MEETING TYPE:         Noise Citizen Working Group MEETING DATE:         December 16, 2003 MEETING LOCATION: Washington Park Community Center (809 S. Washington St.)

ATTENDEES
Tony Gross	CDOT	Charlie Busch	WWPNA
Dale Tischmak	FHU	Jim Jones	WWPNA
Dean Bradley	FHU	Tracy Cochran	Athmar Park
Thor Gjelsteen	FHU	Rod Stude
Bob Mero	CDOT	Dick Sorenson
Bob Dorroh	CCD	Merce Lea	WWPNA
Tim Aschenbrener	CDOT	Charlotte Wenzenburg	WWPNA
Rick Willard	CDOT	Kira Lapin	BHNA
Shaun Cutting	CDOT	Mike Cerbo	State Rep.

PREPARER: Dale Tischmak, FHU
SUBJECT: Noise Impacts in the Valley Highway EIS Corridor

To present and discuss noise impacts and possible mitigation measures for the three build alternatives.

Meeting Summary

Tony Gross from CDOT started the meeting with introductions and a short project history, overview, and schedule. The concept of a “test zone” for noise mitigation in the corridor was discussed as was the Broadway viaduct noise variance.

Tim Aschenbrener from CDOT described pavement design considerations and options.

Bob Dorroh from CCD described some noise measurement data along I-25 that had been collected partially at the request of WWPNA.

Dale Tischmak of FHU presented noise measurement and traffic noise modeling data that had been generated as part of the EIS. Preliminary impacted areas were identified and the process for evaluation of mitigation actions was described. Specific noise abatement actions are in the process of being evaluated, so no specific mitigation suggestions were presented.

Comments/Follow-up Items

Throughout the meeting, attendees raised their questions, concerns, personal observations, goals and suggestions. The key points and action items that were taken from the meeting were:

1. Provide a copy of the viaduct noise variance to WWPNA. Response or Follow-up Identified: FHU e-mailed a copy to WWPNA on December 22, 2003
2. Review pavement types used in other countries to reduce noise Response or Follow-up: CDOT will continue to evaluate available pavement types and will review any additional information the citizens provide.
3. Investigate status of research into additive effects of multiple simultaneous noise mitigation actions (pavement + barrier + absorption, etc.) Response or Follow-up: CDOT will continue to evaluate available research, and will review any additional information the citizens provide.
4. Sound-absorbing materials are of interest to the group Response or Follow-up: See Item 9, below.
5. Efforts should be made to reduce noise at the source Response or Follow-up: See Item 9, below.
6. Provide copies of the noise level contour maps to those interested Response or Follow-up: Copies will be provided to those expressing an interest.
7. Evaluate the noise impact of moving the railroad (this is part of the EIS) Response or Follow-up: The noise impact of moving the railroad will be evaluated as part of the EIS.
8. Coordination of public participation in viaduct demolition after a contractor has been selected Response or Follow-up: The City and County of Denver noise variance for the project requires public outreach and involvement prior to initiation of bridge demolition. This will occur after contractor selection in January 2004.
9. Schedule and conduct a meeting designed to develop a proposal for specific actions that could be taken regarding “nuisance noise” in support of the “test zone” concept that has been suggested by WWPNA for the corridor (January 2004) Response or Follow-up: A meeting will be scheduled and held for this purpose in January 2004 (date pending). Noise workshop participants will be invited to attend.