TEXTE 17/2011 Noise action planning in agglomerations Reduction potentials based on the example of Hamburg | TEXTE | 17/2011 ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH OF THE FEDERAL MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT, NATURE CONSERVATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY Project No. (FKZ) 3707 51 100 Report No. (UBA-FB) 001349/E Noise action planning in agglomerations Reduction potentials based on the example of Hamburg by Marion Bing Christian Popp Lärmkontor GmbH, Hamburg On behalf of the Federal Environment Agency (Germany) UMWELTBUNDESAMT This publication is only available online. It can be downloaded from http://www.uba.de/uba-info-medien-e/4090.html along with a German version. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the official opinions. ISSN 1862-4804 Study performed by: Lärmkontor GmbH Altonaer Poststr. 13b 22767 Hamburg Study completed in: July 2009 (German-language version) Publisher: Federal Environment Agency (Umweltbundesamt) P.O.B. 14 06 06813 Dessau-Roßlau Germany Phone: +49-340-2103-0 Fax: +49-340-2103 2285 Email: [email protected] Internet: http://www.umweltbundesamt.de http://fuer-mensch-und-umwelt.de/ Edited by: Section I 3.4 Noise Abatement of Industrial Plants and Products, Noise Impact Matthias Hintzsche Dessau-Roßlau, March 2011 Abstract According to the environmental noise directive 2002/49/EG noise maps had to be prepared for major roads, major railways, major airports and agglomerations with more the 250.000 persons until 06/30/2007. Based on this results action plans had to be developed. Numerous agglomerations hadn’t been able to deliver the noise maps in time, and had to interpret the term “strategic” also in the case of action planning. The determination of annoyed people according to the environmental noise directive is carried out by calculation. The road traffic is calculated according to the German calculation method VBUS. This calculation method is not designed to indicate the effect of all measures taken for action planning. Therefore, not all measures have an effect of the calculated noise values by VBUS. Some measures are underestimated or cannot be estimated at all by VBUS. The purpose of this project is to identify a cost and time effective solution for agglomerations to estimate the effect of noise mitigation measures on road traffic noise as realistic as possible. Kurzbeschreibung Entsprechend der Richtlinie 2002/49/EG waren bis zum 30.06.2007 Hauptverkehrswege, Großflughäfen sowie Ballungsräume mit mehr als 250.000 Einwohnern zu kartieren und anschließend daran ggfs. Aktionspläne aufzustellen. Zahlreiche Ballungsräume waren jedoch nicht in der Lage, die Lärmkarten termingerecht zu erstellen. Viele Ballungsräume waren somit gezwungen, den Begriff „strategisch“ auch im Zusammenhang mit der Aktionsplanung etwas weiter auszulegen. Bei der Umgebungslärmrichtlinie erfolgt die Bestimmung der Lärmbelastung mit Hilfe von Rechenmodellen. Der Straßenverkehr wird nach der Vorläufigen Berechnungsmethode für den Umgebungslärm an Straßen (VBUS) berechnet. Diese Vorschrift ist jedoch nicht vollständig in der Lage, die bei der Aktionsplanung ergriffenen Maßnahmen abzubilden. Zudem gibt es eine Reihe von Maßnahmen (etwa im Verkehrsmanagement), deren Wirkungen mit der VBUS gar nicht eingeschätzt werden können. Das Ziel dieses Vorhabens ist es, für die Aktionsplanung zum Straßenverkehrslärm in großen Ballungsräumen eine vom Kosten- und Zeitaufwand her vertretbare Lösung zu finden, welche die Lärmminderungseffekte so realitätsnah wie derzeit möglich abzubilden vermag. Noise action planning in agglomerations - Reduction potentials based on the example of Hamburg Table of Contents List of Figures List of Tables 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Adoption and adaptation of the Hamburg calculation model ................................................. 3 3 Analysis of relevant plans and concepts in Hamburg ................................................................ 4 4 The impact of measures on the modal split and traffic parameters ........................................ 7 4.1 Promotion of local public transport ...................................................................................... 9 4.2 Corporate mobility management ........................................................................................13 4.3 Promotion of bicycle traffic ..................................................................................................13 4.4 Spatial shifting of traffic .......................................................................................................14 4.5 Improvement of traffic flow .................................................................................................16 4.6 Summary of impact assessments .........................................................................................18 5 Modelling of road traffic emissions ............................................................................................19 5.1 Input data measure scenario ...............................................................................................19 5.2 Model description ..................................................................................................................20 5.3 Procedure ................................................................................................................................28 5.4 Data interface .........................................................................................................................31 6 Measure validation and model comparison ..............................................................................33 7 Summary ........................................................................................................................................38 8 Annexes ..........................................................................................................................................41 9 References ......................................................................................................................................42 Annex 1: Evaluated planning instruments ........................................................................................44 Annex 2: Model description of TraNECaM/RoTraNoMo ..................................................................45 Annex 3: Transport axes of the Hamburg agglomeration ...............................................................48 Annex 4: Assessment of the effects of measures on the modal split and speeds ..........................49 I Noise action planning in agglomerations - Reduction potentials based on the example of Hamburg List of Figures Fig. 1: Modal Split in the HVV service area in 2006 /4/ ................................................................. 9 Fig. 2: Exemplary area ......................................................................................................................19 Fig. 3: Road sections with assumed reconstruction using low-noise road surfaces (shown in green) ....................................................................................................................20 Fig. 4: Dependence of propulsion noise level on standardized engine speed and engine load .............................................................................................................................22 Fig. 5: Dependence of rolling noise level on speed. The influence of different road surfaces is considered by means of surface-specific adjustments that vary between cars and HDVs. .......................................................................................................22 Fig. 6: Dependency of specific emissions of a car and an HDV with a permissible total mass of less than 7,500 kg on average speed and relative average deviation (standard deviation/average) of the speed curve. Each point represents a driving cycle that has been measured in real traffic conditions. The road surface is SMA 0/11. ..............................................................................................................23 Fig. 7: Comparison of specific emissions of RLS-90 / VBUS and TraNECaM for melted asphalt .....................................................................................................................................23 Fig. 8: Comparison of specific emissions of RLS-90 / VBUS with TraNECaM for melted asphalt, and for TraNECaM for different reference years and melted asphalt road surface ............................................................................................................................24 Fig. 9: Influence of road surface on specific emissions in TraNECaM ........................................25 Fig. 10: Daily traffic load distribution curves of continuous sound pressure level on the example of another major road with 2 lanes with a DTV of 18,639 vehicles ...............26 Fig. 11: Daily traffic load distribution curves of continuous sound pressure level on the example of a 6-lane motorway with a DTV of 41,000 vehicles .......................................26 Fig. 12: Daily traffic load distribution curves of continuous sound pressure level on the example of a 6-lane motorway with a DTV of 106,000 vehicles .....................................27 Fig. 13: Daily traffic load distribution curves of continuous sound pressure level on the example of a 6-lane motorway with a DTV of 121,000 vehicles .....................................27