Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-1

3.6 Noise and Vibration

3.6.1 Introduction

This section identifies potential noise-sensitive land uses within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study 

Area and evaluates the noise- and vibration-related effects associated with the No Build Alternative 

and Build Alternative Options on these areas. Information contained in this section is summarized 

from the Noise and Vibration Technical Memorandum (Appendix F of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR).

3.6.2 Regulatory Framework

In accordance with NEPA (42 USC Section 4321 et seq.), CEQ regulations implementing NEPA 

(40 CFR Parts 1501-1508), FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts (64 FR

28545, May 26, 1999) and CEQA, FRA identified potential noise-sensitive land uses within the Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area, and evaluated the potential impacts that could occur from 

implementation of the Build Alternative Options.

Federal

Environmental Protection Agency Guidance

In 1974, U.S. EPA published Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect 

Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, a comprehensive document that 

identifies noise levels to protect public health and welfare against hearing loss, annoyance, and

activity interference (U.S. EPA 1974). In response to the requirements of the Noise Control Act, U.S. 

EPA identified indoor and outdoor noise limits to protect public health and welfare. U.S. EPA 

identified outdoor day-night average noise level (Ldn) limits of 55 decibels (dB) and indoor Ldn limits 

of 45 dB as desirable for protecting against speech interference and sleep disturbance in residential 

areas and at educational and health care facilities. The sound-level criterion for protecting against 

hearing damage in commercial and industrial areas is identified as the 24-hour equivalent sound 

level (Leq) value of 70 dB (both outdoors and indoors). Based on attitudinal surveys, U.S. EPA 

determined that a 5 dB increase in Ldn or Leq could result in a change in community reaction (U.S. 

EPA 1974). Ldn and Leq are described in further detail in Appendix F of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-2

Federal Transit Administration Noise and Vibration Impact Criteria

FTA has published impact assessment procedures and criteria pertaining to noise and vibration. The 

FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA Manual) (FTA 2018) is used for 

rail projects where conventional train speeds are below 90 miles per hour (FRA 2012). Therefore, 

FRA conventional rail projects generally use noise and vibration assessment guidance from the FTA 

Manual. The FTA Manual also includes assessment methods for noise and vibration from 

construction.

Federal Highway Administration Noise Impact Criteria

Implementation of the Program may involve the construction of new roads and/or grade crossings. 

The need for an impact analysis and evaluation of noise abatement for these types of infrastructure 

improvements depends on whether new project roadways meet the definition of a Type I Project as 

defined by FHWA.

Procedures for preparing operational and construction noise studies and evaluating noise abatement 

considered for federal and federal-aid highway projects are provided under 23 CFR Part 772. Under 

23 CFR Part 772.7, highway projects are categorized as Type I, Type II, or Type III Projects. 

FHWA defines a Type I Project as a proposed federal or federal-aid highway project for the 

construction of a highway at a new location or the physical alteration of an existing highway that 

significantly changes either the horizontal or vertical alignment of the highway. The following projects 

are also considered to be Type I Projects:

• The addition of a through-traffic lane. This includes the addition of a through-traffic lane that 

functions as a high-occupancy vehicle lane, high-occupancy toll lane, bus lane, or truck 

climbing lane;

• The addition of an auxiliary lane, except when the auxiliary lane is a turn lane;

• The addition or relocation of interchange lanes or addition of ramps to a quadrant to 

complete an existing partial interchange;

• Restriping existing pavement for the purpose of adding a through-traffic lane or an auxiliary 

lane; and

• The addition of a new weigh station, rest stop, ride-share lot, or toll plaza or substantial 

alteration to such features.

If a project is determined to be a Type I Project under this definition, the entire project area, as 

defined in the environmental document, is a Type I Project. Type I Projects include those that add an 

interchange, ramp, auxiliary lane, or truck-climbing lane to an existing highway or widen an existing 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-3

ramp by a full lane width for its entire length. Projects that are unrelated to increased noise levels, 

such as striping, lighting, signing, and landscaping projects, are not considered Type I Projects. A 

Type II Project is a noise barrier retrofit project that involves no changes to highway capacity or 

alignment. A Type III Project is a project that does not meet the classifications of a Type I or Type II 

Project. Type III Projects do not require a noise analysis.

Under 23 CFR Part 772.11, noise abatement must be considered for Type I Projects if the project is 

predicted to result in a traffic noise impact. In such cases, 23 CFR Part 772 requires that the project 

sponsor “consider” noise abatement before adoption of the final NEPA document. This process 

involves identification of noise abatement measures that are reasonable, feasible, and likely to be 

incorporated into the project, as well as the identification of noise impacts for which no apparent 

solution is available.

Traffic noise impacts are considered to occur when the predicted noise level in the design year 

approaches or exceeds noise abatement criteria (NAC) specified in 23 CFR Part 772, or a predicted 

noise level substantially exceeds the existing noise level (a “substantial” noise increase). However, 

23 CFR Part 772 does not specifically define the terms “substantial increase” or “approach”; these 

criteria are defined in the state-level implementation of 23 CFR Part 772. An NAC value of 67 

A-weighted decibel (dBA) Leq is used for residences, schools, parks, places of worship, active sport 

areas, and other land uses where there are areas of outdoor frequent human use.

Noise Control Act of 1972

The Noise Control Act of 1972 (Public Law 92 574) established a requirement for all federal 

agencies to administer their programs in a manner that promotes an environment that is free of 

noise that jeopardizes public health or welfare. U.S. EPA was assigned the following responsibilities:

• Providing information to the public regarding the identifiable effects of noise on public health 

and welfare

• Publishing information on the levels of environmental noise to protect the public health and 

welfare with an adequate margin of safety

• Coordinating federal research and activities related to noise control

• Establishing federal noise emission standards for selected products distributed in interstate 

commerce
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-4

State

California Department of Transportation Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol for New Highway 

Construction and Reconstruction Projects

The Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (Protocol) developed by Caltrans is the implementation of 

23 CFR Part 772 in California. The Protocol specifies the policies, procedures, and practices to be 

used by agencies that sponsor new construction or reconstruction of federal or federal-aid highway

projects. The Protocol defines a noise increase from a roadway project as substantial when the 

predicted noise levels with project implementation exceed existing noise levels by 12 dBA or more. 

The Protocol also states that a sound level approaches the NAC when the sound level is within 1 dB 

of the NAC value specified in 23 CFR Part 772 (e.g., 66 dBA would be considered to be approaching 

the NAC of 67 dBA for residential use, but 65 dBA would not be considered to be approaching the 

NAC).

California Department of Transportation Vibration Standards

For continuous/frequent intermittent sources, such as pile driving, Caltrans recommends a 

0.25-inch-per-second peak particle velocity (PPV) threshold for “historic and some old buildings” and 

a PPV of 0.3 inch per second for “older residential structures” (Caltrans 2004). These criteria are 

directed primarily toward, but not limited to, all construction related to pile driving, demolition, and 

pavement-breaking activities.

California Noise Control Act

The California Noise Control Act of 1973 requires a city or county to identify local noise sources and 

analyze and quantify to the extent practicable current and projected noise levels from various 

sources, including highways and freeways; passenger and freight railroad operations; ground rapid 

transit systems; commercial, general, and military aviation and airport operations; and other 

stationary ground noise sources. 

Regional

Los Angeles County General Plan

The Noise Element of the Los Angeles County 2035 General Plan (County of Los Angeles 2015) 

provides goals, objectives, policies, and programs related to noise mitigation and noise compatibility 

with adjacent land uses. These goals include the minimization of impacts on noise-sensitive land 

uses by ensuring adequate site design, acoustical constriction, and the use of barriers, berms, or 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-5

additional engineering controls through best available technologies and utilizing traffic management 

and noise suppression techniques to minimize noise from traffic and transportation systems.

Orange County General Plan

The Noise Element of the Orange County General Plan (Orange County 2005) provides goals, 

objectives, and policies related to noise. These include transportation system noise control, noise 

abatement and monitoring, and land use and planning integration to prevent new noise and land use 

conflicts. 

County of Riverside General Plan

The Noise Element of the County of Riverside General Plan (County of Riverside 2015) includes 

goals and policies to reduce compatibility impacts between sensitive land uses and noise generation 

sources. The policies identified in the plan are intended to ensure that land use and siting decisions 

take noise generation and reduction into account. 

County of San Bernardino General Plan

The Noise Element of the County of San Bernardino General Plan (County of San Bernardino 2014) 

identifies noise abatement provisions to guide local decisions. The plan includes goals and polices to 

minimize potential land use computability conflicts resulting from exposure of county residents to 

mobile and stationary noise sources. 

Local and Tribal Governments

Regulations from cities, local agencies, and tribal governments would be identified in the 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis once site-specific rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities

are known.

3.6.3 Methods for Evaluating Environmental Effects

Because this analysis was conducted at a Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR service-evaluation level, a

screening-level noise and vibration impact assessment was completed rather than a detailed 

quantitative evaluation of project noise and vibration levels. Detailed quantitative analysis would 

occur during Tier 2/Project-level analysis. Assessment of noise and vibration impacts associated 

with the Program is based on guidance in the FTA Manual (FTA 2018).
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-6

Construction Noise Assumptions

The FTA Manual does not contain standardized criteria for assessing construction noise impacts.

Instead, it includes guidelines for suggested noise limits for residential uses exposed to construction 

noise to describe levels that may result in an adverse community reaction. These guidelines are 

summarized in Table 3.6-1.

Table 3.6-1. Federal Transit Administration Construction Noise Impact Limit Guidelines

Land Use 8-hour Leq (dBA), Day 8-hour Leq (dBA), Night

Residential 80 70

Commercial 85 85

Industrial 90 90

Source: FTA 2018

Notes:

dBA=A-weighted decibel; Leq=equivalent sound level

The noise impact limit guidelines are recommended to be used in construction noise assessment of 

transit projects under FTA and are appropriate given federal involvement in the Program. Thresholds 

for construction in local jurisdictions, if more stringent, would be identified as part of a 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis. In many cases, local jurisdictions do not regulate daytime construction 

noise, and FTA daytime standards are often used to determine potential for community annoyance 

during construction. As such, local ordinances were not evaluated for potential noise effects under 

this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR service-level evaluation. FTA guidelines for temporary construction, as 

summarized in Table 3.6-1, provide a reasonable set of indicators that can be used as impact 

thresholds for this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR service-level evaluation.

Individual types of heavy construction equipment commonly used for construction activities are 

expected to generate noise levels ranging from 74 to 89 dBA at 50 feet. Given construction 

requirements, pile drivers could be used. Pile drivers typically generate a maximum noise level of up 

to 101 dBA at 50 feet. The construction noise level at a given receptor would depend on the type of 

construction activity, the noise level generated by that activity, and the distance and shielding 

between the activity and the noise-sensitive receptor. Additional details for noise levels produced by 

commonly used construction equipment is provided in Appendix F of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR.

Based on FTA guidance, a construction noise impact may occur if construction equipment exceeds 

80 dBA Leq (8 hours) at a residential location between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. or 

70 dBA Leq (8 hours) between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. In addition, thresholds for 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-7

construction noise may be set at the local level, according to the expected hours of equipment 

operation and the noise limits specified in the noise ordinances of the applicable local jurisdiction(s).

Rail Operation Noise Assumptions

Operational noise impacts associated with the Program are based on guidance in the FTA Manual.

The FTA Manual describes the noise impact criteria that have been adopted to assess noise 

contributions and potential impacts on the existing environment from rapid transit sources. The noise 

impact criteria defined in the FTA Manual are based on an objective that calls for maintaining a noise 

environment that is considered acceptable for noise-sensitive land uses. For assessing noise from 

transit operations, this Tier 1/Program service-level evaluation relies on FTA’s three land use noise 

categories:

• Category 1: Tracts of land where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose, 

such as outdoor amphitheaters, concert pavilions, and national historic landmarks with 

significant outdoor use.

• Category 2: Residences and buildings where people normally sleep, including homes, 

hospitals, and hotels. 

• Category 3: Institutional land uses (e.g., schools, places of worship, libraries) that are

typically available during daytime and evening hours. Other uses in this category can include 

medical offices, conference rooms, recording studios, concert halls, cemeteries, monuments, 

museums, historical sites, parks, and recreational facilities.

Noise exposure values are reported as the Ldn average sound level for residential land uses 

(Category 2) or the Leq over a 1-hour time period for other land uses (Categories 1 and 3). 

Commercial and industrial uses are not included in the vast majority of cases because they are 

generally compatible with higher noise levels. Exceptions include commercial land uses with a 

feature that receives significant outdoor use, such as a playground, or uses that require quiet as an 

important part of their function, such as recording studios.

In the FTA Manual, noise impact criteria for operation of rapid transit facilities consider a project’s 

contribution to existing noise levels, using a sliding scale, according to the land uses affected. The 

criteria correspond to heightened community annoyance because of the introduction of a new transit 

facility relative to existing ambient noise conditions. Noise impacts are assessed by comparing 

existing outdoor exposures with future project-related outdoor noise levels, as shown on 

Figure 3.6-1. The criterion for each degree of impact is based on a sliding scale that is dependent on 

the existing noise exposure and the increase in noise exposure with the project. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-8

Figure 3.6-1. Federal Transit Administration Noise Impact Criteria

Source: FTA 2018

For assessing noise from transit operations, this Tier 1/Program service-level evaluation relies on 

the following noise impact classifications:

• No Impact: A project, on average, would result in an insignificant increase in the number of 

instances where people are highly annoyed by new noise. 

• Moderate Impact: The change in cumulative noise is noticeable to most people but may not 

be enough to cause strong adverse community reactions. 

• Severe Impact: A significant percentage of people would be highly annoyed by the noise, 

perhaps resulting in vigorous community reaction.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-9

A project’s noise contribution relative to the existing noise levels, as shown on Figure 3.6-1, differs 

according to the level of existing noise exposure. For example, a project contribution of 59 dBA Ldn

would be considered a severe impact at a Category 2 receptor with an existing noise exposure of up 

to 50 dBA Ldn (a difference of 9 dBA), whereas a project contribution of 69 dBA Ldn would result in a 

severe impact at a Category 2 receptor with an existing noise exposure of up to 70 dBA Ldn (a 

difference of 1 dBA). The impact curves shown on Figure 3.6-1 are based on community increases 

in cumulative noise exposure relative to existing conditions, as depicted on Figure 3.6-2. The 

justification for the sliding scale depicted in these figures recognizes that people who are already 

exposed to high levels of noise in the ambient environment are expected to tolerate small increases 

in noise in their community according to the level of their existing noise exposure.

Figure 3.6-2. Increase in Cumulative Noise Levels Allowed by Criteria

Notes: 

Noise exposure increase impact curves are adjusted by +5 dB for Category 3 land uses.

The rail noise model utilized as part of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR service-level evaluation focuses

on land uses that could be subject to Program-related transit noise impacts. Although all developed 

land uses were evaluated in this analysis, the focus of the impact evaluation was on outdoor 

locations with frequent human use, institutional land uses, and residential buildings where people 

normally sleep. The FTA Manual specifies that criteria are to be applied to compare future noise with 

existing noise rather than future noise with projections of future no build noise exposure.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-10

Existing noise levels for receptor locations were derived from projected daily freight, intercity 

passenger, and commuter rail trips along the existing corridor, described in Section 3.6.4. Given the 

high density of residential use along much of the Program Corridor, existing noise levels from rail

operation were calculated by adjusting varying distances between noise-sensitive receptors and 

noise sources. The primary sources of noise along the Program Corridor were assumed to consist of 

either wayside noise from train passbys or grade crossings where trains are required to sound horns 

as they approach within 0.25 mile of the crossing.

The noise model was based on FTA single-event source levels for train vehicles and horns, as 

defined in the FTA Manual. For this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR service-level evaluation, rail vehicle 

source levels specified in the FTA General Assessment methodology were used to determine 

projected future Program-induced noise and vibration levels as a function of distance and to identify 

impacts on noise-sensitive receivers. Noise contributions from rail vehicles were calculated using the 

noise source levels for at-grade rail transit vehicles operating on welded rail, as outlined in the FTA 

Manual. Calculated Program noise levels were then compared with moderate and severe impact 

criteria, according to existing ambient levels at a given receptor location.

A noise impact is considered to occur at a receptor location if the Program-related noise exposure 

for the receptor’s applicable land use category (Category 1, 2, or 3) equals or exceeds the FTA 

criterion for a moderate or severe impact, as shown on Figure 3.6-1, based on the existing noise 

exposure for the receptor. The analysis assumes that the configuration of the track would be the 

same under both existing and future conditions as the Build Alternative Options would use the 

existing railroad ROW. Therefore, the focus of the analysis was on the overall increase in daily train 

trips (four additional daytime [7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.] one-way intercity train trips per day). 

Traffic Noise Assumptions

Noise analysis procedures specified in the Caltrans Protocol would be used to evaluate Program

highway improvements considered to be Type I projects, as defined by FHWA. For roadways where 

changes in traffic volume are anticipated due to implementation of the Program, traffic noise levels 

under the Build Alternative Options would be analyzed at the Tier 2/Project-level based on 

anticipated changes in ridership and subsequent effects on traffic. A traffic noise impact is 

considered to occur where the increase in traffic volume on a given road segment would result in a 

3 dBA increase relative to existing conditions.

Construction Vibration Assumptions

For assessing vibration effects associated with the Program, this Tier 1/Program service-level 

evaluation relies on the FTA’s vibration impact criteria for the land use categories summarized in

Table 3.6-2. The criteria in Table 3.6-2 are based on the frequency of events and related to 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-11

ground-borne vibration that can cause human annoyance or interfere with the use of 

vibration-sensitive equipment. The criteria for acceptable ground-borne vibration are based on the 

velocity in decibels (VdB) for a single event and expressed in terms of root-mean-square velocity 

levels.

Table 3.6-2. Ground-borne Vibration Impact Criteria for General Assessment

Land Use Category

Vibration Impact 

Level: 

Frequent Eventsa

(VdB re 1 micro inch 

per second)

Vibration Impact 

Level: 

Occasional Eventsb

(VdB re 1 micro inch 

per second)

Vibration Impact 

Level: 

Infrequent Eventsc

(VdB re 1 micro inch 

per second)

Category 1: High Sensitivitye

65 VdBd65 VdBd65 VdBd

Category 2: Residentialf 72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB

Category 3: Institutionalg 75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB

Source: FTA 2018

Notes:

a The term frequent events is defined as more than 70 vibration events from the same source each day. Most rapid 

transit projects fall into this category. 

b The term occasional events is defined as between 30 and 70 vibration events from the same source each day. 

Most commuter trunk lines have operations in this range. 

c The term infrequent events is defined as fewer than 30 vibration events of the same kind each day. This category 

includes most commuter rail branch lines. 

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

microscopes. Vibration-sensitive manufacturing or research will require detailed evaluation to define the acceptable 

vibration levels. Ensuring lower vibration levels in a building often requires special design of the heating, ventilation, 

and air conditioning systems and stiffened floors. 

e This category includes 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.

f This category is applicable all residential land use and buildings where people normally sleep, such as hotels and 

hospitals.

g 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.

VdB=velocity in decibels
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-12

FTA analysis guidelines also call for an investigation of the potential for vibration-induced damage to 

fragile or extremely fragile buildings (FTA 2018). Damage to a building is possible (but not 

necessarily probable) if ground-borne vibration levels exceed the following criteria:

• A 0.20-inch-per-second PPV (approximately 100 VdB) for non-engineered timber and 

masonry buildings

• A 0.12-inch-per-second PPV (approximately 95 VdB) for buildings that are extremely 

susceptible to vibration damage

Potential ground-borne vibration that could occur during construction activities was analyzed using 

the methodology discussed in Chapter 12 of the FTA Manual. For this Tier 1/Program service-level 

evaluation, a vibratory roller (source vibration level of 0.21-inch-per-second PPV) was identified as 

the piece of non-impact equipment that could produce the highest vibration levels. Additional detail 

for vibration levels produced by commonly used construction equipment is provided in Appendix F of 

this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR.

Vibration from use of construction equipment within the Program Corridor could cause damage to 

buildings or structures adjacent to the Build Alternative Options. The potential for building damage 

was determined by using FTA methodology, including the damage potential vibration thresholds 

described under FTA vibration impact criteria. In addition, construction-related vibration impacts

could occur if vibration levels from construction equipment are perceptible at a receiving residential 

land use (i.e., 75 VdB, described as the annoyance impact criterion for occasional events at 

Category 2 land uses, summarized in Table 3.6-2). 

Operational Vibration Assumptions

The FTA procedure for a general vibration assessment was used for the analysis of ground-borne 

vibration levels from trains within the existing Program Corridor. For the operational vibration 

analysis, the number of daily events was classified under the FTA category of frequent events for the 

Western Section, which corresponds to more than 70 vibration events from freight, intercity 

passenger, and commuter trains per day, as defined in Table 3.6-2. For the Eastern Section, the 

number of daily events was classified under the FTA category of occasional events, which 

corresponds to between 30 and 70 vibration events from freight and intercity passenger trains 

per day. Land use designations for Category 2 (residences and lodging facilities) and 

Category 3 (institutional use) were used in the analysis. 

Vibration source levels were derived from the FTA Manual using the generalized surface vibration 

curve for locomotive-powered passenger or freight vehicles. Soil propagation characteristics were 

assumed to be normal. For the generalized ground-surface vibration curve, root-mean-square
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-13

velocity-level data at the receptor were used, with the distance of interest adjusted according to

vehicle speed (a maximum of 79 miles per hour was assumed throughout the Program Corridor), 

wheel condition (normal), track condition (normal), track treatments, and the number of floors above 

grade-to-receptor locations. Vibration-level adjustments for special track work were applied as 

applicable in areas adjacent to vibration-sensitive land uses.

Ground-borne vibration impact criteria for the FTA general assessment were used to assess 

vibration impacts from train operations. Impacts would be triggered at a vibration-sensitive location if 

future vibration levels were to exceed the FTA general assessment criteria under FTA vibration 

criteria identified in Table 3.6-2, and predicted future vibration levels were to exceed existing 

vibration levels by 3 VdB or more. 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area 

The Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area for noise includes land uses that could be subject to 

Program-related transit noise impacts. Although all developed land uses were evaluated in this 

analysis, the focus of the impact evaluation was on outdoor locations with frequent human use, 

institutional land uses, and residential buildings where people normally sleep. 

Data Sources

The data sources used to establish the existing conditions include information from U.S. EPA, FRA, 

and Caltrans. 

Related Resources

Noise or vibration impacts identified in this analysis affect related resources identified in Table 3.6-3. 

Table 3.6-3. Related Resources Affected by Noise and Vibration

Resource Effects

Land Use and Planning

(Section 3.2) 

Sensitive land uses (residential uses, educational facilities) may be affected by 

increased noise/vibration.

Cultural Resources

(Section 3.13)

Historic buildings or structures may be affected by increased vibration. 

Parklands and Community 

Services

(Section 3.14)

Sensitive land uses (parks and recreational areas) may be affected by increased 

noise/vibration.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-14

Resource Effects

Environmental Justice

(Chapter 4)

Sensitive receptors in EJ communities may be affected by increased 

noise/vibration.

Notes:

EJ=environmental justice

3.6.4 Affected Environment

Noise and Vibration Sensitive Land Uses

The Program Corridor crosses a large geographic area within Southern California, spanning 

approximately 144 miles from its western terminus in Los Angeles to its eastern terminus in 

Coachella. The Program Corridor occurs within an existing railroad corridor that traverses areas that 

have predominately been heavily modified for urban purposes, especially in the Western Section, 

although some areas occur in, or adjacent to, lands that are in a natural condition. Much of the 

Program Corridor from Los Angeles to Redlands is urbanized. The Eastern Section of the Program 

Corridor east of Colton is less urbanized with vacant land comprising of the largest land use 

category.

Build Alternative Option 1 (Coachella Terminus)

Almost the entire Western Section of the Program Corridor passes through highly developed urban 

and suburban areas, including many areas with adjacent sensitive land uses, such as residences

(Category 2), schools (Category 3), and other institutional uses (Category 3). The Western Section 

also extends through many commercial and industrial areas, which are generally not noise sensitive 

unless they are associated with areas of frequent outdoor use. 

The Eastern Section of the Program Corridor is highly developed in many locations but also passes

through sparsely populated rural areas and open space areas, including a large wind farm west of 

Palm Springs. There are several single- and multifamily residences (Category 2), lodging uses 

(Category 2), churches (Category 3), schools (Category 3), and other institutional uses (Category 3) 

within the Program Corridor. No Category 1 land uses were identified within the Program Corridor.

Additional details related to land use within the Program Corridor, parks and schools located within 

the Program Corridor, and potentially historic buildings (which may be affected by vibration) are 

provided in Section 3.2, Land Use and Planning; Section 3.13, Cultural Resources; and Section 

3.14, Parklands and Community Services; of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-15

Build Alternative Option 2 (Indio Terminus)

Distribution of existing land uses within the Western Section of the Program Corridor under Build 

Alternative Option 2 are the same as Build Alternative Option 1. There are fewer acres of land within 

Build Alternative Option 2 because of the shorter route alignment and reduced station options;

however, Build Alternative Option 2 still contains several single- and multifamily residences 

(Category 2), lodging uses (Category 2), churches (Category 3), schools (Category 3), and other 

institutional uses (Category 3) within the Eastern Section. 

Build Alternative Option 3 (Indio Terminus with Limited Third Track)

Potential sensitive land uses within Build Alternative Option 3 are the same as those identified for 

Build Alternative Option 2. 

Existing Noise Sources

The urban setting that constitutes most of the Western Section of the Program Corridor contains a 

mix of transportation and stationary noise sources associated with a highly developed area. Within 

the Eastern Section of the Program, there is a mix of urban, suburban, and rural areas that contain a 

similar mix of transportation and stationary noise sources. Noise from freeway and local traffic, 

transit, aircraft, heavy equipment, and industrial and commercial sources contributes to ambient 

noise along the Program Corridor. Train and traffic operations are assumed to be primary 

contributors to ambient noise within the Program Corridor. 

Build Alternative Option 1 (Coachella Terminus)

Table 3.6-4 presents existing train operations from the three host railroads along the Program 

Corridor – UP, BNSF, and SCRRA (Metrolink). Operations vary considerably by segment, but both 

the Western and Eastern Sections of the Program Corridor have high-density, multiple-track main 

lines that support freight and passenger rail operations, which contribute to existing noise and 

vibration levels within the Program Corridor. The highest density segment in the Western Section is 

between Los Angeles and Fullerton and has an average of 86 daily trains, while the lowest density 

segment is between Fullerton and Atwood and has an average of 43 daily trains. The Eastern 

Section averages 43 daily trains along the Colton-Coachella segment, consisting of freight and 

passenger trains.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-16

This page is intentionally blank. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-17

Table 3.6-4. Existing Year (2018) Daily Train Operations within Program Corridor (One-Way Trips) 

Endpoints

Eastbound

Commuter 

Trains 

(SCRRA)

Westbound

Commuter 

Trains 

(SCRRA)

Eastbound

Intercity 

Trains

(Amtrak, 

Pacific 

Surfliner)

Westbound

Intercity 

Trains

(Amtrak, 

Pacific 

Surfliner)

Eastbound

Long 

Distance 

Passenger 

Trains 

(Amtrak)

Westbound

Long 

Distance 

Passenger 

Trains 

(Amtrak)

Eastbound

Freight 

Trains 

(UP, BNSF)

Westbound

Freight 

Trains 

(UP, BNSF)

Total 

Average 

Daily 

Volume 

of 

Trains

Western Section (SCRRA – Host Railroad; Additional Operators – Amtrak, BNSF)

Los Angeles

(Union 

Station-Soto)a

14 14 12 12 1 1 0.5 0.5 55

Western Section (BNSF – Host Railroad; Additional Operators – Amtrak, SCRRA, UP)

Los Angeles (Soto)a

–Fullerton

14 14 12 12 1 1 16 16 86

Fullerton-Atwood 5 4 0 0 1 1 16 16 43

Atwood-Riverside 13 12 0 0 1 1 17 17 61

Riverside-Highgrove 10 10 0 0 1 1 27 27 76

Highgrove-Colton 4 4 0 0 1 1 27 27 64
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-18

Endpoints

Eastbound

Commuter 

Trains 

(SCRRA)

Westbound

Commuter 

Trains 

(SCRRA)

Eastbound

Intercity 

Trains

(Amtrak, 

Pacific 

Surfliner)

Westbound

Intercity 

Trains

(Amtrak, 

Pacific 

Surfliner)

Eastbound

Long 

Distance 

Passenger 

Trains 

(Amtrak)

Westbound

Long 

Distance 

Passenger 

Trains 

(Amtrak)

Eastbound

Freight 

Trains 

(UP, BNSF)

Westbound

Freight 

Trains 

(UP, BNSF)

Total 

Average 

Daily 

Volume 

of 

Trains

Eastern Section (UP – Host Railroad; Additional Operator – Amtrak)

Colton-Coachella 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 21 21 43

Notes:

Daily train counts represent revenue train movements on a weekday (Monday-Friday). Freight train counts are based on Base Year (2013) daily freight train totals 

for the line segments shown above, as published in the 2018 California State Rail Plan, Appendix A.4, Table 20. Passenger and commuter train counts are based 

on the following public timetables in effect in September 2018: Metrolink “All Lines” timetable effective May 14, 2018, the 2018 LOSSAN Southern California 

Passenger Rail System Map and Timetables effective April 1, 2018, the Amtrak Southwest Chief timetable effective July 31, 2018, and the Amtrak Sunset Limited 

timetable effective March 11, 2018. 

a Soto interlocking (Milepost 144.4) in Los Angeles

LOSSAN=Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo; SCRRA=Southern California Regional Rail Authority; UP=Union Pacific Railroad
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-19

Passenger trains, such as commuter and intercity trains, are operated on specific schedules and 

operate at higher maximum authorized speeds than freight trains using the Program Corridor. The 

number of freight trains per day and their days and times of operation can vary depending on 

customer requirements, including volumes at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Freight and 

commuter trains are required to sound horns within 0.25 mile of grade crossings. This safety 

measure warns motor vehicle operators of an approaching train and is required under FRA 

regulations. Several grade crossings along the Western and Eastern Sections are located near 

noise-sensitive uses.

Existing noise levels associated with rail operations within the Program Corridor are calculated using 

methods in the FTA Manual, based on the existing frequency of train events. Calculated ambient 

noise levels from total daily train operations were calculated for wayside and horn noise, based on 

the existing operations are summarized in Table 3.6-5.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-20

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-21

Table 3.6-5. Ambient Noise Levels within Program Corridor from Existing Train Operations 

Section Train Noise Source

Ranges of 

Distance from 

Track (feet)

Range of 

Total Average 

Daily Ldn

(dBA)

Range of 

Average Leq

(1 hour) 

(dBA)

Western Section

Los Angeles (Union Station-Sotoa) Wayside noise from train passbys 50 – 150 63.4 – 70.5 58.4 –65.5

Los Angeles (Union Station-Sotoa) Horn noise levels within 0.25 mile of grade crossings 50 – 150 68.7 – 81.0 69.8 – 77.0

Los Angeles (Sotoa-Fullerton) Wayside noise from train passbys 50 - 150 70.6 – 77.8 64.6 –71.8

Los Angeles (Sotoa-Fullerton) Horn noise levels within 0.25 mile of grade crossings 50 – 150 74.1 – 83.4 71.4 – 78.6

Fullerton-Atwood Wayside noise from train passbys 50 – 150 70.2 – 77.4 63.8 – 71.0

Fullerton‐Atwood Horn noise levels within 0.25 mile of grade crossings 50 – 150 73.1 – 81.3 67.8 – 75.0

Atwood-Riverside Wayside noise from train passbys 50 – 150 70.7 – 77.8 64.3 – 71.5

Atwood-Riverside Horn noise levels within 0.25 mile of grade crossings 50 – 150 73.8 – 82.4 69.6 – 76.8

Riverside‐Highgrove Wayside noise from train passbys 50 – 150 72.4 – 79.6 66.2 – 73.3

Riverside‐Highgrove Horn noise levels within 0.25 mile of grade crossings 50 – 150 75.4 – 83.5 70.5 – 77.6

Highgrove‐Colton Wayside noise from train passbys 50 – 150 72.4 – 79.5 66.0 – 73.2

Highgrove‐Colton Horn noise levels within 0.25 mile of grade crossings 50 – 150 75.3 – 82.9 69.6 – 76.8
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-22

Section Train Noise Source

Ranges of 

Distance from 

Track (feet)

Range of 

Total Average 

Daily Ldn

(dBA)

Range of 

Average Leq

(1 hour) 

(dBA)

Eastern Section

Colton-Coachella Wayside noise from train passbys 50 – 150 71.0 – 78.2 64.8 – 71.9

Colton-Coachella Horn noise levels within 0.25 mile of grade crossings 50 – 150 73.9 – 81.1 67.6 – 74.8

Notes:

a Soto interlocking (Milepost 144.4) in Los Angeles 

dBA=A-weighted decibel; Ldn=day-night average noise level; Leq=equivalent sound level
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-23

In addition to rail operation noise, traffic noise from cars and trucks is a primary source of ambient 

noise within the Program Corridor. Many highways and local roads serve commuter and heavy 

trucking demands in both the Western and Eastern Section of the Program Corridor, including 

I-10, SR 60, and SR 91 in the Western Section and I-10, SR 60, and SR 111 in the Eastern Section. 

Build Alternative Option 2 (Indio Terminus)

Existing noise sources and levels within Build Alternative Option 2 are the same as Build Alternative 

Option 1. 

Build Alternative Option 3 (Indio Terminus with Limited Third Track)

Existing noise sources and levels within Build Alternative Option 3 are the same as Build Alternative 

Option 1. 

Existing Vibration Sources 

At higher frequencies, ground-borne vibration can be perceived as a noise source. At sufficiently 

high amplitudes, the propagation of vibration waves through the ground can couple with building 

elements and cause them to vibrate at a frequency that is audible to the human ear. Ground-borne 

noise could rattle windows, walls, or other items that are coupled to building surfaces. Ground-borne 

vibration levels that result in ground-borne noise are often experienced as a combination of 

perceptible vibration and low-frequency noise. 

Build Alternative Option 1 (Coachella Terminus)

Existing vibration sources in the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area include train traffic in the 

Western and Eastern Sections of the Program Corridor and motor vehicle traffic on freeways and 

local arterial streets. Existing vibration levels were not quantified in this analysis since FTA 

classification of vibration events would not change under future conditions with implementation of the 

Build Alternative Options as described in Section 3.6.5.

Build Alternative Option 2 (Indio Terminus)

Existing vibration sources within Build Alternative Option 2 is the same as Build Alternative Option 1. 

Build Alternative Option 3 (Indio Terminus with Limited Third Track)

Existing vibration sources within Build Alternative Option 3 is the same as Build Alternative Option 1. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-24

3.6.5 Environmental Consequences

Overview

Effects as a result of implementing the Build Alternative Options can be broadly classified into 

construction and operational effects. Both short-term or temporary effects and long-term or 

permanent noise and vibration effects would be anticipated as a result of constructing any of the 

Build Alternative Options. 

Construction effects associated with noise and vibration are generally short term and are due to the 

use of construction equipment and vehicles, as well as operation of on-site materials processing and 

handling, such as concrete plants. The potential construction effects on noise and vibration are 

evaluated based on the intensity of the construction activities and the duration of construction of the 

Program. The longer the construction period and the more non-road construction equipment used 

(such as cranes, bulldozers, heavy duty trucks, and concrete batch plants), the greater the potential 

for construction noise and vibration effects.

Noise and vibration effects could also result from operation of any of the Build Alternative Options as 

the addition of two daily roundtrips would result in the increase of passenger rail trains traveling 

within the Program Corridor and the addition of new station facilities (e.g., new sources of mobile 

and stationary noise).

Site-specific sensitive land uses potentially affected by the Program would be further identified as 

part of the Tier 2/Project-level environmental review process. Specific types and degrees of noise 

and vibration impacts on sensitive receptors would not be known until further design and 

construction information is known.

No Build Alternative

The No Build Alternative, as described in Chapter 2, Program Alternatives, of this Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR, is used as the baseline for comparison. The No Build Alternative would not implement the 

Program associated with this service-level evaluation. Under the No Build Alternative, ambient noise 

and vibration levels from existing train operations and local traffic would continue. No 

Program-related construction or increase in service would occur; however, freight and intercity train 

trips would increase in frequency due to regional growth and demand from other projects. Under the 

No Build Alternative, ambient noise and vibration levels from existing train operations and local traffic 

would continue. While no Program-related construction or increase in service would occur, rail noise 

is anticipated to increase within the Program Corridor. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-25

The No Build Alternative assumes completion of those reasonably foreseeable transportation, 

development, and infrastructure projects that are already in progress or are programmed. These 

projects would result in an increase in freight service, as well as an increase in passenger rail 

services in the Program Corridor.

In addition, an increase in traffic is anticipated with the No Build Alternative because more cars 

would be on the roadways compared with what would occur with implementation of the Program. 

These increases in traffic could result in localized increases in ambient noise levels along local 

roadways. 

Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3

Rail and Station Noise Effects

CONSTRUCTION

Western Section. The Build Alternative Options would not require construction of additional rail or 

station infrastructure in the Western Section of the Program Corridor because the existing railroad 

and stations from LAUS to Colton would be used. When compared with the No Build Alternative, 

short-term/temporary effects associated with noise-level increases would be negligible because no 

additional construction activities are planned within the Western Section under Build Alternative 

Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Construction activities required for infrastructure improvements (such as sidings, 

additional main line track, wayside signals, drainage, grade-separation structures) and station

facilities would result in short-term increases in noise in, and around, the construction site. Noise 

during construction would be generated by construction equipment and vehicles during soil 

disturbance, earthwork, and other construction activities. The noise that could be generated would 

vary depending on the length of the construction period, specific construction activity (e.g., grading, 

paving, pile driving), types of equipment, and number of personnel. Potential worst-case equipment 

noise levels from construction of rail infrastructure improvements were evaluated by combining the 

noise levels of up to three of the loudest pieces of equipment that would most likely operate at the 

same time during a given phase of construction. This worst-case scenario assumes a paving project, 

which would include a paver, a dump truck, and an excavator, with an overall noise level of 88 dBA 

Leq (8 hours) at 50 feet. However, estimated overall noise levels (not including impact construction 

equipment like a pile driver or blasting) can range from 88 dBA Leq at 50 feet to 62 dBA Leq at 

1,000 feet ground. The noise calculations conducted for construction equipment is described in 

further detail in Appendix F of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-26

Although construction equipment may operate in many different areas as rail infrastructure 

improvements and station facilities are constructed, the highest noise levels are expected at those 

sites where the duration and intensity of construction activities would be greatest. Construction may 

occur within areas containing sensitive noise receptors and could potentially generate noise that 

would affect these sensitive noise receptors.

Potential noise levels from construction activities are predicted to exceed the FTA daytime 

construction noise criterion at nearby residences, lodging facilities, and institutional uses within 

120 feet of construction areas. The FTA nighttime noise criterion could be exceeded at residences 

and lodging facilities up to 400 feet from construction areas. The need for construction during 

nighttime hours has not been specified and is, therefore, assumed to occur as a worst-case 

scenario. Impact pile drivers produce a maximum noise level of up to 101 dBA at 50 feet. If impact 

pile driving is used, the FTA daytime criterion may be exceeded up to 275 feet, and the FTA 

nighttime criterion may be exceeded at up to 850 feet. The need for pile-driving during construction 

has not been specified and is, therefore, assumed to occur as a worst-case scenario.

Construction at a given location would be intermittent and short term for the noise-sensitive 

receptors adjacent to construction sites. Construction noise would cease once the rail infrastructure 

improvement or station facility is complete. Site-specific noise impacts on sensitive receptors and 

mitigation measures would be considered during Tier 2/Project-level analysis.

When compared with the No Build Alternative, Build Alternative Option 1 could have a substantial 

construction noise effect on sensitive receptors within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. 

When compared with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have slightly 

reduced effects due to a shorter route alignment and reduced station options. However, the 

magnitude of effects would be similar and considered substantial when compared with the No Build 

Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 3 may 

have slightly reduced effects due to a smaller footprint associated with a shorter route alignment, 

reduced station options, and reduced third track rail infrastructure. However, the magnitude of 

effects would be similar for Build Alternative Option 3 and considered substantial when compared 

with the No Build Alternative.

OPERATION

Western Section. Noise-level calculations for train operations were modeled as part of this Tier 

1/Program service-level evaluation assuming the addition of four daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) 

one-way intercity diesel-powered passenger train trips (two daily round-trips) per day within the 

Western Section of the Program Corridor. Current traffic volumes on the Western Section range from 

43 to 86 average daily trains per segment, where a substantial number of freight, passenger, and 

commuter trains operate. The addition of four daily intercity passenger trips would result in a total of 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-27

90 one-way trips per day on the Los Angeles to Fullerton segment, which carries the highest volume 

of trains.

Based on the noise modeling conducted, wayside (engine and wheel/rail noise) and warning horn 

noise (at the at-grade crossings) that could be generated by Program operation would be lower than 

existing average daily rail noise that occur at Category 2 (residential/lodging) and Category 3 

(institutional) land uses. The noise calculations conducted for Category 2 and Category 3 land uses 

within the Western Section of the Program is described in further detail in Appendix F of this Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR.

Operation of the enhanced passenger rail system within the Western Section of the Program 

Corridor under the Build Alternative Options is not be anticipated to result in changes associated 

with operational noise from passenger rail trains or the continuation of operational activities at 

existing rail stations. Operational noise effects associated with the Western Section of the Program 

Corridor under Build Alternative Option 1 would be negligible when compared with the No Build 

Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Options 2 and 3 would 

have the same magnitude of effect and be considered negligible when compared with the No Build 

Alternative.

Eastern Section. Noise-level calculations for train operations were modeled as part of this Tier 

1/Program service-level evaluation assuming the addition of four daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) 

one-way intercity diesel-powered passenger train trips (two daily round-trips) per day within the 

Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. Current rail traffic volumes on the Eastern Section average 

43 one-way trains per day. The addition of 4 daily intercity passenger trips would result in a total of 

47 one-way trips per day on the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor.

Based on the noise modeling conducted, wayside (engine and wheel/rail noise) and warning horn 

noise (at the at-grade crossings) that could be generated by Program operation would be lower than 

existing average daily rail noise that occurs at Category 2 (residential/lodging) and Category 3 

(institutional) land uses. The noise calculations conducted for Category 2 and Category 3 land uses 

within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor are described in further detail in Appendix F of this 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR.

Operation of the enhanced passenger rail system within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor 

under the Build Alternative Options is not anticipated to result in changes associated with operational 

noise from passenger rail trains. However, it is currently unknown if the operation of the enhanced 

passenger rail system would require rail infrastructure improvements that would change the existing 

noise environment (e.g., the provision of grade separations, bridges, or sidings). 

Depending on the configuration of, and amenities available at, rail station facilities, the type of 

operational noise varies. Station platform noise sources generally include a public announcement 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-28

system and chiming sounds from ticket vending machines. Announcement systems are typically 

designed to adjust volume levels automatically to a few dBs above ambient noise. Operation noise 

associated with these sources would occur for brief periods and would not likely result in an 

exceedance of FTA or local standards. However, the operation of new rail station facilities could also 

result in new sources of mobile (e.g., vehicles accessing the station) and stationary noise (e.g.,

building heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems and truck deliveries [if there are 

commercial uses included as part of the station facility]), which may result in exceedances of FTA or 

local standards on adjacent sensitive noise receptors. 

Design specifics and locations of the rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities are not 

known at this time, so the operational noise that could be generated and potential sensitive 

receptors that could be affected during operational activities cannot be quantified at the Tier 

1/Program-level evaluation. Once detailed information for the site-specific rail infrastructure 

improvement or station facility is available, a quantitative estimate of the noise levels during 

operation and impacts on sensitive receptors evaluated during the Tier 2/Project-level analysis

would be conducted. 

When compared with the No Build Alternative, operational noise effects could be moderate within 

the Program Corridor under Build Alternative Option 1. When compared with Build Alternative Option 

1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have the same magnitude of effects and be considered moderate 

when compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative Options 1 or 

2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects due to a smaller footprint associated 

with a shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and reduced third track rail infrastructure. 

However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative Option 3 and considered 

moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative.

Traffic Noise Effects

CONSTRUCTION

Western Section. The Build Alternative Options would not require construction of additional rail or 

station infrastructure in the Western Section because the existing railroad infrastructure and stations 

from LAUS to Colton would be used. When compared with the No Build Alternative, 

short-term/temporary traffic noise effects would be negligible because no additional construction 

activities are planned within the Western Section under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Construction of rail infrastructure improvements, such as sidings, additional main

line track, wayside signals, drainage, grade-separation structures, and stations would generate 

construction traffic, which could contribute to localized increases in roadway noise levels. However, 

these increases in roadway noise generated by construction traffic would occur for brief periods and 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-29

would not likely result in an exceedance of FTA standards or local standards. When compared with 

the No Build Alternative, short-term/temporary noise effects related to roadways and vehicular traffic

would be negligible within the Eastern Section under Build Alternative Option 1. When compared 

with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have the same magnitude of effects 

and be considered negligible when compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared with

Build Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects due to 

a smaller footprint associated with a shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and reduced 

third track rail infrastructure. However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative 

Option 3 and considered negligible when compared with the No Build Alternative.

OPERATION 

Western Section. During operation of the Program within the Western Section of the Program 

Corridor, access streets around each existing station would likely be affected because of additional 

automobile traffic generated by patrons accessing and departing from each station. However, these 

existing stations are located in urbanized areas that already experience moderate to high noise 

levels. The additional traffic trips that could be generated around the existing stations are not 

anticipated to result in a perceptible change in existing noise levels on local roadways. When 

compared with the No Build Alternative, traffic noise effects related to roadways and vehicular traffic 

would be negligible within the Western Section under Build Alternative Option 1. When compared 

with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Options 2 and 3 would have the same magnitude of 

effects and be considered negligible when compared with the No Build Alternative. 

Eastern Section. New train ridership resulting from implementation of any of the Build Alternative 

Options is anticipated to affect the number of automobile trips within the Eastern Section of the 

Program Corridor. For the proposed stations within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor, 

catchment areas have been identified, but no specific sites have been selected. Therefore, it is not 

known at the Tier 1/Program evaluation phase which local streets may be impacted by operation of 

station facilities. It is possible that the addition of automobile trips to the existing roadway network 

could result in increases of noise levels along these local roadways that would require mitigation. 

The location of Type I roadway projects (if any) would require an analysis of traffic noise based on 

procedures described in the Caltrans Protocol, on a case by case basis. A detailed assessment of 

operational traffic impacts would be conducted during the Tier 2/Project-level analysis once 

site-specific rail infrastructure or station facility details are known. 

When compared with the No Build Alternative, traffic noise effects related to roadways and vehicular 

traffic would be moderate within the Eastern Section under Build Alternative Option 1. When 

compared with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have the same 

magnitude of effects and be considered moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-30

When compared with Build Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly 

reduced effects due to a smaller footprint associated with a shorter route alignment, reduced station 

options, and reduced third track rail infrastructure. However, the magnitude of effects would be 

similar for Build Alternative Option 3 and considered moderate when compared with the No Build 

Alternative.

Vibration Effects

CONSTRUCTION

Western Section. The Build Alternative Options would not require construction of additional rail or 

station infrastructure in the Western Section of the Program Corridor because the existing railroad 

and stations from LAUS to Colton would be used. When compared with the No Build Alternative, 

short-term/temporary vibration effects would be negligible because no additional construction 

activities are planned within the Western Section under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Construction activities required for infrastructure improvements (such as sidings, 

additional main line track, wayside signals, drainage, grade-separation structures) and station 

facilities would result in short-term increases in vibration levels in, and around, the construction site. 

Vibration during construction would be generated by the use of construction equipment and vehicles 

during soil disturbance, earthwork, and other construction activities. The vibration that could be 

generated would vary depending on the length of the construction period, specific construction 

activity (e.g., grading, paving, pile driving), types of equipment, and number of personnel. Vibration 

levels that would be generated from various construction equipment (e.g., bulldozers, vibratory 

rollers, and pile drivers) at a range of distances were modeled as part of this Tier 1/Program 

service-level evaluation and are provided in Appendix F of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR.

There are two types of construction vibration effects to consider during construction: human 

annoyance and building damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises 

significantly for extended periods. Fragile buildings, specifically historic structures, are generally 

more susceptible to damage from ground vibration than newer, less fragile buildings. The potential 

for moderate or substantial vibration effects during construction increases where construction 

activities are located adjacent to sensitive land uses. 

Based on the vibration modeling conducted for this Tier 1/Program service-level evaluation, 

ground-borne vibration from construction activities may periodically exceed the FTA vibration 

criterion at residences and lodging facilities (Category 2 land uses) within 110 feet of construction 

areas when using typical heavy equipment. If impact equipment, such as a pile driver, is used, the 

FTA vibration criterion would be exceeded at up to 230 feet. Although vibration from construction 

equipment may be intermittently perceptible at sensitive-receptor locations, the potential for 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-31

substantial annoyance of occupants at nearby building structures is unlikely and would occur only 

during short intervals when equipment is operated near structures.

Depending on where construction would occur within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor, 

construction activities have the potential to cause vibration-induced damage to fragile or extremely 

fragile buildings. This vibration-induced damage could occur if ground-borne vibration levels exceed 

0.20 PPV for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings and 0.12 PPV for buildings that are 

extremely susceptible to vibration damage. 

Based on the vibration modeling conducted for this Tier 1/Program service-level evaluation, vibration 

levels from operation of a vibratory roller would exceed the 0.200-PPV threshold for fragile buildings 

25 feet from the building (0.210 PPV) and the 0.120-PPV threshold for extremely fragile buildings 

40 feet from the building (0.125 PPV). Vibration from operation of a pile driver would exceed the 

0.20-PPV threshold for fragile buildings 70 feet from the building (0.207 PPV) and the 0.120-PPV 

threshold for extremely fragile buildings 110 feet (0.126 PPV) from the building. 

Construction of any of the Build Alternative Options would have the potential to cause temporary 

vibration effects. However, potential vibration effects from each construction project would be short

term, occurring at a location only while construction work is in progress. In general, the degree of 

adverse construction effects is proportional to the length of new rail proposed to be constructed, 

number of grade separations, number and size of new facilities, proximity of the improvements and 

facilities to sensitive receptors, and the duration of construction at each site. Design specifics and 

locations of the rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities are not known at this time, so 

the vibration levels that could be generated and potential sensitive receptors that could be affected 

during specific construction activities cannot be quantified at the Tier 1/Program-level evaluation. 

Once detailed construction information for the site-specific rail infrastructure improvement or station 

facility is available, a detailed estimate of the vibration levels that could be generated during 

construction would be conducted and impacts on sensitive receptors and resources would be 

evaluated during the Tier 2/Project-level analysis. 

When compared with the No Build Alternative, vibration effects could be moderate within the 

Program Corridor under Build Alternative Option 1. When compared with Build Alternative Option 

1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have the same magnitude of effects and be considered moderate 

when compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative Options 1 or 

2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects due to a smaller footprint associated 

with a shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and reduced third track rail infrastructure. 

However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative Option 3 and considered 

moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-32

OPERATION

Western and Eastern Section. As summarized in Table 3.6-2, the FTA classification of vibration 

events under existing conditions within the Program Corridor is frequent. Operation of the Program 

would increase the number of average daily rail trips within the Western Section from a maximum of 

86 rail trips per day to 90 rail trips per day and an increase from 43 rail trips per day to 47 rail trips 

per day within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. These increases in average daily rail 

trips would not result in a change in classification from frequent events (e.g., more than 70 events 

per day). Train speeds are not projected to increase under future conditions within the Program 

Corridor. 

If train traffic with implementation of the Build Alternative Options would exceed the vibration criteria 

for frequent events and increase vibration levels by 3 VdB or more, this would result in a significant 

vibration impact. However, train activity with implementation of the Program would involve commuter 

trains, which produce vibration levels that are more than 10 dB below freight trains in terms of VdB 

root-mean-square values. When compared with the No Build Alternative, vibration effects would be 

negligible within the Western and Eastern Sections of the Program Corridor under Build Alternative 

Option 1. When compared with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Options 2 and 3 would 

have the same magnitude of effects and be considered negligible when compared with the No Build 

Alternative.

3.6.6 NEPA Summary of Potential Effects

Table 3.6-6 and Table 3.6-7 summarize the qualitative assessment of potential effects (negligible, 

moderate, or substantial) under NEPA for each of the Build Alternative Options. This service-level 

evaluation uses the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area to determine the relative magnitude of 

potential effects associated with noise and vibration under each of the Build Alternative Options. 

Specific mitigation measures to reduce effects would be identified during the Tier 2/Project-level 

environmental process.

Table 3.6-6. NEPA Summary of Noise Effects

Alternative Options

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Eastern Section

No Build Alternativea Construction: None 

Operation: None

Construction: None

Operation: None

Build Alternative Option 1 

(Coachella Terminus)

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Substantial 

Operation: Moderate 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-33

Alternative Options

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Eastern Section

Build Alternative Option 2 

(Indio Terminus)

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Substantial

Operation: Moderate 

Build Alternative Option 3 

(Indio Terminus with Limited Third 

Track)

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Substantial

Operation: Moderate 

Notes:

a The No Build Alternative, as identified, includes existing and potential expansion of roadway, passenger rail, and 

air travel facilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area; however, for the service-level evaluation, 

identifying levels of effect from potential expansion of those facilities is speculative and would be dependent on Tier 

2/Project-specific analysis.

EIS/EIR=environmental impact statement/environmental impact report; NEPA=National Environmental Policy Act

Table 3.6-7. NEPA Summary of Vibration Effects

Alternative Options

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Eastern Section

No Build Alternativea Construction: None 

Operation: None

Construction: None

Operation: None

Build Alternative Option 1 

(Coachella Terminus)

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate

Operation: Moderate

Build Alternative Option 2 

(Indio Terminus)

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate

Operation: Moderate

Build Alternative Option 3 

(Indio Terminus with Limited Third 

Track)

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate

Operation: Moderate

Notes:

a The No Build Alternative, as identified, includes existing and potential expansion of roadway, passenger rail, and 

air travel facilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area; however, for the service-level evaluation, 

identifying levels of effect from potential expansion of those facilities is speculative and would be dependent on Tier 

2/Project-specific analysis.

EIS/EIR=environmental impact statement/environmental impact report; NEPA=National Environmental Policy Act
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-34

3.6.7 CEQA Summary of Potential Impacts

Based on the information provided in Section 3.6.4 and 3.6.5, and considering the CEQA Guidelines 

Appendix G Checklist questions for noise and vibration, the Build Alternative Options would have 

potentially significant impacts on noise and vibration when reviewed on a Program-wide basis. 

Placing the rail infrastructure improvements and new station facilities largely within, or along, the 

existing ROW reduces the potential for significant noise and vibration impacts. However, because 

the sites have not been selected, some adjacent noise-sensitive uses may be significantly impacted. 

At the Tier/Program analysis level, it is not possible to know the location, extent, and particular 

characteristics of impacts on these areas. Proposed programmatic mitigation strategies discussed in 

Section 3.6.8 would be applied to reduce potential impacts.

Table 3.6-8 summarizes the CEQA significance conclusions for the Build Alternative Options; the 

proposed programmatic mitigation strategies that could be applied to minimize, reduce, or avoid the 

potential impacts; and the significance determination after mitigation strategies are applied. The 

identification and implementation of additional site-specific mitigation measures necessary for 

Project implementation would occur as part of the Tier 2/Project-level analysis. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-35

Table 3.6-8. CEQA Summary of Impacts for Noise and Vibration

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Would the Program result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of standards 

established in a local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies?

Construction 

Western Section – No Impact. No construction are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR 

evaluation level impacts under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3 because no physical 

improvements are proposed or required within the Western Section.

Not applicable Not applicable 

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potentially significant impacts may occur at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. Potential 

impacts related to a substantial, temporary increase in ambient noise levels are dependent on 

the location of rail infrastructure improvements, station facilities, and the type of construction 

activities required. Construction at a given location would be intermittent and short term for the 

noise-sensitive receptors adjacent to construction sites, with construction noise ceasing once 

construction of a project is completed. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would identify and 

evaluate impacts associated with site-specific construction noise on adjacent noise-sensitive 

receptors.

NOI-1

NOI-2

LU-3

Potentially Significant. NOI-1, NOI-2, 

and LU-3 would minimize, reduce, or avoid

potential impacts associated with 

construction noise through design and 

further analysis during the Tier 

2/Project-level environmental process. 

However, impacts may remain significant 

and unavoidable as further analysis may 

determine that there is a temporary 

construction noise that cannot be mitigated 

between land uses.

Operation

Western Section – Less Than Significant. The increase in train service (two additional 

round-trip daily trains within the Program Corridor) would not change existing land use and 

would not result in a change in the existing noise environment within the existing rail corridor. 

Therefore, no operational impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation

level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-36

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potentially significant impacts may occur at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. A permanent 

increase in ambient noise around new rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities 

could occur. This increase in ambient noise may result in potentially significant impacts on 

adjacent noise-sensitive land uses depending on the location of sensitive receptors. The Tier 

2/Project-level analysis would identify and evaluate impacts associated with noise levels 

increases on adjacent land uses.

NOI-2

LU-3

Potentially Significant. NOI-2 and LU-3 

would minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts associated with operational noise 

through design and further analysis during 

the Tier 2/Project-level environmental 

process. However, impacts may remain 

significant and unavoidable as further 

analysis may determine that there is a 

conflict that cannot be mitigated between 

land uses.

Would the Program result in generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No construction impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3 because no physical 

improvements are proposed or required within the Western Section.

Not applicable Not applicable 

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potentially significant impacts may occur at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. Potential 

impacts related to excessive ground-borne vibration or noise levels are dependent on the 

location of rail infrastructure improvements, station facilities, and the type of construction 

activities. Vibration from construction equipment may be intermittently perceptible at 

sensitive-receptor locations. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would identify and evaluate 

impacts associated with excessive ground-borne vibration or noise levels.

NOI-2 Less than Significant. NOI-2 would 

minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts from excessive ground-borne 

vibration or noise through design and 

further analysis during the Tier 

2/Project-level environmental process. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-37

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Operation

Western Section – Less Than Significant. The increase in train service (two additional 

round-trip daily trains within the Program Corridor) would not change existing land use and 

would not result in a change in the existing noise environment within the existing rail corridor. 

Therefore, no operational impacts under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3 are anticipated at 

the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level.

Not applicable Not applicable 

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potentially significant impacts may occur at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. Potential 

impacts related to excessive ground-borne vibration or noise levels are dependent on the 

location of rail infrastructure improvements, station facilities, and the type of operational 

activities. Operation of station facilities or new rail infrastructure improvements may result in a 

new source of vibration within a particular site. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would identify 

and evaluate impacts associated with from excessive ground-borne vibration or noise levels

during operation.

NOI-2 Less than Significant. NOI-2 would 

minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts from excessive ground-borne 

vibration or noise through design and 

further analysis during the Tier 

2/Project-level environmental process. 

Would the Program be located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been 

adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and expose people residing or working in the Program area to excessive 

noise levels?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. Although the Western Section of the Program Corridor 

contains areas that are located within an airport land use plan, no construction impacts are 

anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, 

or 3 because no physical improvements are proposed or required within the Western Section.

Not applicable Not applicable 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-38

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potentially significant impacts may occur at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. Potential

impacts associated with consistency with airport land use compatibility plans depend on the 

location of rail infrastructure improvements, station facilities, and type of construction activities, 

which are currently unknown. Portions the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor are located 

within the Banning Municipal Airport, Bermuda Dunes Executive Airport, Palm Springs 

International Airport, and Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport Influence Areas. A detailed 

analysis of the airport land use compatibility plans for these airports cannot be considered at 

the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR level as the locations of infrastructure and station facilities is 

unknown. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would identify conflicts with these airport land use 

compatibility plans.

LU-3 Less than Significant. LU-3 would 

minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts from conflicts with applicable 

airport land use consistency plans and 

policies through design and further 

analysis.

Operation

Western Section – Less Than Significant. The Western Section of the Program Corridor 

contains areas that are located within an airport land use plan. However, the increase in train 

service (two additional round-trip daily trains within the Program Corridor) would not change 

existing land use and would not result in new safety hazards or excessive noise for people 

residing or working in the area. A less than significant impact is anticipated at the Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-39

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potentially significant impacts may occur at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. Potential 

operational impacts associated with consistency with airport land use compatibility plans 

depend on the location of rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities, which are 

currently unknown. Portions the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor are located within the 

Banning Municipal Airport, Bermuda Dunes Executive Airport, Palm Springs International 

Airport, and Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport Influence Areas. A detailed analysis of the 

airport land use compatibility plans for these airports cannot be considered at the Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR level, as the locations of infrastructure and station facilities is unknown. 

The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would identify conflicts with these airport land use 

compatibility plans.

LU-3 Less than Significant. LU-3 would 

minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts from conflicts with applicable 

airport land use consistency plans and 

policies through design and further 

analysis.

Notes:

EIS/EIR=environmental impact statement/environmental impact report
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-40

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-41

3.6.8 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Strategies

Identified below are proposed programmatic mitigation strategies for further consideration in the Tier 

2/Project-level analysis. Specific mitigation measures, to the extent required, would be identified and 

discussed during Tier 2/Project-level analysis after design details are known and specific impacts 

are identified. Potential mitigation measures and design features that would avoid or minimize noise

and vibration effects would be developed in consultation with the appropriate agencies with 

jurisdiction. Proposed programmatic mitigation strategies include, but are not limited to the following:

Mitigation Strategy NOI-1: During Tier 2/Project-level analysis, a site-specific construction noise 

management plan shall be prepared for the specific rail infrastructure or station facility proposed. 

The construction noise management plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

• A detailed construction schedule correlating to areas or zones of on-site Project construction 

activity(ies) and the anticipated equipment types and quantities involved. Information will 

include expected hours of actual operation per day for each type of equipment per phase 

and indication of anticipated concurrent construction activities on site.

• Identification of construction noise reduction methods such as shutting off idling equipment, 

construction of a temporary noise barrier, maximizing the distance between construction 

equipment staging areas and adjacent sensitive land use receptors.

• Identification of construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job 

superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow surrounding 

property owners to contact the job superintendent if necessary. In the event the municipality 

with jurisdiction receives a complaint, the construction noise management plan shall include 

guidance to ensure the appropriate corrective actions are implemented and a report of the 

action is provided to the reporting party. Appropriate corrective actions may include stricter 

enforcement of construction schedule, re-location of stationary equipment further from 

adjacent noise-sensitive receptors, reduction in the number of equipment working 

simultaneously in proximity to the sensitive receptor, erection of temporary noise barriers, or 

a combination of the above.

Mitigation Strategy NOI-2: During Tier 2/Project-level analysis, a site-specific noise and vibration 

assessment shall be prepared for the specific rail infrastructure or station facility proposed. The 

site-specific noise and vibration assessment shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

• Identification of adjacent noise sensitive land uses that would be impacted by construction 

and operation activities associated with the specific rail infrastructure or station facility. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.6 Noise and Vibration

May 2021 | 3.6-42

• Identification of construction equipment required to be within 50 feet of existing structures. If 

construction equipment is required within 50 feet, the assessment will demonstrate that the 

human annoyance threshold of 78 velocity in decibels (0.032 inches per second peak 

particle velocity) and structural damage thresholds of 0.2 inches per second peak particle 

velocity for nonengineered timber and masonry buildings and 0.12 inches per second peak 

particle velocity for historic-age buildings that are extremely susceptible to vibration damage 

is achieved.

• Identification of existing noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive land uses. 

• Identification of any on-site generated noise sources, including generators, mechanical 

equipment, and trucks and predicted noise levels at property lines from all identified 

equipment.

• Recommended mitigation to be implemented (e.g., enclosures, barriers, site orientation), to 

ensure compliance with the local jurisdiction’s noise regulations or ordinances. Noise 

reduction measures shall include building noise-attenuating walls, reducing noise at the 

source by requiring quieter machinery or limiting the hours of operation, or other attenuation 

measures. Exact noise mitigation measures and their effectiveness shall be determined by 

the site-specific noise analyses.

Mitigation Strategy LU-3: During a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis, a land use consistency 

analysis shall be conducted by the identified lead agency or agencies to determine consistency of 

the Tier 2/Project-level improvement being proposed with the applicable local jurisdictional general 

plans or programs. If the land use consistency analysis identifies sensitive land uses or 

environmental resources within the Tier 2/Project-level Study Area, design or siting strategies shall

be identified by the lead agency or agencies to avoid or minimize conflicts with sensitive land uses or 

environmental resources.