Noise Feasibility Study Proposed Residential Care Facility ... · Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential Care Facility Page 2 Carmel Heights Re-Development, Mississauga, Ontario

Noise Feasibility Study

Proposed Residential Care Facility

Carmel Heights Re-Development

Mississauga, Ontario

Prepared for:

Micor Developments 2 Hostein Drive

Ancaster, ON L9G 2S5

Prepared by

Yvonne Lo, BASc, PEng

Reviewed by

Brian Howe, MEng, MBA, LLM, PEng

January 21, 2019

Project No: 01800864

Table of Contents 1 Introduction & Summary ................................................................................................................ 1

2 Site Description & Noise Sources................................................................................................... 2

3 Noise Level Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 2

3.1 Road Traffic Noise .................................................................................................................. 2

3.2 Criteria Governing Stationary (Industrial) Noise Sources ...................................................... 4

4 Traffic Noise Predictions ................................................................................................................ 5

4.1 Road Traffic Data .................................................................................................................... 5

4.2 Traffic Noise Prediction .......................................................................................................... 5

5 Traffic Noise Recommendations .................................................................................................... 6

5.1 Outdoor Living Areas .............................................................................................................. 6

5.2 Indoor Living Areas and Ventilation Requirements ................................................................ 6

5.3 Building Facade Constructions ................................................................................................ 7

6 Summary of Traffic Noise Control Recommendations .................................................................. 7

7 Preliminary Assessment of Stationary Noise Sources .................................................................... 9

7.1 Criteria for Stationary Sources of Sound ................................................................................. 9

7.2 Noise Assessment .................................................................................................................... 9

8 Recommendations for Implementation ......................................................................................... 11

Figure 1 – Aerial Photo of Site Figure 2 – Proposed Site Plan Showing Prediction Locations Figure 3 – Assumed Noise Source and Receptor Locations Appendix A – Supporting Drawings Appendix B – Road Traffic Information Appendix C – Sample STAMSON 5.04 Output

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential Care Facility Page 1 Carmel Heights Re-Development, Mississauga, Ontario January 21, 2019

1 INTRODUCTION & SUMMARY

HGC Engineering was retained by Micor Developments Inc. to conduct a noise feasibility study for a

proposed redevelopment of the existing Carmel Heights Seniors Residence location, in Mississauga,

Ontario. The proposed development will include a 6-storey residential rental building, a 2-storey

convent and a 6-storey senior care building all within the same complex. The surrounding area is

characterized by existing residential uses. The study is required by the City as part of their planning

and approvals process.

The primary noise sources impacting the site were determined to be road traffic on Mississauga Road

and Dundas Street West. Relevant road traffic data was obtained from the City of Mississauga. The

data was used to predict future traffic sound levels at the various locations around the proposed site.

The predicted sound levels were compared to the guidelines of the Ministry of the Environment,

Conservation and Parks (MECP) and the Municipality to develop noise control recommendations.

The sound level predictions indicate that the future road traffic sound levels will exceed MECP

guidelines at all façades of the proposed building by a marginal amount. Forced air ventilation

systems with ductwork sized for the future installation of central air conditioning by the occupant

will be required for the proposed building. Any building construction meeting the minimum

requirements of the Ontario Building Code will provide sufficient acoustical insulation for the

proposed development. Warning clauses will need to be included in the purchase and rental

agreements to advise occupants of potentially audible transportation noise levels.

A preliminary investigation of the potential noise impact from the rooftop mechanical equipment of

the proposed building at the existing residences was also conducted based on assumptions made for

similar projects. The results indicate that the potential noise from the rooftop mechanical equipment

can be within the applicable noise guideline limits of the MECP at the neighbouring residences.

Mitigation is not anticipated to be required with respect to rooftop equipment. When detailed roof

plans and equipment specifications are available, an acoustical consultant shall confirm that the

sound level limits will be met at the adjacent residences and provide any additional recommendations

which may be required.


In summary, it is concluded that the proposed development is feasible from the perspective of noise

impact. Details of the assessment leading to this conclusion are provided herein.

2 SITE DESCRIPTION & NOISE SOURCES

Figure 1 is an aerial photo illustrating the location of the proposed site. The proposed residential care

facility is located south of Dundas Street West and west of Mississauga Road with access from

Sherwood Forest Circle in Mississauga, Ontario. A site plan of the development prepared by MSAi

dated September 10, 2018 is shown in Figure 2. Figure 2 also indicates the sound level prediction

locations [A] to [C] for reference purposes. The proposed development will include a 6-storey

residential rental building, a 2-storey convent and a 6-storey senior care building all within the same

complex. Appendix A includes the preliminary floor plans and building elevations.

A site visit was made by HGC Engineering personnel in January 2019 to make observations of the

acoustical environment and to identify the significant noise sources in the vicinity. The surrounding

area is considered to be Class I (urban) in terms of its acoustical environment. Road traffic on

Mississauga Road and Dundas Street are the dominant noise sources in the area. The Carmel Heights

Seniors Residence is currently situated at the subject site and will be removed to make way for the

new development. There are existing residences to the east and west of the development site. There

are no significant sources of stationary noise noted within 500 m of the subject site.

3 NOISE LEVEL CRITERIA

3.1 Road Traffic Noise

Guidelines for acceptable levels of road traffic noise impacting residential developments such as a

retirement care facility are given in the MECP publication NPC-300, “Environmental Noise

Guideline Stationary and Transportation Sources – Approval and Planning”, Part C release date

October 21, 2013, and are listed in Table 1 below. The values in Table 1 are energy equivalent

(average) sound levels [LEQ] in units of A-weighted decibels [dBA].


Table 1: Road Traffic Noise Criteria

Space Daytime LEQ(16 hour)

Road Nighttime LEQ(8 hour)

Road

Outdoor Living Areas 55 dBA -- Inside Living/Dining Rooms 45 dBA 45 dBA

Inside Bedrooms 45 dBA 40 dBA

Daytime refers to the period between 07:00 and 23:00, while nighttime refers to the period between

23:00 and 07:00. The term "Outdoor Living Area" (OLA) is used in reference to an outdoor patio, a

backyard, a terrace or other area where passive recreation is expected to occur. Balconies that are

less than 4 m in depth are not considered to be outdoor living areas under MECP guidelines.

The guidelines in the MECP publication allow the sound level in an Outdoor Living Area to be

exceeded by up to 5 dBA, without mitigation, if warning clauses are placed in the purchase and

rental agreements to the property. Where OLA sound levels exceed 60 dBA, physical mitigation is

required to reduce the OLA sound level below 60 dBA and as close to 55 dBA as technically,

economically and administratively feasible.

A central air conditioning system as an alternative means of ventilation to open windows is required

for dwellings where nighttime sound levels outside bedroom or living/dining room windows exceed

60 dBA or daytime sound levels outside bedroom or living/dining room windows exceed 65 dBA.

Forced-air ventilation with ducts sized to accommodate the future installation of air conditioning is

required when nighttime sound levels at bedroom or living/dining room windows are in the range of

51 to 60 dBA or when daytime sound levels at bedroom or living/dining room windows are in the

range of 56 to 65 dBA.

Building components such as walls, windows and doors must be designed to achieve indoor sound

level criteria when the nighttime sound level at the plane of window is greater than 60 dBA or the

daytime sound level is greater than 65 dBA due to road traffic noise.

Warning clauses to notify future residents of possible excesses are also required when nighttime

sound levels exceed 50 dBA at the plane of the bedroom or living/dining room window and daytime


sound levels exceed 55 dBA in the outdoor living area and at the plane of the bedroom or

living/dining room window due to road traffic.

3.2 Criteria Governing Stationary (Industrial) Noise Sources

An industrial or commercial facility is classified in MECP guidelines as a stationary source of sound

(as compared to sources such as traffic or construction, for example) for noise assessment purposes.

In terms of background sound, the development is located in an urban (Class 1) acoustical

environment which is characterized by an acoustical environment dominated by road traffic and

human activity.

The facade of a residence (i.e., in the plane of a window), or any associated usable outdoor area is

considered a sensitive point of reception. NPC-300 stipulates that the exclusionary minimum sound

level limit for a stationary noise source in an urban Class 1 area is 50 dBA during daytime (07:00 to

19:00) and evening (19:00 to 23:00) hours, and 45 dBA during nighttime hours (23:00 to 07:00). If

the background sound levels due to road traffic exceed the exclusionary minimum limits, then the

background sound level becomes the criterion. The background sound level is defined as the sound

level that is present when the source under consideration is not operating, and may include traffic

noise and natural sounds. To ensure a conservative analysis for evaluating heating, ventilation and air

conditioning equipment, the exclusionary minimum criteria will be adopted at all neighbouring

residential receptors.

The MECP guidelines stipulate that the sound level impact during a “predicable worst case hour” be

considered. This is defined to be an hour when a typically busy “planned and predictable mode of

operation” occurs at the subject facility, coincident with a period of minimal background sound.

Compliance with MECP criteria generally results in acceptable levels of sound at residential

receptors although there may still be residual audibility during periods of low background sound.


4 TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTIONS

4.1 Road Traffic Data

Road traffic data for Mississauga Road and Dundas Street West was obtained from The City of

Mississauga. The data was in the form of Ultimate Annual Average Daily Traffic volumes and is

provided in Appendix A. A day/night split of 90%/10% was used for all roadways. A commercial

vehicle percentage of 7% (split into 3.85%/3.15% medium and heavy trucks) and a posted speed

limit of 60 km/h was used for Dundas Street West. A commercial vehicle percentage of 2% (split

into 1.1%/0.9% medium and heavy trucks) and a speed limit of 50 km/h was used for Mississauga

Road. Table 2 summarizes the traffic volume data used in this study.

Table 2: Ultimate Road Traffic Data

Road Name Cars Medium Trucks

Heavy Trucks

Total

Mississauga Road

Daytime 17 640 198 162 18 000 Nighttime 1 960 22 18 2 000 Total 19 600 220 180 20 000

Dundas Street West

Daytime 50 220 2 079 1 701 54 000 Nighttime 5 580 231 189 6 000 Total 55 800 2 310 1 890 60 000

4.2 Traffic Noise Prediction

To assess the levels of road traffic noise which will impact the site in the future, predictions were

made using STAMSON version 5.04, a computer algorithm developed by the MECP. Prediction

locations were chosen around the proposed development to obtain a representation of the future

sound levels at the proposed building with exposure to Mississauga Road and Dundas Street. The

worst-case prediction locations were chosen at the top floors of the building to investigate ventilation

requirements. The distance setback of the building indicated on the site plan was used in the analysis,

along with an aerial photo to determine the distance to the roadways. Prediction locations are

indicated on Figure 2. The results of these predictions are summarized in Table 3.


Table 3: Predicted Road Traffic Sound Levels [dBA], Without Mitigation

Prediction Location

Description Daytime - at

Façade LEQ(16)

Nighttime - at Façade

LEQ(8)

[A] Senior Care Building 62 56 [B] Convent 56 <50 [C] Rental Building 59 53

5 TRAFFIC NOISE RECOMMENDATIONS

The sound level predictions indicate that traffic sound levels at the proposed building will exceed the

MECP guidelines listed in Table 1, albeit by only a minor amount. Recommendations to meet the

indoor MECP guidelines are discussed below.

5.1 Outdoor Living Areas

There are various patios located along the north side of the proposed building that are less than 4 m

in depth. These areas are not considered outdoor living areas and are therefore exempt from

assessment. Physical mitigation will not be required.

5.2 Indoor Living Areas and Ventilation Requirements

The predicted sound levels at the façades of the proposed building (prediction locations [A] to [C])

will be between 56 and 65 dBA and/or 51 and 60 dBA during the daytime and nighttime,

respectively. As such, the building will require the provision for the future installation of central air

conditioning systems. This requirement is typically satisfied through the installation of forced air

ventilation systems with ductwork sized for the future installation of central air conditioning by the

occupant. The location, installation and sound ratings of the outdoor air conditioning devices should

minimize noise impacts and comply with criteria of MECP publication NPC-300. The use of central

air conditioning will exceed this requirement.


5.3 Building Facade Constructions

Since the future road traffic sound levels outside the façades of the proposed development will be

less than 60 dBA at night and less than 65 dBA during the daytime, any exterior wall, insulated metal

exterior door and double glazed window construction meeting the minimum requirements of the

Ontario Building Code (OBC) will provide adequate sound insulation.

5.4 Warning Clauses

The MECP guidelines recommend that warning clauses be included in the property and tenancy

agreements for all dwelling units with anticipated traffic sound level excesses and are potentially

impacted by surrounding noise sources. The following noise warning clauses are required for the

proposed residential development.

Suggested wording for future dwellings with sound level excesses of the MECP criteria but do not

require physical mitigation measures is given below.

Type A:

Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservations and Parks.

Suggested wording for future dwellings requiring forced air ventilation systems is given below.

Type B:

This dwelling unit has been designed with the provision for adding central air conditioning at the occupant’s discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservations and Parks.

These sample clauses are provided by the MECP as examples and can be modified by the

Municipality as required.


6 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC NOISE CONTROL

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following list and Table 4 summarizes the recommendations made in this report, with respect to

road traffic noise for the proposed site. The reader is referred to the previous sections of the report

where these recommendations are discussed in more detail.

1. Forced air ventilation systems with ductwork sized for the future installation of central air

conditioning by the occupant will be required for the proposed building. The location, installation

and sound ratings of the air conditioning devices should comply with NPC-300. The use of

central air conditioning will exceed this requirement.

2. Warning clauses are required in the purchase and rental agreements for the proposed building.

3. Any building construction meeting the minimum requirements of the Ontario Building Code will

provide adequate acoustical insulation for all units within the development.

Table 4: Summary of Noise Control Requirements and Warning Clauses

Prediction Location

Description Ventilation

Requirements *

Type of Warning Clause

Building Façade

Constructions

A Senior Care Building

Forced Air A, B OBC B Convent

C Rental Building

Notes: -- no specific requirement * The location, installation and sound rating of the air conditioning condensers must be compliant with MECP Guideline NPC-300, as applicable. OBC – Ontario Building Code


7 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF STATIONARY NOISE

SOURCES

A preliminary noise impact assessment at existing nearby residences due to the operation of building

ventilation equipment for the proposed building has been conducted.

7.1 Criteria for Stationary Sources of Sound

Stationary sources of noise are defined as all sources that emit noise within a commercial or

industrial facility boundary. Although not subject to approval by MECP, the mechanical equipment

on the roof of the proposed building has been classified and assessed as stationary sources of sound.

As mentioned in Section 3.2, the criteria is based on the background sound level at sensitive points

of reception (which are typically residences) in the quietest hour that the source can be in operation.

Background sound includes sound from road traffic and natural sounds, but excludes the sources

under assessment. For relatively quiet areas where background sound may fall to low levels during

some hours, NPC-300 stipulates various minimum limits. In Class 1 areas, these limits are 50 dBA

for daytime periods (07:00 to 23:00) and 45 dBA at night (23:00 to 07:00).

7.2 Noise Assessment

Predictive noise modelling was used to assess the potential noise impact of rooftop equipment at the

closest residential receptors. The noise prediction model was based on sound emission levels for

rooftop equipment, assumed operational profiles (during the daytime and nighttime), and established

engineering methods for the prediction of outdoor sound propagation. These methods include the

effects of distance, air absorption, and acoustical screening by barrier obstacles.

There is expected to be no significant noise sources associated with the proposed development

beyond the rooftop mechanical equipment (i.e. deliveries, if any, would be sporadic, light and during

daytime hours only). The likely activities at the proposed residential care facility may include the

occasional movement of passenger vehicles on the property, the infrequent delivery of goods and

garbage collection. These are not considered to be significant noise sources in the MECP guidelines

and are exempt from assessment. It is not expected that there will be significant truck traffic


associated with the proposed building and these have not been included in the analysis. Noise from

safety equipment (e.g. back-up beepers) is also exempt from consideration.

Detailed mechanical rooftop plans are currently not available as the proposed development is still in

the early stages of planning. Lennox LGA060 models (5 tons) were assumed for the rooftop air

conditioning units based on projects of similar nature. The analysis considers a total of eight rooftop

units on the proposed buildings.

Table 5 below summarizes the sound data used in the analysis for the rooftop HVAC units.

Table 5: Sound Power Levels for Rooftop HVAC Units [dB re 10-12 W]

HVAC Unit Octave Band Centre Frequency [Hz] 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k

Lennox LGA060 (5 Tons) -- 72 70 71 68 63 57 48

The following information and assumptions were used in the analysis.

The rental building and senior care building are assumed to be 18.0 m in height. The convent is assumed to be 6.0 m in height.

The most potentially impacted residences are existing two-storey residences and the windows are assumed to be approximately 4.5 m above grade.

Eight HVAC units are shown as green crosses on Figure 3. Sound data was obtained from HGC Engineering project files which were originally obtained from the manufacturer.

In accordance with establishing the predictable worst-case conditions, the rooftop HVAC equipment

were assumed to operate at 100% capacity during daytime and 50% during nighttime hours.

The sound levels were used as input to a predictive computer model. The software used for this

purpose (Cadna-A version 2018 MR 1 build: 163.4824) is a computer implementation of ISO

Standard 9613-2.2 “Acoustics - Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors.” The ISO

method accounts for reduction in sound level with distance due to geometrical spreading, air

absorption, ground attenuation and acoustical shielding by intervening structures such as barriers.

The calculations consider the acoustical effects of distance and shielding by the building.


The results of this assessment indicate a maximum impact of 32 dBA during the daytime and

29 dBA during nighttime at the closest sensitive receptors without any mitigation. These predicted

sound levels are less than the MECP minimum exclusionary limit of 50 dBA during the daytime

hours and 45 dBA during the nighttime hours, based on a typical worst-case operating scenario.

It is concluded that the sounds from the proposed rooftop mechanical equipment are anticipated to

comply with the MECP guidelines at the closest residential receptors and physical mitigation is not

required.

8 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

1) When detailed rooftop equipment models and locations are known, a review should be

conducted by a Professional Engineer qualified to perform acoustical engineering services in

the Province of Ontario to confirm that sound emitted by the building mechanical systems

will not exceed the MECP limits at neighbouring residences and provide any additional

recommendations which may be required in that regard.

2) Prior to the issuance of building permits for this development, the Municipality’s building

inspector or a Professional Engineer qualified to perform acoustical engineering services in

the Province of Ontario should certify that the noise control measures have been properly

incorporated.

3) Prior to assumption, the Municipality’s building inspector or a Professional Engineer

qualified to perform acoustical engineering services in the Province of Ontario should certify

that the noise control measures have been properly installed and constructed.

Figure 1: Key Plan

ylo

Polygonal Line

ylo

Callout

Subject Site

Unit Mix: IL

Studio 18 20%

1Bed 54 63%

2Bed 15 17%

Total 87 100%

Unit Mix: AL + MC

AL Studio 34 50%

MC Studio 35 50%

Total 69 100%

Building B - Rental

Storeys 6

Area 13,870 sm [149,295 sf]

Units 167

Parking 180 Spaces Below Grade

Building A - Seniors

Storeys 6

Area 12535 sm [134,925 sf]

Units 156 [34 AL + 35 MC + 87 IL]

Parking 75 Surface Spaces

Gardens Gardens

Gardens

Gardens

Gardens

75 Surface

Parking

16 10 10 10

6

10 5

Unit Mix

1Bed 36 22%

1Bed+D 89 53%

2Bed 42 25%

Total 167 100%

Gardens

4

Convent

Storeys 2

Area 2490 sm [26,800 sf]

Units 26 [22 Sisters + 4 Visitor/ Guest]

Parking 4 UG Parking Spaces

L

o

a

d

i

n

g

L

o

a

d

i

n

g

W

h

e

e

l

C

h

a

i

r

s

G

u

e

s

t

S

u

i

t

e

s

W

i

n

g

Oratory

(30)

127 sm

C

o

n

f

.

5

s

m

S

t

o

r

.

5

s

m

Security

Door

Security

Door

Security

Door

Security

Door

A

d

m

i

n

W

i

n

g

3

6

s

m

L

i

b

r

a

r

y

/

C

o

m

p

u

t

e

r

/

C

o

n

f

e

r

e

n

c

e

1

0

7

s

m

M

a

i

n

D

i

n

i

n

g

7

1

s

m

O

f

f

i

c

e

3

6

s

m

S

t

e

a

m

T

a

b

l

e

s

1

9

s

m

B

e

v

e

r

a

g

e

s

6

s

m

P

a

t

i

o

B

B

Q

P

i

t

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

&

F

o

o

d

S

t

o

r

a

g

e

7

1

s

m

S

i

s

t

e

r

E

n

t

r

y

R

e

c

e

p

t

i

o

n

1

9

s

m

C

o

a

t

r

o

o

m

1

7

s

m

U

t

i

l

i

t

y

7

s

m

F

i

t

n

e

s

s3

6

s

m

P

a

r

l

o

u

r

3

7

s

m

D

i

n

e

2

0

s

m

R

e

c

R

o

o

m

7

1

s

m

T

V

N

o

T

V

S

e

w

i

n

g

&

C

r

a

f

t

s3

6

s

m

O

f

f

i

c

e

2

2

s

m

A

r

c

h

i

v

e

1

4

s

m

P

a

t

i

o

N

o

r

t

hL

o

u

n

g

e3

6

s

m

V

i

s

i

t

o

r

E

n

t

r

y

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

,

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

S

t

o

r

a

g

e

,

S

e

r

v

e

r

y

1

1

5

s

m

M

a

i

n

D

i

n

i

n

g

1

9

0

s

m

M

a

i

l

1

0

s

m

S

a

l

e

s

2

2

s

m

C

l

o

s

i

n

g

1

6

s

m

A

d

m

i

n

1

2

s

m

G

M

1

2

s

m

R

e

c

e

p

t

i

o

n

L

o

b

b

y

L

o

b

b

y

L

o

u

n

g

e

6

4

s

m

P

i

a

n

o

L

o

u

n

g

e

7

7

s

m

E

M

R

S

e

r

v

e

r

y

A

M

1

2

s

m

L

i

f

e

S

t

y

l

e

1

2

s

m

C

o

p

y

/

S

t

o

r

1

6

s

m

C

o

a

t

C

o

a

t

W

a

l

k

e

r

s

B

i

s

t

r

o

M

u

l

t

i

-

P

u

r

p

o

s

e

R

o

o

m

7

7

s

m

M

o

r

n

i

n

g

S

u

n

C

o

u

n

t

r

y

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

A

m

e

n

i

t

y

7

0

s

m

W

/

C

W

/

C

W

/

C

W

/

C

M

a

i

n

t

.

S

h

o

p

&

O

f

f

i

c

e

3

0

s

m

C

o

m

m

e

r

c

i

a

l

L

a

u

n

d

r

y

7

0

s

m

G

a

r

b

a

g

e

/

R

e

c

y

c

l

i

n

g

3

7

s

m

M

o

v

i

n

g

2

4

s

m

S

t

a

f

f

6

0

s

m

E

l

e

v

a

t

o

r

L

o

b

b

y

J

a

n

O

u

t

d

o

o

r

D

i

n

i

n

g

P

a

t

i

o

P

a

t

i

o

B

a

r

D

a

n

c

e

F

lo

o

r

P

r

i

v

a

t

e

D

i

n

i

n

g

S

ta

g

e

A

m

e

n

i

t

y

5

0

s

m

G

r

e

e

n

h

o

u

s

e

&

Q

u

i

t

e

L

o

u

n

g

e

1

2

0

s

m

V

i

s

i

t

o

r

L

o

u

n

g

e

7

7

s

m

L

i

b

r

a

r

y

/

M

e

d

i

a

1

0

1

s

m

S

c

o

o

t

e

r

s

Entry

Lobby

Entry

Gallery

Lobby

Amenity

72 sm

Reception

43 sm

Store

Display

39 sm

Washroom

13 sm

Conference

Room

72 sm

Coatroom

16 sm

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

M

o

v

i

n

g

/

L

o

a

d

i

n

g

E

x

t

e

n

t

o

f

U

n

d

e

r

g

r

o

u

n

d

P

a

r

k

i

n

g

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

2

B

E

D

L

o

b

b

y

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

2

B

E

D

P

a

r

t

y

R

o

o

m

2

B

E

D

2

B

E

D

8

L

o

c

k

e

r

s

G

a

r

b

a

g

e

R

o

o

m

1

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

2

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

1

2

L

o

c

k

e

r

s

M

a

n

a

g

e

r

O

f

f

i

c

e

4.5

0

4.5m landscape buffer

22

.0

0

4.8

0

18

.7

0

30

.0

0

Stable Top of Bank (Terraprobe)

Natural Feature Stake Out (CVC)

10.0m Setback from Natural Feature

1

0

.0

0

1

0

.

0

0

1

0

.

0

0

1

0

.

0

0

25

.0

0

25

.0

0

MSAiMICHAEL SPAZIANI ARCHITECT INC.

6 Helene Street North, Suite 100Port Credit, Mississauga, ON, L5G 3B2

T 905 891 0691 F 905 891 0514 Mississauga, Ontario

Proposed Site Plan

Carmel Heights Seniors

Development Plan

September 10, 2018

10m Natural Features Setback

ylo

Text Box

Figure 2: Proposed Site Plan Showing Prediction Locations

ylo

Text Box

[A]

ylo

Text Box

[B]

ylo

Text Box

[C]

R2

R3

R1

608440

608440

608460

608460

608480

608480

608500

608500

608520

608520

608540

608540

608560

608560

608580

608580

608600

608600

608620

608620

608640

60864048

2160

0

4821

600

4821

620

4821

620

4821

640

4821

640

4821

660

4821

660

4821

680

4821

680

4821

700

4821

700

4821

720

4821

720

4821

740

4821

740

4821

760

4821

760

4821

780

4821

780

4821

800

4821

800

4821

820

4821

820

4821

840

4821

840

FRAME COORDINATES ARE UTM IN METRES

Figure 3: Assumed Noise Source and Receptor Locations

APPENDIX A

Supporting Drawings

Unit Mix: IL

Studio 18 20%

1Bed 54 63%

2Bed 15 17%

Total 87 100%

Unit Mix: AL + MC

AL Studio 34 50%

MC Studio 35 50%

Total 69 100%

Building B - Rental

Storeys 6

Area 13,870 sm [149,295 sf]

Units 167



Storeys 6

Area 12535 sm [134,925 sf]

Units 156 [34 AL + 35 MC + 87 IL]


Gardens Gardens

Gardens

Gardens

Gardens

75 Surface

Parking

16 10 10 10

6

10 5

Unit Mix

1Bed 36 22%

1Bed+D 89 53%

2Bed 42 25%

Total 167 100%

Gardens

4

Convent

Storeys 2

Area 2490 sm [26,800 sf]



L

o

a

d

i

n

g

L

o

a

d

i

n

g

W

h

e

e

l

C

h

a

i

r

s

G

u

e

s

t

S

u

i

t

e

s

W

i

n

g

Oratory

(30)

127 sm

C

o

n

f

.

5

s

m

S

t

o

r

.

5

s

m

Security

Door

Security

Door

Security

Door

Security

Door

A

d

m

i

n

W

i

n

g

3

6

s

m

L

i

b

r

a

r

y

/

C

o

m

p

u

t

e

r

/

C

o

n

f

e

r

e

n

c

e

1

0

7

s

m

M

a

i

n

D

i

n

i

n

g

7

1

s

m

O

f

f

i

c

e

3

6

s

m

S

t

e

a

m

T

a

b

l

e

s

1

9

s

m

B

e

v

e

r

a

g

e

s

6

s

m

P

a

t

i

o

B

B

Q

P

i

t

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

&

F

o

o

d

S

t

o

r

a

g

e

7

1

s

m

S

i

s

t

e

r

E

n

t

r

y

R

e

c

e

p

t

i

o

n

1

9

s

m

C

o

a

t

r

o

o

m

1

7

s

m

U

t

i

l

i

t

y

7

s

m

F

i

t

n

e

s

s3

6

s

m

P

a

r

l

o

u

r

3

7

s

m

D

i

n

e

2

0

s

m

R

e

c

R

o

o

m

7

1

s

m

T

V

N

o

T

V

S

e

w

i

n

g

&

C

r

a

f

t

s3

6

s

m

O

f

f

i

c

e

2

2

s

m

A

r

c

h

i

v

e

1

4

s

m

P

a

t

i

o

N

o

r

t

hL

o

u

n

g

e3

6

s

m

V

i

s

i

t

o

r

E

n

t

r

y

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

,

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

S

t

o

r

a

g

e

,

S

e

r

v

e

r

y

1

1

5

s

m

M

a

i

n

D

i

n

i

n

g

1

9

0

s

m

M

a

i

l

1

0

s

m

S

a

l

e

s

2

2

s

m

C

l

o

s

i

n

g

1

6

s

m

A

d

m

i

n

1

2

s

m

G

M

1

2

s

m

R

e

c

e

p

t

i

o

n

L

o

b

b

y

L

o

b

b

y

L

o

u

n

g

e

6

4

s

m

P

i

a

n

o

L

o

u

n

g

e

7

7

s

m

E

M

R

S

e

r

v

e

r

y

A

M

1

2

s

m

L

i

f

e

S

t

y

l

e

1

2

s

m

C

o

p

y

/

S

t

o

r

1

6

s

m

C

o

a

t

C

o

a

t

W

a

l

k

e

r

s

B

i

s

t

r

o

M

u

l

t

i

-

P

u

r

p

o

s

e

R

o

o

m

7

7

s

m

M

o

r

n

i

n

g

S

u

n

C

o

u

n

t

r

y

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

A

m

e

n

i

t

y

7

0

s

m

W

/

C

W

/

C

W

/

C

W

/

C

M

a

i

n

t

.

S

h

o

p

&

O

f

f

i

c

e

3

0

s

m

C

o

m

m

e

r

c

i

a

l

L

a

u

n

d

r

y

7

0

s

m

G

a

r

b

a

g

e

/

R

e

c

y

c

l

i

n

g

3

7

s

m

M

o

v

i

n

g

2

4

s

m

S

t

a

f

f

6

0

s

m

E

l

e

v

a

t

o

r

L

o

b

b

y

J

a

n

O

u

t

d

o

o

r

D

i

n

i

n

g

P

a

t

i

o

P

a

t

i

o

B

a

r

D

a

n

c

e

F

lo

o

r

P

r

i

v

a

t

e

D

i

n

i

n

g

S

ta

g

e

A

m

e

n

i

t

y

5

0

s

m

G

r

e

e

n

h

o

u

s

e

&

Q

u

i

t

e

L

o

u

n

g

e

1

2

0

s

m

V

i

s

i

t

o

r

L

o

u

n

g

e

7

7

s

m

L

i

b

r

a

r

y

/

M

e

d

i

a

1

0

1

s

m

S

c

o

o

t

e

r

s

Entry

Lobby

Entry

Gallery

Lobby

Amenity

72 sm

Reception

43 sm

Store

Display

39 sm

Washroom

13 sm

Conference

Room

72 sm

Coatroom

16 sm

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

M

o

v

i

n

g

/

L

o

a

d

i

n

g

E

x

t

e

n

t

o

f

U

n

d

e

r

g

r

o

u

n

d

P

a

r

k

i

n

g

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

2

B

E

D

L

o

b

b

y

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

2

B

E

D

P

a

r

t

y

R

o

o

m

2

B

E

D

2

B

E

D

8

L

o

c

k

e

r

s

G

a

r

b

a

g

e

R

o

o

m

1

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

2

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

1

2

L

o

c

k

e

r

s

M

a

n

a

g

e

r

O

f

f

i

c

e

4.5

0


22

.0

0

4.8

0

18

.7

0

30

.0

0




1

0

.0

0

1

0

.

0

0

1

0

.

0

0

1

0

.

0

0

25

.0

0

25

.0

0




Proposed Site Plan


Development Plan

September 10, 2018





Elevation Concept


Development Plan

September 10, 2018




Elevation Concept


Development Plan

September 10, 2018




Elevation Concept


Development Plan

September 10, 2018

Unit Mix: IL

Studio 18 20%

1Bed 54 63%

2Bed 15 17%

Total 87 100%

Unit Mix: AL + MC

AL Studio 34 50%

MC Studio 35 50%

Total 69 100%

Building B - Rental

Storeys 6

Area 13,870 sm [149,295 sf]

Units 167



Storeys 6

Area 12535 sm [134,925 sf]

Units 156 [34 AL + 35 MC + 87 IL]


Gardens Gardens

Gardens

Gardens

Gardens

75 Surface

Parking

16 10 10 10

6

10 5

Unit Mix

1Bed 36 22%

1Bed+D 89 53%

2Bed 42 25%

Total 167 100%

Gardens

4

Convent

Storeys 2

Area 2490 sm [26,800 sf]



L

o

a

d

i

n

g

L

o

a

d

i

n

g

W

h

e

e

l

C

h

a

i

r

s

G

u

e

s

t

S

u

i

t

e

s

W

i

n

g

Oratory

(30)

127 sm

C

o

n

f

.

5

s

m

S

t

o

r

.

5

s

m

Security

Door

Security

Door

Security

Door

Security

Door

A

d

m

i

n

W

i

n

g

3

6

s

m

L

i

b

r

a

r

y

/

C

o

m

p

u

t

e

r

/

C

o

n

f

e

r

e

n

c

e

1

0

7

s

m

M

a

i

n

D

i

n

i

n

g

7

1

s

m

O

f

f

i

c

e

3

6

s

m

S

t

e

a

m

T

a

b

l

e

s

1

9

s

m

B

e

v

e

r

a

g

e

s

6

s

m

P

a

t

i

o

B

B

Q

P

i

t

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

&

F

o

o

d

S

t

o

r

a

g

e

7

1

s

m

S

i

s

t

e

r

E

n

t

r

y

R

e

c

e

p

t

i

o

n

1

9

s

m

C

o

a

t

r

o

o

m

1

7

s

m

U

t

i

l

i

t

y

7

s

m

F

i

t

n

e

s

s

3

6

s

m

P

a

r

l

o

u

r

3

7

s

m

D

i

n

e

2

0

s

m

R

e

c

R

o

o

m

7

1

s

m

T

V

N

o

T

V

S

e

w

i

n

g

&

C

r

a

f

t

s3

6

s

m

O

f

f

i

c

e

2

2

s

m

A

r

c

h

i

v

e

1

4

s

m

P

a

t

i

o

N

o

r

t

hL

o

u

n

g

e3

6

s

m

V

i

s

i

t

o

r

E

n

t

r

y

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

,

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

S

t

o

r

a

g

e

,

S

e

r

v

e

r

y

1

1

5

s

m

M

a

i

n

D

i

n

i

n

g

1

9

0

s

m

M

a

i

l

1

0

s

m

S

a

l

e

s

2

2

s

m

C

l

o

s

i

n

g

1

6

s

m

A

d

m

i

n

1

2

s

m

G

M

1

2

s

m

R

e

c

e

p

t

i

o

n

L

o

b

b

y

L

o

b

b

y

L

o

u

n

g

e

6

4

s

m

P

i

a

n

o

L

o

u

n

g

e

7

7

s

m

E

M

R

S

e

r

v

e

r

y

A

M

1

2

s

m

L

i

f

e

S

t

y

l

e

1

2

s

m

C

o

p

y

/

S

t

o

r

1

6

s

m

C

o

a

t

C

o

a

t

W

a

l

k

e

r

s

B

i

s

t

r

o

M

u

l

t

i

-

P

u

r

p

o

s

e

R

o

o

m

7

7

s

m

M

o

r

n

i

n

g

S

u

n

C

o

u

n

t

r

y

K

i

t

c

h

e

n

A

m

e

n

i

t

y

7

0

s

m

W

/

C

W

/

C

W

/

C

W

/

C

M

a

i

n

t

.

S

h

o

p

&

O

f

f

i

c

e

3

0

s

m

C

o

m

m

e

r

c

i

a

l

L

a

u

n

d

r

y

7

0

s

m

G

a

r

b

a

g

e

/

R

e

c

y

c

l

i

n

g

3

7

s

m

M

o

v

i

n

g

2

4

s

m

S

t

a

f

f

6

0

s

m

E

l

e

v

a

t

o

r

L

o

b

b

y

J

a

n

O

u

t

d

o

o

r

D

i

n

i

n

g

P

a

t

i

o

P

a

t

i

o

B

a

r

D

a

n

c

e

F

lo

o

r

P

r

i

v

a

t

e

D

i

n

i

n

g

S

t

a

g

e

A

m

e

n

i

t

y

5

0

s

m

G

r

e

e

n

h

o

u

s

e

&

Q

u

i

t

e

L

o

u

n

g

e

1

2

0

s

m

V

i

s

i

t

o

r

L

o

u

n

g

e

7

7

s

m

L

i

b

r

a

r

y

/

M

e

d

i

a

1

0

1

s

m

S

c

o

o

t

e

r

s

Entry

Lobby

Entry

Gallery

Lobby

Amenity

72 sm

Reception

43 sm

Store

Display

39 sm

Washroom

13 sm

Conference

Room

72 sm

Coatroom

16 sm

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

M

o

v

i

n

g

/

L

o

a

d

i

n

g

E

x

t

e

n

t

o

f

U

n

d

e

r

g

r

o

u

n

d

P

a

r

k

i

n

g

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

2

B

E

D

L

o

b

b

y

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

1

B

E

D

+

D

2

B

E

D

P

a

r

t

y

R

o

o

m

2

B

E

D

2

B

E

D

8

L

o

c

k

e

r

s

G

a

r

b

a

g

e

R

o

o

m

1

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

2

B

E

D

1

B

E

D

1

2

L

o

c

k

e

r

s

M

a

n

a

g

e

r

O

f

f

i

c

e

4.5

0


22

.0

0

4.8

0

18

.7

0

30

.0

0




1

0

.0

0

1

0

.

0

0

1

0

.

0

0

1

0

.

0

0

25

.0

0

25

.0

0




Proposed Site Plan


Development Plan

September 10, 2018


APPENDIX B

Road Traffic Information

Look Up ID#: 392

Date: 01-Nov-18

Name: Yvonne Lo

Company HGC Engineering

Name: Loudel Uy

Tel#: (905) 615-3200

Location: - Mississauga Road south of Dundas- Dundas Street, West of Mississauga

AADT: 20,000 60,000

# of Lanes: 2 lanes 7 lanes

% Trucks: 2% 7%

Medium/Heavy Trucks Ratio: 55/45 55/45

Day/Night Traffic Split: 90/10 90/10

Posted Speed Limit: 50 km/h 60km/h

Gradient of Road: <2% <2%

Ultimate R O W: 26m 35m

REQUESTED BY:

PREPARED BY:

ON SITE TRAFFIC DATASpecific Street Names

Mississauga Road Dundas Street WSpecific

Comments: Ultimate Traffic Data only.

NOISE REPORT FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

APPENDIX C

Sample STAMSON 5.04 Output

STAMSON 5.0 NORMAL REPORT Date: 21-01-2019 09:36:09 MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY / NOISE ASSESSMENT Filename: a.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hours Description: Future daytime and nighttime sound levels at the north façade of the Senior’s Residence Building(Prediction Location [A]) Road data, segment # 1: Mississauga (day/night) ----------------------------------------------- Car traffic volume : 17640/1960 veh/TimePeriod * Medium truck volume : 198/22 veh/TimePeriod * Heavy truck volume : 162/18 veh/TimePeriod * Posted speed limit : 50 km/h Road gradient : 2 % Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete) * Refers to calculated road volumes based on the following input: 24 hr Traffic Volume (AADT or SADT): 20000 Percentage of Annual Growth : 0.00 Number of Years of Growth : 0.00 Medium Truck % of Total Volume : 1.10 Heavy Truck % of Total Volume : 0.90 Day (16 hrs) % of Total Volume : 90.00 Data for Segment # 1: Mississauga (day/night) --------------------------------------------- Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 90.00 deg Wood depth : 0 (No woods.) No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface) Receiver source distance : 60.00 / 60.00 m Receiver height : 1.50 / 1.50 m Topography : 3 (Elevated; no barrier) Elevation : 15.00 m Reference angle : 0.00 Road data, segment # 2: Dundas (day/night) ------------------------------------------ Car traffic volume : 50220/5580 veh/TimePeriod * Medium truck volume : 2079/231 veh/TimePeriod * Heavy truck volume : 1701/189 veh/TimePeriod * Posted speed limit : 60 km/h Road gradient : 2 % Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete) * Refers to calculated road volumes based on the following input: 24 hr Traffic Volume (AADT or SADT): 60000 Percentage of Annual Growth : 0.00 Number of Years of Growth : 0.00 Medium Truck % of Total Volume : 3.85 Heavy Truck % of Total Volume : 3.15 Day (16 hrs) % of Total Volume : 90.00

Data for Segment # 2: Dundas (day/night) ---------------------------------------- Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 90.00 deg Wood depth : 0 (No woods.) No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface) Receiver source distance : 195.00 / 195.00 m Receiver height : 1.50 / 1.50 m Topography : 3 (Elevated; no barrier) Elevation : 15.00 m Reference angle : 0.00 Results segment # 1: Mississauga (day) -------------------------------------- Source height = 0.97 m ROAD (0.00 + 57.30 + 0.00) = 57.30 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 90 0.23 65.27 0.00 -7.38 -0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 57.30 dBA Results segment # 2: Dundas (day) --------------------------------- Source height = 1.33 m ROAD (0.00 + 60.79 + 0.00) = 60.79 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 90 0.22 74.90 0.00 -13.53 -0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 60.79 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 60.79 dBA Total Leq All Segments: 62.40 dBA Results segment # 1: Mississauga (night) ---------------------------------------- Source height = 0.97 m ROAD (0.00 + 50.76 + 0.00) = 50.76 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 90 0.23 58.74 0.00 -7.38 -0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.76 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 50.76 dBA Results segment # 2: Dundas (night) -----------------------------------

Source height = 1.33 m ROAD (0.00 + 54.26 + 0.00) = 54.26 dBA Angle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 90 0.22 68.37 0.00 -13.53 -0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 54.26 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment Leq : 54.26 dBA Total Leq All Segments: 55.86 dBA TOTAL Leq FROM ALL SOURCES (DAY): 62.40 (NIGHT): 55.86

Documents

Noise Feasibility Study Proposed Residential Care Facility ... · Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential Care Facility Page 2 Carmel Heights Re-Development, Mississauga, Ontario