PUBLICATION: The Austin American-Statesman
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Metro/State; Pg. B3
BYLINE: Kelly Daniel
DATELINE: Austin, Texas
The Austin American-Statesman reports that Austin, Texas' city council has approved $14.8 million for noise abatement at the new Austin-Bergstrom International Airport. Residents will have the option of having the city buy their house, soundproof it, or do nothing. Many people who have lived there for years have mixed feelings because they don't want to move. Nevertheless they will be escaping the "cracked walls, broken windows" and pollution that were mentioned in their complaints. The city is acting even though federal noise limits that require action have not been reached in most of the neighborhoods. The plan is part of their "Fly Quiet" program, which has already designated southern takeoffs during the day and moved four schools further from the airport.
The article reports that Austin, Texas' city council has approved $14.8 million for noise abatement at the new Austin-Bergstrom International Airport. People living in several of the noisiest neighborhoods -- who are largely senior citizens on fixed incomes who have owned their houses for over 25 years -- will have the choice of having the city buy their house, soundproof it, or leave it as it is. It will take up to a year for appraisals on the houses to be made, and it may take several more years before the actual buyouts. The city plans to resell the homes they buy to people who agree to live with the noise.
The article notes that many of the 55 people at the hearing gave anecdotal examples of the proximity of the planes: "being able to see pilots as they flew by, being able to read small print painted on passing planes, or being able to examine the tire tread on the planes." More seriously, they mentioned cracked walls, broken windows, and pollution.
The article notes that some residents don't want to sell because it raises the question of where to go; one resident was quoted as saying "I'm 65. Who wants a house payment at that age?" And others simply don't want to leave the homes they've known for years.
The article goes on to say that the city will pay $6.1 million of the project while the federal government will pay the rest. The city is taking a voluntary, pro-active stance on noise; most of the neighborhoods they aim to help experience noise levels below the federal standard (65 decibels) that requires action. The number of people 'affected' by noise has dropped from 1,119 to 937 under other noise abatement strategies already in place. These strategies include directing takeoffs (which are louder than landings) to the south during the day. Pilots are also directed not to turn until they are at 3,000 feet. The city also spent $45.7 million with the FAA to move four schools that were going to be too loud even after soundproofing.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 4
BYLINE: Chris Clair
DATELINE: Rolling Meadows, Illinois
Chicago Daily Herald reports that Rolling Meadows, a community near Chicago's O'Hare Airport, has been admitted to the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission: the body that decides how and where soundproofing dollars will be spent. Based on 1997 noise-contour maps, many other communities have also been invited to become members. Locals are pleased, although they know that most money will still go to communities closer to the airport. One resident said he hoped the community would use their new status to oppose runway expansion
The article reports that Rolling Meadows, a community near Chicago's O'Hare Airport, has been admitted as a full member to the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission: the body that decides how and where soundproofing dollars will be spent. In 1993 the community wasn't on noise contour maps and so wasn't invited to join the commission, but based on 1997 maps they and twenty other communities and school districts have been invited to become members.
The article goes on, noting that the Mayor, who has been after soundproofing money for his community for years, is pleased. He does believe, however, that most money will still be spent closer to the airport. A local resident, who argued two years ago that frequent flights and loud planes should justify their membership in the commission, is also pleased; he hopes the city uses their new status to oppose runway expansion at the airports.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 6
BYLINE: S.A. Mawhorr
DATELINE: Addison, Illinois
The Chicago Daily Herald reports that Addison, Illinois officials have approved a $25,000 study to determine whether a noise wall along Interstate 290 would help muffle noise. Officials are past their fears that they may not be able to obtain money for the wall if it were deemed necessary; several state grant programs are available and several community projects may be postponed.
The article reports that Addison, Illinois officials have approved a $25,000 study to determine whether a noise wall along Interstate 290 would help muffle noise. Several weeks ago, officials were divided over the fact that they don't have the $500,000+ to build the wall if it were deemed necessary. Since then, confidence has grown in the ability to obtain funds if their requests are backed by an expert opinion.
The article goes on, noting that at least half of the funds may be obtainable from the state's FIRST program; also, the city can put off optional projects of their own and tap into other state grants. The city is currently talking with several firms about doing the study. The goal is to begin the study as soon as possible, since a possible change in governorship and the end of the FIRST program may mean that funds will be harder to find in the future.
PUBLICATION: Dayton Daily News
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Miami, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Julia Brunts
DATELINE: Tipp City, Ohio
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Bill Jones, Stop Airport Noise and Expansion (SANE)
The Dayton Daily News reports that Tipp City, Ohio's Stop Airport Noise and Expansion (SANE) group held its first public meeting this week. The group was formed in June to oppose Dayton International Airport's expansion plan, which the group thinks will worsen noise and fuel-dumping problems. The group, which includes people with aviation and environmental engineering expertise, has proposed efficiency measures that would make the expansion plan unnecessary.
The article reports that Tipp City, Ohio's Stop Airport Noise and Expansion (SANE) group held its first public meeting this week. The group was formed in June to oppose Dayton International Airport's expansion plan and supplement the existing Tipp-Monroe Airport Task Force, which is made up of public officials and citizens. The three-part plan includes the extension of one runway, and the addition of a third runway that would take planes over the community; residents think that the expansion would make existing noise and fuel-dumping problems worse.
The article notes that people with professional experience in aviation and environmental engineering are members. "It's not just a bunch of wacky old people who say it's too noisy," said one of the group's organizers. The group has proposed efficiency measures that would make the expansion plan unnecessary.
PUBLICATION: Hong Kong Standard
DATE: September 10, 1999
BYLINE: Michele Lee
DATELINE: Hong Kong
The Hong Kong Standard reports that one southern suburb near Hong Kon's Airport blocked a government plan to limit all night-time air traffic to the use of the South runway. The measure was intended to limit the noise in northern suburbs -- where the noise is generally louder -- by shunting it to the quieter suburbs in the south. The southern suburb disagreed, saying that "Residents in both [communities] can at least share the noise burden when both runways are used."
The article reports that one southern suburb near Hong Kon's Airport blocked a government plan to limit all night-time air traffic to the use of the South runway. The measure was intended to limit the noise in northern suburbs -- where the noise is generally louder -- by shunting it to the quieter suburbs in the south. Government officials argued that only five planes landed even on busy days, but leaders in the southern suburb feared an increase if the runway use were restricted.
The article goes on, saying that noise levels in the north range from 65-75 decibels while southern noise levels stay below 70. Government officials argued that only five planes landed at night during one recent busy day, but leaders in the southern suburb fear that there would be an increase once runway use was restricted.
PUBLICATION: Financial Times
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: World Trade; Pg. 07
BYLINE: by Mark Suzman
DATELINE: Washington D.C.
The Financial Times reports that the U.S. undersecretary of commerce asked the European Union (EU) to withdraw a regulation that restricts some U.S. aircraft -- outfitted with noise-dampening hushkits -- from flying in the EU. The U.S. could lose $1.5 billion if the measure -- which would prevent hushkitted aircraft from flying to the EU by May of 2002 if they hadn't operated in the EU prior to May 1999 -- is put in place. The regulation was intended to phase out noisier aircraft over the densely populated EU, but the U.S. claims that the agreement doesn't meet international standards, since U.S. aircraft would be discriminated against while other noisier aircraft still operated.
The article reports that the U.S. undersecretary of commerce asked the European Union (EU) to withdraw a regulation that restricts some U.S. aircraft -- outfitted with noise-dampening hushkits -- from flying in the EU. The U.S. claims that its export markets for hushkits will lose $1 billion and losses from the devaluation of hushkitted aircraft could reach $500 million.
The regulation was intended to phase out noisier aircraft; the U.S. claims that hushkitted aircraft meet quieter standards, but the EU wants to encourage unmodified quieter aircraft because of its higher population densities. It would prevent hushkitted aircraft from flying to the EU by May of 2002 if they hadn't operated in the EU prior to May 1999; the EU has already postponed the measure for one year, partly due to a threat that the U.S. could ban Concorde flights in retaliation. The U.S. claims that the agreement doesn't meet international standards, since U.S. aircraft would be discriminated against while other noisier aircraft still operated.
PUBLICATION: Gloucestershire Echo
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Transport: Air, Pg.8
BYLINE: Mrs. P. Hewitt
DATELINE: Gloucestershire, U.K.
The Gloucestershire Echo prints a letter to the editor from a Springbank, U.K resident. The author is responding to a prior letter, and says that although residents that live near airports must expects some noise, recent increases are in excess of what one should expect from an airport of its size. She believes that recreational and training flights -- not passenger flights -- are largely responsible for the increases, and thinks they should be taken elsewhere.
"Madam - I think Mr Taylor from Gloucester has more than a passing interest in Gloucestershire Airport Ltd, judging by his letter (Echo, August 28). He comments that anyone who lives near an airfield must expect some aircraft noise. How true, Mr Taylor. I have lived within three miles of Staverton for more than 45 years, so I am used to hearing 'some' noise. But what we have been subjected to in the past few years is aircraft movement and noise far in excess of what one would expect from an airfield of this size.
I'm sure Mr Taylor 's well aware that this problem isn't caused by passenger flights to various destinations, it's the recreational and training flights that are causing such distress to so many people. Clearly this is the wrong location for this type of flying and, like Mr and Mrs Low and neighbours from Churchdown, I feel an inquiry is long overdue on how plans for increased aircraft movement over such an area were sanctioned."
PUBLICATION: Herald Express
DATE: September 10, 1999
DATELINE: Torbay, U.K.
The Herald Express reports that tree-cutting along railroad tracks in Torbay, U.K. must now be performed between 7:30 AM and 10 PM on non-Sunday mornings. It normally takes up to four days of work with flailing machines along the seven-mile section of track to finish the job. Work at night, necessitated by train schedules, has prompted resident complaints. The railway was originally slapped with a noise abatement order, but the last minute deal avoided the need for an appeal.
The article reports that tree-cutting along railroad tracks in Torbay, U.K. -- which is necessary every year for safety reasons -- must now be performed between 7:30 AM and 10 PM on non-Sunday mornings. It normally takes up to four days of work with flailing machines along the seven-mile section of track to finish the job. Because of train schedules, the work has traditionally been done late at night for periods of up to half an hour and has disturbed residents.
The article notes that the railway appealed the rule, lost, and now faces a legal bill of 3000 pounds. The railway had agreed not to cut at night, but broke that promise in April. The railway was originally slapped with a noise abatement order, but the last minute deal removed the order and with it the need for an appeal.
PUBLICATION: The Indianapolis News
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Metro South; Pg. S03
BYLINE: Phil Blankenhorn
DATELINE: Greenwood, Indiana
The Indianapolis News reports on several local issues including tax abatement, property taxes, and noise. After complaints from an elderly resident about excessively loud car stereos, the city council is considering an increase in the current $15 fine for noise violations. Police receive frequent noise complaints but fines are too low to effectively deter violators.
The article reports that after complaints from an elderly resident about excessively loud car stereos, the city council is considering an increase in the current $15 fine for noise violations.
The article notes that the resident who complained received support from the police chief; he said that police receive frequent noise complaints but are frustrated by fines that are too low to effectively deter violators.
PUBLICATION: Newsday
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Viewpoints; Page A54
BYLINE: Dan Visentin
DATELINE: Albany, New York
Newsday reports that an Albany, New York Assemblyman disagrees with residents' pleas for soundwalls at train stations, but supports them at a new railyard. He says the horns are necessary to keep people safely away from moving trains, and that people should better insulate their homes if they are so worried about noise. Conversely, he notes that the new Port Jefferson rail yard -- which was opposed by nearby residents -- should be the subject of an immediate noise study and should close while soundwalls are erected if they are deemed necessary.
The article reports that an Albany, New York Assemblyman disagrees with residents' pleas for soundwalls at train stations, but supports them at a new railyard. He notes that while the public wants more government intervention on most safety issues -- gun control, helmet laws, etc. -- they are thoughtlessly clamoring for soundwalls that will block train whistles that are designed to keep people safely away from moving trains. Conversely, he notes that the new Port Jefferson rail yard -- which was opposed by nearby residents -- should be the subject of an immediate noise study and should close while soundwalls are erected if they are deemed necessary.
The author notes that inappropriate soundwalls, such as those designed to block safety horns, would be paid for by many (rail passengers) for the 'benefit' of a few (neighbors). He believes that people should better insulate their homes if they are so worried about noise, since they knew that the Long Island Rail Road would be passing nearby when they moved there; the projects would be paid for by savings in heating and cooling.
PUBLICATION: The Northern Echo
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 8
BYLINE: Gavin Engelbrecht
DATELINE: Darlington, U.K.
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jane Wright, Autodrome Action Group
The Northern Echo reports that Darlington, U.K. residents near Croft Circuit racetrack are still upset at noise levels even after the track implemented noise-reduction measures. 600 complaints over the last three years prompted a 1997 abatement notice, but the notice was withdrawn after the track agreed to noise-reduction measures. The district council has determined that a nuisance still exists even with the measures in place, and plans to pursue another abatement notice.
The article reports that Darlington, U.K. residents near Croft Circuit racetrack are still upset at noise levels even after the track implemented noise-reduction measures. In the years between 1995 and 1998, 600 complaints were made about noise from the track. In 1997, an abatement notice was served to the track, but the management had the notice withdrawn after it agreed to follow self-created noise-reduction measures.
The article notes that although the track has been following those measures, district counselors still feel that a nuisance exists: mainly by the loudest category of allowed vehicles on the track. It a noise abatement notice is to be issued again, it must be proven that the track is not doing the best it can to reduce the noise. Residents say that the berms that have been erected do not block sound for those who are further from the track.
PUBLICATION: The Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. 1C
BYLINE: Meredith Goldstein
DATELINE: Rehoboth, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports that Rehoboth, Rhode Island's zoning board of appeals will rule on a permit that would grant Eugene Dumontier the right to put a golf pro shop and restaurant on his 140 acre property. When his golf course was approved, and his shop and restaurant denied, he appealed the decision; a judge has now said that the Board must evaluate traffic, noise, lighting, parking, and safety more thoroughly before such a denial. Dumontier has agreed to put up a structure to reduce noise, and said he will look into relocating the parking lot.
The article reports that Rehoboth, Rhode Island's zoning board of appeals will rule on a permit that would grant Eugene Dumontier the right to put a golf pro shop and restaurant on his 140 acre property. The Board has already approved the golf course itself, although neighbors have appealed the decision. However, the Board denied a permit for the shop and restaurant, and an appeal by Dumontier resulted in a ruling that the Board must first evaluate traffic, safety, lighting, noise and parking.
The article goes on, noting that the pro shop will only be used by golfers and should not increase traffic. Dumontier has also agreed to minimize lighting. He claims that the small size of the house -- which will house the new shop and restaurant -- guarantees that noisy crowds will not be present. Consultants for the concerned neighbors said that on the contrary, the proposed shop, restaurant, and accompanying parking lot would be "injurious, obnoxious and offensive", "[increasing] the noise in the area significantly." The neighbors are also concerned that lawn chemicals might effect his well water. Dumontier agreed to put up a structure to reduce noise, and said he will look into relocating the parking lot.
PUBLICATION: The Record
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. A16
BYLINE: John Cichowski
DATELINE: Morris County, New Jersey
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Denville resident Robert Belz, prominent activist on rail horns
The Record reports that the Federal Railway Administration (FRA) has agreed to review applications by Morris County, New Jersey communities -- pending for years -- to install devices at railroad grade crossings that would eliminate the need for early-morning horn blasts. Congress asked the FRA in 1994 to design safety rules that would eliminate the need for horns at grade crossing without compromising safety. Certain devices make it virtually impossible for cars to get onto the tracks when a train is coming: barriers that separate lanes, surveillance cameras, and four-gate systems. Standard regulations by the FRA could come out any time from three months to ten years from now.
The article reports that the Federal Railway Administration (FRA) has agreed to review applications by Morris County, New Jersey communities -- pending for years -- to install devices at railroad grade crossings that would eliminate the need for 90 decibel horn blasts. The horns have sounded on weekday mornings since commuter rail service to Manhattan was introduced in 1996. Federal laws require the horn blowing for safety reasons at railroad grades where cars are likely to ignore gates.
The article notes that Congress asked the FRA in 1994 to design safety rules that would eliminate the need for horns at grade crossing without compromising safety. The FRA has stalled since different parts of the country face different conditions. Generally, the FRA agrees that certain devices make it virtually impossible for cars to get onto the tracks when a train is coming: barriers that separate lanes, surveillance cameras, and four-gate systems.
The article goes on to note that while some communities are willing to spend money on such measures, other solutions include rerouting roads to eliminate rail crossings or closing certain crossings at night when noise disrupts the most people. Most communities are hesitant to go ahead with expensive plans unless the FRA has promised to remove the horn requirement if they do. Those new regulations could come out any time from three months to ten years from now.
PUBLICATION: The Times Union
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Main, Pg. A14
BYLINE: Thomas C. Werner
DATELINE: Albany, New York
The Times Union prints a response to a prior letter to the editor regarding noise on New York State's Northway. A state Department of Transportation (DOT) official says that the DOT will be performing a noise study on the Northway in Colonie to determine if there is a need for soundwalls in the area.
The author goes on, noting -- though it isn't clear to what statements in the prior letter he is responding to -- that construction is often done at night to avoid major disruptions in traffic flow. He also notes that the recent addition of a right-turn lane didn't include a noise for two reasons: first the lane was not a through lane, and second an existing lane wasn't moved significantly closer to a noise receptor.
PUBLICATION: The Virginian-Pilot
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Local, Pg. B10
BYLINE: Jacob E. Janssen, David Brashear
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
The Virginian-Pilot prints letters to the editor from two Virginia Beach residents regarding jet noise from Oceana Naval Base. The first resident applauds the proposed plan, which would allow residents to take measures in preparation for expected jet noise. He still believes that the city council needs to establish a noise committee with disaffected residents, and be tougher on the Navy when they move louder jets into the area. The second resident applauds a plan to fly jets higher -- this lessening noise -- but says early warning for noise is irrelevant. He says "Noise is noise, and 108 decibels is just as loud when you know it's coming as it is when it surprises you."
"Jet noise at 1600 hours - get out those earplugs
The Virginia Beach City Council has discussed establishing a committee to look at ways to alert the public about Navy jet flight times (news, Sept. 1), thus providing a forewarning of noise expected from military aircraft operations.
I applaud this proactive initiative. Such activism in response to citizens' concerns is uncommon and gratifying. The warnings will allow residents sufficient lead-time to close windows and confine themselves to their homes with air conditioners running before the "roar of freedom" prevails.
Or they have time to leave tourist town; buy additional term life insurance, earplugs or sleeping pills; schedule religious services during the Navy's quiet hours; pull their children out of schools that are routinely overflown; or reschedule parties and picnics.
One does wonder, however, when the council will propose a committee that includes responsible, but disaffected, residents. One also wonders why the council never raised any concerns in advance of the Navy's decision to bring 156 additional aircraft to Virginia Beach. What unadulterated hypocrisy!
The council has routinely ignored citizens' concerns on this issue. Will it be similarly mute when the Navy moves, in the near future, to replace some 146 F-14 aircraft with aircraft that are two to four times louder?
Jacob E. Janssen
Virginia Beach
Move jet training to an unpopulated area
We appreciate the efforts of Capt. William Zobel, Oceana's new base commander, to think out of the box in addressing the very serious noise problems caused by Oceana activity. One of his team's most laudable short-term remedies is to begin flying planes in and out of Oceana at higher altitudes. This can only help.
But Capt. Zobel's new " Noise Alert Strategy" is badly flawed. Noise is noise, and 108 decibels is just as loud when you know it's coming as it is when it surprises you.
The noise from Oceana must be moved away. This does not necessarily mean that Oceana must be lost or military personnel moved. Flight practice and training must be taken to an unpopulated area, with Oceana used strictly for straight initial take-offs and final landings.
Tourism in the resort area is incompatible with current flight patterns. Undeveloped property around Oceana is undevelopable and represents a significant loss of potential property-tax revenues. Peaceful living and sleeping are ruined with overhead jet noise. And the old Cavalier Hotel, which the Navy currently uses as a marker for landings at Oceana, existed long before Oceana or noisy jets.
We need to figure out and implement a comprehensive solution that works for all of us.
Jacob E. Janssen
Virginia Beach"
PUBLICATION: The Virginian-Pilot
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Virginia Beach Beacon, Pg. 09
BYLINE: William Richardson
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
The Virginian-Pilot prints several letters to the editor, including one from a Virginia Beach resident in support of Oceana Naval Base training flights. The author admits that he does not live in the affected area, and if he did he acknowledges he would be 'on edge.' However, he asserts that military personnel who put their lives on the line should be allowed to make noise if it is necessary for their training.
"Can't take noise out of training
The sounds from jets over Oceana Naval Air Station are almost always described as "the Sound(s) of Freedom" as suggested by Jack Dorsey in his very comprehensive report in The Pilot (Aug. 17, 1999).
This is a good description. But personally, I've always thought of this shattering racket as evidence of well-trained people further preparing themselves to be put in harms way when the time comes to do it.
I always imagine what the young pilot looks like . . . and wonder if the courage for this kind of work can be seen in his face.
Capt. William Zobel, Oceana base commander, has said that he is considering some extraordinary measures to cut down on the noise level over the few weeks of intense training.
These measures will include coming in at high altitudes and climbing faster at take-off.
Fine. But if these changes in what are certainly carefully considered safety procedures cause even the slightest increase in what is already considerable danger for our pilots or for their crews on the ground - or for that matter, anyone on the ground . . . I'd just as soon Captain Zobel forgo them.
I don't live in the " noise area" near the Oceana Base. Probably, I'd get my nerves set a little on edge if I did, but I'm pretty sure that after considering that these pilots will be reporting for work where people will be gunning for them, I'd figure the noise could be put up with."
PUBLICATION: Waikato Times
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: News; National; Pg. 3
BYLINE: Eva Hay
DATELINE: Hamilton, New Zealand
The Waikato Times reports that in Hamilton, New Zealand, a dairy factory will stop testing of a noisy generator while it installs soundproofing. The fifty residents who attended a public meeting called by the factory had complained of the noise, but seemed satisfied that the factory was being responsible in its decision to hold off on testing until soundproofing was installed.
The article reports that in Hamilton, New Zealand, a dairy factory will stop testing of a noisy generator while it installs soundproofing. Residents had complained of the noise, and the factory responded by calling a public meeting to announce their decision to put generator testing on hold. Fifty residents attended the meeting.
The article goes on, noting that most residents felt that the 22-year-old factory had been a good neighbor in the past and had made a responsible decision by temporarily discontinuing testing. In addition, the factory will not test at night for several additional weeks until the co-generation plant, currently under construction, is completed.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Metro Northwest; Pg. 2; Zone: Nw; Northwest Overnight.
BYLINE: Pat Clawson.
DATELINE: Rolling Meadows, Illinois
The Chicago Tribune reports that Rolling Meadows, Illinois has been granted full-member status on the Chicago O'Hare Airport Noise Compatibility Commission. The decision was made after data showed the community to be in O'Hare's 'affected area' by FAA standards, and means that Rolling Meadows may have more access to soundproofing money. The commission makes recommendations to the Chicago's Department of Aviation about which homes and other buildings may need soundproofing.
The article reports that Rolling Meadows, Illinois has been granted full-member status on the Chicago O'Hare Airport Noise Compatibility Commission. After noise monitors were placed in the community last year, the resulting data showed that Rolling Meadows experienced enough noise to be considered in the O'Hare "affected area" by FAA standards. Being admitted onto the commission as a full, voting member means that Rolling Meadows may have more access to soundproofing money.
The article notes that the noise commission's primary job is to determine which "homes, schools, libraries, and other facilities" may need soundproofing. The commission advises Chicago's Department of Aviation about noise problems at O'Hare.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: September 10, 1999
SECTION: Trib West; Pg. 5; Zone: D
BYLINE: Maria Kantzavelos.
DATELINE: Addison, Illinois
The Chicago Tribune reports that officials in Addison, Illinois have approved a noise study which will determine whether a noise wall on Interstate 290 could effectively reduce traffic noise in the community. The study will cost $30,000, and if a noise wall is deemed effective, officials say they will pursue their half of the wall cost -- which would be about $500,000 -- from the state's FIRST program and other state grants.
The article reports that officials in Addison, Illinois have approved a noise study which will determine whether a noise wall on Interstate 290 could effectively reduce traffic noise in the community. The decision was made after it was discovered that the state's FIRST program could help pay for up to half of the cost of a noise wall.
The article continues, noting that the study will cost $30,000. If the study determines that a noise wall is necessary, officials say they will pursue their half of the wall cost -- which would be about $500,000 -- from other state grants.
PUBLICATION: U.S. Newswire
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: National Desk, Labor Reporter
DATELINE: Washington D.C.
The U.S. Newswire reports that the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) will now require mine operators to monitor noise exposure and also make training, hearing tests, and hearing protection available to miners who are exposed to more than an 85 decibel average over eight hours. Hearing loss is one of the top occupational hazards among miners, and may reduce safety in the workplace.
The article reports that the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) will now require mine operators to make training, hearing tests, and hearing protection available to miners who are exposed to more than an average of 85 decibels over eight hours. Actual use of hearing protection and hearing tests will be voluntary at that level. Operators will also be required to monitor workplace noise exposure. Mines may request noise evaluations from MSHA before the noise rules come into effect.
The article notes that current rules will still require hearing protection at noise levels above 90 decibels averaged over eight hours. The Administration will be working with mine operators over the coming years to develop new technologies that will help lower miners' exposure to noise.
The article notes that hearing loss is one of the top health risks among miners, and may reduce workplace safety as well as quality of life.
The article concludes, noting that 182 written comments and 57 spoken comments from public hearings were considered in the creation of these rules.
PUBLICATION: South Bend Tribune
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Local/Area, Pg. D7
BYLINE: Beth Neff
DATELINE: Goshen, Indiana
The South Bend Tribune reports that a public meeting in Goshen, Indiana began a dialogue between city officials and residents on how to reduce noise from train whistles. Residents believe the whistles to have gotten shriller, louder, and less consistent in their number and pattern. Rail officials admitted that engineers sometimes use distinctive 'signatures', "personalizing them or using them to communicate with other engineers." While the Mayor noted that whistles can not be totally banned, new state legislation allows communities to regulate whistles at crossings with both lights and gates. Other communities have used measures such as curbing, vertical delineators, and nets. The council has rejected a resolution to regulate whistles on the local level, but has said it will consider an ordinance if a petition is presented. The Federal Rail Administration also intends to create new standards, which could trump any local ordinance.
The article reports that a public meeting in Goshen, Indiana began a dialogue between city officials and residents on how to reduce noise from train whistles. Forty residents met with the mayor and council members, claiming that train whistle noise has gotten worse since the rail company Norfolk and Southern took over the tracks one year ago.
The article goes on, noting that residents believe the whistles to have gotten shriller, louder, and less consistent in their number and pattern. Rail officials admitted that engineers sometimes use distinctive 'signatures', "personalizing them or using them to communicate with other engineers." The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) regulates the number and length of whistle blows, and these personalized whistles may be in violation of those regulations.
The article notes that while the Mayor noted that whistles can not be totally banned, new state legislation allows communities to regulate whistles at crossings with both lights and gates. Other communities have used measures such as curbing, vertical delineators, and nets. The council has rejected a resolution to regulate whistles on the local level, but has said it will consider an ordinance if a petition is presented. However, one council member said "If you have 500 signatures, I want to see 500 people at that meeting." He also noted that the FRA is creating its own guidelines which may override any local ordinances that they may create.
PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Journal
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Pg. A1
BYLINE: Tania Soussan
DATELINE: Albuquerque, New Mexico
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Marianne Dickinson, president of the Airport Neighbors Alliance
The Albuquerque Journal reports that the Mayor of Albuquerque, New Mexico wants flights to always avoid northern communities by turning to the South after takeoff instead of North. The FAA is resisting the change, saying that routing all takeoffs to the South may cause safety problems, since many landings arrive from the South. Older planes, whether outfitted with noise-reducing hush-kits or not, gain altitude less quickly and cause the worst noise impact; most of these planes already take off to the South. Also, the North-South Runway closed in 1997 and helped to reduce the noise impact on the Northern communities.
The article reports that the Mayor of Albuquerque, New Mexico wants flights to always avoid northern communities by turning to the South after takeoff. Currently, most planes takeoff to the East and turn North. The FAA is resisting the change, saying that routing all takeoffs to the South would cause congestion and may cause safety problems, since many landings arrive from the South.
The article goes on, noting that of the 950 takeoffs and landings at the airport each day, most happen during daylight. Pilots have told the mayor that it would be a simple matter to direct the planes to the South. An environmental review would be required before flight path changes could be made.
The article notes that older planes, whether outfitted with noise-reducing hush-kits or not, gain altitude less quickly and cause the worst noise impact; most of these planes already take off to the South. Also, the North-South Runway closed in 1997 and helped to reduce the noise impact on the Northern communities. The airport is already working to put permanent noise monitors in place, which will ultimately provide information to the public via the Internet.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press Worldstream
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: International News
DATELINE: Oranjestad, Aruba
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Olinda Rasmijn, president of the Stimaruba environmental group
The Associated Press Worldstream reports that a proposed $15 million racetrack in Aruba is being opposed by environmentalists concerned about air pollution, noise, and the possibility of the track's weight and vibrations collapsing a phosphate mine below the track. Environmentalist supporters will honk their car horns at certain times on Monday, and sport T-shirts and bumper stickers. The Environmental Director in the area said the mine shafts are strong enough to support the track, and claims that the regular wind on the island will reduce noise to the level of a vacuum cleaner
The article reports that a proposed $15 million racetrack in Aruba is being opposed by environmentalists. Environmentalists are concerned about air pollution, noise, and the possibility of the track's weight and vibrations collapsing a phosphate mine below the track.
The article goes on to say that the campaign includes T-shirts and bumper stickers. Supporters have also been asked to honk their car horns at certain times on Monday.
The article notes that Prime Minister Eman announced the track on August 19th at a news conference attended by Emerson Fittipaldi. The track is being designed by the designer of the Homestead, Florida track. His Environmental Director claims that environmentalists concerns are unfounded, claiming that the regular northeast wind on the island will reduce noise to the level of a vacuum cleaner. The Environmental Director also said the mine shafts are strong enough to support the track.
PUBLICATION: Birmingham Evening Mail
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 15
BYLINE: Mark Cowan
DATELINE: Birmingham, U.K.
The Birmingham Evening Mail reports that police in Birmingham, U.K. have instituted a rapid response team to respond to late-night noise complaints. The team, which will respond to calls up until 1 AM, will have the authority to "initiate prosecutions" and seize sound amplification equipment. A pilot-program saw 167 noise complaints answered over 25 weeks, resulting in five prosecutions and the seizure of equipment.
The article reports that police in Birmingham, U.K. have instituted a rapid response team to respond to late-night noise complaints. The team, with an operating expense of pounds 15,000, will have the authority to "initiate prosecutions" and seize sound amplification equipment. Complaints about noise are common in the city, but traditional police could not respond in time to catch violators "in the act".
The article goes on, noting that paired officers will respond to noise complaints up until 1 AM. A successful 25-week pilot-program has already taken place, during which 167 noise complaints were answered. The complaints resulted in five prosecutions and the seizure of sound amplification equipment.
PUBLICATION: Bristol Evening Post
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg.2
DATELINE: South Gloucestershire, U.K.
The Bristol Evening Post reports that the South Gloucestershire, U.K. Council will create a noise response team to deal with noise complaints during peak times. Council officers will operate in pairs, and will be available to respond to noise complaints during peak times. Violations will include "noisy parties, loud music, and barking dogs".
The article reports that the South Gloucestershire, U.K. Council will create a noise response team to deal with noise complaints during peak times. In the past, an "out of hours" service by the council responded to emergencies, but the proposed service will be more able to respond to complaints -- which made up half of the calls they received. Council officers will operate in pairs, and will be available to respond to noise complaints during peak times.
The article continues, noting that violations will include "noisy parties, loud music, and barking dogs". Peak times will include 6pm to midnight during the week, 10am to noon at weekends, 6pm to 2am on Saturdays and 6pm to midnight on Sundays.
PUBLICATION: Chattanooga Times
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Metro/Region; Pg. B1
BYLINE: by Jamie Hancock
DATELINE: Lookout Mountain, Georgia
The Chattanooga Times reports that a request by a company in Lookout Mountain, Georgia to rezone a large residential estate so it may host social events there has residents concerned about noise. The city will consider a noise ordinance at their next meeting that might quell fears that there will be no noise limits imposed on the venue. The owners of the business say they planned all along to set noise limits if their rezoning request is approved.
The article reports that a request by a company in Lookout Mountain, Georgia to rezone a large residential estate so it may host social events there has residents concerned about noise. The city is considering a noise ordinance that will quell fears that the company will have no boundaries when it comes to noise. The Town Attorney will draft an ordinance for the next council meeting; the mayor says that striking the balance between permissible music levels and resident irritation will be difficult.
The article continues, noting that one resident questioned why the new event center was being held to stricter standards than other local businesses. Another resident believed that property value would drop 25% based on the "extremely loud music" he heard during a test last month. The owners of the business say they will set noise limits if their rezoning request is approved.
PUBLICATION: Dayton Daily News
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Oped Page, Pg. 15A,
BYLINE: Fred Sedam
DATELINE: Tipp City, Ohio
The Dayton Daily News prints several letters to the editor, including one on noise pollution from Tipp City, Ohio. The author says that expansion at Emery Worldwide Airport will increase a mild annoyance to an unbearable burden. He says that passenger volume had actually decreased in recent years, so the claim that residents should have 'expected' this expansion is wrong.
"Northern suburbs have right to live free of noise pollution
In response to the Aug. 11 letter 'Tipp City should appreciate industry and aviation heritage':
Some mornings the jets are so loud over our house that my children place their hands over their ears to shut out the noise. But the next day the jets will take off in a different direction, and my family will have peace and quiet again for awhile. This is cold comfort to our neighbors in Englewood, who must then suffer the roaring jets taking off over their houses.
I've lived in Tipp City for 10 years and have learned to put up with the intermittent noise pollution and the periodic stench of jet fumes, but an Emery Worldwide expansion would increase these problems from a few times a month to most of the time.
This is an Emery expansion, not really an expansion to provide more airline service to Dayton residents. A few hundred new jobs? What is that compared to making life unbearable for tens of thousands of your neighbors in the north-of-Dayton suburbs?
We should have known the airport might expand? Why? Over the years, some passenger service has been dropped from Dayton because of lack of demand. We might just as easily have expected the airport to decrease in size. . . .
We in the northern suburbs will not shut up and not go gently into the night of the Emery noise -pollution expansion. We live here, and we have the right to live free of devastating pollution."
PUBLICATION: The Idaho Statesman
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Editorial ; Pg. 6b
BYLINE: D. Charles Wray
DATELINE: Sun Valley, Idaho
The Idaho Statesman prints several letters to the editor, including one relating to noise. A Sun Valley, Idaho resident notes that easements -- signed by residents waiving their right to complain about jet noise -- could be the answer to quelling noise complaints near the expanding airport.
"Airport noise
If the city and county are forced into allowing continued building near the airport, there is a simple way to solve the issue of future noise complaints. Determine a physical noise corridor around the airport and make future residents sign a waiver regarding any noise complaints as a condition of occupancy for residence within the established corridor. This allows individuals to evaluate prior to purchase, if they are willing to live under noise conditions.
This also could apply to developments where flood plain conditions exist. Signing a waiver should subject the future occupant to conditions such as waiving any compensation for flood damage from any governmental agency. Under these conditions, the buyer is aware in advance and makes decisions based on fact, not developer marketing propaganda."
PUBLICATION: The Kansas City Star
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Zone/Midtown; Pg. 2; Steve Penn
BYLINE: Steve Penn
DATELINE: Kansas City
The Kansas City Star prints a column that urges self-enforcement of reasonable volume levels on powerful car stereos. The author believes that stereos should be played at high volume: just not when others are around who will be bothered. He found several teenagers who believed that volumes should be turned down when people are around out of respect.
The column urges self-enforcement of reasonable volume levels on powerful car stereos. The author notes that police may now ticket motorists whose stereo can be heard from 50 feet away, and homeowners who creates noise that cross property boundaries.
The column proceeds, noting that the author believes that stereos should be played at high volume: just not when others are around who will be bothered. He sought out several teenagers who believed that volumes should be turned down when people are around out of respect.
PUBLICATION: The Patriot Ledger
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 15C
BYLINE: Kimberly W. Moy, The Patriot Ledger
DATELINE: Milton, Massachusetts
The Patriot Ledger reports that the selectmen of Milton, Massachusetts have decided to support a new $22 million, 5,000-foot runway at Boston's Logan Airport. The runway is intended to reduce noise over certain communities including Milton. Other communities, which will experience increased noise levels -- though still under goals that were set by the communities in the 1980s -- oppose the runway. The new runway will reduce traffic on two other runway in particular, which are currently used heavily because they can handle more traffic in certain weather conditions -- thus reducing delays.
The article reports that the selectmen of Milton, Massachusetts have decided to support a new $22 million, 5,000-foot runway at Boston's Logan Airport. The runway, which is still subject to an environmental review, is intended to reduce noise over certain communities including Milton. 80,000 flights would now fly over the ocean instead of over communities; the new runway is unidirectional, and takeoffs will only proceed to the East. To construct the new runway, an injunction against Logan expansion must be lifted by proving that conditions have changed drastically since the injunction was instituted in the 1970s .
The article goes on, noting that the new runway would cut usage of two other runways -- 4R and 4L -- that currently affect certain communities disproportionately. This would bring their usage to 25 percent, which is close to noise goals set in the 1980s by regional communities; some communities are now voting to abolish the goals -- which balance noise among communities -- since they are currently receiving disproportionately less noise than the goals would allow.
The article notes that 4R and 4L are currently used so much because, in conjunction with another runway, they can handle the desired 120 flights each hour in north winds. This number of flights is targeted since traffic increases at Logan by 3.5% each year, and delays are seventh-worst in the country. Two alternative runways that can be used under the same wind conditions only handle 90 flights per hour; use of the new runway, combined with these alternate runways could handle 120 flights each hour, taking the pressure off the communities overflow by planes using 4R and 4L (the "4s").
The article notes that weather is another reason why the "4s" are used so much. 4R is the only runway with zero-visibility radar equipment that allow planes to land in all weather; addition of similar equipment on the alternate runways will serve to further increase their flexibility. Also, the FAA will be lowering visibility minimums that will allow planes to land on other runways in worse weather conditions than are currently permitted.
PUBLICATION: The Press-Enterprise
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Local; Pg. B01
BYLINE: C.j. Schexnayder
DATELINE: Corona, California
The Press-Enterprise reports that the Corona, California Building Department has been cracking down on construction noise before 7 in the morning. Hot summer days increase mid-day breaks and pressure builders for time, and earlier this summer work resulted in 20 complaints due to construction noise; this is triple the complaints of a normal month. The Police Department takes early-morning complaints since the Building Department is not yet open. Through further cooperation, police can cite violators for misdemeanors while the Building Department can reevaluate building permits if it comes to that.
The article reports that the Coronoa, California Building Department has been cracking down on construction noise before 7 in the morning. The city code forbids construction noise "generated by the use of any tools, machinery or equipment" that disturbs residents between 8 PM and 7 AM Monday through Saturday and at times other than 10 AM to 6 PM on Sunday. Hot summer days that require longer mid-day breaks pressured builders for time, and earlier this summer some began earlier than was permitted. The city received 20 complaints last month due to construction noise, which is triple the complaints of a normal month.
The article continues, noting that the Police Department takes early-morning complaints since the Building Department is not yet open. Through further cooperation, police can cite violators for misdemeanors while the Building Department can reevaluate building permits if it comes to that. As part of the 'crack down' this month, the Building Department issued fliers about the city's ordinance. This flier serves as a warning, so violators can be cited to correct the problem on the first violation. The Building Department notes that since the fliers were passed out, everyone has been very cooperative; even violators in the earlier summer were quite good about following the rules after they were warned.
PUBLICATION: The Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. 1C
BYLINE: Richard Salit
DATELINE: Cranston, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports that Cranston, Rhode Island's Zoning Board denied Burger King's request for a drive-up window. The restaurant gathered 800 signatures that support the window, saying that many customers have asked for a drive-up window in the last two years; they maintain that concerns over increased traffic and drive-thru-speaker noise is unfounded. Residents say traffic is already backed up from cars turning into the restaurant, and fumes cause them to close their windows. Similar public outcry in 1997, when the restaurant was first opened, forced the restaurant to withdraw its request at that time.
The article reports that Cranston, Rhode Island's Zoning Board denied Burger King's request for a drive-up window.
The article notes that the restaurant claimed that customers with small children and disabilities would benefit from the window. They say that the speaker would be inaudible. It would also increase sales by an estimated eight percent. The franchise gathered 800 signatures on a petition supporting the window. They also brought in a traffic expert who said that traffic would not be affected.
The article goes on to say that residents are concerned about increased automobile fumes and noise from the speaker. Public outcry in 1997, when the restaurant was first opened, forced the restaurant to withdraw its request at that time; they installed the window in case they decided to reapply in the future. Traffic already backs up quite a bit for cars turning into the restaurant, and nearby residents don't want to see it -- and its accompanying exhaust fumes -- get worse.
PUBLICATION: Sacramento Bee
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Neighbors; Pg. N1
BYLINE: Ryan Mccarthy
DATELINE: Rocklin, California
The Sacramento Bee reports that delivery trucks at a Rocklin, California grocery store have prompted the city council to propose limits on delivery times. Noise and exhaust has bothered residents, and the city council is considering gates that would keep delivery trucks out after certain hours. Traffic was also a concern, and a stop sign has been installed on the road to the store to deter speeding.
The article reports that delivery trucks at a Rocklin, California grocery store have prompted the city council to propose limits on delivery times. Neighbors complain of 5 to 15 trucks that idle for hours, spewing fumes and noise into their backyards. The community development director suggested that the council consider installing gates to stop delivery trucks from delivering late at night, when noise is most likely to disturb neighbors.
The article continues, noting that the grocery store seems cooperative, and is willing to try the gates. A stop sign has also been installed to reduce the speeding that has become a problem in the area as traffic to the food store has increased. Houses were built near the grocery store in the time between the approval of the store's building permit and the actual opening of the store; residents feel they didn't know what kind of area they were moving into.
The article concludes, noting that residents will be responsible for registering complaints. City officials had considered doing the monitoring themselves, but decided that neighbors will do a better job anyway.
PUBLICATION: The San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Opinion Pg. B-11:1; B-15:2,3
BYLINE: Dianne Jacob, Lisa Kresge, George Eastwood
DATELINE: San Diego, California
The San Diego Union-Tribune prints three opinions from residents near San Diego, California's Miramar Marine Base about proposed new flight paths for noisy helicopters. The first opinion, from the second district supervisor, centers on the importance of maintaining safety despite any possible noise impacts. She also emphasizes the importance of working together with the military instead of creating a confrontational situation. She says that shoving noise from the North County to the East County is not the solution, and notes that the military will consider Eastern routes but will not guarantee that it will use them in the end. The second opinion focuses on the fact that most people who are complaining about noise knew they were moving near an airport. The third opinion renames MARCH (Move Against Relocating Copters Here) to WHINE (We Hope Itineraries are Nudged East) and says that the more urban North County treat East County residents as if they were hicks; the author says that copters would be far more disruptive in the rural East County than the more developed North County.
"Copters, complaints and coming together Rep. Duncan Hunter's position on Marine helicopter routes from Miramar is based on sound logic. He supports following the flight paths that are safest for pilots and most cost-effective. And, he is right. Unfortunately, some politicians are playing politics with our national security. And, that's wrong.
It is imperative to work with others who are adversely affected by the Marine helicopters to come up with a solution that works for all areas of the county.
The solution is to work together and together work with the Marines rather than escalating an already volatile situation. Working together provides the best opportunity for us to find a solution that works for everybody.
In any event, the North County problem must not become East County's problem. The problems expressed two weeks ago in the Escondido town hall meeting are real and must be resolved. But simply pushing this problem from one area into another is not the solution.
East County is capable of becoming either a formidable opponent or a helpful ally. The latter is the better choice.
There is no question that having a military presence in San Diego is a tremendous asset for the region, and the Marines are no exception. The Marines have a mission on behalf of our national defense. However, they also have a responsibility to be sensitive to the needs of the people.
Maj. Gen. Michael DeLong, since taking command at Miramar in July, is like a breath of fresh air. He has demonstrated a sensitivity and willingness to work with the communities by his swift action in ordering changes and issuing new flight instructions which will certainly make life better for some. But there is much more work to be done.
Earlier this month, a meeting was convened in my office with leaders of the communities and entities which would potentially be affected by the alternative eastern route study -- Ramona, Lakeside, Eucalyptus Hills, Poway and Santee, the San Diego Wild Animal Park, county airports staff representing Ramona Airport and Gillespie Field and the San Diego Air Pollution Control District.
The group presented information to the Marines outlining serious concerns with the proposed routes released by MARCH, such as the degradation of air traffic safety and increased potential of mid-air collisions at both Ramona and Gillespie airports, noise, air pollution and the adverse effect on the 3, 500 animals at the Wild Animal Park.
The settlement agreement obligates the Marines to perform an eastern route study, but does not require one to be selected. Noise and air quality impacts will be addressed. The final decision will be made by the Marines and the FAA based on safety, efficiency and effectiveness.
Working with the Marines to be a part of the solution, not a part of the problem, is the right thing to do. DIANNE JACOB Second District supervisor
I am certain that most everyone else is sick about hearing the Marines vs. the MARCHers. I swore I would bite my tongue on this, but I'd rather spare it at this point.
When I decided to move to downtown Golden Hill last year, I was aware that I would be living smack in the middle of the landing path for inbound planes to Lindbergh Field. Sure it was loud, but I learned to tune the planes out. It wasn't like I was forced to live there. Why should I have complained?
I moved to Ranch Penasquitos at the beginning of this year. I read the newspaper daily about the countless complaints from these "disruptive" helicopters. I can honestly say that I hardly ever hear them. Occasionally, I will hear a faint helicopter or jet. Maybe I am just not whining because I wasn't stupid enough to buy a house next to an airport and then complain because I can hear planes all day.
I read that the MARCHers want the helicopters to fly farther east. I guess it's fine that they "disrupt" the East County residents. Then there was the suggestion for them to fly up the coast, but the coastal people don't like fly-bys. Remember the Little League opener?
I have read the endless stories about property depreciation with the air station so close by. Well, the air station has been there long before most of the houses near it were built and before many of the residents were old enough to even think about buying a home.
Then it occurred to me how such noise had affected the residents of Coronado. I mean, my goodness, living next to North Island Naval Air Station has really made Coronado synonymous with living in the slums. What's the Hotel Del down to now? One star? I still don't hear those folks complaining. Maybe they had the good sense to notice the air station down the street from them! LISA KRESGE Rancho Penasquitos
Having failed to stop the Marines from relocating from El Toro to Miramar, Jerry Hargarten's Rancho Bernardo coalition, MARCH (Move Against Relocating Copters Here), probably ought to take on a new name. "We Hope Itineraries are Nudged East" (WHINE) would be more appropriate.
These WHINERS not only are very vocal but also have more than their share of gall. First, they moan and groan about how terrible it would be for their neighborhood if the helicopters were relocated to Miramar. Now that the machines have arrived, their new tack is to try to shove their problem onto East County.
Perhaps there is some truth to the rumor that Rancho Bernardo residents think that anyone who doesn't live there is, well, second class and would consider it a privilege to relieve the really important folks of this world of this onerous burden. Besides, the dumb hicks of East County don't know any better and will put up with anything.
Well, WHINERS, this is one person who thinks your whining is totally off base.
Real estate is location, location, location and the Miramar Air Station was there long before any of your homes and golf courses.
Second, your whining is really becoming unseemly. Deal with it!
The chopper noise is really a small price to pay for freedom and it blends in quite well with the I-15 traffic din.
We in East County would love to help you folks in Rancho Bernardo out, but we put up with the longer commutes and inconveniences of country living just to hear the wings of a red tail hawk beating in the stillness of a new day's morning air. Sorry, but your helicopter flights would be much, much more intrusive out here than along the noisy I-15 corridor. You can always move from Rancho Bernardo. But don't come out this way. We don't want neighbors like you. GEORGE EASTWOOD Ramona"
PUBLICATION: The San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Opinion Pg. B-15
BYLINE: David Everett, Mike Hardcastle-Taylor, Basil Duncan, Joyce Tavrow
DATELINE: San Diego, California
The San Diego Union-Tribune prints several letters to the editor regarding helicopter noise from Miramar Marines Base in San Diego, California. The first writer protests past letters to the editor that painted North Count residents as people who had moved near noise to begin with; the author says that he neither "moved next to an airport [nor] moved next to Interstate 15." He believes North County residents should work with East County residents to have the helicopters moved out of San Diego entirely instead of trying to limit their impact to one part of the county or another. The second writer pushes for consideration of the quickest, most direct flight paths. He says they effect the fewest people even if they pass over the North County where the "squawk factor" (complaint intensity) is higher. The third writer says that in sixty years of living in the North County, she has never been bothered by helicopter noise as much as by other neighborhood noise such as lawnmowers. She believes that another non-noise-related agenda motivates the complainers. The fourth and final writer has problems with the facts that the Marines will consider pilot safety above all other factors and that they will have final say in determining flight paths. She believes that safety of pilots should be balanced with protection of civilians, and that unbiased professionals would be better to decide on the flight paths.
"Forget MARCHers, WHINErs: Don't move helicopters
Why do the people in East County believe that we in the I-15 corridor deserve the helicopters? I live in north Poway, three miles from I-15, and throughout 15 years never heard Miramar Navy jet aircraft noise. In fact, I purposely chose this neighborhood because it was rural and quiet.
Residents in Poway, Rancho Bernardo and Escondido did not move next to an airport, nor do we necessarily live near the "din of I-15." These neighborhoods were peaceful and quiet until the Marines decided to pound the skies over our homes.
But it is not fair to foist the helicopters on East County. After experiencing their torturous, quality-of-life disruption, I would never wish those behemoths upon anyone. Rather, we must rally together to move them out of San Diego.
Perhaps our strategy should be to support the relocation of Lindbergh Field to Miramar, because the sound of a commercial jet is harmless white noise compared to the prolonged, penetrating, low-frequency pounding of a Super Stallion helly-whopter. DAVID EVERETT Poway
It seems logical that the shortest route from Miramar to Camp Pendleton must include an evaluation of flying over communities such as Fairbanks Ranch, Rancho Santa Fe, Olivenhain and Carlsbad, and not just Del Mar, the I-15 corridor and now Ramona.
The squawk factor per well-heeled homeowner from these communities might be higher for our fearless politicians, but the number of citizens impacted might actually be lower with these direct flights.
The "over Del Mar and out to sea" alternative appears to be one of the shortest routes with the least noise impact to communities below and fits nicely with a Marine motto ("From the Sea") as they swoop down into Pendleton. By contrast, flying east from Miramar, then north, then northwest to get to Pendleton while climbing to 2,000 feet or better while flying over Ramona's mountains doesn't seem to pass the logical test for routine flights in terms of safety or efficient use of time, scarce flight crews and equipment.
In fact, this goofy eastern route looks as if it was concocted by a committee of lawyers without the aid of a map who think that Marine Corps Air Station in Yuma is also a coastal Marine base somewhere between San Diego and Orange County. A lawyerly gem, this route seems to want to go to both Yuma and Pendleton at the same time (and flight). As such, it's an ideal route for a pilot who starts out for Yuma and changes his or her destination to Pendleton. At any rate, for flights to Pendleton the shortest route is best. Head west! MIKE HARDCASTLE-TAYLOR Ramona
I am 75 years old and have lived in San Diego almost 60 years. I have lived in Rancho Bernardo almost 30 years and for the life of me I can't understand the intense dislike a few of our North County neighbors have for the Marines.
I live directly under the so-called flight path and I can honestly say I have never heard a dish rattle, never seen a picture sway on the wall and the noise has never interfered with my television. Neighbors' lawn mowers, children in the nearby school yard and street traffic have a much stronger impact on my peace and quiet than do the helicopters.
In spite of what these people say, the noise level is not what they say it is and the exaggerations are unbelievable. In trying to decide why there is so much intensity and misrepresentation of the truth, I have come to believe there is another much stronger agenda that has nothing to do with noise. BASIL DUNCAN Rancho Bernardo
Marine Maj. Gen. Michael DeLong stated that pilot safety will be the primary consideration of the Marines as they study possible new helicopter flight paths. The Marines will decide the final routes.
I have problems with both statements. None of us has any desire to jeopardize the lives of Marine helicopter pilots. However, who is looking out for the well-being of the residents impacted by their daily flyovers? Should it be mainly MARCH? Certainly, Jerry and Virginia Hargarten have devoted their time, talents and energy well beyond any reasonable expectation, to remove these aging behemoths from overhead, but they are volunteers with no official clout.
Why aren't the Marines as concerned about protecting us from their polluting planes, which have a history of "unscheduled" landings, as they are about protecting their own pilots?
Quite obviously, it is the role of our elected officials to safeguard our well-being. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham has stated, "I want the helicopters off the I-15 corridor." San Diego Councilwoman Barbara Warden recently wrote to the Marines (July 15, 1999) demanding that they eliminate the use of the I- 15 corridor helicopter route. But Mayor Susan Golding, a long-time backer of our concerns, has been reluctant to ask the Council to tell the Marines that flying over our densely populated area is unacceptable.
Does it make sense for the Marines to have the final say on the routes they will fly? A better approach would have impartial, knowledgeable professionals design routes that would accomplish the objectives of the Marines while safeguarding the lives of the residents.
MARCH hired retired FAA air traffic controllers/instructors and a retired Marine aviator to determine the feasibility of an eastern route. Their study, submitted to the Corps in June, defines a route that meets air traffic and safety considerations and can be implemented promptly without FAA approval. JOYCE TAVROW Rancho Bernardo"
PUBLICATION: The San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Local Pg. B-3:7,8; B-1:1; B-3:2
BYLINE: Ray Huard
DATELINE: San Diego, California
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that the mayors of four cities in the flight path of helicopters from San Diego, California's Miramar Marines Base met to discuss ways to reduce the noise. They focused on alternate flight paths and quieter helicopters.
The article reports that the mayors of four cities in the flight path of helicopters from San Diego, California's Miramar Marines Base met to discuss ways to reduce the noise. The four politicians stressed their commitment towards solving the problem, and emphasized that "without [the cooperation of the Marines] we really can't solve anything." The four focused on alternate flight paths for helicopters, since citizen activists in the current Interstate 15 corridor have themselves been focusing on alternate routes. The corridor is used frequently, especially when poor weather complicates the use of a coastal route.
The article notes that besides the alteration of flight paths, the four politicians will urge the Marines to begin using their quieter "tilt-winged Osprey" helicopters in place of the older ones as soon as possible. They also vaguely referenced other 'maneuvering things' that might help Marines reduce noise.
The article goes on to say that the four politicians were adamant in their desire not to foist their problem on different communities; their aim is to minimize the noise impact in general, wherever it may fall.
PUBLICATION: The Scotsman
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 1
BYLINE: Ken Houston
DATELINE: Perthshire, Scotland
The Scotsman reports that "one of the most advance facilities of its kind in Europe to improve and develop acoustic products for the construction industry opened this month" in Perthshire, Scotland. The company will market floor and wall-insulation products that will help developers market their buildings and help homeowners cope with noise.
The article reports that "one of the most advance facilities of its kind in Europe to improve and develop acoustic products for the construction industry opened this month" in Perthshire, Scotland. The company will market wall and floor treatments to developers and individual homeowners for the price of a moderate to expensively priced carpet.
The article said that an estimated 3 million people in the UK are affected by noise. Many developers use soundproofing materials to market their buildings. Many traditional houses, which more often had effective insulation materials -- such as boiler ash from coal-fired power plants -- in their floors have seen them removed.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel
DATE: September 9, 1999
SECTION: Local, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Jill Rosen
DATELINE: Boca Raton, Florida
The Sun-Sentinel reports that residents of Boca Raton, Florida seemed enthusiastic after City-Council-sponsored tests of an Automated Horn System at rail crossings. The system places horns at the intersection and focuses them only on the intersection. City Council is considering a free six-month trial of the $15,000 systems. Florida has had night-time bans on train whistles in the past; after being judged too dangerous, the bans are being allowed again if $200,000 four-quadrant gates are installed to prevent cars from sneaking around the gates. Boca Raton is not near the top of the state's priority list for receiving the gates, and so the Automated Horn System is an attractive option.
The article reports that residents of Boca Raton, Florida seemed enthusiastic after City-Council-sponsored tests of an Automated Horn System at rail crossings. The system is designed to reduce disruptive noise from train horns by placing the horns at the intersection itself and focusing the horns on the intersection.
The article notes that the City Council is considering a six-month trial of the systems, which would be free. After that time, the city can buy the systems for $15,000 each from the Texas Company Railroad Controls Limited.
The article goes on to say that in Florida, where the issue of train whistle noise has been a problem, communities were allowed to ban train horns at night on the state's East coast railway from 1984 to 1991. In 1991, the Federal Railroad Commission said that the doubling of car-train crashes in that period necessitated the reinstitution of night train whistles. Some communities have been able to reinstate the ban because of measures such as $200,000 four-quadrant crossing gates that make it harder for cars to try sneaking past when the gates are down. The state Department of Transportation has prioritized intersection along the state railway to receive the gates and thus be eligible for a night-ban on whistles. Boca Raton is not high on the list, and so the Automated Horn System is a viable alternative.
PUBLICATION: The Columbus Dispatch
DATE: September 8, 1999
SECTION: News , Pg. 1D
BYLINE: Ray Crumbley
DATELINE: Westerville, Ohio
The Columbus Dispatch reports that the City Council of Westerville, Ohio is considering changes to its noise ordinance which include the enforcement of noise limits on Polaris amphitheater in neighboring Columbus, Ohio. State law permits a city -- in this case Westerville -- to enforce its noise ordinances on noisy locations from an adjacent city if both cities agree. Westerville is also making changes to its ordinance to make it more enforceable. Westerville feels that Polaris has ignored their concerns up until now.
The article reports that the City Council of Westerville, Ohio is considering changes to its noise ordinance which include the enforcement of noise limits on Polaris amphitheater in neighboring Columbus, Ohio. Currently, the ordinance limits noise to 100 decibels over fifteen minutes, but was written "for the industrial age, not for amphitheaters." The revisions are intended to make the ordinance "more clear, neutral, enforceable and defendable." A noise consultant has also recommended that engineering measurements be changed.
The article notes that the Columbus amphitheater has been drawing noise complaints since it opened in 1994. State law permits a city -- in this case Westerville -- to enforce its noise ordinances on noisy locations from an adjacent city if both cities agree.
The article notes that Westerville feels that the amphitheater has ignored their concerns, and hopes that the new agreement will cause them to pay more attention. Westerville currently has noise-monitors in residential areas near the venue. Officials emphasized that the new noise rules will not be used to crack down on other violators without granting a reasonable amount of time to correct the problem.
PUBLICATION: The Courier-Journal
DATE: September 8, 1999
SECTION: Neighborhoods Pg.01n
BYLINE: Richard Des Ruisseaux
DATELINE: Louisville, Kentucky
The Courier-Journal reports that the Aldermen of Louisville, Kentucky plan to amend the local noise ordinance to be tougher on noise from bars and cars. The Aldermen responded to a proposed wet-dry vote in the area -- designed to shut down loud bars -- by proposing the amendment. They also plan to hire a noise inspector that will monitor noise around the area.
The article reports that the Aldermen of Louisville, Kentucky plan to amend the local noise ordinance to be tougher on noise from bars and cars. The Phoenix Hill Tavern has drawn complaints for its pounding bass, and its community is considering a wet-dry vote that may shut the bar down entirely. The Aldermen took the hint, and plan to set decibel limits for bars, pets, parties, and car stereos.
The article goes on to note that car stereos that can be heard from 50 feet away will be considered violators. An inspector will be hired to monitor noise around the town.
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: September 8, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. N6
BYLINE: Harrison Sheppard
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports that citizens at a meeting of Los Angeles, California's Van Nuys Airport Citizens Advisory Council said soundproofing plans are inadequate. They said that even the best soundproofing forces them to stay indoors, and only manages the noise problem; they want elimination of noise.Airport Commissioners recently banned additional noisy Stage 2 jets from coming to the Airport, but allowed the ones currently there to stay.
The article reports that citizens at a meeting of Los Angeles, California's Van Nuys Airport Citizens Advisory Council said soundproofing plans are inadequate. They said that soundproofing 150 houses and 900 apartments near the airport -- at a cost of $15 million -- only manages the noise problem, and they want elimination of noise. Even the best soundproofing forces them to stay indoors with windows shut. Soundproofing includes new windows, doors, insulation and ventilation systems.
The article continues, noting that the proposal at the advisory council meeting to support "noise control rather than soundproofing" lost 3-9. While the Airport Commissioners recently banned additional noisy Stage 2 jets from coming to the Airport, they allowed the ones currently there to stay.
PUBLICATION: The Morning Call
DATE: September 8, 1999
SECTION: Regional Report, Pg. B2
BYLINE: Zackie Due
DATELINE: Upper Saucon, Pennsylvania
The Morning Call reports that 200 residents of Upper Saucon, Pennsylvania have signed a petition protesting two noise ordinances. The ordinances have already been revised once after resident protests; maximum decibel levels for industrial, residential/agricultural/conservation, and commercial zones are now set at 80, 60 and 68 depending on time of day, and 65 and 70 depending on the time of day, respectively. An original two-week limit on sighting-in hunting weapons on one's own property has been removed. Residents still feel they should be responsible for determining when they can use their firearms.
The article reports that 200 residents of Upper Saucon, Pennsylvania have signed a petition protesting two noise ordinances. One ordinance would limit excessive noise and regulate the discharge of firearms. The two ordinances were originally presented as one, after noise complaints necessitated the drafting of an ordinance that recognized the shift in Upper Saucon from rural to suburban. The ordinance was divided after residents' confusion necessitated the clarification of the issues.
The article continues, noting that the original ordinance set maximum decibel levels for industrial, residential/agricultural/conservation, and commercial zones at 74, 58 and 64 depending on time of day, and 65 and 70 depending on the time of day, respectively. It also restricted shooting ranges to industrial zones, and designated a two-week period prior to hunting season during which people could 'sight-in' their firearms on their own property.
The article notes that after residents expressed their concerns, including the fact that long-time businesses may be forced to shut down under the new limits, the ordinance was revised. Limits were raised in industrial and residential/agricultural/conservation zones to 80 and 60-68 depending on the time of day, respectively. Also, the two-week limit on sighting-in was removed.
The article concludes, noting that there are several exemptions to the ordinance. These include emergency warning devices or "emergency work to provide electricity, water or other public utilities when public health and safety are involved." Also exempt is home and garden equipment like power tools and lawn mowers operated between 8 AM and 9 PM, and firearm discharges while pursuing a game animal during hunting season. Finally, most construction and vehicles are exempted.
PUBLICATION: The News Tribune
DATE: September 8, 1999
SECTION: Pierce County; Pg. A1
BYLINE: David Wickert
DATELINE: Puget Sound, Washington
The News Tribune reports that the University of Puget Sound in Washington will be extending its student code to off-campus student behavior. Student Government, armed with 1,250 signatures from students opposing the policy, says students are already subject to community laws off-campus. A local neighborhood council agrees, saying that preventive measures should take precedence over disciplinary ones. Complaints from community residents have said that some University students are sources of "noise, garbage, and obnoxious behavior." Anything that puts anyone in danger, damages property, or violates alcohol or drug laws could result in punishment ranging from warnings to expulsion.
The article reports that the University of Puget Sound in Washington will be extending its student code to off-campus student behavior. University officials claim that the policy change is minor, and will affect very few students. Student Government believes that students should be treated as adults; they are already subject to community laws and landlord action off-campus; fewer than 1,850 students live off campus, but 1,250 of them have signed a petition opposing the new policy.
The article goes on, noting that the University has traditionally reserved the right to discipline off-campus student behavior, but usually this has only applied to campus-sponsored events. The change comes after complaints from community residents that University students are too disruptive, because of "noise, garbage, and obnoxious behavior."
The article goes on, saying that student behavior that is subject to the change in policy would include anything that puts the student or another person in danger, damages property, or violates alcohol or drug laws. Punishments could range from warnings to expulsion, depending on the severity or frequency of the behavior. If residents complain, they must be willing to testify before a student honor court and otherwise participate in the disciplinary process.
The article says that Student Government believes that more effort should be put into community relations before such a measure is considered. A local neighborhood council, which has worked with two student groups on community clean-ups, agrees that preventive measures should take precedence over disciplinary ones. The council suggested regular meetings with students and neighbors, but says that the students and the University must decide this on their own.
PUBLICATION: The Tennessean
DATE: September 8, 1999
SECTION: Local, Pg. 2B
BYLINE: Debbie McClanahan
DATELINE: Murfreesboro, Tennessee
The Tennessean prints several items regarding local council actions around the state of Tennessee, including one noise ordinance. Murfreesboro, Tennessee passed a noise ordinance restricting the times that construction crews can make noise in residential areas. Noise is limited to 7 AM to 8 PM on weekdays, although it can begin at 6 AM in the summer. On weekends year-round construction noise is permitted between 8 AM to 8 PM. Unacceptable noise is defined as any noise heard beyond the property line.
The article reports that Murfreesboro, Tennessee recently passed a noise ordinance that restricts the times that construction crews can make noise. The ordinance forbids noise from construction before 7 AM and after 8 PM during the week, and before 8 PM and after 8 AM on the weekends.
The article also notes that the ordinance only applies to residential areas. Summer hours are longer, allowing construction to begin at 6 AM during the week. Unacceptable noise is defined as any noise heard beyond the property line.
PUBLICATION: Birmingham Evening Mail
DATE: September 7, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 18
BYLINE: Charles Royle
DATELINE: Birmingham, U.K.
The Birmingham Evening Mail prints some questions and answers regarding when an annoyance is an official nuisance in the UK, and what action can be taken. Anything that injures land or enjoyment of land is a nuisance, including smells and noise. The same noise is also more or less likely to be a nuisance depending on the time of day and the type of zone it is in. An official nuisance may result in a noise-abatement notice, and court action of the notice isn't heeded.
The article prints some questions and answers regarding when an annoyance is an official nuisance in the UK, and what recourse can be taken against it. A nuisance is something that injures land, or negatively affects enjoyment of land. This may include such things as smells and noise. Courts often imagine the behavior of a 'reasonable' person in the face of an alleged nuisance to determine whether a nuisance is truly unreasonable.
The article notes that most nuisances regard noise. The designation of noise as a nuisance may depend on when the noise occurs -- night-time is generally considered more disruptive -- and where it occurs -- differently-zoned districts often have different noise limits.
The article concludes by noting that Environmental Health Departments can serve a noise-abatement notice if an annoyance is determined to be an official nuisance. If the notice is not followed, you may take your case to court. This procedure is designated in the 1974 Control of Pollution Act.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: September 7, 1999
SECTION: Nws; Metro Briefs; Pg. 12
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Sun-Times reports on several happenings around the city of Chicago, including the release of a soundproofing booklet by the Chicago Aviation Department. The booklet discusses what needs to be done and who to contact about doing the work. While the information is intended for those who don't qualify for free soundproofing due to airplane noise, a local anti-noise group said the city should be paying for more soundproofing instead of giving advice.
The article reports on several happenings around the city of Chicago, including the release of a soundproofing booklet by the Chicago Aviation Department. The booklet, which is meant to help homeowners who don't qualify for free soundproofing due to certain levels of airplane noise, discusses what needs to be done and who to contact about doing the work.
The article goes on, noting that the booklets will be distributed to Chicago suburbs. The Suburban O'Hare Commission -- an anti-noise group -- criticized the booklet saying that the city should be paying for soundproofing instead of providing advice.
PUBLICATION: The Evening Chronicle
DATE: September 7, 1999
SECTION: Coast News, Pg. 30
BYLINE: by Gemma Blears
DATELINE: North Tyneside, UK
The Evening Chronicle reports that in North Tyneside, UK a lawsuit levied against an American electronics company has been adjourned until next year. A 500-signature petition from residents complaining of 24-hour noise coming from the factory caused the local council to present a noise-abatement notice, which was not heeded. The factory won the adjournment by claiming that it was currently making changes at the factory.
The article reports that in North Tyneside, UK a lawsuit levied against an American electronics company has been adjourned until next year. The local council had cited 24-hour noise coming from the company's factory -- which opened last year -- and was armed with a 500-signature petition from local residents.
The article notes that the factory, which makes circuit boards, has allegedly violated the 1990 Environmental Protection Act. The factory did not heed a noise-abatement notice that required them to reduce noise levels. The factory had the case adjourned until January, saying that it was making changes at the factory.
PUBLICATION: The Seattle Times
DATE: September 7, 1999
SECTION: Editorial; Pg. B5; Letters To The Editor
BYLINE: Elyse Myer
DATELINE: Seattle, Washington
The Seattle Times prints a letter to the editor from an elderly gardener living beside Interstate 5 in Seattle, Washington. The writer asks that noise abatement funds earmarked for noise walls on Interstate 5 include the area in front of his home.
"I have lived the major part of my 79 years in the Wallingford District. When Interstate 5 was built in front of my house, many residents moved to escape the noise, and this once quiet, friendly street was transformed into a string of rental properties. Since then, the noise has continually increased to near-unbearable levels.
I am a gardener and love my lawn and flowers. I spend a great deal of my time in my yard and am subjected to the loud freeway noise and air pollution that often become overwhelming.
I understand that funding has been appropriated for noise abatement along the I-5 corridor. I feel strongly that this area northwest of the Ship Canal bridge should be included in the effort of these funds." Elyse Myer Seattle
PUBLICATION: The Times
DATE: September 7, 1999
SECTION: Features
BYLINE: Janet Fricker
DATELINE: London, England
The Times reports that people who answer telephones for a living in the UK and elsewhere may be damaging their hearing. Workers, who often sit less than two feet apart in a noisy room with over 100 other employees, experience symptoms including tinnitus, rushing sounds, and certain frequencies that cause pain. Earphones must be turned up loud because of the noisy environment, and piercing beeps indicate when a call is about to come through. Also, unexplained noise shocks -- which reach 140 decibels -- sometimes come through earphones and may cause significant damage after even one exposure.
The article reports that people who answer telephones for a living in the UK and elsewhere may be damaging their hearing. Several employees were interviewed; they experience a variety of noise-induced ailments such as tinnitus (ringing in the ears), rushing sounds, and "recruitment" problems (certain frequencies cause pain in the ears). Some have experienced
The article reports that call center employees -- who will make up 2.3 percent of the UKs total workforce by the year 2002 -- often sit less than two feet apart in a noisy room with over 100 other employees. The loud room, the volume at which he must have his headset, and the loud beep that indicates incoming calls all irritate the ears. 39% of call center employees surveyed by the Royal National Institute for the Deaf were concerned that they were damaging their hearing. Experts say that since normal conversation itself reaches 70 decibels, call center employees are likely facing 85 decibel averages that require hearing protection and education under the 1989 Noise at Work Regulations.
The article goes on to say that the walkman-style earphones used at most call centers fit directly into the ear and give loud sounds no chance to dissipate. Blood vessels that feed the delicate hair cells in the ear constrict, starving the cells, and the hearing that the hair cells provide is damaged. Acoustic shocks, or sudden loud noises that reach 140 decibels can come through the headset due to still-unidentified glitches. One employee said that after experiencing three shocks in a short period of time, "she felt sick, dizzy and so disorientated that she needed to be taken home from work."
PUBLICATION: The Denver Rocky Mountain News
DATE: September 6, 1999
SECTION: Editorial; Ed. Final; Pg. 64A
BYLINE: Keith R. Hand
DATELINE: Aurora, Colorado
The Denver Rocky Mountain News prints a letter to the editor by a realtor from Aurora, Colorado. The writer is concerned that after DIA Airport was built intentionally in an area away from residential neighborhoods, new development plans will place residences there and set the stage for future litigations that taxpayers will end up paying for.
"We must avoid repeating the Stapleton scenario
I am a Realtor and pro-development; however, I'm miffed at the inability of our governing bodies to deal with a self-created problem!
Denver, Aurora and Commerce City allowed development to surround Stapleton Airport to the point that it was an unacceptable noise and safety hazard. The result was to build DIA in a remote enough area to prevent this problem (a good move). As usual a great deal of government money was spent on massive studies to delineate reasonable noise limits and boundaries, and as usual those studies have proven to be inadequate.
Now we read that a new subdivision is planned near DIA. A Realtor says, "It took us a while to get all the approvals through Aurora" and " Noise from jets won't be an issue as the land sits in the same noise contour as Green Valley Ranch." Aren't those the same flawed contours set by the same flawed government studies that defined the noise abatement areas in the first place? Aurora knows the noise standards set can't be met, but sues DIA and then compounds the problem by approving a nearby residential development.
If the counties and municipalities involved know there is a problem, they have a fiduciary responsibility to the citizens to mitigate the circumstance, rather than compound it and burden us all with expensive bickering and legal wrangling. Use the known facts; set realistic boundaries, and get on with development around DIA that will not lead to a repeat of the Stapleton scenario 10 years from now!
We need responsible government, not backbiting litigants."
Keith R. Hand
PUBLICATION: South Wales Evening Post
DATE: September 6, 1999
SECTION: Business: Companies, Pg.10
DATELINE: Swansea, South Wales
The South Wales Evening Post reports that residents living near Magnaforce Metal Fabrications Plant in Swansea, South Wales are upset by the plant's noise. Residents have noticed no reduction in noise after they talked with the business and had officials monitor plant noise. The plant manager claims that they have recently purchased a quieter machine and have reduced noisy work in the mornings an on Sundays.
The article reports that residents living near Magnaforce Metal Fabrications Plant in Swansea, South Wales are upset by the plant's noise. Residents say that they talked with representatives who seemed willing to make changes but have noticed no change. They have also had authorities monitor the noise, but the noise seemed to quiet down at that time.
The article goes on to say that the plant manager claims they have taken several steps to reduce noise. Baffle boards were put up to block noise but were removed after their presence -- which shielded the plant from view -- seemed to encourage break-ins. They have also tried to be quiet in the mornings and don't work on Sunday unless they are on a tight deadline. They also recently purchases a quieter machine.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: September 5, 1999
SECTION: Edt; Letters; Pg. 30
BYLINE: Don Loresch
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Sun-Times prints a series of letters to the editor, one of which is noise-related. A resident near Chicago's O'Hare Airport says that the old-fashioned noise-hotline should be upgraded so callers need not be "subjected to a series of ridiculous questions" after being awakened from sleep at night. He suggests a modified form of caller ID.
"Whole lotta noise
Does anyone remember the old saying, if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, did it really make a sound? That fits what's going on at O'Hare Airport. They have increased flights at night, and since not many people have called the high-tech noise hotline, they are saying that the noise (is down from last year).
Nothing could be further from the truth. It is the way the ridiculous hotline is set up. First, the onus is on you, the caller, to not only be awakened from sleep to call, but then you are subjected to a series of ridiculous questions.
I have called this hotline for the last 20 years, and it has only gotten worse. It is time to upgrade and move into the high-tech age.
When a person calls they do not really want to talk to one of those patronage workers of the City of Noise. Why can't they just use Caller I.D.? That way when you call it is immediately registered as a complaint.
Don Loresch, Elmhurst"
PUBLICATION: The Independent
DATE: September 5, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 13
BYLINE: Geoffrey Lean
DATELINE: London, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Valerie Weedon, National Co-ordinator of the Noise Network in England
The Independent reports that Britain's Noise Act -- which encourages local councils to set up teams of late-night noise inspectors who patrol around the clock and issue immediate fines -- has been ignored by 94% of councils who say those programs are unnecessary and expensive. The Act encourages the use of teams between 11 PM and 7 AM to respond to noise violations; noise over 35 decibels can draw an on-the-spot 100 pound fine.
The article reports that Britain's Noise Act -- which encourages local councils to set up teams of late-night noise inspectors who patrol around the clock and issue immediate fines -- has been used by hardly any councils. 94 percent of councils have said they will not implement the teams, saying they are unnecessary. The law was made optional because of the Treasury Department's concerns that implementation may be too expensive in some areas.
The article goes on to note that a legislator who is known for his successful campaigns had proposed the bill to eliminate loopholes in existing legislation. It encourages the use of teams between 11 PM and 7 AM to respond to noise violations; noise over 35 decibels can draw an on-the-spot 100 pound fine.
The article concludes, noting that even the ten councils who have implemented programs haven't used them much. Of three councils mentioned, one had never issued a fine and two others had only issued two. Valerie Weedon, National Co-ordinator of the Noise Network says that councils should be required to implement a program since it is critical for those disturbed by noise to be able to request an immediate response.
PUBLICATION: The San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: September 5, 1999
SECTION: News Pg. A-1
BYLINE: Mark Arner
DATELINE: San Diego, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Mike Kelly, president of the Friends of Los Penasquitos Canyon Preserve Inc
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that many San Diego leaders are pushing to allow roads through area canyons to alleviate traffic problems. The canyons are important 'wildlife corridors' for species like Mule Deer, and often serve as natural retreats for people who want to escape the city. According to environmentalists, one canyon with a highway through it was "pushed into a slow biological decline." Another canyon which blocked a road that was proposed twenty years ago is in danger again. The canyon in question contains a huge nature preserve where hundreds of songbird species and eleven raptor species live in addition to many mule deer and other wildlife. Canyon crossings contribute to erosion problems in the canyons, and disrupt important wildlife corridors.
The article reports that many San Diego leaders are pushing to allow roads through area canyons to alleviate traffic problems. The largely undisturbed canyons are important 'wildlife corridors' for species like Mule Deer, and often serve as natural retreats for people who want to escape the city. Roads that cross the canyons were removed from the table in years past but are becoming options again as traffic problems increase.
The article notes that in the 1970s, a six-lane freeway was built through San Clemente Canyon and "pushed this scenic coastal canyon into a slow biological decline" from road impact, from invasive exotic plants and from erosion; environmentalists fought the road, and though it was built they succeeded in having it built away from the creek which it was originally meant to follow. Traffic noise drowns out most wildlife noise here. Mule deer are scarce in the lower half of the canyon, discouraged from crossing roads by particularly loud noise under Interstate interchanges. Silt from construction activity fills salt marshes and reduces breeding habitat for ocean fish.
The article also looks at a road proposed for Los Penasquitos Canyon during the same period that was blocked; consequently wildlife still thrives there. Now, however, transportation planners are again pushing to put two roads through the canyon, as they anticipate an estimated 50 percent population increase in the next twenty years. A wildlife preserve in the canyon is home to huge oak groves, a creek and waterfall, and "the constant trilling and chirping of song sparrows, black-headed grosbeaks and ash-throated flycatchers -- some of the 175 types of birds in the preserve." There are also 11 types of raptors that breed in the preserve. Though the canyon is already crossed by highways, the preserve maintains a feel of peacefulness; a local non-profit organization -- Friends of Los Penasquitos Canyon Preserve Inc -- works to keep non-native species and additional highway noise out of the preserve.
The article notes that other canyons in the area are candidates for road crossings. Environmentalists say they're "not opposing a particular project. It's a matter of minimizing the impacts to the landscape, to the land, and to the biology." They say that although California's Transportation Department (Caltrans) estimated noise impacts from the current road through San Clemente Canyon -- an increase of 10 decibels was expected -- they didn't consider increased levels under the interchanges, nor did they consider the importance of wildlife corridors which were much less understood at the time.
PUBLICATION: The Seattle Times
DATE: September 5, 1999
SECTION: Home, Real Estate; Pg. G1; Home Forum
BYLINE: Elizabeth Rhodes
DATELINE: Everett, Washington
The Seattle Times prints a series of questions and answers about real estate. One question asked if residents "have any rights during construction regarding noise." The columnist answers that there is a friendly way -- informally talking to the builder -- and the official way. The official way depends on building codes and local noise ordinances entirely; there are no universal 'rights' in this case.
"Q: The lot behind me is being legally subdivided and two homes will be built. Is there any way I can influence the project in order to retain some privacy, like perhaps having the builder plant tall trees along the property line? Also, how close to the fence can they build, and do neighbors have any rights during construction regarding noise and dust? I live in Everett.
A: There are two ways of approaching this: the personal way and the official way. Certainly it would behoove you to make a friendly visit to the builder and let him know your concerns. Builders usually want good neighbor relations, and this one may well be sympathetic to your needs.
Second, you can make your concerns known to Everett's Department of Planning and Community Development. Its director, Paul Roberts, says "we're very willing to talk, and trade on the goodwill of people doing the work" to make sure the neighborhood's concerns are taken into account.
Beyond that, Roberts says "we're bound by state law to review the application on the basis of the codes that exist, and the law requires us to apply the codes as they exist at the time of application. That's important for people to understand. Their rights are locked in."
Thus the answer to your questions about proximity and noise are contained in the setback provisions within the building code and in the local noise ordinance. Roberts invites you to call the Everett Planning Department (425-257-8731) for more specific information. Also, most public libraries have copies of local building and noise requirements. Home Forum answers readers' questions every Sunday in the Home/Real Estate section. Send questions to Home Forum, Seattle Times, P.O. Box 70, Seattle, WA 98111, or call 206-464-8510 to leave your questions on Home Forum's recorded line. The e-mail address is erhodes@seattletimes.com
Sorry, no personal replies."
Previous week: August 29, 1999
Next week: September 12, 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