Object

Representation ID: 92996

Received: 01/08/2018

Respondent: Fritton Action Rescue Group

Noise impact of proposed quarry at Fritton
Where noise impact assessment is concerned the quieter the location considered the less acceptable is any additional sound.
It is not surprising, therefore, that in a quiet rural community like Fritton the predicted noise impact of a nearby mineral extraction and processing facility would be wholly unacceptable, and would, indeed, in some habited areas, be well in excess of the normal measurement scale.
Local Authorities are required to take such environmental impacts on surrounding areas very seriously (HM DCLG Planning and Environment Division). Accordingly we request that the quarry proposal be rejected.

Previously the applicants assessed the potential noise impact of their road haulage activities but not that of the much noisier extraction and processing operations.
On this occasion our team has, on a conservative basis, assessed the noise impact of the proposed quarry on Fritton and its environs.
For this assessment the sound of quarry activity is taken to be akin to that of a lorry at 40mph at a range of 50ft (15.24 metres), namely 84dB. This is very conservative estimate in that the sound output of road vehicles is very strictly regulated, as compared to quarry machinery. Furthermore, although quarries may seek to control their noise footprint, independent quantitative assessment of their control measures is advised. Pervasive low frequency 'rumble', apt to characterise their activities, is hard to mitigate, both at source and at the receiving end.
We next need to select an ambient sound level to represent that normally experienced by the community FIGURE 1 shows, on a 0.5km x 0.5km grid, tranquillity determinations from the CPRA's 2007 survey. Most of the forest area is highly tranquil (coded green), near the metalled roads moderately tranquil (coded yellow) and the grid square containing the main concentration of Fritton dwellings least tranquil (coded tan). Again, on a conservative basis we will take the ambient sound level in this noisiest grid square (previously determined by the applicants as 42dB) to represent this community as a whole.
Using the above sound levels we can proceed to determine the corresponding noise impact levels for the area surrounding the mineral extraction zone (assuming the applicants conduct their activities up to the edge - which is their right). To do this we determine the predicted ambient sound levels due to our 84dB source using the inverse square way, addition logarithmically the original 42dB ambient (see appendix 1 and appendix 2). We can then determine noise impact values (simply the difference between the existing ambient sound level and the predicted sound level). The distances from source for convenient noise impact levels 5dB, 7dB, 10dB etc. can be determined by interpolation from Appendix 1 to yield the sound impact footprint shown in Figure 2.
From Figure 2 it can be seen that the Fritton community would suffer a noise impact of at least 5dB, and near the quarry over 30dB. On the accepted basis of a doubling of perceived sound for every 10dB increase such impact levels are clearly unacceptable. This noise will affect not only our resident community but also the many hundreds of people who visit Fritton's vehicle free Waveney amenity forest to escape the hubbub of the port conurbations of Lowestoft and Gt Yarmouth and to enjoy some rural tranquillity.
We understand that the threshold of the noisiest impact category mooted (guidelines for Environmental Noise Impact Assessment 2014) termed 'major' is a mere 10dB. If so, given that below this, category impact scale intervals are at most only 5dB in width, it is plain that the noise impact levels shown in Figure 2 arrange well below the normal expected scale of measurement.

Furthermore the Figure 2 noise impact footprint is conservative for much of the area covered. For the quieter parts, broadly corresponding with the green coded part of Figure 1, a 'wilderness' ambient of 35dB would be more appropriate than the 42dB used in which case the noise impact contours would stand higher by some 7dB.

Also for the quiet properties deep within the forest, namely 'Roundhouse' and 'Forest Lodge' where, on occasion no sound is audible beyond one's own breathing and heartbeat, ambient sound of 25dB, used to determine when a receding sound has passed out of earshot, would be a realistic basis for assessment. On this basis, working minerals 500 metres away would cause a noise impact at the properties of some 30dB, and, what is more, minerals could possibly be worked as close as 120 metres, yielding an impact of some 40dB. On the accepted basis of doubling for each 10dB increase this represents a perceived sound level (2 x 2 x 2 = 8 times) the threshold of noise mooted as 'major'.
Such a noise impact would surely constitute some form of record.
Taking account of the guidance of HM Communities Planning and Environment Division we ask that the proposal for a quarry at Fritton be rejected on noise impact grounds.