NOISE BARRIER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Part 4: Conclusions and Bibliography and Appendicies
Other parts of the report
Part
1: Table of Contents,
Introduction and Background
Final Report, July, 1990
Prepared by Julie Farnham and Edward Beimborn
Center for Urban Transportation Studies
University of Wisconsin--Milwaukee
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201
Sound good/look good.
Conclusions
This report has been developed to provide information and tools that can be used to enhance the
visual and aesthetic quality of freeway noise barriers. Noise barriers can be effective in reducing
unwanted sound from highway sources in residential neighborhoods. However, they also can have
a substantial effect on the visual environment of a highway and surrounding neighborhoods. They
can significantly change the view from the road creating monolithic tunnels of walls and by
blocking views of changing urban scenery. They can also change the view towards the road for
the surrounding community by creating barriers to other areas and developing a sense of isolation.
What is needed is a way to provide the benefits of sound reduction from noise barriers while at
the same time creating a positive visual image for road users and the surrounding communities.
This report provides suggestions as to how this can be done.
Key Concepts
An attractive and efficient system for freeway noise control can be developed if the following
principles are followed.
Diversity: Variety in the placement, materials, texture and landscaping can enhance the aesthetic
characteristics of noise barriers. Urban landscapes are diverse mixtures of buildings, plants,
streets and sidewalks; there should be no hesitancy to incorporate this diversity into noise barriers.
Integrate Barriers and Landscaping: Noise barriers and landscaping should be viewed as an
integrated, complementary system. Choices of materials, textures, profile, and location should
be done in such a way that the various elements fit together into an integrated whole. A balance
should be struck between wall decoration and landscaping so that they do not conflict or complete
with each other.
Reflect Neighborhood Characteristics: The physical, cultural and historical characteristics of
urban neighborhoods should be incorporated into the design of noise barrier/landscaping systems.
Noise barriers should reflect the basic land uses and the heritage of the areas through which the
highways pass. Noise barrier design should include efforts to understand urban areas through
careful inventories of physical, visual, cultural, ethnic, historical, and land use characteristics of
different neighborhoods. These factors should be used to shape design themes as well as details.
Specific views should be reinforced and enhanced. Gateways should be identified and
accentuated.
Options: Decisions about barriers and landscaping should be made in consultation with
neighborhood groups, elected officials and others. A broad range of options should be provided
including materials, profile, and configuration of barriers and type, location and configuration of
landscaping. Tradeoffs should be provided between wall materials and landscaping so that an
acceptable balance can be reached.
Creative Process: Finally, a process should be used which maximizes the opportunity for creative
design of noise barrier/landscaping systems. This process would include careful inventories of
neighborhood characteristics, selection of design themes, preparation of alternative designs,
community involvement, and selection of designs that balance the various tradeoffs of cost,
aesthetics and noise reduction. Through such a process systems can be developed that enhance
the quality of the environment that is seen as well as heard along freeways.
Sound good/look good.
Bibliography
We would like to thank members of the TRB Noise Committee who supplied information for this
study through correspondence of noise barrier design in Michigan, New York, New Jersey,
Minnesota, Maryland, California and other states.
Blum, Randolph F., A Guide to Visual Quality in Noise Barrier Design, Implementation Package
77-12, U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, December, 1976.
Fichier D'Écrams Acoustiques, Center D'Études des Transports Urbains, March, 1987.
Gurda, John, Discover Milwaukee Catalog, City of Milwaukee, Department of City Development,
1986, reprinted 1988.
Keegan, Kent Mitchell, The Integration of the Highway and Landform, Center for Architectural
and Urban Planning Research, School of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of
Wisconsin--Milwaukee, 1989.
Minnesota Department of Highways, Office of Environmental Services, Metro Noise Abatement
Program, February, 1976.
Ritzer, James, "The What and Why of Natural Roadsides," in Public Works, March, 1990, pp.
49-53.
Roadside Design Guide, Chapter 3: Roadside Topography and Drainage Features; American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Inc., Washington, D. C., 1989.
Springer, Michael, "Vegetative Lärmschutzwand aus Weidenflechtwerk" ("Vegetative Noise
Barriers from Willowtwigs"), Neue Landschaft, Fachzeitschrift für Garten-, Landschafts-, Spiel-
und Sportplatzbau, Patzer Verlag GmbH u. Co. KG, Hannover, Berlin, West Germany, June,
1987, pp. 287-389.
Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Chapter Trans 405, Register, August 1989, No. 404,
pp. 562-565, 562-567.
, Facilities Development Manual; Procedure 11-15-1, January 31, 1990.
, Maintenance Manual, Supplemental Policy 11.01, October 1, 1988.
A: Noise Barrier Materials
B: Plant Materials
C: Landscape Cost Comparisons
D: Ethnic Neighborhood Descriptions
E: Freeway Noise Barrier Site Inventory Analysis Checklist
APPENDIX A: NOISE BARRIER MATERIAL COSTS
Average Cost Comparisons for Three Common Barrier Materials
| Unit Costs* | ||||
| Material | $/mile | $/LF | $/SF | $ per Abutting Unit** |
| Metal | 1,278,964 | 242 | 13.54 | 14,329-37,034 |
| Wood | 1,916,852 | 363 | 19.72 | 62,733 |
| Concrete | 2,119,624 | 401 | 21.58 | 22,604-35,294 |
* Figures represent costs for 1984 projects in Milwaukee County in 1988 dollars. All costs include 15% Engineering and
Contingencies.
** Figures from 1984 projects. Cost difference for same material partially due to density of abutting development. Higher
densities yield lower costs per abutting unit.
*** Costs for "retrofit" barriers are from 20 to 30 percent greater than "new" barriers due to incidental and miscellaneous
quantities, including traffic control; removals; excavation and finishing; drainage, lighting and sign modifications; and
access restricting.
- rough grooved - stucco
- applied stone - rough raked
- brick and post - cast cedar siding
- cast barn wood - brick
- grape stakes
|
Deciduous Trees |
Design Attributes | Character | Potential Use | |||||||
|
Plant Name |
Form* |
Flowers |
Fall
Color |
Winter
Color |
Formal |
Informal |
General |
Accent |
Massing |
Screen |
| Norway Maple
(Acer platanoides) |
R | X | yellow | X | X | X | ||||
| European
Horsechestnut
(Aesculus hippocastanum) |
R | X | X | X | ||||||
| Cockspur Hawthorn
(Crataegus crus-galli) |
R | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Russian Olive
(Elaegnus angustafolia) |
R/I | X | X | X | X | |||||
| White Ash
(Fraxinus americana) |
O | purple/yellow | ||||||||
| Green Ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica) |
O | yellow | X | X | X | |||||
| Honeylocust
(Gleditsia triacanthos) |
I | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Poplar (variety)
(Populus spp.) |
C | X | X | X | X | |||||
| White Oak
(Quercus alba) |
R/I | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Bur Oak
(Quercus macrocarpa) |
R/I | X | X | |||||||
| Black Locust
(Robina pseudoacacia) |
||||||||||
| Golden Weeping
Willow
(Salix alba 'Trista') |
W | yellow | ||||||||
| Tamarack (variety)
(Tamarix spp.) |
P | yellow | ||||||||
|
Evergreen Trees |
Character | Potential Use | |||||
|
Plant Name |
Form* |
Formal |
Informal |
General |
Accent |
Massing |
Screen |
| Eastern Red Cedar
(Juniperus virginiaua) |
C/P | X | X | X | X | ||
| Black Hills Spruce
(Picea glauce 'Densata') |
P | X | X | X | |||
| Colorado Blue Spruce
(Picea pungens 'Glauca') |
P | X | X | X | |||
| Mugho Pine
(Pinus mugho) |
R/I | X | X | X | X | ||
| Austrian Pine
(Pinus nigra) |
I | X | X | ||||
|
Deciduous Shrubs |
Design Attributes | Character | Potential Use | |||||||
|
Plant Name |
Form* |
Flowers |
Fall
Color |
Winter
Color |
Formal |
Informal |
Accent |
Hedge/
Screen |
Massing |
Ground
Cover |
| Siberian Peashrub
(Caragana arborescens) |
E/R | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Dwarf Bush
Honeysuckle
(Dierville lonicera) |
M | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Mockorange
(Philadelpus spp.) |
R/O | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Jackman Potentilla
(Potentilla fruiticosa 'Jackman') |
M | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Buckthorn (variety)
(Rhamnus spp.) |
E/R | X | X | X | ||||||
| Fragrant Sumac
(Rhus aromatica) |
M | X | X | |||||||
| Smooth Sumac
(Rhus glabra) |
U/F | X | X | X | ||||||
| Staghorn Sumac
(Rhus typhina) |
U/F | X | X | X | ||||||
| Alpine Currant
(Ribes alpinum) |
E/R | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Rugosa Rose
(Rosa rugosa) |
M | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Buffaloberry
(Sheperdia argentea) |
R | X | X | X | ||||||
| Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos alba) |
R | X | ||||||||
|
Evergreen Shrubs |
Design Attributes | Character | Potential Use | |||||
|
Plant Name |
Form* |
Winter
Color |
Formal |
Informal |
Accent |
Soften |
Massing |
Ground
Cover |
| Pfitzer Juniper
(Juniperus chinensis 'Pfitzerana') |
H | X | X | X | X | |||
| Hughe's Juniper
(Juniperus horizontalis 'Hughes') |
H | X | X | X | X | |||
| Vines and Ground Covers | Design Attributes | Character | |||
|
Plant Name |
Flowers |
Fall
Color |
Winter
Color |
Formal |
Informal |
| Crown Vetch
(Coronilla varia) |
X | X | |||
| Virginia Creeper
(Parthenosis quinquefolia) |
X | X | |||
| Fleeceflower
(Polygonium reynoutria) |
X | X | |||
| Native Grasses | Design Attributes | Habitat** | ||||||
|
Plant Name |
Color |
Bloom |
Height |
Wet |
WM |
Mesic |
DM |
Dry |
| Little Bluestem
(Andropogon scoparius) |
copper | July | 2 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Side-oats Grama
(Bouteloua curtipendula) |
orange | July | 2 ft. | X | X | |||
| Blue Grama Grass*
(Bouteloua gracillis) |
white | July | 3-6 in. | X | X | |||
| Buffalo Grass*
(Buchloe datyloides) |
yellow | July | 6 in. | X | X | |||
| Canada Wild Rye*
(Elymus canadensis) |
straw | September | 4 ft. | X | X | |||
| Indiangrass
(Sorghastrum mutans) |
straw | August | 4-5 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Prairie Cordgrass
(Spartina pectinata) |
straw | August | 4-5 ft. | X | X | |||
| Prairie Plants:
Wild Flowers |
Design Attributes | Habitat | ||||||
|
Plant Name |
Color |
Bloom |
Height |
Wet |
WM |
Mesic |
DM |
Dry |
| Heath Aster
(Aster ericoides) |
white | September | 2-3 ft. | X | X | |||
| Prairie Bushclover
(Lespeseza capitata) |
white | August | 3 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Lupine
(Lupine perennis) |
blue | May | 2 ft. | |||||
| Bergamot
(Monorda fistulosa) |
pink | June | 2 ft. | X | X | |||
| Purple Prairie Clover
(Petalostemum purpureum) |
magenta | July | 2 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Black Eyed Susan
(Rudbeckia hirta) |
yellow | June | 1-2 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Spiderwort
(Tradescantia ohiensis) |
blue | June | 2 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Leadplant
(Amorpha canescens) |
violet | June | 3 ft. | X | X | |||
| Thimbleweed
(Anemone cylindrica) |
white | May | 12 in. | X | X | X | ||
| Canada Anemone
(Anemone canadensis) |
white | May | 6-12 in. | X | X | |||
| Swamp Milkweed
(Asclepias incarnata) |
red | June | 2-3 ft. | X | X | |||
| Butterfly Milkweed
(Asclepias tuberosa) |
orange | June | 2-3 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Sky Blue Aster
(Aster azureus) |
blue | September | 2 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Smooth Aster
(Aster laevis) |
blue | August | 2-3 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Stiff Coreopsis
(Coreopsis palmata) |
yellow | July | 2-3 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Pale Purple Coneflower
(Echinacae pallida) |
magenta | June | 2-3 ft. | X | X | |||
| Flowering Spurge
(Euphorbia corollata) |
white | July | 2 ft. | X | X | |||
| Western Sunflower
(Helianthus occidentalis) |
yellow | July | 2 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Rough Blazingstar
(Liatrus aspera) |
magenta | August | 2 ft. | X | X | |||
| White Prairie Clover
(Petalostemum candidum) |
white | June | 2 ft. | X | X | |||
| Dotted Mint
(Monarda punctata) |
pink | May | 1 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Smooth Beardstongue Foxglove
(Penstemon digitalis) |
white | June | 3-4 ft. | X | X | |||
| Large Beardstongue
(Penstemon grandiflorus) |
lavender | May | 2 ft. | X | X | |||
| Meadow Rose
(Rosa carolina) |
pink | May | 18 in. | X | X | |||
| Grayheaded Coneflower
(Ratibida pinnata) |
yellow | July | 3 ft. | X | X | X | ||
| Sweet Black Eyed Susan
(Rudbickia subtomentosa) |
yellow | August | 4-5 ft. | X | X | |||
| Gray Goldenrod
(Solidago nemoralis) |
yellow | August | 1-2 ft. | X | X | |||
| Stiff Goldenrod
(Solidago rigida) |
yellow | August | 3 ft. | X | X | |||
| Showy Goldenrod
(Solidago spectosa) |
yellow | August | 3 ft. | X | X | |||
| Joe-Pye-Weed
(Eupatorium purpurelm) |
purple | August | 6 ft. | X | X | |||
| Wild Iris
(Iris shrevei) |
violet | June | 2-3 ft. | X | X | |||
| Ironweed
(Verononia fasciculata) |
red | July | 2-5 ft. | X | X | |||
Sources: WDOT Project 1161-06-62, USH 51 Columbia--Portage County Line; Prairie Seed Catalog, Prairie Seed Source, North Lake, Wisconsin; Native Wildflowers, Grasses, Plants and Seeds, Prairie Nursery, Westfield, Wisconsin.
| Barrier Material* | ||||||
| Landscape Treatment** | Metal | Wood | Concrete | |||
| Limited (1) | Barrier
Landscape Total |
1.00
.05 1.05 |
Barrier
Landscape Total |
1.50
.05 1.55 |
Barrier
Landscape Total |
1.66
.05 1.71 |
| Average (2) | Barrier
Landscape Total |
1.00
.08 1.08 |
Barrier
Landscape Total |
1.50
.08 1.58 |
Barrier
Landscape Total |
1.66
.08 1.74 |
| Extensive (3) | Barrier
Landscape Total |
1.00
.22 1.22 |
Barrier
Landscape Total |
1.50
.22 1.72 |
Barrier
Landscape Total |
1.66
.22 1.88 |
Notes:
Multipliers are given using least expensive noise abatement, metal wall alone, as base. Base = 1.0. These estimates are approximate. Actual costs will depend
upon the exact nature of the design, site conditions and maintenance concerns.
* Costs for barrier materials based on average unit cost ($/linear foot) from Appendix A.
** Landscape treatment cost based on landscaping along 100 linear feet of barrier and extending 15' into R.O.W. from barrier.
(1) Limited landscaping includes a continuous, single row hedge planted along barrier wall with remainder of landscape area (15' x 100') seeded with wild
flower/grass mixture.
(2) Average landscaping includes a multi-row/mass planting of shrubs of various heights and occasional overstory trees (i.e. 3 per 100 linear feet). Remainder of
landscape area (10' x 100') seeded with wild flower/grass mixture.
(3) Extensive landscaping includes 3' retaining wall extending partial length of barrier segment (i.e. 40'-50'); multi-row/mass planting of shrubs of various heights
and occasional ornamental trees (i.e. 3 per 100 linear feet). Remainder of landscape area (10' x 100') seeded with wild flower/grass mixture.
The following information was derived from the Discover Milwaukee Catalog and the neighborhood poster series, both published by
the City Department of City Development. Map 2 references the location of the neighborhoods identified below by the numbers in
parenthesis.
Near North Side (Harambee (1) and North Division (2))
This area was initially settled by Germans. Other ethnic groups represented include Polish, Dutch, Jewish, and Black. After WWII
the Black population grew steadily, outnumbering the Germans by 1960. Today this area has become one of the most integrated
sections of Milwaukee.
* This neighborhood was home to Borchert Field. Built in 1902, Borchert Field functioned as Milwaukee's major sports stadium until
the construction of County Stadium in the early 1950's made it obsolete. It was located on 8th and Chambers, directly int he path of
the I-43 freeway corridor. In 1952 the site was cleared for freeway construction.
Far Northwest Side (Old Town of Granville)
Until the 1950's Granville was a major center for dairying and truck farming. The area was predominantly German, but many Irish
also settled there. Today the area remains a mix of rural farmland, large lot old suburban, and newer, higher density suburban
development.
* The interchange at Mill Road and Highway 45 is the site of old West Granville's "downtown".
West Side (The Valley (4); Merrill Park (5); Marquette (6))
The area just west of downtown contains a mix of social classes and ethnicity. Many of the very wealthy families built large homes
along Grand Avenue (Wisconsin Avenue) while members of the working class tended to locate directly to the west, toward the
Menomonee Valley.
In 1880, Sherburn S. Merrill located his railroad shops in the Menomonee Valley. The railroad industry soon grew to be the largest
employer in Milwaukee. Workers came from many ethnic backgrounds, but the Irish clearly dominated the working class Merrill Park
neighborhood. In the Valley, sometimes referred to as "Pigsville", livestock farming and slaughterhouses provided much of the local
employment. This neighborhood was physically removed from areas on top of the bluff, resulting in the creation of an isolated and
independent neighborhood dominated by Germans and Slovaks.
Far West Side (Story Hill (3))
The area west of the Menomonee River began to develop in the late 1920's as access was provided by the Interurban Railway. The
area didn't experience rapid development until after WWII when demand for suburban development was very high. As such, this area
is characterized as a post-WWII suburb.
Near South Side (Walker's Point (9); Historic South Side (10))
The neighborhood just south of downtown exhibit a small scale, solid urban residential character. This character is reflected in the small
scale of the numerous neighborhood businesses, e.g. corner stores, taverns and restaurants. There are few tall buildings and the skyline
is distinguished by a profusion of church spires.
Industry became increasingly important in the area after the Civil War. Proximity to Lake Michigan and the Menomonee and
Kinnickinnic Rivers gave this area strategic advantages. The Allen-Bradley clock tower remains both a neighborhood and city
recognized landmark.
Walker's Point is recognized as Milwaukee's oldest neighborhood. It has always existed as an ethnically mixed neighborhood. Many
Polish families initially settled here and are responsible for the construction of many of the prominent churches. A sizeable influx of
Mexicans and Puerto Ricans since the 1940's has resulted in Walker's Point becoming the center of Wisconsin's largest Hispanic
community.
The Historic South Side is less ethnically mixed than Walker's Point, being predominantly Polish. Likewise, many visually prominent
churches were built in this neighborhood, notably St. Josaphat Basilica.
South East Side (Bayview (11) and Tippecanoe (13))
Bayview began as a company town. The Milwaukee Iron Company, and iron and steel rolling mill, was opened by Eber Ward in 1868.
Because of the need for skilled metal workers, many were imported from Great Britain. This area developed as the most distinct British
community in Milwaukee.
Tippecanoe was settled by farmers. The extension of streetcar service to the area in the 1890's spurred some development. John
Saveland, who owned large tracts of land in the area, had planned on developing the area as an upper income suburban residential
community. However, his plans never materialized and the area became populated with mostly blue-collar workers. The name
Tippecanoe is derived from a Republican party rally call and was chosen by Saveland, an outspoken local Republican.
Far South Side (Morgandale (12))
This area consisted of productive farmland, woodland, and wetlands. Truck farming and greenhouses, many specializing in flowers,
became the livelihood for the predominantly German and Polish settlers.
Mitchell Airport was developed on wet and marshy land. Construction began in 1926. Today the area is a mix of old and new
suburban development. Much of the area south of College Avenue has remained in low density development, retaining much of its
original rural/farm character.
A. Barrier Location
Hwy.
predominant sun exposure: front/back/side
entry/exit ramp
width:
B. Predominant Land Use:
D. Specific Context
1. Neighborhood Character
- old/new; homogeneous/diverse; describe:
- highway elevation: cut/fill/at grade:
- ethnic heritage: