ST ATE OF ILLINOIS

POL UTI ON

CONTROL BOARD

JAMES R. THOMPSON CENTER

100 W. RANDOLPH STREET, SUITE 11-500

CHICAGO,IL 60601

PETER ARENDOVICH,

Complainant,

v.

ILLINOIS STATE TOLL HIGHWAY

AUTHORITY,

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

PCB 29009-102

NOTICE OF FILING

TO:

Mr. Peter Arendovich

1388 Gordon Lane

Lemont, IL

60439

Please

take notice that on the 19

th

day of October, 2009, Respondent, Illinois State

Toll Highway Authority's MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT was filed

with the Clerk

of the Pollution Control Board, James R. Thompson Center, 100 W.

Randolph Street, Suite 11-500, Chicago, IL 60601 via electronic filing.

LISA MADIGAN,

Attorney General

of Illinois

~,rJ

~.LANE

Assistant Attorney General

Illinois Toll Highway Authority

2700 Ogden Avenue

Downers Grove, IL

60515

(630) 241-6800

(ex. 1530)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

PETER ARENDOVICH,

Complainant,

v.

THE

ILLINOIS STATE TOLL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY,

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

PCB 09-102

(Enforcement -Noise)

MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Respondent, The Illinois State Toll Highway Authority ("Tollway"), through its attorney,

LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, pursuant to 415 ILCS 5/31, moves

the Pollution Control Board to dismiss the Complainant's First Amended Complaint. In support

thereof, the Tollway states as follows:

1.

The Complainant :filed a Complaint against the Illinois Toll Highway Authority which the

Tollway has responded to with a Motion to Dismiss.

2.

The Illinois Pollution Control Board "Board" ordered the Complainant to respond to the

Motion to Dismiss

on or before September 15,2009.

3.

Instead of submitting a response to the Motion, the Plaintiff :filed a Motion for Leave to

File his First Amended Complaint. Attached as Exhibit

1. The Tollway has no objection to the

:filing

of the Amended Complaint.

4.

To the extent the allegations in the First Amended Complaint are addressed in the

Tollway's pending Motion to Dismiss, it hereby incorporates those points and arguments

by

reference.

5.

Complainant's First Amended Complaint does not set forth a claim for which the Board

has jurisdiction.

1

---

6.

The Board's Authority is as follows:

a)

The Board has the authority to

determine, define and implement the

environmental control standards applicable

in the State of Illinois and may adopt

rules and regulations

in accordance with Title VII of the Act

[415 ILCS 5/5(b)].

b)

The Board has the

authority to conduct proceedings upon complaints charging

violations of the Act, any rule or regulation adopted under the Act, any permit or

term or condition

of a permit, or any Board order; upon administrative citations;

upon petitions

for variances or adjusted standards; upon petitions for review of

the Agency's final determinations on permit applications in accordance with Title

X of the Act; upon petitions to remove seals under Section

34

of the Act; upon

other petitions

for review of final determination which are made pursuant to the

Act or Board rules and which involve a subject which the Board is authorized to

regulate. The Board may also conduct other proceedings as may be provided by

the

Act or any other statute or rule.

[415 ILCS 5/5(d)]

c)

In addition to subsections (a) and (b)

ofthis Section, the Board has the authority

to act as otherwise provided

by law. 35 Ill.Admn.Code 101.106

7.

Although the First Amended Complaint concludes that the Tollway violated of Section

900.102, the Pollution Control Board's rules state as follows:

Section

900.102 Prohibition

of Noise

Pollution

No person shall cause or allow the emission

of sound beyond the boundaries of his

property, as property is defined in Section 25

ofthe Illinois Environmental Protection

Act, so as to cause noise pollution in Illinois, or so as to violate any provision

of this

Chapter.

35 Ill. Admin. Code

900.102.

8.

Here, the First Amended Complaint alleges a violation ofthe Federal Title 23 noise

standards. Exhibit 1 paragraph

1. Specifically, in his noise study report, the Complainant

alleges that the noise levels at his residence have exceeded the noise levels indicated

in Title 23.

Exhibit 1 paragraph 5.

9.

Even taking the allegations as true, a violation of "Title 23" and/or "IDOT's FHWA

Noise Abatement Criteria" is not within the jurisdiction of the Pollution Control Board.

2

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

10.

The Complainant alleges in paragraph 4 that the Respondent's Environmental Impact

Statement ("EIS") was incorrect as the noise reduction from truck, which generate 86 db, is only

reduced

by 9 db. Even assuming this allegation is correct; the First Amended Complaint is

attacking the EIS, which was approved

by the FHW

A.

The FHW A issued a record of decision.

The proper forum for attacking the EIS is through Administrative Review

by the Courts. The

Pollution Control Board's rules do not grant it the authority to collaterally attack Federal

agencies' administrative decisions.

11.

The First Amended Complainant states: "All of the graphs included in the attached study

show that the noise levels generated

by the Tollway are consistently above the maximums

established under state and federal

regulations." Exhibit 1 at paragraph 7. The First Amended

Complainant alleges violations of numerical standards established by the FHW A and the Illinois

Department

of Transportation, implementing the FHWA's rules. However, these allegations do

not cite to or concern Board rules or regulations

12.

The Board has been granted jurisdiction to conduct proceedings of violations of the

Illinois Environmental Protection Act and other regulations adopted under the Act. See above.

It

does not have jurisdiction over Title 23 or the National Environmental Protection Act. Id.

WHEREFORE, Respondent, Illinois State Toll Highway Authority, respectfully requests

that the First Amended Complaint be dismissed.

3

Respectfully Submitted,

~OBERT

~~

T. LANE

Senior Assistant Attorney General

(630) 241-6800 x1530

---

STATE OF ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JAMES

CHICAGO, IL. 60601

PETER ARENDOVICH,

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Complainant,

v.

ILLINOIS STATE TOLL HIGHWAY

AUTHORITY,

Respondent.

PCB 29009-102

NOTICE OF MOTION

To:

Robert T. Lane AAG

Illinois State Toll Highway Authority

2700 Ogden Ave.

Downers Grove, IL.60515

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE

that on September 9, 2009 a motion for

Leave to File an Amended Complaint

was filed with the Clerk of the

Illinois Pollution Control Board, James R. Thompson Center, 100 W.

Randolph Street, Suite 11-500, Chicago, IL 60601 , a copy of which is

attached hereto and hereby served upon you.

CERTIFICA TE OF SERVICE

I, Peter Arendovich, deposes and states that a copy of the foregoing

was served upon the above named by first class mail on the 9th day of

September, 2009.

g~

. eter Arendovlch .

1388 Gordon Lane

Lemont,IL.60439

630-257 -8753

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

STATE OF ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JAMES R. THOMPSON CENTER

CHICAGO, IL. 60601

PETER ARENDOVICH,

Complainant,

v.

ILLINOIS STATE TOLL HIGHWAY

AUTHORITY,

Respondent.

PCB

29009-102

COMPLAINANT'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAIlfT

NOW COMES the Complainant, Peter Arendovich and moves this

Board for an order granting the filing of the Complainant's First

Amended Complaint. In

support of this motion, the Complainant states

as follows:

1.

The Respondent has filed a motion on July 15,2009, to strike

and dismiss the original Complaint as frivolous.

2.

The Complainant

has corrected the legal deficiencies of the

Complaint in answer to the Respondent's Motion to Strike and

Dismiss

3.

A copy

of the First Amended Complaint is attached to this

motion and made a part thereof.

WHEREFORE,

the Complainant prays this board to grant an order

allowing

the filing of the First Amended Complaint.

y

subm~d,

~/

eter Arendovich

1388 Gordon Lane

Lemont,IL.60439

630-257 -8753

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

STATE OF ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JAJlBS R. THOMPSON CBNTBR

CHICAGO, IL. 60601

PETER ARENDOVICH,

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Complainant,

v.

ILLINOIS STATE TOLL HIGHWAY

AUTHORITY,

Respondent.

PCB

29009-102

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

NOW COMES the Complainant, Peter Arendovich, pursuant to 415

ILCS 5/31(d) (1) and 35 Ill. Admn. Code 900.102 et seq. and complains

of the Respondent, the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority as follows:

1.

The Illinois State Toll Highway Authority, (ISTHA), has violated

23 CFR Part 772. 13(c) and 23 USC 109(h) and 35 Ill. Adm.

Code, Subtitle

H, Chapter I, Section 900.102 by failing to

provide

the required noise abatement policies and procedures

required under the provisions of both federal and state law.

2.

ISTHA co-operated with the Federal Highway Administration in

the planning and construction of 1-355 through Cook and Will

Counties.

3.

A required Environmental Impact

Statement, (EIS), was

prepared by the Respondent and included the required noise

abatement studies. The EIS indicates the location of the

Complainant's residence as section 25 shown on the EIS exhibit

---

2-16. A Copy of the exhibit is attached hereto as Complainant's

ExA.

4.

Table 4-15 of the EIS details the Results of the Noise Abatement

Analysis

and section 25, including the Complainant's residence

as well as 23 other residences, states that a noise reduction

barrier is likely to be implemented and that the potential noise

reduction

is to

be

9 dB(A}. (A copy is attached hereto as Exhibit

B). The EIS establishes that heavy trucks generate 86dBA and

the reduction of 9 dBA fails to comply with state and federal

noise levels

as is shown on charts 74 through 79 of Exhibit C.

5.

The Complainant has consistently complained to ISTHA

regarding the excessive noise levels of the constructed Tollway.

ISHTA has failed to properly address the Complainants

concerns. The Complainant hired

the acoustical engineering

firm,

S&V Solutions to conduct detailed scientific studies in

accordance with

the measurement procedures set forth under

the provisions of 35 Ill. Admn. Code Section 900.103. A detailed

scientific

study of the noise levels experienced at the

Complainant's residence has been conducted and a copy of the

detailed analysis and report is attached hereto as Exhibit C. The

study's conclusions states as follows:

"The data shows that from Tuesdays through Fridays the

noise generated by

the highway is above the noise level

indicated on Title 23

Chart (A) shows heavy trucks generate 86 db at a

distance of

50 feet from the source.

Your property is about 150 feet from the source and the

bedroom wall is 350 feet from the source.

Taking into

account Chart (A), the generated noise by

heavy

trucks at 60 MPH is about 86 dB. Based on the

2

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

acoustic distance law, where the amount of decibels

decrease by 5

evety time distance is dou bled (inverse

square law), it is vety unlikely the noise will dissipate to

legal levels

150 feet away, nor at 350 ft. by your bedroom

where the readings were taken. This is shown

on charts

from #74 through #89.

On charts #74 through #79 the high point which is above

65 db correlates with heavy truck noise decibels (db) and

heavy truck traveling frequencies, passing at a given

point."

6.

The noise levels recorded in the detailed scientific study are in

excess of the required maximums established by federal and

state regulations. FHW A regulations contained in lOOT's Traffic

Noise Assessment Manual

at 2-2 indicate that the maximum

dBA for residential areas is 67 dBA. A copy of lOOT's FHW A

NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA is attached hereto as Exhibit O.

7.

All of the graphs included in the attached study show that the

noise levels generated by the Tollway are consistently above the

maximums established under state and federal regulations.

WHEREFORE

the Complainant prays this Board to find ISTHA in

violation of 35 Ill. Adm. Code, Subtitle H, Chapter I, Section 900.102

and to order the Respondent to construct proper noise abatement

barriers as Originally proposed in the Environmental Impact Study and in

accordance with federal

and state laws.

3

".""Peter rendovich

1388 Gordon Lane

Lemont,IL.60439

630-257 -8753

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

1";-

i

t~""~

L:;._.;..,,;tJ ....... .lI---.,_.,

LAZA

((

'j

1,'/

(J

'-~.!

r-,

':

.1.-'

(:-,:'.)

--~~f-·

'\

\

,

·--~~~:

.~~~.

!;~-:

..

/

•....

{

j ---_ •..

-

-~

... ---

-T--

i

--_.-

.

---------- --..;-------

\

,

'.

FAP ROUTE 340

RECEPTORS

E'XH tBrt

'A.

I=YJ.lIAIT

~

.....

a

---

Table 4-15

Results

of Noise Abatement Analysis

Iff

1 (R)

20

15

1200

$450,000

7

YES

2 (R)

18

15

1000

$375,000

6

YES

5(R)

16

15

6800

$2,550,000

1

NO

2

11 (R)

13

25

7680

$4,800,000

2

NO

2

14A (P)

70

25

8800

$5,500,000

4-6

NO

15 (R)

1

25

1600

$l,OOO,QOO

7~8

NO

15A

(R)

8

25

1000

$625,000

7-8

YES

SECTION

15B(R)

9

15

1500

$562,500

2-3

NO

2

16(R)

16

15

1500

$562,500

2-3

NO

2

16A (R)

22

25

4700

$2,937,500

4

NO

2

17 (R)

12

NO

2

17A

(R)

4

25

2200

$1,375,000

13

NO

18 (R)

17

25

10200

$6,375,000

2

NO

1,2

19 (R)

17

25

10200

$6,375,000

2

NO

1,2

21A (R)

2

25

5400

$3,375,000

8-9

NO

1,2

2JB.(f,t)

17

25

10200

$6,375,000

2

NO

1,2

~5

(R)'

22

25

3700

$1.400,000

9

YES

~

-'.

~

_. "-_._- ._-

-

-.-

28 (R)

1

25

2200

$1,375,000

9

NO

1,2

29 (R)

3

25

2600

$1,625,000

9

NO

1,2

30(R)

2

15

1700

$637,500

2

NO

1,2

3l1R)

3

15

1300

$487,500

2

NO

l,2

321R)

5

15

2300

$862,500

2

NO

1,2

ERN SECTION

33 (R)

3

15

3500

$1,312,500

4-6

NO

1

33A (P)

88

25

3000

$1,875,000

4

NO

2

338 (R)

1

25

11200

$7,000,000

2

NO

1,2

34(R)

6

1 -

3400

$1,275,000

4-6

NO

1,2

,0

35(R)

4

15

3400

$1,275,000

4-6

NO

42 (R)

3

25

1400

$875,000

6-8

NO

43 (R)

2

25

2600

$1,625,000

6-8

NO

44 (R)

2

25

2200

$1,375,000

4-6

NO

45 (R)

20

25

1400

$875,000

5

YES

Notes:

46 (R)

25

15

5000

$1,875,000

6-7

YES

"leceptors

l6A and 17 share a

CO;:;r;:cn

:;(lise abatement barrier.

••

fl "

P) - Represents proposed residential cevelopments

£(HI".r

R) - Represents existing residence

• The Cost Includes pmHmlna.y anaysS design, final design and related construction COSts.

- - Not econOmically reasonable or ;eas,ole based on cost compared to benefit.

2 - Does not provide substantiai noise

aoatement.

4-67

.,

b~t t.~

,...,.

~

"

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

consultants in applied acoustics

and vibration technologies

Date: June 13, 2()09

To: Peter Arendovich, Lemont Resident

From:

David Larson, Acoustical Consultant

Ref: 1-355 Traffic Noise Level

Dear Peter:

27707

Moose Range Rd.

Sycamore,IL

60178

815/899-2021

815/899-2115

FAX

I am writing to share the results of the noise monitoring I did it your residence for traffic noise coming

from 1-355. The equipment used is listed below:

1. Brue1 & Kjaer type 2144 acoustics analyzer and data collector.

2. Bruel

&

Kjaer type 2639 microphone preamplifier.

3. Brue1 & Kjaer type 4155 condenser microphone.

4. Brue1 & Kjaer type 4231 portable acoustic calibrator.

This data analyzer/collector was placed

on your premises with a microphone located in two positions:

Position

1: The microphone was placed at a distance of 340 ft from the bridge to your home's balcony

tripod

that held the mic 5 ft above the ground. The total height from the ground to the microphone was 14

feet.

Wind speed and direction was taken from weather reports.

Position 2 was taken

at a distance of 120 ft from the bridge onto your lot. The microphone was placed on

a tripod 5 ft from the ground. Wind speed and direction was taken from weather reports.

The calibration was based on the standard portable B&K calibrator which was applied to the microphone

at the beginning and end of the measurement session.

Data was taken at each position over several different periods of time during the day and night.

The analyzer was set up to measure A-weighted sound level in intervals of one measurement every

second or one measurement every 10 seconds.

The data was recorded on a floppy disk. This data from the disk was then analyzed and converted to an

MS-Excel spreadsheet chart to be studied and to be compared to the value based on which the EIS was

approved.

The following data was collected on a test made for 4 hours in length with 10 seconds intervals.

Notice

the noise generated in decibels in weighed scale A (dBA) at different times:

Chart 81 June 7 2008 Saturday

Chart 83 June 10 2008 Tuesday

Chart 85 June 10 2008 Tuesday

Chart 87 June 11 2008 Wednesday

Chart 88 June 11 2008 Wednesday

from

from

from

from

from

13.55

pm to 18.31 pm

10.00 am to 14.36 am

15.00 pm to 19.30 pm

6 .00 am to 10.36 am

13.30 pm to 18.06 pm

E)(HIBIT

C

---

Solutions

Chart 90 June 12 2008 Thursday

Chart 89 June 12 2008 Thursday

from

13.30 pm to 19.06 pm

from

6.00 am to 19.38 am

You can see a fluctuation in the noise at different times during rush hours (in the morning from

5.30 am

to about

8.00 am, and again in the afternoon from about 3.00 pm to about 7.00 pm).

Data was also collected during a test made for

27 minutes at an interval length of 1 second. Notice the

noise generated

in

decibels weighed scale a (dBA) at different times

Chart 74 June

5

2008 Thursday

from

7.00 am to 7.27 am

Chart 75 June

5

2008 Thursday

from

6.00 pm to 6.27 pm

Chart 77 June

6

2008 Friday

from

6.00 am to 6.27 am

Chart 78 June

6

2008 Friday

from

6.30 am to 6.57 am

Chart 79 June

6

2008 Friday

from

7.20 am to 7.47 am

In this set

of charts it shows that even on Fridays the noise level measured on the A weighed scale is

above the level indicated in the Title 23.

Chart (A) Is a chart provided by the FHA, This chart shows different size vehicles traveling

at different speed and the noise level generated in decibel weighed scale A

ChartA

2

---

Conclusions

1. The data shows that from Tuesdays through Fridays the noise generated by the highway is

above the noise level indicated

on Title 23.

2. Chart (A) shows heavy trucks generate 86 db

at a distance of 50 ft from the source.

3. Your property is about 150 ft. from the source and the bedroom wall is 350 ft from the source.

4. Taking into account Chart (A), the generated noise

by heavy trucks at 60 mph is about 86 dB.

Based

on the acoustic distance law, where the amount of decibels decrease by 5 every time the

distance is doubled (the inverse square law), it is very unlikely the noise will dissipate

to legal

levels

150 ft. away, nor at 350 ft. by your bedroom where the reading were taken. This is shown

on charts from # 74 though #89.

5.

On charts # 74 through #79 the high point which is above 65 db correlates with heavy trucks

noise decibels (db)

and heavy truck traveling frequencies, passing by at a given point.

Best Regards,

David

A. Larson, S& V Solutions, mc.

815-899-2021

office, 815-899-2115 FAX, 815-762-5333 cellular

email:

Appendix 1: inverse square iaw

When sound propagates freely in space the level of sound decays with one over the square of diatance.

This is commonly called the inverse square law and can be written as follows:

Where

L2 is the level of sound a distance X

2

,

and Ll is the level of sound at distance Xl.

Please remember this law applies on to purely free field radiation. Across a grassy field, or a paved

parking lot, or down a gravel road (as examples) one will see less decay with distance.

3

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

Solutions

Appendix 2: multiple sources

If two noise sources of equal strength and uncorrelated with each other (such at two trucks on a highway)

are added, such as they would

if passing the same point at about the same time, then the total level would

be 3

dB

higher than one truck:

Lets us say that a fleet

of trucks are all rated to produce 80 dBA total noise at 100 feet.

Two trucks passing at

100 feet = 83 dBA

Four trucks passing

at 100 feet = 86 dBA

Eight trucks passing at

100 feet::: 89 dBA

4

---

,

noise level (dB or dBA)

_t

(J1

(J1

0>

0>

-...J

-...J

00

00

co

co

.....

0

0

(J1

0

(J1

0

(J1

0

(J1

0

(J1

0

17:00:00

~

~

17:00:46

.......,

3

ro:

17:01 :32

~

...

~

17:02:18

~

~

..-

~

17:03:04

~

-.........:

17:03:50

,~

~

~

~::f.;

C"

17:04:36

~

I»

c;

17:05:22

~

0

;;0000-

::l

17:06:08

~

.-;

'<

17:06:54

-~

S

0

-

~

n

....S&

I»

17:07:40

...:::JJf,

::::II!!!;;

~

0

::l

17:08:26

17:09:12

-~

::311"

:e

'::l

..iIIIIi;

~

r--

C.

17:09:58

P:i..

II

17:10:44

.

~

en

---=

~

en

17:11:30

~

:E

17:12:16

;:::w

@

C1I

~

~

-

3'

17:13:02

~ ~

~

I~

"C

3

t

(1)

17:13:48

:l"

~

0

....

Q.

17:14:34

-=i

e

0

!II

0

'<

17:15:20

-

0

C1I

17:16:52

17:16:06

I~-

...tiC

~

~

~I;.

-

co

CD

en

17:17:38

:::...

n

~

_.

17:18:24

..

15--

-

::l

r>

CD

17:19:10

-

:(

-

~

r

=-

I»

17:19:56

U;

17:20:42

~

:::!!

~

CD

17:21 :28

~

-..;

~

0

-c::::::

~

17:22:14

.....

~

~

17:23:00

-

~

"-![

C3E""' ...

~

17:23:46

~

~

fiii:=

17:24:32

---

~ ~

~.

r=--.

~

17:25:18

~

r.-

"Iii

17:26:04

~

17:26:50

r-:3!=.

17:27:36

~

~~

-

'

~

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

CJ'I

CJ'I

0

CJ'I

18:00:00

18:00:47

18:01

:34

18:02:21

18:03:08

18:03:55

18:04:42

18:05:29

18:06:16

18:07:03

18:07:50

18:08:37

18:09:24

18:10:11

18:10:58

18:11 :45

..

3"

18:13:19

18:12:32

CD

a 18:14:06

0-

~

18:14:53

18:15:40

18:16:27

18:17:14

18:18:01

18:18:48

18:19:35

18:20:22

18:21

:09

18:21 :56

18:22:43

18:23:30

18:24:17

18:25:04

18:25:51

18:26:38

18:27:25

noise level (dB or dBA)

0)

0

C'"

I»

::s

o

n-

'<

(")

o

a

::s

o.

~.

::s

c.

II

tJ)

tJ)

~

co

3

"tJ

::J'"

C

0)

C

U1

C

!»

...a.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

00

47

34

21

08

55

42

29

16

03

01

o

6:00:

6:00:

6:01:

6:02:

6:03:

6:03:

6:04:

6:05:

6:06:

6:07:

6:07":'5

6:08:

6:09:

6:10:

6:10:

6:11 :

6:12:

0'«

-

3"

6:13:

CD

S. 6:14:

Q.

~

6:14:

6:15:

6:16:

6:17:

6:18:

6:18:

6:19:

6:20:

6:21 :

6:21:

6:22:

6:23:

6:24:

6:25:

6:25:

6:26:

6:27:

37

24

11

58

45

32

19

06

53

40

27

14

01

48

35

22

09

56

43

30

17

().A

51

-

38

25

01

01

.. "",,

....

,~.",-._c.~

,

.

"._"

.,"",""'W'

_

.

,.,.-

noise level (dB or dBA)

m

01

""-I

o

'",

:::::..-.

..::II

~

~

~

---::::::i

~

~

~

-

~-

~.

---:31

~l

-

~

i1

.;

-

~

-=::::

"'""""!!

~,

--

;

00

o

~

~

~

;;-.

.....: .300::'

~

~

~

~

00

01

~

-

....:::

.~

-

~

-

-s

r

~

~

..-

~

~

-

""""

~

~

...::

~

~

-

~

~

~

-

~

Z::

~

~~~

co

o

co

01

~

o

o

D)

c-

0-

o

::l

'<

o

(")

~

o

::l

!l.

::l

Q.

II

en

@

~

~

::r

c

en

(5

en

(5

5»

~

en

CD

(")

-

CD

::l

:(

D)

'iii"

::2J

CD

.....

.....

c

---

noise level (dB or dBA)

(J'1

(J'1

0)

0)

--.j

--.j

00

00

(0

(0

......

0

0

(J'1

0

(J'1

0

(J'1

0

(J'1

0

(J'1

0

6:30:00

6:30:47

~

c;;:r

6:31 :34

6:32:21

~

"::::!!

"""

i--

6:33:08

6:33:55

-

~

~

6:34:42

--..,;;;;//IE.

C"

-

~

I»

6:35:29

;=iI!

n

~

~

0

6:36:16

~

::::s

'<

6:37:03

-

~ I~

-

0

C')

6:37:50

I»

~

~

!:!.

0

6:38:37

~

::::s

~

6:39:24

-=

~-

~

~"

~

~

::::s

6:40:11

"""!!I

-==

Co

~

~

II

6:40:58

.~

I&.-

en

@

6:41 :45

-

~

~

6:42:32

...K!!:.

~

1

-

"'C

3"

6:43:19

I~

::::r

F-i!!C

L.:I!!;';:

a

CD

6:44:06

-

-

0

~

en

~

Q,

6:45:40

6:44:53

~

~

....

~

l"-

e

e

en

~

1..00'"'"

!I'

6:46:27

.......

....

F=-~

~

~

f/I

....

~

CD

6:47:14

~ ~

C')

-"

6:48:01

..e

-

CD

::::s

6:48:48

~

..-....:::

-

~

.,

I»

<

6:49:35

~

iii'

=II1II

:::!!

6:50:22

6:51 :09

~

~........;

--

CD

0

......

~

co

6:51 :56

:::s

s::-

6:52:43

6:53:30

-=

--

~

o.c:::

~

6:54:17

~

-=!

so

6:55:04

111:::.

6:55:51

6:56:38

-

--

~

~

~

~

6:57:25

~

~

.:Ill::

~

~

"T-l

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

-

7:20:00

7:20:47

7:21 :34

7:22:21

7:23:08

7:23:55

7:24:42

7:25:29

7:26:16

7:27:03

7:27:50

7:28:37

7:29:24

7:30:11

7:30:58

7:31:45

7:32:32

3'

7:33:19

CD

a

7:34:06

c..

I» 7:34:53

'<

7:35:40

7:36:27

7:37:14

7:38:01

7:38:48

7:39:35

7:40:22

7:41:09

7:41:56

7:42:43

7:43:30

. 7:44:17

7:45:04

7:45:51

7:46:38

7:47:25

U1

o

U1

U1

0>

o

0>

U1

noise level (dB or dBA)

~-

~

r=="'

...

~

~

~

""Si

...

..

~

~

~

.....:;;.

........::::=

-

-

~

I~

ill:"""

~

-

~

~

-

~

!!Ii!!.

~

~

-

~

~

I~

~

~

~

.-::

..-:

-

~

-

~

-!t=..

~

....::::

~

~

-::::::!

-...

~

'-=-

..........a!

-'I

00

o

~

~

F

~

~

-=-

=

'""--

k:

i

!iiiE;

".,

-<;;;.

~

.3

~

~

~

~

~

--

~

~

~

~

:.

~

~

-

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

I"""-

...41/£

I5i-

~~

~

~

'"

00

U1

co

o

co

U1

......

o

o

~,

::s

c.

II

en

@

..a.

Con

3

'a

:::r

o

0')

(5

0')

(5

!»

..a.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

noise level (dB or dBA)

--I'

-----r

I,

noise level (dB or dBA)

'"

on

CO>

on

....

"'"

co

'"

<0

<0

"

II

8

g:

8

'"

....

~.

8

00

0

on

0

~

to

8

'"

0

on

0

'"

a

'"

0

01

0

U1

6:00:00

'"

I

14:30:00

6:07:40

14.37:40

6:15:20

14:45:20

6:23:00

14:53:00

6:30:40

15:00:40

6:38:20

15:08:20

6:46:00

cr

III

15:16:00

CT

7i

III

6:53:40

CD

15:23:40

7i

:::I

0

7:01:20

'<

15:31:20

::I

'<

7:09:00

Q

()

15:39:00

5"

III

(')

7.16:40

II!:

15:46:40

III

CD

::r.

?

0

7:24:20

15:54.20

:?

7:32.00

~

7:39:40

:i'

1:6:02:00

:r

~

III.

D

116:09:40

C-

/I

7:47:20

fD

fD

116:17:20

fD

7:55:00

=E

16:25:00

m

CA

8:02:40

t

16:32:40

@

<0

8:10:20

3

§' 16:40:20

3

§:

"

7:1'

"

..

8:18:00

0

'" 16:48:00

:iT

a

~

16:55:40

C>

'<

..

0-

8:33.20

8:25:40

a

...

::t

'"

...

..

17:03:20

a

::t

0>

I\,)

8:41:00

!'>

C)

...

17:11:00

!»

...

8:48:40

(/I

17:18:40

C>

8:56:20

<0

(')

17:26:20

CD

til

(')

9:04:00

:r

t;

17:34:00

t;

s.

9:11:40

<

17:41:40

III

~

9:19:20

~

17:49:20

~

9:27:00

CD

Ell

17:57:00

iii

:!l

9:34:40

C>

9:42:20

C»

...,

18:12:20

18:04:40

I

<0

C>

C>

9:50:00

18:20:00

9:57:40

18:27:40

10:05;20

18:35:20

10:13:00

18:43:00

10:20:40

18:50:40

'.

.

,

J

10:28:20

18:58:20

'

'-

"

."' ___

I

10:36:00

19:06:00

I.

~.'

~""i

-.)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

6:00:00

6:07:40

6:15:20

6:23:00

6:30:40

6:38:20

6:46:00

6:53:40

7:01:20

7:09:00

7:16:40

7:24:20

7:32:00

7:39:40

7:47:20

7:55:00

8:02:40

i'

8:10:20

CD

8:18:00

AI

a.

sa.

8:25:40

'<

8:33:20

8:41:00

8:48:40

8:56:20

9:04:00

9:11:40

9:19:20

9:27:00

9:34:40

9:42:20

9:50:00

9:57:40

10:05:20

10:13:00

10:20:40

10:28:20

10:36:00

noise level (dB or dBAI

0

'"

<D

'"

8

14:30:00

14:37:40

14:45:20

14:53:00

15:00:40

15:08:20

15:16:00

15:23:40

15:31:20

15:39:00

15:46:40

15:54:20

16:02:00

16:09:40

16:17:20

16:25:00

16:32:40

116:40:20

'16:48:00

(

~16:55:40

"17:03:20

•

17:11:00

17:18:40

17:26:20

17:34:00

17:41:40

17:49:20

17:57:00

18:04:40

18:12:20

18:20:00

18:27:40

18:35:20

18:43:00

18:50:40

18:58:20

19:06:00

noise level (dB or dBAI

~

g

III

o

o

:::J

'<

0"

g

~

?

:Ii!

:i"

Co

II

CJ)

CJ)

m

@

CD

3

'1:1

iT

~

~

o

....

til

CD

n

i

~

~

::!I

CD

o

8

---

2. Noise Regulations

"Special efforts shall be made in the development of a project to comply with

Federal,

State, and local requirements for noise control; to consult with the

appropriate officials to obtain the views

of the affected community regarding

noise impacts and abatement measures; and to mitigate highway-related noise

impacts, where feasible and reasonable."

2-2

This policy statement sets forth the intent of the traffic noise analyses, the identification

of traffic noise impacts, and the need to offer mitigation where reasonable and feasible

criteria have been achieved.

I 2.3 Traffic Noise Impacts and Applicability

2.3.1 FHWA Regulations

Five separate

Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC),

based on land use, are used by FHWA

to assess potential noise impacts as defined by 23 GFR 772. The FHWA considered

several approaches to define impact levels, but generally based the criteria on noise

levels associated with the interference of speech communication. The NAG are

therefore a balance

of what is desirable and what is generally achievable.

2

A traffic noise impact occurs when noise levels approach, meet or exceed the NAG

criteria

listed in the following table or when the predicted noise levels are substantially

higher than the

existing noise level.

TABLE 2-1

FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA

- HOURLY WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL

Activity

leq(h).

Category

dBA

Description of Activity Category

Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary

A

57

significance and serve an important

public need and where

(Exterior)

the preservation

of thOse qualities is essential if the area is

to continue to serve its intended purpose.

67

Residences, picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds,

B

(Exterior)

active sports areas, parks, motels, hotels, schools,

churches, libraries, and hospitals.

G

72

Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in

(Exterior)

Categories A

or B above.

D

--

-

Undeveloped lands.

E

52

Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools,

(Interior)

churches, libraries,

hospitals and auditoriums.

FHWA has deferred to the

State agencies to define the noise level that "approaches" the

NAG and to define a substantial increase

in traffic noise levels. It should be noted that

the NAG are not used as goals for noise attenuation design criteria

or design targets.

Instead, the NAG are noise impact thresholds for considering abatement when they are

approached, met,

or exceeded.

Noise abatement measures are required to be

considered as part

of the project if impacts are identified.

lOOT Highway Traffic Noise Assessment Manual

Rev. 1011107

E~HIBI-r

"

0

-

---

2. Noise Regulations

2-3

Examples of Activity Category A include a monastery, an outdoor prayer area and an

ampitheater. Activity Category B lists specific examples, but other land uses not

specifically listed include cemeteries, campgrounds, and trails. Activity Category

C

examples include commercial and industrial land uses.

The NAC and noise procedure regulations apply to Type

I and Type II (retrofit) projects

only; however, the implementation

of a Type II program is optional.

Type I

and

Type /I

projects

are defined as follows:

Type

I projects.

A proposed Federal or Federal-aid highway project for

the construction of a highway on new location

or the physical alteration of

an existing highway which significantly changes either the horizontal or

vertical alignment or increases the number of through-traffic lanes. Noise

abatement is financed with

funds appropriated fbI" the proposed project.

Type

II

or

Retrofit projects.

A proposed noise abatement project on an

existing

fully controlled-access

State

highway

or Interstate in an urban

area.

2.3.2

JOOT Noise POlicy

The lOOT

Noise Policy

establishes the traffic noise analyses requirements for all Type I

or Type

1/

projects whether they are federally funded or State-only funded, which

includes cost-sharing projects with local funds. The traffic noise impact determination is

based on the FHWA NAC as set forth in

lOOT's policy found in Chapter 26-6.05(c)

(Analysis and Reporting)

of the BDE Manual. lOOT has established the following criteria

to define the

occurrence of a

traffic

noise impact.

• Design year

(typically 20 years into the future) traffic noise levels are

predicted to approach, meet, or exceed the

NAC, with approach defined as

1

dBA

less than NAC

Or,

•

Design year (typically 20 years into the future) traffic noise levels are

predicted to substantially increase (greater than 14 dBA) over existing traffic-

generated noise levels

Based on the approach definition determined by

lOOT, Table 2-2 provides the noise

levels at which a traffic noise impact would occur and would

require consideration of

traffic noise abatement for the design year.

TABLE 2.2

lOOT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS WARRANTING ABATEMENT EVALUATION

Activity. Category

L!lQ(h),

dBA

A

56 (Exterior)

B

66 (Exterior)

C

71 (Exterior)

0

-- -

E

51 (Interior)

lOOT Highway Traffic Noise Assessment Manual

Rev. 1011107

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009

---

r

"'1:0,"-",",11. Mr. Peter Arendovich

1388 Gordon Ln.

Lemont. IL 60439

RITUR, RECEIPT

ReqUESTED

~Yh ,,~

~ '~");%j~'0~\..'Y.'\\:.'lA'

f'\:""';~'~'s.g,,:;.:"\

J

'»\\%"\)\'{\W<--~<~~~~~~~~~~~:~2~~.*~

..

%~¥.%

I' I f Ilf"

r'/w-'''';~;;

7008 0500 0000 2982 4591

1000

U. S. POSTAGE

PAID

LEMONT.IL

60"139

SEP 09. '09

AMOUNT

60515

I

1..

L.(

NO

ISS

Tfl-TE?

7:«.. '///<:"''<14/

J)v/.

2. )

0

0

OtfDE-A:l

nnn"')n"'"l"")t'"'

$3.75

.,....

8~C:~

,,~

C!i,1

~

~~~

H~J

06

0 W

AlIE'.e

s

CR«J V

GO

Z-

L<

c:,

0

S,! S

ItTl.

I<

ofbC:4.T T L4NE-

~.=

rn

Vl

rn

r

•

c

g{;A.

~-U0l~-U:"

(0_

RJt..J

:Z~W.CJO

~1'5~~;S-u

~t:::)

--i~c.or

~

'f

c:::c

I.D

~

OJ

rn

,,)

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposes and states that a copy of this

Notice

of Filing and Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint were served upon PETER

ARENDROVICH at the United States mail chute located at 2700 West Ogden Avenue,

Downers Grove, Illinois 60515 on the

19

th

day of October with proper postage prepaid.

I,

ROBERT T. LANE, here by certify to the foregoing subject to penalty for perjury in

accordance with

Section 1-109 of the Illinois Civil Practice Act.

Senior Assistant Attorney General

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, October 19, 2009