REPORT - Rochford District€¦ · no detectable effect on health and quality of life due to the noise. LOAEL – Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level This is the level above which

REPORT

Southend on Sea - Airport Business Park

Noise Impact Assessment

Client: Henry Boot Development (South)

Reference: IEMR001D01

Revision: 01/Final

Date: 22 October 2015

S o u t h e n d B u s i n e s s P a r k – N o i s e I m p a c t A s s e s s m e n t

22 October 2015 IEMR001D01 i

HASKONINGDHV UK LTD.

Manchester One

Portland Street

Manchester

M1 3LF

United Kingdom

Industry, Energy and Mining

VAT registration number: 792428892

+44 161 2361018

royalhaskoningdhv.com

T

W

Document title: Southend on Sea - Airport Business Park

Document short title: Reference: IEMR001D01

Revision: 01/Final Date: 22 October 2015

Project name: Project number: PB3903

Author(s): Iain Kelly

Drafted by: Iain Kelly

Checked by: Alasdair Baxter

Date / initials: 20/10/2015 / AB

Approved by: Alasdair Baxter

Date / initials: 22/10/2015 / AB

Classification

Open

Disclaimer No part of these specifications/printed matter may be reproduced and/or published by print, photocopy, microfilm or by any other means, without the prior written permission of HaskoningDHV UK Ltd.; nor may they be used, without such permission, for any purposes other than that for which they were produced. HaskoningDHV UK Ltd. accepts no responsibility or liability for these specifications/printed matter to any party other than the persons by whom it was commissioned and as concluded under that Appointment. The quality management system of HaskoningDHV UK Ltd. has been certified in accordance with ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001.


22 October 2015 IEMR001D01 ii

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Site Description and Surrounding Area 1

1.3 Development Proposals 1

1.4 Objectives of the study 1

2 Legislative Framework and Planning Policy 3

2.1 National Legislation 3

2.1.1 Environmental Protection Act 1990 3 2.1.2 The Control of Pollution Act 1974 3 2.2 National Policy Guidance 3

2.2.1 National Planning Policy Framework 3 2.2.2 Noise Policy Statement for England 4 2.2.3 National Planning Practice Guidance for Noise 4 2.3 Guidance 5

2.4 Local Planning Policy Guidance 6

3 Baseline Environmental Noise Survey 7

3.1 Methodology and Procedure 7

4 Baseline Noise Measurement Results 8

4.1 Measured Baseline Noise Data 8

5 Noise Impact Methodology and Assessment Criteria 11

5.1 Consultation 11

5.2 Assessment Methodology 11

5.3 Construction Phase Assessment 11

5.3.1 Methodology 11 5.4 Road Traffic Noise 12

5.4.1 Methodology 12 5.4.2 Traffic Data 12 5.4.3 Significance Criteria 13 5.5 Industrial and Commercial Sound Assessment 13

5.5.1 Noise from Fixed Plant 15 5.5.2 Noise from HGV Deliveries 15 5.6 Noise from Use of Car Parking Areas 16

5.6.1 Car Parking Significance Criteria 16


22 October 2015 IEMR001D01 iii

6 Impact Assessment 17

6.1 Construction noise 17

6.1.1 Construction Noise Sensitive Receptors 17 6.2 Traffic Noise 17

6.3 Operational Site Noise 19

6.3.1 Fixed Plant 19 6.3.2 Noise from HGV Deliveries 20 6.3.3 Noise from Use of Car Parking Areas 21

7 Mitigation Measures 23

7.1 Construction Noise Mitigation 23

7.1.1 Noise Management Plan 23 7.1.2 Management Structure and Responsibilities 23 7.1.3 Training 23 7.1.4 Maintenance 24 7.2 Construction vibration mitigation 24

7.3 Operational Noise Mitigation 24

8 Conclusions 25

Appendices

Appendix A

Site Plans

Site Location and Study Area

Appendix B

Acoustic Terminology


22 October 2015 IEMR001D01 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

Royal HaskoningDHV was instructed to undertake a noise impact assessment to support an Outline Planning Application for the development of a new business park at land east of Cherry Orchard Way, Rochford, falling within the Rochford District Council boundary. The application is submitted on behalf of Henry Boot Developments Ltd (South) (HBD) which is part owner of the land with Southend Borough Council. A noise impact assessment was completed to consider the site suitability for the proposed scheme.

1.2 Site Description and Surrounding Area

The application site comprises 55 acres of predominantly greenfield land in agricultural use. The land is allocated in the recently adopted London Southend and Environs Joint Area Action Plan (2014) (hereafter the JAAP) for a business park. The JAAP is one of a number of plans prepared jointly by Rochford District Council (RDC) and Southend on Sea Borough Council (SBC). The JAAP has been developed in accordance with the Local Development Framework of both RDC and SBC and conforms to the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework which seeks to support sustainable economic development, such as now proposed. The site is in a strategic location, in the immediate vicinity of a regional airport and situated 1.2 km south-west of Rochford town centre and 3.6 km north of Southend-on-Sea town centre. The Site is bounded by Cherry Orchard Way to the west, a principal route out of Southend-on-Sea, and Aviation Way to the south. The ambient noise at the site is likely to be dominated both day and night by road traffic on the surrounding roads, aircraft using the airfield, trains on the Southend rail line and noise associated with the commercial and business parks in the vicinity of the site. Existing noise sensitive receptors (NSRs) are residential premises located on Cherry Orchard Lane to the west of the development area, residential property on Hall Road to the north and offices to the south of the site. The site location and study area masterplan is detailed in Appendix A, Figure 1 and Figure 2.

1.3 Development Proposals

The proposed development comprises B1 and B2 uses along with other ancillary uses to include A1, A3, A4, D1, D2 and B8.

1.4 Objectives of the study

The aims of the noise impact assessment are summarised below;

Characterisation of the existing ambient noise at nearby receptors; Assessment of noise from the construction of the proposed development; Assessment of noise from the proposed commercial and industrial sources; Assessment of noise from the proposed car parking areas;



Assessment of noise from fixed external plant; and Proposals for noise mitigation, as appropriate, within the scheme to protect existing noise

sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the development site.



2 Legislative Framework and Planning Policy

2.1 National Legislation

2.1.1 Environmental Protection Act 1990

Section 79 of the Act defines statutory nuisance with regard to noise and determines that local planning authorities have a duty to detect such nuisances in their area. The Act also defines the concept of “Best Practicable Means” (BPM):

‘practicable’ means reasonably practicable having regard among other things to local conditions and circumstances, to the current state of technical knowledge and to the financial implications;

the means to be employed include the design, installation, maintenance and manner and periods of operation of plant and machinery, and the design, construction and maintenance of buildings and structures;

the test is to apply only so far as compatible with any duty imposed by law; and the test is to apply only so far as compatible with safety and safe working conditions, and

with the exigencies of any emergency or unforeseeable circumstances.

Section 80 of the Act provides local planning authorities with powers to serve an abatement notice requiring the abatement of a nuisance or requiring works to be executed to prevent their occurrence.

2.1.2 The Control of Pollution Act 1974

Section 60 of the Act provides powers to Local Authority Officers to serve an abatement notice in respect of noise nuisance from construction works. Section 61 provides a method by which a contractor can apply for ‘prior consent’ for construction activities before commencement of works. The ‘prior consent’ is agreed between the Local Authority and the contractor and may contain a range of agreed working conditions, noise limits and control measures designed to minimise or prevent the occurrence of noise nuisance from construction activities. Application for a ‘prior consent’ is a commonly used control measure in respect of potential noise impacts from major construction works.

2.2 National Policy Guidance

2.2.1 National Planning Policy Framework

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was introduced in March 2012 replacing the former Planning Policy Guidance 24: Planning and Noise. Paragraph 123 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that 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.

The NPPF also refers to the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) (Defra, 2010).

2.2.2 Noise Policy Statement for England

The Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) document was published by Defra in 2010 and paragraph 1.7 states three policy aims:

“Through the effective management and control of environmental, neighbour and neighbourhood noise within the context of Government policy on sustainable development:

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.”

The first two points require that significant adverse impact should not occur and that, where a noise level falls between a level which represents the lowest observable adverse effect and a level which represents a significant observed adverse effect:

“…all reasonable steps should be taken to mitigate and minimise adverse effects on health and quality of life whilst also taking into consideration the guiding principles of sustainable development. This does not mean that such effects cannot occur.” (Paragraph 2.24, NPSE, March 2010).

Section 2.20 of the NPSE introduces key phrases including “Significant adverse” and “adverse” and two established concepts from toxicology that are being applied to noise impacts:

“NOEL – No Observed Effect Level This is the level below which no effect can be detected. In simple terms, below this level, there is no detectable effect on health and quality of life due to the noise. LOAEL – Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level This is the level above which adverse effects on health and quality of life can be detected”.

Paragraph 2.21 of the NPSE extends the concepts described above and leads to a significant observed adverse effect level – SOAEL, which is defined as the level above which significant effects on health and quality of life occur. The NPSE states:

“it is not possible to have a single objective noise-based measure that defines SOAEL that is applicable to all sources of noise in all situations”. (Paragraph 2.22, NPSE, March 2010).

Furthermore paragraph 2.22 of the NPSE acknowledges that:

“further research is required to increase understanding of what may constitute a significant adverse effect on health and quality of life from noise”.

2.2.3 National Planning Practice Guidance for Noise

The National Planning Practice Guidance for Noise (NPPG Noise, December 2014), issued under the NPPF, states that noise needs to be considered when new developments may create additional noise and



when new developments would be sensitive to the prevailing acoustic environment. When preparing local or neighbourhood plans, or taking decisions about new development, there may also be opportunities to consider improvements to the acoustic environment.

2.3 Guidance

The following guidance has been used for the purpose of the noise and vibration assessment: British Standard (BS) 7445: Parts 1 and 2 - Description and measurement of environmental noise

This Standard provides details of the instrumentation and measurement techniques to be used when assessing environmental noise and defines the basic noise quantity as the continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (LAeq). Part 2 of BS 7445 replicates ISO standard 1996-2. British Standard (BS) 5228-1:2009+A1:2014 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites - Part 1: Noise

This document provides recommendations for basic methods of noise and vibration control relating to construction and open sites where work activities/operations generate significant noise and/or vibration levels. The legislative background to noise and vibration control is described and recommendations are given regarding procedures for the establishment of effective liaison between developers, site operators and local authorities. This British Standard provides guidance on methods of predicting and measuring noise and assessing its impact on those exposed to it. British Standard (BS) 5228-2:2009+A1:2014 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites – Part 2: Vibration

Part 2 of this Standard gives recommendations for basic methods of vibration control relating to construction and open sites where work activities / operations generate significant vibration levels. The Standard includes tables of vibration levels measured during piling operations throughout the UK. It provides guidance concerning methods of mitigating vibration from construction, particularly with regard to percussive piling. BS8233:2014 – Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings

Provides a methodology to calculate the noise levels entering a building through facades and façade elements and provides details of appropriate measures for sound insulation between dwellings. It includes recommended internal noise levels which are provided for a variety of situations. World Health Organisation (WHO) (1999) Guidelines for community noise

These guidelines present health-based noise limits intended to protect the population from exposure to excess noise. They present guideline limit values at which the likelihood of particular effects, such as sleep disturbance or annoyance, may increase. The guideline values are 50 or 55dB LAeq during the day, related to annoyance, and 45 dB LAeq or 60dB LAmax at night, related to sleep disturbance.



British Standard (BS) 4142:2014 – Method for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound

BS 4142 describes methods for rating and assessing sound of an industrial and/or commercial nature. The methods use outdoor sound levels to assess the likely effects of sound on people who might be inside or outside a dwelling or premises used for residential purposes upon which sound is incident. Calculation of Road Traffic Noise

The Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN) document provides a method for assessing noise from road traffic in the UK and a method of calculating noise levels from the Annual Average Weekday Traffic (AAWT) flows and from measured noise levels. Since published in 1988 this document has been the nationally accepted standard in predicting noise levels from road traffic. The calculation methods provided include correction factors to take account of variables affecting the creation and propagation of road traffic noise, accounting for the percentage of heavy goods vehicles, different road surfacing, inclination, screening by barriers and relative height of source and receiver. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges1

Volume 11, Part 3, Section 7 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) provides guidance on the environmental assessment of noise impacts from road schemes. DMRB contains advice and information relating to transport-related noise and vibration, which has relevance with regard to the construction and operational traffic impacts affecting sensitive receptors adjacent to road networks. It also provides guideline significance criteria for assessing traffic related noise impacts.

2.4 Local Planning Policy Guidance

Rochford District Council (RDC) published a Local Development Framework Core Strategy2 in 2011. Within the section on Economic Development the following is stated in Policy ED1 – Employment Growth; “The Council will encourage development that enables the economy to diversify and modernise through the growth of existing businesses and the creation of new enterprises providing high value employment, having regard to environmental issues and residential amenity.” Policy ED4 – Future Employment Allocations goes on to add; “The Council will allocate 18 ha of industrial land to compensate for de-allocations as per Policy ED3. New employment allocations will be in better strategic locations to meet the needs of businesses, be in accessible locations to the local population, and at the same time minimise any negative impact on residential amenity.”

1 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 7 ‘Noise and Vibration’, 2011 (DMRB) 2 Rochford District Council (2011) Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Adopted Version.



3 Baseline Environmental Noise Survey

3.1 Methodology and Procedure

A baseline noise survey was undertaken at locations representative of existing and proposed noise sensitive receptors to support the planning application for the development. The locations are illustrated in Appendix A, Figure 3 and detailed in Table 3.1. Table 3.1: Baseline noise survey locations

Location Description Grid Reference

X Y

MP1 Location representative of the residentialproperty on Cherry Orchard Lane rear garden/facade to the west boundary of the site.

585880.3 189837.4

MP2 Location representative of residential property onHall Road

586524.2 190397.3

MP3 Residential property at Rockall (night time only) 585491.8 189334.2

MP4 Location representative of commercial premiseson Lancaster Business Park (night time only)

586091.4 189447.3

MP5 Mid-point within development area (night time only)

586093.9 189641.5

MP6 Location representative of commercial premiseson Lancaster Business Park (day time only)

586234.4 189482.6

LT1 Eastern boundary of development site closest toairfield

586442.3 189504.6

A baseline noise survey was conducted over 17th to 19th August 2015, in accordance with the procedure described in BS 7445 parts 1 and 2. Weather conditions were favourable for noise measurements with wind speeds of less than 5m/s and dry conditions during the attended measurements. A period during the unattended noise measurements from 0620 hours through until 1600 hours on the 18th August were characterised by rainfall. Data for these periods was omitted from the assessment. The noise measurements were taken using the instrumentation detailed in Table 3.2.



Table 3.2: Noise survey instrumentation

Make Instrument Serial Number

Calibration due date at time of survey

Brüel and Kjӕr

2250 Sound level meter 2506363 05th June 2016

B&K 4189 Microphone 1903936 05th June 2016

Rion

NL-32 Sound level meter 00620155 25th July 2016

UC 53-A Microphone and pre-amp

319829 25th July 2016

Brüel and Kjӕr 4231 Acoustic calibrator 2229669 13th May 2016

The sound level meters were fully calibrated, traceable to UKAS standards and satisfied the requirements of BS EN 61672-1: 2013 1F

3 for a ‘Class 1’ Sound Level Meter (SLM). The SLMs were set to record LAeq, LA90, LA10 and LAmax data with a ‘fast’ time constant and A-weighting. Appendix B presents descriptions of these terms. The noise measurements were conducted with the SLMs mounted on tripods at heights between 1.2m and 1.5m above ground level and 3.5m away from any reflecting surface other than the ground, i.e. in free-field conditions. The instruments were calibrated before and after the survey using the portable calibrator. No deviations in the calibration levels were noted.

4 Baseline Noise Measurement Results

4.1 Measured Baseline Noise Data

Measured baseline noise levels at the monitoring locations MP1 – MP6 and LT1 are presented in the following Table 4.1 and Table 4.2. Table 4.1: Baseline noise level summary – Daytime (17-19th August 2015), free field, dB

Location Time Duration hh:mm

LAeq, dB LAmax, dB LA10, dB LA90, dB

MP1 13:20 01:00 59.2 77.9 62.7 52.3

MP2 14:37 01:00 49.8 68.1 51.2 45.7

MP6 12:11 01:00 65.0 86.4 67.6 45.8

LT1 17:00 01:00 50.8 71.6 52.3 47.5

3 British Standards Institution (2013). BS EN 61672-1:2013 Electroacoustics. Sound level meters. Specifications. BSI, London



Table 4.2: Baseline noise level summary – Night (17-19th August 2015), free field, dB

Location Time Duration hh:mm

LAeq, dB LAmax, dB LA10, dB LA90, dB

MP1 23:51 00:15 52.8 73.9 54.6 39.0

MP2 00:18 00:15 40.9 61.5 43.6 31.3

MP3 00:46 00:15 35.1 61.2 36.6 29.9

MP4 01:09 00:15 49.0 76.4 45.5 34.8

MP5 01:28 00:15 35.6 52.4 39.2 31.1

LT1 00:30 00:15 44.0 62.9 42.0 30.1

Monitoring Location MP1 Daytime ambient noise levels were dominated by road traffic on the B1013 Cherry Orchard Way. During the day aircraft noise and occasional vehicles passing on Cherry Orchard Lane contributed to the ambient noise at this location. At night the ambient noise was dominated by distant airfield activity, occasional road traffic and insect noise. Monitoring Location MP2 Daytime ambient noise levels were dominated by road traffic on Hall Road. Other contributions were from vegetation rustling nearby and a gas gun bird scarer discharging twice during the monitoring period. At night the ambient noise was dominated by occasional road traffic on Cherry Orchard Way, aircraft and occasional domestic noise. Monitoring Location MP3 Measurements were undertaken at night time only at this location. The ambient noise was dominated by occasional road traffic on the local road network, aircraft and occasional domestic noise. Monitoring Location MP4 Measurements were undertaken at night time only at this location. The ambient noise was dominated by occasional road traffic on the local road network, noise sources of an industrial nature from the business units nearby and occasional aircraft. Monitoring Location MP5 Measurements were undertaken at night time only at this location. The ambient noise was dominated by occasional road traffic on the local road network.



Monitoring Location MP6 This location was chosen to substitute MP4 as a mobile cafeteria was parked in the vicinity of MP4 during the day time period. Measurements were undertaken during the day time only at this location and it was deemed that this location was representative of the ambient noise at MP4. The ambient noise was dominated by local road traffic entering the business park and industrial noise from the business units.



5 Noise Impact Methodology and Assessment Criteria

5.1 Consultation

The proposed development lies within the administrative area of Rochford District Council (RDC). Consultation was undertaken with the RDC Environmental Health team to agree the appropriate scope of the noise survey methodology and assessment2F

4

5.2 Assessment Methodology

The study area for the noise assessment comprised the area immediately adjacent to the proposed development site and the receptors in proximity to the site likely to be affected by the scheme. The following sections describe the impact methodology and assessment criteria used to assess the impact of the scheme and the significance of the impacts for the following;

Operational road traffic; Operational noise from fixed plant; Operational noise from HGV deliveries/collections; and Operational car parking noise.

A detailed noise model of the development site and surrounding area was developed using an OS Vectormap and an OS Landform Profile DTM ASCII XYZ file purchased from Ordnance Survey Ltd via emapsite.com. Additional proposed development drawings and base maps were provided by Jefferson Sheard, the appointed architect for the project;

Proposed Indicative Plan 0688_A_2000 Revision L.

5.3 Construction Phase Assessment

5.3.1 Methodology

Construction activities will take place during typical day time construction hours only, assumed to be 07:30 to 18:00 during weekdays only; Saturday 08:00 to 13:00hrs, with no work on Sunday or Bank Holidays.

The noise generated by the construction activities associated with the development have the potential to temporarily increase noise levels at nearby residential properties from the operation of equipment and machinery. Due to the transient nature of construction activities the potential for receptors to be affected will depend on where within the application site the noisy activity takes place, the nature of the activity and controls and meteorological conditions. Noise generated by the construction of the development is inevitable, therefore to minimise the potential for noise impacts generic mitigation measures are provided within Section 7. These include Best Practical Means (BPM) as defined in The Control of Pollution Act 1974, which are provided for inclusion in the site Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).

4 Email titled Baseline noise survey – Southend ABP to Environmental Protection, RDC dated 12/08/15, reply from Principal Environmental Health Officer, RDC dated 19/08/15.



5.4 Road Traffic Noise

5.4.1 Methodology

Variations in road traffic flows on the existing road network were assessed using the guidance given in the advice note HA 213/08 within Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 7 ‘Noise and Vibration’, 2011 (DMRB). Initial screening seeks to identify existing roads or possible new routes where traffic flow changes, exceeding plus 25% or minus 20%, are expected in the year of opening. It is stated that traffic flow variations below this level would give rise to a maximum change in the noise level of less than 1 dB(A). Where road links are predicted to experience an increase less than 25% or a decrease of less than 20%, the guidance indicates that no further assessment needs to be conducted. Where road links are predicted to have an increase of greater than 25% or a decrease of 20%, a noise level calculation should be undertaken following the procedure outlined in CRTN, in consideration of potential effects at receptors within 50m of the roadside.

5.4.2 Traffic Data

The traffic flow data for the road links on the surrounding road network were obtained from the traffic consultants for the project, Vectos, for the baseline years of 2018, 2021 and for the completion year of the development 2032. An email from Vectos5 on the 1st October 2015 summarised the following; “the development will not be operational in 2018. Therefore, there is no change between the without and with development scenarios in 2018. For 2021 it was assumed that Phase 1 is built out, and for 2032 full build out has been assumed.” Therefore for the purposes of the assessment, the years 2021 and 2032 without and with development scenarios were assessed. Annual Average Weekday Traffic (AAWT) flows and Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) percentages provided for the roads detailed in Table 5.1 were used in the road traffic noise assessment. Table 5.1: Road links used in the assessment of noise generated by operational traffic

Road link Link Description Speed km/hr

Hall Road Between B1013 and West Street 65

B1013 Cherry Orchard Way Between Hall Street and Eastwoodbury Lane 80

Hall Road West of Cherry Orchard Way 65

Eastwoodbury Lane South of Cherry Orchard Way 65

Nestuda Way South of Eastwoodbury Lane 65

Rochford Road North of Prince Avenue 48

Southend Road Between Prince Avenue and Sutton Road 48

5 Email from Vectos, Senior Transport Planner – Southend ABP – Information request for the noise impact assessment. Sent 01/10/2015.



Road link Link Description Speed km/hr

Southend Road Between Sutton Road and Bradley Way 48

West Street/Bradley Way Between Hall Road and Southend Road 48

Manners Way Between Southend Road and Prince Avenue 48

Access onto Aviation Way Access onto Aviation Way 48

5.4.3 Significance Criteria

Operational Phase road links were assessed using the operational phase impact magnitude criteria in Table 5.2. The thresholds for differentiating the criteria are taken from DMRB for long-term impacts and the Institute of Acoustics (IOA) and Institute of Environmental Management (IEMA) document 'Guidelines for Noise Impact Assessment' and are an indication of the relative change in ambient noise as a result of a development. The basis for the use of the criteria in Table 5.2 is that the smallest noticeable change in environmental noise level is typically 3dB, whereas a 10dB change is perceived as a doubling or halving of the noise level. Table 5.2: Significance Criteria for Relative Change due to Road Traffic (Long Term)

Change in noise level (dB) Impact significance

0.0 No change

0.1 – 2.9 Negligible

3.0 – 4.9 Minor

5.0 – 9.9 Moderate

10.0+ Major

5.5 Industrial and Commercial Sound Assessment

BS 4142:2014 describes methods for rating and assessing sound of an industrial and/or commercial nature. The assessment of noise impact from the Proposed Development considered the following proposed sound sources in the context of BS4142;

Fixed plant comprising mechanical and electrical equipment; Loading and unloading of goods vehicles at commercial and industrial areas; and Mobile plant and vehicles that comprise the total sound emanating from industrial or commercial

premises. The methods defined in BS4142 use outdoor sound levels to assess the likely effects of sound on people who might be inside or outside a dwelling or premises used for residential purposes upon which sound is incident, and combines procedures for assessing the impact in relation to:



The development of new industrial and/or commercial sources affecting existing receptors; and Planning for new private and commercial residential development being brought near existing

industrial or commercial sources.

The standard is a major update on previous editions incorporating a rigorous assessment of uncertainty in environmental noise measurements and introducing the concepts of “significant adverse impact” rather than likelihood of complaints. Common principles with the previous edition are the consideration of the characteristics of the sound under investigation, time of day and frequency of occurrence. The standard applies to industrial/commercial and background noise levels outside residential buildings and for assessing whether existing and new industrial/commercial noise sources are likely to give rise to significant adverse impacts on the occupants living in the vicinity. Assessment is undertaken by subtracting the measured background noise level from the rating level; the greater this difference, the greater the magnitude of the impact. BS 4142 refers to the following;

“A difference of around +10 dB or more is likely to be an indication of a significant adverse impact, depending on the context.

A difference of around + 5 dB is likely to be an indication of an adverse impact, depending on the context. The lower the rating level relative to the measured background sound level the less likely it is that the specific sound source will have an adverse impact or a significant adverse impact” Where the rating level does not exceed the background sound level, this is an indication of the specific sound source having a low impact, depending on the context.”

When assessing the noise from a source, which is classified as the Rated Noise Level, it is necessary to have regard to the acoustic features that may be present in the noise. Section 9.1 of BS 4142 states:

“Certain acoustic features can increase the significance of impact over that expected from a basic comparison between the specific sound level and the background sound level. Where such features are present at the assessment location, add a character correction to the specific sound level to obtain the rating level.”

The methods for assessing whether an acoustic feature is present are:

Subjective method; Objective method for tonality; and Reference method.

For the subjective method a rating penalty for tones of 2 – 6 dB can be added, while for impulsive noise a correction of up to 9 dB can be applied. The perception of audibility at the monitoring location determines the value of the penalty to be applied. For the objective and reference methods sections 9.3.2 and 9.3.3 and Annexes C and D of the standard should be referred to.



The determination of the specific sound level free from sounds influencing the ambient sound at the assessment location is obtained by measurement or a combination of measurement and calculation. This is to be measured in terms of the LAeq,T, where ‘T’ is a reference period of:

1 hour during daytime hours (07:00 hrs to 23:00 hrs); and 15 minutes during night-time hours (23:00 to 07:00 hrs).

Noise from externally mounted plant is relatively simple to mitigate through the design measures, such as: equipment selection, location of equipment, installation of attenuators or enclosure of equipment. SoundPLAN noise modelling software was utilised to predict the noise effects from fixed plant associated with the development. The model was created using topographical data of the local area and the plan of the proposed development and included nearby existing and proposed residential dwellings and other surrounding buildings. Taking the above guidance into account the impact magnitude criteria presented in Table 5.3 were determined based on the excess of the rating level over the measured background sound level. Table 5.3: Operational noise impact magnitude criteria for industrial/commercial noise sources

Rating level dB LAr,Tr Impact criteria

≤ Measured LA90 Low impact

= Measured LA90 + 1 dB to 2.9 dB Minor Adverse

Measured LA90 + 3 dB to 7.9 dB Moderate Adverse

Measured LA90 + ≥ 8 dB Significant Adverse

5.5.1 Noise from Fixed Plant

As the Airport Business Park planning application is outline at this stage, specific details of any externally mounted plant associated with the commercial establishments, for example refrigeration and ventilation plant, are not available. Noise from plant such as this is typically assessed in the context of BS 4142, which involves a comparison of the rating level and the measured background (LA90) noise level at potential receptor locations. At the later design stage, any externally-mounted plant should be specified such that the daytime and night time background (LA90) noise levels are not exceeded and where appropriate design target levels are to be below these background levels or in accordance with RDC policy.

5.5.2 Noise from HGV Deliveries

Traffic count data provided by the Transport Consultant for the project indicates that up to 68 HGVs visit the site for delivery/collections in any one 24 hour period. The drawings provided by the architect for the project indicate that the proposed service areas and loading bays will be located to the east and south of Plots 5, 6 and 7. It is considered reasonable to assume that deliveries/collections will take place at these indicated areas.



SoundPLAN noise modelling software was utilised to predict the noise effects from delivery and loading noise associated with the development. Operational HGV activity was based on the following assumptions:

1 HGV unloading per hour between 00:00 to 07:00hrs, and 2 HGV’s unloading per hour between 07:00 to 00:00hrs;

Loading and unloading activity will take approximately 30 minutes per HGV with a Sound Power Level of 80 dB(A);

HGV movements in and out of the plots were modelled as a moving line source at <30 km/h on asphalt - Sound Power Level of 61.0 dB(A), per metre;

A total of 68 HGV’s arriving and 68 HGV’s departing the development site each day; and No external handling activities (e.g. via forklift truck) were assumed.

5.6 Noise from Use of Car Parking Areas

Noise from vehicles moving within the car park areas were assessed separately from the changes in road traffic, as the calculation method used for general road traffic (CRTN) does not apply to this type of traffic noise source, where traffic speeds and flows are relatively low. There are no specific UK guidelines for assessing noise of this nature; therefore the noise generated by the car parking movements was assessed using the methodology and guidance provided in the Bavarian Car Parking Lot Noise Study 2007. The SoundPLAN noise modelling software directly implements this calculation method and produces noise levels in the LAeq noise index. The number of spaces for the car park accumulations was obtained from the Architects for the project Jefferson Sheard. The time histogram for the car park accumulations used in the model was derived from information provided by Vectos, the traffic consultants for the project. The predicted levels from the modelling included the HGV movements and loading and unloading activities used in the assessment of HGV deliveries for a robust assessment.

5.6.1 Car Parking Significance Criteria

Based on the proposed car parking layout, normal office hours of operation and traffic accumulations, predicted levels as daytime LAeq,13 hours and peak LAeq,1 hour were generated by SoundPLAN at the nearest receptors. The impact was assessed as the relative increase in the ambient noise level, using the criteria defined in Table 5.4. Table 5.4: Significance criteria for relative change due to car parking

Change in noise level (dB) Impact significance

0.0 No impact

0.1 – 0.9 Negligible

1.0 – 2.9 Minor

3.0 – 4.9 Moderate

5.0+ Major



6 Impact Assessment

6.1 Construction noise

6.1.1 Construction Noise Sensitive Receptors

Noise and vibration associated with the construction phase of the development may have the potential to impact upon residential receptors adjacent to the development site, due to the close proximity of nearby receptors. Although the construction works will be carried out during the day time, some equipment, such as power generation plant for security or lighting, may be required to run at night. Such power generation plant typically operates using a diesel generator which, given the low existing noise levels in the vicinity of the site, has the potential to cause disturbance at nearby residences. Old or ill-maintained equipment is likely to generate higher noise levels; however ‘silenced’ plant is available, which would reduce noise impacts at nearby residences. Mitigation measured using Best Practicable Means (BPM) for construction noise and vibration is presented in Section 7 of this report.

6.2 Traffic Noise

With regard to vehicle movement noise, the screening assessment of operational road traffic impact was undertaken by examining the percentage change in 18 hour Annual Average Weekday (AAWT) traffic in the years 2021 and 2032 without and with the development scheme. The results of this screening exercise are presented in Table 6.1 and Table 6.2. Table 6.1: Screening assessment of scheme traffic impacts (2021)

Road link

18hr AAWT Traffic Flows

(2021) % Change

Without Scheme With Scheme

Hall Road 14,865 14,909 0.3

B1013 Cherry Orchard Way 22,930 24,239 5.4

Hall Road 23,039 23,140 0.4

Eastwoodbury Lane 24,007 25,301 5.1

Nestuda Way 31,212 32,288 3.3

Rochford Road 10,580 10,594 0.1

Southend Road 19,274 19,317 0.2



Road link


(2021) % Change


Southend Road 23,696 23,711 0.1

West Street/Bradley Way 22,273 22,287 0.1

Manners Way 20,798 20,827 0.1

Access onto Aviation Way 4,705 4,719 0.3

Table 6.1 indicates that, in 2021, there are potentially no significant changes in total traffic flows predicted to occur with no links in the study area being classified as ‘affected routes’ as defined in DMRB. The CRTN calculated increase in the LA10,18hr noise level associated with the change in traffic flows would be less than 0.9 dB(A), which in accordance with the criteria in Table 5.2 is of negligible impact. Table 6.2: Screening assessment of scheme traffic impacts (2032)

Road link


(2032) % Change


Hall Road 16,818 17,080 1.5

B1013 Cherry Orchard Way 25,942 33,799 23.2

Hall Road 26,065 26,676 2.3

Eastwoodbury Lane 27,160 34,930 22.2

Nestuda Way 35,311 41,772 15.5

Rochford Road 11,969 12,057 0.7

Southend Road 21,805 22,067 1.2

Southend Road 26,809 26,896 0.3

West Street/Bradley Way 25,198 25,285 0.3

Manners Way 23,530 23,705 0.7

Access onto Aviation Way 5,322 5,410 1.6



Table 6.2 indicates that, in 2032, there are potentially no significant changes in total traffic flows predicted to occur with no links in the study area being classified as ‘affected routes’ as defined in DMRB. The CRTN calculated increase in the LA10,18hr noise level associated with the change in traffic flows would be less than 0.9 dB(A), which in accordance with the criteria in Table 5.2 is of negligible impact.

6.3 Operational Site Noise

The receptors used in the operational site noise impact assessment were selected to represent the existing residential receptors or groups of sensitive receptors, adjacent to or in proximity to the application site. The corresponding nearest baseline noise monitoring locations to the receptors are listed in Table 6.3 and presented in Appendix A, Figure 4. Table 6.3: Noise receptor locations

Receptor Description Location

Useage Corresponding

Nearest Baseline Monitoring LocationsX Y

R1 1-7 Cherry Orchard Lane 585877.1 189936.8 Residential MP1

R2 8 Cherry Orchard Lane 585882.2 189917.8 Residential MP1

R3 Large House off Hall Road

586076.5 190379.2 Residential MP2

R4 Hall Road Cottages 586129.2 190422.1 Residential MP2

R5 Hall Road 586558.1 190380.2 Residential MP2

R6 Cherry Orchard Lane South

585895.7 189662.6 Residential MP1

R7 Residential property at Rockall

585493.4 189351.4 Residential MP3 (night time only)

R8 16-17 Cohav House 586312.6 189489.5 Commercial LT1

R9 Lancaster House 586154.8 189447.8 Commercial MP6 (daytime only)

6.3.1 Fixed Plant

At this stage in the design of the Proposed Development, specific details of any externally mounted plant associated with the commercial establishments, for example refrigeration and ventilation plant, are not available. Noise from plant such as this is typically assessed in the context of BS 4142, which involves a comparison of the rating level and the measured background (LA90) noise level at potential receptor locations.



At the later detailed design stage, any externally-mounted plant should be specified such that the daytime and night time background (LA90) noise levels are not exceeded and where appropriate design target levels are to be below these background levels or in accordance with RDC policy.

6.3.2 Noise from HGV Deliveries

SoundPLAN noise modelling software was utilised to predict the noise from on-site HGV deliveries for the completion year of 2032. This assessment year was deemed to represent the worst case operational year. The predicted levels were corrected to a free field specific sound level and the derived rating level was assigned without the addition of a character correction. This was due to the large distances from the loading and unloading activities and the existing measured ambient night time sound levels being in excess of the predicted HGV delivery noise levels at all receptor locations. The assessment uses the lowest repeatable day and night time background noise levels at the monitoring locations representative of the assessed receptors in order to present a potential worst case for HGV deliveries/collections. The results of the modelling exercise and assessment are presented in Table 6.4 and Table 6.5. Table 6.4: Predicted noise impact of proposed HGV deliveries – daytime

Receptor Floor Façade

Calculated HGV free

field rating level

dB LAeq,16hr

Background noise level at receptor

dB LA90 Day

Assessment Level

(Rating – Background

level)

BS 4142 Assessment

Day time

R1 GF E 27.6 52.3 -24.7 Low Impact F1 E 28.9 52.3 -23.4 Low Impact

R2 GF E 30.1 52.3 -22.2 Low Impact F 1 E 31.5 52.3 -20.8 Low Impact

R3 GF S 19.5 45.7 -26.2 Low Impact F 1 S 20.4 45.7 -25.3 Low Impact



R6 GF N 31.5 52.3 -20.8 Low Impact F 1 N 33.4 52.3 -18.9 Low Impact



The BS 4142 assessment detailed in Table 6.4 determined that HGV deliveries would have a Low Impact during the day, at the nearest existing noise sensitive receptors to the proposed completed development. No significant adverse impact would therefore be anticipated due to the proposed HGV deliveries, unloading and loading activities.



Table 6.5: Predicted noise impact of proposed HGV deliveries – night time


Calculated HGV free

field rating level

dB LAeq,8hr

Background noise level at receptor

dB LA90 Night

Assessment Level

(Rating – Background

level)

BS 4142 Assessment Night time

R1 GF E 24.1 39.0 -14.9 Low Impact F1 E 25.4 39.0 -13.6 Low Impact





R6 GF N 27.9 39.0 -11.1 Low Impact F 1 N 29.7 39.0 -9.3 Low Impact




The BS 4142 assessment detailed in Table 6.5 determined that HGV deliveries would have a Low Impact during the night, at the nearest existing noise sensitive receptors to the proposed development.

No significant adverse impact would therefore be anticipated due to the HGV deliveries, unloading and loading activities during day and night time periods.

6.3.3 Noise from Use of Car Parking Areas

The results of the modelling exercise are presented in Table 6.6 as the predicted free field noise levels from a conservative assumption of car parking accumulations and road traffic using the Development roads for the opening year of 2032. For a complete assessment, HGV deliveries and loading and unloading activities during the day time periods corresponding to normal office opening times at the completed development were included in the modelled scenario. Table 6.6 Predicted noise impact of car park vehicle movements


Operational hours Car Park

use (Free-Field) LAeq,(13hr) dB

Peak Car Park use

(Free-Field) LAeq,(1hr) dB

Existing day time ambient noise level (Free-Field) LAeq,(1hr) dB

R1 GF E 38.5 40.0 59.2 F1 E 39.7 41.0 59.2

R2 GF E 41.3 42.5 59.2




Operational hours Car Park

use (Free-Field) LAeq,(13hr) dB

Peak Car Park use

(Free-Field) LAeq,(1hr) dB

Existing day time ambient noise level (Free-Field) LAeq,(1hr) dB

F 1 E 42.5 43.6 59.2

R3 GF S 33.5 34.7 49.8 F 1 S 34.4 35.6 49.8

R4 GF S 32.2 33.6 49.8 F 1 S 32.8 34.2 49.8

R5 GF S 30.0 31.7 49.8 F 1 S 30.5 32.1 49.8

R6 GF N 46.1 47.6 59.2 F 1 N 47.7 49.0 59.2

R6 GF E 47.5 49.2 59.2 F 1 E 49.0 50.5 59.2

R6 GF S 44.9 46.4 59.2 F 1 S 46.3 47.8 59.2

Table 6.6 shows that car park vehicular movement for the opening year of 2032 is not predicted to give rise to a noise impact at the ground and upper floors of the assessed existing and future properties in closest proximity to the activities when compared with the existing daytime ambient noise levels measured during the baseline noise survey.



7 Mitigation Measures

7.1 Construction Noise Mitigation

It is inevitable that there are usually some increases in noise levels local to works from construction activity; however these changes in noise level are short term and temporary. It is recommended that a CEMP be drafted for the proposed development to address all aspects of the intended construction programme. Mitigation measures include good practice construction management to reduce impacts from the noise generated by the construction phase of the proposed development.

7.1.1 Noise Management Plan

The Control of Pollution Act and BS 5228 define a set of Best Practice working methods and mitigation measures, referred to as Best Practicable Means (BPM). Examples of these measures are:

Where possible, locating plant so that it is screened from receptors by on-site structures, such as site cabins;

Using mobile screening to shield receptors from particularly noisy equipment/activities; Using modern, quiet equipment and ensuring such equipment is properly maintained and

operated by trained staff; Applying silencers/enclosures to particularly noisy equipment where possible; Ensuring that mobile plant is well maintained such that loose body fittings or exhausts do not rattle

or vibrate; Ensuring plant machinery is turned off when not in use; Provide local residents with 24-hour contact details for a site representative in the event that

disturbance due to noise from the construction works is perceived; To inform local residents about the construction works, including the timing and duration of any

particularly noisy elements, and provide a contact telephone number to them; Try to avoid operating particularly noisy equipment at the beginning and end of the day; Carry out piling using the quietest methods available, i.e. augured piling instead of driven piling;

and Keep noisy deliveries, such as skips and concrete, to the middle of the day where possible.

Although the effect of adopting such methods cannot be precisely quantified, it is expected that these methods would reduce noise levels by 5 - 10dB.

7.1.2 Management Structure and Responsibilities

The main contractor will be responsible for robust implementation of noise mitigation measures. The key management roles with regard to the design and implementation of noise control at the construction site are to be defined and their roles should be detailed in the site CEMP.

7.1.3 Training

The site induction programme and site rules must include good working practice instructions for site staff, managers, visitors and contractors to help minimise noise whilst working on the site. Good working practice guidelines/instructions could include, but not be limited to, the following points:

Avoid unnecessary revving of engines;



Plant used intermittently should be shut-down between operational periods; Avoid reversing wherever possible; Drive carefully and within the site speed limit at all times; Report any defective equipment/plant as soon as possible so that corrective maintenance can be

undertaken; and Handle material in a manner that minimises noise.

7.1.4 Maintenance

Maintenance of plant should be carried out routinely and in accordance with the manufacturers’ guidance. A regular inspection of all plant and equipment could be undertaken as a minimum to ensure that:

all plant is in a good state of repair and fully functional; any plant found to be requiring interim maintenance has been identified and taken out of use; acoustic enclosures fitted to plant are in a good state of repair; doors and covers remain closed during operation; and any repairs are being undertaken by a fully qualified maintenance engineer.

7.2 Construction vibration mitigation

Best management practice for vibration should be implemented to minimise vibration impacts, including;

choosing alternative, lower impact equipment or methods where possible; scheduling the use of vibration-causing equipment at the least sensitive time of day; routing, operating or locating high vibration sources as far away from sensitive areas as possible; sequencing operations so that vibration-causing activities do not occur simultaneously; isolating the equipment causing vibration on resilient mounts; and keeping equipment well maintained.

7.3 Operational Noise Mitigation

The assessment has determined that existing receptors in the vicinity of the proposed development will generally not be affected by noise from the operational elements of the development. This includes noise generated by HGV deliveries, unloading and loading activities and the use of car parking areas. No mitigation is therefore necessary for the assessed operational elements of the Proposed Development. As the Airport Business Park planning application is outline at this stage, specific details of any externally mounted plant associated with the commercial establishments, for example refrigeration and ventilation plant, are not available. It was not possible at this stage of the planning application to undertake an assessment of fixed plant noise. However, careful siting of noise sources to take advantage of screening from proposed onsite buildings would be required and fixed plant noise sources associated with the development should be specified such that the daytime and night time background (LA90) noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors are not exceeded and, where appropriate, design target levels are to be below these background levels or in accordance with RDC policy.



8 Conclusions

The noise and vibration assessment has considered noise impacts associated with the construction phase of the development, operational traffic flows, HGV deliveries and car parking associated with the proposed development. It is considered that with the implementation of specific noise control, the use of BPM, good practice and site management measures, any temporary impacts from construction activities will be minimised. Any impacts are short-term and temporary. Increases in vehicle numbers as a result of the proposed development were screened using criteria in DMRB guidance to determine whether detailed assessment was required. Impacts on noise as a result of development-generated traffic were not considered to be significant. A quantitative assessment of noise from building services plant was not possible because sufficient detailed information is not available at this stage. It was therefore proposed, during the detailed design of the development, that all externally mounted building services plant is designed such that the rating level, as defined in BS 4142, at nearby residential properties does not exceed the background (LA90) noise level. This would ensure that any impacts would be of low magnitude. The assessment determined that HGV deliveries would have a Low Impact during the day and night time periods, at the nearest existing noise sensitive receptors to the proposed development. No significant adverse impact would therefore be anticipated due to the HGV deliveries, unloading and loading activities during day and night time periods. The assessment of the car park usage indicated that the noise from the car park is below the existing level of noise from road traffic and resulted in no increase in the ambient noise level, thus resulting in no impact. With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, the site is therefore considered to be suitable for the proposed uses with regard to noise.



Appendix A

Site Plans

Site Location and Study Area

Figure

Date Scale

Title

Client

Project

Noise Assessment, Figure 1

Noise Assessment, Site Boundary

PB3903 Southend Business Park

Henry Boot Development (South)

22/10/2015 1:10000

Checked by Number

IK V1

±Key:

Site Boundary

Plot 6

Plot 7

Plot 5

Plot 8

Plot 3

Plot 14

Plot 19

Plot 21

Plot 16

Plot 18

Plot 10

Plot 15

Plot 4

Plot 9

Plot 2

Plot 1Plot 13

Plot 17

Plot 22

Plot 20

Plot 11

Plot 12

Figure

Date Scale

Title

Client

Project


Noise Assessment, Proposed Masterplan



22/10/2015 1:4000

Checked by Number

IK V1

±Key:

Site BoundaryBuildingsCarParkingRoad Layout

!( Trees

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( LT1MP6

MP5

MP4

MP3

MP2

MP1

Figure

Date Scale

Title

Client

Project


Noise Assessment, Baseline Noise Survey, Monitoring Location Plan



22/10/2015 1:10000

Checked by Number

IK V1

±Key:

Site Boundary!( Attended Monitoring Locations!( Unattended Monitoring Locations

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(R9

R8

R7

R6

R5R4

R3

R2R1

Figure

Date Scale

Title

Client

Project


Noise Assessment, Receptor Location Plan



22/10/2015 1:10000

Checked by Number

IK V1

±Key:

Site Boundary!( Receptors



Appendix B

Acoustic Terminology



Term Definition

Noise sensitive receptors People, property or designated sites for nature conservation that may be at risk from exposure to noise and vibration that could potentially arise as a result of the proposed development/project

Noise and Vibration study area The area assessed for noise and vibration impacts during this assessment

Baseline scenario Scenarios with the proposed development/project not in operation

Decibel (dB) A unit of noise level derived from the logarithm of the ratio between the value of a quantity and a reference value. It is used to describe the level of many different quantities. For sound pressure level the reference quantity is 20 µPa, the threshold of normal hearing is 0dB, and 140dB is the threshold of pain. A change of 1dB is only perceptible under controlled conditions. Under normal conditions a change in noise level of 3dB(A) is the smallest perceptible change.

dB(A) Decibels measured on a sound level meter incorporating a frequency weighting (A weighting) which differentiates between sounds of different frequency (pitch) in a similar way to the human ear. Measurements in dB(A) broadly agree with people’s assessment of loudness. A change of 3 dB(A) is the minimum perceptible under normal conditions, and a change of 10 dB(A) corresponds roughly to halving or doubling the loudness of a sound. The background noise level in a living room may be about 30 dB(A); normal conversation about 60 dB(A) at 1 metre; heavy road traffic about 80 dB(A) at 10 metres; the level near a pneumatic drill about 100 dB(A).

LAeq,T The equivalent continuous sound level – the sound level of a notionally steady sound having the same energy as a fluctuating sound over a specified measurement period (T). LAeq,T is used to describe many types of noise and can be measured directly with an integrating sound level meter.

LA10,T The A weighted noise level exceeded for 10% of the specified measurement period (T). LA10 is the index generally adopted to assess traffic noise

LA90, T The A weighted noise level exceeded for 90% of the specified measurement period (T). In BS 4142: 1990 it is used to define the ‘background’ noise level.

LAmax The maximum A-weighted sound pressure level recorded during a measurement.

PPV Instantaneous maximum velocity reached by a vibrating element as it oscillates about its rest position.

Documents

REPORT - Rochford District€¦ · no detectable effect on health and quality of life due to the noise. LOAEL – Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level This is the level above which