Planning logic and responsibility allocation for traffic arterial noise control

Based on the differentiated strategy of "road first, house later" and "house first, road later"

1. The Dilemma of Noise Control in Two Planning Models

"Roads first, houses later" model (roads built first, houses built later)

The core of the problem: After the road was built, no space was reserved for noise reduction when developing surrounding land, resulting in residential buildings being built right next to the road and directly exposed to frequent traffic noise (70-85dB).

Typical case: In a newly built community along a city expressway, the developer did not install soundproof windows, and the complaint rate after residents moved in reached 80%.

"Build houses first, build roads later" model (build houses first, build roads later)

The core of the problem: Existing buildings fail to take into account the future impact of road noise. As a result, residents are forced to endure the increased noise pollution after road construction, resulting in high control costs and prominent conflicts.

Typical case: A new overpass was built next to a historical district without a fully enclosed sound barrier, which triggered a class action lawsuit from residents.

2. Governance Strategy: Planning Logic Determines the Technical Path

1. "Roads first, housing later" model: Focusing on "planning prevention"

Planning stage:

✅ Noise-sensitive zoning: New residential buildings and schools are prohibited within the compliance distance outside the road red line;

✅ Reserve space for noise reduction: developers are required to set up green isolation belts or setback buffer zones within a compliant distance in land use planning.

Construction phase:

✅ Building protection: Road-facing buildings should use ventilated soundproof windows (sound insulation ≥ 35dB) and floating floor slabs (impact sound pressure level ≤ 65dB);

✅ Road optimization: Use porous asphalt pavement (noise reduction 3-5dB), but increase subsequent maintenance costs.

2. "Housing first, road later" model: Focusing on "passive remediation"

Road design:

✅ Fully enclosed sound barrier: for sensitive building sections, the sound insulation is ≥15dB;

✅ Low noise pavement: OGFC pavement is used to reduce noise by 3-5dB;

Renovation of existing buildings:

✅ Government-subsidized renovation: Free installation of soundproof windows for residents living along the road, with the cost borne by the road construction party.

III. Responsible Body: Multi-level Collaborative Governance Framework

Planning Department:

Noise environmental impact assessments are mandatory for “houses first, roads later” projects, and approval will not be granted if they fail to meet the standards.

Developer/Construction Unit:

During the “house first, road later” road construction, noise reduction measures are implemented simultaneously and the costs are included in the project budget.

Residents and Communities:

Supervise the implementation of governance projects and safeguard environmental rights and interests through legal means.

IV. Learning from International Experience

The British government has compiled a road traffic noise map based on road information from 2001. People can find out the noise level in the corresponding area by simply entering the postcode on the noise map website (noisemapping.org).

V. Conclusion: From "Inverted Power and Responsibility" to "Full-Cycle Governance"

The essence of traffic noise control is the redistribution of planning responsibilities:

"Roads first, buildings later": focuses on prevention, front-loads costs through planning constraints, and developers are primarily responsible for noise reduction;

"Houses first, roads later": emphasizes compensation, the road builder bears the governance costs, and the government coordinates the balance of interests.

Only through the triple mechanism of legal enforcement, technological adaptation and public participation can we break the dilemma of "planning mismatch, everyone pays the price".