NOISE ELEMENT
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
June 2005
NOISE ELEMENT
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
City of Oakland
Community and Economic Development Agency
Planning and Zoning Division
250 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 3315
Oakland, CA 94612
510 | 238.3941
www. oaklandnet. com
June 2005
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
Jerry Brown, mayor
Henry Chang, vice- mayor ( at- large)
Jane Brunner ( District 1)
Nancy Nadel ( District 3)
Jean Quan ( District 4)
Ignacio De La Fuente ( District 5)
Desley Brooks ( District 6)
Larry Reid ( District 7)
Cover photo: Trail in Joaquin Miller Park, by Barry Muniz;
courtesy of the Oakland Convention & Visitors Bureau
PLANNING COMMISSION
Nicole Y. Franklin
Colland Jang, vice- chair
Clinton Killian
Suzie W. Lee
Michael Lighty
Mark A. McClure, chair
Anne E. Mudge
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Claudia Cappio, Director of Development
Margaret Stanzione, Strategic Planning Coordinator
Niko Letunic, project manager
CREDITS
SECTIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................... i
CHAPTER 1: Introduction .......................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2: A noise primer ...................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 3: Institutional framework ...................................................... 9
CHAPTER 4: Local noise environment .................................................. 13
CHAPTER 5: Noise­land
use compatibility ............................................ 19
CHAPTER 6: Policy statements ............................................................... 23
CHAPTER 7: Resources ............................................................................ 27
APPENDIX A: Noise- related policy statements from other
elements of the Oakland general plan ............................................ 29
APPENDIX B: Tables from the technical report ................................... 33
APPENDIX C: Oakland City Council resolution adopting the noise
element ................................................................................................ 45
FIGURES
Figure 1: Noise monitoring locations ................................ after page 14
Figure 2: Roadway noise contours ..................................... after page 14
Figure 3: Railroad noise contours ...................................... after page 16
Figure 4: Existing ( 2004) noise contours for Oakland
International Airport operations ..................................................... 17
Figure 5: Projected noise contours for Oakland International
Airport operations in Year 2010 ...................................................... 18
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NOISE ELEMENT
Table of Contents | ii
This page intentionally left blank
1 | INTRODUCTION
Legislative mandate 􀃂 California state law requires that each city and county adopt
a general plan to guide its physical growth and development. The general plan is a
policy document that forms the basis for a jurisdiction’s official decisions regarding the
future location of housing, business, industry, transportation facilities, parks, open space
and other land uses, the conservation of natural resources, and the protection from
environmental hazards. General plans must address locally relevant planning issues
under various “ elements,” or subject categories, including noise.
The noise element must analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, current and
projected noise levels from the following noise sources: major traffic thoroughfares,
passenger and freight railroad operations, commercial and general aviation operations,
industrial plants, and other ground stationary noise sources contributing to the
community noise environment. Noise levels for these sources must be shown on noise
contour maps prepared on the basis of noise monitoring or modeling techniques. Noise
contours establish the locational relationship between existing and projected land uses
and noise sources, and must be used to guide land use decisions to reduce noise impacts,
especially on 􀃂 sensitive receptors. The noise element must include implementation
measures that address any existing and foreseeable noise problems, and must serve as a
guideline for complying with the state’s noise insulation standards.
􀃂 California Government Code, § 65300- 65303.4
and § 65350- 65362; § 65302( f) for noise element
requirements. The Governor’s Office of Planning
and Research issues General Plan Guidelines, a
document interpreting the legal requirements for
the preparation of a general plan; Appendix C of
that document contains guidelines for the
preparation of the noise element.
􀃂 Noise- sensitive receptors are land uses whose
purpose and function can be disrupted or
jeopardized by noise. Sensitive receptors include
residences, schools, churches, hospitals, elderly-care
facilities, hotels and libraries and certain
types of passive recreational open space.
Understandably, noise is of special concern when
it occurs near sensitive receptors.
NOISE ELEMENT
Introduction | 2
Updating Oakland’s noise element Oakland’s original noise element was adopted
in 1974. Since then, Oakland’s land- use patterns have changed, and its population and
economy have expanded. While noise cannot be eliminated, the City believes that by
updating the noise element and the policy statements in it, it can continue to protect
residents’ exposure to excessive noise levels. This document is meant to satisfy the
state’s requirements for a noise element.
Policy statements At the heart of every element of a general plan is a set of goals,
objectives, policies actions or other statements which are often collectively referred to as
policy statements. The purpose of policy statements is to provide direction for a city or
county and guide the development- related actions and decisions of its officials. Policy
statements attempt to reconcile and accommodate the diverse and often competing
interests of a community and its members. Oakland’s noise element contains two types
of policy statements: policies and actions. Policies identify specific areas in which the
city will direct efforts in order to attain its goals. Actions are detailed and implementable
steps that, if feasible, the city will undertake in order to carry out the policies. There is at
least one action supporting every policy, and each action lists the city agency ( or
agencies) expected to assume the leading role in implementing that action.
It is important to keep in mind that actions are meant to apply only to those geographic
and programmatic areas over which the City of Oakland has legal authority, and that the
actions will only be implemented if they can be accomplished successfully given
financial, environmental, legal, social and technological factors. Also, because the
various elements of the Oakland general plan contain policies that address numerous
different goals, some policies might compete with each other. In deciding whether to
approve a proposed project, the City’s Planning Commission and City Council must
balance the various policies and decide whether the project is consistent ( that is, in
general harmony) with the general plan overall. ( Incidentally, project conflicts with the
general plan do not inherently result in a significant impact on the environment under
the California Environmental Quality Act, since, under the act, impacts must be related
to physical changes.)
Relationship to other elements By law, the elements of a general plan must be
consistent with each other. Appendix C of the State’s General Plan Guidelines
(“ Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of the Noise Element of the General
Plan”) discusses the relationship between noise and other elements, most importantly
the land use and circulation elements ( which in Oakland are aggregated as the land use
In preparing Oakland’s noise element, staff
conducted a thorough review of the noise
elements from the following jurisdictions: Alameda
and Contra Costa counties, and the cities of
Alameda, Berkeley, Emeryville, Fremont,
Hayward, Los Angeles, Oakland ( the 1974
element), Palo Alto, Piedmont, Pittsburg, San
Francisco, San Jose, San Leandro, South San
Francisco, Union City and Walnut Creek.
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
3 | Introduction
and transportation element, or LUTE). Appendix C mentions that “ a key objective of
the noise element is to provide noise- exposure information for use in the land use
element. When integrated with the noise element, the land use element will show
acceptable land uses in relation to existing and projected noise contours.” Regarding the
circulation element, Appendix C states that “ the circulation system must be correlated
with the land use element and is one of the major sources of noise. Noise exposure will
thus be a decisive factor in the location and design of new transportation facilities and
the possible mitigation of noise from existing facilities in relation to existing and planned
land uses.” Appendix C goes on to state that “ the local planning agency may wish to
review the circulation and land use elements simultaneously to assess their compatibility
with the noise element.”
As recommended by Appendix C of the General Plan Guidelines, Oakland’s noise element
provides noise- exposure information— in the form of noise contours ( 􀃂 CHAPTER 4) and
a land use- noise compatibility matrix ( 􀃂 CHAPTER 5)— to inform land- use decisions. ( The
matrix illustrates the degree of acceptability of exposing specified land uses, including
sensitive land uses, to a range of ambient- noise levels, as indicated on the noise contour
maps.) Also, the noise element acknowledges that transportation is the main source of
noise in Oakland, and correlates noise levels with the layout of the transportation system
in the form of noise contour ( 􀃂 CHAPTER 4). It should be mentioned that the LUTE
contains noise- related policies on public nuisances and nuisances from incompatible
land uses, the impact of truck traffic on residential neighborhoods, the development of
new transportation infrastructure, the development of sites near the seaport and airport
and along airport flight paths, and the location of entertainment and large- scale
commercial activities. In addition, the open space, conservation and recreation element
contains policy statements addressing the provision of landscape as noise screens along
freeways ( 􀃂 APPENDIX A).
NOISE ELEMENT
Introduction | 4
This page intentionally left blank
2 | NOISE PRIMER
Description When an object vibrates, it radiates part of its energy as acoustic pressure
in the form of sound waves. Noise can be thought of as sound that is intrusive,
annoying or otherwise unwanted. Sound, and noise, can be described in terms of three
technical variables:
● AMPLITUDE, OR LOUDNESS, which is the difference in pressure between the peak and
the trough of a sound wave; it is measured in decibels.
● FREQUENCY, OR PITCH, which is the number of cycles of a sound wave per unit of time;
pitch rises as the number of cycles increases and drops as it decreases.
● TIME PATTERN. Sounds can be continuous ( as that of a waterfall), fluctuating ( traffic
throughout the day), intermittent ( the ringing of a phone) or impulsive ( a handclap).
Measurement Ambient, or community, noise is measured in decibels using the 􀃂 A-weighted
sound- pressure scale ( dBA). The normal range of human hearing extends
from 0 dBA to about 140 dBA ( 􀃂 TABLE 1, next page). Because sound can vary in
intensity by over one trillion times within the range of human hearing, decibels are
measured on a logarithmic scale, which compresses this range into a manageable set of
numbers. On the logarithmic scale, sound intensity increases exponentially, so that ten
decibels represents ten times more acoustic energy than one decibel but 20 decibels
represents 100 more acoustic energy and 30 decibels, 1,000 times more. Also, noise
sources do not combine in a simple additive fashion: if two sources produce noise levels
􀃂 The human ear is not equally sensitive to all
frequencies of the sound spectrum. The A-weighting
scale adjusts sound levels to correspond
to the human hearing response by de-emphasizing
the very low and very high sound
frequencies that fall outside the human hearing
range.
NOISE ELEMENT
Noise Primer | 6
of 50 dBA each, combining them would produce a noise level of only 53 dBA, not 100
dBA ( that is, a doubling in the amount of sound energy produces only a 3 dBA change).
RANGE OF HUMAN HEARING TABLE 1
NOISE SOURCE OR ENVIRONMENT
( DISTANCE OR LOCATION)
NOISE
LEVEL, DBA
LOUDNESS LEVEL
( COMPARED TO 70 DBA)
140 Deafening; eardrums bleed
􀁧 130 Threshold of pain ( 64 times louder)
Jet takeoff ( at 200 feet)
􀁧 120
Threshold of physical discomfort ( 32
Fire engine siren ( 100 ft), near times louder)
stage at rock concert, table saw
􀁧 110 Extremely loud ( 16 times louder)
Passing train ( at platform),
unmuffled motorcycle
􀁧 100 Very loud ( 8 times louder)
Pile driver, jackhammer ( 50 ft),
airliner ( under flight path)
􀁧 90
Loud; hearing damage from prolonged
Freeway traffic ( 100 ft), passing exposure ( 4 times louder)
truck, vacuum cleaner
􀁧 80
Loud; annoying and highly intrusive
Passing bus ( on sidewalk), street ( twice as loud)
traffic ( 100 ft)
􀁧 70
Moderately loud; intrusive; telephone
Dishwasher, AC unit, passing car use is difficult ( reference loudness)
( on sidewalk)
􀁧 60 Moderate ( half as loud)
Normal conversation, light auto
traffic ( 100 ft), office setting
􀁧 50
Quiet; threshold of interference with
In typical living room, human speech ( 1/ 4 as loud)
background music
􀁧 40
Very quiet; threshold of interference
In library or in bedroom at night, with sleep ( 1/ 8 as loud)
soft whisper
􀁧 30 Faint ( 1/ 16 as loud)
Rustling leaves, inside recording
studio
􀁧 20 Very faint
Human breathing
􀁧 10 Very faint; just audible
0 Threshold of normal hearing
Compiled by City of Oakland staff from various sources
Human perception Because of the physical characteristics of noise transmission and
of noise reception by humans, the relative loudness of sounds does not closely match
the actual amounts of sound energy. A change in ambient noise levels of 1- 2 dBA is not
audible even to sensitive receptors; a change of 3 dBA ( twice the sound energy) is
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
7 | Noise Primer
considered a just- noticeable difference; a change of at least 5 dBA is necessary to elicit a
noticeable change in response by the community; and it takes a change of 10 dBA to be
perceived as a doubling in loudness. From this, it can be inferred that a reduction in
community noise levels of 5- 10 dBA is necessary to appease noise- related complaints.
Time- sensitive measurement The intrusiveness of noise depends not only on
loudness but also on frequency, duration and time of day it occurs. To better gauge the
impact to the community, ambient noise is measured over periods of time rather than at
a given moment. The “ equivalent sound level” ( Leq) can be thought of as the steady-state,
or average, A- weighted sound level over a measurement period, typically one, eight
or 24 hours. The “ community noise equivalent level” ( CNEL) and “ day/ night average
sound level” ( Ldn) are measures of the 24- hour Leq reading at a given location with 􀃂
upward decibel adjustments, or penalties, to account for people’s increased sensitivity to
noise during the evening, night and morning. Lmax and Lmin are the maximum and
minimum noise levels during a measurement period, while Ln refers to the sound level
exceeded over a percentage “ n” of the measurement period ( for example, an L75 of 60
dBA indicates that the sound level exceeded 60 dBA 75 percent of the time).
Sources Noise sources are classified as either stationary ( or point) sources or as
mobile sources. Common stationary sources include commercial and industrial
equipment and activities ( air compressors, generators and gas venting, for example);
construction activities; car stereos and alarms; sporting and other entertainment events;
and residential equipment and activities such as stereos, barking dogs, power tools and
air- conditioning units. Stationary sources usually affect only small areas immediately
adjacent to the source. Mobile sources— especially cars and trucks— are the most
common and significant sources of noise in most communities. Because they stem from
transportation activities, mobile sources often affect large areas along transportation
corridors. The three main types of mobile noise sources are ground motor vehicles
( including cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles and, more recently, motorized scooters),
aircraft, and freight and passenger rail traffic. Traffic noise is generated by tire friction
and wind resistance, and also by engines, mufflers, horns and sirens ( in the case of
emergency vehicles). Traffic noise levels depend on the speed of traffic and the
percentage of trucks and, to a lesser extent, on traffic volume.
Propagation and attenuation Sound propagates, or travels outward, from its
source in waves of acoustic pressure. The pattern of propagation is related to the
geometry of the sound source. Sound from “ point” sources ( such as a piece of
􀃂 For CNEL, penalties are + 5 dBA for readings
made in the 7- 10 pm period and + 10 dBA for
readings in the 10 pm- 7 am period. For Ldn, there
is only a penalty of + 10 dBA during the 10 pm- 7
am period. In practice, Ldn and CNEL values are
considered equivalent, as they rarely differ by
more than 1 dBA.
NOISE ELEMENT
Noise Primer | 8
industrial equipment) propagates in a spherical pattern around the point. Sound from
sources with a linear pattern ( such as a moving train or a line of closely spaced moving
cars) propagates in a cylindrical pattern parallel to the line. Finally, sound from sources
with a quasi- linear pattern ( which is between a point and a line, such as moving cars
spaced far apart), propagates in a hybrid pattern between that of a sphere and a cylinder.
As the sound travels away from its source, it also attenuates, or drops off in loudness.
For each doubling of distance, noise levels attenuate by approximately 6 dBA from point
sources, 4.5 dBA from quasi- line sources and 3 dBA from line sources.
Effects on people Noise can have significant effects on physical and mental human
health and well- being. Adverse impacts and effects include interference with speech and
other forms of communication such as television and radio; sleep disruption; negative
mood and behavioral changes; and hearing loss ( usually temporary and caused by
occupational, rather than environmental, noise). Sleep disruption and interference with
communication are the main sources of noise- related community complaints. It should
be mentioned that people’s tolerance to annoyance from noise is highly subjective,
varying greatly among individuals.
Noise mitigation Noise impacts can be reduced by controlling the level of noise
generation at the source, through site- and building- design techniques at the noise
receptor, and by modifying the sound transmission path between source and receptor:
● AT THE SOURCE: The Federal and state governments establish uniform noise- emission
standards for mobile sources and industrial and consumer machinery, while local
governments may set limits on the operations of those sources and also adopt
decibel- based noise- exposure guidelines for different land uses ( 􀃂 next section).
● AT THE RECEPTOR: Noise can be reduced by using wall sound insulation and sound-rated
doors and windows; by fitting doors and windows properly and sealing
openings and joints; and by locating openings in recognition of nearby noise sources
( however, air conditioning might be needed for adequate ventilation).
● TRANSMISSION PATH: Barriers and buffers can be used to lessen noise. Reduction of
traffic noise, for example, can be accomplished by placing walls or landscaped berms
next to roadways, by re- routing traffic, by prohibiting residential development near
major thoroughfares, and by designing building setbacks or other site features that
orient dwelling units and outdoor areas away from traffic.
3 | INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
Federal Based on its authority to regulate interstate commerce, Congress enacted the
1972 Noise Control Act ( NCA) to provide noise- level standards for transportation,
industrial and commercial equipment. Among other provisions, the NCA specifically
reaffirmed earlier preemption by federal agencies over aircraft- noise control by state and
local governments. In 1990, the Airport Noise and Capacity Act again preempted state
and local authority by extending Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA) authority over
flight patterns, landing and departure times, and other operational aspects of public and
private airports and heliports. The act grandfathered existing local ordinances
controlling noise at airports, but it requires that new regulations receive FAA approval.
State The 􀃂 California noise insulation standards regulate the maximum allowable
interior noise level in new multi- unit buildings ( such as apartment buildings and hotels)
by specifying the extent to which walls, doors and floor/ ceiling assemblies must absorb
sound. The standards establish a threshold of 45 dBA ( CNEL) for noise from exterior
sources in any habitable room with doors and windows closed, and require preparation
of an acoustical analysis for units proposed in areas with ambient- noise levels of 60 dBA
or greater to ensure that the threshold is not exceeded. In Oakland, the standards are
enforced by the Building Services Division of the Community and Economic
Development Agency ( CEDA).
􀃂 California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2.
Title 24, Part 2 is published by the International
Code Council, a non- governmental organization
with sole publication and distribution rights. It
may be examined free of charge at one of many
“ depository libraries” throughout the state, which
are listed on the website of the Building Standards
Commission.
NOISE ELEMENT
Institutional Framework | 10
The state has established 􀃂 regulations— enforced by the California Highway Patrol or
local law- enforcement agencies— which set limits on the operation of vehicle horns,
sirens, and mufflers and exhaust systems, and which set maximum noise levels at which
cars, trucks and motorcycles can be operated. The 􀃂 California airport noise regulations
provide noise standards governing the operation of aircraft and aircraft engines for
airports in the state ( in California, federal and state airport- related regulations are
enforced by Caltrans).
California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) This state law requires public
agencies such as the City of Oakland to identify any significant environmental effects of
their “ actions,” including their approval of development projects, and to mitigate such
effects if feasible. When evaluating projects under CEQA, the City considers the
potential for a project to, among other things, expose persons to, excessive noise levels
or to result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels .
County 􀃂 State law requires the establishment of airport land use commissions
( ALUCs) at the county level. The main role of the ALUCs is to develop airport land- use
plans ( ALUPs) to advise cities and counties on the orderly expansion of public airports
over a 20- year horizon and on minimizing land- use conflicts with surrounding areas
over the issues of noise and building heights. Cities and counties must generally refer
general plans, zoning ordinances and land- use development proposals near airports and
heliports to the ALUC for determination of consistency with the ALUP. In Alameda
County, the county’s Community Development Agency acts as the ALUC, monitoring
Oakland International Airport, Hayward Executive Airport and Livermore Municipal
Airport; it last adopted an ALUP for the county in 1986.
Oakland The Oakland Municipal Code contains numerous regulations related to
noise. The most important are the 􀃂 noise performance standards and the nuisance
noise ordinance. The noise performance standards establish maximum noise levels
generated by certain activities “ across real property lines” which may be received by
residential, commercial, manufacturing and other specified land uses. The standards also
establish maximum noise levels for both short- and long- term construction and
demolition activities, and for residential air- conditioning units, residential and
commercial refrigeration units, and commercial exhaust systems. The nuisance noise
ordinance generally prohibits “ excessive or annoying” noise.
􀃂 California Vehicle Code, § 27000- 27007,
§ 27150- 27159 and § 27200- 27207.
􀃂 California Code of Regulations, Title 21, § 5000,
et seq.
California Public Utilities Code, § 21670- 21679.5
Oakland Municipal Code, 17.120.050
(“ Performance Standards— Noise”); and 8.18.010
(“ Excessive and annoying noises prohibited”) and
8.18.020 (“ Persistent noises a nuisance”).
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
11 | Institutional Framework
In general, noise complaints related to the performance standards are enforced by
CEDA’s Code Enforcement Division while complaints related to “ nuisance” noise—
yelling, loud music or barking dogs, for example— are investigated by the Oakland
Police Department ( OPD also enforces noise regulations related to ground motor
vehicles). In addition, the City uses the zoning ordinance and the conditional- use permit
process to limit the hours of operation for noise- producing activities and to identify
noise- abatement requirements. In some cases, the discretionary review procedures in
the zoning regulations— such as the use permit requirement for certain activities—
provide the means for case- by- case review of potentially noisy uses.
OAK Oakland International Airport ( OAK) has established noise- abatement policies
and procedures regarding runway use, aircraft operation and flight patterns. The airport
also operates an internal noise management office which administers a variety of noise-management
programs: computerized systems to monitor airport- related noise levels in
surrounding communities, sound- insulation programs for residences affected by airport
noise, “ flying quietly” education provided to pilots, periodic public meetings to address
community concerns over noise, online information on runway use and operations and
Bay Area air- traffic patterns, and a 􀃂 noise report hotline.
OAK’s noise report hotline received 3,291 noise-related
complaints in 2003. Of these, the vast
majority ( 2,731 complaints, or 83 percent) came
from Fremont and Alameda callers; Oakland
callers represented just over 1.3 percent of the
total ( 43 complaints). The hotline’s phone
number is 510/ 577.4194; the hotline is generally
staffed weekdays from 8: 30 am to 5 pm ( at other
times, messages are recorded).
“ The Oakland Police Department receives many
complaints about barking dogs… Owners of
barking dogs may be in violation of the Oakland
Municipal Code. Violations are punishable by law
and owners or keepers of animals creating a
nuisance may be required to pay a fine. The
Oakland Police Department investigates all
complaints of barking dogs in the City of Oakland.
To file a complaint or for further information, call
the Oakland Police Department at 415/ 777.3333
24 hours a day, 7 days a week.”
— From the website of the Oakland Animal Shelter
and Animal Control Field Services, a division of
the Oakland Police Department
NOISE ELEMENT
Institutional Framework | 12
This page intentionally left blank
4 | LOCAL NOISE ENVIRONMENT
Noise sources The major noise sources in Oakland, as in most cities, are
transportation activities, specifically motor- vehicle traffic on major thoroughfares, which
generates noise throughout the city continuously; rail operations ( including those of the
Bay Area Rapid Transit, or BART), which produce significant noise levels intermittently
along railroad alignments; and operations at Oakland International Airport ( OAK),
which produce intermittent noise along flight paths. Finally, while a number of
industrial noise sources exist throughout the city ( mostly in West and East Oakland)
which generate noise levels above those of their surroundings, none generates sufficient
noise to affect the city’s overall noise environment.
Technical study In 2004, as part of updating the noise element, the City of Oakland
retained the noise consulting firm of Illingworth & Rodkin to evaluate the city’s noise
environment. The firm conducted a city- wide noise- monitoring survey in August 2004
( supplemented with results from project- specific noise studies conducted previously in
Oakland) and presented the results in a report dated December 2004. Much of the
information contained in this chapter of the noise element is derived from the
Illingworth & Rodkin report. ( More detailed information can be found in the report
itself, which forms part of the noise element by reference, and which is available from
the City.)
NOISE ELEMENT
Local Noise Environment | 14
Noise monitoring survey As mentioned above, Illingworth & Rodkin conducted a
city- wide noise- monitoring survey on August 17- 24, 2004 to determine the local noise
environment. Noise levels were measured long- term ( for 24 hours) at 12 locations in
the city, and short- term ( for 1 hour) at 11 additional locations. These 23 measurements
were supplemented with results from 14 noise studies conducted by others between
1999 and 2003 for specific development projects in Oakland ( 􀃂 FIGURE 1 for noise-measurement
locations). 􀃂 APPENDIX B contains tables summarizing information related
to the long- term measurements ( 􀃂 TABLE B- 1), the short- term measurements ( 􀃂 TABLE B-
2), and the previously conducted measurements ( 􀃂 TABLE B- 3). The measurements
captured noise from a variety of both mobile and stationary sources.
Roadway noise Illingworth & Rodkin used Caltrans’ noise prediction model LeqV2
to develop noise contours ( measured in Ldn) for the major traffic thoroughfares in
Oakland ( including the state and interstate freeways), employing traffic data obtained
from various government agencies. The data were input into the traffic noise model for
calibration with the observed noise measurements, and existing noise levels along city
streets and highways were then calculated using the calibrated traffic noise model ( noise
levels were estimated at 75 feet from the centerline of major local thoroughfares and 150
feet from the centerline of freeways). 􀃂 APPENDIX B contains tables summarizing existing
noise levels and noise levels predicted for the year 2025 along various local streets ( 􀃂
TABLE B- 4) and freeway segments ( 􀃂 TABLE B- 5). The contours of the future traffic noise
levels are shown on 􀃂 FIGURE 2. ( Contours of existing traffic noise levels were not
mapped because they would not be distinguishable from future contours, given the
minor changes expected to occur in noise levels over the next 20 years.) As the noise
contour map shows, freeways are the main source of noise in the city, with I- 580, I- 880,
I- 980 and highways 13 and 24 generating the highest noise levels, in excess of 70 Ldn.
It should be noted that given Ldn values, including as expressed in noise contours, are
considered worst- case estimates because noise measurements do not account for noise-mitigation
measures ( such as sound walls or berms, building setbacks, and sound- rated
construction methods); for this reason, it can be assumed that areas within a given noise
contour or surrounding a measurement site experience noise at below the measured
levels. It should also be noted that although considerable effort goes into developing
noise contours, the present modeling technology is such that the accuracy of contours is
usually no better than +/− 3 dB; noise contours should, therefore, not be thought of as
absolute lines of demarcation on a map ( such as topographical contours) but rather as
bands of similar noise exposure.
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
15 | Local Noise Environment
Railroad noise There are two Union Pacific railroad right- of- ways in the city, both
following north- south alignments. The two lines are parallel and near each other,
contributing to cumulatively higher noise levels on the parcels between them. A typical
train traveling at 25 mph may produce noise levels in excess of 95 dBA at a distance of
100 feet from the tracks, while train horns may approach 110 dBA. Brakes, coupling
impacts and crossing guard warnings are additional common sources of noise along a
railroad corridor. The aboveground BART lines— through West Oakland, along East
8th Street/ East 12th Street/ San Leandro Boulevard, along Highway 24, and along Martin
Luther King Jr Way— are additional noise sources in the city. A typical BART train
produces a noise level of 85 dBA at 100 feet ( noise levels are lower near the stations due
to the slower speeds of approaching and departing trains). BART trains run frequently
through Oakland, at a combined rate of about 40 per hour on all lines during the
daytime on weekdays and about 20 per hour during the early morning and evening on
weekdays and during the weekend and holidays.
Using data collected for the San Leandro general plan update in 2000, Illingworth &
Rodkin estimated noise levels along the Union Pacific and BART track alignments
( including from train warning whistles) through Oakland. Distances from track
centerlines to various Ldn levels are shown on 􀃂 TABLE B- 6, while the noise contours are
shown on 􀃂 FIGURE 3. ( It should be remembered that noise generated by trains is
intermittent, unlike noise from motor- vehicle traffic, which is continuous.) Given the
unavailability of data regarding future railroad and BART operations, predicted future
noise levels and noise contours along the rail corridors have not been prepared.
Aircraft noise 􀃂 FIGURE 4, obtained from Oakland International Airport ( OAK),
shows the noise contours, measured in 􀃂 CNEL, for existing overflight and ground
airport operations ( from the fourth quarter of 2004; it should be noted that noise from
aircraft overflights is intermittent while noise from ground operations is relatively
continuous). 􀃂 FIGURE 5, from the 1996 EIS/ EIR for the Port of Oakland’s proposed
Airport Development Plan, shows the predicted CNEL contours from airport
operations in the year 2010. As the maps show, noise levels in excess of 65 CNEL are
primarily experienced at the airport, over water and over small areas areas of Bay Farm
Island. In addition, it is acknowledged that airplane overflights and other airport
operations affect several neighborhoods in Oakland, San Leandro and the City of
Alameda that are nevertheless outside of the 65 CNEL contour.
Because the community noise equivalent level
( CNEL) is the noise metric specified in the State
Aeronautics Code, aircraft noise in California is
described in terms of CNEL. CNEL is roughly
equivalent to the day/ night average sound level
( Ldn) but includes a 5 dBA upward adjustment for
the evening hours ( 7- 10 pm).
NOISE ELEMENT
Local Noise Environment | 16
Future noise levels The noise element must analyze and quantify, to the extent
practicable, both current and projected noise levels for the major sources of community
noise. As described above, noise levels were predicted for the year 2025 along various
local streets ( 􀃂 TABLE B- 4) and freeway segments ( 􀃂 TABLE B- 5) based on traffic data
obtained from various government agencies. The contours of the future traffic noise
levels are shown on 􀃂 FIGURE 2. ( For the noise element, the City chose a time horizon
of 20 years from the document’s expected publication in 2005. While traffic studies
commonly have two time horizons— 10 and 20 years— community noise levels in a
built- out city like Oakland would not change sufficiently in ten years to also justify this
earlier time horizon. As mentioned earlier, contours of existing traffic noise levels were
not mapped because they would not be distinguishable from future contours, given the
minor changes expected to occur in noise levels over the next 20 years.) Future noise
levels were not predicted along rail corridors because there is no reliable data on how
railroad and BART operations will change over the next 20 years. Finally, 􀃂 FIGURE 5,
shows the predicted CNEL contours from airport operations in the year 2010 ( there is
no reliable data for predicting airport noise contours for the year 2025).
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
17 | Local Noise Environment
Source: Metropolitan Oakland International Airport
EXISTING ( 2004) CNEL NOISE CONTOURS FOR OAKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT OPERATIONS FIGURE 4
NOISE ELEMENT
Local Noise Environment | 18
FUTURE ( 2010) CNEL NOISE CONTOURS FOR OAKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT OPERATIONS FIGURE 5
Source: Port of Oakland Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report; US Army Corps of Engineers, September 10, 1996
5 | NOISE- LAND USE
COMPATIBILITY
A key purpose of the noise contour maps in the noise element is to provide a basis for
determining the acceptability of proposed land uses at their proposed sites. To help
accomplish this, the California Department of Health Services developed receiver- based
noise- compatibility guidelines, in the form of a matrix, for various land uses. The matrix
illustrates the degree of acceptability of exposing specified land uses ( including sensitive
land uses) to a range of ambient- noise levels, as indicated on the noise contour maps.
As part of the noise element update, the City of Oakland is adopting a version of the
guidelines matrix ( 􀃂 FIGURE 6, at the end of this chapter). The matrix, in conjunction
with the noise contour maps ( 􀃂 FIGURES 2- 3, in Chapter 4) and when appropriate, site-specific
noise assessments, should be used by the City when considering proposed
development projects in order to gauge the acceptability of a proposed project ( that is,
its compatibility with noise levels at the proposed site).
The California General Plan Guidelines is of the opinion that the matrix criteria “ require a
rather broad interpretation.” For one thing, noise contours should be thought of as
bands of similar noise exposure, rather than as absolute lines of demarcation, due to the
limited accuracy of existing noise modeling technology; for another, noise contours
should be considered worst- case estimates because noise measurements do not account
for noise- mitigation measures. In addition, the evaluation of proposed land uses for
noise compatibility should, in general, include many factors. These include the type of
NOISE ELEMENT
Noise- Land Use Compatibility | 20
noise source; the sensitivity of the noise receptor; the noise reduction likely to be
provided by structures; the degree to which the noise source may interfere with speech,
sleep or other activities characteristic of the land use; seasonal variations in noise source
levels; existing outdoor ambient levels; general societal attitudes towards the noise
source; prior history of the source; and tonal characteristics of the source. To the extent
that any of these factors can be evaluated, the measured or computed noise exposure
values may be adjusted in order to more accurately assess local sentiments towards
acceptable noise exposure.
Conventional contemporary construction methods and materials decrease outdoor noise
by 12- 18 dB ( with partially open windows). At the same time, according to common
practice, the following are the maximum interior noise levels generally considered
acceptable for various common land uses:
● 45 dB: residential, hotels, motels, transient lodging, institutional ( churches, hospitals,
classrooms, libraries), movie theaters
● 50 dB: professional offices, research and development, auditoria, meeting halls
● 55 dB: retail, banks, restaurants, sports clubs
● 65 dB: manufacturing, warehousing
Taking residential uses as an example, the above information implies that an ambient
noise level of 60 dB is the threshold of a “ normally acceptable” environment for
residences ( maximum interior noise level of 45 dB plus average noise mitigation of 15
dB). Higher ambient noise levels would require detailed noise analyses, sound- rated
construction methods or materials, mechanical ventilation systems ( so that windows may
be kept closed), or noise shielding features such as sound walls, street setbacks and
thoughtful site planning and building orientation. For example, considering that sound
walls typically provide noise level reduction of 10 dB, residences could be built in areas
exposed to noise levels of 70 dB if a suitable sound wall was provided.
Regarding the noise- land use compatibility guidelines, it is important to keep in mind
two cautionary principles. First, the guidelines should not be used permissively to allow
for the degradation of noise levels up to the maximum desired standards: for example, if
the ambient noise level in an area currently zoned for residential uses is below 60 dB, an
increase in noise up to that level should not necessarily be allowed. Second, even land
uses proposed for “ normally acceptable” noise environments should be evaluated in
terms of any potential adverse noise impacts that such proposed projects would have on
existing land uses nearby.
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
21 | Noise- Land Use Compatibility
NOISE- LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX FIGURE 6
LAND USE CATEGORY COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE ( L DN OR CNEL, DB)
55 60 65 70 75 80
Residential
Transient lodging— motels, hotels
Schools, libraries, churches,
hospitals, nursing homes
Auditoriums, concert halls,
amphitheaters
Sports arenas, outdoor spectator
sports
Playgrounds, neighborhood parks
Golf courses, riding stables, water
recreation, cemeteries
Office buildings, business
commercial and professional
Industrial, manufacturing, utilities,
agriculture
Adapted from State of California— General Plan Guidelines, 2003 ( Appendix C); Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research
INTERPRETATION
NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE: Development may occur
without an analysis of potential noise impacts to the
proposed development ( though it might still be
necessary to analyze noise impacts that the project
might have on its surroundings).
CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE: Development should be
undertaken only after an analysis of noise- reduction
requirements is conducted, and if necessary noise-mitigating
features are included in the design.
Conventional construction will usually suffice as long
as it incorporates air conditioning or forced fresh- air-supply
systems, though it will likely require that
project occupants maintain their windows closed.
NORMALLY UNACCEPTABLE: Development should
generally be discouraged; it may be undertaken only
if a detailed analysis of the noise- reduction
requirements is conducted, and if highly effective
noise insulation, mitigation or abatement features
are included in the design.
CLEARLY UNACCEPTABLE: Development should not be
undertaken.
NOISE ELEMENT
Noise- Land Use Compatibility | 22
This page intentionally left blank
6 | POLICY STATEMENTS
Overview At the heart of every general plan element is a set of goals, objectives,
policies, recommendations, strategies, actions and other statements which are often
collectively referred to as policy statements. The purpose of policy statements is to
provide direction for a city or county, and guide the development- related actions and
decisions of its officials. Policy statements attempt to reconcile the diverse interests of a
community, and are normally based on background technical information and issue
analyses developed as part of the general- plan process.
Oakland’s noise element uses a hierarchical, three- layer framework to organize the policy
statements. At the top of the hierarchy are goals, or broad, general ends which the city
desires to achieve by implementing the noise element. The noise element formulates
two goals for the City:
● To protect Oakland’s quality of life and the physical and mental well- being of
residents and others in the City by reducing the community’s exposure to noise; and
● To safeguard Oakland’s economic welfare by mitigating noise incompatibilities
among commercial, industrial and residential land uses.
Goals form the basis for policies, the next level of the hierarchy. Policies, which are less
general than goals, identify specific areas in which the city will direct efforts in order to
attain its goals. Below the policies are actions, detailed and implementable steps that, if
NOISE ELEMENT
Policy Statements | 24
feasible, the city will undertake in order to carry out the policies and, ultimately, the
goals. There is at least one action supporting every policy, and each action lists the city
agency or agencies expected to assume the leading role in implementing that action.
( CEDA refers to the Community and Economic Development Agency, OPD to the
Oakland Police Department, and PWA to the Public Works Agency.) It is important to
note that the actions are underlain by two assumptions. First, the actions are meant to
apply only to those geographic and programmatic areas over which the City of Oakland
has legal authority. Second, the actions will only be implemented if they can be
accomplished successfully given financial, environmental, legal, social and technological
factors.
POLICY STATEMENTS
POLICY 1 Ensure the compatibility of existing and, especially, of proposed
development projects not only with neighboring land uses but
also with their surrounding noise environment.
● ACTION 1.1: Use the noise- land use compatibility matrix ( Figure 6) in
conjunction with the noise contour maps ( especially for roadway traffic) to
evaluate the acceptability of residential and other proposed land uses and also
the need for any mitigation or abatement measures to achieve the desired
degree of acceptability.
􀁦 CEDA PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
● ACTION 1.2: Continue using the City’s zoning regulations and permit processes
to limit the hours of operation of noise- producing activities which create
conflicts with residential uses and to attach noise- abatement requirements to
such activities.
􀁦 CEDA PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
● ACTION 1.3: Continue working with the Alameda County Community
Development Agency ( in its role as the county’s airport land use commission)
and with the Port of Oakland to ensure consistency with the county’s airport
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
25 | Policy Statements
land- use plan of the city’s various master- planning documents, zoning
ordinance and land- use development proposals near Oakland’s airport.
􀁦 CEDA PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
POLICY 2 Protect the noise environment by controlling the generation of
noise by both stationary and mobile noise sources.
● ACTION 2.1: Review the various noise prohibitions and restrictions under the
City’s nuisance noise ordinance and revise the ordinance if necessary.
􀁦 OPD BUREAU OF FIELD OPERATIONS
● ACTION 2.2: As resources permit, increase enforcement of noise- related
complaints and also of vehicle speed limits and of operational noise from cars,
trucks and motorcycles.
􀁦 OPD BUREAU OF FIELD OPERATIONS
􀁦 CEDA CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
● ACTION 2.3: Encourage the Port of Oakland to continue promoting its noise-abatement
office and programs for Oakland International Airport.
􀁦 CEDA PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
POLICY 3 Reduce the community’s exposure to noise by minimizing the
noise levels that are received by Oakland residents and others in the
City. ( This policy addresses the reception of noise whereas
Policy 2 addresses the generation of noise.)
● ACTION 3.1: Continue to use the building- permit application process to enforce
the California Noise Insulation Standards regulating the maximum allowable
interior noise level in new multi- unit buildings.
􀁦 CEDA BUILDING SERVICES DIVISION
● ACTION 3.2: Review the City’s noise performance standards and revise them as
appropriate to be consistent with City Council policy.
􀁦 CEDA PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
NOISE ELEMENT
Policy Statements | 26
● ACTION 3.3: Demand that Caltrans implement sound barriers, building retrofit
programs and other measures to mitigate to the maximum extent feasible noise
impacts on residential and other sensitive land uses from any new, widened or
upgraded roadways; any new sound barrier must conform with City policies and
standards regarding visual and aesthetic resources and quality.
􀁦 PWA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DIVISION
7 | RESOURCES
Below is a list of noise- related resources online, including many that were used to
prepare the noise element. It should be kept in mind that a large percentage of Internet
addresses become invalid every year, as web pages cease to exist or are moved to other
locations on the Internet. Nevertheless, it was felt that providing online resources
would be useful because many web pages do remain valid for at least several years and
also because the noise element will be consulted by the public most frequently in the few
months after its publication.
Government agencies
● FAA Office of Environment and Energy, Noise Division: aee. faa. gov/ noise
● Oakland Community and Economic Development Agency: oaklandceda. com
● Oakland Police Department: www. oaklandpolice. com
Government resources
● Government information sources on noise pollution:
www. libsci. sc. edu/ bob/ class/ clis734/ webguides/ noise. html
● California law codes: leginfo. ca. gov/ calaw. html
● California Code of Regulations: ccr. oal. ca. gov
● California General Plan Guidelines:
opr. ca. gov/ planning/ PDFs/ General_ Plan_ Guidelines_ 2003. pdf
● California Environmental Quality Act: ceres. ca. gov/ ceqa
NOISE ELEMENT
Resources | 28
● Oakland Municipal Code: bpc. iserver. net/ codes/ oakland
● Oakland International Airport's Noise Management Program:
flyoakland. com/ noise/ noise_ management_ pro. shtml
Noise- pollution control advocacy
● Noise Pollution Clearinghouse: nonoise. org
● Right to Quiet Society: quiet. org
● The League for the Hard of Hearing's Noise Center: lhh. org/ noise
● Airport noise law: www. netvista. net/~ hpb
FROM THE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Policy I/ C4.2: Minimizing nuisances. The potential for new
or existing industrial or commercial uses, including seaport and
airport activities, to create nuisance impacts on surrounding
residential land uses should be minimized through appropriate
siting and efficient implementation and enforcement of
environmental and development controls ( p. 42).
Policy T1.5: Locating truck services. Truck services should
be concentrated in areas adjacent to freeways and near the seaport
and airport, while ensuring the attractiveness of the environment
for visitors, local business, and nearby neighborhoods ( p. 51).
Policy T1.6: Designating truck routes. An adequate system
of roads connecting port terminals, warehouses, freeways and
regional arterials, and other important truck destinations should be
designated. This system should rely upon arterial streets away from
residential neighborhoods ( p. 51).
Policy T1.7: Routing freeway construction. New or
expanded freeway construction should be routed through areas
containing land uses which can tolerate any anticipated future noise
impact, and/ or incorporate special design features or traffic
controls which will offset the impact.( p. 51).
Policy T1.8: Re- routing and enforcing truck routes. The
City should make efforts to re- route traffic away from
neighborhoods, wherever possible, and enforce truck route
controls ( p. 51).
APPENDIX A
NOISE- RELATED POLICY STATEMENTS FROM OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
NOISE ELEMENT
Appendix A | 30
Policy T6.1: Posting maximum speeds. Collector streets
shall be posted at the lowest possible speed ( usually a maximum
speed of 25 miles per hour), except where a lower speed is dictated
by safety and allowable by law ( p. 60).
Policy T6.4: Rebuilding freeways. In the event of a major
disaster, necessitating reconstruction of the I- 880 freeway, it should
be rebuilt below ground in the downtown/ Jack London Square
area ( p. 60).
Policy D12.3: Locating entertainment activities. Large
scale entertainment uses should be encouraged to concentrate in
the Jack London Waterfront and within the Broadway corridor
area. However, existing large scale facilities in the Downtown
should be utilized to the fullest extent possible ( p. 73).
Policy D12.4: Locating smaller scale entertainment
activities. Small scale entertainment uses, such as small clubs,
should be allowed to locate in the Jack London Waterfront area
and to be dispersed throughout downtown districts, provided that
the City works with area residents and businesses to manage the
impacts of such uses ( p. 73).
Policy W1.3: Reducing land use conflicts. Land uses and
impacts generated from Port or neighborhood activities should be
buffered, protecting adjacent residential areas from the impacts of
seaport, airport, or other industrial uses. Appropriate siting of
industrial activities, buffering ( e. g., landscaping, fencing, transitional
uses, etc.), truck traffic management efforts, and other mitigations
should be used to minimize the impact of incompatible uses ( p.
78).
Policy W2.2: Buffering of heavy industrial uses.
Appropriate buffering measures for heavy industrial uses and
transportation uses on adjacent residential neighborhoods should
be developed and implemented ( p. 78).
Policy W6.2: Developing areas adjacent to the airport.
Development of sites proximate to airport flight paths should be in
conformance with Federal and State standards, as articulated in
Federal Aviation Regulation, Part 77 and Part 150 ALUC planning
guidelines, and any other applicable regulations and amendments
( p. 88).
Policy W7.1: Developing lands in the vicinity of the
seaport/ airport. Outside the seaport and airport, land should
be developed with a variety of uses that benefit from the close
proximity to the seaport and airport and that enhance the unique
characteristics of the seaport and airport. These lands should be
developed with uses which can buffer adjacent neighborhoods
from impacts related to such activities ( p. 88).
Policy N1.4: Locating large- scale commercial activities.
Commercial uses which serve long term retail needs or regional
consumers and which primarily offer high volume goods should be
located in areas visible or amenable to high volumes of traffic.
Traffic generated by large scale commercial developments should
be directed to arterial streets and freeways and not adversely affect
nearby residential streets ( p. 104).
Policy N1.6: Reviewing potential nuisance activities.
The City should closely review any proposed new commercial
activities that have the potential to create public nuisance or crime
problems, and should monitor those that are existing. These may
include isolated commercial or industrial establishments located
within residential areas, alcoholic beverage sales activities
( excluding restaurants), adult entertainment, or other entertainment
activities ( p. 104).
Policy N3.9: Orienting residential development.
Residential developments should be encouraged to face the street
and to orient their units to desirable sunlight and views, while
avoiding unreasonably blocking sunlight and views for neighboring
buildings, respecting the privacy needs of residents of the
development and surrounding properties, providing for sufficient
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
31 | Appendix A
conveniently located on- site open space, and avoiding undue noise
exposure ( p. 107).
Policy N5.2: Buffering residential areas. Residential areas
should be buffered and reinforced from conflicting uses through
the establishment of performance- based regulations, the removal
of non- conforming uses, and other tools ( p. 109).
Policy N11.4: Alleviating Public Nuisances. The City
should strive to alleviate public nuisances and unsafe and illegal
activities. Code Enforcement efforts should be given as high a
priority as facilitating the development process. Public nuisance
regulations should be designed to allow community members to
use City codes to facilitate nuisance abatement in their
neighborhood ( p. 114).
FROM THE OPEN SPACE, CONSERVATION AND RECREATION
ELEMENT
Policy OS- 3.6: Open Space Buffers Along Freeways.
Maintain existing open space buffers along Oakland’s freeways to
absorb noise and emissions… ( p. 2- 29).
● ACTION OS- 3.6.1: LANDSCAPE SCREENING ALONG FREEWAYS.
Require retention of existing landscape screening as a condition
of development approval for any property adjacent to Highway
13, Highway 580 ( east of Grand), or Highway 24 ( above
Broadway). Encourage Caltrans to include landscape screening
for any sound wall project in these areas ( p. 2- 30).
● ACTION OS- 3.6.3: FREEWAY BUFFERS. Encourage Caltrans to
plant and maintain additional landscaping along Oakland’s
freeways, particularly those stretches of Interstate 880 adjacent
to residential neighborhoods and other sensitive receptors ( p. 2-
30).
NOISE ELEMENT
Appendix A | 32
This page intentionally left blank
See pages that follow
APPENDIX B
TABLES FROM THE TECHNICAL REPORT
NOISE ELEMENT
Appendix B | 34
SUMMARY OF LONG- TERM NOISE MONITORING RESULTS TABLE B- 1
SITE
LOCATION ( DISTANCE, IN FEET, FROM
CENTERLINE OF ROAD)
DATE
DAYTIME NOISE
LEVELS ( DBA)
NIGHTTIME
NOISE LEVELS
L DN
LT- 1 Hwy 24 (~ 144 ft), east of Broadway 8/ 17 to 8/ 19/ 04 74 to 80 67 to 78 80
LT- 2 Skyline Pkwy (~ 20 ft), at 7293 Skyline Pkwy 8/ 17 to 8/ 19/ 04 55 to 68 32 to 58 61- 63
LT- 3 Hwy 13 (~ 90 ft), at Monterey and Maiden Ln 8/ 17 to 8/ 19/ 04 67 to 72 57 to 69 72
LT- 4 Skyline Pkwy (~ 87 ft), at Mott Pl 8/ 17 to 8/ 19/ 04 52 to 61 42 to 55 57- 58
LT- 5 Fruitvale Av (~ 87 ft), at Davis St 8/ 17 to 8/ 19/ 04 63 to 67 54 to 63 67
LT- 6 14th Av (~ 75 ft), at East 22nd St 8/ 17 to 8/ 19/ 04 64 to 68 55 to 64 68
LT- 7 I- 580 (~ 186 ft), at Wesley St 8/ 17/ 04 72 to 73 -- --
LT- 8 San Leandro St (~ 30 ft), at the BART tracks 8/ 23 to 8/ 24/ 04 72 to 74 Down to 59 --
LT- 9 55th Av (~ 132 ft), at Bancroft Av 8/ 23 to 8/ 24/ 04 64 to 74 55 to 74 72
LT- 10 International Blvd (~ 75 ft), at 81st St 8/ 23 to 8/ 24/ 04 67 to 75 61 to 67 73
LT- 11 98th St (~ 81 ft), at E St 8/ 23 to 8/ 24/ 04 69 to 72 60 to 68 72
LT- 12 Hegenberger Rd (~ 81 ft), at Leet 8/ 23 to 8/ 24/ 04 68 to 72 62 to 69 74
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
35 | Appendix B
SUMMARY OF SHORT- TERM NOISE MONITORING RESULTS TABLE B- 2
SITE
LOCATION ( DISTANCE, IN FEET, FROM
CENTERLINE OF ROAD) DATE AND TIME L MAX L MIN L1 L10 L50 L90 L EQ
ST- 1 MLK Blvd (~ 84 ft) 8/ 18/ 2004; 10: 30 am 96 55 83 73 68 60 74
ST- 2 Alcatraz St (~ 36 ft), at 620- 626 Alcatraz 8/ 18/ 2004; 11: 10 am 84 48 75 71 65 53 68
ST- 3 Intersection of Grandview and Gravatt 8/ 18/ 2004; 11: 40 am 66 39 65 55 44 41 53
ST- 4 Moraga (~ 54 ft), at Harbord Dr 8/ 18/ 2004; 12: 15 am 74 45 72 70 63 55 65
ST- 5 Pleasant Valley Av (~ 63 ft), at Home St 8/ 18/ 2004; 12: 40 am 78 54 76 72 66 60 68
ST- 6 Shepard Canyon Rd (~ 63 ft), at Paso Robles 8/ 18/ 2004; 2: 00 am 77 41 70 63 52 44 59
ST- 7 Park (~ 63 ft), at Everett 8/ 23/ 2004; 2: 00 am 78 46 76 71 64 53 67
ST- 8 Lincoln (~ 42 ft), at Burlington 8/ 23/ 2004; 2: 20 am 83 42 77 67 56 46 65
ST- 9 35th Av (~ 69 ft), at Harbor View 8/ 23/ 2004; 2: 50 am 88 50 80 71 63 55 69
ST- 10 Redwood Rd (~ 66 ft), at Via Rialto 8/ 24/ 2004; 12: 00 am 76 48 74 70 61 52 65
ST- 11 Golf Links Rd (~ 71 ft), at Dunkirk Av 8/ 24/ 2004; 12: 40 am 73 39 68 63 52 44 58
During short- term measurements, vehicular traffic on the street network was the dominant noise source; however, there were
contributions from overflight aircraft at ST- 4, ST- 5, ST- 6, ST- 8 and ST- 11. Aircraft at ST- 5 and ST- 8 generated maximum
levels of 70 dBA.
NOISE ELEMENT
Appendix B | 36
SUMMARY OF PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED NOISE MEASUREMENTS TABLE B- 3
LOCATION DURATION
NOISE LEVEL
( DBA)
DISTANCE
( FEET) MAJOR NOISE SOURCE SOURCE OF INFORMATION
Oak & 4th Street 24 Hour 71 Ldn Fence line Traffic on Oak Street ESA, 1999
Telegraph Ave & 32nd St 24 Hour 71 CNEL 50 Traffic on Telegraph Ave ESA, 2000
NE corner of MacArthur BART 24 Hour 72 CNEL * Traffic on I- 580, BART ESA, 2000
MLK Jr Way btwn Apgar & 39th St * 65 Leq 60 I- 580, BART, MLK Jr Way traffic ESA, 2000
62nd St btwn San Pablo & Marshall * 60 Leq 25 Traffic on 62nd and San Pablo ESA, 2000
San Pablo & 16th 30 Min 63 CNEL 30 Traffic on San Pablo Ave Lamphier & Associates, 2000
16th & Clay 30 Min 62 CNEL 30 Traffic on 16th Street Lamphier & Associates, 2000
16th Street btwn Jefferson and Clay 30 Min 61 CNEL 30 Traffic on 16th Street Lamphier & Associates, 2000
17th Street btwn MLK and Jefferson 30 Min 66 CNEL 30 Traffic on 17th Street Lamphier & Associates, 2000
9th St 24 Hour 65 CNEL * Traffic on 9th St Charles Salter & Associates, 2000
8th St 24 Hour 66 CNEL * Traffic on 8th St Charles Salter & Associates, 2000
Jefferson St. 24 Hour 71 CNEL * Traffic on Jefferson St. Charles Salter & Associates, 2000
Clay St. 24 Hour 71 CNEL * Traffic on Clay St. Charles Salter & Associates, 2000
Vernon Street north of Bay Place 24 Hour 58 Ldn 60 Traffic on Vernon Street ESA, 2000
Bay Place 15 Min 64 peak 30 Traffic on Bay Place ESA, 2000
Harrison Street 15 Min 66 peak 55 Traffic on Harrison Street ESA, 2000
3rd/ Broadway, NW Corner 15 Min 70 peak am Sidewalk I- 880, railroad, local traffic Jones & Stokes, 2001
3rd/ Broadway, NW Corner 15 Min 67 Peak pm Sidewalk I- 880, railroad, local traffic Jones & Stokes, 2001
3rd/ Broadway, SW Corner 15 Min 66 peak am Sidewalk I- 880, railroad, local traffic Jones & Stokes, 2001
3rd/ Broadway, SW Corner 15 Min 68 peak pm Sidewalk I- 880, railroad, local traffic Jones & Stokes, 2001
3rd/ Franklin NW Corner 15 Min 69 peak am Sidewalk I- 880, railroad, local traffic Jones & Stokes, 2001
3rd/ Franklin NW Corner 15 Min 66 peak pm Sidewalk I- 880, railroad, local traffic Jones & Stokes, 2001
2nd/ Broadway, SW Corner 15 Min 69 peak am Sidewalk I- 880, railroad, local traffic Jones & Stokes, 2001
2nd/ Broadway, SW Corner 15 Min 69 peak pm Sidewalk I- 880, railroad, local traffic Jones & Stokes, 2001
Pine Street & Gross Street 24 Hour 68 CNEL * I- 880, local traffic, BART, aircraft G. Borchard & Associates, 2001
1109 Wood Street btwn 11th & 12th 24 Hour 64 CNEL * Local traffic, aircraft, I- 880 G. Borchard & Associates, 2001
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
37 | Appendix B
LOCATION DURATION
NOISE LEVEL
( DBA)
DISTANCE
( FEET) MAJOR NOISE SOURCE SOURCE OF INFORMATION
So. side of 3rd St near Tower Lofts 24 Hour 68 Ldn * I- 880, local traffic Charles Salter & Associates, 2001
I- 880 Freeway ( South of Oak Street) 24 Hour 75 CNEL 500 Traffic on I- 880 Lamphier- Gregory, 2002
Foothill Boulevard ( At 68th Ave) 24 Hour 69 CNEL 50 Traffic on Foothill Blvd Lamphier- Gregory, 2002
MacArthur Blvd ( South of 90th Ave) 24 Hour 70 CNEL 50 Traffic on MacArthur Blvd Lamphier- Gregory, 2000
San Pablo Avenue ( at 32nd Street) 15 Min 69 CNEL 50 Traffic on San Pablo Ave Lamphier- Gregory, 2003
West Grand Avenue ( at Chestnut St) 15 Min 71 CNEL 50 Traffic on West Grand Ave Lamphier- Gregory, 2003
Mandela Parkway ( at 17th Street) 15 Min 64 CNEL 50 Traffic on Mandela Parkway Lamphier- Gregory, 2003
16th Street ( West of Wood Street) 24 Hour 66 CNEL * Traffic on 16th Street Lamphier- Gregory, 2003
Peralta Street ( at 8th Street) 15 Min 69 CNEL 50 Traffic on Peralta Street Lamphier- Gregory, 2003
7th Street ( at Mandela Parkway) 15 Min 72 CNEL 50 Traffic on 7th Street Lamphier- Gregory, 2003
Alice St, entrance to ' The Landing' 24 Hour 66- 67 Ldn 40 Amtrak activity and local traffic ESA, 2003
Embarcadero near Alice St 24 Hour 72- 73 Ldn 150 ( Amtrak) Amtrak activity and local traffic ESA, 2003
NOISE ELEMENT
Appendix B | 38
CALCULATED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS FOR MAJOR LOCAL ROADWAYS TABLE B- 4
DISTANCE ( FT) TO NOISE
CONTOUR FROM
ROADWAY CENTER
DISTANCE ( FT) TO NOISE
CONTOUR FROM
ROADWAY CENTER
STREET NAME FROM TO
EXISTING
LDN
( AT 75 FT)
70 LDN 65 LDN 60 LDN
FUTURE LDN
( AT 75 FT)
70 LDN 65 LDN 60 LDN
14th / Beaumont 8th St 21st St 65 * 80 170 66 * 90 190
14th / Beaumont East 24th St East 27th St 67 50 100 210 67 50 100 220
23rd Ave East 7th St 12th St 68 60 120 260 69 60 140 300
23rd Ave 29th Ave East 7th St 68 60 120 260 69 60 140 300
35th Ave Foothill Blvd East 14th St 60 * * 70 61 * * 90
35th Ave MacArthur Blvd Foothill Blvd 66 * 80 180 66 * 90 190
42nd Ave Foothill Blvd ( S) 14th St 67 50 110 240 66 * 90 190
51st St Shattuck Ave Telegraph Ave 61 * * 80 61 * * 90
51st St Telegraph Ave Broadway 67 50 100 210 67 50 100 220
66th Ave Oakport St San Leandro St 66 * 80 180 66 * 90 190
73rd Ave Bancroft Ave MacArthur Blvd 69 60 130 280 70 70 160 350
73rd Ave International Blvd MacArthur Blvd 71 90 190 410 72 100 220 470
73rd Ave Arthur St Bancroft Ave 71 80 180 380 72 100 220 470
7th St Fallon St Fifth Ave 63 * 50 120 65 * 70 160
7th St Wood St Market St 66 * 90 190 67 50 100 220
98th Ave Bancroft Ave Golf Links Rd 66 * 90 180 65 * 70 160
98 th Ave San Leandro St Bancroft Ave 65 * 80 160 66 * 90 190
98 th Ave I- 880 ( E) San Leandro St 67 50 110 230 68 60 120 260
Alcatraz Ave Telegraph Ave Berkeley city limit 64 * 60 140 68 60 120 260
Alcatraz Ave Berkeley city limit Shattuck Ave 60 * * 80 61 * * 90
Bancroft Ave Seminary Ave Havenscourt Blvd 60 * * 80 62 * 50 100
Bancroft Ave Havenscourt Blvd 73rd Ave 66 * 90 200 67 50 100 220
Bancroft Ave 98th Ave SL city limit 66 * 90 190 66 * 90 190
Bancroft Ave 73rd Ave 98th Ave 66 * 90 200 67 50 100 220
Broadway Keith Ave Rte 13 EB on- ramp 69 60 140 300 71 90 190 410
Broadway MacArthur Blvd Pleasant Valley Ave 66 * 90 200 67 50 100 220
Broadway 27th St MacArthur Blvd ( W) 67 50 100 220 66 * 90 190
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
39 | Appendix B
Broadway Pleasant Valley Ave Keith Ave 68 60 120 260 69 60 140 300
Brush St 5th St 11TH St 67 50 100 230 69 60 140 300
Claremont Ave College Ave Berkeley city limit 65 * 80 160 66 * 90 190
Claremont Ave Berkeley city limit CCC LIMIT 67 50 100 230 66 * 90 190
Claremont Ave Telegraph Ave College Ave 66 * 90 190 65 * 70 160
Coliseum Way 46th Ave 66TH Ave ( E) 66 * 90 190 61 * * 90
Edes Ave I- 880 off- ramps 85TH Ave 66 * 90 180 63 * 60 120
Foothill Blvd Lakeshore 5th Ave 58 * * 60 59 * * 60
Foothill Blvd 8th Ave 14TH Ave 63 * 50 110 61 * * 90
Foothill Blvd 14th Ave 19TH Ave 59 * * 60 60 * * 70
Foothill Blvd 23RD Ave Fruitvale Ave 61 * * 80 60 * * 70
Foothill Blvd 35th Ave 38th Ave 62 * 50 110 63 * 60 120
Foothill Blvd 38th Ave 42nd Ave ( S) 63 * 50 110 61 * * 90
Foothill Blvd High St Vicksburg Ave 61 * * 90 62 * 50 100
Foothill Blvd Vicksburg Ave 55th Ave 59 * * 60 59 * * 60
Foothill Blvd 55th Ave Seminary Ave 60 * * 80 59 * * 60
Fruitvale Ave Harold St International Blvd 62 * * 100 63 * 60 120
Fruitvale Ave International Blvd Alameda city limit 63 * 50 120 63 * 60 120
Golf Links Rd Fontaine St 98th Ave 63 * 60 130 64 * 60 140
Grand Ave MacArthur Blvd Piedmont city limit 66 * 90 190 65 * 70 160
Grand Ave Harrison St MacArthur Blvd 69 60 130 280 69 60 140 300
Harrison St Hamilton Pl Santa Clara Ave 66 * 90 200 67 50 100 220
Harrison St 27th St Hamilton Pl 66 * 90 200 67 50 100 220
Harrison St Grand Ave 27th St 66 * 90 200 67 50 100 220
Havenscourt Blvd International Blvd Bancroft Ave 62 * 50 100 63 * 60 120
Hegenberger Rd Edes Ave San Leandro St 75 160 340 730 76 190 410 870
Hegenberger Rd San Leandro St 14th St 74 140 290 640 75 160 350 750
Hegenberger Rd Doolittle Dr Pardee Dr 70 80 160 350 71 90 190 410
High St Brookdale Ave Redding St 64 * 70 140 66 * 90 190
High St Alameda city limit Oakport St 70 70 160 330 69 60 140 300
High St Coliseum Way San Leandro St 65 * 80 160 66 * 90 190
High St Foothill Blvd Brookdale Ave 64 * 60 140 64 * 60 140
NOISE ELEMENT
Appendix B | 40
International Blvd 1st Ave Pl 14th Ave 64 * 70 140 64 * 60 140
International Blvd 14th Ave Fruitvale 66 * 90 180 63 * 60 120
International Blvd Fruitvale Ave 42nd Ave 64 * 70 150 64 * 60 140
Lakeshore Ave 18th St East 12th St East 65 * 70 150 66 * 90 190
Lakeside Dr Madison St Harrison St 63 * 50 120 64 * 60 140
MacArthur Blvd Fruitvale Ave High St 66 * 80 180 66 * 90 190
MacArthur Blvd High St Buell St 66 * 90 190 66 * 90 190
MacArthur Blvd Buell St Seminary Ave ( E) 68 50 110 240 68 60 120 260
Market St 55th St Stanford Ave 66 * 90 180 65 * 70 160
MLK Way 27th St MacArthur Blvd 63 * 60 120 64 * 60 140
MLK Way 47th St END1 63 * 60 120 64 * 60 140
Miles Ave College Ave Rte 24 SB off- ramp 61 * * 90 63 * 60 120
Moraga Ave Piedmont city limit Estates Dr 63 * 60 120 64 * 60 140
Moraga Ave Estates Dr Thornhill Dr 62 * 50 100 64 * 60 140
Moraga Ave Thornhill Dr Mountain Blvd 63 * 60 120 64 * 60 140
Mountain Blvd Edwards Ave ( S) Keller Ave 74 140 300 660 74 140 300 640
Mountain Blvd Holy Names College Redwood Rd ( S) 65 * 70 160 64 * 60 140
Mountain Blvd Redwood Rd ( S) Carson St 62 * 50 100 62 * 50 100
Mountain Blvd Moraga Ave Park Blvd ( N) 65 * 80 170 66 * 90 190
Park Blvd Grosvenor Pl Wellington St 69 60 130 280 69 60 140 300
Park Blvd Leimert Blvd Trafalgar Pl 64 * 60 130 64 * 60 140
Park Blvd Spruce St MacArthur Blvd 65 * 70 160 66 * 90 190
Park Blvd Wellington St Leimert Blvd 65 * 70 150 64 * 60 140
Redwood Rd Aliso Ave Skyline Blvd West 66 * 90 200 66 * 90 190
Redwood Rd Aliso Ave END3 66 * 80 180 66 * 90 190
San Leandro St 66th Ave 75th Ave 67 50 100 230 68 60 120 260
San Leandro St 75th Ave SL city limit 68 50 120 250 69 60 140 300
San Leandro St High St 66th Ave 65 * 70 160 67 50 100 220
San Leandro St Fruitvale Ave High St 66 * 90 200 66 * 90 190
Seminary Ave Bancroft Ave International Blvd 59 * * 70 59 * * 60
Seminary Ave San Leandro St International Blvd 60 * * 70 58 * * 60
Shattuck Ave 52nd St 55th St 61 * * 90 62 * 50 100
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
41 | Appendix B
Shattuck Ave 55th St Alcatraz Ave 63 * 60 130 64 * 60 140
Stanford Ave San Pablo Ave Adeline St 65 * 70 150 67 50 100 220
Telegraph Ave West Grand Ave 27th St 62 * 50 100 60 * * 70
Telegraph Ave 27th St W MacArthur Blvd 62 * 50 100 62 * 50 100
Telegraph Ave 40th St 50th St 62 * 50 100 63 * 60 120
Telegraph Ave 51st St Aileen St 63 * 50 120 63 * 60 120
Telegraph Ave Aileen St Alcatraz Ave 68 60 120 260 68 60 120 260
Telegraph Ave Alcatraz Ave Berkeley city limit 68 60 120 260 68 60 120 260
W MacArthur Blvd Market St Telegraph Ave 66 * 90 200 67 50 100 220
W MacArthur Blvd Telegraph Ave Broadway 67 50 110 230 68 60 120 260
W MacArthur Blvd Broadway Fairmount Ave 68 50 110 240 68 60 120 260
* Distances of less than 50 feet are not included on this table
NOISE ELEMENT
Appendix B | 42
CALCULATED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS FOR HIGHWAYS AND FREEWAYS TABLE B- 5
DISTANCE ( FT) TO NOISE
HIGHWAY VICINITY CONTOUR FROM ROAD CENTER
EXISTING
LDN
( 150 FT)
70 LDN 65 LDN 60 LDN
SR 13 Oakland, Carson St 71 170 380 810
SR 13 Oakland, Redwood Rd 71 170 380 810
SR 13 Oakland, Lincoln Av 72 200 440 950
SR 13 Oakland, Park Blvd 73 240 510 1100
SR 13 Oakland, Moraga Av 72 200 440 950
SR 13 Oakland, Broadway Terr 73 240 510 1100
SR 13 Oakland, Jct SR 24 73 240 510 1100
SR 24 Oakland, Telegraph Av / Claremont Av 79 600 1290 2770
SR 24 Oakland, Broadway / Patton St 79 600 1290 2770
SR 24 Oakland, Jct SR 13 at Landvale Rd 80 700 1500 3230
SR 24 Oakland, Caldecott Lane 79 600 1290 2770
SR 24 Caldecott Tunnel 80 700 1500 3230
I- 580 Oakland, Foothill Blvd 78 550 1180 2540
I- 580 Oakland, 106th Av 78 540 1170 2510
I- 580 Oakland, Golf Links Rd 79 570 1220 2630
I- 580 Oakland, Keller Av 79 570 1230 2640
I- 580 Oakland, Edwards Av 79 570 1230 2660
I- 580 Oakland, Kuhnle Av 79 610 1320 2840
I- 580 Oakland, Jct SR 13 North 79 600 1290 2770
I- 580 Oakland, MacArthur Blvd 78 530 1130 2440
I- 580 Oakland, High St 78 510 1100 2360
I- 580 Oakland, 35th Av 78 550 1190 2560
I- 580 Oakland, Coolidge Av 79 600 1290 2780
I- 580 Oakland, Fruitvale Av 78 550 1190 2560
I- 580 Oakland, Beaumont Av 79 610 1320 2840
CITY OF OAKLAND GENERAL PLAN
43 | Appendix B
DISTANCE ( FT) TO NOISE
HIGHWAY VICINITY CONTOUR FROM ROAD CENTER
EXISTING
LDN
( 150 FT)
70 LDN 65 LDN 60 LDN
I- 580 Oakland, Park Blvd 79 560 1200 2580
I- 580 Oakland, Lakeshore Av / Park Blvd 79 620 1350 2900
I- 580 Oakland, Van Buren Av / Grand Av 79 570 1230 2640
I- 580 Oakland, Oakland Av / Harrison St 79 620 1340 2890
I- 580 Oakland, Jct I- 80 and I- 880 79 610 1300 2810
I- 880 Oakland, 98th Av 83 1070 2310 4980
I- 880 Oakland, Hegenberger Rd 83 1030 2220 4790
I- 880 Oakland, 66th Av 83 1090 2350 5060
I- 880 Oakland, Jct SR 77, High St / 42nd Av 81 810 1750 3770
I- 880 Oakland, 29th / Fruitvale Av 83 1120 2410 5180
I- 880 Oakland, 23rd Av 83 1110 2400 5160
I- 880 Oakland, Embarcadero 83 1180 2550 5490
I- 880 Oakland, 5th Av 83 1180 2550 5490
I- 880 Oakland, Oak St / Madison St 83 1170 2520 5430
I- 880 Oakland, Jackson St / Broadway 83 1090 2360 5080
I- 880 Oakland, Jct I- 980; Market St 83 1100 2370 5100
I- 880 Adeline St / Union St 80 700 1520 3270
I- 880 7th St 80 730 1560 3370
I- 880 West Jct. I- 80 80 670 1440 3110
I- 980 Oakland, 14th St 80 700 1500 3230
I- 980 Oakland, 18TH St 81 810 1750 3770
I- 980 Oakland, Jct. I- 580 82 950 2040 4390
NOISE ELEMENT
Appendix B | 44
NOISE CONTOUR DISTANCES FOR RAILROAD LINES
TABLE B- 6
DISTANCE ( FT) TO NOISE CONTOUR
RAILROADS FROM TRACK
75 LDN 70 LDN 65 LDN 60 LDN
UPRR ( whistle) 80 180 390 840
BART + UPRR 130 280 600 1290
See pages that follow
APPENDIX C
OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE NOISE ELEMENT
NOISE ELEMENT
Appendix C | 46
This page intentionally left blank