residential suitability assessment -...

Residential Suitability Assessment

Park Farm, Bedworth

March 2012

Waterman Energy, Environment & Design Limited

Civic House, 156 Great Charles Street, Birmingham, B3 3HN United Kingdom www.watermangroup.com


Park Farm, Bedworth

Client Name: William Davis Ltd

Document Reference: EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

Project Number: EED11776

Our Markets

Property & Buildings Transport & Infrastructure Energy & Utilities Environment

Quality Assurance – Approval Status

This document has been prepared and checked in accordance with Waterman Group’s IMS (BS EN ISO 9001: 2008 and BS EN ISO 14001: 2004)

Issue Date Prepared by Checked by Approved By

First Issue 23 September 2011 Jon Lee Senior Consultant

Mark Maclagan Principal Consultant

John Hughes

Regional Director

Second Issue 1 March 2012 Jon Lee Senior Consultant


John Hughes

Regional Director

Third Issue 9 March 2012 Jon Lee Senior Consultant


John Hughes

Regional Director

Disclaimer

This report has been prepared by Waterman Energy, Environment & Design Limited, with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the client, incorporation of our General Terms and Condition of Business and taking account of the resources devoted to us by agreement with the client.

We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above.

This report is confidential to the client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies on the report at its own risk.


Contents EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

Contents

1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1

2. Noise Criteria ....................................................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Planning Policy Guidance Note 24: Planning and Noise (PPG 24) .......................................... 2

2.2 BS 8233: ‘Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings’ – 1999 .................................. 3

2.3 World Health Organisation (WHO)............................................................................................ 3

3. Noise Survey ........................................................................................................................................ 5

4. Residential Suitability Assessment ................................................................................................... 7

4.1 PPG 24 Assessment ................................................................................................................. 7

4.2 RCCC Track Assessment ......................................................................................................... 7

5. Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................................ 9

5.1 Internal Noise Levels ................................................................................................................ 9

5.2 External Amenity Spaces ........................................................................................................ 11

5.3 RCCC Race Events ................................................................................................................ 11

6. Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 12

Figures

Figure 1: Site Location and Noise Monitoring Location

Figure 2: Illustrative Masterplan

Figure 3: Monitoring Location ST1



Figure 6: Monitoring Location LT1

Figure 7: Noise Contour Plot - Daytime

Figure 8: Noise Contour Plot - Night-time

Tables

Table 1: Summary of PPG 24 Noise Exposure Categories (Mixed Sources) ......................................... 2

Table 2: Indoor ambient noise levels (BS 8233: 1999) ........................................................................... 3

Table 3: Noise Monitoring Locations ....................................................................................................... 5

Table 4: Noise Monitoring Equipment ..................................................................................................... 6

Table 5: Baseline Noise Measurements ................................................................................................. 6

Table 6: Averaged Ambient Noise Levels and Corresponding NEC ...................................................... 7

Table 7: External Envelope Sound Insulation Requirements and Glazing Specification ....................... 9


Contents EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

Appendices

Appendix A Acoustic Terminology

Appendix B Noise Monitoring Results

Appendix C Weather Observations


Page 1 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

1. Introduction

William Davis Ltd are proposing to develop a site located on land adjacent to the A444 Bedworth bypass

for residential development. Waterman Energy, Environment and Design Ltd (hereafter ‘Waterman’) was

appointed to undertake an environmental noise assessment of the site and its surrounds in order to

determine the suitability of the site for residential development.

This report provides guidance with regards to the existing noise levels present on and in vicinity of the

proposed development and where required, suggests suitable mitigation measures to protect the amenity

of future residents.

The proposed development site (hereafter ‘the Site’) is located adjacent to the A444 Bedworth bypass

and is currently used as grazing farmland. Ground elevations are slightly undulating across the Site. The

Site lies on the edge of a residential area. The Site falls under the jurisdiction of Bedworth and Nuneaton

Council (BNC).

The Site is bounded to the west by a small parcel of land adjacent to the A444 owned by the Highways

Authority, to the North by Bedworth Rugby Club incorporating a remote control car club (RCCC) and

residential properties lie along the eastern boundary with agricultural land to the south. The location of the

site and the long term noise monitoring location is indicated by Figure 1.

A glossary of the acoustic terminology used in this report is presented in Appendix A.


Page 2 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

2. Noise Criteria

2.1 Planning Policy Guidance Note 24: Planning and Noise (PPG 24)

Noise can have a significant impact on the environment and quality life enjoyed by individuals and

communities. The main guidance document with regards to noise for planners in England is PPG 241.

The principal purpose of the guidance is to determine the suitability of the land for residential

development, especially where land is affected by noise from transportation or industrial sources.

However, the PPG also provides general guidance with respect to matters to be taken into account in

determining planning applications both for noise-sensitive developments and those activities which will

generate noise.

PPG 24 provides advice on how the planning system can be used to minimise the adverse impact of

noise without placing unreasonable restrictions on the development or adding unduly to the costs and

administrative burdens of business. As such, it outlines some of the main considerations with local

planning authorities should take into account when determining planning applications for development

that will either generate noise or be exposed to existing noise sources.

In addition, as a general principle, PPG 24 advocates spatial separation of ‘noisy’ developments and

noise-sensitive receptors. However, PPG 24 recognises that this is not always possible or even

desirable. In such circumstances mitigation through design and control and through planning conditions

are cited as the preferred solution.

When assessing the suitability of a site for proposed noise sensitive development PPG 24 provides

guidance in the form of Noise Exposure Categories (NEC), the NEC criteria relevant to mixed noise

sources i.e. road and rail are presented in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Summary of PPG 24 Noise Exposure Categories (Mixed Sources)

NEC LAeq,T dB

(07:00–23:00) LAeq,T dB

(23:00–07:00) Advice

A <55 <45 Noise need not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission, although the noise level at the high end of the category should not be regarded as a desirable level.

B 55–63 45–57 Noise should be taken into account when determining planning applications and, where appropriate, conditions imposed to ensure an adequate level of protection against noise.

C 63–72 57–66

Planning permission should not normally be granted. Where it is considered that permission should be given, for example because there are no alternative quieter sites available, conditions should be imposed to ensure a commensurate level of protection against noise.

D >72 >66 Planning permission should normally be refused

PPG 24 also states that:

‘Sites where individual noise events during the night-time (23:00-07:00) regularly exceed 82 dB LAmax (S time weighting) several times in any hour should be treated as being in NEC C, regardless of the LAeq,8h (except where the LAeq,8h already puts the site in NEC D).’

1 Department of the Environment, 1994, ‘Planning Policy Guidance, Planning and Noise (PPG 24)’ HMSO.


Page 3 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

2.2 BS 8233: ‘Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings’ – 1999

BS 8233:1999 ‘Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings’2 aims to provide recommendations

with regards to the control of noise in and around buildings. It suggests appropriate criteria and limits for

different situations, which are primarily intended to guide the design of new buildings, or refurbished

buildings undergoing a change in use. However, it can be used to assess the changes in the existing

external noise climate on existing sensitive receptors.

The standard suggests good and reasonable internal noise levels for various uses. The criteria relevant

to the residential component of the proposed development are presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Indoor ambient noise levels (BS 8233: 1999)

Location Internal Noise Level

Living rooms (0700-2300hrs)

Good Standard 30 dB LAeq

Reasonable Standard 40 dB LAeq

Bedrooms* (2300-0700hrs)

Good Standard 30 dB LAeq

Reasonable Standard 35 dB LAeq

*For a reasonable standard in bedrooms at night, individual noise events (measured with F time-weighting) should not normally

exceed 45dB LAmax.

With regards to external noise levels BS 8233 states:

‘It is desirable that the steady state noise level does not exceed 50 dB LAeq,T and 55 dB LAeq,T should be

regarded as the upper limit.’

2.3 World Health Organisation (WHO)

The WHO published guidance on the desirable levels of environmental noise in 2000. In this document,

Guidelines for Community Noise3, the authors consider that sleep disturbance criteria should be taken as

an internal noise level of 30dB LAeq,8hr or an external level of 45dB LAeq,8hr, measured at 1m from the

façade. It is also suggested that internal LAmax levels of 45dB and external LAmax levels of 60dB, should not

be exceeded.

For daytime levels, it is considered that:

‘To protect the majority of people from being seriously annoyed during the daytime, the outdoor sound

level from steady, continuous noise should not exceed 55dB LAeq on balconies, terraces, and outdoor

living areas. To protect the majority of people from being moderately annoyed during the daytime, the

outdoor sound level should not exceed 50dB LAeq. Where it is practical and feasible, the lower outdoor

sound level should be considered the maximum desirable sound level for new development.’

However, a review of health effects based noise assessment methods undertaken for the DETR by Porter

et al in 19984, just before the issue of Guidelines for Community Noise, it is noted that:

Perhaps the main weakness of both WHO-inspired documents is that they fail to consider the practicality

of actually being able to achieve any of the stated guideline values.

2 British Standards Institute, 1999, ‘BS 8233:1999 Sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings - Code of

Practice', BSI. 3 World Health Organisation. Guidelines for Community Noise. 2000

4 Porter, N. D., Flindell, I. H. and Berry, B. F. Health Effect Based Noise Assessment Methods: A Review and

Feasibility Study. NPL Report CMAM 16. National Physical Laboratory. September 1998.


Page 4 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

The report goes on to state that:

‘Around 56% of the population in England and Wales are exposed to daytime noise levels exceeding

55dB LAeq and that around 65% are exposed to night-time noise levels exceeding 45dB LAeq (as

measured outside the house in each case). The value of 45dB LAeq night-time outdoors is equivalent to

the 1995 WHO guideline value of 30dB LAeq night-time indoors allowing 15dB attenuation from outdoors

to indoors for a partially open window (for free air ventilation to the bedroom). The percentages exposed

above the WHO guideline values could not be significantly reduced without drastic action to virtually

eliminate road traffic noise and other forms of transportation noise (including public transport) from the

vicinity of houses. The social and economic consequences of such action would be likely to be far

greater than any environmental advantages of reducing the proportion of the population annoyed by

noise. In addition, there is no evidence that anything other than a small minority of the population

exposed at such noise levels find them to be particularly onerous in the context of their daily lives.’

Based on the most recent national survey of noise exposure carried out in England and Wales in

2000/2001, the percentage of the population exposed to day and night-time noise levels exceeding the

WHO guidelines are 54% and 67%, respectively. The studies5 indicate that:

‘The percentage of the UK population exposed to daytime levels of 55dB LAeq,16hr or greater, have

decreased since 1990, whilst the percentage of the UK population exposed to night-time levels of 45dB

LAeq,8hr or greater, have increased since 1990, although this change is not considered statistically

significant.’

Therefore, the levels suggested in Guidelines for Community Noise may be considered more aspirational

than immediately attainable.

5 Skinner, C. J and Grimwood, C. J. The UK National Noise Incidence Study 2000/2001. Noise Forum Conference.

Building Research Establishment. May 2002.


Page 5 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

3. Noise Survey

Baseline noise surveys were undertaken from the 18th to 20

th September 2011. Long term unattended

monitoring was undertaken on Site from 11:00 on 18th September 2011 to 10:00 on 20

th September 2011.

All measurements were undertaken under free-field conditions.

Short term monitoring was undertaken on the Bedworth RCCC track during a race event between 09:30

and 10:30 on 18th September 2011. At each location, one race was measured lasting approximately 5

minutes.

Monitoring locations were selected to represent the proposed potentially sensitive receptors within the

Development. In addition, short term monitoring was carried out at a race event at the Bedworth RCCC

track to obtain an indication of typical noise levels emitted from a race event.

The selected monitoring locations are described in Table 3 and illustrated on Figure 1. Photographs of

each monitoring location are shown in Figures 3 to 6.

Table 3: Noise Monitoring Locations

Monitoring Location (Figure 1)

Description Observations and Predominant Noise Sources

LT1 Free field location at the western boundary, approximately 5m from the carriageway edge.

Dominant noise source identified as road traffic along the A444

ST1 Free-field trackside monitoring location at the start grid

PA audible – lap beeps, mid and end race announcements. Remote control car passes audible.

ST2 Free-field monitoring location approximately 1m from announcement Public Address (PA) on podium

PA dominant - lap beeps, mid and end race announcements

ST3 Free-field monitoring location approximately 3m from announcement PA on control cabin

PA dominant - lap beeps, mid and end race announcements. Trackside chatter from spectators.

The parameters logged throughout the survey period were LAeq, LAmax, LAmin, LA90 and LA10. These

parameters are described in Appendix A. The LAeq level is the equivalent continuous sound pressure

level over the measurement period; LAmax is an indicator of the highest sound level during the

measurement period; the LAmin is the lowest level during the measurement period; LA90 is used as a

descriptor of background noise levels and LA10 is the noise level which is achieved for 10% of the

monitoring period and is often used to describe road traffic noise.

The monitoring equipment used during the survey period is described in Table 4. The sound level meter

was calibrated both before and after each monitoring period; no significant drift from the reference level of

94 dB was recorded.

The weather was dry throughout the survey period and road conditions were dry. Based on

measurements taken during attended monitoring and data from the Coventry weather station (see

Appendix C), wind speeds were under 5m/s throughout the duration of the survey with the exception of

Sunday, where the mean wind speed was 5.8m/s. However the unattended monitoring location was in a

shielded woodland location where wind speeds are expected to be lower than measured by an elevated

anemometer. Temperatures ranged between 18°C during the daytime to 8°C during the night-time

period. A wind shield was fitted to the monitoring equipment at all times.


Page 6 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

Monitoring was undertaken by trained and competent staff being a member of the Institute of Acoustics

(IOA). The monitored noise levels are summarised in Table 5.

Table 4: Noise Monitoring Equipment

Sound Level Meter LT1

Meter Model 01dB Blue Solo

Serial Number 61718

Calibrator

Calibrator Model Rion NC-74

Calibration Level at 1000 Hz 94 dB

Table 5: Baseline Noise Measurements

Location

(Figure 1) Monitoring Period LAeq,T* LA10,T* LA90,T LAmax

#

LT1 Daytime (07:00–23:00) 69.1 72.2 57.3 85.3

Night-time (23:00–07:00) 64.0 69.2 41.5 78.7

ST1 During 5min Race Event 09:30-10:30) 67.6 n/a n/a n/a



Notes: * During the daytime, T is 16 hours. During the night-time, T is 8 hours. # Maximum monitored noise level during survey period.

n/a measurement not required – short term measurements for noise model calculations


Page 7 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

4. Residential Suitability Assessment

4.1 PPG 24 Assessment

Monitored noise levels for location 1 have been have been compared against the NEC criteria for road

traffic noise sources as provided in PPG 24 and summarised in Table 1. The monitored noise levels and

corresponding NEC’s are presented in Table 6.

Table 6: Averaged Ambient Noise Levels and Corresponding NEC

Location (Figure 1, Appendix C)

Period Noise Indices Noise Level

(dB(A)) NEC

LT1 Daytime LAeq, 16 hour 70 C

Night-time LAeq, 8 hour 64 C

The unmitigated monitored noise levels at location 1 (see Table 6), place the Site boundary into NEC C at

ground level. When a site falls into NEC C, PPG 24 states:

‘Planning permission should not normally be granted. Where it is considered that permission should be given, for example because there are no alternative quieter sites available, conditions should be imposed to ensure a commensurate level of protection against noise.’

However, it should be noted that in order to provide for a worst case assessment measurements were

undertaken adjacent to the western site boundary at the closest point to the carriageway edge. In order

to determine noise levels across the site a noise model has been developed in CADNA-A and the output

from this model is indicated in Figure 7 and Figure 8.

The contour plots (Figure 7 and Figure 8) indicate that during the daytime period the majority of the Site

falls into NEC A with a small band of the Site to the west falling into NEC B and NEC C. However, during

the night-time period, a larger proportion of the Site falls into NEC B and an area of approximately 17m at

its widest point (the orange coloured strip of land in Figure 8) falls into NEC C.

With reference to the indicative masterplan (presented as Figure 2), it can be seen that no residential

development is proposed within 17m of the site boundary, as such, it is considered that all residential

areas of the proposed development would at worst fall into NEC B.

When a site falls into NEC B, PPG 24 states:

‘Noise should be taken into account when determining planning applications and, where appropriate,

conditions imposed to ensure an adequate level of protection against noise.’

As such, it is considered that with the incorporation of the 17m landscape buffer along the western

boundary and through careful design and the use of appropriate mitigation measures a good level of

residential amenity for future residents could be maintained. Potential mitigation measures are discussed

in greater detail in the relevant section below.

4.2 RCCC Track Assessment

Consultation was undertaken with the RCCC organisers prior to noise monitoring. During the race season

(usually April to October) race events are held on alternate Sundays and run from approximately 9.30 to

14:00. Noisier petrol cars are not allowed to race on the track.

The monitored noise levels during the RCCC event, presented in Table 6, have been entered into a noise

prediction model created in CADNA-A. Noise levels due to the RCCC event have been calculated at the


Page 8 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

nearest points on the Site boundary to the RCCC track. The worst case predicted noise level due to a

typical race event occurring over 5 minutes is 60.6dB LAeq,T.

When averaging the levels of noise over a 16 hour daytime period (from 07:00 to 23:00), assuming ten 5-

minute races per hour during the whole event from 09:30 to 14:30 (total of 40 races, giving a break for

lunch) this noise level would be reduced to 53.8dB, well within the WHO external guideline noise criteria

and indicative of PPG24 NEC A. As such, it is considered that the RCCC track would not adversely effect

the residential amenity of future residents.


Page 9 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

5. Mitigation Measures

Given that there would be the potential for a small number of residential dwellings to be exposed to noise

levels commensurate with NEC B consideration has been given to appropriate acoustic attenuation

measures to provide a commensurate level of protection against noise for future occupants.

BS 8233 suggests good and reasonable internal noise levels for various uses. The criteria relevant to the

Development are presented in Table 2.

5.1 Internal Noise Levels

Given that there would be the potential for the proposed residential dwellings to be exposed to noise

levels commensurate with NEC B appropriate attenuation would need to be incorporated into the facade

design of the properties so as to ensure that a good level of residential amenity is provided.

The amount of insulation provided by a building element is defined by the weighted sound reduction index

(Rw). The Rw is commonly quoted with the spectrum adaption term Ctr. The spectrum adaption terms are

added to the Rw and are used to take into account the characteristics of a particular noise spectrum. The

term Ctr is used for noise with a frequency spectrum content similar to road traffic noise. This frequency

spectrum contains a certain amount of low frequency noise and can also be attributed to low speed

railway traffic, aircraft at large distances and factories which emit low frequency noise.

The façades of the proposed Development would be required to provide sufficient attenuation as to

ensure that the guideline internal noise levels as provided in BS 8233 are met. Calculations have been

completed to indicate the level of attenuation which the worst affected façade in the illustrative masterplan

(including the 17m landscape buffer) would be required to provide (see

Table 7).

It should be noted that the level of attenuation that the facade would be required to provide would

decrease with increasing distance from the source.

Table 7: External Envelope Sound Insulation Requirements and Glazing Specification

Nearest Proposed Residential Façade to A444

Daytime Noise Levels (0700-2300) In dB LAeq,T

Night-time noise levels (2300-0700) In dB LAeq,T

Free Field Level 61.7 56.6

Façade Level 64.7 59.6

PPG 24 Noise Exposure Category B B

BS 8233 ‘Reasonable Internal Resting / Sleeping Conditions’

40 35

BS 8233 ‘Good Internal Resting / Sleeping Conditions’

30 30

Required Sound Insulation in dB Rw + Ctr ‘Reasonable’

24.7 24.6

Required Sound Insulation in dB Rw + Ctr ‘Good’ 34.7 29.6

Suggested Glazing Specification ‘Reasonable’ standard

4/12/4 4/12/4

Suggested Glazing Specification ‘Good’ standard

6/12/8.8 10/12/6


Page 10 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

It should be noted that the required sound insulation values detailed in this table can be viewed as a

worst-case as they take no account of the improvement in composite sound insulation afforded due to the

higher performance of the external wall. In addition, it should be noted that noise levels would reduce

with lateral and vertical distance from the road carriageway.

The suggested glazing specification is stated in industry standard terms with, for example 4/12/4 would

mean a double glazed window constructed from a 4mm pane, 12mm air gap and a 4mm pane. Where a

decimal point is used (for example 4/12/4.4) this suggests the same specification as mentioned

previously, but with the use of laminate with a thickness of 0.4mm. This could also be an acoustic

laminate denoted by an ‘A’ after the number.

By using standard thermal double-glazing units, suitable internal noise levels can be achieved inside

habitable rooms within the proposed development when considering road traffic sources.

Should the local authority require the BS 8233:1999 ‘good’ standard to be met, a superior level of façade

attenuation would be required for proposed residential properties with façades facing directly onto

surrounding roads, as highlighted in Table 7. However, it should be noted that for façades facing away

from the roads or screened by intervening properties, standard thermal double glazing would be sufficient

to ensure that the BS 8233:1999 ‘good’ standard would be met. Further consideration to detailed façade

design would be undertaken during the detailed design of the development.

Ventilation

As the BS 8233 ‘reasonable’ rating is achieved with standard double-glazed windows, ventilation should

be provided that does not compromise the attenuation of the windows. Furthermore, this should be in

compliance with the requirements of the Building Regulations Approved Document F.

Where appropriate, the preferred choice of ventilation is through the use of natural ventilation openings,

such as trickle vents, air bricks and passive ventilation systems. Such ventilators can be used to meet

the requirements of the Building Regulations Approved Document F for background ventilation. The

future occupants would then have the option of keeping windows closed for most of the time and opening

windows for rapid ventilation and summer cooling.

It is likely that acoustically attenuated trickle ventilators will be suitable to provide air inlet into habitable

rooms whilst maintaining suitable internal noise levels.

The Building Research Establishment (BRE) has published an information paper on the acoustic

performance of such passive ventilation systems. IP4/99:1999 ‘Ventilators: Ventilation and Acoustic

Effectiveness’6 details a study into the sound reduction performance of fourteen different window

mounted trickle ventilators and seven different though wall passive ventilators. The measured sound

reduction performance after taking into account flanking sound paths (i.e. sound paths that do not travel

directly through the vent) and the effective area of the ventilator were 14 - 46 dB(A) for ‘passive through

wall ventilators’.

It can be seen from these figures that for all rooms within the proposed development trickle vents or

passive through wall ventilators are available that meet the requirements of the Building Regulations

Approved Document F for background ventilation and also provide sound reduction performance that

meets or exceeds that required from the glazing elements.

6 BRE Information Paper IP4/99:”Ventilators: Ventilation and Acoustic Effectiveness” (Oct 1999)


Page 11 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

5.2 External Amenity Spaces

PPG 24 highlights the importance of noise in amenity spaces; however there are no suggested targets.

The World Health Organisation has published guidance on desirable levels of environmental noise. The

authors of the 2000 WHO document suggest that:

"to protect the majority of people from being seriously annoyed during the daytime, the sound pressure

level on balconies, terraces and outdoor living areas should not exceed 55 dB LAeq,16hr for a steady,

continuous noise".

The Development should be designed to ensure that gardens of dwellings located near to existing noise

sources (such as the A444) are orientated away from the source. This would ensure the 55dB LAeq,T

criteria would be met in these locations due to significant screening loss afforded by the building

structure. For those gardens which are exposed to noise levels in excess of 55dB LAeq,T solid garden

fencing of a minimum height of 1.8m should be provided. This localised fencing would reduce noise

levels within garden areas sufficiently to ensure that the adopted limit levels are met and a good level of

amenity is provided for future residents.

5.3 RCCC Race Events

Due to the levels of noise experienced from race events at the Site boundary, along with the frequency of

events (once a week at peak season) it is not considered necessary to employ any mitigation measures

for the northern boundary adjacent to the RCCC track. Additionally, note should be taken here that the

RC club is under negotiations to re-locate to another site.


Page 12 of 12 EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

6. Conclusions

Waterman was commissioned to undertake an assessment of environmental noise in order to determine

the suitability of land at Park Farm, Bedworth for residential development.

Noise surveys were carried out from 18th September 2011 to 20

th September 2011 during the daytime

(07:00 to 23:00) and night-time (23:00 to 07:00) periods. The prevalent noise source during the survey

period was noted to be road traffic noise from the A444.

Results of the noise survey indicate that the western boundary of the Site would fall into NEC C during

the daytime and night-time period. As such, mitigation measures were recommended to ensure that a

good level of amenity for future residents could be obtained.

Therefore the applicant incorporated mitigation into the design of the development which included the

allowance of a 17m landscape buffer along the western boundary of the development to ensure proposed

dwellings fall within NEC B.

For internal noise levels within proposed dwellings, a suitable glazing specification and the provision of

acoustically attenuated trickle ventilation for the worst affected facades would minimise the need for

residents to open windows.

It is considered that with the proposed mitigation measures in place a good level of amenity could be

obtained for all future residents of the proposed Development and as such the proposed Development

site would be suitable for residential development.


Figures EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

FIGURES

Figure 1: Site Location and Noise Monitoring Location



Figure 2: Illustrative Masterplan

Source: Pegasus Urban Design drawing EMS.2245_06-1



Figure 3: Monitoring Location ST1 Figure 4: Monitoring Location ST2

Source: Site Survey 18/09/2011 Source: Site Survey 18/09/2011



Figure 5: Monitoring Location ST3 Figure 6: Monitoring Location LT1

Source: Site Survey 18/09/2011 Source: Site Survey 18/09/2011



Figure 7: Noise Contour Plot - Daytime



Figure 8: Noise Contour Plot - Night-time

Source: CADNAA


Appendices EED11776.100.R.1.3.1.JL

APPENDICES



Appendix A Acoustic Terminology

Ambient sound The totally encompassing sound in a given situation at a given time, usually composed of sound from all sources near and far.

Assessment period

The period in a day over which assessments are made.

A-weighting A frequency weighting applied to measured or predicted sounds levels in order to compensate for the non-linearity of human hearing.

Background noise

Background noise is the term used to describe the noise measured in the absence of the noise under investigation. It is described as the average of the minimum noise levels measured on a sound level meter and is measured statistically as the A-weighted noise level exceeded for ninety percent of a sample period. This is represented as the L90 noise level (see below).

Broadband Containing the full range of frequencies.

Decibel [dB] The level of noise is measured objectively using a Sound Level Meter. This instrument has been specifically developed to mimic the operation of the human ear. The human ear responds to minute pressure variations in the air. These pressure variations can be likened to the ripples on the surface of water but of course cannot be seen. The pressure variations in the air cause the eardrum to vibrate and this is heard as sound in the brain. The stronger the pressure variations, the louder the sound that is heard.

The range of pressure variations associated with everyday living may span over a range of a million to one. On the top range may be the sound of a jet engine and on the bottom of the range may be the sound of a pin dropping.

Instead of expressing pressure in units ranging from a million to one, it is found convenient to condense this range to a scale 0 to 120 and give it the units of decibels. The following are examples of the decibel readings of every day sounds;

Four engine jet aircraft at 100m 120 dB

Riveting of steel plate at 10m 105 dB

Pneumatic drill at 10m 90 dB

Circular wood saw at 10m 80 dB

Heavy road traffic at 10m 5 dB

Telephone bell at 10m 65 dB

Male speech, average at 10m 50 dB

Whisper at 10m 25 dB

Threshold of hearing, 1000 Hz 0 dB

dB(A):

A-weighted decibels

The ear is not as effective in hearing low frequency sounds as it is hearing high frequency sounds. That is, low frequency sounds of the same dB level are not heard as loud as high frequency sounds. The sound level meter replicates the human response of the ear by using an electronic filter which is called the ‘A’ filter. A sound level measured with this filter switched on is denoted as dB(A). Practically all noise is measured using the A filter. The sound pressure level in dB(A) gives a close indication of the subjective loudness of the noise.

Do-Minimum Describes a scenario under which the road scheme that is under consideration does not proceed.

Façade Noise Level

A noise level measured or predicted at the façade of a building, typically at a distance of 1m, containing a contribution made up of reflections from the façade itself (+3dB).

LAmax noise level This is the maximum noise level recorded over the measurement period.

LAmin noise level This is the lowest level during the measurement period.

LAeq,T noise level This is the ‘equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level, in decibels’ and is defined in British Standard 7445 as the ‘value of the A-weighted sound pressure level of a continuous, steady sound that, within a specified time interval, T, has the same mean square sound pressure as a sound under consideration whose level varies with time’.



It is a unit commonly used to describe construction noise, noise from industrial premises and is the most suitable unit for the description of other forms of environmental noise.

LA90 noise level This is the noise level that is exceeded for 90% of the measurement period and gives an indication of the noise level during quieter periods. It is often referred to as the background noise level and is used in the assessment of disturbance from industrial noise.

LA10 noise level This is the noise level which is achieved for 10% of the monitoring period and is often used to describe road traffic noise



Appendix B Noise Monitoring Results



30

40

50

60

70

80

90

18/09/2011 09:36 18/09/2011 16:48 19/09/2011 00:00 19/09/2011 07:12 19/09/2011 14:24 19/09/2011 21:36 20/09/2011 04:48 20/09/2011 12:00

Leve

l dB

(A)

DD/MM/YYYY HH:MM

Monitoring Results - Location LT1

Leq

L90

Lmax



Appendix C Weather Observations



Coventry, UK

BST Max Temp C

Mean Temp C

Min Temp C

Max Humidity

Mean Humidity

Min Humidity

Max Wind Speed Km/h

Mean Wind Speed Km/h

Max Gust Speed Km/h

Precipitation mm

Cloud Cover Events

Wind Dir Degrees

18/09/2011 17 14 13 88 70 59 13 8

0 3

311

19/09/2011 18 13 8 100 79 63 26 16

0 5 Rain 220

20/09/2011 18 17 14 100 91 83 29 21 48 0 6 Rain 218

21/09/2011 17 14 12 100 77 55 35 14 53 0 4

217

residential suitability assessment -...

Documents