NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT 

Brightline West Cajon Pass High-Speed Rail Project 

October 2022 

Prepared for 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Prepared by 

Cross-Spectrum Acoustics, Inc. 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Contents 

Abbreviations and Acronyms...........................................................................................................v 

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 

2. Project Description ................................................................................................................... 3 

2.1. Background...................................................................................................................... 3 

2.2. Project Area..................................................................................................................... 3 

2.3. Purpose of and Need for the Project .............................................................................. 3 

2.3.1. Purpose ................................................................................................................... 3 

2.3.2. Need........................................................................................................................ 4 

3. Alternatives............................................................................................................................. 10 

3.1. Build Alternative............................................................................................................ 10 

3.1.1. Section 1 – High Desert......................................................................................... 10 

3.1.2. Section 2 – Cajon Pass........................................................................................... 12 

3.1.3. Section 3 – Greater Los Angeles ........................................................................... 12 

3.1.4. Construction.......................................................................................................... 13 

4. Methodology........................................................................................................................... 15 

4.1. Noise and Vibration Basics ............................................................................................ 15 

4.1.1. Noise Basics........................................................................................................... 15 

4.1.2. Vibration Basics..................................................................................................... 17 

4.2. Relevant Regulations, Plans, and Policies ..................................................................... 18 

4.2.1. Noise Impact Criteria ............................................................................................ 18 

4.2.2. Vibration Impact Criteria ...................................................................................... 21 

4.2.3. Construction Noise Criteria................................................................................... 24 

4.2.4. Construction Vibration Criteria............................................................................. 25 

4.3. Study Area ..................................................................................................................... 26 

4.3.1. Noise Study Area................................................................................................... 26 

4.3.2. Vibration Study Area............................................................................................. 26 

4.4. Methods Used ............................................................................................................... 27 

4.4.1. Operational Noise ................................................................................................. 27 

4.4.2. Traffic Noise .......................................................................................................... 28 

4.4.3. Operational Vibration ........................................................................................... 28 

4.4.4. Construction Noise................................................................................................ 29 

4.4.5. Construction Vibration.......................................................................................... 31 

5. Affected Environment............................................................................................................. 33 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 i 
 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

5.1. Noise.............................................................................................................................. 33 

5.1.1. Section 1 – High Desert......................................................................................... 35 

5.1.2. Section 2 – Cajon Pass........................................................................................... 37 

5.1.3. Section 3 – Greater Los Angeles ........................................................................... 37 

5.2. Vibration........................................................................................................................ 39 

5.2.1. Section 1 High Desert............................................................................................ 41 

5.2.2. Section 2 – Cajon Pass........................................................................................... 41 

5.2.3. Section 3 Greater Los Angeles .............................................................................. 41 

6. Environmental Consequences and Mitigation........................................................................ 43 

6.1. Build Alternative............................................................................................................ 43 

6.1.1. Noise ..................................................................................................................... 43 

6.1.2. Vibration ............................................................................................................... 52 

6.1.3. Cumulative Effects ................................................................................................ 54 

6.2. No Build Alternative ...................................................................................................... 55 

6.2.1. Construction Effects.............................................................................................. 55 

6.2.2. Operation Effects .................................................................................................. 55 

6.2.3. Cumulative Effects ................................................................................................ 55 

6.3. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures ............................................... 55 

6.3.1. Construction.......................................................................................................... 55 

6.3.2. Operational Noise ................................................................................................. 56 

6.3.3. Operational Vibration ........................................................................................... 56 

7. References .............................................................................................................................. 57 

Appendices 

Appendix A Noise Measurement Site Photographs 

Appendix B Vibration Measurement Site Photographs 

Appendix C Noise Measurement Data 

Appendix D Vibration Measurement Data 

ii NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Figures 

Figure 1. Project Area and Vicinity................................................................................................................ 5 

Figure 2. Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels ................................................................................................16 

Figure 3. Typical Ldn Noise Exposure Levels...............................................................................................16 

Figure 4. Typical Levels of Ground-Borne Vibration ...................................................................................18 

Figure 5. Noise Impact Criteria for High-Speed Rail Projects......................................................................19 

Figure 6. Allowable Increase in Cumulative Noise Levels (Categories 1 & 2) .............................................21 

Figure 7. FRA Detailed Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria................................................................23 

Figure 8. High-Speed Rail Vehicle Force Density Level at 150 mph............................................................29 

Figure 9. Noise Measurement Site Locations .............................................................................................34 

Figure 10. Vibration Propagation Measurement Schematic ......................................................................39 

Figure 11. Vibration Measurement Site Locations .....................................................................................40 

Figure 12. Vibration Measurement Results at 100 feet..............................................................................42 

Figure 13. Noise Impact Locations 1 of 3....................................................................................................49 

Figure 14. Noise Impact Locations 2 of 3....................................................................................................50 

Figure 15. Noise Impact Locations 3 of 3....................................................................................................51 

Figure A-1: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-2 7420 Bungalow Way..............................................60 

Figure A-2: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-3 15165 Crane Street................................................60 

Figure A-3: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-4 3733 Bur Oak Road................................................61 

Figure A-4: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-5 13296 Amargesa Road...........................................61 

Figure A-5: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-6 15665 Kingswood Drive.........................................62 

Figure A-6: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-7 14983 S Culver Road..............................................62 

Figure A-7: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-8 15410 La Paz Drive.................................................63 

Figure A-8: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-9 17251 Dante Street ...............................................63 

Figure A-9: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-2 7950 Etiwanda Avenue.........................................64 

Figure A-10: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-3 Needle Avenue ...................................................64 

Figure A-11: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-5 Farmington Street and Mariposa Road..............65 

Figure A-12: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-6 11335 Verde Avenue..........................................65 

Figure A-13: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-7 16424 E Street ....................................................66 

Figure A-14: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-8 15834 Joshua Street ...........................................66 

Figure B-1: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-1 7540 Crawford Place...............................................68 

Figure B-2: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-2 5065 Coyote Canyon Road .....................................68 

Figure B-3: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-3 Bur Oak Road at Anise Drive...................................69 

Figure B-4: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-4 11412 Fashion Court...............................................69 

Figure B-5: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-5 Fox Trail and Santa Fe Trail.....................................70 

Figure B-6: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-6 16338 Avalon Avenue (Avalon Park) ......................70 

Figure C-1: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-2 7420 Bungalow Way ..............................................72 

Figure C-2: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-3 15165 Crane Street................................................72 

Figure C-3: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-4 3733 Bur Oak Road ................................................73 

Figure C-4: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-5 13296 Amargesa Road...........................................73 

Figure C-5: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-6 15665 Kingswood Drive .........................................74 

Figure C-6: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-7 14983 S Culver Road ..............................................74 

Figure C-7: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-8 15410 La Paz Drive.................................................75 

Figure C-8: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-9 17251 Dante Street................................................75 

Figure D-1: Line Source Transfer Mobility Site V-1 7540 Crawford Place...................................................77 

Figure D-2: Line Source Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-2 5065 Coyote Canyon Road..................78 

Figure D-3: Line Source Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-3 Bur Oak Road at Anise Drive...............79 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 iii 
 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Figure D-4: Line Source Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-4 11412 Fashion Court...........................80 

Figure D-5: Line Source Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-5 Fox Trail and Santa Fe Trail .................81 

Figure D-6: Line Source Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-6 16338 Avalon Avenue (Avalon Park) ..82 

Tables 

Table 1. Land Use Categories and Metrics for Noise Impact Criteria .........................................................20 

Table 2. Ground-Borne Vibration and Noise Impact Criteria......................................................................22 

Table 3. Ground-Borne Vibration and Noise Impact Criteria for Special Buildings ....................................22 

Table 4. Interpretation of Vibration Criteria for Detailed Analysis.............................................................24 

Table 5. FRA Construction Noise Assessment Criteria................................................................................25 

Table 6. FRA Construction Vibration Damage Criteria................................................................................25 

Table 7. Operational Noise Screening Distances ........................................................................................26 

Table 8. Operational Vibration Screening Distances ..................................................................................26 

Table 9. Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels ...........................................................................30 

Table 10. Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment.................................................................32 

Table 11. Summary of Noise Measurement Results...................................................................................35 

Table 12. Typical Construction Scenario .....................................................................................................44 

Table 13. Summary of Residential Noise Impacts from HSR Operations....................................................45 

Table 14. Summary of Institutional Noise Impacts from HSR Operations..................................................47 

Table 15. Summary of Potential Construction Vibration Impacts ..............................................................52 

Table 16. Summary of Residential Vibration Impacts.................................................................................53 

Table 17. Summary of Institutional Vibration Impacts ...............................................................................54 

Table D-1: Site V-1 7540 Crawford Place 1/3-Octave Band Transfer Mobility Coefficients .......................77 

Table D-2: Site V-2 2065 Coyote Canyon Road 1/3-Octave Band Transfer Mobility Coefficients ..............78 

Table D-3: Site V-3 Bur Oak Road at Anise Drive 1/3-Octave Band Transfer Mobility Coefficients ...........79 

Table D-4: Site V-4 11412 Fashion Court 1/3-Octave Band Transfer Mobility Coefficients .......................80 

Table D-5: Site V-5 Fox Trail and Santa Fe Trail 1/3-Octave Band Transfer Mobility Coefficients .............81 

Table D-6: Site V-6 16338 Avalon Avenue (Avalon Park) 1/3-Octave Band Transfer Mobility Coefficients 

....................................................................................................................................................................82 

iv NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Abbreviations and Acronyms 

ADT average daily traffic 

ANSI American National Standards Institute 

ARRIVE Advanced Regional Rail Integrated Vision – East 

BMP best management practice 

CalSTA California State Transportation Agency 

Caltrans California Department of Transportation 

CGP Construction General Permit 

CHP California Highway Patrol 

CSA Cross-Spectrum Acoustics 

dB decibel 

dBA A-weighted decibel 

EIR Final Environmental Impact Report 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

FDL Force density level 

FHWA Federal Highway Administration 

FRA Federal Railroad Administration 

FTA Federal Transit Administration 

GHG greenhouse gas 

HOV high-occupancy vehicle 

HSR high-speed rail 

Hz Hertz 

I- Interstate 

in/sec inches per second 

Ldn day night sound level 

Leq equivalent sound level 

Lmax maximum noise level 

Ln sound level exceeded n-percent of the time 

LOS level of service 

LSTM line source transfer mobility 

LT long term 

Lv vibration level 

MOU memorandum of understanding 

mph miles per hour 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 v 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology 

PPV peak particle velocity 

Project Cajon Pass High-Speed Rail Project 

RMS root mean square 

ROW right of way 

RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy 

SBCTA San Bernardino County Transportation Authority 

SCAG Southern California Association of Governments 

SCE Southern California Edison 

SCORE Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion 

SEL sound exposure level 

SR State Route 

ST short term 

TCA temporary construction area 

TM transfer mobility 

TPSS traction power substation 

U.F. usage factor 

US-395 US Highway 395 

USDOT US Department of Transportation 

VdB vibration decibel 

VHT vehicle hours traveled 

VMT vehicle miles traveled 

vi NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

1. Introduction 

DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC (dba “Brightline West”) proposes to construct and operate the 

Cajon Pass High-Speed Rail Project (Project), a 49-mile train system capable of speeds up to 

140 miles per hour (mph) between Victor Valley and Rancho Cucamonga, California (Project). 

The Project includes two railway stations—one in Hesperia, and one in Rancho Cucamonga. The 

station in Victor Valley would be constructed as part of a separate project that was evaluated in 

the DesertXpress Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS; FRA 2011). 

The Project would be constructed within the Interstate 15 (I-15) right-of-way for 48 miles and 

on existing transportation corridors for the last mile into the proposed Rancho Cucamonga 

station. The Project would be powered by overhead electric catenary and require construction 

of one new traction power substation (TPSS) in the Hesperia area. The maintenance facility that 

was evaluated with the Brightline West Victor Valley High-Speed Rail (HSR) Passenger Project 

would provide the primary maintenance functions, although layover tracks are anticipated at 

the Rancho Cucamonga station, which could include light maintenance capability, such as 

interior cleaning and daily inspection. 

Trains are expected to operate daily on 45-minute headways between Victor Valley and Rancho 

Cucamonga. The trip between Victor Valley and Rancho Cucamonga would be approximately 

35 minutes. Service would be coordinated with existing and planned Metrolink service at the 

Rancho Cucamonga station to provide a convenient connection between the HSR and 

commuter rail systems. 

The Project would be constructed and operated under a lease agreement with the California 

Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the use of the I-15 right-of-way and the station at 

Hesperia. Brightline West would secure additional agreements for Right-of-Way Use, Design & 

Construction Oversight and Reimbursement; and Operations & Maintenance, as necessary. 

For the last mile of the project from I-15 to the Rancho Cucamonga Station, there will be 

Agreements with the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the San Bernardino County Transportation 

Authority (SBCTA) for land rights, construction, operations and maintenance. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 1 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

2. Project Description 

2.1. Background 

Early Project coordination for HSR service from Victor Valley to Rancho Cucamonga began in 

2020, with Brightline West meeting with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority 

(SBCTA) to examine a connection between Victor Valley and Rancho Cucamonga. This meeting 

resulted in a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that was fully executed in July 2020 

between Brightline West and SBCTA to study the potential of building HSR within the I-15 rightof-way between Victor Valley and Rancho Cucamonga. A separate MOU was executed in 

September 2020 between Brightline West and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, 

which operates Metrolink, for connection to the existing Metrolink station in Rancho 

Cucamonga. Additionally, the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA), Caltrans, the 

California High-Speed Rail Authority, and Brightline West have executed an MOU regarding the 

Project. The MOU reflects both the regional and statewide interest and value in the Project, 

including interconnectivity opportunities, and outlines how the parties will work together to 

advance their shared interest in the success of the Project. 

2.2. Project Area 

The Project would construct and operate a 49-mile train system capable of speeds up to 140 

mph between Victor Valley- and Rancho Cucamonga, California. The Project includes two 

railway stations: one in Hesperia, and one in Rancho Cucamonga, and will connect to another 

Brightline West station in Victor Valley. The proposed rail alignment would be located within 

the median of the I-15 freeway between Victor Valley and Rancho Cucamonga except for the 

last mile approaching the proposed Rancho Cucamonga station. The Project area is depicted in 

Figure 1. 

2.3. Purpose of and Need for the Project 

2.3.1. Purpose 

The purpose of the Project is to provide reliable and safe passenger rail transportation between 

the Los Angeles metropolitan region and the High Desert of San Bernardino County. The Project 

would provide a convenient, efficient, and environmentally sustainable alternative to 

automobile travel on the highly congested I-15 freeway. The Project would add capacity to the 

overall transportation system by introducing a new HSR service from Victor Valley to Rancho 

Cucamonga. The Project would reduce travel time, improve reliability, and increase the mobility 

options for travel between metropolitan regions. Travel time from Victor Valley to Rancho 

Cucamonga for Project users would be approximately 30 percent faster during normal 

conditions and at least twice as fast during congestion peak periods. The Project would reduce 

automobile vehicle miles traveled (VMT), resulting in a corresponding reduction in greenhouse 

gas emissions (GHG) and air quality emissions. 

2.3.1.1. Multi-Modal Use of the I-15 Corridor 

Operation of the Project would significantly increase the capacity of I-15 as a multi-modal 

corridor in Southern California. This increase in capacity would benefit freeway operations by 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

providing an alternative to automobile travel that would reduce travel time. This shift of people 

from automobile to train travel along the I-15 corridor would reduce the need for programmed 

and/or planned freeway improvement and widening projects. 

2.3.2. Need 

The Project is needed to address transportation capacity deficiencies, major points of 

congestion, limited travel mode choices, safety deficiencies, and reduce GHG emissions. 

Travel demand analysis completed on behalf of the Project in 2020 forecasts 49.1 million oneway trips between Southern California and Las Vegas in 2025, with approximately 85 percent of 

travelers making the trip by automobile. Most of these trips use the Cajon Pass segment of the 

I-15, which is capacity-constrained. Further, the freeway system leading into the I-15 from 

points west, east, and south, including I-10, State Route 210 (SR-210), I-215 and SR-60 have 

similar delays and capacity constraints. The Project would address this demand by providing a 

transportation alternative to vehicle travel, and it would allow access to the Brightline West 

service from the Greater Los Angeles and the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario Metropolitan 

areas, as well as points beyond, with a connection to the Metrolink system in Rancho 

Cucamonga. 

The Project would also support federal and state policies focused on climate change and the 

need to reduce VMT and associated GHG emissions. 

4 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Figure 1. Project Area and Vicinity 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

2.3.2.1. Capacity Constraints 

I-15 through the Cajon Pass is one of the most congested segments of I-15, with no alternative 

routes that provide comparable direct road travel capability because of the mountainous 

topography. Through the Cajon Pass, I-15 supports daily workforce commuters, recreational 

travel, and regional and interstate freight and goods movement. According to the traffic study 

prepared for the I-15 Corridor Project Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (Caltrans and 

SBCTA 2018), unreliability in travel time along segments of I-15 and surrounding roadways is 

caused by roadway capacity constraints, frequent accidents, and various factors that cause 

unanticipated congestion. Travelers using the Project would no longer need to drive through 

the most congested parts of the corridor in the Cajon Pass for interstate or commuter trips, 

thereby avoiding idling and inefficient stop-and-go traffic conditions. 

By 2045, travel speeds are expected to decrease on all but one segment of I-15 between the 

San Bernardino Valley and Apple Valley in the AM peak period, and travel speeds on most 

segments would also decrease—some by more than 10 mph—in the PM peak period (SCAG 

2020). Based on the Project Report for the I-15 Corridor Study (addition of express lanes), traffic 

volumes on I-15 between I-10 and SR-210 are expected to increase in the range of 31 to 

38 percent from 2014 to 2045. The Project Report states the existing level of service (LOS) is 

acceptable in most locations but that there are bottlenecks in each direction of travel that 

degrade traffic operation, especially between Baseline Road and SR-210. Because the express 

lane project is increasing capacity by adding express lanes, the traffic volumes are projected to 

increase by an additional 27 percent. The Project Report further mentions that, although the 

express lane project would improve conditions in the general purpose lanes in many segments, 

it would cause the segment between the I-10 and Fourth Street to worsen in the PM peak hour 

(both directions). In the AM peak hour, the segment between Arrow Route and Fourth Street 

would worsen in the southbound direction. The segment between Baseline Road and SR-210 

would continue to operate at over capacity conditions in all scenarios. 

SCAG’s Connect SoCal Goods Movement Technical Report identifies I-15 as part of the 

U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) Primary Highway Freight Network and among the

network segments that carry the highest volumes of truck traffic in the region. It also identifies 

the entirety of the Cajon Pass as a truck bottleneck, with over 15,000 annual vehicle hours of 

delay. 

As documented above, given the attractiveness of the origins and destinations, the 

transportation capacity constraints on I-15 as described in current and predicted average daily 

traffic (ADT) and LOS limit reasonable highway access between Rancho Cucamonga, Hesperia, 

and Victor Valley. 

I-10 is the primary commuter corridor from San Bernardino County and the San Gabriel Valley 

to Los Angeles. Based on the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) by Caltrans in 2012 for 

I-10 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes from Puente Avenue to SR -57/SR -71, the westbound 

direction of I-10 experiences recurrent congestion in the AM peak hour and eastbound 

direction experiences recurrent congestion in the PM peak hour. Additionally, most of I-10 

operates at capacity in both the AM and PM peak hour with spillbacks at the SR- 57/SR- 71 

interchange and I-605 interchange. In addition, due to short spacing between interchanges, 

6 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

there is insufficient weaving distance leading to much lower speeds in the right lanes of the 

freeway. The Final EIR also indicated that even with the HOV lanes, the forecast volumes (year 

2035) are generally going to result in continued recurrent congestion (Caltrans 2012). 

Due to heavy congestion, both SBCTA and LA Los Angeles Metro are currently converting HOV 

lanes on the I-10, on which operations are degraded according to Federal standards to HighOccupancy Toll/Express Lanes (priced lanes). In addition, LA Los Angeles Metro and Metrolink 

are also coordinating to extend service on the Gold Line to Azusa and eventually to Montclair in 

San Bernardino County. The Brightline service would provide an option that addresses longer 

distance trips that would otherwise burden the peak travel periods on I-10 and other roadways. 

2.3.2.2. Travel Demand 

The anticipated substantial increases in population, housing, and employment in San 

Bernardino County will result in greater demand for transportation facilities and services, 

including increased travel demand that will result in congestion on roadways if capacity does 

not keep up with the demand. The proposed Hesperia Station would provide a convenient 

connection between High Desert communities and the more urbanized San Bernardino Valley 

and Metropolitan Los Angeles. The High Desert provides lower cost housing options for 

Southern California residents, while the Rancho Cucamonga/Ontario area around Ontario 

International Airport has become a significant employment center. 

SCAG forecasts, in its 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities 

Strategy (RTP/SCS), that the population of San Bernardino County will grow to 2,815,000 by 

2045, a 29 percent increase from the US Census Bureau’s 2018 population estimate of

2,180,085, and that the number of households will grow to 875,000, a 39 percent increase over 

the 2018 household estimate of 630,633 (US Census Bureau 2020). Additionally, the 2020-2045 

RTP/SCS forecasts employment in San Bernardino County will increase to 1,064,000 by 2045, a 

72 percent increase from the US Census Bureau’s estimate of 617,828 in 2018.

While the proposed Victor Valley station site would be located at the convergence of all the 

highways en route to Las Vegas for Southern California travelers, the Rancho Cucamonga 

station would be closer to major population centers in Southern California. Compared to the 

Victor Valley station, the proposed HSR station in Rancho Cucamonga, located about 45 miles 

east of downtown Los Angeles, would provide more direct access to the densely populated 

centers in Southern California for both drivers and Metrolink riders; 87 percent of the potential 

market for trips between Las Vegas and Southern California (equivalent to 42.7 million of the 

one-way, in-scope trips in 2025) live within 75 miles of the location of the proposed Rancho 

Cucamonga station. 

The proposed station in Rancho Cucamonga, with a Metrolink connection to Los Angeles, would 

further meet the forecasted demand of the 49.1 million one way trips between Las Vegas and 

Southern California estimated in 2025. Similarly, the proposed Hesperia station would be at the 

convergence of US Highway 395 (US-395) and I-15, so it would serve commuters to Greater Los 

Angeles from the major corridors in the Victor Valley. The Project would also support SCAG’s

Connect SoCal Passenger Rail Technical Report, which identifies closing connectivity gaps as a 

major strategy to increase mobility and improve sustainability. The Project would facilitate 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 7 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

transit connections and would allow residents of the Greater Los Angeles and the Riverside-San 

Bernardino-Ontario Metropolitan areas to travel exclusively by mass transit and passenger rail 

to and from the High Desert of San Bernardino and connect to the BLW station at Victor Valley 

for a connection to Las Vegas. Southern California residents could take the Los Angeles Metro 

rail, regional bus systems, Amtrak, or Metrolink to Los Angeles Union Station to connect via the 

Metrolink San Bernardino Line to the Rancho Cucamonga station. Residents could also take the 

planned West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit service that will operate between the 

Pomona station on the Metrolink Riverside Line in eastern Los Angeles County and the Rancho 

Cucamonga station. While still in early planning and design stages, the planned Tunnel to 

Ontario International Airport (ONT) project may provide an additional connection from the 

Rancho Cucamonga station to the Ontario International Airport. 

Additionally, SBCTA and SCAG’s 2015 Advanced Regional Rail Integrated Vision – East (ARRIVE 

Corridor) plan proposes strategies for transitioning the Metrolink San Bernardino Line, which 

would serve the Rancho Cucamonga station, from a traditional commuter rail line to one that 

promotes transit-oriented development. Improvements to Metrolink, its transit connections, 

and additional development of the station areas with transit-supportive uses at greater 

densities and intensities will encourage the formation of areas that are walkable and that 

provide mobility options in the region. The Project would further the goals of the ARRIVE 

Corridor plan by increasing the activity centers that can be accessed by Southern California’s 

rail network. Additionally, the Metrolink Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) 

program is intended to increase speeds, reliability, and capacity on Metrolink lines including on 

the San Gabriel Subdivision which serves the Rancho Cucamonga station. In 2010, the San 

Bernardino Associated Governments (the predecessor agency to SBCTA) completed the Victor 

Valley Long Distance Commuter Needs Assessment, which identified a phased set of commuter 

improvement projects. Those projects ranged from expanded park and ride facilities to an 

express bus service linking the Victor Valley area of the High Desert to the Rancho Cucamonga 

Metrolink station. The Joshua Street Park & Ride is near the Project’s proposed station in

Hesperia. Such commuter-focused planned improvements highlight the need for travel options 

that reduce the number of single occupancy automobiles on I-15 in San Bernardino County, 

particularly through the Cajon Pass. 

FHWA’s Southern California Regional Freight Study (USDOT 2020) identifies I-15 as a major 

interstate highway corridor that provides access to the interior of the United States for goods 

arriving at the ports of the Los Angeles region and ranks it among the highest truck volume 

corridors in the western United States. Caltrans’ 2015 Interregional Transportation Strategic 

Plan identifies I-15 as a high priority corridor, among six nationally identified “Corridors of the 

Future,” and a “vital link between Mexico, Southern California, and locations to the north and

east of the region.” I-15 also connects Southern California and the southwestern United States 

to the San Joaquin Valley’s agricultural goods via SR-58. By providing passenger rail capacity in 

the corridor, the Project would help maintain freeway capacity for truck freight use by 

removing passenger vehicles from the roadway network. 

8 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

2.3.2.3. Safety 

Alternatives to automobile travel would provide improved safety conditions on the I-15 corridor 

with diversion of vehicle trips to HSR. On a national level, comparing miles traveled via 

commercial aircraft, train, and automobiles on highways, auto travel on highways has by far the 

highest rate of passenger fatalities per mile traveled. In 2019, the average rate of passenger 

fatalities from highway travel was more than 75 times the comparable rate for travel by air and 

34 times the comparable rate by rail. For 2016, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics’ National 

Transportation Statistics (USDOT 2018) reported a rate of passenger fatalities per 100 million 

passenger miles traveled by highway nearly 10 times greater than the rates for travel by air or 

rail. HSR is one of the safest forms of travel. 

The California Office of Traffic Safety ranks San Bernardino County 16th-worst out of 

58 counties for total fatal and injury crashes in 2018 (the most recent year of data available). 

According to the University of California, Berkeley, and SafeTREC’s Transportation Injury 

Mapping System, there were 819 collisions with one or more deaths or injuries along I-15 in San 

Bernardino County in 2019. Of these, nearly one quarter (199) occurred in the 12 miles of the 

Cajon Pass, although the Cajon Pass accounts for only 6.5 percent of the length of I-15 in the 

county. 

A study by the I-15 Mobility Alliance found that the segment of I-15 from I-215 in San 

Bernardino to I-40 in Barstow had a fatality rate 0.009 per million VMT, well above the 

alliance’s performance goal of 0.003 fatalities per million. By connecting the Victor Valley to 

Rancho Cucamonga, the Project would allow more travelers to stay off segments of I-15. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

3. Alternatives 

3.1. Build Alternative 

The Build Alternative (i.e., the Project) consists of a proposed HSR passenger railway with 

associated infrastructure, including two proposed passenger stations. Nearly all of the Project 

would be built within the I-15 right-of-way. Near the proposed southern terminus station in 

Rancho Cucamonga, approximately 1 mile of the rail alignment would be in city street, railroad, 

or utility rights-of-way. 

The proposed rail alignment would be located within the median of the I-15 freeway between 

Victor Valley and Rancho Cucamonga, except at the approach to the proposed Rancho 

Cucamonga station. The rail alignment would be predominately at grade (the same elevation as 

the existing freeway), with select segments of the alignment on aerial structures or in a trench 

to allow for grade separations (including 4 BNSF and 3 UP railroad crossings) and to provide a 

safe incline for train operation. The rail alignment would be predominantly single-track, with 

limited double-track segments in Victor Valley (2.6 miles, including 0.9 miles constructed as part 

of the DesertXpress High-Speed Passenger Train Project), Hesperia (5.5 miles), and Rancho 

Cucamonga (2.1 miles). This would allow for 45-minute headways in the opening year between 

Victor Valley and Rancho Cucamonga and 22.5-minute headways including 0.9 miles 

constructed as part of the DesertXpress High-Speed Passenger Train Project), after year 11. 

These headways, along with the ability to couple trains (double passenger capacity), would 

address projected ridership needs for the foreseeable future. 

For analytical purposes, the Build Alternative is described in three sections. Sections were 

developed to reflect similarly developed areas with similar environmental sensitivity. The 

sections include: 

• Section 1: High Desert – from the Victor Valley station, continuing south along I-15, to 

the I-15/Oak Hill Road interchange in Hesperia 

• Section 2: Cajon Pass – from the I-15/Oak Hill Road interchange, continuing south along 

I-15, through the Cajon Pass, to the I-15/Kenwood Avenue interchange 

• Section 3: Greater Los Angeles – from the I-15/Kenwood Avenue interchange in San 

Bernardino, continuing south along I-15, through the existing Metrolink station in 

Rancho Cucamonga to Haven Avenue 

3.1.1. Section 1 – High Desert 

The proposed rail alignment would connect to the DesertXpress High Speed Train alignment 

approximately one mile south of the Victor Valley station in Apple Valley. The Victor Valley 

station was proposed by the DesertXpress High Speed Train Project (DesertXpress Project) and 

approved in 2011 and modified by the re-evaluation in 2020. From this point, the alignment 

would continue south within the I-15 median. The rail alignment throughout Section 1 would be 

predominantly single track; however, the rail alignment would be double-track north of 

Stoddard Wells Road to the northern terminus of the alignment as it approaches the train 

10 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

platforms of the Victor Valley station. The Project would include a new structure over the 

existing CEMEX railroad bridge. Based on future discussion with CEMEX, the existing railroad 

bridge may be reconstructed as part of the DesertXpress project, in which case the alignment 

would run at-grade in the median under the railroad bridge. 

Brightline West will build a new Southbound on ramp and bridge at South Stoddard Wells Rd. to 

replace similar existing facilities further south. This in-turn requires modifications of I-15 up to 

and including the Mojave River crossing. 

1 

At the Mojave River, a new rail bridge will be constructed within the median of I-15. The 

existing I-15 bridge would be widened to accommodate the rail line. The alignment would then 

continue at grade in the I-15 median with minor roadway widenings for the remainder of 

Segment 1. This portion of the alignment would interface with the following interchanges: 

Stoddard Wells Road North, Stoddard Wells Road South, D Street/E Street, Mojave Drive, Roy 

Rogers Drive/Hook Road, Palmdale Road, La Mesa Road/Nisqualli Road, Bear Valley Road, Main 

Street/Phelan Road, Joshua Street, US-395, Ranchero Road, and Oak Hill Road. 

A new substation would be constructed to support the Project along I-15, between Mesa Street 

and Mojave Street. The area is currently largely undeveloped, other than existing overhead 

power lines and utility access. 

Hesperia Station 

Section 1 includes a new passenger station in Hesperia, at the I-15/Joshua Street interchange. 

This station would serve daily travelers between the High Desert of San Bernardino County and 

the Los Angeles Basin. This would be a limited service for select southbound AM and 

northbound PM weekday on selected Brightline train coaches. The northbound on-ramp to 

Joshua Street would be realigned closer to the freeway, and station parking would be on the 

north side of Joshua Street. Parking would be accessed at the location of the existing 

northbound ramp intersection. To accommodate the rail alignment, the existing US-395 

northbound connector and the existing Joshua Street bridge would be replaced. The Joshua 

Street bridge would be reconstructed at a higher elevation, requiring raising of the I-15 ramps 

and Mariposa Road. The passenger platform would be located within the I-15 median, with 

direct access from the reconstructed Joshua Street bridge at the southern end of the doubletrack segment in Hesperia. The Project design includes adequate parking areas to 

accommodate parking demand. 

Design Elements 

Segment 1 of the Project includes the following design elements. 

• Reconstructions/Interchange Modifications: Widening portions of the I-15 freeway and 

modifications to interchanges at Stoddard Wells Road southbound off-ramp, D Street/E 

Street, Mojave Drive, Roy Rogers Drive/Hook Road, Palmdale Road, La Mesa 

Road/Nisqualli Road, Bear Valley Road, Main Street/ Phelan Road, US-395, Ranchero 

Road, Oak Hill Road, and Joshua Street 

1 These improvements would be consistent with Caltrans’ planned Interstate 15 Interchange Reconstruction (D Street, E Street, Stoddard Wells 

Road, and Mojave River Bridge) project, which was originally analyzed under an Initial Study / Environmental Assessment in 2008. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

• New Substation: Construction of a new substation along I-15 between Mesa Street and 

Mojave Street 

• Station Area: Hesperia station platform, station access/infrastructure, surface parking 

lot accommodating approximately 360 vehicles, bus pick up/drop off areas, Kiss and 

Ride 

3.1.2. Section 2 – Cajon Pass 

Beginning at the I-15/Oak Hill Road interchange and traveling south, the alignment would run 

on the west side of the I-15 northbound lanes at grade and within the existing I-15 right-of-way. 

In this area, the I-15 runs through the San Bernardino National Forest for approximately 

12 miles). The rail alignment throughout Section 2 would be entirely single-track. The Project 

would require replacement of California Highway Patrol (CHP) emergency crossovers where the 

new guideway would block existing crossovers. Four new crossovers would be placed to take 

advantage of existing CHP access between the separated I-15 alignments in the following 

locations: 

• West of Forestry Road crossing the northbound lanes. 

• Approximately 1.25 miles in the southbound direction along I-15 from the crossover 

near Forestry Road, across the northbound lanes. 

• West of the Baldy Mesa (Trestles) OHV Staging Area, across the northbound lanes. 

• West of Perdew Canyon and approximately 1.25 miles north of Mathews Ranch Road, 

across both the north and southbound lanes. 

The alignment would remain at grade throughout Segment 2.Where I-15 northbound and 

southbound lanes reconnect at the foot of the Cajon Pass, the rail alignment would be within 

the I-15 median. This would require widening portions of the I-15 freeway and minor 

realignment of ramps at the I-15/SR-138 interchange. 

Design Elements 

Segment 2 of the Project includes the following design elements. 

• Bridges/Viaducts: None 

• Reconstructions/Interchange Modifications: Widening portions of the I-15 freeway 

including several miles of retained fill, and realignment of ramps at the I-15/ SR-138 

interchange 

• Other Facilities: CHP emergency crossovers 

3.1.3. Section 3 – Greater Los Angeles 

Beginning at the Kenwood Avenue interchange, the proposed rail alignment would continue at 

grade in the I-15 median. At the I-15/I-215 interchange, the alignment would continue between 

the divided I-15 freeway at the same elevation as the freeway including the Devore interchange 

viaduct, curving to the southwest parallel to freeway. The rail alignment would require I-15 

12 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

freeway and interchange ramp modifications at Baseline Avenue, SR-210, Beech Avenue, 

Duncan Canyon Road, Sierra Avenue and Glen Helen Parkway. 

The rail alignment would transition to an aerial alignment and elevate over the I-15 southbound 

lanes south of Church Street and cross at Foothill Boulevard. It would continue along the west 

side of the I-15 freeway on an elevated alignment to enter the San Gabriel Subdivision and 

Eighth Street corridor. The alignment would transition onto an aerial structure and would turn 

west, running parallel to and partially within the existing rail corridor and partially within the 

Eighth Street right-of-way before entering the existing Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink station 

area on an elevated structure. The rail alignment would maintain a single-track configuration 

prior to exiting the freeway median south of Church Street, where it would transition to a 

double-track configuration for the remaining distance to the Rancho Cucamonga station. At the 

Rancho Cucamonga station, an elevated station with a center platform and tracks on either side 

would be constructed parallel to and above the existing eastbound Metrolink platform, 

extending over Milliken Avenue. A new parking structure is proposed at Rancho Cucamonga 

Station, and would replace existing surface parking to accommodate increased parking 

demand. The Project design includes adequate parking areas to accommodate parking demand 

in the opening year. 

Design Elements 

Segment 3 of the Project includes the following design elements. 

• Bridges/Viaducts: Viaduct of approximately 3.5 miles to cross I-15 southbound lanes and 

along existing rail corridor near Rancho Cucamonga station 

• Reconstructions/Interchange Modifications: I-15 freeway and interchange ramp 

modifications at SR-210, Beech Avenue, Duncan Canyon Road, and Glen Helen Parkway 

• Station: Dedicated Brightline station adjacent to the existing Rancho Cucamonga 

Metrolink station, with vertical circulation down to the platform, shared access with 

existing Metrolink station, a share parking structure for vehicles, and a bus plaza 

3.1.4. Construction 

In general, construction activities would consist of clearing, grading, excavation, placing fill, 

stockpiling materials, constructing bridges and walls, installing drainage, installing sub-ballast 

and subgrade, placing and anchoring railroad ties, placing ballast material, and tamping ballast, 

constructing stations, substations, mobilization and demobilization. Construction equipment 

would likely include dump trucks, excavators, loaders, cranes, water trucks, backhoes, scrapers, 

rollers, ballast tampers, concrete trucks, and drill rigs. 

For new and reconstructed overpasses and bridges, construction activities would include 

clearing, grubbing, demolition of existing structures, excavation and drilling for foundations, 

concrete pouring, formwork and rebar placement for foundations, falsework installation, 

construction of bridge decking, placement of ballast and ties, mobilization and demobilization. 

Most construction activities would occur on Caltrans right-of-way. Some, for the rail stations 

and power substations, would occur on public property owned by the City of Rancho 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 13 
 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Cucamonga, SBCTA, or State of California. Temporary construction areas, or TCAs, are 

properties that would be temporarily utilized for construction staging and storage. The Project 

would require TCAs along the alignment between Victor Valley and Rancho Cucamonga. 

14 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

4. Methodology 

4.1. Noise and Vibration Basics 

4.1.1. Noise Basics 

Sound is defined as small changes in air pressure above and below the standard atmospheric 

pressure, and noise is usually considered to be unwanted sound. The three parameters that 

define noise include: 

• Level: The level of sound is the magnitude of air pressure change above and below 

atmospheric pressure and is expressed in decibels (dB). Typical sounds fall within a 

range between 0 dB (the approximate lower limit of human hearing) and 120 dB (the 

highest sound level generally experienced in the environment). A 3-dB change in sound 

level is perceived as a barely noticeable change outdoors, and a 10-dB change in sound 

level is perceived as a doubling (or halving) of loudness. 

• Frequency: The frequency (pitch or tone) of sound is the rate of air pressure change and 

is expressed in cycles per second, or Hertz (Hz). Human ears can detect a wide range of 

frequencies from around 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz; however, human hearing is not as sensitive 

at high and low frequencies, and the A weighting system, which measures what humans 

hear in a more meaningful way by reducing the sound levels of higher and lower 

frequency sounds, is used to provide a measure (dBA) that correlates with human 

response to noise. Figure 2 shows typical maximum A-weighted sound levels for transit 

and non-transit sources. The A-weighted sound level has been widely adopted by 

acousticians as the most appropriate descriptor for environmental noise. 

• Time Pattern: Because environmental noise is constantly changing, it is common to 

condense all of this information into a single number, called the “equivalent” sound

level (Leq). The Leq represents the changing sound level over a period of time, typically 

1 hour or 24 hours in transit noise assessments. For assessing the noise impact of rail 

projects at residential land uses, the day-night sound level (Ldn) is the noise descriptor 

commonly used, and it has been adopted by many agencies as the best way to describe 

how people respond to noise in their environment. Ldn is a 24-hour cumulative Aweighted noise level that includes all noises that occur during a day, with a 10-dB 

penalty for nighttime noise (10 pm to 7 am). This nighttime penalty means that any 

noise events at night are equivalent to 10 similar events during the day. 

Typical Ldn values for various transit operations and environments are shown on Figure 3. 

In addition to the Leq and Ldn, there are other metrics used to describe noise. The loudest 

1-second of noise over a measurement period, or maximum A-weighted sound level (Lmax), is 

used in many local and state ordinances for noise emitted from private land uses and for 

construction noise impact evaluations. Environmental noise can also be viewed on a statistical 

basis using percentile sound levels (Ln), which refer to the sound level exceeded n-percent of 

the time. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 15 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure 2. Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels 

Figure 3. Typical Ldn Noise Exposure Levels 

16 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

4.1.2. Vibration Basics 

Ground-borne vibration from trains refers to the fluctuating or oscillatory motion experienced 

by persons on the ground and in buildings near railroad tracks. Vibration can be described in 

terms of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. Displacement is the easiest descriptor to 

understand. For a vibrating floor, the displacement is simply the distance that a point on the 

floor moves away from its static position. Velocity represents the instantaneous speed of the 

floor movement, and acceleration is the rate of change of the speed. Although displacement is 

easier to understand, the response of humans, buildings, and equipment to vibration is more 

accurately described using velocity or acceleration. 

Two methods are used for quantifying vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) is defined as 

the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration signal. PPV often is used 

in monitoring of blasting vibration, since it is related to the stresses experienced by buildings. 

Although PPV is appropriate for evaluating the potential for building damage, it is not suitable 

for evaluating human response. It takes some time for the human body to respond to vibration 

impulses. In a sense, the human body responds to an average of the vibration amplitude. 

Because the net average of a vibration signal is zero, the root mean square (RMS) amplitude is 

used to describe the "smoothed" vibration amplitude. 

PPV and RMS velocities are normally described in inches per second in the U.S. and in meters 

per second in the rest of the world. Decibel notation is in common use for vibration and has 

been adopted by the FRA in their guidance. Decibel notation compresses the range of numbers 

required to describe vibration. Vibration levels in this report are referenced to 1 x 10-6 inches 

per second (in/sec). The abbreviation "VdB" is used in this document for vibration decibels to 

reduce the potential for confusion with sound decibels. Common vibration sources and human 

and structural response to ground-borne vibration are illustrated in Figure 4. Typical vibration 

levels can range from below 50 VdB to 100 VdB (0.000316 in/sec to 0.1 in/sec). The human 

threshold of perception is approximately 65 VdB. 

Ground-borne vibration can lead to ground-borne noise, which is a low-volume, low-frequency 

rumble inside buildings that occurs when ground vibration causes the flexible walls of the 

buildings to resonate and generate noise. Ground-borne noise is normally not a consideration 

when trains are elevated or at grade. In these situations, the airborne noise usually overwhelms 

ground-borne noise, so that the airborne noise level is the major consideration. However, 

ground-borne noise becomes an important consideration where there are sections of the 

corridor in a tunnel or where sensitive interior spaces are well-isolated from the airborne noise. 

In these situations, the airborne noise path is impeded, and ground-borne noise dominates 

inside buildings. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 17 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure 4. Typical Levels of Ground-Borne Vibration 

4.2. Relevant Regulations, Plans, and Policies 

4.2.1. Noise Impact Criteria 

The FRA guidelines for assessing noise impacts from high-speed train operations (FRA 2012) are 

adapted from the same sources used to develop the FTA guidelines for rail projects and their 

associated stationary facilities (FTA 2018). The noise impact criteria for rail projects and their 

associated fixed facilities, such as storage and maintenance yards, passenger stations and 

terminals, parking facilities, and substations are shown graphically on Figure 5. The land use 

categories (1, 2, 3) shown on Figure 5 are defined in Table 1. 

The FRA operational noise impact criteria are based on well-documented research on 

community response to noise and are based on both the existing level of noise and the change 

in noise exposure due to a project. The FRA noise criteria compare the Project noise with the 

existing noise (not the no-build noise). This is because comparison of a noise projection with an 

existing noise condition is more accurate than comparison of a projection with another noise 

projection. Because background noise may increase by the time the Project is operational, this 

approach of using existing noise conditions is conservative. 

18 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

The FRA noise criteria are based on the land use category of the sensitive receptor. The 

descriptors and criteria for assessing noise impact vary according to land use categories 

adjacent to the track. For Category 2, land uses where people live and sleep (e.g., residential 

neighborhoods, hospitals, and hotels), the day-night average sound level (Ldn) is the 

assessment parameter. For other land use types (Category 1 or 3) where there are noisesensitive uses (e.g., outdoor concert areas, schools, and libraries), the equivalent noise level 

(Leq) for the loudest hour of train activity during hours of noise sensitivity is the assessment 

parameter. Table 1 summarizes the three land use categories. 

Figure 5. Noise Impact Criteria for High-Speed Rail Projects 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 19 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Table 1. Land Use Categories and Metrics for Noise Impact Criteria 

Land Use 

Category 

Noise Metric 

(dBA) Land Use Category 

1 Outdoor 

Leq(h)* 

Land where quiet is an essential element of its intended purpose. Example land uses 

include preserved land for serenity and quiet, outdoor amphitheaters and concert 

pavilions, and National Historic Landmarks with considerable outdoor use. Recording 

studios and concert halls are also included in this category. 

2 Outdoor Ldn 

This category is applicable to all residential land use and buildings where people 

normally sleep, such as hotels and hospitals. 

3 Outdoor 

Leq(h)* 

This category is applicable to institutional land uses with primarily daytime and 

evening use. Example land uses include schools, libraries, theaters, and churches 

where it is important to avoid interference with such activities as speech, meditation, 

and concentration on reading material. Places for meditation or study associated with 

cemeteries, monuments, museums, campgrounds, and recreational facilities are also 

included in this category. 

* Leq (Equivalent Sound Level) for the noisiest hour of transit-related activity during hours of noise sensitivity. 

The noise impact criteria are defined by the two curves in Figure 5, which allow increasing 

project noise as existing noise levels increase, up to a point at which impact is determined 

based on project noise alone. The FTA noise impact criteria include three levels of impact, as 

shown on Figure 5. The three levels of impact include: 

• No Impact: In this range, the Project is considered to have no impact since, on average, 

the introduction of the Project will result in an insignificant increase in the number of 

people highly annoyed by the new project noise. 

• Moderate Impact: Project-generated noise in this range is considered to cause impact 

at the threshold of measurable annoyance. Moderate impacts serve as an alert to 

project planners for potential adverse impacts and complaints from the community. 

Mitigation should be considered at this level of impact based on project specifics and 

details concerning the affected properties. 

• Severe Impact: Project-generated noise in this range is likely to cause a high level of 

community annoyance. Noise mitigation should be applied for severe impacts where 

feasible. 

Although the curves on Figure 5 are defined in terms of the project noise exposure and the 

existing noise exposure, the increase in the cumulative noise – when project-generated noise is 

added to existing noise levels – is the basis for the criteria. To illustrate this point, Figure 6 

shows the noise impact criteria for Category 1 and Category 2 land uses in terms of the 

allowable increase in the cumulative noise exposure. Since Ldn and Leq are measures of total 

acoustic energy, any new noise source in a community will cause an increase, even if the new 

source level is less than the existing level. On Figure 6, the criterion for moderate impact allows 

a noise exposure increase of 10 dBA if the existing noise exposure is 42 dBA or less, but only a 1 

dBA increase when the existing noise exposure is 70 dBA. 

20 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

As the existing level of ambient noise increases, the allowable level of transit noise increases, 

but the total amount that community noise exposure is allowed to increase is reduced. This 

accounts for the unexpected result that a project noise exposure that is less than the existing 

noise exposure can still cause an impact. 

Figure 6. Allowable Increase in Cumulative Noise Levels (Categories 1 & 2) 

4.2.2. Vibration Impact Criteria 

The FRA guidelines (FRA 2012), which acknowledge the FTA guidance document (FTA 2018) as 

their basis, provide ground-borne vibration and noise criteria for a general assessment as 

shown in Table 2. These levels represent the maximum Root Mean Square RMS level of an 

event in VdB (Vibration decibels). In addition, the guidelines provide criteria for special 

buildings that are very sensitive to ground-borne noise and vibration. The impact criteria for 

these special buildings are shown in Table 3. 

Both Table 2 and Table 3 differentiate the vibration impact threshold depending on the number 

of vibration events per day, with fewer than 30 vibration events per day considered 

“infrequent,” between 30 and 70 vibration events considered “occasional,” and more than

70 events considered “frequent” for Table 2. For Table 3, fewer than 70 vibration events per 

day are considered “occasional or infrequent” and more than 70 events are considered 

“frequent.” This dividing line was originally selected so that most commuter rail or intercity rail

projects would fall into the “infrequent” category and most urban transit projects (subway and 

light rail transit) would more typically be in the “frequent” category.

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 21 
 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Table 2. Ground-Borne Vibration and Noise Impact Criteria 

Land Use Category 

Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Levels 

(VdB re 1 micro-inch /sec) 

Ground-Borne Noise Impact Levels 

(dBA re 20 micro-Pascals) 

Frequent 

Events1 

Occasional 

Events2 

Infrequent 

Events3 

Frequent 

Events1 

Occasional 

Events2 

Infrequent 

Events3 

Category 1: Buildings 

where vibration would 

interfere with interior 

operations 

65 VdB4 65 VdB4 65 VdB4 N/A5 N/A5 N/A5 

Category 2: Residences 

and buildings where 

people normally sleep 

72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB 35 dBA 38 dBA 43 dBA 

Category 3: Institutional 

land uses with primarily 

daytime use 

75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB 40 dBA 43 dBA 48 dBA 

1 Frequent Events is defined as more than 70 vibration events of the same kind per day. 

2 Occasional Events is defined as between 30 and 70 vibration events of the same kind per day. 

3 Infrequent Events is defined as fewer than 30 vibration events of the same kind per day. 

4 This criterion limit is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment such as optical 

microscopes. For vibration-sensitive manufacturing or research equipment, a Detailed Vibration Analysis must be 

performed. 

5 Vibration-sensitive equipment is generally not sensitive to ground-borne noise. 

Table 3. Ground-Borne Vibration and Noise Impact Criteria for Special Buildings 

Type of Building or Room 

Ground-Borne Vibration Impact 

Levels 

(VdB re 1 micro-inch /sec) 

Ground-Borne Noise Impact Levels 

(dBA re 20 micro-Pascals) 

Frequent 

Events1 

Occasional or 

Infrequent Events2 

Frequent 

Events1 

Occasional or 

Infrequent Events2 

Concert Halls 65 VdB 65 VdB 25 dBA 25 dBA 

TV Studios 65 VdB 65 VdB 25 dBA 25 dBA 

Recording Studios 65 VdB 65 VdB 25 dBA 25 dBA 

Auditoriums 72 VdB 80 VdB 30 dBA 38 dBA 

Theaters 72 VdB 80 VdB 35 dBA 43 dBA 

1 Frequent Events is defined as more than 70 vibration events per day. 

2 Occasional or Infrequent Events is defined as fewer than 70 vibration events per day. 

For a detailed vibration analysis, more refined impact criteria are required than for a general 

assessment. Therefore, the criteria for a detailed vibration assessment are expressed in terms 

of one-third octave band frequency spectra, based on international and industry standards. The 

22 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

FRA criteria for a detailed vibration assessment are shown on Figure 7 and descriptions of the 

curves are shown in Table 4. The curves on Figure 7 are applied to the projected vibration 

spectrum for the Project. If the vibration level at any one frequency exceeds the criteria, there 

is impact. Conversely, if the entire proposed vibration spectrum of the Project were below the 

curve, there would be no impact. 

Figure 7. FRA Detailed Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Table 4. Interpretation of Vibration Criteria for Detailed Analysis 

Criterion Curve 

(See Fig. 3-4) 

Max Lv 

(VdB)1 Description of Use 

Workshop 90 Distinctly feelable vibration. Appropriate to workshops and non-sensitive 

areas. 

Office 84 Feelable vibration. Appropriate to offices and non-sensitive areas. 

Residential Day 78 Barely feelable vibration. Adequate for computer equipment and lowpower optical microscopes (up to 20X). 

Residential Night, 

Operating Rooms 72 

Vibration not feelable, but ground-borne noise may be audible inside 

quiet rooms. Suitable for medium-power optical microscopes (100X) and 

other equipment of low sensitivity. 

VC-A 66 Adequate for medium- to high-power optical microscopes (400X), 

microbalances, optical balances and similar specialized equipment. 

VC-B 60 Adequate for high-power optical microscopes (1000X), inspection and 

lithography equipment to 3-micron line widths. 

VC-C 54 Appropriate for most lithography and inspection equipment to 1-micron 

detail size. 

VC-D 48 Suitable in most instances for the most demanding equipment, including 

electron microscopes operating to the limits of their capability. 

VC-E 42 The most demanding criterion for extremely vibration-sensitive 

equipment. 

1 As measured in 1/3-octave bands of frequency over the frequency range 8 to 80 Hz. 

Source: FRA, 2012 

4.2.3. Construction Noise Criteria 

There are no standardized construction noise criteria from FTA or FRA for assessing noise 

impacts at sensitive receivers due to construction. The FTA and FRA Guidance Manuals do 

outline general assessment and detailed assessment criteria if local ordinances and standards 

are not adequate. Local ordinances and standards will always have precedence over the 

“reasonable guidelines” established by FRA. The “reasonable guidelines” established by the FRA 

are deliberately conservative in order to avoid adverse community reaction. The cities of 

Rancho Cucamonga, Fontana and Victorville all have ordinances that mention construction 

noise and which generally limit nighttime construction. 

Table 5 shows the FRA noise assessment criteria for construction. The last column applies to 

construction activities that extend over 30 days near any given receiver. Day-night sound level, 

Ldn, is used to assess impacts in residential areas and 24-hr Leq is used in commercial and 

industrial areas. The 8-hr Leq and the 30-day average Ldn noise exposure from construction noise 

calculations use the noise emission levels of the construction equipment, their location, and 

operating hours. The construction noise limits are normally assessed at the noise-sensitive 

receiver property line. 

24 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Table 5. FRA Construction Noise Assessment Criteria 

Land Use 

8-hour Leq (dBA) Ldn (dBA) 

Day Night 30-Day Average 

Residential 80 70 75 

Commercial 85 85 80* 

Industrial 90 90 85* 

* Twenty-four-hour Leq, not Ldn. 

4.2.4. Construction Vibration Criteria 

Guidelines in the FRA guidance manual provide the basis for the construction vibration 

assessment. FRA provides construction vibration criteria designed primarily to prevent building 

damage, and to assess whether vibration might interfere with vibration-sensitive building 

activities or temporarily annoy building occupants during the construction period. The FRA 

criteria include two ways to express vibration levels: (1) root-mean-square (RMS) VdB for 

annoyance and activity interference, and (2) peak particle velocity (PPV), which is the maximum 

instantaneous peak of a vibration signal used for assessments of damage potential. 

To avoid temporary annoyance to building occupants during construction or construction 

interference with vibration-sensitive equipment inside special-use buildings, such as a magnetic 

resonance imaging (MRI) machine, FRA recommends using the long-term vibration criteria 

provided above in Section 4.2. 

Table 6 shows the FRA building damage criteria for construction activity; the table lists PPV 

limits for four building categories. These limits are used to estimate potential problems that 

should be addressed during final design. 

Table 6. FRA Construction Vibration Damage Criteria 

Building Category PPV (inch/sec) Approximate Lv* 

I. Reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.5 102 

II. Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3 98 

III. Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2 94 

IV. Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration 

damage 

0.12 90 

* RMS vibration velocity level in VdB relative to 1 micro-inch/second. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 25 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

4.3. Study Area 

4.3.1. Noise Study Area 

Along the proposed right-of-way, noise-sensitive receivers that could be affected by projectrelated noise needed to be identified. A screening distance was used to narrow the area within 

which noise-sensitive receivers may be located. The FRA has established screening distances for 

potential noise impacts based on existing land uses and the speed at which future high-speed 

trains are expected to operate. These screening distances are shown in Table 7. For the 

purposes of this analysis, the existing environment was considered to be “new rail corridor, 

urban/noisy suburban” with speeds under 170 mph, so the screening distance used was 350 

feet from the track centerline. Noise-sensitive receivers were found by identifying existing 

noise-sensitive land uses (residences, schools, parks, libraries, and hospitals, etc.) within the 

noise impact screening distance for the Build Alternative. 

Table 7. Operational Noise Screening Distances 

Existing Noise Environment 

Screening Distance in Feet for HSR1 

90 to 170 mph 170 mph or More 

Existing rail corridor, urban/noisy suburban – unobstructed 300 feet 700 feet 

Existing rail corridor, urban/noisy suburban – obstructed2 200 feet 300 feet 

Existing rail corridor, quiet suburban/rural 500 feet 1,200 feet 

New rail corridor, urban/noisy suburban – unobstructed 350 feet 700 feet 

New rail corridor, urban/noisy suburban – obstructed2 250 feet 350 feet 

New rail corridor, quiet suburban/rural 600 feet 1,300 feet 

1 Measured from the centerline of the guideway or rail corridor. Minimum distance is assumed to be 50 feet. 

2 Rows of buildings assumed to be 200, 400, 600, 800, and 1,000 feet parallel to the guideway. 

HSR = high-speed rail 

mph = miles per hour 

4.3.2. Vibration Study Area 

Similar to the noise study area, the vibration study area is defined by screening distances 

established by the FRA. For this project, the vibration screening distance is 220 feet from the 

Project centerline for speeds up to 200 mph. 

Table 8. Operational Vibration Screening Distances 

Land Use Screening Distance for HSR (feet from centerline) 

Up to 100 mph Up to 200 mph Up to 300 mph 

Residential 120 feet 220 feet 275 feet 

Institutional 100 feet 160 feet 220 feet 

26 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

4.4. Methods Used 

This section summarizes the models used to project both construction noise and vibration and 

operational noise and vibration levels for potential sources of community impact related to the 

Project. 

4.4.1. Operational Noise 

The primary component of wayside noise from high-speed train operations for the electric 

multiple unit (EMU) vehicles is wheel/rail noise, which results from the steel wheels rolling on 

steel rails. Secondary sources, such as vehicle air-conditioning and other ancillary equipment, 

would sometimes be audible, but are not expected to be significant factors. The projection of 

wayside noise from high-speed train operations was carried out using the model specified in 

the FRA Guidance Manual, with the following assumptions: 

• Based on centerline information provided by the Applicant, the predictions assume a 

16-car EMU train using the reference levels found in Chapter 4 of the FRA Noise and 

Vibration Manual. 

• The operating times for the proposed service would be between 5:30am and 1:00am. 

The operating plan for high-speed rail service specifies headways of 22.5 minutes. 16-

car trains would operate throughout the day. 

• Speeds were based on information provided by the Applicant, with a maximum 

operating speed of 140 miles per hour (mph). 

• The entire Project is proposed to be grade-separated and therefore there would be no 

noise from horns or bells at grade-crossings. 

• The majority of the proposed alignment is single track. There are several locations with 

passing tracks, where turnouts or crossovers would be utilized. For receivers near 

crossovers, 6 dB is added to the noise assessment to account for the additional noise 

from wheels running over the gap in the tracks, however there are no receivers located 

near any of the crossover locations. 

• For receivers near elevated structures, 4 dB is added to the noise assessment relative to 

at-grade locations. 

• To provide enough room for the HSR tracks in the median of the interstate, the 

interstate travel lanes will be shifted toward the outside of the interstate right-of-way in 

some locations. The change in noise levels due to the shift on the traffic lanes was 

assessed in the following manner: 

o For locations with no sensitive noise receptors, no assessment was conducted. 

o For locations with existing noise barriers, it was assumed that the small increase 

in noise would be offset by an increase in the effectiveness of the barriers, since 

the noise source would be moving closer to the barriers. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 27 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

o For locations with noise sensitive receivers and no barriers, the change in noise 

was assessed based on the change in the distance from the middle of the 

existing traffic lanes to the middle of the new traffic lanes. 

• Based on FRA criteria, the potential for surprise (i.e. startle) effects for humans standing 

near the tracks would be limited to areas within 27 feet of the track. 

• Startle effects for wildlife would be limited to areas within 40 feet of the track 

centerline, which in almost all cases would be within the I-15 right-of-way. 

4.4.2. Traffic Noise 

For operational traffic noise near stations, traffic volumes for the no action alternative and 

proposed Project were used to identify locations where the change in traffic volume would 

result in an increase in noise of 3 decibels (dB) or greater, which represents a noticeable change 

in noise level. A 3 dB change in noise represents a doubling of traffic volume due to the Project. 

For locations where there would be a substantial increase in traffic and where there are 

sensitive receptors, a noise assessment was conducted, using a screening distance of 100 feet 

for station access roads. For any locations with sensitive receptors within that screening 

distance, a general noise assessment was conducted. 

4.4.3. Operational Vibration 

The potential vibration impact from high-speed rail operations was assessed using the detailed 

FRA criteria. The following factors were used in determining potential vibration impacts along 

the proposed rail alignment: 

• Vibration propagation tests were conducted at six sites along the corridor near sensitive 

receptors (See Figure 11 for locations of vibration propagation tests). These tests 

measured the response of the ground to an input force. The results of these tests were 

combined with vibration source data for the X2000 high-speed rail vehicle, which was 

deemed to be the most similar vehicle to the EMU (based on their similar configurations 

and maximum speeds) for which data are available in the literature, to project vibration 

levels from vehicles operating along the Project corridor. 

• The assumed vehicle vibration characteristics were combined with the ground vibration 

propagation test results to project vibration levels as a function of distance from the 

tracks. 

• Speeds were based on information provided by the Applicant, with a maximum 

operating speed of 140 mph. 

• The majority of the proposed alignment is single track. There are several locations with 

passing tracks, where turnouts or crossovers would be utilized. For receivers near 

crossovers, 10 VdB is added to the vibration assessment to account for the additional 

vibration from wheels running over the gap in the tracks, however there are no 

receivers located near any of the crossover locations. 

28 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

• For receivers near elevated structures, 10 VdB is subtracted from vibration assessment 

relative to at-grade locations. 

• Based on the detailed vibration criteria for residential nighttime occupancy, a vibration 

criterion of 72 vibration decibels (VdB) (on a 1/3-octave band basis) was used for the 

assessment. 

The assumed vehicle vibration characteristics are represented by the force density levels (FDL) 

spectrum at 150 mph in Figure 8. The force density is the vehicle input force, by frequency, 

which is measured for vehicles operating on different track structures. The results were 

combined with the ground vibration propagation test results (represented by transfer mobility 

spectra shown in Appendix C) to project vibration levels as a function of distance. The formula 

for calculating the future vibration levels is as follows: 

Lv = FDL + LSTM 

Where: 

Lv = projected train vibration level, 

FDL = vehicle force density, and 

LSTM = line source transfer mobility at a given site. 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

6 8 10 13 16 20 25 32 40 50 63 80 100 125 160 200 

Force Density Levels, dB re 1 lb/(ft)1/2 

1/3-Octave Band Center Frequency, Hz 

Figure 8. High-Speed Rail Vehicle Force Density Level at 150 mph 

4.4.4. Construction Noise 

Construction noise and impacts are assessed using a combination of the methods and 

construction source data contained in the FRA guidance (FRA, 2012) and the FHWA Roadway 

Construction Noise Model User’s Guide (FHWA, 2006). Typical noise levels generated by

representative pieces of equipment and their typical usage factors are listed in Table 9.

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 29 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

The noise exposure at a receiver location may be calculated by using decibel addition of all 

operating construction equipment using the following equation: 

Leq(n) = Lmax + 10×Log(U.F.) - 20×Log(D/50) - Ashielding 

where: 

Leq(n) = noise exposure at a receiver resulting from the operation of a single piece of 

equipment over n hours, 

Lmax = noise emission level of the particular piece of equipment at the reference distance 

of 50 feet (taken from Table 21), 

Ashielding = shielding provided by barriers, building, or terrain, 

D = distance from the receiver to the piece of equipment in feet, and 

U.F. = usage factor that accounts for the fraction of time that the equipment is in use 

over the specified time period. For Leq (1) assume a U.F. equal to 100%, and for 8 hours 

or more use the values in Table 9. 

The combination of noise from several pieces of equipment operating during the same time 

period is obtained from decibel addition of the Leq of each single piece of equipment calculated 

using the above equations. 

Table 9. Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels 

Equipment Typical Noise Level (dBA) 

50 feet From Source Typical Usage Factor (%) 

Air Compressor 80 40 

Backhoe 80 40 

Ballast Equalizer 82 50 

Ballast Tamper 83 50 

Compactor 82 20 

Concrete Mixer 85 40 

Concrete Pump 82 20 

Concrete Vibrator 76 20 

Crane, Derrick 88 16 

Crane, Mobile 83 16 

Dozer 85 16 

Generator 82 50 

Grader 85 40 

Impact Wrench 85 50 

30 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Equipment Typical Noise Level (dBA) 

50 feet From Source Typical Usage Factor (%) 

Jack Hammer 88 20 

Loader 80 40 

Paver 85 50 

Pile Driver (Impact) 101 20 

Pile Driver (Vibratory) 95 20 

Pneumatic Tool 85 50 

Pump 77 50 

Rail Saw 90 20 

Rock Drill 85 20 

Roller 85 20 

Saw 76 20 

Scarifier 83 20 

Scraper 85 40 

Shovel 82 40 

Spike Driver 77 20 

Tie Cutter 84 20 

Tie Handler 80 20 

Tie Inserter 85 20 

Truck 84 40 

4.4.5. Construction Vibration 

Construction vibration is assessed for areas where there is a potential for impact from 

construction activities. Such activities include blasting, pile driving, demolition, and drilling or 

excavation in close proximity to sensitive structures. Typical vibration levels generated by 

representative pieces of equipment are listed in Table 10. For damage assessment, the 

following equation is used: 

PPVequip = PPVref × [(25/D)]^1.5 

where: 

PPVequip = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for distance, 

PPVref = the reference vibration level in in/sec at 25 feet from Table 10, and 

D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver in feet. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 31 
 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

For annoyance assessment, the following equation is used: 

Lv (D) = Lv (25 ft) - 30×Log(D/25) 

where: 

Lv(D) = RMS vibration level at distance D, 

Lv(25 ft) = RMS vibration level at 25 feet from Table 10, and 

D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver in feet. 

Table 10. Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment 

Equipment PPV at 25 feet (in/sec) Approximate Lv a 

at 25 feet 

Pile Driver (impact) upper range 1.518 112 

typical 0.644 104 

Pile Driver (vibratory) upper range 0.734 105 

typical 0.170 93 

Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94 

Hydromill (slurry wall) in soil 0.008 66 

in rock 0.017 75 

Vibratory roller 0.210 94 

Hoe ram 0.089 87 

Large bulldozer 0.089 87 

Caisson drilling 0.089 87 

Loaded trucks 0.076 86 

Jackhammer 0.035 79 

Small bulldozer 0.003 58 

Lv = vibration velocity level in dB 

32 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

5. Affected Environment 

The affected noise and vibration environment in the vicinity of the Project was investigated 

based on a review of current project and land use information, GIS data, a windshield survey, 

and measurements conducted during November 2021. Land use in the study area includes a 

combination of residential, institutional, commercial, and industrial zones. Noise-sensitive and 

vibration-sensitive land uses in the study area were identified based on alignment drawings, 

aerial photographs, visual surveys, and land use information. Sensitive receptors located near 

the Project include single-family and multi-family residences, hotels, schools, parks and places 

of worship. 

5.1. Noise 

Existing ambient noise levels in the Project area were characterized through direct 

measurements at selected sites along the proposed Project during November 2021. Estimating 

existing noise exposure is an important step in the noise impact assessment since, as indicated 

above, the thresholds for noise impact are based on the existing levels of noise exposure. The 

measurements consisted of long-term (24-hour) and short-term (one-hour) monitoring of the 

A-weighted sound level at representative noise-sensitive locations. 

All of the measurement sites were located in noise-sensitive areas and were selected to 

represent a range of existing noise conditions along the corridor. Figure 9 shows the general 

locations of the eight long-term (LT) and six short-term (ST) measurement sites. Photographs of 

the measurement sites are included in Appendix A, and detailed noise measurement data are 

presented in Appendix C. 

At each site, the measurement microphone was positioned to characterize the exposure of the 

site to the dominant noise sources in the area. For example, microphones were located at the 

approximate setback lines of the receptors from adjacent existing roads or rail lines, and were 

positioned to avoid acoustic shielding by landscaping, fences or other obstructions. At each of 

the measurement sites, the A-weighted sound levels were continuously monitored during the 

measurement periods. The noise measurements were performed with NTi Audio model XL2 

noise monitors that conform to American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard S1.4 for 

Type 1 (Precision) sound level meters. Calibrations, traceable to the U.S. National Institute of 

Standards and Technology (NIST), were carried out in the field before and after each set of 

measurements using an acoustical calibrator. 

The results of the existing ambient noise measurements, summarized in Table 11 serve as the 

basis for determining the existing noise conditions at all noise-sensitive receptors along the 

proposed rail alignment. The results at each site are described below. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 33 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure 9. Noise Measurement Site Locations 

34 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Table 11. Summary of Noise Measurement Results 

Site 

No. Measurement Location 

Start of 

Measurement 

Meas. 

Duration 

(hrs) 

Nosie Level 

(dBA) 

Date Time Leq Ldn 

LT-2 7420 Bungalow Way, Rancho Cucamonga 10/27/2021 16:00 24 65.1 71.4 

LT-3 15165 Crane Street, Fontana 11/1/2021 19:00 24 64.6 70.9 

LT-4 3733 Bur Oak Road, San Bernardino 10/27/2021 15:00 24 66.1 71.6 

LT-5 13296 Amargosa Road, Victorville 11/2/2021 16:00 24 72.3 76.4 

LT-6 15665 Kingswood Drive, Victorville 11/2/2021 17:00 24 66.6 71.8 

LT-7 14983 S Culver Road, Victorville 11/2/2021 17:00 24 59.3 68.3 

LT-8 15410 La Paz Drive, Victorville 11/3/2021 12:00 24 76.7 80.5 

LT-9 17251 Dante Street, Victorville 11/3/2021 12:00 24 51.8 65.0 

ST-2 7950 Etiwanda Avenue, Rancho 

Cucamonga 

10/28/2021 15:42 1 65.6 71.9* 

ST-3 Nedlee Avenue, San Bernardino 10/28/2021 12:40 1 68.0 72.7* 

ST-5 Farmington Street and Mariposa Road, 

Hesperia 

11/4/2021 14:09 1 69.2 67.2* 

ST-6 11335 Verde Avenue, Hesperia 11/4/2021 9:00 1 61.3 66.0* 

ST-7 16424 E Street, Victorville 11/4/2021 15:47 1 66.7 64.7 

ST-8 15834 Joshua Street, Victorville 11/4/2021 15:45 1 54.5 52.5 

** At these locations, the Ldn was estimated based on the Leq measurements and similar long-term noise measurement sites nearby. 

5.1.1. Section 1 – High Desert 

Victor Valley Station to North D Street: The land use in this area is primarily rural open space 

with some single-family and multi-family residences near Dante Street and E Street. There are 

three hotels and the Shady Oasis Campground adjacent to I-15 on Stoddard Wells Rd. There are 

no institutional land uses in this area. 

North D Street to Mojave Drive: The land use in this area is a mix of industrial, suburban singlefamily, and multi-family residences. The High Desert Apartments, Summer Ridge Apartments, 

and Days Inn by Wyndam Victorville hotel are included in this area. There are no institutional 

land uses in this area. 

Mojave Drive to Palmdale Road: The land use in this area is primarily commercial with a few 

residential areas adjacent to I-15 along South Culver Road, including the Mojave Mobile Home 

Park and the Victorville Fire Department. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 35 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Palmdale Road to La Mesa Road: The land use in this area is a mix of commercial and suburban 

single-family residences adjacent to I-15 near Burning Tree Drive and east of Amargosa Road. 

The Red Roof Inn Victorville hotel is included in this area. Institutional land uses in this area 

include Grace Christian Preschool and Victor Valley Apostolic Church. 

La Mesa Road to Main Street: The land use in the area between La Mesa Road and Bear Valley 

Road in Victorville, CA is a mix of commercial and suburban single-family residences along 

Snake River Drive, Santa Fe Trail, and Pony Trail Road/Court. The Home2 Suites by Hilton 

Victorville hotel is included in this area. South of Bear Valley Road in Hesperia, CA the land use 

is characterized by mostly open space with a mix of commercial, industrial, and residential 

spaces. Some single-family residences are set back from I-15 along Mariposa Road. Institutional 

land use in this area includes the Desert View Memorial Park cemetery. 

Main Street to Oak Hill Road: The land use in this area is primarily open space in San 

Bernardino County with a mix of commercial and rural single-family residences. Noise-sensitive 

land uses include the San Bernardino County Fire Station 305 along Caliente Road and singlefamily residences near Oak Ridge Drive, Oak Hill Drive, and Lantry Lane. There are no 

institutional land uses in this area. 

The noise sites that are used to represent this area, which are described below, are LT-5, LT-6, 

LT-7, LT-8, LT-9, ST-5, ST-6, ST-7, and ST-8. 

Site LT-5: The Ldn measured at this location was 76 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 24 

hours in the front yard of the Family Beauty Salon adjacent to residences along Amargosa Road. 

The dominant noise sources were traffic on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway and Amargosa 

Road. This noise measurement site is representative of noise-sensitive land uses between Yates 

Road in Victorville, CA and Sycamore Street in Hesperia, CA. 

Site LT-6: The Ldn measured at this location was 72 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 24 

hours in the front yard of the single-family residence on Kingwood Drive. The dominant noise 

sources were traffic on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway and Mariposa Road. This noise 

measurement site is representative of noise-sensitive land uses between Roy Rogers Drive in 

and Yates Road in Victorville, CA. 

Site LT-7: The Ldn measured at this location was 68 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 24 

hours in the back yard of this residence along Culver Road. The dominant noise source was 

traffic on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway. This noise measurement site is representative of 

noise-sensitive land uses between Mojave Drive and Roy Rogers Drive in Victorville, CA. 

Site LT-8: The Ldn measured at this location was 81 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 24 

hours at the Summer Ridge Apartments adjacent to I-15. The dominant noise source was traffic 

on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway. This noise measurement site is representative of noisesensitive land uses in close proximity to I-15 between Fresno Street and Mojave Drive in 

Victorville, CA. 

Site LT-9: Ldn measured at this location was 65 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 24 hours 

at the Northgate Village Apartments. The dominant noise sources were traffic on the Interstate 

15 (I-15) freeway and local community noise. This noise measurement site is representative of 

36 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

noise-sensitive land uses along I-15 between Victor Valley Station and Stoddard Wells Road in 

Victorville, CA. 

Site ST-5: The Leq measured at this location was 69 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 1 hour 

at the corner of Farmington Street and Mariposa Road. The dominant noise sources were traffic 

on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway and Mariposa Road. This noise measurement site is 

representative of noise-sensitive land uses along I-15 between Main Street and Oak Hill Road in 

Hesperia, CA. 

Site ST-6: The Leq measured at this location was 61 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 1 hour 

adjacent to the single-family residences on Verde Avenue/Boxwood Avenue. The dominant 

noise sources were traffic on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway and Mariposa Road. This noise 

measurement site is representative of noise-sensitive land uses along I-15 between Sycamore 

Street and Main Street in Hesperia, CA, including the Desert View Memorial Park cemetery. 

Site ST-7: The Leq measured at this location was 67 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 1 hour 

adjacent to the residences along E and D Streets. The dominant noise sources were traffic on 

the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway and local traffic on D and E Streets. This noise measurement 

site is representative of noise-sensitive land uses along I-15 between the E and D Street 

interchanges and Stoddard Wells Road in Victorville, CA. 

Site ST-8: The Leq measured at this location was 55 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 1 hour 

at the cul-de-sac of Joshua Street adjacent to I-15. The dominant noise source was traffic on the 

Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway. This noise measurement site is representative of noise-sensitive 

land uses between D Street and Mojave Drive in Victorville, CA that are shielded from I-15 by 

and noise barrier. 

5.1.2. Section 2 – Cajon Pass 

Oak Hill Road to West Kenwood Avenue: No noise sensitive land uses are within the screening 

distance, and no noise measurements were conducted in this Project section. 

5.1.3. Section 3 – Greater Los Angeles 

West Kenwood Avenue to Sierra Avenue: The land use in this area is primarily rural open space 

with some single-family residences to the northeast of I-15 near Kenwood Avenue, Greenwood 

Avenue, Woodlawn Avenue, Kimbark Avenue and Marion Avenue. There is also an area of 

suburban single-family residences along Bur Oak Road and Comfrey Drive. There are no 

institutional land uses in this area. 

Sierra Avenue to Route 210: The land use in this area is primarily rural open space to the north 

of Duncan Canyon Road with a few single-family residences along Lytle Creek Road. South of 

Duncan Canyon Road, there is a mix of commercial and residential land uses with areas of 

suburban single-family residences adjacent to I-15 along Coyote Canyon Road, Beech Avenue, 

and Summit Avenue. Coyote Canyon Park and San Bernardino County Fire Station 79 are 

included in this area. Institutional land uses in this area include Summit Water of Life Church. 

Route 210 to Base Line Road: The land use in this area is a mix of commercial and residential 

land uses with areas of suburban single-family residences adjacent to I-15 along Williamson 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 37 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Road, Windy Grove Drive, Smithfield Court, Ashland Lane, and Marysville Place. Noise-sensitive 

land uses in this area also include the multi-family residences near Shooting Star Way and 

Comfort Inn Fontana. There are no institutional land uses in this area. 

Base Line Road to Arrow Route: The land use in this area is primarily dense suburban 

residential space between Base Line Road and Church Street/Miller Avenue. South of Church 

Street, the land use is primarily commercial with a few residential areas, including single-family 

residences along Canopy Court and Grape Harvest Drive, and the Barrington Place Apartments 

between I-15 and Etiwanda Avenue. Institutional land uses in this area include Sacred Heart 

Parish School. 

Arrow Route to Rancho Cucamonga Station: The land use in this area is a mix of commercial 

and industrial uses. There are no noise sensitive land uses in this area. 

The noise sites that are used to represent this section, which are described below, are LT-2, LT3, LT-4, ST-2, and ST-3. 

Site LT-2: The Ldn measured at this location was 71 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 24 

hours in the front yard of this single-family residence along Bungalow Way. The dominant noise 

source was traffic on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway. This noise measurement site is 

representative of noise-sensitive land uses south of Route 210 in Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 

Site LT-3: The Ldn measured at this location was 71 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 24 

hours in the back yard of the single-family residence on Crane Street. The dominant noise 

sources were traffic on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway and Coyote Canyon Road. This noise 

measurement site is representative of noise-sensitive land uses between Sierra Avenue and 

Route 210 in Fontana, CA, including Summit Water of Life Church. 

Site LT-4: The Ldn measured at this location was 72 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 24 

hours in the back yard of the single-family residence on Bur Oak Road. The dominant noise 

sources were traffic on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway and local community noise in the Bur 

Oak Road neighborhood. This noise measurement site is representative of noise-sensitive land 

uses between the Glen Helen Pkwy and Sierra Ave in San Bernardino, CA. 

Site ST-2: The Leq measured at this location was 66 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 1 hour 

at the Barrington Place Apartments off Etiwanda Avenue. The dominant noise source was traffic 

on the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway. This noise measurement site is representative of noise 

conditions at the Barrington Place Apartments and the Sacred Heart Parish School in Rancho 

Cucamonga, CA. 

Site ST-3: The Leq measured at this location was 68 dBA. Noise levels were measured for 1 hour 

at a typical residential building setback distance from I-15 at the cul-de-sac at the west end of 

Nedlee Avenue in this rural residential neighborhood. The dominant noise source was traffic on 

the Interstate 15 (I-15) freeway. This noise measurement site is representative of noisesensitive land uses along I-15 between Kenwood Avenue and Glen Helen Pkwy. 

38 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

5.2. Vibration 

Vibration propagation measurements were conducted during November 2021 to determine the 

vibration response characteristics of the ground near vibration-sensitive locations located near 

the proposed mainline track options. A custom-built instrumented hammer was used to impart 

an impulsive force to the ground to determine the ground response. The magnitude of the 

force was calculated based on the acceleration and mass of the falling hammer. The resulting 

vibration signals were measured using high-sensitivity accelerometers (PCB Model 393C and 

393B05) mounted in a vertical direction on pavement or on steel spikes driven into the ground. 

The signals from the hammer and accelerometers were recorded using Data Translation 

DT9837A digital acquisition hardware. Data Translation’s QuickDAQ software, running on a

laptop computer, was used to review the measurement data. 

The vibration propagation test procedure is shown schematically in Figure 10. The 

instrumented hammer was used to generate impulses at specific locations spaced 15 feet apart 

along a line on or parallel to the proposed alignment. A line of accelerometers was placed 

perpendicular to the line of impacts as shown in the figure. The relationship between the input 

force and the resulting vibration measured by the accelerometers, called the transfer mobility 

(TM), was calculated using proprietary software in the Cross-Spectrum Acoustics (CSA) 

laboratory. The transfer mobility represents the vibration propagation characteristics of the 

ground at the measurement site and along the mainline track options. 

Figure 10. Vibration Propagation Measurement Schematic 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 39 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure 11. Vibration Measurement Site Locations 

40 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Six vibration propagation test sites were selected for measurements for the Project. The 

locations of the sites are shown on Figure 11, site photographs are included in Appendix B, and 

detailed propagation information is included in Appendix D. Figure 12 shows the results of the 

vibration propagation tests at 100 feet for each of the test sites. 

The vibration-sensitive land use for the Project is the same as the noise-sensitive land use 

described above. Descriptions of the vibration propagation test sites are as follows: 

5.2.1. Section 1 High Desert 

Site VP-4 was located in the empty lot to the east of the Starbucks located at 11412 Fashion 

Court in Hesperia, CA. The vibration measurements at this location are representative of the 

areas between Main Street and Oak Hill Road in Hesperia, CA. 

Site VP-5 was located at the intersection of Santa Fe Trail and Fox Trail in Victorville, CA. The 

vibration measurements at this location are representative of the areas between Roy Rogers 

Drive in Victorville, CA and Main Street in Hesperia, CA. 

Site VP-6 was located at Avalon Park in Victorville, CA. The vibration measurements at this 

location are representative of the areas between Victor Valley Station and Roy Rogers Drive in 

Victorville, CA. 

5.2.2. Section 2 – Cajon Pass 

Oak Hill Road to West Kenwood Avenue: No vibration sensitive land uses are within the 

screening distance, and no vibration measurements were conducted in this Project section. 

5.2.3. Section 3 Greater Los Angeles 

Site VP-1 was located at the intersection of Crawford Place and Candlewood Street in Rancho 

Cucamonga, CA. The vibration measurements at this location are representative of the areas 

between Route 210 and the Rancho Cucamonga Station in Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 

Site VP-2 was located at Coyote Canyon Park in Fontana, CA. The vibration measurements at 

this location are representative of the areas between Sierra Avenue and Route 210 in Fontana, 

CA. 

Site VP-3 was located at the intersection of Bur Oak Road and Anise Drive in San Bernardino, 

CA. The vibration measurements at this location are representative of the areas between 

Kenwood Avenue and Sierra Avenue in San Bernardino, CA. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 41 
 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

-40 

-30 

-20 

-10 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

6 8 10 13 16 20 25 32 40 50 63 80 100 125 160 200 

Line Source Transfer Mobility, 

dB re 1 (μin/sec)/(lb/ft1/2) 

1/3-Octave Band Center Frequency 

LSTM at 100 ft 

VP-1 VP-2 VP-3 VP-4 VP-5 VP-6 

Figure 12. Vibration Measurement Results at 100 feet 

42 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

6. Environmental Consequences and Mitigation 

6.1. Build Alternative 

Detailed noise and vibration impact assessments were performed based on the criteria 

discussed in Section 4.2 and the prediction methodology described in Section 5.4. The 

assessment results are presented in this section. The FRA guidance manual is the primary 

source for the noise methodology. The noise and vibration assessments included the following 

steps: 

• Noise- and vibration-sensitive land uses were identified using aerial photography, GIS 

data, and field surveys. See Section 5.1. 

• Existing noise levels along the corridor were measured at sensitive receptors. See 

Section 5.1. 

• Vibration-propagation characteristics of the soil along the corridor were measured near 

representative sensitive receptors. See Section 5.2. 

• Project noise and vibration levels from high-speed rail operations and highway noise 

were predicted using Project drawings and information on speeds, headways, track type 

and vehicle type. 

• The noise impact from operations was assessed by comparing the Project noise with the 

existing noise (not the No Build Alternative noise) using the FRA noise impact criteria. 

See Figure 5. 

• The vibration impact from operations was assessed by comparing the Project vibration 

levels with the FRA vibration impact criteria in Figure 7. 

• Mitigation was recommended at locations where Project noise or vibration levels 

exceed the impact criteria. 

6.1.1. Noise 

6.1.1.1. Construction Effects 

Elevated noise levels from construction activities are, to a degree, unavoidable for this type of 

project. For most construction equipment, diesel engines are typically the dominant noise 

source. For other activities, such as impact pile driving and jackhammering, noise generated by 

the actual process dominates. Short-term noise during construction of the Project can be 

intrusive to residents near the construction sites. Most of the construction will consist of site 

preparation and laying new tracks, and should occur primarily during daytime hours, except 

when required and within applicable noise ordinance procedures for a waiver. At some 

locations, more extensive work will occur, such as pile driving for elevated structures and 

retaining walls. 

Table 12 shows noise levels of typical construction equipment from the FTA guidance manual, 

in terms of the maximum levels at 50 feet. Construction noise predictions at noise-sensitive 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 43 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

locations depend on the amount of noise during each construction phase, the duration of the 

noise, and the distance from the construction activities to the sensitive receptor. Conducting a 

construction noise impact assessment requires knowledge of the equipment likely to be used, 

the duration of its use, and the way it will be used by a contractor. Table 12 provides an 

example of a construction noise projection for typical at-grade track construction. Construction 

noise projections for other project features, such as station or parking facilities, would have 

similar results. Under this scenario, an 8-hour Leq of 88 dBA would be projected at a distance of 

50 feet from the construction site. 

Using the criteria in Section 4.2.3 and the example for at-grade construction in Table 12, 

screening distances for at-grade track construction noise impact can be determined. For this 

example at residential land uses, the potential for short-term at-grade track construction noise 

impact could extend to approximately 120 feet from the corridor; however, if nighttime 

construction is conducted, the potential for short-term noise impact from at-grade construction 

could extend to approximately 380 feet from the corridor With this typical example, because 

the majority of the alignment would be in the center of I-15, construction effects would be 

limited to three locations at the northern end of the alignment: two hotels near Stoddard Wells 

Road and one single family residence on Pepper Tree Drive. 

For elevated structure construction, the distances could be larger, depending on the type of 

piling that could occur. When a specific piling method is determined, a screening distance could 

be calculated. 

Table 12. Typical Construction Scenario 

Equipment Type 

Typical Noise Level at 50 

feet (dBA) 

Equipment Utilization 

Factor (%) Leq (dBA) 

Grader 85 50 82 

Backhoe 80 40 76 

Compactor 82 20 75 

Loader 85 20 78 

Roller 74 20 67 

Truck 88 40 84 

Crane, Mobile 83 20 76 

Total 8-hour workday Leq at 50 feet: 88 

6.1.1.2. Operation Effects 

Railway Noise 

The assessment of noise impact from high-speed rail operations is based on a comparison of 

existing and Project noise for different land use categories. Detailed comparisons of the existing 

and future noise levels are presented in Table 13 for residential land uses and Table 14 for 

institutional land uses below. In addition to the location (or name for institutional land uses) 

44 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

and distance to the near track, each table includes the train speed, the existing noise level, the 

projected noise level from high-speed rail operations, and the impact criteria for each receptor 

or receptor group. Each table also includes an inventory of the number of impacts and severe 

impacts at each sensitive receptor location. The noise impact locations are shown in Figure 13 

through Error! Reference source not found. and described in detail below. 

Table 13. Summary of Residential Noise Impacts from HSR Operations 

Location 

Side 

of 

Track 

Dist to Near Track 

(ft) 

Max 

Train 

Speed 

(mph) 

Existing 

Noise 

Level 

(Ldn, 

dBA) 

Noise Level (Ldn, dBA) 

Type and # 

of Impacts 

Project 

Impact 

Criteria 

Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev. 

Section 1 – High Desert 

Victor Valley 

Station to N D St NB 359 100 65 57 61 66 0 0 

Victor Valley 

Station to N D St SB 165 100 65 62 61 66 2 0 

N D St to Mojave 

Dr 

NB 122 90 81 63 65 75 0 0 

N D St to Mojave 

Dr 

SB 137 90 81 62 65 75 0 0 

Mojave Dr to 

Palmdale Rd NB No noise sensitive receivers. 

Mojave Dr to 

Palmdale Rd SB 129 80 68 62 63 68 0 0 

Palmdale Rd to 

La Mesa Rd NB 160 140 72 65 65 71 0 0 

Palmdale Rd to 

La Mesa Rd SB 202 140 76 63 65 74 0 0 

La Mesa Rd to 

Main St NB 163 140 76 65 65 74 0 0 

La Mesa Rd to 

Main St SB 272 140 76 61 65 74 0 0 

Main St to Oak 

Hill Rd NB 422 120 67 57 62 68 0 0 

Main St to Oak 

Hill Rd SB 231 80 67 58 62 68 0 0 

Section 2 – Cajon Pass 

Oak Hill Rd to W 

Kenwood Ave NB No noise sensitive receivers. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 45 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Oak Hill Rd to W 

Kenwood Ave SB No noise sensitive receivers. 

Section 3 – Greater Los Angeles 

W Kenwood Ave 

to Sierra Ave NB 212 140 72 63 65 71 0 0 

W Kenwood Ave 

to Sierra Ave SB No noise sensitive receivers. 

Sierra Ave to Rt 

210 NB No noise sensitive receivers. 

Sierra Ave to Rt 

210 SB 256 140 71 61 65 70 0 0 

Rt 210 to Base 

Line Rd NB 245 140 71 62 65 70 0 0 

Rt 210 to Base 

Line Rd SB 217 140 71 63 65 70 0 0 

Base Line Rd to 

Arrow Route 

NB 177 140 71 64 65 70 0 0 

Base Line Rd to 

Arrow Route 

SB 164 140 71 65 65 70 0 0 

Arrow Route to 

Rancho 

Cucamonga 

Station 

NB No noise sensitive receivers. 

Arrow Route to 

Rancho 

Cucamonga 

Station 

SB No noise sensitive receivers. 

Total: 2 0 

Victor Valley Station to N D St (SB): There are two hotels along the southbound side of the 

proposed alignment between the Victor Valley Station and N D St projected to have moderate 

noise impacts. These impacts are due to the proximity of the hotels to the tracks. 

In addition to the noise from HSR operations, the noise from the shifting of the lanes on I-15 

was also assessed, as described in Section 4.4.1. This change in traffic noise due to the shift of 

the lanes will add approximately 1 dB of noise at receivers in the locations described below. 

At all locations, the impacts due to the HSR operations and change in traffic noise are in the low 

end of the moderate impact range. 

46 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Mojave Dr to N D St (NB): There are 40 single and multi-family homes along the northbound 

side of the proposed alignment between Mojave Dr and N D St projected to have moderate 

noise impacts. 

Mojave Dr to N D St (SB): There are 9 single family homes along the southbound side of the 

proposed alignment between Mojave Dr and N D St projected to have moderate noise impacts. 

La Mesa Rd to Palmdale Rd (NB): There is one hotel along the northbound side of the proposed 

alignment between La Mesa Rd and Palmdale Rd projected to have a moderate noise impact. 

Main St to La Mesa Rd (NB): There are two hotels and 22 single-family homes along the 

northbound side of the proposed alignment between Main St and La Mesa Rd projected to 

have moderate noise impacts. 

Arrow Rd to Base Line Rd (NB): There are 9 single-family homes along the northbound side of 

the proposed alignment between Arrow Rd and Base Line Rd projected to have moderate noise 

impacts. 

Table 14. Summary of Institutional Noise Impacts from HSR Operations 

Name Location 

Side 

of 

Track 

Dist to 

Near 

Track 

(ft) 

Max 

Train 

Speed 

(mph) 

Existing 

Noise 

Level 

(Leq, 

dBA) 

Noise Level (Leq, dBA) 

Type and # 

of Impacts 

Project 

Impact 

Criteria 

Mod. Sev. Mod. Sev. 

Section 1 – High Desert 

Grace 

Christian 

Preschool 

Palmdale 

Rd to La 

Mesa Rd 

SB 423 140 72 57 70 76 0 0 

Victor Valley 

Apostolic 

Church 

Palmdale 

Rd to La 

Mesa Rd 

SB 430 140 72 56 70 76 0 0 

Desert View 

Memorial 

Park 

La Mesa Rd 

to Main St SB 161 120 61 61 63 69 0 0 

Section 3 – Greater Los Angeles* 

Summit 

Water of 

Life Church 

Sierra Ave 

to Rt 210 NB 329 140 65 58 65 71 0 0 

Sacred 

Heart Parish 

School 

Base Line 

Rd to Arrow 

Route 

NB 239 80 66 56 66 72 0 0 

*There are no institutional receptors in Section 2. 

There are no noise impacts predicted at institutional land uses for the Project. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 47 
 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Hesperia Station 

There would be no noise impacts associated with the Hesperia Station. There are no sensitive 

receptors located near the proposed station site. 

Rancho Cucamonga Station 

There would be no noise impacts associated with the Rancho Cucamonga Station. There are no 

sensitive receptors located near the proposed station site. 

Traffic Noise 

There are no locations where the changes in the traffic volumes due to the Project exceed the 

threshold in Section 4.4.2, so no traffic noise impacts are projected. 

48 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Figure 13. Noise Impact Locations 1 of 3 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 49 
 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure 14. Noise Impact Locations 2 of 3 

50 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Figure 15. Noise Impact Locations 3 of 3 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 51 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

6.1.2. Vibration 

6.1.2.1. Construction Effects 

Unlike typical rail operations, there is the potential for damage to nearby structures at close 

distances due to construction vibration from activities, such as pile driving, hoe rams, vibratory 

compaction, and loaded trucks. Most limits on construction vibration are based on reducing the 

potential for damage to nearby structures. Although construction vibrations are only 

temporary, it is still reasonable to assess the potential for human annoyance and damage. 

As a conservative approach, the non-engineered timber and masonry construction category 

(Category III) has been used to assess the potential for construction vibration impacts. A 

vibration criterion of 94 VdB has been used to assess potential damage impact, and 72 VdB has 

been used to assess potential vibration annoyance from construction activities. Vibration 

source levels at 25 feet and the distances to potential residential annoyance and potential 

damage are shown in Table 15. With the exception of impact pile driving, the potential for 

damage is limited to within 25 feet of construction activities. For impact pile driving, the 

distance for the potential for damage is up to 55 feet but would depend on the piling method 

chosen. 

Because the exact location of construction equipment is important in projecting vibration 

levels, a more detailed assessment of potential vibration damage will be performed during final 

design when more accurate equipment locations are known. It is important to note that this 

assessment does not address potential damage to structures due to soil settlement or 

displacement due to construction activities. 

Table 15. Summary of Potential Construction Vibration Impacts 

Equipment Type 

Typical Vibration Level 

at 25 feet (VdB) 

Distance for Potential 

Damage (ft) 

Distance for Potential 

Annoyance (ft) 

Impact Pile Driving 104 55 290 

Push Piling 84 25 125 

Hoe Ram 87 15 80 

Caisson Drilling 87 15 80 

Loaded Trucks 86 15 75 

Clam Shovel 94 25 135 

Vibratory Roller 94 25 135 

6.1.2.2. Operation Effects 

The potential vibration impact from Project operations was assessed on an absolute basis using 

the FRA criterion of 72 VdB for residential land uses with frequent events. The approach used 

for assessing vibration impact generally follows the approach used for the noise impact, except 

that existing vibration is not considered when evaluating impact. For the Project, the estimated 

52 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

root mean square (RMS) velocity levels (VdB re 1 μin./sec) for sensitive receptors at the 

receptor closest to the tracks in each location is presented in Table 16 for residential land uses 

and Table 17 for institutional land uses. Each table lists the locations of the closest receptor for 

each location, the distance to the near track, the train speed, and the projected vibration level 

in each location. The proposed Project would not result in vibration impact at any residential or 

institutional locations. 

Table 16. Summary of Residential Vibration Impacts 

Location 

Side of 

Track 

Dist to 

Near 

Track (ft) 

Max Train 

Speed 

(mph) 

Project 

Levels 

(VdB) 

Impact 

Criteria 

(VdB) 

# of 

Impacts 

Section 1 – High Desert 

Victor Valley Station to N D St NB 192 100 57 72 0 

Victor Valley Station to N D St SB 165 100 58 72 0 

N D St to Mojave Dr NB No vibration sensitive receivers. 

N D St to Mojave Dr SB 137 90 58 72 0 

Mojave Dr to Palmdale Rd NB No vibration sensitive receivers. 

Mojave Dr to Palmdale Rd SB 129 80 57 72 0 

Palmdale Rd to La Mesa Rd NB 160 140 60 72 0 

Palmdale Rd to La Mesa Rd SB 202 140 60 72 0 

La Mesa Rd to Main St NB 163 140 60 72 0 

La Mesa Rd to Main St SB 272 140 59 72 0 

Main St to Oak Hill Rd NB 422 120 68 72 0 

Main St to Oak Hill Rd SB 477 120 68 72 0 

Section 2 – Cajon Pass 

Oak Hill Rd to W Kenwood Ave NB No vibration sensitive receivers. 

Oak Hill Rd to W Kenwood Ave SB No vibration sensitive receivers. 

Section 3 – Greater Los Angeles 

W Kenwood Ave to Sierra Ave NB 212 140 58 72 0 

W Kenwood Ave to Sierra Ave SB No vibration sensitive receivers. 

Sierra Ave to Rt 210 NB No vibration sensitive receivers. 

Sierra Ave to Rt 210 SB 256 140 69 72 0 

Rt 210 to Base Line Rd NB 245 140 50 72 0 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 53 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Rt 210 to Base Line Rd SB 217 140 52 72 0 

Base Line Rd to Arrow Route NB 177 140 54 72 0 

Base Line Rd to Arrow Route SB 164 140 55 72 0 

Arrow Route to Rancho Cucamonga 

Station NB No vibration sensitive receivers. 

Arrow Route to Rancho Cucamonga 

Station SB No vibration sensitive receivers. 

Total: 0 

Table 17. Summary of Institutional Vibration Impacts 

Name Location 

Side of 

Track 

Dist to 

Near 

Track 

(ft) 

Max 

Train 

Speed 

(mph) 

Project 

Levels 

(VdB) Criteria 

# of 

Impacts 

Section 1 – High Desert 

Grace Christian 

Preschool 

Palmdale Rd to La 

Mesa Rd SB 423 140 59 83 0 

Victor Valley 

Apostolic Church 

Palmdale Rd to La 

Mesa Rd SB 430 140 58 83 0 

Desert View 

Memorial Park La Mesa Rd to Main St SB 161 120 59 83 0 

Section 3 – Greater Los Angeles* 

Summit Water of 

Life Church Sierra Ave to Rt 210 NB 329 140 68 83 0 

Sacred Heart 

Parish School 

Base Line Rd to Arrow 

Route 

NB 239 80 46 83 0 

*There are no institutional receptors in Section 2. 

Hesperia Station 

There would be no vibration impacts associated with the Hesperia Station. There are no 

sensitive receptors located near the proposed station site. 

Rancho Cucamonga Station 

There would be no vibration impacts associated with the Rancho Cucamonga Station. There are 

no sensitive receptors located near the proposed station site. 

6.1.3. Cumulative Effects 

In general, noise levels would increase in the future due to increases in population and 

accompanying development as well as potential transportation projects. Overall, community 

54 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

exposure to noise will increase as traffic levels increase. The noise analysis compares project 

noise levels with the existing noise levels, which is conservative because noise is expected to be 

higher in the future with population growth and expanded highways. However, highway or rail 

improvements would need to double their capacity to noticeably increase noise levels for the 

average person (i.e., an increase of 3 dBA). This is not expected to occur. Project-related 

construction noise, construction vibration, and operational vibration are expected to be highly 

localized and are therefore not anticipated to contribute to any significant noise effects. 

Overall, the Project section’s contribution to significant cumulative construction and

operational noise and vibration effects is not anticipated to be cumulatively considerable. 

6.2. No Build Alternative 

6.2.1. Construction Effects 

The No Build Alternative does not include any construction and, therefore, would result in no 

impacts related to construction. 

6.2.2. Operation Effects 

The No Build Alternative would not result in any noise or vibration impacts. There would likely 

be increases in highway and local roadway noise due to increased traffic volumes. 

6.2.3. Cumulative Effects 

The No Build Alternative would not result in any cumulative noise or vibration impacts. There 

would likely be increases in highway and local roadway noise due to increased traffic volumes. 

6.3. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures 

6.3.1. Construction 

Construction activities will be carried out in compliance with all applicable local noise 

regulations. The following mitigation measures will be applied as needed to minimize 

temporary construction noise and vibration impacts: 

• Avoiding nighttime construction in residential neighborhoods 

• Locating stationary construction equipment as far as possible from noise-sensitive sites 

• Constructing noise barriers, such as temporary walls or piles of excavated material, 

between noisy activities and noise-sensitive receivers 

• Routing construction-related truck traffic to roadways that will cause the least 

disturbance to residents, and 

• Using alternative construction methods to minimize the use of impact and vibratory 

equipment (e.g., pile-drivers and compactors). 

Contractors would also be required to prepare a detailed Noise Control Plan. A noise control 

engineer or acoustician will work with the contractor to prepare a Noise Control Plan in 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 55 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

conjunction with the contractor’s specific equipment and methods of construction. Key 

elements of a Plan include: 

• Contractor’s specific equipment types

• Schedule and methods of construction 

• Maximum noise limits for each piece of equipment with certification testing 

• Prohibitions on certain types of equipment and processes during the nighttime hours 

without local agency coordination and approved variances 

• Identification of specific sensitive sites where near construction sites 

• Methods for projecting construction noise levels 

• Implementation of noise control measures where appropriate 

• Methods for responding to community complaints. 

6.3.2. Operational Noise 

Because all of the noise impacts are in the low end of the moderate noise impact range, the 

impacts would not be considered adverse under NEPA, and no mitigation would be required. 

However, Caltrans and Brightline will work together as a part of Caltrans permitting and 

approvals process as the project moves into the design state to investigate locations where 

mitigation might be an option. Measures could include noise barriers along the rail alignment, 

noise barriers along the highway right of way, or other methods to minimize residential noise 

effects. 

6.3.3. Operational Vibration 

No vibration impacts have been identified for the Project, so no vibration mitigation is 

recommended. 

56 NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

7. References 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006. FHWA Construction Noise Handbook. Final 

Report FHWA-HEP-06-015. 

Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment 

Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. Federal Transit Administration, John A. Volpe National 

Transportation System Center and Cross-Spectrum Acoustics Inc. 

Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). 2012. High-Speed Ground Transportation Noise and 

Vibration Impact Assessment. Final Report DOT/FRA/ORD-12/15. 

Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). 2020. National Environmental Policy Act Reevaluation for 

the DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC Xpresswest High-Speed Train Project, Apple Valley, CA to Las 

Vegas, NV. September 2020. 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 57 

 

BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Appendix A 

Noise Measurement Site Photographs 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure A-1: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-2 7420 Bungalow Way 

Figure A-2: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-3 15165 Crane Street 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Figure A-3: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-4 3733 Bur Oak Road 

Figure A-4: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-5 13296 Amargesa Road 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure A-5: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-6 15665 Kingswood Drive 

Figure A-6: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-7 14983 S Culver Road 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Figure A-7: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-8 15410 La Paz Drive 

Figure A-8: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-9 17251 Dante Street 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure A-9: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-2 7950 Etiwanda Avenue 

Figure A-10: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-3 Needle Avenue 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Figure A-11: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-5 Farmington Street and Mariposa Road 

Figure A-12: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-6 11335 Verde Avenue 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure A-13: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-7 16424 E Street 

Figure A-14: Short-Term Noise Measurement Site ST-8 15834 Joshua Street 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Appendix B 

Vibration Measurement Site Photographs 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure B-1: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-1 7540 Crawford Place 

Figure B-2: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-2 5065 Coyote Canyon Road 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Figure B-3: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-3 Bur Oak Road at Anise Drive 

Figure B-4: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-4 11412 Fashion Court 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Figure B-5: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-5 Fox Trail and Santa Fe Trail 

Figure B-6: Transfer Mobility Measurement Site V-6 16338 Avalon Avenue (Avalon Park) 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT 

Appendix C 

Noise Measurement Data 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022 
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022

Figure C-1: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-2 7420 Bungalow Way

Figure C-2: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-3 15165 Crane Street

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

16:0017:0018:0019:0020:0021:0022:0023:00

0:001:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:00

10:0011:0012:0013:0014:0015:00

Sound Level, dBA re 20 μPa

Time of Day

Express West Extension LT-2: 7420 Bungalow Way, ; Wed -- October 

27, 2021 to Thurs -- October 28, 2021; Ldn: 71.4 dBA

Leq Lmax L33 L90

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

19:0020:0021:0022:0023:00

0:001:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:00

10:00

11:0012:0013:0014:0015:0016:0017:0018:00

Sound Level, dBA re 20 μPa

Time of Day

Express West Extension LT-3: 15165 Crane St; Mon -- November 1, 

2021 to Tues -- November 2, 2021; Ldn: 71.6 dBA

Leq Lmax L33 L90
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022

Figure C-3: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-4 3733 Bur Oak Road

Figure C-4: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-5 13296 Amargesa Road

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

15:0016:0017:0018:0019:0020:0021:0022:0023:00

0:001:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:00

10:0011:0012:0013:0014:00

Sound Level, dBA re 20 μPa

Time of Day

Express West Extension LT-4: 3733 Bur Oak Road, ; Wed -- October 

27, 2021 to Thurs -- October 28, 2021; Ldn: 72.6 dBA

Leq Lmax L33 L90

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

95.0

100.0

16:0017:0018:0019:0020:0021:0022:0023:00

0:00

1:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:00

10:0011:0012:0013:00

14:0015:00

Sound Level, dBA re 20 μPa

Time of Day

Express West Extension LT-5: 13296 Amargesa Rd, ; Tues --

November, 2, 2021 to Wed -- November 3, 2021; Ldn: 78 dBA

Leq Lmax L33 L90
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022

Figure C-5: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-6 15665 Kingswood Drive

Figure C-6: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-7 14983 S Culver Road

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

95.0

17:0018:0019:0020:0021:0022:0023:00

0:00

1:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:00

10:0011:0012:0013:0014:0015:0016:00

Sound Level, dBA re 20 μPa

Time of Day

Express West Extension LT-6: 15665 Kingswood Dr, ; Tues --

November, 2, 2021 to Wed -- November 3, 2021; Ldn: 73 dBA

Leq Lmax L33 L90

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

17:0018:0019:0020:0021:0022:0023:00

0:00

1:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:00

10:0011:0012:0013:0014:0015:0016:00

Sound Level, dBA re 20 μPa

Time of Day

Express West Extension LT-7: 14983 S. Culver Rd, ; Tues -- November, 

2, 2021 to Wed -- November 3, 2021; Ldn: 69 dBA

Leq Lmax L33 L90
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022

Figure C-7: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-8 15410 La Paz Drive

Figure C-8: Long-Term Noise Measurement Site LT-9 17251 Dante Street

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

95.0

12:0013:0014:0015:0016:0017:0018:0019:0020:0021:0022:0023:00

0:001:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:00

10:0011:00

Sound Level, dBA re 20 μPa

Time of Day

Express West Extension LT-8: 15410 La Paz Dr, ; Wed -- November, 3, 

2021 to Thurs -- November 4, 2021; Ldn: 82 dBA

Leq Lmax L33 L90

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

12:0013:0014:0015:0016:0017:0018:0019:0020:0021:0022:0023:00

0:001:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:00

10:0011:00

Sound Level, dBA re 20 μPa

Time of Day

Express West Extension LT-9: 17251 Dante St,; Wed -- November, 3, 

2021 to Thurs -- November 4, 2021; Ldn: 82 dBA

Leq Lmax L33 L90
BRIGHTLINE WEST CAJON PASS HIGH-SPEED RAIL 

Appendix D 

Vibration Measurement Data 

NOISE AND VIBRATION TECHNICAL REPORT, OCTOBER 2022