Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVibration Report_11.3.22 VIBRATION REPORT Vibration Existing Conditions and Expected Impacts: Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Prepared for: Mr. Jeffrey Strong Strong’s Yacht Center Engineers: Sean Harkin Sarah Babione Dr. Bonnie Schnitta November 3, 2022 Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 2 of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Section 3.6.11 – Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 3 Section 3.6.12 – Equipment Utilized ............................................................................................................. 4 Section 3.6.13 – Acoustic Criteria and Definitions ........................................................................................ 4 Definitions .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Vibration Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 4 Section 3.6.14 – Analysis of Vibration Data Collected .................................................................................. 6 Current Background Vibration Levels ..................................................................................................... 6 On Site Truck Data Collected .................................................................................................................. 9 Section 3.6.15 – Methodology for Analysis ................................................................................................ 10 FTA Guidelines Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 10 Reference Data Utilized ........................................................................................................................ 11 Section 3.6.16 – Potential Impact Analysis ................................................................................................. 12 Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration ............................................................................................... 13 Potential Impacts from Construction Vibration ................................................................................... 25 Section 3.6.17 – Construction Vibration Monitoring Plan .......................................................................... 27 Vibration Monitoring Terminal Types and Locations ........................................................................... 27 Vibration Monitoring Thresholds ......................................................................................................... 28 Procedure for Potential Vibration Exceedances................................................................................... 30 Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 3 of 30 3.6.11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This document serves to summarize the evaluation of the existing acoustic conditions at Strong’s Yacht Center located at 5780 West Mill Road in Mattituck, NY (“Project Site”) and provide analysis of the expected vibration impacts to be incorporated into the SEQRA review. This vibration report addresses concerns raised by the Town of Southold Planning Board and the New York State Historic Preservation Office during review of the DEIS dated December 2021 regarding potential damage to historic structures and impact to nearby residents from construction and truck traffic on local roads. On August 2nd, 2022, SoundSense documented the existing vibration conditions at various locations near the Project Site and vibration data from a representative truck expected to be used during construction. The measurements collected provide a baseline for existing conditions and have been used in the predictions completed for the Project. Predicted vibration levels were used in conjunction with the methodology and data from the Federal Transportation Authority’s 2018 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (“FTA Guidelines”) and the New Hampshire Department of Transportation’s 2012 Ground Vibrations Emanating from Construction Equipment (“New Hampshire Guidelines”). A more detailed description of the methodologies and analyses used can be found below in Section 3.6.15. The predicted vibration compiled by SoundSense can be compared to the criteria provided in the FTA Guidelines. Analysis of the construction equipment has shown that there is no predicted impact to any nearby neighbors. Additionally, using the data collected near the Project Site, there is no predicted impact to any nearby historic structures from truck traffic. All the data collected during the site visit is well below the threshold at which vibration would cause damage to a historic structure, which would be 0.12 in/s. This conclusion was tested against the worst-case scenario using the reference data and calculation methodology presented in the FTA guidelines detailed further in Section 3.6.15. The worst-case conclusion was that there is a potential impact from truck traffic to the historic Water Tower and Building located at 3380 W Mill Road in Mattituck, NY. These reference values, equations, and methodologies were developed to be used throughout the United States and do not take Long Island’s unique soil structure into account. While there is no impact anticipated using the data collected on site, the risk of potential vibration in the worst-case scenario is identified in this report. To ensure that vibration is responsibly managed, the Applicant has committed to implementing a vibration monitoring plan during construction at the Project Site to protect nearby historic structures of concern and ensure that ground-borne vibrations are not a disturbance to nearby neighbors. Details on a vibration monitoring plan have been provided in this vibration report in Section 3.6.17. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 4 of 30 SECTION 3.6.12 - EQUIPMENT: • Frequency Analyzer: Bruel & Kjaer Model 2250L, Serial No. 3009718 • Accelerometer: Bruel & Kjaer Model 4533-B-002, Serial No. 30014 SECTION 3.6.13 – VIBRATION CRITERIA AND DEFINITIONS: Definitions Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) The peak particle velocity is the maximum peak of the vibration signal. This metric is typically used to evaluate stresses related to building damage. As defined in the Federal Transit Administration’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. RMS Velocity The RMS velocity is used to describe a smoothed vibration signal and is used to evaluate human response to vibration levels. The RMS is equivalent to the square root of the average of the average of the squared level of the signal and is typically equivalent to 0.707 of a signal’s peak. The RMS velocity is calculated in decibels relative to 1 micro-inch per second and is typically noted in VdB. In this document all VdB values are vibration levels in decibels with a reference quantity of 1 micro-in/sec. Accelerometer An accelerometer is a sensor used to measure acceleration at a given location. Due to the mathematical relationships between acceleration, velocity, and displacement, velocity measurements are easily calculated by converting the measured acceleration. Vibration Criteria FTA Guidelines Vibration Criteria It is common to use the FTA Guidelines during vibration analyses for impact from transit projects or construction as a benchmark for evaluation of vibration impact both for damage to structures as well as impact to building occupants. Recommended design criteria to prevent damage to historic and residential buildings can be found in Table 1, and criterion for impact to various structure types can be found in Table 2. Table 1: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria from the FTA Guidelines Building/Structural Category PPV, in/sec Approximate Lv* I. Reinforced-concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.5 102 II. Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3 98 III. Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2 94 IV. Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 90 *RMS velocity in decibels, VdB re 1 micro-in/sec Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 5 of 30 SECTION 3.6.13 – VIBRATION CRITERIA AND DEFINITIONS (Continued): Definitions (Continued) FTA Guidelines Vibration Criteria (Continued) Table 2: Indoor Ground-Borne Vibration (GBV) Impact Criteria for General Vibration Assessment from the FTA Guidelines Land Use Category GBV Impact Levels (VdB) Frequent Events Occasional Events Infrequent Events Category 1: Buildings where vibration would interfere with interior operations. 65 65 65 Category 2: Residences and buildings where people normally sleep. 72 75 80 Category 3: Institutional land uses with primarily daytime use. 75 78 83 For this analysis, buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage, structural category IV as shown in Table 1, will be used to evaluate predicted vibration to historic structures, while structural category III, non-engineered timber, and masonry buildings will be used for evaluation of damage to residential structures. For evaluation of the criteria presented in Table 2 for impact to occupants, category 2 for residences with frequent events will be used. The FTA Guidelines define frequent events as more than 70 events per day and occasional events as between 30-70 events per day. There will be up to, but no more than, 40 truck trips per day during excavation, with a trip to and from the site. Consequently, the frequent events category is appropriate and chosen since it would be worse case scenario. It should also be made clear that using Category 1 is not appropriate for evaluation to residences. As noted by the FTA Guidelines, Category 1 uses criteria including below the threshold of human annoyance but is used for high sensitivity buildings such where vibration-sensitive research, hospitals, and universities conducting physical research operations that has not been shown to correlation with building damage. Town of Southold Vibration Criteria Based on a review of the Town of Southold Town Code, there are no requirements related to vibration limits on construction and vehicle traffic. Therefore, no Town of Southold codes have been considered in this analysis. Analysis will be performed in accordance with the FTA Guidelines and additional information in the New Hampshire Guidelines, which have also been consulted due to its additional research into propagation of construction vibration over distance. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 6 of 30 SECTION 3.6.14 – ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS: Current Background Vibration Levels To monitor vibration levels at the Project Site, a sound level meter and accelerometer were used to measure ground vibration levels from traffic at four locations at or near the Project Site. To establish background vibration levels, a frequency analyzer and accelerometer were used to measure existing traffic vibration levels at each location. Figure 1 below shows each location where measurements were collected during the site visit on August 2nd, 2022. Locations 1 and 2 were measured at the Mattituck Creek Tide Mill (Old Mill Restaurant) and the Frame Water Tower, respectively. As these locations are connected to the road surface as noted in Figure 2, the accelerometer was adhered to concrete at the foundation of the structure during the readings collected. Location 3 was as close to the southern property line of the Project Site as possible, and Location 4 was located at the entrance to the Mill Road Preserve at 25 feet from the roadway to match reference data presented in the FTA Guidelines (see Section 3.6.15). At Locations 3 and 4, the accelerometer was attached to a 6” stake driven into the ground. A summary of the measurements collected including PPV measurements can be found below in Table 3. No frequency analyzer and accelerometer measurements were collected at the Water Tower and Building to be able to collect readings along the unimpeded path through the soil to best determine the existing conditions. Figure 1: Vibration Measurement Locations at the Project Site Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 7 of 30 SECTION 3.6.14 – ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS (Continued): Current Background Vibration Levels (Continued) Figure 2: Accelerometer Installation at Location 2 Accelerometers Installed at Building Foundation Concrete Connected to W Mill Road Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 8 of 30 SECTION 3.6.14 – ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS (Continued): Current Background Vibration Levels (Continued) Table 3: Summary of Background Vibration Data Collected on August 2nd, 2022 Location Ambient Peak Particle Velocity (in/s) RMS Lv (VdB) Location 1 0.022 84 Location 2 0.009 76 Location 3 0.011 78 Location 4 0.007 74 All ambient readings were collected for 10 minutes each. Ambient PPV measurements collected occurred during a vehicle passing at each location apart from Location 3 which was collected as a scissor lift was operating near the measurement location as a part of the normal operation at the Project Site. As can be seen in Table 3, vibration levels measured at all locations are below the 0.12 in/s which would be necessary to cause damage to a historic structure, as previously stated as classified by FTA Guidelines. At Location 4, traffic regularly passed on Cox Neck Road during the data collection period. During the data collection, it was noted that passenger vehicles, construction vehicles, delivery trucks, and trucks all travel on the local roads currently, which cause low levels of vibration transmission into nearby structures. In addition to the low vibration levels measured during the data collection, it is known that soil composition has a significant impact on vibration transmission into nearby structures. Long Island’s sandy soil structure efficiently reduces vibration over short distances. SoundSense has experienced this type of vibration reduction numerous times when collecting measurements for passing railways where vibration from a rail line may be of concern to a new structure under design. This is further validated by truck traffic readings collected in the area. Vibration levels are consistently less than what would be predicted through a standard calculation method that equates vibration solely on distance from vibration source to receiver. Due to Long Island’s unique soil composition, these site measurements that can help to determine the vibration level in a specific region along with standardized methodologies from the FTA Guidelines and New Hampshire Guidelines. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 9 of 30 SECTION 3.6.14 – ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS (Continued): On Site Truck Data Collection Given Long Island’s unique soil structure, it was important to collect vibration readings of truck activity near the Project Site to determine the level of vibration transmission into any nearby residential and historic structures. To facilitate this, measurements of a truck like the ones to be used during the excavation of the site were measured at 25 feet from the road surface to be comparable to the data presented in the FTA Guidelines, which are presented in Table 5. Vibration data from a Peterbilt 389 2020 edition dump truck with a Paccar MX13 engine passing by Locations 1-4 was collected. The dump truck was loaded with 39 tons of sand/dirt at the time of the readings, which is equivalent to 28-29 yards of material. This truck is Tier 4 compliant with EPA standards, using the latest technology to reduce environmental emissions. The truck operator was directed to operate the trucks as he would during normal conditions and operation. For Locations 1 and 2, this meant passing by at 10-15 mph. The truck operator conveyed that these slow speeds were necessary due to the decline coming into Strong’s Yacht Center from West Mill Road, as well as the curve at the bottom of the hill entering Strong’s Yacht Center. Data was collected with the trucks both entering and leaving Strong’s Yacht Center. Data was also collected from trucks moving northbound and southbound at Location 4 with the truck passing at 35 mph, which is the speed limit on W Mill Road. The results of the data collected can be found below in Table 4. Table 4: Vibration Readings Collected from Truck Passbys at the Project Site Location Description Peak Particle Velocity RMS Velocity (VdB) Location 1 Truck Entering the Project Site 0.003 66 Truck Exiting the Project Site 0.002 61 Location 2 Truck Entering the Project Site 0.004 68 Truck Exiting the Project Site 0.002 64 Location 4 Truck Traveling South on W Mill Road 0.007 74 Truck Traveling North on W Mill Road 0.006 73 All the data collected during the site visit is well below the threshold at which vibration would cause damage to a historic structure, which would be 0.12 in/s. Although trucks can have higher airborne noise levels than a passing car, they typically need to travel at a slower speed due to their size and weight, especially when there is a road elevation change and curve in the road, as there is in this scenario. In addition, the suspension and the tires of the trucks that will be utilized at the Project Site provide additional vibration isolation from the body and engine of the truck itself and reduces vibration transmission into the ground. As seen in Table 3, vibration levels of 0.022 in/s when there were no construction vehicles of concern were measured at Location 1. This was during a car passing the location at a higher speed. Since the structure has direct concrete connections with the road, there is little vibration mitigation due to the soil. However, the slower speed needed for the trucks to navigate the area will transmit less vibration into Locations 1 and 2 due to truck traffic associated with the Project Site. It was also noted that the Mattituck Creek Tide Mill is proposed to go under renovation. Construction at this location is anticipated to cause vibration levels in the structure higher than those associated with trucks passing the location. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 10 of 30 SECTION 3.6.15 – METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYSIS: FTA Guidelines Analysis The FTA Guidelines present an analysis methodology for prediction of vibration data over a specified distance for both the PPV and the RMS vibration level. This equation can be used both for truck vibration and construction vibration. Equation 1 below presents the equation for predicting PPV levels with distance and Equation 2 presents the equation for predicting RMS vibration levels in VdB with distance. 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑚=𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑚𝑐𝑐∗(25 𝐷)1.5 Equation 1 where: 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑚 = the peak particle velocity of the equipment adjusted for distance in in/sec 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑚𝑐𝑐 = the source reference vibration level at 25 feet 𝐷 = distance from the equipment to the receiver, in feet 𝐿𝑚.𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑚𝑐𝑐=𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑐𝑐−30 log (𝐷 25) Equation 2 where: 𝐿𝑚.𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑚𝑐𝑐 = the RMS velocity level adjusted for distance, VdB 𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑐𝑐 = the source reference vibration level at 25 feet, VdB 𝐷 = distance from the equipment to the receiver, in feet The velocity reference data noted above is provided in the FTA Guidelines and will be discussed further in this section. Equation 1 can be used to predict PPV vibration levels at various distances to evaluate the risk of potential damage to structures as provided in Table 1. In addition to the FTA Guidelines the State of New Hampshire has published additional data and analysis which calls doubt into the FTA Guideline’s exponent of 1.5 used in the equation. While the FTA guidelines are meant to be used for a wide variety of soil surfaces nationwide, and the work by the State of New Hampshire is unique to New Hampshire, it has recommended using an exponent of 1.1 instead of 1.5. Although it has been established in this report that Long Island’s unique soil structure typically attenuates vibration more effectively than many other soils of geological areas, the exponent of 1.1 has been used in Equation 1 to present a conservative estimation of the predicted vibration levels at nearby structures. This modified equation can be found below in Equation 3 for reference. 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑚=𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑚𝑐𝑐∗(25 𝐷)1.1 Equation 3 Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 11 of 30 SECTION 3.6.15 – METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYSIS (Continued): FTA Guidelines Analysis (Continued) Equation 2 can be used to predict RMS velocity levels at a given distance to compare to the criteria provided in Table 2. However, the criteria provided in Table 2 relates to interior vibration levels. Equation 2 provides the vibration level in the ground at a given distance. There is an adjustment for observed vibration transmission into a structure. The FTA Guidelines recommends the wood frame structures that there is a 5 VdB reduction for vibration levels into the foundation of a wood-frame home, but that there can also be an amplification of 3-6 VdB depending on the floor in the home where vibration levels are observed. Therefore, the 5 VdB reduction and 3-6 VdB amplification result in a maximum possible amplification of 1 VdB compared to ground borne vibration levels. 1 VdB has been added to all ground borne vibration levels to provide a conservative estimation for estimation of interior RMS velocity levels to compare to the criteria in Table 2. The modified equation for evaluation of RMS velocity levels can be found below in Equation 4. 𝐿𝑚.𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑚𝑐𝑐=𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑐𝑐−30 log (𝐷 25)+1 Equation 4 Using Equations 3 and 4, safe distances at which construction vibration would no longer be a concern for structural damage or disturbance to occupants inside a structure both for truck traffic and operating construction equipment. These safe distances and a discussion of any impacts can be found in Section 3.6.16. The only locations where these equations were not applied were Locations 1 and 2 since data of a passing truck was directly measured at each of these locations. The FTA guidelines instruct the user to evaluate each piece of equipment individually for their impact as combined vibration levels cannot be reliably calculated. All calculations completed use the distance from the closest point of construction to the closest point to the receiving structure. Reference Data Utilized for Analysis As noted above, the Equations 3 and 4 use reference vibration data which is provided in the FTA Guidelines. Using the construction equipment list provided by Red Rock Industries, equivalent vibration levels for each type of equipment were used. Where a similar equipment type was not provided, a conservative piece of equipment was utilized which has a higher vibration level than what would be anticipated. These vibration levels were utilized for the analysis to find the minimum safe distance from vibrations due to truck traffic and construction activities. The reference vibration levels can be found below in Table 5. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 12 of 30 SECTION 3.6.15 – METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYSIS (Continued): Reference Data Utilized for Analysis (Continued) Table 5: Reference Vibration Data Utilized for Analysis. Construction Equipment Type FTA Guidelines Equivalent PPV at 25 ft, in/s from FTA Guidelines Approximate RMS Velocity (VdB) at 25 ft Loader Large Bulldozer 0.089 87 Dozer Large Bulldozer 0.089 87 Excavator Large Bulldozer 0.089 87 Water/Fuel Truck Loaded Trucks 0.076 86 Tub Grinder Vibratory Roller 0.21 94 Woodchipper Vibratory Roller 0.21 94 Feller Buncher Large Bulldozer 0.089 87 Scissor Lift Small Bulldozer 0.003 58 Dump Truck Idling Loaded Trucks 0.003 58 Telescopic Forklift Small Bulldozer 0.003 58 Measured Truck at Location 4 - 0.007 74 As seen above, there is a significant difference in the expected vibration from a Loaded Truck and the vibration from a truck measured at Location 4 during the data collection near the Project Site. This is supportive of the previous discussion of the nature of the soil in the area and its ability to organically reduce vibrations from any impact into the soil. Although it is likely that vibration levels at 25 feet will be less for all equipment, the values provided from the FTA guidelines have remained as a part of the analysis to ensure that the worst-case scenario is evaluated. Additionally, the Vibratory Roller has the highest vibration levels of any piece of construction equipment presented in the FTA Guidelines other than pile driving equipment. Since various pieces of equipment such as the Tub Grinder and Woodchipper do not have equivalents in the FTA Guidelines, it was important to include a piece of equipment with a higher vibration level to evaluate a worst-case scenario. No pile driving will be a component of the project and is not of concern. SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS: Two concerns were raised regarding vibration by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), as well as the Town of Southold. These concerns include vibration transmission into historic structures causing potential damage along the truck route and due to construction as well as impact to nearby residences for both potential damage and disturbance during construction. Both impacts are discussed in the sections below. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 13 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS: Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration Although the soil in and around the Project Area significantly attenuates vibration over short periods of distances, Equations 3 and 4 were used to evaluate the minimum distance from trucks which would not cause damage to historic and residential structures as well as impact to nearby residences as defined in Table 2. The minimum distances can be found below in Table 6. Table 6: Minimum Distances to Meet Vibration Criteria Description Minimum Distance to Cause No Damage to Historic Structures (ft) Minimum Distance to Cause No Damage to Residential Structures (ft) Minimum Distance to Meet Recommended Indoor Vibration Levels (ft) Loaded Truck from FTA Guidelines 17 11 79 Measured Truck at Location 4 2 2 29 Based on the data collected and calculations provided, it is anticipated that the minimum distance to meet the criteria would be 17 feet based on the data collected and 79 feet based on a worst-case scenario using the federally standardized FTA Guidelines methodology and Equation 3. Although several residences have structures which are closer than 79 feet from the roadway, no residences along W Mill Road and Cox Neck Road have distances closer than 29 feet from the roadway. Although this presents a potential quality of life impact for homes with distances of less than 125 feet from the road, it should be noted that the ambient PPV data collected from typical vehicle traffic on W Mill Road elicited similar vibration readings to the truck passbys. Therefore, while there is a potential quality of life impact for truck traffic impact, that impact is no greater than the existing typical vehicle passbys which are already using W Mill Road and would therefore be no different than any vibration transmitted currently. Once vehicles turn off W Mill Road and Cox Neck Road, and travel along Sound Avenue, Northville Turnpike, and Route 58, there is also already existing significant truck traffic. A letter was provided to the applicant from Benimax, Inc. a local trucking company noting that Benimax transports up to 500 tons of materials including sand, stone, asphalt, and concrete to the North Fork daily. It is noted that the 500 tons is equivalent to 14 tractor trailer loads of materials. Benimax notes that they use State Route 25, County Road 48, Sound Avenue, Northville Turnpike, and Country Road 58 on a regular basis for their trucking routes. These are metrics for only one of the trucking providers serving the area. Additional truck traffic from other trucking providers would send additional traffic into the area daily. Therefore, truck traffic along these roadways and associated vibration from loaded trucks is already a part of the existing conditions of these areas. For any potential damage to historic structures, worst-case scenario calculations conclude that a minimum distance of 17 feet would be required from the roadway surface. However, based on the vibration data collected near the Project Site, the distance would be 2 feet. For damage to residential structures, the worst-case scenario for damage would be 11 feet and based on the data collected near the Project Site, would be 2 feet. P.W. Grosser has compiled a list of historic structures along the trucking route. A table identifying these historic structures has been included in Table 7. The figures prepared by P.W. Grosser noting the location of each of the historic structures can be found in Figures 3-11 for reference. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 14 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Table 7: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures and Their Distances to Roadway Surfaces Map Marking Structure Address Distance from Road Surface (ft) Historic Status 1 Mattituck Creek Tide Mill 5575 W Mill Rd - Mattituck, NY Connected to Road Surface - Vibration Measured Eligible 2 Frame Water Tower 5670 W Mill Rd - Mattituck, NY Connected to Road Surface - Vibration Measured Undetermined 3 Robinson-D-Aires House 5109 W Mill Rd - Mattituck, NY 58 Undetermined 4 Water Tower and Building 3380 W Mill Rd - Mattituck, NY 12 – To Closest Point of Water Tower Foundation Eligible 5 Cox-Forman Carriage House 100 W Mill Rd - Mattituck, NY 45 Undetermined 6 Luther Cox House 3539 Cox Neck Rd - Mattituck, NY 842 Undetermined 7 Hallock Kirkup House 4995 Sound Ave - Mattituck, NY 46 Undetermined 8 Charles Aldrich House 4100 Aldrich Ln Ext - Mattituck, NY 47 Undetermined 9 Reeve-Jens (II) House 1150 Sound Ave - Mattituck, NY 42 Undetermined 10 Howell House 125 Sound Ave - Mattituck, NY 79 Eligible 11 Eugene Hallock House 6038 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 74 Listed 12 Old Hallock Homestead 5976 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 45 Eligible 13 Harrison Downs House & Farm 5793 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 160 Listed 14 George Luce House 5570 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 58 Eligible 15 Daniel T. Luce House 5528 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 58 Eligible 16 Salem Wells House 5412 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 38 Eligible 17 Jabez Corwin House 5331 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 58 Eligible Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 15 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Table 7 Continued: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures and Their Distances to Roadway Surfaces Map Marking Structure Address Distance from Road Surface Historic Status 18 John Luce House 5298 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 34 Eligible 19 Northville Academy (Congregation Church Parish Hall) 5284 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 63 ft Eligible 20 Sound Ave Congregational Church 5267 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 77 ft Eligible 21 Sound Ave Congregational Church Parsonage 5258 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 46 ft Eligible 22 George Mitchell Terry House 5185 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 56 ft Eligible 23 James Harvey Benjamin House 5161 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 94 ft Eligible 24 Thomas Wardle House 5144 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 37 ft Eligible 25 Buel Wells House 5074 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 48 ft Eligible 26 Daniel Wells House 5004 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 38 ft Eligible 27 Joshua Minor Wells House 4933 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 39 ft Eligible 28 Wheeler Wells House 4928 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 91 ft Eligible 29 Hallock Luce House 4778 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 67 ft Eligible 30 Mitchel Terry House 4624 Sound Ave - Riverhead, NY 32 ft Eligible 31 District #10 School House No Longer on Sound Avenue N/A Eligible 32 McCabe-McKay Farm 219 A Middle Rd - Riverhead, NY 111 ft Undetermined Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 16 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Figure 3: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures on W Mill Road Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 17 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Figure 4: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures on Bergen Avenue Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 18 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Figure 5: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures on Cox Neck Road Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 19 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Figure 6: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures on Sound Avenue from Cox Neck Road to Herricks Lane Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 20 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Figure 7: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures on Sound Avenue from Herricks Lane to Church Lane Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 21 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Impacts Due to Truck Traffic (Continued) Figure 8: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures on Sound Avenue from Church Lane to Northville Turnpike Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 22 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Figure 9: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures on Northville Turnpike from Sound Ave to Doctors Path Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 23 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Figure 10: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures on Northville Turnpike from Doctors Path to Old Country Road (Route 58) Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 24 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Truck Vibration (Continued) Figure 11: Potential, Eligible, and Listed Historic Structures from Route 58 to the Long Island Expressway As noted in Table 7, only the Water Tower and Building located at 3380 W Mill Road would fall within the worst-case scenario threshold of 17 feet for potential damage to historic structures as calculated through Equation 3. However, as with impact to residences, the data collected on W Mill Road clearly shows that the structure would need to be located 2 feet from the road surface to cause any potential damage. Furthermore, Location 4, where data was collected is only 950 feet away from the Water Tower and Building and is anticipated to be analogous to the conditions at the Water Tower and Building including the existing traffic which is like the existing vibration levels measured from traffic. However, a vibration monitor near the Water Tower and Building has been included in the Construction Protection and Monitoring Plan to ensure that vibration transmission into the structure is not a concern. Procedures such as minimizing vehicle speeds near the Water Tower and Building can be put in place if necessary to mitigate vibration during construction. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 25 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Construction Vibration In addition to vehicle traffic along local roadways, vibration from construction equipment and its impact to nearby residences is also a concern. Using Equations 3 and 4, minimum distances from structures to not cause damage to historic structures, to not cause damage to residential structures, and to meet recommended indoor vibration levels were calculated for each type of construction equipment identified in Table 6. The results of these calculations can be found below in Table 9. Table 8: Minimum Distances to Meet Vibration Criteria Construction Equipment Type FTA Guideline Equivalent Minimum Distance to Cause No Damage to Historic Structures (ft) Minimum Distance to Cause No Damage to Residential Structures (ft) Minimum Distance to Meet Recommended Indoor Vibration Levels (ft) Loader Large Bulldozer 20 12 85 Dozer Large Bulldozer 20 12 85 Excavator Large Bulldozer 20 12 85 Water/Fuel Truck Loaded Trucks 17 11 79 Tub Grinder Vibratory Roller 42 27 146 Woodchipper Vibratory Roller 42 27 146 Feller Buncher Large Bulldozer 20 12 85 Scissor Lift Small Bulldozer 1 1 9 Dump Truck Idling Loaded Trucks 17 11 79 Telescopic Forklift Small Bulldozer 1 1 9 Measured Truck at Location 4 - 2 2 29 Using these minimum distances, the risk for potential impact or damage to nearby structures can be evaluated. To evaluate this risk, four receiving structures were identified. These sites can be seen below in Figure 12. Using the proposed site plans as well as distances measured from Google Earth, the approximate distance to the edge of the construction site and to the middle of the construction site were measured for each receiving location. These distances along with the address/description of each structure can be found below in Table 9. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 26 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Construction Vibration (Continued) Figure 12: Receiving Locations Evaluated for Construction Vibration Table 9: Distances from Nearby Residences to the Construction Area at the Project Site Receiving Location Address/Description Nearest Distance to Construction Site (ft) Distance to Center of Construction Site (ft) Receiver 1 800 North Dr - Mattituck, NY 175 385 Receiver 2 805 North Dr - Mattituck, NY 351 561 Receiver 3 5106 W Mill Rd - Mattituck, NY 171 381 Receiver 4 Water Tower and Building - 3380 Sound Ave 1001 1211 Receiver 4 Water Tower and Building - 3380 Sound Ave Distances to Haul Road 192 N/A Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 27 of 30 SECTION 3.6.16 – POTENTIAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued): Potential Impacts from Construction Vibration (Continued) None of the distances to the edge of the construction area from Table 9 are closer than the minimum distances necessary to meet the vibration criteria presented in Tables 1 and 2 to avoid both potential damage and adverse impact to nearby residences for feelable vibration within structures. This indicates that there will be no impact to nearby structures due to construction. There can be an increase in vibration levels due to multiple pieces of construction equipment operating simultaneously. The applicant has committed to implementing vibration monitoring to ensure that there are not adverse vibration impacts to nearby residents. Details on a proposed vibration monitoring plan can be found below in Section 3.6.17. SECTION 3.6.17 – CONSTRUCTION PROTECTION AND VIBRATION MONITORING PLAN: Per the findings in Section 3.6.16, there is one potential impact with damage possible in the worst-case condition at the Water Tower and Building located at 3380 W Mill Road using FTA guidelines for standard soil conditions, but not using the data collected during the data collection on August 2nd, 2022. Analysis completed from the construction site shows that there are no expected impacts to nearby structures and residents during construction. In addition to the analysis completed, the applicant has committed to implementing a construction protection and monitoring plan. It is proposed that vibration monitoring terminals be installed at 4 locations and be monitored through all phases of construction to ensure that vibration relating to construction activities and truck traffic do not have a negative and adverse impact to neighbors and the Water Tower and Building at 3380 W Mill Road. Vibration Monitoring Terminal Types and Locations It is recommended that four vibration terminals be placed at locations near the closest residences to the construction site as well as the Water Tower and Building at 3380 W Mill Road. Vibration monitoring terminals should be installed as close to any impacted structures while also maintaining full access to the vibration monitoring terminals. Possible locations can be found in Figure 13. The vibration monitoring terminals should be cloud connected and able to send email or text message alerts should a specified vibration threshold be exceeded such as Syscom ROCK or an approved equivalent. Exact vibration monitoring sites will not be determined until the vibration monitors are installed based on accessibility to the exact monitoring sites. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 28 of 30 SECTION 3.6.17 – CONSTRUCTION PROTECTION AND VIBRATION MONITORING PLAN (Continued): Vibration Monitoring Terminal Types and Locations (Continued) Figure 13: Prospective Vibration Monitoring Sites Vibration Monitoring Thresholds The Syscom ROCK terminal or an equivalent terminal can set vibration thresholds in PPV. If these thresholds are exceeded, an alert is sent via email or text message to the construction management team to inform the team of an exceedance. To set the vibration thresholds, Equations 3 and 4 can be used, first to determine the maximum reference 25-foot reference vibration levels to comply with the criteria in Tables 1 and 2 if the vibration sources were located at the edge of the construction area, which would be the worst-case scenario. Equations 3 and 4 can be rearranged into Equations 5 and 6 to accomplish this as noted below. 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑚𝑐𝑐=𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑚𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑎∗(𝐷𝑐 25)1.1 Equation 5 where: 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑚𝑐𝑐 = the maximum reference peak particle velocity at 25 feet if the vibration source is located at the construction area boundary 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑚𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑎 = the criteria for no impact, 0.12 in/s for historic structures and 0.2 in/s for residential structures 𝐷𝑐 = distance to the edge of the construction area, in feet Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 29 of 30 SECTION 3.6.17 – CONSTRUCTION PROTECTION AND VIBRATION MONITORING PLAN (Continued): Vibration Monitoring Thresholds (Continued) 𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑐𝑐=𝐿𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑚𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑎+30 log (𝐷𝑐 25)−1 Equation 6 where: 𝐿𝑚𝑐𝑐 = the maximum reference RMS velocity at 25 feet if the vibration source is located at the construction area boundary 𝐿𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑚𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑎 = the RMS velocity criteria for no impact, 72 VdB 𝐷𝑐 = distance to the edge of the construction area, in feet Once a reference maximum PPV and RMS velocity have been established for a piece of equipment at the property line, Equations 3 and 4 can be applied to determine the vibration criteria at the installed distance from the edge of the construction area. The Syscom ROCK system, does not allow for alerts to be set using RMS velocity, but is provided through its cloud portal if a PPV alarm is triggered. To set a threshold for a RMS velocity exceedance, it is recommended that the relationship of the RMS velocity being equivalent to 0.707 of the peak velocity be used. The RMS criteria in VdB can then be calculated to its corresponding PPV value. As a safety factor, 2 dB from the VdB level determined to be appropriate at each vibration monitoring location will be subtracted to determine the appropriate threshold. This would lead to establishing a PPV value by using Equation 7. 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑚=1 0.707 ∗20(𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑚𝑟−2 𝑉𝑚⁄) Equation 7 where: 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑚 = the equivalent PPV alert criteria to meet the RMS velocity criteria at the vibration monitoring terminal 𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑚 = the RMS velocity criteria at the vibration monitoring terminal 𝑉𝑚 = the reference vibration level, 0.000001 in/s Should the PPV as defined in Equation 7 be exceeded, the measured RMS velocity must be confirmed in the ROCK’s cloud portal to determine if this is a confirmed exceedance. At location 4, disturbance to inhabitants is not a concern. The criteria for Location 4 will be for vibration damage only and should be the criteria for vibration damage to historic structures, 0.12 in/s. Ideally at Vibration Monitoring Location 4, the vibration monitoring terminal will be installed as close as possible to the foundation of the Water Tower and Building. Strong’s Yacht Center – 5780 West Mill Road – Mattituck, NY Vibration Analysis Report – 11/3/22 Page 30 of 30 SECTION 3.6.17 – CONSTRUCTION PROTECTION AND VIBRATION MONITORING PLAN (Continued): Procedure for Potential Vibration Exceedances If vibration levels exceed permissible levels, the following steps will be taken for Vibration Monitoring Locations 1-3: - The acoustic consultant and construction management team should be notified if an exceedance is measured. - The time and location of construction activities when the exceedance is measured are to be provided to the acoustic consultant. - If the exceedance is an RMS exceedance, the RMS velocity should be verified in the ROCK’s cloud portal. - Should the cause of the exceedance be linked to the construction activities, construction should be halted immediately until appropriate measures, such as operating fewer pieces of equipment or moving construction activities away from the construction area boundary, can be completed. - The only exception to halting construction would be if it would be a life safety issue for the construction workers, or if it would result in an unsafe structure at the time of halting the construction. In each of these cases. Construction should only be continued until such time that all workers would be safe and that all structures are stable and would not be in danger of collapse. The following procedure should be followed at Vibration Monitoring Location 4, located at the Water Tower and Building: - Arrival and departure times for all trucks to be loaded and leaving with building materials should be logged by the construction management team. All scheduled traffic must occur within defined work hours. - Should an alert be triggered at Vibration Monitoring Location 4, the time of the alert should be correlated with the arrival times of all trucks coming to the Project Site. - If it is confirmed that exceedance is due to operation of a truck associated with the construction, truck operators will be required to reduce speeds near the Water Tower and Building so that vibration is reduced. All drivers are to be notified of any speed restrictions. - Should two alerts confirmed to be due to truck vibration occur on the same day, truck trips are to be halted until additional data can be collected and mitigation can be implemented.