A REPORT – NOISE POLLUTION IN URBAN

AREAS
PLA – 314 SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT
SUBMITTED BY – ARJITA SINGH (181109040)

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING

MANIT , BHOPAL
ABSTRACT

“I have long held the opinion that the amount of noise that
anyone can bear undisturbed stands in inverse proportion to
his mental capacity and therefore be regarded as a pretty
fair measure of it.”
- Authur Schopenhauer
Exposure to noise annoyance due to anthropogenic sources together with noise
sensitivity of public is on the increase especially in developing countries.This study aims
at review of Noise Pollution levels and its sources in the Urban Neighbourhood of
Mathura city. The study observes that mathura city is environmentally noise polluted
and the road traffic , indusries are major souces of it.Noting that the noise level lies
much high than the prescribed limits there is an iminent health risk to the exposed
population if the city. The complexity and magnitude of the problem of Noise Pollution
call for effective and well planned measures in city. Some measures to combat the
problem of Noise Polluiton are disscused in the study to have a sustainable devlopment
in mathura.

Keywords – Noise pollution , Urbanisation , sustainable Development , environment.

CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION

Mordern life has given rise to new form of pollution , noise . Crowded town and cities,
mechanized means of transport, new devices of Recreation and entertainment are
polluting the atmosphere which there continuous noise. Rapid urbanization has led to
various public health challenges, including environmental pollution. Most activities that
cause pollution are essential to meet the needs of the growing population and
development. Therefore preventive measures to minimize pollutants are more practical
than their elimination. Noise is regarded as a pollutant under the air (Prevention and
Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. It has been defined as unwanted sound.consists of
unpleasant obtrusive, annoying, distracting, or persistent sounds that interfere with
sleep or the ability to concentrate or enjoy life. Noise is an underestimated threat that
can cause a number of short- and long-term health problems. It is increasingly
becoming a potential hazard to health, physically and psychologically, and affects the
general well-being of an individual. Excessive noise interferes with people's daily
activities at school, at work, at home, and during leisure time. It can disturb sleep, cause
cardiovascular and psychophysiological effects, reduce performance and provoke
annoyance responses and changes in social behavior.

It also interferes with communication, and this can even endanger life. However, it is a
physical pollutant, not visible and the damage occurs silently, going undetected. This is
also because sensitivity of the human ear gets automatically adjusted to ambient noise
levels, even to increasing noise levels. Moreover, noise pollution control is
overshadowed by other types of pollution such as air, water pollution, largely due to lack
of awareness about its health implications.(3) Epidemiologic studies on hearing and
noise exposure are also lacking although it is the most common preventable cause of
sensori-neural hearing loss.
There are two major settings where noise occurs, viz., community noise and industrial
noise. Community noise (also called environmental noise, residential noise, or domestic
noise) is defined as noise emitted from all sources.

CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW

In recent years heavy urbanization and industrialization has aggravated the

environmental noise problem all around the world and also in Indian Subcontinent. The
increase in the population and the number of circulating vehicles has led to an increase
in noise pollution but noise pollution has been considered less than other contaminants
in the environment (Mansouri et al. 2006) Davis and Masten (2004) stated three valid
reasons as to, why wide spread recognition of noise pollution problem has not
materialized in a similar fashion as have air and water pollution problems. These
reasons are summarized in the definition and perception of noise as a subjective
experience, short decay time and difficulty to associate cause with effect when it comes
to health impacts. Indian cities face a transport crisis characterized by levels of
congestion, noise pollution, traffic fatalities and injuries and inequity for exceeding those
in most European and North American Cities. Indians transport crisis has been
exacerbated by the extremely rapid growth of India’s largest cities in context of low
incomes, limited and outdated transport infrastructure, rampart suburban sprawl,
sharply rising motor vehicle ownership and use, deteriorating bus service, a wide range
of motorized and non-motorized transport modes sharing the roadways and inadequate
as well as uncoordinated land use and transport planning (Panday and verma, 1997).

The need for studies regarding urban noise pollution and its consequences on
environment has motivated various researchers on the problem in several countries
(Ugwuanyi et al., 2004; Zeid et al., 2000; Zheng, 1996; Zannin et al., 2003). Studies
showed that sources of noise are many and varied but many researchers have reported
that road traffic is the predominant and most generalized noise source in urban areas
(Saadu et al., 1998; Bisio, 1996; Nelsen, 1998). Road transportation is next only to
industrial activity in causing ireversible damage to the environment (Ali, 2004;
Chakraborty and Banerijee, 2007; Piccolo et al., 2005; Singal, 2005) the degree of
which has attained global proportions (Brown and Lan, 1987; Kumar and Jain, 1994;
Nirjar et al., 2003; Rao and Rao, 1991). Review of Literature 30 In India along with the
technology the transport need of people increase, which is observed on roads. India
being a developing country is not capable of providing high tech technology to its users
and ultimately density of vehicles on road increases. The major factors that influence
the generation of road traffic noise are: Mean traffic speed, traffic volume, and gradient
of the road, proportion of heavy vehicles and nature of road surface. In addition the
following factors influence the noise level at a reception point located at a reference
distance from the highway: Distance between the source and the receiver, ground
absorption, obstruction due to noise barriers, obstruction due to a restricted angle of
view and Reflection effect. (Shukla et al., 2005) The first noise survey in the world was
carried out in New York City in 1929 (Schultz, 1982). After that only a few studies were
done in fourties and fifties (Erying, 1946; Davis, 1948; Braodbent, 1957). Pioneering
work in the field of noise measurement, analysis and evaluation in India was done by
National physical laboratory, New Delhi in the late fifties. The results showed that day
time city noise varied for 60 dB in quit localities to 95 dB in congested busy localities
(Sampth et al., 2004). Research in the field of noise picked up mainly from the mid 60’s
of the present century (Embelton, 1963; Rather, 1966; Webb and Warren, 1967;
Griffiths and Langdon, 1968; Johnson and Saunders, 1968). Much of the work done in
the field of noise pollution refers to the monitoring of noise levels either at the work
place (from the point of view of occupational health hazards) or in the ambient
environment to assess the prevailing community noise levels. Bhattacharya et al. (1985)
and Bhattacharya et al., (1990) have worked on the problems arising due to noise
pollution in textile and pharmaceutical industries. Several workers have monitored the
community noise levels in different parts of the world, the prominent among them being
the surveys in Tokyo (Mochizuki and Imaizumi, 1967), Great Vancouver (Price, 1972),
Madford Massachusetts (Webster, 1973), Sydney (Burgess, 1977), Calcutta (Pancholy
et al., 1967), Hong Kong (Ko, 1979), Gothenberg (Ohrstrom et al., 1988) and Delhi
(Kumar and Jain, 1994) and in Nagpur (Pandya and Verma, 1997). Then Review of
Literature 31 Pandya (2001) studied the noise environment of Delhi, Dehradun, and
Jamshedpur. Several surveys to measure the community noise on festival etc. have
been carried out as well (Pancholy et al., 1981). After that numerous noise surveys
have been conducted in twenty first century, treating the problem of noise pollution in
many cities throughout the world (Guasch et al., 2002; Lie et al., 2002; Morillas et al.,
2005; Zannin et al., 2002; Rao et al., 2004; Alberola, 2005; Labiedowska, 2005; Pucher
et al., 2005; Tansatcha et al., 2005; Gundogdu et al., 2005; Tang and wang, 2007;
Peter et al., 2008 and Rehdanz and Maddison, 2008) and have shown the scale of
discomfort that the noise causes in people’s lives. Another area of interest in the
community noise studies is to assess the community responses to noise from various
sources. A great deal of work has been done to study the community response to traffic
noise (Fisk, 1973; Langdon, 1976; Gambert et al 1976; Rylander et. al., 1976; Hall and
Taylor, 1977; Scultz, 1978, 1982; George et al., 1983; Bjorkman, 1991). In most of the
studies mentioned above, a major contribution towards community noise levels comes
from road traffic noise which is one of the most extensively studied areas of noise
pollution. A relatively large number of workers have studied various aspects of traffic
noise (Blitz, 1973; Cannelli, 1974; Kumar and Jain, 1994; Zheng, 1996; Suksaard et al.,
1999; Abdel- Raziq et al., 2003; Ramis et al., 2003; Bhadram, 2003; Pandya, 2003;
Georgiadou, 2004; Mishra et al 2010; Swain et al., 2012; Jaddan et al., 2013). It is
evident from the number of studies mentioned above that road traffic noise is a major
source of environmental noise in urban areas. Additionally traffic noise has significant
economical impacts on house prices. Theebe (2004) reported that in a rising market,
the impacts of traffic noise on house prices reached a maximum of 12 percent with an
average of about 5 percent. Data collection and agglomeration is one of the important
elements in assessment and management of urban environmental noise (Sommerhoff
et al., 2004). Analysis of traffic noise generally constitutes an important component of
any Review of Literature 32 environmental impact assessment which is needed for
highway development and improvement (Bhattacharya et al., 2002). Additionally
measurement and estimation of traffic noise are significant tasks that can lead to the
development of efficient methods of control (Geordiadou et al., 2004). 2.2 Effects of
Noise pollution Noise, is defined as unwanted sound that causes various health effects
(Paul, 1993) on human, plants and animals (Bjorn et al., 2010; Slabbekoom and Peet,
2003). Health effects are differing from one person to another according to several
determinants like sound level, frequency and the time of duration to noise pollution.
Exposure to noise pollution causes various health effects, including, hypertension,
hearing loss, sleep disturbance, change in skin temperature and blood circulation (Loeb,
1986). The average sound level (Day-Night Level) should not exceed 40 dB(A)
according to the US Environmental Protection Agency standards (Rosenhall, 1990). In
other respect, the average sound level during day time should not exceed 65 dB (A)
according to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Whereas
exposure to noise pollution at 85 dB(A) should not exceed 40 hours per week. For every
additional 3 dB(A), the maximum exposure time is reduced by a factor 2, e.g. exposure
to noise pollution at 88 dB(A) should not exceed 20 hours (Leighton, 2009). Spain
researchers found that in urban areas householders are willing to pay approximately
four Euros per decibel per year for noise reduction (Barreiro et al., 2005). The growth in
noise is unsustainable because it involves direct as well as cumulative adverse health
effects. It also adversely affects future generations and has socio cultural, aesthetic and
economic effects (Yilmaz and Ozer, 2005). A latest study by Gupta and Ghatak (2011)
found that noise has a significant effect on hearing loss, sleep disturbance, abnormal
heart beat and speech communication problem.

With few exceptions, most noise attenuation studies have agreed that at least some
reduction in noise level can be achieved by the use of roadside vegetation (Fang
Review of Literature 47 and Ling, 2005; Hendricks, 1989; Huddart, 1990; Price, 1988).
In urban areas trees can be used as buffers which are able to reduce noise up to 5–10
dB (Huddart, 1990). Hedges acting as a wind breaks can produce considerable noise
attenuation (Herrington, 1976). Belt of tree which exceeds 30 m could reduce noise up
to 4–8 dB (Embleton, 1963; Huddart, 1990; Lercher, 1995). Finding of Embleton (1963);
Erying (1946); Wiener and Keast (1959) on sound reduction by plants explain
importance of canopy and types of leaves in reducing noise level. Among these studies,
the greatest reduction was a 9 dB reduction with vegetation belts between 20 and 30
meters in width (Huddart, 1990).The differences in the findings of these studies can be
attributed, at least in part, to the wide variety of measurement methods, tree species
and heights, vegetation densities, and noise sources used.
CHAPTER 3 – STUDY AREA

The name Mathura (Braj region) conjures up thousand images of the rich cultural,
mythological architectural, ecological and spiritual heritage. Mathura is the nuclei of the
Braj land where the beauty lies in the Environment, The mythological and Historical
importance of its people and of the region and its People.

 Area (Sq.Km.) - 3,340,00

 Number of Tehsils – 4

 Number of Vikas Khands – 10

 Number of Towns – 25

 Number of villages - 874

GEOGRAPHICAL FEATURES

 Mathura is located at 27.28 degree north to 77.41 degree east.

 It has an average elevation of 174 meters from sea level. The climate of Mathura
is tropical extreme type with very hot summers with temperatures rising beyond
44 degree Celsius.

 The cold and foggy winters in Mathura District, with temperature dipping to 5
degree Celsius attracts the nature loving tourists also.

 The average rainfall is 593 mm, received mostly during the monsoons from July
to September.
 The survey was conducted in the Neighborhood Area , to analyse the result four
points were fixed on Artrial , Subartrial , local Road and Local Road intersection to
formulate the results of Noise Pollution in the area and its effects and the solution.

Figure 1 . The Study area survey points.

The Neighborhood area chosen for the study is very dense and haphazard. There are
more than 120 households in the study area having population of 600-700 persons.

The survey points were fixed at the different roads in order to find the difference
between the intensity of the noise pollution and results were drived from the same.

A comparative analysis of subjective evaluation (population responses) by inhabitants of

areas of high and loe noise incidence, such as a residentail area and the downtown
area of the city , with noise level lower and higher than 65Db(A), respectively , may
provide information indicating that there are potential negative effects on the inhabitant’s
health.
This is a research strategy that allows one to correlate percieved organic effects and
individual sensivity noise in Urban regions, and it can be coroborrated by the objective
ealuations, that is, sound-level measurements.

CHAPTER 4- ANALYSIS

The survey was conducted at the four points at different times (8:00AM, 2:00PM,and
8:PM) to know the results of peak and non-peak hours and the noise at different roads.
The survey analysis was done by the mobile app known as soundmeter by jinysis.

Point A- Artrial road (8:00 AM)

This sample was taken at the morning peak hour in between 8:00-8:05 AM. The
average sound recorded at this time was 41.4 Db. Although it is the morning peak hour
normally people rush to their workplace and chidrens to office this time and there is high
traffic on the roads. But due to covid-19 the traffic is not that much high and it is below
65Db . That means it is bearable and cause no or minimum effects on the residents
living near by in the area.
While in the gauge it is showing the highest sound 52 Db which equal to noise inside
the car and the average of 42.3 db slightly same as 41.4 db because of time gap of two
minutes. So, the analysis shows that in the morning peak are noise pollution is low and
the sound is bearable.

Point A- Artrial Road (2:00 PM)

In the afternoon the road is comparatively busy than the morning as it constitute of
commercial area and also have some repairing and maintainance shops on both sides
of the road . As results are shown here the peak sound value is 72.2 Db and the
average sound is 54.4 db. According to the gauge the meter shows sound 65.0 db. As it
is equal to the limit it can be categorised as the noise pollution and can have adverse
effect on the people’s health and environment.

Point A – Artrial Road (8:00AM)

This sample shows the highest peak sound of the day that is 87.3 Db, whereas the
average is 54.9 Db. The gauge value shows the sound is equal to the noisy office.
Certain reason for the highest noise pollution in area are as follows:-

 As the time is evening peak hour so traffic is high.

 This Artrial road is directly connected to highway so freight vehicles increase in
the evening peak hour.
 Recreational activities, near by market.

Point B- Subartrial Road