My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 11-13-1995
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
CCP 11-13-1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:10:38 PM
Creation date
11/6/2006 4:40:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
184
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> I <br /> I. STATE NOISE STANDARDS <br /> I Sound Level (dBA) <br /> Day (0700.2200) Night (2200-0700) <br /> I Noise Area General Land <br /> Classification Use Type L50 LIO L50 LIO <br /> 1 Residential 60 65 50 55 <br /> I 2 Commercial 65 70 65 70 <br /> 3 Industrial 75 80 75 80 <br /> I Snurce. Minnesota Rules Parts 7030,0010 to 7030.0080, <br /> I During the 1994-95 legislative session, the Minnesota Statutes were revised to exempt from the state noise <br /> standards "an existing or newly constructed segment of a highway, provided that all reasonably available <br /> noise mitigation measures, as approved by the commissioners of the department of transportation and <br /> I pollution control agency, are employed to abate noise." The department oftransportation and the pollution <br /> control agency are currently in the process of developing criteria to define "reasonably available noise <br /> mitigation measures." The criteria being considered include: <br /> I 0 Resident desire for noise mitigation <br /> . Existing daytime and nighttime noise levels <br /> 1- <br /> 0 Change in noise levels associated with the project <br /> I -"" <br /> 0 Average noise level reduction with mitigation <br /> 0 Cost of mitigation per dBA reduction per residence protected <br /> I Potential Noise Imnacts and Miti~ation <br /> I Figures 1,2 and 3 present predicted noise levels along TH 96 based on the assumptions listed above and the <br /> alternative roadway cross sections shown in the figures. <br /> I Figure 1 compares predicted noise levels associated with tbe existing two-lane, roadway to noise levels <br /> associated witb a four-lane divided roadway. The four, lane divided roadway widens the road closer to <br /> adjacent receivers. However, tbe opposing travel lanes are moved furtber from tbe receivers. The net result <br /> I is a sligbt (less than I dBA) increase in noise levels adjacent to the road witb the four-lane divided roadway, <br /> The noise levels shown in Figure I are in excess of the state residential noise standard. Noise levels range <br /> I from approximately 72 dBA at the edge ofthe right of way to approximately 66 dBA at the homes adjacent <br /> to the road, The state residential standard is 65 dBA. This indicates that noise mitigation for the residential <br /> areas along TH 96 may be warranted, However, more detailed analysis including refinement of the <br /> I assumptions regarding traffic volumes and truck percentages and an evaluation relative to tbe criteria listed <br /> on page 6 is necessary before a final determination on the need for mitigation is made. <br /> I' - <br /> Tbe most effective means of noise mitigation is a noise barrier to block the line of sight between the roadway <br /> noise source and the adjacent receiver sites. Figures 2 and.g illustrate the effectiveness of alternative noise <br /> I 47 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.