Noise Feasibility Study Proposed Mixed Use Development ...

Noise Feasibility Study

Proposed Mixed Use Development

3420 & 3442 Hurontario Street

Mississauga, ON

Prepared for:

3420 Hurontario Street Inc. & BET Realty Ltd. 7 Farrington Drive

Toronto, Ontario M2L 2B4

Prepared by

Harry Cai, BEng, EIT

Reviewed by

Sheeba Paul, MEng, PEng

November 17, 2020

HGC Project No: 02000490

Table of Contents

1 Introduction and Summary .......................................................................................................1

2 Site Description and Noise Sources..........................................................................................2

3 Noise Level Criteria..................................................................................................................2

3.1 Road Traffic Noise ............................................................................................................2

4 Traffic Sound Level Assessment ..............................................................................................4

4.1 Road Traffic Data ..............................................................................................................4

4.2 Road Traffic Noise Predictions .........................................................................................5

5 Discussions and Recommendations..........................................................................................6

5.1 Outdoor Living Areas ........................................................................................................6

5.2 Indoor Living Areas and Ventilation Requirements .........................................................7

5.3 Building Façade Constructions .........................................................................................8

6 Warning Clauses .....................................................................................................................10

7 Impact of the Development on Itself ......................................................................................11

8 Impact of the Development on the Environment ....................................................................11

9 Summary and Recommendations ...........................................................................................12

9.1 Implementation................................................................................................................13

Figure 1: Key Plan

Figure 2: Site Plan Showing Prediction Locations

Figure 3: Site Plan Showing Upgraded Glazing Construction and Barrier Requirements

Appendix A: Road Traffic Information

Appendix B: STAMSON 5.04 Output Appendix C: Supporting Documents

Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Mixed Use Development Page 1 3420 & 3442 Hurontario St, Mississauga, ON November 17, 2020

1 Introduction and Summary

HGC Engineering was retained by 3420 Hurontario Street Inc. & BET Realty Ltd. to conduct a noise

feasibility study for a proposed residential development located at 3420 and 3442 Hurontario Street

in Mississauga, Ontario. The residential development will consist of two residential towers (one 30-

storeys and one 36-storeys). The study is required by the City of Mississauga as part of the planning

and approvals process.

The primary sources of noise are road traffic on Hurontario Street, Central Parkway West, and

Fairview Road West. Road traffic data was obtained from the City of Mississauga and were used to

predict future traffic sound levels at the proposed building façades and in large outdoor living areas.

The predicted sound levels were compared to the guidelines of the City of Mississauga and the

Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) to develop noise control

recommendations.

The results of the study indicate that the proposed mixed-use development is feasible with the noise

control measures described in this report. The predicted future daytime and nighttime sound levels at

the proposed buildings will exceed MECP guideline sound levels. Central air conditioning is

required for all dwelling units, and upgraded glazing construction will also be required for all

building facades with exposure to Hurontario Street. Acoustic barrier/parapet walls are required for

the outdoor amenity areas located on the roof of the podium. Noise warning clauses are required for

all dwelling units to inform future occupants of the traffic noise impact, to address sound level

excesses, and proximity to commercial uses.

There is a proposed future Light Rail transit (LRT) system along the centre of Hurontario Street.

Information regarding the Hurontario-Main LRT line was obtained from the Noise and Vibration

Impact Assessment Report prepared for SNC-Lavalin Inc. in support of the Transit Project

Assessment Project (TRAP) by J.E. Coulter Associates Ltd. The report states that the LRT line will

run along the Hurontario Street corridor, beginning at the Port Credit GO Station and ending at the

Brampton GO Transit Station. The findings of the report prepared by J.E. Coulter Associates Limited

for the future Hurontario-Main Street LRT indicate that there will be no noticeable change in the

sound levels along most parts of the corridor and that the contribution of the LRT in relation to the


overall sound level from road traffic is negligible. In addition, predicted ground borne vibration

levels at the site area will be within the applicable limits, and vibration-induced noise from the LRT

will be lower than the predicted sound levels due to road traffic. Supporting documents from the

report are attached in Appendix C.

2 Site Description and Noise Sources

Figure 1 is a key plan indicating the location of the proposed site. The site is located at the west side

of Hurontario Street in Mississauga, Ontario. Figure 2 shows the site plan by Kikor Architects dated

November 13, 2020. The proposed development will consist of two residential towers, Building A

with 36-storeys and Building B with 30-storeys, with a shared podium used for parking and office

spaces, and a tower link connecting the two towers with residential units.

HGC Engineering personnel visited the site on August 7, 2020 to make observations of the acoustical

environment. During the site visit, it was noted that the primary source of noise impacting the site

was road traffic on Hurontario Street. A secondary source of traffic noise is Central Parkway West.

The site is currently occupied by a multi storey medical building housing various medical offices,

which will be demolished for the construction of the proposed mixed-use buildings. The area around

the site is flat and mostly residential. Existing high-rise multi-family dwelling buildings surround the

site in all directions. A gas station (Esso) with a Tim Horton’s drive-through exists across Hurontario

Street. Although sound emission from the gas station and drive-through were not found to be audible

at the site area, it is recommended that a noise warning clause to identify that such commercial uses

in the area may be audible at times be included in the property and tenancy agreements.

3 Noise Level Criteria

3.1 Road Traffic Noise

Guidelines for acceptable levels of road traffic noise impacting residential developments are given in

the MECP publication NPC-300, “Environmental Noise Guideline Stationary and Transportation

Sources – Approval and Planning”, release date October 21, 2013, and are listed in Table I below.

The values in Table I are energy equivalent (average) sound levels [LEQ] in units of A-weighted

decibels [dBA].


Table I: MECP Road Traffic Noise Criteria (dBA)

Area Daytime LEQ (16 hour)

Road

Nighttime LEQ(8 hour)

Road

Outdoor Living Area 55 dBA --

Inside Living/Dining Rooms 45 dBA 45 dBA

Inside Bedrooms 45 dBA 40 dBA

Daytime refers to the period between 07:00 and 23:00. Nighttime refers to the time period between

23:00 and 07:00. The term “Outdoor Living Area” (OLA) is used in reference to an outdoor patio, a

backyard, a terrace, or other area where passive recreation is expected to occur. Small balconies are

not considered OLAs for the purposes of assessment. Terraces greater than 4 m in depth (measured

perpendicular to the building façade) are considered to be OLAs.

The guidelines in the MECP publication allow the daytime sound levels in an Outdoor Living Area

to be exceeded by up to 5 dBA, without mitigation, if warning clauses are placed in the purchase and

rental agreements to the property. Where OLA sound levels exceed 60 dBA, physical mitigation is

required to reduce the OLA sound level to below 60 dBA and as close to 55 dBA as technically,

economically, and administratively practical.

A central air conditioning system is required for dwellings where nighttime sound levels outside

bedroom or living/dining room windows exceed 60 dBA or greater for the Region of Peel, or

daytime sound levels outside bedroom or living/dining room windows exceed 65 dBA. Forced-air

ventilation with ducts sized to accommodate the future installation of air conditioning is required

when nighttime sound levels at bedroom or living/dining room windows are in the range of 51 to 60

dBA or when daytime sound levels at bedroom or living/dining room windows are in the range of 56

to 65 dBA.

Building components such as walls, windows and doors must be designed to achieve indoor sound

level criteria when the plane of window nighttime sound level is greater than 60 dBA or the daytime

sound level is greater than 65 dBA due to road traffic noise.


Warning clauses to notify future residents of possible noise excesses are also required when

nighttime sound levels exceed 50 dBA at the plane of a bedroom/living/dining room window and

when daytime sound levels exceed 55 dBA at the plane of a bedroom/living/dining room window

due to road traffic.

4 Traffic Sound Level Assessment

4.1 Road Traffic Data

Traffic data for Hurontario Street, Central Parkway West, and Fairview Road West was obtained

from the Region of Peel in the form of ultimate Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) traffic

values, and is provided in Appendix A.

For Hurontario Street, an ultimate volume of 40 700 vehicles per day at an operating speed limit of

60 km/h was applied for the analysis. A commercial vehicle percentage of 2.75 % for medium trucks

and 2. 25 % for heavy trucks was applied. A day/night split of 90 % / 10 % was used.

For Central Parkway West, an ultimate volume of 17 700 vehicles per day at an operating speed limit

of 50 km/h was applied for the analysis. A commercial vehicle percentage of 2.2 % for medium

trucks and 1.8 % for heavy trucks was applied. A day/night split of 90 % / 10 % was used.

For Fairview Road West, an ultimate volume of 5 000 vehicles per day at an operating speed limit of

40 km/h was applied for the analysis. A commercial vehicle percentage of 1.1 % % for medium

trucks and 0.9 % for heavy trucks was applied. A day/night split of 90 % / 10 % was used.

Table II summarizes the traffic volume data used in this study.


Table II: Ultimate Road Traffic Data

Road Name Cars Medium

Trucks

Heavy

Trucks Total

Hurontario Street

Daytime 40 185 1 163 952 42 300

Nighttime 4 465 129 106 4 700

Total 44 650 1 293 1 058 40 700

Central Parkway

West

Daytime 14 688 337 275 15 300

Nighttime 1 632 37 31 1 700

Total 16 320 374 306 17 700

Fairview Road West

Daytime 4 410 50 41 4 500

Nighttime 490 6 5 500

Total 3 900 55 45 5 000

4.2 Road Traffic Noise Predictions

To assess the levels of road traffic noise which will impact the study area in the future, sound level

predictions were made using STAMSON version 5.04, a computer algorithm developed by the

MECP. Sample STAMSON output is included in Appendix B.

Predictions of the traffic sound levels were chosen around the proposed residential buildings to

obtain an appropriate representation of future sound levels at various façades. Sound levels were

predicted at the plane of the top storey bedroom and/or living/dining room windows during daytime

and nighttime hours to investigate ventilation and façade construction requirements. Sound levels

were also predicted in possible OLA’s to investigate the need for noise barriers. Figure 2 shows the

site plan of the site with prediction locations. The results of these predictions are summarized in

Table III.


Table III: Predicted Road Traffic Sound Levels [dBA], Without Mitigation

Prediction

Location Description

Daytime

– in the

OLA

LEQ-16 hr

Daytime

– at the

Façade

LEQ-16 hr

Nighttime

– at the

Facade

LEQ-8 hr

[A] Building A, façade facing Hurontario St -- 71 67

[B] Building A, façade facing Central Pkwy -- 69 64

[C] Building A, façade with flanking exposure

to Central Pkwy

-- 62 55

[D] Building A, façade facing Fairview Rd 68 64

[E] Building B, façade facing Hurontario St 71 67

[F] Building B, façade facing Fairview Rd -- 68 64

[G] Building B, façade with flanking exposure to

Fairview Rd

-- 55 <50

[H] Building B, façade facing Central Pkwy 68 64

[I] Outdoor amenity area, west podium area <55* -- --

[J] Outdoor amenity area, east podium area 57* -- --

[K] Tower Link, façade facing Hurontario St -- 70 65 Note: *with a minimum 1.07 m high solid parapet wall

5 Discussions and Recommendations

Sound level predictions indicate that the future traffic sound levels will exceed MECP guidelines at

the proposed development. The following discussion outlines the recommendations for acoustic

barrier requirements, ventilation requirements, upgraded building façade construction, and warning

clauses to achieve the noise criteria stated in Table I.

5.1 Outdoor Living Areas

Predicted sound levels at the west outdoor amenity area on the 5th floor with a minimum 1.07 m high

solid parapet, designated by prediction location [I], will be within the MECP’s limit of 55 dBA. The

predicted daytime sound levels at the east outdoor amenity area on the 5th floor with a minimum

1.07 m high solid parapet, designated by prediction location [J], will be up to 57 dBA, which is in

excess of the MECP’s limit of 55 dBA. While the sound level is still within the MECP’s allowable

exceedance range of 5 dBA from the 55 dBA limit, physical mitigation in the form of an acoustic

barrier is recommended to address these excesses. The various barrier heights required to achieve

MECP’s OLA requirements are provided in Table IV.


Table IV: Required Barrier Heights to Achieve Various Sound Levels

Prediction

Location

Sound Level in OLA [dBA]

55 56 57 58 59 60

Barrier

Height [m] [J] 2.0 1.5 1.07 -- -- --

The MECP’s limit and the Region of Peel’s limit for daytime sound levels in the outdoor living areas

(OLAs) is 55 dBA. If higher sound levels are to be achieved in the OLA’s, it is the proponent’s

responsibility to delegate Council to seek relief from the 55 dBA requirement for the amenity areas.

An acoustic barrier height of 2.0 m, in the form of a solid parapet wall, is recommended for east

outdoor amenity area adjacent to Hurontario Street, designated by prediction location [J], to reduce

the sound level to 55 dBA. Figure 3 shows the location of the required barriers. A solid parapet with

a minimum 1.07 m height will be sufficient for the west outdoor amenity area since it is shielded

from traffic on Hurontario Street by the proposed buildings and podium. Future analysis is required

when grading information is available, and the acoustic barrier heights should be refined.

The wall component of the barrier should be of a solid construction with a surface density of no less

than 20 kg/m2. The walls may be constructed from a variety of materials such as wood, brick, steel,

glass, or other concrete/wood composite systems provided that it is free of gaps or cracks within or

below its extent.

5.2 Indoor Living Areas and Ventilation Requirements

Air Conditioning

The predicted future sound levels outside the top storey windows of the facades with exposure to

Hurontario Street will be greater than 60 dBA during nighttime hours and/or 65 dBA during daytime

hours. To address these excesses, both buildings, Building A and Building B, will require central air

conditioning systems so that windows may be kept closed. It is likely that the building or individual

suites will include air conditioning. In general, window or through-the-wall air conditioning units are

not recommended because of the noise they produce and because the units penetrate through the

exterior wall which degrades the overall sound insulating properties of the envelope. Acceptable

units are those that are housed in their own closet with an access door for maintenance. The location,


installation and sound ratings of the outdoor air conditioning devices should minimize noise impacts

and comply with criteria of MECP publication NPC-300, as applicable.

5.3 Building Façade Constructions

The predicted sound levels at the facades with exposure to Hurontario Street will exceed 65 dBA

during daytime and/or 60 dBA during nighttime. MECP guidelines stipulate that in such cases,

building components including windows, walls, and doors be designed so that the indoor sound

levels comply with the noise criteria in Table I.

Calculations were performed to determine the acoustical insulation factors to maintain indoor sound

levels within MECP guidelines. The calculation methods were developed by the National Research

Council (NRC). They are based on the predicted future sound levels at the building facades, and the

anticipated area ratios of the facade components (walls, windows and doors) and the floor area of the

adjacent room.

Exterior Doors

There may be glazed exterior doors (sliding or swing) for entry onto the balconies from living/dining

rooms and some bedrooms. The glazing areas of the doors should be counted as part of the total

window glazing area. All exterior doors should include good weather seals to reduce air infiltration

to the minimum achievable levels.

Acoustical Requirements for Glazing

A summary of the STC requirements is given in Table V for the building façades, based on the

possibility of sound entering the building through walls, windows and doors for all of the dwellings.

Detailed floor plans and building elevations were not available for review at the time of this report. A

window to floor ratio of 50% (40% fixed, 10% operable) for living/dining room and 40% (30%

fixed, 10% operable) for bedrooms were assumed to determine preliminary window STC ratings

required to mitigate road traffic noise levels.


Table V: Minimum STC Requirements

Prediction

Location Description Space

STC Glazing

Requirements

[A] Building A, façade facing Hurontario St +Living/Dining STC-35

+Bedroom STC-37

[B] Building A, façade facing Central Pkwy +Living/Dining STC-33*

+Bedroom STC-33*

[C] Building A, façade with flanking exposure to

Central Pkwy

+Living/Dining OBC

+Bedroom OBC

[D] Building A, façade facing Fairview Rd +Living/Dining STC-33*

+Bedroom STC-33*

[E] Building B, façade facing Hurontario St +Living/Dining STC-35

+Bedroom STC-37

[F] Building B, façade facing Fairview Rd +Living/Dining STC-33*

+Bedroom STC-33*

[G] Building B, façade with flanking exposure to

Fairview Rd

+Living/Dining OBC

+Bedroom OBC

[H] Building B, façade facing Central Pkwy +Living/Dining STC-33*

+Bedroom STC-33*

[K] Tower Link, façade facing Hurontario St +Living/Dining STC-33

+Bedroom STC-33 Notes: OBC – Ontario Building Code

+ Sound entering through windows and walls

* While facades with flanking exposure to Hurontario Street are somewhat less impacted, we do not typically recommend

less than STC-33 in urban environment such as this.

The glazing requirements can be met using fairly standard sealed units. Operable sections, including

doors and operable windows, must be well-fitted and weather-stripped in order to achieve the upper

range of target STC values.

Alternative assemblies may be required for operable windows and doors to achieve the required

performance values, depending on the nature of seals.

Further Analysis

When detailed floor plans and building elevations are available for the dwelling units, window

glazing construction should be refined based on actual window to floor area ratios.


6 Warning Clauses

The MECP guidelines recommend that warning clauses be included in the property and tenancy

agreements and offers of purchase and sale for all dwelling units with anticipated traffic sound level

excesses. The following noise warning clauses are required for specific dwellings as indicated in

Table VI.

Suggested wording for future dwellings with sound levels exceeding the MECP guideline limit is

given below.

Type A:

Purchasers/tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in the

development and within the building units, sound levels due to increasing road traffic may

occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels

exceed the Municipality’s and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks noise

criteria.

Suggest wording for future dwellings which will have central air conditioning units to be installed is

given below.

Type B:

This dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which will allow

windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels

are within the sound level limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment,

Conservation and Parks.

Suggested wording for future dwelling units in close proximity to commercial buildings is given

below.

Type C:

Purchasers are advised that due to the proximity of the existing commercial buildings,

sound levels from the facilities may be at times be audible.

These sample clauses are provided by the MECP as examples, and can be modified by the

Municipality as required.


7 Impact of the Development on Itself

Section 5.9.1 of the Ontario Building Code (OBC) specifies the minimum required sound insulation

characteristics for demising partitions, in terms of Sound Transmission Class (STC) values. In order

to maintain adequate acoustical privacy between separate suites in a multi-tenant building, inter-suite

walls must meet or exceed STC-50. Walls separating a suite from a noisy space such as a refuse

chute, or elevator shaft, must meet or exceed STC-55. In addition, it is recommended that the

floor/ceiling constructions separating suites from any amenity or commercial spaces also meet or

exceed STC-55. Tables 1 and 2 in Section SB-3 of the Supplementary Guideline to the OBC provide

a comprehensive list of constructions that will meet the above requirements.

Tarion’s Builder Bulletin B19R requires the internal design of condominium projects to integrate

suitable acoustic features to insulate the suites from noise from each other and amenities in

accordance with the OBC, and limit the potential intrusions of mechanical and electrical services of

the buildings on its residents. If B19R certification is needed, an acoustical consultant is required to

review the mechanical and electrical drawings and details of demising constructions and

mechanical/electrical equipment, when available, to help ensure that the noise impact of the

development on itself is maintained within acceptable levels.

8 Impact of the Development on the Environment

Sound levels from stationary (non-traffic) sources of noise such as rooftop air-conditioners, cooling

towers, exhaust fans, etc. should not exceed the minimum one-hour LEQ ambient (background) sound

level from road traffic, at any potentially impacted residential point of reception, to avoid

complaints. Based on the levels observed during our site visit, the typical minimum ambient sound

levels in the area are expected to be 55 dBA or more during the day and 50 dBA or more at night.

Thus, any electro-mechanical equipment associated with this development (e.g. emergency generator

testing, fresh-air handling equipment, etc.) should be designed with these targets in mind such that

they do not result in noise impact beyond these ranges.


9 Summary and Recommendations

The following list and Table VI summarize the recommendations made in this report. The reader is

referred to previous sections of the report where these recommendations are discussed in more detail.

1. Acoustic barriers/parapet walls are recommended for west and east podium outdoor amenity

areas as detailed in Section 5.1.

2. Central air conditioning will be required for all dwelling units.

3. Upgraded glazing constructions are required for the facades with exposure to Hurontario

Street, as shown in Figure 3 and Section 5.3. When detailed floor plans and building

elevations are available for the dwelling units with exposure to the roadways, window glazing

construction should be refined on actual window to floor ratios.

4. The use of warning clauses in the property and tenancy agreements is recommended to

inform future residents of traffic noise issues.


Table VI: Summary of Noise Control Requirements and Noise Warning Clauses

Prediction

Location Description

Acoustic

Barrier

Ventilation

Requirements*

Type of

Warning

Clause

Upgraded

Glazing

Constructions

[A], [E] Building A & B, façade facing

Hurontario St

-- Central A/C A, B, C

LR/DR: STC-35

BR: STC-37

[B] Building A, façade facing

Central Pkwy

LR/DR: STC-33

BR: STC-33

[C] Building A, façade with flanking

exposure to Central Pkwy OBC

[D] Building A, façade facing

Fairview Rd

LR/DR: STC-33

BR: STC-33

[F] Building B, façade facing

Fairview Rd

LR/DR: STC-33

BR: STC-33

[G] Building B, façade with flanking

exposure to Fairview Rd OBC

[H] Building B, façade facing

Central Pkwy

LR/DR: STC-33

BR: STC-33

[I] Outdoor amenity, west podium ✓ -- -- --

[J] Outdoor amenity, east podium ✓ -- -- --

[K] Tower Link, façade facing

Hurontario St -- Central A/C A, B, C

LR/DR: STC-33

BR: STC-33

Notes: * The location, installation and sound rating of the air conditioning condensers must be compliant with MECP

Guideline NPC-300, as applicable.

✓ Outdoor living areas require acoustic barriers. Refer to Section 5.1.

OBC – Ontario Building Code

LR/DR – Living Room/Dining Room

BR – Bedroom

9.1 Implementation

To ensure that the noise control recommendations outlined above are properly implemented, it is

recommended that:

1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for this development, a Professional Engineer

qualified to perform acoustical engineering services in the Province of Ontario should review

the detailed architectural plans and building elevations to refine glazing requirements based

on actual window to floor areas ratios.

2. Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for this development, the Municipality’s building

inspector or a Professional Engineer qualified to perform acoustical engineering services in

the Province of Ontario should certify that the noise control measures have been properly

incorporated, installed, and constructed.

hcai

Polygon

hcai

Text Box

Site Area

hcai

Text Box

Figure 1: Key Plan

hcai

Line

hcai

Text Box

N

N

PH

AS

E 2

PH

AS

E 1

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PR

OP

ER

TY

LIN

E

PR

OP

ER

TY

LIN

E

H U R O N T A R I O S T R E E T PH

AS

E 2

PH

AS

E 1

3.0

0 m

1800

3400

3000

2080

22001800

3.0

0 m

3.0

0 m

3.00 m

6.00 m

TR

AN

SF

OR

ME

R

MIN. LOADING SPACE (9.0m x 3.5m x 7.5m high)

MIN

. L

OA

DIN

G S

PA

CE

(9

.0m

x 3

.5m

x 7

.5m

hig

h)

7.0

0 m

27.7

0 m

EXHAUST SHAFT

INT

AK

E S

HA

FT

7

.5

m

4.5

0 m

2.00 m

6.00 m 4.50m

1

7.0

0m

14.0

0 m

1.3

8 m

6.00 m

1

7.0

0m

3.00 m

17.50m

16.50m

4

.5

m

6.5

m

7.5

0 m

1.50 m

18.5

0 m

0.6

0 m

13.50m

1

6.0

0m

1

3.5

0m

7

.5

0m

7

.0

0m

4

.0

0m

3.0

0 m

1.00 m 28.60 m 32.00 m 28.60 m27.7

0 m

8.0

m

11.50m

18.5

0 m

1000 30000 1000

520

1000520

21000

2565

C E

N T

R A

L P

A R

K W

A Y

W E

S T

H U R O N T A R I O S T R E E T

TOWER A - 36 STOREYS(4 STOREY PODIUM 32 STOREY

TOWER) MIXED USE BLDG286 APARTMENT UNITS

TOWER B - 30 STOREYS(4 STOREY PODIUM & 26 STOREY

TOWER) MIXED USE BLDG 220 APARTMENT UNITS

SHARED PODIUM @ LEVEL 514 APARTMENT UNITS

MPH ROOF MPH ROOF

4S

OUTDOOR AMENITY @ L5OUTDOOR AMENITY @ L5

OUTDOOR AMENITY @ L5

GR

EE

N R

OO

F @

L5

GR

EE

N R

OO

F @

L5

GREEN ROOF @ L5

10S

SWIMMING POOL @ LEVEL 5

SITE ENTRANCE / EXIT


1.5m EXISTING PUBLIC SIDEWALK 1.5m EXISTING PUBLIC SIDEWALK

1.5m SITE ACCESS WALKWAY

1.5

m S

ITE

AC

CE

SS

WA

LK

WA

Y1.5

m E

XIS

TIN

G P

UB

LIC

SID

EW

ALK

RAISED DECK

GREEN ROOF @ L11TOWER A & TOWER B LINK

LEVELS 6-10 160 APARTMENT UNITS

GREEN ROOF @ L6 5S

SIT

E

EN

TR

AN

CE

/ EX

IT

121190

BUILDING "A"FFE = 137.45

BUILDING "B"FFE = 137.45

1.07m HIGH GLAZED BIRD FRIENDLY TREATED ACOUSTIC SCREEN WITH VISUAL MARKERS


1.0

5m

HIG

H B

IRD

FR

IEN

DLY

TR

EA

TE

D

LO

W R

EF

LE

CT

AN

CE

GLA

ZE

D R

AIL

ING

1.05m HIGH BIRD FRIENDLY TREATED LOW REFLECTANCE GLAZED RAILING

2m HIGH GLAZED BIRD FRIENDLY TREATED ACOUSTIC SCREEN WITH VISUAL MARKERS

N

Drawing Title:

Scale:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Project No.:

Date:

No.: Issued For: Date:

Drawing No.:

No.: Revision: Date:

Plot Date:

File Path:

Client:

All Drawings, Specifications, and Related Documents are the Copyright of the Architect. The Architect retains all rights to control all uses of these documents for the intended issuance/use as identified below. Reproduction of these Documents, without permission from the Architect, is strictly prohibited. The Authorities Having Jurisdiction are permitted to use, distribute, and reproduce these drawings for the intended issuance as noted and dated below, however the extended permission to the Authorities Having Jurisdiction in no way debases or limits the Copyright of the Architect, or control of use of these documents by the Architect.

Do not scale the drawings.

This Drawing Is Not To Be Used For Construction Until Signed ByThe Architect.

Authorities Having Jurisdiction

Project:

v.2

020.0

2.2

6

Revisions:

1 : 250

11/13/2020 3:13:56 PM

C:\Revit\2019\19128P10-Model-3420 Hurontario_Residential Development_

JDayabhai.rvt

Mixed Use Residential Development,Mississauga

JD, T.S.,H.C

C.K.

19-128

November 13, 2020

dA1.3

3420 - 3442 HurontarioStreet

Site Plan

Bet Realty Ltd.

dA1.31 : 250

Site Plan 1

hcai

Text Box

Figure 2: Site Plan Showing Prediction Locations

hcai

Callout

[A]

hcai

Callout

[B]

hcai

Callout

[C]

hcai

Text Box

[I]

hcai

Callout

[D]

hcai

Text Box

[J]

hcai

Callout

[H]

hcai

Callout

[K]

hcai

Callout

[E]

hcai

Callout

[F]

hcai

Callout

[G]

N

PH

AS

E 2

PH

AS

E 1

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PR

OP

ER

TY

LIN

E

PR

OP

ER

TY

LIN

E

H U R O N T A R I O S T R E E T PH

AS

E 2

PH

AS

E 1

3.0

0 m

1800

3400

3000

2080

22001800

3.0

0 m

3.0

0 m

3.00 m

6.00 m

TR

AN

SF

OR

ME

R

MIN. LOADING SPACE (9.0m x 3.5m x 7.5m high)

MIN

. L

OA

DIN

G S

PA

CE

(9

.0m

x 3

.5m

x 7

.5m

hig

h)

7.0

0 m

27.7

0 m

EXHAUST SHAFT

INT

AK

E S

HA

FT

7

.5

m

4.5

0 m

2.00 m

6.00 m 4.50m

1

7.0

0m

14.0

0 m

1.3

8 m

6.00 m

1

7.0

0m

3.00 m

17.50m

16.50m

4

.5

m

6.5

m

7.5

0 m

1.50 m

18.5

0 m

0.6

0 m

13.50m

1

6.0

0m

1

3.5

0m

7

.5

0m

7

.0

0m

4

.0

0m

3.0

0 m

1.00 m 28.60 m 32.00 m 28.60 m27.7

0 m

8.0

m

11.50m

18.5

0 m

1000 30000 1000

520

1000520

21000

2565

C E

N T

R A

L P

A R

K W

A Y

W E

S T


TOWER A - 36 STOREYS(4 STOREY PODIUM 32 STOREY

TOWER) MIXED USE BLDG286 APARTMENT UNITS

TOWER B - 30 STOREYS(4 STOREY PODIUM & 26 STOREY

TOWER) MIXED USE BLDG 220 APARTMENT UNITS

SHARED PODIUM @ LEVEL 514 APARTMENT UNITS

MPH ROOF MPH ROOF

4S

OUTDOOR AMENITY @ L5OUTDOOR AMENITY @ L5

OUTDOOR AMENITY @ L5

GR

EE

N R

OO

F @

L5

GR

EE

N R

OO

F @

L5

GREEN ROOF @ L5

10S

SWIMMING POOL @ LEVEL 5

SITE ENTRANCE / EXIT


1.5m EXISTING PUBLIC SIDEWALK 1.5m EXISTING PUBLIC SIDEWALK

1.5m SITE ACCESS WALKWAY

1.5

m S

ITE

AC

CE

SS

WA

LK

WA

Y1.5

m E

XIS

TIN

G P

UB

LIC

SID

EW

ALK

RAISED DECK

GREEN ROOF @ L11TOWER A & TOWER B LINK

LEVELS 6-10 160 APARTMENT UNITS

GREEN ROOF @ L6 5S

SIT

E

EN

TR

AN

CE

/ EX

IT

121190

BUILDING "A"FFE = 137.45

BUILDING "B"FFE = 137.45



1.0

5m

HIG

H B

IRD

FR

IEN

DLY

TR

EA

TE

D

LO

W R

EF

LE

CT

AN

CE

GLA

ZE

D R

AIL

ING

1.05m HIGH BIRD FRIENDLY TREATED LOW REFLECTANCE GLAZED RAILING

2m HIGH GLAZED BIRD FRIENDLY TREATED ACOUSTIC SCREEN WITH VISUAL MARKERS

N

Drawing Title:

Scale:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Project No.:

Date:

No.: Issued For: Date:

Drawing No.:

No.: Revision: Date:

Plot Date:

File Path:

Client:

All Drawings, Specifications, and Related Documents are the Copyright of the Architect. The Architect retains all rights to control all uses of these documents for the intended issuance/use as identified below. Reproduction of these Documents, without permission from the Architect, is strictly prohibited. The Authorities Having Jurisdiction are permitted to use, distribute, and reproduce these drawings for the intended issuance as noted and dated below, however the extended permission to the Authorities Having Jurisdiction in no way debases or limits the Copyright of the Architect, or control of use of these documents by the Architect.

Do not scale the drawings.

This Drawing Is Not To Be Used For Construction Until Signed ByThe Architect.

Authorities Having Jurisdiction

Project:

v.2

020.0

2.2

6

Revisions:

1 : 250

11/13/2020 3:13:56 PM

C:\Revit\2019\19128P10-Model-3420 Hurontario_Residential Development_

JDayabhai.rvt

Mixed Use Residential Development,Mississauga

JD, T.S.,H.C

C.K.

19-128

November 13, 2020

dA1.3

3420 - 3442 HurontarioStreet

Site Plan

Bet Realty Ltd.

dA1.31 : 250

Site Plan 1

hcai

Text Box

Figure 3: Site Plan Showing Upgraded Glazing and Barrier Requirements

hcai

Callout

Upgraded Glazing Construction Required. Refer to Section 5.3

hcai

Line

hcai

Callout

1.07m high Rooftop Parapet. Refer to Section 5.1

harry

Polygonal Line

harry

Line

harry

Polygonal Line

harry

Polygonal Line

harry

Polygonal Line

hcai

Callout

2.0m high Rooftop Parapet. Refer to Section 5.1

Appendix A

Road Traffic Information

ID# 452

Date: 10-Jan-20

Name: Sheeba Paul

Company: HGC Engineering

Name Bertuen Mickle

Tel#: (905) 615-3200

Location: Miss. Valley Blvd - Arista Way to Central Pky EKaneff Cre - Arista Way to Miss. Valley BlvdHurontario Street - Burnhamthorpe Rd to Central Pky EBurnhamthorpe Rd E - Hurontario St to Arista WayCentral Pky - Hurontario St to Miss. Valley Blvd

Mississauga Valley Blvd Keneff Crescent Hurontario Street Burnhamthorpe Road E Central Parkway E

5,000 5,000 40,700 47,800 17,700

2 Lanes 2 lanes 4 Lanes 6 Lanes 4 Lanes

3% 2% 5% 5% 4%

55/45 55/45 55/45 55/45 55/45

90/10 90/10 90/10 90/10 90/10

40 km/h 40 km/h 60 km/h 60 km/h 50 km/h

<2% <2% <2% <2% <2%

27m 15m 50m 60m 35m

Comments: - Ultimate Traffic Data Only

-There is a proposed LRT line along Hurontario St. existing lanes may be converted from 6 lanes to 4 lanes with 2 LRT lines in the middle.

-Please contact Farhad Shala @(905) 615-3200 ext. 3377 or [email protected] for more information regarding LRT.

NOISE REPORT FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

ON SITE TRAFFIC DATA

REQUESTED BY:

PREPARED BY:

AADT:

# of Lanes:

% Trucks:

Medium/Heavy Trucks Ratio:

AADT:

Day/Night Split:

Posted Speed Limit:

Gradient Of Road:

Ultimate R.O.W:

Specific Street Names

ID#: 481

Date: 20-Jul-20

Name: Harry Cai

Company: HGC Engineering

Name: Bertuen Mickle

Tel#: (905) 615-3200

Location: Fairview Road : From Hurontario Street to Hanson Road

AADT: 5,000

# of Lanes: 2 Lanes

% Trucks: 2%

Medium/Heavy Trucks Ratio: 55/45

Day/Night Traffic Split: 90/10

Posted Speed Limit: 40 km/h

Gradient of Road: <2%

Ultimate R O W: 20m

REQUESTED BY:

PREPARED BY:

ON SITE TRAFFIC DATASpecific Street Names

Fairview RoadSpecific

Comments: Ultimate Traffic Data Only

NOISE REPORT FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

3

From: Bertuen Mickle <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 7:28 AM To: Harry Cai <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Ultimate Traffic Data Request ‐ 3420 Hurontario Street

Hello harry,

Yes, the Traffic Data for those streets are still good. Do you want me to provide the traffic data for Fairview road?

Bertuen Mickle, P.M.P., C.E.T. Transportation Infrastructure Technologist 905-615-3200 ext.5807

[email protected]

City of Mississauga | Transportation and Works Department, Infrastructure Planning and Engineering Services Division, Transportation Asset Management Section.

Please consider the environment before printing.

From: Harry Cai [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 11:25 AM To: Bertuen Mickle Subject: Ultimate Traffic Data Request - 3420 Hurontario Street

Hi Bertuen,

HGC Engineering is conducting a noise feasibility study located at 3420 Hurontario Street. A google maps link is provided for your reference.

https://goo.gl/maps/kRkHgNdnRGFRCPhw8

We are looking for ultimate road traffic data for Hurontario Street, Central Parkway, and Fairview Road.

We do have previous traffic data for Hurontario Street and Central Parkway from January 2020 (see attached) that we could use for the study, provided that if you can confirm they are still good to use.

Thank you.

4

Harry Cai, EIT Project Consultant HGC Engineering NOISE | VIBRATION | ACOUSTICS Howe Gastmeier Chapnik Limited 2000 Argentia Road, Plaza One, Suite 203, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5N 1P7 t: 905.826.4044 ext. 297 e: [email protected] Visit our website: www.hgcengineering.com Follow Us – LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube

Appendix B

Sample STAMSON 5.04 Output

STAMSON 5.0 NORMAL REPORT Date: 17-08-2020 15:37:55MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY / NOISE ASSESSMENT

Filename: a.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hoursDescription: Pred. Loc. [A], Building A, facade facing Hurontario St

Road data, segment # 1: Hurontario (day/night) ----------------------------------------------Car traffic volume : 44650/2400 veh/TimePeriod Medium truck volume : 1293/480 veh/TimePeriod Heavy truck volume : 1058/240 veh/TimePeriod Posted speed limit : 60 km/hRoad gradient : 2 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)

Data for Segment # 1: Hurontario (day/night)--------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 25.00 / 25.00 mReceiver height : 106.50 / 106.50 mTopography : 1 (Flat/gentle slope; no barrier)Reference angle : 0.00

Road data, segment # 2: Central Pkwy (day/night)------------------------------------------------Car traffic volume : 14688/1632 veh/TimePeriod *Medium truck volume : 337/37 veh/TimePeriod *Heavy truck volume : 275/31 veh/TimePeriod *Posted speed limit : 50 km/hRoad gradient : 2 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)

* Refers to calculated road volumes based on the following input:

24 hr Traffic Volume (AADT or SADT): 17000 Percentage of Annual Growth : 0.00 Number of Years of Growth : 0.00 Medium Truck % of Total Volume : 2.20 Heavy Truck % of Total Volume : 1.80 Day (16 hrs) % of Total Volume : 90.00

Data for Segment # 2: Central Pkwy (day/night)----------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 0.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 32.00 / 32.00 m

Receiver height : 106.50 / 106.50 mTopography : 1 (Flat/gentle slope; no barrier)Reference angle : 0.00

Road data, segment # 3: Fairview (day/night)--------------------------------------------Car traffic volume : 4410/490 veh/TimePeriod *Medium truck volume : 50/6 veh/TimePeriod *Heavy truck volume : 41/5 veh/TimePeriod *Posted speed limit : 40 km/hRoad gradient : 0 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)



Data for Segment # 3: Fairview (day/night)------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : 0.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 233.00 / 233.00 mReceiver height : 106.50 / 106.50 mTopography : 1 (Flat/gentle slope; no barrier)Reference angle : 0.00

Results segment # 1: Hurontario (day)-------------------------------------

Source height = 1.22 m

ROAD (0.00 + 71.10 + 0.00) = 71.10 dBAAngle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-90 90 0.00 73.32 0.00 -2.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 71.10----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Segment Leq : 71.10 dBA

Results segment # 2: Central Pkwy (day)---------------------------------------



-90 0 0.00 66.20 0.00 -3.29 -3.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 59.90----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Results segment # 3: Fairview (day)-----------------------------------


ROAD (0.00 + 41.80 + 0.00) = 41.80 dBAAngle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 90 0.00 56.72 0.00 -11.91 -3.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.80----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Total Leq All Segments: 71.42 dBA

Results segment # 1: Hurontario (night)---------------------------------------



-90 90 0.00 69.02 0.00 -2.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 66.81----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Results segment # 2: Central Pkwy (night)-----------------------------------------



-90 0 0.00 59.70 0.00 -3.29 -3.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 53.40----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Results segment # 3: Fairview (night)

-------------------------------------





TOTAL Leq FROM ALL SOURCES (DAY): 71.42(NIGHT): 67.01


Filename: b.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hoursDescription: Pred. Loc. [B], Building A, facade facing Central Pkwy Road data, segment # 1: Hurontario (day/night) ----------------------------------------------Car traffic volume : 44650/2400 veh/TimePeriod Medium truck volume : 1293/480 veh/TimePeriod Heavy truck volume : 1058/240 veh/TimePeriod

Posted speed limit : 60 km/hRoad gradient : 2 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)

Data for Segment # 1: Hurontario (day/night)--------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : 0.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 26.00 / 26.00 mReceiver height : 106.50 / 106.50 mTopography : 1 (Flat/gentle slope; no barrier)Reference angle : 0.00













-90 90 0.00 66.20 0.00 -3.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.91----------------------------------------------------------------------------










-90 90 0.00 59.70 0.00 -3.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 56.41----------------------------------------------------------------------------





Filename: c.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hoursDescription: Pred.Loc.[C], Building A, facade flanking central




Data for Segment # 1: Central Pkwy (day/night)----------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : 0.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 32.00 / 32.00 mReceiver height : 106.50 / 106.50 mTopography : 1 (Flat/gentle slope; no barrier)Reference angle : 0.00













Filename: d.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hoursDescription: Pred.Loc.[D], Building A, facade facing Fairview

Road data, segment # 1: Hurontario (day/night)----------------------------------------------Car traffic volume : 44650/2400 veh/TimePeriod Medium truck volume : 1293/480 veh/TimePeriod Heavy truck volume : 1058/240 veh/TimePeriod Posted speed limit : 60 km/hRoad gradient : 2 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)





Data for Segment # 2: Fairview (day/night)------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 205.00 / 205.00 m




ROAD (0.00 + 67.92 + 0.00) = 67.92 dBAAngle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 0 0.00 73.32 0.00 -2.39 -3.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 67.92----------------------------------------------------------------------------




ROAD (0.00 + 45.78 + 0.00) = 45.78 dBAAngle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 90 0.00 57.14 0.00 -11.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.78----------------------------------------------------------------------------







Results segment # 2: Fairview (night)-------------------------------------





TOTAL Leq FROM ALL SOURCES (DAY): 67.95 (NIGHT): 63.65


Filename: e.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hoursDescription: Pred.Loc.[E], BUilding B, facade facing Hurontario











Data for Segment # 3: Fairview (day/night)------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : 0.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 135.00 / 135.00 mReceiver height : 88.50 / 88.50 mTopography : 1 (Flat/gentle slope; no barrier)Reference angle : 0.00






















Results segment # 3: Fairview (night)

-------------------------------------







Filename: f.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hoursDescription: Pred.Loc.[F], Building B, facade facing Fairview






Data for Segment # 2: Fairview (day/night)------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 135.00 / 135.00 m






















Filename: g.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hoursDescription: Pred.Loc.[G], Building B, facade flanking Fairview




Data for Segment # 1: Central Pkwy (day/night)----------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : 0.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 310.00 / 310.00 mReceiver height : 88.50 / 88.50 mTopography : 1 (Flat/gentle slope; no barrier)Reference angle : 0.00



24 hr Traffic Volume (AADT or SADT): 5000 Percentage of Annual Growth : 0.00 Number of Years of Growth : 0.00 Medium Truck % of Total Volume : 1.10 Heavy Truck % of Total Volume : 0.90

Day (16 hrs) % of Total Volume : 90.00

Data for Segment # 2: Fairview (day/night)------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 0.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 135.00 / 135.00 mReceiver height : 88.50 / 88.50 mTopography : 1 (Flat/gentle slope; no barrier)Reference angle : 0.00





















Filename: h.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hoursDescription: Pred.Loc.[H], Building B, facade facing Central Pk


Data for Segment # 1: Hurontario (day/night)--------------------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : 0.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0 / 0 Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 26.00 / 26.00 mReceiver height : 88.50 / 88.50 mTopography : 1 (Flat/gentle slope; no barrier)Reference angle : 0.00

























STAMSON 5.0 NORMAL REPORT Date: 17-08-2020 15:45:10 MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY / NOISE ASSESSMENT

Filename: i.te Time Period: 16 hoursDescription: Pred. Loc. [I], West Podium OLA, Daytime Sound Level

Road data, segment # 1: Hurontario----------------------------------Car traffic volume : 44650 veh/TimePeriod Medium truck volume : 1293 veh/TimePeriod Heavy truck volume : 1058 veh/TimePeriod Posted speed limit : 60 km/hRoad gradient : 2 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)

Data for Segment # 1: Hurontario--------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : 0.00 deg 45.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 62.00 mReceiver height : 1.50 mTopography : 4 (Elevated; with barrier)Barrier angle1 : 0.00 deg Angle2 : 45.00 degBarrier height : 1.07 mElevation : 15.00 mBarrier receiver distance : 8.00 mSource elevation : 0.00 mReceiver elevation : 15.00 mBarrier elevation : 15.00 mReference angle : 0.00

Road data, segment # 2: Central Pkwy------------------------------------Car traffic volume : 14688 veh/TimePeriod *Medium truck volume : 337 veh/TimePeriod *Heavy truck volume : 275 veh/TimePeriod *Posted speed limit : 50 km/hRoad gradient : 2 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)

Data for Segment # 2: Central Pkwy----------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 45.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 35.00 mReceiver height : 1.50 mTopography : 4 (Elevated; with barrier)

Barrier angle1 : -90.00 deg Angle2 : 45.00 degBarrier height : 1.07 mElevation : 15.00 mBarrier receiver distance : 8.00 mSource elevation : 0.00 mReceiver elevation : 15.00 mBarrier elevation : 15.00 mReference angle : 0.00

Road data, segment # 3: Fairview--------------------------------Car traffic volume : 4410 veh/TimePeriod *Medium truck volume : 50 veh/TimePeriod *Heavy truck volume : 41 veh/TimePeriod *Posted speed limit : 40 km/hRoad gradient : 0 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)

Data for Segment # 3: Fairview------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : -45.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 223.00 mReceiver height : 1.50 mTopography : 4 (Elevated; with barrier)Barrier angle1 : -45.00 deg Angle2 : 90.00 degBarrier height : 1.07 mElevation : 15.00 mBarrier receiver distance : 100.00 mSource elevation : 0.00 mReceiver elevation : 15.00 mBarrier elevation : 15.00 mReference angle : 0.00

Results segment # 1: Hurontario-------------------------------


Barrier height for grazing incidence------------------------------------Source ! Receiver ! Barrier ! Elevation ofHeight (m) ! Height (m) ! Height (m) ! Barrier Top (m)------------+-------------+-------------+-------------- 1.22 ! 1.50 ! -0.47 ! 14.53

ROAD (0.00 + 50.23 + 0.00) = 50.23 dBAAngle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 45 0.15 73.32 0.00 -7.11 -6.09 0.00 0.00 -9.89 50.23

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Results segment # 2: Central Pkwy---------------------------------



ROAD (0.00 + 47.45 + 0.00) = 47.45 dBAAngle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 45 0.16 66.20 0.00 -4.25 -1.56 0.00 0.00 -12.95 47.45 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Results segment # 3: Fairview-----------------------------






TOTAL Leq FROM ALL SOURCES: 52.10


Filename: j.te Time Period: 16 hoursDescription: Pred.Loc.[J], East Podium OLA

Road data, segment # 1: Hurontario----------------------------------Car traffic volume : 44650 veh/TimePeriod Medium truck volume : 1293 veh/TimePeriod Heavy truck volume : 1058 veh/TimePeriod Posted speed limit : 60 km/hRoad gradient : 2 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)

Data for Segment # 1: Hurontario--------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 30.00 mReceiver height : 1.50 mTopography : 4 (Elevated; with barrier)Barrier angle1 : -90.00 deg Angle2 : 90.00 degBarrier height : 1.07 mElevation : 15.00 mBarrier receiver distance : 8.00 mSource elevation : 0.00 mReceiver elevation : 15.00 mBarrier elevation : 15.00 mReference angle : 0.00

Road data, segment # 2: Central Pkwy------------------------------------Car traffic volume : 14688 veh/TimePeriod *Medium truck volume : 337 veh/TimePeriod *Heavy truck volume : 275 veh/TimePeriod *Posted speed limit : 50 km/hRoad gradient : 2 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)

Data for Segment # 2: Central Pkwy----------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : 0.00 deg 90.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 75.00 mReceiver height : 1.50 mTopography : 4 (Elevated; with barrier)

Barrier angle1 : 0.00 deg Angle2 : 90.00 degBarrier height : 1.07 mElevation : 15.00 mBarrier receiver distance : 14.00 mSource elevation : 0.00 mReceiver elevation : 15.00 mBarrier elevation : 15.00 mReference angle : 0.00

Road data, segment # 3: Fairview--------------------------------Car traffic volume : 4410 veh/TimePeriod *Medium truck volume : 50 veh/TimePeriod *Heavy truck volume : 41 veh/TimePeriod *Posted speed limit : 40 km/hRoad gradient : 0 %Road pavement : 1 (Typical asphalt or concrete)

Data for Segment # 3: Fairview------------------------------Angle1 Angle2 : -90.00 deg 0.00 degWood depth : 0 (No woods.)No of house rows : 0Surface : 1 (Absorptive ground surface)Receiver source distance : 190.00 mReceiver height : 1.50 mTopography : 4 (Elevated; with barrier)Barrier angle1 : -90.00 deg Angle2 : 0.00 degBarrier height : 1.07 mElevation : 15.00 mBarrier receiver distance : 14.00 mSource elevation : 0.00 mReceiver elevation : 15.00 mBarrier elevation : 15.00 mReference angle : 0.00

Results segment # 1: Hurontario-------------------------------



ROAD (0.00 + 56.23 + 0.00) = 56.23 dBAAngle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -90 90 0.15 73.32 0.00 -3.47 -0.42 0.00 0.00 -13.19 56.23

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Results segment # 2: Central Pkwy---------------------------------



ROAD (0.00 + 45.24 + 0.00) = 45.24 dBAAngle1 Angle2 Alpha RefLeq P.Adj D.Adj F.Adj W.Adj H.Adj B.Adj SubLeq---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 90 0.16 66.20 0.00 -8.08 -3.44 0.00 0.00 -9.44 45.24 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Results segment # 3: Fairview-----------------------------


Barrier height for grazing incidence------------------------------------Source ! Receiver ! Barrier ! Elevation ofHeight (m) ! Height (m) ! Height (m) ! Barrier Top (m)------------+-------------+-------------+-------------- 0.98 ! 1.50 ! 0.36 ! 15.36




TOTAL Leq FROM ALL SOURCES: 56.59


Filename: k.te Time Period: Day/Night 16/8 hoursDescription: Pred.Loc.[K], Tower link facing Hurontario St






-90 90 0.00 73.32 0.00 -3.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 69.77----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Total Leq All Segments: 69.77 dBAResults segment # 1: Hurontario (night)---------------------------------------



-90 90 0.00 69.02 0.00 -3.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65.47

----------------------------------------------------------------------------




Appendix C

Supporting Documents

LEVEL 2 (EMBEDDED) - 10 dB REDUCTION

LEVEL 3 (FLOATING) - 15 dB REDUCTION

LEVEL 1 (EMBEDDED) - 5 dB REDUCTION

LEGEND

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

FIGURE 25

VIBRATION ISOLATION

KING ST. TO CENTRAL PKWY.

hcai

Polygon

hcai

Text Box

Site Area

hcai

Polygon

hcai

Text Box

Site Area

hcai

Distance Measurement

21785.77 mm�

NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT 27 HURONTARIO-MAIN LRT

J.E. COULTER ASSOCIATES LIMITED

Table 12: Predicted LRV Ground-Borne Vibration Levels

Distance from Track Centreline (m)

Vibration Levels (mm/s rms)

40km/h 50km/h 60km/h 80km/h

5-6 0.14 0.17 0.20 0.27

10 0.09 0.11 0.13 0.18

15 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.16

20 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.13

25 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.10

As can be seen from Table 12, any sensitive receptors located at least:

10m from the centreline of the nearest track wherever the LRT travels at 40km/h



25m from the centreline of the nearest track wherever the LRT travels at 80km/h will meet the guideline limit of 0.10mm/s without any additional vibration control measures. An additional 5 dB reduction (44% reduction) will be required for areas with residential receptors located closer than the minimum setbacks described above, in order to reduce the vibration levels to 0.10mm/s rms. For concrete embedded track, however, vibration control to limit vibration-induced noise is more critical and will supersede the requirements for ground-borne vibration mitigation. 5.4.2 Vibration-Induced Sound For light rail on a concrete track bed, vibration-induced sound tends to be more of an issue than perceptible vibration, especially at close setbacks. At greater setbacks, vibration-induced sound becomes less critical, as the damping characteristics of clayey or till soils reduce the vibration levels in the octave bands to which human hearing is sensitive. At setbacks of 20m or more from the nearest track, perceptible (ground-borne) vibration is more critical than vibration-induced noise. The following analysis for vibration-induced noise is based on setbacks of 20m or less, which occur primarily wherever the LRT is operating at 50km/h. Based on the measurements taken from Table 8, the sound levels in various rooms within residences adjacent to the proposed LRT route can be determined. Table 10, below, summarizes the sound levels that can be expected in various rooms as a result of vibration-induced noise. It has generally been assumed that there is usually one room with window exposure to the LRT route, with a second bedroom room set back within the building that does not have any window exposure to the LRT route. As per the FTA guidelines, the recommended objective for vibration-induced noise in the otherwise quiet bedroom (i.e., back room) is 35 dBA. This relationship is explained in Figures 21 and 22 in Appendix A. Table 13, 14, 15, and 16 present the vibration-induced sound levels that can be expected under various circumstances, wherever the LRT is operating at 40km/h, 50km/h, 60km/h, and 80km/h, respectively The distances listed are based on the most common setbacks between the track centreline and sensitive receptors along the LRT corridor. The airborne sound level is the sound level that can be expected in the first room with window exposure facing the LRT, where the airborne noise always dominates the vibration-induced noise. As evidenced by measured

hcai

Rectangle