Evaluation Of Noise Pollution In Urban Parks

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment (2006) 118: 423–433 DOI: 10.1007/s10661-006-1506-6

c Springer 2006 

EVALUATION OF NOISE POLLUTION IN URBAN PARKS PAULO HENRIQUE TROMBETTA ZANNIN∗ , ANDRESSA MARIA COELHO FERREIRA and BANI SZEREMETTA Universidade Federal do Paran´a, Laborat´orio de Ac´ustica Ambiental, Departamento de Engenharia Mecˆanica, Centro Polit´ecnico, Bairro Jardim das Am´ericas, CEP: 81531-990, Curitiba, Paran´a, Brazil (∗ author for correspondence, e-mail: [email protected])

(Received 19 May 2005; accepted 29 July 2005)

Abstract. The present study provides an evaluation of noise pollution in six Urban Parks located in the city of Curitiba, Brazil. Equivalent noise levels (Leq ) were measured in 303 points (each point measured during 3 min) spread throughout the Parks. Measured values were confronted with local legislation (Law 10625) allowed limits, and the Parks were thus classified as “acoustically polluted or unpolluted”. Measured values were also evaluated according to international legislation: Decree no. 12 of the City Council of Rome, DIN 18005 for German cities, the World Health Organization, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Urban parks in the downtown area of Curitiba, surrounded by roads of heavy traffic and in the midst of intense commercial activities, do not satisfy any of the standards used. The most noise-polluted parks in Curitiba were the Public Walk Park and the Botanical Garden Park, with measured Leq of 64.8 dB(A) and 67 dB(A). Keywords: environmental noise, health, noise, noise pollution, open public spaces, public urban parks, US EPA, WHO

1. Introduction According to the World Health Organization, noise pollution is nowadays the third most hazardous environmental type of pollution, preceded only by air (gas emission) and water pollution (Khilman, 2004). Pollution in large cities is an evergrowing problem due to the fact that the urban environment is becoming increasingly crowded, busy and noisy. Since the seventies, “noise” has been largely considered as a major problem of annoyance in cities. Many field surveys have been conducted to evaluate the outdoor noise environment in several countries (Canelli, 1974; Langdon, 1976; Sadan et al., 1986; Brown and Lam, 1987; Brown, 1994; Recuero et al., 1987; Ramalingeswara and Seshagiri, 1992; Chakrabarty et al., 1997; Arana and Garcia, 1998; Abdel-Raziq et al., 2000; Pandya, 2001; Zannin et al., 2001, 2002, 2003; Morillas et al., 2002; Korfali and Massoud, 2003; Diniz and Zannin, 2004, 2005; Brambilla, 2004). Urban parks are one of the typical subjects of urban open space, with some environmental elements such as green area, water front, sports facilities, agreeable landscape. People come to urban parks for various purposes, such as rest, sports,

424

P. H. TROMBETTA ZANNIN ET AL.

relaxation, games, cultural events, sightseeing. Our goal here was to evaluate the degree of noise pollution in urban parks located inside a large and crowded South American city. The city chosen is Curitiba, with its around 1.6 million inhabitants (IBGE, 2000), located in southern Brazil (25◦ 25 40 S and 49◦ 16 23 W), approximately 400 km south from S˜ao Paulo, and 800 km south from Rio de Janeiro. Curitiba is known in Brazil as its “ecological capital”, and has in the preservation of green urban areas one of the main instruments of municipal strategies in environmental policies (Zannin and Szeremetta, 2003). The city has 81 million m2 of green areas within its urban perimeter, made into urban parks. This turned Curitiba into a city with one of the highest ratios of green area per inhabitant in the world, and the one with the highest ratio in Brazil: 50 m2 of green area per inhabitant. This value is much higher than the one recommended by the United Nations Organization, which recommends 16 m2 of green area per inhabitant (Mendon¸ca, 1992). The parks of Curitiba, in their majority, are located in watersheds, many of them with water courses (rivers and lakes) (Zannin and Szeremetta, 2003), in strictly urban regions, surrounded by roads with heavy traffic flow, rendering them exposed to another type of pollution, noise pollution. The administration of the city of Curitiba, in its environmental protection policy, has created in 1995 the Law 8583, dividing the city in urban zones with defined noise emission limits. The legislation has been revised in 2002 into Law 10625 (EPA, 2002). Urban public Parks are classified into “green areas”, for which the diurnal (7 P.M. to 10 P.M.) allowed limits are of Leq = 55 dB(A). In order to evaluate whether these limits are actually met, this investigation has been conducted examining the six largest city Parks of Curitiba: 1. Public Walk Park, 2. Barigui Park, 3. S˜ao Louren¸co Park, 4. Botanical Garden Park, 5. Tingui Park, and 6. Tangu´a Park.

2. Methodology Field work involved measuring noise levels in several points inside each of the 6 parks. The points have been chosen using a non-regular grid (Brown and Lam, 1987; Zannin et al., 2002, Zannin and Szeremetta, 2003). The points have been preferentially located along the pathways mostly used by the park visitors. The total number of measured points was of 303. Table I displays the distribution of these 303 points among the six parks. All measurements were carried out during working days (Monday to Friday), under ideal meteorological conditions: no wind and no rain, and between 5 and 7 P.M. This time of the day represents the peak in number of visitors, as well as the peak in traffic intensity in the roads surrounding the parks. The duration of each measurement was of 3 min. The software Evaluator BK 7820 has been used to generate an average value of the measured noise levels for each park, thus allowing comparison with local and international legislations and standards (Table II).

425

EVALUATION OF NOISE POLLUTION IN URBAN PARKS

TABLE I Number of measured points in each park Urban park

Number of measured points

Public Walk Park S˜ao Louren¸co Park Barig¨ui Park Botanical Garden Park Tingui Park Tangu´a Park Total number of measured points

39 47 70 57 47 43 303

TABLE II Noise emission limits the according to land use of the area Law 10625 Curitiba

Land use of the area

Decree no. 12 Rome

DIN 18005

Leq dB(A) Leq dB(A) Leq dB(A) Leq dB(A) Leq dB(A) Leq dB(A) 7 am–10 pm 10 am–7 am 6 am–10 pm 10 pm–6 am 6 am–10 pm 10 pm–6 am

Acoustically sensitive: school, park, hospital

50

40

Prevailing residential

50

40

Cemeteries, parks

55

55

60

50

Residential and green areas (parks)

55

45

Mixed areas

60

55

Mixed: commercial/ residential

60

50

Downtown

65

55

65

55

65

55

Industrial

70

60

70

60

65

55

Noise levels measured in the parks of Curitiba have been compared with the limits of outdoor ambient noise set for: 1. urban zones of Curitiba, by Law 10625 (EPA, 2002); 2. urban zones in Rome, by the Decree no. 12 of the City Council of Rome (2004); 3. several urban zones in Germany, by DIN 18005 (1987); 4. outdoor living areas, by the World Health Organization, WHO (1999); and 5. outdoor living areas by the United States Environment Protection Agency, US EPA (1974). The noise limits established by the documents cited in this study can be found in Table II. All three urban legislations (from Curitiba, Rome and Germany) establish specific limits for public parks. Several standards have been used in order to put the local noise pollution within a broader global context of care about this worldwide pollution problem.

426

P. H. TROMBETTA ZANNIN ET AL.

2.1. E QUIPMENT USED Noise levels were measured using Br¨uel & Kjaer Mediator 2238 type 1 integrating and logging sound level meter, and Br¨uel and Kjaer Investigator 2260 type 1, with BZ 7203 software for data logging. Values measured were treated with software Evaluator, BK 7820 (Br¨uel and Kjaer, 2004). 2.2. DEFINITIONS In this section some of the terms used in this survey will be explained: 1) Sound pressure: It is the pressure that reaches the eardrum of human and animal ears, caused by the oscillating movement of the molecules in the medium (generally the air). It is given in Pascal (Pa). 2) Sound pressure level: It is given by the formula below, where the reference sound pressure is the minimum sound pressure that can be perceived by the human ear. Its value is equivalent to 20 μPa (20×10−6 Pa)   SPL = 10 log p 2 / p02 where: p: sound pressure; p0 : reference sound pressure = 20 μPa (20×10−6 Pa). 3) dB(A): The ear sensitivity to sound is dependent on the frequency of the sound being detected. Frequencies at the extremes of the hearing frequency range are not as well detected as frequencies in the middle of the range. To account for this when measuring sound, a weighing curve is used to place more emphasis on frequencies to which human ears are more sensitive. The “A” weighing curve is generally used for the purpose of measuring sound levels. The sound weighed by the “A” curve approaches the perception of the human ear and its value is given in dB(A). Some typical values: Leq ≤ 30 dB(A) – bedrooms Leq ≤ 35 dB(A) – classrooms, libraries, medical premises Leq ≈ 65 dB(A) – business offices with normal conversation Leq ≈ 75 dB(A) – street with intense traffic measured at the curb Leq ≈ 85 dB(A) – street with heavy lorries passing at 6 m of distance 4) Equivalent sound level (Leq ): Noise levels are extremely variable over time, going up and down continuously, making it difficult to be evaluated. In order to make things easier, the equivalent level was defined as a continuous sound level that would produce the same effect on the human ear if compared to the actual noise observed during the measurement, with all the variations embedded. So, Leq can substitute all variations with a single value of the noise level. The equivalent sound level is also given in dB(A).

EVALUATION OF NOISE POLLUTION IN URBAN PARKS

427

3. Description of the Parks Table III displays data on the parks surveyed in this study, listed chronologically according to their date of inauguration. Table III provides the area occupied by each park as well as their distances with respect to downtown Curitiba. Figure 1 shows a map of the city with the parks locations. 3.1. A

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PARKS IS PROVIDED BELOW

a) Public Walk Park: Its vegetation is composed of fragments of small-medium sized native trees with maximum average height of 12 m, as well as ornamental species, with the highest coverage by Eucalyptus sp. and Tabebuia chrysotricha, and cinammon Ocotea pulchella and Ocotea puberula. The park is intensely visited and has a very high degree of urbanization. b) S˜ao Lourenc¸o Park: Localized in the city zone of S˜ao Louren¸co, northern region of Curitiba. Though this park occupies a large area, its vegetation does not include any representative species of its original vegetation. It displays only fragmented areas of small sized native trees, which, along with other exotic species, reach an average maximum height of 13 m. The park is intensely visited, also with a high degree of urbanization. c) Barig¨ui Park: The name “Barig¨ui” is of indian origin, meaning “spiny fruit river”, referring to the pines of native pine trees Araucaria angustifolia, still present and characteristic of this region of Brazil. The park is also the largest area of preservation in the central region of the city. Its vegetation is basically composed of a mixed forest with Araucaria, occupying an area of 500,000 m2 of native primary and secondary forests. It is very intensely visited, and has a median degree of urbanization. d) Botanical Garden of Curitiba: Localized in eastern Curitiba, it has a 270,000 m2 area with a reduced coverage by a mixed forest, divided into three strata. The TABLE III The 6 Parks evaluated and listed according to the year of foundation Urban Park

Year of foundation

Area (m2 )

Distance to downtown (km)

Public Walk Park S˜ao Louren¸co Park Barig¨ui Park Botanical Garden Park Ting¨ui Park Tangu´a Park

1886 1972 1972 1991 1991 1996

69,285 203,000 1,400,000 270,000 380,000 235,000

1.00 3.50 5.00 2.50 7.00 6.00

428

P. H. TROMBETTA ZANNIN ET AL.

Figure 1. Urban parks in the city of Curitiba.

highest stratum has 15 m-high trees and displays 60% of coverage; the intermediate (inferior arboreal stratum) has trees of up to 8 m of average height, and coverage of 50%, and the third, lowest stratum, of bushy-herbaceous nature, has an average height of 1.5 m, and coverage of 30%.

429

EVALUATION OF NOISE POLLUTION IN URBAN PARKS

e) Tingui Park: Such as Barig¨ui, and like Tangu´a Park, the vegetation of Tingui Park is also composed basically of mixed forest with Araucaria, with small fragments of native primary forest, and secondary forests. These three parks are contiguous forming the largest linear urban park in Brazil. It receives a median degree of public visitation, and displays an intermediate degree of alteration. f) Parque Tangu´a: The vegetation coverage of Tangu´a Park is similar to that of Tingui mentioned above. The park also displays cultivated species, with an area covered by Pinus sp. next to the native forest. It has a median degree of visitation, and an intermediate degree of alteration.

4. Results and Discussion The evaluation of noise levels in Urban Parks of the city of Curitiba has shown that the Public Walk, Botanical Garden, and S˜ao Louren¸co Parks are acoustically polluted. The average sound levels measured in these parks – Public Walk, Leq = 64.8 dB(A); Botanical Garden, Leq = 67 dB(A); S˜ao Louren¸co, Leq = 59.1 dB(A) – are well above the limits established for parks by the municipal Law 10625 of the city of Curitiba. These levels are also above the limits set by the Decree no. 12 of the city of Rome, and by the German standard DIN 18005 (see Tables IV and V). It can be argued that the municipal legislation in Curitiba may be setting a nonrealistic limit for noise levels that is difficult to be met – 55 dB(A) during the day – considering: – The bad conditions, in general, of the urban streets; – The poor maintenance of some circulating vehicles: cars, buses, motorcycles. It is not rare to find circulating vehicles with damaged exhaust system or even without it; TABLE IV Average sound level measured in each park, with its respective distance to downtown Urban park

Number of measured points

Distance to downtown [km]

Leq dB(A)

Botanical Garden Park Public Walk Park S˜ao Louren¸co Park Tangu´a Park Barig¨ui Park Tingui Park

57 39 47 43 70 47

2.50 1.00 3.50 6.00 5.00 7.00

67.0 64.8 59.1 50.3 50.6 50.5

430

P. H. TROMBETTA ZANNIN ET AL.

TABLE V Noise emission limits for national and international legislations, and the result whether each park does or does not meet the standards established by each legislation

Public Walk S˜ao Louren¸co Park Botanical Garden Barig¨ui Park Tingui Park Tangu´a Park

Law 10625 Curitiba 55 dB(A)

Decree no.◦ 12 Rome 50 dB(A)

DIN 18005 Germany 55 dB(A)

Does not meet Does not meet Does not meet Does meet Does meet Does meet

Does not meet Does not meet Does not meet Does meet Does meet Does meet

Does not meet Does not meet Does not meet Does meet Does meet Does meet

TABLE VI Recommended sound levels for community noise – WHO (1999) and US EPA (1974) Sound level limit for each agency

Effect of levels above the limit

Definition of the area

USEPA Leq (24 h)  55 dB(A)

Outdoor activity interference and annoyance

WHO Leq (24 h) = 55 dB(A)

Moderate to serious annoyance

Outdoor areas where people spend limited amounts of time, such as school yards, playgrounds, parks, etc. Outdoor living area

– The average age of the Brazilian vehicles, of 14 years; – The bad habits, in general, of Brazilian drivers: using the horn for any purpose, with or without apparent reason to do so, accelerating the vehicle during traffic jams or while waiting for green traffic light, high speed driving inside urban regions. It is not rare to find people driving over the speed limit of 40–60 km/h for downtown. It is not, however, the intention of the present study to discuss the applicability of the current legislation of noise emission levels in Curitiba. Certainly, the subject is worthy of further research. The absence of legislation for the control of noise emission levels is certainly a problem, but the existence of a legislation inconsistent with the local conditions that affect noise emission creates a false impression of action of the state. The population and the environment suffer the consequences. On the other hand, instead of speaking about a standard impossible to be met, the focus can be on the lack of urban planning, which should adequate the noise sources (urban traffic, commercial and services areas), so that the limit established by the local legislation could be met in urban parks, that is, Leq = 55 dB(A) during daytime period.

EVALUATION OF NOISE POLLUTION IN URBAN PARKS

431

An example of the lack of urban planning for Curitiba is in the fact that the Public Walk Park is located downtown, bordering mixed areas of services, very acoustically polluted. The level of noise emission measured in 1000 sites spread through diverse urban zones of the city has shown the following scenario: 1. Leq = 73.4 dB(A) for downtown areas; 2. Leq = 74 dB(A) for services zones; 3. Leq = 76.4 dB(A) for mixed zones; 4. Leq = 75.6 dB(A) for residential areas, and 5. Leq = 78.1 dB(A) for industrial areas (Zannin et al., 2002). Again, the limits established by Law 10625 are not met, of 65 dB(A) for downtown and services areas, and of 60 dB(A) for mixed areas (see Table II). Thus, the levels measured in the downtown Public Walk Park are not an isolated situation. It is the second most noise polluted urban park of Curitiba, with the average recorded value of 64.8 dB(A). The elevated levels measured in the Botanical Garden can also be easily explained. This park is surrounded by roads of very intense traffic, also being located next to a railroad. One of the roads that run next to this Park is the highway that links Curitiba to the coast of the State of Paran´a, where one of the main Brazilian harbours is located (Paranagu´a Harbour). This highway thus receives heavy vehicles in high frequency, transporting the agricultural production of the state to the harbour. Noise levels measured by Zannin and Szeremetta (2003) next to this road in the rush hour have revealed values of 72 dB(A). The same study has shown that when the train is passing and emitting its alert signal, the level measured inside the park, ∼70 m away from the railroad, reaches 70 dB(A) (Zannin and Szeremetta, 2003). This park is also bordered by services and areas of mixed activities, and had an average noise emission level of 67 dB(A), thus also well above the limit. On the other hand, Ting¨ui, Tangu´a, and Barig¨ui Parks were devoid of significant noise pollution, according to the limits established by the legislations (Tables IV and V). The levels measured in these three parks were of the 50.3 dB(A) in Tangu´a, 50.6 dB(A) in Barig¨ui, and 50.5 dB(A) in Ting¨ui, thus all below the limit established by the local and German legislations, of 55 dB(A), and also meeting the standards set by the legislation for the city of Rome, of 50 dB(A). The acoustically unpolluted parks share the characteristic of being located away from the downtown area, and also having large mansions among their neighbours. All sound emission levels measured at all locations inside the Public Walk Park, Botanical Garden, and S˜ao Louren¸co Park varied within a narrow range of ∼4 dB(A); all measurements were above the limits set by the municipal law of Curitiba. Even those measurement sites located well inside the parks were still influenced by the high level of noise from road traffic coming from nearby roads. In the unpolluted Ting¨ui, Tangu´a, and Barig¨ui Parks, the variation detected in the sound pressure levels measured was of ∼6 dB(A). In these last parks this larger variation can be ascribed to the presence of elements such as fountains and waterfalls that may produce noise internally to the park.

432

P. H. TROMBETTA ZANNIN ET AL.

5. Conclusions Noise emission levels were here measured in six public urban parks of a large LatinAmerican city, Curitiba, with 1.6 million inhabitants. Measurements of equivalent sound levels in 303 points distributed in those six parks have shown that the parks located in strictly urban areas, dominated by commercial activities and services, and surrounded by roads of intense traffic, as could be expected, were acoustically polluted. The Botanical Garden, though located inside an area of intense traffic, has its localization supported by the need to preserve a remaining area of mixed Ombrophilous Forest, typical of this region of Brazil, nowadays endangered. The most serious cases are those of the Public Walk and the Botanical Garden, where noise emission levels measured – 64.8 dB(A) and 67 dB(A) respectively – are well above the limits established by local and international legislations. These levels exceed as well the recommendations of Health and Environmental Protection Agencies, such as WHO and US EPA. Urban parks are one of the typical subjects of open space design, and play an important role in the daily life of the citizens. However, it is detected that those leisure places in the city of Curitiba are being a potential source of health problems, thus not fulfilling its intended role. To reduce noise exposure of the population is less of a scientific problem but primarily a policy problem, and this is not yet understood in Curitiba as well as in Brazil. From the results obtained here, it can be proposed: a) That urban parks should be so planned as to exist sufficiently away from main city roads of intense traffic of vehicles, as these are the main source of urban noise for parks. There should be urban planning strategies preserving the areas surrounding the parks from receiving undesirable noise sources. b) That street signals indicating the proximity to green areas should be placed near the parks, with indication of speed limits and not allowing the use of horns. c) That the population visiting the parks should be informed about the sound limits allowed in the parks, as well as about the meaning of measured sound levels and the potential risk they represent to their health.

References Abdel-Raziq, I. R., Zeid, Q. and Seh, M.: 2000, ‘Noise measurements in the community of Nablus in Palestine’, Acustica 86, 578–580. Arana, M. and Garcia, A. A.: 1998, ‘A social survey on the effects on environmental noise on the residents of Pamplona, Spain’, Appl. Acoust. 53, 245–253. Brown, A. L.: 1994, ‘Exposure of the Australian population to road traffic noise’, Appl. Acoust. 43, 169–176. Brown, A. L. and Lam, K. C.: 1987, ‘Urban noise surveys’, Appl. Acoust. 20, 23–39. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, Report for 2000, Bras´ılia, D.F. Brazil.

EVALUATION OF NOISE POLLUTION IN URBAN PARKS

433

Brambilla, G.: 2004, ‘Noise and soundscape in Rome’, in: 147th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, New York: Acoust. Soc. Am. 1, 1–13. Br¨uel and Kjaer: 2004, Technical Documentation 2238 and 2260 Integrating and Logging Sound Level Meter, Naerum – Denmark. Cannelli, G. B., Gl¨uck, K. and Santoboni, S.: 1983, ‘Traffic noise pollution in Rome’, Appl. Acoust. 7, 103–115. Chakrabarty, D., Santra, S. C., Mukherjee, A., Roy, B. and Das, P.: 1997, ‘Status of road traffic noise in Calcuta metropolis, India’, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101, 943–949. Decree no.12 of the City Council of Rome 2004. DIN 18005 Teil 1: 1987, Schallschutz im St¨adtebau – Berechnungsverfahren. Berlin, Beuth Verlag (in German). Diniz, F. B. and Zannin, P. H. T.: 2005, ‘Calculation of noise maps around electrical energy substations’, Appl. Acoust. 66, 467–477. Environmental Protection Agency, Curitiba: 1995, Lei Municipal 8583 (in Portuguese). Environmental Protection Agency, Curitiba: 2002, Lei Municipal 10625 (in Portuguese). Khilman, T.: 2004, ‘Noise pollution in cities, Curitiba and G¨oteborg as examples’, in: Proceedings of the Seminar – Environmental Aspects of Urbanization – Seminar in Honor of Dr. Mostafa Kamal Tolba, Gothenburg, Sweden, in CD. Korfali, S. I. and Massoud, M.: 2003, ‘Assessment of community noise problem in greater Beirut area, Lebanon’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 84, 203–218. Langdon, F. J.: 1976, ‘Noise nuisance caused by road traffic in residential areas: Part I’, J. Sound Vibration, 47(2), 243–263. Mendon¸ca, M. N.: 1992, Curitiba sem mestre, Funda¸ca˜ o Cultural, Curitiba, pp. 123 (in Portuguese). Morillas, J. M. B., Escobar, V. G., Sierra, J. A. M., G´omez, R. V. and Carmona, J. T.: 2002, ‘An environmental noise study in the city of C´aceres, Spain’, Appl. Acoust. 63, 1061–1070. Pandya, G. H.: 2001, ‘Urban noise – a need for acoustic planning’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 67, 379–388. Recuero, M., Gil, C. and Grundman, J.: 1987, ‘Effects of traffic noise within the Madrid region’, in: Fifth International Congress on Sound and Vibration, Adelaide, Australia. Ramalingeswara-Rao, P. and Seshagiri-Rao, M. G.: 1992, ‘Community reactions to road traffic noise’, Appl. Acoust. 37, 51–64. Sadan, A. A., Ayorinde, E. O. and Ogisi, F. O.: 1998, ‘Road traffic noise survey and analysis of source major urban centers in Nigeria’, Noise Contr. Eng. J. 46, 146–158. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency): 1974, ‘Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety’, EPA/ONAC 550/9-74-004. WHO (World Health Organization): 1999, ‘Guidelines for Community Noise’, in: WHO-Expert Task Force Meeting, Held in London, April, UK. Zannin, P. H. T. and Diniz, F. B.: 2002, ‘Environmental noise pollution in the city of Curitiba, Brazil’, Appl. Acoust. 63, 351–358. Zannin, P. H. T. and Szeremetta, B.: 2003, ‘Evaluation of noise pollution in the Botanical Garden in Curitiba, Paran´a, Brazil’, Public Health Rep. 19(2), 683–686. Zannin, P. H. T., Diniz, F. B., Ferreira, J. A. and Schuhli, R. B.: 2002, ‘Incˆomodo causado pelo Ru´ıdo Urbano a` popula¸ca˜ o de Curitiba’, J. Public Health 36(4), 521–524.