Barcelona residents used sensors to demonstrate high noise levels at night(bbc.com)
bbc.com
Barcelona residents used sensors to demonstrate high noise levels at night
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-41015486
122 comments
> If you're living here, it's because you made the calculation about the noise and decided to rent or buy anyway
These plazas are commonly located in the old town, so a lot of inhabitants might have inherited the properties. Also, it's sometimes hard to judge how loud an area is really going to be before signing the contract - especially the night-life.
I recently rented a new apartment in a crowded street and while it was certainly a mistake to move here, I didn't expect it to be _that_ loud since when we were there for the apartment viewings there were also a lot of other interested parties and it was distracting from the street noise.
I really wish there would be a project to distribute those noise-tracking devices and make the realtime data available to the public. It would definitely influence buying/renting decisions and help for city planning as I think this serious problem is only tackled on the surface and it brings down quality of living.
These plazas are commonly located in the old town, so a lot of inhabitants might have inherited the properties. Also, it's sometimes hard to judge how loud an area is really going to be before signing the contract - especially the night-life.
I recently rented a new apartment in a crowded street and while it was certainly a mistake to move here, I didn't expect it to be _that_ loud since when we were there for the apartment viewings there were also a lot of other interested parties and it was distracting from the street noise.
I really wish there would be a project to distribute those noise-tracking devices and make the realtime data available to the public. It would definitely influence buying/renting decisions and help for city planning as I think this serious problem is only tackled on the surface and it brings down quality of living.
Possibly there's a simpler solution. A few years ago San Francisco passed a law requiring developers to notify potential residents if there is a nearby music venue, and also protecting those venues from nuisance lawsuits.[1] Perhaps that could serve as a model for public spaces as well.
[1] https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-supes-back-music-...
[1] https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-supes-back-music-...
I doubt it would work. Have you been to Barcelona? People party and make noise even without a music venue. Then there are concerts that get organized in squares. This one is easy to solve because it requires a permit from the city hall.
Yes I have been to Barcelona, but I think you misunderstood my point. The article is about a public space known as a regular gathering spot, not a one-off concert or party. That regularity is what makes it similar to a venue.
It can indeed be hard to judge, and situations may change.
Before moving to my current house I asked around and got the impression that it was fairly quiet late at night; this turned out to be mostly true.
But, a new hotel was completed after I moved and it turns out that my street is the easiest route for drunken guests to take back to that hotel if they've been out on the town.
Totally agree on making this kind of data better available. This way, everybody could have the city they want, with people segregating themselves into neighborhoods depending on the kind of night-life they are looking for.
This is a fantastic idea and is badly needed in residential neighbourhoods of cities all around the world.
So keeping the noise down late at night now constitutes neutering a vibrant public space? Living in a city may require tolerating noise and crowds but it also requires being mindful of how your activities affect others.
"...steps that provided seating for gatherers have now been filled with plant boxes"
This is the real tragedy, since it is a change that doesn't apply only at night. It makes the square less valuable to people 24 hours a day.
This is the real tragedy, since it is a change that doesn't apply only at night. It makes the square less valuable to people 24 hours a day.
It makes it less valuable to transients, and more valuable to the residents.
Transients and anybody who would like to be outside in the square, including residents who live near the square, but it's not like it's "their" square. It isn't a Costco parking lot in Fort Worth, it's a square in Barcelona. The whole point of it is to be an outdoor public space where people can congregate and enjoy themselves.
> The whole point of it is to be an outdoor public space where people can congregate and enjoy themselves.
People can! Following the law and how it relates to noise pollution. Rights are a balance.
Disclaimer: US citizen who has spent more than a few weeks in Barcelona, and has seen how people abuse the commons firsthand
People can! Following the law and how it relates to noise pollution. Rights are a balance.
Disclaimer: US citizen who has spent more than a few weeks in Barcelona, and has seen how people abuse the commons firsthand
> US citizen who has spent more than a few weeks in Barcelona ... seen how people abuse the commons firsthand
Aside from breaking the law, how does one abuse a common area?
Not implying this is what you’re saying, but I’ll never understand people who try to imply commons areas should only exist for the whims of certain classes of people.
I lived near a park in Minneapolis a few years back and one of my obnoxious neighbors were trying to get laws passed to change park rules because they didn’t like the large “poor looking” family who had a weekly cookout in the park on Sundays. She tried so hard to rally the neighborhood into joining her quest...
I kept asking her, “If you don’t like public areas, if you want to control who uses what and how they use it, why on earth would you move into a densely populated area, directly across the street from a public park?” I mean, it was a fairly pricey neighborhood so she had options, I’ll never understand why she didn’t move into one of those suburban neighborhoods with a homeowners association— those are tailor made for people who want to micromanage others and can’t handle living amongst the public. Like, stay out of cities if you’re this type of person...
Aside from breaking the law, how does one abuse a common area?
Not implying this is what you’re saying, but I’ll never understand people who try to imply commons areas should only exist for the whims of certain classes of people.
I lived near a park in Minneapolis a few years back and one of my obnoxious neighbors were trying to get laws passed to change park rules because they didn’t like the large “poor looking” family who had a weekly cookout in the park on Sundays. She tried so hard to rally the neighborhood into joining her quest...
I kept asking her, “If you don’t like public areas, if you want to control who uses what and how they use it, why on earth would you move into a densely populated area, directly across the street from a public park?” I mean, it was a fairly pricey neighborhood so she had options, I’ll never understand why she didn’t move into one of those suburban neighborhoods with a homeowners association— those are tailor made for people who want to micromanage others and can’t handle living amongst the public. Like, stay out of cities if you’re this type of person...
Well, they can't, not on those steps, even if they are quiet as a fly in the middle of the day. That was the CamTin's point.
Must you be on the steps to enjoy the square?
"Here's a flat paved plaza. You cannot sit down. The cops will be by to kick you out at 11."
Sure, sounds like a lot of fun.
Sure, sounds like a lot of fun.
I don’t see be problem. Perhaps it’s a cultural thing.
Yes, it is a cultural thing.
Squares and parks are supposed to have people meeting and using the public space, not for making a space prettier or as a just a transient area, if that was the case then pedestrian streets would be better to make it denser while having the same features of meeting and traffic.
Benches, chairs, steps are necessary so people can sit relatively comfortably for some time while doing other activities, I don't understand how a flat, paved square is a good thing except for displaying flower beds.
Squares and parks are supposed to have people meeting and using the public space, not for making a space prettier or as a just a transient area, if that was the case then pedestrian streets would be better to make it denser while having the same features of meeting and traffic.
Benches, chairs, steps are necessary so people can sit relatively comfortably for some time while doing other activities, I don't understand how a flat, paved square is a good thing except for displaying flower beds.
Probably it is. I guess, in many parts of Europe, we're used to city space being usable by everyone for recreation, without wondering who owns any particular stretch of land and whether they'll want to kick us out.
Alas, this seems to be disappearing here too; cities are importing the strange habits of gated off neighbourhoods, and giving every possible public space to private owners, who destroy its utility by trying to make money off it.
Alas, this seems to be disappearing here too; cities are importing the strange habits of gated off neighbourhoods, and giving every possible public space to private owners, who destroy its utility by trying to make money off it.
Yeah, Americans really don’t like spending time in public spaces unless each person is individually enclosed in a hermetically sealed metal box on wheels.
As a result, places where humans regularly talk to each-other in public freak us out. Why won’t they stop abusing the commons like that?
As a result, places where humans regularly talk to each-other in public freak us out. Why won’t they stop abusing the commons like that?
Considering the Catalan like to eat dinner late, around 8-10PM. An after dinner stroll to the park is now out of the question. Could it be quieter, certainly. There is a technology available to help. Put up leafy trees or a large canvas canopy to muffle the noise.
The cities must apply the law. The law says you cannot make so much noise when people tries to rest. That's all. There are plenty of hours in the day to make noise without disturbing others and breaking laws.
Why has this abuse being running for 20 years? That's a good question. But if someone threw garbage on your property, your answer won't be that "property values should already have adjusted". You just call the police, don't you?
Why has this abuse being running for 20 years? That's a good question. But if someone threw garbage on your property, your answer won't be that "property values should already have adjusted". You just call the police, don't you?
> There are plenty of hours in the day to make noise without disturbing others and breaking laws.
I really hate that attitude. Not everyone works, sleeps, awakes at the same time. People who work night shifts or are natural night owls should have just as much right to enjoy their hours of awakeness as anybody else. Why are the daylight hours ‘OK for noise’, yet the evenings aren’t?
I’m a natural night owl and sometimes get awoken early by rubbish trucks, or just noisy people, shouldn’t I have the same rights?
If you’re a light sleeper, get some ear plugs
I really hate that attitude. Not everyone works, sleeps, awakes at the same time. People who work night shifts or are natural night owls should have just as much right to enjoy their hours of awakeness as anybody else. Why are the daylight hours ‘OK for noise’, yet the evenings aren’t?
I’m a natural night owl and sometimes get awoken early by rubbish trucks, or just noisy people, shouldn’t I have the same rights?
If you’re a light sleeper, get some ear plugs
Basically, everyone would like the world to conveniently work well for their needs. On the one hand, you complain that you deserve the same right to quiet so your sleep isn't disturbed. On the other, you tell people "If you are a light sleeper, get ear plugs." You could get ear plugs. Though if that fixed everything, presumably you would not be here complaining.
There is a chronic issue that being part of a group, for example by living in a city, has benefits, but it also comes with friction. Trying to find best practices for reducing the problems without destroying the fundamental value of group association is always a struggle. One best practice is you try to arrange things to align with group norms so as to inconvenience the fewest people and the reality is that most people sleep at night and work or go to school during the day.
I will add that I tend to be a night owl.
There is a chronic issue that being part of a group, for example by living in a city, has benefits, but it also comes with friction. Trying to find best practices for reducing the problems without destroying the fundamental value of group association is always a struggle. One best practice is you try to arrange things to align with group norms so as to inconvenience the fewest people and the reality is that most people sleep at night and work or go to school during the day.
I will add that I tend to be a night owl.
> On the one hand, you complain that you deserve the same right to quiet so your sleep isn't disturbed. On the other, you tell people "If you are a light sleeper, get ear plugs."
I never said I deserve quiet, I pointed out the discrepancy. It's the sleeper that desires the quiet, but different people sleep different hours of the day, especially in a city. I don't write off to my local council every time I'm awoken at 8am by a rubbish truck, even if I'd only gone to bed a few hours before. Why should people who are awake at so-called 'normal hours' be afforded any additional sympathy? And why should their desires override others? What makes them special?
Are people who are awake through the night 'lesser people'? Or not as important in your world view?
If I can sleep through the daywalker's noise, then daywalkers can sleep thru the nightwalker's noise. And if not, then they're probably living in the wrong part of the city. I find it endlessly perplexing that people will move to places known for the nightlife and then start complaining about it once there.
I never said I deserve quiet, I pointed out the discrepancy. It's the sleeper that desires the quiet, but different people sleep different hours of the day, especially in a city. I don't write off to my local council every time I'm awoken at 8am by a rubbish truck, even if I'd only gone to bed a few hours before. Why should people who are awake at so-called 'normal hours' be afforded any additional sympathy? And why should their desires override others? What makes them special?
Are people who are awake through the night 'lesser people'? Or not as important in your world view?
If I can sleep through the daywalker's noise, then daywalkers can sleep thru the nightwalker's noise. And if not, then they're probably living in the wrong part of the city. I find it endlessly perplexing that people will move to places known for the nightlife and then start complaining about it once there.
They aren't "special." They are the majority.
I'm not arguing that night owls are lesser people. I'm just saying these sorts of conflicts are basically inescapable. They have existed as long as humans have and there is no magic wand solution.
Everyone would like the entire world to work well for them as an individual. Therein lies the rub. We would all like to be able to make noise when we feel like it and to have undisturbed sleep at will where other people are expected to be quiet during that time. The reality is we have two possible choices here:
1. A small number of very powerful people can impose their will on everyone else like that while the majority live in misery.
2. We struggle to find best practices that work reasonably well for as many people as possible.
The second scenario is what most modern cultures typically shoot for. Since night owls are in the minority, policies tend to favor day people.
In theory, we could insist everyone be quiet all the time. In practice, this interferes with industry, commercial, recreation and generally having a life. So in reality we need to demarcate times when an acceptable amount of noise can happen so life can happen.
There are no simple answers. It's a complicated problem.
I'm not arguing that night owls are lesser people. I'm just saying these sorts of conflicts are basically inescapable. They have existed as long as humans have and there is no magic wand solution.
Everyone would like the entire world to work well for them as an individual. Therein lies the rub. We would all like to be able to make noise when we feel like it and to have undisturbed sleep at will where other people are expected to be quiet during that time. The reality is we have two possible choices here:
1. A small number of very powerful people can impose their will on everyone else like that while the majority live in misery.
2. We struggle to find best practices that work reasonably well for as many people as possible.
The second scenario is what most modern cultures typically shoot for. Since night owls are in the minority, policies tend to favor day people.
In theory, we could insist everyone be quiet all the time. In practice, this interferes with industry, commercial, recreation and generally having a life. So in reality we need to demarcate times when an acceptable amount of noise can happen so life can happen.
There are no simple answers. It's a complicated problem.
I notice on your second point you didn't use the phrase "whilst the minority live in misery" like you did for your first point. Good attempt at making readers more sympathetic to your one sided argument. You say the minority here are not lesser people, but you write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it, and therefore their problems or opinions are irrelevant.
If the majority decided to torture the minority, or enslave them, or segregate them, I assume you would consider that immoral, right? And that the majority shouldn't just have carte blanche to do whatever they like to the minority - democracy isn't about 'screwing the minority'.
So, if the sound does really make life "a misery" then isn't that accepting of the torturing of people who have to sleep during the day? Isn't that immoral? The majority inflicting torturous sound on the minority during their sleeping hours?
Or, is it actually the case that the sound isn't really that bad, and that we should all learn to be a bit more accommodating to the fact that in a city people live and work on different schedules, and that your nighttime hours are not sacred. And using your majority position to inflict your will on other people's waking hours just so you can enjoy your sleeping hours is unjustified.
If you live in a city, in an area that's known for it's nighttime scene, I don't see why you should have any special privileges. Just like I don't expect any special privileges because I often sleep the hours that many are awake.
If the majority decided to torture the minority, or enslave them, or segregate them, I assume you would consider that immoral, right? And that the majority shouldn't just have carte blanche to do whatever they like to the minority - democracy isn't about 'screwing the minority'.
So, if the sound does really make life "a misery" then isn't that accepting of the torturing of people who have to sleep during the day? Isn't that immoral? The majority inflicting torturous sound on the minority during their sleeping hours?
Or, is it actually the case that the sound isn't really that bad, and that we should all learn to be a bit more accommodating to the fact that in a city people live and work on different schedules, and that your nighttime hours are not sacred. And using your majority position to inflict your will on other people's waking hours just so you can enjoy your sleeping hours is unjustified.
If you live in a city, in an area that's known for it's nighttime scene, I don't see why you should have any special privileges. Just like I don't expect any special privileges because I often sleep the hours that many are awake.
but you write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it
I said and did no such thing. I'm sorry you seem to be so angry about this, but I don't see any reason why I should be a target of that anger.
I don't intend to reply further to your comments here.
I said and did no such thing. I'm sorry you seem to be so angry about this, but I don't see any reason why I should be a target of that anger.
I don't intend to reply further to your comments here.
I am not angry at you or anybody else on here, sorry if you felt that way. I am arguing my point quite strongly because I have seen aspects of nighttime culture that I feel quite passionately about be destroyed/decimated by the gentrification wave in London.
For example, take a look at this google streetview link [1]. That is The Egg nightclub, it's on York Way in Central London. It was a very industrial area when the club was built. If you pan the camera around, you'll see the residential flats that have been built in the past few years. They are now trying to get the club shut down. There are two other ex-clubs in a 100 metre walk of that point that suffered a similar fate.
This is unacceptable in my opinion, and this is what bugs me about this nonacceptance of nighttime culture - especially in areas where it's often the cause for the regeneration of an area in the first place. Those things made the area cool, the gentrified move in, they kill it.
When I said you implied that we should "write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it"
I was referring to this:
> In theory, we could insist everyone be quiet all the time. In practice, this interferes with industry, commercial, recreation and generally having a life.
Where you appear to state that industry, commercial, recreation and [day time people] having a life is more important than a sizeable minority of human being's quality-of-life. Now, maybe that was a leap too far, but the implication I got was that the majority are more important and that a subset of humanity is irrelevant and should basically be ignored, because finding a solution is too hard; or even just having a bit of understanding that people have different cycles rather than forcing their world to be shut down whilst they're awake, is too hard.
[1] https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5417762,-0.125419,3a,75y,7...
For example, take a look at this google streetview link [1]. That is The Egg nightclub, it's on York Way in Central London. It was a very industrial area when the club was built. If you pan the camera around, you'll see the residential flats that have been built in the past few years. They are now trying to get the club shut down. There are two other ex-clubs in a 100 metre walk of that point that suffered a similar fate.
This is unacceptable in my opinion, and this is what bugs me about this nonacceptance of nighttime culture - especially in areas where it's often the cause for the regeneration of an area in the first place. Those things made the area cool, the gentrified move in, they kill it.
When I said you implied that we should "write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it"
I was referring to this:
> In theory, we could insist everyone be quiet all the time. In practice, this interferes with industry, commercial, recreation and generally having a life.
Where you appear to state that industry, commercial, recreation and [day time people] having a life is more important than a sizeable minority of human being's quality-of-life. Now, maybe that was a leap too far, but the implication I got was that the majority are more important and that a subset of humanity is irrelevant and should basically be ignored, because finding a solution is too hard; or even just having a bit of understanding that people have different cycles rather than forcing their world to be shut down whilst they're awake, is too hard.
[1] https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5417762,-0.125419,3a,75y,7...
If you have an agenda, some friendly advice: pick your battles and look for potential allies.
As stated above, I am also a night owl. This is a different comment by me criticizing how this was handled in this case:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17220149
But I don't even actually want to read your comment in full, much less check your links, because you have left repeated ugly personal attacks of me in specific, which is not a good faith argument and is not exactly how you "win friends and influence people."
Have a nice day and all that.
As stated above, I am also a night owl. This is a different comment by me criticizing how this was handled in this case:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17220149
But I don't even actually want to read your comment in full, much less check your links, because you have left repeated ugly personal attacks of me in specific, which is not a good faith argument and is not exactly how you "win friends and influence people."
Have a nice day and all that.
> repeated ugly personal attacks of me in specific
There aren't any repeated ugly personal attacks, there isn't a single personal attack as far as I can tell. Nor are my responses targeted at you, I have responded to a number of people in this thread. The closest thing I can see is where I picked up on your use of language likely to bias a reader's opinion, I never picked up or discussed any aspect of you or your person though, it was entirely on topic. If there is anything I am truly sorry, that really isn't me. My arguments were entirely in good faith.
Have a nice day yourself.
There aren't any repeated ugly personal attacks, there isn't a single personal attack as far as I can tell. Nor are my responses targeted at you, I have responded to a number of people in this thread. The closest thing I can see is where I picked up on your use of language likely to bias a reader's opinion, I never picked up or discussed any aspect of you or your person though, it was entirely on topic. If there is anything I am truly sorry, that really isn't me. My arguments were entirely in good faith.
Have a nice day yourself.
If you want night parties, vote for it until it is allowed or get some isolated nightclubs. Status quo is that most people sleep at night (and mostly drunk if not) and that’s important. It is changeable, but not by simply ignoring laws and health orgs.
Earplugs don’t save from lowfreq noise that goes through walls, floors and beds almost intact. Disclosure: I’m sleeping from 5 to 10 times a week, not having any fixed time as a ‘morning’.
(edit: I often confuse disclaimer with disclosure)
Earplugs don’t save from lowfreq noise that goes through walls, floors and beds almost intact. Disclosure: I’m sleeping from 5 to 10 times a week, not having any fixed time as a ‘morning’.
(edit: I often confuse disclaimer with disclosure)
> If you want night parties, vote for it until it is allowed
So, minority opinion should always be ignored?
> or get some isolated nightclubs.
One of the major problems in London in the past 5 years has been the smoking ban. So these nightclubs which were previously sealed now have people outside smoking, which has caused additional conflict. It's not as simple as isolating a club or bar.
> Status quo is that most people sleep at night (and mostly drunk if not)
Wow. So people awake are night are drunks? Fantastic. They're not awake for any other reason? Like they did a night shift and want to eat late? Or they want to go shopping when they're not at work? Or ... /* lists all the reasons people do stuff during the day */
This notion that we should be awake and work during the day and sleep during the night is one that's been forced upon us. If you look into the sleeping pattern of the middle ages you'd realise it wasn't always like this, and we're not all like that [1]
> Earplugs don’t save from lowfreq noise that goes through walls, floors and beds almost intact.
I've used earplugs when in places which are noisy, I have found they're absolutely fine for this purpose. It's usually mid and high pitched sounds that are more jarring if you're trying to sleep (the human voice). Things like music which is repetitive is quite easy to tune out because of its repetitive nature.
[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16964783
So, minority opinion should always be ignored?
> or get some isolated nightclubs.
One of the major problems in London in the past 5 years has been the smoking ban. So these nightclubs which were previously sealed now have people outside smoking, which has caused additional conflict. It's not as simple as isolating a club or bar.
> Status quo is that most people sleep at night (and mostly drunk if not)
Wow. So people awake are night are drunks? Fantastic. They're not awake for any other reason? Like they did a night shift and want to eat late? Or they want to go shopping when they're not at work? Or ... /* lists all the reasons people do stuff during the day */
This notion that we should be awake and work during the day and sleep during the night is one that's been forced upon us. If you look into the sleeping pattern of the middle ages you'd realise it wasn't always like this, and we're not all like that [1]
> Earplugs don’t save from lowfreq noise that goes through walls, floors and beds almost intact.
I've used earplugs when in places which are noisy, I have found they're absolutely fine for this purpose. It's usually mid and high pitched sounds that are more jarring if you're trying to sleep (the human voice). Things like music which is repetitive is quite easy to tune out because of its repetitive nature.
[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16964783
>So, minority opinion should always be ignored?
Every minority should be satisfied, but not in the way that heavily affects majority, imo. Health and stress is not a someone’s joke.
>So people awake are night are drunks?
No. But at night you have a much higher probability to meet one who is drunk (from majority) and one is enough to disturb many. That’s what I meant trying to remain concise, sorry for this overstatement.
Unfortunately, any earplugs I tried didn’t stop lowfreq and I’m very sensitive to it (can’t sleep at all). Sleep patterns are a problem for me too, as I already mentioned. I didn’t downvote you (and it doesn’t mean anything since it’s probably emotional here), but at least you can see how much people are affected.
Edit: grammar
Every minority should be satisfied, but not in the way that heavily affects majority, imo. Health and stress is not a someone’s joke.
>So people awake are night are drunks?
No. But at night you have a much higher probability to meet one who is drunk (from majority) and one is enough to disturb many. That’s what I meant trying to remain concise, sorry for this overstatement.
Unfortunately, any earplugs I tried didn’t stop lowfreq and I’m very sensitive to it (can’t sleep at all). Sleep patterns are a problem for me too, as I already mentioned. I didn’t downvote you (and it doesn’t mean anything since it’s probably emotional here), but at least you can see how much people are affected.
Edit: grammar
If you're living here, it's because you made the calculation about the noise and decided to rent or buy anyway, or else you didn't, and why is that the City of Barcelona's problem?
I lived in Barcelona for 5 years, and for the first 18 months my wife and I lived right by the Santa Maria del Mar, a church in a square that is one of the main tourist areas in Barcelona. Our neighbours in the building included an old couple (80's, probably) who had lived there forever, and a 92 year old lady who was born in the building. Our landlords had inherited the place from their parents, who had been there forever too. Barcelona is that sort of place, it has changed incredibly quickly - before the olympics in '92, apparently it was unsafe to walk around that area during the day, but in the last decade or so it's become super hip.
We didn't complain, we just moved, but I would absolutely support reducing the nightlife around that area - the noise was insane. And it was pretty much all caused by tourists, not locals, and Barcelona is on a big drive to prioritise the locals in general. Reducing the nightlife, or even just keeping the noise at night to reasonable levels, wouldn't make the space any less vibrant during the day or even at night at reasonable hours, and would give a lot of relief to residents.
I lived in Barcelona for 5 years, and for the first 18 months my wife and I lived right by the Santa Maria del Mar, a church in a square that is one of the main tourist areas in Barcelona. Our neighbours in the building included an old couple (80's, probably) who had lived there forever, and a 92 year old lady who was born in the building. Our landlords had inherited the place from their parents, who had been there forever too. Barcelona is that sort of place, it has changed incredibly quickly - before the olympics in '92, apparently it was unsafe to walk around that area during the day, but in the last decade or so it's become super hip.
We didn't complain, we just moved, but I would absolutely support reducing the nightlife around that area - the noise was insane. And it was pretty much all caused by tourists, not locals, and Barcelona is on a big drive to prioritise the locals in general. Reducing the nightlife, or even just keeping the noise at night to reasonable levels, wouldn't make the space any less vibrant during the day or even at night at reasonable hours, and would give a lot of relief to residents.
I live on a noisy New York street. Replacing seating with potted plants appears, to me as well, a sloppy response to the problem. (Re-scheduling trash collection, on the other hand, was brilliant.)
Modern technology allows for acoustically isolating virtually any kind of housing. (Provided the windows are shut.) Acoustic retrofitting is expensive, but so is losing the tax revenue from a vibrant public space. A better solution would have involved reducing noise levels inside residents’ homes without smothering the plaza.
(Reminds me of a poster I saw at a club, once. Paraphrasing, “Al sees apartment. Al sees club. Al rents apartment. Al spends all his free time making noise complaints. Don’t be Al.”)
Modern technology allows for acoustically isolating virtually any kind of housing. (Provided the windows are shut.) Acoustic retrofitting is expensive, but so is losing the tax revenue from a vibrant public space. A better solution would have involved reducing noise levels inside residents’ homes without smothering the plaza.
(Reminds me of a poster I saw at a club, once. Paraphrasing, “Al sees apartment. Al sees club. Al rents apartment. Al spends all his free time making noise complaints. Don’t be Al.”)
> so is losing the tax revenue
If you take into account that most of the people sitting on the floor of the square bought their beers in the convenience store and probably paid less than one Euro for each of them, I don't think that the state will loose a massive amount of income via taxes.
On the other hand, I know that measuring everything by the economical peformance is a really common thing to do in the other side of the Atlantic, but the neigbours have the right to be able to sleep, even with the windows open. Those squares are not zoned as industrial area, so they are meant to be silent at night. By law.
If you take into account that most of the people sitting on the floor of the square bought their beers in the convenience store and probably paid less than one Euro for each of them, I don't think that the state will loose a massive amount of income via taxes.
On the other hand, I know that measuring everything by the economical peformance is a really common thing to do in the other side of the Atlantic, but the neigbours have the right to be able to sleep, even with the windows open. Those squares are not zoned as industrial area, so they are meant to be silent at night. By law.
Does keeping your windows shut all the time in New York mean you have an air conditioner on all summer?
Could there be other problems with everyone using air conditioning all the time?
Could there be other problems with everyone using air conditioning all the time?
> windows shut all the time
Windows don’t need to be shut all the time. Just when I’m sleeping, or want some quiet. (I don’t live in an acoustically-isolated environment, either.)
(That said, I and most people I know in Manhattan run air conditioners more or less constantly, while we are in the apartment, all summer.)
Windows don’t need to be shut all the time. Just when I’m sleeping, or want some quiet. (I don’t live in an acoustically-isolated environment, either.)
(That said, I and most people I know in Manhattan run air conditioners more or less constantly, while we are in the apartment, all summer.)
100% agree with you. Often the reason people move in to these areas is the lively bustling local culture. Then the complaints come which sanitise the area, killing its spirit.
This has been happening a lot in London as the tide of gentrification washes in and sucks the life out of the local culture.
A really sad state of affairs
This has been happening a lot in London as the tide of gentrification washes in and sucks the life out of the local culture.
A really sad state of affairs
So you believe that local culture consist of a lot of people getting drunk and shouting?
This has nothing to do with gentrification. Most neighborhoods that suffer this problem are working or middle class. Try doing that in rich quarters and see what happens.
The problem started long ago, aprox. 30 years. You could open a "tavern" with very few permits needed (and limited hours) or you could open a "pub", that you must isolate and comply with many regulations, and you set your hours, no matter the council.
Guess what many did and got a quick buck. Authorities turned a blind eye for the sake of tourism. When hours are enforced, people just go shop strong alcohol and drink in the streets. That generated a very bad problem years ago and there is a law against that.
This has nothing to do with gentrification. Most neighborhoods that suffer this problem are working or middle class. Try doing that in rich quarters and see what happens.
The problem started long ago, aprox. 30 years. You could open a "tavern" with very few permits needed (and limited hours) or you could open a "pub", that you must isolate and comply with many regulations, and you set your hours, no matter the council.
Guess what many did and got a quick buck. Authorities turned a blind eye for the sake of tourism. When hours are enforced, people just go shop strong alcohol and drink in the streets. That generated a very bad problem years ago and there is a law against that.
If you move in to a noisy/lively area and then start making noise complaints, then in my opinion you’re the one at fault. If this has been going on for 20 years then it can hardly be considered an ‘unknown’
> So you believe that local culture consist of a lot of people getting drunk and shouting?
Well done for reducing it with your prejudices, this is local cafe culture, which is very social. It isn’t only ‘being noisy and drunk’, that’s just a symptom. It clearly has a positive social cohesion story behind it too.
And what you deem to be culture may not be what others do. But regardless, it exists and was there before you. So, what right do you have to get rid of it?
Granted, if 100% of residents don’t want it, then that’s an argument to do something about it. But, a lot of the time it’s a handful of very vociferous residents that destroy what the majority want to keep.
If I moved to an area with a noisy local culture and found I couldn’t deal with it, I’d move; I wouldn’t try to bring an end to that culture.
> So you believe that local culture consist of a lot of people getting drunk and shouting?
Well done for reducing it with your prejudices, this is local cafe culture, which is very social. It isn’t only ‘being noisy and drunk’, that’s just a symptom. It clearly has a positive social cohesion story behind it too.
And what you deem to be culture may not be what others do. But regardless, it exists and was there before you. So, what right do you have to get rid of it?
Granted, if 100% of residents don’t want it, then that’s an argument to do something about it. But, a lot of the time it’s a handful of very vociferous residents that destroy what the majority want to keep.
If I moved to an area with a noisy local culture and found I couldn’t deal with it, I’d move; I wouldn’t try to bring an end to that culture.
I'm not reducing anything, that's exactly what people complains about.
You don't seem to understand that the locals are the people complaining, not the drunkards. The locals are people that are living there since forever and many of them can't choose to move.
The drinkers aren't locals. They very much care not to behave like that in their own neighborhoods so they go elsewhere to make noise.
You don't seem to understand that the locals are the people complaining, not the drunkards. The locals are people that are living there since forever and many of them can't choose to move.
The drinkers aren't locals. They very much care not to behave like that in their own neighborhoods so they go elsewhere to make noise.
> You don't seem to understand that the locals are the people complaining, not the drunkards. The locals are people that are living there since forever and many of them can't choose to move.
Can you provide evidence for your assertions? I see none of what you claim in the article. Are all locals complaining? Or a few of them? Have the locals really lived there forever? Where’s the proof?
Ever lasting life aside, I suspect you’re exaggerating and the vast majority will have moved there within the past 20 years.
And how do you know the drinkers aren’t locals? Have you met them? I note from your profile you’re not from the area, so how can you be so sure there aren’t any locals there?
How local do you need to be to be allowed to stay up late and talk in any particular area? Should they live on the same square? Or, within a few streets? Should there be special police officers checking how local you are?
But anyway, my comments were mostly about the general problem of conflict between day and night walkers, not just this specific incident.
Can you provide evidence for your assertions? I see none of what you claim in the article. Are all locals complaining? Or a few of them? Have the locals really lived there forever? Where’s the proof?
Ever lasting life aside, I suspect you’re exaggerating and the vast majority will have moved there within the past 20 years.
And how do you know the drinkers aren’t locals? Have you met them? I note from your profile you’re not from the area, so how can you be so sure there aren’t any locals there?
How local do you need to be to be allowed to stay up late and talk in any particular area? Should they live on the same square? Or, within a few streets? Should there be special police officers checking how local you are?
But anyway, my comments were mostly about the general problem of conflict between day and night walkers, not just this specific incident.
>So you believe that local culture consist of a lot of people getting drunk and shouting?
Yes. Not exclusively so, but yes. Events where drinking and shouting happen (and/or is simply the point) are a large part of culture. It might not be my cup of tea but... http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/016/845/e9d...
Yes. Not exclusively so, but yes. Events where drinking and shouting happen (and/or is simply the point) are a large part of culture. It might not be my cup of tea but... http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/016/845/e9d...
This isn't a vibrant public space, it's just a space full of noisy foreign tourists who are making a racket while the locals are trying to sleep, because they have to go to work the next day.
Noise is a permanent issue of our current times. Noise at day in huge open space like offices ("Just use headphones"), noise by night in urban areas ("Just use ear plugs"). Meanwhile research has shown, that you can't adjust or get used to noise - you might think otherwise but your ear and brain is doing the heavy lifting for you.
"- We do not get used to noise, but our ears "filter out" unpleasant sounds and cope as well as they can with the daily exposure to intensive noise.
- People are unaware of the damage caused by exposure to high levels of noise due to a lack of information.
- The damage affects not only our hearing ability. It may also appear in the form of insomnia, tiredness, lack of concentration, lack of attention at work, lack of efficiency, and even hypertension, heart problems and digestive disorders."
https://www.hear-it.org/we-get-used-to-noise-
"- We do not get used to noise, but our ears "filter out" unpleasant sounds and cope as well as they can with the daily exposure to intensive noise.
- People are unaware of the damage caused by exposure to high levels of noise due to a lack of information.
- The damage affects not only our hearing ability. It may also appear in the form of insomnia, tiredness, lack of concentration, lack of attention at work, lack of efficiency, and even hypertension, heart problems and digestive disorders."
https://www.hear-it.org/we-get-used-to-noise-
Yes. I get woken up by Heathrow air traffic at 4:30am. Bad. So bad.
Kinda sad but the gist is that this went on for years and years and it wasn't until the people got support that they could prove there was an issue with noise.
Nobody in authority listerned or even checked until then.
Nobody in authority listerned or even checked until then.
It'd been going on so long, I would argue that there is an element of "coming to the nuisance" [1] going on. That is, the situation is like people who move next to a farm in order to "get back to nature." Hey! Turn out it sucks to live next to a farm! Lets shut the farm down!
[1] https://dictionary.thelaw.com/coming-to-the-nuisance/
[1] https://dictionary.thelaw.com/coming-to-the-nuisance/
I mostly disagree with the people who are arguing that late night shouting and general noisemaking is just part of the culture and people need to suck it up. But the farm example is a real one. The state where I live has "right to farm" communities, including the one I live in. On the one hand, it's some specific rules about being able to establish small farms. But it's also a reminder not to move out to this nice exurban/rural town and then complain about the smell of the dairy farm down the street.
Or the roosters crowing.
Quite a number of ex-bloc countries ban cars exceeding sanitary norm for sound emission.
My surprise upon my first days in the West was that no Western country seem to have them.
During my stay in Vancouver I got to know well the people who were reving their lambos on West Georgia in 3am.
My surprise upon my first days in the West was that no Western country seem to have them.
During my stay in Vancouver I got to know well the people who were reving their lambos on West Georgia in 3am.
I live in Barcelona. It is a _noisy_ city. It is just normal for young locals to sit outside in plaças or on wide streets on weekend evenings, socialising, having a drink, talking loudly, and even sometimes singing. By evenings I mean the Spanish definition of evenings, which last until way after midnight.
As a foreigner living here, I try to accept the noise as part of the culture, even though the noise annoys me. So it is great to read of locals actively campaigning to reduce noise levels.
On Friday I was in the very plaça (Plaça del Sol) mentioned in the article with a friend, and it was crowded and loud. All the tables were full, people were sitting on the steps, and indeed all over the plaça. My friend said, "it must be bad for the residents". It is good to know at least one plaça in Barcelona is now moving the crowds on after 11:30pm.
As a foreigner living here, I try to accept the noise as part of the culture, even though the noise annoys me. So it is great to read of locals actively campaigning to reduce noise levels.
On Friday I was in the very plaça (Plaça del Sol) mentioned in the article with a friend, and it was crowded and loud. All the tables were full, people were sitting on the steps, and indeed all over the plaça. My friend said, "it must be bad for the residents". It is good to know at least one plaça in Barcelona is now moving the crowds on after 11:30pm.
Yep, same experience.
I'm Canadian but living in Barcelona, in El Born district. I had no idea drunk Brits on vacation could make so much noise at nights. I live above a cafe/bar frequented by locals, and I have no issue with their late night (late night for this Canadian anyhow, around 10-midnight) enjoyment of tapas, wine and friends. Sure the Spaniards aren't exactly known for being quiet people, but it's not unreasonable levels of noise and they're quite quite after midnight. Its the bloody tourists that fly down on a 30 quid Ryanair flight with their lads for a weekend of fun in Barcelona and scream bloody marry at 3 am that get under my skin.
I'm Canadian but living in Barcelona, in El Born district. I had no idea drunk Brits on vacation could make so much noise at nights. I live above a cafe/bar frequented by locals, and I have no issue with their late night (late night for this Canadian anyhow, around 10-midnight) enjoyment of tapas, wine and friends. Sure the Spaniards aren't exactly known for being quiet people, but it's not unreasonable levels of noise and they're quite quite after midnight. Its the bloody tourists that fly down on a 30 quid Ryanair flight with their lads for a weekend of fun in Barcelona and scream bloody marry at 3 am that get under my skin.
I can only apologise. You're suffering from one of the lesser-known aspects of Theresa May's "hostile environment" policy. Many of my fellow countrymen are staunchly opposed to immigration, so we engage in a kind of reverse diplomacy. By exporting our loudest, rudest arseholes to destinations across Europe every weekend, we advertise the very worst aspects of British life and create a powerful deterrent against immigration.
In greece, said tourists are limited into specific resort towns where they can enjoy their general raucousness and binge drinking from their morning breakfast till almost the next one without generally infesting the streets of working people. I don't know why barcelona does not do that - they can arrange that with tour operators.
But that would neuter the GP's purported purpose, wouldn't it?
I lived in Spain for 3 years and moved constantly due to noise. Very few people I spoke to seemed to understand what my problem was. The few who did had long since accepted that it was just how things were.
I did make the mistake of living in a busy tourist area once, it's not a mistake I ever intend to repeat.
I will, however, apologise for the behaviour of my fellow countrymen and, if it's any comfort, please understand that a lot of us hate the 'drunken Brits' as much as everyone else does.
I did make the mistake of living in a busy tourist area once, it's not a mistake I ever intend to repeat.
I will, however, apologise for the behaviour of my fellow countrymen and, if it's any comfort, please understand that a lot of us hate the 'drunken Brits' as much as everyone else does.
Likewise in Barcelona in a touristy area. Crazy noisy. With the summer just starting, I'm anticipating a few sleepless nights!
If there is a particularly noisy group, don't be shy to yell at them "calleu d'una puta vegada".
You shouldn't recommend people to scream to a group of people "Shut the fuck up" because it's not only unpolite but it can be the source of a lot of problems for that person. Be considerate with your recommendations and aware that you could cause problems to others with them.
In Barcelona, "Calleu d'una puta vegada" from a balcony, late at night, is not something that can cause a problem.
What would probably happen is that the people being noisy will appologize, try to be more quiet, forget about the incident after about 5 minutes, and go back to the previous amount of noise until some other neighbour complains.
What would probably happen is that the people being noisy will appologize, try to be more quiet, forget about the incident after about 5 minutes, and go back to the previous amount of noise until some other neighbour complains.
First, it was never stated to do that from a balcony so how would have known that the person to whom it was suggested? But leaving that aside, can you grant me for sure that there won't be any problem? for every place in Barcelona? what about if they people making noise aren't Barcelonian? what if they are too drunk and make even more noise? what if they recognize the balcony from where you screamed at them and start to throw you things as retribution? or ringing at your door? The possible developments of that situation are so many that you can't lightly ignore them, specially when it's another person the one who is going to be in that situation.
im my youth in barcelona it was quite common to throw a bucket of cold water towards the noisy drunks. This usually solved the problem quite well (at least, when i was among the noisemakers...)
I've only been in Madrid and Seville and Granada (from the states), but that sentence looks like Portuguese to me. Does Barcelona speak a different dialect of Spanish or did you just type out a Portuguese sentence?
I don't know enough Spanish to talk to that, but its definitely not Portuguese.
calleu d'una puta vegada
There is at least two words, calleu, and vegada that don't exist in any Portuguese I've encountered. Also, d'una is... not something I've seen in Portuguese before.
But I'm a new speaker so I may be missing something.
I found this slang for shut the fuck up in Portuguese, not sure how cromulent it is: https://en.bab.la/dictionary/english-portuguese/shut-the-fuc...
calleu d'una puta vegada
There is at least two words, calleu, and vegada that don't exist in any Portuguese I've encountered. Also, d'una is... not something I've seen in Portuguese before.
But I'm a new speaker so I may be missing something.
I found this slang for shut the fuck up in Portuguese, not sure how cromulent it is: https://en.bab.la/dictionary/english-portuguese/shut-the-fuc...
It’s Catalan
Well that would be a pretty noisy thing to do, yelling, that is
Glad that you emphasize it's Plaça del Sol, not Plaza del Sol or Square of the Sun
Is that that in the funny dialect they speak? Why do people waste their time with that? After all, they speak the first or second most spoken language in the world, why bother with a dying dialect?
> Is that in the funny dialect they speak?
Catalan is not a dialect of Spanish, if anything it would be a dialect of Occitan. And seeing how condescending are hurtful you are trying to be I suspect you already knew that.
> Why do people waste their time with that?
It's the native language of ~5 million people. We learn it for the same reason Swedish people learn Swedish, Danish people learn Danish, etc. It's just the language we speak in our country.
There is already a de facto international language (which is not Spanish BTW), and we also learn it.
Catalan is not a dialect of Spanish, if anything it would be a dialect of Occitan. And seeing how condescending are hurtful you are trying to be I suspect you already knew that.
> Why do people waste their time with that?
It's the native language of ~5 million people. We learn it for the same reason Swedish people learn Swedish, Danish people learn Danish, etc. It's just the language we speak in our country.
There is already a de facto international language (which is not Spanish BTW), and we also learn it.
This is about the Smart Citizen project.
https://smartcitizen.me/
https://smartcitizen.me/
I've been idly wondering whether there is a comprehensive "quiet community" standard like there is for a "dark sky community"?
From my perspective the main noise pollution problem is fast moving cars, which have obvious fixes. People loudly hanging out in plazas seem like a more difficult problem, and not even something I'm all that comfortable with characterizing as a problem. But maybe turning down lighting could be part of the solution? Or are places people hang out loudly at already not lighted?
From my perspective the main noise pollution problem is fast moving cars, which have obvious fixes. People loudly hanging out in plazas seem like a more difficult problem, and not even something I'm all that comfortable with characterizing as a problem. But maybe turning down lighting could be part of the solution? Or are places people hang out loudly at already not lighted?
I'm from Spain and all city streets and plazas have at least some lighting at night (enough that one can comfortably walk through the city at any hour of the night) and even the least lit areas are popular for people to hang out in. I do not think it would be feasible, desirable or safe to reduce lighting to the point where it would be uncomfortable to be hanging out at night.
I might even predict the opposite effect: drinking on the street, although popular, is illegal in Spanish cities. Darker plazas would make it easier to hide drinking from the police, and could attract even more people.
I might even predict the opposite effect: drinking on the street, although popular, is illegal in Spanish cities. Darker plazas would make it easier to hide drinking from the police, and could attract even more people.
Thanks for the perspective. I'm convinced darker streets/plazas is a non-solution (and note isn't really what dark sky protections are about: it's OK to illuminate down, just not up).
As urban soundscapes go, passenger cars are basically silent. Buses, trucks, trains, and motorcycles all make drastically more noise. Especially when the buses are operating their airbrakes and audible announcements, trains are blowing their horns as they crawl away from stations, trucks are accelerating and decelerating, etc. In other words, I couldn’t disagree more. It’s the slowest-moving everything-except-cars that make an unbearable racket. Maybe this is different in places with more prevalent diesel cars?
I'm living in a German city near (but not directly on) a busy street (as in: lots of cars and tram service every 5 minutes on workdays and every 30 minutes at night). Trams are about as loud as cars, but there are fewer trams than cars, so cars rank slightly worse than trams for me.
The only mode of transportation that's "practically silent" is bicycles. (Pedestrians are silent, too, except for those drunk idiots who like to loudly argue before my house at night.)
> Buses, trucks, trains, and motorcycles all make drastically more noise.
Motorcycles are THE WORST.
> Especially when the buses are operating their airbrakes and audible announcements,
WTF? Announcements happen inside the bus, not outside. (Except if there is a blind person on the platform. They have devices that make the tram or bus announce its destination. But blind people are exceptionally rare, especially at night.)
> trains are blowing their horns as they crawl away from stations
WTF? I only ever see trains blowing their horns when approaching one of the few ungated level crossings in the countryside which have not been outfitted with gates yet.
The only mode of transportation that's "practically silent" is bicycles. (Pedestrians are silent, too, except for those drunk idiots who like to loudly argue before my house at night.)
> Buses, trucks, trains, and motorcycles all make drastically more noise.
Motorcycles are THE WORST.
> Especially when the buses are operating their airbrakes and audible announcements,
WTF? Announcements happen inside the bus, not outside. (Except if there is a blind person on the platform. They have devices that make the tram or bus announce its destination. But blind people are exceptionally rare, especially at night.)
> trains are blowing their horns as they crawl away from stations
WTF? I only ever see trains blowing their horns when approaching one of the few ungated level crossings in the countryside which have not been outfitted with gates yet.
In the US cities I’ve lived in, announcements always happen outside the bus in case there might be a blind person, and the tracks used by freight and regional passenger service have boom gates, flashing lights, bells, and three blows of the train horn at every level crossing (every few blocks). Those trains still kill pedestrians pretty frequently, so there is little appetite for relaxing federal railway safety regulations. In Chicago, some bus shelters also have continuous beeps whether or not a bus is present to alert the blind to their location.
Interesting. Level crossings between railway and streets within cities seem like a colossally bad idea to me, and I don't know of any in Germany. (Except for trams, obviously. Those operate very differently from railway, and at much lower velocities.)
And I'm surprised that the buses don't adopt the same tech that we have, where blind people carry devices that trigger the announcement.
And I'm surprised that the buses don't adopt the same tech that we have, where blind people carry devices that trigger the announcement.
steps that provided seating for gatherers have now been filled with plant boxes
So, the same policy of hostile architecture that gets used to try to be unwelcoming of homeless people can be applied to other demographics and other social problems. Color me not thrilled with this approach.
I've just never had the kind of life that involved lots of alcohol and loud parties. So my admittedly biased tendency is to feel there is no tremendous value in fostering such things. But as other people have noted, this doesn't just impede loud carousers. It also prevents other kinds of just hanging out with people.
The article notes that the nearby commercial development basically sold pizza and beer and suggested this was influenced by the nighttime activities here. It seems to me that trying to get more of a commercial mix in the area could help or otherwise try to foster evening activities other than drinking, hanging in the plaza for free and being loud.
There was one charity that created a midnight basketball program to combat the problem of inner city youth having nothing to do but be troublemakers. It's not like you need to reinvent the wheel here, so to speak. There are examples out there for how to resolve similar kinds of problems in a win/win fashion that gives the offending parties something better to do instead of merely vilifying them.
So, the same policy of hostile architecture that gets used to try to be unwelcoming of homeless people can be applied to other demographics and other social problems. Color me not thrilled with this approach.
I've just never had the kind of life that involved lots of alcohol and loud parties. So my admittedly biased tendency is to feel there is no tremendous value in fostering such things. But as other people have noted, this doesn't just impede loud carousers. It also prevents other kinds of just hanging out with people.
The article notes that the nearby commercial development basically sold pizza and beer and suggested this was influenced by the nighttime activities here. It seems to me that trying to get more of a commercial mix in the area could help or otherwise try to foster evening activities other than drinking, hanging in the plaza for free and being loud.
There was one charity that created a midnight basketball program to combat the problem of inner city youth having nothing to do but be troublemakers. It's not like you need to reinvent the wheel here, so to speak. There are examples out there for how to resolve similar kinds of problems in a win/win fashion that gives the offending parties something better to do instead of merely vilifying them.
bigcostooge(1)
I wonder what the second and third order effects will be of this type of enforcement.
I'm curious, could they use their sensors and other stuff to build some active noise cancellation system for local inhabitants instead?
Like, some buckets of cold water?
After reading, I chuckled and realized the title could have been: "Residents use Arduinos to tell at kids on their lawn..."
We hear the voice of those who live there, but not of those who visit. Both are likely to be citizens, it seems one-sided to give in to the demands of one group, and ignore the other. (Or perhaps both were listened to, but the article gave no indication of that.)
In a society, peoples rights are a lot of times in conflict. In this case, I imagine that the right of the neigbours to be able to rest at night superseedes the right of the visitors to have fun by doing "botellón" (dinking on the street) at night in a residential area.
In any case, this is not special at all. Every European city has regulations about pollution, including noise pollution.
In any case, this is not special at all. Every European city has regulations about pollution, including noise pollution.
Hardly unique to Europe. It's very common in American cities to see signs outside of bars in primarily residential neighborhoods reminding people to be "considerate of our neighbors" and other words to that effect. Cities tend to be noisy but that doesn't mean everyone should take an attitude of "There are sirens and noise anyway, so honk your horn and carouse at 3 in the morning all you want."
If you live in such a section, the noise is not a new phenomenon. Until recently, as people got older and had less benefit relative to negatives of living by the night life, they would move out of these areas, freeing them up and keeping the rents affordable for the next wave..
There are probably laws against noise pollution that the visitors was breaking with impunity.
I misread the title somewhat and now got a «bright» idea: Why not put noise-canceling loudspeakers on plazas? No idea whether this really would work, but I think we should explore a technical solution. Because people need a place to let off steam. A possible double win?
Edit: I googled and found this: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/87833/outdoor-ac... -- it seems that there are limits of physics which make such noise-canceling loudspeakers infeasible. It's a pity.
Edit: I googled and found this: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/87833/outdoor-ac... -- it seems that there are limits of physics which make such noise-canceling loudspeakers infeasible. It's a pity.
Your edit got there before I did :)
I live in a high-rise next to a motorway in London and at 3am I can measure the noise as 60-70db using a mobile phone noise meter (inaccurate but indicative).
I investigated the feasibility of using my stereo speakers as noise-cancelling for the room... mics on the window sills and the speakers to reduce the noise in the room. I figured it would work well enough to remove the constant background hum of the road. I was wrong. It doesn't really work, and it is just noise upon noise.
The best I've managed to do is hang materials inside of the windows (quilts, sheets) and have been able to knock off just under 10db of noise in the best case (when it's just the drone of vehicle volume rather than specific engines or sirens).
The downside is that my high-rise is a high fire-risk tower block and I'm trading one life affecting issue (noise pollution) for another (fire risk) as now I have flammable materials inside my windows. Hard to know which affects sleep more, certainly the noise is the most real and present issue.
I live in a high-rise next to a motorway in London and at 3am I can measure the noise as 60-70db using a mobile phone noise meter (inaccurate but indicative).
I investigated the feasibility of using my stereo speakers as noise-cancelling for the room... mics on the window sills and the speakers to reduce the noise in the room. I figured it would work well enough to remove the constant background hum of the road. I was wrong. It doesn't really work, and it is just noise upon noise.
The best I've managed to do is hang materials inside of the windows (quilts, sheets) and have been able to knock off just under 10db of noise in the best case (when it's just the drone of vehicle volume rather than specific engines or sirens).
The downside is that my high-rise is a high fire-risk tower block and I'm trading one life affecting issue (noise pollution) for another (fire risk) as now I have flammable materials inside my windows. Hard to know which affects sleep more, certainly the noise is the most real and present issue.
Noise cancellation can be a little tricky depending in the frequency. Low frequencies are easiest. Trying feeding the signal through your PC and adjusting the delay, using different delay for different frequency ranges.
Some nice thick shag pile carpets, and wall-hung rugs will also help. If you like posters or pictures, consider using a block frame and putting some sound adsorbent material between the paper and the wall.
Double glazed windows are your best bet, but probably quite hard to install in a high rise. Ideally you want the ones where each glass layer is a slightly different thickness.
Otherwise get some custom fit earplugs from an audiologist, if it's just sleeping that is a problem. They can even fine tune them, so that voice frequencies pass through, but other frequencies are blocked.
Some nice thick shag pile carpets, and wall-hung rugs will also help. If you like posters or pictures, consider using a block frame and putting some sound adsorbent material between the paper and the wall.
Double glazed windows are your best bet, but probably quite hard to install in a high rise. Ideally you want the ones where each glass layer is a slightly different thickness.
Otherwise get some custom fit earplugs from an audiologist, if it's just sleeping that is a problem. They can even fine tune them, so that voice frequencies pass through, but other frequencies are blocked.
More likely to get a pair of these https://www.bose.com/en_us/products/headphones/noise_masking...
Though stopping or masking all noise carries risk by itself... being unable to hear what fire alarms we do have.
Though stopping or masking all noise carries risk by itself... being unable to hear what fire alarms we do have.
Assuming these are roughly equivalent to their in-ear headphones, I wouldn't worry about missing a fire alarm. They're pretty effective, especially for low frequency noise like aircraft engines, but they're a very long way from blocking all sounds.
the sleep pods are a combination of average ear plugs, and tiny little speakers playing white-ish noise rather loud. they don't do any active noise cancellation. sounds like they'll be good for somewhere around 90dB of noise masking.
still doubt they'd stop a fire alarm.
still doubt they'd stop a fire alarm.
Interesting. I hadn't heard about those. I doubt it would handle 90db though. That's pretty loud, probably dangerously so for an extended period; it's about how loud a lawn mower is when you're operating it.
Standard ear protection attenuates about 15-30db.
Standard ear protection attenuates about 15-30db.
the 90dB of noise masking isn't all sound energy. they're also ear plugs (on the less effective end of things) so 15-20dB of that 90 is from jamming them into the ear canal.
I live in Dublin in rented apartment facing very busy street and a pub across the street so had the same problem with noise during the nights.
I bought polycarbonate transparent sheet (firesafe) that can be attached to the window wall with a help of magnetic adhesive tape. http://goldstarplasticsireland.ie/secondary-glazing-system.h...
It is effective in blocking mid and high frequencies, still some low freq energetic noise comes in. Before I had to sleep few nights in a week with wax earplugs, now I manage to sleep normally.
I bought polycarbonate transparent sheet (firesafe) that can be attached to the window wall with a help of magnetic adhesive tape. http://goldstarplasticsireland.ie/secondary-glazing-system.h...
It is effective in blocking mid and high frequencies, still some low freq energetic noise comes in. Before I had to sleep few nights in a week with wax earplugs, now I manage to sleep normally.
What a great invention! I've always rented apartments and have always ignored the advice to get double-glazed windows since that's not something a renter can usually do, but this would be perfect. Thanks for posting it!
Hah, my idea was "ok, so the sensors will shush people? Like play some audio? That seems a bit odd but maybe it could work?"
Come think of it, this is not the first time I've gone through the whole evaluating idea-thought process and even sometimes reaching "I can't believe nobody thought of this before!" before realizing that I read something into a title that wasn't there.
Come think of it, this is not the first time I've gone through the whole evaluating idea-thought process and even sometimes reaching "I can't believe nobody thought of this before!" before realizing that I read something into a title that wasn't there.
It's sort of been done. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mosquito
Basically in areas where loitering by teenagers is perceived to be a problem, playing a high frequency sound tends to be unpleasant to them while older folks often don't hear it.
Basically in areas where loitering by teenagers is perceived to be a problem, playing a high frequency sound tends to be unpleasant to them while older folks often don't hear it.
Giorgi(3)
I feel like they should have maybe subsidized soundproofing in the nearby buildings rather than ruin the nice outdoor space enjoyed by so many party goers.
Kudos to the residents - but since this article is not just about BCN:
> People may not want everything monitored and who decides and shapes this agenda is a big question for future urban democracy.
That is actually my main problem with those fab labs: As collecting data becomes a means of power, the fabs are often an attempt to grab that power. I.e. the people running them are almost always heavily politically aligned towards one extreme of the spectrum and thus the labs themselves are ideological echo chambers (at least in my country).
No wonder it produces agendas like these:
> "We are trying to build a new productivity model for society, creating a new sustainable economy in cities where people can prototype and test ideas,"
Like this (an implied technical ability of the masses) is ever going to happen. Especially if the ones advocating it, are either shunning people outside their belief-system or "promoting" the ability with projects and agendas, no one outside their belief-system is even remotely interested in.
Consider affluent neighbourhood residents going into these labs to print their own noise detectors because of their annoyance with the asylum-seeker-home next door. Not gonna happen.
And since Detroit was mentioned: What if those youngsters in plaça del sol where the ones equipped with sensors?
> People may not want everything monitored and who decides and shapes this agenda is a big question for future urban democracy.
That is actually my main problem with those fab labs: As collecting data becomes a means of power, the fabs are often an attempt to grab that power. I.e. the people running them are almost always heavily politically aligned towards one extreme of the spectrum and thus the labs themselves are ideological echo chambers (at least in my country).
No wonder it produces agendas like these:
> "We are trying to build a new productivity model for society, creating a new sustainable economy in cities where people can prototype and test ideas,"
Like this (an implied technical ability of the masses) is ever going to happen. Especially if the ones advocating it, are either shunning people outside their belief-system or "promoting" the ability with projects and agendas, no one outside their belief-system is even remotely interested in.
Consider affluent neighbourhood residents going into these labs to print their own noise detectors because of their annoyance with the asylum-seeker-home next door. Not gonna happen.
And since Detroit was mentioned: What if those youngsters in plaça del sol where the ones equipped with sensors?
OK fine about rescheduling the garbage trucks, but is this really a success? A vibrant public space has been neutered by more intrusive policing and architectural changes that encourage people to stay away? I'm somewhat sympathetic to the people in these apartments, but if this has been going on for 20 years (and why 20? why not 200?) then property values should already have adjusted. If you're living here, it's because you made the calculation about the noise and decided to rent or buy anyway, or else you didn't, and why is that the City of Barcelona's problem?