Policy for the Assessment and Mitigation of Traffic Noise on County Roads

Transcription

1 Lanark County Policy for the Assessment and Mitigation of Traffic Noise on County Roads d r a f t f o r d i s c u s s i o n Prepared by: AECOM Canada Ltd Morrison Drive, Ottawa, ON, Canada K2H 8S9 T F Date: May 2009

2 Table of Contents 1. Goals and Objectives Background Mitigation Measures for Noise Recommended Process for Implementation References...9 List of Tables Table 1. Summary of Noise Criteria for Sensitive Developments... 4 Table 2. Sound Levels and Human Perception... 5 Table 3. Noise Contour for Typical Traffic Volumes... 6 O:\Projects\18\ \ Lanark TMP\Policy documents\noise\noise Policy-draft rev May-2009.doc

3 1. Goals and Objectives This noise policy document was developed to assist the County of Lanark in their review and approval of development applications and planning documents under the authority of the Planning Act. The principles discussed in this noise policy document and those presented in the Ontario Ministry of the Environment Noise Assessment Criteria in Land Use Planning Publication LU-131, October 1997 are to be incorporated early in the planning process. The purpose of a noise policy is to provide a consistent process for: examination of the need for mitigation of sound levels along County roads in new developments; assessment of sound levels within existing developments in order to determine if retrofit mitigation measures are warranted. 2. Background The Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) developed guidelines in the 1970s to help municipalities with noise control in land use planning. The current MOE guidelines are dated The noise sources covered in the MOE document include surface transportation (road and rail corridors), aircraft and airports and stationary sources (industrial facilities, aggregate facilities, major commercial facilities, sewage treatment facilities and waste sites). The MOE guidelines have been used by the majority of Ontario municipalities to help them make appropriate land use decisions to minimize the impact of noise and to identify where noise mitigation measures are warranted. In a 2002 survey of 18 municipalities in Ontario, almost all said that they rely on the MOE guidelines to assess noise impacts and potential mitigation. The larger, more urban municipalities tended to have a noise policy in place. Some municipalities, such as the City of Ottawa, have adapted the MOE guidelines for their own use. Currently none of the municipalities within Lanark County have adopted noise policies or guidelines and generally rely on the MOE guidelines. The MOE guidelines outline the position of the MOE on noise criteria for planning of sensitive land uses including residential developments, seasonal residential developments, hospitals, nursing/retirement homes, schools, day-care centres, etc. In most cases, it is the developer s responsibility to ensure that any proposed development meets the guidelines for sound levels. The tables found in the MOE guidelines provide noise criteria for urban and suburban locations (Class 1 and Class 2 areas) but the tables do not address rural areas (Class 3). Rural areas are defined as communities of less than 1000 population, agricultural areas and rural recreation development such as cottage areas. The table of noise criteria found in the City of Ottawa guidelines does specify requirements for rural areas. The City of Ottawa has established noise criteria for rural areas that are not O:\Projects\18\ \ Lanark TMP\Policy documents\noise\noise Policy-draft rev May-2009.doc - 2 -

4 different from the criteria for suburban locations, except for stationary noise sources. Since stationary sources are associated with land use planning, which is within the jurisdiction of the local municipalities and not the County, noise criteria for stationary sources are not included in the County noise policy. Noise impact from transportation corridors may include road, rail and air traffic. Table 1 provides the noise criteria for sensitive developments as provided in the MOE guidelines. As noted above the City of Ottawa has developed requirements in rural areas, which are the same for suburban locations, except when it comes to stationary sources. In Table 2 below, numerical sound levels are compared with typical sources. The conditions that warrant a noise study are outlined in the MOE guidelines. Noise prediction software is used to model the level of sound expected under specified traffic and environmental conditions. Traffic data must be forecasted for 10 years after the build-out date of the development or construction of the road and then the traffic data and specific parameters is entered into the noise prediction software. Note that the minimum traffic volume established in the Stamson software is 960 vehicles per day. Stamson is one of the models approved by MOE for noise studies of this type. Where future traffic on a County road is expected to be under 960 vehicles per day, no noise study is warranted. This factor should be taken into consideration when assessing whether a noise study is required. However, the guidelines note that it is in the best interest of the proponent/developer to complete a feasibility study in the early planning stages. Given the prevalence of rural land use in Lanark County, there is a need to ensure that rural areas are included in the noise criteria. Hence the proposed noise policy follows the direction of the City of Ottawa guidelines by specifying the same criteria for rural areas as for suburban areas. Public complaints have been noted about train whistles in Lanark County; however, as noted in Table 1 whistle noise is not included in the determination of outdoor sound levels in the models used. O:\Projects\18\ \ Lanark TMP\Policy documents\noise\noise Policy-draft rev May-2009.doc - 3 -

5 Table 1. Summary of Noise Criteria for Sensitive Developments (Reference: MOE Table 7 in Technical Publication Noise Assessment Criteria in Land Use Planning: Requirements, Procedures and Implementation, LU-131, October 1997) Notes: 1. The criterion may be exceeded by an amount not greater than 5 dba, subject to justification and use of a Warning Clause. 2. Redevelopment of existing residential uses and other sensitive land uses or infilling of residential and other sensitive land uses may be considered above 30 NEF/NEP if it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the long term function of the airport. This is subject to implementation of appropriate control measures including a Warning Clause. 3. or Hourly L eq of road traffic, whichever is higher. 4. Whistle noise excluded. 5. Whistle noise included. 6. Other guidelines for offices, hotels, places of worship, stores, etc. are contained in Annex to LU Compliance with the plane-of-window criteria should ensure that the indoor sound levels are acceptable. Special care must be exercised with some sources. Definitions: OLA means Outdoor Living Area POW means Plane of Window OPOR means Outdoor Point of Reception O:\Projects\18\ \ Lanark TMP\Policy documents\noise\noise Policy-draft rev May-2009.doc - 4 -

6 Table 2. Sound Levels and Human Perception SOUND LEVEL IN DECIBELS (dba) AVERAGE HUMAN PERCEPTION TYPICAL SOURCE 140 Average Human Ear Pain Threshold Uncomfortably Loud 110 Shotgun blast, jet plane at takeoff Rock music, hockey game crowd, severe thunder, pneumatic jackhammer Extremely Loud Lawn mower, tractor, motorcycle, snowmobile Typical range of road noise measured at 15 m, ranging from low volume, low speed road to multi-lane freeway Moderately Loud Quiet Window air-conditioner, crowded restaurant, diesel truck/tractor Singing birds, normal conversation Very Quiet Rustle of leaves, dripping faucet, light rainfall Just Audible Whisper 0 Information from: Noise Hazard and Control Health and Welfare Canada Report 79-END-29 March 1979 O:\Projects\18\ \ Lanark TMP\Policy documents\noise\noise Policy-draft rev May-2009.doc - 5 -

7 3. Mitigation Measures for Noise Noise control measures relevant to development in Lanark County include noise barriers (walls, berms), setbacks for outdoor living areas, central air conditioning with windows, doors and walls designed to have acoustical performance to comply with indoor noise criteria. Privacy fences (generally wood fences) are not effective for noise control. To be effective, it is important that the barrier (wall or berm) be high enough to break the line of sight from the noise source (traffic) to the receiver (person) in the outdoor living space. The MOE guideline specifies the minimum density of the barrier to ensure that sound levels are effectively attenuated. In rural areas along county roads, houses are frequently located back from the road with the outdoor living area located away from the traffic. These conditions help to minimize any impact of noise from traffic. In developments where homes back onto County roads, there is more likelihood that sound levels will be an issue (depending on the volume and composition of traffic). For information, Table 3 indicates the distance between the road and the 55 dba noise contour for a variety of traffic volumes and two scenarios with different percentages of heavy trucks. An assessment is needed to reflect actual site conditions. Table 3. Noise Contour for Typical Traffic Volumes Scenario 1 vpd Automobiles Trucks = 10% Distance to 55 Distance to 55 Medium Heavy dba contour (m) dba contour (m) 2 axles: 85% 3 or more axles: 15% Speed 80 km/h Speed 50 km/h Scenario 2 Trucks = 10% Distance to 55 Distance to 55 vpd Automobiles Medium Heavy dba contour (m) dba contour (m) 2 axles: 50% 3 or more axles: 50% 80 km/h 50 km/h O:\Projects\18\ \ Lanark TMP\Policy documents\noise\noise Policy-draft rev May-2009.doc - 6 -

8 In all examples, the following parameters were used in the model: trucks constitute 10% of the traffic but the amount of heavy truck traffic varies posted speed limit 80 km/h and 50 km/h as noted in the table road grade flat terrain generally flat ground between the road and the receptor is non-reflective no shielding (dense woods) between the road and the receptor To the extent possible, data collection should be done to establish the appropriate parameters for each noise study. The percent of trucks, in particular heavy trucks, has a significant impact on the noise level. Noise mitigation measures in the Lanark County noise policy should reflect current MOE practices and recommendations as they are updated. 4. Recommended Process for Implementation The noise policy will establish the process for determining whether sound attenuation features must be included in a proposed development. A Noise Study will be part of the planning application. A separate Class Environmental Assessment Study will not be required as the construction of noise barriers is a preapproved Schedule A+ project under the Municipal Class EA. It will be the responsibility of the developer or proponent to ensure that a feasibility noise study and/or detailed noise study is completed, if noise is expected to be a concern, to support the development submissions to the County of Lanark. If mitigation measures such as a berm or wall are needed to reduce noise to an acceptable level, the developer will be required to fund their installation. At the time that the local municipality takes ownership of the local roads and other infrastructure within a development, any noise walls should become the property of the County. The following process is suggested for use by developers, local municipalities and the County: Use current MOE guidelines for noise studies. Use forecasted traffic 10 years after build-out of the proposed development in the noise model. Average Annual Daily Traffic volumes will need to be converted to daily and night time traffic volumes for use in the noise prediction software; Select material for noise barriers based on effectiveness and space available: An earth berm is low maintenance and can be attractive with landscaping but requires more area to achieve an effective height. It must also fit the local topography. Where feasible, the County should recommend that berms be considered for new subdivisions adjacent to County roads; O:\Projects\18\ \ Lanark TMP\Policy documents\noise\noise Policy-draft rev May-2009.doc - 7 -

9 Proprietary material has a proven effectiveness for noise walls. Materials such as wood and concrete may be appropriate in some circumstances. Noise walls should be used where berms are not suitable due to topography or property constraints; A mix of an earth berm and a short wall is another alternative to reduce the area required while minimizing the visual impact of the wall; A full height proprietary material noise wall may be most practical and effective for retrofit situations. The County will retain the ownership and control of noise walls on County roads. Place the noise walls within the right-of-way. If walls are located along the back of private properties, establish an easement for maintenance that notes that vegetation planted may be subject to removal as needed to maintain the wall. Where undertaking a full noise study is not reasonable (i.e. development of infill lots or re-development of existing lots), local municipalities must have a protocol for the municipal building permit process for individual property owners such that they acknowledge their understanding of the possible noise impacts due to the location of their proposed dwelling. This acknowledgment would be placed on the deed such that future purchasers would be made aware of the possible impact. 5. Related Issues Fencing: In new developments where residential properties will back onto the County road right-of-way, the County should recommend the installation of privacy or other fencing where noise mitigation is not warranted. The installation of any fencing should be on private property where the private property owners have ownership and control of the fencing. The County and local municipalities should set standards for construction of privacy and other types of fencing. Purchase agreements should note that the property owner is responsible for maintaining the fence and that these fences are not intended for noise mitigation. Where developers decline to install fencing, this decision should be documented on the property deed so that future requests for fencing along the right-of-way by property owners are referred back to the property owner. Retrofit Noise Walls: Some urban municipalities have policies regarding the installation of retrofit noise walls. These walls are installed when traffic has increased beyond the volumes anticipated by the noise study completed as part of the development process such that sound levels now warrant mitigation. This may occur even without road expansion, which normally triggers consideration of noise mitigation. A noise assessment for retrofit conditions is normally carried out in a similar manner to a noise study for new development or road expansion. In the City of Ottawa and York Region, the retrofit policy specifies cost sharing between the road authority and the property owner. Peel Region also installs retrofit barriers under local improvements. Many municipalities do not have a policy and focus their noise wall installations on new developments O:\Projects\18\ \ Lanark TMP\Policy documents\noise\noise Policy-draft rev May-2009.doc - 8 -

10 and where road expansion results in increased traffic volumes and noise. The policy of the Ministry of Transportation is to install retrofit noise walls along provincial freeway corridors where sound levels warrant and where the development affected was approved under the Planning Act prior to In the future, Lanark County may identify locations where residential properties back onto County road corridors and where sound levels have increased to levels where noise mitigation may be considered. The appropriateness of cost sharing with property owners should be considered, similar to the practices in other Ontario municipalities with retrofit noise wall policies. 6. References List of references used in this document include: 1. Noise Assessment Criteria in Land Use Planning Publication LU-131, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, October Noise Assessment Criteria in Land Use Planning: Requirements, Procedures and Implementation, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, October City of Ottawa Environmental Noise Control Guidelines, SS Wilson Associates Consulting Engineers, Approved by City Council on May 10, Noise Hazard and Control, Report 79 END-29 Health and Welfare Canada, March 1979 O:\Projects\18\ \ Lanark TMP\Policy documents\noise\noise Policy-draft rev May-2009.doc - 9 -