PUBLICATION: ANP English News Bulletin
DATE: August 18, 1997
DATELINE: Amsterdam, Netherlands
The ANP English News Bulletin reports that a court in Haarlem, Netherlands ruled Friday that the Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam did not have the authority to limit air traffic and control noise pollution levels by imposing a ban on night flights by wide-body planes. The suit was brought by a number of airlines, led by the charter airline Martinair.
According to the article, the court accepted the plaintiff's argument that only the state was authorized to institute measures such as the banning of certain flights. The court ruled that Schiphol's night flight ban was invalid and should be withdrawn within eight hours of the judgement. The article says that according to the court, the airport authority is not a government agency but a private company, and in order to ensure that noise pollution doesn't exceed legal limits, flight coordination could be handed over to an independent body. In response to the court's ruling Transport Minister Annemarie Jorritsma said Thursday that she is now in favor of allowing the airport to transfer its responsibilities for slot allocations to an independent agency from as early as September instead of waiting until next year.
The article goes on to say that because of the ruling, airlines such as Martinair, El Al, and Polar Air will be allowed to maintain their current schedules including take-offs and landings between 11:00 pm and 6:00 am.
In response to the ruling, environmental organizations called on the government to immediately institute measures that will ensure compliance with the statutory noise pollution levels in and around the airport -- for example by issuing a ministerial directive that would ban night flights, the article says. This call also was backed by the green party GroenLinks. The Christian Democrats responded to the ruling by saying the court struck down Jorritsma's contention that the airport was responsible for ensuring adherence to noise limits. The conservative VVD party, the ruling coalition partner, said the noise pollution problem should be solved by speeking up construction of a fifth runway at Schiphol, the article concludes.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
DATE: August 18, 1997
SECTION: Local, Pg. 3B
BYLINE: Mitch Lipka
DATELINE: Palm Beach, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Pinky Yount, director, Citizens Committee on Airport Noise
The Sun-Sentinel reports that officials from the Palm Beach (Florida) International Airport want to return some of the fees airlines have paid as a penalty for flying noisy airplanes after an airline flies 80% or more of its flights using quieter "Stage 3" jets. Airport officials plan to bring their proposal before county commissioners Tuesday.
According to the article, fees at the airport range from $20 for a nighttime takeoff or landing by a quiet jet to $2,600 for a takeoff and $260 for a landing by an older, noisier plane. In fiscal year 1996, the airport collected $559,429 in such fees, the article says. The airport's new proposal would refund up to 85% of the fees an airline has paid when the airline uses Stage 3 jets for 80% or more of its flights. According to Lisa Waters, the airport's director of noise abatement and technical services, the proposal is a way of rewarding airlines who fly quiet. Airport officials also want to publicize the names of airlines that achieve the quieter flight goal, Waters said. The article notes that five airlines already use Stage 3 jets on 97% or more of their flights: American, Midway, US Airways, Continental, and UPS. All planes are required to use Stage 3 technology by the end of 1999 due to federal law, the article says, but the Palm Beach Airport wants to achieve that goal by this spring, according to Waters.
The article goes on to say that Pinky Yount, head of the Citizens Committee on Airport Noise, said she approves of the plan and hopes it will work. She said the competitive nature of the airline industry might make the refunds attractive
Delta is the airport's largest carrier, the article reports, and last year paid $128,860 in fees. Todd Clay, regional manager of corporate communications for Delta in Atlanta, said the refund idea is a good one, but added that it will be too complicated for large airlines to alter the type of plane they use on certain routes. He said a Delta jet that flies from the Palm Beach Airport doesn't just go to its destination and return to Palm Beach. Instead, a plane goes from one city to the next based on a computer formula that calculates the demand for seats on each flight. Clay added that Delta has a schedule for meeting the federal law, and company officials expect to be ahead of that schedule. He pointed out that 397 of Delta's 551 aircraft are already of the quieter variety. In addition, Clay said he believed Delta is already performing better than the 88% figure cited by the airport when flights by the carrier Comair, which is under contract with Delta, are not included.
The article concludes that both Yount and Waters agreed that even with these efforts, there will still be complaints about noisy jets from residents near the airport.
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: August 17, 1997
SECTION: News, Pg. 1C
BYLINE: Tony De Paul
DATELINE: Warwick, Rhode Island
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Peg Magill, resident and activist; Chris Sirr, Al Gemma, City Councillors
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports that air traffic at the T.F. Green Airport in Warwick, Rhode Island is booming, due in part to a new air terminal that opened 11 months ago and by the introduction of Southwest Airlines to the airport. Meanwhile, residents living near the airport are complaining more and more about the noise from the growing airport. In recent developments, Air Ontario and Southwest announced plans Thursday to add service to Toronto, Iceland, and Luxembourg; the City Council Tuesday asked the state Department of Health to conduct an independent noise study; and a City Councillor has a resolution pending that would require a portion of the airport's landing fees be given to the city. The article details the history of attempts to measure noise impacts at the airport.
According to the article, consultants studied the noise impact from the airport two years ago and found that noise had diminished so much that 4,500 households could be dropped from a soundproofing project, saving taxpayers $116 million. However, the article says, that study was based on jet traffic as of 1993, when the airport was at a standstill. In addition, the Airport Corporation, the company that runs the airport, has always used a computer simulation of noise levels at the airport, even though residents have long demanded that actual ground-level sound measurements be taken. This year, the first since 1992, Green Airport did not get federal money to soundproof homes exposed to jet noise, which forced them to put the program on hold. So far, the program has soundproofed 450 homes at a cost of $12 million.
The article goes on to say that it is not known whether noise levels are actually louder than they were in the past. Jets are often bigger and carry fuller loads than they used to, requiring more power and noise to take off. And, jet flights have increased by one-third compared to the last year, an average of an additional 28 takeoffs and landings per day. More and more jets are the quieter Stage 3 aircraft, but because people hear more planes of all types now, the article says, they may perceive the noise as louder or more annoying.
Meanwhile, Ted Drozdz, chief aeronautical inspector at the airport, said a noise hotline has not seen many calls since the terminal opened until last week when a local television station did a report on airport noise and put the hotline number on the screen. Drozdz said before the broadcast, an average of 10 calls per month were made to the hotline, and now it's "significantly more." He added most of the calls are from residents of Cowesett and Lakewood. Some callers have legitimate complaints, he said, but some do not. Wayne Schuster, director of planning and development at the Airport Corporation, said that most of the complaints are probably a result of the noisier Stage 2 jets that are still flying out of the airport, but which will be phased out by 2000.
The article reports that the Airport Corporation will launch a new noise study in January that will map a new set of nosie contours to show how the city was affected by jet flights in 1997. Schuster said the goal of the study is to find out how many homes are eligible for soundproofing, and whether flight patterns can be changed to minimize noise. Like previous studies, this study will be based on a computer simulation of noise levels in which flight data is entered into the computer model and a map of noise contours is created that is based on that data. Schuster said, "I understand that people were leery of the results that came out in 1995," when the noise contours shrank dramatically. "People naturally said, 'Wait a second, I'm still hearing these planes.'" But he added that the computer model used by the Airport Corporation's consultants, Wyle Laboratories in Arlington, Virginia, is accurate. Schuster said, "You're always going to get people with different sensitivities to noise." But, "we're deeply committed to finding solutions that are palatable for everybody and to making the airport as good a neighbor as it can be."
However, the article reports, the city and residents groups are starting to take the problem into their own hands. The Warwick City Council Tuesday asked the state Department of Health to conduct an independent noise study, and Chris Sirr, the sponsor of the measure, said he wants a study based on actual measurements of noise at ground level, not on computer simulations. Meanwhile, City Councillor Al Gemma has a resolution pending that would require Green Airport to give some of its landing fees to the city, in addition to the city's annual $275,000 cut from airport-parking revenue. Gemma said, "If we've got to live with this cross on our back, we should get a couple of million bucks a year."
In addition, the article says, residents of Cowesett, about three miles south of the airport, are organizing a petition drive aimed at stopping the growth at the airport. The residents want to ban overnight flights; route more air traffic over the Bay; and ban any additional flights until the noise is under control. That anti-noise campaign is being organized by Peg Magill, who said since the new terminal opened last September, there has been a "substantial increase" of noise and traffic over Cowesett. Magill said, "We're just fed up. We're requesting an explanation as to why a heavily residential area like ours was chosen to be a direct flight path." She added that the airport expansion has decreased property values. The article concludes that residents are planning a meeting on August 26 at 7:30 in the Warwick Police Headquarters.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: August 20, 1997
SECTION: NWS; Pg. 20
BYLINE: Heather Ryndak
DATELINE: Park Ridge, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jack Saporito, director, Alliance of Residents Concerning O'Hare
The Chicago Sun-Times reports that Park Ridge, Illinois has become the first town to join a campaign by the Alliance of Residents Concerning O'Hare to remove the Federal Aviation Administration from airport noise monitoring and return the power to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
According to the ariticle, Congress eliminated EPA funding for airport noise monitoring in 1982. The Alliance, based in Arlington Heights, is asking suburban villages to urge Congress members to support legislation to restore the EPA's monitoring role. According to Alliance Director Jack Saporito, the FAA should not be monitoring aircraft noise because it promotes the aviation industry. However, he added, the EPA would be an objective agency and would help protect public health. Saporito said, "The FAA has never done anything to acknowledge public health problems or the environmental impacts of pollution and noise." He added that noise pollution can cause hypertension, sleep deprivation, strokes, heart problems, and high blood pressure. In addition, Saporito said, if the EPA regained control of noise monitoring, the noise threshold for planes probably would be reduced and more health issues would be studied.
The article concludes that under a proposed bill, the EPA would receive between $5 and $8 million from 1998 to 2002 to regulate and monitor aircraft, and would update or develop new noise emission standards and provide technical assistance to local communities.
PUBLICATION: The Dominion (Wellington, New Zealand)
DATE: August 20, 1997
SECTION: News; National; Pg. 3
BYLINE: Alan Samson
DATELINE: Wellington, New Zealand
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Maxine Harris, chair, Residents Airport Noise Action Group
The Dominion reports that the groups involved in an Environment Court hearing against provisions in the Wellington (New Zealand) City Council's district plan regarding acceptable noise controls for the Wellington Airport have signed a consent order, agreeing to settle their differences, after a week of court-ordered mediation. The Residents Airport Noise Action Group, Wellington International Airport Ltd, the Board of Airline Representatives, and Wellington City Council presented the consent order to Judge Shonagh Kenderdine, ending more than 10 years of dispute on the issue.
According to the article, the consent agreement includes the following details:
An air-noise boundary will be set along Hobart St to Shelly Bay Rd on the east, and along Kingsford Smith St and up toward Salek St on the west.
Limits to airport noise emissions and provisions for monitoring will be set in the council's district plan.
A nighttime curfew will be enforced between midnight and 6 am (including a curfew for freight courier planes), and the acceptable noise level for night flights will be reduced. In addition, there are strict rules on engine testing.
Sound insulation for new houses inside the boundary will be required.
A noise management plan will be developed to implement decisions, with representation by residents.
The Defence Ministry will lobby the government for funding for new, quieter planes within five years.
The article says that Judge Kenderdine said issues that still concern residents can be brought before the council as applications for variation, or can be dealt with under the noise management plan. Residents wanted to make a submission to the court regarding the difficulties their group has faced, but Judge Kenderdine would not permit the submission. The article notes that the residents' submission was expected to strongly criticize the other parties, but Kenderdine said there was no point in going over areas that had been agreed upon.
The article goes on to say that John Webb, executive director of the Board of Airline Representatives, said last night the agreement provides a balanced solution. He said the agreement minimizes disturbance to residents but maximises the value of the airport to Wellington. Meanwhile, Maxine Harris, chair of the residents group, said it was difficult for the community group to take the fight as far as the Environment Court. She added, "The fact that it did so has resulted in something better than the council had decided. Had we not appealed the noise environment, it would be far worse than we have now."
The article also notes that the hearing will continue today on one outstanding issue related to controls on residential activity in suburban areas inside an air-noise boundary.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
DATE: August 20, 1997
SECTION: Local, Pg. 3B
BYLINE: Karla Schuster
DATELINE: Boca Raton, Florida
The Sun-Sentinel reports that debate continues in Boca Raton, Florida over whether an airport control tower at Boca Raton Airport, scheduled for construction by the end of the year, will reduce or increase noise levels. On Tuesday, Philip Jones, an air controller for RVA Associates Inc., the company that would run the tower planned for the airport, told members of the airport's noise advisory committee that a tower can help improve noise problems by permitting air traffic controllers to tell pilots to use specific flight routes that avoid residential areas.
The article reports that Jones said, "I'm not here to say that each and every time an aircraft takes off or lands that we will put them in a pattern that conforms with noise abatement procedures...and it's up to a pilot to comply; but in my opinion, a tower can help." However, some committee members said they were concerned that a tower would increase air traffic over Boca Raton. Several homeowners' associations that oppose the tower have the same concern, the article notes. Jones said that a control tower opened at the Kissimmee Airport on May 1 and is operated by his company, and that officials there have logged no noise complaints since then.
Meanwhile, the article goes on to say, noise complaints at the Boca Raton Airport reached an all-time high of 54 during July. However, airport officials say 36 of the calls came from five households. Nina Demeo, Assistant Airport Director, said, "July is the slowest month of the year, and this is the most complaints I've seen in my time here. Many callers were repeaters." The article notes that a total of 17 households made the complaints in July, with most complaining about small planes.
PUBLICATION: The Xinhua News Agency
DATE: August 20, 1997
SECTION: Item No.: 0820048
DATELINE: Beijing, China
The Xinhua News Agency reports that according to today's China Daily, new regulations limiting noise pollution will take effect later this year in Guangdong, a province in South China. The provincial regulations are expected to be passed by the Provincial People's Congress next month.
The article reports that there has been rapid economic growth in Guangdong, and noise, air, and water pollution have worsened. The cities of Guangzhou, Foshan, and Yunfu now are the most seriously polluted cities in the Pearl River delta, which borders Hong Kong and Macao, the article says.
The new regulations in Guangdong will punish companies and drivers who create too much noise in residential areas. In addition, the use of steam machines for driving piles and concrete mixers will be prohibited in downtown areas, and construction on city sites will be banned at night unless a special permit is issued. Noise levels at evening entertainment venues also will be limited, the article says. Fines for violating the new regulations are expected to range between 200 yuan ($24 US) and 100,000 yuan ($12,048 US).
PUBLICATION: AP Worldstream
DATE: August 19, 1997
SECTION: International news
DATELINE: Amsterdam, Netherlands
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Environmental Defense Association
AP Worldstream reports that the Dutch government agreed Monday to accelerate work on a fifth runway at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport. The runway project is designed to decrease noise in neighborhoods near the airport by providing another landing strip for incoming jets.
The article says that Transport Minister Annemarie Jorritsma said easing noise levels for residents is an urgent problem, and the work on the new runway must begin "as quickly as possible," with a target date of 2003 for completion. However, members of the Environmental Defense Association called the plan to speed up construction illegal, and said the government's belief that a new runway will reduce noise is "an illusion."
The article also reports that the Cabinet will decide later this week on limits to the amount of noise generated by the airport, according to Dutch television reports on Tuesday. Schiphol Airport is one of Europe's largest hubs, and the government has been studying various plans for expansion, the article notes, including a controversial plan to build a new satellite airport on a manmade island in the North Sea.
PUBLICATION: Business Wire
DATE: August 19, 1997
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
Business Wire released a press release that reports the Los Angeles World Airports Board of Airport Commissioners agreed Tuesday to lower landing fees for aircraft using Los Angeles and Ontario International Airports. The noise mitigation programs normally paid for through landing fees will now be funded through passenger facility charges levied on each traveler.
The press release reports that the lower landing fees will be $1.83 per 1,000 pounds of landed weight at Los Angeles International (LAX) and $1.07 per 1,000 pounds of landed weight at Ontario. Los Angeles World Airports Board commissioners are seeking to pay for noise-mitigation programs normally funded through landing fees by levying a $3 passenger facility charge (PFC) on each traveler, to be collected by airline officials when they issue tickets. LAX currently has no PFC, one of the few U.S. airports that does not, the press release said.
The press release goes on to say that the Los Angeles World Airports Board applied this summer to the Federal Aviation Administration to charge the PFC, and approvals are expected later this year. An airline landing a typical Boeing 747 with a weight of 630,000 pounds at LAX will pay $1,115 under the new rate, instead of $1,240 under the old rate, the press release says. In addition, the press release notes that several other large U.S. airports now will charge higher landing fees than LAX's reduced fees.
Noise mitigation programs for the airports include making nearly 8,900 homes in Playa del Rey and Westchester eligible for free sound insulation, the press release says. In addition, the city of Ontario uses its noise mitigation grants to fund residential soundproofing and the acquisition of residences.
For more information, contact Tom Winfrey or Nancy Suey Castles at Los Angeles World Airports, 310-646-5260.
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: August 19, 1997
SECTION: News, Pg. 1C
BYLINE: Ellen Liberman
DATELINE: Warwick, Rhode Island
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Wilfred Lambert, Loretta Richards, William and Ella Wong, Linda Johnson, Joe Piscopio, Steven Johnson, Francis and Monica O'Neill, Eddie Bucklin, residents
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports that the phenomenal growth of the T.F. Green Airport in Warwick, Rhode Island has led city officials hoping to capitalize on the airport's success to propose an Airport Economic Redevelopment Plan, in which Hillsgrove is targeted for more commercial and light-industrial development. The plans would eliminate the neighborhoods in the historic village. The article details the history of Hillsgrove, and the sentiments of residents who eventually will lose their homes.
The article reports that Hillsgrove was begun by turn-of-the-century industrialist Thomas Jefferson Hill, who built mills that produced first textiles, then iron goods. Industry, which first brought the village together, is now dividing it, the article says. City officials recently have held a series of public hearings in which they have unveiled plans to bring more commercial and light industrial development into Hillsgrove, including plans to change Post Road into a Parisian-style boulevard and to build a new Amtrak station.
The Hillsgrove residential neighborhood, known as Hillsgrove South, consists of Defrance Court, Cosmo Street, and Mapledale, Carmell, and Pullman Roads, the article reports. The area is surrounded by Post Road, an Airport Connector on-ramp, railroad tracks, and the D'Ambra Construction Co. There is only one route out of the neighborhood, at the corner of Cosmo Street and Post Road, and sometimes traffic is so congested there, residents say, they can't get out at all. The historic mill village is located across the railroad tracks from Hillsgrove South, the article says, and is surrounded by industrial businesses.
The article says that city officials met last month with the owners of the 23 homes in Hillsgrove South to talk about a mass exodus from the neighborhood. City officials said it would be best of all homeowners sold together under terms of a mutual agreement. At the meeting, city officials agreed to conduct an appraisal of the commercial value of the four-and-a-half-acre parcel, and set a reasonable offer for the homeowners, whose properties are valued at $80,000, on average. City Planner Jonathan Stevens said, "All we want to help them [residents] do is to make an informed decision. Growth is inevitable while the economy is good." No developer has expressed a serious interest in the area yet, the article reports, but city officials say they don't want the homeowners to be stuck with unsaleable property when the frontage along Post Road is developed in response to what they believe are inevitable economic-development pressures. However, the article points out, the Airport Economic Redevelopment Plan is still just a plan. And although a new Amtrak terminal is high on the state and city's wish lists, it too is still just a plan.
The article goes on to explore the reactions of some of the residents in Hillsgrove South. Loretta Richards, a Mapledale Road resident, said people are already afraid to spend money on their houses, and cannot sell their homes now because of the uncertainty about what will happen. Wilfred Lambert, a Hillsgrove resident since 1958, said, "I'd be happy if they would leave us alone. But when it gets down to the nitty-gritty, they want us out of here." Other residents, such as William and Ella Wong, have watched their living situation deteriorate as traffic and noise have grown from the surrounding development. The Wongs live 32 feet from the Airport Connector on-ramp. With only a chain-link fence separating their backyard from the speeding cars and trucks, William believes the odds are such that a vehicle will smash through the fence and into their home some day. "It's like Russian roulette," he said.
Residents on Pullman Road have a different perspective, the article reports. Their street parallels the railroad tracks, and after the wooden railroad ties were replaced with concrete ties five years ago, noise and vibrations have increased and cracked foundations of some buildings. Linda Johnson, of Pullman Road, said, "It's getting out of hand. When I moved in 10 years ago, it was a good neighborhood." Joe Piscopio, who owns the Jefferson Grille at the corner of Jefferson and Kilvert Streets and seven rental properties nearby, said there's not much hope for keeping the old mill village alive either. He said most of the residential properties in that area are owned by landlords, because few people would want to purchase a home and live in such an uncertain area. He believes the industrial park to the west, Metro Center, probably will eventually swallow those houses. "It's too valuable to have tenement houses sitting here," Piscopio said. "The story of owning property is to build value. I don't think it will be any more valuable than it is right now."
The article concludes that Hillsgrove homeowners appear to have a mix of feelings over the future of their neighborhood. Some want to stay put. Others say it's a shame about the demise of the neighborhood. Still others believe that trying to come up with an equitable settlement could strain the goodwill that's built up over time in the neighborhood. Steven Johnson, a 21-year resident of Mapledale Road, said the settlement is "going to be an issue." He added, "Some people will be at odds with one another. No one knows how it will be done." Francis and Monica O'Neill of Cosmo St. are among the neighborhood's oldest residents, the article says, and Francis described the neighborhood as one where: "Everybody used to visit everybody. If you needed a cup of sugar, you borrowed it. Anybody would help anybody. You can see why no one want wants to move." But a 37-year resident, Eddie Bucklin, summed up many peoples' sentiment by saying: "It ain't gonna get better, so we have to get out."
PUBLICATION: The San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: August 19, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. A14; Bay Area Report
DATELINE: San Francisco, California
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the Board of Supervisors voted yesterday to allow San Francisco's Municipal Railway to buy 59 more Italian-built Breda streetcars, despite problems with the streetcars that include screeching noise and vibrations that shake houses.
According to the article, the vote authorized the Municipal Railway to spend $13.8 million to begin adding to the 77 streetcars already bought. The city agency hopes to leverage that money to get an additional $30 million from the state Transportation Commission to purchase the streetcars. The article says the Board of Supervisors received assurances from city officials and a manufacturer's representative that solutions are being found for the noise and vibration problems. In addition, supervisors heard that purchasing 59 new cars from another manufacturer would cost an extra $60 million and add several years to the acquisition process. One supervisor, Tom Ammiano, told his colleagues that he went to listen to a streetcar on the J-Line at 5 am that morning and heard a "banshee-like bone-chilling whine." But he added that it was much shorter in duration than last time he heard it, so he is hopeful for a solution.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: August 19, 1997
SECTION: St. Charles, Pg. 01
BYLINE: Ralph Dummit
DATELINE: St. Charles, Missouri
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Pat McDonnell, vice chair, St. Charles Citizens Against Aircraft Noise (CAAN); Barbara White, co-chair, CANN
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that members of St. Charles (Missouri) Citizens Against Aircraft Noise (CAAN) are urging more aggressive action by local officials in pursuing a noise agreement with city officials in St. Louis over noise from Lambert Field. CAAN opposes an airport expansion plan favored by St. Louis officials that would extend a runway two miles closer to St. Charles. CAAN members have staged a rally for September 6 and are urging officials who support the group to attend and speak at the event.
According to the article, there is skepticism among public officials in St. Charles County about the level of support in the community for airport noise issues, said Pat McDonnell, vice chair of CAAN. To help dispel that skepticism, McDonnell announced to the County Council last week that a rally is scheduled for Sept. 6 in the courtyard of the St. Charles City Hall, 200 North Second Street, from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. McDonnell said the rally has been called "to unify and stand up for St. Charles in response to an irresponsible neighbor," and that chairs on a stage at the rally will be labeled with the names of St. Charles and St. Charles County Council members, in order to publicize which officials do or do not show up. He reminded the councillors that more than 5,000 signatures have been collected opposing the expansion plan for Lambert favored by St. Louis officials, and that a similar number of signatures have been collected requesting that "political representatives such as yourselves lobby other representatives to pursue aggressively a noise agreement with the city of St. Louis." Barbara White, co-chair of CANN, said that county residents need to know "where their representatives stand" on the aircraft-noise issue. She added that if officials cannot attend the rally, they can send a representative or issue a statement that can be read at the rally. White said, "Local officials are our voice." They must be made to understand that "people are very much concerned by the noise situation and the future of our community."
Meanwhile, Bob Schnur, County Council Chair (R-3rd District), said county officials are talking with St. Louis and airport officials about a noise agreement, but added that CAAN doesn't believe the county is moving aggressively enough. Schnur said county officials would continue to negotiate and perhaps would "turn up the heat" as time goes on. He ruled out taking legal action over the issue, the article reports.
The article goes on to explain that the County Council passed a resolution in December on which there so far has been little action. The resolution called for the establishment of "a working group composed of community activists, county government, city governments, the Airport Authority, the Regional Commerce & Growth Association, etc., to address the problem." That group has not been formed, but Schnur said this week that it doesn't mean a group will not be formed. The resolution also called for the development of "a noise agreement with significant penalties for failure to abide by the terms and conditions as has been accomplished at other airports around the country." Schnur said that county officials had hoped "to deal openly and directly" with St. Louis officials on a noise abatement agreement. But Monica McFee, a spokesperson for St. Louis Mayor Clarence Harmon, said Monday that the mayor considered the noise issue "to be under the purview of Col. Leonard Griggs," Lambert's director. "The mayor will leave it up to him on steps to take to minimize airport noise, " McFee said. The article says that a spokesperson for Griggs could not be reached for comment. However in the past, the article points out, Griggs has said he has not proposed signing a noise agreement with any community, but that the Airport Authority "will abide by the Environmental Impact Statement and the Record of Decision being developed by the Federal Aviation Administration."
Meanwhile, CAAN's McDonnell went on to remind the County Council that residents get "absolutely no response" to their complaints about noisy flights between 4 a.m. and 6 a.m. He pointed out that the city of Chicago recently made a noise-reduction agreement with its neighbors, but that St. Louis has not responded to their request for a similar agreement. McDonnell said, "The citizens of our community are growing angry over a neighbor who is irresponsible, angry over an issue that can decrease the value of their homes, ruin the education of their children and destroy the flavor of our community and the quality of life in it. This issue isn't going to go away."
PUBLICATION: Telegram & Gazette (Worcester, MA)
DATE: August 19, 1997
SECTION: Local News; Pg. B2
DATELINE: Southbridge, MA
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Dale Johonnett, Town Councillor; David Craig, resident
The Telegram & Gazette reports that Dale Johonnett, a Southbridge, Massachusetts Town Councillor, urged residents last night to let their town councillors know they support a proposed noise control bylaw or it may be defeated.
The article reports that last night was the first of three readings of the five-and-one-half page bylaw, which would prohibit unlawful noise which "annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace or safety of any reasonable person, of normal sensitivity, residing in the area." One resident, David Craig, said he supported the proposed bylaw and asked how it would be enforced. He also suggested that noise-making equipment of repeat offenders be confiscated.
Meanwhile, the article reports, Councillor Johonnett, a strong supporter of the bylaw, said some of the councillors have not shown an interest in pursuing noise complaints. She said if residents don't tell their councillors that they support the proposed bylaw, it may be defeated when it comes up for a vote after the third reading in about one month.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: August 19, 1997
SECTION: Metro Northwest; Pg. 2; Zone: NW; Northwest overnight
BYLINE: Dean Geroulis
DATELINE: Park Ridge, Illinois
The Chicago Tribune reports that the Park Ridge (Illinois) City Council voted unanimously Monday night to reject a proposal to join the City of Chicago's O'Hare Airport Noise Commission. In addition, the council voted to endorse federal legislation that would restore the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate noise emissions, the article reports.
According to the article, the council's vote reflected the widespread suspicion among suburbs around O'Hare International Airport that Chicago's city-suburban noise commission was formed as a way to gain suburban support for a new runway at the airport. The other vote, supporting federal legislation known as the Quiet Communities Act of 1997, would restore funding for the U.S. EPA's Office of Noise Abatement and Control, the article notes.
PUBLICATION: Aviation Daily
DATE: August 21, 1997
SECTION: Vol. 329, No. 37; Pg. 327
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
Aviation Daily reports that the Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners has agreed to reduce aircraft landing fees at Los Angeles and Ontario airports, funds which have been used for noise mitigation programs. The board wants to raise the money for noise mitigation through a passenger facility charge instead, the article reports. The board's decisions must be approved by the Federal Aviation Administration, which is expected later this year.
The article reports that the new landing fees will be $1.83 per 1,000 pounds at Los Angeles International, and $1.07 per 1,000 pounds at Ontario. Those rates are down from $1.97 and $1.29, respectively. With the new rate structure, a 747 landing at 630,000 pounds at Los Angeles will pay $1,115 instead of $1,240. The board said with these changes, Los Angeles International will have landing fees in the mid-range of the country's largest airports, and will have lower fees than those at Chicago O'Hare, Denver, Honolulu, Houston, New York Kennedy, New York LaGuardia, Newark, and Washington National. Board members said the reductions in landing fees resulted from removing the fee calculations of costs associated with noise-mitigation programs. The board is seeking to pay for those noise mitigation programs with a $3 passenger facility charge at each airport. The article points out that Los Angeles International currently is one of the few U.S. airports that does not have a passenger facility charge.
PUBLICATION: Deutsche Presse-Agentur
DATE: August 19, 1997
DATELINE: Warendorf, Germany
The Deutsche Presse-Agentur reports that a judge ruled Tuesday that a German couple from the state of North Rhine-Westphalia will have to quiet their love-making or else risk a fine of up to 500,000 marks ($275,000). The judge ruled that failure to comply with the court order also could lead to a prison sentence. The case was brought by a neighbor tired of hearing the noise next door, the article says.
According to the article, the judge said he hoped to settle the suit amicably, but the couple insisted they were quiet during love-making, while the neighbor insisted they were very loud. As a result, the judge invited numerous witnesses to testify about the noise. Other neighbors claimed that loud music and arguments between the couple were also a regular event, the article reports.
PUBLICATION: Kennebec Journal (Augusta, ME)
DATE: August 18, 1997
SECTION: Local; Pg. 4
BYLINE: George Smith, Mount Vernon resident
DATELINE: Mount Vernon, Maine
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: George Smith, resident
The Kennebec Journal printed an editorial from George Smith, a Mount Vernon, Maine resident, which says that quiet is an important aspect of life in Maine that is not appreciated, understood, protected or respected. The writer goes on to detail several personal experiences he has had with noise or the absence of noise in the outdoors, including noise from trains, personal watercraft, barking dogs, and loud radios, and the affect of noise on fish.
The editorial writer explains that about a month ago, he visited a fish hatchery in Waldoboro where Sam and Carolyn Chapman grow shad, an anadromous fish that once swam by the millions up Maine's unrestricted rivers. He says the Chapmans want to restore the shad to the Kennebec River. The writer says he watched the shad hatch from their eggs in large tanks, and when a train would go by on the rail line about 20 yards behind the hatchery, the adult shad would go crazy, crashing into the sides of the tank trying to escape. Some of the fish were injured because they can't take the noise, he says.
The editorial argues that humans often can't take noise either. The writer points out that Senator Mary Small's proposed legislation this year requiring all towns to enact a barking dog ordinance drew tremendous interest, and many people are fighting for a ban on personal watercraft because of noise. The writer says at his home on the shores of Sourdahunk Lake, human-made noises are very noticeable. Last month, he says, a man liked to cruise up and down the lake with a small yapping dog, which could be heard around the lake because sound carries for miles over water. The dog drove the writer crazy, he says. Trolling also is not allowed on the lake, the editorial writer claims, so a boat motoring up and down the lake ruins a quiet day.
The writer then goes on to complain about loud radios in natural settings. He says once he was fishing from his boat in the evening, when another angler pulled up 30 yards away and cranked up his radio full blast. The writer says he was astonished because Baxter Park doesn't allow radios. However, this angler was staying in a campground outside the park and either didn't understand the rules or didn't care. In another instance, the writer stopped going to the beach because of the blare of radios, but on a recent trip to Popham Beach, he was surprised to find no radios. He says personal radios with earphones are a great invention because everyone can have their own music, and he can have his quiet. The absence of noise on the beach made his experience wonderful, he says.
The writer concludes that at his vacation home, the absence of electricity and telephones makes his senses much more acute and brings home the value of quiet. He says he hears a moose munching on a tree, a deer sneezing at his salt lick, and a mother partridge scolding her brood. And then, he says, there's the sound of a quiet evening with a sky full of stars: the sound of silence.
PUBLICATION: China Business Information Network (CBNet)
DATE: August 21, 1997
SECTION: Business
DATELINE: Guangdong, China
The China Business Information Network reports that new noise regulations expected to be approved next month will take effect later this year in Guangdong, an economically-developed province in south China. The Guangdong Provincial Regulations on the Prevention of Noise Pollution, which are expected to be passed by the Provincial People's Congress next month, will punish firms and vehicle-owners who create too much noise in residential areas, the article says.
According to the article, steam machines that drive piles and concrete mixers will be forbidden in downtown areas, and nighttime construction without permission also will be banned. Noise levels at nightclubs also will be restricted in the evenings. Fines for violating the regulations will range from 200 yuan ($24) to 100,000 yuan ($12,048).
The article notes that noise, air, and water pollution has become pronounced in the province, due to rapid economic growth. The cities of Guangzhou, Foshan, and Yunfu are now the most seriously polluted cities in the Pearl River Delta, which borders Hong Kong and Macao, the article concludes.
PUBLICATION: The Northern Echo (England)
DATE: August 20, 1997
SECTION: Pg. 5
BYLINE: Nigel Burton
DATELINE: London, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jeff Johnson, manager of Autosounds
According to The Northern Echo of England, government officials are preparing to award police with more powers to combat loud car stereos in England.
The article says police are about to be given the power to turn off the greatest noise nuisances on the roads -loud car stereos. Labour ministers are drawing up plans for new laws that will give police sweeping powers to stop noisy sound systems. The craze for high output car entertainment has taken off in recent years. Drivers who have spent thousands of pounds on their music systems take part in "Sound Off" competitions, in which the winner gets a prize for the loudest music. With the growth in systems has come increased noise complaints from people unwillingly subjected to the music.
The article quotes Jeff Johnson, manager of Autosounds, car audio specialists in Darlington: "Some of the lads do go a bit over the top. I knew of one driver whose system produced 159 decibels. If he'd turned it up to full blast the noise would have left him permanently deaf." A normal car stereo, as fitted by a manufacturer, produces about 25 watts. "If you want to do well in a Sound Off competition, a decent set-up costs between #3,000 and #5,000," said Mr Johnson. "Depending on the equipment, that could buy a music power output of 5000 watts." However, Mr Johnson said Autosounds does not approve of noise nuisance. "People have to be sensible about their equipment," he said. "I can see why the police may need new powers but I'd like to see them warn drivers first, before they confiscated equipment. The industry and the public needs protecting from irresponsible drivers who bring car audio into disrepute." George Oliver, a spokesman for Durham police, said noise nuisance is a growing problem. "Ways of tackling these complaints have been discussed at the highest level," he said.
PUBLICATION: The Northern Echo (England)
DATE: August 19, 1997
SECTION: Pg. 1
BYLINE: Guy Boswell
DATELINE: Teesside, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Bob Pickersgill, Airport Action Group member
The Northern Echo of England reports that plans are going forward at Teesside Airport to build one to the United Kingdom's biggest freight distribution centers. The warehouse has been at the center of a controversy in spite of its promise to create thousands of jobs. Nearby residents object to the likelihood of unrelenting road and air traffic as well as noise and air pollution.
According to the article the go-ahead was given yesterday to Teesside Airport to build the #300m warehouse complex despite strong opposition from villagers from miles around. Protestor Bob Pickersgill, of the Airport Action Group, said: "Villagers feel angry and bitter at this decision. It means condemning people to a life of noisy misery, 24 hours a day, both on the roads and under the flightpath." Villagers who fought a campaign to stop the development failed to convince Stockton Borough Council planners the center should be built elsewhere, so they will take their fight to Environment Secretary John Prescott, pleading for a public inquiry. Opponents from villages such as Eaglescliffe and Middleton St George lying in the flight path, or in the countryside for miles round the airport, fear they will be disturbed by more night and day time flights and by heavy trucks. But councilors decided the economic benefits outweighed environmental harm. They did agree to set up a formal agreement to ensure the airport minimizes noise. They promised road improvements and new routes to divert heavy trucks away from villages and towns. Bob Goldfield, airport managing director, said the airfield would become quieter as older noisier planes are phased out, and night flights would be restricted.
According the article, there were many who expressed joy at the approval. The move was widely welcomed by industry leaders who see the airport as a vital development for economically depressed Teesside. The centre will be second in size only to Gatwick for freight packaging and distribution and light industrial assembly. The economic investment agency, Tees Valley Development Company (TVDC), said the center would take Teesside's economic prospects into the 21st century. TVDC Chief Executive Neil Etherington said: "We believe the proposals from the developers Moorfields Estates have enormous potential, both for establishing Teesside International Airport as a major center for handling cargo and a vital element in attracting further inward investment. In itself the airport development offers the prospect of thousands of new jobs, but it could also help attract many thousands more." Stephen Hood, North-East Chamber of Commerce Teesside manager, said: "This is excellent news for Teesside."
Previous week: August 10, 1997
Next week: August 24, 1997
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