Resolution 09061CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 9061
AMENDING THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN OF
THE CITY OF ALAMEDA AND CERTIFYING TFIE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR SAID AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, by its >Res olution No. 8588, adopted September 21,
1976, the City adopted as its Noise Element of the General Plan
of the City of Alameda that certain document entitled "Proposed
Noise Element -City of Alameda -May, 1976," as amended, in accordance
with Sections 65302 and following; Government Code of California,
pages 86, 88 and 92 of which are attached hereto as Exhibit "A",
and;
WHEREAS, there has been prepared an amendment to said Noise
Element, the same having been considered by the Planning Board,
which duly noticed and held public hearings thereon, and which, on
December 4, 1978, approved said amendment and recommended adoption
thereof by the City; and
WHEREAS, on February 20, 1979, the Council received said
Board's recommendations in a report from the City Attorney, dated
February 13, 1979, held a public hearing on the questions of
whether said amendment to the Noise Element conforms to general
and whether its adoption would be in the public interest, heard
testimony and took other evidence thereon, following which said
Council considered the matter and was fully advised in the premises;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board and the City Council have
reviewed and considered a City of Alameda Noise Element Amendment
Final Environment Impact Report for said Amendment;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ALAMEDA that said Council .certifies that it has reviewed and
considered the information contained in the City of Alameda Noise
Element Amendment Final EIR, October 6, 1978, and further certifies
that said Report has been completed in compliance with California
Environmental Quality Act and state guidelines;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City' s Noise Element be and
hereby is amended as set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto:
CJFARLY LJ ACCFP A E . PJrti� construct on nr cietif lope €€ant s houl
be per°€ �i ttod
RCRAf=i }t }0 SE: z }sere Lhe CiNEL �is clener eel p ?rincipally }hy aircraft noise
I ie std € €cJ {�rcls "�`oi' norzially uriaccci ?cable resider €tial uses shall` apply in ai se h9Qa N'S la 5 For purposes o-z~ irdi riai €ce
y ated principally lay a.i i'c:00ft no
65 ci}3 oi,; t }�e appl ca Li on of 'sound ott.c
exceed
60 dB 'i
Gases t ?C o?i C?, '::o ar `t0ri i the 1`F i; i "il1u 1 ly ;�\cco { ?;u a.%'. �(_' =C }�i.:. f.'...0 oY'y• ;rar` :` cu
atteriti can s }real d k e gi zi J u 4 } €o s L i ng any} t >i } c ?i° }L s it �z ofi 5� } 1 d i zigs
Glider t:o prC €rtid x?os re o aid C €i�1Ci ",7um h101 xl1 from noisy'.
1 €Teri an acousi tcal nalys i s i s r€ qui red the Fol `i r. i ng table off` stand,
shall be ppl isc} to cieteraiin the x en of noise'irsula}t.icar for° noise
RLE >i1:i i11 l }r }ER
}use Inlenioi E� r ile;rit i ri z J r v
Ali esi rl +n ti:,.l , i iii. i udi z €g peanorzt
and trarisai a As coil red by 6i ty 0r, ir€ance
Sc.} o it cI assroonls 50 dB
Sc} o, l auditor uiis 'Gr?cliti hate Lheat,r°e S5 dB
Libr�ari es r .c.i eatir z bu E l �i n s 5 5 rJ1
G}iur :h sancLuar i es; aa:ovi .L }ie ti ^os 40 dCt
Cclz °rcert: }galls dB
Industr i < 55C 2
Gorriraerci al 50 dd
i r. Maur°�i re
a r..ea s,
nter`ior c
or} �ontiriuousl� on Isis not related -o no is'
•Ri-..',TIO^ISHJP WITH C`;:;. ,,..' :'SIVE
It was sh0wn in a previ0us secti0n on 'Future u1ture Noise that the population of the
, in 1995 will be Subject t0 less n0ise than the current pOpulati0n. This
should n0t suggest that the City Government become passive and complacent on
the subject. There still remains the problem of dealing with n0ise in the short-
term future. This requires directing i ;r'uiLh toward the more quiet areas While
waiting) for n0ise reducing events t0 r(duee noise in the noisier areas.
Although the Comprehensive Plan is, by its nature, !ong--r"ange it should t�
into account the desirability of sts q,i ng :;rewth in a reas0nab }:e manner. 1 C°
fore, the Lad Use E eeent of the Plan should te! :e the conservative ap oach
Of assuming tj <, current ii liiS of noise will remain until i ewe lev s
demonstrated. a � }_ - m - "1 -� c' in Element Farm island a case point. In Noise it
is .ssiim Ui that about half of the ao pi la ti, r Growth i n Alameda to 1995 will occur
on [lay Farm island. it al so is assume( that the Cd[I. con Lours f r0o a i and Al rpca -s
will he reduced over the years i In the i:a�nt;'vT.1 e however, a reasonable approach
to development of the Island, frcm the point c V1(`r: OF noise co:TWitlbi ii l;`,
{ , .7 to 0 - t I ii en the with COO _L lower
' 0
�,�'C1111C be t.r E'iit..� .. (it'Gfx�Cl.,._.�lu of i.f portion 0 1:F >E. Island `,VIG. a ,,�Y._ ii.,,_1"
.st with he areas si to a higher than 65 dB late i t should
II I line / //�� \ ' it
o he noted the , Life 65 dB COLL. i i ne i s a f l ex 1 b e c ne rnd may 1� be r• di fi ed es
C'
the noise e ,vi ri,ri; ;eui L ch;an nes . Accore
"u types of development, su i.
as residential, we,I C 10. to precluded u d ed C,i an area which currently is
SC<( }ui•4'ct
to noise levels higher than be L,'SLL 11 ill Lne noise levels are reduced.
Portions of the island ith a COIL hl jeer than C: dB could either be developer
t'r1 %h non noise sensitive land uses or should await dcveiopcinnt until lie noise
environment irproves.4 )11611er lepic should apply to other portions of the City
as well, except that where the ChEL 1s dominated by surface noise, 70 dB would
be the il;;per l i m i t of acc: eptab i ! l T,y rather than 65 dB.
The Circulatied Flnoor,-t should take into account t're relationship between noise
and traffic voluaes. For example, a street with ar average daily traffic
volume of 36,O00 vehlc 1 es will project a UN EL c0ntc ur 01 bo 6 approximately 1 60
ret from the ceI:tc; of 1. }i' outer ,,n' 20,000 , icles will it pro ct 65 dB nearly
feet. This -
rti or o
-t i' Z '-� i - 1 _,- for s: case _�. rC ir?�,l'i 1,1 t�zli.c. T "-irt,l "... -01 of-way �(t} ha,
.se Lit' iurC_ • 1n) :n;corp. CLc 1 in traffic
92
V1
-4.f
1"s H
0 0
F. ' f1 ��
ri7 GCi h-- r�
cC"tFi f' . 6 r s
(a tit wN tv
D
, ca
s (D c c
- ;^ ' o
a ru
a
c i 2 -ij. : C6 1
SD
r7 -?
CLEARLY 1.3 .0
PTABL]
be permi
New co structian or development should
.ted
AGRCRAFT NOISE' Where the CNEL is generated principally by
aircraft no the standards for normally unacceptable -residen-
tial uses shall apply in areas which exceed 65 dB, unless, with'
respect to t;.he area between 65 and 70 dB CNEL, the area is sub -
ject to an e e ch prote is the airport from _lawsu .ts
based on aircraft noise t'or ptirp of Ordinance Noe 1750,E
areas 'located ithin 60 dB generated principally by aircraft
noise 'shall be treated as irn pat ted by 65 dt for the appi_icati os
of sound at d. measures
In al`l cases a aoTc , ocher than the Normally; Acceptable category,
particular attention hau be given to t :ho siting and xter or
design of buildings in order t:o provide rn murn exposure to and
rc�a um shielding' from noise
NOISE EA 7h ere norm lly unaccept :pbio areas are txe.:a-t
as conditi_ona.l _y ac c c pt ble' areas be of the existence of
no se ea =.cements, c selling u.n t rmast avncorporato n
and special cc ns t.ruction e t the fo:Ll.o =ing s3 eci icat.a onn
The reducti_an frc rn exter_i..r r noise love is try in.teriar
noise ]_evels `in all habitable rooms attri.bu a3 e tc
exterior' a r a.ft ncaise events shall attain at. least t]-�.e<
fial.iracringz
a. 30 dB in the easemen t. area north (that is, on` the
°' land aide ") of the °' 70 dB C TEL, contour" ';appeari ,g
in the noise elernen of the City of . lameda (19 7
32 dB in the easement~ area auth (that is, on -t..h
'23ay side ") of the ' "70 eB CNEI, contort'° ppearif
in the noise el mcnt of t;l e City` of A da (x_97.
ra addition to saiid reduct?.oz trae' interior~ nose lav4
n all habitable roams a.tt ibutable °::o exterior aia:cdra`
oise events shall not exceed a anea.sure. average CNE%
value o 40 dB,
88
Evidence of compliance with the standards set forth
above shall consist of submittal of an acoustical
analysis report in accordance with the provisions of
Alameda Municipal Code Sec. 10 -1061 (Ordinance No,
1750 N.S.)m
Prospective purchasers or tenants of such residential
property shall be info1:rned of noise levels expected
to occur at the site in plain terms which relate these
noise levels to their potential impact on both indoor
and outdoor activities Such notice shall be included
in the CC &R's for any approved 'developmen-t.,
then an acousi
standards sha_
nsulation foj
e
cal
1 be
noi
ALLOWABLE
analysis is required, he following table o
applied to determine the extent of noise
e -level compatibility.
�XIMUM TN`IERTOR NOTS E LEVELS
11 residential, including
permanent and transient
School' classrooms
School and .toriums;
legitimate theatre
A>
Libraries; recreation
bua.ldings
Church sanctuaries,
movie theaters
Concert halls
Tridust'r
Connrnercia
Standards provided by Dr . Maurice
n 'areas
elated
where people work con
o noisier interior ac
89
anterior Equivalent
nergy Level (Legj
s required by City
Ordinance No 1750 N.S.
0
di
5 dB
5
dB
0 dB
25 d
5 dB2
0 dB2
=ly on tasks rio
inuOU.Z
ivities.
OMMUN1
T
Us
e Community 1
c Compatibil
de noise
oi_se Environments Map is to be used ,ri.th the r and
-y 'Chart and tlae related interpretive description
cornpatihie land use planning in l The
Chart indicates the range ty of various types
and use in relation to levels of nolst e xposure a The map s
hoso areas in the City that are n Accepta1h1.e, Condit
Aceep;tabl.o, Normally ceptal: i_cz, and Clearly Un toe aptvab
ve land use ve uses ax. °e residers ial
ding transient lcacigincgj , schools, 3_ibraries , chl! t
..ursin e.z Q A:i.the >Izrh the mat i'.s oriented
ho
nc
The
C�
Land a{ s, i al o should Jae us < d to eP e om a.tib
lvironrnenLs for the other land uses .ist d -?n the` Char "tb
Co tan ,.y N0i_ e Enva.ron s also k e used to dotrv.c rmi
h >posuz:e Areas Lori appl_i. cat ion of Ordi_nanc e No. 1750 N.S -t
y of Ala.lneda's 31'ois?e Insul_a "Lion Ordinance lJicjh Exposure Area
a was `where the total. comnun:ity: noise ecuiv :l_ont level (the
L+ of all scu:rco':) a ra.s or oxccew5s C5 d1°3m
comnun" not s env. �_roni on�`:s , C" lin ate on i:ho map, rep C S
oiso°' wore' ta.�c:en
es a :Taco no az cx i�ava:
v[ A. rnal s k Oa7 l .nd A i_z:pe?r
ne,
noise levels are basc_.d' on the ;Ty i e Ca e C eke ept tla.at tli 70 dB
contto zr closest -to Runway 9 was ad justi d -to foi1ow the aener al
lic nrinent oa Cat Avenuel and the 65 d13 contour ;gas ad ju, ted
t'o artrzey ens.: 0 pxwont
2
ve oprnen
Soo Discussion of Title 4
street was' d abl to wemov uz e which'
dd on to the noip distortions ou:i_d male tl cm l.i.rie difficult'
on 4L.-.. d A defi ix_te locati.or was pi_clked on
y Road whic woul :i Ie i.ntecjri.ty of uses in the
ediate vie of tl,�ca line al.onc " 1c:cartney
dza tinq the Community Noisd Environnent's map it was 'noted thai
discrepancies b en t7 e IJS..G.. a reap, used as a base
for the %7_yle c rvs, and t z City o A3arrreda base map which s
usccd. 3or the M A Go tna s and t e Nc ise Environme nts map . Ad ,i_.
tional7.y, the rep oducf ion nro ess may. cause map distortion.
1"urthermore, calc.t ia- no sc c`Oil toctrs are not Cinite linos ,
Z "11�s pr scat s a p: °o
and rotated o dina�i
65, 70 and 7
observcatio:i' s
o`tl S s a
F
oC the Noise Elei
Me !location for 6 1
he :Colio cx
"he , o:1tour ?. i ss i 1.1.us r tf d I ..n this rc por hou d he con-
sicd.orcd as consc'rv, ve;, in tho . e . se that noise nL y ! o lcs
than shorn on the map but not greator_ than s c n a onitor?
data on pago 1.9, reaa ar,c c °o? c u s in Chap t r° 5 o t
ylrpoe susport ti,s pro
aG. &, m s cwonside c c o l o n nc? :c c 1s. 1c ?ease tsar
the City map, 4nd s'hou ..d o usoei wb o c eater a c�u acy i c.e crzec
ortzn
The Corp
Lartyo:i_se' Env.ronillntw zna.a sha[m1_ be accepted E
ct.?ve roforonw"e Lor CCITiSCl`anit Equ TCI.iE nM T
RELATIONSHIP WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
It was shown in a previous section on "Future Noise " that the
population of the City in 1995 will be subject to Jess noise than
the current population. This should not suggest that the City
government become passive and complacent on the subject. There
still remains the problem of dealing with noise in the short-
term future. This requires directing growth toward the more quiet
areas while waiting for noise reducing events to reduce noise in the
noisier areas.
Although the Comprehensive Plan is, by its nature, long -range it
should take into account the desirability of staging growth in a
reasonable manner. Therefore, the Land Use Element of the Plan should
take the conservative approach of assuming that current levels of
noise will remain until lower levels can be demonstrated. Bay Farm
Island is a case in point. In the Noise Element it is assumed that
about half of the population growth in Alameda to 1995 will occur
on Bay Farm Island. It also is assumed that the CNEL contours from
Oakland Airport will be reduced over the years. It should also be
noted that the 65 dB CNEL line is a flexible one and may be modified
as the noise environment changes. Accordingly, certain types of
developinent, such as residential, would not be precluded from an
area which currently is subject to noise levels higher than 65 CNEL
if in the future noise levels are reduced. Similar logic should
apply to other portions of the City as well, except that where the
CNEL-is dominated by surface noise, 70 dB would be the upper limit
of acceptability rather than 65 dB.
The Circulation Element should take into account the relationship
between noise and traffic volumes. For example, a street with an
average daily traffic volume of 36, 000 vehicles will project a
CNEL contour of 65 dB approximately 160 feet from the center of the
outer. lane; 20,000 vehicles will project 65 dB nearly 115 feet.
This makes a case for extraordinarily wide rights-of-way for busy
streets, Barr :i_._rs or other noise mitigation measures being in-
corporated in traffic planning.
92
The Circulation Elcmont currently is being revised to incorporate
circulation plans for Bay Farm Island and other changes in the City's
street pattern. When the Circulation Element is adopted, the Noise
Element should be examined for possible changes in the CNEL
generated by new traffic patterns. The methodolocy to be used is
referenced herein under "Future Surface Noise."
The zoning ordinance also should Lake into account the effects of
noise. It would be appropriate to incorporate the concept of
noise compatible land use within the ordinance as a basic require-
ment. Additionally, the zoning ordinance could require appropriate
setbacks and building orientation to provide minimum noiac exposure.
The City's subdivision ordinance should have a role in implementing
the Noise Element. The noise compatibility of the uses proposed by
a subdivision s]aouid be a basic factor in considering approval of a
proposed subdivision. In some cases, deep lots to permit large
setbacks may be required to preclude noise problems. Subdivisions
which anticipane clustering of buildings may be appropriate.
The Noise Element also should be coordinated with the Airport Land
Use Commission (AIXV) Plan. The ALUC Plan originally consisted of
a line on Bay t'arm Island generally parallel to Oakland Airport
Runway 29 and along the general alignment of: Mecartney Road. Th,:7,
intent of the line was to provide a boundary to preclude additional
residential development southerly of the line, towards the exton:Jed
path of Runway 29.
The ALUC Plan was ruled inadequate by the Superior Court and no plan
currently exists. The Alamedalloise Element should be reviewed. by
the ALUC and should serve as a vehicle for the City's participation
in the formulation of the ALUC Plan.
93
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution
was duly and regularly introduced and adopted by the Council of the
City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the 13th day of March,
1979, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Counc lmen Di amen t, Sherratt, Tillman, and President Corica
NOES: one
ABSENT: 'Council man!Beckam, (1).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my and and affixed the
official seal of said City this 14th day of March, 1979.