DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 18 Noise Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 18 Noise Guide April 2017 Noise Guide CHAPTER 18 NOISE GUIDE 18.0 INTRODUCTION The problem of noise generated by highway traffic involves physical, physiological, and psychological factors that cause varying reactions by the public. Highway traffic noise should be considered in the location and design of roadways. This chapter is intended to help designers identify issues related to highway traffic noise, understand the applicable federal and state regulations and guidelines, analyze traffic noise for specific projects, and select and implement noise mitigation measures. From a project's inception, noise mitigation measures may need to be considered as a part of the project. As early in the process as possible, consult the appropriate environmental documentation, if available, to determine if mitigation commitments were made. Contact the Region Environmental Staff for assistance with these determinations and the appropriate regulatory requirements. This chapter contains a summary of basic concepts and supplements existing published material. If more detail is needed concerning any of the following specific subjects, consult the references provided at the end of this chapter. If existing regulation or guidance is revised, or if additional regulation or guidance is published after the date this chapter was published, the new material takes precedence. 18.1 NOISE FUNDAMENTALS Noise is defined as unwanted or excessive sound. Sound (or noise) levels are measured in units of decibels (dB), which are measured on a logarithmic scale which condenses a large range of several magnitudes of sound pressure levels. For the purposes of highway traffic, an “A-scale” weighting is applied to noise levels because the human ear does not perceive all sound frequencies equally. These are referred to as A-weighted decibels (dBA). Because the sound intensity of highway traffic is not constant, a descriptor is needed to describe the source in a steady-state condition. The most common descriptor, which is used for CDOT projects, is the hourly equivalent sound level (Leq(h)). For highway traffic noise analyses, noise 18-1 Noise Guide April 2017 levels are expressed in terms of hourly equivalent A-weighted decibels and expressed in this manner: dBA Leq(h). Since noise levels in the decibel scale are logarithmic, they cannot be added arithmetically. For example, adding two 70-decibel sources results in a noise level of 73 decibels. Any doubling of a noise source, such as doubling the volume of traffic on a roadway or moving the existing traffic twice as close to a neighborhood, increases the overall decibel level 3 decibels. Studies have shown that a 3-decibel change in noise levels is barely detectable by the human ear, even though the overall sound energy has doubled. It normally takes a 5-decibel change in noise levels to be perceptible to most people. A 10-decibel change in noise levels is normally perceived as either a doubling or a halving of the perceived “loudness” of noise levels. Frequency changes, however, may be detectable by people even if the overall decibel levels are unchanged. For highway projects, the noise level of interest is the worst-hour noise equivalent level. This is the time of day when noise levels are highest. It is used for comparison with impact criteria to determine noise impacts. It is also when the highest number of vehicles is traveling at the highest possible speed. This is not necessarily the peak travel hour or rush hour, because there may be periods of congestion when traffic tends to slow, resulting in lower noise levels. For highways that tend to be congested at peak hour, the worst-noise hour is the period either just before or just after peak hour. 18.2 NOISE REGULATIONS AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS The regulations that govern highway traffic noise for Federal-aid projects are contained in Part 772 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR 772) (1). Regulation 23 CFR 772 describes methods that must be followed in the evaluation and mitigation of highway traffic noise in Federal-aid highway projects. The FHWA will not approve plans or specifications for any federally aided highway project unless the project includes noise abatement measures, if the measures have been deemed to be feasible and reasonable to adequately reduce noise impacts. When warranted, noise mitigation is to be considered as an integral component of the total project development process and incorporated as such. Projects that fall under 23 CFR 772 are classified as Type I, Type II or Type III. 18-2 April 2017 Noise Guide The project type will be determined in conjunction with a CDOT noise specialist. Type I definitions are in 23 CFR 772 and CDOT Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidelines (2). Projects that are or may be Type I include but are not limited to: Constructing a new road on a new location Adding a lane, auxiliary lane, or ramp Changing the elevation of the road or ramp Moving the road closer to receptors Adding a new or substantial alteration of a weigh station, rest stop, ride-share lot, or toll plaza Type II projects are defined as the construction of noise abatement on existing highways (“retrofit” projects) in absence of major highway construction. State funding has been unavailable for this program since 1999. A Type III project is any project that does not meet criteria for either a Type I or Type II project. Noise analyses are not required for these non-noise sensitive projects. Examples of Type III projects include resurfacing, bridge rehabilitation including bridge reconstruction with minor non-capacity widening, and most shoulder and maintenance projects. A noise analysis study is required for all Type I projects if noise sensitive properties (receptors) are present in the project study zone, which is defined as a 500-foot halo from the proposed edge of the traveled lane(s). A noise sensitive receptor is any location for which highway traffic noise may be detrimental to the outdoor enjoyment and functional use of the property. Noise sensitive receptors include residences, parks, hotels, schools, and noise-sensitive businesses such as recording studios. A complete list of receptor types is in Table 1 of 23 CFR 772 and Table 18-1 of this document. The purpose of a noise analysis is to identify receptors that are impacted by noise. Noise is determined at existing conditions and is projected for the project design year, which is usually 20 years in the future. As defined in the regulations, a traffic noise impact occurs when projected noise levels approach or exceed the Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) or when the noise from projected traffic levels substantially exceeds the existing noise levels. NACs are noise thresholds in units of dBA and vary by land use category. A substantial increase in noise level is defined as being 10 dBA or more. 18-3 Noise Guide April 2017 An impact due to a substantial increase in noise is rarely encountered in situations other than the construction of a new highway on a new location. Table 18-1 identifies the NAC levels for different land use categories. Table 18-1: CDOT Noise Abatement Criteria for Receptor Activity Descriptions Activity Activity Evaluation Activity Description Category Leq(h)2 Location Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important A 56 Exterior public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. B1 66 Exterior Residential Active sport areas, amphitheaters, auditoriums, campgrounds, cemeteries, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, parks, picnic areas, places of worship, playgrounds, public C1 66 Exterior meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, recreational areas, Section 4(f) sites, schools, television studios, trails, and trail crossings. Auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, places of worship, public meeting D 51 Interior rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, schools, and television studios. Hotels, motels, time-share resorts, vacation rental properties, offices, restaurants/bars, and other E1 71 Exterior developed lands, properties or activities not included in A-D or F. Agriculture, airports, bus yards, emergency services, industrial, logging, maintenance facilities, F NA NA manufacturing, mining, rail yards, retail facilities, ship yards, utilities (water resources, water treatment, electrical), and warehousing. Undeveloped lands that are not permitted for G NA NA development. 1 Includes undeveloped lands permitted for this activity category. 2 Hourly A-weighted sound level in dBA; reflects values that are 1 dBA less than 23 CFR 772 values 18-4 April 2017 Noise Guide The NAC values in Table 18-1 are based on speech communication interference. These noise levels are not legal standards or mitigation design goals, but are the levels for which mitigation must be considered. The levels shown reflect the CDOT approach criterion, which are 1 dBA less than FHWA levels. The most common land use activity category included in noise analyses is Category B, residences, which has a NAC of 66 dBA. Noise regulations require that any receptor determined to be impacted by noise, based on modeling, is entitled to mitigation consideration. Mitigation must be provided if it is found to be feasible and reasonable. The feasibility determination considers the physical constructability of the abatement measure. Factors include construction complexity, required area needed for foundations or equipment, and compatibility with utilities and drainage. Complex construction techniques require more time to install, more cost in labor and equipment, and may cost more to maintain. For a mitigation measure to be feasible, it must be able to be constructible to normal engineering standards to provide a perceivable noise reduction of at least 5 dBA at a minimum of one receptor. Walls cannot be more than 20 feet in height.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Noise Barriers
    INDOT’s Goal for Noise Reduction What is Noise? INDOT’s goal for substantial noise Noise is defined as unwanted sound and can come from man-made and natural 2,000 vehicles per hour sounds twice as loud (+10 dB(A)) reduction is to provide at least a 7 sources. Sound levels are measured in decibels (dB) and typically range from 40 as 200 vehicles per hour. dB(A) reduction for first-row receivers to 100 dB. in the year the barrier is constructed. However, conflicts with adjacent Because human hearing is limited in detecting very high and low frequencies, properties may make it impossible to “A-weighting” is commonly applied to sound levels to better characterize their achieve substantial noise reduction at effects on humans. A-weighted sound levels are expressed as dB(A). all impacted receptors. Therefore, the noise reduction design goal for Indiana is 7 dB(A) for a majority (greater than Common Outdoor Common Indoor Traffic at 65 MPH sounds twice as loud (+10 dB(A)) Noise Levels as traffic at 30 MPH. 50 percent) of the first-row receivers. Noise Levels Noise Levels Decibels, dB(A) 110 Rock Band Highway Traffic Noise Barriers: Jet Flyover at 1150ft (350m) 105 What Causes Traffic Noise? 100 Inside Subway Train (NY) The level of highway traffic noise depends on three factors: • Can reduce the loudness of traffic noise by as much Gas Lawn Mower at 3ft (1m) 95 • Volume of traffic as one-half Diesel Truck at 50ft (15m) 90 Food Blender at 3ft (1m) • Do not completely block all traffic noise 85 • Speed of traffic Noise Barriers 80 Garbage Disposal at 3ft (1m) • Can be effective regardless of the material used • Number of multi-axle vehicles 75 Shouting at 10ft (3m) • Must be tall and long with no openings Gas Lawn Mower at 100ft (30m) As any of these factors increase, noise levels increase.
    [Show full text]
  • Active Noise Systems for Reducing Outdoor Noise
    ACTIVE NOISE SYSTEMS FOR REDUCING OUTDOOR NOISE Biagini Massimiliano, Borchi Francesco, Carfagni Monica, Fibucchi Leonardo, and Lapini Alessandro Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale, Università di Firenze, via Santa Marta, 3 - I-50139 , Firenze, Italy email: [email protected] Argenti Fabrizio Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Informazione, Università di Firenze, via Santa Marta, 3 - I-50139 , Firenze, Italy An ANC system prototype designed for stationary noise control linked to traditional noise barriers was initially developed by authors in the past years. The encouraging results initially obtained have shown that ANC systems are feasible and should be further investigated to improve their performances. Nevertheless, FXLMS algorithm, considered in the first prototype architecture, is known to be affected by convergence problems that generally arise when a system fails to properly identify the noise to be cancelled; this process may (and often does) yield an instable system, where the control algorithm tries to catch-up its own sound, increasing the overall sound pressure level on the targets as in “avalanche” effect, potentially leading to damage fragile instrumentation. Hence, instability is unacceptable in practical applications and must be avoided or prevented. With this respect, in this manuscript some more robust alternative ANC algorithms have been investigated and experimentally verified. Keywords: active noise control, stability. 1. Introduction Active noise control (ANC) techniques are nowadays becoming more and more refined and reached a high level of maturity that allowed integration in modern acoustic devices, mainly targeted to hearing aids, headphones and propagation of noise in ducts [1, 2]. Only in recent years applications considering open field scenarios have been developed in practice (open spaces, ambient noise prop- agation [3, 4]), being such situations affected by weather phenomena, randomly moving sources and, circumstantially, time-varying emission spectrum.
    [Show full text]
  • Sound, Noise and Vibration an Explanation
    Sound, Noise and Vibration An explanation Rupert Thornely-Taylor P5 (1) HOL/10002/0002 Outline of Presentation • What sound is - sources, and ways in which is it transmitted from source to receiver. • What vibration is - sources, and ways in which is it transmitted from source to receiver. • Human perception of sound and vibration. • Measurement scales and indices. • Assessment approaches - relationship between noise and vibration and human response to them. • Ways in which noise and vibration and their effects can be reduced. • Government policy regarding assessment and decision making. • HS2's application of government policy. P5 (2) HOL/10002/0003 Scope of sound and vibration issues SURFACE OPERATION - RAILWAY SURFACE OPERATION - FIXED PLANT UNDERGROUND OPERATION SURFACE CONSTRUCTION TUNNEL CONSTRUCTION P5 (3) HOL/10002/0004 Basics – what sound is • Sound is air oscillation that is propagated by wave motion at frequencies between 20 cycles/per second (Hertz, abbreviated Hz) and 20,000 cycles/second (20kHz). • Sound decays with distance – it spreads out, is reduced (attenuated) by soft ground surfaces and by intervening obstacles. • Sound is measured in frequency – weighted decibels (dBA) approximating the response of the human ear​. • Noise is unwanted sound, which is difficult to measure due to the complexity of the human ear​. P5 (4) HOL/10002/0005 Basics – what vibration is • Vibration is oscillation of solids that can be propagated through wave motion. • Vibration in soil decays with distance and is also attenuated by energy absorption in the soil and by obstacles and discontinuities. • Vibration is mainly of interest in the frequency range 0.5Hz to 250Hz and can give rise to audible sound which is then measured in decibels.
    [Show full text]
  • Noise Assessment Activities
    Noise assessment activities Interesting stories in Europe ETC/ACM Technical Paper 2015/6 April 2016 Gabriela Sousa Santos, Núria Blanes, Peter de Smet, Cristina Guerreiro, Colin Nugent The European Topic Centre on Air Pollution and Climate Change Mitigation (ETC/ACM) is a consortium of European institutes under contract of the European Environment Agency RIVM Aether CHMI CSIC EMISIA INERIS NILU ÖKO-Institut ÖKO-Recherche PBL UAB UBA-V VITO 4Sfera Front page picture: Composite that includes: photo of a street in Berlin redesigned with markings on the asphalt (from SSU, 2014); view of a noise barrier in Alverna (The Netherlands)(from http://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/cutting-noise-with-quiet-asphalt), a page of the website http://rumeur.bruitparif.fr for informing the public about environmental noise in the region of Paris. Author affiliation: Gabriela Sousa Santos, Cristina Guerreiro, Norwegian Institute for Air Research, NILU, NO Núria Blanes, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, UAB, ES Peter de Smet, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, NL Colin Nugent, European Environment Agency, EEA, DK DISCLAIMER This ETC/ACM Technical Paper has not been subjected to European Environment Agency (EEA) member country review. It does not represent the formal views of the EEA. © ETC/ACM, 2016. ETC/ACM Technical Paper 2015/6 European Topic Centre on Air Pollution and Climate Change Mitigation PO Box 1 3720 BA Bilthoven The Netherlands Phone +31 30 2748562 Fax +31 30 2744433 Email [email protected] Website http://acm.eionet.europa.eu/ 2 ETC/ACM Technical Paper 2015/6 Contents 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 5 2 Noise Action Plans .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Overcoming Communication Barriers, Noise & Physical Barriers
    Overcoming Communication Barriers: Noise and Physical Barriers Noise is one of the most common barriers in communication. It is any persistent or random disturbance which reduces, obscures or confuses the clarity of a message. Physical barriers are closely related to noise as they can obstruct the communication transmission process. Types of noise There are many forms of noise barriers which can occur during the communication process. Some examples are: physical interruptions by people interruption by technology, e.g. ringing telephone, new email, instant message, new Tweets, social media updates external noise e.g. distracting activities going on nearby such as traffic noise outside the building or conversations taking place in or near the room distortions of sound leading to delivery of incomplete messages, e.g. not hearing full words or phrases internal noise – physiological (e.g. blocked up ears), or psychological (e.g. distracting thoughts) the inclusion (in written communication) of irrelevant material or unsystematic approach to the subject matter Noise creates distortions of the message and prevents it from being understood the way it was intended. Comprehension usually deteriorates when there is loud, intrusive noise which interferes with the communication assimilation process. The level of noise is very important. Generally, quiet background noise can easily be filtered out, whereas loud or intrusive noise cannot. Dealing with noise To overcome the noise barrier, the source of the noise must first be established. This may not be easy as the noise may be coming from a conversation in an adjacent room, or from traffic passing by the window. Once the source has been identified, steps can be taken to overcome it.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Selection and Approval of Noise Barrier Products Final Report
    Guidelines for Selection and Approval of Noise Barrier Products Final Report Prepared for: National Cooperative Highway Research Program Project 25-25, Task 40 Prepared by: ICF International 33 Hayden Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 July 2008 The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 25-25 Task 40, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board. Acknowledgement This study was conducted as part of National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 25-25, in cooperation with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the U.S. Department of Transportation. The report was prepared by David Ernst, Leiran Biton, Steven Reichenbacher, and Melissa Zgola of ICF International, and Cary Adkins of Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. The project was managed by Christopher Hedges, NCHRP Senior Program Officer. Disclaimer The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board or its sponsors. This report has not been reviewed or accepted by the Transportation Research Board's Executive Committee or the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by NCHRP, the Transportation Research Board or the National Research Council. i Abstract State departments of transportation (DOTs) have identified a need for guidance on noise barrier materials products. This study identified and reviewed literature relevant to noise barrier materials and products with respect to characteristics, testing, selection, and approval.
    [Show full text]
  • Noise Barrier Design: Danish and Some European Examples
    May 2010 Reprint Report: UCPRC-RP-2010-04 NNNoooiiissseee BBBaaarrrrrriiieeerrr DDDeeesssiiigggnnn::: DDDaaannniiissshhh aaannnddd SSSooommmeee EEEuuurrrooopppeeeaaannn EEExxxaaammmpppllleeesss Author: Hans Bendtsen, Danish Road Institute—Road Directorate This report is based on research performed by the Danish Road Institute-Road Directorate on behalf of the University of California Pavement Research Center for the California Department of Transportation, and is reprinted here in its original form. Work Conducted as Part of the “Supplementary Studies for Caltrans QPR Program” Contract PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY: California Department of Transportation The Danish Road Institute— (Caltrans) Road Directorate and University of California Division of Research and Innovation Pavement Research Center Danish Road Institute DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL PAGE Reprint Report UCPRC-RP-2010-04 Title: Noise Barrier Design: Danish and Some European Examples Author: Hans Bendtsen Prepared for: FHWA No.: Date Work Submitted: Date: Caltrans CA101735D July 2009 May 2010 Contract/Subcontract Nos.: Status: Version No: Caltrans Contract: 65A0293 Final 1 UC DRI-DK: Subcontract 08-001779-01 Abstract: Noise barriers are widely used as an effective means to abate highway traffic noise. With public interest in eco-friendly and aesthetic designs for noise barriers growing, highway agencies are exerting greater efforts to provide the public with “green” noise barriers that are functionally sound as well as adaptive to the surrounding environment. This report presents a summary of green noise barrier design practices experienced by the Danish Road Institute (DRI-DK) and other European countries for the last two decades. Some example noise barrier designs are described with recommendations for more effective and innovative ones. The report contains a recommendation to use varied approaches in green noise barrier designs that are adapted to urban and rural settings.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Noise Requirements
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Noise Requirements for MnDOT and other Type I Federal-aid Projects Satisfies FHWA requirements outlined in 23 CFR 772 Effective Date: July 10, 2017 Website address where additional information can be found or inquiries sent: http://www.dot.state.mn. u /environment/noise/index.html "To request this document in an alternative format, contact Janet Miller at 651-366-4720 or 1-800-657-3774 (Greater Minnesota); 711or1-800-627-3529 (Minnesota Relay). You may also send an e-mail to [email protected]. (Please request at least one week in advance). MnDOT Noise Requirements: Effective Date July 10, 2017 This document contains the Minnesota Department of Transportation Noise Requirements (hereafter referred to as 'REQUIREMENTS') which describes the implementation of the requirements set forth by the Federal Highway Administration Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772: Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise. These REQUIREMENTS also describe the implementation of the requirements set forth by Minnesota Statute 116.07 Subd.2a: Exemptions from standards, and Minnesota Rule 7030: Noise Pollution Control. These REQUIREMENTS were developed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and reviewed and approved with by the Federal Highway Administration. C,- 2.8-{7 Charles A. Zelle, Commissioner Date Minnesota Department of Transportation toJ;.11/11 Arlene Kocher, Divi lronAdmini ~ rator Date I Minnesota Division Federal Highway Administration MnDOT Noise Requirements: Effective
    [Show full text]
  • Local Noise Action Plans
    Practitioner Handbook for Local Noise Action Plans Recommendations from the SILENCE project SILENCE is an Integrated Project co-funded by the European Commission under the Sixth Framework Programme for R&D, Priority 6 Sustainable Development, Global Change and Ecosystems Guidance for readers Step 1: Getting started – responsibilities and competences • These pages give an overview on the steps of action planning and Objective To defi ne a leader with suffi cient capacities and competences to the noise abatement measures and are especially interesting for successfully setting up a local noise action plan. To involve all relevant stakeholders and make them contribute to the implementation of the plan clear competences with the leading department are needed. The END ... DECISION MAKERS and TRANSPORT PLANNERS. Content Requirements of the END and any other national or The current responsibilities for noise abatement within the local regional legislation regarding authorities will be considered and it will be assessed whether these noise abatement should be institutional settings are well fi tted for the complex task of noise considered from the very action planning. It might be advisable to attribute the leadership to beginning! another department or even to create a new organisation. The organisational settings for steering and carrying out the work to be done will be decided. The fi nancial situation will be clarifi ed. A work plan will be set up. If support from external experts is needed, it will be determined in this stage. To keep in mind For many departments, noise action planning will be an additional task. It is necessary to convince them of the benefi ts and the synergies with other policy fi elds and to include persons in the steering and working group that are willing and able to promote the issue within their departments.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Noise Wall Construction and Evaluation
    Green Noise Wall Construction and Evaluation Ala R. Abbas Robert Y. Liang Andrew Frankhouser John Cardina Karel L. Cubick for the Ohio Department of Transportation Office of Research and Development and the U. S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration State Job Number 134556 September 2011 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient‟s Catalog No. FHWA/OH-2011/17 4. Title and subtitle 5. Report Date Green Noise Wall Construction and Evaluation September 2011 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Robert Y. Liang, Andrew Frankhouser, John Cardina, Ala R. Abbas, and Karel L. Cubick 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 11. Contract or Grant No. The University of Akron 134556 402 Buchtel Common 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Akron, OH 44325-2102 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Ohio Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Columbus, OH 43223 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract This report details the research performed under Phase I of a research study titled “Green Noise Wall Construction and Evaluation” that looks into the feasibility of using green noise barriers as a noise mitigation option in Ohio. This phase included a thorough review of available green noise barriers to assess their advantages and disadvantages. In addition, it included a questionnaire that was sent out to more than three hundred national and international experts in traffic noise analysis and abatement to document their experience with this type of barriers. Based on the outcome of the literature review and responses to the questionnaire, the Deltalok product was determined to be the most likely product to succeed in Ohio.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix J Noise Impact Analysis
    D RAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT A MAZON F ACILITY A UGUST 2020 C YPRESS, C ALIFORNIA APPENDIX J NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS \\VCORP12\Projects\CCP1603.05A\Draft EIR\Appendices\Appendix J Cover.docx (08/26/20) A MAZON F ACILITY D RAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT C YPRESS, C ALIFORNIA A UGUST 2020 This page intentionally left blank \\VCORP12\Projects\CCP1603.05A\Draft EIR\Appendices\Appendix J Cover.docx (08/26/20) Katella Avenue Amazon Facility NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF CYPRESS PREPARED BY: Bill Lawson, PE, INCE [email protected] (949) 336-5979 Sama Shami [email protected] (714) 389-6609 JULY 7, 2020 13358-05 AMZ Noise Study Katella Avenue Amazon Facility Noise Impact Analysis 13358-05 AMZ Noise Study ii Katella Avenue Amazon Facility Noise Impact Analysis TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................... III APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... IV LIST OF EXHIBITS ............................................................................................................................... V LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................. V LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS ........................................................................................................... VI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • FHWA Noise Compatible Land Use Curriculum
    FHWA Noise Compatible Land Use Curriculum Lesson 1: Discussion of Roadway Noise and FHWA Guidelines Lesson 2: Essential Elements of Noise Compatible Land Use Planning Lesson 3: Noise Compatible Reduction Techniques – Physical Responses Lesson 4: Noise Compatible Reduction Techniques – Policy and Administrative Strategies ♦ PREPARED FOR THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION BY THE CENTER FOR TRANSPORTATION TRAINING AND RESEARCH TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY ♦ November 2006 Contents Curriculum Design, Overview, and Sources for Additional Information Lesson 1: Discussion of Roadway Noise and FHWA Guidelines Lesson 2: Essential Elements of Noise Compatible Land Use Planning Lesson 3: Noise Compatible Reduction Techniques – Physical Responses Lesson 4: Noise Compatible Reduction Techniques – Policies and Administrative Strategies 2 Curriculum Design The 4-part curriculum is structured to be taught in sessions of 90 minutes each. It is expected that the instructor will utilize this information as a foundation and will supplement the core information with specific local examples and additional detail. If one of the companion workshop videos is chosen to supplement the material in any lesson, adjust the length of discussion for the remaining material. It is envisioned that the curriculum could be part of a two-week module for a college level course or a one day seminar. Overview Appropriately accommodating highway noise is a critical component of project planning and implementation for engineers across the nation. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) prescribes a three-part approach for addressing roadway noise including: 1) source controls and quiet vehicles, 2) reduction measures within highway construction, and 3) developing land adjacent to highways in a way that is compatible with highway noise.
    [Show full text]