Island Park U.S. 20. Targhee Pass Environmental Assessment. Traffic Noise Analysis Report

Transcription

1 Island Park U.S. 2 Targhee Pass Environmental Assessment Traffic ise Analysis Report Prepared for Idaho Transportation Department, District 6, Rigby, Idaho Prepared by Horrocks Engineers, Pleasant Grove, Utah April 12, 218

2 TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS REPORT FOR TARGHEE PASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (U.S. 2O: IDAHO 87 MONTANA STATE LINE) Key INTRODUCTION This Traffic ise Analysis Report was prepared in accordance with 23 CFR 772 and the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) Traffic ise Policy (Section 13 of the ITD Environmental Process Manual). 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AND AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 2.1 Description of Project ITD has initiated an Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate risks, benefits, opportunities, and costs associated with reconstruction of Targhee Pass. The study area is adjacent to U.S. 2 between its approximate junction with State Highway (SH) 87 and the Idaho-Montana state line (see Figure 1). The EA is considering five alternatives. Alternative 1 is the no-build alternative. Alternatives 2-5 would include the following transportation improvements: a climbing lane in the uphill direction, from SH 87 to the Idaho-Montana State line wider shoulders left and right turn lanes into Big Horn Hills Estates entrances road subsurface reconstruction and drainage improvements vegetation clearing to reduce shade Alternatives 2-5 differ by types of design elements that are included for reducing wildlife-vehicle collisions. Design features for each alternative are as follows: Alternative 2 three wildlife overpass crossing structures and wildlife fencing. Alternative 3 radar animal detection system to alert drivers to the presence of animals. Alternative 4 wildlife fencing, one wildlife crossing structure at Mile Post 45, and one or more at-grade wildlife crosswalk fence breaks with animal detection and driver warning. Alternative 5 mobile variable message sings to warn drivers of potential wildlife presence. The design year is 24. The proposed project is a Type 1 Project (or a project that requires a noise analysis) because it involves the addition of a through-traffic climbing lane. 2.2 City Approach to ise Abatement The study area is not located within a jurisdiction that has ordinances to promote compatibility between future land development and traffic related noise. 1

3 Figure 1: Project Location Map 2

4 2.3 Adjacent Land Use Near the junction of SH87 and U.S. 2 are a few houses with the adjacent land use being zoned as a mixture of residential, commercial, and commercial limited office use. The remainder of the study area is zoned as rural conservation with one subdivision (Big Horn Hills Estates) and public land managed by the Caribou-Targhee National Forest (see Zoning Map in Appendix A). 3. EXISTING AND DESIGN YEAR NOISE LEVELS & IMPACTS Traffic noise is measured in A-weighted sound levels in decibels (dba) which most closely approximates the way the human ear hears sounds at different frequencies. Since traffic noise varies over time, the sound levels for this noise analysis are expressed as equivalent levels or Leq, representing the average sound level over a one hour period of time. Unless noted otherwise, all sound levels in this noise analysis are expressed in the hourly equivalent noise level. Figure 3 shows sound levels (in dba) of common sounds. 3.1 ise Abatement Criteria (NAC) FHWA has established ise Abatement Criteria (NAC) for several categories of land use activities (see Table 1). FHWA s NAC is based on sound levels that are considered to be an impact to noise sensitive areas (residences, businesses, and outdoor areas where highway traffic noise may affect frequent human activities). These noise sensitive areas are also known as receptors. Primary consideration is to be given for exterior areas where frequent human use occurs. Figure 3: Sound Levels (in dba) of Common Sounds (Compiled from Federal Transit Administration and Environmental Protection Agency Data) ITD has developed a Traffic ise Policy (Section 13 of the ITD Environmental Process Manual) for transportation projects, which conforms to FHWA NAC requirements outlined in 23 CFR 772. ITD s Traffic ise Policy states that a traffic noise impact occurs when either 1) the predicted noise level approaches or exceeds the FHWA NAC, even if the future noise level is lower than the existing noise level (approach means one dba below the FHWA NAC) or, 2) the project design year traffic noise level exceeds the existing noise level by 15 dba or more. 3

5 Table 1: FHWA and ITD NAC Activity Category FHWA Activity Leq (h) ITD Activity Leq (h) Activity Description A 57 (Exterior) 56 (Exterior) Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. B 67 (Exterior) 66 (Exterior) Residential. C 67 (Exterior) 66 (Exterior) D 52 (Interior) 51 (Interior) E 72 (Exterior) 71 (Exterior) F Active sports areas, amphitheaters, auditoriums, campgrounds, cemeteries, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, parks, picnic areas, places of worship, playgrounds, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, recreation areas, Section 4(f) sites, schools, television studios, trails and trail crossings. Auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, places of worship, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, schools, and television studios. Hotels, motels, offices, restaurants/bars, and other developed lands, properties or activities not included in A-D or F. Agriculture, airports, bus yards, emergency services, industrial, logging, maintenance facilities, manufacturing, mining, rail yards, retail facilities, shipyards, utilities (water resources, water treatment, electrical), and warehousing. G Undeveloped lands that are not permitted. Source: FHWA 23 CFR 772 and ITD Traffic ise Policy 3.2 Analysis Methodology The Traffic ise Model (TNM) 2.5 software was used to predict highway traffic noise levels. This software is FHWA-approved and incorporates the following variables to predict noise levels: Roadway Geometry and Topographic Data The roadway geometry data used for the noise model was based on the electronic design files and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Elevation Dataset (NED). 4

6 Traffic Volumes Traffic Volumes were based on Design Hourly Volumes (DHV) provided by ITD. Table 2: 216 Existing DHV Location U.S. 2 EB= 528 WB = 352 State Highway 87 NB = 21 SB = 14 Table 3: 24 Alternative 1 ( Build) DHV Location U.S. 2 EB= 772 WB = 514 State Highway 87 NB = 282 SB = 188 Table 4: 24 Alternatives 2-5 DHV Location U.S. 2 EB= 772 WB =514 State Highway 87 NB = 282 SB = 188 PM Peak Average Volume (vehicles per hour) PM Peak Average Volume (vehicles per hour) PM Peak Average Volume (vehicles per hour) Vehicle Mix The following vehicle mix percentages were used for the Existing, Alternative 1 ( Build), and Alternatives 2-5 models: Table 5: Vehicle Mix Vehicle Type Model Location Percentage Automobile (2-axle, 4 tire) Existing U.S Medium Truck (2-axle, 6 tire) Existing U.S Heavy Truck (3+ axles) Existing U.S Automobile (2-axle, 4 tire) Existing State Highway Medium Truck (2-axle, 6 tire) Existing State Highway Heavy Truck (3+ axles) Existing State Highway Automobile (2-axle, 4 tire) Build/Proposed Action U.S Medium Truck (2-axle, 6 tire) Build/Proposed Action U.S Heavy Truck (3+ axles) Build/Proposed Action U.S Automobile (2-axle, 4 tire) Build/Proposed Action State Highway Medium Truck (2-axle, 6 tire) Build/Proposed Action State Highway Heavy Truck (3+ axles) Build/Proposed Action State Highway

7 Vehicle Speed The following vehicle speeds were used for the Existing, Alternative 1 ( Build), and Alternatives 2-5 models. The vehicle speeds show in Table 6 are existing posted speed limits. These posted speed limits are expected to remain the same for the Build and Build conditions. Table 6: Vehicle Speeds Roadway U.S. 2 State Highway 87 Speed 65 mph 65 mph Weather Conditions and Ground Type FHWA recommended default values for temperature (68 F) and humidity (5) inputs were used in the noise model. The lawn ground type was used to approximate the surrounding residential/undeveloped uses. Receptor Locations A receptor was modeled for every noise sensitive area (residence or recreation area where highway traffic noise may affect frequent human activities) directly adjacent to the proposed road construction. 3.3 Existing ise Field Measurements Field measurements were taken to verify the accuracy of the computer model. If the predicted and measured noise levels are within 3 dba, then the model is within the accepted level of accuracy. Measurement locations are shown Existing ise Level Maps. The measured and predicted noise levels for each monitoring site are shown in Table 7. Each measurement site was found to be within the 3 dba tolerance. Table 7: Field ise Measurements Site Number Location Field ise Level (dba) TNM Output (dba) Difference M1 M2 M3 Gravel pull-out (old Sunset Lodge, south end of study area) South entrance to Big Horn Hills Estates (middle of study area) Howard Springs Picnic Area (paved pull-out, north end of study area)

8 ise Modeling Existing traffic sound levels were calculated using the Traffic ise Model (TNM) 2.5 software using existing conditions (travel lane configurations, posted speed limits, and the current design hourly volumes for SH 87 and U.S. 2). See Table 8 and Appendix A for Existing ise Level Maps for existing noise levels Alternative 1 ( Build) ise Under Alternative 1 ( Build), traffic would generally increase on all roads within the study area. See Table 8 and Appendix A for Build ise Level Maps. Compared to existing noise levels, 24 Alternative 1 ( Build) noise levels would increase an average of 2. dba (an unnoticeable increase), with the greatest increase being 2.1 dba (an unnoticeable increase) at Receptor B1 (a residence located along Mountain View Drive). This increase in noise levels is due to the increase in traffic volumes on existing roadways (SH 87 and U.S. 2) Alternatives 2-5 ise Projected traffic noise levels for each receptor in the study area were calculated using TNM 2.5 software using built conditions (travel lane configurations, design speed, and the 24 design hourly volumes for SH 87 and U.S. 2). Although Alternatives 2-5 include different design elements for wildlife-vehicle collisions prevention, the only projected noise difference is at Receptor B5 with implementation of Alternative 2. The slight noise reduction is caused by one of the proposed wildlife crossings structures blocking noise from the perspective of Receptor B5. In accordance with the ITD ise Abatement Policy, six receptors (representing seven dwelling units) would be impacted as a result of Alternatives 2-5 noise levels exceeding the NAC. receptors would experience a substantial increase (15 dba over existing conditions). Compared to existing noise levels, 24 Alternatives 2-5 noise levels would increase an average of 3.7 dba (a slightly noticeable increase), with the greatest increasing being 5.6 dba (a noticeable increase) at Receptor B26 (a residence located along Big Horn Lane). This increase in noise levels is due to the additional travel lane that is located closer to the receptors. See Table 8 and Appendix A for Alternatives 2-5 ise Level Maps. Table 8: Current & Projected Leq ise Levels (dba) for Targhee Pass EA Receptor Number Distance from U.S. 2 Centerline (feet) 216 dba 24 dba Existing Proposed Alternative 1 ( Build) Alternatives 2-5 U.S. 2; between SH 87 and the Idaho-Montana state line: 65mph B1 Residence B2 - Residence

9 Receptor Number Distance from U.S. 2 Centerline (feet) 216 dba 24 dba Existing Proposed Alternative 1 ( Build) Alternatives 2-5 B3 - Residence B4 - Residence B5 - Residence ¹ 68.1² B6 - Residence B7 - Residence B8 - Residence B9 - Residence B1 - Residence B11 - Residence B12 - Residence B13 - Residence B14 - Residence B15 - Residence B16 - Residence B17 - Residence B18 - Residence B19 - Residence B2 - Residence B21³ - Residence B22 - Residence B23 - Residence B24 - Residence B25 - Residence B26 - Residence B27 - Residence B29 - Residence

10 Receptor Number Distance from U.S. 2 Centerline (feet) 216 dba 24 dba Existing Proposed Alternative 1 ( Build) Alternatives 2-5 B29 - Residence B3 - Residence B31 - Residence B32 - Residence B33 - Residence B34 - Residence B35 - Residence B36 - Residence B37 - Residence B38 - Residence B39 - Residence C4 Trailhead B41 Residence B42 Residence B43 Residence ¹ Alternatives 3, 4, and 5 ² Alternative 2 ³ Represents two dwelling units 4. EXAMINATION AND EVALUATION OF TRAFFIC NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES 4.1 Traffic Management Measures Traffic management measures such as speed restrictions and truck routes may be evaluated for mitigation of traffic noise in cases where such measures do not conflict with the intended use of the roadway or create unreasonable delay or hardship on the motoring public, and they do not create a safety or enforcement problem. According to FHWA s Highway Traffic ise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, a reduction in speed of more than 2 mph is necessary for a noticeable decrease in noise levels. Therefore, traffic management measures were not considered as part of this evaluation because they are not consistent with the intended use of the roadway. 9

11 4.2 Alteration of Horizontal and Vertical Alignments To effectively reduce noise levels, U.S. 2 would need to shift several feet away from the impacted receptors, resulting in the need to acquire large amounts of additional right-of-way. Depressing U.S. 2 several feet may reduce noise levels; however, there would be a large cost associated with lowering the roadway. Therefore, altering the horizontal and vertical alignments was not considered as part of this evaluation. 4.3 Acquisition of Real Property to Serve as a Buffer Zone ITD does not consider the purchase of buffer zones on undeveloped land as a reasonable expenditure of State highway funds because local jurisdictions have the regulatory power to achieve compatible development adjacent to highways. 4.4 ise Barriers For a noise barrier to be effective, it must be high enough and long enough to block the view of the noise source from the receptor s perspective. FHWA s Highway Traffic ise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance states that a good rule of thumb is that the noise barrier should extend four times as far in each direction as the distance from the receptor to the barrier. For instance, if the receptor is 5 feet from the proposed noise barrier, the barrier needs to extend at least 2 feet on either side of the receptor in order to shield the receptor from noise traveling past the ends of the barrier. Receptor B1 Receptor B1 is considered impacted because the 24 traffic noise for Alternatives 2-5 is predicted to exceed the FHWA NAC. ise Wall 1a is 6 feet in length and was modeled to shield Receptor B1 (see ise Wall Map 1 of 4 in Appendix A). ise Wall 1a is considered feasible as an 18 ft wall would achieve a minimum 5 dba traffic noise reduction for the majority of impacted receptors (see Table 9 and the ise Barrier Abatement Checklists in Appendix B). However, ise Wall 1a is not reasonable because the Wall Cost Planning Estimate is above the allowable Benefited Receptor Cost Limit (see Table 1). Therefore, the analysis was ended for this wall. Table 9: Wall 1a Feasibility Analysis Summary Impacted ise Reduction (dba) Receptors 6ft 8ft 1ft 12ft 14ft 16ft 18ft B ity Benefited Feasible Table 1: Wall 1a Reasonability Analysis Summary Wall Height (ft) Adjusted Wall Height (add 4 ft) Cost per Square Foot* Wall Cost Planning Estimate # of Benefited Receptors Benefited Receptor Cost Limit Meets Benefited Receptor Cost Limit? Meets Design Goal (7dBA reduction)? Reasonable? 18ft 22 $35.** $462,. 1 $24,25. *Cost required for walls less than a quarter mile long. ** Includes height premium = $1. per foot over 16 feet. 1

12 Receptors B4 and B5 Receptors B4 and B5 are considered impacted because the 24 traffic noise for Alternatives 2-5 is predicted to exceed the FHWA NAC. ise Wall 1b was modeled to shield Receptors B4 and B4. This wall would be built in two segments to allow for existing residential access. ise Wall 1b measures a total length of 18 feet, with Segment 1 consisting of 5 feet and Segment 2 consisting of 58 feet (see ise Wall Map 1 of 4 in Appendix A). ise Wall 1b is considered feasible as select heights would achieve a minimum 5 dba traffic noise reduction for the majority of impacted receptors (see Table 11 and the ise Barrier Abatement Checklists in Appendix B). However, ise Wall 1b is not reasonable because the Wall Cost Planning Estimate is above the allowable Benefited Receptor Cost Limit (see Table 12). Therefore, the analysis was ended for this wall. Table 11: Wall 1b Feasibility Analysis Summary Impacted ise Reduction (dba) Receptors 6ft 8ft 1ft 12ft 14ft 16ft B B ity Benefited Feasible? Table 12: Wall 1b Reasonability Analysis Summary Wall Height (ft) Cost per Square Foot* Wall Cost Planning Estimate Adjusted Wall Height (add 4 ft) # of Benefited Receptors Benefited Receptor Cost Limit Meets Benefited Receptor Cost Limit? Meets Design Goal (7dBA reduction)? Reasonable? 1ft 14 $29. $438,48. 1 $24,25. 12ft 16 $29. $51,12. 2 $48,5. 14ft 18 $31.** $62,64. 2 $48,5. 16ft 2 $33.** $712,8. 2 $48,5. *Cost required for walls less than a quarter mile long. ** Includes height premium = $1. per foot over 16 feet. Receptors B21 and B22 Receptors B21 and B22 are considered impacted because the 24 traffic noise for Alternatives 2-5 is predicted to exceed the FHWA NAC. Receptor B21 represents two dwelling units to account for the residence currently permitted for construction directly south of the receptor labeled as B21. ise Wall 2 is 1443 feet in length and was modeled to shield Receptors B21 and B22 (see ise Wall Map 2 of 4 in Appendix A). ise Wall 2 is considered feasible as select heights would achieve a minimum 5 dba traffic noise reduction for the majority of impacted receptors (see Table 13 and the ise Barrier Abatement Checklists in Appendix B). However, ise Wall 2 it is not reasonable because the Wall Cost Planning Estimate is above the allowable Benefited Receptor Cost Limit (see Table 14). Therefore, the analysis was ended for this wall. 11

13 Table 13: Wall 2 Feasibility Analysis Summary Impacted ise Reduction (dba) Receptors 6ft 8ft 1ft 12ft 14ft 16ft B B ity Benefited Feasible? Table 14: Wall 2 Reasonability Analysis Summary Wall Height (ft) Adjusted Wall Height (add 4 ft) Cost per Square Foot* Wall Cost Planning Estimate # of Benefited Receptors Benefited Receptor Cost Limit Meets Benefited Receptor Cost Limit? Meets Design Goal (7dBA reduction)? Reasonable? 8ft 12 $24.25 $419, $72,75. 1ft 14 $24.25 $489, $72,75. 12ft 16 $24.25 $559, $72,75. 14ft 18 $26.25** $681, $72,75. 16ft 2 $28.25** $815, $72,75. *Cost required for walls over a quarter mile long. ** Includes height premium = $1. per foot over 16 feet. Receptor C4 Receptor C4 is considered impacted because the 24 traffic noise for Alternatives 2-5 is predicted to exceed the FHWA NAC. ise Wall 3 is 312 feet in length and modeled to shield Receptor C4 (see ise Wall Maps 3 and 4 in Appendix A). ise Wall 3 is considered feasible as select heights would achieve a minimum 5 dba traffic noise reduction for the impacted receptor (see Table 15 and the ise Barrier Abatement Checklists in Appendix B). However, ise Wall 3 it is not reasonable because the Wall Cost Planning Estimate is above the allowable Benefited Receptor Cost Limit (see Table 16). Therefore, the analysis was ended for this wall. Table 15: Wall 3 Feasibility Analysis Summary Impacted ise Reduction (dba) Receptors 6ft 8ft 1ft 12ft 14ft 16ft C ity Benefited Feasible? Table 16: Wall 3 Reasonability Analysis Summary Wall Height (ft) Adjusted Wall Height (add 4 ft) Cost per Square Foot* Wall Cost Planning Estimate*** # of Benefited Receptors Benefited Receptor Cost Limit Meets Benefited Receptor Cost Limit? Meets Design Goal (7dBA reduction)? Reasonable? 8ft 12 $29. $119, $24,25. N/A 1ft 14 $29. $139, $24,25. 12ft 16 $29. $159, $24,25. 14ft 18 $31.** $191, $24,25. 16ft 2 $33.** $226, $48,5. *Cost required for walls less than a quarter mile long. ** Includes height premium = $1. per foot over 16 feet. ***Includes 1 of total cost for clear zone premium (added because of additional costs to install concrete Jersey barrier type deflection of safety purposes) 12

14 5. CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS The most prevalent construction noise source is equipment powered by internal combustion engines (usually diesel). ise from equipment likely to be used on this project (tractors, trucks, graders, pile drivers, etc.) will range to about 95 decibels (dba) when measured from a distance of 15 meters (5 ). To reduce the impact of construction noise, most construction activities will be confined to the period least disturbing to adjacent and nearby residents, between 7: a.m. and 7: p.m. on weekdays. This limitation could be adjusted for short periods, as needed, if approved by the resident engineer. Mitigation of potential highway construction noise impacts shall incorporate low-cost, easy-toimplement measures into project plans and specifications (equipment muffler requirements, work-hour limits). 6. INFORMATION FOR LOCAL OFFICIALS To disclose noise levels to local officials in an effort to prevent future traffic noise impacts on currently undeveloped lands (in conformance with 23 CFR ), a ten-point transect was modeled. The tenpoint transect was placed along U.S. 2 just north of Big Horn Hills Estates in an undeveloped area (see Transect Data Map in Appendix A). According to communication with the Island Park City building and planning department (March 27, 218), there are no active building permits within the study area. However, as confirmed with the Fremont County building and planning department (March 29, 218), there is one active building permits within the Big Horn Hills Estates subdivision adjacent to the study area. B21 represents two dwelling units to account for the residence currently permitted for construction directly south of the receptor labeled as B21 and was accounted for in the noise analysis. ise receptor locations were modeled perpendicular to the proposed U.S. 2 at 5 feet, 75 feet, 1 feet, 125 feet, 15 feet, 2 feet, 25 feet, 3 feet, 4 feet, and 8 feet from both the northbound and southbound centerlines (see Table 16 and Transect Data Map in Appendix A). As can been seen from Table 16, noise levels would exceed the NAC for exterior residential uses between approximately 125 and 15 feet. Table 16: 24 Proposed Action ise Levels (dba) at Selected Distances Design Speed: 65 mph Distance rth of U.S. 2 South of U.S. 2 from Centerline Model ID. dba Model ID. dba 5 RT LT RT LT RT LT RT LT RT LT RT LT RT LT RT LT RT LT RT LT

15 APPENDIX A FIGURES

16 ") «87 2 Commercial Residential Rural Conservation Commercial Limited Office Study Area E 2, 4, Feet 1 inch = 2, feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Existing Zoning

17 «87 2 1B 63 dba 5B 4B 65.1 dba 64.7 dba M1 2B 57.7 dba 3B 55.8 dba Measurement Location E Receptor Location 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Existing ise Levels Map 1 of 4

18 Mountain Howard View Dr 41B 54.9 dba 2 r 21B 63 dba 22B 63.3 dba 26B 57.5 dba 6B 53.7 dba M2 7B 5.3 dba Creek D 8B 52.5 dba 9B 49.9 dba Nez P er 24B 53.1 dba ce Dr 1B 48.5 dba 15B 45.4 dba 16B 44.9 dba 23B 45.7 dba 3B 44.8 dba 17B 44.5 dba 13B 44.6 dba 31B 43.9 dba 18B 43.2 dba 4 19B 42.3 dba 3 Measurement Location 34B 42.6 dba 36B 42.1 dba 39B 42.9 dba 38B 42.2 dba 37B 42.3 dba E Receptor Location 32B 33B 43.6 dba 43.6 dba 35B 41.7 dba B 47.7 dba n Ln 12B 45.2 dba 2B 49.3 dba Ho r 14B 46.5 dba 28B 5.8 dba Big 11B 42B 48.8 dba46.9 dba 25B 54.2 dba Grizzly Ct 43B 5.8 dba 27B 6.4 dba 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Existing ise Levels Map 2 of 4

19 2 4C 7.3 dba M Measurement Location Receptor Location E 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Existing ise Levels Map 3 of 4

20 ) " 57 4C 7.3 dba 2 M Measurement Location Receptor Location E 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Existing ise Levels Map 4 of 4

21 «87 2 1B 64.9 dba 5B 4B 67 dba 66.6 dba 2B 59.6 dba 3B 57.8 dba E Receptor Location 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Build ise Levels Map 1 of 4

22 Mountain View Dr 41B 56.9 dba Howard 7B 52.3 dba Creek D 2 r 21B 64.9 dba 22B 65.2 dba 26B 59.4 dba 6B 55.7 dba 8B 54.5 dba 9B 51.9 dba Nez P er 17B 46.5 dba 3B 46.8 dba 31B 45.8 dba 18B 45.2 dba 19B 44.3 dba 3 32B 33B 45.6 dba 45.6 dba 34B 44.6 dba 36B 44 dba 35B 43.7 dba B 47.7 dba n Ln 4 16B 46.9 dba 29B 49.7 dba Ho r 13B 46.5 dba 15B 47.4 dba Big 12B 47.2 dba 2B 51.3 dba 28B 52.8 dba Grizzly Ct 1B 5.6 dba 11B 42B 48.9 dba 14B 5.8 dba 48.5 dba 25B 24B 56.2 dba 55.1 dba ce Dr 43B 52.8 dba 39B 44.9 dba 38B 44.2 dba 37B 44.3 dba E Receptor Location 27B 62.3 dba 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Build ise Levels Map 2 of 4

23 2 4C 72.1 dba Receptor Location E 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Build ise Levels Map 3 of 4

24 ) " 57 4C 72.1 dba Receptor Location E 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Build ise Levels Map 4 of 4

25 «87 Wildlife crossing structure for Alternative 2 2 1B 68 dba 2B 62.7 dba 3B 6.9 dba 4B 67.8 dba 5B 68.1 dba (Alt. 2) 68.2 dba (Alt. 3-5) ise Impact 4 E8 Feet 1 inch = 4 feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Alternatives 2-5 ise Levels Map 1 of 4

26 41B 6.1 dba Mountain View Dr 7B 54.7 dba Howard Creek Dr 6B 58.7 dba 8B 57.2 dba 9B 54.1 dba 42B 11B 52.9 dba5.6 dba 1B 52.5 dba 14B 5 dba 2B 53.2 dba 21B 67.5 dba Nez Perce Dr 43B 55.1 dba 22B 68.1 dba 27B 65.7 dba 26B 63.1 dba Grizzly Ct 24B 58 dba 25B 59.5 dba 28B 55.3 dba 29B 51.4 dba B 48.5 dba 13B 47.7 dba 15B 48.6 dba 16B 48 dba 17B 47.4 dba 18B 46 dba 23B 48.8 dba 19B 44.9 dba 31B 46.6 dba Big Horn Ln 3B 47.7 dba 33B 32B 46.3 dba 46.3 dba 39B 45.5 dba 34B 45.1 dba 37B 38B 44.8 dba44.7 dba 2 35B 44.1 dba 36B 44.5 dba 1 ise Impact E 4 8 Feet 1 inch = 4 feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Alternatives 2-5 ise Levels Map 2 of 4

27 Wildlife crossing structure for Alternatives 2 and 4 2 4C 73.7 dba ise Impact E 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Alternatives 2-5 ise Levels Map 3 of 4

28 " ) 57 Wildlife crossing structure for Alternative 2 4C 73.7 dba ise Impact E 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Alternatives 2-5 ise Levels Map 4 of 4

29 «87 2 1B 5B Modeled ise Wall 1A 2B 3B Modeled ise Wall 1B Segment 1 Modeled ise Wall 1B Segment Modeled ise Walls E Receptor Location 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment ise Walls Map 1 of 4

30 Modeled ise Wall 2 Mountain View Dr 41B Howard 2 Creek D r 21B 22B 27B 26B 6B 8B 7B 9B 1B ce Dr 43B 2B 15B 13B n Ln 12B 29B Ho r 14B 28B Big 11B Grizzly Ct 42B Nez P er 25B 24B 23B 16B 3B 17B 31B 33B 32B 18B 39B 4 34B 19B 3 38B 36B 35B 2 37B 1 Modeled ise Walls E Receptor Location 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment ise Walls Map 2 of 4

31 Modeled ise Wall 3 2 4C Modeled ise Walls Receptor Location E 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment ise Walls Map 3 of 4

32 ) " 57 Modeled ise Wall 3 2 4C Modeled ise Walls Receptor Location E 4 1 inch = 4 feet 8 Feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment ise Walls Map 4 of 4

33 8 feet (51.4 dba) 4 feet (56.9 dba) 3 feet (59.1 dba) 25 feet (6.5 dba) 2 feet (61.9 dba) 1 Feet (68.4 dba) 15 feet (64.9 dba) 125 feet (66.4 dba) 75 feet (7.6 dba) 5 feet (73.4 dba) 2 1 Feet (69.3 dba) 5 feet (73.4 dba) 75 feet (71 dba) 125 feet (67.9 dba) 15 feet (66.9 dba) 2 feet (64.5 dba) 25 feet (62.9 dba) 3 feet (61.3 dba) 4 feet (58.7 dba) 2 8 feet (51.6 dba) Transect Receptors E 2 4 Feet 1 inch = 2 feet Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Environmental Assessment Transect Data Map

34 APPENDIX B NOISE BARRIER ABATEMENT CHECKLIST

35 APPENDIX B NOISE BARRIER ABATEMENT CHECKLIST

36 Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B1 (Wall 1a - 6ft) ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov 68 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

37 Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B1 (Wall 1a - 8ft) ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov 68 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

38 Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B1 (Wall 1a - 1ft) ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov 68 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

39 Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B1 (Wall 1a - 12ft) ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov 68 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

40 Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B1 (Wall 1a - 14ft) ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov 68 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA 5. Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions >1dBA 4-9dBA Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source Primary Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

41 Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B1 (Wall 1a - 16ft) ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov 68 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA 5. Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions >1dBA 4-9dBA Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source Primary Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

42 Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B1 (Wall 1a - 18ft) ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov 68 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 1 462, 5.5 Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

43 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B4, B5 (Wall 1b - 6ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.8, 68.2 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

44 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B4, B5 (Wall 1b - 8ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.8, 68.2 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA 5. Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions >1dBA 4-9dBA Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source Primary Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

45 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B4, B5 (Wall 1b - 1ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.8, 68.2 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 1 438, Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA 5. Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions >1dBA 4-9dBA Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source Primary Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

46 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B4, B5 (Wall 1b - 12ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.8, 68.2 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 2 51, Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

47 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B4, B5 (Wall 1b - 14ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.8, 68.2 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 2 62, Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA 5. Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions >1dBA 4-9dBA Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source Primary Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

48 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B4, B5 (Wall 1b - 16ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.8, 68.2 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 2 712,8 8.9 Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA 5. Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions >1dBA 4-9dBA Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source Primary Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

49 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B21, B22 (Wall 2-6 ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.5, 68.1 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

50 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B21, B22 (Wall 2-8 ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.5, 68.1 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 3 419, Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

51 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B21, B22 (Wall 2-1 ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.5, 68.1 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 3 489, Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA 5. Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions >1dBA 4-9dBA Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source Primary Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

52 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B21, B22 (Wall 2-12 ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.5, 68.1 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 3 559, Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source >1dBA Primary 4-9dBA Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

53 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B21, B22 (Wall 2-14 ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.5, 68.1 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 3 681, Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA 5. Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions >1dBA 4-9dBA Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source Primary Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.

54 ise Barrier Abatement Checklist Idaho Transportation Department ITD 155 (Rev. 5-11) itd.idaho.gov Key Number Project Number 1454 Impacted Receptor Number B21, B22 (Wall 2-16 ft) Project Name Jct. SH87 to Montana State Line Design Year "Build" dba Level(s) Without Barrier 67.5, 68.1 Barrier Feasibility Can the barrier achieve at least a 5 dba sound level reduction at the majority of impacted receptors without limiting property or neighborhood access? Does the barrier conform to project standards regarding traffic safety, mainenance, and drainage concerns, considering that these issues can often be resolved through use of good design practices? 3. Can an effective barrier be constructed considering the existing site characteristics and topography, and without reconfiguring the site or neighborhood (not including minor access modifications)? If to any of the above, the barrier is not feasible - do not continue with this checklist. If to all of the above, the barrier is feasible - complete the following. Factors Required for Barrier Reasonability Decisions Number of benefitted receptors Estimated barrier cost Closest benefitted receptor to centerline insertion loss Percentage of benefitted property owners who want a traffic noise barrier Percentage of benefitted renters who want a traffic noise barrier $ dba 3 815, Optional Barrier Reasonability Factors Single optional factor can be used to determine reasonableness. The assessment results of the 7 factors below are used to increase the cost per benefitted receptor. High Low 1. Development pre-dated highway construction 2. Development in place before Type of development* Dwelling School 4. Exposure to higher absolute traffic noise levels >1dBA 5-9dBA 5. Changes between existing and build (design year) conditions >1dBA 4-9dBA Effort of local officals to use noise compatible development Project generated traffic noise is the dominate noise source Primary Moderate Low Office 3-4dBA -3dBA Secondary High <1 <1 Retail <3dBA <dba ne Adjusted Value [(THY+TLY-TLN-THN)1] (THY - Total High ; TLY - Total Low ; TLN - Total Low ; THN - Total High ) Adjusted Cost Per Benefitted Receptor (Adjusted Value + $24,25) $24,25. * Dwelling - includes residences, condos, apartments, areas of frequent outdoor use associated with quiet and "Cat. A" uses School - includes libraries, churches, hospitals, and outdoor areas associated with infrequent or noisier activities Office - includes low volume commercial uses, and motels/hotels with outdoor accommodations for guests Retail - includes parking lots, industrial uses, shopping centers, convenience stores, highway businesses, etc.