US 53 Noise Mitigation

Similar documents
MnDOT GREATER MN STAND ALONE NOISE BARRIER PROGRAM

APPENDIX C NOISE STUDY TECHNICAL REPORT

1. Introduction Noise Analysis Results Figures. List of Tables

APPENDIX C NOISE STUDY TECHNICAL REPORT

COMPONENTS OF THE NOISE ELEMENT

FIGURE N-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT NEAR TRANSPORTATION NOISE SOURCES

Noise Impact Study for UMore Park Sand and Gravel Resources

Traffic Noise Introduction to Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement

FEDERAL BOULEVARD (5 TH AVENUE TO HOWARD PLACE) PLANNING ENVIRONMENTAL LINKAGE STUDY TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS

BRITISH COLUMBIA MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY FOR ASSESSING AND MITIGATING NOISE IMPACTS

ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE ASSESSMENT

Appendix K. Environmental Noise Assessment

11 NOISE INTRODUCTION NOISE FUNDAMENTALS AND TERMINOLOGY

BAY MEADOWS PHASE II SPAR 2 SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA

15.1 INTRODUCTION CONTEXT

APPENDIX 5.12-A PROJECT NOISE ANALYSIS: ARTESIAN SUBSTATION

APPENDIX C. Environmental Noise Assessment

Noise Analysis Study along I Tim Bjorneberg Project Development Program Manager SDDOT

TRAFFIC NOISE REPORT

Impact Assessment Methodology for the. Somerville Public Library August 4, 2008 Jason Ross, P.E. Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc.

12-1 INTRODUCTION 12-2 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

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

Noise measurement and mitigation for urban building foundation excavation

Noise Feasibility Study Proposed Residential Development Old Barber House 5155 Mississauga Road City of Mississauga, Ontario

NOISE STUDY REPORT DESIGN ADDENDUM

NORTH GILROY NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS URBAN SERVICE AREA AMENDMENT EIR NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT GILROY, CALIFORNIA

IAC Acoustics Noise-Foil Sound Absorption Panels for Industrial Applications. Dan O Brien

4. Environmental Analysis of the Proposed Project

Virginia Department Of Transportation. Highway Traffic Noise Impact Analysis Guidance Manual

Noise Impact Study for Hyatt House in Davis, California

9.0 Noise and Vibration

3.1 Noise Overlay District

APPENDIX 3.11-A NOISE ANALYSIS DATA

Place Vanier Édifice AEFO

NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL. Number Three Wind Farm Lewis County, New York. Case 16-F-0328

Draft Noise Study Report

Noise Reduction and Asphalt Rubber. Douglas D. Carlson RPA Deputy Director Asphalt Rubber Greenbook Workshop 08/22/02 UCSB, California

Noise Assessments for Construction Noise Impacts

Appendix D Environmental Noise Assessment

4.3 NOISE Environmental Setting. Fundamentals of Sound and Environmental Noise

3.12 NOISE AND VIBRATION ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ACOUSTIC FUNDAMENTALS

E. NOISE AND VIBRATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 12 Noise

Recommended Locations for Sound Barriers

4.10 NOISE. A. Fundamental Concepts of Environmental Acoustics

4.11 Noise and Vibration

A. INTRODUCTION B. AIRBORNE NOISE

4.7 NOISE FUNDAMENTALS OF NOISE AND VIBRATION

To: Hyoksang Kwon, COBE Construction From: Joshua Marcley, Mei Wu Acoustics

4.7 NOISE. Introduction. Decibels and Frequency. Perception of the Receiver and A-Weighting

Virginia Department of Transportation I-66 Tier 2 Environmental Assessment

NYU Core: Post-EIS Façade Improvement Acoustical Assessment

4.10 Noise Setting. a. Overview of Noise and Vibration Measurement

III.I. NOISE AND VIBRATION

HUDSON TUNNEL PROJECT

Dormitory Authority of the State of New York Page 14-1 Staten Island Supreme Courthouse Project Draft EIS

The content of this supplement is based upon the that described in our letter of May 28, 2012.

Evaluation of noise impacts associated with a proposed commercial retail project typically includes the following:

5 INFORMATION UPDATE TRAFFIC NOISE ASSESSMENT TESTON ROAD CITY OF VAUGHAN

Airborne Noise and The New NY Bridge Project

Introduction. Section 3.10 Noise Fundamentals of Noise. Decibels and Frequency

Phil Pogledich, Senior Deputy Counsel, Yolo County; Petrea Marchand, Consero Solutions

TTM & Residential Development Noise Impact Study City of San Jacinto, CA

CHAPTER 9 NOISE ELEMENT

Evaluation of Highway. Noise Mitigation Alternatives. For Vail Colorado. Final Report October Prepared for. Vail, Colorado.

Appendix D Andersen Drive At-Grade Crossing Technical Report on Noise

Noise Assessment Report Main Street, Residential Site Cambridge, ON

This page intentionally left blank

12 November Ms. Winnie Lam Project Manager L.F. George Properties 159 El Camino Real Millbrae, CA 94030

9 October Town of Medway 155 Village Street Medway, MA Chair, Medway Board of Selectmen

Australian Standard. Acoustics Road traffic noise intrusion Building siting and construction AS

UAL URBAN AERODYNAMICS LTD

Stratocell Whisper. Sound Absorbing Polyethylene Foam

ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE ASSESSMENT

LONE HILL TO WHITE DOUBLE TRACK STUDY Community Open Houses May 16 & 17

Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission Proposed City of Elk Grove Sphere of Influence Amendment (LAFC # 09-10) Recirculated Draft EIR

Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance

Non-Traditional Noise and Vibration Mitigation Strategies. Christopher Layman, Ph.D. Shannon McKenna Judy Rochat, Ph.D. ATS Consulting Pasadena, CA

Corporate Environments

Appendix G Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis

Monitoring of the Environmental Noise Level in San Juan, Puerto Rico

Noise Impact Assessment Hamburg Crossings Hamburg, New York. Prepared for Benderson Development 570 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, New York 14202

ASSESSMENT OF INWARD TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT AT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, WONDERFUL BARN, LEIXLIP, CO. KILDARE

PALO VERDE MESA SOLAR PROJECT

4.7 NOISE Setting

Information Sheet - Mountain Highway Interchange Noise Assessment and Sound Mitigation

Appendix F. Environmental Noise Assessment

Design for Noise Mitigation Measures for Public Housing Developments in Hong Kong

MCKENZIE INTERCHANGE PROJECT

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO CALIFORNIA ZONING ADMINISTRATOR REPORT

Presented By: Jim O Neill. Acoustics

I-15 South, MP 0 to MP 16 Environmental Assessment. Public Hearing. August 7, :00 PM to 7:00 PM

A White Paper: ASSESSMENT OF NOISE ANNOYANCE

MANAGING THE NOISE IMPACT FROM SHALE GAS DRILLING

Acoustic design of industrial spaces. The reduction of noise levels and increase of production

EL DORADO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND NOISE ELEMENT PRINCIPLE INTRODUCTION REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

West County Treatment Plant Noise and Odor Control Project Update. June 29, 2004

Power Plant Near-Field Noise Considerations

Day/Night Noise Level Assessment Tool Users Guide

10. Noise and Vibration

Transcription:

US 53 Noise Mitigation 1

Meeting Agenda Introductions Brief Project Overview Terminology Agencies Involved Rules/Regulations Noise Characteristics Project Approach Mitigation Possible Noise Mitigation Details 2

Introductions Pat Huston, MnDOT Project Manager Rob Ege, MnDOT Design Manager John Crawford, Kimley-Horn Beth Kunkel, Kimley-Horn 3

Project Overview

Project Layout 2 nd Ave Area

Project Layout Midway Area

Noise Terminology Decibel: Sound pressure level (db) A-weighted sound level: Human perception to varying frequencies L10 - Sound level exceeded 10% of any period L50 - Sound level exceeded 50% of any period Daytime - 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. Nighttime - 10 p.m. - 7:00 a.m. 7

Agencies that regulate noise FHWA FTA MPCA Projects MnDOT / Local Agencies Projects MnDOT / Local Agencies 8

FHWA Uses Noise Impact Criteria 5 dba increase = impact Within 1 dba of criteria = impact Land Use Categories A: Serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance B: Residences (overnight sleeping), picnic areas, etc. C: Other D: Undeveloped 9

FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria Noise Abatement Criteria by Land Use Category Category L10 dba Evaluation Location Land Use A 60 Exterior Special areas requiring serenity B 70 Exterior Residential C 70 Exterior Recreational D 55 Interior Churches, schools, hospitals, libraries, etc. E 75 Exterior Commercial F -- -- Agricultural and Industrial G -- -- Undeveloped 10

MPCA STATE NOISE STANDARDS DAYTIME NIGHTIME L10 L50 L10 L50 Residential 65 60 55 50 Commercial 70 65 70 65 Industrial 80 75 80 75 11

Noise Characteristics Nearly always dealing with a line source Noise levels change by 3 dba when acoustic changes by factor of 2. This applies to: Distance Traffic volume Changes of 3 dba are just barely perceptible, 5dBA is clearly noticeable 12

Project Approach Define Noise Monitoring Locations Conduct Noise Monitoring Model Study Area Traffic Noise to Determine Impacts Evaluate Potential Mitigation Measures Document Noise Study Findings 13

Noise Mitigation MnDOT cost-effectiveness criteria is used: Cost/Benefitted Receiver <= $43,500 Minimum of 7 db reduction at 1 receptor/barrier Minimum of 5 db reduction to be benefitted To be effective, noise barriers generally need to extend 4 times the distance from the barrier to the receiver, in each direction, without interruptions Mitigation materials: Standard barrier: wood plank or concrete post, earthen berms Placement of vegetation is generally not acceptable 14

Source-Path-Receiver Concept Source Receiver 15

Changes in noise levels in an outdoor environment 3 dba (increase or decrease) is barely perceptible 5 dba (increase or decrease) is clearly noticeable 10 dba (increase or decrease) is perceived as twice as loud (or half as loud) 16

Noise Path without a Barrier Source Receiver 17

Noise Path with a Barrier Barrier Source Receiver 18

Importance of Breaking Line of Sight Source Receiver 19

Importance of Breaking Line of Sight

Project Layout 2 nd Ave Area

2 ND Avenue Area Noise Mitigation Analysis Results and Cost-Effectiveness Receiver ID Build No Wall (dba) Build Wall (dba) Reduction (dba) Benefitted Receiver (>= 5dBA) Design Goal (>= 7dBA) Length (ft) Total Cost Cost per Receiver 1 68.4 58.5 9.9 1 2 63.0 57.5 5.5 1 3 63.6 57.9 5.7 1 4 64.3 57.6 6.7 1 5 64.9 58.4 6.5 1 6 66.1 58.3 7.8 1 7 66.1 58.3 7.8 1 8 65.3 59.1 6.2 1 1,260 $504,000 $38,769 9 65.3 59.1 6.2 1 10 65.1 56.1 9.0 1 11 67.5 59.4 8.1 1 12 67.5 59.4 8.1 1 13 67.5 59.4 8.1 1 Total: 13 22

Noise Wall Visual Simulations 2 nd Avenue Area Images on following 2 slides: Photo of current conditions Photo simulation of proposed noise wall 23

24

25

Project Layout Midway Area

Midway Area Noise Mitigation Analysis Results and Cost- Effectiveness Receiver ID Build No Wall (dba) Build Wall (dba) Reduction (dba) Benefitted Receiver (>= 5dBA) 14 68.1 58.9 9.2 1 15 68.1 58.9 9.2 1 16 67.3 58.2 9.1 1 17 67.3 58.2 9.1 1 18 67.3 58.2 9.1 1 19 68.2 57.3 10.9 1 20 68.2 57.3 10.9 1 21 68.2 57.3 10.9 1 Design Goal (>= 7dBA) Length (ft) Total Cost Cost per Receiver 22 63.0 58.0 5.0 1 2,074 $829,600 $25,139 23 63.0 58.0 5.0 1 24 63.0 58.0 5.0 1 25 62.3 56.7 5.6 1 26 62.3 56.7 5.6 1 27 62.3 56.7 5.6 1 28 62.5 56.1 6.4 1 29 62.6 56.1 6.5 1 30 62.6 56.1 6.5 1 27

Midway Area Noise Mitigation Analysis Results and Cost- Effectiveness (Continued) Receiver ID Build No Wall (dba) Build Wall (dba) Reduction (dba) Benefitted Receiver (>= 5dBA) 30 62.6 56.1 6.5 1 31 62.8 56.9 5.9 1 32 62.8 56.9 5.9 1 33 67.9 62.0 5.9 1 34 67.0 56.2 10.8 1 35 64.3 57.7 6.6 1 36 62.9 57.7 5.2 1 37 62.7 57.5 5.2 1 38 62.6 56.5 6.1 1 39 65.3 56.5 8.8 1 40 67.4 56.5 10.9 1 41 67.8 57.3 10.5 1 42 68.1 59.5 8.6 1 43 68.5 62.3 6.2 1 44 68.5 62.3 6.2 1 45 69.2 62.5 6.7 1 46 69.2 62.5 6.7 1 Design Goal (>= 7dBA) Length (ft) Total Cost Cost per Receiver 2,074 $829,600 $25,139 Total: 33 28

Noise Wall Visual Simulations Midway Area Images on following 4 slides: Photo of current conditions Photo simulation of proposed noise wall 29

30

31

32

33

VOTING DEADLINE Renters and owners of benefitted properties may vote for or against the construction of the wall Official ballots are due March 20 If more than 50% of the total available points are opposed to the wall, it will not be constructed 34

Questions/Answers/Contacts Questions? Project contacts: Pat Huston, Project Manager, MnDOT, 218-725-2707 Rob Ege, Design Manager, MnDOT, 218-725-2788 John Crawford, Kimley-Horn, 612-294-7264 Beth Kunkel, Kimley-Horn, 651-643-0455 35

36