14
HB 790: Implementation and Effectiveness of Sound Mitigation Measures on Texas Highways Project Update Transportation Short Course October 2016

HB 790: Implementation and Effectiveness of Sound ... · HB 790: Implementation and Effectiveness of Sound ... effectiveness of sound mitigation measures on highways ... President

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

HB 790: Implementation and Effectiveness of Sound

Mitigation Measures on Texas Highways

Project Update

Transportation Short Course

October 2016

HB 790

84th Texas Legislature

AN ACT

relating to a study on the implementation and effectiveness of sound mitigation measures on certain

highways.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1. (a) The Texas A&M Transportation Institute shall conduct a study assessing the implementation and effectiveness of sound mitigation measures on highways that are part of the state highway system and toll roads or turnpikes under the jurisdiction of a toll project

entity as defined by Section 372.001, Transportation Code.

Bill Author: Rep. Cindy Burkett

Signed by Gov. Greg Abbott June 17, 2015

HB 790 Bill Objectives

1. an analysis of the process and methodology used by the Texas Department of Transportation or toll project entity for selecting and implementing sound mitigation measures, including factors that affect the process and how outcomes are determined;

2. an analysis of whether any kind of live testing is conducted at any point to determine the actual traffic noise level for neighboring properties;

3. an evaluation of the effectiveness of the process and methodology described by Subdivision (1) of this subsection in reducing the traffic noise level for neighboring properties; and

4. an evaluation of the effectiveness of implemented sound mitigation measures in reducing the traffic noise level for neighboring properties.

Literature Review

• State-of-practice review of mitigation

techniques

• Review of Federal and state regulations

and guidelines

• Comparison to peer states and toll

authorities in those states

Selected Literature Highlights

• Realistically, typical noise barriers can

achieve 5-10 dB(A) reductions. Larger

reductions require higher barriers, change

the top of the wall or a total or partial

covering of the road.

• Rubberized asphalt results vary

– Maryland reported 2.3-3.6 dB(A) reduction

– Texas reported 14 dB(A) reduction

Selected Peer State Highlights

• Noise abatement criteria is consistent with

peer states, but noise wall costs vary

widely from $18/s.f. to $52/s.f.

• Cost-effectiveness criteria also vary widely

from $24,000 to $80,000 per benefitted

receptor

• Of peer states, only California and

Washington participate in a Type II

(retrofit) program

Agencies Interviewed

Authority Agency

Texas Department of Transportation Environmental Affairs Division

Chapter 370

Regional Mobility Authorities

Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA)

Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority (CCRMA)

Northeast Texas Regional Mobility Authority (NETRMA)

Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority (CRRMA)

Chapter 366

Regional Toll Authorities

North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA)

Chapter 284

County Toll Authorities

Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA)

Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority (FBCTRA)

Montgomery County Toll Road Authority (MCTRA)

Interview Topics

• Planning

– Cost estimates

– Cost-effectiveness criteria

– Model inputs and data sources

• Design

– Community input procedures

– Wall design (height and lateral placement)

Interview Topics (cont’d)

• Public Involvement

– Treatment of tenants

– Community involvement techniques

• Policy and Procedure

– Updates considered

Field Study Locations

President George Bush Turnpike Eastern Extension, Garland US 183A, Austin

Field Study Locations (cont’d)

SH 99 Segment G, Houston

Measurement Protocol

• Measure at locations modeled in environmental documentation, preferably behind noise walls

• Obtain private property permission for measurements

• Measure one 15-minute interval during diurnal periods– AM peak (7 a.m. to 9 a.m.)

– Mid-day (1 p.m. to 3 p.m.)

– PM peak (5 p.m. to 7 p.m.)

• Spread measurements between locations across multiple days

• Collect vehicle volume, classification, and speed data from main lanes

View of Equipment from

Receptor Location

WeatherStation

SoundLevelMeter

Project Status

Final report published November 1

and will be publically available.

Contact Information

Jason Crawford

[email protected]

817-462-0534