APPENDIXD. Traffic Noise Technical Report

Transcription

1 APPENDIXD Traffic Noise Technical Report Environmental Assessment - Lincoln County, SD 85 th Street: Sundowner Avenue to Louise Avenue November 2017

2 F I N A L R E P O R T TRAFFIC NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT 85 TH STREET EXTENSION Prepared for South Dakota Department of Transportation Becker-Hansen Building 700 E. Broadway Ave. Pierre, SD URS Project No Paul L. Burgé, INCE.Bd.Cert. Principal Engineer, Acoustics and Noise Control Revised: August 2017 (now AECOM) 401 West A Street #1200 San Diego, CA

3 This page intentionally left blank

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary... ES-1 Section 1 Introduction and Project Description Project Description Description of Alternatives Section 2 Noise Analysis Overview Regulatory Overview Federal Regulations State Regulations and Policies Defining Area of Potential Impact Noise Measurement Procedures Analysis Objectives Selection of Noise Sensitive Receptors Worst-Case Noise Conditions Noise Abatement Requirements Noise Modeling Methodology Project Traffic Data Section 3 Existing Noise Environment and Noise Sensitive Areas Existing Land Use and Zoning Existing Land Uses Noise Sensitive Areas Existing Noise Levels Noise Measurements Noise Model Validation and Results Existing Noise Levels Section 4 Future Noise Levels and Impacts Predicted Noise Levels and Noise Impacts Predicted Impact Distance for Undeveloped Lands Section 5 Noise Abatement Evaluation Noise Abatement Measures Feasible and Reasonable Criteria and Requirements Findings and Recommendations for Noise Abatement Screening Calculation Methodology NSAs Not Evaluated for Abatement NSA7 Residential NSA8 Residential NSA9 Residential NSA10 Residential NSA11 Residential NSA12A Residential NSA12B Residential i

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS NSA13 Residential Summary Section 6 Construction Noise Analysis Typical Construction Noise Levels Construction Noise Abatement Measures Section 7 Information for Local Government Officials Undeveloped Lands Section 8 Conclusions and Recommendations Section 9 Statement of Limitations Section 10 References ii

6 List of Tables, Figures, and Appendices Tables Table ES-1 Summary of Identified Noise Sensitive Areas (NSAs) Table ES-2 Summary of Noise Impacts Table ES-3 Noise Abatement Recommendation Summary for Impacted NSAs Table ES-4 Noise Impact Distances for Undeveloped Lands Table 2-1 FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria Table 3-1 Noise Sensitive Areas (NSAs) Table 3-2 Short-Term Measurement Summary Table 3-3 TNM Validation Summary Table Table 4-1 Summary of Predicted Noise Levels, All Scenarios Table 5-1 NSA9 Barrier Analysis Summary Table 5-2 NSA10 Barrier Analysis Summary Table 5-3 NSA11 Barrier Analysis Summary Table 5-4 NSA12B Barrier Analysis Summary Table 5-5 NSA13 Barrier Analysis Summary Table 5-6 Noise Abatement Summary Table 6-1 Construction Noise Level Ranges Figures Figure 1-1 Project Overview Map Figure 4-1 Future Build Results and Analyzed Barrier Locations, NSA 7-8 Figure 4-2 Future Build Results and Analyzed Barrier Locations, NSA 9-13 Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Background Information on Noise Noise Measurement Data Traffic Data Used for Noise Analysis Selected TNM Input/Output Files Predicted Noise Levels for Modeled Receptors and Benefited Receptor Information iii

7 List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ANSI db dba DU FHWA Leq Leq(1h) LOS NAC NSA ROW SDDOT ST TNM American National Standards Institute Decibel (measure of sound pressure level on a logarithmic scale) A-weighted decibel (sound pressure level) Dwelling Unit Federal Highway Administration Equivalent sound level (energy averaged sound level) A-weighted, energy average sound level during a 1-hour period Level-of-Service Noise Abatement Criteria Noise Sensitive Area Right of Way South Dakota Department of Transportation Short-Term Traffic Noise Model iv

8 Executive Summary ES.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY The Traffic Noise Technical Report for the 85 th Street Extension is an analysis of a proposed transportation improvement project consisting of the addition of paved roadways and a bridge at the intersection of I-29 and 85 th Street in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Figure 1-1 contains an overview of the Project location. The project also originally included improvements to the I-29 and I-229 interchange, but those improvements and associated evaluation of noise impacts and analyzed abatement in those areas were removed from this revised report. The alternatives for the noise analysis are as follows: Existing Condition; and Future Build Alternative (including all proposed improvements) ES.2 NOISE LEVELS AND NOISE IMPACTS The noise analysis for the proposed project included a total of five short-term measurement locations and 199 predicted receptors representing 248 individual noise sensitive dwelling units. In order to simplify the reporting of noise levels, noise impacts, noise mitigation, and in adherence with preferred South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT) analysis methodology, these receptors were organized into 8 separate Noise Sensitive Areas (NSAs) within the study area as indicated in Figure 1-1 (NSA1 through NSA6 have been removed from the study). Existing noise levels were predicted to determine the extent of the noise impact relative to the Project edge of pavement (SDDOT requires analysis out to 300 feet unless impacts are predicted to exist beyond that limit). Future (Year 2035) noise levels were modeled for the Build alternative using standard Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and SDDOT methodologies. These predicted Future Build levels were compared to the existing noise conditions and evaluated for potential impacts as defined by FHWA and SDDOT criteria. Table ES-1 presents a summary of each of the identified NSAs in the Project area along with its associated FHWA/SDDOT noise impact, Land Use, Activity Category, Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC), number of predicted receptor locations, number of representative equivalent units (dwelling units) and estimated existing noise level. ES-1

9 Executive Summary NSA Land Use Table ES-1 Summary of Identified Noise Sensitive Areas (NSAs) Activity Category NAC (Leq, dba) Prediction Locations Represented Equivalent Units Existing Level Leq (1h), dba (Range) 7 Residential B Residential B Residential B Residential B Residential B A Residential B B Residential B Residential B NSAs 1 through 6 were removed from the study Noise levels were predicted for all receptor locations for the Future Build alternative using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM), Version 2.5, the most recent version available. Predictions assumed worst case hourly equivalent noise levels (1-hour Leq, dba) using projected peak-hour design year traffic volumes and speeds. The highest predicted future noise levels for each NSA (among the range of noise levels for each NSA), are summarized in Table ES-2. The SDDOT noise guidance defines a traffic noise impact under two separate conditions: 1) when the future predicted traffic noise level approaches or exceeds the SDDOT NAC, or 2) when the future predicted traffic noise level creates a substantial increase of 15 dba over existing noise levels. NAC values vary depending on land use, but are generally either 66 dba (1-hr Leq, exterior) for residential, institutional, and outdoor active use areas; or 71 dba (1-hr Leq, exterior) for noise sensitive commercial areas, (including hotels and offices with exterior use areas). NAC values for each NSA are indicated in Table ES-1. A summary of all predicted noise impacts (NAC or substantial increase) for each of the identified NSAs is presented in Table ES-2. Due to the large number of modeled receptors and NSAs within the Project area, Appendix E includes the detailed prediction information for each receptor. ES-2

10 Executive Summary Table ES-2 Summary of Noise Impacts NSA ID Highest Predicted Noise Level in Leq (1h), dba Total Number of Noise Impacts (DU) Impact Type NAC/Significant Increase NAC NAC NAC NAC/Significant Increase 12A NAC/Significant Increase 12B 67 1 NAC NAC NSAs 1 through 6 were removed from the study ES.3 NOISE ABATEMENT CONSIDERATIONS AND COMMITMENTS FHWA and SDDOT policy require that when noise impacts are identified, noise abatement must be evaluated. If noise abatement is found to be reasonable and feasible, it must be incorporated into the project. The SDDOT noise guidance specifies that for noise abatement to be feasible, it must be capable of providing a 5 dba noise reduction for 60% of front row receptors, and that it must meet safety, constructability, and access requirements. For an abatement measure to be reasonable, it must meet cost effectiveness requirements, typically with an estimated cost effectiveness value of less than $21,000 per benefited unit ($44/sq. ft.), provide at least 7 dba noise reduction for 40% of benefited receptors, and it must also be accepted by a majority of benefited residents and owners. Each impacted NSA was evaluated to determine if noise abatement, typically in the form of noise walls, was reasonable and feasible. The results of this analysis are presented in Table ES-3. Table ES-3 Noise Abatement Recommendation Summary for Impacted NSAs Impacted NSA Activity Category Abatement Feasible Abatement Reasonable Abatement Recommended 7 B No N/A No 8 B No No No 9 B Yes Yes Yes 10 B Yes No No 11 B Yes No No 12A B No Yes No 12B B Yes No No 13 B Yes No No ES-3

11 Executive Summary ES.4 CONSTRUCTION NOISE Construction noise is expected to occur as a result of the Project, and it is reasonable to assume that the same NSAs that were identified for potential traffic noise impacts might also expect to experience elevated noise levels during construction. At this time insufficient information exists to reasonably predict construction noise levels, and neither FHWA nor SDDOT have identified specific construction noise impact levels. However, this report includes useful information on typical noise levels for construction equipment as well as sample wording for construction noise mitigation/avoidance practices that can be incorporated into construction contract documents and specifications. ES.5 INFORMATION FOR LOCAL OFFICIALS FHWA and SDDOT policy specify that local officials should be provided appropriate information to assist with future compatible land use planning, especially with regard to the future planning and development of currently undeveloped lands near the proposed project right-of-way. This technical noise report will serve as the primary information source to help local officials avoid future incompatible land use planning with regard to noise generated by this project. Table ES-4 presents potential noise impact distances for various regions of the project. Table ES-4 Noise Impact Distances for Undeveloped Lands Undeveloped Area Location Contour Distance (ft) 66 dba 71 dba S of 85 th St, W of I-29 (not within NSA) 45 <10 S of 85 th St, at Hanson Pl. (not within NSA) 50 <10 N of 85 th St, E of Hanson Pl. (NSA9) 50 <10 N of the 85 th St, W of Louise Ave (NSA11) 90 <10 S of the 85 th St, W of Louise Ave (NSA13) 85 <10 ES-4

12 Executive Summary This page intentionally left blank ES-5

13 SECTIONONE Introduction and Project Description SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Traffic Noise Technical Report for the 85 th Street Extension is an analysis of a proposed transportation improvement project consisting of the following elements: The addition of paved roadways and a bridge at the intersection of I-29 and 85 th Street in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. The project also originally included improvements to the I-29 and I-229 interchange, but those improvements and associated evaluation of noise impacts and abatement in those areas were removed from this revised report. Figure 1-1 contains an overview of the Project location. This Figure shows the entire original study area and associated NSAs although I-29/I-229 improvements were later removed from the study. 1.2 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES The alternatives for the noise analysis are as follows: Existing Condition; and Future Build Alternative (all improvements noted above) 1-1

14 SECTIONONE Introduction and Project Description This page intentionally left blank 1-2

15 SECTIONTWO Noise Analysis Overview SECTION 2 NOISE ANALYSIS OVERVIEW This section identifies and reviews the methodology and policy for the technical tasks and analyses used in this report. The actual results of these tasks and analyses are presented in subsequent sections of this report. 2.1 REGULATORY OVERVIEW Federal Regulations The FHWA noise policy is contained within The Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Part 772 (23 CFR 772) which provides procedures for preparing operational and construction noise studies and evaluating noise abatement considered for federal and federal-aid highway projects. The code was recently updated in July of Under the current version of 23 CFR 772.5, projects are categorized as Type I, Type II or Type III projects. The FHWA defines a Type I project as a proposed federal or federal-aid highway project for the construction of a highway on a new location, or the physical alteration of an existing highway which significantly changes either the horizontal or vertical alignment, or increases the number of through-traffic lanes. The proposed project is a Type I project as defined by the FHWA. Type I projects include those that create a completely new noise source, as well as those that increase the volume or speed of traffic or move the traffic closer to a receptor. Type I projects include the addition of an interchange, ramp, auxiliary lane, or truck-climbing lane to an existing highway, or the widening of an existing ramp by a full lane width for its entire length. Projects unrelated to increased noise levels, such as lighting, signing, and landscaping, are not normally considered Type I projects. Under 23 CFR , noise abatement must be considered for Type I projects if the project is predicted to result in a traffic noise impact. In such cases, 23 CFR 772 requires that the project sponsor consider noise abatement before adoption of the final NEPA document. This process involves identification of noise abatement measures that are reasonable, feasible, and likely to be incorporated into the project, and of noise impacts for which no apparent solution is available. Traffic noise impacts, as defined in 23 CFR 772.5, occur when the design year condition noise levels approach or exceed the noise abatement criteria (NAC) specified in 23 CFR 772, or design year condition noise levels create a substantial noise increase over existing noise levels. 23 CFR 772 does not specifically define the terms substantial increase or approach ; these criteria are defined in the SDDOT Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidance (July, 2011), as described in the following section. Table 2-1 summarizes the FHWA NAC corresponding to various defined land use activity categories. Activity categories and related traffic noise impacts are determined based on the actual land use in a given area. Background information on noise levels and noise metrics can be found in Appendix A. In identifying noise impacts, primary consideration is given to exterior areas of frequent human use. In situations where there are no exterior activities, or where the exterior activities are far from the roadway or physically shielded in a manner that prevents an impact on exterior activities, the interior criterion (Activity Category D) may be used as the basis for determining a noise impact. 2-1

16 SECTIONTWO Noise Analysis Overview Table 2-1 FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria Activity Category Activity Criteria 2 Leq(h) L10(h) Evaluation Location Activity description A Exterior Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. B Exterior Residential. C Exterior D Interior E Exterior F Active sport areas, amphitheaters, auditoriums, campgrounds, cemeteries, day care 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. Auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, places of worship, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, schools, and television studios. Hotels, motels, offices, restaurants/bars, and other developed lands, properties or activities not included in A-D or F. Agriculture, airports, bus yards, emergency services, industrial, logging, maintenance facilities, manufacturing, mining, rail yards, retail facilities, shipyards, utilities (water resources, water treatment, electrical), and warehousing. G Undeveloped lands that are not permitted. 1 Either Leq(h) or L10(h) (but not both) may be used on a project. 2 The Leq(h) and L10(h) Activity Criteria values are for impact determination only, and are not design standards for noise 3 Includes undeveloped lands permitted for this activity The federal regulation also covers such topics as traffic noise prediction, analysis of traffic noise impacts, analysis of noise abatement, information for public officials, and construction noise issues, all of which have been incorporated into the current SDDOT noise guidance, as discussed in the next section State Regulations and Policies SDDOT has published the noise policy which provides guidance in the analysis of highway traffic noise and the evaluation of noise mitigation measures. Effective in July 2011, the SDDOT Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidance (hereafter referred to as the SDDOT noise guidance ) also includes current policies, procedures, and practices to be used by agencies that sponsor new construction or reconstruction 2-2

17 SECTIONTWO Noise Analysis Overview of federal or federal-aid highway projects. The NAC specified in the SDDOT noise guidance are the same as those specified in the most recent version of 23 CFR 772. The SDDOT noise guidance states that a sound level is considered to approach the NAC level when the Leq(h) sound level is 1 dba less than the NAC identified in 23 CFR 772. This means that a peak hour noise level of 66 dba is considered to approach the NAC of 67 dba, but 65 dba does not. The SDDOT noise guidance defines a noise increase as substantial when the predicted traffic noise levels with project implementation exceed existing noise levels by 15 dba. The SDDOT noise guidance provides detailed technical guidance for the evaluation of highway traffic noise. This includes field measurement methods, noise modeling methods, and report preparation guidance. In addition to the NAC criteria above, the SDDOT noise guidance also specifies the following definitions and policies: A benefited receptor is the recipient of an abatement measure that receives a noise reduction at or above the minimum threshold of 5 dba. A Feasible Noise Abatement Measure is a mitigation measure that is acoustically feasible and meets engineering requirements for constructability. A noise abatement measure is considered acoustically feasible when a minimum of 60% of front row receptors directly behind the noise wall (noise wall must extend entirely across receptor s property line) achieve a 5 dba noise reduction. A Reasonable Noise Abatement Measure is an abatement measure that has been determined to be cost effective ($21,000/dwelling unit), approved by a minimum of 50% of property owners and residents, and is able to achieve the SDDOT s Noise Reduction Design Goal, which is the optimum desired dba noise reduction determined from calculating the difference between future build noise levels with abatement, to future build noise levels without abatement. The SDDOT design goal is a minimum of 40% of benefited receptors must achieve a 7 dba noise reduction in order for noise abatement to be reasonable. 2.2 DEFINING AREA OF POTENTIAL IMPACT The extent of the noise study analysis area should include all receptors potentially impacted by the project. The FHWA does not establish a fixed distance to define the noise impact analysis area. Historically, absolute noise impacts (those areas with noise levels approaching or exceeding the NAC 66 dba for residential land uses) rarely exist beyond about 400 to 500 feet from the roadway. It is also established that the FHWA Traffic Noise Model is less reliable at predicting noise levels beyond this range, so a 500 foot screening distance from the edge of the proposed highway is established as a default value for the area of potential impact. However, in some areas with low existing noise levels (say below 55 dba during the loudest hour), substantial increase noise impacts could exist without the predicted project noise level approaching or exceeding the NAC, so in these areas a more extensive analysis area may be required. The SDDOT noise guidance has identified the minimum distance to look for receptors is 300 feet from the edge of pavement. If an impact is identified at 300 feet, the next closest receptor would need to be analyzed until a distance where impacts are no longer identified is reached. If no receptors are located within the 300 foot zone, then the closest receptor(s) should be analyzed. 2-3

18 SECTIONTWO Noise Analysis Overview 2.3 NOISE MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES A variety of field noise measurements were conducted for this project. In general, the noise measurement procedures in the field follow recommended standard procedures, including those outlined in the FHWA s Measurement of Highway Related Noise, May 1996, and the SDDOT noise guidance. Specifically, the following practices and procedures were used. The short-term noise measurements (typically minutes) were conducted at actual or representative receptor locations and were used primarily to validate noise models (at locations where traffic noise was dominant). Short-term noise measurements were generally conducted at exterior areas of frequent human use and were only conducted during periods of free flowing traffic, dry roadways, and low to moderate wind speeds (less than 12 mph to avoid extraneous wind noise). Only ANSI (American National Standards Institute) Type 1 sound level meters were used. The meters were subjected to a field calibration check before and after each measurement. Calibration certificates and raw data for each meter used in the Project can be found in Appendix B. Concurrent traffic counts (classified in auto, medium and heavy trucks, buses, and motorcycles) for the acoustically dominant road were conducted for each short-term measurement. Observed live traffic counts were included in the field sheets in Appendix B. All field data was recorded on field data sheets, which included the time, name and location of the measurement, instrumentation data, 5-minute Leq noise levels, observed meteorological data, field calibration data, a measurement site diagram, GIS coordinates, and notes as to the dominant noise sources and any other observed acoustically relevant events (such as aircraft over-flights, emergency vehicle pass bys, etc.). Field sheets used in this project can be found in Appendix B. Photographs were taken for each measurement location showing the measurement location relative to the dwelling and the noise source. Photographs of each of the measurement locations, along with a general description of the location, can be found in Appendix B. 2.4 ANALYSIS OBJECTIVES The purpose of this noise analysis report is to identify and document potential noise impacts associated with the future alternative of the proposed Project and to identify feasible and reasonable abatement. The general analysis procedure for the Project noise study includes the following steps: 1. Review Project Description: Review the project description and project data to be analyzed and collect additional required data (including roadway design files, existing and future traffic data, land use data, etc.). Consider all alternatives, design options, and construction phasing scenarios. This information is presented in Section 1 of this report. 2-4

19 SECTIONTWO Noise Analysis Overview 2. Identify Regulatory Framework: Investigate and establish the regulatory framework to be followed for the noise analysis, including federal, state and local regulations and ordinances applicable to the Project. This information is presented in Section 2 of this report. 3. Establish Existing Land Use and Noise Environment: Investigate and document the existing noise environment for the Project area, including existing noise sensitive land uses and existing noise levels in the Project area. These were accomplished with a careful review of local zoning information, review of aerial photography and a site visit to the Project area. This information is presented in Section 3 of this report. 4. Predict Future Noise Levels and Assess Noise Impacts: Future noise levels at noise sensitive land uses for the future build alternative are predicted using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM) Version 2.5. For each alternative, compare future noise levels (as well as increases in future noise levels over existing noise levels) to appropriate identified noise impact criteria and quantify resulting noise impacts. This information is presented in Section 4 of this report. 5. Evaluate Noise Abatement: Where noise impacts are identified, evaluate potential noise abatement measures. Abatement measures are evaluated for feasibility and reasonableness according to FHWA and SDDOT standards. This information is presented in Section 5 of this report. 6. Consider Construction Noise Impacts: Analyze potential construction noise impacts, and discuss available mitigation options. This information is presented in Section 6 of this report. 7. Information for Public Officials: Provide or identify appropriate information for local public officials to help avoid future noise impacts. This information is presented in Section 7 of this report. A more detailed accounting of the specific procedures involved in each of the above analysis steps is provided in the indicated report section. 2-5

20 SECTIONTWO Noise Analysis Overview 2.5 SELECTION OF NOISE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS In general, noise-sensitive receptors are selected to represent potentially impacted land uses within the Project area. A noise sensitive area, or NSA, is generally defined as a geographical area covering multiple properties with similar land uses and noise environments and that might benefit from a single noise abatement measure, such as a noise wall. An NSA might represent a single isolated property or an entire neighborhood. The delineated NSAs for this Project are described in Section 3 of this report. Within each NSA, representative noise measurements and noise prediction locations may be identified. Typically, each NSA would have one measurement location and multiple noise prediction locations. The number and locations of the receptors (measurement and modeling locations) within each NSA are selected to adequately represent all of the noise-sensitive property units (dwellings) within that NSA, and these properties may include Activity Categories A through E in Table 2-1 (including residential, noise sensitive commercial, parks, schools, hotels, etc.). Activity Categories F and G (agriculture, retail, industrial, transportation, utilities, and undeveloped land), typically would not have associated NSAs or receptor locations. For residential properties in particular, more isolated residences would generally be modeled as individual receptors, while residences in multi-family buildings and dense neighborhoods may be modeled with one modeled receptor location representing multiple dwelling units or homes (receptors). All noise prediction locations are placed to represent an exterior area of frequent human use. For residential properties, this would normally be an exterior activity area between the structure and the proposed project roadway. If no specific outdoor activity area is identified, a position at approximately 10 to 20 feet from the building façade exposed to the project roadway would be used. For commercial and other non-residential properties, some other exterior area of frequent human use would be selected. 2.6 WORST-CASE NOISE CONDITIONS When determining noise impacts, traffic noise predictions must be made for the worst case noise hour (generally during level of service [LOS] C or D with high heavy truck volumes and speeds close to the posted speed limit or design speed). The worst case noise hour is typically either the peak vehicular truck hour or the peak vehicular volume hour (with LOS A through D conditions). 2.7 NOISE ABATEMENT REQUIREMENTS According to the SDDOT noise guidance, once a noise impact has been identified, feasible and reasonable noise abatement measures must be considered. For noise abatement, primary consideration is given to the exterior areas of frequent human use. When traffic noise impacts are identified, noise barrier walls, at a minimum, are required to be considered. In addition to noise walls, other abatement elements may also be considered, if appropriate and applicable, including the following: Traffic management measures; Alteration of horizontal and vertical alignments; 2-6

21 SECTIONTWO Noise Analysis Overview Acquisition of property to serve as a buffer to preempt development that would be adversely impacted by traffic noise; and Noise insulation (institutional buildings only). When noise barriers are considered, a noise barrier design analysis must show that the barrier is feasible. This typically requires that the barrier provides a minimum required level of noise reduction. According to the SDDOT noise guidance, feasible noise barriers must provide at least 5 dba of noise reduction for 40% of impacted front row receptors. In addition to meeting minimum noise reduction requirements, noise barriers must also meet engineering and constructability feasibility requirements in terms of safety, property and emergency access, drainage control, overhead and underground utilities clearance, and other issues. Noise barrier reasonableness is generally related to cost effectiveness. The SDDOT noise guidance expresses barrier cost effectiveness as barrier cost per benefited receptor, with a benefited receptor defined as receiving a noise reduction of 5 dba or greater. Barriers must also achieve the SDDOT noise reduction design goal of 7 dba reduction for at least 40% of benefited receptors. A reasonable cost is considered to be a maximum of $21,000 per benefited receptor. If noise barriers are determined to be reasonable and feasible as defined above, then the viewpoints of property owners and residences should be taken into consideration. Approval by at least half (50%) of all responding benefited owners and residences is needed to implement noise abatement. The polling is typically conducted after the preliminary recommendation is made. 2.8 NOISE MODELING METHODOLOGY Future build noise levels, along with existing noise levels, were predicted using the FHWA TNM Version 2.5, the most recent version available at the time of the analysis. All conventional modeling techniques and recommendations for TNM by both FHWA and SDDOT were implemented. These included the following modeling procedures and conventions: TNM roadways were generally modeled as bundled roadways with no more than three lanes per roadway. All roadway pavement types were modeled as Average. Traffic speeds and volumes for peak traffic hour as provided in the traffic data were modeled to predict worst case noise levels. Traffic speeds and volumes used in this analysis were based on the predicted traffic data included in Appendix C. Existing terrain lines (topography) and buildings were modeled where appropriate. All TNM model runs were detail checked for accuracy by an independent noise analyst. 2-7

22 SECTIONTWO Noise Analysis Overview 2.9 PROJECT TRAFFIC DATA Predicted traffic data for the existing and Future Build was provided by the Project traffic consultant. Truck percentages were also provided along with the predicted traffic data. Traffic data used in this analysis can be found in Appendix C. 2-8

23 SECTIONTHREE Existing Noise Environment and Noise Sensitive Areas SECTION 3 EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT AND NOISE SENSITIVE AREAS 3.1 EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING Existing Land Uses Land uses within the Project study area are a mix of residential, commercial, agricultural, vacant, and undeveloped land uses. The study area consists of mostly single and multi-family residences, located along 85 th Street Noise Sensitive Areas In order to better categorize the potential noise impacts and evaluate noise abatement for the various project alternatives, all of the potentially impacted, noise-sensitive receptors have been organized into Noise Sensitive Areas (NSAs). An NSA is defined as a geographical area that includes a variety of individual noise-sensitive receptor units (individual homes, apartment units, institution properties, etc.) which have a similar land use and noise environment, and if impacted, would likely be protected by a single noise abatement element, such as a noise barrier. Descriptions of delineated NSAs, including location, primary land use and type of noise-sensitive receptors are listed in Table 3-1. Figure 1-1 shows an overview of the Project area with all of the defined NSAs. Table 3-1 Noise Sensitive Areas (NSAs) Noise Sensitive Area Description Short-term ID NSA7 NSA8 NSA9 NSA10 NSA11 NSA12A NSA12B NSA13 NW Quadrant of I-29 and 85 th Street Single Family Residential NW Quadrant of the 85 th Street and Tallgrass Avenue Intersection Single Family Residential NE Quadrant of the 85 th Street and Tallgrass Avenue Intersection Single and Multi-Family Residential NW Quadrant of the 85 th Street and S. Hughes Avenue Intersection Single Family Residential NE Quadrant of the 85 th Street and S. Louise Avenue Intersection Single and Multi-Family Residential SW Quadrant of the 85 th Street and Brett Avenue Intersection Multi-Family Residential SW Quadrant of the 85 th Street and S. Hughes Avenue Intersection Single Family Residential SE Quadrant of the 85 th Street and S. Louise Avenue Intersection Single and Multi-Family Residential Note: NSA1 though NSA6 were removed from the study area, NSA12A added for recent construction ST4 ST5 3-1

24 SECTIONTHREE Existing Noise Environment and Noise Sensitive Areas 3.2 EXISTING NOISE LEVELS Noise Measurements Multiple noise measurements were conducted for this project on October 16, Noise measurements were conducted to provide information for noise model validation (short-term measurements with accompanying classified traffic counts). Noise measurements were conducted as described in Section 2.3. Appendix B includes measurement related materials. A total of 2 short-term (ST) noise measurements were conducted as summarized in Table 3-2. Figure 1-1 contains aerials of the Project area showing each short-term measurement location. Measurement Location* Table 3-2 Short-Term Measurement Summary Location Date Time Measured Leq, dba Distance to Edge of Pavement (ft) Existing Proposed ST4 At 85 th Street and I-29 (West of I-29) 10/16/12 16:15 16: NA ST5 600 feet East of Hanson Place (North of 85 th Street) 10/16/12 11:05 11: * Measurements at locations ST1 through ST3 were conducted at NSAs removed from study area NA means the measured location will be on the future roadway Noise Model Validation and Results The FHWA TNM Version 2.5 was used to predict noise levels for the future build alternative as well as existing noise levels at receptor locations where noise levels are dominated by traffic noise on project roadways. To demonstrate that the noise model is predicting noise levels within a reasonable margin of error, the noise model runs are validated by comparing predicted noise levels to measured noise levels for similar traffic conditions. However, since the TNM only predicts noise levels associated with traffic noise, the model runs can only be validated at measurement locations where current noise levels are dominated by project roadways. For this project, noise model validation was possible for all noise measurement locations. Noise models are considered to be validated if the difference between measured and modeled noise levels for comparable conditions is 3 dba or less. The results of the noise validation effort are presented in Table

25 SECTIONTHREE Existing Noise Environment and Noise Sensitive Areas Table 3-3 TNM Validation Summary Table Measurement Location Location Date Time ST4 At 85 th Street and I-29 (West of I-29) ST5 600 feet East of Hanson Place (North of 85 th Street) Delta represents Modeled Leq Measured Leq. Measured Leq, dba Modeled Leq, dba Delta 10/16/12 16:15 16: /16/12 11:05 11: As shown in Table 3-3, all calculated differences between modeled and measured noise levels are less than 3.0 dba, therefore the noise models in those locations are considered validated. The observed traffic data counted during the noise measurements and used in the validation process were included in the field sheets and can be found in Appendix B. TNM validation runs developed for this Project are digitally archived and will be made available upon request Existing Noise Levels Existing noise levels for NSAs were predicted by modeling the receptor locations using the FHWA TNM. Table 4-1 presents a summary of existing noise levels for all modeled receptors in the Project area. Existing levels for the Project study area range from 32 to 63 dba. Figures 4-1 through 4-2 contain aerials of the Project area showing modeled receptor locations. Due to the large number of modeled receptors and NSAs within the Project area detailed prediction information for each receptor is presented in Appendix E. 3-3

26 SECTIONFOUR Future Noise Levels and Impacts SECTION 4 FUTURE NOISE LEVELS AND IMPACTS This section presents predicted noise levels and noise impacts (or noise impact distances for both identified NSA areas and general undeveloped areas). 4.1 PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS AND NOISE IMPACTS Future build alternative noise levels, along with existing noise levels, were predicted using the FHWA TNM Version 2.5, the most recent version available at the time of the analysis. All conventional modeling techniques and recommendations for TNM by both FHWA and SDDOT were implemented as described in Section 2.8. An Approach or Exceed noise impact occurs when the predicted future noise level at an identified noise receptor location approaches or exceeds the FHWA NAC within 1 dba. A Substantial Increase noise impact occurs when the predicted future noise level at an identified noise receptor location exceeds the existing condition noise level by 15 dba or more. Three receptors (R7-1, R11-25, and R12A-12) would experience a significant increase due to the project. Table 4-1 below contains a summary of the predicted noise levels and noise impacts at all modeled NSA locations in the Project. Figures 4-1 through 4-2 contain aerials of the Project area showing all modeled receptor locations and predicted future build impacts. Due to the large number of modeled receptors and NSAs within the Project area, prediction information for individual receptors is presented in detail in Appendix E 4-1

27 SECTIONFOUR Future Noise Levels and Impacts NSA # of Modeled Receptors Table 4-1 Summary of Predicted Noise Levels, All Scenarios Total Dwelling Units Predicted Noise Level (Range), Leq (1h) dba Existing Future Build Total Number of Noise Impacted Receptors Approach or Exceed NAC Significant Increase A B NSA 1 through NSA 6 were removed from the study Total Impacts 4.2 PREDICTED IMPACT DISTANCE FOR UNDEVELOPED LANDS For use in Land Use Planning, distances to potential noise impact have been calculated for generalized regions within the project corridor, as presented in Table ES-4. The 66 dba contour distance represents the potential impact zone for Land Use Activity Categories B and C (residential and Institutional) and the 71 dba Contour distance represents the potential impact zone for Category E (noise sensitive commercial). 4-2

28 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation SECTION 5 NOISE ABATEMENT EVALUATION 5.1 NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES According to FHWA and SDDOT policies, when noise impacts are identified, noise barriers (at a minimum) must be considered as noise abatement. Other potential noise abatement measures might include heavy truck or speed restrictions, alignment changes, and depressed roadways. Of these alternatives, the Project alignment was evaluated and compared for noise impacts (as presented in section 4), but truck restrictions and speed restrictions below proposed speed limits would significantly reduce the value of the roadway. Noise barriers were evaluated for NSAs 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12A, 12B, and 13 for feasibility and reasonableness. The following section describes the results of the barrier assessments for each evaluated NSA. 5.2 FEASIBLE AND REASONABLE CRITERIA AND REQUIREMENTS In order for mitigation to be recommended, the barrier must meet certain feasibility and reasonableness requirements established by SDDOT in the Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidance. When noise barriers are considered, a preliminary noise barrier design analysis must show that the barrier is feasible. According to the SDDOT noise guidance feasible noise barriers must provide at least 5 dba of noise reduction for 60% of front row receptors. In addition to meeting minimum noise reduction requirements, noise barriers must also meet engineering and constructability feasibility requirements in terms of safety, property and emergency access, drainage control, overhead and underground utilities clearance, and other issues. Noise barrier reasonableness generally is related to cost effectiveness. The SDDOT noise guidance expresses barrier cost effectiveness as barrier cost per benefited residence, with a benefited residence defined as receiving a noise reduction of 5 dba or greater. Barriers must also achieve the SDDOT noise reduction design goal of 7 dba reduction for at least 40% of benefited receptors. A reasonable cost is considered to be a maximum of $21,000 per benefited receptor, with the barrier cost based on $44 per square foot for a post and panel barrier up to 20 feet tall. For a noise barrier to be considered feasible and reasonable the viewpoints of benefited property owners and residents must be taken into consideration. 50% in favor of all responding benefited owners and residents is needed to build noise abatement. Polling for the viewpoints of benefited receptors typically occurs after the Preliminary Noise Analysis or Final Noise Analysis is prepared and approved. 5.3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NOISE ABATEMENT Noise abatement was considered for each NSA with noise impacted receptors. Initially, noise abatement was checked for feasibility (5 dba reduction at 60% of front row receptors and access restrictions). If abatement was determined to be feasible, the abatement was analyzed for cost effectiveness and other reasonableness factors. For all impacted receptors meeting feasibility requirements, preliminary barrier designs were evaluated using either TNM, or in simple cases, using a screening calculation. If the abatement was found to be both reasonable and feasible, it would be recommended for inclusion in the 5-1

29 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation project pending a polling of viewpoints from benefited receptors. The narrative results of abatement evaluations for each impacted NSA are summarized below. Table E-1 in Appendix E lists the existing and predicted future build noise levels as well as the noise levels with a barrier per modeled receptor location. The table also includes the information with regard to benefited receptors and barrier design goal achievement. Figures 4-1 through 4-2 contain aerials showing the noise impacts at every modeled receptor location for each analyzed barrier, as well as the analyzed barrier alignments. Screening Calculation Methodology The screening calculation simplifies the prediction of the reasonableness of the analyzed noise barrier by determining the cost effectiveness per benefitted receptor using barrier metrics rather than modeling. The SDDOT noise guidance states a reasonable cost is considered to be a maximum of $21,000 per benefited receptor. In order to estimate the cost per benefited receptor, the following assumptions were used: The location of the noise barrier is at the right-of-way. The length of the noise barrier is four times longer than the distance between a receptor and the right-of-way to be acoustically effective. The height of the noise barrier is 6 feet. NSAs Not Evaluated for Abatement NSA1 through NSA6 were not evaluated because they were removed from the study. NSA7 Residential NSA7 contains three receptors (R7-02 and R7-07) with NAC impacts and one receptor (R7-01) with a significant increase impact under the proposed alternative. Noise abatement was not feasible for the impacted receptors due to the need for direct driveway access to the residences from 85th Street. Therefore, noise abatement for the NSA is considered not feasible. NSA8 Residential NSA8 contains two receptors (R8-02 and R8-04) with NAC impacts under the proposed alternative. Noise abatement was not considered feasible for either of these receptors due to the need for direct driveway access to the residences from 85 th Street. Therefore, noise abatement for those receptors is considered not feasible. 5-2

30 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation NSA9 Residential NSA9 contains three receptors (R9-16, R9-17, and R9-18, representing a total of 6 dwelling units) with NAC impacts under the proposed alternative. These receptors are representative of multi-family residential land uses north of 85 th Street and west of Brett Avenue. Noise abatement was evaluated at the 85 th Street right-of-way within the NSA and is considered feasible. Figure 4-2 presents the location of the analyzed barrier. Noise abatement in the form of a noise barrier was found to be reasonable and feasible, with 66% of benefited dwelling units meeting the design goal, and with a cost of $16,500 per benefited receptor. Noise abatement is therefore recommended for this NSA. Table 5-1 NSA9 Barrier Analysis Summary Descriptors Barrier Information Number of Impacted Receptors 3 (6 dwelling units) Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Front Row) 6 out of 6 (100%) Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Total) 6 Barrier Evaluation Method TNM Length (ft) 350 Average Height (ft) 6.43 Minimum Height (ft) 6 Maximum Height (ft) 7 Area (ft2) 2,250 Total Cost $99,000 Cost / Benefitted Dwelling Unit $16,500 NR Range For Benefitted Receptors (dba) dba Number of DU meeting Design Goal (7 dba NR) 4 out of 6 (66%) Design Goal Met? Yes Feasible? Yes Reasonable? Yes Recommended? Yes 5-3

31 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation NSA10 Residential NSA10 contains nine receptors (R10-06 through R10-13 and R10-33) with NAC impacts under the proposed alternative. These receptors are representative of single-family residential land uses north of 85 th Street and west of Hughes Avenue. Noise abatement was evaluated at the 85 th Street right-of-way within the NSA and is considered feasible. Figure 4-2 presents the location of the analyzed barrier. While the noise barrier provides line-of-sight blockage from the roadway noise sources to the impacted first row receptors, the SDDOT abatement cost threshold of $21,000 per receptor is exceeded by $19,475. Therefore, noise abatement is not recommended for this NSA because it is considered not reasonable. Table 5-2 NSA10 Barrier Analysis Summary Descriptors Barrier Information Number of Impacted Receptors 9 Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Front Row) 10 out of 11 (90%) Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Total) 10 Barrier Evaluation Method TNM Length (ft) 900 Average Height (ft) Minimum Height (ft) 9 Maximum Height (ft) 11 Area (ft2) 9,199 Total Cost $404,756 Cost / Benefitted Dwelling Unit $40,475 NR Range For Benefitted Receptors (dba) dba Number of DU meeting Design Goal (7 dba NR) 9 out of 10 (90%) Design Goal Met? Yes Feasible? Yes Reasonable? No (Exceeds SDDOT Cost Threshold) Recommended? No 5-4

32 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation NSA11 Residential NSA11 contains four receptors (R11-01, R11-13, R11-26, and R11-27) with NAC impacts and one receptor (R11-25) with significant increase under the proposed alternative. These receptors are representative of single-family residential land uses north of 85 th Street and east of Hughes Avenue. Noise abatement was evaluated at the 85 th Street right-of-way in the NSA and is considered feasible. Figure 4-2 presents the location of the analyzed barrier. While the noise barrier provides line-of-sight blockage from the roadway noise sources to the impacted first row receptors, the SDDOT abatement cost threshold of $21,000 per receptor is exceeded by $12,290. Therefore, noise abatement is not recommended for this NSA because it is considered not reasonable. Table 5-3 NSA11 Barrier Analysis Summary Descriptors Barrier Information Number of Impacted Receptors 5 Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Front Row) 6 out of 7 (85%) Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Total) 10 Barrier Evaluation Method TNM Length (ft) 737 Average Height (ft) Minimum Height (ft) 10 Maximum Height (ft) 11 Area (ft2) 7,566 Total Cost $332,904 Cost / Benefitted Dwelling Unit $33,290 NR Range For Benefitted Receptors (dba) dba Number of DU meeting Design Goal (7 dba NR) 6 out of 10 (60%) Design Goal Met? Yes Feasible? Yes Reasonable? No (Exceeds SDDOT Cost Threshold) Recommended? No 5-5

33 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation NSA12A Residential NSA12A contains seven receptors (R12A-01 through R12A-07, representing a total of 15 dwelling units) with NAC impacts and one receptor (R12A-12, representing one additional dwelling unit) with a significant increase under the proposed alternative. These receptors are representative of multi-family residential land uses south of 85 th Street and west of Brett Avenue. Noise abatement was evaluated at the 85 th Street right-of-way in the NSA and is considered feasible. Figure 4-2 presents the location of the analyzed barrier. Noise abatement in the form of a noise barrier was initially found to be feasible and reasonable at this location. However, during final review it was determined that the proposed noise wall at this location conflicted with a Lewis and Clark Rural Water System pipeline easement, causing the estimated cost of the wall, and any potential costs of relocating easements or wall, to exceed the reasonable allowable costs for the wall. This conclusion was later reviewed and approved by SDDOT staff ( from Tom Lehmkuhl SDDOT Environment Engineering Manager, 8/17/2017), and therefore a noise barrier is not recommended for this location. 5-6

34 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation NSA12B Residential NSA12B contains one receptor (R12B-08) with an NAC impact under the proposed alternative. A barrier in this location was determined to be not reasonable because the SDDOT abatement cost threshold of $21,000 per receptor is exceeded by $10,680. Figure 4-2 presents the location of the analyzed barrier. This receptor was evaluated with a screening calculation and the results are shown below. Table 5-4 NSA12B Barrier Analysis Summary Descriptors Barrier Information Number of Impacted Receptors 1 Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Front Row) 0 Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Total) N/A Barrier Evaluation Method Screening Calculation Length (ft) 120 Average Height (ft) 6 Minimum Height (ft) 6 Maximum Height (ft) 6 Area (ft2) 720 Total Cost $31,680 Cost / Benefitted Dwelling Unit $31,680 NR Range For Benefitted Receptors (dba) Number of DU meeting Design Goal (7 dba NR) Design Goal Met? Feasible? Reasonable? Recommended? N/A N/A N/A Yes No (Exceeds SDDOT Cost Threshold) No Barrier length is extended along the property boundary of the impacted receptor in order to avoid undesirable acoustic end effects. 5-7

35 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation NSA13 Residential NSA13 contains four receptors (R13-01 through R13-04) with NAC impacts under the proposed alternative. These receptors are representative of single-family residential land uses south of 85 th Street and east of Hughes Avenue. Noise abatement was evaluated at the 85 th Street right-of-way in the NSA and is considered feasible. Figure 4-2 presents the location of the analyzed barrier. While the noise barrier provides line-of-sight blockage from the roadway noise sources to the impacted first row receptors, the SDDOT abatement cost threshold of $21,000 per receptor is exceeded by $18,875. Therefore, noise abatement is not recommended for this NSA because it is considered not reasonable. Table 5-5 NSA13 Barrier Analysis Summary Descriptors Barrier Information Number of Impacted Receptors 4 Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Front Row) 4 out of 4 (100%) Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Total) 4 Barrier Evaluation Method TNM Length (ft) 381 Average Height (ft) 9.53 Minimum Height (ft) 9 Maximum Height (ft) 10 Area (ft2) 3,625 Total Cost $159,500 Cost / Benefitted Dwelling Unit $39,875 NR Range For Benefitted Receptors (dba) dba Number of DU meeting Design Goal (7 dba NR) 3 out of 4 (75%) Design Goal Met? Yes Feasible? Yes Reasonable? No (Exceeds SDDOT Cost Threshold) Recommended? No Summary As presented above, mitigation was evaluated for NSAs 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12A, 12B, and 13. NSAs 7 and 8 were determined to be not feasible due to residential access issues (a barrier located along the 85 th Street right-of-way would prevent driveway access for receptors in those NSAs). NSAs 10, 11, 12B, and 13 were determined not reasonable because the SDDOT abatement cost threshold of $21,000 per receptor is exceeded. NSA 12A was determined to be not feasible due to a conflict with a water pipeline easement at that location. Mitigation for NSA 9 found to be both reasonable and feasible and is recommended. 5-8

36 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation Table 5-6 presents the summary of analyzed noise abatement measures for NSAs where abatement was deemed feasible (NSAs 7 and 8 were deemed to be not feasible due to potential access issues from 85 th Street). Table 5-6 Noise Abatement Summary Descriptions NSA9 NSA10 NSA11 NSA12A NSA12B NSA13 Number of Impacted Receptors Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Front Row) Number of Benefitted Dwelling Units (Total) 3 (6 dwelling units) 6 out of 6 (100%) out of 11 (90%) 6 out of 7 (85%) 8 (16 dwelling units) NA 1 out of out of 4 (100%) NA 1 4 Barrier Evaluation Method TNM TNM TNM NA Screening TNM Length (ft) NA Average Height (ft) NA Minimum Height (ft) NA 6 9 Maximum Height (ft) NA 6 10 Area (ft2) 2,250 9,199 7,566 NA 720 3,625 Total Cost $99,000 $404,756 $332,904 NA $31,680 $159,500 Cost / Benefitted Dwelling Unit NR Range For Benefitted Receptors (dba) Number of DU meeting Design Goal (7 dba NR) $16,500 $40,475 $33,290 NA $31,680 $39, out of 6 (66%) out of 10 (90%) NA out of 10 (60%) NA 1 3 out of 4 (75%) Design Goal Met? Yes Yes Yes NA Yes Yes Feasible? Yes Yes Yes No, due to pipeline easement Yes Yes Reasonable? Yes No No NA No No Recommended Yes No No No No No 5-9

37 SECTIONFIVE Noise Abatement Evaluation This page intentionally left blank 5-10

38 SECTIONSIX Construction Noise Analysis SECTION 6 CONSTRUCTION NOISE ANALYSIS FHWA policy requires that construction noise be considered in a Type 1 highway noise analysis. This analysis would generally include the following: 1. Identification of land uses that may be affected by construction noise, 2. Determination of the measures needed in the plans and specifications to minimize or eliminate construction noise impacts; and, 3. Incorporate needed abatement into the plans and specifications. Neither FHWA nor SDDOT identify specific construction noise impact criteria. However, the SDDOT Standard Specifications for Roads and Bridges, 2004, Section 7.23, describes the sound control requirements. In addition, the detailed information required to predict actual construction noise levels (construction schedules, phasing, equipment lists, laydown areas, etc.) has not yet been determined. It is recognized that areas adjacent to the highway right of way and other construction areas (such as staging areas and laydown sites) can temporarily be exposed to high levels of noise during peak construction periods. It is reasonable to assume that the same NSAs identified for potential traffic noise impacts could also be exposed to construction noise. The effect of the noise on the local area can be reduced if the hours and days of construction activity are limited to less sensitive time periods. The project construction standard noise specifications help minimize the effects of construction noise. The following special provisions may be incorporated into the construction contract: a. Inform the local public in advance of construction activities that may generate particularly high noise levels. b. Noise barriers, approved for incorporation into the project, should be constructed as close to the beginning of the project's construction timeline as practical. c. Noise created by truck movement shall not exceed 88 dba at a distance of 50 feet. d. When working between 7:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M., use smart alarms instead of standard reverse signal alarms or use spotters. When working between 10:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. use spotters. e. Have portable noise meters on the job at all times for noise level spot checks on specific operations. Employ an individual trained in the use of noise meters, with working knowledge of sound measurements and their meaning and use as applied to these mitigation/abatement measures. 6-1

39 SECTIONSIX Construction Noise Analysis 6.1 TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS Table 6.1 contains a list of commonly-used construction equipment and noise levels associated with using that equipment. Table 6-1 Construction Noise Level Ranges Equipment Type Noise Level at 50 feet (dba), Range Noise Level at 50 feet (dba), Average a Noise Level at 50 feet (dba), Average b Front Loader Backhoes Equipment Powered by Internal Combustion Engines Other Impact Equipment Stationary Material Handling Earth Moving Tractors Scrapers Graders Pavers Trucks Concrete Mixers Concrete Pumps Cranes, Moveable Cranes, Derrick Pumps Generators Compressors Mounted Breaker (Hoe rams) c Pneumatic Wrenches Jack Hammers, Rock Drills Impact Drivers (Peak) Vibrators Saws Notes: a) From Colorado Construction Noise Symposium, Construction Noise Ranges Chart b) From Highway Construction Noise: Measurement, Prediction and Mitigation. US DOT, FHWA, HHI-22/R10-91(200)EW c) From Allied Construction Products, Cleveland OH

40 SECTIONSIX Construction Noise Analysis 6.2 CONSTRUCTION NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES Although SDDOT does not identify any specific abatement measures related to construction noise, the following list could be considered best practices for the avoidance of any potential problems related to construction noise impacts: No construction shall be performed within 1,000 feet of an occupied dwelling unit on Sundays, legal holidays, or between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. on other days without the approval of the SDDOT construction project manager. All equipment used shall have sound-control devices no less effective than those provided on the original equipment. No equipment shall have unmuffled exhaust. All equipment shall comply with pertinent equipment noise standards of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. No pile driving or blasting operations shall be performed within 3,000 feet of an occupied dwelling unit on Sundays, legal holidays, or between the hours of 8 p.m. and 8 a.m. on other days without the approval of the SDDOT construction project manager. The noise from rock crushing or screening operations performed within 3,000 feet of any occupied dwelling shall be mitigated by strategic placement of material stockpiles between the operation and the affected dwelling or by other means approved by the SDDOT construction project manager. If a specific noise impact complaint is received during construction of the project, the contractor may be required to implement one or more of the following noise mitigation measures at the contractor s expense, as directed by the construction project manager: Locate stationary construction equipment as far from nearby noise-sensitive properties as feasible. Shut off idling equipment. Reschedule construction operations to avoid periods of noise annoyance identified in the complaint. Notify nearby residents whenever extremely noisy work will be occurring. Install temporary or portable acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. Operate electrically powered equipment using line voltage power or solar power. 6-3

41 SECTIONSIX Construction Noise Analysis This page intentionally left blank 6-4

42 SECTIONSEVEN Information for Local Government Officials SECTION 7 INFORMATION FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS 7.1 UNDEVELOPED LANDS To minimize future traffic noise impacts on currently undeveloped lands of Type I projects, SDDOT is required to inform local jurisdictions (where the proposed highway project is located) of the following: 1. Noise compatible planning concepts. 2. The best estimation of the future design year noise levels at various distances from the edge of the nearest travel lane of the highway, where the future noise levels meet SDDOT s definition of approach for undeveloped lands or properties within the project limits. At a minimum, the distance to SDDOT s exterior NAC from Table 2-1 must be identified (this information is provided in Table 4-2). 3. For development that occurs after the date of public knowledge, State funds are not available from SDDOT s non-federally funded Retrofit Program and federal funds are not available as SDDOT does not have a federally approved Type II program. The date of public knowledge is the date of approval of the CE, FONSI, or ROD. To fulfill these three requirements, at a minimum, SDDOT must send a cover letter to local jurisdictions, along with copies of the noise study, explaining noise compatible planning concepts. A face-to-face meeting between SDDOT and the local jurisdiction(s) will likely better convey information than only sending a letter with attachments. Face-to-face meetings between SDDOT and the local jurisdiction(s) shall be held for those new noise-sensitive projects along the project alignment. The letter must also include a table of future noise levels at specific locations or a figure showing the distances to typical noise levels along the roadway for unpermitted, undeveloped lands in the project area. The letter should encourage local officials to make this information available for disclosure in real estate transactions. Local officials should be made aware that federal funds for traffic noise abatement are not available for development that occurs after the date of public knowledge of the project as explained in the letter. The letter and copies of the noise technical report must be provided to and reviewed by City and/or County planning departments. The letter and the report should be distributed with the environmental document. The distribution information, including names and date distributed, and any follow-up contact with local agencies must be documented in the project files. 7-1

43 SECTIONSEVEN Information for Local Government Officials This page intentionally left blank 7-2

44 SECTIONEIGHT Conclusions and Recommendations SECTION 8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The noise analysis for the proposed project included a total of 5 measurement locations and 199 predicted receptors representing 248 individual noise sensitive dwelling units. In order to simplify the reporting of noise levels, noise impacts, noise mitigation, and in adherence with preferred SDDOT analysis methodology, these receptors were organized into eight separate NSAs within the study area (not including NSAs 1 through 6, which were removed from the study). Eight of the NSAs contained receptors with predicted future noise levels approaching or exceeding the NAC or experiencing significant increase. All eight of the aforementioned NSAs were evaluated for noise abatement, and abatement for seven of the NSAs were found to be either not feasible or not reasonable following SDDOT noise guidance. Noise abatement for NSAs 9 was found to be both reasonable and feasible and is recommended for the proposed project. 8-1

45 SECTIONEIGHT Conclusions and Recommendations This page intentionally left blank 8-2

46 SECTIONNINE Statement of Limitations SECTION 9 STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS Background information, land use information, traffic data, roadway design files, and other data have been furnished to URS by SDDOT and/or third parties, which URS has used in preparing this report. URS has relied on this information as furnished, and is neither responsible for nor has confirmed the accuracy of this information. Portions of this report have been prepared based on certain key assumptions made by URS which substantially affect the conclusions and recommendations of this report. These assumptions, although thought to be reasonable and appropriate, may not prove to be true in the future. The conclusions and recommendations of URS are conditioned upon several assumptions. Noise levels found in this report were predicted with the FHWA TNM Version 2.5 computer program as approved by SDDOT for this project. This report assumes that the algorithms within the traffic noise model are correct and comply with SDDOT standards for predictive noise modeling. 9-1

47 SECTIONNINE Statement of Limitations This page intentionally left blank 9-2

48 SECTIONTEN References SECTION 10 REFERENCES South Dakota Department of Transportation, Standard Specification for Roads and Bridges South Dakota Department of Transportation, Noise Analysis and Abatement Guidance. July, Federal Highway Administration, 23 CFR 772, Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise, July Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC. Lee, C.S.Y. and G.G. Fleming Measurement of Highway Related Noise, Federal Highway Administration Report FHWA-PD U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Special Programs Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA. 10-1

49 SECTIONTEN References This page intentionally left blank 10-2

50 Figures

51 e Av me s 29 Project Site WY MN _ ^ 53Rd St 2 % i Ch IA C wa ppe Measurement Location ir 55Th St Bluestem St Nevada Ave 57Th St 58Th St NSA 4 Mandy Ave Sarmar Ave Drexel Dr Holbrook Ave NSA 2 NSA Bremerton Pl Pl ST2 NSA 6 Sharon Ave Mckenzi e Ave Ct 65Th St Misty Glen Pl is e Jor dan Danberry Dr Jo rd a nd r Rebecca St Lou Southwind Ave Dr Project End Line ir ark Pl dc an Gr ke rp Norie 471St Ave Ba k 61St St ST1 59Th St a Cir 60Th St t n Arizo 58Th S Existing Barrier Skinn er Av e Baneberry Ave NSA 1 Baha Ave 56Th St Royal St olis Dr r Technop Elder D Noise Sensitive Area Ave berg Sol 55Th St t 500' Screening Area NE Bonnie Ct S Rd 53 Map Sheet Tennis Ln SD 90 Valhalla Blvd Sa int Ja Dr 94 Marion Rd Pla M Tin s LEGEND Dr OVERVIEW MAP ND 49Th St y th Ca 50Th St NSA 3 ST3 69Th St Mogen Ave Connie Ave Crane Ave 269Th St 471St Ave FIGURE 4-1 Cactus Pl Hanson Pl FIGURE 4-2 NSA 7 NSA 9 NSA 8 Sundowner Ave ST5 ST4 270Th St NSA 12A NSA 10 NSA 12B NSA 11 NSA Mueller Pl Morton Ct Path: \\lajolla\lajolla\projects\_gis\ \map_docs\mxd\overviewjr mxd, jackson.redmond, 12/28/2016, 2:21:40 PM Louise Ave Hughes Ave 74Th St O SOURCES: Receivers, Measurement Locations, NSAs, Barriers (URS, 2014). Aerial (Microsoft, 2011) Feet PROJECT OVERVIEW MAP I-29 CORRIDOR DESIGN PROJECT DATE:DS, 12/28/2016 CREATED BY: DS Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus USDA, USGS, AEX, FIG. NO: Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, SCALE: 1" = 1,100' (1:13,200) 1-1 PM:and PBthe GIS PROJ MapmyIndia, OpenStreetMap contributors, user NO: community SCALE CORRECT WHEN PRINTED AT 11X17

52 LEGEND OVERVIEW MAP 1 7 Impacted St Ave Modeled Receptors # 0 Impacted, Benefited " 6 Impacted, Not Benefited j k Impacted, Design Goal Achieved Sundowner Ave Not Impacted # 0 Not Impacted, Benefited " 6 Not Impacted, Not Benefited j k Not Impacted, Design Goal Achieved D Demolished Sunnyview St Noise Sensitive Area Project End Line Match Line R9-12 " 6 " 6 X " 6 R7-01 R7-02 " 6 R7-06 R7-04 " 6 R8-03 R7-05 X " 6 " 6 R7-07 " 6 " 6 R8-01 R7-08 R7-09 " 6 " 6 R8-02 " 6 R7-10 X " 6 " 6 270Th St R9-01 " 6 R8-04 " 6 M at ch L i n e F i g u re 4-4 Path: \\lajolla\lajolla\projects\_gis\ \map_docs\mxd\future_3jr1.mxd, jackson.redmond, 11/30/2016, 9:25:01 AM R7-03 NSA 9 NSA 8 NSA 7 270Th St 29 O FUTURE BUILD RESULTS AND ANALYZED BARRIER LOCATIONS NSAs 7 & 8 SOURCES: Receivers, Measurement Locations,NSAs, Barriers (URS, 2014). I-29 CORRIDOR DESIGN PROJECT Aerial (Microsoft, 2011) Feet SCALE: 1" =350' (1:4,200) SCALE CORRECT WHEN PRINTED AT 11X17 CREATED BY: DS PM: PB DATE: 11/30/2016 FIG. NO: PROJ. NO:

53 St Ave 6 OVERVIEW MAP Modeled Receptors Impacted #0 Impacted, Benefited "6 Impacted, Not Benefited kj Impacted, Design Goal Achieved Hughes Ave Not Impacted #0 Not Impacted, Benefited "6 Not Impacted, Not Benefited kj Not Impacted, Design Goal Achieved D Demolished Road Noise Sensitive Area Analyzed Barrier- Recommended Sunnyview St Existing Barrier Analyzed Barrier- Not Recommended Project End Line Cactus Pl Hanson Pl Match Line Buildings Path: \\lajolla\lajolla\projects\_gis\ \map_docs\mxd\future_ mxd, jackson.redmond, 8/22/2017, 3:49:54 PM "6 NSA 8 R8-04 "6 Match Line Figure 4-3 R9-12 "6 "6 R9-01 NSA 9 R9-02 "6 "6 "6 R9-03 R9-04 "6 R9-13 R9-15 "6 R10-02 "6 R9-14 "6 R10-03 R9-21 "6 R9-10 "6 R9-20 R10-04 R9-19 "6 "6 R9-08 R9-05 R9-06 R9-07 "6 "6 "6 R9-11 R9-09 R10-05 "6 "6 "6 "6 R9-16 R9-17 "6 "6 270Th St R12A-01 R12A-19 R12A-20 R12A-02 R12A-03 R12A-08 R12A-09 R12A-13 R12A-14 R12A-23 R12A-24 R12A-28 R12A-29 R12A-35 R12A-42 R12A-43 kj kj #0 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 R12A-15 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 R12A-21 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 NSA 12A "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6"6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 R12A-30 R12A-10 R12A-44 R12A-31 R12A-25 R12A-32 R12A-45 R12A-04 R12A-05 R12A-37 R12A-46 R12A-41 R12A-36 X X R9-18 R12A-40 R12A-47 R10-01 R12A-06 R12A-07 R12A-12 R12A-17 R12A-18 R12A-11 R12A-16 R12A-22 R12A-27 R12A-34 R12A-33 R12A-39 Brett Ave R12A-38 R12A-26 "6 R11-19 R10-18 R10-38 R11-07 R11-18 R11-06 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6"6 "6 "6 "6 R11-20 R11-31 R10-31 R10-30 R10-29 R11-08 R10-28 R10-27 R10-37 R11-32 R10-26 R11-05 "6"6 R10-32 R11-09 R11-17 R10-36 R11-21 R11-30 R10-22 R10-17 R10-16 R10-20 R10-21 R11-10 R10-23 "6 "6 "6 R11-04 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 R11-16 "6 R11-29 "6 "6 "6 R11-22 R10-19 R10-15 R10-35 R11-11 "6 "6 NSA 10 "6 "6 R11-03 R10-24 R11-23 "6#0 NSA 11 R10-10 R10-25 R10-14 R10-34 R10-07 R10-09 R11-28 "6 R11-25 R11-24 R11-02 R11-26 kj "6 R10-33 R11-14 kj kj R11-27 R10-13 R11-01 R10-08 R10-11 R10-06 R10-12 "6 kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj R12-01 R12-04 NSA 12B "6 "6 "6 O R12-02 R12-05 R12-06 R12-07 "6 "6 "6 R12-03 R12-12 R12-13 #0 "6 "6 R11-15 R11-12 #0 #0 #0 R11-13 kj kj kj R12-08 R13-17 "6 "6 "6 "6 R12-09 #0 R13-24 R13-16 R13-01 R13-02 R13-25 "6 "6"6"6"6 R12-10 R13-12 "6 "6 R13-05 "6 "6 R13-26 R13-09 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6"6"6"6 R13-27 "6 R13-06 R13-13 "6 R13-28 "6 "6 "6 R13-11 "6 R13-14 "6 R13-29 R13-07 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 "6 R13-30 "6 R13-15 "6 R13-31 "6 R12-11 SOURCES: Receivers, Measurement Locations, NSAs, Barriers (URS, 2014). Aerial (Microsoft, 2011). R13-08 R13-03 R13-10 R13-04 R13-32 R13-18 R13-19 NSA 13 R13-22 R13-23 R13-21 R13-20 R13-33 R13-34 FUTURE BUILD RESULTS AND ANALYZED BARRIER LOCATIONS NSAs 9-13 I-29 CORRIDOR DESIGN PROJECT Feet SCALE: 1" =350' (1:4,200) SCALE CORRECT WHEN PRINTED AT 11X17 CREATED BY: DS DATE: 8/22/2017 PM: PB PROJ. NO: FIG. NO: 4-2

54 This page intentionally left blank Figures

55 APPENDIXA Background Information on Noise

56 Fundamentals of Traffic Noise Assessment and Control Noise is generally regarded as unwanted sound. Man-made noise is everywhere, from the busiest urban centers to the most remote national park. Excessive noise can interfere with sleep, work, recreation, and even one s health. One of the major contributors of noise in our society, perhaps the greatest contributor in terms of the number of people affected, is highway or traffic noise. In this appendix, we will briefly discuss: How noise is measured; How highway noise is generated; How highway noise can be reduced; and Where to get more information. How Noise is Measured Sound can vary over an extremely large range of amplitudes. The decibel (db) is a logarithmic unit that is the accepted standard unit for measuring the amplitude of sound because it accounts for these large variations in amplitude and reflects the way people perceive changes in sound amplitude. Different sounds may have different frequency content. Frequency content of a sound refers to its tonal quality or pitch. When describing sound and its effect on a human population, A-weighted (dba) sound levels are typically used to account for the response of the human ear. The term "A weighted" refers to a filtering of the noise signal to emphasize frequencies in the middle of the audible spectrum and to de-emphasize low and high frequencies in a manner corresponding to the way the human ear perceives sound. This filtering network has been established by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The A-weighted noise level has been found to correlate well with peoples' judgments of the noisiness of different sounds and has been used for many years as a measure of community noise. Figure A.1 illustrates sound pressure levels in db(a) of various sound sources between 0 db(a) (threshold of hearing) and 140 db(a) (threshold of pain). An increase of 3 db(a) in noise level can barely be perceived, while an increase of 5 db(a) is readily noticeable and considered a significant noise increase. A 10 db(a) increase corresponds to a subjective doubling of loudness. A relationship between changes in noise level and loudness is indicated in Table A.1. Since noise fluctuates from moment to moment, it is common practice to condense the noise level over a specified period of time into a single number called the Equivalent Noise Level (L eq ). Many surveys have shown that the L eq properly predicts annoyance, and thus this metric is commonly used for noise measurements, prediction, and impact assessment.

57 Table A.1 Common Indoor and Outdoor Noise Levels* Common Outdoor Noise Levels Noise Level (A-weighted decibels) Common Indoor Noise Levels 110 Rock Band Jet Flyover at 1000 feet 100 Inside Subway Train (NY) Gas Lawn Mower at 3 feet Diesel Truck at 50 feet 90 Food Blender at 3 feet Noisy Urban Daytime 80 Garbage Disposal at 3 feet Gas Lawn Mower at 100 feet 70 Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feet Commercial Area Normal Speech at 3 feet 60 Large Business Office Quiet Urban Daytime 50 Dishwasher Next Room Quiet Urban Nighttime 40 Small Theater Quiet Suburban Nighttime Library 30 Quiet Rural Nighttime Bedroom at Night 20 Broadcast & Recording Studio 10 Threshold of Hearing 0 1 Adapted from Guide on Evaluation and Attenuation of Traffic Noise, AASHTO Table A.2 Relationship Between Changes in Noise Level and Perceived Loudness Increase (or Decrease) in Noise Level Loudness Multiplied (or Divided) by 3 decibels decibels decibels 2 20 decibels 4

58 How Highway Noise is Generated Highway noise is generated from three primary sources: tire/pavement noise, engine noise, and exhaust noise. Tire/pavement noise is the noise generated by the rubber tires rolling over the pavement surface and may vary in intensity and character depending on the type and condition of both the tires and the pavement. For automobiles and light trucks traveling at typical highway speeds (over 50 MPH), tire/pavement noise is generally the dominant noise source. For medium and heavy trucks (like large commercial delivery vehicles and long haul tractor-trailers) engine and exhaust noise also contribute to the noise that they produce. At typical highway speeds one large truck can produce as much noise energy as ten automobiles. How highway noise is experienced at nearby homes is controlled by a number of factors, including: the total number of vehicles on the highway, the percentage of large trucks, the average speed of the vehicles, the distance to the highway, obstructions blocking the view of the highway, and meteorological conditions. Generally speaking, the more vehicles, the higher percentage of large trucks or the closer one is to the highway, the greater the noise will be. Intervening obstructions, either manmade (buildings, walls, berms) or natural (such as intervening terrain) will reduce noise levels. Foliage and vegetation can reduce noise levels, but it must be dense (completely obscuring the view of the highway) and thick (on the order of 50 to 100 feet) in order to make a significant difference. How Highway Noise Can Be Reduced Highway noise can be reduced in a number of ways. Here are some of the most commonly recognized: Traffic Controls The faster vehicles travel, and the higher percentage of large trucks, the louder the noise. Reduced speed limits, or more rigorously enforced existing speed limits, and heavy truck restrictions will reduce noise levels. However, the implementation of such measures is often politically difficult for the sake of lower noise levels alone. Land Use Controls: Perhaps the most common sense and fiscally responsible solution to highway noise, and one favored by most highway agencies, is to restrict the development of lands near highways. Restricting development of land near new highway corridors to non-noise sensitive land uses, such as commercial or industrial activities, can eliminate most noise problems. However, this approach is not suitable for circumstances when land near existing of future highways has already been developed for residential land use. Quieter Vehicle Noise Sources Quieter vehicles mean less highway noise. For automobiles this means quieter tires (since tire/pavement noise is the dominant noise source). For large trucks the EPA has established standards for maximum noise levels for new and in-use trucks. The maximum noise levels for new trucks are lower than those for existing trucks, so as old trucks are phased out and replaced with newer ones the noise produced by the average truck may go down.

59 Noise Barrier Walls and Berms Noise barriers, both structural walls and earthen berms, are often constructed specifically for the purpose of reducing highway noise levels. Noise barrier can be very effective for reducing noise levels at nearby homes, often reducing noise levels by as much as 10 decibels at the closest homes (a perceived halving of loudness). Noise barriers can be expensive to build, on the order of $2 million per mile. Because of their cost, the construction of noise barriers is often restricted to large highway improvement or construction projects. Some jurisdictions; however, are quite active in constructing retrofit noise barrier on existing highways. Quieter Pavements It has long been recognized that some pavement types tend to be quieter than others. White concrete pavement, for example, is typically louder than asphalt blacktop. White concrete with tining (grooves cut into the pavement surface) is louder still. However, white concrete pavement (also known as Portland Concrete Cement, or PCC) is thought to be more durable, and perhaps safer than blacktop pavements (due to better skid resistance and drainage). There is also considerable concern that the low noise advantages of some blacktop pavements may diminish over time. As the tiny nooks and crannies in the black top pavement that give it acoustical absorption may fill up with silt and sand or become compressed over time, eventually reducing the acoustical benefits. The quest for quiet, safe and durable highway pavements is currently the focus of a considerable amount of research. (However, FHWA does not currently recognize pavement noise as a criteria in the pavement selection process). How Noise Barriers Work Noise barriers reduce noise levels by interrupting or lengthening the path that the noise takes between the source and the receiver. In order to be effective at reducing noise, noise barriers must be able to block the line of sight between the object producing the noise (like vehicles on the highway) and the person subjected to the noise (like residents living near the highway). The amount that the noise will be reduced is related to the path length difference between the direct path that the uninterrupted sound would take between the source and receiver (with no barrier) and the diffracted path that the sound must take going over or around the barrier, as illustrated in Figure A.1. Figure A.1 Simple Noise Barrier Geometry

60 Noise barriers may work better for some homes than for others. In Figure A.2, below, home A is relatively close to the highway where the noise barrier can provide a large path length difference between the direct and diffracted paths, resulting in a substantial noise reduction (perhaps as much as 10 to 15 decibels). Home B is further from the barrier and the path length difference is not as great, resulting in less noise reduction (perhaps 7 to 10 decibels). Home C is even further from the highway, and also elevated above the highway level, providing an even smaller path length difference (resulting in a noise reduction of perhaps 3 to 5 decibels). In general, for a given barrier height and location, the further the receiver is from the barrier or the higher the receiver is elevated, the smaller the path length difference (or angle of diffraction) and the smaller the resulting noise reduction. References Figure A.2 Path Length Difference for Varying Receiver Geometry 1. Fundamentals and Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise, Bolt Beranek and Newman, Assessment of Noise with Respect to Community Response, ISO R1996, International Organization for Standardization, Switzerland. 3. Federal Highway Administration, Procedures for Abatement of Highway Noise and Construction Noise. 23 CFR Part 772, Final Rule, effective 9 August Office of Environment and Planning, Memorandum HEP-41 December 1993.

61 APPENDIXA Background Information on Noise This page intentionally left blank

62 APPENDIXB Noise Measurement Data U:\Projects\_Jobs\ I-29 Sioux Falls Noise Analysis\014_WORK_IN_PROGRESS\August 2017\I-29SiouxFalls docx\24-Aug-17\SDG

63

64

65

66

67 APPENDIXB Noise Measurement Data Photograph 1 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST1: Short Term Monitor Along S. Marion Road at the Lexington Estates Apartments Camera facing east. Photograph 2 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST1: Short Term Monitor Along S. Marion Road at the Lexington Estates Apartments Camera facing west. J:\ I-29 Sioux Falls Noise Analysis\014_WORK_IN_PROGRESS\Appendix B 02 Photos.docx\5-Mar-14\SDG B-3

68 APPENDIXB Noise Measurement Data Photograph 3 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST2: Short Term Monitor South of I-229 NB, Northern end of Tallgrass Ave. Camera facing north Photograph 4 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST2: Short Term Monitor South of I-229 NB, Northern end of Tallgrass Ave. Camera facing south J:\ I-29 Sioux Falls Noise Analysis\014_WORK_IN_PROGRESS\Appendix B 02 Photos.docx\5-Mar-14\SDG B-4

69 APPENDIXB Noise Measurement Data Photograph 5 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST3: Short Term Monitor South of I-229 NB, Western end of W. 69 th St. Camera facing west Photograph 6 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST3: Short Term Monitor South of I-229 NB, Western end of W. 69 th St. Camera facing east J:\ I-29 Sioux Falls Noise Analysis\014_WORK_IN_PROGRESS\Appendix B 02 Photos.docx\5-Mar-14\SDG B-5

70 APPENDIXB Noise Measurement Data Photograph 7 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST4: Short Term Monitor West of I-29 SB at 85 th St. Camera facing west Photograph 8 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST4: Short Term Monitor West of I-29 SB at 85 th St. Camera facing east J:\ I-29 Sioux Falls Noise Analysis\014_WORK_IN_PROGRESS\Appendix B 02 Photos.docx\5-Mar-14\SDG B-6

71 APPENDIXB Noise Measurement Data Photograph 9 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST5: Short Term Monitor East of I-29 NB at the west end of 85 th St. Camera facing west Photograph 10 Date: 10/16/13 Comments: ST5: Short Term Monitor East of I-29 NB at the west end of 85 th St. Camera facing south J:\ I-29 Sioux Falls Noise Analysis\014_WORK_IN_PROGRESS\Appendix B 02 Photos.docx\5-Mar-14\SDG B-7

72

73 APPENDIXB Noise Measurement Data This page intentionally left blank U:\Projects\_Jobs\ I-29 Sioux Falls Noise Analysis\014_WORK_IN_PROGRESS\August 2017\I-29SiouxFalls docx\24-Aug-17\SDG

74 APPENDIXC Traffic Data Used for Noise Analysis

75 Other Arterial Roadways (PM Peak Hour, 2 Way Volumes) Louise Ave, North of 85 th St: 1,840 vph; 1.5% Medium / 0.5% Heavy Trucks Louise Ave, South of 85 th St: 1,270 vph; 1.5% Medium / 0.5% Heavy Trucks I 29 SB 41 st St. to I 229 Speed = 60 mph PM Peak Hour = 3,560 Cars = 3,353 (94.2%) Medium Trucks = 45 (1.2%) Heavy Trucks = 162 (4.6%) I 29 NB I 229 to 41 st St. Speed = 60 mph PM Peak Hour = 2,920 Cars = 2,742 (93.9%) Medium Trucks = 28 (1.0%) Heavy Trucks = 150 (5.1%) I 229 SB to I 29 SB ramp Speed = 40 mph PM Peak Hour = 1,090 Cars = 1,068 (98.0%) Medium Trucks = 16 (1.5%) Heavy Trucks = 6 (0.5%) I 29 SB to I 229 NB ramp Speed = 30 mph PM Peak Hour = 840 Cars = 802 (95.5%) Medium Trucks = 24 (2.8%) Heavy Trucks = 14 (1.7%) I 229 SB to I 29 SB ramp Speed = 65 mph PM Peak Hour = 1,920 Cars = 1,834 (95.5%) Medium Trucks = 30 (1.6%) Heavy Trucks = 56 (2.9%) I 229 NB I 29 to Louise Speed = 60 mph PM Peak Hour = 2,230 Cars = 2,122 (95.2%) Medium Trucks = 51 (2.3%) Heavy Trucks = 57 (2.5%) I 29 NB to I 229 NB ramp Speed = 60 mph PM Peak Hour = 1,390 Cars = 1,320 (95.0%) Medium Trucks = 27 (1.9%) Heavy Trucks = 43 (3.1%) I 229 SB Louise to I 29 Speed = 60 mph PM Peak Hour = 3,010 Cars = 2,902 (96.4%) Medium Trucks = 46 (1.5%) Heavy Trucks = 62 (2.1%) 85 th Sundowner to Tallgrass Speed = 40 mph PM Peak Hour = 1,830 Cars = 1,784 (97.5%) Medium Trucks = 35 (1.9%) Heavy Trucks = 11 (0.6%) 85 th Tallgrass to Louise Speed = 40 mph PM Peak Hour = 2,090 Cars = 2,048 (98.0%) Medium Trucks = 32 (1.5%) Heavy Trucks = 10 (0.5%) I 29 SB I 229 to CR106 Speed = 70 mph PM Peak Hour = 4,640 Cars = 4,385 (94.5%) Medium Trucks = 51 (1.1%) Heavy Trucks = 204 (4.4%) I 29 NB CR106 to I 229 Speed = 65 mph PM Peak Hour = 3,220 Cars = 2,994 (93.0%) Medium Trucks = 39 (1.2%) Heavy Trucks = 187 (5.8%) Year 203 Traffic Volumes I 29 / I 229 and 85 th Street Noise Analysis Figure C2