PUBLICATION: Asbury Park Press
DATE: July 17, 1999
SECTION: B, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Courtenay Harris
DATELINE: Newark, New Jersey
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Michael Schatzki, member of New Jersey Coalition Against Aircraft Noise
The Asbury Park Press reports that residents and politicians from ocean-front municipalities near Newark, New Jersey's Airport are opposing the airport's proposed 'ocean routing'. Several ocean-front community councils have opposed the proposal which would take planes over the ocean until they gain altitude, thus reducing noise on the ground; they believe that because they are near the ocean, noise will impact them if the proposal goes through. The routing was proposed in order to avoid new flight paths that would have taken planes over communities; supposedly ocean-routed planes will be far enough out to sea that ocean-front communities won't hear anything.
The article reports that residents and politicians from ocean-front municipalities near Newark, New Jersey's Airport are opposing the airport's proposed 'ocean routing'. Several ocean-front community councils have adopted resolutions that oppose the proposal -- suggested by the New Jersey Coalition Against Aircraft Noise -- which would take planes South over the ocean until they gain enough altitude to turn West without causing much noise on the ground. Many people in ocean-front communities believe that noise will be increased for their communities for the benefit of others.
The article continues, noting that the Coalition says that ocean routing is 'misunderstood.' The routing was proposed in order to avoid flight paths that would have taken planes over communities in three neighboring counties. Ocean routing will supposedly take planes far enough out to sea that ocean-front communities won't hear anything. The FAA is in the midst of studying flight paths over New York and New Jersey, and in the past have called ocean routing impractical; they will, however, "consider any proposal from community groups."
PUBLICATION: News & Record
DATE: July 17, 1999
SECTION: Editorial, Pg. A10
BYLINE: Horace Bennett
DATELINE: Greensboro, North Carolina
The News & Record prints an editorial written by a resident of Greensboro, North Carolina. He says that berms -- with baffles installed on top -- would deflect much of the noise from engine tests that occur at 11 PM and 6 AM on a regular basis. He says that berms would reduce the impact of the imminent arrival of FedEx and their new runway, and says that the reluctant Airport Authority should have no problem gaining approval since the FAA has approved berm construction at so many other airports.
The editorial, written by a resident of Greensboro, North Carolina speaks out in support of the erection of berms around the airport. Engines are tested at 11 PM and 6 AM, and berms -- with baffles installed on top -- would deflect much of the noise upward.
The article continues, noting that the coming of FedEx and its third runway is a 'forgone conclusion', and berms would help reduce their impact. He accuses the Airport Authority of being "stiff-necked in its dealings with the public." He mentions multiple airports where the strategy has worked, saying the Authority could not claim the FAA would reject a proposal accepted at so many other airports.
PUBLICATION: The San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: July 17, 1999
SECTION: Local Pg. B-2:7; B-1:2; B-3:1
BYLINE: Kim Peterson
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jerry Hargarten, chairman of the Move Against Relocating Choppers Here coalition
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that San Diego residents along the Marines Helicopter flight path -- roughly Interstate 15 -- are continuing the campaign to either move the noisy path or receive compensation. In a letter to the Marines, a San Diego Councilwoman asks the Marines to eliminate the flight path, institute a noise monitoring system and reduce the frequency of some helicopter operations. A Del Mar lawyer plans to help 20 residents with "inverse condemnation" suits to force the government to buy their homes or purchase easements. Several alternative routes have been proposed, and the Marines are currently reviewing all of the alternatives. because of negatively-affected property value.
The article reports that San Diego residents along the Marines Helicopter flight path -- roughly Interstate 15 -- are continuing the campaign to either move the noisy path or receive compensation. Residences along the path are subjected to helicopter noise several times a day from Miramar Marine Corps Air Station.
The article continues, noting that City Councilwoman and mayoral candidate Barbara Warden wrote a letter to the Marine Corps asking for the elimination of the flight path. In response to increasing complaints, she also asks the Marines to institute a noise monitoring system and reduce the frequency of some helicopter operations.
The article says that a Del Mar lawyer claims to allege 'inverse condemnation' -- government intrusion onto citizens' property requiring government purchase of the property -- on behalf of at least twenty residents. He will claim that the helicopter noise reduces property values. Even if outright purchase is refused, some residents may sell an easement to the government to allow helicopters to fly over their property.
The article continues, noting that in Rancho Bernando, about 250 people came to a planning board meeting to discuss the helicopter noise problem.
The article notes that Jerry Hargarten, chairman of the Move Against Relocating Choppers Here coalition, has developed an alternative route that would swing east and then north around residential areas, adding only eight minutes to helicopter flights. Since the route does not need FAA approval, it could be implemented immediately; the Marines say they will review the proposal, but say "Finding new places for military helicopters to fly is not like planning a vacation route with the automobile club, it's much more complicated than that. Another proposed route will go over East County communities, and residents there are already preparing for a possible fight.
PUBLICATION: The Times-Picayune
DATE: July 17, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Pg. B6
BYLINE: Joseph S. Bruno
DATELINE: New Orleans, Louisiana
The Times-Picayune prints a letter to the editor from a New Orleans resident. He lists several instances throughout his week when he wishes there had been 'noise police', or at least noise laws put in place by local legislators.
Driving to the movies recently, I stopped at a red light, and all of a sudden, my stomach began to rumble and my ears were bombarded with this sound coming from the car next to me, which had two large speakers in the back seat as big as washing machines.
Where are the noise police?
When I sat down at the movie, the previews came on with stereophonic surround Dolby sound so loud that my ears screamed for mercy. To add insult to injury, at the end of the previews, the screen read "Silence is golden."
Where are the noise police?
On the way home that evening, I stopped at a cocktail lounge to have a beer. When I walked in, I thought I was at a rock concert. The lounge had eight-foot ceilings, but the band had 10-foot speakers. They were so loud that everyone had to shout to be heard.
Where are the noise police?
Please, let some legislators who feel the same way I do submit a bill against excessive noise in public places and then hire some noise police.
Joseph S. Bruno
New Orleans
PUBLICATION: The Indianapolis News
DATE: July 16, 1999
SECTION: Metro North; Pg. N01
BYLINE: Scott L. Miley
DATELINE: Carmel, Indiana
The Indianapolis News reports that a new noise ordinance has been proposed in Carmel, Indiana's City Council that impose stiff fines on noise such as that from loud car stereos. Fines will range from $250 to $2500. Common household lawn and garden equipment will be exempt from 7 AM to 10 PM, as well as approved gatherings and celebrations. Violations will include sound heard from forty feet away or sound measured at 90 decibels or above at 6 feet from the source.
The article reports that a new noise ordinance has been proposed in Carmel, Indiana's City Council that impose stiff fines on noise such as that from loud car stereos. Fines will range from $250 to $2500. The Mayor pushed for the ordinance after he heard much resident concern about noise during his election campaign.
The article continues, noting that exceptions such as lawn mowers, power tools, construction equipment, burglar alarms, legal fireworks and cheering at sporting events will be allowed between 7 AM and 10 PM. Public parades and other approved gatherings will also be exempt. Sounds audible from forty feet away, as well as noise louder than 90 decibels at six feet from the source, will be considered violations.
The article concludes, noting that a recent ordinance in Evansville is similar, forbidding sounds from boom boxes to be heard 10 yards away, with a first-time fine of $50. The distance designation is designed to rid police of the burden of having to carry noise measurement devices.
PUBLICATION: The Seattle Times
DATE: July 16, 1999
SECTION: Editorial; Pg. B5; Letters To The Editor
BYLINE: Virginia P. Sybert
DATELINE: Seattle, Washington
The Seattle Times prints a letter to the editor from a Seattle, Washington resident who wants the Seattle/Tacoma Airport to spread out air-traffic from a third runway more evenly. He also says that he hadn't called the complaint line after awhile because he didn't know calls were being counted. Finally, he wants a moratorium on after-midnight flights. "I'd be willing to give up fresh peaches in December for a full night's sleep."
"Thank you for your article about the proposal to reduce the burden of air traffic noise by widening the north-to-east takeoff flight pattern out of Sea-Tac.
As a Madrona resident, I stopped calling the airplane noise complaint line because I never received a response. Had I known that the Port of Seattle was counting calls, I most certainly would still be making them!
This morning at 1:05 a.m. and then again at 6 a.m., when the jet noise roused me, I lay awake thinking of all those other people who also fly in and out of Sea-Tac (but don't want to pay the price) asleep in their beds. These were not pretty thoughts.
Perhaps if the third runway is built, its use could be limited to planes carrying those of us who live in the flight paths; recompense for paying our civic dues. If there is a possibility to make the burden less for many by spreading it out, why not do so if safety is not an issue?
Ten-thousand people disturbed every 20 minutes seems a fair trade for 1,875 people disturbed at 3.75-minute intervals.
And why not a moratorium on after-midnight flights? I'd be willing to give up fresh peaches in December for a full night's sleep."
PUBLICATION: Daily News
DATE: July 15, 1999
SECTION: Suburban; Pg. 2
DATELINE: New York City
The Daily News reports that the pending introduction of the 1999 Silent Skies Act will require aircraft to meet next-generation Stage 4 engine-noise requirements by 2012. Stage 3 engines were 50% quieter than Stage 2, and now Stage 4 engines will reduce noise by an additional 40%.
The article reports that federal legislators plan to introduce the 1999 Silent Skies Act this week. The legislation will set standards for the next generation of aircraft engines -- Stage 4 -- and require aircraft to be down to Stage 4 Noise Levels By 2012. Stage 3 engines are twice as quiet as their Stage 2 counterparts, and Stage 4 engines will be 40% more quiet.
The article quotes first-year Queens congressman Joseph Crowley as saying "Now that implementation of Stage 3 technology is nearly complete, it's time to raise the bar." Crowley and another first-year congressman from Queens introduced the bill.
PUBLICATION: The Morning Call
DATE: July 15, 1999
SECTION: A.m. Magazine, Pg. D1
BYLINE: Tim Blangger
DATELINE: Beltzville, Pennsylvania
The Morning Call reports that many users of Pennsylvania State Parks are irritated with the noise and unsafe operation of personal watercraft; many operators stay in the same area, creating a more constant noise than most other types of craft. Safety concerns have fueled a regulation that will soon require Pennsylvania operators to carry a Boating Safety Education Certificate. While PWCs made up 6.7 percent of registered boats last year, they were involved in 36 percent of accidents and 56 percent of collisions. Their two-cycle engines -- together with two-cycle engines of other boats -- burn oil and leak disproportionate amounts of oil and fuel into waterways. PWCs are barred from certain lakes as well as areas of the Delaware River. National Parks are considering a ban on PWCs altogether, citing that the focus of an operator on the thrill of the PWC itself means they are not actually "enjoying the resources of the park."
The article reports that many users of Pennsylvania State Parks are irritated with the noise and unsafe operation of personal watercraft. Managers of Beltzville Park -- location of one of the six State Park lakes that Personal Watercraft (PWC) are permitted on -- receive a disproportionate number of complaints about personal watercraft noise; many operators stay in the same area, creating a more constant noise than most other types of craft. Most other State Park lakes have rules that limit watercraft horsepower to 10, well under the 75 typical of PWCs.
The article continues, noting that safety concerns have fueled a regulation that will soon require Pennsylvania operators to carry a Boating Safety Education Certificate. While PWCs made up 6.7 percent of registered boats last year, they were involved in 36 percent of accidents and 56 percent of collisions.
The article continues, noting that PWCs are heavy polluters as well. Their two-cycle engines -- together with two-cycle engines of other boats -- burn oil and leak "15 times more oil into waters each year than Exxon Valdez."
The article goes on, saying that the nature of PWCs as a thrill craft mean that operators want to constantly zip around, making more noise than many other boaters do because of that constant operation.
The article notes that many boating associations support the new safety requirement, as well as supporting restrictions that would raise the minimum age of operators from 12 to 16. They also encourage their members to "move on," not concentrating their noise impact in one small area. At least one boating association in the area of Beltzville Park believes that all boaters -- whether they operate a PWC or a canoe -- should be required to meet the new safety requirement.
The article says that besides State Parks, some other Army Corps of Engineers lakes or privately-owned lakes permit PWCs. The Lehigh River permits them, but PWCs in the Delaware River are limited to the lower parts where it is deeper and less isolated; elsewhere on the Delaware, speed limits are 10 miles per hour.
The article goes on to discuss PWCs in national parks, noting that the Outer Banks National Seashore restricts PWC from landing on or launching from the seashore. Comments regarding the limits were 11 to 1 in favor of banning PWCs from the park. In the past, PWCs would congregate where they could jump waves coming through the inlet, but park managers decided that the operators' focus on the thrill of the watercraft meant that they weren't really "enjoying the resources of the park." The entire national park system is considering a similar ban.
PUBLICATION: South Bend Tribune
DATE: July 14, 1999
SECTION: Local/Area, Pg. A2
BYLINE: Terrence Bland
DATELINE: St. Joseph County, Indiana
The South Bend Tribune reports that St. Joseph County has a new noise ordinance -- driven by increasing development in formerly rural areas -- allowing police to ticket those who are making "loud, raucous or disturbing noises. " The ordinance, which takes effect in August, is similar to ordinances already in place in nearby municipalities.
The article reports that the County Council of St. Joseph County, Indiana adopted a new noise ordinance. Police will have liberal authority to ticket those who are making "loud, raucous or disturbing noises. "
The article notes that the ordinance, scheduled to take effect in August, is modeled after ones already in place in South Bend and Mishawaka. Increasing development in formerly rural parts of the county has necessitated this ordinance.
PUBLICATION: The Associated Press State & Local Wire
DATE: July 14, 1999
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Alexandria, Louisiana
The Associated Press State & Local Wire reports that Alexandria, Louisiana's new noise ordinance promises stiffer fines for violators. Violators will pay from $137 to $587 for creating excessive noise: especially from nightclubs and vehicles. The old ordinance cost violators only $121 for each violation, regardless of the number of previous citations.
The article reports that Alexandria, Louisiana's new noise ordinance promises stiffer fines for violators. Not including court costs of $87 for each violation, fines will run from $50 to $500. Repeat offenders would be eligible for jail time. The ordinance especially targets excessively loud music from vehicles and nightclubs.
The article notes that under the old ordinance, violators owed only $121 for each violation, including court costs. This didn't deter many violators; one of them paid the fine a dozen times in a year.
PUBLICATION: The Associated Press State & Local Wire
DATE: July 14, 1999
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Daphne, Alabama
The Associated Press State & Local Wire reports that a church in Daphne, Alabama is challenging the constitutionality of the noise ordinance used to ticket them for $166. They claim that the ordinance restricts their right to free speech and is unconstitutional. The church has soundproofed its walls and moved its instruments, and the city attorney plans to recommend dismissal based on those good-faith efforts.
The article reports that a church in Daphne, Alabama is challenging the constitutionality of the noise ordinance used to ticket them. Music used in their services was loud enough to keep neighbors from hearing their telephones, and a $166 fine was issued to them. They claim that their right to free speech has been violated, and their lawyer says the exemptions to the ordinance -- which includes construction noise and ball games but not church services -- makes it unconstitutional.
The article notes that the church has taken steps to become better neighbors, including wall soundproofing and the location of instruments further from walls. The City Attorney plans to recommend dismissal of the fine since the church has made a "good-faith" effort to comply with the ordinance.
PUBLICATION: Flight International
DATE: July 14, 1999
SECTION: Air Transport; News; Pg. 9
BYLINE: Emma Kelly
DATELINE: Munich, Germany
Flight International reports that Swiss Air has warned Switzerland's government that an increase in what they must pay to residents who deal with aircraft noise and must soundproof their homes will cripple their ability to compete nationally. Ticket prices would rise by about $5.25 each. Swiss Air says that it has invested heavily in newer, quieter aircraft and they shouldn't be asked to pay the additional money.
The article reports that Swiss Air has warned Switzerland's government that an increase in what they must pay to residents who deal with aircraft noise and must soundproof their homes will cripple their ability to compete nationally. The government is asking that $658 million be paid to residents, and Zurich and Geneva airports will need to raise their landing fees; in turn, airlines will raise ticket prices by about $5.25.
The article continues, noting that Swiss Air has invested around $658 million in new, quieter aircraft, and Crossair plans to purchase similar state-of-the-art aircraft. Comments are being accepted through September, and legislation could come into effect by next year.
PUBLICATION: The Virginian-Pilot
DATE: July 14, 1999
SECTION: Local, Pg. B13
BYLINE: by Nancy L. Grden
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
The Virginian-Pilot prints an editorial by a Virginia Beach resident who believes that local government went too far in promoting economic growth when it invited additional jets to Oceana Air Base without addressing the existing noise problems in communities surrounding the base. She hears noise from jets who fly overhead as many as 50 times in just a few hours; the noise may continue until 2:30 AM, and begins again at dawn.
The editorial continues, noting that jet noise has been linked to human health problems including high blood pressure, heart disease, ulcers and headaches. She asks city and military leaders to establish noise-abatement standards, reduce noise at night, look into noise-reducing equipment, and examine alternative airfields for use in some operations.
The author concludes by acknowledging the importance of the military; she simply believes that they should be subject to the same noise restrictions as commercial airports.
PUBLICATION: The Baltimore Sun
DATE: July 13, 1999
SECTION: Local ,1B
BYLINE: Sheridan Lyons
DATELINE: Union Mills, Maryland
The Baltimore Sun reports that county commissioners in Union Mills, Maryland held a meeting to hear resident's concerns over a loud firing range in the community. The county has no authority to regulate the firing range, but the judge in a pending lawsuit could issue a court order requiring the business to quiet down. A noise expert said that the 100 decibels coming from the firing range is as much as 30 times worse than at other ranges; the increase results from a trend towards noisier games with moving metal targets.
The article reports that county commissioners in Union Mills, Maryland held a meeting to hear resident's concerns over a loud firing range in the community. Deep Run Rifle and Revolver Club, which dates back to the 1940s, was taken to court four months ago over noise levels, but the judge still hasn't issued a decision. The county has no authority to regulate the firing range, but the judge could issue a court order requiring the business to quiet down.
The article continues, noting that since 1994, membership at the club increased and noisy events including moving metal targets increased as well. The business owner claims that he is simply following a national trend towards more dynamic games. A noise expert said that the 100 decibels coming from the firing range is as much as 30 times worse than at other ranges.
The article concludes, noting that local legislators saw the meeting as one-sided; firing range supporters may call a similar meeting in upcoming weeks.
PUBLICATION: Capital Times
DATE: July 13, 1999
SECTION: Communities, Pg. 4C
BYLINE: by Kate Kail
DATELINE: Cross Plains, Wisconsin
The Capital Times reports that the Town Board of Cross Plains, Wisconsin has introduced an ordinance which will limit outdoor concerts to 48 hours, with music allowed between 1 and 11 PM; only one outdoor concert will be permitted at any venue during any one year. A local tavern's outdoor music may be affected, but its indoor music would have to be cited under county law, although the Town plans to give the owner some leeway since he has showed a cooperative spirit.
The article reports that the Town Board of Cross Plains, Wisconsin has introduced an ordinance which will limit outdoor concerts to 48 hours, with music allowed between 1 and 11 PM. Each venue holding such a concert will be limited to one each year. Board members say that a local tavern, which has been the target of complaints over loud music, may be affected.
The article continues, noting that the local tavern -- which measured 94 decibels inside and 85 outside -- is working to soundproof the building. For music originating indoors, any citations of the tavern would have to be under county rules. The Town Board seems happy with the tavern's level of cooperation.
PUBLICATION: The Dayton Daily News
DATE: July 13, 1999
SECTION: Metro, Pg. 4B
BYLINE: Don Baker
DATELINE: Dayton, Ohio
The Dayton Daily News reports that the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) decided to grant variances to two housing developers allowing them to forego more expensive noise-proofing treatments for cheaper, less effective ones. Most County Commissioners from the four counties surrounding the base agreed, saying that it was important to encourage the base to remain open near their communities. The BZA itself is made up of three commissioners from each of the four surrounding counties. Two BZA members opposed the variance.
The article continues, noting that over 1200 homes in the proposed developments would have required soundproofing that reduced noise levels by 30 decibels. The variance means that noise levels will only be reduced by 25 decibels, reducing the approximately $23,000 per-house cost by one-tenth; the completed houses will be sold in the range of $150,000-180,000. When the 30 decibel requirement was set in 1975, approximately 330 flights per day were operating in the area; by 1994, the number was down to 72.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: July 13, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Phil Willon
DATELINE: Orange County, California
The Los Angeles Times reports that a telecommunications company in Orange County, California is installing backup generators in residential neighborhoods. Area City Councils believe that noise from the generators as loud as a lawnmower will disrupt residents. They are also worried that, despite emergency shut-off valves, a car crash could cause an explosion at one of the desk-sized road-side generators. The company didn't use quieter battery backups because they wanted their generators to be able to run indefinitely.
The article reports that Cox Telecommunications in Orange County, California is installing backup generators in residential neighborhoods, and area City Councils aren't pleased. The company says they are needed in case of power outages to keep service available; since their cutting-edge fiberoptic lines can't carry power like copper-wire technology can, backup power can only be provided with local natural-gas-powered generators.
The article continues, noting that the councils believe that noise will disrupt residents. They are also worried that, despite emergency shut-off valves, a car crash could cause an explosion at one of the desk-sized road-side generators. To date, the company has not received any complaints after installing over 60 generators in the area. The generators -- which could be as loud as a lawnmower -- should only switch on in case of a power outage, or once every few weeks for testing.
The article concludes, noting that many other companies have chosen to install battery-backups which produce much less noise and would be adequate for outages of typical duration; Cox chose to install gas-powered generators because they can run indefinitely.
PUBLICATION: The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News
DATE: July 13, 1999
SECTION: Local; Pg. C3
BYLINE: Edward Filo
DATELINE: Jupiter Island, Florida
The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News reports that Jupiter Island, Florida has banned construction noise during the winter season, when most of its 600 residents are there. A noise will be considered too loud if "in its operation [it] would render the enjoyment of property within the town less agreeable." During the summer, noise is limited to between 8:30 and 5:30 during the week, and to between 8:30 and 1 PM on Saturdays. Equipment that produces noise louder than 65 decibels at a neighboring property is prohibited at any time of year.
The article reports that Jupiter Island, Florida -- recently ranked the wealthiest town in America -- has banned construction noise during the winter season. A new ordinance has banned equipment such as cranes, table saws, and sandblasters from the Island from November 1 to April 15; many of the island's 600 residents are only there during that period.
The article continues, noting that a noise will be considered too loud if "in its operation [it] would render the enjoyment of property within the town less agreeable." During the summer, noise is limited to between 8:30 and 5:30 during the week, and to between 8:30 and 1 PM on Saturdays. During any time of year, equipment that produces noise louder than 65 decibels at the nearest neighboring property line.
PUBLICATION: The Times-Picayune
DATE: July 13, 1999
SECTION: National; Pg. A2
BYLINE: by Ed Anderson
DATELINE: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
The Times-Picayune reports that a new Louisiana law requires street performers and other people to keep noise under 55 decibels within ten feet of a hospital or a church which is having a service. Violators may be subject to a 30-day jail term. The law originated from complaints that street performers in New Orleans were making it hard for parishioners in churches to hear the service. American Civil Liberties Union lawyers say the law restricts the free speech of performers and constrains the city's culture.
The article reports that the Louisiana Governor has signed a bill that requires street performers and other people to keep noise down; any noise over 55 decibels within ten feet of a hospital or a church which is having a service will be considered a violation. Also, any noise which is disturbing to "people of ordinary sensibilities" is subject to the law. Violators may be subject to a 30-day jail term. The law originated from complaints that New Orleans' Jackson Square performers were making it hard for parishioners at St. Louis Cathedral to hear the service.
The article continues, noting that churches are required to post signs advertising that there is a service in progress. Lawyers at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) claim that the law is too restrictive, violating performers right to free speech and constraining New Orleans' vibrant culture.
PUBLICATION: The News and Observer
DATE: July 12, 1999
SECTION: Editorial/Opinion; Pg. A8
BYLINE: Louis J. Gale
DATELINE: Raleigh, North Carolina
The News and Observer prints a letter to the editor from a Raleigh, North Carolina resident who is upset over a noise ordinance that plays favorites. He notes that while city-sponsored events are exempt from noise ordinances, a recent orderly protest rally was considered a violation. He asks City Council to comment on these inequities, asserting that this exemption should be removed.
"Your July 2 news article on the Wake County tax hike rally missed a very significant statement by state Rep. Russell Capps.
When a policeman was asked why there was a complaint about the noise from an orderly tax protest rally, but Raleigh's "Alive After Five" party noise was much louder, the policeman replied that since the latter was a city-sponsored function the noise rules did not apply.
When I was a liberal, the watchword was to attack privilege for the select few, be they king, nobility, clergy, politically influential, or rich. Now that I am a conservative (or at least a recovering liberal) I still hate privilege for the select few. I think the city should have the same set of rules for everyone and all organizations. I think the city manager or the City Council should comment on this officer's statement."
PUBLICATION: Newsday
DATE: July 12, 1999
SECTION: News; Page A04
BYLINE: by Craig Linder
DATELINE: Washington D.C.
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Bill Mulcahy, a vice president of Flushing-based Sane Aviation For Everyone
Newsday reports that two new bills in Congress are designed to allow more regional jets into airports in New York City, Washington D.C., and Chicago. Planes with fewer than 70 seats would be eligible. The House bill proposes a total end to flight limits by 2007 and puts no limit on the number of exemptions; the Senate version restricts its exemptions to small planes for the foreseeable future, and allows the Transportation Department to set a limit on the number of exemptions. New York City residents worry about increased noise and pollution. New York Senators are pushing for guarantees that the bills, if passed, would improve air service and competition in upstate New York.
The article reports that two new bills in Congress are designed to allow more regional jets into airports into four specific airports around the country. Current restrictions -- dating from 1969 -- limit the number of flights at New York's Kennedy and LaGuardia Airports, Washington's Reagan National Airport, and Chicago's O'Hare Airport. The bills are meant to allow regional airlines to gain access to these major airports and compete more effectively with the major airlines; only planes with fewer than 70 seats would be eligible for the exemption.
The article goes on to discuss the differences between the two bills. One bill, originated in the Senate, would allow the Transportation Department to determine the number of planes that would be granted the exemption. The other House originated bill would set the stage for a total end to the limits -- for any plane size -- by 2007 and would not limit the number of exemptions at all. While Representatives outside of New York wanted to end the flight limits by 2000, New York Representatives convinced them to wait until 2007 in exchange for their support for the loosening of restrictions on regional jet traffic.
The article also notes that Queens and Brooklyn residents oppose the exemptions, since they have been fighting jet noise and pollution for years. They also claim that health problems such as asthma and drops in property value are caused by the airplanes' disruption, said Bill Mulcahy, a vice president of Flushing-based Sane Aviation For Everyone.
The article also points out that the smaller jets have newer, quieter engines and are smaller and lighter; all of these things mean that they produce less noise than typical jets. New York Senators are leaning towards support of the House bill, provided that it is revised to include assurances that upstate air service will benefit. To this end, they are proposing an amendment that would grant preference for exemptions to flights that serve upstate New York.
PUBLICATION: The Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: July 12, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. 3C
BYLINE: Tiffany Bartish
DATELINE: Charlestown, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports that Charlestown, Rhode Island's Town Council has passed a new noise ordinance aimed at reducing noise from radios -- which should not be audible over 50 feet from the source -- and construction. Construction will be prohibited after 10 PM and before 7 AM. Police will use their own discretion in determining violations, and may levy fines up to $500 and jail terms up to 30 days.
The article reports that Charlestown, Rhode Island's Town Council has passed a new noise ordinance. The ordinance is aimed at reducing noise from car and boat radios, as well as noise from construction.
The article goes on to say that noise from radios should not be audible at fifty feet from the source. Noise at beaches, parks, and playgrounds should not disturb a 'reasonable person.' Construction noise should be non-existent between 10 PM and 7 AM. Beyond that, no decibel limits are set and police may use their discretion when identifying violators.
The article concludes, noting that violators could be fined up to $500 or jailed for 30 days.
PUBLICATION: The Times-Picayune
DATE: July 12, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Pg. B4
BYLINE: Cheron Brylski
DATELINE: New Orleans, Louisiana
The Times-Picayune prints a letter to the Editor from a parishioner at St. Louis Cathedral in New Orleans, Louisiana who approves of a new law to restrict street performers and musicians from interrupting church services with loud music. She lived near the cathedral until recently when she realized that the noise was causing stress-related illnesses in her family. She notes that street performers aren't always musicians, but are often jugglers or other entertainers with boom boxes.
"As a resident of the French Quarter for more than 12 years, with many of those years spent in a second-floor apartment at Royal and St. Peter streets, I have little sympathy for the entertainers who insist they have a right to entertain in front of St. Louis Cathedral during services.
I am still a parishioner at St. Louis Cathedral, and the value of this church to me is not necessarily the Sunday services as much as the weekday masses and the rosary groups. The number of times these services have been interrupted by individuals blowing horns or playing amplified music in Pirate or Exchange alleys is intolerable.
If anyone thinks the type of entertainment in front of the cathedral is representative of New Orleans brass or jazz bands, they're wrong. The type of entertainment that draws the largest crowds and the most noise is by itinerant, non-native street performers who use boom boxes, juggling acts and crowd-participation antics to draw even more attention and more tips.
Sometimes it is impossible to navigate these crowds, and far too often, the noise from these acts permeates the cathedral.
It is my experience that most of these acts did not dominate the space in front of the cathedral until they were driven away from Washington Artillery Park and off Royal and Bourbon streets. Why were they driven away? Because businesses didn't want these acts keeping customers on the street and out of their stores.
When I worked in city government, there was a vigilant effort by the mayor's office and the City Council to protect the residential integrity of the Quarter. This vigilance seems lacking today.
While I recognize the value of Mayor Moon Landrieu's words that neighborhoods shift, change and sometimes die, to lose the Quarter's residential base would destroy this wonderful asset. It is not the musicians who make the Quarter a great place to visit, it is the diversity of those who live and work there.
My husband and I chose to leave the Quarter in 1997 because of the noise and the crime. We were developing stress-related illnesses, which we never realized until we were forced to live outside the Quarter for a month and saw these problems dissipate.
I have experienced street musicians crank up their amplifiers after midnight. I have endured do-wop groups until 3 in the morning, and did so knowing that this was part of the price for living where I did. But eventually the noise encroached upon everything -- including the services at the cathedral. By the time I left the Quarter, the noise was inescapable.
City leaders must address this issue in a way that recognizes the rights of residents as well as street performers. Too often, I've heard the complaints of residents dismissed as those of a "whining minority," which is unfair but perhaps true now. Residents are leaving for the Warehouse District and Magazine Street.
Ironically, most of the musicians don't live in the Quarter, and very few of them worship at the cathedral. Those who complain about Senate Bill 909 do so because they have been circumvented. Musicians unfairly prevented realistic enforcement of city ordinances so parishioners found another recourse.
I applaud them. I applaud those who stood up for them, and, mostly, I wish city leaders would stop procrastinating and come up with a balanced, workable solution that might not make everyone happy but will at least give Quarter residents and parishioners some peace of mind."
PUBLICATION: The Vancouver Sun
DATE: July 12, 1999
SECTION: News; B3
BYLINE: Catherine Porter
DATELINE: Vancouver, British Columbia
The Vancouver Sun reports that the north runway at Vancouver International Airport in British Columbia is being used more while two other runways are being repaired. The $4.25 million project will last 28 days, and will strengthen the runways, improve the electrical system, and resurface several areas. Airport officials say that many planes have taken off over the water, keeping increased noise away from residents, but some residents have definitely noticed the increase.
The article reports that the newer north runway at Vancouver International Airport in British Columbia is receiving more use for the next month while two other runways are being repaired. The $4.25 million dollar project will improve the electrical system in one runway, strengthen the surface of another, and resurface several areas.
The article continues, noting that although residents expected an increase in noise, complaints have not increased. Some say that is because residents are sick of complaining to the airport without getting a response; Airport officials say that good weather has allowed planes to take off over the water, thus keeping increased noise away from residents. While some residents say the noise hasn't increased much, other residents have definitely noticed the increase. One woman bought fans last week "so she could shut the windows to keep the noise out without suffocating."
The article goes on to say that the north runway is usually only used for daytime landings, but is sometimes used at night in cases of emergency or construction.
PUBLICATION: South Bend Tribune
DATE: July 11, 1999
SECTION: Local/Area, Pg. D6
BYLINE: David Tyler
DATELINE: Elkhart, Indiana
The South Bend Tribune reports that Elkhart, Indiana's noise ordinance will be toughening fines, ranging from $100 to $2500. The ordinance will now apply around the clock, and police can identify violators by hearing a noise 50 feet from the source, measuring over 83 decibels at 15 feet, or subjectively judging a sound to be "inherently offensive and patently obnoxious." Recent regulation of train whistles in Elkhart prompted the revisions to the ordinance in the interest of dealing with several other noise issues -- such as loud mufflers or stereos -- at the same time.
The article reports that Elkhart, Indiana's noise ordinance will be getting tougher. Minimum fines will be raised from $25 to $100, and maximum fines will be raised from $100 to $2500.Police will be able to identify violators in several ways, which include: hearing a noise at 50 feet from the source, measuring more than 83 decibels at 15 feet from the source, or judging that any noise is "inherently offensive and patently obnoxious."
The article goes on, noting that the new ordinance will be enforceable around the clock, while the current one only applies between 9 PM and 8 AM.
The article concludes by noting that Elkhart was the first in Indiana to take advantage of a new State Law that allows local regulation of train whistles; train whistles are now only allowed in emergencies in Elkhart. One council member had said "We can't regulate train whistles without regulating" noisy mufflers.
PUBLICATION: The Boston Globe
DATE: July 11, 1999
SECTION: Metro/Region; Pg. B1
BYLINE: by Stephanie Ebbert
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Hyannis, Massachusetts
The Boston Globe reports that residents of Hyannis, Massachusetts oppose $10.3 million in proposed improvements at Barnstable Municipal Airport. They say the project, which airport officials say will just bring the airport into the current century, will increase traffic and destroy environmentally-sensitive land. They resent the burden of tourist flights that stop on the way to Nantucket where they spend their money, and claim that airlines are using Barnstable to do noisy maintenance to avoid disruptions at the flashy Nantucket airport. Residents have used intimidation tactics to try and get their message across: "Too low, too loud, too often."
The article reports that residents of Hyannis, Massachusetts oppose proposed improvements at Barnstable Municipal Airport. Residents, who say the current 230 flights a day are "too low, too loud, too often", believe that the improvements will bring expansion and more noise. Airport officials say that the $10.3 million improvement project -- which would pave part of an unpaved parking lot, improve the access road and renovate the terminal which has been unchanged since the 1940s -- will not increase traffic. It will just bring the airport into "the 20th century, nevermind the 21st."
The article notes that opposition has included "death threats and intimidation tactics" from residents. One resident tried to file a criminal complaint against the Airport manager for disturbing the peace. Others have claimed that town officials are plotting with the airport to make money off of what disturbs residents.
The article goes on to say that residents believe that although tourists use their airport to gain access to Cape Cod destinations like Nantucket, they don't spend money there. They note that the three major Cape Cod carriers use Barnstable for maintenance while hardly any maintenance happens at the Nantucket Airport.
The article notes that an environmental study is getting underway. One option for the new terminal's placement would be on environmentally-sensitive protected land; this is a major problem in the eyes of many residents. Also, residents want better noise controls, including fewer engine 'run-ups' which occur during maintenance and takeoffs. Officials say that run-ups are only done by one carrier, and they have moved operations farther away from residential areas.
The article concludes, noting that Airport officials support Boston's Logan Airport in its quest to add a new runway. They say that the runway will help alleviate flight delays, but critics say that the runway will also increase traffic.
PUBLICATION: The Boston Globe
DATE: July 11, 1999
SECTION: Metro/Region; Pg. C9
BYLINE: by S.i. Rosenbaum
DATELINE: Provincetown, Massachusetts
The Boston Globe reports that a researcher from the University of Connecticut is working with two teenage students at the American School for the Deaf on the question of whether whales may be losing their hearing due to man-made noise. The students feel that hearing loss is something they may have in common with the whales. Whales need their hearing to survive, but will not leave noisy feeding grounds that is as loud and dangerous to a whale's hearing as to humans living near an airport. They will study whether whale songs match noise patterns, which would indicate that the whales may hear, and be injured by, the noise.
The article reports that a researcher from the University of Connecticut is working with two students at the American School for the Deaf on the question of whether whales may be losing their hearing due to man-made noise. Whales, which use their hearing to communicate and avoid collisions with boats, are as good as dead without good hearing. While a whale at a feeding ground which is in an area with boat traffic is exposed to similar hearing dangers as humans who live near an airport, they will not leave.
The article says that the researcher and students will try to match whale-song patterns with the sound of motors; if they do match, whales can likely hear and lose hearing from the noise. They will also be examining a sound that whales use to scare bottom-dwelling fish into the open; this sound was first heard only two years ago. A device that shows sound as a moving line of light allows deaf students to better understand the sounds they are studying.
The article notes that the deaf students are particularly interested in studying deafness in whales since they feel it is something they have in common with the whales. One student said "[Deafness] is worse for whales [because they] can't wear hearing aids." The teenage students have won science awards for their independent studies on bioacoustics.
PUBLICATION: The Times-Picayune
DATE: July 11, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Pg. B1
BYLINE: by Matt Scallan
DATELINE: Kenner, Louisiana
The Times-Picayune reports that Louisiana's New Orleans International Airport will soon begin a $20 million soundproofing project in Kenner. The project is part of the noise mitigation required by a 1989 lawsuit settlement; the airport purchased 700 homes in the loudest areas in the first phase, and soundproofing is the second phase. Residents whose homes are soundproofed -- at a cost of about $20,000 each -- must grant an easement promising not to sue the airport over noise. In homes where renovations would need to be paid by the homeowner before soundproofing could even begin, residents may have the option of receiving cash for the easement instead of insulation. The contractors in charge of soundproofing will be required to remain in the state for at least a year to answer for any homeowner complaints.
The article reports that Louisiana's New Orleans International Airport is close to beginning a soundproofing project in Kenner. The $20 million project designates about $20,000 each for the insulation of nearby homes. A 1989 lawsuit by neighbors forced the airport to buy 700 homes in the areas subject to the highest airport noise at a cost of $60 million; now, the second phase of the settlement -- the soundproofing of 1,000 to 1,800 homes with slightly lower noise exposure -- has begun. The federal government pays 80 percent of the cost, while the airport pays the rest.
The article continues, noting that residents whose homes are soundproofed will be required to grant an easement to the airport which promises they won't sue over noise. Since improvements not related to insulation, such as termite problems around old windows, must be covered by the homeowner, some residents are asking for cash payment for easements instead of soundproofing.
The article continues, noting that homeowners worry that insulation will reduce noise but not vibrations that shake their homes; experts say that vibrations should be reduced as well. The airport is giving each homeowner access to a counselor who will answer similar questions throughout the process.
The article concludes, noting that the bid process will require that contractors remain in the state for at least a year after completion of the contract. This requirement is designed to avoid problems that the airport has experienced with contractors who left the state before they could answer questions regarding shoddy workmanship. The measure will also encourage the use of local contractors.
Previous week: July 4, 1999
Next week: July 18, 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