QUADMAP, three pilots and a methodology

Henk Wolfert1
1

DCMR EPA, The Netherlands

ABSTRACT
QUADMAP a LIFE+ project is running in three European cities, Bilbao, Florence and Rotterdam. The
project aims to develop a methodology for identification, selection and management of quiet urban areas
(QUAs). This because a methodology is still lacking. In the pilot various types of Quiet Urban Areas have
been studied. The areas were analyzed by means of noise mapping, noise measurements and field surveys,
asking visitors to their perception. An expert judgment was also conducted. Based upon these analyses
interventions were proposed for the selected areas in order to improve the current soundscape, and the
overall perception and valuation of the visitors of these areas. The aim of designating and protecting Quiet
Urban Areas is that areas with a good acoustic quality and relatively low noise levels are beneficial for
health because it offers relaxation and reduce stress levels. Some results are already available on the noise
levels determined, perception of wellbeing and all kind of elements present in these areas. Interventions
have been planned and employed. The QUADMAP pilot projects will comprise an ex-ante evaluation as
well, giving more insight on the effects of various interventions such as noise barriers, low noise asphalt
and
nature
features,
on
both
acoustic
and
perception
factors.

1. INTRODUCTION
As the Environmental Noise Directive 2002/49/EC is not clear how to identify, designate and manage
quiet urban areas, the partners in the QUADMAP project decided to develop a methodology that supports
competent bodies in doing this. This methodology is being developed within the LIFE+ QUADMAP
project. QUADMAP is an acronym for QUiet Area Definition and Management in Action Plans. The
QUAMAP project will deliver a guideline that will support authorities by offering them a methodlogy.
Quiet (Urban) Areas are important because they are more or less a haven of quietness or peace for the
residents. Residents can flee from the bustle in the city in order to relax, perceive calmness, nature and
natural sounds. That quiet urban areas are contributing to residents health was already acknowledged by
experts and also by administrations [1]. Partners involved in the QUADMAP project are the municipality of
Florence, the University of Florence (UNIFI), Vie.en.Rose, the municipality of Bilbao, TECNALIA,
BruitParif, the municipality of Rotterdam and DCMR Environmental Protection Agency (DCMR EPA).

2. THE PROVISIONAL METHODOLOGY

In order to develop the methodology an action plan with several steps was drafted. A quick overview is
depicted in figure 1. The first stage (I) of the project was to make an inventory of legislation, policies and
approaches that was already in place in EU Member States. Also the noise maps provided during the first
round of noise mapping according the Environmental Noise Directive (END) delivered input because by
means of these maps quiet or relative quiet areas can be identified. During this stage also the use and
function of these area should be examined. Based on the latter information derived from the noise maps and
use/function potential quiet areas could be pre-selected (II). A subsequent desk study, so is assumed, could
give additional data and information about the selected potential quiet areas (III). Realizing that quiet areas
do have different noise levels, different size, different morphology, different functions and different use it
was also decided to include the possibility to define and designate sub areas. The next step (IV) was to
conduct noise measurements in the selected areas, both short term and long term. During this step also
visitors and users of the selected areas will be questioned by means of standardized questionnaires. The last
step (IV) is the so called management step which means preservation and improvement of the selected area
but also other managerial issues that are relevant to maintain such an area.

1 [email protected]
Inter-noise 2014

Page 1 of 7

Inter-noise 2014

Page 2 of 7

Figure 1- flow-chart of the provisional methodology (source: M.Weber, re 9).

The methodology contains also a special tool developed by BruitParif and the city of Paris [2] that could
be practiced when the noise over the area differs a lot (gradient). One can imagine that especially in large
areas the noise levels are quite different. Along roads, railways, tramways and other noise sources the noise
will be higher than elsewhere in these areas. By means of a grid, laid over the area the noise gradient could
be set. With the help of these gradient also the so called sub-areas could be defined. This can be visualized
by a four color map of the area, see table 1 and figure 2. A radius of 250m is used in this tool. Green and
yellow classified areas can be considered as relatively quiet urban areas, whereas orange and white
classified areas will require substantive interventions in order to reduce the absolute noise levels and/or the
contrasts with the acoustic climate of the surrounding area(s).
Table 1: categories of areas identified by the rQUA method

is the arithmetic average LDEN over the grid cell compared to the adjacent cells

3. PRELIMINARY OUTCOMES
The outcomes of the inventory done during the first step has been reported yet [3,4,5]. It seemed that
some legislation was already in place and some policies too but an approach or methodology was still
lacking. The approaches and/or methodologies used differed a lot, not only Europe-wide but also nationwide. As far as the project identified, numerous indicators to identify quiet urban areas has been used. This
has also been found by the Good Practice Guide on Quiet Areas of the European Environmental Agency
that recently has been published [6]. Based on that data, an expert judgment and previous experiences by
the partners, the preliminary methodology was developed. A rough description of this methodology is
already
been
given.

Inter-noise 2014

Page 2 of 7

Inter-noise 2014

Page 3 of 7

Figure 2: noise levels and noise gradients Rotterdam areas

4. POTENTIAL QUIET URBAN AREAS

Identifying and selecting a quiet urban areas need a deeper look into the latest noise maps. From
these noise maps has been learnt which part of the agglomeration or city is rather quiet compared to
other areas. These areas are often parks, squares, pedestrian areas or areas enclosed by building
(courtyards). Having these areas inventoried the functions and use of such an area were examined.
This could be on spatial, natural characteristics but also on other physical factors. This was mainly
collected from the urban planning department and an additional field inspection. Regarding the use
numerous uses have been found like sporting, reading, playing, relaxing, sun bathing et cetera. By
the consortium it was decided to use an acoustic threshold of 55 dB L DEN and use and function of the
area for pre-selection. Based on the collected data the potential quiet urban areas were selected. In
Florence a number of schoolyards were selected [7], in Bilbao a square in the inner city and a periurban park [8]. Rotterdam selected two city parks. These parks are the Spinoza Park, a small park
enclosed by urban streets and buildings (mainly houses) and the Southern Park, the largest urban
park in The Netherlands. Both parks are situated in the southern part of Rotterdam. The selected
quiet areas in Florence, Rotterdam and in Bilbao are quite divers in function, size and use as can be
derived from the descriptions [9] which made the project quite challenging. It might that a
schoolyard or a square in the inner city is expected to result in other noise levels and other
perceptions
of
the
visitors
and
users?

5. NOISE, JUDGMENT, PERCEPTION AND APPRECIATION

To test whether the provisional methodology would work the selected areas (pilots) were examined on:
o

Occurring noise levels, by conducting short en long term noise measurements.

Visitors and users were questioned on perception and appreciation of the selected area.

Inter-noise 2014

Page 3 of 7

Page 4 of 7
o

Inter-noise 2014

Expert analysis on non-acoustic factors and general characteristics of the pilot areas were executed..

The short term measurements were carried out during the interviews and the long term measurements
were conducted over at least 4 weeks. During the measurements also sound recording were made in the
Florence and Rotterdam pilot areas. A lot of data was collected because samples had been taken every
second. This made that almost every parameter could be estimated, from L 1 to LAeq(24 hr). This information
delivered information on events, background noise, events, dynamics of the noise, et cetera. It appeared
that the noise levels in the Rotterdam parks and the San Marina peri-urban park were rather low compared
to
the
other
pilot
areas.

Figure 3: noise measurements in the Southern Park

By means of a standardized questionnaire, visitors and users of the Quiet Urban Areas have been
interviewed on their perception and appreciation of the area and the surroundings. Some variables that have
been
scrutinized
and
analyzed
are:
Table 2- some variables
Dependent
Perception of the area as good
Perception acoustic environment (noisy-calm)
Perception of the acoustic environment as
pleasant

Independent
LAeq short term
LA50
LAeq long term (Florence)
LA10-LA90
Perception of natural elements as pleasant
Psycho acoustic parameters (sharpness,
roughness, et cetera.

From the analysis it was learnt that most of the correlations between noise levels short term (L Aeq) and
perceived annoyance only is positive in situations where the noise levels are higher than 60 dB(A). The
presence of natural elements in the park is highly appreciated by the respondents.
Ante operam outcomes of the Rotterdam pilots showed that respondents appreciate when the quiet area
(park) is well kept, accessible and when natural and visual elements are present, see table 4. The acoustic
environment was to be find less important which is also confirmed from the conclusion of the ante operam
survey in Florence. In Rotterdam this is due to the fact that the noise levels in these areas are rather low.
The found are LAeq between 52-57 dB(A). For the schoolyards in Florence the reasons could be explained
by the nature of the areas. Expectations of users and visitors of these schoolyards are not especially focused
on noise but more on safety and natural elements. Much of the interviewees, being interviewed on the
schoolyards, were children. It can be assumed that they are not especially interested in noise, especially

Page 4 of 7

Inter-noise 2014

Inter-noise 2014

Page 5 of 7

when playing.
Table 3 scores Rotterdam areas
Element

Visitors
about
Spinoza
park

Air Quality
Safety
Maintenanc

Vistors
about
Southern
Park

10
7*
2*

8
9
3

General
opinion
visitors
Spinoza
park
7
1*
1*

General
opinion
visitors
South. park

Average
general
opinion
about QUA

7
5
1

7
3
1

5.5

3.5

2*
7*

1
7

1*
9*

2
9

1.5
9

5
9

3
10

5
9*

4
10

4.5
9.5

e
Well kept
Services
equipment
Accessibilit
y
Acoustic
environment
Nature
Climate
(humidity,
wind, etc.)
Visual
Smells

Explanation: ex quo means that the score is equal. People were asked what to find of the parks (2 nd
and 3rd column and people visiting the park were asked what to find in general- about quiet urban areas (2
groups of respondents).

6. EXPERT JUDGMENT
An experts judgment was made on non-acoustic factors regarding the area and the noise measurements
have been conducted. These judgments have been made based on a field observations and by consulting the
urban
planning
and
public
green
department.
Table 4: Outcomes expert judgement Southern Park Rotterdam

Inter-noise 2014

Page 5 of 7

Page 6 of 7

Inter-noise 2014

7. ANALYSIS
After completing the measurements, the interviews and the expert analysis the post processing of the
collected data started. Not only the data of the noise measurements but also the data gathered during the
questionnaires and the expert judgment data were scrutinized and analyzed. Statistical analysis with SPSS
have estimated the correlations between perception/appreciation and the noise data. The SPSS analyses
were not only done in Rotterdam but also by UNIFI analyzing the whole dataset.

8. MANAGING QUIET URBAN AREAS

Identification, designation and preservation of Quiet (Urban) Areas is just one side of the same coin. It
is also important to maintain such areas, to improve them and to make the public aware of the presence of
these areas but also to keep these areas attractive. From [10] can be learnt that the owners of the Quiet
Urban Areas or the municipality should:
o

Frequently repeat the interviews among visitors and users of these premises in order to observe
trends in perception and to collect ideas for making these areas more attractive.

To provide quiet areas with provisions that prevent the Quiet (Urban) Areas from mopeds, scooters
and other motorized vehicles. E.g. by means of gates that can not be used by mopeds and scooters
and signs that prohibit those vehicles to enter the area. Local regulation should be in place in order to
do inspections, enforcement and prosecution of the offenders.

The sound in Quiet (Urban) Areas should be preferably dominated by natural noise like bird life,
rustling leaves, playing children, et cetera. In case these sound are missing it could be added by
means of fountains, trees, play grounds or even aviaries.

In order to make Quiet (Urban) Areas more attractive, these areas could be made greener by means
of plants, flowers, trees, bushes or green walls. It contributes to climate adaptation, human health and
makes these areas more attractive.

Quiet (Urban) Areas should be recognizable by signs and shields that show people the route to those
areas and also makes people aware that these areas are present and accessible. Quiet Urban Areas
should be included in walking, hiking and biking routes. The shields could also contain information
of the area and instructions for the visitors.

Page 6 of 7

Inter-noise 2014

Inter-noise 2014

Page 7 of 7

Municipalities should promote the use of Quiet (Urban) Areas by means of a campaign and inform
people about their benefits.

Municipalities should involve the preservation and management of Quiet (Urban) Areas in their
environmental, public green and general policies.

Municipalities could or should involve residents living in the surrounding districts in order to
participate in the management of the Quiet (Urban) Areas.

Large Quiet (Urban) Areas could be guarded by park keepers that also pay attention to misuse of the
area .

It should be noticed that these recommendations also are applicable for quiet areas situated in a rural area.

9. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the preliminary results the following conclusions can be drawn: (I) the stepwise approach
and the triangulation method are considered applicable and usable by local authorities (conclusion from the
Paris workshop with French municipalities in January 2014), (II) the main explanatory factors for
appreciation of quiet urban areas are acoustic as well as non-acoustic including absolute and relative
sound levels, soundscape characteristics and visual characteristics.
As mentioned above the method and instruments have been slightly adjusted incorporating practical
experiences in the pilot studies. During summer 2014 the last interventions are planned in the Rotterdam
pilot areas; the effects of these will be analysed in a post-intervention study at the end this year. The main
aim is to evaluate whether the various interventions resulted in changes (positive or negative) in the
perception and/or valuation of the acoustic and overall environments. Insights gained will be used for final
improvement of the projects guidelines and disseminated internationally. Results, congress papers and
presentations as well as information on future actions are available at the project website,
www.quadmap.eu.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Author may acknowledge the consortium partners and especially the European Commission for
its financial contribution via the LIFE+ fund.

REFERENCES
1. Dutch health council. Quiet areas and health, 1996.
2.
Duguet P, Mietlicki F, Da silva R, Ribeiro C, Gaucher E. Implemented comprehensive approach for
the identification of quiet areas in the city of Paris. Inter-noise 2013. Innsbruck, Austria.
3.
QUADMAP project. report on qua surveys and data analysis, 31 December 2012
4.
Gezer, S. data collection and analysis in the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway and United Kingdom.
DCMR EPA, 2012.
5.
Weber, M. QUADMAP: quiet areas definition and management in action plans introduction.
6.
European Environmental Agency (EEA). Good practice guide on quiet areas 2014.
7.
Bartalucci, C et al.QUADMAP project pilot areas in Firenze, see www.quadmap.eu
8.
Garca, I et all. application of the methodology to assess quiet urban areas in Bilbao: case pilot of
Quadmap. INTERNOISE 2013, New York, USA
9.
Weber, M. Assessing and improving the Soundscape of Urban Parks,. ICBEN2014, Nara,
Japan.
10. Wolfert, H .What can be learnt from the Dutch Noise Act approach on Rural Quiet Areas?
INTERNOISE 2010. Lisbon, Portugal.

Inter-noise 2014

Page 7 of 7