HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - No. 79-9RESOLUTION NO. 79-9
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE SAN
JOAQUIN COUNTY COliNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AS THE NOISE
ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF LODI.
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65302(g) requires
that the General Plan of the City of Lodi shall consist, among other
things, of a Noise Element; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi
has recommended that the Noise Element adopted by the San Joaquin
County Council of Governments on November 28, 1978 be used as the
Noise Element of the City of Lodi; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to notice given, a public hearing was
held by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi on December 11,
1978 and at which public hearing the Planning Commission recom-
mended to the City Council of the City of Lodi the adoption of said
Noise Element of the San Joaquin County Council of Governments; and
WHEREAS, the City Council thereafter set a public hearing
on January 17, 1979 to determine whether the City Council should
adopt the aforesaid Noise Element; and
WHEREAS, after study of said Noise Element by the City
Council and the hearing of public testimony at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City
Council of the City of Lodi that there be adopted as a Noise Element
of the City of Lodi, the Noise Element heretofore adopted by the San
Joaquin County Council of Governments on November 28, 1978 and
that the contents of the document approving the Noise Element be
adopted as the Noise Element of the City of Lodi, a copy of which
document is attached hereto.
Dated: January 17, 1979
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 79-9 of the City
Council of the City of Lodi was adopted in a regular meeting held
January 17, 1979 by the follow-inqr vote:
-I-
Ayes: Councilmen - Hughes, Katzakian and McCarty
Noes: Councilmen - None
Absent: Councilmen - Katnich and Pinkerton
v.
ALICE M. REI
CITY CLERK
-2-
i1V221?e
1978
911*menn,!�
O SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
Phi -
r �
Resolution No. 79-9
It _.
0
none
e6wmt
The preparation of this report was financed in part through
a 701 Comprehensive Planning Assistance Grant from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development administered by
the State of California, Governor's Office of Planning and
Research.
SW J040UN aXM Y CMxQL OF GCKV% ENTS
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION. _ 1
A. Why Noise Control Is Important. . . . . . . . . 1
1. Effects of Noise on People. . . . . . . . . 1
2. Suggested Interior Design Noise Levels. . - 9
B. Legislative Background. . . . . . . . . . . 10
C. Relationship of Noise Element with Other
General Plan Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
D. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 11
II. NOISE ELEMENT GOALS, POLICIES, AND IMPLEMENTATION
PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
III. DESCRIPTION OF COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS . . . . 16
A. Introduction.
16
B. Countywide Noise Surveys. . . . ... . . .
16
C. Noise Contours and Population Impacted by
58
Noise Contours.
18
D. Description, by Community, of Perceived Noise
D.
Problems, Population Impacted by Various
Noise Sources, Average Community Noise Levels,
and Zoning
Special Problems.
28
1. Stockton.
28
2. Tracy
37
3. Escalon .
40
4. Ripon
42
5. Manteca
45
6. Lodi.
47
7. San Joaquin County. . . . . . . . . . . . .
52
IV. GOVERNMENT ROLES IN NOISE COMPATIBLE LAND USE
PLANNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
A.
Introduction.
58
B.
Public Project Noise Effects. . . . . . . . . .
58
C.
Noise Reviews of Projects . . . . . . . .
59
D.
General Placement of Land Uses Through Planning
and Zoning
59
E.
Specific Recommendations for Noise Compatible
Land Use Planning in San Joaquin County . . . .
60
1. Location of Land Uses Near High Noise
Sources . . . . . . .
60
2. Building and Site Design. . . . . . . . . .
68
3. Noise Considerations for Specific Land
Uses (Hospitals, Convalescent Hospitals,
Rest Homes, Schools, Recreation Areas,
Commercial and Industrial Uses) . . . . . .
71
i
Page
V. NON -LAND USE MITIGATION MEASURES FOR NOISE
CONTROL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
76
A.
Police Enforcement of Vehicle Noise Laws . . . .
76
B.
Community Noise Ordinances
77
C.
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
78
APPENDICES
A.
Ldn Noise Contours and Methodology
B.
Proposed Noise Ordinance and Equal Noisiness
Zones
C.
Pertinent Noise Legislation
D.
Office of Noise Control Publication of Building
Insulation and Noise Barrier Evaluation
E.
Partial List of Noise Consultants
F.
References
ii
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
NOISE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
FALL, 1978
Council of Governments Board
Councilman Rick Wentworth, Chairman
Councilman James Pinkerton, Jr., Vice Chairman
Councilman Robert Canclini
Councilman Edmtand Feichtmeir
Councilman James Fulton
Councilman Tom Madden
Supervisor Richard Yoshikawa
Executive Director: Peter D. Verdoorn
Noise Element Staff:
Jean Freitas, Planner
Diane Bromley, Student Intern
Terri Pope, Secretary
Alma Forenti, Illustrator
Myron Chan, Draftsman
Tom Campo, Draftsman
l
i or
LIST OF CHARTS/TABLES/FIGURES
Page
Chart 1
Decibel Reference Chart.
2
Chart 2
Typical Noise Levels for Various Sources . . .
3
Chart 3
Speech Interference.
5
Chart 4
Sleep Interference
6
Figure 1
Suggested Design Levels for Various Uses . . .
9
Illustration of 1":400' Noise Contour Map . . . . . . ..
19
Maps 1-7
Index Maps of Present and Future Noise
Contour Routes
20-26
Chart 5
State Noise Insulation Regulations
27
Table 1
Estimated Population Impacted by Noise Source.
29
Map 8
Stockton Noise Element Map
31-32
Chart 6
Noise Levels in Stockton Schools . . . . . ..
36
Map 9
Tracy Noise Element Map.
38
Map 10
Escalon Noise Element Map.
41
Map 11
Ripon Noise Element Map.
43
Map 12
Manteca Noise Element Map. ...
46
Map 13
Lodi Noise Element Map
49
Map 14
San Joaquin County Noise Element Map . . . ..
53-54
Chart 7
Noise Levels in San Joaquin County Schools
55
Chart 8
Land Use Compatibility
61
Map 15
Stockton Airport 1977 Noise Contours
62
Map 16
Stockton Airport 1997 Noise Contours Without
Cargo Flights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
63
Map 17
Stockton Airport 1997 Noise Contours With
Cargo Flights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
64
Map 18
Tracy Airport 1973 and 1993 Noise Contours . .
65
Figure 2
Noise Control Precautions for Builders . . . .
72
Figure 3
Noise Considerations for Commercial/Industrial
Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
75
Chart 9
Major Perceived Noise Problems
76
iii
SECTION I - INTi4O UCT/ON
WHY NOISE CONTROL IS IMPORTANT
This section describes the many harmful or disturbing effects
noise can have on people. Such effects are what make it
important for cities and counties to alleviate existing problem
areas and to protect against creation of new noise -related
problem areas.
EFFECTS OF NOISE ON PEOPLE
Hearing Loss. The function of the ear is to convert sound
energy nto nerve impulses. As sound waves enter through the
outer ear and eardrum, the middle ear muscles contract or
expand to increase or diminish sounds entering the delicate
inner ear. However, this middle ear reflex is imperfect since
it cannot adequately protect the inner ear against very loud,
impulsive, or sustained noises.
When sounds are too intense and prolonged, the hearing receptor
cells, or "hair cells" can be damaged. The inner ear (cochlea)
is a coiled tube about 34 millimeters long, containing about
17,000 hair cells.
Hearing loss can occur along parts or all of the cochlea.
Thus, the degree of hearing loss depends not only on the
severity of injury at any one location, but upon the spread
of hearing loss in the inner ear.
Hearing loss usually occurs above speaking ranges and spreads
downward. Damage can, therefore, be substantial before hearing
loss is noticed.
Most scientists believe noise levels of 70dB(A) or more con-
tribute to loss of hearing over a lifetime. Clear evidence
is available that noises above 80dB(A) can contribute to inner
ear damage and eventually hearing loss if they are frequently
and regularly encountered. Trucks, trains, sport cars, and
motorcycles all exceed 80dB(A) at 50 feet. Amplified music
at close range may reach 120dB(A). In industry, excessively
loud machinery is often the norm.
The number of such loud noise sources has grown phenomenally
in the last 20 years. Numbers of trucks and cars have more
than doubled, commercial jets increased from 0 in 1995 to
nearly 2,000 in 1970. Appliances, recreational vehicles, and
power lawn mowers, all contribute to a noisier environment.
About twenty million people in the United States are presently
estimated to have some degree of hearing loss, and the rate of
hearing loss is increasing in part due to increased societal
noise levels.
-1-
CHART I
DECIBEL REFERENCE CHART
Sound Source
Jet Plane (100 ft.)
Amplified
Rock Music
Automatic Punch Press (3 ft.)
Shout (6 inches)
Jackhammers (50 ft.)
Diesel Locomotive (50 ft.)
Motorcycle (50 ft.)
Heavy truck (50 ft.)
Power Lawn Mower (3 ft.)
10 -HP Outboard (50 ft.)
Standard Passenger Car (50 ft.)
Interior of Department.Store
Dishwasher, clothealwasher,
stove fan
(operator's distance)
Average business office
Living Room (no T.V.)
Bedroom
Whisper (15 ft.)
Broadcast Studio
Decibels Noise Effects
130
120 Painfully loud, rapid
hearing loss.
110
100 Maddening sound
Evidence that noise can
interfere with work
performance.
90 Federal Industrial
8 hour exposure limit
Well established that
noise levels this high
contribute to hearing
loss.
80 Noise very_ arineying'
Noise level for potential
70 hearing loss begins; hard
to use phone. Stress re-
actions become obvious.
60 Noise intrudes on normal
speech at distances
greater than five tfeet.
50 Some speech and sleep
interference
40
Sleep undisturbed
30
Very quiet
20
10 Sound just audible
0 Hearing limit
M _tT 2
TYPICAL `OISE LEVELS FROM VARIOUS SOUPC£S IN dBA
Hosie Appliances
Level of
7ransporTransportationi Recreational Vehicles
dBA Level
OperatorExposure
(dBA)
Passenger cars (501)
64-76
Group I: Major Equipment
Sports Cars (50')
70-80
and A
and ppli u►ces
Light trucks (50')
70_85
Medium heavy trucks (50')
75-95
Refrigerator
40
Motorcycles street (5U')
65-95
e
4
Off Road Motorcyclesi50')
80-105
trric yeatez
Electric
E
s44
Buses (501)
70-87
Humidifier
50
General aviation propeller aircraft
Floor Pan
51
(take -off @ 1000')
76-93
Dehumidifier
52
2-3 engine jet aircraft
window Pan
54
(take -off @ 10001)
90-100S5
Clothes Dryer
4 engine jet aircraft
Air Conditioner
55
(take -off @1000')
100-105
Light helicootez (500')
65-78
Croup II: Quiet Equipment and
Medium - Heavy helicopters (500')
(
76-92
Small Appliances
Diesel locomotive (50')
�j
88-98
Freight cars (50')
80-9460
Hair Clipper
Train horn (50')
90-114
Clothes Washer
60
Stove Hood Exhaust Pan
61
Industrial Machinery, Equipment (User Dista)
— Distance)
Electric Toothbrush
62
water Closet
62
Pneumatic Power Tools (Grinders, Chippers)
90-116
Dishwasher
64
Molding machines
102-10664
Electric Can Opener
Air blown devices (for paint, clean, etc.)
90-105
Hood
65
Blowers (forced, fan, induced, etc.)
80-100
Dryer
Hair D er
Dry
66
Air compressors
92-100
Faucet
66
Metal forming (Punch, Shearing)
82-97
Vacuum Cleaner
67
Combustion (Furnaces, flare stacks @ 251)
82-97
Electric Knife
68
Turbogenerators (Steam @ 101)
88-92
Pumps (water,hydraulic)
80-92
Croup III: Voisy Small Appliances
Transformers
83-84
Electric Knife Sharpener
70
Industrial
Sewing Machine
70
Tractors (50')
75-95
Oral Lavaqe
72
75
Graders (50')
80-95
Food Blender
75
Pavers (50')
8S-87
Electric Shaver
75
Concrete mixers (50')
7S-88
Electric Lawn Mower
Food Disposal (Grinder)
76
Movable Cranes (SO')
75-85
Generators (50')
72-82
Group IVs Noisy Electric Tools
Jack Hammers s Rock drills (50')
80-98
Impact drivers (peaks) (501)
mm
Electric Edger and Trier
VibratoPile
69-815
Hedge Clippers
eel
4
Sawa (50')
72_82
8o�e Shop tools
85
Even where daily exposure to community noises may not pose a
distinct hazard in itself to hearing, it may increase indi-
vidual hearing loss by making it impossible for a worker in
a noisy factory to find enough off -job quiet to allow the ears
to recover each evening.
Hearing loss can be eliminated if exposure to noise is held to
sufficiently low levels, held to sufficiently short durations,
and allowed to occur only rarely. But regulation of a person's
total exposure to noise is impossible to achieve. Reducing
noise levels of the noise source is a better approach. Clearly,
quieting all noise sources to 70dB(A) or less is impossible at
present. On the other hand, allowing loud noise sources to
continue to proliferate without bound would lead to far greater
problems in terms of hearing loss and other adverse effects of
noise. As a goal from a hearing conservation standpoint, it
is desirable to have as few noise sources as possible which
expose people to sound levels in excess of 70dB(A).
S eech Interference. Another direct effect of noise is masking
where unwanted sounds interfere with wanted signals, such as
speech. Speech interference begins occurring at about 40-45dB(A)
and becomes severe at 60dB(A) and above (see Chart 3). The
relationship shown in the speech interference chart is for
younq adults with normal hearing speaking the same dialect.
Children under about 13 years of age, the elderly, hard of
hearing, and people with dialect differences are likely to
require quieter conditions than those indicated on the chart.
In a highly intellectual technical society, speech communication
plays an important role. Excessive background noise can reduce
the amount and quality of verbal exchange and adversely affect
education, family life styles, occupational efficiency and the
quality of relaxation.
Sleez Interference. To protect a person from sleep interference,
sound levels s ou d not rise above 35-4OdB(A). Whether a person
is actually awakened by a particular noise will depend on noise
levels, characteristics of the noise, stage of sleep, the
person's motivation to awaken, age, sex, and so on. Elderly
people and persons who are ill are particularly susceptible to
sleep interference caused by noise.
Ph sical Reactions. Temporary physical reactions to passing
noise include:
(at most levels)
• an orientation reflex;
• a startle reflex;
(at about 70dB(A) and above)
. construction of the peripheral blood vessels;
. acceleration or deceleration of the heart rate;
. dilation of pupils of the eye;
-4-
r
C
a
0
EZ
10
[-5]
T
SPEECH INTERFERENCE
I S%N".
. '**%
'11s�
%.%,
IN
'**�
—
NO
COMMUNICATION
VOICE
-
MARTIAL
COMMUNICATION
4D
V CF
♦
b ,
q%F��
�
R4�S
fp
EASY
COMMUNICATION
` ♦R`q
F
♦
OS 1 2 3 4 6 10 MS 20 33 80 70 100
DISTANCE FROM TALKER TO LISTENER IN FEET
Distance at which ordinary speech can be understood outside.
Indoors, levels may need to be lower because of the build-up
of sound by reflections from walls of a room.
Source: Public Health & Welfare Criteria for Noise
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973
10
e
e
W
N
h
W
Ge
N
2 .�
ti
a 4
if
3
2
SLEEP INTERFERENCE
b 20 30 40 50 e0 70 e0 90 100 Ib Ito
dSA - INDOORS - OMEF SOUNDS (UNDER 3 MINUTES)
Source: Effects of Noise on People
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1971
-6-
changes in breathing patterns;
changes in movement of the gastrointestinal tract;
. changes in secretion of saliva and gastric juices;
. chemical changes in the blood and urine;
(at higher levels)
. loss in visual acuity; and
. disturbance of equilibrium.
It is proposed, and evidence exists, that chronic arousal of
such physical responses could aggravate the incidence of medical
problems such as headaches, fatigue, digestive disorders, heart
disease, blood circulatory disorders, and equilibrium disorders.
It is also proposed that noise as a source of stress is a likely
contributor to what many medical authorities believe are stress-
related diseases such as ulcers, high blood pressure, heart
disease, and arthritis.
As a source of stress, noise may also be a contributing factor
in mental illness, anxiety, and psychological distress.
Performance and Learning. Work performance can be adversely
affected y noise through distraction and through the physical
reactions previously described. While noise does not seem to
have an effect on overall work productivity, it can reduce
accuracy of work; particularly of complex tasks, and inhibit
learning. Even if it does not do this, the price may be
increased fatigue, distraction, and irritability on the part
of the employee or student. Studies conducted in Europe rec-
ommend 55dB(A) as an upper limit for peak interfering noise in
classrooms.
Privacy. As a result of a lack of acoustical privacy, people
may experience annoyance, sleep interference, speech inter-
ference and all other detrimental effects of noise. Nearly
everyone has experienced this effect at one time or another in
apartments, hotels, or motels. In multi -unit structures,
careful attention to building materials and construction
techniques at separating walls and floor -ceilings is necessary
to provide acceptable interior living environments.
psychological. Facts clearly support the contention that noise
can be a source of psychological distress through annoyance,
speech, sleep interference, etc. This distress in turn can
lead to instability, sexual impotency, headaches, nausea, general
anxiety, and changes in general mood.
Anno ance. A large number of factors govern how annoyed people
w e y noise. First, there are characteristics of the
noise itself, i.e., its loudness and duration, whether it is
impulsive or steady, contains speech or music, or piercing
"pure tones." Second, background noise levels help in deter-
mining how "intrusive" and thus annoying a particular noise is.
-7-
Third, place, time of day, and seasonal variations can make a
difference; people are more likely to be disturbed at home,
at night, and during warm weather. Finally, a person's actual
total exposure to the noise source, and his or her attitude
toward it, may play a part.
The -number of people disturbed by noise generally goes up as
noise levels increase. Predicting annoyance response to noise
in particular situations, however, is difficult. Individuals
who complain are generally not unusually sensitive to noise.
They do tend to have a higher socioeconomic status and a better
education than those who do not complain, but there are few
other guidelines. Communitywide annoyance response also
depends on leadership within that community and a sense of
community.
Complaints are not, then, very good criteria to apply in setting
protective noise standards. As a result, criteria based on the
harmful and disturbing effects of noise on persons have emerged
as more objective, measurable, and protective approaches to the
problem of setting noise standards.
-8-
SUGGESTED INTERIOR DESIGN NOISE LEVELS
The following levels for design of rooms are not required
standards but are design objectives to prevent speech or
sleep interference and other adverse noise effects previously
described.
FIGURE 1
SUGGESTED DESIGN SOUND LEVELS FOR
VARIOUS USES
Type of Use
dB (A) Level
Residential and hotels and motels:
Interior living areas
25-40
Interior sleeping areas
20-35
Hospitals, convalescent homes, rest
homes, housing for the elderly:
Interior living areas
25-40
Interior sleeping areas
20-30
School classrooms, libraries
35-40
Concert halls, recital halls
21-30
Large auditoriums, large theaters
and churches
20-30
Small auditoriums, small theaters
and churches
Not Above 42
Large meeting and conference rooms
Not Above 42
Private or semiprivate offices
38-47
Large offices, reception areas,
retail shops and stores, cafeterias..
42-52
Lobbies, laboratory work spaces,
drafting and engineering rooms..
47-56
Light maintenance shops, office and
computer rooms, laundries
52-61
Shops, garages, power plant control
rooms..
56-66
Other commercial and industrial areas
where speech interference is not
a consideration
Less Than 70
Sources: Kryter, Karl, Effects of Noise on Man
Environmental Protection Agency, Effects of
Noise on People
Environmental Protection Agency, Public Health
and Welfare Criteria for Noise
L.L. Beranek, W.E. Blazier, and J.J. Figwer,
"Preferred Noise Criterion Curves and their
Application to Rooms," Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America 50, 1971, pp. 1223-1228
LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND
This Noise Element is an update of a 1974 Council of Governments
Noise Element. In 1976, the State Office of Noise Control pre-
pared guidelines to implement revised Noise Element Legislation.
The new guidelines and legislation attempt to coordinate the
noise measurement methodology being used throughout the state.
They also set down more specifically what is required in a
noise element.
This element has been prepared by COG to comply with the new
guidelines. Major differences between the new and old elements
are that noise level contours measured by the day -night average
level (Ldn)* method have been calculated and plotted for the
County's major noise sources; population contained within all
of the Ldn noise contours have been estimated; a proposed
countywide noise ordinance has been prepared along with the
"equal noisiness" zones needed for noise ordinances; and a careful
attempt has been made to specifically relate this element to
new state noise laws and standards.
The 1974 COG Noise Element should be consulted for more detailed
information o: -i r. methods for noise reduction.
RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
The noise element is most closely related to the land use,
housing, circulation, and open space/recreation elements. A
key objective of the noise element is to provide noise exposure
information for use in the land use element. This land use
element, when integrated with the noise element, will show
acceptable land uses in relation to existing and projected
noise contoura. The housing element considers the provision
of adequate sites for new housing and standards for the
housing stock. Since residential land use is among the most
noise sensitive, the noise exposure information provided in
the noise element must be considered when planning the loca-
tion and design of new housing. The circulation system is
one of the major sources of noise. Noise exposure will thus
be a factor in the location and design of new transportation
routes and facilities and in the possible mitigation of noise
from existing facilities. Finally, excessive noise can
adversely affect the enjoyment of recreational pursuits.
Recreation areas may also generate high noise levels. Thus,
noise impacts must be considered when planning recreation
uses. Also, open space can be used as a tool to buffer noise
sources fror. sensitive land uses through wide setbacks.
*Refer to Ldn method description, page 18.
-10-
DEFINITIONS
Listed below are terms used in this element:
Ambient: The background noise level always present when
so a ed, identifiable sources are absent.
A -Weighted Sound Level: The sound pressure level in decibels
as Measured on a Sound level meter using the A -weighting filter
network. The A -weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low
and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner
similar to the response of the human ear and gives good cor-
relation with subjective reactions to noise. Sounds measured
with an "A" weighting are abbreviated dBA or dB (A).
Decibel (dB): A unit for describing the amplitude of sound,
equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio
of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure,
which is 20 micropascals (20 micronewtons per square meter) .
E u� a1�Noisiness Zones: Defined areas or regions of a community
wherein the ambient noise levels are generally similar (within
a range of 5dB) . Typically, all sites within any given noise
zone will be of comparable proximity to major noise sources.
Ldn or Day -Night Average Level: Average noise levels during
a 24-hour day obtained after an addition of IOdB to sound
levels occurring at night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
The daily levels of noise exposure are then averaged on an
annual basis. Ldn's are approximately equal to CNEL or
"Community Noise Equivalent Levels."
Noise Contour: A line passing through points where the same
sound intensity level prevails. Contours form bands of
varying width emanating from a noise source.
Residential: Places where people live and sleep. Includes
butrs�no limited to single family dwellings, apartments,
institutions, mobilehomes, group quarters, hotels and motels,
convalescent hospitals, and rest homes.
Trucks: Includes all trucks with three axles or more, and
wwo axle trucks with four rear wheels. This excludes light
pickups and vans.
-11-
SECTION I I - MASE ELEMENT GOALS, POLICIES orad /MPLEMEN7A7?0V P6WAES
GOALS
. To improve the overall environment by reducing physically
harmful and annoying levels of noise.
. To prevent creation of new noise problems in developed and
developing areas.
. To alleviate existing noise problems.
. To provide acceptable exterior and interior noise environments
for residential and other noise sensitive land uses.
POLICIES
. To require acoustical studies for new residential projects
within 60dB Ldn contours as required by State Noise Insulation
Standards, using the contours provided in this element or
updated contours where necessary.
. To apply State Noise Insulation Standards to new single family
detached residential developments, hospitals, convalescent
hospitals and rest homes, as well as to all new attached
residential dwellings.
. To prohibit new residential land uses within present and
future 65dB Ldn contours around all public access airports
as required by California Airport Noise Standards.
. To avoid locating new homes within present and future 60dB
Ldn contours around non -air carrier airports.
. To prohibit new residential land uses within present and
future 75dB Ldn contours, unless effective shielding can be
provided so that acceptable exterior and interior noise
levels are met.
. To reduce exterior sound levels for new noise sensitive uses
to less than 65dB Ldn where possible.
. To use 45dB Ldn as the interior sound level standard for all
new dwelling units.
. To continue to identify noise generators and to calculate
existing and future noise contours for such uses.
. To plan and design public projects and facilities to minimize
noise impacts on neighboring noise sensitive areas.
-12-
. To plan and design public facilities to minimize noise
interference from outside noise sources.
To insure that new commercial and industrial projects are
designed to minimize noise impacts on neighboring noise
sensitive areas.
To protect existing industrial and commercial uses from
potential noise complaints from new residential development
through enforcement of Noise Insulation Standards and through
all other means possible.
To alleviate existing community noise problems through use
of a Comprehensive Noise Ordinance and any other means _
possible.
IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES FOR CITY AND COUNTY DEPARTMENTS
"SMF
Assign, in all affected departments, at least one employee
the responsibility of becoming knowledgeable about noise
control, and consult that person where noise effects of a
plan or project needs to be considered.
. Buy quieter replacement equipment when feasible; include
noise specifications in requests for bids and equipment
information.
. Encourage employees to wear hearing protection when working
noise levels are above 70-8OdBA.
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS:
. Develop performance standards for noise buffer areas between
residential and industrial/commercial uses.
. Incorporate Noise Insulation Standards into local building
codes for new detached dwellings, hospitals, convalescent
hospitals and rest homes.
. Consider the feasibility of making rest home conversions
subject to a Use Permit to allow some control over their
location and design in high noise areas.
. Prepare projected noise contours for transportation routes
with noise contours that are likely to change by 1990, before
or at the time projects are proposed along such routes.
. Continue to identify noise generators and prepare noise
contours around .them before or at the time projects are
proposed near those generators.
-13-
. Use the methodology published by I
Office of Noise Control
included in the appendices to calculate new or updated Ldn
noise contours.
Incorporate noise information and acoustical studies required
by State Noise Insulation Standards into city and county
Environmental Impact Reviews and other review procedures,
rezonings, and general plan amendmeiits.
. Continue to promote compatibility between noise generating
and noise sensitive land uses by the following methods:
limitations on hours of operation, construction of sound
barriers, relocation of noisy equipment, replacement of noisy
equipment with quieter equipment, etc.
PLANNING AND RECREATION DEPARTMENTS:
Locate suitable sites near cities for noisy recreation acti-
vities such as motorcycling.
Locate quiet activity areas of parks away from major noise
sources, or design them so that vehicular access is limited,
or so that they are buffered from noise sources by earth
berms, solid walls, etc.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS:
Designate truck routes in cities where they are not existing
to limit truck access through residential areas.
Consider noise impacts on nearby residents of traffic control
devices such as "slow down bumps," stop signs and lights, and
decorative street 'treatments such as brick crosswalks.
Confine city/county public works activities near residential
areas to daytime hours (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.) except in emergencies.
Specify hours of operation and/or decibel limits in garbage
collection and public works projects contracts.
Design new public works equipment such as pumps, wells, lift
stations, etc. to minimize noise impacts on neighboring noise
sensitive uses.
STOCKTON AIRPORT AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION:
Have an alternate set of future airport contours prepared
assuming higher training flight levels, as recommend by the
Airport Master Plan Consultant.
COG:
. Conduct workshops for building/planning personnel on Ldn noise
contour preparation, and enforcement of building Noise
Insulation Standards.
-14-
. Prepare present and future Ldn contours for all public access
airports in San Joaquin County.
. Keep an ongoing record of all noise complaints received.
. Work with the State Office of Noise Control and/or lobby for
State noise standards specifically applicable to hospitals,
convalescent hospitals, rest homes, and schools.
LAW ENFORCEMENT DPPARTMRNTR-
Increase selective enforcement of State vehicle noise control
laws, coupled with media publicity.
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS DEPARTMENTS:
Design city and county buildings to provide comfortable working
environments regarding noise using the design sound levels for
various uses listed in Figure 1.
LOCAL HEALTH DISTRICT:
In coordination with the Council of Governments, the County
and the cities, prepare and adopt a Countywide Noise Ordinance.
. Enforce a Countywide Noise Ordinance.
-15-
SECT10N 111 -. DEWRIPT/ON OF COMMUNITY NOISE EM,?RCYVMENi5
INTRODUCTION
One of the basic purposes of the Noise Element is to identify
existing noise problem areas and high noise sources. This
section identifies noise sources and noise sensitive uses by
community with a series of maps. It describes average com-
munity noise levels. Through an estimate of the 1975 population
residing within the various noise level contours, it assesses
the relative importance of major sources of noise affecting a
community. Finally, it discusses community noise problems as
perceived by the population in response to a community noise
survey. From these sources, analyses of noise problems and
specific recommendations in each community are made.
Before describing each community, however, the noise surveys
and the noise contours common to all communities are discussed.
The surveys are two countywide noise surveys undertaken in late
1973. The noise contours delineate common high noise impact
areas.
COUNTYWIDE NOISE SURVEYS
A countywide "ambient" or "background" noise level survey was
first conducted. Background noise levels are important since
the intrusiveness of a specific noise source is typically
related to background levels. A 42dBA noise might blend into
the background noise in a city but sound relatively loud in
a rural area. As background levels drop off at night, noises
become more noticeable and thus disturbing. For this reason,
most comprehensive noise ordinances are based on measured
background noise levels.
Day and night background noise levels were measured at 155
residential sites and many commercial and industrial sites
throughout the County. Although the noise levels at each
site were measured for an hour or less during a supposed
typical day and night, and could vary with more extensive
monitoring, the range of levels was not wide between similar
residential areas.
Background noise levels in residential neighborhoods in San
Joaquin County are usually a function of traffic noise, except
for isolated instances where industry or transformer noise
sets a high steady background level. Thus, neighborhoods
closest to high volume freeways tend to have the highest
levels; larger urban areas with many traffic arteries, the
next highest levels; small urban centers with only one or
two major roads, lower levels; and country areas, the lowest
levels.
-16-
Background levels in residential neighborhoods near freeways
in San Joaquin County centered around 44-47 decibels. In the
incorporated cities, background levels, on the average, were
40-45dB(A), with fringe areas tending to have the lower levels.
Small unincorporated urban centers away from freeways usually
had background levels from 34-37dBA. County background levels
ranged between 29-37dBA.
In commercial and industrial areas, background levels were
higher, due to high traffic volumes from nearby major roads,
parking lot activity, industrial blowers, fans, and heavy
equipment. The daytime average background levels for commercial
areas, 56dBA, and industrial areas, 55dBA, are not atypical
for such land uses throughout the state. At night, around
commercial uses which had closed, the average background levels
dropped to 45dBA, only slightly higher than many residential
areas. Industrial levels remained higher, 50 dBA.
From these readings, preliminary "equal noisiness zones" have
been established for the entire County. The residential noise
zones describe areas of similar noise levels through the County.
Residential Noise Zone 1 describes rural residential
areas away from major noise sources;
Residential Noise Zone 2 encompasses quieter residential
areas in the County's cities and some unincorporated
communities;
Residential Noise Zone 3 describes average urban resi-
dential areas; and
Residential Noise Zone 4 includes residential areas
within 800 feet of the County's major freeways (99,
580, 205 and part of 5), 300 feet of other freeways,
and near some heavy industrial areas.
Equal noisiness zones are of primary use in the establishment
and application of comprehensive community noise ordinances.
The equal noisiness zones are mapped in Appendix B. The proposed
noise ordinance, which includes these zones, is also included
in that Appendix.
The second survey conducted by COG was a newspaper noise survey
which ran in all County newspapers of general circulation. The
survey attempted to identify a community's perceived noise
problems. Over 300 persons clipped out and returned the ques-
tionnaire. About a third came from Stockton, a third from Lodi,
and a third from the rest of the County.
Results were interesting. While complaints did come in about
highways, freeways, railroads, and other specific noise sources,
usually from persons living in very high noise contour areas,
-17-
the majority of complaints were about what people perceive to
be unnecessary noise: motorcycles, speeding autos, cars with
modified mufflers, barking dogs, and neighbors.
Thus, there are two types of noise "problems." One is planning -
related such as the building of homes next to major transporta-
tion facilities or industries. The other noise problem is
non -site specific and widespread.
NOISE CONTOURS AND POPULATION IMPACTED BY NOISE CONTOURS
The noise contours used throughout the County were calculated
by the Day -Night Average Level (Ldn) method published by the
State Office of Noise Control. The contour distances are listed
and the methodology is described in more detail in Appendix A.
The contours have also been mapped at a 1"=400' scale. The
City and County Planning Departments have copies of these maps.
An example is shown on page 19.
Basically, Ldn's are average noise levels during a 24-hour day
obtained after an addition of lOdB to sound levels occurring
at night between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. The daily levels of noise
exposure are then averaged on an annual basis. Ldn's are
approximately equal to CNELs or "Community Noise Equivalent
Levels" used in some State legislation.
Ldn's for roads are calculated based on Annual Daily Traffic
volumes, percentage of day/night traffic, truck percentages,
and traffic speed. Ldn's for railroad operations are based on
an annual average of numbers of trains per day and per night
over a 24-hour period. Railroad switchyard Ldn's are more
complicated but data input includes hours and location of
switching activities, location of engine pooling areas or
refrigerator car storage areas, etc.
The noise contours are broken down into 5dB "steps" from 60
to 60 decibels for determination of land use compatibility.
The State Office of Noise Control "Land Use Compatibility
Chart for Community Noise Environments," page 61, describes
noise contour levels within which various land uses are
"acceptable;" "conditionally acceptable" if minor sound
reduction measures are incorporated into the building or
site design; "normally unacceptable" unless moderate to major
sound reduction features are undertaken, and "clearly
unacceptable."
For residential uses, these categories generally correspond
to the following Ldn levels:
Less than 60dB = Acceptable
60-69dB = Conditionally Acceptable
70-74dB = Normally Unacceptable
75dB or greater = Clearly Unacceptable
-16-
i
A�
�• y t
r f `.. ,
1 dlW
.Ap
lir
10
ark
110
• Q:w,r-,
•�. � ^i r "i a M• �•• �"': (%
ti•,�ti.,,; � •� t r '���"ice.. ..-•}i•. .,...,r�..
..u.•n'l.' 1' '7i' fY L _t mow.:
� .. .. 4•�iil�1� .i;,��• 2 � t'S Li. F � ,t . 4 rt�l • 1a`,.' � f ��1,.
• T rv� �`/ � i.•..9 �O�
.t•.,O
ry
�. '`'may �- ~ 19:::x:` • � �� �..� �` .,� ��1
400' NOISE CONTOUR MAP
-19-
•
Routes with noise eontocrs that ar, not likely to ehan�ce signtficantly by 199p
•........
Routes with nolle con to u:s chat are likely to change by 1990.
Routeswith future but ec present contours ;either because road is not vat
— — --
constructed or because traffic counts are presently tuu low to merle contours
although road is destgnated as d maior rcad�.
CDContours
mapped on County I":��n' base naps.
\
Contours napped ar Countc ueriais.
`:o "high
..
maps. Any con•ours are sporedlo•. flo-" ;enerili2ed cnntovrs
d3 > _'0' Ac ate: sec t:�ns
of two noise _,.^tour routes, contours are slightly w:der.
-24-
NORTH
I
MILE
YCNUI.'h
tY
s
NOISE �, ROUTES °�N s
index map 7 'OUN7
Y c
' SpN c•er- - . 0
X -a
Y
:;: -
I ..:.
•'e:.:::.:: :
::illy'.:: ::.:::;:
R
i}. } FL5ENY6LFii:
.............
z
m . � iii •er.�e:' �
c.e[. m s`t� 'r ala ';«•: ::
:... I:. ::. J
Ei �tS r ca 1
f ' •�s `
�r+
1
a
.V K. f. • ___ � . D Cl
i01C F, 3Bi? a Z1r
L
`' 2
n
KE:tatfASY�.. KETTLrttar ( is
r i
NAIOEi: ''� � • �} �JJ •
i {' I r '•i: s?
F
i
.. Eld" 4111E :'•?:C•} .
t I
... .
s
• .� r �gSitKV uewrfnws
Routes with noise contours that are not likely to change significantly by 1990.
s
........ Routes with noise contours that are Likely to change by 1990. '
Routes with future but no present contours (either because road is not yet
TC
constructed of because traffic counts are presently too low to mertt contours -
although road is designated as a major road).
o�Fe,QCH Lp Contours mapped on County 1":500' base maps. jI
Contours mapped on County 1":500' aerials.
NORTH
i
No maps. Any contours are "high speed low flow" genaralized contours
j (70 dB ? < 100'; 5i dB fror. 101-2C0': < 5% dB < > ?00'. At intersections
a of two noise contour routes, contours are slightly wider). MILE .7 I J
s C I
l • �� �lN + •la+Pi• lliyt}1• sa• ano]-a '•+]nu, n•o i +•lou ow] )b
�/ oc 1aa+—.1 1. ".002 C a, BP 09 7 •. oc?-101 +'e'1 YPs �0000l i t Y•
,..-d-
-1
uf) O
y- •ano]uoa p+:}lasso•! .c1/ 1 pada 4114.. a + •anofua Lo• ••d- oN
* M1ydf/ •al•1 aa+ Al-. dd-..d.. •••q ,00. x.1 A1—o uo p•dd- —.1-, O
DYNl. •lp.ua ao(w a •• p.]a•11•ap •i p.., ytn.4i1.
'i +nos uua 114- of -1 -] 111,••+ad j •Slmoa atS Taal s.naa•q ao p•Sena l+una ����
~•c 1 laL Sou al Paea ••n•a+q aWiT+) • not -i ]u••+ad eu Snq +ananl ya}+ +a1noY
L
•y• -0661 iq •tory] o] LI•all • -4, •aneavei ••tuu 411w •alnor .........
I. (• -Obbl Lq All—MutT• +tv.ya 0) /1.1111 ]ou aa. y1 rano]-S -1--loe V11• -3-1]a
- _ IT
I_._ i=:G. ,TST.... I'o ``C � -. ..1 "I`•• l,if Yr.,[I .7Y1 Na 350"
i � +• M1Y�Y1
��(�• �Ij1 i �+ s AgraIsl
ei ' � IIE slYnor f + aalf>rx i
1 r n
1
n
L O
dVW NQ1HM1S 33S
on.19. s1r300. ,; �fJ'����i•,�"_�-TN olnm 1
I y
a aY+ 1 ` 1 f 1].Y ��i \ r •a1 1 3 o'' + wDi.e
�, - • - I L]a3 ,yf;�i -t'C �f • a].rf ll�', ^y L�/xy'�Y:
-t
•.�.. _ .w1wf 1 I ./ 790M11y + � (�.'{•, !�� ,1/W►1L�� b+ J J.i�
��\•''yY 6`110107w/: ws- ii .
y ILII] /-..� '{..c. _ � 1 �l�_ � ��, • �L �0�yOrY,m =}.
.{{,J JJ 7sill tprrw ff�� 1
tit +•. V •�Ij1 JJJ` a f ',j t` .
T_ ekl
Willi•
•� _ • s � � ... , I ]ars - �.: +p
1-- ' �,�,+ -��x ..nen. +�... � ?�c,�:• OtiP
.4 ice' owa lt. sI
._ I: ��. .. `_ •(_'�+ } I. rte_ �-`" � `il - t �; r��c
f Ilk
These categories correspond to State building Noise Insulation
Standards. The only exception to these standards is around
airport areas. Here, because of the difficulty in insulating
buildings from airport noise, because outside yard areas cannot
be shielded, and because airport noise is characterized by
extremely high noise levels followed by periods of quite (and
thus tends to be more bothersome than steady noise), Airport
Noise Standards are more restrictive. New homes are prohibited
within Ldn contours of 65dB or greater around airports.
The Ldn contours and State standards are the basis for many
recommendations contained in this Section and Section IV.
CHART 5
STATE NOISE INSULATION REGULATIONS
APPLICABLE TO ALL CITIES AND COUNTIES
California Airport Noise Standards
Effective November 28, 1970
California Administrative Code
Title 4, Subchapter 6, Article 1, Section 5000
Content: Establishes method for predicting and monitoring
noise exposure around state permit airports.
Sets a numerical limit on the CNEL scale (approx-
imately equal to the Ldn scale) above which the
noise environment is not suited for residential
use (CNEL or Ldn = 65dB). Requires measurement
of noise levels around airports which have a
noise problem. Requires reduction of noise at
airports or sound insulation of existing resi-
dential dwellings and schools near airports so
that the CNEL or Ldn = 65dB contour does not
impact such uses by January 1, 1986.
California Noise Insulation Standards '
Effective August 22, 1974
California Administrative Code
Title 25, Chapter 1, Subchapter 1, Article 4, Section 1092
Content: Sets minimum interior noise standards for sound
insulation from exterior sources in high noise
areas, and between units in all multi -unit
dwellings and hotels and motels. Requires
developers to submit an acoustical analysis
report on projects proposed within CNEL or Ldn
contours of 60 decibels or greater. The report,
prepared under the supervision of an acoustical
technician, shall include maps of the noise
source(s) and project site, predicted noise
levels, noise attenuation measures to be applied,
and an analysis of their effectiveness.
-27-
The mapped contours are existing contours. Future 1995 contours
were prepared only for airports and state highways and freeways.
Future contours were not prepared for other sources because it
was felt the limited data base available would be too unreliable
to project accurate contours for specific areas.
The index maps on the following pages identify all roads and
railroads with existing noise contours. The road segments
marked on the maps are not likely to have changed contours
by 1990. other mapped roads are likely to have changed contours.
It is recommended that along t e latter roads, specific future
contours be used where already available, or be prepared where
not available and used as the basis for building insulation
requirements. Care must be taken to combine the contours with
those of adjacent or intersecting roads and railroads. This
can be done as part of a project's EIR or acoustical report.
Major changes in railroad operations would also necessitate
new contour preparation; no major changes were foreseen by
railroad companies at the time of contour preparation.
The mapped noise contours which accompany the Noise Element do
not show shielding effects as this would be virtually impossible
to do. To estimate sound reductions obtained from buildings,
barrier walls, and the minimal effects of plantings, see the
Building and Site Design section, page 68.
The table on the following page summarizes the estimated popu-
lation residing within various noise contours of different
sources. These results are discussed individually by city and
county.
COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENT DESCRIPTIONS
•STOCKTON
Estimated Population Affected by Various Noise Sources (See
Table 1, Page 29, for Summary
In terms of numbers of persons affected and in terms of severity
of noise impacts, railroads, and State Route 99 are the most
important noise sources affecting the Stockton area. Approxi-
mately 330 persons live within 75dB Ldn contours of railroad
lines in Stockton. That is, they live within 100 feet of
Santa Fe's main line or 150' of Southern Pacific's main rail
line. Another 225 persons live within 75dB Ldn's of Route 99.
Other than switchyards, no other noise sources create levels
of this magnitude.
The State Office of Noise Control Land Use Compatibility Chart
(page 61) lists areas within 75dB Ldn contours as clearly
unacceptable for residential development and would prohibit
-28-
TABLE 1
ESTIMATED POPULATION IMPACTED BY NOISE SOURCE: 1975
-29-
LIIN LEVEL
Nuler Source
60-64dB
65-69dB
70-74dB
75-79dB
Total all Levels
Pop. Impacted
STOCKTON GENERAL
PLAN AREA
Railroads
4,573
4,217
2,005
338
11,133
Rt'. 99
1,637
1,028
506
227
3,400
Interstate 5
1,878
1,102
33
0
3,013
All Other Major
Highways, Ronds,
and Streets
4,475
16,472
962
4
21,913
Total all Sources
12,563
22,819
3,506
569
39,459
=176 137. 22.4%
CITY OF LODI
SPRR
1,911
1,690
751
180
4,522
Rte. 99
545
415
293
246
1,499
Rt. 12
309
341
236
0
898
All Other Major
Streets
509
3,157
204
0
3,870
Total all Sources
3,274
5,603
1,484
413
10,774
32,065. 33.6%
CITY OF TRACY
-
SPRR
672
170
3
845
Eleventh Street
407
64
471
1- 205
67
64
131
All Other Major
Streets
0
1,086
76
1,162
Total ell Sources
1,146
1,384
79
2,609
= 16,055. 16.3%
CITY OF MANTECA
Railroads
1,066
936
336
60
2,398
Rte. 99
847
362
113
267
1,589
Rt. 120
324
0
0
811
All Other Major
Streets
887
126
1,013
Total all Sources
2,400
2,509
515
327
5,811
11,489 33.27.
,CITY OF F.SCALON
SFRR 6 Main St.
210
302
186
18
716
120 and TSRR
66
0
0
0
66
All other Major
Roads and RR -e
78
i47
3
0
228
_
354
_
449
189
18
1,010
- 2,336= 43.2%
Total all Sources
CITY OF RIPON
Rtr.. 99 6 SPRR
395
244
i07
0
746
All Other Major
Streets
291
123
1 ]
0
LSS
Total all Sources
424
761
110
0
901
2,891= 31.2%
UNINCORPORATED COLIN-I-Y
AREA OUTSIDE STOCKTON
I
GE:NE.KAL PLAN AREA
Railroads
603
303
126
6
1,038
i Rte.99
360
318
384
144
1,206
1-5
75
81
54
210
Other State Routes
ISO
I 969
606
1,725
Major County Roads
t
1,749
I 1,278
0
3,027
Major Rds. 6 RR
j� 'There Parallel
1
150
222
507
�
rot„1 „ll Sources
1,323
3,510
2,670
ISO
7,713
} 52,85858= 14.6% '
R)TAI. ALL SOURCES
21,484
36,701
8,615
1,477
68,277
1299,83L= 22.87. !
-29-
new development within this contour band, unless effective
exterior shielding of the noise source can be provided.
Shielding is generally possible for at grade freeways, but
is very difficult for railroad lines or switchyards since
locomotives are 16 feet high and railroad tracks tend to be
elevated. In addition, peak noise levels from trains are
much higher than trucks and even proper shielding will not
reduce peak noise levels enough to eliminate severe distur-
bance.
Stockton's General Plan shows two areas for future residential
development within this contour. one is a triangular area
surrounded by Mariposa Road, Route 99, and Charter Way.
Santa Fe Railroad bisects the area. High noise levels from
all of these sources would render part of this area unacceptable
for residential development. The second area is north of the
Calaveras River and west of the Southern Pacific Railroad.
The eastern 150 feet of this entire strip would be unacceptable
for residential development due to high noise levels.
The next most severe noise contour is a Ldn of 70-74dB. Within
this contour, State Noise Insulation Standards require sound
insulation of multiple family buildings or shielding from
barriers to bring interior sounds to acceptable levels. Yard
areas should be shielded if they are to be useful. Railroads
are by far the largest generator of sound levels this high.
More than 2000 persons in the Stockton General Plan area are
presently impacted to this degree along the Southern Pacific,
Santa Fe, and Western Pacific tracks. Additional development
is planned along SP and WP tracks because of other qualities
this land has for development purposes. Sound insulation of
buildings will be necessary.
State Route 99 and several either very heavily travelled or
high speed roads (Charter Way, I-5, the Crosstown Freeway,
and parts of Center, El Dorado, Fremont, Fresno, Hammer,
Harding, Lower Sacramento, Main, March Lane, Mariposa, Miner,
Pacific, Pershing, Thornton, West Lane/Airport Way, and
Wilson Way) impact another 1500 persons within a 70-74dB Ldn
contour.
It is possible that along northern portions of Thornton, Lower
Sacramento, and West Lanes, as development occurs and speeds
decrease, the 70dB contours may shrink somewhat but this should
be offset in the future by higher traffic volumes. Contours
for all other roads, particularly I-5, are expected to increase
in the future. Except for the freeways and other high speed
roads, however, the 70dB contours will not generally extend
past the first row of homes.
60-64 and 65-69dB Ldn contours are moderate to major noise
impact areas. Normal residential construction with forced
air ventilation will suffice within these contours to provide
-30-
� \ |
-
�
!z § §
:.� .
.§ $ Ir
° E
E
cn 4 \
P. «a�/Z
�_ ��CC \ z
5P��9� S
\ 2@§o£R2 u\
■S2(��7 }j
�
� � ■
� \ ■
§
�
co
�
� . d
�
-32-
acceptable interior environments according to State standards.
Whether annoyance or sleep interference will occur, however,
will depend in part on whether bedrooms are situated toward
the street or at the back of the house. Also, careful atten-
tion to construction details so that windows and doors fit
tightly, and no cracks exist for sound to leak through is
necessary to insure that the house achieves its full insulation
potential. Shielding of yard areas is recommended in all areas
where exterior sound levels exceed an Ldn of 65dB.
Thirty-five thousand persons presently live within 60 or 65dB
contours. These include residents living adjacent to many
major streets (Oak, Park, Benjamin Holt, Swain, Alpine, Filbert,
etc.); back a row or two from very busy roads such as Harding,
Miner, Pacific, etc., or even further back from railroads,
railroad switchyards, and freeways. In the latter group,
estimates of actual populations impacted is difficult because
the contours do not take shielding by buildings into account.
Still, where I-5 or the railroads are elevated, shielding is
not effective and the contours should be fairly accurate.
Obviously, future residential areas cannot be so isolated from
noise sources that sound levels will always be less than 60dB.
They can, however, be designed, constructed, and often shielded
to eliminate potential annoyance from noise.
The Stockton Metropolitan Airport presently impacts only one
residence within a 60-65dB Ldn contour. Maintaining this
situation in the future depends upon whether airport operations
grow at the rate assumed in the Airport Master Plan. If air
cargo flights become a reality, or training flights increase
significantly once Stockton Airport installs radar, the contours
may encompass some planned residential areas (notably an unde-
veloped area east of Airport Way and north of Little Johns
Creek). The General Plan would then need to be amended, since
State Airport Noise Standards are clear that no homes may be
impacted by Airport Ldn contours of 65dB or greater by the end
of 1985.
Industrial noise contours for planning purposes have not yet
been prepared. However, industries adjacent to planned resi-
dential areas which might create high noise levels have been
identified by the Stockton Planning Department. Noise Impact
Study Areas have been placed around these industries on noise
contour maps. Before or at the time residential development
within such areas is proposed, noise contours for these indus-
tries will be prepared. The city will also continue to identify
potential industrial noise generators near developing residential
areas for noise contour preparation.
-33-
Perceived Noise Problems from COG Noise Surve
Perceived noise problems in Stockton, according to the 1973 COG
Survey, were in part land use related and in part not. Residents
living near WPRR tracks, ST&E tracks, and the Santa Fe switch-
yard complained of train noise. Complaints were also received
from residents living near freeways and along major roads.
A small number of commercial and industrial uses near residential
areas generated complaints due to pre -dawn delivery of garbage
trucks, parking lot sweepers, truck traffic, amplified intercom
systems, or plant noise itself.
In some of these cases, the residential and industrial uses
should never have been allowed to develop so close. Other
problems, however, are design -oriented and could have been
eliminated in the initial construction of the homes or commer-
cial/industrial/transportation use. In these cases, design
compromises can still sometimes be worked out to alleviate
existing problems. An adopted noise control ordinance provides
a vehicle for objectively evaluating a noise problem situation.
It is the responsibility of the planning department to review
new commercial and industrial construction for possible noise
impacts and to explore mitigation measures. Figure 3 in
Section IV lists suggested noise impact considerations for
new commercial/industrial projects. Figure 2 describes some
building and design techniques for noise reduction. Other
mitigation measures are described in the 1974 COG Noise Element.
Stockton was similar to the rest of the County in that its
major perceived noise problems were non -land use related.
Fifty-six percent (56%) of people complained about motorcycles.
Motorcycles were singled out because they are loud to start
with and many have modified mufflers which create even higher
sound levels. Motorcycles were also singled out because
many regard tham as unnecessary noise. (They are unnecessary
in an economic sense. Ninety percent (90%) are used for
pleasure purposes only.) Also, many persons operate them in
an unnecessarily noise manner.
Seventy-one percent (71%) of the respondents to the COG noise
survey complained about vehicular noise other than motorcycles.
Of this percentage, nearly half specified speeding cars, or
cars with modified mufflers as causing the problem. Again,
it is unnecessary or excessive noise to which people most
object. (Noise from cars increases as speed increases.)
Speeding cars also elicit complaints because of fears of safety.
The number and severity of complaints regarding motorcycles
and excessively noisy or speeding cars indicates this is a
problem of some importance in the Stockton area. it is one
that can be dealt with under existing legislation if adequate
-34-
personnel and equipment are provided to police for on -street
enforcement. In response to citizen complaints about off-road
motorcycle riding along levees, etc., the Stockton City Council
in 1975 adopted an ordinance restricting motorcycle use to
city streets or on a resident's own property. It is enforced
by trained motorcycle patrolmen.
Harking dog complaints were numerous and scattered throughout
the city. Most problems with barking dogs occur at night when
people are trying to sleep. In 1976, Stockton revised its
"barking dog" ordinance so that "any person" disturbed by
"continuous and incessant" barking can obtain relief. This
ordinance will facilitate resolution of barking dog problems.
"Neighbor" complaints were also important in Stockton and
involved unsupervised children or neighbors playing music
too loudly, or warming up cars in winter. Most of these
complaints could be eliminated with greater consideration on
the part of the noisemakers, but noise ordinances can also
be used as a tool to alleviate this type of problem.
Many of the "neighbor" complaints were from apartment dwellers,
where problems stem from inadequate insulation between units.
A 1973 state law responding to this situation is in effect
providing minimum standards for between -unit insulation in
new multi -family structures. It is enforced by local building
departments.
In summary, planning and careful design and construction can
eliminate most noise problems in Stockton's developing areas.
Since major railroad lines and freeways create such severe
noise impacts, particular care must be taken to insure homes
are adequately protected near these sources or located further
away from them. Where noise problems exist, a noise ordinance
provides a useful tool to identify the severity of the noise
problem situation and to work out compromises.
Special Problems
1. Schools: In 1973, 16 schools in Stockton were affected
by high noise levels from nearby streets. In the past 5
years, 5 schools have been reconstructed and the new
classrooms have been relocated, insulated, and/or air
conditioned to eliminate noise disturbance. These schools
include some of those most severely affected. Still, the
following schools receive noise levels which will interfere
with speech (and learning) . Peak levels above 60dBA can
be considered severe. If air conditioning were provided
in affected classrooms, the worst problems could be
eliminated.
-35-
2. Hospitals, Convalescent Hospitals and Rest Homes: In
Stockton 5 rest homes were located within 60 dB Ldn contours;
7 within 65dB Ldn contours and 1 within a 70dB Ldn contour.
Hospitals and convalescent hospitals tend to be located
along major roads, thus many of these were also affected
by noise. State licensing and construction standards
governing hospitals, convalescent hospitals, and rest
homes do not presently include noise criteria. Due to
a lack of State standards, local actions described on
page7l should be considered by the city. The sick and
the elderly are far more susceptible to noise disturbance
than the general population.
Community Background Noise Levels
For noise ordinance enactment, background noise levels were
surveyed to determine "equal noisiness zones." Due to the
pervasiveness of traffic noise and the number of major streets,
background noise levels in Stockton are primarily in Noise
Zone 3, that is, "urban area" levels. Along freeway corridors
and near the Port of Stockton, residential levels are even
higher and a higher background noise zone would be more appro-
priate (Zone 4). The northwest part of Stockton in 1973 had
lower noise levels than the rest of the city, but this situation
may change as the area develops and as I-5 is completed. Another
small area north of Harding, east of Pershing, south of the
Calaveras River, and west of the San Joaquin Cemetary also
had quieter background sound levels once away from the major
streets. These 2 areas better fit Noise Zone 2, ".suburban"
levels.
-36-
Qua"
SOIRs LSViL6 IS VAZI096 SCINOOLS IM STOCKTON
KS,rxx ?= Tmt= PMx Moin
L[VVJ (i 44M) P10M ML70S ROAD
Number
d1A Laval Out-
MLA Level Iasi"
d" Leval Inside
Classrooms
aids Affected
Classrooms With
Classrooms With
Saler Road
school
Affected
Clasarooms
Windows Open
■indore Closed
Af meting
Apostolic
4
76
66
56
Merckes
tdison
9
19
69
S!
Canter
1
7S-61
65-71
SS -61
Charter
Harrison
2
74
N
54
Alpine
Oakhurst
2
70
60
s0
1-5
St. Gertrude's
1 and
Library
81-92
71-72
61-62
Main*
San Joaquin
1
82
72
62
Park
Mobster
65-67
S5-57
6S-47
I -S
•St. Gertrude's
is also affected by cannery noise in season.
2. Hospitals, Convalescent Hospitals and Rest Homes: In
Stockton 5 rest homes were located within 60 dB Ldn contours;
7 within 65dB Ldn contours and 1 within a 70dB Ldn contour.
Hospitals and convalescent hospitals tend to be located
along major roads, thus many of these were also affected
by noise. State licensing and construction standards
governing hospitals, convalescent hospitals, and rest
homes do not presently include noise criteria. Due to
a lack of State standards, local actions described on
page7l should be considered by the city. The sick and
the elderly are far more susceptible to noise disturbance
than the general population.
Community Background Noise Levels
For noise ordinance enactment, background noise levels were
surveyed to determine "equal noisiness zones." Due to the
pervasiveness of traffic noise and the number of major streets,
background noise levels in Stockton are primarily in Noise
Zone 3, that is, "urban area" levels. Along freeway corridors
and near the Port of Stockton, residential levels are even
higher and a higher background noise zone would be more appro-
priate (Zone 4). The northwest part of Stockton in 1973 had
lower noise levels than the rest of the city, but this situation
may change as the area develops and as I-5 is completed. Another
small area north of Harding, east of Pershing, south of the
Calaveras River, and west of the San Joaquin Cemetary also
had quieter background sound levels once away from the major
streets. These 2 areas better fit Noise Zone 2, ".suburban"
levels.
-36-
TRACY
General
Tracy, thus far, is a relatively quiet community compared to
other cities in San Joaquin County. Major freeways have by-
passed it, although residential development needing sound
reduction features is beginning to occur in North Tracy adjacent
to I-205. The main Southern Pacific Railroad switchyard is
outside the city in an industrial area and affects very few
residents. A large "rim and rail" facility is located in town,
but it elicited no COG noise survey complaints. An industrial
corridor adjacent to residential development on the east side
of town also brought no complaints, but the proximity to resi-
dential development would favor performance standards or at
least careful consideration and mitigation of noise impacts
for new industry locating in this area (refer to Figure 3 for
commercial/industrial noise impact considerations, page 75).
Three schools in Tracy (9 classrooms) are affected by major
roads. Noise levels from passing trucks would be disturbing
with windows open; with windows closed, peak levels are in the
50`s, high enough to -cause some speech interference, but not
high enox4gh, according to Office of Noise Control personnel,
to disrupt classrooms severely.
Estimated Po ulation Affected b Various Noise Sources (See
Ta e , Page 9, for Comparison with Other Cities
The estimated population falling within noise contour impact
areas were as follows:
Ldn 60-64
(moderate)
1,146
persons
Ldn 65-69
(major)
1,384
persons
Ldn 70-74dB
(severe)
79
persons
TOTAL
198
2,609
persons
The severest noise impacts were from high speed roads (parts
of MacArthur and Tracy Boulevards). Merely lowering speed limits
would significantly reduce noise impacts from these roads. By
noise source, the population affected breaks out as follows,
listed in order of importance.
SPRR
845
persons
Eleventh Street
471
persons
Holly Drive
335
persons
Tracy Boulevard
271
persons
Grant Line Road
198
persons
East Street
173
persons
205
131
persons
MacArthur
98
persons
Central Avenue
42
persons
Third and Fourth Streets
45
persons
Tracy Municipal Airport
0
persons
TOTAL
2,609
persons
-37-
k,l -
TRACY ''®''
NOISE ELEMENT MAP 0500 QW
FEET
—38—
RESIDENTIAL
� HOSPITALS/CONVAL. &
----L^^ COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
SCHOOLS/ LIBRARIES
_
REST HOMES
PARKS
� OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES
wOISE CONTOuR ROUTES
40D SWITCHYARD avD RSM
1� FUTURE NOOSE CONTOUR ROUTES
AND RAIL. YAaD
—38—
None of the sources in Tracy create or are likely to create
noise impacts severe enough to prohibit residential development
near them. However, Eleventh Street and 205 will require sound
reduction features in new homes constructed adjacent to them.
The Tracy Airport creates no measurable noise problem at present.
State Airport Noise Standards prohibit new residential develop-
ment within a Ldn contour of 65dB or greater. The existing 65dB
contour is contained primarily within the airport boundary and
encompasses no residences. The future 65dB Ldn contour extends
approximately 700 feet northwest of the junction of Linne and
Corral Hollow Roads and 600 feet southeast of Tracy Boulevard
into an industrial area. One existing home is contained within
the future 65dB contour (See Map 18, page 65).
The future 60dB contour, within which noise could be a problem
for residents and noise analyses must be undertaken before a
new construction occurs, covers roughly 180 acres northwest and
southeast of the airport in planned agricultural and industrial
areas. These are compatible uses as long as construction of
new residences in agricultural zones are prohibited within the
65dB Ldn contour and are avoided or insulated within 60dB Ldn
contour areas. If airport operations change significantly in
the future to accommodate larger planes, new contours should be
prepared at that time.
Perceived Noise Problems from COG Noise Survey
The main perceived noise problems in Tracy were not specific
sources per se. They were motorcycle, truck, and automobile
noise. While individual standard automobiles cause little
problem until their numbers are high, cars with modified or
defective mufflers tend to be highly annoying. In a 1974 field
survey by COG, noise levels of cars driving up and down East
Street near the high school were measured. Thirty-one percent
of the cars were in violation of State vehicle noise laws!
Since the laws are generous for standard cars, it could be
concluded that these cars either had muffler problems or were
being driven in an excessively noisy manner. Part-time police
attention to this problem, newspaper publicity about the fact
that State noise laws will be enforced, and even classroom
education could significantly reduce this situation citywide.
Trucks generate some complaints from residents near truck routes.
Trucks are two to four times as loud as cars and make a great
deal more noise upon acceleration/deceleration. The two major
truck routes in town (Eleventh Street and Grant Line Road) are
lined primarily with commercial uses. Any new residential uses
along these roads will merit sound insulation. Other city truck
routes might be studied for their necessity if noise complaints
become numerous.
-39-
Motorcycles were found by the California Highway Patrol to
be the most common offender of noise laws. This problem can
best be handled in the same manner as loud automobiles.
Barking dogs were also perceived as problems by some, however,
a reasonable city ordinance exists to remedy such situations.
ESCALON
General
Escalon is a mixed use community located away from the County's
freeways. Because of this, its background noise levels are
lower than most other cities in San Joaquin County. It is,
however, bisected by Highway 120 and Santa Fe Railroad, two
sources which create high noise impacts. Other transportation
noise sources include Tidewater Southern Railroad, Escalon
Bellota/McHenry Road, and Main Street. The roads contribute
to background noise levels typical of suburban or small urban
communities. One fringe residential area on the northeach side
is as quiet as many county rural residential areas.
Estimated Population Affected by Various Noise Sources (See
Table 1, Page 29, for Summary)
High noise impacts from transportation sources are reduced
somewhat by the fact that the main roads and railroads are
parallel through much of the city. Secondly, industrial and
commercial uses buffer residential uses from the highest noise
impacts along parts of Santa Fe Railroad and other sources.
Still, major noise sources affect nearly half of Escalon's
population.
The State Noise Compatibility Chart defines an Ldn contour of
75dB or greater as clearly incompatible with residential uses.
Santa Fe Railroad creates an Ldn of 75dB or greater within
100 feet on each side of the tracks. This contour presently
affects only 2 single family homes and 1 apartment, or approx-
imately 15 persons. However, the City's General Plan shows
additional undeveloped residential land along the railroad
track.
Another 185 persons live within 70-74 dB contours (approximately
240 feet either side of the rail line) of Santa Fe Railroad.
State Noise Insulation Standards currently require building
sound insulation in new multiple family construction in this
contour to reduce interior noise to acceptable levels.
Santa Fe Railroad is by far the dominant noise source in
Escalon, affecting 714 persons total within all noise contours.
Route 120 and Tidewater Southern affect another 251 persons;
McHenry Avenue and Tidewater, 177 persons; and Escalon Be llota,
51 persons. But in addition to affecting fewer persons, these
latter roads and railroads create less severe noise impacts
than Santa Fe.
-40-
MAP 10
ESCALON
NOISE ELEMENT MAP U'F5EoEoT '000
Q RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
41M INDUSTRIAL
® SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES
� NOISE CONTOUR ROUTES
-41-
Qb PARKS
® OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL
Perceived Noise Problems from COG Noise Survey
Contrasting with the noise contour information are complaint
data from the 1973 noise survey. The complaints received from
Escalon residents cited only motorcycles, cars, trucks, and
barking dogs. Since the survey, industrial noise complaints
have been received by COG. Complaint data are not generally
a very good indicator of problem situations. Research has
found complaints may represent only 2-20% of the highly annoyed
people in a community. Still, it was surprising that no train
complaints were registered.
The City has responded to citizen complaints by adopting both
a dog noise control ordinance and an ordinance which allows
the prosecution of those who operate vehicles which emit exces-
sive or unnecessary noise.
Thus, possible future noise problems are likely to be planning -
related. In its General Plan, the City has mitigated many
possible problems by buffering most residential areas from
transportation noise sources with commercial or industrial
development. Single family residential uses are buffered further
from some commercial areas by multiple family areas. However,
some residential land is shown for development adjacent to the
Santa Fe tracks as before mentioned. Further, there is one
section where residential uses adjoin industrial land. The
recommendations in Section 4 would apply to these areas.
•RIPON (SEE RIPON NOISE ELEMENT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION)
Community Background Noise Levels and Perceived Noise Problems
In Ripon, as in the rest of the County, transportation noise
is the source which affects the most people. Highway 99 raises
background noise levels throughout the city. Levels, when
measured, ranged from 44-54dBA during the day and 40-45dBA at
night. These levels are relatively high compared to other
cities in the County.
Ironically, the relatively high background noise levels tend
to make intruding sounds such as cars, motorcycles, etc. less
noticeable. Because of this, or effective police enforcement,
or other reasons, only 1 noise complaint, citing cars and trucks,
was received from Ripon. Thus, perceived noise problems in
Ripon are low, and planning for noise compatible land uses take
precedence.
Estimated Population Affected by Various Noise Sources (See
Table 1, Page 29, for Summary)
Highway 99 and the SPRR main line affect
severely in terms of high noise impacts
of persons affected. Approximately 110
-42-
residents the most
and in terms of numbers
residents live within
u,'
RIPON
NOISE ELEMENT MAP
J / A fvl.> L .Q U.S
o
FEET
O RESIDENTIAL ® HOSPITALS /CONVAL. 8,
O COMMERCIAL REST HOMES
4M INDUSTRIAL (f) PARKS
SCHOOLS/ LIBRARIES 1�0 OTHER RESRESIDENTIAL
® NO•�L Coril)JR RDUTE
®s m F_ ,uPE ^iSE COM1:T0uR ROL TES
-43-
an Ldn contour of 70-74dB from these sources. Noise insulation
Standards require sound insulation of new multiple family
structures (or shielding by barriers) within this contour
to bring interior sound to acceptable levels. Barriers must
be high and long enough to block the sound source from sight.
They must also contain no cracks for sound to leak through.
Since the railroad is elevated and locomotives are 16 feet
high, exterior shielding is difficult.
Ripon's General Plan shows most future residential growth
occurring away from the freeway/railroad corridor. However,
there is one residential growth area in the northwest between
Jack Tone Road and Wilma which is affected by these sources.
State Land Use Compatibility Standards identify residential
uses as clearly incompatible within 75dB Ldn contours. (No
persons presently live in areas with levels this high.) The
75dB Ldn contour encompasses a strip 150 feet either side of
the SPRR tracks. The 70dB contour extends another 150 feet
out or 300 feet away from the tracks.
Six hundred and thirty-five persons live within 60--64 and
65-69dB Ldn contours of the freeway and railroad. Main Street
and Milgeo in town affect 140 residents with levels of 60-64dB.
These are moderate to major noise levels. While ordinary
construction with foirced air ventilation will suffice for
acceptable interior levels, shielding of yard areas would be
necessary to make outside sound levels comfortable.
Ripon has planned industry next to residential areas,in�two
places. Possible noise problems are mitigated in, part by
designating much of the industrial area as "light industry."
Still, in both the planned industrial areas and existing
industrial areas adjacent to existing residential areas, the
noise impacts listed on page 74 should be considered to insure
that potential noise problems are averted.
Special Problems
Noise levels from trucks on Main Street are disturbing at
times in 4 classrooms at Ripon Grammar School. This problem
is worst during warm weather when doors need to be opened for
air circulation and harvest season is underway. Noise levels
inside reach 65dBA every time a truck passes by. Speech (and
learning) interference is likely when noise levels rise above
60dBA. Air conditioning would improve this situation signi-
ficantly by reducing interior levels by 10 decibels or one-
half as loud.
The elderly and ill are particularly susceptible to disturbance
by noise. In Ripon, a convalescent hospital and housing for
the elderly front on Main Street. To protect against noise
disturbance, it would be better to locate such uses off major
roads, although sound insulation can provide acceptable interior
environments. The discussion on page 71 describes how local
governments may provide interior noise standards for such uses.
-44-
• MANTECA
Estimated Population Affected by Various Noise Sources
As indicated on the land use map, Manteca residential areas are
separated from many of its major transportation routes by open
space, industry, or commercial development. There are two
sources which do severely impact residents, however. One is
Highway 99 and one is SPRR's main line.
Sixty residents along SPRR and 267 persons along Highway 99
are exposed to the highest average sound levels found anywhere
in the County; 75-80dB. The State Land Use Compatibility Chart
recommends that no new homes be built within areas with sound
levels this high unless effective exterior shielding of homes
by barriers is possible. To achieve effective shielding,
barrier walls must be high and long enough to block vehicles
from sight and contain no cracks or sound leaks. Cracks will
just about negate the effects of the barrier. Trees and shrubs
also have little effect on sound levels. Shielding is generally
possible along 99; it is more difficult along railroad tracks
because of the 16 foot height of the engines and the elevation
of many tracks.
Highway 99 and SPRR are by far the most prominant noise sources
affecting Manteca in terms of numbers affected also. Two
thousand nine hundred and eighty-two persons live within noise
contours of these two sources. State Route 120 affects another
811 persons. Noise from this road, however, is likely to
decrease in the future due to the 120 Bypass. Tidewater Southern
Railroad impacts another 1,000 residents although presently its
operations per day are limited and noise impacts are not severe.
Other major roads (Main, Union, Louise, and Cottage) affect
1,012 residents with moderate to major noise impacts. Totals
by noise levels are contained in Table 1, page 29.
Five thousand eight hundred and eleven persons are affected by
all noise sources, approximately one-third of Manteca's popu-
lation. Of course, these totals do not take into account
shielding by other buildings, so unless the noise source is
elevated, numbers of persons in the lesser noise contours are
likely to be less. The population estimates do point out,
however, the severity of some sources, and the pervasiveness
of relatively high sound levels throughout Manteca.
Traffic noise raises background sound levels in all areas of
Manteca. The quietest area is also the most isolated; the
southwest corner.
Perceived Noise Problems from COG Noise Survey
As might be expected, persons living near 99 and SPRR did com-
plain about these sources in response to the COG noise survey.
-45-
—46—
J
Q
C5 F
�.
17
a
'2 OW
tivN,
QQ Z:)
I-.,: N (tu
F=-
=¢ a otr
-4
3
Nadu
Nu+
W 3
�X
Q
m '
W W -i 0
enfafN 3• � ¢ 1DIV9w•
W� O Z dO
7
MIA
W W
• � Nawa3e
r
I N SNI
�
Z
z
IV
W
uveae
a
NVIdOd
y
:
z
w • _ �
r Nd 9:rl�lw '.
_
z
z -
i air
-36
M
a_
0.
—�
1RNlYM
1
j
IIS ri
Q.
e
SQ
L
—46—
J
Q
C5 F
J Z
W
0
Z N
p W
u 9 N
'2 OW
QQ Z:)
I-.,: N (tu
F=-
=¢ a otr
Nu+
W 3
�X
Q
m '
W W -i 0
F INa I
W� O Z dO
7
MIA
a
•ILi N� r
—
I
"W"
z
uveae
ii
I
a
r Nd 9:rl�lw '.
'iso=Q�
z -
i air
-36
Traffic noise in general was also seen to be a problem. These
types of complaints are directly land use related and in most
cases can be mitigated in new construction by proper design
and shielding of residential buildings. In a few undeveloped
areas, however, (within 150 feet either side of SPRR and
approximately 100 feet of the freeway right-of-way) new residential
construction is clearly unacceptable unless effective barrier
walls can be constructed. This is probably possible only along
99 where it is at grade.
As elsewhere in the County, motorcycles, cars with modified
mufflers, and barking dogs were also important perceived noise
problems in Manteca. These are best dealt with through noise
ordinances and vehicle noise abatement programs (see mitigation
section). No local noise ordinances have yet been adopted.
LODI
Estimated Population Affected by Various Noise Sources (See
Table 1, Pace 29, for Summary)
In terms of severity and numbers of persons affected in Lodi,
Southern Pacific Railroad and Highway 99 create `*he highest
noise impacts. Four hundred and thirteen persons presently
live within the highest noise ccatours found in the County
(Ldn contours of 75-79dB) along Highway 39 and SP's main line.
This number would be larger except industry buffers many
existing residential areas from the severest SPRR noise impacts.
The State Office of Noise Control Land Use Compatibility Chart
identifies Ldn contour areas of 75dB or greater as clearly
unacceptable for new residential development.
There are two undeveloped residential areas in Lodi's General
Plan area within 75dB Ldn contours. Both are adjacent to SPRR.
One is north of Century Boulevard and south of Lowe's Village.
The other is north of Turner Road on the east side. It is
recommended that any new residences be set back at least 105
feet (to the 75dB contour line) in accordance with State
Standards.
Fifteen hundred persons presently live within Ldn contours of
70-74dB. According to State Noise Insulation regulations,
exterior levels this high necessitate building sound insulation
or shielding in order to bring interior sound to acceptable
levels. Normal construction will not suffice. Half of the
total 1,500 persons are affected by SPRR. Highway 99 and
Kettleman Lane account for another 540 persons out of the total.
The other 200 persons live adjacent to Cherokee Lane or high
speed sections of South Hutchins, Lower Sacramento, and Harney
Roads.
60-64dB and 65-69dB Ldn contours are considered moderate to
major noise impact areas. Eight thousand eight hundred and
eighty persons presently live within such contours in Lodi.
-47-
These residents either live adjacent to busy low speed city
streets (Ham Lane, Lodi Avenue, Lockeford, Turner, Hutchins);
a row or two back from the major roads listed in the preceding
paragraph, or even further away from SPRR or Highway 99.
Actual population estimates of persons impacted at these
levels from 99 and SPRR is difficult since the contours do
not take shielding by buildings into account. Still, where
the railroad or freeway is elevated, shielding is not effective
and the contours should be fairly accurate.
Normal residential construction with forced air ventilation is
adequate within 60-69dB contours to meet State standards.
Whether annoyance or sleep interference will occur, however,
will depend in part on whether bedrooms are situated towards
the street or at the back of the house. It will also depend
on whether careful attention has been paid to construction
details to insure that the house achieves its full insulation
potential. Ill-fitting window or door seals can negate the
effects of an insulated wall.
Exterior noise levels greater than 65dB will not be comfortable
for most residential leisure activities. Thus, shielding of
yard areas is recommended where possible when exterior sound
levels exceed an Ldn of 65dB. Shielding has the advantage of
reducing the need for careful attention to construction details.
Perceived Noise Problems from COG Noise Survey
In Lodi, as in the rest of the County, transportation noise
was the major perceived noise problem. In the 1973 COG noise
survey, 65% cited motorcycle noise as bothering them, 55% cited
other vehicular noise and 20% cited trains.
Truck traffic generated specific complaints on the following
Lodi streets: Turner Road (spring to fall); Lockeford; Kettleman
Lane; Woodrow (freeway noise); Golden (freeway noise); East Elm;
East Tokay, East Vine (summer and fall); and Corbin Lane (grape
gondolas).
Lodi has no established truck routes and prohibits them only
on East Tokay and Holly Drive. A 5 week survey in August
and September, 1975 found trucks using Pine, Elm, Lodi, Lockeford,
Turner, Vine, Tokay, and Kettleman to get from downtown or
the industrial sector east to the freeway.
Establishment of truck routes would contain truck noise to a
smaller area of the city. It would alleviate the annoyance of
truck noise on several residential streets, although it would
also increase somewhat the truck load on designated truck
routes_ Another benefit of truck routes is that they enable
more informed decision-making. Potential homebuyers know what
to expect_ New hospitals and schools can be located off truck
routes. Subdivisions can be designed and constructed to
insulate against truck noise.
MEIVIM
IAP 13
I p LOD1
_ NOISE ELEMENT M P
`
aKE NOME 7R.'
MLM AVE.
a :�€
rte(
LDUIE 4VE
!
NNER
•-.ONEER
FLI ¢
14FaF
o s u
ST hoi
3
W
-
-
\!!�
a ¢
`"
E MITS
STAvE
H
- IvE CT
1
tAM
p
,F,QQ M.RRAT
I ��
_
N
_wy.
.147 it
f,
•JERK!
MMy
p z w
T •
fi ¢
W y T
��
�— �•
f
rr
i t
Z
i
LDDI
Q
A 51
W W
• �s
o
I RLZj
SRA 5'
1�'�{'
tl
g
p,
CABRILlO CIR
/
T.
t
m' VI TA •R
X
p
~
IH
--------- AV{
Q .
X
WIN $
Stir
•..�t
T O
T
N
TAY
-- • 7 r r
.�//p
•
r i
j
N
• R V
l
— :STATE
RTE 12
y
ALMOND
`---
—..........
'=
i ---
100 z
— 1
0 RESIDENTIAL
® HOSPITALS / CONVAL.
6
•� ',
COMMERCIAL
REST HOMES
INDUSTRIAL
® PARKS
(W) SCHOOLS/ LIBRARIES
/.7. OTHER NON—RESIDENTIAL
_
STRUCTURES
— r
_
r:0 SE ,-OrJ )uR P )uTES
® SWITCHYARDS
_ _ a• F ;T_PE '+OiSE C0r,T7.R R
k T= ;!--r�
PROPOSED SWITCHYARD
In addition to truck noise and noise contour routes, some
streets, due to location or design, encourage speeding,
"dragging," or socializing. There are also on all streets
in Lodi noise problems created by cars and motorcycles with
modified mufflers. More than half of the persons complaining
about motorcycle noise said they should be better muffled.
Also, one-third of persons complaining about vehicle noise
stated specifically that cars with modified mufflers were
the cause of annoyance. These are basically police problems
which are best alleviated by selective and increased patrols.
Since lack of manpower is always a problem, noise enforcement
on weekends or in known vehicle congregating areas, coupled
with publicity that State vehicle noise laws will be enforced,
` could yield the highest results. Such enforcdment would go
far towards relieving the situation all over the city.
The percentage of residents complaining about train noise was
higher in Lodi than any other city --due in part to the rail-
road's central switchyard locations.
Lodi is a busy switching center where regular switching.acti-
vities occur on the approximate schedule shown below:
M
a. Main Switchyard (from Tokay Street to north of
Lockeford Street):
6:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. - Lodi switch engine begins
work on Lodi trains.
11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. - Two other switchers begin
work on trains bound for Ione and Valley Springs.
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. - Lodi switch engine finishes
up and picks up full cars from Lodi industries.
5:00 p.m. - Roseville train sets out cars in north
yard area. .
8:00 p.m. - The Ione and Valley Springs switchers
return and set out full cars.
All day and night. Mainline trains set out and pick
up cars as they pass through.
b. Lockeford Street Switchyard (from Washington Street
to Cherokee Lane):
1:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m. - General Mills switcher makes
up train for General Mills
C. Woodbridge Switching Area (from Turner Road to Lower
Sacramento Road):
6:30 a. -m. to 7:45 a.m. - General Mills switching.
-50-
Most residential areas affected by the main switchyard are
partially buffered from it by commercial or industrial
buildings. This reduces noise levels to these residential
areas. However, the noise still carries large distances
down straight streets. In addition, the sounds produced by
switching operations are impulsive and irregular --a type
most likely to disturb or awaken.
The Lockeford Street switchyard unfortunately has no buffer
zone between it and residences to the south. Further, switching
occurs late at night. Several persons complained that these
late night switching operations keep them awake or wake them up.
The Woodbridge area switching operations are limited and noise
impacts awe reduced slightly by open space. Still, early morn-
ing trains and switching activities in this area have generated
some noise complaints from residents.
There is little which feasibly can be done to reduce noise
levels from switching activities once a problem situation
exists. Physical measures are expensive and difficult. For
example; barriers must be very high and long. Too, the nature
of switching activities does not lend itself to curfews or
other operational solutions. The best solutions are initial
land use controls which separate railroad and residential uses.
Future railroad development is primarily up to the railroad com-
panies and the Public Utilities Commission. One previous rail-
road proposal was to move the main Lodi switchyard south of
Kettleman Lane. This plan was dropped indefinitely because of
costs. Now, with recent unbuffered residential development in
the vicinity of the proposed switchyard, such a move would not
improve the situation.
Industry in Lodi generated complaints in a few instances. A
noise ordinance is: the most objective tool the city can utilize
to help work out compromises in existing problem situations.
In the future the city plans to separate industrial uses from
residential uses where possible. Where not possible, a "light
industrial designation has been utilized. Only certain types
of industry are permitted within light industry zones so they
act as buffer areas. Performance standards which set time and/or
decibel limits might also be employed in light industrial zones.
Environmental. Impact Reports and other city review procedures
are ot'ier ways to identify and correct potential adverse noise
impacts before any new industrial proposal is far along. Noise
considerations for review are contained in Figure 3, page 75.
"Neighbor" and "barking dog" complaints were scattered through-
out the city. Problems with barking dogs usually occur at night
when people a.re trying to sleep. Many persons also reported
that barking �aogs interfered with them being able to use their
yard as mucin as they would like. The City has an adequate
-51-
"barking dog" ordinance to deal with such situations. "Neighbor"
problems are somewhat more difficult. These are now handled
under nuisance provisions of general law. There are no existing
laws which set objective limits on neighbor noise levels, as a
comprehensive noise ordinance could.
Community Background Noise Levels
Background noise levels are important since the bothersomeness
of a specific noise source is typically related to background
levels. Most noise ordinances are therefore based on measured
background noise levels. Background residential noise levels
in Lodi tend to be relatively low compared to similar areas in
the county's cities. Most of the city is contained in Zone 2
"suburban levels"; the southeast section has somewhat higher
levels and would better fit in Zone 3 "urban area levels". Along
the Route 99 freeway corridor, of course, background levels are
even higher.
-SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
Perceived Noise Problems from COG Noise Survey and Background
Levels
Outside of the Stockton urban area, very few complaints were
received from county residents in the COG noise survey. In the
area around Escalon, motorcycles were a problem; in Linden along
Highway 26 and along a few other very busy roads (Highway 12,
Thornton Road, Highway 99, I-5), cars and trucks elicited com-
plaints. Barking dogs were a problem only in unincorporated
communities. It would appear that, when people move to small
unincorporated communities or onto agricultural parcels, they do
not find noise to be a major problem.
This is easy to justify. Large lots in rural areas mitigate
neighbor and barking dog complaints. If homes are set back from
the road, traffic noise is also reduced. People in small communi-
ties tend to know each other and may be more apt to talk over noise
problems and work out solutions. Traffic volumes on county roads
are generally low, although they may carry high numbers of trucks.
Still, these tend to be agricultural trucks, part of living in
the country, and may not be seen as an intrusion. Noise from
agricultural operations may also be recognized as part of country
living and thus be generally accepted.
Since traffic noise determines background levels in most areas,
lower traffic volumes mean quieter background levels --correspond-
ingly, levels outside of freeway corridors in the County were
quite low. Rural residential areas and some small communities
have the lowest levels. Lockeford and Clements have slightly
higher levels due to busy State Route 88. Morada, French Camp
and Lathrop are affected by freeway noise in varying degrees, as
Thornton will be. Unincorporated East Stockton for the most part
had urban background noise levels.
-52-
�
CQ
7!
SRI,
Ipvnoo VISOJ V6?.i-VOJ
-53-
cl,
jo",Ultj
�
CQ
7!
SRI,
Ipvnoo VISOJ V6?.i-VOJ
-53-
sl N . � u -"•
ay
< o v
E'
2 W m
Oy �y d
`LLJ Z W y
aoSir � ac
O do
040
$�aonas
2113
Z
W
Zl-
K
m
w
K
Ong
CIo
<a-j�
WWNJ
i
p,,Q_Zn
OAAQ°
m�
aoi
�Z3
4
�V
' � Y
i
—54—
Since the noise survey in 1973, COG has maintained an ongoing
noise complaint file. As in city areas, conflicts between proxi-
mate industrial and residential uses have generated some severe
complaints. Solutions are not easily reached, for these problems
are often land use conflicts. Although not many in number, these
instances point out the importance of keeping such uses separate
in the county as well as in city areas, and considering effects
of truck and rail access to the industry. Precisely because
background noise levels are low, industrial noise becomes more
prominent and intrusive. It is the responsibility of the Planning
Department to insure that industrial projects receive at least
an initial noise review. Some potential problems may be design
related, and if so can be eliminated by site planning, buffers,
or other means. Figure 3 on page 75 describes noise impacts in
industrial development which are important to consider.
Special Problems
1. Recreation Areas: Noise considerations in recreation are
important. The county more than the cities has the opportunity
to provide specific recreation areas for quiet uses such as
fishing and bicycling, and other areas for high noise level
activities such as motorcycle riding and speedboating. Restric-
ting motorized access to some parts of parks and waterways would
help provide a few quiet environments where people could unwind
and relax close to home. Conversely, areas need to be sited
for those wishing to engage in noisy recreational pursuits
where others will not be disturbed. Noisy recreational ac-
tivities can be especially bothersome because, unlike traffic
on most roadways and most business operations, the noisiest
periods tend to be after work and on weekends, when people are
home. The recreation noise principles on page 73 particularly
apply to recreation areas.
2. Schools: Truck noise affects several county schools, as in-
dicated in the chart below. Few cities are faced with high
speed truck noise levels to insulate against as county schools
are.
CHART 7
NOISE LEVELS IN VARIOUS SCHOOLS Ir SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
ESTIMATED TRUCK PEAK NOISE LEVELS (a 6dBA) FROM MAJOR ROAD i
Number 43A Level Out- dBA Level Inside dBA Level Inside
Classrooms si. Affected Classroc�s with Classrooms with major Road
School A`[��tec Classr xr? Gt•n Windows Closed Affectinu
Linden =leen. 5 80-87 7C-77 60-$7 State Rt. _
9ruella 80-86 '•0--E .1-66 Acampo '-
Calla 3 Portables 81 Air Conditioning 61 State R_. 12,'
Corner Rm. 91 1. 6L State Rt, 12':
Collegeville 1 80-82 70-72 60-62 Sack Toa- Rd.
Van Allen. 4 7.7 No Windows Coen - 57 State Rt. 12�;
Chartville 80 to 120 70 60 Jack Ton -2 Rte.
Houston Room 5 65-76 55-55 48-51 State Rt. 99
Roon 4 65-76 54-61 52-57 State
2 Classrooms 83 73 63 Acam=c`
Library 63-75 53-65 46-55 state Rt. 9'?
1Highway 26 was being widened. Noise levels have increased.
2Seasonal.
3Sruella also has noise problems from crop dusters.
4Freeway noise in classrooms has been reduced below 50dBA by Caltrans through air
conditioning and other "e lures. f
-55-
Where peak levels exceed 60dBA, speech interference is
severe. Teachers often need to stop teaching until the
truck is past. Even air conditioning will not completely
eliminate the problem in some of the classrooms, but it
certainly alleviates the open window situation. Reduced
window size and sealed or double windows are measures
which would reduce interior levels further. In most new
school construction, classrooms are set further back off
the street, and windows are minimized facing the street
to alleviate potential problems.
3. Airports: All airports in San Joaquin County essentially
meet State Airport Noise Standards. That is, no homes
(except one across from Stockton Airport and one adjacent
to Tracy Airport) are located within existing or projected
65dB Ldn contours (see further discussion and maps begin-
ning on page 66). This standard was established for all
airports in California as the maximum level acceptable for
residential living near airports. However, complaints may
occur where average noise levels are less than 65dB. Heli-
ports, small public access airports, and agricultural dusting
strips can create seasonal or sporadic noise problems.
Since small airports tend to be located in quiet agricul-
tural areas, airplane overflights stand out and are thus
bothersome. The high peak levels become more important to
residents than annual averages. Many public agencies
establish land use limits for new construction around non -
air carrier airports at the Ldn=60dB contour, having had
severe complaint problems around small airports at these
levels.
It is recommended that new home construction be discouraged
within 60dB Ldn contours around Tracy, Linds, and the other
non -air carrier airports. Except for Tracy Airport, this
involves very little land -outside airport boundaries.
Around Tracy Airport, roughly 180 acres outside airport
boundaries are involved.
Estimated Population Affected by Various Noise Sources (See
T e 1, Page 29 for Summary
The largest and most severe single noise source affecting unin-
corporated County residents outside of the Stockton General Plan
area is State Route 99. One thousand two hundred and six persons
are affected. Also, 144 of them are affected by 75dB Ldn con-
tours, the most severe in the County. The State Land Use
Compatibility Chart (page 61) recommends prohibiting new homes
within Ldn's of 75dB or greater unless effective shielding can
be provided to reduce exterior sound levels. Only 6 persons
are located within a contour this high from any other noise
source.
-56-
The next most severe noise contours are Ldn's of 70-74dB.
State Noise Insulation Standards require sound insulation or
shielding of all new multiple family dwellings within 70-74dB
Ldn contours. Two thousand six hundred and seventy County
residents presently live within 70-74dB Ldn contours; 1,278
along major County roads.
A word needs to be said at this point about methodology. All
County roads are "high speed, low volume" or "low speed, low
volume" roads. The Office of Noise Control methodology does
not provide for calculated contours when traffic volumes are
low (5,000-10,000 vehicles per day depending on speed). Instead,
a generalized contour is used. For low speed roads, the contour
is 65dB at greater than 100 feet. The generalization was designed
to protect against low speed roads with low truck volumes. The
high speed generalization uses a 70dB contour within 100 feet
of the roadway; a 65dB contour from 101-200 feet; and a less than
60dB level beyond 200 feet. This generalization was designed
to protect homes adjacent to high speed roads with 10% or more
trucks, since truck peak noise levels are twice as high as cars.
Thus, the 1,278 persons affected by 70-74dB contours from County
roads live within 100 feet of them. Every time a truck passes
by, peak noise levels outside will be 80dBA or greater, and
many County roads average more than 300 trucks a day.
Setbacks greater than 100 feet, a possibility on most County
lots, puts homes in a lower noise contour and significantly
reduces truck noise levels.
Another 1,044 persons live within calculated 70-74dB contours
of highways and freeways. Only 348 persons live within 70-74dB
contour of railroads, or railroads and roads where they are
parallel and create a combined noise contour. The relatively
few persons living near major railroads is in sharp contrast to
the high numbers of urbanites severely affected by railroad
noise.
60-69dB Ldn contours indicate areas where noise is of concernt.
but where normal home construction with forced air ventilation
will suffice to reduce noise to acceptable standards. Outside
levels will stili be high, and shielding of yard access is
recommended where Ldn's exceed 65dB.
Four thousand five hundred and ninety-three County residents
live within 60-69dB contours. This would be within 101-200
feet of "high speed, low flow" roads; within 100 feet of "low
speed, low flow" roads, or at somewhat greater distances from
sources with calculated contours.
-57-
SECTION IV -GOVERNMENT ROLES IN NOISE COMPATIBLE LAND USE PLANNING
INTRODUCTION
Government plays significant roles in keeping existing areas
quiet and in planning noise compatible land uses. It locates
and designs transportation routes and facilities, government
buildings, and parks. It reviews private projects for noise
impacts. It is responsible for changes in land uses and
zoning, as well as changes in zoning regulations governing
a use. These measures are discussed. For new development,
the State's Land Use Compatibility Chart is given describing
noise contour levels within which various land uses are accept-
able. Based on this chart and the State Noise Insulation
Standards and State Noise Standards, described on page 27,
land use recommendations are made. These recommendations
include prohibiting new residential construction in certain
areas, shielding or insulating residences in other areas, and
mitigation of noise impacts through site design, construction
precautions, and other measures. Some noise -related problems
by specific land use are also covered.
PUBLIC PROJECT NOISE EFFECTS
Government plays a role in noise -related land use decisions in
several ways. Directly, it is responsible for location, con-
struction, maintenance, and improvement of many transportation
routes and facilities which have become our most pervasive
noise generators. Although the 1960's freeway building boom
has busted and new air carrier airport construction has nearly
halted, public works projects do continue, though on a smaller
scale.
Noise effects have generally played only a peripheral role in
public works decision-making. Analysis of noise effects and
mitigation measures still need to be included in project con-
ception and design. This might best be done by assigning one
person in a department responsibility for becoming familiar
with sound and noise control. That person can then be informally
consulted about noise effects of possible projects. (The person
would have other responsibilities; sound control would simply
be an area of specialized knowledge.) Too few departments have
persons knowledgeable about sound and its control. Thus, noise
control in projects is often largely ignored or treated super-
fically.
Besides transportation and other public works projects, govern-
ment locates and builds public facilities such as parks, libraries
and government buildings which generate traffic and may create
other noise impacts. It is the responsibility of the implementing
government agency*to insure that projects are planned and designed
to reduce noise since other public agencies may not carefully
review the project for noise impacts.
-58-
In quiet areas, even small increases in noise levels from new
projects will be noticeable. There are many mitigating measures
which can easily reduce possible noise impacts from public
projects. Berms or walls around equipment or noisy play areas
can halve noise levels to nearby neighbors. Garbage bins can
be placed near the street rather than next to a residential
back fence. Access to the facility can often be designed to
bypass quiet areas. where more than .)e access route is pos-
sible, the one which would direct traffic onto a quiet street
might be blocked off. Parking lots can be located on the site
away from residences. Many other similar measures are common
sense, yet they are often overlooked.
REVIEWS OF PRIVATE PROJECTS
Through Environmental Impact Reports, Use Permit reviews,
Subdivision and Development Plan reviews, public agencies also
suggest measures or revise measures included in acoustical
reports to reduce a private project's noise impacts. How well
this is done depends on how familiar the reviewer is with noise
control. At least one employee in affected departments should
be familiar with noise'reduction techniques.
GENERAL PLACEMENT OF LAND USES THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING
Government is also involved in overall placement of land uses
through land use planning and zoning. In these capacities, it
plays major roles in planning noise compatible development and
in keeping quiet areas quiet. Rezonings, and General Plan
development and amendments are times that it is necessary to
look at the noise compatibility of adjacent land uses.
Traditional land use planning and zoning goals have long
attempted to segregate residential uses from industrial and
commercial land uses. For noise control purposes, this is
generally good although it means more and longer commuting
and thus more vehicles on city streets and freeways. Such
separation does, however, mean truck routes are primarily
located in industrial areas rather than purely residential
streets. Garbage collection or deliveries at odd hours will
not disturb residents. Noise from the industry or commercial
establishment itself will not affect residents. Of course,
there will be areas where the uses must meet. In such transition
areas, performance standards are now often used to protect
residents, and to protect business and industry from future
complaints. These standards set decibel and time limits on
noise emissions from new industrial or commercial uses. At
the maximum, performance standards should conform to reasonable
noise ordinance limits so that problem situations are not
created.
Older developed residential areas are where zoning is not as
effective a noise control tool. It is frequent practice to
zone older, large home areas for multiple family development.
As more homes are split into flats or torn down for new apart-
ments, the traffic gradually increases, noise caused simply by
more families living in the area increases, and the desirability
of the neighborhood for single family use goes down. "Quiet"
is a desirable feature in a neighborhood, and noisier neighbor-
hoods are generally seen to be of poorer quality.
Spot zoning for commercial or industrial uses in primarily
residential neighborhoods also tends to occur in older neigh-
borhoods but is to be avoided in planning theory. Avoidance
makes sense in terms of noise control. Such zones may contain
uses which are not now noisy but which could become so in the
future. Spot zoning also allows replacement by another noisier
use allowable in the zone.
A typical zoning plan will locate higher density residential
zones along noisy transportation corridors to protect single
family uses which demand quieter environments. At first, it
would appear this action exposes a lot more people to high noise
environments. Yet it makes sense in some ways from a noise
standpoint. Multiple family buildings can be more economically
sound insulated than single family homes. In apartments, the
relatively small common outside yard and pool areas can be
shielded from roadways by the large building complex. This
benefit does not apply to duplex development with small individual
yards.
Thus, the traditional zoning tenets of separation of uses;
enforcement of such separation; and avoidance of spot zoning
will help keep quiet areas quiet. Adding industrial and com-
mercial performance standards where such uses are adjacent to
residential uses would further reduce possible noise conflicts.
Higher noise levels can be considered a detrimental factor in
increasing the densities of older residential neighborhoods.
There are pros and cons to lining transportation corridors with
multiple family uses as far as noise considerations go. In this
case, proper building design, shielding, and building insulation
are probably more important than whether the zone is multiple
or single family.
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NOISE COMPATIBLE LAND USE PLANNING
IN SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
LOCATION OF LAND USES NEAR HIGH NOISE SOURCES
Chart 8 is the Land Use Compatibility Chart for Community Noise.
Environments prepared by the State Office of Noise Control.
With noise levels given in day -night average levels (Ldn's),
Ion
CHART 8
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY
COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS
Except Around Airports ) California Offs ce of Noise Control
I COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE
LAND USE CATAGORY Win OR CNEL, d5A
Residenfial- low density
single family, duplex,
moble homes
Residential —multi -family
Transient lodging, motels,
hotels
Schools, libraries, i
hospitals, nursing
homes
Auditoriums, concert
halls, amphitheaters
Sports arena, outdoor
spectator sports
Playgrounds,
neighborhood parks
Golf courses, riding
stablestwater recreation,
cemeteries
Office buildings, business,
cortttliilrcial and
professional
Industrial, manufacturing,
utilities, Ogriculture
1 NTERPRETATION:
Normally acceptable
Specified land use is satia:actory, based
upon the ssau-?tion that any building
involved ore 'If nasal conventional
construction, without any special noise
insulation requirements.
Conditionally acceptable
New construction or development alaald
tee undertaken only after a detailed analysis
of the noise reduction requirosionts is wade
and needednoise insulation features included
in the design. Conventional construction, but
with closed windows and !rash air supply
systems or air conditioning will normally
suffice.
-61-
~ Normally unacceptable
Nov construction or developaaswt abould
generally be discouraged. If mw construction
or development does procuad, a dotailad emalyslo
of the noise reduction requirements wont be
made Mind needed noise insulation featuams
included in the design. Reridintial Rennet
Marriors are recommended to wake the outdoor
snvironuent tolerable.
�.Claarly unacceptable
vev coeitruction or drvulopwent alws2d
generally not be undertaken. Residential
Areas The outdoor eavironwsut will be in-
tolerahle for normal residential use.
I
-vA j
f q�0
W
60
STOCKTON METRO. Al
1997 CNEL CONTOURS
(Without Cargo Flights)
P�
�O
Sf,Tf i 4P�
R �
�vl
F
9
JpKKS ��
►.�ttLE � � v �
/ �Ky
�0
�~ s°
v;
�a
P� 70
(RUNWAYS) 75 y0�
f�pK
65
p 20004000
FEET
MAH I ( \
STOCKTON METRO. AIRPORT
1997 CNEL CONTOURS o 2000 -am
(With Two Cargo Flights) FEET
TRACY AIRPORT CONTOURS
1973 AND 1993
LDN NOISE CONTOURS
SOURCE. LAMPMAN a ASSOCIATES, TRACY
-65- MUNICIPAL AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN
the chart provides a guide for noise compatible land use. It
corresponds with existing State Building Noise Insulation
Standards, except Airport Noise Standards which are a special
case. The chart describes Ldn noise contours greater than 75dB
as "Clearly Unacceptable" for new residential construction.
Around airports, new homes are prohibited within Ldn contours
greater than 65dB because of the difficulty in insulating or
shielding against airport noise.
In accordance with the above standards, two specific land use
recommendations are made with regard to noise in San Joaquin
County.
The first recommendation is that no residential land use areas
be planned or constructed within present and future 65dB Ldn
contours of County airports. This is required by State Airport
Noise Standards. Both Stockton and Tracy airports generate 65dB
contours. Neither presently contains residential areas within
future 65dB Ldn contours. However, County policy could permit
the construction of a house on an existing agricultural parcel.
Also, future contours could change to encompass more land based
on changes in airport operations (see maps). One operational
change which would cause such a situation is the success of air
cargo flights out of Stockton. The alternate set of future
airport contours which include two nightly air cargo jets show
that 63 acres of existing residential land northwest of the
airport, and some residential acreage northeast of the airport
would be impacted by 65dB Ldn contours. Another situation which
would increase the predicted 1997 noise contours would be a
significant increase in jet training flights once radar is
installed at Stockton Airport.
Thus, any major change in airport operations above and beyond
predicted air carrier and training flight increased used in
preparation of the 1997 Stockton Airport Contours would neces-
sitate resolving incompatible land use and zoning around Stockton
Airport. No such problems are foreseen around Tracy Airport.
It should be noted that Stockton's prepared contodrs already
take into account many airport operational noise reduction
features. When wind conditions permit, many airplanes avoid
existing residential areas by landing and taking off toward
the south. One airline uses a high fast climbout technique.
A curfew on night operations is in effect. Thus, most of the
sound reduction which can be achieved through aircraft operational
techniques have been effected, and these features have been
included in the prepared noise contours. Changes in air traffic
and land use controls play the critical roles in maintaining
compliance with State standards.
The second noise -related land use recommendation is that resi-
dential development not be allowed in areas around railroads
where the Ldn contour equals 75dB or greater. The 75dB Ldn is
considered "Clearly Incompatible" with residential uses, and
effective shielding by barriers to reduce exterior noise levels
next to heavily used railroad tracks is generally not possible.
This is because railroad tracks tend to be elevated and train
engines are 16 feet high. Additionally, trains generate noise
levels twice as high as trucks. Even with shielding,peak noise
levels at near distances would cause severe disturbance. Such
a restriction would not affect much land. The 75dB Ldn contours
fall about 150 feet either side of Southern Pacific Railroad's
main line track extending from Ripon through Manteca, Lathrop,
French Camp, Stockton, and Lodi. They also affect a 100 foot
strip either side of Santa Fe Railroad.
These 75dB Ldn contour strips include approximately 138 acres
of undeveloped land shown for residential development in City
and County General Plans. If all this land were developed,
another 2,000 residents would be exposed to unacceptably high
noise levels (800 along SPRR in North Stockton alone). Up to
1975, only 602 persons lived within 75dB Ldn contours near
railroads throughout the County. An increase in complaints
and possible class actions would be a likely result.
It should be noted that train noise was the third largest
perceived noise problem in San Joaquin County in COG's Noise
Survey. Complaints were concentrated near all rail lines and
yards in Lodi, along the main Western Pacific and Stockton
Terminal and Eastern lines and the Santa Fe switchyard in
Stockton, and along Manteca's main Southern Pacific line.
Switching noise carries greatly; while most complaints came
from within 900 feet of mainline tracks and less along branch
lines, persons complained up to 2,000 feet away around switch-
yards. Train noise is also one perceived noise problem for
which there are no ready non -land use solutions.
Local governments are pre-empted from regulating railroad
operations to reduce noise, for example, by placing limits on
speed, noise levels, or curfews on operations. The State and
Federal Public Utilities Commissions contend they have final
authority overall phases of railroad operations. Thus, for
railroads particularly, planning compatible land uses around
rail lines and utilizing building restrictions on nearby noise
sensitive land uses are the most important tools local govern-
ments have. Solving existing problems is very difficult.
There are a few other areas in the Countv where Ldn levels are
75dB or greater: around railroad switchyards, along freeways,
and at the junction of two major noise sources. If effective
exterior shielding cannot be provided in such areas, it is
recommended that new residential development be prohibited
within these 75dB contours also. This is not likely to affect
much residential land. The 75dB railroad switchyard contours
are nearly always contained within the switchyard itself.
Along I-5, the only major elevated freeway in the County where
shielding by a developer would be difficult, the future 75dB
contours are generally within the freeway right-of-way.
-67-
BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN
In all other areas it is expected that building and site design
restrictions can create compatible, if not ideal, situations.
Within Ldn contour levels of 60dB and greater, State Building
Noise Insulation Standards* apply to new multiple family
residential construction. It is recommended that these minimum
standards apply to detached single family development hospitals,
convalescent homes, and rest homes. The standards relate to
the noise contour levels as follows:
Conventional residential construction with forced air ventila-
tion is usually adequate where Ldn's are 60-69dB. However,
careful attention to construction details is necessary to insure
that a house achieves its full insulation potential. Ill-
fitting doors and windows can negate the sound insulation effects
of an otherwise well-built home. Locating bedrooms away from
the noise source will also be important in reducing potential
problems. Further, policy -makers should consider the importance
of exterior noise impacts to a project within Ldn contours of
65-75dB. Exterior sound levels will be high in such areas if
yards are not shielded.
Where exterior sound levels exceed an Ldn of 70dB, additional
building sound insulation or shielding is necessary in order
to reduce sounds to acceptable interior levels according to
Noise Insulation Standards.
*California Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 1, Sub-
chapter 1, Article 4, Section 1092.
(The Noise Insulation Standards require: that specified
residential structures, located within an Ldn or CNEL of 60dB,
have an acoustical analysis prepared showing that the struc-
ture has been designed to limit intruding noise to an interior
Ldn level of 45dB. The report shall be prepared under the
supervision of a person experienced in the field of acoustical
engineering and be submitted with the application for a building
permit --if not sooner. It may be included in earlier Planning
Department reviews to minimize inconvenience to developers.
The acoustical report must show topographical relationships of
noise sources and dwelling sites, identification of noise
sources and their characteristics, predicted noise levels at
the exterior of the proposed dwelling unit considering present
and future land usage, basis for the prediction (measured or
obtained from published data) noise attenuation measured to
be applied, and an analysis of the noise insulation effectiveness
of the proposed construction showing that the -prescribed interior
noise level requirements are met. If interior allowable noise
levels are met by requiring that windows cannot be opened, the
design for the. structure must also specify the means that will
be employed to provide ventilation and cooling so as to provide
a habitable interior environment. See Appendix C for complete
text.)
M -11-M
Shielding is often a good answer. Many surface noise sources
can be shielded from residential areas by barrier walls,
reducing Ldn noise levels about lOdB. This would reduce a
70dB Ldn contour area down to an Ldn of 6OdB, making it much
more acceptable for residential construction. Barriers are
a good mitigating measure to employ where possible, for they
reduce building insulation costs and make outside areas
usable. However, this alternative is not always possible.
To be effective, barriers must be solid and contain no cracks
or holes for sound to leak through. Airborne sound travels
readily through any opening. For example, wood slatted chain
link fences are virtually useless as a sound barrier. Barriers
may be constructed of concrete blocks and slabs, one-half inch
thick plywood panels, or earth. All will provide about equal
amounts of reduction since the leakage over the top and sides
of the barrier will determine the net result.
To be effective, barriers must also be high and long enough to
block the noise sources from sight. What can be seen, can be
heard. Thus, at grade or depressed roadways can usually be
shielded. It is much more difficult to shield railroads.
They tend to have elevated tracks in San Joaquin County and
locomotives are 16 feet high. Elevated roadways are also
difficult to shield unless the barrier is on the road level.
An Office of Noise Control publication entitled "Evaluation
of Outdoor to Indoor Noise Reduction of Building Facades and
Outdoor Noise Barriers" provides a method for evaluating a
proposed barrier's effectiveness (see Appendix D).
To estimate shielding sound reductions from buildings, barrier
walls, and the minimal shielding effects of plantings for
specific projects, the following general rules apply:
1. To estimate shielding from buildings:
. Subtract 3 decibels per row of buildings when buildings
occupy 50% of area;
. Subtract 5 decibels per row of buildings when buildings
occupy 60-70% of row area;
. Subtract 7 decibels per row of buildings where buildings
occupy 80% of row area;
. Subtract 10 decibels where buildings occupy 90% of row
area; and
. Subtract 10-15 decibels where a solid row of continuous
buildings completely blocks vehicles from sight.
Sound penetration studies indicate shielding is effective
for the first two to three rows of buildings and remains
_69-
constant thereafter. Reductions (except for continuous
buildings) should not exceed a maximum of 10 decibels.
The average height of the first row of buildings must
equal or exceed the average height of the second row for
a sound reduction to be realized. Where roadways are
elevated, shielding by buildings is very difficult. No
direct line of sight to the roadway should exist. Where
only scattered buildings exist, each building might pro-
duce a small localized shielding effect, but the combined
effect is negligible.
2. To estimate shielding from barrier walls, subtract 10
decibels where a wall barrier, or earth berm, completely
blocks vehicles from sight. Larger reductions up to 15
decibels are very difficult to achieve and are about the
maximum attainable.
3. To estimate shielding from plantings:
. Subtract up to 1 decibel for every 4 feet of depth of
very dense plantings which block vehicles from view; and
Subtract 5 decibels per 100 feet of depth of mature trees
which block sight of vehicles. This should not exceed
10 decibels at a maximum.
As can be seen, plantings have little effect on noise
levels, although they may provide a psychological feeling
of isolation.
Sound insulation of buildings is the other primary method used
to reduce interior noise levels. The office of Noise Control
publication* also describes more effective window/wall com-
binations to use in high noise areas. It describes measures
such as reducing window size, using double windows or staggered
stud walls to increase sound insulation. Solid plywood roof
construction may also be needed. The following paragraphs
delineate other building and site design and construction
techniques to reduce interior noise levels.
one helpful sound reduction measure is to put as much distance
as possible between residential buildings and the noise source.
In apartment projects, parking areas can be located toward the
road. In subdivisions, frontage roads add distance. On country
lots, 100 feet setbacks are often possible. Distance is not as
effective a method as barrier walls, but a 3-4.5dB reduction
will generally occur per doubling of distance from the noise
source.
Another useful measure is to design each dwelling unit so that
bedrooms and quiet living areas face away from the noise source,
*"Evaluation of Outdoor to Indoor Noise Reduction of Building
Facades," Appendix D.
-70--
while kitchens, garages, bathrooms, and playrooms face the
source. In this way, some shielding and additional distance
is obtained from the building itself.
In a subdivision or apartment complex, units can often be
laid out to reduce noise impacts by minimizing the number
nearest the noise source, or by using some units (or commercial
or community buildings) to shield other residential units
behind them.
That construction details are extremely important in achieving
and maintaining a building's full noise reduction potential has
already been mentioned. Most residcs:,ial buildings will reduce
outside sound levels only 15 to 20 decibels. This is because
sound will leak through poorly placed attic or dryer vents, or
improperly sealed windows and doors. The following tips,
published by Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation pertains
primarily to multi -family construction, but many apply to
single family construction as well. (Figure 2)
NOISE CONSIDERATIONS FOR SPECIFIC LAND USES
There are, of course,.noise considerations for other land uses
than residential. What follows are brief discussions of noise
considerations for schools; hospitals, convalescent hospitals
and rest homes; and recreation areas. Lastly, noise concerns
with commercial and industrial uses are covered.
Hospitals, Convalescent Hospitals, Rest Homes. The sick and
the elderly are particularly susceptible to noise disturbance.
The elderly are much more easily awakened by noise than younger
groups, and once awakened, find it more difficult to return to
sleep. Due to a loss of hearing acuity, the aged also need
lower background noise levels to understand speech. For these
reasons, convalescent hospitals, hospitals, and rest homes
need protection from noise sources even more than residences
in general.
Surprisingly, however, there are no specific existing noise
standards (for protection from external noise sources) governing
any of these uses! State Noise Insulation Standards applicable
to new construction of "dwellings other than detached single
family" may be applied to new construction of rest homes or
convalescent hospitals. It is unlikely they could be construed
to apply to hospitals. Rest homes converted from existing
single family homes also receive no noise review. Further,
unless a building permit is needed, the Building or Planning
Department is unlikely to be aware of the conversion.
Rest homes, licensed through the Department of Public Assistance
and the State, are subject to all applicable State and local
building codes and regulations at the time they are licensed
(California Administrative Code, Title 22., Article 6, Section
80801). Thus, making residential conversions subject to a use
-71-
FIGURE 2
NOISE CONTROL PRECAUTIONS FOR, BUILDERS
M4intaLntna Full Reduction Potential of Walls and Floor-Cetll e:
Avoid unnecessary perforation of walla or ceilings. Optimum sound isolation
requLrs4 that holes not be cut for vents or grilles or for recessing
cabinets, light fixtures, etc. Where holes are necessary, avoid placing
them back to back and immediately next to each other. Etictrical boxes
should be staggered at least one stud space.
Seal all openings in walls and floor -ceilings. A non -hardening, resilient
caulking material should be used to seal all cutouts, such as around elec-
trical, telephone and piping outlets. Caulk at all intersections with the
adjoining structure, such as where the wall assembly tweets the floor -ceiling.
Cracke are excellent conductors of airborne sound.
Seal all cracks in subfloors with an airtight caulk or install a layer of
underlayment over the entire surface.
Close all open spaces between joists over party walls with flocking to
prevent sound travelling over walls. Under party walls, close the open
space between the Joists under floors and install gypsum board or plywood
at least 4 feet wide to the bottom of joists.
Cover all party wall and ceiling surfaces behind ducts and piping, behind
bathtubs, behind soffits, and under stairs with gypsum board.
Use resilient floor coverings such as carpeting to isolate structure -borne
vibrations and sound.
Ducts and Conduits:
Do not pierce common floors or walls with duct systema.
Avoid construction such as ducts, rigid conduits or corridors which act as
speaking tubes to transmit sound from one area to another.
Line ducts with insulation to absorb noise and seal conduits.
Ducts, pipes, and conduits should be broken with resilient non -rigid boots
or flexible couplings where they leave vibrating equipment.
Doors:
Stagger doors across hallways.
Avoid sliding doors where control of noise is desired.
Use solid wood core doors or mineral core doors where privacy is demanded.
Hollow core doors will lower sound insulation and should never be used
when a high performance to desired.
Seal doors at top and aides with soft type weather stripping and use
autottwtic threshold.
Windows:
Minimize window vlzes facing noisy areas. Solid insulated walls would tend
to provide better sound reduction.
Arrange casement windows so sound is not reflected into adjoining units.
Movable windows should close tightly and be weatherstripped.
Thtck glass, insulating glass, double glazing and double windows with air
space between all help reduce noise transmission through windows.
Equipment NoLsv;
Locate heating and cooling equipment far from bedrooms.
Inquire• about equipment noise levels before buying and insist on quiet units.i
lsolaty equipment in room with door to outside or use a solid core door,
Basketed, when access is from building interior.
Mount equipment on fiberglass board or other resilient mountings to isolate
vibrations from structure.
Plumbing:
Design pipe runs with owing arm so expansion and contraction can occur
without binding and thus eliminate noise.
taotate pipLng from structure with resilient gasketing and caulking w'tere
they pass through walls, floors, or other building surfaces.
Develop a well-planned layout to minimize the noise of water flowing.
Over -sized pipes and reduced pressure will slow the speed of flowing water
and reduct• noise.
Provtde air chambers at each outlet to eliminate water hammer due to abrupt
atup of flowing water.
Use luiel action water closets and isolate from structure on a floating floor.
Electrical:
airy earh .al,.,rtment as a unit --avoid penetration of walls or floors between
ahnrtment.—
Caulk h,lh-i made by wiring which penetrates connecting structures with
I,Lar,ctc caulk nr dry packing.
Conni•ct vll,rating equipment with flexible wiring.
and "Solutions to Noise Control Problems",
4w,:is-C,,rn Ing F1 berg] as Corporation, Toledo, Ohio 41601
-72-
permit could allow local governments some control over their
location and design in high noise areas. New construction c�
any of these uses can be made subject to the Noise Insulation
Standards governing residences by adopting these standards
into local building codes.
In lieu of State Noise Standards specifically applicable to
hospitals, convalescent hospitals, and rest homes, these actions
at the local level would remedy a lack of noise input.
Schools. Noise affects schools primarily in terms of speech
and learning interference. Speech interference becomes severe
above 55-60dBA and acousticians reco,ta<<end average levels in
the range of 35-40dBA to insure good communication. As was
noted in Section III, these levels are exceeded in many class-
rooms throughout the County. Air conditioned rooms will alleviate
many existing problems by enabling teachers to keep windows
closed. Proper location and design of new classrooms can
eliminate future noise problems. Again, however, there are
no State standards governing new construction of classrooms.
New school construction must meet local building regulations,
thus, local interior standards could be developed and adopted
in lieu of State action. Such standards might combine the
interior design levels on page 9 with an interior peak level
maximum of 60dBA. Also, the State Office of Noise Control Land
Use Compatibility Chart applies as a general location and design
guideline.
Recreation Areas. Noise considerations in recreation areas
deserve specific mention. Quiet is a scarce commodity in San
Joaquin County. Restricting motorized access to some parts of
the County's parks and waterways would help provide a few
environments close to home where people could pursue quiet
activities such as fishing or bicycling. Conversely, there
is a lack of designated suitable sites near cities for persons
wishing to engage in noisy recreational pursuits such as motor-
cycle riding. Multi -use parks may not satisfy either need. It
is recommended that planning and recreation departments add the
following noise principles to their recreation area's site
selection and design criteria:
1. Noise levels intruding in recreational areas and structures
should not hinder the enjoyment of the featured recreational
activities. Thus, where a recreational area is designed
for quiet activities, it should not be placed near major
noise sources unless it can be shielded, and motorized
access should be limited.
2. Design of recreation areas involving noisy activities should
protect surrounding sensitive land uses from disturbance.
Industrial areas might be explored as possible sites for
such uses. Where there are noisy sections of a multi -use
park, they should be buffered from more sensitive park uses
as well as land uses outside the park.
•73-
Commercial and Industrial Uses. Commercial and industrial land
uses are commonly noise generators. Noise -related land use
compatibility problems may occur where these uses are adjacent
to noise sensitive uses. some cities have developed general
performance standards spelling out noise levels, curfews on
operations, or building design measures which new commercial
or industrial projects must meet on fringe areas of zones.
This is a recommended option_
Another approach is, on an individual basis during Environmental
Impact Reports or Use Permit reviews, etc., to look at possible
noise impacts and propose specific measures to minimize noise
emissions. The accompanying chart describes noise considerations
for new commercial or industrial development. These considera-
tions would also be valid where residential uses are proposed
near existing commercial and industrial uses. (Figure 3)
For the latter case, Noise Element legislation provides a third
option. Cities and counties develop Ldn noise contours around
selected industries. New residential construction must then
meet the Noise Insulation Standards which apply to the identified
Ldn noise contours.
No industrial noise contours have yet been prepared. However,
planning agencies have identified several industries which may
create high noise levels. Eight hundred foot "Industrial Noise
Study Areas" have been placed around these industries on the
noise contour maps. Before or at the time development projects
are proposed near these industries, noise contours will be
prepared.
Also, planning departments will continue to identify noisy
industries near where new residential development is likely to
occur. This can be undeveloped residential land or older
residential areas that are experiencing new development at
the same or increased densities.
-74-
FIGURE 3
NOISE CONSIDERATIONS FOR
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
Land separation of residential from industrial or noisy
commercial areas will avoid creation of potential noise -
related land use conflicts. However, in those areas where
residential zones are adjacent to industrial or commercial
areas, performance standards to control noise are advisable,
as are residential insulation standards.
Whether a new industry or commercial G:.tcerprise is locating
near existing residences, or vice versa, noise considerations
should include:
1. Business Hours and Number of Persons Employed
Are there or will there be 24-hour operations which
mean shift changes and large numbers of cars starting
up late at night? What roads will they use? Does
the establishment stay open late? When are the busiest
hours of operation?
2. Maintenance Activities
What kind of plant or office maintenance activities
occur or will occur and at what time of day? .(Daily
garbage pickups or noisy parking lot sweeping may
occur in the very early morning.)
3. Deliveries and Pickups
Will trucks need to make deliveries or pickups? At
what time and how often will they come? On what roads
do or will the trucks travel? Does the industry use
rail service? How often are train. car pickups? Will
the industry be using refrigerator cars?
4. Machinery
What machinery on the premises may be bothersome to
nearby residents, and what are the noise levels of
these machines? Do they contain piercing tones? How
often and at what time of day do or will they run?
Will fans or other steady noises provide a higher than
desirable background noise level for a residential area?
5. Plant or office Expansion Plans
6. Sound Level Measurements to determine existing noise
conditions.
Both industry and commercial activities generate truck and
automobile traffic. Thus, they should be located in areas
where truck access is possible without having to pass through
residential areas.
-75-
SECTION V- NON LAND ISE MITIGATION MEAZRES FOR NnYSE CON777171-
INTRODUCTION
There are many non -land use oriented measures for community
noise control. This section will cover methods to reduce
some major perceived noise problems in San Joaquin County,
and other government -related noise reduction measures.
POLICE ENFORCEMENT OF VEHICLE NOISE LAWS
As was discussed in Section II, motorcycles and excessively
noisy (i.e., with modified mufflers) or speeding or speeding
cars stood out as the major perceived noise problem in the County.
CHART 9
MAJOR PERCEIVED NOISE PROBLEMS IN SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
BY COMPLAINTS RECEIVED IN THE COG NOISE SURVEY
Percent Complaining
Noise Source
61
Motorcycles
59
Other Vehicular Traffic
22
Barking Dogs
16
Trains
13
Neighbors
9
Industry
3
Planes
3
Practicing Bands
15
Miscellaneous
(Percentages do not add up to 100 since many persons
cited more than one noise source.)
These results came from a late 1973 noise survey prepared
by the Council of Governments. what is ironic is that exces-
sively noisy motorcycles and cars are one type of complaint
which can be strictly dealt with under existing laws. State
legislation already prohibits faulty or modified mufflers on
vehicles. This can be visually checked by a police officer.
Other State laws set decibel limits for all vehicles.
Trained officers take vehicle passby noise readings to
determine if the vehicle exceeds limits established. Since
noise limits are generous for standard vehicles, it can be
concluded that vehicles exceeding them have faulty mufflers,
no muffler, or are being driven in an excessively noisy
manner.
-76-
The main reasons police give for not enforcing these sections
of the Vehicle Code are their lack of manpower and that there
are other more important things they must attend to. Yet
they still must spend time responding to noise -related vehicle
complaints, and these incidents could be reduced with a regular
noise enforcement program.
Vehicle noise enforcement programs in other cities have found
that unless officers are given sole responsibility for enforcing
vehicle noise, other responsibilities take priority. To have
an effective noise reduction program, the officer must have
noise abatement as a sole responsibility, at least for certain
hours of duty.
In San Francisco, four officers work full time on noise abate-
ment. While San Joaquin County and its cities could not afford
releasing such manpower, a possible alternative would be to use
additional officers only on Friday and Saturday nights, when
the problem is likely to be most severe. Increased selective
enforcement, coupled with media publicity, could yield good
results.
San Francisco has found ,their operation to be completely self-
supporting through the issuance of fines. Modification of
mufflers result in a mandatory fine while defective mufflers
are treated more leniently. Start up costs for such programs
are minimal --mainly the purchase of a reliable sound level
me ter .
Vehicle noise enforcement may have the added benefit of reducing
overall urban noise levels, as well as peak level annoyance.
San Francisco found dB reductions in nearly all parts of the
City in two years when comparing noise contour maps prepared
in 1974 with those prepared in 1976 after start up of the program.
COMMUNITY NOISE ORDINANCES
The second greatest noise complaint which came out in the survey
were "barking dogs." Twenty-two percent of persons replying
to the COG survey were disturbed by barking dogs. This com-
plaint is best dealt with by ordinance --either as part of a
comprehensive noise ordinance or as a separate ordinance. The
cities and County have responded to the need for ordinances to
control barking dogs. In 1973, only Tracy, Lodi, and Stockton
had dog noise control ordinances. Since then, Stockton has
revised its ordinance to make it easier for persons to obtain
relief, and the County and all cities except Manteca have
adopted barking dog ordinances. Most ordinances declare it
unlawful to keep any animal which disturbs any person by con-
tinuous or incessant barking. In its ordinances, Stockton and
the County specify "incessant barking" as that occurring for
10 minutes or more in duration.
-77-
Enforcement of barking dog ordinances is usually handled
carefully --the complaint is investigated to see if there is
a true problem, and contact with the dog owner is made.
Records are then filed with the District Attorney or City
Attorney who will write a warning letter, etc. before any
drastic action such as fines or removing the dog is taken.
The ordinances merely provide aveneus for legal resolution of
such problems.
"Neighbors" were another widespread urban areas noise problem.
Such complaints primarily involved amplified music, loud
children, or home tool and garden equipment use. Many of the
complainants were apartment dwellers, pointing out the need
for adequate sound insulation between units. (A State law to
provide better insulation between units has been in effect
since 1974. It is enforced by local building departments.)
Noise ordinances are the most effective measure local governments
can employ to alleviate "neighbor" complaints. They establish
time and/or decibel limits on noisy activities, making complaints
relatively easy to define quantitatively.
The noise ordinance is also the most effective tool for resolving
noise problems existing between industrial/commercial areas,
and residential uses. It provides an objective guide for a
mediator to use to define the problem and to work out solutions.
There were few industries which generated complaints throughout
the County. As a perceived noise problem it ranked low.
OTHER
Construction and maintenance activities are a further potential
problem which should be mentioned here. Although construction
and public works activities are generally temporary situations
and have not been a real source of complaint in San Joaquin
County, such problems could occur. Several methods can be
used to reduce. noise impacts from construction sites where
construction is ongoing, or is occurring, for example, near
hospitals or schools.
Curfews on operations are the primary method used to mitigate
noise impacts from private construction activities. Some
public agencies have also established decibel limits on the
amount of noise a construction site may generate. (These could
be included in a commercial noise ordinance.)
Specific measures used to control construction site noise
include operating only certain equipment at one time; moving
some of the noisiest equipment items further into the construc-
tion site; using temporary walls or complete enclosures around
certain equipment; modifying the equipment to make less noise
through muffling; buying quieter replacement equipment, or
substituting quieter processes when possible.
-78-
City and County maintenance and public works activities are
other sources of temporary noise which are reduced by the same
methods listed above. A city or county may also put noise
specifications into city or county contracts such as garbage
collection contracts or public construction contracts.
-79-
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
1. Itcport "
2•
3. Itccipicnt'.+
SHEET
1
4. tI, .,I.d Subtitle
5. Itvpurt Datc-
NOISE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
6.
7. A,.t6,a(,.)
8. Prrlurmmg Orgaiut.ttion It, pt.
Jean Danielson Freitas
Nu.
9. Performing Organization Nims and Address
10. NruJcrt/'I'.ttik/Work Unit
San Joaquin County Council of Governments
11. `:�"`""`""""` "".
1850 East Hazelton Avenue
Stockton, CA 95205
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
13. Type of R,Il rt &
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Covered
451 Seventh Street S.W.
14.
Washington, D. C. 20410
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstracts
This is a planning document. It updates an earlier 1974 Council of
Governments Noise Element to conform with new State noise legislation.
It describes noise and its effects on people. It identifies noise
problem areas in San Joaquin County and how many residents are affected
in these areas. It provides noise contours of high noise. impact areas.
The noise contour areas, along with State noise standards, were used
to.develop noise design and location guidelines for new construction
projects. Goals and policies to prevent land use related noise con-
flicts closely follow State standards, and in some cases carry them
further. Specific4nethods for reducing noise (i.e., noise barriers,
building orientation, and insulation, etc.) are given.
17. Key Words and Docunent Analysis. 17a. Descriptors
Noise Reduction, Noise (sound), Aircraft Noise, Noise Generators,
Urban Planning, Highway Planning, Acoustic Insulation.
17& Idrotiflcrs/Open-Ended Terms
Noise Reduction Planning
Noise Pollution Abatement
General Plan Element
17e. t OSATI Field/Group 05E, 13B, 09D, 06F, 061, 06S, 20A
16. Availability Statement
19. Security Class (This
21. No. of Pug—
Report
Release Unlimited
20. Security Class ('Chis
22. I'ri,c,
Pugc
UNCLASSIFIED
IED
co.M NT15-31 tREV. 3.721 THIS FORM MAY BE REPRODUCED 'Sc"-" 1 1-1 ~"