28.11.2012 Views

Newlands Cross Upgrade EIS - European Investment Bank

Newlands Cross Upgrade EIS - European Investment Bank

Newlands Cross Upgrade EIS - European Investment Bank

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

South Dublin County Council N7 <strong>Newlands</strong> <strong>Cross</strong> <strong>Upgrade</strong><br />

Environmental Impact Statement<br />

Arup Consulting Engineers<br />

Note that all calculations are performed to one decimal place. For the purposes of comparison<br />

with the design goal of 60dB Lden, the relevant noise level is to be rounded to the nearest<br />

whole number in accordance with guidance given in the NRA document.<br />

3.9.4.4 Input to the Noise Model<br />

The noise model was prepared using the following data:<br />

• road alignments, topographical data and Ordnance Survey mapping supplied by Arup<br />

Consulting Engineers;<br />

• traffic flow data supplied by Arup Consulting Engineers;<br />

• traffic speeds as advised by Arup Consulting Engineers.<br />

3.9.4.5 Output of the Noise Model<br />

Predictor calculates noise levels for a set of receiver locations specified by the user. The<br />

results include an overall level Lden in dB.<br />

3.9.4.6 Calibration<br />

The purpose of noise model calibration is to ensure that the software is correctly interpreting<br />

the input data and providing results that are valid for the scenario under consideration. The<br />

CRTN prediction methodology has itself been previously validated.<br />

Given the nature of the scale of the Scheme in question, it was decided that the most<br />

appropriate mechanism for calibration would be to compare the output of the Predictor model<br />

with the output of another CRTN package, i.e. the National Physical Laboratory’s (NPL) html<br />

utility.<br />

The input data for a number of critical receptors was retrieved from the Predictor model and<br />

input to the NPL utility. The results from the two models were compared below in Table 3.1<br />

in order to ensure that the variance was no greater than ±3dB(A) at any of the assessment<br />

locations.<br />

Table 3.1: Comparison of Predicted Values for LA10(1 hour) at Assessment Locations<br />

Receiver<br />

Location<br />

Reference<br />

NPL<br />

LA10 dB<br />

Predictor<br />

LA10 dB<br />

Difference<br />

dB<br />

R01 78 76 -2<br />

R10 73 73 0<br />

R17 71 72 +1<br />

R19 72 72 0<br />

3.9.4.7 Choice of Receiver Locations<br />

Free-field traffic noise levels have been predicted at twenty-five locations in the vicinity of the<br />

proposed and existing roads.<br />

The (national) coordinates of all locations are provided in Table 3.2. These receiver locations<br />

are illustrated in Figure 8.3 (Noise & Vibration Chapter).<br />

December 2007 Page 27

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!