Coordinate with transportation agencies to reduce noise generated outside of the City’s jurisdiction.
City of Livermore General Plan 2003–2025 (2004)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California.
San Joaquin County
San Joaquin County General Plan 2010 (1992)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Policy 1(a): Sets the maximum noise exposure from transit noise at 65 dB for residential and noise-sensitive land use.
City of Tracy General Plan (2011)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California except for the following policies. Ob N-1.1 P9: If primary noise source is from train pass-bys, outdoor noise levels shall be limited to 70 dB Ldn. Ob N-1.2 P2: Mitigation required if Ldn increases by 3 dB and exceeds “normal acceptable” levels, Ldn increases by 5 dB and remains at “normal acceptable” levels, or exceeds noise limits. Ob N-1.3 P1: Evaluate projects for noise impacts. Ob N-1.3 P2: Mitigate significant impacts. Ob N-1.3 P6: Reduce impacts from ground-borne vibration.
City of Lathrop General Plan (1991)
Follows the Noise Element from the San Joaquin County General Plan 2010. Policies: 1: Noise impact threshold set at 60 dB CNEL at the exterior of buildings. 2a: Sets noise limit for new projects at 60 dB CNEL in outdoor activity areas.
City of Manteca General Plan 2023 (2003)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Policies: N-P-1: Defines noise impact at levels above 60 dB Ldn for noise-sensitive land use, 65 dB for other land use, and 70 dB for playgrounds for mobile noise sources. N-P-5: Requires noise mitigation for construction.
City of Ripon General Plan 2040 (2006)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-7
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Policy Title Summary
Stanislaus County
Stanislaus County General Plan (2015)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Policy Two: Requires mitigation in unincorporated areas when noise exceeds standards. 1(a): For transportation noise sources, limits are set at 60 dB Ldn for outdoor activity areas of single family homes and 65 dB for outdoor activity areas of multifamily dwellings. 4: Requires a monitoring program to implement noise mitigation. Policy Three: Protects noise-sensitive land uses. 1: Requires mitigation when Ldn is increased by 3 dB and exceeds “normally acceptable” levels or increased by 5 dB and remains with in “normally acceptable” levels.
City of Modesto Final Urban Area General Plan (2008)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Policies: a: Requires construction activities to comply with the noise ordinance. b: Requires new projects to have additional studies and/or mitigation if noise exposure at single family residential uses exceeds 65 dBA or if noise levels exceed standards set.
Turlock General Plan (2012) Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Policies: 9.4b: Requires preventative measures for the degradation of the noise environment. 9.4-c: Protects residential and noise-sensitive land use areas by minimizing excessive noise exposure. 9.4-e: Required noise-attenuating features for projects with noise exposures exceeding “normally acceptable” levels.
Merced County
2030 Merced County General Plan (2013)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Policies: HS-7.2: Consider noise mitigation measures to reduce traffic and/or rail noise levels to comply with standards if pre-project noise levels already exceed the standards and the increase is significant. HS-7.11: Support improvements to at-grade crossings in urban areas to eliminate the need for train horn sounding near communities. HS-7.12: Requires new project to include appropriate noise mitigation measures to comply with standards.
City of Atwater General Plan (2000)
Follows noise standards set by the State of California. Policy NO-2.4: Mitigate noise created by new transportation noise sources consistent with the standards at existing noise-sensitive land uses.
Merced Vision 2030 General Plan (2012)
Goal is the protection of City residents from the harmful and annoying effects of exposure to excessive noise. Policy N-1.6: Mitigate all significant noise impacts as a condition of project approval for sensitive land uses.
dBA = A-weighted decibel
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
dB = decibels
Ldn = day-night sound level
CNEL = community noise equivalent level
4.12.3 Environmental Setting
This section describes the environmental setting related to noise and vibration by geographic
segment for ACEforward improvements. For the purposes of this analysis, the study area for noise is
defined as the area approximately 500 feet from the track centerline. The study area for vibration is
defined as the area approximately 200 feet from the track centerline. Figures 4.12-4 and 4.12-5
depict the study area for noise and vibration.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-8
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Information for the noise and vibration setting was obtained from the following sources.
Available reports and data (federal and state statues, regional agency policies, and ordinances).
Field reconnaissance throughout the study area to assess potential locations for noise
measurements.
Noise measurements at locations throughout the study area to document existing conditions at
sensitive receivers.
Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) data on existing locomotive fleet and operations.
Available data on UPRR train volumes.
General plan noise elements for jurisdictions along the rail alignment.
Based on the above information, existing noise sources in the study area include commuter and
freight rail operations, roadway traffic, and general community activity. The only significant sources
of vibration in the study area are commuter and freight rail operations.
Because the thresholds for noise impact in FTA noise criteria (defined in Section 4.12.4.2) are based
on the existing noise levels, measuring the existing noise and characterizing noise levels at sensitive
locations in the study area is an important step in the impact assessment. The noise measurements
included both long-term (24-hour) and short-term (1-hour) monitoring of the A-weighted sound
level at noise-sensitive locations in the study area.
The noise measurements were performed with NTi Audio model XL2 noise monitors that conform to
American National Standard Institute standards for Type 1 (precision) sound level meters.
Calibrations, traceable to the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology, were conducted
before and after each measurement. The noise monitors were set to continuously monitor and
record multiple noise level metrics, as well as to obtain audio recordings during the measurement
periods.
Table 4.12-2 summarizes results of the existing noise level measurements, and Figures 4.12-6 and
4.12-7 show the locations of the 34 long-term noise sites (LT) and 13 short-term noise sites (ST).
The long-term noise measurements were used to characterize the existing noise at residential
locations, and the short-term sites were used to characterize the existing noise at sensitive non-
residential locations. Existing noise level measurements are discussed in further detail, by segment,
in the subsections following Table 4.12-2.
The sensitive land use for vibration is essentially the same as for noise, except that park land is not
considered vibration sensitive. Because a general vibration assessment (rather than a detailed
vibration analysis) was performed, vibration measurements were not conducted for this analysis.
Table 4.12-2. Existing Noise Level Measurements in the Study Area
Site No. City Measurement Location Measurement Start Meas. Dur. (hrs.)
Noise Level (dBA)a
Leq Ldn
Centerville/Niles/Sunol
LT-1 Fremont 4709 Deadwood Drive 2015-12-16 15:00:00 24 59 66
LT-2 Fremont 1341 Gilbert Avenue 2015-12-15 13:00:00 24 55 69
LT-3 Sunol 12245A Foothill Road 2015-12-17 14:00:00 24 57 59
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-9
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Site No. City Measurement Location Measurement Start Meas. Dur. (hrs.)
Noise Level (dBA)a
Leq Ldn
ST-1 Sunol Pleasanton Sunol Road 2015-12-17 14:56:00 1 66 64
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction
LT-1N Oakland 11050 Robledo Drive 2016-08-22 9:00:00 24 56 63
LT-2N San Leandro 1016 Minerva Street 2016-08-22 11:00:00 24 52 62
LT-3N San Leandro 547 Dahlia Court 2016-08-22 10:00:00 24 56 57
LT-4N San Leandro 15631 Dermody Avenue 2016-08-22 11:00:00 24 57 65
LT-5N Hayward 18039 Rainer Avenue 2016-08-22 12:00:00 24 52 60
LT-6N Hayward 20364 Times Avenue 2016-08-23 12:09:53 24 54 61
LT-7N Hayward 24080 Amador Village Circle
2016-08-23 10:07:39 24 54 58
LT-8N Hayward 25029 Silverthorne Place 2016-08-23 13:00:00 24 62 58
LT-9N Hayward 26461 Mocine Avenue 2016-08-23 15:00:00 24 66 70
LT-10N Hayward 28453 Rochelle Avenue 2016-08-24 10:00:00 24 56 65
LT-11N Union City 121 Edna Court 2016-08-24 12:00:00 24 53 58
LT-12N Union City 33429 Rail Road Avenue 2016-08-25 14:00:37 24 65 77
LT-13N Union City 1052 Sapphire Terrace 2016-08-24 15:00:00 24 58 62
LT-14N Fremont 35784 Linda Drive 2016-08-24 12:00:00 24 54 61
LT-15N Fremont 37391 Vallejo Way 2016-08-25 10:00:00 24 54 56
LT-16N Fremont 37947 Essanay Place 2016-08-25 15:00:00 24 52 54
ST-1N San Lorenzo San Lorenzo High School 2016-08-24 8:10:00 1 67 65
Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway
LT-1NS Union City 34882 Herringbone Way 2017-03-06 11:00:00 24 59 63
LT-2NS Union City 35981 Gold Street 2017-03-06 11:00:00 24 55 59
LT-3NS Niles 36707 Montecito Drive 2017-03-06 12:00:00 24 53 57
LT-4NS Union City 33450 13th Street 2017-03-07 12:00:00 24 61 65
ST-1NS Union City 33972 13th Street 2017-03-08 10:30:00 1 86 84
Tri-Valley
LT-4 Pleasanton 4180 Jensen Street 2015-12-15 16:00:33 24 64 67
LT-5 Livermore 963 El Rancho Drive 2015-12-15 16:00:00 24 58 57
LT-6 Livermore 14 Jami Street 2015-12-16 16:08:39 24 57 61
Altamont
ST-2 Altamont Altamont Pass Road 2015-12-18 10:03:51 1 74 72
Tracy to Lathrop
LT-7 Tracy 903 South Corral Hollow Road
2015-12-17 10:00:00 24 56 59
LT-8 Tracy 606 East Sixth Street 2015-12-14 11:00:00 24 62 64
LT-9 Banta 22484 7th Street 2015-12-14 13:00:00 24 62 67
LT-10 River Islands
River Islands Welcome Center
2015-12-14 14:00:00 24 55 60
LT-11 Lathrop 15901 7th Street 2015-12-14 15:00:00 24 77 56
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-10
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Site No. City Measurement Location Measurement Start Meas. Dur. (hrs.)
Noise Level (dBA)a
Leq Ldn
ST-3 Livermore 17775 Midway Road 2015-12-17 8:28:28 1 46 44
ST-4 Tracy Lovely Road and Interstate 205
2015-12-16 8:29:30 1 62 60
Lathrop to Stockton
LT-12 Lathrop 13521 Quartz Way 2015-12-16 12:00:00 24 56 52
LT-13 Stockton 1817 S Aurora Street 2015-12-14 17:00:00 24 57 68
ST-5 French Camp
Adas Yeshuran Cemetery 2015-12-17 10:36:30 1 70 68
ST-6 Stockton Stockton Station 2015-12-16 10:07:00 1 62 60
Manteca to Modesto
LT-14 Manteca 1548 Malvick Court 2016-04-25 14:00:00 24 64 71
LT-15 Manteca 144 Goodale Court 2016-04-26 15:00:00 24 69 77
LT-16 Ripon 238 North Locust Avenue 2016-04-26 10:00:00 24 66 71
LT-17 Modesto 2508 Strivens Avenue 2016-04-25 10:00:00 24 65 70
LT-18 Modesto 1814 Lauralee Court 2016-04-25 9:00:00 24 57 63
ST-7 Manteca East Atherton Drive 2016-04-25 14:35:59 1 62 60
ST-8 Ripon 99 North Frontage Road 2016-04-26 14:59:00 1 72 70
ST-9 Ripon Garrison Way 2016-04-25 16:26:30 1 61 59
ST-10 Salida 5213 Whitestone Drive 2016-04-25 11:37:10 1 62 60
ST-11 Modesto Brink Avenue 2016-04-26 11:06:00 1 71 69
ST-12 Modesto 8th Street 2016-04-26 7:59:23 1 75 73
a Ldn is used for Category 2 (residential) land use and Leq is used for Category 3 (institutional) land use.
LT-# = longer-term noise sites
ST-# = short-term noise sites
No. = number
hrs. = hours
dBA = A-weighted decibels
Leq = equivalent sound level
Ldn = day-night sound level
Meas. Dur. = measurement duration
4.12.3.1 San Jose to Fremont
The land uses in the San Jose to Fremont segment are a mixture of industrial, commercial, and
residential areas. Noise-sensitive receptors are concentrated in the segment from the Bayshore
Freeway through Alviso, including mostly single-family and multifamily homes.
Because of the high volume of existing train traffic, noise measurements were not conducted and the
existing noise levels for this segment were modeled based on the schedules for the existing rail
service. The modeled noise levels ranged from 55 to 83 dBA Ldn, depending on the proximity of the
receptor to the existing tracks.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-11
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
4.12.3.2 Centerville to Union City
The noise-sensitive receptors in this segment are Niles Discovery Church, Buddhanusorn Thai
Temple, Gurdwara Sahib Fremont, and a mixture of single- and multifamily homes.
Centerville to Union City is a longer-term improvement segment only; therefore, quantitative noise
measurements at specific sites were not conducted.
4.12.3.3 Centerville/Niles/Sunol
In the Centerville/Niles/Sunol segment, the land uses are a mixture of densely populated residential
areas in Centerville, sparsely populated areas in Niles canyon, and residential areas in Sunol. In the
Centerville/Fremont area, noise-sensitive receptors include the Chinese Independent Baptist
Church, the Bay Area Baptist Church, the Shaolin Temple USA, the Shinn Park and Arboretum, and a
mixture of single-family and multifamily homes. In Niles Canyon, noise-sensitive receptors include
the Golden Gate Primitive Baptist Church and scattered single-family homes. In Sunol, the noise-
sensitive receptors include Sunol Glen Elementary School, Happy Valley Church, and single-family
homes.
The noise measurement sites used to describe this area are LT-1, LT-2, LT-3, and ST-1 (Figure 4.12-
6).
Site LT-1, 4709 Deadwood Drive (Fremont): The Ldn measured at this location was 66 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were traffic on local streets and freight rail traffic. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence. This measurement site is
representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from Central Avenue to Paseo Padre Parkway.
Site LT-2, 1341 Gilbert Avenue (Fremont): The Ldn measured at this location was 69 dBA.
The dominant noise source was freight rail traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24 hours in
the backyard of the residence. This measurement site is representative of all noise-sensitive
land uses from Paseo Padre Parkway to Stenhammer Drive.
Site LT-3, 12245A Foothill Road (Sunol): The Ldn measured at this location was 59 dBA. The
dominant noise source was traffic on Foothill Road and Niles Canyon Road. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the front yard of the residence. This measurement site is
representative of all noise-sensitive land uses through Niles Canyon and in Sunol.
Site ST-1, Pleasanton Sunol Road (Sunol): The Leq measured at this location was 66 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were traffic on Interstate (I-) 680 and Pleasanton Sunol Road. Noise
levels were measured for 1 hour on the shoulder of Pleasanton Sunol Road. This measurement
site is representative of all noise sensitive land uses from Carver Lane to Castlewood Drive.
4.12.3.4 Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction
The land uses along the Niles Subdivision segment from north of Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction
in Oakland consists of a mixture of industrial, commercial, and significant residential areas with
large numbers of residences. Noise-sensitive receptors are concentrated in the segment in various
residential areas in Fremont, Union City, Hayward, San Leandro, and Oakland.
Noise measurements were conducted at the existing locations described below to characterize
existing noise levels for this segment (Figure 4.12-7). The measured noise levels ranged from 54 to
77 dBA Ldn, depending on the proximity of the receptor to the existing tracks.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-12
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Site LT-1N, 11050 Robledo Drive (Oakland): The Ldn measured at this location was 63 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) trains and local traffic. Noise
levels were measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-2N, 1016 Minerva Street (San Leandro): The Ldn measured at this location was 62
dBA. The dominant noise sources were rail traffic and air traffic. Noise levels were measured for
24 hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-3N, 547 Dahlia Court (San Leandro): The Ldn measured at this location was 57 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were local traffic and air traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24
hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-4N, 15631 Dermody Avenue (San Leandro): The Ldn measured at this location was
65 dBA. The dominant noise sources were local traffic and rail traffic. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-5N, 18039 Rainer Avenue (Hayward): The Ldn measured at this location was 60 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were local traffic and air traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24
hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-6N, 20364 Times Avenue (Hayward): The Ldn measured at this location was 61 dBA.
The dominant noise sources are rail traffic and typical neighborhood noises. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-7N, 24080 Amador Village Circle (Hayward): The Ldn measured at this location was
58 dBA. The dominant noise sources are construction and typical neighborhood noises. Noise
levels were measured for 24 hours across the tracks from the property.
Site LT-8N, 25029 Silverthorne Place (Hayward): The Ldn measured at this location was 58
dBA. The dominant noise source is local traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24 hours in the
backyard of the property.
Site LT-9N, 26461 Mocine Avenue (Hayward): The Ldn measured at this location was 70 dBA.
The dominant noise sources are local traffic and typical neighborhood noises. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the property.
Site LT-10N, 28453 Rochelle Avenue (Hayward): The Ldn measured at this location was 65
dBA. The dominant noise sources were rail traffic and typical neighborhood noises. Noise levels
were measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the property.
Site LT-11N, 121 Edna Court (Union City): The Ldn measured at this location was 58 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were local traffic and rail traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24
hours in the backyard of the property.
Site LT-12N, 33429 Rail Road Avenue (Union City): The Ldn measured at this location was 77
dBA. The dominant noise sources were local traffic and rail traffic. Noise levels were measured
for 24 hours in the backyard of the property.
Site LT-13N, 1052 Sapphire Terrace (Union City): The Ldn measured at this location was 62
dBA. The dominant noise sources were local traffic and rail traffic. Noise levels were measured
for 24 hours on the porch of the townhouse next to Green Street.
Site LT-14N, 35784 Linda Drive (Fremont): The Ldn measured at this location was 61 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were construction and rail traffic. Noise levels were measured for
24 hours in the backyard of the residence.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-13
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Site LT-15N, 37391 Vallejo Way (Fremont): The Ldn measured at this location was 56 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were local traffic and rail traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24
hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-16N, 37947 Essanay Place (Fremont): The Ldn measured at this location was 54 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were local traffic and rail traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24
hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site ST-1N, San Lorenzo High School (San Lorenzo): The Leq measured at this location was
67 dBA. The dominant noise sources were construction noises and local traffic. Noise levels
were measured for 1 hour in the parking lot next to the gym of the high school.
4.12.3.5 Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway
The land uses along the Oakland Subdivision segment from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway in
Hayward consists of a mixture of recreational, residential, industrial, and commercial areas. Noise-
sensitive receptors are concentrated in the segment in various residential areas in Fremont and
Union City.
Noise measurements were conducted at the existing locations described below to characterize
existing noise levels for this segment (Figure 4.12-7). The measured noise levels ranged from 57 to
86 dBA Ldn, depending on the proximity of the receptor to the existing tracks.
Site LT-1NS, 34882 Herringbone Way (Union City): The Ldn measured at this location was
63 dBA. The dominant noise sources were BART trains and neighborhood noises. Noise levels
were measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-2NS, 35987 Gold Street (Union City): The Ldn measured at this location was 59 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were BART trains and neighborhood noises. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-3NS, 36707 Montecito Drive (Niles): The Ldn measured at this location was 57 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were BART trains and neighborhood noises. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site LT-4NS, 33450 13th Street (Union City): The Ldn measured at this location was 65 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were BART trains and neighborhood noises. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence.
Site ST-1NS, 33972 13th Street (Union City): The Leq measured at this location was 86 dBA.
The dominant noise source was the BART train on the elevated track. Noise levels were
measured for 1 hour on the side of the road on the east side of the park.
4.12.3.6 Tri-Valley
The Tri-Valley segment includes Pleasanton and Livermore. Noise-sensitive receptors in Pleasanton
include Pleasanton Middle School, Amador Valley High School, and single- and multifamily homes.
The noise-sensitive receptors in Livermore are the Church of Christ, Iglesia Ni Cristo-Livermore, and
single- and multifamily homes.
The noise measurement site used to characterize the Pleasanton area is LT-4. The noise
measurement sites that are used to characterize the Livermore area are LT-5 and LT-6.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-14
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Site LT-4, 4180 Jensen Street (Pleasanton): The Ldn measured at this location was 67 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were traffic on local streets and freight rail traffic. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence. This noise site is representative of all
noise-sensitive land uses from Castlewood Drive to Valley Avenue.
Site LT-5, 963 El Rancho Drive (Livermore): The Ldn measured at this location was 57 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were traffic on local streets and freight rail traffic. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence. This noise site is representative of all
noise-sensitive land uses from Isabel Avenue to Junction Avenue.
Site LT-6, 14 Jami Street (Livermore): The Ldn measured at this location was 61 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were traffic on local streets and freight traffic. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the front yard of the residence. This noise site is representative of all
noise-sensitive land uses from Junction Avenue to South Vasco Road.
4.12.3.7 Altamont
The predominant noise-sensitive land use along the Altamont segment is scattered single-family
housing. The noise measurement site used to characterize this segment is ST-2.
Site ST-2, Altamont Pass Road (Altamont): The Leq measured at this location was 74 dBA.
The dominant noise source was traffic on Altamont Pass Road. Noise levels were measured for
1 hour on the shoulder of Altamont Pass Road. This noise site is representative of all noise-
sensitive land uses in the Altamont segment.
4.12.3.8 Tracy to Lathrop
The segment from Tracy to Lathrop runs from Tracy to Lathrop south of West Lathrop Road,
including Banta, River Islands, and rural areas. Noise-sensitive receptors in Tracy are Valley
Community Baptist Church, Crossroads Baptist Church, Grace Christian Center, and a mixture of
single- and multifamily homes. The noise-sensitive land uses in Banta are a mixture of single- and
multifamily housing. The noise-sensitive land use in River Islands is single-family housing. Noise-
sensitive receptors in Lathrop south of West Lathrop Road include Lathrop Church of Christ, Living
Word Ministries, Abundant Life Center, and single- and multifamily homes. The noise-sensitive land
use in the rural areas consists of scattered single-family housing.
The noise measurement sites used to characterize Tracy are LT-7 and LT-8. The noise measurement
site used to characterize Banta is LT-9, and the noise measurement site used to characterize River
Islands is LT-10. The noise measurement sites used to characterize the rural areas are ST-3 and
ST-4. The noise measurement site used to characterize Lathrop south of W. Lathrop Road is LT-11.
Site LT-7, 903 South Corral Hollow Road (Tracy): The Ldn measured at this location was 59
dBA. The dominant noise source was traffic on Corral Hollow Road. Other noise sources include
traffic on local streets and freight rail traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24 hours on the
side of the church. This noise measurement site is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses
from South Lammers Road to Tracy Boulevard along the downtown Tracy alignment and from
Corral Hollow Road to South MacArthur Drive along the existing Tracy alignment.
Site LT-8, 606 East Sixth Street (Tracy): The Ldn measured at this location was 64 dBA. The
dominant noise source was traffic on East Sixth Street. Other noise sources include traffic on
local streets and freight rail traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24 hours in the front yard of
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-15
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
the residence. This noise site is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from Tracy
Boulevard to North MacArthur Drive and from South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road
in the study area.
Site LT-9, 22484 Seventh Street (Banta): The Ldn measured at this location was 67 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were traffic on Grant Line Road and Seventh Street. Other noise sources
include noise from Banta Elementary School and freight rail traffic. Noise levels were measured
for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence. This noise measurement site is representative of
all noise-sensitive land uses from Banta to Old River.
Site LT-10, River Islands Welcome Center (River Islands): The Ldn measured at this location
was 60dBA. The dominant noise source was traffic on I-5. Other noise sources include traffic on
local streets and freight rail traffic. Noise levels were measured for 24 hours in the backyard of
the center. This noise measurement site is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from
River Trigoso Drive to West Yosemite Avenue.
Site LT-11, 15901 Seventh Street (Lathrop): The Ldn measured at this location was 56 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were traffic on local streets and freight rail traffic. Noise levels were
measured for 24 hours in the front yard of the residence. This noise measurement site is
representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue.
Site ST-3, 17775 Midway Road (Livermore): The Leq measured at this location was 46 dBA.
The dominant noise source was the electrical substation. Noise levels were measured for 1 hour
on the shoulder of Midway Road. This noise measurement site is representative of all noise-
sensitive land uses east of Tracy after the Altamont Pass.
Site ST-4, Lovely Road and I-205 (Tracy): The Leq measured at this location was 62 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were traffic on I-5 and Lovely Road. Noise levels were measured for 1
hour on the shoulder of Lovely Road. This noise site is representative of all noise-sensitive land
uses along the Lyoth-Banta Crossover.
4.12.3.9 Lathrop to Stockton
The Lathrop to Stockton segment extends from Lathrop north of W Lathrop Road to the Stockton
Station, including French Camp. The noise-sensitive land uses in Lathrop north of W Lathrop Road
include single- and multifamily housing. The noise-sensitive land uses in French Camp include
single- and multifamily housing. Noise-sensitive receptors in Stockton include Trinity Chapel Church
of God in Christ, Gurdwara Wahib Sikh Temple, and single- and multifamily homes.
The noise measurement site used to characterize Lathrop north of W Lathrop Road is LT-12. The
noise measurement site used to characterize French Camp is ST-5. The noise measurement sites
used to characterize Stockton are LT-13 and ST-6.
Site LT-12, 13521 Quartz Way (Lathrop): The Ldn measured at this location was 52 dBA. The
dominant noise source was traffic on local streets. Noise levels were measured for 24 hours in
the front yard of the residence. This noise measurement site is representative of all noise-
sensitive land uses from McKinley Avenue to Brookfield Avenue.
Site LT-13, 1817 South Aurora Street (Stockton): The Ldn measured at this location was 68
dBA. The dominant noise source was traffic on Aurora Street and freight rail traffic. Noise levels
were measured for 24 hours in the front yard of the residence. This noise measurement site is
representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from California Street to State Route (SR) 4.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-16
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Site ST-5, Adas Yeshuran Cemetery (French Camp): The Leq measured at this location was
70 dBA. The dominant noise sources were traffic on South McKinley Avenue and train traffic.
Noise levels were measured for 1 hour on the shoulder of South McKinley Avenue in front of
Adas Yeshuran Cemetery. This noise measurement site is representative of all noise-sensitive
land uses from Roth Road to French Camp Road.
Site ST-6, Stockton Station (Stockton): The Leq measured at this location was 62 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were traffic on E Weber Avenue and SR 4 and urban community noise.
Noise levels were measured for 1 hour on the sidewalk at the northwest corner of Channel
Street and East Weber Avenue. This noise site is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses
from SR 4 to the Stockton Station.
4.12.3.10 Manteca to Modesto
The Manteca to Modesto segment extends from Manteca to Modesto North of L Street, including
Ripon, Salida, and rural areas. Noise-sensitive receptors in Manteca are Jehovah’s Witnesses Church,
Life in Christ Fellowship Church, Crossroads Grace Community Church, Freewill Baptist Church, and
a mixture of single- and multifamily homes. Noise-sensitive receptors in Ripon are Ripon Christian
Schools, Ripon High School, and a mixture of single- and multifamily homes. Noise-sensitive land use
in Salida consists of single-family housing. Noise-sensitive receptors in Modesto, north of L Street,
include Modesto Junior College and single- and multifamily homes. Noise-sensitive land use in the
rural areas consists of scattered single-family housing.
The noise measurement sites used to characterize Manteca are LT-14, LT-15, and ST-7. The noise
measurement site used to characterize the rural areas between Manteca and Ripon is ST-8. The
noise measurement sites used to characterize Ripon are ST-9 and LT-16. The noise measurement
site used to characterize Salida is ST-10. The noise measurement sites used to characterize Modesto
are LT-17, LT-18, ST-11, and ST-12.
Site LT-14, 1548 Malvick Court (Manteca): The Ldn measured at this location was 71 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were the freight trains and traffic on Phillips Drive. Noise levels
were measured for 24 hours on the side of the residence closest to Phillips Drive. This noise
measurement site is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from South Airport Way to
North Union Road.
Site LT-15, 144 Goodale Court (Manteca): The Ldn measured at this location was 77 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were local road traffic and freight trains. Noise levels were measured
for 24 hours in the backyard of the residence. This noise measurement site is representative of
all noise-sensitive land uses from North Union Road to SR 120.
Site LT-16, 238 No Locust Avenue (Ripon): The Ldn measured at this location was 71 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were SR 99 and freight trains. Noise levels were measured for 24
hours in the backyard of the residence. This noise measurement site is representative of all
noise-sensitive land uses from Fulton Avenue to the Stanislaus River.
Site LT-17, 2508 Strivens Avenue (Modesto): The Ldn measured at this location was 70 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were SR 99 and freight trains. Noise levels were measured for
24 hours in the backyard of the residence. This noise measurement site is representative of all
noise-sensitive land uses from Bangs Avenue to West Briggsmore Avenue on the northbound
side of the tracks.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-17
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Site LT-18, 1814 Lauralee Court (Modesto): The Ldn measured at this location was 63dBA.
The dominant noise sources were traffic on SR 99 and freight trains. Noise levels were measured
for 24 hours in the backyard of the property along the back fence. This noise measurement site
is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from West Briggsmore Avenue to Kansas
Avenue.
Site ST-7, East Atherton Drive (Manteca): The Leq measured at this location was 62 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were traffic on SR 99, SR 120, and freight trains. Noise levels were
measured for 1 hour on the sidewalk at the corner of East Atherton Drive and Tesora Drive This
noise site is representative of all noise-sensitive land use from SR 120 to East Woodward
Avenue.
Site ST-8, 99 North Frontage Road (Ripon): The Leq measured at this location was 72 dBA.
The dominant noise sources were traffic on SR 99 and freight trains. Noise levels were measured
for 1 hour on the shoulder of 99 North Frontage Road approximately 0.5 mile north of South
Olive Avenue. This noise measurement site is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses
from Austin Road to Jack Tone Road.
Site ST-9, Garrison Way (Ripon): The Leq measured at this location was 61 dBA. The dominant
noise sources were traffic at SR 99 and freight trains. Noise levels were measured for 1 hour on
the shoulder of Garrison Way next to the parking lot for the Canal Street Grille. This noise
measurement site is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from South Olive Avenue to
Fulton Avenue.
Site ST-10, 5213 Whitestone Drive (Salida): The Leq measured at this location was 62 dBA.
The dominant noise source was traffic on SR 99. Noise levels were measured for 1 hour on the
shoulder of Whitestone Drive on the sidewalk across the street from the residence. This noise
measurement site is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from Hammet Road to
Murphy Road.
Site ST-11, Brink Avenue (Modesto): The Leq measured at this location was 71 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were traffic on SR 99 and freight trains. Noise levels were measured for
1 hour on the shoulder of Brink Avenue close to its intersection with Shoemake Avenue. This
noise site is representative of all noise-sensitive land uses from Murphy Road to West
Briggsmore Avenue on the southbound side of the tracks.
Site ST-12, Eighth Street (Modesto): The Leq measured at this location was 75 dBA. The
dominant noise sources were typical urban activities and activities at the train station. Noise
levels were measured for 1 hour on the sidewalk of Eighth Street across the tracks from the
Modesto Transportation Center. This noise measurement site is representative of all noise-
sensitive land uses from Kansas Avenue to the Modesto Station.
4.12.3.11 Modesto to Merced
The Modesto to Merced segment extends from Modesto south of L Street and includes Bystrom,
Ceres, Keyes, Turlock, Delhi, Livingston, Atwater, and Merced. The noise-sensitive receptors in
Modesto, south of L Street, are First Missionary Baptist Church, Redeemer Modesto, Victory in Praise
Church, and single- and multifamily homes. The noise-sensitive land use in Bystrom is single- and
multifamily housing. The noise-sensitive receptors in Ceres are First Missionary Baptist Church, Mar
Gewargis Assyrian Church of the East, and single- and multifamily homes. The noise-sensitive land
use in Keyes is single-family housing. The noise-sensitive receptors in Turlock are New Hope
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-18
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Church, Good News Tabernacle, and single- and multifamily homes. The noise-sensitive land uses in
Delhi are single- and multifamily housing. The noise-sensitive receptors in Livingston are Apostolic
Assembly and single- and multifamily homes. The noise-sensitive land uses in Atwater are single-
and multifamily houses. The noise-sensitive receptors in Merced are Merced Baptist Church and
single- and multifamily homes. The existing noise levels in this segment are similar to those in the
Manteca to Modesto segment.
Modesto to Merced is a longer-term improvement segment only; therefore, quantitative noise
measurements at specific sites were not conducted.
4.12.4 Impact Analysis
This section describes the environmental impacts of the ACEforward’s near-term and longer-term
improvements on noise and vibration. It describes the methods used to evaluate the impacts and the
thresholds used to determine whether an impact would be significant. Measures to mitigate
significant impacts are provided, where appropriate.
4.12.4.1 Methods for Analysis
The approach to evaluating noise and vibration impacts varies between near-term improvements
and longer-term improvements. Noise and vibration impacts associated with the construction of
specific near-term improvements and increased operational service capacity are analyzed
quantitatively. Construction noise impacts for longer-term improvements are qualitatively
presented because detailed construction plans will not be available before publication of this
document. Noise and vibration impacts from longer-term improvement operational service capacity
increases are presented quantitatively. The approach can be summarized as follows.
Analyze direct noise and vibration impacts through quantitative and qualitative analysis.
To assess station noise and vibration, consider train type; train schedules (number of stopping
trains and number of through trains during daytime and nighttime hours); number of cars in
each train; speed profiles for stopping and through trains; plans and profiles of station
structures; landform topography; and noise level changes associated with alterations to train
service volumes.
To assess railroad noise and vibration, consider train type; train schedules (number of through
trains during daytime and nighttime hours); number of cars in each train; speed profiles;
landform topography; and noise level changes associated with alterations to train service
volumes.
To assess construction noise emissions, consider equipment expected to be used by contractors
during construction, usage scenarios for how equipment would be operated, estimated site
layouts of equipment along the ROW, and the location of construction operations with respect to
nearby noise-sensitive receivers.
To assess construction vibration, account for vibration from construction equipment, estimated
site layout of equipment along the ROW, and the location of construction operations with
respect to nearby sensitive receivers.
Include the following scenarios: existing plus construction; operation of near-term
improvements; and operation of near-term improvements plus longer-term improvements.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-19
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Refer to FTA’s guidance manual, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (Federal Transit
Administration 2006).
Construction Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Methodology
The construction noise impact assessment used the methodology described in the FTA guidance
manual (Federal Transit Administration 2006). SJRRC, UPRR and their contractors will make
decisions regarding procedures and equipment. For this analysis, construction scenarios for typical
railroad construction projects are used to predict noise impacts. The construction noise
methodology includes the following information.
Noise emissions from typical equipment used by contractors
Construction methods
Scenarios for equipment usage
Estimated site layouts of equipment along the ROW
Proximity of construction activities to nearby noise-sensitive receivers
FTA construction noise assessment criteria
The FTA guidance manual (Federal Transit Administration 2006) also provides the methodology for
the assessment of construction vibration impacts. Estimated construction scenarios have been
developed for typical railroad construction projects allowing a quantitative construction vibration
assessment to be conducted. Construction vibration is assessed quantitatively where a potential for
blasting, pile-driving, vibratory compaction, demolition, or excavation close to vibration-sensitive
structures exists. The methodology included the following information.
Vibration source levels from equipment used by contractors
Estimated site layouts of equipment along the ROW
Relationship of construction activities to nearby vibration-sensitive receivers
FTA vibration impact criteria for annoyance and building damage
Train Operation Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Methodology
Train operation noise and vibration levels were projected using current ACEforward operation plans
and the prediction models provided in the FTA guidance manual (Federal Transit Administration
2006). Potential impacts were evaluated in accordance with the Detailed Noise Analysis and General
Vibration Assessment procedures outlined in the FTA guidance manual. The methodology and
assumptions for train operation are listed below.
Currently, ACE operates four roundtrip weekday trains between Stockton and San Jose—four
westbound morning trains from Stockton to San Jose, and four eastbound afternoon trains from
San Jose to Stockton.
For near-term improvements (six trains), there are two ACE operational scenarios.
Scenario A-1
In the morning, four westbound trains from Stockton to San Jose and two westbound
trains from Modesto to San Jose.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-20
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
In the afternoon, four eastbound trains from San Jose to Stockton and two eastbound
trains from San Jose to Modesto.
Scenario A-2
All six trains provide service between Stockton and San Jose (assumes no extension to
Modesto).
In the morning, six westbound trains from Stockton to San Jose.
In the afternoon, six eastbound trains from San Jose to Stockton.
For longer-term improvements (10 trains), there are two ACE operational scenarios.
Scenario B-1
In the morning, four westbound trains from Stockton to San Jose and six westbound
trains from Merced to San Jose.
In the afternoon, four eastbound trains from San Jose to Stockton and six eastbound
trains from San Jose to Modesto.
Scenario B-2
All 10 trains provide service between Stockton and San Jose (assumes no extension to
Merced).
In the morning, 10 westbound trains from Stockton to San Jose.
In the afternoon, 10 eastbound trains from San Jose to Stockton.
For near-term improvements through 2020, there are the following changes to freight rail
service.
In Niles Canyon, under two scenarios (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), five freight
trains would be shifted from the Oakland Subdivision to the Niles Canyon Railway
(NCRY).
On the Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction, there would be an
increase of four freight trains under Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b, with a
corresponding decrease in freight train traffic from Niles Junction to Newark Junction
and on the Coast Subdivision from Newark Junction to Elmhurst Junction.
On the Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway and on the Niles
Subdivision from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction, there would be an increase
of four freight trains under Alternative CNS-1c, with a corresponding decrease in
freight train traffic from Niles Junction to Newark Junction and on the Coast Subdivision
from Newark Junction to Elmhurst Junction.
For longer-term through 2040, there are the following changes to freight rail service.
In Niles Canyon, under two scenarios (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), eight freight
trains would be shifted from the Oakland Subdivision to the NCRY.
On the Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction, there would be an
increase of six freight trains under Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b, with a
corresponding decrease in freight train traffic from Niles Junction to Newark Junction
and on the Coast Subdivision from Newark Junction to Elmhurst Junction.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-21
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
On the Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway and on the Niles
Subdivision from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction, there would be an increase
of six freight trains under Alternative CNS-1c, with a corresponding decrease in freight
train traffic from Niles Junction to Newark Junction and on the Coast Subdivision from
Newark Junction to Elmhurst Junction.
The longer-term improvements would not affect the ability for freight to use the Niles
Subdivision or the Oakland Subdivision north of Niles Junction or to use the NCRY. Any
change in potential use of different rail lines would be because of near-term
improvements. Instead, the analysis presented for the longer-term reflects the
independent growth in freight traffic over time.
Projected and existing ambient noise exposures were tabulated at the identified receivers or
clusters of receivers and the levels of noise impact (no impact, moderate impact, or severe impact)
were identified by comparing the existing and train noise exposure based on the applicable FTA
noise impact criteria. Similarly, projected and existing maximum train vibration levels were
tabulated at vibration-sensitive locations and potential impacts were identified based on the
applicable FTA vibration impact criteria along with FTA guidance on how to account for existing
vibration.
4.12.4.2 Thresholds of Significance
The State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq) has identified
significance criteria to be considered for determining whether a project could have significant
impacts on sensitive land use from noise and vibration.
An impact would be considered significant if construction or operation of the project would have
any of the following consequences.
Expose persons to (or generate noise levels in excess of) severe impact standards for a severe
impact established by FTA for transit projects and other changes related to the project. These
standards cover both permanent and temporary/periodic increases in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the proposed project.
Expose persons to or generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels.
Permanently substantially increase ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project.
Temporarily or periodically substantially increase ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project.
The noise and vibration impact criteria for ACEforward are based on FTA and FRA guidelines, and
are described in the following subsections.
FTA Noise Criteria
Construction Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Criteria
Construction activities associated with a large transportation project often generate noise and
vibration complaints even though they take place only for a limited time. For ACEforward,
construction noise and vibration impact is assessed where the exposure of noise- and vibration-
sensitive receivers to construction-related noise or vibration is expected to occur at levels exceeding
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-22
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
standards established by FTA and established thresholds for architectural and structural building
damage (Federal Transit Administration 2006).
Construction Noise Impact Criteria
Table 4.12-3 presents FTA noise assessment criteria for construction. The last column applies to
construction activities that extend over 30 days near any given receiver. Ldn is used to assess
impacts in residential areas and 24-hour Leq is used in commercial and industrial areas. The 8-hour
Leq and the 30-day average Ldn noise exposure from construction noise calculations use the noise
emission levels of the construction equipment, its location, and operating hours. The construction
noise limits are normally assessed at the noise-sensitive receiver property line.
Table 4.12-3. Federal Transit Administration Construction Noise Assessment Criteria
Land Use
8-hour Leq, dBa Noise Exposure, Ldn, dBA
Day Night 30-day Average
Residential 80 70 75a
Commercial 85 85 80b
Industrial 90 90 85b a In urban areas with very high ambient noise levels (Ldn greater than 65 dB), Ldn from construction operations
should not exceed existing ambient noise levels + 10 dB. b 24-hour Leq, not Ldn.
Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006
Leq = equivalent sound level
dBA = A-weighted decibel
Ldn = day-night sound level
dB = decibels
Construction Vibration Impact Criteria
Guidelines in the FTA guidance manual (Federal Transit Administration 2006) provide the basis for
the construction vibration assessment. FTA provides construction vibration criteria designed
primarily to prevent building damage, and to assess whether vibration might interfere with
vibration-sensitive building activities or temporarily annoy building occupants during the
construction period. The FTA criteria include two ways to express vibration levels: (1) root-mean-
square (RMS) vibration velocity level (Lv, in VdB) for annoyance and activity interference; and (2)
peak particle velocity (PPV), which is the maximum instantaneous peak of a vibration signal used for
assessments of damage potential.
To avoid temporary annoyance to building occupants during construction or construction
interference with vibration-sensitive equipment inside special-use buildings, such as a magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI) machine, FTA recommends using the long-term operational vibration
criteria provided in the section below.
Table 4.12-4 shows FTA building damage criteria for construction activity; the table lists PPV and
approximate Lv limits for four building categories. These limits are used to estimate potential
problems that should be addressed during final design.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-23
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-4. Construction Vibration Damage Criteria
Building Category PPV (inch/sec) Approximate Lva
I. Reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.5 102
II. Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3 98
III. Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2 94
IV. Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 90 a RMS vibration velocity level in VdB relative to 1 micro-inch/second.
Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006
PPV = peak particle velocity
RMS = root-mean-square
VdB = vibration decibel
Operational Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Criteria
Train Noise Impact Criteria
The descriptors and criteria for assessing noise impact vary according to land use categories
adjacent to the track. For land uses where people live and sleep (e.g., residential neighborhoods,
hospitals, and hotels), Ldn is the assessment parameter. For other land use types where there are
noise-sensitive uses (e.g., outdoor concert areas, schools, and libraries), Leq(h) for an hour of noise
sensitivity that coincides with train activity is the assessment parameter. Table 4.12-5 summarizes
the three land use categories.
Table 4.12-5. Federal Transit Administration Noise-Sensitive Land Uses
Land Use Category
Noise Metric (dBA) Land Use Category
1 Outdoor Leq(h)*
Tracts of land where quiet is an essential element in their intended purpose. This category includes lands set aside for serenity and quiet, such as outdoor amphitheaters, concert pavilions, and National Historic Landmarks with significant outdoor use.
2 Outdoor Ldn Residences and buildings where people normally sleep. This category includes homes and hospitals, where nighttime sensitivity to noise is of utmost importance.
3 Outdoor Leq(h)*
Institutional land uses with primarily daytime and evening use. This category includes schools, libraries, and churches, where it is important to avoid interference with such activities as speech, meditation, and concentration. Buildings with interior spaces where quiet is important, such as medical offices, conference rooms, recording studios, and concert halls fall into this category, as well as places for meditation or study associated with cemeteries, monuments, and museums. Certain historical sites, parks, and recreational facilities are also included.
* Leq for the noisiest hour of transit-related activity during hours of noise sensitivity.
Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006
dBA = A-weighted decibel
Leq = equivalent sound level
Ldn = day-night sound level
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-24
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
The noise impact criteria used by FTA and FRA are ambient-based; the increase in future noise
(future noise levels with ACEforward compared to existing noise levels) is assessed rather than the
noise caused by each passing train. It is important to note that the criteria do not specify a
comparison of future ACEforward noise with projections of future no-action noise. This is because
comparison of a noise projection with an existing noise condition is more accurate than comparison
of a projection with another noise projection (Federal Railroad Administration 2012: Section 3.2.2).
Because background noise is expected to increase by the time ACEforward improvements start
generating noise, this approach of using existing noise conditions is conservative. Figure 4.12-8
shows FTA noise impact criteria for human annoyance. Depending on the magnitude of the
cumulative noise increases, FTA and FRA categorize impacts as (1) no impact, (2) moderate impact,
or (3) severe impact. Severe impact is where a significant percentage of people would be highly
annoyed by the project’s noise. Moderate impact is where the change in cumulative noise level
would be noticeable to most people, but may not be sufficient to generate strong, negative reactions.
Although the curves in Figure 4.12-8 are defined in terms of the project noise exposure and the
existing noise exposure, the increase in the cumulative noise—when project-generated noise is
added to existing noise levels—is the basis for the criteria. To illustrate this point, Figure 4.12-9
shows the noise impact criteria for Category 1 and Category 2 land uses in terms of the allowable
increase in the cumulative noise exposure. Because Ldn and Leq are measures of total acoustic
energy, any new noise source in a community will cause an increase, even if the new source level is
lower than the existing level. In Figure 4.12-10, the criterion for a moderate impact allows a noise
exposure increase of 10 dB if the existing noise exposure is 42 dBA or less, but only a 1 dB increase
when the existing noise exposure is 70 dBA.
As the existing level of ambient noise increases, the allowable level of transit noise increases, but the
total amount that community noise exposure is allowed to increase is reduced. This accounts for the
unexpected result that a project noise exposure that is lower than the existing noise exposure can
still cause an effect.
Train Vibration Impact Criteria
FTA and FRA provide guidelines to assess the human response to different levels of ground-borne
noise and vibration, as presented in Table 4.12-6. These levels represent the maximum vibration
level of an individual train passby. A vibration event occurs each time a train passes the building or
property and causes discernible vibration. “Frequent Events” are more than 70 vibration events per
day, “Occasional Events” are 30–70 vibration events per day and “Infrequent Events” are fewer than
30 vibration events per day. The guidelines also provide criteria for special buildings that are very
sensitive to ground-borne noise and vibration, such as concert halls, recording studios, and theaters.
Table 4.12-7 shows the impact criteria for special buildings.
Ground-borne vibration impacts from train operations inside vibration-sensitive buildings are
defined by the vibration velocity level, expressed in terms of VdB, and the number of vibration
events per day from the same kind of source. Table 4.12-6 summarizes vibration sensitivity in terms
of the three land use categories and the criteria for acceptable ground-borne vibrations and
acceptable ground-borne noise. Ground-borne noise is a low-frequency rumbling sound inside
buildings, caused by vibrations of floors, walls, and ceilings. Ground-borne noise is generally not a
problem for buildings near railroad tracks at or above grade, because the airborne noise from trains
typically overshadows effects of ground-borne noise. Ground-borne noise becomes an issue in cases
where airborne noise cannot be heard, such as for buildings near tunnels.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-25
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Tables 4.12-6 and 4.12-7 include separate FTA criteria for ground-borne noise. Although the criteria
are expressed in dBA, which emphasizes the more audible middle and high frequencies, the criteria
are significantly lower than airborne noise criteria to account for the annoying low-frequency
character of ground-borne noise. Because airborne noise often masks ground-borne noise for
aboveground (i.e., at-grade or elevated) railroad tracks, ground-borne noise criteria apply primarily
to operations in a tunnel, where airborne noise is not a factor, and to buildings with sensitive
interior spaces that are well insulated from exterior noise.
Table 4.12-6. Federal Transit Administration Ground-borne Vibration and Ground-borne Noise Impact Criteria
Land Use Category
Ground-borne Vibration Impact Levels
(VdB re 1 micro-inch /sec)
Ground-borne Noise Impact Levels
(dBA re 20 micro Pascals)
Frequent Events
Occasional Events
Infrequent Events
Frequent Events
Occasional Events
Infrequent Events
Category 1: Buildings where vibration would interfere with interior operations.
65 VdBa 65 VdBa 65 VdBa N/Ab N/Ab N/Ab
Category 2: Residences and buildings where people normally sleep.
72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB 35 dBA 38 dBA 43 dBA
Category 3: Institutional land uses with primarily daytime use.
75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB 40 dBA 43 dBA 48 dBA
a This criterion limit is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment such as optical microscopes. For equipment that is more sensitive, a Detailed Vibration Analysis must be performed.
b Vibration-sensitive equipment is generally not sensitive to ground-borne noise.
Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006
VdB = vibration decibel
dBA = A-weighted decibel
N/A = not applicable
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-26
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-7. Federal Transit Administration Ground-borne Vibration and Ground-borne Noise Impact Criteria for Special Buildings
Type of Building or Room
Ground-borne Vibration Impact Levels (VdB re 1 micro-inch/sec)
Ground-borne Noise Impact Levels (dBA re 20 micro-Pascals)
Frequent Events
Occasional or Infrequent Events
Frequent Events
Occasional or Infrequent Events
Concert Halls 65 VdB 65 VdB 25 dBA 25 dBA
TV Studios 65 VdB 65 VdB 25 dBA 25 dBA
Recording Studios 65 VdB 65 VdB 25 dBA 25 dBA
Auditoriums 72 VdB 80 VdB 30 dBA 38 dBA
Theaters 72 VdB 80 VdB 35 dBA 43 dBA
Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006
VdB = vibration decibel
dBA = A-weighted decibel
One factor not incorporated in the criteria is existing vibration. In most cases, except near railroad
tracks, the existing environment does not include a substantial number of perceptible ground-borne
vibration or noise events. However, rail projects sometimes use parts of existing rail routes. The
criteria presented in Tables 4.12-6 and 4.12-7 do not indicate how to account for existing vibration,
a common situation for rail projects using existing rail ROWs. Representative scenarios for existing
vibrations can be assessed using the following methods.
Infrequently used rail route: Use the vibration criteria from Tables 4.12-6 and 4.12-7 when
the existing rail traffic consists of four trains or fewer per day.
Moderately used rail route: If the existing rail traffic consists of 5 to 12 trains per day with
vibration that substantially exceeds the impact criteria, there would be no effect as long as the
project vibration levels are at least 5 VdB less than the existing vibration. Vibration from
existing trains can be estimated using the General Assessment procedures in Chapter 10 of the
FTA guidelines.
Heavily used rail route: If the existing traffic exceeds 12 trains per day and if the project would
not substantially increase the number of vibration events (less than doubling the number of
trains is usually considered not substantial), there would be no additional effect unless the
project vibration, estimated using the procedures of Chapter 10 of the FTA guidelines, would be
higher than the existing vibration. In locations where the new trains would be operating at
higher speeds than the existing rail traffic, the trains would likely generate substantially higher
levels of ground-borne vibration. When the project would cause vibration more than 5 VdB
greater than the existing source, the existing source can be ignored and the vibration criteria in
Tables 4.12-6 and 4.12-7 can be applied to the project.
Moving existing tracks: Another scenario where existing vibration can be substantial is a new
rail line within an existing rail ROW that requires shifting the location of existing tracks. Where
the track relocation would cause higher vibration levels at sensitive receptors, the projected
vibration levels from both rail systems must be compared to the appropriate impact criterion to
determine if there would be a new effect. If an effect is judged to have existed prior to moving
the tracks, new effects would be assessed only if the relocation would result in more than a 3
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-27
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
VdB increase in vibration level. Although the impact thresholds given in Tables 4.12-6 and 4.12-
7 are based on experience with vibration from rail transit systems, the thresholds can be applied
to freight train vibrations as well. However, locomotive and rail car vibration should be
considered separately. Because locomotive vibration only lasts for a few seconds, the
infrequent-event limit is appropriate, but for a typical line haul freight train where the rail car
vibration lasts for several minutes, the frequent-event limits should be applied to the rail car
vibration. Some judgment must be exercised to make sure that the approach is reasonable. For
example, some spur rail lines carry very little rail traffic (sometimes only one train per week) or
have short trains, in which case the infrequent-event limits are appropriate.
4.12.4.3 Near-Term Improvements Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact NOI-1 Construction of near-term improvements could expose sensitive receptors to substantial increases in noise levels.
Level of Impact Potentially significant
Mitigation Measures NOI-1.1: Implement a construction noise control plan
Level of Impact after Mitigation
Significant and unavoidable
Impact Characterization
Construction for the various near-term improvements would include three basic activities: (1) site
work, (2) rail work and (3) structures work. Depending on the near-term alternative, site work is
expected to occur over periods of 1–21 months, rail work is expected to occur over periods of 1–28
months, and structures work is expected to occur over periods of 6–26 months. Generally,
construction of a near-term improvement could last anywhere from 8 to 42 months, depending on
the improvement (See Chapter 2, Description of Near-Term Improvements). Because most near-term
improvements are located on an active freight and passenger rail line, construction work could
occur during the nighttime. The local noise ordinances for the cities and counties along the
ACEforward corridor generally limit construction noise to particular time periods during weekday,
weekend, and holiday daytime hours. Nighttime construction work is generally prohibited, but some
jurisdictions allow for a variance.
Table 4.12-8 summarizes the estimated construction noise levels and residential noise impact
screening distances for each of the planned construction activities. The noise estimates are based on
scenarios for the construction activities, using FTA methodology described in Section 4.12.4.1,
Methods for Analysis, and FTA criteria described in Section 4.12.4.2. However, to be conservative, the
screening distance estimates did not assume any topography or ground effects. The results of the
analysis indicate that noise impacts would be limited to residences within 135 to 270 feet from the
construction site, depending on the activity. The potential for noise impact would be greatest during
structures work at locations where pile driving is required for bridge construction.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-28
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-8. Residential Noise Impact Assessment for Construction Activities
Construction Activity and Equipment
Noise Level at 50 feet (dBA)
Equipment Usage Factor (%)
8-Hour Leq at 50 feet (dBA)
Approx. Noise Impact Distance (feet)
Predicted Exposure
Daytime Criterion
SITE WORK 89 80 135
Grader 85 53 82 -- --
Water Truck 84 44 80 -- --
D6 Dozer 85 61 83 -- --
D8 Dozer 85 45 82 -- --
Compactor 82 45 79 -- --
Dump Truck 84 23 78 -- --
RAIL WORK 90 80 150
Locomotive 88 25 82 -- --
D6 Dozer 85 38 81 -- --
Grader 85 38 81 -- --
Water Truck 84 38 80 -- --
Tamper 83 20 76 -- --
Aligner 85 20 78 -- --
Swinger 85 19 78 -- --
Welder 74 38 70 -- --
Flat Bed Truck 84 31 79 -- --
Pickup Truck 75 25 69 -- --
SUV 75 31 70 -- --
35 Ton RT Crane 83 38 79 -- --
Flat Bed Tractor 84 13 75 -- --
Wheel Loader 80 28 74 -- --
STRUCTURES 95 80 270
Impact Pile Driver 101 20 94
Generator 82 90 82 -- --
75 T Mobile Crane 83 38 79 -- --
Water Truck 84 20 77 -- --
Flat Bed Truck 84 25 78 -- --
Pickup Truck 75 53 72 -- --
Concrete Mixer 85 13 76 -- --
Concrete Pump 82 18 75 -- --
Wheel Loader 80 20 73 -- --
Welder 74 31 69 -- --
Leq = equivalent sound level
dBA = A-weighted decibel
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-29
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures
Significance Prior to Mitigation
Construction activities would be considered to have a significant impact if they would generate
noise exposure in excess of the FTA thresholds. As shown in Table 4.12-8, the operation of certain
construction equipment and construction activities could generate noise exposure in excess of FTA
thresholds. Nighttime construction near residential uses would have larger impacts than daytime
construction would have and would result in a potentially significant impact.
Significance with Application of Mitigation
Although the measures specified in Mitigation Measure NOI-1.1 would generally reduce the
construction noise levels, the measures would not necessarily guarantee that sensitive residential
receptors would not be exposed to noise levels exceeding the 80 dBA limit during the day or the 70
dBA limit at night. In specific, given the active railroad, it is probable that construction near some
residential areas will have to be conducted at night to avoid disruption of freight and passenger rail
operations and to complete construction on schedule. Furthermore, a temporary sound wall may be
effective in certain locations, but in many cases the nature of the construction work makes use of
such sound walls infeasible.
Construction-related noise would be short-term and would cease after the construction is
completed. Still, even with mitigation, the impact of temporary construction-related noise on nearby
noise sensitive receptors would remain a significant and unavoidable impact, in particular where
heavy construction would occur immediately adjacent to residences and where construction would
occur at night near residences.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure would apply to all near-term improvements for construction
noise impacts.
Mitigation Measure NOI-1.1: Implement a construction noise control plan
A noise control plan that incorporates, at a minimum, the following best practices into the
construction scope of work and specifications to reduce the impact of temporary construction-
related noise on nearby noise-sensitive receptors will be prepared and implemented.
Install temporary construction site sound barriers near noise sources.
Use moveable sound barriers at the source of the construction activity.
Avoid the use of impact pile drivers where possible near noise-sensitive areas or use quieter
alternatives (e.g., drilled piles) where geological conditions permit.
Locate stationary construction equipment as far as possible from noise-sensitive sites.
Re-route construction-related truck traffic along roadways that will cause the least
disturbance to residents.
Use low-noise emission equipment.
Implement noise-deadening measures for truck loading and operations.
Line or cover storage bins, conveyors, and chutes with sound-deadening material.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-30
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Use acoustic enclosures, shields, or shrouds for equipment and facilities.
Use high-grade engine exhaust silencers and engine-casing sound insulation.
Minimize the use of generators to power equipment.
Limit use of public address systems.
Grade surface irregularities on construction sites.
Monitor and maintain equipment to meet noise limits.
Establish an active community liaison program to keep residents informed about
construction and to provide a procedure for addressing complaints.
Impact NOI-2 Increased passenger service on existing routes, new passenger service on new routes, and relocated freight service could result in severe noise impacts.
Level of Impact Potentially significant (increased passenger service and relocated freight service)
Less than significant (station options)
Mitigation Measures NOI-2.1: Implement a phased program to reduce train noise along the ACE corridor as necessary to address noise increases over Federal Transit Administration’s severe impact thresholds
Level of Impact after Mitigation
Significant and unavoidable (increased passenger service and relocated freight service, depending on mitigation efficacy)
Impact Characterization
The noise impact assessment for the near-term improvements evaluates four major components.
1. Near-term improvements. Individual near-term improvements were assessed for their potential
for impact in the vicinity of the specific improvements. In most cases, individual near-term
improvements by themselves do not result in noise impacts.
2. Increased passenger service. The increase in passenger service throughout the corridor made
possible by the near-term improvements was assessed for impact. This assessment included all
locations throughout the ACEforward corridor, and not just those near specific near-term
improvements. Because of the relatively small increase in passenger service at the near-term
improvement level, there are minimal impacts related only to the increase in passenger service.
3. Near-term improvements plus increased passenger service. In Tracy, the near-term
improvements would relocate the existing passenger service and the increased passenger
service. These relocations were assessed as new projects for noise impacts. The majority of the
noise impacts at the near-term improvement level are at these locations.
4. Relocated freight service. In Niles Canyon and the Niles Subdivision, some of the near-term
improvements would relocate the freight rail operations onto the Niles Canyon Railroad and/or
would allow for increased freight operations on the Niles Subdivision north of Niles Junction to
and from Oakland.3 These relocations of operations were assessed for noise impacts.
3 Alternatives that include a connection to the Niles Subdivision at Niles Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1c,
CNS-2a, and CNS-2b) would result in increased freight north of Niles Junction on the Niles Subdivision and a
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-31
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-9 summarizes the results of the noise impact assessment for near-term improvements.
The impacts related to either 1) near-term improvements or 3) near-term improvements plus
increased passenger service are listed in the rows for specific near-term improvements. The overall
impacts related to 2) increased passenger service are listed in the top-level heading for each
segment. Impacts associated with 4) relocated freight service are addressed separately.
For locations with only increased passenger or freight service, the FTA increase in noise level
criteria were used to assess impact. At other locations, the FTA project noise level criteria were used
to assess the potential for impact.
All of the severe impacts, and the majority of the moderate impacts for near-term improvements are
at locations within 0.25 mile of grade crossings where train horns would be sounded. Most of these
impacts are at the areas where there are new near-term improvements that relocate the existing
service in addition to increasing the passenger service.
Impact Differences by Segment
Near-term impact tables referenced in this discussion are provided in 4.12.5.1, Near-term Impact
Tables.
San Jose to Fremont
There would be no noise impacts in this segment related to the near-term improvements or
increased passenger train service. Alternative SJF-1 would not result in any noise impacts.
Centerville/Niles/Sunol
The majority of the impacts under all alternatives would occur in Sunol and the residential area near
Niles Junction, except Alternative CNS-1c. Alternatives CNS-1a and CNS-1b have the same number
of impacts. Alternative CNS-1c would have a greater number of impacts associated with the
connection of the Niles Subdivision at Industrial Parkway. The additional freight trains along this
line would cause an increase in noise similar to that discussed in the Niles Subdivision section
above. Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b would have fewer impacts because of the relocation of the
freight traffic onto the NCRY (instead of use of the existing UPRR line), which would lower the
project noise along the existing UPRR ROW (and there are fewer receptors along the NCRY, which
would experience an increase in train noise with Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), as presented in
Table 4.12-9.
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction
As described, several near-term alternatives would allow for the shift of freight operations from the
Coast Subdivision (existing) onto the Niles Subdivision. Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b,
would all establish a new rail connection (either from the NCRY or from the Oakland Subdivision) at
Niles Junction to the Niles Subdivision, which would allow freight trains from Oakland to access
Niles Canyon via the Niles Subdivision (and vice-versa). This new rail connection would increase
freight trains along this route compared to existing conditions. The impacts for all three alternatives
would be the same on the Niles Subdivision. Additionally, there would be reductions in noise on the
Coast Subdivision and the Niles Subdivision from Niles Junction to Newark Junction.
corresponding decrease in freight activity on the Niles Subdivision through Centerville and the Coast Subdivision between Newark and Oakland.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-32
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway/Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction
Alternative CNS-1c would establish a new rail connection between the Oakland Subdivision and the
Niles Subdivision at Industrial Parkway in Union City, which would allow freight trains from
Oakland to access Niles Canyon via the Oakland Subdivision (and vice-versa). This new rail
connection would increase freight trains along the Niles Subdivision (between Elmhurst Junction
and Industrial Parkway) and the Oakland Subdivision (between Industrial Parkway and Niles
Junction) compared to existing conditions. The impacts on the Niles Subdivision north of Industrial
Parkway for Alternative CNS-1c would be the same as Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b.
Additionally, there would be reductions in noise on the Coast Subdivision and the Niles Subdivision
from Niles Junction to Newark Junction.
There would be noise impacts on residents along the segments of Niles Subdivision and Oakland
Subdivision, north of Niles Junction (as described above), because of the increase in freight traffic
along the corridor, as presented in Table 4.12-16. Institutional noise impact would occur as well, as
presented in Table 4.12-17.
Tri-Valley
There would be noise impacts for the common portions of the Tri-Valley segment, as presented in
Table 4.12-9. However, there would be no noise impacts associated with Alternatives TV-1 or TV-
2.
Altamont
There would be no noise impacts in this segment related to Alternative A-1 or increased passenger
train service.
Tracy to Lathrop
Alignment Options
Alternatives TL-1, TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, and TL-4b would all result in noise impacts.
However, because of the new track, Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, and TL-4b would result in
much greater numbers of noise impacts because of the locations of new tracks near sensitive
receptors that were not previously exposed to train noise, as presented in Table 4.12-9.
Station Options
There would be no noise impacts associated with any of the station options in the Tracy to Lathrop
segment because none of the stations are located near any sensitive receptors.
Lathrop to Stockton
There would be no noise impacts in this segment related to Alternative LS-1 or increased
passenger train service because there are no sensitive receptors located near the Stockton Station.
Manteca to Modesto
There would be some impacts for the common portions of the Manteca to Modesto segment, as
presented in Table 4.12-9. These impacts are associated only with Scenario A-1. Neither Alternative
MMO-1a nor MMO-1b would result in noise impacts.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-33
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Impact Quantification
Table 4.12-9 provides an overview of the noise impacts associated with the near-term
improvements and increased passenger service. Table 4.12-14through Table 4.12-43 provide
detailed information regarding impacts in each segment, including locations, existing noise levels,
noise levels with near-term improvements or noise level increases with near-term improvements,
impact thresholds, and numbers of severe and moderate impacts. Figures 4.12-10 through 4.12-21
show the locations of noise impacts graphically. The section below provides a narrative discussion
of noise impacts.
Table 4.12-9. Noise Impacts in the Vicinity of Near-Term Improvements
Near-Term Improvement Alternatives
Noise Impacts
Moderate Severe
San Jose to Fremonta 0 0
SJF-1 0 0
Centerville/Niles/Sunola 0 0
CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c 93 1
CNS-2a 49 0
CNS-2b 48 1
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction)a
CNS-1a, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, CNS-2b 1,524 2,108
Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway/Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction
CNS-1c 1,342 1,840
Tri-Valleya 30 0
TV-1 0 0
TV-2 0 0
Altamonta 0 0
A-1 0 0
Tracy to Lathrop—Alignment Optionsa All impacts are included below
TL-1 31 0
TL-2a 218 3
TL-2b 217 3
TL-3 29 1
TL-4a 222 3
TL-4b 221 3
Tracy to Lathrop—Station Options
West Tracy Station A-1 0 0
West Tracy Station A-2 0 0
West Tracy Station A-3 0 0
West Tracy Station A-4 0 0
West Tracy Station A-5 0 0
West Tracy Station B-1 0 0
West Tracy Station B-2 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-34
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Near-Term Improvement Alternatives
Noise Impacts
Moderate Severe
Existing Tracy Station 0 0
Downtown Tracy Station 0 0
Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station 0 0
Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station 0 0
River Islands Station 0 0
Lathrop to Stocktona 0 0
LS-1 0 0
Manteca to Modestob 40 0
MMO-1a 0 0
MMO-1b 0 0 a. The impacts in these areas are related to the increase in passenger train traffic. b. The impacts in the Manteca to Modesto segment are associated with Scenario A-1 only. Scenario A-2 has no
extension to Modesto.
San Jose to Fremont
As presented in Tables 4.12-14 and 4.12-15, there are no moderate or severe noise impacts on
residential or institutional receptors along this segment related to near-term increase in ACE
passenger service.
Centerville/Niles/Sunol
As presented in Tables 4.12-20 and 4.12-21, there are no moderate or severe noise impacts on
residential or institutional receptors in association with Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c
in Fremont west of Niles Junction.
As presented in Tables 4.12 22 and 4.12-23 and shown on Figure 4.12-13, there are moderate or
severe noise impacts on residential receptors (but no moderate or severe impacts on institutional
receptors) in association with Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c at the following locations.
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive (Fremont): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 39 single-family residences along the northbound side of Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and
CNS-1c between Mission Boulevard and Canyon Heights Drive. These noise impacts are because
of the proximity of the tracks and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive (Fremont): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 29 single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and
CNS-1c between Mission Boulevard and Canyon Heights Drive. These noise impacts are because
of the proximity of the tracks and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive (Fremont): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 21 single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and
CNS-1c between Canyon Heights Drive and Stenhammer Drive. These noise impacts are because
of the proximity of the tracks and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Second Street to Carver Lane (Sunol): Moderate noise impact is projected at two single-family
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at one single-family residence along the
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-35
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
northbound side of Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c between Second Street and
Carver Lane. The noise impacts at this location are related to train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Second Street to Carver Lane (Sunol): Moderate noise impact is projected at two single-family
residences along the southbound side of Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c between
Second Street and Carver Lane. The noise impacts at this location are related to train horn noise
at the nearby grade crossings.
As presented in Tables 4.12-24 and 4.12-25 and shown on Figure 4.12-15, there are moderate noise
impacts, but no severe noise impacts, to residential receptors (and no moderate or severe impacts
on institutional receptors) in association with Alternative CNS-2a at the following location:
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive (Fremont): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 19 single-family residences along the northbound side of Alternative CNS-2a between
Mission Boulevard and Canyon Heights Drive. These noise impacts are because of the proximity
of the tracks and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive (Fremont): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 21 single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative CNS-2a between
Mission Boulevard and Canyon Heights Drive. These noise impacts are because of the proximity
of the tracks and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive (Fremont): Moderate noise impact is projected
at four single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative CNS-2a between
Canyon Heights Drive and Stenhammer Drive. These noise impacts are because of the proximity
of the tracks and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Second Street to Carver Lane (Sunol): Moderate noise impact is projected at two single-family
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at one single-family residence along the
northbound side of Alternative CNS-2a between Second Street and Carver Lane. The noise
impacts at this location are related to train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Second Street to Carver Lane (Sunol): Moderate noise impact is projected at two single-family
residences along the southbound side of Alternative CNS-2a between Second Street and Carver
Lane. The noise impacts at this location are related to train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
As presented in Tables 4.12-24 and 4.12-25 and shown on Figure 4.12-16, there are moderate or
severe noise impacts on residential receptors (but no moderate or severe impacts on institutional
receptors) in association with Alternative CNS-2b at the following locations.
Second Street to Carver Lane (Sunol): Moderate noise impact is projected at two single-family
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at one single-family residence along the
northbound side of Alternative CNS-2b between Second Street and Carver Lane. The noise
impacts at this location are related to train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Second Street to Carver Lane (Sunol): Moderate noise impact is projected at two single-family
residences along the southbound side of Alternative CNS-2b between Second Street and Carver
Lane. The noise impacts at this location are related to train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-36
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Niles Subdivision, from Newark Junction to Elmhurst Junction
As presented in Tables 4.12-16 and 4.12-17 and shown in Figure 4.12-12, there are moderate or
severe noise impacts on residential and institutional receptors in association with Alternatives
CNS-1a, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b at the following locations due to the shifting of freight from the Coast
Subdivision to the Niles Subdivision.
Niles Junction to Nursery Avenue (Niles): Moderate noise impact is projected at 47
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 50 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Niles Junction and Nursery Avenue. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Niles Junction to Nursery Avenue (Niles): Moderate noise impact is projected at 28
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 36 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Niles Junction and Nursery Avenue. Moderate noise impact is also
projected at California Nursery Historical Park, and severe noise impact is projected at Niles
Discovery Church. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of
the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Nursery Avenue to Silver Street (Niles): Moderate noise impact is projected at 37 residences,
and severe noise impact is projected at 57 residences along the east side of the Niles Subdivision
between Nursery Avenue and Silver Street. These noise impacts are because of the increase in
freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Nursery Avenue to Silver Street (Niles): Moderate noise impact is projected at 39 residences,
and severe noise impact is projected at 46 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Nursery Avenue and Silver Street. Moderate noise impact is also projected
at Wat Buddnahusorn Temple. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic,
proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Silver Street to Decoto Road (Union City): Severe noise impact is projected at 15 residences
along the east side of the Niles Subdivision between Silver Street and Decoto Road. These noise
impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn
noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Silver Street to Decoto Road (Union City): Moderate noise impact is projected at 164
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 148 residences along the west side of the
Niles Subdivision between Silver Street and Decoto Road. These noise impacts are because of
the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Decoto Road to Kathy Court (Union City): Moderate noise impact is projected at 108
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 70 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Decoto Road and Kathy Court. Severe noise impact is also projected at Hill
View Baptist Church and Purple Lotus University. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Decoto Road to Kathy Court (Union City): Moderate noise impact is projected at 118
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 109 residences along the west side of the
Niles Subdivision between Decoto Road and Kathy Court. These noise impacts are because of the
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-37
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 11
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 97 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Kathy Court and Industrial Parkway. These noise impacts are because of
the increase in freight traffic and proximity of the tracks.
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 44
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 18 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Industrial Parkway and Tennyson Road. These noise impacts are because
of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 81
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 90 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Industrial Parkway and Tennyson Road. These noise impacts are because
of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 66
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 89 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Tennyson Road and Jackson Street. Moderate noise impact is also project
at Cesar Chavez Middle School. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic,
proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 98
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 64 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Tennyson Road and Jackson Street. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Jackson Street to A Street (Hayward): Severe noise impact is projected at 139 residences
along the east side of the Niles Subdivision between Jackson Street and A Street. These noise
impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic and proximity of the tracks.
Jackson Street to A Street (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 23 residences,
and severe noise impact is projected at 74 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Jackson Street and A Street. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic and proximity of the tracks.
A Street to Blossom Way (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at 22 residences,
and severe noise impact is projected at 29 residences along the east side of the Niles Subdivision
between A Street and Blossom Way. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight
traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
A Street to Blossom Way (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at 15 residences,
and severe noise impact is projected at 36 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between A Street and Blossom Way. These noise impacts are because of the increase
in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at 10
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 68 residences along the east side of the Niles
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-38
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Subdivision between Blossom Way and Paseo Grande. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at 38
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 92 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Blossom Way and Paseo Grande. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at
59 residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 68 residences along the east side of the
Niles Subdivision between Paseo Grande and Hesperian Boulevard. These noise impacts are
because of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the
nearby grade crossings.
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at
29 residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 33 residences along the west side of the
Niles Subdivision between Paseo Grande and Hesperian Boulevard. Moderate noise impact is
also project at Pioneer Memorial Cemetery of San Lorenzo. These noise impacts are because of
the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 22 residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 98 residences along the east side of the
Niles Subdivision between Hesperian Boulevard and Aladdin Avenue. These noise impacts are
because of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the
nearby grade crossings.
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 188 residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 56 residences along the west side of
the Niles Subdivision between Hesperian Boulevard and Aladdin Avenue. These noise impacts
are because of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at
the nearby grade crossings.
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected at four
residences along the east side of the Niles Subdivision between Aladdin Avenue and Davis
Street. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic and the train horn noise
at the nearby grade crossings.
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected at 30
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 14 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Aladdin Avenue and Davis Street. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Davis Street to Moorpark Street (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected at 2
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 35 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Davis Street and Moorpark Street. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-39
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Davis Street to Moorpark Street (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected at 188
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 453 residences along the west side of the
Niles Subdivision between Davis Street and Moorpark Street. These noise impacts are because of
the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Moorpark Street to Elmhurst Junction (Oakland): Moderate noise impact is projected at 26
residences along the east side of the Niles Subdivision between Moorpark Street and Elmhurst
Junction. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic and the train horn
noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Moorpark Street to Elmhurst Junction (Oakland): Moderate noise impact is projected at 23
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 20 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Moorpark Street and Elmhurst Junction. Severe noise impact is also
projected at the SUM Bible College and Theological Seminary. These noise impacts are because
of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway/Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction
As presented in Tables 4.12-18 and 4.12-19 and shown on Figure 4.12-14, there are moderate or
severe noise impacts on residential and institutional receptors in association with Alternative CNS-
1c at the following locations due to the shifting of freight from the Coast Subdivision to the Oakland
Subdivision between Niles Junction and Industrial Parkway:
Niles Junction to Barcelona Drive (Fremont): Severe noise impact is projected at 6 residences
along the east side of the Oakland Subdivision between Niles Junction and Barcelona Drive.
These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic and proximity of the tracks.
Barcelona Drive to Silver Street (Fremont): Moderate noise impact is projected at 11
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 53 residences along the east side of the
Oakland Subdivision between Barcelona Drive and Silver Street. These noise impacts are
because of the increase in freight traffic and proximity of the tracks.
Silver Street to Decoto Road (Union City): Moderate noise impact is projected at 1 residence,
and severe noise impact is projected at 169 residences along the east side of the Oakland
Subdivision between Silver Street and Decoto Road. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Silver Street to Decoto Road (Union City): Moderate noise impact is projected at 196
residence along the west side of the Oakland Subdivision between Silver Street and Decoto
Road. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic and proximity of the
tracks.
Decoto Road to Kathy Court (Union City): Moderate noise impact is projected at 8 residences
along the east side of the Oakland Subdivision between Decoto Road and Kathy Court. These
noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train
horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Decoto Road to Kathy Court (Union City): Moderate noise impact is projected at 145
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 133 residences along the west side of the
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-40
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Oakland Subdivision between Decoto Road and Kathy Court. These noise impacts are because of
the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
The following impacts along the Niles Subdivision east of Industrial Parkway for Alternative CNS-
1c are the same as Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b:
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 44
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 18 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Industrial Parkway and Tennyson Road. These noise impacts are because
of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 81
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 90 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Industrial Parkway and Tennyson Road. These noise impacts are because
of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 66
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 89 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Tennyson Road and Jackson Street. Moderate noise impact is also project
at Cesar Chavez Middle School. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic,
proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 98
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 64 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Tennyson Road and Jackson Street. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Jackson Street to A Street (Hayward): Severe noise impact is projected at 139 residences
along the east side of the Niles Subdivision between Jackson Street and A Street. These noise
impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic and proximity of the tracks.
Jackson Street to A Street (Hayward): Moderate noise impact is projected at 23 residences,
and severe noise impact is projected at 74 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Jackson Street and A Street. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic and proximity of the tracks.
A Street to Blossom Way (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at 22 residences,
and severe noise impact is projected at 29 residences along the east side of the Niles Subdivision
between A Street and Blossom Way. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight
traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
A Street to Blossom Way (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at 15 residences,
and severe noise impact is projected at 36 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between A Street and Blossom Way. These noise impacts are because of the increase
in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at 10
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 68 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Blossom Way and Paseo Grande. These noise impacts are because of the
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-41
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at 38
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 92 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Blossom Way and Paseo Grande. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at
59 residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 68 residences along the east side of the
Niles Subdivision between Paseo Grande and Hesperian Boulevard. These noise impacts are
because of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the
nearby grade crossings.
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard (San Lorenzo): Moderate noise impact is projected at
29 residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 33 residences along the west side of the
Niles Subdivision between Paseo Grande and Hesperian Boulevard. Moderate noise impact is
also project at Pioneer Memorial Cemetery of San Lorenzo. These noise impacts are because of
the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 22 residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 98 residences along the east side of the
Niles Subdivision between Hesperian Boulevard and Aladdin Avenue. These noise impacts are
because of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the
nearby grade crossings.
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 188 residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 56 residences along the west side of
the Niles Subdivision between Hesperian Boulevard and Aladdin Avenue. These noise impacts
are because of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at
the nearby grade crossings.
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected at four
residences along the east side of the Niles Subdivision between Aladdin Avenue and Davis
Street. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic and the train horn noise
at the nearby grade crossings.
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected at 30
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 14 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Aladdin Avenue and Davis Street. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossings.
Davis Street to Moorpark Street (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected at 2
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 35 residences along the east side of the Niles
Subdivision between Davis Street and Moorpark Street. These noise impacts are because of the
increase in freight traffic and the train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Davis Street to Moorpark Street (San Leandro): Moderate noise impact is projected at 188
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 453 residences along the west side of the
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-42
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Niles Subdivision between Davis Street and Moorpark Street. These noise impacts are because of
the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Moorpark Street to Elmhurst Junction (Oakland): Moderate noise impact is projected at 26
residences along the north side of the Niles Subdivision between Moorpark Street and Elmhurst
Junction. These noise impacts are because of the increase in freight traffic and the train horn
noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Moorpark Street to Elmhurst Junction (Oakland): Moderate noise impact is projected at 23
residences, and severe noise impact is projected at 20 residences along the west side of the Niles
Subdivision between Moorpark Street and Elmhurst Junction. Severe noise impact is also
projected at the SUM Bible College and Theological Seminary. These noise impacts are because
of the increase in freight traffic, proximity of the tracks, and the train horn noise at the nearby
grade crossings.
Tri-Valley
As presented in Tables 4.12 28 and 4.12 29 and shown on Figures 4.12 10 and 4.12 11, there are
moderate noise impacts, but no severe noise impacts, to residential receptors (and no moderate or
severe impacts on institutional receptors) in association with the near-term increase in ACE
passenger train service at the following locations.
Bernal Avenue to Del Valle Parkway (Pleasanton): Moderate noise impact is projected at one
single-family residence on the northbound side of the alignment between Bernal Avenue and
Del Valle Parkway. This impact is because of the proximity to the alignment and train horn noise
at the nearby grade crossing.
Bernal Avenue to Del Valle Parkway (Pleasanton): Moderate noise impact is projected at two
single-family residences on the southbound side of the alignment between Bernal Avenue and
Del Valle. These impacts are because of the proximity to the alignment and train horn noise at
the nearby grade crossings.
North Murrieta Boulevard to North P Street (Livermore): Moderate noise impact is
projected at one single-family residence on the southbound side of the alignment between
North Murrieta Boulevard and North P Street. This impact is because of the proximity of the
alignment.
North P Street to Junction Avenue (Livermore): Moderate noise impact is projected at 19
single and multifamily residences on the southbound side of the alignment between
North P Street and Junction Avenue. These impacts are because of the proximity of the
alignment and train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Junction Avenue to North Mines Road (Livermore): Moderate noise impact is projected at
seven single-family residences on the northbound side of the alignment between Junction
Avenue and North Mines Road. These impacts are because of the proximity to the alignment.
Altamont
As presented in Table 4.12-30, there are no moderate or severe noise impacts on residential
receptors in association with the near-term increase in ACE passenger train service. There are no
institutional sensitive receivers in the Altamont segment.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-43
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Tracy to Lathrop
As presented in Table 4.12-31 and shown on Figure 4.12-17, there are moderate noise impacts (but
no severe noise impacts) to residential receptors (there are no institutional receptors) in association
with Alternative TL-1 (which would route increased train service along the existing ACE
alignment) at the following locations.
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at one single-family
residence along the southbound side of Alternative TL-1 from I-580 to Corral Hollow Road.
This impact is related to the existing low noise levels.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 17
single-family residences on the southbound side of Alternative TL-1 between Corral Hollow
Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at
two single-family residences on the northbound side of Alternative TL-1 between Tracy
Boulevard and South MacArthur Drive. These impacts are related to train horn noise at the
nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at
one single-family residence on the southbound side of Alternative TL-1 between Tracy
Boulevard and South MacArthur Drive. This impact is because of the proximity of the alignment
and train horn noise at the nearby grade crossing.
South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected
at six single-family residences on the southbound side of Alternative TL-1 between
South MacArthur Drive and North Chrisman Road. These impacts are because of the proximity
of the alignment and train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue (Manteca): Moderate noise impact is projected at three
single-family residences on the southbound side of Alternative TL-1 between SR 120 and West
Yosemite Avenue. These impacts are because of the proximity of the alignment and train horn
noise at the nearby grade crossing.
As presented in Tables 4.12-32 and 4.12-33 and shown on Figure 4.12-18, there are moderate or
severe noise impacts on residential receptors (but no moderate or severe impacts on institutional
receptors) in association with Alternative TL-2a (which would route increased train service along
the Tracy Subdivision through downtown Tracy and use the Midway Crossover) at the following
locations.
I-580 to S Lammers Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at two single-family
residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-2a between I-580 and S Lammers
Road. These impacts are related to the low noise levels in the area.
S Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at six
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2a between S Lammers
Road and Corral Hollow Road. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching
the nearby grade crossing.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 35
single-family residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-2a between Corral
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-44
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Hollow Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to the horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 43
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2a between Corral
Hollow Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 33
single and multifamily residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-2a between
Tracy Boulevard and North Central Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 19
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2a between Tracy
Boulevard and North Central Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
North Central Avenue to MacArthur Drive (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 72
single- and multifamily residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2a between
North Central Avenue and MacArthur Drive. These impacts are because of the proximity to the
alignment and horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossing.
Banta: Moderate noise impact is projected at two residences, and severe noise impact is
projected at two residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-2a in Banta. These
impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossings.
Banta: Moderate noise impact is projected at six residences, and severe noise impact is
projected at one residence along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2a in Banta. These
impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossings.
As presented in Tables 4.12-34 and 4.12-35 and shown on Figure 4.12-19, there are moderate or
severe noise impacts on residential receptors (but no moderate or severe impacts on institutional
receptors) in association with Alternative TL-2b (which would route increased train service along
the Tracy Subdivision through downtown Tracy and use the Lammers Crossover) at the following
locations.
Lammers Connector (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at one single-family
residence along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2b along the Lammers Connector. This
impact is related to the existing low noise levels.
S Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at six
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2b between S Lammers
Road and Corral Hollow Road. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching
the nearby grade crossing.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 35
single-family residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-2b between Corral
Hollow Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 43
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2b between Corral
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-45
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Hollow Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 33
single and multifamily residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-2b between
Tracy Boulevard and North Central Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 19
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2b between Tracy
Boulevard and North Central Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
North Central Avenue to MacArthur Drive (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 72
single- and multifamily residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2b between
North Central Avenue and MacArthur Drive. These impacts are because of the proximity to the
alignment and horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossing.
Banta: Moderate noise impact is projected at two residences, and severe noise impact is
projected at two residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-2b in Banta. These
impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossings.
Banta: Moderate noise impact is projected at six residences, and severe noise impact is
projected at one residence along the southbound side of Alternative TL-2b in Banta. These
impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossings.
As presented in Tables 4.12-36 and 4.12-37 and shown on Figure 4.12-20, there are moderate or
severe noise impacts on residential receptors (but no moderate or severe impacts on institutional
receptors) in association with Alternative TL-3 (which would route increased train service along
the Tracy Subdivision east of Tracy and then use the Lyoth-Banta Crossover to connect with the
Oakland Subdivision heading westward through Tracy) at the following locations.
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at one single-family
residence along the southbound side of Alternative TL-3 from I-580 to Corral Hollow Road.
This impact is related to the existing low noise levels.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 17
single-family residences on the southbound side of Alternative TL-3 between Corral Hollow
Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to train horn noise at the nearby grade
crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at
two single-family residences on the northbound side of Alternative TL-3 between Tracy
Boulevard and South MacArthur Drive. These impacts are related to train horn noise at the
nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at
one single-family residence on the southbound side of Alternative TL-3 between Tracy
Boulevard and South MacArthur Drive. This impact is because of the proximity of the alignment
and train horn noise at the nearby grade crossing.
South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected
at six single-family residences on the southbound side of Alternative TL-3 between
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-46
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
South MacArthur Drive and North Chrisman Road. These impacts are because of the proximity
of the alignment and train horn noise at the nearby grade crossings.
Lyoth-Banta Connector (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at two residences, and
severe noise impact is projected at one residence on the northbound side of Alternative TL-3
along the Lyoth-Banta Connector. These impacts are related to the existing low noise levels and
horn noise from trains approaching the nearby grade crossings.
As presented in Tables 4.12-38 and 4.12-39 and shown on Figure 4.12-21, there are moderate or
severe noise impacts on residential receptors (but no moderate or severe impacts on institutional
receptors) in association with Alternative TL-4a (which would route increased train service using
the SR 120 Crossover then along the Tracy Subdivision through downtown Tracy and then use the
Midway Crossover) at the following locations.
I-580 to S Lammers Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at two single-family
residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-4a between I-580 and S Lammers
Road. These impacts are related to the low noise levels in the area.
S Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at six
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4a between S Lammers
Road and Corral Hollow Road. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching
the nearby grade crossing.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 35
single-family residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-4a between Corral
Hollow Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 43
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4a between Corral
Hollow Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 33
single- and multifamily residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-4a between
Tracy Boulevard and North Central Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 19
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4a between Tracy
Boulevard and North Central Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
North Central Avenue to MacArthur Drive (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 72
single and multifamily residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4a between
North Central Avenue and MacArthur Drive. These impacts are because of the proximity to the
alignment and horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossing.
Banta: Moderate noise impact is projected at two residences, and severe noise impact is
projected at two residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-4a in Banta. These
impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossings.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-47
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Banta: Moderate noise impact is projected at six residences, and severe noise impact is
projected at one residence along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4a in Banta. These
impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossings.
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue (Manteca): Moderate noise impact is projected at four
single-family residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-4a between SR 120 and
West Yosemite Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the
nearby grade crossings.
As presented in Tables 4.12-40 and 4.12-41 and shown on Figure 4.12-22, there are moderate or
severe noise impacts on residential receptors (but no moderate or severe impacts on institutional
receptors) in association with Alternative TL-4b (which would route increased train service using
the SR 120 Crossover then along the Tracy Subdivision through downtown Tracy and then use the
Lammers Crossover) at the following locations.
Lammers Connector (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at one single-family
residence along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4b along the Lammers Connector. This
impact is related to the existing low noise levels.
S Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at six
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4b between S Lammers
Road and Corral Hollow Road. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching
the nearby grade crossing.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 35
single-family residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-4b between Corral
Hollow Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 43
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4b between Corral
Hollow Road and Tracy Boulevard. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 33
single- and multifamily residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-4b between
Tracy Boulevard and North Central Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 19
single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4b between Tracy
Boulevard and North Central Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains
approaching the nearby grade crossing.
North Central Avenue to MacArthur Drive (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at 72
single- and multifamily residences along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4b between
North Central Avenue and MacArthur Drive. These impacts are because of the proximity to the
alignment and horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossing.
Banta: Moderate noise impact is projected at two residences, and severe noise impact is
projected at two residences along the northbound side of Alternative TL-4bin Banta. These
impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossings.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-48
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Banta: Moderate noise impact is projected at six residences, and severe noise impact is
projected at one residence along the southbound side of Alternative TL-4b in Banta. These
impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the grade crossings.
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue (Tracy): Moderate noise impact is projected at four single-
family residences along the northbound side of the alignment between SR 120 and
West Yosemite Avenue. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching the
nearby grade crossings.
Lathrop to Stockton
As presented in Tables 4.12-42 and 4.12-43, there are no moderate or severe noise impacts on
residential or institutional receptors in association with increased ACE passenger service.
Manteca to Modesto
AAs presented in Tables 4.12-44 and 4.12-45, there are moderate noise impacts, but no severe noise
impacts, to residential receptors (and no moderate or severe impacts on institutional receptors) in
association with introduction of new passenger rail service from Manteca to Modesto at the
following locations.
South Airport Way to West Louise Avenue (Manteca): Moderate noise impact is projected at
18 single-family residences along the northbound side of the alignment between South Airport
Way and West Louise Avenue. These impacts are because of the proximity of the alignment and
horn noise from trains approaching the nearby grade crossing.
West Louise Avenue to North Union Road (Manteca): Moderate noise impact is projected at
12 single-family residences along the northbound side of the alignment between West Louise
Avenue and North Union Road. These impacts are related to horn noise from trains approaching
the nearby grade crossing.
North Union Road to West Yosemite Avenue (Manteca): Moderate noise impact is projected
at 10 single and multifamily residences along the northbound side of the alignment between
North Union Road and West Yosemite Avenue. These impacts are because of the proximity of the
alignment and horn noise from trains approaching the nearby grade crossing.
Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures
Significance Prior to Mitigation
There are no sensitive receptors in the vicinity of Alternatives SJF-1; TV-1; TV-2; A-1; West Tracy
Stations A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, B-1, and B-2; Existing Tracy Station; Downtown Tracy Station;
River Islands Station; Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station; Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station;
and LS-1 as thus noise-related impacts with these alternatives would be less than significant.
Near-term operations would result in a total of 4,033 moderate and 3,963 severe noise impacts
because of the implementation of near-term improvements, increased passenger service, the
combination of near-term improvements and increased passenger service, and relocated freight
service. For the near-term improvements and associated increase in passenger traffic, all the severe
impacts are at locations where train horns are sounded at grade crossings. Because near-term
operations would cause an increase in ambient noise levels that exceed the FTA moderate or severe
impact criteria, this is considered a significant impact.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-49
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Significance with Application of Mitigation
There are a number of different methods to reduce the noise impacts of cumulative trains:
Wayside horns: Train horn noise can be reduced through use of a wayside horn, which is an
automatically triggered horn located at the at-grade crossing itself that sounds upon approach of
a train. Because the horns are located at the crossing itself, the area of effect is smaller than the
area of effect of actual train horns; but sensitive receptors in the immediate vicinity of the at-
grade crossing could still be affected by horn noise. Wayside horns are included as one option in
Mitigation Measure NOI-2.1 described below.
Building sound insulation: Another method of reducing the impact of train horn noise is building
sound insulation. Sound insulation of residences and institutional buildings improve the
outdoor-to-indoor noise reduction. Although this approach has no effect on noise in exterior
areas, it is a feasible method for sites where noise barriers are not feasible or desirable, for
buildings where indoor sensitivity is of most concern, or where the horn noise dominates the
noise environment. Improvements in building sound insulation often can be achieved by adding
an extra layer of glazing to the windows and by sealing any holes in exterior surfaces that act as
sound leaks. Building sound insulation is included as one option in Mitigation Measure NOI-2.1
described below.
Quiet zones: FRA has established a process by which a local jurisdiction can designate a specific
area containing at-grade crossings as a “quiet zone,” provided that certain supplemental safety
measures (SSM) are used in place of the locomotive horn to provide an equivalent level of safety
at the at-grade crossing (Federal Transit Administration 2006).
The SSMs commonly used for quiet zones include four-quadrant gates, gates with medians
or channelization devices, one-way street with gates, and street closure. By adopting an
approved SSM at each of the impacted at-grade crossings, a quiet zone at least 0.5 mile long
can be established.
Only with local implementation of the quiet zone can ACE, freight operators, and other
tenant railroad operations be relieved of the requirement to sound their horns when
crossing at-grade crossings. However, following implementation of a quiet zone, if any
unsafe conditions were present at the time of train passage (such as a vehicle going around
the gates or pedestrians in the crossing), train operators would still have the discretion to
sound train horns. Although the quiet zone regulations are silent on the issue of liability,
local jurisdictions may perceive that the implementation of a quiet zone includes acceptance
of potential liability in the event of related accidents. It is possible that jurisdictions may not
wish to risk the potential liability associated with implementing a quiet zone and decline to
do so. In such a case, ACE, freight operators, and other rail operators would continue to use
train horns as a safety device in compliance with FRA requirements.
Where quiet zones are implemented and accepted by local jurisdictions, noise levels related
to ACE near-term or longer-term improvements may be reduced to a less-than-significant
level at some (but not necessarily all) affected locations.
Quiet zones are included as one option in Mitigation Measure NOI-2.1 described below.
Noise Barriers: Noise barriers are not considered a feasible mitigation to address horn noise
because train horns are elevated; thus, noise barriers would have to be as high as or higher than
the locomotives themselves to be effective at shielding train horn noise. Along the ACEforward
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-50
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
corridor, such high walls likely would not be acceptable to local communities. Noise barriers
cannot be placed at the at-grade crossing which also reduces their effectiveness for horn noise
reduction. While lower noise barriers would help to reduce engine and wheel noise for adjacent
receptors, lower noise barriers are not considered cost-effective because they would be only
partially effective at addressing train noise and would not address train horn noise, which is the
dominant concern.
Grade Separation: While grade separations are a technically feasible way to avoid the need for
train horn use, it is a highly expensive mitigation strategy. SJRRC has supported prior grade
separation efforts. SJRRC supports future efforts at grade separation where acceptable to local
communities and where local, state, and federal funding can be obtained to fund these
improvements. Grade separations can cost approximately $50 million to $100 million per
crossing (and sometime more), grade separating all existing at-grade crossings in areas of
significant noise impacts would be cost-prohibitive. SJRRC does not have a dedicated funding
source for the near-term or longer-term improvements. Thus, SJRRC cannot commit to a
comprehensive program of grade separations at this time. However, as described in Mitigation
Measure NOI-2.1, SJRRC will work with local jurisdictions, transportation funding agencies, and
state and federal agencies to support grade separations over time as funding becomes available.
While the recommended mitigation below, where feasible to implement, would help to reduce noise,
it will take time to implement it and it may not be feasible to reduce all noise impacts on a less-than-
significant level; thus, this impact is disclosed as significant and unavoidable.
As to secondary environmental impacts of Mitigation Measure NOI-2.1, the environmental effects of
the different mitigation options would vary. Wayside horns and building sound insulation would
have limited to no secondary environmental impacts. Quiet zone improvements would require
additional construction, but the likely environmental impacts of such construction are limited given
the limited footprint of four-quadrant gates, active warning systems, medians, and street work. In
general, construction impacts for quiet zone improvements would be similar to the impacts
disclosed for improvements construction, would occur in previously developed and disturbed areas,
and would be temporary in nature. The applicable improvements mitigation described for
construction impacts in this EIR, where relevant, would also be applied to quiet zone improvements.
As to grade separations, the design and feasibility of a select number of future grade separations are
unknown and unstudied at this time; thus, the specific environmental impacts cannot be identified.
While they are statutorily exempt from CEQA review, grade separations may nevertheless have
substantial environmental impacts depending on their design and location, and their construction
can be highly disruptive. Therefore, as a conservative assumption, their secondary environmental
impacts are assumed to be significant and unavoidable.
SJRRC will work with other parties when implementing this measure to apply the relevant
construction mitigation measures identified in this EIR to these the implementation of future noise
mitigation improvements. SJRRC is only responsible for that portion of the cumulative increases
caused by the improvements. Other sources of cumulative increases including high-speed rail, other
passenger rail and freight services as well as non-rail sources near the ACEforward corridor would
also bear responsibility for cumulative noise increases.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-51
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure would apply to all near-term improvements (except Alternatives
SJF-1; TV-1; TV-2; A-1; West Tracy Stations A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, B-1, and B-2; Existing Tracy
Station; Downtown Tracy Station; River Islands Station; Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station;
Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station; and LS-1) for noise impacts.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2.1: Implement a phased program to reduce train noise along the
ACE corridor as necessary to address noise increases over Federal Transit
Administration’s severe impact thresholds
SJRRC will coordinate with other rail operators, local jurisdictions, transportation funding
agencies, and state and federal agencies, to implement incremental noise-reduction measures at
the locations of severe cumulative noise impacts as funding becomes available, where measures
are acceptable to the local community, and where measures are determined feasible. This
mitigation applies to the locations where ACEforward would substantially contribute to
cumulative noise impacts. Where ACEforward does not contribute to cumulative noise impacts,
then SJRRC is not responsible to participate in mitigation, even if the cumulative noise impacts
are severe.
SJRRC will work with local, state, and federal partners to establish priorities for noise reduction
measure to be implemented as funding becomes available. SJRRC will also work with other
willing rail operators to seek additional funding from other parties that contribute to cumulative
train noise levels.
This program is expected to be implemented over a period of decades. Improvements will be
phased as needed to address changes in rail service over time and the associated rail noise over
thresholds. If funding participation by other parties is limited, SJRRC may not be able to fund all
potential noise mitigation on its own, particularly where the mitigation to address cumulative
noise impacts far exceeds SJRRC’s fair-share of the impact.
Wayside horns and Residential Building Sound Insulation
SJRRC, in cooperation with the other parties noted above, will evaluate the potential to reduce
noise impacts through the installation of wayside horns and building sound insulation
improvements at residences projected to have a sound increase greater than the FTA moderate
impact criteria. Building sound insulation methods may include extra wall insulation, window
glazing and sealing of exterior surfaces.
During final design, a technical study will be completed to evaluate the effectiveness of reducing
impacts on less than the FTA moderate impact threshold through these methods. If the study
determines it feasible to reduce the impact on less than the threshold at an affected sensitive
noise receptor, then no additional mitigation at that location will be required. Building sound
insulation measures will only be installed to the extent necessary to meet the impact threshold
at the receptor location and will only be installed if building owners are willing to accept such
measures.
Quiet Zones
The lead agency for a quiet zone designation is the local jurisdiction (typically the city or county)
responsible for traffic control and law enforcement on the roads at the at-grade crossings.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-52
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
SJRRC, in cooperation with the other parties noted above, and the affected local jurisdictions will
implement a phased program considering the potential establishment of quiet zones along the
ACE corridor at all locations where train noise is predicted to exceed FTA severe impact
thresholds. SJRRC will work closely with local jurisdictions to prepare the engineering studies
and coordination agreements to design, construct, and enforce potential quiet zones.
Options for establishing quiet zones could include implementation of the following FRA pre-
approved supplemental safety measures (SSMs).
Four-quadrant gate system. This measure involves the installation of at least one gate for
each direction of traffic to fully block vehicles from entering the crossing.
Gates with medians or channelization devices. This measure keeps traffic in the proper
travel lanes as it approaches the crossing, thus denying the driver the option of
circumventing the gates by travelling in the opposite lane.
One-way street with gates. This measure consists of one-way streets with gates installed so
that all approaching travel lanes are completely blocked. This option may not be feasible or
acceptable to local jurisdictions at all locations.
Road closure. This measure consists of closing the road to through travel at the at-grade
crossing. This option may not be feasible or acceptable to local jurisdictions at all locations.
In addition to these pre-approved SSMs, FRA also identifies a range of other measures that may
be used to establish a quiet zone. These measures could be modified SSMs or non-engineering
measures that might involve law enforcement or public awareness programs. Such alternative
safety measures must be approved by FRA based on the prerequisite that they provide an
equivalent level of safety as the sounding of train horns.
Wayside horns can also be utilized as part of a quiet zone. While not avoiding the sounding of a
horn, wayside horns affect a smaller area than train-mounted horn. Wayside horns can be used
when the other measures above are not adequate to avoid the use of a horn.
The lead agency for a quiet zone designation is the local public authority which is the only
authority that can implement a quiet zone. SJRRC or the other rail operators cannot, on their
own, designate the quiet zone. However, only with the implementation of the quiet zone can
SJRRC, other tenant railroads, and freight operators be relieved of the requirement to sound
their horns when crossing at-grade crossings. Thus, if a local city does not accept the quiet zone,
then even if the required SSMs are present, SJRRC, freight and other rail operators would
continue to use train horns as a safety device in compliance with FRA requirements.
Grade Separations
Grade separations are not being considered for the mitigation of severe noise impacts due to the
relatively higher cost and the existence of other feasible mitigation measures.
Noise Barriers
For noise barriers to be effective, these barriers are constructed to intercept the line of sight
between a noise source and receptors. Noise barriers can be constructed from concrete, brick or
masonry blocks, metals, wood, rubber, or transparent panels. The height of each noise barrier
would depend on engineering design on the conditions at each specific location, but typical
noise barriers are 8 to 10 feet in height.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-53
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Recommended Noise Reduction Methods
The following are recommendations for methods to reduce severe noise impacts along the
ACEforward alignment, the Niles Subdivision between Niles Junction and Industrial Parkway in
Oakland (if Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, or CNS-2b is advanced), the Niles Subdivision
between Industrial Parkway and Elmhurst Junction in Oakland (if Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1c,
CNS-2a, or CNS-2b is advanced), and the Oakland Subdivision between Niles Junction and
Industrial Parkway (if Alternative CNS-1c is advanced). As noted above, these
recommendations are subject to funding limitations and the actual improvements will be
determined in consultation with local cities and in consideration of public input received. Detail
on the agreed upon improvements will be provided in the final EIR.
Centerville/Niles/Sunol, east of Niles Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-
2a, and CNS-2b)
Second Street to Carver Lane (Sunol): Creating a quiet zone through Sunol would
mitigate all impacts in this section.
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, part of
CNS-1c [north of Industrial Parkway], CNS-2a, and CNS-2b)
Niles Junction to Nursery Avenue (Niles): A combination of noise barriers and quiet
zones would be able to mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Nursery Avenue to Silver Street (Niles): A combination of noise barriers and quiet zones
would be able to mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Silver Street to Decoto Road (Union City): Noise barriers and a quiet zone would be able
to mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Decoto Road to Kathy Court (Union City): A combination of noise barriers, quiet zones,
and sound insulation would be able to mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway (Hayward): Noise barriers would mitigate the severe
impacts in this section.
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road (Hayward): A combination of noise barriers, quiet
zones, and sound insulation would be able to mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street (Hayward): A combination of noise barriers, quiet
zones and sound insulation would be able to mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Jackson Street to A Street (Hayward): A combination of noise barriers and sound
insulation would mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
A Street to Blossom Way (San Lorenzo): A combination of noise barriers, quiet zones,
and sound insulation would mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande (San Lorenzo): A combination of noise barriers, quiet
zones, and sound insulation would mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard (San Lorenzo): A combination of noise barriers,
quiet zones, and sound insulation would mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue (San Leandro): A combination of noise barriers,
quiet zones, and sound insulation would mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-54
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street (San Leandro): A combination of quiet zones and sound
insulation would mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Davis Street to Moorpark Street (San Leandro): A combination of quiet zones, noise
barriers, and sound insulation would mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Moorpark Street to Elmhurst Junction (Oakland): Quiet zones would mitigate the severe
impacts in this section.
Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway (Alternative CNS-1c)
Niles Junction to Barcelona Drive (Fremont): Noise barriers would mitigate the severe
impacts in this section.
Barcelona Drive to Silver Street (Fremont): Noise barriers would mitigate the severe
impacts in this section.
Silver Street to Decoto Road (Union City): Noise barriers would mitigate the severe
impacts in this section.
Decoto Road to Kathy Court (Union City): A combination of quiet zones and sound
insulation would mitigate the severe impacts in this section.
Tracy to Lathrop (Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, and TL-4b)
Banta: Create quiet zones at the grade crossings through Banta will mitigate all severe
noise impacts for this alternative.
Impact NOI-3 Construction of near-term improvements could expose sensitive receptors to substantial increases in ground-borne vibration levels.
Level of Impact Potentially significant
Mitigation Measures NOI-3.1: Implement a construction vibration control plan
Level of Impact after Mitigation
Less than significant
Impact Characterization
Construction activities can be expected to generate vibration levels at 25 feet as high as 94 VdB from
compactors during site work, 87 VdB from bulldozers during rail work, and 104 VdB from impact
pile drivers during structures work. Except for pile drivers, it is unlikely that such equipment will be
used close enough to sensitive structures to have any damage effects, For pile driving, it is
anticipated that the potential for damage effects will be limited to structures located at distances in
the range of 30–75 feet from the operations, depending on the building category.
In terms of vibration annoyance effects or interference with the use of sensitive equipment, the
potential extent of vibration impact from pile driving is expected to be even greater than for damage
effects. Based on FTA methodology, Table 4.12-10provides the approximate distances within which
receivers could experience construction-related vibration annoyance effects. The results of the
analysis indicate that vibration impacts would extend to distances of 230–630 feet from pile driving
operations, depending on vibration sensitivity.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-55
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-10. Approximate Screening Distances for Vibration Annoyance Effects from Pile Driving
Land Use Categorya Vibration Criterion Level (VdB)
Approximate Vibration Impact Distance (feet)
Category 1 (Sensitive Buildings) 65 630
Category 2 (Residential Buildings) 72 290
Category 3 (Institutional Buildings) 75 230 a See Table 4.12-6 for land use category descriptions.
VdB = vibration velocity
Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures
Significance Prior to Mitigation
Construction activities would be considered to have a significant impact if they would generate
vibration in excess of FTA thresholds. It is expected that ground-borne vibration from construction
activities would cause only intermittent localized disturbance along the rail corridor. Although
processes such as earth moving with bulldozers or the use of vibratory compaction rollers can
create annoying vibration, there should be only isolated cases where it is necessary to use this type
of equipment in close proximity to residential buildings. It is possible that construction activities
involving pile drivers occurring at the edge of or slightly outside of the current ROW could result in
vibration damage, and damage from construction vibration would be a potentially significant
impact.
Significance with Application of Mitigation
With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-3.1, vibration impacts would be avoided or
minimized; if building damage occurs due to construction then repairs would be made or
compensation provided. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-3.1, impacts resulting
from construction vibration structural damage would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure would apply to all near-term improvements for construction
vibration impacts.
Mitigation Measure NOI-3.1: Implement construction vibration control plan
A vibration control plan that incorporates, at a minimum, the following best practices into the
construction scope of work and specifications to reduce the impact of temporary construction-
related vibration on nearby noise-sensitive receptors will be prepared and implemented.
Avoid the use of impact pile drivers where possible near vibration-sensitive areas or use
alternative construction methods (e.g., drilled piles) where geological conditions permit.
Avoid vibratory compacting/rolling in close proximity to structures.
Require vibration monitoring during vibration-intensive activities.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-56
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Impact NOI-4 Relocated passenger or freight service could result in vibration impacts
Level of Impact Potentially significant (Alternative CNS-2a)
Less than significant (all other near-term alternatives)
Mitigation Measures NOI-4.1: Conduct a detailed design-level vibration analysis and implement vibration reduction measures for identified receptors
Level of Impact after Mitigation
Less than significant
Impact Characterization
The vibration impact assessment for the near-term improvements evaluated four major
components.
1. Near-term improvements. Individual near-term improvements were assessed for their potential
for impact in the vicinity of the specific improvements. There are no vibration impacts
associated with individual near-term improvements.
2. Increased passenger service. For locations with existing train traffic, including freight,
commuter rail and/or Amtrak service, FTA vibration criteria for locations with existing
vibration was used. Because of the high volume of train traffic throughout the corridor and the
very small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would
not result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at
locations with existing train operations.
3. Near-term improvements plus increased passenger service. In Tracy, the near-term
improvements would relocate the existing passenger service and the increased passenger
service. These relocations were assessed for vibration impacts.
4. Relocated freight service. In Niles Canyon and the Niles Subdivision, some of the near-term
improvements would relocate the freight rail operations onto the Niles Canyon Railroad and/or
would allow for increased freight operations on the Niles Subdivision north of Niles Junction to
and from Oakland.4 For the Niles Subdivision with existing train traffic, including freight,
commuter rail and Amtrak service, FTA vibration criteria for locations with existing vibration
was used. Because of the high volume of train traffic throughout the corridor and the very small
increase in the number of trains, and because the increased freight service would not result in
vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations with
existing train operations. In the Niles canyon, the freight relocations were assessed for vibration
impacts.
Table 4.12-11 summarizes the results of the vibration impact assessment for near-term
improvements. The only vibration impacts are in the Centerville/Niles/Sunol segment, where the
relocated freight trains are located close to sensitive receptors.
4 Alternatives that include a connection to the Niles Subdivision at Niles Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a,
and CNS-2b) would result in increased freight north of Niles Junction on the Niles Subdivision and a corresponding decrease in freight activity on the Niles Subdivision through Centerville and the Coast Subdivision between Newark and Oakland.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-57
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Impact Differences by Segment
San Jose to Fremont
As noted above, because of the high volume of train traffic throughout the corridor and the very
small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not
result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations
with existing train operations.
Centerville/Niles/Sunol
Along the existing UPRR corridor where ACE operates at present, because of the very small increase
in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not result in vibration
levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations with existing train
operations.
As presented in Table 4.12-46, the only vibration impacts are for Alternative CNS-2a, where the
relocated freight trains are located very close to sensitive receptors. Figure 4.12-23 shows the
locations of vibration impacts relative to this alternative graphically. Vibration impacts are
projected at two single-family residences along the southbound side of Alternative CNS-2a between
Second Street and Carver Lane in Sunol. The vibration impacts at this location are because of the
proximity of the tracks to the residences. No impacts on institutional receptors would occur along
this segment with Alternative CNS-2a as presented in Table 4.12-47.
As presented in Tables 4.12-48 and 4.12-49, no vibration impacts are identified for Alternative
CNS-2b.
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction
As described, several near-term alternatives (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b)
would allow for the shift of freight operations from the Coast Subdivision (existing) onto the Niles
Subdivision. As noted above, because of the existing train traffic throughout the corridor and the
limited increase in the number of trains, and because the increased freight service would not result
in vibration levels greater than existing train levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations
with existing train operations along the Niles Subdivision.
Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway/Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction
As described, one near-term alternative (Alternative CNS-1c) would allow for the shift of freight
operations from the Coast Subdivision (existing) onto the Oakland Subdivision from Niles Junction
to Industrial Parkway and then onto the Niles Subdivision north of Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst
Junction. As noted above, because of the existing train traffic (including frequent BART service)
throughout the corridor and the limited increase in the number of trains, and because the increased
freight service would not result in vibration levels greater than existing train levels, no vibration
impacts are projected at locations with existing train operations along the Oakland Subdivision
south of Industrial. North of Industrial, the freight would be routed along the Niles Subdivision with
Alternative CNS-1c and impacts would be as disclosed for the Niles Subdivision above.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-58
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Tri-Valley
As noted above, because of the very small increase in the number of trains, and because the
increased passenger service would not result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no
vibration impacts are projected at locations with existing train operations.
Altamont
As noted above, because of the very small increase in the number of trains, and because the
increased passenger service would not result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no
vibration impacts are projected at locations with existing train operations.
Tracy to Lathrop
Alignment Options
For Alternative TL-1, because of the very small increase in the number of trains, and because the
increased passenger service would not result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no
vibration impacts are projected at locations with existing train operations.
As presented in Table 4.12-50 through Table 4.12-59, no vibration impacts are identified for
Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, or TL-4b.
Station Options
There are no vibration impacts related to the station options because the station options would not
change the vibration levels associated with trains (e.g., changes in vibration levels are a result of
alignments and service level, not stations).
Lathrop to Stockton
As noted above, because of the volume of train traffic throughout the corridor and the very small
increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not result in
vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations with
existing train operations.
Manteca to Modesto
As noted above, because of the volume of train traffic throughout the corridor and the very small
increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not result in
vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations with
existing train operations.
Impact Quantification
Table 4.12-11 provides an overview of the vibration impacts associated with the near-term
improvements and increased passenger service. Table 4.12-46 through Table 4.12-59 provide
information about alternatives for which vibration modelling was conducted concerning vibration
levels, impact thresholds, and numbers of impacts.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-59
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-11. Operational Vibration Impacts in the Vicinity of Near-Term Improvements
Near-Term Improvement Alternatives Vibration Impacts
San Jose to Fremont 0
SJF-1 0
Centerville/Niles/Sunol
CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c 0
CNS-2a 2
CNS-2b 0
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction
CNS-1a, CNS-2a, CNS-2b 0
Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway/Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction
CNS-1c 0
Tri-Valley 0
TV-1 0
TV-2 0
Altamont 0
A-1 0
Tracy to Lathrop—Alignment Options 0
TL-1 0
TL-2a 0
TL-2b 0
TL-3 0
TL-4a 0
TL-4b 0
Tracy to Lathrop—Station Options 0
West Tracy Station A-1 0
West Tracy Station A-2 0
West Tracy Station A-3 0
West Tracy Station A-4 0
West Tracy Station A-5 0
West Tracy Station B-1 0
West Tracy Station B-2 0
Existing Tracy Station 0
Downtown Tracy Station 0
Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station 0
Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station 0
River Islands Station 0
Lathrop to Stockton 0
LS-1 0
Manteca to Modesto 0
MMO-1a 0
MMO-1b 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-60
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures
Significance Prior to Mitigation
Based on CEQA guidelines, there are two locations with vibration impacts from Alternative CNS-2a
that are considered significant. These impacts are because of the proximity of the new tracks to
sensitive receptors. All other near-term improvements would not result in vibration impacts.
Significance with Application of Mitigation
For Alternative CNS-2a, the vibration impacts identified marginally exceed the threshold for
impact. Because of this, a detailed vibration analysis should be conducted during project design to
determine the magnitude of the vibration impacts. In many cases, the number and magnitude of
impacts with a detailed vibration analysis are less than with a general vibration assessment because
of the conservative nature of the general assessment. If vibration impacts are still identified with the
detailed vibration analysis, the results will allow for specification of mitigation measures, such as
ballast mats or resilient tie pads, which would eliminate the impacts.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure would apply to Alternative CNS-2a for potential vibration
impacts.
Mitigation Measure NOI-4.1: Conduct a detailed design-level vibration analysis and
implement vibration reduction measures for identified receptors
If Alternative CNS-2a is advanced, the SJRRC will conduct a detailed design-level vibration
analysis to determine the level of vibration impact for the two receptors in Sunol to determine if
they will be exposed to vibration levels above FTA criteria. If the detailed analysis shows that
the receptors will be exposed to levels above FTA criteria, then the SJRRC will implement
vibration reduction measures in areas in close proximity to the two receptors including ballast
mats, resilient tie pads, or other measure to reduce levels to below FTA criteria. This measure
will be implemented prior to introducing any new service on the NCRY.
4.12.4.4 Longer-Term Improvements Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact NOI-5 Construction of longer-term improvements could expose sensitive receptors to substantial increases in noise levels.
Level of Impact Potentially significant
Mitigation Measures NOI-1.1: Implement a construction noise control plan
Level of Impact after Mitigation
Significant and unavoidable
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-61
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Impact Characterization
Construction for the various longer-term improvements would include three basic activities: (1) site
work, (2) rail work and (3) structures work. Based on construction of similar near-term
improvements, site work is expected to occur over periods of 1–21 months, rail work is expected to
occur over periods of 1–28 months, and structures work is expected to occur over periods of 6–26
months. Generally, construction of a similar near-term improvement could last 89 to 42 months.
Because most longer-term improvements are located on an active freight and passenger rail line,
construction work could occur during the nighttime. The local noise ordinances for the cities and
counties along the ACEforward corridor generally limit construction noise to particular time periods
during weekday, weekend, and holiday daytime hours. Nighttime construction work is generally
prohibited, but some jurisdictions allow for a variance.
Table 4.12-8 summarizes the estimated construction noise levels and residential noise impact
screening distances for each of the planned construction activities. The noise estimates are based on
scenarios for the construction activities, using FTA methodology described in Section 4.12.4.1, and
FTA criteria described in Section 4.12.4.2. However, to be conservative, the screening distance
estimates did not assume any topography or ground effects. The results of the analysis indicate that
noise impacts would be limited to residences within 135 to 270 feet from the construction site,
depending on the activity. The potential for noise impact would be greatest during structures work
at locations where pile driving is required for bridge construction.
Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures
Significance Prior to Mitigation
Construction activities would be considered to have a significant impact if they would generate
noise exposure in excess of the FTA thresholds. As shown in Table 4.12-8, the operation of certain
construction equipment and construction activities could generate noise exposure in excess of FTA
thresholds. Nighttime construction near residential uses would have larger impacts than daytime
construction would have and would result in a potentially significant impact.
Significance with Application of Mitigation
Although the measures specified in Mitigation Measure NOI-1.1 would generally reduce the
construction noise levels, the measures would not necessarily guarantee that sensitive residential
receptors would not be exposed to noise levels exceeding the 80 dBA limit during the day or the 70
dBA limit at night. In specific, given the active railroad, it is probable that construction near some
residential areas will have to be conducted at night to avoid disruption of freight and passenger rail
operations and to complete construction on schedule. Furthermore, a temporary sound wall may be
effective in certain locations, but in many cases the nature of the construction work makes use of
such sound walls infeasible.
Construction-related noise would be short-term and would cease after the construction is
completed. Still, even with mitigation, the impact of temporary construction-related noise on nearby
noise sensitive receptors would remain a significant and unavoidable impact, in particular where
heavy construction would occur immediately adjacent to residences and where construction would
occur at night near residences.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-62
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure would apply to all longer-term improvements for construction
noise impacts.
Mitigation Measure NOI-1.1: Implement a construction noise control plan
Refer to measure description under Impact NOI-1.
Impact NOI-6 Increased passenger service on existing routes, new passenger service on new routes, and relocated freight service could result in severe noise impacts
Level of Impact Potentially significant (all other longer-term improvements)
Less than significant (Alternatives P-SJF-1, P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, P-SJF-2d, P-SJF-3, P-TV-3, P-TV-4, P-TV-5, P-A-1, P-A-2, P-A-3, P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, P-TL-B2, P-TL-ET, P-TL-DT, P-TL-ELM, P-TL-RI, P-TL-RLM, and P-LS-1)
Mitigation Measures NOI-2.1: Implement a phased program to reduce train noise along the ACE corridor as necessary to address noise increases over Federal Transit Administration’s severe impact thresholds
Level of Impact after Mitigation
Significant and unavoidable (all longer-term improvements except Alternatives P-SJF-1, P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, P-SJF-2d, P-SJF-3, P-TV-3, P-TV-4, P-TV-5, P-A-1, P-A-2, P-A-3, P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, P-TL-B2, P-TL-ET, P-TL-DT, P-TL-ELM, P-TL-RI, P-TL-RLM, and P-LS-1)
Impact Characterization
The noise impact assessment for the longer-term improvements evaluated four major components.
1. Longer-term improvements. Individual longer-term improvements were assessed for their
potential for impact in the vicinity of the specific improvements. In most cases, individual
longer-term improvements by themselves do not result in noise impacts.
2. Increased passenger service along existing rail routes. The increase in passenger service
throughout existing rail corridors made possible by the longer-term improvements was
assessed for impact. Longer-term improvements would result in an increase in passenger
service greater than that for near-term improvements; therefore, there are more noise impacts.
3. Longer-term improvements resulting in relocations plus increased passenger service. In Tracy,
the combination of the near-term and longer-term improvements would relocate the existing
passenger service and increase passenger service. These relocations were assessed as new
projects for noise impacts. For longer-term improvements, the increase in passenger service is
much greater than that for near-term improvements; therefore, there are many more noise
impacts.
4. In the Tri-Valley area, longer-term improvements could result in new ACE, BART, or diesel
multiple unit (DMU) service in locations where no rail service currently exists and/or could
result in additional bus connections between ACE and BART.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-63
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-12 summarizes the results of the noise impact assessment for longer-term
improvements. The impacts related to either longer-term improvements (Item #1 above) or near-
term and longer-term improvements plus increased passenger service (Item #3 above) are listed in
the rows for specific near-term improvements. The overall impacts related to increased passenger
service (Item #2 above) are listed in the top-level heading for each segment. Item #4 is addressed
separately. Because of the complexity of the Tri-Valley alternatives and their conceptual level of
development at this time, the analysis is qualitative and preliminary and subsequent noise analysis
will need to be done in the subsequent project environmental review.
For locations with only increased passenger service, the FTA increase in noise level criteria were
used to assess impact. At other locations, FTA project noise level criteria were used to assess the
potential for impact. For longer-term improvements, such as the BART connections, where no
detailed operational information is available, a screening assessment, as described in Chapter 4 of
the FTA guidance manual, was conducted. A screening assessment is a conservative approach used
to assess the potential for impacts from projects at a high level, when detailed information is not
available. If no sensitive receivers are located within the screening distances, no impact would be
anticipated.
All of the severe impacts and the majority of the moderate impacts for longer-term improvements
are at locations within 0.25 mile of grade crossings where train horns would be sounded. Most of
these impacts are in the areas as described in Item #3 above, where there are new near-term and
longer-term improvements that relocate the existing service in addition to the increased passenger
service. Table 4.12-60 through 4.12-87 lists the locations of the impacts and Figure 4.12-24 through
4.12-37 show the locations of noise impacts graphically.
Impact Differences by Segment
Longer-term impact tables referenced in this discussion are provided in 4.12.5.2, Longer-term
Impact Tables.
San Jose to Fremont
In this segment, there are two sources of noise impact: (1) operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE
passenger trains per day along the existing ACE route (6 additional trains over existing conditions
and 4 more trains than the near-term improvements); and (2) operation of a Tamien layover facility
(Alternative P-SJF-1).
Alternative P-SJF-1 would include additional Tamien layover facility improvements beyond those
included in the near-term improvements. These improvements would occur between the existing
UPRR corridor and SR 87. Based on a screening assessment, there are sensitive receptors near the
facility. However, without specific operational details regarding the facility, a detailed assessment
cannot be conducted. If this improvement is carried forward, a detailed noise assessment will need
to be conducted when operational details are available.
The different alternatives for crossing the Alviso Baylands would not have notable differences in
noise impacts on sensitive receptors as all alternatives would result in the same level of rail traffic in
Alviso and Santa Clara.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-64
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Centerville to Union City
In this segment, there would be the potential noise impacts are related to the extension of service
from Centerville to Union City, which would be a new service on a corridor without existing
passenger rail service.
Based on a screening assessment, there is potential for noise impacts for all alternatives in this
segment. However, without specific operational details regarding the service, a detailed assessment
cannot be conducted. If these improvements are carried forward, a detailed noise assessment will
need to be conducted when operational details are available.
Centerville/Niles/Sunol
There would be some noise impacts in the common portions of this segment because of the
increased passenger service. As presented in Table 4.12-12, Alternative CNS-1 would have the
significantly more noise impacts, with Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b having roughly similar
noise impacts.
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction
The longer-term improvements would not change the potential for freight to use the Niles
Subdivision. However, several of the near-term alternatives would allow for freight to use the Niles
Subdivision north of Niles Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a and CNS-2b) and in the longer-
term there likely would be greater freight operations than in the near-term.
There would be noise impacts for the Niles Subdivision because of the increase in freight traffic
along the existing corridor, as presented in Table 4.12-62. Institutional noise impacts would occur as
well, as presented in Table 4.12-63.
Tri-Valley
In this segment, there are three potential sources of noise impact from longer-term improvements in
this segment: (1) operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger trains per day along the existing
ACE route (6 additional trains over existing conditions and 4 more trains than the near-term
improvements) (all alternatives); (2) operation of new BART, ACE, or DMU/EMU service between
Greenville Road Station and either Isabel Avenue or Dublin/Pleasanton Stations (Alternatives P-
TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, and P-BART-1) or operation of new BART
service to downtown Livermore and/or Vasco (Alternatives P-BART-2 and P-BART-3);and (3)
operation of additional bus service to connect ACE to BART (Alternatives P-TV-1d and P-TV-2d).
A quantitative analysis was done of the impact of operation of up to 10 daily roundtrip ACE trains
along the existing ACE route. There would be significant noise impacts for the common portions of
the Tri-Valley segment as presented in Table 4.12-12 and detailed in Tables 4.12-74 and 4.12-75.
The majority of the impacts are at locations near grade crossings where the additional ACE
operations would increase noise levels because of train horns.
Because of the complexity of the potential ACE to BART and BART to ACE alternatives and the
preliminary state of design, a qualitative analysis was completed. Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b,
P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-BART-2, and P-BART-3 have the potential for
noise impacts based on a screening assessment. The highest potential for impacts would at locations
where the operations or project elements are not in the I-580 median. Within the median, the
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-65
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
distance from the alignment to sensitive receivers and the high existing noise levels would make
impacts unlikely. At locations outside the median of I-580, there would be the potential for noise
impacts at locations where the tracks are at grade or elevated. For locations in tunnels such as for
Alternatives P-BART-2 and P-BART-3 in the segment from I-580 to Downtown Livermore, there
would be no potential for noise impacts. Where the alignments are the same between alternatives
(e.g. the alignment down the I-580 median and on approach to Greenville), a qualitative comparison
can be made between the alternatives based on reference noise levels (at 50 feet and 50 mph) for
the different technologies as follows (San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 2009; Peninsula
Corridor Joint Powers Board 2015):
conventional diesel locomotive—92 dBA (Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b)
DMU—85 dBA [Alternative P-TV-1c (DMU variant) and P-TV-2c (DMU variant)]
EMU—80 dBA [Alternative P-TV-1c (EMU variant) and P-TV-2c (EMU variant)[
BART—80 dBA (Alternative P-BART-1, P-BART-2, and P-BART-3)
For individual passing trains, alternatives diesel locomotive units would be expected to have the
highest noise impact, followed by DMUs, EMUs, and BART. However, the amount of service also
affects the day-night noise levels and the DMU/EMU alternatives and BART alternatives have much
higher levels of service from Greenville along the I-580 corridor than the diesel locomotive
alternatives. Because these alternatives have not been sufficiently designed, a quantitative analysis
of noise impacts would need to be completed during project-level environmental clearance.
Alternatives P-TV-1d and P-TV-2d would be unlikely to have significant impacts, as these
alternatives would involve bus service, and not new trains. However, the operational details needed
to separate out impacts related to different longer-term improvement elements are not currently
available. A detailed noise analysis would need to be completed in the subsequent project
environmental process.
The Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection from Altamont Tunnel, Connection from
Long Tunnel, Facilities with Existing Alignment, and Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long
Tunnel would not have any impacts because there are no sensitive receptors located near the
project elements.
Altamont
In this segment, there would be two potential sources of noise impact from longer-term
improvements in this segment: (1) operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger trains per day
along the existing ACE route (6 additional trains over existing conditions and 4 trains more over
near-term conditions); and (2) train operation along revised routes with the Alternatives P-A-1, P-
A-2, and P-A-3.
There would be no noise impacts in this segment related to the longer-term improvements because
there are no sensitive receptors located near the improvements. However, there would be minimal
impact because of increased service.
Tracy to Lathrop
In this segment, there would be two potential sources of noise impact from longer-term
improvements in this segment: (1) operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger trains per day
along the existing ACE route (6 additional trains over existing conditions and 4 more trains over
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-66
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
near-term conditions) (near-term Alternative TL-1); and (2) operations of up to 10 roundtrip ACE
passenger trains along the existing ACE route and/or revised routes (as a result of near-term
Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, and TL-4b).
Alternatives TL-1, TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, and TL-4b would all result in noise impacts related
to the increased service in the longer-term. However, because of the new sections of track,
Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, and TL-4b would result in much greater numbers of noise
impacts because of the locations of new tracks near sensitive receptors that were not previously
exposed to train noise, as presented in Table 4.12-12 and detailed in Table 4.12-77 through Table
4.12-87.
There are no sensitive receptors in the vicinity of station options in the Tracy to Lathrop segment
(expansion of stations proposed as part of Alternatives P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-
TL-A5, P-TL-B1, P-TL-B2, P-TL-ET, P-TL-DT, P-TL-RI, P-TL-ELM, and P-TL-RLM) and thus no
noise impact would occur.
Lathrop to Stockton
In this segment, the only source of noise impact from longer-term improvements in this segment
would be operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger trains per day along the existing ACE route
(6 additional trains over existing conditions and 4 more trains over near-term conditions).
There would be a few noise impacts because of the increased service in the Lathrop to Stockton
segment as presented in Table 4.12-12 and detailed in Table 4.12-88.
Manteca to Modesto
In this segment, the only source of noise impact from longer-term improvements in this segment
would be operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger trains per day along the UPRR route (10
additional trains over existing conditions and 4 more trains over near-term conditions).
There would be some noise impacts for the Manteca to Modesto segment, primarily at the northern
end of the segment, as presented in Table 4.12-12 and detailed in Table 4.12-90.
Modesto to Merced
In this segment, the source of noise impact from longer-term improvements in this segment would
be operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger trains per day along the existing UPRR route (10
additional trains over existing conditions and 4 more trains over near-term conditions).
There would be some impacts for the common portions of the Modesto to Merced segment.
Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b would have the same impact on noise because the only
difference between these alternatives would be whether a station was placed at Livingston or at
Atwater.
Impact Quantification
Table 4.12-12 provides an overview of the noise impacts associated with the longer-term
improvements and increased passenger service and/or longer-term changes in freight routing due
to near-term improvements in the area between Niles Junction and Elmhurst Junction in Oakland.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-67
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-12. Operational Noise Impacts related to Longer-Term Improvements
Longer-Term Improvement Alternatives
Noise Impacts
Moderate Severe
San Jose to Fremonta 0 0
Centerville to Union Citya 0 0
P-UC-1a c
P-UC-1b c
P-UC-2a c
P-UC-2b c
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction
Near-term Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b 1,568 2,600
Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway/Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction
Near-term Alternative CNS-1c 1,377 2,303
Centerville/Niles/Sunola 17 0
Tri-Valleya 673 17
Tri-Valley – Alignment Options
P-TV-1a c
P-TV-1b c
P-TV-1c c
P-TV-1d c
P-TV-2a c
P-TV-2b c
P-TV-2c c
P-TV-2d c
P-BART-1 c
P-BART-2 c
P-BART-3 c
Tri-Valley—Standard Rail Connection Options
Connection from Existing Alignment d
Connection from Altamont Tunnel d
Connection from Long Tunnel d
Tri-Valley—DMU/EMU Operational Facility Options
Facilities with Existing Alignment d
Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel d
P-TV-3 d
P-TV-4 d
P-TV-5 d
Altamonta 1 0
P-A-1 d
P-A-2 d
P-A-3 d
Tracy to Lathrop
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-68
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Longer-Term Improvement Alternatives
Noise Impacts
Moderate Severe
Tracy to Lathrop Station Parking Improvements
P-TL-A1 d
P-TL-A2 d
P-TL-A3 d
P-TL-A4 d
P-TL-A5 d
P-TL-B1 d
P-TL-B2 d
P-TL-ET d
P-TL-DT d
P-TL-RI d
P-TL-ELM d
P-TL-RLM d
Tracy to Lathrop – Alignment Optionsa All impacts are included below
TL-1a 98 7
TL-2aa 320 33
TL-2ba 315 34
TL-3a 94 2
TL-4aa 314 34
TL-4ba 340 0
Lathrop to Stocktona,e 26 0
Lathrop – Stockton (Existing Route) No receivers within screening distance.
Manteca to Modestoa,f 152 19
Modesto to Mercedb,g 350b 50b a The impacts in these areas are related to the increase in passenger train traffic. b Because Union Pacific Railroad train volume data was not available to model existing noise levels, only an estimate
of the number of impacts in this segment was available. c There are sensitive receptors within the screening distance. However, for longer-term improvements, there is not
enough information available to make an impact determination. If this longer-term improvement element is carried forward, it would need to be assessed for impact.
d There are no sensitive receptors within the screening distance; therefore, no impacts are anticipated. e These impacts would apply to Scenario B-2. f These impacts would apply to Scenario B-1.
DMU = diesel multiple unit; EMU = electric multiple unit
Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures
Significance Prior to Mitigation
There are no sensitive receptors in the vicinity of Alternatives P-SJF-1, P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-
2c, P-SJF-2d, P-SJF-3, P-TV-3, P-TV-4, P-TV-5, P-A-1, P-A-2, P-A-3, P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-
TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, P-TL-B2, P-TL-ET, P-TL-DT, P-TL-ELM, P-TL-RI, P-TL-RLM, and P-LS-1
as thus noise-related impacts with these alternatives would be less than significant.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-69
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
There is insufficient information available to make an impact determination for the ACE to BART
connection alternatives in the Centerville to Union City and Tri-Valley segments and if any of these
longer-term alternatives are carried forward for a project-level analysis, a significance
determination would be made then. Impacts are considered potentially significant pending
completion of project-level evaluations.
Longer-term operations would result in certain moderate and severe noise impacts because of the
implementation of longer-term improvements, increased passenger service, the combination of
longer-term improvements and increased passenger service, and relocated freight service. For the
longer-term improvements and associated increase in passenger traffic, all the severe impacts are at
locations where train horns are sounded at grade crossings. Because longer-term operations would
cause an increase in ambient noise levels that exceed the FTA moderate or severe impact criteria,
this is considered a significant impact.
Significance with Application of Mitigation
As described in Impact NOI-2, there are a number of difference methods to reduce the noise impacts
of cumulative trains. These methods include wayside horns, building sound insulation, quiet zones,
noise barriers, and grade separations. While the recommended mitigation below, where feasible to
implement, would help to reduce noise, it will take time to implement it and it may not be feasible to
reduce all noise impacts on a less-than-significant level; thus, this impact is disclosed as significant
and unavoidable.
As to secondary environmental impacts of Mitigation Measure NOI-2.1, the environmental effects of
the different mitigation options would vary. Wayside horns and building sound insulation would
have limited to no secondary environmental impacts. Quiet zone improvements would require
additional construction, but the likely environmental impacts of such construction are limited given
the limited footprint of four-quadrant gates, active warning systems, medians, and street work. In
general, construction impacts for quiet zone improvements would be similar to the impacts
disclosed for improvements construction, would occur in previously developed and disturbed areas,
and would be temporary in nature. The applicable improvements mitigation described for
construction impacts in this EIR, where relevant, would also be applied to quiet zone improvements.
As to grade separations, the design and feasibility of a select number of future grade separations are
unknown and unstudied at this time; thus, the specific environmental impacts cannot be identified.
While they are statutorily exempt from CEQA review, grade separations may nevertheless have
substantial environmental impacts depending on their design and location, and their construction
can be highly disruptive. Therefore, as a conservative assumption, their secondary environmental
impacts are assumed to be significant and unavoidable.
SJRRC will work with other parties when implementing this measure to apply the relevant
construction mitigation measures identified in this EIR to these the implementation of future noise
mitigation improvements. SJRRC is only responsible for that portion of the cumulative increases
caused by the improvements. Other sources of cumulative increases including high-speed rail, other
passenger rail and freight services as well as non-rail sources near the ACEforward corridor would
also bear responsibility for cumulative noise increases.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-70
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure would apply to all longer-term improvements (except
Alternatives P-SJF-1, P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, P-SJF-2d, P-SJF-3, P-TV-3, P-TV-4, P-TV-5, P-
A-1, P-A-2, P-A-3, P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, P-TL-B2, P-TL-ET, P-
TL-DT, P-TL-ELM, P-TL-RI, P-TL-RLM, and P-LS-1) for noise impacts.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2.1: Implement a phased program to reduce train noise along the
ACE corridor as necessary to address noise increases over Federal Transit
Administration’s severe impact thresholds
Refer to measure description under Impact NOI-2.
Impact NOI-7 Construction of longer-term improvements could expose sensitive receptors to substantial increases in ground-borne vibration levels.
Level of Impact Potentially significant
Mitigation Measures NOI-3.1: Implement a construction vibration control plan
Level of Impact after Mitigation
Less than significant
Impact Characterization
Construction activities can be expected to generate vibration levels at 25 feet as high as 94 VdB from
compactors during site work, 87 VdB from bulldozers during rail work, and 104 VdB from impact
pile drivers during structures work. Except for pile drivers, it is unlikely that such equipment will be
used close enough to sensitive structures to have any damage effects. For pile driving, it is
anticipated that the potential for damage effects will be limited to structures located at distances in
the range of 30–75 feet from the operations, depending on the building category.
In terms of vibration annoyance effects or interference with the use of sensitive equipment, the
potential extent of vibration impact from pile driving is expected to be even greater than for damage
effects. Based on FTA methodology, Table 4.12-10 provides the approximate distances within which
receivers could experience construction-related vibration annoyance effects. The results of the
analysis indicate that vibration impacts would extend to distances of 230–630 feet from pile driving
operations, depending on vibration sensitivity.
Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures
Significance Prior to Mitigation
Construction activities would be considered to have a significant impact if they would generate
vibration in excess of FTA thresholds. It is expected that ground-borne vibration from construction
activities would cause only intermittent localized disturbance along the rail corridor. Although
processes such as earth moving with bulldozers or the use of vibratory compaction rollers can
create annoying vibration, there should be only isolated cases where it is necessary to use this type
of equipment in close proximity to residential buildings. It is possible that construction activities
involving pile drivers occurring at the edge of or slightly outside of the current ROW could result in
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-71
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
vibration damage, and damage from construction vibration would be a potentially significant
impact.
Significance with Application of Mitigation
With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-3.1, vibration impacts would be avoided or
minimized; if building damage occurs due to construction then repairs would be made or
compensation provided. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-3.1, impacts resulting
from construction vibration structural damage would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure would apply to all near-term improvements for construction
vibration impacts.
Mitigation Measure NOI-3.1: Implement construction vibration control plan
Refer to measure description under Impact NOI-3.
Impact NOI-8 Relocated passenger or freight service could result in severe vibration impacts
Level of Impact Potentially significant (Alternative CNS-2a)
Less than significant (all other longer-term alternatives)
Mitigation Measures NOI-4.1: Conduct a detailed design-level vibration analysis and implement vibration-reduction measures for identified receptors
Level of Impact after Mitigation
Less than significant
Impact Characterization
The vibration impact assessment for the longer-term improvements assessed four major
components.
1. Longer-term improvements. Individual longer-term improvements were assessed for their
potential for impact in the vicinity of the specific improvements. There are no vibration impacts
associated with individual longer-term improvements.
2. Increased passenger service. For locations with existing train traffic, including freight,
commuter rail and/or Amtrak service, FTA vibration criteria for locations with existing
vibration was used. Because of the high volume of train traffic throughout the corridor and the
very small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would
not result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at
locations with existing train operations.
3. Near-term and longer-term improvements plus increased passenger service. In Tracy, the near-
term and longer-term improvements would relocate the existing passenger service and the
increased passenger service. These relocations were assessed as new projects for vibration
impacts. The only vibration impacts for longer-term improvements are at these locations.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-72
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
4. In the Tri-Valley area, longer-term improvements could result in new ACE, BART, or DMU
service in locations where no rail service currently exists and/or could result in additional bus
connections between ACE and BART, which could result in additional vibration effects.
Table 4.12-13 summarizes the results of the vibration impact assessment for longer-term
improvements. The only vibration impacts are in the Centerville/Niles/Sunol segment, where the
new tracks are located close to sensitive receptors. Figure 4.12-37 show the locations of vibration
impacts in the Centerville/Niles/Sunol segment graphically.
Impact Differences by Segment
San Jose to Fremont
In this segment, there are two sources of vibration impact: (1) operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE
passenger trains per day along the existing ACE route (6 additional trains over existing conditions
and 4 more trains than the near-term improvements); and (2) operation of a Tamien layover facility
(Alternative P-SJF-1).
The different alternatives for crossing the Alviso Baylands (Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b,
P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d) would not have notable differences in vibration impacts on sensitive
receptors as all alternatives would result in the same level of rail traffic in Alviso and Santa Clara.
Because of the high volume of train traffic throughout the corridor and the small increase in the
number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not result in vibration levels
greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations with existing train
operations.
Alternative P-SJF-1 would include additional Tamien layover facility improvements beyond those
included in the near-term improvements. These improvements would occur between the existing
UPRR corridor and SR 87 and would not result in any change in vibration effects given existing
passenger and freight rail traffic in locations closer to sensitive receptors.
Centerville to Union City
In this segment, vibration impacts are related to the extension of service from Centerville to Union
City, which would be a new service on a corridor without existing passenger rail service.
There are no vibration impacts in this segment as there are no sensitive receptors within the
screening distance; thus, no impact would be expected.
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction
Because of the existing train traffic throughout the corridor and the limited increase in the number
of trains, and because the increased freight service would not result in vibration levels greater than
existing train levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations with existing train operations
along the Niles Subdivision.
Centerville/Niles/Sunol
In this segment, the only source of impact would be operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger
trains per day along the existing ACE route (6 additional trains over existing conditions and 4 more
trains than the near-term improvements). Because of the volume of train traffic throughout the
corridor and the small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-73
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
would not result in vibration levels greater than existing levels along existing routes, no vibration
impacts are projected at locations with existing train operations.
The different near-term alternatives for transiting through Niles Canyon would not result in any
changes to the longer-term impacts because those alternatives would all leave ACE passenger
service on the existing UPRR route (and additional trains would have the same vibration profile as
existing ACE trains. While several of the near-term alternatives would allow for freight to use the
NCRY (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), the longer-term alternatives would not change freight
operations; thus, vibration levels would not increase over that expected with near-term alternatives.
Thus, there would be no vibration impacts in this segment related to longer-term improvements.
Tri-Valley
In this segment, there are three sources of potential vibration impact from longer-term
improvements in this segment: (1) operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger trains per day
along the existing ACE route (6 additional trains over existing conditions and 4 more trains than the
near-term improvements) (all alternatives); (2) operation of new BART, ACE, or DMU service
between Greenville and either Isabel or Dublin (Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a,
P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, and P-BART-1) or operation of new BART service to downtown Livermore
and/or Vasco (Alternatives P-BART-2 and P-BART-3); and (3) operation of additional bus service
to connect ACE to BART (Alternatives P-TV-1d and P-TV-2d).
Because of the volume of train traffic throughout the corridor on the existing UPRR corridor and the
small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not
result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations
with existing train operations along the UPRR corridor.
Based on a screening assessment, there is potential for vibration impacts associated with
Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-BART-2, or
P-BART-3 at locations where the alternatives or project elements are not within the median of
I-580. The bus alternatives (Alternatives P-TV-1d and P-TV-2d) would not be expected to have
any vibration impacts at any locations, as rubber-tired vehicles do not generate vibration at a high
enough level to cause impacts. However, the operational details needed to separate out impacts
related to different longer-term improvements are not currently available. A detailed vibration
analysis will need to be conducted in the subsequent near-term improvement environmental
review.
There would be no impacts associated with Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection
from Altamont Tunnel, Connection from Long Tunnel, Facilities with Existing Alignment, and
Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel as there are no sensitive receptors located near
these project elements.
Altamont
In this segment, there would be two sources of potential vibration impact from longer-term
improvements in this segment: (1) operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger trains per day
along the existing ACE route (6 additional trains over existing conditions and 4 more trains over
near-term conditions); and (2) train operation along revised routes with Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2,
and P-A-3.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-74
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Because of the volume of train traffic throughout the corridor on the existing UPRR corridor and the
small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not
result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations
with existing train operations along the UPRR corridor. As to operations with revised routes, there
are no receptors close to the tracks that would have impacts; thus, there are no vibration impacts in
this segment.
Tracy to Lathrop
In this segment, there would be two sources of potential vibration impact from longer-term
improvements in this segment: (1) operation of up to 10 roundtrip ACE passenger trains per day
along the existing ACE route (6 additional trains over existing conditions and 4 more trains over
near-term conditions) (near-term Alternative TL-1); and (2) operations of up to 10 roundtrip ACE
passenger trains along the existing ACE route and/or revised routes (6 additional trains over
existing conditions and 4 more trains over near-term conditions) (near-term Alternatives TL-2a,
TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, and TL-4b).
Because of the volume of train traffic throughout the corridor on the existing UPRR corridor and the
small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not
result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations
with existing train operations along the UPRR corridor.
For near-term Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, and TL-4b, with the longer-term
improvements, there would be increased vibration because of the increased service along new
routes and because of the locations of new tracks near sensitive receptors that were not previously
exposed to train vibration.
There are no vibration impacts in this segment as there are no receptors close to the tracks that
would have impacts.
Lathrop to Stockton
Because of the volume of train traffic throughout the corridor on the existing UPRR corridor and the
small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not
result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations
with existing train operations along the UPRR corridor.
Manteca to Modesto
Because of the volume of train traffic throughout the corridor on the existing UPRR corridor and the
small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not
result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations
with existing train operations along the UPRR corridor.
Modesto to Merced
The longer-term improvements would result in operation of up to four roundtrip ACE passenger
trains per day along the existing UPRR route (four additional trains over existing conditions).
Because of the volume of train traffic throughout the corridor on the existing UPRR corridor and the
small increase in the number of trains, and because the increased passenger service would not
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-75
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
result in vibration levels greater than existing levels, no vibration impacts are projected at locations
with existing train operations along the UPRR corridor.
Impact Quantification
Table 4.12-13 provides an overview of the vibration impacts associated with the longer-term
improvements and increased passenger service.
Table 4.12-13. Vibration Impacts in the Vicinity of Longer-Term Improvements
Longer-Term Improvement Alternatives Vibration Impacts
San Jose to Fremont 0
P-SJF-1 b
San Jose – Fremont (Existing route) 0
Centerville to Union City 0
P-UC-1a b
P-UC-1b b
P-UC-2a b
P-UC-2b b
Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction 0
CNS-1a, CNS-2a, CNS-2b c
Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway/Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction
CNS-1c c
Centerville/Niles/Sunol 0
CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c 0
CNS-2a 2
CNS-2b 0
Tri-Valley
Tri-Valley—Alignment Options
P-TV-1a a
P-TV-1b a
P-TV-1c a
P-TV-1d a
P-TV-2a a
P-TV-2b a
P-TV-2c a
P-TV-2d a
P-BART-1 a
P-BART-2 a
P-BART-3 a
Tri-Valley—Standard Rail Connection Options
Connection from Existing Alignment b
Connection from Altamont Tunnel b
Connection from Long Tunnel b
Tri-Valley—DMU/EMU Operational Facility Options
Facilities with Existing Alignment b
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-76
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Longer-Term Improvement Alternatives Vibration Impacts
Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel b
P-TV-3 b
P-TV-4 b
P-TV-5 b
Altamont 0
P-A-1 b
P-A-2 b
P-A-3 b
Tracy to Lathrop
P-TL-A1 b
P-TL-A2 b
P-TL-A3 b
P-TL-A4 b
P-TL-A5 b
P-TL-B1 b
P-TL-B2 b
P-TL-ET b
P-TL-DT b
P-TL-RI b
P-TL-ELM b
P-TL-RLM b
Tracy to Lathrop – Alignment Options All impacts are included below
TL-1 0
TL-2a 0
TL-2b 0
TL-3 0
TL-4a 0
TL-4b 0
Lathrop to Stockton 0
P-LS-1 b
Manteca to Modesto 0
Modesto to Merced 0
P-MME-1a a
P-MME-1b a
a. There are sensitive receptors within the screening distance. However, for longer-term improvements, there is not enough information available to make an impact determination. If this element is carried forward into the project, it would need to be assessed for impact.
b. There are no sensitive receptors within the screening distance; therefore, no impacts are anticipated. c. There are no sensitive receptors within the screening distance, but freight vibration levels resulting from
additional freight movements would not be expected to result in greater vibration levels than existing trains along the segment.
DMU = diesel multiple unit; EMU = electric multiple unit.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-77
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures
Significance Prior to Mitigation
Based on CEQA guidelines, there are two locations with vibration impacts from Alternative CNS-2a
that are considered significant. These impacts are because of the proximity of the new tracks to
sensitive receptors. All other longer-term improvements would not result in vibration impacts.
Significance with Application of Mitigation
For Alternative CNS-2a, the vibration impacts identified marginally exceed the threshold for
impact. Because of this, a detailed vibration analysis should be conducted during project design to
determine the magnitude of the vibration impacts. In many cases, the number and magnitude of
impacts with a detailed vibration analysis are less than with a general vibration assessment because
of the conservative nature of the general assessment. If vibration impacts are still identified with the
detailed vibration analysis, the results will allow for specification of mitigation measures, such as
ballast mats or resilient tie pads, which would eliminate the impacts.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure would apply to Alternative CNS-2a for potential vibration
impacts.
Mitigation Measure NOI-4.1: Conduct a detailed design-level vibration analysis and
implement vibration reduction measures for identified receptors
Refer to measure description under Impact NOI-4.
4.12.5 Noise and Vibration Impact Tables
4.12.5.1 Near-Term Impact Tables
Table 4.12-14. San Jose to Fremont − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist. to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Diridon Station to West Taylor Street
NB 282 35 55 0 3 6 0 0
Diridon Station to West Taylor Street
SB 204 20 56 0 1 3 0 0
West Taylor Street to Nimitz Freeway
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
West Taylor Street to Nimitz Freeway
SB 298 60 55 0 2 4 0 0
Nimitz Freeway to De La Cruz Boulevard
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-78
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist. to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Nimitz Freeway to De La Cruz Boulevard
SB 135 60 55 0 1 3 0 0
Aldo Avenue to Montague Expressway
NB 135 60 55 0 0 2 0 0
Aldo Avenue to Montague Expressway
SB 189 60 55 0 2 6 0 0
Montague Expressway to Agnew Rd
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Montague Expressway to Agnew Road
SB 116 60 55 0 0 2 0 0
Agnew Road to Fairway Glen Drive
NB 129 60 55 0 0 2 0 0
Agnew Road to Fairway Glen Drive
SB 88 60 55 0 0 2 0 0
Fairway Glen Drive to Tasman Drive
NB 133 60 55 0 1 4 0 0
Fairway Glen Drive to Tasman Drive
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Southbay Freeway to Guadalupe River
NB 111 45 65 0 1 4 0 0
Southbay Freeway to Guadalupe River
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Guadalupe River to Alviso Marina County Park
NB 83 70 55 0 0 1 0 0
Guadalupe River to Alviso Marina County Park
SB 101 70 69 0 0 2 0 0
Diridon Station to West Taylor Street
NB 282 35 55 0 3 6 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-79
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-15. San Jose to Fremont − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Bellarmine College Preparatory
SB 349 60.0 56 0 6 11 0 0
Kathryn Hughes Elementary School
NB 476 60.0 55 0 7 12 0 0
Table 4.12-16. Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, CNS-2b) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Niles Junction to Nursery Avenue
E 80 30 54 73 55 61 47 50
Niles Junction to Nursery Avenue
W 65 30 54 80 55 61 28 36
Nursery Avenue to Silver Street
E 63 30 61 80 58 64 37 57
Nursery Avenue to Silver Street
W 59 30 61 81 58 64 39 46
Silver Street to Decoto Road
E 57 30 62 70 59 64 0 15
Silver Street to Decoto Road
W 76 30 62 68 59 64 164 148
Decoto Road to Kathy Court
E 39 30 58 86 57 62 108 70
Decoto Road to Kathy Court
W 75 30 58 82 57 62 118 109
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway
E 82 30 58 67 57 62 11 97
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway
W No noise-sensitive receptors
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road
E 84 30 65 78 61 66 44 18
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road
W 57 30 65 80 61 66 81 90
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street
E 58 30 58 77 57 62 66 89
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-80
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street
W 104 30 58 76 57 62 98 64
Jackson Street to A Street
E 108 30 58 66 57 62 0 139
Jackson Street to A Street
W 54 30 58 70 57 62 23 74
A Street to Blossom Way
E 61 30 58 81 57 62 22 29
A Street to Blossom Way
W 76 30 58 79 57 62 15 36
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande
E 55 30 60 79 58 63 10 68
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande
W 75 30 60 79 58 63 38 92
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard
E 61 30 60 83 58 63 59 68
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard
W 87 30 60 81 58 63 29 33
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue
E 57 30 57 81 56 62 22 98
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue
W 64 30 57 76 56 62 188 56
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street
E 455 30 62 59 59 64 4 0
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street
W 78 30 62 82 59 64 30 14
Davis Street to Moorpark Street
E 63 30 63 69 59 65 2 35
Davis Street to Moorpark Street
W 63 30 62 76 59 64 188 453
Moorpark Street to Elmhurst Junction
E 132 30 63 61 59 65 26 0
Moorpark Street to Elmhurst Junction
W 57 30 63 81 59 65 23 20
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-81
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-17. Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b) − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
California Nursery Historical Park
W 289 30 54 64 60 66 1 0
Niles Discovery Church
W 64 30 54 75 60 66 0 1
Wat Buddnahusorn Temple
W 106 30 54 60 60 66 1 0
Gurdwara Sahib Temple
E 116 30 54 59 60 66 0 0
Hill View Baptist Church
E 43 30 65 80 66 71 0 1
Hill View Baptist Church 2
E 163 30 65 64 66 71 0 0
Purple Lotus University
E 102 30 65 74 66 71 0 1
New Hope Baptist Church
E 207 30 65 63 66 71 0 0
Cesar Chavez Middle School
E 294 30 56 64 61 67 1 0
Community Outreach Church
W 228 30 66 55 66 72 0 0
Bay Hills Community Church
W 266 30 66 47 66 72 0 0
Iglesia Adventista del Septimo Dia
E 139 30 54 58 60 66 0 0
Colonial Acres Elementary School
E 254 30 67 65 67 72 0 0
San Lorenzo High School
E 239 30 67 65 67 72 0 0
Pioneer Memorial Cemetery of San Lorenzo
W 118 30 67 70 67 72 1 0
SUM Bible College and Theological Seminary
W 62 30 56 75 61 67 0 1
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-82
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-18. Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway, and Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway and Elmhurst Junction (Alternative CNS-1c) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Niles Junction to Barcelona Drive
E 86 30 57 67 56 62 0 6
Niles Junction to Barcelona Drive
W No noise-sensitive receptors
Barcelona Drive to Silver Street
E 56 30 57 70 56 62 11 53
Barcelona Drive to Silver Street
W No noise-sensitive receptors
Silver Street to Decoto Road
E 62 30 59 70 57 63 1 169
Silver Street to Decoto Road
W 149 30 63 63 59 65 196 0
Decoto Road to Kathy Court
E 817 30 65 62 61 66 8 0
Decoto Road to Kathy Court
W 82 30 63 81 59 65 145 133
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway
E No noise-sensitive receptors
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway
W No noise-sensitive receptors
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road
E 84 30 65 78 61 66 44 18
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road
W 57 30 65 80 61 66 81 90
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street
E 58 30 58 77 57 62 66 89
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street
W 104 30 58 76 57 62 98 64
Jackson Street to A Street
E 108 30 58 66 57 62 0 139
Jackson Street to A Street
W 54 30 58 70 57 62 23 74
A Street to Blossom Way
E 61 30 58 81 57 62 22 29
A Street to Blossom Way
W 76 30 58 79 57 62 15 36
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande
E 55 30 60 79 58 63 10 68
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-83
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande
W 75 30 60 79 58 63 38 92
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard
E 61 30 60 83 58 63 59 68
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard
W 87 30 60 81 58 63 29 33
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue
E 57 30 57 81 56 62 22 98
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue
W 64 30 57 76 56 62 188 56
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street
E 455 30 62 59 59 64 4 0
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street
W 78 30 62 82 59 64 30 14
Davis Street to Moorpark Street
E 63 30 63 69 59 65 2 35
Davis Street to Moorpark Street
W 63 30 62 76 59 64 188 453
Moorpark Street to Elmhurst Junction
E 132 30 63 61 59 65 26 0
Moorpark Street to Elmhurst Junction
W 57 30 63 81 59 65 23 20
Table 4.12-19. Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway and Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway to Elmhurst Junction (Alternative CNS-1c) − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Learn and Play Montessori School – Niles
E 484 30 55 39 60 66 0 0
Buddhist Temple W 237 30 55 54 60 66 0 0
James Logan High School
W 915 30 61 49 63 69 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-84
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Hill View Baptist Church
E 817 30 61 50 63 69 0 0
Purple Lotus University
E 874 30 61 46 63 69 0 0
New Hope Baptist Church
E 979 30 61 46 63 69 0 0
Cesar Chavez Middle School
E 294 30 56 64 61 67 1 0
Community Outreach Church
W 228 30 66 55 66 72 0 0
Bay Hills Community Church
W 266 30 66 47 66 72 0 0
Iglesia Adventista del Septimo Dia
E 139 30 54 58 60 66 0 0
Colonial Acres Elementary School
E 254 30 67 65 67 72 0 0
San Lorenzo High School
E 239 30 67 65 67 72 0 0
Pioneer Memorial Cemetery of San Lorenzo
W 118 30 67 70 67 72 1 0
SUM Bible College and Theological Seminary
W 62 30 56 75 61 67 0 1
Table 4.12-20. Centerville/Niles/Sunol − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Central Avenue to Newark Boulevard
NB 103 79 59 1 2 4 0 0
Central Avenue to Newark Boulevard
SB 150 79 59 0 2 4 0 0
Newark Boulevard to Nimitz Freeway
NB 113 79 59 0 2 4 0 0
Newark Boulevard to Nimitz Freeway
SB 139 79 59 0 2 4 0 0
Nimitz Freeway to Dusterberry Way
NB 70 79 59 1 2 4 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-85
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Nimitz Freeway to Dusterberry Way
SB 134 79 59 0 2 4 0 0
Dusterberry Way to Fremont Boulevard
NB 103 79 71 0 3 6 0 0
Dusterberry Way to Fremont Boulevard
SB 95 79 64 1 2 4 0 0
Fremont Boulevard to Paseo Padre Parkway
NB 82 45 59 0 2 4 0 0
Fremont Boulevard to Paseo Padre Parkway
SB 151 45 59 0 2 4 0 0
Paseo Padre Parkway to Shinn Street
NB 81 79 57 1 2 4 0 0
Paseo Padre Parkway to Shinn Street
SB 90 79 57 1 2 4 0 0
Shinn Street to Mission Boulevard
NB 73 79 57 1 2 4 0 0
Shinn Street to Mission Boulevard
SB 88 15 57 1 3 6 0 0
Niles Connection NB 100 15 57 1 3 6 0 0
Niles Connection SB 225 15 57 0 3 6 0 0
See Niles Canyon Tables
Carver Lane to Castlewood Drive
NB 457 45 68 0 3 6 0 0
Carver Lane to Castlewood Drive
SB 95 40 66 0 1 3 0 0
Table 4.12-21. Centerville/Niles/Sunol − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Newark Community Church
NB 481.0 15.0 71 0 3 6 0 0
Chinese Independent Baptist Church
NB 164.1 79.0 71 0 3 6 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-86
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Fremont Christian School
SB 359.7 79.0 66 0 3 7 0 0
Filipino-American United Church
NB 312.4 79.0 66 0 3 7 0 0
Live and Play Montessori School
NB 345.5 79.0 71 0 3 6 0 0
New Dawn Worship Center
SB 373.9 79.0 71 0 3 6 0 0
Templo Betania SB 310.6 79.0 71 0 3 6 0 0
Fremont Apostolic Church
NB 102.8 79.0 71 0 3 6 0 0
Church of Christ SB 352.2 79.0 71 0 3 6 0 0
Montessori School-Centerville
SB 146.4 79.0 71 0 3 6 0 0
Shinn Park and Arboretum
NB 445.3 79.0 67 0 3 7 0 0
Happy Valley Church
NB 457.3 45.0 68 0 3 6 0 0
Table 4.12-22. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
NB 71 40 57 63 56 64 39 0
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
SB 72 40 57 64 56 64 29 0
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
NB 139 40 57 59 56 64 0 0
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
SB 50 40 57 63 56 72 21 0
Niles Canyon NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Niles Canyon SB 282 40 57 48 56 70 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-87
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
2nd St to Carver Lane (Sunol)
NB 300 40 62 65 59 64 2 1
2nd St to Carver Lane (Sunol)
SB 60 40 57 59 56 62 2 0
Table 4.12-23. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c) − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Dawoodi Bohra Masjid
SB 115 40 67 58 67 72 0 0
Sunol Glen Elementary School
NB 480 40 67 43 67 72 0 0
Table 4.12-24. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2a) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
NB 71 40 57 60 56 62 19 0
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
SB 72 40 57 61 56 62 21 0
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
NB 139 40 57 56 56 62 0 0
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
SB 50 40 57 60 56 67 4 0
Niles Canyon NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Niles Canyon SB 282 40 57 51 56 67 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-88
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
NB 78 40 62 60 59 64 3 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
SB 138 40 57 59 56 62 2 0
Table 4.12-25. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2a) − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Dawoodi Bohra Masjid
SB 115 40 67 55 67 72 0 0
Sunol Glen Elementary School
NB 480 40 67 40 67 72 0 0
Table 4.12-26. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2b) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
NB 71 40 57 60 56 62 19 0
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
SB 72 40 57 61 56 62 21 0
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
NB 139 40 57 56 56 62 0 0
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
SB 50 40 57 60 56 67 4 0
Niles Canyon NB No noise-sensitive receptors
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-89
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Niles Canyon SB 282 40 57 51 56 67 0 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
NB 78 40 62 63 59 64 2 1
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
SB 138 40 57 59 56 62 2 0
Table 4.12-27. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2b) − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Dawoodi Bohra Masjid
SB 115 40 67 55 67 72 0 0
Sunol Glen Elementary School
NB 480 40 67 43 67 72 0 0
Table 4.12-28. Tri-Valley − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts* Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Castlewood Drive to I-680
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Castlewood Drive to I-680
SB 437 45 57 0 3 6 0 0
I-680 to Bernal Avenue
NB 127 60 57 0 3 6 0 0
I-680 to Bernal Avenue
SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bernal Avenue to Del Valle Parkway
NB 53 60 62 2 2 4 1 0
Bernal Avenue to Del Valle Parkway
SB 66 60 62 2 2 4 2 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-90
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts* Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Del Valle Parkway to Valley Avenue
NB 84 70 57 1 2 4 0 0
Del Valle Parkway to Valley Avenue
SB 90 70 57 1 2 4 0 0
Isabel Avenue to North Murrieta Boulevard
NB 271 70 57 1 3 6 0 0
Isabel Avenue to North Murrieta Boulevard
SB 270 70 57 1 3 6 0 0
North Murrieta Boulevard to North P Street
NB 113 70 57 2 3 6 0 0
North Murrieta Boulevard to North P Street
SB 103 70 57 3 3 6 1 0
North P Street to Junction Avenue
NB 174 70 62 2 2 4 0 0
North P Street to Junction Avenue
SB 74 70 57 4 2 4 19 0
Junction Avenue to North Mines Road
NB 85 60 57 3 2 4 7 0
Junction Avenue to North Mines Road
SB 100 60 57 2 2 4 0 0
North Mines Road to Joyce Street
NB 112 60 57 2 3 6 0 0
North Mines Road to Joyce Street
SB 166 60 57 0 3 6 0 0
Joyce Street to South Vasco Road
NB 257 60 57 1 3 6 0 0
Joyce Street to South Vasco Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
* The impacts in the Tri-Valley segment are related to the increase in passenger train traffic and not the near-term alternatives.
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-91
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-29. Tri-Valley − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts* Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Hearst Elementary School
NB 185.0 60.0 63 0 4 8 0 0
Pleasanton Middle School
NB 342.3 60.0 63 0 4 8 0 0
Amador Valley High School
SB 499.8 45.0 67 0 3 7 0 0
Iglesia Ni Cristo, Livermore
SB 99.6 60.0 67 0 3 7 0 0
*The impacts in the Tri-Valley segment are related to the increase in passenger train traffic and not the near-term alternatives.
Table 4.12-30. Altamont − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
I-580 to Carroll Road
NB 203 35 74 0 1 2 0 0
I-580 to Carroll Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Altamont NB 484 40 74 0 1 2 0 0
Altamont SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Table 4.12-31. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-1) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road
NB 428 60 46 3 7 13 0 0
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road
SB 166 70 46 7 7 13 1 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-92
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 199 70 57 1 2 4 0 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 116 70 57 3 2 4 17 0
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive
NB 136 70 62 2 2 4 2 0
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive
SB 134 70 57 2 2 4 1 0
South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road
NB 158 70 57 1 2 4 0 0
South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road
SB 82 70 57 3 2 4 6 0
Riva Trigoso Drive to SR 120
NB 220 79 59 1 2 5 0 0
Riva Trigoso Drive to SR 120
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 173 60 64 2 2 4 0 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 97 60 64 4 2 4 3 0
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 217 50 59 2 2 4 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-93
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-32. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2a) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
SB 372 60 46 50 52 59 0 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
NB 269 70 46 53 52 59 2 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
SB 339 70 46 51 52 59 0 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 57 52 56 62 0 0
South Lammers Rd to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 57 60 56 62 6 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 57 62 56 62 35 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 57 60 56 62 43 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 57 63 56 62 33 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 57 60 56 62 19 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 62 59 59 64 0 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 57 63 56 62 72 0
Banta NB 142 70 62 65 59 64 2 2
Banta SB 124 50 62 65 59 64 6 1
I-205 to Old River NB No noise-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 57 55 56 62 0 0
Old River to I-5 NB No noise sensitive receptors.
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 53 57 63 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-94
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 199 50 59 60 57 63 0 0
Table 4.12-33. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2a) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 67 52 67 72 0 0
Montessori School of Tracy
NB 309 50 67 51 67 72 0 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 67 44 67 72 0 0
Grace Christian Center
NB 193 50 63 44 64 70 0 0
Lathrop Church of Christ
SB 452 50 66 38 67 72 0 0
Table 4.12-34. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2b) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Lammers Connector
NB 357 70 46 51 52 59 0 0
South Lammers Connector
SB 141 60 46 57 52 59 1 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 57 52 56 62 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-95
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 57 60 56 62 6 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 57 62 56 62 35 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 57 60 56 62 43 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 57 63 56 62 33 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 57 60 56 62 19 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 62 59 59 64 0 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 57 63 56 62 72 0
Banta NB 142 70 62 65 59 64 2 2
Banta SB 124 50 62 65 59 64 6 1
I-205 to Old River NB No noise-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 57 55 56 62 0 0
Old River to I-5 NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 53 57 63 0 0
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 199 50 59 60 57 63 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-96
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-35. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2b) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 67 52 67 72 0 0
Montessori School of Tracy
NB 309 50 67 51 67 72 0 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 67 44 67 72 0 0
Grace Christian Center
NB 193 50 63 44 64 70 0 0
Lathrop Church of Christ
SB 452 50 66 38 67 72 0 0
Table 4.12-36. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-3) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road
NB 428 60 46 46 52 59 0 0
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road
SB 166 70 46 52 52 59 1 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 199 70 57 52 56 62 0 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 116 70 57 61 56 62 17 0
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive
NB 136 70 62 60 59 64 2 0
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive
SB 134 70 57 60 56 62 1 0
South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road
NB 158 70 57 55 56 62 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-97
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road
SB 82 70 57 63 56 62 6 0
Lyoth-Banta Connector
NB 125 70 62 66 59 64 2 1
Lyoth-Banta Connector
SB 456 50 64 55 60 66 0 0
I-205 to Old River NB No noise-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 57 55 56 62 0 0
Old River to I-5 NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 53 57 63 0 0
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 199 50 59 60 57 63 0 0
Table 4.12-37. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-3) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Lathrop Church of Christ
SB 452 50 66 38 67 72 0 0
Table 4.12-38. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4a) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-98
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
SB 372 60 46 50 52 59 0 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
NB 269 70 46 53 52 59 2 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
SB 339 70 46 51 52 59 0 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 57 52 56 62 0 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 57 60 56 62 6 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 57 62 56 62 35 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 57 60 56 62 43 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 57 63 56 62 33 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 57 60 56 62 19 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 62 59 59 64 0 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 57 63 56 62 72 0
Banta NB 142 70 62 65 59 64 2 2
Banta SB 124 50 62 65 59 64 6 1
I-205 to Old River NB No noise-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 57 55 56 62 0 0
Old River to I-5 NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 53 57 63 0 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 176 60 64 61 60 66 4 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 233 60 64 60 60 66 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-99
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-39. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4a) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 67 52 67 72 0 0
Montessori School of Tracy
NB 309 50 67 51 67 72 0 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 67 44 67 72 0 0
Grace Christian Center
NB 193 50 63 44 64 70 0 0
Table 4.12-40. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4b)- Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Lammers Connector
NB 357 70 46 51 52 59 0 0
South Lammers Connector
SB 141 60 46 57 52 59 1 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 57 52 56 62 0 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 57 60 56 62 6 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 57 62 56 62 35 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 57 60 56 62 43 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 57 63 56 62 33 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 57 60 56 62 19 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-100
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 62 59 59 64 0 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 57 63 56 62 72 0
Banta NB 142 70 62 65 59 64 2 2
Banta SB 124 50 62 65 59 64 6 1
I-205 to Old River NB No noise-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 57 55 56 62 0 0
Old River to I-5 NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 53 57 63 0 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 176 60 64 61 60 66 4 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 233 60 64 60 60 66 0 0
Table 4.12-41. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4b) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 67 52 67 72 0 0
Montessori School of Tracy
NB 309 50 67 51 67 72 0 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 67 44 67 72 0 0
Grace Christian Center
NB 193 50 63 44 64 70 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-101
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-42. Lathrop to Stockton − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
McKinley Avenue to Brookfield Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
McKinley Avenue to Brookfield Avenue
SB 237 50 59 1 2 4 0 0
Roth Road to East Wyman Road
NB 152 70 70 0 0 2 0 0
Roth Road to East Wyman Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
East Wyman Road to French Camp Road
NB 159 50 75 0 0 2 0 0
East Wyman Road to French Camp Road
SB 146 50 73 0 0 2 0 0
California Street to East Charter Way
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
California Street to East Charter Way
SB 87 50 59 2 2 5 0 0
East Charter Way to SR 4
NB 431 50 64 0 2 4 0 0
East Charter Way to SR 4
SB 449 50 59 0 2 5 0 0
SR 4 to Stockton Station
NB 437 50 66 0 1 3 0 0
SR 4 to Stockton Station
SB 166 50 66 1 1 3 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-102
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-43. Lathrop to Stockton − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Level Increase (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Haven Peace Inc. SB 185 50 73 0 2 5 0 0
Gurdwara Sahib Sikh Temple
SB 184 50 66 0 3 7 0 0
Table 4.12-44. Manteca to Modesto − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Airport Way to West Louise Avenue
NB 57 50 64 65 60 66 18 0
South Airport Way to West Louise Avenue
SB 190 50 64 57 60 66 0 0
West Louise Avenue to North Union Rd
NB 56 50 59 65 57 63 12 0
West Louise Avenue to North Union Rd
SB 126 50 59 60 57 63 0 0
North Union Road to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 44 50 73 66 65 72 10 0
North Union Road to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 95 50 73 64 65 72 0 0
West Yosemite Avenue to South Main Street
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
West Yosemite Avenue to South Main Street
SB 246 50 73 53 65 72 0 0
South Main Street to South Powers Avenue
NB 243 50 69 56 63 69 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-103
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Main Street to South Powers Avenue
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
South Powers Avenue to SR 120
NB 206 50 69 57 63 69 0 0
South Powers Avenue to SR 120
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
SR 120 to East Woodward Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
SR 120 to East Woodward Avenue
SB 188 50 62 51 59 64 0 0
Austin Road to South Olive Avenue
NB 239 70 72 50 65 71 0 0
Austin Road to South Olive Avenue
SB 351 70 76 53 65 74 0 0
South Olive Avenue to Jack Tone Road
NB 273 70 61 49 58 64 0 0
South Olive Avenue to Jack Tone Road
SB 302 70 61 49 58 64 0 0
Jack Tone Road to Fulton Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Jack Tone Road to Fulton Avenue
SB 481 50 59 37 62 68 0 0
Fulton Avenue to Main Street
NB 214 50 66 50 62 67 0 0
Fulton Avenue to Main Street
SB 181 50 66 51 62 67 0 0
Main Street to Stanislaus River
NB 294 50 66 48 62 67 0 0
Main Street to Stanislaus River
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Hammet Road to Toomes Road
NB 343 50 66 47 61 67 0 0
Hammet Road to Toomes Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Toomes Road to Kiernan Avenue
NB 361 50 64 39 65 70 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-104
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Toomes Road to Kiernan Avenue
SB 199 50 66 52 61 67 0 0
Kiernan Avenue to Bangs Avenue
NB 341 50 70 49 65 70 0 0
Kiernan Avenue to Bangs Avenue
SB 98 50 66 63 61 67 0 0
Bangs Avenue to Murphy Road
NB 139 50 66 59 61 67 0 0
Bangs Avenue to Murphy Road
SB 259 50 66 49 61 67 0 0
Murphy Road to Beckwith Road
NB 380 50 70 39 69 74 0 0
Murphy Road to Beckwith Road
SB 416 50 70 51 65 70 0 0
Beckwith Road to Conant Avenue
NB 340 50 65 47 60 66 0 0
Beckwith Road to Conant Avenue
SB 212 50 66 50 61 67 0 0
Conant Avenue to West Briggsmore Avenue
NB 413 50 65 45 60 66 0 0
Conant Avenue to West Briggsmore Avenue
SB 228 50 64 42 65 70 0 0
West Briggsmore Avenue to Princeton Avenue
NB 459 50 57 45 56 62 0 0
West Briggsmore Avenue to Princeton Avenue
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Princeton Avenue to Kansas Avenue
NB 139 50 62 57 59 64 0 0
Princeton Avenue to Kansas Avenue
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Kansas Avenue to Modesto Station
NB 312 50 70 52 65 70 0 0
Kansas Avenue to Modesto Station
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-105
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-45. Manteca to Modesto − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Charter High School
NB 139 50 63 46 64 70 0 0
Modesto Junior College
SB 228 50 64 42 65 70 0 0
Humphreys College
NB 380 50 70 39 69 74 0 0
San Joaquin Valley College
NB 361 50 64 39 65 70 0 0
Ripon Cemetery NB 283 50 71 41 70 75 0 0
Ripon Christian Schools
SB 412 50 71 38 70 75 0 0
Zion United Reformed Church
SB 481 50 59 37 62 68 0 0
Freewill Baptist Church
NB 163 50 82 53 70 80 0 0
Manteca Gospel Assembly
NB 198 50 82 49 70 80 0 0
Freedom Christian Center
NB 358 50 82 41 70 75 0 0
Table 4.12-46. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2a) − Residential Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
SB 344 40 64 80 0
Niles Canyon NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Niles Canyon SB 87 40 78 80 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
NB 300 40 74 80 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
SB 60 40 82 80 2
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-106
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-47. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2a) − Institutional Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Dawoodi Bohra Masjid SB 390 40 62 83 0
Golden Gate Primitive Baptist Church
SB 346 40 64 83 0
Table 4.12-48. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2b) − Residential Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
SB 344 40 64 80 0
Niles Canyon NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Niles Canyon SB 87 40 78 80 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
NB 300 40 74 80 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
SB 60 40 73 80 0
Table 4.12-49. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2b) − Institutional Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Dawoodi Bohra Masjid SB 390 40 62 83 0
Sunol Glen Elementary School
NB 480 40 60 83 0
Golden Gate Primitive Baptist Church
SB 346 40 64 83 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-107
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-50. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2a) − Residential Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
SB 372 60 66 80 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
NB 269 70 71 80 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
SB 339 70 77 80 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 67 80 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 73 80 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 70 80 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 70 80 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 75 80 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 70 80 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 69 80 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 75 80 0
Banta NB 142 70 79 80 0
Banta SB 124 50 77 80 0
I-205 to Old River NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 75 80 0
Old River to I-5 NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 72 80 0
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 199 50 72 80 0
Table 4.12-51. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2a) − Institutional Vibration Impact Assessment
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-108
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 68 83 0
Montessori School of Tracy NB 309 50 67 83 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 62 83 0
Grace Christian Center NB 193 50 72 83 0
Lathrop Church of Christ SB 452 50 63 83 0
Table 4.12-52. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2b)− Residential Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
South Lammers Connector NB 357 70 68 80 0
South Lammers Connector SB 141 60 77 80 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 67 80
0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 73 80
0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 70 80
0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 70 80
0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 75 80
0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 70 80
0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 69 80
0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 75 80
0
Banta NB 142 70 79 80 0
Banta SB 124 50 77 80 0
I-205 to Old River NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 75 80 0
Old River to I-5 NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 72 80 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-109
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 199 50 72 80 0
Table 4.12-53. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2b) − Institutional Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 68 83 0
Montessori School of Tracy NB 309 50 67 83 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 62 83 0
Grace Christian Center NB 193 50 72 83 0
Lathrop Church of Christ SB 452 50 63 83 0
Table 4.12-54. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-3) − Residential Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Lyoth-Banta Connector NB 125 70 68 80 0
Lyoth-Banta Connector SB 456 50 77 80 0
I-205 to Old River NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 75 80 0
Old River to I-5 NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 72 80 0
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 199 50 72 80 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-110
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-55. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-3) − Institutional Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Lathrop Church of Christ SB 452 50 63 83 0
Table 4.12-56. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4a) − Residential Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
SB 372 60 66 80 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
NB 269 70 71 80 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
SB 339 70 69 80 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 67 80 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 73 80 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 70 80 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 70 80 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 75 80 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 70 80 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 69 80 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 75 80 0
Banta NB 142 70 77 80 0
Banta SB 124 50 77 80 0
I-205 to Old River NB No vibration-sensitive receptors.
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 75 80 0
Old River to I-5 NB No vibration-sensitive receptors.
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 72 80 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-111
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 176 60 74 80 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 233 60 72 80 0
Table 4.12-57. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4a) − Institutional Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 68 83 0
Montessori School of Tracy NB 309 50 67 83 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church NB 478 50 62 83 0
Grace Christian Center NB 193 50 72 83 0
Lathrop Church of Christ SB 452 50 63 83 0
Table 4.12-58. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4b) − Residential Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
South Lammers Connector NB 357 70 68 80 0
South Lammers Connector SB 141 60 77 80 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 67 80 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 73 80 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 70 80 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 70 80 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 75 80 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 70 80 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-112
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 69 80 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 75 80 0
Banta NB 142 70 77 80 0
Banta SB 124 50 77 80 0
I-205 to Old River NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 75 80 0
Old River to I-5 NB No vibration-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 72 80 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 176 60 74 80 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 233 60 72s 80 0
Table 4.12-59. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4b) − Institutional Vibration Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Distance to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Vibration Levels (VdB)
# of Impacts
Near-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 68 83 0
Montessori School of Tracy NB 309 50 67 83 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church NB 478 50 62 83 0
Grace Christian Center NB 193 50 72 83 0
Lathrop Church of Christ SB 452 50 63 83 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-113
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
4.12.5.2 Longer-Term Improvement Impact Tables
Table 4.12-60. San Jose to Fremont − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Diridon Station to West Taylor Street
NB 282 35 55 0 3 6 0 0
Diridon Station to West Taylor Street
SB 204 20 56 0 1 3 0 0
West Taylor Street to Nimitz Freeway
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
West Taylor Street to Nimitz Freeway
SB 298 60 55 0 2 4 0 0
Nimitz Freeway to De La Cruz Boulevard
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Nimitz Freeway to De La Cruz Boulevard
SB 135 60 55 0 1 3 0 0
Aldo Avenue to Montague Expressway
NB 135 60 55 1 0 2 0 0
Aldo Avenue to Montague Expressway
SB 189 60 55 1 2 6 0 0
Montague Expressway to Agnew Road
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Montague Expressway to Agnew Road
SB 116 60 55 1 0 2 0 0
Agnew Road to Fairway Glen Drive
NB 129 60 55 1 0 2 0 0
Agnew Rd to Fairway Glen Drive
SB 88 60 55 1 0 2 0 0
Fairway Glen Drive to Tasman Drive
NB 133 60 55 0 1 4 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-114
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Fairway Glen Drive to Tasman Drive
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Southbay Freeway to Guadalupe River
NB 111 45 65 1 1 4 0 0
Southbay Freeway to Guadalupe River
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Guadalupe River to Alviso Marina County Park
NB 83 70 55 0 0 1 0 0
Guadalupe River to Alviso Marina County Park
SB 101 70 69 0 0 2 0 0
Diridon Station to West Taylor Street
NB 282 35 55 0 3 6 0 0
Table 4.12-61. San Jose to Fremont − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term
Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Bellarmine College Preparatory
SB 347 60 56 0 6 11 0 0
Kathryn Hughes Elementary School
NB 476 60 55 0 7 12 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-115
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-62. Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, CNS-2b) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Long-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Long-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Southern Extent to Nursery Avenue
NB 80 30 54 75 55 61 43 64
Southern Extent to Nursery Avenue
SB 65 30 54 82 55 61 21 44
Nursery Avenue to Silver Street
NB 63 30 61 82 58 64 22 81
Nursery Avenue to Silver Street
SB 59 30 61 83 58 64 39 50
Silver Street to Decoto Road
NB 57 30 62 72 59 64 0 15
Silver Street to Decoto Road
SB 76 30 62 70 59 64 158 154
Decoto Road to Kathy Court
NB 39 30 58 88 57 62 119 91
Decoto Road to Kathy Court
SB 75 30 58 84 57 62 130 122
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway
NB 82 30 58 69 57 62 12 102
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway
SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road
NB 84 30 65 80 61 66 51 18
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road
SB 57 30 65 82 61 66 36 147
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street
NB 58 30 58 78 57 62 92 100
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street
SB 104 30 58 78 57 62 175 85
Jackson Street to A Street
NB 108 30 58 67 57 62 8 139
Jackson Street to A Street
SB 54 30 58 72 57 62 51 74
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-116
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Long-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Long-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
A Street to Blossom Way
NB 61 30 58 82 57 62 20 36
A Street to Blossom Way
SB 76 30 58 81 57 62 24 36
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande
NB 55 30 60 81 58 63 21 68
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande
SB 75 30 60 81 58 63 57 97
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard
NB 61 30 60 85 58 63 100 81
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard
SB 87 30 60 83 58 63 37 39
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue
NB 57 30 57 83 56 62 61 102
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue
SB 64 30 57 77 56 62 95 181
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street
NB 455 30 62 61 59 64 29 0
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street
SB 78 30 62 83 59 64 55 20
Davis Street to Moorpark Street
NB 63 30 63 71 59 65 0 37
Davis Street to Moorpark Street
SB 63 30 62 78 59 64 54 591
Moorpark Street to Northern Extent
NB 132 30 63 63 59 65 30 0
Moorpark Street to Northern Extent
SB 57 30 63 83 59 65 24 22
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-117
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-63. Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-2a, CNS-2b) − Institutional Noise Impacts Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Long-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Long-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
California Nursery Historical Park
SB 289 30 54 64 60 66 1 0
Niles Discovery Church
SB 64 30 54 75 60 66 0 1
Wat Buddnahusorn Temple
SB 106 30 54 60 60 66 1 0
Gurdwara Sahis Temple
NB 116 30 54 59 60 66 0 0
Hill View Baptist Church
NB 43 30 65 80 66 71 0 1
HIl Viee Baptist Church 2
NB 163 30 65 64 66 71 0 0
Purple Lotus University
NB 102 30 65 74 66 71 0 1
New Hope Baptist Church
NB 207 30 65 63 66 71 0 0
Cesar Chavez Middle School
NB 294 30 56 64 61 67 1 0
Community Outreach Church
SB 228 30 66 55 66 72 0 0
Bay Hills Community Church
SB 266 30 66 47 66 72 0 0
Iglesia Adventista del Septimo Dia
NB 139 30 54 58 60 66 0 0
Colonial Acres Elementary School
NB 254 30 67 65 67 72 0 0
San Lorenzo High School
NB 239 30 67 65 67 72 0 0
Pioneer Memorial Cemetery of San Lorenzo
SB 118 30 67 70 67 72 1 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-118
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Long-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Long-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
SUM Bible College and Theological Seminary
SB 62 30 56 75 61 67 0 1
Table 4.12-64. Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway, and Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway and Elmhurst Junction (Alternative CNS-1c) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Southern Extent to Nursery Avenue
NB 86 30 57 69 56 62 0 6
Southern Extent to Nursery Avenue
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Nursery Avenue to Silver Street
NB 56 30 57 72 56 62 12 56
Nursery Avenue to Silver Street
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Silver Street to Decoto Road
NB 62 30 59 71 57 63 5 170
Silver Street to Decoto Road
SB 149 30 63 65 59 65 190 6
Decoto Road to Kathy Court
NB 817 30 65 63 61 66 8 0
Decoto Road to Kathy Court
SB 82 30 63 83 59 65 129 189
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Kathy Court to Industrial Parkway
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road
NB 84 30 65 80 61 66 51 18
Industrial Parkway to Tennyson Road
SB 57 30 65 82 61 66 36 147
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street
NB 58 30 58 78 57 62 92 100
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-119
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Tennyson Road to Jackson Street
SB 104 30 58 78 57 62 175 85
Jackson Street to A Street
NB 108 30 58 67 57 62 8 139
Jackson Street to A Street
SB 54 30 58 72 57 62 51 74
A Street to Blossom Way
NB 61 30 58 82 57 62 20 36
A Street to Blossom Way
SB 76 30 58 81 57 62 24 36
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande
NB 55 30 60 81 58 63 21 68
Blossom Way to Paseo Grande
SB 75 30 60 81 58 63 57 97
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard
NB 61 30 60 85 58 63 100 81
Paseo Grande to Hesperian Boulevard
SB 87 30 60 83 58 63 37 39
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue
NB 57 30 57 83 56 62 61 102
Hesperian Boulevard to Aladdin Avenue
SB 64 30 57 77 56 62 95 181
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street
NB 455 30 62 61 59 64 29 0
Aladdin Avenue to Davis Street
SB 78 30 62 83 59 64 55 20
Davis Street to Moorpark Street
NB 63 30 63 71 59 65 0 37
Davis Street to Moorpark Street
SB 63 30 62 78 59 64 54 591
Moorpark Street to Northern Extent
NB 132 30 63 63 59 65 30 0
Moorpark Street to Northern Extent
SB 57 30 63 83 59 65 24 22
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-120
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-65. Oakland Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Industrial Parkway, and Niles Subdivision, from Industrial Parkway and Elmhurst Junction (Alternative CNS-1c) − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Dist to Near Track (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise
Level (dBA)
Near-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Near-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Learn and Play Montessori School – Niles
NB 484 30 55 39 60 66 0 0
Buddhist Temple SB 237 30 55 54 60 66 0 0
James Logan High School
SB 915 30 61 49 63 69 0 0
Hill View Baptist Church
NB 817 30 61 50 63 69 0 0
Purple Lotus University
NB 874 30 61 46 63 69 0 0
New Hope Baptist Church
NB 979 30 61 46 63 69 0 0
Cesar Chavez Middle School
NB 294 30 56 64 61 67 1 0
Community Outreach Church
SB 228 30 66 55 66 72 0 0
Bay Hills Community Church
SB 266 30 66 47 66 72 0 0
Iglesia Adventista del Septimo Dia
NB 139 30 54 58 60 66 0 0
Colonial Acres Elementary School
NB 254 30 67 65 67 72 0 0
San Lorenzo High School
NB 239 30 67 65 67 72 0 0
Pioneer Memorial Cemetery of San Lorenzo
SB 118 30 67 70 67 72 1 0
SUM Bible College and Theological Seminary
SB 62 30 56 75 61 67 0 1
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-121
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-66. Centerville/Niles/Sunol − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Central Avenue to Newark Boulevard
NB 103 79 59 1 2 4 0 0
Central Avenue to Newark Boulevard
SB 150 79 59 1 2 4 0 0
Newark Boulevard to Nimitz Freeway
NB 113 79 59 1 2 4 0 0
Newark Boulevard to Nimitz Freeway
SB 139 79 59 1 2 4 0 0
Nimitz Freeway to Dusterberry Way
NB 70 79 59 2 2 4 8 0
Nimitz Freeway to Dusterberry Way
SB 134 79 59 1 2 4 0 0
Dusterberry Way to Fremont Boulevard
NB 103 79 71 0 3 6 0 0
Dusterberry Way to Fremont Boulevard
SB 95 79 64 1 2 4 0 0
Fremont Boulevard to Paseo Padre Parkway
NB 82 45 59 1 2 4 0 0
Fremont Boulevard to Paseo Padre Parkway
SB 151 45 59 1 2 4 0 0
Paseo Padre Parkway to Shinn Street
NB 81 79 57 2 2 4 6 0
Paseo Padre Parkway to Shinn Street
SB 90 79 57 2 2 4 1 0
Shinn Street to Mission Boulevard
NB 73 79 57 3 2 4 2 0
Shinn Street to Mission Boulevard
SB 88 15 57 3 3 6 0 0
Overacker Avenue Offshoot
NB 62 15 57 4 2 4 8 0
Overacker Avenue Offshoot
SB 97 15 57 2 2 4 0 0
Niles Connection NB 100 15 57 2 3 6 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-122
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Niles Connection SB 225 15 57 1 3 6 0 0
Shinn Offshoot NB 110 15 57 2 3 6 0 0
Shinn Offshoot SB No noise sensitive receivers
See Niles Canyon Tables
Carver Lane to Castlewood Drive
NB 457 45 68 0 3 6 0 0
Carver Lane to Castlewood Drive
SB 95 40 66 0 1 3 0 0
Table 4.12-67. Centerville/Niles/Sunol − Intuitional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Newark Community Church
NB 481 15 71 0 3 6 0 0
Chinese Independent Baptist Church
NB 164 79 71 0 3 6 0 0
Fremont Christian School
SB 360 79 66 0 3 7 0 0
Filipino-American United Church
NB 312 79 66 0 3 7 0 0
Live and Play Montessori School
NB 346 79 71 0 3 6 0 0
New Dawn Worship Center
SB 374 79 71 0 3 6 0 0
Templo Betania SB 311 79 71 0 3 6 0 0
Fremont Apostolic Church
NB 103 79 71 0 3 6 0 0
Church of Christ SB 352 79 71 0 3 6 0 0
Montessori School-Centerville
SB 146 79 71 0 3 6 0 0
Shinn Park and Arboretum
NB 445 79 67 0 3 6 0 0
Happy valley Church
NB 457 45 68 0 3 6 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-123
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-68. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a and CNS-1b) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer
-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
NB 71 40 57 67 56 62 34 32
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
SB 72 40 57 68 56 62 13 29
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
NB 139 40 57 63 56 62 21 0
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
SB 50 40 57 67 56 62 24 10
Niles Canyon NB No noise sensitive receivers.
Niles Canyon SB 282 40 57 52 56 67 0 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
NB 78 40 62 67 59 64 0 3
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
SB 138 40 57 64 56 62 10 0
Table 4.12-69. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternatives CNS-1a and CNS-1b) − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Dawoodi Bohra Masjid
SB 115 40 67 61 67 72 0 0
Sunol Glen Elementary School
NB 480 40 67 45 67 72 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-124
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-70. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2a) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
NB 71 40 57 64 56 62 28 18
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
SB 72 40 57 65 56 62 32 3
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
NB 139 40 57 60 56 62 9 0
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
SB 50 40 57 64 56 62 26 0
Niles Canyon NB No noise sensitive receivers.
Niles Canyon SB 282 40 57 55 56 67 0 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
NB 78 40 62 64 59 64 3 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
SB 138 40 57 64 56 62 22 0
Table 4.12-71. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2a) − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer
-Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Dawoodi Bohra Masjid
SB 115 40 67 55 67 72 0 0
Sunol Glen Elementary School
NB 480 40 67 42 67 72 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-125
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-72. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2b) − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
NB 71 40 57 64 56 62 28 18
Mission Boulevard to Canyon Heights Drive
SB 72 40 57 65 56 62 32 3
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
NB 139 40 57 60 56 67 9 0
Canyon Heights Drive to Stenhammer Drive
SB 50 40 57 64 56 67 26 0
Niles Canyon NB No noise sensitive receivers.
Niles Canyon SB 282 40 57 55 56 67 0 0
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
NB 78 40 62 67 59 64 0 3
2nd Street to Carver Lane (Sunol)
SB 138 40 57 64 56 62 10 0
Table 4.12-73. Centerville/Niles/Sunol, East of Niles Junction (Alternative CNS-2b) − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer
-Term
Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Dawoodi Bohra Masjid
SB 115 40 67 58 67 72 0 0
Sunol Glen Elementary School
NB 480 40 67 45 67 72 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-126
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-74. Tri-Valley − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Castlewood Drive to I-680
NB No noise sensitive receivers.
Castlewood Drive to I-680
SB 437 45 57 0 3 6 0 0
I-680 to Bernal Avenue
NB 127 60 57 1 3 6 0 0
I-680 to Bernal Avenue
SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bernal Avenue to Del Valle Parkway
NB 53 60 62 4 2 4 39 0
Bernal Avenue to Del Valle Parkway
SB 66 60 62 5 2 4 16 1
Del Valle Parkway to Valley Avenue
NB 84 70 57 3 2 4 10 0
Del Valle Parkway to Valley Avenue
SB 90 70 57 2 2 4 16 0
Isabel Avenue to North Murrieta Boulevard
NB 271 70 57 2 3 6 0 0
Isabel Avenue to North Murrieta Boulevard
SB 270 70 57 2 3 6 0 0
North Murrieta Boulevard to North P Street
NB 113 70 57 5 3 6 381 0
North Murrieta Boulevard to North P Street
SB 103 70 57 5 3 6 38 0
North P Street to Junction Avenue
NB 174 70 62 3 2 4 86 0
North P Street to Junction Avenue
SB 74 70 57 7 2 4 17 16
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-127
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Junction Avenue to North Mines Road
NB 85 60 57 5 2 4 41 0
Junction Avenue to North Mines Road
SB 100 60 57 4 2 4 11 0
North Mines Road to Joyce Street
NB 112 60 57 4 3 6 18 0
North Mines Road to Joyce Street
SB 166 60 57 1 3 6 0 0
Joyce Street to South Vasco Road
NB 257 60 57 1 3 6 0 0
Joyce Street to South Vasco Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors.
Table 4.12-75. Tri-Valley − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Hearst Elementary School
NB 185 60 63 0 4 8 0 0
Pleasanton Middle School
NB 342 60 63 0 4 8 0 0
Amador Valley High School
SB 500 45 67 0 3 7 0 0
Iglesia Ni Cristo, Livermore
SB 100 60 67 1 3 7 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-128
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-76. Altamont − Residential Noise Impact Assessment for Altamont
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer
-Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
I-580 to Carroll Road
NB 203 35 74 0 1 2 0 0
I-580 to Carroll Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors.
Altamont NB 484 40 74 0 1 2 0 0
Altamont SB No noise-sensitive receptors.
I-580 to South Lammers Road
NB No noise-sensitive receptors.
I-580 to South Lammers Road
SB 166 70 46 11 7 13 1 0
Table 4.12-77. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-1) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road
NB 428 60 46 5 7 13 0 0
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 199 70 57 2 2 4 0 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 116 70 57 5 2 4 54 1
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive
NB 136 70 62 4 2 4 2 0
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive
SB 134 70 57 4 2 4 3 0
South MacArthur Drive to
NB 158 70 57 3 2 4 7 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-129
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
North Chrisman Road
South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road
SB 82 70 57 6 2 4 10 5
Riva Trigoso Drive to SR 120
NB 220 79 59 2 2 5 0 0
Riva Trigoso Drive to SR 120
SB No noise-sensitive receptors.
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 173 60 64 2 2 4 1 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 97 60 64 4 2 4 3 1
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors.
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 217 50 59 2 2 4 12 0
Table 4.12-78. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2a) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
NB No noise-sensitive receptors.
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
SB 372 60 46 52 52 64 1 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
NB 269 70 46 55 52 64 3 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
SB 339 70 46 54 52 64 2 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-130
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 57 54 56 67 0 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 57 62 56 62 18 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 57 64 56 62 81 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 57 62 56 62 69 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 57 65 56 62 37 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 57 62 56 62 21 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 62 61 59 64 3 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 57 65 56 62 86 0
Banta NB 142 70 62 68 59 64 12 0
Banta SB 124 50 62 67 59 64 8 0
I-205 to Old River
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River
SB 197 70 57 58 56 67 1 0
Old River to I-5 NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 56 57 68 0 0
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to
SB 199 50 59 62 57 63 4 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-131
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
McKinley Avenue
Table 4.12-79. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2a) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 67 54 67 72 0 0
Montessori School of Tracy
NB 309 50 67 54 67 72 0 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 67 46 67 72 0 0
Grace Christian Center
NB 193 50 63 46 64 70 0 0
Lathrop Church of Christ
SB 452 50 66 40 67 72 0 0
Table 4.12-80. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2b) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Lammers Crossover
NB 357 70 46 53 52 64 1 0
South Lammers Crossover
SB 141 60 46 59 52 64 1 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 57 54 56 67 0 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 57 62 56 62 18 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-132
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 57 64 56 62 81 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 57 62 56 62 69 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 57 65 56 62 37 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 57 62 56 62 21 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 62 61 59 64 3 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 57 65 56 62 86 0
Banta NB 142 70 62 68 59 64 12 0
Banta SB 124 50 62 67 59 64 8 0
I-205 to Old River
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River
SB 197 70 57 58 56 67 1 0
Old River to I-5 NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 56 57 68 0 0
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 199 50 59 62 57 63 4 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-133
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-81. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-2b) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 67 54 67 72 0 0
Montessori School of Tracy
NB 309 50 6r7 54 67 72 0 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 67 46 67 72 0 0
Grace Christian Center
NB 193 50 63 46 64 70 0 0
Lathrop Church of Christ
SB 452 50 66 40 67 72 0 0
Table 4.12-82. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-3) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road
NB 428 60 46 49 53 59 0 0
I-580 to Corral Hollow Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 199 70 57 58 59 61 0 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 116 70 57 60 59 61 17 0
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive
NB 136 70 62 64 64 66 2 0
Tracy Boulevard to South MacArthur Drive
SB 134 70 57 59 59 61 1 0
South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road
NB 158 70 57 58 59 61 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-134
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South MacArthur Drive to North Chrisman Road
SB 82 70 57 60 59 61 6 0
Lyoth-Banta Crossover
NB 125 70 62 69 59 69 3 0
Lyoth-Banta Crossover
SB 456 50 64 57 60 71 0 0
I-205 to Old River NB No noise-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River SB 197 70 57 58 56 67 1 0
Old River to I-5 NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 56 57 68 0 0
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
East Louise Avenue to McKinley Avenue
SB 199 50 59 62 57 63 4 0
Table 4.12-83. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-3) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Lathrop Church of Christ
SB 452 50 66 40 67 72 0 0
Table 4.12-84. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4a) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Patterson Pass Road to I-580
SB 372 60 46 52 52 64 1 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-135
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
I-580 to South Lammers Road
NB 269 70 46 55 52 64 3 0
I-580 to South Lammers Road
SB 339 70 46 54 52 64 2 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 57 54 56 67 0 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 57 62 56 62 18 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 57 64 56 62 81 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 57 62 56 62 69 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 57 65 56 62 37 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 57 62 56 62 21 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 62 61 59 64 3 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 57 65 56 62 86 0
Banta NB 142 70 62 68 59 64 12 0
Banta SB 124 50 62 67 59 64 8 0
I-205 to Old River
NB No noise sensitive receivers
I-205 to Old River
SB 197 70 57 58 56 67 1 0
Old River to I-5 NB No noise sensitive receivers
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 56 57 68 0 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 176 60 64 61 64 71 1 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 233 60 64 60 62 71 1 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-136
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-85. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4a) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 67 54 67 72 0 0
Montessori School of Tracy
NB 309 50 67 54 67 72 0 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 67 46 67 72 0 0
Grace Christian Center
NB 193 50 63 46 64 70 0 0
Table 4.12-86. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4b) - Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Lammers Crossover
NB 357 70 46 53 52 64 1 0
South Lammers Crossover
SB 141 60 46 59 52 64 1 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
NB 292 50 57 54 56 67 0 0
South Lammers Road to Corral Hollow Road
SB 224 70 57 62 56 62 18 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
NB 237 50 57 64 56 62 81 0
Corral Hollow Road to Tracy Boulevard
SB 228 50 57 62 56 62 69 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
NB 139 50 57 65 56 62 37 0
Tracy Boulevard to North Central Avenue
SB 224 50 57 62 56 62 21 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-137
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
NB 262 50 62 61 59 64 3 0
North Central Avenue to North MacArthur Drive
SB 142 50 57 65 56 62 86 0
Banta NB 142 70 62 68 59 64 12 0
Banta SB 124 50 62 67 59 64 8 0
I-205 to Old River
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
I-205 to Old River
SB 197 70 57 58 56 67 1 0
Old River to I-5 NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Old River to I-5 SB 257 70 59 56 57 68 0 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 176 60 64 61 64 71 1 0
SR 120 to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 233 60 64 60 62 71 1 0
Table 4.12-87. Tracy to Lathrop (Alternative TL-4b) - Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term
Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Community Baptist Church
NB 292 50 67 54 67 72 0 0
Montessori School of Tracy
NB 309 50 67 54 67 72 0 0
Tracy Southern Baptist Church
NB 478 50 67 46 67 72 0 0
Grace Christian Center
NB 193 50 63 46 64 70 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-138
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-88. Lathrop to Stockton − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term
Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
McKinley Avenue to Brookfield Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
McKinley Avenue to Brookfield Avenue
SB 237 50 59 1 2 4 0 0
Roth Road to East Wyman Road
NB 152 70 70 0 0 2 0 0
Roth Road to East Wyman Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
East Wyman Road to French Camp Road
NB 159 50 75 0 0 2 0 0
East Wyman Road to French Camp Road
SB 146 50 73 0 0 2 0 0
California Street to East Charter Way
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
California Street to East Charter Way
SB 87 50 59 3 2 5 26 0
East Charter Way to SR 4
NB 431 50 64 1 2 4 0 0
East Charter Way to SR 4
SB 449 50 59 0 2 5 0 0
SR 4 to Stockton Station
NB 437 50 66 1 1 3 0 0
SR 4 to Stockton Station
SB 166 50 66 2 1 3 3 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-139
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-89. Lathrop to Stockton − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Incr.
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Haven Peace Inc SB 185 50 73 0 2 5 0 0
Gurdwara Sahib Sikh Temple
SB 184 50 66 0 3 7 0 0
Table 4.12-90. Manteca to Modesto − Residential Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Airport Way to West Louise Avenue
NB 57 50 64 68 60 66 39 0
South Airport Way to West Louise Avenue
SB 190 50 64 61 60 71 1 0
West Louise Avenue to North Union Road
NB 56 50 59 68 57 63 24 0
West Louise Avenue to North Union Road
SB 126 50 59 63 57 63 56 0
North Union Road to West Yosemite Avenue
NB 44 50 73 70 65 72 28 0
North Union Road to West Yosemite Avenue
SB 95 50 73 68 65 72 15 0
West Yosemite Avenue to South Main Street
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
West Yosemite Avenue to South Main Street
SB 246 50 73 57 65 72 0 0
South Main Street to South Powers Avenue
NB 243 50 69 59 63 69 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-140
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
South Main Street to South Powers Avenue
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
South Powers Avenue to SR 120
NB 206 50 69 60 63 69 0 0
South Powers Avenue to SR 120
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
SR 120 to East Woodward Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
SR 120 to East Woodward Avenue
SB 188 50 62 52 59 64 0 0
Austin Road to South Olive Avenue
NB 239 70 72 52 65 76 0 0
Austin Road to South Olive Avenue
SB 351 70 76 57 65 79 0 0
South Olive Avenue to Jack Tone Road
NB 273 70 61 51 58 69 0 0
South Olive Avenue to Jack Tone Road
SB 302 70 61 50 58 69 0 0
Jack Tone Road to Fulton Avenue
NB No noise-sensitive receptors
Jack Tone Road to Fulton Avenue
SB 481 50 59 42 62 68 0 0
Fulton Avenue to Main Street
NB 214 50 66 51 62 67 0 0
Fulton Avenue to Main Street
SB 181 50 66 53 62 67 0 0
Main Street to Stanislaus River
NB 294 50 66 49 62 72 0 0
Main Street to Stanislaus River
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Hammet Road to Toomes Road
NB 343 50 66 48 61 67 0 0
Hammet Road to Toomes Road
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Toomes Road to Kiernan Avenue
NB 361 50 64 44 65 70 0 0
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-141
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Max. Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Toomes Road to Kiernan Avenue
SB 199 50 66 55 61 67 0 0
Kiernan Avenue to Bangs Avenue
NB 341 50 70 53 65 70 0 0
Kiernan Avenue to Bangs Avenue
SB 98 50 66 67 61 67 7 0
Bangs Avenue to Murphy Road
NB 139 50 66 63 61 72 0 0
Bangs Avenue to Murphy Road
SB 259 50 66 50 61 67 0 0
Murphy Road to Beckwith Road
NB 380 50 70 43 69 74 0 0
Murphy Road to Beckwith Road
SB 416 50 70 55 65 70 0 0
Beckwith Road to Conant Avenue
NB 340 50 65 48 60 66 0 0
Beckwith Road to Conant Avenue
SB 212 50 66 52 61 72 0 0
Conant Avenue to West Briggsmore Avenue
NB 413 50 65 47 60 71 0 0
Conant Avenue to West Briggsmore Avenue
SB 228 50 64 47 65 70 0 0
West Briggsmore Avenue to Princeton Avenue
NB 459 50 57 46 56 67 0 0
West Briggsmore Avenue to Princeton Avenue
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
Princeton Avenue to Kansas Avenue
NB 139 50 62 61 59 69 1 0
Princeton Avenue to Kansas Avenue
SB No noise-sensitive receptors
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
Environmental Impact Analysis Noise and Vibration
ACEforward Draft EIR 4.12-142
May 2017 ICF 00458.15
Table 4.12-91. Manteca to Modesto − Institutional Noise Impact Assessment
Location Side of Track
Near Track Dist (ft)
Train Speed (mph)
Existing Noise (dBA)
Longer-Term Noise Levels (dBA)
Type and # of Impacts Longer-
Term Level
FTA Criteria
Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev.
Valley Charter High School
NB 139 50 63 50 64 70 0 0
Modesto Junior College
SB 228 50 64 47 65 70 0 0
Humphreys College
NB 380 50 70 43 69 74 0 0
San Joaquin Valley College
NB 361 50 64 44 65 70 0 0
Ripon Cemetery NB 283 50 71 45 70 75 0 0
Ripon Christian Schools
SB 412 50 71 43 70 75 0 0
Zion United Reformed Church
SB 481 50 59 42 62 68 0 0
Freewill Baptist Church
NB 163 50 82 58 70 80 0 0
Manteca Gospel Assembly
NB 198 50 82 54 70 80 0 0
Freedom Christian Center
NB 358 50 82 46 70 75 0 0
ACEforward
Figure 4.12-1Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels
(Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006)
ACEforward
Figure 4.12-2Typical Ldn Noise Exposure Levels
(Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006)
ACEforward
Figure 4.12-3Typical Levels of Ground-borne Vibration
(Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006)
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
San Jose
Fremont
Modesto
Tracy
Stockton
Merced
Lathrop
LivermorePleasanton
Manteca
Union City
Milpitas
Ceres
Ripon
Salida
Atwater
Oakdale
Delhi
Livingston
Escalon
Turlok
MERCED CO
STANISLAUS CO
SAN JOAQUIN CO
SANTA CLARA CO
ALAMEDA CO
CONTRA COSTA CO
Proposed ACEforward Improvements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 155 10
Miles
Figure 4.12-4
ACEforward Corridor - Noise and Vibration Study Area
ACEforward
Proposed ACEforward Improvements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 82 4 6
Miles
Figure 4.12-5
Niles and Oakland Subdivisions - Noise
ACEforward
Niles Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Coast Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Niles Subdivision
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
San Jose
Fremont
Modesto
Tracy
Stockton
Merced
Lathrop
LivermorePleasanton
Manteca
Union City
Milpitas
Ceres
Ripon
Salida
Atwater
Oakdale
Delhi
Livingston
Escalon
Turlok
MERCED CO
STANISLAUS CO
SAN JOAQUIN CO
SANTA CLARA CO
ALAMEDA CO
CONTRA COSTA CO
ST-8ST-9
ST-7
ST-2
ST-1
ST-5
ST-3
ST-6
ST-4
LT-3
LT-7
LT-6
LT-1
LT-4
LT-5
LT-2
LT-9LT-8
ST-11
ST-12
ST-10
LT-15
LT-17
LT-12
LT-13
LT-10
LT-16
LT-14
LT-18
LT-11
Noise Measurement Locations
Proposed ACEforward Improvements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 155 10
Miles
Figure 4.12-6
ACEforward Corridor - Noise Measurement Sites
ACEforward
ST-1NS
LT-4NS
LT-3NS
LT-2NSLT-1NS
LT-9N
LT-8N
LT-7N
LT-6N
LT-5N
ST-1NLT-4N
LT-3N
LT-2N
LT-1N
LT-17N
LT-16NLT-15NLT-14N
LT-13N
LT-12N
LT-11N
LT-10N
Noise Measurement Sites
Proposed ACEforward
Improvements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 82 4 6
Miles
Figure 4.12-7
Niles and Oakland Subdivisions - Noise Measurement Sites
ACEforward
Niles Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Coast Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Niles Subdivision
ACEforward
Figure 4.12-9FTA Cumulative Noise Impact Criteria
(Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006)
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
San Jose
Fremont
Modesto
Tracy
Stockton
Merced
Lathrop
LivermorePleasanton
Manteca
Union City
Milpitas
Ceres
Ripon
Salida
Atwater
Oakdale
Delhi
Livingston
Escalon
Turlok
MERCED CO
STANISLAUS CO
SAN JOAQUIN CO
SANTA CLARA CO
ALAMEDA CO
CONTRA COSTA CO
CO
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 155 10
Miles
See Figures 4.12-13, 4.12-15, and 4.12-16
See Figures 4.12-17through 4.12-22
See Figure 4.12-14
Figure 4.12-10
Near-term Moderate Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
San Jose
Fremont
Modesto
Tracy
Stockton
Merced
Lathrop
LivermorePleasanton
Manteca
Union City
Milpitas
Ceres
Ripon
Salida
Atwater
Oakdale
Delhi
Livingston
Escalon
Turlok
MERCED CO
STANISLAUS CO
SAN JOAQUIN CO
SANTA CLARA CO
ALAMEDA CO
CONTRA COSTA CO
CO
Impact Type
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 155 10
Miles
See Figures 4.12-13,4.12-15, and 4.12-16
See Figures 4.12-17through 4.12-22
See Figure 4.12-14
Figure 4.12-11
Near-term Severe Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
Noise Impacts
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 82 4 6
Miles
Figure 4.12-12
Niles Subdivision - Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
Niles Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Coast Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Niles Subdivision
Impact Type
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 10.5
Miles
Figure 4.12-13
Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
Noise Impacts
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 82 4 6
Miles
Figure 4.12-14
Alternative CNS-1c Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
Niles Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Coast Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Niles Subdivision
For impacts along the Oakland Subdivision, east of Niles Junction,
see Figure 4.12-13
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 10.5
Miles
Figure 4.12-15
Alternative CNS-2a Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
Impact Type
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 10.5
Miles
Figure 4.12-16
Alternative CNS-2b Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-17
Alternative TL-1 Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-1
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-18
Alternative TL-2a Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-2a
TL-2a
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-19
Alternative TL-2b Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-2b
TL-2b
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
ACEforward DRAFT EIS/EIR
Impact Type
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-20
Alternative TL-3 Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-3
TL-3
TL-3
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
ACEforward DRAFT EIS/EIR
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-21
Alternative TL-4a Near-Term-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-4a
TL-4a
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-22
Alternative TL-4b Near-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-4b
TL-4b
TL-4b
Vibration Impacts
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line±0 10.5
Miles
Figure 4.12-23
Alternative CNS-2a Near-term Vibration Impact Locations
ACEforward
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
San Jose
Fremont
Modesto
Tracy
Stockton
Merced
Lathrop
LivermorePleasanton
Manteca
Union City
Milpitas
Ceres
Ripon
Salida
Atwater
Oakdale
Delhi
Livingston
Escalon
Turlok
MERCED CO
STANISLAUS CO
SAN JOAQUIN CO
SANTA CLARA CO
ALAMEDA CO
CONTRA COSTA CO
O CO
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 155 10
Miles
See Figures 4.12-31through 4.12-36
See Figures 4.12-27,4.12-29, and 4.12-30
See Figure 4.12-28
Figure 4.12-24
Longer-term Moderate Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
San Jose
Fremont
Modesto
Tracy
Stockton
Merced
Lathrop
LivermorePleasanton
Manteca
Union City
Milpitas
Ceres
Ripon
Salida
Atwater
Oakdale
Delhi
Livingston
Escalon
Turlok
MERCED CO
STANISLAUS CO
SAN JOAQUIN CO
SANTA CLARA CO
ALAMEDA CO
CONTRA COSTA CO
O CO
Impact Type
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 155 10
Miles
See Figures 4.12-31through 4.12-36
See Figures 4.12-27,4.12-29, and 4.12-30
See Figure 4.12-28
Figure 4.12-25
Longer-term Severe Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
Noise Impacts
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 82 4 6
Miles
Figure 4.12-26
Niles Subdivision - Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
Niles Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Coast Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Niles Subdivision
Impact Type
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 10.5
Miles
Figure 4.12-27
Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
Noise Impacts
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 82 4 6
Miles
Niles Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Coast Subdivsion
Oakland Subdivision
Niles Subdivision
Figure 4.12-28
Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
For impacts along the Oakland Subdivision, east of Niles Junction,
see Figure 4.12-27
Impact Type
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 10.5
Miles
Figure 4.12-29
Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
Impact Type
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovement
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 10.5
Miles
Figure 4.12-30
Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
Impact Type
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-31
Alternative TL-1 Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-1
TL-1
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-32
Alternative TL-2a Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-2a
TL-2a
TL-2a
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
ACEforward DRAFT EIS/EIR
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-33
Alternative TL-2b Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-2b
TL-2b
TL-2b
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
Impact Type
Moderate
Severe
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-34
Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-3
TL-3
TL-3
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 62 4
Miles
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
Figure 4.12-35
Alternative TL-4a Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-4a
TL-4a
TL-4a
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mante
Tracy
Lathrop
Impact Type
Moderate
Proposed ACEforwardImprovements
Stations
!( Existing
!( Proposed
Other Features
Existing Rail
Major Roadway
County Line
±0 62 4
Miles
Figure 4.12-36
Alternative TL-4b Longer-term Noise Impact Locations
ACEforward
TL-4b
TL-4b
TL-4b