noise analysis for maplecrest road improvement (des. no ... · traffic management measures ......
TRANSCRIPT
Noise Analysis for Maplecrest Road Improvement
(Des. No. 0500695) in Fort Wayne, Allen County, Indiana
By
Michael A. Stafford, PhD, Air/Noise Specialist
2011-IN314-04 Maplecrest Noise Analysis
Noise Analysis for Maplecrest Road Improvement
(Des. No. 0500695) in Fort Wayne, Allen County, Indiana
By
Michael A. Stafford, PhD, Air/Noise Specialist
Submitted By:
Luella Beth Hillen
ASC Group, Inc.
6330 East 75th Street, Suite 100
Indianapolis, Indiana 46250
317.915.9300
Submitted To:
A&Z Engineering, LLC
9017 Coldwater Road, Suite 500
Fort Wayne, IN 46825
260.485.7077
Lead Agency: Indiana Department of Transportation
August 15, 2011
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................. i
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ ii
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... ii
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TYPE ........................................................................................ 1
LAND USES AND RECEPTORS ................................................................................................. 2
EXISTING AND FUTURE NOISE LEVELS ............................................................................... 3 Scenarios ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Modeling ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Roadways ................................................................................................................................ 4
Traffic Data ............................................................................................................................. 5 Topography ............................................................................................................................. 6
Other TNM Data Elements ..................................................................................................... 6 Measurements And Model Calibration/Validation ..................................................................... 6
Measurements ......................................................................................................................... 6
Modeling ................................................................................................................................. 7 Modeling Results And Impact Identification .............................................................................. 7
NOISE ABATEMENT ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................... 8
Traffic Management Measures ................................................................................................... 8 Noise Insulation .......................................................................................................................... 8 Alteration of Alignment .............................................................................................................. 8
Acquisition of Real Property For Buffer Zones .......................................................................... 8 Noise Barrier Construction ......................................................................................................... 9
CONSTRUCTION NOISE ............................................................................................................. 9
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................. 9
LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................. 11
FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................... 12
TABLES ....................................................................................................................................... 16
APPENDIX A: NOISE FUNDAMENTALS .......................................................................... A - 1
APPENDIX B: FIELD DATA................................................................................................. B - 1
ii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Maplecrest Added Travel Lanes Project Noise Map. (Sheet 1 of 3) .............................13
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Noise Abatement Criteria. ..............................................................................................17
Table 2. Traffic Volume Estimates. ..............................................................................................17
Table 3. Traffic Volumes for TNM Modeling. .............................................................................18
Table 4. Existing Noise Measurement Sites. ................................................................................18
Table 5. Measurements of Existing Noise Levels. .......................................................................18
Table 6. Model Validation Results. ..............................................................................................19
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results. .................................................................................................19
1
INTRODUCTION
ASC Group, Inc., under contract with A & Z Engineering, LLC, completed a noise
assessment for the planned project to add lanes to Maplecrest Road in Fort Wayne, Allen
County, Indiana. This noise analysis was done to satisfy requirements of the Indiana Department
of Transportation (INDOT) Traffic Noise Policy (INDOT 2011), which is INDOT’s
implementation of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) rules found in Title 23 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 772 as modified on July 13, 2010. The analysis
conforms to procedures specified in both the INDOT Traffic Noise Policy and in FHWA
guidance (FHWA 2011).
This report is organized with a project description section following this introduction that
describes the project and evaluates its project type under FHWA rules. The next section
identifies land uses in terms of FHWA activity classifications and noise abatement criteria.
Within the identified land-use areas, individual receptors are identified for analysis. Noise
impact criteria are also discussed in this section. The subsequent section evaluates existing and
future noise levels, including descriptions of the modeling approach and input data, field
measurements, and model validation/calibration. Modeling results are presented in this section
for Existing, No-Build, and Build scenarios. Noise abatement measures and construction noise
issues are discussed in the next sections, followed by a final section that summarizes the noise
analysis and its conclusions. Tables and figures are located at the end of the text before the
appendices. Appendix A contains a description of noise fundamentals and terminology that may
be useful to readers not already knowledgeable in traffic noise analysis. Appendix B contains
field data sheets and equipment calibration certificates. Input and output files from computer
modeling runs are available in electronic format.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TYPE
The project is located in Fort Wayne, Allen County, Indiana, and involves adding travel
lanes to an existing road. Plans are to add two lanes (one northbound and one southbound) to
Maplecrest Road between Lake Avenue and East State Boulevard. Maplecrest Road currently
has two through-lanes with short turn-lanes at a few locations. Traffic is controlled by a signal at
East State Boulevard, a stop sign at Lake Avenue, and an all-way stop at Monarch Drive
(approximately 1,100 feet south of the East State Boulevard intersection). Speed limits on
2
Maplecrest are currently 30 miles per hour (mph) north of State, 30 mph between State and
Centerton Drive, and 35 mph south to where the project ends at Lake Avenue. Under the
proposed project, all speed limits will remain the same. The distance from Lake Avenue to East
State Boulevard is approximately 4,500 feet (0.86 miles). Numerous side streets and driveways
intersect with Maplecrest, and those access points will be maintained under the proposed project.
Because this project adds new travel lanes to an existing highway, it is considered a Type
I project as defined in FHWA (2011). For Type I projects, INDOT (2011) requires a traffic
noise analysis to include an area extending 500 feet from the edge of pavement where
construction will occur. This project is shown on Figure 1 with the noise study area outlined in
red.
LAND USES AND RECEPTORS
Under FHWA rules, a traffic noise impact occurs when predicted traffic noise levels in
the Build scenario approach or exceed noise abatement criteria (NAC) values or when a
substantial increase is predicted to occur compared with existing noise levels. Noise abatement
is considered wherever such impacts occur. NAC are defined based on land use or activity
categories as shown in Table 1. The NAC values are used solely to determine when noise
impacts occur and when noise abatement is considered; they should not be considered Federal
standards or even desirable noise levels.
INDOT (2011) defines the term “approach” to mean within 1 A-weighted decibel (dBA)
and a “substantial” increase to mean that future noise levels exceed existing levels by 15 dBA or
more. Thus, for a Category B land use area which has a NAC Leq(h) of 67 dBA, an impact
occurs at a receptor and noise abatement is considered for that receptor if predicted noise levels
reach 66 dBA. However, if the existing noise level for the area is 45 dBA, then an impact would
occur and noise abatement would be considered if the predicted noise level exceeded 60 dBA.
Project mapping provided by A & Z Engineering was used in conjunction with the
Google Earth computer program to classify land uses within the noise study area according to the
categories given in Table 1 and to identify individual receptors within those land use areas. Land
uses and receptor locations were verified and refined during a site visit on May 4, 2011. Land
use areas present in the noise study area are shown as shaded regions on Figure 1. Land uses
3
include Category B (residential), Category C (school), Category E (restaurant and office), and
Category F (retail shops, farmland, and industrial).
Receptors are also shown on Figure 1. INDOT (2011) defines a receptor as a point where
noise impacts are measured or modeled. Measurement locations are identified on Figure 1 using
a yellow/red symbol and are labeled as “M-#, where # is a sequential number. All other
receptors were used in the modeling analysis and are shown on Figure 1 using a black/red
symbol. They are labeled with the identification number used in the modeling files and in the
results tables discussed later in this report. These modeling receptors are numbered sequentially
from south to north and west to east.
Modeling receptors were located in areas of frequent human use near residences and
other buildings. All residential receptors represent single-family dwellings or individual units
within multiple-family residences. Receptors were placed at a height of five feet above the
ground except at the three-story Georgetown Place apartment complex (receptors 51 to 90). In
this complex, three receptors were placed at each apartment location along the building, at
heights of 5 feet (1st floor), 15 feet (2
nd floor), and 25 feet (3
rd floor). Second and third floor
receptors are identified with the same number as the ground floor receptor with the added letters
“a” for 2nd
floor and “b” for 3rd
floor.
FHWA rules also require receptors to be located on any undeveloped (Category G) land
for which future development is already permitted. INDOT (2011) defines “permitted” to mean
that “there is a definite commitment to develop land with an approved specific design of land use
activities (as evidenced by the issuance of a building permit).” For this project, no land is
classified as Category G. The owner of the Category F farmland in the southwest portion of the
noise study area (west of Maplecrest Road and north of Lake Avenue) was contacted by A & Z
Engineering and no development is planned there. Therefore, no receptors were added for
permitted developments not yet constructed, and no assessment of future noise levels in Category
G areas was required.
EXISTING AND FUTURE NOISE LEVELS
This section describes the modeling approach used to compute existing and future noise
levels, input data used in the modeling and field measurements used in model
validation/calibration.
4
SCENARIOS
Three scenarios were evaluated: Existing (current conditions), No-Build (future
conditions if the project is not constructed), and Build (future conditions if the project is
constructed). FHWA rules use results of the Existing and Build scenarios to determine if
impacts will occur. The No-Build scenario was analyzed to provide additional information if
needed for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents. Existing and No-Build
scenarios include street configurations if the project is not built and traffic data for the years
2007 and 2027, respectively. The Build scenario includes the street configuration and traffic
data for 2027 if the proposed project is built.
For this project, the noise study area was modeled all at once; it was not broken up into
smaller analysis areas. Receptors were the same for all scenarios. The only difference between
the Existing and No-Build scenarios was in the traffic data used. The Build scenario used the
same traffic data as the No-Build scenario, but the TNM runs incorporated the proposed physical
changes due to the project.
MODELING
Each scenario was modeled using the current version of the FHWA’s Traffic Noise
Model (TNM) version 2.5 (Anderson et al. 1998; Lau et al. 2004). Input data requirements for
TNM include detailed information about roadway alignments, elevations, and traffic volumes.
In addition, other elements that may affect noise transmission between the roadways and the
receptors can be specified as necessary. These other elements include topography, existing
barriers, buildings, trees, and ground surfaces. TNM input data elements are described below.
Roadways
Three roads were included in the TNM modeling analysis: Lake Avenue, Maplecrest
Road, and East State Boulevard. Maplecrest Road and Lake Avenue are two-lane roads at
present and East State Boulevard is a four-lane road. Lake Avenue and East State Boulevard
will not be altered by this project, which will add one travel lane on either side of the existing
lanes on Maplecrest Road. Road alignments were drawn using a computer aided design (CAD)
program onto aerial photographs that were obtained from the Google Earth computer program.
The aerial images are dated May 31, 2011. One TNM road was defined for each travel lane.
Center turn-lanes were also defined near the Maplecrest Road/East State Boulevard intersection.
5
Traffic volumes were assigned to each lane as appropriate for the scenario being modeled.
Details are given in the traffic section below.
Other roads also exist within the project area, but no traffic volumes were available for
these roads and traffic volumes—especially truck volumes, which are major noise contributors—
are expected to be too low for them to significantly affect noise levels.
Topographic contours provided by A & Z Engineering and visual observations made
during the site visit both indicate that roads are relatively flat. Roadway elevations change
gradually over the length of the project, and nearby terrain matches the road elevation within 1 to
2 feet. As a result, all roads were modeled with elevations set to zero.
As previously discussed above, traffic controls within the noise study area consist of
speed limits, one signal, and two stop signs. No changes to these controls are planned as part of
this project. These controls were included in the roadway definitions input into TNM.
Traffic Data
Annual average daily traffic (AADT) volume estimates for 2007 and 2027 were provided
by A & Z Engineering. The 2027 traffic volumes are expected to be the same whether or not the
project is constructed, so Build and No-Build volumes are identical. Design hourly volumes
(DHVs) were estimated to be 10 percent of the AADTs with trucks comprising approximately
0.5 percent of the total traffic on Maplecrest Road. Traffic volumes and fractions are shown in
Table 2.
For each road segment, the TNM model uses as input data the average speed and the
number of vehicles per hour for up to five vehicle classes. For this project, traffic speeds were
determined from speed limits. However, obtaining values of vehicles per hour in the required
vehicle type categories from AADTs and truck fractions requires certain assumptions and
numerical manipulations. Traffic volumes for two of the TNM vehicle classes were estimated
from the values given in Table 2: cars (vehicles with two axles and four tires such as cars, light
vans, pickup trucks) and medium trucks (vehicles with two axles and six tires). All three roads
modeled are designated “No Truck” routes, so no heavy trucks (vehicles with three or more
axles) are expected. The other two TNM vehicle classes (buses and motorcycles) were not used
because they cannot be distinguished from cars and trucks in the traffic volumes provided.
Traffic volumes used in the TNM modeling are given in Table 3. Calculations and factors are
explained in the footnotes to the table.
6
Topography
As discussed above, the terrain within the project area is relatively flat and will not
significantly affect modeled noise levels. Therefore, all receptors and roads were modeled with
ground elevation set to zero. One terrain line was defined to account for a series of small hills
approximately two to four feet in height located between Maplecrest Road and Receptor 1. All
other TNM elements were defined with ground level set to zero.
Other TNM Data Elements
Other data elements that may be defined in TNM include building rows, tree zones,
ground zones, and existing barriers. For this project, building rows were used to represent rows
of houses and existing barriers were used to represent large buildings and existing masonry
walls. No other TNM elements were used.
MEASUREMENTS AND MODEL CALIBRATION/VALIDATION
This section describes the ambient noise measurements obtained for this project and how
those measurements were used to (1) characterize the ambient noise environment and (2) to
validate the TNM model for this application. Sounds in the noise study area may arise from a
variety of sources, of which traffic on nearby roads is only one. Other noise sources may include
air conditioners, lawn mowers and other home maintenance equipment, power transformers,
aircraft, animals, children, etc. TNM is only capable of modeling traffic noise, so it is important
in trying to predict future noise levels to determine if traffic noise dominates the area or if other
noises in the area are significant. This is done by running TNM with traffic volumes obtained
while measurements were being taken and comparing the results with the actual measurements.
Measurements
Noise measurements were taken on May 4, 2011, at five locations. Table 4 lists the
measurement sites and gives additional information about each one. Field measurement
locations are shown in yellow on Figure 1 and labeled with the prefix “M.”
Noise measurements were made using a Quest 2800 Sound Level Meter (SLM) that met
the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) SI.4-1993, TYPE II standards for accuracy
(ANSI 1993) and that was capable of automatically computing Leq values. SLM calibration was
checked using a 114-dB calibrator before and after each measurement, and meter readings were
adjusted for instrument bias and drift following FHWA procedures (Lee and Fleming 1996).
7
Calibration certification statements for the SLM and the calibrator are shown in Appendix B.
Noise measurements and calibration data are presented in Table 5.
Measurement durations were at least 15 minutes in order to adequately capture noise
variations over time and obtain an accurate Leq value. Distances from nearby roads, buildings,
and structures were measured at each site. Sketches were made on field data sheets of each site
showing the measurement location relative to roads, buildings and structures, noting terrain
features and surface types. Wind speeds and temperatures during each measurement were
obtained on site using a handheld hot-wire anemometer with built-in thermometer. Copies of the
field data sheets are in Appendix B.
Modeling
TNM was run for comparison to each measurement taken. Roads and other TNM
elements were the same as in the Existing scenario except that the traffic volumes modeled were
obtained during the measurements and only one field measurement receptor was included in each
TNM run. Results are shown in Table 6. Because all modeled values agree with measurements
within 3 dBA, the model is considered valid for this project and no external (non-roadway) noise
source is considered significant.
MODELING RESULTS AND IMPACT IDENTIFICATION
Predicted noise levels are shown in Table 7 for all three scenarios. NACs are approached
or exceeded at 10 residential receptors in the Build scenario. These receptors (119, 137, 162,
185, 186, 197, 208, 209, 214, and 220) are highlighted in pink in Table 7 to indicate that they are
impacted receptors. All of these receptors represent first-row residences in the northern half of
the noise study area. They are located less than 100 feet from Maplecrest Road.
Future noise levels are higher than existing levels primarily because of the higher traffic
volumes anticipated in the future. This increase is evident in both the Build and No-Build
scenarios. Build results in the southern portion of the noise study area are similar to the No-
Build results. Small differences occur due to spreading the traffic over more lanes, some of it
closer to any given residence and some of it farther away. However, in the northern part of the
study area, the difference between Build and No-Build numbers is significant. This is probably
due primarily to the proposed increase in speed limit in the north.
8
NOISE ABATEMENT ALTERNATIVES
Several noise abatement measures were considered for the impacted receiver in this
project. These include traffic management measures, noise insulation, alteration of alignment,
acquisition of real property, and noise barrier construction. Due to limitations on INDOT’s
ability to acquire property for mitigation or to mitigate sites off of state rights-of-way (ROW),
the most common form of abatement is the construction of noise barriers.
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Different traffic controls at intersections could be considered (e.g., signalization instead
of stop signs), but the effect on noise levels would be minimal. Lowering speed limits may
reduce noise levels, but would also reduce functionality of the road system. Heavy trucks are
already prohibited on Maplecrest Road. Therefore, additional traffic management measures are
considered not feasible.
NOISE INSULATION
In Indiana, impacted non-profit and public buildings may be eligible for noise insulation.
There is one school within the noise study area, but it is not impacted. Therefore, noise
insulation is not applicable.
ALTERATION OF ALIGNMENT
Alignment modifications generally involve orienting and/or locating the roadway
sufficient distances from noise-sensitive areas to minimize noise impacts. Because all the land
adjacent to Maplecrest Road near the impacted receptors is already developed, any horizontal
alignment change would require the acquisition of additional property for mitigation purposes,
something INDOT and the City of Fort Wayne have limited ability to do. In addition,
Maplecrest Road is relatively flat and any alteration in vertical alignment would likely
exacerbate noise impacts. Thus, neither vertical nor horizontal modifications to the proposed
alignment are considered feasible or reasonable noise abatement measures for this project.
ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR BUFFER ZONES
Buffer zones are undeveloped open spaces that border a road. Buffer zones are created
when the agency purchases land or development rights in addition to the normal ROW so that
future dwellings cannot be constructed near the roadway in areas with the potential for excessive
traffic noise. However, as mentioned above, INDOT and the City of Fort Wayne have limited
9
ability to acquire property for mitigation or to mitigate sites off of public ROWs. Therefore, this
is not considered a suitable option.
NOISE BARRIER CONSTRUCTION
Noise barriers were considered for the impacted receiver. However, to provide
significant noise reduction, a barrier’s length must typically extend four times the distance from
the barrier to the receiver in each direction. So, for example, if a single residence is located 50 ft
from the barrier, the barrier would need to extend approximately 200 ft to either side of the
residence to be protected. In this project, the presence of existing driveways and street
intersections would make any proposed noise barrier unlikely to be effective in reducing noise
levels. Therefore, barriers are considered not feasible for this project.
CONSTRUCTION NOISE
All developed land uses and activities adjacent to the proposed project will be affected by
the noise generated during construction activities, primarily by heavy machinery. Heavy
machinery (such as front-end loaders, bulldozers, graders, dump trucks, pavers, etc.) will
produce noise at levels ranging from 70 to nearly 100 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. However, it
is difficult to accurately predict levels of construction noise at a particular receptor or group of
receptors as the machinery is constantly moving in unpredictable patterns.
Daily construction normally occurs during daylight hours when occasional loud noises
are more tolerable. No one location is expected to be exposed to construction noise of long
duration; therefore, extended disruption of normal activities is not anticipated. However,
provisions will be included in the plans and specifications requiring the contractor to make every
reasonable effort to minimize construction noise through abatement measures such as work-hour
controls and maintenance of muffler systems. Equipment will be operated in compliance with all
applicable local ordinances and regulations pertaining to construction noise.
Due to the temporary nature of construction noise, no construction noise barriers are
proposed for this project.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Noise modeling results for the proposed improvements to Maplecrest Road in Fort
Wayne, Indiana, are summarized in Table 7 and compared with the measured noise levels for the
Existing and No-Build scenarios. Noise impacts are predicted at 10 residential receptors.
10
However, based on the studies thus far accomplished, the State of Indiana and the City of Fort
Wayne have not identified any locations where noise abatement is likely. Noise abatement
considerations at these locations are based upon preliminary design costs and design criteria.
Noise abatement has been found to be not feasible based on the presence of existing access
points on Maplecrest Road, including side streets and private driveways. A reevaluation of the
noise analysis will occur during final design. If during final design it has been determined that
conditions have changed such that noise abatement is feasible and reasonable, the abatement
measures might be provided. The final decision on the installation of any abatement measure(s)
will be made upon the completion of the project’s final design and the public involvement
processes.
The viewpoints of the benefited residents and property owners are a major consideration
in determining the reasonableness of highway traffic noise abatement measures for proposed
highway construction projects. These viewpoints have been determined and addressed during the
environmental phase of project development. The will and desires of the public are an important
factor in dealing with the overall problems of highway traffic noise. The City of Fort Wayne will
incorporate highway traffic noise consideration in ongoing activities for public involvement in
the highway program, i.e., and will re-examine the residents’ and property owners’ views on the
desirability and acceptability of abatement during project development.
11
LITERATURE CITED
23 CFR Part 772 2010. “Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction
Noise.” http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-15848.pdf
Anderson, Grant S., Cynthia S. Y. Lee, Gregg O. Fleming, and Christopher W. Menge 1998.
FHWA Traffic Noise Model® Version 1.0 User’s Guide, U.S. DOT, FHWA, Washington,
DC,
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/traffic_noise_model/old_versions/tnm_versi
on_10/users_guide/index.cfm, January.
ANSI 1993. “Specification for Sound Level Meters.” American National Standard, ANSI
Standard S1.4-1993. New York: American National Standards Institute.
FHWA 2011. Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, U.S.
Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration,
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/regulations_and_guidance/analysis_and_aba
tement_guidance/guidancedoc.pdf, Revised January.
INDOT 2011. Indiana Department of Transportation Traffic Noise Policy, Office of
Environmental Services, Division of Production Management,
http://in.gov/indot/files/NDOT_Noise_Policy_June_2011.pdf, January.
Lau, Michael C., Cynthia S. Y. Lee, Judith L. Rochat, Eric R. Boeker, and Gregg O. Fleming
2004. FHWA Traffic Noise Model® User’s Guide (Version 2.5 Addendum), U.S. DOT,
FHWA, Washington, DC,
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/traffic_noise_model/tnm_v25/users_manual
/index.cfm, April.
Lee, Cynthia S. Y., and Gregg O. Fleming 1996. Measurement of Highway-Related Noise,
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/measurement/measure.cfm, FHWA-PD-96-
046, May.
12
FIGURES
13
Figure 1. Maplecrest Added Travel Lanes Project Noise Map. (Sheet 1 of 3)
14
Figure 1. Maplecrest Added Travel Lanes Project Noise Map. (Sheet 2 of 3)
15
Figure 1. Maplecrest Added Travel Lanes Project Noise Map. (Sheet 3 of 3)
16
TABLES
17
Table 1. Noise Abatement Criteria.
Activity
Category Leq(h) dBA
* Description of Activity Category
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 purpose.
B 67 (Exterior) Residential
C 67 (Exterior)
Active sport 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 52 (Interior)
Auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, places of
worship, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio
studios, recording studios, schools, and television studios
E 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
Table 2. Traffic Volume Estimates.
TDa
DHVb
Existing 2007 No-Build 2027 Build 2027
Maplecrest Rd NB 0.005 891 1448 1448
Maplecrest Rd SB 0.005 891 1448 1448
Lake Ave EB 0.02 668 983 983
Lake Ave EB 0.02 668 983 983
State Blvd E of Maplecrest EB 0.01 784 784 784
State Blvd E of Maplecrest WB 0.01 784 784 784
State Blvd W of Maplecrest EB 0.01 864 864 864
State Blvd W of Maplecrest EB 0.01 864 864 864 NA = Not Applicable.
a TD = Fraction of vehicles in the design hour that are commercial trucks. b DHV = number of vehicles in the design hour. Values were estimated to be 10 percent of AADTs on the Bonar design drawings.
18
Table 3. Traffic Volumes for TNM Modeling.
Road
Existing 2007 Build and No-Build 2027
Cars Med.
Trucks
Heavy
Trucks Cars
Med.
Trucks
Heavy
Trucks
Maplecrest Rd NB 887 4 0 1,441 7 0
Maplecrest Rd SB 887 4 0 1,441 7 0
Lake Ave EB 655 13 0 963 20 0
Lake Ave EB 655 13 0 963 20 0
State Blvd E of Maplecrest Rd EB 776 8 0 776 8 0
State Blvd E of Maplecrest Rd WB 776 8 0 776 8 0
State Blvd W of Maplecrest Rd EB 855 9 0 855 9 0
State Blvd W of Maplecrest Rd EB 855 9 0 855 9 0
Traffic volumes for the different vehicle types were calculated from the values in Table 2 as follows:
Cars = DHV x (1 - TD). Medium Trucks = DHV x TD
Table 4. Existing Noise Measurement Sites.
Site ID Location Description
M-1 Edge of field near Georgetown Place apartments 150 ft
west of Maplecrest Rd.
Representative of noise levels at apartment
complex.
M-2 Edge of field near Georgetown Place apartments 300 ft
west of Maplecrest Rd.
Representative of noise levels at apartment
complex.
M-3 Edge of driveway for Haley Elementary School 150 ft
west of Maplecrest Rd.
Representative of noise levels at houses on
Monarch Dr.
M-4 Edge of driveway for Haley Elementary School 300 ft
west of Maplecrest Rd.
Representative of noise levels at houses on
Monarch Dr.
M-5 6322 Centerton Dr. 95 ft east of Maplecrest Rd. First row residence.
Table 5. Measurements of Existing Noise Levels.
Site ID Date and Time
Noise
Readings Leq
(dBA)
Calibrator Readings
(dBA) Drift
Correctiona
Corrected
Leq (dBA) Initial Final
M-1 5/4/10 3:15 PM 51.1 114.1 114.1 -0.1 51.0
M-2 5/4/10 3:35 PM 47.7 114.1 114.2 -0.15 47.6
M-3 5/4/10 5:30 PM 57.1 114.1 114.1 -0.1 57.0
M-4 5/4/10 5:50 PM 49.3 114.1 114.1 -0.1 49.2
M-5 5/4/10 6:25 PM 59.2 114.1 114.1 -0.1 59.1
a Drift Correction = Reference Level (114.0) - 1/2 (Final + Initial), per Section 3.1.4 of FWHA Manual, Measurement of Highway-
Related Noise, May 1996.
19
Table 6. Model Validation Results.
Site ID Measured Noise Levels
(Leq(1hr), dBA)
Modeled Noise Levels Using
TNM (Leq(1hr), dBA)
Difference (Meas. - TNM)
(dBA)
M-1 51.0 50.9 0.1
M-2 47.6 45.4 2.2
M-3 57.0 56.3 0.7
M-4 49.2 48.4 0.8
M-5 59.1 57.6 1.5
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
1 Residence B 66.0 56.3 58.1 58.2 1.9
2 Residence B 66.0 56.3 58.4 58.4 2.1
3 Residence B 66.0 51.4 53.4 53.5 2.1
4 Residence B 66.0 49.9 51.8 52.0 2.1
5 Residence B 66.0 48.4 50.4 50.5 2.1
6 Residence B 66.0 47.7 49.6 49.7 2.0
7 Residence B 66.0 47.2 49.1 49.2 2.0
8 Residence B 66.0 46.6 48.5 48.6 2.0
9 Residence B 66.0 57.4 59.5 59.6 2.2
10 Residence B 66.0 57.1 59.2 59.3 2.2
11 Residence B 66.0 51.8 53.9 53.9 2.1
12 Residence B 66.0 49.5 51.5 51.5 2.0
13 Residence B 66.0 48.0 50.0 50.1 2.1
14 Residence B 66.0 47.1 49.1 49.2 2.1
15 Residence B 66.0 46.3 48.3 48.4 2.1
16 Residence B 66.0 45.4 47.3 47.4 2.0
17 Residence B 66.0 52.4 54.5 54.5 2.1
18 Residence B 66.0 49.9 51.9 51.9 2.0
19 Residence B 66.0 47.9 49.9 50.0 2.1
20 Residence B 66.0 46.7 48.7 48.8 2.1
21 Residence B 66.0 45.6 47.6 47.7 2.1
22 Residence B 66.0 45.2 47.1 47.2 2.0
23 Residence B 66.0 56.5 58.7 58.7 2.2
24 Residence B 66.0 57.6 59.7 59.8 2.2
25 Residence B 66.0 56.5 58.6 58.7 2.2
20
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
26 Residence B 66.0 52.9 55.0 55.0 2.1
27 Residence B 66.0 49.1 51.2 51.3 2.2
28 Residence B 66.0 48.0 50.1 50.2 2.2
29 Residence B 66.0 46.9 49.0 49.1 2.2
30 Residence B 66.0 45.7 47.8 47.9 2.2
31 Residence B 66.0 44.7 46.8 46.9 2.2
32 Residence B 66.0 52.2 54.3 54.3 2.1
33 Residence B 66.0 49.6 51.7 51.9 2.3
34 Residence B 66.0 48.0 50.1 50.2 2.2
35 Residence B 66.0 46.2 48.2 48.3 2.1
36 Residence B 66.0 45.0 47.0 47.2 2.2
37 Residence B 66.0 53.9 56.0 55.9 2.0
38 Residence B 66.0 55.7 57.8 57.8 2.1
39 Residence B 66.0 48.1 50.1 50.4 2.3
40 Residence B 66.0 46.1 48.1 48.4 2.3
41 Residence B 66.0 44.7 46.7 47.0 2.3
42 Residence B 66.0 45.6 47.7 48.0 2.4
43 Residence B 66.0 46.3 48.4 48.7 2.4
44 Residence B 66.0 55.4 57.5 57.6 2.2
45 Residence B 66.0 55.0 57.1 57.1 2.1
46 Residence B 66.0 48.0 50.0 50.4 2.4
47 Residence B 66.0 45.2 47.3 47.6 2.4
48 Residence B 66.0 52.8 54.9 54.9 2.1
49 Residence B 66.0 46.9 49.0 49.3 2.4
50 Residence B 66.0 44.9 47.0 47.3 2.4
51 Residence B 66.0 44.4 46.4 47.4 3.0
51a Residence B 66.0 49.4 51.5 51.3 1.9
51b Residence B 66.0 50.4 52.5 52.4 2.0
52 Residence B 66.0 44.8 46.9 48.0 3.2
52a Residence B 66.0 49.7 51.8 51.6 1.9
52b Residence B 66.0 50.7 52.8 52.8 2.1
53 Residence B 66.0 45.1 47.2 48.3 3.2
53a Residence B 66.0 49.8 51.9 51.8 2.0
53b Residence B 66.0 50.9 53.0 53.0 2.1
54 Residence B 66.0 45.6 47.7 48.9 3.3
54a Residence B 66.0 50.1 52.2 52.0 1.9
54b Residence B 66.0 51.3 53.4 53.4 2.1
21
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
55 Residence B 66.0 45.8 47.9 49.2 3.4
55a Residence B 66.0 50.2 52.3 52.1 1.9
55b Residence B 66.0 51.4 53.6 53.6 2.2
56 Residence B 66.0 46.7 48.8 49.9 3.2
56a Residence B 66.0 50.8 52.9 52.8 2.0
56b Residence B 66.0 52.1 54.2 54.3 2.2
57 Residence B 66.0 48.1 50.2 51.3 3.2
57a Residence B 66.0 51.9 54.0 54.0 2.1
57b Residence B 66.0 53.5 55.6 55.7 2.2
58 Residence B 66.0 49.9 52.0 52.6 2.7
58a Residence B 66.0 53.2 55.3 55.3 2.1
58b Residence B 66.0 54.9 57.0 57.0 2.1
59 Residence B 66.0 51.6 53.7 54.0 2.4
59a Residence B 66.0 54.5 56.6 56.7 2.2
59b Residence B 66.0 55.9 58.0 58.1 2.2
60 Residence B 66.0 54.0 56.1 55.7 1.7
60a Residence B 66.0 56.4 58.5 58.7 2.3
60b Residence B 66.0 57.3 59.4 59.5 2.2
61 Residence B 66.0 38.3 40.4 40.5 2.2
61a Residence B 66.0 39.6 41.7 41.8 2.2
61b Residence B 66.0 41.2 43.3 43.4 2.2
62 Residence B 66.0 38.3 40.4 40.5 2.2
62a Residence B 66.0 39.6 41.7 41.8 2.2
62b Residence B 66.0 41.3 43.4 43.5 2.2
63 Residence B 66.0 38.4 40.4 40.6 2.2
63a Residence B 66.0 39.6 41.7 41.8 2.2
63b Residence B 66.0 41.7 43.8 43.9 2.2
64 Residence B 66.0 38.5 40.6 40.8 2.3
64a Residence B 66.0 39.7 41.8 41.9 2.2
64b Residence B 66.0 42.4 44.5 44.6 2.2
65 Residence B 66.0 38.8 40.9 41.1 2.3
65a Residence B 66.0 40.0 42.1 42.2 2.2
65b Residence B 66.0 43.5 45.6 45.7 2.2
66 Residence B 66.0 51.1 53.6 54.2 3.1
66a Residence B 66.0 54.8 57.1 57.1 2.3
66b Residence B 66.0 56.5 58.6 58.6 2.1
67 Residence B 66.0 53.1 55.2 55.5 2.4
22
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
67a Residence B 66.0 56.2 58.3 58.3 2.1
67b Residence B 66.0 57.7 59.8 59.8 2.1
68 Residence B 66.0 54.9 57.0 56.9 2.0
68a Residence B 66.0 57.5 59.6 59.8 2.3
68b Residence B 66.0 58.8 60.9 60.9 2.1
69 Residence B 66.0 57.0 59.4 58.8 1.8
69a Residence B 66.0 59.5 61.6 61.7 2.2
69b Residence B 66.0 60.1 62.2 62.3 2.2
70 Residence B 66.0 59.0 61.1 60.8 1.8
70a Residence B 66.0 61.4 63.5 63.6 2.2
70b Residence B 66.0 61.5 63.6 63.6 2.1
71 Residence B 66.0 37.8 39.8 39.9 2.1
71a Residence B 66.0 39.5 41.5 41.5 2.0
71b Residence B 66.0 41.1 43.1 43.2 2.1
72 Residence B 66.0 37.8 39.9 40.0 2.2
72a Residence B 66.0 39.5 41.6 41.5 2.0
72b Residence B 66.0 41.4 43.4 43.5 2.1
73 Residence B 66.0 38.0 40.1 40.2 2.2
73a Residence B 66.0 39.5 41.6 41.6 2.1
73b Residence B 66.0 41.7 43.8 43.9 2.2
74 Residence B 66.0 38.2 40.3 40.6 2.4
74a Residence B 66.0 39.6 41.7 41.8 2.2
74b Residence B 66.0 42.4 44.4 44.6 2.2
75 Residence B 66.0 38.3 40.4 40.8 2.5
75a Residence B 66.0 39.8 41.9 42.0 2.2
75b Residence B 66.0 43.2 45.3 45.5 2.3
76 Residence B 66.0 50.3 52.7 53.3 3.0
76a Residence B 66.0 54.2 56.5 56.4 2.2
76b Residence B 66.0 55.7 57.8 57.9 2.2
77 Residence B 66.0 51.9 54.5 55.0 3.1
77a Residence B 66.0 55.5 57.8 57.8 2.3
77b Residence B 66.0 57.2 59.3 59.3 2.1
78 Residence B 66.0 53.4 55.5 55.9 2.5
78a Residence B 66.0 56.4 58.5 58.6 2.2
78b Residence B 66.0 57.9 60.0 60.0 2.1
79 Residence B 66.0 55.1 57.9 57.9 2.8
79a Residence B 66.0 58.1 60.2 60.5 2.4
23
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
79b Residence B 66.0 59.2 61.3 61.4 2.2
80 Residence B 66.0 57.6 59.7 59.6 2.0
80a Residence B 66.0 60.0 62.1 62.2 2.2
80b Residence B 66.0 60.4 62.5 62.5 2.1
81 Residence B 66.0 44.8 46.9 47.7 2.9
81a Residence B 66.0 49.6 51.6 51.8 2.2
81b Residence B 66.0 50.6 52.7 52.9 2.3
82 Residence B 66.0 45.2 47.3 48.1 2.9
82a Residence B 66.0 49.8 51.9 52.2 2.4
82b Residence B 66.0 50.9 52.9 53.2 2.3
83 Residence B 66.0 45.6 47.7 48.6 3.0
83a Residence B 66.0 50.1 52.2 52.5 2.4
83b Residence B 66.0 51.2 53.3 53.5 2.3
84 Residence B 66.0 46.0 48.0 49.0 3.0
84a Residence B 66.0 50.3 52.4 52.7 2.4
84b Residence B 66.0 51.5 53.5 53.7 2.2
85 Residence B 66.0 46.3 48.4 49.4 3.1
85a Residence B 66.0 50.5 52.6 52.8 2.3
85b Residence B 66.0 51.8 53.9 54.1 2.3
86 Residence B 66.0 47.7 49.8 50.9 3.2
86a Residence B 66.0 51.6 53.7 53.9 2.3
86b Residence B 66.0 53.1 55.2 55.3 2.2
87 Residence B 66.0 49.4 51.5 52.6 3.2
87a Residence B 66.0 52.9 55.0 55.2 2.3
87b Residence B 66.0 54.7 56.8 56.8 2.1
88 Residence B 66.0 50.5 52.6 53.5 3.0
88a Residence B 66.0 53.7 55.8 56.0 2.3
88b Residence B 66.0 55.5 57.6 57.6 2.1
89 Residence B 66.0 52.9 55.0 55.5 2.6
89a Residence B 66.0 55.7 57.8 58.0 2.3
89b Residence B 66.0 57.1 59.2 59.2 2.1
90 Residence B 66.0 55.8 57.9 58.0 2.2
90a Residence B 66.0 58.1 60.2 60.4 2.3
90b Residence B 66.0 59.0 61.1 61.1 2.1
91 Residence B 66.0 53.9 56.1 56.1 2.2
92 Residence B 66.0 47.5 49.6 50.0 2.5
93 Residence B 66.0 45.7 47.8 48.1 2.4
24
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
94 Residence B 66.0 44.7 46.8 47.1 2.4
95 Residence B 66.0 54.5 56.6 56.6 2.1
96 Residence B 66.0 48.0 50.1 50.5 2.5
97 Residence B 66.0 53.9 56.0 56.0 2.1
98 Residence B 66.0 47.8 49.9 50.3 2.5
99 Residence B 66.0 44.4 46.4 46.8 2.4
100 Residence B 66.0 53.7 55.8 55.8 2.1
101 Residence B 66.0 45.1 47.1 47.5 2.4
102 Residence B 66.0 48.1 50.2 50.7 2.6
103 Residence B 66.0 55.0 57.1 57.0 2.0
104 Residence B 66.0 48.2 50.3 50.9 2.7
105 Residence B 66.0 45.5 47.6 48.1 2.6
106 Residence B 66.0 54.4 56.5 56.5 2.1
107 Residence B 66.0 48.2 50.3 51.0 2.8
108 Residence B 66.0 46.0 48.1 48.7 2.7
109 Residence B 66.0 56.1 58.2 58.2 2.1
110 Residence B 66.0 48.2 50.3 51.2 3.0
111 Residence B 66.0 46.3 48.3 49.1 2.8
112 Residence B 66.0 54.4 56.5 56.6 2.2
113 Residence B 66.0 50.0 52.1 53.2 3.2
114 Residence B 66.0 46.0 48.0 48.9 2.9
115 Residence B 66.0 46.7 48.8 49.6 2.9
116 Residence B 66.0 48.0 50.1 51.1 3.1
117 Residence B 66.0 53.4 55.5 56.4 3.0
118 Residence B 66.0 55.3 57.4 57.9 2.6
119 Residence B 66.0 63.5 65.6 66.2 2.7
120 Residence B 66.0 45.8 47.9 48.7 2.9
121 Residence B 66.0 45.7 47.8 48.5 2.8
122 Residence B 66.0 47.2 49.3 50.2 3.0
123 Residence B 66.0 48.4 50.5 51.5 3.1
124 Residence B 66.0 50.7 52.8 53.9 3.2
125 Residence B 66.0 52.5 54.6 55.8 3.3
126 Residence B 66.0 58.9 61.0 61.2 2.3
127 Residence B 66.0 63.2 65.3 65.9 2.7
128 Residence B 66.0 46.6 48.7 49.5 2.9
129 Residence B 66.0 48.1 50.2 51.2 3.1
130 Residence B 66.0 52.3 54.4 55.6 3.3
25
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
131 Residence B 66.0 59.5 61.6 61.8 2.3
132 Residence B 66.0 54.5 56.6 56.9 2.4
133 Residence B 66.0 49.9 52.0 53.2 3.3
134 Residence B 66.0 48.1 50.2 51.5 3.4
135 Residence B 66.0 46.9 49.0 50.0 3.1
136 Residence B 66.0 45.9 48.0 48.8 2.9
137 Residence B 66.0 64.0 66.1 66.6 2.6
138 Residence B 66.0 59.0 61.1 61.3 2.3
139 Residence B 66.0 47.3 49.4 50.3 3.0
140 Residence B 66.0 48.5 50.6 51.7 3.2
141 Residence B 66.0 50.7 52.8 54.0 3.3
142 Residence B 66.0 54.8 56.9 57.8 3.0
143 Residence B 66.0 60.8 62.9 63.2 2.4
144 Residence B 66.0 61.2 63.3 63.5 2.3
145 Residence B 66.0 51.1 53.2 54.6 3.5
146 Residence B 66.0 49.3 51.4 52.8 3.5
147 Residence B 66.0 47.9 49.9 50.9 3.0
148 Residence B 66.0 55.9 58.0 58.7 2.8
149 Residence B 66.0 63.0 65.2 65.5 2.5
150 Residence B 66.0 51.6 53.7 55.2 3.6
151 Residence B 66.0 50.0 52.0 53.4 3.4
152 Residence B 66.0 48.2 50.3 51.3 3.1
153 Residence B 66.0 47.0 49.0 49.9 2.9
154 Residence B 66.0 48.7 50.7 51.8 3.1
155 Residence B 66.0 50.7 52.8 54.1 3.4
156 Residence B 66.0 63.2 65.3 65.6 2.4
157 Residence B 66.0 48.3 50.3 51.3 3.0
158 Residence B 66.0 49.8 51.8 53.0 3.2
159 Residence B 66.0 51.7 53.8 55.2 3.5
160 Residence B 66.0 55.6 57.7 59.0 3.4
161 Residence B 66.0 60.9 63.0 63.7 2.8
162 Residence B 66.0 63.7 65.8 66.4 2.7
163 Residence B 66.0 61.2 63.3 63.0 1.8
164 Residence B 66.0 54.8 56.9 57.8 3.0
165 Residence B 66.0 51.8 53.9 55.1 3.3
166 Residence B 66.0 50.3 52.4 53.4 3.1
167 Residence B 66.0 48.6 50.6 51.5 2.9
26
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
168 Residence B 66.0 47.7 49.7 50.6 2.9
169 Residence B 66.0 49.0 51.1 52.1 3.1
170 Residence B 66.0 50.7 52.8 54.0 3.3
171 Residence B 66.0 52.6 54.7 56.1 3.5
172 Residence B 66.0 56.1 58.2 59.2 3.1
173 Residence B 66.0 62.5 64.7 65.3 2.8
174 Residence B 66.0 63.5 65.6 65.3 1.8
175 Residence B 66.0 57.2 59.3 59.8 2.6
176 Residence B 66.0 52.9 55.0 56.2 3.3
177 Residence B 66.0 51.0 53.1 54.2 3.2
178 Residence B 66.0 48.9 50.9 51.8 2.9
179 Residence B 66.0 62.1 64.2 64.9 2.8
180 Residence B 66.0 48.4 50.4 51.4 3.0
181 Residence B 66.0 49.4 51.4 52.5 3.1
182 Residence B 66.0 51.2 53.3 54.6 3.4
183 Residence B 66.0 53.4 55.4 56.9 3.5
184 Residence B 66.0 57.2 59.3 60.8 3.6
185 Residence B 66.0 65.2 67.3 67.1 1.9
186 Residence B 66.0 65.8 67.9 68.0 2.2
187 Residence B 66.0 56.2 58.3 59.2 3.0
188 Residence B 66.0 53.0 55.1 56.3 3.3
189 Residence B 66.0 50.6 52.7 53.8 3.2
190 Residence B 66.0 49.0 51.0 51.8 2.8
191 Residence B 66.0 48.3 50.3 51.2 2.9
192 Residence B 66.0 49.3 51.3 52.5 3.2
193 Residence B 66.0 51.1 53.1 54.6 3.5
194 Residence B 66.0 53.3 55.4 57.1 3.8
195 Residence B 66.0 56.9 58.9 60.7 3.8
196 Residence B 66.0 62.2 64.4 65.8 3.6
197 Residence B 66.0 64.8 66.9 68.2 3.4
198 Residence B 66.0 56.3 58.2 59.4 3.1
199 Residence B 66.0 53.1 55.2 56.4 3.3
200 Residence B 66.0 51.1 53.2 54.3 3.2
201 Residence B 66.0 49.2 51.2 52.0 2.8
202 Residence B 66.0 48.6 50.4 51.4 2.8
203 Residence B 66.0 49.9 51.8 53.2 3.3
204 Residence B 66.0 51.6 53.6 55.3 3.7
27
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
205 Residence B 66.0 54.1 56.1 58.2 4.1
206 Residence B 66.0 57.5 59.6 61.3 3.8
207 Residence B 66.0 61.6 63.7 65.1 3.5
208 Residence B 66.0 67.2 69.3 70.0 2.8
209 Residence B 66.0 65.5 67.6 68.7 3.2
210 Residence B 66.0 56.7 58.8 60.2 3.5
211 Residence B 66.0 53.9 55.9 57.3 3.4
212 Residence B 66.0 51.5 53.6 54.9 3.4
213 Residence B 66.0 49.6 51.6 52.7 3.1
214 Residence B 66.0 63.7 65.8 67.1 3.4
215 Residence B 66.0 55.6 57.7 59.1 3.5
216 Residence B 66.0 52.2 54.2 55.8 3.6
217 Residence B 66.0 50.6 52.6 53.8 3.2
218 Residence B 66.0 48.7 50.6 51.6 2.9
219 J Wilbur Haley Elementary
School C 66.0
51.3 52.9 54.3 3.0
220 Residence B 66.0 63.8 65.9 67.3 3.5
221 Residence B 66.0 58.1 60.2 61.9 3.8
222 Residence B 66.0 54.0 56.0 57.7 3.7
223 Residence B 66.0 51.8 53.7 55.3 3.5
224 Residence B 66.0 49.7 51.6 52.8 3.1
225 Residence B 66.0 56.6 58.6 60.1 3.5
226 Residence B 66.0 55.4 57.5 58.9 3.5
227 Residence B 66.0 54.5 56.5 58.1 3.6
228 Residence B 66.0 53.8 55.8 57.4 3.6
229 Residence B 66.0 52.7 54.6 56.2 3.5
230 Residence B 66.0 52.1 54.0 55.6 3.5
231 Residence B 66.0 51.4 53.3 54.9 3.5
232 Residence B 66.0 51.0 52.9 54.4 3.4
233 Residence B 66.0 50.0 51.9 53.1 3.1
234 Residence B 66.0 49.6 51.4 52.5 2.9
235 Residence B 66.0 49.1 50.9 52.0 2.9
236 Residence B 66.0 48.6 50.4 51.4 2.8
237 Playground C 66.0 55.7 57.0 58.4 2.7
238 Retail F NA 62.4 64.5 65.3 2.9
239 Office E 71.0 64.9 67.0 68.1 3.2
240 Residence B 66.0 57.0 59.0 60.1 3.1
241 Residence B 66.0 57.0 59.0 60.0 3.0
28
Table 7. Noise Modeling Results.
Modeled
Location Description
Activity
Category
Impact
Criterion
Modeled Sound Levels (dBA)
Build -
Existing Existing
2009
No-
Build
2030
Build
2030
242 Residence B 66.0 57.0 59.0 60.0 3.0
243 Residence B 66.0 56.9 58.9 59.8 2.9
244 Residence B 66.0 51.8 53.7 55.2 3.4
245 Residence B 66.0 51.7 53.5 55.0 3.3
246 Residence B 66.0 51.9 53.7 55.1 3.2
247 Residence B 66.0 52.1 53.8 55.3 3.2
248 Residence B 66.0 50.1 51.9 53.1 3.0
249 Residence B 66.0 50.2 52.0 53.2 3.0
250 Residence B 66.0 50.2 51.9 53.2 3.0
251 Residence B 66.0 50.4 52.1 53.3 2.9
252 Restaurant E 71.0 60.1 62.0 63.3 3.2
253 Retail F NA 62.3 63.8 65.1 2.8
254 Retail F NA 61.0 62.8 63.1 2.1
255 Retail F NA 63.0 63.8 63.9 0.9
256 Retail F NA 62.5 63.4 63.6 1.1
257 Retail F NA 57.0 58.3 58.5 1.5
258 Retail F NA 60.6 61.9 62.2 1.6
259 Retail F NA 62.1 62.5 62.6 0.5
260 Residence B 66.0 52.3 53.7 54.0 1.7
261 Residence B 66.0 53.1 54.6 54.9 1.8
262 Residence B 66.0 53.8 55.2 55.6 1.8
263 Residence B 66.0 54.4 55.8 56.2 1.8
264 Residence B 66.0 55.0 56.5 56.8 1.8
265 Retail F NA 63.1 64.1 64.1 1.0
266 Retail F NA 62.1 62.3 62.3 0.2
267 Retail F NA 55.2 57.1 57.3 2.1
268 Retail F NA 59.1 60.8 60.8 1.7
Color Definitions:
Pink FHWA impact: Build noise level exceeds criterion or substantially exceeds Existing level.
Yellow Predicted noise level approaches or exceeds NAC.
A - 1
APPENDIX A: NOISE FUNDAMENTALS
A - 2
This Appendix describes basic acoustical principles and terminology as they are applied
to highway noise. Noise is often defined as undesirable sound. Some sounds (such as music or
birds singing) are not considered noise by most people, but other sounds from sources such as
trucks on a highway or planes passing overhead are typically considered noise. This report
focuses on the noises associated with highway traffic, though other noises may have been
included in some measured noise levels. Traffic noises arise due to vehicle engines and
exhausts, tire vibration, horns, brakes, etc. Each noise source produces its own combination of
sounds. In the following paragraphs, some basic principles of sound are discussed in the context
of highway noise analysis.
Loudness
Sound is created when a source vibrates in air, creating pressure pulses that move through
the air or other medium away from the source in waves. When these pressure waves reach a
receiver like the human ear, the pressure variations are interpreted as sounds. More forceful
vibrations mean higher pressures in the sound waves, and these are interpreted by the human ear
as louder or more intense sounds.
Sound pressures to which people may be exposed can vary greatly. For example, the
sound pressure of leaves rustling at night might be 200 micropascals ( Pa), and the sound
pressure of a jet plane passing overhead might be 6,000,000 Pa. To simplify handling such
large ranges of numbers, loudness is usually expressed as a Sound Pressure Level (SPL), which
is expressed in units called decibels (dB). The dB is defined based on a logarithmic scale
relative to a defined reference level. Mathematically, the SPL in dB is defined in Equation (1).
SPL (in dB) = 20 log10 (p/po) (1)
Where p= the sound pressure in Pa;
po= the reference sound pressure (normally 20 Pa, the typical hearing threshold of a
young adult).
In the example given above, leaves rustling at 200 Pa would give an SPL of about 20
dB and a jet plane at 6,000,000 Pa would have an SPL of about 110 dB. Decibel levels
associated with other common noises include a quiet bedroom at night (30 dB), normal speech
with someone 3 ft away (67 dB), and a gasoline-powered lawn mower from 3 ft away (90 dB).
Because of the way the decibel is defined mathematically and the way human ears
respond to sound intensities, comparing the “noisiness” of two sounds based on their dB values
A - 3
is not straightforward. For example, a truck passing on the highway might be generating a sound
pressure level of 90 dB at a listener. However, the addition of a second identical truck will not
produce 180 dB, nor will it double the apparent loudness to the listener. In fact, the second truck
would only produce an additional 3 dB (for a total SPL of 93 dB) and the average listener would
just barely be able to discern any difference in loudness. It would require 10 identical trucks to
double the apparent loudness for the listener, at which point the SPL would increase by 10 to a
value of 100 dB. Thus, for most highway applications, two rules of thumb are commonly used:
A change of less than 3 dB is not noticeable to most people, and
An increase of 10 dB will sound twice as loud and a decrease of 10 dB will sound
half as loud.
Frequency
In addition to loudness, sounds can also be described by how fast the pressure changes
over time. Increasing the vibration rate at the source (more beats per minute) will cause the air
pressure to change at a higher frequency. The human ear perceives the frequency of the sound
pressure wave as pitch. For example, different notes played on a piano have different
frequencies. Lower frequencies are perceived as being lower in pitch while higher frequencies
are perceived as being higher in pitch.
Frequency is measured in units of Hertz (Hz), which represent the number of times the
pressure changes per second. Normal human ears can detect frequencies ranging from
approximately 30 Hz to 16,000 Hz. However, the ear is best at hearing mid-range frequencies
(around 1000 Hz). For example, if a person hears two sounds that have the same pressure level
(same dB value), but one sound is at 200 Hz and the other is at 1000 Hz, the 1000 Hz sound will
seem to be much louder.
In recognition of this human hearing phenomenon, a frequency-weighting scheme called
A-weighting is used in representing highway sound levels. In the A-weighting scheme, sound
levels from various frequencies are weighted using the factors shown in Table A-1 to essentially
subtract out portions of the sounds (mostly in the lower frequencies) that human ears do not hear
well. Then the weighted sounds are added together to yield a single value (designated dBA) that
approximately simulates the overall loudness that the human ear would perceive. All noise
levels presented in this report are A-weighted values.
A - 4
Duration
In addition to the relatively quick pressure variations (hundreds or thousands per second)
that are measured as frequency, sound levels may also vary over longer time periods of minutes
or hours. Noise measurements made at regular time intervals at the same location will generally
vary widely, making it difficult to compare overall noise levels associated with a highway
project at two or more locations or traffic scenarios.
One option for describing a varying sound environment is to measure the sound exposure
level (SEL), which is the total sound energy of a single sound event and takes into account both
its intensity and duration. One way to understand SEL is to think of it as the sound level you
would experience if all of the sound energy of a sound event occurred in one second. This
normalization to a duration of one second allows the direct comparison of sounds of different
durations.
Another alternative is to look at average noise levels over a specified time period.
Several noise descriptors or metrics are used to describe time-averaged noise levels. The Leq is a
single number that describes the mean sound intensity level during a specified time period. The
time period can be one hour or several hours. The symbol Leq(h) is typically used to denote an
Leq for the noisiest hour of the day. Leq(day) and Leq(night) refer to averages over daylight and
nighttime hours, respectively. Ldn is essentially a weighted average of Leq(day) and Leq(night)
values where nighttime sounds are weighted more heavily than daylight sounds. Another
descriptor that is occasionally used is L10(h), which is the sound level exceeded 10 percent of the
time over a one-hour period. The noise measurements and modeling results presented in this
report are Leq(h) values.
Noise Measurement
Noise levels for highway projects are measured following FHWA guidance (Lee and
Fleming 1996). A Sound Level Meter (SLM) that meets or exceeds American National
Standards Institute (ANSI) S1.4-1993, TYPE II standards for accuracy (ANSI 1993) is required.
The SLM detects sounds using a microphone that converts the sound pressure levels into
electrical signals. The electrical signals are then amplified and recorded or displayed. Typically,
the SLM measures sounds of all frequencies within its operating range and add these together to
produce a single sound level measurement. Filtering circuitry is included to automatically give
A - 5
A-weighted results. In addition, some SLMs have integrating capabilities built in so that Leq
values can be obtained directly.
Calibration of the SLM is important to ensure that accurate measurements are obtained.
In addition to annual calibration in the lab, a calibrator is also used before and after field
measurements. The calibrator generates a known volume sound level at a single frequency
(typically either 94 or 114 dB at 1000 Hz). By placing the calibrator over the SLM microphone
and obtaining a reading, accuracy of the SLM can be checked. If SLM readings obtained using
the calibrator are off by less than 1 dB, the measurement readings can be corrected for
instrument drift. If the calibration readings are off by more than 1 dB, the measurement readings
must be discarded.
In the field, the SLM is situated with the microphone pointing up so that highway sounds
all impinge on the membrane at the end of the microphone at an incidence angle of 90 degrees
(grazing incidence). The microphone is situated atop a tripod or other support at a height of 5 ft
above the ground to simulate the height of the average listener’s ears. A windscreen is placed
over the microphone to eliminate wind noise from the measurements. Measurement periods of at
least 15 minutes are used to obtain a good estimate of the Leq(h).
While noise measurements are being made, traffic counts are obtained for nearby
roadways. Counts are made of different vehicle types in each travel direction. In situations
where traffic volumes are too large to count using a tally sheet, a video camera may be used to
record the traffic so it can be counted later.
A number of environmental factors can affect noise readings in the field, including
meteorological conditions (wind speed and direction, humidity, temperature, precipitation),
terrain, ground surface (paved, grass, etc.), distance to nearby roads, and the presence of
structures and buildings that may block or reflect traffic noise. All of these things should be
measured and/or described when field measurements are taken.
Noise Modeling
Noise modeling is the calculation of noise levels at one or more receptor locations using
complex mathematical equations representing the physics of sound propagation. Various
parameters must be known or estimated to use these equations. Such parameters include the
physical relationship of source to receptor (distance, height differences, intervening terrain, type
of ground surface, locations of barriers, etc.) and the noise emissions of the source.
A - 6
For highway noise modeling, the latest version of the Traffic Noise Model (TNM), TNM
2.5, is used. This model was developed by the FHWA for use in highway noise analyses and is
accepted by most state transportation authorities. As described in its User’s Manual (Anderson
et al. 1998; Lau et al. 2004), TNM calculates noise levels at user-specified receptor locations
using the volume, speed, and vehicle mix of traffic on nearby roadways. Noise emissions
profiles for various vehicle types are built into the model and are used with site-specific traffic
data to define the noise source term. TNM then calculates the propagation of noise from one or
more sources to user-specified receptors, taking into account terrain and ground surface
variations and the presence of existing buildings and natural noise barriers. TNM also contains
tools for designing noise barriers and evaluating their effectiveness.
Table A-1. A-Weighted Frequency Response Factors.
Center of Frequency Range (Hz) A-Weighted Response Factor (dB)
31.5 -39
63 -26
125 -16
250 -9
500 -3
1000 0
2000 +1
4000 +1
8000 -1
16000 -7
B - 1
APPENDIX B: FIELD DATA
Includes:
Field Data Sheets for Noise Measurements
Calibration Certification for Quest Model 2800 Sound Level Meter
Calibration Certification for Quest Model QC-10 Calibrator
Calibration Certification for TSI Model AVM430 Anemometer/Thermometer.
