Uncertainty
  1. A consideration of uncertainty is required by BS 4142:2014+A1:2019.
  2. The baseline noise survey was carried out in appropriate conditions, over a significant period of time and hence uncertainty regarding the measured baseline and background sound levels at the receptors has been minimised.
  3. The main source of uncertainty within the assessment is the sound power data provided and/or derived for the main items of substation electrical plant. A precautionary approach has been taken with respect to source levels. With regard to the potential for acoustic characteristics such as tonality, the effect of uncertainty has been minimised by applying an appropriate and precautionary tonality penalty to the predicted levels.
  4. Some uncertainty also exists for the construction noise and vibration assessment whereby likely construction scenarios and assemblages of plant have been assessed. Uncertainty was minimised by consultation and liaison with project engineers with experience of the construction processes involved in the construction of the onshore elements of offshore wind farms.

Sensitivity

  1. Sensitive receptors, in the context of noise and vibration, are typically residential premises but can also include schools, places of worship and noise sensitive commercial premises. Table 9.24   Open ▸ presents the definitions used relating to the sensitivity of the receptor, with reference to the guidance contained within TAN.
Table 9.24:
Sensitivity Levels for Receptors

 Table 9.24:  Sensitivity Levels for Receptors

  1. All receptors considered within this assessment are of high sensitivity.
  2. The significance of the effect is determined by correlating the magnitude of the impact and the sensitivity of the receptor, as outlined in Table 9.25   Open ▸ below.

9.9.3.    Impact Significance Matrix

Table 9.25:
Matrix Used for the Assessment of the Significance of the Effect

Table 9.25: Matrix Used for the Assessment of the Significance of the Effect

 

9.10. Primary & tertiary mitigation

  1. As part of the Proposed Development design process, a number of measures have been proposed to reduce the potential for impacts due to noise and vibration (see Table 9.26   Open ▸ ). These include measures which have been incorporated as part of the Proposed Development’s design (referred to as ‘primary mitigation’) and measures which will be implemented regardless of the impact assessment (referred to as ‘tertiary mitigation’). As there is a commitment to implementing these measures, they are considered inherently part of the design of the Proposed Development and have therefore been considered in the assessment presented in Section 9.11 below (i.e. the determination of magnitude and therefore significance assumes implementation of these measures). These measures are considered standard industry practice for this type of development.
Table 9.26:
Measure Adopted as Part of the Proposed Development (Primary & Tertiary Mitigation)

Table 9.26:  Measure Adopted as Part of the Proposed Development (Primary & Tertiary Mitigation)

 

9.11. Assessment of Significance

  1. An assessment of the likely significance of the effects of the Proposed Development on noise and vibration sensitive receptors caused by each identified impact is given below.

INCREASES IN ROAD TRAFFIC NOISE

  1. Increases in road traffic, including HGV traffic, due to construction vehicles accessing sites during the construction period has the potential to increase noise levels at nearby NSRs.

Construction phase

Magnitude of impact
  1. The road links identified by the transport assessment as carrying construction traffic are presented below in Table 9.27   Open ▸ and shown in Figure 12.1 and Figure 12.4
Table 9.27:
Development Impact on Daily Traffic Flows

Table 9.27:  Development Impact on Daily Traffic Flows

  1. The highway links at Skateraw and the unnamed road north of Barnes Terrace are predicted to experience an increase of more than 25% in road traffic flows during the construction period. Predictions of the LA10,18hour noise index in the noise and vibration study area were carried out in accordance with the method provided in CRTN within noise prediction software CadnaA, using the projected traffic flows and HGV composition. Where roads have low flows (<1000 vehicles per day) a further calculation, using a moving point line source, was undertaken to validate the predicted noise level change.
  2. The predicted noise levels arising due to road traffic at each of the identified NSRs are provided in Table 9.28   Open ▸ .
Table 9.28:
Predicted Construction Road Traffic Noise

Table 9.28:  Predicted Construction Road Traffic Noise

  1. Road traffic noise from the A1 is dominant at many of the receptors and therefore the influence of noise from other roads is diminished.
  2. Predicted increases in road traffic noise and the resultant impact magnitude, with reference to Table 9.18, are negligible at all identified NSRs.
  3. The impact is predicted to be of local spatial extent, medium term duration, intermittent and high reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. The magnitude is therefore considered to be negligible.
Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. As noted above, all receptors considered within the Noise and Vibration Chapter are of high sensitivity.
Significance of the effect
  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be negligible and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be high. The effect will, therefore, be of negligible adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No secondary mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of secondary mitigation is not significant in EIA terms. The residual effect will, therefore, be of negligible significance.

VIBRATION AT SENSITIVE RECEPTORS

  1. Operation of construction plant and equipment, both static and mobile, has the potential to transmit perceptible vibration to NSRs.

Construction phase

Magnitude of impact
  1. Operation of drilling rigs and ancillary equipment is expected to produce the greatest vibration impacts, due to the proximity of trenchless technology (e.g. HDD) works to receptors and is therefore taken forward as the worst-case for the vibration assessment.
  2. Vibration levels decay very rapidly with distance from a source (BS 5228-2:2009+A1:2014). A representative example of trenchless technology given within BS 5228-2:2009+A1:2014 is for boring through silts overlying sandstone with a PPV of 8 mm/s at 4.5 m from the source, decreasing to a PPV of 2.7 mm/s at 7 m from the source and 1.8 mm/s at 12 m from the source.
  3. Research carried out by Reilly C. et al (Vibrations due to horizontal directional drilling in Lucan Formation rock and Dublin Boulder Clay, Conference Paper, Civil Engineering Research in Ireland, 2020) reported vibration levels of less than 1 mm/s PPV at distances of 9 m from drilling through Lucan Formation rock overlain by Dublin Boulder Clay.
  4. Given the distances between sources of vibration during the construction works and the NSRs (a minimum of 10 m) PPV levels would be below the criteria outlined in Table 9.22   Open ▸ at the NSRs along the Proposed Development area.
  5. The impact is predicted to be of local spatial extent, medium term duration, intermittent and high reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. The magnitude is therefore considered to be negligible.
  6. It is not currently known whether piling or significant ground improvement works will be required at the onshore substation. However, with reference to Table 9.20   Open ▸ and Table 9.22   Open ▸ and the distances of the nearest receptors to the onshore substation (approximately 300 m) it is anticipated that vibration impacts from potential piling at the onshore substation would be of negligible magnitude.
  7. Vibration impacts from construction works would therefore be of negligible magnitude.
Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. As noted above, all receptors considered within the Noise and Vibration Chapter are of high sensitivity.
Significance of the effect
  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be negligible, and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be high. The effect will, therefore, be of negligible adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No secondary mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effects in the absence of secondary mitigation is not significant in EIA terms. The residual effect will, therefore, be of negligible significance.

NOISE AT SENSITIVE RECEPTORS

  1. Operation of construction plant and equipment has the potential to increase noise levels at NSRs.

Construction phase

Magnitude of impact
  1. Table 9.29   Open ▸ to Table 9.36 show the predicted impacts due to noise during construction, under the Maximum Design Scenario (MDS). Noise levels are predicted only at those receptors close to the proposed construction activities. For all scenarios, except trenchless technology (e.g. HDD) at landfall and along the cable corridor, night-time impacts are based on equipment such as generators running overnight, in order to allow for site security, rather than construction activities being undertaken overnight. The predicted daytime noise level encompasses the proposed standard construction hours of 07:00 to 19:00 which includes periods that BS5228 defines as “Evening and Weekend”.
Table 9.29:
Enabling Works Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.29:  Enabling Works Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.30:
Trenchless Technology Landfall Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.30:  Trenchless Technology Landfall Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.31:
Trenchless Technology Cable Corridor Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.31:  Trenchless Technology Cable Corridor Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

* - see Maximum Design Scenario in Section 9.8.1

Table 9.32:
Jointing Bay Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.32:  Jointing Bay Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

 

Table 9.33:
Open Trenching Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.33:  Open Trenching Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.34:
Cable Pulling Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.34:  Cable Pulling Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.35:
Onshore Substation Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.35:  Onshore Substation Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.36:
Open Trenching and Jointing Bay (Concurrent) Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.36:  Open Trenching and Jointing Bay (Concurrent) Construction Noise, Predicted Impacts

 

  1. Impacts are of local spatial extent, medium term duration, intermittent and high reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. The magnitude of impacts, with reference to Table 9.16   Open ▸ , during the daytime, ranges from negligible to medium at all identified NSRs.
  2. During the evening, weekend and night-time, impact magnitudes range from negligible to high.
Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. All receptors considered within the Noise and Vibration Chapter are of high sensitivity.
Significance of the effect
  1. At the majority of receptors except for CCR1, the magnitude of the impacts, during the daytime, is deemed to be negligible to low and the sensitivity of the receptors is considered to be high. The effect will, therefore, be of negligible to minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
  2. At CCR1 the magnitude of impact during the daytime (during Enabling Works) is predicted to be medium and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be high. The effect will, therefore, be of moderate adverse significance, which is significant in EIA terms.
  3. During the evening and weekend the magnitude of impact ranges from negligible to high and the sensitivity of the receptors is considered to be high. The effect will, therefore, be of negligible to major adverse significance, which is significant in EIA terms.
  4. During the night-time the magnitude of impact again ranges from negligible to high and the sensitivity of the receptors is considered to be high. The effect will, therefore, be of negligible to major adverse significance, which is significant in EIA terms.
Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. During open trenching, cable pulling works and construction of the onshore substation noise impacts from construction works will generally be of negligible to low magnitude.
  2. For all other construction scenarios a number of receptors will experience impacts of medium or high magnitude during either daytime, weekend or night-time.
  3. Secondary mitigation is, therefore, considered necessary.
  4. Example mitigation, in the form of temporarily located noise barriers to individual plant items and/or to the boundary of the compounds during construction and the limiting of active plant numbers during the weekend hours, has been modelled and the results presented in Table 9.37   Open ▸ to Table 9.41   Open ▸ .
Table 9.37:
Enabling Works Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.37:  Enabling Works Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.38:
Trenchless Technology Landfall Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.38:  Trenchless Technology Landfall Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.39:
Trenchless Technology Cable Corridor Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.39:  Trenchless Technology Cable Corridor Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.40:
Jointing Bay Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.40:  Jointing Bay Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

 

Table 9.41:
Open Trenching and Jointing Bay (Concurrent) Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

Table 9.41:  Open Trenching and Jointing Bay (Concurrent) Construction Noise Mitigated, Predicted Impacts

 

  1. Overall, following mitigation, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be negligible to low at most and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be high. The effect will, therefore, be of negligible to minor significance, which is not significant in EIA terms. 

Operation and maintenance phase

Magnitude of impact
  1. The impact assessment has been carried out using the unmitigated noise level for the various potential onshore noise and vibration study area components.
  2. Operations at the onshore substation would be 24 hours a day. A detailed CadnaA noise model was created to assess noise levels comprising the plant items set out in Table 9.11   Open ▸ . Ground absorption was incorporated into the CadnaA model using a coefficient of 0 within the substation compound (to represent hard, reflective ground) and 1 elsewhere (representing soft ground, i.e. agricultural land).
  3. Calculated operational rating levels have been compared with the background sound levels at each receptor, which have been derived from the measured baseline noise data contained within Table 9.8   Open ▸ and Table 9.9   Open ▸ .
  4. The impact of the predicted noise levels from the onshore noise and vibration study area at surrounding residential receptors are presented in Table 9.42   Open ▸ . The magnitude of effects has been assessed in accordance with BS 4142:2014+A1:2019. A tonality penalty of +6 dB(A) (for highly perceptible tonality) has been added to the predicted specific sound level. Noise from the onshore substation is neither intermittent nor impulsive in character, therefore no penalties for intermittency or impulsivity have been added.
  5. The requirement for inclusion of tonality penalties will be developed and reviewed throughout the detailed onshore substation design process and may therefore be removed at future stages.
  6. Table 9.42   Open ▸ and Table 9.43   Open ▸ show the maximum operational noise impact (i.e. during the night).
Table 9.42:
Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Predicted Impacts, HVAC

Table 9.42:  Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Predicted Impacts, HVAC

Table 9.43:
Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Predicted Impacts, HVDC

Table 9.43:  Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Predicted Impacts, HVDC

  1. The impact is predicted to be of local spatial extent, long term duration, continuous and low reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor(s) directly.
  2. Of the 11 receptors assessed under the HVAC scenario, one is predicted to have negligible, one a low, one a medium and eight a high magnitude.
  3. Of the 11 receptors assessed under the HVDC scenario, one is predicted to have negligible, one a low and nine a high magnitude.
  4. Analysis of the individual source contributions at each receptor indicates that the Transformers are the dominant noise source in each of the scenarios with cooler being of secondary dominance in the HVDC scenario.
Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. All receptors considered within the Noise and Vibration Chapter are of high sensitivity.
Significance of the effect
  1. Overall, it is predicted that the sensitivity of the receptor is high, and the magnitude, at its highest, is high. The effect is of major adverse significance, which is significant in EIA terms.
Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. The Proposed Development will commit to limiting operational noise from the onshore substation to a noise rating level (in accordance with BS4142:2014+A1:2019) of no greater than 5 dB above the representative background detailed within Table 9.42   Open ▸ , LAr,Tr (15 minutes) at any time at the NSRs limited to no less than 35dB LAr,Tr (15 minutes) where background is considered low. Table 9.44   Open ▸ shows the suggested rating levels.
Table 9.44:
Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Suggested Rating Level Limits

Table 9.44:  Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Suggested Rating Level Limits

  1. The allowance for a rating level up to 5 dB above the representative background, or an absolute rating level of 35dB(A) was derived from consideration of the context of the existing environment (low background sound levels at many receptors) and the proposed onshore infrastructure in accordance with BS 4142:2014+A1:2019. No further contextual factors were considered relevant.
  2. Therefore, it is considered that the operational rating limit (in accordance with BS 4142:2014+A1:2019) is appropriate as this represents a limit of less than +5 dB(A) (minor adverse) above the representative background sound level (subject to a lower cut-off value of 35dB(A)) derived from measured levels.  
  3. The commitment to limit operational noise from the onshore substation to a maximum rating level up to 5 dB(A) above the representative background (subject to a lower cut-off value of 35dB(A)) at any NSR ensures that impacts are reduced to, at most, minor adverse, which is not significant.
  4. During detailed design of the onshore substation, mitigation strategies, such as the use of landscaped bunds, equipment selection to reduce/eliminate tonality, provision of barriers and/or enclosures and to reduce overall noise level of each contributing item of equipment, will be developed to ensure the operational noise commitment will be met.
  5. As an example mitigation measure, enclosures around the transformers and attenuation to the coolers (for the HVDC scenario) were included in residual operational noise models.  Enclosures are highly effective noise mitigation methods, typically achieving reductions in noise emissions of greater than 18dB.  
  6. Table 9.45   Open ▸ and Table 9.46   Open ▸ show the maximum operational noise impact following mitigation by enclosure of the transformers (i.e. during the night). In a highly conservative approach, a +6dB penalty for tonality has been added. With predicted levels at or far below background, perceptible tonality at the receptors is unlikely.
Table 9.45:
Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Predicted Residual Impacts, HVAC

Table 9.45:  Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Predicted Residual Impacts, HVAC

Table 9.46:
Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Predicted Residual Impacts, HVDC

Table 9.46:  Onshore Substation Operational Noise, Predicted Residual Impacts, HVDC

  1. Overall, following mitigation, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be negligible and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be high. The residual effects will, therefore, be of negligible significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.

9.11.1.              Proposed Monitoring/Further Assessment

  1. Proposed monitoring measures are outlined in Table 9.47   Open ▸ below.
Table 9.47:
Monitoring Commitments for Noise and Vibration

Table 9.47:  Monitoring Commitments for Noise and Vibration

 

9.12. Cumulative Effects Assessment

9.12.1.              Methodology

 

  1. The Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) takes into account the impact associated with the Proposed Development together with other relevant plans, projects and activities. Cumulative effects are therefore the combined effect of the Proposed Development in combination with the effects from a number of different projects, on the same receptor or resource. Please see Volume 1, Chapter 2 of the Onshore EIA Report for detail on CEA methodology.
  2. The projects and plans selected as relevant to the CEA presented within this chapter are based upon the results of a screening exercise (see Volume 4, Appendix 2.4). Each project or plan has been considered on a case by case basis for screening in or out of this chapter's assessment based upon data confidence, effect-receptor pathways and the spatial/temporal scales involved.
  3. The specific projects scoped into the CEA for Noise and Vibration, are outlined in Table 9.48   Open ▸ .
Table 9.48:
List of Other Projects Considered Within the CEA for Noise and Vibration

Table 9.48:  List of Other Projects Considered Within the CEA for Noise and Vibration

 

 

9.12.2.              Maximum Design Scenario

  1. The maximum design scenario(s) summarised here have been selected as those having the potential to result in the greatest effect on an identified receptor or receptor group. The cumulative effects presented and assessed in this section have been selected from the details provided in Volume 1, Chapter 5 of the Onshore EIA Report as well as the information available on other projects and plans, to inform ‘maximum design scenarios’. Effects of greater adverse significance are not predicted to arise should any other development scenario, based on details within the Project Design Envelope, to that assessed here, be taken forward in the final design scheme.
  2. The maximum design scenario, derived from the proposed construction programmes for the SP Energy Networks (SPEN) Eastern Link – Branxton Grid  Substation and Eastern Link - Converter Station and Cables Route projects and the Proposed Development, would be the concurrent construction works during Cable Pulling for the Proposed Development, Substation Site Preparation and Earthworks for the Eastern Link – Branxton Grid Substation project and Site Preparation Works along the cable corridor for the Eastern Link -Converter Station and Cable Route project. Under this maximum design scenario, the most affected receptor (common to the Proposed Development and both of the Eastern Link developments) would be CCR1 Castledene.

 

9.12.3.              Cumulative Effects Assessment

  1. An assessment description of the likely significance of the cumulative effects of the Proposed Development upon noise and vibration receptors arising from each identified impact is given below.

CUMULATIVE Noise

Tier 2

Construction phase

Magnitude of impact

  1. There is potential that the proposed construction phase of the Proposed Development, the SPEN Eastern Link – Branxton Grid Substation, and the SPEN Eastern Link - Converter Station and Cable Route may overlap and hence there is potential for cumulative noise impacts to occur.
  2. The Noise and Vibration Chapter of the EIA Reports  for both of the SPEN Eastern Link  works (Eastern Link 1 Northern Point of Connection Substation EIA Report, Chapter 11, Noise and Vibration, December 2021 and Eastern Link 1 Northern Point of Connection Converter and Cables EIA Report, Chapter 11, Noise and Vibration, July 2022) provide details of the expected noise level at the closest receptor to both the Proposed Development works (during Cable Pulling) and works associated with both Eastern Link projects (CCR1 Castledene) and predicts a noise level during Substation Site Preparation and Earthworks of 59 dB(A) and during Site Preparation along the cable corridor of 63dB(A). With reference to Table 9.35   Open ▸ the predicted noise level from the Proposed Development works during Cable Pulling is a maximum of 57.1 dB(A).
  3. Addition of these results in a predicted cumulative noise level of 65.2 dB(A) which, with reference to Table 9.16   Open ▸ and Table 9.17   Open ▸ , is of medium magnitude should these activities occur during daytime and of high magnitude should these activities occur during the weekend period.
  4. The cumulative effect is predicted to be of local spatial extent, short term duration, intermittent and high reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. The magnitude is therefore, considered to be medium to high.

Sensitivity of receptor

  1. All receptors within the Noise and Vibration assessment are considered to be of high sensitivity.

Significance of effect

  1. Overall, the magnitude of the cumulative effect is deemed to be medium to high and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be high. The cumulative effect will, therefore, be of moderate to major adverse significance, which is significant in EIA terms.

Secondary mitigation and residual effect

  1. The assessment of cumulative effects has considered a worst case scenario whereby the noisiest activities and highest impacts at the most affected receptor were considered. The assessment, in the absence of detailed information regarding the construction programme for the Eastern Link projects, assumed that these activities would occur simultaneously. 
  2. Secondary mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of secondary mitigation is significant in EIA terms. Secondary mitigation will involve the detailed planning of the timing of these potentially concurrent activities in order to prevent significant cumulative impacts occurring. Should the temporal separation of these activities not be feasible then additional secondary mitigation, such as temporarily located noise barriers to individual plant items and/or to the boundary of the compounds during construction and the limiting of active plant numbers, will be provided.
  3. The mitigation measures will ensure that the magnitude of impact will be reduced to low, at most.
  4. The residual effect will, therefore, be minor, which is not significant in EIA terms.
Operational phase
  1. The Noise and Vibration Chapter of the EIA Report for the SPEN Eastern Link – Branxton Grid Substation works scoped out the assessment of operational noise stating:

               "Operational noise effects associated with the proposed substation equipment installations, on the basis that there are no transformers or other significant noise emitting equipment intended to be installed”

  1. On this basis cumulative impacts of the Proposed Development and the SPEN Eastern Link – Branxton Grid Substation are not predicted.
  2. The Noise and Vibration Chapter of the EIA Report for the SPEN Eastern Link  - Branxton Grid Substation reported a “fair weather” L50 of 3dB(A) for corona noise from overhead lines. Corona noise occurs predominantly in damp or wet conditions, during which a BS 4142:2014+A1:2019 assessment (such as that undertaken for the Proposed Development) is invalid.
  3. Given the fair weather predicted L50 of 3dB(A) it is considered highly unlikely that cumulative operational impacts will occur.
  4. The Noise and Vibration Chapter of the EIA Report for the SPEN Eastern Link -  Converter Station and Cables reported a predicted specific noise level (LAeq,Tr) of 26dB(A) at North Lodge (the closest NSR assessed for Eastern Link - Converter Station to the Proposed Development). Predicted noise levels due to the Proposed Development at North Lodge are a maximum of 14dB(A). When two noise levels are more than 10dB different, the lower of the two levels is taken to have no influence on the higher, hence noise from the Proposed Development in operation will not increase the noise level at this receptor and no significant cumulative impacts are predicted.

9.13. Inter-Related Effects

  1. A description of the likely inter-related effects arising from the Proposed Development on noise and vibration is provided in Volume 4, Appendix 15.2 of the Onshore EIA Report.

9.14. Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, Likely Significant Effects and Monitoring

  1. Information on noise and vibration within the noise and vibration study area was collected through desktop review, site surveys and consultation.
  2. Table 9.49   Open ▸ presents a summary of the potential impacts, mitigation measures and the conclusion of likely significant effects in EIA terms in respect to noise and vibration. The impacts assessed include increases in road traffic noise, vibration at sensitive receptors and noise at sensitive receptors. Overall, it is concluded that there will be no likely significant residual effects arising from the Proposed Development during the construction, operational and maintenance or decommissioning phases.
  3. Primary, Tertiary, and Secondary mitigation measures, during both construction and operation, have been proposed. Mitigation during construction will be largely secured within the CEMP and with the provision of specific mitigation such as site boundary temporary barriers. Mitigation measures for operational noise from the substation will be developed through the detailed design post consent phase and may include such measures as enclosure of specific equipment.
  4. A further detailed noise impact assessment is proposed, prior to commissioning of the substation.
  5. Table 9.50 presents a summary of the potential cumulative impacts, mitigation measures and the conclusion of likely significant effects in respect to noise and vibration in EIA terms. The cumulative effects assessed include noise at sensitive receptors. Overall, it is concluded that there will be no likely significant cumulative effects from the Proposed Development alongside other projects/plans.

 

 

Table 9.49:
Summary of Likely Significant Environmental Effects, Mitigation and Monitoring

Table 9.49:  Summary of Likely Significant Environmental Effects, Mitigation and Monitoring


Table 9.50:
Summary of Likely Significant Cumulative Environment Effects, Mitigation and Monitoring

Table 9.50:  Summary of Likely Significant Cumulative Environment Effects, Mitigation and Monitoring

 

9.15. References

 

BSI (2019). British Standards Institution [BS] 4142:2014+A1:2019 Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound, BSI, London.

BSI (2003). British Standards Institution [BS] 7445-1:2003 - Description and measurement of environmental noise.  Guide to quantities and procedures.  BSI, London.

BSI (2003). British Standards Institution [BS] EN 61672-1:2003 Electroacoustics.  Sound level meters.  Specifications.  BSI, London.

BSI (2014). British Standards Institution [BS] 5228-1:2009+A1:2014 “Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites – Part 1: Noise”.

BSI (2014). British Standards Institution [BS] 5228-2: 2009+A1:2014 “Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites – Part 2: Vibration”.

BSI (2014). British Standards Institution [BS] 8233: Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings.  BSI, London.

Department of Transport, Welsh Office (1988). Calculation of Road Traffic Noise. HMSO, London.

Highways England (2020). Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 7: Noise and Vibration LA111. National Highways.

High Speed Two Phase One Information Paper E23: Control of Construction Noise and Vibration (2017)

Hiller.  DM and Crabb GI (2000).  Ground borne vibrations caused by mechanised construction works.  Highways Agency, Transport Research Laboratory, TRL report 429.

International Organization for Standardization (2013).  ISO 717-1:2013 Acoustics — Rating of sound insulation in buildings and of building elements — Part 1: Airborne sound insulation.  ISO, Switzerland.

International Organization for Standardization (2010).  ISO 3744:2010 Acoustics — Determination of sound power levels and sound energy levels of noise sources using sound pressure — Engineering methods for an essentially free field over a reflecting plane.  ISO, Switzerland.

International Organization for Standardization (1996).  ISO9613-2:1996 Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 2: General method of calculation.  ISO, Switzerland.

Rockhill D.J, Bolton M.D and White D.J (2014).  Ground-borne vibrations due to press-in piling operations.  Cambridge University Engineering Department.

Transport Research Laboratory (2000). Hiller D.M and Crabb G.I Groundborne vibration caused by mechanised construction works.  TRL Report 429.  Wokingham:TRL,2000.

Watts, GR (1990).  Traffic induced vibrations in building.  Department for Transport, Transport and Road Research Laboratory Research Report (TRRL), Research Report 246.

Association of Noise Consultants Good Practice Working Group, BS 4142:2014+A1:2019 Technical Note, ANC 2020

Reilly C. et al (2020) Vibrations due to horizontal directional drilling in Lucan Formation rock and Dublin Boulder Clay, Conference Paper, Civil Engineering Research in Ireland)

 

Council of the European Union. (2002). Council Directive 2002/49/EC on the Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise. Accessed on 30/0521. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32002L0049 

Control of Pollution Act (1974).  HMSO, London.

Environmental Protection Act (1990).  HMSO, London.

 

[1] BS4142 uses the term 'sound' rather than 'noise' but this chapter adopts the use of the term 'noise' where relevant for consistency.

[2] C = Construction, O = Operational and maintenance, D = Decommissioning