PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Business News
DATELINE: Brussels, Belgium
The Associated Press reports that the United States government filed a complaint last month with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) over a proposed European Union (EU) ban on aircraft outfitted with "hushkits," which are mufflers that reduce noise on older planes. The ban is to take effect May 4. The ICAO has given the European Commission a deadline of June 30 to respond to the complaint.
AP reports that U.S. Department of Transportation spokesperson Bill Mosley stated that negotiations with the EU over a settlement in the matter will not take place. The American airline industry claims that the EU ban is unfair and discriminatory to the United States. It is American companies which manufacture and outfit older planes with the hushkits, and American airlines which use the hushkitted planes and sell the planes to other airlines worldwide. The EU opposes the use of hushkits because it believes that they are not effective enough in reducing noise pollution. The EU rules have already cost the U.S. industry $2.1 billion in sales and fleet depreciation.
The article mentions that the EU risks losing its voting rights within the ICAO if the ICAO sides with the U.S. in its complaint over the ban.
PUBLICATION: Seattle Post-Intelligencer
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: News, Pg. B2
BYLINE: Jack Hopkins
DATELINE: Seattle, Washington
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Gerhard Letzing and Melanie Martin, Citizens for Airplane Noise Equity; Rainier Chamber of Commerce; Columbia City Revitalization Committee; Save Our Valley; 37th District Democrats; Lakewood/Seward Park Community Club; Friends of Seward Park
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that residents of southeast Seattle are at loggerheads with their neighbors in northern Seattle over a proposal by Seattle-Tacoma International Airport to change the take-off flight path of some planes from a northerly path to an easterly path. The path change is commonly referred to as the "split east turn." Southeast Seattle residents will hold a public meeting on Tuesday to voice their complaints with city, county, and port officials.
According to the article, the southeast neighborhoods that would be adversely affected by the path change are Columbia City, Lakewood, and Seward Park. The northern neighborhoods that would gain noise relief from the path change are Beacon Hill, Madrona, Leschi, and the Central Area.
The article quotes Gerhard Letzing, spokesperson for southeast Seattle opponents, as saying, "The split east turn is not fair for Southeast Seattle. It shifts more jet noise to a community already suffering from Boeing Field, Renton Airport and Seafair noise."
According to the article, opponent Melanie Martin agrees with Letzing, and added that southeast Seattle is already subjected to more noise than the northern neighborhoods. In addition, these southeast Seattle residents are irked that the planes that would be diverted east would be passing over their area of the city at a considerably lower elevation (as low as 2500 feet) than they currently pass over northern Seattle (minimum 5000 feet.)
The article states that the group Citizens for Airplane Noise Equity feels that flight paths and resulting airplane noise should be more equitably distributed over all of Seattle's neighborhoods. Joining this group in opposition to the proposal are the Rainier Chamber of Commerce, Columbia City Revitalization Committee, Save Our Valley, 37th District Democrats, Lakewood/Seward Park Community Club, Friends of Seward Park, and many residents of Mercer Island.
The article reports that commissioners from the Port of Seattle will consider the "split east turn" proposal this fall. The FAA could then accept or reject the proposal after Port approval.
PUBLICATION: AAP Newsfeed
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Nationwide General News; Australian General News
DATELINE: Canberra, Australia
The AAP Newsfeed (Australia) reports that the Collins-Class submarine project is finally showing good results. The noise problems that have plagued the Australian submarines are now better under control, meaning that the submarine combat system is closer to being considered combat ready.
According to the article, Lieutenant Commander Peter Scott of the HMAS Collins reported that hull work on the submarine has significantly reduced the noise of the sub as it travels through the water. Scott added that the sub's sonars are also more accurate now because of the reduced noise around the sub.
The article adds that the subs still need to overcome many other problems besides noise in order to be combat ready.
PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Journal
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Editorial Page; Pg. A16
DATELINE: Albuquerque, New Mexico
The Albuquerque Journal published an editorial about a proposed Albuquerque noise ordinance. The writer believes that a noise ordinance is a good idea, but the city needs to make sure that the ordinance will be backed up with proper enforcement ability.
According to the editorial, the proposed ordinance would regulate such annoyances as loud car stereos, and even offensively loud ice cream trucks. It also prohibits the sale of dirt bikes and other similar all-terrain vehicles, which the editorial writer believes is inconsistent with the rest of the ordinance.
The editorial writer states that the city must be sure that the ordinance can be properly enforced by the police department. Interestingly enough, the police department itself contributes to the city noise problem with its use of two helicopters, and the editorial writer does not believe that the department should be exempt from the noise ordinance.
PUBLICATION: AP Online
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Entertainment, Television And Culture
BYLINE: Natasha Gural
DATELINE: Hartford, Connecticut
AP Online reports that cities are using innovative ways of punishing noise violators. Much of the article discusses how some college students in Connecticut were forced to attend an opera performance as punishment for breaking various campus rules. A small portion of the article deals with unique punishment for noise ordinance violations.
The article reports that noise offenders in Alexandria, Louisiana were sentenced by the judge to attend a three-hour music appreciation session of their least favorite type of music: country.
According to the article, the sentencing judge said, "I'm going to put them in a room without a window because I'm afraid they'd jump."
The article adds that in Fort Lupton, Colorado, noise violators who are caught playing loud music are required to meet once a month to listen to music selected by the court. These mostly young offenders must pay the price by giving up a precious weekend evening to listen to the likes of Wayne Newton, Dean Martin, and John Denver.
PUBLICATION: Canberra Times
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Part A; Page 6
BYLINE: Nick Gentle
DATELINE: Canberra, Australia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Ron Murnain, Ridgeway Residents Action Group
The Canberra Times in Australia reports that residents near the Fairbairn Park car racetrack have complained repeatedly about high noise levels to the ACT's Environment Management Authority, but have not received satisfactory action.
The article states that Ron Murnain, spokesperson for the Ridgeway Residents Action Group, said that the group does not want to see the racetrack closed, but rather, wants the Government to enforce its Fairbairn Park noise regulations. The regulations were put in place in 1998, and Murnain said the noise levels at the track are still considerably high than the limit.
The article goes on to say that the Government believes it has responded appropriately to noise complaints. Environment Management Authority noise inspectors had attempted to measure noise levels at the track after having received two complaints during the past year, but were unable to get an accurate noise level reading because of poor weather conditions.
The article reports that Greens MLA Kerrie Tucker said that this proves that the EMA is not intent on enforcing noise regulations at the park, because with 80 events per year taking place at Fairbairn Park, more than two noise inspections should have been carried out.
PUBLICATION: Cincinnati Enquirer
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Metro, Pg. D01
BYLINE: Patrick Crowley
DATELINE: Hebron, Ohio
The Cincinnati Enquirer reports that Kenton (Kentucky) County Airport, serving parts of Kentucky as well as the greater Cincinnati, Ohio area, hopes to build a new runway beginning in 2003. The airport board plans to use portable jet noise monitors to measure neighborhood noise levels to determine which areas near the airport will be eligible for the airport's noise abatement program. Areas in both Kentucky and Ohio will be monitored. The board will meet on Monday to decide whether to accept the proposed noise monitoring program.
According to the article, airport board noise abatement manager Barbara Schempf said, "The portable monitors are good because we have the flexibility to push them around and use them in different areas. And we'll do pre- and post-testing of areas before and after the runway opens to determine the buildings, including schools, that need sound insulation."
The article reports that the FAA has not yet approved the runway project. They will study the proposed noise abatement plan when determining whether or not to approve the project. Part of the noise plan would also include diverting nighttime flights away from homes in the town of Florence, Kentucky.
The article goes on to say that the airport will need to purchase more than 200 homes in Boone County, Kentucky in order to build the runway. Cincinnati City Councilman Todd Portune would also like to see areas on the west side of Cincinnati monitored for noise and considered for the noise abatement program as well.
The article reports that the community believes the airport board is approaching the runway project openly and fairly. Airport board member Mark Guilfoyle said, "This is the kind of positive development that can come from an open dialogue and a willingness to listen."
PUBLICATION: Copley News Service
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: State And Regional
BYLINE: Dean Olsen
DATELINE: Springfield, Illinois
The Copley News Service reports that the Illinois House of Representatives has passed a bill that will penalize drivers of vehicles playing stereos that can be heard at least 75 feet away from the vehicle. Police will be able to fine offenders $50 for violations. The bill will shortly be presented to Governor George Ryan for his signature.
According to the article, a similar law was in force in Illinois until last November, when the Illinois Supreme Court overturned it because the law did not prohibit advertising-related noise. The new law will include advertising-related noise, but will continue to exempt emergency vehicle noise. The House originally had exempted advertising-related noise so that ice-cream trucks could continue to operate, with music playing, in residential neighborhoods.
The article reports that the city of Aurora, Illinois has been waiting for the bill to be signed into law so that it can proceed with a case against U.S. Marine Lance Cpl. Crispin Paustian, whose car was impounded by the city last June after Paustian was pulled over for blaring his car stereo.
PUBLICATION: Evening Standard
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 27
BYLINE: Mark Benham
DATELINE: London, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Friends of the Earth; United Kingdom Noise Association; Campaign for the Protection of Rural England
The Evening Standard in London, England reports that the United Kingdom Noise Association used International Noise Awareness Day to publicly ask the Government to make noise pollution a priority when drafting a new aviation strategy report that will be published next year. The Association based its request partially on a report by Friends of the Earth that states that hundreds of thousands of people living near airports are adversely affected by noise.
According to the article, the Association is asking the Government "to formulate the 'first comprehensive noise strategy' since the Wilson Government in 1963." The Association has also asked the Government to act on lowering noise due to road traffic and other sources, and to give local governments more power in enforcing noise regulations. It was also suggested that noise education be included in school curricula.
The article mentions that it has been claimed that a plane traverses the main flight path from Greenwich to Heathrow Airport every ninety seconds between the hours of 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM. John Stewart, chairman of Hacan Clear-Skies, emphasized that, even though each plane now generates less noise than in the past, the total number of aircraft using the skies has greatly increased, adding tremendously to the overall noise level.
PUBLICATION: London Free Press
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Wheels, Pg. E1, Test Drive
BYLINE: Dan Proudfoot
DATELINE: London, England
The London Free Press published an article by automotive writer Dan Proudfoot touting the virtues of the new 2000 model Subaru Legacy, including reduced engine and driving noise.
The article states that a smoother idle in the new model means that the driver can feel only a faint steering wheel vibration. Proudfoot also noted that the engine hum at 140 km/hour with 3,800 rpm was very minimal.
Proudfoot states in the article that another feature that absorbs and reduces noise is a new rear suspension system. In addition, "a new platform and stronger, more rigid body also contributes to the quiet interior."
PUBLICATION: New York Times
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Section B; Page 1; Column 1; Metropolitan Desk
BYLINE: Clyde Haberman
DATELINE: New York, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Nancy B. Nadler, director of the Noise Center at the League for the Hard of Hearing
The New York Times reports in an editorial that a citywide minute of quiet that was supposed to take place on Wednesday as part of International Noise Awareness Day was a failure in New York City. The minute of quiet is encouraged by the League for the Hard of Hearing. The writer discerned no reduction in the noise level during that time.
The editorial reports that the writer could still hear loud noise generated by construction projects, jackhammers, trucks, boom boxes, screaming human voices, car horns, and boom cars. The Noise Center at the League for the Hard of Hearing warns that New Yorkers are losing their hearing at an increasing rate each year.
According to the editorial, the Noise Center conducted free hearing tests of 64,000 New Yorkers over a period of eighteen years from 1980 to 1998. The test failure rate now is 60 per cent higher than it was in the early 1980's. A person fails the test if he/she cannot hear various pitches at 20 decibels. In 1991, 28 percent of those tested failed the test. In 1998, 42 percent of the people tested failed the test. Nancy B. Nadler, director of the Noise Center, reacted to the findings by saying, "It's really shocking. It's frightening, actually."
The editorial reports that loud noise is the most frequent "quality of life" complaint of New York residents. Ms. Nadler said that many people "end up frustrated because nothing gets done, whether as a result of either ineffective noise codes or bureaucratic sloth."
The editorial reports that Nadler is very concerned. She added, "We really need to look at this as a serious health hazard."
PUBLICATION: Newsday
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Real Estate; Page C13
BYLINE: Joe Catalano
DATELINE: New York, New York
Newsday published a question and answer column about real estate issues. A reader posed a question about condominium noise, and attorney Michael Cohen answered the question.
In the column, the reader complains that her neighbors in the condominium below the one in which she and her husband live annoy them with the noise from their TV. The neighbors also disturbed previous owners with the same noise. The reader has brought the issue before the condo association board, who is obtaining a court order against the noise offenders. The reader wants to know if she is obligated to inform potential buyers about the noisy neighbors.
Attorney Michael Cohen answers the reader's question in the column. He says the reader is not obligated to tell a potential buyer about the noise up front, because noise is a subjective intrusion. He does warn the reader, however, that she is obligated to answer the truth if a potential buyer asks about whether the neighbors are noisy.
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: News, Pg. 1C
BYLINE: Bob Jagolinzer
DATELINE: Johnston, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin in Rhode Island reports that a nightclub, Club Starzz, has hat its license suspended for 60 days for violating the noise ordinance in the town of Johnston. If convicted of the violation in court, the club could also be required to pay a fine of $50. The club's lawyers are also seeking to have another town ordinance of which the club has been found in violation, governing after-hours operations, overturned because of unconstitutionality.
According to the article, the club would like to have its after-hours license reinstated so that the club can remain open between 1:00 AM and 6:00 AM. Its after-hours license was revoked last summer.
The article states that the club's lawyer will appear in Superior Court to have the club's noise ordinance violation overturned, on the grounds that the town has no proof to substantiate the violation. The lawyer also plans to appeal the club's license suspension to the state liquor board because he says that the town is preventing the club from using its liquor license.
PUBLICATION: Southland Times
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: News; National; Pg. 20
BYLINE: Hayman Ivor
DATELINE: Wanaka, New Zealand
The Southland Times in New Zealand reports that two residents in Wanaka, New Zealand have appealed to the Environment Court about noise emitted from a pump station that adjoins their property. The court has decided not to close the station, but rather, to limit nighttime noise from the pump station to no more than 40 decibels.
According to the article, when it was built in 1989, the pump station was originally meant only to work during the day. However, the city of Wanaka has grown tremendously in the last decade, and the pump station now runs almost around the clock, disturbing the residents' sleep.
The article reports that the Queenstown Lakes District Council plans to replace the station in 2003. The station will be upgraded this year, and the Council will attempt to lessen the noise during the upgrade process.
PUBLICATION: Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Letters To The Editor; Pg. A7
DATELINE: Stuart, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Robert Gavin
The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News in Stuart, Florida published a letter to the editor from a reader named Robert Gavin who is concerned about noisy aircraft at Witham Field. The letter is reprinted here in its entirety:
"Editor:
Who's fooling whom?
At the March 28 Martin County Commission meeting, a motion was introduced by Dennis Armstrong allegedly to control the number of touch-and-go landings at Witham Field by adopting a Vero Beach voluntary plan. It was a tiger without teeth, a gesture without meaning. It does absolutely nothing to alleviate noise or safety problems at the airport. Why is this?
First, it is entirely voluntary, and you have seen how effective the voluntary controls have been at reducing low-flying, noisy aircraft. Second, it is in effect only from 10 p.m. until 7 a.m. Ask yourself, how many pilots in training are going to practice landings and takeoffs at 2 in the morning? Do you recall any? Third, there are no weekend restrictions; they can and do practice all weekend (except at night, of course). Aren't the weekends when we experience more air traffic? Fourth, because it is voluntary there is no penalty for violations - and how can you violate something that is entirely voluntary?
Commissioner Janet Gettig tried to introduce a substitute motion but was unable to secure a second. Why? Are the other commissioners giving only lip service to our concerns about airport noise? Do they really care what the noise at and around the airport is doing to our neighborhoods? Ms. Gettig's substitute motion was to adopt the noise ordinance which is in effect at Pompano Beach. That ordinance places a limit of three touch-and-goes, limits the hours to 9 a.m.-5 p.m., and prohibits entirely touch-and-goes on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, and there are other restrictions. This is not a new, untested ordinance; it has been in effect for five years. What is so difficult about changing the name of the location and adopting it for Witham Field?
Wouldn't that be nice for Martin County? Wouldn't you like that? Why were four of our commissioners - Armstrong, Gainey, Melzer and Wilcox - unwilling to even consider adopting the Pompano ordinance, even on a temporary basis, rather than the toothless Vero Beach voluntary provisions? You might want to come to a county commission meeting, or write to them, and see what kind of an answer you get."
Robert Gavin
Stuart
PUBLICATION: Times
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Features
DATELINE: London, England
The Times of London reports on a Court of Appeals case concerning a contract between a chartered surveyor and a prospective purchaser. The court's task was to determine whether the purchaser could receive damages for "non-physical distress and annoyance" resulting from the high level of aircraft noise that he was subjected to on the property. The contract stipulated that the surveyor was to advise "whether the property might be affected by aircraft noise." The court decided that the property owner was not entitled to a monetary award because the noise was an annoyance, rather than something that caused physical damage or distress. The judges explained that a surveyor's contract does not cover "non-physical stress and annoyance."
According to the article, the "prospective purchaser", Graham Farley, did buy the house, and then claimed that his use and enjoyment of the property was adversely affected by the aircraft noise. He claimed that the surveyor, Michael Skinner, was negligent in inspecting the property, because he did not find that the property was in fact close to a navigation beacon, and that, especially on weekends, the aircraft noise had become unacceptable to him.
The article states that the Court of Appeals did not find Skinner negligent because Farley did not incur physical discomfort from the noise.
PUBLICATION: Tulsa World
DATE: April 14, 2000
BYLINE: D.R. Stewart
DATELINE: Tulsa, Oklahoma
The Tulsa World reports that the Tulsa, Oklahoma firm of Cinnabar Service Co. has been chosen by the Tulsa Airport Authority to receive a one-year, $2 million contract to manage the noise mitigation program to be undertaken by Tulsa International Airport. Approximately 1,200 homes near the airport will qualify for the $33 million program.
According to the article, the FAA must approve the Airport Authority's selection of Cinnabar. The FAA will issue grants for 80 percent of the noise mitigation program costs. Cinnabar has previously done work for Tulsa International Airport and has helped with an acquisition program of homes near Jones Airport in Jenks.
The article states that Cinnabar plans to begin meeting with homeowners by October 1. Tulsa Mayor Susan Savage believes it will be very important for Cinnabar to keep the lines of communication open with the property owners during the project. Cinnabar officials said they recently attended meetings between officials from San Diego International Airport-Lindbergh Field and residents involved in that airport's noise abatement program. Cinnabar learned that, while property owners are anxious to have the noise levels in their home reduced, they are often unwilling to change their lifestyle in order to have the soundproofing work.
According to the article, Cinnabar CEO William Bacon said, "The one thing we learned from the meetings was to first purchase a home in the area, sound insulate it and use it as a program office to give people an idea of how their homes might be modified so they can become comfortable with the options available. Homes without central heat and air would have to have central heat and air installed to create a closed environment to reduce the noise levels in the interior."
The article states that residents qualifying for the program can choose one of three options: sound insulation amounting to $25,000 per home, payments for flyover easements, or a home sales assistance program that would pay homeowners the difference between their selling price and the fair market value of their home if the airport were not there.
PUBLICATION: Union Leader
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Section B Pg. 1
BYLINE: Jerry Miller
DATELINE: Newington, New Hampshire
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Barbara McDonald
The Union Leader in Manchester, New Hampshire reports that some Newington, New Hampshire residents are concerned that the expansion of a local golf course has led to an increase in airport noise. When the Pease Golf Course expanded, twenty-six acres of trees were removed, and the residents claim that the lack of trees has increased the noise. A meeting was held recently with the Pease Development Authority (PDA) to allow the residents to air their grievances.
According to the article, resident Barbara McDonald also accused the PDA of not notifying the town Conservation Commission or the adjacent property owners of its plans. The PDA's chief engineer, Jerry Dexter, said that the PDA had mistakenly failed to notify the property abutters, but has now rectified the situation.
The article states that conservationist and environmentalist Peter Loughlin attended the meeting, and does not believe that cutting the trees would have increased the noise from the airport. He believes, instead, that the noise increase is due to where and how the planes are parked at the airport terminal building. He thought that the noise problem could be solved by installing noise barriers or by turning the planes in a different direction so that the plane noise does not affect McDonald's neighborhood.
According to the article, Loughlin said, "I'm not terribly concerned about the extent of the cutting," which he said represents "minimal impact on the wooded 300 acres" nearby.
The article states that Peggy Lamson, a PDA member who represents the town of Newington on the PDA board, agrees that the noise from the airport is audible to residents in south Newington and must be addressed. PDA Chairman Bill Bartlett confirmed that the PDA will respond to the residents' concerns.
The article reports that the PDA is also considering an expansion of its airport terminal building.
PUBLICATION: Virginian-Pilot
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Local, Pg. B10
DATELINE: Norfolk, Virginia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Carl B. Anderson
The Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk, Virginia published a batch of letters to the editor. One of them is from a reader in Virginia Beach who complains about the noise from navy jets. The letter is reprinted here in its entirety:
"Mayor, c'mon by and enjoy sound of freedom.
I would like to invite the Honorable Mayor Oberndorf to my home in the Shadowlawn section of Virginia Beach. We could enjoy a nice cookout or relax by the pool. Conversation would have to be kept to a minimum because most of the time the jet noise is so loud that you cannot hear yourself speak, let alone anyone else speak to you.
She will be able to sit back and listen to the sound of freedom. Don't get me wrong, I am as patriotic as the next person, but this goes beyond that. There is a certain arrogance that the City Council has adopted when it comes to the Navy and the jet noise. The council made the decision to have the jets relocate here, so it must have been the right decision. Council members bury their heads in the sand and ignore that they made a mistake.
I have lived in my current house for the past 20 years. I had co-existed peacefully with the Navy and the jet noise up until the additional jets were relocated from Florida. Now it is different. The new jets are much louder, and they fly 24 hours a day.
The roar of the jets is not the sound of freedom, but rather the loss of quality of life."
Carl B. Anderson
Virginia Beach
PUBLICATION: Washington Times
DATE: April 14, 2000
SECTION: Part E; Auto Weekend; Pg. E1
BYLINE: Tom Keane
DATELINE: Washington, D.C.
The Washington Times published an auto review on the new Nissan Sentra. The reviewer reports very favorably on the vehicle, and is particularly impressed with its quieter interior.
The article states that the suspension system has been improved substantially, resulting in less road noise reverberating through the car and reaching the driving interior. The reviewer was pleased at the reduced noise in this economy-level car, and compared the low noise level to that of a much more expensive and well-equipped car, such as the Maxima.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: State and Regional
DATELINE: Riverside, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Charles and Shirley Jones
The Associated Press reports that two residents in Yermo, California sued Union Pacific railroad for noise produced by trains in the rail yard located near their home. The San Bernardino County Superior Court had dismissed the suit on the grounds that complaints relating to railroad operations are governed by federal regulations, not state law. The couple appealed the case, and the Fourth District Court of Appeal has now ruled that the lawsuit can be reinstated because the couple are contending that the noise was due to harassment and not to normal railroad operations.
According to the article, the couple, Charles and Shirley Jones, contend that they complained to Union Pacific in 1997 that the railroad was parking idling engines in front of their home. The couple said their complaints were ignored, even though the railroad instructed employees to move the engines after one hour. Worse than that, the Jones' said that after they lodged their complaint, train engineers also began harassing them by purposefully blowing their horns in front of the Jones' home at all hours of the day and night.
The article states that Court of Appeal Justice Barton Gaut ruled that federal law would prohibit the suit only if "the tooting of train horns and idling of train engines for long periods of time in front of (the Jones') house was necessary to reduce congestion and operate Union Pacific's railroad business safely and efficiently."
The article reports that the lawsuit will go back to Superior Court and will be decided by a jury.
PUBLICATION: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: Nwanews; Pg. B1
BYLINE: Andy Davis
DATELINE: Fayetteville, Arkansas
The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reports that some residents in Washington County, Arkansas have complained about barking dogs at a local animal shelter. A noise ordinance was proposed, but was tabled by the Animal Concerns Advisory Board because it was too vague and would be difficult to enforce.
According to the article, the Animal Haven Rescue Shelter houses twenty-one dogs and is run by Shena Hodges. The proposed noise ordinance would have forbidden "loud or frequent barking, howling or other noises that bother neighbors." The Board said it wants to confer with county attorney George Butler on the wording of any ordinance before taking action on it.
The article states that Washington County animal control officer Chris Williams believes that the proposed ordinance would put too many demands on the sheriff's office by requiring deputies to respond to each noise complaint in person. Williams also added that he had recommended to Hodges that she consider using an electronic device such as a collar that would give a dog a small shock when it barks. He noted that Hodges refused to consider such a device.
PUBLICATION: Asahi News Service
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: International News
BYLINE: Koichi Iitake
DATELINE: Tokyo, Japan
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Motomu Maya
The Asahi News Service in Japan reports that residents near the U.S. Naval Air Facility in Atsugi are asking the U.S. government to address the noise pollution problems at the base. The residents believe that Japan should not listen to the American government's demand that Japan deal with the dioxin problem in the area until the noise problems at the base are solved.
According to the article, a Japanese industrial waste disposal facility next to the military base may be responsible for the high levels of dioxin found in the area. Japan had agreed to undertake efforts to reduce the dioxin by installing particle-collecting filters in the facility's incinerators and making the smokestacks taller. Local Japanese residents are angry with their government for seeming to put the health of U.S. military personnel ahead of the health of its own citizens by giving the dioxin problem priority over the noise problem.
The article notes that several residents and other supporters filed a petition on April 13 with the Japanese Defense Agency protesting their government's inaction over the noise problem. Resident Motomu Maya declared, "It is OK for the government to tackle the dioxin issue because it is a serious problem that should be solved. But the government should not forget the fact that we have been suffering noise pollution from the base for 40 years." Maya and others contend that noise from the military's jets is a problem for area residents.
The article states that Maya is in charge of a group of 300 other residents and supporters who will be meeting with Foreign Minister Yohei Kono, Defense Agency Director-General Tsutomu Kawara, and Environment Agency Director-General Kayoko Shimizu. The Defense Agency will respond to the group's petition by April 13. An official indicated that Japan would most likely not do anything to break its bilateral security treaty with the United States.
PUBLICATION: Asbury Park Press
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: F, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Brian Donahue
DATELINE: Freehold, New Jersey
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Helen Doane
The Asbury Park Press reports that Helen Doane, a resident of Freehold, New Jersey, requested that the Freehold Borough Council amend its noise ordinance to read that barking dogs may not be left outside all day while their owners are gone. The Council refused to change the ordinance.
According to the article, the current noise ordinance prohibits barking dogs outside between the hours of 8:00 PM and 8:00 AM. If a barking dog bothers someone during the day, that person must bring in a signed complaint. Councilman Richard Daesener noted that it would be "unrealistic" to amend the noise ordinance to include a 24-hour prohibition against barking dogs.
PUBLICATION: Asbury Park Press
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: G, Pg. 2
BYLINE: Nancy Kearney
DATELINE: Shrewsbury, New Jersey
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Frederick W. Robison
The Asbury Park Press reports that a resident in Shrewsbury, New Jersey had opposed the construction of an Edwards Super Food Store in his community because of concerns over noise, hours, and traffic. The resident, Frederick W. Robison, filed a lawsuit against the borough planning board and the supermarket chain in back in 1998 after the planning board first approved the store's plans. Robison claimed that the store's hours of operation and noise levels would violate ordinances in the borough.
According to the article, the Superior Court judge in the case "remanded the plans back to the planning board in September to reconsider a variety of issues including noise, hours and traffic." The planning board then held three months of hearings, and finally approved the project in February without having made any changes to it. The store will open in mid-May. Its parking lot will accommodate 200 cars, and it will be open from 6:00 AM until midnight.
The article goes on to say that the planning board has retained the right to make changes to the store site in the future, such as building a sound barrier, in order to make sure that the store is not in violation of the borough noise ordinance.
PUBLICATION: Atlanta Journal and Constitution
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: Cobb Extra; Pg. 1Jg
BYLINE: Mary Lou Pickel
DATELINE: Austell, Georgia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Woody Thompson, County Commissioner; William Dorsey
The Atlanta Journal and Constitution reports that construction work on the Norfolk Southern Railway train-to-truck transfer station in Austell, Georgia has angered residents in the small town because much of the work is done at night and prevents them from sleeping. County Commissioner Woody Thompson has come to the aid of the residents by issuing a formal complaint to the city of Austell, requesting enforcement of its noise ordinance, prohibition of nighttime work at the site, and watering of the site to prevent dust from filling the air around area homes.
According to the article, Mayor Joe Jerkins declared that there was nothing the city could do because its noise ordinance prohibiting daytime noise of over 75 decibels and nighttime noise of over 65 decibels had not been violated by the railroad. The decibel readings at the construction site have only been measured by the railroad itself, not by the city.
However, the article states that the noise ordinance prohibits night construction in residential areas no matter what the decibel reading is. The ordinance forbids excavating or building in any residential district in the city between the hours of 8:00 PM and 7:00 PM unless an emergency situation exists. In an emergency, night work is only allowed after the public works director issues a permit. The railroad has not received such a night work permit.
The article mentions that City Clerk Carolyn Duncan stated that the 1995 federal Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act exempts railroads from local ordinances.
The article then goes on to say that Glenn Scammel, majority counsel for the Ground Transportation subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives, is not convinced that the railroad is indeed exempt from Austell's noise ordinance. Scammel is of the opinion that railroads are exempt from local laws affecting economics (such as land use and zoning), but that they are not necessarily exempt from local laws pertaining to policing or environmental concerns. Scammel added that it is a decision for the courts to make.
The article states that Austell resident William Dorsey filed complaints from numerous residents with the city of Austell two weeks ago. As a result of the complaints, the mayor asked the railroad to shut off the back-up beepers on the construction equipment at night. The railroad complied, and also said that they would move their nighttime construction away from the residential areas. Dorsey contends that the construction site is still an annoyance because of bright nighttime illumination, dust, and bulldozer noise.
PUBLICATION: Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: News; Pg. 12
DATELINE: United Kingdom
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: United Kingdom Noise Association
The Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail reports that a new anti-noise organization has formed in the United Kingdom. The group, called the United Kingdom Noise Association, plans to unite various organizations that oppose neighborhood noise, loud music, airplane, and traffic noise so that citizens fighting excessive noise can be assured of positive results.
PUBLICATION: Gloucestershire Echo
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: News: Ents, Pg.3
DATELINE: Gloucestershire Echo
The Gloucestershire Echo reports that residents near the Cheltenham racecourse in England are concerned about a four-day outdoor event to be held in August called the Greenbelt Festival, which brings in 8,000 festivalgoers. The borough council will decide tomorrow whether to grant the event an entertainment license for this year's festival. Most public officials have no opposition to the event. Many residents complained about the event at a recent public meeting.
According to the article, residents are mostly concerned about loud music late at night. The festival organizers have agreed this year to close outdoor events at 11:00 PM and indoor events at 2:00 AM. In addition, there will not be as many outdoor shows at the festival as last year. Finally, police and organizers have agreed to meet near Prestbury Park each night during the festival at 11:00 PM to assess the noise levels.
The article states that officials will hold a follow-up public meeting in October to find out whether residents found this year's festival to be an improvement.
PUBLICATION: Ledger
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: Metro; Pg. B3
DATELINE: Lake Alfred, Florida
The Ledger in Lakeland, Florida reports on problems at Lake Alfred that were recently addressed at a meeting of Lake Alfred's Parks and Recreation Board. There was a complaint by a resident about high methanol alcohol levels in the lake, and many complaints were lodged about noise from boat racing on the lake and noise raised by the racers who camp in Lions Park on the shore of the lake.
According to the article, one member of the Board responded to the noise complaints by making a motion to completely eliminate boat racing on the lake, but her motion was not seconded and therefore did not pass. The Board will recommend, however, that the City Commission only allow races from 9:00 AM until sunset on Saturdays, and from noon until sunset on Sundays.
The article states that many residents were displeased with the Board's action. Currently races are not supposed to start before the times recommended by the Board anyway.
The article goes on to say, however, that race official Bud Gann said that the three annual races held on the lake by the Outboard Racing Association do not begin until 10:00 AM on Saturdays and noon on Sundays. When a resident complained that he heard boats on the lake at 7:10 AM on the day of the last race, Gann responded that it was probably an individual racer testing his/her boat. After the Board meeting, Gann called racers and asked them not to test their boats before 9:00 AM.
PUBLICATION: Morning Star
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: Front Page; Pg. 2A
BYLINE: Mike Ramsey
DATELINE: Wilmington, North Carolina
The Morning Star in Wilmington, North Carolina reports that a popular nightclub offering outdoor music reopened two weeks ago in a new location that is bothering residents in downtown Wilmington. The bar, called the Icehouse, had previously been located in a warehouse district of the city, but has reopened in a downtown area near condominiums. The Icehouse had violated the city noise ordinance in the past at its old location.
According to the article, Icehouse manager Ian Moseley said that he will close the bar at 11:00 PM on weeknights and at midnight on weekends to try to placate residents. Downtown residents often complain about noise from businesses and entertainment locales.
The article states that the city of Wilmington is in the process of drafting a new noise ordinance, and is attempting to listen both to residents and business owners in the downtown district. Another restaurant and bar that has been the focus of many residential noise complaints recently is the Reel Café. It has violated the city noise ordinance on numerous occasions, particularly after it began offering outdoor music on its rooftop bar and set up a courtyard tent in the winter for live music. These offerings have since been discontinued, although the bar is appealing one of its noise violations. The bar has also tried to listen to residents' wishes by ending outdoor music by 8:00 PM, although it has extended the hours that it serves alcohol until almost 2:00 AM.
The article notes that Daniel D'Alessandro, one of the owners of the Reel Café, lamented, "I get harassing phone calls. One person said, 'Don't you know what the new society is downtown now? It's condominiums and homeowners, not bars and restaurants.'"
According to the article, a new noise ordinance is being drafted by city planner Bob Hosmer. Under the current ordinance, certain decibel levels are acceptable at certain times and at a specific distance from the source of the noise. However, any "reasonable person" with normal hearing can ask for the ordinance to be invoked if he/she is disturbed by any noise. A police official then decides whether the noise is loud enough for a citation. And the current ordinance brings a violator up on criminal charges.
The article goes on to say that the new ordinance might declare a noise violation a civil offense, since it is easier to convict someone on civil charges. In addition, the fine for a first offense may be raised from $100 to $500. Hosmer would also like to put a limit on the times when live music may be offered, although city attorney Tom Pollard said that outlawing outdoor music may not be possible because "music is a protected form of free speech under the First Amendment." An ordinance may only legally be able to enforce music volume.
The article mentions that Moseley and D'Alessandro believe that the ordinance should be based strictly on measurable decibel levels. Pollard disagreed, saying that bass music also disturbs people, but cannot be adequately measured.
According to the article, Hosmer believes that restaurants and residents need to learn to work and live together. People move to downtown areas because of their vibrancy, but do not want to listen to music so loud that they can't enjoy living there, and end up complaining about the very thing that possibly drew them downtown in the first place.
PUBLICATION: New York Times
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: Section G; Page 6; Column 6; Circuits
BYLINE: Anne Eisenberg
DATELINE: Buffalo, New York
The New York Times reports that State University of New York Buffalo engineering students have designed a way to eliminate snowmobile noise and air pollution. They won first place in a contest sponsored recently by the Society for Automotive Engineers.
According to the article, the originator of the concept, Dr. Lori Fussell of Wilson, Wyoming, commented, "It's the beginning of a technical solution to a huge problem. People on the extremes of the issue want either unrestricted use or complete prohibition. This way we can deal with it not as a political issue, but as a research one, finding ways to reduce pollution and noise at reasonable cost." She added, "National parks are extremely interested in a technological solution to this controversy."
The article states that the students used two-year old snowmobiles that had previously been rented out to visitors at Yellowstone National Park. The winning students' design was a four-stroke engine that reduced unburned hydrocarbons to undetectable levels. The snowmobiles were judged for fuel economy, performance, design, noise, and emissions. The Buffalo students won in every category except performance. They were awarded $17,000 in prize money for their efforts.
The article mentions that students from the University of Waterloo in Ontario came in second place. Their design was a two-stroke engine that reduced unburned hydrocarbons to 95 percent.
PUBLICATION: Palm Beach Post
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: Local, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Sarah Eisenhauer
DATELINE: Stuart, Florida
The Palm Beach Post reports that a wealthy attorney in Stuart, Florida who has been fighting to be able to land his private Boeing 737 at Witham Field has come up against resistance from residents and from the Martin County Commission. The Commission decided at a recent meeting to back plans that would block larger aircraft from using the airport. The businessman, Willie Gary, said that he might file suit against the county.
In the article, Gary insisted, "I've bought a 737, and I plan to land my plane. I'm not going to take this lying down."
According to the article the new airport plans would forbid aircraft heavier than 105,000 pounds from using the airport. Landing a larger plane at the airport would mean that the owner or pilot could be fined.
The article states that Gary might also consider using St. Lucie County International Airport in Fort Pierce for his 737, even though it is quite a distance away from his home and offices. But he would probably receive as much opposition in St. Lucie County as he has in Martin County. In addition, St. Lucie Airport's runways might not be sufficient to handle large aircraft like Gary's 737.
The article then mentions that Gary plans to spend $1 million to outfit his jet with a "hushkit," which is a noise reduction muffler for airplanes. However, he maintains that a 737 is less noisy than some other planes that are currently allowed at Witham Field.
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: News, Pg. 1D
BYLINE: Bob Jagolinzer
DATELINE: Johnston, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports that a nightclub in Johnston, Rhode Island has had its business license suspended for sixty days for violating the town's noise ordinance and a club operating hours ordinance. Club Starzz's owners plan to appeal the Town Council's decision in court.
According to the article, club owners Michael and Gene Marocco recently attended a Council hearing at which they were asked to state their case and present to the Council why they believed their license should not be suspended. The owners' lawyer said that the club is only booked for special parties, and there are already parties scheduled during the 60-day suspension period which would be difficult to cancel.
The article states that the town's ordinance prohibits clubs from being open between 1:00 AM and 6:00 AM. The owners plan to go to federal District Court to ask that the ordinance be overturned on constitutional grounds. The club was cited for violating the after-hours operation ordinance only once before the suspension was levied. Its after-hours license was also revoked last summer, however.
The article reports that the town hired an East Greenwich policeman to test the decibel levels outside the club, after having received numerous complaints about noise. The police reported that that in one night of taking readings, the decibel level at the club averaged 64, but ranged from a low of less than 50 to a high of 71. The sound was described as "pulsating with an occasional drum beat."
The article goes on to say that the club's lawyer retorted that cars driving in the club's neighborhood can generate those same levels of noise. He stated that the town's ordinance says that a violation does not occur in a business zone unless the noise exceeds 79 decibels. The club owners say that they have tried to comply by soundproofing the club to a tune of $9,000.
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: News, Pg. 1D
BYLINE: Michael Smith
DATELINE: Warwick, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports that T.F. Green Airport in Warwick, Rhode Island plans to change its flight paths in order to reduce noise in certain neighborhoods. Under the new plan, the FAA would need to soundproof 800 to 900 fewer homes than they would have needed to had the flight paths remained the same. Airport officials recently presented the plans to the public and, pending FAA approval, would like to start using the new paths in December.
According to the article, jets leaving the airport currently take numerous flight paths, bothering many neighborhoods with noise. The new plan would consolidate them into seven main flight paths. With such a concentration, many neighborhoods would benefit from noise relief; however, some neighborhoods would be subjected to increased noise. Officials say that they tried to map out the new paths so that planes would be taking off over areas that are not heavily populated. Another key goal is to direct the planes over water soon after takeoff to further reduce noise.
The article states that officials recently presented their plan to the public by making available a "draft environmental impact statement" that would clearly show the affected areas. It includes the seven takeoff paths as well as one landing flight path. The Cowesett neighborhood would benefit a great deal; the neighborhoods of Massasoit and Hillsgrove would be adversely affected by the noise.
The article also mentions that city planning director Mark Carruolo is worried that the draft statement does not involve enough research about the neighborhoods that will hear more noise under the new flight path plan.
The article then describes the residents' reactions to the plans. Many who attended the meeting were actually less concerned about the flight paths than they were about which houses are part of the airport's new buyout plan. Some residents whose houses are on the list want to know when they'll be able to move out of their homes. Others not on the list wish to be added. Airport officials said they will hold public forums on the buyout this summer.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: North Post, Pg. 3
BYLINE: Lisa J. Wolfe
DATELINE: Hazelwood, Missouri
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that Lambert Field in Hazelwood, Missouri plans to expand. At a recent City Council meeting, members discussed noise levels in the neighborhoods they represent.
According to the article, Councilman Richard Piotrowicz recommended that the city join the National Organization to Insure a Sound Controlled Environment, an organization that works on the federal level to create new laws about airport noise reduction. It would cost the city $1,155 each year to join, and would give Hazelwood the opportunity to effect change.
The article states that Councilwoman Norma Caldwell resists joining the organization until the city finds out how bothersome airport noise actually is to city residents. She said, "I haven't had many complaints in my ward lately, and in one year the number of calls regarding airport noise has dropped from 455 to 240."
The article notes that some council members believe that there are many people bothered by airport noise who don't call to complain about it because they don't believe it would help. Councilwoman Jeanette Eberlin reminded the council that there is an established hotline that residents should use to complain about the noise. Residents should be urged to use the hotline more. The phone number is 314-551-5050.
PUBLICATION: Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: Local; Pg. C1
BYLINE: Dan McCue
DATELINE: Jupiter Island, Florida
The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News reports that Jupiter Island, Florida plans to amend its noise ordinance to prevent some construction equipment from operating on Saturdays in the summer months. The current noise ordinance bans the equipment from November 1 through April 15 only. Under the amendment, the equipment would be allowed to continue operating only with permission from the property owner's neighbors.
According to the article, Jupiter Island Mayor Joseph E. Connolly and the Town Board met recently to review the ordinance, which had only been adopted last July to satisfy complaints from many seasonal residents. At the meeting, Town Attorney Skip Randolph was asked to present an amendment to the noise ordinance at the Board's meeting on May 10.
The article reports that Mayor Connolly attempted to listen to all residents when considering the ordinance. He said, "What we tried to do with this ordinance is satisfy three constituencies: those who were disturbed by the construction noise, those who were trying to move into their new homes, and the construction industry itself, which has made invaluable contributions to our community. Now it's time to also try and meet the needs of another important group of people, those of us who live here all year-round."
The article lists the equipment that the ordinance bans: cranes, compressors, table saws, earth movers, metalwork hammers, sandblasters and other property "that in its operation would render the enjoyment of property within the town less agreeable."
According to the article, the current ordinance lifts the ban on such equipment between April 16 and October 31. During this period, equipment may operate from 8:30 AM until 5:30 PM Monday through Friday, and from 8:30 AM until 1:00 PM on Saturdays. Equipment louder than 65 decibels at the owner's property boundary is not allowed. The amendment would prohibit Saturday operations.
The article states the Mayor Connolly believes that the amendment will pass without controversy.
PUBLICATION: Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: Letters To The Editor; Pg. A11
DATELINE: Stuart, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Betty Becker
The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News recently published a letter to the editor from Stuart, Florida resident Betty Becker, who is concerned about aircraft noise at Witham Field. The letter is reprinted here in its entirety:
"Editor:
It sickens us to learn they are considering having large jets to land here at Witham Field.
Stuart is a gem among gems, but would certainly not be an upscale little city for very long if that is the case. The noise from those jets would be another distraction; property values would drop like a hot potato - people who have bought second homes for rest and relaxation would not tolerate that situation for long - and there would be a grand exodus. Even now, the noise from noisy old planes is horrible, and they sound as if they've had far more wear and tear than intended. There's an accident waiting to happen some time or another!
People attending meetings at the library say the noise interferes with their programs, as well as the dense population of the area plus a number of condos nearby.
The noise from the two days of airshows is worse than intolerable. Some of those daredevils barely skim the tops of the higher buildings, some fly in "V" formations too close together, etc. The very sick folk in hospitals have to listen to that flying right over their heads. Just recently, a plane crashed at an air show killing the pilot. You think that couldn't happen here? Guess again.
It would be a lot less costly if the airport was moved to a rural area, and the suggestion someone had to relocate the fairgrounds and Martin County Golf Course to that location was a splendid idea. That would accommodate far more people than an airport does at any time. A devastating plane crash could wipe out a good segment of densely populated little Stuart, not to mention the megamillions of dollars spent in numerous lawsuits, and loss of life - the most important.
Betty Becker
Stuart"
PUBLICATION: Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News
DATE: April 13, 2000
SECTION: Local; Pg. C1
BYLINE: Jerry M. Gutlon
DATELINE: Stuart, Florida
The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News reports that the controversy about whether or not to allow large, noisy planes to use Witham Field in Stuart, Florida continues. The County Commission would like to institute a weight ban on planes; airport officials believe that noise levels should be the criterion for a ban instead.
According to the article, the Commission has proposed banning aircraft from Witham Field that weigh more than 105,000 pounds. Airport Director Mike Moon insisted that larger airplanes are not necessarily noisier.
In addition, the article states that no bans at the airport can take place until two studies, which are required by the federal government, are completed. The two studies are an F150 and an F161.
The article states that the F150 study gathers data on airport noise levels. The Witham Field F150 study will be completed at the end of this year. When that study is completed, the county can then begin the F161, which would allow officials to actually develop a noise reduction plan. That study could take a long time, and Moon cautioned that noise bans might not be able to be put into effect for years.
The article goes on to say that Moon attempted to explain the two federal studies to the public at a recent meeting. He said, "As I understand it, the Part F150 study is a land-use compatibility study which will tell us what decibel noise level the land (around the airport) falls in. It's an annual average. We have to compile the information within the context of the federal regulations."
The article then states that some Commissioners were concerned that it might take so long to begin reducing noise at the airport. Moon said after the county has compiled all the data concerning noise, the next step is to begin the Part F161 study to develop noise restrictions. Residents were also confused and angered by the intricacies of the federal studies. Moon said that, in the F150 study, noise levels are averaged for an entire year. The hours involved in the average also include the times when the airport is completely silent. To the residents in attendance, this did not seem fair and made no sense.
The article notes that Moon reiterated that the airport currently requests that pilots voluntarily follow noise reduction procedures. In addition, he said that one possibility currently available to the county would be to help homeowners soundproof their houses. Alternatively, the county could also purchase the homes outright.
The article says that Commissioner Janet Gettig is not satisfied with these solutions. She said, "I was never told that the only thing we could do is buy homes. I don't think people are looking for us to buy homes. Even after the 150 (study) we won't be able to limit the noise. I don't remember hearing anything last April about that."
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: News; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Robert Sanchez
DATELINE: Lombard, Illinois
The Chicago Daily Herald reports that some residents who live on busy North Avenue in Lombard, Illinois have complained about the traffic noise. The state plans to begin a $29.5 million project to widen three miles of the street, turning it into a six-lane highway, and has agreed to install two sound barrier walls on the south side of North Avenue to help reduce the traffic noise. The wall will either be made of wood or concrete.
According to the article, once the wall is installed, the residents will no longer be able to directly access North Avenue from their driveways. Instead, the state will build a frontage road between the sound barriers and their properties. Village President William Mueller said that he would discuss alternatives with the state if the idea of a wall proved to be objectionable to many of the residents. However, residents who have voiced opinions about the project so far seem to be resigned to the fact that the wall, while unattractive, might be the best solution.
The article states that Rick Young, a consultant services engineer with the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), said that residential noise is a problem that IDOT takes into consideration when undergoing a road widening project. He has reassured the village that IDOT will do what it can to work with Lombard residents. The state will meet with residents and officials this fall to get their input on the visual nature of the wall. The start date for the project was originally 2001, but it has now been delayed until 2002 so that it will not interfere with another road construction project that will be taking place in the village at the same time.
PUBLICATION: Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: News; Pg. 17
DATELINE: Edinburgh, Scotland
The Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail reports that a group of researchers from Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh, Scotland are studying whether high noise levels in hospitals are adversely affecting patient recovery times and increasing nurses' stress levels. Part of the study will include installing special sound-absorbing ceilings to see if they make a difference.
The article reports that the university's project is being sponsored by Ecophon, a Swedish ceiling manufacturer. The team hopes to prove that it is very difficult for patients to fall asleep in noisy hospitals and this delays their recovery. It also ends up costing more because of longer hospital stays and more dispensing of sleep aid medications.
According to the article, the research team conducted a similar experiment last year in Scottish schools. They concluded that the special ceilings did make a difference in reducing noise levels in the schools.
PUBLICATION: Jiji Press Ticker Service
DATE: April 12, 2000
DATELINE: Tokyo, Japan
The Jiji Press Ticker Service out of Tokyo reports that Bridgestone Corporation and Topy Industries, Ltd. have come together to create the first automobile wheels that substantially reduce noise. The wheels accomplish this because of shock-absorbing rubber installed between the rim and the disc.
The article states that, after testing, the companies expect to have the new wheels on the commercial market by the end of 2001. Current wheel technology causes noise inside the car because of steel and aluminum rims and discs.
PUBLICATION: News Tribune
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: Pg. B1
BYLINE: David Wickert
DATELINE: Lakewood, Alaska
The News Tribune reports that Lakewood, Alaska officials are worried that Alaska Airlines' plan to use nearby McChord Air Force Base for employee military mission training might mean an increase in noise and air pollution, as well as a higher risk of accidents taking place. The Air Force is reviewing the plan, and does not believe that the operations would increase pollution levels or accident risk, even though there would be more flights into and out of McChord.
According to the article, Lakewood officials do not believe that the Air Force has studied the environmental impact of the plan carefully enough. They are also concerned that the plan would allow other airlines to use the base in the future for similar training. A public hearing will take place at a Lakewood school this evening to give residents an opportunity to find out more about the plan.
The article reports that Alaska Airlines currently conducts such military training at Grant County Airport in Moses Lake. However, the flight time from Sea-Tac Airport, where the flights originate, to Grant County Airport is three times as long as to the Air Force Base, which is only a ten-minute flight. The extra time would mean more training opportunity.
The article notes that the Air Force maintains a Civil Reserve Air Fleet, of which Alaska Airlines is a part. The Air Force might call on trained airline employees and equipment in case of emergency or war, making proper training essential. At McChord, approximately 90 operations (an operation being defined as one takeoff or one landing) will take place each month under the plan. That would total 1,080 operations per year. The base currently schedules almost 33,000 military operations per year. So, according to the Air Force, the Alaska Airlines plan would not generate very many additional operations. The Air Force has therefore concluded that increases in noise and air pollution would be minimal.
The article states that the City of Lakewood remains concerned because the airline's operations would be concentrated into one three or four hour session per month, thereby resulting in a sharp increase in noise levels and air pollution during that time.
The article notes that if the Alaska Airlines training plan is approved, the Air Force could consider adding more private airlines to the program without having to conduct an additional environmental impact study. That could eventually increase the number of operations for private airline training fourfold.
PUBLICATION: Christchurch Press
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: News; National; Pg. 6
DATELINE: Auckland, New Zealand
The Press in Christchurch, New Zealand reports that an Auckland, New Zealand clinical psychologist has released a controversial study that says that infants at risk of crib death have an easier time breathing if they are exposed to background noise while they are sleeping.
According to the article, the research was conducted by Malcolm Stewart, a senior lecturer at the Auckland School of Medicine, with assistance from Scottish acoustics specialist Sean Smith. Their research postulates that breathing problems can be triggered in some babies because of a lack of noise while sleeping. And in some vulnerable babies, such as preemies and those with pre-existing respiratory problems, their breathing could stop completely, resulting in crib death. The background noise may give them just enough stimulation to remind them to breathe.
The article also mentions that Stewart believes his theory is in agreement with current thinking about babies' sleeping positions. In order to reduce crib-death risk, parents are now encouraged to have their babies sleep on their backs, not on their sides or stomachs. Stewart believes that babies' ears are more covered in those positions, and do not allow for adequate noise stimulation.
The article reports that crib-death researcher Shirley Tonkin is not convinced that sounds make much of a difference in infant crib death.
PUBLICATION: Press Association Newsfile
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: Home News
BYLINE: Charlotte Gapper
DATELINE: London, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: John Stewart, HACAN ClearSkies; United Kingdom Noise Association; Noise Network; Pipedown; Refined Bitumen Association
The Press Association Newsfile reports that British individuals and groups against noise are supporting the formation of a new national organization called the United Kingdom Noise Assocation (UKNA.) Members of the new group have appeared before the House of Commons, asking that the British Government create a noise strategy and enforce anti-noise laws.
According to the article, John Stewart, chairman of HACAN ClearSkies, a groups that fights aircraft noise, said: "Noise has become the forgotten pollutant. Yet it impinges on the lives of millions of people. This new organisation aims to put the question of noise right up the political agenda. We will be pressing the Government to draw up a noise strategy. What we are hoping to do is probably in due course have a series of conferences and seminars and issue some publications and hopefully get meetings with ministers."
The article states that one of the purposes of the new organization is to obtain more power for local government to be able to deal with local noise issues. The UKNA will draw on the expertise of lobbying groups, academic researchers, and law experts.
The article notes that some of the organizations that are involved in getting the UKNA off the ground include Noise Network (deals with neighborhood noise,) Pipedown (concerned with piped music,) and the Refined Bitumen Association (campaigns for quieter road surfaces.)
PUBLICATION: Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: News, Pg. 1C
BYLINE: Suzannah Gonzales
DATELINE: Barrington, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports that the town of Barrington, Rhode Island has recently instituted pet ordinances, mostly focused on problems with dogs. A restraint ordinance requires that dogs will have to be kept on leashes; a waste removal ordinance requires that owners pick up after their dogs when off the owner's property; and a noise ordinance will require that owners ensure their pets are not disturbing neighbors with barking and other noise.
The article states that under the noise ordinance, owners will have to pay the town a fine for each day that their barking dog disturbs a neighbor. The ordinance was proposed by Councilwoman Mary Alyce Gasbarro, who had received complaints from many residents about nuisance dogs. The ordinances exempt licensed dogs working with disabled people, such as seeing-eye dogs.
According to the article, owners previously were allowed to let their dogs wander on public property or on private property as long as the pet obeyed the owner's commands.
The article then goes into specifics about the noise ordinance. An owner will be in violation of the ordinance if there is a written complaint filed by two or more people against the dog and its owner, or if a police officer or animal control officer observes a dog making too much noise. In both cases, the dog must be causing a public nuisance, which "shall include, but is not limited to, the habitual howling, yelping or barking which creates a noise disturbance." If found in violation of the noise ordinance, the owner will be fined $25 for the first offense, $50 for the second offense, and $75 for subsequent offenses.
The article states that one town councilman opposed the ordinance because he feels it is not enforceable. People can no more control their dogs' noise than they can noise made by their children, he insisted.
PUBLICATION: San Francisco Examiner
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: Habitat; Pg. Za-2 Mr. Handyperson
BYLINE: Mark Hetts
DATELINE: San Francisco, California
The San Francisco Examiner published a question and answer column to "Mr. HandyPerson." One reader poses a question about a hot-water tap that causes thumping sounds and vibrating noises, and wonders if it has to do with air in the pipes.
The column reports that the reader hears the thumping when the single-lever tap is closed. He shut off the water to the house using the main shut-off valve and then opened the faucet, but it did not cure the noise.
The reader then continues in the column by posing his second noise problem. He hears a daily "long, low, loud vibration" that reminds him of a steamboat whistle. He hears it most often very early in the morning, and can stop the noise when he opens the tap. The noise continues as soon as the tap is shut off again.
In the column, Mr. HP responds that the problem has to do with a "lack of air chambers to prevent what are commonly called 'water hammers.'" The pipes bang when pressurized water stops quickly when the tap is turned off. The resulting rattling of the pipes can cause them to leak or break over time. If small air chambers are installed in the supply lines leading to the noisy tap, the thumping noise should cease. The whistling noise might possibly be connected to the water hammer problem, but if it continues after the air chambers are installed, Mr. HP tells the reader to check for a problem with the toilet fill valve.
PUBLICATION: San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: Home; Pg. 3/Z1; Grassroots
BYLINE: Michele Driscoll Alioto
DATELINE: San Francisco, California
The San Francisco Chronicle publishes a gardening column. The columnist, Michele Driscoll Alioto, suggests that if readers are bothered by noise from traffic or neighbors' equipment when they are seeking peace and quiet in their gardens, they can help solve the problem by using plants and soil as a noise barrier.
The columnist states that soil is an extremely effective sound barrier, and an earthen berm would therefore work very well. She then suggests planting a hedge of evergreen plants or a line of trees on the berm to further reduce the noise.
PUBLICATION: Sarasota Herald-Tribune
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: B Section, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: John Hielscher
DATELINE: Sarasota, Florida
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has still not decided whether to approve a takeoff path at Sarasota-Bradenton Airport that it had previously approved. The agency has said it needs to continue to review neighborhood noise data, and could possibly demand a new environmental impact statement that could delay the path's approval for more than another year.
According to the article, the new takeoff path is locally known as the "270-turn." It will allow jet aircraft to take off to the west, reducing noise heard by many neighborhoods on the mainland. However, the new path would take the planes over the middle of Longboat Key, and residents of the island are concerned about the increase in noise to which they will be subjected. The Sarasota-Manatee Airport Authority believes that the new path will reduce residential noise overall. It will eliminate the "takeoff roar" that the mainland residents now hear. Even though some Longboat Key residents and others will hear more noise, not as many residents will be affected as are currently.
The article reports that the Airport Authority is disgruntled because the FAA reviewed an environmental impact assessment in November 1998 and then approved the 270-turn. The FAA then reversed its decision months later, after the airport had already started preparations for using the new path. The FAA stated that it needed to study the neighborhood noise levels more closely.
The article notes that the Airport Authority has provided the FAA with its noise impact information. Thirty houses north of the airport in the Whitfield neighborhood would experience noise levels that are 1.5 decibels higher than what they currently hear. FAA Administrator Jane Garvey has said the agency has received assurance from airport authorities that noise mitigation plans would be implemented to reduce neighborhood noise to acceptable levels. If the FAA agrees with the airport's plans, approval might be granted "within several months." If the agency decides it needs an additional environmental impact statement, a decision could be a year to a year and a half away.
The article mentions that the town of Longboat Key and a condominium association on the island recently sued the Manatee County Commission for approving an airport expansion project. The County Commission is in favor of the 270-turn.
PUBLICATION: Hernando Times
DATE: April 12, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 1
BYLINE: Jeffrey S. Solochek
DATELINE: St. Petersburg, Florida
The Hernando Times in Florida reports that Hernando County residents have lodged many complaints about Planet Bubba, a nightclub that allegedly makes too much noise, and is a location used for drug dealing and nude dancing. Some residents recently filed petitions with the Hernando County Government Center enumerating their complaints. In addition, they attended a recent County Commission meeting to voice their concerns in person. New ordinances will be drafted by the County Attorney's office as a result.
According to the article, residents complain of not being able to sleep. Neighbor Asenath Kuhar said that he can hear the club's DJ from 10:00 PM until 2:00 AM, and then hears noise from patrons in the parking lot. Bass rumbling from the club's music speakers are particularly annoying to resident Ray Briggs. Briggs also said that patrons drive on his yard, and he can't sleep because of the police cars and helicopters that are regularly called to the club. Vena Vedder, another neighbor, also complained about the bass levels as well as trash in her yard and swearing voices. Another resident disapproved of the club for reasons of morality.
The article states that the club's owners are Richard Fabrizi and a local radio personality known as "Bubba the Love Sponge Clem." Fabrizi attended the Commission meeting and defended his place of business, saying his club was legitimate and was being harassed. He insisted that the sound levels from the club's speakers have been checked many times, and do not exceed allowable levels. He stated that he is actually planning to add more speakers and bass to his sound system at the club. Speaking of the harassment, he said, "Attorneys are involved now."
The article reports that Code Enforcement Director Frank McDowell III and Assistant County Attorney Kent Weissinger attended the meeting to hear residents' concerns. Commissioners have asked for a noise ordinance and better enforcement of the county's nuisance laws. Weissinger wants anyone who is disturbed by the club to let him know. He said, "The more we hear from you and your concerns, the better able we are to craft our ordinance." He said he will begin to draft an ordinance that will be completed in six weeks to two months. McDowell added that residents should continue to call his office with complaints as well.
The article goes on to say that a recent US Supreme Court ruling will allow the city of Erie, Pennsylvania to ban nude dancing on grounds of "negative secondary effect." Weissinger said, "We are looking to see and document the negative secondary effects that the noise at Planet Bubba and the general activities there have."
PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Tribune
DATE: April 11, 2000
SECTION: Pg. A5
BYLINE: Kate Nash
DATELINE: Albuquerque, New Mexico
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Stephen Frazier, chairman of Citizens for a Quiet Environment
The Albuquerque Tribune reports that Albuquerque mayor Jim Baca wants the city's noise ordinance to be rewritten.
In the article, he states, "Noise really is the worst but least-addressed form of pollution." He said that about 300 to 400 noise complaints are filed with the city each year.
According to the article, violators under the new ordinance would be fined $25 for a first offense, $50 for a second offense, $100 for a third offense, and a court-imposed fine of up to $500 for a fourth offense. The current noise ordinance does not levy fines.
The article summarizes the proposed ordinance. A person would be in violation for operating a boombox or other portable sound or music equipment in public spaces if the sound can be heard 25 feet away. A violation would also occur if a resident were to use outdoor power equipment (lawn mowers, leaf blowers, etc.) at night. The ordinance would prohibit helicopter operation at higher than 90 decibels. It would also prohibit excessive noise near schools, libraries, and hospitals. Law-enforcement and emergency equipment would be exempt from the ordinance. "Hazardous Noise Area" signs would be posted by the city in areas where noise levels reach 90 decibels or higher. Stephen Frazier, chairman of Citizens for a Quiet Environment, is generally please with the new ordinance, although he would have liked to have seen provisions for the hearing impaired addressed in the ordinance.
The article reports further details of the ordinance. The article is quoted as follows, "For residential areas, the sound shall not exceed 55 decibels in the day and 50 at night. For commercial areas, the sound shall not exceed 60 decibels during the day and 55 at night. For industrial areas, noise shall not exceed 75 decibels during the day and 70 at night."
The article states that the mayor will be showing the drafted ordinance to the City Council at its meeting on Monday. City environmental Health Department Director Sarah Kotchian and local noise awareness groups helped to draft the plan. The Environmental Health Department will request money from the City Council so that they could hire a person with a vehicle to enforce the ordinance. The ordinance would also be enforced by the police.
The article then tells readers who to contact for complaints: "For moving vehicles, loud parties, house alarms and other after-hours complaints, call the Albuquerque Police Department at 242-2677. For neighborhood noise, including daytime television, stereos, radios, equipment noise, ice-cream trucks, public-address systems and helicopters, call the Environmental Health Department at 768-2600. For barking dogs, call the Animal Services Division at 768-1975 *For military aircraft complaints, call 846-5991. For complaints about general aviation aircraft, call 842-2007."
PUBLICATION: Birmingham Evening Mail
DATE: April 11, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 7
BYLINE: Andy Probert
DATELINE: Droitwich, England
The Birmingham Evening Mail in England reports that Darryl Knight of Droitwich, Worcestershire, England was found guilty of violating a noise abatement notice that had been issued to him by Wychavon District Council's environment protection department. He was fined pounds 300 for causing a noise nuisance in his neighborhood after playing music and operating his TV at excessively high noise levels.
According to the article, this is not the first time Knight has violated local noise laws. He has previously paid pounds 200 and pounds 140 in fines.
The article states that in the most recent incident, a neighbor complained because her sleep was being disturbed by Knight's music and TV. When she asked him to turn the TV set and the music levels down, she claims he verbally abused her. Mark Cox, the Council's investigating officer, said, "This really was a frustrating state of affairs for the neighbours. On some occasions they could switch off the volume on their TV and still clearly hear the dialogue for the programme from Knight's set."
The article reports that the sound levels of Knight's equipment were officially measured from the neighbors' houses. The noise often continued night after night. Don Lawley, chairman of the council's environment committee, summed up the incident by saying, "There is no way the council will tolerate such selfish behaviour."
PUBLICATION: Detroit News
DATE: April 11, 2000
SECTION: Front; Pg. 1
BYLINE: B.G. Gregg
DATELINE: Detroit, Michigan
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Inter-County Citizens Achieving Regional Excellence; Intercounty Citizens Against Racetrack Establishment (I-CARE)
The Detroit News reports that the Nederlander Entertainment Group in Detroit, Michigan has received approval from the Michigan State Fair advisory board to develop the state fairgrounds to a tune of $80 million. The development plan includes a race track, convention space, equestrian center, theaters, a renovated Coliseum, and a few nearby hotels. Many nearby residents have opposed the development.
According to the article, a Nederlander group spokesperson said the cost could reach $500 million if one includes neighborhood and other hotel development in the area. A Nederlander representative said, "This will be the largest non-industrial development project in the city of Detroit's history." It could bring up to 1,000 jobs to the area. Fairground improvement, which comprises the first phase of the development project, will be finished by the time of the summer fair in 2001.
The article states that residents of Palmer Woods, Greenacres and Greenbriar in Detroit, Ferndale, and Hazel Park recently voiced their opposition at a Michigan State Fair Advisory Council meeting. They are primarily concerned with increased noise from the planned 50,000 seat racetrack.
The article mentions that residents of the area have a history of banding together to fight unwanted development. In 1996, residents formed Intercounty Citizens Against Racetrack Establishment (ICARE) to successfully fight a proposed $40 million racetrack.
According to the article, a development spokesman said that the city of Detroit has agreed to support the project as long as the project is sensitive to the needs of area residents. The city can do nothing about development of the fairgrounds itself, since it is state property. A new Michigan law allows the state to lease the fairgrounds to a private enterprise for year-round use that would include circuses, rock concerts, and other forms of entertainment. The private enterprise must agree to do fairground renovations, and to give a percentage of its profits to the state. The state has rarely been able to run the Michigan State Fair profitably for the past 30 years. Governor Engler has refused to consider moving the fair to another location in the state.
The article goes on to say that the Intercounty Citizens Achieving Regional Excellence group has opposed the racetrack not, only because of noise during the races themselves, but also because of noisy cars practicing and being worked on. The Nederlander group maintains it will try to lessen the noise. Schrott said, "We'll engage whatever kind of technology they have available today to handle the sound. If somebody next door is mowing their lawn at 7 in the morning, it is certainly a lot more noise than cars that are two miles away."
The article adds that some residents are in favor of the development because of more job opportunities. They are willing to sacrifice noise inconvenience for economic gain.
PUBLICATION: Evening News
DATE: April 11, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 9
DATELINE: Edinburgh, Scotland
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: "The Bond" Residents' Association
The Evening News in Edinburgh, Scotland reports that residents in an Edinburgh, Scotland neighborhood near a park are protesting a fair that is slated to take place there in May. In previous years, the fair, they say, has produced too much noise, litter, vandalism, and other crimes. They have asked the City Council to refuse to give the promoters a license to hold the fair this year.
According to the article, the promoters, M and D Automatics, have requested to open the fair on Leith Links from May 4-8. The company is owned by Mathew and Douglas Taylor.
The article states that the City Council will decide on Friday whether or not to grant the license. The Bond Residents' Association, a neighborhood group opposing the fair, has brought their protests to the Council. They also voiced their opposition to a fair that took place in the park in February, claiming that it had stayed open later at night and for more days than had been allowed.
The article adds that environmental health officials have given their opinion that the license should be granted, as long as the fair closes as 10:00 PM and keeps amplified music down to acceptable levels. The Taylors said they would be willing to comply with those stipulations.
PUBLICATION: Express and Echo
DATE: April 11, 2000
SECTION: Pg.6
DATELINE: Exeter, England
The Express and Echo in Exeter, England reports that residents living near a newly opened highway, the A30, may apply for compensation from the government through the Highways Agency. The homeowners are eligible for compensation under the Land Compensation Act 1973, which states that "there is a right to compensation when property is devalued by more than GBP 50 as a result of physical factors such as noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke and artificial lighting."
According to the article, homeowners must wait for twelve months after the opening of the section of highway along which they live to file their claims. They can then file their claims up until six years from that date. Homeowners will generally receive their compensation within six months of making their claims.
In the article, a Highways Agency spokesman said that homeowners must wait for twelve months because "it takes that long for the full extent of loss of value through noise, pollution or through any other reason, to become known."
According to the article, the first neighborhoods eligible to make claims will be those between Exeter and Birdcage Lane near Whimple. Homeowners between Patteson's Cross and Iron Bridge will be eligible in February 2001, twelve months after the final stretch of highway is opened
The article goes on to say that homeowners can request a brochure outlining their entitlements by writing to: Highways Agency, Lands Branch, Falcon Road, Sowton, Exeter, EX2 7LB.
PUBLICATION: Kennebec Journal
DATE: April 11, 2000
SECTION: Local; Pg. B2
BYLINE: Betty Adams
DATELINE: Augusta, Maine
The Kennebec Journal reports that an Augusta, Maine bar will be able to offer live music three nights per week as a result of a recent City Council vote that granted the business a special amusement permit. Complaints from residents about loud music and patrons prompted city meetings to discuss the issue.
According to the article, the Caddy Shack Bar and Grill will have to comply with orders issued by the City Council as part of the license. The owners must hire two security guards or off-duty policemen to help curtail customer noise and crime. The guards will be required to be on duty from 9:30 PM to 1:30 AM on Thursday, Friday and Saturday, the three days of the week that the bar will be allowed to offer live music.
The article states that, in addition, the bar will need to soundproof the building, keep all doors and windows closed, and lower the noise level of live bass music to that of recorded music.
The article notes that 3 Councilors opposed the license, while 4 voted for it. Those against the license thought that the noise from the bar was unacceptable, and that the bar and its live music have a detrimental effect on the downtown neighborhood in which it is located. The license will be granted for three months and then will be reviewed.
PUBLICATION: New Straits Times
DATE: April 11, 2000
SECTION: Letters; Pg. 13
BYLINE: R.B.
DATELINE: Petaling Jaya, Malaysia
The New Straits Times in Malaysia published a letter to the editor from a reader who is bothered by noise from LRT trains. The letter is reprinted here in its entirety:
"I WISH to complain about the extreme, and annoying noise of the LRT trains from University Station in Kampung Kerinchi to the station past Amcorp Mall managed by Putra LRT.
The melange of sounds are utterly aggravating and exasperating.
This happens daily every three minutes or so, from early morning to past midnight the following day.
It is not only annoying but quite disgusting.
I would suggest to the Department of Environment that this is not just " noise nuisance".
Rather, I would label it " noise pollution".
Perhaps the DOE can take the action that is so urgently required to curb the annoyance caused to the residents, particularly in Section 9 and 10, Petaling Jaya.
I gather that in Melbourne, Australia laminated chipboards line both sides of train track at residential areas.
Perhaps this should be looked into by both the DOE and Putra for the benefit of all concerned.
R.B. Petaling Jaya"
PUBLICATION: Vancouver Sun
DATE: April 11, 2000
SECTION: News; B1 / Front
BYLINE: Larry Pynn
DATELINE: Surrey, British Columbia, Canada
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Barbara Bower
The Vancouver Sun in British Columbia, Canada reports that Adler Forest Products Ltd. in Surrey has encountered difficulties as a result of noise and dust complaints by residents in a neighborhood adjoining one of its factories. Some people have questioned why the city of Surrey has allowed industrial zoning areas to be placed alongside residential areas. The president of Adler Forest Products is Rod Hoffmeister, the son of Bert Hoffmeister, a well-known British Columbia businessman and leader of local forestry organizations.
According to the article, Adler Forest Products' operation in question was started last year in an industrial building located between the Revy Home Centre and a residential neighborhood. At the plant, timber is milled into hardwood floors under a contract with Mill Run Hardwood Floors, Inc.
The article states that the city soon received complaints from residents about noise and dust from the two sawdust-removal machines on the site. Resident spokesperson Barbara Bower said, "It was awful. You couldn't hear yourself think and they were spewing sawdust all over the neighborhood."
According to the article, the city responded by issuing the company a stop-work order until a noise study was conducted and the sawdust-removal machines placed in some type of enclosure. Hoffmeister said that the costs involved in paying for an enclosure and in loss of production were so high that the company is almost to the point of going out of business. The enclosure cost $150,000. Production dropped from 10,000 square feet per day to only 3,000 square feet per day. Hoffmeister said the company is now negotiating with creditors.
The article goes on to say that the factory now complies with the city noise ordinance, which limits noise at property lines to 60 decibels. The company has been able to raise production levels again now that the work is completed.
The article notes that the factory currently runs one day shift, but is contemplating adding a second shift when business improves in the near future. The hardwood floors are shipped to the US, Japan, and the United Kingdom, as well as to locations in Canada.
The article reports that newspaper employees went to the factory site to hear the noise for themselves. They found that the factory produced less noise than trucks and forklifts from the home center store adjacent to the factory. Mrs. Bower said that even though the noise level is lower now, it is still a big problem because it is a "constant low drone" that prevents her from spending time outdoors on her property. Bower also believes that the factory should not have been allowed to operate in an area that is zoned "light-impact industry."
The article states that Surrey general planning and development manager Murray Dinwoodie defended the zoning permit issued to Adler because the factory is completely enclosed, as opposed to most wood mills that conduct most of their operations outdoors. He added that the site of the factory has been zoned industrial for over twenty years, and that the industrial site predated the residential development next to it. He agreed that the city might not have put those industrial and residential zones side by side if it were creating a new zoning plan today. But since the zoning is in place, the city is determined to find a solution that will work for everyone.
The article further notes that the Surrey City Council will hire an independent sound consultant to measure the noise at the factory and to give recommendations on how to lower the noise levels. The site will not receive final inspection approval until the noise study is completed.
The article says that Bower's response to the city noise study is that she believes the city is afraid that Adler will file a lawsuit if the city forces the company to move from the site.
PUBLICATION: Virginian-Pilot
DATE: April 11, 2000
SECTION: Local, Pg. B10
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
The Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk, Virginia published a letter to the editor from a reader who is complaining about jet noise in Virginia Beach. The letter is reprinted here in its entirety:
"Homecoming present: noise, noise, noise
We moved to Los Angeles almost four years ago, but my husband and I plan to return to Virginia Beach to live out our retirement years. We are both natives of the Hampton Roads area. We own residential property in Virginia Beach, and I am part owner of two small businesses in the area.
For the past four years, I have yearned to return to the serenity and small-town feeling of the Oceanfront communities. A recent two-week visit to our condo, at the south end of the beach, proved to be quite noisy and unsettling due to the jets flying overhead.
When I moved away from Virginia Beach, jets were flying over but the noise was tolerable. Now a huge number of planes fly in rapid succession, sometimes for hours at a time. They also seem to be flying lower. The tranquillity of this area has been compromised.
My heart is broken that our "little bit of heaven" near the Oceanfront has been invaded by unnerving and unhealthy noise. We will return to live permanently in Virginia Beach in October and pray for a better situation for all the residents in the southern end of the Oceanfront.
Helen Heath Allsbrook
San Pedro, Calif."
PUBLICATION: Daily Press
DATE: April 10, 2000
SECTION: Local, Pg. C7
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise
The Daily Press in Virginia Beach, Virginia reports that over 300 residents of Virginia Beach and Chesapeake attended a meeting recently to discuss the jet noise problem from the nearby Navy base. The meeting was organized by Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise (CCAJN), a local citizens' group whose members currently number more than 1,500. City and Navy officials also attended the meeting.
According to the article, many CCAJN members attended the meeting and a number of lawyers were invited as well. One possible solution that they discussed was to speak with City Council members about the problem. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to discussing the viability of filing lawsuits against the base for reimbursement of lost property values. Either individuals or groups would be able to file lawsuits if they can prove that their quality of life has been affected by the jet noise, and that the value of their properties has dropped as a result. One lawyer who gave such advice was Jack Ferrebee.
The article states that a lawyer from Massachusetts, Cristobal Bonifaz, also attended the meeting. He has experience in this area, having successfully sued Westover Air Force Base in his home state on behalf of homeowners he represented. He told the crowd that his was a group lawsuit of more than twenty people. As settlement, the Air Force was required to pay between $30,000 and $40,000 to each property owner. He maintained that the threat of having to pay homeowners forces the military to study more closely the noise problem and the number and types of planes that use bases near residential neighborhoods.
The article notes that, by the end of the Virginia Beach meeting, more than 100 residents had added their names to a list of those interested in filing a lawsuit. The idea of lawsuits met with some opposition, however. One resident, Nancy L. Grden, thought that suing would be a waste of time, when the real issue was actually reducing the noise from the jets.
The article goes on to say that a brochure, the "Voters Guide to Virginia Beach Council Elections," answers questions about jet noise that are discussed by several of the local political candidates. Three local candidates for public office attended the meeting.
The article states that the Navy has responded to the jet noise issue by announcing a $9.9 million plan to build a "hush-house," a sound-insulated building that would absorb the sound of jet engine tests.
The article also notes that CCAJN already filed a lawsuit against the Navy, in 1998. That suit claimed that "the Navy's environmental impact statement for the move of FA-18 Hornets to Oceana Naval Air Station was flawed." The case was decided against CCAJN, but they have appealed the ruling. The appeal is still pending.
PUBLICATION: Engineering News-Record
DATE: April 10, 2000
SECTION: News Site; Vol. 244, No. 14; Pg. 31
BYLINE: Sherie Winston
DATELINE: Washington, DC
The Engineering News-Record reports that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is finally extending their 1983 hearing loss rule to include the construction industry. Charles N. Jeffress, assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health, made this announcement at a recent conference in Washington, DC on jobsite noise and hearing loss. The conference was sponsored by the Laborers' Health and Safety Fund of North America, OSHA, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
According to the article, Jeffress said that the current general noise standard does not include certain types of industries where workers are exposed to a very high level of noise. The Government has stated in the past that ironworkers and boilermakers are exposed to the highest level of noise, while highway workers, carpenters, and concrete workers have the most total employees exposed to noise. Jeffress added that another problem in these industries is that workers often don't wear the hearing protection that is provided to them.
The article adds that David Haggerty, an official with the labor-management trust of the boilermakers union in Hopewell, Virginia, stated that workers often don't wear needed hearing protection because it makes it hard for them to communicate with and hear one another. It also makes it difficult, and sometimes dangerous, because they can't always hear alarms when they're wearing hearing protection.
The article goes on to say that OSHA is looking for input from industry leaders as it formulates the new hearing rule.
PUBLICATION: Evening News
DATE: April 10, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 11
DATELINE: Edinburgh, Scotland
The Evening News in Edinburgh, Scotland reports that the Midlothian Council will soon make a decision about whether or not to extend the evening hours of this year's "Hunter and Lass" summer festival. The outdoor festival takes place in Penicuik public park, and residents who live nearby oppose the later closure because of noise.
According to the article, officials are considering allowing the closing time to be 10:30 PM this year, instead of 9:30 PM as in past years. The fair runs from May 24-27.
The article mentions that residents Margaret and John Scott wrote a letter to the city council saying that the noise will disturb their children's sleep, and a later closing time will mean more teenagers gathering together and making noise when they leave the festival.
PUBLICATION: Express and Echo
DATE: April 10, 2000
SECTION: Pg.6
DATELINE: Exeter, England
The Express and Echo in Exeter, England reports that a community in an East Devon parish has been wrestling with the issue of whether a dog boarding kennel that may be built will cause too much neighborhood noise.
According to the article, the kennel would be located at Sunnymead in Langaton Lane near Pinhoe. In addition to the noise from barking dogs, residents are concerned that the road is too narrow for the traffic that the kennel would generate.
The article states that the area's environmental health officer is worried about the noise, despite the fact that the kennel is not situated close to any homes, and there are a lot of trees between the kennel site and a neighboring farm. He has filed his objections with the East Devon District. The Council will decide on the kennel's application this week.
PUBLICATION: Fulton County Daily Report
DATE: April 10, 2000
DATELINE: Fulton County, Georgia
The Fulton County Daily Report reports that a clay shooting range at Hanging Rocks Plantation in Jenkins County, Georgia had a lawsuit filed against it last year by Leroy Clayton, who complained of noise from the firing range. He won the case, and in March the shooting range was told it must not conduct sport shooting on Sundays on property adjacent to Clayton's land. Clayton was not awarded monetary damages in the case.
According to the article, Judge Turner's order "prohibits defendants, their representatives, agents and employees from operating any sport shooting, skeet or other target shooting range on their property adjacent to Plaintiff's property from midnight Saturday until midnight Sunday." The owners of the range, Robert Jenkins and his mother Mabel, will likely appeal the decision on grounds that the jury did not understand the legal ramifications of a noise nuisance ruling against the shooting range.
The article reports that the Jenkins' lawyer also said that he will question Turner's ruling because he believes that a state law exempting shooting ranges does indeed apply in this case. The law (OCGA 41-9-1) states that "a shooting range under operation for a year or more cannot become a nuisance solely as a result of changed conditions in or around the locality of such range." Turner interpreted the law as only applying to existing shooting ranges around which residential homes are later built, which was not the situation with the Hanging Rocks range. There was also a discrepancy between the officially advertised opening date of Hanging Rocks, and the date on which shooting actually first took place, which was a year earlier than advertised.
The article describes the history of the Jenkins' property. It was originally a dairy farm, and then became a hunting retreat. After ten years as a hunting retreat, the Jenkins built the clay shooting range.
The article states that the plaintiff's attorney thinks that the case will generate many more complaints about "noise nuisances" in the county. He is afraid that dove shooting, chain saws, and boom boxes being operated on Sundays will be next.
The article notes that Jenkins has filed a countersuit against Clayton because of damage done to his business when Clayton complained to other people about the shooting range.
The article reports that the Jenkinses hired Frank Artusa, a sound engineer, to be an expert witness at the trial. He measured the sound levels at different areas on Jenkins' property and on the road in front of Clayton's house. Artusa reported that that the levels of 46 decibels in front of Clayton's house and 64 decibels at the shooting range's office were below the national daytime standards of 65 decibels.
According to the article, Clayton was disappointed that the jury did not decide to completely shut down the Hanging Rocks range. He claimed that he heard twenty-five shots per minute coming from the range on a recent Sunday afternoon.
PUBLICATION: Irish Times
DATE: April 10, 2000
SECTION: City Edition; Law Report; Pg. 20
BYLINE: Colette Kinsley, Barrister
DATELINE: Dublin, Ireland
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Seamus Kinlan
The Irish Times reports on a recent court case. Mr. Seamus Kinlan sued Ireland's Minister for Defense and the Attorney General for noise-induced hearing loss that he incurred during his years working as a member of the Defense Forces. He wanted the government to pay for hearing aids. The court decided that his hearing is not currently bad enough for hearing aids, but he would be compensated for probable future hearing loss.
The ruling is quoted here: "Where there is no immediate necessity for the plaintiff to wear hearing aids, he will not be granted the costs of such hearing aids. However, where the evidence indicates that the plaintiff's hearing will as a matter of probability deteriorate with age, the appropriate capital figure will be allowed. With regard to damages for hearing loss itself, where several audiograms are given and the results differ, it is appropriate to aggregate the results and divide that number by the number of audiograms given to get a mean figure for the percentage current loss. Damages may then be assessed on that result by application of the guidelines set down by the Supreme Court in the Hanley case. Again, where audiogram results differ with regard to projected hearing loss, a similar computation can be made with a deduction of the percentage for current loss of hearing."
The article states that the High Court awarded Mr. Kinlan (pounds) 7,729 in damages.
PUBLICATION: Las Vegas Review-Journal
DATE: April 10, 2000
SECTION: B; Pg. 1B
DATELINE: Richfield Village, Nevada
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Katherine Martin, president of Richfield Neighborhood Association
The Las Vegas Review-Journal's City Desk column reports that residents near an interstate in Richfield, Nevada may finally get some relief from bothersome noise from the highway.
According to the article, the city has agreed to build a sound barrier between the interstate and a residential neighborhood of more than 350 homes, specifically along I-15 near the Sahara Avenue interchange. Residents have asked for a wall for the past four years, and the city had denied their requests in the past.
The article states that some residents had been trying to shield themselves from the noise by doing things such as putting blankets over their windows. The freeway noise has been constant. A stretch of I-15 is being reconstructed, and so the city has finally agreed to install the sound barrier as part of the reconstruction project.
The article reports that the cost of the sound wall, predicted to be $200,000, will be divided between the Las Vegas Regional Transportation Commission and the Nevada Department of Transportation. City Council Michael McDonald was a strong supporter of the project. City planning engineer Charles Kajkowski said the wall will be constructed beginning in the middle of the year 2001, and will be 400 feet long and 14 feet high.
PUBLICATION: News-Gazette
DATE: April 10, 2000
BYLINE: Mike Monson
DATELINE: Sidney, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Timothy Johnson; Eric Mitchell
The News-Gazette in Sidney, Illinois reports that residents are concerned about a natural gas-fired "peaker" power plant slated to be built northeast of Sidney. They are concerned about noise, air pollution, and aesthetics. State Representative Timothy Johnson lives in the neighborhood most likely to be affected, and he has voiced strong opposition to the plant. He would like the zoning to be amended so that power plants would have to be located in industrial areas rather than rural areas.
According to the article, PSEG Global of Parsippany, New Jersey has applied for a special use permit for the plant. The Champaign County Board has responded by trying to change its zoning ordinance to prohibit the plant at the Sidney site.
The article reports that a PSEG spokesman said the plant would operate during "peak" electrical use periods, mostly from May to September. It would operate only during the daytime from Monday through Friday.
The article states that PSEG Global is considering twelve sites in the Midwest for peaker power plants. The company will eventually pick five to seven sites on which to build new plants. The spokesman said that the plant would have no negative impact on the community. Sidney would receive an extra $88,000 to $125,000 in property taxes if the plant were built there.
The article goes on to say that Representative Johnson has galvanized many members of his community to fight the plant. Johnson said, "To put what amounts to an industrial site in the middle of a rural agricultural and residential area, I can't imagine that anyone living near it wouldn't be concerned. I don't think anyone wants to have it located there. It would be totally incompatible with the aesthetic nature of the neighborhood."
According to the article, another resident, Eric Mitchell, has written a letter opposing the plant that he hopes many others in the community will sign. Mitchell is concerned about the noise and the appearance of the plant. The planned peak power plant in Sidney would have four turbines, four muffling exhaust towers under 60 feet tall, and two water retention tanks.
The article goes on to say that the zoning amendment drafted by Champaign County officials will be presented to the Champaign County Board Environment and Land Use Committee this week. If the Board were to approve the amendment, it would then go to the towns involved for their approval. A final County Board vote will take place on June 20.
The article reports that the state environmental protection agency has said that there have not ever been any noise complaints filed against a peaker plant in Illinois, because the noise is so minimal.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: April 10, 2000
SECTION: West Post, Pg. 9
BYLINE: Jean Abernathy
DATELINE: St. Louis, Missouri
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Shannon Goebel
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports on a scientific research project contest for high school students. Senior Shannon Goebel won a first-place prize for her research on the actual and perceived noise levels to which teen-agers are exposed.
According to the article, Shannon spent two years on research. Boys were compared to girls. She asked fifteen boys and fifteen girls to wear a sound monitor for twelve continuous hours. Most of the boys, whom she interviewed beforehand, believed that they are routinely exposed to louder noises than girls are. Goebel's research found out that the hypothesis was true. She is not sure why; she hypothesizes that perhaps it is because boys are more aggressive.
In addition, the article states that both the boys and the girls underestimated how much noise to which they are exposed. Twenty-seven of the students were exposed to noise levels that are higher than what is considered safe. The highest decibel level averaged out to be 126.4 decibels.
The article notes that Goebel believes her research proves that teenagers are exposed to noises so loud that they are at risk for hearing losses in their later adult years. A physician at Washington University is helping her to get her research published in a medical journal.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press & Local Wire
DATE: April 15, 2000
SECTION: Business News
DATELINE: Brussels, Belgium
An article by the Associated Press reported that the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has given the European Commission (EU) until the end of June respond to the United States' complaints over its ban on hush kits--noise reducing technology for noisy jets.
The article said the ongoing dispute prompted the US to abandon negotiations an file a complaint with the ICAO. The article said if the ICAO sides with the US complaint, the EU could lose its voting rights in the organization, but environmentalists urged the EU Parliament to adopt the prohibition on registering aircraft with hushkits.
PUBLICATION: Arizona Republic
DATE: April 15, 2000
SECTION: Sun Cities/Surprise Community; Pg. 1
BYLINE: by Lori Baker
DATELINE: Phoenix and Glendale, Arizona
According to the Arizona Republic, noise from Interstate 10 already interferes with the quality of life and peace of mind for residents who live nearby, but a construction project for a local loop has added to the din.
The article said that while, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) refused to pay for sound walls along the loop, Phoenix and Glendale city councils have come to the rescue. Glendale city officials say the state should pay for the noise barriers, and are preparing to meet with ADOT officials to discuss the case yet one more time. At issue is a local community that was declared residential before the freeway was construction.
The article said the cost to Phoenix is around $1.7 million while the cost to Glendale is lower, $500,000.
The article said the goal for the sound walls is to reduce noise to 62 decibels (dB), or the level of normal speech about three feet away.
According to the article, buildings within about half a mile away may have to be soundproofed with extra insulation or thicker windows in order for noise levels not to exceed 45 decibels.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: April 15, 2000
SECTION: North Phoenix Community; Pg. 1
BYLINE: by David Madrid
DATELINE: Glendale, Arizona
The Associated Press printed an article from the Arizona Republic about developers who have threatened to sue several cities around Luke Air Force Base. The developers want zoning changes in order to develop the land within a 1988 noise contour. The cities want to keep the noise contour zoning because of safety hazards and noise, and to do otherwise would leave them vulnerable to potential lawsuits they could not afford.
Accordng to the article, Glendale city council members announced the city is prepared to defend the Luke Air Force Base cities, adding that they are ready for the fight and certain to win.
The article said that of particular concern are 10 acres of a development near Surprise, Arizona, which are inside the noise corridor.
PUBLICATION: The Guardian
DATE: April 15, 2000
SECTION: Guardian Foreign Pages; Pg. 16
BYLINE: Adela Gooch
DATELINE: Madrid, Spain
According to The Guardian, the noise levels from mobile telephones is such a nuisance that people are demanding legislative action. The growth rate of mobile telephone use is higher in Spain than anywhere else in Europe, according to the article--from one million to 18 million in just five years.
The article said that the noise level in public places often exceed established decibels (dB) levels (55 to 65 dB) that the World Health Organization set. So the Centre for Scientific Investigation, Spain's primary research center supports the demand for legislative action.
The article said that Spain's national pastime, la charla (small talk, talking just to be talking and chatty citizens that use mobile telephones for personal reasons are the reason that mere "noise pollution" has escalated to shouting and physical brawls.
The article said that mobile telephone companies, in an effort to stop legislation, have published "guidelines" for using the telephones and asked users to use the text message system.
PUBLICATION: Ottawa Citizen
DATE: April 15, 2000
SECTION: New Homes; I1 / Front
BYLINE: Jennifer Campbell
DATELINE: Nepean, Ottawa, Canada
The Ottawa Citizen printed an article about a city planner in Nepean, Ottawa who is redesigning the city and building in more character. Included in the plans is the elimination of noise walls in neighborhoods.
The article said that the city's chief planner, Jack Stirling, plans to eliminate noise walls from future urban planning by building grid-oriented communities (where drivers depart from established points rather than one access point).
PUBLICATION: Press Journal
DATE: April 15, 2000
SECTION: Indian River County; Pg. A8
DATELINE: Vero Beach, Florida
The Press Journal printed a letter from an aircraft engineer regarding jet noise complaints. The letter is printed in its entirety.
As an aircraft engineer, I depend on aircraft noise to earn a living. This town has been a center for aviation for many years. (Lots of airplanes, lots of airplane noise.) If people did not want to listen to aircraft noise, they should have looked a lot more closely where they were moving to. Personally, I will be right on the runway when my new home is built. I love airplane noise.
A reminder to those who are complaining about the noise, you will need to disclose the problem to potential buyers of your home. If you don't, you could be held liable for lack of disclosure. It has happened in California and other parts of the country.
Dave Cadorette
Liaison Engineering
Vero Beach
PUBLICATION: Union Leader
DATE: April 15, 2000
SECTION: Section A Pg. 4
BYLINE: Mark Hayward
DATELINE: Manchester, New Hampshire
The Union Leader printed an article regarding the Manchester City Planning Board and controversy over Interstate 293. The article said that a landowner wants to build an 11-lot subdivision near the interstate, but the board already said no in 1999--because of noise. The article said that six homes would "actually have I-293 in their back yard."
The article said that a lawyer for the landowner said that the noise would be equivalent to the noise on a street corner in town, and that people could sit outside and carry on a conversation. Noise inside the home, the lawyer said, would not be a problem so long as construction was appropriate.
According to the article, one city council member said the city could be forced to build a sound wall in the future if the subdivision were built.
Vaillancourt warned if the homes are built, those homeowners may one day be demanding the city erect a fence to dampen noise from the interstate.
The article said no decisions were made regarding the proposed subdivision.
PUBLICATION: Washington Times
DATE: April 15, 2000
SECTION: Part A; Commentary; Editorials; Letters; Pg. A11
BYLINE: Elizabeth Foster, Director, National Campaign for Hearing Health
The Washington Times printed a commentary regarding the dangerous impact of noise on hearing. The commentary is printed in its entirety.
As the director of the National Campaign for Hearing Health, I applaud your article addressing the dangers of toxic noise ("Test project for bridge sure to be deafening," Metropolitan, March 22).
"Toxic noise" is a phrase coined by my group to define noises that can destroy and irreversibly damage hearing.
When hair cells in the ear, the sensory organs that allow us to hear, are damaged by loud noises, they cannot be regenerated. Like chemicals found in tap water or air, exposure to loud, everyday noise is a form of environmental pollution that can permanently destroy hair cells.
The result is hearing damage and, in some cases, permanent hearing loss. Prolonged exposure to noise above the 85 decibel level, such as that of a pile driver being used in bridge construction, has been shown to cause hearing loss.
Neighbors should not "become accustomed" to the bridge construction noise. They do so at risk to their hearing. Symptoms of hearing loss from toxic noise include ringing or pain in the ears, difficulty hearing quiet sounds, a feeling of fullness in the ears and an awareness of transient hearing loss.
To prevent hearing damage from toxic hearing loss, wear ear plugs/protection when exposed to loud noises (those construction workers operating the pile driver are wearing ear protection for a reason), plug ears with fingers when "ambushed" by unexpected loud noises and see a doctor on a regular basis for testing and monitoring.
Our organization offers free earplugs to help prevent the damage caused by exposure to toxic noise. For information on the danger toxic noise poses to your hearing health, visit www.hearinghealth.net.
ELIZABETH FOSTER
Director
National Campaign for Hearing Health
Washington
The National Campaign for Hearing Health is sponsored by the Deafness Research Foundation.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: State and Regional
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise; Nancy L. Grden; Paula E. Backus
The Associated Press reports that a meeting was held recently in Virginia Beach, Virginia to ask for help from the city and from Navy officials in reducing jet noise from the nearby Oceana Naval Air Station. The meeting was called by Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise (CCAJN), a group that was formed two years ago and has 1,500 members.
According to the article, CCAJN members, as well as some lawyers who attended the meeting, talked about possible solutions to the noise problem. Ideas included contacting City Council members and filing lawsuits. Attorney Jack Ferrebee told the group that lawsuits could help them get reimbursed for property value reductions and for adverse changes in their quality of life as a result of the noise. Another lawyer in attendance, Cristobal Bonifaz of Massachusetts, recommended that the residents sue. A few years ago he represented more than twenty people who lived near Massachusetts' Westover Air Force Base and won the case. The homeowners received $30,000 to $40,000 each.
The article states that not everyone who attended the meeting was in favor of filing a lawsuit against the base. Nancy L. Grden asked, "Isn't the point to reduce the jet noise? Why waste our time in conversation?"
The article reports, however, that more than 100 residents at the meeting showed their interest in filing a lawsuit by adding their names to a list of those for whom a lawsuit would be an answer. Paula E. Backus was one of these. She said that because of the noise, she is concerned that the value of her property will fall. The Navy has attempted to address residents' concerns by announcing a program to build a $9.9 million "hush-house," an insulated hangar for testing jet engines during ground maintenance.
The article adds that CCAJN already filed a lawsuit in 1998, claiming that the Navy's environmental impact statement for the relocation of FA-18 Hornets to Oceana Naval Air Station was not accurate. They lost the case, but CCJN appealed, and the case is now pending in the 4th US Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia.
The article goes on to say that CCAJN members distributed a brochure at the meeting called "Voters Guide to Virginia Beach Council Elections," which highlights different local candidates for public office and their stand on the jet noise issue. Candidates in attendance included mayoral candidate Mike Arsuaga, at-large council seat candidate John O. Parmele Jr., and school board at-large seat candidate Brian A. Kirwin.
PUBLICATION: Sunday News
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: Perspective, Pg. P-3, Letters
DATELINE: Lancaster, Pennsylvania
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Kevin and Yvonne Thatcher
The Sunday News in Lancaster, Pennsylvania printed a letter to the editor from two readers in Elizabethtown who are concerned about car stereo noise. The letter is reprinted here in its entirety:
"For the past nine months, a group of concerned citizens in Elizabethtown has attempted to resolve a major problem that plagues our town, namely the excessive and unacceptable noise levels caused by inconsiderate people who drive through town blasting their car stereos at all hours of day, including late into the night.
Their behavior shows that they have no common courtesy toward others, let alone any common sense. But our town officials and other state and county officials, despite being made aware of this, refuse to do anything and do not enforce the laws -- including noise ordinances already on the books here in Elizabethtown.
As residents, we have the right to quiet enjoyment. By refusing to enforce our rights, our town, county and state officials that have been contacted are doing a great disservice to our community.
The sound of these car stereos not only vibrates our homes, but it can actually be felt! Therefore, it is literally a form of physical assault, known to cause major migraines and mental anguish in many people.
Living on or near the main street is next to impossible! These drivers are guilty of disturbing the peace, disorderly conduct and negligent driving, yet our police have actually been observed looking the other way. The residents of our town are forced to put up with this major annoyance and, thanks to the apathy of our town officials, the perpetrators are getting away with it.
April 12 is National Noise Awareness Day. We challenge Elizabethtown officials and our police department and other county and state officials to actually do something about this ongoing problem. All those who live in Elizabethtown who have had enough of the excessive noise should make their voices heard so that officials have no choice but to enforce our rights!
If other towns can write citations for these drivers, then we expect Elizabethtown to do the same. No excuses! These people are lowering the quality of life in our town. And no, if we don't like it we will not move away. This is our town, and those who drive through it will respect our rights! And those who supposedly run our town will enforce those rights! We will not tolerate this problem any longer."
Kevin and Yvonne Thatcher
Elizabethtown
PUBLICATION: Arizona Republic
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: Valley and State; Pg. B6
BYLINE: Charles Kelly
DATELINE: Bullhead City, Arizona
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Brian Stevens
The Arizona Republic reports that the town of Bullhead City, Arizona is about to put into effect a new, strict noise ordinance that will hopefully solve the city's problems with car stereos. Resident Brian Stevens helped spearhead the effort to get the ordinance passed.
The article quotes Stevens as saying, "These stereos can literally be heard half a mile in each direction, thereby affecting 600 or 700 homes in a moving radius. We just basically said enough is enough."
The article states that Toby Cotter, the public information officer for Bullhead City, said that many residents work at night in the casinos in nearby Laughlin, Nevada. It is very difficult for them to try to sleep during the day with loud music playing.
The article adds, however, that not everyone thinks there is a noise problem in town. James Hart, who is a co-owner of a stereo speaker store, thinks that tough enforcement of the ordinance will anger car stereo owners and hurt local businesses. He said, "I rarely hear [noise] on my street. I think it (the ordinance) is a little ridiculous."
Additionally, the article quoted Dennis Miller, who owns an audio shop and who believes that the ordinance unfairly singles out noisy electronic equipment. He contended, "They are picking on car audio and not picking on sport rods that are extremely loud, and Harley-Davidsons that are extremely loud."
The article then describes more fully the noise ordinance. It forbids any "reckless" noise that "disturbs the peace of a person of normal sensitivity in residential parts of the city." Many towns across the nation have taken an interest in Bullhead City's new ordinance because of its level of detail. The ordinance particularly targets electronic equipment such as radios, televisions, musical instruments, CD players, and loudspeakers, and will be easier to enforce than the old ordinance. CNN profiled Bullhead City's ordinance in a short television report recently, and soon thereafter, the city received calls from towns in Wisconsin and Kentucky, asking for details about the ordinance.
The article discusses further the details of the ordinance. A device is considered in violation of the ordinance if it is plainly audible from twenty feet away from its source, between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. A device is in violation of the ordinance any time of the day or night if sound vibration can be felt twenty feet away. Many homes in the city are on small lots, and that is why such short distances are specified in the ordinance. Emergency vehicles and specially permitted events such as parades and public assemblies are exempt.
The article states that someone in violation of the ordinance may be charged with a misdemeanor for which the violator can be fined up to $2,500, up to 180 days in jail, or both. Martin Rogers, the city prosecutor, said that a first-time offender would probably be fined $100 plus court charges. If someone were convicted two times within a year, he/she would probably be fined $200 plus court charges and jail time of 48 hours. Under the new ordinance, police can act on a violation without a complaint. Under the old ordinance, they needed to receive a complaint first. Many elderly people, in particular, were afraid of complaining about noise generated by somebody "unsavory looking."
The article adds that Stevens said he counted 19 occurrences of car stereo noise from vehicles driving by his home last Thanksgiving. He said, "We hope that the Police Department will view it as a serious problem and will enforce it, and thereby word will get out and this type of noise will diminish."
PUBLICATION: Atlanta Journal and Constitution
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: Gwinnett Extra; Pg. 5Jj
BYLINE: Jack Warner
DATELINE: Atlanta, Georgia
The Atlanta Journal and Constitution reports that a reader recently asked for help in determining the cause of extremely loud noise from his bandsaw. The newspaper's woodworking expert, Jack Warner, attempts to answer the question.
The column states that the reader has a quarter-inch blade on his bandsaw. He says that the saw cuts fine, but generates excessive noise. He wonders if it is perhaps caused by vibration.
Warner says in the column that he needs more information in order to answer the question. He would like to know: is the quarter-inch blade the only blade the user has had on the saw? Is it the first quarter-inch blade on the saw? What kind of saw is it? Does is sound like metal-to-metal noise, or a vibrating noise? When answering the question, Warner will assume that the saw is a standard 14-inch Delta or Jet.
In the column, Warner suggests first checking for proper tension, and opening the saw (after unplugging it) to check whether the blade is hitting the upper and lower bearings or blocks when the blade makes a full circuit through the saw. Is the blade perhaps hitting another part of the saw that is out of place? Is the blade running true? Is the top wheel balanced?
Warner says in the column that if the noise is caused by the blade itself, it will sound like a ticking or scraping noise when the top wheel is spun by hand. If the wheel itself is making noise, it could be bad bearings.
Warner writes that a well-tuned and properly set up bandsaw should not vibrate much at all. If the entire saw is vibrating severely, the cause might be an out-of-balance base or loose bolts. Warner wonders how a saw that is making as much noise as the reader describes could still cut well.
PUBLICATION: High Point Enterprise
DATE: April 9, 2000
BYLINE: Paul B. Johnson
DATELINE: High Point, North Carolina
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Steve Flannigan; Linda Simmons Mansfield; Steve Worgan
The High Point Enterprise in North Carolina reports that many residents in north High Point are concerned about a proposed Federal Express Corporation (FedEx) cargo hub that is set to be built at Piedmont Triad International Airport (PTIA). The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has recently released its preliminary environmental impact study on the project, which is estimated to cost $300 million.
According to the article, the impact study comprises three volumes and more than 1,000 pages. It examines twenty-one environmental categories, including air and noise pollution, wetlands, and farmlands. Those critical of the project say that the study favors the airport's plan to build a third runway to accommodate FedEx. The study will receive a final decision this fall, and, if approved, the new hub will open in 2005.
The article states that resident and businesswoman Linda Simmons Mansfield thinks that the FAA is favoring FedEx and the hub project over the welfare of the community. She said, "I think the report is a farce."
The article notes that north High Point resident Steve Flannigan added, "This has been rubber-stamped, and that's a shame." He said that he will continue to fight the project, but he said that he has decided to move from his home, which is located 4 miles from the airport. He thinks the hub will add greatly to the aircraft noise problem and to air pollution. Opponents of the project say that the FedEx planes will take off and land mainly over north High Point and western Guilford County. The hub could be looking at 126 arrivals and departures daily between the hours of 10:00 PM and 4:00 AM.
The article goes on to say that any residential areas that are four miles or more from the airport will not be included in the airport's noise contours for the project. The draft impact study indicates that between 172 and 272 homes will fall within the contours. Homes that fall outside the noise contours will not be eligible for FAA buyouts or homeowner compensation.
However, the article also reports that PTIA officials have told homeowners that they will listen to complaints from any local resident who is bothered by increased noise, whether or not their home falls within the contour. PTIA Executive Director Ted Johnson said that the airport will work with noise experts to assist in this process. He said, "The tougher issue is going to be what we do for folks outside the noise contours."
According to the article, Mansfield and Flannigan are skeptical of promises being made by the airport. Mansfield had been living in her new home for six months when FedEx announced the project in April 1998. She lives 8 miles from the airport and is bothered by the current level of noise and air traffic. She said that she has found jet fuel residue in the horse water troughs on her farm.
The article mentions that Flannigan and other project opponents plan legal action against FedEx and the airport. They will also attend the May 23 hearing on the draft study in Greensboro. Steve Worgan, another north High Point resident who is fighting the project said that they will try to convince local politicians to do more to support their constituents in this matter. There will be Guilford County Board of Commissioners elections this year. Six commissioners will be up for re-election. One of them is Walt Cockerham, who supports the project and currently serves on the Airport Authority. Linda Shaw and Steve Arnold, the commissioners who represent the affected areas of western Guilford and north High Point, will not be up for reelection until 2002.
PUBLICATION: High Point Enterprise
DATE: April 9, 2000
DATELINE: High Point, North Carolina
The High Point Enterprise in North Carolina reports on the recently released Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) draft environmental impact study of the proposed Federal Express cargo hub at Piedmont Triad International Airport. The study is summarized on the following Web site: www.gsoair.org. The study is also available at five locations in Guilford and Forsyth Counties, including the airport and the public library in High Point.
The article includes the following excerpts from the study:
The article reports on the project's scope. In 2005, FedEx will operate 48 arrivals and departures between 10:00 PM and 4:00 AM. By 2009, that number could climb to 126. In 2009, 104,000 packages are expected to be processed each night.
The article reports on expected noise. The FAA realizes that noise will affect some properties. If the airport builds a third runway to accommodate FedEx, between 170 and 270 homes will fall within the airport's noise contours.
The article says that the report states that the hub will address issues relating to air quality. Projections are that "total emission of nitrogen oxides -- the precursors to ozone -- are above the Clean Air Act" acceptable levels.
Concerning water quality, the article states that the hub could adversely impact the Brush Creek, Horsepen Creek, and East Fork Deep River sub-basins. The project will address stormwater runoff issues. The hub project is not expected to adversely impact any endangered species.
PUBLICATION: Ledger
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: East Polk; Pg. F1
BYLINE: Lorrie Delk
DATELINE: Lake Alfred, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Brett Stegmaier
The Ledger in Florida reports that the controversy over boat racing on Lake Alfred continues. The city of Lake Alfred's Parks and Recreation Board will hold a meeting this week to hear people on both sides of the issue speak before the Board makes a recommendation to the City Commission as to whether the races will be allowed to continue.
According to the article, residents who oppose the races, like Brett Stegmaier, are concerned about noise, water pollution, and alcohol consumption. Stegmaier said that people who live on the lake are accustomed to it being a quiet environment, and the races disturb that. He said that, even though there are only five or six races per year on the lake, the racers generate noise on the lake on other weekends when they come to the lake to practice before a competition.
In addition, the article notes that Stegmaier is also concerned about water pollution. He said that he saw a racer refueling his boat in the water, and saw him spill fuel. He confronted the racer, who denied having spilled any fuel. Bud Gann, a race official, countered by saying that the fuel and oil used by the boats are not harmful to the environment because they are not petroleum based. And he added that the boats actually help the lake's natural environment because the propellers aerate the water. R.J. Wanska from Wizard Marine Performance in Auburndale, confirmed that the methanol/alcohol fuel used by the race boats is water soluble. And the lubricant used is from castor oil, instead of petroleum based.
The article mentions that Rodney Thompson, who also lives on the lake, thinks that the races would be fine as long as they were better supervised by city officials. He also wants to be sure that city ordinances are enforced.
The article states that Bud Gann is also a member of the Florida Outboard Racing Association, the sponsor of the races on Lake Alfred. He said that the races only take place on Lake Alfred three times a year (although other personal watercraft races take place on the lake as well), and they are not as noisy as they used to be, because boats with open exhausts are no longer allowed. And the races start after noon and end before nightfall, added Gerry DeAngelo, recreation director for the city of Lake Alfred.
In addition to environmental concerns, the article reports that some residents are also concerned about the racers consuming alcohol. Some claim to have seen racers drinking in Lions Park during race weekends, where many racers and spectators camp. Consumption of alcohol is prohibited in any city-owned park. Gann also said that racers are not allowed to drink alcohol after midnight the night before a race, and they must wait one hour after races are finished to begin drinking again
The article goes on to say that some residents also think that the city does not receive enough money in revenues from the races to make it worthwhile. The city currently makes $180 to $250 per race. City Manager Jim Drumm said that city crews often have quite a substantial clean-up task after the races are over.
The article reports that DeAngelo said the races have been held on Lake Alfred since 1941, and many world records have been set there. Gann said, "People like to race on Lake Alfred because it's fast."
The article further reports that races are currently scheduled for May 13-14, and for sometime in October. After the upcoming meeting, the Parks and Recreation Boards will pass their recommendation on to the City Commission, whose members will make the final decision as to whether the races will be allowed to continue.
PUBLICATION: London Free Press
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: News, Pg. A4
BYLINE: Jim Taylor
DATELINE: Central Elgin County, England
The London Free Press in England reports that people have varying degrees of tolerance for noise, based partly on where they live, and also on their particular personalities. This makes noise issues difficult to regulate and enforce.
According to the article, residents in a big city such as London are accustomed to a cacophony of noises, whereas those in rural areas such as Elgin County do not expect to hear sirens and traffic all day and night.
The article reports that Central Elgin officials recently held a public meeting, attended by over one hundred people, to discuss a proposed noise bylaw. The need for a bylaw was triggered initially by complaints about loud outdoor café music in Port Stanley and loud cars at a drag strip in Sparta.
The article notes that attendees at the meeting had varying degrees of tolerance for noise. A man from the St. Thomas suburb of Lynhurst was annoyed by nighttime train whistle. Another man was worried that a noise bylaw would prevent him from doing work on his home on Sundays. A woman from Belmont had questions about barking dogs. Another man was tired of listening to snowmobiles and all-terrain vehicles racing near his home at night.
The article goes on to say that it is difficult for people to compromise about noise. Owners of bars believe they should be entitled to host outdoor music because they pay taxes. Homeowners believe they are entitled to peace and quiet because they also pay taxes.
The article states that the draft noise bylaw says that noise must cease at 1:00 AM. A bar owner opposed this curfew because he says that 40% of his business is conducted between midnight and 2:00 AM.
According to the article, St. Thomas' noise bylaw states that a noise can be deemed to be disturbing any time of the day. There is no time limit.
The article concludes by stating that Central Elgin will study the issue and the possibility of enacting a noise bylaw next month.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 14; Zones Desk
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Christopher Barnes, Studio City Residents Association; Kathy Anaya; Restore Our Airport Rights (ROAR)
The Los Angeles Times printed letters to the editor from readers who responded to an editorial that the newspaper published about a proposed expansion at Burbank Airport in California. The letters are reprinted here in their entirety:
"Re "Salvaging an Airport Pact," Valley Edition Editorials, April 2.
Having reported accurately on the numerous detractors to the proposed Burbank Airport framework for resolution, The Times still finds no fault with the proposal or its authors. Incredibly, The Times continues to ignore the fundamental flaws in the proposal that were really the cause for the proposal's demise. Instead, sounding like an apologist for Burbank Mayor Stacey Murphy and Council member Dave Golonski (or perhaps a tape recording of same), The Times seems to "blame" this episode on ROAR Restore Our Airport Rights and groups like it. The Times seems to think that if it wasn't for those pesky troublemakers (who are watching their way of life being seriously compromised by the Airport Authority's plans), all would be well at Burbank Airport.
The Times should consider this alternative to blaming ROAR and other community groups: If the parties to the framework agreement had engaged the affected communities, had not lied about their back-room dealings and had not tried to force this deal down our throats, despite its deep flaws, perhaps we could have saved a lot of wasted time and effort. As it is, at least now perhaps all the affected parties can work together to achieve a fair compromise. And yes, we can do that within the applicable federal laws, The Times' obtuse sovereignty arguments notwithstanding."
CHRISTOPHER BARNES
Studio City Residents Assn.
Board of Directors *
"I don't understand how the Burbank Airport expansion continues to be "in dispute." The issues are basic and fundamental: Safety, size and noise. As it sits now, who can dispute that its design is outdated, it's unsafe and already plenty noisy. The solutions to these problems should be decided by those directly affected.
We in Burbank are not unsympathetic to the problems we all share. I know firsthand the noise levels one experiences in Studio City and its surrounding area. In general, it's far worse that what I encounter living in Burbank. However, arguing for easterly takeoffs is not the solution. As I understand it, this is not safe. Why can't we continue with the voluntary curfew and begin building? Then after the two-year noise study, turn the voluntary into mandatory?
Since Glendale and Pasadena have only to gain from a more broad expansion, night flights, etc., and don't appear to be adversely affected by their negative consequences, it seems fair that they should bow to the decisions of the citizens of Burbank and trust that responsible action will be taken. The airport agreement that most citizens in Burbank would agree to would be one that should satisfy us all."
KATHY ANAYA
Burbank *
"The latest turn in the ongoing flap over the plans for a new Burbank Airport terminal would be laughable if it wasn't so discouraging, if not dangerous, to the traveling public. Put it up to a vote of Burbank neighbors who are upset about noise? You know how that will turn out! Emotional NIMBYism will carry the day and the project will suffer further delays. I have a solution: Allow only those locals to vote who have lived there since before the airport was built. Or throw the vote open to all those citizens of the Valley, and Los Angeles County, who depend on that airport for safe, essential and convenient transportation."
JOHN KRIZEK
Valley Glenn
PUBLICATION: New Hampshire Sunday News
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: Section A Pg. 1
BYLINE: Mark Hayward
DATELINE: Manchester, New Hampshire
The New Hampshire Sunday News reports that the city of Manchester, New Hampshire is considering allowing Ciment Quebec, Inc. to build four storage towers for dry cement. The towers would be south of the Manchester Millyard and would be 68 feet high, with an elevator mechanism on top that would make the total height eighty-seven feet.
According to the article, members of the Manchester Planning Board recently traveled to Palmer, Massachusetts to look at similar Ciment Quebec towers there. Members were unimpressed with the unattractive towers. Those who visited the towers in Palmer were David Boutin, Peter Capano, David Scannell, Real Pinard, and Terry Harlacher.
The article states that many people in Manchester are concerned that the towers would be inappropriate for Manchester. The Planning Board recently told Ciment Quebec to take their proposal to the Manchester Heritage Commission. The Commission has no power to turn down the project, but they will hold a public hearing about it. The Planning Commission then has thirty days to make its final decision.
According to the article, alternate planning commissioner Boutin is concerned. He said, "The river, the Millyard, that's all part of our heritage, our culture."
The article states that Manchester officials have also been concerned about noise from the facility. The facility in Palmer uses a pneumatic system to unload cement from railcars. The pneumatic system generates 82 decibels of sound. The facility in Manchester would use a quieter bucket elevator system that is predicted to generate only 60 decibels.
The article reports that in Palmer, the closest homes are located about 700 feet from the facility. The storage tanks are not visible from the homes. One resident, Mel Carroll, said that he sometimes hears a clanking noise from the facility, and can smell diesel fumes.
PUBLICATION: Press-Enterprise
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: Local; Pg. B01
BYLINE: Sandra Stokley
DATELINE: Pedley, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Cindy Scheirer; Linda McDonald; Curtis Hummel; John Tavaglione, Riverside County Second District Supervisor
The Press-Enterprise reports that Cindy Scheirer, a resident of Pedley, California, is perpetually annoyed by the noise made by hundreds of roosters owned by her neighbors in this rural community. Scheirer estimates that there are at least eight nearby properties that each have more than fifty roosters.
According to the article, Riverside County Second District Supervisor John Tavaglione is considering placing a cap on how many roosters one person can keep. Many others have also complained about the noise. Additionally, illegal cockfighting has been known to take place in the county. Tavaglione's board colleague Jim Venable will help to draft an ordinance that will be announced at public hearings in the coming weeks.
The article states that different areas have different rules about roosters. In rural and agricultural areas of Riverside County, owners of at least 1/4 acre can keep up to 199 fowl. There is no distinction between male and female. Orange County bans noise-making fowl completely. Los Angeles County has no fowl limit in unincorporated areas, but uses a noise ordinance for enforcement of problems. San Diego County has a noise ordinance and a limit of 25 birds per property. San Bernardino County enforces number limits based on zoning and lot size. The city of Riverside allows up to 50 fowl in residential zones if they are 100 feet from any residence and if they do not crow.
The article goes on to say that many residents like Chris Maddalena, who oppose any fowl limits, are bird breeders and exhibitors. Some also sell eggs and meat. Maddalena also opposes cockfighting, but he does not believe that legal breeders should be punished as well. He thinks noise complaints about the chickens are unjustified. He asked, "Why would you move to an agricultural area and not expect people to use their property for agricultural purposes?"
The article reports, however, that some offenders have moved to the area just recently. Linda McDonald has lived in the county for fourteen years and had no problem until a family with two dozen roosters moved next door to her. She thinks there should be a limit. She complained, "Those roosters crow around the clock. It's not a pretty noise. It's very irritating, very stressful."
The article notes that another resident, Curtis Hummel, was active in 1998 in fighting the rooster noise. He and Scheirer collected 1,000 signatures for a petition. Hummel also tape recorded the rooster sounds that he hears at his home. Hummel stopped protesting because of harassment. He said, "People started referring to us as animal haters and saying if there was a move to limit roosters, that horses would be next. The funny thing is I own chickens and horses."
The article states that Maddalena has fought rooster bans before. In 1990, he helped defeat a proposed rooster ban in Los Angeles County. John Calas, acting administrator for land use regulation in Los Angeles County, was surprised at how vehement the arguments became at the public hearings that were held at that time. He said, "I never realized it was such an emotional issue."
The article adds that Tavaglione is prepared for plenty of opposition. He stated, "I think there's a will on the part of the board members to tackle a problem that has continued to get worse. Bottom line, someone is going to have to tell me why 199 roosters on a piece of property is important. I understand chickens, but not roosters."
PUBLICATION: San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: Opinion;Pg. G-5
DATELINE: San Diego, California
The San Diego Union-Tribune printed an interview with Major General William G. Bowdon, Commander of the Marine Corps Air Bases Western Area. Bowdon spoke about flight routes and the use of the Miramar air facility. He addressed military aircraft noise at the base. The interview is reprinted here in its entirety:
"We've changed the routes almost 30 times already since we've been here just to mitigate noise. We've moved away from Del Mar by about a mile and a half.
Q uestion: Could you summarize the situation today with Marine fixed-wing use of Miramar, the search for alternative flight routes, and your relations with the community?
Answer: Miramar, there's a lot of history out there that you all are probably more familiar with than I am. About how it was negotiated years ago with whether or not the Marines would come there and what would happen and who voted for what in terms of whether it would be military or a civilian airport and how all that turned out. The most important thing that happens at Miramar everyday is Third Wing Aircraft Company shows up and they go to work to train Marines. We're asking these young people to fly in all kinds of conditions, getting shot at at times and so forth. They have to be trained. There's 25 squadrons that deploy in the Third Marine Aircraft Wing. Right now 12 of them are deployed. So all those pilots that I have on the flight line right now at Miramar are not trained. They're flying the sorties that they need to fly in order to be combat trained. My job is to make sure that that happens and to support the Third Marine Aircraft Wing so that they can deploy on a moment's notice. The other things that I do, of course, are the things that fall out as a city within a city, quality of life kinds of issues for all the people who work there as well as their families, Marines, sailors and civilians. That's job number two. And certainly job number three, that I spend a lot of time on and I'm very concerned about, of course, is community outreach. We're in the schools. We're part of the city.
Q: What about litigation involving Marine use of Miramar?
A: All of the litigation took place before I got here . . . We came to a settlement about a year ago. We're trying to answer the three tenets of that litigation. One, to do an air quality study. That's ongoing and will be finished in the summer. Two, to do a noise study offshore at Del Mar. That's complete and in the hands of the folks who need it at Del Mar. And three, to do the eastern route study.
Q: To refresh our memories, MARCH (Move Against Relocating Choppers Here), the City of Del Mar and Del Mar businessman Richard Hertzberg were the plaintiffs?
A: Yes, at least in my mind that's how it was. Mr. (Jerry) Hargarten was named as the March chairman.
Q: Did this settlement, in which the Marines agreed to pay over $600,000 in MARCH's legal bills, buy any cooperation from the coalition?
A: MARCH has its say in this. I appreciate their input. I agree with what MARCH says about contacting their elected political officials and using them to come to us. I have always, since the day I got here, been in contact with political officials from all sides of Miramar, from the East County to up and down I-15 to Del Mar. We've shown them the base, we've shown them the squadrons, we've put faces to the people who work out there. We've taken them up in the control tower. We've flown the mayor of Escondido and others on the routes to show them what we're doing.
Q: What is the process to get to a point where you may or may not recommend changes in the helicopter routes?
A: The process that was agreed upon in the litigation was for us to provide the draft study to the litigants. And I felt that the elected officials should get that as well.
Q: Have the draft studies been released publicly?
A: No. We feel we need to keep the due process intact. The initial part of that is for the litigants to take the draft study and then to come back to us and give us their comments. At that point, we will take those comments and make a decision as to whether or not we have a feasible route. If we have a feasible route negotiated with the litigants, and certainly with input from the elected officials, then we'll determine feasibility. With a feasible route then we'll continue with further studies, an environmental assessment which will include public comment. That's the point where we'd like for the public to engage and we will go to the town meetings, we'll go wherever we need to go in order to take in public comment. We would also seek the FAA's comments.
Q: How soon does the public get to look at these studies?
A: It depends on how fast the litigants give us back their comments . . . We gave it to them on March 10. If they're going to take the whole 60 days, that would run us through to about the first part of May. And then we'll move from there.
Q: Has public input affected your operations?
A: We've changed the routes almost 30 times already since we've been here just to mitigate noise. I'll give you a few of the major ones: the Julian departure, which the people in Mira Mesa, Fairbanks Ranch and Rancho Santa Fe are very concerned about. We moved it over a few radials and we raised the initial holddown altitude for fixed wing from 3,000 to 6,000 feet. That was huge for those people. On the helicopter routes, it took us two to three years to get the Class B air space that's over us changed so that we could raise the altitudes of transient aircraft up and down I-15 from 2,000 and 2,500, the two levels that we go in north and south, to 3,000 and 3,500. We created another route, the Torrey Pines route, where we've moved away from Del Mar by about a mile and a half. We also prioritized all of our flights for a westerly route out over the water. We want to fly over as few people as we possibly can. The easiest way for us to do that is to go due west seven miles. It puts us a mile offshore and we turn north.
Q: And that is your basic route which you fly most of the time except for certain weather conditions?
A: About 80 percent of the time to Camp Pendleton.
Q: And so all this complaining is about the other 20 percent of the time?
A: You got it.
Q: Can you give us an idea of the scope of the problem in terms of the number of flights per month?
A: We fly on average 9000 ops. A takeoff and a landing would be 2 ops. A sortie is a flight obviously. We're running about 9,000 ops per month. Eighty percent of that is fixed wing, 20 percent of that is rotary wing.
Q: But how many flights that actually could bother people?
A: Right now, we're averaging about 100 times a month we fly up and down I-15 . . . some days just one helicopter flight, some days it's 3, 4 or 5. What drives that is the weather.
Q: What is the population of the footprint that's affected on the ground there by the current I-15 land routes?
A: I am told that SANDAG has estimated that at 350,000 people.
Q: During the last base closure process, did the Marine Corps support closing El Toro?
A: I think they did from the standpoint of wanting to consolidate and wanting to consolidate two bases into one and being closer to the Marine ground units at Pendleton. Miramar provided an ideal location. Not so much from the standpoint that it was located in an urban area . . . but it is at the center of all the ranges and warning areas that we have to the west as well as Camp Pendleton to the north, Twentynine Palms farther north and east, and then all of your bombing ranges and so forth that we have to the east of us around the Salton Sea and out by Yuma. The center of that is Miramar. The other thing that's good about Miramar is the fact that the Navy is here. So we interact with the Navy and we interact with the shipping and so forth and do our training with them.
Q: It seems that MARCH and the City of Del Mar and Hertzberg as the plaintiffs have the studies and a chance to provide input before the rest of the community. That would seem to disadvantage areas farther to the east -- Ramona, Poway, whatever -- that would rather keep the routes that you now have because they are going to be sharing noise that they don't now get. Is that the case?
A: I think it is and I think it's my responsibility to balance that and I will. I have a responsibility to the public to ensure that everybody gets a fair shake here and I'm going to do that. What I want us to do is fly over the least populated areas. That's why we are prioritized to fly offshore. As long as the weather is good, that's what will happen. Since we instituted those policies of prioritizing our flights offshore, we haven't gone a full year yet to see how that's going to work out. But my gut feeling is that we'll be flying this year less over I-15 than we did last year.
Q: What weather conditions preclude flying offshore?
A: The coastal layer. In other words, quite often we get a coastal layer that comes in and it's right over the beaches there. If we can get to 1,500 VFR (Visual Flight Rules), then we can fly offshore as long as we stay VFR all the way out.
Q: When you go north on 15, where do you break off from the freeway?
A: We go all the way to Red Mountain. We follow I-15 above Escondido to a Red Mountain Road intersection and then turn off.
Q: But by that time you have pretty good altitude.
A: You are at 3,000 or 3,500. Our instructions to our air crew are to put the freeway directly under you. Not to deviate. And we've emphasized this in numerous communications with our people. That's the most noise abating way that we can operate up and down I-15. I'm satisfied that, one, our air crews have taken this to heart, and two, I'm satisfied that we're doing the best we can out there.
Q: Why not higher?
A: Class B air space (commercial restrictions). Iff you enter into that Class B air space you have to be under IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) control with an FAA controller controlling you.
Q: Are all of your operations during the day?
A: No. Our people have to be trained at night. So we're flying at night but, of course, it's a reduced operation in most cases at night.
Q: How late?
A: It can go as late as 11 and sometimes 12. It depends on the operation. They're only allowed one approach into Miramar when they do that. But, yeah, we fly at night. We have to. That's what's expected of them in the real world out there in East Timor and the Persian Gulf or East Africa or wherever we're going to ask them to go.
Q: Why couldn't the Marines' operations be consolidated at Camp Pendleton and open up that airfield at Miramar for civilian use?
A: Right now the airfield at Camp Pendleton is a small airfield that's been built in a creek bed. It has flooded several times. This year the base has spent $45 million on a dike system. It's a huge project. It's got pumps like you have around New Orleans to drain New Orleans when it has to be drained. There are 188 aircraft -- two training squadrons -- on that airfield right now. Imagine a beehive -- that's the best way I could describe Camp Pendleton's airfield to you. It's a busy place. There's a lot of training gone on. On the flight line, I can't put another hangar, I can't put another airplane down there.
Q: What geographic areas are noise complaints coming from?
A: Last summer when we were flying a lot up and down I-15 until we were able to get the Class B air space changed, we were receiving about 33 complaints per 100 ops. Right now we're receiving about 10 per 100 ops. The complaints come from Escondido, Poway, Rancho Bernardo. There are people out there who feel like the Marines shouldn't be here. I think that that's where a lot of it stems from.
Q: Is it your expectation that when the eastern route study process is completed you will recommend different routes for the helicopters?
A: I've said since day one that I-15 will be a part of our procedures. I'm not saying that that won't ever change, but for the foreseeable future, I-15 is part of our procedures. I-15 came to us and was originally designed with the help of the FAA. Now why was that? One was, the FAA suggested we use a freeway to fly over because it mitigates the noise. The other part of it is, it comes into Miramar at about a 45-degree angle. And that allows the air crew to look both ways for air traffic they may be merging with. So I-15 represents a safe, good route to fly in terms of flying airplanes. What we're really trying to do is come up with a route that we will use to spread some of the load off I-15 from time to time when we have to use I-15. If nothing else, the eastern route study has verified what was found five or six years ago, that the best route between Camp Pendleton and Miramar is I-15 if you're going to have to fly an inland route. It's longer than the offshore route. That's another reason why we'd rather fly offshore."
PUBLICATION: South China Morning Post
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 3
BYLINE: Jennifer Ehrlich
DATELINE: Hong Kong
The South China Morning Post in Hong Kong reports that most tenants in Kam Yuen mansions on Old Peak Road have decided to move from their apartments because of ongoing, intolerable construction noise in the buildings. During the construction, they have continued to pay $40,000 per month in rent, and some of them are now considering suing the landlord for $250,000 each for damages.
According to the article, the tenants maintain that the landlord, Cam Cheung Investment Company, has been accusing them of leaving their apartments because the rents are too high, not because of the incessant noise. Tenant Dinesch Mahbubani retorted, "It's bad enough we have to leave, but it's an insult to imply it is suddenly high rents that have forced three families to move."
The article states that the tenants first complained about the noise to the landlord, and then contacted the police and several government agencies. Under contractual law, the tenants' options are to either move out or file a lawsuit against the landlord. There is no law pertaining to the amount or duration of construction noise that is allowed in a building. The Environmental Protection Department is currently drafting new legislation to set general noise guidelines because they receive more and more complaints each year.
The article reports that senior environmental protection officer Wong Cheung-Lam said that the new guidelines will only affect tenants who do not have specific agreements with their landlords concerning allowable noise levels. The new guidelines will also further restrict offhours construction. Currently, construction is allowed anytime except for from 7:00 PM until 7:00 AM and on Sundays.
PUBLICATION: Sunday Mercury
DATE: April 9, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 37
DATELINE: Birmingham, England
The Sunday Mercury in Birmingham, England reports that our hearing can be damaged by exposure to all types of seemingly harmless things in the home and in our everyday lives. Loud music is usually the first offender that comes to mind, but there are many others as well.
According to the article, more than 8.5 million people in Britain have some level of hearing loss. Only two million of these get help for their problem. International Noise Awareness Day, which is sponsored in part by Scrivens, the Birmingham-based hearing aid and optical specialist, will take place this coming Wednesday and will attempt to warn people about the dangers of being continually exposed to loud noises.
The article states that some noise culprits that are found in the home are cordless telephones with loud rings of up to 140 decibels, lawn mowers, leaf blowers, chainsaws, and power tools. Even musical instruments, personal stereos, coffee grinders, and food processors can cause hearing loss with repeated exposure.
Previous week: April 2, 2000
Next week: April 16, 2000
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