West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 1 December 2014
11.0 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Introduction
11.1 This chapter of the ES assesses the likely significant effects of the Proposed
Development in terms of noise and vibration, in particular the potential direct and
indirect effects of the development arising from construction phase noise and vibration
and operational phase road traffic noise at sensitive receptor locations.
11.2 The chapter describes the assessment methodology; the baseline conditions at the Site
and surroundings; the likely significant environmental effects; the mitigation measures
required to prevent, reduce or offset any significant adverse effects; and the likely
residual effects after these measures have been employed. A summary of impact
significance and mitigation is included as Table 11.38. This chapter has been prepared
Royal HaskoningDHV.
Planning Policy Context
11.3 This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the following leg islation,
policies and guidance.
National Legislation
Environmental Protection Act (EPA) (1990) HMSO i
11.4 Section 79 of the Act defines statutory nuisance with regard to noise and determines
that local planning authorities have a duty to detect such nuisances in their area. The
Act also defines the concept of “Best Practicable Means” (BPM):
“ ‘practicable’ means reasonably practicable having regard
among other things to local conditions and circumstances,
to the current state of technical knowledge and to the
financial implications;
the means to be employed include the design, installation,
maintenance and manner and periods of operation of plant
and machinery, and the design, construction and
maintenance of buildings and structures;
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 2 December 2014
the test is to apply only so far as compatible with any duty
imposed by law; and
the test is to apply only so far as compatible with safety
and safe working conditions, and with the exigencies of
any emergency or unforeseeable circumstances.”
11.5 Section 80 of the Act provides local planning authorities with powers to serve an
abatement notice requiring the abatement of a nuisance or requiring works to be
executed to prevent their occurrence.
The Control of Pollution Act, 1974 (CoPA) ii
11.6 Section 60 of the Act provides powers to Local Authority Officers to serve an abatement
notice in respect of noise nuisance from construction works.
11.7 Section 61 provides a method by which a contractor can apply for ‘prior consent’ for
construction activities before commencement of works. The ‘prior consent’ is agreed
between the Local Authority and the contractor and may conta in a range of agreed
working conditions, noise limits and control measures designed to minimise or prevent
the occurrence of noise nuisance from construction activities. Application for a ‘prior
consent’ is a commonly used control measure in respect of potential noise effects from
major construction works.
The National Planning Policy Framework ii i
11.8 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was introduced in March 2012 replacing
the former Planning Policy Guidance 24: Planning and Noise. Paragraph 123 of the
National Planning Policy Framework states that planning policies and decisions should
aim to:
“avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts
on health and quality of life as a result of new
development;
mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts
on health and quality of life arising from noise from new
development, including through the use of conditions;
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 3 December 2014
recognise that development will often create some noise
and existing businesses wanting to develop in continuance
of their business should not have unreasonable restrictions
put on them because of changes in nearby land uses since
they were established; and
identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have
remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for
their recreational and amenity value for this reason.”
Planning Practice Guidance
11.9 The National Planning Practice Guidance for Noise (NPPG Noise, March 2014) iv, issued
under the NPPF, states that noise needs to be considered when new developments may
create additional noise and when new developments would be sensitive to the prevailing
acoustic environment. When preparing local or neighbourhood plans, or taking decisions
about new development, there may also be opportunities to consider improvements to
the acoustic environment.
11.10 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), 2010, Noise Policy
Statement for England (NPSE)v
11.11 The NPSE document was published by Defra in 2010 and paragraph 1.7 states three
policy aims:
“Through the effective management and control of
environmental, neighbour and neighbourhood noise within
the context of Government policy on sustainable
development:
1. avoid significant adverse impacts on health and
quality of life;
2. mitigate and minimise adverse impacts on health
and quality of life; and
3. where possible, contribute to the improvement of
health and quality of life.”
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 4 December 2014
11.12 The first two points require that significant adverse effect should not occur and that,
where a noise level falls between a leve l which represents the lowest observable
adverse effect and a level which represents a significant observed adverse effect:
“…all reasonable steps should be taken to mitigate and
minimise adverse effects on health and quality of life
whilst also taking into consideration the guiding principles
of sustainable development. This does not mean that such
effects cannot occur.” (Paragraph 2.24, NPSE, March 2010).
11.13 Section 2.20 of The NPSE introduces key phrases including “Significant adverse” and
“adverse” and two established concepts from toxicology that are being applied to noise
effects:
“NOEL – No Observed Effect Level
This is the level below which no effect can be detected. In
simple terms, below this level, there is no detectable
effect on health and quality of life due to the noise.
LOAEL – Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level
This is the level above which adverse effects on health and
quality of life can be detected”.
11.14 Paragraph 2.21 of the NPSE extends the concepts described above and leads to a
significant observed adverse effect level – SOAEL, which is defined as the level above
which significant effects on health and quality of life occur.
11.15 The NPSE states:
“it is not possible to have a single objective noise-based
measure that defines SOAEL that is applicable to all
sources of noise in all situations”. (Paragraph 2.22, NPSE,
March 2010).
11.16 Furthermore paragraph 2.22 of the NPSE acknowledges that:
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 5 December 2014
“further research is required to increase understanding of
what may constitute a significant adverse effect on health
and quality of life from noise”.
Local Planning Policy
South Cambridgeshire District Council Development Control DPD vi
11.17 South Cambridgeshire District Council (SCDC) is in the process of preparing a new Local
Plan which is expected to be adopted in late 2014.
11.18 Until the new Local Plan is adopted, the Local Development Framework (LDF) remains in
place. The LDF comprises a number of documents including the adopted Core Strategy
and the Development Control Policies DPD. Whilst the Core Strategy sets out the overall
approach to development in the District, a review of the Development Control Policies
DPD highlighted the following policy relevant to noise:
“NOISE POLICY NE/15 Noise Pollution
1. Planning permission will not be granted for
development which:
a. Has an unacceptable adverse impact on the
indoor and outdoor acoustic environment of
existing or planned development;
b. Has an unacceptable adverse impact on
countryside areas of tranquillity which are
important for wildlife and countryside
recreation; or
c. Would be subject to unacceptable noise levels
from existing noise sources, both ambient and
having regard to noise impulses whether
irregular or tone.
2. Conditions may be attached to any planning
permission to ensure adequate attenuation of noise
emissions or to control the noise at source.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 6 December 2014
Consideration will be given to the increase in road
traffic that may arise due to the development and
conditions or Section 116 agreements may be used
to minimise such noise.
3. In particularly sensitive locations, business us
development may be restricted to office use only
(B1(a)).
4. Where a planning application for residential
development is near an existing noise source, the
applicant will be required to demonstrate that the
proposal would not be subject to an unacceptable
noise levels.
5. The District Council will seek to ensure that noise
from proposed commercial, industrial, recreational
or transport use does not cause any significant
increase in the background noise level of nearby
existing noise sensitive property which includes
dwellings, hospitals, residential institutions, nursing
homes, hotels, guesthouses, and schools and other
educational establishments.
7.55 Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 paragraph 5
requires development plans to include policies
which ensure noise sensitive developments are
located away from existing sources of significant
noise, and that potentially noisy developments are
located in areas where noise will not be such an
important consideration or where its impact can be
minimised”.
South Cambridge District Council, March 2010 - District Design Guide (SPD)vii
11.19 Noise is referred to in Section 11.28 of this guidance with further explanation provided
in Appendix 6 Noise – Detailed Design Guidance. The appendix contains supplementary
design guidance for all aspects relating to noise and vibration including outdoor and
indoor noise levels standards and criteria, sound insulation requirements, and
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 7 December 2014
construction noise for example. This guidance does not reflect the current terminology
of the NPPF and NPSE, for example using LOAEL/SOAEL to determine effect levels for
assessment purposes. Where applicable the latest available standard and/or guidance
has been incorporated in to this assessment.
Guidance
11.20 The following guidance has been considered in the noise and vibration assessment. A
summary description of each standard can be found in Appendix 11.1.
British Standards Institution (2003) BS 7445-1-2003 – Description and
measurement of environmental noise. Guide to quantities and procedures. BSI,
London”.vii i
British Standards Institution, (2014). BS 4142:2014 – Methods for rating and
assessing industrial and commercial sound. BSI, London. ix
Berglund et al (1999) – Guidelines for Community Noise. Geneva, World Health
Organisation (WHO).x
British Standard (BS) 5228-1:2009+A1:2014 “Code of practice for noise and
vibration control on construction and open sites – Part 1: Noise” [BSI, 2014].xi
British Standard [BS] 5228-2: 2009+A1:2014 “Code of practice for noise and
vibration control on construction and open sites – Part 2: Vibration” (BSI,
2014).xii
Department of Transport, Welsh Office (1988). Calculation of Road Traffic Noise
HMSO, London.xiii
The Highways Agency (2011) Design Manual for Roads and Br idges, Volume 11,
Section 3, Part 7: Noise and Vibration. The Highways Agency.xiv
British Standard Institute (2014). BS8233: Guidance on sound insulation and
noise reduction for buildings. BSI, London. xv
British Standard 6472-1:2008 Guide to evaluation of human exposure to
vibration in buildings. Part 1: Vibration sources other than blasting, BSI .xvi
Education Funding Agency (2012). Acoustic Performance Standards For Priority
Schools Building Programme. Department for Education, London. xvii
British Council for Offices (2014). Guide to Specification 2014. BCO, London. xviii
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 8 December 2014
Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria
11.21 This section describes the assessment methodology, including data collation,
consultation and effect assessment criteria that were used in the noise and vibration
assessment.
Consultation
11.22 This assessment has been informed by the Scoping Opinion issued by SCDC on 28 th
January 2014. Comments received from the Environmental Health Officer of SCDC were
taken into account in the noise assessment methodology provided in this chapter. On
attending the Site concerns over equipment security were identified. The Site was
considered to be ‘open land’ due to the public rights of way, the proximity to the college
in the centre, the industrial zone located towards the east and north-east and the
commercial zone at the A1198/A428 roundabout. On this basis the baseline noise survey
was adapted and comprised attended measurements of 1 hour duration during the
reference daytime period (07:00 to 23:00hrs) and 15 minutes duration during the
reference daytime period (23:00 to 07:00hrs). Attended measurements quantifying the
baseline ambient and the background noise climate were carried out at representative
locations throughout the daytime and night time periods.
Study Area
11.23 The Study Area for the noise and vibration assessment comprised the area immediately
adjacent to the Site, and is shown in Figure 11.1. The closest noise sensitive receptors
in each geographical direction were taken into account, on the basis that receptors
further from the Site will experience lower noise levels due to the increased separation
distance. The Study Area also comprises sections of thesurrounding road network
significantly affected by the development. The extent of the road network considered
for this assessment was dictated by the Transport Assessment data provided by Royal
HaskoningDHV (RHDHV).
11.24 The existing noise sensitive receptors located around the Site include residential
dwellings to the east and south (Lower Cambourne and Caxton respectively),
educational facilities at Cambourne Village College accessible via Sheepfold Lane, and
retail in the form of restaurants to the north-west near Caxton Gibbet. There are
industrial and commercial premises along Sheepfold Lane and located within the nearby
Cambourne Business Park to the north-east and east, additional industrial premises to
the centre in the form of Swansley Wood Farm, and to the north buildings close to the
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 9 December 2014
A428. The principle noise effects on these receptors will arise as a result of the
construction phase of the Site and from predicted increased traffic flows associated with
the development.
Construction
11.25 An assessment of noise and vibration effects has been undertaken based on the
information provided in Chapter 6- Construction Programme.
Construction Activities
11.26 Noise levels from the construction phase were calculated using the methods and
guidance in BS5228. This Standard provides methods for predicting receptor noise leve ls
from construction works, based on the number and type of construction plant and
activities operating on site with corrections to account for: the ‘on -time’ of the plant, as
a percentage of the assessment period; distance from source to receptor; acousti c
screening by barriers, buildings or topography; and ground type. The source noise
levels for each piece of plant equipment likely to be in operation during construction
were used as the basis for the calculation and were derived from Annex C of BS5228.
11.27 SoundPLAN noise modelling software was utilised to predict the noise from the
construction activity at existing sensitive receptors. The calculation method takes
account of air absorption, distance attenuation, barriers and topography, and light
downwind conditions from source to receptor. A three-dimensional model was created
using topographical data of the local area and plans and elevations of the Proposed
Development. The model incorporated the Proposed Development, nearby existing
residential dwellings, educational, industrial, leisure and auxiliary buildings; and the
surrounding local road network.
11.28 A list of typical construction plant and equipment associated with each key element of
the construction process and considered during the noise assessment was taken from
the Construction Plant table detailed within Chapter 6: Construction Programme and
reproduced as Table 11.1. The results were calculated as the dB LAeq,10h noise levels,
representing a conservative prediction of the noise level that might affect adjacent
receptors over the full period of one ten-hour day of construction activity.
11.29 The following assumptions were made:
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 10 December 2014
Construction activities will take place during typical day time construction hours
only;
For this assessment these were assumed to be 08:00 to 18:00 during weekdays,
08:00 to 13:00 on Saturday, no work on Sunday or Bank Holidays;
All ground at the Site was assumed to have anabsorption factor of 0.6;
otherwise roads were assumed to be acoustically hard and reflective, i.e.
concrete/tarmac and a +5dB adjustment included in the SoundPLAN noise model
using the ‘create ground effects from road surfaces’ function);
All noise emitting equipment was modelled as a point source and placed at
representative locations within the construction zones based on details provided
in Figure 6.1 – Phasing Plans;
The haul roads highlighted on Figure 6.1 – Phasing Plan were included in the
model and associated vehicle movements were based on details provided in
Chapter 6: Construction Programme;
Acoustic propagation effects were calculated using the BS5228 method; and
The ‘on-time’ for all plant was assumed to be 50% .
11.30 The types of plant proposed to be used during construction is presented in Table 6.2 of
Chapter 6 - Construction Programme. Based on experience of assessing similar projects
and to provide a conservative approach for the construction noise assessment, a list of
assumed plant and typical construction equipment used during a representative phase
are presented in Table 11.1.
Table 11.1: List of Assumed Plant for Construction Noise Assessment
Phase Plant / Activity BS5228
Reference No.
Noise level (dB LwA)
On-time (%)
Enabling Works
Tracked/wheeled 360 degree Excavators
C1.13 4 114 50
Excavator mounted hydraulic breakers
C5.1 4 116 50
Excavator mounted hydraulic crushers
C1.15 4 111 50
Dumpers C2.31 4 123 50
Construction Traffic Movements on Haul Routes
C8.20 Based on 100 two-way HGV trips per
day
76 n/a
Construction Traffic Movements on Haul Routes
SoundPLAN Source Noise
Library
Based on 170 two-way car or light vehicle
trips per day
56 n/a
1, 2, 3 Tracked/wheeled 360 degree Excavators
C1.13 8 114 50
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 11 December 2014
Phase Plant / Activity BS5228
Reference No.
Noise level (dB LwA)
On-time (%)
Mobile Craneage/Tower Cranes
C3.29 4 98 50
Dumpers C2.31 8 123
Construction Traffic Movements on Haul Routes
C8.20 Based on 100 two-way HGV trips per
day
76 n/a
Construction Traffic Movements on Haul Routes
SoundPLAN Source Noise
Library
Based on 170 two-way car or light vehicle
trips per day
56 n/a
4, 5, 6 Tracked/wheeled 360
degree Excavators
C1.13 4 114 50
Mobile Craneage/Tower Cranes
C3.29 2 98 50
Dumpers C2.31 4 123 50
Construction Traffic Movements on Haul Routes
C8.20 Based on 100 two-way HGV trips per
day
76 n/a
Construction Traffic Movements on Haul Routes
SoundPLAN Source Noise
Library
Based on 170 two-way car or light vehicle
trips per day
56 n/a
7 Tracked/wheeled 360 degree Excavators
C1.13 2 114 50
Mobile Craneage/Tower Cranes
C3.29 2 98 50
Dumpers C2.31 2 123 50
11.31 Predicted construction noise effects were assessed at the closest existing receptors to
the Site, and included groups of commercial, educational or residential receptors.
These noise sensitive receptors are highlighted in Table 11.2 and in Figure 11.2.
Table 11.2: Existing Construction Noise Receptor Locations
Receptor Number
Location X Y
CN1 Swansley Lane 531134 259847
CN2 Meadowsweet Close 531149 259745
CN3 Codling Walk 530932 259579
CN4 Woodfield Lane 530800 259452
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 12 December 2014
Receptor Number
Location X Y
CN5 School Lane 530890 259246
CN6 Brockholt Road 530329 258909
CN7 Swansley Wood Farm 530479 260195
CN8 Cambourne Village College 530998 259980
CN9 SCDC Offices 531379 260070
11.32 New noise sensitive receptors associated with each construction phase including the
proposed residential units and schools were also considered in accordance with the
phasing of the construction programme detailed in Figure 6.1 -Phasing Plans. These
new receptors were labelled according to the zoning identified on Figure 4.7 Parameters
Plan and are presented on Figure 11.3.
11.33 The predicted construction noise levels were assessed against noise limits derived from
advice within Annex E of BS 5228-1:2009+A1:2014. The Standard details the “ABC
method”, which specifies a construction noise limit based on the existing ambient noise
level. Table 11.3, reproduced from BS 5228, provides the criteria for selection of a
noise limit for a specific receptor location. To provide a conservative approach to the
assessment new noise sensitive receptors emerging due to the construction phasing of
the Development were considered as threshold category A.
Table 11.3: Construction Noise Threshold Levels Based on the ABC Method
(BS5228)
Assessment category and threshold value period
(LAeq)
Threshold value, in decibels (dB)
Category A A)
Category B B)
Category C C)
Night time (23.00 to 07.00) 45 50 55
Evening and weekends D) 55 60 65
Daytime (07.00 – 19.00) and Saturdays (07.00 - 13.00)
65 70 75
A) Category A: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5 dB) are less than these values.
B) Category B: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5 dB) are the same as category A values.
C) Category C: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5 dB) are higher than category A values.
D) 19.00–23.00 weekdays, 13.00–23.00 Saturdays and 07.00–23.00 Sundays.
11.34 The criteria for assessing the magnitude of predicted noise effects in relation to the
above construction noise thresholds, is detailed in Table 11.4.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 13 December 2014
Table 11.4: Construction Noise Magnitude of Effect
Construction noise level (dB)A Magnitude of
Effect A) 65dB threshold B) 70dB threshold C) 75dB threshold
≤65 ≤70 ≤75 Negligible
>65 – ≤70 >70 – ≤75 >75 - ≤80 Minor
>70 – ≤75 >75 – ≤80 >80 - ≤85 Moderate
>75 >80 >85 Major
11.35 Table 11.5 shows the derived construction noise threshold level for each existing
construction noise receptor, based on the measured daytime ambient noise level at the
closest baseline monitoring location.
Table 11.5: Construction Noise Receptor Locations
Receptor Number
Nearest Baseline
Measurement Location
Description
Measured Daytime
ambient noise level
(dB LAeq)
Category
Daytime noise
threshold (dB LAeq)
CN1 M4 Swansley Lane 40.9 A 65
CN2 M4 Meadowsweet Close
40.9 A 65
CN3 M4 Codling Walk 40.9 A 65
CN4 M5 Woodfield Lane 40.9 A 65
CN5 M5 School Lane 55.1 A 65
CN6 M5 Brockholt Road 55.1 A 65
CN7 M3 Swansley Wood Farm
53.2 A 65
CN8 M4 Cambourne Village College
46.4 A 65
CN9 M8 SCDC Offices 46.4 A 65
Construction Related Vibration
11.36 Groundborne vibration can result from construction works and may lead to perceptible
levels of vibration within nearby properties, which at higher levels can cause annoyance
to residents. In extreme cases, cosmetic or structural building damage can occur,
however vibration levels have to be very high for this effect to be manifested and such
cases are rare.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 14 December 2014
11.37 High vibration levels generally arise from ‘heavy’ construction works such as piling, deep
excavation, or dynamic ground compaction.
11.38 Annex E of British Standard BS 5228-2:2009+A1:2014 contains empirical formulae
derived by Hiller and Crabb (2000) from field measurements relating resultant peak
particle velocity (PPV) with a number of other parameters for vibratory compaction,
dynamic compaction, percussive and vibratory piling, the vibration of stone columns and
tunnel boring operations. These prediction equations a re based on the energy approach.
Use of these empirical formulae enables resultant PPV to be predicted and for some
activities (vibratory compaction, vibratory piling and vibrated stone columns) they can
provide an indicator of the probability of these levels of PPV being exceeded.
11.39 The empirical equations for predicting construction-related vibrations provide estimates
in terms of PPV, therefore the consequences of predicted levels in terms of human
perception and disturbance can be established through direct comparison with the BS
5228-2:2009+A1:2014 guidance vibration levels.
11.40 There is generally a separation distance of 50 metres between the closest potential
construction works and existing residential properties. Due to this separation distance it
is considered that vibration will not adversely affect receptors and has not been
assessed in further detail.
11.41 However it may be required once the exact construction phasing, equipment numbers,
location and types are determined for the development using the approach outlined
above to calculate the resultant vibration levels from heavy construction activities at the
sensitive receptors and identify any potential effect using the criteria detailed in
Table 11.6.
Table 11.6: Vibration Limits for Human Response
Vibration Limit, PPV
(mm/s) Interpreted Significance To HUMANS Effect Classification
≤0.14 Vibration unlikely to be perceptible None
0.14 to 0.3 Vibration might just be perceptible in the most sensitive situations for most vibration frequencies associated with construction
Negligible – Adverse
0.3 to 1.0 Vibration might just be perceptible in residential environments
Minor – Adverse
1.0 to ≤10.0 It is likely that vibration at this level in residential environments will cause complaint, but can be tolerated if prior warning and explanation has been given to residents
Moderate – Adverse
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 15 December 2014
Vibration Limit, PPV
(mm/s) Interpreted Significance To HUMANS Effect Classification
≥10 Vibration is likely to be intolerable for any more than a brief exposure to this level
Substantial - Adverse
Road Traffic Noise Assessment Methodology
11.42 Noise level increases due to increases in traffic volume and composition on surrounding
local roads were calculated in accordance with the methodology contained in Calculation
of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN). The significance of any predicted change in noise level
was then assessed in accordance with the criteria contained in the Design Manual for
Roads and Bridges (DMRB).
11.43 In accordance with the methodology contained in DMRB, Volume 11, Section 3, Chapter
3 an initial screening assessment was undertaken to assess whether there would be any
significant changes in traffic volumes as a result of the Proposed Development. Any
road links with a predicted increase in traffic volume of 25%, or a decrease of 20%,
were identified in the initial part of the assessment. Such changes in traffic volume
would correspond to a 1dB(A) change in noise level at the relevant road link, which is
regarded as imperceptible and therefore negligible with regard to effect significance. If
a development gives rise to traffic increases which are no greater than 25%, or
decreases no more than 20%, then guidance indicates that no further assessment needs
to be conducted (Highways Agency 2011).
11.44 Where road links were predicted to have an increase of greater than 25% or a decrease
of 20%, a noise level calculation should be undertaken following the procedure outlined
in CRTN.
11.45 The extent of the road network considered in the noise assessment was dictated by the
Transport Assessment provided by Royal HaskoningDHV the Transportation Consultants
for the project. Further details are provided in Chapter 9 - Transport and Access. The
transport study area was defined through scoping discussions and consultation with
SCDC and the HA on those roads and junctions that may experience a material increase
in traffic as a result of the development.
11.46 The Proposed Development will be phased, and therefore some parts of the Site will be
operational prior to 2028. However, baseline traffic flow data was not available for any
interim years at the time of this assessment and therefore only effects as a result of the
completed development, in 2028, were considered. This is a conservative approach as it
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 16 December 2014
considered the effect of the fully-built out Proposed Development on existing and
proposed receptors, accounting for traffic growth until 2028. Additional information is
provided in the limitations and assumptions section of this chapter.
The following dates were assumed in the traffic noise assessment:
2028 Base Flows;
2028 Base plus Development Flows.
11.47 Table 11.7 presents the 18-hour Annual Average Weekday Traffic (AAWT) flows, HGV
percentages and speeds used in the assessment which were provided by RHDHV, for the
following roads:
A1198 Ermine Street;
A1198 Caxton;
A1198 into Cambourne;
Cambourne Road North bound;
Cambourne Road South bound;
Broad Street;
School Lane;
A428;
Sheepfold Lane.
Table 11.7: Traffic Data Used in the Assessment
Road Link
2013 Base 2028 Without
Scheme 2028 With
Scheme
Speed (kph)
18-Hour AAWT Flow
% HGV
18-Hour AAWT Flow
% HGV 18-Hour
AAWT Flow
% HGV
A1198 Ermine Street 6,688 4.5 8,582 4.5 10,187 3.8 82
A1198 Caxton 2,244 2.3 2,879 2.3 2,879 2.3 56
A1198 into Cambourne 6,567 3.8 8,427 3.8 9,984 3.2 85
Cambourne Road northbound 9,170 2.3 11,768 2.3 16,415 1.6 56
Cambourne Road
southbound 9,300 3.8 11,934 3.8 15,782 2.9 53
Broad Street 6,005 2.5 7,706 2.5 8,624 2.2 43
School Lane 6,736 5.2 8,644 5.2 9,562 4.7 42
A428 (east of Caxton Gibbet Roundabout) 30,181 5.6 38,729 5.6 40,159 5.5 113
Sheepfold Lane 1,109 4.3 1,423 4.3 9,644 0.6 48
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 17 December 2014
11.48 The primary spine road of the development is represented by the Sheepfold Lane flows
(2028 with Scheme) highlighted in Table 11.7 and these 18-Hour AAWT Flows were
included in the noise model. The criteria determined in Table 11.8 relate to a relative
increase in noise in comparison to an existing noise leve l, such as the change due to
increased traffic on the road network. The thresholds for differentiating the criteria are
based on guidance in DMRB which suggests that in some studies, a change of 1dB in
road noise has been observed to cause annoyance in some residents and that 1dB is
generally accepted as the smallest perceptible change.
Table 11.8: Magnitude of Effect for Relative Change Due to Road Traffic
Change in noise level (dB) Magnitude of Effect
0.0 No change
0.1 – 2.9 Negligible
3.0 – 4.9 Minor
5.0 – 9.9 Moderate
10.0+ Major
11.49 Predictions of road traffic noise were undertaken for the baseline year with and without
the Proposed Development and are presented in Appendix 11.1 Figure A9 and
Figure A10 as LA10,18h noise contours.
Completed Development
Industrial Noise Assessment
11.50 At this stage in the design of the Proposed Development, specific details of any
externally mounted plant associated with residential, commercial or educational
establishments, for example refrigeration and ventilation purposes, are not available.
Noise from plant such as this is typically assessed in the context of BS 4142, which
involves a comparison of the rating level and the measured background (LA90) noise
level at potential receptor locations. Noise from externally mounted plant is relatively
simple to mitigate through the design measures, such as: equipment selection, location
of equipment, installation of attenuators or enclosure of equipment.
11.51 At the later detailed design stage, any externally-mounted plant should be specified
such that the daytime and night time background (LA90) noise levels are not exceeded
and where appropriate design target levels are to be 5dB below these background
levels.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 18 December 2014
11.52 At this stage of the application there is not specific data to determine the impact of any
noise associated with the proposed sports pitches and open recreational spaces.
Potential mitigation if required can be considered at the detailed application stage.
Suitability of Site for Residential Development
11.53 The Proposed Development includes a residential aspect. The suitability of the Site for
this use was assessed using the assessment methodology described below.
11.54 Guidance in BS8233:2014 Section 6.2.2 highlights the use of modelling tr affic noise and
the text is reproduced below:
“A Defra-commissioned study, prepared by TRL and
entitled “Method for Converting the UK Road Traffic
Noise Index LA10,18h to the EU Noise Indices for
Road Noise Mapping”, is the source of the method
promulgated in Highways Agency document HD
213/11 for estimating night-time noise levels from
the calculated or measured LA10,18h.
This study, however, also provides methods for the
conversion of LA10,18h index to other indices,
including various period LAeq,T values. Whilst these
conversions have been developed primarily for
compliance with strategic EU noise mapping
requirements, they provide one potential approach
to estimating the range of noise indicators which
are relevant to modelling traffic noise.
Otherwise, conversion of LA10 to LAeq can be
achieved by the (approximate) relationship: LAeq,16h
= LA10,18h – 2 dB. This is generally correct with a
95% confidence interval of ±2 dB for moderate and
heavy traffic flows.”
11.55 18-Hour Annual Average Daily Traffic (AAWT) flows and HGV percentages were provided
for the roads detailed in Table 11.7.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 19 December 2014
11.56 SoundPLAN noise modelling software was utilised to predict the noise from the 18-Hour
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AAWT) flows and HGV percentages in Table 11.7 for the
road network within the vicinity of the Site at existing and future sensitive receptors.
The calculation method takes account of air absorption, distance attenuation, barriers
and topography, and light downwind conditions from source to receptor. A three-
dimensional model was created using topographical data of the local area and plans and
elevations of the Site. The model incorporated the Proposed Development, nearby
residential dwellings, auxiliary buildings and the surrounding local road network.
11.57 The calculated noise levels generated by the modelling exercise are reported as
predicted LAeq,16hr noise levels for daytime (07:00 to 23:00) and L Aeq,8hr night time (23:00
to 07:00) periods at the noise sensitive receptors (NSRs), based on the inputted traffic
flow movements. The development including the newly formed NSRs is shown on
Figure 11.3 and classification was based on the zoning shown in Figure 4.7 Parameters
Plan.
11.58 The assessment of suitability for residential dwellings was underta ken considering the
internal ambient noise levels for dwellings recommended in BS 8233:2014 Table 4 and
reproduced in Table 11.9.
Table 11.9: Indoor Ambient Noise Levels for Dwellings (from BS 8233)
Activity Location 07:00 to 23:00 23:00 to 07:00
Resting Living Room 35dB LAeq,16hr -
Dining Dining Room/Area 40dB LAeq,16hr -
Sleeping (daytime resting) Bedroom 35dB LAeq,16hr 30dB LAeq,8hr
11.59 BS8233:2014 contains additional guidance on the appropriate use of the indoor ambient
noise levels for dwellings detailed in Table 11.9 above. These guidelines are
reproduced below:
The levels shown are based on the existing guidelines issued by the World
Health Organisation (WHO) and assume normal diurnal fluctuations in external
noise. In cases where local conditions do not follow a typical diurnal pattern, for
example on a road serving a port with high levels of traffic at certain times of
the night, an appropriate alternative period, e.g. 1 hour, may be used, but the
level should be selected to ensure consistency with the levels recommended
above;
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 20 December 2014
Where development is considered necessary or desirable, despite external noise
levels above WHO guidelines, the internal target levels may be relaxed by up to
5 dB and reasonable internal conditions still achieved.
These levels are based on annual average data and do not have to be achieved
in all circumstances. For example, it is normal to exclude occasional events, such
as fireworks night or New Year’s Eve;
Regular individual noise events (for example, scheduled aircraft or passing
trains) can cause sleep disturbance. A guideline value may be set in terms of SEL
or LAmax,F, depending on the character and number of events per night. Sporadic
noise events could require separate values;
If relying on closed windows to meet the guide values, there needs to be an
appropriate alternative ventilation that does not compromise the façade
insulation or the resulting noise level.
11.60 An assessment of the predicted indoor ambient noise levels at the completed Site were
compared with the BS8233 noise levels detailed in Table 11.9. The assessment
thresholds detailed in Table 11.10 for differentiating the criteria are based on guidance
in DMRB.
Table 11.10: Magnitude of Effect for Indoor Ambient Noise Levels
Change in noise level (dBA) Magnitude of Effect
0.0 – 2.9 Negligible
3.0 – 4.9 Minor
5.0 – 9.9 Moderate
10.0+ Major
11.61 The World Health Organisation (WHO) “Guidelines for community noise” provides a
range of noise targets aimed at protecting the well -being and health of communities.
These are aspirational targets and are highlighted in Table 11.11.
Table 11.11: WHO Guidelines for Community Noise
Specific Environment Typical Situation LAeq,T Time base
(hours)
Reasonable resting/ sleeping conditions
Serious annoyance, daytime
evening
55 16
Moderate annoyance, daytime evening
50 16
11.62 In a planning context BS8233:2014, paragraph 7.7.3.2 recognises that the WHO
aspirational noise targets are not achievable in all situations:
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 21 December 2014
“For traditional external areas that are used for amenity
space, such as gardens and patios, it is desirable that
the external noise level does not exceed 50 dB LAeq,T,
with an upper guideline value of 55 dB LAeq,T which
would be acceptable in noisier environments. However,
it is also recognized that these guideline values are not
achievable in all circumstances where development
might be desirable. In higher noise areas, such as city
centres or urban areas adjoining the strategic transport
network, a compromise between elevated noise levels
and other factors, such as the convenience of living in
these locations or making efficient use of land resources
to ensure development needs can be met, might be
warranted. In such a situation, development should be
designed to achieve the lowest practicable levels in
these external amenity spaces, but should not be
prohibited”.
11.63 An assessment of the predicted external daytime noise levels at the completed Site were
compared with the WHO recommended noise levels detailed in Table 11.11 above. The
assessment thresholds detailed in Table 11.12 for differentiating the criteria are based
on guidance in DMRB and are related to the excess above the upper threshold of 55dB
LAeq,16hr WHO criteria shown in Table 11.11.
Table 11.12: Magnitude of Effect for External Daytime Noise Levels
Change in noise level (dBA) Magnitude of Effect
0.0 – 2.9 Negligible
3.0 – 4.9 Minor
5.0 – 9.9 Moderate
10.0+ Major
11.64 The LAeq,16h (day) and LAeq,8h (night) were calculated at various receptor locations within
the proposed residential areas and the predicted noise levels were used to indicate the
likely internal noise level. Once the Proposed Development is built and operational,
noise levels would differ from those measured during the baseline noise survey, due to
changing road traffic and introduction of the development buildings to the Site.
Calculated noise levels derived from the noise modelling study were therefore used to
assess suitability for residential development.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 22 December 2014
11.65 Facade elements (e.g. glazing and ventilation apertures) can be specified to achieve
required internal noise levels, which are intended to ensure that adequate noise
reduction occurs to reduce direct and flanking transmission across facade elements.
Significance Criteria
11.66 In order to determine the significance of an impact, not only must the magnitude of
impact be determined, but the sensitivity of the receptors to the impact must also be
defined. Table 11.13 presents definitions of terms relating to the sensitivity of the
receptor.
Table 11.13: Definitions of Terms Relating to the Sensitivity of Receptors
Sensitivity Definition
High Hospitals (e.g. operating theatres or high dependency units), care homes at
night
Medium Residential accommodation, private gardens, hospital wards, care homes,
schools, universities, research facilities, national parks, during the day; and temporary holiday accommodation at all times
Low Offices, shops, outdoor amenity areas, long distance footpaths, doctors
surgeries, sports facilities and places of worship
Negligible Warehouses, light industry, car parks, agricultural land
11.67 For the identified noise sensitive receptors the sensitivity of each was determined and
presented in Table 11.14.
Table 11.14: Classification of Receptors Sensitivity
NSR Location Category Sensitivity
CN1 – CN8 Residential Accommodation, Rear
Gardens, College/School Medium
CN9 Existing Offices/Commercial Low
Newly Formed Residential Receptors
Residential Accommodation, Rear Gardens
Medium
Newly Formed Schools Schools, Universities Medium
Newly Formed Offices and Commercial
Offices, shops Low
Newly Formed Amenity (other than residential)
Outdoor amenity areas, sports facilities
Low
Newly Formed Warehouses
Warehouses, light industry, car parks
Negligible
11.68 The effect assessment matrix presented in Table 11.15 was used to determine the
effect significance based on receptor sensitivity and magnitude of impact.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 23 December 2014
Table 11.15: Effect Significance Matrix
Sensitivity
High Medium Low Negligible
Magnitude
Major Major Major Moderate Minor
Moderate Major Moderate Minor Minor
Minor Moderate Minor Minor Negligible
Negligible Minor Negligible Negligible Negligible
Limitations and Assumptions
11.69 The negligible threshold at residential receptors used in this assessment applies to noise
levels outside of a property. BS8233 states that a partly open window will offer up to 15
dBA attenuation against external noise, therefore on this basis the negligible threshold
at residential receptors would produce an internal noise level lower than the 30dB
criterion defined in BS8233 inside bedrooms during the night time period.
11.70 This assessment utilised traffic data provided by the Transportation Consultants for the
project for the years of assessment 2028. The Proposed Development will be phased,
and therefore some parts of the Site will be operational prior to 2028 (anticipated year
of completion). The approach adopted in this ES provided a conservative assessment as
it includes all development generated traffic and background growth, the effect of the
fully-built out Proposed Development on existing and proposed receptors, accounting for
traffic growth until 2028.
11.71 The assessment of site suitability for residential development was based on the West
Cambourne Parameters Plan provided as the following drawings.
West Cambourne Figure 4.1 Open Space
West Cambourne Figure 4.2 Landscape & Ecology
West Cambourne Figure 4.3 Tree Retention Plan
West Cambourne Figure 4.4 Development Areas
West Cambourne Figure 4.5 Building Heights
West Cambourne Figure 4.6 Access & Circulation
West Cambourne Figure 4.7 Parameters Plan
11.72 The assessment predicted noise levels for all receptor facades for the construction
phasing and for the completed development. External noise levels without and with the
development were predicted to establish the site suitability in the context of criteria
detailed in BS8233.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 24 December 2014
Baseline Conditions
11.73 In order to characterise the existing environment within the Study Area an attended
baseline noise survey was undertaken. Prior to conducting the baseline noise survey
SCDC were contacted via email and telephone on the 17 January 2014 to discuss the
proposed methodology and receptor monitoring locations. No direct response was
received. The scoping opinion document from SCDC and others was received after
completion of the baseline noise survey.
11.74 On attending the Site concerns over equipment security were identified. The Site was
considered to be ‘open land’ due to the public rights of way, the prox imity to the college
in the centre, the industrial zone located towards the east and north-east and the
commercial zone at the A1198/A428 roundabout. On this basis the baseline noise survey
was adapted and comprised a series of attended measurements.
11.75 The noise measurements were taken using a Brüel and Kjær Type 2250 Sound Level
Meter (SLM). The noise meter was fully calibrated, traceable to UKAS standards and
satisfies the requirements of BS EN 61672: 2003xix for ‘Type 1’ SLM. The noise
measurements were conducted with the SLM tripod mounted at a microphone height of
1.5 metres above ground level and 3.5 metres away from any reflecting surface other
than the ground, i.e. in free-field conditions. The calibration of the SLM was checked
before and after each survey period, with no change in sensitivity observed.
11.76 Attended noise measurements were typically conducted over a 1 hour period during the
daytime, using the Reference period (07:00hrs to 23:00hrs); and for a duration of 15
minutes during the night time Reference period (23:00hrs to 07:00hrs). The
measurements included the following noise indices:
LAeq – the equivalent continuous sound pressure level over the measurement
period. This parameter was standardised as pertinent for land use within
BS7445-2xx;
LAmax – the maximum sound pressure level occurring within the defined
measurement period;
LA90 – the sound pressure level exceeded for 90% of the measurement period
and is indicative of the background noise level; and
LA10 – the sound pressure level exceeded for 10% of the measurement period.
The LA10 index is used within the CRTN as an appropriate descriptor of traffic
noise.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 25 December 2014
11.77 The equivalent continuous sound pressure level (LAeq) is the conventional descriptor of
environmental noise and is defined below.
11.78 Noise measurements are normally taken with an A-weighting (denoted by a subscript
‘A’) to approximate the frequency response of the human ear.
11.79 Sensitive receptors, in the context of noise and vibration, are typically resi dential
premises but can also include schools, places of worship and noise/vibration sensitive
commercial premises.
11.80 The attended baseline noise survey was undertaken on 20 and 21 January 2014 during
daytime and night time periods at the NSR locations indicated on Figure 11.1, to
further inform the baseline noise assessment. Measurements were deemed to be taken
in accordance with guidance in BS7445.
11.81 The noise measurement results are detailed in Table 11.16 and Table 11.17
representing daytime and night time periods respectively, with observations made
regarding the character of noise and any specific noise sources audible during the
surveys.
11.82 The noise environment around the Proposed Development is largely governed by local
road traffic during the daytime reference period and to a slightly lesser extent at some
NSRs during the night time reference period.
Table 11.16: Baseline Noise Survey Summary – Daytime
Measure-ment
Position
Date and Time
Duration
Measured Noise Level Qualitative Noise Monitoring Comments
LAeq dB
LA90 dB
LA10 dB
LAmax dB
M1 21/01/14
13:20 01:00:00 59.9 48.1 63.6 76.1
Vehicles along A1198 and A428. Occasional aircraft, no obvious
plant noise from retail outlets. Occasional clunks/thuds.
M2 21/01/14
10:58 01:00:00 69.5 55.6 73.7 80.1
Free flowing traffic along A428, windpseed <2m/s. Intermittent whining.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 26 December 2014
Measure-ment
Position
Date and Time
Duration
Measured Noise Level Qualitative Noise Monitoring Comments LAeq
dB LA90
dB LA10
dB LAmax
dB
M3 21/01/14
14:30 01:00:00 53.2 48.0 52.4 75.8
Distant road traffic noise audible. Approximately 5°C, windpseed <3.5m/s. No obvious plant noise, vehicle doors opening/closing in car park of industrial unit.
M4 20/01/14
15:17 01:00:00 40.9 36 44 64.2
Temperature approximately 4°C. Sunny, windspeed <2m/s. Low background noise, occasional reverse bleeper, intermittent whining, distant road traffic noise, accelerating vehicles, “whooshing”.
M5 20/01/14
16:37 01:00:00 55.1 47.0 58.3 66.1
Road traffic noise main source. Regular flow along A1198, occasional aircraft.
M6 21/01/14
12:12 01:00:00 66.1 46.9 70.9 91.6
Regular traffic along A1198, “whooshing” and exhaust noise. Slight breeze, generally <2m/s, up to <3m/s.
M7 21/01/14
15:35 01:00:00 57.4 53.8 59.5 71.3
Road traffic noise along A428 dominant,
continuous “whooshing”. No significant noise from industrial unit, occasional vehicle into compound.
M8 21/01/14
09:54 01:00:00 46.4 40.4 45.5 69.5
Occasional vehicle accessing Cambourne College. Distant road traffic noise, exhaust noise, accelerating. Occasional light breeze, generally < 2m/s. Children’s voices at college. Aircraft.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 27 December 2014
Table 11.17: Baseline Noise Survey Summary – Night Time
Measure-ment
Position
Date and Time
Duration
Measured Noise Level Qualitative Noise Monitoring Comments
LAeq dB
LA90 dB
LA10 dB
LAmax dB
M1 21/01/14
02:35 00:15:00 48.2 32.0 51.9 63.8
Road traffic noise approaching roundabout, along A1198 and along A428. Clunks from approaching HGVs. No noise from retail outlets.
M2 21/01/14
03:01 00:15:00 57.7 35.0 59.3 77.4
HGVs passing along A428, occasional clunks and bangs, tyre road surface noise. Occasional bird song, animal calls audible during lulls in traffic. Low level whine audible intermittently during lulls.
M3 21/01/14
01:50 00:15:00 41.8 31.2 45.9 53.3
Distant road traffic noise – “whooshing”. Vehicles accelerating. No plant noise from farm, storage depot.
M4 21/01/14
00:11 00:15:00 42.3 33.1 45.5 53.9
Distant road traffic noise, still, approximately 1°C. Sirens in distance.
M5 21/01/14
00:50 00:15:00 39.7 27.4 42.7 57.2
Distant road traffic noise, still, approximately 1°C.
Occasional vehicle along A1198.
M6 21/01/14
01:25 00:15:00 49.5 28.4 44.3 75.3
Road traffic noise from occasional passing vehicle. Distant road traffic noise “whooshing”. Still.
M7 21/01/14
02:11 00:15:00 45.8 31.6 48.6 63.9
Road traffic noise along A428 dominant. No plant noise from depot, clunks from passing vehicles including HGVs.
M8 21/01/14
03:21 00:15:00 47.8 32.4 52.9 59.9
Road traffic noise along A428 main noise source – “whooshing”. Occasional bird calls. No obvious noise from Cambourne Business Park.
11.83 The results of the baseline noise survey indicate elevated levels of road traffic noise at
measurement location M2, M5 and M6 which was mainly affected by vehicle movements
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 28 December 2014
along the A428 and A1198 Ermine Street and A1198 into Cambourne during the daytime
and to a lesser extent in the night time period.
11.84 Location M1 was affected during the daytime by vehicle movements along the A1198
heading to and from the junction with the A428 roundabout and from vehicles using the
lay-by and access road heading towards Swansley Wood Farm. Location M7 was
influenced by road traffic noise along the A428 and occasional vehicles using the
storage facility opposite the monitoring location. Location M3 was affected by
occasional vehicles accessing Swansley Wood Farm yard and associated buildings.
11.85 Location M4 was predominantly influenced by distant road traffic noise from the
surrounding roads and during the daytime low level noise originating from the nearby
school/college.
11.86 Dominating noise sources at Location M8 during the daytime period included vehicles
accessing the school/college, noise from the adjacent business park and from road
traffic passing along the A428.
11.87 During the baseline noise survey an investigation was carried out to establish and
identify the origin of any significant noise sources within the study area. Qualitative
descriptors of the noise sources referred to in Table 11.16 and Table 11.17 as
‘clunks’, ‘bangs’, ‘intermittent whining’, ’reverse bleepers’ and ‘whooshing’ were not
considered to be at significant levels or duration in comparison with the road traffic and
were included to provide an insight to the ambient noise environment.
Likely Significant Effects
Effects of Construction Activities before Mitigation
11.88 Figure 6.1 - Phasing Plans were used to model the proposed Enabling Works and
subsequent construction Phase 1 to 7 of the Proposed Development. The potential for
sensitive receptors to be affected will depend on where within the Site the noisy activity
takes place, the nature of the activity and controls, and meteorological conditions.
11.89 The results of the construction noise calculations for each phase are presented in
Table 11.18 to Table 11.25 and as isopleth (contour) plots in Appendix 11.1,
Figure A1 to Figure A8. The tables show a comparison between the calculated level
and the construction noise limit for that receptor, which are listed in Table 11.5.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 29 December 2014
Table 11.18: Construction Assessment – Enabling Works
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN1 GF (NW)
F1 61.4 61.4
65 -3.6 -3.6
Negligible Negligible
CN2 GF (NW)
F1 F2
60.7 61.0 61.4
65 -4.3 -4.0 -3.6
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN3 GF (NW)
F1 61.5 61.8
65 -3.5 -3.2
Negligible Negligible
CN4 GF (W)
F1 F2
63.4 63.8 64.1
65 -1.6 -1.2 -0.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN5 GF (SE)
F1 44.4 44.9
65 -20.6 -20.1
Negligible Negligible
CN6 GF (N)
F1 57.9 57.9
65 -7.1 -7.1
Negligible Negligible
CN7 GF (NW) GF (SE)
62.0 63.5
65 -3.0 -1.5
Negligible Negligible
CN8
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF(NW) F1 F2
GF(SW) F1 F2
60.9 61.0 61.5 62.3 62.3 62.7 60.0 60.1 60.4 58.8 59.0 59.2
65
-4.1 -4.0 -3.5 -2.7 -2.7 -2.3 -5.0 -4.9 -4.6 -6.2 -6.0 -5.8
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN9 GF F1 F2
68.0 68.0 68.4
65 +3.0 +3.0 +3.4
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
11.90 The results in Table 11.18 demonstrate that predicted enabling works construction
noise levels for the conservative assessment during the daytime are generally below the
proposed BS5228 threshold limits for all construction noise sensitive receptor locations.
Construction activities were predicted to have a Negligible to Minor Adverse effect at
the existing Medium sensitivity receptor locations.
11.91 Effects of construction noise around the Site will vary according to which phase is being
constructed at any time. There will also be a risk of effect on newly constructed and
occupied properties within the Site from the construction activities associated with later
phases. These newly formed receptors are shown on Figure 11.3 and classification was
based on the zoning shown in Figure 4.7 Parameters Plan. Sensitivity of these
receptors is shown in Table 11.14.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 30 December 2014
Table 11.19: Construction Assessment – Phase 1
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN1 GF (NW)
F1 63.0 63.1
65 -2.0 -1.9
Negligible Negligible
CN2 GF (NW)
F1 F2
61.7 62.1 62.6
65 -3.3 -2.9 -2.4
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN3 GF (NW)
F1 62.3 62.7
65 -2.7 -2.3
Negligible Negligible
CN4 GF (W)
F1 F2
66.4 66.8 67.8
65 +1.4 +1.8 +2.8
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
CN5 GF (SE)
F1 59.6 59.9
65 -5.4 -5.1
Negligible Negligible
CN6 GF (N)
F1 61.2 61.3
65 -3.8 -3.7
Negligible Negligible
CN7 GF (NW) GF (SE)
60.5 61.2
65 -4.5 -3.8
Negligible Negligible
CN8
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF(NW) F1 F2
GF(SW) F1 F2
64.1 64.3 64.8 64.5 64.6 65.1 58.2 58.3 58.9 59.8 59.8 60.3
65
-0.9 -0.7 -0.2 -0.5 -0.4 +0.1 -6.8 -6.7 -6.1 -5.2 -5.2 -4.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Minor Adverse Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN9
GF
F1 F2
68.6
68.7 69.1
65
+3.6
+3.7 +4.1
Minor Adverse
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
11.92 The results in Table 11.19 demonstrate that predicted Phase 1 construction noise
levels for the conservative assessment during the daytime are generally below the
proposed BS5228 threshold limits for most construction noise sensitive receptor
locations. Construction activities were predicted to have a Negligible to Minor Adverse
effect at the existing medium sensitivity receptor locations during Phase 1 construction.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 31 December 2014
Table 11.20: Construction Assessment – Phase 2
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN1 GF (NW)
F1 61.9 62.0
65 -3.1 -3.0
Negligible Negligible
CN2 GF (NW)
F1 F2
61.0 61.2 61.7
65 -4.0 -3.8 -3.3
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN3 GF (NW)
F1 59.3 59.6
65 -5.7 -5.4
Negligible Negligible
CN4 GF (W)
F1 F2
58.0 58.2 58.9
65 -7.0 -6.8 -6.1
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN5 GF (SE)
F1 49.0 49.3
65 -16.0 -15.7
Negligible Negligible
CN6 GF (N)
F1
55.9
55.9 65
-9.1
-9.1
Negligible
Negligible
CN7 GF (SE) GF (NW)
66.3 58.3
65 +1.3 -6.7
Minor Adverse Negligible
CN8
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF(NW) F1 F2
GF(SW) F1 F2
66.0 66.3 66.8 65.6 65.9 66.4 56.3 56.4 56.9 60.4 60.6 61.0
65
+1.0 +1.3 +1.8 +0.6 +0.9 +1.4 -8.7 -8.6 -8.1 -4.6 -4.4 -4.0
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN9 GF F1 F2
61.4 61.9 62.7
65 -3.6 -3.1 -2.3
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (c)
F1 (NE) F2
F1 (NW F2
F1 (SW) F2
65.8 65.8 70.1 70.2 67.0 67.0
65
+0.8 +0.8 +5.1 +5.2 +2.0 +2.0
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Residential C (a)
GF (NW) F1
GF (NE) F1
GF (NW) F1
64.7 65.1 66.8 66.9 64.3 64.4
65
-0.3 +0.1 +1.8 +1.9 -0.7 -0.6
Negligible Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Negligible Negligible
Proposed Secondary
School
GF (W) F1 F2
60.8 61.0 61.6
65 -4.2 -4.0 -3.4
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Zone (iii) GF (NE)
F1 F2
56.5 58.1 59.3
65 -8.5 -6.9 -5.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible
11.93 The results in Table 11.20 demonstrate that predicted Phase 2 construction noise
levels for the conservative assessment during the daytime are generally below the
proposed BS5228 threshold limits for most construction noise sensitive receptor
locations. Construction activities were predicted to have a Negligible to Moderate
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 32 December 2014
Adverse effect at the medium sensitivity existing and newly constructed Phase 1
receptor locations during Phase 2 construction.
Table 11.21: Construction Assessment – Phase 3
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN1 GF (NW)
F1 62.5 62.7
65 -2.5 -2.3
Negligible Negligible
CN2 GF (NW)
F1 F2
64.5 64.7 65.1
65 -0.5 -0.3 +0.1
Negligible Negligible
Minor Adverse
CN3 GF (NW)
F1 62.4 62.9
65 -2.6 -2.1
Negligible Negligible
CN4
GF (W)
F1 F2
57.9
58.5 59.4
65
-7.1
-6.5 -5.6
Negligible
Negligible Negligible
CN5 GF (SE)
F1 46.5 47.1
65 -18.5 -17.9
Negligible Negligible
CN6 GF (N)
F1 55.4 55.4
65 -9.6 -9.6
Negligible Negligible
CN7 GF (SE) GF (NW)
71.5 63.8
65 +6.5 -1.2
Moderate Adverse Negligible
CN8
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF(NW) F1 F2
GF(SW) F1 F2
57.0 57.1 57.4 65.4 65.6 66.0 68.0 68.2 68.6 70.3 70.5 70.9
65
-8.0 -7.9 -7.6 +0.4 +0.6 +1.0 +3.0 +3.2 +3.6 +5.3 +5.5 +5.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
CN9 GF F1 F2
59.5 60.1 61.2
65 -5.5 -4.9 -3.8
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A1 (a)
GF (N) F1
68.4 68.5
65 +3.4 +3.5
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Residential A1 (b)
GF (W) F1 F2
GF (S) F1 F2
67.3 67.8 68.4 72.0 72.2 72.5
65
+2.3 +2.8 +3.4 +7.0 +7.2 +7.5
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Residential A2 (b)
F1 (N) F2
63.0 63.3
65 -2.0 -1.7
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (c)
F1 (NE) F2
43.8 43.9
65 -21.2 -21.1
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (d)
GF (NW) F1 F2
70.4 70.6 71.0
65 +5.4 +5.6 +6.0
Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Residential C (a) GF (NW)
F1 55.6 56.4
65 -9.4 -8.6
Negligible Negligible
Residential C (b)
GF (NE) F1
66.5 67.0
65 +1.5 +2.0
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 33 December 2014
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
Residential C (c)
GF (W) F1 F2
GF (N) F1 F2
60.7 61.2 61.8 66.6 66.9 67.4
65
-4.3 -3.8 -3.2 +1.6 +1.9 +2.4
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Proposed Secondary
School
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (N) F1 F2
61.8 61.9 62.2 70.2 70.3 70.7
65
-3.2 -3.1 -2.8 +5.2 +5.3 +5.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Proposed
Primary 2.2Ha
GF (NW) F1
F2 F1 (SW)
F2
63.0 63.2
63.7 70.9 71.1
65
-2.0 -1.8
-1.3 +5.9 +6.1
Negligible Negligible
Negligible Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Zone (iii) GF (NE)
F1 F2
53.5 54.9 56.3
65 -11.5 -10.1 -8.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible
11.94 The results in Table 11.21 demonstrate that predicted Phase 3 construction noise
levels for the conservative assessment during the daytime are generally below the
proposed BS5228 threshold limits for most construction noise sensitive receptor
locations. Construction activities were predicted to have a Negligible to Moderate
Adverse effect at the existing and newly constructed Phase 1 and 2 medium sensitivity
receptor locations during Phase 3 of construction.
Table 11.22: Construction Assessment – Phase 4
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN1 GF (NW)
F1 56.7 56.9
65 -8.3 -8.1
Negligible Negligible
CN2 GF (NW)
F1 F2
63.0 63.1 63.5
65 -2.0 -1.9 -1.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN3 GF (NW)
F1 64.6 65.0
65 -0.4 +0.0
Negligible Negligible
CN4 GF (W)
F1
F2
70.1 70.2
70.6
65 +5.1 +5.2
+5.6
Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Moderate Adverse
CN5 GF (SE)
F1 43.7 45.3
65 -21.3 -19.7
Negligible Negligible
CN6 GF (N)
F1 55.0 55.2
65 -10.0 -9.8
Negligible Negligible
CN7 GF (SE) GF (NW)
58.1 63.2
65 -6.9 -1.8
Negligible Negligible
CN8 GF (SW)
F1 F2
57.9 58.3 58.8
65 -7.1 -6.7 -6.2
Negligible Negligible Negligible
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 34 December 2014
Construction
Noise Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
GF (E) F1 F2
GF(NE) F1 F2
GF(NW) F1 F2
56.8 56.9 57.3 50.1 50.6 51.4 55.9 56.5 57.3
-8.2 -8.1 -7.7 -14.9 -14.4 -13.6 -9.1 -8.5 -7.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN9 GF (NW)
F1 F2
54.3 54.6 55.3
65 -10.7 -10.4 -9.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A1 (a)
GF (N) F1
GF (NE)
F1
54.5 54.7 37.4
37.5
65
-10.5 -10.3 -27.6
-27.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Negligible
Residential A1 (b)
GF (W) F1 F2
GF (S) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
57.4 57.9 58.6 51.1 52.8 54.7 36.2 36.3 36.3
65
-7.6 -7.1 -6.4 -13.9 -12.2 -10.3 -28.8 -28.7 -28.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (a)
F1 (SW) F2
55.1 55.8
65 -9.9 -9.2
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (b)
F1 (N) F2
51.9 52.3
65 -13.1 -12.7
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (c)
F1 (NE) F2
36.0 36.0
65 -29.0 -29.0
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2
(d)
GF (SW) F1 F2
56.4 56.9 58.0
65 -8.6 -8.1 -7.0
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential B (a)
F1 (E) 48.1 65 -16.9 Negligible
Residential C (a)
GF (S) F1
GF (NW) F1
F1 (E)
44.3 44.4 55.9 56.6 71.5
65
-20.7 -20.6 -9.1 -8.4 +6.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Moderate Adverse
Residential C (b)
GF (NE) F1
63.2 63.5
65 -1.8 -1.5
Negligible Negligible
Residential C (c)
GF (N) F1 F2
GF (W) F1 F2
60.7 61.0 61.7 51.4 53.1 54.9
65
-4.3 -4.0 -3.3 -13.6 -11.9 -10.1
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential D (a)
GF (SW) F1
44.3 44.4
65 -20.7 -20.6
Negligible Negligible
Residential D (b)
GF (SE) F1 F2
GF (NW) F1 F2
57.1 58.0 58.8 66.9 67.0 67.4
65
-7.9 -7.0 -6.2 +1.9 +2.0 +2.4
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Proposed Secondary
GF (E) F1
61.2 61.3
65 -3.8 -3.7
Negligible Negligible
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 35 December 2014
Construction
Noise Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
School F2 GF (SW)
F1 F2
61.6 72.3 72.4 72.6
-3.4 +7.3 +7.4 +7.6
Negligible Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Proposed Primary 2.2Ha
GF (NW) F1 F2
57.3 57.4 58.1
65 -7.7 -7.6 -6.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Proposed Primary 2.9Ha
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF (S) F1 F2
60.7 60.9 61.4 57.4 57.7 58.2
65
-4.3 -4.1 -3.6 -7.6 -7.3 -6.8
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Zone (iii) GF (NE)
F1
F2
48.8 50.0
50.7
65 -16.2 -15.0
-14.3
Negligible Negligible
Negligible
11.95 The results in Table 11.22 demonstrate that predicted Phase 4 construction noise
levels for the conservative assessment during the daytime are generally below the
proposed BS5228 threshold limits for most construction noise sensitive receptor
locations. Construction activities were predicted to have a Negligible to Moderate
Adverse effect at the existing and newly constructed Phase 1, 2 and 3 medium
sensitivity receptor locations during Phase 4 of construction.
Table 11.23: Construction Assessment – Phase 5
Construction
Noise Receptor
Floor
and Façade
Direction
Predicted
Facade Noise Level
(dBA)
BS5228
Threshold Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN1 GF (NW)
F1 63.1 63.2
65 -1.9 -1.8
Negligible Negligible
CN2 GF (NW)
F1 F2
68.8 68.8 69.2
65 +3.8 +3.8 +4.2
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
CN3 GF (NW)
F1 68.4 68.8
65 +3.4 +3.8
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
CN4 GF (W)
F1 F2
67.6 67.9 68.3
65 +2.6 +2.9 +3.3
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
CN5 GF (SE)
F1 63.3 64.1
65 -1.7 -0.9
Negligible Negligible
CN6 GF (N)
F1 57.8 57.8
65 -7.2 -7.2
Negligible Negligible
CN7 GF (NW) GF (SE)
66.2 67.3
65 +1.2 +2.3
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 36 December 2014
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN8
GF (SW) F1 F2
GF (E) F1 F2
GF(NE) F1 F2
GF(NW) F1 F2
65.4 65.5 65.9 61.3 61.5 61.9 54.0 55.4 56.8 58.9 59.4 60.0
65
+0.4 +0.5 +0.9 -3.7 -3.5 -3.1 -11.0 -9.6 -8.2 -6.1 -5.6 -5.0
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN9 GF (NW)
F1
F2
58.1 58.3
58.9
65 -6.9 -6.7
-6.1
Negligible Negligible
Negligible
Residential A1 (a)
GF (NE) F1
GF (N) F1
38.2 38.2 48.4 48.7
65
-26.8 -26.8 -16.6 -16.3
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A1 (b)
GF (S) F1 F2
GF (W) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
55.6 56.7 58.2 58.4 59.3 60.1 38.0 38.1 38.1
65
-9.4 -8.3 -6.8 -6.6 -5.7 -4.9 -27.0 -26.9 -26.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (a)
F1 (SW) F2
59.2 60.0
65 -5.8 -5.0
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (b)
F1 (N) F2
51.8 54.2
65 -13.2 -10.8
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (c)
F1 (NE) F2
37.9 37.9
65 -27.1 -27.1
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (d)
GF (SW) F1 F2
62.7 63.3 64.2
65 -2.3 -1.7 -0.8
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential B (a)
F1 (E) 53.2 65 -11.8 Negligible
Residential B (b)
GF (SE) F1
55.0 57.0
65 -10.0 -8.0
Negligible Negligible
Residential C (a)
GF (NW) F1
GF (S) F1
F1 (E)
41.2 42.9 60.3 60.9 64.0
65
-23.8 -22.1 -3.7 -3.1 -1.0
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential C (b)
GF (NE) F1
65.6 66.1
65 +0.6 +1.1
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Residential C (c)
GF (W) F1 F2
GF (N) F1 F2
49.5 50.0 50.5 65.6 66.0 66.5
65
-15.5 -15.0 -14.5 +0.6 +1.0 +1.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Residential D (a)
GF (SW) F1
41.7 41.8
65 -23.3 -23.2
Negligible Negligible
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 37 December 2014
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
Residential D (b)
GF (SE) F1 F2
GF (NW) F1 F2
61.9 62.5 63.0 61.8 62.0 62.6
65
-3.1 -2.5 -2.0 -3.2 -3.0 -2.4
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential G (a)
GF (W) F1
40.2 40.3
65 -24.8 -24.7
Negligible Negligible
Residential G (b)
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF (SE) F1 F2
61.6 61.7 62.2 63.1 63.5 64.1
65
-3.4 -3.3 -2.8 -1.9 -1.5 -0.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Proposed Secondary
School
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (SW) F1 F2
71.7 71.8 72.1 61.6 61.9 62.3
65
+6.7 +6.8 +7.1 -3.4 -3.1 -2.7
Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Proposed Primary 2.2Ha
GF (NW) F1 F2
58.4 58.5 59.0
65 -6.6 -6.5 -6.0
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Proposed Primary 2.9Ha
GF (S) F1 F2
62.9 63.4 63.8
65 -2.1 -1.6 -1.2
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Zone (iii) GF (NE)
F1 F2
52.2 53.4 54.9
65 -12.8 -11.6 -10.1
Negligible Negligible Negligible
11.96 The results in Table 11.23 demonstrate that predicted Phase 5 construction noise
levels for the conservative assessment during the daytime are generall y below the
proposed BS5228 threshold limits for most construction noise sensitive receptor
locations. Construction activities were predicted to have a Negligible to Moderate
Adverse effect at the existing and newly constructed Phase 1, 2, 3 and 4 medium
sensitivity receptor locations during Phase 5 of construction.
Table 11.24: Construction Assessment – Phase 6
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN1 GF (NW)
F1 57.9 58.2
65 -7.1 -6.8
Negligible Negligible
CN2 GF (NW)
F1 F2
60.8 61.0 61.5
65 -4.2 -4.0 -3.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN3 GF (NW)
F1 61.8 62.2
65 -3.2 -2.8
Negligible Negligible
CN4 GF (W)
F1 F2
55.0 55.4 56.1
65 -10.0 -9.6 -8.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 38 December 2014
Construction
Noise Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN5 GF (SE)
F1 42.5 44.1
65 -22.5 -20.9
Negligible Negligible
CN6 GF (N)
F1 50.4 50.4
65 -14.6 -14.6
Negligible Negligible
CN7 GF (NW) GF (SE)
66.4 52.2
65 +1.4 -12.8
Minor Adverse Negligible
CN8
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (SW) F1 F2
GF(NW) F1 F2
GF(NE) F1 F2
54.3 54.5 54.9 55.2 55.4 55.8 58.6 60.0 61.1
59.0 60.0 60.7
65
-10.7 -10.5 -10.1 -9.8 -9.6 -9.2 -6.4 -5.0 -3.9
-6.0 -5.0 -4.3
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN9 GF (NW)
F1 F2
55.1 55.9 56.7
65 -9.9 -9.1 -8.3
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A1 (a)
GF (N) F1
GF (NE) F1
66.6 66.9 44.3 44.4
65
+1.6 +1.9 -20.7 -20.6
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Negligible Negligible
Residential A1 (b)
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF (W) F1 F2
GF (S) F1 F2
40.6 40.6 40.7 68.8 69.2 69.6 51.0 53.2 55.0
65
-24.4 -24.4 -24.3 +3.8 +4.2 +4.6 -14.0 -11.8 -10.0
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (a)
F1 (SW) F2
51.3 52.0
65 -13.7 -13.0
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (b)
F1 (N) F2
53.5 53.1
65 -11.5 -11.9
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (c)
F1 (NE) F2
40.5 40.5
65 -24.5 -24.5
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (d)
GF (SW) F1 F2
53.8 54.2 54.8
65 -11.2 -10.8 -10.2
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential B (a)
F1 (E) 43.6 65 -21.4 Negligible
Residential B (b)
GF (SE) F1
55.1 55.5
65 -9.9 -9.5
Negligible Negligible
Residential B (e)
GF (NW) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF (SW) F1 F2
61.9 62.4 63.1 61.5 62.0 62.6 56.3 57.2 53.0
65
-3.1 -2.6 -1.9 -3.5 -3.0 -2.4 -8.7 -7.8 -12.0
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 39 December 2014
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
Residential C (a)
GF (NW) F1
GF (S) F1
F1 (E)
45.1 47.0 37.0 37.1 49.1
65
-19.9 -18.0 -28.0 -27.9 -15.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential C (b)
GF (NE) F1
55.2 54.6
65 -9.8 -10.4
Negligible Negligible
Residential C (c)
GF (N) F1 F2
GF (W) F1 F2
52.9 54.8 56.8 48.2 49.9 51.7
65
-12.1 -10.2 -8.2 -16.8 -15.1 -13.3
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential D
(a)
GF (SW)
F1
39.9
39.9 65
-25.1
-25.1
Negligible
Negligible
Residential D (b)
GF (SE) F1 F2
GF (NW) F1 F2
53.2 54.4 55.5 55.5 56.3 57.3
65
-11.8 -10.6 -9.5 -9.5 -8.7 -7.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential E (a)
GF (W) F1
42.8 42.9
65 -22.2 -22.1
Negligible Negligible
Residential E (b)
GF (SE) F1 F2
57.0 57.8 58.5
65 -8.0 -7.2 -6.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential G (a)
GF (W) F1
42.8 42.9
65 -22.2 -22.1
Negligible Negligible
Residential G (b)
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF (SE) F1 F2
67.6 67.8 68.1 58.1 58.9 59.5
65
+2.6 +2.8 +3.1 -6.9 -6.1 -5.5
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Proposed Secondary
School
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (SW) F1 F2
63.4 63.5 63.8 39.7 39.7 39.7
65
-1.6 -1.5 -1.2 -25.3 -25.3 -25.3
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Proposed Primary 2.2Ha
GF (NW) F1 F2
67.0 67.3 67.8
65 +2.0 +2.3 +2.8
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Proposed Primary 2.9Ha
GF (S) F1 F2
54.7 55.3 55.8
65 -10.3 -9.7 -9.2
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Zone (iii) GF (NE)
F1 F2
40.8 41.9 43.5
65 -24.2 -23.1 -21.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible
11.97 The results in Table 11.24 demonstrate that predicted Phase 6 construction noise
levels for the conservative assessment during the daytime are generally below the
proposed BS5228 threshold limits for most construction noise sensitive receptor
locations. Construction activities were predicted to have a Negligible to Minor Adverse
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 40 December 2014
effect at the existing and newly constructed Phase 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 medium sensitivity
receptor locations during Phase 6 of construction.
Table 11.25: Construction Assessment – Phase 7
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN1 GF (NW)
F1 63.0 63.1
65 -2.0 -1.9
Negligible Negligible
CN2 GF (NW)
F1 F2
68.8 68.9 69.3
65 +3.8 +3.9 +4.3
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
CN3 GF (NW)
F1 66.4 66.6
65 +1.4 +1.6
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
CN4 GF (W)
F1 F2
58.0 58.3 59.0
65 -7.0 -6.7 -6.0
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN5 GF (SE)
F1 50.9 52.0
65 -14.4 -13.0
Negligible Negligible
CN6 GF (N)
F1 50.9 51.2
65 -14.1 -13.8
Negligible Negligible
CN7 GF (NW) GF (SE)
53.5 52.8
65 -11.5 -12.2
Negligible Negligible
CN8
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF(SW) F1 F2
GF(NW) F1 F2
61.4 61.6 62.0 51.7 53.3 55.0 64.7 64.8 65.2
50.8 51.2 51.8
65
-3.6 -3.4 -3.0 -13.3 -11.7 -10.0 -0.3 -0.2 +0.2
-14.2 -13.8 -13.2
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Minor Adverse
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN9 GF (NW)
F1 F2
55.9 56.3 56.9
65 -9.1 -8.7 -8.1
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A1 (a)
GF (NE) F1
GF (N) F1
36.3 36.3 50.2 50.2
65
-28.7 -28.7 -14.8 -14.8
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential A1 (b)
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF (W) F1 F2
GF (S) F1
F2
35.3 35.3 35.3 53.3 54.8 56.2 46.3 49.1
52.3
65
-29.7 -29.7 -29.7 -11.7 -10.2 -8.8 -18.7 -15.9
-12.8
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Negligible
Residential A2 (a)
F1 (SW) F2
54.2 55.9
65 -10.8 -9.1
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (b)
F1 (N) F2
50.0 52.2
65 -15.0 -12.8
Negligible Negligible
Residential A2 (c)
F1 (NE) F2
35.3 35.4
65 -29.7 -29.6
Negligible Negligible
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 41 December 2014
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
Residential A2 (d)
GF (SW) F1 F2
62.2 62.8 63.7
65 -2.8 -2.2 -1.3
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential B (a)
F1 (E) 53.5 65 -11.5 Negligible
Residential B (b)
GF (SE) F1
46.2 48.2
65 -18.8 -16.8
Negligible Negligible
Residential B (e)
GF (NW) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF (SW)
F1 F2
48.9 50.5 52.5 48.9 50.3 51.4 51.0
51.7 52.3
65
-16.1 -14.5 -12.5 -16.1 -14.7 -13.6 -14.0
-13.3 -12.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Negligible Negligible
Residential C (a)
GF (E) F1
GF (NW) F1
F1 (S)
47.5 41.4 44.4 36.5 36.5
65
-17.5 -23.6 -20.6 -28.5 -28.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential C (b)
GF (NE) F1
50.7 52.0
65 -14.3 -13.0
Negligible Negligible
Residential C (c)
GF (W) F1 F2
GF (N) F1 F2
50.2 52.0 53.5 49.9 51.5 53.1
65
-14.8 -13.0 -11.5 -15.1 -13.5 -11.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential D (a)
GF (SW) F1
38.8 38.9
65 -26.2 -26.1
Negligible Negligible
Residential D (b)
GF (NW) F1 F2
GF (SE) F1 F2
57.5 57.8 58.4 45.4 46.2 46.9
65
-7.5 -7.2 -6.6 -19.6 -18.8 -18.1
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential E (a)
GF (NW) F1
GF (NE) F1
66.8 67.0 53.5 54.5
65
+1.8 +2.0 -11.5 -10.5
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Negligible Negligible
Residential E (b)
GF (SE) F1 F2
50.4 51.8 53.1
65 -14.6 -13.2 -11.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential F (a)
GF (N) F1 F2
45.5 46.0 46.1
65 -19.5 -19.0 -18.9
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Residential G (a)
GF (W) F1
40.4 40.4
65 -24.6 -24.6
Negligible Negligible
Residential G (b)
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF (SE) F1 F2
67.0 67.2 67.7 59.3 59.4 59.8
65
+2.0 +2.2 +2.7 -5.7 -5.6 -5.2
Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Adverse
Negligible Negligible Negligible
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 42 December 2014
Construction Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade Direction
Predicted Facade
Noise Level (dBA)
BS5228 Threshold
Level (dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
Residential H
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (S) F1 F2
GF (SE) F1 F2
53.4 53.9 54.4 54.6 55.0 55.6 52.4 53.0 53.5
65
-11.6 -11.1 -10.6 -10.4 -10.0 -9.4 -12.6 -12.0 -11.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Proposed Secondary
School
GF (SW) F1 F2
GF (E) F1
F2
43.0 43.0 43.0 70.7 70.8
71.1
65
-22.0 -22.0 -22.0 +5.7 +5.8
+6.1
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse
Moderate Adverse
Proposed Primary 2.2Ha
GF (NW) F1 F2
55.4 55.9 56.5
65 -9.6 -9.1 -8.5
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Proposed Primary 2.9Ha
GF (S) F1 F2
49.9 51.2 52.6
65 -15.1 -13.8 -12.4
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Zone (iii) GF (NE)
F1 F2
49.2 50.7 52.6
65 -15.8 -14.3 -12.4
Negligible Negligible Negligible
11.98 The results in Table 11.25 demonstrate that predicted Phase 7 construction noise
levels for the conservative assessment during the daytime are generally below the
proposed BS5228 threshold limits for most construction noise sensitive receptor
locations. Construction activities were predicted to have a Negligible to Moderate
Adverse effect at the existing and newly constructed Phase 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 medium
sensitivity receptor locations during Phase 7 of construction.
11.99 The approach assumed that all construction equipment would be operating close to the
Site boundary, which would not necessarily occur at all times, and this was the refore a
conservative (worst-case) assessment. However, the adoption of general good practice
construction noise management measures, typically Referred to as Best Practical Means
(BPM), is recommended and is discussed in the mitigation measures section of this
chapter.
Effects of Road Traffic before Mitigation
11.100 Noise level increases due to increases in traffic volume and composition on surrounding
local roads were calculated in accordance with the methodology contained in Calculation
of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN). The significance of any predicted change in noise level
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 43 December 2014
was then assessed in accordance with the criteria contained in the Design Manual for
Roads and Bridges (DMRB).
11.101 The predicted increase in LA10,18h noise level at receptors was calculated using the CRTN
method. Table 11.26 shows the predicted road traffic noise levels from the baseline
and with-development and the relative increase in road traffic noise level . Noise
isopleth (contour plots) are shown in Appendix 11.1, Figure A9 and Figure A10.
Table 11.26: Road Traffic Assessment
Traffic Noise
Receptor
Floor and
Façade
Direction
Baseline Façade Noise Level
(L10,18h dBA)
Predicted Development Facade Noise
Level (L10,18h dBA)
Difference (dBA)
Effect
CN1 GF (NW)
F1 51.5 53.3
47.6 48.6
-3.9 -4.7
Negligible Negligible
CN2 GF (NW)
F1 F2
50.1 51.5 52.3
46.7 47.5 48.2
-3.4 -4.0 -4.1
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN3 GF (NW)
F1 50.4 51.5
47.5 48.2
-2.9 -3.3
Negligible Negligible
CN4 GF (W)
F1 F2
51.5 52.4 53.2
50.8 51.7 52.5
-0.7 -0.7 -0.7
Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN5 GF (SE)
F1 61.7 63.5
62.1 63.9
+0.4 +0.4
Negligible Adverse Negligible Adverse
CN6 GF (N)
F1 49.8 49.9
49.1 50.1
-0.7 +0.2
Negligible Negligible Adverse
CN7 GF (NW) GF (SE)
53.4 50.7
47.0 55.3
-6.4 +4.6
No change Minor Adverse
CN8
GF (E) F1 F2
GF (NE) F1 F2
GF(NW) F1 F2
GF(SW) F1 F2
51.2 52.8 53.6 55.1 56.4 57.2 52.7 53.8 54.5 44.1 45.3 46.3
44.6 45.8 47.1 48.0 49.3 50.2 48.3 49.1 49.9 42.9 43.8 44.7
-6.6 -7.0 -6.5 -7.1 -7.1 -7.0 -4.4 -4.7 -4.6 -1.2 -1.5 -1.6
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
CN9 GF F1 F2
56.1 58.0 58.9
48.9 49.8 50.7
-7.2 -8.2 -8.2
Negligible Negligible Negligible
11.102 The results of the assessment show that a maximum increase of +4.6dB due to the
Proposed Development is predicted at existing nearby medium sensitivity receptor CN7,
which is a Minor Adverse effect, according to the criteria defined in Table 11.8. A
Negligible Adverse effect is predicted for receptors CN5 and CN6, and for all other
assessed receptor locations there is a predicted Negligible effect.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 44 December 2014
11.103 The overall finding is that the existing receptors around the Site are generally
unaffected by noise from road traffic, with a Minor Adverse effect predicted at receptor
CN7 Swansley Wood Farm arising from the proximity to the proposed spine road
through the development. Due to the minor significance of the effect and the relatively
small geographical extent, it is not deemed that specific mitigation is required in order
to reduce the effect.
Completed Development
Site Suitability for Residential Development
11.104 In addition to considering the effect of the Proposed Development on existing sensitive
receptor locations, an assessment was also undertaken to predic t noise effect at those
proposed residential dwellings within the Site which will be occupied in 2028.
11.105 BS8233:2014 demonstrates that the use of standard thermal glazing in residential units
will reduce road traffic noise by 33dB Rw from an external free field noise level. A
compressible airtight seal can also be fitted to the closing surfaces. Where suitable
sound attenuating trickle vents are also incorporated into the thermal glazing units, a
33dB reduction of road traffic noise should be achieved.
11.106 The noise level for each residential development phase was predicted using SoundPLAN
based on the parameter plans. The noise level for each receiver floor and façade
direction (where indicated) was calculated and is shown in Table 11.27 to Table
11.34. Noise contour plots for the completed development are provided in Appendix
11.1 Figure A11 to A12; and in Figure A17 for the baseline year 2028 without
development. For some phases there are duplicated façade directions included
representing a closer proximity of the proposed building to a noise source i.e. a road.
11.107 The predicted external noise level was calculated as an internal noise level using
guidance in BS8233 and specified in paragraph 11.105 above for typical sound reduction
of building elements. The internal noise level was compared with the BS8233 guidance
noise level of 35dB LAeq,16hr for resting in Living Rooms during the daytime period, and
the BS8233 guidance noise level of 30dB LAeq,8hr for the night time period.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 45 December 2014
Table 11.27: Site Suitability for Residential Development Assessment – Zone A1
Zone and Direction
of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,16h dBA)
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,8h dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predic-ted
Internal Night time
Noise Level (dBA)
BS8233 Daytime Criteria
Met (35dB
LAeq,16h)
BS8233 Night time
Criteria Met
(30dB LAeq,8h)
A1(a) N GF F1
60.3 61.6
52.5 53.8
24.3 25.6
16.5 17.8
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
A1(a) NE GF F1
65.3 67.1
57.3 58.9
29.3 22.9
21.3 22.9
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
A1(b) W GF F1 F2
55.6 56.3 56.9
48.1 48.8 49.3
<20 20.3 20.9
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
A1(b) NE GF F1 F2
65.3 66.9 67.7
57.3 58.8 59.5
29.3 30.9 31.7
21.3 22.8 23.5
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
A1(b) S GF F1 F2
64.6 64.6 64.5
56.7 56.6 56.5
28.6 28.6 28.5
20.7 20.6 20.6
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
11.108 Table 11.27 shows the Zone A1 predicted internal noise levels. The BS8233 daytime
internal noise level criterion is met for all facades and receiver floors using the sound
insulation value of 33dB Rw detailed above. The predicted night time internal noise
levels meet the BS8233 night time internal noise level criteria of 30dB L Aeq in bedrooms
at some of the receiver floors and facades.
Table 11.28: Site Suitability for Residential Development Assessment- Zone A2
Zone and Direction
of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,16h dBA)
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,8h dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predic-ted
Internal Night time
Noise Level (dBA)
BS8233 Daytime Criteria
Met (35dB
LAeq,16h)
BS8233 Night time
Criteria Met
(30dB LAeq,8h)
A2(a) SW F1 F2
41.8 43.2
35.1 36.4
<20 <20
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
A2(b) N F1 F2
46.1 48.0
39.2 40.9
<20 <20
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
A2 (c) NE F1 F2
67.7 68.4
59.6 60.2
31.7 32.4
23.6 24.2
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
A2 (d) SW GF F1
F2
41.5 42.4
43.5
42.8 43.8
44.9
<20 <20
<20
<20 <20
<20
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
11.109 Table 11.28 shows the Zone A2 predicted internal noise levels. The BS8233 daytime
internal noise level criterion is met for all facades and receiver floors using the sound
insulation value of 33dB Rw. The predicted night time internal noise levels meet the
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 46 December 2014
BS8233 night time internal noise level criteria of 30dB LAeq in bedrooms at some of the
receiver floors and facades in the direction of the A428.
Table 11.29: Site Suitability for Residential Development Assessment- Zone B
Zone and Direction
of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,16h dBA)
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,8h dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predic-ted
Internal Night time
Noise Level (dBA)
BS8233 Daytime Criteria
Met (35dB
LAeq,16h)
BS8233 Night time
Criteria Met
(30dB LAeq,8h)
B(a) E F1 44.7 37.8 <20 <20 Yes Yes
B(b) SE GF F1
41.8 43.1
35.0 36.3
<20 <20
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
B(e) SW GF F1 F2
49.6 50.1 50.6
42.5 43.0 43.4
<20 <20 <20
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
B(e) NE GF F1 F2
50.9 51.6 52.1
43.7 44.3 44.8
<20 <20 <20
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
B (e) NW GF F1 F2
65.9 66.4 66.3
57.9 58.3 58.2
29.9 30.4 30.3
21.9 22.3 22.2
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
11.110 Table 11.29 presents the Zone B predicted internal noise levels. The BS8233 daytime
internal noise level criterion is met for all facades and receiver floors using the
conservative sound insulation value of 33dB Rw. The predicted night time internal noise
levels meet the BS8233 night time internal noise level criteria of 30dB L Aeq in bedrooms
at all of the receiver floors of the assessed façades.
Table 11.30: Site Suitability for Residential Development Assessment- Zone C
Zone and Direction
of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,16h dBA)
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,8h dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predicted Internal
Night time Noise Level (dBA)
BS8233 Daytime Criteria
Met (35dB
LAeq,16h)
BS8233 Night time
Criteria Met
(30dB LAeq,8h)
C(a) S GF F1
53.7 55.0
46.3 47.6
<20 <20
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
C(a) NW GF F1
58.3 59.0
50.6 51.3
22.3 23.0
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
C(a) E F1 46.9 39.9 <20 <20 Yes Yes
C(b) NE GF F1
45.3 46.1
38.4 39.2
<20 <20
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
C(c) W GF F1 F2
62.5 62.7 62.9
54.6 54.9 55.0
26.5 26.7 26.9
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
C(c) N GF F1 F2
48.6 49.2 49.7
41.5 42.1 42.6
<20 <20 <20
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 47 December 2014
11.111 Table 11.30 shows the Zone C predicted internal noise levels. The BS8233 daytime
internal noise level criterion is met for all facades and receiver floors using the sound
insulation value of 33dB Rw. The predicted night time internal noise levels meet the
BS8233 night time internal noise level criteria of 30dB L Aeq in bedrooms at the receiver
floors at all assessed façades.
Table 11.31: Site Suitability for Residential Development Assessment- Zone D
Zone and Direction
of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,16h
dBA)
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,8h
dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predicted Internal
Night time Noise Level (dBA)
BS8233 Daytime Criteria
Met (35dB
LAeq,16h)
BS8233 Night time
Criteria Met
(30dB LAeq,8h)
D(a) SW GF F1
58.4 59.2
50.7 51.5
22.3 23.2
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
D(b) NW GF F1 F2
45.4 46.5 47.5
38.5 39.5 40.4
<20 <20 <20
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
D(b) SE GF F1 F2
64.3 64.4 64.3
56.3 56.4 56.3
28.3 28.4 28.3
20.3 20.4 20.3
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
11.112 Table 11.31 presents the Zone D predicted internal noise levels. The BS8233 daytime
internal noise level criterion is met for al l facades and receiver floors using the sound
insulation value of 33dB Rw. The predicted night time internal noise levels meet the
BS8233 night time internal noise level criteria of 30dB L Aeq in bedrooms at the receiver
floors at the assessed façades.
Table 11.32: Site Suitability for Residential Development Assessment- Zone E
Zone and Direction
of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,16h dBA)
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,8h dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predicted Internal
Night time Noise Level (dBA)
BS8233 Daytime Criteria
Met (35dB
LAeq,16h)
BS8233 Night time
Criteria Met
(30dB LAeq,8h)
E(a) NE GF F1
46.3 47.5
39.3 40.5
<20 <20
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
E(a) NW GF F1
46.1 47.5
39.2 40.4
<20 <20
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
E(b) SE GF F1 F2
54.9 55.3 55.7
47.4 47.9 48.2
<20 <20 <20
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
11.113 Table 11.32 shows the Zone E predicted internal noise levels. The BS8233 daytime
internal noise level criterion is met for a ll facades and receiver floors using the sound
insulation value of 33dB Rw. The predicted night time internal noise levels meet the
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 48 December 2014
BS8233 night time internal noise level criteria of 30dB L Aeq in bedrooms at the receiver
floors for all assessed façades.
Table 11.33: Site Suitability for Residential Development Assessment- Zone F
Zone and Direction
of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,16h dBA)
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,8h dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predicted Internal
Night time Noise Level (dBA)
BS8233 Daytime Criteria
Met (35dB
LAeq,16h)
BS8233 Night time
Criteria Met
(30dB LAeq,8h)
F(a) N GF F1 F2
61.0 62.9 63.8
53.2 55.0 55.8
25.0 26.9 27.8
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
F(b) N GF F1 F2
54.9 56.8 57.9
47.5 49.2 50.2
<20 20.8 21.9
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
11.114 Table 11.33 highlights the Zone F predicted internal noise levels. The BS8233 daytime
internal noise level criterion is met for all facades and receiver floo rs using the sound
insulation value of 33dB Rw. The predicted night time internal noise levels meet the
BS8233 night time internal noise level criteria of 30dB LAeq in bedrooms at the receiver
floors for all assessed façades.
Table 11.34: Site Suitability for Residential Development Assessment- Zone G
Zone and Direction of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade
Noise Level (LAeq,16h
dBA)
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade
Noise Level (LAeq,8h dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predicted Internal
Night time Noise Level
(dBA)
BS8233 Daytime Criteria
Met (35dB
LAeq,16h)
BS8233 Night time
Criteria Met
(30dB LAeq,8h)
G(a) W GF F1
57.7 59.7
50.1 52.0
21.7 23.7
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
G(b) SE GF F1 F2
44.0 45.1 46.1
37.1 38.2 39.1
<20 <20 <20
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
G(c) N GF F1 F2
46.9 48.3 49.8
39.9 41.2 42.7
<20 <20 <20
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
G (c) SW GF F1 F2
39.2 40.9 43.0
32.7 34.2 36.2
<20 <20 <20
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
G (d) NE GF F1
47.7 49.0
40.7 41.9
<20 <20
<20 <20
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
11.115 Table 11.34 presents the Zone G predicted internal noise levels. The BS8233 daytime
internal noise level criterion is met for all facades and receiver floors using the sound
insulation value of 33dB Rw. The predicted night time internal noise levels meet the
BS8233 night time internal noise level criteria of 30dB LAeq in bedrooms at the receiver
floors for all assessed facades.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 49 December 2014
Table 11.35: Site Suitability for Residential Development Assessment- Zone H
Zone and Direction
of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,16h dBA)
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade Noise Level
(LAeq,8h dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predicted Internal
Night time Noise Level (dBA)
BS8233 Daytime Criteria
Met (35dB
LAeq,16h)
BS8233 Night time
Criteria Met
(30dB LAeq,8h)
S GF F1 F2
64.6 64.7 64.5
56.6 56.7 56.5
28.6 28.7 28.5
20.6 20.7 20.5
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
E GF F1 F2
55.4 56.4 57.0
47.9 48.8 49.4
<20 20.4 21.0
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
SE GF F1 F2
47.3 48.3 49.3
40.3 41.2 42.2
<20 <20 <20
<20 <20 <20
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
11.116 Table 11.35 shows the Zone H predicted internal noise levels. The BS8233 daytime
internal noise level criterion is met for all facades and receiver floors usi ng the sound
insulation value of 33dB Rw. The predicted night time internal noise levels meet the
BS8233 night time internal noise level criteria of 30dB L Aeq in bedrooms for all assessed
facades.
11.117 The above tables demonstrate that applying the assumed 33dB Rw sound insulation
detailed in BS8233:2014, Annex G, paragraph G.1 for assessment purposes, the 30dB
LAeq,8hr internal night time noise level in bedrooms and the 35 dB LAeq,16hr internal
daytime noise level in living rooms and resting spaces would be achieved in all locations
within the Site. Therefore the effects on the internal noise levels for medium sensitivity
receptors within the Proposed Development are negligible.
11.118 These predictions are based on the assumptions outlined earlier in this section. A
detailed noise ingress calculation following the detailed methodology in BS8233 to
determine suitable building envelope sound insulation properties can be completed once
site and building designs, layouts and locations are finalised for the development.
External Spaces
11.119 An assessment of the external amenity spaces around the Proposed Development was
undertaken which is largely influenced from road traffic movements and considered to
be the dominant noise source. Noise contour plots were produced highlighting the
predicted noise levels around the Proposed Development using the BS8233 and WHO
guidance threshold categories detailed in Table 11.11 and using the assessment
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 50 December 2014
criteria detailed in Table 11.12. Noise contour plots are provided in Appendix 11.1,
Figure A13 to Figure A16.
11.120 Figure A13 to Figure A16 in Appendix 11.1 show that for the majority of the Site
the predicted noise levels fall within the WHO and BS8233 threshold categories and as
result the effect of road traffic noise on the future users of these amenity areas is
considered to be negligible using the criteria provided in Table 11.12. However, as
illustrated by Figures A13 to A16 a proportion of the Proposed Development
comprising amenity and garden spaces, in close proximity to the A428, parallel to the
A1198 and along the proposed spine road, are predicted to experience noise levels
above the desirable WHO noise threshold categories.
11.121 Paragraph 7.7.3.2 of BS8233:2014 recognises these WHO “guideline values are not
achievable in all circumstances where development might be desirable”. In those parts
of the Site where the noise levels are expected to be above the desirable WHO
thresholds the effect on future recreational users and residents of affected gardens is
considered to be Minor adverse. In addition paragraph 7.7.3.2 of BS8233:2014
suggests:
“In such a situation, development should be designed to
achieve the lowest practicable levels in these external
amenity spaces, but should not be prohibited”
Site Suitability for Other Development
11.122 In addition to considering the effect of the Proposed Development on existing sensitive
residential receptor locations, an assessment was also undertaken to predict noise
effect at proposed educational facilities within the Site.
11.123 The noise level for the other development (including offices and schools) was predicted
using SoundPLAN based on the parameter plans. The noise level for receiver floors and
façade direction (where indicated) was calculated and is shown in Table 11.36 to
Table 11.37. Noise contour plots for the completed development are provided in
Appendix 11.1 Figure A11 and A13; and in Figure A17 for the baseline year 2028
without development.
11.124 The predicted external noise level was calcu lated to an internal noise level using
guidance in BS8233 and specified in paragraph 11.105 above for typical sound reduction
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 51 December 2014
of building elements. The internal noise level was compared with the upper limit for
indoor ambient noise level detailed within Table 1 of the Performance Standards for the
Priority Schools Building Programme (PSBP). This table recommends a guidance noise
level of 30dB LAeq,30mins for teaching spaces specifically for students with Special
Educational Needs and 35dB LAeq,30mins for most classrooms. External free-field noise
levels were compared with WHO guidance of an upper limit of 55dB L Aeq,T in outdoor
playgrounds during play time and assessed against criteria in Table 11.12.
Table 11.36: Site Suitability for Other Development Assessment- Schools
Building Direction
of Façade
Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade
Noise Level
(LAeq,16h dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Predicted External
Free-Field Noise Level
(LAeq,16h dBA)
Internal Criteria
Met (30dB
LAeq,16h)
External
Criteria
Met (55dB LAeq,T)
Primary School 2.2Ha
NW GF F1 F2
56.4 57.2 57.7
20.4 21.2 21.7
53.4 Yes Yes Yes
Yes
Primary School 2.7Ha
S GF F1 F2
62.9 63.0 63.1
26.9 27.0 27.1
59.9 Yes Yes Yes
No
Secondary School 6.36Ha
E
GF F1 F2
43.9 44.5 45.1
<20 <20 <20
40.9 Yes Yes Yes
Yes
SW
GF F1
F2
47.0 47.9
48.4
<20 <20
<20
44.0 Yes Yes
Yes
Yes
11.125 Table 11.36 shows the predicted internal noise levels and free-field external noise
levels for the proposed schools. The PSBP daytime internal noise level criterion is met
for all facades and receiver floors using the sound insulation value of 33dB Rw. The
predicted external noise levels meet the WHO criteria of 55dB LAeq,T in playgrounds for
all assessed areas with the exception of Primary School 2.9Ha. A comparison with the
assessment criteria in Table 11.12 highlights that an excess of +4.9dB for an external
space is considered to be a Minor magnitude of effect. The school is a Medium
sensitivity receptor; therefore the significance of effect is Minor Adve rse. For all other
external spaces the significance of effect is Negligible.
11.126 Predicted noise levels at proposed office receptor locations are presented in
Table 11.37 for locations closest to the dominant noise source (the A428) to provide a
conservative assessment. The predicted external noise level was calculated to an
internal noise level using guidance in BS8233 and specified in paragraph 11. 105 above
for typical sound reduction of building elements (33dB Rw). These internal levels were
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 52 December 2014
compared with the guidance provided in guidance from British Council for Offices Guide
2014 (Offices). This guidance recommends an internal ambient noise level of 40dB L Aeq
in single occupancy offices and 40 to 50dB LAeq in multi occupancy offices.
Table 11.37: Site Suitability for Other Development Assessment- Offices
Building Direction of
Façade Floor
Predicted Develop-
ment Façade
Noise Level (LAeq,16h
dBA)
Predicted Internal Daytime
Noise Level (dBA)
Internal Criteria Met (40dB LAeq)
Zone (i) N F1 F2
62.8 64.1
26.8 28.1
Yes Yes
Zone (ii) NE GF F1 F2
64.2 66.4 67.4
28.2 30.4 31.4
Yes Yes Yes
11.127 Table 11.37 shows the predicted internal noise levels and free-field external noise
levels at proposed buildings within Zone (i) and Zone (ii) taken from the parameters
plan. The daytime internal noise level criterion is met for facades and receiver floors
facing the A428 using the sound insulation value of 33dB Rw. A comparison with the
assessment criteria in Table 11.10 highlights a Negligible magnitude of effect. Office
type premises are a Low sensitivity receptor; therefore the significance of effect is
Negligible. No specific mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measures
Construction
11.128 The appointed main contractor for the works may elect to enter i n to a Section 61
agreement under The Control of Pollution Act (CoPA) with the LPA. A Section 61
agreement provides a method by which a contractor can apply for ‘prior consent’ for
construction activities before commencement of works. The ‘prior consent’ is agreed
between the Local Authority and the contractor and may contain a range of agreed
working conditions, noise limits and control measures designed to minimise or prevent
the occurrence of noise nuisance from construction activities. Application for a ‘prior
consent’ is a commonly used noise control and management measure in respect of
potential noise effects from major construction works.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 53 December 2014
11.129 A conventional approach to good construction noise management would be via the
implementation of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), which can
include measures such as:
Informing local residents about the construction works, including the timing and
duration of any particularly noisy elements, and providing a contact telephone
number to them;
Avoiding operating particularly noisy equipment at the beginning and end of the
day;
Keeping potentially noisy deliveries, such as skips and concrete, to the middle or
less sensitive times of the day where possible;
Locating noisy static plant, such as diesel generators, away from residential
properties;
Using the most modern equipment available and ensuring equipment is properly
maintained; and
Where possible, using silencers/mufflers on equipment.
Bunding or screening including site hoardings to assist in reducing noise effects.
11.130 Although the combined effect of adopting such methods cannot be quantified, it is
expected that these methods could reduce source noise levels by some 5 - 10dB.
Construction vibration
11.131 At this stage it is not possible to specify mitigation measures for levels of vibration
likely to arise if activities such as piling operations were to occur. Preference should
therefore be given to using methods and equipment which would be expected to
generate lower levels of vibration.
Training
11.132 The site induction programme and site rules would include good working practice
instructions for site staff, managers, visitors and contractors to help minimi se noise
whilst working on the Site.
11.133 Good working practice guidelines/instructions would include, but not be limited to, the
following points:
Avoid un-necessary revving of engines;
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 54 December 2014
Plant used intermittently should be shut-down between operational periods;
Avoid reversing wherever possible;
Drive carefully and within the site speed limit at all times;
Report any defective equipment/plant as soon as possible so that corrective
maintenance can be undertaken; and
Handle material in a manner that minimises noise.
Maintenance
11.134 Maintenance of plant should be carried out routinely and in accordance with the
manufacturers’ guidance. A regular inspection of all plant and equipment will be
undertaken as a minimum to ensure that:
All plant is in a good state of repair and fully functional;
any plant found to be requiring interim maintenance has been identified and
taken out of use;
acoustic enclosures fitted to plant are in a good state of repair;
doors and covers remain closed during operation; and
any repairs are being undertaken by a fully qualified maintenance engineer .
Non-compliance with Noise Limits / Receipt of Complaint
11.135 If the noise levels agreed with SLDC are exceeded as a result of construction works at
the development or a complaint is received from a local resident, an investigation would
be instigated by the Site Manager within an agreed time period to identify the cause of
the non-compliance/complaint.
11.136 Such an investigation may involve the identification and cessation of the activity or
activities considered to be the cause of the non-compliance/complaint (where
operationally safe to do so) and/or the investigation of mitigation measures to reduce
the noise emission levels from the activity or activities, for example the replacement of
noisy plant with quieter alternatives and/or the use of temporary screens.
11.137 Any deviation from agreed working practices would be identified immediately and
conformance to the working practice reinstated. A further noise survey should be
undertaken as soon as possible following the implementation of mitigati on to re-assess
the noise levels against the guideline noise levels. A complaints response system would
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 55 December 2014
be maintained for the Site enabling any complaints regarding noise to be reported and
appropriate action taken.
Communication
11.138 Contact information and contact details should be displayed at the site entrance in order
that complaints can be registered. A 24hr emergency contact number should be set up
and distributed accordingly to ensure enquiries can be registered at all times.
Traffic
Completed Development
Site Suitability
11.139 Tables 11.27 to 11.35 demonstrate that applying guidance within BS8233:2014 and
specifying a 33dB Rw sound insulation for assessment purposes, the 30dB LAeq,8hr
internal night time noise level in bedrooms and the 35 dB LAeq,16hr internal daytime noise
level in living rooms and resting spaces would be achieved in all locations within the
Site. The detailed design stage may consider mitigation measures for noise sources
outside of the buildings and can include;
Increasing the sound insulation of the building envelope;
Planning the interior lay-out to avoid nose sensitive rooms being placed on the
noise source side, or incorporating buffer zones i.e. toilets, corridors, hallways ;
Suitable positioning of buildings on site;
Orientation of buildings on site; and
Attenuating the sound on its path to the receiver .
11.140 Noise contour plots presented in Appendix 11.1, Figure A13 to Figure A16 highlight
that areas of the Site in close proximity to the A428, parallel to the A1198 and along the
proposed spine road, are predicted to experience noise levels above the desirable WHO
noise threshold categories. At the detailed design stage the finalised layouts of
buildings, separating garden boundary fences and landscaping may show an
improvement on these predicted levels. For example noise levels within garden spaces
can be reduced by around 10dB through constructing a close-boarded fence with a
minimum density of 11kg/m3, no gaps between panel sections or the fence and the
ground.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 56 December 2014
11.141 Table 11.36 shows the predicted internal noise levels and free -field external noise
levels for the proposed schools. The PSBP daytime internal noise level criterion is met
for all facades and receiver floors using the sound insulation value of 33d B Rw. An
excess of +4.9dB was predicted for an external space at the Primary School 2.2Ha
location and was considered to be a Minor magnitude of effect. The school is a Medium
sensitivity receptor; therefore the significance of effect is Minor Adverse. M itigation at
the detailed design stage of the finalised layouts of buildings may show an improvement
on these predicted levels. Noise levels within external spaces can be reduced by around
10dB through constructing a close-boarded fence with a minimum density of 11kg/m3,
no gaps between panel sections or the fence and the ground.
Residual Effects
Construction
11.142 Construction activities for the phased assessment were predicted and shown in
Table 11.18 to Table 11.25 to have a Negligible effect at most receptor locations with
a Moderate Adverse effect at a few medium sensitivity receptor locations during the
phased construction of the Proposed Development. Noise mitigation measures will be
used to ensure that noise from construction related activities will be controlled to
acceptable levels at receptor locations.
11.143 The approach assumed that all construction equipment would be operating close to the
site boundary, which would not necessarily occur at all times, and this was the refore a
conservative assessment. However, the adoption of general good practice construction
noise management measures, typically Referred to as Best Practical Means (BPM), is
recommended and is discussed in the mitigation measures section of this chapter.
11.144 The application of BPM is likely to reduce noise levels by an order of 5-10dB and
therefore the maximum effects in close proximity to receptors are expected to be
Negligible Adverse.
Traffic
11.145 The overall finding of the traffic noise assessment is that existing receptors around the
Site are generally unaffected by development road traffic noise. There is a predicted
increase of +4.6dB at receptor CN7 Swansley Wood Farm with the completed
development traffic flows. This is due to the proximity of the receptor to the proposed
spine road within the Site. The noise modelling did not include any existing boundary
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 57 December 2014
fence at the property. Inclusion for example of a close-boarded fence with a minimum
density of 11kg/m3 with no gaps between panel sections or the fence and the ground
can provide around a 10dB reduction.
Completed Development
Site Suitability
11.146 The implementation of the mitigation measures outlined above show that t he effects
associated with the Proposed Development are negligible.
Cumulative Effects
Construction
11.147 The committed developments in the vicinity of the Site, are detailed in Table 2.5 of
Chapter 2: Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology. Some of these construction
periods have the potential to overlap with the construction period of the Proposed
Development. It is likely that these developments will implement site -specific measures
to mitigate noise associated with construction works. These would be implemented as
part of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) wh ich is likely to be
requested by SCDC as a condition of the planning permission. It is therefore not
anticipated that any cumulative effects associated with the construction phase will be
significant.
Completed Development
11.148 Traffic generated by the committed developments in the vicinity of the site, as detailed
in Table 2.5 of Chapter 2: Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology was included
in the traffic flows provided by Royal HaskoningDHV for the 2028 assessment years, and
utilised in the noise assessment. Forecast traffic volumes for the assessment years of
2013 and 2028 have been prepared using NTEM and TEMPro data. TEMPro forecasts
allow for other committed development (including those defined in Chapter 2:
Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology). The cumulative effects of traffic
generated by committed developments were therefore considered in terms of noise
emissions generated and effects. The results of the operational phase assessment show
that committed development traffic flows, in combination with the Proposed
Development traffic, would not lead to significant increases in noise levels at most
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 58 December 2014
sensitive receptor locations. Further details regarding the derivation of the utilised
traffic flows are included in Chapter 9: Transport and Access.
Summary
11.149 The assessment has considered the potential for the Proposed Development to affect
the noise environment at existing and proposed receptor locations during its
construction and completion. The suitability of the Site for residential development was
also considered in relation to noise at assumed receptor locations within the Site itself.
11.150 The noise assessment considered the potential noise effects associated with the phased
construction of the Site at a number of nearby receptors, and new receptors emerging
through the phased construction, having regard to the existing noise environment which
is mainly influenced by road traffic noise from nearby highways.
11.151 Potential unmitigated noise effects during the construction phase using a conservative
approach are considered to range from Negligible for most NSRs to Moderate Adverse.
The can be mitigated by a range of measures to reduce the effect, including:
A Section 61 agreement to be made with the local planning authorit y agreeing
permitted working hours of between 08:00 and 18:00 and noise limits during
construction; and
The use of Best Practice Methods to minimise the potential noise effects from
construction activities.
11.152 An assessment of the increase in road traffic noise generated by the development on
the surrounding road network predicted Minor Adverse at one existing receptor location
due to the proximity of the proposed spine road. The noise modelling did not include
any existing boundary fence at this property. Mitigation, for example by means of
erecting a close-boarded fence with a minimum density of 11kg/m 3 with no gaps
between panel sections or the fence and the ground, can provide around a 10dB
reduction.
11.153 The assessment concluded that the Site is suitable for residential dwellings and using
the 33dB Rw sound insulation detailed in BS8233:2014, Annex G, paragraph G.1 for
assessment purposes, achieves the 30dB LAeq,8hr internal night time noise level in
bedrooms and the 35 dB LAeq,16hr internal daytime noise level in Living rooms and resting
spaces.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 59 December 2014
11.154 External noise levels were assessed against the BS8233 and WHO guidance levels. Some
areas of the Site in close proximity to the A428 and A1198 were shown to be in excess
of these desirable noise levels. For such circumstances, Paragraph 7.7.3.2 of
BS8233:2014 suggests:
“In such a situation, development should be designed to
achieve the lowest practicable levels in these external
amenity spaces, but should not be prohibited”
11.155 The assessment concluded that the Site is suitable for schools and office buildings and
using the 33dB Rw sound insulation detailed in BS8233:2014, Annex G, paragraph G.1
for assessment purposes, achieves recommended internal noise level requirements .
11.156Table 11.38 provides a summary of the likely significant effects and proposed
mitigation measures for the Site.
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 60 December 2014
Table 11.38: Table of Significance – Noise and Vibration
Potential Effect
Nature of Effect
(Permanent/ Temporary)
Significance (Major/Moderate/
Minor) (Beneficial/Adverse/
Negligible)
Mitigation / Enhancement Measures
Geographical Importance*
Residual Effects (Major/Moderate/
Minor) (Beneficial/Adverse
/Negligible) I UK E R C D L
Construction
Noise during construction phases at NSRs
Temporary Negligible to Moderate Adverse
Use of BPM, CEMP, Section 61 application
* Negligible
Vibration during construction phases at NSRs
Temporary Use of BPM, CEMP, Section 61 application
* Negligible
Completed Development
Traffic noise at NSRs Permanent Negligible to Minor Adverse
Barrier (fencing), Planning Condition * Negligible
Internal Noise Levels Permanent Negligible Improved sound insulation/ventilation strategy, Planning Condition
* Negligible
External Noise Levels Permanent Negligible to Minor Adverse
Barrier (fencing), landscaping, Planning Condition
* Negligible
Cumulative Effects
Construction Not Significant Not Significant None required * Not Significant
Completed Development Permanent Negligible Measures included as part of a detailed planning application.
* * Not Significant
* Geographical Level of Importance
I = International; UK = United Kingdom; E = England; R = Regional; C = County; D =District; L = Local
West Cambourne Noise and Vibration
19102/A5/ES2014 Chapter 11 – Page 61 December 2014
References
i. Environmental Protection Act 1990. HMSO, London
ii . Control of Pollution Act 1974. HMSO, London ii i. Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) (2012) National Planning Policy
Framework. iv. Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), 2014. National Planning
Practice Guidance. v. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), 2010. Noise Policy
Statement for England vi. South Cambridgeshire District Council, Local Planning Policy: South Cambridgeshire District
Council’s (SCDC’s) – “Local Development Framework, Development Control Policies, Development Plan Document”, Adopted July 2007, July 2007.
vii. South Cambridgeshire District Council, District Design Guide (SPD), March 2010. vii i. British Standards Institution, (2003). BS 7445-1:2003 - Description and measurement of
environmental noise. Guide to quantities and procedures. BSI, London ix. BS4142:2014 - Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound, BSI,
2014. x. Berglund et al. (1999) - Guidelines for Community Noise. Geneva, World Health
Organisation (WHO) xi. British Standard [BS] 5228-1: 2009+A1:2014 “Code of practice for noise and vibration
control on construction and open sites – Part 1: Noise” (BSI, 2014) xii. British Standard [BS] 5228-2: 2009+A1:2014 “Code of practice for noise and vibration
control on construction and open sites – Part 2: Vibration” (BSI, 2014) xii i. Department of Transport, Welsh Office (1988). Calculation of Road Traffic Noise HMSO,
London xiv. The Highways Agency (2011) Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3,
Part 7:Noise and Vibration. The Highways Agency xv. British Standard Institute (2014). BS8233: Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for
Buildings. British Standard Institute, London. xvi. British Standard 6472-1:2008 Guide to evaluation of human exposure to vibration in
buildings. Part 1: Vibration sources other than blasting, BSI, London. xvii. Education Funding Agency (2012) Acoustic Performance Standards For Priority Schools
Building Programme. Department for Education, London. xvii i. British Council for Offices (2014). Guide to Specification 2014. BCO, London. xix. British Standards Institution (2003). BS EN 61672-1:2003 Electroacoustics. Sound level
meters. Specifications. BSI, London. xx. British Standards Institution, (2003). BS 7445-2 Description and Measurement of
Environmental Noise: Guide to the Acquisition of Data Pertinent to Land Use. BSI, London.
Path:
Figure
Date Scale
Title
Client
Project
Figure 11.1
Study area and baseline noise measurementlocations
Project 9Y1623Cambourne West
MCA Developments
20/08/14
Checked by Issue number
DC 2
±
Do not scale