F6. Operational Noise

Transcription

1 F6. Operational Noise Executive Summary: Chapter F6. Operational Noise The operational noise assessment considers how the noise generated by the loading or offloading of a container ship when berthed at 201/2 with six quayside cranes in use, and noise from associated container handling plant and vehicles, impacts on residential properties in the immediate vicinity of the Container Terminal. An acoustic model of activity associated with Berth 201/2 has been developed using noise source data taken of similar container handling plant at DP World Southampton. A further ambient noise survey has also been undertaken to supplement the surveys previously undertaken for the ES. The assessment has considered both short term noise impacts when Berth 201/2 is first operational and longer term impacts when the Container Terminal is at full capacity. Consideration has also been given to changes to road and railway noise. For noise assessment purposes use has been made of the British Standards cited in the Draft National Statement for Ports and significance effects criteria have been derived from these standards. The short-term operational noise effects are considered to be neutral or of minor adverse significance for residential properties outside the port boundaries, but of moderate adverse significance for the two residential properties located immediately adjacent to the port boundary. In the longer term, internal noise levels at these two properties are assessed as being of major adverse significance, if the windows of these properties are kept open. No significant noise effects of increased road traffic are anticipated. significant noise effects from rail traffic are anticipated. Minor adverse Mitigation measures include a positive purchasing policy with respect to noise limitation, environmental awareness training of operatives, ensuring noise aspects are included in planned maintenance routines and the offer of improved ventilation to the two buildings likely to be affected, to allow windows to be kept shut, when necessary. F6.1 Construction noise has been assessed in chapter 17. This chapter assesses operational noise and has been produced by Xodus Group Ltd. F6.2 The objective of the operational noise assessment is to assess the effect that the proposed redevelopment of Berths 201/2 will have on the day to day ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the container terminal when the new deepwater berth is in operation. This operational noise assessment considers the noise generated by the loading or off-loading of a container ship when berthed at 201/2 with six quayside cranes in use, and noise from the associated activity of moving the containers within the terminal itself, by the straddle carriers. It also considers the noise from the movement of HGVs within the terminal complex associated with the extra container handling activity. This chapter also includes, in accordance with the approach set out 389

2 in chapter 7, an assessment of the impacts of the Container Terminal operating with a throughput of 2.8 million TEU. F6.3 The approach to the operational noise assessment has been to develop an acoustic model of activity associated with Berth 201/2, using the noise modelling package CadnaA (as used for the construction noise model in the ES). To populate the noise model, detailed noise measurements have been made of an existing quayside crane of the type to be used at Berth 201/2 and also noise associated with the operation and movement of straddle carriers. F6.4 These measurements have been used to calculate noise source sound power level values, in frequency bands one octave wide, which have been entered into the noise model at appropriate locations, using a combination of point, line and area sources. The model details are described below. F6.5 Detailed surveys of the ambient noise environment around the port were undertaken between March and June, 2008 and in October As part of the operational noise assessment an ambient noise survey was undertaken at three specific locations in the vicinity of the Container Terminal over a two week period in August F6.6 A review has been undertaken of standards and guidance relating to the assessment of noise from ports and industrial noise in general. In addition, an overview has been undertaken of potential changes to offsite road and railway noise levels as a consequence of the future operation of Berths 201/2. F6.7 No operational vibration effects are considered likely due to the nature of operations, and have therefore been scoped out of this study. Planning, Legislation and Guidance Draft National Policy Statement for Ports F6.8 In November 2009 the Draft National Policy Statement (NPS) for Ports was published by the Department of Transport. Section 2.22 of the Draft NPS deals with the potential impacts of noise (which includes consideration of vibration). F6.9 The Draft NPS recognises that the impacts of excessive noise are wide ranging, with the most common being disturbance, that can lead to annoyance or loss of sleep. It can also affect the use and enjoyment of areas of value such as quiet places and areas with high landscape quality. It also recognises that noise from a proposed port development can have adverse impacts on wildlife and biodiversity. F6.10 In respect of noise assessments, the Draft NPS indicates that they should describe the noise generating aspects of the development and associated noise characteristics, identify noise sensitive premises and noise sensitive areas that may be affected, the characteristics of the existing noise environment, a prediction of how the noise environment will change with the proposed development, an assessment of the effect of these changes and a description of the measures that will be applied to control the effects of noise. The noise associated with ancillary activities associated with the development, such as increased road movements should also be assessed. 390

3 Noise Policy Statement for England F6.11 In March 2010, the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) set out the long term vision of Government noise policy as to Promote good health and a good quality of life through the effective management of noise within the context of Government policy on sustainable development. F6.12 The long term vision is supported by the following aims: Through the effective management and control of environmental, neighbour and neighbourhood noise within the context of Government policy on sustainable development: avoid significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life; mitigate and minimise adverse impacts on health and quality of life: and where possible, contribute to the improvement of health and quality of life. Draft National Planning Policy Framework F6.13 The government published the draft National Planning Policy Framework in July This document will, when finalised, replace most Planning Policy Statements and Planning Policy Guidance Notes. Policy 173 relates to noise and reflects the Noise Policy Statement for England viz.: 173. Planning policies and decisions should aim to: avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and quality of life arising from noise from new development, including through the use of conditions, while recognising that many developments will create some noise; and identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational amenity value for this reason. Planning Policy Guidance PPG24: Planning and Noise F6.14 In the formulation of policies on planning developments that have issues relating to noise, local planning authorities are advised by the Department of the Environment in Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 24 Planning and Noise. The aim of this guidance is to provide advice on how the planning system can be used to minimise the adverse impact of noise without placing unreasonable restrictions on developments or adding unduly to the costs and administrative burdens of business. It includes some of the main considerations that should be taken into account when determining planning applications for development, which will generate noise. F6.15 PPG24 considers both the bringing of people to noise (new residential developments) and also the bringing of noise to people (new or changed infrastructure, industrial and commercial developments). In the context of Berth 201/2, reference is made in PPG 24 to noise from industrial and commercial development and noise from construction sites. Noise from the 391

4 intensification of use of an existing road is not specifically covered by PPG 24, but in general terms, reference is made to the calculation methodology given in Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (Department of Transport, 1998), and also to advice in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11, Section 3, Part 7 Traffic Noise and Vibration (Highways Agency, latest revision 2011). For railways, reference is made in PPG24 to draft guidance, which was subsequently issued in 1995 by the Department of Transport in its publication Calculation of Railway Noise. British Standard BS 4142 F6.16 In the case of industrial development, PPG 24 confirms that the character of the noise should be taken into account, as well as its levels. The policy document cites the use of British Standard BS 4142:1990 Method for Rating Industrial Noise Affecting Mixed Residential and Industrial Areas for Assessing the Noise from Proposed Industrial and Commercial Premises. This standard has since been amended and the current version is dated The prime purpose of this standard is to determine the likelihood of complaints about noise from industrial and commercial installations. The foreword to the standard states that it may also be helpful in certain aspects of environmental planning and may be used in conjunction with recommendations on noise levels and methods of assessment published elsewhere. F6.17 The foreword to the standard also recognises that it is necessarily general in character and may not cover all situations. The likelihood that an individual will complain depends on individual attitudes and perceptions in addition to the noise levels and acoustic features present. Although in general there will be a relationship between the incidence of complaints and the level of general community annoyance, quantitative assessment of the latter is beyond the scope of the standard, as is the assessment of nuisance. F6.18 The assessment methodology for assessing the likelihood of complaints is to compare the rating level of the industrial source (specific noise level of the industrial activity, corrected for character by + 5 db where appropriate) with the pre-existing background noise level, expressed as L A90. Both the rating level and the background noise level refer to the external noise climate in the vicinity of the sensitive area. F6.19 The advice given in BS 4142 is to make measurements (to determine background noise levels) during periods when the background noise level is typical of the background noise when the specific noise source is, or will be operating. It should be noted that there is no requirement to consider the minimum background noise level. The specific noise level of the industrial source is based on 1 hour reference time intervals during the day and 5 minutes at night. For the container terminal, which operates 24 hours per day, daytime and night-time specific noise levels will be similar, except for the amount of HGV activity which will be reduced at night. F6.20 PPG 24 quotes the standard as stating that a difference (between the rating level and the typical background noise level) of around 10 db or higher indicates that complaints are likely and that a difference of around 5 db is of marginal significance. The standard itself states that if the rating level is more than 10 db below the measured background noise level then this is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely. PPG 24 stops short of advising on acceptable levels of noise of an industrial nature as affecting existing residential development. 392

5 F6.21 An issue which always arises for a continuously operating industrial plant is to define the background noise level to be used in the assessment. For a new operation, there is some relevance in using the typical value of the pre-existing background noise level, but in time, noise from the new industrial development can become the most significant feature of the background noise environment, and in this situation any future assessment, for any new noise source, should refer to the new background noise level, on the assumption that it has gained general acceptability in the area. British Standard BS 8233 F6.22 PPG 24 also cites the use of BS Code of Practice for Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings, which gives general guidance on acceptable noise levels within buildings. In sleeping areas, the recommended maximum intrusive noise levels are db L Aeq, T. This equates approximately to an external noise level of db LAeq T with windows open and db L Aeq, T with windows partially open. With windows shut, the level difference outside to inside is at least 30 dba in a typical modern dwelling. This standard was revised in 1999 and now states that 35 db L Aeq, T in bedrooms represents a reasonable noise environment due to external sources and that individual noise events should not normally exceed 45 db L Amax F (inside the bedroom). This is equivalent to about 60 db L Amax F outside the bedroom, for a partially open window. The current version of the standard cites an internal level of 40 db L Aeq, T as being a reasonable level of intrusive noise for resting conditions, which is equivalent to an external level of 55 db L Aeq, T with windows partially open. The time period T should be appropriate to the activity involved (e.g to for bedrooms) according to the standard. The Draft NPS for Ports also cites the 1999 version of BS F6.23 With respect to external living areas, BS 8233 states that in gardens and balconies, it is desirable that the steady noise level does not exceed 50 db L Aeq, T and 55 db L Aeq, T should be regarded as the upper limit (few people are seriously annoyed by a level of 55 db L Aeq, T according to WHO Guidelines see below). WHO Guidelines for Community Noise and Night Noise Guidelines for Europe F6.24 Similar, although slightly more stringent advice as included in BS 8233 is given by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in a 1999 report by a WHO expert task force, entitled Guidelines for Community Noise. In 2009 a report was published presenting the conclusions of a WHO working group responsible for preparing guidelines for exposure to noise during sleep. This document can be seen as an extension to the original 1999 WHO report. F6.25 Neither of these reports has been adopted into UK legislation or formal guidance and hence they remain sources of information reflecting a high level of health care with respect to noise, rather than standards to be rigidly applied. Exceedances of the WHO guideline values do not necessarily imply significant noise impact and indeed, it may be that significant impacts do not occur until much higher degrees of noise exposure are reached. F6.26 For operational noise assessment purposes for Berth 201/2, use has therefore been made of the British Standards referred to in the Draft NPS for Ports, viz BS 4142 and BS

6 Southampton City Council Policy F6.27 Sustainable Development Principle SDP 16 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (2006) gives the City Council s policy on noise. SDP 16 Noise Proposals for: (i) (ii) noise-generating development will not be permitted if it would cause an unacceptable level of noise impact; noise-sensitive development will not be permitted if its users would be adversely affected by significant noise from existing or proposed noise-generating uses. New Forest District Council Policy F6.28 Whilst the Container Terminal lies within the City of Southampton, it has the potential to influence the ambient noise environment within New Forest District and the New Forest National Park. F6.29 The New Forest District Council Core Strategy recognises that with respect to noise, light and air quality, uses outside the National Park can have an impact on it, although it has to be taken into account that the National Park lies in a heavily-populated part of South-East England rather than in a remote and tranquil part of the country. (paragraph ) F6.30 In its section titled Safe and Healthy Communities, the strategy recognises that the Plan Area contains a number of installations and forms of infrastructure that can give rise to various forms of pollution, including noise (e.g. Fawley refinery) (paragraph 6.5.4). Further reference is made to PPG 24 Planning and Noise as government guidance on this type of pollution (paragraph 6.5.6). Significance of Effects Operational Noise F6.31 In cases where residential areas are adjacent to large continuously operating industrial sites, it is often the industrial sites themselves that define the background noise in that area. In these cases, it is often relevant to assess both the short-term effects of a new development (i.e. the effect within the first year or so after the development) as well as longer term effects of noise. F6.32 BS 4142 has been used to assess short-term operational noise impacts based on pre-existing ambient noise levels. The relevant factor is L Ar, T L A90 T in db, i.e. the difference between the rating level of the new noise and the pre-existing background noise level expressed as L A90, T using time weighting F. As the noise predictions are based on expected values of sound propagation downwind of the noise source, it is relevant to compare predicted noise levels on a like for like basis. In this assessment, the pre-existing L A90 T noise level has been taken as being the typical background noise levels in a downwind direction from the container terminal, generally during active periods of the container terminal categorised by daytime (07:00 19:00 hours), evening (19:00 23:00 hours) and night-time (23:00 07:00 hours). A core night-time period has also been considered (00:00 04:00 hours). This normally represents the quietest period of the night. The significance effects matrix is given in Table F

7 Table F6.1: Significance effects terminology for short-term operational noise Short-term operational noise Neutral Minor Adverse Moderate Adverse Major Adverse LAr, T LA90, T db < > 10 F6.33 In the medium-term, for infrastructure developments which operate continuously, absolute noise levels become more significant as new background noise levels become established. The following assessment matrix given in Table F6.2 has also been used which is based, in part, on the reasonable standards of internal noise according to British Standard BS In addition, use has been made of the guidance in BS 8233 for external living areas. Table F6.2: Significance effects terminology for medium-term operational noise Medium-term operational noise Neutral Minor Adverse Moderate Adverse Major Adverse Change in LAeqT (external) < >10 Daytime (internal absolute) 40 db LAeqT > 10 Night-time (internal absolute) 35 db LAeqT > 10 External (absolute) 55 db LAeqT > 10 Relevant Guidance Relating to Traffic and Railway Noise F6.34 The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11 (Highways Agency, 2011) sets out the overall assessment process for new or altered highways. DMRB Section 3 Part 7 relates to the assessment of noise and vibration. Whilst it is principally concerned with the assessment of increased noise due to new or altered roads, it is nevertheless considered reasonable to use its methodology as a guide to the significance of increased traffic noise levels from intensification of use of an existing highway. F6.35 In the UK, use is made of the L A10 18 h noise index based on the categorised annual average weekday traffic flow, in relation to the determination of eligibility under the Noise Insulation Regulations for new or altered highways. For the assessment of the suitability of a site for residential development adjacent to an existing road use is made of the daytime and night-time L Aeq noise indices. F6.36 It is generally accepted that increased road traffic noise can have both a short and long-term effect, in that a sudden change in noise will create a greater impact in the shorter term than over a longer period time. (The same phenomenon may also apply to other sources of noise, such as continuously operating industrial sites, although this is less well documented). Tables F6.3 and F6.4 give the DRMB classification of noise impacts in the short term and long term respectively. These are based on the L A10 18h noise index but changes to the L Aeq16h index would be expected to give similar results. 395

8 Table F6.3: Significance criteria for road traffic noise changes short term Noise change, db LA10, 18 h Adverse / beneficial Significance of any effect 0 Adverse No change Adverse Negligible Adverse Minor Adverse Moderate 5+ Adverse Major Table F6.4 Significance criteria for road traffic noise changes long term Noise change, db LA10, 18 h Adverse / beneficial Significance of any effect 0 Adverse No change Adverse Negligible Adverse Minor Adverse Moderate 10+ Adverse Major F6.37 Railway noise is normally considered to be less annoying than road traffic noise and therefore, as a worst case, it would be reasonable to use the same significance criteria for railway noise as for road traffic noise. However, as the Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996 consider both daytime and night-time noise levels (expressed as L Aeq, T, where T= 06:00-24:00 hours for daytime and 24:00 to 06:00 hours for night-time), it is considered reasonable, where possible, to separate out any changes to daytime and night-time railway noise levels to assess their significance. Ambient Noise Environment Previous Surveys F6.38 Full details of the ambient surveys previously undertaken can be identified by reference to Chapter 17 and Appendix I of the ES, and to the reports which support the ES. Detailed surveys were undertaken between March and May 2008 and then again between September and October Survey F6.39 For the purposes of the operational noise assessment, a supplementary ambient noise survey was undertaken during August 2011 at some of the locations previously used for the 2008 surveys. These consisted of a mixture of attended and unattended measurements. Using the same terminology as for the 2008 surveys, the following locations were used in These locations are also shown in Figure F6.1, below. 396

9 Environmental Statement for Port of Southampton: Berth 201/202 Works LT2: LT2RO: RO7: LT3: LT3RO: 5 Creighton Road, Regents Park, Southampton (in garden) - unattended; 5 Creighton Road, Regents Park, Southampton (on pavement) - attended; Old Eling House (formerly The Vicarage) Eling Hill, Totton; unattended and attended; 25 Skippers House, Portside Close, Admiralty Quay, Marchwood unattended; Marchwood Yacht Club foreshore attended. Figure F6.1 Measurement Locations F6.40 The unattended noise measurements were undertaken over a period of up to two weeks. The attended measurements were undertaken over three separate nights. All measurements were made in sample periods of five minutes in duration. At LT2 and RO7, the unattended measurements were made with the microphone of the measurements system 4 m above local ground. At LT3 the measurements were taken from the balcony of the property. All the attended measurements were made with the microphone 1.5 m above local ground. The attended measurements also included observations of events contributing to the ambient noise environment. F6.41 The results of the attended measurements are given in Appendix J Section 1. The results of the unattended measurements are given in Appendix J Section 2. F6.42 During the survey, the weather was mixed. During the second week there was a greater preponderance of westerly winds, compared to the first. The detailed wind directions during 397

10 the survey period can be obtained from Appendix J Section 3 and these are summarised on the charts in Appendix J Section 2. F6.43 Information provided by DP World for the survey period from 17 th 31 st August inclusive (15 days), indicates that a total of 42,375 containers were moved over the quay in this period. At a TEU/box ratio of 1.66, this indicates a per annum rate of 1.66 million TEU. This is very close to the forecast of 1.6 million TEU per annum for 2011, thus indicating that the terminal was working at a typical handling rate during the noise survey period. F6.44 A summary of the results of the attended noise survey is given in Table F6.5. The values obtained are compared with the results of the previous noise surveys. For the previous attended noise surveys, the measurements were usually made in a downwind direction from the port. For the 2011 survey, upwind and downwind ambient noise data are included in the summary. Location Table F6.5: Comparison of results of attended ambient night-time noise surveys (00:00 04:00) Date Average, db Maximum, db Minimum, db LAmax F LAeq 5m LA90 F LAmax F LAeq 5m LA90 F LAmax F LAeq 5m LA90 F LT2RO (Creighton Rd) 08/ / / RO7 (Old Eling House) 08/ Downwind 08/ / / LT3RO (Skippers House) 08/ / / F6.45 It can be seen from Table F6.5 that at Location LT2RO (5 Creighton Road), average night-time ambient noise levels in 2011, are very similar to what they were in At location R07, when compared just on the basis of downwind noise levels from the port, it is also the case that ambient noise levels are very similar to those measured in (When all the data from the 2011 survey is taken into account, the average ambient noise levels are less, but this is not the basis on which the 2008 surveys were undertaken as the 2011 survey contains a mixture of upwind and down-wind data). At LT3RO the current survey indicates slightly lower ambient noise levels than previously recorded, but this is probably because all data was taken into account to calculate the average. A more comprehensive data set for this location is from the unattended noise monitor at Location LT3, and the results from this are discussed below. F6.46 Table F6.6 gives a summary of the unattended noise measurements at Location LT2, Creighton Road, and compares these with the measurements taken in the earlier part of In this table, and to conform to the noise averaging protocol used in the ES, daytime is taken as between 08:00 to 19:00, evening is 19:00 to 23:00, night-time is between 23:00 and 07:00 and 398

11 the short night is between 00:00 and 04:00. The averaging is all based on 5 minute sample periods. Table F6.6: Comparison of ambient unattended noise survey results at Location LT2 Location LT2 db LAmax F db LAeq db LA90 F (Creighton Rd) Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Daytime 08/2011 Daytime 04/ ±3 ± ±2 ±3 Evening 08/2011 Evening 04/ ± ±3 ± ±2 ±3 Night 08/2011 Night 04/ ± ±3 Short night 08/2011 Short night 04/ ± ±3 F6.47 It can be seen from the detailed results in Appendix J Section 2 that noise levels here follow a typical urban day/night variation where road traffic noise tends to dominate the ambient noise environment. F6.48 Table F6.7 gives a similar comparison for Location LT3, Skippers House, Admiralty Quay, Marchwood, and compares the 2011 results with those taken in the earlier part of 2008 and again in October Table F6.7: Comparison of ambient unattended noise survey results at Location LT3 Location LT3 db LAmax F db LAeq db LA90 F (Skippers House) Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Daytime 08/2011 Daytime 10/2008 Daytime 04/ ± Evening 08/2011 Evening 10/2008 Evening 04/ ± Night 08/2011 Night 10/2008 Night 04/ ±6 ±6 ± Short night 08/2011 Short night 10/2008 Short night 04/ ±6 ±

12 F6.49 Table F6.7 shows that, on average, ambient noise levels have not changed by any significant amount at Skippers House, Admiralty Quay since the first major noise survey was undertaken in April There may have been a slight decrease in noise (of 1 to 2 dba) since the 2008 survey but nothing more than this. The pattern of the ambient noise environment at LT3 is very different from that at LT2, and is due to the dominance of noise from the Container Terminal and port at this location. F6.50 No unattended measurements had previously been taken at RO7, Old Eling House (previously The Vicarage). Table F6.8 gives the results of the 2011 unattended noise survey at this location. Table F6.8: Summary results of unattended ambient noise survey at RO7 Location RO7 db LAmax F db LAeq db LA90 F (Old Eling House) Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Daytime 08/ ±3 46 ±2 Evening 08/ ±3 42 ±2 Night 08/ ±3 43 ±3 Short night 08/ ±3 42 ±3 F6.51 There are two cottages located adjacent to the port boundary and accessed off Western Avenue which have been previously identified as Location RO5 in the ES. The October 2008 ambient noise survey indicated the following noise levels at this location: Table F6.9: Results of 2008 ambient attended survey at Location RO5 Location RO5 Day Night (Cottages, Western Ave) LAeq, T LA90, T LAeq, T LA90, T Average Maximum Noise Source Tests F6.52 A series of noise measurements was undertaken at the Container Terminal in order to determine noise source values that could be used in the operational noise model. Noise measurements were undertaken on Liebherr Crane C and also on two types of straddle carriers. These were a Noell and a Kalmar unit, of the type that would be used in association with Berth 201/2 operations. F6.53 The purpose of the noise tests was to provide noise data to be able to calculate octave band sound power levels over operational cycles, which could then be used in the CadnaA operational noise model for the development. Sound pressure level measurements were therefore taken at a measured distance from each of the noise sources in sample periods of 1 400

13 second. Using the concept of attenuation through geometrical divergence, the sound power levels of the noise sources could be determined through the integration of the measured sound pressure levels with an appropriate area correction term. F6.54 For the quayside crane, noise measurements were taken with an empty container being handled, as from previous experience, this has been found to be the noisier condition as the crane can work faster than when a full load is being lifted. Measurements were also taken of levels of impact noise as the crane spreader engaged onto the container and also impact noise as the container impacted onto the ground. F6.55 In addition to the noise from the machinery house, trolleying and hoisting, measurements of the movement alarms on the quayside crane were also made. F6.56 For the straddle carrier, measurements were taken during hoisting and lowering and with the carrier moving. It was found that a straddle carrier emits slightly higher noise levels when unladen as compared to when moving a container, as in the former case the straddle carrier moves faster. Noise measurements were also taken of the movement alarm on a straddle carrier, which sounds for a few seconds when a straddle carrier first sets off. F6.57 During the noise tests, care was taken to minimise the effects of extraneous noise as far as possible and other container terminal operations in the vicinity of the noise tests were temporarily halted whilst the measurements took place. F6.58 Noise data used in the model for a container ship was taken from the results of previous noise tests by Xodus personnel at a comparable size container terminal. HGV noise was taken from British Standard BS 5228, with an allowance for reduced noise levels with the HGV slowing down at the roundabout prior to Transfer Area 3 (next to Western Avenue access gate). F6.59 The sound power levels obtained from the noise source tests and used in the noise model are shown in Table F6.10. These parameters are either SEL W (sound power levels normalised to a one second time interval for a noise source which is not continuous) or L W (sound power levels for the noise source, assuming the noise source is continuous). Table F6.10: Noise source values used in operational noise model for Berths 201/2 (Sound Power Level db re W) Noise Source Quayside crane, SELw per cycle Quayside crane engaging spreader, SELw per impact Quayside crane, container onto quay SELw per impact Straddle carrier engaging spreader, SELw per impact Straddle carrier container impact, SELw per impact Overall Octave Band Centre Frequency, Hz d B31.5 A k 2k 4k 8k

14 Quayside crane alarm, Lw (each alarm) Straddle carrier alarm, Lw Straddle carrier loaded moving, Lw Straddle carrier light, moving, Lw Straddle carrier idling, Lw HGV Lw per vehicle (9 m/s) Container ship berthed Operational Noise Model for Berths 201/2 F6.60 The noise model for Berths 201/2 assumes six quayside cranes, each performing 30 trolley moves per hour. For the import of containers, the container is delivered from the ship to the quayside and is then picked up by a straddle carrier and is assumed to then be taken to one of three locations. For containers to be collected by HGVs, the containers are assumed to be stacked in the area immediately to the west of Berths 201/2. Containers for transhipment have been assumed to be delivered to stacking areas B and C. The various areas are shown in Figure F6.1. F6.61 It has been assumed that 40% of the containers are for rail transport, of which 3/4 go via stacking area V (the remaining 1/4 go initially via HGVs to another local rail depot and are initially stacked locally to 201/2). It has also been assumed that 10% of the container moves are as a result of transhipment activity. Thus the assumption has been made that 60% of the containers will initially be stacked in the area to the west of 201/2. The noise model then uses these statistics, together with assumed speeds of 4.5 m/s for a laden straddle carrier, and 8 m/s for a light straddle carrier, to define noise sources, for the activities immediately associated with 201/2. F6.62 These assumptions are based on discussions with the terminal operator and represent the likely way that the terminal will operate with Berths 201/2. The model has been developed based on the maximum capacity for the development which will be achieved in F6.63 A container ship has been included in the model as a reflective solid object 400 m long, 50 m wide and 15 m above the quay level, together with its own noise source term. (Note: the height of the container ship above the quay is a worst case assumption, as frequently containers will be stacked considerably higher than this). Thus, the ship will shield some low level noise sources, nominally in an easterly direction, whilst reflecting some noise back in a westerly direction. Given the elevation of the quayside cranes, the trolleying noise associated with the crane does not benefit from any shielding effects provided by the container ship. F6.64 Noise from HGVs has also been included in the model. It has been assumed that HGVs enter and leave via Dock Gate 20 and use Western Avenue, entering the Container Terminal near Transfer Area 3. It has been assumed that the hourly ratio of day to night movements is 2:1 over the daytime (07:00 to 19:00) compared to the night-time shift periods (19:00 to 07:00) and that 70% of HGVs have a return load. A TEU to container ratio of 1.75 has been used to 402

15 calculate the number of HGV hourly movements associated with collection and delivery to Transfer Area 3, given that Berth 201/2 development will add 0.5 million TEU per annum to the capacity of the terminal. A sound power level source term has then been used, together with an assumed speed of 9 m/s (20 mph) to define the noise source for HGVs. Use of HGV movement data for a 12 hour night, rather an 8 hour noise night results in a slightly conservative nighttime estimate of average 1 hour night-time HGV noise levels, but gives results close to the highest individual 1 hour HGV night-time noise level. F6.65 The model uses the propagation algorithms given in International Standard ISO Acoustics Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors Part 2: General method of calculation. Ground terrain contours have been included and offsite, and some on-site, buildings in the vicinity of the Container Terminal have been included as solid objects. This then provides a degree of realism as to screening effects provided by the buildings themselves. F6.66 The output from the model are noise contours, which depict the L Aeq, T sound pressure levels due to activity immediately associated with 201/2. These are given in Appendix J Section 4 for the separate daytime and night-time situations. (The difference between day and night-time relates to the number of HGVs accessing Transfer Area 3). F6.67 The predicted sound pressure levels at each of the defined receiver locations are given in Table F6.11. Table F6.11: Predicted operational noise levels Berth 201/2 Location Name Sound Pressure Level db LAeq, T Daytime Night-time LT2 5 Creighton Road, Regents Park RO7 Old Eling House, Eling LT3 Skippers House, Admiralty Quay RO5 Western Avenue Cottages Operational Noise Assessment British Standard BS 4142 F6.68 An assessment of the potential noise impact of the operation of Berth 201/2 is considered appropriate in the period immediately after Berth 201/2 opens, as this represents the point at which there will be sudden change in the noise environment. The noise model represents berths 201/202 operating at full capacity, although, in reality, some activity (particularly HGV movements) will increase over a number of years as the throughput at 201/202 berth increases. It is reasonable, therefore, to compare predicted operational noise levels with existing background noise levels as a worst case. BS 4142 requires the rating level of the noise to be compared with the pre-existing noise level, expressed as L A90, T. The background noise level should be typical of the background noise when the specific noise source is or will be operating, but is not actually operating at the time of the measurement. Also the background noise level should be measured during periods when conditions are appropriate to the assessment similar to those which prevail when the specific noise level is determined 403

16 F6.69 The operational noise level is determined under downwind conditions from the Berth, therefore it is appropriate, where the background noise level varies significantly with wind direction, to consider the background noise level under similar meteorological conditions. It can be seen from Appendix J Section 2 that this consideration applies in particular to Location LT3 (Skippers House), where both existing L A90 and L Aeq noise levels show a dependence on wind direction. F6.70 In general, ambient noise levels at Skippers House are lowest when the wind has a southerly component to it and highest when the wind has a northerly component. However, this generalised rule needs to be tempered by activity levels at the Container Terminal. For example in the evening of 20/8/2011 there was a period with very light N winds, but low measured noise levels. There was, however, very little activity on the quayside at this time, thus despite the light N wind, the measured noise levels were low. F6.71 Another period of low ambient noise at Skippers House occurred around midnight of 24-25/08/2011. Not only was the wind nominally S, but there was also no quayside activity taking place. Another low noise period occurred during the early morning period of 28/08/2011 between 03:00 and 07:00 with W winds. Again there was very little quayside activity during this period. F6.72 Thus to undertake a BS 4142 assessment for operational noise from Berth 201/2, it is considered appropriate to consider existing ambient noise levels with existing quayside activity occurring and under meteorological conditions favourable for sound propagation to the assessment position. In general, this condition is considered to occur when the existing background noise level is greater than or equal to 50 db L A90,T. Under this condition, the typical existing background noise level at LT3 (Skippers House) is 52 db L A90, T. The average L Aeq, T noise level corresponding to this background noise level is 55 db L Aeq, T. F6.73 BS4142 uses the concept of rating level, which is the specific noise level from the noise in question, expressed as L Aeq, T, corrected by +5 db where it has character which would be likely to draw attention. However, in the case of the redevelopment of Berth 201/2, it is not considered appropriate to apply this character correction, as the characteristic Container Terminal noise is already present as part of the pre-existing ambient noise environment. F6.74 Therefore the BS 4142 daytime noise assessment for Skippers House is as follows: Specific noise level, L Aeq, T Acoustic feature correction Rating level Background noise level, L A90, T Excess of rating over background level 55 db 0 db 55 db 52 db (for nominal downwind with terminal operating) +3 Assessment indicates less than a marginal significance with respect to complaints Significance of effect: minor adverse F6.75 It should be noted that given the dominance of the existing ambient noise level from the Container Terminal there is no assumed difference to the relevant background noise level at Skippers House during the evening, or night-time, although the rating level will decrease slightly 404

17 as indicated in Table F6.11. Therefore the evening and night-time significance of operational noise from Berth 201/2 is also minor adverse at Skippers House. F6.76 At LT2 (Creighton Rd), the existing background noise level is more dominated by road traffic noise from Millbrook Road West, which, due to its proximity to Creighton Road will be less dependent on wind direction here. However, due to the dominance of the background noise by road traffic there is a much greater variation in background noise at this location with time of day. The BS 4142 assessment has therefore been based on average values of all the background noise levels over the day, evening and night-time periods. The BS 4142 assessment for LT2 is therefore as follows: Day Evening Night Short Night Specific noise level, L Aeq, T 44 db 44 db 44 db 44 db Acoustic feature correction 0 db 0 db 0 db 0 db Rating level 44 db 44 db 44 db 44 db Background noise level, L A90, T 49 db 47 db 42 db 41 db Excess of rating over background level Assessment indicates less than a marginal significance with respect to complaints Significance of effect: neutral to minor adverse F6.77 At RO7 (Old Eling House), the ambient noise level is again more controlled by noise from the container terminal, when in a downwind situation from the container terminal. During the available unattended measurements at this location the wind was mainly W (more of an upwind situation) However, the results of the attended measurements on the night of 22 nd - 23 rd August 2011 with NNE winds, shows a background noise level of 47 db L A90 at Old Eling House with the terminal operating at a relatively high rate. The BS 4142 assessment then becomes: Specific noise level, L Aeq, T Acoustic feature correction Rating level Background noise level, L A90, T Excess of rating over background level 40 db 0 db 40 db 47 db (for nominal downwind with terminal operating) -7 Assessment indicates less than a marginal significance with respect to complaints Significance of effect: neutral F6.78 Based on a predicted noise level of 58 db L Aeq, T (daytime) and 57 db L Aeq, T (night-time) the following assessment to BS 4142 is made for Location RO5 (Cottages, Western Avenue): 405

18 Day Evening Night Specific noise level, L Aeq, T 58 db 57 db 57 db Acoustic feature correction 0 db 0 db 0 db Rating level 58 db 57 db 57 db Background noise level, L A90, T 51 db 51 db 51 db Excess of rating over background level Assessment indicates marginal significance Significance of effect: moderate adverse F6.79 A moderate adverse short term effect is forecast for noise levels at the cottages on Western Avenue although this has to be viewed in respect of the location of these properties within a port environment. Longer Term Operational Noise Assessment F6.80 The maximum throughput of the Container Terminal to date was in 2007 when approximately 1.9 million TEU were handled. Throughput in 2011 is predicted to be 1.6 million TEU but, as noted in F6.45, the terminal was operating at an effective annual throughput of 1.66 million TEU during the period of the 2011 noise surveys. F6.81 The estimated maximum capacity of berths 204 to 207 is 2.3 million TEU which would be achieved by a higher number of quayside crane moves and, ultimately by the addition of two more cranes of the same type already installed. This also equates to the maximum capacity of the terminal without 201/202 berths operational (the future position without the works). Assuming that noise levels are proportional to terminal throughput, the overall environmental noise levels arising from operations on berths are likely to increase on average from 2011 noise levels (measured with an equivalent annual throughput of 1.66 million TEU), by 10 times the logarithmic ratio of the TEU throughput. This equates to 10 x log (2.3/1.66) = 1.3 db. F6.82 The absolute noise levels associated with all berths operating at full capacity (the future position with the works) are obtained by adding the expected noise levels due to operation of Berth 201/2 calculated from the noise model to the increased noise levels from 204 to 207 berth operating at maximum capacity as calculated in F6.84, Table F6.12. F6.83 When assessing the change in noise due to a development several years in the future, it is usually necessary to understand what the baseline noise environment would be in the absence of that development first. This then allows a like-for-like comparison between the baseline noise level and the with-development noise level. In this case, the additional capacity created as a result of the works would not be realised until In order to assess the longer term effect of the increase in throughput facilitated by the berth 201/202 works, it is therefore considered appropriate to compare the noise level relating to the future position with the works to that which could exist in 2021 without the works. For robustness, a comparison with the 2008 and baseline levels is also considered. 406

19 F6.84 Table F6.12 indicates the noise level changes that will occur at Locations LT2, RO7 and LT3, generally for conditions favourable for sound propagation. These have been corrected for the effects of the façade for LT3 (Skippers House). At Location LT2 (Creighton Rd), it was thought that noise from Millbrook Road West dominated the ambient noise environment even into the night, therefore it has been assumed that noise levels for 2007, 2011 and Capacity without works are identical, and are based on the measured 2011 noise levels. At RO7 (Old Eling House), the daytime noise levels are based on the daytime downwind surveys undertaken here in 2008 and at RO5 (Western Avenue Cottages), the baseline data is also based on 2008 data. Table F6.12 Predicted changes to ambient noise environment Location LAeq, T Sound Levels at Defined Location 2008 baseline 2011 baseline 204 to 207 berth maximum (position without works) Specific noise due to Berth 201/2 Total noise with 201/2 (position with the works) LT3 Skippers House façade RO7 Old Eling House LT2 Creighton Rd RO5 Cottages, Western Avenue Change from 2008, dba Change from 2011, dba Change from max position without works, dba day night day night day night F6.85 The Change columns in Table F6.12 indicate the change in ambient noise level that will occur in the longer term between the Container Terminal at capacity with 201/202 in operation and different baseline scenarios. The last column is the difference between the position without the works and the total noise due to Berth 201/2 at maximum capacity and the 204 to 207 berths combined. The extent of changes predicted are considered to represent minor adverse effects in all cases although bordering on a moderate adverse effect at LT3 in relation to the low 2011 baseline. F6.86 The assessment of absolute noise levels has also been considered using the approach given in Table F6.2. Internal noise levels have been calculated by assuming a level difference of 30 db across a façade for the case of windows shut, and a level difference of 15 db across a façade for the case of windows partially open. The resultant internal noise levels have then been judged by the assessment matrix given in Table F6.2 for the situation with the terminal operating at full capacity and then with the extra throughput provided by Berth 201/2. In addition, for a robust analysis, the 2008 and 2011 baseline internal noise levels have also been assessed. The results of this assessment are given in Table F