PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Metro Desk
BYLINE: H.G. Reza
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Pete Maddox, resident
The Los Angeles Times reports that during runway repair at John Wayne Airport in California, pilots are flying a different approach before landing. The path is more towards the west than usual, and at lower altitude, which has angered residents who have gotten more noise than they're used to. The Federal Aviation Administration says there's no safety problems involved with the new approaches.
According to the article, the construction has necessitated the shut down of equipment normally used in bad weather by pilots to land safely. If it wasn't shut down, pilots might get false readings. Instead of the usual system, a directional antenna is used to line up with the runway on cloudy days. This method brings pilots over a different area at a lower altitude in what is termed a 'non-precision' approach, and has drawn over 100 noise complaints in the last few weeks. Normally, the Instrument Landing System (ILS) would guide pilots along a path designed to minimize noise pollution.
The article reports that the antenna brings aircraft more to the west, and residents there have said "the noise is unbelievable. When this happens we can't talk to each other inside the house or on the telephone." The FAA insisted that except for the noise, the altered flight path is perfectly safe. Descents formerly began at 6.5 miles from the runway at 2,600 feet, while the temporary approach necessitates a descent beginning at 5.3 miles from the runway at only 1,600 feet. Construction may take until October to complete.
PUBLICATION: St. Petersburg Times (St. Petersburg, FL)
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: Pasco Times; Pg. 2
BYLINE: C.T. Bowen
DATELINE: Pasco, Florida
The St. Petersburg Times published an editorial in which the author takes exception to Florida county commissioner Pat Mulieri's request to ban late-night outdoor dance concerts known as raves.
According to the editorial, Mulieri is making such a request even though an all-night concert over the weekend near Zephyrhills prompted few complaints. The concert featured 80 acts and disc jockeys playing loud, bass-driven music known as techno-rock It ran from late afternoon Saturday until early morning Sunday at Festival Park, the same outdoor venue that has been host to the annual Livestock heavy metal concert. Mulieri, in a Tuesday memorandum to County Administrator John Gallagher, wondered why the concert, Zen Fest '98, wasn't cited for disturbing the peace. She said the music could be heard 4 miles away, and she asked for a county review and rewrite of its policies governing outdoor concerts. Specifically, she's seeking a ban of the raves - late-night parties attractive to teens and young adults - similar to the measure adopted by Polk County.
The editorial contends, "It is distressing to hear Mulieri's call for action even though she had no firsthand knowledge of complaints. Mulieri usually is genuine in responding to constituent concerns about county government, but in this instance she is overly aggressive and pushing for government intervention when none is needed." Apparently, Mulieri said the noise ordinance had to have been broken even though there was no evidence support her contention.
The article reports that in her effort to support a ban, Mulieri expressed concerns about drug use. The event "has a history of actions that compromise the health and safety of participants and residents (drug overdose)," she wrote to Gallagher. But the editorial says, "State laws governing illegal substances and underage drinking already are in place. Enforcement of existing laws, not creating a new one, is the proper tactic. Likewise, a remedy already is in place to combat loud noise. The County Commission adopted a noise ordinance last year and enforcement of that local law is appropriate if music levels are too loud." The editorial goes on to say that in this case, the law was enforced. Sheriff's officers said they received three complaints about the concert, but supervisors found the sound levels within reason.
The editorial invites readers to contrast "Mulieri's zealousness with the more reasonable approach of the park owners." Mike Sierra, owner of Festival Park, received a dozen complaints and said he was unaware the music would continue throughout the night. He apologized and said he would not rent the park again to people who don't turn off the loud speakers by 1 a.m. The editorial suggests Mulieri and other commissioners consider responding rationally to concerts when proper controls already exist.
PUBLICATION: Chapel Hill Herald (Chapel Hill, NC)
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: Front; Pg. 1;
BYLINE: Beth Velliquette
DATELINE: Hillsborough, North Carolina
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Cathy Carroll, business owner
The Chapel Hill Herald reports an ordinance restricting truck traffic on Churton Street in Hillsborough, North Carolina, seems to be having its intended effect, making the area safer and more quiet.
According to the article, Hillsborough police are ready to crack down on truckers who still defy the rules. As of Aug. 28, police officers started issuing traffic citations to tractor-trailer drivers who drive through Hillsborough on Churton Street. "A half a year's time is enough for people to know they can't drive through town," said Hillsborough Police Chief Nate Eubanks. "I just told my officers to get out there and issue citations." In early 1998, the Hillsborough Town Board, with the approval of the NC Department of Transportation, passed Town Ordinance Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-10, which prohibits any truck having six or more wheels or having an axle load limit in excess of 13,000 pounds on Churton Street between U.S. 70 and U.S. 70-A.
The article states two business owners on Churton Street said they were pleased that the truck traffic had diminished. A year ago, logging trucks, trucks carrying crushed cars, turkeys and tobacco rumbled and roared up and down Churton Street so often that sometimes it was difficult to hear testimony in the Orange County Courthouse. Windows rattled in their frames, and people scurried across the street to avoid being hit. "It was the vibration and the noise, " said Cathy Carroll of Carroll Realty and Construction Co., located on Churton Street. "It just seemed really loud. You would frequently hear the squealing of brakes, and you were leery about looking out the window, afraid it would be another accident." In 1993, Betty Gates, the owner of a local real estate management company, was killed when a truck ran over her as she was crossing the street in her wheelchair. Before the law changed and truck drivers started going around Hillsborough, it didn't seem safe to stand on the sidewalks, much less try to cross the street, Carroll said. "You would definitely not want a child crossing the street alone," she said. Carroll said she feels safer now that there aren't so many trucks on Churton Street. "I feel it's much safer. It's really decreased the noise, and it's easier for people to take their time to park on the street," she said.
The article goes on to say trucks haven't been completely eliminated from Churton Street. Some have local deliveries and some try to sneak through, Eubanks said. "You're still going to have some trucks trying to slip through," he said. "I think they are being educated. The word of mouth is you can't go through Hillsborough."
PUBLICATION: The Denver Post
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: Denver & The West; Pg. B-11
BYLINE: Fred Brown
DATELINE: Denver, Colorado
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Mort Marks, resident
The Denver Post reports there's controversy over bringing in commercial air traffic to Centennial Airport in Colorado's Arapahoe County.
According to the article, Mort Marks, who has made Centennial a sort of personal history project, is among the many opponents of commercial air traffic at Centennial. Marks and others feel the little corporate jets are bad enough, but it would be much worse with regularly scheduled passenger planes. They're bigger, displace more air and thus make more noise. However, last month, the Federal Aviation Administration told Centennial, and the county airport authority that runs it, that it was illegal and discriminatory to ban commercial traffic from the airport. Arapahoe County says it will fight the FAA through the federal courts, if necessary. It already won its battle in state courts against a Texas businessman who has been trying for years to start a commercial operation at Centennial.
The article reports one issue in the Centennial's noise problem is a question of promises made to buyers, Marks points out. When Centennial Airport was built in the mid-1960s, most of Greenwood Village, north of the airport, already was in place or plotted. Since 1975, Arapahoe County commissioners have issued "overflight disclosures" to people buying homes in the airport neighborhoods. It's a promise that the airport serves, and will serve, only general aviation and corporate aircraft. "So there's always the threat of tremendous lawsuits against the commissioners if they ever change," Marks warned.
The article reports Marks also believes commercial traffic would make the airport less convenient for the companies that keep their executive planes there. "The businesses that use it want it to stay the way it is," Marks said. "They'd be driven out by commercial travel." Centennial is now the second-busiest general aviation airport in the nation, with an estimated 450,000 landings and takeoffs a year. And, it's 14th busiest among all airports, general or commercial. Marks said he and other airport neighbors wouldn't mind if Centennial went from No. 2 in general aviation to No. 1. "No one is against it," he said.
The article goes on to say the most irritating thing to Marks and others is that federal bureaucrats can overrule community wishes. Marks thinks that the airport can get along without the $1.5 million to $2 million in FAA money if it needs to. He points out it could be more expensive for the county to cave in to the FAA's dictate and subject itself to the possibility of lawsuits from homeowners.
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin (Providence, RI)
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. 4C
BYLINE: Doug Allan
DATELINE: Seekonk, Massachusetts
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports new anti- noise regulation are included among a package of local bylaws in Seekonk, Massachusetts, just given approval by the attorney general's office.
According to the article, Seekonk Town Clerk Jan Parker thinks the public should be made aware of new restrictions and requirements that cover everything from noise to yard sales. The noise law says that if your car radio or home stereo can be heard at a distance of 150 feet, you're polluting the air with noise. For this "breach of peace," there is a $50 fine, and it applies as well to "loud and boisterous singing by any person or group of persons. Not only are teens with boom boxes affected, but also people playing in a neighborhood band. It is presumed that the restriction on "the making of loud outcries" is not intended for sporting events and the like.
PUBLICATION: St. Petersburg Times (St. Petersburg, FL)
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: Pasco Times; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Logan D. Mabe
DATELINE: Pasco, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Pat Mulieri, county commissioner; Eva Rader, Timber Lake board president
The St. Petersburg Times reports last weekend's all-night "rave" party in Pasco, Florida, was noisy enough to prompt one county commissioner to seek a change in the way the county permits such events.
According to the article, County Commissioner Pat Mulieri sent a memo to County Administrator John Gallagher on Tuesday asking that Pasco's events ordinance be reviewed and rewritten after Saturday's Zen Festival '98. The techno-rock concert began about 5 p.m. Saturday and concluded about 7 a.m. Sunday. During those hours, Festival Park featured driving bass lines and thunderous drum beats that carried for miles. "How could the music be heard 4 miles away and our noise ordinance not be violated," Mulieri asked in her memo. "Why weren't they cited for disturbing the peace?"
The article goes on to say Pasco County Sheriff's Office spokesman Jon Powers said it wasn't clear that the ordinance was being violated. "Our people were out there the whole time and indicated that it wasn't as loud as Livestock was," said Powers, referring to another popular annual concert at the park. "We had a total of three complaints. A supervisor went to the locations where the complaints were phoned in from and felt that it was well within acceptable limits." One reason the music may have seemed more annoying, Powers said, may have been because of the deep bass, which may not show up on decibel meters. "From a technical standpoint, and I'm not an engineer, I think the three complaints centered around the bass," Powers said. "And I'm not completely sure that a (decibel meter) would register bass. The machine registers constant noise. "
The article reports Mulieri said she received no specific complaints from residents and drafted the memo only after television news reporters questioned her about the county's policies that allowed the festival to take place. "I've asked Gallagher to look into it to see what we can do" about restricting similar concerts, said Mulieri, who wants to see Pasco follow the example of other counties that have banned such festivals. "Our noise ordinance had to have been broken. And is that fair to the residents?"
The article says residents' experiences of the noise from the concert varied. "We didn't seem to have any problems here," said Wilma Liddle, acting office manager at Tropical Acres Estates about a mile north of Festival Park. "I live in the park and didn't even know there was a concert. Usually, when they have those Livestock festivals you can hear every word they say. But this one, we didn't even know it was going on." But at Timber Lake Estates, several miles west of Festival Park, the sound rattled some mobile home walls. "I personally heard it," said Timber Lake board president Eva Rader. "I don't suppose it would have been a nuisance if I wasn't trying to get some rest. When I really heard it was when I tried to go to bed. I thought, "Am I imagining this? Where is this boom-boom coming from?' " Residents of Palm View Gardens said the concert was less disruptive than they had anticipated. Despite being less than a mile from the park, noise wasn't a problem either. "We could hear rock music, but I think most of it was coming from the cars passing by," said Janet Trask, manager of the park. Resident Vivian McMillan said this weekend's concert was no worse than Livestock. "But we have friends who live off Allen Road, and they said it shook their windows," McMillan said.
According to the article, Festival Park owner Mike Sierra said he got about a dozen complaint calls from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., when the last band performed. "We anticipated they'd play music until about midnight or 1 a.m. and stop," Sierra said. "So we were somewhat disappointed the way things worked out." Sierra said he will not again rent to Zen Fest organizers, or any group that plans on blaring music past 1 a.m. "We get smarter as we get older and that was a real learning experience to say the least," Sierra said. "All we could do was apologize to our neighbors."
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: St. Charles Post, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Ralph Dummit
DATELINE: St. Louis, Missouri
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Pat McDonnell, vice president of St. Charles Against Aircraft Noise (CAAN); J. Randolph Babbitt, president of the Air Line Pilots Association
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports three organizations that oppose the expansion plan for Missouri's Lambert Field are scheduled today to picket the St. Louis City Hall. After the picketing, they hope to meet with St. Louis Mayor Clarence Harmon to voice their complaints.
According to the article, Pat McDonnell, vice president of St. Charles Against Aircraft Noise, or CAAN, said his group and members of Bridgeton Air Defense and People Building Community will participate in the demonstration. In an announcement Tuesday, McDonnell said the protest will be an effort to inform the public "of the arrogance and deceit being employed by the city of St. Louis and the Federal Aviation Administration in their attempt to legitimatize the proposed W-1W plan," which is favored by St. Louis. The city of St. Louis owns Lambert Field, and Mayor Harmon sits on the Lambert Airport Authority. A response from Harmon's office was not available Tuesday.
The article reports the three protest groups are upset because Harmon and the FAA have refused to release a document prepared by airport consultants and the Central Region FAA in rebuttal to a list of 18 concerns about W-1W raised by the Air Line Pilots Association. The document being withheld, McDonnell said, relates to the safety of the expansion plan. The protesters will ask Harmon "to raise the curtain of secrecy surrounding W-1W," McDonnell said. He contends that the document would reveal that in order to meet the increase in capacity promised by W-1W, "the airport runways will have to be operated in a manner that will not only affect safety but will also provide more noise to the south and east of Lambert." McDonnell contends that W-1W proponents have changed their thinking about the operation of a new runway, and that in order to increase capacity, more aircraft will be taking off to the East than originally planned. The result, he said, would be considerably more noise for St. Ann and the University of Missouri-St. Louis. Such noise may not have been considered in the FAA's environmental impact statement, he said.
The article states the organizations in today's protest have sought unsuccessfully to persuade the FAA to conduct a real-time simulation of the W-1W runway "as a way to remove any and all doubts as to the safety aspects of the plan," McDonnell said. But FAA Administrator Jane Garvey said late in July that such a study will not be conducted because the FAA is satisfied that the runway's operation would be safe. Informed sources said this week that the FAA will give its official approval, called a record of decision, to the W-1W plan on Sept. 28 or 29. Bridgeton officials and others say they will file suit to block W-1W as soon as the record of decision is issued.
According to the article, last month, J. Randolph Babbitt, president of the Air Line Pilots Association, wrote to Garvey that the pilots had been unable to get a complete copy of the FAA's rebuttal to their concerns. Babbitt said a formal request for the release of the document had been filed under the Freedom of Information Act but that he did not expect a response for several weeks. Babbitt pointed out to the FAA administrator that the pilots support improvements to safety and capacity at Lambert. But, he wrote, "we are convinced, and a real-time simulation would decisively demonstrate, that the W-1W plan has significant safety impacts and represents virtually no capacity gains." Babbitt wrote, "We are particularly alarmed that this project, which we have estimated to cost $2.5 billion or more, would use limited resources that could be applied toward a runway configuration that would significantly improve safety and capacity." The pilots favor construction of a runway on the south side of Interstate 70, an area that would be closer to the airport terminal.
PUBLICATION: Ventura County Star
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: Editorials; Pg. B07
BYLINE: Al Knuth
DATELINE: Camarillo, California
The Ventura County Star published the following letter to the editor about the existing noise jet noise problem at Camarillo Airport from resident Al Knuth of Camarillo, California. Knuth opposes proposals to allow larger jets at the airport. Knuth writes:
I have recently read several articles in the Star regarding a proposal to land Boeing 727 jet aircraft at Camarillo Airport for commercial purposes. Judging from some of the comments in the news articles, some of the members of the Camarillo City Council are unaware of the existing noise problem caused by jet planes landing at the airport. This is not surprising, due to the fact that the airport is operated by the county, and it is the county staff who receive the majority of the complaints.
However, there is a current problem, as summarized in my May 5 letter, which I presented at a public hearing regarding the Camarillo Airport Noise Study. Although the hearing was not well-advertised, it was attended by more than 20 Camarillo citizens with similar concerns.
I subsequently discussed the jet plane problem with the assistant director of airports, and while he acknowledged that many of the jets did, in fact, take the straight-in approach over the residential and commercial areas just east of the runway regardless of weather conditions, the airport was powerless to do anything about it.
He said that this was entirely up to the discretion of the pilot, but that if the plane violated minimum altitude or noise standards, it should be reported to the Federal Aviation Administration. This is much easier said than done, due to the fact that most planes ID numbers are not visible from the ground.
From the time the county took over the operation of the airport, there have been numerous debates regarding its use. Each time, it was agreed that the airport use would be limited to propeller-driven aircraft only, no jets or commercial aviation would be allowed. Time seems to have dimmed the recollection of these debates, but I don't think its changed the minds of the citizens of Camarillo who live near the airport.
Approving 727s to land at Camarillo Airport for commercial purposes opens Pandora's box! From a safety standpoint, they won't mix very well with the landing patterns of the airplanes currently using the airport. From a noise standpoint, these planes are much noisier than the jets that are currently causing a noise problem and, as Bob Fowler, president of the Camarillo Airport Hangar Association, stated, "There are no guide rails in the sky." There will be violations. From a political standpoint, it sets a precedent for approval of large jets to land at Camarillo Airport. Where will it end? We already have a jet noise problem!
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: Metro Lake; Pg. 2; Zone: L
BYLINE: Rogers Worthington
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jack Saporito, member of the Alliance of Residents Concerning O'Hare
The Chicago Tribune reports Chicago's Mayor Richard M. Daley, state legislators, major airline executives, and north suburban business leaders will meet to discuss O'Hare International Airport on Thursday during a closed-door meeting.
According to the article, the meeting, organized by the Greater O'Hare Association of Industry and Commerce, will address the city's efforts to reduce noise at O'Hare. The latest figures show mixed results for the city's noise -reduction efforts. Plans for the airport, such as the city's proposal to extend Balmoral Drive in Rosemont into O'Hare to relieve traffic congestion, will also most likely be addressed.
The article states a longtime and vocal critic of O'Hare expansion denounced the meeting as an effort to build support for adding flights at O'Hare. Chicago officials "want to modify the runways, and we will not allow that because it's for more flights," said Jack Saporito, of the Alliance of Residents Concerning O'Hare.
The article reports officials also are expected to discuss airport-related issues that could be discussed in the General Assembly's fall veto session, said Laurie Stone, executive director of the association. It's unclear what lawmakers could take up in their post-election session. But Republican gubernatorial candidate George Ryan has said that, if elected, he favors using state money to buy land that could be used to build a third regional airport near Peotone, in Will County. Stone said the gathering would be closed to the press and the public so that the lawmakers could feel comfortable to engage in a "free-spirited dialogue." The meeting might include a tour of O'Hare's noise -abatement office and the "hush house" enclosure that reduces noise from jets. Meanwhile, Chicago's Department of Aviation is involved in a count of homes around O'Hare for its updated " noise contour" map, which determines how the city allocates money for soundproofing homes and schools. "What was a home eight or nine years ago could be a strip mall now, and vice-versa," said Dennis Culloton, spokesman for Chicago's aviation department.
PUBLICATION: The Associated Press
DATE: September 8, 1998
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Ron Wietecha, mayor of Park Ridge
The Associated Press reports complaints about airplane noise from Chicago's O'Hare International Airport often come from residents in the towns that are the least affected by airplane noise problems.
According to the article, the department compared calls to a noise hotline for O'Hare to the cities ranked noisiest by mechanical noise monitors. Park Ridge accounted for more than a third of this year's calls but averaged less noise than at least nine of the 18 other towns the department tracks. "I suspect the amount of calls ... means they're really paying attention to the issue," Mark Fowler, executive director of the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission, told the Chicago Sun-Times on Monday. Fowler added that Park Ridge officials frequently publicize the hotline number. Residents of the town average about 720 calls to the hotline a month. But Park Ridge Mayor Ron Wietecha says the call volume stems not from publicity, but from the problem airplane noise creates in the town.
The article reports Mayor Wietecha, a vocal member of the Suburban O'Hare Commission, maintains that Chicago's method of averaging decibel levels downplays the amount of noise suburban residents actually experience. But Fowler said the standard for averaging noise paints the most accurate picture possible by factoring in both the loudness of a take-off or landing and how often such noises occur in a given area.
The article goes on to say Chicago aviation spokesman Dennis Culloton noted that calls to the hotline tend to increase when the noise issue gets media attention. "We welcome the hotline calls, but we would just ask for a certain amount of perspective," Culloton said. "It's all part of the massive amount of data we collect to get a picture."
PUBLICATION: News & Record (Greensboro, NC)
DATE: September 8, 1998
SECTION: Editorial, Pg. A8
DATELINE: Greensboro, North Carolina
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jeff Johnson
The News & Record published the following letter to the editor from Jeff Johnson, a resident of Greensboro, North Carolina. In his letter Johnson contends recent articles published in the newspaper about the new FedEx hub unfairly deny equal space to citizens' concerns. Johnson writes:
Recent articles have been unfairly biased toward FedEx and have not fully addressed the concerns that most citizens in Northwest Guilford have. Out of nearly four pages of a promotional piece Aug. 30 for FedEx, only a mere couple of lines note concerns over this project. The article notes the Texas hub can be located easily by looking for the "yellow and gold glow" of the lights and indicates "noises in the night" such as the planes, motorized tugs, horns and the whining of hydraulic lifts.
The article mentions that the nearest neighbors are five miles away without mentioning that thousands of Guilford County citizens are within a five-mile zone, with many only a mile from the end of the proposed runway.
Could the paper not interview any of the citizens in the Fort Worth area who had to be relocated and the impact it has had on their family, community and neighborhoods? How about the people left in homes nearest these hubs to determine the noise impact (are their children awakened at night?) and any home depreciation they have seen? How has FedEx worked with these home owners on the timing of announcements, soundproofing of homes, free flow of information and compensation to impacted neighbors?
As you are reporting, please consider giving equal time and coverage to both sides of the issue. We are concerned with issues covering the safety and well-being of our children, unlike those just concerned with profits.
PUBLICATION: The San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: September 8, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. A13
BYLINE: Benjamin Pimentel
DATELINE: San Carlos, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Marland Townsend, Foster City councilwoman; Barbara Heineman, Foster City resident; Eileen Larsen , Foster City councilwoman
The San Francisco Chronicle reports a plan to extend the runway at California's San Carlos Airport makes neighbors fear bigger and noisier aircraft. Airport officials stress the project is necessary to increase airport safety.
According to the article, officials at San Carlos Airport, owned by San Mateo County, plan to lengthen the 2,600-foot runway by 400 feet. But Foster City officials criticize the project, saying it would attract bigger planes, which would mean more noise. "This 400-foot extension translates directly to more noise, and that's our concern," said Foster City Councilman Marland Townsend. Foster City resident Barbara Heineman said it would make life even more miserable for her community, which has also complained about current noise from commercial planes flying into San Francisco International Airport. "It'll increase the existing traffic (at San Carlos Airport), which they are not managing well," said Heineman. "They fly over my house regularly, and it disrupts my ability to enjoy a peaceful existence in my own home."
The article reports San Carlos Airport Manager Gary Petersen emphasized that the runway extension is necessary to make the increasingly busy airport safer. The airport records 150,000 takeoffs and landings each year, he said. That number is expected to rise to 190,000 each year by 2015 because of the rapid economic growth in the Bay Area, he said. The airport is situated next to a number of major Bay Area businesses. "We never expected Redwood Shores to be a center of commerce," Petersen said. "It's not about bringing in larger aircraft, it's about making the airport safer for those aircraft that are already using it." He denied that an extended runway would mean bigger planes flying over Foster City and Redwood Shores. However, it would give planes, including corporate jets and private aircraft, more room to maneuver in case of trouble. For example, if an aircraft's engine fails, he said, the extended runway would make it easier for the pilot to handle the emergency. "We could provide an extra margin for them to stop safely," Petersen said. "There is no such thing as an airport that's too safe."
According to the article, San Carlos Airport is expected to produce a preliminary study on the project's environmental effect this month. Airport officials will then decide if the expansion will require a full environmental impact report, which would require public hearings. Foster City Councilwoman Eileen Larsen said she is concerned that the airport will eliminate such a process. "They wouldn't have to let anybody know, and the next thing you'll find out is that the planes are coming over," she said. "The airport is safe as it is." Petersen said he believes that the airport will most probably conduct a full environmental review to get more input from the affected communities. "It's not a good idea to hide this from people," he said. "We are not trying to hide this from people, and we have never hidden this from people."
The Foster City Council voted last month to oppose the airport's plan. Other cities near the airport, Redwood City, San Carlos and Belmont, have yet to publicize their positions on the airport's plan. Redwood Shores resident LaVerne Atherly said he has no problems with the airport's plan and he believes opponents are overreacting. "There are more important things we need to address and spend our energies on," he said.
PUBLICATION: The Tennessean
DATE: September 8, 1998
SECTION: Business, Pg. 1E
BYLINE: Michael Davis
DATELINE: Nashville, Tennessee
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Danny Waggener, resident; Norene Smith, resident
The Tennessean reports the Federal Aviation Administration is reducing the size of the noise contour map at Tennessee's Nashville International Airport, saying the airport is quieter than it was in 1993 when the map was made.
According to the article, the FAA says reduced air traffic and less-noisy, new-design engines have reduced overall noise around the airport. Nashville International's 1993 "noise contours," the footprint showing average noise levels around the facility, will be reduced by about one-half by 2001. The smaller contours will have little effect on operations at the airport, since most of the existing noise zones contain either buffer areas or homes that are already soundproofed. Some nearby residents agree that jet noise is less intrusive than it once was, but that's relatively speaking. "Every once in a while they'll come in low and you'll hear it. But it doesn't bother us too much," said Lisa Lane resident Manson McClain, who lives close to the airport's longest runway. "It's not as bad as it used to be."
The article states between 1989 and 1996, the airport spent about $90 million in federal grants and funds provided by the airlines to buy, help sell or insulate more than 4,200 homes considered to be too close to the noisy jets for comfort. 554 houses were purchased and leveled, and the area turned into buffer; the airport helped sell or purchased 795 homes, with 31 remaining under airport ownership; and 2,853 houses were fitted with sound-resistant doors and windows, baffles and insulation at an average cost of $4,000 to $5,000 apiece.
According to the article, as houses were soundproofed, the noise levels themselves have been falling. Airport sound levels are measured cumulatively and weighted for intensity as well as for number of occurrences. The airport is not as busy as it was five years ago. With American Airlines dismantling its Nashville hub, the airport's total daily big jet flights have declined by about 25%. Newer-model aircraft engines are also getting quieter. FAA regulations require by Dec. 31 of next year, all aircraft operating in the continental United States must be fitted with either new, quieter power plants or hush kits. And in Nashville, big carriers like Southwest Airlines and American tend to fly newer jets, which typically use the latest-generation engines. "Based on the operations and the aircraft that are used, it is getting quieter in Nashville," said Peggy Kelley of the FAA's Memphis office. "There is a noticeable difference."
The article reports not all homeowners around Nashville International agree. Some of the closest still claim the jets, particularly those outbound and powering up to climb, rattle their windows. "They make loud, thunderous noise, " said Danny Waggener, a neighbor of McClain's. "You can hear then when they fire up to get ready to go, before they even leave the ground." But many residents admit that takeoffs and landings are no longer intolerably loud. "If you have the sliding glass doors open, you can hear it," said Dora Cope of Clovernook Lane. "But it doesn't bother us like before."
The article goes on to state some residents near the airport are still waiting to be soundproofed. Homes outside the Federal Aviation Administration sound contours but still blasted with jet noise are being fitted with storm windows under Metro's Community Sound Insulation Program, started in 1992. About 6,000 residences have been soundproofed, with another 1,300 or so on the waiting list. James Bruce Stanley, who is chairman of Metro Council's noise mitigation committee, says the going is slow because the program is under-funded. The program needs almost $3 million to complete its project, but has received only $1 million a year for the past two years. Residents say they're frustrated. "We're on the list," said Norene Smith of Windemere Drive, about three miles north of the airport. "Why don't we go ahead and get them?"
PUBLICATION: The Advocate (Baton Rouge, LA)
DATE: September 6, 1998
SECTION: People; Pg. 12H; Ground Work
BYLINE: Bob Souvestre
DATELINE: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
The Advocate of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, published a column that advocates for the use of protection devices to prevent noise-induced hearing damage.
According to the column, the writer doesn't hear as well as he used to. He wonders if it could be because, over the years, he seldom wore anything to protect his hearing from exposure to loud sounds such as those from lawnmowers, grass edgers, string trimmers, chain saws and power tools.
The article states noise-induced damage to hearing is a progressive and permanent injury. While some types of hearing damage may be temporary or heal partially, long-term noise exposure causes permanent hearing loss. Sound is energy that is transmitted through the air, measured in decibel levels. Sound can be considered good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant. Noise is undesirable sound. Even though people may get used to noise and learn to ignore it, their ears are still subjected to the forces of sound pressures and may be damaged.
The article reports intensity and exposure to noise determines the potential for hearing loss, both short term and permanent. Research indicates that noises below 85 decibels present no hazard to the ears, but there is evidence that 90 decibels may cause harm over an eight-hour period. A sound level of 90 decibels is quite loud, and many people prefer to use hearing protection at much lower noise levels. But most people are not exposed to a constant sound level during a given day. However, they may be exposed to several sound levels for varying times during the day, and it's wise to use hearing protection when the sound level exceeds 85 decibels. The following are some typical sound levels. The activity, location or item is followed by its decibel rating in parentheses: quiet whisper (20), average home (40), average office (60), lawnmower (90), table saw (100), thunder (110), chain saw (113), loud rock music (116), jackhammer (120) and jet airplane (140). Studies indicate that most people experience pain at a 130-decibel level.
According to the column, homeowners who save money by cutting their own firewood with chain saws without hearing protection may lose something more valuable than money-their hearing. A chain saw's small muffler does little to reduce the noise produced by its engine. Inexpensive earplugs, available at all drugstores, help protect against hearing loss.
PUBLICATION: The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, TN)
DATE: September 6, 1998
SECTION: Metro, Pg. B1
BYLINE: Kevin Robbins
DATELINE: Memphis, Tennessee
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Michael Thornton, resident;
The Commercial Appeal reports there are fewer planes and quieter skies in the Memphis, Tennessee, area since the Northwest Airlines strike began.
According to the article, above Joy Lane, in the Charjean neighborhood near Airways and Interstate 240, passenger planes still depart and arrive, but there are fewer of them. Since August 28, when a pilots' strike grounded all 114 daily Northwest flights at Memphis International Airport, resident Stanley Minor's car alarm has not been set off by the roar of an airplane. While the bitter, expensive strike has strained the community in many ways, some good, in the form of quiet, has come of it to neighborhoods in the flight path.
The article reports mockingbirds no longer compete with 727s; crickets can be heard at night instead of DC9s; and people can take their telephones outside and speak without shouting. "It's plane-free weather," observed Karen Lebovitz, owner of Otherlands Coffee Bar on Cooper. Outside, on the deck, tables were the scenes of quiet, civil conversations. The only noise was from cars on Cooper. Three graduate students at the University of Memphis sat on the deck. "We sit out here so often," said student Falshunnee Bradford. "Whenever the planes did go by, we'd stop talking." Saturday, Bradford and her friends spoke without interruption while Northwest pilots and executives continued to disagree. The strike began over pay and job security, and thousands of employees have been laid off, including Cyndi Harter, a flight attendant from Collierville. Harter and a colleague said Saturday morning they wished that they were working. "I've not noticed" the silence left by the strike, Harter said. In Midtown, Michael Thornton dropped some golf balls on a practice green at Overton Park. "I hear birds," he said. "You know if you hear the birds, it's quiet," said Thornton, an MATA bus driver from North Memphis. " That seems to relax you." On the other side of the park, families picnicked along East Parkway. "I haven't heard a plane today," said Ricky Grady of South Memphis, who'd been at the park since 6:30 a.m. "We've still," Grady said, "got FedEx coming through here at night."
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: September 6, 1998
SECTION: Real Estate; Part K; Page 3; Real Estate Desk
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Lisa and David Schechter
The Los Angeles Times published the following letter to the editor from two Los Angeles, California, residents who chided the newspaper for omitting the existence of airplane noise in any article about Sunset Park real estate. The Schechters wrote:
When my wife and I were looking for a house a year ago, we found that many of the nicer parts of Santa Monica's Sunset Park community suffered from incessant airplane noise from the adjacent Santa Monica Airport.
This ever-busier airport sends low-flying, noisy planes over the community every two minutes during the daytime and four minutes during the evening. From many backyards in Sunset Park, you can read the airplane's registration numbers; from some you can tell the brand of sunglasses the pilot is wearing.
No neighborhood is perfect, but the airplane noise issue is one that deserves a mention in any article on Sunset Park real estate.
PUBLICATION: The New York Times
DATE: September 6, 1998
SECTION: Section 14; Page 6; Column 1; The City Weekly Desk
BYLINE: Corey Kilgannon
DATELINE: New York City, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Charlotte Russell, resident; Angelita Ortega, resident
The New York Times reports New York City residents are annoyed by the increased flights over their neighborhoods in the last several months. The sharp rise in air traffic and its attendant noise are due to runway work at La Guardia Airport.
According to the article, Charlotte Russell has no pleasant comparisons for the low-flying commercial airplanes that rattle the windows of her Washington Heights apartment. "It's like Chinese water torture waiting for the next one to come," said Russell, pointing out that flights had increased sharply several months ago over her building, on West 185th Street near the George Washington Bridge. "A few weeks ago at about 7:30 A.M., they were flying about every three minutes over us full throttle, flying low," said Russell. She said that she and her neighbors had called the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates the three major local airports, to complain about the low-flying planes, but had received no response. "That blast of noise is like being right on the tarmac," she said. "It's an environmental hazard and a shock to the nervous system."
The article reports like Russell, many upper Manhattan residents say they have been bothered by an increase in the amount of commercial jets flying over their neighborhoods on weekends. A Port Authority spokesman, Peter Yerkes, said the increase is due to runway construction. Planes landing at La Guardia Airport have been rerouted on weekends because of runway construction, he said. Because the north-south runway has been closed on weekends since mid-May, planes have been using the east-west runway, from midnight Friday to 6 a.m. Monday, he said. "There has been no net increase in aircraft using the airport," Mr. Yerkes added. He said the runway project would continue until mid-October.
The article states a spokeswoman for the Federal Aviation Administration, Arlene Salac, confirmed that the flight patterns of arriving planes had been changed to accommodate the single runway. "In order to come to land, they fly over the Hudson River and cross over northern Central Park," Ms. Salac said. "That's why the folks up in Harlem area are seeing more traffic." A Councilman for East Harlem, William Perkins, said he and other residents had resorted to counting planes to make the best of it. "I was sitting in a friend's house and in a five-minute period, we counted about 10 of them," he said. Angelita Ortega, who lives on East 128th Street, called the noisy weekend flights overhead "very annoying and very disruptive." She added, "I was shocked when they first started. I didn't think it would be a permanent thing, but it hasn't stopped. Everyone comes through here," she said. "It's the worst in the summer, when everything's open. On Saturday and Sunday, we sit out in the yard, we count them." But apparently, not everyone hates the planes. Lars Westvind, an artist, said the planes had a soothing effect, especially when he paints in the backyard of his East 130th Street home. "We're right on the flight line," he said. "It depends on the weather -- when it's cloudy they fly very low. But my wife and I enjoy watching them. They're not so loud."
PUBLICATION: Sarasota Herald-Tribune (Sarasota, FL)
DATE: September 6, 1998
SECTION: A Section, Pg. 16A
BYLINE: Catherine Hollingsworth
DATELINE: Washington, DC
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: David Jenkins, director of conservation and public policy for the American Canoe Association in Washington; Ben Beech, spokesman for The Wilderness Society
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports national seashores in Florida and North Carolina are among several that would be exempt from a ban on Jet Ski-type watercraft under new proposed National Park Service regulations.
According to the article, if the NPS regulations are approved, personal watercraft would be allowed in about twenty-four parks throughout the country unless park officials later determined that their use became a nuisance, safety hazard or threat to wildlife. But environmentalists are strongly opposed to having personal watercraft in any federally protected waterways and say the rule doesn't go far enough. "We're talking about national parks - the crown jewels of our natural resources," said David Jenkins, director of conservation and public policy for the American Canoe Association in Washington. He said the pollution and noise from personal watercraft detract from the serenity and quiet park-goers seek. Personal watercraft can travel at high speeds in shallow water. Their buzzing sound sometimes scares animals and annoys people. "There's no way to escape these things now," Jenkins said.
The article reports Florida is one of the largest markets for personal watercraft, and recent booms in sales nationwide have led to more crowded waterways at popular U.S. vacation spots. The industry says it's unfair to single it out for a ban, when motor boats and helicopter air tours also contribute noise to parks. "I would like a reasonable approach, a nondiscriminatory approach," said John Donaldson, spokesman for the Personal Watercraft Industry Association. The association is amenable to restrictions on how close the watercraft can be driven to the shoreline. Manufacturers are working to reduce the sound and making cleaner-burning engines for new models. But The Wilderness Society wants to crack down on all vehicles that make loud noises, including snowmobiles and motor boats. "Pretty soon they're going to have to hand out ear plugs at the entrance gates," said the society's spokesman Ben Beech. "A lot of these noisy activities cannot just go on. We have to take steps now before it's too late," Beech said.
The article goes on to report that according to David Barna of the National Park Service, the agency intends to ban personal watercraft in most of its parks. Five national park areas including the Everglades have banned personal watercraft because of safety concerns and the impact on wildlife, according to the park service. At least 43 states have regulations such as training requirements and restrictions on stunts. However, a provision in the proposed watercraft rule would allow 12 parks - including the Canaveral National Seashore in Florida and Cape Hatteras and Cape Lookout in North Carolina - to set special rules and possibly avoid a complete ban. In 13 other parks - including the Gulf Islands National Seashore in Florida and Mississippi - the park superintendents would decide whether to permit or prohibit these personal watercraft. "They are leaving it up to individual parks what to do . . . I think that leaves the door wide open for the industry to sue," said Amy Knowles, president of Save Our Waters Coalition in Islamorada. "That's not a hard and fast policy," said Knowles, whose group advocates setting up safe zones for personal watercraft. "There's got to be some way for us all to enjoy the water." Monroe County recently won the right to enforce such safe zones in parts of the Florida Keys, which were challenged by the industry but upheld by the state Supreme Court. The county's policy is seen as a compromise approach for both conservationists and the industry. "That's catching on," said the canoe association's Jenkins. The proposed rule is still under review by the White House. If approved, it would be published in the Federal Register, allowing for a 60-day comment period.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: September 12, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 3; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Karen Robinson-Jacobs
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Ginny Kruger, assistant chief deputy to county supervisor
The Los Angeles Times reports that resident outcry has convinced the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission to consider noise restrictions for Universal Studios.
According to the article, moviemaking sounds such as explosions, gunfire, and helicopter noise disturb neighbors of the studio. Although Universal had said that any noise limits would limit its moviemaking methods, the commission decided to include, in plans for studio expansion, bans on "loud 'impulsive' sounds such as explosions and gunfire from midnight to 5 a.m. during the winter, and from 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. during daylight saving time."
The article reports that Universal Studios disagrees strongly with the proposed limits, and "any dramatic policy shift that potentially could affect one of the largest studios in the world." The entire commission will consider the proposals on October 7th and 14th. Decisions at that time may include approval or suggested changes for the county staff.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: September 11, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 5
BYLINE: Robert C. Herguth
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jack Saporito, head of Alliance of Residents Concerning O'Hare; Joe Karaganis, attorney for the Suburban O'Hare Commission
The Chicago Daily Herald reports a closed-door meeting between Illinois state and local officials and airline executives Thursday caused some noise activists to suggest the aim of the meeting was to discuss expansion at O'Hare International Airport.
According to the article, state legislators met with airline executives and Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley on Thursday to discuss topics of mutual interest, especially the city-run airport. The closed-door gathering, which was sponsored by the Greater O'Hare Association of Industry & Commerce, led some to question whether the aim of the event was to gain regional support for future airport expansion. "The meeting was held to put more flights at O'Hare - bottom-line," said Jack Saporito, head of the Arlington Heights-based Alliance of Residents Concerning O'Hare, which opposes additional noise, flights or runways. "Look at the business groups who were there and the airlines, they're all airport expansionists." Joe Karaganis, attorney for the Suburban O'Hare Commission, a group fighting noise and expansion at O'Hare, echoed Saporito. "I think it was laying the groundwork for a major expansion of O'Hare," Karaganis said. "You've only got three choices here: you can send the traffic out of state, because O'Hare is jammed up to the rafters; you can build a third airport, which they don't want; or you can expand O'Hare ... and they maintain their monopoly."
The article reported Mayor Daley, however, brushed off such suggestions, saying local officials get together periodically to discuss any number of matters.
PUBLICATION: Times Newspapers Limited
DATE: September 11, 1998
SECTION: Home News
DATELINE: London, England
Times Newspapers Limited reports anti-noise groups lost their fight to restrict night-time flying at England's three major airports.
According to the article, residents have lost a fight to restrict night flying at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports next summer. Night movements and noise quotas would remain the same, the Government said. Anti- noise groups are still hoping for a night curfew in 2000.
PUBLICATION: Tulsa World
DATE: September 11, 1998
BYLINE: D.R. Stewart
DATELINE: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Tulsa World reports military jets are the loudest aircraft at Oklahoma's Tulsa International Airport and cause the most complaints among airport-area residents. But a recent study found certain departure procedures can reduce noise from the military aircraft.
According to the article, a noise consultant told Tulsa Airport Authority trustees Thursday that modified flight procedures are reducing complaints about aircraft noise from locally-based military jets, the loudest aircraft at Tulsa International Airport. Oklahoma Air National Guard F-16 fighter jets are the loudest aircraft flying at Tulsa International and cause the most noise complaints among area residents, said Ryk Dunkelberg, a consultant with Barnard Dunkelberg & Co. who conducted the study. The noise study backs up neighbors who say the Guard's F-16s are the loudest and most intrusive of the aircraft operations conducted at the airport. The study measured aircraft noise at five locations around the airport from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. and from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. daily. One of the sites was located at the north end of the airport; two in the neighborhoods west of the airport, and two to the south of the airport. The article reports the study found that the F-16s account for 35.9 percent of the military aircraft flights at Tulsa International and 6.6 percent of all aircraft operations. The remainder of the military operations are transient aircraft that either stop at Tulsa to refuel or they practice touch-and-go operations and instrument landing system approaches. The F-16s consistently ranked loudest in the noise survey.
The article reports that there are ways to quiet those aircraft. The study showed that under certain departure profiles -- disengaging the afterburners for reduced power levels or flying at 95 percent power without the afterburners -- the F-16s can operated as quietly as some commercial aircraft. Dunkelberg said the study concluded that F-16 noise levels can be reduced to tolerable levels of the low-90-decibel range -- about the levels experienced by an observer standing next to a busy freeway -- by discontinuing use of afterburners in formation takeoffs to the south and west. Noise levels also were reduced by gaining altitude fast on takeoff with the use of afterburners and then turning off the afterburners at the airport property line.
The article states in a second strategy to deal with the noise issue, the airport staff has notified transient military aircraft that they will be assessed landing fees for the first time. Airports Director Brent Kitchen said, "We had to do something. They would do touch-and-goes and stay in patterns and do practice approaches several hours at a time. It created two concerns: noise over the neighborhoods and the pounding on our pavements. And they didn't pay us anything and they didn't buy fuel."
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: September 11, 1998
SECTION: Metro Chicago; Pg. 9; Zone: N
BYLINE: Rogers Worthington
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Tribune reports suburban legislators met Thursday with the Greater O'Hare Association of Industry and Commerce to discuss regional cooperation and support of O'Hare International Airport.
According to the article, the meeting Thursday for five hours behind closed doors at O'Hare International Airport, was sponsored by a suburban business association--the Greater O'Hare Association of Industry and Commerce. "I think the theme was that O'Hare Airport is a jewel and that we should jealously guard it and be supportive of it," said state Sen. Dan Cronin (R-Elmhurst), one of about 20 Chicago-area state legislators who attended the session at the O'Hare Hilton Hotel. Attendees and organizers characterized the meeting as the opening of a dialogue and a low-key briefing.
The article reports the intent of the Bensenville-based Greater O'Hare Association clearly was to build support for O'Hare, described as the region's premier economic engine but one dogged by residents' opposition to noise and expansion, not to mention talk of a third airport at Peotone. At Thursday's meeting, which was closed to the media, Mayor Daley gave a short speech, renewing his commitment to regionalism and O'Hare's role in keeping businesses in the state. Other speakers briefed the legislators on noise abatement efforts at the airport and announced that two major airlines, United and American, would achieve 100 percent compliance with quieter engine requirements at O'Hare a year ahead of the Jan. 1, 2000, federal deadline.
The article states Chicago Aviation Commissioner Mary Rose Loney reviewed the airport's renovation plans, as well as plans to reconfigure access roads to the airport from the Northwest Tollway to relieve congestion. Audience members heard from Montie Brewer, a resource planning executive with United Airlines, about the economics and logistics of major hubs, and how a third airport in the Chicago market would only work if O'Hare and Midway were shuttered. And they heard from Neil Newhouse, a pollster commissioned by the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce, who presented some results of a survey of 1,000 suburbanites taken last March. Among his findings, according to those present: Airport noise was less a concern for respondents than was the ground traffic congestion of roadways around O'Hare, and a majority of survey respondents in Will County indicated they would vote "yes" if confronted with a referendum question on a third airport.
PUBLICATION: The Arizona Republic
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: Chandler Community; Pg. Ev4
DATELINE: Gilbert, Arizona
The Arizona Republic published the following letter to the editor from Gilbert, Arizona, resident Nick Champion. In his letter, Champion challenges the town council's position on airport noise and its effects on residents' property values. Champion wrote:
Those of us who are opposed to the proposed noise -zone tagging (which appears to have been blessed by Gilbert) want you to know that we are not opposed to progress.
We will not stand in the way of the Williams Gateway Airport project's commercial success. Neither will we stand idly by while politicians sweep us under the rug like yesterday's news. If one can imagine a highway project which, once under way, builds homes within six miles of the road's projected path, then detours the highway to build an overpass on top of that community of homes, one can imagine our plight. If one can further dream the nightmare of a Town Council, which sits with its eyes, ears, and mouth covered like the proverbial non-responsive apes while the innocent receive an unjust punishment, one can understand our anger. We challenge the Gilbert Town Council. If it believes, as has been reported, that the property values in the proposed airport influence area will not go down as a result of title attachments and forced disclosure, then we ask its to put its money where its collective mouths are. We ask them to similarly tag their own properties and to take the same risk they are ever so willing to impose on us. Moreover, we ask them to set aside $20 million dollars in a reserve fund so that if they are proven wrong, the homeowners they harmed can be reimbursed. It is high time to take some measure of responsibility for this grand experiment with people's lives.
PUBLICATION: The Buffalo News (Buffalo, NY)
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: Local, Pg. 7B
BYLINE: Lisa Haarlander
DATELINE: Depew, New York
The Buffalo News reports Depew, New York, officials will consider banning train whistles at a public hearing Monday.
According to the article, train whistles produce shrill blasts that can momentarily match the noise of a rock concert or a pneumatic drill. Village Trustee John M. Fragale called for the hearing to listen to residents' reaction to the frequent whistle blasts. After calling various state and federal agencies, Fragale believes that the village has the power to ban them. Fragale said he also is investigating alternatives to banning whistles, such as consolidating crossings. "Is this a real nuisance or not?" he asked. "If these crossings have all this safety equipment, why are we being redundant and having that whistle blow?"
The article reports railroad officials call train whistle bans dangerous -- pointing out that in New York State last year 39 people were killed and 66 injured in railroad accidents. Conrail spokesman Robert Libkind said trains blow the whistles before every crossing as a safety precaution in case someone is on the tracks. "It is a matter of public safety," he said. Blowing whistles saves lives, according to a Federal Railroad Administration study in 1995. The report encompassed public crossings on 17 rail lines in 27 states. The study found a 30 percent drop in accidents at crossings when whistles were blown. "The bottom line was that fatalities do increase when there is no whistle," said Marmie Edwards, spokeswoman for Operation Lifesaver, a nonprofit group that educates the public about railroad safety. According to federal statistics, a person is hit by a train every 100 minutes somewhere in the country; 90 percent of accidents occur because people trespass or try to beat a train.
The article states Depew isn't the first municipality to consider banning train whistles. In 1992, about 160 cities in 24 states banned train whistles, according to the Federal Railroad Administration. More current figures were not available. Residents of Gould Avenue -- right next to one of three railroad lines in Depew -- seem mainly resigned to train whistles blowing five to six times a day, although their tolerance level differs. "It doesn't bother us. I'd rather have the trains behind us than the planes overhead," said Lynne Martin, referring to the noise residents near the airport have to tolerate. She and her husband, Chet, said whistles should be blown as a safety precaution. "It gets the kids off the tracks," Mrs. Martin said. But even after living with whistles for 33 years, Stephania Balcerzak of Gould Avenue still finds them a nuisance. "If you watch TV, you have to put it on full volume," she said. "It would be a warning, but they're too loud . . . They're very annoying."
PUBLICATION: The Orange County Register
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Pg. B01
BYLINE: Mary Ann Milbourn
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Bill Kogerman, head of an anti-airport group
The Orange County Register reports a new effort is under way to start commercial air-cargo flights at the proposed El Toro airport next year. Airport opponents vow to fight the effort.
According to the article, Gary Proctor, chairman of Orange County's El Toro Airport Citizens Advisory Commission, said he will ask county staff today to prepare a plan for cargo service at the Marine base, which closes July 3. Initial service would be limited to two cargo carriers offering four daily flights each. Such service could show how El Toro can operate with flight restrictions that keep noise levels from becoming intrusive, he said. "The (airport opponents) don't believe us when we tell them we're going to fly out on certain runways during certain hours and that certain (noisy) aircraft won't be allowed," Proctor said. "We're going to prove that with air cargo. "
The article reports Bill Kogerman, head of an anti-airport group, said Proctor can expect a fight. He said the opposition would sue to require a full environmental-impact report for air-cargo service. Opponents also will challenge the Citizen Advisory Commission's authority to get involved with air-cargo planning, he said.
PUBLICATION: The Patriot Ledger
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 23C
BYLINE: Ray McEachern
DATELINE: Quincy, Massachusetts
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Mary Venuti, resident; Thomas Smollett, resident
The Patriot Ledger reports city officials in Quincy, Massachusetts, are taking action to give residents relief from noise made by barges unloading oil and early morning dumpster pickups.
According to the article, city license officials are helping residents from Quincy Point and those from South Quincy with noise nuisance problems. In Quincy Point, the noise is caused when ocean barges unload oil at the Sprague Energy tank farm terminal. Diesel pumps sometimes operate non-stop for up to 24 hours at a stretch while unloading oil barges. According to Mary Venuti and several of her neighbors at the 300-unit Captain Cove condominiums, diesel pumps worked through the Labor Day weekend unloading a barge, drowning out cookouts with a loud roar, spoiling sleep, and forcing residents to close their windows. To demonstrate the noise level, condominium resident Thomas Smollett played a recording of loud droning diesel pumps he taped on his balcony 800 feet from the barge. Smollett said the noise, which reached 118 decibels, was so loud it could be classified as environmentally unhealthy. He suggested the use of sound-deadening housing over the engines to muffle the sound.
The article reports that when Ward 2 Councilor Daniel Raymondi urged city license officials to check the noise, board Chairman Joseph Shea named a panel to work with Sprague. Shea said Fire Chief Thomas Gorman, who is a member of the license board, will head the group, which will include Shea, building Inspector Joseph Prondak, Sprague terminal manager Steve Cipullo, and Sprague company engineers. Shea said he is hopeful the panel can come up with a solution within a month.
The article states South Quincy residents are losing sleep over a different kind of noise. Neighbors in the Franklin Street area said early morning rubbish dumpster pickups by Browning Ferris Industries trucks have been waking people up between 5:15 and 7 a.m., despite repeated complaints. Representatives of BFI told the board they will cooperate with the city by seeking to reschedule the pickups later in the day. When Raymondi asked the board to ban such early morning pickups, Police Chief Thomas Frane said since the city already has an ordinance that bans noise before 7 a.m., officers can be alerted to watch early dumpster pickups in the Franklin Street area. Frane said he realized that BFI must make early pickups in some areas to avoid traffic and meet schedules, but he said the noise ordinance could be applied "citywide" to prevent pre-7 a.m. pickups at firms that abut residential neighborhoods. The chief said if the problems persist, BFI could be ticketed with $50 fines.
PUBLICATION: Sarasota Herald-Tribune
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: Local/State, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Kellie Mcmaster
DATELINE: Sarasota, Florida
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports authorities could start procedures to close a nightclub in Sarasota, Florida, after neighbors charge the club violated a noise agreement.
According to the article, attorneys on both sides of the OuterLimits nightclub noise issue say there is still room to negotiate a solution rather than shut down the club. But neighbors of the club on U.S. 41 recently filed complaints about excessive noise, meaning that the club violated an agreement, and authorities could start procedures to close the nightclub. Two residents filed complaints with the Manatee County Sheriff's Office after a band performed at the club Monday night. Senior Assistant County Attorney Jim Minix said he will talk to the club's attorney, Michael Mosca, before filing any motions in court or taking any further legal action. "We may have an agreement as opposed to legal action - again," he said Wednesday.
The article reports the county and the club have been battling over how to keep the noise down outside the club. The two sides reached an agreement and avoided taking the matter to court two weeks ago. But the agreement states that the club must keep the noise below a certain decibel level, and if two or more people complain, the county can file motions to have the club closed. Deputies served the club's manager Monday night with a notice to appear in court, but Mosca said the club kept the level within the limit and monitored the sound throughout the evening. Mosca said that it's a matter of taste, not the amount of sound. "Probably if you had the Philadelphia Philharmonic (Orchestra) playing Beethoven's Fifth, people wouldn't have been complaining," he said.
The article states according to Minix, it's up to Mosca to prove that the club was within the limits set in the agreement. "I've received official information that there were complaints, and if no adequate response is forthcoming, we will file a motion with the court," he said.
PUBLICATION: The Times-Picayune (New Orleans, LA)
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: National; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Steve Ritea
DATELINE: Mandeville, Louisiana
The Times-Picayune reports Mandeville, Louisiana, residents still oppose plans for a go-cart track at a local miniature golf course, despite the owner's pitch that it will offer a positive recreational alternative for the area's teens.
According to the article, owner Bryan Horridge says adding a go-cart track to his Mandeville miniature golf course is good for his business and a good alternative for St. Tammany Parish's restless teen-agers. But residents in the nearby Fontainebleau subdivision say 10 miniature cars screaming around a 650-foot track at all hours is not a good way to preserve property values or the peace. Close to 75 residents attended a meeting of Mandeville's Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, and most opposed the plans for a go-cart track at Putt-Putt on West Causeway Approach. The commission will make a recommendation to the City Council, which has the final say, on Sept. 22.
The article reports Horridge brought a sound study to the meeting that showed noise from go-carts to be at 40 decibels, 25 decibels less than the music he plays outdoors at Putt-Putt, which he said has never generated complaints. The track also would be more than 250 feet away from the nearest home, Horridge said. Since he opened Putt-Putt, Horridge said, he has gone to great lengths to address neighbors' concerns, spending at least $3,000 to shield homes from noise and lights at his batting cages. I'd like to know one thing I haven't done, he said. William Decker, Horridge's attorney, suggested when people think go-carts, they remember the noisy ones from when they were kids. That's not the go-cart that's going to be used here, he said. Horridge presented a petition signed by some 4,000 of his customers who want the track, but commission member Trilby Lenfant questioned the ages of those who signed. Aren't most of them kids? she asked.
The article states Fontainebleau residents presented their own petition with 200 signatures. But regardless of the number of signatures, city officials say it doesn't change the fact that Horridge made a promise five years ago, when he first built Putt-Putt, that there would be no go-carts. When the city annexed the 2.29-acre property in 1994, Zoning Chairman Nixon Adams said, it rezoned the property with that specific instruction. I think that's sort of a contract, he said, and it's what we agreed to. Mayor Eddie Price praised Horridge for doing a fantastic job with Putt-Putt, but, nonetheless, they made a commitment not to put go-carts there, he said. And we made a commitment to the people of Fontainebleau. Decker, Mandeville's former city attorney, said the city suckered Horridge into accepting a planned commercial district zoning plan, which gives Mandeville greater discretion over what can go there.
PUBLICATION: The Associated Press
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: Sports News
BYLINE: P.J. Slinger
DATELINE: Mankato, Minnesota
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Clell Hemphill, resident
The Associated Press reports as personal watercraft grow in popularity in Minnesota, they are attracting more scrutiny with regards to noise and safety issues.
According to the article, personal watercraft are big business in Minnesota. They also are the source of annoyance for people who hear the machines' continuous buzz from their lake homes and cottages. The noise created by the machines is the biggest complaint against personal watercraft, according to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. However, DNR officials said personal watercraft generally operate at less than the state's 82 decibel watercraft noise limit. "It's no worse than other boats or the fishermen who are up at 5 a.m.," said Kay John of Burnsville, who has a cottage on Lake Jefferson. Kay and her husband, Bill, own two personal watercraft. "People want peace and quiet on the lake, and we want peace and quiet," Bill John said. "But everybody's got their thing that they enjoy. It's the ones that don't act responsibly that create problems for others. We don't want to see people abuse it." The Minnesota Legislature considered banning personal watercraft use on all lakes smaller than 200 acres, but the ban never made it onto the final bill.
The article reports part of the noise issue is that there are more personal watercraft on lakes every year. The DNR said there were about 5,000 new personal watercraft registered last year, an 18 percent growth from the previous year. There are several new rules this year for personal watercraft operators, such as the no-wake zone (5 mph) increase from 100 feet to 150 feet away from non-motorized boats, shorelines, docks, swim rafts or anchored boats. Also, no personal watercraft can be on the water before 9:30 a.m. and must be off one hour before sunset, a two-hour decrease in usage time. Larry Walters, who has had a cottage on Lake Jefferson, said the seven new rules are helpful but still don't stop an inherently dangerous activity. "Very few of the people are breaking the rules, but even they don't realize what they are doing to the boaters," he said. "I think they're dangerous because they can cut back so quickly. Speedboats can't dodge them." In 1997, Minnesota had 62 accidents involving personal watercraft, including two deaths and several serious injuries, according to the Department of Natural Resources. Personal watercraft last year were involved in 37 percent of reported boating accidents. Also, more tickets are written, percentage-wise, to personal watercraft operators than to boaters, according to DNR conservation officer Dave Mador. He said part of the disparity is because there are more rules for personal watercraft than boats.
The article states Clell Hemphill, who lives on Duck Lake, thinks personal watercraft manufacturers could prevent complaints by limiting the noise emitted by the machines. "It would be just like putting a muffler on your car," Hemphill said. "I think they should be able to do that from a manufacturer's standpoint. There should also be a speed limit put on them." Hemphill said the stricter rules are not being heeded. "I haven't noticed any big changes," he said. "It's much worse than it was 10 years ago. People are still staying too close to shore."
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Shamus Toomey
DATELINE: Wheeling, Illinois
The Chicago Daily Herald reports the village board of Wheeling, Illinois unanimously approved a new subdivision on a piece of land north of Palwaukee Municipal Airport.
According to that article, the 20-acre site land just north of Palwaukee Municipal Airport could have homes on it as early as next summer following the Wheeling village board's unanimous approval of a new subdivision Tuesday night. The proposed River Mills subdivision will have 23 town house buildings and eight, three-story condominium buildings, officials said. The site sits on a parcel of unincorporated land north of the airport. An annexation agreement worked out between the village and the developer, Burnside Construction, likely will be passed by the village board later this month, village attorney Jim Rhodes said.
The article reports in the annexation agreement there is a clause requiring the developer to notify each future River Mills homeowner of the complex's proximity to Palwaukee Airport. The agreement pre-empts future litigation by future River Mills residents concerning noise from the airport, Rhodes said. "It prevents them from raising the issue of noise because they know beforehand that there's going be aircraft that are going over," Rhodes said. The clause, which the developer said the village insisted on, was suggested nearly a decade ago in a noise study commissioned for the airport. The River Mills subdivision is the first to enter into such an agreement in Wheeling, and the village plans to ask future residential developers looking to build near Palwaukee for the same, Rhodes said.
PUBLICATION: Federal Department and Agency Documents
DATE: September 9, 1998
DATELINE: Washington, DC
The Federal Department and Agency Documents reports airplanes in the United States are ahead of the required deadlines to transition to quieter aircraft, reports Secretary of Transportation Rodney E. Slater.
According to the article, with the continued removal of noisier aircraft and the introduction of quieter airplanes to the U.S. fleet, approximately 80 percent of airplanes operating in the United States today are the quieter Stage 3 aircraft, Secretary of Transportation Rodney E. Slater reported today. "President Clinton is committed to protecting the environment, and I am pleased by this progress," said Secretary Slater. For the sixth consecutive year, the aircraft fleet has been ahead of the requirement to transition to quieter aircraft. The Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 requires that all airplanes meet quieter Stage 3 noise levels by the year 2000. Secretary Slater's report to Congress shows that operators exceeded the Dec. 31 interim compliance requirement. Operators either had to reduce noisier Stage 2 airplanes by 50 percent or have 65 percent of the quieter Stage 3 airplanes in their fleets. In the past year, 225 noisier Stage 2 aircraft have been removed from service while 554 quieter Stage 3 aircraft are engaged. FAA Administrator Jane F. Garvey said, "I applaud the continued commitment of airplane operators and manufacturers. The operators continue to meet or exceed interim compliance dates and manufacturers continue to develop quieter aircraft and engines." Some operators are complying with the Stage 2 airplane phaseout by installing Stage 3 noise level hushkits to their Stage 2 fleet. Many airline operators have already met the criteria for the next interim compliance date, which is Dec. 31, 1998.
PUBLICATION: The Tampa Tribune
DATE: September 9, 1998
SECTION: Pasco, Pg. 1
BYLINE: John Temple
DATELINE: Pasco, Florida
The Tampa Tribune reports Pasco, Florida, is considering a ban on all-night outdoor music shows after a recent event resulted in dozens of drug arrests and noise complaints.
According to the article, Zen Fest may have to find a new home next year. Pasco Commissioner Pat Mulieri wants to ban all-night music festivals after the event this weekend resulted in dozens of drug arrests and noise complaints. "It's difficult for me to see how an all-night event like this can be positive," Mulieri said. On Tuesday, Mulieri asked County Administrator John Gallagher to evaluate an ordinance Polk County passed last year banning outdoor concerts between 11 p.m. and 10 a.m. Polk County officials banned such events after Zen Fest '97, held at the Polk County Fairgrounds, resulted in more than 50 arrests and hundreds of noise complaints.
The article reports this year, the event was held at Festival Park, two miles south of Zephyrhills. Twenty-seven people were charged with drug possession, according to Pasco sheriff's office reports. About a dozen residents called Festival Park to complain about the noise, said Mike Sierra, the park's owner. Pasco officials told commissioners the promoters were aware of Pasco's noise ordinance, which allows sheriff's deputies to cite noise polluters who disturb "the peace, quiet and comfort of a neighborhood." Sierra complained that promoters didn't respond when he asked them to point speakers south instead of north, toward Zephyrhills.
The article states Mulieri asked County Attorney Karla Owens to look into what rights the county has to bar an event with "a history of actions that compromise ... health and safety." She will discuss the issue during the commissioners' meeting today. "We have good concerts - . . . - and I don't want to curtail those events that portray a positive image for Pasco County," Mulieri said. "But I am for curtailing activities like Zen Fest."
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: September 8, 1998
SECTION: Nws; Pg. 10
BYLINE: Gilbert Jimenez
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Sun-Times reports Chicago's Fly Quiet program produces negligible results as night flights from O'Hare Airport increase.
According to the article, data shows that the number of O'Hare night flights during the first quarter of 1998 increased by 12 percent, and critics say any decrease in noise per plane is offset by the increased number of aircraft. According to city data from the first quarter of 1998, noise over the Fly Quiet areas increased by about 12 percent, or 6 decibels, an indication that more planes flew over those areas than during the same period last year.
The article reports some residential areas near O'Hare Airport have experienced slightly less noise overnight since the city's Fly Quiet program began in June, 1997. Under Fly Quiet, the city asks air traffic controllers and pilots to use flight paths over less populated areas between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Fowler said about 70 percent of night-hours pilots were complying with the request to use the alternative runways. During those hours, the average noise level over residential areas has decreased by 0.74 decibels, or 1.3 percent -- not enough difference for the human ear to distinguish. Mark Fowler, head of the city's noise compatibility commission, acknowledged that a change of at least 3 decibels is needed to be noticed.
The article reports while the Fly Quiet program continues, the number of hotline complaints increases. The number of nighttime complaint calls increased. For the first four months of 1997, 170 callers phoned in 424 complaints. During the same period this year, 2,242 callers filed 6,316 gripes about late-night airplane noise.
PUBLICATION: Nottingham Evening Post
DATE: September 8, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg.5
DATELINE: Nottingham, England
The Nottingham Evening Post reports Richard Ramsey of Nottingham, England, has been fined for two breaches of a noise abatement notice.
According to the article, Richard Ramsey was ordered to pay a total of GBP 260, including GBP 60 costs by city magistrates. Ramsey did not attend yesterday's hearing and the case was proved in his absence. Caroline Hawkins, prosecuting on behalf of Nottingham City Council, said: "Throughout 1997, the environmental health department received numerous complaints of noise nuisance emanating from a house in Rose Close, St. Ann's." An noise abatement notice was served on Ramsey on January 30 this year, but a council official was called out again on February 3 and February 12. On both occasions the official heard loud music coming from Ramsey's house, and on one occasion she could feel the vibrations through the floor in a neighboring house, the court was told.
PUBLICATION: Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN)
DATE: September 8, 1998
SECTION: Kim Ode; Pg. 4E
BYLINE: Kim Ode
DATELINE: Minneapolis, Minnesota
The Star Tribune reports an unintended consequence of the pilots' strike against Northwest Airlines: natural quiet beneath the airport flight paths in Minneapolis, Minnesota
According to the article, the chance to get reacquainted with the sound of a quiet world without airplanes is an unexpected result of the Northwest Airlines pilots' strike. When a jet flies over these days, it's a rare sight. The skies over neighborhoods such as those around Lake Nokomis aren't empty, but the noise from single-engine planes seems like "skittering mosquitoes, and the occasional drub-drub-drub of a cargo plane seems almost quaint." Even residents who considered themselves outside the prime noise zone have been struck by how the quiet has taken on a different quality. When a plane flies over now, it can be long heard droning into the distance.
According to the article, there's been a lot of talk about noise this summer. After planes, the chief target is personal watercraft. The peace and quiet of a lake is destroyed anytime these craft roar around and around. But sales are declining, and many lake associations have adopted restrictions as to the times of day these machines can operate. Leaf-blower season is nearly here, and that usually spurs a burst of activity in the offices of Minneapolis Environmental Management, the enforcement agency for the city noise ordinance. The ordinance states that anyone making noise 10 decibels above the accepted noise level between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., is in violation. Between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., the noise threshold is 5 decibels above the accepted noise level. Anne Stahn of the Environmental Management offices said that most of this summer's complaints have been about boom boxes and car stereos, which shouldn't be audible beyond 50 feet, and construction site activity, which shouldn't start before 7 a.m. Another seasonal complaint is against machine shops or auto body repair shops that open their doors in the summer to keep their workers cool. "They're these little businesses scrunched into residential neighborhoods and installing an air conditioning system would be thousands of dollars," Stahn said. The city first notifies the business of the complaint, then talks with them with the intent of reaching some compromise. Mediation services are available. Stahn said another common complaint is about a neighbor's air conditioning unit being too loud. About half the time, the complainant goes directly to the city enforcers instead of knocking on the neighbor's door. "About 80 percent of the time, there's something else going on between them," Stahn said. "If it wasn't the air conditioner, it would be something else." The article concludes that noise issues raise some "good questions about what we should tolerate as neighbors, as well as how we should consider the impact our choices have on others."
PUBLICATION: Aviation Week and Space Technology
DATE: September 7, 1998
SECTION: Air Safety; Vol. 149, No. 10; Pg. 177
BYLINE: Geoffrey Thomas
DATELINE: Perth, Australia
Aviation Week and Space Technology reports Australia's government shared- noise strategy significantly reduces capacity at Sydney's Kingsford Smith Airport while increasing safety concerns.
According to the article, political interference in the air traffic control procedures at Australia's Sydney airport, aimed at more evenly distributing noise pollution, has significantly reduced safety margins, according to a recent report by Australia's Bureau of Air Safety Investigation. BASI, safety experts, controllers and pilots have called for the government to abandon or at least modify the complex noise -sharing procedures for approach and departures to Sydney's Kingsford Smith Airport. Under orders from the Australian Government, air traffic control rotates runways almost regardless of prevailing wind conditions. Noise at Sydney Airport has been a major political problem for both federal and state governments and local councils, with many closely contested electorates located under the flight paths for the airport.
The article reports increasing the difficulties for ATC are a series of "ludicrous" and conflicting approach and departure routes, according to safety analysts. The airport also practices simultaneous parallel and cross runway operations and has general aviation aircraft and 747s using the same runways, slowing traffic flow dramatically. Sydney has no specified short takeoff and landing runway. Australian aircraft separation standards dictate a light aircraft must be 7 naut. mi. behind a 747 when turning on final. On touchdown this separation increases to 10 naut. mi. because of approach speed differences.
The article states a new long-term operating plan introduced earlier this year capped movements at 80 per hour, with the intention of sharing the noise pollution during off-peak times through the middle of the day. Bowing to increasing community pressure, Minister of Transport Mark Vaile directed the ATC to distribute the noise throughout the entire day, significantly reducing the number of daily movements the airport can handle. The change brought strong criticism and warning from Ansett and Qantas airlines. They suggested the government policy could strangle Australia's premier hub.
The article goes on the say the BASI report, prompted after three breakdowns in aircraft separation standards occurred, says aircraft have been requested to operate with crosswinds of up to 25 kt. which has "reduced safety margins" for aircraft and "increased the complexity of the surrounding airspace." ICAO guidelines stipulate a maximum 15-kt. crosswind and 5-kt. tailwind for dry runways. BASI recommended that Airservices Australia, which controls ATC, and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority reconsider the current policy of operating runways with up to 25-kt. crosswinds "when other runways are available."
According to the article, the report also found that "flight crews have been exposed to high workloads within the airspace of the Sydney Terminal Area due to the late assignment of the landing runway." Air Traffic Controllers have also been "subject to significant and ongoing changes over the past four years and human factors have not been adequately considered within the Sydney Terminal Area" the report said. Overall, BASI said Sydney-area controllers were "demoralized, tired, and overwhelmed by complex flight path changes." Over 90% of controllers said their morale was low. Absenteeism rates have been well above other airports. While the choice of a landing runway still remains with the captain, "bucking the flow" has meant delays of up to 50 min. A Boeing 767 captain requested a longer runway for a transcontinental flight to Perth and had to wait for 50 minutes until a slot was available. Other pilots have complained about the late assignment of runways as well.
PUBLICATION: Evening Herald (Plymouth)
DATE: September 12, 1998
SECTION: Pg.2
BYLINE: Sam Dunn
DATELINE: Plymouth, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Mike Pearse, member of Osbourne Court Residents' Association; Vivien Pengelly, Plymouth councilor
The Evening Herald reports the Plymouth, England, City Council is determined to address the issue of excessive noise from a free festival in 1999 after complaints about this year's event.
According to the article, the three-day Soundwaves extravaganza that drew 80,000 people to Plymouth Hoe brought misery to residents who live near the festival site. They had to keep windows shut and wear earphones to watch the television. Osbourne Court Residents' Association member Mike Pearse protested against the continued 'excessive' noise levels, and said some of the residents of Osbourne Court had taken a holiday during the festival just to get away. "At no time could we escape the noise, " said Pearse, 62. "We had to keep our windows shut which, with the hot weather, made life unbearable. We will be taking a petition round to other residents in the area to make this protest heard."
The article reports Plymouth councilor Vivien Pengelly pledged to look at ways of reducing further the noise disturbance caused by the festival, saying "residents in Plymstock, four-and-a-half miles away, found they couldn't even watch their television in peace - that's a real concern." She added: "We are going to sit down and thrash out a solution to the problem." Councilor David Viney agreed that, despite the small number of official complaints, the ability of the volume to travel meant it had to be carefully considered for next year. He said: "1999 is of course the eclipse year, and there will be an extended spell of events up on the Hoe. And that may mean extra disturbance for those who can hear it."
The article went on to report leisure committee head Chris Mavin urged members not to ignore the economic benefits of the three-day festival because of a few complaints. He said: "We will do everything in our power to address the issue of loud noise, but we can't ignore the impact of 80,000 people on Plymouth and its business. National coverage was received and it allowed us to establish Plymouth as the city of festivals. But all complaints will be taken on board."
PUBLICATION: The Arizona Republic
DATE: September 11, 1998
SECTION: Northwest Valley Community; Pg. 2
BYLINE: Bill Lipscomb
DATELINE: Surprise City, Arizona
The Arizona Republic published the following letter to the editor from Bill Lipscomb of Surprise City, Arizona. In his letter, Lipscomb warns citizens of the dangers of allowing residential growth under the flight paths at Luke Air Force Base. Lipscomb wrote:
If you can't say something nice about us . . . then we won't talk with you at all!
That's apparently what the mayor and council members communicated at a recent Surprise City Council meeting.
It seems that they got all ruffled by an editorial in the Daily News-Sun titled "Unbridled growth threatens Luke." Heck, that's quite a mature and responsible response: You either treat us nice, or we won't do business with you!
I believe, though, that the article simply attempted to illustrate how a city government (Surprise and El Mirage) can disrupt and/or completely shut down military operations as effectively as a terrorist attack. In this case, the weapon of choice was not a bomb, but allowing residential growth to develop right next to and under the flight paths of Luke's fighter jets. (Mayor Joan Shafer and City Council members got in a huff because they felt -- or wanted us to think they felt -- that the newspaper was calling them terrorists.)
So, how is it that residential growth can shut down an Air Force base? Let me explain.
When F-16 jets take off, they make a lot of noise, especially if they are in afterburner. That noise is measured in decibels (db). Beginning at 65-69 dbs, this noise level catches your attention. As the levels increase, so does people's agitation.
Luke is intensely aware of this situation and has tried to persuade local cities from approving residential developments within these zones of high jet noise (referred to as Aircraft Noise Contours of 65, 70, 75 and 80 dbs) surrounding the base, particularly as they stretch toward Surprise and El Mirage from the takeoff runways on the base.
Why is Luke concerned? Because of the probability of an increasing number of complaints from homeowners buying and living in new residential communities located within the noise contours. Complaints from the general public could lead to this being a factor if another round of closures by the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRACC) takes place. In other words, Luke could be shut down.
I'd submit to you that noise can be the undoing of Luke. But, while noise can offend the eardrum, there is another reason homes should not be built under the flight paths of jets. Remember, all this noise emanates from F-16 jet engines. The high-decibel contour zones are highest right under the flight paths and gravitate decreasingly outward from there. While this engine noise can be quite loud, it won't measure up to the noise created by a jet slamming into a neighborhood.
Remember, things that fly have been known to come down on their own accord. It has happened at other bases. I personally watched a B-52 take off at March AFB and plow into the ground just a couple miles off the end of the runway, where now exists a residential community. (The base was realigned by BRACC -- B-52 and KC-10 aircraft were moved out just a few years ago because of all the residential developments going up adjacent to the base.)
Should that terrible incident ever occur, then at whom should the finger of blame be pointed: at Luke AFB, which has been flying here since the '40s when the area was only sparsely populated, or at the mayor and city council members of Surprise and El Mirage who excitedly joined hands with greedy developers (who are in it only for the buck) just to say they were the leaders of growth within their cities?
I think we, as concerned citizens, should insist that our city officials reconsider their plans for residential growth in harm's way, not only for the sake of Luke's future, but for the safety and comfort of the people who entrust them to make wise decisions. And for the potential new home buyers looking at homes in these communities: Beware!
Now, I know that there are legal issues involved in all this (i.e., Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, regarding the taking of property), but I believe that those with serious concern and desire can succeed in doing what's right.
PUBLICATION: New York Law Journal
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: Court Decisions; Pg. 21
DATELINE: New York City, New York
The New York Law Journal reports a case in which a nightclub failed in its challenge to charges of excessive noise violations. The summary, text, and discussion of the case follows:
"Summary New York County Supreme Court Environmental Law:
"Nightclub and owner of the building sought to set aside noise violations. After complaints by an upstairs tenant, Department of Environmental Protection inspectors had taken readings in the club and in the apartment. The violations had originally been thrown out because, as the music was never off, the validity of the readings was questioned. The violations were reinstated by the Environmental Control Board, which found that DEP's procedure for taking ambient readings sufficed. The court upheld reinstatement. IA PART 55 Justice J. Solomon.
"Text of Decision: n1 Although ECB is not named as a respondent, the petition challenges the actions of both DEP and ECB. Accordingly, the petition has been construed by ECB as including it as a respondent.
This dispute concerns the issuance of two Notices of Violation ("NOVs") on April 4, 1996 in response to complaints of excessive noise at petitioner Reminisce Bar and Lounge ("the Club"), a nightclub at 334 East 73rd Street, New York, NY. Petitioner Elliana Properties owns the building in which the Club is located. DEP is an administrative agency which, inter alia, enforces laws, rules and regulations for the purpose of eliminating noise pollution. ECB is an administrative agency which, inter alia, conducts proceedings for the adjudication of laws, rules and regulations relating to noise pollution.
"On April 4, 1996 at approximately 10:30 p.m., DEP inspectors went to the Club to investigate a complaint of excessive noise made by a tenant residing above the Club. The DEP inspectors found that the music being played at the Club exceeded the allowable sound levels set forth in @ 24-241.1(a) of the Noise Code. Following DEP procedures, the inspectors took several noise level readings in the complainant's apartment with the windows closed. One inspector then left the apartment and went into the Club to transmit the music to the other inspector by walkie-talkie so as to verify that the music was coming from the Club. The inspector who remained in the apartment took twelve noise readings, including three ambient readings to determine how much sound from the Club and how much was from noise in the environment or so-called ambient noise. n2 NOVs were issued to the Club and to Elliana Properties.
"n2 Section 24-203(g) of the Noise Code provides that "ambient noise means the all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment, being usually a composite or sounds from many sources near and far."
"The NOVs directed petitioners to appear before the ECE on June 4, 1996. The hearing was adjourned to July 30, 1996. Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ') Amy Slifka conducted the hearing with regard to four NOVs issued to petitioners, n3 including the two issued on April 4, 1996. On August 5, 1996, the ALJ dismissed the April NOVs. She found that because the music was never off, "the test was not conducted properly and the readings are not valid."
"n3 DEP had investigated a prior complaint in February and, as a result, had issued two NOVs. The ALJ dismissed the February NOVs but DEP did not appeal their dismissal.
"By letter to ECB, dated September 5, 1996, DEP requested a sixty day extension of time to file an appeal of the August 5, 1996 decision "due to the review process and the heavy caseload that (DEP) is currently experiencing." Petitioners opposed DEP's request, which ECB nonetheless granted on October 24, 1996. DEP appealed the August 5, 1996 decision on October 31, 1996. On September 24, 1997, ECB reversed the ALJ's decision and found that petitioners violated Administrative Code @ 24-241.1(a) of the New York City Charter by causing and permitting excessive noise, and imposed a civil penalty of $2,400 against each of the petitioners. Petitioners subsequently brought this proceeding.
"Discussion: In reviewing administrative determinations, "the courts cannot interfere unless there is no rational basis for the exercise of discretion or the action complained of is 'arbitrary and capricious.' " Matter of Pell v. Board of Education, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 231 (1974) (citation omitted). Moreover, "an administrative agency's construction and interpretation of its own regulations and of the statutes under which it functions is entitled to the greatest weight." Tonny & Tina, Inc. v. Department of Consumer Affairs, 95 A.D.2d 724 (1st Dept. 1983) aff'd 62 N.Y.2d 671 (1984) (citations omitted).
"Petitioners first argue that ECB did not have the authority to consider DEP's appeal because it was not filed within the 30 days following the mailing of the ALJ's August 4, 1996 decision as required under 15 RCNY @ 31-55(b). n4 This argument is without merit. At the time of DEP's request, there was no rule governing extensions of time to appeal. However, it was ECB's long standing policy to extend the time to appeal where, as in this case, the request was made within the 30 day limit to file the appeal. This court will not interfere with this policy which was a rational and practical response to the absence of any rule governing extensions of time to appeal. n5 Accordingly, ECB rationally granted DEP an extension of time to appeal.
"n4 This rule provides, in part, that "any party, aggrieved by the hearing officer's recommended decision and order may within 30 days of service of the same upon him, file written exceptions with the board and upon all parties."
"n5 In October 1997, ECB amended its rules to include a provision governing the extensions of time to appeal. See 15 RCNY @ 31-72(b) (requiring that an extension of time to file an appeal be supported by "evidence of impossibility or other explanation of an inability to file timely.")
"Petitioners next argue that there was no basis for finding that it violated the noise regulations on April 4, 1996 because the music in the Club was never off. This argument is unavailing. ECB rationally found that DEP's procedure for taking ambient readings in cases like this one, which involve commercial music, was sufficient. In particular, ECB accepted DEP's argument that the music did not have to be turned off to take the ambient readings and found that it "is sufficient that there be periodic drops in volume during the measurement period in order to compute the sound attributable to the Club's music during peak volume levels." And, contrary to petitioners' argument, there was testimony that the ambient readings were taken during lulls in the music. Accordingly, the ECB's determination was not arbitrary or capricious, and the court will not second guess the agency's judgment in its area of expertise.
"The court has considered petitioners' other arguments and found them to be without merit.
"Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
"This constitutes the decision and judgment of the court."
PUBLICATION: Bernama, The Malaysian National News Agency
DATE: September 10, 1998
SECTION: News
DATELINE: Bangkok, China
Bernama, The Malaysian National News Agency reports China's Bangkok Metropolitan Administration plans to regulate noise levels of passenger boats after operators were found to suffer hearing damage.
According to the article, the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration plans to impose a limit on the noise level produced by passenger boats in two major canals following a finding that over half of the boat attendants have hearing problems. City spokesman Mahint Tanboonperm said a study by BMA's public health division conducted in July and August found that 55% of 126 attendants aboard passenger boats on San Saeb and Lat Phrao canals had hearing difficulty.
The article reports The Harbor and the Pollution Control departments will place a limit on the noise from engines aboard the boats in the near future. Operators who violate the rule will be fined or have their licenses suspended. The official limit on the noise level from boat engines is 80 decibels while the engines currently used aboard the boats in the two canals generally produced about 200 decibels, Mahint noted.
Previous week: August 30, 1998
Next week: September 13, 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