Traffic Noise in Rural Areas: personal experiences of people affected “There was a time when we’d have a birthday picnic there for my daughter. It’s water, it’s dead still and you could hear the plop of the fish. Well you’ve got no chance of that now. It should be tranquillity at its best. But all that’s gone.” The Noise Association Traffic Noise in Rural Areas: personal experiences of people affected Report from Transport for Quality of Life to The Noise Association based on case study interviews and survey research funded by Esmee Fairbairn Foundation Note on authorship his report has been prepared by Ian Taylor, Carey Newson, Jillian Anable and TLynn Sloman of Transport for Quality of Life. Acknowledgements he original research for this project was made possible by a grant from the TEsmee Fairbairn Foundation. The project was prepared in conjunction with the Noise Association. The project team are particularly grateful to John Stewart for his input and support throughout. We would like to thank the individuals from the following organisations that acted as a main contact to facilitate the case studies: Friends of the Lake District, Campaign to Protect Rural England Blackburn Group, M40 Chilterns Environmental Group, East Ilsley Parish Council. We would also like to thank Brian Irving of Brydekirk, Dumfries and Galloway for his information on the local situation and for putting us in touch with others to interview in the area. We are grateful to all the interviewees for their time and information. We would also like to extend our thanks to the many other individuals who contacted us with detailed information about their experiences of rural traffic noise from around the UK, of which we have only been able to use a small proportion here. Cover photo: Kennet and Avon Canal and A34 Newbury bypass. 4 Traffic Noise in Rural Areas Transport for Quality of Life, 2008 Executive summary raffic increase in the UK - and the increased noise it brings with it - is now Tpredominantly in rural areas. Road noise has been identified through previous ‘tranquillity mapping’ exercises as one of the major causes of loss of tranquillity. This report for The Noise Association seeks to put this quantitative mapping into a human perspective. Through interviews in five case study locations we have tried to demonstrate how people in rural areas are actually experiencing road noise. It is a qualitative social study rather than a technical study and tries to see noise at the personal level of those experiencing it. In this respect it seeks to provide insights not available from the many numerical assessments of noise annoyance that relate noise models and habitation patterns to standardised annoyance graphs. The research deliberately looks at individuals who are experiencing traffic noise and should not therefore be taken as a quantitatively representative analysis of experience of road noise across the countryside as a whole. The results should, however, be considered as an indicator of the level and type of disruption that traffic noise can cause to people who live, work or take recreation in areas of the country with comparable circumstances to those studied. The case study locations for the research were: • M40 Chilterns area • Dumfries and Galloway minor roads near A74(M) and A75 • M65 Blackburn greenbelt • A34 at East Ilsley, North Wessex Downs area • A590 within Lake District National Park An additional postal survey was included with a magazine mail-out to members of Friends of the Lake District resident in Cumbria. Overall findings The research found levels of severe noise disturbance in some villages that do not align with general perceptions and expectations of rural situations: “It is a relief to go out for the day or in the afternoon to get away from it. I try and go out as much as possible now.” Although traffic noise levels are less further from roads, many reports emerged of significant disturbance in the open countryside, at some distance from the source of the noise. These experiences were associated with a sense of frustration at loss of enjoyment of otherwise attractive places, to the extent that some were no longer felt to be worth visiting: “You could go up there and it was quite quiet, but because the amount of traffic has increased so much it’s noisier, I just don’t do it any more, which is sad, ‘cos it’s a lovely fell.” Traffic Noise in Rural Areas Transport for Quality of Life, 2008 5 Both of these types of disturbance were found to fall largely outside existing procedures for assessment of road noise. Summary conclusions • Even in lightly populated rural areas disturbance from traffic noise has become problematic, in places severe • Traffic noise causes disturbance at distance from roads • Noise-affected scenic locations are deliberately avoided by some people, visited less by others, and are felt to be a degraded experience for a proportion of those that do visit • Current approaches to assessment of road noise nuisance are inadequate for country areas • Some villages heavily affected by traffic noise are nevertheless judged ineligible for amelioration measures • Rural traffic noise problems are not restricted to major roads • Increased traffic volume has led to more noise nuisance in country areas • Increased traffic speed has increased rural noise disturbance • Noise disturbance has risen as a result of an increase in particularly noisy types of traffic: HGVs and other large vehicles, motorcycles, ‘hot-rod’ cars, off-road vehicles Recommendations 1. Recognise the impacts of road noise on rural areas The solution lies in recognising the worth to society of lack of noise and how intrusion of noise fundamentally changes the experience of countryside amongst those living or seeking recreation there. Present noise policy is merely overseeing cumulative worsening of noise intrusion throughout the countryside. Noise policy should be more ambitious: it should aim to ‘clean up’ the countryside polluted by road noise, just as its rivers and estuaries have been successfully cleaned in recent decades. 2. Set targets for traffic noise reduction throughout the countryside Recognition is required that noise from roads in the countryside is already at unacceptable levels. These noise levels reduce the value of the countryside as a shared resource for the whole of society. Actions are needed to reverse the present trajectory towards ever fewer tranquil areas. Decision-makers should set in place policies to reduce rural traffic noise. 6 Traffic Noise in Rural Areas Transport for Quality of Life, 2008 3. Reduce traffic speeds in country areas The quickest way to achieve a large reduction in road noise in the countryside is to cut speed limits. 4. Restrictions on noisy vehicles The rapid growth of heavy goods vehicles and other commercial vehicles on rural roads demands consideration of where these vehicles are or are not appropriate. Enforceable controls are required for particularly noisy motorbikes and cars. 5. Recognise the deficiencies of road appraisal for rural areas Appraisal guidance for road schemes should make it clear that noise disturbance generally extends beyond 300m in country areas and should be explicitly included in the assessment process. 6. Re-assess the approach to noise mitigation measures The ‘Noise Severity Index’ should be amended so that it has a fairer application to small communities and extended to include disturbance that occurs at lower noise levels. The overall budget for physical noise mitigation measures should be increased. However, mitigation measures considered for trunk roads and motorways should not, as at present, be restricted to constructional solutions but should include minimal cost measures such as reducing speed limits to 50 mph from the current 70mph on dual carriageway roads close to settlements. Local authorities should rebalance their assessment of noise problems on roads under their control to lower the threshold for application of reduced speed limits and weight restrictions where noise is an issue. 7. Invest in ‘smart’ tourism Visiting and taking recreation in scenic country areas is liable to become a self- destructive activity if it is reliant on private vehicles. National Parks and other areas that attract high numbers of visitors and their cars require public transport access options (scheduled and demand-responsive) of sufficient quality to permit restrictions on private car movements, with the aim of concentrating a large proportion of car destinations at places that can act as public transport hubs near the boundary of the area in question. Traffic Noise in Rural Areas Transport for Quality of Life, 2008 7 Contents Page Introduction: traffic, noise and tranquil countryside 9 Context: official assessment procedures for road noise disturbance 11 Methodology 12 The case studies in summary 14 Issues arising from the case studies 18 Survey of Lake District residents 28 Discussion 33 Conclusions and Recommendations 37 List of appendices 41 References 42 Appendices: A) Case Study 1: M40 Chilterns area B) Case Study 2: Dumfries and Galloway minor roads near A74(M) and A75 C) Case Study 3: M65 Blackburn greenbelt D) Case Study 4: A34 at East Ilsley, North Wessex Downs area E) Case Study 5: A590 within Lake District National Park F) Survey of Friends of the Lake District membership G) How noise nuisance is assessed To go to the appendices, click on the coloured hot-links above or on the hot-links coloured green in the texts of the report. 8 Traffic Noise in Rural Areas Transport for Quality of Life, 2008 Introduction: traffic, noise and tranquil countryside he ‘tranquillity maps’ of The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), have Traised awareness that only a comparatively small – and decreasing - proportion of England’s countryside can now be regarded as ‘tranquil’ . These maps show that roads are one of the major causes of loss of tranquillity.