PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Journal
DATE: September 30, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 3
BYLINE: Elvia Diaz
DATELINE: Santa Fe, New Mexico
The Albuquerque Journal reports a popular night spot in downtown Santa Fe, New Mexico, is forbidden from offering live music until the bar's owner complies with the city's noise ordinance, a city official said Tuesday.
According to the article, city officials have verbally warned the owner of El Paseo Bar & Grill on Galisteo Street that noise levels had been too high on several occasions this summer, in violation of the noise ordinance, city spokesman Juan Rios said. Rios said staffers took noise -level readings near El Paseo after receiving several complaints from people who own time-share apartments next to the bar. El Paseo owner Matt Chavez declined comment Tuesday, saying he is working with the city to resolve the issue.
The article reports Rios said the city can either issue a citation ordering El Paseo to immediately comply with the noise ordinance or ask for a court hearing. The city has asked for a court hearing in February in case negotiations with the bar's owner fail between now and that time, Rios said. "If we can't reach a solution, then the courts are always an alternative," Rios said.
The article states Lewin Barringer, a musician who has played at El Paseo about once a week for the past two years, called the city's case against the bar "ridiculous." Barringer said El Paseo told members of his group last Thursday that their Friday performance was canceled until further notice. "It affects me in a lot of ways," Barringer said. "It's hurting my income. I don't know whether I will be able to pay my rent now." Barringer said music levels at El Paseo haven't been any more excessive recently than in the past two years.
PUBLICATION: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
DATE: September 30, 1998
SECTION: Ozaukee Washington Pg. 1
BYLINE: Jeanette Hurt
DATELINE: Cedarburg, Wisconsin
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Cathy Weigl, resident
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports the city of Cedarburg, Wisconsin, is investigating complaints from neighbors about noise at the local Amcast Automotive Plant.
According to the article, "It is serious," Mayor Keith Kaiman said Tuesday. "The city will be responsive." For more than a year, neighbors have complained and petitioned city and company officials about the noise problems. The neighbors' noise abatement group publishes a quarterly newsletter, Amcast Noise Pollution. Cathy Weigl, a resident who lives near the plant, as well as other residents contend that Amcast has not lived up to the promises company officials made in February, when a noise consultant hired by the city concluded that some noise at the plant exceeds the sound levels allowed under municipal ordinances. "It's gotten to the point where we've needed to make more noise, " Weigl said, adding that her 15-year-old son has been prescribed sleeping pills because of the noise and that she uses ear plugs. "I often sleep on my living room couch because it's the furthest spot away from the factory in my house," she said.
The article reports Amcast spokeswoman Phyllis Naylor said she could not comment on any specific complaints from neighbors and referred a reporter Tuesday to a letter the company sent to city officials. The letter, sent by Amcast division manager Joseph Angi, says the company needs more time to correct some of the noise problems. He also wrote that the company has taken several corrective actions to date, including closing unused wall and roof penetrations, and was working to install more silencers and permanently close unused exterior doors. But according to the September issue of the residents' newsletter, Amcast has installed only one stack silencer and one fan silencer. At a meeting between company officials and neighbors on Sept. 2, an Amcast official told them that the fan silencers were on order, and that he was waiting for them to be installed and evaluated before he could justify purchasing more stack silencers. Also, in the letter to the city, Angi said the neighbors "were not very interested in progress other than why activities were not completed in accordance with the original targeted timing. In my opinion, the outcome of the meeting was not very positive for Amcast or the neighbors." Weigl said the neighbors are looking for an attorney who would represent them pro bono if the problem is not resolved. "If someone has to give their kids sleeping pills, it's far beyond a nuisance," Weigl said.
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: September 30, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. 2C
BYLINE: Jillian Safer
DATELINE: West Greenwich, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports a Rhode Island zoning board last night continued a hearing to a fourth night of review on a gun club's application for a special-use permit that would allow it to relocate, frustrating the club's lawyer.
According to the article, the Zoning Board of Review last night heard more than an hour of testimony from supporters and opponents of the Exeter-based Wincheck Gun Club's application for a special-use permit that would allow it to relocate to a parcel off the New London Turnpike. By 10:30 p.m., with nearly a dozen residents waiting to speak and lawyers for both sides waiting to make closing statements, the board continued the hearing to its Oct. 20 meeting. This continuance, which sets up a fourth night of review before the board, exasperated the lawyer for the gun club, John Kupa, who also represented the club over the last several months in hearings before the Planning Board. The gun club has a purchase-and-sale agreement on 43 acres off the New London Turnpike near the Big River Management Area.
The article reports the club's plan has drawn significant protest from residents who say the operation would add too much noise and traffic to the area. The club has conducted sound tests that show the noise would not exceed the maximum level in the town's zoning ordinance, but some opposed to the plan have questioned the accuracy of those findings. Residents last night said they can still hear shots from their homes. Last night the lawyer for 28 of the residents, Jeffrey S. Brenner, cross-examined the real estate appraiser who testified for the gun club, questioning his conclusion that the gun club would have no adverse effect on property values. Brenner presented a real estate appraiser who testified that property values and the welfare of residents would be jeopardized by the gun club. Paul J. Bordieri Jr. of United Appraisal Group, of Providence, said he had looked at the average difference between the list price and the selling price of homes in West Greenwich and found the difference was greater for those homes within two miles of the two existing gun clubs in the area, South County Rod and Gun Club and the Rhode Island Fish and Game Protective Association, both in West Greenwich. But Zoning Board members questioned how it could be determined that the gun clubs, rather than other factors, reduced property values. Brenner also submitted a report from an engineer who found that the New London Turnpike north of Henry Brown Road is not safe for two-way traffic.
The article states Kupa asked Zoning Board members last night if they could finish the review at their next meeting, as the club must move from its leased property in Exeter in November. Town Solicitor Michael Ursillo advised board members to make no promises, telling Kupa that the board will keep the hearing open as long as residents wish to testify. After closing the hearing, he said, the board has 30 days to vote on the permit application. Such time will likely be needed for board members to review all the testimony and reports from both sides, he said.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: September 30, 1998
SECTION: St. Charles Post, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Ralph Dummit
DATELINE: St. Charles, Missouri
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Joe Ortwerth, St. Charles County executive; Don Ohlms, member of CAAN (St. Charles County Citizens Against Airport Noise); Bob Moeller, St. Charles mayor; Rose Kasper, council president; Pat McDonnell, co-chairman of CAAN; Conrad Bowers, Bridgeton mayor
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports if, as expected, the Federal Aviation Administration gives the green light to the $2.6 billion W-1W plan for expanding Lambert Field, the announcement will set in motion legal actions by public officials in St. Charles County.
According to the article, County Executive Joe Ortwerth, a vocal opponent of the plan, said Tuesday, "If the record of decision is based on the final environmental impact statement, I assuredly will be asking the County Council to join me in a joint (effort) with Bridgeton in challenging the decision." Bridgeton officials have been on record for months that they will file suit against the FAA if W-1W is approved. The expansion plan would wipe out about 2,000 homes and businesses in Bridgeton. The city's mayor, Conrad Bowers, told an audience in St. Charles on Aug. 31, "The people of Bridgeton will go to the wall to defeat W-1W."
The article reports the County Council has stressed that the main issue is noise and that some assurance is required that the expansion of Lambert will not increase aircraft noise over the county. So far, however, council members have failed to get a noise agreement from St. Louis, which owns Lambert. Councilman Carl Bearden said Tuesday, "It always has been the council's position that if necessary, we would litigate,"' but only as a last resort if efforts fail to get a noise agreement. Council Chairman Bob Schnur wrote to Don Ohlms, a member of CAAN - St. Charles County Citizens Against Airport Noise - that the council is asking Lambert and St. Louis officials "for a strict, enforceable, written noise agreement in which they guarantee that the noise suffered (by) St. Charles County residents is reduced to levels lower than they are today, with or without expansion." Schnur's June 25 letter asserted, "If we do not get this agreement, we will not support W-1W or any expansion plan, and we will litigate." As for the city of St. Charles, Mayor Bob Moeller and Council President Rose Kasper have pressed the FAA for a study to prove the safety of the W-1W plan and whether the plan will deliver the additional airport capacity claimed by its proponents. FAA officials have refused to conduct such a study, saying the plan is safe and that additional study is not necessary. Moeller and Kasper were among a group of residents protesting against W-1W Monday outside the St. Louis City Hall. Although the St. Charles officials had asked to speak with St. Louis Mayor Clarence Harmon, no one was present to greet them in City Hall.
The article states Ortwerth's strategy is to mount a legal challenge to the final environmental impact statement prepared by the FAA. Early this year, Ortwerth sent a 23-page letter to the FAA in which he contended that the environmental statement "fails miserably to justify" W-1W. He called the "so-called evidence" compiled to support the W-1W plan "poorly disguised bureaucratic fiction." Ortwerth labels as "patently untrue" the FAA's contention that W-1W will allow for dual simultaneous independent arrivals and departures for aircraft operating under instrument flight rules. He asserts that federal law was violated when the FAA precluded "the possibility of a reasoned choice" of alternate plans. Instead, he said, the FAA accepted the plan promoted by St. Louis and airport officials and ignored alternate proposals from independent sources. Ortwerth ended his letter to the FAA by saying, "St. Charles County will not willingly submit to Lambert Airport's scorched-earth approach to airport expansion. All the more so when the colossal negative impacts resulting from W-1W will not by any stretch of the imagination create a world-class airport."
According to the article, Pat McDonnell, a co-chairman of CAAN, suspects the FAA's approval of W-1W is vulnerable because airport officials have tinkered with the way runways will be used in order to meet some of the safety concerns expressed by airline pilots and controllers. "They've had to make changes to make the runways safer and because they couldn't get the capacity" they had promised, McDonnell said. "Our thinking is that the process they started with is not the way they ended up." He contends that residents in St. Ann and Woodson Terrace would be subjected to much more aircraft noise than originally planned. No public hearings have been held on the altered runway uses. McDonnell said, "Those people have the right to be heard."
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: September 30, 1998
SECTION: Metro Chicago; Pg. 1; Zone: N
BYLINE: Anthony Colarossi
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jean Juske, resident; Katie Artzer, resident; Joyce Siragusa, resident
The Chicago Tribune reports a Chicago, Illinois, City Alderman has introduced an initiative to amend the city's 1996 ordinance that bans loud music in cars. Opponents of the current noise ordinance say it hurts business at car-audio retailers.
According to the article, a 1996 ordinance, popular with quiet-loving residents citywide, allows police to fine a car owner $500 and impound the vehicle if the car emits sound audible more than 75 feet away. Towing and storage costs are additional. But a growing hesitance to invest in equipment that allows one's car to "pound" has audio retailers lobbying the City Council. They want aldermen to amend the 1996 ordinance that bans loud music in cars. A survey of 20 car-audio retailers in Chicago shows their sales are off by an average 30 percent since the ordinance took effect. The Virginia-based Consumer Electronics Manufacturers Association conducted the study, and it claims three Chicago car audio businesses no longer exist because of the noise ordinance. Ald. Percy Giles, whose ward includes at least six such businesses, is proposing an amendment limiting the ban on vehicular noise to evening hours. He would have the ban begin at 9 p.m. weekdays and 10 or 11 p.m. on weekends. Giles' amendment also may seek to delay the impounding penalties to a second or third offense and lower the noise -ordinance fines. "At least two businesses in my ward have made complaints," Giles said of the noise ordinance. "I have had a couple of (retailers) in my ward go out of business."
The article reports Giles doesn't speak for everyone. Resident Jean Juske hates the drone and whistle of an obscenity-laced gangsta beat thrown from a trunk-sized speaker vibrating through the windows and walls of her Northwest Side home. "It annoys me terribly," Juske said. "And I'm not an old crab." For Juske and other residents who appreciate any quiet a city this size can offer, car stereo sound levels have improved somewhat. Ald. Ray Suarez sponsored the ordinance now being blamed for the drop in car-audio business. "They may have lost some (business), but I still see cars with boom boxes left and right," Suarez said. "I am not going to (take) any position until I hear from the people I represent." Suarez's constituents already are talking. "I don't feel a trunk full of amplifiers and speakers quantifies civil rights," said Joyce Siragusa. Katie Artzer, a West Humboldt Park resident, has problems with the sound levels and musical tastes of people who park in her alley. "It's a nuisance," Artzer said. "A decent person wouldn't blast their music that way in the neighborhood."
The article states since September, 1996, 5,769 vehicles have been impounded for noise violations, according to the city's Department of Streets and Sanitation. Terry Levin, a spokesman for the city department that handles the towing and storage of impounded cars, says 2,967 cars were impounded for noise -ordinance violations between March and August. City Department of Revenue records show the city has collected more than $1.3 million this year for noise -ordinance violations. many retailers are unhappy. Pro Auto Sound & Alarm, on West North Avenue, has watched business drop like the volume in many cars. "If that ordinance was dropped tomorrow, I would have business around the corner," said manager Francisco Soto. "People are afraid to get systems." Soto says audio businesses have invested in neighborhoods others ignore, and elected officials need to protect store owners' interests too. "Be fair to both sides," Soto said. "Give them a chance to play their music during the day."
PUBLICATION: The Baltimore Sun
DATE: September 29, 1998
SECTION: Local (News), Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Erika Niedowski
DATELINE: Columbia, Maryland
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Kendall Echols, resident; Jonathan Schultz, resident; Josh Heltzer, vice chairman of the River Hill Village Board
The Baltimore Sun reports residents of a Maryland village have been offered evergreen trees to buffer noise from a four-lane highway, although officials admit the vegetation will do little to mitigate the noise.
According to the article, residents of Columbia's River Hill village have complained for years about noise pollution from nearby Route 32. Passing 18-wheel trucks make their windows shake, they say, and the constant rumble of traffic makes it hard to enjoy dinner conversation on their decks and patios. Jonathan Schultz, an outspoken proponent of sound barriers, said even from inside his house, "it sounds sort of like a train terminal because there's a constant rumble." Last night, state and county officials publicly announced a plan to plant trees long the highway. Christopher J. McCabe, a Republican state senator, and Charlie Adams, the State Highway Administration's director of environmental design, outlined to the River Hill Village Board and concerned residents their plan to plant more than $50,000 worth of evergreen trees on both sides of the four-lane highway to help address the noise problem. But trees aren't what River Hill residents had in mind. "I think it's the state's attempt to put a Band-Aid on a big problem and hope it'll go away," said Kendall Echols, who claims to hear every car and truck passing on Route 32 from inside his house -- with the windows shut. "The state and the developer failed the residents of this community," he said, "and are unwilling to rectify the mistakes that they made." In some areas of River Hill, the noise meets or exceeds the maximum decibel level as laid out in the county's sound ordinance, according to measurements taken by the state.
The article reports many village residents -- concerned about even more noise if the state goes ahead with its plan to expand Route 32 from two lanes to four between Route 108 and Interstate 70 -- have suggested sound barriers, which can cost as much as $1.5 million a mile, as a means to mitigate noise from passing traffic. But Adams, of the SHA, said River Hill doesn't qualify for assistance under the state's sound barrier program because the houses were built after the state had completed its environmental impact studies for Route 32. "I can't stand here tonight and put that offer on the table," he said. Adams concedes that the trees, which could take more than five years to mature, will provide residents little, if any, relief from the noise. The idea behind the "screens" of vegetation is simply to provide homeowners with a kind of visual buffer -- a psychological buffer -- instead.
The article states without the option of sound barriers, residents are shifting their focus toward another goal: having their community included in the environmental impact study the SHA is completing on the Route 32 expansion. Josh Heltzer, vice chairman of the River Hill Village Board and head of a noise committee, has submitted such a request to SHA, but has not received a definitive response. Adams and McCabe noted that it would be inconsistent with precedent to allow a community outside the geographic boundaries of the expansion project to be involved in a discussion of "downstream" traffic impact, but residents still intend to pursue this avenue.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: September 29, 1998
SECTION: Nws; Pg. 11
BYLINE: Becky Beaupre
DATELINE: Des Plaines, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Laverne Johnson, resident; Gayle Smolinski, Roselle mayor
The Chicago Sun-Times reports residents of Chicago's suburbs, airport activists, and other leaders fear a federal proposal to redesign flight paths would lead to increased flights at O'Hare Airport and more noise below.
According to the article, Federal Aviation Administration officials said the new plan is to improve efficiency and reduce delays and would have no impact on the number of O'Hare flights. "Our project deals with the existing level of traffic," said Robert Everson, manager of the FAA's Chicago Terminal Airspace Project. "Our goal is efficiency. Whether the project happens or not, traffic is still forecasted to increase." FAA officials discussed the proposal and gathered input from residents and leaders Monday at its regional office in Des Plaines as part of an environmental review. A public hearing will be held next year after a draft of the environmental impact statement has been completed, officials said. The goal of the proposal is to change the way airplanes are routed at high altitudes. It involves proposed changes in arrival paths at O'Hare, Midway, and Milwaukee's Mitchell Airport.
The article reports the part of the plan that drew the most comment was the way O'Hare-bound airplanes approach four "corner posts." Under the changes, the planes that now approach three of the four posts in single streams would arrive in two streams. One would be at 11,000 feet, the current level, and the second at 12,000 feet. Air traffic controllers also would take responsibility for planes at 50 or 60 miles out, rather than 40 miles. Currently, with single streams, airplanes weave, making "S-turns" that waste fuel. It also causes backups and delays, which sometimes can push more flights into the evening hours, FAA officials said. But some of those who spoke at the meeting said the double streams would allow for an increase in capacity. "My concern is you're going to add a new corridor, but you're not going to reduce the old one," Roselle Mayor Gayle Smolinski said. Added Forest Glen resident Laverne Johnson, "It's going to give us more traffic over our area and more noise. " FAA officials said they won't know how the plan might affect noise and pollution levels until the environmental study is completed. Illinois Transportation Secretary Kirk Brown asked the FAA to address ground capacity at the Chicago airports -- including building a third regional airport in the south suburbs -- before redesigning flight routes.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: September 29, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Zones Desk
BYLINE: Andrew Blankstein
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: James Arone, member of Citizens United of Burbank; Stacey Murphy, Burbank vice-mayor
The Los Angeles Times reports that Reno Air, which had sought to fly before 7 a.m. at Burbank Airport when the voluntary curfew lifts, decided it won't violate the curfew.
According to the article, Reno Air decided not to pursue pre-7 a.m. flights after many residents attended a recent Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority meeting and expressed their concerns. The voluntary curfew runs from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., and Reno Air had hoped to fly out at 6:40 a.m. Tensions run high among residents when noise comes up in conversation., and the airline decided to push its flight up until 7 a.m. so they did not "appear insensitive to the noise complaints of local residents. The new early flights go to San Jose.
The article reports that while the airline agreed to observe the curfew, a spokesman said "It's a disturbance to the airlines and the householders who live around the airport" to have non-mandatory rules. United, America West and Alaska airlines all violate the curfew and yet have not been pressured as Reno Air was.
According to the article, Pasadena's mayor is calling for better education for airlines to make sure they understand what their early-morning noise impacts can do to a resident's quality of life. He also said that the airport authority should research a Part 161 study, which is required by the Federal Aviation Administration before any mandatory curfew is instituted. Another officials said "that was "what Burbank city government has been asking for. The question is, will they cooperate with the study and agree to live by the outcome?" The airport authority noted that if all airlines would agree to the curfew in writing, an FAA approval would not be necessary. They also noted that although Reno Air couldn't have been stopped from flying early, they decided to forego the option to avoid negative publicity.
The article reports that residents were happy that their opposition convinced the airline to reconsider. A spokesman for Citizens United of Burbank said "I am glad Reno Air listened to what the residents had to say. I think it shows a willingness to try to be cooperative. This should serve as a message to the other airlines."
PUBLICATION: The Plain Dealer
DATE: September 29, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Steve Luttner
DATELINE: Medina, Ohio
The Plain Dealer reports the city of Medina, Ohio, will adopt construction noise restrictions in response to complaints from residents who are losing sleep to a current building boom.
According to the article, Medina Police Chief Dennis Hanwell has asked City Council to pass legislation that would make it illegal to make noise at construction or remodeling projects during evening and early morning hours. Hanwell said the Police Department traditionally gets late-night and early-morning complaints from residents during summer months about noise at roofing jobs and other construction sites. But Hanwell said such complaints increased this summer, which he attributes to the city's recent spurt in home-building. "It's just due to the density of the housing," he said. "Some of the residents are saying that they need to have some hours so they can sleep without being disturbed."
The article reports the legislation has been drafted and referred to a City Council committee for discussion. Hanwell said he was proposing that the noise ban go into effect at 8 p.m. and continue until 7 a.m. Hanwell said police had been using a section of an existing law that refers to "unreasonable noise." But the chief said he thought it was time that the city have a more specific law that outlaws noise coming from "construction, drilling or demolition work." Hanwell said a first violation of the law could be a minor misdemeanor, with a maximum fine of $100. But the chief said a subsequent violation could be a fourth-degree misdemeanor, resulting in a fine of up to $250 and 30 days in jail.
PUBLICATION: The San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: September 29, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. A14
BYLINE: Julie N. Lynem
DATELINE: Sunnyvale, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jim Lincoln, resident
The San Francisco Chronicle reports the city council in Sunnyvale, California, will meet to discuss the effect of noise on the community, including noise created by leaf blowers.
According to the article, resident Jim Lincoln says the noise and swirling dirt caused by leaf blowers have become so unbearable that he can no longer eat lunch on his patio. Lincoln does not want blowers completely banned, but he would like their use to be restricted. "People who are at work during the day have no idea just how irritating the dust and noise is," he said. Today, the Sunnyvale City Council will discuss the effect of noise on the community, including noise created by gasoline-powered leaf blowers, said David Boesch, director of community development. The council members are then expected to direct city staff to search for alternative ways to deal with high noise levels. Those alternatives could mean restricting the hours during which powered equipment, including leaf blowers and lawn mowers, are used. But do not expect any proposed ordinances from the council yet, Boesch said. The council members will seek community feedback first. "There are some members of the community who are watching the issue," he said. "We'll see whether the council will proceed ahead with a series of meetings to identify the magnitude of the problem."
The article reports complaints about leaf blowers have caused many Bay Area cities to ban the machines. Berkeley enacted a leaf blower ban in 1991. Los Altos and Piedmont have also imposed bans. Menlo Park passed a ban on gasoline-powered blowers in April, although voters will be asked whether to overturn the council's decision in a referendum on the November ballot. Earlier this month, state legislators defeated a bill that would have prevented cities from banning leaf blowers. Lincoln would welcome a stronger noise ordinance in Sunnyvale. "I bought a sound level meter to measure the noise, " he said. "At peak one day, the level was higher than noise created by a large symphony orchestra."
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: September 29, 1998
SECTION: Metro, Pg. B1
BYLINE: Mark Schlinkmann
DATELINE: St. Louis, Missouri
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Bob Moeller, St. Charles mayor
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports despite expected federal approval of Missouri's Lambert Field's expansion plan, three busloads of opponents picketed outside St. Louis City Hall on Monday.
According to the article, the approximately 125 protesters, from the Bridgeton and St. Charles areas, also picketed outside the Metropolitan Square building, home of the St. Louis Regional Commerce & Growth Association, a prime supporter of the airport's expansion into Bridgeton. Opposition leaders said they don't intend to stop their fight when the Federal Aviation Administration issues its long-awaited "record of decision" in favor of the expansion plan. Officials expect that final decision to be released Wednesday - the last day of this federal fiscal year. An FAA spokeswoman declined Monday to comment on the timing of the release. FAA officials in July cleared the way for final approval of the W-1W expansion plan when they deemed safe the runway design. They also rejected a request by opponents that the agency conduct more studies.
The article reports once the agency gives its approval, opponents vow to take their fight to state and federal courts. Protesters carried signs Monday as they walked outside the two buildings. They chanted songs, including one referring to the airport as "airpork." The crowd was orderly but loud enough to be heard inside City Hall at a second-floor hearing. Opponents are upset that more than 2,000 Bridgeton homes and businesses would be razed for a new runway. They also contend that the plan is unsafe, won't increase capacity enough, and will bring too much noise to the St. Charles area. Supporters dispute those points and say the expansion is needed to keep Lambert competitive with airports in other cities. But St. Charles Mayor Bob Moeller, who was among the protesters, said, "You can't stand in your backyard and talk now" because of aircraft noise. The W-1W plan would be "putting the airport two miles closer to St. Charles," he said. Approval of the $2.6 billion Lambert Airport expansion plan would add a new runway to the southwest of existing runways and require the demolition of about 2,000 homes and businesses in Bridgeton.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: September 29, 1998
SECTION: Metro Northwest; Pg. 1; Zone: NW
BYLINE: Rogers Worthington
DATELINE: Des Plaines, Illinois
The Chicago Tribune reports third airport proponents objected Monday to the Federal Aviation Administration's plan for reconfiguring the use of Chicago's air space at O'Hare International Airport. Objectors say the proposed plan fails to address O'Hare's inability to safely handle growth.
According to the article, south suburban airport proponents on Monday sought to turn a presentation on the Chicago Terminal Airspace Project into a debate over the need for a third airport due to capacity constraints at O'Hare International Airport. The plan was presented by regional officials of the Federal Aviation Administration to citizens groups at the FAA's Des Plaines headquarters. Presenters characterized the plan as a way to improve safety and get the flying public in and out of O'Hare more quickly. "We need a tool to make our air space less complex and more efficient," said Bob Everson, the FAA's manager for the air-space project. Now, airplanes trying to get into O'Hare during peak arrival hours are forced into holding patterns as far away as South Dakota because of air traffic, Everson said.
The article reports third-airport proponents accused the FAA of failing to address the predicted growth in the region's air traffic and what they say is O'Hare's inability to safely handle that growth. Illinois Transportation Secretary Kirk Brown faulted the FAA for redesigning the use of air space before it studied the ground capacity needs of Chicago's "already constrained" airports. The agency, Brown said, was ignoring the need for an additional runway at O'Hare and for a south suburban airport to handle projected growth. "If the FAA maintains that the airports are not currently capacity constrained, we are requesting that the FAA provide accurate capacity forecasts for O'Hare and Midway for at least 5 to 10 years in the future," Brown said.
The article went on to say others attacked the air-space project's goal of reducing arrival and departure delays as a way to increase air traffic at O'Hare. "Every time you reduce delay, you increase capacity," said Joseph Karaganis, a lawyer who represents member municipalities of the Suburban O'Hare Commission, which opposes more air traffic at O'Hare and supports a third airport at Peotone. But FAA officials insisted their proposal would merely facilitate a more efficient arrival of the traffic already coming into O'Hare, and not increase traffic. "Aviation is forecast to increase over the years. But CTAP will not cause those increases, directly or indirectly," said Bruce Johnson, the FAA's acting air-traffic division manager for the region.
According to the article, the new air-space plan would create two parallel streams of traffic, one at 11,000 feet and one at 12,000 feet, approaching each of O'Hare's four geographic "cornerposts" on the same course. Currently, planes approach the cornerposts at one altitude. Regional air-traffic controllers would hand off flights to local controllers 60 miles from O'Hare, rather than the present 40 miles. The local controllers, who are based in Elgin, would then merge the traffic into one stream, directing planes to land at any of O'Hare's three approach runways.
The article reports the FAA is seeking public input for the air-space project's environmental impact statement. Noise tops the FAA's list of some 20 possible concerns. "We expect noise to be the primary environmental issue associated with the project," said Annette Davis, project manager for the environmental impact statement. Consulting firms hired by the FAA to prepare the environmental statement will evaluate the impact of the proposed air-space project over an area of 21,000 square miles, from the Wisconsin border to the Indiana border, Davis said. Noise impact will be calculated for 165,000 different points by a computer model. One promised benefit of the air-space project, Davis said, would be less noise at night. "When planes come in late, they depart late," she said. Under the air-space plan, "more (planes) will depart on time."
PUBLICATION: The Associated Press
DATE: September 28, 1998
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Durango, Colorado
The Associated Press reports commissioners in La Plata County, Colorado, will reconsider a proposed noise standard for the oil and gas industry after industry officials claimed the restrictions are impractical.
According to the article, an expert said rustling leaves, at times, could violate the maximum sound level. Commissioners last week received a report on the proposed standard from Englewood-based Engineering Dynamics and are expected to meet soon to re-examine the noise levels. The commissioners drafted the standard after rural residents complained about noise from nearby oil and gas operations. But industry officials claim the limits in the proposal are impractical if not impossible to achieve, at least not without excessive costs.
The article reports, in addition, many oil and gas developers are upset about a county rule requiring industry to give property owners more choice about where gas wells are drilled on their properties. Many landowners own surface rights but not mineral rights. Industry representatives say the county's required deference to surface owners overturns almost 100 years of state law regarding the dominance of the mineral estate.
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: September 28, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. N3
BYLINE: Deborah Sullivan
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jim Arone, member of Citizens United of Burbank
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports while Burbank city leaders fight a proposed new passenger terminal at Burbank Airport, citing noise factors, two private terminals that house the jets of Hollywood moguls such as Time Warner and DreamWorks SKG escape city scrutiny.
According to the article, the planes hangared in those private terminals - the Gulfstreams and Lear Jets that fly executives across the country - are as loud or louder than most commercial airliners, public records show. Six of the seven noisiest flights out of Burbank Airport are these corporate jets. Airport officials are discussing with the city whether to control private jet noise. "Our statement used to be that the airline jets were the biggest part of the noise problem," said airport spokesman Victor Gill. But as airline manufacturers have made passenger planes quieter, "we're getting to the point that the corporate jets are the biggest part of the problem." But the city dismisses restricting business jets while fiercely opposes new commercial flights. In fact, city officials are now fighting plans by Reno Air to offer a 6:40 a.m. flight to San Jose. Burbank city officials oppose the flight, saying that the early morning flight violates the voluntary curfew on departures before 7 a.m. and would only worsen the noise impact on residents. The flight is another example of the sleep-shattering noise that disturbs residents, according to city officials. They contend noise that wakes people comes primarily from big airline jets on scheduled flights, not the smaller planes that ferry VIPs from such companies as Disney, Time Warner, and DreamWorks SKG. "Our position is that when people complain about noise, what they complain about is the Southwest jet taking off," said Burbank City Manager Robert "Bud" Ovrom. "Occasionally, what they complain about is Michael Eisner leaving on his jet." As the dispute rages, residents living under the flyways feel under siege from all sides. "When you start getting the corporate jets with the commercial jets with the private aviation, for the average person in the community, they still break it down the same way," said Jim Arone of Citizens United of Burbank. "Noise is noise is noise. "
The article reports a study of airport noise conducted by the consulting firm Coffman Associates projects that commercial airlines will make five times as many jet flights as private fliers, but private jets will account for six out of seven of the noisiest, Stage 2 jet flights. Furthermore, flights during the voluntary overnight curfew between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. are dominated by air cargo carriers, not by commercial airlines. A forthcoming section of the airport's noise study will calculate what portion of noise comes from the private jets and will suggest the best measures to fix that.
The article states current rules require airlines to use only quieter Stage 3 jets and hold them to a voluntary nighttime curfew. But business planes are subject to few of the restrictions imposed on airlines. Although no one is allowed to fly Stage 2 jets at night, private companies can use them freely during the day. At least nine private Stage 2 jets are hangared at Burbank Airport, including one owned by Roy Disney's subsidiary Earth Star and another owned by Kevin Costner's TIG Productions. And while most airlines have agreed to avoid night flights of even relatively quiet jets, Stage 3 corporate and cargo jets can take off any time of the day or night. Between May 1996 and April 1997, the airport logged 18,451 night flights, of which 14,814 - 80 percent - were either private or cargo flights. The balance represented airliners.
According to the article, Ovrom, the Burbank City Manager acknowledged that the city also has a financial incentive to allow corporate planes to fly in and out of Burbank. The city received $825,000 in property taxes last year from planes stationed at the airport. It's projected to jump to $1,064,000 this year, which would bring airplane property taxes to 7.2 percent of the city's total projected property taxes. "Those planes are tagged basically equivalent to property taxes you'd get off a new building," Ovrom said. "So if Warner Bros. buys a new $35 million Gulf Stream 4, that's basically the equivalent of Warner Bros. building a $35 million new building."
The article reports the airport has an opposite interest in corporate jets. In the 1996-97 fiscal year, the airport received $2,757,373 in landing fees from commercial jets, down slightly each year from $2,811,896 in the 1994-95 fiscal year. But the airport does not levy any landing fees on private planes. Unlike the city, it does not collect any property tax income from them. Gill said, however, that the airport has no financial bias but is simply trying to cut noise wherever it can. "We've made most of the improvement we can make on the commercial side of the equation," the airport's Gill said. "The question is how much more improvement we can make dealing with the fact of corporate activity." CORRECTION-DATE: Wednesday, September 30, 1998 CORRECTION: For the record.
An article Monday referred to the overnight curfew on flights at Burbank Airport in one place as mandatory and in another as voluntary. In fact, the curfew is voluntary.
PUBLICATION: The Gazette (Montreal)
DATE: September 28, 1998
SECTION: News; Peggy Curran; Pg. A3
BYLINE: Peggy Curran
DATELINE: Montreal, Canada
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Josette Lincourt, resident; Bronwen Mantel, resident; Lorraine Semienchuk, resident
The Gazette reports Montreal residents who are assaulted by noise from planes, trains and automobiles believe landlords and homeowners need to speak out about this quality of life issue.
According to the article, for the last year Josette Lincourt has dealt with an unwelcome intruder in her St. Laurent apartment - the perpetual noise of airplanes as they take off or land at Dorval. Lincourt's building lies just north of one of the airport's flight paths. And while airport officials insist the transfer of flights from Mirabel to Dorval has not meant a dramatic increase in air traffic, Lincourt insists she can feel the difference in her bones. "I'm physically ill; I have chronic insomnia," said Lincourt, who has gone to an emergency department six times this year suffering from unstable angina, although her cholesterol is normal and her arteries are clear. "It's ruining my life." Between the time she gets home at 6 p.m. and midnight, she often counts 50 planes going over her roof - the engines start revving again at 6 a.m. "The window for sleeping is very short."
The article goes on to report in lower Westmount, Bronwen Mantel keeps her windows sealed and wears earplugs to bed. Some neighbors wear earplugs day and night to block out the stereo sound of commuter trains and the Ville Marie Expressway at the foot of the street. Mantel says that when she bought her house 16 years ago, she believed Canadian Pacific planned to reroute local trains and pull up the tracks. Instead, CP renovated Windsor station and increased the number of commuter runs. Meanwhile, traffic on the Ville Marie Expressway almost tripled. A study showed traffic jumped from 60,000 cars per weekday in 1982 to 154,000 vehicles in 1994. "When we bought our house 20 years ago, we were shocked by the noise the day we moved in," said Lorraine Semienchuk, one of Mantel's neighbors. "Since then, it has increased more and more. I'm embarrassed to invite friends over in the summer. If you're outside, you have to stop talking when the trains go by."
The article states Semienchuk, Mantel and others are lobbying Westmount to revive plans to build a sound barrier to muffle noise from the expressway. Back in 1993, when traffic volume was lower, noise levels nearest the Ville Marie already exceeded 75 decibels, 10 decibel points above the limit set by Transport Quebec limits. Westmount made plans to build a 7-metre sound barrier at a cost of $4.2 million, with Quebec paying half the cost. But the plan was put on hold in 1996 after surveys suggested residents were torn - caught between wanting to reduce noise levels and fears a barrier would be ugly, block sunlight and cut views to the south. Mayor Peter Trent, explaining the decision in the Westmount Examiner this month, said: "How can council persuade all Westmounters to shoulder a $2 million expense - $300 per average single-family dwelling - when the people most directly affected are divided down the middle on the issue?" But advocates of the sound barrier see it a health and safety issue. They question the way the city solicited opinions after it set up boxcars to demonstrate how high the sound barrier would be. The sound barrier citizens' group has begun listening to homeowners, studying business and real-estate fallout from noise pollution and talking to experts. They're also hoping to compel CP to reduce noise, heed speed limits and install mufflers.
According to the article, in St. Laurent, Councillor Alan DeSousa has spoken out against airport noise and Aaron Makovka, who is running for a council seat, is campaigning on the issue. But Lincourt fears that until landlords and homeowners complain about the impact noise is having on rentals and property values, council will be content to reap the benefits of being an industrial hub close to the airport while residents who live under the flight path suffer from all the noise.
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: September 28, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. 3C
DATELINE: West Greenwich, Rhode Island
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: David Berry and Carol Healy, Planning Board members
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports West Greenwich, Rhode Island, residents will have their turn tomorrow to present arguments to the Zoning Board of Review against allowing a gun club's request for re-location.
According to the article, the Zoning Board of Review tomorrow night will continue its review of the Wincheck Gun Club's petition for a special-use permit that would allow the club to relocate from Exeter to a site off the New London Turnpike. This will be the third evening the board will dedicate to the issue. Previous sessions and public hearings held by the Planning Board drew dozens of area residents who have protested the permit due to concerns about noise and traffic. Twenty-eight residents have hired lawyer Jeffrey S. Brenner to represent them. At its August meeting, the Zoning Board of Review wrapped up testimony from the gun club. Tonight, it is expected to hear comment from residents.
The article reports the Planning Board in July voted 3 to 2 to recommend that the zoning board grant the permit. Planning Board members who supported the application said that, despite residents' concerns, tests of gun shots at various points on the site have shown the club meets town noise regulations and that a traffic study projected little adverse impact. However, Planning Board members David Berry and Carol Healy, who voted against the application, questioned whether the noise tests were properly conducted.
PUBLICATION: The Weekly of Business Aviation(TM)
DATE: September 28, 1998
SECTION: Business Aviation Intelligence; Vol. 67, No. 13; Pg. 137
DATELINE: Washington, DC
The Weekly of Business Aviation(TM) reports critics of a National Park Service aircraft noise study at the Grand Canyon spoke on Capitol Hill last week.
According to the article, Elling Halvorson, president of Papillon Airways, Inc., a Grand Canyon air tour helicopter operator, told the House natural parks and public lands subcommittee last week that the NPS report to Congress that less than one-half of one percent of the parks' nearly 2,000 square miles is sound free from touring aircraft "is an absolute untruth. I can assure you beyond any doubt that there are hundreds of square miles of the Grand Canyon where touring aircraft cannot be heard," Halvorson said, adding that "the flawed [NPS] study has mislead Congress, the press and the public."
PUBLICATION: Leicester Mail
DATE: September 27, 1998
SECTION: Environment: Noise Pollution, - Claim, Pg.1
DATELINE: Leicester, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Robert Newton-Baca, founder of First Environment Residents' Network (FERN)
The Leicester Mail reports a community action group in Leicester, England, claims it is still fighting for some peace and quiet more than two years after voicing its concern about noise from a nearby juvenile detention center.
According to the article, the First Environment Residents' Network (FERN) claim its members have suffered 'vulgar noise pollution' from the Glen Parva Young Offenders Institute. Founder member of FERN, Robert Newton-Baca, told the Mail that persistent calls for help to local councilors, MPs and MEPs to solve the problem have been without success. He said: "This has been going on for years. We have contacted hundreds of people; nobody seems to be able to help." He added much of the noise came 'all hours' from girls on the nearby housing estate and their boyfriends, who are inmates, shouting to each other over the perimeter fence.
The article reports according to a letter to Newton-Baca, Blaby District Council is aware of complaints by residents, and is currently in the process of serving a Statutory Notice, 'but are experiencing delays in establishing the appropriate body to whom the notice should be served.' Newton-Baca said: "The council wants to prosecute but they don't know who to prosecute." However, the governor of the institute, Mr. Bryan Payling, says the institute is being blamed for noise pollution unfairly. He told the Mail: "This is a matter which has been going on for years. I have told the council that I will co-operate with them to demonstrate whether what the residents are complaining about constitutes a statutory problem."
PUBLICATION: Times Newspapers Limited
DATE: September 27, 1998
SECTION: Home News
BYLINE: Jonathan Leake
DATELINE: London, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jayne Adamson, resident
The Times Newspapers Limited reports the British government faces an outcry from residents over its plans for a huge expansion of flightpaths that will lead to at least 1m more homes being disturbed by aircraft noise.
According to the article, Ministers expect the number of take-offs and landings at British airports to increase from 1.6m to more than 4m by 2015, leading to the creation of dozens of new flightpaths over homes around existing airports as well as the construction of new airports and runways. Noise from low-flying aircraft will soon affect as much as 5,000 square miles of land previously free of the problem. Among the worst affected areas will be southeast England, where there is pressure for a new runway at Heathrow or Gatwick or, alternatively, a new airport. The government will publish its plans next year in a policy document. "Transport officials behind the airport policy are very gung-ho about this. They believe expanding regional airports will bring huge economic benefits and the noise issue is secondary," said a Whitehall source.
The article reports official figures show the number of people using British airports will rise from 130m people a year now up to 378m by 2015. John Reid, the transport minister, said: "Expanding local airports will help regional development, relieve pressure on airspace in the southeast and reduce the need for people to travel long distances to airports." The government has smoothed the way for such an expansion by abolishing rules that restricted international access to regional airports. A Sunday Times survey confirmed that airports around Britain are drawing up ambitious expansion plans. Such expansions are in addition to those at better known airports such as Liverpool, which last year handled 29,000 commercial flights carrying 600,000 people.
The article state the airport expansion proposals threaten to inspire a grassroots rebellion by residents on a scale similar to that which halted the last government's road-building program. Ian Harvey, an aviation specialist at the University of Wales, said: "In Europe, airport noise has long been a political issue and it is starting to happen here, too." In many areas, developments have already sparked rebellions. One is on Teesside, where the towns of Darlington, Middlesbrough and Stockton-on-Tees were untroubled by aviation noise until the local airport renamed itself Teesside International and increased its traffic from a few flights a day to more than 20. The airport is planning further expansion that will make it Britain's second biggest cargo operation after Heathrow, with the daily number of flights expected to reach 50, most of them at night. Protesters told a recent public inquiry that 1,200 homes would suffer intolerable noise with tens of thousands more subjected to regular irritation. A noise expert hired by the developers said "only" 500 homes would find the noise intolerable, but conceded that villagers in Lower Dinsdale, directly under the take-off route, would be subjected to 100 decibels of noise at least 40 times a day, the equivalent to sitting next to a "ghetto-blaster" at full volume.
The article goes on to say the effect of expansion on residents living close to airports is highlighted in the Midlands, where Birmingham International airport has just begun a Pounds 260m expansion. Ten years ago it handled just 7,000 aircraft movements a year. It expects this to rise to 100,000 by 2005. It has coped with the increase by doubling the "con trolled airspace" through which it can direct aircraft and by increasing the number of departure routes. The result has been that towns such as Wolverhampton, Dudley, Stourbridge and Bromsgrove have been covered by a new air traffic control "umbrella" allowing passenger jets to descend low over them to land at Birmingham. Walsall and Leamington Spa have been particularly hard hit because aircraft can now fly as low as 1,500ft over them.
According to the article, in the past 10 years, aircraft movement at Manchester airport has risen from 400 a day to 670. In 1986, the airport handled 4.5m passengers, but by 1996 the figure had reached almost 15m. By 2005 airport chiefs expect 30m travelers a year. Jayne Adamson, 37, who has three children and lives three miles away in Cheadle Hulme, said about the noise: "It is worse in the summer when aircraft take off on a different flightpath. You have to stop your conversation because it is so ear-splitting. It even makes the roof tiles vibrate and I have often woken up in the middle of the night thinking there has been an earthquake."
PUBLICATION: Crain's Detroit Business
DATE: September 28, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 34
BYLINE: Terry Kosdrosky
DATELINE: Detroit, Michigan
Crain's Detroit Business reports that Pro Air Inc. has received approval from the Federal Aviation Administration to fly up to 36 departures a day out of Detroit City Airport, an increase of 28 flights over the former limit of eight.
The city had commissioned an environmental assessment from Cincinnati-based Parson Brinkerhoff Aviation Inc., which found added flights would have no significant environmental impact on air, ground and water quality near the airport. The assessment also measured added noise pollution and automobile traffic around the airport. The FAA concurred with the findings on all counts clearing the way for Pro Air's increased flights.
Southwest Airlines Inc., by comparison flew at its peak 23 departures a day before ceasing operation at City Airport in September 1993, the article said. The limit of eight flights was set after the completion of a 1997 environmental assessment. Pro Air was providing passenger service at the airport in June of that year.
The new assessment just completed was based on Pro Air's plan to add six planes to the fleet every 12 months. The article describes Pro Air as a low-fare airline that offers consistent ticket pricing. Flights go to Newark, N.J.; Baltimore; Indianapolis; and Philadelphia. Winter flights are offered to Florida.
Officials in the nearby community of Warren are disappointed with the FAA's decision. Warren Mayor Mark Steenbergh and the Warren City Council opposed passenger service at City Airport and encouraged the FAA to reject the request for increased flights. Residents located in Warren's south end frequently complain to city officials about airplane noise.
The article notes that Deputy Mayor Mike Greiner recognized the city's chances of getting the FAA to reject the additional flights were slim. He is quoted saying, "It is tough for us, but we want to take a strong stand against any type of expansion every step of the way. Then if there's a plan to expand the airport or the runway, they'll know our concerns."
Greiner noted further that he believed the city of Warren had the added burden of combating the positive publicity Pro Air received during the pilots' strike at Northwest Airlines Corp., Detroit Metropolitan Airport's largest carrier. News broadcasts showed passengers frustrated by Northwest piling into Pro Air's planes, the article said.
Greiner named their focus at the city government level as dealing with "residents who live right under the flight path. It's about noise and safety."
PUBLICATION: The Economist Intelligence Unit Ltd.
DATE: September 28, 1998
DATELINE: Europe
The Economist Intelligence Unit reports that the Environment Commission for the European Union has announced that it will propose, by the end of 1999, a legislative framework to extend ambient noise levels, beyond the current limits, for cars, lorries and aircraft.
The announcement came from the commissioner, Ritt Bjerregaard, while speaking at a conference in Copenhagen. The commissioner states the proposal she is working on will improve awareness of noise levels across the EU - an essential step toward developing an integrated approach to reducing noise.
The major constraint in reducing noise levels, she said, is the absence of a generally accepted noise index. The proposal will set deadlines to develop noise indicators and methods to calculate harmonized exposure levels throughout the EU.
According to the article the proposal specifically encourages the dissemination of data regarding the affects of noise on public health and safety. And it will place the issue of noise pollution in the overall context of an urban strategy - reaching environment, transportation and social policy. The proposed legislation will authorize use of EU funds to support scientific research on the reduction of noise pollution, she said.
Not long after making the announcement, the commissioner rejected a call from the European Parliament to enforce a ban on airline night flights.
According to the article MEPS were debating a proposal from the Commission to gradually phase out older noisy airplanes - an example set by the U.S - when the question on banning night flights arose. Under this proposal, planes would not be re-registered by the Commission after April 1st 1999. Planes fitted with "hush kits", aimed to reduce emission and noise levels to meet the current limits, would be banned after April 2002.
According to the article the Commission wants to prevent any increase in the use of adapted planes and see them replaced instead by more modern, quieter models.
PUBLICATION: Industrial Health & Hazards Update
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: No. 10, Vol. 98; Issn: 0890-3018
DATELINE: United States
Industrial Health & Hazards Update announces a new report by Armstrong Laboratory on the complexity of noise research.
According to the press release, this Armstrong Laboratory report attempts to convey the complexity of, and the difficulties in forming, a perspective on noise research. This is then followed by a discussion of some of the early research that had a large role in developing many of the methods and procedures for noise assessment and evaluation. Many of these methods and recommendations are still used, both nationally and internationally. The report also presents a discussion of: noise-induced physiological changes; noise as a stress; some specialized topics on the effects of impulsive acoustic stimuli; noise effects on sleep and on hearing; and the effects of noise on people's health.
This Industrial Health & Hazards Update reviewed report from InfoTeam Inc. can be ordered by mail-Box 15640, Plantation, FL 33318-5640; Phone (954) 473-9560, Fax (954) 473-0544: Report No. HN980125; 1997, 54 pp. Price: $99.00, prepaid. E-mail to: InfoTeamMA@aol.com
Copyright 1998 Merton Allen Associates
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. A1
BYLINE: Dan Mihalopoulos
DATELINE: St. Louis, Missouri
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports economic development officials predict expansion at Missouri's Lambert Field would have a wide-ranging direct and indirect impact, creating thousands of new jobs, pouring billions of dollars into the local economy, and helping Lambert compete with airport hubs across the United States.
According to the article, the environmental impact statement and economic forecast for Lambert's expansion project says that by 2015, more than 26,000 people would work at the airport or in jobs directly dependent on it, such as travel agents or freight forwarders. That would be up from about 17,000 now. Additionally, Lambert's annual contribution to the economy through payroll, tourism, taxes, and other factors would grow to between $ 8 billion and $ 15 billion from $ 5 billion currently. But, those numbers are only predictions. If the nation's sustained economic boom continues, air travel will grow even faster than expected, and Lambert's $2.6 billion addition should prove well worth it. On the other hand, a lengthy recession could slow the rapid growth of air travel and dull the benefits of expansion.
The article states the people charged with attracting business to the St. Louis area say the expansion is absolutely critical to the region's economic future. Richard C.D. Fleming, president of the Regional Commerce and Growth Association, has called the W-1W expansion "the most important infrastructure project facing the St. Louis region." The construction work alone - including runway addition and terminal renovation - would mean more than 4,000 jobs over the next 10 years. Overall, 80,000 jobs could be affected across the region, said Denny Coleman, St. Louis County's top economic-development official. "At the St. Louis County Economic Council, we talk to businesses all the time who ask us, 'When is Lambert ever going to get expanded?' " Coleman said. "The convenience that expansion would offer to the business community can't be understated. People want to fly without the hassle of unnecessary delays and connecting flights." If Trans World Airlines can maintain a hub at Lambert, then travelers can more readily come to and leave from St. Louis without making stopovers. "The quicker you can get from one place to the next, the more opportunity you have to compete globally," said Vi Smith, executive director of the Creve Coeur-Olivette Chamber of Commerce, a business group that has long supported Lambert expansion. "When runways close down due to bad weather, business people don't have tolerance anymore," Smith added. "I don't know how much an extra runway will help, but it has to be a vast improvement over what we have at Lambert now." The new Lambert, she said, would benefit companies large and small.
According to the article, David Doll is a real-estate developer with Westfield America Corp., the Los Angeles-based owner of several major malls in the St. Louis area. Doll often flies out of Lambert as well as other airports around the country. Although he said he would not avoid doing business in St. Louis because of common delays at Lambert, he noted that "the physical plant of the airport is beginning to look tired. O'Hare in Chicago and Los Angeles International Airport have maintained themselves well," Doll observed. "Lambert is in need of a renovation that will bring it to a level that compares with the country's other major airports."
PUBLICATION: The Bond Buyer
DATE: October 2, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 1
BYLINE: Steve Goldsmith
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Conrad Bowers, Bridgeton mayor
The Bond Buyer reports the city of Bridgeton, Missouri, filed suit against the city of St. Louis hours after St. Louis won approval for expansion of the Lambert-St. Louis International Airport.
According to the article, although St. Louis won final approval for a $2.6 billion expansion of the Lambert-St. Louis International Airport from the Federal Aviation Administration, the project now faces new legal opposition. Just hours after St. Louis Mayor Clarence Harmon called the FAA's actions "a bold and exciting move forward for aviation and, most important, for the region's economy," a legal challenge was initiated to overturn the project. Bridgeton, a small municipality that will lose about a third of its land to the expansion, filed suit in St. Louis Circuit Court, claiming St. Louis violated state law by failing to get zoning approval from Bridgeton. Bridgeton Mayor Conrad Bowers, who called the expansion a flawed plan, said his city would also file suit in federal court, alleging that the FAA's environmental studies overlooked city residents' environmental and noise concerns. Another nearby municipality also is expected to file suit because of the potential that increased noise will affect its quality of life.
The article reports that in separate statements read, Mayor Harmon, Missouri Gov. Mel Carnahan, and several U.S. representatives - including House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, D-Mo. - all heralded the project's economic benefits and urged opponents to work with city officials on the expansion. "We can do this jointly and share the benefits of jobs, economic growth, and an improved quality of life for those in the region, or we can continue to debate while other cities aggressively improve their aviation systems and their local economies at our expense," Harmon said. The airport expansion will be the largest public works project in the city's history. It will include a new runway, terminal expansion, renovation of an existing runway, and the addition of 6,000 parking spaces, and is expected to be financed almost entirely by general airport revenue bonds. Land acquisition is scheduled for this fall, roadway improvements are set to begin in the summer of 2000, and runway construction is slated to start in spring 2001. According to city officials, the airport will serve 42 million passengers in 2015, compared with 27 million last year. And construction work would provide more than 4,000 jobs over the next 10 years.
PUBLICATION: The Associated Press
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Cleveland, Ohio
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Tom Jones, Olmsted Falls mayor; Susan Straub, Parma councilwoman
The Associated Press reports Ohio residents of suburbs near Cleveland Hopkins International Airport fear more airport expansion will mean more noise.
According to the article, during a $600 million expansion project, business leaders have suggested further improvements to keep facilities at Hopkins adequate past 2020. "The human element has been left out," said Tom Jones, mayor of Olmsted Falls, which is the path of departing flights. Everybody's in agreement that a functional airport is good for the economic development of the region. But there are people who live here." In Parma, Councilwoman Susan Straub said she was appalled by a Cleveland business community study that concluded that two new runways, in addition to one already planned, will be needed. "I understand we all need business and to make our economy better," she said. "But at what expense? At the expense of the working people, the taxpayers that live in our community and have to put up with the noise?"
The article reports John Habat, vice president of government and transportation for the Greater Cleveland Growth Association, which sponsored the airport study, said the association was aware of suburban concerns and involved them in the debate about how to expand the airport. Cleveland Mayor Michael R. White said last week that he wanted to work with local communities near the airport in determining Hopkins' future. The Federal Aviation Administration which has set standards for acceptable noise levels requires that a study of noise impact be done before it approves an airport expansion. The city-owned airport is located at the southwest edge of Cleveland near Brook Park, Parma, Berea, North Olmsted, Fairview Park and Olmsted Falls.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: Part A; Page 1; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Bettina Boxall
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Sgt. Dave Anderson, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department; Andrei Simic, USC anthropology professor; Connie Brown, resident
The Los Angeles Times reports the calls pour in all night long to California's downtown Los Angeles police communications center from Angelenos desperate for a little peace and quiet.
According to the article, from Sunland to San Pedro, from Laurel Canyon to South-Central, residents plead for the CD players and the deejays and bands to fall silent. Whether it's a measure of the city's fondness for lively celebration or of its rudeness and incivility, roughly half the calls to Los Angeles police on a typical Saturday night involve complaints about blaring music and loud parties. In many outlying communities, it's not much quieter. Some small cities pay the LA County Sheriff's Department to run weekend patrols devoted entirely to quieting loud gatherings. On a weekend night in Orange County, at least a third of the calls to Huntington Beach police are party complaints, while in Ventura County they are common as well. While crime may be decreasing, party noise remains an annoyingly invasive constant, pitting neighbor against neighbor and consuming significant chunks of law enforcement time, since residents call police rather than risk a personal confrontation with their neighbors.
The article goes on to say reports of loud parties come mostly from poor, dense neighborhoods. Yet affluent areas have their own brand of invasive parties. In the canyons, music bounces around the hillsides for miles, and in the wealthiest enclaves, mansion owners sometimes illegally rent out their homes for lavish, catered parties attended by hundreds. The ear-splitting music comes in every musical taste and accompanies every size gathering--from a few people standing around a car radio to hundreds of youths jammed into small suburban yards for underground pay parties with deejays. Sometimes the loud gatherings turn lethal, as in the case of an LAPD officer who was fatally shot in August while sitting in his patrol car waiting for backup units to help break up a loud wedding party attended by gang members in southwest Los Angeles. A few weeks later, a sleeping 9-year-old girl was killed when a man fired shots through her front door because he was angry that the child's father had told him and his music-playing buddies to quiet down at 3 a.m.
The article reports however trivial a thundering band or sound system may seem on the scale of urban problems, when there is no escape, it can turn a night at home into a brutal experience. Just listen to one call to Los Angeles police on a particular Saturday night. "The neighbors on both sides have had music on so you can't even hear yourself think," a San Fernando Valley man moaned to the operator after letting out a prolonged sigh. "It's been going on for seven hours. Ma'am, it's just unbearable. We have children who can't sleep." Urban dwellers have been annoying their neighbors with loud music ever since the radio and phonograph were invented. But pumped-up modern sound systems and the grating quality of some contemporary pop music make it harder than ever to escape a neighbor's enjoyment. "You could crack walnuts with the vibrations from some of those sound systems," said Los Angeles County Sheriff's Sgt. Dave Anderson, who oversees a weekend patrol unit that does nothing but handle party complaints in the city of Paramount. Houses several doors removed from the parties literally shudder from the sound.
According to the article, beyond cranked-up amplifiers, there may be another element at work. "On the most abstract level it has something to do with the lack of public consensus, the lack of cultural consensus about what the rules of behavior are," said USC anthropology professor Andrei Simic. He cites two factors: the national emphasis on individual rights and the increasingly polyglot nature of American society. Simic recently returned from Germany and Austria, where, he said, people don't make noise late at night because it isn't tolerated. The societal rule is not defied because there is enough cultural homogeneity to enforce it. Los Angeles has no such homogeneity but is rather a stew of global cultures, including some that prize a lively public night life and some that don't. Moreover, Simic said, "the individual ethos in America has gone so far" that the clash of conflicting personal rights has become something of a cliché. Indeed, law enforcement officers say their admonishments to turn the volume down are often greeted with the response: "This is my house, I can do what I want."
The article states law enforcement officers say that they would prefer not to break up so many parties. "We would much rather be doing something a little more beneficial than telling people they should have common sense about how loud they play music," said Sgt. Michael Oreb, a Newton patrol supervisor. The fact that it falls to patrol units to handle party calls means that on a busy crime night, it can easily be an hour or more before officers respond. Noise complaints are low priority, automatically put on hold if more pressing calls come in, and they can stack up on police operators' computer screens. The public knows that. Police say that callers will sometimes falsely claim they've heard gunfire at a neighbor's gathering, just to get a swift response. Getting authorities to react quickly can be even tougher if the problem involves illegal rentals of private homes for parties. Since that is a zoning violation--conducting a commercial business in a residential zone--it becomes a matter for the city Building and Safety Department, which usually sends inspectors to investigate weekend parties only if it has advance notice of the event. "I'm giving up. I'm moving," said Connie Brown, an exasperated Hollywood Hills resident who said she and others have complained for years to the city about noise and disruption coming from one neighborhood house that is routinely rented out for private parties. "I'm leaving LA and this is part of it. The city does not function. Period."
PUBLICATION: The Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA)
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: Local; Pg. B01
BYLINE: Michael Mcbride
DATELINE: Norco, California
The Press-Enterprise reports the town of Norco, California, is considering adopting operating standards that would restrict noise from a nightclub and an amusement center to a specific level of decibels.
According to the article, in an effort to make an area attractive to commerce and visitors, on Tuesday, Norco's Sixth Street Revitalization Committee asked consultant Lloyd Zola to draw up what are called performance or operating standards for the street. The specific plan would replace Norco's current zoning laws for that area of Sixth Street. Examples of such standards would be restricting operating hours of a nightclub or noise from an amusement center to a specific level of decibels. The City Council has the final say on the committee's recommendations. If such a proposal were accepted, the council or the Planning Commission could impose operating restrictions on noise, vibration, smoke, dust, smells, solid waste disposal, lighting, glare and heat, radioactivity and electrical disturbances. "These standards could be imposed as conditions and eliminate guesswork for businesses thinking about locating on Sixth Street," said Jim Daniels, Norco's planning director.
The article reports the process would be helpful to business owners because they would know ahead of time exactly what the city allows for a particular kind of business, said Brian Oulman, the city's economic development director. "They wouldn't need to spend time and money on applications for conditional use permits," Oulman said. The conditional use permit process would be eliminated for Sixth Street if operating standards are adopted. A conditional use permit allows an applicant to operate under specific conditions imposed on it by the commission. The specific plan eventually decided on for Sixth Street would not affect existing businesses without their owners' consent.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. A1
BYLINE: Mark Schlinkmann
DATELINE: St. Louis, Missouri
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Sara Barwinski, Bridgeton resident; Rowan Raftery, leader of Bridgeton Air Defense; Joe Ortwerth, St. Charles County executive; Conrad Bowers, Bridgeton mayor
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports the Federal Aviation Administration on Wednesday approved southwest expansion into Bridgeton at Missouri's Lambert Field. A few hours later, attorneys for Bridgeton filed suit in St. Louis Circuit Court to try to overturn the plan.
According to the article, other legal challenges may be initiated by St. Charles and St. Charles County - areas to the west where some residents worry about increased aircraft noise. The $2.6 billion project, in the planning stages for a decade, would add a third runway southwest of the current airfield by 2004, and other improvements. Airport Director Leonard Griggs said buyouts of about 2,000 homes and businesses, most of them in Bridgeton, could begin in 45 days, although it will take a few years to complete them. St. Louis Mayor Clarence Harmon called the FAA decision "a bold and exciting move forward for aviation and, most importantly, the region's economy." The construction work alone would mean more than 4,000 jobs over the next 10 years. An expansion timetable issued by Lambert shows when the initial construction work will be done on related road changes, such as the relocation of Natural Bridge Road and the tunneling and relocation of North Lindbergh Boulevard. That would begin in the summer of 2000. Runway construction would start about a year later. Besides the runway, various other improvements are planned, including the eventual construction of a new terminal for Lambert's main tenant, Trans World Airlines.
The article reports opponents such as St. Charles County Executive Joe Ortwerth blasted the FAA decision. In a statement, Ortwerth said the FAA reached "a fraudulent conclusion based on a bogus environmental impact statement" it released in December. Advocates of the plan say the expansion will allow more flights - especially in poor weather - and reduce costly delays. That's needed to keep the airport and the metropolitan area competitive with other big cities, they say. Yet critics contend the project, known as W-1W, is too expensive; that projections of flight capacity made by Lambert are exaggerated, and that the plan may be unsafe. They argue that the FAA should look again at expanding Lambert in other directions or at putting the region's main airport elsewhere. The Air Line Pilots Association and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association are among the plan's opponents.
The article states Bridgeton residents, who have been divided over the long-debated expansion issue, offered markedly different reactions to the decision. For example, the Bridgeton Air Defense, also known as BAD, joined with opponents in the St. Charles area to declare that "we've just begun to fight. We are willing to make sacrifices that serve the common good - but not a common greed," said a statement issued by BAD, St. Charles Citizens Against Aircraft Noise, and the People Building Community group. Meanwhile, members of the Let's Get On With Our Lives group - Bridgeton residents in the proposed buyout area who want to sell out and be done with it - showed up at Harmon's news conference to show their support. Spokesman Don Vandervort said the day was "bittersweet" for members, but that the decision means residents "don't have to spend another summer or another school year not knowing what is going to happen with their families." Bridgeton officials repeated that they had no plans to seek a temporary restraining order that would seek to freeze the buyout process while the court considers the suits. Sara Barwinski, a Bridgeton activist against W-1W, said that is in keeping with a long-standing commitment that the municipality would not stand in the way of those residents who wanted to proceed with buyouts. Rowan Raftery, a Bridgeton Air Defense leader, added that his city couldn't afford the sizable bond that a court would likely require Bridgeton to post if a freeze were ordered.
According to the article, Bridgeton's suit charges that St. Louis violated state law by neglecting to secure zoning approval from Bridgeton for the expansion. St. Louis owns and operates the airport, which is in unincorporated St. Louis County. "The city of St. Louis has as much right to force the airport into Bridgeton as we have to force St. Louis to relocate the Arch," Bridgeton Mayor Conrad Bowers said at a news conference at his City Hall. Bowers said Bridgeton will file another suit in federal court. He didn't provide details, but said it may relate to environmental protection laws. Airport Director Griggs said he is confident that St. Louis and the FAA are on sound legal ground. But he added that if Bridgeton should win the zoning suit, St. Louis officials would ask the Legislature to pass a law overriding such a decision.
The article reports among those applauding the FAA move Wednesday was House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, D-St. Louis County. "You cannot keep big employers and companies in St. Louis if you don't have first-class air service," Gephardt said in a telephone interview. "We had to make a decision for the good of the whole region." Gephardt had helped set up a meeting in July between Harmon and other local officials and Jane Garvey, the FAA chief, that led to her decision against a further safety and capacity study. Gephardt's House colleague, Rep. Jim Talent, R-Chesterfield, was upset with the FAA move. He said he still wants to see a computer simulation study of the plan to check concerns about capacity in bad weather. Talent said he spoke with Garvey shortly after the record of decision was released. "She seems to have some doubts (about capacity), but she's moving forward anyway," Talent said. "She said she believed they had resolved them, but she wasn't sure." An FAA spokesman, Bob Hawke, said later that Garvey had focused on safety issues during her talk with Talent and that she felt they had been addressed.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: North Post, Pg. 4
BYLINE: Phil Sutin
DATELINE: Creve Coeur, Missouri
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that after the state denied their request to pay for sound walls along Interstate270, Creve Coeur, Missouri, officials are considering their financing options to mitigate noise along the interstate highway.
According to the article, early this year the state turned down Creve Coeur's request that it pay for noise walls. Later, the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council declined Creve Coeur's proposal that the federal government spend $1 million to cover about 60 percent of the cost. In its application to East-West Gateway, Creve Coeur estimated the total cost at $1.617 million. High costs compared to benefits was the main reason both requests were turned down, according to state highway officials and East-West Gateway records.
The article reports now the City Council must decide what Creve Coeur's next step, if any, should be, says City Administrator Michael McDowell. Lesley Solinger-Hoffarth, a Department of Transportation project manager, said the state paid the total cost of sound walls when it added capacity or realigned an interstate highway. The area to be protected must meet noise standards. The cost cannot be more than $30,000 for each residential property. The state conducted noise studies in the late 1980s when it widened Interstate 270 from Interstate 70 to Clayton Road. A few areas met the noise criteria, but none met the cost-benefit criteria.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: St. Charles Post, Pg. 1
BYLINE: John Sonderegger
DATELINE: St. Peters, Missouri
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Lew McLain, alderman
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports a St. Peters, Missouri, Alderman is pushing a bill to further restrict noise from the St. Charles Speedway.
According to the article, Mel Hemsath is the owner and promoter of the Sunday night stock-car races at the St. Charles Speedway, the oldest track in the St. Louis area. As subdivisions have been built around the track, complaints about noise soon followed. The Hemsath family sold some of the land on which homes now sit. About 20 years ago, St. Peters annexed some land that included St. Charles Speedway. "I went in voluntarily," Hemsath said. "They said, 'You can do business like you've always done business before.' Of course, they didn't do it in writing, and their word ain't no good."
The article reports Hemsath said he was unaware of any municipal laws governing his track until last summer. When Hemsath allowed a driver to practice on the track on a Saturday morning, the St. Peters police showed up, Hemsath said, and gave him a ticket. "I said, 'What's this for?' They told me I was not allowed to have cars on my track before noon on Saturday. I told them I didn't have any idea what they were talking about," he said. "They told me I should go over to St. Peters City Hall and read the ordinances that had been passed about St. Charles Speedway."
The article reports another more restrictive bill is under discussion by the St. Peters Board of Aldermen and sponsored by Alderman Lew McLain, who lives about a mile from the speedway "We don't want to put them out of business," McLain said. "I want to make sure that they quit racing by 11 o'clock." The current ordinance says that racing must stop at 11 p.m. and that noise levels at the fence of the speedway property cannot exceed 93 decibels. McLain's bill would call for an end to the racing at 10:30 p.m., and the noise level would be dropped to 80 dB. "We've been trying to hit 10:30 all year, but we can't make that guarantee," Hemsath said. "There's no way on earth you can do that." Races can be delayed because of accidents on the track or bad weather. Sometimes, too much water will be put down in preparation for the night of racing, and that problem takes time to resolve. Moreover, there's usually a lot of money on the line when the final races are run. It would be impossible to run the preliminary events and then stop before the feature races were run. Drivers and spectators alike would be upset, Hemsath said. Putting new restrictions on noise also would hurt the track, he said, because muffler changes are harder on engines and some drivers would choose not to race at St. Charles Speedway. McLain said St. Peters dispatched Ron Darling, director of environmental services, to the speedway recently, and 19 of the cars that he checked failed the inspections.
The article states noise from the track affects the quality of life in St. Peters on Sunday nights, said McLain, who lives about a mile from the speedway. Sometimes, the noise makes him think he is in the pits, he said, and the noise can be heard on some nights, if the wind is blowing in a certain direction, four miles away at the St. Peters police station. "We can live with it one night a week," McLain said. "But we want it to end before 11 p.m. If we say 11, it goes past 11. If we say 10:30, maybe they'll finish at 10:45. We're not going to hold them to the letter." Gates open at 5 p.m. at St. Charles Speedway, and laps start at 6 p.m. Hemsath said he can't start his show any earlier because of the sun and heat, which makes the track a dust bowl. A special Wednesday night show recently went well past 11 p.m., and the cars were bigger and louder than usual, McLain said. The Police Department received 12 complaints that night. McLain received calls from unhappy residents. Hemsath said that he didn't promote that race but that it didn't run much past 11 p.m. and the promoter had to shorten or eliminate some of his races at the end. A version of McLain's bill will be discussed at the next workshop session on October 8.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: October 3, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 6
BYLINE: Robert C. Herguth
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Daily Herald reports that the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission discussed the need to tackle national airport noise issues and the importance of forming alliances with similar groups in other cities.
According to the article the O'Hare panel was created in 1996 by Chicago and but now consists of suburban and city leaders who try to reduce noise coming from O'Hare International Airport. The panel's chairperson, Arlene Mulder, is quoted saying, "We've learned that the impact of jet noise is a very local problem. I frankly believe the commission must also extend its influence farther from home." That means forming alliances with groups doing similar work in the Twin Cities and San Francisco, actively lobbying for legislation in Washington, D.C., and arranging face-to-face meetings with the players in Washington D.C. to communicate their wishes.
A variety of aviation-related issues are brewing in the capital that affect O'Hare and suburban neighbors, the article said. Among them are rumors that Congress may vote next year to increase the passenger facility charge, or PFC - a $3 tax on airline tickets - by $2. Also, the article reports that the Federal Aviation Administration is involved in an initiative to employ satellite technology to improve planes' precision during take off and landing.
According to the article Mulder advocates that an additional $206,000 is needed to make the commission more active in Washington. The city of Chicago funds the commission. Its Aviation Commissioner, Mary Rose Loney, does not think money will be a problem. Other commission members however, differed in their views pointing out that new activities would detract from current efforts to sound-proof homes and schools. The article quotes the opinions of several members who say soundproofing homes is a higher priority than worrying "about the problems of the world."
A proposal to expand the commission's mission will be brought before the commission next month, the article said.
Other action from the panel was also reported in the article including the approved raise for Executive Director Mark Fowler, who will now be paid $60,000 annually, up from $50,000. The panel also reportedly heard from Robert Hettinger, president of the Mobile Home Owners Association of Illinois, who urged the panel to authorize sound-proofing for mobile homes near the airport - which do not qualify under the current regulations.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: October 3, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 6; Zones Desk
DATELINE: Burbank, California
Los Angeles Times credits citizen protest with air carriers' decision to delay early morning take offs from Burbank Airport.
The article reports how city officials had been advised by their lawyers to stay silent when the airport's governing body considered a request by Reno Airlines to schedule a 6:40 a.m. flight out of the Burbank Airport.
The article quotes the lawyers' memo - obtained by newspaper staff - which recommends that the city not fight the Reno proposals, "This would demonstrate that the airport commission, when left to its own devices, is "unwilling or unable to persuade airlines to comply with a voluntary noise curfew."
That advise was ignored by Burbank city officials who are often noted reminding voters just how hard they have fought against early morning and late night flights at Burbank Airport during an election year. Burbank City Councilman Bob Kramer is quoted saying, "That was the advice from the attorneys, but obviously we didn't listen to them in this case."
According to the article at least three elected officials--Mayor David Golonski, Vice Mayor Stacey Murphy and Councilman Ted McConkey--spoke against the early morning flights at airport commission meetings.
Even so Reno Air had secured the majority support from nine-member commission for the flights that would go to the airline's San Jose hub.
The dispute took an unexpected turn the article said when Reno Air voluntarily agreed to delay takeoffs in an effort to "be a good neighbor".
PUBLICATION: The Press-Enterprise
DATE: October 3, 1998
SECTION: Local; Pg. B05
BYLINE: Courtney Perkes
DATELINE: Riverside, California
The Press-Enterprise reports that Union Pacific Railroad is seeking a federal court ordered injunction to lift a ban on idling locomotives in Riverside, California.
According to the article, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) imposed the ban to give residents of a west Colton neighborhood relief from the soot and the noise of idling rail cars.
Railroad spokesman Mike Furtney says their motion for the preliminary injunction to lift the ban will be heard in Los Angeles federal court on October 19.
The Air Quality Management District (AQMD) banned the practice of parking trains on a parallel track known as Slover Siding except in cases of emergency. The practice is used to park trains while other trains pass on the main lines.
According to residents trains have idled as long as three days, spewing soot and creating noise.
The AQMD hearing board made its order to stop parking idling trains on the siding last July. The railroad filed a federal lawsuit as its response to the order. They argue that the AQMD hearing board does not have the authority to issue and enforce orders pertaining to railroad operations. In September, the board modified their own order to allow trains to idle in an emergency.
The railroad complaints that it is losing money because operations take longer now that siding is banned.
The senior district prosecutor for the AQMD, Nancy Feldman, is noted in the article making the admission that higher courts have held that only the federal Surface Transportation Board in Washington has authority to regulate railroad operations. Feldman hopes, however, that the court will make a distinction in this case.
Thus far the order has been effective in reducing the air quality concerns, the article says, referring to Feldman's comments: "They've been complying with the order and keeping off the siding. Of course, the complaints have gone down dramatically." The injunction if granted would lift the ban until there is a final outcome to the lawsuit, which could take years.
The article quotes from several residents and Councilman Donald Sanders, whose district includes the siding. Sanders reportedly called the railroad's actions cavalier and unacceptable. "I simply feel this is a slap in the face. I would hope they would come to their senses and show some respect of the people's rights, the article said quoting Sanders.
Resident William Harring is quoted in the article saying, "With this siding being closed, it shows that they can get along without it. If that gets changed, that really stinks. The railroad has to realize they've got to live with the people in the community now. It can't just be the railroad's way all the time."
Another resident, Pete Colunga, said quality of life has improved now that the parked trains no longer disturb the neighborhood: "We get to barbecue outside now. We get to enjoy our back yard. It's been nice, clean air."
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: October 3, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 6; Zone: N
BYLINE: Rogers Worthington
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Tribune reports that the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission is discussing whether to expand its campaign to Washington, D.C. in an effort to reduce noise levels back home.
According to the article Commission Chairwoman Arlene Mulder suggests the commission push Illinois' congressional delegation and others in the Capitol for greater support of noise-reduction efforts.
"We need to broaden our outreach to also affect these issues at federal levels and try to create a better communications system with our representatives," the article said quoting Mulder.
Mulder, the article says, is mayor of Arlington Heights, one of the cities represented on the Commission. She outlined the following areas for advocacy at the national level: (1) research into reducing the noise generated by Stage III jet aircraft engines; (2) urging the Federal Aviation Administration to promote new, global positioning satellite navigation equipment for all airliners so that pilots could more precisely follow departure headings (which might increase compliance under the city's Fly Quiet program); and (3) winning an increase in the passenger facility charge, used by Chicago to pay for soundproofing of homes and schools and for airport capital improvements. (Congress has been debating proposals to raise the charge to $5 from its current $3 per airline ticket.)
The advocacy Mulder suggests would include letters, telephone calls and trips to Washington. None of these activities were described as lobbying.
Commission members were not unified in supporting Mulder. Some believe their interests would be better served by spending some of the commission's annual $206,000 allocation on soundproofing rather than lobbying.
But Donald Namyst, a Norridge village trustee who chairs the commission's residential soundproofing committee is noted saying, "If we're going to get something done, it will take more than just our municipalities around the airport. We have to address it as a national problem."
Mulder's proposal will be voted on in November, the article said.
The article also summarizes the commission's decision to send a statement to the Federal Aviation Administration's regional office in Des Plaines. The statement says the redesign of Chicago's airspace should include an environmental impact statement. The requested statement is an effort to secure the FAA's assurance that the redesign will not increase aircraft noise, interfere with the "Fly Quiet" program or stand in the way of introducing new technologies to reduce aircraft noise.
PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Journal
DATE: October 2, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 3
BYLINE: Patricia Gabbett Snow
DATELINE: Albuquerque, New Mexico
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Stephen Frazier of the Self Help for the Hard of Hearing; Right to Quiet Society in Vancouver, B.C.
The Albuquerque Journal reports how one man, Stephen Frazier, is speaking out against loud background music and other noise.
You don't have to listen too closely, or travel too far, article says referencing Fraizer, to have your senses assaulted.
The article paints a picture of noise: "There's the traffic racing down Paseo del Norte about a mile away. Horns honking. Car stereos booming.
There's the mall and nearby restaurants with vocal 'background' music so loud you can't converse with anyone. And there's the sprawling car dealership with an outdoor paging system and frequent radio station remotes with blaring music designed to lure customers off Coors Boulevard."
The article notes how, for the average person, the urban racket could be an annoyance, a distraction, or the price you pay for living in the big city.
But the article quickly amends that statement to describe how, for persons like Stephen Frazier, the "cacophony causes a more severe strain".
"I think because of the fact that I have a hearing problem, it makes it more difficult than for the general public," the article says, quoting Frazier.
The article explains how, Frazier rather than being less susceptible because of his hearing impairment, is, on the contrary, more sensitive to loud or ambient noise, which makes it harder for him to distinguish between certain consonants when people are conversing. That is just one impetus behind his anti-noise crusade.
The article explains further how Frazier -- a retired public relations executive for Columbia Artists in New York City and later, a men's clothing buyer -- tries to make area businesses aware of how loud background music can affect people, especially the hearing impaired. According to the article Frazier, suffers from upper-register hearing loss as well as tinnitus.
For example, Frazier, 61, voices his displeasure by dispersing his business cards with the following message on the back: "To the manager: I found it very unpleasant to be in your establishment because of the music. Loud vocal music makes it difficult for those with a hearing disability (with or without hearing aids) to understand your employees. If you want our business, please get rid of the vocals and turn the music down."
His cards are created in a manner similar to other anti-noise groups, such as the Right to Quiet Society based in Vancouver, B.C., whose cards thank business managers who don't use background music in their establishments.
According to the article Frazier has handed out about 50 of the cards since getting involved with several anti-noise groups around the world through the Internet about two years ago. "I pass them out if the music is particularly annoying," the article says quoting Frazier.
Usually, Frazier hands the card to a cashier with a request that it be given to the manager, the article says, noting that Frazier does not want a confrontation. Frazier is quoted saying, "I don't think I'm extreme. I think I'm pretty reasonable. I think education is important. I think people are not aware of the problems they can cause and the damage they can do."
Frazier frequently carries around a hand-held noise meter to determine decibel levels at the business site. He also wears hearing aids at times, but one of their drawbacks is that they amplify everything, including background noise.
On occasion his frustration at being unable to communicate over the loud music has caused him to leave businesses.
Frazier hopes Albuquerque will follow the steps of Vancouver B.C., whose City Council recently accepted 135 of a task force's 162 specific suggestions to reduce noise. Among the recommendations was that the city require operators of outdoor paging systems employ alternative practices, such as electronic pagers. The city also adopted the recommendation that all government-owned equipment -- from chain saws to tractors -- be equipped with "hush kits" or muffling devices, the article said, referencing Frazier.
Other cities - such as St. Paul, Minnesota, San Antonio, Texas, and Palo Alto, Calif - specifically ban the use of noise to lure consumers. Other cities - including Chicago and Tulsa, Oklahoma - have laws on loud car stereos.
Frazer's concern, the article notes is that its noise code written in 1975 has not been updated since 1981. "It's pretty inadequate," the article says quoting Frazier's assessment.
The article states that two noise studies were recently completed. Recommendations from the studies will be submitted to the City Council soon, the article said. An appointed committee will then revise Albuquerque's noise code.
A local group called SHHH (Self Help for the Hard of Hearing) wants Frazier to be considered and has requested Albuquerque's Mayor Jim Baca, to appoint Fraizer to such a committee.
The article quotes Frazier stating his belief that people have become more concerned about noise pollution as the city has grown, but "a lot of people feel there's nothing they can do about it."
Frazier would like to see people voice their complaints about annoying music and then avoid businesses that don't pay attention to their concerns the article said. He suggests further that newspapers include noise ratings in their restaurant reviews.
Frazier's e-mail address is listed in the article: SFNABQ@compuserve.com.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: October 2, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 6
BYLINE: Robert C. Herguth
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Daily Herald reported that a Federal Aviation Administration workshop for the public discussing airspace changes was vague about whether the changes would mean increased flight capacity.
According to the article technical words like "S-turn" and "corner post" were tossed around at the workshop making the proposed plan seem complicated. Neighbors such as Craig Beto just wanted to know whether the plan will result in more flights, and more noise at O'Hare International Airport.
According to the article Beto, 27, lives in an Elk Grove Township trailer home near the world's busiest airport. Beto attended the three-hour event with his 65-year-old father, Wayne.
Answers to Beto's questions depended on who was doing the talking the article said. Joe Karaganis, an attorney for the Suburban O'Hare Commission, said that the FAA plan would mean more flights and more noise. Karaganis, the article said, has been actively fighting O'Hare noise and expansion. But Bob Everson, the FAA's program manager, is quoted saying, "The thrust behind this is to increase efficiency. It does not increase flights. . .[It] is to deal with the existing level of traffic."
Everson summarized how planes under the current procedure enter through one of four corner posts. One stream travels through each of the four-corner posts and the planes follow. Under the new plan two streams would be created through three of the four corner posts. The FAA claims the new proposal helps smooth out traffic flow, enhance safety and save fuel.
Everson claims an environmental study is under way to examine noise impact and any other negative impact on the area. Additional changes are proposed under the plan for Midway Airport and Milwaukee's General Mitchell International Airport.
FAA environmental specialist Annette Davis stated that a total of 165,000 locations will be tested for noise. Karaganis, however, points out that the computer modeling that will be used to do the study won't provide an accurate picture.
According to the article, "[Karaganis] scoffed at the fact the study won't test air toxins, and he publicly debated Denis Burke, manager of the TRACON air traffic control center in Elgin, about capacity and noise issues."
"When you make it more efficient, you're able to process more operations in any given time," the article said quoting Karaganis' words. Burke reportedly rebutted saying, "This does not increase capacity. This is a procedural thing."
The proposal also allows air traffic controllers to start taking control of air traffic up to 60 miles out, an additional 20 miles out. The expansion would give controllers more time to line up aircraft and more flexibility in guiding them.
A public hearing will proceed any implementation of the proposal, now scheduled for June 2000, the paper said, quoting an FAA official.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: October 2, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 4; Metro Desk
DATELINE: Inglewood, California
The Los Angeles Times reports that the community of Inglewood will receive $17 million in grants from the Federal Aviation Administration's airport improvement program to help reduce residents' exposure to noise from Los Angeles International Airport.
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calf) made the announcement. According to the article the two grants will permit residents to move to homes in quieter neighborhoods and help soundproof other homes in the Darby-Dixon area.
PUBLICATION: The Morning Call
DATE: October 2, 1998
SECTION: Bethlehem, Pg. B1
BYLINE: Christian D. Berg
DATELINE: Allentown, Pennsylvania
The Morning Call reports that noises from two industries in Northampton, Pennsylvania exceed the borough's noise ordinance by more than 20 decibels. Borough officials, however, refuse to take adverse action until they have an opportunity to correct the problems.
According to the article the Borough Council unanimously allowed expenditures of $1,000 for a sound survey when around 25 residents living near the two plants appeared at the Aug. 20 meeting to complain about the noise. Neighbors of the two industries reportedly lamented about how the noise "rattles their windows, vibrates their homes and wakes them up at night."
According to Rollin's report, noises from the first company, Ponderosa, exceeded the borough's limit by 24 decibels at certain frequencies, while noise from the other company, Northampton Generating, exceeded the borough's limit by as much as 20 decibels.
In spite of these strong indicators, borough solicitor Emil Giordano reportedly said the council wouldn't take action against the companies until they've had a chance to correct the problems. Gioradano is quoted in the article saying, "I'm not denying there's a violation of the ordinance, but that doesn't mean we're not going to give them a reasonable opportunity to correct it."
The article reported that, under Giradano's view, if Ponderosa and Northampton Generating fail to eliminate the offensive noises the borough can present violation notice to the companies, providing them 30 days to correct the situation. If the problem still isn't solved, the companies could be fined up to $500 per day for violating the noise ordinance.
According to the article, the offending industries have together hired the engineering firm Spotts, Stevens and McCoy to conduct a sound survey of their own. The firm is hired, the article said, to make recommendations for eliminating noise that exceeds borough-zoning regulations. "If there are noises emanating from our plant that are in violation, we will certainly address them," the article said quoting Ponderosa plant manager Jim Flynn.
The Ponderosa Company faces additional problems the article said including complaints about foul odors. The Ponderosa company recycles used office paper into pulp for paper mills and has been closed since Sept. 11 under an order from the state Department of Environmental Protection for repeated odor violations.
The article indicates that Ponderosa appealed DEP's order to the state Environmental Hearing Board, but decided to work out a settlement with DEP instead of pursuing its appeal. Ponderosa hopes to reopen as soon as possible the article said.
PUBLICATION: The Plain Dealer
DATE: October 2, 1998
SECTION: Editorials & Forum; Pg. 8B
DATELINE: Cleveland, Ohio
The Plain Dealer published the following editorial, which raises concerns about the affect of noise in the face of the assumed expansion at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport.
Lately, the paper is full of articles about the capacity of Cleveland Hopkins International Airport in the future.
The airport is surrounded closely by the Metroparks, NASA-Lewis Research Center, the West Side of Cleveland and several suburbs. How much room is there to expand? A large increase in air traffic, including international flights with wide-body jets, will require a much larger area than currently is available, even with the I-X Center removed.
It seems nobody involved in the current discussions has any concern about increased jet noise in the surrounding communities. Not too long ago, Cleveland Mayor Michael R. White was enraged about the noise of added train traffic through the East Side. What happens west of the Cuyahoga River is no concern of his. My suggestion is to stop spending tax money on Hopkins and build a large regional jetport south of Cleveland. It is unconscionable to spend billions of dollars on a project that will be outdated within 20 years. It would be very helpful, if the mayors of the surrounding suburbs, besides Brook Park Mayor Thomas Coyne, would get involved actively and openly in these discussions.
DIETRICH VAGT
Middleburg Heights
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: October 2, 1998
SECTION: St. Charles Post, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Ralph Dummit
DATELINE: St. Louis, Missouri
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that St. Charles County may join others in a lawsuit against the Federal Aviation Administration to block the expansion of Lambert Field Airport.
The article reports that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced that it has approved a plan to build a 9,000-foot runway at Lambert Field Airport on Wednesday. The runways would be two miles closer to St. Charles.
According to the article County Executive Joe Ortwerth and St. Charles Mayor Bob Moeller are already committed to litigation and County Council Chairperson Bob Schnur, R-3rd District is preparing a resolution to introduce at the October 13 council meeting.
The resolution, he said, sets a 30-day deadline for the city of St. Louis to reach an enforceable noise-reduction agreement with St. Charles County. [Lambert Field Airport is owned by the city of St. Louis.] Without such an agreement, Schnur said he would be in favor of litigation.
The article quotes Schnur saying, "The time to talk [with St. Louis] is over. The time to get something done is here." The remainder of the article demonstrates just how long in coming that conclusion has been.
Twenty-one months ago St. Charles County Council was anticipating increased noise from the proposed W1-1 runway and passed a resolution proposing "a noise agreement with significant penalties for failure to abide by the terms and conditions."
When opponents of the proposed W-1 runway expressed their impatience that no noise-abatement agreement had been reached, Schnur reportedly responded, "I'm hopeful that some meaningful dialogue can be established [with the city of St. Louis] within 30 to 45 days to talk about the viability of a noise-abatement agreement." (May 30, 1997).
Two and a half months later, Schnur was noted saying that "[St. Charles County will] continue to talk with them and as time moves on, perhaps we'll turn up the heat. (Aug. 19, 1997).
At that time, County Executive Joe Ortwerth voiced that he favored suing the FAA if W-1W was approved while Schnur reportedly said, "Litigation is not the route to take."
Then, according to the article, Schnur conceded nine months ago that, "If we have no indication from St. Louis and Lambert authorities . . . to further [the] discussion, they have made the decision (to litigate) for us." (January 6, 1998).
Schur's plan to propose a resolution at the council's October meeting would appear to give St. Louis a 30-day deadline placing the council in litigation by mid-November.
Ortwerth's reaction to the FAA's approval of the W-1W project, was, by contrast, "swift and decisive", the article stated. Ortwerth reportedly called the FAA's position "a foolhardy decision," and promised he would seek the council's approval to join the city of Bridgeton in filing suit against the FAA. The article quotes the county executive saying, "[The FAA decision] is a terrible setback for the National Airspace System and the long-term viability of Lambert Field. [The FAA endorsement] is a fraudulent conclusion based on a bogus environmental impact statement."
Similarly, a statement from St. Charles City Administrator Mike Miller was published as a quote from Mayor Moeller: "Although St. Charles continues to prefer mitigation to litigation, the continued intransigence of St. Louis leaves no alternative but to vigorously challenge the W-1W project in court . . .St. Charles has directed its special airport counsel to do just that."
Miller said Wednesday, "W-1W . . .poses safety issues that have never been resolved. We have knowledge of a conflict among FAA people about giving approval to this plan."
The article reports that Ortwerth supported his position saying that recent months have demonstrated "that W-1W will provide only marginal long-term improvements to Lambert Field for an astronomical cost." He asserted that the FAA's own study "acknowledges time and time again that W-1W is an inferior choice."
The article continues its quote of Ortwerth to the end of the article. "[The environmental impact statement prepared by FAA] acknowledges that there will be a 50 to 70 percent increase in noise over St. Charles city when W-1W is placed in operation. This will result in a serious devaluation of property values and the quality of life in this historic town and have a demoralizing impact on the future of this community...Considering the fact that W-1W is such a worthless investment, these devastating community impacts cannot be tolerated.. .[The preparation of the environmental impact statement] has been a sham developed by parties with grievous conflicts of interest. It will be necessary for these serious irregularities to be exposed in a court of law."
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: October 2, 1998
SECTION: St. Charles Post, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Sarah Gerry
DATELINE: St. Charles, Missouri
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Edna Rooney, Resident; Carlene Elmore, St. Charles County Citizens against Airport Noise
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports on citizen views and their efforts to stop the expansion of Lambert Field near St. Charles, Missouri.
The article states that St. Charles homeowners have come to accept the current level of aircraft noise coming from Lambert Field's low-flying jets: "When the noise eclipses conversations, residents wait for quiet to continue. When the sound interrupts classroom lessons, teachers close their windows." But any indication that citizens will accept further expansion of nearby Lambert Field is negated by the positions local citizens described in the article.
"If St. Louis officials expect St. Charles residents to quietly accept the W-1W expansion of Lambert Field, 'They're not giving us any credit for having beans in our noggins,'" the article says quoting St. Charles resident Edna Rooney. Rooney, a former funeral home employee, remarked about how difficult it is to hear clergy at graveside services.
According to Rooney the mayor of St. Charles, the president of the St. Charles City Council and other residents protested the W1-W expansion in downtown St. Louis. The mayor of St. Louis, however, never met with their representatives, the article said.
The article elaborates about how both St. Charles and Bridgeton residents had brought the W-1W expansion issue before the head of the Federal Aviation Administration in Washington D.C. The article gives Rooney's description about how Rep. Richard A. Gephardt, D-south St. Louis County, interfered with the meeting and told the FAA that the situation had been resolved.
"He sold St. Charles down the river," the article said, quoting Rooney, "There will be litigation."
The article also describes other protesting residents such as Carlene Elmore. Elmore, is noted as the treasurer of St. Charles County Citizens Against Airport Noise, an organization that has been working for the past two years to inform the community about the effects of the expansion. Elmore is unwilling to relocate to another area, the article said, "That is giving into a predator. The predator has no right to control my life."
The article describes the positions of other community persons, including a Presbyterian minister, its Christian education director, a clerk at the local museum, a small business owner, and construction workers.
PUBLICATION: The Boston Globe
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: Metro/Region; Pg. B7
BYLINE: Anthony Flint
DATELINE: Boston, Massachusetts
The Boston Globe reports that changed flight patterns at Logan Airport may pit Boston neighborhoods against each other.
According to the article the Federal Aviation Administration has been directing jets to take off of Runway 27 to fly over neighborhoods of South Boston and Franklin Park during the last 18 months. The flights use to cruz over a neighborhood called Jamacia Plain but residents of that neighborhood worked over many years to get that flight path changed.
Now residents of Dorchester are complaining that jets are shaking houses, waking late sleepers, and interrupting conversations, the article said. Dorchester Councilor Maureen Feeney yesterday called the FAA for an explanation from Massport asking if her constituents were eligible for home soundproofing. East Boston's Councilor Paul Scapicchio was noted saying that the greatest portion of Logan noise hits his constituency.
Other neighborhoods are concerned as well, the article continued. Hyde Park Councilor Daniel F. Conley acknowledged the potential tension of different neighborhoods all clamoring to keep the planes from flying overhead. "We're in this together," the paper said, quoting Conley.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: Neighbor; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Carmen Greco Jr.
DATELINE: Warrenville, Illinois
The Chicago Daily Herald reports that the city of Warrenville, Illinois is voicing its clear opposition to the railport proposed by Union Pacific. West Chicago has already publicized its opposition to the project.
According to the article Warrenville's Mayor and other city officers are hoping to organize regional opposition to the project in an effort to squelch the project. Geneva and St. Charles in nearby Kane County also have formally opposed the railport, but Lakics said he is still awaiting word from the cities of Batavia, Wayne and Winfield.
The article states that the proposed railport would allow train cars and trucks to swap freight on 500 acres of property near the DuPage Airport.
The West Chicago officials reportedly said they would prefer hotel, entertainment and office uses for the property near Roosevelt Road and Fabyan Parkway.
Among Warrenville's greatest concerns is the increased rail traffic the project would create. The tracks run near many residential neighborhoods on the city's west side. "[The rail line] goes right by half of our residents," the paper said quoting Mayor Vivian Lund.
Already residents complain about train noise, the article said, referencing statements from city officials. City officials say the railport would only increase train traffic and worsen the noise problem.
Airport officials, however, say that the project does not need approval from West Chicago. City Council member Maury Goodman also said he disagrees with DuPage Airport officials," I believe we should defend the other cities' processes for doing this."
PUBLICATION: The Plain Dealer
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: Northeast Ohio; Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Alan Achkar
DATELINE: Cleveland, Ohio
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Tom Jones, Mayor of Olmsted Falls, OH; Susan Straub, Parma Councilperson
The Plain Dealer reports that a newly released report to expand Cleveland's airport has alarmed area residents who feel the airport noise is already problematic.
According to the report more runways at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport will mean a healthier regional economy. Business leaders agree with the report that was created by the Greater Cleveland Growth Association.
Persons living near Hopkins, however, say runways means more airplanes flying over their homes, more noise, and more air pollution.
"The human element has been left out," the article said, quoting Olmsted Falls Mayor, Tom Jones. "Everybody's in agreement that a functional airport is good for the economic development of the region. But there are people who live here."
According to the article the community of Olmsted Falls is in the flight path for departing aircraft.
A councilperson in another community, Parma, was noted saying that she was "absolutely appalled" by the suggestion that two new runways would be needed at Hopkins by 2020 when one is already under planning.
Straub is quoted in the article saying, "Yes, I understand we all need business and to make our economy better. But at what expense? At the expense of the working people, the taxpayers that live in our community and have to put up with the noise?
According to the article Jones and Straub have helped lead efforts in their respective communities to protest the noise from the airport. Even while talking on the phone an overhead jet could be heard. Residents are already bracing for aggravation of noise in Olmsted Falls and Parma due to the expansion already underway. Not surprisingly talk of still more runways heightens their fears.
Mayor Stanley Trupo, of nearby Berea, echoes a similar sentiment, "This is very hard to understand, how they would put in two more runways without impacting the entire west side of Cuyahoga County."
According to the article the report does mention the less preferred option of building a new airport in the event that existing airports cannot be sufficiently expanded.
A task force with Mayor Michael R. White will begin to pursue air service expansion, the article said. Vice president of government and transportation for the Growth Association, John Habat said the Growth Association is aware of the concerns of residents in western Cuyahoga County communities and plans to involve their participation in determining how to expand the airport.
The article mentions that the Federal Aviation Administration requires a completed noise impact study before it approves any expansion. The article quotes Dean Nitz, FAA Airport District Office Manager regarding the options: If noise standards cannot be met, they may purchase properties and relocate residents, soundproof houses or change flight paths.
Even when all these things are done residents are still not satisfied, the article said, referring to Nitz' statements. "Aircraft still do make noise, after all."
PUBLICATION: The San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: Local Pg. B-1
BYLINE: Mark Arner
DATELINE: El Cajon, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Gordon Gardner, resident
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that homeowner opposition put a temporary end to Home Depot's plan to build near a residential subdivision. The company has appealed the denial of their conditional-use permit and scheduled an after-election appeal hearing for November.
According to the article, residents believe the proposed Home Depot store site would substantially alter their quiet, tree-lined neighborhood by attracting nearly 8,000 more cars a day on nearby streets.
They have held several community meetings and gathered more than 100 signatures on a petition to block the project.
Home Depot spokesmen extolled the project's benefits before the El Cajon Planning Commission citing the creation of 150 to 200 new jobs, increased sales tax revenue, and add a new traffic signal to manage increased traffic.
Homeowners countered the good news describing the anticipated effects in their neighborhood including shortcutting by motorists through their streets, changes in the residential character of the area, and increased traffic, noise, air pollution and crime.
Resident prevailed, the article said, with a 4-1 vote. Not only did the commission reject the company's request for a conditional-use permit, it also voted unanimously to urge the City Council to refuse the county's zoning designation from residential to commercial if the lot is ultimately annexed to El Cajon.
Home Depot Inc.'s attorney, Gregory Garratt, is noted in the article saying that the appeal hearing was scheduled for November to allow a key Home Depot executive, Greg George, to attend.
But local resident Gordon Gardner, who is credited with spearheading the opposition believes the delayed hearing date is politically motivated. The article quotes Gardner saying, "I believe that Home Depot's delay is designed to postpone the appeals hearing until after the Nov. 3 election, to ease the pressure on the City Council and to break up the momentum that has built up from neighborhood opposition."
"I believe that if there had not been a stalwart defense put up by the neighborhood, this project would already have been approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Home Depot is missing our point that the site they want is not the site where Home Depot should be, because it does not fit into the neighborhood."
A commercial real estate broker representing Home Depot, Mike Morris, denied political motivation was involved in the delayed schedule of the hearing. Morris is noted making the argument that the disputed lot has been designated for commercial use since 1979 in El Cajon's general plan -- if the lot is ever annexed to the city.
El Cajon's Mayor, Joan Shoemaker, is mentioned in the article saying the delay is needed to further analyze traffic and noise impacts. The Planning Commission reportedly raised both issues before it voted against the project.
Home Depot real estate agent contends that they are willing to pay for traffic devices such as speed bumps or a barricade to close Sydney Terrace to prevent motorists from taking shortcuts through the nearby neighborhood. But Mayor Shoemaker is quoted saying, "Unless they can come back with more information about traffic and noise, I don't think we're ready to reconsider it."
PUBLICATION: The Times Union
DATE: October 1, 1998
SECTION: Business, Pg. E1
BYLINE: Jo-Ann Johnston
DATELINE: Green Island, NY
The Times Union reports that a long-standing scrap metal business is challenging Green Island's newly amended noise ordinance.
According to the article the sentence added to the community's general noise ordinance reads: "No junkyard, demolition, dismantling or crushing operations will be permitted between the hours of 8 p.m. and 7 a.m. of the following day."
The junkyard business, R.K. Freedman & Son Inc., says the law was created to target his business and limit its noise and hours of operation. It sued the Village Board in state Supreme Court earlier this month alleging that the amended ordinance was created specifically to keep the junkyard, and the junkyard alone, from operating at night.
According to the article the junkyard has been in its current location on 14 acres on Tibbits Avenue for 27 years. It takes discarded metal and cars from business, individuals and local governments, including Green Island, and converts them into scrap for recycling.
Firm president Morris Freedman is noted pointing out how it is only his business - among all those in the heavy industrial zone - that is affected by the changed ordinance. Other noisy businesses operating 24 hours a day are not affected by the ordinance. "This is basic harassment from the village," the paper said quoting Freedman.
According to Freedman the business has lost between $200,000 and $300,000 because of the village's action, and has had to lay off four employees specifically because of the prohibition of their particular kind of noise at night.
The article adds that Freedman had not even been aware that the change in the ordinance had been proposed. He learned about the ordinance when longtime Mayor John McNulty called him the next day to tell him to quit operating at night.
The reporter indicated that the village declined to comment for the news article because of the law suit.
But apparently, industrial noise from his place of business is a topic of neighborhood conversation, even though Freedman said the neighbors hadn't spoken directly to him.
The article quotes from unidentified neighbors saying, "It's loud. . .His business has grown, and I'm glad for him, but it's not good for us. It's really gotten out of hand."
Freedman admits that the new machine he bought last year shreds scrap metal, and does make a different sound than the crusher he previously had. Whereas the crusher whined, the shredder periodically clangs, the article said, referring to Freedman's description. Freedman is quoted saying, "Is it any noisier? I don't know?"
The $2 million shredder is a big improvement for other reasons, Freedman told the reporter. "It's better for the environment," because it yields more recyclable material, and generates less trash for landfills. It also gives him more material to sell -- often at a better price -- and gives his steel-mill customers a purer product.
The article explains that scrap metal market is subject to lots of price fluctuations. If Freedman gets a big load of metal in when scrap is fetching a favorable price, it's important for him to shred it right away, the article said. That requires an overnight crew, according to Freeman.
Freedman is noted saying he does not want to run his shredder every night. He does want the option to run it when it makes business sense to do so. The article explains further that when he can't run his machine at night, the metal piles up and, since he can't sell the metal as is, it has prompted layoffs. "I hate that part," the article said quoting Freedman. Freedman believes his situation is particularly ironic, the article says, because he employs people from the village of Green Island, so Freeman reasons that the village ordinance is ultimately hurting itself.
Freedman's attorney supports his argument that his client is being unfairly singled out by the village. Evidence of the unfair regulation is demonstrated by recent attempts to attract to the same area a new tire-recycling venture called Rubber Mountain. "If you're willing to invite a tire recycler, how does that discourage additional noise?"
A photograph is included with the article.
Previous week: September 20, 1998
Next week: October 4, 1998
Aircraft Noise
Amplified Noise
Effects on Wildlife/Animals
Construction Noise
Firing Ranges
Health Effects
Home Equipment and Appliances
Industrial/Manufacturing
International News
Environmental Justice
Land Use and Noise
Lawsuits
Civil Liberty Issues
Miscellaneous Noise Stories
Noise Ordinances
Noise Organizations Mentioned
Outdoor Events
Noise in Our National Parks/Natural Areas
Regulation
Residential and Community Noise
Snowmobile and ATV Noise
Research and Studies
Technological Solutions to Noise
Transportation Related Noise
Violence and Noise
Watercraft Noise
Workplace Noise
Chronological Index
Geographical Index