PUBLICATION: Ventura County Star
DATE: May 13, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. B01
BYLINE: Gareth W. Dodd
The Ventura County Star reports the Oxnard, California Airport Authority voted to revise their twenty year master plan before sending it to the County Board. Residents said the environmental impact report did not adequately address potential noise problems that could result from increased air traffic. Traffic could increase from about 100,000 aircraft landings to 150,000 in the next 10 years.
The article goes on, saying that the airport administrator and other staff members believed that since there would be no physical expansion, noise levels would remain acceptable. They said that air traffic would still remain well below the 190,000 landings of the mid-1980s, and that a current 75,000 pound weight limit would exclude the noisier jets. They also noting the industry trend toward quieter jets.
The story continues, noting that residents are concerned that the plan sets the needs of the airport ahead of the community, setting the stage for problems in the future. Airport Authority members finally agreed, saying they should decide on more noise mitigation measures.
PUBLICATION: The Times-Picayune
DATE: May 14, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Pg. B1
BYLINE: by Coleman Warner Staff Writer
DATELINE: New Orleans, Louisiana
The Times-Picayune reports that police in New Orleans' French Quarter posted signs in front of St. Louis Cathedral suggesting musicians were not welcome. Musicians are upset, and some signs have disappeared. An attorney who has represented street performers in the past say the signs, intended to bar noise above 78 decibels 50 feet from its source during services, seem to suggest that no noise is acceptable at any time. Parishioners planned to sue for their right to worship without disruptive sound, but they are holding off since the city has posted the signs and promised to enforce the noise limits. The noise limits in the quarter are already above the 70 decibels in other residential areas of New Orleans.
The article goes on to say that some musicians believe that these strong signs signal the beginning of an attempt to remove street musicians from the quarter. In part, the strong nature of the signs may have been due to the fact that parishioners do not always want to be responsible for indicating when a service is in progress.
PUBLICATION: Orlando Sentinel Tribune
DATE: May 15, 1999
SECTION: Local & State; Pg. D1
BYLINE: by Julie Carr Smyth
DATELINE: Orlando, Floridaj
The Orlando Sentinel Tribune reports that an Orlando, Florida airport advisory board approved a rule that would notify prospective home buyers of aircraft noise if the land was previously not zoned residential. Orlando's two airports are voluntarily adopting the rule to avoid expensive noise abatement measures in the future that have cost airports like Atlanta $400 million. Some buyers will be asked to sign waivers saying they won't sue over noise, while
The article continues, noting that in the next twenty years, the airport plans to add a fourth runway, add a new terminal complex, and extend two existing runways -- all of which is expected to double air traffic. While Orlando has only 210 residents in areas that are too noise under federal guidelines (as compared to Miami which has 100,000), development pressures promise to bring people into areas closer to the airport, previously zoned for other uses.
After the airport authority approves the measure, local governments will need to approve it. Then, anyone requesting a title search in a rezoned area will receive noise maps, and developers will be asked to voluntarily inform potential buyers about noise. There are four zones mapped around the two airports, based on average noise and on occasional maximums. In the loudest ring, home buyers will have to provide the airport with an easement allowing planes to fly overhead, while in the zone closest to the airport residents will have to sign a document agreeing not to sue the airport over noise.
PUBLICATION: Orange County Register
DATE: May 13, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. A01
BYLINE: Mary Ann Milbourn
DATELINE: Orange County, California
The Orange County Register reports that a test of commercial jet noise at El Toro Marine Base in Orange County, California has been scheduled for June 4-5. The test is intended to give residents in southern Orange County an idea of the noise they would face if the closing marine base becomes a commercial airport. The test will include seven types of jets taking off from two runways between 7 AM and midnight. Opponents say that since frequency, times of day, and length of the demonstration will all be less than an actual commercial airport, it will be misleading.
The article goes on to say that aircraft will include the smaller Boeing 737-200 to the four engine Boeing 747-400. Three of the county supervisors believe the test will be effective, while the minority is skeptical.
PUBLICATION: Leicester Mail
DATE: May 13, 1999
SECTION: Transport: Air, Pg.1
DATELINE: Leicester, U.K.
The Leicester Mail reports that a county MP from the U.K.s Leicester community is co-sponsoring a parliamentary motion to require local governments to take noise considerations seriously at their regional airports. Other parliamentary members said the legislation would make local governments more responsible and take some pressure off of airports and developers who have traditionally had to fend for themselves regarding noise issues.
The article continued, noting that locals fighting a runway extension at East Midlands Airport were glad for the timely boost to their cause; they want noise monitoring equipment installed whether or not the extension is approved as well as restricted night flights. The airports environmental officers says their environmental impact study has been completed, and recommendations include restrictions on night flights, preferred less disruptive flight paths, and a noise monitoring system.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: May 14, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Zones Desk
BYLINE: Andrew Blankstein
The Los Angeles Times reports that the FAA told California's Burbank airport that a noise study must preclude a night flight ban. The city of Burbank had sought a ban on flights between 10 PM and 7 AM, as well as a limit of the numbers of flights. City officials acknowledged the setback, but says it was committed to pursuing a curfew, either through a study or through a voluntary agreement with the airlines involved. A voluntary curfew already exists, though it is not always followed.
The article continued, saying that the airport authority voted last year to launch such a noise study, and have hired consultants, but they say it would take two years and $2 million. Only four such studies have ever been undertaken, and none of them have ever been finished; in two cases, the airports reached an agreement which meant the study was no longer necessary. An ongoing battle between the airport and the city of Burbank, traced back to a 1973 Supreme Court ruling barring the city from interfering in airport operations, have airport officials asking for more gates and more expansion than the city wants to give; a recent ruling granted the city the ability to block land acquisition for airport expansion.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: May 14, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 6; Editorial Writers Desk
DATELINE: Orange County, California
The Los Angeles Times editorial staff printed an article asking citizens of Orange County, California to accept the "sporadic and short duration" airport noise as many people accept freeway noise. The author tried to appeal to the reader's desire to "travel the world and share with our fellow men and women our cultures."
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: May 14, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. N1
BYLINE: Lee Condon
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports that the FAA has told Burbank, California's Airport that it can not impose a mandatory curfew on night flights, despite the fact that local noise restrictions were imposed in 1977. Burbank believed that these local restrictions, in place before the 1990 Airport Noise and Capacity Act that bars airports from making new noise rules, would allow them to impose a curfew.
The story goes, noting that the FAA's long-awaited decision said that a mandatory curfew could only come after a formal "Part 161" study. City and airport officials say they are committed to performing a study, but that they'd rather try a voluntary curfew. A voluntary curfew is preferred because it is much less expensive than a formal study, though getting the airport's six commercial airlines to agree is easier said than done.
The article continues, saying that Burbank wants a curfew and a noise budget before it will approve construction on a new terminal. Airport officials claim the terminal is several hundred feet to close to both runways, and relocation of the terminal should be expedited in the name of safety. Local representatives disagree on the next step; some say that construction should begin on two new gates, allowing debate over further expansion continue, while others say that the airport must get serious about noise abatement and expansion limits first.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press State & Local Wire
DATE: May 15, 1999
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Powell, Wyoming
The Associated Press State & Local Wire reports that in Powell, Wyoming where a new noise ordinance has just been established, residents still find the County Fairground stock car races too loud. The new ordinance sets a limit of 80 decibels at 100 feet, and readings taken on May 8 showed an acceptable average; however, residents claim that particularly loud times still exceed the limits. A resident suggested planting a row of trees to buffer the race noise, and the Park Board is looking into the possibility.
PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Journal
DATE: May 13, 1999
SECTION: Metro & New Mexico; Pg. D1
BYLINE: John J. Lumpkin
The Albuquerque Journal reports that the owner of La Mesa, New Mexico Albuquerque Aviary will appeal the planning board's decision not to issue him a needed permit. Neighbors complained that his open-roofed aviary, housing at least 600 exotic birds, creates too much noise. He was then told to apply for a permit, which was denied.
The owner maintains that his money-losing business is good for the community --- which had until recently been known for violent crime -- and for birds that might otherwise be euthanized. If he is awarded the permit, he plans to put up foam barriers to block the noise, but city officials say the only real solution may be a year-round enclosure.
PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Journal
DATE: May 14, 1999
SECTION: Metro & New Mexico; Pg. B1
BYLINE: John J. Lumpkin
DATELINE: La Mesa, New Mexico
The Albuquerque Journal reports that the owner of Albuquerque Aviaries, a bird sanctuary for 600-800 exotic birds, has been told by the city planning department that he must enclose his open-roofed business to reduce the noise. After neighbors complained last year, he was told he needed a conditional use permit, which was denied to him unless he constructs a roof which would cost up to $15,000. He plans to take his case to City Council.
Robert Harrison, the owner, gets most of his birds from animal control agencies and owners that no longer wanted the animals. He breeds the birds and sells the offspring to support the business, but he must still offset its losses with profits from his other businesses.
PUBLICATION: Asheville Citizen-Times
DATE: May 13, 1999
SECTION: Local; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Paul Clark
DATELINE: Asheville, North Carolina
The Asheville Citizen-Times reports on the increase of hearing problems in relatively young people. Louder traffic, appliances, and music put younger people at risk, and have created two generations of kids who will lose more hearing than their parents did. Noise-induced hearing loss affects 20 million Americans, and nearly every other U.S. adult believes he or she has lost some hearing, while one in three 18 to 29-year-olds believes the same. There has been a fourteen percent increase in hearing loss ince 1971, and kids as always think they're immune to health problems like hearing loss.
The article continues, quoting the National Center for Medical Rehabilitation as saying "The estimated annual cost of lost productivity, special education and medical care because of untreated hearing loss is $56 billion." Noise levels become dangerous at about 80 decibels, which is well below the 100 decibel volume of many walkmans and 120 decibel rock concerts. Health problems from noise can include stress, high blood pressure, sleep loss, distraction and lost productivity.
PUBLICATION: The Toronto Star
DATE: May 11, 1999
SECTION: News
BYLINE: Mike Funston
DATELINE: Oakville, Toronto
The Toronto Star reports that Canada's CN Rail, which moved some noisy operations to its Oakville railyard in 1998, is appealing a Canadian Transport Agency order to reduce noise in Oakville. A citizen's committee supported the March ruling, which requires CN to monitor noise at the yard twice each month and submit a long-term noise reduction plan. The Federal Court of Appeals will now determine if the appeal has legal grounds, and in the meantime CN will perform noise measurements in compliance with the order.
The article continues, noting that residents have had to dundure "shunting cars banging into each other, ...revving locomotives, regular rumbling of heavy rolling stock and vibrations."
PUBLICATION: St. Petersburg Times
DATE: May 12, 1999
SECTION: Hernando TIMES; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Scott Calvert
DATELINE: Brooksville, Florida
The St. Petersburg Times reports that Clem, a radio shock-jock in Hernando County, Florida visited the County Commission to defend his nightclub against noise complaints. The nightclub is within the local noise ordinance limits, but neighbors are still complaining. Clem has pledged to install noise-blocking panels, and pays off-duty sheriffs deputies to patrol the parking lot on weekends, and insists that he is doing nothing wrong.
The article continues, explaining that Clem hyped the appearance on his talk show for several days, doing his best to get free publicity. Residents followed, telling of disruptive music thumping late into the night, causing lack of sleep which they fear will hurt their job productivity and their children's performance in school. Legal or not, they want the music stopped.
PUBLICATION: Portland Press Herald
DATE: May 9, 1999
SECTION: Sports, Pg. 6D
BYLINE: Mike Recht
DATELINE: Canterbury, New Hampshire
The Associated Press reports that Canterbury, New Hampshire residents are hearing too much noise from Loudon, New Hampshire's 82,000-seat race car track across the highway. Canterbury, known for their living museum "Shaker Village" which celebrates simplicity and spirituality, is closer to the racetrack than most of Loudon and yet has no official voice with which to protest the noise.
The article goes on to note that while most Canterbury residents think race fans have a right to their enjoyment, they want their quiet back too. "The reason I hate that noise is the reason race fans like that noise, " says Canterbury resident Hillary Nelson, who lives 1 1/2 miles from the track. "It's part of an adrenalin rush. When I'm out in my garden or reading a book, I don't want to be pumped up." Some Canterbury residents sued in 1989, when major expansion of the then-small racetrack was first announced, but settled with a stipulation for preservation of trees around the track.
The story continues, noting that before he bought the track there was midweek testing as well as night racing. Also, the speedway gives pays $565,000 in property taxes, hundreds of thousands in state business taxes, $200,000 each hear for police and fire protection and traffic control. He has also purchased a fire truck for Loudon, built a baseball field, and pledged an annual $50,000 for college scholarships, as well as donating money for school projects in Canterbury. Critics argue "you can't buy your way out of a quality of life issue."
PUBLICATION: The News and Observer
DATE: May 11, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. B1
BYLINE: J. Andrew Curliss
DATELINE: Durham, North Carolina
The News and Observer reports that changes to Durham, North Carolina's noise and trespasssing ordinances, aimed at quieting nightclub 'let-out', will go to the City Council for approval. The "Power Company" nightclub has been the setting for a shooting and a major fist-fight in the last year, and city officials made the ordinance changes to give police more authority in keeping closing time quiet and orderly. The changes require patrons -- who can number in the thousands outside the club at closing -- to move to their car 'without delay', and define noise violations more loosely as "unreasonably loud and disturbing." In addition to the problems with violence, neighbors had been complaining about noise from music and unruly patrons.
The article goes on, noting that in the past unreasonably loud noise had to also be above certain decibel limits to be considered a violation. It defines 'unreasonably loud' as "noise that creates an interference with peace or good order and defines 'disturbing noise' as noise that would be perceived by a person of ordinary sensibilities as interrupting the normal peace and calm of the area.
PUBLICATION: HIGH POINT ENTERPRISE
DATE: May 10, 1999
BYLINE: by Paul B. Johnson
DATELINE: Greensboro, North Carolina
High Point Enterprise reports that the FAA is performing a year-long environmental impact study -- which will include data on where noise impacts will be worst -- for a proposed FedEx hub at Piedmont Triad International Airport (PTIA) in Greensboro, North Carolina. FedEx and PTIA claim noise mitigation measures, such as soundproofing airplane engines, will be taken to minimize morning and evening noise disruption. The hub would serve 20-25 planes a day on a third, parallel runway.
The article continues, saying that the Piedmont Quality of Life Coalition are opposed to the third runway. A public information session with the FAA was disappointingly short on data regarding the impact of jet noise on neighborhoods, but the FAA says that is because they have none as of yet. The public will have time to review and respond to the study when it is released.
The story goes on to say that when the study is completed, it will show the worst noise impact areas over an average 24-hour period and allow homes to be designated for possible buyouts; federal regulations require appropriate compensation for those displaced in projects like this one. Other possible compensation would be reimbursement for soundproofing, or money for the right to fly over a home.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press State & Local Wire
DATE: May 12, 1999
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Stamford, Connecticut
The Associated Press State & Local Wire reports that Stamford, Connecticut's noise ordinance will now be enforced by police instead of city health inspectors. The change comes in response to continuing, frequent complaints about car stereos, construction, car alarms, and garbage trucks among other noise sources. Fines can be up to $99 per day, and noise limits depend on the type of zone (residential, commercial, industrial) the noise is in.
The article continues, saying that five officers will be trained to use a decibel meter. They will check noise levels before, during, and after noise violations to build effective evidence against violators. While some violations, like car alarms, will be difficult to enforce because they are often caused accidentally, many others will be quite enforceable.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Tribune
DATE: May 13, 1999
SECTION: Metro Northwest; Pg. 1; Zone: Nw
BYLINE: by Rogers Worthington
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Tribune reports that many U.S. airports and residents are concerned that while quieter planes are available, airlines are continuing to put hush-kits and performance-modification kits on noisier planes. While these kits quiet planes enough to meet year 2000 standards, the newer, quieter planes are up to 3 times as quiet. Some airports, including Chicago O'Hare, are joining Airport Council International in asking the FAA to phase out the older modified planes.
The article continues, noting that airports have already agreed with the FAA that they will not establish any new noise rules to preclude those they have set for the year 2000. This means that airports have fewer options to reduce noise, and makes the older, noisier planes more of an issue. Noise 'kits' are being used more than airport officials anticipated, since low jet-fuel prices allow the operation of older, less fuel-efficient planes to remain cost effective. The European Union plans to remove 'modified' planes from their airports by the middle of 2000, which means that it will be harder for U.S. airlines to resell the older planes and switch to newer models in the future.
The article also notes that 'modified' planes meet noise requirements by averaging measurements from takeoff, arrival, and alongside the runway; this means that while takeoff may exceed noise standards, lower arrival measurements make the average acceptable. 'Modification' can take the form of 'hush kits', which is an acoustical treatment of the engines, or 'performance modification', which moderates (except in emergencies) throttle intensity and wing flap angle to lower noise.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: May 9, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 5
BYLINE: Jon Davis
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Daily Herald reports that 8 of 37 noise monitors at Chicago O'Hare's Airport show that aircraft noise is decreasing. Compared to last year, the first three months of this year were quieter by one or two decibels -- the smallest discernible amount measurable -- and noise complaints were down too. Some of the change may have to do with quieter aircraft being used.
The article continued, saying that many officials were pleased, while acknowledging they still had a long way to go. An attorney for the anti-noise Suburban O'Hare Commission notes that a quarterly average in in fact an average of daily averages; this mathematical distillation can mask many of the loudest events, and make the data misleading. One resident noted that noise impact monitors had before last year said there was no noise impact in certain communities that were clearly affected, saying that noise monitor data should be taken lightly.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: May 12, 1999
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Stamford, Connecticut
The Associated Press State & Local Wire reports that Stamford, Connecticut's noise ordinance will now be enforced by police instead of city health inspectors. The change comes in response to continuing, frequent complaints about car stereos, construction, car alarms, and garbage trucks among other noise sources. Fines can be up to $99 per day, and noise limits depend on the type of zone (residential, commercial, industrial) the noise is in.
The article continues, saying that five officers will be trained to use a decibel meter. They will check noise levels before, during, and after noise violations to build effective evidence against violators. While some violations, like car alarms, will be difficult to enforce because they are often caused accidentally, many others will be quite enforceable.
PUBLICATION: The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
DATE: May 9, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. B7
BYLINE: Shannon Hemann, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
DATELINE: Fayetteville, Arkansas
The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reports that a live band and fireworks at a Pink Floyd Laser Light Show on Fayetteville, Arkansas Fairgrounds was too loud. After residents up to five miles away complained, police visited the fairgrounds and ticketed the man running the show. Police said the noise was above acceptable limits, but they still couldn't legally shut down the concert.
PUBLICATION: Austin American-Statesman
DATE: May 12, 1999
SECTION: Special - Airport Preview; Pg. E9
BYLINE: Debbie Hiott
DATELINE: Richland Estates, Austin, Texas
The Austin American-Statesman reports that officials for a new International Airport in Austin, Texas have proposed a buyout to neighboring homeowners. City Council still has to approve the proposal, which would give homeowners the option of selling to the airport. The airport would then try to sell the homes to others, telling them about the noise concerns and requiring the signing of a waiver for noise issues.
The article continues, noting that affected neighborhoods include several communities of differing property value ranges. Some homeowners are concerned that they couldn't find another house as good as what they have, but are worried about the potential noise. Neighbors in the loudest 65 decibel average noise contours may have the option of a buyout, or other measures such as soundproofing; the measures would be funded in part by the airport's $6 million noise mitigation budget. The airport is also considering flight path alterations that would limit residential exposure to jet noise, and would allow jets to turn over neighborhoods only after a certain elevation is reached.
PUBLICATION: World Airport Week
DATE: May 11, 1999
SECTION: Vol. 6, No. 19
DATELINE: London, England
World Airport Week reports that the European Union has extended its deadline for registration of hushkitted aircraft. The deadline, pushed from April 1999 to April 2000, must be met by hushkitted aircraft if they wish to fly in European Union airspace after April 2002. The ruling is intended to require the use of newer, quieter jets, but compromises with the U.S. who argued their hushkit manufacturers were being discriminated against.
The article continues, saying that the European Union and the U.S. will be working towards agreement on a tougher noise limit through ICAO (the organization representing the world's civil aviation authorities), including the scheduled phase-out of the noisiest jets now in use. The U.S. branch of Airport Council International is urging the FAA to ban the long-term use of marginally compliant (i.e. hushkitted) Stage 3 aircraft and pushing for new aircraft to make full use of quieter technology.
PUBLICATION: The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News
DATE: May 9, 1999
SECTION: Letters To The Editor; Pg. A6
BYLINE: William H. Whittemore
DATELINE: Stuart, Florida
The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News in Stuart Florida printed the following letters to the editor concerning airport noise:
Editor:
After attending both airport meetings and reading numerous letters concerning the noise and air traffic at Witham Field, I am amazed at how much misinformation is spewing forth concerning our airport and air operations in general.
One example that showed complete ignorance of any facts was the man who eloquently described his maid finding black oily soot on his coffee table and blaming it on jets using the airport. Jet fuel leaves a white film similar to Vaseline. I would suggest the gentleman look into west winds and burning sugar-cane fields.
Another was a fellow who was an air traffic controller 17 years ago, saying our airport was unsafe because we don't have radar. We get our radar coverage from Palm Beach. As a pilot with a plane at Witham Field and a home nearby, I would be the first to complain if I thought there was anything unsafe at our airport.
Someone wanted to move the airport west. The cost would be somewhere between $80-$100 million or about $1,500 per household in Martin County.
And there is the problem of the expansion of the airport. Did you know that in 1990 there were 183,824 air operations at Witham Field? In 1997 there were 101,875, and in 1998 there were 100,151 - a decrease of 46 percent over 1990.
Finally, the noise issue which seemed to arouse the greatest emotion of all: A scientific noise study has to be implemented and a noise problem proven before the FAA can act to restrict night flights on Level 1 and 2 jets. The county and the state do not have jurisdiction in this matter. A preliminary noise study is scheduled over Thanksgiving weekend, one of the busiest, in order to paint the worst-case scenario.
I doubt, after the preliminary study, that the FAA will find Witham Field noisy enough to enact a formal study or any noise abatement procedures. So my suggestion to those who don't appreciate the airport is for them to move west or turn down their hearing aids.
William H. Whittemore
Stuart
Previous week: May 2, 1999
Next week: May 16, 1999
Aircraft Noise
Amplified Noise
Effects on Wildlife/Animals
Construction Noise
Firing Ranges
Health Effects
Home Equipment and Appliances
Industrial/Manufacturing
International News
Environmental Justice
Land Use and Noise
Lawsuits
Civil Liberty Issues
Miscellaneous Noise Stories
Noise Ordinances
Noise Organizations Mentioned
Outdoor Events
Noise in Our National Parks/Natural Areas
Regulation
Residential and Community Noise
Snowmobile and ATV Noise
Research and Studies
Technological Solutions to Noise
Transportation Related Noise
Violence and Noise
Watercraft Noise
Workplace Noise
Chronological Index
Geographical Index