I-10 Twin Peaks Traffic Interchange, Environmental Assessment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts October 2005 Construction noise is intermittent and depends on the type of operation, location, and function of the equipment, and the equipment usage cycle. Traffic noise is more continuous after construction activities are completed. Permanent Impacts Predicted noise levels assuming completion of the preferred alternative may be found in the column labeled Modeled Future (2030) in the table in Appendix C. Of the 126 modeled receivers, 49 were predicted to experience noise levels that would require consideration of traffic noise abatement. The results of the modeling for the future condition are divided by area and discussed in the following sections. Twin Peaks Road (Receivers noted as NR# and RS#) As would be expected, adding a new segment of Twin Peaks Road to connect to I-10 increases traffic substantially through Continental Ranch and results in traffic moving through an area where no traffic exists currently. As a result of this increase in traffic and the new roadway, noise levels are predicted to increase along Twin Peaks Road. As shown in the table in Appendix C, the increase in traffic noise levels ranges from 6 dBA to 18 dBA. The areas of higher increases were those areas on the east side of Continental Ranch where no roadway exists currently (NR26-NR32A and RS27-RS30). Although STAMINA did not predict that traffic noise levels would approach or exceed the NAC (64 dBA or higher for the residences and other sensitive land uses in this area), substantial increases (15 dBA) in noise levels were predicted. These increases are predicted along the eastern border of Continental Ranch both north and south of Twin Peaks Road. Twin Peaks Road TI area (Receivers noted as I10F#) STAMINA predicted increases in traffic noise in this area as well. However, because traffic noise levels and traffic volumes are already high in this area, the predicted increases were much lower than along Twin Peaks Road. In this area traffic noise level increases ranged from 4 dBA to 5 dBA; however, all modeled receivers in this area approached or exceeded the NAC (69 dBA or higher for commercial properties). Linda Vista Boulevard (Receivers noted as LVR#) Although no improvements to Linda Vista Boulevard are proposed throughout the majority of the study area, the provision of a Twin Peaks Road TI, would result in increased traffic along Linda Vista Boulevard. To fully explore traffic noise impacts, traffic noise levels were modeled as far east as Thornydale Road (nearly 4 miles east of the Twin Peaks Road TI). As a result of the increase in traffic, STAMINA predicted increases in traffic noise levels ranging from 2 dBA to 14 dBA. Because of this wide range in values, these areas are discussed individually below. Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange at Twin Peaks/Linda Vista 4-52 Project No.: NH-010-D (AIW) TRACS No.: 10 PM 236 H5838 01D
NR1 NR2 NR3 SILVERBELL ROAD Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange at Twin Peaks/Linda Vista NR31A-F NR29A-F NR32 NR32A NR27 NR27A NR27B NR26 NR30 NR26A NR7 NR8 NR13 NR14 NR25 NR30A NR6 NR9 NR11 NR6 NR12 NR19 NR20 NR10 NR15 NR16 NR18 NR5 RS5 RS13 RS7 RS9 NR21 NR23 RS6 RS11 RS12 RS15 NR17 NR24 NR4 RS14 NR22 SCHOOL3 RS8 RS21 RS22 RS10 RS18 SOCCER2 SCHOOL4 PARK17 RS19 RS20 RS23 TWIN PEAKS ROAD SAFEWAY RS30 RS29 A-E 4-53 COACHLINE BLVD RS28 A-C PARK16 RS27 RS27A RS25 RS26 RS24 NR28 NR28A Noise Wall Figure 4-4a Noise Analysis Project Number: 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 160 and 161:
Affected Environment and Environmen
Page 162 and 163:
Affected Environment and Environmen
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?