Issuu

aci Acoustical Consultants Inc. 5031 – 210 Street Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6M 0A8 Phone: (780) 499-1591 www.aciacoustical.com

Environmental Noise & Vibration Impact Assessment For The

Sturgeon Valley Residential Development in

Sturgeon County, AB

Prepared for:

Cantiro c/o Select Engineering Consultants Inc.

07/17/2026

Prepared by: P. Froment, B.Sc., B.Ed., P.L.(Eng.) aci Acoustical Consultants Inc. Edmonton, Alberta

aci Project #: 25-092 July 17, 2026

07/17/2026

Disclaimer This report has been prepared by aci Acoustical Consultants Inc. (aci) in response to a specific request for service from, and for the exclusive use of, the Client to whom the report is addressed. The report has been prepared in a manner consistent with a level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering and science professions currently practising under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the services are provided, subject to the time limits and physical constraints applicable to this report. The findings contained in this report are based, in part, upon information provided by others. aci does not vouch for the accuracy of information provided by others or how that may impact the accuracy of the results presented in the report. The information contained in this report is not intended for use of, nor is it intended to be relied upon, by any person, firm, or corporation other than the Client to whom it is addressed, with the exception of the applicable regulatory authority to whom this document may be submitted. Any, calculation methods and noise models prepared by aci are considered proprietary professional work product and shall remain the copyright property of aci who authorizes only the Client to use and make copies of the report.

The report is of a summary nature and is not intended to stand alone without reference to the instructions given to aci by the Client, communications between aci and the Client, and to any other reports prepared by aci for the Client relative to the specific project described in the report. In order to properly understand the suggestions, recommendations, and opinions expressed in this report, reference must be made to the whole of the report. aci cannot be responsible for use of portions of the report without reference to the entire report. aci accepts no liability or responsibility for any damages that may be suffered or incurred by any third party as a result of the use of, reliance on, or any decision made based on this report.

Unless otherwise stated, the suggestions, recommendations, and opinions given in this report are intended only for guidance of the Client in the design of the specific project. The extent and detail of investigations, necessary to determine all of the relevant conditions which may affect potential project construction costs would normally be greater than has been carried out for design purposes. Any Contractors bidding on, or undertaking work discussed in this report, should rely on their own investigations, as well as their own interpretations of the factual data presented in the report, including but not limited to proposed construction techniques, materials selected, schedule, safety and equipment capabilities.

Executive Summary

aci Acoustical Consultants Inc., of Edmonton AB, was retained by Cantiro c/o Select Engineering Consultants Inc (SEC) to conduct an environmental noise impact assessment (NIA) for the proposed Sturgeon Valley residential development (the Development) in Sturgeon County, AB. The purpose of the work was to conduct baseline noise and vibration monitoring within the study area adjacent to the Canadian National Railway (CN) rail line. The results of the monitoring were used to determine the noise and vibration impacts under future conditions on the Development. This was then used to determine if noise attenuation measures would be required to meet the requirements of the Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations (2013) prepared for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and the Railway Association of Canada (RAC). Site work was conducted for aci on June 24 & 25, 2026, by P. Froment, B.Sc., B.Ed., P.L.(Eng.). The baseline noise monitoring resulted in an Leq24 value of 64.4 dBA respectively, at the noise monitoring location. During the 24-hour noise monitoring period, there were 2 separate train passages during the monitoring period. The 1/3-octave band frequency results indicated elevated noise levels in the lower frequency bands (near 63 – 80 Hz) which can be associated with the locomotive engine noise. The results of the noise modeling for the Current Case scenario indicated excellent correlation with the noise monitoring data, particularly over the course of the entire 24-hour period. The results of the Future Case noise modeling for the FCM/RAC Criteria for outdoor amenity spaces the indicated noise levels ranging from 45.6 – 47.3 dBA Leq24. Since all residential outdoor amenity spaces were well below the requirements the FCM/RAC Criteria of 55 dBA LeqDay, additional noise mitigation will not be required. The results of the Future Case Modeling for the FCM/RAC Criteria for interior noise indicated day-time noise levels ranging from 45.6 to 56.3 dBA LeqDay and night-time noise levels that range from 46.8 to 57.5 dBA LeqNight. Since the maximum noise levels during the night-time exceed the criteria of 50 dBA Leq during the night-time a review of the proposed exterior building wall and window construction will be warranted. To achieve an interior noise level of 35 dBA Leq during the night-time, the exterior wall structure needs to reduce the noise by 22.5 dBA. The results of the baseline vibration monitoring indicated typical ambient vibration levels of approximately 0.1 – 0.2 mm/s RMS with spikes ranging as high as 0.35 mm/s associated with the various train passages. The measured value of 0.35 mm/s RMS when extended out to the nearest residential property line (approximately +35 m), will result in a vibration level of approximately 0.03 mm/s which is well below the criteria of 0.14 mm/s. Therefore, no additional vibration mitigation is required.

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Location Description ....................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Measurement Methods .................................................................................................................... 1 3.1. Baseline Noise Monitoring.......................................................................................................... 1 3.2. Baseline Vibration Monitoring.................................................................................................... 2 4.0 Noise Modeling Methods ................................................................................................................ 2 4.1. Computer Noise Modeling Software ........................................................................................... 2 4.2. Noise Modeling Scenarios........................................................................................................... 3 4.3. Noise Modeling Parameters ........................................................................................................ 4 4.4. Modeling Confidence .................................................................................................................. 4 5.0 Permissible Sound Levels ............................................................................................................... 5 5.1. Noise Criteria .............................................................................................................................. 5 5.1.1. FCM/RAC Criteria .............................................................................................................. 5 5.1.2. Summary of Noise Criteria.................................................................................................. 6 5.2. Vibration Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 7 6.0 Results and Discussion of Noise ..................................................................................................... 7 6.1. Baseline Noise Monitoring.......................................................................................................... 7 6.2. Current Case Noise Modeling Results ........................................................................................ 8 6.3. Future Case Noise Modeling ....................................................................................................... 8 6.3.1. Future Case Noise Modeling (Outdoor Amenity Space) .................................................... 8 6.3.2. Future Case Noise Modeling (Façade Noise Levels for Interior Noise Levels) ................. 9 7.0 Results and Discussion of Vibration ............................................................................................. 11 7.1. Baseline Vibration Monitoring.................................................................................................. 11 7.2. Vibration Impact Assessment .................................................................................................... 11 8.0 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 12 9.0 References ..................................................................................................................................... 13 Appendix I MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT USED ........................................................................... 25 Appendix II THE ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE (GENERAL) ............................ 29 Appendix III SOUND LEVELS OF FAMILIAR NOISE SOURCES .................................................. 41 Appendix IV NOISE MODELING PARAMETERS ............................................................................ 43 Appendix V WEATHER DATA............................................................................................................ 44 Appendix VI FCM/RAC GUIDELINES WINDOW & DOOR RECOMMENDATIONS ................... 46 Appendix VII FCM/RAC GUIDELINES ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES ........................................ 48

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

List of Tables Table 1. Baseline Noise Monitoring Results .............................................................................................. 7 Table 2. Current Case Noise Modeling Results ......................................................................................... 8 Table 3. Future Case Noise Modeling Results (Outdoor Amenity Space) ................................................ 9 Table 4. Future Case Modeling for FCM/RAC Criteria .......................................................................... 10 List of Figures Figure 1. Study Area ................................................................................................................................ 14 Figure 2. Noise and Vibration Monitoring Equipment ............................................................................ 15 Figure 3. Baseline Noise Monitoring Broadband Sound Levels .............................................................. 16 Figure 4. A-Weighted 1/3 Octave Leq24 Sound Levels ........................................................................... 16 Figure 5. Current Case - Leq24 Noise Modeling Sound Level .................................................................. 17 Figure 6. Future Case - LeqDay Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Outdoor Criteria) .......................................... 18 Figure 7. Future Case - LeqDay Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Indoor Criteria) 1.5 m .................................. 19 Figure 8. Future Case - LeqNight Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Indoor Criteria) 1.5 m ................................ 20 Figure 9. Future Case - LeqDay Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Indoor Criteria) 4.5 m .................................. 21 Figure 10. Future Case - LeqNight Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Indoor Criteria) 4.5 m .............................. 22 Figure 11. Broadband Vibration Monitoring Results (Horizontal Parallel to Rail Line)......................... 23 Figure 12. Broadband Vibration Monitoring Results (Horizontal Perpendicular to Rail Line)............... 23 Figure 13. Broadband Vibration Monitoring Results (Vertical) .............................................................. 23 Figure 14. Broadband Vibration Levels for Rail Passage (12:15 – 12:30) .............................................. 24 Figure 15. Broadband Vibration Levels for Rail Passage (06:22 –06:39) ............................................... 24

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

1.0 Introduction

Topographically the land between 127 Street and the residential lots will be relatively flat. Currently there are no existing residences in any parts of the study area. Presently, the land is not covered with any type of significant vegetation and once the development is in place, much of the land will be comprised of roads, structures, etc. 3.0 Measurement Methods 3.1. Baseline Noise Monitoring As part of the Project, a baseline noise monitoring was conducted near the Development site, to determine the existing noise levels associated with the CN rail line. The noise monitor was located 10 m southwest of the centre of track of the rail line and approximately 18 m east of Sturgeon Road, as indicated in Figure 1 and shown in Figure 2. At this location there was direct line-of-sight to the rail line and to

As required by CN.

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Sturgeon Road. The noise monitor was started at approximately 06:55 on Wednesday June 24, 2026, and ran for approximately 30 hours until 13:15 on Thursday June 24, 2026. 3.2. Baseline Vibration Monitoring A baseline vibration monitoring was conducted near the Development site, to determine the existing vibration levels associated with the rail line. The vibration monitor was located 10 m southwest of the centre of track of the rail line and approximately 18 m east of Sturgeon Road, as indicated in Figure 1 and shown in Figure 2. At this location there was direct line-of-sight to the rail line and to Sturgeon Road. The noise monitor was started at approximately 06:55 on Wednesday June 24, 2026, and ran for approximately 30 hours until 13:15 on Thursday June 24, 2026. A local weather monitoring station was used throughout the entire noise monitoring period to obtain the wind speed, wind direction, temperature, and relative humidity. The noise and vibration monitors were installed at a location outside of the study area due to the limited access to the study area due to construction and ground conditions (heavy rains caused muddy soil). However, the location selected was representative of the trains that will pass directly by the Project. Refer to Appendix I for a detailed description of the noise, vibration and weather measurement equipment used, Appendix II for a description of the acoustical terminology, and Appendix III for a list of common noise sources. The noise measurement instrumentation was calibrated at the start of the measurements and then checked afterwards to ensure that there had been no calibration drift over the duration of the measurements. 4.0 Noise Modeling Methods 4.1. Computer Noise Modeling Software The computer noise modeling was conducted using the CADNA/A (Version 2026 MR1, build: 215.5625) software package. CADNA/A allows for the modeling of various noise sources such as road, rail, and various stationary sources. In addition, topographical features such as land contours, vegetation, and bodies of water can be included. Finally, meteorological conditions such as temperature, relative humidity, wind-speed and wind-direction can be included in the calculations. Note that all modeling methods used exceed the requirements of the FCM/RAC Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations. 2

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

The calculation method used for noise propagation follows the ISO standard 9613-2. All receiver locations were assumed as being downwind from the source(s). In particular, as stated in Section 5 of the ISO document: “Downwind propagation conditions for the method specified in this part of IS0 9613 are as specified in 5.4.3.3 of IS0 1996-2:1987, namely -

wind direction within an angle of ± 450 of the direction connecting the centre of the dominant sound source and the centre of the specified receiver region, with the wind blowing from source to receiver, and wind speed between approximately 1 m/s and 5 m/s, measured at a height of 3 m to 11 m above the ground.

The equations for calculating the average downwind sound pressure level LAT(DW) in this part of IS0 9613, including the equations for attenuation given in clause 7, are the average for meteorological conditions within these limits. The term average here means the average over a short time interval, as defined in 3.1. These equations also hold, equivalently, for average propagation under a well-developed moderate ground-based temperature inversion, such as commonly occurs on clear, calm nights”. 4.2. Noise Modeling Scenarios As part of the study, three (3) scenarios were modeled including: 1) Current Case: This included existing buildings (if applicable), elevation contours and noise sources (train passages). The noise monitoring data was used as a calibration method for the model. The noise modeling results were calculated at the location of the baseline case noise monitor. 2) Future Case for FCM/RAC Outdoor Criteria 1:. This included components of the Baseline Case Scenario with the addition of the proposed Development, future noise sources associated with the rail traffic and current alignments. 3) Future Case for FCM/RAC Criteria: This included all conditions associated with Scenario 3) with the inclusion of the train whistle. The noise modeling results were calculated at adjacent building facades at 1.5 m (Main floor) and 4.5 m (2nd Floor) above the proposed ground elevations. This was conducted for daytime (07:00 to 23:00) and night-time (23:00 to 07:00) periods. Notes:

The contributions from the adjacent roads were not included in the FCM/RAC scenarios as the noise contributions of the road are not to be added for this analysis.

A more detailed discussion on the various criteria will be discussed in Section 5.0.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA 4.3. Noise Modeling Parameters

Due to the relatively short distances from the roads to the nearest residential structures and the minimal amount of vegetation, vegetative sound absorption was not included in the model. Similarly, snow cover was not included since there can be variation in absorption/reflection caused by different snow conditions. As a result, all projected future sound level propagation calculations are considered representative of summertime conditions for all residents. Current rail data was provided by SEC and corrected for the monitoring period. As per the FCM/RAC Guidelines, the future rail line parameters were modeled assuming an escalation of 2.5% per year for 10years, based on current rail activity. The computer noise modeling results were calculated in two ways. First, sound levels were calculated at specific receptor locations (i.e. typical residential outdoor amenity spaces). This was done at a height of 1.5 m from the ground (& 4.5 m for the FCM/RAC interior noise levels criteria) and at an offset from the façade of 3 m for all locations. The projected noise levels at the receptor locations provide a more representative indication of the precise noise levels experienced by residents in their private backyard. In addition, the use of specific receptor locations allows for a better evaluation of the anticipated performance of any noise mitigation measures, if required (i.e. the reduction in noise levels). Secondly, color noise contours were calculated using a 2 m x 2 m grid over the entire study area at a height of 1.5 m (& 4.5 m for the FCM/RAC interior noise levels criteria). The color noise contours were used to determine if and where noise mitigation was required as they illustrate the projected noise levels within the entire residential private back yard spaces. They were then used once mitigation was in place to ensure that all areas within the residential private back yard spaces were below the applicable criteria. Refer to Appendix IV for a list of the noise modeling parameters. 4.4. Modeling Confidence The algorithms used for the noise modeling follow the ISO 9613 standard. The published accuracy for this standard is ±3 dBA between 100 m – 1,000 m. Accuracy levels beyond 1,000 m are not published. Experience based on similar noise models conducted over large distances shows that, as expected, as the distance increases, the associated accuracy in prediction decreases.

Experience has shown that

environmental factors such as wind, temperature inversions, topography and ground cover all have increasing effects over distances larger than approximately 1,500 m. As such, since all receptors are within approximately 1,500 m of the most dominant noise sources, the prediction confidence is considered high. 4

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

5.0 Permissible Sound Levels Environmental noise levels from various sources (industrial, roads, railways, etc.) are commonly described in terms of equivalent sound levels or Leq. This is the level of a steady sound having the same acoustic energy, over a given time period, as the fluctuating sound. In addition, this energy averaged level is A– weighted to account for the reduced sensitivity of average human hearing to low frequency sounds. These Leq in dBA, which are the most common environmental noise measure, are often given for day-time (07:00 to 23:00) LeqDay and night-time (23:00 to 07:00) LeqNight while other criteria use the entire 24-hour period as Leq24. Due to the presence of the CN rail line, the projected noise and vibration levels will be compared to the FCM/RAC Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations which includes the maximum noise and vibration levels. 5.1. Noise Criteria 5.1.1. FCM/RAC Criteria The FCM/RAC Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations (the Guidelines) is a document that: “...is intended for use by municipalities and provincial governments, municipal staff, railways, developers, and property owners when developing lands in proximity to railway operations. They are meant to assist municipal governments and railways in reviewing and determining general planning policies when developing on lands in proximity to railway facilities, as well as to establish a process for making site specific recommendations and decisions to reduce land-use incompatibilities for developments in proximity to railway operations.” It is important to note that the recommendations provided within the Guidelines are not legislatively binding. However, for lack of any other directly applicable criteria, the Guidelines will be used for the noise and vibration impact assessment. Regarding noise, the Guidelines provide for maximum noise levels and mitigation information for the outdoor amenity space adjacent to the rail line. Further, the Guidelines provide for maximum outdoor noise levels at the building façade and corresponding maximum indoor noise levels depending on the type of room (i.e. bedrooms versus living/dining rooms) during the daytime and night-time. As specified in Section AC.1.4. of the Guidelines, the maximum recommended noise levels are as follows: 5

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Outdoor amenity space = 55 dBA LeqDay 1

Living/Dining Rooms: Outdoor façade = 55 dBA LeqDay, Indoor = 40 dBA LeqDay.

Bedrooms: Outdoor façade = 50 dBA LeqNight, Indoor = 35 dBA LeqNight.

The assessed locations for the outdoor amenity space are to be at a height of 1.5 m and at a distance of 3 m from the Structure 2. The assessed locations for the building façades will be conducted at 1.5 m (first storey) and 4.5 m (second storey) above the proposed future grades. If the outdoor façade noise levels are determined to be below 50 dBA LeqNight and the outdoor amenity space noise levels are determined to be below 55 dBA LeqDay, then no further assessment is required since a typical building construction that adheres to the National Building Code will easily provide the minimum 15 dBA attenuation required to achieve the maximum recommended indoor noise levels. If, however, the outdoor façade noise levels are modeled to exceed 50 dBA LeqNight and 55 dBA LeqDay, then recommendations for the exterior building construction (including walls, windows, and ventilation penetrations) may be provided to allow for interior noise levels below 35 dBA LeqNight and 40 dBA LeqDay. The Guidelines recommend that the noise modeling use a 10-year future escalation of 2.5% per year for the rail line as well as a 10-year vehicle traffic volume projection. Further, as stated in Section AC.1.3.10 “when no relief from whistling has been authorized, whistles should be included in the analysis to determine the mitigation measures to achieve the indoor sound level limits. Whistles are not required to be included in the determination of sound barrier requirements.” During the baseline noise monitoring and field site visits, whistles were observed directly in the area where the Development houses will be located. Hence, whistles have been included in the noise assessment for the interior noise investigation. 5.1.2. Summary of Noise Criteria In summary, as per the FCM/RAC Guidelines and CN Policies, the maximum allowable noise levels for the Development will be: -

Maximum outdoor amenity space noise level of 55 dBA LeqDay. Or, if the outdoor amenity space noise levels are modelled to exceed 55 dBA LeqDay, then building envelope construction recommendations are given to provide for an Indoor noise level of 40 dBA LeqDay.

Maximum outdoor façade noise level of 50 dBA LeqNight. Or, if the outdoor façade noise levels are modelled to exceed 50 dBA LeqNight, then building envelope construction recommendations are given to provide for an Indoor noise level of 35 dBA LeqNight.

1 2

As defined in the Guidelines, daytime is from 07:00 – 23:00 (16-hours) and night-time is from 23:00 – 07:00 (8-hours) Note that the exact location of the structures is not yet known. Approximate structure locations were used.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA 5.2. Vibration Criteria With regards to vibration, as stated in Section AC.2.5.10.:

“Ground-borne vibration transmission is to be estimated through site testing and evaluation to determine if dwellings within 75 meters of the railway right-of-way will be impacted by vibration conditions in excess of 0.14 mm/s RMS between 4 Hz and 200 Hz. The monitoring system should be capable of measuring frequencies between 4 Hz and 200 Hz ±3dB, with an RMS averaging time constant of 1 second. If in excess, appropriate isolation measures are recommended to be undertaken to ensure living areas do not exceed 0.14 mm/s RMS on or above the first floor of the dwelling.” As per the FCM/RAC Guidelines, the maximum recommended vibration level at the location of the Residential structures is 0.14 mm/s RMS.

6.0 Results and Discussion of Noise 6.1. Baseline Noise Monitoring The results of the baseline noise monitoring are provided in Table 1 and in Figure 3 & Figure 4 (broadband A-weighted Leq sound levels and 1/3 octave band Leq sound levels provided).

Table 1. Baseline Noise Monitoring Results Monitor 12:00 June 24 - 12:00 June 25, 2026

Leq24 (dBA)

LeqDay (dBA) (07:00 - 23:00)

LeqNight (dBA) (23:00 - 07:00)

68.7

60.9

72.4

During the noise monitoring period, there was one (1) train passage that occurred during the daytime and one (1) that occurred during the night-time period, respectively, as illustrated in Figure 3 and confirmed through review of the simultaneous recorded audio. The 1/3-octave band frequency results, as shown in Figure 4, indicate elevated noise levels in the lower frequency bands (near 63 – 80 Hz) which are associated with the locomotive engine noise.

Subjectively, in the audio recording, the trains were the dominant noise source when present. When there was no rail related noise, the dominant noise source was vehicle traffic on Sturgeon Road. There were no significant stationary noise sources contributing to the local noise climate of the area.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

During the entire 24-hour noise monitoring period, the average wind speed was mild (entirely below 10 km/hr) and varied from several directions. All weather data are presented in Appendix V. 6.2. Current Case Noise Modeling Results The results of the Current Case noise modeling are provided in Table 2 and are illustrated in Figure 5. The results indicate excellent corroboration between the noise model and the noise monitoring results for the Leq24 with slightly conservative values.

Table 2. Current Case Noise Modeling Results Leq24 (dBA) Monitoring Results

64.4

Modeling Results

64.6

Difference

0.2

6.3. Future Case Noise Modeling The future case noise modeling will be discussed in various sections which will address the various FCM/RAC Guidelines. As a result, there will be variances in the receptor locations and in the acoustical descriptors (Leq24, LeqDay, LeqNight). 6.3.1. Future Case Noise Modeling (Outdoor Amenity Space) The results and discussion in this section are specific to the FCM/RAC criteria for outdoor amenity space criteria of 55 dBA LeqDay. As per the criteria, the assessed locations for the outdoor amenity spaces were set a height of 1.5 m and at 3.0 m (horizontally) away from the projected structures, train whistles were not included in this scenario, nor were the contributions from adjacent roadways. Therefore, the projected noise levels are reflective of the contributions from the rail line.

The results of the Future Case noise modeling within the outdoor amenity spaces are shown in Table 3 and illustrated in Figure 6. The results of the Future Case modeling indicate noise levels ranging from 45.6 – 47.3 dBA Leq24. The projected noise levels are relatively consistent throughout the study area as illustrated in Figure 6 and in Table 3. Since all residential outdoor amenity spaces are below 55 dBA LeqDay, noise mitigation will not be required.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

Table 3. Future Case Noise Modeling Results (Outdoor Amenity Space) Receptor

Future LeqDay (dBA)

Receptor

Future LeqDay (dBA)

R-01

47.0

R-11

46.6

R-02

46.1

R-12

46.6

R-03

47.3

R-13

46.6

R-04

47.3

R-14

46.6

R-05

47.2

R-15

46.3

R-06

47.1

R-16

45.7

R-07

46.8

R-17

45.6

R-08

46.7

R-18

45.7

R-09

46.7

R-19

45.6

R-10

46.7

Minimum

45.6

Maximum

47.3

6.3.2. Future Case Noise Modeling (Façade Noise Levels for Interior Noise Levels) The results of the Future Case Modeling for the FCM/RAC Criteria noise modeling are provided in Table 4. It should be noted that the contributions from the train whistles have been included for sections of the track that are within 220 m of 127 Street 1. Table 4 provides the modeled noise levels for main floor (1.5 m) and second floor (4.5 m) receptor locations. In addition, the color noise contours for the main floor and second floor, during the daytime and night-time are provided in Figures 7 – 10, respectively.

The results indicate daytime noise levels that range from 44.8 – 54.8 dBA Leq at a height of 1.5 m and 46.8 – 56.0 dBA Leq at a height of 4.5 m, respectively. The results indicate nighttime noise levels that range from 46.7 – 56.3 dBA Leq at a height of 1.5 m and 47.9 – 57.5 dBA Leq at a height of 4.5 m.

The maximum noise levels of 56.0 dBA Leq (1.5 m) & 57.5 dBA Leq(4.5 m), during the night-time, respectively, exceed the criteria of 50 dBA Leq during the night-time. As such, a review of the proposed exterior building wall and window construction is warranted. To achieve an interior noise level of 35 dBA Leq during the night-time, the exterior wall structure needs to reduce the noise by approximately 22.5 dBA. Thus, the nighttime is the determining factor, and a reduction of at least 22.5 dBA will be required.

Under the Canadian Rail Operating Rules trains below 44 miles per hour are required to sound the whistle at least 20 seconds of warning prior to entering the crossing. Assuming a speed of 40 km/hr, this would mean that the whistle would need to be blown within 220 m of the crossing. As such, 10 dBA increase was applied to the rail sections within 200 m of the various crossings.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

For further reference, there is additional information and recommendations regarding window and door construction within the FCM/RAC Guidelines provided in Appendix VI. Table 4. Future Case Modeling for FCM/RAC Criteria Future LeqDay (dBA)

Future LeqNight (dBA)

Receptor

Future LeqDay (dBA)

Future LeqNight (dBA)

R-01

45.9

47.1

R-01(4.5 m)

47.1

48.3

R-02

45.5

46.7

R-02(4.5 m)

46.6

47.8

R-03

46.5

47.7

R-03(4.5 m)

47.7

48.9

R-04

46.5

47.7

R-04(4.5 m)

47.7

48.9

Receptor

R-05

46.5

47.7

R-05(4.5 m)

47.6

48.8

R-06

46.3

47.5

R-06(4.5 m)

47.5

48.7

R-07

46.1

47.3

R-07(4.5 m)

47.3

48.5

R-08

46.0

47.2

R-08(4.5 m)

47.2

48.4

R-09

46.0

47.2

R-09(4.5 m)

47.1

48.3

R-10

46.0

47.2

R-10(4.5 m)

47.1

48.3

R-11

45.9

47.1

R-11(4.5 m)

47.1

48.3

R-12

45.9

47.1

R-12(4.5 m)

47.1

48.3

R-13

45.9

47.1

R-13(4.5 m)

47.0

48.2

R-14

45.9

47.1

R-14(4.5 m)

47.1

48.3

R-15

45.5

46.7

R-15(4.5 m)

46.7

47.9

R-16

45.0

46.2

R-16(4.5 m)

46.5

47.7

R-17

44.9

46.1

R-17(4.5 m)

46.4

47.6

R-18

44.9

46.1

R-18(4.5 m)

46.5

47.7

R-19

44.8

46.0

R-19(4.5 m)

46.2

47.4

Max

46.5

47.7

Max

47.7

48.9

Min

44.8

46.0

Min

46.2

47.4

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

7.0 Results and Discussion of Vibration 7.1. Baseline Vibration Monitoring The results of the baseline vibration monitoring for each of the 3 measurement axes (horizontal parallel to the rail line, horizontal perpendicular to the rail line, vertical) are provided in Figures 11 – 13, respectively. In addition, Figure 14 & Figure 15 provide the broadband results of a train passages which resulted in the highest vibration levels. The results indicate typical ambient vibration levels of approximately 0.1 – 0.2 mm/s RMS with spikes ranging as high as 0.35 mm/s associated with the various train passages. The train passage resulted in levels above 0.14 mm/s, however it should be noted that the sensor was 10 m southwest of the centre of track of the rail line.

7.2. Vibration Impact Assessment As mentioned above, the maximum monitored vibration level was 0.35 mm/s RMS at 10 m from the rail line. The upper surface of the ground consists of soil which conservatively attenuates with geometric spreading at an inverse-squared relationship. Thus, when this value of 0.35 mm/s RMS is extended out to the nearest proposed property line (+35 m), the resultant vibration level at the nearest property line is approximately 0.03 mm/s which is well below the criteria of 0.14 mm/s. Therefore for the residential structures (which are at an even greater distance from the rail line), the vibration levels will be even lower. Therefore, no additional vibration mitigation is required.

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

8.0 Conclusion The baseline noise monitoring resulted in an Leq24 value of 64.4 dBA respectively, at the noise monitoring location. During the 24-hour noise monitoring period, there were 2 separate train passages during the monitoring period. The 1/3-octave band frequency results indicated elevated noise levels in the lower frequency bands (near 63 – 80 Hz) which can be associated with the locomotive engine noise.

The results of the noise modeling for the Current Case scenario indicated excellent correlation with the noise monitoring data, particularly over the course of the entire 24-hour period.

The results of the Future Case noise modeling for the FCM/RAC Criteria for outdoor amenity spaces the indicated noise levels ranging from 45.6 – 47.3 dBA Leq24. Since all residential outdoor amenity spaces were well below the requirements the FCM/RAC Criteria of 55 dBA LeqDay, additional noise mitigation will not be required.

The results of the Future Case Modeling for the FCM/RAC Criteria for interior noise indicated day-time noise levels ranging from 45.6 to 56.3 dBA LeqDay and night-time noise levels that range from 46.8 to 57.5 dBA LeqNight. Since the maximum noise levels during the night-time exceed the criteria of 50 dBA Leq during the night-time a review of the proposed exterior building wall and window construction will be warranted. To achieve an interior noise level of 35 dBA Leq during the night-time, the exterior wall structure needs to reduce the noise by 22.5 dBA.

The results of the baseline vibration monitoring indicated typical ambient vibration levels of approximately 0.1 – 0.2 mm/s RMS with spikes ranging as high as 0.35 mm/s associated with the various train passages. The measured value of 0.35 mm/s RMS when extended out to the nearest residential property line (approximately +35 m), will result in a vibration level of approximately 0.03 mm/s which is well below the criteria of 0.14 mm/s. Therefore, no additional vibration mitigation is required. Refer to Appendix VII for a detailed summary of the noise and vibration assessment procedures in accordance with FCM/RAC Guidelines.

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

9.0 References -

Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations. Prepared for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the Railway Association of Canada, May, 2013.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Standard 1996-1, Acoustics – Description, measurement and assessment of environmental noise – Part 1: Basic quantities and assessment procedures, 2003, Geneva Switzerland.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Standard 9613-1, Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 1: Calculation of absorption of sound by the atmosphere, 1993, Geneva Switzerland.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Standard 9613-2, Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 2: General method of calculation, 1996, Geneva Switzerland.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

Figure 1. Study Area

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

Environmental Weather Sensor

Rail Line

Noise Monitor Microphone

Vibration Sensor under Enclosure

Figure 2. Noise and Vibration Monitoring Equipment 1

Example of a typical setup. The picture file for the actual setup near Sturgeon Road was corrupted.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

Examples of Rail Passages

Figure 3. Baseline Noise Monitoring Broadband Sound Levels 80

60 50 40 30 20 10

12.5 k

3.15 k

1.25 k

Frequency (Hz)

800

500

315

200

125

dBC

0 dBA

Sound Pressure Level (dBA)

Figure 4. A-Weighted 1/3 Octave Leq24 Sound Levels 16

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

CN Rail Line

Noise & Vibration Monitor Location Sturgeon Road

Figure 5. Current Case - Leq24 Noise Modeling Sound Level

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

R-01

Sturgeon Road

R-05

R-10 CN Rail Line

R-15

R-19

Figure 6. Future Case - LeqDay Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Outdoor Criteria)

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

R-01

R-05 Sturgeon Road

R-10

CN Rail Line

R-15

R-19

Figure 7. Future Case - LeqDay Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Indoor Criteria) 1.5 m

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

R-01

R-05 Sturgeon Road

R-10

CN Rail Line

R-15

R-19

Figure 8. Future Case - LeqNight Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Indoor Criteria) 1.5 m

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

R-01

R-05 Sturgeon Road

R-10

CN Rail Line

R-15

R-19

Figure 9. Future Case - LeqDay Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Indoor Criteria) 4.5 m

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

R-01

R-05 Sturgeon Road

R-10

CN Rail Line

R-15

R-19

Figure 10. Future Case - LeqNight Sound Levels (FCM/RAC Indoor Criteria) 4.5 m

July 17, 2026

12:00:00 12:18:00 12:36:00 12:54:00 13:12:00 13:30:00 13:48:00 14:06:00 14:24:00 14:42:00 15:00:00 15:18:00 15:36:00 15:54:00 16:12:00 16:30:00 16:48:00 17:06:00 17:24:00 17:42:00 18:00:00 18:18:00 18:36:00 18:54:00 19:12:00 19:30:00 19:48:00 20:06:00 20:24:00 20:42:00 21:00:00 21:18:00 21:36:00 21:54:00 22:12:00 22:30:00 22:48:00 23:06:00 23:24:00 23:42:00 00:00:00 00:18:00 00:36:00 00:54:00 01:12:00 01:30:00 01:48:00 02:06:00 02:24:00 02:42:00 03:00:00 03:18:00 03:36:00 03:54:00 04:12:00 04:30:00 04:48:00 05:06:00 05:24:00 05:42:00 06:00:00 06:18:00 06:36:00 06:54:00 07:12:00 07:30:00 07:48:00 08:06:00 08:24:00 08:42:00 09:00:00 09:18:00 09:36:00 09:54:00 10:12:00 10:30:00 10:48:00 11:06:00 11:24:00 11:42:00 12:00:00

Vibration Velocity (mm/s) 12:00:00 12:17:00 12:34:00 12:51:00 13:08:00 13:25:00 13:42:00 13:59:00 14:16:00 14:33:00 14:50:00 15:07:00 15:24:00 15:41:00 15:58:00 16:15:00 16:32:00 16:49:00 17:06:00 17:23:00 17:40:00 17:57:00 18:14:00 18:31:00 18:48:00 19:05:00 19:22:00 19:39:00 19:56:00 20:13:00 20:30:00 20:47:00 21:04:00 21:21:00 21:38:00 21:55:00 22:12:00 22:29:00 22:46:00 23:03:00 23:20:00 23:37:00 23:54:00 00:11:00 00:28:00 00:45:00 01:02:00 01:19:00 01:36:00 01:53:00 02:10:00 02:27:00 02:44:00 03:01:00 03:18:00 03:35:00 03:52:00 04:09:00 04:26:00 04:43:00 05:00:00 05:17:00 05:34:00 05:51:00 06:08:00 06:25:00 06:42:00 06:59:00 07:16:00 07:33:00 07:50:00 08:07:00 08:24:00 08:41:00 08:58:00 09:15:00 09:32:00 09:49:00 10:06:00 10:23:00 10:40:00 10:57:00 11:14:00 11:31:00 11:48:00

Vibration Velocity (mm/s) 0.45

0.45

0.5

Vibration Velocity (mm/s)

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

0.5

Horizontal Perpendicular

0.4

0.35

0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.14 mm/s

0.05

Time

Figure 11. Broadband Vibration Monitoring Results (Horizontal Parallel to Rail Line)

0.5

Horizontal Parallel

0.4

0.35

0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.14 mm/s

0.05

Time

Figure 12. Broadband Vibration Monitoring Results (Horizontal Perpendicular to Rail Line)

0.45

Vertical

0.4

0.35

0.3

0.25

0.15

0.2

0.1

0.14 mm/s

0.05

Time

Figure 13. Broadband Vibration Monitoring Results (Vertical)

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

0.4 Limit

Horizontal Perpendicular

Horizontal Parallel

Vertical

0.35

Vibration Velocity (mm/s)

0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.14 mm/s

0.1

0.05

12:30:00

12:29:00

12:28:00

12:27:00

12:26:00

12:25:00

12:24:00

12:23:00

12:22:00

12:21:00

12:20:00

12:19:00

12:18:00

12:17:00

12:16:00

12:15:00

Time

Figure 14. Broadband Vibration Levels for Rail Passage (12:15 – 12:30)

0.4 Series4

Horizontal Perpendicular

Horizontal Parallel

Vertical

0.35

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.14 mm/s

0.1

0.05

06:39:00

06:38:00

06:37:00

06:36:00

06:35:00

06:34:00

06:33:00

06:32:00

06:31:00

06:30:00

06:29:00

06:28:00

06:27:00

06:26:00

06:25:00

06:24:00

06:23:00

0 06:22:00

Vibration Velocity (mm/s)

0.3

Time

Figure 15. Broadband Vibration Levels for Rail Passage (06:22 –06:39)

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

Appendix I MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT USED Noise Monitor The environmental noise monitoring equipment used consisted of a Brüel and Kjær Type 2250/2270 Precision Integrating Sound Level Meter enclosed in an environmental case, a tripod, a weather protective microphone hood, and an external battery. The system acquired data in 15-second Leq samples using 1/3 octave band frequency analysis and overall A-weighted and C-weighted sound levels. The sound level meter conforms to Type 1, ANSI S1.4, ANSI S1.43, IEC 61672-1, IEC 60651, IEC 60804 and DIN 45657. The 1/3 octave filters conform to S1.11 – Type 0-C, and IEC 61260 – Class 0. The calibrator conforms to IEC 942 and ANSI S1.40. The sound level meter, pre-amplifier and microphone were certified on May 15, 2025, and the calibrator (type B&K 4231) was certified on November 14, 2025 by a NIST NVLAP Accredited Calibration Laboratory for all requirements of ISO 17025: 1999 and relevant requirements of ISO 9002:1994, ISO 9001:2000 and ANSI/NCSL Z540: 1994 Part 1. Simultaneous digital audio was recorded directly on the sound level meter using a 8 kHz sample rate for more detailed post-processing analysis. Refer to the next section in the Appendix for a detailed description of the various acoustical descriptive terms used. Weather Monitor The weather monitoring equipment used for the study consisted of an Orion Weather Station 9510-A-1 with a WXT520 Self-Aspirating Radiation Shield Sensor Unit, a Weather MicroServer 9590 Data-logger, and a Lightning Arrestor. The Data-logger and batteries were located in a grounded, weather protective case. The Sensor Unit was mounted on a sturdy survey tripod (with supporting guy-wires) at approximately 5.0 m above ground. The system was set up to record data in 1-minute samples obtaining the wind-speed, peak wind-speed, and wind-direction in a rolling 2-minute average as well as the 1-minute temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure, rain rate and total rain accumulation.

Vibration Monitor The vibration monitoring system consisted of a Brüel and Kjær Type 4450 vibration analyzer connected to a Brüel and Kjær Type 8380 Geophone. The system acquired the RMS and Peak broadband acceleration, velocity, and displacement as well as the 1/3 octave band acceleration and velocity vibration data in 60-second time periods. The equipment conforms to ISEE, ISO 4866, DIN 4150, DIN 45669-1, ISO 2631 with a broadband noise floor of 0.01 mm/s, a broadband measurement resolution of 0.008 mm/s, and a1/3-octave band noise floor of 0.0013 mm/s. Record of Calibration Results Date

Time

Pre / Post

Calibration Level

Calibrator Model

Serial Number

Noise Monitor Pre-Calibration

June 24, 2026

06:50

Pre

93.9 dBA

B&K 4231

2575493

Noise Monitor Post-Calibration

June 25, 2026

13:20

Post

93.9 dBA

B&K 4231

2575493

Description

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

B&K 4231 Calibrator Calibration Certificate

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

B&K 2250 Calibration Certificate

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

B&K VMT Calibration Certificates

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Appendix II THE ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE (GENERAL) Sound Pressure Level Sound pressure is initially measured in Pascal’s (Pa). Humans can hear several orders of magnitude in sound pressure levels, so a more convenient scale is used. This scale is known as the decibel (dB) scale, named after Alexander Graham Bell (telephone guy). It is a base 10 logarithmic scale. When we measure pressure we typically measure the RMS sound pressure. 2   PRMS P  SPL = 10 log 10  2  = 20 log 10  RMS   Pref   Pref 

Where:

SPL = Sound Pressure Level in dB PRMS = Root Mean Square measured pressure (Pa) Pref = Reference sound pressure level (Pref = 2x10-5 Pa = 20 µPa)

This reference sound pressure level is an internationally agreed upon value. It represents the threshold of human hearing for “typical” people based on numerous testing. It is possible to have a threshold which is lower than 20 µPa which will result in negative dB levels. As such, zero dB does not mean there is no sound! In general, a difference of 1 – 2 dB is the threshold for humans to notice that there has been a change in sound level. A difference of 3 dB (factor of 2 in acoustical energy) is perceptible and a change of 5 dB is strongly perceptible. A change of 10 dB is typically considered a factor of 2. This is quite remarkable when considering that 10 dB is 10-times the acoustical energy!

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA Frequency

The range of frequencies audible to the human ear ranges from approximately 20 Hz to 20 kHz. Within this range, the human ear does not hear equally at all frequencies. It is not very sensitive to low frequency sounds, is very sensitive to mid frequency sounds and is slightly less sensitive to high frequency sounds. Due to the large frequency range of human hearing, the entire spectrum is often divided into 31 bands, each known as a 1/3 octave band. The internationally agreed upon center frequencies and upper and lower band limits for the 1/1 (whole octave) and 1/3 octave bands are as follows:

Lower Band Limit 11

Whole Octave Center Frequency 16

Upper Band Limit 22

31.5

125

177

250

355

500

710

1000

1420

2000

2840

4000

5680

8000

11360

16000

22720

Lower Band Limit 14.1 17.8 22.4 28.2 35.5 44.7 56.2 70.8 89.1 112 141 178 224 282 355 447 562 708 891 1122 1413 1778 2239 2818 3548 4467 5623 7079 8913 11220 14130 17780

1/3 Octave Center Frequency 16 20 25 31.5 40 50 63 80 100 125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1000 1250 1600 2000 2500 3150 4000 5000 6300 8000 10000 12500 16000 20000

Upper Band Limit 17.8 22.4 28.2 35.5 44.7 56.2 70.8 89.1 112 141 178 224 282 355 447 562 708 891 1122 1413 1778 2239 2818 3548 4467 5623 7079 8913 11220 14130 17780 22390

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Human hearing is most sensitive at approximately 3500 Hz which corresponds to the ¼ wavelength of the ear canal (approximately 2.5 cm). Because of this range of sensitivity to various frequencies, we typically apply various weighting networks to the broadband measured sound to more appropriately account for the way humans hear. By default, the most common weighting network used is the so-called “A-weighting”. It can be seen in the figure that the low frequency sounds are reduced significantly with the A-weighting.

Combination of Sounds When combining multiple sound sources the general equation is:

 n SPL i  Σ SPL n = 10 log 10  Σ 10 10  i =1  Examples: - Two sources of 50 dB each add together to result in 53 dB. - Three sources of 50 dB each add together to result in 55 dB. - Ten sources of 50 dB each add together to result in 60 dB. - One source of 50 dB added to another source of 40 dB results in 50.4 dB It can be seen that, if multiple similar sources exist, removing or reducing only one source will have little effect. 32

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Sound Level Measurements Over the years a number of methods for measuring and describing environmental noise have been developed. The most widely used and accepted is the concept of the Energy Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) which was developed in the US (1970’s) to characterize noise levels near US Air-force bases. This is the level of a steady state sound which, for a given period of time, would contain the same energy as the time varying sound. The concept is that the same amount of annoyance occurs from a sound having a high level for a short period of time as from a sound at a lower level for a longer period of time. The Leq is defined as: dB  1 T P 2 1 T  10 L eq = 10 log 10  ∫ 10 dT  = 10 log 10  ∫ dT  2 0  T 0 Pref T  

We must specify the time period over which to measure the sound. i.e. 1-second, 10-seconds, 15-seconds, 1-minute, 1-day, etc. An Leq is meaningless if there is no time period associated.

In general there a few very common Leq sample durations which are used in describing environmental noise measurements. These include: -

Leq24 LeqNight LeqDay LDN

- Measured over a 24-hour period - Measured over the night-time (typically 22:00 – 07:00) - Measured over the day-time (typically 07:00 – 22:00) - Same as Leq24 with a 10 dB penalty added to the night-time

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Statistical Descriptor Another method of conveying long term noise levels utilizes statistical descriptors. These are calculated from a cumulative distribution of the sound levels over the entire measurement duration and then determining the sound level at xx % of the time.

Industrial Noise Control, Lewis Bell, Marcel Dekker, Inc. 1994

The most common statistical descriptors are: Lmin L01 L10

L50 L90 L99 Lmax

- minimum sound level measured - sound level that was exceeded only 1% of the time - sound level that was exceeded only 10% of the time. - Good measure of intermittent or intrusive noise - Good measure of Traffic Noise - sound level that was exceeded 50% of the time (arithmetic average) - Good to compare to Leq to determine steadiness of noise - sound level that was exceeded 90% of the time - Good indicator of typical “ambient” noise levels - sound level that was exceeded 99% of the time - maximum sound level measured

These descriptors can be used to provide a more detailed analysis of the varying noise climate: - If there is a large difference between the Leq and the L50 (Leq can never be any lower than the L50) then it can be surmised that one or more short duration, high level sound(s) occurred during the time period. - If the gap between the L10 and L90 is relatively small (less than 15 – 20 dBA) then it can be surmised that the noise climate was relatively steady.

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Sound Propagation In order to understand sound propagation, the nature of the source must first be discussed. In general, there are three types of sources. These are known as ‘point’, ‘line’, and ‘area’. This discussion will concentrate on point and line sources since area sources are much more complex and can usually be approximated by point sources at large distances. Point Source As sound radiates from a point source, it dissipates through geometric spreading. The basic relationship between the sound levels at two distances from a point source is:  r2  ∴ SPL1 − SPL 2 = 20 log 10    r   1 Where: SPL1 = sound pressure level at location 1, SPL2 = sound pressure level at location 2 r1 = distance from source to location 1, r2 = distance from source to location 2 Thus, the reduction in sound pressure level for a point source radiating in a free field is 6 dB per doubling of distance. This relationship is independent of reflectivity factors provided they are always present. Note that this only considers geometric spreading and does not take into account atmospheric effects. Point sources still have some physical dimension associated with them, and typically do not radiate sound equally in all directions in all frequencies. The directionality of a source is also highly dependent on frequency. As frequency increases, directionality increases. Examples (note no atmospheric absorption): - A point source measuring 50 dB at 100m will be 44 dB at 200m. - A point source measuring 50 dB at 100m will be 40.5 dB at 300m. - A point source measuring 50 dB at 100m will be 38 dB at 400m. - A point source measuring 50 dB at 100m will be 30 dB at 1000m. Line Source A line source is similar to a point source in that it dissipates through geometric spreading. The difference is that a line source is equivalent to a long line of many point sources. The basic relationship between the sound levels at two distances from a line source is:  r2  SPL 1 − SPL 2 = 10 log 10    r1    The difference from the point source is that the ‘20’ term in front of the ‘log’ is now only 10. Thus, the reduction in sound pressure level for a line source radiating in a free field is 3 dB per doubling of distance. Examples (note no atmospheric absorption): - A line source measuring 50 dB at 100m will be 47 dB at 200m. - A line source measuring 50 dB at 100m will be 45 dB at 300m. - A line source measuring 50 dB at 100m will be 44 dB at 400m. - A line source measuring 50 dB at 100m will be 40 dB at 1000m.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA Atmospheric Absorption

As sound transmits through a medium, there is an attenuation (or dissipation of acoustic energy) which can be attributed to three mechanisms: 1) Viscous Effects - Dissipation of acoustic energy due to fluid friction which results in thermodynamically irreversible propagation of sound. 2) Heat Conduction Effects - Heat transfer between high and low temperature regions in the wave which result in non-adiabatic propagation of the sound. 3) Inter Molecular Energy Interchanges - Molecular energy relaxation effects which result in a time lag between changes in translational kinetic energy and the energy associated with rotation and vibration of the molecules.

The following table illustrates the attenuation coefficient of sound at standard pressure (101.325 kPa) in units of dB/100m. Temperature

Relative Humidity

(%)

125

250

500

1000

2000

4000

0.06

0.18

0.37

0.64

1.40

4.40

0.03

0.10

0.33

0.75

1.30

2.50

0.02

0.06

0.24

0.70

1.50

2.60

0.07

0.15

0.27

0.62

1.90

6.70

0.04

0.12

0.28

0.50

1.00

2.80

0.02

0.08

0.26

0.56

0.99

2.10

0.06

0.11

0.29

0.94

3.20

9.00

0.04

0.11

0.20

0.41

1.20

4.20

0.03

0.10

0.21

0.38

0.81

2.50

0.05

0.15

0.50

1.60

3.70

5.70

0.04

0.08

0.19

0.60

2.10

6.70

0.03

0.08

0.15

0.36

1.10

4.10

Frequency (Hz)

As frequency increases, absorption tends to increase As Relative Humidity increases, absorption tends to decrease There is no direct relationship between absorption and temperature The net result of atmospheric absorption is to modify the sound propagation of a point source from 6 dB/doubling-of-distance to approximately 7 – 8 dB/doubling-of-distance (based on anecdotal experience)

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

120

Sound Pressure Level (dB)

100

Base

60 1 kHz

500 Hz

250 Hz

125 Hz

1600

1800

2000

2 kHz 40 4 kHz 20 8 kHz

200

400

600

800

1000 1200 distance (m)

1400

Atmospheric Absorption at 10oC and 70% RH

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Meteorological Effects There are many meteorological factors which can affect how sound propagates over large distances. These various phenomena must be considered when trying to determine the relative impact of a noise source either after installation or during the design stage. Wind - Can greatly alter the noise climate away from a source depending on direction - Sound levels downwind from a source can be increased due to refraction of sound back down towards the surface. This is due to the generally higher velocities as altitude increases. - Sound levels upwind from a source can be decreased due to a “bending” of the sound away from the earth’s surface. - Sound level differences of ±10dB are possible depending on severity of wind and distance from source. - Sound levels crosswind are generally not disturbed by an appreciable amount - Wind tends to generate its own noise, however, and can provide a high degree of masking relative to a noise source of particular interest. Temperature - Temperature effects can be similar to wind effects - Typically, the temperature is warmer at ground level than it is at higher elevations. - If there is a very large difference between the ground temperature (very warm) and the air aloft (only a few hundred meters) then the transmitted sound refracts upward due to the changing speed of sound. - If the air aloft is warmer than the ground temperature (known as an inversion) the resulting higher speed of sound aloft tends to refract the transmitted sound back down towards the ground. This essentially works on Snell’s law of reflection and refraction. - Temperature inversions typically happen early in the morning and are most common over large bodies of water or across river valleys. - Sound level differences of ±10dB are possible depending on gradient of temperature and distance from source. Rain - Rain does not affect sound propagation by an appreciable amount unless it is very heavy - The larger concern is the noise generated by the rain itself. A heavy rain striking the ground can cause a significant amount of highly broadband noise. The amount of noise generated is difficult to predict. - Rain can also affect the output of various noise sources such as vehicle traffic. Summary - In general, these wind and temperature effects are difficult to predict - Empirical models (based on measured data) have been generated to attempt to account for these effects. - Environmental noise measurements must be conducted with these effects in mind. Sometimes it is desired to have completely calm conditions, other times a “worst case” of downwind noise levels are desired.

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Topographical Effects Similar to the various atmospheric effects outlined in the previous section, the effect of various geographical and vegetative factors must also be considered when examining the propagation of noise over large distances. Topography - One of the most important factors in sound propagation. - Can provide a natural barrier between source and receiver (i.e. if berm or hill in between). - Can provide a natural amplifier between source and receiver (i.e. large valley in between or hard reflective surface in between). - Must look at location of topographical features relative to source and receiver to determine importance (i.e. small berm 1km away from source and 1km away from receiver will make negligible impact). Grass - Can be an effective absorber due to large area covered - Only effective at low height above ground. Does not affect sound transmitted direct from source to receiver if there is line of sight. - Typically less absorption than atmospheric absorption when there is line of sight. - Approximate rule of thumb based on empirical data is: (dB / 100m) Ag = 18 log10 ( f ) − 31 Where: Ag is the absorption amount Trees - Provide absorption due to foliage - Deciduous trees are essentially ineffective in the winter - Absorption depends heavily on density and height of trees - No data found on absorption of various kinds of trees - Large spans of trees are required to obtain even minor amounts of sound reduction - In many cases, trees can provide an effective visual barrier, even if the noise attenuation is negligible.

Tree/Foliage attenuation from ISO 9613-2:1996

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Bodies of Water - Large bodies of water can provide the opposite effect to grass and trees. - Reflections caused by small incidence angles (grazing) can result in larger sound levels at great distances (increased reflectivity, Q). - Typically air temperatures are warmer high aloft since air temperatures near water surface tend to be more constant. Result is a high probability of temperature inversion. - Sound levels can “carry” much further. Snow - Covers the ground for approximately 1/2 of the year in northern climates. - Can act as an absorber or reflector (and varying degrees in between). - Freshly fallen snow can be quite absorptive. - Snow which has been sitting for a while and hard packed due to wind can be quite reflective. - Falling snow can be more absorptive than rain, but does not tend to produce its own noise. - Snow can cover grass which might have provided some means of absorption. - Typically sound propagates with less impedance in winter due to hard snow on ground and no foliage on trees/shrubs.

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Appendix III SOUND LEVELS OF FAMILIAR NOISE SOURCES Used with Permission Obtained from the Alberta Energy Regulator Directive 038 (February, 2007)

Source 1 Sound Level ( dBA) ____________________________________________________________________________________ Bedroom of a country home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Soft whisper at 1.5 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Quiet office or living room . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .

Moderate rainfall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Inside average urban home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Quiet street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Normal conversation at 1 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Noisy office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Noisy restaurant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Highway traffic at 15 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Loud singing at 1 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tractor at 15 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

78-95

Busy traffic intersection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Electric typewriter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bus or heavy truck at 15 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

88-94

Jackhammer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

88-98

Loud shout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Freight train at 15 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Modified motorcycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Jet taking off at 600 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100

Amplified rock music . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

110

Jet taking off at 60 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

120

Air-raid siren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

130

Cottrell, Tom, 1980, Noise in Alberta, Table 1, p.8, ECA80 - 16/1B4 (Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta).

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

SOUND LEVELS GENERATED BY COMMON APPLIANCES Used with Permission Obtained from the Alberta Energy Regulator Directive 038 (February, 2007)

Source 1 Sound level at 3 feet (dBA) ____________________________________________________________________________________ Freezer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38-45 Refrigerator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

34-53

Electric heater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hair clipper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Electric toothbrush . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

48-57

Humidifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

41-54

Clothes dryer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51-65

Air conditioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

50-67

Electric shaver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

47-68

Water faucet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hair dryer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

58-64

Clothes washer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

48-73

Dishwasher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

59-71

Electric can opener . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60-70

Food mixer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

59-75

Electric knife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

65-75

Electric knife sharpener . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sewing machine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

70-74

Vacuum cleaner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

65-80

Food blender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

65-85

Coffee mill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

75-79

Food waste disposer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

69-90

Edger and trimmer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Home shop tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

64-95

Hedge clippers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Electric lawn mower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

80-90

Reif, Z. F., and Vermeulen, P. J., 1979, “Noise from domestic appliances, construction, and industry,” Table 1, p.166, in Jones, H. W., ed., Noise in the Human Environment, vol. 2, ECA79-SP/1 (Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta). 42

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

Appendix IV NOISE MODELING PARAMETERS Rail Traffic Volumes # Trains Day-time

# Trains Night-time

Track Speed (km/hr)

Train Length (m)

Monitoring Rail Traffic

1,962

Current Rail Traffic

1,962

Future Rail Traffic

2,512

General Modeling Parameters Parameter

Value

Modeling Software

CADNA/A (Version 2026 MR1, Build 215,5625)

Standard Followed

ISO 9613-2

Ground Sound Absorption Coefficient

0.5

Wind Speed

1 - 5 m/s (3.6 - 18 km/hr)

Wind Direction

Downwind from all sources to all receptors

Temperature

10 °C

Humidity

70%

Topography

Provided by Client

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

Appendix V WEATHER DATA 40

Average Windspeed (Km/hr)

0 12:00

14:00

16:00

18:00

20:00

22:00

00:00

02:00

04:00

06:00

08:00

10:00

12:00

06:00

08:00

10:00

12:00

Time of Day (24-hour format)

Monitored Wind Speed (June 24 – 25, 2026) S

Wind Direction

S 12:00

14:00

16:00

18:00

20:00

22:00

00:00

02:00

04:00

Time of Day (24-hour format)

Monitored Wind Direction (June 24 – 25, 2026) 44

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA 30

Temperature (Celcius)

-10

-20

-30 12:00

14:00

16:00

18:00

20:00

22:00

00:00

02:00

04:00

06:00

08:00

10:00

12:00

06:00

08:00

10:00

12:00

Time of Day (24-hour format)

Monitored Temperature (June 24 – 25, 2026)

100

Relative Humidity (%)

0 12:00

14:00

16:00

18:00

20:00

22:00

00:00

02:00

04:00

Time of Day (24-hour format)

Monitored Humidity (June 24 – 25, 2026)

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Appendix VI FCM/RAC GUIDELINES WINDOW & DOOR RECOMMENDATIONS Section 3.4.1.8 Windows Acoustically, windows are among the weakest elements of a building façade. An open or acoustically weak window can severely negate the effect of an otherwise acoustically strong façade. Therefore, it is extremely important to carefully consider the effects of windows on the acoustic performance of any building façade in proximity to a railway corridor. In addition to the recommendations below, proponents are advised to familiarize themselves with the Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating system, which allows for a comparison of the noise reduction that different windows provide 1. In order to successfully ensure noise reduction from windows, proponents should: -

ensure windows are properly sealed by using a flexible caulking such as mastic or silicone on both the inside of the window and outside, between the wall opening and the window frame;

use double-glazed windows with full acoustic seals. When using double-glazing, the wider the air space between the panes, the higher the insulation (50 mm to 100 mm is preferable in non-sealed widows and 25mm in sealed windows). It is also desirable in some cases to specify the panes with different thicknesses to avoid sympathetic resonance or to use at least one laminated lite to dampen the vibration within the window;

consider reducing the size of windows (i.e. use punched windows instead of a window wall or curtain wall);

consider increasing the glass thickness;

consider using absorbent materials on the window reveals in order to improve noise insulation in particularly awkward cases;

consider using hinged or casement windows or fixed pane windows instead of sliding windows;

ensure window frames and their insulation in the wall openings are air tight; and

incorporate acoustic seals into operable windows for optimal noise insulation.

Note that window frame contributions to noise penetration are typically less for aluminum and wood windows than for vinyl frames, as above 2.

The STC rating of a “soundproof” window is typically in the range of 45 to 54. Note that STC ratings should include the full window assembly with the frame, as frames have been shown to be a weak component, and may not perform as anticipated from the glazing specifications. 2

July 17, 2026

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

aci Project #25-092

Section 3.4.1.9 Doors In order to ensure proper acoustic insulation of doors: -

airtight seals should be used around the perimeter of the door;

cat flaps, letter box openings, and other apertures should be avoided;

heavy, thick, and/or dense materials should be used in the construction of the door;

there should be an airtight seal between the frame and the opening aperture in the façade;

windows within doors should be considered as they exhibit a higher acoustic performance than the balance of the door material; and

sliding patio doors should be treated as windows when assessing attenuation performance.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

Appendix VII FCM/RAC GUIDELINES ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES AC.1.3. Recommended Procedures for the Preparation of Noise Assessment Reports for New Residential or Other Sensitive Land Uses in Proximity to Railway Corridors Procedure

Assessment Implementation

1. Studies should be undertaken by a qualified consultant using an approved prediction model.

Assessment Conducted by P.Froment, B.Sc.,B.Ed., P.L.(Eng.) 19+ years experience with noise and vibration impact assessments.

2. Where studies are not economically or practically feasible, due for example to the scale of a development or the absence of an available mechanism to secure a study, reasonable and practical measures should be undertaken to minimize potential noise impacts, such as increased building setbacks, noise fencing, and building construction techniques (e.g. brick veneer, air conditioning), etc.

Not Applicable.

3. Obtain existing rail traffic volumes from railway.

Obtained from Quantitative Rish Analysis.

4. Use most current draft plan/site plan and grading plans for analysis.

Most current site plan obtained from client for use in analysis.

5. Escalate rail traffic volume data by 2.5% compounded annually for a minimum of 10 years, unless future traffic projections are available.

Future rail traffic volumes escalated by 2.5% for 10-year period.

6. Conduct analysis at closest proposed sensitive receptor. The minimum setback distances based on the classification of the rail line, as specified by the railway should be used for the analysis. If the closest proposed residential receptor is at the greater distance than the minimum setback distance, then the greater distance may be used.

Analysis conducted at exterior façade of residential structure and in outdoor amenity area.

7. The analysis needs to be conducted at the following locations: • Outdoor amenity area receptor. This is usually in the rear yard at a point that is 3 m away from the rear wall of the house. This is typically a daytime calculation; • 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Storey receptor for low-rise dwellings. The nighttime calculation should be conducted at the façade where a bedroom could be located. The daytime calculation should be conducted at the façade where the living/dining/family areas could be located; and • If the building is a multi-Storey building the calculations should be conducted at the outdoor amenity areas and at the highest floor of the building.

Analysis conducted at outdoor location, 3m from rear of residential structure (day-time levels) and at exterior façade of Residential structure (day and night-time levels).

8. The typical receptor heights are summarized below. These are to be used as a guide only. If the actual receptor heights are known they should be used. • Outdoor amenity area: 1.5 m above the amenity area elevation; • 1st Storey receptor: 1.5 m above the 1st floor finished grade elevation; • 2nd Storey receptor: 4.5 m above the 1st floor finished grade elevation; and • 3rd Storey receptor: 7.5 m above the 1st floor finished grade elevation.

Analysis conducted at 1.5 m elevation for outdoor amenity area and at 1.5 m & 4.5 m above elevation at exterior façade of residential structure for interior assessment.

9. The analysis should be conducted assuming a 16 hour day (LeqDay) and an 8 hour night (LeqNight).

Analysis conducted with 16-hour day (LeqDay) and an 8-hour night (LeqNight).

10. When no relief from whistling has been authorized they should be included in the analysis to determine the mitigation measures to achieve the indoor sound level limits. Whistles are not required to be included in the determination of sound barrier requirements.

Whistles were observed during noise monitoring and are anticipated at 127 Street. Therefore, whistles have been included in the assessment of the indoor sound level limits.

11. Any topographical differences between the source and receiver should be taken into account.

Digital elevation contours were utilized in the noise model.

12. The attenuation provided by dense, evergreen forest of more than 50 m in depth can also be included in the analysis (assuming it will remain intact).

No significant vegetation between the Rail line and the Residential structures. Vegetative sound attenuation not applicable.

13. Intervening structures that may provide some barrier effect may also be included in the analysis.

No surrounding existing structures were included in the noise model.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

AC.1.3. Recommended Procedures for the Preparation of Noise Assessment Reports for New Residential or Other Sensitive Land Uses in Proximity to Railway Corridors (Cont.) Procedure

Assessment Implementation

14. The results of this analysis should be compared to the applicable sound level limits listed in AC.1.4 to determine the required mitigative measures for both the outdoor amenity areas and the dwelling. Mitigative measures could include noise barriers, architectural and ventilation components (eg. brick veneer, air conditioning, forced air ventilation, window glazing requirements, etc.)

Exterior sound levels were compared to criteria in AC.1.4. (35 dBA LeqNight, 40 dBA LeqDay).

15. The required sound barrier heights to achieve the guidelines at the outdoor amenity areas can be determined using an appropriate model. The relative location with respect to the source and the receiver is required as well as the grades of the tracks, barrier location, and receptor.

- Not applicable.

16. The sound barrier needs to be designed taking into consideration the minimum safety requirements of the railway.

- Not applicable.

17. The architectural component requirements must include the minimum requirements of the railways. The remainder of the components can be determined using the AIF procedures found in the CMHC publication, “Road and Rail Noise: Effects on Housing”, (NHA 5156 08/86) or the BPN 56 procedures found in the National Research Council publication “Building Practice Note 56, Controlling Sound Transmission into Buildings”, September 1995. 18. In preparing the report all of the above information must be included so that the report can be appropriately reviewed. In addition to the above, the report should include the following: • Key plan; • Site plan/draft plan; • Summary of the rail traffic data, including the correspondence from the railways; • Figure depicting the location of the sound barrier, including any extensions or wraparounds; • Top of barrier elevations; • Sample calculations with and without the sound barrier; • Sample calculations of how the architectural requirements were determined; • Summary table of lots/blocks/units requiring mitigation measures, including lots that require air conditioning and warning clauses; and • Any other information relevant to the site and the proposed mitigation.

Exterior sound levels were compared to criteria in AC.1.4 and building façade recommendations were provided to ensure interior noise levels would be compliant with criteria in AC.1.4. (35 dBA LeqNight, 40 dBA LeqDay).

- Key plan and Site Plan in Figure 1. - Rail traffic data in Appendix IV.

July 17, 2026

aci Project #25-092

Cantiro – SEC – Sturgeon Valley – FCM/RAC – NIA

AC.2.5. Recommended Procedures for the Preparation of Vibration Impact Studies for New Residential or Other Sensitive Land Uses in Proximity to Railway Corridors Procedure

Assessment Implementation

1. Studies should be undertaken by a qualified consultant.

Assessment Conducted by P. Froment, B.Sc.,B.Ed., P.L.(Eng.) 19+ years experience with noise and vibration impact assessments.

2. Where studies are not economically or practically feasible, due for example to the scale of the new development or the absence of an available mechanism to secure a study, reasonable and practical measures should be undertaken to minimize potential vibration impacts, such as increased building setbacks, perimeter foundation treatment (eg. Thicker foundations) and/or other vibration isolation measures, etc.

Not Applicable.

3. Vibration measurements should be conducted for all proposed residential/ institutional type developments.

Baseline vibration monitoring was conducted at the Project site.

4. The vibration measurements should be conducted at the distance corresponding to the closest proposed residential receptor, or on the minimum setbacks based on classification of the rail line. If the proposed dwelling units are located more than 75 m from the railway right-of-way, vibration measurements are not required.

Baseline vibration monitoring was conducted in between the Rail line and the proposed residential locations at a location suitable for conducting the measurements.

5. Sufficient points parallel to the tracks should be chosen to provide a comprehensive representation of the potentially varying soil conditions.

The Project site is relatively small. A single vibration monitoring location is sufficient.

6. A minimum of five (5) train passbys (comprised of all train types using the rail line) should be recorded at each measurement location.

A total of 2 trains in a 24-hour period were recorded. The highest vibration level obtained from all measurements was used for the assessment/calculations.

7. The measurement equipment must be capable of measuring between 4 Hz and 200 Hz ± 3 dB with an RMS averaging time constant of 1 second.

The vibration measurement equipment meets the required measurement capabilities.

8. All measured data shall be reported.

All vibration measurement data is reported in Section 7.0 and in Figures 11 - 14.

9. The report should include all of the above as well as: • Key plan; • Site/draft plan indicating the location of the measurements; • Summary of the equipment used to conduct the vibration measurements; • Direction, type, speed (if possible), and number of cars of each train measured; • Results of all the measurements conducted; • Exceedance, if any; and • Details of the proposed mitigation, if required.

- Key plan and Site Plan in Figure 1. - Description of vibration monitoring equipment provided in Appendix I - Information provided in Appendix IV. The type of trains was freight. - There were no exceedances - Vibration mitigation is not required.

10. Ground-borne vibration transmission is to be estimated through site testing and evaluation to determine if dwellings within 75 metres of the railway right-of-way will be impacted by vibration conditions in excess of 0.14 mm/sec. RMS between 4 Hz. and 200 Hz. The monitoring system should be capable of measuring frequencies between 4 Hz and 200 Hz ± 3 dB, with an RMS averaging time constant of 1 second. If in excess, appropriate isolation measures are recommended to be undertaken to ensure living areas do not exceed 0.14 mm/sec. RMS on and above the first floor of the dwelling.

The Monitored vibration levels and calculated vibration levels at the Residential Structures, based on the baseline vibration monitoring results, indicated vibration levels below 0.14 mm/s. No additional vibration mitigation is required.

July 17, 2026