Environmental Noise Assessment Feasibility Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development

Environmental Noise Assessment Feasibility Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development Novus Reference No. 12-0253 Version No. 1.1 (DRAFT) May 1, 2015 NOVUS PROJECT TEAM: Scientist: Specialist: Project Manager: Principal: Kevin Carr, P.Phys. Marcus Li, B.Sc., B.Eng.Sc. Hamish Hains, M.A.Sc., P.Eng. R.L. Scott Penton, P.Eng. Air Quality Sound & Vibration Sustainable Water Wind & Climate Novus Environmental Inc. 150 Research Lane, Suite 105, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 4T2 Novus West Inc. 906 12 Avenue SW, Suite 600, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2R 1K7

This page intentionally left blank for 2-sided printing purposes

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION... 1 1.1 Focus of Report... 1 1.2 Nature of the Subject Lands... 1 1.3 Nature of the Surroundings... 1 PART 1: IMPACTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT ON THE DEVELOPMENT... 2 2.0 Transportation Noise Impacts... 2 2.1 Transportation Noise Sources... 2 2.2 Surface Transportation Noise Criteria... 3 2.2.1 Ministry of the Environment Publication NPC-300... 3 2.3 Traffic Data and Future Projections... 5 2.3.1 Roadway Traffic Data... 5 2.4 Projected Sound Levels... 6 2.4.1 Façade Sound Levels... 6 2.4.2 Outdoor Amenity Areas... 7 2.5 Façade Recommendations... 7 2.6 Ventilation and Warning Clause Requirements... 8 2.6.1 Residential Units... 8 2.6.2 Outdoor Amenity Areas... 8 3.0 Stationary Source Noise Impacts... 9 3.1 Guideline D-6... 9 3.1.1 Compliance with Guideline D-6 Criteria... 10 3.2 MOE NPC-300 Guidelines for Stationary Noise Sources... 11 3.3 Stationary Noise Modelling... 13 3.3.1 Noise Impact Prediction... 14 3.4 Required Warning Clauses... 15 PART 2: IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON ITSELF... 16 4.0 Outdoor Noise Impacts From Ventilation Sources... 16 5.0 Interior Noise Sources... 16 5.1 Interior Walls and Floors... 17 PART 3: IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SURROUNDING AREA... 18 6.0 Impacts of the Development on Surrounding Properties... 18 Novus Environmental i

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS... 18 7.1 Transportation Noise... 18 7.2 Industrial Stationary Noise... 19 7.3 Overall Assessment... 19 8.0 REFERENCES... 20 List of Tables Table 1: NPC-300 Sound Level Criteria for Road and Rail Noise... 3 Table 2: NPC-300 Ventilation and Warning Clause Requirements... 4 Table 3: MOE Publication NPC-300 Building Component Requirements... 5 Table 4: Summary of Road Traffic Data Used in the Transportation Noise Analysis... 6 Table 5: Summary of Worst-case Transportation Sound Levels... 6 Table 6: Guideline D-6 Potential Influence Areas and Recommended Minimum Setback Distances for Industrial Land Uses... 9 Table 7: Guideline D-6 Industrial Categorization Criteria... 10 Table 8: Major Industries Within 1000 m of Proposed Development... 11 Table 9: NPC-300 Class 4 Steady Sound Noise Requirements... 12 Table 10: Summary of Stationary Source Noise Impacts Façade Levels... 14 Table 11: Typical Indoor Noise Control Design Criteria... 17 List of Figures Figure 1: Figure 2: Figure 3: Figure 4: Figure 5: Figure 6: Figure 7: Site Plan Context Plan Modelled Façade Sound Levels Roadway, Daytime Modelled Façade Sound Levels Roadway, Night-time Surrounding Industry Stationary Noise Source Locations Modelled Façade Sound Levels Stationary, Daytime/Evening Modelled Façade Sound Levels Stationary, Night-time List of Appendices Appendix A: Elevation Drawings Appendix B: Traffic Data Appendix C: Façade Calculations Appendix D: Sound Power Level Data Novus Environmental ii

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 1.0 INTRODUCTION Novus Environmental Inc. (Novus) was retained by DIAMONDCORP to conduct an Environmental Noise Feasibility Assessment for the proposed mixed-use residential development located at 939 Eglinton Avenue East, in Toronto ON (site). The proposed development is located on the south-east corner of the Eglinton Avenue East and Brentcliffe Road intersection in Toronto, Ontario. 1.1 Focus of Report In keeping with City of Toronto requirements, this report examines the potential for: Impacts of the environment on the proposed development; Impacts of the proposed development on the environment; and Impacts of the proposed development on itself. 1.2 Nature of the Subject Lands The subject property is located on the south-east corner of Eglinton Avenue East and Brentcliffe Road, in Toronto, Ontario. The site is currently a commercial plaza. The proposed development includes three (3) distinct blocks. Along Eglinton Avenue East is the North Block with an 8-storey podium, a 19-storey tower (Tower A) on the west side and a 24-storey tower (Tower B) on the east side. Between the towers is a 2-storey mass with a rooftop outdoor amenity space. The Mid Block consists of a 34-storey building (Tower C) on the west side and a 31-storey tower (Tower D) on the east side. An outdoor amenity space rests atop the 8-storey mass located between these towers. The South Block consists of a 6-storey commercial building (Tower E), located at the southeast corner of the development, and a landscaped public park at the southwest corner. A site plan for the proposed development is shown in Figure 1. Elevation drawings for the development are included in Appendix A. 1.3 Nature of the Surroundings Key features of the area and lands surrounding the proposed development site, relevant to this assessment are: Eglinton Avenue East is north of the site with existing residential lands beyond. To the east of the site lies Brentcliffe Road, and existing commercial/retail/residential lands. Novus Environmental 1

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Vanderhoof Avenue and existing industrial/commercial/retail lands are located south of the proposed development. Included with the industrial land uses are an Asphalt Plant and a Ready-Mix facility. A Mercedes-Benz dealership is located to the west, adjacent to the development. Further to the west is commercial/retail lands, with residential lands located on the other side of Laird Drive. A context plan is shown in Figure 2. PART 1: IMPACTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT ON THE DEVELOPMENT In assessing potential impacts of the environment on the proposed development, the focus of this report is to consider: 1) Transportation noise impacts from surrounding roadways; and 2) Stationary noise impacts from industrial sources. The nearest rail line is located approximately 750 m from the proposed development, and is screened by intervening buildings. Therefore, a railway noise assessment is not required. There are no airports in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development, and an assessment of aircraft noise impacts is not required. 2.0 Transportation Noise Impacts 2.1 Transportation Noise Sources Transportation noise sources of interest with the potential to produce noise at the proposed development are: Eglinton Avenue East; Brentcliffe Road; Vanderhoof Avenue; and Laird Road. Sound exposure levels at the development, due to these sources have been predicted, and this information has been used to identify façade, ventilation, and warning clause requirements. Novus Environmental 2

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 2.2 Surface Transportation Noise Criteria 2.2.1 Ministry of the Environment Publication NPC-300 Noise Sensitive Developments Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Publication NPC-300 provides sound level criteria for noise sensitive developments. The applicable portions of NPC-300 are Part C Land Use Planning and the associated definitions outlined in Part A Background. Table 1 to Table 3 below summarize applicable surface transportation (road and rail) criteria limits. Location Specific Criteria Table 1 summarizes criteria in terms of energy equivalent sound exposure (Leq) levels for specific noise-sensitive locations. Both outdoor and indoor locations are identified, with the focus of outdoor areas being amenity spaces. Indoor criteria vary with sensitivity of the space. As a result, sleep areas have more stringent criteria than Living / Dining room space. Table 1: NPC-300 Sound Level Criteria for Road and Rail Noise Type of Space Outdoor Amenity Area Living / Dining Room [3] Sleeping Quarters Notes: Time Period Daytime (0700 2300h) Daytime (0700 2300h) Nighttime (2300 0700h) Daytime (0700 2300h) Nighttime (2300 0700h) Energy Equivalent Sound Exposure Level L eq [5] (dba) Road Rail [1] Assessment Location 55 55 Outdoors [2] 45 40 Indoors [4] 45 40 Indoors [4] 45 40 Indoors [4] 40 35 Indoors [4] [1] Whistle noise is excluded for OLA noise assessments, and included for Living / Dining Room and Sleeping Quarter assessments, where applicable. [2] Road and Rail noise impacts are to be combined for assessment of OLA impacts. [3] Residence area Dens, Hospitals, Nursing Homes, Schools, Daycares are also included. During the nighttime period, Schools and Daycares are excluded. [4] An assessment of indoor noise levels is required only if the criteria in Table 3 are exceeded. [5] L eq the energy equivalent sound exposure level, integrated over the time period shown. Novus Environmental 3

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Ventilation and Warning Clauses Table 2 summarizes requirements for ventilation where windows potentially would have to remain closed as a means of noise control and apply where the sound exposure levels found in Table 2 exceed the guideline limits in Table 1 for indoors spaces. Despite the implementation of ventilation measures where required, some occupants may choose not to use the ventilation means provided, and as such, warning clauses advising future occupants of the potential excess over the Table 1 guideline limits are required. Warning clauses also apply to the OLA where an excess of up to 5 dba over the 55 dba OLA limit is often acceptable to many, particularly in the context of an urban environment. Warning clauses are discussed further in Section 2.6. Table 2: NPC-300 Ventilation and Warning Clause Requirements Assessment Location Time Period Energy Equivalent Sound Exposure Level L eq (dba) Road Rail [1] Ventilation and Warning Claus Requirements [2] Outdoor Amenity Area Daytime (0700 2300h) 56 to 60 incl. Type A Warning Clause 55 None Plane of Window Daytime (0700 2300h) Nighttime (2300 0700h) 56 to 65 incl. > 65 51 to 60 incl. > 60 Forced Air Heating with provision to add air conditioning + Type C Warning Clause Central Air Conditioning + Type D Warning Clause Forced Air Heating with provision to add air conditioning + Type C Warning Clause Central Air Conditioning + Type D Warning Clause Notes: [1] Whistle noise is excluded. [2] Road and Rail noise is combined for determining Ventilation and Warning Clause requirements. Novus Environmental 4

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Building Shell Requirements Table 1 provides Leq thresholds which if exceeded, require the building shell and components (i.e., wall, windows) to be designed and selected accordingly to ensure that the Table 1 indoor location criteria are met. Table 3: MOE Publication NPC-300 Building Component Requirements Assessment Location Time Period Energy Equivalent Sound Exposure Level L eq (dba) Road Rail [1] Component Requirements Plane of Window Daytime (0700 2300h) Nighttime (2300 0700h) > 65 > 60 > 60 > 55 Designed/ Selected to Meet Indoor Requirements [2] Notes: [1] Including whistle noise. [2] Building component requirements are assessed separately for Road and Railway noise. The resultant sound isolation parameter is required to be combined to determine and overall acoustic parameter. In summary, roadway noise impacts are to be predicted at the plane-of-window for the proposed development. Providing the plane-of-window sound levels exceed the daytime and nighttime sound levels indicated in Table 3, the determination of the building façade components is required for meeting the indoor sound level criteria outlined in Table 1. In addition, the ventilation requirements and warning clauses were determined, as outlined in Table 2, based on the plane-of-window noise levels. 2.3 Traffic Data and Future Projections 2.3.1 Roadway Traffic Data Road traffic volume data were obtained from BA Group, the transportation consultant on the project. A growth rate of 1 % per year was applied to determine the 10-yr future horizon traffic volumes. Commercial traffic percentages and day/night splits were assumed based on City of Toronto averages on file at Novus. Table 4 summarizes the road traffic volumes used in the analysis. Copies of all traffic data used and calculations can be found in Appendix B. Novus Environmental 5

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Table 4: Summary of Road Traffic Data Used in the Transportation Noise Analysis Roadway Link 2025 Traffic Levels (AADT) Daytime Day / Night Volume Split Nighttime Commercial Traffic Breakdown % Medium Trucks % Heavy Trucks Vehicle Speed (km/h) Elginton Ave E 55,575 91.7 8.3 2.3 2 50 Brentcliffe Rd 14,250 91.7 8.3 2.3 2 50 Vanderhoof Ave 4,418 91.7 8.3 2.3 2 50 Laird Dr 26,191 91.7 8.3 2.3 2 50 Road traffic sound levels at the proposed development were predicted using Cadna/A, a commercially available noise propagation modelling software. Roadways were modelled as line sources of sound, with sound emission rates calculated using the ORNAMENT algorithms, the road traffic noise model of the MOE. These predictions were validated and are equivalent to those made using the MOE s ORNAMENT or STAMSON v5.04 road traffic noise models. 2.4 Projected Sound Levels 2.4.1 Façade Sound Levels Sound levels were predicted along the facades of the residential towers and the podium levels using the building evaluation feature of Cadna/A. This feature allows for noise levels to be predicted across the entire façade of a structure. The worst-case façade sound level is presented for each residential tower and podium level in Table 5. The sound levels are also compared to the limit requiring an assessment of indoor sound levels. Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the sound levels along each tower and podium façade for the daytime and night-time periods, respectively. Table 5: Summary of Worst-case Transportation Sound Levels Roadway Building In Room Assessment Building Sound Level [1] Component Criteria Required? Day Night Day Night Day Night (dba) (dba) (dba) (dba) (Yes/No) (Yes/No) Tower A 66 59 65 60 Yes No Tower B 66 59 65 60 Yes No Tower C 59 51 65 60 No No Tower D 63 56 65 60 No No Podium North Block 69 62 65 60 Yes Yes Podium Mid Block 64 57 65 60 No No Notes: [1] The sound levels presented are for the worst-case exposed facade. Novus Environmental 6

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Based on the above results, an assessment of in-room noise levels is required for Tower A, Tower B, and the North Block Podium. 2.4.2 Outdoor Amenity Areas The Outdoor Amenity Areas considered in this assessment are as follows, as indicated in Figure 1: Landscaped Roof Deck, on the North Block Podium, between Tower A and Tower B; The rooftop amenity space, located on the Mid Block Podium, between Tower C and Tower D; and A Landscaped Public Park, located on the south-west corner of the development. The above rooftop terraces have the potential to be impacted by transportation noise. An assessment of transportation noise impacts on the amenity space were predicted to be below 55 dba for both terraces and the landscaped public park. Therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required for these amenity spaces. The private balconies for each residential unit have been excluded from the assessment, assuming the MOE minimum depth requirement of 4 m is not met. 2.5 Façade Recommendations Indoor sound levels and required Façade Sound Transmission Classes (STCs) were estimated using the procedures outlined in National Research Council Building Practice Note BPN-56. Detailed floor plans were not available at the time of the assessment. For the analysis, generic bedrooms and living rooms have been considered. A 60% glazing-to-floor-area was assumed, and assessed with an STC 41 rating for the non-glazing component of the façade. Additional detail associated with the Façade Calculations are shown in Appendix C. The in-room noise level assessment was completed for the north façade of the North Block Podium, as the façade levels were found to be the highest for the development. The minimum structural requirements of the Ontario Building Code (OBC) are predicted to be adequate for living room and bedroom spaces along the north façade of the North Block Podium. Therefore, no upgraded glazing is predicted to be required for the residential units on Tower B or the North Block Podium. It should be noted that if a unit has two (2) exposed sides to Eglinton Avenue, an increase in 3 STC points may be necessary for the glazing. Once detailed floor plans and façade plans are finalized, the requirements for the glazing should be reviewed by an Acoustical Consultant. Novus Environmental 7

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 2.6 Ventilation and Warning Clause Requirements The requirement to include Warning Clauses is summarized in Table 2. Where required, the warning clauses must be included in all agreements of purchase and sale or lease and all rental agreements. 2.6.1 Residential Units Based on the predicted façade noise levels, air conditioning will be required for residential units on Tower B and the North Block Podium. All other residential units will require the provisions for future air conditioning. A Type D noise warning clause is required for the Tower B and North Block Podium residential units. The remaining residential units will require a Type C noise warning clause. The Type C and D Warning Clauses are summarized below: Type C Warning Clause This dwelling unit has been designed with the provision for adding central air conditioning at the occupant s discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment. Type D Warning Clause This dwelling unit has been or will be fitted with a central air conditioning system which will enable occupants to keep windows closed if road and or air traffic noise interferes with the indoor activities. 2.6.2 Outdoor Amenity Areas Noise impacts were predicted to be below 55 dba for both rooftop terraces and the public park. Therefore, no warning clauses are required for these amenity areas. Novus Environmental 8

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 3.0 Stationary Source Noise Impacts A review has been conducted for the potential impacts on the development from stationary noise, since there are a number of commercial and industrial buildings adjacent to the proposed site. 3.1 Guideline D-6 The D-series of guidelines were developed by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) in 1995 as a means to assess recommended separation distances between industrial facilities and surrounding land uses which could be affected by industrial emissions. In addition to separation distances, the D-series guidelines suggest control measures for land use planning proposals in an effort to prevent or minimize adverse effects from the encroachment of incompatible land uses where a facility either exists or is proposed. The guideline specifically addresses issues of odour, dust, noise and litter. To minimize the potential to cause an adverse effect, areas of influence and recommended minimum setback distances were included within the guidelines. Guideline D-6 Compatibility Between Industrial Facilities and Sensitive Land Uses is specific to industrial uses in proximity to more sensitive land uses such as the proposed residential and commercial development. The areas of influence and recommended separation distances from the guidelines are provided in Table 6. The industrial categorization criteria are supplied in Guideline D-6-2, and are shown in Table 7. Table 6: Guideline D-6 Potential Influence Areas and Recommended Minimum Setback Distances for Industrial Land Uses Industry Classification Area of Influence Recommended Minimum Setback Distance Class I Light Industrial 70 m 20 m Class II Medium Industrial 300 m 70 m Class III Heavy Industrial 1000 m 300 m The separation distances from the above table, relative to the proposed development, are shown in Figure 2. Novus Environmental 9

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Table 7: Guideline D-6 Industrial Categorization Criteria Category Outputs Scale Process Class 1 Industry Class 2 Industry Noise: Sound not audible off property Dust: Infrequent and not intense Odour: Infrequent and not intense Vibration: No groundborne vibration on plant property Noise: Sound occasionally heard offproperty Dust: Frequent and occasionally intense Odour: Frequent and occasionally intense Vibration: Possible ground borne vibration, but cannot be perceived off property No outside storage Small scale plant or scale is irrelevant in relation to all other criteria for this Class Outside storage permitted Medium level of production allowed Self contained plant or building which produces/ stores a packaged product Low probability of fugitive emissions Open process Periodic outputs of minor annoyance Low probability of fugitive emissions Operations / Intensity Daytime operations only Infrequent movement of products and/ or heavy trucks Shift operations permitted Frequent movements of products and/ or heavy trucks with the majority of movements during daytime hours Possible Examples Electronics manufacturing and repair Furniture repair and refinishing Beverage bottling Auto parts supply Packaging and crafting services Distribution of dairy products Laundry and linen supply Magazine printing Paint spray booths Metal command Electrical production Manufacturing of dairy products Dry cleaning services Feed packing plants Class 3 Industry Noise: Sound frequently audible off property Dust: Persistent and/ or intense Odour: Persistent and/ or intense Vibration: Ground borne vibration can frequently be perceived offproperty Outside storage of raw and finished products Large production levels Open process Frequent outputs of major annoyances High probability of fugitive emissions Continuous movement of products and employees Daily shift operations permitted Paint and varnish manufacturing Organic chemical manufacturing Breweries Solvent recovery plants Soaps and detergent manufacturing Metal refining and manufacturing 3.1.1 Compliance with Guideline D-6 Criteria A site visit to lands within the study area was conducted to identify local industries and to understand the potential for noise impact. Table 8 lists the larger scale Class 2 and Class 3 industries in the area. Novus Environmental 10

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Table 8: Major Industries Within 1000 m of Proposed Development Facility CBM 55 Industrial St Clearmount Plastics Ltd 103 Vanderhoof Ave Coco Paving 37 Commercial Rd Type of Operation Ready Mix Concrete Batch Plant Acrylic Embedment Manufacturing Facility Industry Class Class 3 Class 2 Certificate of Approval / Environmental Compliance Approval No. CofA No. 4072 7NPRCG CofA No. 9738 7WTR6H Asphalt Plant Class 3 CofA No. 8318 7PTNFL The surrounding area also includes a number of other Class 1 industries and commercial uses not listed in the above table. These uses include restaurants, retail stores, various storage facilities, car dealerships, and auto-mechanic facilities. The Mercedes Benz Midtown dealership is the only Class 1 industry located within the 70 m Area of Influence with the potential for noise, and was therefore included in the assessment. As no significant noise sources are located on any other Class 1 industries within the 70 m Area of Influence, noise impacts were not assessed. The Clearmount Plastics Limited is considered to be a Class 2 industry and located within the 300 m area of influence. An assessment of noise impacts from this facilities was included. The CBM and Coco Paving facilities are both located within the 1000 m area of influence for the Class 3 industries. Therefore, noise impacts from both these facilities were also included in the assessment. The locations of the above industries are shown in Figure 2. 3.2 MOE NPC-300 Guidelines for Stationary Noise Sources MOE noise guidelines for stationary source noise impacting residential and certain institutional and commercial developments are given in MOE publication NPC-300. The applicable portions of NPC-300 are Part C Land Use Planning and the associated definitions outlined in Part A Background. The acoustic environment surrounding the proposed development is dominated by the roadway noise and a general urban hum during all periods of the day. Therefore, the proposed development is considered to be located in an urban Class 1 area. In NPC-300, an area (otherwise classified as Class 1 or Class 2) can also be defined with a Class 4 designation based on the following: Intended for development with new noise sensitive land use(s) that are not yet built; Novus Environmental 11

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 In proximity to existing, lawfully established stationary source(s); and Has formal conformation as a Class 4 area classification, determined during the land use planning process. For the purposes of this assessment, the proposed development is assumed to be located in a Class 4 area. The City of Toronto planning staff will need to confirm, in accordance with the requirements of NPC-300, that such a designation is acceptable. The sound level limit for steady sound sources are expressed as a 1-hr equivalent sound level (1-hr Leq), and is the higher of the NPC-300 exclusionary limits and the existing background sound level. The NPC-300 stationary source noise requirements are summarized below for steady sound sources for outdoor and plane-of-window receptor locations in a Class 4 area. Table 9: NPC-300 Class 4 Steady Sound Noise Requirements Notes: Receiver Category Outdoor Plane of Window [2] Time Period [1] or minimum hourly L eq of background noise, whichever is higher [2] Applicable for Noise Sensitive Spaces, as defined in NPC-300. Exclusionary Sound Level Limits, 1h L eq (dba) [1] 0700 1900h 55 1900 2300h 55 2300 0700h 0700 1900h 60 1900 2300h 60 2300 0700h 55 Sound level limits do not apply to emergency equipment operating during emergency situations. However, emergency equipment operating in non-emergency situations, such as testing or maintenance of such equipment, requires assessment under NPC-300. The sound level limits for emergency equipment operating in non-emergency situations are 5 db greater than the sound level limits otherwise applicable to other stationary sources, as described above. Additionally, emergency equipment operating in non-emergency situations is to be assessed independently of all other stationary sources of noise. The ambient sound levels from the surrounding roadways were modelled at the proposed development. The predicted sound levels are not anticipated to exceed the exclusionary limits outlined in Table 9 for the facades exposed to the surrounding stationary noise sources. Therefore, the MOE Class 4 exclusionary limits have been applied for the proposed development. Novus Environmental 12

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 3.3 Stationary Noise Modelling Inclusion of the surrounding significant noise sources was determined based on a combination of site visit observations by Novus personnel during 2013 and 2014 and a review of aerial photography. The significant noise sources included in the assessment are as follows: CBM Ready Mix Facility Three (3) dust collectors; Pneumatic unloading of cement powder; Cement Truck wash and mix; and One (1) emergency generator. Clearmount Plastics Limited One (1) dust collector; and Rooftop HVAC units. Coco Paving Asphalt plant noise. Mercedes-Benz Midtown Three (3) rooftop air cooled condensers; Three (3) boiler exhaust stacks; One (1) cooling tower; Three (3) general exhaust fans (for cars); and One (1) emergency generator Each of the above facilities is required to meet the MOECC NPC-205 noise guideline limits at existing noise sensitive receptors, as indicated in their respective Certificates of Approval (CofA). Prior to predicting the combined noise impacts on the proposed development, each facility was modelled to meet the NPC-205 guideline limits at the surrounding existing receptors. A summary of the sound power levels (PWL) and assumptions used in the analysis are included in Appendix D. Figure 5 shows the noise source locations included in the noise modelling. Novus Environmental 13

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 3.3.1 Noise Impact Prediction Modelling was performed using Cadna/A, a computerized implementation of the ISO 9613 noise propagation algorithms. The model took into consideration the rough layout of the development, surrounding topography, and the surrounding buildings. As described in ISO 9613-2, ground factor values that represent the effect of ground absorption on sound levels range between 0 and 1. Based on the specific site conditions, the ground factor values used in the modelling were a ground factor value of 0 for acoustically reflective surfaces, such as asphalt, with localized areas ground factors of 1 drawn in for absorptive areas, such as grass areas. As discussed above, ambient sound exposures were conservatively not included in this assessment. Façade Levels The building evaluation feature of the Cadna/A was used to assess noise impacts on the residential portions of the towers. This feature allows for noise levels to be predicted across the entire façade of a structure. The worst-case noise impacts from the surrounding stationary sources are shown in Table 10. The results shown are for the building façade with the highest impacts. Table 10: Summary of Stationary Source Noise Impacts Façade Levels Applicable Stationary Source Meets Building [1] [2] Impacts Criteria [3] Criteria? Day Night Day Night Day Night (dba) (dba) (dba) (dba) (Yes/No) (Yes/No) Tower A 56 50 60 55 Yes Yes Tower B 50 50 60 55 Yes Yes Tower C 59 54 60 55 Yes Yes Tower D 54 52 60 55 Yes Yes Podium North Block 57 49 60 55 Yes Yes Podium Mid Block 60 54 60 55 Yes Yes Notes: [1] The sound levels presented are for the worst-case exposed facade. [2] Generator testing was excluded. [3] The exclusionary Class 4 guideline limits were applied. The façade noise impacts are shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7 for the daytime and night-time periods, respectively, as a change relative to the guideline limits. As shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7, no excesses of the guideline limits are predicted. Therefore, the stationary noise impacts from the surrounding industries are predicted to meet the Class 4 guideline limits on all facades of the proposed development. Novus Environmental 14

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Outdoor Amenity Areas The Outdoor Amenity Areas considered in this assessment include two (2) rooftop terraces identified in Figure 1. These amenity spaces are as follows: Landscaped Roof Deck, on the North Block Podium, between Tower A and Tower B; The rooftop amenity space, located on the Mid Block Podium, between Tower C and Tower D; and A Landscaped Public Park, located on the south-west corner of the development. The above rooftop terraces have the potential to be impacted by transportation noise. An assessment of stationary noise impacts on the amenity space were predicted to be below the 55 dba Class 4 limit for both terraces and the Landscaped Public Park. Therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required for these amenity spaces. The private balconies for each residential unit have been excluded from the assessment, assuming the MOE minimum depth requirement of 4 m is not met. Generator Testing Generator noise impacts have been assessed separately from the other stationary noise sources. The predicted noise impacts are below 50 dba on all facades and within the Outdoor Amenity Spaces, which meets the Class 4 exclusionary limit of 65 dba during the daytime period. These impacts were predicted based on a 1-hour duration for testing, and the simultaneous testing of both the CBM and Mercedes-Benz Midtown generators. 3.4 Required Warning Clauses Since the surrounding stationary noise sources are anticipated to be audible at times, a warning clause should be included in the Agreement of Purchase and Sale or Lease and in the relevant Development Agreements. An MOE NPC-300 Type E warning clause is required. A template Type E Warning Clause is shown below: Type E Warning Clause Purchasers/tenants are advised that due to the proximity of the adjacent industries, noise from the industries may at times be audible. Novus Environmental 15

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 PART 2: IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON ITSELF 4.0 Outdoor Noise Impacts From Ventilation Sources The building ventilation and potential emergency systems associated with the development have not been designed at this time. Although no adverse impacts are expected, such equipment has the potential to result in noise impacts on residential spaces within the development. It is therefore recommended that ventilation sources be reviewed by an acoustical professional prior to final selection of equipment. 5.0 Interior Noise Sources Building rooms or spaces next to mechanical equipment areas may be adversely affected by sound transmitted through ducts, opening, or noise induced by mechanical system vibrations into the building structure. The isolation of sound from mechanical equipment can be readily achieved with good design. All supply, return and miscellaneous fans should be provided with adequate vibration isolation to ensure that vibration is not transferred to the building structure and become a source of noise. Duct silencers can be used to ensure that high fan noise levels are not carried by the duct work to residential and other noise sensitive rooms throughout the building. Fans should be connected to ducting with flexible connectors. Duct work should be hung on vibration isolating hangers. All chillers, compressor and similar items of equipment should be provided with adequate vibration isolation and mounted on concrete inertia bases. The chiller room may need a floating floor or other alternate acoustically equivalent "room to room" construction to ensure that the high sound levels associated with a chiller are not transmitted to the residential units. All piping runs within the building are potential sources of noise. For example, plumbing can be a source of noise particularly if the source is not in the same suite as the listener. Pipes that pass through walls, floors and ceiling should be treated to reduce potential noise and vibration impacts. For example, pipes should be hung on vibration isolating hangers, and risers should not be rigidly connected to the floors or other supporting members at anchor locations. Pumps should be provided with adequate vibration isolation and mounted on concrete inertia bases where required. Transformers and other vibration noise producing electrical components should be provided with adequate vibration isolation. Novus Environmental 16

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 The following table indicates accepted guidelines to limit interior sound levels from continuous building services (i.e., pumps, air handling units, etc.). These guidelines are in the form of Noise Criteria (NC) curves, which indicate the maximum desirable sound level at the receptor in different frequency bands depending on the use of the space. Table 11: Typical Indoor Noise Control Design Criteria Type of Space Range of Sound Levels (dba) Range of NC Criteria Residence 25 35 20 30 Apartments 30 40 30 35 Private / Executive Office 30 40 25 35 General/Open Office 40 50 35 45 Conference Room 30 40 25 35 Restaurants / Lounges 35 50 35 45 5.1 Interior Walls and Floors Walls and floors separating mechanical rooms, fan rooms, electrical rooms, elevators shafts and rooms, garbage chutes, retail spaces etc. from residential spaces in the building should have adequate sound transmission loss. The Building Code requires a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) of 55 for such floors and walls. Interior walls between adjacent residential units should have a sufficient sound transmission loss. A minimum STC of 50 to 55 is recommended between adjacent units, STC-50 being specified by the Ontario Building Code. Adequate sound isolation can only be achieved if pertinent details for design and construction are followed. For example, closure of all cracks by caulking or equivalent, and the sealing of all wall penetrations, including electrical outlets. Electrical outlets serving different suites should not be within the same stud space or masonry cavity. Attention should also be paid to the effect of party rooms and other recreational and utility areas located adjacent to, or in close proximity to, residential units and office spaces. Noise and vibration impacts due to these areas should be investigated, and noise and/or vibration control measures included as necessary. An important aspect not addressed by the Building Code is impact sound. The floor/ceiling systems can be designed to minimize the transmission of impact sounds. The use of carpet or resilient underlayments to meet Impact Insulation Class (IIC) ratings of IIC 55-60 would be appropriate for stacking residential suites. Novus Environmental 17

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 PART 3: IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SURROUNDING AREA 6.0 Impacts of the Development on Surrounding Properties In terms of the noise environment of the area, it is expected that the project will have a negligible effect on the neighbouring properties. The traffic related to the proposed development will be small in relation to the traffic volumes within the area, and is not of concern with respect to noise impact. Other possible sources of noise associated with the development, with potentially adverse noise impacts on the surrounding neighbourhood, are emergency generators and mechanical roof-top equipment for the proposed development. This equipment must meet MOE Publication NPC-300 requirements at the closest off-site noise sensitive receptors. Given the high ambient sound levels in the area, the large separation distances to off-site noise sensitive receptors, and the fact that the systems will be designed to ensure that the applicable noise guideline are met at on-site receptors, off-site impacts are not anticipated. Regardless, potential impacts should be assessed as part of the final building design. The criteria can be met at all surrounding and on-site receptors by the appropriate selection of mechanical equipment, by locating equipment with sufficient setback from noise sensitive locations, and by incorporating control measures (e.g., silencers) into the design. 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The potential for noise impacts on and from the proposed development have been assessed. Impacts of the environment on the development, the development on itself, and the development on the surrounding area have been considered. Based on the results of our studies, the following conclusions have been reached: 7.1 Transportation Noise An assessment of transportation noise impacts has been completed. Upgrades to façade construction (windows and walls) are not required for the residential units. Noise impacts in the rooftop amenity spaces are predicted to not require any additional noise mitigation measures. Novus Environmental 18

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 Provisions for air conditioning are recommended as outlined in Section 2.6. Type C and Type D warning clauses must be included in all agreements of purchase and sale or lease and all rental agreements, as outlined in Section 2.6. 7.2 Industrial Stationary Noise Stationary noise impacts were assessed against the MOE NPC-300 Class 4 Area criteria. The significant stationary sources in the surrounding area include the CBM ready-mix plant, Clearmount Plastics Limited facility, the Coco Paving asphalt plant, and the Mercedes-Benz Midtown dealership. Stationary noise impacts from the surrounding industrial noise are predicted to meet NPC-300 Class 4 requirements at all noise sensitive areas. A Type E noise warning clause should be included in all agreements of purchase and sale or lease and all rental agreements, as outlined in Section 3.4. 7.3 Overall Assessment Impacts of the environment on the proposed development can be adequately controlled through the feasible mitigation measures and warning clauses detailed in Part 1 of this report. Impacts of the proposed development on itself can be adequately controlled by following the design guidance outlined in Part 2 of this report. Impacts of the proposed development are predicted to meet the applicable guideline limits, and can be adequately controlled by following the design guidance outlined in Part 3 of this report. Given the early stage of design and the conservative analysis that has been completed, the details of the above assessment should be reviewed by an Acoustical Consultant as part of the future site plan approval application. Novus Environmental 19

Environmental Noise Assessment 939 Eglinton Avenue Development May 1, 2015 8.0 REFERENCES International Organization for Standardization, ISO 9613-2: Acoustics Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors Part 2: General Method of Calculation, Geneva, Switzerland, 1996. Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE), 1989, Ontario Road Noise Analysis Method for Environment and Transportation (ORNAMENT) Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Publication NPC-300: Environmental Noise Guideline, Stationary and Transportation Sources Approval and Planning, 2013. Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE), 1996, STAMSON v5.03: Road, Rail and Rapid Transit Noise Prediction Model Novus Environmental 20

Figures Novus Environmental

This page intentionally left blank for 2-sided printing purposes

Plan provided by DIAMONDCORP Figure No. 1 Site Plan Scale: Date: N.T.S. 15/04/20 939 Eglinton Avenue East Proposed Development Toronto, Ontario True North File No.: Drawn By: 12-0253 MTL

Proposed Development Mercedes Benz Midtown Clearmount Plastics CBM Ready Mix Coco Paving Photography: Image 2012 DigitalGlobe, 2012 Google Figure No. 2 Context Plan Scale: Date: 1: 11,000 15/01/12 939 Eglinton Avenue East Proposed Development Toronto, Ontario True North File No.: Drawn By: 12-0253 KAC

Photography: Image 2012 DigitalGlobe, 2012 Google Figure No. 3 Modelled Façade Sound Levels Roadway, Daytime 939 Eglinton Avenue East Proposed Development Toronto, Ontario True North Scale: Date: File No.: Drawn By: 1: 1,000 15/04/22 12-0253 MTL

Photography: Image 2012 DigitalGlobe, 2012 Google Figure No. 4 Modelled Façade Sound Levels Roadway, Night-time 939 Eglinton Avenue East Proposed Development Toronto, Ontario True North Scale: Date: File No.: Drawn By: 1: 1,000 15/04/22 12-0253 MTL

Proposed Development Mercedes Benz Midtown Clearmount Plastics CBM Ready Mix Coco Paving Photography: Image 2012 DigitalGlobe, 2012 Google Figure No. 5 Surrounding Industry Stationary Noise Source Locations 939 Eglinton Avenue East Proposed Development Toronto, Ontario True North Scale: Date: File No.: Drawn By: 1: 11,000 15/01/12 12-0253 KAC

Stationary Noise Source Photography: Image 2012 DigitalGlobe, 2012 Google Figure No. 6 Modelled Façade Sound Levels Stationary, Daytime/Evening 939 Eglinton Avenue East Proposed Development Toronto, Ontario True North Scale: Date: File No.: Drawn By: 1: 1,000 15/05/01 12-0253 MTL

Stationary Noise Source Photography: Image 2012 DigitalGlobe, 2012 Google Figure No. 7 Modelled Façade Sound Levels Stationary, Night-time 939 Eglinton Avenue East Proposed Development Toronto, Ontario True North Scale: Date: File No.: Drawn By: 1: 1,000 15/05/01 12-0253 MTL

This page intentionally left blank for 2-sided printing purposes

Appendix A Novus Environmental

This page intentionally left blank for 2-sided printing purposes

BRENTCLIFFE ROAD ELEVATION 0.35m ROAD WIDENING PROPOSED 6 ST. RETAIL/ OFFICE BUILDING SCALE 1:300 PROJECT No:33021 MARCH 12, 2015 EAST ELEVATION - BRENTCLIFFE ROAD EGLINTON AVE. EAST & BRENTCLIFFE ROAD EGLINTON AVE EAST CONDO ROAD PUBLIC STREET VANDERHOOF AVE. PROPOSED 31 ST. RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 14

BRENTCLIFFE RD. PROPOSED 19 ST. MIXED USE/ RESIDENTIAL BUILDING EGLINTON AVE. EAST ELEVATION SERVICE LANE ±23.0m NORTH ELEVATION - EGLINTON AVE. EAST EGLINTON AVE. EAST & BRENTCLIFFE ROAD SCALE 1:300 PROJECT No:33021 MARCH 12, 2015 15

Appendix B Novus Environmental

This page intentionally left blank for 2-sided printing purposes

Kevin Carr From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Stephen J. Bahadoor <Bahadoor@bagroup.com> August-01-13 4:14 PM Kevin Carr; Alun S. Lloyd; Caitlin Willcocks Lucy Cameron; Hamish Hains; Mark S. VanderSluis RE: 939 Eglinton Follow up Flagged Hi Kevin, I can provide some info on traffic volumes in the area. Our work typically focusses on the morning and afternoon peak periods, and we do not typically collect AADT or hourly distribution information. We do, however, have some AADT traffic count summaries from the City for Eglinton Avenue, Laird Avenue and Wicksteed. Some of this info is dated, but here's a summary of what's we have on file: Eglinton Avenue 47,396 (from a 2009 City of Toronto count) Laird Drive 22,336 (from a 2009 City of Toronto count) Wicksteed Avenue 8568 (from a 2006 City of Toronto count) * no hourly variation information available For Brentcliffe, Vanderhoof and Research, we do not have any AADT info on file, but I can provide an estimated AADT based on factored peak hour volumes from our study counts: Brentcliffe Road 12,900 Research Road 900 Vanderhoof Avenue 4,000 (sorry no counts available for Industrial Street and Commercial Road) We are in the process of preparing our future estimates, which document peak hour volumes 5 years into the future. This would not forecast AADT outright. I've had a look at the past few AADT counts for Eglinton, and they seem to show a modest growth of about 1% per annum. I believe that would be a fair assumption to forecast future volumes... this would be somewhat conservative, bearing in mind growth trends are based on past data, and do not take into account the effects of the LRT. I will forward you the data we have in a separate email. There'll be some information on peak hour truck volumes in there. Cheers, Stephen J. Bahadoor, P.Eng. Transportation Engineer 416.961.7110, ext. 136 bahadoor@bagroup.com BA Consulting Group Ltd. 1

This page intentionally left blank for 2-sided printing purposes

Appendix C Novus Environmental

This page intentionally left blank for 2-sided printing purposes

Page 1 of 1 BPN 56 Calculation Procedure Required Glazing STC Rating (Fixed Veneer) 939 Eglinton Ave, 12 0253 Receptor ID Source Description Sound Levels Room / Façade Inputs Source Inputs Veneer Component 1 Glazing Component 2 Façade Required Required Veneer Glazing Total Total Veneer % Glazing % Incident Angle Assumed Sound % Total Free field Room Room Frequency Sound Indoor Sound Noise Wall Wall Wall Floor of Floor of Floor Sound Correction Spectrum type: Veneer Component Category: Energy Transmitted Component Category: Correction: Absorption: Correction Correction Level: Level: Reduction: Area Area Area Area Area: Area: Angle: Factor: STC Correction Energy (dba) (dba) (dba) (dba) (m 2 ) (m 2 ) (m 2 ) (m 2 ) (%) (%) (deg) (STC) (%) (%) (STC) POR_N_Day North Façade, worst case Living Room 69 3 45 27 4.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 40 60 Intermediate 30 90 1 D. mixed road traffic, distant aircraft 41 D. sealed thick window, or exterior wall, or roof/ceiling 3 7 10 10 C. sealed thin window, or openable thick window 1 4 90 0 31 POR_N_Ngt North Façade, worst case Bedroom 62 3 40 25 4.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 40 60 Intermediate 30 90 1 D. mixed road traffic, distant aircraft 41 D. sealed thick window, or exterior wall, or roof/ceiling 3 7 12 6 C. sealed thin window, or openable thick window 1 4 94 0 29 Room Correction Frequency Correction % Total Transmitted Energy Sound Energy Correction Require Glazing STC 150422 BPN56 STC Reqts 939 Eglinton 12 0253.xlsx\BPN56

This page intentionally left blank for 2-sided printing purposes

Appendix D Novus Environmental

This page intentionally left blank for 2-sided printing purposes

Page 1 of 1 Table D.1: Summary of Noise Source Sound Power Levels ID Source Description Calculated Sound Power Levels (db) 32 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 CBM_DC_all CBM Aggregates Ready Mix Plant, dust collectors x3 0 100 97 95 94 89 87 84 80 95.6 sound level data represents 3 units in operation. assumed to operate 24 hours per day. CBM_PneuLoad CBM Aggregates Ready Mix Plant, Pneumatic Unloading (Cement Powder) 115.6 118.3 110.5 110.4 107.5 106.6 101.6 95.4 85.6 110.6 assumed to occur for a duration of at least 1 hour. assumed to occur during any period of the day. CBM_WashMix CBM Aggregates Ready Mix Plant, Truck Wash and Mix 111.5 115.8 114.7 115.6 110.1 107.8 106.3 101 93.2 113.8 assumed to occur for a duration of at least 1 hour. assumed to occur during any period of the day. CBM_Gen CBM Aggregates Ready Mix Plant, generator 104 110 105 106 108 107 103 97 115.2 a Weather Enclosure sufficient for compliance with NPC 205 limits. daytime testing only for 60 min assumed. sound level data presented is A Weighted. Clearmount_DC Clearmont Plastics generic dust collector 96 94 91 89 85 88 87 80 77 92.4 assumed to operate 24 hours per day Clearmount_HVAC Clearmount HVAC unit 84 87 88 88 87 85 81 77 71 89.5 50% duty cycle applied during the night time period. Coco_Asphalt Coco Paving Asphalt Plant 116.3 117.9 117.8 117 103.9 99.7 95.6 94.4 88.8 110.7 adjusted for compliance with NPC 205 criteria at existing receptors. assumed to operate 24 hours per day. Mercedes_BD_CarWash Mercedes bay door (car wash noise) 79.7 76.9 78.6 75.2 77.6 82.1 80.1 77 77.2 86.4 PWL is based on pressure washer spray noise PWL adjusted for 20 min/hr of pressure washer noise modelled as daytime only, since service hours are from 7:30 am to 6:30 pm. Mercedes_ACC Mercedes air cooled condenser 84 87 88 88 87 85 81 77 71 89.5 assumed to operate during daytime and evening only to match with dealership hours of operation. no duty cycling was applied. Mercedes_ACC Mercedes air cooled condenser 90 93 94 94 93 91 87 83 77 95.5 assumed to operate during daytime and evening only to match with dealership hours of operation. no duty cycling was applied. Mercedes_Boiler Mercedes boiler exhaust stack 107.3 99.1 102 88.2 90.4 80.1 73.7 64 52.1 90.7 based on historical measurements Mercedes_CT Mercedes cooling tower (Top) 94 93 92 91 88 88 86 83 94.8 Centrigual Blow Through type of cooling tower. Mercedes cooling tower (Overall Avg) 91 95 92 90 86 85 82 78 92.7 assumed fan speed to cycle down during night time period. Mercedes_EF Mercedes rooftop exhaust fan (for cars) 99 93.8 90.8 86.9 82.4 78.8 75.9 71.6 89.1 modelled as daytime only, since service hours are from 7:30 am to 6:30 pm. an Acoustic Enclosure is required for compliance with NPC 205 limits. Mercedes_Gen Mercedes generator 86 93 92 93 95 94 91 84 101.2 daytime testing only for 60 min assumed. sound level data presented is A Weighted. Total PWL Notes (dba) AppD PWL summary 939 Eglinton 12 0253_150501.xlsx\TD1