Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report

Transcription

1 Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report Full Depth Roadway Reconstruction and Widening of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Northeast Extension (I-476) from Milepost A31.3 to A38.1 Lower Salford, Franconia, and Salford Townships Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Prepared for: Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission P.O. Box Harrisburg, Pennsylvania March 2013 Prepared by 375 East Elm Street Suite 101 Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428

2 PRELIMINARY NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT Full Depth Roadway Reconstruction and Widening of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Northeast Extension (I-476) from Milepost A31.3 to 38.1 Lower Salford, Franconia, Salford Townships Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Prepared for: Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission P.O. Box Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Prepared by: A.D. Marble and Company 375 East Elm Street Suite 101 Conshohocken, Pennsylvania March 2013

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents... i List of Illustrations... iii 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY Analytical Procedures Evaluation Criteria Warranted Criteria Feasibility Criteria Reasonableness Criteria Noise Abatement Measures EXISTING HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE ENVIRONMENT (MONITORED DATA) Identification of Noise Study Areas (NSAs) Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Noise Study Area Short-Term Noise Monitoring FUTURE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE ENVIRONMENT (EXISTING AND FUTURE MODELED) Validation of Noise Modeling Loudest Hour Computations Existing Computed Sound Levels Future (2036) No Build Condition Computed Sound Levels Future (2036) Build Condition Computed Sound Levels...31 i

4 6.0 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE CONSIDERATION AND MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES Mitigation Alternatives Noise Barrier Evaluation Summary of Results and Recommendations Detailed Noise Barrier Descriptions CONSTRUCTION NOISE CONSIDERATION AND MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS...51 Bibliography Appendices Appendix A: Traffic Data Appendix B: Field Measurement Data Sheets Appendix C: Figures Appendix D: Site Development Plans Proposed Communities Appendix E: Warranted, Feasible, and Reasonable Worksheets ii

5 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figures 1 Project Location Map Noise Study Areas (NSAs) Index Map... Appendix C 2A to 2L Noise Study Areas (NSAs) Existing Conditions... Appendix C 3A Noise Study Area 6 with Mitigation... Appendix C 3B Noise Study Area 8 with Mitigation... Appendix C 3C Noise Study Area 14 with Mitigation... Appendix C Tables 1. Summary of Noise Abatement Analysis FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level Decibels (db[a]) Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurement Results Measured vs. Computed Sound Levels Computed Existing (2011) and Future (2036) Loudest-Hour Sound Levels Summary of Evaluated Noise Barriers Computed Loudest-Hour Sound Levels and Insertion Loss Values...48 iii

6 1.0 Executive Summary

7 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission (PTC) has initiated preliminary engineering design for the full depth roadway reconstruction and widening of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Northeast Extension (I-476) from Milepost (MP) A31.3 to MP A38.1 in Lower Salford, Franconia, and Salford townships, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. This report addresses the potential for noise impacts based on the noise analysis performed during the preliminary engineering design phase of this project. Traffic noise impact analysis and abatement measures were evaluated according to the methodology and procedures set forth by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in Federal-Aid Policy Guide Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772, Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise (July 2011); and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) in the Project Level Highway Traffic Noise Handbook, Publication No. 24 (April 2011). This effort has focused on all sensitive land uses in proximity to the Turnpike. A total of 19 Noise Study Areas (NSAs) were identified from south to north, with nine NSAs located on the west side of the Turnpike and ten NSAs located to the east of the Turnpike. Noise monitoring was conducted at 62 representative sites within the project study area in May and June The monitoring data was used to develop computer models capable of predicting the worst-case noise levels for existing and future roadway conditions. When worst-case existing traffic is applied, noise levels are predicted to range from 47 decibels (db[a]) to 72 db(a), with levels at or above the requisite noise abatement criteria for the specific land use at 24 sites involving 14 of the 19 NSAs identified for this analysis. Travel volumes are expected to increase approximately 56 percent by the design year 2036 (traffic data can be referenced in Appendix A). The 2036 No Build traffic noise levels throughout the project area range from 49 db(a) to 74 db(a), with an average increase of 2 db(a) over existing conditions observed. The geographic concentration of elevated noise levels is consistent with those identified in the existing worst-case scenario. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 1

8 The existing conditions noise model was then modified to incorporate design changes to the existing roadways and changes to the surrounding topography. This revised model was used to predict design year (2036) Build traffic noise levels at all monitored sites. With the proposed improvements, 2036 Build traffic noise levels through the corridor range from 51 db(a) to 74 db(a), with an average increase of 2 db(a) over existing conditions observed. Design year traffic noise impacts were identified within 15 of the 19 NSAs. Therefore, abatement consideration is warranted for NSAs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, and 19 within the project corridor. No traffic noise impacts were identified for NSAs 15, 16, and 17. For NSA 9, future noise levels are predicted to reach 66 db(a). However, this is not sufficient to create an impact for the mixed land use of Category E, with no associated outdoor land use, and the non-noise sensitive Category F retail store located within this NSA. NSAs where no impacts were identified do not warrant abatement consideration; therefore no further analysis was performed for NSAs 9, 15, 16, and 17. Since noise impacts have been identified, this study included an evaluation of noise abatement. Alternative forms of abatement can be effective under certain circumstances. These include acquisition of additional right-of-way (ROW) for installing barriers or earthen berms, inclusion of traffic control measures, and modification of the alignment. Given the nature of the Turnpike through the project area, restrictions on travel speeds or truck traffic utilization to control noise would not serve the roadway s intended function and would be difficult to enforce. Therefore, this study focused on vertical noise barriers as the only abatement consideration. Abatement in the form of noise barriers can provide effective mitigation to receptors with an equivalent dwelling unit value of 98 dwelling units, involving three of the NSAs, with reductions ranging from 0 db(a) to 14 db(a). Table 1 provides a summary of noise barriers that were considered in each NSA. Specifications for the recommended noise barriers are detailed in Section 6.0 and the Appendices of this document. The recommended noise barriers for NSA 6, 8 and 14 would range in height from approximately 8 to 18 feet and would have a total length of approximately 10,705 feet. The recommended barriers would benefit approximately 26 equivalent dwelling units within NSA 6, 42 equivalent dwelling units within NSA 8, and 30 equivalent dwelling units at NSA 14. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 2

9 Table 1: Summary of Noise Abatement Analysis. NSA / Barrier Number Barrier Height Impacted Noise Reduction Min. db(a) Avg. db(a) Max. db(a) # of Units Impacted # of Impacted Units at NR Goal* # of Units Benefited+ Barrier Sq.Ft. Barrier Sq.Ft. per Unit Benefited NSA 1 / Barrier 1 8 feet ,857 6,429 No 10 feet ,071 5,357 No 12 feet ,285 2,143 No 14 feet ,499 2,250 No 16 feet ,714 2,571 No 18 feet ,928 2,893 No 20 feet ,142 3,214 No Optimized ,714 2,571 No NSA 2 / Barrier 2 8 feet No 2 18,409 9,205 No 10 feet ,012 3,835 No 12 feet ,614 4,602 No 14 feet ,216 4,602 No 16 feet ,819 5,260 No 18 feet ,421 5,917 No 20 feet ,023 6,575 No Optimized ,016 4,145 No NSA 3 / Barrier 3 8 feet ,229 9,743 No 10 feet ,536 7,307 No 12 feet ,843 4,384 No 14 feet ,150 3,935 No 16 feet ,457 3,897 No 18 feet ,765 3,654 No 20 feet ,072 4,004 No Optimized ,859 3,866 No NSA 4 / Barrier 4 8 feet No 0 15,200 15,200 No 10 feet ,000 3,167 No 12 feet ,799 3,800 No 14 feet ,599 4,433 No 16 feet ,399 3,378 No 18 feet ,199 3,800 No 20 feet ,999 4,222 No Optimized ,000 3,333 No NSA 5 / Barrier 5 8 feet No 3 18,801 6,267 No 10 feet ,501 3,917 No 12 feet ,201 4,700 No 14 feet ,901 3,290 No 16 feet ,601 3,418 No 18 feet ,302 3,846 No 20 feet ,002 4,273 No Optimized ,002 2,300 No Feasible? Reasonable? * Noise Reduction (NR) Goal is 5dB(A). + Benefited Units are Impacted and non-impacted Units with a NR of at least 5dB(A). Full Depth Roadway Reconstruction and Widening of the Pennsylvania North East Extension (I-476) from Milepost A31.3 to A38.1 Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 3

10 Table 1: Summary of Noise Abatement Analysis. NSA / Barrier Number Barrier Height Impacted Noise Reduction Min. db(a) Avg. db(a) Max. db(a) # of Units Impacted # of Impacted Units at NR Goal* Feasible? # of Units Benefited+ Barrier Sq.Ft. Barrier Sq.Ft. per Unit Benefited NSA 6 / Barrier 6 8 feet No 6 17,954 2,992 No 10 feet ,443 1, feet ,931 1, feet ,420 1, feet ,908 1, feet ,397 1, feet ,886 1,662 Optimized ,930 1,267 NSA 7 / Barrier 7 8 feet ,841 8,841 No 10 feet ,051 11,051 No 12 feet ,261 13,261 No 14 feet ,472 15,472 No 16 feet ,682 17,682 No 18 feet ,892 19,892 No 20 feet ,102 22,102 No Optimized ,479 17,479 No NSA 8 / Barrier 8 8 feet ,040 2,447 No 10 feet ,050 1, feet ,060 1, feet ,070 1, feet ,080 2,048 No 18 feet ,090 2,252 No 20 feet ,100 2,502 No Optimized ,073 1,811 NSA 10 / Barrier 9 8 feet ,958 12,986 No 10 feet ,698 9,740 No 12 feet ,437 9,740 No 14 feet ,177 11,363 No 16 feet ,917 12,986 No 18 feet ,656 14,609 No 20 feet ,396 16,233 No Optimized ,200 7,067 No NSA 11 / Barrier 10 8 feet No 0 4,960 4,960 No 10 feet No 0 6,200 6,200 No 12 feet No 0 7,440 7,440 No 14 feet No 0 8,680 8,680 No 16 feet No 0 9,920 9,920 No 18 feet No 0 11,160 11,160 No 20 feet No 1 12,400 12,400 No Optimized No 1 11,963 11,963 No Reasonable? * Noise Reduction (NR) Goal is 5dB(A). + Benefited Units are Impacted and non-impacted Units with a NR of at least 5dB(A). Full Depth Roadway Reconstruction and Widening of the Pennsylvania North East Extension (I-476) from Milepost A31.3 to A38.1 Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 4

11 Table 1: Summary of Noise Abatement Analysis. NSA / Barrier Number Barrier Height Impacted Noise Reduction Min. db(a) Avg. db(a) Max. db(a) # of Units Impacted # of Impacted Units at NR Goal* Feasible? # of Units Benefited+ Barrier Sq.Ft. Barrier Sq.Ft. per Unit Benefited NSA 12 / Barrier 11 8 feet ,587 3,698 No 10 feet ,983 3,698 No 12 feet ,380 3,698 No 14 feet ,777 3,046 No 16 feet ,174 3,481 No 18 feet ,570 3,916 No 20 feet ,967 4,351 No Optimized ,783 3,340 No NSA 13 / Barrier 12 8 feet No 2 34,839 17,420 No 10 feet ,549 4,839 No 12 feet ,259 4,355 No 14 feet ,969 5,081 No 16 feet ,679 5,807 No 18 feet ,389 6,532 No 20 feet ,099 7,258 No Optimized ,435 3,944 No NSA 14 / Barrier 13 8 feet ,649 4,608 No 10 feet ,561 3,840 No 12 feet ,473 3,770 No 14 feet ,386 2,419 No 16 feet ,298 1, feet ,210 2,074 No 20 feet ,122 2,304 No Optimized ,496 1,517 NSA 18 / Barrier 14 8 feet No 0 6,938 6,938 No 10 feet ,673 8,673 No 12 feet ,407 10,407 No 14 feet ,142 6,071 No 16 feet ,876 6,938 No 18 feet ,611 7,806 No 20 feet ,345 8,673 No Optimized ,460 5,230 No NSA 19 / Barrier 15 8 feet ,191 3,438 No 10 feet ,488 3,070 No 12 feet ,786 3,223 No 14 feet ,084 3,761 No 16 feet ,381 4,298 No 18 feet ,679 4,835 No 20 feet ,977 5,372 No Optimized ,390 2,710 No Reasonable? * Noise Reduction (NR) Goal is 5dB(A). + Benefited Units are Impacted and non-impacted Units with a NR of at least 5dB(A). Full Depth Roadway Reconstruction and Widening of the Pennsylvania North East Extension (I-476) from Milepost A31.3 to A38.1 Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 5

12 2.0 Introduction

13 2.0 INTRODUCTION This report describes the methodology and presents the findings of the traffic noise analysis conducted by A.D. Marble & Company of Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, for the PTC of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The project area extends from MP A31.3 to MP A38.1 in Lower Salford, Franconia, and Salford townships in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania (Figure 1). The southern limit of the project area is approximately 0.15 mile north of the Turnpike crossing of the main branch of Skippack Creek; the northern limit of the project area is approximately 0.1 mile north of the first stream crossing north of Clump Road. The project involves the widening of the Turnpike from four to six lanes (three lanes per travel direction) and includes full depth roadway reconstruction, widening roadway bridges, and the replacement of overhead bridges, culvert extensions, drainage, stormwater management, and side road adjustments. In addition, roadway shoulders and medians will be widened. All construction for this project will follow the existing centerline of the Turnpike. The purpose of the traffic noise study is to (1) determine if project-related noise impacts will occur and (2) determine whether noise abatement for affected areas in the form of noise barriers or other mitigation measures would be warranted, feasible, and reasonable, based upon FHWA and PennDOT criteria as utilized by the PTC. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 6

14 Figure 1 Project Location Map Full Depth Roadway Reconstruction and Widening of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Northeast Extension (I-476) from Milepost A31.3 to A38.1 Lower Salford, Franconia, Salford Townships, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania UV4013 MARLBOROUGH Ridge Road UV 563 Northern Project Limit (MP A38.1) WEST ROCKHILL SELLERSVILLE UV 309 SALFORD UV 309 TELFORD HILLTOWN TELFORD UV 152 UV4085 UV 113 Project Location SOUDERTON FRANCONIA Harleysville Pike UV1001 UPPER SALFORD 476 HATFIELD Path: P:\GIS\Projects\P1263\MXD\Noise\ProjectLocation.mxd LOWER SALFORD Southern Project Limit (MP A31.3) TOWAMENCIN UV 463 UV 63 Lansdale Interchange 6,000 3,000 0 Feet Project Location Noise Impact Analysis Report 7

15 3.0 Methodology

16 3.0 METHODOLOGY Traffic noise impact analysis and abatement measures were evaluated according to the methodology and procedures set forth by the FHWA in Federal-Aid Policy Guide Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772, Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise (July 2011), and PennDOT in the Project Level Highway Traffic Noise Handbook, Publication No. 24 (April 2011). Per FHWA/PennDOT noise guidance, the full-depth roadway reconstruction and widening of the Turnpike from MP A31.3 to MP A38.1 qualifies as a Type I project. A Type I project is a project considered for noise abatement that involves the construction of a highway on a new location or the physical alteration of an existing highway, which significantly changes either the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the number of through-traffic lanes. 3.1 Analytical Procedures Noise studies involve monitoring and modeling components. Noise monitoring for this project was conducted at 62 representative receptor locations dispersed throughout the 19 NSAs located within the project corridor. The noise monitoring was performed in May and June 2012 using four RION NL-22 sound level meters. To ensure accurate readings, the meters were field calibrated prior to each daily monitoring session with the RION sound level meters internal calibrators. These monitors are laboratory calibrated annually to ensure accurate recordings of sound level data (Appendix B). The laboratory calibration certificates are included in Appendix B. To ensure a free-flowing traffic noise source capable of reproduction within the noise models, periods of peak traffic congestion were noted and avoided for use as monitoring sessions. Typical free-flow conditions were present during all monitoring periods. Short-term monitoring is described in Section 4.2 of this report. In order to accurately validate the traffic noise model, comprehensive traffic data were gathered concurrent to the short-term monitoring periods (Appendix B). Traffic speeds, number of vehicles, and compositions were noted during the monitoring periods, allowing for accurate computer model validation. See Section 5.0 for details regarding the noise model validation process. Once a model is validated, it allows for accurate prediction of existing and future no Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 8

17 build and build worst-case traffic noise impacts. Additionally, other significant localized factors affecting the recorded noise levels were noted, such as non-traffic noise sources (aircraft flyovers, train horns, barking dogs, etc.) and intervening terrain. The FHWA, under the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), has developed and refined the methodology employed to model and predict traffic noise levels in this study. The latest computer model, called the FHWA Traffic Noise Model version 2.5 (TNM), predicts highway traffic noise levels at user-defined receptors, and aids in the design of highway noise barriers. TNM includes a database of speed-related noise emission levels for a variety of vehicle types (automobiles, medium trucks, heavy trucks, buses, and motorcycles). In addition, TNM contains a database of emission levels that accounts for the effects of accelerating vehicles, such as those affected by traffic control devices (stop signs, signals, or on-ramps) as well as the effects of roadway gradients. Sound propagation is computed by accounting for the effects of ground and atmospheric absorption, divergence (i.e., geometric spreading of sound energy over distance), topography, man-made barriers, vegetation, and rows of buildings. To ensure a high level of accuracy, all TNM databases and calculations are based on 1/3-octave band data, and the results are recombined to give noise levels in the A-weighted db(a). TNM enables the user to evaluate a variety of traffic conditions and to develop and analyze proposed abatement. TNM model validation was completed according to PennDOT procedures prior to modeling future conditions. Initially, predicted noise levels generated in TNM from the traffic data collected during field monitoring are compared to the field measured noise levels to ensure that the model is reasonably validated (within ±3 db[a]) to the observed site conditions. Predictions are then made using the worst case assumptions, including peak-hour traffic data provided by the PTC (Appendix A). Based on existing peak-hour travel demand, roadway capacity data, and field observation, it was assumed that travel speeds are near the posted speed. Therefore, the traffic noise model used the posted speed of 65 miles per hour (mph) throughout the project corridor. 3.2 Evaluation Criteria The evaluation criteria followed the methodologies and criteria specified in PennDOT s Publication No. 24 (April 2011). Under state and federal guidelines, noise abatement is Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 9

18 considered if it is warranted (noise levels exceeding abatement criteria). Determinations are evaluated following the identification of areas warranting abatement consideration, feasibility (constructability and effectiveness) of proposed abatement, and reasonableness (sq. ft./benefit). For this study, the existing year (2011) and the design year (2036) traffic noise levels were used to determine traffic noise impacts through the corridor. Table 2. FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level Decibels (db[a]). Activity Criteria 1 Activity Group Leq(h) Evaluation Location Description A 57 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 purposes. B 2 67 Exterior Residential. C 2 67 Exterior 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. D Auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, 52 Interior places of worship, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, schools, and television studios. E 2 72 Exterior Hotels; motels; offices; restaurants/bars; and other developed lands, properties, or activities not included in A-D or F. 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: Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772 Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise Final Rule. 1. The Leq(h) Activity Criteria values are for impact determination only, and are not design standards for noise abatement measures. 2. Includes undeveloped lands permitted for this activity category Warranted Criteria Noise abatement consideration is warranted if a noise impact is identified. A noise impact occurs when the existing or predicted level approaches or exceeds the FHWA s Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) (Table 2). The listed activity groups were established by the FHWA based on a variety of noise-sensitive land uses. Noise-sensitive land usage in this project area consists of a mix of Activity Categories B, C, E, and F. PennDOT defines the approach criterion as 1 db(a) less than the FHWA NAC. Therefore, there is a traffic noise impact if predicted exterior noise Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 10

19 levels are 66 db(a) or greater (for Categories B and C noise-sensitive land usage). Alternatively, the noise policy also considers properties as impacted if there is a 10 db(a) increase over existing traffic noise levels even if the absolute level falls below 66 db(a). This type of impact is addressed under the policy s substantial increase criteria. The impacts identified in this study are a result of traffic noise levels exceeding the 66 db(a) criterion. For this project, there are no traffic noise impacts due to the substantial increase criterion Feasibility Criteria Feasibility deals primarily with acoustical and engineering considerations. Effective abatement is considered feasible if the predicted insertion loss (i.e., reduction in noise level as a result of the proposed abatement) is at least 5 db(a) for the majority (50 percent or greater) of the impacted sites. Additionally, a variety of engineering constraints must be considered when determining the feasibility of the proposed abatement. Engineering considerations include restrictions to vehicular or pedestrian traffic (including driveways); safety concerns (such as sight distances or recovery zones); barrier constructability and maintainability; utility and drainage impacts; and overall adverse social, economic, and environmental effects Reasonableness Criteria Reasonableness determination primarily focuses on a maximum square foot per benefited receptor (Max SF/BR) measurement to determine the relative value of the proposed abatement solution. PennDOT s noise barrier cost reasonableness value is based on a Max SF/BR value of 2,000 square feet. The square footage of a barrier is based on its length multiplied by its height above the finished ground at its base to the top elevation. The benefited receptor values are determined by counting all receptors receiving a 5 db(a) or greater insertion loss (IL). Although at least a 5 db(a) IL for the majority of receptors is required to meet the feasibility criteria, the proposed barrier must reduce noise levels by at least 7 db(a) for at least one benefited receptor. It is desirable to provide this IL for additional impacted receptors while conforming to the Max SF/BR criteria and if justified by a point of diminishing returns evaluation. While optimizing a proposed noise barrier, the desired abatement goals should be evaluated in terms of establishing noise reductions for impacted receptors only. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 11

20 3.3 Noise Abatement Measures A variety of measures can be considered to address an identified noise impact. Placement of vertical noise barriers within the ROW are most commonly recommended and were considered in this analysis due to their minimal spatial requirements. Alternative actions can be effective under certain circumstances. These include acquisition of additional ROW for installing barriers or earthen berms, inclusion of traffic control measures, and modification of the alignment. Given the nature of the Turnpike through the project area, restrictions on travel speeds or truck traffic utilization to control noise would not serve the roadway s intended function and would be difficult to enforce. Therefore, this study focused on vertical noise barriers as the only abatement consideration. For non-residential land use the equivalent dwelling unit guidance outlined in Appendix E of Publication No. 24 was employed during the feasibility and reasonableness screening for mitigation. Appendix E of Publication 24 provides guidance for establishing a grid of receptors at 130 foot spacing in usable outdoor space avoiding parking lots and drainage facilities, where each receptor equals one dwelling unit. This methodology was specifically utilized for developing equivalent dwelling unit values for the Living Faith Fellowship Church in NSA 6, the Minh Dang Quang Meditation Center in NSA 13, and the Buxmont Horse Riding Club in NSA 19. When necessary for verifying benefited dwelling units, additional modeled only receptor locations were included at during the mitigation analysis. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 12

21 4.0 Existing Highway Traffi c Noise Environment (Monitored Data)

22 4.0 EXISTING HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE ENVIRONMENT (MONITORED DATA) 4.1 Identification of Noise Study Areas (NSAs) PennDOT Publication No. 24 (April 2011) states that NSAs should be delineated as areas of common highway traffic noise influence throughout the entire project limits of the proposed transportation improvement project. NSA boundaries typically do not traverse over any major and/or significant highway traffic noise influence sources (i.e., existing or proposed roadways). Grouping common areas into NSAs also assists in evaluating mitigation, organizing reports, and facilitating discussions. Following this guidance, the project area was organized into 19 NSAs from south to north, with nine NSAs located to the west of the Turnpike and ten NSAs located to the east of the Turnpike. All NSA s were identified in a Noise Monitoring Work Plan that was reviewed and approved by the PTC in April Figure 2 (Index Map) and Figures 2A through 2L are located in Appendix C and present the limits of the 19 NSAs; each one is described below. Consistent with the Publication No. 24 guidance, NSA boundaries extended approximately 500- feet from the existing edge-of-shoulder of the Turnpike roadway, as stipulated for projects involving an expansion of an existing facility. The organization of land use into NSAs does not affect the mitigation screening process results as it is common practice to evaluate mitigation alternatives across NSA boundaries if and when appropriate. This same rationale applies to the sub-division of distinct communities within NSAs where it may be appropriate to consider them independent of one another. In addition, reference monitoring locations beyond the 500-foot study area boundary were identified for several NSAs within the project area. Reference sites M- 08, M-09, M-11, M-16, M-17, M-29, M-48, M-51, and M-54 were included in order to ensure valid modeling results for identifying potential impacts and benefits beyond the standard 500- foot study area boundary. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 13

23 4.1.1 Noise Study Area 1 (see Figure 2A) NSA 1 is located adjacent to the western ROW of the Turnpike and includes seven single-family residential homes and two apartment buildings, housing a total of eight units, spread across the NSA east of Freed Road. NSA 1 is classified as land use Category B Noise Study Area 2 (see Figure 2A) NSA 2 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike along the east side of Cassel Road. NSA 2 includes nine scattered single-family residential homes. NSA 2 is classified as land use Category B Noise Study Area 3 (see Figures 2B and 2C) NSA 3 is located adjacent to the western ROW of the Turnpike. NSA 3 includes four singlefamily residential homes situated on a private lane accessed from Yoder Road, 14 single-family residential homes along Summerwind Lane within the neighborhood of Summerwind, and eight additional single-family residential homes situated along Yoder Road. NSA 3 is classified as land use Category B Noise Study Area 4 (see Figures 2C and 2D) NSA 4 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike along Schoolhouse Road and Halteman Road. NSA 4 is a mix of residential and office buildings with 14 scattered singlefamily residential homes and an office complex. The office complex houses the offices for Advantage Academy and Lakeside Facility Management. NSA 4 is classified primarily as land use Category B, with the office building classified as Category E with no outdoor land use associated with the property Noise Study Area 5 (see Figure 2D) NSA 5 is located adjacent to the western ROW of the Turnpike and includes approximately ten single-family residential properties located along Schoolhouse Road and Kulp Road. NSA 5 is classified as land use Category B. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 14

24 4.1.6 Noise Study Area 6 (see Figure 2E) NSA 6 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike and is bound by Harleysville Pike to the north and agricultural land to the east and south. NSA 6 includes nine single-family residential homes situated along Moyer Road, and a residence associated with a farmstead. The residential portion of NSA 6 is classified as land use Category B. Living Faith Fellowship Church (equivalent dwelling unit value of 15) is also located within the NSA boundary and is classified as a land use Category C facility Noise Study Area 7 (see Figure 2E) NSA 7 is located adjacent to the western ROW of the Turnpike along the south side of Harleysville Pike. This NSA includes the single residential home associated with Alderfer s Turkey Farm. NSA 7 is classified as land use Category B with the turkey farm classified as Category F Noise Study Area 8 (see Figures 2E, 2F, and 2G) NSA 8 is located adjacent to the western ROW of the Turnpike and extends from just south of Morwood Road south to S.R (Harleysville Pike). NSA 8 consists of several existing and one proposed residential developments. Approximately 28 residential properties bordering Morwood Road, Heath Road, Crestwood Drive, Eisenhauer Drive, Indian Creek Road, and Keller Creamery Road currently exist within this NSA. In addition, the proposed Vistas at Highland Ridge planned community (see Appendix D for the land development plan) will incorporate six additional single-family residential lots situated between the existing communities along Crestwood Drive and Eisenhauer Drive within the NSA boundary. NSA 8 is classified as land use Category B Noise Study Area 9 (see Figure 2E) NSA 9 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike along the north side of Harleysville Pike. This NSA includes a mix of commercial and retail facilities. The commercial and retail facilities within NSA 9 include the Dutch Cupboard (Category F), the closest site to the Turnpike; next Williams, Bergey & Koffel funeral home (Category E); and finally, Foedisch Chiropractor and Muscle Therapy Center (Category C). NSA 9 is classified as a mix of land use Category C, E and F land use. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 15

25 Noise Study Area 10 (see Figures 2F, 2G, and 2H) NSA 10 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike and is bordered by Morwood Road to the north and agricultural fields to the south. NSA 10 includes three single-family residential homes situated along Meetinghouse Road, a single-family residential home attached to a farmstead accessible from Indian Creek Road, three single-family residential homes, and one retail facility (florist) located along Morwood Road. NSA 10 is primarily classified as land use Category B, with some Category F land use interspersed Noise Study Area 11 (see Figure 2H) NSA 11 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike along the north side of Morwood Road. NSA 11 is comprised of four single-family residential homes. NSA 11 is classified as land use Category B Noise Study Area 12 (see Figure 2H, 2I, and 2J) NSA 12 is located adjacent to the western ROW of the Turnpike. This NSA includes three single-family residential homes along South Shultz Road within a large forested track of land, four large residential properties just north of South Dietz Mill Road, 14 evenly spaced residential homes along Pin Oak Drive, and three residential homes along Creamery Road at the southern extent of the NSA. NSA 12 is also interspersed with non-noise sensitive agricultural and forested land. NSA 12 is primarily classified as land use Category B Noise Study Area 13 (see Figures 2H, 2I, and 2J) NSA 13 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike extending north from Creamery Road. Five evenly spaced homes border Allentown Road and Creamery Road within this NSA. This NSA also includes two residences that border the Turnpike to the south of South Dietz Mill Road, and three single-family residences and the Minh Dang Quang Meditation Center (equivalent dwelling unit value of 6) located to the north of South Dietz Mill Road. NSA 13 is primarily classified as land use Category B, with the meditation center property classified as Category C. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 16

26 Noise Study Area 14 (see Figures 2J and 2K) NSA 14 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike to the north of NSA 13 and south of Ridge Road. NSA 14 includes a single-family residence south of Voudy Road, a cluster of single-family homes situated on the Voudy Road cul-de-sac, the Country View at Salford community (see Appendix D for the land development plan), which is currently under construction, and the Swartley Memorial Baseball Field. NSA 14 is classified primarily as land use Category B, with the ball field classified as Category C Noise Study Area 15 (see Figure 2K) NSA 15 is located adjacent to the western ROW of the Turnpike along the south side of Ridge Road. NSA 15 includes one single-family home that fronts Ridge Road. The NSA is bound by Ridge Road to the north, the Turnpike to east, and agricultural fields to the south. NSA 15 is classified as land use Category B Noise Study Area 16 (see Figures 2K and 2L) NSA 16 is located adjacent to the western ROW of the Turnpike between Clump Road to the north and Ridge Road to the south. NSA 16 includes five relatively evenly spaced, single-family residential homes along Whites Mill Road. NSA 16 is classified as land use Category B Noise Study Area 17 (see Figures 2K and 2L) NSA 17 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike between Ridge Road and Clump Road. NSA 17 includes four single-family residential homes. NSA 17 is classified as land use Category B Noise Study Area 18 (see Figure 2L) NSA 18 is located adjacent to the western ROW of the Turnpike along the north side of Clump Road. NSA 18 encompasses two single-family residences that front Clump Road. The NSA is bound by Clump Road to the south, the Turnpike to the east, and agricultural fields and forested land to the north. NSA 18 is classified as land use Category B. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 17

27 Noise Study Area 19 (see Figure 2L) NSA 19 is located adjacent to the eastern ROW of the Turnpike from Clump Road north toward the northern limit of the project study area. NSA 19 includes two single-family residential homes adjacent to Clump Road, the Buxmont Horse Riding Club (equivalent dwelling unit value of 5) with an outdoor riding ring, and three single-family residences adjacent to Wambold Road. NSA 19 is primarily classified as land use Category B, with the riding club property classified as Category C. 4.2 Short-Term Noise Monitoring Short-term noise monitoring sessions, 15 minutes in duration, were conducted at 62 locations, identified on the tables and figures with an M followed by a number, within the project area between May 10, 2012, and June 20, Figures 2A through 2L (Appendix C) show the locations of the noise monitoring sites, and Table 3 provides a summary of the measurement results. The results shown in red indicate impacted receptors based upon their land use category. The objectives of the short-term noise measurements were to: Obtain noise measurement data used to validate the traffic-noise prediction modeling for each NSA, thereby increasing confidence in computed noise levels; Obtain counted traffic data used as input to the TNM during validation of the noise modeling for each NSA; and Document existing ambient sound levels at noise study locations within each NSA. The short-term measurement sites were selected according to the following requirements: Represent noise-sensitive land uses within each NSA. Short-term measurement sites were selected to represent various categories or clusters of noise-sensitive receptors within each NSA. Distinguishing characteristics of various clusters included some or all of the following: o Distance to the Turnpike; o Absence or presence of shielding (e.g., first-row vs. second-row receptors); o Roadway/receiver geometry (e.g., Turnpike depressed or on-fill, receptors on hillside overlooking Turnpike, presence of entrance/exit ramps, etc.); and o Influence of other traffic-noise sources such as local streets. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 18

28 Table 3: Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurement Results NSA Receptor I.D. Address Monitored Level (db[a]) M Freed Road Freed Road 1 M M Yoder Road 61 M Cassell Road 66 2 M Cassell Road 67 M Cassell Road 66 M-08* 98 Fretz Road 60 M Summerwind Lane 61 M-09* 223 Summerwind Lane Yoder Road 3 M M-11* 104 Sunset Drive 57 M Yoder Road 64 M Schoolhouse Road Souderton, PA M Schoolhouse Road Souderton, PA Halteman Road 4 M-15 Souderton, PA M-16* 760 Halteman Road Souderton, PA M Halteman Road Souderton, PA M-17* 828 Kulp Road 59 5 M Kulp Road 63 M Schoolhouse Road 63 M Schoolhouse Road 61 M Moyer Road Souderton, PA Moyer Road 6 M-23 Souderton, PA M Souderton-Harleysville Pike 65 Full Depth Roadway Reconstruction and Widening of Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 19

29 Table 3: Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurement Results NSA Receptor I.D. Address Monitored Level (db[a]) Souderton-Harleysville Pike 7 M M Souderton-Harleysville Pike 61 M Morwood Road 61 M Crestwood Drive Highland Court - future construction 8 M M Eisenhauer Drive 59 M Indian Creek Road 57 M Indian Creek Road Souderton-Harleysville Pike 9 M M Meetinghouse Road M-29* 560 Indian Creek Road 60 M Indian Creek Road 62 M Morwood Road Morwood Road 11 M M Creamery Road 62 M Pin Oak Drive 66 North of 25 Pin Oak Drive 12 M M Dietz Mill Road 67 M South Shultz Road 60 M Creamery Road 66 M South Dietz Mill Road South Dietz Mill Road 13 M M South Allentown Road 63 M-48* 164 South Allentown Road 54 Full Depth Roadway Reconstruction and Widening of Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 20

30 Table 3: Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurement Results NSA Receptor I.D. Address Monitored Level (db[a]) M Voudy Road 59 M Meadow Lane 67 Corner of Meadow Lane & Country View Way 14 M-51* 53 M-52 End of Libby Court (under construction) 56 M-53 Tylersport Fire Company Field (baseball field) Ridge Road 15 M Whites Mill Road 16 M M-54* M Ridge Road 149 Clump Road Green Lane, PA M-59 M Reilly Road 141 Clump Road Green Lane, PA M Clump Road 57 Wambold Equestrian Center 19 M M Wambold Road Green Lane, PA * Denotes a reference monitoring site Full Depth Roadway Reconstruction and Widening of Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 21

31 When possible, represent areas of frequent human use. Alternatively, measurement sites were selected in areas that did not have frequent human use but were acoustically equivalent to nearby locations with frequent human use (e.g., on the grass along a side street or set back the same distance from the Turnpike as the yard of the adjacent house); Give primary consideration to first-row receivers. Typically, traffic noise levels will be highest at the closest receivers and noise barriers will provide the greatest benefit at these locations; Conduct additional measurements at second-row and third-row locations. Additional measurements were conducted at these locations to assist in the noise modeling validation and in determining the effects of shielding; and Miscellaneous reference monitoring locations. Reference measurements were conducted at select monitoring locations (M-08, M-09, M-11, M-17, M-29, M-48, M-51, and M-54) beyond the typical study area boundaries where potential abatement consideration was possible. For each site, these procedures were followed: The short-term measurements were conducted with ANSI Type 2 instruments with calibrations traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); The sound level meters were field calibrated before and after each short-term measurement; Measurements were conducted for a minimum of 15-minute periods. Individual one minute average sound levels (L eqs ) were recorded so that periods including events not representative of the ambient noise environment or not traffic-related could be separated or excluded. Specifically, notes on the site sketches were included indicating potential periods of non- traffic noise influence (i.e., barking dogs and aircraft over-flights). The data collected for these individual periods is further scrutinized following the field monitoring to identify outlier data and potentially exclude these periods from the calculation of the overall average sound level; A short-term field measurement data sheet (see Appendix B) was completed for each measurement site; Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 22

32 If present, abnormal weather data including wind speed and direction, temperature, and relative humidity were recorded during each measurement period to ensure requisite meteorological conditions for noise model validation. For example, monitoring should not be performed during periods of excessive wind as this will potentially cause mechanical interference (microphone and windscreens) or abnormal noise propagation patterns; During each short-term noise measurement, simultaneous traffic volume and classification counts were conducted for all roads on which traffic was judged to make a significant contribution to the measured sound level at an individual site. Traffic volumes and classes were noted on the site sketches (see Appendix B) for each short-term measurement; No short-term measurements were conducted during periods of stop-and-go traffic or if the average speed was judged to vary significantly during the measurement period; No short-term measurements were conducted during periods when the Turnpike pavement was wet; and Noise meter location sketches were drawn indicating approximate distances to known landmarks to allow for duplication of monitoring sites if necessary. Significant variations in propagation path elevation (significant cut/fill) were depicted as cross sections where necessary. Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 23

33 5.0 Future Highway Traffi c Noise Environment (Existing and Future Modeled)

34 5.0 FUTURE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE ENVIRONMENT (EXISTING AND FUTURE MODELED) 5.1 Validation of Noise Modeling The FHWA has developed a computer noise model that is used for traffic noise emissions prediction and abatement evaluation. As referenced in Section 3.1, the FHWA s TNM includes a database of speed-related noise emission levels for a variety of vehicle types (i.e., automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks). TNM also includes a database of noise emission levels that accounts for acceleration noise on roadway facilities that would be associated with traffic control devices (stop lights, stop signs, tollbooths, and on-ramps) or gradient changes. TNM uses these emissions data to calculate sound energy propagation over distances and estimate noise levels at discrete locations. Ground and atmospheric absorption of sound energy as well the spreading of energy over distance (divergence) are considered, as are the effects of man-made barriers, topography, vegetation, and rows of buildings. PennDOT Publication No. 24 stipulates the use of the most current version of TNM when assessing traffic noise levels for highway projects. The TNM modeling for a specific project area is typically validated by comparison of TNM computed results with the field-measured noise data. Publication No. 24 describes the purpose of modeling validation and describes the procedure. To help accomplish the modeling validation, simultaneous noise measurements and traffic counts were conducted during the 62 short-term measurements described in Section 4.2. The directional traffic counts included vehicle class identification broken down into cars, medium trucks, and heavy trucks. Following the measurements, the short-term traffic counts were normalized to hourly volumes and used as input to the noise prediction model. Based on a comparison of measured and computed sound levels, refinements were made to the TNM model to more accurately represent the acoustical landscape. Refinements included adjustments to variables within the propagation path, including but not limited to alterations of building row characteristics and adjustments to terrain lines and tree zones. Table 4 presents the measured and TNM-calculated noise levels for the 62 short-term measurement sites following refinement of the noise modeling. Note that the measured and Preliminary Noise Impact Analysis Report 24