ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING Attachments 27 April 2010
City of Belmont
Attachments
Ordinary Council Meeting
Held
27 April 2010
A1
ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING Attachments 27 April 2010
Ordinary Council 27/04/10
Item 12.1 refers
Attachment 1
Scheme Amendment 59 Report
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
A29
A30
A31
A32
A33
A34
A35
A36
A37
A38
A39
A40
A41
ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING Attachments 27 April 2010
Ordinary Council 27/04/10
Item 12.1 refers
Attachment 2
Scheme Amendment 59 Submission Table
A42
PLA
NN
ING
AN
D D
EVEL
OPM
ENT
AC
T 20
05
SCH
EDU
LE O
F SU
BMIS
SIO
NS
TO
CIT
Y O
F BE
LMO
NT
TOW
N P
LAN
NIN
G S
CH
EME
NO
. 14
AMEN
DM
ENT
NO
. 59
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
1.
MJ
Har
ding
Lo
t 3 T
eleg
raph
R
oad,
Esp
eran
ce
4/27
Har
dey
Roa
d,
Asc
ot
Obj
ectio
n 1.
A
n ex
istin
g no
n-co
nfor
min
g us
e is
alre
ady
allo
wed
, in
esse
nce
the
prop
osal
will
al
low
for a
noth
er n
on-
conf
orm
ing
use.
2.
Mot
or v
ehic
le w
ash
is
unac
cept
able
bas
ed o
n:
• C
urre
nt n
oise
is a
lread
y un
acce
ptab
le. A
dded
no
ise
from
car
was
h,
vehi
cles
and
occ
upan
ts
(inc.
radi
os e
tc).
• C
hem
ical
was
h sp
ray
• N
oise
from
del
iver
ies
(load
ing
/ unl
oadi
ng)
• P
ropo
sed
hour
s of
op
erat
ion
• Li
kelih
ood
of a
dditi
onal
lig
htin
g / l
ight
impa
ct
• V
isua
l im
pact
of 3
-5m
hi
gh b
uild
ings
3.
Not
es th
at p
lann
ing
repo
rt id
entif
ies
a lik
ely
impa
ct o
n ad
join
ing
resi
dent
ial
prop
ertie
s.
Par
tially
uph
old.
M
atte
rs r
aise
d sh
ould
be
ad
dres
sed
at
the
deve
lopm
ent
stag
e bu
t th
e is
sues
ca
n be
re
info
rced
by
be
ing
spec
ified
as
is
sues
fo
r co
nsid
erat
ion
on l
odge
men
t of
an
y pr
opos
al.
1.
The
fact
that
ther
e is
an
exis
ting
non-
conf
orm
ing
use
is n
ot a
reas
on to
reje
ct th
e Am
endm
ent.
2.
N
oted
. •
Noi
se (c
urre
nt a
nd
futu
re) i
s re
quire
d to
co
mpl
y w
ith
Env
ironm
enta
l P
rote
ctio
n (N
oise
) R
egul
atio
ns 1
997.
The
no
ise
impa
ct fr
om
addi
tiona
l dev
elop
men
t on
site
will
be
dete
rmin
ed a
t de
velo
pmen
t app
licat
ion
stag
e.
• A
pplic
ant h
as a
dvis
ed
that
the
inte
nded
was
h un
it ha
s au
tom
ated
do
ors
at e
ntry
/ ex
it w
hich
mus
t be
clos
ed fo
r
A43
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
4.
Que
stio
ns in
vest
men
t in
a ca
r w
ash
tailo
red
for a
n ex
tra 1
4 ve
hicl
es p
er d
ay –
it is
like
ly
that
this
will
be
grea
ter,
henc
e th
e in
vest
men
t by
BP.
5.
Ant
i-soc
ial b
ehav
iour
, rad
ios
and
sque
alin
g ty
res
may
be
mor
e no
isy
that
the
was
h un
it its
elf.
6.
3
min
ute
car m
ovem
ent i
s un
acce
ptab
le.
7.
10
:00p
m is
too
late
for
cess
atio
n of
ope
ratio
n of
car
w
ash
havi
ng re
gard
to
prox
imity
of n
eigh
bour
s
8.
Car
was
hes
have
bee
n pr
oven
sci
entif
ical
ly to
co
ntrib
ute
to b
reed
ing
bact
eria
that
can
lead
to
Legi
onna
ires
dise
ase
due
to
recy
cled
wat
er, w
arm
sto
rage
ta
nks
and
wat
er v
apou
r. 7
deat
hs in
Mel
bour
ne.
unit
to o
pera
te. T
o be
co
nsid
ered
furth
er a
t DA
stag
e.
• A
s pe
r dot
poi
nt 1
. •
Hou
rs o
f ope
ratio
n of
C
onve
nien
ce S
tore
is
curr
ently
24
hr a
day
/ 7
days
a w
eek.
No
chan
ge
prop
osed
. Ve
hicl
e W
ash
inte
nded
to b
e lim
ited
to
com
ply
with
EP
(Noi
se)
Reg
ulat
ions
. Can
be
furth
er c
onsi
dere
d at
DA
stag
e.
• To
be
cons
ider
ed a
t DA
st
age.
•
To b
e co
nsid
ered
at D
A
stag
e.
3.
N
oted
. Maj
ority
of i
mpa
cts
on a
djoi
ning
land
use
s w
ill be
dev
elop
men
t pro
posa
l sp
ecifi
c an
d co
nsid
ered
at
DA
sta
ge.
4.
N
oted
. Per
sona
l opi
nion
.
5.
Valid
poi
nt b
ut n
ot a
land
us
e sp
ecifi
c m
atte
r. C
ounc
il to
pro
vide
max
imum
en
cour
agem
ent t
o bu
sine
ss
oper
ator
to a
ppro
pria
tely
m
anag
e.
6.
N
oted
. Per
sona
l opi
nion
.
A44
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
7.
To b
e fu
rther
con
side
red
at
DA
sta
ge.
8.
Pr
opos
ed c
ar w
ash
inte
nded
to
be
cold
wat
er w
ash
only
. N
o ca
ses
of L
egio
nnai
re’s
di
seas
e in
WA
asso
ciat
ed
with
car
was
hes.
Typ
ical
ly
asso
ciat
ed w
ith a
ir-co
nditi
onin
g un
its, s
oil /
po
tting
mix
es a
nd m
ore
hum
id c
limat
es. T
o be
m
anag
ed b
y bu
sine
ss
oper
ator
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith
heal
th re
gula
tions
.
2.
RN
Kem
p 3/
27 H
arde
y R
oad,
Asc
ot
3/27
Har
dey
Roa
d,
Asc
ot
Obj
ectio
n
1.
Con
cern
ed a
bout
and
st
rong
ly d
isag
ree
with
the
prop
osed
car
was
h.
2.
A
n ex
istin
g au
tom
atic
car
w
ash
is lo
cate
d ac
ross
the
road
.
3.
Cur
rent
ly a
n ex
istin
g qu
iet
neig
hbou
rhoo
d an
d se
e no
ne
ed fo
r dis
turb
ance
like
ly to
be
gen
erat
ed fr
om th
e ca
r w
ash,
par
ticul
arly
: •
Noi
se
• P
ollu
tant
s / g
rey
wat
er
mis
t
Par
tially
uph
old.
M
atte
rs r
aise
d sh
ould
be
ad
dres
sed
at
the
deve
lopm
ent
stag
e bu
t th
e is
sues
ca
n be
re
info
rced
by
be
ing
spec
ified
as
is
sues
fo
r co
nsid
erat
ion
on l
odge
men
t of
an
y pr
opos
al.
1.
N
oted
.
2.
The
car
was
h ac
ross
th
e ro
ad i
s a
self-
oper
ated
car
w
ash.
Th
e pr
opos
ed
car
was
h is
au
tom
atic
. C
ompe
ting
busi
ness
is n
ot a
pl
anni
ng c
onsi
dera
tion.
3.
Not
ed.
• N
oise
(c
urre
nt
and
futu
re)
is
requ
ired
to
A45
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
com
ply
with
E
nviro
nmen
tal
Pro
tect
ion
(Noi
se)
Reg
ulat
ions
19
97.
The
nois
e im
pact
fro
m
addi
tiona
l de
velo
pmen
t on
site
will
be
give
n du
e co
nsid
erat
ion
at
deve
lopm
ent
appl
icat
ion
stag
e.
• A
pplic
ant
has
advi
sed
that
the
int
ende
d w
ash
unit
has
auto
mat
ed
door
s at
en
try
/ ex
it w
hich
mus
t be
clos
ed fo
r un
it to
op
erat
e.
To
be
cons
ider
ed fu
rther
at D
A
stag
e.
3.
C
O &
J D
anks
4/
27 H
arde
y R
oad,
Asc
ot
4/27
Har
dey
Roa
d,
Asc
ot
Obj
ect
1.
Dis
appo
inte
d th
at th
e C
ounc
il fe
els
the
need
to a
men
d TP
S14
to a
llow
thes
e ad
ditio
nal u
ses.
2.
Has
pre
viou
sly
disa
gree
d w
ith
prop
osal
how
ever
Cou
ncil
is
now
mak
ing
it ea
sier
for t
he
serv
ice
stat
ion
to c
arry
on
and
do w
hate
ver t
hey
wan
t. 3.
M
ain
conc
ern
is w
ater
spr
ay
from
the
car w
ash
and
nois
e fro
m th
e dr
ive
thro
ugh.
Par
tially
uph
old.
M
atte
rs r
aise
d sh
ould
be
ad
dres
sed
at
the
deve
lopm
ent
stag
e bu
t th
e is
sues
ca
n be
re
info
rced
by
be
ing
spec
ified
as
is
sues
fo
r co
nsid
erat
ion
on l
odge
men
t of
an
y pr
opos
al.
1.
Am
endm
ent
has
been
in
itiat
ed b
y th
e ap
plic
ant,
not
the
Cou
ncil.
2.
Not
ed.
The
Sch
eme
Amen
dmen
t an
d de
velo
pmen
t ap
plic
atio
n pr
oces
ses
are
sepa
rate
. Is
co
rrec
t in
not
ing
that
if
the
A46
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
4.
Will
Cou
ncil
put u
p a
buffe
r fe
nce
high
er th
an th
e ex
istin
g to
pre
vent
und
esira
bles
from
cl
imbi
ng o
ver?
5.
Pre
viou
sly
rais
ed c
once
rn
over
war
m w
ater
and
the
thre
at o
f Leg
ionn
aire
s di
seas
e –
7 ca
ses
in
Mel
bour
ne.
6.
W
ould
Cou
ncill
ors
like
this
to
go a
head
if th
ey w
ere
neig
hbou
rs?
7.
E
nter
tain
ing
area
and
be
droo
ms
whe
re y
oung
gr
andc
hild
ren
slee
p ar
e in
ar
ea n
ear p
ropo
sed
car w
ash,
w
hich
will
add
to e
xist
ing
nois
e le
vels
/ w
ater
spr
ay e
tc.
8.
E
xist
ing
car w
ash
less
than
40
0m a
way
and
see
s no
nee
d fo
r ano
ther
in th
e vi
cini
ty.
9.
C
ounc
illors
sho
uld
have
a
hear
t and
say
no
to p
ropo
sed
car w
ash.
Amen
dmen
t is
en
dors
ed,
the
uses
the
mse
lves
wou
ld
be
perm
itted
, su
bjec
t to
co
mpl
ianc
e w
ith
othe
r de
velo
pmen
t sta
ndar
ds.
3.
Ap
plic
ant
has
advi
sed
that
th
e in
tend
ed w
ash
unit
has
auto
mat
ed d
oors
at
entry
/
exit
whi
ch m
ust
be c
lose
d fo
r un
it to
ope
rate
. W
ill be
co
nsid
ered
fu
rther
at
D
A
stag
e.
4.
The
Cou
ncil
will
not
erec
t a
fenc
e. T
his
is t
o be
agr
eed
to
betw
een
affe
cted
la
ndow
ners
in
ac
cord
ance
w
ith
the
Div
idin
g Fe
nces
A
ct.
5.
Not
ed. I
nfor
mat
ion
from
ap
plic
ant i
s th
at a
ny
prop
osed
car
was
h is
in
tend
ed to
be
cold
wat
er
was
h on
ly. N
o ca
ses
of
Legi
onna
ire’s
dis
ease
in W
A
asso
ciat
ed w
ith c
ar w
ashe
s.
Typi
cally
ass
ocia
ted
with
air-
cond
ition
ing
units
, soi
l /
potti
ng m
ixes
and
mor
e hu
mid
clim
ates
. To
be
man
aged
by
busi
ness
op
erat
or in
acc
orda
nce
with
H
ealth
Reg
ulat
ions
.
6.
The
Am
endm
ent h
as b
een
A47
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
initi
ated
on
plan
ning
gr
ound
s.
7.
C
omm
ents
not
ed. N
oise
is
requ
ired
to c
ompl
y w
ith E
P
(Noi
se) R
egul
atio
ns. R
efer
al
so to
Poi
nt 3
. Noi
se im
pact
w
ill b
e co
nsid
ered
furth
er a
t D
A s
tage
.
8.
The
car
was
h ac
ross
th
e ro
ad i
s a
self-
oper
ated
car
w
ash.
Th
e pr
opos
ed
car
was
h is
aut
omat
ic.
Prov
ides
ch
oice
. C
ompe
ting
busi
ness
is
no
t a
plan
ning
co
nsid
erat
ion.
9.
C
ounc
il w
ill m
ake
a de
cisi
on
on p
lann
ing
grou
nds.
4.
JJ &
KA
Rei
d 16
Car
bine
S
treet
, Asc
ot
16 C
arbi
ne S
treet
, A
scot
O
bjec
tion
1.
P
revi
ousl
y ob
ject
ed to
de
velo
pmen
t pro
posa
l and
ob
ject
ions
hav
e no
t cha
nged
.
2.
BP
has
had
little
rega
rd to
re
solv
ing
prob
lem
s ov
er th
e pa
st 1
0 ye
ars,
in p
artic
ular
in
rela
tion
to d
eliv
ery
of fu
el
(som
etim
es in
ear
ly h
ours
of
mor
ning
), w
hich
dis
rupt
s sl
eep.
3.
O
bjec
tion
is b
ased
on
Par
tially
uph
old.
M
atte
rs r
aise
d sh
ould
be
ad
dres
sed
at
the
deve
lopm
ent
stag
e bu
t th
e is
sues
ca
n be
re
info
rced
by
be
ing
spec
ified
as
is
sues
fo
r co
nsid
erat
ion
on l
odge
men
t of
an
y pr
opos
al.
1.
N
oted
. Th
e S
chem
e Am
endm
ent
and
deve
lopm
ent
appl
icat
ion
proc
esse
s ar
e se
para
te.
2.
Rel
ates
to
man
agem
ent
of
exis
ting
oper
atio
ns.
Not
a
A48
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
prob
lem
s as
soci
ated
with
24
/7 fu
el a
nd c
onve
nien
ce
stor
e, b
orde
ring
on
resi
dent
ial/s
tabl
ing
area
, w
hich
enc
roac
hes
on th
e qu
ality
of l
ife, p
artic
ular
ly:
• Lo
catio
n of
car
was
h w
ill ha
ve a
dire
ct im
pact
on
resi
dent
ial p
rope
rties
. •
Noi
se –
doo
rs o
n ca
r w
ash
will
not d
imin
ish
nois
e, e
spec
ially
giv
en
cars
que
uing
nea
rby
resi
denc
es.
• A
ntis
ocia
l beh
avio
ur (b
ad
lang
uage
, fig
htin
g,
syrin
ges
thro
wn
over
fe
nce,
car
ala
rms,
etc
). •
Vib
ratio
n fro
m tr
ucks
on
site
. •
Impa
ct o
n pr
oper
ty
valu
es.
• E
xist
ing
auto
mat
ed c
ar
was
h at
BP
Red
cliff
e an
d se
lf-op
erat
ed c
ar w
ash
acro
ss th
e ro
ad –
nei
ther
ha
ve im
pact
on
resi
dent
ial
prop
ertie
s.
• R
esum
ed la
nd fo
r Gre
at
Eas
tern
Hig
hway
w
iden
ing
will
mak
e ac
cess
to a
nd fr
om th
e si
te m
ore
prob
lem
atic
. D
oes
not b
elie
ve th
e tra
ffic
stud
y ac
cura
tely
de
tails
the
real
traf
fic
cons
ider
atio
n fo
r th
is
proc
ess.
3.
Con
cern
s no
ted.
•
Loca
tion
is b
ased
on
a de
velo
pmen
t co
ncep
t on
ly.
A fo
rmal
D
A
is
requ
ired
whi
ch
will
as
sess
im
pact
s on
ad
join
ing
resi
dent
ial
prop
ertie
s.
• N
oise
(c
urre
nt
and
futu
re)
is
requ
ired
to
com
ply
with
E
nviro
nmen
tal
Pro
tect
ion
(Noi
se)
Reg
ulat
ions
19
97.
The
nois
e im
pact
fro
m
addi
tiona
l de
velo
pmen
t on
si
te
will
be
dete
rmin
ed
at
deve
lopm
ent
appl
icat
ion
stag
e.
• N
ot a
lan
d us
e sp
ecifi
c m
atte
r. To
be
man
aged
by
in
divi
dual
bu
sine
ss
oper
ator
. •
Req
uire
d to
com
ply
with
E
nviro
nmen
tal
Hea
lth
Reg
ulat
ions
. •
Pro
perty
va
lues
no
t a
plan
ning
con
side
ratio
n.
• C
omm
ents
no
ted.
Im
pact
s on
ad
join
ing
resi
dent
ial
land
use
s to
be
fur
ther
con
side
red
at
A49
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
mov
emen
ts a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith th
e si
te.
• La
rge
impa
ct fo
r hor
ses
on a
djoi
ning
pro
perti
es –
ho
rses
are
hig
hly
stru
ng
anim
als
and
nois
e an
d vi
brat
ion
can
upse
t the
m
easi
ly.
4.
C
ar w
ash
and
deliv
ery
of fu
el
/ sto
ck s
houl
d be
bet
wee
n 7a
m a
nd 7
pm.
5.
C
onve
rsio
n of
ser
vice
are
a to
pl
ant r
oom
will
con
tribu
te to
ad
ditio
nal i
mpa
cts
on
adjo
inin
g re
side
nces
.
6.
Con
cern
BP
is u
sing
the
notif
icat
ion
on ti
tle o
f uni
ts to
th
e ga
in a
ppro
val,
and
that
it
is u
nrea
sona
ble
for B
P to
ar
gue
that
she
d on
adj
oini
ng
prop
erty
will
min
imis
e no
ise,
as
it w
as n
ot c
onst
ruct
ed b
y B
P, b
ut ra
ther
by
owne
rs to
as
sist
miti
gatin
g no
ise.
7.
Bel
ieve
s th
at th
ere
will
be
min
imal
invo
lvem
ent /
co
nsid
erat
ion
of im
pact
on
adjo
inin
g la
ndow
ners
in fu
ture
de
velo
pmen
t pro
posa
l.
8.
Bel
ieve
that
the
exte
nsio
ns
prop
osed
by
BP
will
not
DA
sta
ge.
• M
RW
A
has
prov
ided
co
mm
ents
on
th
is.
Con
side
ratio
n fo
r fo
rmal
de
velo
pmen
t app
licat
ion.
•
Not
ed,
as p
er d
ot p
oint
1.
4.
Not
ed.
To
be
cons
ider
ed
furth
er a
t DA
sta
ge.
5.
For
cons
ider
atio
n at
D
A
stag
e.
6.
N
otifi
catio
n on
C
T is
in
tend
ed
to
info
rm
land
owne
rs
of
pote
ntia
l am
enity
im
pact
. D
oes
not
take
aw
ay
requ
irem
ent
to
com
ply
with
de
velo
pmen
t st
anda
rds
unde
r a
form
al
DA
. 7.
An
y D
A
rece
ived
w
ill
be
adve
rtise
d to
af
fect
ed
land
owne
rs
in
acco
rdan
ce
with
TP
S re
quire
men
ts.
8.
Th
e A
men
dmen
t ha
s be
en
mad
e on
pla
nnin
g gr
ound
s.
A50
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
enha
nce
the
area
, but
mak
e it
an u
nten
able
situ
atio
n w
ith
adjo
inin
g re
side
ntia
l/sta
blin
g di
stric
t.
5.
C
A K
elly
6/
27 H
ardy
Roa
d,
Asc
ot
6/27
Har
dy R
oad,
Asc
ot
O
bjec
t
1.
Con
cern
s re
late
to th
e pr
opos
ed u
tility
/ se
rvic
e ar
ea.
2.
C
once
rned
that
due
to th
e he
ight
of f
ence
bet
wee
n af
fect
ed p
rope
rty a
nd u
tility
ar
ea, t
his
will
resu
lt in
vie
w,
smel
l and
ver
min
impa
cts
from
rubb
ish.
3.
If de
velo
pmen
t pro
ceed
s,
wou
ld li
ke to
rais
e th
e he
ight
of
the
fenc
e.
Dis
mis
s.
1.
The
Am
endm
ent
rela
tes
to
land
us
es,
rath
er
than
sp
ecifi
c de
velo
pmen
t co
ncep
t.
2.
As
ab
ove.
Th
is
is
to
be
addr
esse
d at
DA
sta
ge.
3.
Not
ed.
Sub
ject
to
co
mpl
ianc
e w
ith
Cou
ncil
requ
irem
ents
.
6.
Mai
n R
oads
WA
P
O B
ox 6
202
Eas
t Per
th 6
892
(Ref
05/
2652
/02)
210
Gre
at E
aste
rn
Hig
hway
, Asc
ot
No
obje
ctio
n 1.
N
otes
tha
t a
porti
on o
f th
e su
bjec
t pr
oper
ty (
sepa
rate
to
the
MR
S
rese
rvat
ion)
is
re
quire
d fo
r “r
oad
purp
oses
” to
acc
omm
odat
e a
bus
lane
w
ith q
ueue
jum
ping
fac
ilitie
s du
ring
peak
ho
ur
perio
ds
alon
g G
EH
.
Not
ed.
Land
owne
r /
appl
ican
t is
aw
are
of t
he r
oad
wid
enin
g of
Gre
at
Eas
tern
Hig
hway
.
7.
Wat
er
Cor
pora
tion
PO
Box
100
Le
eder
ville
690
2 (R
ef J
T1 2
006
Gen
eral
N
o ob
ject
ion
1.
R
etic
ulat
ed w
ater
sup
ply
is
avai
labl
e.
2.
Not
ed.
This
A
men
dmen
t do
es
not
dire
ctly
pro
pose
any
cha
nges
to
serv
ices
or a
n y p
hysi
cal w
orks
.
A51
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
0935
9 VO
2)
3.
Any
requ
ired
exte
nsio
ns to
w
ater
mai
ns m
ust b
e w
ithin
ro
ad re
serv
es h
avin
g re
gard
to
Util
ity P
rovi
ders
Cod
e of
P
ract
ice.
4.
A
rea
can
be c
onne
cted
to
exis
ting
grav
ity s
ewer
ne
twor
k.
5.
An
exis
ting
sew
er e
asem
ent
exis
ts o
n no
rther
n bo
unda
ry,
and
any
deve
lopm
ent i
n th
is
area
will
requ
ire d
ue
cons
ider
atio
n.
6.
Wat
er s
trate
gy a
nd
man
agem
ent i
ssue
s sh
ould
be
add
ress
ed in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
Sta
te W
ater
Stra
tegy
, S
tate
Wat
er P
lan,
and
Dep
t of
Wat
er B
ette
r Urb
an W
ater
M
anag
emen
t doc
umen
t. 7.
Fu
ndin
g is
bas
ed o
n ‘u
ser
pays
’ – d
evel
oper
to p
rovi
de
all w
ater
and
sew
er
retic
ulat
ion,
esp
ecia
lly n
ew
wor
ks.
Hea
dwor
ks
cont
ribut
ion
for w
ater
, sew
er
and
drai
nage
als
o ap
plic
able
. 8.
A
ny d
evel
opm
ent w
ill re
quire
W
ater
Cor
p B
uild
ing
Ser
vice
s ap
prov
al a
nd w
ith p
rior
paym
ent o
f hea
dwor
ks.
Any
ph
ysic
al
wor
ks
and/
or
fee/
char
ges
requ
ired
in r
elat
ion
to
serv
ices
et
c w
ill
be
addr
esse
d at
an
y fu
ture
su
bdiv
isio
n an
d/or
DA
sta
ge.
A52
No .
Nam
e an
d A
ddre
ss
Des
crip
tion
of
Affe
cted
Pro
pert
y,
Lot N
o., S
tree
t, et
c.
Res
ume
of S
ubm
issi
on
Cou
ncil
Rec
omm
enda
tion
Com
mis
sion
R
ecom
men
datio
n
9.
Info
rmat
ion
prov
ided
m
ay
chan
ge
and
Wat
er
Cor
p sh
ould
be
co
ntac
ted
if de
velo
pmen
t ha
s no
t pr
ocee
ded
with
in 6
mon
ths.
8.
W
este
rn P
ower
Lo
cked
Bag
252
0 P
erth
600
1
Gen
eral
N
o O
bjec
tions
1.
D
evel
oper
to
co
ntac
t P
erth
O
ne C
all
Ser
vice
and
obt
ain
loca
tion
deta
ils
of
Wes
tern
P
ower
un
derg
roun
d ca
blin
g ob
tain
ed
prio
r to
an
y ex
cava
tion
com
men
cing
.
2.
Wor
k S
afe
requ
irem
ents
mus
t al
so
be
obse
rved
w
hen
exca
vatio
n w
ork
is
bein
g un
derta
ken
in t
he v
icin
ity o
f an
y W
este
rn P
ower
ass
ets.
3.
A
ny
chan
ge
to
the
exis
ting
pow
er
syst
em
is
the
resp
onsi
bilit
y of
the
indi
vidu
al
deve
lope
r.
Not
ed.
This
A
men
dmen
t do
es
not
dire
ctly
pro
pose
any
cha
nges
to
serv
ices
or a
ny p
hysi
cal w
orks
. A
ny p
hysi
cal
wor
ks r
equi
red
in
rela
tion
to s
ervi
ces
etc
will
be
addr
esse
d at
an
y fu
ture
su
bdiv
isio
n an
d/or
DA
sta
ge.
9.
Wes
tnet
Ene
rgy
PO
Box
849
1
Per
th B
C 6
849
(Ref
LM
093
90)
Gen
eral
N
o O
bjec
tions
N
oted
.
A53
ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING Attachments 27 April 2010
Ordinary Council 27/04/10
Item 12.1 refers
Attachment 3
Scheme Amendment 59 Independent Acoustic Report
A54
Noise Impact Assessment
Prepared For
City of Belmont
March 2010
Reference: 10031514-01
Automotive Vehicle Wash BP Ascot
Great Eastern Highway
GEORGE
LLOYD
Acoustics
A55
Report: 10031514-01
Lloyd George Acoustics Pty Ltd ABN: 79 125 812 544
PO Box 717 Hillarys WA 6923
Offices: Ocean Reef Padbury Scarborough Waterford
Phone: Fax:
Email: Mobile:
9300 4188 9300 4199 [email protected]
0439 032 844
9401 7770 9401 7770 [email protected]
0400 414 197
9245 3223 9300 4199 [email protected]
0438 201 071
9313 3655 9300 4199 [email protected]
0427 388 876
Member of the Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants – (AAAC)
Approved for Issue: Terry George
Position: Project Director
Verified Daniel Lloyd
Date: 30 March 2010
This report has been prepared in accordance with the scope of services described in the contract or agreement between Lloyd George Acoustics Pty Ltd and the Client. The report relies upon data, surveys, measurements and results taken at or under the particular times and conditions specified herein. Any findings, conclusions or recommendations only apply to the aforementioned circumstances and no greater reliance should be assumed or drawn by the Client. Furthermore, the report has been prepared solely for use by the Client, and Lloyd George Acoustics Pty Ltd accepts no responsibility for its use by other parties.
A56
Lloyd George Acoustics
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1
2 CRITERIA ........................................................................................................................ 1
3 CARWASH USAGE ......................................................................................................... 4
4 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 5
4.1 Site Measurements ................................................................................................... 5
4.2 Noise Modelling ........................................................................................................ 5
4.2.1 Meteorological Information ................................................................................ 5
4.2.2 Topographical Data ........................................................................................... 6
4.2.3 Ground Absorption ............................................................................................ 6
4.2.4 Sound Power Data ............................................................................................ 6
5 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................... 10
5.1 Background Noise Measurements ......................................................................... 10
5.2 Noise Modelling ...................................................................................................... 10
6 ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................. 12
6.1 Existing Service Station .......................................................................................... 12
6.2 Existing Service Station with Car Wash ................................................................. 12
7 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 12
APPENDICES
A Site Plan
B Carwash Noise Measurements
C Vacuum Noise Measurements
D Tyre Pressurisation Noise Measurements
E Terminology
A57
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 1
1 INTRODUCTION
BP Australia Pty Ltd (BP) are proposing to refurbish an existing service station located at 210 (Lot 151) Great Eastern Highway in Ascot, on the corner of Resolution Drive – refer Figure 1.1 taken from the City of Belmont’s Local Planning Scheme No.14. The main area of interest of this report is the addition of an automotive vehicle wash, although analysis has also been undertaken of some existing noise sources.
Figure 1.1 –Locality Map
Noise from the facility has been assessed to the closest residences (refer Figure 1.1) against the prescribed standards of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
Note that an acoustic assessment has already been undertaken by another consultant and submitted to the City of Belmont. However, the Council have requested an independent acoustic assessment to ensure compliance can be achieved.
Appendix E contains a description of some of the terminology used throughout this report.
2 CRITERIA
Environmental noise in Western Australia is governed by the Environmental Protection Act 1986, through the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 (the Regulations).
Regulation 7 defines the prescribed standard for noise emissions as follows:
“7. (1) Noise emitted from any premises or public place when received at other premises –
(a) Must not cause or significantly contribute to, a level of noise which exceeds the assigned level in respect of noise received at premises of that kind; and
Proposed Facility
R1 – 27 Hardey Rd
R4 – 249 GEH
R3 – 214 GEH
R2 – 16 Carbine St
A58
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 2
(b) Must be free of –
i. Tonality;
ii. Impulsiveness; and
iii. Modulation”.
A “…noise emission is taken to significantly contribute to a level of noise if the noise emission exceeds a value which is 5dB below the assigned level…”
Tonality, impulsiveness and modulation are defined in Regulation 9. Noise is to be taken to be free of these characteristics if:
(a) The characteristics cannot be reasonably and practicably removed by techniques other than attenuating the overall level of noise emission; and
(b) The noise emission complies with the standard after the adjustments of Table 2.1 are made to the noise emission as measured at the point of reception.
Table 2.1 – Adjustments For Intrusive Characteristics
Tonality Modulation Impulsiveness
+ 5dB + 5dB + 10dB
Note: The above are cumulative to a maximum of 15dB.
The baseline assigned levels (prescribed standards) are specified in Regulation 8 and are shown below in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2 – Baseline Assigned Noise Levels
Premises Receiving Noise Time Of Day
Assigned Level (dB)
LA10 LA1 LAmax
Noise Sensitive1
0700 to 1900 hours Monday to Saturday (Day)
45 + influencing
factor
55 + influencing
factor
65 + influencing
factor
0900 to 1900 hours Sunday and public holidays (Sunday)
40 + influencing
factor
50 + influencing
factor
65 + influencing
factor
1900 to 2200 hours all days (Evening)
40 + influencing
factor
50 + influencing
factor
55 + influencing
factor
2200 hours on any day to 0700 hours Monday to Saturday and 0900 hours Sunday and public holidays (Night)
35 + influencing
factor
45 + influencing
factor
55 + influencing
factor
Commercial All hours 60 75 80
1. Applies within 15metres of a building associated with a noise sensitive use, as defined in Schedule 1, Part C.
A59
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 3
The influencing factor has been calculated at each receiver location. Note that R3 is currently commercial and therefore has no influencing factor with allowable levels of 60 dB LA10, 75 dB LA1 and 80 dB LAmax. Table 2.3 shows the applicable influencing factor should the site be developed into residential.
Table 2.3 – Influencing Factor Calculation
Description Within 100 metre Radius
Within 450 metre Radius Total
R1 – 27 Hardey Road
Commercial Land 1.0 dB
21 %
1.3 dB
25 % 2 dB
Major Road 6 dB
GEH - 6 dB
Total 8 dB
R2 – 16 Carbine Street
Commercial Land 1.1 dB
22 %
1.3 dB
25 % 2 dB
Major Road 6 dB
GEH - 6 dB
Total 8 dB
R3 – 214 Great Eastern Highway (Assume Future Residential)
Commercial Land 1.1 dB
22 %
1.3 dB
25 % 2 dB
Major Road 6 dB
GEH - 6 dB
Total 8 dB
R4 – 249 Great Eastern Highway
Commercial Land 2.3 dB
47 %
1.3 dB
25 % 4 dB
Major Road 6 dB
GEH - 6 dB
Total 10 dB
A60
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 4
With reference to Section 4, it has been determined that the most critical assigned noise levels are the LA10 on Sundays during the day and the LA1 during the night. The LAmax is also applicable for the intermittent audible alarm from the air pressurisation units used for tyre inflation.
Table 2.4 shows the critical assigned noise levels including the influencing factor at each of the assessment locations.
Table 2.4 – Assigned Noise Levels
Premises Receiving Noise
Assigned Level (dB)
Sunday Day LA10 Night LA1 Night LAmax
R1 48 53 63
R2 48 53 63
R3 60 (48) 75 (53) 80 (63)
R4 50 55 65
Numbers in brackets indicate assigned noise level if residential use.
3 CARWASH USAGE
From Table 2.2, it can be seen that for items that do not operate for more than 10% of the time, a higher allowable noise level is permissible. That is, if something generates noise for more than 1% but less than 10% of the time, the LA1 parameter is applicable. Similarly if something operates for less than 1% of the time, the LAmax parameter is applicable.
Information sourced for previous projects indicated that a car wash will be used 34.5% during the day on a Sunday and 3.2% of the night on a Sunday. All other days/times resulted in lower percentage uses and thus Sunday is the most critical. Note that vacuum usage is assumed to be equivalent with carwash usage.
Due to the relative low usage of the car wash at night, it is considered unlikely the vacuum units would operate simultaneously with the carwash and hence these are assessed independently. During the day or evening, it is considered possible that the carwash and vacuums will operate simultaneously.
Noise from the audible alarm associated with the air pressurisation device is present for only a short time, considered to be less than 1% and therefore the night LAmax parameter is applicable.
A61
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 5
4 METHODOLOGY
4.1 Site Measurements Long term monitoring has been undertaken at R4 as part of a different project. This monitoring involved the use of an ARL Type 316 noise data logger and was located 5 metres from Great Eastern Highway. The logger was programmed to record hourly LA1, LA10, LA90, and LAeq levels. The logger was field calibrated before and after the measurement session and found to be accurate to within +/- 1 dB. Lloyd George Acoustics also holds current laboratory calibration certificate for the loggers.
Hand held noise measurements were undertaken of the equipment (existing and proposed) on 25 March 2010. The proposed carwash was measured at BP Carlisle (corner of Orrong Road and Archer Street), whilst the vacuum and tyre pressurisation alarm were both measured at the Ascot side.
Measurements were undertaken in accordance with Regulations 19, 20, 22 and 23 and Schedule 4, specifically noting the following:
The sound level meter used was a Bruel & Kjaer Type 2260 (S/N: 2508199), which holds current laboratory certificates of calibration (Calibration Date 4 July 2007) available upon request and was field calibrated before and after the measurements and found to be within +/- 0.5 dB. This meter simultaneously records the slow and fast time weighted sound levels allowing relevant data to be collected. The microphone was fitted with a standard wind screen with winds being less than 5m/s;
The microphone was at least 1.2 metres above ground level and at least 3.0 metres from reflecting facades (other than the ground plane) and as such no adjustments have been applied for reflected noise;
4.2 Noise Modelling To determine the noise emissions from the automotive vehicle wash facility, the computer modelling programme SoundPlan 6.5 has been utilised. The programme was selected to use the CONCAWE algorithms, which requires the following input data:
Meteorological Information;
Topographical data;
Ground Absorption; and
Source sound power levels.
4.2.1 Meteorological Information
Meteorological information utilised is based on that specified in EPA Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors No.8 Environmental Noise draft, and are shown below in Table 4.1.
A62
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 6
Table 4.1 –Modelling Meteorological Conditions
Parameter Night (1900-0700) Day (0700-1900)
Temperature (oC) 15 20
Humidity (%) 50 50
Wind Speed (m/s) 3 4
Wind Direction* All All
Pasquil Stability Factor F E
* Note that the modelling package used allows for all wind directions to be modelled simultaneously.
Note that the above conditions approximate the typical worst-case for enhancement of sound propagation. The EPA policy is that compliance with the assigned noise levels needs to be demonstrated for 98% of the time, during the day and night periods, for the month of the year in which the worst-case weather conditions prevail. In most cases, the above conditions occur for more than 2% of the time and therefore must be satisfied.
At wind speeds greater than those shown above, sound propagation may be further enhanced, however background noise from the wind itself is likely to be elevated and dominate the ambient noise levels.
4.2.2 Topographical Data
Topographical data was based on file data, which is from the Department of Land Information (DLI). The contours are in 1-metre intervals and cover the noise sensitive premises of concern.
Buildings and perimeter fencing have also been included as these can provide barrier attenuation when located between a source and receiver, much the same as a hill.
4.2.3 Ground Absorption
Ground absorption varies from a value of 0 to 1, with 0 being for an acoustically reflective ground (e.g. water or bitumen) and 1 for acoustically absorbent ground (e.g. grass). The site itself is considered to be reflective so an absorption of 0.1 (10%) has been assumed, with the surrounding land assumed to be 0.65 (65%), representing a mixture of hard and soft.
4.2.4 Sound Power Data
Measurements were undertaken of the BP Carlisle carwash for a deluxe carwash and standard carwash. The noise levels were logged in 1-second intervals at 3-metres from the entry door. The entry and exit to the carwash are fitted with acoustic doors that close once the wash commences. The results of the noise logging are presented in Appendix B. The LA10 and LA1 noise levels from the carwash were then determined and converted to a sound power level. Note that the entry and exit doors are assumed to have the same sound power level as shown below in Table 4.2.
A63
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 7
During the day on a Sunday, the carwash may operate once every 15-minutes. Based on this usage, the calculated sound pressure level at 3-metres was 76 dB LA10, with negligible difference between the standard and deluxe wash cycles. During the night, the usage may be once every 2-hours. Based on this usage, the calculated sound pressure level at 3-metres was 77 dB LA1, again with negligible difference between the standard and deluxe wash cycles.
The vacuum and tyre pressurisation alarms were both measured at the existing Ascot site at 1-metre from each source with the logging results presented in Appendices C & D respectively.
The vacuum usage is assumed to be on a 1 for 1 basis with the car wash. As such, the calculated sound pressure level at 1-metre was 84 dB LA10 when assessed over a 15-minute period (e.g. daytime) and 84 dB LA1 when assessed over a 2-hour period (e.g. night-time).
The highest noise level recorded from the tyre pressurisation alarm was 81 dB LAmax at 1-metre.
Table 4.2 – Sound Power Levels Used in Modelling, dB(A)
Item One-Third Octave Band Centre Frequency (Hz)
dB(A) 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k
LA1 Noise Level
Vacuum 66 69 70 87 82 85 85 77 91
Auto Wash 70 80 81 84 87 87 83 69 93
LA10 Noise Level
Vacuum 58 65 72 87 82 83 85 77 91
Auto Wash 66 79 79 82 86 86 82 68 91
LAmax Noise Level
Air Pressure Alarm 89 89
A64
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 10
5 RESULTS
5.1 Background Noise Measurements Figure 5.1 shows the noise levels over an entire Sunday. The measurement location is at 5-metres from the edge of Great Eastern Highway and is therefore significantly influenced by road traffic. The lowest noise level is at 4am when road traffic is at a minimum, recording a noise level of 46 dB LA90. During the day, the noise level is continually around 60 dB LA90.
For every doubling of distance away from the road, a 3 dB reduction would be approximately applicable.
5.2 Noise Modelling Table 5.1 summarises the results of the calculations for the existing conditions.
Table 5.1 – Summary of Predicted Noise Levels: Existing Conditions
Scenario Assessment Location
R1 - Hardey R2 - Carbine R3 – 214 GEH R4 - 249 GEH
L10 Day (Vacuum Only) 44 48 48 43 – 46
L1 Night (Vacuum) 44 49 48 43 – 47
Lmax Night (Alarm) 42 45 44 46
Note: The range in noise level at R4 is for the ground and upper floors where there is a variation.
Table 5.2 summarises the results of the calculations with the addition of the carwash.
Table 5.2 – Summary of Predicted Noise Levels: Includes Proposed Carwash
Scenario Assessment Location
R1 - Hardey R2 - Carbine R3 – 214 GEH R4 - 249 GEH
L10 Day (Vacuum & Car Wash) 56 56 63 51
L1 Night (Car Wash) 56 56 64 52
L1 Night (Vacuum) 44 49 48 43 – 47
Lmax Night (Alarm) 42 45 44 46
Note: The range in noise level at R4 is for the ground and upper floors where there is a variation.
A65
Lloyd George Acoustics
30
40
50
60
70
80
901:
00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:0
0
11:0
0
12:0
0
13:0
0
14:0
0
15:0
0
16:0
0
17:0
0
18:0
0
19:0
0
20:0
0
21:0
0
22:0
0
23:0
0
0:00
SPL,
dB(
A)
Time
Figure 5.1 - Noise Monitoring: Sunday 30 November 2008L1 L10 Leq L90
A66
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 12
6 ASSESSMENT
Noise levels from each of the noise sources have the potential to contain intrusive characteristics, in particular tonality. However, if compliance is achieved, that is the noise levels from the service station is equal to the assigned noise levels, it is unlikely that any intrusive characteristics would be audible above background noise. As such, no penalty has been applied for intrusive characteristics.
6.1 Existing Service Station
Examining the existing scenario (Table 5.1), compliance is currently being achieved. The most critical location is R2, where the predicted noise level from the vacuum unit during the day is the same as the assigned noise level.
If location R3 was redeveloped for residential use, compliance would be achieved at ground level. However, the noise levels from the vacuum units are calculated to be 5 dB higher at an upper floor and would therefore exceed. This could however be readily overcome by considering this in the design of the residences. It is unlikely that a development would have balconies for instance facing the service station so external noise at an upper level is unlikely to a concern. Any windows facing the service station would likely be relatively small and thicker than standard glass to minimise the impact of road traffic noise.
6.2 Existing Service Station with Car Wash
With the addition of the car wash, noise levels are calculated to exceed the prescribed standards of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, based on the car wash measured at BP Carlisle.
Noise levels from the vacuum and tyre pressurisation alarm comply by themselves, however the noise of the vacuum units does significantly contribute at some locations.
At R4, it is considered that compliance is achieved at all times, given the only exceedance is by 1 dB during the day.
At R1 and R2, the car wash is calculated to cause exceedances during the day and night, by up to 8 dB. Even at R3, a 3 dB exceedance is calculated during the day assuming this is a commercial property.
7 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the methodology and analysis described in this report, the proposed automotive carwash is calculated to exceed the Sunday LA10 day time assigned noise levels by up to 8 dB and the night-time LA1 assigned noise levels by up to 3 dB. It is therefore recommended that further noise controls be implemented than those currently proposed.
A67
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 13
In terms of the measured carwash in Carlisle, this did incorporate acoustic doors. Compared with file data for a typical car wash with no acoustic doors, the Carlisle carwash was around 7 dB less. This would relate to doors that have an Rw
1 rating of around 13. From file information, ratings of up to Rw 26 are available for car wash doors. To achieve compliance at R1 & R2, an Rw 26 door would be required to the carwash entry. This will result in noise from the carwash being 5 dB less than the assigned noise level, thereby allowing for the contribution of the vacuum unit should the two operate simultaneously during the day. An alternative would be to reduce the rating of the entry door to say Rw 21 and replace the vacuum units with quieter models. File data suggests models that are up to 15 dB quieter than those currently present are available. Note that whilst the adjoining lot is commercial, the exit door is less critical and would need to be improved by only 3 dB (i.e. an Rw 17 rated door).
A further alternative may be to relocate the carwash. From an acoustic perspective, the preferred location would be to be orientated parallel to Great Eastern Highway and on the south side of the parking area where the vacuums are located. This would need to be assessed in detail on its own merit if it is practicable from a traffic arrangement point of view.
Based on the proposed arrangement, the most practicable noise control options are considered to be:
1. Replace the existing vacuum units with quieter models; and
2. Upgrade the entry door to a minimum Rw 21 rated door; and
3. Upgrade the exit door to a minimum Rw 17 rated door.
Note that the above recommendations assume the adjoining property to the east remains as a commercial use. If this property were to be developed as single storey residential, noise levels are calculated to exceed by up to 15 dB. In this case, the following would be required:
1. Replace the existing vacuum units with quieter models; and
2. Install Rw 26 rated doors at both the entry and exit; and
3. Increase the height of the boundary wall from 1.8 metres to 2.1 metres.
If the neighbouring property were to be developed to multi-storey residential, noise levels at Level 1 would exceed by up to 19 dB. With the inclusion of Rw 26 rated acoustic doors, the exceedance would still be 6 dB and therefore the boundary wall would need to increase to 3.5 metres or Level 1 of the development would need to incorporate design features to minimise noise intrusion (e.g. no balconies facing service station, 10mm laminated glass to windows etc).
1 Rw is a single number value given to a material providing guidance on its sound insulation performance and measured in a laboratory under controlled conditions. It is determined by using the procedures documented in AS/NZS 1276 and AS 1191. The higher the number, the better the performance. Note it is very similar to the previously used STC (Sound Transmission Class) value. The only difference being a shift in frequency range where Rw is determined from the transmission loss at each one-third-octave band centre frequency between 100 Hz and 3.15kHz, STC was between 125 Hz and 4kHz. The two ratings are normally within 1 point of each other.
A68
Lloyd George Acoustics
Reference: 10031514-01 Page 14
If the neighbouring development was to be more than 2 storeys, a boundary wall of say 4 metres high (considered to be the maximum practicable) would not reduce noise levels. As such, floors above Level 1 would need to incorporate noise mitigation design features and the carwash would need the highest rated acoustic doors (Rw 26).
A69