Noise Pollution

Adults, teens and children who live, play, go to school and work next to the Hanlon will be most heavily impacted. If traffic increases on adjacent streets, those residents too, will be impacted by noise and poorer air quality.

We know that residents living along the Hanlon are already exposed to noise at greater than the Ministry of the Environment guidelines of 50- 55 decibels.

Re: concerns with Stantec's flawed methodology in handling the noise issue.

I attended the Dec 5th MTO meeting at the Holiday Inn Guelph. The display included "measures" of present and projected noise levels (in decibels)  at various locations near the Hanlon. For example, at Ironwood/Shadybrook current noise levels were listed as 45.0-59.2 and these were projected to increase to 48.3-64.0.

There are serious problems with the information and process:
1) The public display should have disclosed that no noise measurements were actually taken. The data were created using  ORNAMENT a computerized model that is a least a quarter of a century old. None of the limitations of the model were disclosed. Given that the Hanlon is being changed from a Parkway within Guelph, to the equivalent of a 400 series Highway, we need transparency regarding assumed traffic volume, traffic type, night/day volumes that drive noise.

2) Current MTO standards (see Hanlon noise study file below) permit noise levels to be increased by 5 dB due a single highway changes with no requirement for noise abatement provided final noise levels (projected by ORNAMENT) do not exceed 65 decibels. In practical terms this means that housing within hearing distance of the Hanlon may experience successive increments of 4-5 dB which over 10-20 years will add 10-20 dB with no requirement for noise abatement.  The 5 dB threshold is enforced to the nearest decimal and appears to assume 100% precision of ORNAMENT, a model that has signficant error/imprecision.

3) Page 8 of the attached University of Guelph report compares permitted maximum Residential noise levels in Canada (55 dB) with Germany (49 dB, Netherlands (40 dB) and most importantly the World Health Organization (45 dB). Why does Ontario combine the highest permitted noise levels in the developed world with a process that allows unabated and repeated 5dB noise increases?

Liz, it is apparent that the Province owns the Hanlon and has the power to change its scope ultimately carving Guelph into two parts( East & West). This note is to request that you contact the Environment Ministry to challenge the current noise level standards, the thresholds used (turn up the noise 5 dB at a time and do no abatement) and request an increase in transparency when ancient methods are used to impose more noise on residents. I am certain that most people who attended the Dec 5th meeting had no idea that the noise levels were all estimated. There was zero disclosure of the assumed traffic volumes behind the noise projections and no consideration of 10-20 year impacts.

Clearly the City of Guelph has little power regarding MTO standards. However, somebody must move Provincial noise standards into the 21st century and to this end the City of Guelph should use every possible legal obstacle to apply pressure on the province, including measures to delay construction until impacts on local residents are addressed. From Erika M. Weltzien,

Guelph Engineering Study-Noise Reduction, 2005

Ministry of Transportation Guidelines

MTO's idea of acceptable noise level:

The following is from one of our readers: When I was at the last public meeting (PIC #2 at Holiday Inn on December 5, 2007) I was discussing the noise level definitions with the MTO official. I thought they were far too high for safe levels now(some days in our backyard we can’t even hear someone talking to us a few feet away). I asked him where these standards were obtained and he said the MTO negotiates the acceptable levels with the Ministry of Environment. He told me that if I lived along the QEW in Toronto the levels would be around 80 or 85 so these really weren’t so bad.

I was appalled that he would make the comparison and before I could say anything another woman who was listening said to him that we don’t live in Toronto, nor do we want to and that is why we are in Guelph.

Environmental Protection Act
Under the Environmental Protection Act noise is a pollutant and the EPA legislates that everyone is entitled to the use and enjoyment of their property. How will this happen if people can't use their backyards or have problems sleeping at night because of noise from the expanded Hanlon? Children who play outside in their yards will receive the most exposure to noise and air pollution. .

Health effects of exposure to noise include

• hearing impairment,

• speech interference,

• sleep disturbance,

• cardiovascular and other physiological effects,

• psychological effects include loss of performance, loss of memory

• effects on residential behavior, and annoyance.

Excess Noise and Heart Disease

Other effects of noise pollution

Noise Baseline and the Ministry of the Environment -

Tim
I enjoyed your letter to the editor in the Trib. It should generate a lot of interest and action.Well done.
 
Have you contacted the Ministry of the Environment about the noise? Apparently they take precedence over MTO on matters pertaining to air, water and noise. At the very least they should have established a noise baseline in 1972 and measured changes in community noise levels since then. It is absolutely critical that they record the noise baseline prior to the proposed changes (now) so that they can see the effects, positive or negative of the changes made and add noise abatement features to their design if they are warranted. Even at my house, which is a half kilometer away, the noise from the highway reaches unpleasant levels.  
 
Dave
David J. Penny, BES