14. Noise and Vibration

14.1

14. Noise and Vibration

Introduction

14.1 This Chapter reports the outcome of the assessment of likely significant environmental

effects arising from the Proposed Development in relation to noise and vibration.

14.2 The Chapter describes the consultation that has been undertaken during the EIA, the

scope of the assessment and assessment methodology, and a summary of the baseline

information that has informed the assessment.

14.3 A number of effects have been avoided in advance of the assessment and where

relevant, these are clearly stated. The assessment reports on the likely significant

environmental effects, the further mitigation measures required to prevent, reduce or

offset any significant adverse effects, or further enhance beneficial effects. The

conclusions are provided in terms of the residual effects and whether these are

considered significant.

14.4 This Chapter including its associated appendices is intended to be read as part of the

wider ES with particular reference to the introductory chapters of this ES

(Chapters 1 - 5), as well as Chapter 19: Cumulative Effects Assessment.

Legislative Framework

National Policy and Legislation

National Planning Policy Framework

14.5 The National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’) (Ref 14.1), revised most recently in

February 2019, replaced the majority of previous Planning Policy Guidance notes and

Planning Policy Statements, including PPG24: Planning and Noise.

14.6 The NPPF does not include any noise assessment methodologies, although it does

make the following references to noise:

Paragraph 170:

“Planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local

environment by:

preventing new and existing development from contributing to, being put at

unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of

soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability. Development should,

wherever possible, help to improve local environmental conditions such as air

and water quality, taking into account relevant information such as river basin

management plans.”

Paragraph 180:

14.2

“Planning policies and decisions should also ensure that new development is

appropriate for its location taking into account the likely effects (including cumulative

effects) of pollution on health, living conditions and the natural environment, as well as

the potential sensitivity of the site or the wider area to impacts that could arise from

the development. In doing so they should:

a) mitigate and reduce to a minimum potential adverse impact resulting from

noise from new development – and avoid noise giving rise to significant

adverse impacts on health and the quality of life;

b) identify and protect tranquil areas which have remained relatively

undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value

for this reason.”

Paragraph 182:

“Planning policies and decisions should ensure that new development can be integrated

effectively with existing businesses and community facilities (such as places of worship,

pubs, music venues and sports clubs). Existing businesses and facilities should not have

unreasonable restrictions placed on them as a result of development permitted after

they were established. Where the operation of an existing business or community

facility could have a significant adverse effect on new development (including changes

of use) in its vicinity, the applicant (or ‘agent of change’) should be required to provide

suitable mitigation before the development has been completed.”

Noise Policy Statement for England

14.7 Reference is made in the NPPF to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural

Affairs (DEFRA) 2010 Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) (Ref 14.2). The NPSE

sets out the Government’s long-term policy for noise and noise management, and aims

to promote “good health and good quality of life through the effective management of

noise within the context of Government policy on sustainable development”.

14.8 The NPSE Explanatory Note provides guidance on the levels of effect of environmental

noise and gives three levels of effect, namely:

• No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) – this is the level below which no effect can be

detected. In simple terms, below this level there is no effect on health and

quality of life due to noise;

• Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) – this is the level which adverse

effects on health and quality of life can be detected; and

• Significant Observed Adverse Effect Level (SOAEL) – this is the level above which

significant adverse effects on health and quality of life occur.

14.3

14.9 There are no defined ‘noise-based measures’ for these terms and, with reference to

the SOAEL, the NPSE goes on to state (at paragraph 2.22) that “it is not possible to have

a single objective noise-based measure that defines SOAEL that is applicable to all

sources of noise in all situations. Consequently, the SOAEL is likely to be different for

different noise sources, for different receptors and at different times…not having

specific SOAEL values in the NPSE provides the necessary policy flexibility until further

evidence and suitable guidance is available”.

14.10 The NPSE advises that the effect of noise should be assessed on the basis of negative

and significant negative effects but does not provide any specific guidance on

assessment methods or limit sound levels.

14.11 In the absence of specific guidance within the NPPF and NPSE for the assessment of

environmental noise, it is considered appropriate to base assessments on local

planning authority requirements, current British Standards and national and

international guidance (as described later in this Chapter). However, one noteworthy

advisory point in the NPSE is the need to place into context any general requirements

that increases in ambient noise should be ‘minimised’.

Planning Practice Guidance – Noise

14.12 On 6 March 2014, the Department for Communities and Local Government (‘DCLG’)

launched a Planning Practice Guidance (‘PPG’) web-based resource (Ref 14.3), updated

most recently in July 2019.

14.13 The PPG defines when noise is relevant to planning:

“Noise needs to be considered when development may create additional noise, or

would be sensitive to the prevailing acoustic environment (including any anticipated

changes to that environment from activities that are permitted but not yet

commenced). When preparing plans, or taking decisions about new development, there

may also be opportunities to make improvements to the acoustic environment. Good

acoustic design needs to be considered early in the planning process to ensure that the

most appropriate and cost-effective solutions are identified from the outset.”

14.14 The PPG section on noise includes a table that summarises "the noise exposure

hierarchy, based on the likely average response" which offers "examples of outcomes"

relevant to the NOEL, LOAEL and SOAEL effect levels described in the NPSE (see above).

These outcomes are in descriptive form.

Development Plan

Swindon Borough Local Plan 2026

14.15 The Swindon Borough Local Plan (Ref 14.4) was formally adopted by Swindon Borough

Council (SBC) in March 2015, providing their development strategy for the delivery of

“sustainable growth to the year 2026”.

14.4

14.16 A number of the policies within the Swindon Borough Local Plan relate to noise (and

vibration) impact in the context of the protection of amenity, whereby “development

should not adversely impact users of existing or proposed development” and

“development should be compatible with nearby land uses and not compromise

amenity”.

14.17 Local Plan Policy EN7 “Pollution” is aimed at all types of development, including

industrial and commercial premises. It states:

“Development that is likely to lead to emissions of pollutants such as noise,

light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, soot, ash, dust, grit or toxic substances

that may adversely affect existing development and vulnerable wildlife

habitats, shall only be permitted where such emissions are controlled to a

point where there is no significant loss of amenity for existing land uses, or

habitats.”

14.18 It goes on to state, at paragraph 4.366:

“The policy is aimed at all forms of development including residential, retail,

industrial and commercial premises, ensuring the protection of the

environment from potentially polluting neighbours…In most cases this may

entail controls placed on incoming development to ensure that the amenities

of existing occupiers in the adjoining area are not adversely affected from

potentially polluting neighbours.”

14.19 Policy EN7 of the Swindon Borough Local Plan is, therefore, applicable to the

assessment of noise and vibration impact associated with the Proposed Development,

to ensure that the amenity of existing uses is not adversely affected.

Summary of Consultation

14.20 Table 14.1 provides an overview of the consultation which has informed the design of

the Proposed Development, the consideration of likely significant effects and the

methodology for assessment.

Table 14.1: Summary of Consultation

Body /

Organisation

Contact Date and Form of

Consultation

Summary

Swindon

Borough

Council

Environmental

Health

Department

Scoping Opinion Advised on the assessment to

include the effects of construction

noise (along with those associated

with the haul route) and the effects

of noise during operation.

14.5

Scope of the Assessment

14.21 An EIA Scoping Report was submitted to SBC in August 2018, as presented in

Appendix 1.1. This section provides confirmation on the scope of the assessment

presented within this Chapter.

Effects which are Not Significant

14.22 The following effects which are not significant were identified as part of the EIA

Scoping Report and are not considered further in this Chapter. The effects are listed in

this below.

Vibration during the operational stage

14.23 It is considered that there will be little or no heavy equipment on the Proposed

Development which has the potential to generate vibration, therefore this effect is not

considered to be significant.

Likely Significant Effects

14.24 The following effects are considered elsewhere in the ES:

• Construction noise levels on ecological receptors is considered within Chapter

18: Ecology.

14.25 The following effects are considered potentially significant and are reported within this

Chapter:

• Construction:

‒ Construction noise at residential areas; and

‒ Construction vibration at residential areas.

• Operation:

‒ External fixed plant items and heavy goods vehicles manoeuvring and

loading/unloading within the Site boundary; and

‒ Development related road traffic noise effects on the surrounding road

network.

Extent of the Study Area

14.26 The study area for the noise assessment includes the nearest noise-sensitive receptors

in each direction from the Proposed Development (see paragraph 14.38 for

approximate distances between the Ste boundary and receptors). These receptors are

considered worst-case as they would be subject to the highest noise levels from the

Site. The receptor locations which define the study area are shown in Figure 14.1.

14.27 For the assessment of operational road traffic noise, the study area includes noise-

sensitive receptors which may front the road links included in the analysis. This area

has been dictated by the extent of the traffic model.

14.6

Background Studies to Inform the ES

14.28 The following background studies have informed this Chapter:

• A baseline sound survey has been undertaken at locations representative of the

nearby noise-sensitive receptors, as detailed below. The survey covered a period

of seven days to include a weekend.

• A noise survey of the existing operations was undertaken to establish source

levels for use in the assessment of Phase 1.

Assessment Methodology

14.29 The assessment has referenced various British Standards and guidance documents

which are listed below and summarised in further detail in Appendix 14.1.

14.30 For the prediction and assessment of construction noise and vibration:

• BS5228-1:2009+A1:2014, Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on

Construction and Open Sites – Part 1: Noise (Ref 14.5); and

• BS5228-2:2009+A1:2014, Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on

Construction and Open Sites – Part 2: Vibration (Ref 14.6).

14.31 For the prediction and assessment of commercial/industrial noise:

• BS4142:2014+A1: 2019, Methods of Rating and Assessing Industrial and

Commercial Sound (Ref 14.7).

14.32 For the prediction and assessment of road traffic noise:

• Former Department of Transport/Welsh Office technical memorandum

Calculation of Road Traffic Noise, 1988 (Ref 14.8); and

• Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, LA111 Noise and Vibration (Ref 14.9).

14.33 For guidance in assessing the environmental effects of noise:

• Guidelines for Environmental Noise Impact Assessment (Ref 14.10).

Establishing Baseline Conditions

Site and Adjacent Receptors

14.34 A baseline noise survey was undertaken between Wednesday 26 September and

Tuesday 2 October 2018 to determine the baseline noise and vibration environment

across the study area.

14.35 It is considered that the baseline noise climate has not significantly changed since the

baseline survey was undertaken. As such, the data are considered valid and robust for

use in this assessment.

14.7

14.36 The details of the equipment used in the survey can be found in Appendix 14.2. The

monitoring equipment was calibrated before and after the measurements with no

significant drift observed. The equipment had been calibrated via a UKAS accredited

laboratory within the two years preceding the survey (and one year for the calibrator

itself).

Monitoring Locations

14.37 Baseline noise levels were measured at the following locations during the survey:

• Monitoring Location 1 – on the north-eastern boundary of Phase 2;

• Monitoring Location 2 – on the north-western boundary of Phase 2;

• Monitoring Location 3 – on the south-western Boundary of Phase 2; and

• Monitoring Location 4 – beyond the eastern boundary of Phase 1.

14.38 The above monitoring locations are representative of the following noise-sensitive

receptors closest to the Site which have been selected due to their proximity to the

Proposed Development:

• Monitoring Location 1 – representative of The Marsh (Receptor 3, approximately

90m from the site boundary), Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and Kite Hill

(Receptor 2, approximately 150m from the site boundary);

• Monitoring Location 2 – representative of Applegate House (Receptor 4,

approximately 10 from the site boundary);

• Monitoring Location 3 – representative of Great Moor Leaze Farm (Receptor 5,

approximately 100m from the site boundary); and

• Monitoring Location 4 – representative of Church Road (Receptor 1,

approximately 360m from the site boundary).

14.39 The monitoring locations and the sensitive receptors are shown in Figure 14.1.

14.40 At each noise monitoring location, the microphone was 1.5m above the ground in free-

field conditions, i.e. at least 3.5m from the nearest vertical reflecting surface.

Selection of Appropriate Baseline Noise Levels

14.41 For the assessment of operational commercial/industrial noise levels within the Site, it

is considered reasonable that the day with the lowest modal background sound level is

representative of the daytime background sound level at the receptor.

14.42 For the night-time period the modal value is generally the result of measurements

during the middle of the night. On this, BS4142:2014 states:

“Among other considerations, diurnal patterns can have a major influence on

background sound levels and, for example, the middle of the night can be

distinctly different (and potentially of lesser importance) compared to the start

or end of the night-time period for sleep purposes.”

14.8

14.43 It is, therefore, considered that the night-time period with the lowest average

background sound level is representative of the night-time level at the receptor. This

accounts for the range of background sound levels over the whole night-time period,

rather than defining the background using the lowest measured levels.

Reporting of Environmental Effect and Significance Criteria

14.44 The impact of construction noise has been determined with reference to the guidance

in BS5228-1:2009+A1:2014, as shown in Table 14.2.

Table 14.2: Construction Noise – Magnitude of Change

Magnitude

of change

Definition

Large Threshold value (LAeq) is exceeded by more than 5dB

Medium Threshold value (LAeq) is exceeded by a value between 3 and 4.9dB

Small Threshold value (LAeq) is exceeded by a value between 0.1 and 2.9dB

Negligible Threshold value (LAeq) is not exceeded

14.45 The impact of construction vibration has been determined with reference to the

guidance of BS5228-2:2009+A1:2014, as shown in Table 14.3.

Table 14.3: Construction Vibration – Magnitude of Level

Magnitude

of level

Definition

Large Vibration level (PPV) exceeds 5.0mm/s

Medium Vibration level (PPV) is between 1.0mm/s and 4.9mm/s

Small Vibration level (PPV) is between 0.3mm/s and 0.9mm/s

Negligible Vibration level (PPV) is equal to or lower than 0.30mm/s

14.46 The impact of operational commercial/industrial noise upon residential receptors has

been determined with reference to the guidance in BS4142:2014, as shown in

Table 14.4.

Table 14.4: Operational Commercial/Industrial Noise – Magnitude of Level

14.9

Magnitude

of level

Definition

Large Rating level (LAR,T) is 10dB or more above the background sound level, LA90

Medium Rating level (LAR,T) is between 5.0 and 9.9dB above the background sound

level, LA90

Small Rating level (LAR,T) is between 0.1 and 4.9dB above the background sound

level, LA90

Negligible Rating level (LAR,T) is equal to or below the background sound level, LA90

14.47 The impact of operational road noise upon residential receptors has been determined

with reference to the guidance in DMRB LA111, as shown in Table 14.5 and Table 14.6.

Table 14.5: Short-term Operational Road Traffic Noise – Magnitude of Change

Magnitude

of change

Definition

Large Greater than or equal to 5.0 dB LA10,18hr

Medium 3.0 to 4.9 dB LA10,18hr

Small 1.0 to 2.9 dB LA10,18hr

Negligible Less than 1.0 dB LA10,18hr

Note: short-term refers to an assessment of road traffic noise scenarios in the same

year, comparing the ‘without development’ scenario to the ‘with’ development

scenario.

Table 14.6: Long-term Operational Road Traffic Noise – Magnitude of Change

Magnitude

of change

Definition

Large Greater than or equal to 10.0 dB LA10,18hr

Medium 5.0 to 9.9 dB LA10,18hr

Small 3.0 to 4.9 dB LA10,18hr

Negligible Less than 3.0 dB LA10,18hr

14.48 The significance of the effect will depend on the receptor type and its sensitivity to the

impact. The sensitivity of a receptor is shown in Table 14.7.

14.10

Table 14.7: Sensitivity Criteria for Receptors

Sensitivity Definition

High Residential properties

Schools and healthcare buildings (daytime only)

Medium Offices and other non-noise producing employment areas

Low Noise-generating areas

Negligible

14.49 All receptors in this assessment are residential and, therefore, of high sensitivity to

noise.

14.50 The sensitivity of the receptor, together with the magnitude of the impact, defines the

significance of the effect as shown in Table 14.8. Effects can be defined as beneficial,

adverse or negligible.

Table 14.8: Significance of Noise Effect

Sensitivity of Receptor

Mag

nit

ud

e o

f le

vel/

chan

ge High Medium Low Negligible

Large Major Moderate to

Major

Minor to

Moderate

Negligible

Medium Moderate to

Major

Moderate Minor Negligible

Small Minor to

Moderate

Minor Negligible to

Minor

Negligible

Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible

14.51 Within this Chapter of the ES a moderate or major effect is considered significant whilst

minor and negligible effects are not significant.

Baseline Conditions

14.52 A summary of the survey results from the baseline survey is shown in Table 14.9. The

detailed survey results are available upon request.

Table 14.9: Survey Results dB

14.11

Date Time LAeq LAFmax LA10

Monitoring Location 1

Wed 26 Sept 2018 16:42 - 23:00 50.3 81.6 52.0

26 - 27 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 46.6 61.5 48.7

Thurs 27 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 51.7 77.3 52.8

27 - 28 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 43.4 80.6 45.1

Fri 28 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 44.6 84.5 45.8

28 - 29 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 43.7 80.6 45.9

Sat 29 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 50.7 73.0 52.7

29 - 30 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 43.9 63.1 49.8

Sun 30 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 52.1 74.7 53.8

30 Sept - 1 Oct 2018 23:00 - 07:00 44.1 57.4 48.9

Mon 01 Oct 2018 07:00 - 14:32 51.5 82.6 52.4


Wed 26 Sept 2018 17:16 - 23:00 50.7 101.5 52.2

26 - 27 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 45.9 78.3 48.2

Thurs 27 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 52.6 72.0 54.2

27 - 28 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 47.1 65.6 49.2

Fri 28 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 47.9 76.8 49.9

28 - 29 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 46.1 72.9 48.6

Sat 29 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 52.3 76.7 54.3

29 - 30 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 47.0 85.2 49.1

Sun 30 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 54.0 94.8 55.6

30 Sept - 1 Oct 2018 23:00 - 07:00 48.3 73.2 50.4

Mon 01 Oct 2018 07:00 - 14:46 54.1 81.4 55.5


14.12

Date Time LAeq LAFmax LA10


Wed 26 Sept 2018 18:16 - 23:00 58.4 85.1 58.5

26 - 27 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 50.6 82.7 51.7

Thurs 27 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 58.9 92.8 58.5

27 - 28 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 51.4 81.5 53.2

Fri 28 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 58.5 94.3 58.4

28 - 29 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 50.9 81.5 52.8

Sat 29 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 58.6 103.1 57.9

29 - 30 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 49.8 82.2 51.6

Sun 30 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 58.4 99.6 58.2

30 Sept - 1 Oct 2018 23:00 - 07:00 50.3 79.7 52.4

Mon 01 Oct 2018 07:00 - 15:06 59.3 83.4 59.0


Wed 26 Sept 2018 19:13 - 23:00 51.3 85.1 53.5

26 - 27 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 48.0 72.3 50.0

Thurs 27 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 52.7 69.8 54.5

27 - 28 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 44.6 77.8 46.8

Fri 28 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 47.2 87.8 49.5

28 - 29 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 44.8 86.8 46.8

Sat 29 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 52.6 85.6 54.4

29 - 30 Sept 2018 23:00 - 07:00 44.7 63.8 50.4

Sun 30 Sept 2018 07:00 - 23:00 53.4 84.8 54.9

30 Sept - 1 Oct 2018 23:00 - 07:00 48.0 72.9 50.0

Mon 01 Oct 2018 07:00 - 15:23 53.5 88.9 54.9

14.53 A further analysis of the background noise levels (LA90) is presented in Table 14.10.

14.13

Table 14.10: Summary of Background Noise Levels, dB

14.14

Location Period Minimum Maximum Average Mode

Monitoring

Location 1

Daytime 44.1 51.7 48.2 -

36.9 52.7 49.0 51.0

37.1 43.6 40.4 42.0

37.1 52.9 42.3 47.0

39.3 52.4 47.1 50.0

46.4 52.0 48.6 48.0

Night-time 37.2 52.0 43.1 42.0

36.5 43.5 40.1 39.0

36.6 49.9 40.7 38.0

38.8 49.9 43.9 41.0

38.1 54.3 44.0 41.0

Monitoring

Location 2

Daytime 44.6 50.5 48.1 50.0

42.2 53.2 50.4 53.0

40 49.1 44.8 46.0

41.7 53.1 48.5 51.0

46.1 53.6 51.2 53.0

50.1 54.5 51.7 50.0

Night-time 35.6 54.2 42.2 37.0

39.4 48.7 43.2 43.0

38.0 50.6 42.2 40.0

38.1 49.7 43.9 42.0

39.4 56.5 45.3 41.0

Monitoring

Location 3

Daytime 47.0 54.7 51.0 50.0

47.2 55.3 53.4 53.0

46.8 54.1 50.9 52.0

47.8 55.8 51.4 50.0

47.7 55.9 53.1 55.0

51.4 55.8 53.4 53.0

Night-time 38.6 57.0 45.2 39.0

40.1 53.1 45.7 47.0

40.6 52.7 45.3 42.0

42.5 49.6 45.3 43.0

14.15

Location Period Minimum Maximum Average Mode

39.9 56.8 46.3 43.0

Monitoring

Location 4

Daytime 44.3 52.3 47.8 -

40.1 53.8 50.5 52.0

36.8 47.4 42.6 44.0

44.4 52.9 49.6 50.0

46.6 53.9 51.3 52.0

50.2 54.3 51.6 51.0

Night-time 40.2 52.9 45.0 42.0

36.5 46.5 41.0 41.0

36.7 49.1 40.9 39.0

39.8 50.7 44.6 41.0

38.4 55.2 45.0 42.0

- no repeat values in dataset

Weather

14.54 With the exception of Friday 28th September 2018, the weather conditions during the

survey were dry with wind speeds below 5m/s. On 28th September, the conditions

were dry with wind speeds mostly below 5m/s.

Baseline Noise Levels Used in Assessments

14.55 Based on the data in Tables 14.9 and 14.10 the following baseline noise levels are used

in the assessments.

• Receptor 1 (Church Road):

‒ Construction noise: a baseline ambient noise level of 47dB LAeq.

‒ Operational commercial/industrial noise (daytime): a background sound

level of 44dB LA90.

‒ Operational commercial/industrial noise (night-time): a background sound

level of 41dB LA90.

• Receptor 2 (Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and Kite Hill):



level of 42dB LA90.


level of 40dB LA90.

14.16

• Receptor 3 (The Marsh):



level of 42dB LA90.


level of 40dB LA90.

• Receptor 4 (Applegate House):



level of 46dB LA90.


level of 42dB LA90.

• Receptor 5 (Great Moor Leaze Farm):

‒ Construction noise: a baseline ambient noise level of 58dB LA90.


level of 50dB LA90.


level of 45dB LA90.

Future Baseline

14.56 For receptors 1, 2 and 3, it is considered that the baseline noise and vibration climate is

likely to remain relatively similar in the absence of the Proposed Development.

However, receptors 4 and 5 are relatively close to the proposed Southern Connector

Road (SCR) and the noise climate at these receptors could be influenced at a low level

by the new road. However, this will largely depend on any mitigation that may be

incorporated into the design of the SCR.

Sensitive Receptors

14.57 As set out above and for clarity here, the following sensitive receptors have been

identified and assessed within the ES (see Figure 14.1):

• Receptor 1 (Church Road);

• Receptor 2 (Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and Kite Hill);

• Receptor 3 (The Marsh);

• Receptor 4 (Applegate House); and

14.17

• Receptor 5 (Great Moor Leaze Farm).

14.58 As mentioned in the ‘Extent of the Study Area’ area section above, the operational

road traffic noise effects are assessed on road links in the surrounding area, the

geographical extent of which are dictated by the transport model. The assessment

presented in the ‘Development related road traffic noise effects on the surrounding

road network’ section below has not considered individual receptors long each road

link as there may be many; instead it has cautiously assumed that there are sensitive

receptors fronting each link.

14.59 All receptors and road link are considered to have a high sensitivity to noise.

Primary and Tertiary Mitigation

Construction Phase

14.60 The primary and tertiary mitigation which have been evaluated as part of the

construction phase assessment are outlined below:

• All construction activity will take place during normal daytime working hours, i.e.

07:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday and 07:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays;

• Construction deliveries to and from the Site would only be undertaken during

the above core hours;

• ‘Best Practicable Means’ will be employed as defined in Section 72 of The

Control of Pollution Act 1974 to minimise noise and/or vibration;

• Guidance given in BS5228: 2009+A1: 2014 Part 1 Annex B (Noise sources,

remedies and their effectiveness) will be followed;

• Only plant that conforms to the relevant European Union noise emission

standards will be used during the construction of the Proposed Development;

• All plant items brought to the Site will be properly maintained, provided with

effective silencers and operated in a manner so as to avoid causing any excessive

noise or vibration;

• All items of plant operating on the Site in intermittent use will be shut down in

the intervening periods between use; and

• All stationary plant will be located as far as possible from occupied dwellings.

Operation Phase

14.61 There are no primary and tertiary mitigation which have been evaluated as part of the

operation phase assessment.

Assessment of Effects, Secondary Mitigation and Residual Effects

Construction Phase

Construction noise at residential areas

14.18

14.62 The Proposed Development has the potential to generate noise during the

construction phase. It is inevitable that with a project of this nature some disturbance

could be caused to those living and working nearby during the construction phase.

However, disruption due to construction noise is a localised phenomenon and is

temporary in nature.

14.63 The techniques available to predict the likely noise effects from construction are

necessarily based on detailed information on the type and number of plant being used,

their location and the length of time they are in operation.

14.64 For this assessment, the noise levels associated with three typical construction stages

have been predicted, as follows:

1. Site clearance and enabling works;

2. a) Piling and ground works and b) Sub-structure works; and

3. Superstructure works.

14.65 The assessment has been undertaken based on generic plant items to be utilised

during each stage and activity, the associated sound power levels (determined from

Annex C of BS5228-1:2009+A1:2014) and the likely percentage “on-time” for each item

of plant, as set out in Appendix 14.3.

14.66 It is accepted that construction activities and plant may vary from those presented

above. However, as it would not be feasible to assess all potential construction

configurations, the assessment undertaken is considered a robust representative of the

anticipated construction noise levels.

14.67 Noise levels have been predicted at the closest noise-sensitive receptors to the Site.

The predictions have been undertaken using the proprietary noise modelling software

CadnaA®, which incorporates the methodology outlined in BS5228-1:2014:A1:2014.

The model assumes hard ground and applies the screening effect of barriers from

Figure F.3 of the standard (at 500Hz).

14.68 For most stages and sub-stages, it has been assumed that the majority of plant would

be operating at a height of 2m above ground level. For the superstructure works, some

plant would be operating at increased heights and 12m above ground level has been

assumed.

14.69 Noise levels have been predicted at a height of 1.5m, which is representative of the

ground floor of a receptor. Predicted levels relate to the typical 10-hour working day.

14.70 The construction plant have been positioned across the Site for each phase; however,

at times, plant may operate closer to, or further away, from the receptors. However,

the calculations are considered to represent a reasonable worst-case scenario.

14.19

14.71 As Phase 1 is relatively small, plant have been located across the Site, in positions that

are considered representative of works which would be undertaken. As the Phase 2

site is larger, predictions for Receptors 1, 2, and 5 are based on plant operating in the

southern section of the Site whilst predictions at Receptors 3 and 4 are based on plant

operating in the northern section of the Site.

14.72 The predicted noise levels for each stage of construction are presented in Table 14.11.

This relates to Phase 1 of the Proposed Development. The table also compares the

predicted noise levels with the threshold value adopted for the assessment.

14.73 The assessment of construction noise is based on the assumption that the construction

of Phase 1 and Phase 2 do not run in parallel. However, to assess a reasonable worst-

case where the construction of the phases may happen concurrently, the predicted

construction noise levels for Phase 1 and Phase 2 have been summed logarithmically.

This has been undertaken for each receptor simply by adding the highest predicted

noise levels during Phase 1 to the highest predicted noise level during Phase 2. The

resulting magnitude of change is no greater than those stated within the assessment.

14.20

Table 14.11: Predicted Construction Noise Levels and Assessment for Phase 1, dB LAeq,10hour

14.21

Receptor Construction Stage Predicted Noise

Level

Threshold Value Difference Magnitude of

Effect

Significance

of Effect

Receptor 1

Church Road

Stage1 - Demolition and Enabling Works 49.6 65.0 -15.4 Negligible Negligible

Stage2a – Ground Works 51.5 -13.5 Negligible Negligible

Stage2b - Substructure Construction 50.2 -14.8 Negligible Negligible

Stage3 – Superstructure Works 52.5 -12.5 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 2

Undertown

Farm, Kings

Lane Farm

and Kite Hill





Receptor 3

The Marsh





Receptor 4

Applegate

House

Stage1 - Demolition and Enabling Works 49.0 65.0 -16 Negligible Negligible




Receptor 5

Great Moor

Leaze Farm




14.22

Receptor Construction Stage Predicted Noise

Level

Threshold Value Difference Magnitude of

Effect

Significance

of Effect


14.23

14.74 The sensitivity of all receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of change is

considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, temporary, short-

term effect which is considered to be negligible during Phase 1 construction works.

14.75 The predicted Phase 2 construction noise levels at the closest receptors are presented

in Table 14.12. The table also compares the predicted noise levels with the threshold

value adopted for the assessment.

14.24

Table 14.12: Predicted Construction Noise Levels and Assessment for Phase 2, dB LAeq,10hour

14.25

Receptor Construction Stage Predicted

Noise Level

Threshold

Value

Difference Magnitude of

Effect

Significance

of Effect

Receptor 1

Church Road

Stage 1 - Demolition and Enabling Works 48.9 65.0 -16.1 Negligible Negligible

Stage 2a – Ground Works 50.2 -14.8 Negligible Negligible

Stage 2b - Substructure Construction 49.2 -15.8 Negligible Negligible

Stage 3 – Superstructure Works 51.4 -13.6 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 2

Undertown Farm, Kings

Lane Farm and Kite Hill





Receptor 3

The Marsh





Receptor 4

Applegate House


Stage 2a – Ground Works 72.3 7.3 High Major

Stage 2b - Substructure Construction 65.9 0.9 Small Minor

Stage 3 – Superstructure Works 66.8 1.8 Small Minor

Receptor 5

Great Moor Leaze Farm

Stage 1 - Demolition and Enabling Works 50.0 65.0 -15 Negligible Negligible



14.26

Receptor Construction Stage Predicted

Noise Level

Threshold

Value

Difference Magnitude of

Effect

Significance

of Effect


14.27

14.76 The sensitivity of all receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of change

(during all construction stages) at Receptors 1, 2, 3 and 5 is considered to be negligible.

Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, temporary, short-term effect which is

considered to be negligible during Phase 2 construction works.

14.77 The sensitivity of Receptor 4 is considered to be high. The magnitude of change during

demolition and enabling works is considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is likely

to be a direct, temporary, short-term effect which is considered to be negligible. The

magnitude of change during ground works is considered to be high. Therefore, there is

likely to be a direct, temporary, short-term, adverse effect which is considered to be

major. The magnitude of change during substructure and superstructure works is

considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, temporary, short-term,

adverse effect which is considered to be minor.

Secondary Mitigation or Enhancement

14.78 The major effect at Receptor 4 (Applegate House) during the Phase 2 ground works is

expected to be for a relatively short duration whilst plant are working closest to the

property. During this period, it is recommended that a screen of approximately

2.5 metres in height is located very close to (or on) the site boundary with Applegate

House. The barrier should provide a reduction in nose levels of approximately 5dB. The

resulting noise level during ground works would be 67 dB LAeq,10hour.

Residual Effect

14.79 The sensitivity of receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of level, following

secondary mitigation, is considered to be negligible to small. Therefore, there is likely

to be a direct, temporary, short-term, adverse residual effect which is considered to be

negligible (for Receptors 1, 2, 3 and 5) to minor (Receptor 4 during Phase 2 only).

14.80 This effect is considered to be Not Significant.

Construction vibration at residential areas

14.81 The levels of vibration that would be likely during piling on the Site have been

predicted, although the type of piling has not been confirmed. Desktop predictions for

percussive piling operations have been undertaken.

14.82 The predicted vibration levels at each of the receptors for both Phase 1 and Phase 2

works are shown in Table 14.13 and Table 14.14 respectively. The distance from piling

operations to each receptor is based on the distance between the receptor and the

closest edge of the nearest building to be constructed for each of the Phases.

14.83 The following parameters have been assumed for percussive piling in accordance with

Table E.1 of BS5228:2009:

• kp = 2 (this is the mid value for when piles are not driven at refusal, 1<kp< 3);

• W = 42,500J (this is the mid value for the nominal hammer energy, 1.5 >W> 85

kJ); and

• r = distance from piling operations to receptor (m)

14.28

Table 14.13: Predicted Construction Vibration Levels for Phase 1 Works

Receptor Distance from Piling Operations to

Receptor (m)

Predicted Vibration

Level mms-1

Magnitude of

Level

Significance of

Effect

Receptor 1: Church Road 469 0.14 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 2: Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and Kite Hill 425 0.16 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 3: The Marsh 488 0.13 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 4: Applegate House 375 0.19 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 5: Great Moor Leaze Farm 300 0.25 Negligible Negligible

Table 14.14: Predicted Construction Vibration Levels for Phase 2 Works

Receptor Distance from Piling Operations to

Receptor (m)

Predicted Vibration

Level mms-1

Magnitude of

Level

Significance of

Effect

Receptor 1: Church Road 562 0.11 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 2: Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and Kite Hill 272 0.28 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 3: The Marsh 126 0.77 Small Minor

Receptor 4: Applegate House 52 2.42 Medium Moderate

Receptor 5: Great Moor Leaze Farm 320 0.23 Negligible Negligible

14.29

14.84 The sensitivity of all receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of level at all

receptors during Phase 1 works is considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is likely

to be a direct, temporary, short-term, adverse effect which is considered to be

negligible during Phase 1 construction works.

14.85 The sensitivity of all receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of level during

Phase 2 works at receptors 1, 2 and 5 is considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is

likely to be a direct, temporary, short-term, adverse effect which is considered to be

negligible during Phase 2 construction works at receptors 1, 2 and 5. The magnitude of

level at Receptor 3 is considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct,

temporary, short-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor during Phase 2

works at Receptor 3. The magnitude of level at Receptor 4 is considered to be medium.

Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, temporary, short-term, adverse effect which is

considered to be moderate during Phase 2 works at Receptor 4.

14.86 The above assessments assume that the construction of Phase 1 and Phase 2 do not

run in parallel. However, a reasonable worst-case is to assess the construction phases

happening concurrently. Unlike noise, vibration dissipates very quickly with distance.

Figure 14.1 shows that none of the Receptors are within close proximity to both

phases; the closest being greater than 200 metres. On this basis, it is very unlikely that

the magnitudes of level with the phases being constructed concurrently would be any

greater than those stated above.


14.87 Piling operations cannot take place at a greater distance from Receptor 4 to reduce the

magnitude of level to small or negligible.

14.88 As the piling method has not been finalised, it is not possible to confirm with certainty

that a medium magnitude of level will result at Receptor 4. Continuous fight auger

(CFA) piling produces much lower levels of vibration and is recommended, where

ground conditions (and other project constraints) allow. In relation to CFA piling,

BS 5228 states:

“The levels of vibration associated with continuous flight auger injected piling and

pressed-in piling are minimal, as the processes do not involve rapid acceleration or

deceleration of tools in contact with the ground but rely to a large extent on steady

motions.”

14.89 It is not possible to predict vibration levels from CFA piling. However, based on

experience and the excerpt above, it is unlikely that vibration levels of greater than

1 mm/s PPV will be generated at Receptor 4.

Residual Effect

14.90 The sensitivity of receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of level, following

secondary mitigation, is considered to be negligible to small. Therefore, there is likely

to be a direct, temporary, short-term, adverse residual effect which is considered to be

negligible to minor.


14.30

Operation Phase

14.92 The predictions for the operational assessment of noise within the Site have been

undertaken using the proprietary software CadnaA® and the calculation algorithms set

out in ISO 9613-2:1996.

14.93 The application is detailed for Phase 1 and outline for Phase 2. Consequently, there is

more information available for Phase 1 and so a detailed assessment has been

undertaken. For Phase 2, noise emission limits have been defined which will be used

during the detailed design and plant procurement process.

External fixed plant items and heavy goods vehicles manoeuvring and

loading/unloading within the Site – Phase 1

14.94 A noise survey of the existing operations was undertaken on 24 July 2018 to establish

source levels for use in the assessment of Phase 1 of the Proposed Development. The

results of the measurements are presented in Table 14.15 below.

Table 14.15: Noise Levels for Existing Operations

Measurement Description Noise Level,

LAeq, T dB

1 Horizontal Metal Sawing Machine (HMSM) at 1m 80

2 Internal Compactor (Up) at 1m 79

3 Internal Compactor (Down) at 1m 81

4 External Compactor at 1m 73

5 HMSM at 1m 79

6 HMSM at 3m 73

7 Unit 14 with HMSM line of sight to HMSM 67

8 Reverberant field in Unit 14 away from HMSM 59

9 Internal Compactor Warehouse (Up) at 13m 78

10 Internal Compactor Warehouse (Down) at 30m 59

11 Production Area Reverberant field 74

12 Forklift in operation at 5m 67

13 Mitsubishi ACU/AHU 1 at 1m 65

14 Mitsubishi ACU/AHU 2 at 1m 80

15 Exhaust at 3m 73

16 Delivery (1xHGV arrived, followed by a second HGV and

one smaller vehicle, all unloading simultaneously.) 3-7m

from vehicles

65

14.31

14.95 A review of the application drawings for the Proposed Development does not indicate

any external plant. However, it is assumed that there will be items of external plant

such as HVAC equipment (ACU/AHU’s) but the location of these is unknown at present.

The impact of HVAC equipment is discussed in the following section.

14.96 For the purpose of this assessment it has been assumed that, with the exception of the

unspecified external plant and HGVs, the plant listed in Table 14.15 would be located

within the proposed Wasdell facility.

14.97 The noise model has been developed on the basis of no internal walls within the

proposed building. This is considered a worst-case assumption, with the sound

reduction properties of the internal walls not being taken in to consideration.

Therefore, noise levels from the production area, which is contained within a room in

the centre of the building, would have greater prevalence at the facades of the building

than would be expected.

14.98 The reverberant field within the building has been calculated with an assumed

absorption coefficient of 0.1 giving an overall reverberant sound level in the building of

79dB. The facades of the building have been conservatively modelled with a sound

reduction performance of 24dB Rw.

14.99 In relation to HGV movements on the Site, it is understood from the WSP

Transportation team that during a typical day there would be a total of 90 HGV

movements to and from the Site equating to a total of 180 movements. The operator

has stated that 90% of these movements would be between the hours of 07:00 and

19:00. For the assessment it has been assumed that there would be 20 HGV

movements in any given hour during the day and one HGV movement in any given 15-

minute period at night.

14.100 Based on previously measured noise data, each HGV would have a sound power level

of 98dB and would travel at an average speed of 10km/h within the Site.

14.101 The character of the sound at the receptor and the penalty that would apply in

accordance with BS4142:2014 are detailed in Table 14.16. It must be noted that these

are assumptions which may need to be refined as the design evolves and plant are

procured. However, the assessment below is considered to provide a reasonable

estimate at this stage.

14.32

Table 14.16: Characteristics of Specific Sound Sources

Acoustic

Characteristic

Assessment Outcome

Tonality Given the noise climate in the area it is considered

that tones may be just perceptible at the sensitive

receptors. A +2dB penalty will be applied.

Based on the

individual

characteristics a

total penalty of

+5dB at the

receptors is

considered

appropriate.

Impulsivity The proposed processes will be containment within

the building and so an impulsive noise correction is

not considered applicable.

Other sound

characteristic

Given the noise climate in the area it is considered

that sound from the Site may be recognisable at the

sensitive receptors. A +3dB penalty will be applied.

Intermittency Due to the site being operational on a 24/7 basis it is

considered that the sound being generated would

not be intermittent.

14.102 The rating levels (i.e. specific level with the addition of the +5dB correction above) have

been compared to the derived background sound levels and assessed in accordance

with BS4142:2014. The daytime (07:00 and 23:00 hours) and night-time (23:00 and

07:00 hours) assessment are presented in Table 14.17 and Table 14.18 respectively.

The noise levels include contributions from the internal processes and also the HGVs

manoeuvring within the Site boundary.

14.33

Table 14.17: Phase 1 BS4142:2014 Daytime Assessment (07:00 – 23:00 hours), dB

Receptor Representative Background

Sound Level, LA90

Predicted Rating

Level, LAr, Tr

Difference Magnitude

of Effect

Significance

of Effect

Receptor 1: Church Road 44 33 -11 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 2: Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and Kite Hill 42 33 -9 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 3: The Marsh 42 33 -9 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 4: Applegate House 46 35 -11 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 5: Great Moor Leaze Farm 50 37 -13 Negligible Negligible

Table 14.18: Phase 1 BS4142:2014 Night-Time Assessment (23:00 – 07:00 hours), dB

Receptor Representative

Background Sound Level,

LA90

Predicted Rating

Level, LAr, Tr

Difference Magnitude

of Effect

Significance

of Effect

Receptor 1: Church Road 41 31 -10 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 2: Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and Kite Hill 40 31 -9 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 3: The Marsh 40 31 -9 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 4: Applegate House 42 32 -10 Negligible Negligible

Receptor 5: Great Moor Leaze Farm 45 34 -11 Negligible Negligible

14.34

14.103 It can be seen from Tables 14.17 and 14.18 that for both the daytime and night-time period

the rating level at the residential properties, due to the Proposed Development, is predicted

to be between 9 and 13dB below background sound levels.

14.104 With reference to BS4142:2014, the operation of the Proposed Development would have a

low impact. Furthermore, the predicted rating levels comply with the requirements of SBC’s

EIA Scoping Opinion (Appendix 1.2) – i.e. at least 5dB(A) below the background sound level

at each sensitive receptor.

14.105 The sensitivity of all receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of change is

considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term,

effect which is considered to be negligible.


14.106 No mitigation is considered necessary.

Residual Effect

14.107 The sensitivity of all receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of change, following

secondary mitigation, is considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct,

permanent, long-term, residual effect which is considered to be negligible.


External fixed plant items (Phases 1 and 2) and heavy goods vehicles manoeuvring and

loading/unloading within the Site (Phase 2)

14.109 SBC has requested that the rating level of all plant at the Site is at least 5dB(A) below the

background sound level at each sensitive receptor. As can be seen from Tables 14.17 and

14.18, the rating level from internal plant and HGV movements associated with Phase 1 is

between 9dB(A) and 13dB(A) below the background sound level during the day and between

9dB(A) and 11dB(A) below the background sound level during the night.

14.110 The rating level of all unspecified plant in Phase 1 and Phase 2, when added to the rating

levels presented in Tables 14.17 and 14.18, must be no more than the levels detailed below.

This would ensure the overall rating level from Proposed Development is at least 5dB(A)

below the background sound level at the sensitive receptors. Note that the levels in

Table 14.19 assume that the plant assessed for Phase 1 remain unchanged.

Table 14.19: Noise Limit at Receptors from Unspecified Plant, dB

Receptor Rating Level, LAr, Tr

Daytime Night-time

Receptor 1: Church Road 38 34

Receptor 2: Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and Kite Hill 35 33

Receptor 3: The Marsh 35 33

Receptor 4: Applegate House 38 35

Receptor 5: Great Moor Leaze Farm 44 39

14.35

14.111 It is recommended, should the plant and HGV movements in Phase 1 be different from the

assumptions above (see paragraphs 14.94, 14.97 and Table 14.15), that the following noise

limits for the Proposed Development (Phases 1 and 2) be included in a planning condition for

the Site. Note that the limits are defined as rating levels which include any character

corrections in line with BS 4142. These limits comply with the requirements of SBC.

Table 14.20: BS 4142 Noise Emission Limits for Phases 1 and 2, dB

Receptor Daytime Rating Level

(dB, LAr,T))

Night-time Rating

Level (dB, LAr,T))

Receptor 1: Church Road 39 36

Receptor 2: Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and

Kite Hill

37 35

Receptor 3: The Marsh 37 35

Receptor 4: Applegate House 41 37

Receptor 5: Great Moor Leaze Farm 45 40

14.112 The sensitivity of all receptors is considered to be high. Assuming noise limit in Table 14.20

are achieved, the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is

likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term, effect which is considered to be negligible.


14.113 Noise emission limits have been derived for the operational phase of the Proposed

Development and will be included in a planning condition. This is to ensure noise levels from

internal and external plant and HGVs manoeuvring within the site are acceptable at the

closest residential areas and meet the requirements of SBC.

Residual Effect

14.114 The sensitivity of all receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of change, following

secondary mitigation, is considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct,

permanent, long-term, residual effect which is considered to be negligible.


Development related road traffic noise effects on the surrounding road network

14.116 The operational road traffic noise assessment has utilised traffic flow data provided by WSP’s

Transportation team and considers the effects of the development related traffic on the

surrounding road network. The assessment has been carried out considering the following

scenarios:

Opening year for Phase 1: 2021;

Fully operational year (Phase 1 and Phase 2): 2026; and

Future year: 2036.

14.117 The following traffic flows have been assessed for each of the above scenarios:

14.36

2021:

o Baseline; and

o Baseline + Phase 1.

2026:

o Baseline;

o Baseline + Forecast (includes infrastructure and growth1); and

o Baseline + Forecast + Phases 1 and 2.

2036:

o Baseline;

o Baseline + Forecast (includes infrastructure and growth); and

o Baseline + Forecast + Phases 1 and 2.

14.118 The effects of Phase 1 of the Proposed Development in isolation are presented for 2021,

whilst for 2026 and 2036 the baseline is assessed against not only the flows associated with

the Proposed Development but also those associated with infrastructure and growth.

Consequently, the 2026 and 2036 scenarios present cumulative effects in addition to those

associated with the Proposed Development.

14.119 For each of the above scenarios, the Basic Noise Level (BNL) has been calculated for each

road link in accordance with CRTN. Tables 14.21 to 14.25 present the assessment findings.

Opening Year for Phase 1: 2021

Table 14.21: Operational Road Traffic Noise Assessment 2021, dB LA10,18hr

1 Includes NEV (North East Village) and SCR

14.37

Road Link 2021 Difference

Phase 1 – Baseline

Magnitude of

Change

Significance of

Effect

SCRR North of Site Access N/A1

SCRR South of Site Access +1.6 Small Minor

Purley Road 0 Negligible Negligible

Pack Hill South of Site Access +1.4 Small Minor

Pack Hill East of Site Access 0 Negligible Negligible

A419 North of Commonhead 0 Negligible Negligible

A419 South of Commonhead 0 Negligible Negligible

A4259 (Hospital to Commonhead

Roundabout) +0.2

Negligible Negligible

A4259 (Hospital to Homington Avenue) +0.3 Negligible Negligible

A4259 (Homington Avenue to Bridlestone

Avenue) +0.3


A4259 (Bridlestone Avenue to Dayhouse

Lane) +0.2


A4259 (Dayhouse Lane to Coate

Roundabout) +0.2


B4006 Dorcan Way (Coate Roundabout to

Holiday Inn Access) 0


Shaftesbury Avenue (Coate Rbt to

Amersham Rd) 0


A4259 Queens Drive (Coate Roundabout to

Queens Drive) 0


B4006 Marlborough Road (Coate

Roundabout to Sandringham Road) 0


M4 West of Junction 15 0 Negligible Negligible

M4 East of Junction 15 0 Negligible Negligible

A346 South of Junction 15 0 Negligible Negligible

A419 On-Slip - Northbound (North of

Commonhead Roundabout) +0.2


A419 Off-Slip - Southbound (North of



A419 On-Slip - Southbound (South of



A419 Off-Slip - Northbound (South of



14.38


Phase 1 – Baseline

Magnitude of

Change

Significance of

Effect

M4 On-Slip - Eastbound (East of Junction

15) 0


M4 Off-Slip - Westbound (East of Junction

15) 0


M4 On-Slip - Westbound (West of Junction

15) 0


M4 Off-Slip - Eastbound (West of Junction

15) 0


1SCRR not operational in baseline scenario

14.120 The sensitivity of all receptors fronting the links above is cautiously considered to be high.

The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible to small. Therefore, there is likely to

be a direct, permanent, short-term, effect which is considered to be negligible to minor

during the 2021 opening year for Phase 1.

Fully operational year (Phase 1 and Phase 2): 2026

14.121 Table 14.22 presents the assessment of road traffic noise levels in 2026 comparing the

baseline levels against the Baseline + Forecast + Phases 1 and 2 levels.


14.39


Forecast, P1 and P2

– Baseline

Magnitude of

Change

Significance of

Effect


SCRR South of Site Access +5.8 Large Major

Purley Road +0.4 Negligible Negligible

Pack Hill East of Site Access -0.2 Negligible Negligible

A419 North of Commonhead +0.1 Negligible Negligible

A419 South of Commonhead +0.4 Negligible Negligible


Roundabout) +0.7




Avenue) +0.9



Lane) +0.5



Roundabout) +0.5



Holiday Inn Access) +0.1


Shaftesbury Avenue (Coate Roundabout to

Amersham Rd) +0.6



Queens Drive) +0.4



Roundabout to Sandringham Road) +0.3


M4 West of Junction 15 +0.2 Negligible Negligible

M4 East of Junction 15 +0.1 Negligible Negligible

A346 South of Junction 15 +0.5 Negligible Negligible





Commonhead Roundabout) -0.1




Small Minor



Small Minor

14.40


Forecast, P1 and P2

– Baseline

Magnitude of

Change

Significance of

Effect


15) +0.4



15) +0.3



15) +0.5



15) +0.6



14.122 The sensitivity of all links is cautiously considered to be high. With the exception of three

links (SCR south of site access, the Commonhead A419 on-slip southbound and off-slip

northbound), the magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. Therefore, for the

receptors fronting these links there is likely to be a direct, permanent, short-term, effect

which is considered to be negligible during the 2026 opening year for Phase 1 and Phase 2.

14.123 On the SCR south of the site access, the magnitude of change is considered to be large.

However, as stated above, this is when comparing the 2026 baseline to the 2026 baseline +

forecast + Proposed Development. The magnitude of change for this road link is presented

below following further analysis of the traffic flow data presented in Table 14.23.

14.124 On the Commonhead A419 on-slip southbound and off-slip northbound, the magnitude of

change is considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, short-

term, effect which is considered to be minor during the 2026 opening year for Phase 1 and

Phase 2. As above, the major effect on Pack Hill is a result of cumulative traffic including the

North East Village and SCR schemes in combination with the Proposed Development (Phase 1

and 2).

14.125 It is important to understand how the Proposed Development contributes to the major effect

on the SCR south of the site access detailed in Table 14.22 above. This has been undertaken

by comparing the 2026 Baseline traffic flows with the 2026 Baseline + Forecast flows – i.e.

not including the Proposed Development. This assessment is presented in Table 14.23 below

for the SCRR south of the site access only. Note that it is the comparison that is important

and not the magnitude of effect and significance of effect.



Forecast – Baseline

SCRR South of Site Access +4.5

14.41

14.126 It can be seen that the NEV and SCR developments (in the absence of the Proposed

Development) result in a 4.5 dB increase to noise levels on the SCR to the south of the site

access. When compared to the difference for this road link presented in Table 14.22, it can

be seen that the operation of the Proposed Development results in a 1.3dB increase.

Therefore, on the SCR south of the site access there is likely to be a direct, permanent, short-

term, effect which is considered to be minor during the 2026 opening year for Phase 1 and

Phase 2.

Future Year: 2036

14.127 Table 14.24 presents the assessment of road traffic noise levels in 2036 comparing the

baseline levels against the Baseline + Forecast + Phases 1 and 2 levels.


14.42


Forecast, P1 and P2

– Baseline

Magnitude of

Change

Significance of

Effect


SCRR South of Site Access +4.2 Medium Moderate

Purley Road 0 Negligible Negligible





Roundabout) +0.6




Avenue) +0.7



Lane) +0.4



Roundabout) +0.4






Amersham Rd) +0.6



Queens Drive) +0.3
















Small Minor



Small Minor

14.43


Forecast, P1 and P2

– Baseline

Magnitude of

Change

Significance of

Effect


15) +0.5



15) +0.2



15) +0.4



15) +0.7



14.128 The sensitivity of all receptors fronting the links above is cautiously considered to be high.

With the exception of three links (SCR south of the site access and the Commonhead A419

on-slip southbound and off-slip northbound ), the magnitude of change is considered to be

negligible. Therefore, for receptors fronting these links there is likely to be a direct,

permanent, short-term, effect which is considered to be negligible during the 2036 scenario.

14.129 On the SCR south of the site access, the magnitude of change is considered to be medium.

However, as stated above, this is when comparing the 2036 baseline to the 2036 baseline +

forecast + Proposed Development. The magnitude of change for this road link is presented

below following further analysis of the traffic flow data presented in Table 14.25.

14.130 On the Commonhead A419 on-slip southbound and off-slip northbound, the magnitude of

change is considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, short-

term, effect which is considered to be minor during the 2036 scenario.

14.131 As with the 2026 scenario, it is important to understand how the Proposed Development

contributes to the moderate effect on the SCR south of the site access detailed in

Table 14.24 above. This has been undertaken by comparing the 2036 Baseline traffic flows

with the 2036 Baseline + Forecast flows – i.e. not including the Proposed Development. This

assessment is presented in Table 14.25 below for the SCR south of the site access only. Note

that it is the comparison that is important and not the magnitude of effect and significance

of effect.



Forecast – Baseline

SCRR South of Site Access +3.1

14.44


Development) result in a 3.1 dB increase to noise levels on the SCR to the south of the site


be seen that the operation of the Proposed Development results in a 1.1dB increase.

Therefore, on the SCR south of the site access there is likely to be a direct, permanent, short-

term, effect which is considered to be minor during the 2036 scenario for Phase 1 and

Phase 2.

14.133 The above scenarios assess the short-term effects of the Proposed Development (including

cumulative schemes, where stated above) as, for each scenario, it is the comparison of traffic

data for the same year that forms the basis of the assessment. However, it is also

appropriate to assess the long-term effects of the scheme by comparing the 2021 baseline

traffic flows against the 2036 traffic flows with the Proposed Development in combination

with the cumulative schemes, as shown in in Table 14.26 below. Long-term effects are

assessed against the criteria in Table 14.16.

Table 14.26: Long Term Operational Road Traffic Noise Assessment, dB LA10,18hr

14.45

Road Link 2021 Baseline v

2036 All

Development

Magnitude of

Change

Significance of

Effect


SCRR South of Site Access +5.5 Medium Moderate

Purley Road +0.2 Negligible Negligible





Roundabout) +0.2




Avenue) +0.4



Lane) +0.3



Roundabout) +0.3






Amersham Rd) 0



Queens Drive) +0.3




















14.46

Road Link 2021 Baseline v

2036 All

Development

Magnitude of

Change

Significance of

Effect


15) +0.8



15) +0.4



15) +0.6



15) +0.4



14.134 With the exception of Pack Hill to the south of the Site access, the magnitude of change is

considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term,

effect which is considered to be negligible.

14.135 On Pack Hill to the south of the site access, a change of +5.5 dB is predicted in the long-term.

The magnitude of change is considered to be medium. Therefore, there is likely to be a

direct, permanent, long-term, effect which is considered to be moderate.

14.136 As with the short-term scenarios, it is important to understand how the Proposed

Development contributes to the moderate effect on Pack Hill to the south of the site access

detailed in Table 14.26 above. This has been undertaken by comparing the 2036 Baseline +

Forecast flows (i.e. not including the Proposed Development) with the 2021 Baseline traffic

flows. This assessment is presented in Table 14.27 below for Pack Hill south of the site access

only. Note that it is the comparison that is important and not the magnitude of effect and

significance of effect.

Table 14.27: Long Term Operational Road Traffic Noise Assessment, dB LA10,18hr

Road Link 2036 Forecast – 2021 Baseline

Pack Hill to the South of Site Access +4.5


Development) result in a 4.5 dB increase to noise levels on Pack Hill to the south of the site


be seen that the operation of the Proposed Development results in a 1dB increase.

Therefore, on Pack Hill to the south of the site access the Proposed Development is likely to

result in a direct, permanent, long-term, effect which is considered to be negligible.


14.138 Effects in the long-term are negligible to minor. As such, no mitigation is considered

necessary.

14.47

Residual Effect

14.139 The sensitivity of receptors is considered to be high. The magnitude of level in the long-term,

following secondary mitigation, is considered to be negligible to small in the long-term for all

three scenarios. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, temporary, long-term residual

adverse effect which is considered to be negligible to minor at all receptors fronting the road

links.


Limitations and Assumptions

14.141 To ensure transparency within the EIA process, the following limitations and assumptions

have been identified:

• As outlined in Chapter 4: The Proposed Development, construction will commence in

2020 with Phase 1 operational by 2021, and Phase 2 operational by 2025. The

Proposed Development will become fully operational in 2025. This chapter considers

an opening year of 2026, reflecting the first full year of operation. The assessment

years have been agreed with SBC and this is considered to represent a robust and

worst-case assessment.

• The model for the operational phase noise predictions has assumed the following:

‒ Downwind propagation, i.e. a wind direction that assists the propagation of

sound from source to receptor;

‒ Ground absorption factor of 0.5 (mixed ground);

‒ A reflection factor of 2;

‒ A daytime receptor height of 1.5m and a night-time receptor height of 4.0m to

represent a first-floor bedroom window; and

‒ No doors or other openings have been included on the facades of the Phase 1

building.

Summary

Construction

14.142 An assessment of noise levels during the construction of Phase 1 show that all effects are

expected to be negligible. During Phase 2, and with the incorporation of mitigation

measures, it is expected that noise levels will result in insignificant effects at the closest

receptors to the Site.

14.143 Vibration levels generated during construction of Phase 1 are expected to be negligible.

During Phase 2 it has been recommended that, ground conditions (and other project

constraints) allowing, continuous flight auger piling should be used rather than percussive

piling techniques. In this case the resulting vibration levels during the Phase 2 construction

woks should be insignificant.

14.48

Operation

14.144 The operations within the Phase 1 have been predicted using noise survey data gathered at

the operator’s existing facility. The internal process in combination with HGVs manoeuvring

within the site are likely to result in negligible effects at the closest receptors. The predicted

noise levels also comply with the requirements of Swindon Borough Council.

14.145 As Phase 2 is subject to an outline application, noise emission limits have been set to ensure

that the future operations meet the requirements of Swindon Borough Council and that

noise levels at the closest residential areas are acceptable.

14.146 The development will generate road traffic on the surrounding road network. An assessment

has been undertaken to determine short-term effects during 2021, 2026 and 2036 and to

also determine the change in noise levels over the longer term by comparing the 2021 and

2036 scenarios.

14.147 In most instances, there are short-term insignificant effects on the surrounding road

network. However, during 2026, moderate or major effects are predicted on three road links

in the area (SCRR south of the site access, Pack Hill south of site access and the A4259

Queens Drive). However, the long-term analysis shows that these effects reduce to

insignificant and are, therefore, predicted to be short-term only.

14.148 Table 14.28 provides a summary of the effects, residual effects and a conclusion as to

whether the effect is significant or not significant.

14.49

Table 14.28: Summary of Residual and Significant Effects

14.50

Effect Receptor Residual Effect Is the Effect

Significant?

Construction Phase

Construction noise at residential areas All Negligible:

Receptor 1 (Church Road),

Receptor 2 (Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and

Kite Hill)

Receptor 3 (The Marsh)

Receptor 5 (Great Moor Leaze Farm)

Minor adverse:

Receptor 4 (Applegate House)

No

Construction vibration at residential areas All Negligible:

Receptor 1 (Church Road),

Receptor 2 (Undertown Farm, Kings Lane Farm and

Kite Hill)

Receptor 3 (The Marsh)

Receptor 5 (Great Moor Leaze Farm)

Minor adverse:

Receptor 4 (Applegate House)

No

Operation Phase

External fixed plant items and heavy goods vehicles

manoeuvring and loading/unloading within the Site

boundary

All Negligible at all receptors No

14.51

Effect Receptor Residual Effect Is the Effect

Significant?

Development related road traffic noise effects on

the surrounding road network

All Negligible on all road links accessed, with the

exception of the following:

Minor adverse on Pack Hill/SCRR south of the site

access, A419 on-slip southbound (south of

Commonhead roundabout), A419 off-slip northbound

(south of Commonhead roundabout)

No

16.52

References

Ref: 14.1: National Planning Policy Framework

Ref: 14.2: Noise Policy Statement for England

Ref: 14.3: Planning Practice Guidance – Noise

Ref: 14.4: Swindon Borough Local Plan 2026

Ref: 14.5: BS5228-1:2009+A1:2014, Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on

Construction and Open Sites – Part 1: Noise

Ref: 14.6: BS5228-2:2009+A1:2014, Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on

Construction and Open Sites – Part 2: Vibration

Ref: 14.7: BS4142:2014, Methods of Rating and Assessing Industrial and Commercial Sound

Ref 14.8: Department of Transport/Welsh Office technical memorandum Calculation of Road

Traffic Noise, 1988

Ref 14.9: Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, LA111 Noise and Vibration

Ref: 14.10: The Guidelines for Environmental Noise Impact Assessment, produced by the

Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA)

14. Noise and Vibration

Documents

Transcript of 14. Noise and Vibration