western section operational noise management sub plan ... · te480-02f04 (rev 10) hex final design...

Sydney (Head Office)Renzo Tonin & Associates (NSW) Pty LtdABN 29 117 462 8611/418A Elizabeth St., SURRY HILLS, NSW 2010PO Box 877 STRAWBERRY HILLS, NSW 2012Ph (02) 8218 0500 Fax (02) 8218 0501

Melbourne

Brisbane

Gold Coast

Kuwait

Consultants in Acoustics, Vibration & Structural Dynamics

email: [email protected]

website: www.renzotonin.com.au

HUNTER EXPRESSWAY DESIGN & CONSTRUCT

OPERATIONAL NOISE MANAGEMENT SUB PLAN

FINAL DESIGN

TE480-02F04 (REV 10) HEX FINAL DESIGN ONMSP

5 JUNE 2012

Prepared for:

Abigroup

Level 20, The Zenith Tower

B821 Pacific Hwy

CHATSWOOD NSW 2067

© Renzo Tonin & Associates (NSW) Pty Ltd HUNTER EXPRESSWAY DESIGN & CONSTRUCT

TE480-02F04 (rev 10) HEx Final Design ONMSP OPERATIONAL NOISE MANAGEMENT SUB-PLAN

FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page ii

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Date Revision HistoryNon-

IssuedRevision

IssuedRevision

Prepared By

(initials)

Instructed By

(initials)

Reviewed &Authorised by

(initials)

26/03/11 P85% ONMSP - 0 TG PK PK

6/04/11 85% ONMSP - 1 TG PK PK

22/08/11 P100% ONMSP - 2 TG PK PK

1/09/11 Final ONMSP - 3 TG PK PK

10/10/11 Final Design ONMSP 4 5 TG PK PK

30/03/12 Final 100% ONMSP 6 7 TG PK PK

26/04/12 Revised Final 100% ONMSP - 8 TG PK TG

1/05/12 Revised Final 100% ONMSP - 9 TG PK TG

5/06/12 Approved Final ONMSP - 10 TG PK TG

The work presented in this document was carried out in accordance with the Renzo Tonin & Associates Quality Assurance System,which is based on Australian Standard / NZS ISO 9001.

This document is issued subject to review and authorisation by the Team Leader noted by the initials printed in the last column above.If no initials appear, this document shall be considered as preliminary or draft only and no reliance shall be placed upon it other thanfor information to be verified later.

This document is prepared for our Client's particular requirements which are based on a specific brief with limitations as agreed to withthe Client. It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by a third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third partywithout prior consent provided by Renzo Tonin & Associates. The information herein should not be reproduced, presented or reviewedexcept in full. Prior to passing on to a third party, the Client is to fully inform the third party of the specific brief and limitationsassociated with the commission.

The information contained herein is for the purpose of acoustics only. No claims are made and no liability is accepted in respect ofdesign and construction issues falling outside of the specialist field of acoustics engineering including and not limited to structuralintegrity, fire rating, architectural buildability and fit-for-purpose, waterproofing and the like. Supplementary professional advice shouldbe sought in respect of these issues.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page iii

CONTENTS

1 Introduction 1

2 Purpose and Objectives 3

2.1 Purpose 3

2.2 Objectives 3

3 Environmental and Legal Obligations 4

3.1 Minister’s Conditions of Approval 4

3.2 Statement of Commitments 6

3.3 Scope of Work and Technical Criteria 7

3.4 Legislation 12

3.5 Guidelines and Background Documents 12

3.6 Operational Noise Criteria 12

3.6.1 NSW Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise 13

3.6.1.1 Target Noise Goals 15

3.6.1.2 Allowance Noise Goals 15

3.6.1.3 Acute Noise Levels 15

3.6.1.4 Maximum Noise Levels 15

3.6.2 SWTC Requirements 16

4 Environmental Aspects and Background Studies 18

4.1 Sensitive Receivers 18

4.2 Traffic Noise Monitoring Methodology 19

4.2.1 Environmental Assessment (2009) 22

4.2.2 Detailed Design (2010) 22

4.2.3 Maximum Noise Level Survey Methodology 25

4.3 Existing Noise Levels 26

4.3.1 Existing Road Traffic Noise Levels (ECRTN) 26

4.3.2 Existing Maximum Noise Levels 27

4.4 Traffic Volume and Composition Data 28

4.4.1 Existing Traffic Volumes 28

4.4.2 Project Traffic Volumes 29

4.5 Road Traffic Noise Model 29

4.5.1 Noise Model Inputs 29

4.5.2 Noise Model Verification 31

5 Operational Noise Assessment 34

5.1 Traffic Noise Mitigation 34

5.1.1 Reduced Speed Limits 34

5.1.2 Low Noise Pavements 35

5.1.3 Noise Barriers 36



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page iv

5.1.4 Low-Noise Expansion Joints on Bridges 37

5.1.5 At Property Treatment 37

5.1.6 Management of road traffic noise 39

5.2 Predicted Noise Levels 39

5.2.1 Noise Contours 39

5.2.2 Noise Levels at Noise Sensitive Receivers 40

6 Operational Noise Monitoring 41

6.1 Monitoring 41

6.2 Assessment of Noise Mitigation Measures 42

6.3 Reporting 43

6.4 Recommended Brief for RMS’s Consultant 43

7 Heavy Vehicle Rest Areas, Branxton 46

7.1 Description of Rest Areas and Surround 46

7.2 Noise Criteria 46

7.2.1 Trucks on the Freeway 46

7.2.1.1 Road Traffic Noise 46

7.2.1.2 Sleep Disturbance 47

7.2.2 Trucks in the Truck Rest Area 47

7.3 Noise Assessment 48

7.3.1 Noise Sources 48

7.3.2 Noise Assessment 49

7.3.2.1 Trucks on the Freeway - Sleep Disturbance 49

7.3.2.2 Trucks in the Truck Rest Area 49

APPENDIX A - Glossary of Acoustic Terms 51

APPENDIX B - Traffic Volume and Composition Data 56

APPENDIX C - Noise Model Verification Results 60

APPENDIX D - Noise Mitigation Design Pavement Schedule 63

APPENDIX E - Noise Mitigation Design – Noise Wall / Mound Schedule 64

APPENDIX F - final Design Noise Contour Lines (with At-Road Noise Mitigation) 65

APPENDIX G - Noise Mitigation Design – SWTC Appendix 9 Noise Sensitive ReceiverSchedule 94

APPENDIX H - Noise Mitigation Design – Additional Noise Sensitive Receiver Schedule97

APPENDIX I - RMS Noise Mitigation Design 100

APPENDIX J - Detailed Long Term Noise Monitoring Results 103

APPENDIX K - Detailed Lmax Noise Monitoring Results 104

APPENDIX L - Review Comments Register 105



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page v

List of Figures

Figure 1 - Locality Map Showing Project Route & Receiver/ Monitoring Locations (North - Zone 2and 3) 20

Figure 2 - Locality Map Showing Project Route & Receiver/ Monitoring Locations (South - Zone1 and 2) 21

List of Tables

Table 3.1 - Minister’s Conditions of Approval 4

Table 3.2 - Statement of Commitments 6

Table 3.3 - Scope of Works and Technical Criteria 7

Table 3.4 - Noise Criteria for Residential Receivers 14

Table 3.5 - Noise Criteria for Sensitive Land Use Developments 14

Table 4.1 – Sensitive Receiver Locations 18

Table 4.2 – Results of Leq Traffic Noise Monitoring from 2009 22

Table 4.3 – Noise Monitoring Locations 24

Table 4.4 – Maximum Noise Level (LAmax) Monitoring Locations 26

Table 4.5 – Summary of Monitored Noise Levels 26

Table 4.6 – Summary of Maximum Noise Level Events along Existing Pacific Highway 28

Table 4.7 – Existing 2010 Traffic Volumes and Compositions 29

Table 4.8 - Summary of Noise Modelling Inputs 30

Table 4.9 – Validation Results Summary: Measured to Modelled Statistical Analysis 32

Table 5.1 – Road Pavement Noise Corrections Relative to Dense Graded Asphalt 35

Table 5.2 – RMS Residential At-Property Treatment Options 38

Table 7.1 – Night Noise Criteria for Truck Rest Area 47

Table 7.2 – Night Noise Criteria for Truck Rest Area 48

Table 7.3 – Sound Power Levels for Truck Rest Area Activities 49

Table 7.4 – Predicted Noise Levels at Residential Receivers 50



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 1

1 INTRODUCTION

Renzo Tonin & Associates (NSW) Pty Ltd, on behalf of Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd (Abigroup)

have prepared this Operational Noise Management Sub-Plan (ONMSP), which may also be

referred to as an Operational Noise Management Report (ONMR), at this Final design stage of

the Project. It forms a key element of the operational management documents for the Hunter

Expressway – Kurri Kurri to Branxton Design and Construct Project (the Project).

This ONMSP seeks to meet the requirements of Condition 84 of the Minister’s Conditions of

Approval.

This ONMSP outlines the operational noise design criteria; baseline noise monitoring pre-

construction; noise-modelling results; the location, type and timing of noise mitigation

measures; and the proposed noise monitoring program to be implemented following the

completion and opening of the Project.

The Project involves the construction of a dual carriageway standard upgrade of the New

England Highway that bypasses Kurri Kurri and Branxton. In the south it connects into the

southern section of the Hunter Expressway, which is being designed and constructed by others,

approximately 1 kilometre to the south east of Cessnock Road (the Kurri Kurri Interchange).

The Project ties into the existing dual carriageway New England Highway to the west of

Branxton. In addition, four interchanges, at Kurri Kurri, Loxford, Allandale and Branxton, will

provide access to and from the bypass.

The Project is classed as a freeway or arterial road. In accordance with the ECRTN the Project

contains two different noise categories. These are:

1. New Freeway / Arterial Road

The majority of the road is to be built in a new road corridor where sensitive receivers

are not currently exposed to road traffic noise or sensitive receivers are exposed to

traffic noise from a different direction as a result of the Project.

2. Redevelopment of Existing Freeway / Arterial Road

A small section of the northern-most section of the route to the north of the Branxton

Rest Areas, where the Project re-joins the existing New England Highway is essentially

an expansion of an existing freeway / arterial road corridor (existing New England

Highway) to increase its traffic carrying capacity. Sensitive noise receptors potentially

impacted by the Project are currently exposed to road traffic noise from the existing

New England Highway.

Baseline traffic noise monitoring and detailed operational noise modelling has been undertaken

by Renzo Tonin & Associates. The noise modelling conducted for this Project assesses future

traffic noise levels with the Project in operation for the year 2026. The Project is expected to

open to traffic in 2013. Noise modelling has been undertaken for the year 2026 as required by



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 2

the RMS’s Scope of Work and Technical Criteria (SWTC) for this Project. This is considered to

be a conservative approach.

The noise modelling forms the basis for the detailed design of at-road noise mitigation

measures and identifies areas that require additional noise mitigation in the form of at-property

treatment to noise sensitive properties.

The proposed design criteria and noise management measures outlined in this ONMSP address

the requirements of the NSW ‘Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise’ (ECRTN) (DECCW,

ex EPA, 1999) in accordance with Condition 84 of the Minister’s Conditions of Approval (MCoA).

This is the IFC ONMSP, and it contains the noise prediction results and mitigation measures

based on the final road design.

The work documented in this ONMSP was carried out in accordance with Renzo Tonin &

Associates Quality Assurance System, which is based on Australian Standard / NZS ISO 9001.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 3

2 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

This ONMSP (or ONMR) has been prepared to meet the requirements of the Minister’s

Conditions of Approval and the RMS’s Scope of Work and Technical Criteria for the Project. The

objective of the ONMSP is to manage operational noise emission from the Project and ensure

appropriate operational noise mitigation measures are designed and installed to minimise noise

impacts to the community during operation of the Project.

2.1 Purpose

The purpose of the ONMSP is to:

confirm the road traffic noise goals for the Project to manage noise impacts on

local residents and other noise-sensitive receivers;

describe the existing noise environment at local residents and other noise-sensitive

receivers along the route;

identify operational noise treatments to be located along the route;

outline an effective implementation, monitoring, auditing and reporting framework;

and

provide an efficient, simplified and diligent approach to addressing the issue of

road traffic noise; and

identify and address any urban design issues relating to noise control measures.

2.2 Objectives

The objectives of the ONMSP are to meet the noise assessment criteria and commitments to the

community as described in the Minister’s Conditions of Approval for the Project and the following

environmental documents:

The RMS’s submission report statement of commitments; and

Environmental Assessment - Noise Assessment National Network F3 Freeway to

Branxton Link (Atkins Acoustics, February 2007); and

Noise Assessment Hunter Expressway F3 Freeway to Branxton (Atkins Acoustics,

October 2009).



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 4

3 ENVIRONMENTAL AND LEGAL OBLIGATIONS

This section presents the relevant legislation applicable to the Project and refers to the

Minister’s Conditions of Approval, Noise and Vibration legislation, guidelines and standards.

The design team has prepared this report in accordance with the following:

The Minister’s Conditions of Approval;

The RMS’s submission report statement of commitments;

The RMS’s Scope of Works and Technical Criteria (SWTC);

DECCW (ex DECC and EPA) Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise (ECRTN),

1999;

RTA Environmental Noise Management Manual (ENMM), 2001; and


Branxton Link (Atkins Acoustics, February 2007) and Noise Assessment Hunter

Expressway F3 Freeway to Branxton (Atkins Acoustics, October 2009).

3.1 Minister’s Conditions of Approval

The Minister’s Conditions of Approval (MCoA) relevant to noise and vibration management for

the Project are detailed in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 - Minister’s Conditions of Approval

RefNo.

Minister’s Condition of Approval Addressed in:

1. The proposal shall be carried out in accordance with:

i. the original request for approval of the proposal, including:

Proposed Highway Link – F3 Freeway to Branxton, Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) (Connell Wagner June 1995);

Proposed Highway Link – F3 Freeway to Branxton, Fauna Impact Statement (FIS)(Connell Wagner January 1997) and accompanying documentation, Flora and FaunaReport (Mount King Ecological Surveys 1995), Fauna Survey Greta Deviation(Connell Wagner 1996) and Herptofauna Survey (Richard Wells 1995);

Additional Flora and Fauna Assessment (AFFA) (Connell Wagner May 2001) tosupplement the original FIS;

Representations Report, Volumes 1, 2 and 3 (RTA, October 2001);

Supplementary Review of Environmental Factors (SREF) for the Allandale to IllalongSection Comparison of Options (Connell Wagner August 2000);

Kurri Sand Swamp Woodland Recovery Assessment (Biosis Research), a reportcommissioned jointly by the RTA and NPWS in August 2001;

Additional Environmental and Engineering Assessment (Connell Wagner May 2001);and

Compensatory Habitat Proposal and Candidate Areas – Stage 2 Report (ConnellWagner September 2001).

ii. the staged construction modification request (MOD-10-2006-i), including:

Correspondence from the RTA to the Department, dated 20 December 2005,accompanied by F3 Freeway to Branxton Link – Modification to Permit StagedConstruction (Acacia Environmental Planning Pty Ltd, September 2005);

Noted andadhered to inthis report



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 5

RefNo.

Minister’s Condition of Approval Addressed in:

iii. the alignment and ancillary infrastructure modification request (07_0033 Mod 1),including:

Correspondence from the RTA to the Department, dated 12 March 2007;

F3 Freeway to Branxton Link – Modification to Approved Project EnvironmentalAssessment (Acacia Environmental Planning Pty Ltd, March 2007);

F3 Freeway to Branxton Link: Threatened Species Assessment for Proposed DesignChanges (Biosis Research, January 2007);

Noise Assessment: National Network, F3 to Branxton Link (Atkins Acoustics,February 2007);

Socioeconomic Analysis of the Proposed Tuckers Lane to Black Creek Modification(Centre for International Economics, January 2005); and

F3 Freeway to Branxton Link: Submissions Report (Stuart J Hill Pty Ltd, June 2007);

iv. the conditions of this approval.

3. In the event of an inconsistency between:

the Conditions of this approval and any document listed from condition 1ito 1.iii inclusive, the conditions of this approval shall prevail to the extentof the inconsistency; and

any document listed from condition 1i to 1iii inclusive, and any otherdocument listed from condition 1i to 1iii inclusive, the most recentdocument shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.


Operational Noise

84. A detailed Operational Noise Management Sub Plan (NMSP Operation) shall be prepared inconsultation with the DECCW. The NMSP Operation shall include, but not be limited to:

i. details of noise mitigation measures to be implemented for the operation stagesufficient to address the technical requirements of the NSW Government’sguideline – Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise;

ii. location, type and timing of erection of any permanent noise barriers;

iii. specific physical and managerial measures for controlling noise and vibration;

iv. predicted road traffic noise levels immediately after opening and with allproposed noise mitigation measures in place, at the noise sensitive receiverlocations identified in the Representations Report;

v. a methodology and procedures for assessing compliance with the predictedroad traffic noise levels immediately after opening; and

vi. the urban design issues relating to noise control measures.

With respect to Condition of Approval No. 84 (iii) above, the Proponent shall consider theuse of a range of structural and non-structural measures including speed controls and theuse of open graded asphalt.

This report

Section 5.1

Section 5.1.3

Section 5.1

Section 5.2 &Appendix E

Section 6

Section 5.1.3and Urban &LandscapeDesign Sub Plan

Noise Auditing

85. Monitoring of operational noise shall be undertaken in accordance with the NMSP(Operation). The Proponent shall, in consultation with the DECCW, assess the adequacy ofthe traffic noise mitigation measures after one year of operation with regard to the DECCWguideline Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise. Should the assessment indicate aclear trend in traffic noise levels which are higher than the predictions made and exceed EPAnoise criteria, the Proponent shall consider further mitigation measures including but notlimited to inclusion of noise barriers, insulation of buildings, and total acquisition ofproperties.

Section 6

86. Notwithstanding the above, the Proponent shall, as a minimum, comply with the noiseassessment criteria described in Section 9 of the Additional Environmental and EngineeringAssessment report (Connell Wagner, May 2001).

Section 3.6 andSection 6



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 6

3.2 Statement of Commitments

This report considers the requirements in the Statement of Commitments developed from the

environmental documents. These are summarised in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2 - Statement of Commitments

SourceDocument

Source Statement of Commitment TimingAddressed

in:

RepresentationsReport andEnvironmentalImpactStatement.

RR Section2.4.10

EISSection2.4.10

Provision of mitigation measures to meet target noiselevels

Pre-construction

Section 5 ofthis report

ConsistencyReview

18.1(2) All noise control options must be developed on the basisof practicality, cost effectiveness, equity, aesthetics andowner preferences

Pre-construction


ProposedHighway Link F3Freeway toBranxton,EnvironmentalImpactStatement - MainVolume, June1995

ExecutiveSummary

The route selection and concept design for the Proposalhave sought to minimise the number of residencesexposed to high traffic noise levels. However, with thegenerally low background noise levels along the corridor,it would be necessary for specific mitigation measures atnumerous locations in order to meet target noise levelsestablished by the RTA for new roads in rural areas. Thiswould include a variety of barriers, or in more isolatedcases, treatment of houses. Future housing in the vicinityof the road would be expected to be located, designedand constructed to meet environmental noise goals.

Pre-construction


8.4.3 The acoustic investigation included a range of alternativemitigation measures that could be considered for thecontrol of traffic noise in those locations where theassessment criteria would not otherwise be met:

i. using dense grade asphaltic concrete which wouldreduce noise by 0.5-1.0dB(A) or using open gradeasphaltic concrete which would reduce noise by anadditional 2.0-2.5dBI(A);

ii. acoustic barriers in the form of acoustic screens, earthbund walls or road cuttings (or a combination of these)can achieve substantial noise reductions depending onthe design and height of the barrier

iii. be reducing speed by 35kph, noise would be reducedby 2dB(a)

iv. acoustic treatment of buildings (e.g. double glazingand mechanical ventilation).

Pre-construction


Summary of KeyCommitments,Obligations,Undertakings orRequirements inthe Hunter

RR Vol 1 The EPA's Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noisemust be taken into consideration during detailed designwhen considering the impact on Kurri Kurri TAFE.

Pre-construction.

Section 3.6of this report

Section8.2

Where noise levels would increase and exceed the RTAassessment criteria, acoustic measures to decrease noiseat residences would be implemented.

Pre-construction




FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 7

SourceDocument

Source Statement of Commitment TimingAddressed

in:

Expressway e-TableEnvironmentalDocuments,November 2009

Correspondence

In the area of proposed embankment betweenapproximately 28km 200 and 28km 860 earth mounds ofbetween 2 to 4 metres will be considered adjacent to theroad shoulder, as part of the road formation. Noise levelswill comply with the requirements of the EPA'sEnvironmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise. Furtherconsultation on noise attenuation measures will takeplace with Mr Windt at the design stage prior toconstruction.

As with the embankment mentioned above, earthmounds of between 2 to 4 metres will be consideredadjacent to the road shoulder, as part of the roadformation. Noise levels will comply with the requirementsof the EPA's Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise.The RTA cannot give an assurance that these noise levelswill be suitable for an open air theatre. Furtherconsultation on noise attenuation measures will takeplace with Mr Windt at the design stage prior toconstruction.

Pre-construction

Appendix D

3.3 Scope of Work and Technical Criteria

This report considers the requirements of the Project Scope of Works and Technical Criteria

(SWTC). Relevant sections of the SWTC are summarised in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3 - Scope of Works and Technical Criteria

Ref No. Scope of Works and Technical Criteria Addressed in:

Scope of Works and Technical Criteria VT6 Exhibit A

5.10 – Functional Requirements

5.10.2 Noise Mitigation Measures and Structures

Noise mitigation measures and structures must be:

(a) provided in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Documents andAppendix 14;

(b) designed in accordance with RTA Noise Wall Design Guidelines 2007; and

(c) integrated with the urban and landscape design.


5.14 – Pavements

5.14.1

(a)

General

Pavements must:

(viii) have wearing surfaces which produce noise levels and tonal noise characteristicsthat contribute to noise mitigation and compliance with the noise levelrequirements of the deed.

Appendix D

5.20 – Future Works

5.20 (a) In the design of the Works the Contractor must consider and accommodate the detaileddesign, construction and maintenance, by others, of:

(iv) noise barriers on the Main Carriageway and the bridge over Camp Road adjacentto the future Anvil Creek development at Greta. The noise barriers will be locatedon the outside verge of the southbound carriageway of the Main Carriagewaysbetween Chainages 27960 and 31300 and will have a height of 4.3 metres abovethe adjacent outside pavement surface level.


Appendix E



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 8


Appendix 4 – Additional Environmental Requirements

4.14 – Noise Mitigation

4.14 (a) Notwithstanding the requirements of Practice Note ii of RTA Environmental NoiseManagement Manual, December 2001, noise mitigation measures are not required atcommercial or industrial premises.


4.14 (b) Further to any other requirements of the Environmental Documents in relation to noisemitigation measures, the Contractor must design and provide at-road operational noisemitigation measures to maintain operational noise levels of 55dB (A) LAeq15hr (day) orless and 50dB (A) LAeq9hr (night) or less, for the year 2026, at the locations identified bythe contour lines sown in Figure 9.26 and described in electronic file App9NoiseContoursMOD_May2010.txt in Appendix 9.

At-road operational noise mitigation measures must be contained within the Site, LocalRoad Works Areas and existing road reserves.

At-road noise mitigation barriers must be provided, as a minimum, at the locations,lengths and heights detailed in Table 4.5.

The Contractor must undertake noise modelling on the design of the Project Works to:

predict the 55dB (A) LAeq15hr (day) and 50dB (A) LAeq9hr (night) 2026 operationalnoise level contours;

predict operational LAeq15hr (day) and LAeq9hr (night) 2026 noise levels at the noise-sensitive receiver locations identified in Table 9.7 of Appendix 9;

identify the receivers where the operational noise levels are predicted to exceed55dB(A) LAeq15hr (day) and 50dB(A) LAeq9hr (night) 2026 operational noise levels atthe receivers.

The noise modelling must:

(i) use traffic speeds of 115 km/h (day) and 120 km/h (night) for the MainCarriageways and Ramps and the traffic speeds for Local Roads identified inTable 4.6;

(ii) use the traffic volumes and proportion of heavy vehicles percentages for the year2026 identified in Table 4.7 to 4.11, inclusive;

(iii) notwithstanding the corrections identified in Table 3.1 of the ENMM, apply thefollowing road surface noise corrections (relative to dense graded asphalticconcrete) for transversely and longitudinally tyned, dragged or Portland cementconcrete surfaces:

+3.0 dB(A) correction for traffic noise,

+3.5 dB(A) correction for cars,

+1.0 dB(A) correction for trucks; and

(iv) include a +2.5dB(A) facade reflection.

The Contractor must comply with the requirements of this subsection 4.14(b)notwithstanding any financial, costing, feasibility or other constraints on the types ofmitigation identified in the ENMM.

Sections 4.5and 5 of thisreport

Appendix E ofthis report

Appendix F ofthis report

Appendix G andG of this report

Sections 4.4and 4.5 of thisreport

4.14 (c) Further to the requirements of subsection 4.14(b) and for the avoidance of any doubt, theContractor is not required to and must not undertake any at-residence noise mitigationtreatment at noise sensitive receivers.


4.14 (d) Pavement wearing surfaces must be designed to produce noise levels and tonalcharacteristics that contribute to achieving compliance with the noise level requirementsof the Project Deed. Low noise pavement must be provided on the Main Carriagewaysand Ramps at the following locations:

Chainage 12900 to 15750;

Chainage 31000 to 32800; and

Chainage 35400 to 38000.

Low noise pavements must comply with the requirements of Appendix 12 of the Scope ofWorks and Technical Criteria.

Section 5.1.1and Appendix D

4.14 (e) Bridge joints must be designed, selected and installed to reduce vehicle noise impacts. Section 5.1.4



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 9


4.15 – Operational Noise Management Report

4.15 (a) Further to the requirements of Condition 84 of the approval issued by the Minister forUrban Affairs and Planning pursuant to Section 115B(2) of the Environmental Planningand Assessment Act 1979, dated 7 November 2001, the Contractor must prepare anoperational noise management report as a part of the Design Documentation for the noisemitigation measures. The Contractor must undertake a noise study on the certified andverified Design Documentation of the Project Works and include a report on this study inthe operational noise management report. The operational noise management reportmust be included as part of the review of proposed operational noise mitigation measuresrequired by condition 84 of the approval issued by the Minister for Urban Affairs andPlanning pursuant to Section 115B(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act1979, dated 7 November 2001. The noise study must use the input variables of trafficspeed, volume and composition identified in section 4.14 of this Appendix 4.

This Document

4.15 (b) In addition to the requirements of the other Environmental Documents the noise studyand noise management report must address and include:

(i) a description of the prevailing ambient noise environment;

Noted andadhered to in:

Section 4.3

(ii) the results of noise modelling and proposed mitigations required by section 4.14of this Appendix 4;

Section 4.5 and5

(iii) the results of all field survey and noise monitoring required to calibrate themodelling required by section 4.14 of this Appendix;

Section 4.3 and4.5.2

(iv) details on the noise-sensitive receivers and noise monitoring locations, includingdistances to the nearest roads where roads are located close to the noisemonitors;

Section 4

(v) a site plan showing the noise-sensitive receivers and noise monitoring locations; Figure 1 andFigure 2

(vi) aerial photographs showing the noise-sensitive receivers and noise monitoringlocations;

Figure 1 andFigure 2

(vii) details on the positioning of noise loggers at each noise monitoring location,including photographs of the noise logger in its monitoring position;

Appendix J

(viii) charts and a summary table of measured and/or computed noise modelingparameters, including the LAmax, LA10, LAeq and LA90, at 15-minute intervals foreach 24-hour period of the noise monitoring survey;

Appendix J

(ix) a table summarising the noise parameters measured; Section 4.2

(x) summaries of the computational algorithms used in the noise model andjustification for their selection, the location of noise-sensitive receivers and howthe modelling parameters were addressed;

Section 4.5

(xi) a table summarising the relevant noise modelling parameters computed at themonitoring locations and comparisons with the design noise objectives andrequirements of the Environmental Documents and section 4.14 of this Appendix4;

Section 4.5

(xii) noise contour maps for the year 2026 detailing the LAeq (9hr) Night and LAeq (15hr)

Day and identifying all noise-sensitive receiver locations;Appendix F

(xiii) details on all noise sensitive receivers that are predicted to exceed the ECRTN(base and allowance criteria) for the year 2026;

Appendix G & H

(xiv) identification of noise-sensitive receivers predicted to have noise levels, for theyear 2026, at an acute noise level or above; and

Appendix G & H

(xv) identification of all at-road operational noise mitigation measures Appendix D & E



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 10


Appendix 9 – Geometric Performance and Design Requirements

9.11 – 2026 Noise Contours

9.11 The 2026 Noise Contour coordinates are those contained in the electronic fileApp9NoiseContoursMOD_May2010.txt, titled “2026 Noise Contours – MOD May 2010 -MX-GENIO input file” which is a part of this Appendix 9.

Section 6.2 andAppendix F

9.12 - 2026 Noise Levels

9.12 Noise-sensitive receiver’s locations are identified in Table 9.7. Section 5.3 andAppendix G

Table 9.7 Road Traffic Noise Levels at Noise-Sensitive Receivers

LOT DP Street address

2551 827110 951 Lovedale Road, Allandale, 2325




188 755204 88 James Lane, Bishops Bridge, 2326




221 881054 2A Russell Street, Branxton, 2335

21 593748 271 Camp Road, Greta, 2334

1 416028 273 Camp Road, Greta, 2334

2 1129191 321 Tuckers Lane, Greta, 2334

100 1131413 349 Tuckers Lane, Greta, 2334

434 755231 72 Hart Road, Loxford, 2326

433 755231 78 Hart Road, Loxford, 2326

70 1087121 7 McLeod Road, Loxford, 2326

1 854893 54 Bakers Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326

51 542253 71 Bakers Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326

20 854107 970 Old Maitland Road, Sawyers Gully, 2326






359 755231 42 Lumby Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326

12 1082775 78 Lumby Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326

322 755231 103 Bishops Bridge Road, Sawyers Gully, 2326

1 999156 549 Majors Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326

453 755231 2 Dawes Avenue, Loxford 2326

11 84443 7 Standen Drive, Lower Belford 2335

60 809738 2013 New England Highway, Greta 2334



A 405885 2029 New England Highway, Greta 2334


902 747350 2084 New England Highway, Branxton 2335

62 825567 305 Tuckers Lane, Greta 2334

8 868722 165 Camp Road, Greta 2334

5 242211 958 Lovedale Road, Allandale 2325

2552 827110 931 Lovedale Road, Allandale 2325

444 755231 Cnr Horton Road & Scales Ave, Loxford 2326



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 11


Table 9.7 Road Traffic Noise Levels at Noise-Sensitive Receivers (Continued)

LOT DP Street address

12 1015148 2657 New England Highway, Lower Belford 2335










102 1104942 413 Majors Lane, Keinbah 2321

2 1034109 19 Hinds Lane, Sawyers Gully 2326





Appendix 12 – Pavement Performance and Design Requirements

12.3 Low Noise Pavements

12.3 Low noise pavements must comply with the following requirements:

(a) where the speed zoning is above 80 km/h, the pavement wearing surface mustbe open graded asphalt, stone mastic asphalt (SMA) or exposed aggregateconcrete that meets the noise requirements identified in the EnvironmentalDocuments;

(b) where the speed zoning is 80 km/h or less, dense graded asphalt or light hessiandragged concrete surfaces may be used in addition to the surfaces specified insection 12.3(a);

(c) open graded asphalt surfacing must have a minimum thickness of 30 mm. Wherea concrete base is provided, it must be continuously reinforced with a protectioncourse of a minimum 25 mm thickness of dense graded asphalt under the opengraded asphalt surfacing. Where an asphalt base is provided, the top layer ofasphalt base must have a maximum 14 mm nominal aggregate size and aminimum 7 mm bitumen seal immediately beneath the open graded surfacing;

(d) where exposed aggregate concrete surfacing is provided, the concrete base mustbe continuously reinforced concrete, dowelled plain concrete or jointed reinforcedconcrete (dowelled). The base concrete must have a maximum 10 mm aggregatesize with a polishing aggregate friction value (PAFV) of greater than 50; and

(e) SMA surfacing must have a minimum thickness of 30 mm. Where a concretebase is provided, it must be continuously reinforced concrete. Where an asphaltbase is provided, the top layer of asphalt base must have a maximum 14 mmnominal aggregate size and a minimum 7 mm bitumen seal must be placedimmediately beneath the SMA surfacing.

Noted andadhered to byDesign Team

Appendix 17 – Rest Area Performance and Design Requirements

17.2 Rest Area Requirements

17.2(y) noise mitigation measures that comply with the requirements of section 4.14 of Appendix4 and, as a minimum, are similar to and consistent with the noise mitigation measuresshown in Figure 17.1 and Figure 17.2.




FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 12

3.4 Legislation

Key environmental legislation relating to the management of road traffic noise includes:

Protection of the Environment Operations Act (1997);

Environment Planning and Assessment Act (1979); and

Local Government Act (1993).

3.5 Guidelines and Background Documents

The key references relevant to road traffic noise management include:

Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise (ECRTN), NSW OEH (ex EPA), May

1999;

Environmental Noise Management Manual, NSW RTA, 2001;

Noise Wall Design Guidelines, NSW RTA, May 2007; and

Road Noise Policy (RNP), NSW OEH (ex DECCW), March 2011.

Background studies and assessment of potential noise impacts as a result of the operation of

the Project include:

Proposed Highway Link – F3 Freeway to Branxton, Environmental Impact

Statement (EIS) (Connell Wagner June 1995);

Additional Environmental and Engineering Assessment report (Connell Wagner,

May 2001);

Representations Report, Volumes 1, 2 and 3 (RTA, October 2001);


Branxton Link (Atkins Acoustics, February 2007); and

Noise Assessment Hunter Expressway F3 Freeway to Branxton (Atkins Acoustics,

October 2009).

3.6 Operational Noise Criteria

In accordance with Condition 84, the Operational Noise Mitigation measures contained within

this Report have been designed in accordance with the NSW ‘Environmental Criteria for Road

Traffic Noise’ (ECRTN). It is noted that a new road traffic noise policy was released by OEH (ex

DECCW) for use post 1st July 2011, entitled NSW ‘Road Noise Policy’ (RNP), March 2011.

Nonetheless, the ECRTN is still the applicable policy for this Project because the Project was

approved prior to the 1st July 2011. Consequently the MCoA and the SWTC refer to the ECRTN,

not the RNP.

Further to this, other Environmental Documents for the project (outlined in Section 3.5) have

been taken into consideration in the development of the operational noise mitigation measures.

It is noted that the noise assessment criteria are consistent with the noise assessment criteria

described in Section 9 of the Additional Environmental and Engineering Assessment report

(Connell Wagner, May 2001).



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 13

3.6.1 NSW Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise

The ECRTN outlines the NSW Government’s guidelines for road traffic noise assessment.

Specific objectives of the ECRTN include establishment of criteria to define acceptable noise

levels, methods for assessing and measuring noise impacts and identification of all strategies

available to reduce traffic noise.

In accordance with the ECRTN, a number of factors should be considered in setting road traffic

noise levels:

Whether there is an existing road corridor and whether the road project is intended

to increase traffic-carrying capacity substantially, or whether the traffic mix would

be substantially changed. This situation generally provides less scope for reducing

noise;

Whether or not substantial changes to the road alignment are proposed, or

whether the road is on a ‘new’ corridor. These road alignment changes provide the

greatest opportunity to achieve optimum noise management;

Whether the design/ profile of a proposed road is to be altered substantially. In

these cases there is also significant opportunity to consider noise reduction options

(e.g. putting a large proportion of the road in a tunnel);

Whether the criteria are being applied in relation to any redevelopment occurring

adjacent to an established road. In these cases, there is opportunity to use the

design of the redevelopment to control or reduce noise impact; and

Whether the area affected is an urban or rural environment where existing noise

levels will inevitably vary substantially, and where the response to additional noise

will also vary.

All these factors have been considered in the development of the noise level criteria for the

Hunter Expressway (Kurri Kurri to Branxton) Project.

Under the ECRTN, the Project is classed as a freeway or arterial road because it is a road that

handles through traffic bound for another locality and has characteristically heavy and

continuous traffic flows.

The Project is a new freeway / arterial road because it is to be built in a new road corridor, with

the exception of a small section of the route to the north of the Branxton Truck Rest Areas.

This approximately 1.5 kilometre section essentially entails the upgrading of the existing

highway to a dual carriageway, controlled access highway. This section is assessed as a ‘road

redevelopment’ in accordance with Practice Note 1 of the ENMM, as the upgrade is required to

facilitate an increase in the traffic carrying capacity of the New England Highway, and sensitive

receivers are exposed to existing road traffic noise. Therefore, according to the ECRTN, this

Project has two (2) noise criteria categories for residential receivers with respect to Table 1 of

the ECRTN:

Hunter Expressway (North of Kurri Kurri Interchange to Branxton Truck Rest Area):



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 14

Hunter Expressway (North of Kurri Kurri Interchange to Branxton Truck Rest Area):

Category 1 – New Freeway or Arterial Road Corridor: areas not currently exposed

to road traffic noise; and

Hunter Expressway (Branxton Truck Rest Area to New England Highway):

Category 3 – Redevelopment of Existing Freeway / Arterial Road: areas currently

exposed to road traffic noise.

The relevant noise criteria for this Project are therefore summarised in Table 3.4 below.

Table 3.4 - Noise Criteria for Residential Receivers

Type of DevelopmentCriteria

Day, dB(A) Night, dB(A) Where Criteria are Already Exceeded

1. New freeway or arterial roadcorridor

LAeq(15hr) 55 LAeq(9hr) 50 The new road should be designed so asnot to increase existing noise levels bymore than 0.5 dB.

3. Redevelopment of existingfreeway/ arterial road

LAeq(15hr) 60 LAeq(9hr) 55 In all cases, the redevelopment should bedesigned so as not to increase existingnoise levels by more than 2 dB.

Source: NSW Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise (May 1999).

The ECRTN also sets guidelines for the assessment of traffic noise on sensitive land use

developments.

Table 3.5 - Noise Criteria for Sensitive Land Use Developments

Type of Development

Criteria

Day,dB(A)

Night,dB(A)

Noise Mitigation Measures

Proposed schoolclassrooms

Leq(1hr) 401 - To achieve internal noise criteria in the short-term, themost practicable mitigation measures are often related tobuilding or facade treatments.

In the medium to longer term, strategies such asregulation of exhaust noise from in-service vehicles,limitations on exhaust brake use, and restricting access forsensitive areas or during sensitive times to low noisevehicles can be applied to mitigate noise impacts acrossthe road system. Other measures include improvedplanning, design and construction of sensitive land usedevelopments; reduced new vehicle emission standards;greater use of public transport; and alternative methods offreight haulage. These medium to long-term strategiesapply equally to mitigating internal and external noiselevels.

Where existing levels of traffic noise exceed the criteria,all feasible and reasonable noise control measures shouldbe evaluated and applied. Where this has been done andthe internal or external criteria (as appropriate) cannot beachieved, the proposed road or land use developmentshould be designed so as not to increase existing roadtraffic noise levels by more than 0.5dB(A) for new roadsand 2dB(A) for redeveloped roads or land usedevelopment with potential to create additional traffic.

Existing school classroom Leq(1hr) 451 -

Hospital wards Leq(1hr) 351 Leq(1hr) 351

Places of worship Leq(1hr) 401 Leq(1hr) 401

Active recreation (e.g.golf courses)

Leq(15hr) 602 -

Passive recreation andschool playgrounds

Leq(15hr) 552 -

Source: NSW Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise (May 1999).

Note: 1. Internal noise criteria

2. External noise criteria



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 15

The noise criteria described above are consistent with the Environmental Documents.

3.6.1.1 Target Noise Goals

The Target noise goals for this project are defined in Table 3.4 as follows for each type of noise

sensitive receiver:

New freeway or arterial road corridor (i.e. receivers newly affected by road noise):

Day – LAeq(15hr) 55 dB(A)

Night – LAeq(9hr) 50 dB(A)

Redevelopment of existing freeway / arterial road (i.e. receivers currently affected by

road noise):

Day – LAeq(15hr) 60 dB(A)

Night – LAeq(9hr) 55 dB(A)

3.6.1.2 Allowance Noise Goals

As per the ECRTN and ENMM, Allowance noise goals apply where existing (or future-existing)

noise levels already exceed the ECRTN’s Target noise goals, and all feasible and reasonable

traffic management and noise reducing design opportunities have been incorporated into the

road design. Allowance noise goals are set as follows:

For Redev Rds: ‘Future-Existing’ Noise Level + 2 dB(A)

For new roads: ‘Future-Existing’ Noise Level + 0.5 dB(A)

3.6.1.3 Acute Noise Levels

Acute noise levels are defined in the ENMM to be equivalent to or greater than LAeq(15hr) 65

dB(A) during the day period and LAeq(9hr) 60 dB(A) during the night period.

3.6.1.4 Maximum Noise Levels

Maximum noise levels generated by road traffic noise have the potential to cause disturbance

to sleep. The conditions stipulated in the MCoA do not specifically require an assessment of

maximum noise levels to be considered during the development of noise mitigation for sensitive

receptors. Notwithstanding this, the ECRTN does require maximum noise levels during each

hour of the night time period (10:00pm to 7:00am) to be assessed and reported to give an

indication of the likelihood of awakening reactions.

The ECRTN does not include noise criteria for assessing maximum noise level events. This is

primarily because research conducted to date in this field has not been definitive and the

relationship between maximum noise levels, sleep disturbance and subsequent health effects is

not currently well defined. Guidelines for assessing maximum noise levels are provided in

Practice Note iii of the ENMM. The guidelines are to be used as a tool to help prioritise and

rank mitigation strategies, but should not be used as a decisive criterion in itself and should not

be used to aid in designing the degree of mitigation required.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 16

The ENMM defines a “maximum noise event” as any pass-by for which:

Lmax – Leq ≥ 15 dB(A), where the Lmax noise level is greater than 65 dB(A).

3.6.2 SWTC Requirements

The sections of the SWTC relevant to noise are set out in Section 3.3 and summarised in Table

3.3 of this report. Importantly the SWTC identifies additional contractual requirements to the

standard requirements of the ECRTN and the ENMM.

Section 4.14(b) of Appendix 4 of the SWTC refers to additional operational noise goals to be

achieved by the Project in Sections 9.11 of Appendix 9 of the SWTC.

Section 4.14(b) The Contractor must undertake noise modeling on the design of the

Project Works to:

predict the 55dB (A) LAeq15hr (day) and 50dB (A) LAeq9hr

(night) 2026 operational noise level contours;

predict operational LAeq15hr (day) and LAeq9hr (night) 2026

noise levels at the noise-sensitive receiver locations identified

in Table 9.7 of Appendix 9;

identify the receivers where the operational noise levels are

predicted to exceed 55dB(A) LAeq15hr (day) and 50dB(A)

LAeq9hr (night) 2026 operational noise levels at the receivers.

Section 9.11 2026

Noise Contours

Maintain year 2026 operational noise levels of 55dB(A)

LAeq15h(day) or less and 50 dB(A) LAeq9h (night) or less, at the

locations identified by the contour lines described in electronic file

App9NoiseContoursMOD_May2010.txt in Appendix 9.

Furthermore, Section 4.14(b) states:

At-road operational noise mitigation measures must be contained within the Site,

Local Road Works Areas and existing road reserves.

At-road noise mitigation barriers must be provided, as a minimum, at the

locations, lengths and heights detailed in the SWTC’s Table 4.5.

In addition, Section 4.14(c) of the SWTC requirements states that the Contractor is not

required to and must not undertake any at-residence noise mitigation treatment at noise

sensitive receivers.

It is noted that the additional contractual noise requirements identified in the SWTC refer only

to the ECRTN’s ‘new road’ criteria, that is 55 dB(A) LAeq15hr (day) and 50 dB(A) LAeq9hr (night).

However, following the RMS's ENMM Practice Note 1, the ‘redeveloped road’ criteria (rather

than new road criteria) would apply at isolated properties along the New England Highway that

are currently exposed to road traffic noise from the same direction as the Project.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 17

Under the SWTC the Contractor is not required to meet a specific noise level at these locations,

only to predict noise levels to assist RMS in determining at-property treatments. To further

assist RMS in determining appropriate at-property treatments, properties that could be

assessed under the ‘redeveloped road’ criteria, LAeq15hr (Day) 60 dB(A) and LAeq9hr (Night) 55

dB(A) have also been noted.

With regard to the SWTC contours, all areas impacted by the SWTC contours are, in accordance

with ENMM Practice Note 1, assessed to 'new road' criteria.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 18

4 ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS AND BACKGROUND STUDIES

4.1 Sensitive Receivers

Sensitive receivers along the route have been identified for the purposes of this ONMSP based

on Table 9.7 of the SWTC and are summarised in below. The sensitive receivers are also

shown in Figure 1 and 2.

Table 4.1 – Sensitive Receiver Locations

ID LOT DP Street address Design Zone

RTR1 2551 827110 951 Lovedale Road, Allandale, 2325 2




RTR5 188 755204 88 James Lane, Bishops Bridge, 2326 1




RTR9 221 881054 2A Russell Street, Branxton, 2335 3

RTR10 21 593748 271 Camp Road, Greta, 2334 2

RTR11 1 416028 273 Camp Road, Greta, 2334 2

RTR12 2 1129191 321 Tuckers Lane, Greta, 2334 2

RTR13 100 1131413 349 Tuckers Lane, Greta, 2334 2

RTR14 434 755231 72 Hart Road, Loxford, 2326 1

RTR15 433 755231 78 Hart Road, Loxford, 2326 1

RTR16 70 1087121 7 McLeod Road, Loxford, 2326 1

RTR17 1 854893 54 Bakers Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326 1

RTR18 51 542253 71 Bakers Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326 1

RTR19 20 854107 970 Old Maitland Road, Sawyers Gully, 2326 1






RTR25 359 755231 42 Lumby Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326 1

RTR26 12 1082775 78 Lumby Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326 1

RTR27 322 755231 103 Bishops Bridge Road, Sawyers Gully, 2326 1

RTR28 1 999156 549 Majors Lane, Sawyers Gully, 2326 1

RTR29 453 755231 2 Dawes Avenue, Loxford 2326 1

RTR30 11 84443 7 Standen Drive, Lower Belford 2335 3

RTR31 60 809738 2013 New England Highway, Greta 2334 3





FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 19

ID LOT DP Street address Design Zone

RTR34 A 405885 2029 New England Highway, Greta 2334 3


RTR36 902 747350 2084 New England Highway, Branxton 2335 3

RTR37 62 825567 305 Tuckers Lane, Greta 2334 2

RTR38 8 868722 165 Camp Road, Greta 2334 2

RTR39 5 242211 958 Lovedale Road, Allandale 2325 2

RTR40 2552 827110 931 Lovedale Road, Allandale 2325 2

RTR41 444 755231 Horton Road, Loxford 2326 1

RTR42 12 1015148 2657 New England Highway, Lower Belford 2335 3










RTR52 102 1104942 413 Majors Lane, Keinbah 2321 1

RTR53 2 1034109 19 Hinds Lane, Sawyers Gully 2326 1





4.2 Traffic Noise Monitoring Methodology

Existing traffic noise levels were quantified by referring to noise monitoring undertaken during

2003 and 2009 and presented in the Noise Assessment Hunter Expressway F3 Freeway to

Branxton (Atkins Acoustics, October 2009). Additionally, long-term, unattended noise

monitoring was carried out by Renzo Tonin & Associates in November and December 2010 in

accordance with the requirements of the NSW ECRTN and the RMS’s ENMM.

The majority of the route passes through areas which are not significantly affected by existing

traffic noise. Noise levels in these areas are dominated by local traffic, domestic activity, birds,

breeze in trees, some industrial noise and rail noise. For these areas, emphasis is therefore

placed on achieving the ECRTN’s target-noise goals, which are more stringent than any

‘allowance’ over existing traffic noise criteria. This provides for a conservative approach which

is consistent with the SWTC requirements.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 22

The northern-most section of the route (north of the Branxton truck rest area) passes through

areas with existing road traffic noise exposure from the New England Highway. Existing road

traffic noise exposure is defined in the RMS’s ENMM as ‘…the prevailing noise level from the

existing road alignment(s) under consideration is equal to or greater than 55dB(A) LAeq(15hr) or

50dB(A) LAeq(9hr)’. Traffic noise exposure should also be from the same direction before and

after the Project completion for this definition to apply.

4.2.1 Environmental Assessment (2009)

Existing traffic noise levels presented in the 2009 Noise Assessment have been taken into

consideration in this report. The measured Leq traffic noise levels at the monitoring locations

are shown below. The descriptors relevant to traffic noise studies according to the NSW ECRTN

for traffic noise are the LAeq(15hr) daytime and LAeq(9hr) night time descriptors. Daytime

represents the period 7am to 10pm and night represents the period 10pm to 7am.

Table 4.2 – Results of Leq Traffic Noise Monitoring from 2009

MonitoringLocation

Location

Measured Noise Levels, dB(A) Affected byexisting

traffic noise?LAeq(15hr)

(7am - 10pm)LAeq(9hr)

(10pm - 7am)

R1 2657 New England Highway, Branxton 56 55 Yes

R2 2490 New England Highway, Branxton 60 59 Yes

R3 62 Fleet Street, Branxton 52 53 No

R4A 4 Railway Street, Branxton 54 55 No

R5 2 Usher Street, Illalong 50 50 No

R6 1044 Lovedale Road, Allandale 51 49 No

R7 84 Bakers Lane, Sawyers Gully 47 42 No

R8 14 Horton Road, Loxford 51 53 No

R9 Kurri Kurri TAFE Cottage V (Accommodation) 46 44 No

R10 Kurri Kurri TAFE (Administration) 51 45 No

R11 18 Arcacia Street, Kurri Kurri 56 52 No

R12 ‘Frogella’ 21 Brooks Street, Kurri Kurri 50 48 No

R13 77 Clift Street, Heddon Greta 50 46 No

Source: Noise Assessment Hunter Expressway F3 to Branxton. Atkins Acoustics and Associates, Report No.39.5645.R1:DD:CD1 Rev02, October 2009.

4.2.2 Detailed Design (2010)

Additional long-term (unattended) and short-term (attended) noise monitoring was carried out

in November and December 2010 in accordance with the requirements of the NSW ECRTN and

the RMS’s ENMM. The primary objective of the traffic noise monitoring was to obtain current

traffic noise levels at selected locations along the Project route to assist in establishing the

operational noise model. The long-term noise monitoring results, in combination with

concurrent classified traffic count and speed monitoring along the route, were used to verify

and calibrate the road traffic noise model to local conditions.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 23

Noise monitoring was carried out at a total of twenty (20) locations, summarised in Table 4.3.

Where possible, noise monitoring was conducted at locations previously monitored during the

EA phase of the project, plus additional locations determined during the design phase. Where

possible, assistance was sought from residents to locate the noise monitor in a similar position

to that used during the EA.

Noise monitoring was conducted in accordance with the procedures set out in Australian

Standard 2702-1984 “Acoustic Methods of Measurement of Road Traffic Noise”. Noise

measurements were conducted 1m from the building facade most exposed to traffic noise, at a

height of 1.2m to 1.5m above the most exposed floor level. Where physical constraints on site

prevented the noise monitor from being set up near the facade, monitoring was conducted in

the free-field, and a +2.5dB(A) facade correction was applied to the measured LAeq noise levels

to convert the free-field measurement to an equivalent measurement at 1m from facade.

Long-term, unattended noise measurements were conducted using Renzo Tonin & Associates

(RTA) Technology noise monitors (01, 02, 03 and 04 models), which comply with Australian

Standard AS IEC 61672.1 2004 “Electroacoustics - Sound Level Meters” and are designated as

Type 2 instruments suitable for field use (01 and 02 RTA Technology monitors) and Type 1

instruments suitable for field and laboratory use (03 and 04 RTA Technology monitors). A

noise monitor consists of a sound level meter and a computer housed in a weather resistant

enclosure. Ambient noise levels were recorded at a minimum rate of 10 samples per second.

Every 15 minutes, the data is processed statistically and stored in memory.

The equipment was calibrated prior and subsequent to the measurement period using a Brüel &

Kjær Type 4230 calibrator. No significant drift in calibration was observed in any noise

monitor.

The equipment used for the short-term, attended noise measurements was a Brüel & Kjær Type

2250 precision sound level analyser. Statistical noise levels were acquired in both overall and

octave band frequencies. This instrument complies with AS IEC 61672.1 2004 “Electroacoustics

- Sound Level Meters” and is designated as Type 1 instrument having an accuracy suitable for

field and laboratory use.

The sound level analyser was calibrated prior and subsequent to the measurements using a

Bruel & Kjaer Type 4231 calibrator. No significant drift in calibration was observed.

Measurements affected by extraneous noise, wind (greater than 5m/s) or rain were excluded

from the recorded data in accordance with Australian Standard AS2702-1984 Acoustics –

‘Methods for the Measurement of Road Traffic Noise’ and the NSW DECCW’s noise monitoring

policy (NSW ECRTN pp35-36 and NSW Industrial Noise Policy (INP) pp68-72). The Bureau of

Meteorology (BOM) provided meteorological data from Cessnock Automatic Weather Station

(stn 061260), which is considered representative of the site, for the duration of the noise

monitoring period. The wind data was modified to allow for the height difference between the

BOM weather station, where wind speed and direction is recorded at a height of 10m above

ground level, and the microphone location, which is at 1.5m above ground level. The wind



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 24

correction factor applied to the data was taken from Australian Standard AS1170.2 1989

Section 4.2.5.1.

Table 4.3 below presents the details of the noise monitoring locations.

Figure 1 and 2 show noise monitoring locations on aerial maps.

Table 4.3 – Noise Monitoring Locations

No.Type

1 Address Description of Monitoring LocationInstrument

IDMonitoring

Period

L01 LT 21 Pothana Ln,Belford

Noise monitor located in the rear yard, approx. 11mfrom the façade facing the New England Hwy. Distanceto Hwy approx. 360 m.

RTA01-001 18-29 Nov2010

L02 Lmax 3045 New EnglandHwy, Belford

Noise monitor located in the rear yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing the New England Hwy. Distanceto Hwy approx. 180 m.

RTA04-013 19-29 Nov2010

L03 LT 62 Standen Drive,Lower Belford

Noise monitor located in the front yard in the free fieldapprox. 19m away from the residence (shed obscuredat-façade location). Distance to New England Hwyapprox. 540 m.

RTA03-001 19-29 Nov2010

L04 LTLmax

7 Standen Drive.Lower Belford

Noise monitor located in the front yard in the free fieldapprox. 5.5m away from the covered balcony.Distance to New England Hwy approx. 95 m.

RTA01-005 18-29 Nov2010

L05 LT 12 Standen Drive,Lower Belford

Noise monitor located in the front yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing the New England Hwy.Distance to Hwy approx. 280 m.

RTA01-007 18-29 Nov2010

L06 LT 2490 New EnglandHwy, Branxton

Noise monitor located in the front yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing the New England Hwy.Distance to Hwy approx. 55 m.

RTA01-036 18-29 Nov2010

L07 LT 1864 Wine CountryDrive, Branxton

Noise monitor located in the front yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing Wine Country Dr. Distance toDr approx. 60 m.

RTA-02-020 18-29 Nov2010


Noise monitor located in the front yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing New England Hwy. Distance toHwy approx. 35 m.

RTA02-030 18-29 Nov2010


Noise monitor located in the rear yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing the Hunter Expressway location(opposite façade to New England Hwy). Distance toProject approx. 680 m, distance to New England Hwyapprox. 65 m.

RTA01-017 18-29 Nov2010

L10 ST 2029 New EnglandHwy, Branxton

Sound level meter located in the side yard, approx.1m from the façade facing the Hex-New England HwyLink Road (perpendicular façade to New England Hwy).Distance to Project approx. 740 m, distance to NewEngland Hwy approx. 70 m.

B&K2250 19 Nov 2010

L11 LT 2017 New EnglandHwy, Greta

Noise monitor located in the front yard in the free fieldapprox. 41m away from the covered balcony.Distance to Project approx. 650 m, distance to NewEngland Hwy approx. 100 m.

RTA01-099 18-29 Nov2010

L12 ST 349 Tuckers Ln,Greta

Sound level meter located in the side yard, approx.1m from the façade facing the Project (perpendicularfaçade to Tuckers Lane). Distance to Project approx.175 m, distance to Tuckers Ln approx. 30 m.

B&K 2250 18 Nov 2010

L13 ST 1 Nelson St, Greta(at the intersectionwith Cliff St.)

Noise monitor located in the front yard in the freefield. Distance to Project approx. 840 m, distance toNelson Road approx. 16 m.

B&K 2250 18 Nov 2010



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 25

No.Type

1 Address Description of Monitoring LocationInstrument

IDMonitoring

Period

L14 LT 1030 Old MaitlandRoad, SawyersGully

Noise monitor located in the side yard in the free fieldapprox. 5.5m away from the façade facing the Project(perpendicular façade to Old Maitland Rd). Distance toOld Maitland Rd approx. 27 m, distance to Projectapprox. 140 m.

RTA02-030 30 Nov to10 Dec 2010

L15 LT 103 Bishops BridgeRoad, SawyersGully

Noise monitor located in the side yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing the Project (perpendicularfaçade to Bishops Bridge Rd). Distance to Projectapprox. 220 m, distance to Bishops Bridge Rd approx.50 m. Distance to Aluminium Smelter approx.700.

RTA01-007 30 Nov to10 Dec 2010

L16 LT 78 Hart Road,Loxford

Noise monitor located in the side yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing the Project (perpendicularfaçade to Hart Rd). Distance to Project approx. 160m, distance to Hart Rd approx. 30 m. Distance toAluminium Smelter approx.700.

RTA01-001 30 Nov to10 Dec 2010

L17 LT 2 Dawes Avenue,Loxford

Noise monitor located in the front yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing the Project (perpendicularfaçade to Horton Rd). Distance to Project approx. 320m. Distance to Aluminium Smelter approx.650.Approx 55 m to rail line.

RTA01-017 30 Nov to10 Dec 2010

L18 LT 'Frogella' 21Brooks Street,Kurri Kurri

Noise monitor located in the rear yard in the free fieldapprox. 4m away from the façade facing the Project(perpendicular façade to Main Rd). Distance to MainRd approx. 90 m, distance to Project approx. 600 m.

RTA02-020 30 Nov to10 Dec 2010

L19 LT 3/98 Main Rd,Heddon Greta

Noise monitor located in the side yard in the free fieldapprox. 3.5m away from the façade facing the Project(perpendicular façade to Main Rd). Distance to MainRd approx. 20 m, distance to Project approx. 350 m.

RTA01-03 30 Nov to10 Dec 2010

L20 LT 24 Anvil Street,Stanford Merthyr

Noise monitor located in the front yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing the Project and Maitland Rd.Distance to Project approx. 800 m. Distance to HEX(Alliance) approx. 650 m. Distance to Maitland Rdapprox.4 m.

RTA01-094 30 Nov to10 Dec 2010

Notes 1. LT = Long term, unattended noise monitoring; Lmax = Long term, unattended Lmax noise monitoring (Lmax only);ST = short term, attended noise monitoring

4.2.3 Maximum Noise Level Survey Methodology

Maximum noise level (LAmax) noise monitoring was carried out at two (2) locations along the

Project route, as summarised in Table 4.4. LAmax noise monitoring was conducted in accordance

with the protocols presented in Practice Note iii of the ENMM.

Noise measurements were conducted 1m from the building facade most exposed to traffic

noise, at a height 1.2m to 1.5m above the most exposed floor level over a one night period,

between 10:00pm to 7:00am.

Noise measurements were conducted using RTA Technology 04 model noise monitors, which

comply with Australian Standard AS IEC 61672.1 2004 “Electroacoustics - Sound Level Meters”

and are designated as a Type 1 instruments suitable for field and laboratory use. These

automated noise monitors are capable of storing sound pressure levels for every one second

period for the duration of the monitoring period.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 26

The equipment was calibrated prior and subsequent to the measurement period using a Brüel &

Kjær Type 4230 calibrator. No significant drift in calibration was observed in any noise

monitor.

Table 4.4 – Maximum Noise Level (LAmax) Monitoring Locations

No. Type Address Description of Monitoring LocationInstrument

IDMonitoring

Period

L02 Lmax 3045 New EnglandHwy, Belford

Noise monitor located in the rear yard, approx. 1mfrom the façade facing the New England Hwy.

Distance to Hwy approx. 180 m.

RTA04-013 19-29 Nov2010

L04 Lmax 7 Standen Drive.Lower Belford

Noise monitor located in the front yard in the freefield approx. 5.5m away from the covered balcony.

Distance to New England Hwy approx. 95 m.

RTA01-005 18-29 Nov2010

4.3 Existing Noise Levels

4.3.1 Existing Road Traffic Noise Levels (ECRTN)

The existing traffic noise levels measured along the Project route are summarised in Table 4.5

below. The noise levels presented below are the overall, noise levels for each relevant traffic

noise descriptor. Detailed noise monitoring data are included in Annexure G of this ONMSP.

Observations in the field during the monitoring period found that the noise levels in these areas

are dominated by local traffic and domestic activity. Fauna noise, including insects, frogs and

birds also were identified as audible at most of the monitoring locations. Industrial noise from

the Kurri Kurri Aluminium Smelter was audible at monitoring locations L15, 16 and 17. Further

to this, rail noise from the Main Northern Railway Line was identified as audible at the locations

shown below.

Noise levels are presented in terms of the noise descriptors relevant to this project. The

relevant descriptors for traffic noise are LAeq(15hr) and LAeq(9hr) which represent the existing day

and night traffic noise levels, respectively.

Table 4.5 – Summary of Monitored Noise Levels

No. AddressApprox. Distance to

Significant Noise Sources1

Measured Noise Levels, dB(A)2

LAeq (15hr) Day LAeq (9hr) Night

L01 21 Pothana Ln, Belford New England Hwy 360 m; RailLine 485 m

54 53

L03 62 Standen Drive, Lower Belford New England Hwy 540 m; RailLine 985 m

54 52

L04 7 Standen Drive. Lower Belford New England Hwy 95 m; Rail Line620 m

64 62

L05 12 Standen Drive, Lower Belford New England Hwy 280 m; RailLine 610 m

55 55

L06 2490 New England Hwy, Branxton New England Hwy 55 m; Rail Line515 m

60 59

L07 1864 Wine Country Drive, Branxton Wine Country Dr 70m; Rail Line430 m

55 53



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 27

No. AddressApprox. Distance to

Significant Noise Sources1

Measured Noise Levels, dB(A)2

LAeq (15hr) Day LAeq (9hr) Night


53 51


56 54


56 54

L11 2017 New England Hwy, Greta New England Hwy 100 m; RailLine 460 m

58 56

L12 349 Tuckers Ln, Greta Tuckers Ln 30 m; Rail Line 710 m LAeq(15min) 36-49

L13 1 Nelson St, Greta Nelson Rd 16 m; Rail Line 380 m LAeq(15min) 53-59

L14 1030 Old Maitland Road, SawyersGully

Old Maitland Rd 27 m 56 57

L15 103 Bishops Bridge Road, SawyersGully

Bishops Bridge Rd 50 m;Aluminium Smelter 700 m

54 51

L16 78 Hart Road, Loxford Hart Rd 30 m; AluminiumSmelter 700 m

63 63

L17 2 Dawes Avenue, Loxford Dawes Ave Rd 14 m; AluminiumSmelter 650 m; Rail Line 55 m

50 44

L18 'Frogella' 21 Brooks Street, KurriKurri

Main Rd 90m 54 51

L19 3/98 Main Rd, Heddon Greta Main Rd 20m 71 65

L20 24 Anvil Street, Stanford Merthyr Maitland Rd 4 m 58 54

Notes: 1. Acoustically significant noise sources that contribute to the existing ambient noise environment

2. Free field locations have been corrected to account for facade reflections; i.e. +2.5dB(A) to the monitored noise levels

The traffic noise levels presented in Table 4.5 above show that while the majority of the Project

route passes through areas currently not affected by traffic noise, some areas of the route,

particularly west of Branxton have existing road traffic noise exposure from the New England

Highway. Existing road traffic noise exposure is defined by the RMS’s ‘Environmental Noise

Management Manual’ (ENMM) as ‘…the prevailing noise level from the existing road

alignment(s) under consideration is equal to or greater than 55dB(A) LAeq(15hr) or 50dB(A)

LAeq(9hr)’. As noted above, traffic noise exposure should also be from the same direction before

and after the Project completion for this definition to apply.

Furthermore, it is noted that many of the noise monitoring locations were affected by non-

traffic noise sources, such as freight train noise from the nearby rail line, fauna noise (e.g.

insects, frogs etc.) and at a few locations by industrial noise (e.g. aluminium smelter plant).

4.3.2 Existing Maximum Noise Levels

The LAmax noise level represents the loudness of the maximum noise events and can be used

when assessing sleep arousal. As recommended by the RMS’s ENMM, the LAmax noise levels

reported below are those that occur at night (between 10pm and 7am), and where Lmax – Leq is

greater than 15 dB(A).



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 28

Table 4.6 below summarises the maximum noise level events measured at each monitoring

location during the measurement period. Detailed results of the maximum noise level

monitoring are provided in Annexure H.

Table 4.6 – Summary of Maximum Noise Level Events along Existing Pacific Highway

ID AddressApprox. Distance to

Significant NoiseSources1

LAmax Range(10pm-7am)

dB(A)

No. of Events (10pm-7am)

Range per Hour Range per Night

L02 3045 New England Hwy,Belford

New England Hwy 180 mRail Line 180 m

74-97 0-11 23-46

L04 62 Standen Drive, LowerBelford

New England Hwy 540 mRail Line 985 m

71-80 0-3 1-9

Notes: 1. Acoustically significant noise sources that contribute to the existing ambient noise environment

Measured LAmax noise levels indicate that up to 11 events occur per hour at the monitoring

locations and up to 46 events during a whole night period over the one week monitoring period.

Heavy vehicle traffic volumes at Belford for the night period were on average 377 vehicles

between 10pm and 7am.

4.4 Traffic Volume and Composition Data

4.4.1 Existing Traffic Volumes

Classified traffic volume counting was undertaken simultaneously with the noise monitoring.

The traffic volume data combined with the concurrent noise monitoring results were used to

assist in validating the noise model.

Seven (7) traffic count locations were selected, to ensure that all traffic movements along the

Project route were accounted for. It is noted that all monitoring was completed prior to the

commencement of construction; hence no modified speed limits were in place. At the time of

monitoring the posted speed limits along the existing New England Highway ranged from

60km/h to 100km/h.

When analysing the data for the New England Highway at Belford it was found that traffic on

the New England Highway is at a standstill during the peak periods (6am to 9am and 3pm to

6pm). The noise model used the 85 percentile traffic speed obtained from the traffic count

reports. When the peak hours were included, the traffic speed was skewed causing differences

between the modeled and measured traffic noise levels. Furthermore, CoRTN is designed to

model free-flowing traffic, not stop-start traffic, further increasing potential errors in the

modeling results. Consequently, the peak hour traffic volumes and speeds were removed from

the noise model and subsequently from the matching period’s noise monitoring results to

improve the accuracy of the noise model predictions.

The results of the traffic volume counting are summarised in Table 4.7 following.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 29

Table 4.7 – Existing 2010 Traffic Volumes and Compositions

Road Direction

Day – 7am to 10pm (15hr) Night – 10pm to 7am (9hr)

TotalVehicles

% HeavyVehicles

Speed1 TotalVehicles

% HeavyVehicles

Speed1

New England Hwy, Belford eastbound 5151 15.3 109 681 27.0 112

(east of Kirkton Rd)2 westbound 4243 12.8 105 1545 12.0 105

Wine Country Drive, Branxton northbound 2533 6.3 84 674 11.2 90

(south of Main Northern Railway) southbound 2759 6.6 87 264 19.3 92

New England Highway, East eastbound 7426 12.3 68 1869 16.1 72

Branxton (south of Wyndham St) westbound 6741 13.0 84 820 20.3 85

Old Maitland Road, Bishops northbound 1584 9.2 88 217 9.2 90

Bridge (north of Majors Lane) southbound 1722 5.8 85 223 10.1 87

Hart Road, Loxford eastbound 374 20.3 85 305 8.5 84

(south west of Scales Road) westbound 532 15.7 89 106 27.1 88

Main Road, Heddon Greta eastbound 4364 6.8 72 447 10.4 77

(east of Abbotoir road) westbound 4397 7.2 71 497 9.0 75

Stanford Road, Stanford Merthyr northbound 732 5.2 77 94 7.3 78

(south of Main Rd) southbound 676 3.0 67 125 2.9 66

Note: 1. Speed represents the 85th percentile speed monitored during the traffic volume counting

2. Daytime modified to 10 hours (9am to 3pm and 6pm to 7pm); Night modified to 8 hours (10pm to 6am) toeliminate impact of peak hours traffic standstill on New England Highway near Belford.

4.4.2 Project Traffic Volumes

The traffic volumes, compositions and speeds used in the design noise modelling for year 2026

are presented in the tables in Appendix B in terms of daytime (15hr) and night-time (9hr)

data. Data for the design year, 2026 was obtained from the traffic data identified in Tables 4.6,

4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10 and 4.11 of Appendix 4 of the SWTC. The traffic volumes used to assess

noise impacts are consistent with previous noise assessment documents.

Details regarding the two-way split of traffic flow for the main carriageways were obtained from

the Noise Assessment Hunter Expressway F3 to Branxton. Atkins Acoustics and Associates,

Report No. 39.5645.R1:DD:CD1 Rev02, October 2009 p13-14 (“the 2009 Noise Assessment”).

The forecast traffic volumes on opening of the Hunter Expressway in 2013 were provided by

RMS and were based on Version 12 of their Lower Hunter Traffic Model.

4.5 Road Traffic Noise Model

4.5.1 Noise Model Inputs

For this project, noise modelling was undertaken using two noise modelling software packages:

SoundPLAN - the Road Traffic Noise Module (v6.4)

Cadna-A (v4.1).



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 30

Both noise modelling software packages are recognised and accepted by both RMS and the

DECCW. The reason for running two noise models was to check and confirm the output results

of each model.

Both traffic noise prediction models adopted a method developed by the United Kingdom

Department of Environment entitled “Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (1988)” known as the

CoRTN88 method. This method has been adapted to Australian conditions and extensively

tested by the Australian Road Research Board. The noise models predict noise levels for free

flowing traffic and a modified method has been developed which enables an accurate prediction

of noise from high truck exhausts to be taken into account.

The method predicts the L10, 1hour noise levels, and a correction of -3dB(A) is applied to obtain

the Leq, 1 hour noise levels for every hour in a 24 hour day. The Leq(1 hour) noise levels for the day

time period 7am to 10pm is used to determine the daily Leq(15 hour) noise level. Similarly, the

Leq(1 hour) noise levels for the night time period 10pm to 7am is used to derive the night time

Leq(9 hour) noise level.

The noise prediction model takes into account the following inputs.

Table 4.8 - Summary of Noise Modelling Inputs

Input Parameters Data Acquired From

Traffic volumes and mix Future (2026) traffic counts provided in Tables 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10 & 4.11 ofAppendix 4 of the SWTC. Note that average hourly traffic volumes are used forthe purpose of noise modelling, and these were obtained by dividing the trafficvolumes for the representative period by the number of hours in that period. Forexample, day time traffic volumes for the design model were divided by 15 todetermine the average hourly traffic volume for the day period (7am to 10pm).

Vehicle speeds Future (2026) traffic speed of 115 km/hr (day) and 120 km/h (night) for theMain Carriageway and Ramps as noted in Section 4.14 of Appendix 4 of theSWTC.

Local Road traffic speeds identified in Table 4.6 of Appendix 4 of the SWTC.

Gradient of roadway Final design drawings provided by the Project’s Design Joint-Venture.

Source height 0.5m for car exhaust, 1.5m for car and truck engines and 3.6m for truck exhaustand detailed within CoRTN.

Ground topography Topographic data provided by the Project’s Design Joint-Venture (electronic).Land contours presented in a combination of 2m and 10m intervals.

Angles of view from receiver From aerial photos and drawings provided by the Project’s Design Joint-Venture.

Air and ground absorption As detailed within the CoRTN algorithms and their application in SoundPLAN’sRoad Traffic Noise Module (v6.4) and Cadna-A (v4.1). Ground absorption factorwas set to 0.5 overall, with heavy forest or thick vegetated areas set to 1.0.

Reflections from existingbarriers, structures & cuttingson opposite side of road

Determined from review of drawings provided by the Project’s Design Joint-Venture.

Buildings From aerial photos.

Receiver Heights 1.5m above ground level for Ground Floor and 4.5m above ground level for 1stFloor.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 31

Input Parameters Data Acquired From

Facade correction +2.5dB(A), when modelling to 1m from building facades, in accordance withNSW ECRTN note iii (p12).

Australian Conditions Corrections:

-1.7 dB(A) for ‘at 1m from facade’ conditions

-0.7 dB(A) for ‘free field’ conditions

from the Australian Road Research Board (ARRB) Transport Research (Saunderset al 1983) and referred to in Austroads Research Report (ARR), “An Approach tothe Validation of Road Traffic Noise Models” (2002).

Road surface Corrections applied relevant to standard Dense Graded Asphalt (DGA):

0dB(A) for AC14 & 7mm SS (=DGA)1

-2dB(A) for Stone Mastic Asphalt (SMA)

+3dB(A) for Plain Concrete Pavement (PCP) [as directed by the SWTC]

Roadside noise walls /mounds

See noise wall schedule in Appendix E.

Sensitivity allowance 0dB(A), in accordance with SWTC

Note 1: AC14 & 7mm SS is equal to DGA according to advice provided by the Project’s pavement engineers

Future traffic noise levels for the year 2026 have been predicted using both the SoundPLAN and

Cadna-A noise modelling software. These models were validated using noise monitoring

conducted at a few locations along the short section of the New England Highway, between

Branxton and Belford, which best relates to the Project and concurrent traffic counts at one

station closest to Branxton.

As part of the design phase of the project further noise monitoring and traffic count data was

acquired to determine the specific model calibration factors for the project. It is noted that one

of the limitations of the Project is that validation is only possible on a small section of the

existing New England Highway between Branxton and Belford.

The design year’s (year 2026) noise contours were also modelled to compare the final design’s

at-road operational noise mitigation measures against the SWTC Appendix 9 requirements.

The design year’s forecasted traffic volumes used in the modelling are shown in Section 4.4.2

above.

Distances between vehicles and critical receivers, relative heights of road and receivers,

gradient of the road and angles of view, were all obtained from drawings, maps, aerial photos

supplied to us by the HEx DJV team.

4.5.2 Noise Model Verification

The model is verified and calibrated using the long-term noise monitoring results acquired at

five (5) locations (Locations L01, L03, L04, L05 and L06) and traffic count data obtained at one

(1) position along the existing New England Highway between Branxton and Belford in

November 2010 and some additional data acquired in the field in February 2011 to take

account of the influence of non-traffic noise sources (e.g. fauna and train noise) from the

monitoring results. The noise monitoring results are presented in Section 4.3 and the existing

traffic data in Section 4.4.1 of this ONMSP.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 32

As part of the Final design, the modelled traffic noise levels for existing conditions are

compared to the measured traffic noise levels to determine any variation between the two

levels at each monitoring location. A statistical analysis of the data available to date has been

conducted, to determine the ‘mean difference’ between the modelled and measured noise

levels, and the variations between the comparisons for the day and night periods. By further

analysing the differences between the modelled and the measured noise levels, the ‘standard

deviation’ is obtained, which can indicate the degree of spread in the results.

Appendix C provides a graphical presentation of the validation results comparing both the

SoundPLAN and the Cadna-A modelled traffic noise levels for existing conditions with the

measured traffic noise levels obtained from the five (5) noise monitoring locations along the

existing New England Highway between Branxton and Belford.

Table 4.9 summarises the results of the traffic noise model validation process conducted to

date on both noise models.

Table 4.9 – Validation Results Summary: Measured to Modelled Statistical Analysis

Statistical MetricsDay LAeq(15hr), dB(A) Night LAeq(9hr), dB(A)

SoundPLAN CadnaA SoundPLAN CadnaA

Mean Difference -3.7 -3.0 -1.0 -0.6

Standard Deviation 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.5

Note: -ve Mean Difference values indicate Model generally over-predicts noise levels by the value indicated; +ve MeanDifference values indicate Model generally under-predicts noise levels by the value indicated

It is noted that during site inspections of the verification monitoring locations, traffic noise from

the existing New England Highway was observed to be the most significant noise contributor to

the acoustic environment at these locations. However, other non-traffic noise sources also

contributed to the noise environment, in particular fauna noise and rail noise. These were found

to be more pronounced with increased distance from the New England Highway as traffic noise

becomes less prominent and other ambient noise becomes more significant with increased

distance from the highway. Thus a greater variance was found between modelled and

measured noise data at locations of lower traffic noise levels.

The noise model verification tests presented in Table 4.9 above, show the model to predict

results that fall within a reasonable level of the true noise levels in practice. According to the

Australian Road Research Board (ARRB) research Report ARR No.122, “An Evaluation of the

U.K. DoE Traffic Noise Prediction Method”, March 1983 (by Saunders, Samuels, Leach & Hall),

the accuracy of the CoRTN88 noise algorithms is generally expected to predict noise levels that

are within:

± 1.8dB(A) in the free-field and ± 2.5dB(A) within 1m from façade, of the true

noise levels in practice with a 84% confidence limit, and

± 3.6dB(A) in the free-field and ± 5.0dB(A) within 1m from façade, of the true

noise levels in practice with a 95% confidence limit.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 33

Therefore, the results presented above provide a reasonable level of confidence in the accuracy

of the noise model used for modelling traffic noise levels. In particular, the accuracy of the

night-time noise modelling is very good which is important for this Project, because the night-

time noise goals will control the design of noise mitigation measures for this Project.

To address the risk of non-compliance it is common for a factor of safety to be applied to model

predictions at the detailed design phase of a project. For this Project RMS has identified that

there is already some conservatism built into the road traffic volume data and the vehicle

speeds used in the noise model. Therefore RMS considers that no additional factors of safety

are warranted. Hence the noise predictions presented in Appendix G and H are direct outputs

of the noise model and have not been adjusted to take into account the results presented in

Table 4.9.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 34

5 OPERATIONAL NOISE ASSESSMENT

5.1 Traffic Noise Mitigation

There are a number of methods available to mitigate traffic noise from roads, including:

Reduced speed limits;

Low-noise pavement surfaces;

Roadside noise barriers: earthmounds and/or noise walls;

Low noise expansion joints on bridges; and

At-Property treatment to buildings.

Both the DECCW’s ‘Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise’ (ECRTN) and the

‘Environmental Noise Management Manual’ (ENMM), acknowledge and accept the use of these

methods to mitigate traffic noise from road projects.

The ENMM gives guidance on appropriate treatment of dwellings affected by traffic noise. The

manual suggests that if the affected residences are single, isolated residences or close groups

of only two or three residences, then at-property treatment is very likely to be more cost-

effective than installing noise barriers.

As traffic noise is a significant issue for the community surrounding this Project, detailed noise

modelling has been completed by the design team using the traffic modules of the SoundPLAN

and Cadna-A noise modelling software. The minimum noise mitigation requirements required

by the SWTC have been incorporated into the design. Additional measures have been

optimised to ensure the Final design meets all environmental requirements and delivers the

best environmental outcomes. The noise mitigation measures incorporated into the design are

described below.

Non-residential noise sensitive receivers, where they exist along the Project extent, are taken

account of in the noise mitigation measures (low noise pavement and noise barriers) herein.

5.1.1 Reduced Speed Limits

On high speed roads such as the Hunter Expressway, halving the average speed will lead to a

reduction of up to 5-6 dB(A) in the LAeq traffic noise level. However, such a drastic reduction in

the road speed would negate part of the original purpose of the proposed roadway. Reducing

the traffic speed to 100 km/h would have less than 1 dB(A) noise reduction to the LAeq traffic

noise level. Reduction of speed limits is consequently not seen as a practical solution to

reducing noise from the Project.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 35

5.1.2 Low Noise Pavements

With the general exception of motorcycles, for all vehicles in a reasonable state of

maintenance, tyre/road interaction represents the main source of noise at constant speeds in

excess of around 30-50 km/hr for cars and 40-80 km/hr for trucks (Samuels 1982, NSW Roads

& Traffic Authority 2002). Over the last 10 to 15 years there have been gradual reductions in

road tyre noise as a result of a combination of quieter tread design and through the

development of quieter pavements.

The type of road surface can have a significant impact on traffic noise generated by pavement

tyre/road interaction. Table 5.1below provides a comparison of the noise characteristics of

varying pavement types relative to Dense Graded Asphalt (DGA).

Table 5.1 – Road Pavement Noise Corrections Relative to Dense Graded Asphalt

Surface Type

Noise Level Reduction

Overall TrafficNoise

Individual Vehicle Pass-by Noise

Cars Trucks

Portland Cement Concrete: Hessian Drag & Tyned(PCC)

0 to +3.0 +1.0 to +3.5 -1.0 to +1.0

Stone Mastic Asphalt (SMA) -2 to -3.5 -2.2 -4.3

Ref: RMS’s Environmental Noise Management Manual

Low noise pavement has been incorporated into the design noise model to ensure conformance

with Section 4.14(d) of Appendix 4 of the SWTC. Further to the SWTC’s minimum

requirements, additional low noise pavement has been included in the design noise model to

further aid in reducing noise levels to ensure conformance with the contour lines described in

electronic file App9 NoiseContoursMOD_May2010.txt , titled ‘2026 Noise Contours – MOD May

2010-MX-GENIO input file’ which is part of Appendix 9 of the SWTC.

Entry and exit ramps in noise sensitive areas will be paved with low noise pavement. In non-

noise sensitive areas, where the ramp speed is less than 80 km/h, ramps are paved with AC14.

A pavement schedule is provided in Appendix D.

As part of the project, local roads imposed upon by the Project will be paved with AC14 or

sprayed seal (7 mm), which is equal to DGA (according to the Project’s pavement engineers).

Low noise pavements tend to perform best at speeds of greater than 80km/h. Noise reductions

are less for speeds less than 80km/h. Acoustic performance, as well as pavement wear, is also

negatively affected by stop-start traffic on these surfaces. Therefore, the use of AC14 (DGA) or

sprayed seal for local roads would be sufficient as the posted speeds on these roads will be less

than 80km/h and stop-start traffic would be a common occurrence.

Section 4.14(b) (iii) of Appendix 4 of the SWTC, states:

(iii) notwithstanding the corrections identified in Table 3.1 of the ENMM, apply the following road surface

noise corrections (relative to dense graded asphaltic concrete) for transversely and longitudinally tyned,

dragged or Portland cement concrete surfaces:



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 36

o +3.0 dB(A) correction for traffic noise,

o +3.5 dB(A) correction for cars,

o +1.0 dB(A) correction for trucks.

The noise model therefore, includes corrections consistent with the SWTC.

5.1.3 Noise Barriers

Noise barriers are most feasible where residences are closely grouped, where the barriers do

not cause access difficulties to properties, and where they are visually acceptable.

Noting that traffic noise is a significant issue for the community surrounding the Project, the

HExDJV team has optimised the design of noise barriers to deliver the best available

environmental outcome for residences in the Project’s surrounds.

Noise barriers have been incorporated into the design in accordance with Table 4.5 in Appendix

4 of the SWTC. Further to the SWTC’s minimum requirements, some of these barriers have

been increased in height and length in the design noise model to further aid in reducing noise

levels to ensure conformance with the contour lines described in electronic file App9

NoiseContoursMOD_May2010.txt , titled ‘2026 Noise Contours – MOD May 2010-MX-GENIO

input file’ which is part of Appendix 9 of the SWTC. A noise wall schedule is provided in

Appendix E.

The noise model assumes the following:

The heights of the noise barriers are relative to the final ground levels at the base

of the noise walls as shown on the design drawings and plans;

Noise levels were modelled to single point receptors at a height of 1.5m above

ground or second floor level and at 1m away from building facades; and

Noise contours were calculated at 1.5m above ground and in the free-field (i.e.

away from building facades).

All noise barriers on the Project shall be constructed of concrete panels supported on steel

posts, with the exception of the barriers between CH35620 to 36120 and CH36750 to 36823,

which shall be vegetated earth mounds. For details on the urban design issues relating to noise

barriers refer to the Urban and Landscape Design Sub Plan (ref: HEX-RP-UD-0008.01.100).

Construction of the noise barriers shall commence in 2011 and continue throughout the course

of 2012. A large number of barriers are to be constructed on fill requiring earthworks to be

completed prior to construction. The current program of barrier construction is as follows:

Second half 2011 – noise barriers in the vicinity of Kurri Kurri TAFE;

Throughout 2012 in the following order:

Noise barriers at Branxton;

Noise barriers at Greta;

Remaining noise barriers at Kurri Kurri/ Heddon Greta.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 37

5.1.4 Low-Noise Expansion Joints on Bridges

Furthermore, the expansion joints on the bridges are selected from a range that minimise noise

generation. Depending on the engineering requirements of the bridge structure (e.g.

allowances for movement of the structure), a range of expansion joints are available that can

provide acoustic benefits and will meet applicable specifications in accordance with RMS’s

requirements.

Types of expansion joints that are selected to reduce noise impact include:

finger plate types, which allow for large movements in the structure;

aluminium strip seal systems, which are heavy duty types suitable for use on

heavily trafficked structures where a moderate movement capacity is required,

which can be installed to provide a flush surface true to the profile of the viaduct

deck surface.

Good installation of expansion joints is a key factor in ensuring a good acoustic outcome. It is

recommended that the joints be installed by specialists to ensure that the surface is flat and

there are no transverse ‘open’ gaps running across the bridge. This will minimise noise

generated by vehicle tyres when passing over the joint and reduce the potential for

reverberation of noise underneath the bridge structure.

5.1.5 At Property Treatment

Along the route of the Project, residential properties are in a mixture of suburban, semi-rural

and rural areas. The SWTC’s noise contours discussed in Section 5.1.3 generally set the noise

limits for the urbanised areas along the route, where residences are grouped together (i.e. at

Branxton, Greta, Loxford, Kurri Kurri, Heddon Greta and Stanford Merthyr). Along the

remainder of the route, residential properties are scattered and spaced well apart. At-property

treatment is usually more cost-effective than installing noise barriers for the residential

properties that are well spaced apart.

The design team has conducted modelling for the design year 2026, using the CoRTN88 traffic

noise algorithms as applied within SoundPLAN and CadnaA noise modelling software to confirm

noise levels at noise sensitive receivers identified along the route. The ENMM states that all

feasible and reasonable mitigation options should be explored in an endeavour to reduce noise

levels to the target noise levels as set in the ECRTN. The target noise levels are external noise

goals but building treatment in many cases is the most feasible and reasonable option available

despite it only reducing noise levels inside a dwelling. Therefore, any building treatment should

be designed to achieve the internal noise levels that would have been achieved had noise from

the Project complied with the ECRTN criteria externally.

According to the ENMM, building treatments (in no particular order) may comprise:

Fresh air ventilation systems that allow existing windows and doors to be kept

shut;



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 38

Upgraded windows and glazing and solid core doors on the exposed facades of

masonry structures only (these techniques are unlikely to produce any noticeable

benefit for light frame structures with no acoustic insulation in the walls);

Upgrading window and door seals;

Sealing wall vents; and

External screen walls or property boundary fencing.

Predicted noise levels at noise sensitive receivers are provided in Appendix G and Appendix

H of this report. Noise levels have been predicted beyond the 300m modelling reliability limits

of the CoRTN88 noise algorithms (p6, p54 & p97 of ENMM, 2001) and out to a distance of

600m from the road (p21 & p22 of NSW Road Noise Policy, 2011). The extent of the noise

model more than adequately addresses properties that are likely to exceed the Project target

noise levels. RMS is treating all houses where target noise levels will be exceeded with the

exception of all residences that were granted development consent subsequent to the date of

the project approval (November 2001).

Properties that exceed the SWTC/ECRTN criteria require consideration for at-property treatment

as all reasonable and feasible in-corridor mitigation measures have been incorporated into the

Project. According to the SWTC, Abigroup is not permitted to provide at-property noise

mitigation measures for this Project. RMS is responsible for undertaking at-property

treatments. The following criteria for selecting treatment options have been adopted by RMS.

Table 5.2 – RMS Residential At-Property Treatment Options

Predicted ECRTN noisecriteria exceedance, dB(A)

At-Property Acoustic Treatment

<5 Ducted air-conditioning with fresh air ventilation or split air-conditioningsystem with separate fresh air mechanical ventilation where ducted systemsare not practical.

6-10 Ducted air-conditioning with fresh air ventilation or split air-conditioningsystem with separate fresh air mechanical ventilation where ducted systemsare not practical.

Plus consideration of upgraded windows, upgraded glazing, upgraded windowand door seals, solid core doors and sealed wall vents, to the most impactedfaçade(s) where significant benefit can be demonstrated (based on buildingcondition, extent of exposure).

11-15 Ducted air-conditioning with fresh air ventilation or split air-conditioningsystem with separate fresh air mechanical ventilation where ducted systemsare not practical.

Plus upgraded windows, upgraded glazing, upgraded window and door seals,solid core doors and sealed wall vents to all impacted façade(s).

>15 Treatments nominated above plus other treatment considerations, whereappropriate such as acoustic fencing and enclosed verandas.

Note: All noise levels in dB(A) to the nearest 1 dB(A)

Existing air conditioning treatments at properties will be assessed and new or upgraded installations provided on asrequired basis.

Details of at-property treatments have been determined by RMS and are provided in Appendix

I.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 39

5.1.6 Management of road traffic noise

The effectiveness of noise mitigation measures will be monitored as part of the Environmental

Impact Audit Report, to be completed by RMS. This Environmental Impact Audit Report will be

prepared within 2 months after the first 12 months, 2 years, and 5 years of operation, in

accordance with MCoA 39. This audit report will be used to identify any deficiencies in noise

mitigation measures. If during the audit report noise levels are detected to be considerably

different to those identified in the Operational Noise Assessment, then a review of noise

mitigation measures will be undertaken by RMS and maintenance will be carried out

accordingly.

Additionally, joint pavement inspections will be carried out annually by RMS with the service

provider. These inspections will assess the pavement condition and highlight any maintenance

required in the following year. All maintenance work in the Hunter region will then be prioritised

and maintained accordingly.

Speed enforcement along the Hunter Expressway will be carried out by NSW police.

5.2 Predicted Noise Levels

Future traffic noise levels for the year after opening (year 2013) and the ‘design’ year (year

2026) have been predicted using the validated CoRTN88 traffic noise algorithms as applied

within SoundPLAN and Cadna-A noise modelling software packages.

Noise mitigation measures required as a minimum by Appendix 4 of the SWTC were

incorporated into the design, including:

low noise pavement,

noise barriers.

Noise contours for the year after opening (year 2013) and the design year (year 2026) during

the day and night periods were prepared incorporating noise mitigation measures such as low-

noise pavement and the noise barriers, as described above. Furthermore, noise levels have

been predicted to noise sensitive receiver locations along the route to show compliance with the

SWTC requirements, the MCoA and the ECRTN.

5.2.1 Noise Contours

Appendix F presents the noise contours for Kurri Kurri, Stanford Merthyr, Heddon Greta,

Loxford, Greta and Branxton after the noise walls and low noise pavements have been

implemented for the design year 2026 and the after opening year 2013.

Note that the road design details for the Buchanan to Kurri Kurri section of the Hunter

Expressway were provided to us by the Alliance Team for inclusion into our noise model. Noise

contours beyond the project limits (i.e. east of CH12900) are inclusive of this road design

information. Therefore, noise contours shown for Stanford Merthyr represent noise levels

generated by this project and the Alliance project.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 40

The predicted tender design LAeq(15hr) (day) 55dB(A) and LAeq(9hr) (night) 50dB(A) noise contour

line for year 2026 can be compared with the noise contour line described in electronic file App9

NoiseContoursMOD_May2010.txt , titled ‘2026 Noise Contours – MOD May 2010-MX-GENIO

input file’ in Appendix 9 of the SWTC, in accordance with Section 4.14 (b) of Appendix 4 of the

SWTC.

In the noise contour maps of Appendix F the ‘dark green’ line identifies LAeq(15hr) (day) 55dB(A)

and LAeq(9hr) (night) 50dB(A) noise contour line on the respective day/ night noise contour

maps. The noise contour maps show that the Final design’s LAeq(15hr) (day) 55dB(A) and LAeq(9hr)

(night) 50dB(A) noise contour lines for year 2026 fall within the noise contour lines described in

the above referenced file and thus comply with the SWTC noise contour requirements.

It is noted that Wine Country Drive has been modelled only within the main alignment corridor

rather than extending north of the corridor towards Branxton. Wine Country Drive crosses the

SWTC noise contours at Branxton, making it impossible for the noise contours to be met at that

point if Wine Country Drive is extended beyond the road corridor. Furthermore, Wine Country

Drive is an existing road, with existing traffic and existing traffic noise emissions to its adjacent

and neighbouring properties. The SWTC noise contour criteria of 55dB(A) for day and 50dB(A)

for night is based on the ECRTN’s new arterial road criteria. This would not apply to Wine

Country Drive.

5.2.2 Noise Levels at Noise Sensitive Receivers

Appendix G presents the predicted noise levels for the years 2013 and 2026 at noise sensitive

receiver locations identified in Table 9.7 of Appendix 9 of the SWTC. Note that all properties

identified in Appendix 9 of the SWTC are beyond the area controlled by the SWTC noise

contours described in Appendix 4 of the SWTC and in Section 5.2.1 above.

Road traffic noise levels at these properties were determined using single point receiver

calculations within the noise model, as this approach provides the most accurate results. The

properties were identified from aerial photos. Predicted 2026 noise levels that exceed LAeq(15hr)

(day) 55dB(A) and LAeq(9hr) (night) 50dB(A) are identified, as required by Section 4.14(b) of

Appendix 4 of the SWTC. 57 properties were identified as exceeding the noise criteria.

Appendix H presents a list of 39 noise sensitive receivers in addition to those identified in

Table 9.7 of Appendix 9 of the SWTC. Predicted 2026 noise levels that exceed LAeq(15hr) (day)

55dB(A) and LAeq(9hr) (night) 50dB(A) are identified, as required by Section 4.14(b) of Appendix

4 of the SWTC. 35 properties were identified as exceeding the noise criteria.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 41

6 OPERATIONAL NOISE MONITORING

6.1 Monitoring

Monitoring of operational noise is to be undertaken in accordance with Practice Note viii of the

RMS’s ENMM to meet Condition 85 of the MCoA.

In accordance with the MCoA 85, one year after commencement of operation of the Project, or

as otherwise agreed by the Director-General, the adequacy of the noise mitigation measures

shall be assessed. In order to do this, operational noise monitoring shall be conducted to

compare actual noise performance of the Project against noise performance predicted in design

process. That is, operational noise monitoring shall compare actual traffic noise levels with the

predicted mitigated noise levels and determine whether the intended acoustical outcomes, as

presented in this ONMSP (and other environmental documents as described in Section 2.2), are

achieved.

The operational noise monitoring to be undertaken shall be reported to the Director-General

and the DECCW.

Where possible, the noise monitoring locations for operational noise should be the same as

those locations identified in Table 4.1 in this ONMSP. Noise monitoring locations shall be

selected to represent the potentially most affected noise-sensitive receptors along the Project

route. The operational noise monitoring locations will be subject to alteration (while preserving

the intent of the noise monitoring program) based on site specific conditions including access to

the site and consideration of localised extraneous noise sources (e.g. air conditioners etc.).

Furthermore, additional or alternative noise monitoring locations from those identified in Table

4.1 may be selected to monitor noise levels at residences from where comments or complaints

may be received from the community with regard to operational noise. Importantly, to avoid

the influence of noise unrelated to the Project from contaminating the noise measurement

results, it is advised that noise monitoring be conducted closer to the Project (i.e. within 100m)

and modelling be used to evaluate noise levels further afield, where necessary. RMS has an

Environmental Hotline (1300 308 349) for the general public to register adverse comments of

complaints to environmental issues, including noise. Each complaint is logged, tracked and an

appropriate response action is provided by a designated Roads and Maritime Services officer.

A minimum of seven (7) days of noise monitoring is to be conducted, excluding all adverse

weather [e.g. rain, wind, temperature inversions etc.] and excluding all non-traffic noise

influences [e.g. noise from fauna (insects, frogs etc.), rail activity, industrial premises, local

traffic noise unrelated to the Project, foliage noise etc.]. To avoid extreme temperature

inversions impacting on the noise measurements, it is advisable that noise monitoring be

conducted only during the warmer summer and/or spring months of the year, as the cooler

winter and autumn months increases the likelihood of temperature inversion occurrence in this

region of NSW.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 42

It is important to note that where noise monitoring is conducted at large distances from the

Project (i.e. more than approx. 100m), the influence of non-traffic or ambient type noise tends

to become more significant and extra caution needs to be taken to ensure that either

specialised and highly sensitive unattended noise monitoring equipment is used or operator

attended measurements are conducted, to filter out and discard all possible non-traffic noise

leaving behind only that noise which is traffic noise and is relevant to the Project.

Classified traffic monitoring is to be conducted simultaneously with the noise monitoring to

identify traffic volumes, classifications and vehicle speeds.

Where the monitoring and assessment indicates a difference between the actual traffic noise

levels and predicted traffic noise levels, the implementation of additional feasible and

reasonable noise mitigation measures shall be investigated, in accordance with Practice Note

viii of the ENMM and MCoA 85.

6.2 Assessment of Noise Mitigation Measures

The assessment of the adequacy of the traffic noise mitigation measures presented in this

ONMSP shall be undertaken, as required by Condition 85 of the MCoA. The methodology to be

used for the assessment shall be as follows:

Design year (2026) traffic noise levels, as predicted with the corrected model, are

to be compared against the Project’s noise goals as set out in this ONMSP to

determine the adequacy of the noise mitigation measures implemented.

Should it be determined that the noise mitigation measures are inadequate, then

additional feasible and reasonable noise mitigation measures should be

investigated.

Given that there are physical limitations associated with applying additional noise

mitigation measures to within the road corridor once the project has been

constructed and is operational, where found necessary and practical, consideration

should be given to the provision of at-property treatments to additional properties,

subject to the RMS’s consent.

Where there are community noise complaints, these should be addressed by re-

assessing and modelling design year traffic noise levels at the complainant

properties or properties in the vicinity of where complaints have arisen and

comparing re-modelled design year traffic noise levels against the Project noise

goals.

The adequacy of the traffic noise mitigation measures should be assessed in accordance with

Practice Note viii of the ENMM, which requires the following:

If the measured noise levels exceed the design noise levels by 2dB(A) or less, the

noise data should be examined, the prediction methodology and suitability of

mitigation measures should be reassessed and the reasons for the marginal

exceedance(s) be identified and reported.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 43

If measured noise levels exceed the design noise level for year 1 by more than

2dB(A), the adequacy of the noise mitigation needs to be reviewed, and if

problems are identified steps need to be taken to rectify the situation. Additional

noise treatments may be required to achieve the design noise level, where this is

feasible and reasonable.

Any additional mitigation measures will be determined in consultation with RMS (and possibly

affected property owners) including consideration of at-property treatment.

6.3 Reporting

In accordance with Condition 85 of the MCoA, operational noise monitoring and reporting

should be undertaken 1 year after the Project opening. A report is to be prepared,

summarising:

the noise monitoring methodology and instrumentation used,

the results of the noise monitoring,

details of how all noise data that may have been affected by adverse weather [e.g.

rain, wind, temperature inversions etc.] has been removed from the monitoring

results,

details of how all non-Project noise influences [e.g. noise from fauna (insects, frogs

etc.), rail activity, industrial premises, local traffic noise unrelated to the Project,

foliage noise etc.] has also been removed from the monitoring results,

details of the operational noise assessment, and

an assessment of the performance and effectiveness of applied noise mitigation

measures, as determined in this ONMSP.

Where required, re-assessment of additional feasible and reasonable noise mitigation measures

is to be conducted. Given that there are physical limitations associated with applying additional

noise mitigation measures to within the road corridor once the project has been constructed

and is operational, where found necessary and practical, consideration should be given to the

provision of at-property treatments to additional properties, subject to the RMS’s consent.

6.4 Recommended Brief for RMS’s Consultant

We understand that RMS is proposing that the operational noise monitoring be conducted by an

acoustic consultant who is independent of the design and construction phases of the project.

Subsequently, to assist with the operational noise monitoring phase of this Project, the

following consultant’s brief is provided to guide the acoustic consultant to be engaged by RMS

in appropriately quoting for and conducting the work.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 44

The acoustic consultant shall:

1. Select noise monitoring locations to represent the potentially most affected noise-

sensitive receptors along the Project, and where possible select the same noise

monitoring locations as those locations monitored for the ONMSP. Additional noise

monitoring locations to those identified in the ONMSP may be selected at residences from

where comments or complaints may be received from the community with regard to

operational noise.

2. To avoid the influence of noise unrelated to the Project from contaminating the noise

measurement results, noise monitoring should be conducted within 100m of the Project

and modelling be used to evaluate noise levels further afield, where necessary.

Alternatively, either specialised and highly sensitive unattended noise monitoring

equipment is used or operator attended measurements are conducted, to filter out and

discard all possible non-traffic noise leaving behind only that noise which is traffic noise

and is relevant to the Project.

3. Where noise monitoring is to be conducted to specifically check compliance against the

SWTC noise contours, the noise monitor shall be placed away from large vertical surfaces

that can reflect sound and affect the monitoring results (i.e. in a free-field position at

least 3.5m from any large reflecting surface). Where the noise contours are on or near

property boundary fences, noise monitoring should be done on the property side of the

fence, to represent the actual noise impacting the property occupants - not outside the

fence where traffic noise exposure is not relevant.

4. A minimum of seven (7) days of noise monitoring is to be conducted, excluding all

adverse weather [e.g. rain, wind, temperature inversions etc.] and excluding all non-

traffic noise influences [e.g. noise from fauna (insects, frogs etc.), rail activity, industrial

premises, local traffic noise unrelated to the Project, foliage noise etc.].

5. Measure actual traffic noise and traffic volumes, classifications and vehicle speeds at one

year after the Project opening, in accordance with Condition 85 of the MCoA.

6. Use measured actual traffic noise and volumes, classifications and vehicle speed data to

validate a noise model of the Project at time of monitoring. Then apply the design year

(2026) traffic volumes, classifications and vehicle speed data to the validated noise

model, to predicted noise levels at the monitored locations and compare these to the

design year 2026 noise levels presented in the ONMSP.

7. Design year (2026) traffic noise levels shall be compared against the Project’s noise goals

as set out in the ONMSP to determine the adequacy of the noise mitigation measures

implemented.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 45

8. Where required, re-assessment of additional feasible and reasonable noise mitigation

measures is to be conducted where determined that the noise mitigation measures are

inadequate. Where there are physical limitations associated with applying additional

noise mitigation measures to within the road corridor, where found necessary and

practical, consideration should be given to the provision of at-property treatments to

additional properties, subject to the RMS’s consent.

The adequacy of the traffic noise mitigation measures shall be assessed in accordance

with Practice Note viii of the ENMM, which requires the following:

If the measured noise levels exceed the design noise levels by 2 dB(A) or less, the

noise data should be examined, the prediction methodology and suitability of

mitigation measures should be reassessed and the reasons for the marginal

exceedance(s) be identified and reported.

If measured noise levels exceed the design noise level for year 1 by more than 2

dB(A), the adequacy of the noise mitigation needs to be reviewed, and if problems

are identified steps need to be taken to rectify the situation. Additional noise

treatments may be required to achieve the design noise level, where this is feasible

and reasonable.

Any additional mitigation measures will be determined in consultation with RMS (and

possibly affected property owners) including consideration of at-property treatment.

9. Where there are community noise complaints, these should be addressed by re-assessing

and modelling design year traffic noise levels at the complainant properties or properties

in the vicinity of where complaints have arisen and comparing design year traffic noise

levels against the Project noise goals.

A report is to be prepared, summarising:

the noise monitoring methodology and instrumentation used,

the results of the noise monitoring,

details of how all noise data that may have been affected by adverse weather

[e.g. rain, wind, temperature inversions etc.] has been removed from the

monitoring results,

details of how all non-Project noise influences [e.g. noise from fauna (insects,

frogs etc.), rail activity, industrial premises, local traffic noise unrelated to the

Project, foliage noise etc.] has also been removed from the monitoring results,

and

details of the operational noise assessment, and

an assessment of the performance and effectiveness of applied noise mitigation

measures, as determined in this ONMSP.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 46

7 HEAVY VEHICLE REST AREAS, BRANXTON

7.1 Description of Rest Areas and Surround

The heavy vehicle rest areas will be located to the north of Branxton Village on the northern

and southern side of the expressway. The north bound rest area will be directly accessed from

the Expressway. The east bound rest area is accessed from the existing New England Highway

via an exit route of the Expressway. The facility will accommodate up to fifteen (15) heavy

vehicles in each direction (eastbound/ westbound). There will also be provision for a driver

reviver station.

Typical noise emission associated with the rest area will include:

Heavy vehicles decelerating as they approach the rest area and accelerating as

they depart the rest area;

Noise emission from parked trucks, mainly idling engines and truck mounted

refrigeration units, which may operate continuously while the truck is parked;

Heavy vehicle air brake release.

Heavy vehicles may potentially use their engine brakes as they slow down to approach the rest

areas as there is approx. 2% downhill gradient on the section of road providing access to the

rest areas. The rest areas themselves are relatively flat and therefore would not lend

themselves to the use of engine brakes.

The nearest residences to the rest areas have been identified as mainly scattered residences to

the north, east and west, including:

2490 New England Highway, Branxton, approx. 100 m north of the rest areas;

1 Wentworth Close, Branxton, approx. 600 metres east of the rest areas;

2 Wentworth Close, Branxton, approx. 600 metres east of the rest areas;

Residential properties in Branxton Village, approx. 750 m east of the rest areas;

2540 New England Highway, Branxton, approx. 700 m north west of the rest

areas; and

2657 New England Highway, Branxton, approx. 1 km west of the rest areas.

7.2 Noise Criteria

7.2.1 Trucks on the Freeway

7.2.1.1 Road Traffic Noise

The noise of all vehicles, including trucks, travelling along the Hunter Expressway (Kurri Kurri

to Branxton) has been assessed in Section 5 of the ONMSP. The truck rest area itself is not

expected to increase traffic on the alignment. Therefore road traffic noise generated by the

rest area is not further addressed in this section of the report.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 47

7.2.1.2 Sleep Disturbance

Maximum noise levels generated by road traffic noise have the potential to cause disturbance

to sleep. The ECRTN and the ENMM however, do not include noise criteria for assessing

maximum noise level events. This is primarily because research conducted to date in this field

has not been definitive and the relationship between maximum noise levels, sleep disturbance

and subsequent health effects is not currently well defined.

Notwithstanding this, the ECRTN requires a broad assessment and reporting of maximum noise

levels during each hour of the night time period (10pm to 7am) to give an indication of the

likelihood of awakening reactions.

Furthermore, guidelines for assessing maximum noise levels are provided in Practice Note (iii)

of the RMS’s ENMM. The guidelines are to be used as a tool to help prioritise and rank

mitigation strategies, but should not be used as a decisive criterion in itself.

According to Practice Note (iii) of the RMS’s ENMM, a “maximum noise event” can be defined as

any passby for which:

Lmax – Leq ≥ 15 dB(A)

where the Lmax noise level is greater than 65 dB(A).

Background noise levels were measured by Atkins Acoustics and Associates in September/

October 2009 as part of the 2009 EA Noise Assessment. Background measurements were also

completed by Renzo Tonin & Associates in November- December 2010 and the results are

presented in Appendix J of this report. Based on these measured background noise levels for

the critical night period (10:00pm to 7:00am), the noise criteria are summarised in the table

below.

Table 7.1 – Night Noise Criteria for Truck Rest Area

ReceiverL90 Background

Noise Level,dB(A)1

ECRTN/ ENMM Noise Criteria

LA1(1min) ECRTN2

2490 New England Highway, Branxton 36 65

2657 New England Highway, Branxton 36 65

Branxton Village 32 65

Notes: 1. Background levels for the critical night period (10:00pm to 7:00am);

2. At nearest bedroom window.

7.2.2 Trucks in the Truck Rest Area

There are no specific goals for assessing potential noise impact from rest areas or the general

noise amenity surrounding them. The rest areas will be in use 24 hours per day. Therefore it

is appropriate to use the NSW Industrial Noise Policy (the “INP”, Environment Protection

Authority, 2000) to assess the potential noise intrusion of rest area activities to surrounding

noise sensitive receivers (dwellings). Guidance for assessing sleep disturbance resulting from



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 48

short-duration high-level noises which occur between 10:00pm and 7:00am is taken from the

NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water’s (DECCW’s) policy with respect

to sleep disturbance.

The policy states that a sleep disturbance criterion of LA1(1min) ≤ LA90(15min) + 15dB(A), should be

used as a first step ‘guide’ as it is ‘not ideal’ and ‘where it is not met, a more detailed analysis

is required’. That detailed analysis includes a reference to the research material contained in

the NSW ‘Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise’ (ECRTN) in the assessment of the

subject proposal.

It is noted that in reviewing the research material referred to in the ECRTN and more recent

research, and notwithstanding DECCW’s policy, noise levels less than “background + 15dB(A)”

do not guarantee zero sleep disturbance. It is also noted that the DECCW policy includes in the

background LA90(15minute) noise from the subject premises.

The sleep arousal criteria described in the DECCW’s policy indicated above is used for the

purpose of noise impact assessment for this study and is summarised in the following table.

Background noise levels were measured by Atkins Acoustics and Associates in September/

October 2009 as part of the 2009 EA Noise Assessment. Background measurements were also

completed by Renzo Tonin & Associates in November- December 2010 and the results are

presented in Appendix J of this report. Based on these measured background noise levels for

the critical night period (10:00pm to 7:00am), the noise criteria are summarised in the table

below.

Table 7.2 – Night Noise Criteria for Truck Rest Area

ReceiverL90 Background

Noise Level,dB(A)1

Noise Criteria

LAeq(15min), INP2 LA1(1min) ECRTN3

2490 New England Highway, Branxton 36 41 51

2657 New England Highway, Branxton 36 41 51

Branxton Village 32 37 47


2. At residential boundary;

3. At nearest bedroom window;

7.3 Noise Assessment

7.3.1 Noise Sources

Typical noise sources for rest areas are obtained from Renzo Tonin & Associates’ data library

and summarised in Table 7.3 below. The data includes individual sound exposure levels for a

variety of noise sources. SEL measurements are useful as they can be converted to obtain LAeq

sound levels over any period of time (15 minutes in this assessment) to assess impact against

the NSW INP. LA1(1min) source noise levels are also provided for the assessment of sleep

disturbance.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 49

Table 7.3 – Sound Power Levels for Truck Rest Area Activities

ActivitySource Height,

m

Sound Power Level, dB(A) re 1pW

SEL LA1(1min)

Truck moving on site (<10km/h) 1.5 106 107

Truck idling 1.5 97 100

Truck mounted refrigerator condenser 3 102 -

Truck air brakes 1 - 116

Truck reverse signal 1 - 107

Truck engine compression brakes 3.5 - 120

7.3.2 Noise Assessment

7.3.2.1 Trucks on the Freeway - Sleep Disturbance

The potential for sleep disturbance from trucks exiting the main alignment to access the Rest

Area has been determined using the highest sound power level from Table 7.3, being that of

truck engine compression brakes at 120 dB(A) re 1pW. The calculation assumes a truck using

compression braking at any point along the North Branxton Rest Area exit ramp. The closest

residential receivers, 2490 and 2540 New England Highway are 200m and 500m (respectively)

from the exit ramp. The Lmax noise level calculated at the closest residential receivers are:

2490 New England Highway - approximately 58 dB(A); and

2540 New England Highway - approximately 51 dB(A).

Therefore, according to the ENMM’s maximum noise level threshold, described in Section

7.2.1.2 of this report, trucks entering and departing the truck rest area are not likely to cause

sufficient noise to trigger sleep disturbance.

7.3.2.2 Trucks in the Truck Rest Area

Table 7.4 below summarises predicted noise levels from the truck rest area to the nearest

affected residential receivers. Distance attenuation and attenuation provided by the 4.5m

acoustic barrier/ earth mound shown in Figure 17.1 and 17.2 of Appendix 17 of the SWTC have

been taken into consideration. The INP noise intrusion assessment assumes that 50% of the

truck rest area facilities are occupied by refrigerated trucks and there are up to 7 trucks moving

around the site during a typical ‘worst case’ operating scenario. The ECRTN sleep disturbance

assessment assesses noise impact from the highest potential noise source on site, being truck

air brakes.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 50

Table 7.4 – Predicted Noise Levels at Residential Receivers

Activity

INP Assessment, LAeq(15min)

dB(A)ECRTN Assessment, LA1(1min)

dB(A)

Criteria Rest Area Criteria Air brakes

2490 New England Highway, Branxton 41 42 51 56

1 Wentworth Close, Branxton 41 <30 51 47

2 Wentworth Close, Branxton 41 <30 51 46

Residential properties in Branxton Village 37 <30 47 45

2540 New England Highway, Branxton 41 <30 51 45

2657 New England Highway, Branxton 41 <30 51 41


2. At residential boundary;

3. At nearest bedroom window;

4. Background noise levels at residences in Wentworth Close and at 2540 New England Hwy are assumed to besimilar to 2490 New England Hwy for the purpose of this report

Review of the predicted noise levels against the assessment criteria indicates that compliance

will be achieved at all locations, with the exception of the two residential lots at 2490 New

England Highway, Branxton. An insignificant noise intrusion exceedance of 1dB(A) is predicted

for the rare times when the worst-case scenario may occur. Similarly an exceedance of 5dB(A)

is predicted for the rare times when the worst-case maximum noise event of release of air

brakes may occur.

It is noted that existing ambient LAeq(15min) and LA1(1min) noise levels have been monitored as part

of the EA Noise Assessment in the vicinity of the proposed rest areas along the New England

Highway and were found to be significantly higher than the noise emission levels from the rest

area activities predicted in Table 7.4 above. Given that the exceedances predicted are small,

would only occur infrequently, are worst-case scenarios and existing ambient noise levels are

often higher in level, it is unlikely that noise impacts from the proposed rest areas would

adversely impact upon the acoustic amenity of surrounding noise sensitive receiver areas.

Despite the above, the 2009 EA Noise Assessment indicates that RMS would consider the

provision of building treatment for the two residences located immediately north of the

proposed rest areas (at 2490 New England Highway, Branxton). Therefore, at this Final design

stage, noise mitigation treatment of these two residences will be postponed pending a more

detailed on-site investigation and analysis to be conducted.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 51

APPENDIX A - GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTIC TERMS

The following is a brief description of the technical terms used to describe noise to assist in

understanding the technical issues presented.

Adverse Weather Weather effects that enhance noise (that is, wind and temperature

inversions) that occur at a site for a significant period of time (that

is, wind occurring more than 30% of the time in any assessment

period in any season and/or temperature inversions occurring more

than 30% of the nights in winter).

Air-borne noise This refers to noise which is fundamentally transmitted by way of

the air and can be attenuated by the use of barriers and walls

placed physically between the noise and receiver.

Alpha (α) The absorption coefficient of a material, usually measured for each

octave or third-octave band and ranging between zero and one.

For example, an alpha of 0.85 for an octave band means that 85%

of the sound energy within that octave band is absorbed when it

hits the material. Conversely, the more acoustically reflective a

material is, the lower it’s alpha is.

Ambient Noise The all-encompassing noise associated within a given environment

at a given time, usually composed of sound from all sources near

and far.

Assessment Period The period in a day over which assessments are made.

Assessment Point A point at which noise measurements are taken or estimated.

Audible Range The limits of frequency which are audible or heard as sound. The

normal ear in young adults detects sound having frequencies in the

region 20 Hz to 20 kHz, although it is possible for some people to

detect frequencies outside these limits.

A-weighting An adjustment made to sound level measurement, by means of an

electronic filter, to approximate the response of the human ear.

Background Noise Background noise is the term used to describe the underlying level

of noise present in the ambient noise, measured in the absence of

the noise under investigation, when extraneous noise is removed.

It is described as the average of the minimum noise levels

measured on a sound level meter and is measured statistically as

the A-weighted noise level exceeded for ninety percent of a sample

period. This is represented as the L90 noise level (see below).



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 52

Barrier - noise Any natural or artificial physical barrier to the propogation of noise

(from a roadway), but generally referring to acoustically reflective

or absorbent fences, walls or mounds (or combinations thereof)

constructed beside a roadway.

Buffer An area of land between a roadway and a noise-sensitive land use,

used as open space or for some other noise-tolerant land use.

Decibels [dB] 10 times the logarithm (base 10) of the ratio of a given sound

pressure to a reference pressure; used as a unit of sound. The

following are examples of the decibel readings of every day steady

or quasi-steady sounds:

0dB the faintest sound we can hear

20dB quiet bedroom at night or recording studio

30dB quiet library or quiet location in the country

40dB living room

50dB typical office space or ambience in the city at night

60dB normal conversational speech

70dB a car passing by

80dB kerbside of a busy road

90dB truck passing by

100dB nightclub

110dB rock band or 2m from a jackhammer

120dB 70m from a jet aircraft

130dB threshold of pain

140dB 25m from a jet aircraft

dB(A) Unit used to measure ‘A-weighted’ sound pressure levels. The

human ear is not as effective in hearing low frequency sounds as it

is hearing high frequency sounds. That is, low frequency sounds of

the same dB level are not heard as loud as high frequency sounds.

The sound level meter replicates the human response of the ear by

using an electronic filter which is called the “A” filter. A sound level

measured with this filter switched on is denoted as dB(A).

Practically all noise is measured using the A filter.

Diffraction The distortion around solid obstacles of waves travelling past.

Fluctuating Noise Noise that varies continuously and to an appreciable extent over

the period of observation.

Free-field An environment in which there are no acoustic reflective surfaces.

Free field noise measurements are carried out outdoors at least



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 53

3.5m from any acoustic reflecting structures other than the ground.

Frequency Of a periodic quantity: the time rate of repetition or the reciprocal

of the period. It is also synonymous with pitch and is often used to

describe the character of a sound. Frequency is measured in Hertz

(Hz).

Ground-borne noise Ground-borne noise propagating through the ground as vibration

and then radiated by vibrating building elements such as wall and

floor surfaces. This noise is normally noticeable only in areas that

are well protected from airborne noise.

Heavy Vehicle A truck, transporter or other vehicle with a gross weight above a

specified level (for example: over 8 tonnes).

Intermittent noise The level suddenly drops to that of the background noise several

times during the period of observation. The time during which the

noise remains at levels different from that of the ambient is one

second or more.

Loudness A rise of 10 dB in sound level corresponds approximately to a

doubling of subjective loudness. That is, a sound of 85 dB is twice

as loud as a sound of 75 dB which is twice as loud as a sound of 65

dB and so on. That is, the sound of 85 dB is four times or 400%

the loudness of a sound of 65 dB.

Lmax The maximum sound pressure level measured over a given period.

When A-weighted, this is usually written as the LAmax.

Lmin The minimum sound pressure level measured over a given period.

When A-weighted, this is usually written as the LAmin.

L1 The sound pressure level that is exceeded for 1% of the time for

which the given sound is measured.

L10 The sound pressure level that is exceeded for 10% of the time for

which the given sound is measured.

L10(1hr) The L10 level measured over a 1 hour period.

L10(18hr) The arithmetic average of the L10(1hr) levels for the 18 hour period

between 6am and 12 midnight on a normal working day.

L90 The level of noise exceeded for 90% of the time. The bottom 10%

of the sample is the L90 noise level expressed in units of dB(A).

LAeq Equivalent sound pressure level – the steady sound level that, over

a specified period of time, would produce the same energy



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 54

equivalence as the fluctuating sound level actually occurring.

LAeq(1hr) The Leq noise level for a one-hour period. In the context of the

EPA’s Traffic Noise Policy it represents the highest tenth percentile

hourly A-weighted Leq during the period 7am to 10pm, or 10pm to

7am (whichever is relevant).

Leq(8hr) The continuous noise level during any one hour period between

10pm and 6am.

Leq(9hr) The Leq noise level for the period 10pm to 7am.

Leq(15hr) The Leq noise level for the period 7am to 10pm.

Leq (24hr) The equivalent continuous noise level during a 24 hour period,

usually from midnight to midnight.

Microphone An electro-acoustic transducer which receives an acoustic signal

and delivers a corresponding electric signal.

Noise Sound which a listener does not wish to hear.

NRC The Noise Reduction Coefficient. It is the average of each

absorption coefficient for the 250Hz, 500Hz, 1kHz & 2kHz octave

bands. These frequencies are chosen as they roughly correlate

with the frequencies of the human voice.

Reflection Sound wave changed in direction of propagation due to a solid

object obscuring its path

Reverberation Time The amount of time (in seconds) it takes for a noise signal within a

confined space to decay by 60dB. The longer the reverberation

time (usually denoted as RT60), the more echoic a room. Longer

reverberation times generally promote higher overall noise levels

within spaces.

Often the reverberation time is measured as the mid-frequency

RT60, being the average reverberation time for the 250, 500, 1k &

2kHz octave bands. These frequencies correspond with those for

the NRC so that sensible calculations may be undertaken.

Sabine A measure of acoustic absorption. It is the product of the

material’s Coefficient of Absorption (alpha) and the surface area of

the material (m2). For example, a material with alpha = 0.65 and a

surface area of 8.2m2 would have 0.65 x 8.2 = 5.33 Sabine.

Sabine is usually calculated for each individual octave (or third-

octave). However the same calculations may be undertaken (for



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 55

indicative purposes) using the NRC of a material rather than alpha.

SEL Sound Exposure Level (SEL) is the constant sound level which, if

maintained for a period of 1 second would have the same acoustic

energy as the measured noise event. SEL noise measurements are

useful as they can be converted to obtain Leq sound levels over any

period of time and can be used for predicting noise at various

locations.

Sound A fluctuation of air pressure which is propagated as a wave through

air.

Sound Absorption The ability of a material to absorb sound energy through its

conversion into thermal energy.

Sound Level Meter An instrument consisting of a microphone, amplifier and indicating

device, having a declared performance and designed to measure

sound pressure levels.

Sound Pressure Level The level of noise, usually expressed in dB(A), as measured by a

standard sound level meter with a pressure microphone. The

sound pressure level in dB(A) gives a close indication of the

subjective loudness of the noise

Sound Power Level Ten times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the sound

power of the source to the reference sound power.

Structure-borne noise Vibration propagating through solid structures in the form of

compressional or bending waves, heard as sound.

Tonal noise Containing a prominent frequency and characterised by a definite

pitch.

Transmission The amount of noise passing from one room or area to another,

usually passing through an object. For example, if on one side of a

wall is 100dB of noise and other the other only 65dB, it is said that

the transmission loss of the wall is 35dB. As an alternative to (but

still synonymous with) transmission loss, the weighted noise

reduction index (Rw) is often used.



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 56

APPENDIX B - TRAFFIC VOLUME AND COMPOSITION DATA


presented in the tables below were obtained from the traffic data identified in Tables 4.6, 4.7,

4.8, 4.9, 4.10 and 4.11 of Appendix 4 of the SWTC.

Table B.1 - 2026 Traffic Volumes and Heavy Vehicle Percentages – Main Carriageways

Location Direction

Daytime (7.00am-10.00pm) Night (10.00pm-7.00am)

TrafficVol

VehicleSpeed

% HeavyTraffic

VolVehicleSpeed

% Heavy

Branxton Interchange toNew England Hwy

Westbound 14,747 115 17.0 3,453 120 27.5

Eastbound 15,046 115 17.0 2,854 120 27.5

Allandale Interchange toBranxton Interchange

Westbound 16,370 115 12.9 3,830 120 22.1

Eastbound 17,397 115 12.9 3,103 120 22.1

Loxford Interchange toAllandale Interchange

Westbound 20,862 115 11.3 4,838 120 19.7

Eastbound 22,470 115 11.3 3,830 120 19.7

Kurri Kurri Interchange toLoxford Interchange

Westbound 25,112 115 10.7 5,588 120 19.1

Eastbound 27,659 115 10.7 4,741 120 19.1

Table B.2 - 2026 Traffic Volumes and Heavy Vehicle Percentages – Branxton

Interchange, New England Highway Junction and Wine Country Drive Junction

Location


TrafficVol

VehicleSpeed

% Heavy Traffic VolVehicleSpeed

% Heavy

Branxton Interchange

Westbound Exit Ramp 6,077 115 4.9 1,136 120 8.8

Westbound Entry Ramp 4,323 115 17.0 891 120 27.8

Eastbound Exit Ramp 3,844 115 11.6 760 120 19.9

Eastbound Entry Ramp 6,071 115 4.1 1,127 120 7.5

To New England Hwy Northbound 5,542 80 11.3 1,092 80 19.4

From New England Hwy Southbound 5,064 80 15.0 1,027 80 24.9

To Wine Country Dr Southbound 9,427 80 6.6 1,787 80 11.7

From Wine Country Dr Northbound 10,377 80 7.0 1,975 80 12.5

New England Highway Junction

Southern Approach Northbound 5,542 80 11.3 1,092 80 19.4

Southern Approach Southbound 5,064 80 15.0 1,027 80 24.9

Northern Approach Southbound 4,432 80 11.2 872 80 19.2

Northern Approach Northbound 5,384 80 10.8 1,057 80 18.6

Western Approach Eastbound 1,882 80 19.2 394 80 31.0

Western Approach Westbound 1,407 80 10.2 275 80 17.7



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 57

Location


TrafficVol

VehicleSpeed


% Heavy

Wine Country Drive Junction1

Southern Approach Northbound 9,229 60 8.6 1,779 60 15.1

Southern Approach Southbound 9,345 60 8.1 1,793 60 14.2

Northern Approach Southbound 9,427 80 6.6 1,787 80 11.7


Western Approach Eastbound 6,465 60 8.8 1,248 60 15.4

Western Approach Westbound 5,399 60 9.2 1,046 60 16.1

Notes: 1. Wine Country drive has been modelled only within the main alignment corridor rather than extending north ofthe corridor towards Branxton.

Table B.3 - 2026 Traffic Volumes and Heavy Vehicle Percentages – Allandale

Interchange, Loxford Interchange and Kurri Kurri Interchange

Location


TrafficVol

VehicleSpeed


% Heavy

Allandale Interchange

Westbound Exit Ramp 4,668 115 5.7 878 120 10.2

Eastbound Entry Ramp 4,899 115 4.3 911 120 7.7

Southern approach Northbound 2,618 80 6.5 496 80 11.7

Southern approach Southbound 2,724 80 9.1 527 80 15.9

Northern Approach Southbound 4,768 80 4.3 887 80 7.8

Northern Approach Northbound 4,246 80 0.0 761 80 0.0

Loxford Interchange

Westbound Exit Ramp 4,213 115 10.3 755 120 10.3

Eastbound Entry Ramp 5,240 115 9.2 939 120 9.2

Southern approach Northbound 4,995 60 9.5 895 60 9.5

Southern approach Southbound 3,968 60 10.7 711 60 10.7

Northern Approach Southbound 629 60 11.2 113 60 11.2

Northern Approach Northbound 629 60 11.2 113 60 11.2

Kurri Kurri Interchange

Westbound Exit Ramp 6,559 115 7.0 1,248 120 12.4

Westbound Entry Ramp 5,695 115 7.0 1,083 120 12.4

Eastbound Exit Ramp 6,944 115 9.9 1,353 120 17.2

Eastbound Entry Ramp 6,854 115 5.4 1,286 120 9.6


Northern Approach Southbound 9,798 60 5.3 1,837 60 9.5

Southern approach Southbound 8,877 60 8.0 1,703 60 14.2

Southern approach Northbound 8,114 60 7.5 1,550 60 13.3



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 58


presented in the tables below were obtained from the RMS.

Table B.4 - 2013 Traffic Volumes and Heavy Vehicle Percentages – Main Carriageways

Location Direction


TrafficVol

VehicleSpeed

% HeavyTraffic

VolVehicleSpeed

% Heavy

Branxton Interchange toNew England Hwy

Westbound 9,166 115 14.1 2,134 120 20.5

Eastbound 9,752 115 14.6 1,788 120 28.5

Allandale Interchange toBranxton Interchange

Westbound 10,041 115 11.1 2,319 120 16.0

Eastbound 10,568 115 12.8 1,862 120 25.7

Loxford Interchange toAllandale Interchange

Westbound 12,610 115 10.2 2,880 120 15.2

Eastbound 13,347 115 11.0 2,313 120 22.9

Kurri Kurri Interchange toLoxford Interchange

Westbound 16,097 115 9.9 3,523 120 14.6

Eastbound 17,600 115 10.1 3,020 120 20.7

Table B.5 - 2013 Traffic Volumes and Heavy Vehicle Percentages – Branxton

Interchange, New England Highway Junction and Wine Country Drive Junction

Location


TrafficVol

VehicleSpeed


% Heavy


Westbound Exit Ramp 2872 115 5.5 539 120 9.8

Westbound Entry Ramp 1987 115 17.3 410 120 28.3

Eastbound Exit Ramp 2142 115 10.5 419 120 18.1

Eastbound Entry Ramp 2874 115 4.7 536 120 8.4

To New England Hwy Northbound 3618 80 10.1 706 80 17.4

From New England Hwy Southbound 3061 80 13.6 614 80 22.8

To Wine Country Dr Southbound 3884 80 7.2 740 80 12.7

From Wine Country Dr Northbound 4287 80 7.5 819 80 13.3

New England Highway Junction

Southern Approach Northbound 3618 80 10.1 706 80 17.4

Southern Approach Southbound 3061 80 13.6 614 80 22.8



Western Approach Eastbound 1688 80 14.0 340 80 23.5

Western Approach Westbound 1390 80 9.1 269 80 16.0



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 59

Location


TrafficVol

VehicleSpeed


% Heavy

Wine Country Drive Junction1

Southern Approach Northbound 3956 60 8.4 762 60 14.8

Southern Approach Southbound 3983 60 8.0 764 60 14.0



Western Approach Eastbound 3884 60 7.2 740 60 12.7

Western Approach Westbound 4287 60 7.5 819 60 13.3

Notes: 2. Wine Country drive has been modelled only within the main alignment corridor rather than extending north ofthe corridor towards Branxton.

Table B.6 - 2013 Traffic Volumes and Heavy Vehicle Percentages – Allandale

Interchange, Loxford Interchange and Kurri Kurri Interchange

Location


TrafficVol

VehicleSpeed


% Heavy




Southern approach Northbound 1951 80 6.2 496 80 11.1

Southern approach Southbound 2061 80 8.0 527 80 13.9



Loxford Interchange









Westbound Entry Ramp 3019 115 6.9 574 120 12.4

Eastbound Exit Ramp 4248 115 9.1 822 120 15.8








FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 60

APPENDIX C - NOISE MODEL VERIFICATION RESULTS

Noise Modelling Software: CADNARoad Traffic Noise Model: CoRTN 88

Noise Measurement Period: 18-29 November 2010

Verification Results CADNA (rev 9).xls

© Renzo Tonin & Associates

Note: R2

is a test of goodness of fit between the data and the proposed trend line. It ranges between 0 and 1. A value approaching 1 means a

good fit and a value approaching zero means no fit, i.e. the values are random with respect to the proposed equation.

Hunter Expressway: Kurri Kurri to Branxton

Noise Model Verification Results

R² = 0.8304

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

45 50 55 60 65 70 75

Mo

dell

ed

No

ise

Level,

dB

(A

)

Measured Noise Level, dB(A)

Modelled -v- Measured: Day LAeq,15hr

Noise Levels, dB(A) Best Fit Line

R² = 0.7498

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

40 45 50 55 60 65 70

Mo

dell

ed

No

ise

Level,

dB

(A

)


Modelled -v- Measured: Night LAeq,9hr


no

ise

mo

del

veri

ficati

on

Consultants in Acoustics, Vibration & Structural Dynamicsemail: [email protected]: www.renzotonin.com.au

Noise Modelling Software: SoundPLANRoad Traffic Noise Model: CoRTN 88

Noise Measurement Period: 18-29 November 2010

Verification Results SoundPLAN (rev 11).xls

© Renzo Tonin & Associates

Hunter Expressway: Kurri Kurri to Branxton

Noise Model Verification Results

R² = 0.8097

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

45 50 55 60 65 70 75

Mo

dell

ed

No

ise L

evel,

dB

(A

)


Modelled -v- Measured: Day LAeq,15hr


R² = 0.7498

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

40 45 50 55 60 65 70

Mo

dell

ed

No

ise L

evel,

dB

(A

)


Modelled -v- Measured: Night LAeq,9hr


no

ise m

od

el

verif

icati

on

Consultants in Acoustics, Vibration & Structural Dynamics

email: [email protected]

website: www.renzotonin.com.au



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 63

APPENDIX D - NOISE MITIGATION DESIGN PAVEMENT SCHEDULE

Pavement Location Reference SurfaceApprox Chainages Approx

Lengthfrom from

Main Alignment P01 SMA 12900 16600 3700

NB & SB Carriageways P02 PCP 16600 30950 14350

P03 SMA 30950 33120 2170

P04 PCP 33120 35350 2230

P05 SMA 35350 38090 2740

P06 PCP 38090 39500 1410


Northbound exit ramp SMA 0 560 560

Northbound entry ramp SMA 0 660 660

Southbound exit ramp SMA 0 620 620

Southbound entry ramp SMA 0 640 640

Cessnock Road 7mm SS

Loxford Interchange


AC14 440 640 200

Southbound entry ramp AC14 0 200 200

SMA 200 630 430

Hart Road 7mm SS



AC14 260 500 240


SMA 300 480 180

Links to Lovedale Road 7mm SS

Link to Quarry 7mm SS



AC14 440 653 213

Northbound entry ramp PCP 0 40 40

SMA 40 800 760

Southbound exit ramp SMA 0 601 601


SMA 180 660 480

Link to New England Hwy 7mm SS

Link to Wine Country Drive 7mm SS

Wine Country Drive 7mm SS

New England Hwy 7mm SS

Note: 7mmSS & AC14=DGA according to advice from Project’s Pavement Engineer;

7mm SS = 7mm sprayed seal



FINAL DESIGN

5 June 2012 Page 64

APPENDIX E - NOISE MITIGATION DESIGN – NOISE WALL / MOUND

SCHEDULE

Noise Barrier LocationHeight

(m)

Approx Chainages ApproxLength

Area(m2)from to

Main Road, Kurri Kurriadjacent to Northbound carriageway

barrier to be erected 2nd half of 2011

NW01 4.5 Meatworks 13913 167 7779

Kurri Kurri Interchangeadjacent to Northbound carriageway entry Ramp


NW02 5.0 13900 14800 900 4425

Kurri Kurri Interchange to LoxfordInterchange

adjacent to Southbound carriageway

(top of cut and top of fill)

barriers to be erected 2nd half of 2011

NW03a 6.5 14442 14700 258 1651

NW03b 5.5 14700 14880 182 1001

NW03c 5.0 14883 15002 242 1200

NW04 5.0 14980 15043 73 425

NW05 5.0 15074 15140 78 425

NW06a 5.5 15120 15285 180 990

NW06a 5.0 15285 15340 58 290

NW06a 5.5 15340 15640 301 1655

NW06b 4.5 15640 15745 105 473

along northern side of McLeod Road


NW07 4.0 - - 185 740

Future Noise Wall - Anvil CreekDevelopment1

adjacent to Southbound carriageway above the adjacentoutside pavement surface level

NW07 4.3 27960 31300 3340 (14362)

Tuckers Laneadjacent to Southbound

carriageway (top of cut and top of fill)

barriers to be erected throughout 2012

NW08 6.0 31540 31759 219 1314

NW09 6.0 31740 31832 92 552

NW10 6.0 31848 31940 92 552

NW11a 6.0 31923 32094 171 1026

NW11b 6.0 32089 32260 171 1026

NW11c 6.0 32255 32426 171 1026

NW11d 6.0 32421 32658 237 1422

North of Branxton Interchange

adjacent to Southbound carriageway

(top of cut and top of fill)

EM denotes earth mound

barriers to be erected throughout 2012

NW12 5.0 35540 35620 80 400

NW13-EM 6.0 35620 36120 500 3000

NW14a 5.0 36120 36182 62 365

NW14b 4.0 36178 36286 108 436

NW14c 4.0 36280 36338 58 240

NW15-EM 2.0 36760 36824 64 120

NW16 5.0 36816 37144 322 1630

NW17 5.0 37127 37328 196 945

NW18 5.0 36318 37440 122 610

NW19 5.0 37435 37570 135 670

NW20 5.0 37556 38000 454 2285

Notes: 1. Future Works to be considered and accommodated under item 5.20 of SWTC. Noise wall is not detailed in Table 4.5(SWTC App 4). Noise wall was included in the noise model for generation of noise contours, but not for prediction ofnoise levels to single point receivers.