PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Journal
DATE: July 29, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 1
BYLINE: Andrew Padilla
DATELINE: Corrales, New Mexico
The Albuquerque Journal reports that the Village Council in Corrales, New Mexico will consider amending its noise ordinance to exempt ice cream truck vendors. The article says the council voted unanimously Tuesday to consider the issue next month.
According to the article, the noise ordinance in Corrales currently bans the use of loudspeakers to advertise or attract the attention of residents. Village Administrator Phil Rios said ice cream vendors were told they couldn't use loudspeakers after some residents complained about the noise. But now, the article says, other residents have complained to Mayor Gary Kanin that their kids are missing the ice cream truck. Resident Ed Paschich said music from ice cream trucks is a piece of Americana. He added, "Music from an ice cream truck isn't noise, it's a Norman Rockwell delight." Mayor Kanin agreed, saying, "It's an American tradition. I would tend to believe in that, since I'm as American as anyone else." Kanin also said he is annoyed by the fire-engine-like bells that ice cream vendors are now using to attract kids. "Every time they come down that road, you hear that bell, and it's aggravating," Kanin said.
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: July 29, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. N1
BYLINE: Lee Condon
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Peter Kirsch, attorney for the City of Burbank
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports that a study released Tuesday found that air traffic growth at the Burbank (California) Airport will increase the number of homes impacted by noise by about 400, raising the total to about 2,700, during the next 12 years. The report will be presented today to the airport's Community Study Advisory Committee, made up of airport officials and community stakeholders. The article notes that the study adds fuel to the long legal and political battle between airport and city officials over a proposed expansion at the airport. City officials want to replace the terminal but not expand the facility because of the potential increase in traffic and noise. Airport officials want to increase the airport form 14 to at least 19 gates for economic development and safety reasons.
According to the article, Coffman Associates, consultants for the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority, found in their study that by 2010, the noise "footprint" will grow by a few streets to the north, south, and west, where residents in North Hollywood, Sun Valley, and Burbank already experience what state and federal government officials call an unacceptable level of jet noise. The noise footprint shows areas where jet noise exceeds 65 decibels, on average. Victor Gill, a spokesperson for the airport, said, "We're acknowledging the noise impact is going up a little. The airport is going to chip away at that with our home insulation project." Other airport officials said the increase in the noise footprint is minor, and provides evidence that a new terminal is needed to deal with increased demand and federal safety standards. The article explains that the new noise footprint in the study was based on a projected demand for new air service, rather than on whether the airport terminal is replaced and expanded. The report found that in order to accommodate the projected new passengers, the number of commercial flights in and out of the airport would have to increase by about 100 a day. Gill said Phase I of the study has been completed, and Phase II, which will offer solutions to the noise problem, will be compiled during the next nine months.
Meanwhile, the article says, Peter Kirsch, a lawyer for the city of Burbank, said 400 homes is a big increase for the noise footprint. He said, "What this data shows is that the noise is going to get worse. We've been arguing for years that the noise contour is going to get bigger." The noise footprints of most airports around the country are shrinking, Kirsch said, because aircraft are becoming quieter due to federal regulations. But the Burbank Airport, he said, already uses the quieter aircraft, so that increased noise will come only from increased air traffic. Ted McConkey, a Burbank City Councilor, said he thought the estimate of an increase of 400 homes for the new noise footprint is low. He said, "I would be suspicious of that because of the increased number of flights and the doubling [of] the number of passengers."
But Gill of the airport said the increase in flights and demand will occur regardless of whether the airport expansion occurs, and thus the new noise footprint is not related to the expansion fight. He also said that if the airport adds new gates and flights, the noise footprint will not necessarily increase dramatically. He said, "They [Burbank city officials] simply cannot accept that we can have a doubling of flights and not have a doubling of noise." Gill also said that nine homes have already been soundproofed in a pilot program, and the additional homes being added to the noise footprint also may be eligible for soundproofing.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: July 29, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 8; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Lorenza Munoz
DATELINE: Aliso Viejo, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Tom Wilson, County Supervisor; Ronald Steinbach, attorney and advisor, Taxpayers for Responsible Planning
The Los Angeles Times reports that Orange County, California supervisors decided to require "avigation easements" from all new homeowners near the proposed El Toro Airport. Mission Viejo Company, a developer, will now build 1,800 housing units. Anyone buying one of the units must sign an easement promising not to sue the airport over noise problems, but real estate agents are also required to disclose explicit details about potential jet noise.
According to the article, the area to be developed was off-limits when the military occupied the airport, but the county supervisors will allow houses there now that the military is leaving and a commercial airport may replace the base.
The article notes that the ban on development was lifted because commercial jets are expected to be quieter than military jets. Noise will be present in the area, and may cause complaints, but county officials think that it will be quieter than 65-decibels: avoiding mandatory soundproofing.
The article notes that opponents of the airport maintain that homeowners still wouldn't realize the extent to which they had signed away their rights. The lawyer for the anti-airport group Taxpayers for Responsible Planning argued that most home-buyers signing the easements don't realize "they had waived the right to sue the county of Orange for property damage to their homes, ... waived the right to seek noise insulation, ... and signed away up to one-third of their home value in the event El Toro opens up to commercial flights."
PUBLICATION: The Seattle Times
DATE: July 29, 1998
SECTION: East; Pg. B3; Just Ask Johnston
BYLINE: Steve Johnston
DATELINE: Seattle, Washington area
The Seattle Times printed a column in which a reader said he and his family like to camp at the Crystal Springs campground along Interstate 90 near Snoqualmie Pass in Washington. But, the reader said, the increase in traffic along the Interstate has made the campground very noisy. He asked who he can write to ask for a noise barrier separating the campground from the Interstate. The columnist responded that there is no chance of getting a noise wall built in that area.
According to the column, there are two ways that noise walls get built by the state Department of Transportation. Noise walls are built when new highways are built or old highways are expanded. Neighborhoods also can ask the state to build a noise wall between an existing highway and their homes, but the state rarely builds a wall in these cases. In the case of a campground, it would never happen, the columnist says, because there wouldn't be enough people benefiting from a project that would cost millions. The column notes that the state department of Environmental and Special Services builds the noise walls, and it builds about one wall every two years in heavily populated neighborhoods.
PUBLICATION: Ventura County Star
DATE: July 29, 1998
DATELINE: Ventura, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Mike Barton, resident
The Ventura County Star printed the following letter-to-the-editor from Mike Barton, a Ventura, California resident, regarding noise from a gun range in the area:
Re: Stacey K. Klemms July 14 letter, Gunfire not normal: Please listen closely. This is not a gun issue, this is a noise issue. The gunshots are distinct, sharp sounds that occur once every second when law enforcement is not there. There is machine-gun-style rapid fire when law enforcement is there, not the distant, low-volume shooting sound that has been described.
Have you ever been on a lake where you could hear sounds from a great distance? This is the same sort of phenomenon. The sharp-impact echo reverberates down through the valley and sounds much closer than it is. The city of Ventura has not done enough to insulate the citizens from the relentless onslaught of loud and harmful noise.
I support the gun range, if and only if, it is a good neighbor and takes the necessary steps to relieve the residents of the intrusive noise disturbance and to prevent causing further public injury. If the gun range is unable to do that, I fully support moving it to another city of law-abiding citizens. There, through proper education, it can be explained to the surrounding residents and their children what the difference is between the gunfire of bad people and the gunfire of good people, so they will know whether to duck or just ignore the crack of bullets over their heads.
PUBLICATION: Orlando Sentinel Tribune
DATE: July 28, 1998
SECTION: A Section; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Dan Tracy
DATELINE: Orlando, Florida
The Orlando Sentinel Tribune reports that the City Council in Orlando, Florida voted on Monday to approve an agreement that mostly prohibits future residents in a project known as Vista East from suing nearby Orlando International Airport over airplane noise. The article explains that the council's action paves the way for the $500 million residential and commercial project to begin.
According to the article, the proposed Vista East development is located near State Road 436 on the west to the Central Florida GreeneWay toll road on the east, about two miles northeast of the airport. The agreement approved by the council stipulates that no one can sue the airport over noise unless more than 16 percent of the flights that leave the airport go over the 1,800-acre tract more than 55 days a year. Officials at the airport pushed for the agreement because threats of lawsuits could stifle the airport's future growth. The article notes that currently, about 350,000 planes take off and land at the airport each year, with no more than 10 percent crossing the Vista East land. Rob Yeager, the developer with Sullivan Properties Inc., said people who live in Vista East will hardly notice jets. "It's quiet like the country out there," Yeager said.
The article explains that the area has long been under consideration for development because of its proximity to the airport and jobs. In addition, the GreeneWay opened about five years ago, making the area easier to reach from the north and the south. But, the article says, the land remained undeveloped because it didn't have roads, water, and sewer lines, and because it was the subject of a lawsuit involving a veterans hospital that was never built. The issues were eventually worked out, but the impasse over the noise waivers remained.
The article says that several weeks ago, the impasse looked especially bad when airport officials and developer Yeager couldn't agree on the waiver and stopped talking. They asked the City Council and Mayor Glenda Hood to take a side. But city councilors told the parties to compromise, and when airport officials agreed to limit the percentage of flights that could go over the land without homeowners suing, the deal was signed. Yeager said, "It made sense to be good neighbors to each other."
The article goes on to say that Yeager said road and utility construction could begin by November or December, and model homes could be ready by next fall. Road extensions will be placed on Chickasaw Trail, the Econlockhatchee Trail, and Goldenrod Road, and an extension of LeeVista Boulevard will be connected to the GreeneWay. Once the roads are in place Yeager and other home-building companies will start the Tivoli Woods and Vista Lakes subdivisions, which will have 2,800 houses and 1,800 apartments. Another 1.2 million square feet of shops, offices and commercial are in the plans. As many as 25,000 people -- roughly the population of Winter Park -- could live in Vista East in ten years, the article notes.
PUBLICATION: Aberdeen Evening Express
DATE: July 27, 1998
SECTION: Pg.3
BYLINE: Catherine Lyst
DATELINE: Aberdeen, Scotland
The Aberdeen Evening Express reports that a resident in the Aberdeen, Scotland area has applied for permission to build a loft for racing pigeons in the shared back yard of his council apartment. However, the article says, the next-door neighbor is opposing the plan, saying the pigeons will create noise and make a mess. Planning officers at the Aberdeen City Council have recommended that councilors approve the plan, and the issue will be discussed at Thursday's planning committee meeting.
According to the article, Harry Gordon of School Drive, Seaton, has applied for the permit to keep pigeons. Gordon's wife, Elizabeth, said, "Harry has kept pigeons all his life and wants to start up again. He would die if he didn't get his loft. She added, "Racing pigeons don't make a mess when they are flying. They only make a mess inside the loft which Harry will clean up. And Mr. McQueen will not be able to hear any noise."
The article explains that Richard McQueen, Gordon's next-door neighbor, has lived in his apartment for 15 years, and said he cannot believe the pigeons may be allowed. He said, "It is just nonsense. It is bad enough with seagulls. I can hardly clean my windows as it is. It will be even worse with pigeons as well. McQueen added, "I live on my own and watch a lot of TV. These pigeons are bound to make a lot of noise. And I am sure the other neighbors will soon get sick of them messing on their washing." McQueen also said that Gordon had only lived in the apartment for a couple of months and that he was upset that Gordon could move in and bring pigeons with him.
PUBLICATION: The Courier-Journal (Louisville, KY)
DATE: July 27, 1998
SECTION: News Pg.01a
BYLINE: Chris Poynter
DATELINE: Bowling Green, Kentucky
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Bill and Gail Ballance, members, Warren County Citizens for Managed Growth; Joey Roberts, leader, Warren County Citizens for Managed Growth
The Courier-Journal reports that a battle is shaping up over a proposal to build a 3,000-acre airport and industrial-park complex outside Bowling Green, Kentucky, near Smiths Grove, a town of about 700. Today, the article says, a feasibility study compiled by HNTB Corp. will be released that will identify at least two proposed sites for an airpark. Meanwhile, a residents group has formed that opposes the airpark.
According to the article, airparks usually include factories, warehouses, a major interstate connection, a rail line, an airport, and machines to move supplies and products. There are about a dozen airparks across the nation, the article says, the largest of which is Alliance Airport in Fort Worth, Texas, owned and operated by billionaire Ross Perot. Some airparks are designated as federal Free Trade Zones, which means that imported parts are not immediately taxed, a potential savings of millions of dollars a year for companies. According to Michael Buchanon, a Warren County Judge-Executive, Warren County is an ideal location for an airpark. The CSX railroad runs through downtown Smiths Grove, Interstate 65 cuts through the county, and the William Natcher and Cumberland parkways are nearby, he said. In addition, the proposed Interstate 66 might go through the area.
The airpark proposal has some strong supporters, the article says. Proponents, including Jody Richards, a state Representative from Bowling Green, and Jack Eversole, executive director of the Barren River Area Development District, said an airpark would help a region that has lost thousands of garment-factory jobs to overseas labor recently. Richards last year helped get $6 million to start the airpark project. Buchanon, the county Judge-Executive, said, "I see this as the next step of economic development based on transportation." Charles Meeks, a Smiths Grove resident, said, "I think Warren County would be silly not to want it. I think economically it would be good." The article notes that Warren County citizens and officials have toured airparks in the South in the past few months, including one in Huntsville, Alabama last week. That airpark has been open for 12 years and has added 28,000 jobs to the community, according to Alabama officials.
Others, however, vehemently oppose the proposal, the article says. They say a $100 million airpark would be a waste of money and would spoil the rural character of Smiths Grove. Charles Meisel, a landowner in northern Warren County, said, "I like the community the way it is. I know that it's bad to try to hold up progress, but this is a little country community and we don't want to see it change." Other critics say the airpark has not tenants and no guarantee of federal funding. In addition, some question whether the airpark concept works and what the impact would be on the existing airport in Bowling Green, which is expected to spend about $2.8 million in renovations this year. Some residents, including Bill and Gail Ballance, are concerned about pollution and noise. Gail Ballance said city officials shouldn't promote the idea without commitments from businesses. She said the situation is similar to she and her husband seeking a loan for their dairy farm with no money of their own and no cows. She said, "And then the banker asks: 'Do you have any cows?' ... We say: 'Well, no, we don't have any cows to put in it, but I'm sure once we built it, the cows will come.' Do you think I'm going to get the million-dollar loan?"
The article explains that the Ballances and about 200 other residents in Smiths Grove have joined together to form Warren County Citizens for Managed Growth to fight the airpark. The group is handing out fliers, creating a web-site and newsletter, and producing a video for the local cable public-access channel. The video includes interviews with residents living near the Louisville International Airport about the constant noise and air pollution from overhead jets. Joey Roberts, the leader of the group, said he moved to Smiths Grove from Bowling Green to enjoy the rural area.
Meanwhile, County Judge-Executive Buchanon said the airpark is not a "build it, and they will come" project. He said he hoped several companies would commit to the project before construction would begin, but didn't identify any specific prospects. However, he indicated that auto companies and related industries would locate in the airpark due to the automotive plants in the surrounding area.
The article says that according to Paul Puckli, associate vice president for HNTB Corp. which is performing the feasibility study, some airparks around the country have been successful, while "the jury is still out" on others. The airpark in Huntsville, Alabama has been successful partly because it's designated as a Free Trade Zone, allowing Chrysler to import car parts through the airpark without paying taxes, saving the company up to $60 million per year. But, Puckli said, an airpark in Kinston, North Carolina has been open for about four years but has only one tenant, while one in Fort Wayne, Indiana has been open two years and has no tenants.
PUBLICATION: The Courier-Journal (Louisville, KY)
DATE: July 27, 1998
SECTION: Your Money Lemme Doit Pg. 03C
DATELINE: Louisville, Kentucky
The Courier-Journal printed a column in which a resident of Louisville, Kentucky wrote in to say that two garages in the neighborhood have become music halls for practicing bands. The resident asked the columnist to find out what can be done about the constant noise. The columnist responded by asking police officers to monitor the neighborhood, but police heard excessive noise on only one occasion. The columnist tells the reader to call the police when the music being played.
According to the column, the reader said loud music can be heard in the evenings at a house on Royal Avenue, and all day at a house on Eastern Parkway. The columnist says that police visited the two homes and didn't find loud music at the house on Royal Avenue, but did hear loud music one night at the home on Eastern Parkway. Captain Myra Mason of the police force said the officer asked that the music be turned down, and the father of the boys said they music would be lowered. Mason added that police will continue to monitor these homes, but said neighbors' help also is needed. Mason said, "Anytime the music is too loud, we would appreciate her [the reader] calling the police. Sometimes police ask for people to turn music down and they turn it back up as soon as the police leave. [Your reader] or any other citizen should call the police again. Most officers give warnings first, but if the noise persists, citations can be written."
PUBLICATION: The Detroit News
DATE: July 27, 1998
SECTION: Accent; Pg. Pg. B1
BYLINE: Tom Long
DATELINE: U.S.
The Detroit News printed an editorial in which the columnist says ice cream trucks should not be banned. He goes on to list the objections to ice cream trucks brought by many baby boomer parents, including the trucks' potential for accidents, the possibility that the trucks may be driven by pedophiles, and the trucks' noise. The columnist argues against all of these objections.
According to the editorial, communities across the country have been struggling to deal with what they perceive as a problem with ice cream trucks. The columnist says there's no doubt that ice cream trucks create a safety problem when kids run toward the truck and into the street. But, the columnist argues, this really isn't the fault of the ice cream truck, it's the fault of the parents who don't teach their kids not to run into the street without looking. In some towns, officials have required ice cream trucks to add stop signs similar to those on school buses, and in other towns, ice cream trucks can't drive on busy streets.
But, the columnist says, the other two common complaints against ice cream trucks are far more absurd -- that they make too much noise and they may be driven by pedophiles. If we really want to get rid of all possible contact between kids and pedophiles, the editorial says, we'll have to get rid of all rec centers, the Boy Scouts and most major religions. The contention that music from ice cream trucks is noise pollution is the most alarming complaint, the columnist says. Many parents probably loved hearing an ice cream truck when they were young, the writer says, but now want to deny their kids that pleasure because it intrudes on their "insular lives." Baby boomers are now becoming fuddy-duddies, the editorial argues. A classic piece of Americana like the ice cream truck should be revered, the writer says, in our increasingly sanitized and regulated world. There is obviously something very wrong, the columnist concludes when it is easier to ban an ice cream truck than an assault rifle.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: July 27, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 3; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Karen Robinson-Jacobs
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Tony Lucente, president, Studio City Residents Association; Joan Luchs, leader, North Hollywood Residents Association's development committee
The Los Angeles Times reports that in Los Angeles, California the second phase of Universal Studios' proposed 3.3-million-square-foot expansion. The project in its entirety is being looked at by county planners. It's scale had been diminished after residents complained last year, but the second phase construction could bring the project up to the size of its original grandeur. The second phase would develop 250,000 square feet to eventually be used to expand Universal's City Walk attraction.
According to the article, the new space will include 90,000 square feet to be used as a strip for 20 stores, restaurants, and events for additional tenants. It could be complete in two years.
The article goes on to say that meetings will be held October 7 and 14 about the overall proposed master plan, which would include stores, offices, hotel space, film production studios, and additional visitor attractions. Regional planners will have to consider the environmental impact report and the specific plan -- which sets maximum building heights and noise levels -- before the project could be approved.
The article explains that although the second phase -- excluding the master plan -- was reduced in size from 358,000 to 250,000 square feet, the master plan will bring the total up to 340,000.
The article notes that neighbors are angry that the total square footage will be so large, saying the expansion will worsen noise and traffic. They also say that Universal has basically subtracted space from the Phase II plan and put it in the master plan. President of Studio City's residents association, Tony Lucente, said "We knew it was a multi-phased project. But we really did think Phase II [square-footage] was folded into the master plan."
The article reports that Universal claims mitigation measures have already been implemented to insure no additional increase in noise from the second phase. Joan Luchs, President of North Hollywood's residents association says it's not true, saying "If you add close to 100,000 square feet on top of what's already there, without additional mitigation it will be a tragedy for North Hollywood and the Cahuenga Pass."
PUBLICATION: The Orange County Register
DATE: July 27, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. A01
BYLINE: Marla Jo Fisher
DATELINE: Anaheim, California
The Orange County Register reports that contractors working on a major construction project at Disneyland in Anaheim, California are taking special methods to cut down on the negative impacts of the project, including dust, noise, traffic, and other impacts.
The article reports that the $1.4 billion project, expected to take five years to complete, will include a new theme park called Disney's California Adventure, a five-story parking garage, a shopping-and-entertainment center on a pedestrian promenade, a remodeled Disneyland Hotel, and a 750-room hotel. In addition, the project will realign streets, move a portion of West Street underground to create the pedestrian promenade, demolish hotels, and build several parking lots. Virtually every available construction worker in the county will be used for the project, Disney officials said. Currently, there are 100 to 200 workers on the site, depending on the day. Construction manager Alan Rose said, "We'll probably move half a million yards of dirt in 1998. It is a tremendous challenge to do construction in the middle of an operating environment like this."
The article goes on to describe how Disney is trying to mitigate the impacts of the construction project. To control noise from equipment, every machine must have a muffler. In addition, pile drivers, machines that ram steel foundation pilings several feet into the ground, are banned at the construction site. The construction site is only a few feet from the entrance to the Magic Kingdom, so the kind of noise that pile drivers produce would be inconceivable, the article says. Instead, workers use a giant vibrator hung on a crane that shakes foundation pilings in place, which displaces soil much more slowly and quietly than a pile driver. When the vibrator won't work in an area, workers use a machine that looks like a four-foot-long corkscrew to create a hole for a piling. Outside the boundaries of the resort project, noise from the work can't exceed 60 decibels, the equivalent of a manual typewriter, the article says. The streets outside the boundaries include Katella Avenue, Walnut Street, Ball Road, and Harbor Boulevard. Ray Gomez, a Disney spokesperson, said, "They are measuring the noise every week."
The article goes on to detail the measures Disney is taking to deal with dust, dirt on truck tires and in the rest of the resort, traffic congestion, and aesthetics.
The article says that despite all of the mitigation measures, some neighbors still suffer from the project's impacts, especially those off Walnut Street to the west of the park. One resident, Roberto Cruz, built a fountain in his yard to help cut down on the noise, and moved dense fig trees and planted other trees to create a living dust screen.
The article also includes a sidebar that advises residents to prepare in advance for development projects. For example, the article says, if you're a homeowner, attend all public hearings on projects in your neighborhood. Before you buy property, contact the city planning department and find out if any large projects are planned nearby or if any proposed changes would alter your neighborhood's character. For instance, a new hospital would bring increased traffic and sirens. If a development is planned for your neighborhood, ask to read the planning files or environmental-impact statement for the project, which should give a picture of the potential impacts of the project. The documents also will spell out how the developer is supposed to mitigate the impacts of the project. For example, construction hours or truck traffic may be limited.
The article says that if a construction project near your home is causing problems, first talk to the construction company officials to see if the problem can be solved. If the problem goes on, contact your building department at city hall and ask for the rules governing construction in your city. Most cities ban construction before 7 a.m. and after 7 p.m. and impose other restrictions. Ask the building department how to file a complaint, or call your city councilor for help.
The article explains that this report is part of a continuing series on how Orange County is changing from development. To access previous stories on this topic, visit the web-site: www.ocregister.com/growth. Some of the stories include: Maps to the Future: Details of proposed development; Home Remodeling: New houses have varied look; Nature: Questions about the quality of life; Annexation: Newport Beach considers options for Newport Coast; Transportation: Debate over Foothill South extension.
PUBLICATION: The Orange County Register
DATE: July 27, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. A06
BYLINE: Marla Jo Fisher
DATELINE: Orange County, California
The Orange County Register reports that large and small construction projects in Orange County, California affect people who live nearby. The most common complaints from neighbors over construction are noise, dust, and aesthetics. The article goes on to briefly discuss each of these impacts.
According to the article, contractors must usually control dust by watering down the dirt at the project site. If the project is on or near a hillside, it's often covered with tarps or vegetation to avoid mudslides during the rainy season. Occasionally, the number of large trucks that can drive down residential streets is limited.
The article reports that most contractors don't try to control noise very much unless it's required. Often, however, construction is limited to daylight hours. The article says that in 1994, some Aliso Viejo residents fought for and won the right to have a noise wall built to mitigate noise from the toll-road construction below their homes. But when they realized the wall would block their views, they re-negotiated and got a clear plexiglass wall.
The article notes that sometimes construction projects ruin aesthetics. For example, the Mesa Consolidated Water District settled a lawsuit with some residents about the construction of an underground reservoir by agreeing to make its pump house look like an ordinary residence. In addition, water district officials agreed to double-glaze windows and add insulation and air-conditioning for neighbors most directly affected by noise. Other residents living near freeway expansion projects complain about the unsightly dumping by construction workers on vacant lots.
PUBLICATION: The Herald-Sun (Durham, NC)
DATE: July 26, 1998
SECTION: Editorial; Pg. A16
DATELINE: Durham, North Carolina
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jacqueline Harris, resident
The Herald-Sun printed a letter-to-the-editor from Jacqueline Harris, a Durham, North Carolina resident, arguing that the City and County Councils should enforce noise and health ordinances:
The City Council and the Durham County Commissioners must not have much to do. What is so wrong with a flag or a cow? Is there a noise ordinance in Durham? What about a health ordinance?
I worked at Liggett & Myers for 33 years, and we had to wear ear plugs to protect our ears, but cars can play music day or night that you can hear a mile down the road before you see the car. Tell me how the individual can hear a siren or anything else? This noise could cause a very bad accident on our roads.
According to the Health Department, as long as you have your garbage tied up in a bag, you can put your garbage in the yard or wherever you want for the rats and flies to eat. This is very unsanitary. The garbage and the smell are a disgrace to the neighborhood!
What are we paying taxes for -- to allow cars to play loud music, throw your garbage out the door in the yard for rats to eat? We do not need a landfill in Durham. The City Council and Durham County Commissioners are more concerned about having the American flag and the cow on top of the store taken down than enforcing a noise ordinance and a health ordinance.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: July 26, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 6; Editorial Writers Desk
DATELINE: Irvine, California area
The Los Angeles Times printed the following letters-to-the-editor from residents in the Irvine, California area regarding the proposed commercial airport at the El Toro Marine Corps Air Station:
To the editor:
Isn't it curious? Peggy Ducey, a Newport Beach official and executive director of a coalition of cities that support the El Toro plan, recognizes that "we can't just push our need for airport service onto someone else." ("Irvine's El Toro Fight Takes New Direction: South," July 18.)
Yet that is precisely what Newport Beach deep pockets are trying to do to us in south Orange County.
Carrie Harvey, Laguna Niguel resident
To the editor:
Peggy Ducey, in response to Irvine's attempt to examine a regional solution to airport demand, located away from population centers, says that we can't dump our airport traffic on someone else. Who, exactly, is this "we" that she refers to? Certainly not the city of Newport Beach, which has been promoting El Toro as a means of dumping John Wayne Airport traffic (and more) onto south Orange County.
Ducey replaced the previous champion, county airport planner Courtney Wiercioch, who complained that the 40,000-member Air Line Pilots' Assn. was not considering the impact on local residents when it had the nerve to point out that the county's proposed runways are unsafe. Since Wiercioch's office has systematically understated the impact of noise, traffic and pollution for the last two years, her brand of "consideration" for the 250,000 people adjacent to El Toro is more than a bit suspect. Wiercioch's statement trumped her earlier statement in response to a group of Laguna Hills churches, concerned that one-per-minute approaches of aircraft might interrupt Sunday services. Wiercioch stated that her studies show that noise levels will be no higher than they are now. This conveniently ignored the fact that the Marines do not fly on Sunday (or on Saturday, or after 10 p.m. on weekdays).
It is apparent that airport supporters are willing to make any kind of outrageous statement, with a straight face, as long as it suits their agenda. I shudder to think what's next.
Arnold Burke, Lake Forest resident
To the editor:
To protect the millions of dollars that developers have invested in efforts to sell the voters on an airport at El Toro, we can expect even more of this sort of maneuver.
When money and its political clout is used to take away our voting rights, we are getting more of what we in Orange County already have and that is government by developers.
Barney Deasy, Laguna Hills resident
To the editor:
Without the airport at El Toro, the economy is doing quite well, thanks to new high-tech businesses, and Orange Countians still have a good quality of life. Bring in a monster airport and we could lose these high-tech businesses to quieter communities.
Earl Biven, Irvine resident
PUBLICATION: The Montgomery Advertiser
DATE: July 26, 1998
SECTION: Front Page; Pg. 1A
BYLINE: Malcomb Daniels
DATELINE: Montgomery, Alabama
The Montgomery Advertiser reports that Eddie Lee Moore, a resident of Montgomery, Alabama, received a citation under the city's noise ordinance in 1996 for playing his car radio too loud. Now, Moore is waiting to hear whether the Alabama Supreme Court will hear his challenge to the constitutionality of the noise ordinance. The article notes that Moore is being represented by the American Civil Liberties Union.
According to the article, in early 1996 the Montgomery City Council voted to raise the minimum fine on a noise violation from a $46 to $150. In May 1996, Moore received a $150 ticket for playing his car radio too loud. Moore was convicted in Montgomery Municipal Court and appealed to the Montgomery Circuit Court. In September 1997, he pleaded guilty to the charge with the understanding that he would appeal. In May, the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama filed a brief in the Alabama Supreme Court on Moore's behalf.
The article reports that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) believes that Montgomery's noise ordinance violates a person's right to free speech and due process under the law. Tommy Goggans, an attorney who is assisting the ACLU in Moore's appeal, said that Montgomery's noise ordinance is unconstitutional because it doesn't require police officers to measure the noise in any way before issuing a citation. Goggans said Montgomery's law "leaves to the whim of what and when a police officer might be thinking at that moment." The article notes that in some cities, noise violations are based on decibel levels.
PUBLICATION: The Montgomery Advertiser
DATE: July 26, 1998
SECTION: Front Page; Pg. 1A
BYLINE: Frank Mastin Jr.
DATELINE: Montgomery, Alabama
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Sidney Williams, Montgomery City Councilor
The Montgomery Advertiser reports that residents and officials in Montgomery, Alabama say that since the Montgomery City Council called for aggressive enforcement of the noise ordinance and raised the minimum fine for violations in 1996, noise from loud car stereos has decreased.
According to the article, the Montgomery City Council raised the minimum fine for noise violations from $46 to $150 in early 1996, along with calling for increased enforcement of the ordinance. Police responded by issuing 770 tickets in May and 502 in June of 1996. According to Montgomery Municipal Court records, the number of citations written since has leveled off, but remains steady.
Residents around the city say that there are fewer loud car stereos now, but the problem is not completely gone. Reverend Willie Johnson said, "I heard one come through here, I thought it was thunder." Johnson added that the problem is not as bad as it used to be. Frank Guidas, a Woodmere resident, said, "I don't think it's as bad as it used to be, but they still run around with the boom boxes in the back seat. I won't say it's really that bad, but you can still hear them, even if you're in your house, because we're only about 40 or 50 feet from the street in most of the houses."
Michael Harsey, a Chisholm resident, said many of his friends have large boom boxes, and he believes if merchants are allowed to sell the loud stereos, consumers should be able to play them. He added, "I think it's just a way for them [the city] to make money." Harsey said loud music ought to be allowed with a reasonable curfew of about 9 p.m. Some of his friends are selling their loud stereos instead of risking the fines, Harsey said.
Meanwhile, the article says, one merchant reported that his sales of loud stereo systems had declined, but now was starting to climb again. Wesley Williams, manager of Jimmy's Car Stereo on Atlanta Highway, said big boom boxes still are not as popular as they once were. Williams said his workers have changed their sales pitch since the ordinance crackdown. Before, Williams said, the loudest stereos were the most popular. Now, the sales pitch centers around sound quality rather than loudness. Williams said, "Our business has not fallen off, we just change the way we do business." At Car Audio Plus, the owner said sales of big boom boxes had declined about 50 percent after the new ordinance passed. He said, "It's so outrageous. If somebody ever takes the city to court, the city will lose, because it's unconstitutional, in my opinion."
But others are pleased with the results of the ordinance. Sidney Williams, a Montgomery City Councilor and leading proponent of the ordinance, said, "I'm very satisfied with it [the ordinance], although we are going to have people who disobey just like you have people who run red lights." But, he added, "People know that there will be a cost and they know what the penalties are."
PUBLICATION: The News Tribune (Tacoma, WA)
DATE: July 26, 1998
SECTION: Local/State; Pg. C1
BYLINE: Barbara Clements
DATELINE: Seattle, Washington area
The News Tribune reports that a new plan has been proposed that would shift some nighttime flight paths at the Sea-Tac Airport in the Seattle, Washington area to reduce noise over Federal Way. There are conflicting accounts of whether the plan has been proposed by the Federal Aviation Administration or the office of U.S. Representative Adam Smith. The article reports that a similar proposal involving daytime flights was rejected by the FAA in April, surprising and disappointing many local officials.
According to the article, Holly Chisa, an aide to U.S. Representative Adam Smith (D-Kent), told members of a task force studying departure routes from the airport that the FAA had suggested changing the flight paths of about 10 southbound planes taking off at night. The article says that instead of turning right at Interstate 5 and South 320th Street, as they do now, the jets would travel about three miles farther south and turn over the Tacoma Tideflats.
The article explains that in April, FAA officials rejected a similar proposal involving 40 daytime flights because it would place flights too close to planes going into McChord Air Force Base and could confuse air traffic controllers on busy days. The FAA's decision stunned members of the task force, which is make up of officials from the cities of Tacoma, Federal Way, Milton, Edgewood, and Fife, because the federal agency had previously supported the plan. Many task force members said that six years of work and study had been wasted when the FAA rejected the plan. The plan would have diverted the flights from the South 320th Street corridor five miles farther south before they turned to the west. The article says that about 75 jets per day turn over South 320th Street at an altitude of about 3,000 feet, and residents have long complained about the noise.
According to the article, Representative Smith and Chisa, his aide, refused to comment on the idea last week. However, in a July 17 letter, Chisa said the FAA had suggested shifting the nighttime routes. George Orr, manager for the FAA's airspace branch for the Northwest, said he was familiar with the proposal and didn't see any fatal flaws in it. But, he said that Chisa, not the FAA, has proposed the plan. Orr said that if air traffic is light, northbound flight paths already are shifted between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. to reduce flights. Orr said Chisa asked if a similar plan could be worked out for southbound flights.
The article says that regardless of who proposed the plan, it still would need the approval of the task force and the Port of Seattle's noise abatement committee. Members of the noise abatement committee have agreed to study the proposal this fall, and Chisa has said she will call a task force meeting if members express enough interest in it.
Meanwhile, one member of the task force said he was skeptical that the proposal would do any good. Phil Watkins, a Federal Way City Councilor, said the best chance of reducing jet noise over Federal Way now is for the city to pursue a lawsuit against the proposed third runway at Sea-Tac. But John Williams, the mayor of Milton, said he's willing to look at the idea since he heard it may reduce some of the noise over Milton, Fife, and Edgewood. The article notes that even if the task force approved the proposal, the noise abatement committee won't release its recommendations for at least another year.
PUBLICATION: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
DATE: July 26, 1998
SECTION: Editorial, Pg. E-2
DATELINE: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette printed an editorial that says a proposal in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to lower the permitted decibel limit is probably a good one. But, the editorial argues, it is difficult to imagine enough police enforcement to truly do away with noise pollution.
According to the editorial, the city already has a noise ordinance that sets the lawful noise limit at 85 decibels. But City Councilor Dan Onorato and some of his constituents are proposing that the limit be changed to 68 decibels to deal with loud car stereos. Violators would be fined $300, and if they received a second citation, they would be fined again and their cars would be impounded until they paid the fine and towing costs.
The editorial says that issues such as noise have been targeted to "re-civilize" our cities and increase quality of life. In New York, the editorial reports, enforcing nuisance crimes such as noise violators has been linked to reducing the overall crime rate. But, the editorial argues, it's easier to announce a policy of cracking down on noise polluters than it is to enforce such a policy. It's difficult to imagine enough police resources being mobilized against noise pollution, the editorial says. And, it says, when police enforce nuisance crimes, there usually are complaints about selective enforcement on the basis of age or race or neighborhood. But, the editorial concludes, if New York can live with 68 decibels, Pittsburgh probably can do the same.
The editorial also mentions that Councilor Onorato also has proposed that the city purchase 15 more noise-measuring meters for police to use in enforcing the law.
PUBLICATION: The Record (Bergen County, NJ)
DATE: July 26, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. N03
BYLINE: The Associated Press
DATELINE: Surf City, New Jersey
The Record reports that towns along New Jersey's shoreline are attempting to keep life peaceful during the busy summer season by imposing stiff fines for noise pollution, disorderly conduct, and public urination. The rules have angered some residents, but local officials say the high fines are an effective deterrent.
According to the article, in an incident earlier this month, college student Amy Palanjian and 27 others were fined $1,030 each for violating Surf City's noise ordinance during a June 29 party. According to Andrea Palanjian, Amy's mother, the fine cost her daughter her college savings account. She added that the fines are unreasonable, and she and several other parents are discussing an appeal because they believe their children's rights were violated during the July 16 court hearing. Palanjian said she believes her daughter should face the consequences of her actions, but the fine is out of proportion to the crime. She said in a published report, "I think that kind of fee was ridiculous. Maybe they could have made an impression that they weren't going to tolerate it another way" through community service and a cheaper fine.
But according to Mayor Leonard Connors, making violations costly is the only way the town can get serious, the article says. Connors said $1,000 fines for noise violations aren't unusual, and the students at the party weren't singled out or treated differently than anyone else. He said, "I think the fine was just right because they're not going to forget what got them into trouble in the first place. If they would have been fined community service and $50, they would have walked away laughing."
In another town, Beach Haven, officials have set high fines for public urination, and also have established "zero-tolerance" zones near bars where noise polluters will be ticketed without receiving warnings first.
The article explains that some critics have said towns are using the stiff fines to pad the town coffers, officials in both towns deny that motivation. James McCaffrey, the Police Chief in Beach Haven, said, "These towns have budgets of millions of dollars. The money generated through fines is nothing... . It's a half a cent on the tax rate."
PUBLICATION: St. Petersburg Times
DATE: July 26, 1998
SECTION: Neighborhood Times; Pg. 6
BYLINE: Christina Headrick
DATELINE: St. Petersburg Beach, Florida
The St. Petersburg Times reports that the City Commission in St. Petersburg Beach, Florida unanimously approved changes to its noise ordinance last week after weakening the proposed rules in a concession to hotel owners. The article says that eight large resort owners had opposed the changes to the noise rules. But, Tuesday, hotel managers said the noise ordinance approved by the Commission would benefit both frustrated residents and hotel guests.
According to the article, the original proposed changes to the ordinance called for reducing the hours that outdoor music is allowed. Outdoor music would have been permitted until 9 p.m. instead of 11 p.m. In addition, the proposed changes would have automatically revoked the right to hold outdoor entertainment for repeat offenders. The version of the ordinance approved by the Commission will allow loud outdoor music until 10:30 p.m., after which establishments will have to turn down the volume by five decibels. In addition, the final rules don't require outdoor entertainment permits to be automatically revoked after repeat violations. However, there is a higher fine of $500 after the third citation. City Commissioners also urged the Police Department to enforce the law more aggressively.
The article explains that residents of the Silver Sands condominiums, who have complained for years about noise from the open-air Swigwam bar on Gulf Blvd. and other bars, again brought the noise issue before the Commission last year. Commissioner Jim Myers, who lives in Silver Sands, said he was satisfied with the changes to the ordinance, the article says. Myers said, "The new rules will give us more protection because they lower the decibel levels that are allowed, and they also increase the fines. I also think it made some of the noisemakers more aware of the problem. If we get lucky, then they'll turn it down now and we won't have to get into more difficulties about this."
PUBLICATION: Knoxville News-Sentinel (Knoxville, TN)
DATE: July 27, 1998
SECTION: A Section; Pg. A4
BYLINE: Jim Balloch, News-Sentinel Staff Writer
DATELINE: Knoxville, Tennessee
The Knoxville News-Sentinel reports Knoxville, Tennessee's City Council agenda for Tuesday night includes proposals to update the city's thirty-year-old noise ordinance to make it more enforceable.
According to the article, the council will examine proposed changes to the city's noise ordinance, which has been undergoing extensive scrutiny and discussion for more than two years. Council members could approve the new noise ordinance on first reading Tuesday. The proposed ordinance, drafted with the help of a committee appointed by Mayor Victor Ashe that included representatives from community groups and businesses, establishes day and night noise levels for residential, commercial, and industrial areas, and it sets specific distance limits from which various noises may be audible. The city's noise ordinance has been criticized as too vague as well as inadequate given advances in sound technology and amplification that have occurred in the 30 years since it was enacted. Those advances include equipment with which a police officer can measure noise levels, said committee member John Key. Key said noise ordinances of 16 other cities were studied in preparation for the measure before the City Council.
PUBLICATION: Time
DATE: July 27, 1998
SECTION: International Edition; Time Atlantic; Cover Story; Pg. 38
BYLINE: James Geary, reported by Anthee Carassava/Athens, Phil Couvrette/Paris, Abi Daruvalla/Amsterdam, Helen Gibson/London, James L. Graff/Brussels, Ulla Plon/Copenhagen and Ursula Sautter/Bonn
DATELINE: Europe
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Takis Goulielmos, member of Greece's Association for the Quality of Life; Valerie Gibson, founder of Noise Network; Arnan Oberski, chairman of the Amsterdam Residents Group against Noise from Schiphol; Cees van Ojik, Amsterdam physician; Louis Dandrel, "sound anthropologist" and head of the Paris-based firm Diasonic
Time Magazine reports noise pollution is increasing across Europe. While noise can damage health and destroy peace of mind, there are ways to lessen its impact.
According to the article, noise can lead to murder. A 78-year-old retired farmer, Lambrinos Lykouresis, who lived in Lithakia, on the Greek island of Zakynthos, claims he had complained to his neighbor for months about her blasting music. Lykouresis says he only wanted to listen to the evening news in peace. On May 31, 1996, he snapped. When 40-year-old housewife Imberia Boziki answered the doorbell, Lykouresis fired his hunting rifle three times, killing Boziki instantly and wounding her 24-year-old son. Lykouresis, convicted of manslaughter and serving two life sentences, now listens to the evening news in a Greek maximum security prison,. The Lykouresis case is an extreme example of the lengths to which some people will go for a little peace and quiet. But it's a sad example of the devastating effects noise pollution, of one of the world's most pervasive yet least publicized environmental problems. Noise pollution is termed the presence of intrusive and unwanted sounds that can seriously affect physical and psychological health. A 1996 study conducted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development found Greece to be the noisiest nation in Europe. In Athens, 60% of the capital's 5 million residents are subjected to noise volumes above 75 decibels (dB), a level that is double the threshold at which symptoms such as aggression and hypertension can occur. "There's no such thing as peace and quiet here anymore," says Takis Goulielmos, a senior member of Greece's Association for the Quality of Life. "Noise pollution is becoming the country's greatest [health] threat. If effective measures are not taken, Greeks will either turn mad or deaf."
The article reports the Greeks are not unique. According to Europe's Environment, a report published in 1995 by the European Environment Agency (E.E.A.), about 65% of the European population are regularly exposed to noise intensities above 55 dB, a level high enough to cause annoyance, aggressive behavior, and sleep disturbance. The E.E.A. also concluded that some 113 million Europeans are routinely subjected to more than 65 dB, the level at which hypertension can result, and 10 million endure noise above 75 dB, which can lead to high stress levels, increased heart rates, and potential hearing loss. Except for people--who blast stereos and televisions and scream at outdoor entertainment and sporting events--the usual sources of noise pollution are planes, trains and automobiles. In Germany, for example, the Federal Environmental Agency estimates that 70% of the country's inhabitants feel continuously disturbed by road traffic. In the Netherlands, more than a million people are subjected to excessive noise levels due to their proximity to Schiphol Airport, according to a report by the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (R.I.V.M.). In an increasingly overcrowded and congested Europe, noise pollution is a problem that occurs in urban and rural areas alike. And those who suffer from these acoustic intrusions are starting to speak out.
The article states Valerie Gibson, a partner in a freelance photography business, started campaigning against noise pollution in 1991, when she was forced to move from her home in southeast London because of a neighbor who refused to turn down her music. "It was a horrific experience," Gibson recalls. "We still get feelings of panic when neighbors have loud parties." Amplified music was the top domestic noise nuisance in a survey conducted this year by Britain's National Society for Clean Air and Environmental Protection. In Britain, residents bothered by loud neighbors can complain to the local council. But taking noise-makers to court can be a slow and discouraging process. And councils often lack the resources--and the incentive--to prosecute. The Cardiff County Council in Wales takes a more direct approach. During Noise Awareness Day on July 1, it publicly steamrollered stereos and speakers it confiscated from offenders over the past four years. But however legitimate the grievance, those who do complain can be stigmatized for insisting on their right to quiet. "There's a lot of prejudice against people who complain," says Gibson. "Most people move house rather than confront the source of the problem." Having moved once already, Gibson is staying put and fighting through the Noise Network, an organization she founded that campaigns against domestic noise intrusions. Gibson's current target is Cable & Wireless Communications, which has been running an ad that encourages subscribers to "Turn up the volume and tune into the month's best music on cable." Gibson contends the ad incites anti-social behavior by endorsing loud music. The Advertising Standards Authority, the body that regulates advertising in Britain, rejects Gibson's claim. But Gibson is continuing her fight by submitting to the government's Noise and Nuisance Policy Unit a stack of press clippings detailing cases in which loud music has driven people to suicide and murder.
The article goes on to report people living at a five-story housing estate beside the Paris' Peripherique, a racetrack ring road--are regularly driven to distraction by the traffic noise they endure 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Despite double-glazed windows and sound-absorbing barriers along the roadside, noise levels of 90 dB and above are common inside the apartments. "It's like a subway train blasting across my living room," says one resident. Unfortunately, those unable or unwilling to move away have little choice but to insulate themselves as best they can from the noise. In general, the higher the barrier and the closer to the noise source, the better it works. But with extremely wide highways like the Peripherique, barriers can't do much to block traffic noise coming from the farthest lanes.
According to the article, there are alternatives to suffering through the noise. Several U.S. states have recently began building new urban roads in tunnels, which has the dual effect of burying the noise and providing more public space for parks and playing fields. Quieter road surfaces with open, pitted textures that absorb more sound than the denser surfaces currently in use are being developed. But there's a much easier way to crack down on road racket: reduce speed limits. As an automobile's velocity increases, so does its noise. According to the U.S. non-profit group Noise Pollution Clearinghouse, lowering vehicle speeds from 65 to 48 km/h results in noise reductions equivalent to removing half the cars from the road.
The article reports in the Netherlands, Europe's most densely populated, the natural quiet is hard to find. For the past 10 years, the Dutch noise pollution debate has focused almost exclusively on plans to add a fifth runway to Schiphol Airport. Proponents of expansion believe that the new runway is vital if Schiphol is to maintain its status as a major gateway to Europe for passengers and goods. Opponents claim it's a mistake to expand Europe's fourth busiest airport when it's located so close to Amsterdam. Marianne de Bie, spokeswoman for Schiphol Airport, agrees that expansion of the existing site would be "unwise in terms of safety and environmental considerations." De Bie says the airport proposes that further growth take place on a purpose-built island off the Dutch coast. "Politicians still have to make a choice between economic growth and environmental norms," says Keimpe Wieringa of the R.I.V.M. For Arnan Oberski, chairman of the Amsterdam Residents Group against Noise from Schiphol, the choice is clear. Oberski keeps a decibel meter on his balcony and claims that it regularly measures 100 dB and higher as planes cross the sky every 90 seconds during peak periods. "The sound of aircraft thundering over my head is extremely disturbing," he says. "It's an unfair invasion into your life resulting from other people's desire to make money."
The article states Cees van Ojik, a family physician from Zwanenburg, deals daily with the side-effects of living under Schiphol's flight paths. His campaign to stop the airport's expansion began 30 years ago when he was made privy to a confidential government report on the public health effects of a proposed new runway. "I was shocked," he recalls. "The report said 70% of local people would suffer from excessive noise and 30% would have sleeping and/or anxiety-related problems." The runway was built as planned in 1968, but a study carried out 10 years later showed that heart disease had doubled in the Zwanenburg area, and the use of sleeping pills increased 20-50%. "We're back where we started," Van Ojik muses. "People seem resigned to the fact that sickness is the price you pay for a healthy economy. When a plane roars overhead," says Van Ojik, "your heart rate goes up. This has a negative effect on the nervous system and is a factor in heart disease." The sound of an aircraft engine effects the heart because loud noises switch on our 'fight or flight' mechanism. Prolonged exposure to loud sounds causes the body to produce a steady stream of adrenaline, which can lead to hypertension, psychological problems, and sexual dysfunction. A German study completed in 1992 by the Berlin Institute for Water, Soil and Air Hygiene found that individuals exposed to average noise levels of 65 dB during the day--roughly one-sixth of the German population--had a 20% higher risk of heart attack.
According to the article, children seem especially vulnerable to excessive noise. Studies made near Munich Airport concluded that noise from the aircraft adversely affected learning abilities in schoolchildren. The studies, published in Psychological Science in 1995 and 1998, tracked the cognitive abilities of students attending schools near Munich Airport when the facility was moved to a new site in 1992. Before and after the airport's move, children from both sites took a range of psychological tests, including cognition, physiology and motivation. Researchers found reduced cognitive ability in the area of long-term memory and language comprehension in both groups of children during their residence near the airport. But these adverse effects disappeared in children at the previous airport site two years after the move, while exactly the same pattern of reduced learning ability occurred in children living around the new airport.
The article reports while Schiphol's future expansion should be decided by the end of the year, the European Commission has taken other steps to inform consumers of noise pollution from outdoor equipment.. The new directive which, if approved, would consolidate noise pollution requirements for a range of outdoor equipment--from lawnmowers and leafblowers to garbage trucks as well as the shredder/chipper. The goal is to label such products with a "guaranteed maximum noise level," thus giving consumers a chance to assess this home equipment in terms of quietness.
The article states in some cases, there is a technological solution to intrusive noise. In the small town of Pegnitz, Germany, hotelier Andreas Pflaum has created an oasis of natural sounds. In the gardens behind his Post Hotel, guests are treated to the such sonic refreshments as twittering larks and a purling fountain even as traffic roars down the busy highway running alongside the premises. To maintain its soundscape, the Post Hotel is equipped with directional microphones that track the sound of approaching cars and trucks. The microphones adjust the volume of a network of loudspeakers accordingly. The loudspeakers play classical music to gently distract guests from the din of traffic, the volume of this protective sound screen ebbs and flows with the stridency of the noise. During evening rush hour the garden swells with Wagner. When all is quiet on the highway, the music fades too. "This kind of noise is a pleasure, not a pain," says Pflaum.
The article goes on to report musical interludes are also being used in Paris to blot out polluting noises. Louis Dandrel, self-professed "sound anthropologist" and head of the Paris-based firm Diasonic, is determined to relieve Paris of the rattle of motorbikes and the beeping of mobile phones. One of Diasonic's recent commissions came from the Music Pavilion in Paris' Villette exhibition complex, which wanted an end to the deafening echoes and reverberating footsteps in a passage connecting a suite of offices to concert and exhibition spaces. Dandrel filled the high curving walls of the corridor with a wave of ambient sound by placing gongs along the corridor and hanging a "sound cloud" in the shape of small bells from the ceiling. The result is similar to a mechanical orchestra conducted by a computer. The soothing, meditative music it produces, says Dandrel, is "like a fugue, with the street noise as the contrabass, the gongs as the brass and the bells as the strings." A similar principle is being applied at the high-speed train station at Roissy Airport outside Paris. At more than 100 dB, the sound of a high-speed train barreling through a station at 180 km/h is only slightly quieter than the sound of a jet airplane taking off. The ear's hearing mechanisms can be damaged by noise at this volume, especially if it occurs in a sudden burst. So to protect passengers waiting on the platform, the sound system at Roissy is programmed to chime in when a train is within 1 km of the station. The speakers broadcast music that builds to a climax as the train approaches, then slowly diminishes as the train moves on. Since the ear is gradually prepared for the coming sonic shock of the train's approach, the risk of damage is greatly reduced.
The article goes on to cite three more innovative solutions to noise pollution. First, in response to incessant dog barking, a few inventive Frenchmen are attempting canine noise control in Paris. The AboiStop (Bark Guard) collar manufactured by Dynavet emits the scent of citronella or mustard, which dogs detest, every time the animal barks. As a result, the dog eventually comes to associate the unpleasant smell with barking, and simply stops. Another collar called Bark Control made by Eurosos Systemes emits high-frequency sounds, which dogs also detest, at every bark. The dog learns that barking causes pain, and quickly stops the noise. Also in Paris, the sounds of public utility and roadworks, especially when they occur at night or during weekends, are the source of some of the loudest complaints about noise pollution. The Compagnie Parisienne de Chauffage Urbain (C.P.C.U.), the public heating company in Paris, is working to reduce the impact of its noisy activities on the city's environment. The C.P.C.U. has developed mobile sound-suppressing containers to cover its construction sites. Placed over the work area, these modules keep most of the noise contained. A layer of sand spread around the container absorbs escaping noise and dampens vibrations. The C.P.C.U.'s silent structures are a success, halving construction site noise levels from 110 dB to 55 dB. And in the Netherlands, Dutch electronics giant Philips has developed the Ultra Bass sound system whose speakers, instead of actually producing bass notes, exploit the principle of the "missing fundamental" to create the illusion of sound. Complex tones consist of a low fundamental frequency and a series of higher frequencies called harmonics. If the human ear hears harmonics without their corresponding fundamental, the brain supplies the missing tone by itself. In Ultra Bass, Philips removes the music's fundamental bass tones while filtering the harmonics that accompany them back into the signal. The result: the rhythms of bass notes dance only in partygoers' heads--and neighbors have peaceful nights.
According to the article, noisy modern life is unlikely to be muted any time soon. But that doesn't mean that noise pollution has to drive us all crazy or deaf. Sensible urban planning, innovative new technology, and creative acoustic architecture--plus good neighborliness--can go a long way toward restoring peace and quiet.
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: July 31, 1998
SECTION: Editorial, Pg. N24
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
The Daily News of Los Angeles published the following editorial regarding the need to reach a positive settlement to reduce noise, eliminate safety hazards, and improve service at Burbank Airport in California.
Two reports on the noise and traffic problems around Burbank Airport are excellent talking points for FAA official Jane Garvey when she arrives Aug. 11 to, we hope, find a way out of the impasse over a new terminal.
One study said if that air traffic doubles in the next 12 years as projected, the area affected by noise would increase 17 percent - 400 homes.
The second report looked at how to mitigate area noise. It found that noise could be reduced by strengthening the informal curfews already in place at the airport, building a sound wall at its northeast border and routing departing night flights away from homes.
But no breakthrough will be achieved in the long-running, costly and nasty dispute that has left an inadequate and unsafe terminal in place at this valuable facility unless residents of Burbank, the Valley and neighboring communities rally to demand a solution.
The area's entire congressional delegation must also get on board and force the city of Burbank, the Airport Authority and Southwest Airlines to reach a positive settlement that will reduce noise, eliminate a safety hazard and improve service.
Reps. Howard Berman and Brad Sherman are leading the charge to help resolve the dispute that has prevented building a new - and safer - terminal at Burbank Airport. Certainly, their input is valuable and long overdue.
But it's not enough. Reps. Howard "Buck" McKeon, James Rogan, David Drier and Henry Waxman should jump into the fray and use their considerable political clout to encourage compromise.
If a compromise can't be reached, federal legislation may be needed to end the fight and let everyone get on with their lives and business.
It's time to end a political stalemate that has squandered millions of dollars of public money on lawyers because neither side believes it's in their interest to come together for the greater public good.
A safer, modestly expanded commuter airport at Burbank that respects the neighborhoods and meets the needs of the larger community is in everyone's best interest.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: July 31, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 2; Orange County Focus Desk
BYLINE: John Canalis
DATELINE: El Paso, California
The Los Angeles Times reports that a 312-foot-high ride called the Supreme Scream at Orange County's Knott's Berry Farm is the tallest structure in the county. After reprimands from the city, primed by resident complaints, alterations including new valves and a diffusers were added to quiet the ride.
The article notes that one resident, praising the owners, said "The noise is significantly reduced. I think Knott's has really followed through." Noise will be officially evaluated at the end of the month.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: July 31, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 3; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Andrew Blankstein
DATELINE: Burbank, California
The Los Angeles Times reports that Burbank Airport officials have proposed several noise-mitigation strategies, but a recent study says none of those may ever be implemented.
According to the article, the study said only 7 of 21 proposed strategies are feasible. None may ever be used.
The article notes that the Part 150 study, so named because it is called for in the 150th part of a larger federal aviation study required for funding consideration. The study will allow local officials to apply for federal funding to go towards noise study.
The article indicates that while the report considers growth of aviation, resulting negative impacts on residents, and possible ways to reduce that impact, no promises were made on what could be implemented. An airport spokesman said "It's too early to tell what we're going to do. But we will look at the recommendations and consider the technical feasibility, the financial realities and the legal requirements."
The article notes that earlier this week, Burbank Airport was granted a renewal of its variance that lets it operate at noise levels louder than the state has designated. Most airports in the state must follow them strictly. The variances must be reexamined every three years.
The article notes that some of the major noise-mitigation strategies are a 20-foot-high wall to block noise on the airport's east side, a "hush-house" enclosure for engine testing, voluntary quiet-flying techniques, special flight paths for night flights, or an outright ban on night flights.
According to the article, estimates released this week say that Burbank Airport's current 4.7 million passengers per year will increase to 10 million by 2020. Airport officials say the increase would occur even without an expanded terminal.
The report further estimates that the current number of houses impacted by noise is 2,184, but that number could increase to 2,622 if no new noise mitigation is undertaken.
The article added that the city of Burbank pointed to the reports saying that the prospect of worsening noise problems is even more reason that the airport should limit the number of flights at the airport, and implement a nighttime ban between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. on takeoffs: a measure it has been pushing for years.
The article notes that Burbank's lawyer said he will keep opposing the airport's proposal for a 19-gate terminal on land owned by Lockheed-Martin. He also criticized the airport authority for ignoring the noise issues.
The article notes that last February, a court told Burbank it couldn't block airport construction by invoking land-use designations, since it gave up those rights when it agreed to become part of the joint Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena airport authority that administers Burbank Airport. A similar lawsuit that said the airport never asked the city if it could use industrially-zoned land was filed in May, and a ruling is pending.
The article says that airport officials want noise considered as an issue that is separate from terminal expansion.
PUBLICATION: The Rocky Mountain News
DATE: July 31, 1998
SECTION: Local; Ed. F; Pg. 37A
DATELINE: Thornton, Colorado
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Mike Benallo, president, National Organization to Insure a Sound-controlled Environment and Jo Thorne, vice-president, National Organization to Insure a Sound-controlled Environment
The Rocky Mountain News reports that members of the National Organization to Insure a Sound-controlled Environment elected Mike Benallo, a councilman from Commerce City, president and Jo Thorne, a councilwoman from Thornton as vice-president.
The new executive board was approved at the annual symposium, which was held last week in Thornton. According to the article the group's mission is to reduce aviation noise in local communities.
PUBLICATION: South China Morning Post
DATE: July 31, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 3
BYLINE: Nan Yick-Pong
DATELINE: Hong Kong, China
South China Morning Post reports that officials are being urged to provide more details on flight paths and the people affected by aircraft noise.
Environmental affairs panel chairman Christine Loh Kung-wai said that accurate information on the number of people under the arrival flight path needs to be released. According to the article Ms Loh said that planes descend into Chek Lap Kok from the northeast and fly over Sha Tin, Tsuen Wan, Tsing Yi and Ma Wan.
Officials were asked to reveal how many residents would be affected when the second runway opened. The Civil Aviation Department was asked to conduct noise testing and to provide details of all flight paths considered during the construction of the airport.
Ms Loh hopes the requested information will be available for their next meeting on August 18.
The Civil Aviation’s Air traffic general manager, Alex Au, said flight paths could not be changed easily. "Hong Kong is a hilly territory. The hills in Lantau and the New Territories leave very little flexibility for the alignment of flight paths,” the article said quoting Au.
Au is further quoted saying, "It is the safest for an aircraft to reach an altitude of 4,500 feet (1,385 metres) over Sha Tin and start going down and glide into Chek Lap Kok. In summer, Hong Kong is under the influence of southwest monsoon. Thus planes need to fly from the northeast and the use of runway 25 is greater. In the winter, when the wind blows from the northeast, this runway will become less needed."
PUBLICATION: Final
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: Chandler Community; Pg. Ev1
BYLINE: John Drake
DATELINE: Chandler, Arizona
The Arizona Republic announced a public meeting July 30, 1998 to give residents a chance to talk about airplane noise and future development at Chandler Airport.
Coffman Associates Inc., a consulting firm hired to study airport expansion and noise issues, will conduct the meeting. Recommendations from the Coffman group include lengthening of runways and accommodations to cater to larger business jets.
The biggest complaint from those living in neighborhoods south and west of the airport is aircraft noise, the article said, referring to words of Larry Stafford, who lives in Twin Acres, south of the airport. Stafford is noted saying that while most planes are tolerable, high-performance, aerobatic planes are able to cut south, flying low and directly over neighborhoods. "There are suggested guidelines for them to follow, but they don't have to," the article said, quoting Stafford. Helicopter noise has also disturbed Stafford and other neighbors like Russ Meredith, who lives in Diamond Drive, also south of the airport.
The article notes that Meredith believes the airport expansion is inevitable no matter what area residents say. He is moreover “not convinced the noise studies they did are an accurate picture of what we're going through over here.” But Meredith was noted saying he thinks Chenoweth is doing as well as he can to keep pilots in line.
Chenoweth reportedly tried to address residents’ noise complaints by asking pilots to avoid taking off and landing directly above neighborhoods. "For the most part, the local pilots have done a good job," the paper said quoting Chenoweth.
Noise consultants have recommended Chandler lengthen the runway to 6,800 feet from 4,850 feet to accommodate about 90 percent of most general aviation aircraft, but according to the article Chenoweth said any final decision would be a long way off. The City Council and the Federal Aviation Agency and the airport commission must approve any changes.
The longer runway could expand its business and revenue by catering to bigger business planes and jets, the article said, referring Chenoweth. But Chenoweth also reportedly said Chandler Airport is not planning to accommodate commercial airline carriers for passengers or cargo.
According to the article the airport currently caters to two markets -- recreational fliers, who run the gamut from single-engine planes to twin-engine turbo-props, and business fliers, mostly executives on 20-passenger planes. The article emphasized that larger business jets need to be allowed to land at the airport to support Chandler’s economy. Cenoweth is quoted saying, "We're not meeting our potential. The consultants have said if we are going to service the demand out there, we need to move ahead."
Chenoworth is noted saying that an area may be created for pilots to simply drive through a gate, get their aircraft from its hangar, receive clearance and take off. Such ease of transportation would be an incentive to have an office or factory nearby. “We see that as a strong attraction for business," the article said quoting Chenoweth. "You want to bring business in around an airport."
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. N6
BYLINE: Lee Condon
DATELINE: Burbank, California
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports that noise at the Burbank Airport could be reduced with night curfews, sound walls and re-routing of night flights. The recommendations were unveiled in a preliminary study made by Coffman Associates, a noise consultant hired by the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport.
Coffman Associates used computer models to look at steps that could cut noise at the airport. The city of Burbank is pressing for night curfews and caps on flights. They hope to block the airport's expansion plans because of residents’ noise complaints.
According to the article another study - released just a day earlier - said the area affected by Burbank Airport would increase 17 percent if air traffic doubles in the next 12 years unless mitigation measures are taken.
The report created by Coffman was described in the article as a part of a larger study of noise surrounding the airport, which is funded by both the airport and the Federal Aviation Administration. The report was intended to select noise issues that merit further study, the article said, referring to comments from Coffman associate Mark Johnson.
Johnson is noted in the article stating his belief that it is unlikely that the FAA would accept a complete curfew on night flights since that would restrict interstate commerce. The airport echoed his position. But Johnson reportedly said informal curfews already in operation (including a ban of all the noisier planes and partial curfews on commercial aircraft from taking off between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.) were options for consideration.
Other noise mitigation measures that Coffman Associates Inc reportedly say merit further study include: (1) Building a 20-foot-tall, 2,500-foot-long sound wall (such a wall could reduce ground noise from the airport affecting about 120 residents by 3 decibels); (2) Building a structure where smaller planes could be serviced; (3) Eliminating noise made on the ground during engine "run-ups" that are part of maintenance procedures; (4) Encouraging pilots of Gulfstream business jets to use "quiet flying procedures" developed by the manufacturer; (5) Encouraging all pilots to use techniques that will make takeoffs quieter; (6) Routing night flights over corridors where there are few homes, such as along railroad tracks; and (7) Buying and demolishing homes along the corridor, as Los Angeles International Airport officials did in El Segundo in the 1960s.
Other noise reduction techniques were rejected by Coffman Associates Inc. because they would have little impact at Burbank Airport or are not legal under current laws and regulations. The lengthening of runways, for example, was rejected because of restrictions existing in the airport authority's joint-powers agreement.
The article notes that one member of the advisory committee, Ron Vanderford, doubts the consultant's suggestions will have much impact saying, "I think it would be a minor lessening of noise. "
PUBLICATION: Deseret News
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: Opinion; Pg. A18
BYLINE: Janice B. Smith
DATELINE: Salt Lake City, Utah
The Deseret News published the following letter to the editor regarding the much-delayed enforcement of a local noise ordinance in Salt Lake City, Utah.
After five years of attempting to have the noise ordinance upheld during rock concerts at the State Fairgrounds, the system has finally worked, and someone with authority heeded our petitions.
Thanks to the efforts of City Councilman Carlton Christensen, who engaged the mayor's office in solving this problem, the noise ordinance was finally enforced during the concert July 11. Thanks also to Marge Harvey from Mayor Deedee Corradini's office for her willingness to work with us and follow through to ensure that our rights would not be violated again.
While we still had to endure the insufferable noise for a couple of hours, her previous efforts to make sure everything was in place for the ordinance to be obeyed finally paid off with the health department doing its job and the police department showing a courteous response and a willingness to do its part, finally.
The toning down, way down, was very much appreciated. (It is interesting to note that the concert reviewers made no mention of the volume being turned down. Evidently those that paid to hear were able to hear.) The sad note to this is that before, as private citizens, our complaints about these violations, with one or two exceptions, were disregarded.
Besides having to hear the horrendously loud music, we have been forced to endure repetitive loud bass sounds for long periods of time (another singular violation) and the shouting of obscenities in the name of free speech.
Thanks again to Marge Harvey and to Christensen for taking action and seeing that the ordinance was enforced.
Janice B. Smith
Salt Lake City
PUBLICATION: The Evening Standard
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 17
BYLINE: Nick Pryer
DATELINE: London, England
The Evening Standard reports that tenants in London’s council flats plan to take their grievance concerning inadequate soundproofing to the House of Lords. The Appeal Court recently ruled the council had no obligation to improve the soundproofing of the flats.
Tracey Tanner, mother-of-four, was among the residents at Casino Avenue flats that took Southward council to court. The article quotes Tanner saying, "Living here is an absolute nightmare. You can hear everything your neighbors do, from boiling a kettle to switching the lights on, and much, much worse.
"It's a 24-hour thing. You can hear your neighbor's alarm clock going off in the morning; hear them get up to make a cup of tea, have a bath, wake their children up, turn the television on everything they do until they go to bed.
"When you move here you soon learn that you have to be quiet in everything you do - even in bed. I don't think you would hear anyone screaming with joy in these flats any more .... they wouldn't be able to look the neighbors in the eye.
"The thing I hate most is sitting in my bath and hearing a bum squeaking across the bath upstairs. I don't know why but it makes me feel really uncomfortable knowing there's someone else in the bath six to eight feet above me."
According to the article Mrs. Tanner, 37, is one of the driving forces attempting to persuade Southwark council to soundproof the flats. Living at Casino Avenue flats is very stressful, the article said, referring to Mrs. Tanner’s remarks. "You have to try to keep your kids quiet and stop shouting at them yourself because it would disturb the neighbours."
"You can hear every footstep, every program they watch on television and their telephone conversations, even the light switches going on and off."
The article describes the source of the problem as the lack of insulation or other soundproofing materials. The block was built in 1919, and though sound between flats on the same level was not particularly bad, sound carries very easily through floors and ceilings.
"The flats have very small floor voids which were originally packed with sawdust to deaden the noise, but that has now become compacted," the article said quoting Mrs. Tanner again.
The article explained further that some of the flats were severely damaged in the Second World War and have no insulation between upstairs and downstairs apartments, apart from floorboards and ceiling plaster.
Last year an arbitration panel ordered the council to spend L60,000 to soundproof the flats after tenants complained.
The article reported one tenant saying: "I can hear all the private and most intimate moments of my neighbours' lives - conversations, what TV station they are watching, when they go to the loo, when they make love.
"Every light switched on or off, every door opened and closed, every pot or pan placed on the cooker, all these I hear."
The Southwark council's appeal against the arbitration panel was rejected in the High Court so Southwark took the case to the Court of Appeal in an attempt to avoid being forced to do the work.
According to the article Lord Justice Mantell told the court: "The block was jerry-built at the end of the First World War and falls far short of the standard which would be necessary under present-day building regulations." Justice Mantell is reported further describing the soundproofing as "wholly inadequate", "intrusive, inconvenient and often embarrassing".
The appeal judges, however, decided by a two to one majority, that the Southwark council had no duty as landlords to protect their tenants' privacy. Lord Justice Peter Gibson is reported saying that in his dissenting opinion that the levels of noise did [editor’s italics] amount to a breach of a quiet enjoyment covenant in the tenants' leases. “The council's argument that the tenants had no right to expect their flats to be improved by soundproofing was simply wrong in logic and in law," the article said, quoting Gibson’s opinion.
According to the article the importance of the case to hundreds of thousands of tenants nationwide and the split decision prompted the Appeal Court to grant the 22 council tenants leave to appeal to the House of Lords.
Mrs Tanner, 37, is quoted saying, "If we can get legal aid we will certainly take the case to the Lords because it affects everybody's lives in these flats."
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Metro Desk
BYLINE: John Canalis
DATELINE: El Paso, California
Los Angeles Times reports that Knott’s Berry Farm is trying to tone down the "scream" in the new Supreme Scream ride by installing sound buffers in the ride's mechanism. According to the article Knott’s has spent about $50,000 on city-hired inspectors to quiet down the new ride.
The article reports it isn't the screaming that is the problem, “it's the screeching, scratching and rumbling sounds punctuated by blasts of air that torment neighbors.” The ride started dropping its passengers down 30-story tracks July 3. Since then, the article says, residents along a Buena Park cul-de-sac - about 800 feet from the ride - say they have been inundated by its noise.
Neighbor Dianne Krylo, 32, is described in the article as coping by keeping her children, ages 2, 4, 7 and 8, inside with the windows shut. “I can't swim when I want to, because it's too loud. I can't play with my children when I want to. Basically, I feel like a prisoner in my home," the article said, quoting Krylo.
Another resident Sue Peterson, 37, described the irritation caused by the ride: "It's a fingernails-on-a-chalkboard sound, that's just what it is. The way that they've handled this has been poor."
Peterson’s husband, Erik Peterson, 35, was noted saying it had been a peaceful neighborhood for eight years, except for the occasional music or shouting. He is well aware of the music and shouting noise when bought a home near a theme park, the article said, and stated clearly he wouldn't complain now, without cause. "Remember, for us noise is a relative term. We're used to roller coasters," the article said, quoting Mr. Peterson. The predecessor to the Supreme Scream ride - the XK1, a spinning attraction - was not a bothersome neighbor.
Knott has responded by installing diffusers on one of the ride's three tracks to muffle its mechanical sounds. (Little can be done about the screaming.)
Dick Rohrbach, vice president of the facilities reported visiting the neighborhood near the installed diffuser and said, “It was extremely quiet compared to the other two [neighborhoods without diffusers]." Writers of the article indicated that diffusers were to be installed on the remaining two tracks overnight Wednesday.
Expectations were running high that the diffusers would bring and end to the neighborhood's battle with the park and City Hall as well.
According to the article, residents were angered when Knott's officials didn't return their calls so they sent their complaints to the City Council, which in turn took no action because the issue wasn't on the council’s agenda.
The article quoted Krylo as saying, "They [City Council] work for me, and they're supposed to be my voice, and they're not listening to me for whatever loyalties they have to Knott's Berry Farm."
But Mayor Jerry Sigler was noted in the article saying that Knott's and the city began working on the problem when the complaints began. "Sometimes you can't do things overnight. They [city staffmembers] don't call the residents every day and give them a report.” After visiting the neighborhoods to listen to the ride, Sigler reportedly remarked, “It's very strange. I went over and rode the machine myself, and you cannot hear it. When I went into the neighborhood, I could hear it more. . . . Sound travels."
The article also quotes Knott's General Manager Jack Falfas saying that he has been in discussions with residents and was “trying to keep [neighbors] updated. I sincerely understand the situation . . . . I want them to be able to enjoy their backyard as much as they did at any other time."
Residents recognized the general manager’s contributions and praised him for improvements made to one track, the article said. The article further indicates that Knott's will monitor the rides Friday to see how well the newly installed equipment works.
A graphic accompanies the article with the following captions: Knott's is trying to tone down the "scream" in the Supreme Scream ride by installing sound buffers in the ride's mechanism. 1. Air forced into tube at 260-foot-high level of tower makes a whooshing sound. New diffuser would eliminate the noise. 2. Piston is forced down by compressed air. 3. Cart with riders is pulled upward by cable.
PUBLICATION: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: Local, Pg. B-7
BYLINE: Timothy Mcnulty
DATELINE: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that Mayor Murphy is expected to sign a noise ordinance if City Council gives its final approval August 3. The Council has already given preliminary approval to the ordinance, which provides tougher fines for noise violators and threatens repeat offenders with “booting” of their cars when the penalty fines are not paid.
The bill barely passed by a vote of 5-3, the article said, with Jim Ferlo, Valerie A. McDonald and Sala Udin voting against it. Councilman Gene Ricciardi was reported absents.
According to the article, the bill, introduced by Dan Onorato, initially stated that drivers with car stereos playing more than 68 decibels would be fined $300 after the first offense and after the second offense fined another $300 and have their cars impounded. After considering the legality of impounding loud cars, the bill was reportedly changed. The article reports that under the revised version, repeat offenders who fail to pay their fines will find their cars “booted”. When the owner pays the fines, the boot will be removed.
Amendments to the bill clarify that the ordinance will be applied to homes as well as cars. The article described how if police officers could hear music above 68 decibels at 75 feet or more away, either home or car owners could be cited. Fines for first time offenders were lowered in the amendments from $300 to $150. Fines for repeat offenders remained unchanged at $300.
The article also mentions that in a related bill, the police department was provided 15 new sound meters to enforce the 68-decibel rule. Police would not need to use a sound meters however to cite people.
It is reported that Councilpersons Ferlo and McDonald oppose the 68-decibel rule. According to the article they reason that since the current noise threshold of 85 decibels was not enforced, and new ordinance would probably not be a priority for police or enforced fairly by them.
Councilman Udin, also in opposition to the ordinance, was described in the article wondering if the bill was really a "question of taste" promoted by older people who don't like rap music.
But Onorato, the bill's sponsor, is noted in the article as viewing his proposed ordinance as emblematic of the city’s "quality of life."
According to the article Police Chief Robert W. McNeilly Jr. agrees. McNeilly is quoted saying that "community policing" stop more serious lawbreaking from happening in the future.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: Local, Pg. 6B, 'Round Town The Lighter Side Of The News
DATELINE: Weston, Florida
The Sun-Sentinel reports that Weston city council has approved a noise code prohibiting loud and raucous noise.
As a result, the Castalines, after two and a half years of suffering, are finally seeing a response from the local authorities to help ensure peace and quiet they need from two barking Rottweilers.
According to the article the Castalines’ bedroom is located next to their neighbor's storage room, where the two barking Rottweilers are kept. The couple had initially called upon the Broward Sheriff's Office for help, but were told their neighbor and his dogs weren't violating any law.
The article explains that Weston city commissioners have now approved a noise code prohibiting loud and raucous noise. So when the Castalines called the police last weekend, their neighbor was cited for a noise code violation.
PUBLICATION: The Vancouver Sun
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: Editorial; Letter Of The Day; Pg. A14
BYLINE: Dave Pickell
DATELINE: Vancouver, Canada
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Dave Pickell, CAN-IT, Citizens Against Noise In
Town)
The Vancouver Sun published the following editorial concerning the need to legislate against the menace of car alarms.
Ahh, the barbecue is sizzling, the guests are murmuring to each other, the kitten is purring in the corner of the deck and ...
EEEAAAGGGRating three! What's that? The ghastly racket goes on and on and ...
Oh, yes. Another car alarm. As it whoops and buzzes, spewing jarring noise into the environment, everyone's pulse races -- everyone's except that of the absent owner of the vehicle.
Come on, people. Noise pollution is just as real and just as invasive in the urban environment as other kinds, kinds which have been proscribed and quite properly legislated against.
People who place such alarm devices in their vehicles show the ultimate in selfishness: a willingness to invade the space of their fellow citizens with a raucous noise that says, "I care about my car and could care less about your ears."
If someone came along our block dumping refuse in each yard they passed, we'd deal with them accordingly. The temptation to do the same with these morons is strong -- unfortunately, they can never be found.
Let city council take heed and begin the process of enacting bylaws on the behalf of the silent majority to fight this menace. Otherwise I'll get my friend who lives across the street from city hall to play his Ministry CD -- very loudly, at all hours of the day.
Concerned citizens are invited to join CAN-IT (Citizens Against Noise In Town).
Dave Pickell
Vancouver
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: Commentary; Pg. 20; Zone: N; Voice Of The People (Letter).
BYLINE: Ronald W. Wietecha, Mayor, Park Ridge
DATELINE: Park Ridge, Illinois
Chicago Tribune published the following poignant commentary from the Mayor of Park Ridge, a suburb of Chicago, and neighbor to O’Hare International Airport. The commentary takes issue with the opinion of the Chicago Tribune’s editorial board which concluded that any review of the environmental impact of safety, noise and air pollution implications from a shift of 100 military slots at O'Hare International Airport to commercial usage will, in all likelihood, show minimal adverse impact.
It is shocking to learn that members of the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune apparently do not read their own news articles. In the lead editorial on July 16, they conclude that any review of the environmental impact of safety, noise and air pollution implications from a shift of 100 military slots at O'Hare International Airport to commercial usage will, in all likelihood, show minimal adverse impact. The editorial also states that such "minimal adverse impact" won't placate the anti- noise lobby and the politicians who exploit it. The tragedy of their conclusion is that it does not reflect the facts contained in the news articles that appear in their own paper.
For example an article the day before contained two important facts regarding airport safety that mitigate against the editorial board's conclusion ("U.S. senators in a dogfight over adding O'Hare flights," News, July 15). First, a Federal Aviation Administration spokesman admitted that on any given day the number of flights that land and take off during busy travel hours can exceed the legal limits for such flights.
Second, an Illinois Department of Transportation official pointed out that O'Hare Airport is exceeding its safety capacity for total number of flights by at least 15,000 flights per year based on Chicago's own numbers. These facts alone indicate the need for an impact study to determine the effect of more flights per year being advocated by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and his Senate committee.
Other reasons exist that warrant a current impact study. Environmentalists for years have accused O'Hare of being one of the biggest air polluters in the state. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency continues to refuse to do a detailed study of O'Hare-area air quality. To date the IEPA only measures emissions from land-based machinery and vehicles. It asserts that its budget does not allow for the analysis of pollution levels from the more serious formaldehyde-based and carcinogenic airplane exhaust.
There is also the problem of noise pollution. Park Ridge residents regularly complain about the noise from low-flying, loud Stage 2 and Stage 3 aircraft. Airplane noise is monitored in Park Ridge by three permanently fixed sensors installed by the city of Chicago. The test results are then averaged over a 24-hour period, including the quiet times between flights, yielding unrealistic results. Separate Suburban O'Hare Commission noise monitors regularly record hurtful plane noise levels over 110 decibels in the same locations. Noise test results are regularly manipulated, while planes flying over schools interfere with classroom lectures and student learning.
I cannot agree with the Tribune that in all likelihood any review of safety, air quality and noise at O'Hare Airport will show minimal adverse impact. No one has yet been able to accurately identify how much noise and air pollution we now endure. No one has yet properly assessed either current safety violations or the potential for air disasters from "shoehorning" more and more flights into an airport facility that has reached its capacity.
It's time to address the legitimate concerns of people who for too long have been regularly dismissed or ignored. Park Ridge continues to pay the price for Chicago's profits.
PUBLICATION: The Dallas Morning News
DATE: July 29, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 1A
BYLINE: Rani Cher Monson
DATELINE: Dallas, Texas
The Dallas Morning News reports that over 310 letters have been sent to the city requesting that it alter its plans to expand Bowen and Sublett roads. Those writing the letters want the peace and quietude of a Carmelite convent preserved.
Existing plans call for the city to acquire about five of the convent's 52 acres at 5801 Mt. Carmel Drive to extend Bowen and widen Sublett.
According to the article, the nuns say they would have to spend at least $930,000 to build a wall or berm to block the noise caused by the increased traffic, and they want the city to pay for the noise barrier.
Mayor Elzie Odom addressed 75 people who attended a Tuesday night’s Council meeting saying, "The members of this City Council are just as sensitive to the purpose of the [convent] as you all are, but we also are the stewards of taxpayers' dollars, and we have to file procedures."
The article stated that nine residents requested council members to reach a settlement with the sisters and prevent litigation. A former Mayor, Harold Patterson, was among the speakers and reportedly brought supporters to their feet.
The article quoted Patterson saying, "I was born and raised in this city, and I cannot recall the city ever taking a religious group to condemnation. It hasn't been done, and it shouldn't be done. Anytime you condemn property it's bad because you're taking someone's land without their permission."
According to the article alternative plans were suggested by residents including ideas such as moving the road west or putting it through a nearby trailer park. Resident Vicki Hauck was quoted saying, "The sisters live in an area that is not like our way of life. They have a peaceful oasis, and they have opened their facility to all of us. This way of life needs to be preserved."
Other publically known personalities were also noted in the article uring the city to delay its condemnation process. They included former Mayor S.J. Stovall and former council member Martha Walker.
The article indicates that Mayor Odom is willing to negotiate with the nuns to avoid the condemnation hearing, and that staff members had been instructed to make a new offer to the nuns on Tuesday. "We continue daily to try and reach a compromise. We told staff to go back with another offer, and we're doing everything we can to reach an agreement that will be pleasing to both sides," the paper said quoting Mayor Odom.
Although the mayor did not discuss the content of the new offer, the condemnation hearing itself - originally scheduled for Wednesday - was postponed until Aug. 20 to provide additional time to arrive at a compromise.
The legal representative for the nuns, Attorney Earl Hale, is mentioned in the article saying that his clients were unaware of plans to expand the road to 120 feet when they acquired the property in the early 1980s. "The city has clearly changed its plans, and it's making a much wider thoroughfare than ever anticipated. Nobody ever told the sisters they may have to take more of their land to build the road,” the paper said quoting Attorney Hale. Hale is noted in the article saying that the sisters need to be compensated for both the land and loss of their quiet lifestyle.
According to Mayor Odom the plans were changed to make Sublett six lanes instead of four to accommodate the growth in South Arlington. He is quoted explaining that, "Unfortunately, enough land was not dedicated when the nuns bought the land. Our attempts to acquire additional land have been ongoing, and the only remaining option once the city and property owner cannot reach an agreement is to go to a condemnation hearing."
The article describes the issue as being divisive among a largely unified council. Voting against the condemnation proceeding last month, for example, was Mayor Pro Tem Dottie Lynn and Judy Rupay voted against proceeding with the condemnation process. "I wanted to try and work this out. I still hope we can sit down with the nuns and work with them because I believe they're willing to cooperate," the article said, quoting Ms. Rupay.
PUBLICATION: News & Record (Greensboro, NC)
DATE: July 29, 1998
SECTION: Triad/State, Pg. B1
BYLINE: John A. Nagy
DATELINE: Greensboro, North Carolina
News & Record reports Piedmont Triad International Airport in North Carolina will open a new runway parallel to the existing main runway to accommodate extra flights expected from Fedex’s new hub.
Fedex announced that the $300 million hub - scheduled to open in 2003 - will handle packages along the East Coast and will start with at least 20 night flights, and increase its numbers from there. The airport authority agreed to pay all cost associated with noise stemming from the hub. Residents who live near the airport, especially the north end where the hub is proposed, are raising their concerns regarding safety, noise and the cost of the new hub and runway.
A number of homes on the north end are reportedly within the direct line of the new runway. The article states that these residents are asking that the hub be relocated to the south side and that the third runway be eliminated.
The article also states that according to the minutes of several Airport Authority closed-door meetings, the third runway was the prime condition for the airport’s recruiting of FedEx’s package-sorting hub. The minutes apparently demonstrate how the airport authority moved aggressively during winter and early spring to lure the shipping giant and its $300 million hub.
FedEx reportedly sought bids from a total of six North Carolina and South Carolina airports earlier in the year to host their hub, which is expected to employ 1,500 people. The project was a highly coveted economic development project among the bidders. On April 13 FedEx selected Greensboro as its site.
According to the article authority members wanted to first lengthen the airport's two existing runways and then add a third runway several years later. But during the March 9 meeting FedEx officials said they wanted the parallel runway built in time for the hub opening in 2003. The authority agreed to pursue the third runway immediately.
The necessity of the third runway has been the source of an extensive community debate. Homeowners living north of the airport argue that the airport's two existing runways could serve FedEx's needs adequately. FedEx and airport officials, however, claim the third, parallel runway is essential for FedEx to land and launch its planes within a short time frame.
Greensboro has also agreed to pay all cost associated with noise stemming from the hub, including lawsuits and federal mandates to noise-proof nearby homes. Ted Johnson, the authorities Executive Director said, “We put that in there to keep us on an even keel."
Airport officials also agreed not to limit Fedex’s flight times but to ask the company, whenever possible, to fly in and take off over the tank farm, away from neighborhoods to the north.
Before proceeding further the authority will have a study completed by an airport consultant from Tampa, Florida. The study is a part of a federally mandated review of the hub project and third-runway construction. The entire process is expected to take close to two years to complete and to cost approximately $1.4 million.
The Airport Marriott Hotel is hosting a public hearing on the study August 17.
PUBLICATION: Portland Press Herald
DATE: July 29, 1998
SECTION: Coast & State, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Susan Rayfield
DATELINE: Wiscasset, Maine
The Portland Press Herald reports the fans at Maine Yankee nuclear plant are generating noise that exceeds state limits in residential areas located up to two miles away. The noise has angered residents and prompted investigation by the Maine’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
The DEP found noise levels within acceptable limits at the edge of Main Yankee’s property but when nighttime noise was checked by Maine Yankee officials at the nearby residential properties, they found the noise at three locations registered at 48 to 52 decibels - above the state's night noise limit of 45 decibels. The noise is presumed to have been carried by the wind.
According to the article 18 fans were installed in May to cool water where radioactive fuel rods are stored. Workers removed the metal roof over the fans last week, but that did not help.
Turning off some of the fans at night was not an option because it could raise the temperature of the spent fuel pool to an unacceptable level, the article stated, referring to comments of Maine Yankee’s spokesperson Maureen Brown. The plant is trying to muffle the noise by building a sound buffer of shipping containers around the fans. Sound levels were to be checked July 29.
The paper reported that the DEP does not plan to take action on the case. DEP agency administrator Nancy Beardsley said, "They're working as fast as they can. But if they're not successful, Maine Yankee will have to come up with something else to bring noise levels down."
Replacement of the fan motors and blades is expected to bring a three-fold reduction in the noise, the paper reported. Motors and blades were to be delivered in August and installed in September.
The paper reported that, according to spokesperson, Maureen Brown, the fans will continue to operate for at least five years.
PUBLICATION: The Rocky Mountain News
DATE: July 29, 1998
SECTION: News/National/International; Ed. F; Pg. 4A
BYLINE: Michael Romano; Rocky Mountain News Washington Bureau
DATELINE: Denver, Colorado
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Gary Ruskin, Director, Congressional Accountability Project
The Rocky Mountain News reports that opponents of a sixth runway at Denver International Airport (DIA) say the city used an indicted lobbyist to overturn a 3-year-old ban on federal funding for the project. According to the article, the federal ban was put in place to force Denver to address noise problems.
The article recounts how, last month U.S. Rep. Bud Shuster, chairman of the House Transportation Committee, suddenly announced that he was lifting the ban on federal money for the $85 million runway. Opponents of the runway are pointing fingers at Eppard - who for more than 24 years was Shuster's chief political aide- as the person responsible for Shuster’s action.
Denver officials deny using the controversial lobbyist, Ann Eppard, who was indicted on influence-peddling last April (on charges unreleated to the DIA.)
Among the accusers is Republican Rep. Bob Schaffer of Fort Collins. Schaffer is quoted in the article saying, "This all has to do with Denver's 'new' lobbyist (referring to Eppard). The chairman (Shuster) seems to have suddenly developed a passionate interest in the sixth runway. It's unusual that the congressman from Pennsylvania would take such a passionate interest in Denver's airport."
The article notes how the sixth runway is a pet project of Denver Mayor Wellington Webb. Webb reportedly argues that it is necessary for the DIA to accommodate more international flights. The city therefore has admittedly paid lobbying firms hundreds of thousands of dollars to thwart the runway's opponents.
The article, seemingly in support of the accusations against Eppard, points out how she remains on the chairman’s (Shuster’s) campaign payroll and continues to represent many clients before his transportation committee.
Further support for the accusation may exist in Eppards’ own lobbying reports, the article said. Eppart reports being paid $40,000 from Capital Investments and $20,000 from Reid and Priest. Both are lobbying firms for the city of Denver on DIA issues and both retain subcontracts with Eppard. (Denver paid Capital Partnerships Inc. $140,000 last year and Reid and Priest $150,000 according to the Senate public-documents office.) The article notes that neither Eppard nor spokespersons for the lobbying firms returned calls to the paper.
Earlier in the year a $204 billion highway authorization bill passed through Shuster's committee. Eppard's lobbying reports indicate that the same two firms paid her for work on that issue.
But Denver’s chief legal counsel for the airport, Lee Marable, said officials at the two firms deny employing Eppard on any issues relating to DIA. Marable is quoted saying, "She (Eppard) did not do any work on behalf of the city and county of Denver. It sounds to me as if people are just speculating."
The article reports that Eppard’s indictment was based on her failure to report about $230,000 she received from a lobbyist and his clients. She also was also reportedly charged with tax evasion after an investigation regarding alleged influence-peddling for a $4 billion highway construction project in Boston.
Rep. Shuster has pending charges of his own. Rep. Joel Hefley, a Republican from Colorado Springs is the chairman of the House ethics subcommittee investigating conflict-of-interest charges against Shuster. That complaint, the article said, was filed about two years ago by a Ralph Nader watchdog group and alleges a pattern of questionable financial and personal entanglements between Eppard and Shuster.
Gary Ruskin director of the Congressional Accountability Project, the Nader group that filed the complaint against Shuster, made the following statement quoted in the article: "This situation (with the DIA lobbying) is exactly what the complaint is all about. This is about the tangled web of legislative, political, financial and personal ties - and the magical, the positively magical - effect that Eppard's lobbying has on Congressman Shuster's work product."
The article reported that Rep. Hefley declined to comment on the committee's ethics investigation but noted that he believes Eppard lobbied Shuster for the sixth runway and that makes his (own) effort to halt construction "more problematic."
According to the article Hefley helped stop federal funding for the runway for about three years. Hefley and fellow Republican Rep. Frank Wolf of Virginia successfully inserted language in the Airport Improvement Authorization Act that in effect freezes federal funding for the runway. (The article describes Wolf’s hostility toward DIA stemming from a political battle with Shuster.)
According to the article Shuster’s spokesperson Scott Brenner said opponents of the runway are simply sore losers. According to Brenner the funding ban was lifted because "the chairman believes that those in the immediate area should control issues like this. He thinks they know best what to do."
The article explains that lifting the ban on federal funding is distinguishable from an assurance of funding. The funding decision must still go through the appropriations process in both houses of Congress, and the article indicates that it is unlikely that full funding would come by next year.
Meanwhile Rep. Hefley was quoted near the end of the article saying, "We're trying to work the Senate angle, the appropriations angle - every angle we can. First of all, they've got to do an environmental impact study. That alone will take a year. In the meantime, we're going to continue to work on this noise problem. My opposition stands."
PUBLICATION: The Sentinel
DATE: July 29, 1998
SECTION: Pg.7
DATELINE: Biddulph, England
The Sentinel reports that noise generated by a skate ramp in Biddulph has become an irritant for nearby residents.
According to the article Staffordshire Moor-lands District Council staff will monitor sound levels around the ramp during the Summer break.
The article states that the ramp was erected in front of Biddulph Valley Leisure Centre about a year ago at the cost of GBP 5,000. But a 500-signature petition was handed to the council complaining about noise months later.
Carol Alcock, was quoted in the article as one of the residents disturbed by the noise, "During the last Summer holiday the situation was dreadful. It is in the wrong place, we are not blaming the children but it does need moving.." But Sally Hughes, of the Biddulph Reapers Roller Skater Hockey Club, is quoted conveying an opposite viewpoint, "After all the expense it seems a waste of money to move it again. I suspect some of the claims about noise levels are exaggerated."
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: July 30, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Metro Desk
BYLINE: John Canalis
DATELINE: El Paso, California
The Los Angeles Times reports that a 30-story amusement park ride at Knott's Berry Farm, which has been drawing resident complaints over noise, is scheduled to receive noise-reduction treatment tonight. The Farm has spent $50,000 so far to pay noise consultants to come up with the solution.
The article reports that neighbors don't mind the screaming as much as "the screeching, scratching and rumbling sounds punctuated by blasts of air that torment neighbors." Neighbors live as close as 800 feet from the ride, and say "the way that they've handled this has been poor."
The article interviews one neighbor who says "we're used to roller coasters," but says this ride is much louder and more annoying than its predecessor.
The article goes on to say that the vice president of the Farm says that after a test installation of diffusers on one of the ride's three tracks, the neighborhood closest to that track seemed to be much quieter. Wednesday, diffusers will be installed on the other two tracks.
The article notes that the Farm angered residents by not returning their calls, and also became upset at their City Council when they wouldn't discuss the non-agenda item. The Mayor countered that problems aren't solved immediately. He had visited the neighborhoods and the ride and acknowledged that the neighborhoods were noisier than the area directly below the ride.
The article notes that the Farm's general manager has talked to residents and updated them to some extent, and residents said he did do a fairly good job. They thought the first diffusers helped and are waiting eagerly to hear the ride when it's installed fully.
PUBLICATION: The Dallas Morning News
DATE: August 1, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 1A
BYLINE: Rani Cher Monson
DATELINE: Dallas, Texas
The Dallas Morning News reports negotiations continue between a group of Carmelite nuns who want to protect their property from increased traffic noise and the city of Dallas, Texas, that wants to expand two roads adjacent to the sisters' convent.
According to the article, the Carmelite nuns, who've had an outpouring of community support, rejected a proposal for noise mitigation from the city Friday and made a counteroffer. The new offer, which both the city and the sisters declined to discuss, is one of several dozen already considered by both parties. "The offer certainly is a compromise," said attorney Earl Hale, who is representing the nuns pro bono. "While it will help the sisters, it certainly does not solve all of their problems. The sisters are weary of this matter and they want to put it behind them. In that spirit, they made an offer in hopes it will be accepted." Hale said his clients' newest counteroffer is much less expensive than prior proposals. "We were proposing a project that wouldn't cost anywhere near $300,000," he said, declining to state how much he believes their proposal would cost to complete. "The sisters really are just praying this will all be worked out."
The article reports the cost of protecting the convent could range from $136,000 to more than $ 1 million depending on the method used, Engineering Services Director Bill Verkest said. Plans call for the city to acquire about five of the convent's 52 acres at Mt. Carmel Drive to extend Bowen Road and widen Sublett Road. Residents have suggested alternative plans, such as moving the road west or putting it through a nearby trailer park, to protect the nuns. Hale said his clients are embarrassed because they feel their requests have not been correctly expressed to council members. "The sisters were distressed because it appears the city rejected their idea of a berm because of the cost," Hale said about an earthen wall that would surround portions of the property to block out noise. "But the cost was beyond reason and included things the sisters didn't want or need." Hale contends the city should have allowed his clients to review the proposal before presenting it to council members. "The proposal was intended to mislead the City Council about the state of the nuns' request," he said. "It was damaging to have the City Council hear the sisters wanted this and that, when there were things we would have taken off of the list." The extra work included an acceleration and deceleration lane, unnecessary street improvements and a left and right turn lane into the property, Hale said. Verkest defended his actions, saying it was his responsibility to inform council members of the entire cost. "The information presented to the City Council accurately reflects the items the nuns requested we look at," he said about a proposal that cost $371,000. "Earl Hale felt it was inappropriate for us to take the cost to the City Council before we went back to them," he said. "But that's not the way the world works." After learning the nuns felt some portions of the projects were not needed, Verkest removed some items which decreased the cost to $245,000. That proposal has not been approved by the council, Verkest said. Council members also will consider hiring a noise consultant to study the impact from an extra 42,000 cars that would travel the road each day.
PUBLICATION: Calgary Herald
DATE: August 1, 1998
SECTION: Business: Oil & Gas; Pg. C2
BYLINE: the Canadian Press
DATELINE: Caroline, Alberta, Canada
Calgary Herald reports that about 75 people from Caroline, Alberta, attended a public meeting Thursday to express their worries about noise pollution from a $259 million processing plant. The Imperial Oil Ltd. proposes to build the plan just 10 kilometres from Caroline, and would extract ethane, propane, butane and other liquids from natural gas on site.
Imperial Oil Ltd sponsored the meeting. Representatives of the company told residents their concerns would be addressed. Imperial Oil environmentalist Allan Kennedy said that noise from the plant will be reduced by electric-driven furnaces and enclosures.
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: August 1, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. N3
BYLINE: Deborah Sullivan
DATELINE: Burbank, California
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports that the Burbank Airport and the city of Burbank each claimed victory Friday after Caltrans decided to renew the airport's noise variance - with some new conditions.
According to the article, the variance is granted to most airports and allows Burbank to continue operating even though it exceeds state noise levels. Under the variance, the airport must produce a report in one year detailing how it will try to reduce that noise.
The city’s attorney for airport affairs, Peter Kirsch, was quoted saying, "Caltrans concluded that the airport had not done enough in the past to deal with noise impacts and imposed some very specific and stringent requirements for what it must do in the future. So what this decision does is it puts the airport authority on a very short leash. It can no longer say, don't worry, be happy, we are doing a good job."
Airport spokesman Victor Gill was noted saying the new conditions are minor adjustments to existing practices. He is quoted saying the airport got the outcome it desired as well, "The bottom line is this: We went to Caltrans to get permission to operate for another three years, we demonstrated that we have made good-faith efforts to comply with the standards, and (the agency) granted us the permission to operate."
According to the article the Caltrans decision specifically requires the airport to identify ways to reduce its noise impact area, create a timetable for achieving those reductions, details studies on achieving noise reductions and, if it doesn't conduct those studies, explain why it didn't.
The airport authority is also required in the decision to find out if more people would participate in a noise insulation program if legal waivers were changed and identify ways the city can help the authority achieve noise reductions.
The mandates are intended to bring the airport into line with state laws that limit airplane noise over nearby homes to less than 65 decibels. The article said Burbank Airport produces noise at 65 decibels or louder over 350 acres, according to its spokesperson.
PUBLICATION: The Florida Times-Union
DATE: August 1, 1998
SECTION: Community News; Pg. 4
BYLINE: Beth Reese Cravey
DATELINE: Green Cove Springs, Florida
The Florida Times-Union reports that the Clay County commissioners have reversed their May decision to restrict the location and size of church facilities. Their decision had banned church complexes of more than 3,500 square feet from local, neighborhood-type roads.
As a result of the reversal, there will be “no limit on church uses and associated uses,” the article said quoting county Zoning Director Linda Jackson. Each church rezoning application will be judged individually.
According to the article, Commissioners apologized for adopting the restrictions in the first place. Commissioner George Bush said, “A couple of months ago we fixed something that was not broken. We messed up.”
Another Commissioner, Charles R. 'Buddy' Griffin, reportedly warned that, even though he supported the reversal, lifting the zoning restrictions could backfire. The article quoted Griffin saying, ”I'd rather err on the side of God and do the right thing. But if a Satanic church comes forward [to locate in a neighborhood] . . . if there were not a good reason to turn it down [such as traffic or safety considerations], I would not be able to.”
According to the article, the decision had approved the limits on churches as a part of a package of land development regulation changes that, among other things, restricted the size of churches, child care centers and other community facilities proposed for residential areas. The decision specifically prohibited churches of more than 3,500 square feet from locating on neighborhood roads (roads which are designed to serve the needs of residential areas). The article said the restriction was designed to preserve established residential areas by not allowing within their borders large developments, such as church complexes, that would drastically increase traffic and noise. The article indicated that about 90 percent of the roads in Clay County are local roads.
Commissioners were reportedly inundated with complaints from pastors and churchgoers, after they approved the measure. They felt the restrictions treated churches unfairly.
Doug Matyi, pastor of Green Cove Springs Assembly of God, has a rezoning request pending with the commission. He was quoted saying, “Churches are on all sorts of roads, performing good purposes. Each rezoning, each church, will stand on its own merits.”
The article says that Matyi’s church is presently reviewing environmental reports for property it wishes to buy, and its request for rezoning with the commission will not be acted upon at this time. The proposed church 6.7-acre is located in a sparsely populated neighborhood. Many residents of the area oppose the church’s plan, believing it would destroy the neighborhood's residential character and increase noise and traffic.
Tyson Foods Inc. also had a rezoning request with the commission but has withdrawn it. They had proposed to build two large chicken houses but residents in the area opposed the plan because they feared it would create noise and odor problems.
PUBLICATION: The Florida Times-Union
DATE: August 1, 1998
SECTION: Community News; Pg. 1
BYLINE: R. Michael Anderson
DATELINE: Green Cove Springs, Florida
The Florida Times-Union reports that spot zoning in Clay County, Florida has made life miserable for resident Walter Callaway but the county’s new comprehensive zoning plan reportedly addresses future spot zoning problems, and creates land-use categories and regulations to control growth.
According to the article the comprehensive plan came too late for Callaway and his neighbors who live next to a dump truck business on the southwest edge of Green Cove Springs. Prior zoning practices permitted spot zoning (a term usually applied when businesses are permitted next door to residences).
In this case, the lot next to Callaway's property was zoned commercial about 15 years ago for a used car lot. The article said Callaway did not find the used car lot unobjectionable. But when the business changed to trucking a few years ago, Callaway reportedly found the noise and dust unbearable. Callaway is quoted saying, “This is a spot-zoning nightmare. Those trucks run from 6 in the morning till sometimes late at night. My cat's hair stands on end when they go rumbling by. And when those tailgates slam down, it sounds like a 75mm shell going off.”
But Weltzbarker Enterprises, the dump truck business next door, reports there is little they can do to curb the dust and noise. Brian Weltzbarker, one of the owners of the business explained that the trucks usually leave the yard by 6 a.m. and return by 7 p.m. “I'm not intentionally making noise at 5:30 in the morning. But we have to be on the job site by 7 [a.m.].”
The article notes that Weltzbarker, his parents and a brother run the family business, operating nine dump trucks hauling asphalt and fill dirt mostly on road construction jobs.
The family's hopes business success might resolve the neighborhood flap. “We're a growing business. We don't intend on being there forever, maybe another year or year and a half,” the article said quoting Weltzbarker.
According to the article Callaway complained to the county zoning department, but was told nothing could be done about the problems because the business was properly zoned.
'It's legal,'
Zoning Director Linda Jackson said. “It’s legal.” Even loud noise from the trucks isn't regulated. Only “barking dogs and amplified music from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., is enforced by the Sheriff's Office,” under the county’s noise ordinance.
The Callaways also live about 150 feet from an old borrow pit recently cited by county zoning officials. The article discusses the recent infraction the quasi-judicial legal process used to determine a violation and enforcement.
Callaway had made his complaint to County Commissioner Larry Lancaster who believed Callaway's problems were good examples of spot zoning issues eliminated by the comprehensive plan. Lancaster introduced Callaway to speak at the meeting because “he had a message, and I felt he had a place to say it,” the article said, quoting Lancaster.
According to the article the July 21 meeting kicked off a state-mandated evaluation and appraisal of the comprehensive plan to determine whether the growth-management document has achieved its goals or needs fine-tuning.
PUBLICATION: The News Tribune
DATE: August 1, 1998
SECTION: Local/State; Pg. B1
DATELINE: Tacoma, Washington
The News Tribune reports that Fort Lewis is again training artillery crews at Fort Lewis during the nighttime hours which has set off a series of complaints. Some find the booms and vibrations a nuisance. Others believe these noises are the sounds of freedom.
According to the article the 104 responses were made to the following “BackTalk question”: What do you think about live artillery practice at Fort Lewis? Of the 104 responses, the paper said nine were against the night practice sessions, four thought the times should be adjusted and the rest praised the Army.
What follows is a copy of the responses published in the article:
"I understand the need for live artillery fire out of Fort Lewis. When they're shot off, my house shakes and the windows rattle from the impact. The only thing is question is the timing. Earlier this week, it didn't stop until 12 or 1 o'clock in the morning, and it started again at 5 in the morning. I think Fort Lewis could use better discretion in the timing of these things." - Bob Stewart, Yelm *
"Night before last, when I heard all the vibration through my house, I thought we were having an earthquake as I ran downstairs, scared to death. But it didn't take me long to realize the sound was coming from Fort Lewis. I thank God they're out there doing all this practicing. They're protecting our country, because we never know when we're going to be attacked by another country. I can tolerate the noise. ..." - Yvonne Schwab-Vidovic, Midland *
"The noise shakes my house, rattles my windows, but I feel so much better knowing it's our boys on the fort and not a foreign country on my neighborhood street." - Pat Averyt, Spanaway *
"In time of peace, people forget that we can't count on it. A well-trained army ready to effectively defend our country is of first importance. Fort Lewis has been there since 1917. People who do not choose to be inconvenienced by military activity should not have chosen to live near a military installation." - LouAnn Vaughn, Eatonville *
"I live near Fort Lewis, but most of the noise is drowned out by the daily noise of boom boxes going full blast coming from vehicles zooming past my house. They cause my windows to rattle. Does anyone have a phone number so I could complain about that?" - Lois Dowling, Tacoma *
"The military spent a great deal of money to build the Yakima firing range, and they just refurbished it but are not using it because, I believe, it's easier to stay in the Fort Lewis area where it's more comfortable. It's ridiculous for them to create problems and noise in this area when they have a firing range which is named for it. Secondly, it's not just American troops that are training there. If military from Europe, Asia, etc., want to train, let them train in their own countries...." - Marie Scott, Lakewood *
"The base was probably there first, and I suspect the complainers don't have relatives in the military. Otherwise, they would know that's what keeps their sons and daughters from coming home in body bags." - Gil Sussell, Puyallup *
"My husband is out with 1st 37th Field Artillery, and living here, we have a lot of noise. But even if I didn't live on Fort Lewis, I think I wouldn't want to fly in a airplane piloted by someone who had never flown before, so I definitely do not want my country protected by inexperienced soldiers...." - Joyce Klas, Fort Lewis *
"The live artillery practice at Fort Lewis has never really bothered me. I've lived in this area my whole life and didn't realize the impact it has on people from out of town. We have guests this week from out of town, and they actually jump when they hear the noise. It scared the hell out of them. But we don't even hear it anymore." - Diane Taylor, Tacoma
PUBLICATION: The Northern Echo
DATE: August 1, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 15
BYLINE: Chris Brayshay
DATELINE: Middlesbrough, England
The Northern Echo reports that the fight to quieten town pubs and clubs has been a success in Middlesbrough where “OUT-of-hours” noise patrols are used. According to the article the patrols function as noise teams and were first put out on the town’s street four years ago to crack down on weekend levels.
Noisy residents are also being more considerate of their neighbors as a peaceful revolution gathers momentum in Middlesbrough.
The teams have been so successful on Friday and Saturday nights that patrols may now be extended to other nights. Jeff Duffield, environmental protection manager with Middlesbrough Council said, "It's like knowing there is a policeman at the bottom of the street when you are driving: you drive more carefully. Friday and Saturday nights are no longer as bad as they were as people are aware that the patrols are out. And so we are looking at other nights."
According to the article the team just made its 6,000th visit - made during office hours - to disconnect a faulty alarm that was keeping residents awake, resulting in a (GBP) 70 disconnection fee for its owner. The team reportedly averages five call outs a night in the summer months.
Councilman Oliver Johnson, chairman of the council's public protection and trading standards committee was quoted saying, "I don't think we realized it would be as successful as it has, but it proves we are responding to the needs and inquiries of people.”
”There is no doubt about it, noise comes high on the list of what people would like tackling. We would obviously like to be able to give time to other nights. We do try to respond to residents whenever there is a complaint but like everything else this service is resource funded. We will obviously strive to keep the patrols going, I am certain, for the foreseeable future."
The news article reports that sixteen environmental health officers operate the noise patrol rota. Between complaints they also carry out taxi licensing checks, food hygiene and public safety inspections, out-of-hours.
Previous week: July 19, 1998
Next week: August 2, 1998
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