PUBLICATION: The Arizona Republic
DATE: February 20, 1999
SECTION: Northeast Phoenix Community; Pg. 4
BYLINE: Brian Anderson
DATELINE: Cave Creek, Arizona
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Tony Biggs, resident; Don Brewer, resident
The Arizona Republic reports neighbors in an Arizona town say their solitude is being destroyed by the barking of eight dogs from a nearby residence.
According to the article, Tony Biggs' quiet life amid the ironwood trees and desert scrub of the northeast Valley came to end a few weeks ago. Until then, about the only sounds to pierce the silence were the chirps and squeals of wildlife. An occasional plane would fly over or a neighbor's dog would bark a bit, but his surroundings brought welcome solitude from city life. Then that all changed, Biggs said, when John Faultner and his five pit bullterriers moved in near his home on a county island south of Carefree. "Now the noise is just unacceptable, to say the least," Biggs said. "The fact is that the dogs are just continuously making noise, and we're going berserk." Day and night, the dogs bellow from their pens and leashes, Biggs said. People once accustomed to sleeping with their windows open in the neighborhood south of Dixileta Drive near 64th Street now put pillows over their heads to sleep.
The article reports Biggs said he's tried reasoning with Faultner, but his new neighbor won't listen. Biggs tried calling the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, but no tickets were issued. He called county Rabies and Animal Control officials, but Faultner was only warned to license the dogs before March 9. Now there is the case scheduled to be heard Tuesday in Scottsdale Justice Court that Biggs is hoping, but not with much confidence, will force Faultner to move the dogs. Biggs and his neighbors are trying to obtain an injunction against Faultner. Tensions between the two are so strained that Biggs recently bought a handgun for protection, he said. "It's going to get pretty bad real soon," he said. "This was a nice quiet neighborhood. Now we're armed to the teeth like we're in some kind of war."
The article states Faultner said bringing home handguns and launching accusations is uncalled for. He tries to control the noise, he said, but his five dogs coupled with the three that his mother owns tend to get a little rowdy at times. "They're making me out to be this terrible person," Faultner said. "I've tried to be cooperative with this guy behind me here. I'll do whatever I can to keep them quiet." For the most part, Faultner has been more accommodating than other owners of barking dogs, said Lt. Jim Miller, commander of the Carefree and Cave Creek sheriff's substation. When a complaint sent a deputy out to his house a couple of weeks ago, Faultner agreed to move the animals from one side of the yard to the other in hopes of quieting them, Miller said. He also gave out his phone number to his neighbors so they could call if they were annoyed. "That was pretty responsive to a deputy just coming up saying your dogs are loud," said Miller, who met with Biggs on Wednesday night.
According to the article, the dogs continue to bark, said neighbor Don Brewer, who added that Faultner still stares and tries to intimidate people. "This kid's just a loose cannon. You never know what to expect," Brewer said. "The whole neighborhood is upset with this character." But the harassment complaints and court summons are pointless, Faultner said, because he and his dogs plan only to stay for a couple more months. "It's just a terrible situation," he said. "I certainly wish no harm on them and I do my best to keep those dogs quiet."
PUBLICATION: The Evening Post (Wellington)
DATE: February 20, 1999
SECTION: News; National; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Simon Beattie
DATELINE: Wellington, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Luit Bieringa, chairman of The Inner City Residents' Association
The Evening Post (Wellington) reports tensions are mounting between inner-city residents and bar owners over complaints about loud music in Wellington, England.
According to the article, The Inner City Residents' Association has formed an action group to look at noise problems while bar owners, who say they were there first, are becoming increasingly frustrated with the constant complaints and the actions of Wellington City Council. They feel the council is favoring the residents who live in central city accommodations. Currently, the council is taking legal action against the Indigo Bar and Venue through the Environment Court to force it to lower noise levels and install sound proofing. Police and noise control officers stopped a concert there last week after a complaint from the public.
The article reports Indigo Bar owner Adrian Mackenzie said he had been served by the council with more than six abatement notices to lower music levels since the bar opened about eight months ago. The site has been a rock music venue for about thirty years. Mr. Mackenzie wanted to start a mediation process, but the council said it wasn't interested. Mackenzie said the council's laws were operating only one way and were not accommodating bars. But council environment health officer Matthew Borich said they had tried to resolve noise problems with Mr. Mackenzie in the past without success. Other bars in central Wellington, including the Fat Ladies Arms, Molly Malones, Loaded Hog and Cafe Paradiso have all had continuing problems with complaints from the public about noise levels.
According to the article, Council spokesman Richard MacLean said the council was caught in the middle of disputes between residents and bar owners. But he said the council was forced to take action if noise levels were deemed to be unacceptable. MacLean also said summer was especially bad as many bars kept their doors open. Inner City Residents' Association chairman Luit Bieringa said an action group had been set up to look at noise problems and co-operate with bars. "We need to identify what those problems are and get (the) council to address them in consultation with those who make the noise and come up with a solution."
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale)
DATE: February 20, 1999
SECTION: Local, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Brad Bennett
DATELINE: Boca Raton, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Janet Eaton-Sherr, resident
The Sun-Sentinel reports protesters gathered at Florida's Boca Raton Airport on Friday to win greater representation on the airport's governing board and more control over noise.
According to the article, about 50 people who live near the airport carried large white signs that said: "We're entitled to quiet enjoyment of our homes" and "Nighttime curfew now." The protest was intended to highlight recommendations by state Sen. Ron Klein and state Rep. Curt Levine, both Boca Raton Democrats, to add at least two members to the Airport Authority to represent homeowners affected by aircraft noise. The five-member authority has only one member living west of Interstate 95, where airplanes using the airport are restricted to flying. "All the air traffic is west of I-95," said Janet Eaton-Sherr of the Boca Grove Golf and Tennis Club, a residential community west of I-95. "We are affected by it." Eaton-Sherr said the rule, created by the Federal Aviation Administration in 1982, made sense at the time because the western area was undeveloped. "Now it makes no sense," she said. Sen. Klein said, "We believe that there should be a broader representation. Having flights in the middle of the night is not a fair representation." Candidates for municipal offices also turned out for the rally to support residents. "When an airport authority wants to work for you, they're perfectly capable of working for you," said City Council member Susan Whelchel, who is up for re-election this year. "If Levine wants to add more people( to the board), I'm all for it," mayoral candidate Dave Freudenberg said.
Thearticle reports Diane Bryant Gullo, the airport's new noise abatement officer, said the airport is conducting a Part 150 Noise Study on several issues, including: a nighttime curfew; expanding the flight zone east of I-95; and FAA funding for more studies on airplane-use restrictions and aircraft noise. Gullo said the FAA would have to conduct an environmental study on the impact of expanding the flight zone east of I-95. But she had "no official position" on expanding the board.
PUBLICATION: Asheville Citizen-Times (Asheville, NC)
DATE: February 19, 1999
SECTION: Local; Pg. B3
BYLINE: Julie Ball
DATELINE: Hendersonville, North Carolina
The Asheville Citizen-Times reports Henderson County, North Carolina, officials are considering relaxing their proposed noise ordinance by allowing increased noise levels and exempting businesses and industries.
According to the article, the original proposal prohibited noise higher than 60 decibels during the day, roughly the equivalent of a sewing machine or typewriter. Under the original proposed ordinance, the nighttime allowable level would be 50 decibels. But Henderson County Commissioner Bill Moyer wants to increase the allowable daytime level to 80 decibels and the nighttime level to 60 decibels. "There seems to be support to do that," Moyer said of raising the decibel levels. Unlike the original proposed ordinance, Moyer's proposal would also exempt noise created by businesses and industries. However, it would not exempt loud parties, stereos and barking dogs.
The article reports last month, a number of camp owners in Henderson County expressed concerns about the 60 decibel limit and asked for an exemption from the ordinance. Tom Rosenberg, associate director of Blue Star Camps for Boys and Girls, said he is waiting to see what county officials finally decide. "Kids make noise when they learn and when they play," Rosenberg said. "It's hard to know, to be honest, what decibel level would be meaningful for us." He added, "This is a very important issue for us. It could put us out of business," he said.
The article reports the noise ordinance was first proposed in response to a planned racetrack in the Naples community, which has since been abandoned. Moyer said Wednesday he hopes commissioners can reach an agreement on the ordinance by the end of the month. The board has scheduled a workshop session to discuss the proposed ordinance next Thursday.
PUBLICATION: The News and Observer (Raleigh, NC)
DATE: February 19, 1999
SECTION: Day; Pg. E3
BYLINE: Christina Nifong
DATELINE: Durham, North Carolina
The News and Observer reports before deciding to issue a special use permit to a recyclables collector, Durham, North Carolina's, Town Council took some measurements of current noise levels in the city.
According to the article, on Feb. 9, Michael Adcock, with Durham's Environmental Resources Department, took a sound level meter to Hoover and Ashe roads in East Durham to find out. He spent an hour that morning standing on a dirt drive 30 feet from the center of Hoover Rd., reading his Quest Technologies model 2700. (It's about the size of an animal crackers box with a squat microphone on top.) Adcock found the background noise on the street averaged between 48.4 and 49.1 decibels. (That's louder than a humming refrigerator but softer than a typical conversation. And quieter than most urban street corners.) Barking dogs raised the average background sound level to 78.7 decibels, roughly the level of an alarm clock. A plane flying overhead registered at an average level of 65.9 decibels. A postal truck roaring measured 87.2 decibels - coming close to the sound level of a lawn mower. At noon, Adcock moved to the corner of Hoover and Angier roads, where traffic increased the background noise level to between 60.2 and 62.3 decibels. He measured large trucks, such as tractor trailers and dump trucks, at a range of 76.8 decibels to 87.3 decibels-about as loud as an average motorcycle. A train crossing the intersection reached 115.1 decibels at its peak loudness.
The article goes on to say the city council members needed to decide whether to allow a special use permit to Tidewater Fibre Corp., Durham's new recyclables collector, for a 25-acre parcel off Hoover Road for sorting its materials. Based on Adcock's measurements, the council granted the permit, deciding the noise of Tidewater's trucks would not exceed existing noise.
PUBLICATION: Agence France Presse
DATE: February 18, 1999
SECTION: Financial Pages
DATELINE: Washington, DC
Agence France Presse reports the United States on Thursday condemned a recent move by the European Parliament to ban hush-kitted jet aircraft in the European Union.
According to the article, David Aaron, undersecretary for international trade at the US Commerce Department, called the February 10 vote on the draft directive "arbitrary, non-productive and discriminatory" and said the US government was "extremely disappointed" with the decision. Aaron said the United States was now urging the EU to postpone implementation of the regulation to allow for negotiations. As written, the directive would bar EU-registered aircraft outfitted with "hush kits," noise reduction devices found on older planes, from operating in the European Union beginning April 1. Hush-kitted aircraft registered outside the European Union would be barred from April 2002, unless they had been registered in the EU before April 1, 1999. The legislation needs approval from European transport ministers who meet in Brussels on March 29.
The article reports the EU executive commission contends that aircraft fitted with hush kits are not as environmentally friendly as those with cleaner burning new-generation engines. It said hush-kitted aircraft require 50 percent more fuel consumption on take-off and are significantly noisier than more modern aircraft. Using hush kits, according to the commission, carriers can continue to fly airplanes that are more than 25 years old.
The article states the directive has elicited cries of protest in the United States, where officials say it could jeopardize orders for US aircraft and aircraft engines worth one billion dollars. Aaron declined to indicate what action the United States might take if the European Union adopts the regulation. He noted that while the Washington "will take whatever action we deem to be appropriate," it was not looking for a "punishing fight" with the European Union over the issue. However, in a retaliatory move, two members of Congress have introduced legislation that bars the Anglo-French supersonic jet Concorde from US airspace if the European Union goes ahead and implements the legislation.
PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Journal
DATE: February 18, 1999
SECTION: Metro & New Mexico; Pg. D1
BYLINE: Tania Soussan
DATELINE: Alburquerque, New Mexico
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Steve Frazier, chairman of Citizens Noise Advisory Committee
The Albuquerque Journal reports a citizens' group is working to update Albuquerque's noise laws.
According to the article, that's the aim of a new group called the Citizens Noise Advisory Committee whose members include neighborhood representatives, a speech and language pathologist, an environmental scientist and others. Albuquerque's noise law is difficult to enforce and outdated because it doesn't properly address things like "boom cars" and outdoor loudspeakers, said group chairman Steve Frazier. The group met last week to organize and begin studying the law and comparing it to the codes in 29 other cities so it can recommend changes and additions. Frazier said Albuquerque's noise code is less strict than the codes of such neighboring cities as Salt Lake City and Denver. In Tucson, for example, drivers of "boom cars" can be cited if the music from their stereos can be heard or felt from 50 feet away.
The article states meanwhile, Albuquerque's Environmental Health Department is working on a review of the noise ordinance and planning some revisions of its own, deputy director Curt Montman said. "It's time to look at it," Montman said. "There have been on occasion some things we have not been able to deal with, things that are not covered in the noise ordinance." For example, the city may change the way it measures noise to define a violation, he said. Frazier said his group will complement the city's efforts, and Montman said he's happy to hear their ideas. "Any time we look at redoing an ordinance, we certainly want input from the citizenry," he said.
The article reports the Citizens Noise Advisory Committee also intends to make specific suggestions for a broad, overall policy to deal with increasing noise pollution in the city. Noise is a quality-of-life issue that must be addressed as the city grows, Frazier said. Studies have shown that noise not only disrupts sleep and work, but also can cause hearing loss and other health problems such as high blood pressure and increased risk of stroke. In addition, loud background noise can interfere with learning and the development of language skills in children, according to a New York study. Frazier said there are other noise problems here, too. The lack of speed-limit enforcement on such roads as Paseo Del Norte is a noise problem because a car traveling at 70 mph creates more than 75 percent more sound energy than one going 50 mph, he said.
The article says to find out more about the Citizens Noise Advisory Committee, contact Frazier at 897-0840 or SFNABQ@compuserve.com.
PUBLICATION: The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, TN)
DATE: February 18, 1999
SECTION: Business, Pg. C1
BYLINE: Jennifer Thomas and Dave Hirschman
DATELINE: Washington, DC
The Commercial Appeal reports flights to the United States by the Concorde may be prohibited if the European Union follows through with its ban on jets that use hushkits to reduce noise.
According to the article, members of the U.S. House of Representatives are ready to ban supersonic Concorde aircraft flights to the United States if the European Union follows through with a plan to bar older Boeing Co. aircraft from operating in Europe. The European Parliament ignored U.S. complaints last week and approved a ban on airplanes that use noise-reduction devices known as hushkits. The EU said hush-kitted planes are noisier than planes with newer engines and pose an environmental threat, even though they meet the latest international noise -reduction standards. Rep. James Oberstar(D-Minn.), chief sponsor of the bill to ban the Concorde, said the EU ban is a "thinly veiled attempt to give a competitive advantage to EU aircraft and engine manufacturers." Airlines are fitting hundreds of Boeing 727 and DC9 planes with the hushkit mufflers in order to meet international noise -reduction standards that take effect in 2002. The EU ban will prohibit new registrations of planes fitted with the devices beginning next month. It will also bar hushkit-equipped planes registered in other countries from flying in the EU after April 1, 2002.
The article states the U.S. government says the hushkit ban would affect more than $1 billion in U.S. exports from Boeing Co., the world's largest jetmaker, General Electric Co.'s GE Aircraft Engines unit, and Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp. U.S. airlines, including FedEx and Northwest Airlines, would also be affected. FedEx has marketed hushkits for years, and many of the company's own B727s carry them. FedEx currently operates five B727s in Europe. "The big question for us is which organization is going to be allowed to regulate the international certification of aircraft," said Jess Bunn, a FedEx spokesman. "We don't think a unilateral action by a regional group such as the European Union is appropriate. We think if something like this is going to be done, it has to be done by an international body like the (International Civil Aviation Organization)." The EU decision, which is to take effect next month, came despite a request for a delay from U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky and other U.S. officials. Transportation Department officials said the United States is considering taking the issue to the World Trade Organization.
The article reports the legislation to ban the Concorde could be voted on by the House of Representatives as early as next week. It has the support of Transportation Committee Chairman Bud Shuster, Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Jimmy Duncan, Illinois Democrat William Lipinski and California Republican Stephen Horn. "We have allowed British Airways and Air France to fly the Concorde into the United States, even though the Concorde does not meet our environmental noise limits," Oberstar said. "I am willing to continue cooperating and allow continuation of this waiver but only if the EU drops this outrageous proposal. " Oberstar warns the United States may take other steps if the EU attempts to enforce the ban. "Banning the Concorde is only the first step," he said. Similar legislation has been introduced in the Senate by South Carolina Democrat Ernest F. 'Fritz' Hollings. The Senate has yet to act on the measure.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: February 18, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Jean O. Pasco
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Len Kransner, resident who operates an anti-El Toro Web site; Colleen and Phil Smoot, residents; Meg Waters, spokeswoman for a coalition of South County cities
The Los Angeles Times reports most noise complaints generated by John Wayne Airport in California last year came from areas miles away, in neighborhoods deemed "quiet" by the county. With much more air traffic planned at the proposed airport at El Toro, South Orange County residents fear there will no quiet zones for them.
According to the article, Colleen and Phil Smoot live on Balboa Island in Newport Harbor, four miles away from the John Wayne runways in an area that is supposed to be quiet. Yet the first number on their telephone's speed dial is the noise complaint office at John Wayne Airport. "We try just to call when it's really annoying, when you have to stop conversation," Colleen Smoot said. The Smoots' problems with loud jets are the very concerns that South Orange County residents have about a proposed international airport to replace the El Toro Marine Corps Air Station. Anti-airport residents point to complaints like the Smoots' to defend why they don't believe the county's assurances of a "quiet" new airport. "Why are people four to six miles from the airport complaining about noise that the county says shouldn't bother them? For good reason," said Len Kransner, who operates an anti-El Toro Web site.
The article reports nearly all the complaints last year came from areas labeled quiet by county planners, according to a Times review of noise reports at John Wayne Airport. The Smoots have been diligent, so that they accounted for about 40% of the 1,916 noise complaints logged at the airport last year. On some days, they called a dozen times to notify the airport of loud noise from departing jets. But they say their complaints reflect those of their neighbors as well. "We just want to preserve a record and make sure everyone is following the rules," said Colleen Smoot. Airlines that violate the airport's strict noise limits are supposed to be fined, but no fines were given in 1998, county officials said.
The article goes on to say few noise complaints came from Santa Ana Heights, a neighborhood that starts about 1,500 feet from the end of the runway from which planes usually depart. New homes were banned there 14 years ago because average noise levels exceeded the state limit of 65 decibels. Remaining homes were soundproofed at county expense. Residents living outside the 65-decibel zone don't qualify for the same protections.
According to the article, it isn't average noise that causes people to complain about jets at John Wayne Airport. Most of last year's complaints were triggered by individual departing flights that caused noise monitors to reach in the high 80- to low 90-decibel range. Comparatively, a motorcycle 25 feet away generates about 90 decibels. "Single-event levels are high, and that's what people react to, not an average of noise, " said Kransner, who also analyzed John Wayne Airport noise complaints. "When the phone rings in the middle of the night, it's no less annoying." Meg Waters, spokeswoman for a coalition of South County cities, said residents near El Toro weren't happy, either, about occasional military jets, which are about 10 times louder than commercial jets. "The only magic to 65 decibels is that, if you're outside the zone you don't get soundproofing money for your home," she said. "It has nothing to do with quiet." Yet it is average noise levels on which county planners and state regulators base their decisions. State noise law regulates airports, freeways and other noise generators based on sound averaged over 24 hours, which factors single bursts of noise along with longer periods of relative quiet. The averaging is called the Community Noise Equivalency Level or CNEL. Homes are not allowed within the 65-decibel CNEL zone unless soundproofed.
The article reports John Wayne Airport also records how much noise each aircraft makes, called the Single Event Noise Exposure Level. The longer the noise lasts, the higher the SENEL reading goes. The airport must keep track of the sound each jet makes so it can enforce noise limits. It also maintains a night-time curfew among other restrictions. The proposed El Toro airport is planned for commercial jets departing an average of every five minutes around-the-clock. Flights would land every nine minutes.
The article states South County residents see John Wayne Airport as a model for the noise levels they could expect and the protections they deserve. But it's unlikely they will be able to get similar protections because the airport's restrictions are written in a 1985 court agreement which are scheduled to expire in 2005. County planners insist that strict noise limits like those at John Wayne Airport aren't necessary at El Toro. They argue that the vast stretches of the 4,700-acre, mostly undeveloped base, are the best protection against noise. About 2,000 acres are planned for the airport, which by 2020 would serve about 24 million passengers a year. John Wayne Airport, on the other hand, sits on about 500 acres and serves about 8 million passengers a year.
According to the article, for jets arriving at El Toro, the nearest homes to the runway--about two miles away at Leisure World in Laguna Hills--would escape the loudest noise, which would be confined to undeveloped land. According to noise studies released in December, Leisure World would experience the highest average airport noise, at 64 decibels. Noise in Aliso Viejo, also under the arrival path, is expected to be 62 decibels. For jets departing El Toro to the east, the closest homes would be six miles away in Rancho Santa Margarita. Jets leaving to the north would be 12 miles from the first homes in Anaheim Hills. "The bottom line is that the vast majority of Orange County's 2.6 million residents, north and south, will experience little or no noise from the new airport," El Toro airport planning manager Courtney Wiercioch contends.
The article published the following data supplied by John Wayne Airport: Fourth quarter 1998 complaints by area-Balboa/Corona del Mar: 50%; Westcliff: 13%; Tustin/Orange: 9%; Costa Mesa: 7%; Eastbluff: 4%; Santa Ana: 3%; Santa Ana Heights: 2%; Other areas: 12%. Total 1998 complaints-Jan. 1-March 31: 332; April 1-June 30: 566; July 1-Sept. 30: 720; Oct. 1-Dec. 31: 298; Total complaints: 1,916.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale)
DATE: February 18, 1999
SECTION: Local, Pg. 3B
BYLINE: Jill Rosen
DATELINE: Boca Raton, Florida
The Sun-Sentinel reports residents' complaints about noise from jets flying to and from Florida's Boca Raton Airport are getting louder.
According to the article, at a meeting of the Airport Authority on Wednesday, the airport's new noise abatement and communications officer, Diane Gullo, said 150 people called the airport's noise hotline during January -- a dramatic increase from January 1998 when only 44 people complained on the recorded line. Meanwhile, those who support efforts by state Sen. Ron Klein and state Rep. Curt Levine to get more representation on the Airport Authority from neighborhoods affected by noise plan to demonstrate Friday at the airport.
The article states all the candidates in the City Council race are focusing on airport issues in the wake of next month's elections. "We've become the whipping boy of almost every political entity in this area, and I don't think that's right," authority member Frank Kneiser said. Nevertheless, Airport Authority members acknowledged residents' increasing displeasure with the airport by deciding on Wednesday to look into hiring a public relations firm because the public outcry is intensifying. "There's a lot more that's going to happen before it stops," authority member Phil Modder said. "We are under increasing scrutiny, and I think we have an obligation to do something about it."
The article reports Gullo said January's jump in noise complaints was unusual because approximated 25% of those callers had never called the line before. Often, the authority blames the high number of noise line complaints on one or two callers. Of the 150 calls, 92 were made about jet noise, and 54 came during the night. Many of the calls were made during Super Bowl weekend as corporate jets landed in Boca Raton. Gullo said that judging from the calls so far this month, it's on track to rival January's numbers.
According to the article, also on Wednesday, the Airport Authority decided to explore purchasing a $15,000 portable noise monitor to measure sound levels in surrounding neighborhoods. The authority also will consider adding members to its Noise Compatibility Advisory Committee, a group the authority created to address noise concerns.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: February 18, 1999
SECTION: Metro Lake; Pg. 3; Zone: L
BYLINE: Jennifer Vigil
DATELINE: Bannnockburn, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Barbara VanderKloot, committee co-chair
The Chicago Tribune reports the village of Bannockburn, Illinois, has launched a campaign to block tollway noise from the community.
According to the article, the village is forming a residents' committee to fight for protection against increasing noise pollution. The village is seeking construction of a sound wall along the east side of the tollway, which faces Bannockburn, similar to the one the authority has agreed to build on the west side, along Riverwoods.
The article reports Barbara VanderKloot, who was named committee co-chair, said the village has been inspired by the recent success of Deerfield residents in stopping the construction of an elevated exit. Scott Dworschak, community affairs manager for the Toll Highway Authority, said that while the agency understands why communities want sound walls, Bannockburn does not qualify for a wall under federal guidelines.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: February 18, 1999
SECTION: Metro Chicago; Pg. 3; Zone: N; Campaign '99
BYLINE: Monica Davey
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Marius Gallagher, resident
The Chicago Tribune reports residents of Chicago wards put a non-binding referendum question on a ballot for Tuesday that makes noise pollution from Midway Airport a reason for property tax relief.
According to the article, Marius Gallagher, who lives about a mile from Midway Airport, and his neighbors hope someone might finally hear their complaints if voters approve a local referendum question on Tuesday's ballot that asks: "Shall the Cook County assessor review and reduce the current property tax assessments on all homes which have been harmed by the increased noise, fumes and air pollution caused by the growing number of airplane flights at Midway Airport?" By design, the question is meant to be viewed as a sure thing with a loud message. But a positive vote is non-binding; referendum questions are only advisory. "It's kind of like a wish list for certain groups," said Tom Leach, spokesman for the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners. To get a local advisory question on the ballot requires petition signatures of 10 percent of the voters in a ward or in a number of precincts in a ward.
The article states Gallagher, an airport- noise activist, said despite its advisory nature, officials won't be able to ignore the outcome in the 23rd Ward. "We'll get their attention," he said. "Every year they tell us they're going to reduce the noise and every year they don't." Last year, Gallagher and eight others applied for lower tax assessments on their Midway-area homes because of the airport traffic, he said. Seven of them, including Gallagher, succeeded in getting some reduction. He believes all Midway neighbors deserve cuts.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: February 18, 1999
SECTION: Metro Lake; Pg. 5; Zone: L
BYLINE: Tim Pareti
DATELINE: Arlington Heights, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Stephen Daday, village trustee and chairman of The Arlington Heights Village Advisory Committee on O'Hare Noise; Martin Cawley, resident
The Chicago Tribune reports members of an Arlington Heights, Illinois, advisory panel on aircraft noise voted Tuesday to oppose expansion at O'Hare International Airport.
According to the article, members of an Arlington Heights advisory panel on aircraft noise will ask the Village Board to send letters to Washington and to Springfield opposing any proposal to expand O'Hare International Airport. The Arlington Heights Village Advisory Committee on O'Hare Noise decided Tuesday to oppose expansion while discussing ways to implement its strategic plan to reduce aircraft noise in the village.
The article reports the Village Board approved the strategic plan last week just as federal transportation officials announced a proposal to lift a 30-year-old cap limiting hourly flights at O'Hare and shortly after Chicago Mayor Richard Daley proposed new terminals and other improvements for the airport. Some members considered reworking the strategic plan but decided instead to draft a letter opposing the end of flight caps and Daley's expansion plan. "I think the issues are a little separate, but it's included in what we're doing here," said Stephen Daday, a village trustee and chairman of the advisory committee.
The article states the panel's strategic plan calls for airlines to phase out noisier and older airplanes; no increase in flight operations at O'Hare; and compliance with the Fly Quiet program that directs nighttime departures over unpopulated areas. Another goal listed in the plan is to motivate village residents to oppose any O'Hare expansion. Daday said the village set aside $2,500 to distribute telephone stickers and magnets bearing the village's O'Hare noise hot-line telephone number.
According to the article, village resident Martin Cawley said the strategic plan was not tough enough to curb increasing aircraft noise over the village. "It's about time to take a stand," Cawley said. "Those are all beautiful goals and objectives, but they've done absolutely nothing."
PUBLICATION: Austin American-Statesman
DATE: February 17, 1999
SECTION: Metro/State; Pg. B7
BYLINE: Debbie Hiott
DATELINE: Austin, Texas
The Austin American-Statesman reports an updated study on noise around a new airport in Southeast Austin, Texas, shows an increase in the number of residents who will be affected by noise from aircraft taking off and landing.
According to the article, when Austin-Bergstrom International Airport opens May 2, about 500 more residents will be exposed to the noise of airplanes landing and taking off than city consultants predicted in a 1994 study. Preliminary results of an updated study on noise around the new airport in Southeast Austin show an estimated 1,500 people will be within the airport's noise contour if there is no noise mitigation. The contour is a map of where noise with a day and night average of 65 decibels or more will occur in an area. The new noise contour and estimate of the number of people who would be affected by high levels of noise are not final, said Holland Young, the new airport's senior planner. The noise study will be completed within the next two months, Young said.
The article states the city is expected to undertake noise mitigation measures or changes in operations -- everything from soundproofing homes to changing flight paths -- to reduce the number of residents in the highest noise area. "This is the point where we start talking about that," Young said. Airport staff will recommend a noise mitigation plan to the City Council. Young is not sure why more people are affected by noise under the new study than under the 1994 study by Greiner Inc. More people have moved into the area since the '94 study. "We may also have a better count this time," he said. The city updated the noise study because of changes in proposed operations at the new airport.
The article reports residents will have an opportunity to look at the new noise contour map and learn about the ongoing noise study at an open house today at the new airport. Residents can make written comments and suggestions about what they would like to see done to help reduce the impact of noise. Some area residents would like to see the city buy their homes outright, so they can move to a less noisy environment. Others, such as Bill Hightower, aren't so sure. "Myself, I've been here 30 years, and I'd hate to try and pick up and move," said Hightower, who lives in Richland Estates, just north of the new airport's west runway. Residents there are dealing not only with noise but the fumes from the nearby airport cargo complex across Texas 71.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: February 17, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 10
BYLINE: Chris Fusco
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Arlene Mulder, Arlington Heights Village president and chairwoman of O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission
The Chicago Daily Herald reports a consultant for Chicago's aviation department told suburban leaders Tuesday that adding flights at O'Hare International Airport likely would make airplane noise more tolerable, especially at night.
According to the article, the move would allow regional commuter flights now taking off and landing past 9:45 p.m. to do so during the day. Consultants said that would reduce air traffic and noise at night, when suburban residents are most sensitive to it. But members of the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission's technical committee Tuesday are wary of the U.S. Senate bill that would allow O'Hare officials to schedule 30 additional flights each day. Arlington Heights Village President Arlene Mulder, who chairs the commission, worries the bill, if passed, would bring more noise to the area. Arlington Heights residents, Mulder said, have noticed jets approaching O'Hare lower to the ground than they did five or 10 years ago. She wonders if that kind of air traffic would increase if flight restrictions were eased. A proposal by President Clinton to lift flight caps altogether frightens her even more. "Whether it's perception or reality, (flight caps) have been some sense of security," Mulder said "This is the only thing at all that has given us some sort of sense of control."
The article reports city aviation consultant Douglas F. Goldberg described the existing restrictions at O'Hare as out-of-touch with the aviation marketplace. They were designed in 1968 and haven't been updated since, he said. The so-called "high-density rule" limits O'Hare to 155 scheduled take-offs and landings per hour between 6:45 a.m. and 9:15 p.m. However, air traffic controllers sometimes push other flights ahead of schedule, bringing the total number of take-offs and landings per hour past 200. "It's an archaic rule," Chicago aviation department spokesman Dennis Culloton said. "Technology and procedures have passed it by."
The article states opponents of more flights at O'Hare, however, said relaxing the flight cap would only increase noise and jeopardize safety. That, combined with the city's plans for additional terminals and other renovations at O'Hare, have them worried more runways are on the way. "There are safety factors here, and the fact is they're pushing the envelope," said Patrick Durante, executive assistant to Republican Congressman Henry Hyde of Wood Dale, who opposes the Senate bill. "If you keep crowding it, something's going to happen."
PUBLICATION: Washington News Bureau
DATE: February 17, 1999
SECTION: Metro Iowa Pg.6
BYLINE: Kenneth Pins
DATELINE: Washington, DC
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Barbara Favola, chairwoman of a committee on airport noise
The Washington News Bureau reports Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has caused impassioned protests in Washington with his bill that, among other things, would add 48 takeoff and landing slots at Reagan National Airport.
According to the article, Washington, DC ,residents say added flights would create more noise, imperil safety and tip the balance between Dulles, Baltimore-Washington International and Reagan National airports. McCain's critics fear allowing more planes to fly into National from farther away will ultimately lead to bigger planes and more noise. They say the larger carriers currently serving the airport eventually will lobby for fewer restrictions on the size of the jets they can fly here. "This is just a slap in the face," said Barbara Favola of Arlington, Va., chairwoman of a committee here on airport noise. The Washington Post has published letters critical of McCain on Sunday's and Tuesday's editorial pages. Local television stations have shown District of Columbia Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton ready to fight McCain in the House.
The article states what seems bad for Washington is good for Des Moines. McCain says he wants the flights to create more competition and thus lower fares -especially for high-fare cities such as Des Moines. McCain has said enhanced airline competition at popular destinations such as Washington will mean that travelers in Phoenix, Des Moines and Rochester, NY, are no longer captives of one major airline's high-cost flights. People in Washington say they are sympathetic to Des Moines' costly fares, but they say they have to look out for local interests first.
The article reports this current debate in Washington is another sign that increasing competition in cities bypassed by airline deregulation won't be easy. Patrick Murphy, the deputy secretary of transportation for aviation, has said additional flights into Reagan National would not harm safety. But adding slots seems to have rekindled a turf war over who should make decisions about air service to the nation's capital. "Through the 1970s, this was a battleground," said Leo Schefer of the Washington Airport Task Force. He said the current level of landing and takeoff slots was set to help balance traffic at suburban Dulles and urban National airports. "They helped stop the complaining about National," Schefer said. Schefer said McCain's bill now threatens that balance. He said it also could end up establishing new monopolies among smaller airlines. "It will, A, not increase competition and, B, not lower fares," said Schefer. "We think that's bad public policy."
PUBLICATION: The London Free Press
DATE: February 17, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. A4
DATELINE: Stratford, Ontario, CANADA
The London Free Press reports a man from Stratford, Ontario, with a history of disturbing his neighbors with loud music was fined $1,700 and prohibited from owning a stereo for the next two years.
According to the article, the 36-year-old man lives in a city apartment building and had been annoying one neighbor in particular for some time. Police had investigated 17 noise complaints at that address since June 30. Criminal charges of mischief by obstructing the enjoyment of property were filed Jan. 24 after police were called to the residence three times due to loud music.
The article reports in sentencing, Judge Greg Pickle said the Ontario Court of Appeal during the last 18 months has indicated that noise complaints -- normally considered city bylaw infractions -- can result in Criminal Code charges. This case was one of those instances, he said. "You have to have respect for your neighbors."
PUBLICATION: Sarasota Herald-Tribune
DATE: February 17, 1999
SECTION: B Section, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Dale White
DATELINE: Sarasota, Florida
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports the Manatee County Commission declined to take a position on a proposed flight path from Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport that will reduce aircraft noise over Manatee while increasing noise over central Longboat Key, Florida.
According to the article, rather than take an official stance, the Manatee County Commission will urge federal authorities to "expedite" a decision regarding a new flight path for jets departing from the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport. The commission is maintaining a neutral position because they represent residents who are favorably and adversely affected by the proposal (Manatee County includes the northern half of Longboat Key). Instead, as airport officials suggested, they promised to encourage the FAA to make a decision based on facts rather than on lobbying or political pressure - and to do so expeditiously. In a letter to the FAA the commission will emphasize, however, that the proposed route is consistent with objectives that the Manatee County government included in a 1986 development order for reconstruction of the airport on the county line.
The article reports on Tuesday, at the commissioners' request, representatives from the airport explained why they want the Federal Aviation Administration to approve what has been called "the 270-degree turn." Airport Executive Director Fred Piccolo said a southern shift in the flight path for departing jets will cause "the least noise impact" for the greatest number of residents. Airport officials expected the route change to be authorized by now, Piccolo said. But he said Longboat has hired attorneys in Washington, DC, to lobby the FAA and delay the approval process by calling for another environmental review. "They (FAA officials) need to hear from the proponents (of the new flight path) as well," Piccolo said. Residents from Trailer Estates and other south-Manatee neighborhoods now directly under the current flight path attended the presentation and applauded the airport officials' arguments. Longboat Key Town Commissioner Ron Johnson, however, urged the County Commission not to take a stance in favor of the change unless Longboat representatives are invited to a future meeting to present their case against it.
The article states speaking as individuals, several Manatee commissioners spoke in favor of the proposed route. "The truth is, this is the safest route," Commissioner Lari Ann Harris said. ". . .We're doing the right thing - and, hopefully, the FAA will do the same." Commissioner Pat Glass called the proposal "a reasonable solution" to the airport's noise complaints. "It's an issue of trade-offs," Commissioner Jon Bruce said. "It's an issue of fairness." Currently, jets take off toward the northwest - reaching an altitude of more than 1,000 feet over Whitfield Estates, about 2,000 feet over Bayshore Gardens and about 5,000 feet in the vicinity of Coquina Beach and Longboat Pass. For years, MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa prohibited jets from taking off on a more westerly route that would leave their noise over more of Sarasota Bay and fewer residential areas. But, because the military has altered its jet routes for military training, that ban has been lifted. Airport officials now suggest that jets depart at the more westerly angle, directly over now-vacant properties that the airport bought as part of a $20 million noise abatement program. The jets would take off over Sarasota Bay instead of mainland Manatee County.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: February 17, 1999
SECTION: Metro Chicago; Pg. 5; Zone: S
BYLINE: Rogers Worthington
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Arlene Mulder, mayor of Arlington Heights and chairman of the city-suburban O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission
The Chicago Tribune reports key members of the Illinois congressional delegation have been asked to withhold approval of legislation ending a cap on hourly flights at O'Hare International Airport until an impact study can be done.
According to the article, Arlene Mulder, mayor of Arlington Heights and chairman of the city-suburban O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission, also said Tuesday that any consideration of lifting the cap should be used as leverage to get better compliance by airlines with the commission's "Fly Quiet" program. "Inability to get better compliance could have some bearing" on the flight cap issue, Mulder said. Mulder said she has written to Sens. Peter Fitzgerald (R-Ill.) and Richard Durbin (D-Ill.); U.S. Reps. Philip Crane (R-Ill.) and William Lipinski (D-Ill.); and House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.); as well as to Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain. McCain, chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, has been advocating for more slots at O'Hare.
The article reports noise committee members say it's difficult to determine which flights belonging to which airlines are failing to comply with Fly Quiet, said David Strahl, assistant village manager of Mt. Prospect. Fly Quiet seeks to reduce noise by having departing aircraft fly predetermined routes over non-residential areas. Strahl says the only data provided by Chicago Department of Aviation officials is a monthly graph showing numerous curved lines to the left and the right from a map of the airport's runways and preferred Fly Quiet flight paths. "We've been seeing these spaghetti pictures for a year now, but it's difficult to tell if there has been any change over time," he said. Aviation Department officials, however, released new figures Tuesday indicating that complaints to O'Hare's noise hot line had declined to 4,240 in the last quarter of 1998 from 6,197 in the last quarter of 1997.
The article states the existing cap, called the high-density rule, limits scheduled hourly arrivals and departures under instrument flight rules to 155 between 6:45 a.m. and 9:15 p.m. The Federal Aviation Administration implemented it in 1968 in an attempt to reduce delays and airlines' fuel costs at O'Hare and three East Coast airports. But no limit was set on the number of flights O'Hare could handle and no prohibition on exceeding 155 operations an hour when planes were under visual flight rules, consultant Rick Baird told the Technical Committee. "Even under the high-density rule, we can exceed that if the demand is there . . . and if we feel we can safely accommodate that airplane," said Baird, a former FAA official at O'Hare. More flights can be handled because delays at O'Hare have been reduced by 40 percent, said Douglas Goldberg, a vice president of Landrum & Brown, consulting engineers to O'Hare. Goldberg suggested that lifting the cap could lead to a reduction in the number of flights overnight and during the "shoulder hours" in the late evening and early morning, when many noise complaints are made. "If the high-density rule didn't exist, you'd actually have less operations during those times," Goldberg said. Lifting the cap also would allow carriers who serve smaller markets to fly into O'Hare. The current proposal is contained in the Clinton administration's re-authorization act for the FAA.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: February 17, 1999
SECTION: Metro Northwest; Pg. 1; Zone: Nw
BYLINE: Dimitra Defotis
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Tribune reports as Chicago officials consider building more terminals at O'Hare International Airport, 15 nearby schools are competing to be one of the four chosen this year to be insulated against jet noise.
According to the article, noise monitors were installed at St. Zachary Catholic Elementary School in Des Plaines last week in the first round of testing to determine which of the mostly northwest suburban schools will receive money from Chicago. The city said it will soundproof at least eight schools in the next two years and is committed to the program. However, the city won't add any more schools to the short list until regulations for quieter planes go into effect next January. Some school officials and local legislators grew concerned two weeks ago when city officials announced their proposed $1 billion terminal expansion plan, which city leaders insist does not mean more flights at the airport. Then days later, the Clinton administration proposed eliminating the rule that caps the number of hourly flights at O'Hare. For school administrators who work near O'Hare, it was bad news on top of the already intolerably shrill engine noise that can disrupt classrooms. However, Raymond Kuper, superintendent in Union Ridge Elementary District 86 in Harwood Heights and head of the noise compatibility commission's school soundproofing committee, said his group is keeping a watchful eye on the pool of money set aside for schools. "I tend to think (terminal expansion) almost puts more pressure on the city to put more effort into soundproofing," Kuper said.
The article reports the city gets most of the funds to soundproof the schools from major airlines and ticket fees, but has said it cannot afford to do all the work at once. School officials, however, have grown impatient as they long for triple-paned windows, new roofs, air conditioning and other improvements to insulate classrooms against airplane noise. Scott Rosinski, the computer teacher at Mary Seat of Wisdom Catholic School in Park Ridge, said the noise is so loud that he can feel the vibrations. The school is being retested this year after not making the cut last year. "I have been in the school office where the windows are shaking," Rosinski said. "You can feel your chair moving a little bit. You can tell there is sound moving the windows." Adds Meryl Fulara, a 1st-grade teacher, "We have to stop our classes. . . . In the primary grades, with short lessons, you have lost some of the effectiveness of teaching." On one morning, her students counted more than 10 planes rumbling overhead. On the opposite end of town at Franklin Elementary School, soundproofing work completed in 1997 included new windows and an air-conditioning system. The main entrance to the public school, with its carpet-hushed hallways, is as quiet as a padded recording booth. There is "a 100 percent improvement because of air conditioning and soundproofing," said Donna Bartuce, a 5th-grade teacher at Franklin. Her students agree. "Every time the teacher went to talk, the airplanes would come and she would have to stop, and then she would forget what she was saying and she would have to start all over," said Meg Steiner, 11, of Park Ridge.
The article states since 1984, roughly $117 million has been spent to soundproof 71 schools in the suburbs and Chicago. Another 80 schools claim to need work, but about half are in outlying suburbs and might not experience the noise levels needed to qualify for soundproofing cash, according to the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission, which monitors testing and names qualifying schools. Soundproofing can cost as little as $4 million at an elementary school and as much as $20 million at a large high school. The most expensive work is a new ventilation system with air conditioning so windows do not need to be opened. Critics complain that when the commission averages the noise levels at the schools, the final number eliminates the loudest instances that might exceed federal standards. They also say the commission has slowed the soundproofing process as it revises maps that show the areas hit hardest by the noise. "Kids in those schools will continue to suffer the noise impact for several years while the city and airlines play games with funding and eligibility," said Joe Karaganis, an attorney for the Suburban O'Hare Commission, an anti- noise, anti-expansion group.
PUBLICATION: The Canberra Times
DATE: February 16, 1999
SECTION: Part A; Page 8
DATELINE: Canberra, Australia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Murray May, resident
The Canberra Times published a letter from Murray May, a resident of Hackett, Australia, urging residents to take action about proposed upgrades at Canberra Airport to preserve property values and their quality of life. Mr. Hackett writes:
"I am very concerned about the current proposals to upgrade Canberra Airport to international airport status. Canberra Airport is the sixth-busiest airport in Australia for passenger movements. The draft Master Plan for developing the new international airport suggests it will become a lot busier.
"The year 2020 noise forecast of annual (630 daily) movements represents a 75 per cent increase over the total number of movements recorded in 1997-98 of annual (357 daily) movements. At a community consultation meeting held on February 11, I learnt that Canberra residents have only until March 5 to comment on the plan, which is available in public libraries.
"I was told that we have nothing to fear in relation to projected noise levels, given the evidence presented from modeling and projected improvements in aircraft technology. However, I was less than convinced, as the proponents Capital Airport Group seemed to be unaware of the reality (models aside) of people's daily experience of aircraft noise at the present time.
Residents of Inner North (especially Hackett, Ainslie, Watson): If you care about the quality of life and property values, act now."
PUBLICATION: Journal of Commerce
DATE: February 16, 1999
SECTION: Special Report; Pg. 13A
BYLINE: Chris Isidore
DATELINE: Naples, Florida
The Journal of Commerce reports tougher noise regulations possibly grounding a number of large aircraft was the topic of discussion at a transportation and aerospace conference in Naples, Florida, last week.
According to the article, when stricter noise regulations in the United States and Europe, known as Stage III rules, take effect on Jan. 1, it could ground as many as 125 aircraft, said Richard Shuyler, executive vice president of Atlas Air Inc., the world's largest operator of Boeing 747 freighters. "That's going to take a huge amount of capacity out of the system," he warned at a panel discussion on freighter capacity at the BT Alex Brown Transportation and Aerospace Conference here last week. While all 27 of the Atlas freighters that it flies for other international airlines meet the Stage III requirements already, many older aircraft now serving as the backbone of other fleets, such as 727s or DC-8s, must be retrofitted with expensive "hush kits" or they will have to be grounded. "If they were new DC-8s, it'd be one thing," Shuyler said after the panel. "But many of these are 30 years old."
The article reports another panelist, Tom Christopher, chief executive of Kitty Hawk Inc., will be removing his DC-8s from service for just that reason this year. "It didn't make sense to put a $3.5 million hush kit on a 30-year old airplane," he said. But that doesn't mean all those planes will be stuck on the ground. Barry Fine, president of Miami-based Fine, said he may be interested in buying Kitty Hawk's DC-8s as part of his plan to virtually double his fleet this year. Half of Fine's 14 DC-8s have hush kits now, while the remaining half will be outfitted with them by August. Both Fine and Christopher disagreed with Shuyler that the noise regulations would cause a major disruption in capacity. "There will be a few aircraft that come out, but very few," said Christopher. "I doubt seriously if most will leave the market." Still other aircraft, such as the 707s or even the 747-100s, don't even have hush kits available and must either be grounded or fly only half full, a fact that could make them uneconomical to operate.
The article states Shuyler believes the optimism that people like Fine and Christopher have about the future of the DC-8s will vanish. "My guess is when Barry Fine looks at the same numbers that Tom did, he'll end up making the same decision," said Mr. Shuyler. Meanwhile, Edward Wolfe, an analyst for BT Alex. Brown and the panelist's moderator, and Lee Hibbets, associate editor of Cargo Facts newsletter, both said they believe the Stage III problem won't hurt the major air cargo carriers significantly, though there could be problems for some of the smaller operators. "It takes out some of the smaller, less capitalized carriers," Mr. Wolfe said after the panel. "But it (freighter capacity) is not going to fall off a cliff."
PUBLICATION: Western Morning News (Plymouth, England)
DATE: February 16, 1999
SECTION: Pg.12
DATELINE: Barnstaple, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Margaret Heard, resident; Pam Holland, district councilor for Roundswell
The Western Morning News reports residents of Barnstaple, England, are objecting to potential noise pollution if a factory destroyed by fire is rebuilt.
According to the article, fire destroyed the Croydex woodworking factory on the Roundswell Industrial Estate in the summer of 1997. At the time of the fire, complaints alleging noise nuisance from the factory's machinery were under investigation by the district council. After granting planning permission for the reconstruction of the factory, district councilors imposed noise control conditions. The owners of the Croydex site, M Baker (South West) Ltd., are now trying to have the noise control conditions lifted.
The article reports the council has received more than 40 letters of objection from Roundswell residents who fear dropping the condition may result in unacceptable noise levels. "It's a nuisance when you get noise pollution from places that you don't think it should be coming from, especially in a residential area," said local resident Margaret Heard. "What came from there before was very noxious - especially if you got the wind in a certain area. I think they're just trying this because it's quietened down recently. People move around quite a lot and they probably think new people won't think anything of it."
The article states Pam Holland, district councilor for Roundswell, said she would "fight to the last breath in her body" to protect residents from noise nuisance. "One old lady on the Old Bideford Road said her husband had been woken up by the noise of electric saws at four o'clock in the morning," she said. "Nobody would want that at four o'clock in the morning. I don't want to put anyone out of a job, God forbid," Holland said. "But this application should not go through until there is no noise - or if there is, the residents of my parish are not affected by it." M Baker (South West) Ltd. declined to comment yesterday. North Devon District Council's northern rural area committee will consider the application after a site meeting tomorrow morning.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: February 15, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Janet Wilson
DATELINE: Costa Mesa, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jeanne Brown, resident; Laurie Lusk, resident
The Los Angeles Times reports two Costa Mesa, California, residents who lost a noise suit to the state-run Orange County Fair have been billed $3.3 million in legal fees for prolonging the suit.
According to the article, all Jeanne Brown and Laurie Lusk wanted was a little peace and quiet. Now, the two former Costa Mesa neighbors have been given a bill for $3.3 million in legal fees. Brown, who lives on her husband's military pension and Social Security, and Lusk, a homemaker, could be left penniless by their latest effort to keep noise down at events at the Pacific Amphitheater. The women joined a business fraud lawsuit between the state-run Orange County Fair and Exposition Center and two major theater promoters over the promoters' sale of the outdoor venue to the fair. Fair officials charged that the promoters lied about sound restrictions, which made it nearly impossible to hold concerts. Brown and Lusk, who lived within earshot of the amphitheater, joined the lawsuit to make sure the noise restrictions remained in effect. The theater promoters agreed in June to pay $16 million to settle the fraud allegations, but the women pursued their claim for noise limits--and lost. Last month, a judge ruled that because they lost, the women must pay the fair's "reasonable" attorney fees and court costs. Brown, 68, said: "I can't believe it. All we asked was for them to keep the sound down." The women say they could be forced to file for bankruptcy.
The article reports the fair's attorneys decided to make an example of the women and their lawyer, Richard L. Spix, to deter further noise lawsuits. "It's our hope that Spix will now inform the neighbors that if they decide to file frivolous lawsuits, there's a downside," said Thomas R. Malcolm, one of the nine attorneys representing the fair. "This is a deterrent effect we're seeking." Spix said the message that the fair's attorneys are sending is "a fairly obvious attempt to silence the neighbors who had the audacity to sue such a big organization."
The article states Superior Court Judge Robert E. Thomas will determine at a March 5 hearing whether the women should pay the whole amount or something less. But legal experts already are questioning whether it is appropriate even to hold them liable for paying attorney fees to the state-owned-and-operated fair. "What California is doing here is trying to chill public participation in the decision-making process," said UCLA corporate law professor Stephen Bainbridge. "If these two women lose, it sends a message to everybody who participates in public decision-making that you're risking bankruptcy if you oppose what the state is doing," he said. Pamela Karlan, a Stanford University law professor, said it is rare for a plaintiff as big as the state of California to ask an intervenor like the two women to pay its legal fees. "The traditional American rule is that each side pays its own fees, win, lose or draw," Karlan said. "But there have been cases where intervenors should be responsible for some of the fees, especially if they're responsible for prolonging the process." Spix said his clients wanted to settle, but the fair refused to agree to reasonable noise levels. Fair officials countered that the levels Spix offered still made it impossible to hold concerts of any kind.
The article reports the amphitheater, which opened on the fairgrounds in 1982, hosted popular acts such as Guns 'N Roses but outraged neighbors. The residents, including Brown and Lusk, filed lawsuits alleging that concerts were too loud and that promoters were violating established noise limits. Fair officials said that after they took over the amphitheater in 1995, they scrupulously followed noise standards. They contend Spix was to blame for their predicament because he refused to negotiate a settlement simply to prolong decades of litigation. "Our goal is to send a message to Mr. Spix that he can't bully us around. He's been making a career out of getting neighbors to sue the fair for the last 17 years," Malcolm said. Spix said he has represented residents in two other lawsuits because every operator of the amphitheater has refused to obey a 1980 agreement on noise limits reached after Costa Mesa city officials sued the state. Both of his lawsuits resulted in noise limits being set, and in the second case, he won damages.
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: February 15, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. 1C
BYLINE: Mark Arsenault
DATELINE: Westerly, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports the town of Westerly, Rhode Island, is updating its noise ordinance to make it easier to enforce.
According to the article, after testing the town's noise ordinance with a new decibel meter, local officials have found that Westerly's noise law may not be reasonable, Town Manager Ernest Zmyslinski said. The town's noise ordinance sets limits on noise levels allowed in Westerly's various development zones, and at different times of the day, the manager said. But "the ordinance is difficult to enforce because the decibel levels allowed within the ordinance appear to be too low," Zmyslinski said. "A truck starting up could exceed the decibel limits at certain hours of the day."
The article reports Zmyslinski has asked other communities for copies of their noise ordinances, and has collected samples for reference, he said. He is also speaking with representatives from the University of Rhode Island and Brown University to find experts to help the town set proper noise limits, Zmyslinski said.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: February 14, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 16; Zones Desk
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: John Di Minico, resident
The Los Angeles Times published letters from California residents expressing their views on noise from the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport. The following letter is from John Di Minico of Studio City, California. Mr. Di Minico writes:
" Re "More Airport Posturing," Feb. 7.
Thank you for finally stating the obvious. Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena control the airport and share in its benefits. But a look at the flight paths on any given day will show that it is North Hollywood, Valley Village, Studio City and Sherman Oaks that suffer the consequences. How is it that Glendale and Pasadena are allowed to dump their noise problem in their neighbors' laps?
"If they want control of the airport, then let them listen to it."
The second letter is from Archie Willis of Sun Valley, California:
"I live in the landing pattern of the Burbank Airport. I knew it was there when I moved. If I didn't expect noise, I would have moved somewhere else.
"It would be nice if this were brought up in some of these meetings."
Previous week: February 7, 1999
Next week: February 21, 1999
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