Minutes, of the Committee-of-the-Whole Meeting

of the City Council of the

CITY OF DARIEN
DECEMBER5, 2005

CALL TO ORDER

The Committee-of-the- \Vhole Meeting of the City Council of the City of Darien was
called to order at 6:30 ]?oM. by Mayor Kathleen Moesle Weaver. In attendancewere:
Aldermen Biehl, Gattuso, Marchese, McIvor, Poteraske,and Weaver. Also in attendance
were: Mayor Weaver, Clerk Coleman, Administrator Valla, Attorney Madden, and
Director Gombac.

2. PROPOSED SOUND WALL ON I-55

Administrator Vana indicated that handouts of the presentation were placed on the dais
for Council, a copy of th.e presentation entitled 'Traffic Noise Study and Noise
Abatement Evaluation' is attached hereto. He introduced Sean LaDieu of Huff & Huff~
~1~;;: the consulting firnl that perfonned the sound study on both Route 53 and 1-55.1

Mr. LaDieu said that the study was initiated in 2003 by the Village of Willow brook for a
section of IL Route 83 awd by the City of Darien for I-55 from IL Route 83 to Lemont
Road. The study includt~ various goals: identify traffic noise levels, detennine if those
levels would justify a traffic noise impact, and if those impacted receptors qualified for a
noise abatementevaluatil:>n.The evaluation would determine where a noise wall or noise
abatementtechnique would be affective and feasible. He spoke about the noise study,
which included ten (10) receptor locations, monitOJ1ng,modeling, abatement analysis,
abatementoptions, and design concept with associatedcosts. "
I I

Administrator Vana indicated that the residents would be surveyed to see if there was
interest in. a Special Se1:viceArea; Council reviewed the survey and agreed with the
format.: 'Fherewas discussion that the residents would need to petition for the sound wall
and that 51% would dete11Ilineif the wall would or would not be constructed.

~
 December5, 200:;
Committee-of-the-Whole

3 ADJOURNMENT

There being no further businessto come before the Committee-of-the-Whole, the meeting
adjourned at 7:05 P.M. I

~~t-l.J1Ll<)~
K~athleenMoesle W eaver ~M;yor

JFC:jr I
A!l supporting documentation.and report originals of these minutes are on file in the Office of the City plerk under
FIle Number 12-05-05 CoInmlttee-of-tlIe-Whole. j

~ Minutesof 12-05-05Conuniuee-of-the-Whole

2
 The goal of these studies is to identify
existing and future traffic noise levels,
noise irrlpacts, and evraluate potential
81batement techniqlues,o

:::::
 ~ Conducting computer noise modeling
~ Performing a noise aba1:emE~ntanalysis
~ Considering noise abatement o~ltions
~ Presenti ng a design corlcept an(j
associated costs

dB(A)
:~jg~~ ",
Hom1'!'!ise. .
rnmmnn Olltclnnr~..nli l,v,l.
Trainat 100ft 110
rnmn1nnInclnnrSn.mcllevel.

,~ ::::-, 1J~::,\~~ :etF?"Ver at 1000ft- I:ance Club Music

"" 'Ja5Lawnmoweral 3 ft Inside SubwayTrain (NY)

90 Food Blenderat 3 ft ~
£7P
Diesel Truck a' 50 ft
General Freight Train a' 100 ft
GarbageDisloosalat 3 ft
Noisy Urban Daytime- 80 Very Loud Speechat 3 ft

Gas Lawnmower a' 100 ft

Commercial Area 70 Vacuum Cleaner at 10 Ii

NorD1a1 Speech at 3 Ii .FHW A Noise Abatement I
Criteria is 67 dBA I

60 Large Business Office

Quiet Spee,:h at 3 II
50 Dishwasher Next ROOITI
Small Theat"r Large Co,ference Room
40 (Backgroundi)
I. .::.. ~
Librarya~
30
Bedroom at Night
Concert Hall (Background)
20
Broadcast& RecordingStudio

Thresholdof Hearing
-0

COMMON SOUND LEVELS

2
.FHWA aploroved Traffic Noise Modlel (TNM)

.Inputs into model include

). Traffic volumes

) Traffic speed

~ Road~'ay horizontal al1ld vertical

alignment
» Traffic composition
~Receptor location and elev.ation

NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA -HOURL Y WEIGHT}:D SOUND LEVEL

3
 Noise Abatement Analysis

Includes noise reduction, cost effectivene!;s

and engineering! constraints

~ Goal was to achieve an 8-dBA reduction in noise levels

which is con:sidered a "substantial noise reduction" by
lOOT
~ lOOT considl9rs that noise abatement is cost. effective if
$24,000 per benefited residence is achieved.
~ Engineering constraints include utility locations, drainage,
and removal of existing vegetation.

Noise Abatement Optiion~;

.Engine Brakin~J ("Jake Braking")

.Nloise barriers and earth berms

4
Most teasibl19
option due to
limited right-ot-
way and utilities
was noise walls.

IN-rERSTATE R~OUTE ~55

TRAFFIC NOISE

STIJDY RE"iIE\N

-,

5
 RGURE
ES-1

5OLRC'
UN'IED
PRO.ECT LOCAT1CX-1

"'TIS
MAP
CITYOf DARIEN
DAR1EN.ILUNOIS

"""' rr TH[W!£R'".'acDor...SURY!y
"""""'I"NSDoL
"D«). ~L[ ""
1
200~ ~

NOISE RECEPTOR LOCATIONS

Distanceto Number of
Receptor Interstate 55 ReprE,sented
Centerline, ft Residences
DSS..1 180 26
740 (to I-55)
D55.-2 10
200 (from ramp)
7 Residences
055..3 200
Daycarl: Facility

6
 INTEIRST A TE 55 -TNM PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS

Existing (2003)Traffic Noise 2020Traffic Noise Levels,

Levels,dBA dBA

Boldface indicates the noise levels approadl or exceed the NAC

SUI\I,.~~RY OF NOISE BARRIER LOCATIONS

SicJleof I1leight Required to

Noise Receptors Approx.
Intelrstate Achieve 8 dBA Noise
Barrier Affected Lengt~l, ft
.'" 5 Iteduction Goal, ft
ID No.

--- 03 North 9,592 9-2\

D4 South 5,60'~ 12-18

".,
~,.;

I
 SUMMARY OF NOISEW ALL COST EVALUATION

Bf:oefited
NoiseWall Construction Costs Cost per Receptor
Receptors

Dl $889,200 III $8,010

02 $639,800 10 $63,980

03 $3,609,700 189 $19,100

D4 $1,927,100 51 $37,790

D4a $1,190,700 18 $66,150

D4b $557,700 29 $19.231

8
.
9