Regional Rail Revival Warrnambool · 6/18/2019 · The Aurecon Jacobs Mott MacDonald Joint Venture has been engaged by Rail Projects Victoria to undertake a noise assessment for

Regional Rail RevivalWarrnamboolPREPARED FOR RAIL PROJECTS VICTORIA

WLU-AJM-PWD-WPD-REP-XAV-WPD-0000329WAURN PONDS TRAIN MAINTENANCE ANDSTABLING FACILITYNOISE ASSESSMENT

D AT E 18 J UN E 2 0 19

File WLU-AJM-PWD-WPD-REP-XAV-WPD-0000329 18 June 2019 P. i

Contents1 Executive Summary 1

2 Introduction 2

2.1 Project Description 2

2.2 Operations 11

2.3 Nearby Noise Sensitive Areas 11

2.4 Benefits of the Project 13

2.5 Purpose of Assessment 13

3 Regulatory Context 14

3.1 Noise from Industry in Regional Victoria (NIRV) 14

4 Methodology 16

4.1 Approach 16

4.2 Operational Scenarios 16

4.3 Acoustic Model 17

4.4 Files Used for the Assessment 18

4.5 Limitations 18

5 Noise Assessment 19

5.1 Noise Sensitive Areas - RMNLs 19

5.2 Acoustic Model 19

5.3 Predicted Noise Levels 22

5.4 Summary 24

6 Noise Management 26

6.1 Noise Barriers 26

6.2 Acoustic Shed 26

6.3 Alternative Location of the WPSF 26

6.4 Off-reservation Treatment 27

7 Discussion 28

8 Conclusion 29

AppendicesAppendix A

Site Layout

File WLU-AJM-PWD-WPD-REP-XAV-WPD-0000329 18 June 2019 P. ii

Glossary and AbbreviationsThe definitions of the terms used in this report are set out below.

T ERM M EANI NG

dB Sound pressure levels are expressed in decibels as a ratio between the measured sound pressurelevel and the reference pressure. The reference pressure is 2x10-6 Pascal (Newtons per squaremeter). Some typical noise levels are presented below:

Sound Pressure Level, dB(A) Example

130 Threshold of pain

120 Jet aircraft take-off at 100 m

110 Power tool at 1 m

100 Nightclub

90 Heavy trucks at 5 m

80 Kerbside of busy street

70Loud radio (in typical domesticroom)

60 Office

50 Domestic fan heater at 1m

40 Quiet, night-time urban area

30 Quiet whispering

20 Rural environment on still night

10 Sound insulated test chamber

0 Threshold of hearing

dB(A) The A-weighted sound pressure level in decibels, denoted dB(A) is the unit generally used for themeasurement of environmental, transportation or industrial noise. The A-weighting scale approximatesthe sensitivity of the human ear when it is exposed to normal levels and correlates well with thesubjective perception of a number of different types of sounds.

An increase or decrease in sound level of approximately 10 dB corresponds respectively to asubjective doubling or halving in loudness. A change in sound level of 3dB is considered to be justnoticeable.

EPA 1413 EPA Victoria’s Applying NIRV to proposed and existing industry, Publication 1413, October 2011

File WLU-AJM-PWD-WPD-REP-XAV-WPD-0000329 18 June 2019 P. iii

T ERM M EANI NG

Frequency

The rate of repetition of a sound wave. The unit of frequency is the Hertz (Hz), which is defined as onecycle per second.

Human hearing ranges approximately from 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz. For design purposes, the octavebands between 63 Hz to 8 kHz are generally used. The most commonly used frequency bands areoctave bands. For more detailed analysis each octave band may be split into three one-third octavebands or narrow frequency bands.

LAeq

The equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level is the value of the A-weighted soundpressure level of a continuous steady sound that has the same acoustic energy as a time-varying A-weighted sound pressure level when determined over the same measurement period.

Noise Barrier A contiguous solid construction typically consisting of a surface density in the order of 15 kg/m2 ormore, with no gaps or holes

NIRV EPA Victoria’s Noise from Industry in Regional Victoria, Publication 1413, October 2011

NSA Noise Sensitive Area (as defined in SEPP N-1):

a) That part of the land within the apparent boundaries of any piece of land which is within adistance of 10 m outside the external walls of any of the following buildings –- Dwelling (except Caretaker’s House)- Residential Building

b) That part of the land within the apparent boundaries of any piece of land on which issituated any of the following buildings which is within a distance of 10 m outside the externalwalls of any dormitory, ward or bedroom of such buildings –- Caretaker’s House- Hospital- Hotel- Institutional Home- Motel- Reformative Institution- Tourist Establishment- Work Release Hostel

PRINP Victorian Passenger Rail Infrastructure Noise Policy, April 2013

PSA Planning Scheme Amendment

SEL The Sound Exposure Level is a measure of the total acoustic energy of an acoustic event presentedas the same amount of energy over a period of one second.

TEL The Transit Exposure Level is the A-weighted sound level of a train pass-by, measured for a timeinterval and normalised to the pass-by time.

SEPP N-1 EPA Victoria’s State Environmental Protection Policy (Control of Noise from Commerce, Industry andTrade) No. N-1, No. S183, Gazette 31/10/2001

Sound Power LevelThe Sound Power Level of a source is a measure of the total acoustic power radiated by a source. It isa characteristic of the sound source which is not affected by the environment within which the sourceis located.

File WLU-AJM-PWD-WPD-REP-XAV-WPD-0000329 18 June 2019 P. 1

1 Executive Summary

The Aurecon Jacobs Mott MacDonald Joint Venture has been engaged by Rail Projects Victoria to undertake anoise assessment for Stage 1 of the Waurn Ponds Stabling Facility. This project is funded and is expected to bedelivered by 2021.

Noise impacts for four operational scenarios have been assessed with respect to the EPA Noise from Industryin Regional Victoria Guideline. These scenarios are:

· Scenario 1: Three VLocity trains idling on stabling roads 4 to 6 during refuelling operations

· Scenario 2: Three VLocity trains starting-up on stabling roads 4 to 6 and leaving the site at 10-minuteintervals

· Scenario 3: Three locomotive trains starting-up on stabling roads 4 to 6 and leaving the site in 10-minuteintervals, and three non-operating/non-idling VLocity trains parked on stabling roads 1 to 3

· Scenario 4: Three VLocity trains operating/idling on stabling roads 1 to 3 and three locomotive trainsoperating/idling on stabling roads 4 to 6, with trains leaving the site at 10-minute intervals.

Exceedances to the Recommended Maximum Noise Levels have been predicted for Scenarios 2, 3 and 4 dueto start-up operations during the night period (early morning, prior to 7am).

Consequently, we have undertaken a preliminary identification of a range of mitigation options. The mitigationmeasure considered most appropriate for the site is off-reservation treatment consisting of architecturaltreatment to residences. Mitigation measures may be further developed during Detailed Design.

The proposed Incorporated Document requires the preparation of a Development Plan that addressesoperational noise impacts, and the preparation of an Environmental Management Framework (EMF) thatmanages construction noise. It is anticipated that this noise assessment will be updated during the DetailedDesign phase of the Project to ensure that the predicted noise impacts and specified mitigation measures aretailored to the final design.

Stage 2 of the project is not funded and noise modelling has not been undertaken for Stage 2 because:

· The design and operational aspects are not finalised

· The types of trains to be stabled at the site are not known

· The surrounding land use and sensitive receptor context may be different when Stage 2 of the project isprogressed

An assessment of construction noise is not presented in this report. However, construction noise is to bemanaged, by a contractor, in accordance with:

· Environmental Guidelines for Major Construction Sites, Publication 480

· Noise Control Guidelines Publication 1254 (EPA 1245) and

· The EMF under the Incorporated Document


2 Introduction

The Aurecon Jacobs Mott MacDonald Joint Venture (AJM-JV) has been engaged by Rail Projects Victoria(RPV) to undertake a noise assessment for Stage 1 of the Waurn Ponds Stabling Facility (WPSF S1). TheWPSF S1 is a funded project and is expected to be delivered by 2021.

A Stage 2 development of this site may be undertaken beyond the 2021 proposed delivery of WPSF S1.Stage 2 is not a funded project and there are currently many unconfirmed variables associated with it including;rolling stock, service changes, design changes and nearby land use. Consequently, it is not possible toaccurately model the noise impacts of Stage 2 Works. To assess and address the noise impacts of a Stage 2development, the proposed Incorporated Document will require the preparation of an environmental report aspart of the Development Plan for the Stage 2 Works, which must satisfy the Minister of Planning. ThisEnvironmental Report would include further assessment of noise impact and mitigation measures for theStage 2 Works.

2.1 Project Description

2.1 .1 LAND REQUIREMENTS

Project Land – All areas of land required within the Site for the purposes of the Project:

· At 255 Reservoir Road:

» 350 metres south of the rail corridor between Pettavel Road and Bogans Lane.Wider Project Land – All land that the Project requires for the delivery of ancillary infrastructure and associatedconstruction activity:

· At 255 Reservoir Road:

» Approximately 50 metres north of the rail corridor between Pettavel Road and Reservoir Road/BogansLane. It is anticipated that only a small portion of this wider project land will be required, subject to thedetermination of the ultimate location of the occupational crossing as part of Stage 2 of the project.

· Surrounding 255 Reservoir Road:

» Within the existing rail corridor for approximately 3040 metres west and for 3550 metres east of BogansLane inclusive;

» Within the Bogans Lane road reservation, 500 metres south of Reservoir Road;

» Within the Pettavel Road road reservation, 170 metres north of the rail corridor and 480 metres south ofthe rail corridor;

» Within the Reservoir Road road reservation, 800 metres east of, and including its intersection withBogans Lane.

Figure 2-1 shows the regional context of the Project Land and Wider Project Land. Figure 2-2 shows the aboveProject Land and Wider Project Land in closer detail.


FIG URE 2- 1: REG I ONAL C ONT EXT M AP


FIG URE 2- 2: PR OJECT L AND AND W I DER PR OJ ECT L AND


2.1 .2 STAGED DELIVERY

It is proposed to deliver the Project in stages:

· Stage 1 is funded and is expected to be delivered by 2021;

· Delivery of the balance of the Facility (referred to in this report as Stage 2) is subject to further Governmentdecision making in relation to the funding and procurement of new trains to service the Geelong Line andbroader regional rail network and associated stabling and maintenance requirements. The timing fordelivery of Stage 2 is unknown at this time. Stage 2 may be delivered in one or more stages depending onthe outcome of this decision making.

Figure 2-3 presents the Concept Design for the Project. The Concept Design is indicative only and may besubject to change through the detailed design process.

2.1.2.1 Stage 1 Infrastructure

Stage 1 is anticipated to deliver a train stabling facility with the capacity to stable 6 trains. It is anticipated thatthe facility will primarily cater for VLocity/DMU trains, however, it is proposed to have capacity to cater for 3locomotive trains in the short-term while locomotives continue to be phased out of the V/Line fleet. The facilitywould be located south of the existing railway corridor, directly east of the existing farm laneway at the centre ofthe Site, and west of Bogans Lane. The Stage 1 facility would occupy an area of approximately 11 hectares,and would be in the order of 1030 metres long, 150 metres wide at its widest section and 100 metres wide at itsmost narrow point.

Stage 1 is anticipated to comprise:

INITIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT

· Land acquisition for the entire footprint of Stage 1 and Stage 2;

· On-site mobilisation;

· Connections to key services (electricity, water, sewerage, drainage, communications, etc.);

· Security fencing and entrance/exit gates around the perimeter of the stabling roads and Stage 1 facilities;

· Earthworks to support initial facilities and trackwork;

· Landscaping;

· Road access from Bogans Lane;

· Power and dam infrastructure works resulting from the acquisition of farmland for the facility site;

· Modified stock crossing and vehicular access to the adjacent leasehold farm property (i.e. the Boral ownedland to the east);

· It is expected that the existing level crossing that serves the central farm laneway will remain in operation atits current location, potentially with some modifications as required by V/Line.

TRACK LAYOUT

· Six stabling roads, comprising four single ended and two double ended stabling roads;

· One single entry/exit train access point from existing rail corridor towards the eastern end of the site, justwest of Bogans Lane.


SERVICING FACILITIES

· Fuelling facilities on four stabling roads;

· Power, toilet extraction and water replenishment equipment, footpaths and yard lighting provided on all ofthe stabling roads.

ANCILLARY FACILITIES

· Upgrades to the existing signalling system within the rail corridor;

· Waste compound for rubbish and hard waste;

· Bunded fuelling area;

· Water storage and supply for stabling sidings;

· Drainage systems, including water sensitive urban design (WSUD) and the modification or relocation offarm dams;

· Telecommunications;

· Asphalt footpaths;

· CCTV to cover stabling sidings area;

· Driver and cleaner’s amenities;

· Formed and sealed access roadways, with capacity to allow for B-double truck access and turnaround;

· Car parking for drivers, visitors and cleaners.

2.1.2.2 Stage 2

As stated above, Stage 2 is subject to further Government decision making. However, it is anticipated thatStage 2 will increase the stabling capacity of the Facility to 26 trains and will introduce a train maintenancefacility. Based on an indicative concept design, the Stage 2 facility is anticipated to occupy an area ofapproximately 46 hectares, and be in the order of 1720 metres long, 320 metres wide at its widest section and160 metres wide at its narrowest.

Stage 2 is anticipated to comprise:

SITE DEVELOPMENT

· Security fencing and entrance/exit gates around the perimeter of the Stage 2 facility;

· Earthworks to support expansion of facilities and trackwork;

· Landscaping;

· A rerouting of the farm laneway to cross the rail corridor in proximity to the Pettavel Road boundary of theSite.


RAIL FACILITIES

· Two access points from existing rail corridor, one towards the eastern end of the site and one towards thewestern end of the site;

· Stabling roads for up to 26 trains;

· Bio-wash facilities;

· Train wash facilities;

· A maintenance facility with 5 maintenance roads.

SERVICING FACILITIES

· Expansion of fuel and water facilities;

· A substation;

· Expansion of staff facilities;

· One gatehouse along the entry road.

Ancillary facilities may include the following:

· Drainage systems, including WSUD and the modification or relocation of farm dams;

· Telecommunications;

· Internal/external access arrangements;

· Utility protection and installation;

· Signalling infrastructure;

· Emergency access via Pettavel Road.

2.1 .3 CONSTRUCTION PHASE

2.1.3.1 Construction Activities

Key construction activities anticipated for the Project include:

T ABLE 2- 1: C ONST R UCT I ON ACT IV IT IE S

ST AG E CONST R UCT I ON ACT I VIT IE S

ST AG E 1

Site Development

· On-site mobilisation;· Connections to key services (electricity, water, sewerage, drainage, communications);· Security fencing and entrance/exit gates;· Earthworks to support initial facilities and trackwork;· Road access from Bogans Lane;· Initially required internal roads; and· Security and safety facilities.

Works· Construction of internal roads, footpaths, car parking and associated sealing;· Construction of new rail tracks and associated signalling systems;· Construction of fuelling facilities;


ST AG E CONST R UCT I ON ACT I VIT IE S

· Reinstatement and landscaping;· Installation of utility infrastructure;· Bulk earthworks; and· Construction of ancillary buildings and services.

ST AG E 2

Works

· Construction of train maintenance building and internal fit out;· Construction of additional tracks and connections;· Modifications to the fuelling facility;· Automated train wash plant and bio-wash;· Extension of stabling sidings;· Expansion of staff amenities and training facilities;· Provision of train cleaners store and amenities building;· Expansion of staff car parking;· Provision of train crew administration facilities.

Being grazed farmland, the site is already substantially cleared of vegetation. The exception is two areas oflinear shelterbelt vegetation. Vegetation removal will be minimised to the extent practical and occurprogressively throughout all activities.

2.1.3.2 Construction Operation

The construction duration is expected to be approximately 12 to 18 months for each stage of the Project, andsubject to the Project requirements at the time. During each phase, the construction operating hours will beundertaken in accordance with the relevant protocols.

During the site preparation and construction phases, access to the site is anticipated to be provided via BogansLane for Stages 1 and 2. Alternative access may be possible from Pettavel Road for Stage 2.

Vehicle movements would be coordinated as required and advised by standard traffic management measures.

The preferred site access route during construction of the site is via the Geelong Ring Road. Alternatively,access to the site can be provided via Princes Highway.

2.1.3.3 Staff Numbers

During the construction phase it is expected that up to 100 personnel could be on-site at any one time.

2.1 .4 OPERATIONAL PHASE

This section describes the expected operational activities.

Operational activities are subject to completion of the detailed design phase for each stage of the Project andconfirmation of the operator’s timetabling requirements.

2.1.4.1 Operation of Train Stabling and Maintenance Facilities

The Facilities are anticipated to operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

It is expected that trains will enter and exit the facility from turnouts constructed off the mainline. The layout ofthe track work would enable flexibility for the train operator and maintainers to minimise any potential conflictingtrain movements, and reduce the overall amount of shunting time onsite for the trains.

It is anticipated that trains will enter and exit the site during the day and night as required to serve the railwaytimetable. Trains may arrive/depart at 10 minute intervals during peak periods. The total number of trainarrivals and departures per day is not yet known and will be subject to the operator’s timetabling requirements.


It is assumed that up to 3 trains may be idling at any one point in time during Stage 1 operations. The totalnumber of trains idling as part of Stage 2 is subject to future detailed design and operational requirements.These assumptions will be reviewed subject to the operator’s timetabling requirements.

The overall operational concept for the Facility is to provide an efficient series progression for stabling, servicingand maintenance (if required) of trains from initial train arrival until its next scheduled departure into revenueservice. Typical train movements would be entry through the northern most fuelling roads, continuing through tothe western most shunting neck. From here the train would head east into the stabling roads where it wouldreside prior to departure. If maintenance was required, trains would leave the stabling siding and enter themaintenance facility.

2.1.4.2 Staff numbers

It is anticipated that the Facility may accommodate 10 staff during Stage 1 of the Project and 40 staff during Stage 2, with the expectationthat all staff will not be on site at any one time, and staff will work in shifts. An expected breakdown of shift allocation is as follows:

T ABLE 2- 2: ST AF F NUM BE RS

S HI FT T IM E STAFF PE RCE NT AG E NUM BER OF ST AF FF OR ST AGE 1

NUM BER OF ST AF FF OR ST AGE 2

Morning 40% 4 16

Afternoon 40% 4 16

Overnight 20% 2 8

2.1.4.3 Vehicle and Staff access

The primary access point to the Facility would be located to the east from Bogans Lane. The preferred accessroute to the site from the Geelong Ring Road would be via Anglesea Road and Reservoir Road. Vehicles willbe expected to exit the site the same way.

The primary access gate is to be utilised by staff and delivery vehicles to both enter and exit the facility. Visitorsand administration office personnel would be directed to the relevant area and directed to the car park afterchecking-in, identification and registration at the primary access gate.

For Stage 2, emergency vehicle access could be provided at the western end of the site from Pettavel Road,where required. Appropriate internal access would also be provided for emergency vehicles to the maintenanceworkshop, stabling tracks and main parts of the Facility.

The internal road layout would be designed to limit the need to cross tracks within the site.

Adequate car parking spaces will be provided for both maintenance and operations staff and visitors. It isexpected that car parking areas will be located to minimise walking distances to site facilities.

Pedestrian movement networks would be designed to provide adequate access, minimise walking distances tosite facilities and provide for personal safety.


FIG URE 2- 3: C ONC E PT DES IG N


2.2 Operations

Four operational scenarios are being considered for the Project. These are:

· Scenario 1: Three VLocity trains idling on stabling roads 4 to 6 during refuelling operations

· Scenario 2: Three VLocity trains starting-up on stabling roads 4 to 6 and leaving the site at 10-minuteintervals

· Scenario 3: Three locomotive trains starting-up on stabling roads 4 to 6 and leaving the site in 10-minuteintervals, and three non-operating/non-idling VLocity trains parked on stabling roads 1 to 3

· Scenario 4: Three VLocity trains operating/idling on stabling roads 1 to 3 and three locomotive trainsoperating/idling on stabling roads 4 to 6, with trains leaving the site at 10-minute intervals

2.3 Nearby Noise Sensitive Areas

The closest Noise Sensitive Areas (NSAs) to the proposed stabling facility and their approximate distance fromit are provided in Table 2-3 and are shown in Figure 2-4. These NSAs are residential.

T ABLE 2- 3: NOI SE SE NS IT IVE AR E AS I N W AUR N PONDS S URR OUNDI NG T HE W PS F S1

L OC AT I ON APPR O XIM AT E DI ST ANCE F R OMST ABLI NG F AC ILIT Y (M ) COM M ENT

Location 1 1500 Uphill, overlooking the site, single storey






Location 7 1030 Downhill of the site, single storey








FIG URE 2- 4: L OC AT I ON OF NOIS E S E NST I VE ARE A S I N R E L AT I ON T O T HE PR O POS E D ST ABL I NG SIT E

Boral has a facility which is located near to the proposed WPSF and noise from the Boral facility impacts onsome of the NSAs identified in Table 2-3. RPV1 has advised that the Boral facility currently operates 24 hours aday, 7 days a week and is used for the processing of clinker and concrete production activities. Boral has a planto close the facility by 2020, following which there will be demolition and rehabilitation of the site2. Noise fromdemolition and construction activities are not assessed by NIRV.

1 Email dated 10 May 20192 Boral News April 2018

Key

Noise Sensitive Areas

Project Area


Despite the information indicating that Boral will close, RPV3 has advised that Boral will continue to hold alicense to operate and could therefore continue. Consequently, noise from the Boral facility running concurrentwith the site has been considered.

2.4 Benefits of the Project

This project will support increased and more reliable train services between Waurn Ponds and Melbourne. Thisis essential to service the increasing population of Geelong / Wyndham / Armstrong Creek/ Waurn Ponds andthe surrounding areas needing to access Melbourne for employment. The increased fleet will require a newtrain maintenance and stabling facility to support and accommodate it.

2.5 Purpose of Assessment

The purpose of this investigation is to predict potential noise impacts from the operation of Stage 1 of the WPSFand assess them using the EPA Guidelines Noise from Industry in Regional Victoria (NIRV).

3 Meeting 28 May 2019


3 Regulatory Context

NIRV is used to assess noise from a stabling facility. The State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noisefrom Commerce, Industry and Trade) No. N-1 (SEPP N-1) states:

Commercial, industrial or trade premises means any premises except: …a tram, light rail or railway line notbeing a siding, marshalling yard or maintenance depot of any tram, light rail or railway line4.

Noise from fixed infrastructure associated with the WPSF S1 is, therefore, to be assessed in compliance withSEPP N-1 and consequently NIRV.

Noise from railway operations outside of a stabling and maintenance facility is assessed separately under thePassenger Rail Infrastructure Noise Policy (PRINP). The PRINP is not applicable to noise within the WPSF S1as the PRINP states:

Transport bodies and planning authorities…need not have regard to this policy when exercising powers orperforming functions in relations to:…where the State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise fromCommerce, Industry and Trade) No. N-1 provisions apply.

3.1 Noise from Industry in Regional Victoria (NIRV)

EPA has provided three documents to address noise from industry in regional Victoria. These include:

1. EPA Publication 1411 October 2011, Noise from Industry in Regional Victoria Publication (NIRV)

2. EPA Publication 1412 October 2011, SEPP N-1 and NIRV Explanatory Notes (EPA 1412)

3. EPA Publication 1413 October 2011, Applying NIRV to Proposed and Existing Industry (EPA 1413)

NIRV is a non-statutory guideline which provides a method for setting Recommended Maximum Noise Levels(RMNLs) to manage the impacts of noise from industry in regional Victoria.

EPA 1413 guides EPA’s implementation of NIRV through compliance and approval decision making. Thisdocument provides useful guidance to fulfil EPA’s expectations.

The RMNLs are determined following the method in NIRV and are based upon the land use zone in which thenoise emitter is located, the ‘generating zone’, and the land use zone where the noise sensitive area is located,the ‘receiving zone’. They apply to the cumulative noise from all industrial noise sources but do not includenoise from traffic on road or rail corridors.

The assessment of noise emitted from an industrial facility is over a half-hour period at the surrounding NSAs. The time periods defined in

NIRV are presented in Table 3-1.

4 State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise from Commerce, Industry and Trade) No. N-1.


T ABLE 3- 1: T IM E PER I O DS F OR NIR V ASSE SSM E NT S

T IM E PERI OD HOURS

Day0700 – 1800 Monday – Friday0700 – 1300 Saturdays

Evening1800 – 2200 all days1300 – 1800 Saturdays0700 – 1800 Sundays and Public Holidays

Night 2200 – 0700 all days

The RMNLs should not be less than the Base Noise Levels. The NIRV Base Noise Levels are presented inTable 3-2.

T ABLE 3- 2: B ASE NOI SE LE VE LS F OR NS A S

PERI ODBASE NOISE L EVE L ( NIR V)

DBL A E Q , 3 0 M I NS

Day 45

Evening 37

Night 32

EPA 1413 states:

where recommended noise levels cannot be met, NIRV provides an alternative approach to deliver reasonablenoise outcomes.

EPA 1413 also states:

proposed projects that cannot meet the recommended levels only proceed if:

· They will apply best-practice noise mitigation

· They demonstrate that alternative locations were not available

· The approving authority decides that the proposal is of net benefit for the area

EPA 1413 states that the EPA is to be:

mindful of exceptions where meeting the recommended levels may not be reasonable or practicable for a site.

In situations where the RMNLs cannot be met the following approach is recommended:

1. Propose best practice measures to reduce noise

2. Examine off-site options e.g. treating the affected dwellings and a long-term plan for noise reduction.


4 Methodology

4.1 Approach

The approach for this assessment consists of:

1. Identification of NSAs

2. Determination of the RMNL at each NSA

3. Creation of an acoustic model in SoundPLAN 8.0 of the WPSF S1 and surrounding areas including NSAs

4. Prediction of noise levels at the NSAs due to activities in the WPSF S1 for each operational scenario

5. Comparison of predicted noise levels with RMNLs

6. Consideration of mitigation

4.2 Operational Scenarios

Four operational scenarios are proposed for the stabling facility:

· Scenario 1:

a. Three VLocity trains idling on stabling roads 4 to 6 during refuelling operations

· Scenario 2:

a. Three VLocity trains starting-up on stabling roads 4 to 6

b. Three VLocity trains starting-up on stabling roads 4 to 6 and exiting the site at 10-minute intervals

· Scenario 3:

a. Three locomotive trains starting-up on stabling roads 4 to 6, and three non-operating/non-idlingVLocity trains parked on stabling roads 1 to 3

b. As per Scenario 3a, with the three N-Class locomotives exiting the stabling yard in 10-minuteintervals

· Scenario 4:

a. Three VLocity trains operating/idling on stabling roads 1 to 3 and three locomotive trainsoperating/idling on stabling roads 4-6

b. As per Scenario 4a, with three trains exiting the site in 10-minute intervals


Scenario 1 consists of refuelling and de-watering and would occur during the evening period.

Scenarios 2, 3 and 4 apply to start-up at the stabling site and would occur during the night period (early morningprior to 7:00 hours).

Each scenario has also been modelled with and without the Boral operations running concurrently.

4.3 Acoustic Model

The acoustic model is based on the following:

· Trains on the site consist of 6-car VLocity trains and / or N-Class locomotives with five carriages

· Each scenario occurs for the full assessment period of 30-minutes

· Ground absorption of 0.5.

· For Scenario 1:

» The dewatering pump is located near the fuel pump and is based on the noise measurements of thedewatering pump at Traralgon sidings.

» The dewatering pump is operated simultaneously with the refuelling pump during refuelling operations

» B-double fuel tankers are switched off during refuelling

» N-Class locomotives are not being refuelled at this facility

» VLocity trains have been modelled as returning from service as opposed to operating from a cold startbecause refuelling occurs following the completion of the passenger service

· For Scenario 2:

» VLocity trains leave the station at approximately 15 km/hr, from roads 1, 2 and 3

· For Scenario 3:

» Trains leave once every ten minutes and consequently time-weightings have been applied as follows:

Road 6: 100% of the 30-minute period



» Trains leave the station at approximately 15 km/hr

· For Scenario 4:

» Trains leave once every ten minutes and consequently time-weightings have been applied as follows:

Road 1, 3, 4 and 6: 100% of the 30-minute period (mix of locomotives and VLocity trains)

Road 2: 33% of the 30-minute period (VLocity)

Road 5: 66% of the 30-minute period (locomotive)

» Trains from Roads 2, 4 and 5 leave the station at approximately 15 km/hr

» The order of start-up operations in a half hour period for the N-Class locomotive consists of idling(2 minutes), followed by revving (3 minutes), and finally the HEP revving (25 minutes). The locomotiveassumed to be in operation for 66% of the 30-minute period will only consist of HEP revving.


4.4 Files Used for the Assessment

The following files have been used in the assessment:

· WP Stabling – 3d strings.dxf (Elevation of stabling facility)

· rrr_wlu_acoustic_lidar_contours_05.shp (Elevation contours of surrounding Waurn Ponds area)

· WLU-AJM-PWWP-M2_DD-D05000-STBLING ST1.dxf (Stabling design)

4.5 Limitations

The following limitations apply to the assessment:

· Noise measurements have been conducted at the stabling yard in Ararat to determine source noise levels ofthe (3-car) VLocity vehicles during start-up operations and these have been used in the acoustic model.Noise levels of the future fleet on the Geelong Line may have different noise levels.

· Noise measurements have been conducted at the stabling yard in Traralgon to determine source noiselevels of the (3-car) VLocity vehicles during dewatering and refuelling operations and these have been usedin the acoustic model. Noise levels of the future fleet on the Geelong Line may have different noise levels.

· Noise measurements have been conducted at the stabling yard in Bacchus Marsh to determine sourcenoise levels of the N-Class locomotives during start-up operations and these have been used in the acousticmodel. Noise levels of the future fleet on the Geelong Line may have different noise levels.

· Noise from slow moving locomotives within a siding has not been captured by AJM, therefore predictionswere based on slow moving Freight noise6 which is considered a representative approach.

· Site operations of the Boral facility were noted during the night period on 4 April, 2019. The only notablenoise source was a fan running to the west of the site. It is assumed that this fan runs throughout the wholeevening and night period.

6 NSW Rail Noise Database – Stage III Measurements and Analysis – January 2015. Report Number 610.14035-R1


5 Noise Assessment

Noise modelling has been undertaken to assess the impact of airborne noise from the stabling yard with respectto the RMNLs at the NSAs.

5.1 Noise Sensitive Areas - RMNLs

The RMNLs at NSAs near the stabling facility, along with information about the emitter and receiving zones, areprovided in Table 5-1.

T ABLE 5- 1: RE C OMM ENDE D M AXIM UM NO ISE L EV E L - NI RV

L OC AT I ON RECE IVE RZ ONE EM IT T ER Z ONE

RECE IVE RDIST ANC E

N O T E 1

(M )

RM NL


DAY EVE NI NG NIG HT

Location 1 Farming Zone (FZ) Public Use Zone 4 (PUZ4) >900 45 37 32


Location 3 Farming Zone (FZ) Public Use Zone 4 (PUZ4) 650 45 37 32











Notes:1. Receiver distance is the shortest distance from the NSA to the boundary of the zone in which the noise emitter is located.

5.2 Acoustic Model

5.2 .1 PREDICTION METHODOLOGY

Airborne noise levels from the stabling site have been predicted using the methodology from ISO 9613-2:1996 –Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 2: General method of calculation.

This assessment is based on the following inputs:

· Octave band source levels

· Operational timetables

· Train lengths / speed


· Air absorption

· Atmospheric refraction

· Split height source modelling

· Ground effects (Ground factor = 0.75)

· Meteorological effects

· Screening

· Reflection

5.2 .2 SOURCE NOISE LEVELS

The time weighted source noise levels of activities in the stabling yard are provided in Table 5-2.

T ABLE 5- 2: S O UND POW ER LE VE LS OF ST ABLI NG ACT I VIT I ES

SOURC E

T IM E INUSE I NHAL FHOUR

PERI ODN O T E 1

( %)

OCT AV E BAND CE NT R E FRE QUE NCY , HZ

SOUND POW ER L EVE LS , DB T OT ALSOUNDPOW ER

LEV EL, DBA63 12 5 25 0 50 0 1K 2K 4K 8K

VLocity Start-up Note 2

Front –Undercarriage 100 96 100 92 90 90 88 80 75 94

Front – SideExhaust Note 3 100 84 83 77 79 79 74 69 64 83

Middle –Undercarriage 100 95 96 90 87 90 87 82 77 94

Middle – SideExhaust 100 91 87 83 85 87 82 77 69 90

Rear –Undercarriage 100 92 93 91 88 92 88 83 81 95

Rear – SideExhaust 100 84 83 77 79 79 74 69 64 83

HVAC Note 4 100 80 80 79 78 77 75 72 72 82

VLocity idling Note 5

Front –Undercarriage 100 85 88 83 80 77 74 68 63 83

Front – SideExhaust Note 3 100 86 86 77 81 67 62 55 47 79

Middle –Undercarriage 100 87 88 82 81 75 75 67 62 83

Middle – SideExhaust 100 85 86 78 85 68 63 58 48 83

Rear –Undercarriage 100 93 94 88 87 81 81 73 68 89

Rear – SideExhaust 100 86 86 77 81 67 62 55 47 79

HVAC 100 80 80 79 78 77 75 72 72 82

N-Class start-up operations Note 6


SOURC E

T IM E INUSE I NHAL FHOUR

PERI ODN O T E 1

( %)

OCT AV E BAND CE NT R E FRE QUE NCY , HZ

SOUND POW ER L EVE LS , DB T OT ALSOUNDPOW ER

LEV EL, DBA63 12 5 25 0 50 0 1K 2K 4K 8K

Engine Idle 7 115 100 95 97 93 86 77 69 98

Engine Revving 10 117 110 99 103 102 94 89 81 106

HEP Revving 83 102 98 94 96 95 94 89 83 100

Plant equipment

Fuel Pump Note 7 100 81 82 84 84 87 84 80 74 91

Dewatering Pump– Dewatering Note 4 0.5 68 64 65 81 72 67 65 61 79

Dewatering Pump– Water Cycle Note 4 95.5 74 87 63 65 78 78 78 72 84

Boral night operations

FanNote 11 100 109 109 116 110 98 95 88 80 111

Notes:

1. Time-weightings apply for trains not operating for the entire 30-minute period2. Measured at Ararat sidings3. The values provided are based on the opposite (rear) driver cabin (as VLocitys can travel in both directions)4. SWL level is based on North West Rail Link noise report7, octave band frequency spectrum derived based on outdoor packaging

units5. Measured at Traralgon sidings6. Measured at Bacchus Marsh sidings7. Pump sound power levels have been derived based on empirical equations 8 based on 22 kW pump operating at 2900 RPM.8. HVAC noise levels have been based on publicly available data as HVAC noise from VLocity trains could not be measured due to

engine noise.9. N-Class locomotives have been modelled based on measurements of an existing locomotive from a cold start at Bacchus Marsh

sidings10. VLocity trains have been modelled based on measurements from an existing 3-car VLocity from a cold start at Ararat11. Measurements undertaken at Waurn Ponds, 4 April 2019.

Train movements (15 km/hr) within the stabling have been based on the noise levels shown in Table 5-3.

T ABLE 5- 3: S OUND LE VE LS F OR T R AI NS OPER AT I N G AT 1 5 KM /HR

SOURC ET RANSIT E X POS UR E L EV EL (T EL )

DB( A)

DIST ANC E

(M )

6-car VLocity Note 1 78 7.5

N-Class Note 2 94 15

Carriages Note 2 63 15

Notes:

1. Measured at Traralgon sidings2. Based on freight movements at grade9

7 North West Rail Link – Noise and Vibration Technical Paper for Operations and Additional Construction Works – 17 th October 2012. Rev.NWRL-10046-R-NO-00012-v1.0-EIS2 Operational NV.doc8 Engineering Noise Control – Theory and Practice, Bies, D. A. and Hansen, C. H., Fourth Edition, Spon Press 2009.9 NSW Rail Noise Database – Stage III Measurements and Analysis – January 2015. Report Number 610.14035-R1


5.2.2.1 Track Joint, Switch and Crossing Noise

Switches and crossings built into rail tracks can result in noise from interaction with the wheel and the rail headjoints. Noise from this effect can increase with severity depending on the complexity of the joint.

The following overall noise corrections have been applied to these sections of track:

· 6 dB addition to the source noise levels for level crossings/turnouts (NORD2000)

5.2 .3 METEOROLOGY

The ISO 9613-2 model is based on meteorological conditions favourable to propagation (i.e. downwind). Othermeteorological inputs are:

· Relative Humidity: 70%

· Temperature: 10 degrees Celsius

· Air Pressure: 1013 mbar

5.3 Predicted Noise Levels

5.3 .1 DAY PERIOD

Specific activities have not been identified for the day period. RPV has advised that activity during the day timeis expected to be less than for during the night period. Consequently, compliance with the night RMNL willimply compliance with the day RMNL or mitigation designed for the night period will be adequate for the day.

5.3 .2 EVENING PERIOD

Scenario 1 (stabling operations) occurs during the evening period.

The predicted noise levels for Scenario 1 along with the relevant RMNL and any exceedances are provided inTable 5-4 for the WPSF S1 only and in Table 5-5 for the WPSF S1 and also the Boral facility.

T ABLE 5- 4: PR E DI CT E D NOIS E LEV EL S DURI NG T HE E VE N I NG PER I O D- S CE N ARI O 1 W PS F S 1 O NLY

PR OPERT YEVE NI NG RM NL


PRE DICT E D NOI SE LE VE L


PRE DICTE DEXCEE DANCE

DB

Location 1 37 15 -

Location 2 37 19 -

Location 3 37 22 -

Location 4 38 25 -

Location 5 37 14 -

Location 6 41 34 -

Location 7 37 22 -

Location 8 37 18 -

Location 9 37 17 -

Location 10 37 17 -

Location 11 37 17 -

Location 12 37 15 -

Location 13 37 15 -


T ABLE 5- 5: PR E DI CT E D NOIS E LEV ELS DURI NG T HE E VE NI NG PER I OD- S CE NARI O 1 WPS F S 1 ANDBOR AL

PR OPERT YEVE NI NG RM NL NO T E 1




PRE DICTE DEXCEE DANCE

DB

Location 1 37 25

Location 2 37 29 -

Location 3 37 29 -

Location 4 38 32 -

Location 5 37 31

Location 6 41 36 -

Location 7 37 33 -

Location 8 37 30 -

Location 9 37 30 -

Location 10 37 31 -

Location 11 37 31 -

Location 12 37 31 -

Location 13 37 30 -

5.3 .3 NIGHT PERIOD

Scenarios 2 to 4 occur during the night period. The predicted noise levels for Scenarios 2 to 4 along with therelevant RMNL and any exceedances are provided in are provided in Table 5-6 for the WPSF S1 only and inTable 5-7 for the WPSF S1 and also the Boral facility.

T ABLE 5- 6: PR E DI CT E D NOIS E LEV EL S DURI NG T HE NI G HT PERI OD- SCE N ARI OS 2, 3 AND 4 W PSF S 1ON LY

PR

OP

ER

TY

NIG

HT

RM

NL

DB

LA

EQ

,30

MIN

S



PRE DICTE D EX CEE DANC E

DB

SC

EN

AR

IO2

A

SC

EN

AR

IO2

B

SC

EN

AR

IO3

A

SC

EN

AR

IO3

B

SC

EN

AR

IO4

A

SC

EN

AR

IO4

B

SC

EN

AR

IO2

A

SC

EN

AR

IO2

B

SC

EN

AR

IO3

A

SC

EN

AR

IO3

B

SC

EN

AR

IO4

A

SC

EN

AR

IO4

B

Loc. 1 32 21 21 25 28 28 29 - - - - - -

Loc. 2 32 26 26 30 33 33 33 - - - 1 1 1

Loc. 3 32 30 30 33 37 37 37 - - 1 5 5 5

Loc. 4 33 32 32 35 38 38 39 - - 2 5 5 6

Loc. 5 32 20 21 24 30 27 29 - - - - - -

Loc. 6 36 42 42 42 45 46 47 6 6 6 9 10 11

Loc. 7 32 26 27 34 36 36 36 - - 2 4 4 4

Loc. 8 32 23 23 30 32 32 32 - - - - - -

Loc. 9 32 21 22 28 31 31 31 - - - - - -

Loc. 10 32 22 21 29 31 31 31 - - - - - -

Loc. 11 32 22 21 28 30 30 30 - - - - - -

Loc. 12 32 20 20 26 29 29 29 - - - - - -


PR

OP

ER

TY

NIG

HT

RM

NL

DB

LA

EQ

,30

MIN

S




DB

SC

EN

AR

IO2

A

SC

EN

AR

IO2

B

SC

EN

AR

IO3

A

SC

EN

AR

IO3

B

SC

EN

AR

IO4

A

SC

EN

AR

IO4

B

SC

EN

AR

IO2

A

SC

EN

AR

IO2

B

SC

EN

AR

IO3

A

SC

EN

AR

IO3

B

SC

EN

AR

IO4

A

SC

EN

AR

IO4

B

Loc. 13 32 20 19 26 28 28 28 - - - - - -

T ABLE 5- 7: PR E DI CT E D NOIS E LEV EL S DURI NG T HE NI G HT PERI OD- SCE N ARI OS 2, 3 AND 4 W PSF S 1AND BOR AL

PR

OP

ER

TY

NIG

HT

RM

NL

DB

LA

EQ

,30

MIN

S




DB

SC

EN

AR

IO2

A

SC

EN

AR

IO2

B

SC

EN

AR

IO3

A

SC

EN

AR

IO3

B

SC

EN

AR

IO4

A

SC

EN

AR

IO4

B

SC

EN

AR

IO2

A

SC

EN

AR

IO2

B

SC

EN

AR

IO3

A

SC

EN

AR

IO3

B

SC

EN

AR

IO4

A

SC

EN

AR

IO4

B

Loc. 1 32 26 26 28 30 30 30 - - - - - -

Loc. 2 32 30 30 32 34 34 35 - - - 2 2 3

Loc. 3 32 32 32 34 37 37 38 - - 2 5 5 6

Loc. 4 33 35 34 36 39 39 39 2 1 3 6 6 6

Loc. 5 32 31 31 32 33 32 33 - - - 1 - 1

Loc. 6 36 42 42 42 45 46 47 6 6 6 9 10 11

Loc. 7 32 34 34 37 38 38 38 2 2 5 6 6 6

Loc. 8 32 31 31 33 34 34 34 - - 1 2 2 2

Loc. 9 32 31 31 32 33 34 33 - - - 1 2 1

Loc. 10 32 31 31 33 34 34 34 - - 1 2 2 2

Loc. 11 32 32 32 33 34 34 34 - - 1 2 2 2

Loc. 12 32 31 31 32 33 33 33 - - - 1 1 1

Loc. 13 32 30 30 31 32 32 32 - - - - - -

5.4 Summary

Day Period: Specific stabling yard activities have not been identified during the day period. Activity is expectedto be less than for the night period and therefore compliance is expected.

Evening Period: Scenario 1 would be undertaken and noise from this activity is predicted to comply with theRMNLs at all NSAs. This includes when the site is running concurrent with Boral operations.

Night Period: Three scenarios have been considered (Scenarios 2 to 4) each of which consists of two subscenarios, both with and without Boral operations:

Without Boral operating


· Scenario 2a - an exceedance of 6 dB is predicted at one NSA

· Scenario 2b - an exceedance of 6 dB is predicted at one NSA

· Scenario 3a - exceedances of up to 6 dB are predicted at 4 NSAs

· Scenario 3b - exceedances of up to 9 dB are predicted at 5 NSAs



With Boral operational

· Scenario 2a - an exceedance of 6 dB is predicted at 3 NSAs

· Scenario 2b - an exceedance of 6 dB is predicted at 3 NSAs






6 Noise Management

A number of noise management measures have been assessed/considered with respect to the alternativeapproach in EPA 1413 in order to determine the most appropriate outcome for the project. Each noisemanagement measure is discussed below.

6.1 Noise Barriers

Noise barriers have been considered as a mitigation measure. However, due to the site topography and thelocation of the sources, noise barriers are not effective at providing mitigation for stabling noise with respect tothe NSAs. This is because many of the nearby NSAs are elevated on a hill overlooking the stabling yard.

Preliminary modelling has shown that a barrier configuration of height 8 m and total length of approximately950 m would not adequately mitigate the noise to meet the RMNLs during the night period.

Noise barriers are therefore not proposed for this project.

6.2 Acoustic Shed

A high sound insulating acoustic shed with sealed closed doors has the potential to provide mitigation thatwould adequately reduce noise from the stabling facility to achieve the RMNLs at the NSAs. Such a shed wouldneed a sophisticated ventilation system to address diesel fumes and would be a significant cost item. It wouldalso impact on operation, typically during peak periods, when opening and closing doors to sheds wouldincrease the headway time between trains leaving the facility. Most importantly during this time the shed’seffectiveness at mitigating sound would be diminished as the doors would need to be open.

An acoustic shed is therefore not proposed for this project.

6.3 Alternative Location of the WPSF

The location of the stabling facility has been strategically selected. PTV considered several sites for it to meetcurrent and future operational requirements10. Considerations included topography, availability of land and sizeof land parcel, location of watercourses, location of residences, road access, rail access, cultural heritage andearthworks/rehabilitation required.

The land at 255 Reservoir Road was chosen as the preferred site as it meets all the necessary key criteriaincluding:

· Proximity to the rail corridor and the terminus at Waurn Ponds

» Ensures that the Project does not require the relocation of any existing significant rail services orinfrastructure

· The location is beyond the Waurn Ponds railway station

· Trains to start and finish at the WPSF S1 prior to and after daily operation

10 Email dated 16/05/2019


· Empty train travel and associated costs are minimised

· Opportunity to rationalise stabling and maintenance across the network.

It is therefore not proposed to relocate the WPSF.

6.4 Off-reservation Treatment

Off-reservation treatment would typically consist of:

1. Architectural mitigation such as upgrading of windows / doors, sealing of vents and provision of alternativeforms of ventilation

2. The installation of external screen walls near to the residence

Architectural treatments provide an effective form of mitigation because the exceedance to the RMNLs arepredicted to occur during the night period (in the early hours of the morning) when residents are likely to beinside.

Provision of architectural mitigation would mean that the RMNLs are no longer applicable. It is thereforeproposed that architectural treatments be designed to comply with the internal design sound levels inAS/NZS 2107:201611.

For sleeping areas (during the night time) in a house in a rural area with negligible transportation, therecommendation for the design sound level in a bedroom is 25 to 30 dB(A). It is proposed to design noise fromthe stabling facility to achieve 20 dB(A) to allow for any additional future noise or noise from Boral (should itcontinue to operate or from the demolition/rehabilitation).

An inspection of each property would be required to refine the acoustic model and to determine specific acoustictreatments. However, it is expected that these would typically consist of:

· Upgraded sealed glazing such as: 10 mm glazing / 16 mm air cavity / 8.8 lamination glazing (0.8 mmPolyvinyl buytral (PVB) layer)

· Door seals (Perimeter, meeting style, drop seals)

· Sound insulation in the roof cavity

· Treatment to air-vents

· Provision of ventilation fans

· Increase mass density of façade / ceiling, if deemed required

11 Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 2107:2016 - Acoustics – recommended design sounds levels and reverberation times forbuilding interiors.


7 Discussion

PTV considered several sites for the stabling facility to meet current and future operational rail requirements andthe land at 255 Reservoir Road was chosen as the preferred site as it meets all the necessary key criteria.

The stabling facility would be relocated from Geelong station to 255 Reservoir Road. At Geelong station thereare a significant number of residences in closer proximity to the stabling facility than for the site at WaurnPonds. The closest residence to the stabling facility in Geelong is approximately 130 m away (226 PrincesHighway, Geelong).

There are 12 residences within 1.7 km of the WPSF S1 site. Of these, exceedances to the RMNLs arepredicted at up to 11 residences, depending on the scenario considered. These 11 properties are Location 2 toLocation 12, as per Figure 2-4. The proposed approach to managing noise at these residences where there is arisk of exceeding the RMNLs is through off-reservation treatment (architectural treatments). The number ofproperties to be offered off-reservation treatment will be refined during the next phase of design.

Architectural treatments are expected to include improved sealed glazing, door seals, treatment to air vents andventilation fans, however, inspection of each property is required to identify appropriate treatments. This form ofmitigation has been selected for the following reasons:

1. The noise predicted to exceed the RMNLs would occur during the night period in the early hours of themorning when it is expected that the residents would be inside the house.

2. There are residences on a hill overlooking the site which means that noise barriers are not effective.

3. An acoustic shed could provide mitigation but would result in operational issues and would not present acost-effective solution.

4. Architectural treatment would mitigate all noise, including noise from Boral.

The long-term plan for noise reduction at the NSAs involves phasing out the older N-Class locomotives andreplacing them with newer Diesel Multiple Units (such as VLocity or yet-to-be-procured DMUs).


8 Conclusion

The Aurecon Jacobs Mott MacDonald Joint Venture has undertaken a noise assessment for Stage 1 of theWaurn Ponds Stabling Facility. This project is funded and is expected to be delivered by 2021.

Four operational scenarios have been considered for the site. A computational model has been created topredict noise levels to the nearby Noise Sensitive Areas and assess the noise levels with respect to the EPA’sNoise from Industry in Regional Victoria Recommended Maximum Noise Levels. A number of exceedances arepredicted for the operational scenarios during the night period due to start-up operations (early morning, prior to7:00 hours).

A range of mitigation options have been assessed, varying from noise barriers to an acoustic shed, andrelocation to off-reservation treatment. Off-reservation treatment is proposed as the best practical solution fornoise mitigation for a variety of reasons which have been discussed.

Appendix A

Site Layout

File WLU-AJM-PWD-WPD-REP-XAV-WPD-0000329 18 June 2019

Appendix A - Site Layout

FIG U RE A. 1: S IT E L AY OUT A ND ST ABLI NG R O AD N OT AT I ON

Key: Road 1 Road 2 Road 3 Road 4 Road 5 Road 6

222 EXHIBITION STREET, MELBOURNE VIC 3000PO BOX 23061 DOCKLANDS VIC 8012 AUSTRALIA

Regional Rail Revival Warrnambool · 6/18/2019 · The Aurecon Jacobs Mott MacDonald Joint Venture has been engaged by Rail Projects Victoria to undertake a noise assessment for

Documents