SU0007300 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the very least, reference noise level measurements of the asphalt plant should have been conducted on the Munn Perkins site. These reference measurements could have been used to generate noise contours associated with the operations. The noise level data can 1-23 be used as direct inputs into a model which can account for prevailing wind direction, Cont. wind speed, temperature, atmospheric conditions and topography. Comment 2: The Draft EIR incorrectly states the time period when the noise measurements were conducted. They were not conducted. in 2010, as stated on page 3.4-10_ The noise measurements were actually conducted between September 27, 2008 and October 2, 2008. The summary of the noise measurement data contained in the Draft EIR in Table 3.4-2 is not completely accurate. VA-ile we believe that the noise level data collected during a harvest may not accurately describe the ambient noise environment and should 1-24 be excluded, the range of daytime maximum noise levels at Site A is actually between 62 dBA and 77 dBA, and not between 62 dBA and 70 dBA as shown in Table 3.4-2. Although this may be a minor issue, it should be mentioned. Pages 3.4-10 and 3.4-11, and Table 3.4-3 of the Draft EIR indicate that additional noise measurements were conducted between 9 p.m. and S a.m. on September 28, 2010 and October 2, 2010. Once again, this is not accurate. The Appendix B clearly indicates that this data was collected in 2008. Comment 3: Table 3.4-3 of the Draft EIR summarizes the ambient noise level data collected between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m. on September 28, 2008 and October 2, 2008, as shown in the Appendix B (BAC Report). However the Draft EIR fails to summarize the existing Ldn values as 1-25 shown in Table 7 of Appendix B (BAC Report). Table 7 of the BAC report clearly shows that residences along East River Road already exceed the San Joaquin County noise level standards for transportation noise sources by up to 10 dBA (75 dBA Ldn). This is a critical piece of information that the County should be aware. This information will assist in determining if residents are already exposed to a significant noise exposure and whether they should be subject to an additional increase in noise levels due to haul truck operations. Comment 4: The prediction of the nighttime asphalt plant operations is difficult to evaluate. The EIR should provide a noise contour map associated with the asphalt plant operations. This would enable the reader to determine all of the homes which may be impacted by the 1-26 asphalt plant. Due to the potential for significant noise levels due to asphalt plant operations, an accurate method for evaluating asphalt plant noise levels is to run the plant . during the nighttime hours, and collect noise level data during the operations. This would provide an accurate representation of potential noise impacts. This would also give the County the ability to listen to the operations at the neighboring residences. 2