BOA agenda 041618 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

288 Randy Herman: I have some questions about that. I read over this report and I heard someone say the 289 intent was to have ballgames during the day at not at night. Is that right? 290 291 Richard Gurlitz: The intent is... 292 293 Bill Munsee: I am Bill Munsee. I'm the post commander. And I am duly sworn. At this point, we don't have 294 any intent to have a ball field out that. That is Phase II, whenever we get there. The other lighting we have 295 out there is not for ball park lighting but so you can see when you are walking around at night. We're not 296 going to have towers of lights. 297 298 Randy Herman: My question is specifically about the paragraph in the report that's dated Jan. 4 that says 299 for ballgame speech noise during the "day," sound levels are below the noise ordinance. However, for 300 "evening" games, speech noise level should be controlled to maintain compliance. It also makes the 301 assumption that there would be 100 people attending the ballgame. I'm just wondering, how well do you 302 know what the intent is to do that. 303 304 Richard Gurlitz: So, we tasked the Stewart Acoustical Consultants to give us an understanding of what we 305 could expect to be the sound conditions, the acoustical conditions on site and on the borders of the site 306 given normal conditions. And sound travels differently at night than it does during the day. And the noise 307 ordinance has different requirements at night than it does during the day. So, we came up with a series of 308 understandings of how things would generally be used. The report has as its basis 100 people. If 1,000 309 people show up, we'll have a problem and we'll have an issue. The normal is there will probably be 25 310 people. 311 312 Randy Herman: It sounds to me like you are saying there will be times when there will possibly be 250 313 people on the site. 314 315 Richard Gurlitz: In the meeting room. Indoors. And there is a possibility that there will be 250 on the site. 316 But the goal of the acoustical report was to set what we consider to be the probably parameters of how it 317 would operate normally just to set up an understanding. Until you do the work, you don't know what the 318 results are. What we did is we stood out. We stood basically right here with a sound meter and did several 319 tests to determine what the ambient noise was. WE got five readings of that. We then did readings right 320 here on 54 of the same noise. Of course, the noise were the trucks barreling down 54. That's the highest 321 noise. Here you go over any Orange County noise ordinance. Those trucks are noise. It allowed us to 322 determine the attenuation of 40 decibels. We knew we were at 80 decibels here and 40 decibels there. In 323 the report, that gave us an understanding of what we were losing through the forest. It was done a week 324 before Christmas. There were no leaves on the trees. It was a worse -case scenario in terms of figuring out 325 what the background noise is along 54 and the attenuation from the site to 54. This report is figuring out 326 under normal operating systems, 100 people at a baseball game with a PA system ... the other question is if 327 we had a band, how loud can we get before we are out of ordinance. If we were at 85 decibels with the 328 band, which is normal, we would be within 5 decibels of the ordinance at the property line. 329 330 Randy Herman: I have one other question about the report. I saw on the application there are plans to do 331 fireworks, at least on some holidays. Was there any kind of evaluation of what the sound requirement 332 would be for that? 333 334 Neese - Brown: If I could point out, in the conditions to which the applicant has agreed, condition Number 3 335 in your packet is a condition that specifically requires that the site use at all times adheres to the Orange 15