The differents fonctions of the GIpSynoise tool

During the project, the cities often expressed their interest to go beyond the European requirements (in particular with regard to the noises of activity, of neighbourliness…). They also underline the difficulty of the choice of the ranges of the colours which must be legible, in coherence as much as possible with the codes colour of the other vigilance and alarm systems, and with the standard ISO 1996-2. The choice to vary in a chromatic way (yellow to red) and of intensity (light to dark) appears well adapted.

The crossing of the acoustic data and the exposed population allows the visualization of the influence of the noise levels on the populations. This crossing could be the subject of a logarithmic curve treatment in order to better account for the increasing and nonlinear importance of the crossing of the two factors. The description of “sensitive” areas according to criteria specific to local specificities would be better.

Counting exposed populations by classes of 5dB (A) and by noise sources brings also useful information for the action plan definition. A map integrating the summation of the different noise sources (multi-exposition) is not required in all member state regulation. 

The exposed surfaces by classes of 5dB (A) and by noise sources, are considered to be relevant for:
•    urban projects, rehabilitation plans
•    advantage of a global indicator (all noise sources)
•    identification of the principal noise sources
•    the planning of the solutions adapted to each noise sources and each type of building.

Counting dwellings, schools and hospitals by classes of 5 dB (A) and sound sources, cover a great importance for the locating, the protection and the knowledge of the exposure levels of the sensitive areas. The possibility of showing the frequentation of the establishments, and the summation of the all noise sources, would bring more in term of information in a decisional logic and planning. The importance of these maps is in direct relationship to the action plans and the transport plans. The limit is in the difficulty of having a GIS layer containing an exhaustive list of those “sensitive” buildings.

The exposed population maps bring direct and clear information, easily translatable in term of stakes of environmental policy.

The noise maps and tables, in a representation of locating bring the detail, on a smaller scale, of all the indicators necessary to a decision-making. The contribution of each sound source, and their summation, will help to classify  territory, according to acoustic criteria.

The conflict maps (presenting a difference between what exists and objectives qualitative and/or rules) will make it possible to identify the sectors, the urban areas on which the sound environment must be taken into account firstly. Those will facilitate a direct reading of the cartographies, in action logic.

The edition of an automatic report “data to be transmitted to the European Commission” will consist in generating, once all the integrated source data, a report integrating all the maps and the tables required by the European Commission in a standard form. 

The risks maps and tables of annoyance and sleep disturbance consist of a crossing of the acoustic data calculated with the curves of relation dose-answers published by the European Commission.
 
Lastly, noise maps and tables, in a representation of scenario of action plans, shows the impact of various actions carried out in order to limit noise exposure (reduction of the traffic, installation of new buildings…) in term of exposure of urban areas and the populations.

Some light gaps exist between expectations of the European Commission on the one hand and those of partner cities on the other hand. One of expectations of the cities is to obtain “microscopic” information. But these variations are more complementary than divergent.



• CONTEXT
• TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
• FOLLOWING WORK
• GREATER LYON METHODS
• GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT NOISE