Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
5.14 Quiet Areas as Solution to Decrease People's
Annoyance
To efficiently combat the invasion of noise pollution, one possible solution is to
offer quiet areas to inhabitants. In fact Ohrstrom et al. (
2006
) have proved that the
percentage of annoyed subjects when exposed at different sound levels (
L
Aeq, 24 h
)
with access to a quiet site their level of annoyance decreases compared with people
without access to a quiet site (Fig.
5.8
).
In this study was demonstrated that dwellers who have access to quiet indoor and
outdoor areas are less sensitive to annoyance effect by noise dose. The reduction of
sound level perceived is of 5 dB at the most exposed sites. Of course, to protect
people the level of the sound from traffic should not exceed 60 dB (
L
Aeq, 24 h
) even
if the dwellers have access to a quiet side.
This research confirms how important, from a psychological point of view, is the
availability of a quiet site. This provision does not reduce the physical effect of
noise but contributes significantly to the psychological effects that in turn modifies
the physiological reaction of the human body.
5.15 The Aesthetic Component of Soundscape
Interpretation
Acoustic comfort, defined as the state of mind that expresses satisfaction with the
acoustic environment, should be the main outcome expected by urban park visitors.
However, there is scant and fragmented information about the processes that create
this type of comfort. A multivariate model has been proposed by Tse et al. (
2012
)
approaching the study of soundscape in four parks of Hong Kong. They have
included in a questionnaire, administrated to 595 respondents, natural rather than
Fig. 5.8
Percentage of
annoyed subjects at
different sound levels
(
L
Aeq, 24 h
) for individual
without (
black bars
) and
with (
white bars
) access to a
quiet site in their dwelling
areas (Reproduced with
permission from
¨
hrstr¨m
et al.
2006
)
Search WWH ::
Custom Search