7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 1/13

Environment FHWA > HEP > Environment > Noise > Products

Highway Traffic Noise in the United States

Problem and Response

by

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

April 2000

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables

Introduction

Purpose

The Highway System

The Federal/State Relationship

Federal Participation in the Cost of Projects

THREE­PART APPROACH TO HIGHWAY NOISE ABATEMENT

Land Use Planning and Control

Source Control

Highway Project Noise Mitigation

FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT PROCEDURES

Noise Descriptors

Impact Criteria

Existing Activities

Type I/Type II Projects

Noise Analysis

Federal Participation

Noise Abatement

Coordination with Local Officials

Traffic Noise Prediction

Construction Noise

NOISE BARRIERS CONSTRUCTED OR PLANNED

Noise Barriers Constructed

Effectiveness

Public Perception

Research Efforts

This web site was copied prior to January 20, 2005. It is now a Federal record managed by the National Archives and Records Administration.

External links, forms, and search boxes may not function within this collection. Learn more. [hide]
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 2/13

SUMMARY

APPENDIX

A. 23 CFR Part 772 ­ Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction

Noise

LIST OF TABLES

1. Road Ownership in the United States

2. Classification of Roads by Functional System

3. Maximum Noise Emission Levels as Required by EPA for Newly Manufactured Trucks with

GVWR Over 4,525 Kilograms

4. Maximum Noise Emission Levels as Required by EPA for In­Use Medium and Heavy

Trucks with GVWR Over 4,525 Kilograms Engaged in Interstate Commerce

5. Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) Hourly A­Weighted Sound Level ­ decibels (dBA)

6. Noise Barrier Construction By State

7. Total Noise Barrier Area by Material Type

8. States That Have Not Constructed Noise Barriers to Date

9. Barrier Attenuation

INTRODUCTION

Noise, defined as unwanted or excessive sound, is an undesirable by­product of our modern

way of life. It can be annoying, can interfere with sleep, work, or recreation, and in extremes may

cause physical and psychological damage. While noise emanates from many different sources,

transportation noise is perhaps the most pervasive and difficult source to avoid in society today.

Highway traffic noise is a major contributor to overall transportation noise. A broad­based effort

is needed to control transportation noise. This effort must achieve the goals of personal privacy

and environmental quality while continuing the flow of needed transportation services for a

quality society.

Purpose

This report has been developed to provide information about the problem of highway traffic

noise and the United States' response to that problem. This report summarizes 1) the general

nature of the problem, 2) the response of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to the

problem, and 3) highway noise barriers constructed or planned. Before discussing these items,

however, a general discussion of the Federal­aid highway program is included to assist the

reader.

The Highway System

Most (97 percent) roads and streets in the United States are under the jurisdiction of State and

local governments. The Federal jurisdiction is mainly limited to National Parks, National Forests,

and other government­owned land. Generally in these areas, there are no permanent residents

and, therefore, no noise problem of any extent.

Ownership of the roads in the United States is shown in Table 1.
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 3/13

Table 1

Road Ownership in the United States ­ 1998

Owner

Linear

Kilometers *

Percent Of All

Roads

Federal 193 3

State 1,241 20

Local 4,855 77

* Rounded to the nearest thousand

The Federal­aid highway program is a federally assisted, State administered grant program

which provides Federal funds to State and local governments to construct and improve

highways. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) set the course

for future roles of federal, state, and local government in maintaining the country's highways,

bridges, and mass transit facilities, and in strengthening highway safety programs. The ISTEA

called for linking "...all forms of transportation in a unified, interconnected manner..economically

efficient and environmentally sound...[to] move people and goods in an energy efficient manner."

The ISTEA restructured the Federal­aid highway program and established two Federal­aid

systems ­ the National Highway System (NHS) and the Interstate System, which is a component

of the NHS. The revised Federal­aid program includes about 1.5 million kilometers of the 6.3

million kilometers of roads in the United States. As can be seen in Table 2, urban roadways

currently comprise a small portion of total roadways, yet carry a large portion of all highway

travel.

Table 2

Classification of Roads by Functional System ­ 1998

System

Linear

Kilometers *

Percent of All

Roads

Percent of Vehicle

Kilometers

Traveled

Urban 1,355 21.5 60.6

Rural 4,934 78.5 39.4

TOTAL 6,289 100.0 100.0

* Rounded to nearest thousand

The Federal/State Relationship

The FHWA is the designated Federal government agency for administering the Federal­aid

highway program. The FHWA mission is to aid States in providing safe and efficient surface

transportation for the movement of people and goods by all modes. The FHWA is responsible

for providing guidance to State highway agencies and metropolitan planning agencies (MPOs)

and for reimbursing the States and MPOs for the Federal share of projects. The States, in

cooperation with MPOs, initiate, plan, design, construct, operate, and maintain the highways on

the Federal­aid systems.
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 4/13

Federal Participation in the Cost of Projects

With a few exceptions, the FHWA does not pay for the entire cost of the projects it funds.

Federal funds are normally "matched" with State and/or local government funds to account for

the necessary dollars to complete the project. The Federal share is specified in legislation.

Interstate System projects are typically funded 90 percent Federal and 10 percent State, but

most other types of projects are funded at a slightly lower Federal share (80 percent).

THREE­PART APPROACH TO NOISE ABATEMENT

Effective control of the undesirable effects of highway traffic noise requires that land use near

highways be controlled, that vehicles themselves be quieted, and that mitigation of noise be

undertaken on individual highway projects.

The first component is traditionally an area of local responsibility. The other components are the

joint responsibility of private industry and of Federal, State, and local governments.

Land Use Planning and Control

The Federal Government has essentially no authority to regulate land use planning or the land

development process. The FHWA and other Federal agencies encourage State and local

governments to practice land use planning and control in the vicinity of highways. The Federal

Government advocates that local governments use their power to regulate land development in

such a way that noise­sensitive land uses are either prohibited from being located adjacent to a

highway, or that the developments are planned, designed, and constructed in such a way that

noise impacts are minimized.

Some State and local governments have enacted legislative statutes for land use planning and

control. As an example, the State of California has legislation on highway noise and compatible

land use development. This State legislation requires local governments to consider the adverse

environmental effects of noise in their land development process. In addition, the law gives local

governments broad powers to pass ordinances relating to the use of land, including among

other things, the location, size, and use of buildings and open space.

Although other States and local governments have similar laws, the entire issue of land use is

extremely complicated with a vast array of competing considerations entering into any actual

land use control decisions. For this reason, it is nearly impossible to measure the progress of

using land use to control the effects of noise.

Source Control

The Noise Control Act of 1972 gives the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the

authority to establish noise regulations to control major sources of noise, including transportation

vehicles and construction equipment. In addition, this legislation requires EPA to issue noise

emission standards for motor vehicles used in Interstate commerce (vehicles used to transport

commodities across State boundaries) and requires the Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Administration (FMCSA) to enforce these noise emission standards.

The EPA has established regulations which set emission level standards for newly

manufactured medium and heavy trucks that have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of

more than 4,525 kilograms and are capable of operating on a highway or street. Table 3 shows

the maximum noise emission levels allowed by the EPA noise regulations for these vehicles.
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 5/13

Table 3

Maximum Noise Emission Levels as Required by EPA for Newly Manufactured

Trucks with GVWR Over 4,525 Kilograms

Effective Date

Maximum Noise Level 15 Meters from

Centerline of Travel*

January 1, 1988 80 dBA

* Using the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. (SAE), test procedure for acceleration under

56 kph

For existing (in­use) medium and heavy trucks with a GVWR of more than 4,525 kilograms, the

Federal government has authority to regulate the noise emission levels only for those that are

engaged in interstate commerce. Regulation of all other in­use vehicles must be done by State

or local governments. The EPA emission level standards for in­use medium and heavy trucks

engaged in interstate commerce are shown in Table 4 and are enforced by the FMCSA.

Table 4

Maximum Noise Emission Levels as Required by EPA for In­Use Medium and Heavy Trucks with GVWR

Over 4,525 Kilograms Engaged in Interstate Commerce

Effective Date Speed

Maximum Noise Level 15 Meters

from Centerline of Travel

January 8, 1986 Less than 56 kph 83 dBA

January 8, 1986 Greater than 56 kph 87 dBA

January 8, 1986 Stationary 85 dBA

Highway Project Noise Mitigation

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 provides broad authority and

responsibility for evaluating and mitigating adverse environmental effects including highway

traffic noise. The NEPA directs the Federal government to use all practical means and measures

to promote the general welfare and foster a healthy environment.

A more important Federal legislation which specifically involves abatement of highway traffic

noise is the Federal­Aid Highway Act of 1970. This law mandates FHWA to develop noise

standards for mitigating highway traffic noise.

The law requires promulgation of traffic noise­level criteria for various land use activities. The

law further provides that FHWA not approve the plans and specifications for a federally aided

highway project unless the project includes adequate noise abatement measures to comply with

the standards. The FHWA has developed and implemented regulations for the mitigation of

highway traffic noise in federally­aided highway projects.

The FHWA regulations for mitigation of highway traffic noise in the planning and design of

federally aided highways are contained in Title 23 of the United States Code of Federal

Regulations Part 772 (attached). The regulations require the following during the planning and

design of a highway project: 1) identification of traffic noise impacts; examination of potential
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 6/13

mitigation measures; 2) the incorporation of reasonable and feasible noise mitigation measures

into the highway project; and 3) coordination with local officials to provide helpful information on

compatible land use planning and control. The regulations contain noise abatement criteria

which represent the upper limit of acceptable highway traffic noise for different types of land

uses and human activities. The regulations do not require that the abatement criteria be met in

every instance. Rather, they require that every reasonable and feasible effort be made to

provide noise mitigation when the criteria are approached or exceeded. Compliance with the

noise regulations is a prerequisite for the granting of Federal­aid highway funds for construction

or reconstruction of a highway.

FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT PROCEDURES

The FHWA noise abatement procedures are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (23

CFR 772). The procedures are described in the following sections.

Noise Descriptors

Noise descriptors are used to describe the time­varying nature of noise. The L10 and Leq noise

descriptors are used in the abatement procedures. The former is the noise level exceeded 10%

of the time in the noisiest hour of the day. The latter is the constant, average sound level, which

over a period of time contains the same amount of sound energy as the varying levels of the

traffic noise. The L10 is a statistical descriptor that is easy for most people to determine and

understand. While the Leq descriptor is harder for inexperienced people to understand, it has

the advantages over L10 of being more reliable for low­volume roadways and of permitting noise

levels from different sources to be added directly to one another for inclusion in noise analyses.

Leq for typical traffic conditions is usually about 3 dBA less than L10 for the same conditions.

Impact Criteria

A traffic noise impact occurs when either of the following conditions exist:

1. The projected traffic noise levels approach or exceed the noise abatement criteria (NAC)

shown in Table 5, or

2. The projected traffic noise levels substantially exceed the existing noise levels in an area.

Table 5

Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) Hourly A­Weighted Sound Level ­ decibels (dBA)*

Activity

Category

Leq(h) L10(h) Description of Activity Category

A

57

(Exterior)

60

(Exterior)

Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary

significance and serve an important public need and where

the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is

to continue to serve its intended purpose.

B

67

(Exterior)

70

(Exterior)

Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports

areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches,

libraries, and hospitals.

C

72

(Exterior)

75

(Exterior)

Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in

Categories A or B above.
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 7/13

D ­­ ­­ Undeveloped lands.

E

52

(Interior)

55

(Interior)

Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools,

churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums.

* Either L10(h) or Leq(h) (but not both) may be used on a project.

There is no mandated definition for what constitutes a substantial increase over existing noise

levels in an area. Most State highway agencies use either a 10 dBA increase or a 15 dBA

increase in noise levels to define a "substantial increase" in existing noise levels. Several State

highway agencies use a sliding scale to define substantial increase. The sliding scale combines

the increase in noise levels with the absolute values of the noise levels, allowing for a greater

increase at lower absolute levels before a substantial increase occurs.

Existing Activities

The location of existing activities in the vicinity of various study alternatives for a highway project

are identified by individual land uses, or by broad categories of land use for which a single NAC

level may apply. In some cases, lands which are undeveloped at the time of the project may be

known to be under consideration for development in the future. If this is the case and definite

commitments have been made to develop the land, then, these lands are treated as developed

and the highway noise impacts assessed accordingly. Primary consideration for highway traffic

noise analysis is normally given to exterior areas where frequent human use occurs.

Type I/ Type II Projects

The FHWA regulation makes a distinction between projects for which noise abatement is

considered as a feature in a new or expanded highway and those for which noise abatement is

considered as a retrofit feature on an existing highway. The former are defined as Type I

projects, the latter as Type II. For Type I projects, the consideration of noise abatement as part

of the highway construction project is mandatory if Federal­aid funds are to be used and if a

traffic noise impact is expected to occur. Type II projects are, however, completely voluntary on

the part of the individual States, and such projects compete for funds with all the other

construction needs of the States. It should be noted that the National Highway System

Designation Act of 1995 (NHS) restricted Federal participation in Type II noise barriers to those

projects that were approved before November 28, 1995 or are proposed along lands where land

development or substantial construction predated the existence of any highway.

Noise Analysis

Analysis of the traffic noise impacts expected from construction of a highway involves a number

of technical steps. The traffic noise analysis includes the following for each alternative under

detailed study:

1. identification of existing activities, developed lands, and undeveloped lands for which

development is planned, designed and programmed, which may be affected by traffic

noise from the highway;

2. determination of existing noise levels;

3. prediction of traffic noise levels;
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 8/13

4. determination of traffic noise impacts; and

5. examination and evaluation of alternative noise abatement measures for reducing or

eliminating the traffic noise impacts.

If potential traffic noise impacts are identified, noise abatement is considered and implemented,

if it is found to be both reasonable and feasible. The views of the impacted residents are a major

consideration in reaching a decision on the reasonableness of abatement measures to be

provided. When noise abatement measures are being considered, every reasonable effort is

made to obtain substantial noise reductions. Substantial noise reductions have been defined by

State highway agencies to typically range from 5 to 10 dBA.

Federal Participation

Federal funds may be used for noise abatement measures where:

1. a traffic noise impact has been identified,

2. the noise abatement measures will reduce the traffic noise impact, and

3. the overall noise abatement benefits are determined to outweigh the overall adverse

social, economic, and environmental effects and the costs of the noise abatement

measures.

The Federal share of the abatement costs is at the same participating ratio as for the system on

which the project is located.

Noise Abatement

If traffic noise impacts are identified, various noise abatement measures are considered to

mitigate the adverse impacts. The construction of a noise barrier is the mitigation measure most

often associated with the concept of noise abatement. For this reason a special section on noise

barriers, which begins on page 12, has been included in this report to discuss this subject in

more detail.

Other possible noise abatement measures include traffic management measures, creating

buffer zones, planting vegetation, installing noise insulation in buildings, and relocating the

highway.

Traffic management measures can sometimes reduce noise problems. For example, if

acceptable alternative truck routes are available, trucks can be prohibited from certain streets

and roads, or they can be permitted to use certain streets and roads only during daylight hours.

Traffic lights can be changed to smooth out the flow of traffic and to eliminate the need for

frequent stops and starts. Speed limits can be reduced; however, about a 32 kilometer­per­hour

reduction in speed is necessary for a readily noticeable (5 dBA) decrease in noise levels.

Buffer zones are undeveloped, open spaces which border a highway. Buffer zones are created

when a highway agency purchases land, or development rights, in addition to the normal rightof­way, so that future dwellings cannot be constructed close to the highway. This prevents the

possibility of constructing dwellings which would otherwise experience an excessive noise level

from nearby highway traffic. An additional benefit of buffer zones is improvement of the roadside

appearance. However, because of the tremendous amount of land which must be purchased
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 9/13

and because in many cases dwellings already border existing roads, creating buffer zones is

often not possible. While Federal­aid highway funds may be used on a highway project to create

buffer zones, this measure has not been used very often.

Vegetation, which is so high, wide, and dense that it cannot be seen over or through, can

decrease highway traffic noise. However, it requires a 61­meter width of such vegetation to

reduce noise by 10 decibels, which cuts in half the loudness of traffic noise. It is not feasible to

plant enough vegetation along a road to achieve such reductions. If vegetation already exists, it

can be saved to maintain a psychological relief, if not an actual lessening of traffic noise levels.

If vegetation does not exist, it can be planted for psychological relief, not to reduce traffic noise

levels.

Insulating buildings can greatly reduce highway traffic noise, especially when windows are

sealed and cracks and other openings are filled. Sometimes noise­absorbing material can be

placed in the walls of new buildings during construction. However, insulation can be costly,

because air conditioning is usually necessary once the windows are sealed. Federal­aid

highway funds may be used for noise insulation of public­use or non­profit institutional

structures. Such funds may also be used for noise insulation of residences and other private­use

buildings where noise impacts are severe and no other type of abatement is possible. Very few

private­use buildings have been noise insulated with Federal­aid highway funds. The majority of

Federal­aid highway funds used for noise insulation has been spent to noise insulate schools. In

many parts of the country, highway agencies do not have the authority to insulate buildings;

thus, in those States, noise insulation cannot be included as part of a highway project.

A noise attenuation measure which should always be considered is the possibility of altering the

highway location to avoid those land use areas which have been determined to have a potential

traffic noise impact. Since sound intensity decays with distance from the source, increased

distance between the noise source and receiver will reduce the noise impact. It may also be

possible to obtain attenuation by depressing the roadway slightly to produce a break in the line

of sight from the source to the receiver. Potential noise reduction should be considered with the

many other factors which influence the selection of roadway alignment.

Coordination With Local Officials

The FHWA noise regulation requires coordination with local officials whose jurisdictions are

affected. The primary purpose of this coordination is to promote compatibility between land

development and highways.

Highway agencies furnish the following information to appropriate local officials:

1. Estimated future traffic noise levels at various distances from the highway improvement.

2. Locations where local communities should protect future land development from becoming

incompatible with anticipated highway traffic noise levels.

Traffic Noise Prediction

The FHWA has developed a model to accurately predict future highway traffic noise levels. State

highway agencies either use the FHWA model for highway traffic noise analysis or a model

based upon the same methodology as that contained in the FHWA model.

The FHWA has also developed national averages of vehicle emission levels to be used in the
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 10/13

FHWA prediction model. State highway agencies either use the national average levels or

measure their own levels based upon FHWA measurement procedures.

Construction Noise

Highway construction noise is often viewed by the public as being short term and a necessary

price for growth and improvement. Highway construction noise should generally be addressed in

a qualitative, rather than quantitative, manner commensurate with the scope of the highway

project. Construction noise levels may be predicted, if warranted. If potential construction noise

impacts are identified, a common sense approach should be utilized to incorporate appropriate

abatement measures into the highway project.

NOISE BARRIERS CONSTRUCTED OR PLANNED

Noise barriers are solid obstructions built between the highway and the homes along the

highway. Effective noise barriers can reduce noise levels by ten to fifteen decibels, cutting the

loudness of traffic noise in half. Barriers can be formed from earth mounds along the road

(usually called earth berms) or from high, vertical walls. Earth berms have a very natural

appearance and are usually attractive. However, an earth berm can require quite a lot of land, if

it is very high. Walls take less space. They are usually limited to eight meters in height because

of structural and aesthetic reasons. Noise walls can be built out of wood, stucco, concrete,

masonry, metal, and other materials. Noise barriers are designed and constructed to be visually

pleasing and blend with their surroundings.

Noise Barriers Constructed

The Federal­aid highway program has always been based on a strong State­Federal

partnership. At the core of that partnership is a philosophy of trust and flexibility, and a belief that

the States are in the best position to make investment decisions that are based on the needs

and priorities of their citizens. The FHWA noise regulations give each State department of

transportation (DOT) flexibility in determining the reasonableness and feasibility of noise

abatement and, thus, in balancing the benefits of noise abatement against the overall adverse

social, economic, and environmental effects and costs of the noise abatement measures. The

State DOT must base its determination on the interest of the overall public good, keeping in

mind all the elements of the highway program (need, funding, environmental impacts, public

involvement, etc.). Congress affirmed and extended the philosophy of partnership, trust, and

flexibility in the enactment of ISTEA.

The flexibility in noise abatement decisionmaking is reflected by data indicating that some States

have built many noise barriers and some have built none. Through the end of 1998, forty­four

State DOTs and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico have constructed over 2,610 linear

kilometers of barriers at a cost of over $1.4 billion ($1.9 billion in 1998 dollars). Six States and

the District of Columbia have not constructed noise barriers to date. Table 6 lists the ten States

that have constructed the most noise barriers, in terms of area, length, and cost. The cost data

in Table 6 give a general indication of trends. However, the data should not be used for exact

comparisons, since precise, uniform individual barrier costs are very difficult to obtain. Table 7

shows total noise barrier areas by material type. Table 8 lists the six States that have not

constructed noise barriers to date.

Table 6

Noise Barrier Construction By State Through 1998
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 11/13

Square Meters

(Thousands)

Linear Kilometers Actual Cost (Millions) 1998 Dollars (Millions)

California 2,849 California 777.2 California $399.6 California $487.2

New Jersey 806 Virginia 153.3 New Jersey 182.3 New Jersey 210.4

Virginia 790 New Jersey 142.1 Maryland 138.0 Maryland 153.2

Ohio 613 Ohio 138.2 Virginia 120.8 Virginia 143.0

Maryland 581 New York 110.7 New York 104.1 New York 116.5

New York 496 Colorado 104.4 Pennsylvania 74.8 Pennsylvania 88.3

Minnesota 491 Minnesota 101.8 Ohio 63.1 Illinois 71.0

Illinois 346 Maryland 99.6 Illinois 61.2 Ohio 68.1

Pennsylvania 333 Illinois 97.8 Florida 55.1 Minnesota 62.7

Colorado 329 Pennsylvania 83.5 Michigan 48.1 Florida 62.3

10 State

Total

7,634 1,808.6

10 State

Total

$1,24.1 $1,462.7

Table 7

Total Noise Barrier Area by Material Type Through 1998

Single Material Barriers Combination Barriers

Material

Square

Meters

(Thousands)

Material

Square

Meters

(Thousands)

Concrete/Precast 4292 Berm/Wood 279

Block 2731 Concrete/Block 166

Wood/Post & Plank 508 Wood/Concrete 155

Concrete/Unspecified 456 Berm/Concrete 138

Berm Only 344 Berm/Metal 134

Wood/Glue Laminated 294 Metal/Concrete 85

Metal/Unspecified 240 Berm/Block 72

Wood/Unspecified 239 Concrete/Brick 54

Absorptive 154 Wood/Metal 43

Brick 94 Berm/Wood/Concrete 27

Other 139 Wood/Block 26

Berm/Wood/Metal 16

Other 116

Total 9,491 Total 1,311
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 12/13

Table 8

States That Have Not Constructed Noise Barriers to Date

Alabama Mississippi Montana

North Dakota South Dakota Rhode Island

Effectiveness

Noise barriers can be quite effective in reducing noise for receptors within approximately 61

meters of a highway. Table 9 summarizes barrier attenuation.

Table 9

Barrier Attenuation

Reduction in Sound

Level

Reduction in

Acoustic Energy

Degree of Difficulty

to Obtain Reduction

5 dBA 70% Simple

10 dBA 90% Attainable

15 dBA 97% Very Difficult

20 dBA 99% Nearly Impossible

Barriers do have limitations. For a noise barrier to work, it must be high enough and long

enough to block the view of a road. Noise barriers do very little good for homes on a hillside

overlooking a road or for buildings which rise above the barrier. Openings in noise walls for

driveway connections or intersecting streets greatly reduce the effectiveness of barriers. In some

areas, homes are scattered too far apart to permit noise barriers to be built at a reasonable cost.

Public Perception

Overall, public reaction to highway noise barriers appears to be positive. There is, however, a

wide diversity of specific reactions to barriers. Residents adjacent to barriers have stated that

conversations in households are easier, sleeping conditions are better, a more relaxing

environment is created, windows are opened more often, and yards are used more in the

summer. Perceived non­noise benefits include increased privacy, cleaner air, improved view and

sense of ruralness, and healthier lawns and shrubs. Negative reactions have included a

restriction of view, a feeling of confinement, a loss of air circulation, a loss of sunlight and

lighting, and poor maintenance of the barrier. Most residents near a barrier seem to feel that

barriers effectively reduce traffic noise and that the benefits of barriers outweigh the

disadvantages of the barriers.

Research Efforts

Over the last two decades, much work has been done within the highway program to develop

the basic tools necessary to analyze the impacts of highway traffic noise. Efforts have focused
7/16/2015 Noise ­ Environment ­ FHWA

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041108035115/http:/www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/probresp.htm 13/13

on the establishment of criteria for considering highway traffic noise, the measurement and

prediction of noise levels, and the development and evaluation of feasible measures to abate

highway traffic noise. Today, research efforts are continuing to assure that analysis tools reflect

the current state­of­the­art in highway traffic noise, while meeting the program needs of State

highway agencies.

Highway traffic noise research has been guided and continues to be guided by representatives

of State DOTs, other State government agencies, local government agencies, Federal agencies,

and the academic and private sectors. An important part of this cooperative effort is the work of

the Transportation Research Board Committee on Transportation­Related Noise and Vibration,

which has been instrumental in identifying and prioritizing research needs. Another important

part of this effort is the research work that individual States conduct within their own highway

programs.

Future research efforts will strive to produce more cost effective solutions and efficient allocation

of resources to deal with the problems of highway traffic noise. Emphasis is anticipated in the

areas of traffic noise prediction and abatement analysis.

SUMMARY

The United States has undertaken a program which utilizes a three­part approach to the

abatement of highway traffic noise. Noise­compatible development through effective land use

planning and control is traditionally an area of local responsibility. Source control or control of

noise emissions from the vehicles themselves is a joint responsibility of private industry and of

Federal, State, and local governments. The FHWA has established noise standards for different

types of land use activities adjacent to highways. These standards require that for certain types

of federally­aided highway projects, States must conduct noise analyses to identify potential

highway traffic noise impacts. If impacts are identified, noise abatement measures must be

considered and implemented, if determined to be both reasonable and feasible. Among the

various types of possible abatement measures, the construction of noise barriers is most

commonly used.

FHWA Home | HEP Home | Noise Home | Feedback

United States Department of Transportation ­ Federal Highway Administration