downtown ferry basin redevelopment acoustic … · this document may not be reproduced in full or...

DOWNTOWN FERRY BASIN REDEVELOPMENT – STAGE 1

ACOUSTIC ASSESSMENT Rp 001 r06 20180107 | 12 November 2018

http://www.marshallday.com

84 Symonds Street

PO Box 5811 Wellesley Street

Auckland 1141 New Zealand

T: +64 9 379 7822 F: +64 9 309 3540

www.marshallday.com

Project: DOWNTOWN FERRY BASIN REDEVELOPMENT – STAGE 1

Prepared for: Auckland Transport Private Bag 92250 Auckland 1142

Attention: Haylee Minoprio

Report No.: Rp 001 r06 20180107

Disclaimer

Reports produced by Marshall Day Acoustics Limited are based on a specific scope, conditions and limitations, as agreed between Marshall Day Acoustics and the Client. Information and/or report(s) prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics may not be suitable for uses other than the specific project. No parties other than the Client should use any information and/or report(s) without first conferring with Marshall Day Acoustics.

The advice given herein is for acoustic purposes only. Relevant authorities and experts should be consulted with regard to compliance with regulations or requirements governing areas other than acoustics.

Copyright

The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Marshall Day Acoustics constitutes an infringement of copyright. Information shall not be assigned to a third party without prior consent.

Document Control

Status: Rev: Comments Date: Author: Reviewer:

Draft - For team review 16 Aug 2018 B Lawrence C Fitzgerald

Issued 01 For Resource Consent 11 Sep 2018 B Lawrence C Fitzgerald



Issued 04 For Resource Consent 2 Oct 2018 B Lawrence C Fitzgerald

Issued 05 For Resource Consent 9 Nov 2018 B Lawrence C Fitzgerald

Issued 06 For Resource Consent 12 Nov 2018 B Lawrence C Fitzgerald


This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited

Rp 001 R06 20180107 BL Downtown Ferry Basin Redevelopment - Stage 1 (Assessment of Acoustic Effects).docx 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 5

2.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................... 5

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................................................................... 6

3.1 Sensitive Receivers ..................................................................................................................................... 6

3.2 Ambient Airborne Noise Environment ..................................................................................................... 7

3.3 Ambient Underwater Noise Environment ................................................................................................ 7

4.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ..................................................................................................................... 8

4.1 Noise ............................................................................................................................................................ 8

4.2 Vibration ...................................................................................................................................................... 8

4.3 Underwater Noise .................................................................................................................................... 10

5.0 CONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 12

5.1 Demolition of Piers 3 and 4 ...................................................................................................................... 12

5.2 Refurbishment of Pier 1 Building ............................................................................................................. 12

5.3 Construction of Breakwater and New Ferry Berths ............................................................................... 12

6.0 ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................................................. 13

6.1 Construction Noise (Airborne) ................................................................................................................. 13

6.2 Construction Vibration ............................................................................................................................. 15

6.3 Construction Noise (Underwater) ........................................................................................................... 16

7.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE AND VIBRATION MANAGEMENT .................................................................... 19

7.1 Foreword ................................................................................................................................................... 19

7.2 Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan ........................................................................... 20

8.0 CONDITIONS OF CONSENT ...................................................................................................................... 20

9.0 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 21




APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY

APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF AMBIENT AIRBORNE NOISE MEASUREMENTS

APPENDIX C SUMMARY OF AMBIENT UNDERWATER NOISE MEASUREMENTS

APPENDIX D AUP(OP) ZONING

APPENDIX E UNDERWATER NOISE MATTERS OF DISCRETION AND ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

APPENDIX F UNDERWATER NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES

APPENDIX G PREDICTED CONSTRUCTION NOISE CONTOURS

APPENDIX H DRAFT CNVMP




1.0 INTRODUCTION

Marshall Day Acoustics (MDA) has been engaged to provide an assessment of construction noise and vibration for the proposed Downtown Ferry Basin Redevelopment Stage 1 (the Project). It provides new ferry berths on the northern end of Queens Wharf West for ferry services currently operating from Piers 3 and 4.

This report contains an assessment of the airborne noise, underwater noise and vibration from the proposed demolition of Piers 3 and 4, construction of the new piers and terminal upgrade works. The vibration assessment addresses potential cosmetic building damage and amenity. Structural and settlement related vibration effects are addressed by others.

Post construction, Queens Wharf will continue to be used for the berthing of vessels. Queens Wharf is in the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) (AUP(OP)) Central Wharves Precinct. “The purpose of the precinct is to provide for ongoing use for maritime passenger operations and other marine and port activities”. Noise from operation of vessels is exempt from the applicable AUP(OP) rules as set out in I202.6.1.4 (2). Therefore, a detailed operational noise assessment has not been undertaken. However, it is noted that locating ferry services on the western side of Queens Wharf would generally move Ferry activities further away from noise sensitive receivers on Princes Wharf and the south side of Quay Street.

Acoustic terminology used throughout this report is included in Appendix A.

2.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW

The Downtown Ferry Basin Redevelopment is part of the wider Downtown Waterfront programme of works being delivered for Americas Cup 36 (AC36). The Downtown Ferry Basin Redevelopment proposes that all existing ferry berth on Piers 3 and 4 within the Ferry Basin are relocated to the western edge of Queens Wharf.

Stage 1 of the proposed ferry basin redevelopment includes the construction, establishment and operation of new infrastructure to provide for six berths adjacent to Queens Wharf West and modifications to the existing ferry terminal building and immediate surrounds. The new berths are labelled Piers A-F, with Pier A located closest to the ferry terminal building and Pier F located towards the northern end of Queens Wharf. The proposal also includes the demolition of the existing piles, pontoons and gangways located at Piers 3 and 4.

Stage 1 works areas are shown indicatively on Figure 1 overleaf and summarised as follows:

• Six new floating pontoon berths in a reverse saw-tooth arrangement.

• Three new covered gangways providing access to the pontoons from Queens Wharf West.

• Associated maritime infrastructure such as fendering.

• A 210m long wave attenuator comprised of approximately 402 closely spaced piles.

• New landside infrastructure such as signage and ticketing gates.

• Improvements to the existing ferry terminal shelter including.

The works are proposed to span a maximum of 12 months, with normal construction hours between 7am – 10pm, Monday – Saturday. There is the potential for low noise activities such as equipment/material deliveries and concrete pours to take place outside of these hours, as well as works inside the terminal during the day on Sundays to avoid peak times. Regardless of compliance, impact pile driving, vibro pile driving, concrete cutting and concrete breaking will not be undertaken at night (10pm – 7am).




The primary activity of interest is the piling works because it has the potential to generate high levels of airborne noise and underwater noise for extended periods. It also has the potential to generate appreciable vibration depending on the piling methodology.

Demolition activities such as concrete cutting and concrete breaking also have the potential to generate high levels of noise and/or vibration, but would occur locally for short, intermittent periods.

Figure 1: Overview of project

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

3.1 Sensitive Receivers

The existing environment contains a wide variety of activities, including commercial spaces (offices, event spaces, bars etc.), apartments and hotels, busy public spaces and marine operations.

Table 1 overleaf lists the closest receivers and provides the distance from each receiver to the closest high-noise works area (piling or concrete cutting/breaking).

Consultation with Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA) on 13 August 2018 included discussion on the potential noise and vibration effects of the proposed construction works on activities in The Cloud and Shed 10 event spaces. Craig Fitzgerald (MDA) summarised the preliminary findings of this report, including that breakwater piling is predicted to result in significant effects for noise sensitive activities in The Cloud. This is due to proximity of the works and the lightweight façade of The Cloud. It is understood that there are a small number of pre-booked events in The Cloud during the construction period, but the construction programme will accommodate these to avoid conflict. Furthermore, no additional noise sensitive events will be booked in The Cloud during the normal construction hours detailed in Section 2.0. Therefore, The Cloud will not be a noise sensitive receiver during the Project works. Shed 10 is further from the construction works and effects can be managed using standard adaptive management and communication protocol.

Demolition Piers 3 and 4

Proposed Pier 4

Pier 1 refurbishment




The two heritage listed kiosks are adjacent to the Piers 3 and 4 demolition works. It is understood that these buildings are proposed to be temporarily relocated for the Quay Street Strengthening Project in advance of the Piers 3 and 4 demolition. This sequence would avoid potential vibration effects on these buildings from this project. However, as this is reliant on another project consent and its sequencing, the kiosks have been considered as part of the existing environment to address the residual vibration risk.

Table 1: Summary of closest receivers

Activity Receiver Type Distance to closest works area

Demolition of Piers 3 and 4

ANZ building Convenience store and offices 7m

Ferry Building Restaurants and offices 10m

Adventure Jet ticket booth / container on Pier 2

Information/service 15m

Pier 2 building (ticket booth and connected office)

Information/service 35m

PWC, HSBC and M Social buildings Cafés, offices and accommodation

25 – 55m

Princes Wharf apartments Residential 50m

Construction of new piers

The Cloud Event space 10m

Pier 1 building (first floor offices) Offices 15m

Shed 10 Event space 50m

Pier 2 building (waiting area) Public space 60m

Princes Wharf apartments and Hilton Hotel

Residential/accommodation 160m

Ferry Building Restaurants and offices 110m

3.2 Ambient Airborne Noise Environment

Airborne noise levels were measured at three locations surrounding the project site to gain an understanding of the existing daytime noise environment. In summary, the levels ranged from 59 – 72 dB LAeq, with the main noise sources being traffic, ferry movements and construction. The noise levels are high, but typical of a busy commercial environment.

A full summary of the ambient noise measurements is provided in Appendix B.

3.3 Ambient Underwater Noise Environment

The underwater noise environment in the Waitematā was measured at three representative locations; near the Harbour Bridge, Hobson Wharf and Bean Rock. The underwater noise survey is detailed in Appendix C.

In summary, the average noise level ranged between 120 – 123 dB rms re 1 μPa and is influenced by regular boat movements. The background underwater noise environment, in the absence of nearby boat movements, ranged between 104 – 110 dB L90 re 1 μPa.




4.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

4.1 Noise

Appendix D includes a table summarising the relevant construction noise rules, as well as an aerial view of the area and planning map showing the relevant AUP(OP) Zones and Precincts.

The proposed Downtown Ferry Terminal site is zoned Coastal Marine Area (CMA) within the Central Wharves Precinct. The Cloud and Shed 10, Piers 1 and 2 buildings and Princes Wharf apartments/hotel are also in the Central Wharves Precinct and are also zoned CMA.

AUP(OP) Central Wharves Precinct rule I202.6.1.5 states: “Construction activity within the Central Wharves Precinct must not exceed the noise levels specified in E25.6.28 Construction noise levels in the Business – City Centre Zone and the Business – Metropolitan Centre Zone, when measured 1m from the façade of any building on the south side of Quay Street”. No noise limits apply at noise sensitive receivers within the CMA (e.g. Princes Wharf apartments or the Piers 1 and 2 buildings).

The relevant construction noise limits from AUP(OP) Rule E25.6.28 for a total construction duration of 15 consecutive calendar days or more are summarised in Table 2. The noise limits apply at 1m from the façade of any building on the south side of Quay Street that is occupied during the construction work.

Table 2: Construction Noise Limits (AUP(OP) Table E25.6.28.2)

Day Time LAeq (30min) LAFmax

Monday to Friday 0630 – 2230 75 90

Saturday 0700 – 2300 80 90

4.1.1 Sunday 0900 – 1900 65 85

4.1.2 All other times (night-time) 60 75

Table 2 defines 16-hour daytime periods, Monday to Saturday, inside which noisy works would be scheduled. Sundays and night-time periods on all days have more stringent Project Standards. Quiet activities are permissible during these periods, but heavy civil works should not be undertaken.

While no construction noise rules apply to receivers within the Central Wharves Precinct, the noise limits in Table 2 are used to inform the effects assessment and enable a consistent approach for adaptive management protocol. As result, the limits in Table 2 are proposed as Project Standards in the draft consent conditions contained in Section 8.0.

4.2 Vibration

4.2.1 Cosmetic Building Damage

AUP(OP) rule E25.6.30 (1)(a) requires construction vibration to be measured and assessed in accordance with German Standard DIN 4150-3:1999 “Structural vibration – Part 3: Effects of vibration on structures”. The short-term (transient)1 vibration limits in Figure 2 apply at building foundations in any axis. The vibration limits in all other cases are summarised in Table 3.

The criteria relate to the avoidance of cosmetic building damage, such as cracking in paint or plasterwork. Cosmetic building damage effects are deemed ‘minor damage’ in the Standard and can generally be easily repaired. The cosmetic building damage thresholds are much lower than those

1 Short-term (transient) vibration is “vibration which does not occur often enough to cause structural fatigue and which does not produce resonance in the structure being evaluated”.




that would result in structural damage. The Standard states: "Experience has shown that if these values are complied with, damage that reduces the serviceability of the building will not occur”.

Table 3: Vibration at horizontal plane of highest floor (DIN 4150-3 1999: Tables 1 and 3)

Structure Type Peak Particle Velocity Vibration Level (mm/s)

Short-term (transient)1 Long-term (continuous)2, 3

Line 1. Commercial or Industrial buildings 40 10

Line 2. Residential buildings 15 5

Line 3. Historic or Sensitive Structures 8 2.5

Figure 2: Short-term (transient)1 vibration at building foundations (DIN 4150-3 1999: Figure 1)

4.2.2 Amenity

AUP(OP) rule E25.6.30 (1)(b) requires construction vibration to comply with the limits in Table 4 in any axis when measured in the corner of the floor of the storey of interest for multi-storey buildings, or within 500mm of ground level at the foundation of a single storey building. However, where construction vibration from daytime works (7am to 6pm) is predicted to exceed 2mm/s PPV for up to three (3) days, the occupants of all buildings within 50m must be advised of the works at least three (3) days prior to the works commencing and the vibration level must not exceed 5mm/s.

Table 4: Vibration amenity at horizontal plane of floor level of interest (AUP(OP) E25.6.30.1)

Receiver Peak Particle Velocity Vibration Level (mm/s)

0700 - 2200 2200 - 0700

Occupied activity sensitive to noise 2 0.3

Other occupied buildings 2 2

2 Long-term (continuous) vibration includes types not covered by the short-term vibration definition.

3 The long-term (continuous) criteria can apply at all floor levels, but levels are normally highest at the top floor.




4.3 Underwater Noise

4.3.1 Overview

Section F2.18 of the AUP:(OP) includes objectives and policies relating to the management of the adverse effects of underwater noise on marine fauna. Table F2.19.8 (A114) classifies “underwater blasting, impact and vibratory piling, and marine seismic surveys” as restricted discretionary activities. Therefore, assessment of underwater noise effects is required for this project due to the use of impact and vibratory piling methods.

There are no underwater noise standards in the AUP(OP). F2.23.1.3(c) identifies specific matters of discretion and F2.23.2.7 identifies assessment criteria, both of which are included in Appendix E for reference.

An underwater noise effects assessment requires input from both an acoustician and marine ecologist. The marine ecologist identifies the relevant species of interest. The acoustician determines the relevant zones of influence (or effects envelopes) for the proposed works inclusive of practicable mitigation and management measures. The zones and proposed measures inform the marine ecologists effects assessment.

The social and economic benefit of the project is not address by the acoustician nor the marine ecologist. This matter must be addressed separately by others.

4.3.2 Species of Interest

The species of interest in the project vicinity have been identified by the project’s marine ecologist.4 In summary:

• Orca, common dolphin and bottlenose dolphin have been identified as the primary species of interest. NOAA classifies these species as mid-frequency Cetaceans (MF) for the purposes of underwater noise sensitivity

• Fur seals may also be present in the area, which are classified as otariid pinnipeds (OW).

• It is also understood that a resident leopard seal has been sighted in the Waitematā Harbour since 2015. This is unusual as leopard seals primarily inhabit the Antarctic region, although the species has been known to visit New Zealand in winter. Leopard seals are classified as phocid pinnipeds (PW) for the purposes of assessing underwater noise sensitivity.

The project’s marine ecologist4 also identifies fish species found in the Waitematā, but notes they are not dependant on the existing habitat and finds the overall level of effects to be ‘Very Low’, with no additional mitigation measures required beyond those described in Section 7.2 for marine mammals.

4.3.3 Marine Mammals – Physiological Impacts

There is no New Zealand guidance on underwater noise effects. However, the US Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has provided guidance for assessing the effects of anthropogenic (human-made) sound on marine mammals5 (referred to as the ‘NOAA Guidelines’). This US statute does not apply in New Zealand, but the NOAA Guidelines are provided to give context to the underwater noise assessment.

The NOAA Guidelines identify the received levels above which individual marine mammals are predicted to experience changes in hearing sensitivity. These changes are either temporary

4 ‘Downtown Ferry Redevelopment – Stage 1: Marine Ecological Assessment’, dated September 2018

5 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: ‘Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects on Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing’ (July 2016).




(‘Temporary Threshold Shift’ or TTS), or permanent (‘Permanent Threshold Shift’ or PTS)6. Auditory threshold shifts can be caused from peak exposure (high-level impulsive events such as pile strikes) or from cumulative exposure (lower noise levels over an extended period such as from vibro-piling or multiple pile strikes).

The NOAA Guidelines provide TTS and PTS onset thresholds for mid-frequency cetaceans using ‘peak’ and ‘SELcum’ assessment descriptors. The peak level is the highest un-weighted instantaneous pressure level recorded during the measurement period, whereas SELcum is the species-weighted cumulative sound exposure level over a 24-hour period. The criteria are summarised in Table 5.

Table 5: Summary of NOAA TTS and PTS thresholds7

Species Threshold Type Impulsive sources (e.g. impact piling)

Non-impulsive sources (e.g. vibro piling)

Mid-frequency cetaceans

TTS 224 dB Lpeak / 170 dB SELcum (mf) 178 dB SELcum(mf)

PTS 230 dB Lpeak / 185 dB SELcum (mf) 198 dB SELcum(mf)

Otariid pinnipeds TTS 226 dB Lpeak / 188 dB SELcum (pw) 199 dB SELcum(pw)

PTS 232 dB Lpeak / 203 dB SELcum (pw) 219 dB SELcum(pw)

Phocid pinnipeds TTS 212 dB Lpeak / 170 dB SELcum (pw) 181 dB SELcum(pw)

PTS 218 dB Lpeak / 185 dB SELcum (pw) 201 dB SELcum(pw)

4.3.4 Marine Mammals – Behavioural Impacts

Behavioural responses to underwater noise can vary significantly depending on species, the noise environment, and the frequency content of the noise source. These effects can include temporary avoidance of the noisy area, disorientation or impeded communication.

Relatively little is known about the thresholds above which there are likely to be behavioural impacts.

As interim guidance, NOAA states that behavioural impacts can occur at 160 dB re. 1 Pa rms for

impact piling, and as low as 120 dB re. 1 Pa rms for vibratory driven piles (depending on the noise environment).

It should be noted that these thresholds are widely recognised to be conservative, particularly for non-impulsive sources such as vibro piling and elevated noise environments (refer Section 3.3) and are only interim criteria until formal guidance is available. For impact piling, the behavioural response zone extends across to Stanley Bay. For vibro piling, the zone extends to Bayswater to the north, Chelsea Bay to the west, and Devonport to the east.

With reference to the T&T report8, the marine ecologists have advised that the Central Waitematā Harbour is not regularly occupied by marine mammals and is not a critical habitat for feeding, breeding or migration for the species of interest. Therefore, detailed consideration of behavioural effects, such as potential auditory masking, is not necessary.

6 TTS in humans can be likened to the ‘muffled’ effect on hearing after being exposed to high noise levels such as at a concert. The effect eventually goes away, but the longer the exposure, the longer the threshold shift lasts. Eventually, the TTS becomes permanent.

7 SEL thresholds have a reference of 1 μPa2s and Lpeak thresholds have a reference of 1 μPa

8 ‘Downtown Ferry Redevelopment – Stage 1: Marine Ecological Assessment’, dated September 2018




4.3.5 Criteria for Divers

The US Navy (US Federal Register, 2002) states there are no adverse noise effects below

145 dB re 1 Pa rms. However, changing heart rates or breathing frequency have been found to

occur above 154 dB re 1 Pa rms. Safety guidelines for human divers published in a NATO Undersea Research Centre (NURC) publication9 recommends military divers should avoid areas where noise levels exceed 160 dB re 1 μPa rms (125Hz – 4kHz). 160 dB re 1 μPa rms is considered an acceptable threshold for experienced divers near the proposed works and aligns with the marine mammal behavioural response threshold for impulsive sources (impact piling) above.

5.0 CONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY

The following indicative methodologies are based on the ‘Berth 3 & 4 Pontoon and Gangway Installation’ from Downer, dated 26 September 2018, and a subsequent discussion with Downer10 and T&T11.

5.1 Demolition of Piers 3 and 4

Demolition of Piers 3 and 4 is understood to involve:

• Removal of the existing piles by cutting at seabed level using an underwater wire saw and lifting using a crane

• Removal of the wharf deck by cutting sections with a concrete saw and removal with a crane of hydraulic excavator. Use of jack hammers or small excavator mounted concrete breaker (5T) may be required to remove the concrete over girders and girder flanges

The duration of these works is approximately 4 weeks.

5.2 Refurbishment of Pier 1 Building

The refurbishment within the Terminal Building would generally involve the use of hand tools within a hoarded worksite. This may include the use of concrete saws and jack hammers to run services within the floor slab and modify the canopy to the Ferry Building.

The duration of these works is approximately 6 months.

5.3 Construction of Breakwater and New Ferry Berths

The primary activity of interest is the piling works because it has the potential to generate high levels of airborne and underwater noise for extended periods. It also has the potential to generate appreciable vibration depending on the piling methodology.

Driving of the piles (i.e. the actuation time of the vibro hammer or impact hammer) is the focus of this assessment as it is predicted to be the loudest activity. Other activities such as pile preparation and alignment, crane operations, truck deliveries and concrete pours, are predicted to produce significantly lower noise levels.

The breakwater piles are proposed to be installed by a rig positioned on Queens Wharf. All other piles (pontoons, gangway landings, fenders and dolphins) are proposed to be installed from a barge or temporary staging. It is understood that up to two piling rigs could operate simultaneously.

9 ‘NATO Undersea Research Centre Human Diver and Marine Mammal Risk Mitigation Rules and Procedures’, NURC-SP-2006-008, September 2006.

10 Ben Lawrence (MDA) discussion with Gavin Jones (Downer) on 5 September 2018

11 Ben Lawrence (MDA) emails with Tim Allsopp-Smith (T&T) on 2 and 9 November 2018




The indicative construction methodologies described in the following sub sections are representative of the proposed activities and included for assessment purposes. However, the methodology may evolve as design and construction progresses.

The duration of these piling works is 6 – 12 months.

5.3.1 Breakwater

The 210m long breakwater is to be comprised of 310mm diameter steel UC piles at 770mm centres. The piles are to be installed using a combination of impact and vibro driving methods:

• The southern 90m of breakwater piles are to be impact driven approximately 1.5m into the Eastern Coast Bays Formation (ECBF). Up to 60 strikes would be required per pile, and up to 4 piles installed per day.

• The northern 115m of breakwater piles are to be primarily vibro driven to, but not into, the ECBF. This would require up to 30 minutes of vibro driving per pile, and up to 8 piles could be installed per day.

• There is an allowance for the northernmost 48 of these piles to be impact driven into the ECBF. Up to 40 strikes would be required per pile, and up to 4 piles could be installed per day.

A pile gate would be used to position the breakwater piles. The gate would be supported at each end by a 310mm diameter steel UC pile (or similar). Each gate would typically enable the installation of five breakwater piles. The piling gate support piles would be driven to a depth of approximately 2m, requiring a total of 2 minutes of vibro driving to install and subsequently remove the pile.

5.3.2 Pontoon, Gangway Landings, Fender and Dolphin Piling Works

The permanent piles consist of 710mm circular steel casings which are to be driven 7m into the ECBF. Up to 4 piles would be installed per day suing the following methodology:

• The steel casing would be driven to a depth of 1 – 2m into the ECBF

• Bore out the inside of the pile down to depth

• Drive the steel tube down to depth

• Clean out and place reinforcing and concrete

• Install the HDPE sleeve

A total of 30 minutes of vibro driving or 60 strikes are predicted to be required to drive each pile.

If temporary staging used instead of a barge, 500mm steel piles would be required to support the staging. These piles are anticipated to require 1 minute of vibro driving per pile, at a rate of four piles per day.

Pile gates will also be used for the pontoon, gangway landings, fender and dolphin piles. In some cases, a gate may be needed for each pile due to the separation between pile locations. Each gate would require four 310mm UC piles driven into the ECBF to a depth of approximately 2m, requiring 2 minutes of vibro driving per pile (install and remove).

6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 Construction Noise (Airborne)

6.1.1 Predicted Levels

Indicative construction noise levels are presented in Table 6 overleaf. They are considered representative of the activities proposed, however in practice, construction noise levels are inherently variable due to factors such as equipment selection, methodology and operator skill and




care. The shaded cells in Table 6 show the distances from the noise source where noise levels above the daytime Project Standard of 75 dB LAeq are predicted.

Appendix G shows the predicted noise contours for vibro piling the southern-most gangway landing, and vibro piling a dolphin pile at the western extent closest to the receivers on Princes Wharf. Construction noise is predicted to comply with the relevant noise limits in AUP(OP) rule I202.6.1.5.

Table 6: Indicative noise levels at 1m from a building façade (without acoustic screening)

Equipment Sound power level

(dB LwA)

Noise level (dB LAeq) at distance of

Setback to achieve compliance (m)

Activity 10m 20m 50m 75 dB LAeq (daytime)

60 dB LAeq

(night-time)

Demolition Concrete cutting 115 90 84 75 48 N/A

Hand held or small excavator mounted breaking (1 - 5T)

111 86 80 71 33 N/A

Piling Vibro piling 116 91 85 76 52 N/A

Impact piling (including dolly and casing)

114 89 83 74 44 N/A

Bored piling/drilling 111 86 80 71 33 132

General Concrete truck and pump discharging

103 78 72 63 14 63

Mobile crane (35t) operating

98 73 67 58 8 40

Mobile crane (35t) idling 88 63 57 48 3 14

Generator 93 68 62 56 4 25

As identified in section 4.1, while no construction noise rules apply to receivers within the Central Wharves Precinct, the noise limits in Table 2 of this report are used to inform the effects assessment and enable a consistent approach for adaptive management protocol. As result, the limits in Table 2 are proposed as Project Standards in the proposed consent conditions in Section 8.0. The following sub sections provide further assessment at receivers within the Central Wharves Precinct, with reference to the Project Standards where appropriate.

6.1.2 Demolition of Piers 3 and 4

Demolition activities, such as concrete cutting and concrete breaking, are predicted to exceed the Project Standard without mitigation at short distances from the Ferry Building and ANZ building. These exceedances are predicted to be for short durations, and can, in most cases, be mitigated by noise barriers, or by use of smaller equipment (e.g. using a small concrete breaker instead of a larger one where appropriate). Mitigation and management would be detailed in the Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan (CNVMP) for these activities.

6.1.3 Refurbishment of Pier 1 Building

Activities inside the Pier 1 Building, such as concrete cutting and use of handheld breakers, are predicted to result in intermittent disruption of building occupants and commuters. We recommend advanced communication of works that are likely result in disturbance for occupants and reduced intelligibility of PA announcements for commuters.




6.1.4 Pier 1 Building

There is the potential for the daytime Project Standard to be exceeded by up to 10 decibels at the northern façade of the Pier 1 Building during piling works for the southern gangway landing. Noise barriers are predicted to provide marginal mitigation benefit. Based on the piling rates in Section 5.0, the exceedances of the 75 dB LAeq noise limit relate to less than 1 hour in total while the 7 piles for the landing are installed.

The breakwater piling works are predicted to produce noise levels of up to 75 dB LAeq at the façade of the Pier 1 Building for the southern-most piles.

6.1.5 The Cloud and Shed 10

The proposed construction works are predicted to generate high noise levels at the western façade of The Cloud event space. The breakwater piling works are approximately 10m from the façade of The Cloud. The noise levels at the façade are predicted to be 85 – 90 dB LAeq. As discussed in Section 3.1, The Cloud will not be a noise and vibration sensitive receiver during the Project works.

Shed 10 is mostly shielded by The Cloud, except for the southern and northern ends of the breakwater and southern-most gangway landing piling works. During these activities, noise levels at the façade of Shed 10 are predicted to be up to 75 dB LAeq.

As discussed in Section 3.1, consultation has been undertaken with RFA regarding these event spaces. The effects on their operations is not considered further by this assessment but should be addressed by the CNVMP (Section 7.0).

6.1.6 The Apartments and Hotel on Princes Wharf

Noise levels at the residential receivers on Princes Wharf are predicted to be 60 – 65 dB LAeq for the representative peak piling period, which is well below the daytime project standard of 75 dB LAeq. These noise levels would be noticeable due to the character of the noise source, but generally similar in level to the existing noise environment (refer Section 3.2).

6.1.7 Cumulative Effects

The construction noise methodology is based on two piling rigs operating simultaneously. Given the work site space constraints, close proximity of receivers and sequencing, any noise events that exceed the noise limits would almost always be dominated by one noise source. (e.g. concrete cutting or the closest piling rig). This would also be the case when considering concurrent downtown projects including construction of the seawall for the Quay Street Strengthening Project. While the ambient noise level may increase due to concurrent construction projects, or both piling rigs were operating at full revs concurrently, the cumulative noise level during any exceedance would generally increase by less than 1 – 2 decibels. This is an indiscernible change in level. What may be apparent is that high construction noise levels are more frequent / regular.

6.2 Construction Vibration

The vibration assessment addresses potential cosmetic building damage and amenity. Structural and settlement related vibration effects are addressed by others.

6.2.1 Cosmetic Damage

Table 7 overleaf provides indicative construction vibration levels for vibratory piling and impact piling. These activities have the potential to generate high vibration levels at receivers within short distances.

In terms of vibration sensitivity, buildings nearby to the piling works are all classed as commercial. It should be noted that Queens Wharf is a listed Heritage feature within the Heritage & Sensitive Structures setbacks in Table 7 (the concrete wharf structure, imbedded rails, Shed 10 and the original




Ferry Shelter within the Downtown Ferry Terminal), but is not sensitive to cosmetic damage from construction vibration (e.g. plaster or paint cracking).12

A 1 – 5 ton excavator mounted concrete breaker would be used during demolition near the kiosks (if not relocated prior), Ferry Building, and Pier 1 building. To enable compliance, a hand breaker must be used within 4m of heritage buildings and sensitive structures, and within 2m of other buildings.

All zones should be reviewed by the Acoustic Specialist when new information becomes apparent through vibration monitoring (refer CNVMP) or other means.

Table 7: Indicative distances for piling to comply with vibration limits at building foundations 13

Area

Amenity Setback (m)

AUP(OP)

Cosmetic Building Damage Setback (m)

Activity

Heritage & Sensitive

Structures

Residential Commercial

Breakwater piles14

Impact piling 61 36 19 3

Vibro piling 19 15 6 3

All other piles15

Impact piling 25 15 8 1

Vibro piling 8 6 3 1

6.2.2 Amenity

There is the potential for the breakwater impact and vibro piling works to exceed the AUP(OP) amenity vibration threshold at The Cloud and would be perceptible at times at Shed 10. However, as discussed in Section 3.1, The Cloud will not be a vibration sensitive receiver during the Project works. The vibration effects on their operations is not considered further by this assessment but should be included in the CNVMP (refer Section 7.0).

There is also the potential for impact driving of the southern wharf extension of approximately 40 breakwater piles at the southern end of the works to marginally exceed the amenity threshold at the northern end of the Pier 1 Building. In total, this equates to exceedances for less than 1 hour for the wharf extension and approximately 1 hour per day for 4 – 10 days for the breakwater piles, depending on the methodology.

There is potential for a marginal exceedance of the AUP(OP) vibration amenity threshold for concrete breaking adjacent to the historic Ferry Building. This means that vibration would be noticeable for short periods while the proximate section of wharf deck is removed.

6.3 Construction Noise (Underwater)

6.3.1 Overview

Piling is predicted to produce the highest levels of underwater construction noise. Noise levels are dependent on the installation method (impact, vibro or drilled/bored), pile type (steel, concrete or timber), pile size and mitigation. Noise propagation underwater is dependent on the bathymetry in the project vicinity and seafloor properties (rock, sand, mud etc.).

12 John Brown (Plan Heritage), discussions with Craig Fitzgerald (MDA) on 16 August 2018.

13 Based on regression analysis of available vibration measurements.

14 Includes a 100% safety factor due to the proximity of the piles to the existing wharf structure.

15 Does not include a safety factor as the piles are separate from the wharf structure.




6.3.2 Source Levels

Underwater source levels for the proposed piling works are summarised in Table 8. This is based on the piling methodology and piling rates in Section 5.3.

The 310mm steel UC piles required for the pile gates are negligible in comparison to the main piles because they are small and would take minimal time to drive in. They are not considered further.

The underwater noise source levels used are from California Department of Transportation’s document ‘Technical Guidance for Assessment and Mitigation of the Hydroacoustic Effects of Pile Driving on Fish’ (referred to as CALTRANS)16. The data is based on a considerable number of underwater noise measurements of piling works with pile sizes, pile types, environments and equipment that is comparable to the proposed works for this project. The CALTRANS data is provided at a distance of 10m from the pile, so the levels have been increased by 15 decibels to represent an equivalent source level at 1m from the pile in accordance with general industry practice.

The equivalent species weighted SEL has been calculated for each piling type based on the number of strikes/driving time per pile. The impact piling levels include mitigation in the form of a wooden cushion between the hammer and pile, which reduces the impact piling source levels by 10 decibels17. See Appendix F for details of this mitigation method.

Table 8: Pile driving underwater source levels

Description

Source levels (dB re 1μPa at 1m)

Details Peak RMS SELss SELcum(mf) SELcum(pw) SELcum(ow)

Breakwater piles

310mm UC steel

Vibro driving

(Up to 30 minutes vibro per pile, 8 piles per day)

180 165 N/A 179 189 189

Impact driving

(Up to 60 strikes per pile, 4 piles per day)

205 183 171 187 199 200

Main piles

710mm circular steel

Vibro driving

(Up to 30 minutes vibro per pile, 4 piles per day)

190 180 N/A 200 210 210

Impact driving

(Up to 60 strikes per pile, 4 piles per day)

215 195 182 187 199 200

6.3.3 Noise Modelling

Modelling of impact piling noise levels has been undertaken using dBSea, which is proprietary underwater noise prediction software that enables spatial visualisation for the various zones of influence. The model inputs are summarised as follows:

16 Table VI-1 for impact piling source levels, and Table I.2-2 for vibratory piling source levels.

17 Section 4.4.2.4 of CALTRANS states that, based on measurements, an 11 – 26 decibel reduction in piling noise level can be achieved with a wooden cushion between the hammer and pile cap. A 10 decibel reduction has been assumed as a conservative approach.




• Bathymetry provided by Auckland Council

• Source spectrums based on in-water measurements of impact driven steel piles18 and vibratory driven steel piles19 between 20Hz – 20kHz, scaled to the levels provided in Table 8

• The noise contours are calculated using a Parabolic Equation (‘PE’) solver for frequencies below 2kHz and a ‘Ray Trace’ solver above 2kHz. The cross over is considered suitable for depths of between 5 and 20m found in Waitematā Harbour

• Seafloor is assumed to be mud with sandstone beneath

• The speed of sound is assumed to be constant in the water column

6.3.4 Zones of Influence

The predicted zones of influence for the proposed piling works are presented in Table 9. The zones are based on the criteria provided in the NOAA guidelines for mid-frequency cetaceans, otariid pinnipeds and phocid pinnipeds (Section 4.3). The zones of influence have been provided as distances from the pile being installed.

Table 9: Zones of influence

Zones of influence

Species Threshold Vibro Piling Impact Piling

All species PTS – peak Below criteria Below criteria

TTS – peak Below criteria Below criteria

Mid-frequency cetaceans

PTS – cumulative exposure Below criteria Below criteria

TTS – cumulative exposure 65m 35m

Otariid pinnipeds PTS – cumulative exposure Below criteria Below criteria

TTS – cumulative exposure <20m <20m

Phocid pinnipeds PTS – cumulative exposure <20m 24m

TTS – cumulative exposure 145m 155m

In summary, the zones are as follows:

• The largest PTS zone is 24m for phocid pinnipeds, and below the criteria for all other species

• The largest TTS zone is 155m for phocid pinnipeds, 65m for mid-frequency cetaceans, and <20m for otariid pinnipeds

Figure 3 in Appendix G graphically illustrates the largest TTS zones in Table 9.

The TTS and PTS cumulative exposure zones represent a boundary, outside of which, there is predicted to be a negligible risk of hearing impairment regardless of the duration a marine mammal is in the project vicinity. If a marine mammal enters a cumulative exposure zone, there is potential for the onset of TTS or PTS. How close the marine mammal gets to the piling determines how fast the cumulative exposure limits are reached. As it is often difficult to track the location of a marine

18 ITAP –Institut für technische und angewandte Physik GmbH: ‘Ermittlung der Schalldruck-Spitzenpegel aus Messungen der Unterwassergeräusche von Offshore-WEA und Offshore- Rammarbeiten’ (2005).

19 ITAP –Institut für technische und angewandte Physik GmbH: ‘Spektren der Vibrationsramme beim Umspannwerk’ (2011).




mammal’s movement, it is considered conservatively appropriate to apply the outer extents of the boundaries for management protocol.

With reference to Section 4.3.4, the potential behavioural response zone extends to Bayswater to the north, Chelsea Bay to the west, and Devonport to the east.

6.3.5 Cumulative Underwater Noise Effects

There are several projects in the downtown area which involve piling works in the marine zone. As the project timeframes are scheduled to overlap, there is potential for piling works to take place at different sites on the same day, potentially resulting in larger zones.

For the Downtown Ferry Basin Redevelopment, the zones are small compared to other nearby projects such as the Quay Street Waterfront Park or the Queens Wharf Cruise Berth Upgrade Project based on the current methodology. The zones would therefore be controlled by the latter projects for any concurrent piling works.

7.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE AND VIBRATION MANAGEMENT

7.1 Foreword

Construction noise and vibration management is essential to ensure emissions are reasonable.

The foreword of New Zealand Standard NZS 6803:1999 “Acoustics – Construction Noise” states: “Construction noise is an inherent part of the progress of society. As noise from construction is generally of limited duration, people and communities will usually tolerate a higher noise level provided it is no louder than necessary, and occurs with appropriate hours of the day. The Resource Management Act 1991 requires the adoption of the best practicable option to ensure the emission of noise from premises does not exceed a reasonable level. The Act also imposes a duty on every person to avoid, remedy, or mitigate any adverse effect on the environment arising from an activity carried on by, or on behalf of, that person.”20

The following relevant AUP OIP objectives and policies provide further guidance:

• AUP OIP objectives in E25.2 (1) require that “People are protected from unreasonable levels of noise and vibration”, while (4) states: “Construction activities that cannot meet noise and vibration standards are enabled while controlling duration, frequency and timing to manage adverse effects”. This acknowledges that there are often periods or activities where the construction noise standards cannot be met. The objective is to enable them provided they are no louder than necessary.

• AUP OIP policies in E25.3 (2) require “Minimise, where practicable, noise and vibration at its source or on the site from which it is generated to mitigate adverse effects on adjacent sites”, while (10) states: “Avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of noise and vibration from construction, maintenance and demolition activities while having regard to:

a) the sensitivity of the receiving environment; and

b) the proposed duration and hours of operation of the activity; and

c) the practicability of complying with permitted noise and vibration standards.”

This acknowledges the practicability of compliance. A CNVMP should address all three elements.

• AUP matters of discretion in E25.8.2 (1) parts (a) and (b) state:

a) “whether activities can be managed so that they do not generate unreasonable noise and vibration levels on adjacent land uses particularly activities sensitive to noise

20 New Zealand Standard NZS 6803:1999 “Acoustics – Construction Noise”, Foreword




b) the extent to which the noise or vibration generated by the activity:

o will occur at times when disturbance to sleep can be avoided or minimised; and

o will be compatible with activities occurring or allowed to occur in the surrounding area; and

o will be limited in duration, or frequency or by hours of operation; and

o will exceed the existing background noise and vibration levels in that environment and the reasonableness of the cumulative levels; and

o can be carried out during daylight hours, such as road works and works on public footpaths”

There are predicted exceedances of the proposed project standards for several nearby receivers (Section 6.0). However, these are considered reasonable provided they are of limited duration and BPO measures are implemented through a CNVMP to avoid, remedy and mitigate the effects as far as practicable.

7.2 Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan

A CNVMP is recommended as a condition of any consent granted (Section 8.0). It should include:

• The project standards that should, as far as practicable, be complied with to enable a consistent approach for adaptive management protocol (noting that no construction noise rules apply to receivers within the Central Wharves Precinct)

• Predicted noise and vibration levels for relevant equipment and/or activities

• Construction noise and vibration mitigation and management measures

• Noise and vibration monitoring requirements

• Communication, consultation and complaints response procedures

The following procedure should be implemented to manage the effects of underwater noise:

• Undertake visual monitoring 30 minutes prior to commencing piling operations to ensure there are no marine mammals or divers in the area

• Ensure that there are no diving activities scheduled during piling works

• Undertake visual monitoring during piling operations to identify any marine mammals or divers that enter the area

• Implement low power or shut down procedures when a marine mammal or diver is identified within the TTS zones (based on the current methodology, Table 9 identifies a zone of up to 155m for phocid pinnipeds for the largest impact driven piles)

• Where practicable, use ‘soft starts’ (gradually increasing the intensity of piling) and minimise duty cycle to manage the effects of underwater noise

These recommendations should be included in the CNVMP proposed condition of any consent granted (Section 8.0). A draft CNVMP is contained in Appendix H. The draft CNVMP must be updated by the consent holder prior to works to reflect any changes in methodology proposed by the contractor and submitted to Auckland Council for certification.

8.0 CONDITIONS OF CONSENT

The following conditions are recommended for any consent granted:

1. Construction noise shall be measured and assessed in accordance with the provisions of New Zealand Standard NZS 6803:1999 “Acoustics - Construction Noise” and comply with the following




Project Standards at 1m from the façade of any building that is occupied during the construction work unless otherwise provided for in the CNVMP (refer condition 3).

Day Time LAeq (30min) LAFmax

Monday to Friday 0630 – 2230 75 90

Saturday 0700 – 2300 80 90

8.1.1 Sunday 0900 – 1900 65 85

8.1.2 All other times (night-time) 60 75

2. Construction vibration shall be measured and assessed in accordance with German Standard DIN 4150-3:1999 “Structural Vibration – Part 3: Effects of Vibration on Structures” and comply with AUP(OP) Standard E25.6.30 (1) unless otherwise provided for in the CNVMP (refer condition 3).

3. The consent holder shall prepare a Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan (CNVMP).

The objectives of the CNVMP are:

a) Identify and adopt the Best Practicable Option (BPO) for the management of construction noise and vibration;

b) Define the procedures to be followed when construction activities cannot meet the noise and vibration standards in Conditions 1 and 2;

c) Inform the duration, frequency and timing of works to manage disruption;

d) Require engagement with affected receivers and timely management of complaints; and

e) Include measures to protect the wellbeing of marine mammals.

At a minimum, the CNVMP must address the relevant measures in Annex E of NZS 6803:1999 "Acoustics - Construction Noise” and Appendix B of DIN 4150-3:1999 “Structural vibration - Part 3 Effects of vibration on structures”. It must also include measures to manage the underwater noise effects on marine mammals from vibratory piling.

At least five (5) working days prior to Commencement of Construction, the consent holder shall submit the CNVMP to the Team Leader Compliance Monitoring – Central to certify the CNVMP.

9.0 CONCLUSIONS

MDA has undertaken a construction noise and vibration assessment for the proposed Downtown Ferry Basin Redevelopment Stage 1 works.

In summary:

• No airborne construction noise rules apply to receivers within the Central Wharves Precinct. To address the noise effects on these receivers, the noise limits in Table 2 are proposed as Project Standards in a condition of consent. The Project Standards align with the noise limits set out in AUP(OP) rule I202.6.1.5. Airborne construction noise is predicted to generally comply with the Project Standards. Local, short term exceedances of the Project Standards include:

o Demolition activities, such as concrete breaking and concrete cutting in proximity to the ANZ Building and Ferry Building

o Piling activities in proximity to The Cloud (in consultation with the RFA, The Cloud will not be a noise and vibration sensitive receiver during the Project works)

o Piling works for the southern gangway landing received at the northern façade of the Pier 1 Building




• Construction vibration is predicted to comply with the relevant cosmetic building damage limits at all locations provided that only small concrete breakers or hand-held breakers are used for demolition works. However, there is residual potential exceedance of the vibration amenity limits for proximate piling and concrete breaking activities received at the ANZ building, Ferry Building and Pier 1 building.

• Underwater noise effects should be managed by implementing low power or shut down procedures for piling works when a marine mammal or diver is identified within the TTS zones identified in Table 9.

The effects are considered reasonable provided they are of limited duration and BPO measures are implemented through a CNVMP to avoid, remedy and mitigate the effects as far as practicable. A draft CNVMP is contained in Appendix H.




APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY

Noise A sound that is unwanted by, or distracting to, the receiver.

dB Decibel (dB) is the unit of sound level. Expressed as a logarithmic ratio of sound pressure (P) relative to a reference pressure (Pr), where dB = 20 x log(P/Pr). The convention is a reference

pressure of Pr = 20 Pa in air.

dBA The unit of sound level which has its frequency characteristics modified by a filter (A-weighted) to more closely approximate the frequency bias of the human ear. A-weighting is used in airborne acoustics.

LAeq (t) The equivalent continuous (time-averaged) A-weighted sound level commonly referred to as the average level. The suffix (t) represents the period, e.g. (8 h) would represent a period of 8 hours, (15 min) would represent a period of 15 minutes and (2200-0700) would represent a measurement time between 10 pm and 7 am.

LAFmax The A-weighted maximum noise level. The highest noise level which occurs during the measurement period.

NZS 6803:1999 New Zealand Standard NZS 6803: 1999 “Acoustics - Construction Noise”

Vibration When an object vibrates, it moves rapidly up and down or from side to side. The magnitude of the sensation when feeling a vibrating object is related to the vibration velocity. Vibration can occur in any direction. When vibration velocities are described, it can be either the total vibration velocity, which includes all directions, or it can be separated into vertical (up and down vibration), horizontal transverse (side to side) and horizontal longitudinal direction (front to back) components.

PPV Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) is the measure of the vibration amplitude, zero to maximum, measured in mm/s.

DIN 4150-3:1999 German Standard DIN 4150-3:1999 “Structural Vibration - Effects of Vibration on Structures”

Underwater noise A sound that is unwanted by, or distracting to, the receiver underwater.

Lpeak The peak instantaneous pressure level (un-weighted).

RMS Root Mean Square (RMS) is the equivalent continuous (time-averaged) sound level commonly referred to as the average level (period matches the event duration).

SEL Sound exposure level (SEL) is the total sound energy of an event, normalised to an average sound level over one second. It is the time-integrated, sound-pressure-squared level. SEL is typically used to compare transient sound events having different time durations, pressure levels and temporal characteristics.

SELcum The SELcum is the ‘cumulative’ sound energy of all events in a 24-hour period, normalised to an average sound level over one second.

TTS Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS) is the temporary loss of hearing caused by sound exposure. The duration of TTS varies depending on the nature of the stimulus, but there is generally recovery of full hearing over time. TTS in humans can be likened to the ‘muffled’ effect on hearing after being exposed to high noise levels such as at a concert. The effect eventually goes away, but the longer the exposure, the longer the threshold shift lasts. Eventually, the TTS becomes permanent (PTS).

PTS Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS) is the permanent loss of hearing caused by acoustic trauma. PTS results in irreversible damage to the sensory hair cells of the ear.




APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF AMBIENT AIRBORNE NOISE MEASUREMENTS

A representative daytime noise survey of the area was undertaken between 10am and 3pm on Monday 19 February 2018. Figure 3 shows the measurement locations.

Figure 3: Aerial map of airborne measurement locations

The noise measurements were undertaken in accordance with the relevant standards. The weather conditions were overcast with 8/8 oktas cloud cover and little to no wind. The duration of each measurement was 15 minutes.

The results are presented in Table 10. In summary, high ambient noise levels were measured in the project vicinity, which was controlled by road traffic on Quay Street, vessel movements and other construction works.

Table 10: Summary of noise and vibration survey results

Measurement position Noise levels (dB) Dominant source

LAmax LAeq LA90

1 Princes Wharf 92 64 57 Ferries (multiple horns), construction

2 Ferry Building balcony 92 72 65 Traffic (trucks, buses), construction

3 The Cloud 72 59 58 Distant traffic and construction

MP1

MP2

MP3




APPENDIX C SUMMARY OF AMBIENT UNDERWATER NOISE MEASUREMENTS

Noise levels were measured at four locations shown as MP2 – MP5 on Figure 4 overleaf, referred to as Harbour Bridge, Bayswater, Hobson Wharf and Bean Rock respectively.

Figure 4: Hydrophone locations

Soundtrap 201 hydrophones were deployed at the Harbour Bridge (MP2), Bayswater (MP3) and Hobson Wharf (MP4), measuring a frequency range of 10Hz – 96kHz, repeating the measurements in the assessment report21. In addition, a Soundtrap 300 HF hydrophone was deployed at Bean Rock (MP5) measuring a frequency range of 10Hz – 288kHz to represent the harbour entrance.

A standard rigging arrangement was used22 with the hydrophones at a height of 3m above the seabed. There were no anthropogenic noise sources near the hydrophones during deployment.

The hydrophones were deployed for a two-week period (7 – 20 September 2018). However, the Harbour Bridge (MP2) surface buoy was damaged, and the hydrophone was retrieved, by a third party after only 4 days. Furthermore, the Bayswater (MP3) hydrophone was not recovered.

Table 11 summarises the results of 1 second measurement intervals over the first 4 days of the survey period. This period is common to the three hydrophones retrieved and is considered representative of the noise environment. Measurement data below 63Hz has been excluded due to the influence of tidal flows.

Table 11: Summary of underwater noise measurements (dB re 1 μPa)

Measurement position L01 RMS L50 L90

MP2 (Harbour Bridge) 133 120 110 104

MP3 (Bayswater) - - - -

MP4 (Hobson Wharf) 132 123 115 110

MP5 (Bean Rock) 136 123 111 106

21 ‘Rp 001 20170963 BL (Westhaven Marina Extension - Acoustic Assessment)’, dated 22 December 2017

22 ‘Good Practice Guide for Underwater Noise Measurement’, National Physics Laboratory (NPL) Scotland (Section 4.2.3 – bottom-mounted with surface float)

MP2: Harbour Bridge

MP4: Hobson Wharf MP5: Bean Rock

MP3: Bayswater




APPENDIX D AUP(OP) ZONING

Table 12: Auckland Unitary Plan noise rules summary

Section Relevant Rule(s)23

E25 Noise and Vibration

E25.6.28 (Business City Centre)

Monday – Friday 6.30am – 10.30pm (day) 75 dB LAeq and 90 dB LAFmax

Saturday 7am – 11pm (day) 80 dB LAeq and 90 dB LAFmax

Sunday 9am – 7pm (day) 65 dB LAeq and 85 dB LAFmax

Other times 10pm – 7am (night) 60 dB LAeq and 75 dB LAFmax

Only the noise limits from this rule are relevant (refer rule I202.6.1 below).

F2 Coastal – General Coastal Marine Zone

F2.21.11 (Airborne Noise)

Refers to E25 Noise and Vibration, but is overridden by rule I202.6.1 below.

I202 Central Wharves Precinct

I202.6.1. b (Land and water use standards)

The Auckland-wide noise rules E25.6.2 – 13, 23 – 29 and 31 – 33 do not apply to land and coastal marine area in the Central Wharves Precinct.

I202.6.1.5 (CMA)

Noise limits in E25.6.28 apply at buildings on the south side of Quay Street only. No noise limits apply at noise sensitive receivers within the CMA (e.g. Princes Wharf apartments or Queens Wharf Ferry Building).

23 Summary of key limits only, refer to rules in full. However, all generally assume the construction exceeds 20 weeks (i.e. long-term duration).




Business – City Centre Zone (majority of CBD buildings)

Coastal – General Marine Zone (harbour / wharves, including Princes and Hobson Wharf buildings)

Open Space – Community Zone (Kiosk East, information centre)

Road




APPENDIX E UNDERWATER NOISE MATTERS OF DISCRETION AND ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

F2.23.1.3(c) identifies specific matters that Council will restrict its discretion to for assessment of underwater blasting, impact and vibratory piling, marine seismic surveys. In addition F2.23.2.7 identifies specific assessment criteria for assessment of underwater blasting, impact and vibratory piling, marine seismic surveys as follows in Table 13 and Table 14.

Table 13: Specific matters of discretion the Council will restrict its discretion to when assessing a restricted discretionary activity resource consent application relating to underwater blasting, impact and vibratory piling, marine seismic surveys - AUP(OP) F2.23.1.3(c)

F2.23.1.3 (c) underwater blasting, impact and vibratory piling, marine seismic surveys:

(i) the health and well-being of marine fauna (including threatened and at-risk species) and people from the underwater noise associated with the proposal;

(ii) the practicability of being able to control the underwater noise effects

(iii) the social and economic benefits of the proposal; and

(iv) the extent to which non-transitory or more than minor adverse effects on threatened or at risk indigenous species (including Maui’s Dolphin and Bryde’s Whale) are avoided.

Table 14: Relevant Assessment Criteria Council will consider for restricted discretionary activities relating to underwater blasting, impact and vibratory piling, marine seismic surveys (note that no other criteria apply) - AUP(OP) F2.23.2(7)

F2.23.2(7)(a) whether the proposal has included an assessment of:

(i) the extent to which the underwater noise associated with the proposal adversely affects the health and well-being of marine fauna and people;

(ii) the practicability of being able to control the underwater noise effects;

(iii) the social and economic benefits of the proposal; and

(iv) the extent to which the adverse effects of underwater noise will be mitigated.

APPENDIX F UNDERWATER NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES

Hammer Cushions

A wooden, polymer or nylon cushion placed between hammer and pile, which can reduce the injury potential of impact piles from impulsive signals.

We understand this measure is routinely employed by New Zealand piling contractors to reduce wear on equipment and mitigate noise. This measure has been assumed in the acoustic assessment as the base case.

Wooden cushions provide the greatest reduction in noise level. Polymer cushions are noticeably less effective, and nylon cushions are the least effective.

Image: https://theconstructor.org/geotechnical/pile-driving-equipment-types-uses/17605/




APPENDIX G PREDICTED CONSTRUCTION NOISE CONTOURS

The following airborne construction noise contours are attached:

• Figure 1: Vibro Piling North (Dolphin)

• Figure 2: Vibro Piling South (Breakwater)

The following underwater construction contours are attached:

• Figure 3: Underwater Management Zones




APPENDIX H DRAFT CNVMP

A draft CNVMP has been prepared and is attached overleaf.


Sourced from the LINZ Data Service and licensed for re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 New Zealand licence

Noise Sources

Piling

Noise Level (dB LAeq)

at 1.5m above ground

55

60

65

70

75

80

±0 10 20 30 405

Meters

Scale @ A3: 1:1,250Prepared by: Ben LawrenceDate: 12/11/2018

Downtown Ferry Terminal Stage 1 - Airborne Construction Noise LevelsFigure 1: Vibro Piling - Ferry Dolphin Pile

Client: Auckland TransportPath: I:\JOBS\2018\20180107\04 Calculations\Sp001 20180107 BL Downtown Ferry Relocation

Filename: Ferry Dolphin Piling.SGSThe noise contours in this figure were obtained by computer interpolation between calculated grid points.

There is an interpolation accuracy of +/- 1.5 dB

Sourced from the LINZ Data Service and licensed for re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 New Zealand licence

Noise Sources

Piling

Noise Level (dB LAeq)

at 1.5m above ground

55

60

65

70

75

80

±0 10 20 30 405

Meters


Downtown Ferry Terminal Stage 1 - Airborne Construction Noise LevelsFigure 2: Vibro Piling - Southern Gangway Pile

Client: Auckland TransportPath: I:\JOBS\2018\20180107\04 Calculations\Sp001 20180107 BL Downtown Ferry Relocation

Filename: Southern Gangway Piling.SGSThe noise contours in this figure were obtained by computer interpolation between calculated grid points.

There is an interpolation accuracy of +/- 1.5 dB

Sourced from the LINZ Data Service and licensed for re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 New Zealand licence±0 102030405

Meters

Folder I:\JOBS\2018\20180107\06 Drawings\GIS\Downtown Ferry Relocation\


Downtown Ferry Terminal Stage 1Figure 3: Underwater Management Zones (Largest TTS zone for each species group)

Client: Auckland TransportPath: I:\JOBS\2018\20180107\04 Calculations\Underwater

Filename: dBSea 001 20180107 Downtown Ferry Relocation.uwa

Noise Sources

Piling

TTS Zones

Mid-Frequency Cetaceans

Otariid Pinnipeds (<20m)

Phocid Pinnipeds

downtown ferry basin redevelopment acoustic … · this document may not be reproduced in full or...

Documents