noise feasibility study proposed mixed-use/residential

Noise Feasibility Study

Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development

55 Kerr Street,

Cambridge, Ontario

Prepared for:

50 Shade Street Investments Inc. 425 Alness Street,

Toronto, Ontario M3J 2t8

Prepared by

Yvonne Lo, BASc, PEng

Reviewed by

Sheeba Paul, MEng, PEng

June 14, 2019

Project Number: 01800816

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

2 Site Description & Noise Sources................................................................................................... 2

3 Noise Level Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 3

3.1 Road Traffic ............................................................................................................................. 3

4 Assessment of Road Traffic Noise on the Proposed Building, Methods & Results ....................... 4

4.1 Road Traffic ............................................................................................................................. 4 4.2 Road Traffic Noise Predictions ............................................................................................... 5

5 Discussion & Recommendations .................................................................................................... 6

5.1 Outdoor Living Areas .............................................................................................................. 6 5.2 Indoor Living Areas & Ventilation Requirements .................................................................. 7 5.3 Building Façade Constructions ................................................................................................ 7 5.4 Warning Clauses ...................................................................................................................... 7

6 Stationary Noise Sources ................................................................................................................ 8

6.1 Criteria for Stationary Sources of Sound ................................................................................. 8 6.2 Assessment of Existing Stationary Noise Sources and their Impact on Proposed Sensitive Receptors ............................................................................................................................................ 9 6.3 Assessment of Proposed Stationary Noise Sources and their Impact on Adjacent Sensitive Receptors ............................................................................................................................................ 9 6.4 Impact of the Development on Itself ..................................................................................... 10

7 Summary of Recommendations .................................................................................................... 10

8 Implementation ............................................................................................................................. 12

Figure 1 – Key Plan Figure 2 – Site Plan Showing Prediction Locations Figure 3 – Existing Noise Source Locations Figure 4 – Predicted Daytime Sound Level Contours from Existing Stationary Noise Sources, dBA Figure 5 – Predicted Nighttime Sound Level Contours from Existing Stationary Noise Sources, dBA Figure 6 – Proposed Noise Source Locations Appendix A – Road Traffic Data Appendix B – Sample STAMSON 5.04 Output Appendix C – Consultant Statutory Declaration

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development Page 1 55 Kerr Street, Cambridge, Ontario June 14, 2019

1 Introduction

HGC Engineering was retained by 50 Shade Street Investments Inc. to conduct a noise feasibility

study for a mixed-use development to be located at 55 Kerr Street in the City of Cambridge,

Ontario. The proposed development is to include one 24-storey residential building and one

30-storey mixed-use building with one shared level of underground parking. This study has been

prepared as part of the approvals process as required by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo

(RMOW).

The primary noise sources impacting the site are road traffic on Beverly Street, Shade Street and

Kerr Street with lesser contributions from Main Street. Projected road traffic volume data was

obtained from the RMOW. The data was used to estimate future sound levels (LEQ) at the

façades of the proposed mixed-use/residential buildings. The estimated sound levels were

compared to the guidelines of the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP)

and the RMOW.

The results of this study indicate that with suitable noise control measures integrated into the

design of the buildings, it is feasible to achieve the indoor MECP guideline sound levels from

road traffic sources. The recommended noise control measures include appropriate wall and

window glazing assemblies, and an alternative means of ventilation to open windows. Warning

clauses will need to be included in the property, tenancy and rental agreements to warn

occupants of potentially audible transportation noise levels and of the nearby

commercial/institutional uses.

An analysis was also conducted to determine the potential impact of noise from rooftop units at

the adjacent commercial/institutional building to the southwest of the subject site on the

proposed buildings in addition to the impact of rooftop mechanical equipment at the proposed

buildings on existing residences. The analysis was based on a review of the latest site plan

prepared by Jonathan Weizel Architect, dated June 6, 2019, aerial photos and a site visit.

Reasonable estimates of the size and tonnage of the existing and proposed rooftop mechanical

units have been used based on experience with similar projects. Manufacturer’s sound power

data was used in the analysis to estimate sound levels associated with the existing commercial

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development Page 2 55 Kerr Street, Cambridge, Ontario June 14, 2019 building on the proposed dwelling units and sound levels associated with the proposed buildings

on existing dwelling units.

A 3D computer model of the area was created, using acoustic modelling software, in order to

predict the sound levels at the locations of the proposed buildings and the existing dwelling units.

The results indicate that the sound emissions from the existing commercial/institutional building

on proposed residential receptors as well as the sound emissions from the proposed building on

existing residential receptors will be below the MECP minimum exclusionary sound level limits.

Further, physical mitigation measures are not required for the stationary noise sources associated

with the existing and proposed buildings.

2 Site Description & Noise Sources

The site is situated on the west side of Shade Street, south of Kerr Street, specifically at 55 Kerr

Street, in the City of Cambridge, Ontario. Figure 1 shows a key plan of the subject site. A site

plan prepared by Jonathan Weizel Architect, dated June 6, 2019, is shown in Figure 2. Figure 2

also indicates the sound level prediction locations. The proposed development will consist of one

30-storey building and one 24-storey building each with podiums of 8-storeys, 6-storeys and 4-

storey and one shared level of underground parking.

HGC Engineering visited the site in January 2019 to investigate the site and the surrounding land

uses. The acoustical environment surrounding the site is urban. The subject site is currently

vacant. The surrounding lands consist mainly of residential and commercial/institutional uses.

The site visit concluded that the significant noise source impacting the study area are road traffic

noise on Shade Street, Kerr Street and Beverly Street with lesser contributions from Main Street.

There is an existing BB gas station to the north with garage repair uses facing east and Werner’s

Auto Sales & Services to the further east, but there are residential uses closer to these uses than

the subject site. Sounds from the commercial uses in the area were not discernible over road

traffic during the site visit, nevertheless, a noise warning clause is recommended to inform the

future occupants of the development of the proximity to existing and future commercial uses and

that sounds may be audible, as included in Section 5.4.

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development Page 3 55 Kerr Street, Cambridge, Ontario June 14, 2019 The sources of sound of greatest potential impact on the proposed buildings are the rooftop units

at the existing commercial/institution building located to the southwest of the proposed

development. The specific models of the mechanical equipment are not known. Reasonable

estimates were used in the analysis along with manufacturer’s sound level data contained in

HGC Engineering project files. Figure 3 shows the location of the existing rooftop mechanical

units, as used in the calculations.

3 Noise Level Criteria

3.1 Road Traffic

Guidelines for acceptable levels of road traffic noise impacting residential developments are

given in the MECP publication NPC-300, “Environmental Noise Guideline Stationary and

Transportation Sources – Approval and Planning”, release date October 21, 2013, and are listed

in Table I below. The values in Table I are energy equivalent (average) sound levels [LEQ] in

units of A-weighted decibels [dBA].

Table I: MECP Road Traffic Noise Criteria (dBA)

Area Daytime LEQ (16 hour)

Road Nighttime LEQ(8 hour)

Road

Outdoor Living Area 55 dBA --

Inside Living/Dining Room 45 dBA 45 dBA

Inside Bedroom 45 dBA 40 dBA

Daytime refers to the period between 07:00 and 23:00. Nighttime refers to the time period

between 23:00 and 07:00. The term “outdoor living area” (OLA) is used in reference to an

outdoor patio, a backyard, a terrace, or other area where passive recreation is expected to occur.

The MECP and Regional Municipality of Waterloo (RMOW) guidelines allow the daytime

sound levels in an Outdoor Living Area to be exceeded by up to 5 dBA, without mitigation, if

warning clauses are placed in the purchase and rental agreements to the property. Where OLA

sound levels exceed 60 dBA, physical mitigation is recommended to reduce the OLA sound level

to below 60 dBA and as close to 55 dBA as technically, economically and administratively

feasible. Note that not all OLA’s necessarily require protection, if there are other protected

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development Page 4 55 Kerr Street, Cambridge, Ontario June 14, 2019 outdoor areas accessible to the residents.

MECP and RMOW guidelines require central air conditioning or other ventilation system to be

installed prior to occupancy as an alternative means of ventilation to open windows for dwellings

where nighttime sound levels outside bedroom or living/dining room windows exceed 60 dBA or

daytime sound levels outside bedroom or living/dining room windows exceed 65 dBA. Provision

for air conditioning is required when nighttime sound levels at bedroom or living/dining room

windows are in the range of 51 to 60 dBA or daytime sound levels at bedroom or living/dining

rooms are in the range of 56 dBA to 65 dBA. Building components such as walls, windows and

doors must be designed to achieve indoor sound level criteria when the plane of window

nighttime sound level is greater than 60 dBA or the daytime sound level is greater than 65 dBA

due to road traffic noise.

Warning clauses to notify future residents of possible excesses are also required when nighttime

sound levels exceed 50 dBA at the plane of the bedroom or living/dining room window and

daytime sound levels exceed 55 dBA in the outdoor living area and at the plane of the bedroom

or living/dining room window due to road traffic.

4 Assessment of Road Traffic Noise on the Proposed

Building, Methods & Results

4.1 Road Traffic

Projected traffic data for Main Street, Kerr Street, Beverly Street, and Shade Street were

obtained from the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The data is in the form of Average Annual

Daily Traffic (AADT) values, and is provided in Appendix A. A forecasted AADT of 7,100

vehicles per day was applied to Main Street, along with commercial vehicle percentages of 1.5%

for medium trucks and 2.5% for heavy trucks were used. A forecasted AADT of 3,500 vehicles

per day was applied to Kerr Street, along with commercial vehicle percentages of 1.2% for

medium trucks and 1.1% for heavy trucks was used. A forecasted AADT of 9,400 vehicles per

day was applied to Beverly Street, along with commercial vehicle percentages of 1.2% for

medium trucks and 2.1% for heavy trucks were used. A forecasted AADT of 2,400 vehicles per

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development Page 5 55 Kerr Street, Cambridge, Ontario June 14, 2019 day was applied to Shade Street, along with commercial vehicle percentages of 2.1% for medium

trucks and 1.7% for heavy trucks were used.

Posted speed limits of 50 km/h were used for all the roadways in the analysis in conjunction with

a 90/10 day/night volume split. The traffic volumes used in the analysis are provided in Table II.

Table II: Forecasted Road Traffic Data

Road Name Cars Medium Trucks

Heavy Trucks

Total

Main Street Daytime 6 134 96 160 6 390 Nighttime 682 11 18 710 Total 6 816 107 178 7 100

Kerr Street Daytime 3 078 38 35 3 150 Nighttime 342 4 4 350 Total 3 420 42 39 3 500

Beverly Street

Daytime 8 181 102 178 8 460 Nighttime 909 11 20 940 Total 9 090 113 197 9 400

Shade Street Daytime 2 078 45 37 2 160 Nighttime 231 5 4 240 Total 2 309 50 41 2 400

4.2 Road Traffic Noise Predictions

To assess the levels of road traffic noise which will impact the subject site in the future, sound

level predictions were made using STAMSON version 5.04, a computer algorithm developed by

the MECP. Sample STAMSON output is included in Appendix B.

Predictions of the traffic sound levels were made at various façades with exposure to the road

traffic noise sources, as shown in Figure 2. The results of these predictions are summarized in

Table III. The acoustic recommendations will be subject to modifications if the building

envelopes or heights are changed significantly. The worst case prediction locations were chosen

at the top floors of the proposed buildings, to investigate ventilation and building façade

construction requirements and in the outdoor amenity areas to investigate acoustic barrier

requirements.


Table III: Predicted Future Sound Levels, [dBA]

Prediction Location

Building Description Daytime – at Façade/OLA

LEQ(16)

Nighttime – at Façade

LEQ(8)

A

A

West Façade 58 51

B North Façade 59 53

C East Façade 59 53

D South Façade 57 51

E

B

West Façade 56 50

F North Façade 55 <50

G East Façade 58 52

H South Façade 57 50

I A G/F Amenity Space <55 --

J B Rooftop Garden <55 --

K B G/F Amenity Space <55 --

5 Discussion & Recommendations

The following discussion outlines preliminary recommendations for building façade

constructions, ventilation requirements, and noise warning clauses to achieve the noise criteria

stated in Table I.

5.1 Outdoor Living Areas

An outdoor amenity area is indicated on the site plan south of Building A at ground level

(Prediction Location [I]). Building B also has outdoor amenity areas indicated on the 4th floor

(Prediction Location [J]) and on the south side of the ground floor (Prediction Location [K]). The

predicted sound level in these areas will be less than 55 dBA.

The dwelling units within the proposed development may have balconies and patios that are less

than 4 m in depth. These areas are not considered to be outdoor amenity areas under MECP

guidelines, and are therefore exempt from traffic noise assessment.

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development Page 7 55 Kerr Street, Cambridge, Ontario June 14, 2019 5.2 Indoor Living Areas & Ventilation Requirements

Provision for the Future Installation of Air Conditioning

The predicted sound levels at the façades of both towers will be between 56 and 65 dBA during

the daytime and between 51 and 60 dBA during the nighttime. The proposed buildings will

require an alternative means of ventilation to open windows. The use of central air conditioning

will exceed this requirement. The guidelines also recommend warning clauses for these dwelling

units.

In general, window or through-the-wall air conditioning units are not recommended because of

the noise they produce and because the units penetrate through the exterior wall which degrades

the overall sound insulating properties of the envelope. Acceptable units are those that are

housed in their own closet with an access door for maintenance. Any outdoor air conditioning

unit or rooftop mechanical unit should be located, installed, and selected with an appropriate

sound emission rating to comply with MECP guidelines NPC-300.

5.3 Building Façade Constructions

Since future road traffic sound levels at the plane of window for the façades of the proposed

buildings will be less than 65 dBA during the daytime and 60 dBA during the nighttime, any

exterior wall, and double glazed window construction meeting the minimum requirements of the

Ontario Building Code (OBC) will provide adequate sound insulation for all dwelling units in

this development.

5.4 Warning Clauses

MECP guidelines recommend that appropriate warning clauses be used in the Development

Agreements and in purchase, sale and lease agreements (typically by reference to the

Development Agreements), to inform future owners and occupants about noise concerns

from transportation sources in the area. The following clauses are recommended:

(a) Purchasers/tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in the development and within the building units, sound levels due to increasing road traffic may on occasion interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the City and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.


(b) This dwelling unit has been fitted with a forced air heating system and the ducting etc., was sized to accommodate central air conditioning. Installation of central air conditioning will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the Municipality’s and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks’ noise criteria. (Note: The location and installation of the outdoor air conditioning device should be done so as to minimize the noise impacts and comply with criteria of MECP publication NPC-300.)

(c) Purchasers/tenants are advised of the proximity of nearby commercial, institutional, retail and office facilities, the sound from which may at times be audible.

These sample clauses are provided by the MECP as examples and can be modified by the

Municipality as required.

6 Stationary Noise Sources

6.1 Criteria for Stationary Sources of Sound

Stationary sources of noise are defined as all sources that emit noise within a commercial or

industrial facility boundary. The existing rooftop mechanical equipment on the roof of the

adjacent commercial building located to the southwest of the subject site can be classified as

stationary sources of sound. It is understood that the proposed building will be serviced by roof

mounted make up air units which are also classified as stationary sources of sound.

The Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) provides guidelines for the

assessment of stationary noise sources. NPC-300 “Environment Noise Guideline Stationary and

Transportation sources – Approval and Planning” referenced with regard to traffic noise is also

intended for use in the planning of noise sensitive land uses adjacent to residential buildings.

The criteria is based on the background sound level at sensitive points of reception (which are

typically residences) in the quietest hour that the source can be in operation. Background sound

includes sound from road traffic and natural sounds, but excludes the sources under assessment.

For relatively quiet areas where background sound may fall to low levels during some hours,

NPC-300 stipulates various minimum limits. In class 1 areas, these limits are 50 dBA for

daytime periods (07:00 to 23:00) and 45 dBA at night (23:00 to 07:00).

Sources sound levels for typical rooftop mechanical units and assumed operational information

(outlined below) were used as input to a predictive computer model (Cadna-A version 2019

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development Page 9 55 Kerr Street, Cambridge, Ontario June 14, 2019 (32 bit) : build 167.4905), in order to estimate the sound levels from the existing

commercial/institutional building at the proposed development. The computer model is based on

the methods from ISO Standard 9613-2.2, “Acoustic – Attenuation of Sound During Propagation

Outdoors”, which accounts for reduction in sound level with distance due to geometrical

spreading, air absorption, ground attenuation and acoustical shielding by intervening structures.

Assumptions regarding the operating duty cycles of the equipment (100% during the daytime,

and 50% during the night-time) were included based on our experience with other projects.

6.2 Assessment of Existing Stationary Noise Sources and their

Impact on Proposed Sensitive Receptors

Sound power levels from the existing rooftop mechanical equipment were estimated based on

manufacturer’s data for mechanical equipment used in similar past projects with locations shown

in Figure 3. Rooftop units on the existing commercial/institutional building with sound power

ratings of 72 dBA were assumed in the analysis. The results of this assessment indicate a

maximum impact of 30 dBA during the daytime and 27 dBA during nighttime at the closest

sensitive receptors as shown in Figures 4 and 5. These predicted sound levels are less than the

MECP minimum exclusionary limit of 50 dBA during the daytime hours and 45 dBA during the

nighttime hours, based on a typical worst-case operating scenario.

It is concluded that sounds from the existing rooftop mechanical equipment associated with the

adjacent commercial/institutional building are anticipated to comply with the MECP guidelines

at the proposed buildings and physical mitigation is not required.

6.3 Assessment of Proposed Stationary Noise Sources and their

Impact on Adjacent Sensitive Receptors

Sound power levels from the proposed rooftop mechanical equipment were estimated based on

manufacturer’s data for mechanical equipment used in similar past projects. Two make-up air

units each were assumed at Buildings A and B. Roof mounted make-up air units at the proposed

buildings with sound power ratings of 86 dBA were assumed in the analysis with locations

shown in Figure 6. The results of this assessment indicate a maximum impact less than 30 dBA

during the daytime and less than 25 dBA during nighttime. These predicted sound levels are less

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development Page 10 55 Kerr Street, Cambridge, Ontario June 14, 2019 than the MECP minimum exclusionary limit of 50 dBA during the daytime hours and 45 dBA

during the nighttime hours, based on a typical worst-case operating scenario.

It is concluded that sounds from the proposed rooftop mechanical equipment associated with the

proposed building are anticipated to comply with the MECP guidelines at the existing sensitive

receptors and physical mitigation is not required.

6.4 Impact of the Development on Itself

Section 5.9.1 of the Ontario Building Code (OBC) specifies the minimum required sound

insulation characteristics for demising partitions, in terms of Sound Transmission Class (STC)

values. In order to maintain adequate acoustical privacy between separate suites in a multi-

tenant building, inter-suite walls should meet or exceed STC-50. Walls separating a suite from a

noisy space such as a refuse chute, or elevator shaft, should meet or exceed STC-55. In addition,

it is recommended that the floor/ceiling constructions separating suites from any amenity or

commercial spaces also meet or exceed STC-55. Tables 1 and 2 in Section SB-3 of the

Supplementary Guideline to the OBC provide a comprehensive list of constructions that will

meet the above requirements.

Tarion’s Builder Bulletin B19R requires the internal design of condominium projects to integrate

suitable acoustic features to insulate the suites from noise from each other and amenities in

accordance with the OBC, and limit the potential intrusions of mechanical and electrical services

of the buildings on its residents. If B19R certification is needed, an acoustical consultant is

required to review the mechanical and electrical drawings and details of demising constructions

and mechanical/electrical equipment, when available, to help ensure that the noise impact of the

development on itself is maintained within acceptable levels.

7 Summary of Recommendations

Sound levels due to road traffic will exceed MECP guidelines at the proposed mixed-use

buildings. The following recommendations are provided with regard to noise mitigation.

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed-Use/Residential Development Page 11 55 Kerr Street, Cambridge, Ontario June 14, 2019 For transportation noise sources

1. An alternative means of ventilation to open windows should be implemented with a warning

clause for the proposed mixed-use/residential buildings. The use of central air conditioning

will exceed this requirement.

2. Warning clauses should be used to inform future owners of the road traffic noise issues and

the presence of nearby commercial/institutional facilities.

Table IV: Summary of Noise Control Requirements and Noise Warning Clauses

Prediction Location

Building Description Ventilation

Requirements* Warning Clause

Upgraded Building Constructions +

A

A

North Façade

Forced Air A, B, C OBC

B East Façade C South Façade D West Façade E

B

North Façade F East Façade G South Façade H West Façade

Notes: -- no specific requirement * The location, installation and sound rating of the air conditioning condensers must be compliant with MECP Guideline NPC-300, as applicable. OBC – Ontario Building Code

For stationary noise sources

1. The predicted sound levels from proposed and existing rooftop mechanical equipment will be

well below the MECP minimum exclusionary limit. Physical mitigation will not be required

for the proposed and existing rooftop mechanical equipment.

2. Tarion Builder’s Bulletin B19R requires that the internal design of condominium projects

integrates suitable acoustic features to insulate the suites from noise from each other and

amenities in accordance with the OBC, and limit the potential intrusions of mechanical and

electrical services of the buildings on its residents. If B19R certification is needed, an

acoustical consultant is required to review the mechanical and electrical drawings and details

of demising constructions and mechanical/electrical equipment, when available, to help

ensure that the noise impact of the development on itself are maintained within acceptable


levels. Outdoor sound emissions should also be checked to ensure compliance with the City

of Waterloo noise by-law.

8 Implementation

To ensure that the noise control recommendations outlined above are properly included in the

building design and properly implemented in the final construction, it is recommended that:

1) Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for this development, the Municipality’s

building inspector or a Professional Engineer qualified to provide acoustical engineering

services in the Province of Ontario to certify that the noise control measures for the

buildings have been properly incorporated, installed and constructed.

2) When detailed rooftop equipment models and locations are known for the proposed

buildings, a detailed noise study should be conducted by a Professional Engineer

qualified to perform acoustical engineering services in the Province of Ontario to confirm

that sound emitted by the building mechanical systems will not exceed the MECP limits

at neighbouring residences and provide any additional recommendations which may be

required in that regard.

3) The mechanical roof top units should be similar to those assumed in the current analysis.

If alternate rooftop units are chosen or the location of the mechanical units are modified,

an acoustical engineer should verify that the source sound level does not exceed current

analysis, and the locations for the HVAC units conform to the assumptions made in this

report, and that acceptable sound levels will result at all offsite residential receptors.

Figure 1: Key Plan

ylo

Polygon

ylo

Callout

Subject Site

55 Kerr Street Cambridge ON

217/14

Site Plan

A-01

Nov. 2017

Residential Development

ON A THA NE I Z E L

A RCH I TECT

THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECKAND VERIFY ALL DIMENSONS ANDREPORT ALL ERRORS AND OMISSIONSTO THE ARCHITECTDO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGSTHIS DRAWING SHALL NOT BE USED FORCONSTRUCTION PURPOSES UNTIL SIGNED BYTHE ARCHITECT

RevisionsNo. Reference Date

Drawing Title

Project

Scale Date

Project Number Drawing Number

ON

TARIO

A S S OCIA TI O

N

OF

ARCHITECTS

JONATHAN R. WEIZELLICENCE

3237

36 JANESVILLE ROADThornhill, Ontario L4J 6Z9Telephone......................(905) 707-1996Facsimile.......................(905) 707-3474

1 Issued For Client Review Nov. 15, 20172345678

P r e l i m i n a r y

SK SOUTH Option 3

Project Name updated and Issued Jan. 24, 2018

Re-issued to consultants Mar. 21, 2019Issued to consultants Feb. 08, 2019

3D Views added April 15, 2019Loading spaces area revised May 01, 2019Issued For Client Review May 13, 2019Parking Revised & more stats Added May 28, 2019

9 Units' Area & type and Building-A (26th to29th) & Building-B (20th to 23) plans added

June 03, 20199 June 06, 2019More Info Added and Issued

274.6

6

274.6

327

4.65

274.6

5

274.6

127

4.71

274.6

627

4.96

275.2

4

275.5

9

275.8

827

6.30

276.5

7 276.71CB CB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK CONCRETE SIDEWALK

CB

MH

MH

MH

CBCB

P.I.N. 03818-0002(LT)

276.6

8

276.8

0

276.8

827

6.62

276.6

8

276.4

7

GV

WV

X

276.6

9

XXX276.65

276.4

4

276.73

CURB CUT

275.71

275.7

6

276.0

4

276.0

6

XXX

275.6

3

276.25

275.80

275.9

5

95.183

275.5

1

WV

275.2

3

274.6

9

WV

X275.08

274.8

527

5.00

SIGN F.H.

XXX

274.76

274.6

3

N56°04'25"W

274.7

8

275.66

XX

275.73

85.429

XXX

274.9

927

4.86

275.49

275.3

1

275.3

7

274.8

8

X

274.5

3

275.23274.87

CB

274.5

6

274.8

6

274.7

1

X

274.42

274.73

20.0

71

274.4

0274.3

7

274.3

2CONCRW

274.5

5

78.5

90

274.69

274.2

5

9.754

CURB CUT

274.6

4

275.0

0

02 274.7

6

PAR

T 3,

PLA

N 6

7R-1

953

274.2

0

N33

°16'

45"E

P.I.N

.

038

17-

0

025(

LT)

274.1

6

274.1

227

4.15

274.0

2

273.8

6

273.8

9

274.0

5

PAR

T 1

, PL

AN 5

8R -

132

63G

R A

V E

L

274.0

5 N23°10'10"E

273.6

8LOT

5

3

PAR

T 1,

P

LAN

6

7R

-

19

53

274.3

5

274.6

5

SIGN

XX

XX

275.8

4

276.8

627

6.72

275.9

3

WV

WV

276.5

7

276.5

8

F.H.

CL

XX

HP

276.7

9

CB

276.4

1

276.5

3

276.5

8

276.5

2 276.6

1

109.

579

275.7

3

XX

275.9

5

GW

275.8

8

EASEMENT, INST. # WS701039PART 1, PLAN 67R-2189

X

276.7

7276.7

8

276.5

7

WV

276.5

4

MH

276.5

0

SIGN

276.5

5

X

CB

276.2

6

276.3

8

XX

XX

276.6

1

276.4

5

276.1

3

276.2

4

276.3

6

WV

274.7

4

275.3

2

274.4

2

XX

XX

276.3

5

HP

276.0

4

275.4

827

5.51

274.5

8

LOT 2

275.5

0

276.3

027

6.33

276.1

1

275.6

8

XX

X

276.3

7

276.1

6

276.1

6

276.0

2

276.1

0

N30

°52'

20"E

275.9

4

276.0

2

276.0

8

X

276.0

3

275.8

4

XX

276.2

1

276.0

627

6.11

CB27

6.09

GUY

275.9

5

276.1

0

CB

HP

276.0

9

276.2

2

XX40.691

276.1

8

276.2

2

X

275.8

3

275.9

027

5.90

MH27

5.98

LOTS

WE

ST

OF

SH

ADE

STR

EET

A

ND

SO

UTH

OF

KER

R

STR

EET

274.2

3

274.1

2

273.7

527

3.85

82.393

274.7

4

274.6

2

274.0

2

LOT 60

TP O

F BA

NK

G R

A V

E L

273.9

6

273.7

7

N58°11'05"W

N31

°48'

40"E

274.0

827

4.07

273.7

9

274.0

1 N06°19'15"E

10.513

273.9

4

274.0

2

273.7

3

273.6

3

274.1

1

274.0

3

273.4

8

25.803

11.680

94.073

GUARD RAIL

P A V E M E N T

273.3

7

N55°50'50"W

274.1

1

P A V E M E N T

273.9

527

3.83 27

3.87

273.7

6

273.9

1

273.9

627

3.93

273.9

3

273.8

427

3.93

273.9

3

273.8

3

273.9

3

PLAN 67R-1359PART 2

273.8

2

274.4

5

273.8

1

PLAN D-7

CHAINLINK FENCE ON WALLX X X X275.9

827

4.52

275.7

5

275.4

6

4.49

275.0

3

P A V E M E N T

N59°09'50"W

275.9

127

3.97

1.012N

26°05'50"E

273.8

9

32.976

273.9

6

273.9

1

274.8

2

P.I.N. 03817- 0026(LT)

275.9

7

275.1

8

275.5

4

PLAN

615

LOT 3

PART

1

,

PLA

N

67R-

20

92

X

BLOCK A

LOT

59

273.6

6

RT

2,

PL

AN

58R

-

8

969

276.7

9

276.7

9276.8

0

276.8

527

6.69

276.8

0

276.9

5

276.8

5

276.7

8276.7

4

276.6

9276.6

8

276.6

9

276.7

2

276.6

927

6.64

276.6

327

6.61

276.6

427

6.48

276.6

2 276.6

927

6.75

276.7

7

276.9

0

276.74

276.6

4

276.6

1

276.4

9

276.45

276.4

9

276.5

0

276.4

927

6.53

276.5

8

276.6

6

276.9

0

276.7

6

276.78

276.5

7

276.4

9

276.5

5

276.4

827

6.49

276.3

0

276.4

027

6.49

276.69

276.8

5

276.7

7

276.6

1

277.5

927

6.75

GV

CB

CB

SIGN

TV PED

TV PED

McNAUGHTONSTREET

DAYLIGHT

N56°04'25"W

N31

°48'

40"E

78.5

90

N33

°16'

45"E

20.0

71

N23

°10

'10"

E

N26°05'50"E

1.012

N59°09'50"WN55°50'50"W

32.976

82.3

93

N58°11'05"W 10.513

N06°19'15"E

25.803

40.691

95.183

N30

°52

'20"

E10

9.5

79

McNAUGHTONSTREET

1,233.74 m2

DN

DN DN

TRIANGLEN

276.6

9

276.6

9

276.4

4

276.0

4

275.7

6

275.3

1

274.8

5

274.6

3

274.6

4

274.5

8

275.9

4

276.0

2

276.1

3

276.2

6

276.3

6

276.4

1

276.5

2

276.6

2

276.6

8

275.9

5

274.5

527

4.32

274.0

527

3.89

273.6

827

3.63

273.7

3

273.6

6

273.7

7

274.0

5

274.2

527

4.42

273.3

7

273.8

3273.9

1

273.7

6

K E R R S T R E E T

S H A D

E S T R

E E T

12,000

12,0

00 6 ,0006,000

6,000

10,000 1,000

3,000300

6,500300600

2,900 2,900 3,400 2,000 3,400 3,400 2,300 5,500

12,000

4,500

4,500

4,500

4,50

0

5,50

01,

800

5,50

012

,910

10,0

003,

870

300

5,500 7,600 2,500 3,0001,800

34,000 15,625 3,800

1,20

03,

400

2,00

03,

400

2,40

02,

000

2,40

01,

200

1,8007,600

1,800

19,600

2,00

025

,800

3,51

01,

800

6,00

05,

500

7,00

05,

500

7,80

03,

510

25,8

001,

400

12,000

21,3

004,

500

7,600

6,000

9,000

55,525

4,42

520

,600

30,7

7520

,245

20,6

002,

400

3,96

0

19,600

7,620

7,620

71,843

37,020

12,000

2,900 2,900 3,400 2,000 3,400 3,400 2,300

2,092

506

600

1,20

0

R 9,000

R 9,000

R 15,000

R 15,00

0

R 107,600

R 100,000

R 9,000

R 15,000R 9,000

R 9,00

0R

15,0

00

R 6,

000

R 5,500

R 15,000

R 6,000

R 6

,000

R 6,000R 6,000

R 9,000

R 9,00

0

R 15,000

R 9,000

R 9,000

R 9,000R

9,0

00

R 6,000

1,956.64 m2

44.7 m2

354.99 m2

113.9 m2

LINE OF PARKADE BELOW

PROPERTY LINE



Fire departmentconnection

Fire departmentconnection

FLOOD PLAIN

FLOOD PLAIN

PRE-FINISHEDMETAL RAILING1070mm MIN.

PAINTED LINES (TYP.)

HYDRANT TO BE RE-LOCATED

HYDRO POLE TOBE RE-LOCATED

GLAZED 3RD.FLOOR BRIDGE

DROPPED CURB

DROPPED CURB WITHTACTILE STRIPS

WASTE LOADING AREA

PRE-FINISHEDMETAL RAILING1070mm MIN.

PAINTEDLINES (TYP.)

DROPPED CURB WITH TACTILE STRIPS

DROPPED CURB WITHTACTILE STRIPS

DROPPED CURB WITH TACTILE STRIPSDROPPED CURB WITH TACTILE STRIPS

PAINTEDLINES (TYP.)

32 SPACES

5

4DN

BUILDING "B"24 STOREYS

BUILDING "A"30 STOREYS

DN

LOAD

ING

SPACE

FIRE ROUTE

FIRE ROUTE

LOA

DIN

G S

PAC

E

5

A

A

B

B

PRO

PO

SE

D C

UR

B C

UT

+274.87

+275.185

+276.40

SLO

PE

DO

WN

5 %

SLO

PE

7%

+276.25

+276.70

+276

.70

+276.60

+276.40

+276.60

+275.90

+276

.47

+276.62

+276.20+275.55

PROPOSED CURB CUT

13 5

FIRE RO

UTE

8 STOREYS

4 S

TOR

EYS

6 STOREYS

4 STOREYS

314 UNITS

278 UNITS

CAFE'S PATIO

OUTDOOR AMENITY SPACE

OUTDOOR AMENITY SPACE

PATIO

PATIOPATIO

PATIO

PATIO

PATIO

PATIO

PATI

O

ROOF GARDEN ON 4th FLOOR ROOF(722.36m2)

STAIR

ELEVATOR

1,233.74 m2

PATI

OPA

TIO

PATIO

PATIO

PATIO

PATIO

PATIOPATIOPATIO

+276.70

CAFE AT GROUNDFLOOR LEVEL

10 B

ICY

CL E

RAC

K10

BIC

YC

L E R

AC

K

HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT

+276.65

7.50%

15.00%

PATIO

AAA

AAA

34,000 15,350 7,650 3,000

INFORMATION ON THIS DRAWING WAS TAKEN FROM SURVEYPART OF LOTS 1 AND 2, WEST OF SHADE STREET AND SOUTH OF KERR STREETLOT 3 AND PART OF LOTS 1, 2 AND 4, NORTH OF KERR STREET AND WEST OF SHADE STREETLOTS 2, 3 AND BLOCK A AND PART OF LOT 4, WEST OF SHADE STREET AND SOUTH OF KERR STREETPLAN 615 AND LOT 60 AND PART OF LOT 59, PLAN D-7CITY OF CAMBRIDGE, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOOBY MacDONALD TAMBLYN LORD SURVEYINGDATED : May 07, 2018SCALE: 1:2501 Site plan

SHADE STREET

KERR STREET

Preliminary Site StatisticsSite area 10,099.4m2

Building “A” Ground Floor Area 1,233.74.04m2Building “B” Ground Floor Area 1,956.64m2

Building's Total Ground Floor Area 3,190.38m2Building's Coverage 31.59%Asphalt Area 2,478.54m2Landscape Area 4,430.48m2Landscape Coverage 43.87%

Parking Spaces required 592 SpacesParking Spaces providedOn grade 32 SpacesP-1 Level 203 SpacesP-2 Level 203 SpacesP-3 Level 206 SpacesTotal 644 Spaces

55 KERR STREETSK SOUTH

50 KERR STREETSK NORTH

Building “A” 314 UNITSBuilding “B” 278 UNITS Building's Total 592 UNITS

Bicycle Parking Recommendedas per City of Kitchener DraftZoning By-law April 2018 296 SPACEBicycle Parking Provided +/-284 SPACE

ylo

Text Box

Figure 2: Proposed Site Plan

ylo

Text Box

[H]

ylo

Oval

ylo

Callout

[K]

ylo

Text Box

[G]

ylo

Callout

[J]

ylo

Oval

ylo

Text Box

[F]

ylo

Callout

[I]

ylo

Oval

ylo

Text Box

[C]

ylo

Text Box

[D]

ylo

Text Box

[B]

ylo

Text Box

[A]

ylo

Text Box

[E]

17555850

17555850

17555900

17555900

17555950

17555950

17556000

17556000

17556050

17556050

17556100

1755610048

0090

0

4800

900

4800

950

4800

950

4801

000

4801

000

4801

050

4801

050

4801

100

4801

100

4801

150

4801

150

4801

200

4801

200

FRAME COORDINATES ARE UTM IN METRES

Figure 3 - Noise Source Locations

40

30

25

35

17555850

17555850

17555900

17555900

17555950

17555950

17556000

17556000

17556050

17556050

17556100

1755610048

0090

0

4800

900

4800

950

4800

950

4801

000

4801

000

4801

050

4801

050

4801

100

4801

100

4801

150

4801

150

4801

200

4801

200


Figure 4 – Predicted Daytime Sound Levels, dBA (Without Mitigation)

35

30

25

17555850

17555850

17555900

17555900

17555950

17555950

17556000

17556000

17556050

17556050

17556100

1755610048

0090

0

4800

900

4800

950

4800

950

4801

000

4801

000

4801

050

4801

050

4801

100

4801

100

4801

150

4801

150

4801

200

4801

200


Figure 5 – Predicted Nighttime Sound Levels, dBA (Without Mitigation)

19

17

19

19

17555850

17555850

17555900

17555900

17555950

17555950

17556000

17556000

17556050

17556050

17556100

1755610048

0090

0

4800

900

4800

950

4800

950

4801

000

4801

000

4801

050

4801

050

4801

100

4801

100

4801

150

4801

150

4801

200

4801

200


Figure 6 - Proposed Noise Source Locations

APPENDIX A

Road Traffic Information

Shade St @ Kerr St., Cambridge, ON

2028 AADT ForecastDecember 6, 2018

1. Development/Location

2. Current AADT (2018) 6,400

3. Forecast AADT (2028) 7,100

4. Commercial Vehicle Rates % Medium Trucks 1.5%

% Heavy Trucks 2.5%

5. Posted Speed Limit 50 km/h

6. Day/Night Splits

7. Expiry

8. Notes

Region of Waterloo AADT Forecast for Noise Studies

Regional Standard 90/10 Day/Night Split

Main Street (Wellington Street - Shade Street)

December 31st, 2020

This forecast is intended for the purpose of carrying out a

noise study only. The above AADTs represent the traffic

volumes on Main Street, between Wellington Street and

Shade Street, in Cambridge, ON. The City of Cambridge

should be contacted to confirm the validity of this forecast,

considering that Main Street Street falls within the City's

jurisdiction. This forecast remains valid up to the date

indicated above. The Region of Waterloo should be

contacted for an updated forecast if there are plans to use

this forecast beyond the above validity period.

DOCS #2882094 Prepared by: Michelle Pinto




2. Current AADT (2018) 3,100



% Heavy Trucks 1.1%


6. Day/Night Splits

7. Expiry

8. Notes



Kerr Street (Beverly Street - Shade Street)

December 31st, 2019



volumes on Kerr Street, between Beverly Street and Shade

Street, in Cambridge, ON. The City of Cambridge should be

contacted to confirm the validity of this forecast,

considering that Kerr Street falls within the City's









2. Current AADT (2018) 8,500



% Heavy Trucks 2.1%


6. Day/Night Splits

7. Expiry

8. Notes



Beverly Street (Kerr Street - Dundas Street N)

December 31st, 2019



volumes on Beverly Street, between Kerr Street and Dundas

Street N, in Cambridge, ON. The City of Cambridge should be

contacted to confirm the validity of this forecast, considering

that Beverly Street falls within the City's jurisdiction. This

forecast remains valid up to the date indicated above. The

Region of Waterloo should be contacted for an updated

forecast if there are plans to use this forecast beyond the

above validity period.





2. Current AADT (2018) 2,100



% Heavy Trucks 1.7%


6. Day/Night Splits

7. Expiry

8. Notes


Shade Street (Kerr Street - Main Street)


December 31st, 2019



volumes on Shade Street, between Kerr Street and Main

Street, in Cambridge, ON. The City of Cambridge should be

contacted to confirm the validity of this forecast,

considering that Shade Street falls within the City's






APPENDIX B

Sample STAMSON 5.04 Output

of 4 Prediction Location [A] STAMSON 5.0 NORMAL REPORT Date: 13-06-2019 09:24:38 MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY / NOISE ASSESSMENT Filename: a.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hours Description: Predicted future daytime and nighttime sound levels at the west façade of Building A, Prediction Location [A]. Road data, segment # 1: Main (day/night) ---------------------------------------- Car traffic volume : 6134/682 veh/TimePeriod * Medium truck volume : 96/11 veh/TimePeriod * Heavy truck volume : 160/18 veh/TimePeriod * Posted speed limit : 50 km/h Road gradient : 0 % Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete) * Refers to calculated road volumes based on the following input: 24 hr Traffic Volume (AADT or SADT): 7100 Percentage of Annual Growth : 0.00 Number of Years of Growth : 0.00 Medium Truck % of Total Volume : 1.50 Heavy Truck % of Total Volume : 2.50 Day (16 hrs) % of Total Volume : 90.00 Data for Segment # 1: Main (day/night) -------------------------------------- Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 0.00 deg Wood depth : 0 (No woods.) No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface) Receiver source distance : 230.00 / 230.00 m Receiver height : 1.50 / 1.50 m Topography : 3 (Elevated; no barrier) Elevation : 87.00 m Reference angle : 0.00 Road data, segment # 2: Kerr (day/night) ---------------------------------------- Car traffic volume : 3078/342 veh/TimePeriod * Medium truck volume : 38/4 veh/TimePeriod * Heavy truck volume : 35/4 veh/TimePeriod * Posted speed limit : 50 km/h Road gradient : 0 % Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete) * Refers to calculated road volumes based on the following input: 24 hr Traffic Volume (AADT or SADT): 3500 Percentage of Annual Growth : 0.00 Number of Years of Growth : 0.00 Medium Truck % of Total Volume : 1.20 Heavy Truck % of Total Volume : 1.10 Day (16 hrs) % of Total Volume : 90.00

of 4 Prediction Location [A] Data for Segment # 2: Kerr (day/night) -------------------------------------- Angle1 Angle2 : 0.00 deg 90.00 deg Wood depth : 0 (No woods.) No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface) Receiver source distance : 19.00 / 19.00 m Receiver height : 1.50 / 1.50 m Topography : 3 (Elevated; no barrier) Elevation : 87.00 m Reference angle : 0.00 Road data, segment # 3: Beverly (day/night) ------------------------------------------- Car traffic volume : 8181/909 veh/TimePeriod * Medium truck volume : 102/11 veh/TimePeriod * Heavy truck volume : 178/20 veh/TimePeriod * Posted speed limit : 50 km/h Road gradient : 0 % Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete) * Refers to calculated road volumes based on the following input: 24 hr Traffic Volume (AADT or SADT): 9400 Percentage of Annual Growth : 0.00 Number of Years of Growth : 0.00 Medium Truck % of Total Volume : 1.20 Heavy Truck % of Total Volume : 2.10 Day (16 hrs) % of Total Volume : 90.00 Data for Segment # 3: Beverly (day/night) ----------------------------------------- Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 90.00 deg Wood depth : 0 (No woods.) No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface) Receiver source distance : 100.00 / 100.00 m Receiver height : 1.50 / 1.50 m Topography : 3 (Elevated; no barrier) Elevation : 87.00 m Reference angle : 0.00 Results segment # 1: Main (day) ------------------------------- Source height = 1.26 m ROAD (0.00 + 47.64 + 0.00) = 47.64 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

of 4 Prediction Location [A] -90 0 0.00 62.50 0.00 -11.86 -3.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.64 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 47.64 dBA Results segment # 2: Kerr (day) ------------------------------- Source height = 1.03 m ROAD (0.00 + 53.68 + 0.00) = 53.68 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 90 0.00 57.71 0.00 -1.03 -3.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 53.68 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 53.68 dBA Results segment # 3: Beverly (day) ---------------------------------- Source height = 1.20 m ROAD (0.00 + 55.01 + 0.00) = 55.01 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 90 0.00 63.24 0.00 -8.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.01 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 55.01 dBA Total Leq All Segments: 57.84 dBA Results segment # 1: Main (night) --------------------------------- Source height = 1.26 m ROAD (0.00 + 41.15 + 0.00) = 41.15 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

of 4 Prediction Location [A] -90 0 0.00 56.02 0.00 -11.86 -3.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.15 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 41.15 dBA Results segment # 2: Kerr (night) --------------------------------- Source height = 1.03 m ROAD (0.00 + 47.17 + 0.00) = 47.17 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 90 0.00 51.21 0.00 -1.03 -3.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.17 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 47.17 dBA Results segment # 3: Beverly (night) ------------------------------------ Source height = 1.21 m ROAD (0.00 + 48.49 + 0.00) = 48.49 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 90 0.00 56.73 0.00 -8.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.49 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 48.49 dBA Total Leq All Segments: 51.33 dBA TOTAL Leq FROM ALL SOURCES (DAY): 57.84 (NIGHT): 51.33

APPENDIX C

Consultant Statutory Declaration

noise feasibility study proposed mixed-use/residential

Documents