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 /> , <br /> '. barrier treatments, <br /> , Figure 2 shows the effectiveness of a ] 0 foot noise barrier located either adjacent to the roadway or at the <br /> edge of the right-of-way. Either barrier location would result in approximately an 8 dBA reduction in noise <br /> , levels relative to the unmitigated condition. Noise levels adjacent to the roadway would be below the state <br /> residential noise standard. Benefits associated with placing a barrier adjacent to the road include noise <br /> mitigation for the trail and better access to the trail. However, with the barrier adjacent to the road, <br /> , pedestrians on the trail would not be visible from the road which could be a safety concern. With the barrier <br /> at the edge ofthe right-of-way, pedestrians on the trail would be visible from the road, however, access to <br /> the trail would require periodic breaks in the barrier. <br /> , Figure 3 shows the effectiveness of a 4-foot earthen berm adjacent to the road. Such a berm would require <br /> approximately 24 feet of right-of-way which would restrict options for a sidewalk. A berm would be less <br /> , effective than a I O-foot noise barrier resulting in approximately a 3 dBA reduction relative to the unmitigated <br /> condition. Noise levels would be below state standards at the residences adjacent to the road, <br /> If barriers are constructed adjacent to the road, it is likely that breaks in the barrier would be required for <br /> , driveway access. Such barrier breaks would reduce the effectiveness of the barrier. Figure 3 illustrates how <br /> 20-foot break in the noise barrier for driveway access would reduce the effectiveness of the noise barrier. <br /> Rather than an 8 dBA reduction associated with the unbroken barrier, a broken barrier would result in <br /> , approximately a 6 dBA reduction. The effectiveness of the barrier would be further compromised with <br /> additional breaks. <br /> ~. A vegetative barrier between the roadway and receiver is often suggested for noise mitigation, While a <br /> vegetative barrier can effectively block the line of sight and may offer perceived relief (out of sight, out of <br /> mind), actual noise reduction is likely to be minimal. Studies have found that to obtain a 3 dBA reduction <br /> , in noise levels, a dense vegetative strip 50-feet wide is required. <br /> . <br /> As discussed previously, reducing speeds or the percentage of trucks would also result in a reduction in noise <br /> I levels, Both of these control measures are difficult to enforce and without enforcement, they would be <br /> ineffective in reducing noise levels. <br /> l <br /> .. <br /> . CULTURAL RESOURCES <br /> STORM WATER MANAGEMENT <br /> I <br /> I <br /> - ~ <br /> . <br /> .- - <br /> - <br /> lIiJi-' <br /> *,::t <br /> J 48 <br /> -~~- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.