Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-1

3.3 NOISE AND VIBRATION

This section identifies noise and vibration sensitive land uses along the existing 

Coast Corridor rail alignment and identifies potential noise and vibration impacts of 

both the No Build Alternative and the Build Alternative. 

3.3.1 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

Federal 

Noise Pollution and Abatement Act of 1972

This act addresses excessive noise as a potential threat to human health and 

welfare, including noise related to transportation, machinery, appliances, and other 

products in commerce. Following adoption of this act, the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) published Information on Levels of Environmental Noise 

Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety 

(EPA 1974). In this document, EPA provided recommendations for maximum noise 

exposure levels below which there would be little to no risk from any of the 

identified health or welfare effects of noise.

Federal Noise Emission Compliance Regulation Code

FRA’s Railroad Noise Emission Compliance regulations1prescribe compliance 

requirements for enforcing railroad noise emission standards adopted by the EPA.

2

 

The provisions apply to the total sound emitted by moving rail cars and locomotives 

(including the sound produced by refrigeration and air conditioning of units that are 

an integral element of such equipment), and associated equipment. 

Train Horn Rule and Quiet Zones

Under the Train Horn Rule3, locomotive engineers must begin to sound train horns 

at least 15 seconds, and no more than 20 seconds, in advance of all public grade 

crossings. The maximum volume level for the train horn is 110 decibels, and the 

minimum sound level is 96 decibels.

 

1

49 CFR 210

2

40 CFR 201

3

49 CFR Part 222
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-2

In a quiet zone, railroads have been directed to cease the routine sounding of their 

horns when approaching public highway-rail grade crossings. Localities desiring to 

establish a quiet zone are first required to mitigate the increased risk caused by the 

absence of a train-mounted horn. Measures to reduce risk include gated crossings 

with flashing signals, other signage, fencing, and related measures.

State

California Noise Control Act of 1973

The California Noise Control Act4establishes the Office of Noise Control in the 

Department of Health Services to assist local communities developing noise control 

programs and provide guidance for cities and counties developing noise elements of 

the General Plan in compliance with Government Code Section 65302.

California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

The California OSHA requires employers to provide employees with proper 

protection against the effects of noise exposure when sound exceeds certain level 

(an 8-hour time weighted average of 90 dBA).

5

 The protective measures may be 

provided either through engineering or administrative controls. If these control 

measures fail to reduce the noise within the acceptable limits, personal protective 

equipment shall be provided and used. Additionally, whenever employee noise 

exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour sound level of 85 dBA, the employer shall 

develop and administer a Hearing Conservation Program.

California Noise Insulation Standards

California Noise Insulation Standards6detail requirements for new multi-family 

structures located within the 60 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)

7

contour 

adjacent to roads, railroads, rapid transit lines, airports or industrial areas. 

Residential buildings or structures located within exterior community noise 

equivalent level contours of 60 dB of an existing or adopted freeway, expressway, 

major street, thoroughfare, railroad or rapid-transit line shall require an acoustical 

analysis showing that the proposed building has been designed to limit intruding 

noise to the allowable interior noise levels prescribed in Section 1092 (e)(2). 

 

4

Health and Safety Code Section 46010

5

A decibel (dB) is a unit that describes the amplitude of sound. A dBA describes A-weighting in noise 

measurements, which accounts for the relative frequencies at which humans perceive sound. 

6

Title 25, Section 1092

7

Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a 24-hour average sound level that includes both an 

evening and nighttime weighting, as further discussed in Subsection 3.3.2.
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-3

California Building Standards Code

The California Buildings Standards Code8contains the regulations that govern the 

construction of buildings in California. The Code requires that for any habitable 

room within a multi-family residential development, interior noise levels shall not 

exceed a CNEL of 45 dBA for noises attributable to exterior sources. Multi-family 

residential uses must comply with pertinent requirements in addition to and 

separate from CEQA. However, the State does not regulate noise levels within 

single-family detached homes. 

Local

Government Code Section 65302 requires cities and counties to include a noise 

element as part of their general plans. The Noise Element identifies the major 

sources of noise in the area and establishes ways to minimize exposure to sensitive

receptors. A city or county must quantify the current and projected noise levels 

from highways and freeways, passenger and freight railroad operations, ground 

rapid transit systems, air travels, and other sources. 

Monterey County General Plan

The main sources of noise in Monterey County include transportation facilities

(highways, roads, railroads, and aircraft), several industrial and food-packing plants, 

mining operations, and power-generation. The Safety Element includes policies that 

establish acceptable limits of noise exposure. New noise-sensitive land uses may 

only be allowed in areas where existing and projected noise levels are deemed 

acceptable. Furthermore, the County requires the inclusion of standard noise 

protection measures into all construction contracts. These measures limit 

construction hours, require noise muffling equipment, and set forth other 

regulations to reduce potential noise effects. 

City of Salinas General Plan

The Noise Element identifies existing and projected noise sources in the community 

and identifies ways to reduce potential impacts. The Noise Element contains 

policies and programs to achieve and maintain noise levels compatible with various 

types of land uses. Like most urbanized areas, Salinas experiences increasing noise 

levels associated with transportation and other sources. In addition to standard

 

8

Title 24, California Code of Regulations
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-4

policies to shield sensitive receptors from noise exposure, Salinas has developed a 

Noise Plan that defines the City’s specific programs along with an implementation 

plan. Programs include specific land use compatibility guidelines with maximum 

noise level amounts, based on the land use designation. 

City of Soledad General Plan 

The major source of noise in Soledad is car and truck traffic on US 101. However, 

other noise generators that contribute to local ambient noise levels include 

railroads, aircraft, farming activities, quarry activities, and industrial facilities. 

Policies and implementation programs outlined in the Noise Element focus on 

establishing noise projections for proper planning and reducing the noise impacts at 

sensitive receptor locations. The Soledad Downtown Specific Plan (2012) 

contemplated a variety of new land uses in central portion of the City, including 

conceptual plans for a proposed new passenger rail station (identical to the station 

included here as part of the Build Alternative). In its environmental review of the 

specific plan as a whole, the City concluded that buildout would result in temporary 

construction noises, but with mitigation, such noises would not result in any 

significant impacts.9

City of King City (King City) General Plan

According to the King City Noise Element, primary noise sources are US 101, the 

railroad, and industrial activities. King City has adopted goals and policies to 

encourage land use patterns that reduce the level of human noise exposure.10 King 

City adopted the First Street Corridor Master Plan, in which the city contemplated a 

number of land use changes, including conceptual plans for a passenger rail station 

(identical to the station included here as part of the Build Alternative).11

San Luis Obispo County General Plan

The main sources of noise in San Luis Obispo County are from roadways, railroads,

airports, and agricultural and commercial activities. The County General Plan 

includes policies and mitigation to reduce noise impacts from railroads and these 

other sources. The noise exposure ranges depicted on noise contour maps are used 

to determine the land use designation of the area and where new development may 

occur. Noise created by new transportation noise sources must be consistent and 

not exceed the levels specified within each land use designation.

 

9

City of Soledad,2012, p. 1-3 and appendix

10City of King, 1998, pp. 25-29

11 City of King, 2013, p. 29, p. 82
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-5

3.3.2 METHODS OF EVALUATION

Information for the noise and vibration analysis was obtained/developed from 

several sources. A qualified acoustical professional, with specific subject-matter 

expertise as an author of FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment 

Manual (2006), reviewed aerial mapping of proposed improvements as well as 

considerable background information (including but not limited to Appendices B, C, 

and D) and recommended appropriate screening distances to assess noise and 

vibration impacts based on relevant criteria. The acoustical professional based the 

screening distances on potential future train speed estimates and the type of 

construction work for each improvement type. Recommended noise screening 

distances along the corridor are shown in Table 3.3-1 for train operations in both 

2020 and 2040. Vibration screening distances are shown in Table 3.3-2.

Federal Transit Administration Noise and Vibration Impact 

Assessment

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidance manual, Transit Noise and 

Vibration Impact Assessment (2006) contains methods for combining transit/rail 

noise sources with traffic and bus noise sources at stations using both FTA criteria 

(which are identical to the FRA criteria) and FHWA criteria.

The purpose of the document is to provide understanding of noise and vibration 

effects of mass-transit projects located in population centers and populated land 

use types. Furthermore, the document provides noise and vibration fundamentals 

for subject-matter understanding and context. 

Noise Compatibility

Based on the recommended screening distances, the second component of the 

analysis was to inventory the surrounding land uses within the screening areas. 

Generally, land use categories characterize the density of people and intensity of 

nearby development. As a result, land use typology is a helpful gauge of the 

potential presence of sensitive receptors. A review of aerial maps was conducted to 

determine the presence of potentially sensitive land uses near the existing rail 

alignment and proposed improvement areas. Sensitive land uses for this analysis 

include residences, schools, hospitals, parks, and historic structures. Land use 

assumptions are as follows:

 Agricultural: Fields of crops, fences, farm equipment, rural dirt roads, electrical 

distribution lines, barns, and crop processing buildings are dominant features in 

an agricultural area. Agricultural areas may also include residential uses -

typically farmhouses or other farmworker housing. 
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-6

 Urban/Suburban: Urban/suburban areas include residential and commercial 

buildings, parking lots, and landscaping along streets and sidewalks. Generally, 

urban/suburban areas have many residential sensitive receptors.

 Industrial/Institutional: Industrial areas typically include utility lines, 

equipment, machinery, freight tracks, and factories. Sensitive receptors in these 

areas would be employees working in factories or operating machinery. 

 Open Space/Undeveloped: Open space and undeveloped areas include rolling 

hills, mountain ranges, valleys, and trees and shrubs are visible on the horizon. 

Residential and commercial developments are not prevalent in these areas.

The analysis then compares future noise and vibration created by each alternative 

with the existing land use to determine the level of compatibility with each existing 

land use type. 

 High compatibility indicates areas where the alternative would affect none or 

very few sensitive receptors, either because sensitive land uses are not present 

within the provided screening distances or that the nature of the proposed work 

would not produce noticeable noise and vibration effects.

 Medium compatibility indicates areas where there may be a moderate number 

of sensitive land uses nearby within the screening distances and would be 

moderately affected.

 Low compatibility indicates areas where there are many sensitive land uses 

nearby within the screening distances and would be highly affected.

Trains and train horns sounding at at-grade crossings are main contributor to 

ambient noise levels in the immediate vicinity of the existing railroad, particularly 

where the railroad is separated from US 101 by more than 0.25 miles. 

As neither alternative would remove any existing at-grade crossings, screening 

distances are sized to assume the ongoing use of horns (i.e., the distances are larger 

than if no horns were sounding). Table 3.3-1 below reflects the screening distances 

used in this analysis which reflect existing or new mainline operations as well as 

siding increases. 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-7

Table 3.3-1 Noise Screening Distances

Segment 2020 2040

Start Point

(Mile Post)

End Point

(Mile Post)

Mainline 

Operations 

(Feet)

Siding 

Increase

(Feet)

Mainline 

Operations

(Feet)

Siding 

Increase

(Feet)

MP 114.9

Salinas

MP 116.9

Salinas

100 200 200 0

MP 116.9

Firestone

MP 144.9

Soledad

500 100 600 0

MP 144.9

Harlem

MP 155.5

Harlem

500 0 700 0

MP 155.5

Detector

MP 160.3

Detector

50 100 100 100

MP 160.7

King City

MP 163.7

King City

50 200 100 100

MP 163.7

Welby

MP 185.7

San Ardo

500 100 600 0

MP 185.7

Wunpost

MP 207.6

McKay

500 100 600 0

MP 207.6

Wellsona

MP 210.7

Wellsona

600 0 700 0

MP 210.7

Detector

MP 218.4

Paso Robles

500 100 600 0

MP 218.4

Templeton

MP 226.9

Atascadero

600 0 700 0

MP 226.9

Detector

MP 229.6

Detector

50 100 50 100

MP 229.6

Santa 

Margarita

MP 233.1

Santa 

Margarita

100 200 300 0

MP 233.1

South Santa 

Margarita

MP 234 

South Santa 

Margarita

300 100 500 0

MP 234

Cuesta

MP 238.8

Cuesta

500 100 700 0
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-8

Segment 2020 2040

Start Point

(Mile Post)

End Point

(Mile Post)

Mainline 

Operations 

(Feet)

Siding 

Increase

(Feet)

Mainline 

Operations

(Feet)

Siding 

Increase

(Feet)

MP 238.8

Serrano

MP 244.8

Chorro

600 0 900 0

MP 244.8

Detector

MP 248.4

Detector

500 100 700 0

MP 248.4

N. San Luis 

Obispo

MP 248.5

N. San Luis 

Obispo

500 0 800 0

Source: Cross-Spectrum Acoustics, 2013

Vibration Compatibility

Table 3.3-2 shows proposed screening distances for vibration. These distances were 

recommended in order to assess potential human annoyance and potential damage 

to historic and potentially historic properties. The vibration distances are for both 

2020 and 2040 because there is no difference between the operating scenarios for 

vibration. 

Table 3.3-2 Vibration Screening Distances

Segment Vibration Screening Distance

Start Point End Point (Feet)

MP 114.9

Salinas

MP 116.9

Salinas

80

MP 116.9

Firestone

MP 144.9

Soledad

130

MP 144.9

Harlem

MP 155.5

Harlem

100

MP 155.5

Detector

MP 160.3

Detector

100

MP 160.7

King City

MP 163.7

King City

100

MP 163.7

Welby

MP 185.7

San Ardo

130
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-9

Segment Vibration Screening Distance

Start Point End Point (Feet)

MP 185.7

Wunpost

MP 207.6

McKay

120

MP 207.6

Wellsona

MP 210.7

Wellsona

120

MP 210.7

Detector

MP 218.4

Paso Robles

120

MP 218.4

Templeton

MP 226.9

Atascadero

120

MP 226.9

Detector

MP 229.6

Detector

120

MP 229.6

Santa Margarita

MP 233.1

Santa Margarita

80

MP 233.1

South Santa Margarita

MP 234 

South Santa Margarita

60

MP 234

Cuesta

MP 238.8

Cuesta

50

MP 238.8

Serrano

MP 244.8

Chorro

40

MP 244.8

Detector

MP 248.4

Detector

50

MP 248.4

N. San Luis Obispo

MP 248.5

N. San Luis Obispo

40

Source: Cross-Spectrum Acoustics, 2013

3.3.3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Noise Fundamentals

Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Airborne sound is a rapid fluctuation of air 

pressure above and below atmospheric pressure (frequency). Sound levels are 

usually measured and expressed in decibels (dB), with zero dB corresponding 

roughly to the threshold of hearing. A decibel is a unit that describes the amplitude 

of sound.
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-10

Most of the sounds heard in the environment do not consist of a single frequency, 

but rather a broad band of frequencies, with each frequency differing in sound level. 

The intensities of each frequency add together to generate a sound and form the 

overall ambient noise level. The method commonly used to quantify environmental 

sounds consists of evaluating all of the frequencies; human hearing is less sensitive 

at low frequencies and extreme high frequencies than in the frequency mid-range, 

which is called "A" weighting and is how humans perceive noise. A-weighting deemphasizes low-frequency and very high-frequency sound in a manner similar to 

human hearing. The use of A-weighting is required by most local agencies as well as 

other federal and state noise regulations (e.g., the California Department of 

Transportation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Labor, 

Occupational Safety & Health Administration and U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development).

In practice, the level of a sound source is measured using a sound level meter that 

includes an electrical filter corresponding to the A-weighting curve. Typical Aweighted levels measured in the environment are shown in Figure 3.3-1 for 

different types of noise. 

In determining the daily level of environmental noise, it is important to account for 

the difference in response of people to daytime and nighttime noises. During the 

nighttime, exterior background noises are generally lower than the daytime levels. 

However, most household noise also decreases at night and exterior noise becomes 

very noticeable. Further, most people sleep at night and are very sensitive to noise 

intrusion. To account for human sensitivity to nighttime noise levels, a descriptor, 

Ldn (day/night average sound level), was developed. The Ldn divides the 24-hour day 

into the daytime of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM and the nighttime of 10:00 PM to 7:00 

AM. The nighttime noise level is weighted 10 dB higher than the daytime noise 

level. The CNEL is another 24-hour average that includes both an evening and 

nighttime weighting.

Vibration Fundamentals

Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average 

motion of zero. Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) is typically used to quantify vibration 

amplitude. The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative 

peak of the vibration wave and are used to evaluate human response to vibration. 

To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be 

annoying. Figure 3.3-2 displays the reactions of people and the effects on buildings 

that continuous typical ground-borne vibration levels can produce. 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-11

Low-level vibrations frequently cause irritating secondary vibration, such as a slight 

rattling of windows, doors, or stacked dishes. The rattling sound can give rise to 

exaggerated vibration complaints, even though there is very little risk of actual 

structural damage. In high noise environments, which are more prevalent where 

groundborne vibration approaches perceptible levels, this rattling phenomenon may 

also be produced by loud airborne environmental noise causing induced vibration in 

exterior doors and windows.

Construction activities can cause vibration that can vary in intensity. The use of pile 

driving and vibratory compaction equipment typically generates the highest 

construction related ground-borne vibration levels. Because of the impulsive nature 

of such activities, the use of the peak particle velocity descriptor (PPV) has been 

routinely used to measure and assess ground-borne vibration and almost exclusively 

to assess the potential of vibration to induce structural damage and the degree of 

annoyance for humans.

Railroad Noise and Vibration

Transit noise is generated by transit vehicles in motion, as well as from locomotive 

engine exhaust. Speed also plays a direct factor in noise levels; however, according 

to the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, locomotive exhaust 

noise dominates at low speeds for diesel-powered trains. As speed increases, 

wheel-rail noise becomes dominant. Trains are also equipped with horns and bells 

for use in emergency situations as well as to signal to pedestrians and vehicles

before traveling through an intersection or at-grade crossings. Horns and bells 

combined with moving vehicle noise can generate noise levels that are considered 

annoying to nearby residents and other sensitive receptors.12

Ambient vibration is usually characterized with a continuous 10- to 30-minute 

measurement of vibration. Passenger and freight trains usually create high levels of 

vibration, but intermittently and for short periods of time. Train vibration results 

from the type of wheel, texture of the railway tracks, and train speed. Effects upon

sensitive receptors will vary based on structural components of the nearby building 

as well as geology of the underlying bedrock and soil.

13

The study area encompasses a spectrum of land uses, all of which differ in ambient 

noise level. Rural, undeveloped areas have lower noise levels in comparison to 

noise levels near roadways and urban developments. Much of the study area 

 

12 Federal Transit Administration (FTA), 2006, pp. 2-6 – 2-7

13FTA, 2006,.pp. 7-11
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-12

encompasses agricultural, open space areas as well as industrial/institutional and 

urban/suburban areas. US 101 and the existing Coast Corridor alignment are the 

largest contributors to the ambient noise levels in the study area. 

According to information from the applicable county general plans, existing noise 

levels along the US 101 corridor - near which much of the existing railroad is located 

-are between 60 and 70 CNEL.14 

3.3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

No Build Alternative

The No Build Alternative would involve maintaining existing physical conditions 

along the Coast Corridor study area. The No Build Alternative contemplates rail 

service improvements in Salinas and points north along the railroad tracks in 

Monterey County that are intended to facilitate expanded passenger rail service. 

According to the SDP, freight rail operations are likely to increase by the year 2040, 

doubling from 2 daily freight trains today to 4 daily trains in 2040. Implementation 

of these projects would occur regardless of whether or not any of the proposed 

physical improvements comprising the Build Alternative are ultimately constructed. 

The No Build Alternative may thus result in result in noise and vibration impacts to 

sensitive land uses, but primarily north of Salinas, as these areas would see both 

increased passenger and freight service. The Salinas to San Luis Obispo study area 

would see only increased freight service. If additional freight service is proposed for 

late night hours, the additional service could result in somewhat more pronounced 

noise effects along the corridor, because people are somewhat more sensitive to 

nighttime noises. The Phillips 66 Company Rail Spur Extension Project is currently 

undergoing CEQA-only review for the proposed construction and operation of a rail 

spur into an existing oil refinery in southern San Luis Obispo County, CA.

Build Alternative

Construction-Period Noise and Vibration Effects

The Build Alternative contemplates a number of physical improvements throughout 

the Coast Corridor study area. To the extent any of these improvements are 

ultimately carried forward for further design leading to construction, heavy 

 

14 County of Monterey, 2006, figure 4.8-3; County of San Luis Obispo , 1992, Noise Element and 

Appendix A
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-13

equipment and vehicles could result in temporary increases in noise and vibration 

levels. These temporary construction impacts would be more pronounced at 

nighttime when overall ambient noise levels are lower. Table 3.3-3 outlines typical 

construction equipment and their relative noise levels. 

Proposed improvements that require extensive grading or excavation, such as curve 

realignments, siding extensions, and new stations would have a more noticeable 

noise and vibration effect owing to anticipated construction time. Additionally, 

some of the proposed improvements would likely require site clearing and 

earthmoving activities, such as excavation, grading, and vibratory rolling, toward the 

construction of new rail tracks. 

Powered switches and other track/signal upgrades would generally not require such 

extensive use of heavy construction equipment and thus would not have less 

potential to result in significant noise or vibration effects upon sensitive receptors. 

However, the anticipated equipment required for construction is unclear at this 

time, since the Build Alternative improvements are conceptual at the programmatic 

level.

Table 3.3-3 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels

Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) dBA 

at 50 feet

Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) 

dBA at 300 feet

Backhoe 78 63

Compactor (ground) 83 68

Compressor (air) 78 63

Concrete Mixer Truck 79 64

Concrete Pump Truck 81 66

Crane 81 66

Dozer 82 67

Dump Truck 76 61

Excavator 81 66

Front End Loader 79 64

Generator 81 66

Paver 77 62

Pneumatic Tools 85 70

Pumps 81 66

Roller 80 65

Scraper 85 70

Source: FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide, 2006 
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-14

Operational Noise and Vibration Effects

The Build Alternative proposes an increase of two passenger trains per day through 

the corridor by 2020 and two additional passenger trains per day by the year 2040. 

The improvements included in the Build Alternative would also provide improved 

efficiency in the movement of existing freight rail through the corridor. As a result, 

the Build Alternative has the potential to increase operational noise and vibration 

within the Coast Corridor study area. 

For diesel-powered commuter rail trains at low speeds, locomotive exhaust is 

typically the greatest source of noise. This would occur primarily as trains approach 

and pass through urban areas. As speed increases, wheel-rail noise becomes the 

dominant noise source. Additionally, the railway itself can radiate noise as it 

vibrates in response to the dynamic loading of the moving train. Trains are also 

equipped with horns and bells for use in emergency situations and as a general 

audible warning to track workers and trespassers within the right-of-way as well as 

to pedestrians and motor vehicles at highway grade crossing.15

Noise Compatibility

Table 3.3-4 summarizes the potential for the proposed physical improvements and 

service expansion comprising the Build Alternative to result in operational period 

noise impacts. The table identifies each proposed improvement’s noise 

compatibility within the screening distances identified in Table 3.3-1. Table 3.3-4

also notes existing and proposed maximum speeds for each rail segment. 

Table 3.3-4 Noise Compatibility 

Build Alternative 

Components/Current and 

Future Maximum Train 

Speeds in the Area

Predominant Land Use 

Types within Screening 

Distance

Noise Compatibility

Salinas Powered Switch

Current Max Speed: 40-60 mph

Future Max Speed: No Change

N/A N/A

 

15 FTA, 2006
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-15

Build Alternative 

Components/Current and 

Future Maximum Train 

Speeds in the Area

Predominant Land Use 

Types within Screening 

Distance

Noise Compatibility

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #1

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

Industrial/Institutional; 

Urban/Suburban; Some 

Agricultural

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

Spence Siding Extension

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

Agricultural N/A

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #2 

Current Max Speed Zones 60-70 

mph; 35-40

Future Max Speed Zones: 90 

mph; 60 mph

Mostly Agricultural; 

Urban/Suburban near Chualar, 

Gonzales, and Soledad 

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

Gonzales Powered Switch

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

N/A N/A

Soledad Powered Switch

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

N/A N/A

Soledad New Passenger Station

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

Industrial/Institutional; 

Urban/Suburban; Vosti Park

Medium

Harlem/Metz Curve Realignments

Current Max Speed: 35-40 mph

Future Max Speed: 60 mph

Agricultural; Open 

Space/Undeveloped; Some 

Residential

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

Chalone Creek New Siding 

Current Max Speed: 35-40 mph

Future Max Speed: 60 mph

Agricultural; Open 

Space/Undeveloped; Some 

Residential

N/A
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-16

Build Alternative 

Components/Current and 

Future Maximum Train 

Speeds in the Area

Predominant Land Use 

Types within Screening 

Distance

Noise Compatibility

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #3

Current Max Speed Zones: 35-40

mph; 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed Zones: 60 

mph; 60-70 mph (no change)

Agricultural; Open 

Space/Undeveloped; Some 

Industrial

High

Coburn Curve Realignments

Current Max Speed: 35-40 mph

Future Max Speed: 60 mph

Agricultural; Open 

Space/Undeveloped; Some 

Industrial

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

King City Siding Extension

Current Max Speed: 60 mph

Future Max Speed: No Change

Some Agricultural; 

Urban/Suburban

N/A

King City New Passenger Station

Current Max Speed: 60 mph

Future Max Speed: No Change

Industrial/Institutional; 

Urban/Suburban

Medium

King City Powered Switch

Current Max Speed: 60 mph

Future Max Speed: No Change

N/A N/A

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #4

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

Agricultural; Some 

Industrial/Institutional; Some 

Residential

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

MP 165 Curve Realignment

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

Agricultural; Some 

Industrial/Institutional; Some 

Residential

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

San Lucas New Siding 

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

Agricultural; Urban/Suburban N/A
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-17

Build Alternative 

Components/Current and 

Future Maximum Train 

Speeds in the Area

Predominant Land Use 

Types within Screening 

Distance

Noise Compatibility

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #5

Current Max Speed Zones: 60-70

mph; 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed Zones: 90 

mph; 70 mph

Agricultural; Open 

Space/Undeveloped; some 

Industrial; some Residential

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

MP 172 Track Realignment

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

Agricultural; Open 

Space/Undeveloped; some 

Industrial; some Residential

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

San Ardo Powered Switch

Current Max Speed: 60-70 mph

Future Max Speed: 90 mph

N/A N/A

Getty/Bradley Curve 

Realignments

Current Max Speed Zones: 60-70

mph; 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed Zones: 90 

mph; 70 mph

Open Space/Undeveloped High

Bradley Siding Extension

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

Open Space/Undeveloped; some 

Residential

N/A

Bradley Powered Switch

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

N/A N/A

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #6

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

Open Space/Undeveloped; some 

Industrial and Residential near 

Camp Roberts

High in Open Space/Undeveloped 

areas; Low in Residential areas
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-18

Build Alternative 

Components/Current and 

Future Maximum Train 

Speeds in the Area

Predominant Land Use 

Types within Screening 

Distance

Noise Compatibility

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #7

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

Urban/Suburban; some 

Agricultural

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

McKay/ Wellsona Curve 

Realignments

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

Open Space/Undeveloped; some 

Residential

High in Open Space/Undeveloped 

areas; Low in Residential areas

McKay East Powered Switches

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

N/A N/A

Wellsona New Siding

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

Open Space/Undeveloped; some 

Residential

High in Open Space/Undeveloped 

areas; Medium in Residential 

areas

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #8

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

Urban/Suburban; some Industrial; 

some Open Space/Undeveloped 

High in Open Space/Undeveloped 

areas; Low in Residential areas

Wellsona/ Paso Robles Curve 

Realignments

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

Agricultural; Industrial; some 

Residential

High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas

Templeton Siding

Current Max Speed: 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

Urban/Suburban N/A

Templeton/ Henry Curve 

Realignments

Current Max Speed: 40-50 mph

Future Max Speed: 70 mph

Urban/Suburban; Agricultural High in Agricultural areas; Low in 

Residential areas
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-19

Build Alternative 

Components/Current and 

Future Maximum Train 

Speeds in the Area

Predominant Land Use 

Types within Screening 

Distance

Noise Compatibility

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #9

Current Max Speed Zones: 40-55 

mph; 35 mph

Future Max Speed Zones: 70 mph 

(between mp 218.4-223.0)

Urban/Suburban; Santa Margarita 

Community Park; Pine Mountain 

Cemetery

High in Open Space/Undeveloped 

areas; Low in Residential areas

Henry/Santa Margarita Curve 

Realignment

Current Max Speed Zones: 40-55 

mph; 35 mph

Future Max Speed: No Change

Urban/Suburban; Open Space/ 

Undeveloped; some Industrial

Low

Santa Margarita Powered Switch

Current Max Speed 40-55 mph

Future Max Speed: No Change

N/A N/A

Cuesta Second Main Track

Current Max Speed: 20-30 mph

Future Max Speed: No Change

Utilities/Open Space High

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #10

Current Max Speed: 20-30 mph

Future Max Speed: No Change

Urban/Suburban; Parks Medium

Source: Circlepoint, 2013; Caltrans Division of Rail, 2013

Generally speaking, physical improvements proposed for urban/suburban areas 

(where residential uses are common) generally have lower noise compatibility 

because there are more sensitive land uses located within the noise screening 

distances. Less populated areas like open space/undeveloped lands have few 

sensitive land uses, but are considered more sensitive because increased noise 

levels could degrade the quality of recreational activities. 

Conversely, areas that have agricultural land use types are less likely to be affected 

by proposed improvements because there are few people present in these areas to 

experience increased noise. 
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-20

The noise compatibility level also depends on the type of improvement because 

changes to the existing rail alignment may potentially expose new sensitive land 

uses to operational impacts of the train. 

The existing railway alignment passes through all areas potentially affected by curve 

realignments, thus the noise generated by passing trains is currently experienced at 

these locations. Additionally, curve realignments would serve to straighten the 

alignment to some degree, as such, noise associated with reduced train speeds 

would likely decrease.

Curve realignments are mostly proposed for agricultural and open space/ 

undeveloped areas, but some (particularly Wellsona/Paso Robles, 

Templeton/Henry, and Henry/Santa Margarita) may affect residential properties 

within the operative noise screening distances. The McKay/Wellsona curve 

realignment is proposed for lands adjacent to and within the Big Sandy Wildlife 

Area. These curve realignments would alter noise levels in these areas by relocating 

portions of the railway. However, given the land uses in this area, noise 

compatibility would be considered low. 

The proposed King City and Soledad passenger rail stations are located in relatively

densely populated areas through which existing passenger and freight rail trains 

pass without stopping. There are many noise sensitive uses located near the 

footprint of the proposed stations. Train service associated with the Build 

Alternative would result in trains that would potentially stop at the proposed new 

passenger stations. Trains coming to a stop at a passenger station would travel at 

lower speeds and thus result in a different noise profile than trains passing through 

without stopping. Locomotive exhaust noise may be more apparent at such low 

speeds, but wheel noise would be lower. Additionally, a train traveling through a 

populated area would likely sound the train’s horn for standard safety purposes. As 

a result, existing noise levels would not drastically change. Therefore, noise 

compatibility in these locations would be moderate.

Proposed new sidings or siding extensions are generally less likely to affect sensitive 

land uses because the new tracks would be placed within existing right-of-way of 

the rail alignment. However, some proposed siding additions or new sidings 

(Templeton, Wellsona, Bradley, and King City) could expose populated areas to 

potential new noise from train idling. Noise compatibility in these populated 

locations would be moderate; trains currently travel along these areas, but the 

incremental addition of idling noise could affect sensitive receptors. 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-21

Upgrades to tracks along the existing alignment would allow for trains to safely 

travel at faster speeds, which may have additional noise impacts. Moreover, 

increases in noise due to increased rail service would be gradual over time and 

would be intermittent, rather than sudden and sustained. 

Along several segments of the existing railroad (#1, #2, #4, and #6), proposed train 

speeds would increase from a maximum of 60 miles per hour (mph) to as high as 90 

mph. Because there are some sensitive land uses in proximity to this segment, the 

incremental noise increase leads to a conclusion of medium compatibility. 

Along existing alignment segment #3, train speeds would not substantially increase

and few sensitive land uses are present. Accordingly, noise compatibility would be 

high. 

Along existing alignment segments #7, #8, and #9, trains could increase from a 

maximum speed of 55 mph to 70 mph. Resultant noise compatibility would be high

along portions that are in agricultural use; low in areas with residential uses. Speeds 

along existing alignment #10 would not substantially increase, but since this is a 

residential area, the resultant noise compatibility would be medium.

Vibration Compatibility

Generally, vibration effects are more localized near the proposed improvement, 

thus the screening distance is shorter than noise compatibility. Similarly to the 

noise compatibility assessment, proposed improvements within urban/suburban 

areas have low vibration compatibility because there are more sensitive land uses

located within the vibration screening distances. Vibration impacts are not as 

prevalent for agricultural and open space/undeveloped areas, owing to sparse

population and limited developed infrastructure in these areas. 

Table 3.3-5 Vibration Compatibility 

Build Alternative 

Components

Land Use/Probability of 

Sensitive Receptors

Vibration Compatibility

Salinas Powered Switch N/A N/A

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #1 

Some potentially Residential buildings; 

Mostly Agricultural land uses

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Spence Siding Extension Agricultural High

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #2 

Some potentially Residential buildings; 

Mostly Agricultural land uses

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Gonzales Powered Switch N/A N/A
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-22

Build Alternative 

Components

Land Use/Probability of 

Sensitive Receptors

Vibration Compatibility

Soledad Powered Switch N/A N/A

Soledad New Passenger Station Some potentially Residential buildings; 

8 potentially Historic buildings and 1 

potentially Historic park resource

Medium

Harlem/Metz Curve Realignments Mostly Agricultural and Open 

Space/Undeveloped; Some potentially 

Residential properties; 4 potentially 

Historic properties

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Chalone Creek New Siding Mostly agricultural and open 

space/undeveloped; Some potentially 

residential properties; 1 potentially 

historic property

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #3

Mostly Agricultural and Open 

Space/Undeveloped; Some potentially 

Residential properties; 2 potentially 

Historic properties

High in agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Coburn Curve Realignments Mostly Agricultural; Some potentially 

Residential properties

High in agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

King City Siding Extension Mostly potentially Residential 

properties; some Agricultural; 6 

potentially Historic properties

High in agricultural portions; 

Medium in Residential 

portions

King City New Passenger Station Mostly potentially Residential 

properties; 3 potentially Historic 

properties

Medium

King City Powered Switch N/A N/A

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #4

Mostly agricultural and open 

space/undeveloped; Some potentially 

residential properties; 3 potentially 

historic properties

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

MP 165 Curve Realignment Mostly agricultural; Some potentially 

residential properties; 2 potentially 

historic properties

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

San Lucas New Siding Mostly agricultural; Some potentially 

residential properties

High in Agricultural portions; 

Medium in Residential 

portions

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #5

Agricultural; open space/undeveloped; 

some industrial; some residential

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-23

Build Alternative 

Components

Land Use/Probability of 

Sensitive Receptors

Vibration Compatibility

MP 172 Track Realignment Mostly Agricultural; some potentially 

Residential properties; 1 potentially 

Historic property

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

San Ardo Powered Switch N/A N/A

Getty/Bradley Curve Realignments Open Space/Undeveloped; 1 

potentially Historic property

Medium

Bradley Siding Extension Open Space/Undeveloped High

Bradley Powered Switch N/A N/A

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #6

Open Space/Undeveloped; some 

Industrial and Residential near Camp 

Roberts; 3 potentially Historic 

properties

High in Open 

Space/Undeveloped portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #7

Many potentially Residential 

properties; some Open 

Space/Undeveloped; 3 potentially 

Historic properties

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

McKay/Wellsona Curve 

Realignments

Mostly Open Space/Undeveloped; 

some potentially Residential 

properties; 1 potentially Historic 

property

High in Open Space/

Undeveloped portions; Low 

in Residential portions

McKay East Powered Switches N/A N/A

Wellsona New Siding Mostly open space/undeveloped; some 

potentially residential properties; 2 

potentially historic properties

High in Open 

Space/Undeveloped portions; 

Medium in Residential 

portions

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #8

Many potentially residential 

properties; some open space/

undeveloped; 3 potentially historic

properties

High in Open 

Space/Undeveloped portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Wellsona/Paso Robles Curve 

Realignments

Mostly Open Space/Undeveloped; 

some potentially Residential 

properties; 3 potentially Historic 

properties

High in Agricultural portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Templeton Siding Many potentially Residential properties Low

Templeton/Henry Curve 

Realignments

Many potentially Residential properties Low
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-24

Build Alternative 

Components

Land Use/Probability of 

Sensitive Receptors

Vibration Compatibility

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #9

Many potentially Residential 

properties; some Open 

Space/Undeveloped; 3 potentially 

Historic properties

High in Open 

Space/Undeveloped portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Henry/Santa Margarita Curve 

Realignment

Many potentially Residential 

properties; 2 potentially Historic 

properties

Low

Santa Margarita Powered Switch N/A N/A

Cuesta Second Main Track Open Space; 1 potentially Historic 

property

High

Upgrades to Existing Alignment 

Section #10

Many potentially Residential 

properties; some Open 

Space/Undeveloped; 1 potentially 

Historic property

High in Open 

Space/Undeveloped portions; 

Low in Residential portions

Note: Sensitive receptors reported here may differ in some instances to those reported in Table 3.3-4. This is due 

to different screening distances used in the noise and vibration analyses. 

Source: Circlepoint, 2013; AECOM, 2013; ICF, 2013

Similar to noise compatibility, vibration compatibility is based on the potential to 

result in new effects upon sensitive land uses. Proposed curve realignments could 

potentially move train tracks closer to potential residential buildings as well as allow 

trains to travel at faster speeds, thus increasing vibration effects on sensitive land 

uses. The Harlem/Metz and Mile Post 165 curve realignments occur in a primarily 

agricultural area; however, several potentially historic structures are located within 

the vibration screening distances. The proposed Wellsona/Paso Robles, 

Templeton/Henry, and Henry/Santa Margarita curve realignments are located in 

relatively populated areas that also include potentially historic buildings. Vibration 

compatibility of these proposed improvements is therefore low. 

There are several potentially historic structures surrounding the footprint of the 

proposed Soledad and King City stations. Freight and passenger train services 

already travel through these downtown districts. The Build Alternative would 

potentially result in increased passenger service but also new stations in these 

communities. If new stations are developed, the result would be that the new Coast 

Daylight passenger service would pass slowly through these communities, resulting 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-25

in a lower level of vibration than if trains passed through at high speed.16 Freight 

and Coast Starlight trains would continue to pass through Soledad and King City 

without stopping at the new stations.

Similarly to proposed curve realignments, new sidings or siding extensions in mostly 

developed areas, such as the proposed King City, San Lucas, and Wellsona sidings, 

could expose populated areas to potential new noise from train idling. Although 

trains currently travel along these areas, new sidings could result in incremental 

addition of idling vibration impacts. Vibration compatibility in these areas is 

moderate.

As with the noise compatibility assessment, track improvements to existing 

alignment areas would allow trains to safely travel at higher speeds and would 

accommodate a higher capacity of trains on the corridor. Both of these factors 

would contribute to increased vibration to sensitive receptors. Several notable

historic structures and bridges occur within existing alignment areas. The Mission 

San Miguel and the Rios Caledonia Adobes area both within the vibration screening 

distance of segment #7 of the existing alignment. In this area, which includes 

nearby residential lands, track improvements would allow for maximum speeds to 

increase from 55 mph to 70 mph. The Bradley Bridge is eligible for the National 

Record of Historic Places (NRHP) (and discussed in Section 3.10, Cultural Resources) 

is located within existing alignment #6 where speeds would increase from a 

maximum of 60 mph to 90 mph. Therefore, vibration compatibility both these areas

(segments #6 and #7) would be low.

3.3.5 AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION 

STRATEGIES

Individual improvements comprising the Build Alternative should be designed to 

minimize noise and vibration impacts along the Corridor. Strategies have been 

identified at this preliminary stage to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate any 

potentially significant impacts. Mitigation strategies for construction noise and 

vibration impacts can generally include noise control measures that can be applied 

as needed. Such strategies include the following:

A-NO-1. Avoid nighttime construction in residential neighborhoods.

MIN-NO-2. Use specially quieted equipment with enclosed engines and/or highperformance mufflers.

 

16 FTA, 2006, p. 7-10
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-26

MIN-NO-3. Locate stationary construction equipment as far as possible from noisesensitive sites.

MIN-NO-4. Construct noise barriers, such as temporary walls or piles of excavated 

material, between noisy activities and noise-sensitive receivers.

MIN-NO-5. Re-route construction-related truck traffic along roadways that will 

cause the least disturbance to residents.

MIN-NO-6. Where construction of improvements requires deep foundations, avoid 

impact pile driving near noise-sensitive areas, where possible. Drilled piles or the 

use of a sonic or vibratory pile driver are quieter alternatives where the geological 

conditions permit their use. If impact pile drivers must be used, their use will be 

limited to the periods between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM on weekdays.

Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation strategies for operational noise and 

vibration impacts can generally be applied to the trains and the path between the 

train and the receiver or property. Noise barriers are a common approach to 

reducing noise impacts from surface transportation sources. Noise walls 

constructed near the railroad right-of-way can shield sensitive receptors from train 

noise as well. Building sound insulation can also be an effective mitigation strategy. 

Sound insulation to improve the outdoor-to-indoor noise reduction has been widely 

applied around airports and has seen limited application for rail projects. Although 

this approach has no effect on noise in exterior areas, it may be the best choice for 

sites where noise barriers are not feasible or desirable, and for buildings where 

indoor sensitivity is of most concern. Substantial improvements in building sound 

insulation (on the order of 5 to 10 dBA) can often be achieved by adding an extra 

layer of glazing to the windows, by sealing any holes in exterior surfaces that act as 

sound leaks, and by providing forced ventilation and air-conditioning so that 

windows do not need to be opened.

Localities wishing to reduce train horn noise may take the steps needed to establish 

a new quiet zone. This would cease the use of train horns at public highway-rail 

grade crossings. The locality would be required to mitigate the increased risk 

associated with the absence of a horn before receiving approval of the quiet zone.

Vibration impacts can generally be reduced by vehicle wheel and track maintenance 

efforts. Additional track work and materials such as rail fasteners with soft and 

resilient elements can provide greater vibration isolation than standard fasteners. 

Ballast mats made of rubber-like material can be placed on asphalt or concrete base 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.3 Noise and Vibration

3.3-27

with the normal ballast, ties, and rail on top. The reduction in ground-borne 

vibration provided by a ballast mat is strongly dependent on the frequency content 

of the vibration and design and support of the mat. 

The appropriateness of these strategies would be determined upon subsequent 

analysis of proposed improvements and ground conditions.

3.3.6 SUBSEQUENT ANALYSIS

Prior to implementing specific elements of the Build Alternative, additional noise 

and vibration analysis could be conducted to determine existing noise and vibration 

levels within the areas to be specifically affected and to calculate any increases in 

noise levels and vibration that may result from implementing the specific 

improvement. If noise and vibration levels would increase substantially as a result 

of the proposed improvement and would affect sensitive land uses, the evaluation 

should identify specific mitigation measures to be applied based on those discussed 

above in Subsection 3.3.5.
3.3-1

Figure Examples of Typical Outdoor Noise Exposure

Source: FTA, 2006

Coast Corridor Improvements EIR/EIS
3.3-2

Figure Typical Ground-Borne Vibration Levels and Criteria

Source: FTA, 2006

Coast Corridor Improvements EIR/EIS
Coast Corridor

3.3 Noise and Vibration Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.3-30

Page intentionally left blank