noise workshops - texas a&m universityso, what is a traffic noise workshops… first of all,...

$: NOISE WORKSHOPS - Texas A&M UniversitySo, what is a traffic noise workshops… first of all, this is about traffic noise,,,, Not talking about rail or airplane noise.\ഠ This procedure$
Footer Text Date

NOISE WORKSHOPS Let’s Talk About That Noise

Date

Footer Text Date

What is a traffic noise workshop?

An informal meeting between TxDOT personnel and owners of property adjacent to a proposed noise barrier(s).

2

Presenter

Presentation Notes

So, what is a traffic noise workshops… first of all, this is about traffic noise,,,, Not talking about rail or airplane noise. This procedure is strictly for auto traffic. In short a traffic noise workshop is An informal meeting between TxDOT personnel and owners of property adjacent to a but, How these meeting can go can vary greatly…. From good to bad… but there are things that can be done to ensure the best possible meeting

Footer Text Date

Traffic Noise Guidance and Policy

FHWA

– 23 CFR 772

TxDOT’s Guidelines for the Analysis and Abatement of Roadway Traffic Noise (2011)

TxDOT’s Traffic Noise Handbook

3

Presenter

Presentation Notes

why do we do these meetings? Well, it is in the federal rule, 23 CFR 772. This says that we have to have some kind of public involvement any time a noise barrier is proposed. FHWA 23 CFR 772 TxDOT Guidelines are TxDOT’s interpretation of the federal rule. … this applies for any project txdot has a part in… regardless of funding – All the details and definitions. we do our public involvement via a noise workshop… TxDOT’s Traffic Noise Handbook – further instructions on how to work with our noise guidance.. And in this case, how to get a workshop accomplished and documented.

Footer Text Date

A Brief Overview of the Traffic Noise Process

The major objectives of a traffic noise analysis are to:

– Identify areas where possible noise impacts may occur for each project alternative.

– Consider and evaluate abatement measures to mitigate these impacts.

– Propose implementation of feasible and reasonable abatement measures.

– Communicate the results to the public and local officials.

Important: it is never too early to discuss possible noise abatement

4

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Let me recap the traffic noise process for those of you new to all of this (if a traffic noise analysis is triggered type 1 project - )

Footer Text Date


Identify adjacent land uses for noise sensitive areas (residences, schools, churches, parks, etc)

INCLUDES PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT

5

Presenter

Presentation Notes

You can identify these land uses with a combination of GIS, field visits, and your local planning department Remember, permitted development is included. Trip to planning department

Footer Text Date








6

Presenter

Presentation Notes

So now you have determined that you have impacts…

Footer Text Date


FHWA’s Traffic Noise Model (TNM)

7

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Model roadways and adjacent land uses to determine noise levels

Footer Text Date


8

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Evaluate barriers

Footer Text Date








9

Footer Text Date


Noise Barrier

AKA Sound Walls

Are barriers REASONABLE AND FEASIBLE?

10

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Are these walls effective at reducing noise? Are these walls cost effective?

Footer Text Date

Feasible and Reasonable (TxDOT noise guidelines)

Feasible: A noise abatement measure is NOT FEASIBLE unless the measure achieves a noise reduction of at least 5 dB(A) at greater than 50% of first row impacted receptors.

Reasonable: The combination of social, economic, and environmental factors considered in the evaluation of a noise abatement measure. A determination of reasonableness for abatement measures will include consideration of the following range of factors:

– Cost Effectiveness

– Noise reduction design goal for roadway traffic noise abatement measures (at least one receiver must have a noise reduction of -7 dB(A) or greater

– Views of Benefitted Receptors

11

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Feasible. a noise reduction of at least 5 dB(A) at greater than 50% of first row impacted receptors. Blocking the line of site between the source and receptor usually provides a 5 dB(A) noise reduction.

Footer Text Date

Feasible and Reasonable (TxDOT Noise Guidelines)

12

Presenter

Presentation Notes

A barrier cannot be proposed unless it meets the reasonable and feasible thresholds

Footer Text Date







13

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The final part of the reasonableness condition… the public has to want the barrier. So accurate viewpoints on proposed barriers need to be known Important: it is never too early to discuss possible noise abatement

Footer Text Date

Noise Workshop!

Purpose: to provide sufficient information to owners of property adjacent to a proposed noise barrier(s) that will allow these owners to make an informed vote for or against the proposed noise barrier(s).

14

Presenter

Presentation Notes

So, how do we communicate the results with the public? A NOISE WORKSHOP Informed vote… describe the abatement accurately and include the positives and negatives And then, voting…

Footer Text Date

Sample Ballot

15

NOISE BARRIER BALLOT SH 286 EXPANSION and SH 358 INTERCHANGE PROJECT

NOISE WORKSHOP, May 23, 2000

In conjunction with the SH 286 expansion and SH 358 interchange project, the Texas Department of Transportation proposes to construct a noise barrier within the right-of-way west of SH 286 between Gollihar Road and Mansheim Drive. However, the proposed noise barrier cannot be constructed without the approval, by majority vote, of adjacent property owners. 1. Do you own property adjacent to the right-of-way west of SH 286 between Gollihar

Road and Mansheim Drive? YES ______ NO ______

2. FULL NAME (please print)

ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. _____________________________

3. Are you for or against the construction of the proposed noise barrier within the right-of-way west of SH 286 between Gollihar Road and Mansheim Drive? Only one vote is allowed for each property.

FOR _____ AGAINST _____ This vote is final.

4. Comments (use reverse if necessary):

SIGNATURE (required) __________________________________ DATE • The ballot must be completed and signed by the property owner of record. • If possible, please bring your completed and signed ballot to the Noise Workshop. • If you are not able to attend the Noise Workshop, please send your completed and

signed ballot (must be postmarked no later than ……………) to: Texas Department of Transportation, Attention: …………..P.O. Box 9907, Corpus Christi, TX, 78469-9907.

1) • Adjacent property owners will be notified of the results of the vote for or against the proposed noise barrier after all ballots have been received and counted.

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Ballots!!! are Mailed with an invitation to a noise workshop…. reasonable return dates… not in guidelines, no tac rules. Public involvement requirements for a MAPO would be reasonable Here is a sample ballot… Note what needs to be on the ballot Make it clear what and where the barrier is being voted on; Confirmation that the person that receives the ballot lives adjacent to the barrier details about walls while still accounting for final engineering unknowns that may change precise wall locations It must be noted that the property owner is the only one who can vote

Footer Text Date

Mailing

Mailing preferably by prestamped/preaddressed return envelope

include a description of the noise barrier and the noise effects with and without the barrier.

Include a description of the decision making process that TxDOT will follow to assess the survey/ballot results and make a decision on whether to build the barrier.

Include an invitation to the meeting with the location and time

16

Presenter

Presentation Notes

To get the word out about these meetings and ballots we currently preferably prestamped/preaddressed return envelope, and will include a package of material that describes the noise barrier under consideration and the noise effects with and without the barrier. It will also describe the decision making process that TxDOT will follow to assess the survey/ballot results and make a decision on whether to build the barrier. This should be accompanied by an invitation to the meeting which would location and time of the meeting

Footer Text Date

Timing

After public hearings, a traffic noise workshop will also be conducted to discuss the results of noise studies and solicit input from the public on barriers to be included in the final design.

Early public involvement regarding noise is encouraged, however, specifics regarding abatement and voting are reserved for the traffic noise workshop

17

Presenter

Presentation Notes

After public hearing… not predecisional… when we have maximum engineering info Early is fine but not commitments or voting

Footer Text Date

Who’s invited?

Required: adjacent, first row property owners and residents

Only ballots cast by property owners will be counted

Public can attend

Staff: engineers, ROW experts, and noise experts

18

Presenter

Presentation Notes

1st row property owners; identified by tax appraisal district Required: adjacent, first row property owners Residents of adjacent properties can come and express viewpoints, however only homeowner’s votes are counted Public can attend Staff: engineers, noise experts

Footer Text Date

Voting Results

Ballots cast by residents will be obtained for viewpoints,

only ballots cast by property owners will count towards determining whether a noise barrier will be constructed or not.

If the total respondents to the survey/ballot do not total a majority (50% + 1) of the benefitted receptors, then a second attempt will be made to solicit the views of those who did not respond. No third attempt is required if a majority (50% + 1) did not respond.

A majority (50% + 1) of the total benefitted receptors must indicate on the survey/ballot that they want a barrier constructed for it to be considered reasonable. All survey/ballots must be returned to TxDOT, by a due date. If a majority (50%+1) of the total benefitted receptors do not respond by the due date or do not respond after the second attempt, then TxDOT will base their decision on the survey responses they received even though a majority of responses were not received.

19

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Generally, residential property owners prefer traffic noise barriers, while commercial property owners prefer to maintain visibility for their business from adjacent roadways. This can cause conflicts in mixed-use developments, as noise barriers may block line of sight to adjacent businesses. When a mutually satisfactory compromise cannot be reached between businesses and residences, noise barriers may be terminated at property line dividing the two areas.

Footer Text Date

Presentation – format Agenda: (recommended)

Brief overview of the project

Brief summary of the results of the noise analysis

Brief discussion of the Noise Barrier Brochure

Detailed review of the noise barrier proposal

Display plans in sufficient detail/scale for property owners to be able to identify their property relative to the proposed noise barrier(s)

Appearance

Display a picture depicting the (one) design, surface treatment and color selected by the district

(Optional/Recommended) Display pictures of a variety (two or three) of designs, surface treatments and colors (selected by the district) from which the owners of property adjacent to a proposed noise barrier(s) will be allowed to choose/vote

Detailed review of the Public Approval process (vote)

Important to include key dates/deadlines

Conduct vote

Obtain as many qualifying votes as possible during the Workshop

20

Footer Text Date

NOISE WORKSHOP SAMPLE

9/9/16

Footer Text Date

What is the Purpose of this Workshop?

Provide overview of how traffic Noise Analysis was conducted

Address the potential sound wall location, dimensions, construction, easements, utilities, and vegetation impacts

22

Presenter

Presentation Notes

What is our goal for this evening? First, to provide you with a general overview on our traffic noise analysis and criteria used to develop our preliminary sound wall recommendations. As part of the presentation, we will discuss the details of the sound wall locations, heights, lengths, constructability, easements, vegetative impacts, and utility constraints.

Footer Text Date

Highway Traffic Noise

Source >>>Propagation Path>>>Receiver

Produced from tires, engines, and mufflers of cars and trucks

Measured either by a sound meter or predicted by computer program

Depends on the number and speed of vehicles, the terrain, and the distance between the highway (source) and listener (receiver)

23

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Noise is unwanted sound. Noise can be produced by highway traffic primarily from the tires, engines, and mufflers of cars and trucks. The level of traffic noise is measured by a sound meter or predicted by a computer program. The level of traffic noise depends on the number and speed of cars, the terrain, and the distance between the highway (source) and listener (receiver). Sound waves travel, or propagate, from source to receiver.

Footer Text Date

Fences

Buildings Buildings

Buildings Fences

24

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Highway traffic noise is often blocked by buildings. Tall fences are also effective, but never completely block all traffic noise.

Footer Text Date

Topography

25

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Topography also affects highway traffic noise levels. When the highway is either higher or lower than the receiver, overall noise levels are reduced. In both these cases, the sound waves have a longer path to travel.

Footer Text Date

Traffic Noise Analysis

FHWA regulation on highway traffic noise requires that we conduct noise studies when:

• utilizing federal funds

• adding capacity on existing highways

TxDOT guidelines (FHWA approved) utilized to perform this analysis

The purpose of our noise study is to learn whether noise will have an impact on nearby outdoor areas frequently used by people

GUIDELINES for

ANALYSIS AND ABATEMENT of

ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE

26

Presenter

Presentation Notes

FHWA requires that we conduct noise studies when federal funds are utilized and when adding capacity on existing highways may have an increased effect on noise. Both state and federal guidelines were used to develop our traffic noise model and perform our traffic noise analysis. The purpose of our noise study is to investigate the impact that the MIP traffic noise has on the nearby outdoor areas frequently used by people.

Footer Text Date

Traffic Noise Impacts

NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA (NAC) dB(A) (Leq) Activity Area Category

57 A

Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose

FHWA has established Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) to determine possible traffic noise impacts on various activity areas.

TxDOT decides that an impact occurs when predicted noise levels are: 1 dB(A) below, equal to, or above the NAC criteria for a specific activity area

OR More than 10 dB(A) higher than the existing levels at any activity area.

In either of the above condition, noise abatement must be considered.

Measured in decibels (dB)

Not all sound can be heard by the human ear. When sound levels are measured, sound meters adjust the high/low frequencies of traffic noise to match the way an average person hears it. This adjustment is called A-weighting (dB(A)).

Traffic noise levels are never constant due to the changing number, type and speed of vehicles. A single value is used to represent the average or equivalent sound level or “Leq.”

67 B Residential

67 C

Active sport areas, amphitheaters, auditoriums, campgrounds, cemeteries, daycare centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, parks, picnic areas, places of worship, playgrounds, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, recreation areas, Section 4(f) sites, schools, television studios, trails, and trail crossings

27

Presenter

Presentation Notes

FHWA has established Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) to determine potential traffic noise impacts on the different activity areas and land use located along the Mopac corridor. Sound is measured in decibels and composed of many frequencies, some high, some low. Because not all frequencies can be heard by the human ear, an adjustment has to be made to the way an average person would hear the noise. This adjustment is called A-weighting and expressed as dBA. Also, traffic noise is never constant due to varying number and speed of vehicles. An equivalent sound level, expressed as Leq, is used to represent the steady-hum of the varying traffic sound levels averaged over time. Leq is used for all traffic noise analyses on TxDOT projects. If predicted traffic noise levels approach or exceed 67 dBA Leq for residential areas, then those areas are identified as impacted by traffic noise.

Footer Text Date

What does 67 dB(A) Sound Like?

Sources dB(A)

Rock Band 110

Leaf Blower 100

Food Blender 90

Police Whistle 80

Vacuum Cleaner 70

Conversation at 3-ft 60

Refrigerator 50

Library 40

67 dB(A)

28

Presenter

Presentation Notes

This table shows representative sound levels for a variety of common indoor and outdoor activities. Our 67 dBA NAC threshold falls somewhere between the sound of a vacuum cleaner and a conversation you would have with someone if they were standing 3 feet from you.

Footer Text Date

Our Noise Study does What?

Identifies land use and activity areas that may be impacted by highway traffic noise

Determines existing noise levels

Predicts noise levels 20 years in the future for No-Build and Build Alternatives

Examines and evaluates ways to reduce noise impacts (abatement measures)

Homes

Parks

Schools

29

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The noise study we have performed along Mopac includes four primary steps: First, we have identified the land use and activity areas that may be impacted by traffic noise based on the NAC categories. Activity areas that include homes, parks, and schools along the Mopac corridor have been identified as potentially impacted. We have determined the existing noise levels during the time of the day that reflects the loudest hourly traffic noise levels occurring on a regular basis under normal traffic conditions. We have predicted noise levels 20 years into the future for No-build and Build Alternatives, by utilizing future traffic volumes, traffic speed, and % vehicle type. Estimates for both the existing and predicted noise levels were generated by the latest FHWA computer noise models. And finally, we have evaluated abatement measures to reduce traffic noise impacts.

Footer Text Date

Noise Abatement Consideration

Noise abatement refers to the positive action taken to reduce the impact of noise from highway traffic on an activity area

Noise abatement on this project:

Sound walls

Sound walls evaluated to determine if they are feasible AND reasonable

Photos taken from FHWA Keeping the Noise Down Guidebook

30

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Noise abatement refers to the measures that can be recommended on a project in order to reduce traffic noise on an activity area (home, park, school, etc.). There are numerous abatement measures that can be considered, but for Mopac, the team is recommending sound walls. Sound walls are by far the most common form of noise abatement. If sound walls are considered on a project, we then have to further evaluate the sound walls to determine if they are feasible and reasonable.

Footer Text Date

Feasibility Requirements

Can sound wall: Provide a minimum of 5 dB(A)

reduction in noise levels at the majority of impacted sites?

Be constructed at the appropriate location?

Will sound wall: Create a safety problem?

Restrict access for vehicular and pedestrian movement?

Be inaccessible for maintenance?

Impact utilities, drainage?

Affect historic properties?

-4 -5 -4 -5 -5 -5 -5 -7 ???????????????????????????????? SOUND WALL ??????????????????????????????

31

Presenter

Presentation Notes

A sound wall is determined to be feasible if it: - provides a minimum of 5 dBA reduction in noise level for the majority of the first row impacted sites can be designed and physically constructed on site In this example, you have the majority of the receivers with a minimum of 5 dBA reduction in noise level, so this sound wall is feasible. Sound walls cannot create a safety problem, restrict access to both pedestrian/vehicular traffic, or adversely impact utilities, drainage or historic properties. Any of these site constraints have the ability to limit the feasibility of the sound wall.

Footer Text Date

Reasonableness Requirements

Cost/benefit analysis where total cost of sound wall is $25,000 (or less) per benefitted receiver

Noise reduction design goal where at least one first row receiver (residence) achieves at least a 7 dBA reduction in noise

Opinion of the benefitted receiver where the final decision to construct sound wall or not is by a simple majority vote

-7

Cost for each Benefitted Receiver

32

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The determination of reasonableness for the sound wall considers 3 factors: A cost/benefit analysis is performed where the total cost of the sound wall cannot be more than $25,000/benefitted receiver. The total cost of the sound wall is divided among the number of benefitted receivers that would receive a reduction of at least 5 dBA. A noise reduction design goal where there is at least one first row receiver with a reduction of at least 7dBA in noise level. And, of course, the opinion and views of the residents on whether they want the sound wall or not, should a Build Alternative be selected. Only ballots cast by the first row of benefitted receivers, which is usually the adjacent property owner, will count towards that determination. This is done by a simple majority vote.

Footer Text Date

-5 -5 -7 -5 -5 -5 ??????????????????????????????????????????????????? SOUND WALL ????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Total Cost # Benefitted =

Cost for each Benefitted Receiver

33

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Here is an example of a sound wall that would be considered both feasible and reasonable. You have the majority of the first row receivers that experience at least a 5 dBA reduction in noise level. Sound wall is feasible. The total cost of the sound wall is estimated at $120,000. The sound wall proposed would benefit 6 receivers. So the cost/benefited receiver is $20,000, less than the $25,000 criteria. The noise reduction design goal of a 7 dBA for at least one of the first row receivers is also achieved, which is also a second factor in the reasonableness criteria. Sound wall is reasonable.

Footer Text Date

Sound Walls MOST Likely to be Feasible and Reasonable

34

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Sound walls are most likely to be feasible and reasonable if they are continuous with no gaps.

Footer Text Date

Sound Walls NOT Likely to be Feasible and Reasonable

35

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Sound walls that cannot be continuous due to maintaining access for vehicular movement are not likely to satisfy the feasible and reasonable criteria. Openings in sound walls for driveways or intersecting streets lessen the effectiveness.

Footer Text Date

Public Involvement

??????????????????????? SOUND WALL ??????????????????????

Consent of a Majority of Adjacent Property Owners

36

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Sound walls are proposed to be located within the TxDOT ROW. Adjacent property owners will be allowed to vote on whether or not they want the sound wall, should a Build Alternative be selected. A simple majority vote of 51% for ballots received for each wall will make that final determination. All sound wall detailed information that will be provided this evening is based on our preliminary recommendations, is subject to change, and pending FHWA approval of a Build Alternative.

Footer Text Date

How Sound Walls Work

A + B > C = Longer Path Length

C

A B

Diffraction

37

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Traffic noise is forced to take a longer path over and around the sound wall. Sound walls do not completely block all traffic noise. The bending of the sound waves around the sound wall is called diffraction, which results in a reduction of the noise level.

Footer Text Date

When Sound Walls are MORE Effective

Within TxDOT ROW Source Receiver

Within TxDOT ROW Source Receiver

-5

-5

200 ft

38

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Sound walls are more effective when they are closer to the source (highway) or closer to the receiver (listener). Sound walls closer to the edge of the highway pavement are more likely to be shorter in height, while sound walls closer to the listener will more likely require a taller wall in order to achieve the same benefit in noise reduction. A sound wall can achieve a 5 dBA noise level reduction when it is tall enough to break the line-of-sight from the highway to the listener. Sound walls provide very little benefit for homes on a hillside overlooking the highway or for buildings that rise above the sound wall. Sound walls are most effective for areas that are within 200-ft of the highway, which is usually the first row of homes.

Footer Text Date

Inside TxDOT ROW

Outside TxDOT ROW

When Sound Walls are MORE Effective

-5

-5

39

Presenter

Presentation Notes

UPRR is located either within the median or outside of TxDOT ROW. The recommended sound wall height/length are based on highway traffic noise. However, the proposed sound walls modeled for highway traffic noise will still be effective against some of the train traffic noise along MoPac.

Footer Text Date

How Do People React to Sound Walls?

Positive reactions may include:

– Conversations in households are easier

– Sleeping conditions have improved

– More relaxing environment

– Open windows more often and use yards more in the summer

– Indirect benefits include: increased privacy, cleaner air, improved view and a rural sense, healthier lawns and shrubs

40

Presenter

Presentation Notes

In general, public reaction to sound walls is positive. However, specific reactions vary widely. Residents near a sound wall have experienced the following:

Footer Text Date

How Do People React to Sound Walls?

Negative reactions may include:

– Restrictions of view

– Feeling of confinement

– Reduced air circulation

– Reduced lighting and sunlight

– Maintenance and utility issues

– Removal of vegetation, loss of trees

41

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Negative reactions from residents near a sound wall may include: Also, motorists sometimes complain about a loss of view or scenic vistas and a feeling of being “walled-in” when travelling next to sound walls. Sound walls should reflect the character of their surroundings to the extent possible. In summary, most residents near a sound wall do seem to feel that they effectively reduce traffic noise and the pros outweigh the cons. While sound walls do not completely eliminate all highway traffic noise, they do reduce it substantially and improve the quality of life for those who live adjacent to them.

Footer Text Date

Comments :

TxDOT

ATTN: District Environmental Coordinator

P.O. Box 66666

Austin, TX 66666

For More Information Contact:

John Doe

512.555.5555

www.TxDOT.com

42

http://www.mopacexpress.com/

Footer Text Date

Documentation

43

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Document with items listed in traffic noise handbook

Footer Text Date

Documentation

Documentation is required

Documentation of the completed traffic noise workshops shall include

– a summary of the materials presented,

– comments from the public and associated responses, and

– the results of the ballots for each proposed barrier.

This concludes the environmental process

44

Footer Text Date

Questions???

???

45

noise workshops - texas a&m universityso, what is a traffic noise workshops… first of all,...

Documents