My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1984.03.14 PC Minutes
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
1984 PC Minutes
>
1984.03.14 PC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2015 6:21:59 PM
Creation date
2/27/2015 9:56:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
3/14/1984
Document Type
Minutes
Commission Name
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
(3) <br />"Measure of external noise environments" "is determined by <br />the value of day -night average sound level produced as the result <br />of the accumulation of noise from all sources contributing <br />to the external noise environment at the site. Day -night average <br />sound level, abbreviated as DNL and symbolized as Ldn is the <br />24-hour average sound level." <br />It is interesting to note that: HUD's minimum property standards <br />for urban and rural communities, as developed over the past 44 years are <br />aimed at prohibiting HUD support for new construction, of noise sensitive <br />useson sites having unacceptable noise exposure. (Above information <br />found on page 221 and 222 book 24 C.F.H.) <br />Another item to consider is the type of metering equipment used. <br />The meter used on March 3, 1984, falls into the following category, <br />and I quote from U.S. Bureau of Standards Hand Book 119, page 12, <br />attachment ##5. <br />"The readings of an ordinary sound -level meter will fail to indicate <br />the true level of rapidly peaking sounds because the needle <br />of the meter is too sluggish to follow the sharp pressure changes <br />that occur on impulsive sounds like shots, or even the sounds <br />of a poorly muffled internal combustion engine, which after all, <br />derives its power from the explosions confined in combustion <br />chambers. This makes it difficult to estimate exposure to <br />impulsive noises." <br />In visiting the gun club's noise abatement enclosure on March 3, 1984, <br />I see they have framed in and made previsions for one door and two windows <br />on the south side. This presents a new problem not yet addressed. I have <br />specific pages from a document titled Fundamentals and Abatement of <br />Highway Traffic Noise. The above document and its contents are used by <br />the Minnesota Highway department. In this document they have a section <br />titled "Holes in Barriers," which gives the following example... <br />(Attachment #6) <br />Barrier "A" <br />80 decibels on noise producing side of a barrier and then <br />50 decibels on receiver's side, for a 30 decibel reduction. <br />Barrier "B" <br />Same as above except we now have a hole which represents 10'0 <br />of the surface area. We still have 80 decibels on noise pro- <br />ducing side, but now have only a 4 decibel reduction, or a <br />76 dba reading on the receivers side, due to the 10/ hole in <br />the barrier. <br />Mir. Linnell stated that he thought a 10 dba reduction in sound level <br />will occur this summer when the foliage comes out. I have attachment ##7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.