PUBLICATION: Deutsche Presse-Agentur
DATE: October 18, 1997
SECTION: International News
DATELINE: Bangkok, Thailand
The Deutsche Presse-Agentur reports that according to Saturday's Nation paper, nearly one-third of all traffic police in Bangkok, Thailand have hearing problems because of their continuous exposure to noise levels above 70 decibels. The percentage of officers with hearing problems increases the longer they have been with the force, said Monthip Srirattana, director of the Science Ministry's environmental research and training center. All of the officers who have held their jobs for more than ten years have hearing problems, Monthip noted. The article notes that the Science Ministry will join with the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) to create stricter noise control laws and extend "no- noise zones" to deal with the problem, according to Monthip.
PUBLICATION: The Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville, FL)
DATE: October 18, 1997
SECTION: Community News; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Sandy Strickland
DATELINE: Jacksonville, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Roy Miller, Ken Durkee, residents and members of Citizens for Amphitheater Awareness
The Florida Times-Union reports that a debate over whether the City of Jacksonville, Florida should build an amphitheater in Metropolitan Park is heating up. At a meeting Monday of the Southwest Citizens Planning Advisory Committee, two residents expressed their opposition to the proposal on behalf of a citizens group. City representatives did not attend the meeting, the article reports.
According to the article, city officials are considering replacing the pavilion at Metropolitan Park with an $18 million open-air facility that would seat 17,000 or more. Under the plan, the city would own the facility, but would lease it to a private firm that would book concerts.
The article reports that instead of sending a representative to Monday's meeting, Mayor John Delaney sent a letter and information packet. Susan Wiles, the mayor's deputy chief of staff, said the proposal was at too premature a stage to send a representative to the meeting. Meanwhile, Delaney has pledged that issues surrounding noise, public access, economic feasibility, control of the park, and type of acts presented would be addressed before moving forward with the proposal. Delaney said in his letter that the current pavilion operates at a $1 million annual deficit, lacks the amenities to attract top artists, and is badly in need of repair, which would cost between $3 million and $6 million.
The article goes on to say that the proposed amphitheater has been strongly opposed by residents who live in St. Nicholas and Empire Point across the St. Johns River from the park. Residents have formed a group called Citizens for Amphitheater Awareness, and are presenting their concerns to the city's citizens advisory committees. Two residents, Roy Miller and Ken Durkee, spoke on behalf of the group on Monday. Miller said the project would be "an experiment on the river" that would hurt property values, ruin the quality of life for nearby residents, and drive downtown redevelopment to the suburbs, the article says. Miller added that he has talked to residents in Virginia Beach and other cities with amphitheaters, and they have said the high decibel levels cause their houses to vibrate. "I can't find one built in a metropolitan area that doesn't cause this type of problem," Miller said. "The only one that doesn't generate complaints is built in the country."
Meanwhile, Corina Danielson, chair of the Southwest Citizens Planning Advisory Committee, said the group doesn't plan to take a position on the issue, but the presentation was helpful for informational purposes. Other committee members made various comments, the article says. Ed Pauly, an advisory committee member, said he was in Virginia Beach recently and talked with people who lived 1 to 1 1/2 miles from that city's amphitheater. The residents told him they could hear the music, Pauly said. Another committee member, Samantha Wyatt, said residents' concerns were valid, but asked residents to propose an alternative. Other committee members said they were neutral, or said they were sympathetic to noise concerns, but believed a modern amphitheater could be built without exceeding the volume of the concerts that currently play in the park. One committee member, Jean McCorkle, said she is strongly opposed to the amphitheater. McCorkle said she had done some research on the issue, and she questioned whether the amphitheater would pay for itself. She added that residents in other states have filed lawsuits against amphitheaters because of noise, and that the city would not be able to control the acts booked, which could lead to the presence of sexually explicit performers.
PUBLICATION: The Gazette (Montreal)
DATE: October 18, 1997
SECTION: Editorial / Op-Ed; Pg. B4
BYLINE: Mike McDonald, Dorval resident
DATELINE: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
The Gazette printed the following letter-to-the-editor from Mike McDonald, a Dorval, Quebec resident, regarding noise from the new overseas flights taking off from Montreal's Dorval Airport:
The people who have been complaining about noise are full of it, especially Micheline Talbot, Ron Hillman, and Louise Sauve. I'm tired of hearing these people whine and complain about an almost non-existent increase in noise.
The new flights flying in and out of Dorval are almost noiseless compared with the flights that have been there all along. DC9s (Air Canada, US Airways and Northwest Airlines), 737s (Canadian), 727s (Delta Air Lines, First Air, Northwest Airlines and American Airlines) and MD-80s (Delta, American, US Airways, Northwest) all make much more noise than any of the jumbo jets now flying into Dorval, and they've been there all along.
For Micheline Talbot: it's impossible for you to be hearing more noise in the morning! The first international flight is an Air Canada 747-300 arriving from London, England (I believe), which lands in early afternoon (between 12:30 and 1:30). If you hear more noise than you used to, you're imagining it.
For Ron Hillman: how could these flights have affected your summer barbecues? These flights didn't start arriving in Dorval until Sept. 15. And as for your classes, none of these flights depart during class hours! The first one to leave is an Air Canada 747 sometime between 3:30 and 4:30 p.m. What you are hearing is regular traffic.
For Louise Sauve: nothing noisy arrives in Dorval after midnight, much less takes off. Landings of just about any aircraft are quiet, although aircraft-landing lights could be a little annoying (easily fixed with a good blind). Takeoffs are the noisiest part of flight. But nothing noisy takes off before 7 a.m.
Before you all start asking how I know all this, I'll tell you: I work for Delta Air Lines, out on the ramp loading and unloading luggage. I know very well how noisy these planes can be, and I also know how quiet the new ones are.
British Airways has a Boeing 777 that leaves around 9 p.m. I sat to watch this behemoth take off. And you know what? I could barely hear it. If you don't believe me, stand with a device to measure sound in Surrey Park (Dorval) right at the end of Runway 28. You'll see what I say is true. Call Boeing, call McDonnell-Douglas, call the manufacturers and ask them for the decibel levels of these international planes compared with the U.S. and domestic ones.
PUBLICATION: The Orlando Sentinel
DATE: October 18, 1997
SECTION: Local & State; Pg. D3
BYLINE: Joe Van Leer
DATELINE: Lake Helen, Florida
The Orlando Sentinel reports that residents in Lake Helen, Florida are speaking out about the nuisance of a theatre in their neighborhood. They told City Commissioners at a meeting Thursday that the theatre generates too much noise and traffic for a residential neighborhood. In response to residents and the theatre manager's comments, Commissioners decided to review about seven years' worth of records to determine whether the theater's existence is in violation of any city codes.
According to the article, residents along Washington and South Goodwin streets have complained for years about the noise and traffic from the theater. In addition to noise from traffic and from play members and patrons, residents said noise from early-morning set construction also is a nuisance. Residents also complained that they never were properly notified the theater would remain permanently at that location, and some suggested it be relocated to a commercial area.
The article says that David Miller, the manager of Shoestring Theatre, said shows in the evening average 90 people, or about 30 cars. Shows on Sunday afternoons average 106 play patrons, or 35 cars. Miller complained about harassment from the residents, and added, "We'd be delighted to solve this problem but we can't move. It would be too costly to build another structure and we already put about $40,000 of improvements into the building." The animosity from residents began with the purchase of the property, Miller said, when former Commissioner John Smart outbid the Bender family who lived next door to the building. A corporation, Shoestring Theatre, now owns the property.
According to the article, former Lake Helen resident and Commissioner Jeff Bender previously has said that a special permit was granted to the theater in 1989 and that it violated city code. But, the article reports, former Commissioner John Smart has said that according to a city attorney, the theater site isn't violating any city ordinances. Commissioner Marge Clauser said, "Whatever happened between a previous commission and landholders, the theater is not in the right location. We have to look at the statute of limitations and see if the situation can be rectified." The article also notes that last year, Commissioner Mark Shuttleworth created a committee to find a compromise in the situation, but it was short-lived.
PUBLICATION: The Orlando Sentinel
DATE: October 18, 1997
SECTION: Local & State; Pg. D1
BYLINE: Elaine Backhaus
DATELINE: Sanford, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Kathy Sikes, Brenda Williams, residents
The Orlando Sentinel reports that noise complaints are rising at Florida's Orlando Sanford Airport. A group of residents brought their concerns this week to the airport's Sanford Noise Abatement Committee, saying it appears there will be no end to the noise problems because the city, the county, and the airport authority continue to solicit more airport activity. Residents from prestigious neighborhoods in Lake Mary said they may consider legal action if the noise doesn't decrease.
According to the article, passenger traffic at the airport has increased dramatically recently, from 448,141 to 798,959 in eight months. Despite residents' anger, the airport has taken several steps to decrease the noise recently, the article says. Pilots have been told to approach the airport at higher speeds and altitudes to curb noise, and to fly over Lake Monroe instead of residential areas before turning and landing from the west. In addition, pilots are being educated about the noise-sensitive areas around the airport. The Noise Abatement Committee also is considering requiring pilots to approach the airport at even higher altitudes and using alternative runways to move planes away from populated neighborhoods.
However, the article goes on to report, residents say they haven't noticed any improvement in noise levels. Resident Kathy Sikes said it is still just as loud over her home. "The changes haven't helped," Sikes said. "The noise has gotten worse. If it is unbearable now, then what is the noise going to be like as growth continues. This is unacceptable." Resident Brenda Williams agreed, saying the airport "is not alleviating the noise problem if it continues to allow more activity. It is only making the problem worse."
Meanwhile, Jack Dow, airport director of operations, confirmed that there has been an increase in noise complaints. There were 91 complaints in September 1996, compared to 183 last month.
The article also tells readers that if they want to call the Noise Complaint Hotline at (407) 323-2604, they should give their names, addresses, and telephone numbers, and state whether they would like a return call. They also should explain whether they are complaining about noise or low-flying aircraft, and should give the date, time, weather, location of the incident, and aircraft type and airline when possible.
PUBLICATION: ANP English News Bulletin
DATE: October 17, 1997
DATELINE: Amsterdam, Netherlands
The ANP English News Bulletin reports that according to the airline KLM, the flight restrictions imposed at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport to reduce noise pollution could cost the airline as much as 1.2 billion guilders in eliminated flights under a worse-case scenario. The restrictions are scheduled to take effect January 1. Meanwhile, the article says, the officials from the National Aviation and Astronautics Laboratory said they have found a way to reduce noise by 50% with a combination of technical adaptations and new methods of taking off and landing.
According to the article, the Netherlands' cabinet reached a much-debated decision to restrict flights in and out of Schiphol after weeks of debate in parliament. Under the flight restrictions, two of the five runways will be shut down after 9 p.m. starting January 1.
The article reports that KLM's unofficial worse-case scenario was calculated by assuming 360,000 flight movements instead of the 400,000 which would be expected next year according to normal growth patterns. A spokesperson for KLM said this would mean the airline would have to cancel 30 to 40 flights in Europe, which would ground as many as seven airplanes. KLM's subsidiaries Northwest and Air UK would have to ground an additional three jets. The article reports that Leo van Wijk, the new KLM chief, will meet with Transportation Minister Annemarie Jorritsma on October 21 to discuss the matter.
The article says that the National Aviation and Astronautics Laboratory (NLR) has been investigating alternative measures to achieve noise pollution standards. NLR officials said they have found a way to reduce noise by 50% through technical adaptations and new methods of taking off and landing. Introducing quieter turbines will reduce noise by 20%, NLR officials say, and new computer systems for choosing the best runway, more support systems for air traffic controllers, and new landing techniques such as gliding would diminish noise by an additional 30%. Experimental gliding landing techniques have resulted in a 74% reduction in noise pollution complaints in Leiden, the article explains. Gliding techniques require more time between individual landings for safety purposes, the article says, but the NLR currently is investigating ways to allow glide-landings to take place during peak hours.
PUBLICATION: Asbury Park Press (Neptune, NJ)
DATE: October 17, 1997
SECTION: B, Pg. 4
BYLINE: Liz Sheehan
DATELINE: Shrewsbury, New Jersey
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Richard Staniford, Pedro Larrauri, residents
The Asbury Park Press reports that the Planning Board in Shrewsbury, New Jersey postponed a decision on a proposal to build a 58,000-square-foot Edwards supermarket off Newman Springs Road till November 6. At a meeting Wednesday night, residents who live near the proposed site continued to protest the plan, the article says, and have hired a lawyer to help them fight the proposal. Residents object both to the presence of a supermarket and to a 14-foot sound barrier the developer has proposed building to cut down on noise from the supermarket.
The article reports that resident Richard Staniford, whose property is next to the site, is strongly opposed to the sound barrier, which would be located about 110 feet from some properties. He said, "I don't see any of these walls around Shrewsbury." If the Planning Board permitted a sound barrier in his neighborhood, he said, "You'll (other borough residents) have a wall in your back yard." Another resident, Pedro Larrauri, said he was concerned about the enforcement of noise laws and didn't want a building of that size behind his property.
The article goes on to say that Thomas Thomas, planning consultant for the borough, said that the sound barrier proposed by the developer would be more effective than a lower wall in blocking noise. But he added that a sound barrier isn't always the answer, because it won't block low-frequency sounds, such as those from trucks. Thomas also noted that the proposed supermarket is so large that the developer had to seek a variance to have a buffer smaller than the required 20-foot buffer. According to Thomas, the plan represents "just a little too much building and too much intensity for the site."
PUBLICATION: The Baltimore Sun
DATE: October 17, 1997
SECTION: Editorial, Pg. 22A, Letters
BYLINE: Ada Schultz, Towson resident
DATELINE: Towson, Maryland
The Baltimore Sun printed the following letter-to-the-editor from Ada Schultz, a Towson, Maryland resident, regarding a noise barrier in her neighborhood that helped stop a truck accident from causing widespread damage in the neighborhood:
In response to the letter regarding the wall noise barriers ("Money should go to the poor, not highway walls," Oct. 10), I cite the following: I live directly behind the site of the Aug. 18 accident involving the 8,500-gallon fuel tanker that crashed and exploded on Interstate 83 North, killing the driver and endangering the lives and homes adjacent to the crash. We have been told that had the portion of the wall that was completed not been there, the fire could have gotten into the main gas line. Therefore, all the homes connected to that line could have also exploded, causing many more fatalities.
We on Jeffers Circle consider ourselves very fortunate that our county fire departments, including the volunteer units in our area, responded so quickly. The walls are not only protection from noise, but also against accidents to our neighborhood.
PUBLICATION: CTK Business News Wire
DATE: October 17, 1997
SECTION: Business News
DATELINE: Dresden, Germany
CTK Business News Wire reports that Bohemiaelast, a Czech producer of noise barriers made from recycled tires, has secured contracts with Sweden and currently is holding talks with the German area of Saxony, according to Zdenek Bohdanecky of Bohemiaelast.
According to the article, Hubert Baier, who represents Bohemiaelast in Germany, said that the chances the company would get the contracts in Saxony were good. The noise barriers would be used mainly for new motorways to be constructed in Germany. In Sweden, the company will build four plants for processing old tires, and will supply 2,000 square meters of noise barrier panels and rubber floor covering for cattle sheds. On the Czech market, the company has supplied noise barrier panels and other components for the Decin-Prague railway corridor, and contracts for another corridor are underway, the article says.
For more information, contact Bohemiaelast Hovorcovice Brezinevska 385 25064 Hovorcovice; tel: (02) 687 0730; fax: (02) 687 0560.
PUBLICATION: The Daily Telegraph
DATE: October 17, 1997
SECTION: Pg. 15
BYLINE: Paul Marston
DATELINE: London, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise
The Daily Telegraph reports that the British government was accused of caving in to pressure from British Airways yesterday after dropping a 12-year-old commitment to seek continual noise reductions at London's Heathrow Airport. The inspector leading the public inquiry into the planned fifth terminal at Heathrow and residents opposed to the development both criticized the Labor government for its action.
According to the article, inspector Roy Vandermeer QC said ministers have "moved the goal posts" to accommodate the increase in aircraft noise expected to occur if the new terminal is approved. Vandermeer added that he did not understand "why the Government now thinks it is not desirable to aim for a reduction in noise even if it is practical to accept they might not succeed."
Residents opposed to the Heathrow expansion, which would increase passenger traffic by almost 60%, said the policy change shows the government is no longer impartial. A spokesperson for the Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise said: "This confirms our worst fears about Labor, and its supine attitude to big business in general and British Airways in particular. We'd heard that Tony Blair's favorite businessman was Bob Ayling, BA's chief executive, and this is proof."
Meanwhile, the government's Department of Environment and Transport said that ministers still are strictly neutral over the Heathrow development, as they are required to be until they have considered the inquiry report. They aren't likely to receive that report until 1999, the article notes.
A spokesperson for British Airways denied that its lobbying had brought about the policy change, the article says. The spokesperson said, "We are in favor of everything practicable being done to continue to reduce noise at Heathrow because we wish to be a good neighbor."
PUBLICATION: The Evening Standard (London)
DATE: October 17, 1997
SECTION: Pg. 2
BYLINE: Patrick McGowan
DATELINE: London, England
The Evening Standard reports that the British government has dropped its commitment to cut noise levels at London's Heathrow Airport, on the grounds that an improvement in noise levels cannot be guaranteed. The news came through civil service evidence in the public inquiry into the proposed fifth terminal at Heathrow. The news shocked residents opposed to the expansion, the article says
According to the article, the information was given at the inquiry by Elizabeth Duthie, head of the Aviation Environment Division of John Prescott's super-ministry, the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions. The news prompted the Inquiry Inspector Roy Vandermeer QC to ask for clarification "at Ministerial level."
PUBLICATION: Sarasota Herald-Tribune
DATE: October 17, 1997
SECTION: Local/State, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Tabatha Barham
DATELINE: Venice, Florida
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports that the six candidates running for Venice (Florida) City Council gave mixed opinions about moving the Venice Municipal Airport at a candidate's forum on Thursday. According to the article, the incumbents said they would reserve judgment until they see the results of a study being conducted on the topic. The new candidates, for the most part, are opposed to the idea, the article says.
The article reports that residents near the airport have complained about the noise for years. Last month, the City Council voted to spend about $21,000 on a study to investigate moving the airport.
The article says Councilor John Osmulski said, "I think we all have to keep an open mind until that ... study is completed." His opponent, Janice McDermott, said, "I'm not going to be politically correct on my answer. I don't think moving the airport makes common sense at all." She said that if the airport is moved, it will just cause noise complaints from another area.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
DATE: October 17, 1997
SECTION: Local, Pg. 3B
BYLINE: Karla Schuster
DATELINE: Boca Raton, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jim Dunne, resident
The Sun-Sentinel reports that a joint meeting between the Boca Raton (Florida) City Council and the airport authority was held Thursday to discuss noise problems at the airport. At the meeting, airport officials said the city's growth is the major reason for the increase in plane traffic. Nevertheless, airport authority officials agreed to create a report gauging what impact the expansion of Boca Aviation, the airport's sole maintenance operator, will have on the airport and nearby neighborhoods. The article says that Boca Aviation plans to build 38 new hangars, new offices, and an 8,000-square-foot jet maintenance center.
According to the article, the city council asked for the joint meeting with the airport authority in response to residents' concerns about the expansion and the effectiveness of the airport's noise advisory committee. The meeting was the second such meeting in four months, the article notes. Both Nelson Rhodes, the airport manager, and Mark Wantshouse, the Boca Aviation President, said the expansion will not dramatically increase traffic above what is already projected for the airport. Wantshouse said, "The majority of our business is transient people -- not people who are based at the airport. They're people who have business here or have a reason to be in Boca and want to land at this airport. It's not this development that's increasing traffic. It's just the development of the city."
Meanwhile, residents said the meeting represented progress, but that the city council must remain involved in airport affairs. Jim Dunne, a resident who lives near the airport, said, "This meeting today is great, and talking about these issues is great, but it only happened because the City Council got involved, and I urge you to stay involved because we feel much more comfortable when you are."
The article notes that according to Phil Modder, the chair of the airport authority, airport officials want to improve their image with residents.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
DATE: October 17, 1997
SECTION: World Series, Pg. 6WS
BYLINE: Bob French
DATELINE: Fort Lauderdale, Florida area
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Emmanuel Edwardville, Christopher Nealy, residents
The Sun-Sentinel reports that residents surrounding the Pro Player Stadium in north Dade County, Florida are bracing for an onslaught of traffic and noise during the World Series between the Marlins and Cleveland Indians.
According to the article, resident Emmanuel Edwardville said, "There will be helicopters, blimps, fireworks. It will be chaos. The World Series is a good thing for Florida, but for this neighborhood it will be a real problem." Edwardville and some of his neighbors said Thursday they are worried about traffic to and from Games 1 and 2 on Saturday and Sunday, and possible Games 6 and 7 the following weekend. "My wife works two jobs and she is concerned she could be stuck in traffic for hours," said Edwardville. "We had to find an alternate route." Resident Christopher Nealy said traffic is a problem during any large event at the stadium.
However, the article concludes, officials at the stadium and the Marlins said residents won't notice much difference in traffic during the Series than during a Dolphins game.
PUBLICATION: The Orange County Register
DATE: October 16, 1997
SECTION: Metro; Pg. B05
BYLINE: Mary Ann Milbourn
DATELINE: Irvine, California
The Orange County Register reports that San Diego Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell said in a tentative court ruling issued Wednesday that the City of Irvine's plans to develop the El Toro Marine Base failed to analyze development restrictions that protect Marine landing and takeoff zones. She also indicated that the city should have considered how its plan fits with county air-safety and noise restrictions. In another lawsuit filed by airport opponents against the county regarding the proposed conversion of the El Toro base into a commercial airport, McConnell tentatively ruled Friday that the county artificially minimized the impact an airport would have on noise, traffic, and air quality. Final rulings in both cases are due in 90 days.
The article explains that one suit was filed by Orange County against Irvine in January, after the city introduced a plan for a sports arena, and entertainment and business complex on 440 acres of the base within city limits. According to county attorneys, the city did not adequately address traffic impact and mitigation, and failed to consider the county's Airport Environs Land Use Plan. That plan is intended to protect airfields from encroachment by development, the article notes. The article also says that although Judge McConnell sided with the county on the above-mentioned issues, she sided with the city on nine other issues in her tentative ruling.
In the other lawsuit, airport opponents challenged the county's environmental-impact report and base-reuse plan for converting the El Toro Marine Base into an international airport.
PUBLICATION: The Pantagraph (Bloomington, IL)
DATE: October 16, 1997
SECTION: Editorial; Pg. A10; Letters
BYLINE: Dave Ellis, a rural Chenoa resident
DATELINE: Chenoa, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Dave Ellis, a rural Chenoa resident
The Pantagraph printed the following letter-to-the-editor from Dave Ellis, a rural Chenoa, Illinois resident, regarding the noise and air pollution caused by a grain elevator near his home:
In response to the proposed grain elevator at the former rail yard site: I live in an area adjacent to a grain elevator. Each year for approximately two months at harvest time and again when crops are sold and shipped we are overwhelmed with an unimaginable amount of dust and debris associated with the grain industry.
Have you ever seen red snow? Have you ever been in a dust storm? Believe me, if you do allow the proposed elevator you will be very sorry. The grime associated with the elevator deteriorates shingles and the particles sift through windows. Be prepared to clean constantly and stock up with dust masks. You can't help inhaling the particles in the air.
Another drawback of the elevator is the truck and wagon traffic which will be backed up for many, many blocks waiting to load or unload grain. We don't have to pay admission to see "the races." I just open the blinds. We have front row seats to watch the speeding, noisy trucks -- which don't usually cover their loads -- coming and going from the elevator.
If your proposed elevator has driers or fan ventilation systems, be prepared with big ear plugs; the noise pollution is deafening. I find all of the discussion about the hazardous asbestos problems interesting. Why aren't those same concerns being voiced for air and noise pollution that will affect many people for a very large area and possible the entire city?
Even though the roads will probably be surfaced in your area, the trucks are big and here they usually drive on the shoulders, stirring up huge clouds of dust that cover everything. We can't have our windows open nor can we use our central air conditioning as the particles plug up the system. Enjoying any outside fall activities is strictly nonexistent in our area, especially at harvest time, due to the influx of pollution from the elevator.
Please put the proposed elevator in a more suitable site where the elevator won't have an impact on human beings.
PUBLICATION: The Patriot Ledger (Quincy, MA)
DATE: October 16, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. 17C
BYLINE: Kimberly Moy
DATELINE: Quincy, Massachusetts
The Patriot Ledger reports that the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority voted unanimously to build a deep-rock tunnel instead of a marine pipeline in Fore River to relieve sewage overflows in Braintree and Weymouth. The decision has pleased residents in the nearby area, who feared massive construction impacts from the marine pipeline option.
According to the article, construction of the marine pipeline would have affected neighbors more than the deep-rock tunnel, said Katie Barrett, chair of the Fore River Watershed Association. Barrett, a Quincy resident, said people were worried about noise, debris, construction traffic, the eyesore of barges used for staging in the Fore River, and other effects of marine pipeline construction, said Barrett. Jack Walsh, chair of the Nut Island Citizens Advisory Committee, said, "It's good for the people in the immediate area. The alternative would have ripped up the harbor and had all sorts of other impacts." The construction of the tunnel will begin in June 1999, and will create minimal disturbances for residents, according to Kevin O'Brien, MWRA director of engineering and construction.
The article goes on to discuss the project in detail.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: October 16, 1997
SECTION: News, Pg. 02B, Briefs/Region Column
BYLINE: Associated Press
DATELINE: Madison County, Missouri
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that a lawsuit was filed recently in Madison County (Missouri) Circuit Court against Granite City Steel Co. by 200 workers who say they have hearing loss and that the company allowed noise levels to be about 50% higher than federal safety standards permit.
According to the article, the workers each seek more than $50,000 in damages from a major shareholder in the company, NKK Corp., and the company officer who controls safety programs, Hideakai Inoue. The lawsuit charges that the company didn't take safety measures to protect workers' hearing, such as installing mufflers that would have reduced the noise.
PUBLICATION: Flight International
DATE: October 15, 1997
DATELINE: Europe
Flight International printed an editorial in which the columnist says that the aviation industry should do more to show how it is already making strides against air and noise pollution unless it wants to be faced with "increasingly irrational, and occasionally impossible," regulation. The writer goes on to discuss the new air emissions surcharge at the Zurich Airport and the new flight restrictions due to noise problems at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport as cases in point.
According to the editorial, the new emissions surcharge scheme at Zurich Airport, which is being challenged in court by the International Air Transport Association (IATA), is adding up to 40% to landing fees for the jets that emit the most nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The columnist agrees that Zurich residents have a right to be protected from air pollution, but questions whether the surcharges are an appropriate or effective way of achieving that goal. The evidence at this stage suggests the surcharges are not appropriate, the editorial says, partly because the way that emissions are calculated is suspect.
The editorial goes on to say that similar criticisms can be leveled against the noise restrictions at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport, which will curtail growth in air traffic in 1998. The writer says there was no clear evidence that breaches in the noise "contours" drawn up around the airport have had any impact on local residents. The columnist says the broader picture illustrates that the airport had abated noise levels in many of the neighboring residential areas.
The editorial writer argues that the problem in these cases is that political authorities are making decisions because they want to help the environment, but the people involved are non informed or concerned about the broader implications of their decisions.
Airlines don't want to complain too loud against these environmental campaigns, the writer notes, for fear of being seen as opposed to environmental concerns. The public's confidence must be won over, according to the columnist, and the aviation industry should learn from the lessons of the petro-chemical and automotive industries. The editorial says these industries have "suffered from the environmental movement." The first response of those industries, the editorial says, was to fight their accusers using "hard science and economics," but this battle was difficult against the "more popular, intuitive arguments in favor of cleaning up the environment."
A better response, the editorial argues, is to engage in a more open public debate and to educate the public about what can and cannot be done. The editorial writer says that the most successful strategy is to steer the debate "towards a more measured look at global 'life cycle' costs and away from knee-jerk reactions." Taking a broader look at air pollution, the writer says, may illustrate that more should be done to restrict road traffic than air traffic. IATA has pointed out, the editorial says, that a change in the efficiency of Europe's air-traffic-control systems would cut emissions more than any number of airport restrictions.
PUBLICATION: Flight International
DATE: October 15, 1997
DATELINE: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Flight International reports that the Netherlands Government agreed October 3 to allow Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport to violate its noise standards till the end of the year, but has said the airport will have to meet those standards in 1998.
According to the article, the airport was on its way to breaching government noise standards due to its increase in air traffic during the first part of 1997. Violating those limits would have forced runways to be closed during the day, the article notes. The noise standards are required not to be violated with certain noise "contours" drawn around the airport. Airport officials said the airport was "tending to infringe" the contour limits in a couple of places, but not in heavily populated areas. Meanwhile, officials at the airline KLM, which has its hub at the airport, said meeting the noise standards by restricting flights would have cost the airline around DF 1150 million ($75 million) during the last three months of the year. The air carrier appealed to the Dutch prime minister that the lost revenues were out of proportion to the benefit to local residents.
As a result, the article says, the Dutch government agreed to overlook the noise infringements, but required the airport to place further limits on nighttime noise by closing two of its four runways starting at 9 p.m. each day, instead of 11 p.m. Airport officials say the airport will have to rein in growth in air movements to about 4% or less in order not to violate noise standards in 1998. The article reports that restrictive measures are likely to include more severe penalties on the noisiest, Stage 2 aircraft, which already must pay double landing fees during the day. The accelerated construction of a fifth runway is another option airport officials are considering, the article explains. Meanwhile, KLM officials say that the noise contour rules should be made more flexible so that a minor violation in one area does not automatically result in massive restrictions.
PUBLICATION: The Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville, FL)
DATE: October 15, 1997
SECTION: Community News; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Alliniece Taylor
DATELINE: Mayport, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jackson Lanehart, teacher; Susan Wilkinson, school board member
The Florida Times-Union reports that Jackson Lanehart, a teacher at the Mayport (Florida) Middle School, has been trying since 1977 to get walls added to the open classrooms in the school, arguing that the background noise is distracting to students. Last week the Duval County School Board voted in favor of the improvements, but funding has not yet been found for the project, the article says.
According to the article, the middle school was built without walls dividing classrooms, in order to allow teachers and students the versatility of addressing a small or large group. But teachers and school board members say the concept doesn't work. School board member Susan Wilkinson said open classrooms make it easy for children to be distracted and difficult for teachers to discipline students. She added that trying to create barriers between classrooms with filing cabinets or rolling chalkboards may be hazardous. "It's just not an environment that's conducive to learning," she Wilkinson.
According to Wilkinson, the county school board voted to add the wall project to its seven-year plan, but funding has not been confirmed. The board currently is in its second year of the plan. Wilkinson said, "It's a difficult decision because of limited dollars. The superintendent will have to do some juggling on the seven-year facilities plan. The good news is it looks like we're going to get it to happen; the bad news is that it's going to take a while." McGlade Holloway, the Assistant Superintendent for Facilities, said her department is looking at cost estimates for the job at Mayport and similar work at Sandalwood High School. The project at Mayport is expected to cost about $1.6 million, while the Sandalwood project should cost less than $200,000. The cost to build walls at Mayport is higher, the article explains, because lighting, air-conditioning, heating, ventilation, electricity, communications and fire sprinklers will need to be realigned. By contrast, the re-design at Sandalwood involves only installing fire-rated or smokeproof walls.
Meanwhile, teacher Jackson Lanehart has been working for 20 years to get walls built, the article says. Lanehart said of the school's open layout, "This is what I call education asbestos of the 70s. It needs to be removed and replaced." Lanehart says he knows he still may not see the results of his crusade, but says he believes "if you persist long enough with something, it will work out." He said that the open classrooms don't work because teachers are doing different things at the same time, making it difficult for some students to focus on their studies and creating a "compromised educational environment." "I can't keep kids from seeing what's out there," he said.
PUBLICATION: The Patriot Ledger (Quincy, MA)
DATE: October 15, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. 15C
BYLINE: Roberta Holland
DATELINE: Braintree, Massachusetts
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jane Marks, Chester Mann, Mary Earley, residents
The Patriot Ledger reports that a meeting was held yesterday in Braintree, Massachusetts commuter-train station between residents, elected officials, and representatives from the MBTA to discuss the noise problems produced by Red Line and Old Colony trains. The meeting was arranged by State Representative Joseph Sullivan (D-Braintree), who is chair of the House Transportation Committee, and was held at the station platform so MBTA officials could hear the noise produced. Residents of Hawthorne Place condominiums, Georganna Street, and French Avenue complained that the new commuter trains are adding to noise already caused by the Red Line and freight trains.
According to the article, residents Jane Marks has lived in the area for 30 years, and said her windows rattle and her china shakes when some of the trains go by. The situation has gotten worse with the new commuter trains, she said. "It's like a plane is going over my house," she added. Some residents said they would not be satisfied until a noise barrier is built to separate their neighborhoods from the noise.
The article reports that officials from the transit authority said some changes have already been made to improve the situation. Brian Dwyer, superintendent of the Red Line, said the public address system has been disconnected at the station to reduce noise levels, and workers have been told not to let trains idle behind homes. Andrew Brennan, the environmental affairs manager at the transit authority, said he is familiar with the residents' complaints, but mitigation measures are being put in place according to a priority list. He said many other mitigation projects rank above a noise barrier for French Avenue and Woodsum Drive. However, Brennan said new noise level readings will be taken in those areas. Representative Sullivan said the noise readings should measure the cumulative effect of the Old Colony trains and the Red Line, and based on the new readings, the project may be able to move up on the priority list. Sullivan added that he will use his position as chair of the House Transportation Committee to keep pressure on the transit authority and to ensure there is money in the budget to build a barrier.
The article notes that Sullivan estimated the noise barrier would cost about $1.5 million and would be three-quarters of a mile long. After the meeting, Sullivan said he wants construction of the wall to begin in the spring, the article says. But some residents don't believe it will happen. Resident Mary Earley said, "I feel they're courting us, but they're not going to marry us. I'm not really hopeful."
PUBLICATION: The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA)
DATE: October 15, 1997
SECTION: Local, Pg. B6
BYLINE: John Murphy
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
The Virginian-Pilot reports that noise complaints have plagued GTE Amphitheater in Virginia Beach, Virginia since it opened two years ago. At a meeting of the City Council on Tuesday, representatives of Cellar Door, which manages the amphitheater, said they plan to plant trees to cut down on noise, adjust lawn speakers, and consider purchasing better speakers. But City Councilors and residents continued to by skeptical and angry about the problem, the article says.
According to the article, Cellar Door officials outlined their noise reduction improvements at the meeting. They said the number of callers to the complaint hotline dropped from 179 to 94 during the 1996 and 1997 concert seasons; they have installed a $30,000 computerized sound management system; and they have voluntarily reduced its decibel limit at concerts.
But councilors wanted to more than that, the article reports. Councilor Nancy Parker said, "Tell me specifically what are we going to do to deal with the issue." G. Wilson Rogers, executive vice president of Cellar Door, outlined three additional mitigation measures: planting a stand of cypress trees on either side of the amphitheater to serve as a sound buffer; adjusting lawn speakers so they focus directly on the crowd; and considering the purchase of better speakers, which would decrease sound distortion. Rogers also said that many of the noise problems occur because of weather conditions, especially the wind.
The article goes on to explain that residents of Salem Lakes and Landstown have grown increasingly angry about the noise from the amphitheater. The noise levels are required not to go above 60 decibels, about the loudness of a conversation, but although Cellar Door has stayed within that limit, residents have continued to complain, the article says. Some residents have even threatened to sue if they have to in order to quiet the noise.
At Tuesday's meeting, councilors appeared to be on residents' side, the article says. Councilor Barbara Henley said, "I'm really troubled that people have to complain in order for us to recognize there is a problem." Henley accused Cellar Door of being in denial about the problem, a claim which Rogers strongly denied. Councilor Parker reminded Cellar Door officials that residents lived in the neighborhood first. Councilor Reba McClanan remarked that the construction of a new soccer complex near the amphitheater also has angered neighbors with crowd noise and dust from the parking lots. "The frustration level [in the neighborhoods] is very high," she said.
PUBLICATION: Airports
DATE: October 14, 1997
SECTION: Airports Intelligence; Vol. 14, No. 41; Pg. 411
DATELINE: U.S.
The publication Airports reports that the U.S. House and Senate sent President Clinton a fiscal 1998 Department of Transportation funding bill (H.R.2169) last week. The bill includes $1.7 billion for the Airport Improvement Program, which is $240 million over the fiscal 1997 level and $700 million over the administration request. A provision in the bill limited funds for both noise planning and mitigation and the Military Airport Program (MAP). In addition, House and Senate negotiators agreed last week to modify the Wright Amendment, which placed statutory restrictions on commercial service at Dallas Love Field. The House and Senate conferees allowed three additional states to be served without restriction from Love Field.
According to the article, the conference report (House 105-313) states that without the provision to limit noise and MAP funding, "there would be an imbalance between the various components of this program, with safety, security, small hubs, true discretionary, and capacity-enhancement funds held at the fiscal year 1997 level while allowing huge increases in two particular programs." The noise set-asides would have risen 66% under the current reauthorization formulas, the article notes. Under the funding limitation adopted in the bill, noise mitigation still receives a sharper increase in funds -- about 40% -- than the 27% increases in both the capacity/safety/security/ noise set-aside and the remaining discretionary areas.
The article goes on to say that among the changes to the Wright Amendment are the addition of Alabama, Kansas, and Mississippi to the list of states that may be served from Dallas Love Field without restriction. Previously under the Wright Amendment, Love Field could serve only Texas and its four contiguous states -- Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, and Oklahoma.
The measure adopted by the conferees also overturned a year-old DOT ruling that blocked Legend Airlines from operating Boeing 737-class aircraft with 56 seats from Love Field. Legend appealed the interpretation to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, but Congress's action renders the challenge moot, the article says. The measure also deleted Senate bill language giving the Dallas City Council the power to nullify the Legend measure, and it negates Senate report language that said regional jets were not subject to Wright Amendment restrictions. The conference report also requires the Federal Aviation Administration to evaluate congestion and delays in the Dallas/Fort Worth area if operations increase more than 25% at the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport or Love Field. ****
Federal Aviation Administration Budget, Fiscal 1990-1998 (In billions of dollars) 199019911992199319941995 Operations3.8244.0364.3604.5384.5814.595 Grants-in-aid for airports*1.4221.8351.9001.8001.6901.450 Facilities and equipment1.7212.0952.4092.3502.1202.087 Research, engineering, and development0.1700.2050.2180.2300.2540.259 TOTAL7.1378.1718.8878.9188.6458.392
Proposed House-Senate Final 19961997**1998199819981998 Operations4.6434.955#5.386##5.3005.3795.302 Grants-in-aid for airports*1.4501.4601.0001.7001.7001.700 Facilities and equipment1.8751.9381.8751.8751.8891.875 Research, engineering, and development0.1860.2080.2000.1850.2140.199 TOTAL8.1548.5618.4619.0609.1829.077
Notes: Columns may not add due to rounding.
*Represents obligations ceilings set in appropriations acts.
** Includes $57.9 million for operations, $147.7 million for F & E, and $21 million for R, E & D provided by Congress for aviation security initiatives subsequent to enactment of the fiscal 1997 DOT appropriations act.
# Includes $75 million in offsetting fees.
## Includes $350 million in offsetting fees, of which $300 million are new.
PUBLICATION: Airports
DATE: October 14, 1997
SECTION: AIP Allocations Tentatively Approved by FAA; Vol. 14, No. 41; Pg. 417
DATELINE: California
The publication Airports printed the following list of Airport Improvement Program projects tentatively approved for California by the Federal Aviation Administration:
Six Southern California counties: $300,000 to conduct regional system plan study and $80,000 to conduct a master plan update
State of California: $470,000 to conduct a system plan study
Municipality of Burbank, Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport: $1,000,000 to soundproof residences (30 units), soundproof school, and provide relocation assistance
Municipality of Fresno, Fresno Air Terminal: $1,000,000 to soundproof residences (80 units)
Kneeland Airport (general aviation): $185,542 to conduct a master plan study
Municipality of Los Angeles, Los Angeles International Airport: $7,561,491 to acquire land for noise compatibility and provide relocation assistance, and $3,000,000 to acquire land for noise compatibility
Municipality of Monterey, Monterey Peninsula Airport: $158,355 to build apron and install security fencing
Municipality of Oceano, Oceano County Airport: $374,000 to build apron, rehabilitate runway lighting, install visual approach aid, install airport beacon and tower, and install fencing
Municipality of Ontario, Ontario International Airport: $2,500,000 to soundproof residences (125 units)
Municipality of Palm Springs, Palm Springs Regional Airport: $3,805,594 to extend runway (design), relocate access road, and acquire land for approaches, and $2,000,000 to soundproof residences (about 210 units) and acquire land for noise compatibility
Municipality of Sacramento, Sacramento Mather Airport: $1,555,800 to install runway and taxiway lighting and install fencing
Municipality of San Bernardino, San Bernardino International Airport: $1,575,000 to improve terminal building and $596,000 to improve/modify building
Muncipality of San Diego, San Diego International-Lindbergh Field: $4,307,097 to build taxiway, rehabilitate taxiway lighting, and improve terminal
Municipality of San Francisco, San Francisco International: $2,000,000 to soundproof residences (200 units) and $2,000,000 to soundproof residences (200 homes)
Municipality of San Jose, San Jose International: $2,654,921 to soundproof residences (175 units)
Municipality of Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara Municipal Airport: $1,662,142 to improve runway safety area
PUBLICATION: Airports
DATE: October 14, 1997
SECTION: AIP Allocations Tentatively Approved by FAA; Vol. 14, No. 41; Pg. 418
DATELINE: Missouri
The publication Airports printed the following list of Airport Improvement Program projects tentatively approved for Missouri by the Federal Aviation Administration:
City of St. Louis, Lambert-St. Louis International Airport: $3,800,000 to acquire land for noise compatibility, provide relocation assistance, and soundproof residences, and $1,200,000 to acquire noise monitoring system
PUBLICATION: EIU ViewsWire
DATE: October 13, 1997
DATELINE: London, England
EIU ViewsWire printed an editorial in which the public inquiry into London's Heathrow Airport expansion, Britain's longest public inquiry ever, is discussed. The editorial writer talks about the disillusionment of all parties in the length of the inquiry, the fact that the airport owner has made two important concessions in the inquiry, and argues that Heathrow will face continuing pressures to expand and a site for a new airport should be considered.
According to the editorial, the public inquiry into Heathrow's plans for a fifth terminal will become Britain's longest-running public inquiry next week after going on for two and a half years, including 340 days of hearings. The editorial reports that for some of those involved in the daily life of the public inquiry, the task is profitable -- Lord Silsoe, the barrister leading the airport operator's team, is reputed to be earning $3,220 a day. And, the editorial says, the taxpayers are footing about one-half of the costs of the inquiry. Most of the parties involved in the inquiry believe the process has become a nightmare, the editorial says, even those to whom delay is an advantage. The main opponent of the airport expansion, a group of a dozen local authorities, may not be able to continue in the inquiry because the inquiry has gone on for so long, the group is out of money. And the owner of Heathrow, BAA, is extremely disillusioned as well, the editorial writer says. The government now is actively considering reforms to inquiries, including the imposition of a timetable on the processes. Dick Caborn, the minister for planning, said that a system which invites everybody to debate issues for years on end "is not necessarily the best way forward."
Still, the editorial argues, before we get rid of the inquiry process, we should remember that the Heathrow Terminal Five inquiry is about to achieve two significant breakthroughs in the public interest. BAA now is saying privately that it is prepared to accept a ban on all night flights as the price for building Terminal Five. In addition, BAA has told ministers that it supports an environmental levy on landing fees paid by airlines. Such a levy could be used to improve surface transport to the airport and to reduce noise and pollution. The editorial writers that both these concessions by BAA are important ones.
The editorial goes on to argue that the airport's landing fees are extremely low. In a study published last month by SBC Warburg, Heathrow's landing fee per passenger was found to be Stg 4.60, which is not quite half of that at regional airports such as Luton, Newcastle, and the East Midlands, and just over one-third of that at Tokyo's Narita airport. Airlines have benefited from these low fees, the editorial says, and there is a strong case for an environmental levy at the airport regardless of what happens with Terminal Five.
The other concession made by BAA -- a ban on all flights between midnight and 6 am -- will make residents near the airport happy, the editorial says. Noise from increased flights is the most contentious issue in the inquiry, and residents most resent the 16 flights that arrive daily between 4 am and 6 am. BAA has conducted surveys which found that as many as a quarter of the people living near the airport said they were regularly awakened by aircraft noise at night, the editorial says. The first attempt to get approval for the fifth terminal was rejected 15 years ago, the editorial notes, at which time the inquiry inspector said night flights were "a particular curse," and recommended they be banned. But, the editorial says, since then the number of aircraft landing at Heathrow between 11.30 p.m. and 6 am has increased by one-third.
Commitments have been broken so often in this saga, the writer says, that airport opponents won't take anything on trust. In 1978, at the public inquiry into Heathrow's Terminal Four, the inspector approved the terminal on the condition that this would be the last big expansion of Heathrow. The inspector set a limit on flight numbers at 275,000 flights a year, but within ten years, that condition had been overturned by the government. The editorial notes there are now 425,000 flights a year. Once again, BAA says that if the fifth terminal is built, flight numbers will rise only to 453,000 in the early years of the next century. But, the editorial writer says, "you do not have to be a cynic to disbelieve such forecasts." Heathrow is the world's busiest international airport and is central to British aviation -- it is only inevitable, the writer says, that there will be strong pressures for a third runway and further development. The only thing that might stop the inevitable expansion, the writer suggests, is some sort of disaster in which a plane crashes into west London. And the more flights there are over London, the writer says, the more likely it is that something could happens. An airport located farther away from populations centers should be considered, the editorial advises, and the Thames Estuary might be a promising possibility.
PUBLICATION: Aviation Daily
DATE: October 16, 1997
SECTION: Europe; Vol. 330, No. 11; Pg. 95
DATELINE: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Aviation Daily reports that Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport and the Dutch government were the victors in lawsuits brought against the airport for not following noise regulations.
The short article goes on to say that Amsterdam Schiphol Airport and the Dutch government have won a small victory in keeping control of noise rules at the airport. According to wire reports, three lawsuits against the government were thrown out because environmental groups did not prove noise control actions at Schiphol were illegal. The court found the government has taken action to ensure noise levels next year will not exceed limits.
PUBLICATION: The Northern Echo
DATE: October 15, 1997
SECTION: Pg. 6
BYLINE: Gavin Engelbrecht
DATELINE: Thirsk, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Michael Coates, district council environmental health officer
The Northern Echo of England reports that after a public inquiry yesterday that a bid by Kwik Fit, a tire and exhaust fitting chain, to expand its operations near a market town's conservation area would result in an unacceptable disturbance to residents. The district health officer said residents should not lose their freedom from noise on the weekends and holidays.
According to the article, Kwik Fit, which wants to extend its opening hours at its Thirsk branch on weekends, also was reprimanded for an internally illuminated sign erected without consent. The company is appealing an order to remove a sign on the front of its building and the refusal of permission for a free-standing sign. The public inquiry in Northallerton follows Hambleton District Council's refusal of permission for opening until 5.30pm on Saturday afternoons, and from 9am-5pm on Sundays and Bank Holidays at the Long Street site.
The article reports that district council environmental health officer Michael Coates said the greatest concern about the use of the site at weekends was noise. In his submission to the inquiry, he said it was important that residents who lived around the site were able to be guaranteed freedom from noise when they wanted most to enjoy their houses and gardens - on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. Mr Coates said: "Many of the noises are distinctive and are likely to draw attention, for instance, doors being slammed shut, engines being started and revved and people shouting and tires being screeched. As with a great many sources of disturbance, it is not just the level of noise that causes the problem, but the duration of time when the noise is anticipated and this results in anxiety."
The article reports that Anthony Glenister, spokesman for Kwik Fit said the road where the business is located carried 1,060 vehicles an hour between noon and 6pm on Saturdays and 892 vehicles per hour on Sundays from 9am to 5pm. He argued the site would generate just four and less than three vehicle movements per hour respectively on those days, and therefore could not lead to justifiable complaint.
PUBLICATION: The Baltimore Sun
DATE: October 17, 1997
SECTION: Local (News), Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Larry Carson
DATELINE: Middle River, Maryland
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Adam Paul, president, White Marsh Civic Association; Albert Marani, resident
The Baltimore Sun reports that officials in Baltimore County, Maryland said yesterday that they would support a proposed auto speedway in Middle River only if the developer helps build wide roads to handle traffic. In response, the developer warned that such restrictions might make the project impossible. Meanwhile, residents who have strongly opposed the track worked with county officials to get many of their concerns reflected in the county's offer to the developer.
According to the article, the Middle River Racing Association wants to build the track on an 1,100-acre site. County Executive C. A. Dutch Ruppersberger said the county was conceptually in favor of the project, but said the developer must keep all track traffic off residential roads and accept the full burden of providing sewerage utilities. County officials also said that the developer's plan to open the track in 1999 is impossible because of the state and federal requirements, and that the soonest the track could open is three to four years from now.
In response to the county's proposal, Joe Mattioli, the racing association's chief operating officer, said in a written statement that the county's plan had "serious implications on the timing and development of this project." He said the association's officials would study the proposal and decide whether "in light of the rapid changes in the motor sports industry, development of the facility is feasible at this site." The developer has been considering other sites, the article reports, due to the strong opposition to the Maryland site. Other possible sites include ones in Harford and Anne Arundel counties and in the Chicago area.
According to the article, the racing association first proposed a facility with 54,800 seats and 10,500 parking places, and proposed widening residential roads east of the site, using 100 shuttle buses from Martin State Airport and Essex Community College to shuttle race-goers. But the county's proposal calls for extending Campbell Boulevard by five lanes southeast from Pulaski Highway (U.S. 40) into the 1,100-acre site, and extending White Marsh Boulevard (Route 43) by seven lanes from Eastern Boulevard. In addition, the county is saying the developer would have to pay $6.2 million to widen those roads, and $6.5 million for water and sewer service. The developer also would be required to pay for county police needed to direct traffic and to agree to the aesthetic design of an earthen berm proposed for noise control. The county's proposal also would allow the track to increase its number of seats to 109,600, and its number of parking spaces to 25,000 after 2003, when White Marsh Boulevard is scheduled to link the site with Interstate 95.
According to County Councilor Vincent Gardina, who represents the area, the county's plan "is in direct response to community input." Almost every point in the county plan was first raised by Adam Paul, president of the White Marsh Civic Association and a critic of the track, Gardina said. Paul said he and a dozen other residents met yesterday with county officials and were satisfied with the plan. But resident Albert Marani said that even with the earthen berms, "noise will be the dominant problem."
Previous week: October 5, 1997
Next week: October 19, 1997