f6. operational noise · 2011. 10. 24. · f6. operational noise likely to be affected, to allow...

Environmental Statement for Port of Southampton: Berth 201/202 Works updated by Further Information

389

F6. Operational Noise

F6.1 Construction noise has been assessed in chapter 17. This chapter assesses operational noise and has been produced by Xodus Group Ltd.

F6.2 The objective of the operational noise assessment is to assess the effect that the proposed redevelopment of Berths 201/2 will have on the day to day ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the container terminal when the new deepwater berth is in operation. This operational noise assessment considers the noise generated by the loading or off-loading of a container ship when berthed at 201/2 with six quayside cranes in use, and noise from the associated activity of moving the containers within the terminal itself, by the straddle carriers. It also considers the noise from the movement of HGVs within the terminal complex associated with the extra container handling activity. This chapter also includes, in accordance with the approach set out

Executive Summary: Chapter F6. Operational Noise The operational noise assessment considers how the noise generated by the loading or off-loading of a container ship when berthed at 201/2 with six quayside cranes in use, and noise from associated container handling plant and vehicles, impacts on residential properties in the immediate vicinity of the Container Terminal. An acoustic model of activity associated with Berth 201/2 has been developed using noise source data taken of similar container handling plant at DP World Southampton. A further ambient noise survey has also been undertaken to supplement the surveys previously undertaken for the ES. The assessment has considered both short term noise impacts when Berth 201/2 is first operational and longer term impacts when the Container Terminal is at full capacity. Consideration has also been given to changes to road and railway noise. For noise assessment purposes use has been made of the British Standards cited in the Draft National Statement for Ports and significance effects criteria have been derived from these standards. The short-term operational noise effects are considered to be neutral or of minor adverse significance for residential properties outside the port boundaries, but of moderate adverse significance for the two residential properties located immediately adjacent to the port boundary. In the longer term, internal noise levels at these two properties are assessed as being of major adverse significance, if the windows of these properties are kept open. No significant noise effects of increased road traffic are anticipated. Minor adverse significant noise effects from rail traffic are anticipated. Mitigation measures include a positive purchasing policy with respect to noise limitation, environmental awareness training of operatives, ensuring noise aspects are included in planned maintenance routines and the offer of improved ventilation to the two buildings likely to be affected, to allow windows to be kept shut, when necessary.


390

in chapter 7, an assessment of the impacts of the Container Terminal operating with a throughput of 2.8 million TEU.

F6.3 The approach to the operational noise assessment has been to develop an acoustic model of activity associated with Berth 201/2, using the noise modelling package CadnaA (as used for the construction noise model in the ES). To populate the noise model, detailed noise measurements have been made of an existing quayside crane of the type to be used at Berth 201/2 and also noise associated with the operation and movement of straddle carriers.

F6.4 These measurements have been used to calculate noise source sound power level values, in frequency bands one octave wide, which have been entered into the noise model at appropriate locations, using a combination of point, line and area sources. The model details are described below.

F6.5 Detailed surveys of the ambient noise environment around the port were undertaken between March and June, 2008 and in October 2008. As part of the operational noise assessment an ambient noise survey was undertaken at three specific locations in the vicinity of the Container Terminal over a two week period in August 2011.

F6.6 A review has been undertaken of standards and guidance relating to the assessment of noise from ports and industrial noise in general. In addition, an overview has been undertaken of potential changes to offsite road and railway noise levels as a consequence of the future operation of Berths 201/2.

F6.7 No operational vibration effects are considered likely due to the nature of operations, and have therefore been scoped out of this study.

Planning, Legislation and Guidance Draft National Policy Statement for Ports F6.8 In November 2009 the Draft National Policy Statement (NPS) for Ports was published by the

Department of Transport. Section 2.22 of the Draft NPS deals with the potential impacts of noise (which includes consideration of vibration).

F6.9 The Draft NPS recognises that the impacts of excessive noise are wide ranging, with the most common being disturbance, that can lead to annoyance or loss of sleep. It can also affect the use and enjoyment of areas of value such as quiet places and areas with high landscape quality. It also recognises that noise from a proposed port development can have adverse impacts on wildlife and biodiversity.

F6.10 In respect of noise assessments, the Draft NPS indicates that they should describe the noise generating aspects of the development and associated noise characteristics, identify noise sensitive premises and noise sensitive areas that may be affected, the characteristics of the existing noise environment, a prediction of how the noise environment will change with the proposed development, an assessment of the effect of these changes and a description of the measures that will be applied to control the effects of noise. The noise associated with ancillary activities associated with the development, such as increased road movements should also be assessed.


391

Noise Policy Statement for England

F6.11 In March 2010, the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) set out the long term vision of Government noise policy as to “Promote good health and a good quality of life through the effective management of noise within the context of Government policy on sustainable development”.

F6.12 The long term vision is supported by the following 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.”

Draft National Planning Policy Framework F6.13 The government published the draft National Planning Policy Framework in July 2011. This

document will, when finalised, replace most Planning Policy Statements and Planning Policy Guidance Notes. Policy 173 relates to noise and reflects the Noise Policy Statement for England viz.:

“173. 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, while recognising that many developments will create some noise; and

identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational amenity value for this reason.”

Planning Policy Guidance PPG24: Planning and Noise

F6.14 In the formulation of policies on planning developments that have issues relating to noise, local planning authorities are advised by the Department of the Environment in Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 24 Planning and Noise. The aim of this guidance is to provide advice on how the planning system can be used to minimise the adverse impact of noise without placing unreasonable restrictions on developments or adding unduly to the costs and administrative burdens of business. It includes some of the main considerations that should be taken into account when determining planning applications for development, which will generate noise.

F6.15 PPG24 considers both the bringing of people to noise (new residential developments) and also the bringing of noise to people (new or changed infrastructure, industrial and commercial developments). In the context of Berth 201/2, reference is made in PPG 24 to noise from industrial and commercial development and noise from construction sites. Noise from the


392

intensification of use of an existing road is not specifically covered by PPG 24, but in general terms, reference is made to the calculation methodology given in Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (Department of Transport, 1998), and also to advice in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11, Section 3, Part 7 – Traffic Noise and Vibration (Highways Agency, latest revision 2011). For railways, reference is made in PPG24 to draft guidance, which was subsequently issued in 1995 by the Department of Transport in its publication Calculation of Railway Noise.

British Standard BS 4142

F6.16 In the case of industrial development, PPG 24 confirms that the character of the noise should be taken into account, as well as its levels. The policy document cites the use of British Standard BS 4142:1990 Method for Rating Industrial Noise Affecting Mixed Residential and Industrial Areas for Assessing the Noise from Proposed Industrial and Commercial Premises. This standard has since been amended and the current version is dated 1997. The prime purpose of this standard is to determine the likelihood of complaints about noise from industrial and commercial installations. The foreword to the standard states that it may also be helpful in certain aspects of environmental planning and may be used in conjunction with recommendations on noise levels and methods of assessment published elsewhere.

F6.17 The foreword to the standard also recognises that it is necessarily general in character and may not cover all situations. The likelihood that an individual will complain depends on individual attitudes and perceptions in addition to the noise levels and acoustic features present. Although in general there will be a relationship between the incidence of complaints and the level of general community annoyance, quantitative assessment of the latter is beyond the scope of the standard, as is the assessment of nuisance.

F6.18 The assessment methodology for assessing the likelihood of complaints is to compare the ‘rating level’ of the industrial source (specific noise level of the industrial activity, corrected for character by + 5 dB where appropriate) with the pre-existing background noise level, expressed as LA90. Both the rating level and the background noise level refer to the external noise climate in the vicinity of the sensitive area.

F6.19 The advice given in BS 4142 is to make measurements (to determine background noise levels) during periods when the background noise level “is typical” of the background noise when the specific noise source is, or will be operating. It should be noted that there is no requirement to consider the minimum background noise level. The specific noise level of the industrial source is based on 1 hour reference time intervals during the day and 5 minutes at night. For the container terminal, which operates 24 hours per day, daytime and night-time specific noise levels will be similar, except for the amount of HGV activity which will be reduced at night.

F6.20 PPG 24 quotes the standard as stating that a difference (between the rating level and the typical background noise level) of around 10 dB or higher indicates that complaints are likely and that a difference of around 5 dB is of marginal significance. The standard itself states that if the rating level is more than 10 dB below the measured background noise level then this is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely. PPG 24 stops short of advising on acceptable levels of noise of an industrial nature as affecting existing residential development.


393

F6.21 An issue which always arises for a continuously operating industrial plant is to define the background noise level to be used in the assessment. For a new operation, there is some relevance in using the typical value of the pre-existing background noise level, but in time, noise from the new industrial development can become the most significant feature of the background noise environment, and in this situation any future assessment, for any new noise source, should refer to the new background noise level, on the assumption that it has gained general acceptability in the area.

British Standard BS 8233

F6.22 PPG 24 also cites the use of BS 8233 1987 Code of Practice for Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings, which gives general guidance on acceptable noise levels within buildings. In sleeping areas, the recommended maximum intrusive noise levels are 30 – 40 dB LAeq, T. This equates approximately to an external noise level of 40 – 50 dB LAeq T with windows open and 45 – 55 dB LAeq, T with windows partially open. With windows shut, the level difference outside to inside is at least 30 dBA in a typical modern dwelling. This standard was revised in 1999 and now states that 35 dB LAeq, T in bedrooms represents a reasonable noise environment due to external sources and that individual noise events should not normally exceed 45 dB LAmax F (inside the bedroom). This is equivalent to about 60 dB LAmax F outside the bedroom, for a partially open window. The current version of the standard cites an internal level of 40 dB LAeq, T as being a reasonable level of intrusive noise for resting conditions, which is equivalent to an external level of 55 dB LAeq, T with windows partially open. The time period T “should be appropriate to the activity involved (e.g. 23-00 to 07-00 for bedrooms)” according to the standard. The Draft NPS for Ports also cites the 1999 version of BS 8233.

F6.23 With respect to external living areas, BS 8233 states that in gardens and balconies, it is desirable that the steady noise level does not exceed 50 dB LAeq, T and 55 dB LAeq, T should be regarded as the upper limit (few people are seriously annoyed by a level of 55 dB LAeq, T according to WHO Guidelines – see below).

WHO Guidelines for Community Noise and Night Noise Guidelines for Europe

F6.24 Similar, although slightly more stringent advice as included in BS 8233 is given by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in a 1999 report by a WHO expert task force, entitled Guidelines for Community Noise. In 2009 a report was published presenting the conclusions of a WHO working group responsible for preparing guidelines for exposure to noise during sleep. This document can be seen as an extension to the original 1999 WHO report.

F6.25 Neither of these reports has been adopted into UK legislation or formal guidance and hence they remain sources of information reflecting a high level of health care with respect to noise, rather than standards to be rigidly applied. Exceedances of the WHO guideline values do not necessarily imply significant noise impact and indeed, it may be that significant impacts do not occur until much higher degrees of noise exposure are reached.

F6.26 For operational noise assessment purposes for Berth 201/2, use has therefore been made of the British Standards referred to in the Draft NPS for Ports, viz BS 4142 and BS 8233.


394

Southampton City Council Policy

F6.27 Sustainable Development Principle SDP 16 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (2006) gives the City Council’s policy on noise.

“SDP 16 Noise

Proposals for:

(i) noise-generating development will not be permitted if it would cause an unacceptable level of noise impact;

(ii) noise-sensitive development will not be permitted if its users would be adversely affected by significant noise from existing or proposed noise-generating uses.”

New Forest District Council Policy

F6.28 Whilst the Container Terminal lies within the City of Southampton, it has the potential to influence the ambient noise environment within New Forest District and the New Forest National Park.

F6.29 The New Forest District Council Core Strategy recognises that with respect to noise, light and air quality, “uses outside the National Park can have an impact on it, although it has to be taken into account that the National Park lies in a heavily-populated part of South-East England rather than in a remote and tranquil part of the country.” (paragraph 3.1.10)

F6.30 In its section titled Safe and Healthy Communities, the strategy recognises that the Plan Area contains a number of installations and forms of infrastructure that can give rise to various forms of pollution, including noise (e.g. Fawley refinery) (paragraph 6.5.4). Further reference is made to PPG 24 “Planning and Noise” as government guidance on this type of pollution (paragraph 6.5.6).

Significance of Effects – Operational Noise

F6.31 In cases where residential areas are adjacent to large continuously operating industrial sites, it is often the industrial sites themselves that define the background noise in that area. In these cases, it is often relevant to assess both the short-term effects of a new development (i.e. the effect within the first year or so after the development) as well as longer term effects of noise.

F6.32 BS 4142 has been used to assess short-term operational noise impacts based on pre-existing ambient noise levels. The relevant factor is LAr, T – LA90 T in dB, i.e. the difference between the rating level of the new noise and the pre-existing background noise level expressed as LA90, T using time weighting F. As the noise predictions are based on expected values of sound propagation downwind of the noise source, it is relevant to compare predicted noise levels on a like for like basis. In this assessment, the pre-existing LA90 T noise level has been taken as being the typical background noise levels in a downwind direction from the container terminal, generally during active periods of the container terminal categorised by daytime (07:00 – 19:00 hours), evening (19:00 – 23:00 hours) and night-time (23:00 – 07:00 hours). A core night-time period has also been considered (00:00 – 04:00 hours). This normally represents the quietest period of the night. The significance effects matrix is given in Table F6.2.


395

Table F6.1: Significance effects terminology for short-term operational noise

Short-term operational noise Neutral Minor Adverse

Moderate Adverse Major Adverse

LAr, T – LA90, T dB < 0 0 - 5 5 - 10 > 10

F6.33 In the medium-term, for infrastructure developments which operate continuously, absolute noise levels become more significant as new background noise levels become established. The following assessment matrix given in Table F6.2 has also been used which is based, in part, on the “reasonable” standards of internal noise according to British Standard BS 8233. In addition, use has been made of the guidance in BS 8233 for external living areas.

Table F6.2: Significance effects terminology for medium-term operational noise

Medium-term operational noise Neutral Minor Adverse Moderate Adverse Major Adverse

Change in LAeqT (external) <0 0-5 5-10 >10

Daytime (internal absolute) ≤ 40 dB LAeqT + 0 - 5 + 5 - 10 > 10

Night-time (internal absolute) ≤ 35 dB LAeqT + 0 - 5 + 5 - 10 > 10

External (absolute) ≤ 55 dB LAeqT + 0 - 5 + 5 - 10 > 10

Relevant Guidance Relating to Traffic and Railway Noise

F6.34 The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11 (Highways Agency, 2011) sets out the overall assessment process for new or altered highways. DMRB Section 3 Part 7 relates to the assessment of noise and vibration. Whilst it is principally concerned with the assessment of increased noise due to new or altered roads, it is nevertheless considered reasonable to use its methodology as a guide to the significance of increased traffic noise levels from intensification of use of an existing highway.

F6.35 In the UK, use is made of the LA10 18 h noise index based on the categorised annual average weekday traffic flow, in relation to the determination of eligibility under the Noise Insulation Regulations for new or altered highways. For the assessment of the suitability of a site for residential development adjacent to an existing road use is made of the daytime and night-time LAeq noise indices.

F6.36 It is generally accepted that increased road traffic noise can have both a short and long-term effect, in that a sudden change in noise will create a greater impact in the shorter term than over a longer period time. (The same phenomenon may also apply to other sources of noise, such as continuously operating industrial sites, although this is less well documented). Tables F6.3 and F6.4 give the DRMB classification of noise impacts in the short term and long term respectively. These are based on the LA10 18h noise index but changes to the LAeq16h index would be expected to give similar results.


396

Table F6.3: Significance criteria for road traffic noise changes – short term

Noise change, dB LA10, 18 h Adverse / beneficial Significance of any effect 0 Adverse No change

0.1 – 0.9 Adverse Negligible

1 – 2.9 Adverse Minor

3 – 4.9 Adverse Moderate

5+ Adverse Major

Table F6.4 Significance criteria for road traffic noise changes – long term

Noise change, dB LA10, 18 h Adverse / beneficial Significance of any effect 0 Adverse No change

0.1 – 2.9 Adverse Negligible

3 – 4.9 Adverse Minor

5 – 9.9 Adverse Moderate

10+ Adverse Major

F6.37 Railway noise is normally considered to be less annoying than road traffic noise and therefore, as a worst case, it would be reasonable to use the same significance criteria for railway noise as for road traffic noise. However, as the Noise Insulation (Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems) Regulations 1996 consider both daytime and night-time noise levels (expressed as LAeq, T, where T= 06:00 -24:00 hours for daytime and 24:00 to 06:00 hours for night-time), it is considered reasonable, where possible, to separate out any changes to daytime and night-time railway noise levels to assess their significance.

Ambient Noise Environment Previous Surveys F6.38 Full details of the ambient surveys previously undertaken can be identified by reference to

Chapter 17 and Appendix I of the ES, and to the reports which support the ES. Detailed surveys were undertaken between March and May 2008 and then again between September and October 2008.

2011 Survey

F6.39 For the purposes of the operational noise assessment, a supplementary ambient noise survey was undertaken during August 2011 at some of the locations previously used for the 2008 surveys. These consisted of a mixture of attended and unattended measurements. Using the same terminology as for the 2008 surveys, the following locations were used in 2011. These locations are also shown in Figure F6.1, below.


397

LT2: 5 Creighton Road, Regents Park, Southampton (in garden) - unattended; LT2RO: 5 Creighton Road, Regents Park, Southampton (on pavement) - attended; RO7: Old Eling House (formerly The Vicarage) Eling Hill, Totton; unattended and attended; LT3: 25 Skippers House, Portside Close, Admiralty Quay, Marchwood – unattended; LT3RO: Marchwood Yacht Club foreshore – attended.

Figure F6.1 Measurement Locations

F6.40 The unattended noise measurements were undertaken over a period of up to two weeks. The

attended measurements were undertaken over three separate nights. All measurements were made in sample periods of five minutes in duration. At LT2 and RO7, the unattended measurements were made with the microphone of the measurements system 4 m above local ground. At LT3 the measurements were taken from the balcony of the property. All the attended measurements were made with the microphone 1.5 m above local ground. The attended measurements also included observations of events contributing to the ambient noise environment.

F6.41 The results of the attended measurements are given in Appendix J Section 1. The results of the unattended measurements are given in Appendix J Section 2.

F6.42 During the survey, the weather was mixed. During the second week there was a greater preponderance of westerly winds, compared to the first. The detailed wind directions during


398

the survey period can be obtained from Appendix J Section 3 and these are summarised on the charts in Appendix J Section 2.

F6.43 Information provided by DP World for the survey period from 17th – 31st August inclusive (15 days), indicates that a total of 42,375 containers were moved over the quay in this period. At a TEU/box ratio of 1.66, this indicates a per annum rate of 1.66 million TEU. This is very close to the forecast of 1.6 million TEU per annum for 2011, thus indicating that the terminal was working at a typical handling rate during the noise survey period.

F6.44 A summary of the results of the attended noise survey is given in Table F6.5. The values obtained are compared with the results of the previous noise surveys. For the previous attended noise surveys, the measurements were usually made in a downwind direction from the port. For the 2011 survey, upwind and downwind ambient noise data are included in the summary.

Table F6.5: Comparison of results of attended ambient night-time noise surveys (00:00 – 04:00)

Average, dB Maximum, dB Minimum, dB Location Date

LAmax F LAeq 5m LA90 F LAmax F LAeq 5m LA90 F LAmax F LAeq 5m LA90 F

LT2RO (Creighton Rd) 08/2011 60 48 47 64 49 48 55 48 46

10/2008 60 51 48 74 53 51 56 48 45

04/2008 56 47 44 63 51 49 51 43 41

RO7 (Old Eling House) 08/2011 54 45 43 64 49 48 48 41 39

Downwind 08/2011 60 48 47 64 49 48 55 48 46

10/2008 59 51 49 62 52 51 55 50 48

04/2008 58 49 48 66 51 50 52 46 44

LT3RO (Skippers House) 08/2011 55 46 44 65 49 46 48 42 41

10/2008 59 50 48 68 52 51 50 42 41

04/2008 61 50 48 68 54 50 53 46 45

F6.45 It can be seen from Table F6.5 that at Location LT2RO (5 Creighton Road), average night-time ambient noise levels in 2011, are very similar to what they were in 2008. At location R07, when compared just on the basis of downwind noise levels from the port, it is also the case that ambient noise levels are very similar to those measured in 2008. (When all the data from the 2011 survey is taken into account, the average ambient noise levels are less, but this is not the basis on which the 2008 surveys were undertaken as the 2011 survey contains a mixture of up-wind and down-wind data). At LT3RO the current survey indicates slightly lower ambient noise levels than previously recorded, but this is probably because all data was taken into account to calculate the average. A more comprehensive data set for this location is from the unattended noise monitor at Location LT3, and the results from this are discussed below.

F6.46 Table F6.6 gives a summary of the unattended noise measurements at Location LT2, Creighton Road, and compares these with the measurements taken in the earlier part of 2008. In this table, and to conform to the noise averaging protocol used in the ES, daytime is taken as between 08:00 to 19:00, evening is 19:00 to 23:00, night-time is between 23:00 and 07:00 and


399

the “short night” is between 00:00 and 04:00. The averaging is all based on 5 minute sample periods.

Table F6.6: Comparison of ambient unattended noise survey results at Location LT2

dB LAmax F dB LAeq dB LA90 F Location LT2 (Creighton Rd) Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Daytime 08/2011 Daytime 04/2008

63 67

±5 ±5

54 56

±3 ±3

49 52

±2 ±3

Evening 08/2011 Evening 04/2008

60 64

±5 ±6

51 53

±3 ±3

47 50

±2 ±3

Night 08/2011 Night 04/2008

55 59

±5 ±5

47 50

±3 ±4

42 46

±3 ±4

Short night 08/2011 Short night 04/ 2008

54 58

±5 ±5

46 48

±3 ±4

41 44

±3 ±4

F6.47 It can be seen from the detailed results in Appendix J Section 2 that noise levels here follow a typical urban day/night variation where road traffic noise tends to dominate the ambient noise environment.

F6.48 Table F6.7 gives a similar comparison for Location LT3, Skippers House, Admiralty Quay, Marchwood, and compares the 2011 results with those taken in the earlier part of 2008 and again in October 2008.

Table F6.7: Comparison of ambient unattended noise survey results at Location LT3

dB LAmax F dB LAeq dB LA90 F Location LT3 (Skippers House) Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Daytime 08/2011 Daytime 10/2008 Daytime 04/2008

64 64 67

±5 ±5 ±7

54 53 55

±4 ±4 ±4

50 50 52

±4 ±4 ±4

Evening 08/2011 Evening 10/2008 Evening 04/2008

62 63 64

±5 ±5 ±6

52 52 53

±4 ±4 ±4

48 49 50

±4 ±5 ±4

Night 08/2011 Night 10/2008 Night 04/2008

61 62 64

±6 ±6 ±6

52 51 53

±4 ±4 ±4

48 49 50

±4 ±4 ±4

Short night 08/2011 Short night 10/2008 Short night 04/ 2008

62 63 64

±5 ±6 ±6

52 51 53

±4 ±4 ±4

48 49 50

±4 ±5 ±4


400

F6.49 Table F6.7 shows that, on average, ambient noise levels have not changed by any significant amount at Skippers House, Admiralty Quay since the first major noise survey was undertaken in April 2008. There may have been a slight decrease in noise (of 1 to 2 dBA) since the 2008 survey but nothing more than this. The pattern of the ambient noise environment at LT3 is very different from that at LT2, and is due to the dominance of noise from the Container Terminal and port at this location.

F6.50 No unattended measurements had previously been taken at RO7, Old Eling House (previously The Vicarage). Table F6.8 gives the results of the 2011 unattended noise survey at this location.

Table F6.8: Summary results of unattended ambient noise survey at RO7

dB LAmax F dB LAeq dB LA90 F Location RO7 (Old Eling House) Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Avg Std Dev Daytime 08/2011

60

±5

51

±3

46

±2

Evening 08/2011

55

±5

46

±3

42

±2

Night 08/2011

54

±5

47

±3

43

±3

Short night 08/2011

53

±4

46

±3

42

±3

F6.51 There are two cottages located adjacent to the port boundary and accessed off Western Avenue which have been previously identified as Location RO5 in the ES. The October 2008 ambient noise survey indicated the following noise levels at this location:

Table F6.9: Results of 2008 ambient attended survey at Location RO5

Day Night Location RO5 (Cottages, Western Ave) LAeq, T LA90, T LAeq, T LA90, T

Average 59 51 56 51

Maximum 63 55 57 54

Noise Source Tests

F6.52 A series of noise measurements was undertaken at the Container Terminal in order to determine noise source values that could be used in the operational noise model. Noise measurements were undertaken on Liebherr Crane “C” and also on two types of straddle carriers. These were a Noell and a Kalmar unit, of the type that would be used in association with Berth 201/2 operations.

F6.53 The purpose of the noise tests was to provide noise data to be able to calculate octave band sound power levels over operational cycles, which could then be used in the CadnaA operational noise model for the development. Sound pressure level measurements were therefore taken at a measured distance from each of the noise sources in sample periods of 1


401

second. Using the concept of attenuation through geometrical divergence, the sound power levels of the noise sources could be determined through the integration of the measured sound pressure levels with an appropriate area correction term.

F6.54 For the quayside crane, noise measurements were taken with an empty container being handled, as from previous experience, this has been found to be the noisier condition as the crane can work faster than when a full load is being lifted. Measurements were also taken of levels of impact noise as the crane spreader engaged onto the container and also impact noise as the container impacted onto the ground.

F6.55 In addition to the noise from the machinery house, trolleying and hoisting, measurements of the movement alarms on the quayside crane were also made.

F6.56 For the straddle carrier, measurements were taken during hoisting and lowering and with the carrier moving. It was found that a straddle carrier emits slightly higher noise levels when un-laden as compared to when moving a container, as in the former case the straddle carrier moves faster. Noise measurements were also taken of the movement alarm on a straddle carrier, which sounds for a few seconds when a straddle carrier first sets off.

F6.57 During the noise tests, care was taken to minimise the effects of extraneous noise as far as possible and other container terminal operations in the vicinity of the noise tests were temporarily halted whilst the measurements took place.

F6.58 Noise data used in the model for a container ship was taken from the results of previous noise tests by Xodus personnel at a comparable size container terminal. HGV noise was taken from British Standard BS 5228, with an allowance for reduced noise levels with the HGV slowing down at the roundabout prior to Transfer Area 3 (next to Western Avenue access gate).

F6.59 The sound power levels obtained from the noise source tests and used in the noise model are shown in Table F6.10. These parameters are either SELW (sound power levels normalised to a one second time interval for a noise source which is not continuous) or LW (sound power levels for the noise source, assuming the noise source is continuous).

Table F6.10: Noise source values used in operational noise model for Berths 201/2 (Sound Power Level dB re 10-12 W)

Octave Band Centre Frequency, Hz Noise Source

Overall dBA

31.5 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k

Quayside crane, SELw per cycle

130 130 131 128 130 128 125 120 115 102

Quayside crane engaging spreader, SELw per impact

117 126 121 123 119 116 111 104 98 86

Quayside crane, container onto quay SELw per impact

115 119 119 122 117 113 109 102 96 84

Straddle carrier engaging spreader, SELw per impact

120 122 122 121 119 117 116 111 106 99

Straddle carrier container impact, SELw per impact

118 114 117 117 118 117 114 109 103 98


402

Quayside crane alarm, Lw (each alarm)

113 96 89 97 95 102 95 101 106 111

Straddle carrier alarm, Lw 107 - - 98 97 102 99 104 92 80

Straddle carrier loaded moving, Lw

105 99 107 103 102 101 100 97 94 88

Straddle carrier light, moving, Lw

107 91 109 104 104 103 99 102 98 92

Straddle carrier idling, Lw 96 92 104 65 94 94 90 89 89 73

HGV Lw per vehicle (9 m/s) 106 - 116 109 107 104 100 98 92 88

Container ship berthed 111 - - - 111 109 106 103 94 83

Operational Noise Model for Berths 201/2

F6.60 The noise model for Berths 201/2 assumes six quayside cranes, each performing 30 trolley moves per hour. For the import of containers, the container is delivered from the ship to the quayside and is then picked up by a straddle carrier and is assumed to then be taken to one of three locations. For containers to be collected by HGVs, the containers are assumed to be stacked in the area immediately to the west of Berths 201/2. Containers for transhipment have been assumed to be delivered to stacking areas B and C. The various areas are shown in Figure F6.1.

F6.61 It has been assumed that 40% of the containers are for rail transport, of which 3/4 go via stacking area V (the remaining 1/4 go initially via HGVs to another local rail depot and are initially stacked locally to 201/2). It has also been assumed that 10% of the container moves are as a result of transhipment activity. Thus the assumption has been made that 60% of the containers will initially be stacked in the area to the west of 201/2. The noise model then uses these statistics, together with assumed speeds of 4.5 m/s for a laden straddle carrier, and 8 m/s for a light straddle carrier, to define noise sources, for the activities immediately associated with 201/2.

F6.62 These assumptions are based on discussions with the terminal operator and represent the likely way that the terminal will operate with Berths 201/2. The model has been developed based on the maximum capacity for the development which will be achieved in 2027.

F6.63 A container ship has been included in the model as a reflective solid object 400 m long, 50 m wide and 15 m above the quay level, together with its own noise source term. (Note: the height of the container ship above the quay is a worst case assumption, as frequently containers will be stacked considerably higher than this). Thus, the ship will shield some low level noise sources, nominally in an easterly direction, whilst reflecting some noise back in a westerly direction. Given the elevation of the quayside cranes, the trolleying noise associated with the crane does not benefit from any shielding effects provided by the container ship.

F6.64 Noise from HGVs has also been included in the model. It has been assumed that HGVs enter and leave via Dock Gate 20 and use Western Avenue, entering the Container Terminal near Transfer Area 3. It has been assumed that the hourly ratio of day to night movements is 2:1 over the daytime (07:00 to 19:00) compared to the night-time shift periods (19:00 to 07:00) and that 70% of HGVs have a return load. A TEU to container ratio of 1.75 has been used to


403

calculate the number of HGV hourly movements associated with collection and delivery to Transfer Area 3, given that Berth 201/2 development will add 0.5 million TEU per annum to the capacity of the terminal. A sound power level source term has then been used, together with an assumed speed of 9 m/s (20 mph) to define the noise source for HGVs. Use of HGV movement data for a 12 hour night, rather an 8 hour “noise night” results in a slightly conservative night-time estimate of average 1 hour night-time HGV noise levels, but gives results close to the highest individual 1 hour HGV night-time noise level.

F6.65 The model uses the propagation algorithms given in International Standard ISO 9613-2 “Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 2: General method of calculation”. Ground terrain contours have been included and offsite, and some on-site, buildings in the vicinity of the Container Terminal have been included as solid objects. This then provides a degree of realism as to screening effects provided by the buildings themselves.

F6.66 The output from the model are noise contours, which depict the LAeq, T sound pressure levels due to activity immediately associated with 201/2. These are given in Appendix J Section 4 for the separate daytime and night-time situations. (The difference between day and night-time relates to the number of HGVs accessing Transfer Area 3).

F6.67 The predicted sound pressure levels at each of the defined receiver locations are given in Table F6.11.

Table F6.11: Predicted operational noise levels Berth 201/2

Sound Pressure Level dB LAeq, T Location Name

Daytime Night-time LT2 5 Creighton Road, Regents Park 44.1 43.6

RO7 Old Eling House, Eling 41.3 40.4

LT3 Skippers House, Admiralty Quay 55.0 54.9

RO5 Western Avenue Cottages 58.0 57.0

Operational Noise Assessment British Standard BS 4142

F6.68 An assessment of the potential noise impact of the operation of Berth 201/2 is considered appropriate in the period immediately after Berth 201/2 opens, as this represents the point at which there will be sudden change in the noise environment. The noise model represents berths 201/202 operating at full capacity, although, in reality, some activity (particularly HGV movements) will increase over a number of years as the throughput at 201/202 berth increases. It is reasonable, therefore, to compare predicted operational noise levels with existing background noise levels as a worst case. BS 4142 requires the “rating level” of the noise to be compared with the pre-existing noise level, expressed as LA90, T. The background noise level should be “typical of the background noise when the specific noise source is or will be operating, but is not actually operating at the time of the measurement”. Also the background noise level should be measured “during periods when conditions are appropriate to the assessment similar to those which prevail when the specific noise level is determined…”


404

F6.69 The operational noise level is determined under downwind conditions from the Berth, therefore it is appropriate, where the background noise level varies significantly with wind direction, to consider the background noise level under similar meteorological conditions. It can be seen from Appendix J Section 2 that this consideration applies in particular to Location LT3 (Skippers House), where both existing LA90 and LAeq noise levels show a dependence on wind direction.

F6.70 In general, ambient noise levels at Skippers House are lowest when the wind has a southerly component to it and highest when the wind has a northerly component. However, this generalised rule needs to be tempered by activity levels at the Container Terminal. For example in the evening of 20/8/2011 there was a period with very light N winds, but low measured noise levels. There was, however, very little activity on the quayside at this time, thus despite the light N wind, the measured noise levels were low.

F6.71 Another period of low ambient noise at Skippers House occurred around midnight of 24- 25/08/2011. Not only was the wind nominally S, but there was also no quayside activity taking place. Another low noise period occurred during the early morning period of 28/08/2011 between 03:00 and 07:00 with W winds. Again there was very little quayside activity during this period.

F6.72 Thus to undertake a BS 4142 assessment for operational noise from Berth 201/2, it is considered appropriate to consider existing ambient noise levels with existing quayside activity occurring and under meteorological conditions favourable for sound propagation to the assessment position. In general, this condition is considered to occur when the existing background noise level is greater than or equal to 50 dB LA90,T. Under this condition, the typical existing background noise level at LT3 (Skippers House) is 52 dB LA90, T. The average LAeq, T

noise level corresponding to this background noise level is 55 dB LAeq, T.

F6.73 BS4142 uses the concept of “rating level”, which is the specific noise level from the noise in question, expressed as LAeq, T, corrected by +5 dB where it has character which would be likely to draw attention. However, in the case of the redevelopment of Berth 201/2, it is not considered appropriate to apply this character correction, as the characteristic Container Terminal noise is already present as part of the pre-existing ambient noise environment.

F6.74 Therefore the BS 4142 daytime noise assessment for Skippers House is as follows:

Specific noise level, LAeq, T 55 dB

Acoustic feature correction 0 dB

Rating level 55 dB

Background noise level, LA90, T 52 dB (for nominal downwind with terminal operating)

Excess of rating over background level

+3

Assessment indicates less than a “marginal significance” with respect to complaints

Significance of effect: minor adverse F6.75 It should be noted that given the dominance of the existing ambient noise level from the

Container Terminal there is no assumed difference to the relevant background noise level at Skippers House during the evening, or night-time, although the rating level will decrease slightly


405

as indicated in Table F6.11. Therefore the evening and night-time significance of operational noise from Berth 201/2 is also minor adverse at Skippers House.

F6.76 At LT2 (Creighton Rd), the existing background noise level is more dominated by road traffic noise from Millbrook Road West, which, due to its proximity to Creighton Road will be less dependent on wind direction here. However, due to the dominance of the background noise by road traffic there is a much greater variation in background noise at this location with time of day. The BS 4142 assessment has therefore been based on average values of all the background noise levels over the day, evening and night-time periods. The BS 4142 assessment for LT2 is therefore as follows:

Day Evening Night Short Night Specific noise level, LAeq, T 44 dB 44 dB 44 dB 44 dB

Acoustic feature correction 0 dB 0 dB 0 dB 0 dB

Rating level 44 dB 44 dB 44 dB 44 dB

Background noise level, LA90, T 49 dB 47 dB 42 dB 41 dB


-5 -3 +2 +3


Significance of effect: neutral to minor adverse

F6.77 At RO7 (Old Eling House), the ambient noise level is again more controlled by noise from the container terminal, when in a downwind situation from the container terminal. During the available unattended measurements at this location the wind was mainly W (more of an upwind situation) However, the results of the attended measurements on the night of 22nd - 23rd August 2011 with NNE winds, shows a background noise level of 47 dB LA90 at Old Eling House with the terminal operating at a relatively high rate. The BS 4142 assessment then becomes:

Specific noise level, LAeq, T 40 dB

Acoustic feature correction 0 dB

Rating level 40 dB

Background noise level, LA90, T 47 dB (for nominal downwind with terminal operating)


-7


Significance of effect: neutral

F6.78 Based on a predicted noise level of 58 dB LAeq, T (daytime) and 57 dB LAeq, T (night-time) the following assessment to BS 4142 is made for Location RO5 (Cottages, Western Avenue):


406

Day Evening Night Specific noise level, LAeq, T 58 dB 57 dB 57 dB

Acoustic feature correction 0 dB 0 dB 0 dB

Rating level 58 dB 57 dB 57 dB

Background noise level, LA90, T 51 dB 51 dB 51 dB


+7 +6 +6

Assessment indicates “marginal significance”

Significance of effect: moderate adverse

F6.79 A moderate adverse short term effect is forecast for noise levels at the cottages on Western Avenue although this has to be viewed in respect of the location of these properties within a port environment.

Longer Term Operational Noise Assessment

F6.80 The maximum throughput of the Container Terminal to date was in 2007 when approximately 1.9 million TEU were handled. Throughput in 2011 is predicted to be 1.6 million TEU but, as noted in F6.45, the terminal was operating at an effective annual throughput of 1.66 million TEU during the period of the 2011 noise surveys.

F6.81 The estimated maximum capacity of berths 204 to 207 is 2.3 million TEU which would be achieved by a higher number of quayside crane moves and, ultimately by the addition of two more cranes of the same type already installed. This also equates to the maximum capacity of the terminal without 201/202 berths operational (the future position without the works). Assuming that noise levels are proportional to terminal throughput, the overall environmental noise levels arising from operations on berths 204-207 are likely to increase on average from 2011 noise levels (measured with an equivalent annual throughput of 1.66 million TEU), by 10 times the logarithmic ratio of the TEU throughput. This equates to 10 x log (2.3/1.66) = 1.3 dB.

F6.82 The absolute noise levels associated with all berths operating at full capacity (the future position with the works) are obtained by adding the expected noise levels due to operation of Berth 201/2 calculated from the noise model to the increased noise levels from 204 to 207 berth operating at maximum capacity as calculated in F6.84, Table F6.12.

F6.83 When assessing the change in noise due to a development several years in the future, it is usually necessary to understand what the baseline noise environment would be in the absence of that development first. This then allows a like-for-like comparison between the baseline noise level and the with-development noise level. In this case, the additional capacity created as a result of the works would not be realised until 2021. In order to assess the longer term effect of the increase in throughput facilitated by the berth 201/202 works, it is therefore considered appropriate to compare the noise level relating to the future position with the works to that which could exist in 2021 without the works. For robustness, a comparison with the 2008 and 20011 baseline levels is also considered.


407

F6.84 Table F6.12 indicates the noise level changes that will occur at Locations LT2, RO7 and LT3, generally for conditions favourable for sound propagation. These have been corrected for the effects of the façade for LT3 (Skippers House). At Location LT2 (Creighton Rd), it was thought that noise from Millbrook Road West dominated the ambient noise environment even into the night, therefore it has been assumed that noise levels for ”2007”, “2011” and “Capacity without works” are identical, and are based on the measured 2011 noise levels. At RO7 (Old Eling House), the daytime noise levels are based on the daytime downwind surveys undertaken here in 2008 and at RO5 (Western Avenue Cottages), the baseline data is also based on 2008 data.

Table F6.12 Predicted changes to ambient noise environment

LAeq, T Sound Levels at Defined Location

Location 2008

bas

eline

2011

bas

eline

204 t

o 20

7 ber

th m

axim

um

(pos

ition

with

out w

orks

)

Spec

ific n

oise

due

to

Berth

201/2

Tota

l noi

se w

ith 20

1/2

(pos

ition

with

the w

orks

)

Chan

ge fr

om 20

08, d

BA

Chan

ge fr

om 20

11, d

BA

Chan

ge fr

om m

ax p

ositi

on

with

out w

orks

, dBA

LT3 – Skippers House façade 55.7 55.2 56.6 57.5 60.1 +4.4 +4.9 +3.5 day – 2008 52.5 52.0 53.4 41.3 53.6 +1.1 +1.6 +0.2 RO7 – Old Eling House

night 48.8 48.3 49.7 40.4 50.2 +1.4 +1.9 +0.5 day 53.6 53.6 53.6 44.1 54.1 +0.5 +0.5 +0.5 LT2 – Creighton Rd

night 45.5 45.5 45.5 43.6 47.7 +2.2 +2.2 +2.2 day - 2008 59.0 59.5 60.9 57.7 62.6 +3.6 +3.1 +1.7 RO5 – Cottages,

Western Avenue night - 2008 56.0 56.5 57.9 57.0 60.5 +4.5 +4.0 +2.6

F6.85 The “Change” columns in Table F6.12 indicate the change in ambient noise level that will occur in the longer term between the Container Terminal at capacity with 201/202 in operation and different baseline scenarios. The last column is the difference between the position without the works and the total noise due to Berth 201/2 at maximum capacity and the 204 to 207 berths combined. The extent of changes predicted are considered to represent minor adverse effects in all cases although bordering on a moderate adverse effect at LT3 in relation to the low 2011 baseline.

F6.86 The assessment of absolute noise levels has also been considered using the approach given in Table F6.2. Internal noise levels have been calculated by assuming a level difference of 30 dB across a façade for the case of windows shut, and a level difference of 15 dB across a façade for the case of windows partially open. The resultant internal noise levels have then been judged by the assessment matrix given in Table F6.2 for the situation with the terminal operating at full capacity and then with the extra throughput provided by Berth 201/2. In addition, for a robust analysis, the 2008 and 2011 baseline internal noise levels have also been assessed. The results of this assessment are given in Table F6.13.


408

F6.87 In this table, the absolute internal noise levels at the locations considered are all assessed as neutral with windows to the properties shut. For most of the properties, except LT2 (Creighton Rd) at night, which is assessed as neutral, this then changes to minor or moderate adverse with windows open, without any change to the assessment category for the terminal at capacity compared to the situation with 201/2 operational. The exception is at RO5 (Western Ave Cottages), where the night-time noise levels with windows open goes into the major adverse category with Berth 201/2 operational. In reality, the night-time ambient noise levels are only predicted to change by less than 3 dB. It is considered likely that the residents of these properties would, in any case, probably keep the windows of their properties facing towards the port, shut at night. At Skippers House, it can be seen that the low 2011 baseline results in a change of category between 2008 and 2011, which then reverts back to the same assessment category for the capacity without the works and capacity with the works scenarios.

Table F6.13: Assessment of absolute internal noise levels (see Table F6.2)

Location Day/Night Windows 2008 2011 Capacity without the

works

Capacity with the works

Shut Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Day

Open Minor Minor Minor Minor

Shut Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral

LT2 Creighton Rd

Night Open Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral


Open Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate

Shut Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral

RO5 Western Ave Cottages Night

Open Moderate Moderate Moderate Major


Open Neutral Neutral Minor Minor

Shut Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral RO7 Old Eling House

Night Open Minor Minor Minor Minor


Open Minor Neutral Minor Minor

Shut Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral LT3 Skippers House

Night Open Moderate Minor Moderate Moderate

F6.88 Table F6.14 gives an assessment of external daytime noise levels in relation to the balcony areas at Skippers House (façade levels) and garden areas at Western Avenue Cottages, Old Eling House and Creighton Road (assumed free field noise levels). The only change relates to Skippers House where the assessment of the external balcony spaces changes from minor adverse to moderate adverse (but only by a fraction of a dB).


409

Table F6.14: Assessment of absolute external living area noise levels

Location Capacity without the

works

Capacity with the works

Change?

LT2 Creighton Rd

Neutral Neutral No

RO5 Western Ave Cottages

Moderate Moderate No

RO7 Old Eling House

Neutral Neutral No

LT3 Skippers House

Minor Moderate Yes

Other Operational Noise Considerations

RMG Crane and RTG Crane Operations

F6.89 It is recognised that at some time in the future, part of the Container Terminal may change from a complete straddle carrier operation to a rail mounted gantry (RMG) crane or a rubber tyred gantry crane (RTG) system.

F6.90 A RMG crane system would include one or more lower level cranes on rails, either perpendicular or parallel to the quay. These would be electrically driven and therefore relatively quiet in operation. It is likely that some smaller shuttle straddle carriers would still be used to transport containers from the quayside to the RMGs but these would travel a shorter distance than the straddle carriers currently envisaged for 201/2, and therefore the overall effect would most likely be to reduce the straddle carrier noise contribution to the total noise emission levels, whilst introducing some noise from the RMGs.

F6.91 The alternative system would be to introduce RTG cranes. These are diesel engine powered and potentially a significant source of noise. However, one RTG crane does the work of many straddle carriers and, consequently, any increase in noise would potentially be offset. In addition, modern RTGs are much quieter than historically and remain so as long as attention is paid to maintaining a good sound attenuation enclosure for the engine and a high performance exhaust silencer (normally a double attenuator arrangement). Sound power levels less than those for a straddle carrier of the type in use at DP World Southampton can be achieved by careful attention to detail, and by buying the RTGs to a defined noise specification.

F6.92 Containers still need to be transported to the RTG stacking areas and this is conventionally done using tractor trailer systems. Thus some additional noise is introduced from the tractor trailers, but this is potentially offset by the lower noise levels from using the quietened RTGs instead of straddle carriers. Again, tractor units have been quietened in recent years and low noise variants are available.

F6.93 As long as sufficient attention is paid to utilising low noise units, it is unlikely that the use of RMG or RTG cranes rather than straddle carriers would result in an impact of greater significance than predicted in this operational noise assessment.


410

Hatch Covers

F6.94 An occasional source of relatively high level impact noise currently occurs at the container terminal when hatch covers are removed from a container ship. These are lowered onto the quay, and inevitably a noise is produced by this action. To a large extent the container ship itself will provide a degree of shielding of this type of noise from the nearest residential locations in Admiralty Quay and, for the most part, and given the distances involved, the level of this intermittent type of impact noise will be similar to that already experienced.

Road Traffic Noise Assessment

F6.95 The Transport Assessment examines the impact of traffic generated by the proposed Berth 201/202 works. This considers both the increase in traffic movements with the addition of the Berth 201/202 development as compared to the terminal otherwise operating at a capacity of 2.3 million TEU per annum and also a more robust assessment based on the future position with the Berth 201/2 development and a lower baseline based on no growth at the port.

F6.96 The relevant traffic flows are given in Tables 23, 24, 25 and 26 of the Transport Assessment. Traffic noise levels have been calculated based on the Department of Transport’s procedure “Calculation of Road Traffic Noise”, allowing for different speeds on the relevant roads identified in these tables. The greatest change in traffic noise levels will occur along Redbridge Road, for the more robust assessment, where the maximum increase in traffic noise level is 0.9 dB. The effect of increased road traffic noise is therefore considered negligible.

Railway Noise Assessment

F6.97 Chapter F2 considers rail usage and how the number of trains will need to increase to meet the demand of an increasing percentage share of handling of freight by rail.

F6.98 Currently 19 intermodal services are operated from Southampton, with a further five paths currently available and unused. It is likely that in the future, changes will be made to the types of wagons used, the lengths of the trains and possibly the locomotives which are used to pull the container trains. For example the Class 70 is being introduced by Freightliner in addition to the standard Class 66

F6.99 With the berth 201/202 works in place, the number of trains per day required would be 24. These additional trains are likely to be evenly spread across the day.

F6.100 The local railway network also serves other regular freight (particular a regular car transporter service to the docks) as well as regular and frequent passenger services. Of the passenger services, there are approximately 40 diesel hauled Cross Country passenger train movements, and more than 70 third rail electric passenger train movements serving the London to Bournemouth/Weymouth route via Southampton. Other passenger trains serve the cruise liner trade from Southampton. Thus any noise effect from an increased number of container trains on the local network will be diluted, to an extent, by the other passenger and freight services.

F6.101 The information in Chapter F2 has been used to define day and night container train movements and length and number of trains, where day is assumed to be 06:00 to 24:00 hours


411

and night 24:00 to 06:00 hours. Published railway timetables have been used to determine the frequency and times of passenger trains. Train noise levels have been based on the procedure in the Department of Transport Publication “Calculation of Railway Noise” to calculate relative SEL values at a distance of 25 m from the track based on different mixes of trains. A train speed of 80 km/hr has been used for assessment purposes with all diesel locomotives assumed to be under load. It has also been assumed that at present, there is only a small number of container trains hauled by Class 70 locomotives (2 per day assumed), but this will increase to 50% of all Freightliner container trains in the future. Separate calculations have been undertaken for the daytime and night-time period to take into account the minimum number of passenger train movements during the night. It has also been assumed that the increase in number of container train movements will be spread evenly across the day.

F6.102 Whilst a realistic noise impact assessment of changes to the number and type of trains would be to compare the situation with Berth 201/2 operational and the terminal acting at full capacity with the same situation without the Berth 201/2 development, for a robust assessment a comparison has also been undertaken of the change in railway noise levels from the current (2011) situation. The results are given in Table F6.5. These changes are given in dB which are effectively the changes to the period LAeq noise levels over the defined daytime and night-time periods.

Table F6.15: Predicted changes to railway noise levels

Change to LAeq, T, dB Scenario

Daytime Night-time Berth 201/2 operational with terminal at full capacity – current (2011) situation

1.0 2.1

Berth 201/2 operational with terminal at full capacity – terminal at full capacity without the works

0.5 1.3

F6.103 It can be seen from Table F6.5 that, in comparison with the 2011 situation, the greatest change in period railway noise levels will occur at night with an increase in night-time noise levels of just over 2 dB. This is assessed as being of minor adverse significance. Future noise level changes with and without the Berth 201/2 development are also, therefore, assessed as being of minor adverse significance.

Mitigation

F6.104 When purchasing new quayside cranes, straddle carriers and other port equipment such as RMGs and RTGs, consideration will be given to noise emission levels, and a noise specification will be included as part of the bidding and procurement process.

F6.105 All crane and straddle carrier operatives will be made aware of environmental noise considerations in relation to port operations, and will be encouraged to strive towards quiet container handling practices.


412

F6.106 Planned maintenance procedures will include ensuring that all engine silencers remain effective, and are replaced immediately when any defects are identified.

F6.107 Given the proximity of the cottages at Western Avenue to the 201/2 development, and in recognition of the already relatively high noise levels at this location, mitigation measures in the form of improved ventilation to bedrooms will be offered, to allow bedroom windows to be kept shut at night and maintain a reasonable internal noise environment with adequate ventilation.

Summary and Conclusions

F6.108 This chapter has considered the potential operational noise impact from the redevelopment of Berths 201/2 at the Port of Southampton and has included further baseline noise measurements and detailed noise tests on the type of machinery to be used at Berth 201/2.

F6.109 A noise model of the operations from Berth 201/2 has been developed, based on assumptions on the activities that occur when a large container ship is being handled at the berth, and the distribution of containers by road, rail and for transhipment.

F6.110 The operational noise assessment has considered both short-term effects when a noise assessment to British Standard BS 4142 might be considered to apply, and also to longer-term effects when absolute noise levels become of increasing importance.

F6.111 The short-term operational noise effects are considered to be neutral or of minor adverse significance for residential properties outside the port boundaries, but of moderate significance at the two in-port cottages on Western Avenue.

F6.112 Longer term changes in ambient noise levels with 201/2 operating to increase throughput to 2.8 million TEU per annum, as compared to ambient noise levels with the container terminal operating at a capacity of 2.3 million TEU, are a maximum of 3.5 dB at Skippers House, Admiralty Quay, but generally less than 3 dB elsewhere.

F6.113 No changes to the assessment of internal noise levels in residential properties are predicted for the effect of the operation of 201/2 compared to the without works capacity situation (2.3m TEU), except at the Western Avenue cottages, where night-time internal noise levels change from moderate adverse to a major adverse if the windows of the properties are kept open.

F6.114 No changes to the assessment of external living area noise levels at residential properties are predicted for the effect of the operation of 201/2 compared to the without works capacity situation (2.3m TEU), except at Skippers House, where daytime noise levels change from minor adverse to moderate adverse (but only by a fraction of a dB into the moderate adverse category).

F6.115 No significant noise effects of increased road traffic is anticipated as a consequence of the project. Minor adverse significant noise effects from rail traffic are anticipated.

F6.116 Mitigation measures include a positive purchasing policy with respect to noise limitation, maintaining an operational noise model to assess the effects of proposed changes, environmental awareness training, ensuring noise aspects are included in planned maintenance


413

routines and making an offer of improved ventilation to bedrooms of the two potentially affected residential properties within the port.

Description of Acoustic Terms When listening to noise which occurs out in the open (e.g. from road traffic, aircraft, birds, wind in the trees etc.), it is common experience that the noise level is not constant in loudness, but is changing in amplitude all of the time. Therefore, in order to numerically describe the noise levels, it is beneficial to use statistical parameters. It has become practice to use indices which describe the noise level which has been exceeded for a certain percentage of the measurement period, and also an index which gives a form of average of the sound energy over a particular time interval. The former are termed percentile noise levels and are notated LA90, LA50, LA10 etc. and the latter is termed the equivalent continuous noise level and is notated by LAeq. It is worth noting that if the noise level does not vary with time, then all the parameters, in theory, normalise to a single value. With regard to the percentile levels, the LA90 is the sound pressure level which is exceeded for 90% of the measurement time. It is generally used as the measure of background noise in environmental noise standards.

The LAeq (sometimes denoted LAeq,T) is the equivalent continuous noise level and is an energy averaged value of the actual time varying sound pressure level over the time interval, T. It is used in the UK as a measure of the noise level of a specific industrial noise source when assessing the level of the specific source against the background noise. It is also used as a measure of ambient noise (i.e. the “all-encompassing” sound field).

The LAmax F is the maximum sound pressure level within the measurement period using the Fast (F) time weighting of the sound level meter (integrating time 125 ms).

The term 'A' weighting implies a measurement made using a filter with a standardised frequency response which approximates the frequency response of the human ear at relatively low levels of noise. The resulting level, expressed in 'A' weighted decibels, or dBA, is widely used in noise standards, regulations and criteria throughout the world.

For a more detailed analysis of the frequency characteristics of a noise source, then noise measurements can be made in bands of frequencies, usually one octave wide. The resulting levels are termed octave band sound pressure levels. The standard octave band centre frequencies range from 31.5 Hz (about three octaves below middle ‘C’ on the piano) to 8 kHz (about five octaves above middle ‘C’). This covers most of the audible range of frequencies (usually taken to be around 20 Hz to 20 kHz). The ‘A’ weighted noise levels can be calculated using the octave band data. Octave band noise levels are usually quoted as linear data – i.e. without an ‘A’ weighting filter being applied.

The term decibel is a relative quantity and should always be referenced to an absolute level. In this chapter, all sound pressure levels (denoted LP) are expressed in dB ref 20 µPa.

Subjectively, and for steady noise levels, a change in noise level of 2 - 3 dBA is normally just discernible to the human ear. A difference of 10 dBA represents a doubling or halving of subjective loudness.


414

Sound power (denoted LW) is the acoustical power radiated from a sound source. The advantage of using the sound power level, rather than the sound pressure level, in reporting noise from industrial sites is that the sound power is independent of the location of the site, distance from the measurement point and environmental conditions. If the sound power of a source is known, then it is possible to calculate the sound pressure level at a distance away from the source, accounting for the attenuation due to propagation, as discussed above. In this report, all sound power levels are expressed in dB ref 1 pW.

Use has also been made of the term SELw per cycle. This is the sound power level, normalised to a one second time period for a cycle of activity of a noise source.

f6. operational noise · 2011. 10. 24. · f6. operational noise likely to be affected, to allow...

Documents