In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82 Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister 219915 Issue | 30 May 2012 Arup Arup Pty Ltd ABN 18 000 966 165 This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client. It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party. Job number 219915 Arup Level 17 1 Nicholson Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Australia arup.com.au
32
Embed
In the matter of Amendment C82 - Hobsons Bay City … the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82 Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister 219915 | Issue | 30 May 2012 | Arup
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
In the matter of Amendment C82
Amendment C82
Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister
219915
Issue | 30 May 2012
Arup Arup Pty Ltd ABN 18 000 966 165
This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client.
It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party.
Job number 219915
Arup Level 17 1 Nicholson Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Australia arup.com.au
3.1 I have experience on the following projects (and others):
3.2 Regional Rail Link, Melbourne
Technical lead for the acoustic predictions and assessment for the Regional Rail Link (RRL) in Western Melbourne. RRL comprises approximately 50 km of new railway through existing and new corridors, and includes a 2 km tunnel option through Footscray.
3.3 VicTrack Guidelines
Development of guidelines for assessment of noise and vibration impacts on developments adjacent to the rail corridor.
Acoustic and vibro-acoustic engineering for the new grade separation and premium station at Nunawading, Melbourne. Prediction, assessment and monitoring of construction noise and vibration, particularly night-works and piling operations. Acoustic design of PA and EWIS systems for the station and platforms.
3.5 North Sydney Freight Corridor (NSFC) Epping to Thornleigh Third Track
and Gosford Passing Loops, Project Definition
Acoustics technical leader for the preliminary noise assessment undertaken for the NSFC ETTT and GPL project definition stage works.
3.6 South Sydney Freight Line
Technical lead for the local authority review of the South Sydney Freight Line noise and vibration assessment, including re-modelling of the proposed route and assessment in accordance with IGANRIP.
3.7 South West Rail Link
Project director for noise and vibration input to the South West Rail Link tender design for Laing O’Rourke. Tender stage modelling of the proposed alignment and assessment in accordance with IGANRIP.
3.8 Northbridge Development, East Perth
Review of the groundborne noise and vibration assessment and track design parameters for the Northbridge Development, East Perth.
In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister
3.9 Brisbane Airport Corporation, New Parallel Runway
Development of a brief for the noise assessment, including a detailed robust assessment and prediction methodology, procurement advice and peer review of noise assessment.
3.10 ECRL Groundborne Noise and Vibration Review and Community
Consultation, Eastwood.
Assessment and review of predicted groundborne noise and vibration impacts from underground sections of the Epping to Chatswood Rail Link affecting two residences in Eastwood.
3.11 Bruce Highway, Gympie
Route selection stage studies for proposed development of the Bruce Highway near Gympie. This included evaluation of Arup’s innovative Community Noise Burden for each of the shortlisted route options to aid the assessment.
3.12 Gungahlin Drive Extension, EIS Peer Review
Peer review of the noise and vibration working paper for the EIS of a proposed 8km dual-carriageway road in Canberra, ACT.
3.13 Caboolture to Landsborough Rail Upgrade
Noise and vibration assessment for route selection studies for proposed amplification of the Caboolture to Landsborough railway north of Brisbane, QLD.
3.14 Parramatta Rail Link, Tender Support
Design advice to contractor including groundborne noise and vibration assessment and vibro-acoustic design of track for of twin-bore tunnel section under residential areas of Sydney, Australia.
3.15 Channel Tunnel Rail Link, UK
Noise and vibration assessment and track design for the 40 km twin-bore London Tunnels section under residential areas of East London to St. Pancras Station. Floating Track Slab design for the East Coast Mainline Bridge near St. Pancras Station. Track design for new St. Pancras Station platforms over heritage listed structure to protect concessions and ticketing halls from structureborne noise and vibration.
3.16 Upgrade of the Pacific Highway, Moorland to Herons Creek
Noise and vibration assessment for the route options development stage, assessing twelve route options around the townships of Kew and Johns River.
In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister
Implementation of an overall 'noise exposure' methodology that rates the potential for annoyance of nearby residents. Preparation of noise and vibration assessment for the EIS.
3.17 Upgrade of the Pacific Highway, Karuah
Noise and vibration assessment and mitigation design for the upgrade of the Pacific Highway to bypass the township of Karuah in New South Wales.
In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister
4.1 In May 2010, I was asked to undertake a peer review of the original ViPAC Noise
Impact Assessment (NIA) presented in support of the rezoning application for the
Caltex Site. The key aims of my peer review were to determine whether:
the recommendations made in ViPAC’s NIA are appropriate.
there are any alternative measures to what is proposed in the NIA.
there are any other considerations that have been overlooked in the NIA, and what are the implications.
4.2 The two reports that I reviewed were:
Former Caltex Terminal, Blackshaws and Sutton Roads, South Kingsville, Architectus Group Pty Ltd, February 2010.
Caltex Site, South Kingsville, Noise Impact Assessment, Report No. 30B-09-0219-DRP-442897-2-Final, ViPAC Engineers and Scientists Ltd, 1 March 2010.
4.3 I have also reviewed the Witness Statement and Noise and Vibration Assessment
for the site prepared by Jim Antonopoulos of SLR Consulting Australia Pty Ltd1,
and the Statement of Evidence prepared by Robert Burton of Burton Acoustic
Group2.
1 Noise and Vibration Assessment, Hobsons Bay Planning Scheme Amendment C82, Former Caltex Site, Blackshaws Road, South Kingsville, SLR Consulting Australia Pty Ltd Report No. 640.10353-R1, 18 May 2012. 2 Former Caltex Site, Blackshaws Road, South Kingsville, Statement of Evidence, Burton Acoustic Group, 21 May 2012.
In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister
to be between 10–20 dB lower than measured using the unattended noise logging
undertaken on the site boundary, which shows what are presumed to be freight
pass bys at between 90–100 dBLAmax. This suggests that the noise predictions
based on the source noise levels in Table 3 may under-predict the impacts.
5.7 Criteria
5.8 With respect to the potential industrial noise impacts on the site, the SEPP N-1
limits developed in the report appear reasonably high. ViPAC need to provide
additional details regarding their determination of the SEPP Noise limits,
including;
Locations of the measurement positions used to determine the background noise levels.
Whether the background noise levels used to derive the SEPP limits were made in the absence of the industrial noise, or made at a derived location not affected by industrial noise.
Assumptions used regarding railway zoning (Schedule B2, part 3(d) of SEPP N-1 specifically defines the railway in this area as being type 3).
5.9 In terms of rail noise intrusion, the Vipac NIA relies on ‘sleep disturbance’
criteria developed by the NSW EPA for their road traffic noise criteria. On this
basis, ViPAC state that maximum internal noise levels between 50–55 dB(A) are
unlikely to cause awakening, and one or two events with internal noise levels
between 65–70 dB(A) are not likely to adversely affect health and wellbeing. It is
not explicitly stated which of these limits has been ultimately chosen for the
assessment.
5.10 The application of the NSW EPA criteria for sleep disturbance from road traffic
noise to railway noise impacts is questionable. The NSW EPA acknowledges that
the results from research into sleep disturbance from night-time noise are highly
variable, and no clear conclusion is evident. However, their main recommendation
is that the ‘emergence’ of individual maximum noise events above the average
noise level should be limited to 15 dB. This criterion is not discussed in the
ViPAC assessment. Furthermore, while there is no Victorian legislation or
guidance which set limits on noise from railway operations, railway noise limits
In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister
6 Additional Site Noise and Vibration Measurements and Analysis
6.1 In 2012, I was engaged by Hobson’s Bay City Council to prepare a report
addressing the following issues:
Noise and vibration levels on the Former Caltex Terminal Site (the Site) over a 24 hour period.
Identification of acoustic criteria (noise and vibration) for a multi-storey residential development. This includes criteria for industrial noise, railway noise and vibration and road traffic noise. The criteria will set an appropriate amenity for proposed development on the Site.
Identification of statutory noise limits which would apply to the Site.
A SEPP N-13 assessment. Determination of the noise limits that would apply at future residences on the Site.
Assessment of the noise and vibration levels measured on site to determine if they are suitable for residential uses (assuming 6 storey towers).
Determine if the noise levels on the Site exceed the noise criteria.
Identification of in-principle noise mitigation options on the Site to meet the acoustic criteria and statutory noise limits.
6.2 The results of this study are documented in the Report: C82, The Former Caltex
Terminal, South Kingsville, Noise and Vibration Measurements and Assessment,
dated 23 May 2012.
6.3 This work was undertaken prior to the Expert’s Conclave, and informed my input
to that meeting. The following results therefore do not counter matters that were
agreed at the Expert’s Conclave and are documented in the minutes of the
meeting.
6.4 The site is exposed to a number of noise sources including road traffic noise.
Railway noise and industrial noise and is shown in Figure 1 below.
3 State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise from Commerce, Industry and Trade) No. N-1, Published 15 June 1989.
In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister
(iii) Attended background noise measurements at a location representative of the residential location on the Site but where industrial noise is not audible. This has been used to determine a derived noise limit.
6.20 All noise measurements have been conducted in general accordance with
AS 1055.1. The parameters recorded include LAmax, LAeq, LA90 and LAmin.
6.21 The locations of the measurement positions, noise logger positions and vibration
logger positions measurements are shown in Figure 3 below:
Figure 3 Noise and vibration measurement location plan.
6.22 Attended measurements were conducted at Positions P1 to P5 during the Daytime
Period (Monday 20 February 2012 from 14:30 to 16:10 hours) the Evening Period
(Wednesday 29 February 2012 from 19:10 to 20:45 hours) and the Night Period
(Thursday 23 February 2012, 23:00 to 00:15 hours on Thursday 24 February
2012). There periods are defined in SEPP N-1.
P6
LEGEND
Noise Logger
Vibration Logger
Attended Measurements
P2
P3
N4
P1
P4 P7 N3
N1
V1
P5
N2
In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister
6.29 Results of the attended measurements are provided below.
Table 5 Results of attended noise measurements during the Day Period on Monday, 20 February 2012 (dB re 20 x 10-6 Pa)
Position Start time (hours)
End time (hours)
Duration (minutes)
LAmax LAeq LA90 Notes
P1 14:30 14:33 3 59 49 46 General factory noise from Sutton St industries. Occasional hammering, around 20% of the time. Hammering not heard in remaining measurements.
P2 14:37 15:09 31 69 56 54 Fan/suction noise from high level louvers in small SMC workshop. Measurement distance is about 35 m from source. Faint noise of a loose grille audible throughout. Noise had no tonal characteristics, was continuous throughout the period, and had no impulsive or intermittent characteristics.
P3 15:12 15:25 12 77 56 52 Factory noise from the Sutton St industrial plants was audible. Sounded like a constant mechanical hum. Some siren noise from a factory was just audible.
P4 15:29 15:32 3 66 54 49 Measurement was conducted roughly in the middle of the site. Some knocking sounds from SMC were audible. Additionally, sandblasting from SMF Engineering was also audible.
P5 15:33 15:39 6 76 68 64 Measurement conducted close to SMF Engineering at a distance of approximately 25 m. Sound similar to sand blasting could be heard loudly and continuously.
Background Noise Measurements at Residential Location
P6 15:54 16:07 12 - 56 42 Background noise measurement for SEPP N-1 assessment. Distant traffic noise from Melbourne Road audible. Some traffic noise from adjacent local roads could also be heard. No industry noise from identified noise sources audible.
P6 16:08 16:21 10 - 61 43 Second background noise measurement for SEPP N-1 assessment.
In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister
Table 6 Results of attended noise measurements during the Evening Period on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 (dB re 20 x 10-6 Pa)
Position Start time (hours)
End time (hours)
Duration (minutes)
LAmax LAeq LA90 Notes
P1 19:12 19:22 10 67 59 50 Occasional car passby. No industrial noise audible. Cricket noise constant– this was the dominant noise source.
P3 19:36 19:46 10 60 54 53 Cricket noise dominant. Occasional car passby, distant road traffic and train noise just audible. No industrial noise audible.
P7 20:05 20:11 5 62 59 55 Cricket noise dominant. No industrial noise audible. Road traffic noise just audible. Light rain started four minutes into the measurement.
Background Noise Measurements at Residential Location
P6 20:28 20:40 10 - 51 41 Background noise measurement for SEPP N-1 assessment. Very light rain at start of measurement. Occasional car passbys on Blackshaws Road.
Table 7 Results of attended noise measurements during the Night period on 23 February 2012 (dB re 20 x 10-6 Pa)
Position Start time (Hours)
End time (Hours)
Duration (minutes)
LAmax LAeq LA90 Notes
P5 23:02 23:23 10 73 59 43 Occasional car passby on Blackshaws Road. Distant traffic noise from Melbourne Road. No industrial or mechanical noise audible.
Included freight train noise of 2.5 minute duration.
P2 23:09 23:10 1 95 83 72 Measurement of freight train which started about 50 m away. Measurement position was 10 m away from tracks.
P2 23:12 23:18 6 60 47 46 No fan/suction noise audible unlike daytime measurements. Only a distant faint tapping noise was barely audible from the SMC main workshop. Cricket noise was constant throughout the measurement. It was the dominant noise source. Some distant road traffic noise from Melbourne Road & occasional metro train (Williamstown line) passby.
P1 23:21 23:31 10 63 49 44 Constant cricket noise- this was the dominant noise source. Some traffic in the background. No industrial/mechanical noise audible. Car passby noted as 55 dB (A) but excluded from overall measurement.
P3 23:24 23:30 6 62 55 53 Incessant and very loud cricket noise. No industrial noise audible, cricket noise very loud. Distant traffic noise from Melbourne Road. Distant occasional metro train noise heard in the distance.
P5 23:40 23:50 10 56 46 44 Some distant noise from SMC just audible at the start of the measurement. Cricket noise was audible –and the dominant noise source.
P7 23:47 00:20 30 58 43 40 Intermittent clanging noise (throughout) - 1 to 3 sec intervals. 2 x knocks - 51 dB(A). Occasional forklift engine – up to 50 dB(A). Very short duration.
Music noise from radio just audible throughout.
In the matter of Amendment C82 Amendment C82Expert Witness Statement of Dr Kym Burgemeister