This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 001 R0 20210601 SJP (Waihi North Noise Assessment) ISSUE 32 of 79 6.5 WUG Portal We have considered the potential need to form bunds along the north-western shoulder of the WUG Portal cutback. While these may provide some small benefit to overall noise emissions fromWNP (e.g. the Processing Plant), we do not think it is necessary to control noise from the WUG Portal alone. Daytime noise emissions from portal use will be masked by other activities, while night-time movement of underground vehicles will be screened by the cutback edge, meaning that noise from the vehicles alone will be minimal. Figure 17: Indicative WUG Portal layout 6.6 Ngati Koi Domain and Other Recreation Areas We have also considered noise impacts on users of the recreation areas in close proximity to Gladstone, particularly Ngati Koi domain and the areas of Union Hill with public access. Generally speaking, noise levels would be 50-55 dB LAeq from typical Gladstone operations, with some small areas of the existing motocross track exposed to noise levels of 60 dB LAeq at times. By virtue of the nature of that recreational activity, users of the motocross track and to a lesser extent the mountain bike track on Winner Hill would not be particularly noise sensitive. Because of this, adverse noise impacts are unlikely to eventuate. For any proximate walking tracks, we expect that for users of these, operational noise would be clearly audible. However recreational users inherently choose to come to these areas, would only be in the area for short periods and would in our opinion not be subject to unreasonable noise levels while in the vicinity. This is because noise levels would be only just above what would occur without the project in place and in addition, these areas are already subject to mining noise to a degree. This suggests that a user of these recreational areas would currently appreciate it would be subject to mining noise. To provide some additional context, the predicted noise levels presented above would ensure a similar level of amenity protection as provided for by some District Plans that contain noise limits of 55 dB for residential activity. That is because in our opinion residential activity is inherently more noise sensitive than recreational activity. In other words, if the noise levels presented above would be acceptable in a residential context, they are entirely acceptable in this recreational context. We also consider that based on the urban location of the tracks it is unlikely to cause annoyance.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjE2NDg3