PUBLICATION: The Atlanta Journal
DATE: May 8, 1997
SECTION: Features; Pg. 03G
BYLINE: Bill Hendrick
DATELINE: Atlanta, Georgia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Gary Evans and Lorraine Maxwell, researchers, Cornell University; Debra Brewer, audiologist, Emory University; Todd Kingdom, ear specialist, Emory University; Russell Kirkland, principal, J.E. Edmonds Elementary School in Forest Park, Georgia
The Atlanta Journal reports that a new study in the Journal of Environment and Behavior by Cornell University researchers has found that loud noise can delay reading skills and language acquisition skills in children. Children cope with the loud noise by "tuning out" many sounds, including human speech, the study found.
According to the article, Drs. Gary Evans and Lorraine Maxwell studied children in schools exposed to frequent aircraft noise and children in quiet neighborhoods. They found that even when children could hear human speech, noise had adversely affected both their their reading and oral language skills, along with their level of understanding.
Meanwhile, an elementary school near Atlanta's Hartsfield International Airport that was soundproofed a decade ago has experienced a steady improvement in reading and other language skills of pupils, and less stress in teachers, according to principal Russell Kirkland of J.E. Edmonds Elementary.
According to Emory University audiologist Debra Brewer, noise even in "normal" classrooms can interfere with concentration and learning skills. She said studies have shown that teachers' voices are often all but drowned out by relatively small environmental noises, the article reports. Brewer added that all schools should have sound systems that allow teachers to move around and still be heard in all parts of the classroom. Brewer said that noise is a major problem that poses dangers to the physical and mental health of both children and adults.
The article says that research also shows that: -- The unpredictability of noise causes anger, aggression, poor performance and insomnia. -- Prolonged noise damages the inner ear's hair cells that carry sound to the brain. -- Noise is a factor in hypertension, cardiovascular and digestive problems. A study at Germany's Max Planck Institute showed that consistent exposure to 70 decibels of noise, a relatively low level, caused vascular constriction, which is dangerous for people whose coronary arteries already have been narrowed by atherosclerosis. -- Noise may also be associated with colitis, ulcers, asthma, headaches, and possibly birth defects.
The article also presented the following chart about the relative decibel level of different noises. Sustained noise over 85 decibels can cause permanent hearing loss, the article says. -- A quiet home: 20 to 40 decibels -- Normal talking: 40 to 60 decibels -- A ringing telephone: 65 decibels -- A noisy restaurant: 70 decibels -- A vacuum cleaner: 75 decibels -- Shouting: 90 decibels -- A subway train: 100 decibels -- Jet flying 1,000 feet overhead: 103 decibels -- Honking horns, jackhammers, loud music: 100-120 decibels -- Jet takeoff at close range: 120 decibels
Source: Council on the Environment of New York City
PUBLICATION: Idaho Falls Post Register
DATE: May 8, 1997
SECTION: Editorial; Pg. A10
BYLINE: J. Robb Brady
DATELINE: Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming
The Idaho Falls Post Register printed an editorial that explores the issue of how many snowmobiles should be allowed in Yellowstone National Park and its six adjacent national forests in order to avoid conflicts with wildlife and other recreational users and damage to natural resources. The editorial writer says that the scientific answer to the question is fairly straightforward, but a political solution acceptable to everyone is not so easy.
According to the article, the scientific solution to the problem boils down to carrying capacity. But the timing and placement of both snowmobilers and other visitors also is likely to play an important part in planners' decisions about snowmobile regulations.
The editorial writer says that a few years ago, most visitors to the park in the winter were snowmobilers, but that's no longer the case. People involved in non-motorized recreation, including cross country skiers, winter campers, and visitors served by coaches, now outnumber snowmobilers. The writer says that this past winter, 310,760 people visited Yellowstone, including 75,265 snowmobilers.
The editorial goes on to say that some wildlife seem to tolerate the noise of the snowmobiles, but biologists say this appearance could be misleading. The impact noise has on wildlife is dependent on where it occurs, its intensity, and the number of machines in the same area at once, the editorial reports. Other visitors to the park, such as cross country skiers and snowshoers, can also disturb wildlife, but the slower approach of these recreators gives wildlife more time to avoid them, the editorial says.
Another issue for planners, the editorial reports, is the large number of visitors to Old Faithful in the winter. The area has a serious sewage handling problem, and noise from the snowmobiles sometimes detracts from the natural experience that people come to enjoy.
In light of these issues, the writer says that planners dealing with snowmobile regulations will consider if there are ways to separate snowmobiles from wildlife and from other visitors who come to the park for a more natural experience. The writer suggests that perhaps some groomed snowmobile trails should be abandoned to protect wildlife and to protect areas from visitors seeking solitude and quiet. The writer asks whether snowmobiles should be allowed only on alternate weeks, or whether older, more noisy machines should be banned if the snowmobile industry invents machines that are quieter and less polluting. The writer believes that some limits are unavoidable.
Two proposals currently under study, the editorial says, will not be popular right now but could perhaps be phased in as part of a long-term plan. One proposal is to allow snow coaches only to enter the park. The other proposal is to allow cars only on the road from the West Yellowstone Entrance to Old Faithful.
As a short-term solution, the editorial writer suggests that park officials should work with snowmobile manufacturers to set a reasonable deadline for eliminating noisy and highly polluting two-cycle snowmobile engines from the park and perhaps from other parts of the Yellowstone ecosystem nearby. The writer points out that carbon monoxide levels at the West Park Entrance are routinely higher than federal air quality standards now, and if snowmobile manufacturers want their machines to continue to be welcome in Yellowstone, they should act quickly to come up with less polluting machines.
PUBLICATION: Sunday Mirror
DATE: May 4, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. 4
DATELINE: Great Yarmouth, England
The Sunday Mirror reports that jet skiers have been banned from using an area in Great Yarmouth, England on noise and safety grounds. Jet skiers have also recently been banned from Gorleston and a Norfolk seaside resort on the same grounds.
PUBLICATION: The Detroit News
DATE: May 6, 1997
SECTION: Metro; Pg. Pg. C5
BYLINE: Douglas Ilka
DATELINE: Southfield, Michigan
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Beth Rulon, Southfield resident; State Sen. Gary Peters, D-Bloomfield Township
The Detroit News reports that after a 10-year fight, the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) will extend a sound barrier wall on the north side of I-696 from Franklin Road to just short of Inkster Road in Southfield, Michigan. The decision comes after about 250 residents fought to have the noise barrier in their neighborhoods.
The article says that Beth Rulon, one of the Southfield residents who fought for the noise barrier, was very happy with the news. She said, "I'm happy that the residents stuck together on this because I think that's what really did it." Rulon added that in the warm weather months, she can't open her windows because either the noise or the dust gets her, but she said she's looking forward to having the wall built.
The article goes on to say that the City Council unanimously approved MDOT's proposal to extend the barrier by 3,350 feet. An issue that is still unresolved is whether to extend a final 500-foot portion of the wall that would cost $500,000. MDOT officials have resisted building this extension because only five homeowners would benefit, the article reports. However, State Sen. Gary Peters (D-Bloomfield Township) has introduced an amendment to a transportation appropriations bill that would provide the money for the extension, according to the article. The bill has passed the Senate and awaits action in the House.
The article also says that the noise barrier will cost $2.26 million; federal funds will cover about $2.04 million, MDOT will pay $198,100, and the city of Southfield will pay $28,300. The project is slated to begin later this summer.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel
DATE: May 7, 1997
SECTION: Editorial, Pg. 22A
DATELINE: Boca Raton, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Carol Hanson, Mayor
The Sun-Sentinel printed an editorial in which residents, pilots, and the Airport Authority of the Boca Raton (Florida) Airport are encouraged to sit down together and work out reasonable procedures to deal with aircraft noise that can be reviewed by the Federal Aviation Administration.
According to the editorial, the Boca Raton Airport serves mostly private aviation traffic and probably never will compete with the neighboring Palm Beach International and Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airports. Still, the editorial says, takeoffs and landings have increased dramatically in the last several years. A runway extension was recently completed and a control tower will be functioning soon. With the increased airport activity, resident noise complaints have also increased, especially with regard to flights late and night and early in the morning.
The editorial says that Mayor Carol Hanson last week asked the city's Airport Authority to consider banning takeoffs and landings between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. Hanson said she believes the current voluntary curfew and noise-abatement procedures aren't working. Hanson's proposal follows the lead of curfews at other airports, the editorial says, such as Washington, D.C.'s National Airport that prohibits night flights. In addition, the Palm Beach International Airport settled a citizen's group's lawsuit by agreeing to charge stiff fees for overnight jet takeoffs and landings.
However, the editorial says that the problem in Boca Raton isn't nearly as bad as the problems at other airports, and a resolution probably can be found if all parties sit down and work out their differences together. Solutions such as takeoff and approach patterns that minimize noise impact, steeper takeoff angles, and the "fanning" of departures, as well as an overnight curfew should all be subject to open discussion, the editorial says. This will avoid solving the problem in the courtroom, the article concludes.
PUBLICATION: The Tampa Tribune
DATE: May 7, 1997
SECTION: South Tampa, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Nanette Woitas
DATELINE: Tampa, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Bruce Green, Culbreath Bayou resident; Joyce Bond, Maria O'Sullivan, Beach Park residents
The Tampa Tribune reports that neighborhoods south of the Tampa (Florida) International Airport will experience aircraft noise due to a six-month project that will repair the airport's main runway.
The article says that airport officials closed the north-south runway last week to repair the crumbling concrete surface. Planes that normally depart down that main runway leave over Old Tampa Bay, away from most homes. But during the repair project, all planes taking off and landing from the north and sounth are using the parallel runway on the other side of the main terminal. Planes using that runway fly over Beach Park and neighborhoods directly south, and Carrollwood Village and homes to the north, the article reports. The alternate runway normally serves about one-quarter of the airport's activity, but now it's carrying almost all the airport's traffic, according to the article. About 280 planes depart from the airport every day.
The article reports that many residents said they noticed more airplane noise over the weekend. Residents most affected by the noise are those between West Shore Boulevard and the bay. Culbreath Bayou resident Bruce Green said the noise was considerably more than usual. Joyce Bond, a Beach Park resident, said planes frequently interrupt her poolside socializing, sometimes every few minutes. Another Beach Park resident, Maria O'Sullivan, said she wonders whether passengers in the low-flying planes can see her lying in bed at night. Planes about a mile from the end of the runway could be flying as low as 300 feet, according to Tampa air traffic manager John Steward. Nine resident complaints have been filed with the airport about noise during the past week, said Louis Miller, director of the Hillsborough County Aviation Authority.
The repair project is slated to proceed quickly, the article says. Contractors will be working on the project six days a week, 20 hours a day, according to Miller. Take-offs to the south are slated to be shifted back to the main runway within four months, he added. Airport officials notified residents of the project before it started, Miller said, and will keep residents up-to-date on progress.
PUBLICATION: The Orlando Sentinel
DATE: May 10, 1997
SECTION: A Section; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Sandra Pedicini
DATELINE: New Smyrna Beach, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Peggy Marrs, Joanne Behr, Carman Pelling, residents
The Orlando Sentinel reports that many residents in the New Smyrna Beach, Florida area are unhappy with the "personal watercraft zones" established by Volusia County, because jet skis in the zones are noisy and prevent others from swimming in the area. In response to the complaints, county officials are planning public meetings to talk about creating some new personal watercraft zones that would be rotated with the current zones.
According to the article, the personal watercraft zones run from Eighth to 24th avenues in New Smyrna Beach, and are rotated by county officials. But last year, the article says, the number of zones in the New Smyrna Beach area decreased from eight to five. As a result, personal watercraft are now allowed in each remaining zone for a longer period of time, and residents near the zones are unhappy with the increased activity. Now, county officials are considering creating new zones as far north as Ponce Inlet.
Several residents have complained about the noise from jet skis in the zones, the article reports. Peggy Marrs, who lives near one of the zones, says the noise is "like a bunch of little bees." Joanne Behr, who also lives on the beach, said she would like her grandchildren to be able to swim in front of her home, but they cannot because it's a personal watercraft zone. Behr said she believes "places heavily populated with families and children shouldn't have a jet ski area." Resident Carmen Pelling, who lives near a zone, said she thinks if some areas have to put up with jet skis, other areas should too.
The article goes on to say that Michael Pleus, who is organizing the public meetings, said he expects after everyone airs their concerns at the hearings, some consensus will be reached. The County Council will have the final say on the zones, which Pleus said he hoped could be in place by the end of June, the article reports.
PUBLICATION: Newsday
DATE: May 9, 1997
SECTION: News; Page A33
BYLINE: Errol Cockfield Jr.
DATELINE: Islip, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Peggy Gualtieri, former member of FAA airport committee, current member of Holbrook Civic Association, and Holbrook resident; Suffolk County Legislator Steve Levy (D-Bayport); Thomas Plunkett, Bohemia resident
Newsday reports that residents who live near the Long Island-MacArthur (New York) Airport are angry that airplanes have begun to fly into the airport after 11 p.m. and are claiming that airport officials and Islip town officials misled them into believing there was a late-night curfew on flights.
According to the article, airlines have been regularly scheduling flights that arrive after 11 p.m. at the airport. Peggy Gualtieri of Holbrook, who was a member of an FAA committee that studied the airport from 1991to 1995, said the residents on the committee believed town officials when they said flights would rarely land after 11 p.m., but the officials "sold us out."
However, the article says, MacArthur Airport manager Al Werner said the Town of Islip, which runs the airport, has a 1984 town ordinance that allows quieter airplanes to fly into the airport at anytime. Werner said he doesn't recall promising residents that the airport would make no noise after 11 p.m., and suggested he would not make such a promise because the 1984 ordinance was already in place. However, Werner admitted that only in the last year have planes have been coming in after 11 p.m. The airlines decided to schedule later flights because of connection problems they were having from west and southwest airports, Werner said. He added that residents should understand that airlines need to be able to change their hours of operations. "Times change, things change, economics change," he said.
Meanwhile, the article reports, about 200 residents gathered to discuss the problem on April 17 at a meeting organized by Suffolk County Legislator Steve Levy (D-Bayport). Levy formed a committee of residents to study the issue at the end of the meeting, the article says. "We're trying to make sure that the curfews that we thought were in place are actually enforced," he said. "We're not trying to close down the airport." Levy added that a recent announcement by US Airways to end service to MacArthur will cut back on some after-hours noise, but will not completely solve the problem because two other airlines also have late-night flights.
Levy also said that he believes the town had supported area residents in their wish to have flights end at 11 p.m., but last year caved to pressure from the airlines. The article says that Islip Town Supervisor Pete McGowan said through a spokesperson that the town had to provide emergency services for airlines if they schedule later flights uner FAA rules.
PUBLICATION: Sunday Times
DATE: May 4, 1997
SECTION: Features
DATELINE: Great Britain
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: The Sunday Times and their Campaign for Safe Waters (The Sunday Times, 1 Pennington Street, London E1 9XW; e-mail at 101575,2133@compuserve.com); David Bellamy, environmentalist and president of Coral Cay Conservation; John Fowles, author and Dorset coast resident
The Sunday Times reports that its own Campaign for Safe Waters in Great Britain has produced letters from many residents who want to restrict jet skis (also called "wet bikes") as well as the support of David Bellamy, environmentalist and president of Coral Cay Conservation, and John Fowles, author and Dorset coast resident.
According to the article, David Bellamy wrote in a letter that the people of their island nation like the seaside, which can be "a place of solace." However, Bellamy continued, "of all the water sports, jet skis ruin that tranquillity with noise and danger both to humans and to wildlife." He added that estuaries and sea lochs are crucial habitat for seabirds, and that "jet skis are among one of the most intrusive and destructive pastimes on the world's coral reefs."
The article says John Fowles said he loves the sea, but has a deep hatred of jet skis. Fowles said, "The noise they make is terrible; a sort of neurotic whining, like a chainsaw. I am fanatically in favour of legislation to stop them."
The article went on to print the following letters from readers on the same topic:
I live in Felixstowe and am a keen sea swimmer. On many occasions I have been "buzzed" in the water by wet bikers. This is very dangerous, as in the choppy North Sea the visibility of people in the water is very poor. What is also of concern is that these people can't swim themselves. Twice I've had to go in and rescue them from the sea.
Caroline Whitworth, Felixstowe, Suffolk
I live overlooking Barmouth beach, a delightful 10-mile strip of gently shelving sand, ideal for leisurely family summer days. On a good day, porpoise and the rare bottlenose dolphin flash in and out of the waves. With the arrival of wet bikes, all this has changed. Goodbye to peace and quiet. Swim at your peril, and don't expect to see a dolphin.
Andy Wilson, Barmouth, Gwynedd
Jennifer Ansbro, e-mail address
I swim off Church Ope Cove on Portland, where I have a beach hut. Last year, while swimming there, I heard the ominous sound of an approaching wet bike. I tried to alert it to my presence, but in the choppy waters he was unable to see me and passed within a few feet - this time.
Susan Biddiss, Osmington, Dorset
PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Citizen
DATE: May 10, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. A9
BYLINE: Vincent Kiernan
DATELINE: Ithaca, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Gary Evans and Lorraine Maxwell, researchers, Cornell University; Arline Bronzaft, noise specialist, City University of New York
The Ottawa Citizen reports that researchers at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York are suggesting that children who live in noisy areas have poorer reading skills because they tune out human speech and thus have a harder time recognizing and understanding human speech.
According to the article, the Cornell research is the first study to explain the way in which noise and reading ability are linked. Researchers Gary Evans and Lorraine Maxwell compared 58 seven- and eight-year-olds from a school which lies in the flight path of one of New York City's airports with 50 children of the same age from a quiet neighborhood in the study, the article reports. Children were given a variety of reading and hearing tests, including tests to identify certain words in a list, read out nonsense words to show their understanding of consonant-vowel combinations, and identify words that were partly obscured by static. The children from the noisy neighborhood not only had poorer reading skills, as expected, but also had a lower ability to recognize and understand spoken words, the article reports. The researchers concluded that in order to cope with their noisy living situation, the children "filtered out" certain sounds, including human speech. Reading skills are acquired partly by listening to others, the article says, so ignoring speech hampers reading development.
The article reports that Arline Bronzaft, a noise specialist at the City University of New York, said the study is very significant because it establishes a link between noise exposure and language development. She added that the findings probably would apply to schools near any large airport.
PUBLICATION: The Daily Telegraph
DATE: May 7, 1997
SECTION: Property; Pg. 30
BYLINE: Tom Rowland
DATELINE: Great Britain
The Daily Telegraph printed an editorial in which the writer outlines why it is often noisier in the country in Great Britain than in the city, town, or suburbs.
The editorial writer says that when he visited the first new house to be built from cob in Britain for at least 100 years in a sleepy Devon valley between Honiton and Seaton, the tranquillity was shattered by the drone of a sawmill half a mile away on a ridge. He asked the homeowners whether they were disturbed by the noise that shattered the otherwise charming setting, and they responded that in south Devon, it's not politically correct to complain about an activity that creates jobs. The writer said that in the suburbs, a NIMBY action group would have demanded that the sawmill move, and in the city, environmental health officers would have insisted that the sawmill have more muffling and noise insulation. But in the country, he says, people believe business must be nurtured and complaining is not done.
As another example, the editorial writer says that some friends of his bought a house set in a big garden in the Hertfordshire countryside, but were kept awake by a farmer who harvested through the night. When they complained, they were told, "If you don't like the country, then clear off back to the city." The writer says that any visit to the country will almost surely be accompanied by a nearby farmer wielding a hedge trimmer, a gang plough, or a earth moving machine.
The writer also points out that country houses and cottages are often set very close to country roads, and these roads are more and more frequented by vehicles moving very fast. The result, according to the writer, is that country residents are far more affected by traffic noise than city residents, where speed limits are lower. In addition, the writer says, traffic noise carries a long way in the country.
Military jets are another problem for many in the country, the editorial says. Areas of Scotland experience low-flying jets, Somerset regularly experiences low-flying Harriers, and much of rural Wiltshire experiences countless helicopter flights.
Finally, the writer says, if you find a secluded cove for a picnic, chances are that jet skiers will destroy your peaceful setting.
By contrast, the writer concludes, the suburbs can be blissfully quiet.
PUBLICATION: The Vancouver Sun
DATE: May 10, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. A20
DATELINE: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
The Vancouver Sun reports that a lawsuit filed a month ago by residents of Richmond, British Columbia against the Vancouver International Airport Authority and the federal government claims that residents are entitled to compensation for noise and nuisance from aircraft using the new, third runway of the airport. In response, the airport authority and federal government filed documents this week in the British Columbia Supreme Court saying residents should have been aware of the airport plans for a new runway and there are no grounds for a court to allow a class-action lawsuit on the matter.
According to the article, residents believe a class-action suit is warranted, saying that the government's environmental assessment review panel recommended that compensation be paid to the neighborhood but was ignored. But the airport authority and federal government claim that the creation of a third runway was public knowledge since 1946. They say that the plaintiffs who want compensation failed to investigate the community before purchasing their property, to pay sufficient regard to notices placed on the title to their property, to properly insulate their homes, and to take other reasonable steps to minimize noise, noxious fumes, or vibrations, the article reports. The defendants also claim in the documents that the third runway is necessary to the economy of Vancouver.
The article notes that a date has not been set for the trial.
PUBLICATION: Hartford Courant
DATE: May 8, 1997
SECTION: Town News; Pg. B1
BYLINE: Rubaina Azhar
DATELINE: Suffield, Connecticut
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Robert Frasco, resident; Roland Dowd, First Selectman; Charles Watras, Suffield resident and head of the Bradley International Airport Commission
The Hartford Courant reports that Suffield, Connecticut resident Robert Frasco proposed creating a local oversight committee to help keep the volume in check at the Bradley International Airport at the board of selectment meeting Wednesday. In addition, Frasco asked to see a moratorium on business agreements with the airport until the noise impacts can be gauged. First Selectman Roland Dowd responded by asking the audience to call him personally with noise complaints so that he can create a log of the problem.
According to the article, Frasco and other residents talked at the meeting about their worries that as the airport grows, the noise will become unbearable. Frasco said, "We're sleeping next to a 900-pound gorilla that is going to win this fight unless we do something about it." In addition, Frasco said that the town's efforts to recruit an international flower and perishables center to the area is "a conflict of interest" with the efforts to reduce aircraft noise. Frasco said he would like to see a moratorium on any business agreements the town makes involving the airport until the proposed committee can gauge the noise that would be created by such development.
The article adds that an important issue for residents are "rogue planes," planes that don't follow the established flight pattern and fly over residential areas at low altitudes. Frasco said such planes are lower and louder all the time.
In response to residents' concerns, First Selectman Roland Dowd said he would like residents to call him with their noise complaints instead of the airport's noise-complaint line. Dowd said he would record the date, time, and approximate whereabouts of the plane involved in each noise complaint, and would contact the airport to find out which plane and pilot is involved. Dowd said, "Let's try dealing with the noise that way before we start issuing moratoriums and forming committees."
The article goes on to say that Charles Watras, a Suffield resident recently named by the governor to head the Bradley International Airport Commission, also attended the meeting, and said the commission spent a major portion of its meeting that day on noise abatement. He added that the concerns of the commission were the same as those of the residents.
PUBLICATION: Kansas City Star
DATE: May 8, 1997
SECTION: Zone/Lee's Summit; Pg. 12
BYLINE: Kevin Hoffman
DATELINE: Lee's Summit, Missouri
The Kansas City Star reports that the City Council in Lee's Summit, Missouri unanimously approved changes to its noise ordinance Tuesday. The changes include adding strict definitions of noise nuisances and giving police officers the ability to generate complaints.
According to the article, police will now use portable "noise meters" to measure noise disturbances. The new ordinance defines almost any noise disturbance, according to Police Chief Ken Conlee, and will make enforcement easier. Under the new ordinance, most noise disturbances will be prohibited between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., including noises from jet skiing and trash trucks. Some noises, such as car radios and loud mufflers, are prohibited at all times. Violators of the ordinance could face up to 90 days in jail and/or a $500 fine. In addition, the police have more power under the new ordinance, and can sign noise complaints themselves instead of relying on residents to sign complaints. The changes are effective immediately, the article says.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: May 10, 1997
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 4; Zones Desk
BYLINE: Martha Willman
DATELINE: Van Nuys, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Gerald Silver, president of Homeowners of Encino
The Los Angeles Times reports that the Federal Aviation Administration will have inspectors on some news helicopters that fly over the San Fernando Valley, to address residents' concerns about noise from helicopters Van Nuys Airport.
The article reports that the FAA sent a letter about the inspectors to Gerald Silver, president of Homeowners of Encino (HOE). In the letter, FAA Regional Administrator William Withycombe said the FAA would "increase surveillance" at Van Nuys and would seek "to address community concerns" and "ultimately reduce noise." Residents, including members of HOE, have complained often about noise from helicopters in neighborhoods south and southeast of the airport, and homes near Sepulveda basin. Radio news helicopters based at the airport -- which often take off in the early hours -- have been particularly annoying to residents. Federal and city officials said that of about 40 helicopters based at Van Nuys -- more than at any other airport in Southern California -- there are about six media helicopters.
The article goes on to say that media pilots said at an April meeting that they would take FAA inspectors on helicopter. An FAA representative said it was "a good gesture on their part so that the FAA could observe for themselves how they are conducting their operations."
The article goes on to say that a March resolution by the L.A. airport commission asked the FAA to restrict the flight of all helicopters between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Helicopters which are currently unrestricted, and often take off as early as 5:30 a.m., cause many noise problems. A representative from teh Professional Helicopter Pilots Association said that such restrictions would hurt the media business, and would also hurt the residents throughout Southern California who depend on the news.
The article concludes, saying that the airport plans to implement a new radar system in August that will differentiate between fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. Silver said he hoped that would help identify the worst noise offenders, but officials said the new system wouldn't help distinguish different aircraft.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel
DATE: May 4, 1997
SECTION: Community Close-Up, Pg. 3
BYLINE: Rafael Lorente
DATELINE: Sunrise, Florida
The Sun-Sentinel reports the city commissioners in Sunrise, Florida last week tentatively approved an ordinance that tightens the city's noise regulations. The proposed ordinance would prohibit loud noises at any time of the day, and police would have the power to determine if a noise is loud enough to be prohibited. The article says that the proposal must be voted on a second time to become law.
According to the article, the current noise ordinance prohibits loud noise only between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. At other times of day, the article says, the police are powerless. The ordinance was prompted by two residents who complained that their neighbor played loud music at all times of the day. The proposed ordinance would prohibit noise at any time of day based on the standard of the "ordinary, auditory senses of a reasonable person." The new ordinance passed 4-0 with Mayor Steve Feren absent, the article reports.
However, Mike Kerner, a member of the County Executive Committee of the Libertarian Party, said the "reasonable person" standard was too vague, and that the ordinance should have noise limits defined and should require officers to test for noise with a noise meter. Kerner said, "There's no objective standards. I'm a Libertarian and I like justice. This could be misused."
In response, Assistant City Attorney John Herin Jr. said the proposed ordinance allows reasonable people to make the call. "The intent is to foster civility," Herin said. "You don't need to have a specific measurement to know that a barking dog is a nuisance." Commissioner Irwin Harlem said he believed the city should buy a noise meter, even though he voted for the ordinance. Police Chief David Boyett responded that noise complaints are not common, and that the proposed ordinance is only addressing "some isolated problems," the article concludes.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: May 5, 1997
SECTION: Metro Southwest; Pg. 3; Zone: SW
BYLINE: Dawn Frison
DATELINE: Palos Hills, Illinois
The Chicago Tribune reports that Palos Hills, Illinois has amended its noise ordinance so that it now includes decibel threshold readings. In addition, a decibel meter will now be used by police to make it easier to enforce the regulations.
The article says that the maximum level for residential noise will be 72 decibels as read by a decibel meter 50 feet away from the source of the noise. Business noise will be allowed to be 79 decibels. Public Safety Chairman Ald. Marty Kleefisch said that including decibel levels in the noise ordinance was an important goal of the new ordinance. Kleefisch said that he believes judges want proof of noise levels in court, which can be accomplished by a decibel reading.
The city will purchase a decibel meter for $1,000 to enforce the new ordinance, the article says. Police Chief Paul Madigan said there will be no need to train officers to use the meter.
PUBLICATION: News and Record
DATE: May 6, 1997
SECTION: Triad/State, Pg. B2
BYLINE: Kelly Simmons
DATELINE: Greensboro, North Carolina
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Charles and Gwendolyn Brown, College Hill residents
The News & Record reports that the Greensboro (North Carolina) City Council tonight will consider a proposal that would increase penalties for violating the city's noise ordinance, and would make landlords of noisy tenants liable for penalties as well. The proposal is being considered to deal with the partying students in off-campus housing.
The article reports that the proposal would raise the first-time penalty from $100 to $200, and would require second-time offenders to pay $400. After two citations, offenders could pay $500 for each additional citation. The additional violations would also carry a potential 30-day jail term, the article reports. The proposal also holds landlords responsible for their tenants' noise violations. After a first offense, landlords would be warned, and after a second offense they would be fined $100. Under the current ordinance, landlords are not held responsible for noise violations if they are not present on the property.
The article goes on to report that the city's noise ordinance prohibits loud noises between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. The City Council began debating the issue two weeks ago when College Hill residents complained about loud late-night parties at two University of North Carolina at Greensboro fraternity houses. According to College Hill residents Charles and Gwendolyn Brown, the noise problem from fraternities has been going on for years, and has hurt business at their historic Troy-Bumpas Inn Bed & Breakfast on Mendenhall Street.
Meanwhile, Eric Searles, president of the Pi Kappa Phi fraternity house, said he did not object to the increased fines. However, the article reports, Searles said the neighbors and the university should find a long-term solution so that the problems doesn't reoccur whenever new students move into the fraternity houses. Searles said one option would be for the fraternities to move on campus.
The noise issue will be discussed further on Wednesday at a meeting of fraternity representatives, University officials, and College Hill residents, the article says.
PUBLICATION: London Times
DATE: May 9, 1997
SECTION: Home news
BYLINE: Paul Wilkinson
DATELINE: Great Britain
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jan Westby, pet therapist
Times Newspapers Limited reports that a legal fight to quiet four barking dogs in Great Britain ended after the dogs were quieted through sessions with a pet therapist.
According to the article, Mark Bambrough sought a noise abatement notice due to the continuous barking of the four dogs of his neighbor, Pamela Chambers. Magistrates at the Bradford Magistrates' Court threatened to remove the animals, but Bambrough agreed to an adjournment to allow Chambers time to quiet the dogs. The dogs spent six weeks of sessions with Jan Westby, a pet therapist, and were cured of their incessant barking. Bambrough has halted his legal action, the article reports.
The article says that Westby has been helping dogs with behavior problems for five years, but has never been asked to help in a court case. She said that dogs that have been brought up in stable environments can suffer from separation anxiety when someone important leaves them. Chambers said two of her dogs, which are puppies, were bonded to her and to each other. Chambers said Westby cured the puppies' barking by breaking the bondings and by teaching them commands to stop barking, the article says.
PUBLICATION: Telegraph Herald
DATE: May 4, 1997
SECTION: Features; Pg. e 4
BYLINE: Robert Weller
DATELINE: Moab, Utah
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Walt Dabney, superintendent of Arches, Canyonlands, and Natural Bridges National Monument
The Telegraph Herald reports that Walt Dabney, superintendent of Arches and Canyonlands National Parks and Natural Bridges National Monument, is worried that noise could compromise the natural quiet people seek in national parks and preserves. The article explores how things have changed in Utah since Edward Abbey wrote about the area in the late 1950s, and about how the noise from airflights are a controversial issue in many national parks.
The article prints the following quote from Edward Abbey's "Desert Solitaire," about Abbey's experience living and working at Arches National Park: "I wait. Now the night flows back, the mighty stillness embraces and includes me; I can see the stars again and the world of starlight. I am 20 miles or more from the nearest fellow human, but instead of loneliness I feel loveliness. Loveliness and a quiet exultation." The article reports that when Abbey lived in Arches in the late 1950s, a few thousand visitors came through each year. But this year, more than 900,000 will visit Arches National Park, and more than 450,000 will visit the neighboring Canyonlands. Despite the crowds, these areas are still considered prime for those seeking natural quiet, but noise is slowly becoming an issue in natural environments, the article says. Walt Dabney said, "What I hope the American people will recognize before it's too late is that there are a few of these places where we want to recognize natural sound as a national resource."
The article says that Abbey, in "Desert Solitaire," preferred to talk about "a great stillness" rather than silence. He wrote, "... for there are a few sounds: the creak of some bird in a juniper tree, an eddy of wind that passes and fades like a sigh, the ticking of the watch on my wrist -- slight noises that break the sensation of absolute silence but at the same time exaggerate my sense of the surrounding, overwhelming peace." Dabney said, "Sometimes you can sit out there and your ears will ring because it is so quiet. It's as quiet as a professional recording studio. You can absolutely hear rocks fall without the sound of some airplane circling overhead." He added that in some areas, the natural sound can be deafening, such as in Cataract Canyon, on the rapids of the Colorado River. "But it's natural," he said. Dabney went on to say that some believe Abbey put a curse on the Moab parks by writing about them and thus enticing millions to come visit them. He and others in the Park Service worry that talking about the quiet and peacefulness that remain in these places will entice even more people to come.
The article goes on to report that national parks already can ask visitors to turn down loud music, but the National Parks and Conservation Association is pushing the Clinton administration to restrict airflights above national parks. The Park Service has reported to Congress that nearly a third of the nation's parks are plagued by aircraft noise. Most of the attention surrounding airflights has centered on the Grand Canyon, where more than 800,000 people per year take sightseeing flights. Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt announced plans last year to limit Grand Canyon flights, but postponed some of the restrictions after air operators filed a federal lawsuit. Dabney said that under current regulations, park officials would have no way to stop flights over Old Faithful at Yellowstone, which would ruin the experience of 2,500 people on the boardwalk for the pleasure of a handful of people in a helicopter or plane.
Meanwhile, Bonnie Lindgren, operator-manager for Redtail Aviation, Inc., in Moab, and treasurer of the U.S. Air Tours Operators Association, said that the industry would accept restrictions if the approach is "reasonable and balanced," the article reports. Lindgren said that until recently, the Park Service wanted to have control over flights so it could ban them completely. She said, "I don't fault the Park Service for wanting to have some control over flights over the parks," and agreeing with Dabney that it "would be a terrible scenario" for helicopters to be flying over Old Faithful. The article reports that Lindgren's company, which operates 93 percent of the park flights in the Moab area, has offered to coordinate with the Park Service by avoiding areas where hikers have registered to travel. In response, Dabney conceded that there have been very few complaints by park visitors in his region.
PUBLICATION: PR Newswire
DATE: May 9, 1997
SECTION: Lifestyle
DATELINE: Washington, D.C.
PR Newswire reports that a new video available from the National Audiovisual Center illustrates different types of highway noise barriers, their effectiveness, and other details.
The article says that the video looks at advantages and disadvantages with earth berms, vegetation, and different kinds of walls. In addition, it illustrates how a small decrease in decibels can make a significant difference for nearby residents. Sections of the video include: Basic Acoustics, Barrier Performance, Types Of Barriers, Barrier Materials And Appearance, and Maintenance And Safety Concerns. The article says that the video is useful for residents living near highways, and highway engineers and planners.
The video is titled: "Highway Noise Barriers: Performance, Maintenance and Safety," and is available from the National Audiovisual Center at NTIS, 703-487-4650, for $60, plus $4 handling fee; quote order number AVA19985VNB1KEA. Or, fax order to: 703-321-8547. Or, order by major credit card through NTIS OrderNow Online: http://www.ntis.gov/ordernow/. To search for the video through OrderNow, enter AVA19985-VNB1KEA in the Product ID field.
PUBLICATION: The Hartford Courant
DATE: May 5, 1997
SECTION: Town News; Pg. B1
BYLINE: Rubaina Azhar
DATELINE: Suffield, Connecticut
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Roland Dowd, First Selectman; Douglas Viets, resident and chair of the zoning and planning commission
The Hartford Courant reports that residents in Suffield, Connecticut have been complaining about noise from "rogue planes" from the Bradley International Airport. As state Department of Transportation studies whether to build a new terminal at the airport, residents and some officials are worried that the plans could mean even more noise for the community.
According to the article, town residents have been calling the airport and town hall repeatedly in the past month to complain about what First Selectman Roland Dowd calls "rogue planes," planes that break from their flight patterns and fly over residential areas at low altitudes. Dowd said there is no excuse for rogue planes, and that pilots are just cuttine corners. Douglas Viets, a South Main Street resident and chair of the zoning and planning commission, said the noise problem from the planes is more the fault of air traffic controllers than the fault of pilots. Viets said that planes heading northeast from the airport are being instructed to turn before reaching the Connecticut River, a deviation from the established departure route, the article reports.
Meanwhile, the article says, while proposed upgrades are being studied for the airport, residents are worried that the changes could mean more noise. A study has been under way since March to look at options for the airport's Terminal B, one of two major terminals at Bradley. Choices being considered include constructing a new terminal at the same site or at a new site. An environmental study will also being performed, the article reports, that will gauge the preferred option's impact on noise, air quality, wetlands, and traffic. Robert Juliano, head of the state Department of Transportation's Bureau of Aviation and Ports, said it's too soon to say whether proposed upgrades at Bradley will result in increased plane traffic and noise, according to the article. Robert Messina, a project engineer with the DOT, said the airport upgrades are not an expansion so much as they are "a modernization of facilities that are not really functional." The DOT will recommend an option after the studies are complete, the article reports, and pass their decision onto the Bradley Airport Commission sometime in June, after which a public hearing will be held.
First Selectman Dowd said he would like to see a new terminal built in place of Terminal B. He said the airport's development is very important to Suffield in terms of jobs and the economy, but that the airport is "no good for the noise problem in town." Resident Viets said that the noise problem needs to be addressed as the airport grows, or it will become intolerable to live in Suffield, the article reports.
PUBLICATION: Newsday
DATE: May 6, 1997
SECTION: Health & Discovery; Page B27
BYLINE: Kenneth Chang
DATELINE: St. Lawrence and Saugenay Rivers, Quebec, Canada; Groton, Connecticut
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Peter Scheifele, researcher, National Undersea Research Center at the University of Connecticut; Adam Frankel, postdoctoral bioacoustics researcher, Cornell University; Darlene Ketten, professor, Harvard Medical School
Newsday reports that a University of Connecticut researcher is studying whether shipping noise in the St. Lawrence and Saugenay Rivers in Quebec could damage the hearing and capacity for survival of beluga whales in the area.
According to the article, Peter Scheifele, a researcher at the National Undersea Research Center at the University of Connecticut's Avery Point campus in Groton, has been measuring the noise levels in the St. Lawrence area for 2 1/2 years as part of efforts by the Canadian government to save and revive beluga whales. The article explains that the belugas living in the St. Lawrence and Saugenay Rivers are descendants and cousins of Arctic beluga whales, but unlike the Arctic whales, the St. Lawrence belugas spend their entire lives along a stretch of river about 100 miles long. The St. Lawrence whales have faced repeated threats in the Canadian rivers, the article reports. For many decades, the whales were hunted for their blubber and meat. Later, heavy metals and PCBs from industrial waste poisoned them. Around 1900, about 10,000 belugas lived in the waterways, but today, their number is down to between 500 and 700. Belugas are about 15 feet long, weigh 1,200 to 1,400 pounds, and are characterized by a bulbous, jellylike forehead and the lack of a dorsal fin, the article says.
The attempt to study the effects of shipping noise on the whales is a part of an effort to understand what might be currently threatening their survival. Researcher Peter Scheifele explained that research on the effects of noise on whales is central to their survival because "a deaf whale is basically a dead whale." Scheifele said some of the data he has gathered suggest some of the whales whould be wearing hearing protection because of the massive noise level from merchant ships.
According to the article, ocean noise became a major environmental issue about two years ago when researchers studying global climate change proposed blasting bursts of sound through the ocean floor to measure water temperatures. Environmentalists objected that the Acoustic Thermometry of Ocean Climate project, ATOC for short, would deafen or frighten, whales, dolphins, and other marine animals in range of the giant underwater speakers. As a result of the controversy, the article reports, ATOC researchers agreed to first test the sounds' effects on marine animals. Initial results have not indicated much, but according to Scheifele, the ATOC project woke people up to the realization that noise pollution is very insidious for marine animals.
Scheifele has conducted noise measurements in the St. Lawrence as part of his research, the article reports, and has found that noise levels are quite high. For example, the sounds centered around 500 Hz often average about 90 decibels. (These numbers refer to in-air decibel units. For historical reasons, ocean researchers use a different baseline for their measurements. Ordinary conversation registers about 60 in-air decibels; a rock concert, 110 decibels.) Scheifele found that the noise in the St. Lawrence was especially loud in the middle of the day during the summer, when boats carrying whale-watchers approach the whales territory for a closer look. Scheifele speculates that the waterway's hard, steep sides cause the noise to reverberate much like a pipe organ, according to the article. The effects of this level of noise on whales is not yet known, but bioacoustics researcher Adam Frankel said the levels Scheifele has recorded are high and indicate that further research should be done.
The article goes on to say that Darlene Ketten, a professor at Harvard Medical School, will be helping out with the St. Lawrence beluga research by examining the ears of any whales that wash up dead or beach themselves. Ketten said the St. Lawrence noise is likely to cause some damage to the whales, but it's not clear how much. She said because sound is so important to the whales, it's possible the whales are able to adapt to some noise increase.
Three female beluga whales which may be enlisted in Scheifele's research are now at the Mystic (Conn.) Marinelife Aquarium, the article reports. David St. Aubin, director of research and veterinary science at Mystic, said the whales are highly interactive and are known as the "canaries of the sea." The aquarium is trying to breed the female whales, the article says, but those that do not become pregnant will help with Scheifele's research sometime next year. The whales will be trained to tell human researchers whether they hear a sound or not by moving or staying still. According to such "audiograms" performed on other belugas, the whales' ears are relatively insensitive to low-frequency shipping rumbles, the article says. However, Scheifele wants to perform more audiograms on belugas, because of uncertainties in the earlier data.
Scheifele said that there are many uncertainties about beluga ears, but a safe assumption is that beluga ears are at least as sensitive as humans' ears. The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration says that several hours' exposure to noise at 90 decibels can cause hearing damage in people. Scheifele has found that in two of the three areas the St. Lawrence belugas frequent, conditions are that noisy during the midday. He added that if the noise is found to damage the belugas' hearing, solutions might include limiting the number of whale-watching boats or spreading out the ships more, the article reports.
PUBLICATION: The Herald
DATE: May 6, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. 4A
BYLINE: Maura Ammenheuser
DATELINE: York, South Carolina
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Charles Plyler, Bud Rushin, residents
The Herald reports that two residents of York, South Carolina brought noise problems to the County Council Monday. Charles Plyler complains about noisy gunfire at a nearby police shooting range, and Bud Rushin can't sleep because of unmuffled pumping at a water treatment plant near his home. The council agreed to investigate both complaints.
According to the article, Plyler's complaint is directed at the Rock Hill Police Pistol Club shooting range on Worthy Boys Road, about a mile from Plyler's Porter Road home. Plyler said there has been more noise than usual lately, a fact confirmed by Rock Hill police Chief Larry Nowery, who said police officers are currently taking tests they must pass twice annually to keep their state firearms certification. Nowery said it takes about two weeks for his 100 officers to qualify. However, Plyler maintained that the noise has bothered him since at least 1981, and has bothered him more since July, when he became laid up with a broken leg. Plyer said he believes the noise violates county law, and brough a petition signed by 128 of his neighbors asking the council to shut down the pistol club. Plyler said Nowery claims he doesn't have authority over the pistol club, so Plyler began complaining to the county sheriff's department. Plyler added even though the pistol club's property is owned by the Rock Hill police department, they shouldn't be immune from local laws. In response, Nowery said the gun range is older than many homes in the area, and he doesn't believe the officers are violating any county or state legislation, the article reports.
In the other issue brought before the County Council, Bud Rushin played a tape recording of noise he regularly hears from the aeration pumps at the Blue Ribbon Water Company, a water treatment plant. Rushin said he has tried to solve the noise problem by dealing with Bill Hopper, the owner of the company, but said Hopper rarely responds to his calls. Rushin said the plant used to keep its aeration pumps covered, which muffled the noise, but stopped doing so last year, the article reports. Rushin said that Hopper told him the pumps will overheat if they're covered again, but Rushin doesn't believe this claim, the article says.
In response to the complaints, the council asked the county sheriff's department to investigate the noise levels at the pistol club and decide whether county law is being violated. In addition, county officials will write to the owner of the water treatment plant, asking him to quiet his operation. If the company doesn't comply, the council did not specify what action it would take.
PUBLICATION: The New York Times
DATE: May 4, 1997
SECTION: Section 5; Page 3; Column 1; Travel Desk
BYLINE: Edwin McDowell
DATELINE: U.S.
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Rob Smith, southwest staff director, Sierra Club; Paul Pritchard, president, National Parks and Conservation Association; John McCain, Republican U.S. Senator from Arizona, chair of the Senate Commerce Committee; Bill Frist, Republican U.S. Senator from Tennessee
The New York Times reports that national parks recently have been at the center of controversy over efforts to preserve or restore the parks to "natural quiet" by restricting air tour flights. Legal and legislative fights have resulted over restrictions in the Grand Canyon and Rocky Mountain National Parks.
The article reports that the Interior Department and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced new regulations restricting sightseeing flights over the Grand Canyon on December 31, 1996. Those regulations, which took effect Thursday, cap the number of commercial aircraft that can fly over the canyon at 136, cap the size of the existing fleet, and ban flights from sunset to dawn. The rules originally were also intended to ban to tours over 87% of the park, compared with the current 45%. But, the article says, the Sierra Club and six other environmental groups filed suit against the FAA, claiming that few air tours fly over the additional area placed off limits and that the expanded area represents virtually no change. The FAA and the Interior Department later said they would delay regulations that would enlarge the size of the flight-free zone and that would modify air routes until at least next January, after hearing strong opposition from park users, aviation groups, and Native American tribes. In response to the federal agencies' action, Paul Pritchard, president of the National Parks and Conservation Association, said, "This guarantees another summer of noise at the Grand Canyon," the article reports.
The FAA also raised controversy in January by proposing a temporary ban on sightseeing flights over Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado, according to the article. The park currently does not have such flights. Dan Anderson, the president of the United States Air Tour Association of Alexandria, Virginia, said the proposal was unnecessary regulation, and he urged Congress to "step in and provide the oversight necessary to protect a vital segment of aviation from the zealots in this administration." The association filed suit to block both the new rules on flights in the Grand Canyon and the ban on air tours over Rocky Mountain National Park. However, unless the courts rule otherwise, the article reports, the ban at Rocky Mountain will remain in effect for 24 months or until the FAA comes up with a policy that applies to the entire national parks system, whichever comes first.
The Clinton Administration initiated the effort to restore or protect natural quiet in the national parks, according to the article, but the goal also has bipartisan support. For example, the ban on flights over Rocky Mountain National Park resulted from concerns by a bipartisan coalition of Colorado congressmen. In addition, the National Parks Overflight Act of 1997, a bill aimed at promoting quiet and safety in national parks, was introduced in February by Senator John McCain, a Republican of Arizona and chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, and Senator Bill Frist, a Republican of Tennessee. If passed, the bill would require the Department of the Interior to recommend regulations, including possibly flight restrictions, and would require the FAA to implement the recommendations. Senator McCain said he has been trying for 10 years to restore natural quiet to the Grand Canyon, and that we cannot afford to wait until natural quiet has been lost before taking steps to preserve it. The bill currently is in the Commerce Committee, and its fate is uncertain, the article reports.
Meanwhile, opponents of the bill and of other flight restriction proposals say that such regulations would force the national park system to manage air space, which it is ill-equipped to do. Jim Petty, president of Air Vegas Airlines in Las Vegas, Nevada and the chair of the United States Air Tour Association, said, "The agenda of the environmental community is to limit access to our national park system, not only by air but by car, and even to hikers who go in on foot. The Grand Canyon is just the focal point. First, the national parks, then, other public lands."
However, Rob Smith, the southwest staff director of the Sierra Club, said that most environmentalists do not want to ban air tours, only to keep them away from visitor areas, the article reports. Smith said, "The one great value of national parks should be that visitors don't have to listen to the clatter of everyday life." Smith added that with some 95,000 air tours per year now flying over the Grand Canyon, visitors now have an "airport experience."
PUBLICATION: News and Record
DATE: May 8, 1997
SECTION: Triad/State, Pg. B2A
BYLINE: Beth McMurtrie
DATELINE: Greensboro, North Carolina
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Richard Jackson, president, College Hill Neighborhood Association
The News & Record reports that police in Greensboro, North Carolina have made it easier for residents to file noise complaints by permitting them to phone with their name and address rather than show up at the magistrate's office. Noise from fraternity parties is an issue in Greensboro, and administrators from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro have promised to keep closer tabs on fraternities to deal with noise problems.
The article reports that noise issues were discussed at a semiannual meeting held Wednesday and attended by University officials, the Greensboro police, representatives of Greek organizations, City Council member Sandy Carmany, and Richard Jackson, president of the College Hill Neighborhood Association.
At the meeting, the article says, University administrators said they would watch more closely the off-campus fraternities so that minor incidents don't get disregarded. The University's two off-campus fraternities, Sigma Phi Epsilon and Pi Kappa Phi, have been criticized recently for rowdy parties, and Sigma Phi Epsilon has been banned from holding parties till fall because of noise problems at a spring party. Assistant Vice Chancellor Jim Lancaster said the University is working on developing a point system for the two fraternities, whereby complaints against the fraternities would rack up points, and after a certain number of points accumulates, fraternities would be punished.
Police from the university and town also outlined a new procedure for noise complaints, according to the article. Residents no longer have to show up at the magistrate's office to press charges. Instead, they can simply give their name and address over the phone. Richard Jackson of the College Hill Neighborhood Association said he would publicize the new procedure in the association's newsletter.
Representatives of the two fraternities attending the meeting said they will educate their new members about being good neighbors, and will review members on a regular basis to weed out trouble-makers, the article reports.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: May 8, 1997
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 3; Zones Desk
BYLINE: John Canalis
DATELINE: Costa Mesa, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Heather Somers, City Councillor
The Los Angeles Times reports that on May 5, Costa Mesa (California) officials passed an ordinance that bans the use of horns -- and other attention-getting devices -- from being used by truck vendors for non-driving purposes. The city wants to quiet neighborhoods where residents have complained about noise from truck vendors selling ice cream, produce, and other products. City officials say that some trucks drive by the same area every ten minutes.
The article reports that although state laws don't allow a ban on the vending trucks themselves, the new ordinance has drawn on portions of other ordinances that have already withstood legal challenges. It appears compatible with state law, and so jurisdiction conflicts -- such as the required insurance policies in a Santa Ana ordinance that were overrided by existing state law -- shouldn't arise.
The article reports that the ordinance will include distance restrictions, which say that truck vendors must stay 500 feet from schools and parks, 300 feet from other vendors, and 100 feet from intersections. Areas with speed limits over 35 mph are off limits. Trucks must move on after 10 minutes in one place, except for at construction sites where they may remain for 30 minutes. Vendors may only operate between 9 a.m. and 8 p.m.
Some call the new regulations racist against Latino vendors who are merely trying to stay off of welfare, but residents deny those allegations. Some feel the vending trucks are dangerous because children are excited by the horns.
The article also reports that other aspects of the ordinance include requirements for a city business license, county health sticker, operator's permit, and trash receptacles -- since littering was associated with truck vendors.
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: May 7, 1997
SECTION: News, Pg. N3
BYLINE: Tony Knight
DATELINE: Van Nuys, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Don Schultz, member of the Van Nuys Airport Citizens Advisory Council and president of the Van Nuys Homeowners Association; Gerald Silver, president, Homeowners of Encino; Laura Chick, City Councillor
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports that a city attorney said Tuesday that the Van Nuys (California) Airport does not have to follow a resolution passed by the Airport Commission in 1984 prohibiting certain types of heavy aircraft at the airport. Many such aircraft already operate at the airport.
According to the article, airport officials were stunned in January when confronted with a 1969 Airport Commission resolution, later reaffirmed in 1984, that bans planes heavier than 12,500 pounds from operating as charters or air taxis at the airport. Mayor Tom Bradley in 1984 assured San Fernando Valley homeowners that the policy would not change without an environmental review and public hearings. However, airport officials acknowledge that there are dozens of aircraft over the 12,500-pound limit operating as unscheduled charters and air taxis. In addition, the article says, the biggest and most influential businesses at the airport are flying the heavy planes.
In response to this issue, the Van Nuys Airport Citizens Advisory Council and airport comissioners asked for a report on the 1984 resolution, but four months have passed without a report. However, Assistant City Attorney Bret Lobner Tuesday told the Citizens Advisory Council that the policy was not an ordinance that could be enfoced in court. "I think they (the commission) passed it with good intentions and the rest is history," Lobner said.
Lobner's news was harshly criticized by homeowner leaders at the meeting, the article says. Don Schultz, a member of the citizen's council and president of the Van Nuys Homeowners Association, said, "Where is the good faith by this Department of Airports, saying that a policy that's been in place for years -- that we can ignore it?" Gerald Silver, president of the Homeowners of Encino, added, "If we are now going to say that resolutions mean nothing, then any resolution you don't want to follow folks, you don't have to follow because Mr. Lobner says they don't mean anything." Schultz said the homeowner groups would fight to get the policy enforced. He said he believes the Department of Airports didn't expect anyone to pay attention to the old policy, but they got caught.
The article goes on to say that the issue is becoming more important, especially to some powerful City Council members, because while it is being studied, it is delaying a federal process to study noise issues at the airport. City Councillor Laura Chick recently wrote to Airports Executive Director Jack Driscoll asking that the issue be resolved quickly.
PUBLICATION: Evening Standard
DATE: May 8, 1997
SECTION: Pg. 21
BYLINE: Peter Gruner
DATELINE: Great Britain
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Hilary King, spokesperson, Chartered Institute of Public Health Officers
The Evening Standard reports that Great Britain's "environment police," who deal with issues involving noise, food hygiene, bonfire smoke, litter, and dumping are increasingly experiencing violent and aggressive responses from the people they deal with.
The article reports that environmental health officers rarely have police escorts, and environmental health chiefs believe the officers may need better training to respond to aggressive behavior. Instances of violence against the officers include a man who knocked over and kicked an officer who was called to his home, and a couple who were found guilty of assault on a noise patrol. Hilary King, spokesperson for the Chartered Institute of Public Health Officers, said that new laws now allow officers to confiscate equipment and plans are in the works for on-the-spot fines, which will only increase the risks to the officers.
PUBLICATION: The Courier-Journal
DATE: May 4, 1997
SECTION: News, Pg. 01A
BYLINE: Cynthia Eagles
DATELINE: Radcliff, Kentucky
The Courier-Journal reports that army officials are worried that the Fort Knox army base could be threatened due to increases in noise complaints if landowners are allowed to build homes near the base in Radcliff, Kentucky. Army officials want a noise buffer zone to surround the base. Meanwhile, in a lawsuit to be heard May 12 at the Hardin fiscal court, homeowner Dale Irwin is expected to win permission from the court to build a home near the base.
The article reports that Dale Irwin's property is located in the Ky. 313 corridor, an area that officials want to be designated as a noise buffer zone for the Army post. Officials say that future homes in the area could be exposed to continual noise, concussion and flashes from tank ranges. The Radcliff planning commission denied Irwin a permit to build a house, but the fiscal court is expected to overturn that decision. Army officials believe such a decision could open the door to more residential development in the area, and could potentially force out Fort Knox. According to Don Williams, a retired Army colonel and former Fort Knox chief of staff, noise complaints from the surrounding community can make an army base a less competitive and less desirable training facility.
The buffer zone is needed, according to Joe Yates, the post's environmental protection specialist, because the technology is not available to muffle the sound of tank ranges, the article says. Fort Knox officials have already taken some noise abatement measures, such as planting trees and installing sound-absorbing rubber matting on some ranges. The proposed buffer zone is roughly nine miles long and one mile wide along the Bullitt-Hardin county line. The issue of the buffer zone came to the forefront after a 1994 inter-county cooperative planning effort determined that land near the post's tank firing ranges should be developed in ways that won't lead to increased complaints about noise, the article reports. Last summer, former Fort Knox Commanding General Lon Maggart and other top-ranking army officials wrote to Hardin County officials urging them not to undermine the buffer zone. Maggart wrote Hardin County Judge-Executive Glen Dalton, "Increased residential development in the Highway 313 corridor could seriously affect our ability to train. If the opportunity to train is in any way restricted, Fort Knox could be placed in jeopardy."
The article goes on to say that county planners now require houses to be on ten-acre lots and to have a certain amount of frontage on a county- or state-maintained road in order to discourage residential growth in the buffer zone. For Dale Irwin, the frontage requirements call for a minimum 60-foot access. According to the article, Irwin's father, Louie Irwin, gave Dale 10 acres of the 192-acre farm he owns for building a home. However, Dale Irwin can't meet the frontage requirement with the amount of land he now has. The article also reports that some magistrates are sympathetic to the Irwins' point of view. Magistrate Charlie Wise, whose district includes the buffer zone and who owns large tracts of land in the area, said, "The people that held on to their land and tried to farm are not being treated fairly. I've got over 200 acres, and I can't give my kids a lot? I think that's wrong."
Wise went on to say that he believes the buffer zone concept is being unfairly applied. He said that the Radcliff planning office allowed people to build homes "within a stone's throw" of the post, while residents in his district were prevented from developing their farms. "They're building right against the military reservation, every day closer to the firing ranges than we are in our own land," Wise said. "And here we are two to three miles away from it and they are wanting to restrict our land out here." However Joe Yates of the army post said he was not aware of any developments in Radcliff that were in areas where noise complaints would be a problem, the article reports. Fort Knox studies of noise complaints have shown that they tend to come predominantly from communities east of the post, especially Lebanon Junction and Shepherdsville. The terrain and the location of the ranges make it more likely that sound will carry east and south of the post.
The article says the situation could become more contentious in the next few weeks because modernized tank ranges north of Ky. 313 will be coming into full use, increasing noise levels. Larger and louder tank cannons will be used, and new training roles will produce artillery and helicopter gunfire. In addition, the article says, the training will take place during both the day and night. Joe Yates of the army post says with the modernization of the tank ranges, nearby residents will "hear noise like they never heard before."
Meanwhile, Hardin County Planning Chair Bob Krausman believes that industrial development should occur in the corridor, the article reports. He said industrial developments would not bring complaints about For t Knox noise, and could take advantage of Ky. 313's access to Interstate 65. Krausman added that the corridor already has several industrial developments, and Kentucky courts have already ruled that Hardin County can't stop such industrial-related uses in the area. However, in two working sessions with county magistrates, the industrial zone idea has not received much support. Magistrate Charlie Wise, for instance, has criticized the idea because he says the area doesn't have enough flat land or the appropriate utilities.
The article also says that Wise has suggested the army buy the land in the buffer zone as a solution. Planning commission member Rick Baumgardner has proposed that county officials try to get grants to buy the development rights to the land in the buffer zone. Baumgardner said non-military federal money might be available. The county planning office has agreed to research the issue, the article concludes.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel
DATE: May 8, 1997
SECTION: Editorial, Pg. 26A
DATELINE: Fort Lauderdale, Florida area
The Sun-Sentinel printed the following letter-to-the-editor from John Hogan, a Fort Lauderdale, Florida area resident, regarding noise from jet takeoffs:
I agree with the letter writer from Davie concerning the excessive noise coming from the aircraft take-offs. I gave up calling the listed phone number to complain. I live eight miles to the north, and one mile from the beach. Lately, it has become increasingly impossible to talk on the phone when this "new type" of quieter aircraft takes off to the east and circles west over Sunrise Boulevard. Several times the noise vibration has popped a picture off my wall.
I can understand changing the pattern when there is bad weather over the ocean, but even on clear days (starting before 7 a.m.) I have been awakened by low-flying jets. I think the problem stems from less room in the sky for all of the additional aircraft that our county commissioners think Broward County needs to thrive. Recently, while north of Commercial Boulevard, I noticed the jet noise was even worse than my area, but residents tell me that it is normally that noisy in the afternoon.
What will happen when "our" airport gets expanded to allow even more take-offs and landings of these "new" stage 3 quieter engines?
Previous week: April 27, 1997
Next week: May 11, 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