PUBLICATION: The Arizona Republic
DATE: October 16, 1999
SECTION: Az Home; Pg. Ah3
BYLINE: Tim Carter
DATELINE: Arizona
The Arizona Republic prints a column that answers questions about building. The builder answers a question about how to soundproof a home that is already built, and then moves on to describe steps that can be taken in the construction of a new house.
The column includes a question about how to soundproof a home that is already built. The builder answers first by noting that to soundproof a house, the real goal is to minimize vibrations: the phenomenon that causes sound.
The builder goes on to note many specific things you can do to an existing house, including: "caulking cracks where walls contact floors, caulking holes inside and around electrical boxes, and installing weatherstripping around doors and windows." These actions will block air leaks that transmit sound.
The builder then notes additional things that can be done while building a new house. Sound-absorbing floor, wall, and duct insulation materials help, but many of his suggestions involve isolating aspects of the house to prevent sound transmission. For example, he suggests putting electrical boxes in separate stud cavities, and isolating "framing members" from all plumbing, furnaces, and other vibrating items. He also suggests using two rows of wall studs that don't touch each other, or at least placing a resilient material between studs and drywall to dampen sound transmission between sides of the wall.
PUBLICATION: The Birmingham Post
DATE: October 16, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 6
DATELINE: Crewkerne, England
The Birmingham Post reports that Crewkerne, England noise officials busted the Mayor, the town councillor, and the chair of the noise abatement committee for a 1:15 AM noise violation. The town postmaster, who left his home to complain about the noise, wants the three to resign.
The article reports that when Crewkerne, England noise officials arrived at Town Hall in response to a 1:15 AM noise complaint, they found the Mayor, the town councillor, and the chair of the noise abatement committee "having a jolly good time." The celebration involved several kegs of beer and three bands, and was being held to celebrate the town manager's husband's 50th birthday.
The article notes that the town postmaster, who left his home to complain about the noise, wants the three to resign. The chair of the noise committee said she was "desperately sorry that people lost their night's sleep." The town clerk, who was not present at the party, has resigned because of frustration over the incident. She said it was obvious that working for this community was a "waste of time", as the party didn't even have a proper permit to sell alcohol.
PUBLICATION: The Columbian
DATE: October 16, 1999
SECTION: Front Page; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Dean Baker
DATELINE: Vancouver, Washington
The Columbian reports that a lawsuit is threatening a proposed amphitheater in Vancouver, Washington. Opponents fear noise as well as traffic, environmental damage and reduced property values. They argue the noise will be inappropriate for 'non-public' events. Officials claim that the events will in fact be public, and that all concerns were addressed in the application.
The article reports that a lawsuit is threatening a proposed amphitheater in Vancouver, Washington. Opponents say the 18,000 seat amphitheater -- to be located on the fairgrounds -- will cause more noise and hold later events than is allowed for 'non-public' events. County officials and the company who has proposed the amphitheater (Q Prime) say the events are public, and thus should be allowed.
The article goes on to note that opponents fear noise as well as traffic, environmental damage and reduced property values. Officials say that all of those concerns were addressed in both the application and in conditions that officials opposed on approval. Q Prime says that it is confident that the courts will decide in their favor.
PUBLICATION: The Courier-Journal
DATE: October 16, 1999
SECTION: News Pg.01a
BYLINE: Sheldon S. Shafer
DATELINE: Louisville, Kentucky
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Mary Rose Evans of the Airport Neighbors' Alliance in Louisville, Duane Parker of the South Louisville Neighborhood Association
The Courier-Journal reports that new noise-reduction strategies have been developed for Louisville International Airport in Kentucky, and will go to the FAA for approval next fall. The article notes that the strategies are in response to a report, which included computer-model data and actual noise measurements. 3,600 homes are now considered to be in high-noise areas.
The article reports that new noise-reduction strategies have been developed for Louisville International Airport in Kentucky, and will go to the FAA for approval next fall. "More than 2,000 homes along Preston Highway could become eligible for federal money" to reduce noise levels from the airport and other sources.
The article goes on to list the actions that may be taken, including relocation of residents or soundproofing of homes, erection of highway noise barriers, limitation of construction in certain zones, redistributing takeoffs and landings, and directing planes to turn only after certain altitudes are reached. The Regional Airport Authority board will hear new noise data as part of a report by a "team of airport officials, users and neighbors". Then, the report will be presented to the FAA.
The article notes that new noise data was presented at a public meeting which was attended by over 150 people. Consultants noted that flights will increase 16.7 percent in the next five years. 1,400 homes that were in high-noise areas in 1993 will still be there by 2005. In addition, Mary Rose Evans, president of the Airport Neighbors' Alliance, said the number of newly affected homes could reach 1,500.
The article notes that the eastern runway of the two is used for 4/5 of takeoffs and landings, based on the 1993 observation that Old Louisville and the University of Louisville was experiencing too much noise. Proposals to redistribute the use of these runways, which would decrease noise along Preston Highway which is closer to the east runway, prompted Evans to say, "'Our goal is not to switch (the noise problems) from one area to another.' Rather, she indicated, the goal is to reduce airport noise to an acceptable level everywhere." Residents seem to prefer the soundproofing option to a buyout of their house.
The article notes, that the airport authority agreed to buy up to 3,000 homes in high-noise areas after the 1993 noise study, and still has 1,250 to buy under that agreement. Since about 3,600 homes are in high-noise areas according to the new noise study, more houses will now be eligible for the buy out. Homes that were eligible in 1993 but are now out of high-noise zones will remain eligible. High-noise areas are defined as having more than 65 decibels of noise as a daily average.
The story mentions that the report was generated from data gathered over 28 days last spring. Most of the data used computer models, but actual noise measurements and flight data confirmed the accuracy of the models. The study cost $975,000 and is being paid for by the airport authority, the FAA and the airlines at the airport. One reason for the study was to remain eligible for federal improvement funding; eligibility requires noise studies every five years.
PUBLICATION: The Florida Times-Union
DATE: October 16, 1999
SECTION: Community News; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Jessie-Lynne Kerr
DATELINE: Jacksonville, Florida
The Florida Times-Union prints a question and answer column dealing with construction, housing, and highway issues. One person asked if the Jacksonville, Florida noise code forbids beepers that signal the backing up of late-night construction equipment. In fact, the beepers are mandated by the federal government to be exempt from local noise laws.
One question submitted to the column asked if the Jacksonville, Florida city noise code could help a resident bothered by beepers that signal the backing up of late-night construction equipment.
The columnist responded that although the city noise code prohibits construction noise louder than 55 decibels, OSHA-mandated backup beepers are exempt for safety reasons.
PUBLICATION: The Gazette
DATE: October 16, 1999
SECTION: Editorial / Op-Ed; B6
BYLINE: Thomasine Mawhood
DATELINE: Montreal, Canada
The Gazette prints a letter to the editor that questions why Aeroports de Montreal (ADM) consistently ignores resident concerns over noise and pollution from area airports. The author criticizes ADM for blaming aircraft manufacturers and keeping takeoff and landing information away from the public. His main concern is that Mirabel Airport, which has a larger buffer zone for crashes, noise, and pollution, is being ignored as an alternative to overusing Dorval Airport.
"Nycol Pageau-Goyette, chairman of Aeroports de Montreal, admits that citizens of municipalities surrounding Dorval airport are upset by the noise of the aircraft (Gazette, Oct. 9).
Instead of accepting responsibility for this noise, since it was ADM that moved trans-border and international flights from Mirabel to Dorval in 1997, Ms. Pageau-Goyette blames the aircraft manufacturers: "We're not building the aircraft. They're the ones making the noise. " This is like saying that when a gun is used in a crime, the manufacturer of the gun should be arrested and not the user.
The same article mentions two remedies to noise that ADM put in place, GEMS (Global Environment Management System) and the Citizens Inquiry Line.
GEMS is a fascinating piece of technology, which, among other capabilities, uses eight sensors to monitor aircraft noise. There is not, however, a sensor for the longest runway that heads west over Pointe Claire. There used to be one, but ADM removed it. Why?
The Citizens Inquiry Line may be useful for finding lost luggage, but it is not capable of answering technical questions. Aircraft exhaust vapourizes at 6,000 feet and not at a few hundred, as one citizen was told. The majority of the planes that fly over the West Island are below 6,000 feet.
Another citizen, annoyed by the incessant landings on the runway closest to her, enquired about the number and frequency of landings per runway (there are three). She was told that this information was not available to the public. Why not?
Many people move to the West Island to escape the noise and pollution of larger municipalities. Thanks to ADM, noise and pollution have caught up to them: 1,000 additional spaces for cars at the airport, a 30-per-cent increase in highway traffic, trains are longer and international aircraft are larger, noisier and pollute more.
Why does ADM persist in ignoring Mirabel airport with its huge buffer zone for crashes and expansion?"
PUBLICATION: Sacramento Bee
DATE: October 16, 1999
SECTION: Editorials; Pg. B7
BYLINE: Claudia Smith Brinson
DATELINE: Columbia, South Carolina
The Sacramento Bee prints a column that discusses noise pollution in our national parks. The column discusses air-tour noise, raft-motor noise, and other problems in our national parks. She mentions that the National Park Service is currently drafting a policy that will require all parks to monitor their noise and establish natural sound levels as well as sources of the most intrusive human-made sounds.
The column discusses noise pollution in our national parks. The columnist mentions the 1987 National Parks Overflights Act, and the FAA's 1988 regulations in response to the Act. The regulations included flight-free zones over Grand Canyon National Park and minimum altitudes. New proposals "would limit sightseeing flights to 88,000 a year" for the $375-million air-tour industry in southern Nevada.
The article notes that in the late 1970s, park officials considered eliminating motors from the Colorado River. Although that idea was scrapped because of tour operator protests, new regulations are again being proposed that may limit motor use on the river for the $25-million tour industry there.
The article also notes that snowmobile roads in Yellowstone provide paths for bison which unknowingly walk out of their parks to rancher land; ranchers killed at least 1,000 last year because they are afraid of diseases that bison carry that affect livestock.
The article discusses Florida's Everglades and other national parks which are currently being monitored to establish natural sound levels as well as sources of the most intrusive human-made sounds. The National Park Service is currently drafting a policy that will require all parks to similarly monitor their noise.
PUBLICATION: The San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: October 16, 1999
SECTION: Local Pg. B-8
BYLINE: Mark Arner
DATELINE: Hillcrest, California
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that a resident of Hillcrest, California who has repeatedly complained about noise from night construction caused by Caltrans will probably not get relief. After approaching the highway patrol and the city attorney's office, it seems that noise from Caltrans' work has remained under the 86 decibel limit allowed by the state. Although the city may have stricter laws, it is out of city jurisdiction because the construction is taking place on Caltrans' right of way -- "even if its noise can be heard beyond its property."
The article reports that a resident of Hillcrest, California has repeatedly complained about noise from night construction that wakes him. The noise comes from Caltrans work on Route 163. The resident has urged the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to "carry out a citizen's arrest on his behalf." Officers submitted his complaints to city authorities.
The article goes on to note that the resident believes that the construction crews have broken local and state laws that limit excessive noise and forbid disturbing of the peace. CHP officers examined the site but did not halt work; they did, however, submit the complaint to the San Diego City Attorney's office. That office, in turn, said that because the construction is taking place on Caltrans' right of way, it is out of city jurisdiction -- "even if its noise can be heard beyond its property." The City Attorney's office did not know whether general state laws forbidding disruptions of the peace would apply in this case.
The article notes that the construction crews monitor their own noise levels. Although they are permitted to reach 86 decibels, they did not exceed 76 on the nights in question. Officials at Caltrans say that the heaviest work on the highway is now done.
PUBLICATION: Seattle Post-Intelligencer
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. C14
BYLINE: Kery Murakami P-I Reporter
DATELINE: Seattle, Washington
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that Seattle's new noise ordinance is almost in effect, but that the Mayor and the City Council still haven't agreed on a few issues. They must agree on whether music clubs will be given warnings before citations are issued, and when or whether protesters will be allowed to use bullhorns and other amplifiers. The Council seems willing to compromise on both issues to get the ordinance approved by the Mayor.
The article reports that Seattle's new noise ordinance is almost in effect, but that the Mayor and the City Council still haven't agreed on a few issues. One issue is the rights of protesters. One labor organization in the city believes that bullhorns and other amplifiers should not be restricted for protesters at all, while the Mayor believes they should be allowed during the day. The Council inadvertantly passed the ordinance with a complete ban on such devices, but a representative says they are drafting changes to clarify only a night ban between 11 PM and 5 AM.
The article notes that another issue is the protection of the city's music industry. The Mayor wants to require warnings before citations are made, so music clubs aren't as vulnerable. Club owners in the area are worried that even that isn't enough, since the definition of noise is too vague. Council representatives say that they could likely find a compromise with the Mayor to provide for such warnings.
PUBLICATION: Seattle Post-Intelligencer
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: Editorial, Pg. A16
DATELINE: Seattle, Washington
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer prints an editorial which supports the Seattle City Council's proposed new noise ordinance. They agree with the Mayor that music clubs should be allowed warnings before fines kick in, and that protesters should be allowed to use amplifiers during the day. They see the fines as too mild.
The editorial supports the Seattle City Council's proposed new noise ordinance. The ordinance was last changed 25 years ago. The editorial staff say that while it's important to reduce noise, it's also important to allow free speech. That is why they support the Mayor in his proposed changes to the ordinance.
The article goes on to note that the Mayor wants two changes to the ordinance: a provision for a pre-fine warning for music clubs, and the protection of political protest. The Council says its aims are to forbid amplifiers between 11 PM and 5 AM, which the editorial staff sees as a reasonable compromise. They see the fines -- "$100 for the first offense, $250 for the second offense within a year and $500 or 30 days in jail for the third offense" -- as "timid".
The article also notes that to further address the growing conflict between residents and loud music clubs, the council wants to establish 'entertainment zones' where noise rules will be relaxed.
PUBLICATION: The Associated Press State & Local Wire
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: Business News
BYLINE: Melissa O'neil
DATELINE: Kennewick, Washington
The Associated Press State & Local Wire discusses hearing loss with expert Francis Aiello from the Columbia Basin Hearing Center. Aiello mentions several ways that recent patients have damaged their hearing. He also explains how hearing loss occurs, and notes that the average age for patients visiting the Center has decreased.
The article discusses hearing loss with expert Francis Aiello from the Columbia Basin Hearing Center. He gives several anecdotes of ways that people he's worked with have damaged their hearing. His examples include the obvious loud music and firearm discharges. Also, there is the optician who lost hearing from grinding eyeglass lenses, and possibly damaged his ears before that from mine work, employment in the military, and even bow hunting. In addition, he mentions lawn mowers and equipment at work can cause damage over the long run. He mentions that ear protection -- including ear plugs and earmuffs -- are easy ways to reduce noise exposure.
The article goes on to mention the hair cells that register sound in the ear. One detail, not mentioned in most articles similar to this one, is that the hair cells that respond to high-frequency sounds are found in the first rows of cells. Those cells are damaged first, and damage may progress to the lower frequencies. Tinnitus -- ringing in the ears -- is one early sign of injury.
The article also notes that younger ears are more sensitive. The average age of people visiting Aiello has dropped from 61 to 52 in the last twenty-five years. Some of that is due to the decrease in the visibility of hearing aids, but some is also due to the tendency for people to be exposed to more noise than they used to.
PUBLICATION: The Atlanta Journal and Constitution
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: Local News; Pg. 1H
BYLINE: Gary Hendricks
DATELINE: Forest Park, Georgia
The Atlanta Journal and Constitution reports that residents of Forest Park, Georgia are upset that Hartsfield International Airport hasn't been including the city in negotiations over a fifth runway. County authorities negotiated several conditions for approval of the runway, including compensation for lost tax revenue and the promise of attracting new commerce to the area. The County Commissioner promised that their noise abatement program would be the "best in the world", but residents who already endure aircraft noise from the existing runways don't believe it
The article reports that residents of Forest Park, Georgia are upset that Hartsfield International Airport hasn't been including the city in negotiations over a fifth runway. Negotiations thus far has been with Clayton County, since that government has the "condemnation authority" to acquire land for the $869 million, 9,000 foot runway. A recent public forum -- attended by 600 -- was held so residents could express their concerns to County authorities.
The article notes that County authorities negotiated several conditions for approval of the runway, including compensation for lost tax revenue and the promise of attracting new commerce to the area. The Airport would go the General Assembly if the County did not grant them the land, and that body "can't negotiate on [Forest Park's] behalf."
The article says that residents are worried about new overflights if the runway goes through. While the County Commissioner promised that their noise abatement program would be the "best in the world", and would use an environmental impact statement to identify candidates for home buyouts and soundproofing. Residents who already endure aircraft noise from the existing runways don't believe it.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: Neighbor; Pg. 1
BYLINE: S.a. Mawhorr
DATELINE: Addison, Illinois
The Chicago Daily Herald reports that Addison, Illinois has decided to hire a noise consultant to determine whether a noise wall could ease noise for residents in the Oak Mill neighborhood. Some officials say the the city would have trouble paying for the $1-million-per-mile wall even if it would help. Proponents hope to get half of the money from Illinois' FIRST construction program, and to get the rest from other grants or by postponing less important village projects.
The article reports that Addison, Illinois has decided to hire a noise consultant to determine whether a noise wall could ease noise for residents in the Oak Mill neighborhood. The study will cost $19,000, which will clear up the debate over whether a noise wall would be effective. Some officials say the study is a waste of time, since the city would have trouble paying for the $1-million-per-mile wall.
The article notes that the wall is proposed for the Oak Mill neighborhood, near Interstate 290 and Route 83. Proponents hope to get half of the money from Illinois' FIRST construction program, and to get the rest from other grants or by postponing less important village projects.
PUBLICATION: The Hartford Courant
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: Connecticut; Pg. B7
BYLINE: Paul Marks
DATELINE: Windsor, Connecticut
The Hartford Courant reports that noise consultants for Windsor, Connecticut's Bradley International Airport will hold their next public information session on November 4th. The consultants hope to determine ways to reduce aircraft noise disturbances. The article notes that one method to do this would be to spread flight paths more evenly, but tests this summer prompted a huge increase in noise complaints.
The article reports that noise consultants for Windsor, Connecticut's Bradley International Airport will hold their next public information session on November 4th. 1,000 noise complaints last year prompted the hiring of the consultants, and more than 3,200 complaints to-date this year prompted the hiring of the consultants. The consultants hope to determine ways to reduce aircraft noise disturbances.
The article notes that one method to do this would be to spread flight paths more evenly, but tests this summer prompted a huge increase in noise complaints. One resident said this is probably because residents who had no noise exposure suddenly had some, and it seemed like a lot even though it is eclipsed by residents under the current flight paths.
PUBLICATION: Knoxville News-Sentinel
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: A Section; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Hayes Hickman
DATELINE: Knoxville, Tennessee
The Knoxville News-Sentinel reports on a noisy section of Interstate 40 where residents want noise barriers. An environmental study from 1988 called for barriers, but it was shown in a 1990 study that walls there would exceed the $25,000 per home cost. Residents say the number of people who would benefit from walls is being underestimated.
The article reports on several traffic-related situations near Knoxville Tennessee. The first issue is a congested intersection, while the second is a noisy section of Interstate 40 where residents want noise barriers. An environmental study from 1988 called for barriers, but it was shown in a 1990 study that walls there would exceed the $25,000 per home cost. The walls were so expensive because they would have to be over twenty feet high to be effective. Residents say the number of people who would benefit from walls is being underestimated.
The article notes that the highway is already 11,000 daily vehicles above a previous traffic prediction for 2007.
PUBLICATION: The Legal Intelligencer
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: Regional News ; Sys; Pg. 3
BYLINE: by Shannon P. Duffy
DATELINE: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
The Legal Intelligencer reports that Philadelphia's United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners can no longer protest at such loud volumes. Use of non-union labor at Society Hill Towers has prompted an ongoing protest from the union which has prompted over 40 noise calls to police. The union's lawyer argued that only the city can enforce noise laws, but the judge said that especially because of the union's use of lookouts to evade proper noise measurement by local police, the NLRB "cannot be required to rely exclusively upon municipal enforcement mechanisms."
The article reports that Philadelphia's United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners can no longer protest at such loud volumes. Use of non-union labor at Society Hill Towers has prompted an ongoing protest from the union which has prompted over 40 noise calls to police. Their use of lookouts allowed them to quiet down before police could measure the noise accurately.
The article notes that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) judge ruled that "the union is enjoined from amplifying its message at the Towers complex at noise levels which exceed Section V(B) of the Noise and Excessive Vibration Regulations, promulgated by the Philadelphia Department of Public Health, and is barred from using any sound system at all between the hours of 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays or between 4 p.m. and 11 a.m. on weekends." The union's lawyer argued that only the city can enforce noise laws, but the judge said that especially because of the union's use of lookouts, the NLRB "cannot be required to rely exclusively upon municipal enforcement mechanisms."
PUBLICATION: The Morning Call
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: Local/Region, Pg. B4
BYLINE: Zackie Due
DATELINE: Upper Saucon, Pennsylvania
The Morning Call reports that the Upper Saucon Town supervisors voted at a recent meeting not to approve a noise ordinance after the vast majority of attendees against it. 100 petitioners originally requested an ordinance to get relief from the noise of motorcycles and other vehicles. The supervisors also stopped working on another noise-related ordinance that would restrict the use of firearms, and a committee will try to define a shooting range so it includes commercial ranges, but does not prevent "professional target shooters and local hunters and farmers [from continuing] to practice shooting on their own properties."
The article reports that the Upper Saucon Town supervisors voted not to approve a noise ordinance after nearly all of the 90 people in attendance at the meeting spoke against it. The opponents also presented a petition of 300 signatures opposing the ordinances. Business people worried that the ordinance would hurt business, but the 100 petitioners who originally requested an ordinance, want relief from the noise of motorcycles and four-wheel-drive vehicles.
The article goes on to note that the supervisors also stopped working on another noise-related ordinance that would restrict the use of firearms. Hunters, farmers, and marksmen have opposed the law which would restrict shooting ranges to industrial zones. A three-person committee -- consisting of a supervisor, a marksmen, and a state Game Warden -- will try to define a shooting range so it includes commercial ranges, but does not prevent "professional target shooters and local hunters and farmers [from continuing] to practice shooting on their own properties."
PUBLICATION: The News Tribune
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: Pg. B2
BYLINE: David Wickert
DATELINE: Fort Lewis, Washington
The News Tribune reports that late-night military drills at Fort Lewis, Washington will increase noise around the base for three upcoming days.
The article reports that late-night military drills at Fort Lewis, Washington will increase noise around the base for three upcoming days. The military reports that the drills, which involve 105 mm howitzers, can not be conducted at any other time. The drills are intended to improve combat skills.
PUBLICATION: The Record
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: News; Two Star P; Pg. L1
BYLINE: Leonor Ayala
DATELINE: Haledon, New Jersey
The Record reports that Haledon, New Jersey has settled a lawsuit out of court with a local quarrying firm which had sued over a Haledon law that restricted the quarry's hours of operation. The new agreement allows some night work, but requires regular review of noise and dust levels, traffic plans submitted in advance, and regular environmental impact studies.
The article reports that Haledon, New Jersey has settled a lawsuit out of court with Braen Stone Industries, a local quarrying firm. Braen had sued over a Haledon law that restricted the quarry's hours of operation. A lawyer for the borough said that the agreement represented more beneficial aspects than would have been gained in court.
The article notes that the new ordinance resulting from the agreement will restrict the quarry's hours to between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., and Saturday from 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m; this time, however, exceptions will be allowed. The law will also require "a monthly municipal review of the facility's dust-control and noise levels", to be paid for by a $10,000 trust fund set up by the quarry. Traffic plans must be submitted five days in advance to any nighttime operations, which "are now restricted to 55 nights a year between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m." Further, the quarry must apply for a license renewal, and the application must include an environmental impact statement. Violation of any of these provisions could result in a fine of up to $500.
The article notes that Braen objected to many aspects of the original law, including prohibition of night operations, "specifications on noise, slope requirements, the amount of licensing fees, the width of buffer zones, and the need for environmental impact studies."
The article concludes by mentioning that noise will be controlled in part by a 30-foot noise wall, and dust will be controlled in part using water-based methods.
PUBLICATION: Sarasota Herald-Tribune
DATE: October 15, 1999
SECTION: A Section, Pg. 14A
BYLINE: Tom Darin
DATELINE: Brandenton, Florida
Sarasota Herald-Tribune prints a letter to the editor from a Brandenton, Florida man concerned about the impact of airboats. He says that their noise and intrusiveness are a problem for residents, wildlife, and fishermen. Further, he says that the decibel-based ordinance passed in a nearby community is unenforceable.
"Airboat noise assaults the ears
Commercial-fishing airboats have created an assault of intolerable noise levels on our waterways. Personal watercraft noise is a whisper in comparison. Most airboat noise is generated by the propeller. It can't operating at reasonable noise levels because there are no technological fixes. Airboat operators (with ear protection, of course) display little regard for those they subject to this sensory assault. They rocket through flocks of waterfowl and clusters of sports fishermen (wading and afloat), recreational boaters or other commercial fishermen in conventional boats, etc. Shoreline residents endure the equivalent of an airport runway directly outside their homes for days on end.
A decibel-based ordinance enacted in Manatee County earlier this year seems unenforceable. It commits scarce police resources, equipped with decibel meters, to inefficient cat-and-mouse games chasing airboats. Evasion is easy. If caught, the civil fine is a mere $50. Complaints about the airboat noise to environmental agencies are fruitless, because they say it's not their jurisdiction.
Florida's beautiful waterways are an integral part of the lifestyle that lured many of us here. Until now, competing demands on this resource have been managed fairly well at various levels. Sacrificing the waterways to the callous disregard and narrow commercial interests of a very few can't possibly be justified.
For a variety of reasons, the new ordinance has been a failure. These obnoxious machines continue to operate in heavily populated areas, in any fashion, at incredibly loud noise levels, with virtual impunity. Commercial fishing isn't the issue. Numerous conventional commercial boats prove that airboats aren't necessary to the business. With increasing Asian demand for mullet roe, the airboat problem will grow worse. Those interested in preserving our quality of life should contact their representatives."
Previous week: September 19, 1999
Next week: October 17, 1999