The content of this supplement is based upon the that described in our letter of May 28, 2012.

Transcription

1

2 September 20, Wertheim Court, Unit 25 Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada L4B 1B9 web telephone fax Davis Howe Partners LLP 5 th Floor, 99 Spadina Avenue Toronto, ON M5V 3P8 Attention: Mr. Michael Melling Re: Environmental Noise Analysis Update - Royal Park North Proposed Mixed Use Development Milton Heights Neighbourhood Milton, Ontario Our File: Dear Mr. Melling: This letter addresses the noise mitigation requirements for the proposed Royal Park North (RPN) development and is supplementary to our April 06, 2012 draft report for RPN, attached here as Appendix B. The content of this supplement is based upon the that described in our letter of May 28, TRANSPORTATION NOISE The primary issues with respect to transportation noise relates to achieving compliance with the Ministry of the Environment guideline limit of 55 dba while not exceeding the Town s or the Region s policies regarding maximum sound barrier heights. Additional items relate to Highway 401 noise at the second row of dwellings along the northern periphery of the Royal Park North site via the gaps between the housing blocks at the first row. It has been clarified the Region s policy limits sound barrier heights to a maximum of 3 m sound barrier height. In practice, barrier heights up to 3.5 m may be allowed in some cases. In addition, the Region requires a minimum barrier height of 2.4 m, where sound barriers are needed. The policy addresses height in relation to the noise barrier wall and does not appear to state or imply that the height is inclusive of a berm. In other words, the maximum height may relate only to the wall or fence portion and the overall height including an earth berm or retaining wall can exceed the 3.0 m maximum height. For the purpose of this review, a maximum overall height of up to 3.5 m has been considered, including an earth berm. The Town s policy limits the maximum fence height to 2.0 m. Greater heights are permitted using a combination of earth berm and wall or fence. The maximum height adjacent to rail lines is 3.0 m, which presumably relates to the wall or fence height only. Consulting Acoustical Engineers

3 1.1 Royal Park North Site: The draft plan for the Royal Park North site has been revised from that which was included in our April 6, 2012 draft report. Associated figures based on this revised draft plan are in Appendix A. The revisions to the plan are minor and inconsequential to the noise mitigation requirements. The sound barrier heights have been revised form our April report as follows: At the three storey townhouse blocks along the northern and eastern periphery, the second floor outdoor decks on top of the garages will be fully shielded by the dwelling structures instead of the free standing sound barrier screen wall that was originally proposed along the edge of the deck; At the western periphery, the previously recommended 3.5 m barrier height will be maintained, and additional temporary screening will be provided by an earthen stockpile opposite the west side, until the lands to the west are developed; At the second row along the northern periphery, 2.0 m high sound barriers will be provided along the side lot lines at the end units to address a possible excess of 1 to 3 db at some locations where there are gaps in the first row. The design of the dwellings at the first row may be revised to be continuous, eliminating the need for these sound barriers. At locations next to New Tremaine Road, modifications have been made in accordance with the minimum barrier heights set out by the Region s policies. Figure 2 in Appendix B shows the noise control measures for the transportation sources. Three Storey Townhouse Blocks Along Northern & Eastern Periphery: For the second floor decks of the end units, our results indicate that a 6.1 m high sound barrier is required to meet the 55 dba limit at the extreme northern row and 2.6 m for the units at the northeast corner. The barrier height is relative to the deck surface. This will achieve the noise limits by folding over the upper portion of the barrier, to create a roof above the deck, which will satisfy the minimum barrier height requirement. This design has been used for other projects. Appendix B includes a drawing showing the concept. It is expected that the covered deck design will be used for all dwellings within this block, and not only where required to address a predicted noise excess; At the second row along the north side, our results indicate that an excess of 1 to 3 db above the 55 dba limit may occur, but is highly dependent on whether gaps are present in the first (northern) row. 2.0m high sound barriers are recommend at the side lot line of the second row lots in close proximity to the gaps to meet the 55 dba limit. Final requirements will need to be updated once detailed dwelling siting plans have been developed, and of the size and location of the gaps in the first row has been confirmed. 2 Consulting Acoustical Engineers

4 Western Periphery: A 3.5 m high sound barrier is recommended for the blocks along the west side, which will result in noise levels of 55 dba to maximum of 58 dba at these locations; To meet the 55 dba limit at the few locations where an excess is predicted, an earthen stockpile will be provided at the west side of the site as temporary solution until the lands to the west are developed; Once the lands to the west are developed, the screening provided by the future buildings, and any additional sound barriers is expected to be sufficient to meet the guidelines. On the basis that only the 3.5 m high sound barrier is provided, the predicted excess of 1 to 3 db at the two western units (Block 17 and north end of Block 11) would therefore only be temporary; Adjacent to New Tremaine Road: Block 5 fronts toward New Tremaine Road. Our results indicate that a 2.0 m high sound barrier is required at the south lot line of the southern unit to meet the 55 dba target; However, a 2.4 m high sound barrier will be provided to satisfy the Regions minimum 2.4 m requirement. Elsewhere: It is expected that the 55 dba limit will be met at the outdoor living areas (OLA s). Additional sound barriers are not expected to be necessary. Other: Ventilation Requirements: Locations requiring mandatory air conditioning and the provision for adding air conditioning are shown in Appendix A, Figure 2; Exterior Wall and Window Requirements: These remain as set out in our previous report, with some locations requiring upgrades. As noted in the our previous prior noise report(s), the final requirements will be reviewed when detailed house plans have been developed. The final requirements are not expected to be problematic in terms of demonstrating feasibility. 2.0 INDUSTRIAL NOISE There have been some minor changes to the noise prediction model since the April 06, 2012 report was prepared. Specifically these changes are: To address an issue regarding the minimum additional transmission loss applied to the Modatek scrap metal bin, as opposed to the calculated additional transmission loss which was previously used in the assessment, the following additional reduction has been reduced and applied: Frequency ,000 2,000 4,000 8,000 TL (db) Consulting Acoustical Engineers

5 Source Name / ID MA03/MOD_EX_M3_2 reference sound level was adjusted from the 97 dba to 79 dba. The 97 dba reference has been confirmed as a typo in the RWDI update data set provided to us; For the Modatek scrap metal bin, it is now assumed that the sound power level was determined based on hemispherical radiation. Quarter sphere radiation was previously used in the assessment. Hypothetical Future Industry Use at 77 & 99 Peru Road: A hypothetical industrial use has been considered for the lands at 77 and 99 Peru Road, which are currently occupied by legal non-conforming residences. A use similar to the size and scope of the recently added warehouse at the Karmax lands has been assumed on these lands. The assumed noise generating sources include: 9 (nine) rooftop exhaust fans (same number and reference sound emission levels as the Karmax warehouse); 1 (one) grade level emergency generator (same number and reference sound emission levels as the Karmax warehouse); 2 (two) rooftop duct collectors (reference sound emissions base on measurements from other Valcoustics projects); 1 (one) rooftop cooling tower (reference sound level is based on the Modatek cooling towers, for a single unit) 2.1 Royal Park North Development Site: Additional assessment receptor locations at the interior of the development have been reviewed. The initial assessment based on three storey top floor windows at 7.5 m above grade, shows some locations at the south faces of dwellings at the southern periphery where an excess is predicted for the worst case impulse source scenario (the worst case being Modatek Future 2A scenario). However, these locations coincide with detached and semi-detached dwellings which are now confirmed to be two storey. On the basis of two storey dwellings (4.5 m high window receptor), the guidelines are met. This conclusion is based on the assumption there are no noise sensitive uses within the mixed use blocks at the south side of the site (Blocks 28 and 29). This conclusion also does not rely on any screening by the future buildings within the mixed use Blocks 28 and 29. This conclusion, relies on the presence of the commercial building at the Business Park Block 30 being present, at least for the dwellings at the eastern and southern portions of the site. We have assumed the following for the Business Park Block: Minimum height of 8.5 m above grade; Building massing and north-south coverage are as shown in Appendix B Figures B-2 to B-8. Eastwest site coverage is shown in Figures B-2 to B-8, and some flexibility will be permitted; 4 Consulting Acoustical Engineers

6

7 APPENDIX A FIGURES FOR ROYAL PARK NORTH SITE

8

9 DECKED - TOWNHOME RESIDENTIAL

10 ER01 ER0 1 I nd: 37 d : 3 PR33 I nd: 40 Am b: 49 PR01 I nd: 45 Am b: 56 PR02 Am b: 52 PR21 ER02 ER0 2 nd: 36 Am b: 41 d : 3 PR22 Am b: 41 PR23 I nd: 42 Am b: 39 PR03 I nd: 45 Am b: 56 PR04 I nd: 43 PR05 Am b: 51 I nd: 28 PR06 I nd: 42 Am b: 51 PR32 I nd: 41 Am b: 50 PR31 I nd: 42 Am b: 5 PR30 PR34 I nd: 42 I nd: 41 PR29 I nd: 37 PR35 I nd: 40 PR28 I nd: 40 Am b: 46 PR27 PR24 I nd: 43 Am b: 4 PR25 I nd: 43 PR26 I nd: 39 Am b: 46 PR20 Am b: 42 I nd: 40 Am b: 46 PR18 PR19 Am b: 42 PR07 I nd: 42 Am b: 55 PR08 I nd: 43 Am b: 51 PR15 PR14 I nd: 43 nd: 43 Am b: 45 Am b: 45 PR16 I nd: 43 Am b: 44 PR17 I nd: 43 Am b: 44 PR09 I nd: 43 Am b: 52 PR10 PR12 I nd: 41 I nd: 43 PR11 I nd: 31 Am b: 45 PR13 I nd: 43 Am b: 45 Business Par k Building 8. 5 m Above G rade ER03 ER0 d I nd: : 50 Am b: 5 ER04 ER0 4 I nd: 48 d : 4 ER05 ER05 nd: 51 d : 5 ER06 ER06 d : nd: 5 51 Am b: 49 ER07 ER0 7 I nd: 52 d : 5 ER08 ER08 d I : nd: 4 49 Am b: 46 ER09 ER09 I nd: 49 d : 4 Am b: 46 ER10 ER10 d I nd: : 4 46 Am b: 44 ER11 ER11 I nd: 46 d : 4 Am b: 43 ER12 ER12 d Ind: : 4 47 Am b: 42 ER13 ER13 Ind: 49 d : 4 Am b: 41 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier PR33 Ind: 40 Amb: 49 PR01 Ind: 45 Amb: 56 PR02 Amb: PR03 Ind: 45 Amb: 56 PR05 Ind: 28 Amb: 47 PR34 Ind: 41 PR35 Ind: 40 Amb: PR04 Amb: 51 PR06 Ind: 42 Amb: 51 PR32 Ind: 41 Amb: 50 PR31 Ind: 42 Amb: 50 PR30 Ind: 42 PR27 Ind: 40 Amb: 46 PR28 Ind: 40 Amb: 46 PR07 Ind: 42 Amb: 55 PR29 Ind: 37 Amb: PR08 Amb: 51 PR12 Ind: 41 PR13 Amb: 45 PR09 Amb: 52 PR11 Ind: 31 Amb: PR Business Park Building 8.5 m Above Grade PR25 Amb: 47 PR26 Ind: 39 Amb: 46 PR15 Amb: 45 PR17 Amb: 44 PR16 Amb: 44 PR14 Amb: 45 ER03 50 Ind: 50 Amb: 52 Amb: PR24 Amb: 44 PR20 Amb: 42 PR18 PR19 Amb: ER02 ER02 Ind: PR22 Amb: 41 PR21 Amb: PR23 Ind: 42 Amb: Title Karmax and Modatek Existing- Non-Impulse Scenario VCL Mitigation on Scrap Metal Bin Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Close Up Of Royal Park North Site Date May 24, 2012 Project No Figure A-2 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

11 ER01 ER0 1 I nd: 37 d : 3 PR33 I nd: 40 Am b: 49 PR01 I nd: 45 Am b: 56 PR02 Am b: 52 PR21 ER02 ER0 2 nd: 36 Am b: 41 d : 3 PR22 Am b: 41 PR23 I nd: 42 Am b: 39 PR03 I nd: 45 Am b: 56 PR04 I nd: 43 PR05 Am b: 51 I nd: 28 PR06 I nd: 42 Am b: 51 PR32 I nd: 41 Am b: 50 PR31 I nd: 42 Am b: 5 PR30 PR34 I nd: 42 I nd: 41 PR29 I nd: 37 PR35 I nd: 40 PR28 I nd: 40 Am b: 46 PR27 PR24 I nd: 43 Am b: 4 PR25 I nd: 43 PR26 I nd: 40 Am b: 46 PR20 Am b: 42 I nd: 40 Am b: 46 PR18 PR19 Am b: 42 PR07 I nd: 43 Am b: 55 PR08 I nd: 43 Am b: 51 PR15 PR14 I nd: 43 nd: 43 Am b: 45 Am b: 45 PR16 I nd: 43 Am b: 44 PR17 I nd: 43 Am b: 44 PR09 I nd: 43 Am b: 52 PR10 PR12 I nd: 41 I nd: 43 PR11 I nd: 31 Am b: 45 PR13 I nd: 43 Am b: 45 Business Par k Building 8. 5 m Above G rade ER03 ER0 d I nd: : 50 Am b: 5 ER04 ER0 4 I nd: 48 d : 4 ER05 ER05 nd: 52 d : 5 ER06 ER06 d : nd: 5 51 Am b: 49 ER07 ER0 7 I nd: 52 d : 5 ER08 ER08 d I : nd: 4 49 Am b: 46 ER09 ER09 I nd: 49 d : 4 Am b: 46 ER10 ER10 d I nd: : 4 46 Am b: 44 ER11 ER11 I nd: 46 d : 4 Am b: 43 ER12 ER12 d Ind: : 4 47 Am b: 42 ER13 ER13 Ind: 49 d : 4 Am b: 41 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier PR33 Ind: 40 Amb: 49 PR01 Ind: 45 Amb: 56 PR02 Amb: PR03 Ind: 45 Amb: 56 PR05 Ind: 28 Amb: 47 PR34 Ind: 41 PR35 Ind: 40 Amb: PR04 Amb: 51 PR06 Ind: 42 Amb: 51 PR32 Ind: 41 Amb: 50 PR31 Ind: 42 Amb: 50 PR30 Ind: 42 PR27 Ind: 40 Amb: 46 PR28 Ind: 40 Amb: 46 PR07 Amb: 55 PR29 Ind: 37 Amb: PR08 Amb: 51 PR12 Ind: 41 PR13 Amb: 45 PR09 Amb: 52 PR11 Ind: 31 Amb: PR Business Park Building 8.5 m Above Grade PR25 Amb: 47 PR26 Ind: 40 Amb: 46 PR15 Amb: 45 PR17 Amb: 44 PR16 Amb: 44 PR14 Amb: 45 ER03 50 Ind: 50 Amb: 52 Amb: PR24 Amb: 44 PR20 Amb: 42 PR18 PR19 Amb: ER02 ER02 Ind: PR22 Amb: 41 PR21 Amb: PR23 Ind: 42 Amb: Title Karmax and Modatek Future 1- Non-Impulse Scenario VCL Mitigation on Scrap Metal Bin Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Close Up Of Royal Park North Site Date May 24, 2012 Project No Figure A-3 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

12 ER01 ER0 1 I nd: 37 d : 3 PR33 I nd: 40 Am b: 49 PR01 I nd: 46 Am b: 56 PR02 Am b: 52 PR21 ER02 ER0 2 nd: 36 Am b: 41 d : 3 PR22 Am b: 41 PR23 I nd: 43 Am b: 39 PR03 I nd: 46 Am b: 56 PR04 I nd: 43 PR05 Am b: 51 I nd: 28 PR06 I nd: 42 Am b: 51 PR32 I nd: 41 Am b: 50 PR31 I nd: 42 Am b: 5 PR30 PR34 I nd: 42 I nd: 41 PR29 I nd: 37 PR35 I nd: 41 PR28 I nd: 41 Am b: 46 PR27 PR24 Am b: 4 PR25 I nd: 43 PR26 I nd: 40 Am b: 46 PR20 I nd: 45 Am b: 42 I nd: 40 Am b: 46 PR18 PR19 I nd: 45 Am b: 42 PR07 I nd: 43 Am b: 55 PR08 I nd: 43 Am b: 51 PR15 PR14 nd: 44 Am b: 45 Am b: 45 PR16 I nd: 43 Am b: 44 PR17 Am b: 44 PR09 I nd: 43 Am b: 52 PR10 PR12 I nd: 41 PR11 I nd: 32 Am b: 45 PR13 I nd: 43 Am b: 45 Business Par k Building 8. 5 m Above G rade ER03 ER0 d I nd: : 50 Am b: 5 ER04 ER0 4 I nd: 48 d : 4 ER05 ER05 nd: 52 d : 5 ER06 ER06 d : nd: 5 52 Am b: 49 ER07 ER0 7 I nd: 52 d : 5 ER08 ER08 d I : nd: 4 49 Am b: 46 ER09 ER09 I nd: 50 d : 5 Am b: 46 ER10 ER10 d I nd: : 4 46 Am b: 44 ER11 ER11 I nd: 46 d : 4 Am b: 43 ER12 ER12 d Ind: : 4 47 Am b: 42 ER13 ER13 Ind: 49 d : 4 Am b: 41 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier PR33 Ind: 40 Amb: 49 PR01 Ind: 46 Amb: 56 PR02 Amb: PR03 Ind: 46 Amb: 56 PR05 Ind: 28 Amb: 47 PR34 Ind: 41 PR35 Ind: 41 Amb: PR04 Amb: 51 PR06 Ind: 42 Amb: 51 PR32 Ind: 41 Amb: 50 PR31 Ind: 42 Amb: 50 PR30 Ind: 42 PR27 Ind: 40 Amb: 46 PR28 Ind: 41 Amb: 46 PR07 Amb: 55 PR29 Ind: 37 Amb: PR08 Amb: 51 PR12 Ind: 41 PR13 Amb: 45 PR09 Amb: 52 PR11 Ind: 32 Amb: PR Business Park Building 8.5 m Above Grade PR25 Amb: 47 PR26 Ind: 40 Amb: 46 PR15 Amb: 45 PR17 Amb: 44 PR16 Amb: 44 PR14 Amb: 45 ER03 50 Ind: 50 Amb: 52 Amb: PR24 Amb: 44 PR20 Ind: 45 Amb: 42 PR18 PR19 Ind: 45 Amb: ER02 ER02 Ind: PR22 Amb: 41 PR21 Amb: PR23 Amb: Title Karmax and Modatek Future 2- Non-Impulse Scenario VCL Mitigation on Scrap Metal Bin Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Close Up Of Royal Park North Site Date May 24, 2012 Project No Figure A-4 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

13 ER01 ER0 1 I nd: 39 d : 3 PR33 I nd: 42 Am b: 49 PR01 I nd: 45 Am b: 56 PR02 I nd: 39 Am b: 52 PR21 ER02 ER0 2 nd: 37 Am b: 41 d : 3 PR22 Am b: 41 PR23 I nd: 42 Am b: 39 PR03 I nd: 45 Am b: 56 PR04 I nd: 46 PR05 Am b: 51 I nd: 27 PR06 I nd: 36 Am b: 51 PR32 Am b: 50 PR31 I nd: 46 Am b: 5 PR30 PR34 I nd: 45 I nd: 42 PR29 I nd: 38 PR35 I nd: 41 PR28 I nd: 41 Am b: 46 PR27 PR24 Am b: 4 PR25 PR26 I nd: 42 Am b: 46 PR20 Am b: 42 I nd: 41 Am b: 46 PR18 PR19 I nd: 45 Am b: 42 PR07 I nd: 46 Am b: 55 PR08 I nd: 46 Am b: 51 PR15 PR14 I nd: 45 nd: 45 Am b: 45 Am b: 45 PR16 I nd: 45 Am b: 44 PR17 Am b: 44 PR09 Am b: 52 PR10 PR12 I nd: 41 PR11 I nd: 30 Am b: 45 PR13 Am b: 45 Business Par k Building 8. 5 m Above G rade ER03 ER0 d I nd: : 48 Am b: 5 ER04 ER0 4 I nd: 52 d : 5 ER05 ER05 nd: 58 d : 5 ER06 ER06 d : nd: 5 58 Am b: 49 ER07 ER0 7 I nd: 56 d : 5 ER08 ER08 d I : nd: 5 54 Am b: 46 ER09 ER09 I nd: 54 d : 5 Am b: 46 ER10 ER10 d I nd: : 5 51 Am b: 44 ER11 ER11 I nd: 47 d : 4 Am b: 43 ER12 ER12 d Ind: : 3 39 Am b: 42 ER13 ER13 Ind: 37 d : 3 Am b: 41 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier PR33 Ind: 42 Amb: 49 PR01 Ind: 45 Amb: 56 PR02 Ind: 39 Amb: PR03 Ind: 45 Amb: 56 PR05 Ind: 27 Amb: 47 PR34 Ind: 42 PR35 Ind: 41 Amb: PR04 Ind: 46 Amb: 51 PR06 Ind: 36 Amb: 51 PR32 Amb: 50 PR31 Ind: 46 Amb: 50 PR30 Ind: 45 PR27 Ind: 41 Amb: 46 PR28 Ind: 41 Amb: 46 PR07 Ind: 46 Amb: 55 PR29 Ind: 38 Amb: PR08 Ind: 46 Amb: 51 PR12 Ind: 41 PR13 Amb: 45 PR09 Amb: 52 PR11 Ind: 30 Amb: PR Business Park Building 8.5 m Above Grade PR25 Amb: 47 PR26 Ind: 42 Amb: 46 PR15 Ind: 45 Amb: 45 PR17 Amb: 44 PR16 Ind: 45 Amb: 44 PR14 Ind: 45 Amb: 45 ER03 48 Ind: 48 Amb: 52 Amb: PR24 Amb: 44 PR20 Amb: 42 PR18 PR19 Ind: 45 Amb: ER02 ER02 Ind: PR22 Amb: 41 PR21 Amb: PR23 Ind: 42 Amb: Title Modatek - Impulse Future 1 Scenario Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Close Up Of Royal Park North Site Date May 24, 2012 Project No Figure A-5 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

14 ER01 ER0 1 I nd: 39 d : 3 PR33 I nd: 42 Am b: 49 PR01 I nd: 45 Am b: 56 PR02 I nd: 39 Am b: 52 PR21 ER02 ER0 2 nd: 37 Am b: 41 d : 3 PR22 Am b: 41 PR23 I nd: 43 Am b: 39 PR03 I nd: 45 Am b: 56 PR04 I nd: 46 PR05 Am b: 51 I nd: 26 PR06 I nd: 36 Am b: 51 PR32 Am b: 50 PR31 I nd: 46 Am b: 5 PR30 PR34 I nd: 45 I nd: 42 PR29 I nd: 39 PR35 I nd: 40 PR28 I nd: 41 Am b: 46 PR27 PR24 Am b: 4 PR25 PR26 I nd: 43 Am b: 46 PR20 I nd: 45 Am b: 42 I nd: 40 Am b: 46 PR18 I nd: 45 PR19 I nd: 45 Am b: 42 PR07 I nd: 46 Am b: 55 PR08 I nd: 47 Am b: 51 PR15 PR14 I nd: 45 nd: 45 Am b: 45 Am b: 45 PR16 I nd: 45 Am b: 44 PR17 I nd: 45 Am b: 44 PR09 Am b: 52 PR10 PR12 I nd: 42 PR11 I nd: 31 Am b: 45 PR13 I nd: 45 Am b: 45 Business Par k Building 8. 5 m Above G rade ER03 ER0 d I nd: : 48 Am b: 5 ER04 ER0 4 I nd: 52 d : 5 ER05 ER05 nd: 59 d : 5 ER06 ER06 d : nd: 5 59 Am b: 49 ER07 ER0 7 I nd: 57 d : 5 ER08 ER08 d I : nd: 5 54 Am b: 46 ER09 ER09 I nd: 54 d : 5 Am b: 46 ER10 ER10 d I nd: : 5 51 Am b: 44 ER11 ER11 I nd: 47 d : 4 Am b: 43 ER12 ER12 d Ind: : 4 40 Am b: 42 ER13 ER13 Ind: 39 d : 3 Am b: 41 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier PR33 Ind: 42 Amb: 49 PR01 Ind: 45 Amb: 56 PR02 Ind: 39 Amb: PR03 Ind: 45 Amb: 56 PR05 Ind: 26 Amb: 47 PR34 Ind: 42 PR35 Ind: 40 Amb: PR04 Ind: 46 Amb: 51 PR06 Ind: 36 Amb: 51 PR32 Amb: 50 PR31 Ind: 46 Amb: 50 PR30 Ind: 45 PR27 Ind: 40 Amb: 46 PR28 Ind: 41 Amb: 46 PR07 Ind: 46 Amb: 55 PR29 Ind: 39 Amb: PR08 Ind: 47 Amb: 51 PR12 Ind: 42 PR13 Ind: 45 Amb: 45 PR09 Amb: 52 PR11 Ind: 31 Amb: PR Business Park Building 8.5 m Above Grade PR25 Amb: 47 PR26 Amb: 46 PR15 Ind: 45 Amb: 45 PR17 Ind: 45 Amb: 44 PR16 Ind: 45 Amb: 44 PR14 Ind: 45 Amb: 45 ER03 48 Ind: 48 Amb: 52 Amb: PR24 Amb: 44 PR20 Ind: 45 Amb: 42 PR18 Ind: 45 PR19 Ind: 45 Amb: ER02 ER02 Ind: PR22 Amb: 41 PR21 Amb: PR23 Amb: Title Modatek - Impulse Future 2A Scenario Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Close Up Of Royal Park North Site Date May 24, 2012 Project No Figure A-6 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

15 ER01 ER0 1 I nd: 27 d : 2 PR33 I nd: 30 Am b: 49 PR01 I nd: 31 Am b: 56 PR02 I nd: 23 Am b: 52 PR21 ER02 I nd: 36 ER0 2 nd: 27 Am b: 41 d : 2 PR22 I nd: 36 Am b: 41 PR23 I nd: 35 Am b: 39 PR03 I nd: 32 Am b: 56 PR04 I nd: 33 PR05 Am b: 51 I nd: 13 PR06 I nd: 21 Am b: 51 PR32 I nd: 32 Am b: 50 PR31 I nd: 31 Am b: 5 PR30 PR34 I nd: 32 I nd: 29 PR29 I nd: 25 PR35 I nd: 31 PR28 I nd: 30 Am b: 46 PR27 PR24 I nd: 37 Am b: 4 PR25 I nd: 37 PR26 I nd: 27 Am b: 46 PR20 I nd: 36 Am b: 42 I nd: 27 Am b: 46 PR18 I nd: 37 PR19 I nd: 37 Am b: 42 PR07 I nd: 31 Am b: 55 PR08 I nd: 32 Am b: 51 PR15 PR14 I nd: 38 nd: 38 Am b: 45 Am b: 45 PR16 I nd: 37 Am b: 44 PR17 I nd: 37 Am b: 44 PR09 I nd: 31 Am b: 52 PR10 PR12 I nd: 32 I nd: 31 PR11 I nd: 20 Am b: 45 PR13 I nd: 34 Am b: 45 Business Par k Building 8. 5 m Above G rade ER03 ER0 d I nd: : 40 Am b: 5 ER04 ER0 4 I nd: 42 d : 4 ER05 ER05 nd: 45 d : 4 ER06 ER06 d : nd: 4 42 Am b: 49 ER07 ER0 7 I nd: 46 d : 4 ER08 ER08 d I : nd: 4 44 Am b: 46 ER09 ER09 I nd: 43 d : 4 Am b: 46 ER10 ER10 d I nd: : 3 34 Am b: 44 ER11 ER11 I nd: 34 d : 3 Am b: 43 ER12 ER12 d Ind: : 3 33 Am b: 42 ER13 ER13 Ind: 32 d : 3 Am b: 41 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier PR33 Ind: 30 Amb: 49 PR01 Ind: 31 Amb: 56 PR02 Ind: 23 Amb: PR03 Ind: 32 Amb: 56 PR05 Ind: 13 Amb: 47 PR34 Ind: 29 PR35 Ind: 31 Amb: PR04 Ind: 33 Amb: 51 PR06 Ind: 21 Amb: 51 PR32 Ind: 32 Amb: 50 PR31 Ind: 31 Amb: 50 PR30 Ind: 32 PR27 Ind: 27 Amb: 46 PR28 Ind: 30 Amb: 46 PR07 Ind: 31 Amb: 55 PR29 Ind: 25 Amb: PR08 Ind: 32 Amb: 51 PR12 Ind: 32 PR13 Ind: 34 Amb: 45 PR09 Ind: 31 Amb: 52 PR11 Ind: 20 Amb: PR10 Ind: Business Park Building 8.5 m Above Grade PR25 Ind: 37 Amb: 47 PR26 Ind: 27 Amb: 46 PR15 Ind: 38 Amb: 45 PR17 Ind: 37 Amb: 44 PR16 Ind: 37 Amb: 44 PR14 Ind: 38 Amb: 45 ER03 40 Ind: 40 Amb: 52 Amb: PR24 Ind: 37 Amb: 44 PR20 Ind: 36 Amb: 42 PR18 Ind: 37 PR19 Ind: 37 Amb: ER02 ER02 Ind: PR22 Ind: 36 Amb: 41 PR21 Ind: 36 Amb: PR23 Ind: 35 Amb: Title Modatek - Impulse Future 2B Scenario Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Close Up Of Royal Park North Site Date May 24, 2012 Project No Figure A-7 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

16 ER01 E R 0 1 I nd: 30 I n d : 3 0 PR33 I nd: 32 Am b: 49 PR01 I nd: 33 Am b: 56 PR02 I nd: 29 Am b: 52 PR21 ER02 I nd: 37 E R 0 2 I nd: 30 Am b: 41 I n d : 3 0 PR22 I nd: 37 Am b: 41 PR23 I nd: 36 Am b: 39 PR03 I nd: 33 Am b: 56 PR05 I nd: 24 PR24 I nd: 38 Am b: 44 PR25 I nd: 38 PR04 I nd: 33 Am b: 51 PR06 I nd: 26 Am b: 51 PR07 I nd: 34 Am b: 55 PR32 PR08 I nd: 34 I nd: 35 Am b: 50 Am b: 51 PR31 I nd: 34 Am b: 50 PR30 PR09 PR34 I nd: 33 I nd: 41 I nd: 31 Am b: 52 PR29 I nd: 33 PR12 PR35 I nd: 42 I nd: 30 PR28 I nd: 31 Am b: 46 PR27 PR13 I nd: 29 I nd: 41 Am b: 45 Am b: 46 PR26 I nd: 28 Am b: 46 PR20 I nd: 38 Am b: 42 PR18 I nd: 38 PR19 I nd: 38 Am b: 42 PR15 PR14 I nd: 39 I nd: 39 Am b: 45 Am b: 45 PR16 I nd: 39 Am b: 44 PR17 I nd: 38 Am b: 44 PR10 I nd: 42 PR11 I nd: 28 Am b: 45 Business Park Building 8. 5 m Above G rade ER03 E R 0 3 I n d I : nd: Am b: 52 ER04 E R 0 4 I nd: 45 I n d : 4 5 ER05 E R 0 5 I nd: 48 I n d : 4 8 ER06 E R 0 6 I n d I : nd: Am b: 49 ER07 E R 0 7 I nd: 51 I n d : 5 1 ER08 E R 0 8 I n d I : nd: Am b: 46 ER09 E R 0 9 I nd: 50 I n d : 5 0 Am b: 46 ER10 E R 1 0 I n d I : nd: Am b: 44 ER11 E R 1 1 I nd: 46 I n d : 4 6 Am b: 43 ER12 E R 1 2 I n d I : nd: Am b: 42 ER13 E R 1 3 I nd: 52 I n d : 5 2 Am b: 41 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier PR33 Ind: 32 Amb: 49 PR01 Ind: 33 Amb: 56 PR02 Ind: 29 Amb: PR03 Ind: 33 Amb: 56 PR05 Ind: 24 Amb: 47 PR34 Ind: 31 PR35 Ind: 30 Amb: PR04 Ind: 33 Amb: 51 PR06 Ind: 26 Amb: 51 PR32 Ind: 34 Amb: 50 PR31 Ind: 34 Amb: 50 PR07 Ind: 34 Amb: 55 PR30 Ind: 33 PR29 Ind: 33 Amb: 47 PR28 Ind: 31 Amb: 46 PR27 Ind: 29 Amb: PR08 Ind: 35 Amb: 51 PR12 Ind: 42 PR13 Ind: 41 Amb: 45 PR09 Ind: 41 Amb: 52 PR11 Ind: 28 Amb: PR10 Ind: Business Park Building 8.5 m Above Grade PR25 Ind: 38 Amb: 47 PR26 Ind: 28 Amb: 46 PR15 Ind: 39 Amb: 45 PR17 Ind: 38 Amb: 44 PR16 Ind: 39 Amb: 44 PR14 Ind: 39 Amb: 45 ER03 42 Ind: 42 Amb: 52 Amb: PR24 Ind: 38 Amb: 44 PR20 Ind: 38 Amb: 42 PR18 Ind: 38 PR19 Ind: 38 Amb: ER02 ER02 Ind: PR22 Ind: 37 Amb: 41 PR21 Ind: 37 Amb: PR23 Ind: 36 Amb: Title Karmax - Impulse Existing Scenario Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Close Up Of Royal Park North Site Date May 24, 2012 Project No Figure A-8 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

17 ER01 E R 0 1 I nd: 37 I n d : 3 7 PR33 I nd: 40 Am b: 49 PR01 I nd: 46 Am b: 56 PR02 Am b: 52 PR21 ER02 E R 0 2 I nd: 37 Am b: 41 I n d : 3 7 PR22 Am b: 41 PR23 I nd: 43 Am b: 39 PR03 I nd: 46 Am b: 56 PR05 I nd: 29 PR24 Am b: 44 PR25 I nd: 43 PR04 I nd: 43 Am b: 51 PR06 I nd: 42 Am b: 51 PR07 I nd: 43 Am b: 55 PR32 PR08 I nd: 41 I nd: 43 Am b: 50 Am b: 51 PR31 I nd: 42 Am b: 50 PR30 PR09 PR34 I nd: 42 I nd: 43 I nd: 41 Am b: 52 PR29 I nd: 37 PR12 PR35 I nd: 41 I nd: 41 PR28 I nd: 41 Am b: 46 PR27 PR13 I nd: 40 I nd: 43 Am b: 45 Am b: 46 PR26 I nd: 40 Am b: 46 PR20 I nd: 45 Am b: 42 PR18 I nd: 45 PR19 I nd: 45 Am b: 42 PR15 PR14 I nd: 43 Am b: 45 Am b: 45 PR16 I nd: 43 Am b: 44 PR17 Am b: 44 PR10 I nd: 43 PR11 I nd: 31 Am b: 45 Business Park Building 8. 5 m Above G rade ER03 E R 0 3 I n d I : nd: Am b: 52 ER04 E R 0 4 I nd: 48 I n d : 4 8 ER05 E R 0 5 I nd: 51 I n d : 5 1 ER08 E R 0 8 I n d I : nd: Am b: 46 ER09 E R 0 9 I nd: 49 I n d : 4 9 Am b: 46 ER10 E R 1 0 I n d I : nd: Am b: 44 ER11 E R 1 1 I nd: 45 I n d : 4 5 Am b: 43 ER12 E R 1 2 I n d I : nd: Am b: 42 ER13 E R 1 3 I nd: 49 I n d : 4 9 Am b: 41 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier PR33 Ind: 40 Amb: 49 PR01 Ind: 46 Amb: 56 PR02 Amb: PR03 Ind: 46 Amb: 56 PR05 Ind: 29 Amb: 47 PR34 Ind: 41 PR35 Ind: 41 Amb: PR04 Amb: 51 PR06 Ind: 42 Amb: 51 PR32 Ind: 41 Amb: 50 PR31 Ind: 42 Amb: 50 PR07 Amb: 55 PR30 Ind: 42 PR29 Ind: 37 Amb: 47 PR28 Ind: 41 Amb: 46 PR27 Ind: 40 Amb: PR08 Amb: 51 PR12 Ind: 41 PR13 Amb: 45 PR09 Amb: 52 PR11 Ind: 31 Amb: PR Business Park Building 8.5 m Above Grade PR25 Amb: 47 PR26 Ind: 40 Amb: 46 PR15 Amb: 45 PR17 Amb: 44 PR16 Amb: 44 PR14 Amb: 45 ER03 50 Ind: 50 Amb: 52 Amb: PR24 Amb: 44 PR20 Ind: 45 Amb: 42 PR18 Ind: 45 PR19 Ind: 45 Amb: ER02 ER02 Ind: PR22 Amb: 41 PR21 Amb: PR23 Amb: Title Karmax + Modatek Future 2 with New Industry - Non-Impulse Scenarios Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Close Up Of Royal Park North Site Date May 24, 2012 Project No Figure A-9 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

18 APPENDIX B DRAFT APRIL 06, 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT

19 Environmental Noise Feasibility Assessment Milton Heights Neighbourhood Royal Park North Proposed Mixed-Use Development Town of Milton April 06, 2012 Project: Prepared for Royal Park Homes Prepared by DRAFT Terry Harding, B.E.Sc., P.Eng. DRAFT Mark Levkoe, B.Sc.E., P.Eng.

20 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 1 Environmental Noise Feasibility Assessment Milton Heights Neighbourhood Royal Park North Proposed Mixed-Use Development Town of Milton 1.0 INTRODUCTION Valcoustics Canada Ltd. (VCL) previously prepared a Noise Feasibility Assessment for the overall Milton Heights Neighbourhood dated November 28, 2006 (hereafter referred to as the November 28, 2006 Report) (Reference 6). The November 28, 2006 Report assessed the noise impact from the existing and future transportation noise sources and the two existing industrial plants immediately east, on the Milton Heights development site as a whole. The whole site comprises three separate parcels each with different ownership, these being: Royal Park North (RPN) parcel at the north end, bordering Highway 401; Century Grove parcel, in the middle area; and Andrin parcel at the south end, bordering the CP Rail line running along a northwest to southeast diagonal. This report addresses the Royal Park North parcel only. The other two parcels are addressed under separate cover. The noise control measures have been updated accounting for changes to the subdivision plan, current road traffic data and confirmed alignment of the New Tremaine Road. In addition, noise from the two industrial plants east of the site have been updated based on recent sound source inventories by the plant operators. The sound exposures on the site due to the primary transportation sources and primary industrial uses have been predicted and compared to the applicable Ministry of Environment (MOE) noise guideline limits. Where excesses above the guideline limits occur, mitigation measures have been recommended. This assessment concludes that the proposed residential uses are feasible, relative to ensuring compliance with the applicable environmental noise guidelines. This conclusion includes the potential impacts from the nearby industrial uses.

21 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page SITE AND AREA DESCRIPTION The site is bounded by: Highway 401 to the north, including a drainage channel (watercourse) between the highway and the site; Peru Road along the east side, with the existing Modatek Systems (Magna) industrial plant beyond, at the east side of Peru Road, and a second industrial plant, Karmax Heavy Stamping (Magna) south of the Modatek plant; No. 3 Side Road to the south; with existing residential beyond (as well as proposed residential immediately south of the existing, and owned by the same applicant but not part of this application); and Existing residential along the west side at the north end, with the existing Tremaine Road at the south end. The site is currently agricultural with some existing residential uses. As part of the development New Tremaine Road will be realigned and will interchange with Highway 401. The realigned New Tremaine Road will bisect the site and will be elevated to accommodate a grade separation over Highway 401. The residential and mixed use blocks will be on the west side of the realigned Tremaine Road, with a future business park (and stormwater pond) at the east side. The business park is part of the RPN application. A Key Plan is shown as Figure 1. This report is based on the RPN Draft Subdivision Plan by Freeman Planning Solutions Inc, dated March 12, 2012 and shown as Figure 2A, as well as grading information from Grading Concept plan prepared by Urbantech Consulting dated March, Please note that the March 12, 2012 draft plan does not include or show the dwelling sitings at the northerly portion of the Condo Townhouse Block 27, located along the northern edge of the site and continuing along the western side of the New Tremaine Road. The graphic appearing in our Figure 2 has the concept block plan superimposed on the draft plan, to aid the assessment of noise control measures that can be expected for these units. The concept is based on decked townhomes of three stories, with an outdoor deck at the second floor, atop the garage. The outdoor deck in this case will be at the south side of the dwellings, and well shielded from Highway 401 to the north. 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE ASSESSMENT - TRANSPORTATION SOURCES 2.1 TRANSPORTATION NOISE SOURCES The noise sources with the potential for impact on the proposed development are road traffic on: Highway 401; the realigned Tremaine Road; and the existing Tremaine Road. The existing Tremaine Road was reviewed but was found to be insignificant relative to the Highway 401 noise contribution, and therefore is not included in the noise prediction summaries. Traffic volumes on the existing Peru Road and No. 3 Side Road are insignificant relative to the other (primary) traffic sources and have not been considered.

22 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 3 The existing CPR line to the south is far enough away that it does not require consideration. The potential for noise impacts from the two industrial Magna plants to the east to the east have been updated. See Section 3.0 below Road Traffic Sources Road traffic data used in this assessment is summarized in Table 1. Appendix A includes associated correspondence. The future (ultimate) traffic data for Highway 401 was obtained from Ministry of Transportation (MTO). The traffic data for the existing Tremaine Road (Year 2010) and the New Tremaine Road realignment (future condition) was obtained from the Region of Halton. The existing Tremaine Road data was not escalated (on the basis that any future traffic growth will default to the New Tremaine Road realignment). Additional information regarding road traffic data for Highway 401 and New Tremaine Road is presented in Section below, in regard to existing traffic volumes and in relation their use to establish the ambient sound levels expected at the subject site around the time of initial occupancy, as part of the assessment of the industry sources Rail Traffic Sources The existing CPR line to the south is at least 530 m from the site at the closest point, and will have insignificant noise impacts on the subject site. CPR have noise requirements for separations of 300 m or less, relative to the rail right-of-way, which is exceeded here. The CPR line is not considered further in this study. 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL GUIDELINES Ministry of the Environment The applicable environmental noise guidelines for new residential developments are given in MOE Publication LU-131 and are summarized in Appendix B. If the daytime sound energy exposure, L eq Day (1), at the exterior face of living or dining rooms is greater than 65 dba, means must be provided so that windows can be kept closed for noise control purposes and central air conditioning is required. For daytime sound exposures between 56 and 65 dba inclusive, there need only be the provision for adding air conditioning at a later date. A warning clause advising the occupant of the potential interference with some activities is also required. At nighttime, air conditioning would be required when the sound exposure exceeds 60 dba (L eq Night (2) ) at bedroom windows (provision for adding air conditioning is required at 50 dba). For outdoor amenity areas, the design goal is 55 dba L eq Day (0700 to 2300 hours), with an excess not exceeding 5 dba considered acceptable in many cases. For road traffic sources the indoor criteria are 45 dba for living quarters and 40 dba for sleeping quarters. The architectural design of the building envelope (walls, windows, etc.) must provide adequate sound isolation (1) L eq Day - 16 hour energy equivalent sound level ( hours). (2) L eq Night - 8 hour energy equivalent sound level ( hours).

23 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 4 to achieve these indoor sound exposure limits, based on the applicable outdoor sound exposure on the facades. For non-residential (commercial) uses, the only requirement is an indoor sound level limit of 50 dba for transportation sources. 2.3 NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Road Traffic Sources Using the road traffic data in Table 1, the sound energy exposures, in terms of L eq Day and L eq Night, were determined using STAMSON V5.04 ORNAMENT, the computerized road traffic noise prediction model of the MOE. The daytime calculations were made at a height of 1.5 m above grade corresponding to an outdoor standing height at grade or a first storey living room/dining room window. For the detached dwellings, nighttime calculations were made at a 4.5 m high receptor, corresponding to a second floor bedroom window of a two storey dwelling. For the towns, a 7.5 m high receptor representing a third floor window was used. Screening of the Highway 401 express lanes by the elevated realigned New Tremaine Road, as well as the elevated Highway 401 on-ramp, was accounted for in the noise predictions, where applicable. The highest daytime and nighttime sound exposures of 74 dba and 76 dba, respectively, are predicted at the north facade of the townhouse dwellings fronting toward Highway 401 at the northwest portion of the site (Block 27, Units 27A to 27D). The second floor outdoor decks at the south side of these units are well shielded from the Highway 401 noise, except at the extreme east and west end units due to the lack of screening by the building structure at one side, where sound exposures of approximately 66 to 67 dba are predicted, for the units closest to Highway 401. To the east and remaining within this Block 27, and furthest from Highway 401 (Unit 27P), the daytime / nighttime sound exposures are predicted to be 66 / 67 dba at the north facade. At the second floor deck of this unit, the daytime sound exposure is predicted to be 65 dba, with Highway 401 and New Tremaine Road having approximately equivalent contributions. The most southerly of the units in Block 27 (Units 27Q to 27S) front towards New Tremaine Road - daytime / nighttime sound exposures of 69 / 68 dba are predicted. Worst case sound exposures at the second floor decks are 64 dba at the extreme north unit (Unit 27Q) and 61 dba at the extreme south unit (Unit 27S). At the detached dwellings closest to New Tremaine Road, daytime / nighttime sound exposures of 66 / 63 dba are predicted at the eastern facades, and daytime levels of 60 dba or less at the rear yard OLA s. Interior lots beyond the northern and eastern periphery will experience lower sound exposures due to the shielding by the intervening dwellings. Based on the proximity to Highway 401and New Tremaine Road for the eastern blocks, the daytime sound exposures in the second floor outdoor decks exceed the 55 dba guideline and 60 dba upper limit at several of the end units of these blocks. The balance of these second floor decks that are fully shielded from the highway and/or new Tremaine Road are expected to meet the 55 dba guideline. The interior lots benefit from the screening by the future dwellings and also are expected to meet the 55 dba guideline, with minor exception at two locations along the west side. A sample calculation of the future road traffic noise sound exposure is contained in Appendix C. 2.4 NOISE CONTROL MEASURES The noise control measures for transportation noise sources can generally be classified into two categories which are interrelated, but which can be treated separately for the most part: (a) Architectural elements to achieve acceptable indoor noise guidelines;

24 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 5 (b) Design features to protect the outdoor amenity areas. Table 4 and attached notes summarizes the noise abatement recommendations, as well as Figure Exterior Wall and Window Construction Residential Dwellings Construction above the minimum requirements governed by the minimum Ontario Building Code (OBC) should be expected at the dwellings closest to the peripheries of the site. The required Sound Transmission Class (STC) ratings for the exterior facades were calculated assuming windows have a surface area equalling 20% of the associated room floor area, and exterior walls were assumed to have a surface area equal to 80% of the associated room floor area for walls carrying a window. The exterior wall and window requirements are based on standard assumptions and should be checked once detailed working drawings are available for the dwellings. For the dwellings at the northern, western and eastern peripheries of the site, brick veneer exterior wall construction (or STC 54 equivalent) is recommended, and has been assumed when determining the exterior window STC requirements. Figure 2 shows the dwellings where the upgraded brick veneer wall construction is recommended. Assuming the brick veneer exterior wall construction requirements for the dwellings indicated above, the closest townhouse dwellings fronting toward Highway 401 also require upgraded windows: for corner bedroom units, windows on the north facade are required to have minimum STC 39 ratings and the windows on the east or west facade are required to have minimum STC 36 ratings; for non-corner units, windows on the north facade require minimum STC 36 ratings; windows meeting the minimum non-acoustical aspects of the Ontario Building Code (OBC) are acceptable for most other windows, and assuming brick veneer exterior wall construction for the locations shown in Figure 2 and in Table 4. At most other locations, and Table 4 summarize the general architectural exterior wall/window requirements Commercial Buildings Standard 1 inch sealed units double glazed units will be sufficient to allow the indoor sound level limits to be met. Upgraded exterior wall construction should not be necessary. Standard construction meeting the minimum building code requirements should be sufficient. This includes glazed or metal panel spandrel rated at about STC 35 or higher VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS Mandatory air conditioning should be anticipated at the first row of dwellings along the northern, eastern and western periphery of the site. Beyond the first rows requiring air conditioning, subsequent rows will require the provision to allow the future installation of air conditioning, by the occupant. For low density development, the provision normally takes the form of a ducted ventilation system suitably sized to accommodate the addition of central air conditioning. Regardless of the noise control requirements, all dwellings in the development are anticipated to be designed with this type of system.

25 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 6 Figure 2 and Table 4 show the ventilation requirements OUTDOORS The unmitigated daytime sound exposures at the OLAs of the dwellings along the periphery of the site with exposure to either Highway 401 or the realigned Tremaine Road are above the 55 dba MOE guideline and 60 dba MOE upper in some cases. Sound barriers and other methods to achieve acoustical screening have been investigated. Grade Level OLA s: The locations where sound barriers are required include Blocks 11, 14 and 17 at the west side, and Block 5 at the east side (south end). At Blocks 11 and 14, (west side): a 3.5 m high sound barrier is needed to achieve 55 dba. This is considered feasible and is recommended; at the northern end of Block 11 the barrier height would need to increase to about 3.9 m to maintain 55 dba. It would be preferable to maintain the 3.5 m height for the full block. This would result in a predicted sound exposure 1 db above 55 dba for those northerly units, and should not be an issue. At Block 17 (west side): a sound barrier height of 5.8 m at the end (west) unit is needed to meet 55 dba; the preferred height is 3.5 m to maintain aesthetic consistency with the suggested barrier at Blocks 11, and 14 immediately south; assuming 3.5 m at Block 17, the predicted sound exposure is 58 dba which is within the 5 db excess allowable under MOE guidelines in certain cases; for this case, the aesthetic consistency of maintaining the 3.5 m barrier height is considered to be valid justification for the allowable, minor excess over the 55 dba target criterion. At Block 5 (fronting onto New Tremaine Road): a 2 m high sound barrier is needed to meet 55 dba at the south lot line of the extreme south unit, and is recommended; the predictions indicate no sound barrier is needed at the extreme north unit, partly because the small segment of the New Tremaine Road visible from the rear yard location is partially screened due to the grade separation. A sound barrier at the north unit to match the south unit would be desirable, but is not mandatory. Second Level Outdoor Decks: This involves the extreme end units of Blocks 27A, 27D, 27P, 27Q and 27S, as a minimum. The concepts discussed here may also be appropriate for the end units at several or all of the other blocks within Block 27, at least in terms of maintaining an aesthetic consistency.

26 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 7 Northerly Units (Units 27A, D, E): relative to the deck surface, a 6.1 m high sound barrier is required to meet the 55 dba guideline target. This is clearly impractical; a 2.4 m high barrier would maintain the sound level within the 5 db allowable excess. This is an appropriate solution for these locations; see also the general design provisions discussion below; Easternly Units (Units 27P, Q, S): 2.4 to 2.6 m high sound barriers are needed to meet the 55 dba guideline target; a 2.4 m high barrier is recommended. A minor excess of 1 db would occur at the units where 2.6 m height is noted, which is insignificant. The 2.4 m height would maintain aesthetic congruence and justifies the minor excess. General Design Provisions (all units): these general design provisions can be used to further reduce the sound exposures at the sheltered outdoor decks of the end units, for the blocks oriented parallel to the primary noise source : locate the deck access door closest to exposed side wall of the unit. This will create the tendency to locate the seating area towards the more sheltered area of the deck, where better acoustical screening will occur; similarly, provide planter boxes, storage areas or similar at the exposed side of the deck. This also will create the tendency to locate the seating area towards the more sheltered area of the deck, where better acoustical screening will occur; For units where the 2.4 m high sound barrier is required, the barrier could take the form of a narrow 2.4 m tall storage shed or shelving the full length (or large portion thereof). This could be provided as a general feature for all end units if desired. For those locations where the storage unit must meet the requirements for effective sound barriers, as noted below. The sound barrier requirements are shown on Figure 2, and summarized in Table 4. The grade level sound barrier heights are based on the grading information shown in the Grading Concept plan prepared by Urbantech Consulting dated March The sound barrier requirements will need to be reviewed and confirmed once final development grading and dwelling sitings become available, or if changes are made relative to the March 2011 grading plan. Sound barriers must be of solid construction with no gaps, cracks or holes and must have a minimum surface density of 20 kg/m 2. A variety of materials are available including wood, masonry, earth berms, or a combination of materials. The indicated sound barriers have been recommended on the basis of protecting the full available OLA area. The actual OLA areas are not available at this time. In some cases, the areas may be less than the minimum s suggested under LU-131. For example, from the very preliminary concept plans for the second floor decks, the full deck area is likely to be around 16 sq m. This is short of the minimum 37 sq m suggested under LU-131, but is not atypical of new residential of similar urban densities. For the laneway towns type dwellings, where the OLA is nestled between the dwelling and the detached garages, the preliminary estimate is about 45 sq m. This would appear to meet the 37 sq m LU-131 requirement for row housing. Further clarification of the minimum OLA areas is under review.

27 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page WARNING CLAUSES Where the sound exposure guidelines are exceeded, appropriate warning clauses should be registered on title to make future occupants aware of the potential noise situation MIXED USE BLOCK 29 A concept plan showing possible building siting is not available at this time. Due to the proximity of this block to New Tremaine Road, some noise control measures may be needed, possibly including sound barriers. The requirements should not differ fundamentally from those at the locations with similar setback to New Tremaine Road. The specific requirements for this block can be developed when lot siting is developed. The absence of this review for this block at this time is not expected to affect the feasibility of the development as a whole. 3.0 INDUSTRY NOISE The potential noise impacts from the two industrial plants at the east side of Peru Road were reviewed in great detail as part of our November 2006 Report. The industrial noise assessment was based on sound measurements made on the two industrial properties, including at the rooftop, and with the full cooperation of both plants; the two plants being Modatek Systems at the north, and Karmax Heavy Stamping at the south. 3.1 INDUSTRY NOISE SOURCES Modatek & Karmax Plants: The primary industry sources with the greatest potential for noise impacts at the subject site are the Modatek Systems plant, immediately east at the east side of Peru Road, and a second industrial plant, Karmax Systems located south of Modatek. An open area that includes rail spurs is located between the two plants. Both plants are operated by Magna. Appendix D includes brief descriptions for the regular operations at the Modatek and Karmax plants, as provided to us with the Reference 7 materials. Additional Industrial Lands at the East Side of Peru Road: Consideration has also been given to the additional industrial uses and industrial zoned lands at the east side of Peru Road, between the two Magna plants (75 Peru Road, 77&79 Peru Road). This involves U-Need Storage (75 Peru Road) and the industrial zoned lands at 77 & 79 Peru Road, both currently being occupied by legal non-conforming uses Updated Industry Information Since the time of our November 2006 report, some changes have occurred at the Karmax and Modatek plants, with most of the changes understood as having occurred at the Modatek plant, in terms of new sources added at the rooftop. There may also have been a small addition to the Modatek building along a portion of the south side. There have been a few noticeable changes to the rooftop equipment types and/or locations at the Karmax building, but these are minor. The warehouse building at the west side of the Karmax site is now constructed, but is smaller than that originally contemplated in our original November 2006 report (it appears that only the

28 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 9 north portion of the warehouse was built). The number of rooftop fans atop this warehouse is also less than that originally assumed for our November 2006 report. This update accounts for the current building forms and massing, as well as roof heights as provided via the industry s acoustical consultant(s) and summarized in the Reference 9 materials. The Reference 9 information also included an update the noise sources and associated sound emission level data and other pertinent information used for this noise modelling update, with exception of the following: the information from RWDI indicates base grades for both industries as m. Data provided via the Region of Halton indicates the Modatek site at about m +/-, and at the Karmax site about /-. It is noted that the topographical information for the Karmax site is only for a small section at the east side, but inferring from that, the grade would not appear to be at m as best can be determined. Our analyses is based on the m and m base grades as noted above. The source height and roof height information provided in the Reference 9 materials has been adjusted accordingly. for impulses at the Karmax site, the Reference 9 sound levels for coupling/uncoupling events are either or 99.4 dbai. The reference sound level for unloading/loading is either or dbai. Our standard reference levels for coupling/uncoupling is 120 dbai and unloading/loading is 110 dbai. Each reference level is then prorated based on the number of occurrences of each event and the number of source locations used to represent each event. The 120 dbai and 110 dba reference levels for coupling/uncoupling and loading/unloading have been used in the modelling, as well as prorated based on the number of events occurring at each location. for impulse sources at Modatek Existing Scenario/Future Scenario 1 conditions, two sources are given in the Reference 9 tables (Imp_MI_ImpA and Imp_MI_ImpB). It is understood the reference sound level for these sources is representative of a total LLM from multiple activities occurring in the yard. This total LLM was then spatially averaged between the two sources (i.e. -3 db per source). This is not entirely consistent with how we would model impulses from different sources, but ultimately does not result in substantive differences in terms of worst case impacts, and therefore, the data as provided in the Reference 9 materials has been used in the modelling. However, we have assumed that all impulse activities used to generate these reference levels typically occur at all locations in the yard within the same 1 hour period; for impulse events in the Modatek: Future Scenario 2" condition, the Reference 9 information indicates that four sources are present, two with the same reference sound level as above (Imp_MI_ImpA and Imp_MI_ImpB), and two additional sources representing train impulses (MI_TrainA and MI_TrainB). We are advised these are distinct and separate events, and thus, should be assessed separately. This is not consistent with our normal method of assessing the worst case condition. We are assuming that the reference sound levels presented for these future sources have been spatially averaged between the two point sources; Based on our observations, we have noted some discrepancies with some of the source heights above roof as provided, namely the scrubber stacks as well as the cooling towers. Our modelling is based on the following source heights: Cooling Towers (Modatek): fan 3 m above roof (no change to the 1.0 m source height for cooling tower casing.

29 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page ENVIRONMENTAL GUIDELINES The applicable environmental noise guidelines for new residential developments are given in MOE Publication LU-131 and are summarized in Appendix B. Outdoors The MOE guidelines set a (one-hour L eq ) exclusionary limit of 50 dba, or the ambient due to road traffic noise, if higher, during any hour of the daytime (0700 to 2300 hours), for the sound exposure from a stationary source at any outdoor point of reception in any area amenable for use. This can include outdoor balconies. Plane of a Window The applicable sound level limit is expressed in terms of one hour L eq (as opposed to 16 hour [day] and 8 hour [night] as is used for ground transportation sources). The MOE guidelines set a (one-hour L eq ) exclusionary limit of 50 dba during the day and evening (0700 to 2300 hours) and 45 dba at night (2300 to 0700 hours) or the ambient due to the road traffic noise, if higher, in the plane of a window. No specific indoor sound exposure guidelines are provided for stationary sources. The MOE guidelines recognize minimum sound level limits which are called the exclusion limits for stationary sources, or the existing ambient sound exposure if higher. The exclusion limits for a Class 1 area are: Daytime (0700 to 2300 hours): 50 dba (L eq 1 ); Nighttime (2300 to 0700 hours): 45 dba (L eq 1 ). The same guideline limits also apply to impulsive sources, based on logarithmic mean impulse level (L LM ). For sources or events that are considered infrequent, these are excluded from needing to comply with the MOE guideline limits. Certain sources are subject to being penalized where the source character has a greater potential to cause annoyance, and have been included here Ambient Sound Levels Minimum ambient sound levels, due to road traffic sources (Highway 401 and new Tremaine Road), were predicted at each of the assessment receptors used in the analysis. The road traffic predictions were done using the CadnaA implementation of the RLS-90 traffic noise model. The RLS-90 model was calibrated using emission data for each road source as predicted by the MOE traffic noise model ORNAMENT/STAMSON. All ambient calculations were done for the most stringent nighttime period only, to consider the worst case condition. For Highway 401, the minimum hourly road traffic data was provided by the Ministry of Transportation. The average minimum hourly volume (over 7 days) for Highway 401 of 695 vehicles occurs during the 0200 to 0300 hour. For New Tremaine Road, the future Year 2031 data provided by the Region was scaled back to the Year 2015 data using an assumed 2% annual decay rate (ie the reverse of a standard 2% annual growth rate). This was done in the absence of near term estimates of the traffic volumes on New Tremaine Road when initially opened, and coinciding with the initially occupancies of the subject site. The minimum hourly data for New Tremaine Road was derived from the 24 hour data using the typical ITE traffic distribution model for well travelled roadways. According to this distribution, the minimum hourly volume of 44, which is 0.2% of the 2015 volume of 21,802 vehicles, occurs during the hours of 0400 to The predicted minimum ambient sound levels consider only the portion of Highway 401 on the east side of the New Tremaine overpass. This was done since the sound level contribution, at the critical receptors, from

30 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 11 the portion of the roadway on the west side would be mostly screened by the proposed buildings of the subject development. It is noted that the contribution of New Tremaine road is only relevant at the east side of the Royal Park North site, at the dwellings closest to the New Tremaine Road. At all other locations the sound level contribution from New Tremaine Road is insignificant. Further note, all ambient sound level predictions include for the presence of the future building on the lands designated as Business Park on the Royal Park North site. The building was assumed to be 6 m high for assessment purposes Applicable Guideline Limits The predicted ambient sound exposures are greater than the minimum exclusion limits, the minimum nighttime sound exposures predicted to be 53 to 55 dba at the east periphery, where the highest levels form the industrial sources will occur. The ambient sound levels are shown on the corresponding Figures 3 to 9, indicated as Amb: in each receptor summary text box D-1 AND D-6 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES The MOE D-1 and D-6 guidelines are intended to assist in the planning process when new sensitive land uses are proposed within the potential influence area of existing facilities, or when new facilities are proposed where existing sensitive uses would be within the new influence area. The stated objectives of the MOE guidelines are to "...minimize or prevent, through the use of buffers, the exposure of any person... to adverse effects associated with the operation of specified facilities...". Environmental noise is one identified, potential, adverse effect. Separation distance is one buffering technique. Other types of buffers or mitigation are recognized, such as sound barrier berms, walls or buildings. Where a specific site is proposed for development, it is the proponent's responsibility to investigate, propose and implement mitigation that can be located either at the source, elsewhere on the facility site, on the sensitive land use site, or on intervening sites. The D-6 guideline is a direct application of D-1, specific to industrial operations/facilities and sensitive land uses. Guideline D-6 identifies potential separation distances between sensitive land uses and industry, based on categorizing industry into one of three classes. Class I: potential zone of influence 70 m; minimum 20 m. Class II: potential zone of influence 300 m; minimum 70 m. Class III: potential zone of influence 1000 m; minimum 300 m. The setbacks are typically lot line to lot line. Where zoning setbacks preclude uses with potential for conflict, setbacks on source or receptor properties can be part of the minimum setback. In general, compliance with the numeric sound level guideline limits outlined in MOE publications LU-131 or NPC 205/232 have been adequate to demonstrate land use compatibility between industrial facilities and noise sensitive uses, for buffer setbacks less than the suggested minimums outlined in the D-1 and D-6 publications. There are several pit-falls in the literal application of Guideline D-6: 1. It is not always easy to fit every industry into only one of three categories. Some smaller industries (Class I) sometimes have one of the characteristics of a larger industry (Class III) and as a result, on

31 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 12 occasion, there has been a tendency to classify based on the highest category for any characteristic rather than on an overall judgement. This can lead to ridiculous conclusions on occasion for very small industrial operations with one characteristic being the same as the Class III industry examples given in D Applying the minimum recommended (or other arbitrary) separation distance provides no assurance that there will be no environmental noise impacts and that no mitigation will be required. There have been occasions where planners assumed that implementing either the minimum or a separation distance equal to the indicated potential zone of influence automatically resolved all issues. Conversely, there are examples where noise sensitive developments have been approved with buffer setbacks much less than the minimums under D-6, on the basis that the applicable MOE noise guideline limits of LU-131 or NPC 205/232 are met. In fact, high density residential with common property lines to Class III industry (i.e., 0 m setback) has been approved on this basis. In other words, compliance with the numeric sound level limits of the MOE can be a better predictor of land use compatibility, rather than buffer setbacks alone and in the absence of numeric sound limits. 3. The D-1 and D-6 guidelines are broad guidelines considering a variety of potential environmental impacts, including noise and air quality, etc. Distance separation alone is generally not an efficient mitigation technique for noise, because of the non-linear relationship between sound level and distance from a source. That is, the rate of fall off of sound level diminishes with increasing distance. Thus, relying on distance alone can lead to inefficient use of infrastructure and available land. Including mitigation such as sound barriers, building orientation (e.g., direction that loading docks face), or noise control at source (e.g., equipment selection, silencers on fans, etc.) can often lead to appropriate compliance with noise criteria and land use compatibility, using separation distances less than the minimum in the D-6 guidelines. 3.3 NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Methodology The noise analysis was done using CadnaA environmental acoustics modelling software. A 3-D model of each industrial plant and the surrounding lands was developed using the proposed draft plan and industrial building massing (as defined by recent aerial imagery from Google Earth). The site topography is based on the most recent grading plan. The noise modelling accounts for the soft ground topography between the noise sources and receiver areas, screening by existing buildings and structures where applicable, as well as various environmental factors such as atmospheric absorption, ground effects, etc following the procedures of ISO 9613 Part 2. The following analytical parameters and assumptions were used: the source reference information as provided in the updated Tables 1A and 2A of Reference 9, except as noted in Section above; building outline locations have been assumed based on freehand outlines per the current aerial images on Google Earth; sound power levels for all rooftop sources are assumed to have been generated using hemispherical radiation; sound power level for the scrap metal bin is assumed to have been generated using quarter sphere radiation (Note: this was indicated as hemispherical radiation in the Reference 9 document accompanying the Feb 10, 2012 circulation of our Cadna/A model, which was incorrect); the site topography is based on the current site grading plans (the grading plans for the other two proposed residential parcels; Century Grove parcel and Andrin parcel, are also included in the Cadna model), including the proposed grade separation of the New Tremaine Road alignment, and existing berms at the west side of both industrial plants.

32 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 13 for ground absorption, the surface in and around the both plants have been modelled as reflective with G=0, and all other areas absorptive with G=1 (in accordance with ISO ), except the local roads which are also modelled as reflective with G= 0. Also, at this time, we are showing a proposed storm water detention pond as G=0; the default standard environmental conditions in the CadnaA model of 10 degrees C and 70% relative humidity have been used; order of reflections = 2 (pertains to the sound reflection characteristics from stationary objects in the Cadna/A model). the predictions apply to a top floor receptor of the three storey dwelling, corresponding to 7.5 m above grade Noise Control Measures The sound level predictions account for the noise control measures as identified the Tables 1A and 2A of Reference 9 materials. Relative to the data as provided in Table 1A, the degree of noise reduction for the Modatek scrap metal bin has been increased. The as-provided reduction is proposed as 5 or 6 db (the amount depends upon the scenario), which is thought to be the minimum required to address environmental compliance matters identified by Magna (and their consultants). The control measure for the scrap metal bin has not been implemented at the time of writing, nor the specific control measure identified in the Reference 9 materials, but is likely to involve enclosing or closing off the scrap metal storage area at the open (west) face, such as with an operable door of some sort (eg sliding door). The total transmission loss (TL) data applied to the scrap metal bin noise level was: 1/1 Octave Band ,000 2,000 4,000 8,000 Scrap Bin TL (db) This TL data is a composite TL based on 1/16 inch thick metal panel with 0.1% opening, recognizing that a an enclosure solution would likely involve a metal closure panel and sliding metal door, but which would not seal completely (eg, at the perimeter of the sliding door), hence the 0.1% opening assumption to account for sound leaks or equivalent. This TL data excludes the as-proposed 5 or 6 db reduction per the Reference 9 Table 1A, that is, it is total TL, not additional TL. The effect with or without the upgraded Modatek scrap metal bin enclosure has been reviewed, and is discussed later Sound Level Predictions In addition to sound level predictions at the proposed residential receptors, predictions were made at the closest existing residential dwellings to the plants, based on the each plant operating individually (as would be considered when assessing the compliance status of the plant under the EPA). This was done to address any possible noise reduction the plant may need to be considering, to aid any additional noise mitigation considerations that may be relevant to the proposed residential uses. For Modatek, there are predicted excesses of 1 db for the non-impulse sources at several of the existing dwellings which can and typically is considered as being insignificant. For the impulse scenario, an excess of up to 10 db is predicted at the closest existing dwellings along Peru Road;

33 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 14 For Karmax, there are no excesses predicted for the non-impulse scenario at any of the existing dwellings. For the impulse scenario, an excess of up to 4 db is predicted at the closest existing dwellings along Peru Road; Despite the predicted excess at several of the existing dwellings in the area, this has not been accounted for when reporting the predicted sound exposures at the subject site. In this case, this has no bearing on the compliance status at the site. Figure 3 shows the assessment receptor locations PR41 and PR42 used for the site. These represent the worst case locations relative to the noise emissions from the Modatek and Karmax plants. To present a worst case condition, the noise emissions from both plants combined has been considered (except for the impulse sources which are addressed on an individual basis to present a worst case condition). The operating scenarios as presented in the Reference 7 to 9 materials were investigated, specifically: Modatek Existing scenario for impulse and non-impulse sources (there is no future scenario); Modatek Future 1 scenario for non-impulse sources; Modatek Future 2 scenario for non-impulse sources; Modatek Existing scenario for impulse sources; Modatek Future 2 scenario for impulse sources (broken out as 2A and 2B, to address specific source types); The predicted sound exposures, at the proposed residential uses are: Non-impulse: Karmax Existing + Modatek Existing scenario: 49 dba or less; Karmax Exiting + Modatek Future 1 scenario: 49 dba or less; Karmax Exiting + Modatek Future 2 scenario: 49 dba or less. Impulse: Modatek Existing scenario: 55 dbai or less; Modatek Future 2A scenario: 55 dbai or less; Modatek Future 2B scenario: 38 dbai or less; Karmax Existing scenario: 41 dbai or less. Table 3 summarizes the predicted sound levels at the example proposed residential receptors due to the Modatek and Modatek industry sources combined, for the non-impulse sources and scenarios. Figures 3 to 9 summarize the predicted sound levels for the above cases. Not accounting for any addition noise control outside of what has been proposed by Magna (and the clarification noted above regarding the additional noise reduction applied to the Modatek scrap metal bin), the

34 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 15 predicted sound levels at the proposed do not exceed the 55 dba nighttime guideline for the worst case location. This is sufficient to show compliance with the most stringent daytime and nighttime MOE sound level limits. This conclusion still applies regardless of whether the additional mitigation noted in Section above, is applied to the Modatek scrap metal bin or not. In the summary below, the non-impulse sound source level predictions are shown with / without the additional mitigation: the as-proposed mitigation proposed by Magna results in an increase of 2 db in the worst case: Non-impulse (with / without additional Modatek Scrap Mental Bin Mitigation): Karmax Existing + Modatek Existing scenario: PR01 : 49 / 50 dba; PR02: 49 / 51 dba; Karmax Exiting + Modatek Future 1 scenario: PR01 : 49 / 51 dba; PR02: 49 / 51 dba; Karmax Exiting + Modatek Future 2 scenario: PR01 : 49 / 51 dba; PR02: 49 / 51 dba;. Thus, the compliance status is maintained regardless of whether the additional mitigation is applied to the Modatek scrap metal bin or not. It is included in this assessment for consistency Additional Noise Control Measures Additional noise control measures are not required. However, it is again clarified that additional noise reduction has been applied to the scrap metal bin to better reflect the noise reduction that is likely to occur in practice for a closure solution, relative to the minimum 5 or 6 db reduction suggested by Magna. 4.0 GROUND VIBRATION The CP Rail line and the stamping presses at Karmax are potential sources of ground vibration. There are no stamping presses or other sources of ground vibration at the Modatek plant. 4.1 CP Rail The railway is far enough away that ground vibration will not be an issue at the subject Royal Park North site. 4.2 Stamping Presses (Karmax) The potential for ground vibration from the stamping presses at Karmax was reviewed in our November 2006 report and were not found to not be problematic at the closest proposed residential. This included a review of the potential for stamping presses in the new warehouse, should that area ever be considered for production uses. The proposed residential uses for the subject Royal Park North site are well removed from the existing or possible future stamping presses at Karmax. Ground vibration will not be an issue. We are not aware of any fundamental changes to the stamping presses at the Karmax plant that might affect the ground vibration levels at off site areas. The original assessment and conclusions are expected to still be applicable. For convenience, the section addressing the ground vibration assessment from the November 2006 report are included here in Appendix E. It must be noted that the Appendix E discussions regarding the closest proposed dwellings are in reference to the Century Grove land parcel to the south of the subject Royal Park North parcel, which has proposed dwellings closer than that for the subject site considered here.

35 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page APPLICATION OF D-1 and D-6 GUIDELINES TO PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN The Karmax and Modatek plants are automotive parts manufacturing, and can be classified as Class II industries under D-6. This classification is helped in part by the substantive planned or currently installed noise control measures in place and acoustical buffering of many of the noise sources at both industries to address existing residential uses nearby. Further, the plants do not appeared to be or have been a source of major annoyance at the existing community, as evidenced by the general lack of documented noise complaints by the surrounding residential uses. The minimum setback would be therefore be 70 m on th basis of a Class II grading. The industries due east of the site can classified as belonging to Class I or II, with minimum separation of 20 or 70 m, respectively. The draft plan shows non-residential blocks at the eastern portion closest to existing industrial uses to the east, including Business Park Block 30, and Stormwater Pond Block 32. The largest minimum separation distance of 70 m to the closest proposed residential uses, as recommended by D-6, is achieved in all cases. Actual separations are much greater, and in the order of 330 m. As noted previously, compliance with the numerical limits of LU-131 is considered an adequate indicator of land use compatibility by itself. The additional noise control measures noted in Section above will be sufficient to show compliance with the reference guideline limits. This excludes the upgraded mitigation noted for the Modatek scrap metal bin in Section Future Uses at MI Development Lands The issue has been raised regarding possible future uses at the MI Development lands. This includes possible expansions assuming the Karmax and Modatek plants remain, or other uses assuming both plants cease operations. For the case where the two plants remain, the presence of the new residential at the subject site will not adversely affect either plants ability to obtain or update their Environmental Compliance Approval certificates (previously Certificate of Approval). This is due to the presence of existing residential at the same setback as the proposed residential, and with a lower guideline limit that must be respected by the plant operators as part of their environmental compliance requirements. The proposed three storey townhouse dwellings at the east side can result in slightly higher sound exposures at the top floor, but this is offset by the higher ambient sound levels due to closer proximity to Highway 401, as well as greater exposure to New Tremaine Road (due to a greater view of the elevated portions of the roadway). In addition, the planned expansion at the Modatek facility has been considered as part of this assessment. For Karmax no specific expansion plans have been provided. In either case, additional specific expansion plans by MI Developments can be considered and addressed when specific details of the expansion plans are provided. The same argument holds true for any possible future alternative uses at either site, in terms of the presence of the proposed residential uses not affecting the type of uses at the site, considering the closer proximity of the existing residential development to these industrial lands. Further, any change in use triggering a change to a Class III operation with 300 m separation, is currently satisfied. 5.2 Existing U-Need Storage Facility (75 Peru Road) The site has been visited on several occasions, and negligible activity was observed, as well as a general absence of noise emissions at locations very close to the site. The potential noise sources only appear to be that due to truck arrivals and departures, which seems minimal based on the site observations, as well as aerial imagery showing what appears to be a small operation. The presence of several residential dwellings in much closer proximity to this the 75 Peru Road site relative to the subject site, is noted, including dwellings at the west side of Peru, and not on the industrial zoned lands

36 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 17 as is the case for the land immediately north that includes a residential dwelling within metres of the 75 Peru Road operations. The presence of the existing dwellings and the obligation by the operator of 75 Peru Road to comply with the environmental noise requirements is sufficient to ensure there will be no adverse impacts at the subject site. 5.3 Industrial Zoned Lands - 79 & 99 Peru Road The lands currently include legal non-conforming residential uses and are not a nosie concern relative to the subject site. It is conceivable that these lands could ultimately be used for industrial uses, under what is understood to be General Industrial (M2) zoning, permitting Class II or III uses. In the absence of specific plans indicating type, number and location of noise sources, detailed assessment of potential noise impacts is not appropriate in the attempt to assess the potential noise impacts and a valid comparison of the compliance status relative to applicable noise guideline. A more reasonable assessment can be concluded by determining the maximum permitted noise emissions, this in turn being determined by the operators obligations to comply with the environmental noise requirements at existing residential uses nearby. This can then be used to assess possible noise levels at other areas, particularly if the other areas are in the same general direction as the existing dwellings, relative to the industry in question. By similar arguments given in Sections 5.1 and 5.2 above, the presence of existing dwellings at the west side of Peru Road would be sufficient to ensure there will be minimal noise impact at the subject site, on the basis that the future industry respects its obligation to remain in compliance with the environmental noise requirements at these existing dwellings. 6.0 CONCLUSIONS The proposed development is considered as being feasible, relative to demonstrating adequate compliance with the applicable noise guidelines. In summary 1. Construction above the minimum requirements governed by the minimum OBC requirements should be expected at the dwellings closest to Highway 401, and the realigned New Tremaine Road. 2. Brick veneer (or STC 54 equivalent) exterior wall construction is recommended for dwelling along the north periphery closest and/or with exposure to Highway 401. See Figure The bedroom windows in the townhouse dwellings closest to Highway 401 required upgraded STC ratings: STC 39 in the worst case, but must be checked once house plans are available. 4. Mandatory air conditioning is required for the dwellings on the northen, western and eastern periphery of the site. 5. Beyond the first rows requiring mandatory air conditioning, subsequent rows will require the provision to allow the future installation of air conditioning, by the occupant. For low density development, the provision normally takes the form of a ducted ventilation system suitably sized to accommodate the addition of central air conditioning. 6. Sound barriers are required for certain areas, primarily the dwellings/lots at the western, northern and eastern periphery. This includes sound barriers along the side of the second floor decks of several end units, as well as grade level sound barriers at a few lots. The reverse frontage townhouse dwellings along the northern periphery and use of well shielded second floor decks above the garages dramatically reduces the need for large sound barriers commonly seen for developments this close

37 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 18 to major 400 series Highways. In most cases the 55 dba guideline can be met with reasonable barrier heights, and are recommended. In a few cases a very minor excess of 1 to 2 dba over the 55 dba guideline is predicted. 7. Warning clauses advising the occupants of the potential noise from the roadways are required at several Lots. 8. A detailed noise impact study will be required once final site grading and dwelling sitings becomes available. This should also include an update for the exterior window and wall requirements, based on the proposed floor plans. 9. Noise from the nearby industrial plants at the east side of Peru Road has been updated based on the source reference information provided in the Reference 7 tom 9 materials, and with some small changes to some of the information to either better reflect conditions as observed, or to suite or typical methodologies for certain sources. In addition the minimum noise reductions applied to the scrap metal bin has been increased, to better reflect the noise reduction that is likely to occur in practice. In addition the minimum noise reductions applied to the scrap metal bin has been increased, to better reflect the noise reduction that is likely to occur in practice (although is not considered as being mandatory for this site). 10. The update assessment for the industrial plant sources confirms: the reference daytime and nighttime sound level limits are met the highest predicted sound level at the worst case proposed residential receptor is 49 dba for the non-impulse sources (51 dba assuming no upgraded mitigation for the scrap metal bin), and 55 dbai for the impulse sources. These are within the predicted minimum ambient sound exposures and therefore sufficient to establish compliance with the applicable noise guidelines. 11. Warning clauses advising the occupants of the sounds from the nearby industrial uses may sometimes be audible, are recommended. ML/TH J:\2002\102286\200 (Royal Park)\Reports\Milton Meadows _RPN_Draft_V2.0_new.wpd

38 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 19 REFERENCES 1. PC STAMSON 5.03, Computer Program for Road Traffic Noise Assessment, Ontario Ministry of Environment. 2. Building Practice Note No. 56: "Controlling Sound Transmission into Buildings", by J. D. Quirt, Division of Building Research, National Council of Canada, September, "Environmental Noise Assessment in Land-Use Planning 1987", Ontario Ministry of Environment, February 1987, ISBN "Road and Rail Noise: Effects on Housing", Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Publication NHA 5156, 81/ "Noise Assessment Criteria in Land Use Planning", Ontario Ministry of Environment, Publication LU-131, October "Environmental Noise Feasibility Assessment ", Milton Heights Neighbourhood, November 28, 2006, Valcoustics Canada Ltd (Project ). 7. November 11, 2011 Memorandum, RWDI Air Inc. 8. December 23, 2011 Memorandum, RWDI Air Inc. 9. February 4, transmission with attachments ( Updated Table 1A - Modatek, Updated Table 2A - Karmax, Updated Table 1D - Modatek, Table 2D), RWDI Air Inc,

39 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 20 TABLE 1 FUTURE ROAD TRAFFIC DATA (1) Roadway AADT (2) % Trucks (3) Medium Heavy Speed Limit (kph) % Grade Highway , < 2 Tremaine Road (Realigned) 29, Tremaine Road (Existing) 3, < 2 Notes: (1) Highway 401 data obtained from the MTO for the Year Tremaine Road data obtained from the Region of Halton for the ultimate condition. See Appendix A. (2) AADT - Annual Average Daily Traffic. (3) Heavy/Medium ratio is assumed for Highway 401.

40 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 21 TABLE 2 PREDICTED SOUND ENERGY EXPOSURE OUTDOORS (1) ROAD TRAFFIC NOISE - NO MITIGATION Location (2) Source Distance (m) (3) L eq Day (dba) L eq Night (dba) Highway 401 Westbound Block 27A (North Facade) Highway 401 Eastbound TOTAL Block 27A (OLA) Highway 401 Westbound Highway 401 Eastbound TOTAL 66 Highway 401 Westbound Highway 401 Eastbound Block 27K (North Facade) Highway 401 Ramp New Tremaine Road Northbound New Tremaine Road Southbound TOTAL Highway 401 Westbound Highway 401 Eastbound Block 27P (OLA) New Tremaine Road Northbound New Tremaine Road Southbound TOTAL 65 Highway 401 Westbound Highway 401 Eastbound Block 5 (East Facade) New Tremaine Road Northbound New Tremaine Road Southbound TOTAL New Tremaine Road Northbound Block 5 (OLA) New Tremaine Road Southbound TOTAL 60

41 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 22 TABLE 2 (cont d) Location (2) Source Distance (m) (3) L eq Day (dba) L eq Night (dba) Block 18 (North Facade) Block 13 (North Facade) Highway 401 Westbound Highway 401 Eastbound TOTAL Highway 401 Westbound Highway 401 Eastbound TOTAL Highway 401 Eastbound Block 25 (East Facade) Highway 401 Westbound New Tremaine Road Northbound New Tremaine Road Southbound TOTAL Block 44 (West Facade) Block 23 (North Facade) Highway 401 Eastbound Highway 401 Westbound TOTAL Highway 401 Eastbound Highway 401 Westbound TOTAL Notes: (1) Daytime sound exposures apply to 1.5 m high Living room window and in the rear yard OLA. Nighttime sound exposures apply to the top floor bedroom window (4.5 m above grade for laneway singles and towns; 7.5 m above grade for decked townhomes). (2) See Figure 2 for receptor locations. (3) Distance indicated is from the centre line of the noise source to facade.

42 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 23 TABLE 3 PREDICTED SOUND ENERGY EXPOSURE OUTDOORS MODATEK + KARMAX INDUSTRY SOURCES - WITH MITIGATION (1) Assessment Receptor Daytime - dba (dbai) Predicted Hourly Leq (LLM) Nighttime dba (dbai) SCENARIO: Karmax + Modatek Existing : Non- Impulse PR PR SCENARIO: Karmax + Modatek Future 1 : Non- Impulse PR PR SCENARIO: Karmax + Modatek Future 2 : Non- Impulse PR PR SCENARIO: Modatek Existing : Impulse PR01 (55) (55) PR02 (53) (53) SCENARIO: Modatek Future 2A : Impulse PR01 (55) (55) PR02 (55) (53) SCENARIO: Modatek Future 2B : Impulse PR41 (30) (30) PR42 (29) (29) SCENARIO: Karmax Existing : Impulse PR41 (38) (38) PR42 (38) (38) Notes: (1) Including mitigation proposed by Karmax and summarized in Reference 9. Predictions include additional reduction for the scrap metal bin. See text

43 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 24 TABLE 4 NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES Building Air Conditioning (1) Exterior Wall (2) Exterior Window (3) Sound Barrier (4) Warning Clauses (5) Transportation Noise Sources Block 27A (west unit), Block 27D (east unit) Mandatory Brick Veneer Up to STC 39 see text & Figure 2 A, B, C Blocks 27B, 27C Remaining units in Blocks 27A and 27D (interior units) Mandatory Brick Veneer Up to STC 36 no A, B, C Block 27E (north unit) Mandatory Brick Veneer Up to STC 35 see text & Figure 2 A, B, C Block 5 (south unit) Block 27P (east unit) Block 27Q (north unit) Block 27S (south unit) Mandatory Brick Veneer OBC see text & Figure 2 A, B, C Blocks 11, 14, 17, 18, 19, 27F to 27O, 27R, 44 Remaining units in Block 5, 27E, 27P, 27Q 27S Mandatory Brick Veneer OBC no A, B, C Block 4, 6, 7, 8, 12 to 16, 20 to 25, 43 All other residential lots / units Industrial Noise Sources Provision for Adding no special requirements OBC OBC no A, B, D OBC OBC no B Residential uses along the eastern periphery of the site Noise control measures proposed by operators of the Modatek and Karmax plants for rooftop and grade level plant sources and as part of environmental compliance requirements for existing residential uses are considered to be adequate. Additional measures are not considered to be necessary. Notes: * OBC denotes any construction meeting the minimum non-acoustical requirements of the Ontario Building Code. For additional notes to this table, see the following page.

44 Milton Heights Neighbourhood / Royal Park North Feasibility File: Page 25 NOTES TO TABLE 3 1. Central air conditioning allows windows to remain closed for noise control purposes. Provision for adding air conditioning typically takes the form of a ducted ventilation system sized to accommodate the addition of central air conditioning by the occupant. 2. Masonry construction or acoustically equivalent construction to brick veneer meeting minimum STC Upgraded means construction beyond that governed by the minimum non-acoustical requirements governed by the OBC (typically about STC 30). A sliding glass walkout door should be considered as a window and be included in the percentage of glazing. 4. Earth berms, acoustic fences or combinations of berms and fences may be used, provided a minimum face density of at least 20 kg/ sq m is maintained, and the barrier is free of cracks, gaps and openings. 5. Standard example warning clauses to be registered on title and be included in Offers of Purchase and Sale and Leases on designated units: A. Purchasers are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in this development and within the building units, sound levels from increasing road traffic may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound level may exceed the noise guidelines of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment. B. Purchasers are advised that sounds from the area industrial uses may occasionally be audible. C. This dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the Municipality s and the Ministry of the Environment s noise criteria. D. This dwelling unit has been fitted with a forced air heating system and the ducting, etc. was sized to accommodate central air conditioning. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the Municipality s and the Ministry of Environment s noise criteria. 6. Conventional roof construction meeting Ontario Building Code requirements is satisfactory in all cases. 7. All exterior doors shall be fully weatherstripped.

45

46

47 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier Royal Park North ER01 Ind: 41 dba Amb: 46 dba PR01 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 55 dba PR02 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 53 dba ER02 dba Amb: 46 dba ER03 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 52 dba ER04 Ind: 48 dba Amb: 47 dba ER05 Ind: 51 dba Amb: 47 dba ER06 Ind: 51 dba Amb: 49 dba ER08 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 45 dba ER07 Ind: 52 dba Amb: 47 dba ER09 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 45 dba ER10 Ind: 46 dba Amb: 44 dba ER11 Ind: 46 dba Amb: 43 dba ER12 Ind: 47 dba Amb: 42 dba ER13 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 41 dba Title Karmax and Modatek Existing- Non-Impulse Scenario VCL Mitigation on Scrap Metal Bin Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Date Apr 3, 2012 Project No Figure 3 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

48 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier Royal Park North ER01 Ind: 41 dba Amb: 46 dba PR01 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 55 dba PR02 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 53 dba ER02 dba Amb: 46 dba ER03 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 52 dba ER04 Ind: 48 dba Amb: 47 dba ER05 Ind: 52 dba Amb: 47 dba ER06 Ind: 51 dba Amb: 49 dba ER08 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 45 dba ER07 Ind: 52 dba Amb: 47 dba ER09 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 45 dba ER10 Ind: 46 dba Amb: 44 dba ER11 Ind: 46 dba Amb: 43 dba ER12 Ind: 47 dba Amb: 42 dba ER13 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 41 dba Title Karmax and Modatek Future 1- Non-Impulse Scenario VCL Mitigation on Scrap Metal Bin Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Date Apr 3, 2012 Project No Figure 4 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

49 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier Royal Park North ER01 Ind: 41 dba Amb: 46 dba PR01 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 55 dba PR02 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 53 dba ER02 dba Amb: 46 dba ER03 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 52 dba ER04 Ind: 48 dba Amb: 47 dba ER05 Ind: 52 dba Amb: 47 dba ER06 Ind: 52 dba Amb: 49 dba ER08 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 45 dba ER07 Ind: 52 dba Amb: 47 dba ER09 Ind: 50 dba Amb: 45 dba ER10 Ind: 46 dba Amb: 44 dba ER11 Ind: 46 dba Amb: 43 dba ER12 Ind: 47 dba Amb: 42 dba ER13 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 41 dba Title Karmax and Modatek Future 2- Non-Impulse Scenario VCL Mitigation on Scrap Metal Bin Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Date Apr 3, 2012 Project No Figure 5 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

50 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier Royal Park North ER01 Ind: 42 dba Amb: 46 dba PR01 Ind: 55 dba Amb: 55 dba PR02 Ind: 53 dba Amb: 53 dba ER02 dba Amb: 46 dba ER03 Ind: 48 dba Amb: 52 dba ER04 Ind: 52 dba Amb: 47 dba ER05 Ind: 58 dba Amb: 47 dba ER06 Ind: 58 dba Amb: 49 dba ER08 Ind: 54 dba Amb: 45 dba ER07 Ind: 56 dba Amb: 47 dba ER09 Ind: 54 dba Amb: 45 dba ER10 Ind: 51 dba Amb: 44 dba ER11 Ind: 47 dba Amb: 43 dba ER12 Ind: 39 dba Amb: 42 dba ER13 Ind: 37 dba Amb: 41 dba Title Modatek - Impulse Existing Scenario Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Date Apr 3, 2012 Project No Figure 6 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

51 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier Royal Park North ER01 dba Amb: 46 dba PR01 Ind: 55 dba Amb: 55 dba PR02 Ind: 53 dba Amb: 53 dba ER02 dba Amb: 46 dba ER03 Ind: 48 dba Amb: 52 dba ER04 Ind: 52 dba Amb: 47 dba ER05 Ind: 59 dba Amb: 47 dba ER06 Ind: 59 dba Amb: 49 dba ER08 Ind: 55 dba Amb: 45 dba ER07 Ind: 57 dba Amb: 47 dba ER09 Ind: 54 dba Amb: 45 dba ER10 Ind: 51 dba Amb: 44 dba ER11 Ind: 47 dba Amb: 43 dba ER12 Ind: 40 dba Amb: 42 dba ER13 Ind: 39 dba Amb: 41 dba Title Modatek - Impulse Future 2 A Scenario Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Date Apr 3, 2012 Project No Figure 7 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

52 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier Royal Park North ER01 Ind: 34 dba Amb: 46 dba PR01 Ind: 38 dba Amb: 55 dba PR02 Ind: 38 dba Amb: 53 dba ER02 Ind: 35 dba Amb: 46 dba ER03 Ind: 39 dba Amb: 52 dba ER04 Ind: 42 dba Amb: 47 dba ER05 Ind: 45 dba Amb: 47 dba ER06 Ind: 42 dba Amb: 49 dba ER08 dba Amb: 45 dba ER07 Ind: 46 dba Amb: 47 dba ER09 dba Amb: 45 dba ER10 Ind: 34 dba Amb: 44 dba ER11 Ind: 34 dba Amb: 43 dba ER12 Ind: 33 dba Amb: 42 dba ER13 Ind: 32 dba Amb: 41 dba Title Modatek - Impulse Future 2 B Scenario Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Date Apr 3, 2012 Project No Figure 8 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

53 Legend Existing Receptor Proposed Receptor Point Source Line Source Sound Barrier Royal Park North ER01 Ind: 35 dba Amb: 46 dba PR01 Ind: 41 dba Amb: 55 dba PR02 Ind: 41 dba Amb: 53 dba ER02 Ind: 36 dba Amb: 46 dba ER03 dba Amb: 52 dba ER04 Ind: 46 dba Amb: 47 dba ER05 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 47 dba ER06 Ind: 50 dba Amb: 49 dba ER08 Ind: 49 dba Amb: 45 dba ER07 Ind: 53 dba Amb: 47 dba ER09 Ind: 52 dba Amb: 45 dba ER10 Ind: 35 dba Amb: 44 dba ER11 Ind: 38 dba Amb: 43 dba ER12 Ind: 40 dba Amb: 42 dba ER13 Ind: 46 dba Amb: 41 dba Title Karmax - Impulse Scenario Project Name Milton Meadows/Royal Park North Date Apr 3, 2012 Project No Figure 9 J:\2002\102286\400 (OMB)\Analysis\Cadna\ \Base Models\Base Model with VCL SM Mit For RPN.cna Date Plotted:

54 File: Milton Heights Neighbourhood Royal Park/Noise Feasibility APPENDIX A ROAD TRAFFIC DATA CORRESPONDENCE

55 Terry Harding From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jakaitis, Alicia June 6, :12 AM Krusto, Matt; Green-Battiston, Melissa; Mark Levkoe RE: RFI RE: Request for Ultimate Traffic Data - Tremaine Rd Realignment Hi Terry, I can follow up on the speed limit reduction in the future, however, please use 80km/hr for your analysis as the volumes provided do not include the updated modeling work the Region is currently undertaking as part of our Transportation Master Plan, Road to Change (2031). Tremaine Road will be 6 lanes post 2021 and much higher volumes are expected. Alicia Hi Terry,

56 Please see the below noted traffic data for Tremaine Road. TREMAINE ROAD AADT 29,990 Speed (km/h)80 Trucks (%) 12 Medium/Heavy (%) 50/50 Day/Night (%) 90/10 Please let me know if you need anything further, Alicia

57 Terry, Please see below for responses to your request for confirmation of data. Changes have been highlighted in blue. Regards, Chris As follow up to my Aug 23/06 voice mail, please confirm the ultimate data as provided in 2004 (by Eric Hakomaki at Region of Halton) is still applicable, or update as appropriate, for the Tremain Rd realignment, immediately south of Hwy 401. This is for an update to our environmental noise assessment study for the Milton Heights neighborhood, which butts up against the south side of the 401, at the west side of Peru rd. The realigned Tremain Rd will bisect our site, and we need to look at the noise control measures that will be needed. Data as provided by Halton Region in 2004 for realigned Tremain Rd: Ultimate AADT: 25, 800 Trucks: 13% (8 % medium, 5% heavy) Speed: 80 kph future speed - 60km/h

58 # lanes : 4 ROW: 35 m Day/Night split: 85/15 ROW - 40 m (+/- more required at intersections) Please confirm, or update this data, as soon as possible. Thank you Terry Harding Valcoustics Canada Ltd This message, including any attachments, is privileged and intended only for the person(s) named above. This material may contain confidential or personal information which may be subject to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act. Any other distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, fax or and permanently delete the original transmission from us, including any attachments, without making a copy. Thank you This message, including any attachments, is privileged and intended only for the person(s) named above. This material may contain confidential or personal information which may be subject to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act. Any other distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, fax or and permanently delete the original transmission from us, including any attachments, without making a copy. Thank you

59