Analysing and mapping spatial and temporal dynamics of urban traffic noise pollution: a case study in Kahramanmaraş, Turkey

  • Hakan Doygun
  • Derya Kuşat Gurun


This study aimed at quantifying noise pollution from urban traffic in the city of Kahramanmaraş, Turkey. A total of 114 measurements for the equivalent noise level (L Aeq) were made at 38 urban locations classified as “residential areas”, “residential and commercial areas” and “industrial areas” according to the national regulations, during morning, mid-day and evening hours. Our findings tabulated and mapped revealed that mean noise level in “residential and commercial areas” was highest relative to the other land-use types. Minimum and maximum values of noise pollution were recorded during the mid-day and evening hours, regardless of the land-use types. Noise limit values were exceeded at two locations only out of 38 based on the national regulation criteria and at over half of the locations based on the international criteria.


Kahramanmaraş Noise map Noise pollution Traffic noise Urban traffic 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alberola, J., Flindell, I. H., & Bullmore, A. J. (2005). Variability in road traffic noise levels. Applied Acoustics, 66, 1180–1195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anonymous (2004a). Kahramanmaras urban population between the years 1950 and 2000. Results of general census 2000, Turkish Republic State Institute of Statistics, Ankara.Google Scholar
  3. Anonymous (2004b). Environment report of Kahramanmaras: 2003. Kahramanmaras Governorship, The Directorate of Environment and Forestry, Kahramanmaras.Google Scholar
  4. Anonymous (2005). Regulation of assessment and management of environmental noise. Official Journal No.: 25862, Date: 01 July 2005. Retrieved from
  5. Anonymous (2006). Number of motor vehicles in K.Maraş between the years 1996 and 2004. Turkish Republic Institute of Statistics, Ankara.Google Scholar
  6. Barrigon Morillas, M. J., Gomez Escobar, V., Mendez Sierra, J. A., Vilchez Gomez, R., & Trujillo Carmona, J. (2002). An environmental noise study in the city of Caceres, Spain. Applied Acoustics, 63, 1061–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berglund, B., Lindvall, T., & Schwela, D. H. (Eds.) (1999). Guidelines for community noise. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, A. L., & Lam, K. C. (1987a). Urban noise surveys. Applied Acoustics, 20(1), 23–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, A. L., & Lam, K. C. (1987b). Levels of ambient noise in Hon-Kong. Applied Acoustics, 20, 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Calixto, A., Diniz, F. B., & Zannin, P. H. T. (2003). The statistical modeling of road traffic noise in an urban setting. Cities, 20(1), 23–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Doygun, H., & Alphan, H. (2005). Short-term land use changes in Kahramanmaraş urban area Paper presented at the International Congress on Information Technology in Agriculture, Food and Environment, Adana, Turkey, October.Google Scholar
  12. EEA (European Environment Agency) (1999). Environment in the European Union at the turn of the century. Copenhagen, Denmark: European Environment Agency.Google Scholar
  13. Golebiewski, R., Makarewicz, R., Nowak, M., & Preis, A. (2003). Traffic noise reduction due to the porous road surface. Applied Acoustics, 64, 481–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Li, B., & Tao, S. (2004). Influence of expanding ring roads on traffic noise in Beijing city. Applied Acoustics, 65, 243–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Öhrström, E., Skanberg, A., Svensson, H., & Gidlöf-Gunnarsson, A. (2006). Effects of road traffic noise and the benefit of access to quietness. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 295, 40–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Piccolo, A., Plutino, G., & Cannistraro, G. (2005). Evaluation and analysis of the environmental noise of Messina, Italy. Applied Acoustics, 66, 447–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sommerhoff, J., Recuero, M., & Suarez, E. (2004). Community noise survey of the city Valdivia, Chile. Applied Acoustics, 65, 643–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Stanners, D., & Bourdeau, P. (Eds.) (1995). Europe’s environment - the Dobris assessment. European Environment Agency.Google Scholar
  19. Stoilova, K., & Stoilov, T. (1998). Traffic noise and traffic light control. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 3(6), 399–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. TSI (Turkish Standards Institution) (1992). Acoustics – Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise Part 2-Acquisition of Data Pertinent to Land Use, TS 9798 (ISO 1996–2:1987). Turkish Standards Institution.Google Scholar
  21. TSI (Turkish Standards Institution) (2005). Acoustics – Description, Measurement and Assessment of Environmental Noise - Part 1: Basic Quantities and Assessment Procedures, TS 9315 (ISO 1996–1:2003), Turkish Standards Institution.Google Scholar
  22. Zannin, P. H. T., Calixto, A., Diniz, F. B., & Ferreira, J. A. C. (2003). A survey of urban noise annoyance in a large Brazilian city: the importance of a subjective analysis in conjunction with an objective analysis. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 23, 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zannin, P. H. T., Diniz, F. B., & Barbosa, W. A. (2002). Environmental noise pollution in the city of Curitiba, Brazil. Applied Acoustics, 63, 351–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of ForestryUniversity of Kahramanmaraş Sutcu ImamKahramanmaraşTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and ArchitectureUniversity of Kahramanmaraş Sutcu ImamKahramanmaraşTurkey

Personalised recommendations