Elvin Pinckney - Comments

1 47763 Sec. 772.5 (a)(1)&(2) Significant change in vertical and horizontal alignment definition must consider the factor of a 3 dB(a) increase in noise level. Ohio would like to use the factor of a decrease of 50% of the distance between the original edge of pavement and the nearest sensitive land use. Would this be acceptable to FHWA. This would eliminate modeling to determine a “less than” or “greater than” 3dB(a) change in noise level based on the change in horizontal alignment. 2 47764 772.5(d) ODOT would like to be sure that the intent of Section 772.5(d) which defines the term “residents”. The regulation should be clear that only a multi-family unit owner will be surveyed for their input on the construction of a noise barrier to help establish cost reasonableness. 3 47764 772.5(e) Defines special use facilities. Since cemeteries have been added to activity category B, our concern is with the vast real estate that can be occupied by a cemetery. ODOT would like to see more guidance in what areas of a cemetery to focus an analysis and possible abatement. The area of a Chapel (that is frequently used by guests) or new gravesites that warrant a lower noise environment for a funeral service, or the entire multi-acre facility? 4 47764 772.5(p) Will define the term “common noise environment”. It is very important for SHAs to know if this common noise environment can include one or more barriers for a given neighborhood/subdivision or an entire corridor with multiple noise barriers that can be assessed together. ODOT presently considers each neighborhood/subdivision as it’s own noise environment. 5 47766 772.9 (c)(5)(i)(A The word “majority” refers to at least 1 percentage point over 50%. Would the FHWA support a project that was supported by a lessor percent of the impacted residents, say 49%? Many times it’s difficult to get a response rate that is greater than 50% from a public involvement effort. Should FHWA be firm on the 51% issue, ODOT could put this part of the regulation in print on public correspondence in an effort to get a better public response. 6 47766 772.9 What is the opinion of FHWA on a SHA adjusting their present “substantial increase” definition. 7 47765 772.9 Requirement for indoor analysis should be explained. How is indoor noise level determined for the design year? 8 47768 772.15 Please discuss when this is required. To what level? Is this intended to be a requirement separate from a Type 1 or II noise analysis report? 9 47768 772.17(c) Reference to 772.17(a) – Should be changed to 772.17(b) 10 47768 772.17 (b)(1) Please add topography to the discussion on TNM LOOKUP limitations. 11 47773 772.19 A discussion of when it’s appropriate to make these determinations in either the pre NEPA or post NEPA conditions is requested. *This is in the original regulation 12 13