I-10 Twin Peaks Traffic Interchange, Environmental Assessment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts October 2005 STAMINA is a traffic noise prediction model developed by FHWA that utilizes site-specific information including traffic volume, speed, vehicle classification data, roadway lane configuration, and site acoustical characteristics to predict peak-hour traffic noise at selected receiver locations. Table 4-7. Traffic Noise Monitoring Results Monitoring Location and (Beginning Times) Location 1 South Side of Linda Vista Boulevard, East of Hartman Lane (7:15 – 7:36 AM) Location 2 West of I-10 at Linda Vista Boulevard (6:56 – 7:20 AM) Location 3 South Side of Twin Peaks Road, West of Palm Canyon Drive (7:52 – 8:07 AM) Location 4 West Side of Twin Peaks Elementary School (5:21 – 5:42 PM) Location 5 East of I-10 at Camino de Mañana Road (4:27 – 4:50 PM) Location 6 Mountain View High School/Arthur Pack Golf Course (4:08 – 4:29 PM) Location 7 North Side of Twin Peaks Road, West of Sunflower Ridge Road (5:10 – 5:32 PM) Noise Level (dBA) (Highest Reading Per Site) To ensure that the results of STAMINA accurately reflected actual conditions, traffic (volumes and numbers of medium and heavy trucks) and site data (location and height of walls) were also collected during field noise measurements. These field conditions were entered in the computer model and the noise levels predicted by the model were compared to those measured in the field. This adjustment process identifies minor modifications in model data entries that are used to more accurately predict field conditions. Model predicted values were within 2 dBA of those values measured in the field, demonstrating that the model predicted actual monitored conditions well. Modeling of Existing Conditions Noise levels for current (2004) conditions were modeled at sensitive receivers in the project area. This was done to determine where noise impacts currently exist and to establish the baseline from which a substantial increase in noise levels is determined. Traffic data necessary for modeling were obtained from several different sources. The primary source of information was the Traffic Report prepared for this project. The report provided traffic counts, speeds, peak hour, and vehicle classification information (numbers of trucks, cars, etc.) for most of the streets in the study area. The project route was broken into multiple segments Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange at Twin Peaks/Linda Vista 4-50 68 73 57 55 69 56 63 Project No.: NH-010-D (AIW) TRACS No.: 10 PM 236 H5838 01D
Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts October 2005 within the model to accommodate areas where the roadway climbs and traffic volumes and speeds differed. Roadway geometry, topography, and receiver locations and elevations were established from MicroStation plan sets from project design engineers and PAG aerial photos and digital terrain model files. One hundred twenty-six representative properties throughout the study area were selected as model receiver locations (see Figures 4-4a-d). Residences and businesses within the study area were chosen as representative sensitive noise receivers and STAMINA was used to estimate the noise levels at these receiver locations under existing (2004) traffic and under predicted conditions (2030). The results of the analysis are presented in the table in Appendix C. Noise receivers were designed as NR# along the north side of Twin Peaks Road, RS# along the south side of Twin Peaks Road, I10F# in the area of I-10 and its frontage roads, or LVR# along Linda Vista Boulevard. Impacts No Build Alternative The noise monitoring and modeling analyses suggested that the NAC are exceeded at a number of locations within the study area. Because traffic noise levels are dependent upon traffic volumes, and traffic volumes are predicted to increase in the area, noise levels would increase also. As a result additional properties in the project area would be impacted by traffic noise regardless of whether or not the project is constructed. According to the table in Appendix C, the entire area near I-10 (all receivers beginning I10F#) exceeds the NAC under current conditions. All modeled locations in this area are commercial land uses. Although one residential property exists within this area, this residence would be acquired by the proposed improvements; therefore, this residential site was not modeled. With the exception of this area near I-10, only one other receiver (LVR12) within the study area approached or exceeded the NAC for the year 2004. This receiver, located at the intersection of Linda Vista Boulevard and Manatee Drive is adjacent to Linda Vista Boulevard and substantially lower in elevation than the roadway. This residence (as opposed to most in the area) is not separated from the roadway by a wall. It is reasonable to assume that, with additional traffic growth, additional residences in this area would exceed the NAC. Preferred Alternative Temporary Impacts Construction noise differs from traffic noise in several ways: • Construction noise lasts only for the duration of the construction contract, and it is usually limited to daylight hours when most human activity occurs. • Construction activities generally are of a short-term nature, and depending on the nature of construction operations, it could last from seconds (e.g., a truck passing a receiver) to months (e.g., constructing a bridge). Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange at Twin Peaks/Linda Vista 4-51 Project No.: NH-010-D (AIW) TRACS No.: 10 PM 236 H5838 01D
Page 1:
Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange a
Page 4 and 5:
Draft Environmental Assessment Octo
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Mitigation Measures October 2005
Page 14 and 15:
Mitigation Measures October 2005 19
Page 16 and 17:
Mitigation Measures October 2005 St
Page 18 and 19:
Introduction October 2005 CHAPTER 1
Page 20 and 21:
AVRA VALLEY RD MARANA I-10 SCENIC D
Page 22 and 23:
Introduction October 2005 Cortaro R
Page 24 and 25:
Project Purpose and Need October 20
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Alternatives October 2005 CHAPTER 3
Page 36 and 37:
Alternatives October 2005 Figure 3-
Page 38 and 39:
Alternatives October 2005 • Shall
Page 40 and 41:
Alternatives October 2005 Interstat
Page 42 and 43:
Alternatives October 2005 Road). Pr
Page 44 and 45:
Alternatives October 2005 Preferred
Page 46 and 47:
Alternatives October 2005 Twin Peak
Page 48 and 49:
Alternatives October 2005 I-10 Fron
Page 50 and 51:
Alternatives October 2005 Linda Vis
Page 52 and 53:
Alternatives October 2005 Twin Peak
Page 54 and 55:
Alternatives October 2005 and sidew
Page 56 and 57:
Alternatives October 2005 proposed
Page 58 and 59: Alternatives October 2005 Near the
Page 60 and 61: Avra Valley Rd. Twin Peaks Rd. Silv
Page 62 and 63: Affected Environment and Environmen
Page 78 and 79: Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange a
Page 120 and 121: Wall to Protect Rec. ID Affected En
Page 136 and 137: 44.20 Avra Valley Rd Twin Peaks Rd
Page 158 and 159:
Affected Environment and Environmen
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Public Involvement/Project Coordina
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Conclusion October 2005 Interstate
Page 178 and 179:
Bibliography October 2005 CHAPTER 8
Page 180 and 181:
Bibliography October 2005 Tetra Tec
show all

I-10 Twin Peaks Traffic Interchange, Environmental Assessment

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?