Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Gas Station with a Convenience Store Hwy 26, Collingwood, Ontario

Transcription

1 Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Gas Station with a Convenience Store Hwy 26, Collingwood, Ontario Prepared for: CST Canada Co Bl Rene-Leveque, Suite 3200 Montreal, Quebec H3B 0C9 Prepared by Sheeba Paul, PEng and Bill Gastmeier, MASc, PEng February 13, 2015

2 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction and Summary Site Description Site Description Noise Source Description Criteria Stationary Noise Criteria Sound Level Criteria at the Residential Receptors Stationary Source Assessment Results Recommendations and Summary Conclusions and Recommendations... 8 Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Locations Figure 4 Figure 5 Key Plan Preliminary Site Plan Sketch Indicating Assumed Location of Rooftop Units and Residential Receptors Predicted Daytime Sound Level Contours, dba, at 4.5 m height Predicted Daytime Sound Level Contours, dba, at 4.5 m height

3 Noise Feasibility Study Page Hwy 26, 1.0 Introduction and Summary Howe Gastmeier Chapnik Limited (HGC Engineering) was retained by CST Canada Co. to investigate the potential environmental noise feasibility of a proposed gas station and convenience store on the adjacent residences. The proposed gas bar is to be located at Hwy 26 in the Town of Collingwood, Ontario. This report summarizes the investigation. The analysis is based on criteria contained in the noise guidelines of the Ministry of Environment (MOE); site plan dated November 25, 2014; aerial photo; site visit; information pertaining to business hours; and information regarding equipment sound power levels from equipment manufacturers obtained from HGC Engineering files. A computer model of the area was created, using acoustic modelling software, in order to predict the sound levels from the gas bar and convenience store at the locations of nearby existing residences. The results indicate that the sound emissions of the gas bar and convenience store will be within the applicable noise guideline limits of the MOE at the nearby residential receptors, with no additional mitigation measures. The results are summarized in this report. 2.0 Site Description The development is proposed on the north side of Highway 26 between S. Clair Street and Robert Avenue, specifically at Hwy 26. Figure 1 represents a key plan of the area. Figure 2 shows the proposed preliminary site plan prepared by exp dated November 25, The site consists of one 1- storey building which is a convenience store, six gas pumps and parking spots. The area labelled residential lot to the north has been purchased and has been merged with the commercial lands. The area will be a buffer area between the commercial building and the existing house to then north. The gas bar and convenience store are expected to be open from 24 hours a day 7 days a week. The rooftop HVAC units have not been selected for the convenience store building. It is likely that there will be two to three rooftop units. For the purpose of the analysis, three 5-Ton units (Lennox

4 Noise Feasibility Study Page Hwy 26 models) and one condenser/compressor unit were assumed. The locations have been approximated and sound levels have been taken from HGC Engineering project files for similar projects. 2.1 Site Description Currently, the subject site is vacant. There are existing residences to the north, northwest and northeast. The residence to the north and northwest are 2-storey and the residence to the east is 1- storey. On the south side of Hwy 26 is the Collingwood Ethanol plant. To the east is an existing commercial building including a restaurant and office. Highway 26 is a two lane roadway (1 lane in each direction). St. Clair St and Robert Ave are low volume residential roads. The subject site is located in a Class 1 (urban) acoustical environment where the background sound is primarily made up of the sounds of road traffic and human activity (the urban hum) in the daytime and nighttime hours. 2.2 Noise Source Description The primary sources of sound associated with the site are the rooftop equipment associated with the convenience store building. Sensitive receptor locations were taken at the most potentially impacted residences, which are the existing residences to the north (R1), northwest (R2, R3) and east (R4). Typical sound levels associated with tonnages of the equipment were obtained from HGC files from similar past projects. Three 5-Ton units and one condenser/compressor units were assumed on the roof of the convenience store building. 3.0 Criteria 3.1 Stationary Noise Criteria MOE Guideline NPC-300, Environmental Noise Guideline Stationary and Transportation Sources Approval and Planning is the MOE guideline for use in investigating Land Use Compatibility issues with regard to noise. An industrial or commercial facility is classified in MOE guidelines as a stationary source of sound (as compared to sources such as traffic or construction, for example) for

5 Noise Feasibility Study Page Hwy 26 noise assessment purposes. Noise from the proposed development may potentially impact neighbouring noise sensitive land uses. In terms of background sound, the development is located in an urban (Type I) acoustical environment which is characterized by an acoustical environment dominated by road traffic and human activity. NPC-300 is intended for use in the planning of both residential and commercial/industrial land uses and provides the acceptability limits for sound due to commercial operations in that regard. The facade of a residence (i.e., in the plane of a window), or any associated usable outdoor area is considered a sensitive point of reception. NPC-300 stipulates that the exclusionary sound level limit for a stationary noise source in an urban Class 1 area is taken to be 50 dba during daytime hours (07:00 to 23:00), and 45 dba during nighttime hours (23:00 to 07:00). If the background sound levels due to road traffic exceed the exclusionary limits, then the background sound level becomes the criterion. The background sound level is defined as the sound level that occurs when the source under consideration is not operating, and may include traffic noise and natural sounds. Commercial activities such as the occasional movement of customer vehicles, and garbage collection are not of themselves considered to be significant noise sources in the MOE guidelines. Accordingly, these sources have not been considered in this study. Noise from safety equipment (e.g. back-up beepers) is also exempt from consideration. Frequent truck movements at a warehouse or busy shipping/receiving docks at an industry must generally be assessed. Trucking activities have not been included in this assessment since they will occur on an infrequent basis. The MOE guidelines stipulate that the sound level impact during a predicable worst case hour be considered. This is defined to be an hour when a typically busy planned and predictable mode of operation occurs at the subject facility, coincident with a period of minimal background sound. Compliance with MOE criteria generally results in acceptable levels of sound at residential receptors although there may still be residual audibility during periods of low background sound Sound Level Criteria at the Residential Receptors Typical ambient sound levels can be determined through prediction of road traffic volumes in areas where traffic sound is dominant. Where it can be demonstrated that the hourly ambient sound levels

6 Noise Feasibility Study Page Hwy 26 are greater than the exclusionary minimum limits listed above, the criterion becomes the lowest predicted one-hour L EQ sound level during each respective period. At locations where the ambient sound levels are low, the exclusionary minimum criteria of 50/45 apply. A site visit was performed during a quiet daytime hour. The measured background sound levels were less than 50 dba during the daytime hours at R1 to the north. The recommended criteria during the daytime and nighttime at each receptor are indicated in Table I. Table I: Noise Level Criteria at Receptors [dba] Receptor Daytime (07:00 23:00) Night-time (23:00 07:00) R1 (2-storey existing residence to the north) R2 (2-storey existing residence to the northwest) R3 (2-storey existing residence to the northwest) R4 (1-storey existing residence to the east) In each case, the limits apply at any point on the property, and at residential window locations. Consequently, the most stringent receptor location is the upper-story windows of the closest dwellings, as these locations are most exposed to the rooftop sound sources. 4.0 Stationary Source Assessment Predictive noise modelling was used to assess the potential sound impact of rooftop equipment at the closest residential receptors. Residential receptors, R1 to R4, are located to the north, northwest and east of the site. The noise prediction model was based on sound emission levels for rooftop equipment, assumed operational profiles (during the daytime and nighttime), and established engineering methods for the prediction of outdoor sound propagation. These methods include the effects of distance, air absorption, and acoustical screening by barrier obstacles. There will be one building on the subject site which is proposed to be a convenience store. There are expected to be no significant noise sources associated with this development beyond the rooftop mechanical equipment (i.e. deliveries, would be occasional, light and during daytime hours only). The operation of the gas pumps is exempt from noise assessment under MOE guidelines and is

7 Noise Feasibility Study Page Hwy 26 generally not a source of concern to neighbouring residents. Table II below summarizes the sound data for the gas bar. Table II: Manufacturer s Sound Power Levels for Gas bar [db re W] Octave Band Centre Frequency [Hz] Source k 2k 4k 8k HVAC unit (Lennox, 5-Ton) Condenser/compressor units The above outlined sound levels and site features were used as input to a predictive computer model. The software used for this purpose (Cadna-A version ) is a computer implementation of ISO Standard Acoustics - Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors. The ISO method accounts for reduction in sound level with distance due to geometrical spreading, air absorption, ground attenuation and acoustical shielding by intervening structures such as barriers. The following information and assumptions were used in the analysis. The height of the convenience store building was assumed to be 5.0 m. R1, R2 and R3 are existing 2-storey residences. R4 is an existing 1-storey residence. First storey bedroom windows are at approximately 2.0 m in height. Second storey bedroom windows are at approximately 4.5 m in height. The rooftop units on the convenience store building were assumed to be located as shown in Figure 3. The rooftop equipment was assumed to include 5-Ton Lennox models along with one condenser/compressor unit. The A/C units were assumed to be 1.2 m high and the condenser units was assumed to be 0.5 m high. Sound data for the equipment was obtained from HGC Engineering files. It indicates a sound power level of 72 dba for 5-Ton units. The data for the condenser unit indicates a sound power level of 90 dba. The mechanical equipment should be selected using this data and when the selections are finalized, the manufacturers sound levels should be provided for review to ensure MOE compliance at the

8 Noise Feasibility Study Page Hwy 26 offsite residential receptors. In this impact assessment, we have considered typical worst-case (busiest hour) scenarios for each time period to be as follows: Assumed daytime worst-case scenario: All rooftop equipment operating continuously at full capacity, Assumed night-time worst-case scenario: All rooftop equipment operating on a 50% duty cycle, Garbage collection and any shipping and receiving taking place at this location will generally occur during the daytime hours. Commercial activities such as the occasional movement of customer vehicles on the property, the infrequent delivery of goods to convenience stores and gas station, fast food restaurants etc. and garbage collection are not of themselves considered to be significant noise sources in the MOE guidelines.

9 Noise Feasibility Study Page Hwy Results The calculations consider the acoustical effects of distance and shielding by the buildings. The unmitigated sound levels due to the rooftop mechanical equipment and tire inflator at the closest neighbouring residences (R1 to R4) are summarized in the following table. Table III: Predicted Sound Levels from the Proposed Commercial Site at Residential Receptors [dba] Receptor *Daytime *Night-time Criteria *Daytime in At first floor At second storey Day/Night rear yard window window R1 (2-storey existing residence to the north) 50 / R2 (2-storey existing residence to the 50 / northwest) R3 (2-storey existing residence to the 50 / northwest) R4 (1-storey existing residence to the east) 50 / Note: * A receptor in the rear yard is taken to be 1.5 m above grade. First floor windows are taken to be 2.0 m above grade. Second storey windows are taken to be 4.5 m above grade. The results of the calculations indicate that the predicted sound levels due to operation of the rooftop mechanical equipment will be within the MOE limits at the neighbouring residential receptors, in a worst case scenario. 4.2 Recommendations and Summary In summary, HGC Engineering has predicted the sound levels near the proposed gas bar and convenience store, reviewed the site plan, reviewed typical sound rating data for HVAC units and performed calculations to determine the impact at the existing residential units with respect to MOE guidelines. The configuration of the commercial building on the site can achieve MOE guidelines, as long as the following are met. 1) When further details of roof plans and the mechanical equipment selections are available, an acoustical engineer should verify that the source sound level specifications and locations for

10 Noise Feasibility Study Page Hwy 26 the HVAC units conform to the assumptions made in this report and that acceptable sound levels will result at all offsite residential receptors. 2) Before the issuance of building permits, an acoustical consultant should review the plans and specifications to certify that the required noise control measures and sound level specifications have been included in their entirety. 3) After construction, the municipal building inspector or a Professional Engineer qualified to perform acoustical engineering services in the Province of Ontario should certify that the rooftop parapets have been built to the approved height and extent. Figure 4 shows the daytime sound level contours at 4.5 m in height. Figure 5 shows the nighttime sound level contours at 4.5 m in height. 5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations Assuming typical worst-case equipment and operating scenarios as described above, the analysis indicates that the noise impact of the commercial site can comply with MOE criteria at the nearest façades of the existing residential buildings without additional noise mitigation measures. The reader is referred to previous sections of this report where the recommendations are discussed in detail.

11

12

13 R R R R FRAME COORDINATES ARE UTM IN METRES Figure 3 - Sketch Indicating Assumed Location of Rooftop Units and Residential Receptors

14 R R R R FRAME COORDINATES ARE UTM IN METRES Figure 4 - Predicted Daytime Sound Level Contours, dba, at 4.5 m height

15 R R R R FRAME COORDINATES ARE UTM IN METRES Figure 5 - Predicted Nighttime Sound Level Contours, dba, at 4.5 m height