Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CHAPTER 8 - PG 1
8. NOISE AND VIBRATION
8.1 INTRODUCTION
8.1.1 ThischapterconsidersthepotentialnoiseandvibrationimpactsandeffectsthatmayariseasaresultoftheconstructionandoperationoftheproposedNorthamptonGateway,includingthestrategicrailfreightinterchange(SRFI),theRoadeBypassandtheotherhighwayworks1. FurtherdetailsoftheProposedDevelopmentaregiveninChapter2oftheES(DescriptionofDevelopment).
8.1.2 TheProposedDevelopmenthasthepotentialtogeneratenoisefromthefollowingsources:
• ConstructionoftheSRFI(includingwarehousing),theRoadeBypassandtheotherhighwayworks;
• ThechangeinroadtrafficflowsontheroadnetworkaroundtheMainSite,includinganyeffectsofthehighwayworks,andaroundthevillageofRoadeasaconsequenceoftheRoadeBypass;
• ThetrafficservingtheSRFItravellingontheinternalroadswithintheMainSite;
• TheadditionalfreighttrainsservingtheSRFItravellingontheNorthamptonLooprailwayline;
• ThefreighttrainsservingtheintermodalfreightterminaltravellingwithintheMainSite,includingtheassociatedloadingandunloadingactivities;
• Heavygoodsvehicles(HGVs)andotheroperationalactivityattheMainSitesuchasmanoeuvring,loadingandunloadingattheproposedwarehouses,intermodalfreightterminal,aggregatesfacilityand‘rapidrailfreight’facility;and
• MechanicalservicesplantassociatedwiththewarehousingattheSRFI.
8.1.3 ItisalsopossiblethattheadditionalfreighttrainsservingtheSRFItravellingontheNorthamptonLoopcouldleadtoanincreaseinperceptiblevibrationatreceptorsclosetotherailwayline.
8.1.4 Toassistwiththeunderstandingofthischapter,aGlossaryofAcousticTermsisprovidedinAppendix8.1.
8.2 RELEVANT POLICY AND LEGISLATION
8.2.1 TheoverarchingGovernmentpolicyonnoiseissetoutintheNoisePolicyStatementforEngland(NPSE).
8.2.2 Fornationallysignificantroad,railandstrategicrailfreightinfrastructureprojects(asdefinedinthePlanningAct2008),theNationalPolicyStatementforNationalNetworks(NPSNN)setsouttherelevantpolicyobjectives.Furthermore,atparagraph5.193oftheNPSNN,itstatesthat,indecisionmaking,dueregardbegiventotheNPSE,theNationalPlanningPolicyFramework(NPPF)andtheGovernment’sassociatedplanningguidanceonnoise(PPG(N)).
1 These works are referred to as ‘highway mitigation measures’ in the other parts of the Environmental Statement, however, they are referred to as ‘highway works’ in this chapter to avoid confusion with any acoustic mitigation measures that may be proposed for the highway works.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 2
National Policy Statement for National Networks (NPSNN) 2
8.2.3 Intermsofhumanreceptors,theNPSNNspecifies(paragraph5.191)thatnoiseandvibrationshouldbeassessedusingtheprinciplesoftherelevantBritishStandardsandotherguidance.ThepredictionofroadtrafficnoiseshouldbebasedonthemethoddescribedinCalculationofRoadTrafficNoise3(CRTN)andpredictionofnoisefromrailwaysshouldbebasedonthemethoddescribedinCalculationofRailwayNoise4(CRN).Fortheprediction,assessmentandmanagementofconstructionnoise,referenceshouldbemadetoanyrelevantBritishStandardsandotherguidancewhichalsogiveexamplesofmitigationstrategies.
8.2.4 Withrespecttowildlifeandbiodiversity,impactsshouldbeassessedinaccordancewiththeBiodiversityandEcologicalConservationsectionoftheNPSNN(Paragraphs5.20–5.38).Withregardtonoise,theNPSNNstatesthat: The applicant should consult Natural England with regard to assessment of noise on designated nature conservation sites, protected landscapes, protected species or other wildlife. (Paragraph 5.192) Itgoeson:
The results of any noise surveys and predictions may inform the ecological assessment.
8.2.5 TheNPSNNalsostatesthat: Applicants should consider opportunities to address the noise issues associated with the Important Areas as identified through the noise action planning process. (Paragraph 5.200) 5
8.2.6 Regardingmitigation,inparagraph5.197theNPSNNstatesthat: The Examining Authority and the Secretary of State should consider whether mitigation measures are needed both for operational and construction noise over and above any which may form part of the project application. The Secretary of State may wish to impose requirements to ensure delivery of all mitigation measures.
8.2.7 Andinparagraph5.198that: Mitigation measures for the project should be proportionate and reasonable and may include one or more of the following:
• engineering:containmentofnoisegenerated;
• materials:useofmaterialsthatreducenoise,(forexamplelownoiseroadsurfacing);
• lay-out:adequatedistancebetweensourceandnoise-sensitivereceptors;incorporatinggooddesigntominimisenoisetransmissionthroughscreeningbynaturalorpurposebuiltbarriers;
• administration:specifyingacceptablenoiselimitsortimesofuse(e.g.,inthecaseofrailwaystationPAsystems).
8.2.8 TheNPSNN(atParagraph5.199)alsostatesthatformostprojects,therelevantNoiseInsulationRegulationswillapply(Seeparagraph8.2.25et seq. below).ThismeansthattheassessmentmustconsiderwhethertheProposedDevelopmentislikelytotriggeranyeligibilityunderthetermsoftheseRegulationsandprovideanindicationofanylikelyeligibility.
2 National Policy Statement for National Networks, Department for Transport (2014)3 Calculation of Road Traffic Noise, Department of Transport (1988)4 Calculation of Railway Noise, Department of Transport (1995)5 Important Areas are defined in the relevant Noise Action Plans produced by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs when implementing the Environmental Noise (England) Regulations 2006, as amended (SI 2006/2238).
CHAPTER 8 - PG 3
8.2.9 Inparagraph5.195,theNPSNNstatesthat: The Secretary of State should not grant development consent unless satisfied that the proposals will meet the following aims, within the context of Government policy on sustainable development:
• avoid significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life from noise as a result of the new development;
• mitigate and minimise other adverse impacts on health and quality of life from noise from the new development; and
• contribute to improvements to health and quality of life through the effective management and control of noise, where possible.”
8.2.10 ThesestatementsreflecttheaimsoftheNoisePolicyStatementforEngland(NPSE).
Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) 68.2.11 TheNPSEistheoverarchingGovernmentpolicyonnoise.Itseekstoclarifytheunderlying
principlesandaimsinpastandexistingpolicydocuments,legislationandguidanceinrelationtoallformsofnoiseincludingenvironmentalnoise,neighbournoiseandneighbourhoodnoise(butnotnoiseintheworkplace).
8.2.12 ItusestheestablishedconceptsofNoObservedEffectLevel(NOEL)andLowestObservedAdverseEffectLevel(LOAEL).TheNPSEextendsthesebyintroducingSignificantObservedAdverseEffectLevel(SOAEL).Thisisthelevelabovewhichsignificantadverseeffectsonhealthandqualityoflifeoccur.However,theexplanatorynotetotheNPSEstatesthatitisnotpossibletoidentifyasingleobjectivevaluetodefineSOAELfornoisethatisapplicabletoallsourcesofnoiseinallsituations.Itislikelytobedifferentfordifferentnoisesources,fordifferentreceptorsandatdifferenttimes.
8.2.13 TheNPSE’svisionisconsistentwithparagraph5.195oftheNPSNNreferredtoabove–itisto: Promote good health and a good quality of life through the effective management of noise within the context of Government policy on sustainable development. This long-term vision is supported by the following aims:
• Avoid significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life;
• Mitigate and minimise adverse impacts on health and quality of life; and
• Where possible, contribute to the improvement of health and quality of life.
Through the effective management and control of environmental, neighbour and neighbourhood noise within the context of Government policy on sustainable development.
8.2.14 ThesecondaimoftheNPSEreferstonoiseimpactsthatliesomewherebetweenLOAELandSOAEL.TheNPSEassertsthat,whilethismeansthatallreasonablestepsshouldbetakentomitigateandminimiseadverseeffects,thisdoesnotmeanthatsuchadverseeffects cannot occur 7.
6 Noise Policy Statement for England, Defra (2010)7 Ibid, paragraph 2.24
CHAPTER 8 - PG 4
8.2.15 InadecisionletterassociatedwiththeThamesTidewayTunnelproject,theGovernmentclarifiedthemeaningofthephrase‘sustainabledevelopment’asfollows:
The National Planning Policy Framework, the National Planning Practice Guidance on noise and the Noise Policy Statement for England are all clear that noise management should be determined in the context of sustainable development including the environmental, economic and social benefits of the proposal.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)8
8.2.16 TheNPPFsetsouttheGovernment’splanningpolicyforEngland.Atitsheartisanintentiontopromotemoresustainabledevelopment.TheNPPFaddressesnoiseasaplanningissueprimarilythroughastatementoffourprinciples,atparagraph123:
Planning policies and decisions should aim to:
• Avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development;
• Mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and quality of life arising from noise from new development, including through the use of conditions;
• Recognise that development will often create some noise and existing businesses wanting to develop in continuance of their business should not have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes in nearby land uses since they were established, and
• Identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason.
8.2.17 ItcanbeseenhowtheNPPFreflectstheaimsoftheNPSEandthedecisiontestsintheNPSNN.Furthermore,theNPPFmakesreferencetotheNPSEforadviceontheachievementofthesepolicyaims,andparticularlyinconnectionwiththeexplanationof‘adverseimpacts’.
Planning Practice Guidance (Noise) (PPG(N))9
8.2.18 FurtherguidanceinrelationtotheNPPFhasbeenpublishedontheGovernmentPlanningPortal.ThePPG(N)supportstheNPPFbyprovidingarangeofadviceandincludesanoiseexposurehierarchybasedonthelikelyaverageresponse.
8.2.19 InlinewiththeNPPF,theNPSEandthedecisiontestsintheNPSNN,theguidanceconfirmsthatsignificantadverseeffectsshouldbeavoided.Atthenextleveldowninthehierarchy,wherethereisanobservedadverseeffect,thePPG(N)confirmsthateffectsshouldbemitigatedandreducedtoaminimum(asfarasreasonablypracticable).Nomitigationmeasuresarerequiredforeffectsthatareconsideredtobebelowthelowestobservedadverseeffectlevel(LOAEL).
Local Policy8.2.20 ThelocalplanningpolicycontextisaddressedindetailintheseparatePlanningStatementwhich
formspartofthesubmittedapplication.TheWestNorthamptonshireJointCoreStrategyLocalPlan(Part1)2014containstwopoliciesthatareconsideredrelevanttotheassessmentofnoiseimpactsarisingfromtheProposedDevelopment.
8 National Planning Policy Framework, Department for Communities and Local Government, (2012)9 Planning Practice Guidance: Noise - http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/noise/noise-guidance/
CHAPTER 8 - PG 5
8.2.21 PolicyS10SustainableDevelopmentPrinciplesstatesthat:
Development will: … k) Minimise pollution from noise, air and run off.
8.2.22 PolicyBN9PlanningforPollutionControlstatesthat:
Proposals for new development which are likely to cause pollution or likely to result in exposure to sources of pollution … will need to demonstrate that they provide opportunities to minimise and where possible reduce pollution issues that are a barrier to achieving sustainable development and healthy communities including: …
e) Reducing the adverse impacts of noise.
8.2.23 PolicyBN9alsostatesthat:
Development that is likely to cause pollution, either individually or cumulatively, will only be permitted if measures can be implemented to minimise pollution to a level which provides a high standard of protection for health and environmental quality.
8.2.24 Itcanbeseenthatthespecificlocalpoliciesarebroadlyconsistentwithnationalpolicyobjectives,andthereforeachievingnationalpolicyobjectiveswillalsosatisfylocalpolicyrequirements.
Noise Insulation Regulations 1975 (as amended 1988)10
8.2.25 Theseregulationsapplytonewandalteredhighwaysandplacevariousdutiesandpowersontherelevantauthoritytocarryoutormakeagrantinrespectofthecostofcarryingoutsoundinsulationworkinortoaneligiblebuilding.Paragraph5.199oftheNPSNNstatesthattheseregulationswouldapplyformostnationalnetworkprojects.
8.2.26 Theregulationsapplyonlytoresidentialpropertiesnotmorethan300mfromtheneworalteredroad.Therelevantauthorityhasadutytooffercompensationifthefinalroadtrafficnoiseexposureatthefaçadeofthedwellingisatleast68dB,LA10,18h(06.00–24.00hours)asaresultofnoisefromtheneworalteredroad.Inaddition,othercriteriamustbemet.Theseconcerntheincreaseinroadtrafficnoisethatwouldbeexperienced(itmustbeatleast1dB(A)greatercomparedwiththecurrentsituation),andthecontributionbeingmadebynoisefromtheneworalteredhighwaytotheoverallnoiseattheproperty(whichmustbeatleast1dB(A)).
8.2.27 Inaddition,therelevantauthorityhasthepowertooffercompensationtodwellingsaffectedbythealteredhighwayifthefinalroadtrafficnoiseexposureatthefaçadeofthedwellingisatleast68dB,LA10,18h(06.00–24.00hours).
Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 199611
8.2.28 Theseregulationsapplytoadditionalandalteredrailwaysworksandplacevariousdutiesandpowersontherelevantauthoritytocarryoutormakeagrantinrespectofthecostofcarryingoutsoundinsulationworkinortoaneligiblebuilding.Paragraph5.199oftheNPSNNstatesthattheseregulationswouldapplyformostnationalnetworkprojects.
10 The Noise Insulation Regulations 1975 (SI 1975/1763), as amended by The Noise Insulation (Amendment) Regulations 1988 (SI 1988/2000)
11 The Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996 (SI 1996/428)
CHAPTER 8 - PG 6
8.2.29 Theregulationsapplyonlytoresidentialproperties.Tobeeligibleforanofferofcompensation,thefinalrailwaynoiseexposureatthefaçadeofthedwellingmustbeatleasteither68dB,LAeq,18h(06.00–24.00hours)or63dBLAeq,6h(00.00–06.00hours)asaresultofnoisefromtheneworalteredrailway.Inaddition,othercriteriaconcerningtheincreaseinrailwaynoisethatwouldbeexperienced,andthecontributionbeingmadebynoisefromthenewrailwaytotheoverallnoiseattheproperty,mustbemet.
8.3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Assessment Methodology8.3.1 TheProposedDevelopmenthasthepotentialtogeneratenoisefromthefollowingsources:
• Construction of the SRFI (including warehousing), the Roade Bypass and the other highway works;
• The change in road traffic flows on the road network around the Main Site, including any effects of the highway works, and around the village of Roade as a consequence of the Roade Bypass;
• The traffic serving the SRFI travelling on the internal roads within the Main Site;
• The additional freight trains serving the SRFI travelling on the Northampton Loop railway line, which could also lead to an increase in perceptible vibration at receptors close to the railway line;
• The freight trains serving the intermodal freight terminal travelling within the Main Site, including the associated loading and unloading activities;
• Heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) and other operational activity at the Main Site such as manoeuvring, loading and unloading at the proposed warehouses, intermodal freight terminal, aggregates facility and ‘rapid rail freight’ facility; and
• Mechanical services plant associated with the warehousing at the SRFI.
8.3.2 Ingeneral,theassessmentmethodologyusedforeachtypeofsourceisdifferentintermsofhowthepotentialnoiseorvibrationimpactispredictedandhowtheeffectisassessed.Thedegreeoftheimpactandthesignificanceoftheeffectisdependentuponseveralfactors,includingthenoiselevelfromtheparticularactivity,theexistingsoundenvironment,andtheduration,timingandcharacterofthedifferentnoisesources.
8.3.3 Theassessmentmethodologiesthathavebeenusedforeachelementoftheassessmentaredescribed below.
Construction Noise8.3.4 AnindicationofthepotentialnoiseeffectsofactivitiesassociatedwithconstructionoftheSRFI
andRoadeBypasshasbeendeterminedattherelevantnearbynoisesensitivereceptorsaslistedinTable8.12andshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapter.Inaddition,aqualitativeassessmenthasbeenprovidedofthepotentialconstructionnoiseimpactsoftheotherhighwayworksbasedontheinformationavailable.
8.3.5 BasedontheexpectedactivityscenariosforconstructionoftheSRFIandRoadeBypass,noiselevelshavebeenpredictedusingestimatesofthetypeandnumbersofplantandequipmentlikelytobeused,togetherwiththeirestimatedusage,oron-time,foratypicalworkingdaywhentheactivitiesareinrelativelycloseproximitytothereceptors.TheseestimatesarebasedondetailedinformationprovidedbycontractorspriortoconstructionofasimilardevelopmentandaresummarisedinAppendix8.2.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 7
8.3.6 Foreachactivity,thecontributionsforeachitemofplantwerecombinedandmodelledasasingleactivitypointsource.ManyoftheconstructionactivitieswilloccuracrosstheMainSiteandalongthelengthoftheRoadeBypasssite.Fortheseactivities,theactivitypointsourcewasmodelledinseveraldifferentlocationstogiveanindicationofthelikelynoiseexposureateachreceptorwhentheactivityisnearby.NoallowancehasbeenmadeforthepotentialscreeningeffectthattheproposedlandscapingbundsaroundtheMainSiteandtheRoadeBypasssitemayhave,meaningthatrobustandworst-caseassumptionshavebeenconsideredforthisaspect.
8.3.7 TheconstructionnoisepredictionshavebeenbasedontheprinciplesofthemethodologycontainedwithinAnnexFofBS5228-1:2009+A1:201412,asrequiredbytheNPSNN(Paragraph5.191).ThisstandardhasbeenformallyadoptedbyGovernmentastheCodeofPracticeforuse in this situation13.PropagationofconstructionnoisehasbeenpredictedusingIMMInoisemodellingsoftwareandtheprinciplesoftheISO9613-2:199614methodology,assumingmoderatedownwindpropagationbetweenthesourceandreceptors.
8.3.8 ThesignificanceofpotentiallyadverseconstructionnoiseeffectshasbeendeterminedusingthethresholdssetoutinTable8.1.ThevaluesarebasedontheguidancewithinAnnexEofBS5228-1:2009+A1:2014andtheeffectsthatconstructionnoisecanhaveonthoseexposedtoit.ThethresholdsareexpressedintermsofcurrentGovernmentpolicy.
Table 8.1 Thresholds of potential effects of construction noise at residential buildings
Effect Time Period Threshold Value (LAeq,T)a
LOAEL Day(07:00–23:00) 65Evening(19.00–23.00) 55Night(23.00–07.00) 45
SOAEL Day(07:00–23:00) 75Evening(19.00–23.00) 65Night(23.00–07.00) 55
Notes:
a These effects are expected to occur if the programme of works indicates that the relevant threshold values are likely to be exceeded over a period of at least one month. The values apply to a location one metre from a residential building façade containing a window, ignoring the effect of the acoustic reflection from that façade.
8.3.9 InadditiontotheprimaryconstructionworkstakingplaceattheMainSiteandtheRoadeBypasssite,aqualitativeassessmenthasbeenmadeofthepotentialnoiseeffectsoftheotherhighwayworkswhereasensitivereceptorislocatedwithin300moftheworksbasedontheinformationavailable.
Construction Vibration8.3.10 OfthelikelyactivityscenariostobeusedforconstructionoftheProposedDevelopment,only
pilinghasbeenidentifiedashavingthepotentialtogeneratelevelsofvibrationthatcouldadverselyaffectnearbyreceptors.Thepotentialeffectsofthishavebeendiscussedbasedontheinformation available.
12 BS 5228-1:2009+A1:2014 – Code of Practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites, Part 1: Noise13 Statutory Instrument 2015/227 – The Control of Noise (Code of Practice for Construction and Open Sites) (England) Order 201514 ISO 9613-2: Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 2: General Method of calculation, ISO (1996)
CHAPTER 8 - PG 8
8.3.11 ThepotentialforgroundbornevibrationcausedbythepassageofconstructionHGVtraffictravellingontheroadnetworkhasalsobeendiscussed.
8.3.12 AlthoughtheconceptsregardingLOAELandSOAELinGovernmentpolicyreferonlytonoiseexposure,itishelpfultoadoptthesameprincipleswhenassessingvibrationimpactandeffect.Table8.2setsouttheconstructionvibrationexposurethresholdsbasedontheguidancewithinAnnexBofBS5228-2:2009+A1:201415.
Table 8.2 Thresholds of potential effects of construction vibration at residential buildings
Effect Threshold Value (PPV, mm/s)a
LOAEL 0.5SOAEL 1.0b
Notes:
a This is the level at a residential receptor.
b Guidance in BS 5228-2:2009+A1:2014 states that this level of exposure can be tolerated by those affected if prior warning and explanation has been given. It goes on to state that a level of 10 mm/s is likely to be intolerable in most building environments for any more than a very brief exposure.
Operational Phase – Railway Noise8.3.13 ThenumberoffreighttrainsusingtherailwaynetworkwillincreaseasaresultofSRFIoperations.
8.3.14 ThepotentialchangeinaveragerailwaynoisehasbeenpredictedusingtheenvironmentalnoisemodellingsoftwareIMMIwhichincorporatesthemethodologyforcalculatingrailwaynoisesetoutintheCalculationofRailwayNoise(CRN)asrequiredbytheNPSNN.Thismethodologyassumesthatthereceptorisdownwindofthesource.ThesourcetermsforthedifferenttypesoflocomotiveandwagonhavebeentakenfromCRNandfromthe2007Defrareport16 which providedupdatedtermsfornewerrollingstock.
8.3.15 ThenoiselevelsarisingfrompassengerandfreighttrainactivityontheNorthamptonLoopandWestCoastMainLinehavebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptorlocationsforthefollowingDo-Minimum(DM)andDo-Something(DS)scenarios17:
• 2017baseline;
• 2021DMandDS–SRFIopeningyear;
• 2033DMandDS–HighSpeedTwo(HS2)Phase2bopeningyear;and
• 2043DMandDS–NationalRaillong-termplanninghorizonscenario.
15 BS 5228-2:2009+A1:2014 – Code of Practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites, Part 2: Vibration16 Additional railway noise source terms for “Calculation of Railway Noise 1995”, Defra (2007)17 The Do-Something (DS) and Do-Minimum (DM) scenarios refer to the noise or vibration environment with and without the Proposed Development
respectively. By comparing the predicted noise levels from a particular source for the two scenarios in a given year, any changes that may result from
the Proposed Development can be identified and assessed, taking account of changes that would be expected to occur regardless of the develop-
ment.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 9
8.3.16 Theinputdatausedtomodelthedifferentscenarioshasbeenprovidedbytherailconsultantandincludesthefollowingconsiderations:
• Thecurrentleveloffreightandpassengertrainactivityonthetwolines;
• Thelikelybackgroundgrowthinfreighttrainactivity;
• TheanticipatedadditionalfreighttrainmovementsassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopment;and
• ThechangesinpassengertrainactivityfollowingcompletionofHS2Phase1in2026andHS2Phase2bin2033.
8.3.17 ItshouldbenotedthatwhiletheinformationrelatingtochangesintrainservicesresultingfromtheoperationofHS2isbasedoncurrentestimates,thereissomeuncertaintyregardingtheextentofthechangesatthistime.
8.3.18 The2017baselinescenarioinputdatahasbeenbasedonanalysisofcurrentpassengerandfreighttrainmovementsontheNorthamptonLoopandWestCoastMainLine.Forthefuturescenarios,thebackgroundgrowthinfreightnumbershasbeenbasedonNetworkRail’s2016FreightNetworkStudywhichindicatesthatintermodalrailtrafficwillgrowat5.2%perannum.TheadditionalfreightactivityassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmenthasbeenbasedonthe‘highforecast’datafromtherailtrafficlevelforecastprovidedbytherailconsultant,meaningthatrobustandworst-caseassumptionshavebeenconsideredforthisaspect.
8.3.19 ThepredictedscenariosareunderstoodtoberepresentativeoftypicalrailoperationsontheNorthamptonLooporWestCoastMainLine,withnoengineeringworkstakingplaceduringthenight-timeperiod.
8.3.20 AsummaryoftheassumptionsusedfortherailwaynoisepredictionsontherailwaynetworkcanbefoundinAppendix8.3.TherailwaynoisemodelhasbeenverifiedusingtheresultsofthebaselinenoisesurveyasdescribedinAppendix8.4.
8.3.21 ThesignificanceofpotentiallyadverserailwaynoiseeffectshasbeenbasedonacombinationofthechangeinnoiseexposurebetweentheDMandDSscenarios,andtheresultingnoiseexposure.ThenoiseexposurethresholdsaresetoutinTable8.3.Thesehavebeenderivedfromtheeffectsthatrailwaynoisecanhaveonthoseaffected18andareexpressedintermsofGovernmentpolicy.
Table 8.3 Thresholds of potential effects of railway noise at residential buildings
Effect Time Period Threshold Value (LAeq,T)a,b
LOAEL 07.00–23.00 5023.00–07.00 40
SOAEL 07.00–23.00 6523.00–07.00 55
Notes:
a This is the average daily value at a position one metre from a residential building façade containing a window, ignoring the effect of an acoustic reflection from that façade.
b For the night-time period of 23.00 – 07.00, the relevant noise indicator is Lnight.
18 The evidence for using some these values can be found in guidance from the World Health Organisation. Similar values have been used for the assessment of other schemes such as HS2.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 10
8.3.22 IfthedaytimeLOAELthresholdvalueisexceeded,thedatainTable8.4setsouthowthemagnitudeoftheimpactisdescribedtakingaccountofthechangeindaytimenoiseexposureandtheresultingexposure.
Table 8.4 Descriptors of magnitude of daytime railway noise change
Magnitude of Impact Resulting Exposure
Between LOAEL & SOAEL SOAEL or greaterNoChange 0 0Negligible Upto2.9dB(A) Upto0.9dB(A)Minor 3.0–4.9dB(A) 1.0–2.9dB(A)Moderate 5.0–9.9dB(A) 3.0–4.9dB(A)Major 10.0dB(A)andover 5.0 dB(A) and over
8.3.23 Whetherornotasignificantadverseeffectisexpectedtooccurisdeterminedbycomparingthepredictednoiselevel(withtheProposedDevelopment)withtheLOAELandSOAELvaluesshowninTable8.3,andalsoconsideringtheincreaseinnoiseduetotheProposedDevelopment.IftheresultforanypropertyfallsinthecategoriesshownbytheshadedboxeswithtextinboldinTable8.4,thatindicatesthatthepropertyisregardedasexperiencingasignificantadverseeffectwithrespecttoGovernmentpolicyduetoanincreaseinrailwaynoiseduringthedaytimeperiod..
8.3.24 Ifthenight-timeLOAELthresholdisexceeded,thedatainTable8.5setsouthowthemagnitudeoftheimpactisdescribedtakingaccountofthechangeinnight-timenoiseexposureandtheresultingexposure.
Table 8.5 Descriptors of magnitude of night-time railway noise change
Magnitude of Impact Resulting ExposureBetween LOAEL & SOAEL SOAEL or greater
NoChange 0 0Negligible Upto0.9dB(A) Upto0.9dB(A)Minor 1.0-2.9dB(A) 1.0–2.9dB(A)Moderate 3.0–4.9dB(A) 3.0–4.9dB(A)Major 5.0dB(A)andover 5.0dB(A)andover
8.3.25 Whetherornotasignificantadverseeffectisexpectedtooccurisdeterminedbycomparingthepredictednoiselevel(withtheProposedDevelopment)withtheLOAELandSOAELvaluesshowninTable8.3,andalsoconsideringtheincreaseinnoiseduetotheProposedDevelopment.IftheresultforanypropertyfallsinthecategoriesshownbytheshadedboxeswithtextinboldinTable8.5,thatindicatesthatthepropertyisregardedasexperiencingasignificantadverseeffectwithrespecttoGovernmentpolicyduetoanincreaseinrailwaynoiseduringthenight-timeperiod.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 11
8.3.26 InaccordancewiththerequirementsofCRN,theinformationprovidedbytherailconsultantwasbasedonan18hourdaytimeperiod(06:00–24:00)anda6hournight-timeperiod(00:00–06:00).Thenoiseexposureresultswere,therefore,predictedintermsoftheseperiods.Equivalencehasbeenassumedwiththecorresponding16hourand8hourperiodsbasedontheguidancegivenintheDepartmentforTransportdocumentTAGUnitA3:EnvironmentalImpactAppraisal19. Consequently,forthepurposeoftheassessment,the16hourvalueshavebeenassumedasequaltothepredicted18hourvalues,andthe8hourvaluesassumedasequaltothepredicted6hourvalues.
8.3.27 WhenassessingthelikelihoodofeligibilityforanofferofmitigationunderthetermsoftheNoiseInsulationRegulations(Railways),CRNrequiresthatthedayandnight-timerailtrafficflowsusedinthecalculationshallrepresentwhenthenoiselevelsareexpectedtobeattheirhighestuptoaperiodof15yearsafteropeningthesystem.Therefore,the2033DSscenario,withtheSRFIfullyoperational,hasbeenconsideredfortheeligibilityassessment.
8.3.28 Whilsttheaveragenight-timeexposureprovidesanindicationofthepotentialsleepdisturbance,considerationhasalsobeengiventotheassociatedmaximumlevelsthatwouldoccurfromtrainmovements.
8.3.29 Theapproachthathasbeenadoptedconsiderstheprobabilityofamaximumnoiselevelgivingrisetoanoiseinducedawakening20.ItisbasedonresearchbyElmenhorstetal21 and is increasinglybeingadoptedtoassesstheimpactonsleepofmaximumnoiselevelsatnight22.
8.3.30 ThemethoddeterminedtheinternalLAmaxvaluefromthemovementsofthedifferenttraintypes;furtherdetailsaregiveninAppendix8.3.Thiswascombinedwiththenumberofmovementsinthenightperiod(23.00–07.00)todeterminetheprobabilityofthosemovementscausinganoiseinducedawakening.ThechangeinprobabilityasaresultoftheexpectedchangeinmovementsarisingfromtheProposedDevelopmentwasdeterminedforthevariousscenariosdescribedabove.
8.3.31 Theexpectedchangeinprobabilityofnoise-inducedawakeningshasbeendeterminedatlocationslocatedontheNorthamptonLoopandalsolocationsfurthersouthwheretheWestCoastMainLineandNorthamptonLooparejoined.Theassessmenthasassumedbothwindowsopenand windows closed.
8.3.32 Asignificanteffecthasbeendefinedifthereisexpectedtobeanincreaseofonenoise-inducedawakeningatnightasaresultoftheProposedDevelopment.
Operational Phase – Railway Vibration8.3.33 AstheProposedDevelopmentwillincreasethenumberoffreighttrainsusingtherailnetwork,
SRFIoperationshavethepotentialtoincreasegroundbornevibrationatreceptorsclosetotheNorthamptonLooptrackasaresultofpassingtrains.
8.3.34 TheassessmentofpotentiallyadverserailwayvibrationeffectshasfollowedtheprinciplesofBS6472-1:200823.Thestandarddescribesamethodofestimatinghumanresponsetovibrationinbuildingsduringthedayandnight-timeperiodsbydeterminingthevibrationdosevalue(VDV)basedonmeasureddata.ThestandardidentifiestheprobabilityofadversecommentbasedontheVDVexperienced,assummarisedinTable8.6.
19 Transport Appraisal Guidance Unit A3: Environmental Impact Appraisal, Department for Transport (2015)20 Awakening here means not just being woken in the conventional sense, but also experiencing change in sleep state to
Sleep Stage S121 “Examining nocturnal railway noise and aircraft noise in the field: Sleep, psychomotor performance and annoyance”, Elmenhorst et
al, Science in the Total Environment, 424 (2012) 48-5622 For example, HS223 BS 6472-1: 2008 – Guide to evaluation of human exposure to vibration in buildings. Part 1: Vibration sources other than blasting
CHAPTER 8 - PG 12
Table 8.6 Vibration dose value ranges that result in different probabilities of adverse comment
Place and Time Low probability of ad-verse comment (m/s1.75)
Adverse comment possible (m/s1.75)
Adverse comment probable (m/s1.75)
Residentialbuildings16hourday 0.2to0.4 0.4to0.8 0.8to1.6
Residentialbuildings8hournight 0.1to0.2 0.2to0.4 0.4to0.8
8.3.35 ThevibrationlevelsarisingfrompassengerandfreighttrainactivityontheNorthamptonLoophavebeenpredictedattwoofthereceptorsclosesttothelineforthesameDMandDSscenariosasforrailwaynoise,asfollows:
• 2017baseline;
• 2021DMandDS–SRFIopeningyear;
• 2033DMandDS–HighSpeedTwo(HS2)Phase2bopeningyear;and
• 2043DMandDS–NationalRaillong-termplanninghorizonscenario.
8.3.36 Theinputdataconsiderationsregardingthenumberandtypeoftrainsforthedifferentscenariosarethesameasforrailwaynoise,summarisedpreviously.
8.3.37 Thetworeceptorsareapproximately27mand85mtothenearestrailontheNorthamptonLooprespectively.Insoftsoilconditions,significantlevelsofgroundbornevibrationresultingfrompassingfreighttrainsmaybepropagateduptodistancesof100mfromthetrack24. Consequently,assessmentofgroundbornevibrationatthetworeceptorsisconsideredasuitableapproachtoidentifyinganypotentialimpacts.
8.3.38 VDVshavebeencalculatedusingvibrationlevelsofpassingpassengerandfreighttrainsderivedfrommeasurementstakenatthetworeceptorlocations.BoththemeasurementandcalculationproceduresfollowedtheguidelinesinBS6472-1:2008.Thepredictedvibrationlevelsareconsidered representative of those that would be measured inside the properties at the receptor locations.
8.3.39 InaccordancewiththerequirementsofCRN,theinformationprovidedbytherailconsultantwasbasedonan18hourdaytimeperiod(06:00–24:00)anda6hournight-timeperiod(00:00–06:00).TheVDVrangesindicatingprobabilityofadversecommentusea16hourdaytimeperiod(07:00–23:00)and8hournight-timeperiod(23.00–07.00).Itisnotexpectedthatthisdifferencewillhaveasignificanteffectasitisthemagnitudeofthevibrationeventsthatisusuallymoreimportantratherthanthenumberofeventsortheirduration24.Furthermore,mosttrainmovementsbetween06:00–07:00hoursareandwillcontinuetobepassengertrains,whichhavealowervibrationmagnitudethanfreighttrains.
8.3.40 AlthoughtheconceptsregardingLOAELandSOAELinGovernmentpolicyreferonlytonoiseexposure,itishelpfultoadoptthesameprincipleswhenassessingvibrationimpactandeffect.Table8.7setsouttherailwayvibrationexposurethresholdstogetherwiththedescriptorsformagnitudeofimpact.
24 Thompson, D, Railway Noise and Vibration, Mechanisms, Modelling and Means of Control, Chapter 12 (2009)
CHAPTER 8 - PG 13
Table 8.7 Thresholds of potential effects of railway vibration at residential buildings (derived from BS 6472-1:2008)
Effect Impact DescriptionVibration Exposurea
VDV Daytime (m/s1.75)
VDV Night-time (m/s1.75)
- Negligible <0.2 <0.1LOAEL Minor 0.2 0.1- Moderate 0.21–0.79 0.11–0.39SOAEL Major 0.8 0.4
Notes: a Usually determined in the centre of a normally loaded floor within the dwelling.
Operational Phase – Road Traffic Noise8.3.41 Thepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoisehasbeenpredictedusingtheenvironmentalnoise
modellingsoftwareIMMIwhichincorporatesthemethodologyforcalculatingroadtrafficnoisefromtheCalculationofRoadTrafficNoise(CRTN)asrequiredbytheNPSNN.Thismethodologyassumes that the receptor is downwind of the source.
8.3.42 ThenoiselevelsarisingfromroadtrafficactivityontheselectedroadswithintheacousticstudyareahavebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptorlocationsforthefollowingDMandDSscenarios:
• 2015baseline;
• 2021DMandDS–SRFIopeningyear(noRoadeBypassorhighwayworksotherthantheA508duallingbetweentheMainSiteandjunction15oftheM1,andtheimprovementworksatjunction15itself);and
• 2031DMandDS–SRFIfullyoperationalwithallhighwayworkscompleted,includingtheRoadeBypass.
8.3.43 Inadditiontotheselectedroadswithintheacousticstudyarea,trafficdataforroadswithinthewidertransportmodelhasbeenanalysed.Additionallinkshavebeenidentifiedfromwhichtherecouldbeanoiseimpact.Thishasprimarilybeenbasedonlinkswheretrafficflowsareexpectedtoincreasebymorethan25%fromtheDMtotheDSscenariosandwhereanoise-sensitivereceptoriswithin300mofthelink.Thesearedescribedastriggereddatalinks.Astheseroadsarenotaffectedbythehighwayworks,noiselevelshavebeenpredictedbycalculationofthedaytimebasicnoiselevel(BNL)asdescribedinCRTNfortherelevantDMandDSscenarios.
8.3.44 TheroadtrafficflowsusedforDMandDSscenariosincludethecumulativeeffectofallcommitteddevelopmentandinfrastructureschemes.Theseincludethesmartmotorwayschemebetweenjunctions13and16oftheM1whichisexpectedtobecompletedbyMarch2022.
8.3.45 EStrafficdataintheformofAnnualAverageDailyTraffic(AADT)andAnnualAverageWeekdayTraffic(AAWT)flowshavebeenprovidedbyWSPfromtheNorthamptonshireStrategicTransportModel(NSTM2),whichtheymaintainandoperateonthebehalfofNorthamptonshireCountyCouncil(NCC).WSPhaveproducedtheEStrafficdatainaccordancewiththeirstandardmethodologyforthisprocess,whichisunderstoodtoinvolvetheuseofpeakperiodtoAADTandAAWTconversionfactors.However,sothattheresultingdataisappropriatetoexaminethemorelocalisedimpactsthatcouldarisefromtheNorthamptonGatewaydevelopmentproposals,roadtypespecificconversionfactorshavebeenused.FurtherdetailsregardingtheproductionoftheEStrafficdataareprovidedinChapter12oftheES(Transportation).
CHAPTER 8 - PG 14
8.3.46 TheroadtrafficnoisemodelhasbeenverifiedusingtheresultsofthebaselinenoisesurveyasdescribedinAppendix8.4.
8.3.47 ThesignificanceofpotentiallyadverseroadtrafficnoiseeffectshasbeenbasedonacombinationofthechangeinnoiseexposurebetweentheDMandDSscenarios,andtheresultingnoiseexposure.ThenoiseexposurethresholdsaresetoutinTable8.8.Thesehavebeenderivedfromtheeffectsthatroadtrafficnoisecanhaveonthoseaffected25andareexpressedintermsofGovernmentpolicy.
Table 8.8 Thresholds of potential effects of road traffic noise at residential buildings
Effect Time Period Threshold Value (LAeq,T)a,b
LOAEL 07.00–23.00 5023.00–07.00 40
SOAEL 07.00–23.00 6523.00–07.00 55
Notes:
a This is the average daily value at a position one metre from a residential building façade containing a window, ignoring the effect of an acoustic reflection from that façade.
b For the night-time period of 23.00 – 07.00, the relevant noise indicator is Lnight.
8.3.48 IfthedaytimeLOAELthresholdisexceeded,thedatainTable8.9setsouthowthemagnitudeoftheimpactisdescribedtakingaccountofthechangeindaytimenoiseexposureandtheresultingexposure.
Table 8.9 Descriptors of magnitude of daytime road traffic noise change
Magnitude of Impact Resulting ExposureBetween LOAEL & SOAEL SOAEL or greater
NoChange 0 0Negligible Upto2.9dB(A) Upto0.9dB(A)Minor 3.0–4.9dB(A) 1.0–2.9dB(A)Moderate 5.0–9.9dB(A) 3.0–4.9dB(A)Major 10.0dB(A)andover 5.0dB(A)andover
8.3.49 Whetherornotasignificantadverseeffectisexpectedtooccurisdeterminedbycomparingthepredictednoiselevel(withtheProposedDevelopment)withtheLOAELandSOAELvaluesshowninTable8.8,andalsoconsideringtheincreaseinnoiseduetotheProposedDevelopment.IftheresultforanypropertyfallsinthecategoriesshownbytheshadedboxeswithtextinboldinTable8.9,thatindicatesthatthepropertyisregardedasexperiencingasignificantadverseeffectwithrespecttoGovernmentpolicyduetoanincreaseinroadtrafficnoiseduringthedaytimeperiod.
8.3.50 Ifthenight-timeLOAELthresholdisexceeded,thedatainTable8.10setsouthowthemagnitudeoftheimpactisdescribedtakingaccountofthechangeinnight-timenoiseexposureandtheresultingexposure.
25 The evidence for using some these values can be found in guidance from the World Health Organisation. Similar values have been used for the assessment of other schemes such as A14 DCO.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 15
Table 8.10 Descriptors of magnitude of night-time road traffic noise change
Magnitude of Impact Resulting ExposureBetween LOAEL & SOAEL SOAEL or greater
NoChange 0 0Negligible Upto0.9dB(A) Upto0.9dB(A)Minor 1.0–2.9dB(A) 1.0–2.9dB(A)Moderate 3.0–4.9dB(A) 3.0–4.9dB(A)Major 5.0dB(A)andover 5.0 dB(A) and over
8.3.51 Whetherornotasignificantadverseeffectisexpectedtooccurisdeterminedbycomparingthepredictednoiselevel(withtheProposedDevelopment)withtheLOAELandSOAELvaluesshowninTable8.8,andalsoconsideringtheincreaseinnoiseduetotheProposedDevelopment.IftheresultforanypropertyfallsinthecategoriesshownbytheshadedboxeswithtextinboldinTable8.10,thatindicatesthatthepropertyisregardedasexperiencingasignificantadverseeffectwithrespecttoGovernmentpolicyduetoanincreaseinroadtrafficnoiseduringthenight-timeperiod.
8.3.52 CRTNcalculatesroadtrafficnoiselevelsintermsoftheLA10,18hindex.Inordertocomparetheseresultstothenoiseexposurethresholds,therelationshipfromparagraph2.2.13oftheDepartmentforTransportdocumentTAGUnitA319hasbeenusedforconversiontodaytimeLAeq,16hvalues,andthemethoddescribedintheDefracommissionedreportbyTRL/CasellaStanger26hasbeenusedforconversiontonight-timeLnightvalues.
8.3.53 WhenassessingthelikelihoodofeligibilityforanofferofmitigationunderthetermsoftheNoiseInsulationRegulations(Roads),CRTNrequiresthattheday-timeroadtrafficflowsusedinthecalculationrepresentwhenthenoiselevelsareexpectedtobeattheirhighestuptoaperiodof15yearsaftertheroadisopentotraffic.Therefore,the2031DSscenario,withtheSRFIfullyoperational,hasbeenconsideredfortheeligibilityassessment.
Operational Phase – Road Traffic Vibration8.3.54 Withregardtoroadtrafficinducedgroundbornevibration,itisrarethatthiswouldresultin
perceptiblelevelsofvibrationwithinsensitivepropertiesalongaroute.Themaincauseofvibrationofthistypeisvehiclespassingoverirregularitiesintheroadsurfaceandisthereforenotadirectresultofanychangesinthevolumeofroadtraffic.
8.3.55 AsthehighwayworksassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentconsistoftheconstructionofanewroad,i.e.theRoadeBypass,aswellasimprovementstootherexistingsectionsofroad,thecorrespondingroadsurfaceswilleitherbeneworundergomaintenanceaspartoftheworks.Asaresult,itisnotexpectedthatanysignificantincreaseinroadtrafficinducedgroundbornevibrationwilloccurasaresultoftheProposedDevelopment,andnofurtherassessmenthasbeencarriedout.27
26 Method for Converting the UK Road Traffic Noise Index LA10,18h
to the EU Noise Indices for Road Noise Mapping, TRL/Casella Stanger for Defra (2006)
27 Insomesituations,thoselivingclosetohighwayscanperceivevibrationintheirhomeseveniftheroadsurfaceissmooth.Thatfeatureisgenerallycausedbylow-frequencysoundfrom,asarule,heavygoodsvehiclescausingthestructureofthehousetoresonateslightly.Therearenospecificmethodsforassessingsuchaneffect,buttheriskofitoccurringgenerallyincreasesordecreaseswiththeoverallleveloftrafficnoiseexperienced.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 16
Operational Phase – SRFI Activities at Main Site8.3.56 SoundfromoperationalactivitiestakingplaceattheSRFIhasthepotentialtocauseimpactsat
nearbyreceptorsduringthedayandnight-timeperiods.
8.3.57 PotentialsourcesofoperationalsoundattheSRFIinclude:
• heavygoodsvehicles(HGVs)andlightvehicles(e.g.cars)travellingontheinternalaccessroads;
• freighttrainmovementsontheinternaltracks;
• theuseofrailmountedgantrycranes(RMGs),reachstackersandtelehandlerstohandlecontainersattheintermodalfreightterminal;
• excavatorsandwheeledloadersdistributingaggregateattheaggregatesfacility;and
• forklifttrucksmovingcargoatthe‘rapidrailfreight’facility.
8.3.58 ThepotentiallevelsofsoundarisingfromoperationalactivitiesattheSRFIhavebeenpredictedusingtheenvironmentalnoisemodellingsoftwareIMMIfortherelevantreceptorlocations.Severaldifferentmethodsofpredictionhavebeenuseddependingonthetypeofsource,allofwhichassumedownwindpropagationfromthesourcetothereceptor.Theseare:
• CalculationofRoadTrafficNoise(CRTN)forvehiclestravellingontheinternalaccessroads;
• CalculationofRailwayNoise(CRN)forfreighttrainstravellingontheinternalrailwaytracks;and
• ISO9613-2:1996forallothersources,togetherwithappropriatesourcedata.
8.3.59 Theresultshavebeenprocessedsoastodeterminetheimpactduringthepeakhourofoperationsinthe16-hourdaytimeperiod(07.00–23.00),andthepeak15minutesofoperationsinthe8-hournight-timeperiod(23.00–07.00).
8.3.60 ThepredictionshavebeenbasedontheSRFIoperatingatfullcapacitywithallwarehousinginuse,meaningthatrobustassumptionshavebeenconsideredforthisaspect.Thefollowinginformationhasbeenincorporatedintothepredictionmodel:
• Thelayoutofthesiteasshownintheillustrativemasterplan,includingthesizeandheightsoftheproposedwarehousing;
• Theproposedtopographyforthesite,includingtheinherentscreeningeffectsofthebundingandlandscaping;
• TheexpectedlevelofHGVactivityattheproposedwarehousing,intermodalfreightterminal,‘rapidrailfreight’facilityandaggregatesfacility,includingtravelontheinternalaccessroads;
• Thenumberandtypeoffreighttrainmovements,includingarrival,departureandshuntingmanoeuvres;and
• Theexpectedactivitiesattheintermodalfreightterminal,‘rapidrailfreight’facilityandaggregatesfacility,includingthelikelydurationsthatequipmentwillbeoperationalduringtheassessment periods.
8.3.61 FurtherinformationregardingtheassumptionsmadeforthepredictionsofoperationalsoundcanbefoundinAppendix8.5.
8.3.62 SoundemissionfrommechanicalplantassociatedwiththeSRFI,suchasthatusedforventilationandcoolingofthewarehouses,isconsideredacomponentofoperationalsound.Priortotheoccupantsofthewarehousesbeingknown,noinformationregardingthetypeornumberoftheseunitsisknown.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 17
8.3.63 Priortoinstallation,itisproposedthatdetailsofthemechanicalplantwillbesubmittedtoandapprovedbytherelevantplanningauthority.Aspartofthisprocess,soundfromtheproposedplantinstallationswillbeassessedand,ifrequired,mitigatedtodemonstratecompliancewiththeGovernmentandLocalpolicysetoutinsection8.2.Itemsofplantwillbeselectedandlocatedtominimiseoperationalsoundatnearbyreceptors,withfurtheroptionsformitigationincludinglocalscreening,enclosuresandin-ductattenuators.
8.3.64 TheassessmentofpotentialsoundimpactsfromoperationoftheSRFIhasbeenbasedontheprinciplesofBS4142:201428.Thismethodologyprovidesaninitialestimateofimpactbasedonthedifferencebetweensoundfromthesourcebeingassessed(thespecificsoundlevel)andtheexistingbackgroundsoundlevelatthereceptorlocation,andthecontextinwhichthesoundatthe receptor occurs.
8.3.65 Thestandardalsostatesthatcertaincharacteristicscanincreasetheextentoftheimpactoverthatexpectedfromasimpledifferenceinnoiselevels.Thesecharacteristicsincludetonality,impulsivityandintermittency.Thestandarddescribesvariousoptionsfortakinganysuchfeaturesintoaccountandfordeterminingwhatisdescribedinthestandardasa‘ratinglevel’.
8.3.66 Thestandardstatesthattheextentoftheimpactcanbedeterminedbysubtractingthetypicalbackgroundsoundlevelfromtheratinglevel.Thegreaterthedifferencethegreaterthemagnitudeoftheinitialimpactestimate.Thestandardstatesthat:
• Adifferenceofaround+10dB29ormoreislikelytobeanindicationofasignificantadverseimpact,dependingonthecontext;
• Adifferenceofaround+5dBislikelytobeanindicationofanadverseimpact,dependingonthecontext;
• Wheretheratingleveldoesnotexceedthebackgroundsoundlevel,thisisanindicationofthespecificsoundsourcehavingalowimpact,dependingonthecontext;and
• Thelowertheratinglevelisrelativetothemeasuredbackgroundsoundlevel,thelesslikelyitisthatthespecificsoundsourcewillhaveanadverseimpact.
8.3.67 Thestandardstatesthatwhilethedifferencebetweentheratinglevelandbackgroundsoundlevelprovidesaninitialestimateoftheimpact,otherfactorsshouldbeconsideredintermsofthecontext,suchastheabsolutenoiselevelsandhowthecharacterandlevelofthespecificsoundsourcerelatestotheexistingsoundenvironment.
8.3.68 Regardingconsiderationoftheabsolutelevelsofsound,therelevantguidelinevaluesprovidedinBS8233:201430 have been referenced. Table 4 of that standard sets out desirable internal levels tobeachievedinnewdwellingsfromexternalsources.Informationisalsoprovidedregardingdesirablelevelsofsoundforexternalamenityspacesassociatedwithdwellings.ThevariousvaluesfromBS8233:2014aresummarisedinTable8.11.
28 BS 4142:2014: Method for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound, BSI (2014)
29 BS4142statesthat:Allthemeasurementsandvaluesusedthroughoutthisstandardare“A”-weighted.Where“A”weightingisnotexplicitinthedescriptor,itistobeassumedinallcases,exceptwhereitisclearlystatedthatitisnotapplicable,asinthecaseoftones.
30 BS8233:2014:Guidanceonsoundinsulationandnoisereductionforbuildings,BSI(2014)
CHAPTER 8 - PG 18
Table 8.11 Summary of guideline sound levels from BS 8233:2014
Location (activity) Time Period Desirable Sound Level not to be exceeded
InsideBedroomsandLivingRooms(resting)
Day(07:00–23:00) 35-40dBLAeq,T
InsideBedrooms(sleeping) Night(23:00–07:00) 30-35dBLAeq,T
InsideDiningRoom/area(dining) Day(07:00–23:00) 40-45dBLAeq,T
ExternalAmenitySpace Day(07:00–23:00) 50-55dBLAeq,T
8.3.69 ThelowervaluesshowninTable8.11abovearegenerallyregardedastheLOAELforsteadyexternalsound,i.e.noadverseeffectduetotheimpactofthesoundwouldbeexpected.Ifthesoundhascertaincharacteristics,itcouldbeappropriatetoconsideralowervalueastheLOAEL.
8.3.70 TheWorldHealthOrganisation’sGuidelinesforCommunityNoise31 have been used to consider the potentialimpactfromanymaximumshort-termnoiselevelsfromSRFIoperationsduringthenight-time period.
8.3.71 Theguidelinesstatethat,forgoodsleep,indoorsoundpressurelevelsshouldnotexceedaround45dBLAFmaxmorethan10–15timespernight.Thisisequatedtoalevelattheoutsidefaçadeof60dBLAFmaxwithapartiallyopenwindow.ItisgenerallyacceptedthatthiscriterionisaLOAEL.32
8.3.72 TheInstituteofEnvironmentalManagementandAssessment(IEMA)publishedtheirGuidelinesforEnvironmentalNoiseImpactAssessmentin201433. The document describes a process for undertakingsuchassessments.Itnotesthattheextentoftheeffectsofnoiseimpactcanrarelybedeterminedsolelybythedifferencebetweencurrentandfuturenoiselevels,andthatthereareotherfactorstoconsiderwhendeterminingpotentialeffects.Thisprinciplehasbeenfollowedinthe assessment.
Receptors8.3.73 AstheProposedDevelopmentcomprisesseveraldifferentelements,suchastheSRFIattheMain
SiteandtheRoadeBypass,notallreceptorswillbeaffectedbythesamesourcesofnoiseatpotentiallysignificantlevels,andnotallreceptorswillbeaffectedbypotentiallysignificantlevelsofvibration.
8.3.74 Consequently,thepotentialimpactsandeffectshavebeenconsideredatdifferentreceptorlocationsdependingonwhichsourcesarelikelytohavepotentialtocauseadverseimpactsandeffects.Broadly,thesearethereceptorsclosesttotheparticularsource.Whenconsideringroadtrafficnoise,therelevantreceptorshavebeensplitintothreegroups:thosearoundtheMainSite(R01-R36),thosearoundtheRoadeBypass(R37-R56),andthosearoundtheotherhighwayworks(R57-R62).
8.3.75 ThereceptorsarelistedinTable8.12,togetherwiththerelevantsourcesofnoisefromtheProposedDevelopmentusedforassessment.ThelocationsofthereceptorsareshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.
31 Guidelines for Community Noise, WHO (1999)32 There is no equivalent research regarding the probability of a noise-induced awakening from sources such as those which would
occur at the SRFI. Hence the approach to maximum noise levels is based on WHO guidance.33 Guidelines for Environmental Noise Impact Assessment, IEMA (2014)
CHAPTER 8 - PG 19
Table 8.12 List of receptors and assessed sources of noise
Receptor Construction Noise
Road Traffic NoiseRailway Noise
SRFI Operational Noise
Around Main Site
Roade Bypass
Other High-way Works
R01 Woodpecker Way - Y - - Y -R02 Northampton South SUE W
- Y - - Y Y
R03 Northampton South SUE S
- Y - - Y Y
R04 Collingtree Ct Y Y - - - YR05 Collingtree Ct Y Y - - - YR06 Watering Ln Y Y - - - YR07 Windingbrook Ln - Y - - - -R08 Hilton West Y Y - - - YR09 Hilton East - Y - - - -R10 Saxon Ave - Y - - - -R11 Holiday Inn West Y Y - - - YR12 Maple Farm East - Y - - - YR13 Maple Farm South Y Y - - - YR14 Collingtree Rd Y Y - - - YR15 Collingtree Rd North - Y - - Y YR16 Collingtree Rd South Y Y - - Y YR17 Collingtree Rd West - Y - - Y YR18 Collingtree Rd North - Y - - Y -R19 Collingtree Rd South Y Y - - Y YR20 Stockwell Way - Y - - Y -R21 Barn Lane Y Y - - Y YR22 Rectory Ln - Y - - - -R23 Barn Ln Y Y - - Y YR24 Lodge Farm Y Y - - Y YR25 Barn Ln Y Y - - Y YR26 Northampton Rd - Y - - - -R27 Blisworth High St - Y - - - -R28 Courteenhall Rd Y Y - - Y YR29 West Lodge Cottag-es West
Y Y - - - Y
R30 West Lodge Cottag-es East
- Y - - - -
R31 Bridge Cottage North - Y - - Y -R32 Bridge Cottage South
- Y - - Y -
R33 Bridge Cottage West - Y - - Y -
CHAPTER 8 - PG 20
Receptor Construction Noise
Road Traffic NoiseRailway Noise
SRFI Operational Noise
Around Main Site
Roade Bypass
Other High-way Works
R34 Courteenhall West - Y - - - -R35 Thorpewood Farm North
- Y - - - -
R36 Thorpewood Farm South
- Y - - - -
R37 Plain Woods Farm - - Y - - -R38 Hyde Farm Y - Y - - -R38a Hyde Farm - - Y - - -R39 Bailey Brooks Ln West
Y - Y - Y -
R39a Bailey Brooks Ln West
Y - Y - Y -
R40 London Rd Y - Y - - -R40a London Rd - - Y - - -R41 Blisworth Rd N Y - Y - - -R42 Dovecote Rd Y - Y - - -R42a Dovecote Rd - - Y - - -R43 Abbots Way Y - Y - - -R44 Stratford Road 2 - - Y - - -R45 Northampton Rd - - Y - - -R46 Blisworth Rd S-Left Y - Y - - -R47 Blisworth Rd S-Right Y - Y - - -R48 Hyde Rd - - Y - - -R49 Hyde Farm House Y - Y - - -R50 Stratford Rd West - - Y - - -R51 Stratford Rd East - - Y - - -R52 Roade High St - - Y - - -R53 Eliz Wood School Y - Y - - -R54 Ashton Rd W - - Y - Y -R55 Ashton Rd E - - Y - - -R56 Northampton Rd Y - Y - - -R57 The Lodge - - - Y - -R57a Woodleys Farm-house
- - - Y - -
R58 Tunnel Hill Cottages - - - Y - -R59 Blaize Farm - - - Y - -R60 Stokehill Cottage - - - Y - -R61 Northampton Rd - - - Y - -R62 Paddocks Farm - - - Y - -
CHAPTER 8 - PG 21
8.3.76 TheeffectsofanypotentialincreaseingroundbornevibrationfromadditionalfreighttrainsservingtheSRFIhasbeenpredictedattworeceptors:R18(CollingtreeRoad)andR24(LodgeFarm).ThelocationsofthereceptorsareshowninFigure8.1attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.
8.4 BASELINE CONDITIONS
Noise Surveys8.4.1 TocharacteriseandquantifytheexistingbaselinesoundenvironmentaroundtheMainSiteand
Roade,afirstsetofbaselinenoisesurveyswereundertakenduringSeptember,OctoberandNovember2016.Followingareviewofthemeasureddataandweatherconditionsduringthesurveys,asecondsetofsurveyswereconductedinJuneandJuly2017.Detailsregardingthesurveysaregivenbelow.
8.4.2 TheprimarysourceofnoiseintheareaisroadtrafficontheM1,whichrunsalongtheeasternboundaryoftheMainSite.OthersourcesofnoisearetheWestCoastMainLineandNorthamptonLooprailwaylines,whichrunthroughthevillageofRoadeanddivergejustsouthoftheMainSite,androadtrafficonlocalroads.Bothrailwaylinesareusedbypassengerandfreightservices.
8.4.3 ThevillageofCollingtree,tothenorth-eastoftheMainSite,isonthesouthernoutskirtsoftheurbanareaofNorthampton.ThepropertiesinclosestproximitytothedevelopmentsitearealsoclosetotheM1andsubsequentlycurrentlyexperiencehighlevelsofroadtrafficnoise.ThereisalsoexistingindustrialandcommercialdevelopmentaroundJunction15oftheM1.
8.4.4 TheareatothesouthandwestoftheM1aroundtheMainSiteandRoadeBypasssitecouldbeconsideredsemi-rural,andispredominantlycomposedoffarmland,villagesandindividualdwellings.TheseareasareallaffectedtosomeextentbyroadtrafficnoisefromtheM1.ThroughthecentreofRoadetherearehighvolumesofroadtrafficandconsequentlytherearehighlevelsofroadtrafficnoise.
8.4.5 Asnotedabove,followingthefirstsetofbaselinesurveys,theresultswerereviewedtogetherwithmeasuredweatherdataforthesameperiod.Thisindicatedthatthewinddirectionwasatypicalforalargeproportionofthesurvey.TheprevailingwinddirectionintheUKissouth-westerly,butduringthefirstroundofsurveystherewereseveralperiodswithnortherlywinds.
8.4.6 Winddirectioncanhaveasignificanteffectonnoiselevels.Thiscanbeparticularlyapparentwhenthereisadominant,static,andsteadysourceofnoisesuchasroadtrafficontheM1.Theeffectofthewindisgreaterasthedistancefromthesourceincreases.Noiselevelsgenerallyincrease downwind of the source and decrease upwind of the source.
8.4.7 Theeffectofdifferentwinddirectionswillaffectsomenoiseindicesusedtodescribethenoiseenvironmentmorethanothers.AtlocationswhichexperiencedistantroadtrafficnoisefromtheM1,thebackgroundlevel(LA90,T),ameasureindicatingtheconstant,underlyinglevelofnoise,mayvarysignificantlywithwinddirection.However,ifthereislocalroadtrafficorrailwaynoiseatthesamelocation,itisthesesourcesthatwillusuallydominatetheambientnoiselevel(LAeq,T).Furthermore,asthelocalsourcesaretypicallyclosertothereceptors,theresultswilltendtoshowless variation with wind direction.
8.4.8 Followingthereview,asecondsetofbaselinesurveyswerecarriedoutinJuneandJuly2017sothatamorerobustandcomprehensivesetofmeasurementdataincludingnoiselevelsrepresentativeofdifferentwinddirectionswascollected.ThiswasparticularlyimportantatlocationsclosertotheMainSitewherethebackgroundnoiselevelwouldbeusedintheassessmentofoperationalnoisefromSRFIactivities.Thesecondsetofsurveysalsocapturedsomelocationswhereaccesscouldnotbeobtainedatthetimeofthefirstsurveys.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 22
8.4.9 Thedatesofthesurveyswerechosensothatmonitoringwasnotcarriedoutduringatypicalperiods,e.g.duringschoolorpublicholidays.
8.4.10 Thesurveyscomprised15staticmonitoringlocationsleftunattendedforthedurationofthemonitoring,and8locationswhereshort-termattendedmeasurementswereundertaken.ThelocationswereselectedtoberepresentativeoftheexistingnoisesensitivereceiversaroundtheProposedDevelopment.Atallmeasurementpositions,themicrophoneswereintheacousticfreefieldandataheightof1.5to2.0mabovelocalgroundlevel.
8.4.11 Inaddition,short-termmeasurementsofroadtrafficnoiseweremadeat3locationstoassistinverifyingthepredictedlevelsofroadtrafficnoise.
8.4.12 Asummaryofthesurveydates,numberofdayandnight-timeperiodsrecorded,andobservationsof main noise sources at each location are summarised in Table 8.13 for the unattended measurements,Table8.14forattendedmeasurements,andTable8.15fortheroadtrafficnoisemodelverificationmeasurements.
8.4.13 PlansshowingthemonitoringlocationsareprovidedinAppendix8.7,anddetailsofthemonitoringequipmentusedaregiveninAppendix8.8.
Table 8.13 Details of unattended noise surveys34
Unat-tended Survey Location
Survey Dates No. of Full Continuous Periods Recorded
Observations of Main Noise Sources
Start End Day(16hr) Night(8hr)
L1 CollingtreeRoad
14/10/16 28/10/16 13 14 RoadtrafficonCollingtreeRoadandM1;passenger/freighttrains.13/06/17 27/06/17 13 14
L2 CollingtreeCourt 14/10/16 31/10/16 16 17 RoadtrafficonM1.
L4 BarnLane29/09/16 13/10/16 13 14 RoadtrafficonM1(dis-
tant);lightaircraftover-head.13/06/17 27/06/17 13 14
L5 CourteenhallRoad
30/09/16 13/10/16 12 13 RoadtrafficonM1(dis-tant);passenger/freighttrains.13/06/17 27/06/17 13 14
L6 LodgeFarm 14/06/17 12/07/17 27 28Passenger/freighttrains;roadtrafficonM1(dis-tant).
L7 CollingtreeRoad
14/10/16 31/10/16 16 17 Passenger/freighttrains;roadtrafficonCollingtreeRoadandM1.13/06/17 27/06/17 13 14
L8 Hilton Hotel (west)
29/09/16 13/10/16 13 14 RoadtrafficonM1andA45.14/06/17 27/06/17 12 13
L9 HolidayInn 30/09/16 13/10/16 12 13 RoadtrafficonM1.
L10 WestLodgeCottages
13/10/16 31/10/16 17 18 Roadtrafficon NorthamptonRoad.13/06/17 27/06/17 13 14
34 Notethat,ultimately,themonitoringlocationdesignationsL3,S1,S2andS9werenotused.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 23
Unat-tended Survey Location
Survey Dates No. of Full Continuous Periods Recorded
Observations of Main Noise Sources
L11 WindingbrookLane
14/10/16 31/10/16 16 17 RoadtrafficonA45andM1.13/06/17 27/06/17 13 14
L12 WoodleysFarm 02/11/16 18/11/16 15 16
RoadtrafficonNorthamp-tonRoad;lightaircraftoverhead.
L13 BaileyBrooksLane 01/11/16 18/11/16 16 17
Passenger/freighttrains;roadtrafficonM1(dis-tant).
L14 BlisworthRoad 01/11/16 18/11/16 16 17
RoadtrafficonA508,BlisworthRoadandM1(distant);passenger/freighttrains.
L15 DovecoteRoad 01/11/16 18/11/16 16 17
RoadtrafficonA508,BlisworthRoadandM1(distant);passenger/freighttrains.
L16 HydeFarmHouse 01/11/16 18/11/16 16 17 RoadtrafficonM1(dis-
tant).
Table 8.14 Details of attended noise surveys
Attended Survey Loca-tion
DateStart Time
No. of Full 15min Intervals Record-
ed
Observations of Main Noise Sources
S3 Hilton Hotel (east)
30/09/16 11:51 3RoadtrafficonA45.
13/10/16 10:54 4
S4 RathvillyFarm14/06/17 12:23 3 Passenger/freighttrains;road
trafficonM1(distant).12/07/17 15:07 3
S5 StockwellWay14/10/16 13:47 4 RoadtrafficonM1andCol-
lingtreeRoad;passenger/freighttrains.31/10/16 10:44 3
S6 SaxonAvenue14/10/16 14:07 3 RoadtrafficonSaxonAvenue,
FinneyDrive,A45andM1.31/10/16 10:44 3
S7 Courteenhall30/09/16 12:55 3
RoadtrafficonM1.13/10/16 11:05 3
NML3 BridgeCot-tage
30/09/16 10:29 3 RoadtrafficonCourteenhallRoadandM1(distant);passen-ger/freighttrains.13/10/16 12:58 4
NML4 CourteenhallRoad
30/09/16 10:25 3 RoadtrafficonCourteenhallRoadandM1(distant); passenger/freighttrains.13/10/16 12:57 3
NML5 Northampton Road
14/06/17 14:58 3 RoadtrafficonNorthamptonRoad.12/07/17 13:48 3
CHAPTER 8 - PG 24
Table 8.15 Details of road traffic noise surveys
Road Traffic Noise Survey Location
Date Start TimeNo. of Full
1hr Intervals Recorded
Observations of Main Noise
Sources
S8 LondonRoad 01/11/16 14:56 3 RoadtrafficonA508
S10 StratfordRoad 01/11/16 13:42 3 RoadtrafficonA508
S11 Northampton Road 01/11/16 09:45 3 Roadtrafficon
A508
8.4.14 Afieldcalibrationcheckwasundertakenpriortoandfollowingeachsetofsurveymeasurementsandnosignificantdriftincalibrationwasidentifiedatanylocation.Allthesoundlevelmeters(SLMs)andfieldcalibratorsusedforthesurveyswereClass1approved.AllSLMswerewithin2yearsoftheirlastlaboratorycalibration,andallcalibratorswithin1year.
8.4.15 TheresultsofthesurveysarepresentedinAppendix8.9.Timehistorygraphshavebeenproducedforthelong-termunattendedsurveylocations,andtableshavebeenprovidedsummarisingthemeasurednoiselevelsattheshort-termattendedandroadtrafficnoisesurveylocations.
8.4.16 AweatherstationwasinstalledclosetosurveylocationL5torecordprecipitationrate,windspeedandwinddirectiondatafrom9thOctober2017untilthesurveymeasurementswerecompleted.Priortothis,andtosupplementthedatawhererequired,publiclyaccessibleweatherdatafromthenearbyweatherstationINORTHAM935 was used to provide details of local weather conditions.
Noise - Important Areas8.4.17 Asstatedinparagraph8.2.5above,theNPSNNstatesthatapplicantsshouldconsider
opportunitiestoaddresstheexistingnoiseissuesassociatedwiththeImportantAreasasidentifiedbyDefrathroughthenoiseactionplanningprocess.
8.4.18 ThefollowingImportantAreashavebeenidentifiedneartotheProposedDevelopment,withthecorrespondingnoisesourceinbrackets:
• PropertiesadjacenttotheexistingrailwaytrackinRoade(rail);
• HighStreet,CollingtreeatthepropertiesadjacenttotheM1(roadtraffic);
• AsectionoftheA508throughRoade(roadtraffic);and
• AsectionoftheA508throughGraftonRegis(roadtraffic).
8.4.19 ThelocationsofthefourImportantAreasareshowninAppendix8.10.
35 https://www.wunderground.com/personal-weather-station/dashboard?ID=INORTHAM9
CHAPTER 8 - PG 25
Characterisation of Background Sound Levels for Assessment of SRFI Operational Activities at Main Site
8.4.20 Asmentionedintheassessmentmethodologysection,theassessmentofpotentialimpactsfromthesoundofoperationalactivitiesattheSRFIisbasedonBS4142:2014.Thisstandardconsidersboththedifferencebetweenthepredictedsoundlevelfromtheactivitiesatthereceptorsandthecorrespondingexistingtypicalbackgroundsoundlevel(LA90,T),andthecontextinwhichthesoundoccursatthereceptor,whichincludesconsiderationoftheabsolutelevelsofsound.
8.4.21 BS4142:2014statesthatitisimportanttoensurethatthebackgroundsoundlevelsusedintheassessmentarereliableandsuitablyrepresenttheparticularcircumstancesandperiodsofinterest.Theobjectiveistoquantifywhatistypicalduringtheperiodswhenthenoisesourceswouldbeoperational,ratherthanascertainingthelowestbackgroundsoundlevel.
8.4.22 Tocharacterisethebaselinesoundenvironment,thesurveyresultsandweatherdatawerereviewedandanymeasuredsoundlevelsthatwerelikelytohavebeencontaminatedbyhighwindspeeds,precipitation,thedawnchorusandothersucheventswereexcluded.
8.4.23 Asdiscussedpreviously,thewinddirectionhasastronginfluenceonthemeasuredsoundlevelsintheareaaroundtheProposedDevelopment.Consequently,thesurveyresultshavebeensplitintotwodatasetsbasedonthewinddirectionatthetimeofmeasurement,asfollows:
• Broadly south-westerly winds(i.e.soundlevelsmeasuredwhenwindsfromthewest,westsouthwest,southwest,southsouthwestorsouth);and
• Broadly north-easterly winds(i.e.soundlevelsmeasuredwhenwindsfromthewestnorthwest,northwest,northnorthwest,north,northnortheast,northeast,eastnortheast,east,eastsoutheast,southeast,southsoutheast).
8.4.24 Ingeneral,forpositionstothesouthorwestoftheM1,broadlysouth-westerlywindswillresultinlowerbackgroundsoundlevels.ThesamewinddirectionswillcausegenerallyhigherbackgroundsoundlevelsatpositionstothenorthoreastoftheM1.
8.4.25 ForpositionsnorthoreastoftheM1theoppositeistrue,i.e.broadlysouth-westerlywindswillresultingenerallyhigherbackgroundsoundlevels,andbroadlynorth-easterlywindswillcausegenerallylowerbackgroundsoundlevels.
8.4.26 Afterfilteringthemeasurementdataaccordingtowinddirection,thefrequencyofoccurrenceofthemeasuredbackgroundsoundlevels(roundedtothenearestwholenumber)wasexamined.Themodalvalue,i.e.themostfrequentlyoccurringvalue,wasidentifiedforboththedayandnight-timeperiodsforeachmonitoringlocation.Generally,themodalvalueisconsideredtobeagoodindicatorofthetypicalbackgroundsoundlevelwithintheseperiods.
8.4.27 However,insomesituations,thebackgroundsoundlevelisnotevenlyspreadaboutthemodalvalueandtherecanbequiteafewoccasionswhenalowervalueoccurs.
8.4.28 Toexplorewhetherthisfeatureexisted,thefollowingprocesswasadopted.Forthemeasurementsmadeateachmonitoringlocation,thevalueoftheresultwasidentifiedforwhich75%oftheallthemeasuredvalueswerehigher.Thisvalueisknownasthelowerquartileandwasdeterminedforboththedayandnight-timeperiods.Whenthelowerquartilevaluewasmorethan2dB(A)belowthemodalvalue,thiswasconsideredanindicationthattherewasunevennessinthedistributionofthebackgroundsoundlevel.Inthosecases,thelowerquartilevaluewasusedasasensitivitytestintheoperationalsoundassessment,inadditiontothemodalvalue.Thismeansthatarobustapproachtotheconsiderationoftypicalbackgroundsoundlevelsintheassessmenthas been followed.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 26
8.4.29 Basedonthisanalysis,thebackgroundsoundlevels(LA90,15min)foreachmonitoringpositionhavebeenidentifiedforthedaytime(07.00–23.00)andnight-time(23:00–07:00)periods.ThesevaluesarepresentedinAppendix8.11.Theappendixalsoidentifiestherepresentativemonitoringlocationforeachreceptorlocation,alongwithanyrequiredcorrectiontorelatetheresultsfromthemonitoringlocationtotherelevantreceptorlocation.
Vibration Survey8.4.30 Aspreviouslydiscussed,receptorsclosetotheNorthamptonLooprailwayline,onwhichfreight
trainsservingtheSRFIwillbetravelling,arealreadyexposedtofrequentpassengerandfreighttrainpasses.Attheclosestreceptorstotheline,groundbornevibrationresultingfromthetrainpassesmaybeexperienced.
8.4.31 TocharacteriseandquantifytheexistinglevelsofvibrationresultingfromfreightandpassengertrainsusingtheNorthamptonLoop,VibrationDoseValue(VDV)measurementsoftrainpasseswereundertakenattwooftheclosestreceptors.TheseareshownaslocationsV1andV2onthemonitoringlocationplaninAppendix8.7.TheresultshavebeenusedtopredictthepotentialincreaseinperceptiblevibrationatthecorrespondingreceptorsduetoadditionalfreighttrainsservingtheSRFIontheNorthamptonLoop.
8.4.32 VibrationmeasurementswerecarriedoutfollowingtheprinciplesofBS6472-1:2008.AtriaxialaccelerometerwasattachedtoamountingplateconformingtotheGermanstandardDIN45669-2:2005-0636.AtV1themountingplatewasplacedinthemiddleofaconcreteslabusedforcarparkingonthesideoftheresidenceclosesttotherailway.AtV2itwasplacedonaconcretedyard/drivewayareain-linewiththeclosestpointoftheresidencetothetrack.Bothpositionswereconsideredrepresentativeofthefloorvibrationexperiencedinsidetheproperties.
8.4.33 Bothmonitoringlocationsweretothewestoftherailway,andsoclosertothenorthboundline.V1wasapproximately22mtothecentreofthenorthboundtrack,andV2wasapproximately87m.
8.4.34 Ateachlocation,ameasurementwasstartedasatrainapproachedthemonitoringsiteandstoppedasitmovedaway.Themeasurementsindicatedthattheweightedaccelerationintheverticalaxiswasthedominantdirectionofvibration.InaccordancewithBS6472-1:2008,onlythisaxishasbeenconsideredfurther.
8.4.35 ThenumberandtypeofmeasuredtrainpassestogetherwiththeaverageandmaximumVDVbresultsforeachtraintypearesummarisedinTable8.16.
Table 8.16 Summary of measured VDVb levels for train passes
Survey Location Train Type
Northbound (nearside) Southbound (far side)No. of Passes
Avg, VDVb
Max, VDVb
No. of Passes
Avg, VDVb
Max, VDVb
V1
Freight 4 0.016 0.019 3 0.008 0.011Passenger(4car) 14 0.009 0.012 13 0.005 0.006Passenger(8car) - - - 3 0.007 0.008Passenger(12car) 1 0.011 0.011 - - -
V2Freight 3 0.004 0.004 3 0.004 0.004Passenger(4car) 4 0.001 0.002 4 0.003 0.003
36 DIN 45669-2:2005-06 Measurement of vibration immission - Part 2: Measuring method
CHAPTER 8 - PG 27
8.5 ASSESSMENT OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
Construction Noise8.5.1 Thissectiondealswiththeassessmentofthepotentialtemporarynoiseeffectsatnearbynoise
sensitivereceptorsresultingfromconstructionworksassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentas described in section 8.3.
8.5.2 PredictednoiselevelsfortheactivitieslikelytobeusedintheconstructionoftheSRFIandRoadeBypassattherelevantreceptorsarepresentedinAppendix8.12,basedontheestimatesofplantandequipmentlistedinAppendix8.2.TherelevantreceptorsarelistedinTable8.12andshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.
8.5.3 ThevaluesrepresenttheLAeq,12hrnoiselevelstobeexpectedonatypicalworkingdayatgroundfloorlevelwhentheactivitiesareinrelativelycloseproximitytothereceptor.Thetablesarecolourcodedtoindicatehowthepredictednoiselevelscorrespondtothethresholdsofpotentialeffectsstated in Table 8.1.
8.5.4 Onoccasion,theremaybedayswhenthepredictednoiselevelscouldbeslightlyhigherthanthosepresented,whenactivitiesaretakingplaceatclosestpossiblepointtothereceptor.However,thiswouldbeverymuchaworstcase,atypicaloccurrence.
SRFI8.5.5 Table1ofAppendix8.12indicatesthatthevastmajorityofactivitiesinvolvedintheconstruction
oftheSRFIwouldresultindailyconstructionnoiselevelsbelowtheLOAELevenwhentheyareinrelativelycloseproximitytotherelevantreceptors.NoactivitiesarepredictedtocauseanimpactwhichexceedstheSOAEL.Therefore,nosignificantadversenoiseeffectsareexpected.
8.5.6 Itshouldalsobenotedthatattworeceptors,R4andR5,wherethepredicteddailyconstructionlevelsforoneactivity,bulkearthworks,arebetweentheLOAELandtheSOAELwheninrelativelycloseproximity,theexistinglevelsofambientnoisearecomparabletothepredictedconstructionnoiselevelsduetotheproximityoftheM1.DuetotheconstantnatureofthenoisefromtheM1,itisunlikelythatconstructionactivitywillbeaudibleatthesereceptors.
8.5.7 Theconstructionnoiselevelswillvaryconsiderablythroughouttheworksprogrammedependingonthedifferentactivitiesbeingundertakenduringeachphase,andhowtheyaredistributedacrossthe site.
8.5.8 TheindicativemasterprogrammeindicatesthatmuchofconstructionactivityfortheMainSite(bulkearthworks,landscaping,roadconstructionandconstructionofrailterminal)isexpectedtobecarriedoutoveraperiodofaroundtwoandahalfyears.Dependingontherateoftake-upofdevelopmentplots,workonconstructingthewarehousebuildingscouldextendforaroundafurtherthreeyears.Theinitialworkswillincludethecreationofthelandscapingbundsaroundthesite.ThisshouldprovidescreeningoftheconstructionactivitiesfromthereceptorsandreducethepredictednoiselevelsfromthoseshowninTable1ofAppendix8.12.
8.5.9 Thebulkearthworksactivitymaytakeuptotwoyearstopreparetheentiresite,andthereforethetimespentinrelativelycloseproximitytoanyonereceptorisexpectedtobeminimal,withdailyconstructionnoiselevelstypicallybeingmuchlowerduringthisphaseoftheworksthanthoseshowninTable1ofAppendix8.12.
8.5.10 Whileitispossiblethatmorethanoneactivitymaytakeplaceconcurrently,thepredictednoiselevelsshowninTable1ofAppendix8.12arebasedontheactivitiesbeinginrelativelycloseproximitytothereceptors.Therefore,itisunlikelythatanyotheractivitiestakingplaceatthesametimewouldbecloseenoughtoaparticularreceptortocauseamaterialincreaseinconstructionnoise levels over those shown.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 28
8.5.11 Regardingconstructionworkinghours,thefollowingarecurrentlyanticipated:
• 07:00–19:00hours:MondaytoFriday;
• 07:00–16:00hours:Saturdays.
• NoworksonSundaysorpublicholidays.
8.5.12 Itisexpectedthatallconstructionrelateddeliverieswouldalsotakeplaceduringthesehours,exceptforlargeitemsofplantwhichusuallyhavetobetransportedontheroadnetworkatothertimeswhenthereisminimaltraffic.Sitepersonnelwouldtypicallybepermittedtoaccessthesiteshortlybeforeandafterthesehours.
8.5.13 Onoccasion,outofhoursworksmayberequiredwhereitisnotpracticabletocompletethemwithinthehoursstatedabove.Suchactivitiesmayincludelongconcretepours,whichcannotbeinterruptedoncestarted,andpowerfloatingoftherailterminalwhichmustbeundertakenwhentheconcretehascuredtoacertainlevel.Anysuchworkswouldbeappropriatelymanagedandmitigatedtominimiseanypotentialadversenoiseeffectsasfaraspracticable.
8.5.14 Inaddition,someactivitiestakingplacearoundtheoutsideoftheMainSitewillrequireoutofhoursworking,includingduringthenight-timeperiod,tocomplywiththerequirementsofHighwaysEngland.Asabove,theseworkswouldbeappropriatelymanagedandmitigatedtominimiseanypotentialadversenoiseeffectsasfaraspracticable.
8.5.15 Aswillbethecaseintheoperationalphase,vehiclesaccessingtheMainSitewillapproachprimarilyusingtheA508NorthamptonRoadfromJunction15oftheM1.ThetotalnumberofdailyvehiclemovementsfortheconstructionworksisanticipatedtobelowerthanwhentheSRFIisoperational.Therefore,thepotentialconstructionroadtrafficnoiseimpactisexpectedtobenoworse,andlikelyless,thanthatpredictedfortheoperationalphase,andconsequentlynosignificantadversenoiseeffectsareanticipatedattherelevantreceptors.
Roade Bypass8.5.16 Table2ofAppendix8.12indicatesthatmostofactivitiestakingplaceontheRoadeBypasssite
wouldresultindailyconstructionnoiselevelsbelowtheLOAELevenwhentheyareinrelativelycloseproximitytotherelevantreceptors.ThereareasmallnumberofreceptorswheretheimpactisexpectedtofallbetweentheLOAELandSOAEL.Fortwoactivities,itispredictedthattheSOAELmightbeexceededdependingonthedurationofthoseactivities.Thismayoccurwhentheworksareinrelativelycloseproximitytotworeceptors,resultinginfourinstancesofapotential(temporary)significantadversenoiseeffect.
8.5.17 Thesetworeceptors,R38andR41,areveryclosetothecentralroundaboutoftheproposedRoadeBypassthatformsthejunctionwiththeexistingBlisworthRoad.ThepotentialexceedancesoftheSOAELarepredictedwhenenablingworksandthefirstphaseofroadconstructiontakeplaceinthisarea.
8.5.18 TheoutlineconstructionprogrammeindicatesthattheworksassociatedwiththeRoadeBypassareexpectedtobecarriedoutoveran18monthperiod.Withthemainbypassroutebeingover2kminlength,thetimespentbyasingleactivityinrelativelycloseproximitytoanyonereceptorwouldlikelybeminimal,withconstructionnoiselevelsthroughoutthedurationoftheworksbeingtypicallymuchlower.
Other Highway Works8.5.19 Regardingconstructionnoiseattheotherhighwayworkslocations,sixsiteshavebeenidentified
whereareceptoriswithin300moftheworksboundary.ThesearethesitesassociatedwiththesevenreceptorsR57toR62(incl.R57a)asshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 29
8.5.20 Theseworksconsistofalterationsandrealignmentsofexistingroadsandareexpectedtolastbetweentwoandsixmonthsdependingtheextentoftheworks.NoearthworksareexpectedexceptatthesiteencompassingthejunctionsbetweentheA508andRookeryLane/AshtonRoad,justsouthoftheRoadeBypass,associatedwiththereceptorR60.Someoutofhoursworksareexpectedtobeneededtoaccommodatetie-insbetweentheoldandnewroadsurfaces.
8.5.21 Estimatesofthetypeandnumbersofplantandequipmentlikelytobeusedfortheseworks,aswellastheirestimatedusageforatypicalworkingday,arenotavailableatthisstage.Therefore,itisnotpossibletoproduceanindicationofthepotentialeffectsintermsofthepredictionofnoiselevels.ThiswillbeconsideredindetailduringproductionoftherelevantPhasespecificConstructionEnvironmentalManagementPlan(P-CEMP)asrequiredbytheDCO.
8.5.22 Whilerelativelysmall-scalewhencomparedtoconstructionoftheSRFIandRoadeBypass,itispossiblethattheseworkscouldresultinsomeadversenoiseeffectsattherelevantreceptors.Anysuchworkswillbeappropriatelymanagedandmitigatedtominimiseanypotentialadversenoiseeffectsasfaraspracticable.
Construction Vibration8.5.23 OftheconstructionactivitieslistedintheoutlineconstructionprogrammefortheProposed
Development,onlypilinghasbeenidentifiedashavingthepotentialtogiverisetovibrationthatmaycauseadverseeffectsatnearbyreceptors.
8.5.24 ItisunderstoodthattheonlyelementoftheProposedDevelopmentforwhichpilingmayberequiredistheconstructionoffoundationsfortheRoadeBypassrailwaybridge.Thelocationofthebridgeisapproximately110mfromthenearestsensitivereceptorslocatedattheendofBaileyBrooksLaneinRoade.
8.5.25 Thepropagationofvibrationfromtheactivitytothereceptorwilldependuponthepilingmethod,theequipmentused,andtheinterveningsoilandgeologytype.Consequently,itisdifficulttopredictthelikelyeffectswithasufficientlevelofcertaintyatthisstage.However,ithasbeenfoundpreviouslythat,ingeneral,nomaterialadverseeffectsarelikelytooccurwhenthedistancetothenearestreceptorisover100m.Consequently,nosignificantadversevibrationeffectsfromconstructionactivitiesareexpected.
8.5.26 WithregardtopotentialgroundbornevibrationcausedbythepassageofHGVtrafficservingthesiteduringconstruction,asdiscussedinsection8.3,thisisprimarilyaresultoftheconditionoftheunderlyingroadsurface.ConstructionHGVtrafficwillberoutedawayfromanysensitivereceptorswherepracticabletominimiseanypotentialgroundbornevibration.
Railway Noise8.5.27 Thissectiondealswiththeassessmentofthepotentialchangeinrailwaynoiseasaresultofthe
ProposedDevelopment.OperationoftheSRFIwillmeanthatadditionalfreighttrainswillusetherailnetwork,enteringandexitingthesiteviatheNorthamptonLooplinethatrunsalongthewesternboundaryoftheMainSite.
8.5.28 AveragerailwaynoiselevelshavebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptorsincludingtheeffectsofbothpassengerandfreighttrainactivityontheNorthamptonLoopandWestCoastMainLineforthebaseline,DMandDSfutureyearscenariosdescribedinsection8.3.
8.5.29 TheWestCoastMainLinehasbeenincludedasthetwolinesareadjacentuntiljustsouthoftheMainSite,wherebytheWestCoastMainLinedivergestothenorth-west.ThismeansthatreceptorstothesouthoftheMainSite,includingthoseinRoade,areapproximatelythesamedistancefrombothlines.Therelevantreceptorsincludethoseclosetothetwolineswheretheyruntogether,andtheNorthamptonLoopwhereitdiverges.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 30
8.5.30 Aspreviouslydiscussed,thepredictionsassumetypicalrailoperationswithnoengineeringworkstakingplace.DetailsofthenumberandtypeoftrainsusedforeachscenarioarepresentedinAppendix8.3.TherelevantreceptorsarelistedinTable8.12andshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.
8.5.31 ItshouldbenotedthatnoisefromtheSRFIfreighttrainsoncetheyhavemovedofftheNorthamptonLoopandintotheSRFIsiteisnotpartofthesepredictionsasitisconsideredanoperationalsoundsourceandareassessedinthecorrespondingsectionbelow.NoSRFIfreighttrainshavebeenassumedtotravelonthesectionofNorthamptonLooplinenexttotheMainSite,i.e.theywilleitherenterorexittheSRFIfromtheconnectionsatthenorthernandsouthernendsofthe site.
8.5.32 Table1ofAppendix8.13presentsthepredicteddaytimeaveragerailwaynoiselevels,withTable5presentingthelevelsforthenight-timeperiod.ThedaytimevaluesarepresentedasLAeq,16hrnoiselevels,andthenight-timevaluesasLAeq,8hrnoiselevels.
8.5.33 Tables2to4ofAppendix8.13presenttheassessmentofanyexpectedsignificantadverseeffectsandtheimpactmagnitudesduringthedaytimeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.4.Tables6to8presentthecorrespondingassessmentforthenight-timeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.5.
Significant Adverse Effects8.5.34 ItcanbeseenfromtheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.13thatnosignificantadverseeffects
havebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptorsasaresultofthechangeinaveragerailwaynoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentforanyofthefutureyearscenariosineitherthedayornight-timeperiods.
Impact Magnitudes8.5.35 TheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.13alsoshowthatnoadverseimpactshavebeenpredicted
attherelevantreceptorsasaresultofthechangeinaveragerailwaynoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentforanyofthefutureyearscenariosineitherthedayornight-timeperiods.Allimpactmagnitudesareexpectedtobeeithernegligibleornochange.
Noise Insulation Regulations (Railways)8.5.36 Noreceptorshavebeenidentifiedasbeinglikelytobeeligibleforanofferofmitigationunderthe
termsoftheseregulations.
Noise Action Planning Important Areas8.5.37 Asstatedinparagraph8.4.18above,thereisarailwayImportantArea(IA)inthevicinityofthe
ProposedDevelopment.TherailwaynoiseIAshowninFigure1ofAppendix8.10encompassestheNorthamptonLoopandWestCoastMainLineastheyrunthroughRoade.TherelevantreceptorsmostrepresentativeofthisareaareR39,R39aandR54.
8.5.38 TheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.13showthatnosignificantadverseeffectsoradverseimpactsasaresultoftheProposedDevelopmentareexpectedatthesereceptorsinanyfutureyearscenario.Theexpectedimpactmagnitudesforallfutureyearsareatworstnegligibleduringboththedayandnight-timeperiods.
8.5.39 Giventhelimitedsizeoftheexpectedimpactmagnitudes,theOrderlimitsoftheProposedDevelopment,andthenatureofthescheme,itisnotconsideredthatthereareanypracticableopportunitiestoaddresstheexistingnoiseissuesassociatedwiththisrailwaynoiseIAwithregardtoparagraph5.200oftheNPSNN.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 31
Site of Special Scientific Interest8.5.40 TheRoadeCuttingSiteofSpecialScientificInterest(SSSI)encompassestheareaaroundthe
railwaylinesbetweenthesouthernboundaryoftheMainSiteandthecentreofRoade.ThesiteisalsolistedintheGeologicalConservationReview(GCR)andhasbeenidentifiedasapotentialLocalWildlifeSite(LWS).FurtherdetailscanbefoundinChapter6oftheES(EcologyandNatureConservation).
8.5.41 ItisanticipatedthattheadditionalfreighttrainactivityresultingfromoperationoftheSRFIwouldhave,atmost,anegligibleimpactonthisareaandthereforenosignificantadversenoiseeffectonanygeologyorwildlifeisexpected.
Maximum Noise Levels from Railway Movements8.5.42 Theimpactofnight-timemaximumnoiselevelsfromtrainmovementswasassessedatsix
receptors:R1,R18,R24,R32,R39andR54.Twoassessmentswereundertaken,oneassumingbedroomwindowsarepartlyopenforventilationprovidinganoverallsoundattenuationof12dB(A);theotherassumingwindowsclosedprovidingasoundattenuationof25dB(A).Thislatterassumptioncouldbeanunderestimateifthereceptorshavestandardthermaldouble-glazedwindows,meaningthatrobustandworst-caseassumptionshavebeenconsideredforthisaspect.
8.5.43 TheprobabilityofanoiseinducedawakeninghasbeendeterminedbyreferencetoFigure2inapaperpresentedtoInternoisein2013byFenechetal37.ThatfigureisbasedontheworkbyElmenhorst(Footnote17).FurtherdetailsoftheassessmentmethodaresetoutinAppendix8.3.
8.5.44 TheresultsoftheassessmentaresetoutinAppendix8.13.Itcanbeseenthatthepotentialincreaseinnoiseinducedawakeningsfrommaximumnoiselevelsislessthanoneinalltheassessmentyearswithwindowsclosedandhencenosignificantadverseeffectsareexpected.
8.5.45 Forwindowsopen,thesameresultistrueforlocationsR23,R32andR39forallscenariosandforlocationsR1,R18andR54for2021and2033.However,in2043,atthesethreelocations,itisestimatedthatthenumberofnoiseinducedawakeningsfrommaximumnoiselevelscouldincreasebyjustoveronepernightindicatingthatasignificantadverseeffectcouldoccuratthesereceptors.
8.5.46 Itshouldbenoted,particularlyregardingtheassessmentofmaximumnoiselevelsfromrailwaymovements,thatwhiletwotypesoffreightlocomotivehavebeenassumedforthepredictionsofrailwaynoiseforbothSRFIandnon-SRFImovements(seeAppendix8.3),itislikelythatothertypesoffreightlocomotivethatproducelowerlevelsofnoisewillbeusedforsomeofthemovements.However,itisnotpossibletoaccuratelyidentifyhowmanymovementsthismayaffect.Thismeansthatworst-caseandrobustassumptionshavebeenconsideredforthisaspect.
Summary8.5.47 Theassessmentofthepotentialchangeinaveragerailwaynoiseasaresultoftheoperationofthe
SRFIhasshownthatnosignificantadversenoiseeffectsoradverseimpactsareexpectedatanyoftherelevantreceptorsforallfutureyearscenariosduringboththedayandnight-timeperiods.Theassociatedimpactmagnitudeswouldbe,atworst,negligible.
8.5.48 Theassessmentofthepotentialchangeinnight-timemaximumrailwaynoiselevelsasaresultoftheoperationoftheSRFIhasshownthattherearethreeofthereceptorsassessedwhere,in2043,thenationalraillongtermplanninghorizon,therecouldjustbeasignificantadverseeffectduetoapossibleincreaseofonenoiseinducedawakeninganightforthatscenario.
37 “Health effects from high-speed railway noise – a literature review”, Fenech et al, Internoise 2013
CHAPTER 8 - PG 32
Railway Vibration8.5.49 Thissectiondealswiththeassessmentofthepotentialchangeinrailwayinducedvibrationasa
resultoftheProposedDevelopment.OperationoftheSRFIwillmeanthatadditionalfreighttrainswillusetherailnetwork,enteringandexitingthesiteviatheNorthamptonLooplinethatrunsalongthewesternboundaryoftheMainSite.Freighttrainstravellingonsurfacerailwaysareconsideredapotentialsourceofgroundbornevibration.
8.5.50 RailwayinducedvibrationlevelshavebeenpredictedattworeceptorsincludingthecontributionofbothpassengerandfreighttrainactivityontheNorthamptonLoopforthebaseline,DMandDSfutureyearscenariosdescribedinsection8.3.Thepredictionshavebeenbasedonthemeasurementsoftrainpassestakenduringthebaselinesurvey,withthereceptorscorrespondingto the two measurement locations.
8.5.51 Thereceptors,R18andR24,arearound30mand86mfromthecentreofthenorthboundtrack.Inthemostfavourableconditions,significantlevelsofvibrationwouldnotbeexpectedtopropagatebeyond100mfromthetrack.Therefore,thepredictedvibrationlevelsatthetworeceptorsareconsideredrepresentativeofthosethatmaybeexperiencedatotherreceptorsclosetothetrack.ThelocationsofthesereceptorsareshowninFigure8.1andinAppendix8.6.
8.5.52 Aspreviouslydiscussed,thepredictionsassumetypicalrailoperationswithnoengineeringworkstakingplace.DetailsofthenumberandtypeoftrainsusedforeachscenarioarepresentedinAppendix8.3.Thevibrationlevelsusedinthepredictionsarethehighestmeasuredvaluesforeachrepresentativetraintypetakenduringthebaselinesurvey.
8.5.53 Astheresultsofthepredictionsarebeingconsideredasrepresentativeofotherreceptors,inordertoprovidearobust(worst-case)assessment,ithasbeenassumedthatallfreighttrainsservingtheSRFIpassthetworeceptorlocations.Asdiscussedintherailwaynoiseassessmentsection,theSRFIfreighttrainswilleitherenterorexittheSRFIfromtheconnectionstotheNorthamptonLoopatthenorthandthesouthofthesite.Therefore,duringactualoperation,itisexpectedthatsomeSRFIfreighttrainswillonlytravelonthetracktothenorthofthesite,andsomeonlyonthetrackto the south.
8.5.54 Table8.17belowpresentsthepredicteddaytimevibrationdosevalues(VDVs)fromrailwayinduced vibration. These are considered representative of the levels that could occur inside the propertiesatthereceptorlocations.Table8.18presentsthepredictedVDVsforthenight-timeperiod.
Table 8.17 Predicted railway VDVs for daytime period (07:00 – 23:00)
ReceptorPredicted VDVb (m/s1.75) - Day2017Baseline
2021DM
2021DS
2033DM
2033DS
2043DM
2043DS
R18CollingtreeRd 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06R24LodgeFarm 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02
Notes: DM = Do Minimum, DS = Do Something
CHAPTER 8 - PG 33
Table 8.18 Predicted railway VDVs for night-time period (23:00 – 07:00)
ReceptorPredicted VDVb (m/s1.75) - Night2017Baseline
2021DM
2021DS
2033DM
2033DS
2043DM
2043DS
R18CollingtreeRd 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04R24LodgeFarm 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Notes: DM = Do Minimum, DS = Do Something
Significant Adverse Effects8.5.55 ItcanbeseenfromTables8.17and8.18thatnoexceedancesoftheSOAELasdescribedinTable
8.7,havebeenpredictedatthetworeceptorsasaresultofthechangeinrailwayinducedvibrationassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentforanyofthefutureyearscenariosineitherthedayornight-timeperiods.Therefore,nosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedatreceptorsclosetotheNorthamptonLoopline.
Impact Magnitudes8.5.56 Tables8.17and8.18alsoshowthatnoadverseimpactshavebeenpredictedatthetworeceptors
asaresultofthechangeinrailwayinducedvibrationassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentforanyofthefutureyearscenariosineitherthedayornight-timeperiods.AllimpactmagnitudesareexpectedtobenegligibleasdescribedinTable8.7.
Sites of Special Scientific Interest8.5.57 TheRoadeCuttingSiteofSpecialScientificInterest(SSSI)encompassestheareaaroundthe
railwaylinesbetweenthesouthernboundaryoftheMainSiteandthecentreofRoade.ThesiteisalsolistedintheGeologicalConservationReview(GCR)andhasbeenidentifiedasapotentialLocalWildlifeSite(LWS).FurtherdetailscanbefoundinChapter6oftheES(EcologyandNatureConservation).
8.5.58 ItisanticipatedthattheadditionalfreighttrainactivityresultingfromoperationoftheSRFIwouldhave,atmost,anegligibleimpactonthisareaandthereforenosignificantadversevibrationeffectonanygeologyorwildlifeisexpected.
Summary8.5.59 Theassessmentofthepotentialchangeinrailwayinducedvibrationasaresultoftheoperationof
theproposedSRFIhasshownthatnosignificantadversevibrationeffectsoradverseimpactsareexpectedatreceptorsclosetotheNorthamptonLoopforallfutureyearscenariosduringboththedayandnight-timeperiods.
Road Traffic Noise – Around Main Site8.5.60 Thissectiondealswiththeassessmentofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasaresult
oftheProposedDevelopmentontheroadsaroundtheMainSite.TheassessmentdoesnotincludetheroadswithintheMainSiteitself,providingaccesstotheSRFIwarehousingandotherelements,astheyareconsideredtobeanoperationalsoundsourceandareassessedinthecorrespondingsectionbelow.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 34
8.5.61 Roadtrafficnoiselevelshavebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptorsforthebaseline,DMandDSfutureyearscenariosdescribedinsection8.3.TherelevantreceptorsarelistedinTable8.12andshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.
8.5.62 Table1ofAppendix8.14presentsthepredicteddaytimeroadtrafficnoiselevels,withTable4ofthatappendixpresentingthelevelsforthenight-timeperiod.ThedaytimevaluesarepresentedasLAeq,16hrnoiselevels,andthenight-timevaluesasLnight,equivalenttoLAeq,8hr,noiselevels.
8.5.63 Tables2and3ofAppendix8.14presenttheassessmentofanyexpectedsignificantadverseeffectsandtheimpactmagnitudesduringthedaytimeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.9.Tables5and6presentthecorrespondingassessmentforthenight-timeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.10.
Significant Adverse Effects8.5.64 ItcanbeseenfromtheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.14thatmostreceptorsaroundtheMain
SitearenotexpectedtoexperienceanysignificantadverseeffectsasaresultofthechangeinroadtrafficnoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentforanyofthefutureyearscenariosineitherthedayornight-timeperiods.
8.5.65 Asignificantadverseeffecthasbeenpredictedatonereceptor:R30WestLodgeCottages-EastFaçade,locatedontheA508justtothesouthoftheMainSite,forthe2031DSdayandnight-timescenarios.ThisisduetothepredictedroadtrafficnoiselevelexceedingtheSOAELfortheDSscenarios,togetherwithaminorincreaseof1.7dB(A)fromtheDMtotheDSscenariofortheday,and1.6dB(A)forthenight.
8.5.66 AtR27BlisworthHighStreet,inthe2021DSdaytimescenarioonly,itcanbeseenfromAppendix8.14thattheresultsindicateasignificantadverseeffectinthatyear.However,thiseffectwouldonlybetemporaryasoncetheRoadeBypassisoperational,R27wouldreceiveaminorbeneficialimpactforboththedayandnight-timeasindicatedbytheresultsforthe2031DSscenarios.
8.5.67 Otherexpectedimpactmagnitudesarediscussedinthefollowingparagraphs.
Impact Magnitudes8.5.68 TheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.14showthatmostreceptorsaroundtheMainSitearenot
expectedtoexperienceanymaterialadverseimpactsasaresultofthechangeinroadtrafficnoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentforanyofthefutureyearscenariosineitherthedayornight-timeperiods.Theimpactmagnitudesareexpectedtobelargelynegligible.
8.5.69 MinorbeneficialimpactshavebeenpredictedatuptotenofthereceptorsclosetothenorthandwestboundariesoftheMainSitedependingonthefutureyearandassessmentperiod,duetothelandscapingbundsaroundthesitescreeningthemfromroadtrafficnoisefromtheM1.ThisoutcomemeansthattherequirementofGovernmentpolicyassetoutinthe3rdbulletpointofparagraph5.195oftheNPSNNismet(seeparagraph8.2.9above).
8.5.70 InadditiontotheminoradverseimpactatR30leadingtoasignificantadverseeffectasdiscussedabove,thereceptorR29,whichislocatedontheothersideofthesameproperty,isalsopredictedtoexperienceaminoradverseimpactduringbothfutureyearnight-timescenarios.
8.5.71 MinoradverseimpactsarealsopredictedatthereceptorsR31toR33forthe2021DSnight-timescenario,whicharedifferentfacadesofthesamebuilding(BridgeCottage)locatedonCourteenhallRoadatthesouthoftheMainSite.However,inthe2031DSscenariothesehavechangedtobemainlyminorbeneficialduetotheRoadeBypassaffectingtheflowoftrafficinthisarea.Asdiscussedabove,itisexpectedthatthebeneficialimpactsasaresultofthebypasswouldoccurconsiderablybefore2031.AchievingthisoutcomemeansthattherequirementofGovernmentpolicyassetoutinthe3rdbulletpointofparagraph5.195oftheNPSNNismet(seeparagraph8.2.9above).
CHAPTER 8 - PG 35
Noise Insulation Regulations (Roads)8.5.72 Onereceptorhasbeenidentifiedasbeinglikelytobeeligibleforanofferofmitigation.ThisisR30
WestLodgeCottages-EastFaçade,thesamereceptorwhereasignificantadverseeffectmayoccur.
Noise Action Planning Important Areas8.5.73 Asstatedinparagraph8.4.18above,therearethreeroadImportantAreasinthevicinityofthe
ProposedDevelopment.OneoftheseImportantAreasencompassesCollingtreeCourt,whichisoppositethenorth-eastareaoftheMainSite,ontheothersideoftheM1(SeeFigure2ofAppendix8.10).TherelevantreceptorsmostrepresentativeofthisareaareR4andR5.
8.5.74 TheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.13showthatnosignificantadverseeffectsoradverseimpactsasaresultoftheProposedDevelopmentareexpectedatthesereceptorsinanyfutureyearscenario.Theexpectedimpactmagnitudesforallfutureyearsareatworstnegligibleduringboththedayandnight-timeperiods.Italsonotedthat2mhighfencingisalreadyinplacebetweenCollingtreeCourtandtheM1.
8.5.75 Giventhelimitedsizeoftheexpectedimpactmagnitudes,theOrderlimitsoftheProposedDevelopment,andthenatureofthescheme,itisnotconsideredthatthereareanypracticableopportunitiestoaddresstheexistingnoiseissuesassociatedwiththisroadtrafficnoiseIAwithregardtoparagraph5.200oftheNPSNN.
Summary8.5.76 TheassessmentofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasaresultoftheProposed
DevelopmentontheroadsaroundtheMainSitehasshownthatpotentiallysignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedatjusttwoofthe36receptorsconsidered.However,foroneoftheseinstancestheeffectistemporaryandshouldbemitigatedfollowingthecompletionoftheRoadeBypass.
8.5.77 Theassessmenthasalsoshownthatthepredictedimpactmagnitudesatthereceptorsarelargelynegligibleforallfutureyearscenariosduringboththedayandnight-timeperiods.Severalminorimpacts,bothbeneficialandadverse,havebeenidentified,butnoneofthelatterareexpectedtoresultinmaterialadverseeffects.
Road Traffic Noise - Roade Bypass8.5.78 Thissectiondealswiththeassessmentofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasaresultof
theProposedDevelopmentontheroadsaroundtheRoadeBypasssite,aswellasonthebypassitself.
8.5.79 ItshouldbenotedthattheRoadeBypassisnotplannedtobecompetedinthe2021DSscenario,whichrepresentstheexpectedopeningyearoftheSRFI.Thetrafficnoisepredictionsforthisscenarioarebasedontheexistingroadlayout.However,thebypass,aswellasallotherhighwayworks,areexpectedtobecompletedin2031DSandhavebeenmodelledassuch.
8.5.80 Otherwise,roadtrafficnoiselevelshavebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptorsforthebaseline,DMandDSfutureyearscenariosdescribedinsection8.3.TherelevantreceptorsarelistedinTable8.12andshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.
8.5.81 Table1ofAppendix8.15presentsthepredicteddaytimeroadtrafficnoiselevels,withTable5presentingthelevelsforthenight-timeperiod.ThedaytimevaluesarepresentedasLAeq,16hrnoiselevels,andthenight-timevaluesasLnight,equivalenttoLAeq,8hr,noiselevels.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 36
8.5.82 Tables2and3ofAppendix8.15presenttheassessmentofanyexpectedsignificantadverseeffectsandtheimpactmagnitudesduringthedaytimeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.9.Tables6and7presentthecorrespondingassessmentforthenight-timeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.10.
Significant Adverse Effects8.5.83 ItcanbeseenfromtheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.15thatnosignificantadverseeffects
havebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptorsaroundtheRoadeBypasssiteasaresultofthechangeinroadtrafficnoiseforanyofthefutureyearscenariosineitherthedayornight-timeperiods.
Impact Magnitudes8.5.84 Tables2and6inAppendix8.15showthatin2021,priortoconstructionofthebypass,thevast
majorityofreceptorsaroundtheRoadeBypasssitearenotexpectedtoexperienceanyadverseimpactsasaresultofthechangeinroadtrafficnoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentinthatyearineitherthedayornight-timeperiods.
8.5.85 Manyofthe2021DSnoiselevelsarebelowtheLOAELandthereforenoadverseimpactisidentified.Thepredictedimpactsatalmostallotherreceptorsareexpectedtobenegligible.Aminoradverseimpactispredictedatonereceptor,R52RoadeHighStreet.
8.5.86 Tables3and7inAppendix8.15showthatin2031,withtheRoadeBypassconstructedandinuse,bothbeneficialandadverseimpactswouldbeexpectedatthereceptorsaroundthesite,aswellasseveralnegligibleimpacts.
8.5.87 Inparticular,beneficialimpactsareexpectedatthereceptorslocatedontheA508asitpassesthroughthecentreofRoade,asroadtrafficisrelocatedontothebypass.ThisoutcomemeansthattherequirementofGovernmentpolicyassetoutinthe3rdbulletpointofparagraph5.195oftheNPSNNismet(seeparagraph8.2.9above).AdverseimpactsareexpectedatthereceptorsclosetotheRoadeBypasssiteonthewesternsideofthevillagewhereexistinglevelsofroadtrafficnoisearerelativelylow.
8.5.88 Thedesignofthebypassincludeslandscapebundingnexttothenewroad,particularlyonthesideclosesttoRoade.Carehasbeentakentooptimisethedesigntoprovidethemaximumacousticbenefitasfarasispracticablefollowingtherecommendationsgiveninparagraph5.198oftheNPSNN,witharesultingreductioninroadtrafficnoiselevelsofupto3dB(A)atthereceptorsclosesttothebypassoverwhattheymighthavebeenotherwise.
8.5.89 Inordertomitigateandminimisefurtherthepredictedadverseimpacts,thepotentialforadditionalmitigationhasbeenidentifiedintheformofacousticfencing.Thisisdescribedinthemitigationsectionbelowtogetherwithanoverallanalysisofthenoiseimpactoftheproposedbypass.
Noise Insulation Regulations (Roads)8.5.90 Noreceptorshavebeenidentifiedasbeinglikelytobeeligibleforanofferofmitigationunder
theseregulations.
Noise Action Planning Important Areas8.5.91 Asstatedinparagraph8.4.18above,therearethreeroadImportantAreasinthevicinityofthe
ProposedDevelopment.OneoftheseImportantAreasencompassesthesectionoftheA508thatpassesthroughRoadetothenorthoftherailwayline.TherelevantreceptormostrepresentativeofthisareaisR44.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 37
8.5.92 TheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.15showthatanegligibleimpactisexpectedatR44inthe2021DSscenario.However,inthe2031DSscenariowhentheRoadeBypassisoperational,thereceptorisexpectedtoexperienceaminorbeneficialimpactduringthedayandamajorbeneficialimpactduringthenightbecauseofthereductionintrafficvolumeontheA508.ThisoutcomemeansthattherequirementofGovernmentpolicyassetoutinthe3rdbulletpointofparagraph5.195oftheNPSNNismet(seeparagraph8.2.9above).
8.5.93 ItcanbeseenthattheRoadeBypassisexpectedtohelpaddresstheexistingnoiseissuesassociatedwiththisIAwithregardtoparagraph5.200oftheNPSNNbyreducingthelevelsofroadtrafficnoisewithinit.
Local Wildlife Sites8.5.94 TheRoadeQuarryLocalWildlifeSite(LWS)islocatedatthesouthofRoade,adjacenttothe
A508ontheeastside.FurtherdetailscanbefoundinChapter6oftheES(EcologyandNatureConservation).
8.5.95 Itisanticipatedthatin2021,priortotheconstructionofthebypass,thechangeinroadtrafficnoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentwouldhave,atmost,anegligibleimpactontheLWSandthereforenosignificantadversenoiseeffectonanywildlifeisexpected.In2031,beneficialnoiseimpactsareanticipatedattheLWSasaresultoftheRoadeBypass.Thisisfurtherdescribedinthemitigationsectionbelow.
Summary8.5.96 TheassessmentofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasaresultoftheProposed
DevelopmentontheroadsaroundtheRoadeBypasssite,aswellasfromthebypassitself,hasshownthatnosignificantadversenoiseeffectsareexpectedatanyoftherelevantreceptorsforanyfutureyearscenarioduringboththedayandnight-timeperiods.
8.5.97 Theassessmenthasalsoshownthatin2021,priortotheconstructionofthebypass,thepredictedimpactmagnitudesatthereceptorsarealmostallnegligible.In2031,whenthebypasshasbeenconstructedandisinuse,thereareavarietyofbeneficialandadverseimpactmagnitudes,reflectingtheshiftofroadtraffictravellingthroughthecentreofRoadeontheA508ontothebypasstothewestofthevillage.Thebeneficialimpactsareinpartduetothecarefullandscapingaroundthenewbypass.Inordertomitigateandminimisefurtherthepredictedadverseimpacts,additionalmitigationhasbeenidentifiedandisdiscussedinthemitigationsectionbelow.
8.5.98 InreducingroadtrafficnoiseinthecentreofRoade,theconstructionofthebypasshelpsaddresstheexistingnoiseissuesassociatedwiththeNoiseActionPlanningImportantArealocatedthere,aswellasattheRoadeQuarryLocalWildlifeSiteatthesouthofthevillage.ThisoutcomemeansthattherequirementofGovernmentpolicyassetoutinthe3rdbulletpointofparagraph5.195oftheNPSNNismet(seeparagraph8.2.9above).
Road Traffic Noise – Other Highway Works8.5.99 Thissectiondealswiththeassessmentofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasaresultof
theProposedDevelopmentintheareasaroundtheotherhighwayworkswhereanoise-sensitivepropertyiswithin300mofthesite.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 38
8.5.100 Theotherhighwayworksconsistofalterationsandrealignmentsofseveralsectionsofexistingroad,describedinChapter2oftheES(DescriptionofDevelopment).ThefollowingworksarealreadyintegratedintotheassessmentofroadtrafficnoisearoundtheMainSite:
• thenewroundaboutontheA508toserveasaccesstotheSRFI;
• duallingoftheA508betweenthenewroundaboutandM1Junction15;
• enlargementandreconfigurationofM1Junction15;and
• wideningoftheA45tothenorthofM1Junction15.
8.5.101 Sixoftheotherhighwayworkshavebeenidentifiedforassessment,correspondingtothesevenreceptorsR57toR62(incl.R57a),whichwereselectedtobethoseclosesttothechangesinroadrealignment.Theseworksarepartofthe‘A508routeupgrade’describedinChapter2oftheES,andindetailinChapter12(Transportation).
8.5.102 Roadtrafficnoiselevelshavebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptorsforthebaseline,DMandDSfutureyearscenariosdescribedinsection8.3.TherelevantreceptorsarelistedinTable8.12andshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.
8.5.103 Table1ofAppendix8.16presentsthepredicteddaytimeroadtrafficnoiselevels,withTable3presentingthelevelsforthenight-timeperiod.ThedaytimevaluesarepresentedasLAeq,16hrnoiselevels,andthenight-timevaluesasLnight,equivalenttoLAeq,8hr,noiselevels.
8.5.104 Table2ofAppendix8.16presentstheassessmentofanyexpectedsignificantadverseeffectsandtheimpactmagnitudesduringthedaytimeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.9.Table4presentsthecorrespondingassessmentforthenight-timeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.10.Notethatastheotherhighwayworkswillnothavebegunin2021andtheirlocationsarelargelyisolatedfromtheMainSiteandRoadeBypasssite,assessmenthasbeencarriedoutforthe2031scenariosonly.
Significant Adverse Effects8.5.105 ItcanbeseenfromtheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.16thatmostreceptorsaroundtheother
highwayworksarenotexpectedtoexperienceanysignificantadverseeffectsasaresultofthechangeinroadtrafficnoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentforthe2031scenarioineitherthedayornight-timeperiods.
8.5.106 Asignificantadverseeffecthasbeenpredictedatonereceptor:R57TheLodge,locatedontheA508justtothesouthoftheMainSite,forthe2031DSdaytimescenarioonly.ThisisduetothepredictedroadtrafficnoiselevelexceedingtheSOAELfortheDSscenario,togetherwithaminorincreaseof1.3dB(A)fromtheDMtotheDSscenario.
8.5.107 ItshouldbenotedthatR57islocatedonthesamesectionoftheA508,betweenthesouth-eastcorneroftheMainSiteandtheRoadeBypass,asR30,forwhichasignificantadverseeffecthasalsobeenindicatedaspartoftheroadtrafficnoiseassessmentforreceptorsaroundtheMainSite.ThepredictedsignificantadverseeffectsatbothreceptorsarisefromminorincreasesinroadtrafficnoiseintermsofimpactmagnituderesultinginnoiseexposureabovetheSOAEL.
Impact Magnitudes8.5.108 TheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.16alsoshowthatthereisamixtureofimpactmagnitudes
predictedatthereceptorsclosetotheotherhighwayworksforthe2031DSscenarios.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 39
8.5.109 ItcanbeseenthatminorbeneficialimpactsarepredictedatR60duringboththedayandnight-timeperiods.ThisoutcomemeansthattherequirementofGovernmentpolicyassetoutinthe3rdbulletpointofparagraph5.195oftheNPSNNismet(seeparagraph8.2.9above).AmoderateadverseimpactispredictedatR58duringthenight-timeperiodonly.Theotherimpactsconsistofminoradverseandnegligiblemagnitudes.
Noise Insulation Regulations (Roads)8.5.110 Onereceptorhasbeenidentifiedasbeinglikelytobeeligibleforanofferofmitigation.ThisisR57
TheLodge,thesamereceptorwhereasignificantadverseeffectisexpectedasdiscussedabove.
Noise Action Planning Important Areas8.5.111 Asstatedinparagraph8.4.18above,therearethreeroadImportantAreasinthevicinityofthe
ProposedDevelopment.OneoftheseImportantAreasencompassesthesectionoftheA508asitpassesthroughGraftonRegis.TherelevantreceptormostrepresentativeofthisareaisR62.
8.5.112 TheassessmenttablesinAppendix8.16showthatnosignificantadverseeffectsoradverseimpactsasaresultoftheProposedDevelopmentareexpectedatthisreceptorinthe2031futureyearscenario.Theexpectedimpactmagnitudesforthe2031DSscenariosarenegligibleduringboththedayandnight-timeperiods.
8.5.113 ItispossiblethattheexistingnoiseissuesassociatedwiththisroadtrafficnoiseImportantAreacouldbemitigated,ifpracticable,byuseofalownoiseroadsurface,suchasathinsurfacecourse.Theviabilityofthispotentialmitigationmeasurewouldbediscussedwiththelocalhighwayauthorityduringthedetaileddesignapprovalprocess,asinsomesituationstheincreasedmaintenancerequirementsrestrictthepotentialuseofthistypeofmitigation.ItisnotconsideredthatthereareanyotherpracticableopportunitiestoaddresstheexistingnoiseissuesassociatedwiththisroadtrafficnoiseIAwithregardtoparagraph5.200oftheNPSNN.
Summary8.5.114 TheassessmentofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasaresultoftheProposed
Developmentintheareasaroundtheotherhighwayworkshasshownthatapotentiallysignificanteffectisexpectedatonereceptor.
8.5.115 Theassessmenthasalsoshownthatthereareavarietyofimpactmagnitudesexpectedattheotherreceptors,ingeneralnegligibleandminor,withthelatterincludingbothbeneficialandadverse impacts.
8.5.116 TheremaybeanopportunitytoreduceroadtrafficnoiselevelsattheNoiseActionPlanningImportantAreaatGraftonRegisifpracticable,butthiswouldrequirefurtherdiscussionwiththelocalhighwayauthorityduringthedetaileddesignapprovalprocess.
Road Traffic Noise – Triggered Data Links8.5.117 Thissectiondealswiththeassessmentofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasaresultof
theProposedDevelopmentonthetriggereddatalinks,i.e.roadsinthewidertransportmodelthathavemetcertaincriteriaintermsoftheincreaseintrafficflows(seesection8.3forfurtherdetails).Intotal,sixsuchroadshavebeenidentified.
8.5.118 Aspreviouslydiscussed,roadtrafficnoisefromthetriggereddatalinkshasbeenpredictedasadaytimebasicnoiselevel(BNL)forthefutureyearDMandDSscenarioswherecertaincriteriahavebeenmet.Thismeansthatthepredictedlevelsapplytoareferencedistanceof10mfromtheroadratherthanataspecificreceptor.Aspotentialnoisechangeisakeyconsideration,thisapproachwouldenablethescaleofanynoiseimpacttobedetermined.Dependingonthelocation,theassessmentyearshasbeeneither2021or2031.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 40
8.5.119 Table1ofAppendix8.17presentstheassessmentofanyexpectedsignificantadverseeffectsandtheimpactmagnitudesinaccordancewithTable8.9.ThetableincludesthepredicteddaytimeroadtrafficnoiselevelspresentedasLAeq,16hrvalues.
Significant Adverse Effects8.5.120 ItcanbeseenfromtheassessmenttableinAppendix8.17thatnosignificantadverseeffectshave
beenpredictedasaresultofthechangeinroadtrafficnoisefortherelevantfutureyearscenarios.
Impact Magnitudes8.5.121 Table1inAppendix8.17alsoshowsthatthereareavarietyofimpactmagnitudespredictedfor
therelevantfutureyearscenarios.
8.5.122 Itcanbeseenthatnochangeandnegligibleimpactsarepredictedattwolocations,andminoradverseimpactsattwoothers.ThepredictedDSroadtrafficnoiselevelsarebelowtheLOAELatthetworemaininglocations,andthereforenoadverseimpacthasbeenidentified.
Summary8.5.123 TheassessmentofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasaresultoftheProposed
Developmentonthesixtriggereddatalinkshasshownthatnosignificantadversenoiseeffectsareexpectedintheimmediateareasaroundthecorrespondingroads.
8.5.124 Theassessmenthasalsoshownthatthereareavarietyofimpactmagnitudesexpectedatintheimmediateareaaroundtheroadswith,atworse,minoradverseimpactspredicted.
Operational Sound from SRFI Activities at the Main Site8.5.125 Thissectiondealswiththeassessmentofsoundfromoperationalactivitiestakingplaceatthe
SRFI.Anoverviewofthedifferentsourcesandactivitiesincludedisgiveninsection8.3.Fulldetailsofallmodellingassumptions,includingsourcelevels,areprovidedinAppendix8.5.ThepredictionsassumethattheSRFIisfullyoperational,meaningthatrobustandworst-caseassumptions have been considered for this aspect.
8.5.126 Asdiscussedinsection8.3,theprimaryassessmenthasbeenbasedontheprinciplesofBS4142:2014.Tomakeaninitialestimateoftheimpactofthesourcebeingassessed,twovaluesarerequired.Thefirstistheratinglevelofthesourcetobeassessed.Thisisthespecificsoundlevelthat,ifrequired,hasbeencorrectedtoaccountforcertainacousticfeaturesthancanincreasetheextentoftheimpact.
8.5.127 TheoperationalsoundfromtheSRFIwouldbecomplexinnature,composedofdifferentsourcesindifferentlocationsaroundthesite.Asacautiousapproach,a+3dB(A)penaltyhasbeenappliedtoallsourcesofanindustrialnatureontheSRFItoaccountforfeaturesthatmaybereadilydistinctive at the receptors.
8.5.128 Thesecondvaluerequiredisthetypicalbackgroundsoundlevelatthereceptor,againstwhichtheratingleveliscompared.Asdiscussedinsection8.4,ithasbeenrecognisedthatwinddirectionhasastronginfluenceonthemeasurednoiselevelsintheareaaroundtheMainSite.Consequently,typicalbackgroundsoundlevelshavebeenderivedforeachsurveylocationusingthemodalvalueofthesurveyresultsfortwowindconditions:broadlysouth-westerlywindsandbroadlynorth-easterlywinds.Theinitialestimateofimpactisconsideredunderbothwindconditions,althoughitneedstobeborneinmindthat,asintherestoftheUK,theprevailingwinddirectionintheareaisbroadlysouth-westerly.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 41
8.5.129 Alsodiscussedinsection8.4,wherethedistributionofmeasuredbackgroundsoundlevelswasnottypical,thelowerquartileofthevalueshasbeenidentifiedandusedasanadditionalsensitivitytest.Thetypicalandsensitivitytestvalueshavebeencorrectedtorelatetheresultsfromthemonitoringlocationtotherelevantreceptorlocationifrequired.FurtherdetailsofthebackgroundsoundderivationprocesscanbefoundinAppendix8.11.
8.5.130 Theinitialestimateofimpactisdeterminedbysubtractingthetypicalbackgroundsoundlevelfromtheratinglevelandconsideringthedifference.Theestimatecanthenbemodifiedbytakingcontextintoaccount,suchastheabsolutelevelofthespecificsoundandthelikelyfaçadeinsulationoftherelevantdwelling.
8.5.131 RatinglevelsforoperationalactivitiestakingplaceattheSRFIhavebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptorsforthepeakhourduringthedayandthepeak15minutesduringthenight.TherelevantreceptorsarelistedinTable8.12andshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.
8.5.132 Table1ofAppendix8.18presentsthecomparisonofthepredictedratinglevelswiththetypicalbackgroundsoundlevelsattherelevantreceptorsforbothwindconditionsduringthedaytimeperiod.Table2oftheappendixpresentsthecorrespondingsensitivitytestcomparisonswhererequired.Tables3and4oftheappendixpresentthesamecomparisonsforthenight-timeperiod.
Assessment of Operational Sound Impacts – Daytime – Broadly South-Westerly Winds8.5.133 ItcanbeseenfromTables1and2ofAppendix8.18thatunderbroadlysouth-westerlywinds
duringthedaytime,mostrelevantreceptorsareexpectedtoexperiencelowimpactsfromoperationalsoundfromtheSRFI.
8.5.134 AtthereceptorsfromR2toR13,broadlytothenorth-eastoftheMainSiteandrelativelyclosetotheM1,thepredictedratinglevelsareatleast10dB(A)belowboththemodalandanysensitivitytestbackgroundsoundlevels.Asaresult,nosignificantadverseeffectsoradverseimpactsareexpectedduetooperationalsoundatthesereceptors.
8.5.135 AsthelocationofthereceptorsmovesfurtherawayfromtheM1tothewest,thebackgroundsoundlevelsbecomelowerasroadtrafficnoiselevelsdecreaseduetoboththegreaterdistancetothemotorwayandtheeffectofthebroadlysouth-westerlywinds.
8.5.136 This,alongwithaslightincreaseinratinglevelsduetothelocationoftherailterminalonthewestsideoftheMainSite,resultsinthedifferencebetweenratingandbackgroundsoundlevelsbeingreduced,andatseveralreceptorstothewestandsouthofthesite,theratinglevelisexpectedtoexceedthebackgroundsoundlevelunderbroadlysouth-westerlywinds.
8.5.137 TheratinglevelsatfivereceptorsinthevicinityofR21toR28exceedthecorrespondingmodalbackgroundsoundlevelsbyupto6dB(A),asatR28CourteenhallRoadatthesouthofthesite,andthesensitivitytestbackgroundsoundlevels,wherepresent,byupto7dB(A),asatR25BarnLanedirectlytothewestofthesite.
8.5.138 Withouttakingcontextintoaccount,theimpactsatthesereceptorscouldbeconsideredaspotentiallyadverse,thougharenotsignificantlyadverse.
8.5.139 However,consideringthecontext,especiallywithrespecttotheabsolutelevelsofpredictedsound,theratinglevelspredictedatthefivereceptorsrangefrom41upto45dBLAr,1hr,aspredictedatR25BarnLane.WhenthesearecomparedtothedaytimeexternalguidelinedesirablesoundlevelsfordwellingsfromBS8233:2014,assummarisedinTable8.11,theratinglevelsareatleast5dB(A)belowthelowerthresholdforexternalamenityspace.Assumingatypicalreductionof12dB(A)forexternalsoundpassingthroughanopenwindowintoahabitableroom,theratinglevelsareatleast2dB(A)lowerthanthelowerthresholdforrestinginsidelivingroomsduringthedaytime.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 42
8.5.140 Furthermore,noneofthepredictedratinglevelsatthereceptorsinthevicinityofR21toR28areexpectedtoexceedtheLOAELeitheroutsideorwithindwellingsduringthedaytime.
8.5.141 ItshouldbenotedthattheguidelinedesirablelevelsinTable8.11areforthefull16hourdaytimeperiod,whereastheassessmenthasconsideredthepeakhourofthedayintermsofSRFIoperationalactivity.Therefore,itwouldbeexpectedthatatleastsomeotherhoursofthedaywouldfeaturelowerlevelsofoperationalsoundfromtheSRFI,furtherreducingtheimpact.
8.5.142 Insummary,someadverseimpactsareindicatedinitiallyforthedaytimepeakhourofSRFIoperationsunderbroadlysouth-westerlywindsatsomereceptorstothewestandsouthoftheMainSite.However,whentheimpactmagnitudesandpredictedabsolutelevelsofoperationalsoundaretakenintoaccount,nosignificantadverseeffectsoradverseimpactsareexpected.
Assessment of Operational Sound Impacts – Daytime – Broadly North-Easterly Winds8.5.143 ItcanbeseenfromTables1and2ofAppendix8.18thatunderbroadlynorth-easterlywinds
duringthedaytime,almostalltherelevantreceptorsareexpectedtoexperiencelowimpactsfromoperationalsoundfromtheSRFIaccordingtotheprinciplesofBS4142:2014.
8.5.144 WhiletherelevantreceptorsfromR2toR11aretotheeastoftheM1,theyaregenerallycloseenoughtotheroadsoasnotbetobesignificantlyaffectedbyanypotentialdecreaseinroadtrafficnoiselevelsduetobroadlynorth-easterlywinds.Conversely,mostofthereceptorstothewestarefurtherfromtheroadandthereforeexperienceincreasedbackgroundsoundlevelsundertheseconditions.Asaresult,nosignificantadverseeffectsoradverseimpactsareexpectedduetooperationalsoundatallreceptorsexceptR23andR25.
8.5.145 AtreceptorsR23andR25,tothewestofthesite,themodalbackgroundsoundlevelsofthetwowinddirectionsarethesame,thoughunderbroadlynorth-easterlywindstherearenoadditionalsensitivitytestvalues.Asaresult,theratinglevelsatthereceptorsare3-4dB(A)abovethemodalbackgroundsoundlevels,andtheresultingimpactscouldbeconsideredaspotentiallyadverse.
8.5.146 However,consideringthecontext,especiallywithrespecttotheabsolutelevelsofpredictedsound,theratinglevelspredictedatthetworeceptorsare44-45dBLAr,1hr,andthereforetheassessmentisthesameasforbroadlysouth-westerlywinds.TheresultisthatneitherofthepredictedratinglevelsatreceptorsR23andR25areexpectedtoexceedtheLOAELeitheroutsideorwithindwellingsduringthedaytime.
8.5.147 Insummary,thepredictedratinglevelsforthedaytimepeakhourofSRFIoperationsunderbroadlynorth-easterlywindsexceedthemodaland/orsensitivitytestbackgroundsoundvaluesattworeceptorsatthewestoftheMainSite.However,nosignificantadverseeffectsareexpected,and,oncethepredictedabsolutelevelsofoperationalsoundhavebeentakenintoaccount,noadverseimpactsarelikely.
Assessment of Operational Sound Impacts – Night-Time – Broadly South-Westerly Winds8.5.148 ItcanbeseenfromTables3and4ofAppendix8.18thatunderbroadlysouth-westerlywinds
duringthenight-time,mostrelevantreceptorsareexpectedtoexperiencelowimpactsfromoperationalsoundfromtheSRFIbasedontheprinciplesofBS4142:2014.
8.5.149 AtthereceptorsfromR2toR13,totheeastoftheMainSiteandrelativelyclosetotheM1,thepredictedratinglevelsarealmostallbelowboththemodalandanysensitivitytestbackgroundsoundlevels.TheratinglevelatR13MapleFarm–SouthFaçadeis2dB(A)lessthatthemodalvalueandexceedsthesensitivitytestvaluebyjust1dB(A).Consequently,nosignificantadverseeffectsoradverseimpactsareexpectedduetooperationalsoundatreceptorsR2toR13.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 43
8.5.150 Asinthedaytimeassessmentunderbroadlysouth-westerlywinds,duetolowerbackgroundsoundslevelsattherelevantreceptorsfurtherawayfromtheM1tothewest,andslightlyhigherratinglevelsduetotheproximityoftherailterminal,theratinglevelexceedsthebackgroundsoundlevelatseveralreceptorstothewestandsouthofthesite.Asbackgroundlevelsaretypicallyloweratnight,thisisexpectedtooccuratninereceptors,ahighernumberthanduringtheday.
8.5.151 TheratinglevelsattheninereceptorsinthevicinityofR16toR29exceedthecorrespondingmodalbackgroundsoundlevelsbyupto8dB(A),asatR28CourteenhallRoadatthesouthofthesite,andthesensitivitytestbackgroundsoundlevels,wherepresent,byupto9dB(A),asatR23BarnLaneandR25BarnLane.
8.5.152 Withouttakingcontextintoaccount,theimpactsattheninereceptorscouldbeconsideredaspotentiallyadverse,andsomeaspossiblysignificantlyadverse.
8.5.153 However,consideringthecontextespeciallywithrespecttotheabsolutelevelsofpredictedsound,theratinglevelspredictedattheninereceptorsrangefrom42dBLAr,15minupto45dBLAr,15min,aspredictedatR23BarnLandandR25BarnLane.Assumingatypicalreductionof12dB(A)forexternalsoundpassingthroughanopenwindowintoahabitableroom,theinternalratinglevelsareequaltoorupto3dB(A)greaterthanthelowerthresholdforbedrooms,butbelowtheupper threshold in all cases.
8.5.154 ItshouldbenotedthattheguidelinedesirablelevelsinTable8.11applytothefull8hournight-timeperiod,whereastheassessmenthasbeenbasedonthepeak15minutesofthenightintermsofSRFIoperationalactivity.Therefore,itwouldbeexpectedthatatleastsomeother15minuteperiodsofthenightwouldfeaturelowerlevelsofoperationalsoundfromtheSRFI.
8.5.155 Onthisbasis,allofthepredictedratinglevelsattheninereceptorsinthevicinityR16toR29areexpectedtoexceedtheLOAELwithindwellingsduringthenight-timewithwindowsopenduringthepeak15minuteperiod.
8.5.156 Insummary,thepredictedratinglevelsexceedthemodaland/orsensitivitytestbackgroundsoundvaluesatsomereceptorsatthewestandsouthoftheMainSiteduringthepeak15minuteperiod.Whencontextistakenintoaccount,nosignificantadverseimpactsoreffectsareexpectedinthissituation.Itispossiblethatsomeadverseimpactsoreffectsmayoccur,butthiswouldbedependentonhowoftenthroughoutanightthepeakactivityoccurs.
Assessment of Operational Sound Impacts – Night-Time – Broadly North-Easterly Winds8.5.157 ItcanbeseenfromTables3and4ofAppendix8.18thatunderbroadlynorth-easterlywinds
duringthenight-time,almostalltherelevantreceptorsareexpectedtoexperiencelowimpactsfromoperationalsoundfromtheSRFIaccordingtotheprinciplesofBS4142:2014.
8.5.158 WhiletherelevantreceptorsfromR2toR11aretotheeastoftheM1,theyaregenerallycloseenoughtotheroadsoasnotbetobesignificantlyaffectedbyanypotentialdecreaseinroadtrafficnoiselevelsduetobroadlynorth-easterlywinds.Conversely,mostofthereceptorstothewestarefurtherfromtheroadandthereforeexperienceincreasedbackgroundsoundlevels.
8.5.159 Theratinglevelsattworeceptors,R23BarnLaneandR25BarnLane,arepredictedtoexceedthemodalbackgroundsoundlevel,butonlyby1dB(A).Neitherreceptorhasasensitivitytestvalue.Onthisbasis,itisconsideredhighlyunlikelythatanadverseimpactwouldbeexpectedateitherreceptor.
8.5.160 Insummary,nosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedinthissituation.Furthermore,noadverseimpactsarelikely.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 44
Assessment of Operational Sound Impacts – Maximum Noise Levels at Night8.5.161 Asdiscussedinsection8.3,thepotentialimpactofmaximumnoiselevelsfromoperational
activitiestakingplaceattheSRFIduringthenight-timehasalsobeenconsidered.
8.5.162 Thisisbasedonthecomparisonofthepredictedmaximumnoiselevelswiththeguidelinecriterionof60dBLAFmaxattheoutsidefaçadeofthereceptor,whichshouldnotbeexceededmorethat10-15timespernightforgoodsleep.ThisisgenerallyacceptedastheLOAEL.
8.5.163 MaximumnoiselevelsfromoperationalactivitiestakingplaceattheSRFIhavebeenpredictedattherelevantreceptors,whicharelistedinTable8.12andshowninFigures8.1,8.2and8.3attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.6.Furtherdetailsofallmodellingassumptions,includingsourcelevels,areprovidedinAppendix8.5.
8.5.164 ItcanbeseenfromTable1ofAppendix8.18thatnopredictedmaximumnoiselevelsareexpectedtoexceedthe60dBLAFmaxattheoutsidefaçadeofanyrelevantreceptor.
8.5.165 Insummary,nosignificantadverseeffectsoradverseimpactsareexpectedasresultofmaximumnoiselevelsfromoperationalactivitiestakingplaceattheSRFIduringthenight-timeperiod.
Summary of Operational Sound Impacts8.5.166 Theassessmentofthepotentialimpactsofsoundfromoperationalactivitiestakingplaceatthe
SRFIhasshownthatnosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedatanyoftherelevantreceptorswhentheSRFIisfullyoperationalduringboththedayandnight-timeperiods.
8.5.167 TheassessmenthasalsoshownthatsomeadverseimpactsmightoccuratsomeoftherelevantreceptorstothewestandsouthoftheMainSiteduringthenight-timeperiodunderbroadlysouth-westerlywinds.
Summary of Expected Significant Adverse Effects8.5.168 Basedontheresultsoftheassessmentsofthepotentialsourcesofnoiseandvibrationassociated
withtheProposedDevelopment,Table8.19summarisesthereceptorsatwhichsignificantadverseeffectshavebeenidentified,togetherwiththecorrespondingsources.
8.5.169 TheresultshavetakenintoaccountanymitigationthatitisinherentlyintegratedintothedesignoftheProposedDevelopment,suchasthelandscapingbundsaroundtheMainSiteandRoadeBypass,exceptintheassessmentofconstructionnoise,meaningthatrobustassumptionshavebeenconsideredpriortothedevelopmentbeingcompleted.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 45
Tabl
e 8.
19 S
umm
ary
of e
xpec
ted
sign
ifica
nt a
dver
se e
ffect
s
Des
crip
tion
Loca
tion
Rec
epto
rD
S Sc
enar
ioIm
pact
M
agni
tude
Res
ultin
g Ex
posu
reSi
gnifi
cant
Addi
tiona
l Sp
ecifi
c M
itiga
tion
Prop
osed
Con
struction
Noi
se
Road
e By
pass
si
te
R38Hyde
Farm
N/A
N/A
≥SOAE
LYe
sYe
s
R41Blisworth
Ro
ad–North
Façade
N/A
N/A
≥SOAE
LYe
sYe
s
Railw
ay
Noi
se
(maximum
no
iselevels)
Thre
e lo
catio
ns
adjacent
tora
ilway
R01Woo
d-pe
cker
Way
2043Nig
ht
One
ad
ditio
nal
nois
e in
duce
d aw
akening
N/A
Yes
No
R28Collingtree
Road
North
N/A
Yes
No
R54As
hton
RdW
N/A
Yes
No
Road
Traffic
Noi
se
Arou
nd
Main
Site
R27Blisworth
HighStreet
2021Day
Minor
Ad
verse
≥SOAE
LYe
sNo(Tem
porarySho
rt-Term
Effe
ct)
R30WestL
odge
Cottages–Ea
st
Façade
2031Day/
Night
Minor
Ad
verse
≥SOAE
LYe
sYe
s
Other
Highw
ay
Works
R57Th
eLo
dge
2031Day
Minor
Ad
verse
≥SOAE
LYe
sYe
s
CHAPTER 8 - PG 46
Uncertainty and Limitations of the Assessment8.5.170 TheuncertaintyandlimitationsoftheassessmentarediscussedinAppendix8.19.
8.6 MITIGATION
Construction Noise and Vibration8.6.1 Thissectiondealswiththeproposedmitigationoftemporarynoiseandvibrationimpactsand
effectsthatmayresultfromconstructionworksassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopment.
8.6.2 Ingeneral,constructionnoiseandvibrationwillbemanagedbytheuseofbestpracticablemeans(BPM),i.e.theuseofallreasonablemeasurestominimiseconstructionnoiseandvibration.ThiswillfollowtheprinciplesoftheguidancewithinBS5228:2009+A1:2014parts1and238andmayincludethefollowingwhereappropriate:
• Selectionofappropriateequipmentandconstructionmethods;
• Planttobelocatedasfarawayasisreasonablypracticablefromnoise-sensitivereceptors;
• Staticplant/equipmentfittedwithsuitableenclosuresorscreeningwherepracticable;
• Temporaryhoardings/screensaroundthesiteboundaryorspecificactivitiesasappropriate;
• SitepersonnelinstructedonBPMtoreducenoiseandvibrationaspartoftheirinductiontrainingandasrequiredpriortospecificworkactivities;
• Appropriatemanagementofworkinghoursfornoisiertasks;and
• Liaisonwithresidentsinadvanceofworkscommencingtoprovideinformationregardingtheprogramme.
8.6.3 Regardingtheresultsofthepredictedconstructionnoiselevelsdiscussedinsection8.5,whilethemajorityarebelowtheLOAELwhenincloseproximitytotherelevantreceptors,potentiallysignificantadversetemporarynoiseeffectshavebeenpredictedattworeceptors,R38HydeFarmandR41BlisworthRoad–NorthFaçade,whentwoactivitiesassociatedwiththeRoadeBypassworksareinrelativelycloseproximity:theinitialenablingworksandthefirstphaseofroadconstruction.
8.6.4 ItisexpectedthatbyuseofBPM,particularlythroughuseoftemporaryscreensaroundtheconstructionactivities,thatthenoisefromtheseactivitiescouldbeattenuatedsothatthepredictedconstructionnoiselevelswouldbebelowtheSOAELinallinstances.
8.6.5 Asdiscussedinsection8.5,thepredictednoiselevelsforconstructionoftheSRFIandRoadeBypassarebasedonestimatesoftheplantandequipmentlikelytobeusedfortheconstructionactivities,aswellastheirusageduringatypicalworkingday.TheuseofotherspecificBPMmeasureswillbeconsideredforallconstructionworksassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentanddescribedintherelevantPhasespecificConstructionEnvironmentalManagementPlan(P-CEMP)asrequiredbytheDCO,whendetailedinformationregardingtheproposedconstructionmethodsareavailable.Thismayalsoincludeanoisemonitoringregimefortheworks.
38 BS 5228-1:2009+A1:2014 – Code of Practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites, Part 1: Noise;
BS 5228-2:2009+A1:2014 – Code of Practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites, Part 2: Vibration
CHAPTER 8 - PG 47
Summary8.6.6 Mitigationofthetemporarynoiseandvibrationimpactsandeffectsresultingfromconstruction
worksassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentwillbemanagedthroughuseofBPM,suchascarefullocationofplantanduseoftemporaryscreensaroundconstructionactivities.SpecificBPMmeasureswillbeconsideredanddescribedintherelevantPhasespecificConstructionEnvironmentalManagementPlans(P-CEMPs).
8.6.7 RegardingthesignificantadversenoiseeffectspredictedatthereceptorsR38andR41duringcertainconstructionactivitiesassociatedwiththeRoadeBypassworks,itisexpectedthatthesecanbeattenuatedthroughtheuseoftemporaryscreenssuchthattheconstructionnoisewouldbebelowtheSOAELinallinstances.
8.6.8 Asaresult,itisconsideredthatallexpectedsignificantadversenoiseeffectsresultingfromtheconstructionworkshavebeenappropriatelymitigated.
Railway Noise and Vibration8.6.9 Forthemostpart,nosignificantadverseeffectsoradverseimpactsareexpectedasaresultof
thepotentialchangeinrailwaynoiseorrailwayinducedvibrationassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentforanyofthefutureyearscenariosatanyoftherelevantreceptors.Theexceptionsarethreelocationswhenin2043,thenationalraillongtermplanninghorizon,therecouldjustbeasignificantadverseeffectduetoapossibleincreaseofonenoiseinducedawakeninganightinthat scenario.
8.6.10 Inconsideringmitigationoptions,itneedstoberecognisedthattheresultsoftheassessmenthaveonlyjustindicatedasignificantadverseeffectforthesituationsome25yearsahead.AsmentionedinAppendix8.19,thereisadegreeofuncertaintyassociatedwiththisassessment.Thisincludesthenoiselevelsemittedfromtherollingstock.Asdiscussedinsection8.5,itislikelythatsomeofthefreightlocomotivesusedforthepredictionofrailwaynoisefrombothSRFIandnon-SRFImovementswouldgeneratelowerlevelsofnoisethanthosecurrentlyassumed.
8.6.11 WorkisbeingcarriedoutataEuropeanleveltoreducethenoisefromfreighttrainsanditislikelythatby2043,quieterrollingstockwillbeinusecomparedwiththatassumedforthisassessment.Therefore,thepotentialsignificantadverseeffectwouldbemitigatedbytheuseofquieterrollingstock.
Road Traffic Noise – Around Main Site8.6.12 Thissectiondealswiththeproposedmitigationofanyexpectedsignificantadversenoiseeffects
resultingfromthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentontheroadsaroundtheMainSite.
8.6.13 Asdiscussedinsection8.5andsummarisedinTable8.19,asignificantadversenoiseeffecthasbeenpredictedfor2031DSatonereceptor,R30WestLodgeCottages-EastFaçade.ThisislocatedontheA508justtothesouthoftheMainSite.ThisisassociatedwithaminoradverseimpactmagnitudethatresultsinanexposureabovetheSOAEL.
Mitigation of Significant Adverse Effects8.6.14 RegardingthesignificantadverseimpactpredictedatR30forthe2031DSdayandnight-time
scenarios,mitigationwillbeappliedthroughimplementingtheNoiseInsulationRegulationsfortheresidentialpropertiesrepresentedbythatreceptor.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 48
Mitigation of Other Adverse Impacts8.6.15 Whilenotidentifiedassignificant,considerationhasalsobeengiventothepredictedimpactsat
theotherrelevantreceptorsaroundtheMainSite,asrequiredbytheNPSNN.Asdiscussedinsection8.5,thepredictedmagnitudesarelargelynegligible,andofthesmallnumberofexpectedminoradverseimpacts,themajorityarenolongerpresentfollowingtheopeningoftheRoadeBypass.Onthisbasis,noadditionalmitigationisrequired.
Summary8.6.16 ForreceptorR30,whereasignificantadversenoiseeffectresultingfromthepotentialchangein
roadtrafficnoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentontheroadsaroundtheMainSiteisexpected,theNoiseInsulationRegulationswillbeimplementedfortheaffecteddwellingstoprovidemitigation.
8.6.17 Asaresult,itisconsideredthatallexpectedsignificantadversenoiseeffectsresultingfromthechangeinroadtrafficnoiseontheroadsaroundtheMainSitehavebeenappropriatelymitigated.
Road Traffic Noise – Roade Bypass8.6.18 Nosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedduetothepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasa
resultoftheProposedDevelopmentontheroadsaroundtheRoadeBypasssite,aswellasonthebypassitself,foranyofthefutureyearscenariosatanyoftherelevantreceptors.
Mitigation of Other Adverse Impacts8.6.19 Whilenosignificantadverseeffectsareexpected,itisrecognisedfromtheassessmentinsection
8.5thatfollowingtheopeningoftheRoadeBypass,asreflectedinthe2031DSscenarios,avarietyofbeneficialandadverseimpactsarepredictedattherelevantreceptors.Thisincludesseveralmajoradverseimpacts,withchangesofmorethan10dB(A),butwhichresultinalevelbelowtheSOAELwhentheDMandDSscenariosarecompared.
8.6.20 InaccordancewiththeGovernmentpolicyaimtomitigateandminimiseadverseimpacts,theeffectofadditionalmitigationmeasureshasbeenanalysed,inadditiontothelandscapebundingincludedinthedesignofthebypass.
8.6.21 Followingareviewofthedifferentmitigationoptionsavailable,thetargeteduseoffencingontopofthelandscapebundinghasbeenutilised,followingtherecommendationsgiveninparagraph5.198oftheNPSNN.Thisincreasestheoverallheightofthebarrierandprovidesadditionalattenuationoftheroadtrafficnoisefromthebypassattherelevantreceptorsandothernearbyproperties.
8.6.22 ThelocationofthefencingisshowninFigure8.6attheendofthischapterandinAppendix8.20andisfocusedaroundthecentralroundaboutandconnectingroadtothesouthernroundabout.Thislocationwasselectedtobemostbeneficialtothosereceptorswherethegreatestadverseimpacts were otherwise predicted.
8.6.23 Theadditionalmitigationisamixtureof2mand3mhighfencingandisconsideredthemaximumpracticableheighttousefollowingcoordinationwiththelandscapeconsultant.Somesectionsofthefencinghavesoundabsorptivecoveringsfacingtheroadtoreducereflectedroadtrafficnoise.
8.6.24 Tables1and5ofAppendix8.15includethepredicteddayandnight-timeroadtrafficnoiselevelsforthe2031DSscenarioswiththeadditionalfencinginplace.Tables4and8oftheAppendixpresenttheassessmentofanyexpectedsignificantadverseeffectsandtheimpactmagnitudesforthe2031DSscenariosincludingthefencing.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 49
8.6.25 Whencomparedtothe2031DSscenarioswithoutthefencing,thenumberofpredictedbeneficialandnegligibleimpactsremainsthesameforboththedayandnight-timeperiods.However,thenumberofmoderateandmajoradverseimpactsduringthedaydecreasesbytwoandonerespectively,withnomajoradverseimpactsremaining.Duringthenight,thenumberofmajoradverseimpactsdecreasesbythree,withthenumberofmoderateadverseimpactsincreasingbytwo as a result.
8.6.26 Thepropertyatwhichthehighestincreasesinroadtrafficnoisebetweenthe2031DMandDSscenariosareexpectedisHydeFarm,representedbyreceptorsR38andR38a.Whentheresultsofthe2031DSscenarioswithandwithouttheadditionalfencingarecompared,thepredictedroadtrafficnoiselevelsatthesereceptorsarereducedby4to5dB(A).
8.6.27 Twoofthereceptorspredictedtoexperiencemajoradverseimpactsinthe2031DSnight-timescenario,regardlessofadditionalfencing,areR39andR39a.Thisisprimarilybecausetheyareclosetothebypassasitcrossesovertherailwaytracks,andforstructuralreasons,thebridgeparapetsarelimitedtoaheightof1.9m.Therefore,limitedscreeningofroadtrafficnoisepassingoverthebridgeispossible.
8.6.28 Thisoutcome,however,isbasedonconsideringroadtrafficnoiseonly.Whilstroadtrafficandrailwaynoiseareofdifferentcharacter,thetworeceptorsalreadyexperiencenoisefromthenearbyrailway.Togiveanindicationofwhatacombinedimpactmaybe,thepredictedroadtrafficandrailwaynoiselevelsatR39andR39ahavebeencombinedforthe2033/2031DMandDSnight-timescenariosandtheresultsconsideredinaccordancewithTables8.5and8.10.ThisindicatesthatthechangeincombinedroadtrafficandrailwaynoisewouldreducetoanegligibleimpactatR39andaminoradverseimpactatR39a.
8.6.29 Ithasbeenshownthatasaresultoftheproposedlandscapebundingplusadditionalfencing,theadverseimpactsduetotheintroductionoftheRoadeBypasshavebeenmitigatedandreducedtoaminimumatthemostaffectedreceptors,inaccordancewithGovernmentpolicyaims.
Further Analysis of Change in Road Traffic Noise Levels due to Roade Bypass8.6.30 Ashasbeenpreviouslydiscussed,thereceptorsselectedfortheassessmentofpotentialchange
inroadtrafficnoiseontheroadsaroundtheRoadeBypasssite,aswellasthebypassitself,donotreflectthetotalnumberofdwellingsthatmayexperiencebeneficialoradverseimpacts.Toassessthisaspectfurther,twoadditionalanalyseshavebeencarriedout.
8.6.31 Figure8.7attheendofthischaptercontainsadrawingshowingRoadeasitwouldappearwiththebypass,alsoshowninAppendix8.21.Overlayingthedrawingarecolouredcontoursindicatingthechangeinroadtrafficnoiselevelsbetweenthe2031DMandDS(includingadditionalfencing)daytimescenariosataheightof1.5m.Thekeyisshowninthebottomright-handcorner.
8.6.32 Itcanbeseenthattheareaswhereareductioninroadtrafficnoiselevelsisexpected,primarilythroughthecentreofRoadealongtheA508,appeartoaffectmorepropertiesthantheareasshowinganincreaseinroadtrafficnoisearoundthebypassroute,whicharelessheavilypopulated.Theredcontouralsoshowshow,asaresultofthelandscapebundingandfencing,thehighestincreasesinroadtrafficnoisearerestricted,particularlyontheeastsideofthebypassfacingRoade.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 50
8.6.33 UsingthechangecontoursandOrdnanceSurveyAddressBasedata,ithasbeenpossibletoestimatethenumberofresidentialpropertieswithinthelimitsofthedrawingshowninFigure8.7thatwouldexperiencecertainapproximatelevelsofroadtrafficnoiseforboththe2031DMandDSdaytimescenariosandcalculatethechangeinnumbersbetweenthetwoscenarios.TheresultsarepresentedinTable8.20below.
Table 8.20 Estimated number of residential properties in Roade exposed to different levels of road traffic noise for 2031 DM and DS daytime scenarios
Predicted LAeq,16hr (dB) from Road Traffic Noise
Number of residential properties
2031 DM 2031 DS w/Mit
Change from 2031 DM to DS
38 2 1 -143 479 415 -6448 460 553 +9353 138 160 +2258 107 74 -3363 23 7 -1668 1 0 -1
8.6.34 Table8.20indicatesthat,broadlyspeaking,asaresultoftheRoadeBypassandtheproposedmitigation,thenumberofresidentialpropertiesexposedtohigherlevelsofroadtrafficnoisewouldbereduced.Inparticular,therewouldbeareductionofabout70%inthenumberofpropertieswithnoiseexposuresabovetheSOAEL.Thenumberofresidentialpropertiesthatwouldexperiencelowerlevelsofnoisewouldalsoincreaseoncethebypassisinoperation.
8.6.35 Onthisbasis,itcanbeseenthat,ingeneral,theeffectoftheRoadeBypasssatisfiesGovernmentpolicywithregardtocontributingtotheimprovementofhealthandqualityoflifethroughtheeffectivemanagementandcontrolofnoise.
8.6.36 ItshouldalsobenotedthatasignificantproportionoftheresidentialpropertieslocatedinthecentreofRoade,whereroadtrafficnoisewillbealleviatedthemost,arewithintheNoiseActionPlanningImportantAreaasdiscussedinsection8.5.
8.6.37 ThechangecontoursshowninFigure8.7alsoindicatehowroadtrafficnoisewillbereducedwithintheRoadeQuarryLocalWildlifeSite(LWS)asaresultoftheRoadeBypass.Itcanbeseenthat,duetothelowervolumeoftraffictravellingontheA508directlyadjacenttotheLWSatthesouthofthevillage,reductionsinroadtrafficnoiseofupto10dB(A)betweenthe2031DMandDSdaytimescenariosareexpected,particularlyatthewesternsideofthesiteclosesttotheA508.
Summary8.6.38 Whilenosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedduetothepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoise
asaresultoftheProposedDevelopmentontheroadsaroundtheRoadeBypasssite,aswellasonthebypassitself,foranyofthefutureyearscenarios,additionalmitigationmeasureshavebeenutilisedtosatisfyGovernmentpolicywithregardtomitigatingandminimisingotheradverseimpacts.ThisfollowstherequirementsregardingmitigationmeasuresintheNPSNN.
8.6.39 Ithasalsobeenshownthatthenumberofresidentialpropertiesexposedtothehighestlevelsofroadtrafficnoiseinthe2031DMdaytimescenarioarelikelytobereducedwiththeopeningofthebypass,indicatinganoverallbeneficialimpactofthescheme.AsimilarreductioninroadtrafficnoiseattheRoadeQuarryLWShasalsobeenindicated.TheseoutcomesmeanthattherequirementofGovernmentpolicyassetoutinthe3rdbulletpointofparagraph5.195oftheNPSNNismet(seeparagraph8.2.9above).
CHAPTER 8 - PG 51
Road Traffic Noise – Other Highway Works8.6.40 Thissectiondealswiththeproposedmitigationofanyexpectedsignificantadversenoiseeffects
resultingfromthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentintheareasaroundtheotherhighwayworkswhereanoise-sensitivepropertyiswithin300mofthe site.
8.6.41 Asdiscussedinsection8.5andsummarisedinTable8.19,asignificantadversenoiseeffecthasbeenpredictedatonereceptor,R57TheLodge,locatedontheA508justtothesouthoftheMainSite.
Mitigation of Significant Adverse Effects8.6.42 RegardingthesignificantadverseimpactpredictedatR57forthe2031DSdaytimescenario,
mitigationwillbeappliedthroughimplementingtheNoiseInsulationRegulationsfortheresidentialpropertiesrepresentedbythatreceptor.
Mitigation of Other Adverse Impacts8.6.43 WhilenotidentifiedassignificantbecausetheresultinglevelisbelowtheSOAEL,consideration
hasalsobeengiventothepredictedimpactsattherelevantreceptorsaroundtheotherhighwayworkssites.Asdiscussedinsection8.5,amoderateadverseimpactispredictedatR58,atthejunctionbetweenStokeRoadandKnockLane,duringthe2031DSnight-timescenario.
8.6.44 Consideringthespaceavailablebetweentheroadandthereceptor,itisunlikelythatinstallationofabarrierwouldbepracticable,especiallyasduringthenight-timethereceptoristhefirst-floorwindowataheightof4.5m.Inaddition,asthesectionofroadisclosetoajunction,roadtrafficisunlikelytobetravellingatsufficientspeedstomakealownoiseroadsurfaceeffective.Onthisbasis,thereisnopracticableopportunitytomitigatethisimpact.
8.6.45 AtlocationsR57aandR59,minoradverseimpactsarepredictedduringthe2031DSnight-scenarioonly.Astheotherhighwayworksarenottakingplaceonthesectionsofroadclosesttothesereceptors,thereisnotconsideredtobeapracticableopportunityforspecificmitigation.
Summary8.6.46 ForreceptorR57,whereasignificantadversenoiseeffectresultingfromthepotentialchange
inroadtrafficnoiseassociatedwiththeProposedDevelopmentintheareasaroundtheotherhighwayworksisexpected,theNoiseInsulationRegulationswillbeimplementedfortheaffecteddwellingstoprovidemitigation.
8.6.47 RegardingthereceptorR58,whichisexpectedtoexperienceamoderateadverseimpactbutwitharesultinglevelwhichisbelowSOAEL,itisconsideredthattherearenopracticableoptionstomitigatethisimpact.ThisisalsothecaseregardingthepredictedminoradverseimpactsatR57aandR59.
Road Traffic Noise – Triggered Data Links8.6.48 Nosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedasaresultofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoise
asaresultoftheProposedDevelopmentonthetriggereddatalinksfortherelevantfutureyearscenariosintheimmediateareasaroundthecorrespondingroads.
Mitigation of Other Adverse Impacts8.6.49 Minoradverseimpactshavebeenpredictedattwoofthetriggereddatalinksforthe2031DS
daytimescenario.However,duetotheirrelativeisolationfromtheProposedDevelopmentandthatnoworksareplannedattheirlocation,itisnotconsideredthatthereisapracticableopportunitytomitigatetheseimpacts.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 52
Summary8.6.50 Nosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedasaresultofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoise
asaresultoftheProposedDevelopmentonthetriggereddatalinksfortherelevantfutureyearscenariosandthereforenoadditionalmitigationisrequired.
8.6.51 Considerationhasalsobeengiventotheminoradverseimpactspredictedattwoofthetriggereddatalinks,butthereisnotconsideredtobeapracticableopportunitytomitigatethem.
Operational Sound from SRFI Activities at the Main Site8.6.52 Nosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedasaresultofthepotentialimpactsofsoundfrom
operationalactivitiestakingplaceattheSRFIatanyoftherelevantreceptorswhentheSRFIisfullyoperational.
Mitigation of Other Adverse Impacts8.6.53 Whilenotidentifiedassignificant,considerationhasalsobeengiventothepotentialadverse
impactsattherelevantreceptorstothewestandsouthoftheMainSiteduringthenight-timeperiodunderbroadlysouth-westerlywinds.Underthesewindconditions,theprevailingwinddirectionintheUK,thereceptorsattheselocationswillgenerallyexperiencelowerbackgroundsound levels.
8.6.54 TheprimarysourceofpredictedsoundfromSRFIoperationsinthisareaistherailterminalatthewestoftheMainSite,andmorespecifically,thereachstackersandtelehandlersusedtohandleand move the intermodal containers.
8.6.55 ThedesignoftheMainSiteincludeslandscapebundsaroundtheperimeteroftheSRFI,withheightsoptimisedtoprovidemaximumenvironmentalmitigationwhileremainingpracticable,followingtherecommendationsgiveninparagraph5.198oftheNPSNN.Thebundingalongthewestofthesite,adjacenttotherailterminal,wouldbeapproximately16mabovetheleveloftherailterminalgroundsurface,and,asthegroundtothewestistypicallyatalowerlevel,atanevengreaterheightabovethegroundlevelatthereceptors.
8.6.56 IthasbeenestimatedthatthebundingandlandscapingaroundtheMainSitewouldreduceoperationalsoundlevelsbybetween5and13dB(A)atthereceptorsR21andR23-R25tothewestofthesite,andby3dB(A)atR28tothesouthofthesite.
8.6.57 Thebenefitofanypracticableincreaseinbundheightintermsoffurtherreducingoperationalsoundlevelsfromtherailterminalattherelevantreceptorshasbeenanalysedandbeenfoundtobeminimal.Thisisprimarilyduetotherelativelylargeareaoftherailterminalwithinwhichthenoisesourcescanmove,limitingtheeffectivenessofscreeningattheboundary.ThisisparticularlythecaseatthereceptorR28,atthesouthofthesite,duetotherelativeorientationofthe rail terminal.
8.6.58 Itshouldbenotedthatduetolimitationsinstandardenvironmentalnoisemodellingtechniques,thesoundattenuatingpropertiesofthebundingmaybeunderestimatedatreceptorsclosetothebottomofthebunding,suchasthosetothewestofthesite.Thisisduetopotentialadditionalgroundattenuationasthesoundtravelsfromthetopofthebundtothereceptornotbeingrecognised.Itisestimatedthatthiscouldfurtherreduceoperationalsoundlevelsattherelevantreceptorsbyupto5dB(A).
8.6.59 Inadditiontothebunding,theuseofadditionalbarriersaroundtheperimeteroftherailterminalhasalsobeeninvestigated.However,againduetotherelativelylargesizeoftherailterminal,theinclusionofsuchbarrierswouldhavenobenefitatpracticableheights,particularlyconsideringtheheightandscreeningeffectofthebundingalreadyinplace.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 53
8.6.60 Itshouldbenotedthatthepredictionsofoperationalsoundfromtherailterminalassumetherearenostoredcontainersinplace.Thismeansarobustandworst-caseapproachisconsideredbecauseinreality,therewouldtypicallybeasignificantnumberofstackedintermodalcontainersthatcouldprovideascreeningeffectasthereachstackersandtelehandlerswouldoftenbeincloseproximitytothem.Preliminarymodellingindicatesthatwiththeadditionofsingleheightrowsofcontainersintheavailablespaces,operationalsoundfromtherailterminalwouldbereducedbyupto2dB(A)atthereceptorstothewestandsouthoftheMainSite.Itisunderstoodthatcontainerscouldbestackedtwohighinthereceptionarea,andhigherthanthisinthemainareaoftherailterminal,whichwouldlikelyincreasethescreeningeffect.
8.6.61 Followingtheassessmentofotherpotentialoptionsformitigationofoperationalsoundfromtherailterminal,ithasbeenconcludedthattakingintoaccounttheattenuationprovidedbythebundingaroundtheMainSite,therearenootherpracticableoptionsmateriallytoreducefurtherthe sound levels at the relevant receptors.
Summary8.6.62 Nosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedasaresultofthepotentialimpactsofsoundfrom
operationalactivitiestakingplaceattheSRFIatanyoftherelevantreceptorswhentheSRFIisfullyoperationalandtherefore,noadditionalmitigationisrequired.
8.6.63 Considerationhasalsobeengiventothepotentialadverseimpactspredictedduringthenight-timeperiodunderbroadlysouth-westerlyconditionsatseveralreceptorstothewestandsouthoftheMainSite,mainlyasaresultoftherailterminal.However,followinganalysisofdifferentoptions,nopracticablemethodofprovidingfurthersignificantmitigationhasbeenfoundwhenconsideringthemitigationalreadyprovidedbytheextensivebundingaroundtheperimeteroftheMainSite.Consequently,Governmentnoisepolicyhasbeenappropriatelyapplied.
8.7 RESIDUAL EFFECTS
8.7.1 Followingtheimplementationoftheproposedmitigationmeasuresdescribedintheprevioussection,Table8.21belowconfirmsthatthepredictedsignificantadverseeffectsareconsideredtohavebeenmitigated.
Table 8.21 Confirmation of mitigation to address expected significant adverse noise effects
Description Location Receptor Summary of mitigation
Construction Noise RoadeBypasssite
R38HydeFarmUseofBPMR41BlisworthRoad-North
FaçadeRailway Noise (maximum noiselevels)
Threelocationsadja-centtorailway
R01WoodpeckerWayIntroductionofquieterroll-ingstockby2043
R18CollingtreeRoadNorth
R54AshtonRdW
RoadTrafficNoiseAroundMainSite R30WestLodgeCottages-
EastFaçade ImplementationofNIR
OtherHighwayWorks R57TheLodge ImplementationofNIR
8.7.2 FurthertoTable8.21,itisnotconsideredthatthereareanyresidualsignificantadversenoiseeffectsfollowingmitigation.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 54
8.8 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
Road Traffic Noise8.8.1 Thetrafficdatausedinthepredictionofroadtrafficnoiseforallbaselineandfutureyearscenarios
hasbeensuppliedbythetransportconsultantandincludesthechangesintrafficassociatedwithall committed development and allocated sites within the Northamptonshire area.
8.8.2 Thedataalsoincludesthecommittedinfrastructureschemesandthosehighlylikelytocomeforwardbeforetheforecastassessmentyears.ThisincludestheHighwaysEnglandSmartMotorwayProject.
8.8.3 Basedonthisinformation,thecumulativeroadtrafficnoiseimpactsoftheProposedDevelopmenttogetherwithotherdefinedlandusesandinfrastructureschemeshavebeenassessedaspartoftheprimaryroadtrafficnoiseassessmentinsection8.5.
8.8.4 TheNorthamptonSouthSustainableUrbanExtension(SUE)istheclosestcommitteddevelopmenttotheProposedDevelopmentandislocatedjusttothenorth-eastoftheMainSiteontheothersideoftheM1.Thisdevelopmentisprimarilyresidentialandisthereforenotadevelopmentthatisexpectedtogeneratenoise.Consequently,itisnotexpectedtocauseanyadversenoiseimpactsoreffectsatexistingreceptors,otherthanfromanyassociatedincreaseinroadtrafficnoise.Therefore,thecumulativeeffectofnoisefromtheProposedDevelopmentandtheNorthamptonSouthSUEhasonlybeenconsideredforroadtraffic.
Rail Central SRFI8.8.5 RailCentral(RC)isaproposedSRFINSIPschemelocatedonasitedirectlytothewestofthe
NorthamptonGateway(NGW)site.
8.8.6 Theschemeisnotyetthesubjectofanapplicationfordevelopmentconsent,however,aScopingReportwassubmittedinDecember2015andanupdatedPreliminaryEnvironmentalInformationReport(PEIR),whichincludedanoiseandvibrationchapter,wasissuedinMarch2018aspartofthestage2pre-applicationconsultationprocess.
8.8.7 Althoughnotacommitment,duetothetype,sizeandproximityoftheRCschemetotheNGW,anypotentiallysignificantcumulativeeffectshavebeenconsideredbasedonthecurrentlyavailable information.
8.8.8 Theassessmentsbelowdiscusstwoaspectsofthecumulativeeffects:roadtrafficnoise,forwhichtheNGWtransportconsultanthassuppliedappropriatedata,andoperationalsound,whichconsidersthepredictedratinglevelsatthetworeceptorlocationsthataresharedbytheassessments for both schemes.
Road Traffic Noise8.8.9 Thetransportconsultanthassupplieda2031DSscenariothatincludesroadtrafficfromtheNGW
andtheRCproposalscurrentatthetimethetrafficmodellingwascarriedout.Thisincludeshighwayworkselementsfrombothschemes,thoughmostsignificantlyintermsofpotentialchangesinroadtrafficnoiselevels,theRoadeBypassisincluded.However,theinformationfromRCwasnotfinalisedbythetimeofthecumulativeassessment.Therefore,theconclusionssetoutbelowshouldberegardedastentative.
8.8.10 RoadtrafficnoiselevelshavebeenpredictedfortrafficassociatedwiththeMainSite,theRoadeBypassandotherhighwayworksreceptorslistedinTable8.12,forthecumulative2031DSscenariousingthemethoddescribedinsection8.3.TheresultsarethereforedirectlycomparablewiththosefeaturingonlytheNGWintheprevioussectionsofthischapter.NotethatthisincludestheproposedadditionalmitigationmeasuresfortheRoadeBypassasdiscussedinsection8.6.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 55
8.8.11 Tables1,3and5ofAppendix8.22presentthepredicteddaytimeroadtrafficnoiselevelsattheMainSite,RoadeBypassandotherhighwayworksreceptorsrespectively,togetherwiththeresultsforthe2031DMandDSwithoutRailCentralscenarios.Tables8,10and12presenttheresultsforthenight-timeperiod.
8.8.12 Tables2,4and6ofAppendix8.22presenttheassessmentofanyexpectedsignificantadverseeffectsandtheimpactmagnitudesduringthedaytimeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.9.Tables9,11and13presentthecorrespondingassessmentforthenight-timeperiodinaccordancewithTable8.10.
8.8.13 Ratherthanprovideafullcommentaryontheresultsofthecumulativeroadtrafficscenarios,itisconsideredproportionatetoconsiderjusttheresultsintermsofthedifferencesbetweenthemandthe2031DSwithoutRCscenarios,whichhavealreadybeendiscussedindetailinsection8.5.
8.8.14 Ingeneral,thepredictedroadtrafficnoiselevelsforthecumulative2031scenariosattherelevantreceptorsarewithin±1dB(A)ofthelevelsfortheDSscenariowithoutRC.
8.8.15 Intermsofsignificantadverseeffects,thecumulative2031DSscenariosarepredictedtoproduceexactlythesameresultsastheDSscenariowithoutRC,i.e.theyareindicatedatR30andR57.ThesearesummarisedinTable8.19attheendofsection8.5,themainassessmentoflikelysignificanteffectssection.
8.8.16 Tables7and14ofAppendix8.22presentthedifferencesineffectlevelandimpactmagnitudebetweenthecumulativeandNGWonly2031DSdayandnight-timescenariosrespectively.Broadly,anychangesarearesultofsmallincreasesintheDSroadtrafficnoiselevelandlargelyresultinnegligibleimpacts.
8.8.17 AttheRoadeBypassreceptorR41BlisworthRdN-Wduringthedaytimeperiod,aminoradverseimpacthasincreasedtoamoderateadverseimpactduetoanincreaseof0.6dB(A)betweenthetwo scenarios.
Operational Sound from SRFI Activities8.8.18 TheassessmentofsoundfromoperationalactivitiesthatareexpectedtotakeplaceattheRail
CentralSRFIhasbeenincludedinthePEIRissuedinMarch2018inconnectionwiththatproposal.
8.8.19 TheRCoperationalsoundassessmenthasbeenbasedontheprinciplesofBS4142:2014.ThisisthesamebasisasusedfortheassessmentoftheNGWproposals.However,thereappeartobedifferencesintheapproachadoptedtoidentifyingsignificantadverseeffectsintheRCPEIRcomparedwiththatdescribedabovefortheNGW.Inparticular,noconsiderationoftheabsolutelevelsofoperationalsoundappearstohavebeenundertakenfortheRCassessment.Consequently,theconclusionsfromthetwoassessmentsarenotdirectlycomparable.
8.8.20 IfRCwereapprovedandconstructedtherewouldbeonlytworeceptorlocationsremainingthatarelikelytobeaffectedbyoperationalnoisefrombothproposals.ThesearedescribedinTable8.22below:
Table 8.22 Receptors shared by Northampton Gateway and Rail Central assessments of operational sound
Receptor Rail Central DesignationR21BarnLane NSR04BarnLane,MiltonMalsorR28CourteenhallRoad NSR05WestLodgeFarm
CHAPTER 8 - PG 56
8.8.21 TheresultsoftheNGWassessmentatthesereceptorshasindicatedthatnosignificantadverseeffectsareexpectedduringthedayornight-timeperiodsundereitherofthetwowindconditionsconsidered.Itispossible,thatanadverseimpactmayoccuratR28duringthenight-timeunderbroadlysouth-westerlywinds.
8.8.22 Thebackgroundsoundlevelsusedfortheinitialestimateofimpacthavebeenbasedonsurveymeasurementsforbothproposals.ForNGW,themostrelevantsituationforthesereceptorswaswithbroadlysouth-westerlywinds.ItisunclearwhichconditionsapplytothebackgroundsoundlevelsusedforRC.Nevertheless,thebackgroundsoundvaluesusedintheRCassessmentarebetween5and10dB(A)higherduringthedaytimeand6and7dB(A)higherduringthenight-timeatthesereceptorscomparedwiththeequivalentvaluesusedforNGW.Astheassessmentmethodologyrequiresacomparisonbetweentheoperationalsoundandthebackgroundsound,usingthehigherRCbackgroundsoundlevelswouldreducetheapparentmagnitudeoftheimpact,beforecontextisconsidered.
8.8.23 Theprocessforarrivingattheratinglevelsforoperationalsoundisbroadlythesameinbothassessmentsinthata+3dB(A)penaltyhasbeenaddedtothepredictedspecificsoundlevelstoaccountfordistinctiveacousticfeatures.Itisalsothecasethatoperationalsoundisconsideredatgroundfloorlevelduringthedaytimeandatupperfloorlevelduringthenight-timeinbothassessments.Onthisbasis,thecumulativeratinglevelfrombothproposalscanbeapproximatedbylogarithmicallysummingtheindividualratinglevelsforeachscheme.Theratinglevelsforeachschemeatthetworeceptors,aswellasthecumulativeratinglevel,areshowninTable8.23below.
Table 8.23 Cumulative rating levels for Northampton Gateway and Rail Central
ReceptorDaytime Rating Level, dB LAr,1hr
Night-Time Rating Level, dB LAr,15min
NGW RC Cumulative NGW RC CumulativeR21BarnLane 42 47 48 42 48 49R28CourteenhallRoad 42 45 47 43 47 48
8.8.24 ItisunderstoodthattheratinglevelsquotedforRCincludethecurrentlyproposedmitigationmeasures for that scheme.
8.8.25 ItcanbeseenthattheratinglevelsfromtheRCdevelopmentareexpectedtobegreaterthanthosefromNGWatthetworeceptorsbybetween3and5dB(A)duringthedayandbetween4and6dB(A)duringthenight.
8.8.26 AninitialestimateofthepotentialimpacthasbeencarriedoutusingthebackgroundsoundlevelsidentifiedintheNGWassessment(i.e.underbroadlysouth-westerlywinds).Table8.24comparestheratinglevelsfromTable8.23withtheNGWbackgroundsoundlevels(BSL)forthedaytimeperiod,andTable8.25doesthesameforthenight-timeperiod.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 57
Table 8.24 Initial estimate of impact from NGW, RC and cumulative SRFI operations under broadly south-westerly winds for daytime period
Receptor
Daytime (07:00-23:00)
BSLNGW RC CumulativeRating Difference Rating Difference Rating Difference
R21BarnLane 40 42 +2 47 +7 48 +8
R28 Courteen-hallRoad
36 42 +6 45 +9 47 +11
Table 8.25 Initial estimate of impact from NGW, RC and cumulative SRFI operations under broadly south-westerly winds for night-time period
Receptor
Night-Time (23:00-07:00)
BSLNGW RC CumulativeRating Difference Rating Difference Rating Difference
R21BarnLane 36 42 +6 48 +12 49 +13
R28 Courteen-hallRoad
35 43 +8 47 +12 48 +13
8.8.27 ItcanbeseenfromTables8.24and8.25thattheinitialestimatesofcumulativeoperationalsoundimpactunderbroadlysouth-westerlywindsaregenerallydominatedbytheRCSRFI.Duringthenight-timeinparticular,potentiallysignificantadverseimpactsareinitiallyindicatedatbothreceptorsasaresultofRCSRFIoperations.
8.8.28 Regardingcontext,whenthecumulativedaytimeratinglevelsarecomparedtothecorrespondingguidelinedesirableexternalsoundlevelsfordwellings,assummarisedinTable8.11,thecumulativeratinglevelsarebelowthelowerthresholdforexternalamenityspace.Assumingatypicalreductionof12dB(A)forexternalsoundpassingthroughanopenwindowintoahabitableroom,thecumulativeratinglevelswouldbeequaltoand1dB(A)abovethelowerthresholdforrestinginsidelivingrooms.Thiswouldjustindicateapotentialadverseeffect.
8.8.29 Duringthenight-time,assumingatypicalreductionof12dB(A)forexternalsoundpassing throughanopenwindowintoahabitableroom,thecumulativeratinglevelswouldexceedtheupperthresholdforsleepinginsidebedroomsby1and2dB(A).Thiswouldindicateapotentialadverseeffect.
8.8.30 Basedontheresultsofboththeinitialestimateofimpactandtheconsiderationofcontext,thecumulativeassessmentofsoundfromoperationalactivitiestakingplaceatboththeNorthamptonGatewayandRailCentralunderbroadlysouth-westerlywindshasindicatedthatadverseimpactsandeffectscouldoccurduringboththedaytimeandnight-timeperiodatthetwosharedreceptorlocations.Inparticular,theimpactwouldbegreaterwiththeadditionofRCcomparedwithNGWoperatingonitsown.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 58
8.8.31 TheassessmentusesthecurrentlyavailableinformationfromRailCentral.Thiscouldbesubjecttochange,forinstanceifRailCentralweretoidentifytheneedforadditionalmitigation.
Summary of Cumulative Assessment with Rail Central8.8.32 Theassessmentofthepotentialchangeinroadtrafficnoiseasaresultofthecumulativeeffects
ofboththeNGWandRCschemesontheroadsaroundtheMainSite,RoadeBypassandotherhighwayworkshasshownthereisnochangeintermsofexpectedsignificantadverseeffectstothescenariofeaturingonlyNGWtraffic.However,thereisuncertaintyoverthecurrentlyavailabletrafficfiguresassociatedwithRC.Consequently,thiscanonlybeatentativeconclusion.
8.8.33 AcomparisonofthecumulativeDSscenario,includingbothNGWandRC,andNGWonitsownhasshownasmallnumberofchangesintheDSeffectlevelsandimpactmagnitudesatsomereceptors.TheimpactmagnitudeatonereceptorclosetotheRoadeBypassisexpectedtoincrease from minor adverse to moderate adverse.
8.8.34 TheassessmentofsoundfromoperationalactivitiestakingplaceatboththeNGWandRChasshownthatthosefromtheRCSRFIarelikelytodominateatthetwosharedreceptors,withadverseimpactsandeffectspossiblyoccurringduringboththedaytimeandnight-timeperiods.ThecumulativeimpactwithbothNGWandRCoperatingisworsecomparedwithNGWoperatingon its own.
8.9 CONCLUSIONS
8.9.1 ThepotentialnoiseandvibrationimpactsandeffectsthatmayariseasaresultoftheconstructionandoperationoftheproposedNorthamptonGatewayStrategicRailFreightInterchange(SRFI)development,includingtheassociatednewroadinfrastructure,inparticular,theRoadeBypass,andworkstotheexistingroadnetwork,havebeenassessedinaccordancewithrelevantGovernmentandLocalPolicy.
8.9.2 Asmallnumberofsignificantadverseeffectshavebeenidentifiedrelatingtotheconstructionphase,night-timerailwayoperationsandtoroadtrafficnoise.Mitigationmeasureshavebeenproposedtoaddressthoseeffects.Otheradverseimpactshavebeenmitigatedandminimisedwhere practicable.
8.9.3 TheproposedRoadeBypassisexpectedtoreducesignificantlythelevelofroadtrafficnoiseontheA508throughthecentreofRoade,partofwhichiswithinaNoiseActionPlanningImportantArea.AsimilarreductioninroadtrafficnoiseisexpectedattheRoadeQuarryLocalWildlifeSiteatthesouthofthevillage.Additionalmitigationhasbeenproposedtominimisetheadverseimpactsassociatedwiththerelocationofroadtrafficontothebypass.
8.9.4 AcumulativeassessmentofsoundfromoperationalactivitiestakingplaceatboththeNorthamptonGatewayandRailCentralSRFIschemehasshownthatadverseimpactsandeffectspossiblyoccurringduringboththedaytimeandnight-timeperiodatthosereceptorspotentiallyaffectedbybothschemes.Furthermore,thecumulativeimpactwithbothNGWandRCoperatingisworsecomparedwithNGWoperatingonitsown
8.9.5 Itisconcludedthattherequirementssetoutinparagraph5.195oftheNPSNNhavebeenmet.
CHAPTER 8 - PG 59
Figu
re 8
.1 R
ecep
tor l
ocat
ions
for n
oise
and
vib
ratio
n as
sess
men
t – A
roun
d M
ain
Site
and
oth
er h
ighw
ay w
orks
sou
th o
f Mai
n Si
te
CHAPTER 8 - PG 60
Figu
re 8
.2 R
ecep
tor l
ocat
ions
for n
oise
and
vib
ratio
n as
sess
men
t – R
oade
Byp
ass
and
arou
nd o
ther
hig
hway
wor
ks w
est o
f Roa
de
CHAPTER 8 - PG 61
Figu
re 8
.3 R
ecep
tor l
ocat
ions
for n
oise
and
vib
ratio
n as
sess
men
t – A
roun
d ot
her h
ighw
ay w
orks
sou
th o
f Roa
de
CHAPTER 8 - PG 62
Figu
re 8
.4 N
oise
and
vib
ratio
n m
onito
ring
loca
tions
- SR
FI
CHAPTER 8 - PG 63
Figu
re 8
.5 N
oise
and
vib
ratio
n m
onito
ring
loca
tions
- R
oade
CHAPTER 8 - PG 64
Figu
re 8
.6 R
oade
Byp
ass:
Loc
atio
n of
pro
pose
d fe
ncin
g
CHAPTER 8 - PG 65
Figu
re 8
.7 R
oade
: Cha
nge
in ro
ad tr
affic
nois
e fro
m 2
031
DM
to D
S w
/Miti
gatio
n sc
enar
ios
for d
aytim
e pe
riod
