Acoustic assessment for proposed industrial units on … assessment for proposed industrial units ... residential properties which are located to the rear of the site on Hacking Drive

Martin

Environmental

Solutions

Martin Environmental Solutions August 2016

[email protected] 1

www.m-e-solutions.co.uk Report No.: 1374.1

MES

Acoustic assessment for proposed industrial units on Shay Lane, Longridge, Lancashire Prepared for:

George Gordon Gleefield Cumeragh Lane Whittingham Preston PR3 2AJ August 2016

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.m-e-solutions.co.uk/

Martin

Environmental

Solutions


[email protected] 2


MES

1. Introduction 1.1. Martin Environmental Solutions has been commissioned to undertake an acoustic

assessment to assess the impact of a proposed industrial unit on land to the east of

Shay Lane currently occupied by Hills Fine Foods Ltd.

1.2. The assessment will consider the noise levels to be experienced at existing

residential properties which are located to the rear of the site on Hacking Drive.

Site Location and Context

1.3. The site is located along Shay Lane a busy industrial estate in Longridge. To the

northeast, north east and south of the site are more industrial properties with a

residential housing estate located to the southeast. The nearest residential properties

are located at a higher level than the site with an approx. 2m high banking to the rear

of the site topped with evergreen trees. Beyond the industrial estate to the west and

south are agricultural fields.

1.4. The development includes the construction of industrial units which for the medium

term at least will be used by Hill Fine Foods for the storage of and production of food.

Refrigeration units are planned but specific details are currently unavailable.

However it has been confirmed that the units will be located to the west end of the

building adjacent to Shay Lane and at the furthest point from the residential

properties as possible with the structure of the building acting as a barrier.

1.5. The assessment therefore aims to identify the current background sound levels on

site and set limits for the new plant so that no adverse impact will be experienced by

the nearby residential properties.

1.6. In relation to vehicle movements on site these will mirror existing activities and will

not generate any additional adverse impact on the nearby residents.



Martin

Environmental

Solutions


[email protected] 3


MES

2. Policy and Guidance

2.1 The impact of noise can be a material consideration in the determination of

planning applications. The planning system has the task of guiding development

to the most appropriate locations. It is recognised that on occasions it will be

difficult to reconcile some land uses, such as housing, hospitals or schools, with

other activities that generate high levels of noise. However the planning system is

tasked to ensure that, wherever practicable, noise-sensitive developments are

separated from major sources of noise (such as road, rail and air transport and

certain types of industrial development).

2.2 The Government’s publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF),

which seeks to prevent new and existing development from contributing to or

being put at unacceptable risk from noise pollution, has replaced previous

Planning Policy Statements and Planning Policy Guidance Notes. However in the

absence of any new guidance it is still considered appropriate to refer to the

detailed guidance in relation to noise provided by the document Planning Policy

Guidance, PPG24: Planning and Noise with many planning authorities still using

this guidance note on the basis that the science contained within it is still valid.

2.3 The Government have also issued the Noise Policy Statement for England

(NPSE). The NPSE clarifies the Government’s underlying principles and aims in

relation to noise and sets a vision to promote good health and a good quality of life

through the effective management of noise while having regard to the

Government’s sustainable development strategy. The NPSE aims to mitigate and

minimise adverse impacts on health and quality of life through the effective

management and control of noise.

2.4 The NPSE introduces the following terms although no sound levels are given to

represent these many authorities have identified the sound level criteria in line

with the World Health Organisation and BS8233: 2014 levels. The terms

introduced by the NPSE are:

NOEL – No Observed Effect Level (<30dB(A) inside <50dB(A)

outside, 10dB below background)

LOAEL – Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (30-35dB(A) inside

50- 55dB(A) outside, background to +5dB)



Martin

Environmental

Solutions


[email protected] 4


MES

SOAEL – Significant Observed Adverse Effect Level (>35dB(A) inside,

>55dB(A) outside, >+10dB above background)

2.5 The sound levels within the brackets of the previous paragraph are those

determined by Lancashire authorities as appropriate levels to indicate the relevant

effect levels represented by the NPSE. These levels are detailed with in the

Lancashire Planning Guidance document on noise which is in the process of

being finalised and is currently used by a number of Lancashire authorities.

2.6 Other commonly used examples of standards utilised by Local Planning

authorities for the consideration of noise impacts include comparison of the likely

noise levels to be experienced at a development, with levels that have been

recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO) as Guidelines for the

prevention of Community Noise Annoyance and within BS8233: 2014.

2.7 The WHO recommended noise levels for outdoor amenity areas (gardens) that

should not be exceeded are 55dB(A) LAeq,16hr in order to avoid ‘Serious Community

Annoyance or 50dB(A) LAeq,16hr to avoid ‘Moderate Community Annoyance’ during

the day. For indoor levels WHO set 35 dB(A) LAeq,16hr during the day to prevent

Moderate Annoyance and 30 dB(A) LAeq,8hr at night to prevent sleep disturbance.

2.8 BS 8233:2014 ‘Guidance on sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings’

also specifies desirable noise levels to be achieved inside dwellings.

2.9 BS 8233:2014 ‘Sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings – Code of

Practice’ also specifies desirable noise levels to be achieved inside dwellings. BS

8233 presents two levels, the first between the hours of 07:00 – 23:00 and the

second between 23:00 -07:00.

2.10 The daytime period suggests internal noise levels of 35dB LAeq,16hr, for resting in

living rooms and bedrooms while for night time a level of 30dB LAeq,8hr is

recommended. The Lancashire guidance also specifies a maximum of 45dB(A) for

regular events.

2.11 In addition British Standard 4142:2014 Method for rating industrial and commercial

sound. This standard is used for assessing sound from proposed, new, modified

or additional source(s) of sound of an industrial and/or commercial nature;



Martin

Environmental

Solutions


[email protected] 5


MES

2.12 The methodology of BS4142: 2014 compares the sound predicted by the source

in question against the background, LA90 sound levels.

2.13 If the "problem" sound is tonal, such as whine or hum, or if it is impulsive such as

bangs or clatters or if it is irregular enough to attract attention a correction is

added to the "specific" level to produce the "rating level“. The "background" LA90

measurement is then compared against the "rating" level.

2.14 If the "rating" level exceeds the "background" by around 10 dB(A) or more this

"indicates a significant adverse impact". A difference of around 5 dB(A) ‘indicates

an adverse impact. The lower the commercial noise level is, the lower the likely

impact.



Martin

Environmental

Solutions


[email protected] 6


MES

3. Assessment Methodology 3.1. On site monitoring was undertaken on the 2nd-3rd August 2016. The meter was set

up on the rear boundary of the site near to the residential properties and away from

the road. The meter was set up adjacent to the car park and on a forklift route

around the existing building.

3.2. The meter was set at a height of 1.5m away from any reflective surfaces. The

weather at the time was varied with some showers. The wind began to pick up

towards the end of the monitoring session.

3.3. All measurements were taken using a Cirrus, Optimus Green CR-171B, Type 1

sound level meter. The meters were calibrated before and after use and no

significant deviation was identified. The meters had been recently calibrated by the

manufacturers and calibration certificates are available in Appendix C.



Martin

Environmental

Solutions


[email protected] 7


MES

4. Monitoring Results and Assessment 4.1. Onsite monitoring was carried out from 14:50 on the Tuesday to 14:40 on the

Wednesday. The full results are provided in Appendix A with a summary below.

Start Time End Time Duration LAeq LA90 LAMax

02/08/2016 14:49 02/08/2016 19:00 04:10:13 55.5 49.9 88.4

02/08/2016 19:00 02/08/2016 23:00 04:00:00 60.3 39.9 80.6

02/08/2016 23:00 03/08/2016 07:00 08:00:00 58.2 40.0 81.8

03/08/2016 07:00 03/08/2016 14:37 07:37:27 59.5 50.0 92.5

4.2. The above measurements show that the daytime average background sound level at

the monitoring position was 50dB(A). This reduces during the evening to 40dB(A)

and reminded at that level throughout the night. The background sound level is

heavily influenced by existing refrigeration plant on nearby buildings, particularly

during the evening and night-time periods with maximum levels during the night-time

being linked to passing vehicles. A loud alarm also sounded for a short, 5 minute

period just after 23:00. After 06:00 the monitoring was influenced by vehicles on the

estate including a reversing forklift and by a heavy 5 minute rain shower

4.3. During the daytime period sound levels vary in relation to activities on site by Hills’

Fine Foods including vehicle and forklift movements and in relation to the rest of the

industrial estate.

4.4. The residential properties are situated approximately 2 m above the industrial estate

and with the standard height of a receptor being 1.2 to 1.5 m, a ground floor receptor

is virtually in-line with the existing plant. As this dominants the background sound

level a standard distance calculation has been used to ascertain the existing

background sound at the nearest residential property to the proposed building. This

will equate to a reduction of 5dB(A) at the garden boundary to the site and 6dB to the

façade of the property (no façade correction taken into account), see Appendix B for

detail.

4.5. Therefore background levels at the nearest residential property will be approximately

no less than 35dB(A) on the garden boundary decreasing to 34dB(A) at the property

during the night-time period and 45dB(A) and 44dB(A) respectfully during the day..



Martin

Environmental

Solutions


[email protected] 8


MES

4.6. The proposed building is to be located facing south with the refrigeration plant

located on the western elevation, facing the road. The building itself will act as a

barrier with a predicted attenuation level of 26dB.

4.7. Therefore to ensure no adverse impact on to the residential properties at the rear of

the site, and to prevent creep it is recommended that the resulting sound level at the

properties is kept to 5dB below the background sound level.

4.8. Concentrating on the night-time sound level as this gives the lowest background

level, this equates to a total sound level of 67dB(A) from the refrigeration plant, or a

combined sound power level of 113dB(A). During the standard working day this can

increase to 77dB(A) without resulting in any increase in the sound level being

experienced at the residential properties.

𝐿𝐴90 + 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡. 𝐴𝑡𝑡. +𝐵𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑡𝑡. −𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 − 5𝑑𝐵 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑏𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 = 𝑓𝑎𝑛 𝐿𝑃

34 + 17 + 26 − 5 − 5 = 67𝑑𝐵(𝐴)



Martin

Environmental

Solutions


[email protected] 9


MES

5. Conclusions 5.1. The prevailing background sound levels within the area have been identified and at

the residential properties presumed to be well below those accepted as reasonable

within BS8233: 2014 and by the world health organisation and the Lancashire

planning noise guidance document.

5.2. However in line with BS4142: 2014 to avoid any adverse impact on these residents

it is recommended that the new refrigeration plant be designed so as to result in

sound levels at the residential property below those already being experienced.

5.3. As detailed above this will result in a combined sound level limit (at 1m from the

units) of 67dB(A) LAeq during the evening ad night-time periods increasing to

77dB(A) LAeq, during the daytime (07:00-19:00) i.e. when activities will be ongoing at

the site.

5.4. This will ensure that external daytime and night-time sound levels from the units at

the nearest property will be below the guideline levels set and the existing sound

levels and will have no observed effect (NOEL) on the nearby residential properties.



Martin

Environmental

Solutions


[email protected] 10


MES

Figure 1 – Aerial Photograph



Martin

Environmental

Solutions




MES

Appendix A – Monitoring Results

Time Duration LAeq (dB) LFMax (dB) LA90 (dB)

02/08/2016 14:49 00:10:14 56.4 74.3 55.4

02/08/2016 15:00 01:00:00 56.2 72.0 55.2

02/08/2016 16:00 01:00:00 58.3 88.4 43.8

02/08/2016 17:00 01:00:00 52.5 70.3 49.8

02/08/2016 18:00 01:00:00 51.0 67.4 50.1

02/08/2016 19:00 01:00:00 50.8 66.9 50.0

02/08/2016 20:00 01:00:00 50.2 62.7 49.7

02/08/2016 21:00 01:00:00 47.9 60.5 38.1

02/08/2016 22:00 01:00:00 66.0 80.6 49.8

02/08/2016 23:00 01:00:00 66.0 79.6 49.9

03/08/2016 00:00 01:00:00 44.7 52.1 34.5

03/08/2016 01:00 01:00:00 50.3 51.9 49.9

03/08/2016 02:00 01:00:00 50.4 52.9 49.9

03/08/2016 03:00 01:00:00 50.4 54.8 49.8

03/08/2016 04:00 01:00:00 49.7 71.5 40.7

03/08/2016 05:00 01:00:00 51.9 71.9 41.5

03/08/2016 06:00 01:00:00 58.6 81.8 51.0

03/08/2016 07:00 01:00:00 60.0 91.9 50.5

03/08/2016 08:00 01:00:00 58.4 81.9 51.2

03/08/2016 09:00 01:00:00 59.9 86.9 55.0

03/08/2016 10:00 01:00:00 56.3 82.8 49.5

03/08/2016 11:00 01:00:00 57.3 91.9 49.5

03/08/2016 12:00 01:00:00 62.2 91.7 49.3

03/08/2016 13:00 01:00:00 54.5 77.7 50.0

03/08/2016 14:00 00:37:25 62.9 92.5 51.2



Martin

Environmental

Solutions




MES

Appendix B – Calculations Barrier attenuation

Day-time

Distance = 57.5m

Distance source to barrier (wall) = 0.5m

Distance between barriers = 26m (the building)

Distance barrier 2 to receiver = 31m

Height of source = 3m above ground level (69m above sea level)

Height of receiver = 1.5m above the ground level (3m above site level)

Height of Barrier 1 = 5m above ground level

Height of Barrier 3 = 5m

Path difference = 1.661995893

Barrier Attenuation has been calculated using the following formula:

Path Difference

1.661995893

Attenuation 26.1dB



Martin

Environmental

Solutions




MES

Distance Attenuation

𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑡𝑡 = 20𝑙𝑜𝑔 (𝑟

𝑅)



Martin

Environmental

Solutions




MES

Appendix C – Calibration Certificates



Martin

Environmental

Solutions




MES



Martin

Environmental

Solutions




MES



Documents

Acoustic assessment for proposed industrial units on … assessment for proposed industrial units ... residential properties which are located to the rear of the site on Hacking Drive