."
a
"
l
~
if
:I
:I
,
•
a
."
."
~
0
(I)
m
0
Z
0
en
m
~
m
c:
Z
~
~
~
0
z
t
:II
~
i!!
m
:II
6
S
6
(I)
z
Ie
f.
i
:I
Ii
1:1'.
0
:I
liP
3.
It
,
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
1-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Technical Report
August 10,2005
1lIimis
open
Roads
'JlJIJway't.
fora
Fas;,,;fture
Hlt
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
II.
III.
A.
B.
C.
IV.
V.
A.
B.
C.
A.
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1
CHANGES INCORPORATED IN
THE TRAFFIC NOISE MODELS ............. 2
METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 3
IDENTIFYING NOISE SENSITIVE LAND USE .................................................................. 3
DETERMINING TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS .................................................................... .4
1) Existing Noise Levels ....................................................................................... 4
2) Modeling Traffic Noise Levels ........................................................................ 5
Ev ALUA T1NG NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES .............................................................
9
RESUL TS ............................................................................................................... 12
EXISTING CONDITIONS (1994 AND 1999) .................................................................. 12
2020 No-AcTION ALTERNATIVE .............................................................................. 16
BUILD ALTERNATIVES .............................................................................................. 16
1) 2020 4/6.Lane Alternative ............................................................................. 16
2) 2020 6.Lane Alternative ................................................................................ 16
3) 2030 6-Lane Alternative ................................................................................ 17
NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES ................................................................... 18
EIS TRAFFIC NOISE BARRIERS .................................................................................. 18
B.
IMPACTED RECEPTORS NOT QUALIFYING FOR DETAILED ABATEMENT MEASURE
EVALUATION
..................................................................................................................... 19
c.
D.
E.
F.
VI.
VII.
EFFECTIVENESS IN TRAFFIC NOISE REDUCTION ........................................................ 19
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ............................................................................................... 20
FEASIBILITY AND REASONABLENESS ........................................................................ 22
RECOMMENDATION ...................................................................................................
25
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 27
CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 28
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
1 -
SUMMARY OF LAND USE CHANGES FROM THE SFEIS ...........................................
.3
TABLE 2 - EXISTING
(199512000)
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS ...................................................... 4
TABLE 3 - EXISTING (2005) TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS ............................................................... 5
TABLE 4 - TRAFFIC SPEEDS ..................................................................................................... 8
TABLE 5 - FHW A NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA (NAC) ...................................................... 10
TABLE 6 - SUMMARY OF EXISTING READINGS AND 2005 PREDICTED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS
...................................................................................................................................... 12
TABLE 7 - FEIS AND SFEIS NOISE BARRIERS BASED ON 2005 MODELING ........................... 18
TABLE 8 - EFFECTIVENESS OF NOISE BARRIERS IN TRAFFIC NOISE REDUCTION ................... 20
TABLE 9. COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF NOISE BARRIER ............................................................. 21
TABLE
10-
COMPARISON OF TRAFFIC NOISE ABATEMENT RECOMMENDA TIONS .................. 22
TABLE
11
-
REASONABLENESS OF NOISE BARRIERS .............................................................. 24
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
1-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
I. INTRODUCTION
The Interstate Route 355 (1-355) South Extension project includes 12 miles of expressway on
new alignment
in Cook, DuPage, and Will Counties. Exhibit A shows a project location map.
The project
is a divided interstate highway, which will extend the existing 1-355 south from
Interstate Route 55 (I-55) to Interstate Route 80
(1-80). The project includes the construction of
one toll plaza (located between 167
th
Street and Bruce Road) and six interchanges (I-55, 127th
Street, Archer Avenue to 143
rd
Street, 159
th
Street (lllinois Route 7), U.S. Route 6, and 1-80).
A traffic noise analysis was conducted for the 1-355 South Extension project during the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process. The original studies were initiated for the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) in
1993 and the Supplemental Final Environmental
Impact Statement (SFEIS) in 1999. The results
of these studies recommended six noise barriers
along the proposed 1-355 South Extension Corridorl. The total cost
of these walls is
approximately $5,649,000 (based on $25/sq-ft).
Subsequent changes in the desigtl and traffic have made it necessary to reevaluate the
recommended mitigation measures
2
•
The purpose of the reevaluation is to incorporate the
necessary changes, verify the mitigation committed to
in the previous studies, and make minor
adjustments to the design
of the proposed noise walls (wall height, length, and placement along
right-of-way)
if necessary.
•
In addition to design and traffic volume changes, land use changes have occurred within the
project area. Although land use changes that occurred after the publication
of the SFEIS Notice
of Intent (plats recorded with the County after April 1999) do not qualify for mitigation
measures, the Tollway modeled the sensitive receptors to provide an understanding
of their
future noise levels. There are four new developments that would benefit from noise abatement.
The Tollway is not responsible for the construction
of traffic noise abatement walls for the new
developments.
The reevaluation included the following tasks:
• Identify noise sensitive land use
• Model Future (2020) No-Action, Future (2020) Build, Future (2020) Build, and Future
(2030) Build scenarios
.
•
Determine traffic noise impacts on noise sensitive land uses
• Evaluate noise abatement measures (for those areas platted prior to April 1999)
• Develop recommendations
I
Record of Decision (ROD), FHWA-IL-EIS-93-03-FS/4(f), February 25, 2002; Section V. Mitigation and
Commitments, Noise (page lO); as was identified in Draft SEIS, Section 4.13.
2 Ibid.
Section VI. Comments on the Final SEIS, Response to Will County Land Use Department, page 16.
-1 -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
II. CHANGES INCORPORATED IN THE TRAFFIC NOISE MODELS
Since the publication of previous noise studies for the 1-355 South Extension project, changes in
the design and traffic volumes have made it necessary to reevaluate the proposed mitigation
measures. The changes are as follows:
•
Four-lanelsix-lane cross-section.
Previous studies modeled six lanes of traffic along the
South Extension. For the reevaluation, in addition to the six-lane configuration, a four-
lane/six-lane configuration was modeled. The four-lane section was between 1-80 and
127th Street, with the remaining corridor modeled as six lanes. This configuration reflexes
the opening day
of the South Extension.
•
Toll plaza.
The traffic noise models used in previous studies did not include a toll plaza.
A toll plaza was included in the updated models.
It was placed between 167
th
Street and
Bruce Road. The toll plaza design included the Open Road Tolling (ORT) (three express
I-PASS lanes and two manual lanes in each direction). Since traffic volumes were not
available for the open road tolling design, it was assumed that 25-percent
of the traffic
would exit to use the manual lanes and that 75-percent
of the traffic would remain on the
mainline and use the express I-PASS lanes.
•
2030 Traffic volumes.
The traffic noise models of the FEIS used 2010 peak hour traffic
volumes and those
of the SFEIS used 2020 peak hour traffic volumes. Since the
completion
of these studies, projected 2030 traffic volumes have been provided by the
Chicago Area Transportation Study (CATS). Based on a comparison, these volumes are
generally lower than the 2020 peak hour traffic volumes. Because
of this difference, both
sets
of traffic data were modeled so the worst-case scenario for the traffic noise would be
addressed.
In addition, land use changes have occurred.
•
Land use.
Land use changes from what was evaluated in the EIS process were identified.
These changes involved the conversion
of land from open space to residential
development. Although not qualified for noise mitigation measures (such as walls or
berms), these locations were included in the future noise level modeling process.
- 2-
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
III. METHODOLOGY
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
A. Identifying Noise Sensitive Land Use
Noise sensitive land use includes residential development, commercial development,
churches, parks, and recreational facilities.
These land uses were identified as part of the
SFEIS. Noise sensitive land use changes were identified as part
of the reevaluation.
Although these new developments were platted after April 1999, identified in
Table 1, they
do not qualify for mitigation measures, their future noise levels were predicted based on
available data. Table 1 summarizes the additional noise sensitive not qualifying land uses that
are within 500 feet' of the 1-355 alignment and their respective new receptor ID.
A
complimentary technical
memo August 10, 2005, Traffic Noise Analysis Summary for New
Developments along 1-355 South Extension, was prepared to aid municipalities and
developers in their planning of noise abatement.
Table 1 - Summary of Land Use Changes from the SFEIS
NE Quadrant of 1-355 and I-55
Residential
Development
1-12
(Farmingdale
VillageNicente)
NW Quadrant of
1-355 and I-55
Residential
Development
16
(Bolingbrook subdivision)
SE Quadrant of
1-355 and I
Street
Old Quarry Middle School
36
SE Quadrant of
1-355 and 1
Street
Residential
Development 37
(South Pointe)
SW Quadrant
of 1-355 and 1
Street
Residential
DeVelopment 31-35
(Mayfair Estates)
NW Quadrant ofI-355 and
12
Street
Residential
Development
22,23,25-30
(Briarcliffe Estates)
SW Quadrant of 1-355 and 1
Street between
1-
Residential
Development 59-72
355 and Gougar Road
(Parker Ridge Estates)
South
.of proposed 1-355 and 1-80 Interchange
Liberty Junior High School 80,85-91
&
Residential Development
(Walker Country Estates)
NE Quadrant of
1-355 and I
Street
Currently
residential
as
57,
58
modeled in the
SFEIS; (existing
however,
Lockport
is
receptors
considering changing the
from
SFEIS)
land use to commercial
-3 -
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
B. Determining Traffic Noise Impacts
Traffic noise levels were predicted using the Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) -
approved highway prediction computer program Traffic Noise Model (TNM) Version 2.5 (an
updated version
of the TNM model used in the SFEIS). The TNM noise model accounts for
such factors as soft and hard ground attenuation, shielding from local terrain and structures,
traffic control devices, hourly traffic volumes, vehicle classification, vehicle speeds, and
steep-grade adjustments.
1) Existing Noise Levels
Existing traffic noise levels were obtained for all receptors in 1995 (FEIS), 2000
(SFEIS), or 2005 (new developments). The noise levels were taken
at representative
locations. Table 2 summarizes existing traffic noise levels for receptors along the
1-
355 South Extension that were taken during the FEIS/SFEIS analysis. Additional
information on the existing traffic noise levels is located in the FEIS and SFEIS.
Table 2 • Existing
(1995/2000)
Traffic Noise Levels
13-17
Residential
64dBA
18-21
Recreational
45dBA
22-24
Residential
73dBA
31
Residential
58dBA
37
Residential
62dBA
38-41
Residential
41 dBA
42
Residential
51 dBA
43-51
Residential and
62dBA
Commercial
52
Residential
49dBA
53-56
Residential
64dBA
57-58
Residential
50dBA
73-75
Residential and
65dBA
Commercial
76-84
Residential
68dBA
Table 3 summarizes the existing (2005) traffic noise levels for several areas of new
development. Existing (2005) measurements could not be taken at new receptors 16,37,
or 80 due to construction noise that would have interfered with the readings. Existing
measurements for those receptors were estimated from 2000 existing readings
of
receptors representing existing developments located close to the new developments.
- 4-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Table 3 - Existing (2005) Traffic Noise Levels
]-12
Residential
67dBA
36
School
52dBA
32-35
Residential
49dBA
25-30
Residential
5] dBA
59-72
Residential
48dBA
85-91
Residential
64dBA
Existing noise levels taken in 2005 were measured during peak hour periods (7:00 a.m.
to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.) to coincide with the expected highest traffic
noise levels. These periods provide the best opportunity to monitor the highest existing
noise level, since they have the highest volume
of traffic traveling at free flow speeds.
Tuesday through Thursday were selected to take the noise measurements because peak
hour traffic volumes on these days represent the typical weekday traffic conditions. Air
humidity, surface characteristics, and wind speeds have an effect on noise levels.
Measurements were not taken during certain weather conditions, such
as windy and
rainy days to avoid inaccurate measurements
of traffic noise.
A Brnel
&
Kjaer Model 2236 digital noise meter, set at approximately five feet above
the ground, was used to measure the existing noise level at the representative receptors.
The noise meter was calibrated before every reading with a Brnel
&
Kjaer Model 4231
calibrator. Refer to Exhibit B in the appendix for a summary
of the specifications of the
noise meter and calibrator. At each location, sound measurements were taken for a
minimum
of ten minutes. Traffic data (such as volume, speed, classification) were
collected simultaneously with the noise level measurement. Special events, such
as
airplanes passing or dogs barking in the proximity, were documented to assist with the
calibration process.
2) Modeling Traffic Noise Levels
Traffic Noise Receptors
All noise sensitive receptors within the project limits were evaluated for potential traffic
noise impacts; although only those platted before April 1999 qualify for mitigation.
Noise sensitive receptors are residential and outdoor recreational properties within 500
feet from the proposed edge
of travel lane. A total of 91 traffic noise receptor locations
(representing 277 residences, two schools, two commercial units, and three recreation
areas [Forest Preserves] were evaluated for this study. All
of the traffic noise receptors
were modeled at five feet above ground elevation, and measured from a location
of the
residence where frequent human activities occur closest to the proposed roadway
alignment.
-5 -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Roadway
The TNM program predicts the noise energy reaching a receptor from a roadway section.
The roadway is divided into segments representing different traffic volumes, speeds,
grades, and sections
of a curve. The variables of traffic volumes, traffic speed, and
roadway grade account for the different traffic noise levels reaching a receptor.
The
1-355 South Extension is designed as a six-lane divided highway from I-55 to
approximately
12th
Street and a four-lane divided highway from approximately
12th
Street to 1-80. Since the ultimate configuration of the South Extension is six lanes along
the entire corridor, both scenarios were modeled.
Access is fully controlled and provided at six interchange locations: I-55,
1-80, 127
th
Street, IL Route 1711 Archer A venue, 159
th
Street (IL Route 7), and U.S. Route 6. I-55 is
a six-lane, access-controlled facility that is designed
to intersect with 1-355 as a
directional interchange.
1-80 is a six-lane, access-controlled facility that is designed to
intersect with
1-355 as a directional interchange. 127
th
Street is designed to intersect 1-
355 with a diamond interchange. IL Route 17l1Archer Ave is designed to be a split
diamond interchange with 1-355. 159
th
Street (IL Route 7) is designed to intersect 1-355
with a diamond interchange. U.S. Route 6 is designed to be a partial clover-leaf
interchange with
1-355 with all ramps to the north of U.S. Route 6.
Depressed roadway sections are proposed as part
of the design of 1-355 that will help to
reduce traffic noise.
In addition, there is a toll plaza proposed between 167
th
Street and
Bruce Road. The facility is proposed as an ORT facility with express I-PASS lanes and
exit ramps to manual lanes. See Exhibit C for the proposed roadway improvements.
Traffic Characteristics
Two sets
of traffic volumes were used for this noise reevaluation: 2020 PM Peak hour
volumes and 2030 PM peak hour traffic volumes (Refer to Exhibit D for the peak hour
traffic volumes). Both sets
of traffic volumes were developed by CATS. The original
traffic noise study completed for the FEIS used 2010 traffic volumes while the traffic
noise study for the SFEIS used 2020 traffic volumes.
It
was the initial intent of this study
to update the SFEIS traffic study with 2030 traffic volumes only.
However, a
comparison
of 2020 and 2030 traffic volumes showed a decrease in the projected traffic
volumes from 2020 to 2030.
In order to obtain traffic noise results for the worst-case
scenario, both sets
of volumes (2020 and 2030) were modeled in the reevaluation.
Traffic noise abatement measures were only modeled using the highest traffic volumes
(2020).
At the toll plaza, it was assumed that the traffic split
of vehicles using the I-PASS
Express Lanes and vehicles using the manual lanes is 75 percentl25 percent.
Traffic noise levels are affected by the speed
of the vehicles. The faster a vehicle travels,
the more traffic noise
is produced. The traffic speeds used in the traffic noise model are
shown in Table
4.
The traffic noise levels produced are also dependent upon the types of vehicles using the
roadway. A heavy truck produces more traffic noise than an automobile. With 2020
traffic volumes, trucks percentages represented ten-percent
of the total vehicles predicted
to travel along 1-355. Within this ten-percent truck volume, heavy trucks represented the
majority
of the truck percentage (approximately seven-percent). With 2030 traffic
-6-
1-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
volumes, trucks percentages represented between three-percent and four-percent of the
total vehicles predicted to travel along 1-355. Within this three-percent, truck volume,
heavy trucks represented the majority of the truck percentage (approximately two-
percent).
Noise Barriers
Noise barriers, earthen berms, forests, and buildings will in varying degrees reduce the
traffic noise reaching the receptors from the roadway. The TNM 2.5 program allows for
the input
of terrain lines, buildings, tree zones, and noise barriers to calculate their
influence on traffic noise reduction.
Within
1-355 South Extension project area there is one existing earthen berm (varying 3.5
feet to 6.5 feet high) that is located in the southeast quadrant
of 1-355 and 1-80. See
Exhibit C for the location
of the earthem berm.
In addition, sections of the roadway are proposed to be depressed, which generally
functions
as a berm reducing traffic noise levels. The sections along 1-355 that were
modeled
as depressed include areas just south of the Des Plaines River Bridge to north of
135
th
Street, just south of 135
th
Street to just south of 143
rd
Street, just south of 159
th
Street (short distance), and just south of Bruce Road to just north of Spring Creek. See
Exhi bit C for the approximate locations
of the depressed roadway.
-7 -
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Table 4 - Traffic Speeds
1-355
55 mph
I-55
55 mph
Davey Road
35 mph
Bluff Road
35 mph
New Avenue
40 mph
Street
35 mph
Street
45 mph
50 mph
Street
35 mph
StreetllL Route
171
Frontage Road
35 mph
Street
45 mph
Street
35 mph
Street
35 mph
Street (IL Route 7)
45 mph
Street
50 mph
40 mph
Street
50 mph
Toll Plaza manual lanes
35 mph
Bruce Road
45 mph
u.S. Route 6
45 mph
Cedar Road
45 mph
1-80
55 mph
-8 -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 SOllth Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
c. Evaluating Noise Abatement Measures
The FHW A has established guidelines defining impact, noise abatement criteria (NAC), as
shown in Table 5. These NAC are set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 23 Part
772 (23 CFR 772). The NAC are not attenuation criteria or targets. Accordingly noise
abatement measures are considered
if the receptor(s) meet one of the following:
• The design year predicted noise levels approach
or exceed the NAC
• The design year predicted noise levels substantially exceed the existing noise levels
FHW A allows the State Highway Authority (SHA) to establish the definition
of approach
and substantially exceed. The lllinois Tollway defines noise levels within I dBA
of the
FHWA's NAC
as approaching (66 dBA for residential use and 71 dBA for commercial use)
and a level
14 dBA greater than exiting noise levels as a substantial increase where
mitigation measures must be considered. The goal
of noise abatement measures is to achieve
a substantial reduction in future noise levels. These definitions are taken from the lllinois
Tollway's
Traffic Noise Study and Abatement Policy
that was last updated in April 2005.
The Notice
of Intent for the 1-355 South Extension SFEIS was published in the Federal
Register
in April 1999. Any development platted (recorded with the County) before April
1999 and located within 500 feet
of the edge of travel lane must be evaluated for traffic noise
impacts and adhere to the guidelines/policies
of the FHW A and lllinois Tollway.
Developments platted after April 1999 are responsible for conducting their own traffic noise
studies and providing their own traffic noise abatement as may be deemed needed.
All
of the new developments identified in Table 1 were platted after April 1999. Although
not qualified for lllinois Tollway funded mitigation, they are included in the traffic noise
model to aid local agencies and developers in the planning and consideration
of noise
abatement for their communities. A technical memorandum dated August
10, 2005,
Traffic
Noise Analysis Summary
for New Developments along
/-355
South Extension,
contains the
results
of the traffic noise modeling for the new developments.
Noise barriers are constructed only
if they are effective in reducing traffic noise and are cost-
effective:
•
Effectiveness in Traffic Noise Reduction:
An effective noise barrier must reduce the
traffic noise level by at least 5 dBA (preferably 8 dBA) at one location.
•
Cost-Effectiveness:
Total cost of the noise barrier should be reasonable taking the
number
of benefited receptors (residences) into consideration. In general, a residence
is considered benefited
if traffic noise levels are reduced by 3 dBA to 5 dBA or more
as a result of a noise barrier (this may include second row receptors).
- 9-
1-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Table 5 • FHW A Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC)
A
57
Lands on which serenity and quiet are
of
(Exterior)
extraordinary significance and serve an important
public need and where the preservation
of those
qualities is essential
if the area is to continue to
serve its intended purpose.
B
67
Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds,
(Exterior)
active sports areas, parks, residences, motels,
hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C
72
Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in
(Exterior)
Categories A
or B above.
D
Undeveloped Lands.
E**
52 (Interior)
Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting
rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and
auditoriums.
Source:
23
CFR 772-Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise.
Notes:
*
"Leq(h)"
-
The hourly value of Leq. Leq is the equivalent steady.state sound level. which in a stated period of time
contains the same acoustic energy as the time-varying sound level during the same period. For purposes
of measuring or
predicting noise levels. a receptor is assumed
10
be at ear height. located five feet above ground surface.
**
Use of interior noise levels shall be limited to situations where exterior noise levels are not applicable. i.e .. where there
are no exterior activities to be affected by traffic noise.
or where exterior activities are far from or physically shielded from
the roadway
in a manner that prevents lin impact on exterior activities.
The NAC are noise impact thresholds
for considering abatement. (Abatement must be considered when predicted traffic noise
levels
for the design year approach [i.e .• are within 1 decibel ofl or exceed the noise abatement criteria. or when the
predicted traffic noise levels are substantially higher [i.e
.• are more than
14
decibels greaterl than the existing noise level.)
The NAC are
nOi attenulllion design criteria or targets.
The
goal of noise abatement measures is to achieve a substantial
reduction infuture noise level. The reductions
mayor may not result infuture noise levels at or below the NAC.
In addition, feasible and reasonable factors are considered. Some of the criteria used include:
• Feasibility and Reasonablenesi Factors
Constructability: noise barriers can be built given the topography of the location.
Maintainability: noise barriers should not inhibit or complicate proper
maintenance.
Safety: noise barriers must not pose a threat to safety, interfere with normal access
to the property, hinder maintenance, or disrupt drainage.
I
Adverse Impacts: noise barriers should not have substantial adverse
environmental and social-economic impact.
Drainage: noise barriers should not impact drainage.
3 Criteria of "feasibility and reasonableness" of noise abatement were adapted from
Traffic Noise Study and
Abatement Policy, Illinois State Toll Highway Authority. April 2005
- 10-
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Public Support: noise barriers are wanted by most impacted residents.
Land Use Stability: the existing and proposed land use should accommodate
traffic noise abatement.
Local Controls: the local governing or jurisdictional body should control noise
sensitive land uses from being located adjacent to the roadway.
Local Official: the local representative authorities should support noise
abatement.
Noise Level Changes from Future Build and No-Action: noise abatement
measures are more practical
if noise levels between the build alternative and No-
Action alternative are 5 dBA or greater.
Antiquity: noise abatement measures are more practical
if the development was
constructed before the Tollway facility.
Aesthetic: noise barriers should be able to blend in with its surroundings.
Right-of-way
(ROW) Needs: noise barriers should
be
constructed within lllinois
Tollway ROW,
if ROW is required; it is preferable for it to be donated.
- II -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
1*
2*
J*
4*
5*
6*
7*
8*
9*
10*
11*
12*
13
14
15
16*
17
18
19
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
IV. RESULTS
A. Existing Conditions
Under existing conditions, a total of 22 receptors (representing 47 residences and one school)
approach or exceed the NAC. Table 6 shows the existing traffic noise levels. As shown in
the table, the existing traffic noise levels at receptors located adjacent to 1-355 range between
41.0 dBA and 73.0 dBA. Receptors 1 to
15 are located adjacent to I-55 and not 1-355. These
receptors
(1 to 15) are included in the analysis because of ramp improvements required for
the interchange
of 1-355 with I-55. An exception is Receptor 1. The improvements do not
extend to this development (Vicente subdivision); the development is included in the analysis
because the community has expressed concerns about traffic noise related to the 1-355 South
Extension. Receptors 76 to
91 are located adjacent to 1-80 and not 1-355. These receptors
(76 to 91) are included in the analysis because
of the ramp required for the interchange of 1-
355 with 1-80.
Table 6 • Summary of Existing Readings and 2005 Predicted Traffic Noise Levels
Residences (2)
No
67**
70.5
70.0
70.0
69.0
Yes a
Single Residence
No
67**
68.5
69.5
69.5
67.0
Yes
Residences (2)
No
67**
69.5
70.5
70.5
68.0
Yes a
Single Residence
No
*
69.5
70.5
70.5
Yes a
Residences (3)
No
67**
68.0
69.5
69.5
67.0
Yes a
Residences (2)
No
67**
66.5
68.0
68.0
65.5
Yes a
Residences (2)
No
67**
67.5
68.5
68.5
66.0
Yes a
Residences (2)
No
67**
67.0
68.5
68.5
65.5
Yes
Single Residence
No
67**
67.5
69.0
69.0
66.0
Yes a
Single Residence
No
67**
66.0
68.0
68.0
64.5
Yes a
Residences (2)
No
67**
66.0
68.0
68.0
65.0
Yes a
Residences (2)
No
67**
65.0
67.0
67.0
64.0
Yes a
Residences (10)
No
64
68.0
65.5
65.5
64.5
Yes
C
Residences (9)
No
64
71.5
72.0
72.0
70.0
Yes a,c
Residences (9)
No
64
70.0
71.0
71.0
68.5
Yes a
Residences (10)
No
64
62.0
57.0
57.0
54.5
No
Residences (30)
No
64
66.0
71.5
71.5
69.5
Yes
Forest
No
45
Yes b
PreservelPark
55.0
65.0
65.0
63.0
Forest
No
45
Yes a,b
PreservelPark
31.0
68.0
68.0
69.0
- 12-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Table 6 - Summary of Existing Readings and 2005 Predicted Trame Noise Levels
20
Forest
No
45
Yes
',b
PreservelPark
32.5
~
73.0
66.0
21
Forest
No
45
Yes
',b
PreservelPark
64.0
68.0
68.0
~
22*
Single Residence
Yes
51**
55.0
66.5
~
63.5
Yes
a,
23*
Single Residence
Yes
51**
48.0
64.0
64.0
61.5
No
24
Single Residence
Yes
73
58.5
63.5
63.5
61.0
No
25*
Residences (2)
Yes
51**
44.0
65.5
65.5
63.0
Yes
26*
Residences (2)
Yes
51**
41.5
65.5
65.5
61.0
Yes
27*
Residences (2)
Yes
51**
40.5
66.0
~
60.0
Yes
28*
Residences (2)
Yes
51**
39.5
67.0
~
60.5
Yes
29*
Residences (2)
Yes
51**
39.0
64.5
64.5
59.5
No
30*
Residences (2)
Yes
51**
39.5
56.5
56.5
54.5
No
31
Residences (5)
Yes
58
46.5
59.5
59.5
52.5
No
32*
Residences (3)
Yes
49**
42,5
59.5
59.5
53.0
No
33*
Residences (2)
Yes
49**
42.0
59.0
59.0
53.5
No
34*
Residences (2)
Yes
49**
40.0
66.0
66.0
61.5
Yes
35*
Residences (2)
Yes
49**
38.0
64.5
64.5
61.5
Yes
School- Old
36*
Quarry Middle
Yes
52**
44.5
61.5
61.5
58.0
No
School
37*
Residences (4)
No
62
39.0
60.5
60.5
55.5
No
38
Residences (3)
Yes
41
37.5
63.0
63.0
60.5
Yes
39
Residences (2)
Yes
41
38.5
64.5
~
62.0
Yes
40
Residences (5)
No
41
41.5
64.5
64.5
61.5
Yes
41
Residences (4)
No
41
45.5
61.5
61.5
59.5
Yes
42
Single Residence
No
51
56.0
65.5
65.5
62.0
Yes
43
Single Residence
No
62
54.5
65.0
65.0
63.0
No
44
Single Residence
Yes
62
45.0
61.0
61.0
59.0
No
45
Residences (4)
Yes
62
55.0
58.0
57.5
57.0
No
46
Residences (4)
No
62
58.5
57.5
57.0
56.5
No
47
Residences (5)
Yes
62
55.0
59.5
59.5
57.0
No
- I3 -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Table 6 - Summary of Existing Readings and 2005 Predicted Traffic Noise Levels
48
Single Residence
Yes
62
47.0
58.0
58.0
56.0
No
Commercial -
No, does not
49
Fire House
Yes
62
65.0
68.5
68.5
66.0
meet the 71
dBANAC
50
Single Residence
Yes
62
62.0
65.0
65.0
63.0
No
51
Single Residence
Yes
62
58.0
61.5
61.5
59.5
No
52
Residences (4)
Yes
49
51.5
66.5
65.5
64.0
Yes "
53
Single Residence
No
64
60.5
63.0
63.0
62.5
No
54
Single Residence
No
64
60.5
61.5
61.5
61.0
No
55
Residences (4)
No
64
48.5
54.0
54.0
53.0
No
56
Single Residence
No
64
59.0
60.5
60.5
60.0
No
57
Residences (4)
No
50
60.5
64.0
63.5
62.5
Yes
58
Residences (4)
No
50
61.5
65.0
64.5
63.5
Yes
59*
Single Residence
No
48**
55.0
61.0
60.5
59.0
No
60*
Single Residence
No
48**
54.5
~
62.0
60.0
Yes
61*
Residences (2)
No
48**
53.0
64.5
63.5
61.5
Yes
62*
Residences (2)
No
48**
52.5
67.0
65.5
63.5
Yes
63*
Residences (2)
No
48**
49.5
69.5
69.0
67.0
Yes
64*
Residences (2)
No
48**
45.5
68.5
67.5
65.0
Yes "
65*
Residences (2)
No
48**
42.5
68.0
66.5
64.0
66*
Residences (2)
No
48**
53.5
63.0
62.0
59.5
67*
Single Residence
No
48**
41.0
59.5
59.5
57.0
No
68*
Single Residence
No
48**
39.5
60.0
59.0
57.5
No
69*
Single Residence
No
48**
39.0
60.5
59.5
58.0
No
70*
Residences (2)
No
48**
39.0
60.0
59.0
57.5
No
71*
Residences (2)
No
48**
38.5
59.0
58.5
57.0
No
72*
Single Residence
No
48**
38.0
58.0
57.5
56.0
No
Commercial -
73
Landscape
No
65
No
Business
44.0
59.0
58.5
56.0
74
Single Residence
No
65
53.0
55.5
55.0
53.5
No
75
Single Residence
No
65
63.0
64.0
63.5
62.5
No
- 14-
/-355
South Extension (FAP
340)
Traffic Noise AnaLysis ReevaLuation
Table 6 - Summary of Existing Readings and 2005 Predicted Traffic Noise Levels
77
Residences (5)
No
68
70.5
70.5
70.0
65.5
Yes
a.
78
Residences (5)
No
68
67.5
70.0
69.5
65.0
Yes
a.c
79
Residences (4)
No
68
64.0
64.5
64.5
62.5
No
80*
School - Liberty
No
68
No
Junior High
58.0
59.5
59.5
54.5
81
Single Residence
No
68
56.0
58.0
58.0
53.0
No
82
Single Residence
No
68
55.0
57.5
57.5
53.0
No
83
Residences (2)
No
68.
53.0
57.0
57.0
51.5
No
84
Residences (2)
No
68
53.0
56.0
56.0
50.5
No
85*
Residences (6)
No
64**
52.5
56.5
56.5
51.0
No
86*
Residences (6)
No
64**
55.0
58.5
58.5
52.5
No
87*
Residences (6)
No
64**
59.5
62.0
62.0
55.0
No
88*
Residences (6)
No
64**
60.0
62.0
62.0
55.5
No
89*
Residences (6)
No
64**
60.5
62.5
62.5
55.5
No
90*
Residences (5)
No
64**
60.5
62.0
62.0
55.0
No
91*
Residences (5)
No
64**
61.5
63.0
63.0
55.5
No
Notes: A highlighted noise level indicates that the receptor either approaches or exceeds the NAC for the indicated scenario.
An underlined
bold
predicted noise level indicates that the receptor substantially exceed the existing noise levels for the indicated scenario.
*
Receptor represents a new development that was platted after April 1999.
**
Receptor's existing noise level was identified in
2005
(If receptor is not double asterisked. the existing noise level was takenfrom the FEIS or the SFEIS)
***
The Illinois Tollway defines noise impact when traffic noise levels for the design year approach within 1 dBA of the FHWA's NAC
(66
dBAfor residential use) or
when the predicted tra,Uic noise levels substantially higher (more than 14 dBA greater) than the existing noise level. Noise barriers are constructed only
if
they are
effective
in reducing traffic noise. cost-effective. andfeasible and reasonable.
a. These values represent noise levels for the proposed condition that exceed the impact criteria of
66
dBA. The corresponding noise levels are bolded.
b.
These values represent noise levelsfor the proposed condition that are greater than 14 dBA over the existing noise level.
c.
Consideration of abatement warranted and noise wall recommended in the SFEIS for this receptor.
This reevaluation will analyze the recommended wall
height and length only.
d.
Consideration of abatement warranted and noise wall recommended in the FEIS for this receptor.
This reevaluation will analyze the recommended wall
height and length only.
- 15 -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
1-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
B. 2020 No-Action Alternative
The 2020 No-Action Alternative represents the future conditions if the 1-355 South Extension
is not constructed. Under the No-Action Alternative a total
of 18 receptors (representing 92
residences) will approach or exceed the NAC. Table 6 shows the predicted No-Action traffic
noise levels. As shown in the Table 6, the No-Action traffic noise levels at receptors located
adjacent to
1-355 are predicted to range between 31.0 dBA and 72.0 dBA.
C. Build Alternatives
Three alternatives were considered for the future build condition in this traffic noise
reevaluation: 2020 4/6-Lane Alternative, 2020 6-Lane Alternative, and a 2030 6-Lane
Alternative. The 4/6-Lane Alternative will be constructed with the accommodations for six
lanes throughout. The worst-case scenario is the 2020 6-Lane Alternative as the traffic
volumes are predicted to be the highest and the travel lanes are located closest to receptors.
1) 2020 416-Lane Alternative
The 2020 4/6-Lane Alternative includes a six-lane divided highway from I-55 to
approximately
127th Street and a four-lane divided highway from approximately 127th
Street to 1-80. Access is fully controlled and provided at six recommended interchange
locations: I-55,
127th Street, IL Route 1711Archer Avenue, 159
th
Street (IL Route 7), U.S.
Route 6, and
1-80.
Under the 2020 4/6-Lane Alternative, a total of 28 receptors (representing 97 residences
and the forest preserve areas north
of the Des Plaines River) will approach or exceed the
NAC. A total
of 25 receptors (representing 49 residences and the forest preserve areas
north
of the Des Plaines River) substantially exceed the existing noise levels. Many of the
impacted receptors represent new developments platted after April 1999, and therefore,
are not considered for noise abatement. Table 6 shows the predicted Build traffic noise
levels. As shown in the table for this alternative, the traffic noise levels at receptors
located adjacent to the
1-355 south extension are predicted to range between 54.0 dBA
and 73.0 dBA. The noise levels with this alternative are on average approximately
10
dBA higher than the No-Action Alternative.
2) 2020 6-Lane Alternative
The 2020 6-Lane Alternative is the worst-case alternative. This alternative includes a
six-lane divided highway from I-55 to
1-80. Access is fully controlled and provided at six
recommended interchange locations: I-55, 1-80,
12ih
Street, IL Route 17l1Archer
Avenue, 159
th
Street (IL Route 7), and U.S. Route 6.
Under the 2020 6-Lane Build Alternative a total
of 30 receptors (representing 103
residences and the forest preserve areas north of the Des Plaines River) will approach or
exceed the NAC. A total
of 26 receptors (representing 53 residences and the forest
preserve areas north
of the Des Plaines River) substantially exceed the existing noise
levels. Many
of the impacted receptors represent new developments platted after April
1999, and therefore, are not considered for noise abatement. Table 6 shows the predicted
Build traffic noise levels. As shown in the table for this alternative, the traffic noise
levels
at receptors located adjacent to the 1-355 South Extension are predicted to range
between 54.0 dBA and 73.0 dBA. The noise levels with this alternative are on average
approximately
10 dBA higher than the No-Action Alternative.
- 16-
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
3)
2030 6-Lane Alternative
The 2030 6-Lane Alternative includes a six-lane divided highway from I-55 to 1-80.
Access is fully controlled and provided at six recommended interchange locations: I-55,
127
th
Street, IL Route 17t/Archer Avenue, 159
th
Street (IL Route 7), U.S. Route 6, and 1-
80.
Under the 2030 6-Lane Alternative a total of 15 receptors (representing 67 residences and
the forest preserve areas north
of the Des Plaines River) will approach or exceed the
NAC. A total
of 13 receptors (representing 26 residences and the forest preserve areas
north
of the Des Plaines River) substantially exceed the existing noise levels. Many of the
impacted receptors represent new developments platted after April 1999, and therefore,
are not considered for noise abatement. Table 6 shows the predicted Build traffic noise
levels. As shown in the table for this alternative, the traffic noise levels at receptors
located adjacent to the
1-355 South Extension are predicted to range between 50.5 dBA
and 70.0 dBA. The noise levels with this alternative are on average approximately 7 dBA
higher than the No-Action Alternative.
- 17 -
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
v. NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES
Noise abatement measures were considered as part of the traffic noise studies conducted for the
FEIS and the SFEIS. As part
of this reevaluation the traffic noise wall heights and lengths
recommended in the FEIS and SFEIS were reanalyzed for final design.
In
addition, impacted
receptors representing development platted prior to April 1999 were considered for traffic noise
abatement. This section presents results
of the traffic noise abatement analysis.
A. EIS Traffic Noise Barriers
A total of six traffic noise barriers were recommended in the FEIS for mitigating traffic noise
at noise impacted locations within the study area.
Of the six traffic noise barriers, two extend
along I-55 (SFEIS-l and SFEIS-2), two extend along 1-80 (SFEIS-3 and SFEIS-4), and the
remaining two barriers along 1-355 (FEIS-l and FEIS-2). The traffic noise barriers that
extend along I-55 and 1-80 were also recommended in the SFEIS. Each noise barrier length
extends parallel to the alignment a distance
of approximately four times the perpendicular
distance
of the last protected receptor to the noise barrier. Parallel barriers (barriers that run
adjacent to a roadway on both sides
of the roadway) are avoided where possible. Where
parallel barriers cannot be avoided the width-to-height ratio
of the roadway section to the
barriers should be at least
10: 1. The width being the distance between the barriers, and the
height is the average height
of the barriers involved above the roadway.4 Table 7 summarizes
the revised dimensions and locations
of the EIS recommended noise barriers. Exhibit C
illustrates the locations of these noise barriers.
Table 7 • FEIS and SFEIS Noise Barriers based on 2005 Modeling
Northeast quadrant of 1-355 and 135
th
Street
FEIS-2
14
990
Northeast quadrant of 1-355 and 163rd Street
SFEIS-l
14
5,400
Southeast quadrant
of 1-355 and I-55 between
Murphy Road
Lemont Road
SFEIS-2
17
4,060
Northwest quadrant
of 1-355 and I-55 adjacent to
both
facilities
SFEIS-3
14
1,350
Northwest quadrant
of 1-355 and 1-80 adjacent to 1-80
SFEIS-4
14
1,020
Southwest quadrant of 1-355 and 1-80 adjacent to 1-80
Note: The noise barrier heights and lengths were revised in 2005 using TNM
2.5
with the worst-case scenario. the 2020 6-Lane Alternative. The
height
of the wall may be greater than the stated height. but not less than.
4 Federal Highway Administration, "Keeping the Noise Down: Highway Traffic Noise Barriers"; Publication No:
FHW A-EP-O 1-004, HEPNI2-0 1 (lOM)E and at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment
- 18 -
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
B. Impacted Receptors Not Qualifying for Detailed Abatement Measure
Evaluation
Five receptors representing developments platted prior to April 1999 are impacted by the
proposed improvements that do not qualify for detailed abatement and evaluation. These
receptors (18, 19, 20, 21, and 52) represent four residences and the forest preserve property
located north
of the Des Plaines River. After an analysis and consideration of the receptors
were conducted, it was determined that noise abatement would not be warranted for these
receptors.
Receptors
18 to 21 represent the Keepataw Forest Preserve and the Black Partridge Woods
and Nature Preserve. These receptors are generally located approximately seventy-feet below
the
1-355 South Extension bridge structure that spans the Des Plaines River Valley. These
forest preserves attract a minimal number
of passive recreational visitors per day throughout
the year. The cost
of a noise barrier placed on top of the bridge structure and redesign of the
bridge would not be justified based on the sparse number
of undocumented visitors
potentially benefited. A noise abatement wall was not evaluated at these locations.
Receptor 52 represents four residences in the southeast quadrant
of 151
51
Street and 1-355.
These residences face
151
51
Street. Due to their close proximity to 151
51
Street a noise barrier
of reasonable height could not effectively reduce the noise at these locations. The barrier
would need to start several feet south
of 151
st
Street in order to avoid creating a sight-
distance hazard. Based on the predicted noise levels, the wall would need to be at least
21
feet high and approximately 1,000 feet long.
C. Effectiveness in Traffic Noise Reduction
According to lllinois Tollway policy, a noise barrier is considered effective if it reduces the
traffic noise level by 5 dBA or more at least at one location. A traffic noise receptor is
considered benefited,
if the traffic noise level is reduced by 3 dBA to 5 dBA or more as a
result
of a noise barrier. All receptors within 500 feet of the edge of proposed travel lane are
considered in the noise wall evaluation. Table 8 shows the predicted traffic noise levels with
potential noise barriers based on 2005 analysis.
Field studies have shown traffic noise levels are not substantially increased by construction
of a noise barrier on the opposite side of a highway from a receiver.
If
both the direct noise
levels and the reflected noise levels are not abated
by natural or artificial terrain features, the
noise level increase is theoretically limited to 3 dBA, due to a doubling
of energy from the
noise source. In practice, however, not all
of the acoustical energy is reflected back to the
receiver due
to diffraction, reflection, longer path length the sound must travel, blocked, and
absorbed sound energy. Measurements made to quantify this reflective increase have never
shown an increase
of greater than 1 - 2 dBA, which is not perceptible to the average human
ear.
s
Of the six traffic noise barriers reevaluated, five (FEIS-I and SFEIS-l to SFEIS-4) are
determined effective in traffic noise reduction. Noise wall FEIS-2 was not effective
at
reducing traffic noise.
5 Ibid,
Federal Highway Administration
- 19-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Table 8 - Effectiveness of Noise Barriers in Traffic Noise Reduction
FEIS-l
38
3
66
63.0
59.0
4.0
Yes
39
2
66
59.5
5.0
Yes
40
5
66
64.5
62.5
2.0
No
Yes
3
41
4
66
61.5
56.5
5.0
Yes
42
66
65.5
62.5
3.0
Yes
FEIS-2
57
4
66
64.0
62.0
2.0
No
NOb
58
4
66
65.0
62.5
2.5
No
SFEIS-l
13
10
66
65.5
63.0
2.5
No
14
9
66
72.0
63.5
8.5
Yes
Yes
15
9
66
71.0
64.0
7.0
Yes
SFEIS-2
17
30
66
71.5
63.5
8.0
Yes
Yes
SFEIS-3
76
5
66
73.0
67.5
5.5
Yes
Yes
77
5
66
70.5
62.0
8.5
Yes
SFEIS-4
78
5
66
70.0
64.5
5.5
Yes
Yes
Note:
a. This wall was modeled because it was recommended in the
1996
FEIS. The predicted noise levels no longer warrant consideration of a noise wall; however. the wall
is still effective
for reduction of traffic noise levels.
b. This wall was modeled because it was recommended in the 1996 FEIS.
The
predicted noise levels no longer warrant consideration of a noise wall and the noise wall
is no longer effective
for reduction of traffic noise levels.
D.
Cost-Effectiveness
In addition to being effective in traffic noise level reduction, barriers must be cost-effective.
A cost-effective barrier should be reasonable based on the number
of sensitive receptors
benefited. A receptor is considered benefited
if traffic noise levels are reduced by at least 3
dBA to 5 dBA
as a result of a noise barrier. Secondary receptors should also be considered
while calculating cost-effectiveness. Secondary receptors are those that are not directly
adjacent to the roadway but are within 500 feet; typically these receptors are somewhat
shielded from the primary (first row) receptors. Exhibit C presents the 500-foot buffer
location map. The cost-effectiveness
of a barrier is based on the per benefited receptor costs.
A unit cost
of $25 per square-foot is assumed for the barrier cost calculation.
All six barriers (FEIS-l, FEIS-2, and SFEIS-I to SFEIS-4) were evaluated for cost-
effectiveness. Table 9 presents the cost-effectiveness analysis. If the cost per benefited
receptor is reasonable, other reasonableness factors were considered prior to the
recommendations.
All six barriers were determined to be cost-effective based on the cost per
number
of residences within 500 feet of the edge of pavement.
- 20-
1-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Table 9. Cost-Effectiveness of Noise Barrier
FEIS-l
14
2,450
$857,500
10
25
$85,800
$34,300
FEIS-2
14
990
$346,500
0
10
N/A
$34,700
SFEIS-l
14
5,400
$1,890,000
18
56
$105,000
$33,800
SFEIS-2
17
4,060
$1,725,500
30
60
$57,500
$28,800
SFEIS-3
14
1,350
$472,500
10
20
$47,300
$23,600
SFEIS-4
14
1,020
$357,000
5
11
$71,400
$32,500
a.
b.
Costs based on $251sq foot
Benefited Receptors are those where the noise levels are reduced by the barrier by at least
3
to
5
dBA
-
modeled for first row receptors only.
Table 10 presents a comparison of traffic noise abatement recommendations between the
previous studies completed for the
1-355 South Extension. Many of the final costs are
comparable between barriers. All design barrier heights have been reduced from the heights
previously recommended based on updated elevation data. Recommendations for two
of the
traffic noise walls, SFEIS-I and SFEIS-2, are considerably different between the 2005
analysis and the recommendations presented in the previous documents. For SFEIS-I, the
2005 analysis resembles closely to the FEIS findings, and not the SFEIS findings. The
difference in recommendations is not exactly known and may be a result
of varying
interchange designs, aerial coverage, elevation data, an oversight or a combination
of factors.
Also
as shown in Table 10, Barrier FEIS-I and Barrier FEIS-2 were recommended in the
FEIS and not the SFEIS. Two primary factors may have contributed to this finding. First,
the noise walls recommended in the FEIS were modeled using STAMINA 2.0 and 2010
traffic volumes. The noise walls modeled for the SFEIS and the 2005 traffic noise
reevaluation used TNM and 2020 traffic volumes. STAMINA 2.0 is known to over-predict
modeled traffic noise levels by 2-4 dBA where TNM is much closer in predicting actual
future conditions.
The second factor has to do with
mOT cost per benefited receptor criteria. According to the
mOT traffic noise criteria used in the SFEIS analysis, a barrier is only recommended if a
traffic noise reduction
of 8 dBA is attained for the shielded receptor. In addition the total
cost
of the traffic noise barrier could not exceed $24,000 per benefited residence (a residence
is considered benefited if it would experience a traffic noise reduction of 5 dBA or more).
The IDOT traffic noise criteria used in the FEIS were less stringent. Due to the differences
between the FEIS and SFEIS traffic noise analyses, the Illinois Tollway committed
to
constructing all noise abatement recommended in the FEIS and SFEIS.
- 21 -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
Table 10 • Comparison of Traffic Noise Abatement Recommendations
FEIS-l
2,240
x 25
$1.400,000
NR
NR
2.450 x 14
$857,500
FEIS-2
1,000
x 25
$625,000
NR
NR
990 x 14
$346,500
SFEIS-l
5,000
x 15
$1,875,000
1,556
x 25
$972,600
5.400
x 14
$1,890,000
SFEIS-2
1.400
x 25
$875,000
1,394 x 19
$662,175
4,060
x 17
$1,725,500
SFEIS-3
1,200
x 15
$450,000
1,211 x 15
$454,050
1,350
x 14
$472,500
SFEIS-4
1,000
x 15
$375,000
982 x 15
$368,275
1,020
x 14
$357,000
NR
=
Traffic noise barrier not recommended in study
*
Information obtained from the 1-355 South Extension Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Supplemental Final
Environmental Impact Statement (SFEIS)
E. Feasibility
and
Reasonableness
All of the previously committed noise barriers were evaluated for feasibility and
reasonableness_
Constructability
All six noise barriers are proposed to be constructed along the back
of roadway/ramp
shoulders. Drastic change in topography is not anticipated at any
of the proposed noise
barrier locations. Topography will not pose a problem for construction
of the noise barriers.
Based on constructability, the proposed noise barriers are feasible and reasonable.
Safety
The noise barriers will not interfere with the access to
1-355, I-55,
1-80, or other access points
for Tollway maintenance and public safety. Coordination with municipalities will continue
during the design phase to ensure that the barriers do not hinder their maintenance or
interfere with the normal roadway drainage patterns. Based on public safety, the proposed
noise barriers are feasible and reasonable.
Adverse Impacts
Due to the proximity
of the evaluated noise barriers to the proposed roadway/ramp shoulders,
the potential noise barriers are not anticipated to induce adverse impact on the environment
(i.e.
natural resources, wetlands, floodplains, water quality). Based on the impact evaluations
from the EIS process and documentation
of adverse impacts, the proposed noise barriers are
feasible and reasonable.
Public Support
Noise barriers are generally favored by residents immediately adjacent to highways, because
noise barriers could improve their living quality by reducing the traffic noise levels normal
outside human activity areas.
However, local residents may have concerns about
unsightliness, shortened daylight, shadows, reduced property safety, and changes in air
circulation patterns due to the noise barriers. To ensure that most influenced residents want
- 22-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
the noise barriers, community meetings or surveys are recommended. The lllinois Tollway
has developed a local advisory committee that is composed
of community leaders and
citizens
of the communities located adjacent to the 1-355 alignment. The committee meets
monthly and is open to the general public. The focus
of the committee is to address local
issues related to construction activities such
as noise, aesthetics, landscaping, property
access, protection and use, surface water drainage, and public utilities. Since December
2004, two of the meetings have focused specifically on traffic noise. Results of the meeting
indicate that noise walls are desired along the
1-355 alignment. Based on public support, the
proposed noise barriers are deemed feasible and reasonable.
Other reasonableness factors should include land use stability, local controls, community
desires, views
of local officials, noise level changes from Build and No-Action conditions,
antiquity, aesthetics, right-of-way (ROW) or property acquisition needs, and other
environmental and social issues. Table
11 addresses the reasonableness factors for barriers
FEIS-l, FEIS-2, and SFEIS-l to SFEIS-4. All six noise barriers reevaluated for feasibility
and reasonableness are effective. They include Barrier FEIS-l, Barrier FEIS-2, Barrier
SFEIS-l, Barrier SFEIS-2, Barrier SFEIS-3, and Barrier SFEIS-4.
- 23 -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
1-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
<
Table 11- Reasonableness
of Noise
Barriers
FEIS-l
I
No
No
I
Supported by
I
Barrier
I
3.8
I
Homes were
I
Pleasing
I
None
I
None
change
controls
community
Supported
constructed first
Anticipated
expected
used
FEIS-2
I
Potential
No
Supported by
Barrier
2.25
Homes were
Pleasing
None
I
None
change
controls
community
Supported
constructed first
Anticipated
used
SFEIS-l
I
No
No
Supported by
Barrier
6.0
Homes were
Pleasing
None
I
None
change
controls
community
Supported
constructed first
Anticipated
expected
used
SFEIS-2
I
No
No
Supported by
Barrier
8.0
Homes were
Pleasing
I
None
I
None
change
controls
community
Supported
constructed first
Anticipated
expected
used
SFEIS-3
I
No
No
I
Supported by
I
Barrier
I
7.0
I
Homes were
I
Pleasing
I
None
I
None
change
controls
community
Supported
constructed first
Anticipated
expected
used
SFEIS-4
I
No
No
Supported by
Barrier
5.5
Homes were
Pleasing
None
I
None
change
controls
community
Supported
constructed first
Anticipated
expected
used
- 24-
1-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
F.
Recommendation
Based on the reevaluation analysis of the effectiveness in traffic noise level reduction, cost-
effectiveness, feasibility and reasonableness, and prior FEIS/SFEIS abatement
recommendations, a total
of six traffic noise barriers are recommended.
Barrier FEIS-l (14-foot by 2,450-foot) is recommended for the residences in the northeast
quadrant of 1 35
th
Street and 1-355. A total of 25 residences will benefit from Barrier FEIS-l.
A barrier was modeled in this location because there will be a substantial increase between
existing traffic noise levels and predicted traffic noise levels warranting consideration
of
noise abatement. Barrier FEIS-l reduces traffic noise levels by at least 5 dBA at 2 noise
receptor locations (39 and 41; representing 6 residences). In addition, several residences are
located within 500 feet
of the travel lane that should experience a noise level reduction with
the proposed barrier. The estimated cost
of Barrier FEIS-t is $857,500. This is equivalent to
approximately $85,800 per benefited receptor (considering first row receptors only) or
$34,300 per receptor within 500 feet
of travel lane.
Barrier FE/S-
/
is recommended for
construction based on the substantial increase from the existing noise levels to future noise
levels, effective and substantial predicted traffic noise reduction, reasonable cost, the
reasonableness factors and previous recommendations
in the FE/S.
Barrier FEIS-2 (14-foot by 990-foot) is recommended for the ten residences in the northeast
quadrant
of 163rd Street and 1-355. A barrier was modeled in this location because there will
be a substantial increase between existing traffic noise levels and predicted traffic noise
levels warranting consideration
of noise abatement. Barrier FEIS-2 does not reduce traffic
noise levels by 5 dBA at either
of the traffic noise receptor locations (57 or 58). The
estimated cost
of Barrier FEIS-2 is $346,500. This is equivalent to $34,700 per receptor
within 500 feet
of travel lane. Coordination with Lockport has resulted in additional land use
information. Lockport is considering rezoning this area from residential to industrial.
Industrial land use
is associated with different noise abatement criteria for identifying impact
than that
of residential land use. It is not likely that this area would warrant consideration of
noise abatement if the land was rezoned industrial.
Barrier FE/S-2 is however recommended
for construction based on the substantial increase from the existing noise levels to future
noise levels and previous
in the FE/S.
Barrier SFEIS-t (l4-foot by 5,400-foot) is recommended for the residences in the southeast
quadrant
of I-55 and 1-355. A total of 56 residences will benefit from Barrier SFEIS-t. A
barrier was modeled in this location because predicted traffic noise levels exceed the NAC
warranting consideration
of noise abatement. Barrier SFEIS-l reduces traffic noise levels by
at least 5 dBA at two traffic noise receptor locations (14 and
15; representing 18 residences).
In addition, several residences are located within 500 feet of the travel lane that should
experience a noise level reduction with the proposed barrier. The estimated cost
of Barrier
SFEIS-l
is $1,890,000. This is equivalent to approximately $105,000 per benefited receptor
(considering first row receptors only) or $33,800 per receptor within 500 feet
of travel lane.
Barrier SFEIS-J
is recommended for construction based on effective and substantial
predicted traffic noise reduction, reasonable cost, the reasonableness factors and previous
recommendations
in the FE/S/SFE/S.
Barrier SFEIS-2 (l7-foot by 4,060-foot)
is recommended for the residences in the northwest
quadrant
of I-55 and 1-355. A total of 60 residences will benefit from Barrier SFEIS-2. A
barrier was modeled in this location because predicted traffic noise levels exceed the NAC
warranting consideration
of noise abatement. Barrier SFEIS-2 reduces traffic noise levels by
-25 -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
1-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
at least 5 dBA at traffic noise receptor 17 (representing 30 residences). In addition, several
residences are located within 500 feet
of the travel lane that should experience a noise level
reduction with the proposed barrier. The estimated cost
of Barrier SFEIS-2 is $1,725,500.
This is equivalent to approximately $57,500 per benefited receptor (considering first row
receptors only)
or $28,800 per receptor within 500 feet of travel lane.
Barrier SFEIS-2 is
recommended for construction based on effective and substantial predicted traffic noise
reduction, reasonable cost, the reasonableness factors and previous recommendations
in the
FEIS/SFEIS.
Barrier SFEIS-3 (14-foot by 1,350-foot)
is recommended for the residences in the northwest
quadrant
of 1-80 and 1-355. A total of 20 residences will benefit from Barrier SFEIS-3. A
barrier was modeled in this location because predicted traffic noise levels exceed the NAC
warranting consideration
of noise abatement. Barrier SFEIS-3 reduces traffic noise levels by
at least 5 dBA at two traffic noise receptor locations (76 and 77; representing
10 residences).
In addition, several residences are located within 500 feet of the travel lane that should
experience a noise level reduction with the proposed barrier. The estimated cost
of Barrier
SFEIS-3 is $472,500. This is equivalent to approximately $47,300 per benefited receptor
(considering first row receptors only) or $23,600 per receptor within 500 feet
of travel lane.
Barrier SFEIS-3 is recommended for construction based on effective and substantial
predicted traffic noise reduction, reasonable cost, the reasonableness factors and previous
recommendations
in the FEIS/SFEIS.
Barrier SFEIS-4 (14-foot by 1,020-foot) is recommended for the residences in the southwest
quadrant
of 1-80 and 1-355. A total of 11 residences will benefit from Barrier SFEIS-4. A
barrier was modeled in this location because predicted traffic noise levels exceed the NAC
warranting consideration
of noise abatement. Barrier SFEIS-4 reduces traffic noise levels by
at least 5 dBA at traffic noise receptor 78 (representing 5 residences). In addition, several
residences are located within 500 feet
of the travel lane that should experience a noise level
reduction with the proposed barrier. The estimated cost
of Barrier SFEIS-4 is $357,000.
This is equivalent to approximately $71,400 per benefited receptor (considering first row
receptors only) or $32,500 per receptor within 500 feet
of travel lane.
Barrier SFEIS-4 is
recommended for construction based on effective and substantial predicted traffic noise
reduction, reasonable cost, the reasonableness factors and previous recommendations
in the
FEIS/SFEIS.
- 26-
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
VI. SUMMARY
The results of the traffic noise reevaluation of the recommended mitigation measures conducted
for the
1-355 South Extension Project include:
•
Residential development, educational facilities, commercial development, and recreational
facilities are identified within the project area.
• There are
28 receptors (representing 97 residences and the forest preserve areas north of the
Des Plaines River) and 30 receptors (representing
103 residences and the forest preserve
areas south
of the Des Plaines River) that have traffic noise levels approaching (66 dBA) or
exceeding (67 dBA) the NAC in 2020 with proposed improvements.
• A total
of 15 receptors (representing 67 residences and the forest preserve areas north of the
Des Plaines River) will have traffic noise levels exceeding the NAC (67 dBA in 2030 with
proposed improvements.
•
Eight new developments that were platted after April 1999 were identified within the
project area.
Of the eight new developments, four are identified as impacted they will have
traffic noise levels exceeding the NAC. Noise abatement was not considered by the lllinois
Tollway for these impacts since the areas were platted after April 1999. The applicability
of
traffic noise abatement is the responsibility of the representative jurisdictional
communities/developer. However, a technical memorandum dated August 10, 2005,
Traffic
Noise Analysis Summary
for New Developments along
/-355
South Extension,
was prepared
that contains the results
of the traffic noise modeling for the new developments. The memo
can be referenced by communities/developers for their abatement planning.
•
Six traffic noise barriers were recommended for construction through the EIS process.
• The construction
of the six previous recommended noise barriers (Barrier FEIS-l, Barrier
FEIS-2, Barrier SFEIS-l, Barrier SFEIS-2, Barrier SFEIS-3, and Barrier SFEIS-4) are
recommended for construction.
- 27-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
/-355 South Extension (FAP 340)
Traffic Noise Analysis Reevaluation
VII. CONCLUSION
A traffic noise analysis and reevaluation of the previous recommended six noise barriers was
conducted for the
1-355 South Extension Project to address the results of previous EIS traffic
noise studies, identify traffic noise impacts associated with developments platted after April
1999, and to determine feasibility and reasonableness
of potential noise abatement committed
throughout the project area.
In the worst-case scenario, with the
2020 6-Lane Alternative, a total
of 30 receptors (representing
103 residences and the forest preserve areas north of the Des Plaines River) will have traffic
noise levels exceeding the NAC with proposed improvements. To reduce potential traffic noise
impacts six previous committed traffic noise barriers (Barrier FEIS-I, Barrier FEIS-2, Barrier
SFEIS-I, Barrier SFEIS-2, Barrier SFEIS-3, and Barrier SFEIS-4) are recommended for
construction.
- 28 -
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
LIST OF EXHIBITS:
Exhibit
A:
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D:
Project Location Map
Specifications
ofthe Noise Meter and Calibrator Used in the Field Measurement
1-355 South Extension Traffic Noise Receptors and Proposed Noise Walls
2020 and 2030 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
Exhibit A: Project Location Map
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
Exhibit B: Specifications of the Noise Meter and Calibrator Used in the Field
Measurement
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
Table B-1: Major Specifications of Bruel
&
Kjaer Model 2236 Sound Level Meter
Conforms to
- IEC
651 (1979) and 804 (1985) Type 1
- ANSI S 1.4 (1983) and Draft S 1.43, 6
th
September, 1992 Types 1
Noise floor
- Typically:
18 dB (A)
- Maximum: 20 dB(A) RMS
Measuring range
- Highest range: 140
dB
- Lowest range: 10 dB
- Measurement range: 80 dB
Frequency weighting
RMS:
Microphone
Memory
- A, C according to IEC 651 Type 1
-
L: flat from 10Hz to 20 kHz (±2 dB) with Type 1 tolerances
Peak:
- C according to IEC 651 Type 1
-
L: flat from 10Hz to 20 kHz (±2 dB) with Type 1 tolerances
Type 4188 prepolarized free-field
112"
condenser microphone
- Sensitivity: -30 dB re 1 VlPa ± 2
dB
- Frequency range: 8 Hz to 12.5 kHz (±2 dB)
- Capacitance:
12 pF
40 records
of overall results
Source: Brtlel
&
Kjaer website, 2003
Table B-2: Major Specifications of Bruel
&
Kjaer Model 4231 Sound Level Calibrator
Conforms to
- IEC 942 (1988) Class I
- ANSI S 1.40 (1984)(R 1997)
Calibration accuracy
±0.2
dB
Calibration frequency
1 kHz
Calibration sound level
94 dB
or 114 dB
Fitting microphones
Fits BrUel &Kjrer 1" and
112"
microphones (l/4" and
118"
microphones with adaptor)
Source: Brnei
&
Kjaer website, 2003
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
Soundwalls
ABOUT THE TOLLWAY
I ROADS & TOLLS
.,.; ABOUT TH E
'!til
TOLLWAY
Leadership
Reports
Finance
Regulations, Rules,
and Policies
Inspector
General's Office
Employment
Page 1 of 10
CONTACT US
I
SITE MAP
I
HOME
tig"
EN ESPANOL
I NEWS ROOM
I DOING BUSINESS
I I-PASS
I TRAFFIC & CONSTRUCTION
Tollway: About the Tollway: Regulations, Rules, and Policies: Soundwalls
Soundwalls
Traffic Noise Study & Abatement Policy
Illinois Tollway
1.0 PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW
In
2004,
the Congestion-Relief Program -
Open Roads for
a
Faster Future
was
ap~
200S,
the Illinois Tollway launched the $6.3 billion program. The Tollway's Traffic
and Abatement Policy update provides
an opportunity to evaluate traffic noise thn
implementation of the CRP.
The Tollway's current policy addresses guidelines and procedures for initiating traf
studies and considering traffic noise abatement. The policy first establishes the eli
requirements for a Traffic Noise Study. The policy then establishes the requiremer
considering the construction
of traffic noise abatement structures when they are f4
reasonable.
The traffic noise analysis guidance provided in this policy is based largely
on the n
material
that is found in Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772 (23 CFR Pal
entitled "Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction
Noi~
The initial traffic noise impact assessment for all projects will be a cursory review.
assessment would determine
if noise sensitive receptors are within the project lim
noise impacts are already present,
if future traffic noise levels are likely to increas
future traffic noise impacts will occur. This review would include assessment
of exi
proposed land use plans, review of aerial photography, a review of prior studies, c
representative number
of short-term is-minute Leq traffic noise measurements.
If initial traffic noise impact assessments indicate the possibility of future traffic nc
then a Traffic Noise Study will be performed. A detailed technical memorandum wi
prepared to document the assumptions, data, procedures, results and traffic noise
considerations and recommendations from the Traffic Noise Study.
2.0 DEFINITIONS
http://www.illinoistollway.comJportal/page?_dad=portal& _ schema=PORT AL& yageid= 1...
7/13/2009
...
..
.,
1-/
~
.
Illinois
Tollway
.~~~
ILLINOIS STATE TOLL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY
TO:
Illinois Tollway Board of Directors
DATE: January 27, 2009
FROM:
Rocco J. Zucchero
Deputy
Chief of Engineering for Planning
SUBJECT: Interstate 355 Post-Construction Noise Report
The following summary and attachments were prepared in response to a resident concern expressed at
the Tollway's December 18,2008 Board Meeting.
Overview and History
Interstate 355 has been considered
by the Chicagoland Metropolitan Region since the early 1960's.
The roadway centerline was recorded in 1968 and the State
of Illinois (both Illinois Department of
Transportation and Illinois Tollway) began studying the South Extension of Interstate 355, from I-55
to
1-80 in the mid 1980's. The Federal Highway Administration required that an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) be prepared for this project to ensure compliance with the National Environmental
Protection Act (NEP A). NEP A is the applicable law that is invoked when federal activities such as
highway construction is proposed and establishes a broad national framework for protecting our
environment. NEP A's basic policy is to assure that all branches of government give proper
consideration to the environment prior to undertaking any major federal action that significantly
affects the environment.
An
EIS identifies the purpose and need for a project, as well as discloses the potential impacts. The
EIS provides the basis for project development and impact mitigation, including noise impacts. The
Tollway'S Noise Policy is consistent with the federal guidelines, 23CFR772, which provides the
foundation for noise abatement recommendations along Interstate 355. Federal guidelines identify
noise impact thresholds for considering abatement when the traffic noise levels approach 67dBA, or
have a substantial noise increase over existing noise levels. Noise abatement recommendations are
applied consistently across all Tollway projects, which have a goal to achieve an 8dBA noise
reduction for the first-floor receptors. However, the minimum acceptable noise reduction is 5dBA.
EIS Noise Abatement Recommendations
IDOT's 1996 EIS recommended noise abatement at six locations associated with the construction
of
Interstate 355. Two locations along I-55, two locations along 1-80, north of 163
rd
Street and north of
135
th
Street (see attached). A lawsuit in 1997 delayed the project and required an update to the EIS.
The Supplemental EIS prepared by IDOT in 2000/01 revised the noise abatement recommendations to
reflect analysis changes based on the newly released Traffic Noise Model (TNM) adopted by FHW A
and as such reduced the amount of recommended abatement from six locations to four locations (see
attached). Noise abatement was removed due to changes
in
both the federal model and IDOT Policy.
1
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
-..
."...
t
.
The updated EIS recommended the removal of noise abatement at 135
th
Street and 163
rd
Street
because the walls were no longer considered reasonable or feasible due to IDOT cost and noise
reduction policy.
Tollway Noise Abatement Re-evaluation
In
2004 the Tollway updated the traffic noise study and noise abatement recommendations to reflect
2030 traffic and a continuous six-lane corridor from I-55 to
1-80. The final recommendation
reinstituted all of the original noise abatement recommendations as outlined in the 1996 EIS. Noise
abatement at both the 135
th
Street and 163
rd
Street locations was added back into the roadway design.
Several public meetings were held throughout the final phases
of design and early stages of
construction. The Tollway hosted monthly Local Advisory Committee meetings starting in November
2004, with two meetings specifically designated to discuss noise abatement recommendations.
In
addition, a significant public outreach effort including the development and dissemination of project
fact sheets continued throughout construction to reaffirm noise abatement recommendations, as well as
provide information regarding the basis for these recommendations (attached).
following statistics represent information presented in the EIS, actual contract documents, and
change orders approved by the Tollway Board:
• Modeled noise levels Pre
1-355:
• Predicted noise levels without wall:
• Predicted noise levels with wall:
•
•
•
•
•
Post-Construction Noise Measurements:
41dBA
61-65dBA
56-63dBA
2,450' of noise wall, 14.0' avg. ht.
2,560'
of noise wall, 15.8' avg. ht.
72' of additional wall- 2,632' total
2' additional height over southern 300'
240',
of additional wall, 10.0 avg. ht.
2,872' (422'
of additional noise wall)
On January 20
th
and 22nd, 2009 Tollway staff and traffic noise consultant, Huff and Huff, measured
noise along 1-355 in the vicinity of 135
th
Street.
Graphs and tables summarizing the field
measurements are attached for reference. Post-construction noise measurements north of 135
th
Street
range from 56-62dBA, below the federal noise abatement impact criteria of 67dBA.
Conclusion
Tollway staff conducted a review of the historical records for the 1-355 project to assess compliance
with 23CFR772, the federal guideline concerning traffic noise, as well as Illinois Department of
Transportation and Illinois Tollway Policies concerning traffic noise studies and abatement
recommendations. After reviewing these documents it is reasonable to conclude that the Tollway's
construction of 1-355 is consistent with both the federal and state criteria and exceeds the
recommendations outlined
in
the Federal Highway Administration approved Environmental Impact
Statement. The noise wall constructed in the vicinity
of 1-355 and 135
th
Street is 422' longer and
nearly 2' taller than that documented in the EIS and required to demonstrate compliance with NEP A.
Post-construction field measurements of traffic noise reaffirmed the noise modeling results included in
the EIS and confirmed the overall effectiveness
of noise abatement in this area.
2
Gilman, lIya
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
LaPorte, Angela
Tuesday, July 14,
20094:14 PM
Gilman,lIya
Zucchero, Rocco
Subject:
Cost Information for Noise Wall Change- Contract 7713
Attachments:
135th Noise Wall. pdf
lIya:
Per your discussion, in May of 2007 the pre-cast concrete noise abatement wall (included in Contract 7713) on the east
side
of 1-355 just north of the 135
th
street bridge was modified as noted in the attached document. The modification
included 72 feet
of additional wall length at a height of 15.8 feet for a total of 1137.6 square feet. The modification also
included an additional 2 feet in height for approximately 300 feet in length totaling 600 square feet of additional noise wall.
Combined (1137.6+600) 1737.6 additional square footage of noise wall at $33.31 per square foot equals $57,879.46 of
additional noise wall costs incurred at this location.
The Tollway then included a wooden noise wall extension
in contract 7728. This noise wall extension included 240 feet of
additional wall length with an average height of 10 feet which cost $69,280. The noise wall extension was studied with the
overall intention of decreasing sounds levels behind the wall for 2 homes by 2 decibels.
I hope this helps answer the questions you asked earlier, let me know if there is anything else that needs clarification.
Angela
135th Noise
Wall. pdf (3 MB)
Angela La Porte
Environmental Planner
Illinois Tollway
Downers Grove, IL 60515
Office Phone: (630) 241-6800 Ext. 3963
Fax: (630) 241-6105
1
>-
!
'0
l-
e;;
.~
0
E
CI)
:::E
tn
C
~
S
.
...,
~
It)
It)
M
..!.
I
u.s. Department
of Transportation
Federal Highway
Administration
Mr. Peter Arendovich
1388 Gordon Drive
Lemont, IL 60439
Illinois Division
February 19,2009
.
~
.....
"
.....
t ..
3250 Executive Park Dr.
Springfield, IL 62703
Refer To: HDA-IL
Subject:
1-355 South Extension Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Dear
Mr. Arendovich:
We have received your January 23, 2009, letter to
our office concerning the 1-355 South
Extension and the traffic noise generated from that facility. We signed the Record of Decision
(ROD) for this facility
on February 25, 2002. The ROD contained the commitment to construct
noise walls where determined to
be economically reasonable and feasible, at locations identified
in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement.
We have concluded the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (Tollway) has appropriately
fulfilled the commitments relating to noise abatement that were stipulated in the ROD. The
Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) legal authority regarding the Tollway is limited.
Because the Tollway implemented the noise abatement measures stipulated
in the ROD,
FHWA's responsibility in this project concerning traffic noise has been completed. The FHWA
has
no legal authority for any further action.
Any further inquiries should be directed to the Tollway at:
Illinois State Toll Highway Authority
2700 Ogden Avenue
Downers Grove, IL 60515
Phone: (630) 241-6800
www.il1inoistollway.com
AMERICAN
IIOVZ •• TH.
L"
BCONOMY
Sincerely,
~
orman R. Stoner, P.E.
Division Administrator
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
Interstate 355
Post Construction Noise Abatment Evaluation
Archer Avenue to north
of 135th Street
1/20/2008
1/22/2008
1/2212008
Site 1
Time
of Measurement
8:16am
Average Leq
dBA
59dBA
Site 2
Time
of Measurement
8:48am
Average Leq
dBA
69dBA
Site
3
Time of Measurement
9:22am
5:53am
5:00pm
Average Leq
dBA
58dBA
62dBA
62dBA
Site 4
Time of Measurement
9:49am
6:09am
5:20pm
Average Leq
dBA
56dBA
60dBA
61dBA
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
Table 1 to Part 772-Noise Abatement Criteria
[Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level-decibels (dBA)1]
Activity
Category Leq(b)
LIO(h)
Description of activity category
A
57
60
Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary
(Exterior)
(Exterior) significance and serve an important public need and
where the preservation
of those qUalities is essential if
the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose.
B
67
70
Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active
(Exterior) (Exterior) sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools,
churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C
72
75
Developed lands, properties, or activities not included
(Exterior)
(Exterior)
in Categories A
or B above.
D
tundeveloped lands.
E
52
55
Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms,
(Interior) (Interior)
schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums.
1Either L10(h) or Leq(h) (but not both) may be used on a project.
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009
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 Frivolous Complaint were served upon PETER
ARENDROVICH at the United States mail chute located at 2700 Ogden A venue,
Downers Grove, Illinois 60515 on the
15
th
day of July with proper postage prepaid. I,
Robert
T. Lane, hereby certify to the foregoing subject to penalty for perjury in
accordance with Section 1-109
of the Illinois Civil Practice Act.
~NE
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, July 15, 2009