The liveability of cities worldwide is under threat by the predicted increase in intensity and frequency of heatwaves and the absence of a clear spatial overview of where action to address this. Heat stress impairs vital urban functions (Böcker and Thorsson 2014), hits the local economy (Evers et al. 2020), and brings risks for citizens’ health (Ebi et al. 2021). The ongoing densification of cities may escalate the negative consequences of heat, while rising climate adaptation ambitions require new pathways to (re)design public places for a warmer climate. Currently, policy makers and urban planners rely on remote sensing and modelling to identify potential heat stress locations, but thermal comfort models alone fail to consider socio-environmental vulnerabilities and are often not applicable in different countries (Elnabawi and Hamza 2020).In the Cool Towns Interreg project, researchers collaborated with municipalities and regions to model urban heat stress in nine North-Western European cities, to find vulnerabilities and to measure on the ground (see Spanjar et al. 2020 for methodology) the thermal comfort of residents and the effectiveness of implemented nature-based solutions. Using the Physiological Equivalent Temperature (PET) index, several meteorological scenarios were developed to show the urban areas under threat. The PET maps are complemented by heat vulnerability maps showing key social and environmental indicators. Coupled with local urban planning agendas, the maps allowed partner cities to prioritize neighbourhoods for further investigation. To this end, community amenities and slow traffic routes were mapped on top of the PET maps to identify potential focus areas.A comparative analysis of the collated maps indicates certain spatial typologies, where vital urban activities are often influenced by heat stress, such as shopping areas, mobility hubs, principal bicycle and pedestrian routes. This project has resulted in the development of a multi-level Thermal Comfort Assessment (TCA), highlighting locations where vulnerable user groups are exposed to high temperatures. Standardized for European cities, it is a powerful tool for policy makers and urban planners to strategically identify heat stress risks and prioritize locations for adapting to a changing climate using the appropriate nature-based solutions.
MULTIFILE
Since it is insufficiently clear to urban planners in the Netherlands to what extent design measures can reduce heat stress and which urban spaces are most comfortable, this study evaluates the impact of shading, urban water, and urban green on the thermal comfort of urban spaces during hot summer afternoons. The methods used include field surveys, meteorological measurements, and assessment of the PET (physiological equivalent temperature). In total, 21 locations in Amsterdam (shaded and sunny locations in parks, streets, squares, and near water bodies) were investigated. Measurements show a reduction in PET of 12 to 22 °C in spaces shaded by trees and buildings compared to sunlit areas, while water bodies and grass reduce the PET up to 4 °C maximum compared to impervious areas. Differences in air temperature between the locations are generally small and it is concluded that shading, water and grass reduce the air temperature by roughly 1 °C. The surveys (n = 1928) indicate that especially shaded areas are perceived cooler and more comfortable than sunlit locations, whereas urban spaces near water or green spaces (grass) were not perceived as cooler or thermally more comfortable. The results of this study highlight the importance of shading in urban design to reduce heat stress. The paper also discusses the differences between meteorological observations and field surveys for planning and designing cool and comfortable urban spaces. Meteorological measurements provide measurable quantities which are especially useful for setting or meeting target values or guidelines in reducing urban heat in practice.
Small urban water bodies, like ponds or canals, are often assumed to cool their surroundings during hot periods, when water bodies remain cooler than air during daytime. However, during the night they may be warmer. Sufficient fetch is required for thermal effects to reach a height of 1–2 m, relevant for humans. In the ‘Really cooling water bodies in cities’ (REALCOOL) project thermal effects of typical Dutch urban water bodies were explored, using ENVI-met 4.1.3. This model version enables users to specify intensity of turbulent mixing and light absorption of the water, offering improved water temperature simulations. Local thermal effects near individual water bodies were assessed as differences in air temperature and Physiological Equivalent Temperature (PET). The simulations suggest that local thermal effects of small water bodies can be considered negligible in design practice. Afternoon air temperatures in surrounding spaces were reduced by typically 0.2 °C and the maximum cooling effect was 0.6 °C. Typical PET reduction was 0.6 °C, with a maximum of 1.9 °C. Night-time warming effects are even smaller. However, the immediate surroundings of small water bodies can become cooler by means of shading from trees, fountains or water mists, and natural ventilation. Such interventions induce favorable changes in daytime PET.
