PUBLICATION: Aberdeen Press and Journal
DATE: July 11, 1998
SECTION: Business: Companies, Pg.3
DATELINE: Aberdeen, Scotland
The Aberdeen Press and Journal reports the Highland Council's Ross and Cromarty area planning committee, near Aberdeen, Scotland, has delayed a ruling on noise problems by the quarry operator Leiths, on its Tor Achilty quarry near Contin, until September. The committee is set to consider a breach of the quarry's planning conditions related to noise levels. Committee members delayed their ruling in order to allow the quarry to finish work which is intended to minimize the noise.
According to the article, the committee already informed Leiths officials of their disappointment at the length of time the company has taken to install noise monitoring equipment, given the seriousness of the breach of planning conditions. But, the article notes, committee members also were sympathetic to the quarry's problems, and some members criticized newcomers who have complained about the industrial noise in the area. Councilor Sandy MacKenzie said, "The problems associated with noise are nothing compared with those of no noise. If there's no noise, there's no work." Another Councilor, Val MacIver, said the protective services department should come up with what constituted acceptable industrial noise.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: July 11, 1998
SECTION: Nws; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Lynn Sweet
DATELINE: Washington, DC and Chicago, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Representative Henry Hyde (R-Illinois); Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Illinois); Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (D-Illinois); Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois)
The Chicago Sun-Times reports that Illinois Congress members stepped up pressure on Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) Friday, trying to stop him from moving forward on his plan to add 100 daily flights at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago.
According to the article, Representatives Henry Hyde (R-Illinois) and Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Illinois) sent McCain a letter, in which they said, "We respectfully ask that you remove any provisions from your proposed legislation that would expand or reallocate slots at O'Hare airport." In addition, Senators Carol Moseley-Braun (D-Illinois) and Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) invited McCain to come to Illinois to meet with residents living near O'Hare before making a final decision. They wrote, "We would like to invite you to come to Illinois and talk with some of the people whose daily lives are influenced by the drone of airplanes overhead."
The article explains that McCain is chair of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, and provoked an angry response from many in the Chicago area when he added a provision to an aviation bill he wrote to convert 100 military takeoff and landing slots at O'Hare to commercial use. McCain wants the number of takeoffs and landings at O'Hare to increase in order to provide more competition and lower fares, the article says.
Representatives Hyde and Jackson are allied to promote construction of a third regional airport in Peotone, the article notes. Hyde's constituents are pummeled by O'Hare noise, and Jackson's constituents want increased south suburban growth. Hyde and Jackson wrote to McCain that the extra flights at O'Hare would not have a minimal noise impact simply because the quieter Stage 3 planes would be used. They wrote, "Our residents know full well that there are Stage 3 aircraft out there with noise emissions severe enough to cause cracks in their walls with the noise and vibration from their operations."
The article also notes that on Thursday, Senator Moseley-Braun invoked a rarely used Senate rule to prevent McCain's committee from its final work on the legislation until Tuesday.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: July 11, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Stacy St. Clair
DATELINE: Itasca and Wood Dale, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Gigi Gruber, Itasca Village President; Dave Tolemy, Wood Dale Alderman; Marija Andrijonas, Itasca resident
The Chicago Daily Herald reports that local officials in Itasca and Wood Dale, Illinois are urging residents to call Illinois' two senators to protest a plan to add 100 daily flights at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago. The article notes that the proposal is championed by Senator John McCain (R-Arizona), the chair of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, and is scheduled for a final vote in the committee on Tuesday.
According to the article, Gigi Gruber, the Itasca Village President, and Dave Tolemy, a Wood Dale Alderman, are urging residents to call Democratic Senators Carol Moseley-Braun and Dick Durbin so they are fully aware of the suburbs' opposition. Gruber said, "I would strongly encourage residents to call them Monday. It's an election year (for Moseley-Braun) and they have to listen. They cannot ignore this whole thing." Both senators already have said they will not support the bill.
The article explains that the proposal would convert 100 unused military slots at O'Hare to commercial use over a three-year period. McCain and other supporters of the plan say it would foster competition at the airport. Suburban officials say the bill would make an already bad situation worse. Alderman Tolemy said, "The senator from Arizona who proposed this should get his (butt) put in a sling. I'd love for this guy to come and live here."
The article also gives the Senators' phone numbers: Moseley-Braun: (202) 224-2854; Durbin: (202) 224-2152.
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: July 11, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. N1
BYLINE: Beth Barrett
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Howard Rothenbach, member, Citizens United
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports California Representatives Howard Berman (D-Mission Hills) and Brad Sherman (D-Woodland Hills) announced Friday that they will lobby the federal government to resolve the long-running dispute over expansion of the Burbank Airport. The Representatives also announced that Jane Garvey, the head of the Federal Aviation Administration, will come to Los Angeles on August 11 to mediate a solution to the fight between city of Burbank and the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority. The city is involved in legal battles with the airport authority over the proposed airport expansion, saying the airport's plans will cause more jet noise for its residents. The Representatives made their announcements at a summit on Los Angeles area airport issues sponsored by the Valley Industry and Commerce Association.
According to the article, Representative Sherman said he believes the federal government has more options than those explored so far to help end the standoff. Bradley Mims, the FAA's assistant administrator for government and industry affairs who attended the summit, said if there is still a deadlock after Garvey intervenes, Congress likely would have to serve as a mediator. Sherman said he hopes a settlement can be negotiated that has local consensus, and that legislation can grow out of such an agreement. The article notes that if California lawmakers lobby Congress to intervene, it could ignite a nationwide fight over the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. That Act established a national airport policy based on concern that there were too many non-uniform local standards.
The article reports that the politicians' moves seemed to have caught many off-guard. Howard Rothenbach, a member of Citizens United of Burbank, said he wasn't really sure how to interpret the federal interest, except to believe it might "be a good start." Rothenbach, who routinely hears cargo planes over his home, said he just wants "somebody who'll consider our concerns, who'll give weight to them." The article notes that Citizens United wants a mandatory 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. curfew at the airport, and wants the growth of flights capped at 10 percent. Airport officials say such restrictions are under federal control, and it would be difficult to get the federal government to agree to such restrictions.
Representative Berman, meanwhile, said the Airport Authority is in an entrenched position, which could make a solution more difficult. He said, "It will take years and years unless the authority changes its perspective and quits pushing off flight and curfew issues by saying the FAA won't let us do that." But Victor Gill, the Airport Authority's spokesperson, said it is not the curfew that's the problem, but rather the federal law that restricts the Airport Authority from agreeing to a curfew.
PUBLICATION: The Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville, FL)
DATE: July 11, 1998
SECTION: Community News; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Timothy Allen Gilmore
DATELINE: Jacksonville, Florida
The Florida Times-Union reports that a noise wall has been completed in Jacksonville, Florida along Interstate 95 from north of Emerson Street to south of University Boulevard. Residents are mostly happy with the noise wall, the article says.
According to the article, the wall is 20-foot-high, 5-inches-thick, and is made of concrete. The wall runs for 15,500 linear feet on both sides of the expressway, and was part of a $3.6 million project of work on Interstate 95.
The article reports that residents say while some noise still can be heard, it's nothing like it used to be. Resident Edgar Borders said, "It was just a constant noise, even in the house. I've lived here for 50 years and I never got used to it." Margaret Nugent, a live-in nanny, said, "We used to be able to hear the radios in all the cars, tires squealing, accidents happening. We can still hear a lot of that, but it's not as loud." Borders added, "Sometimes accidents would come in the direction of the houses, though they never got real close. Compared to what it was, it seems real calm now." Some residents also say they like the added security the wall provides. Nugent said, "There's a lot more privacy now. You know, you got a lot of strange people that walk along the highway. Sometimes people would just come off the highway and walk right through your yard to get to a convenience store or something." Nugent added, "One night, our doorbell rang real late. It was a lady whose car had broken down, wanting to call a tow truck. But when somebody wanders over late at night, you don't know if it's a rapist or who it is."
Although the noise wall dwarfs the surrounding houses, the article says, most residents said they don't mind that much. Nugent said, "It's a small price to pay." The article notes that trees soon will be planted along the wall on the highway side, and other landscaping left intact on the residents' side help reduce the impact.
One resident, Shirley Fedd, said her house is positioned between the wall and a dead-end, and highway noise actually seems to be greater now. She said, "The strange thing is that it's louder now than it was before. Sirens go by and then when big trucks come, my bedroom shakes. It happens all the time, but it didn't used to." But Mike Goldman, a spokesperson for the Department of Transportation, said, "There's no way to tell if it's actually amplified there without sending somebody out to measure sound levels, and there's no point in doing that. This is the first complaint we've heard."
PUBLICATION: The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA)
DATE: July 11, 1998
SECTION: Local, Pg. B3
BYLINE: Louis Hansen
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Daniel and Claudia Robinson, Toni Green, residents; Dennis Borgerding, president, Salem Lakes Civic League
The Virginian-Pilot reports that a pair of rock concerts at GTE Virginia Beach Amphitheater in Virginia Beach, Virginia have resulted in the heaviest noise complaints this season about the amphitheater. City officials and representatives of Cellar Door, a company that operates the amphitheater, will meet Monday to again discuss ways of keeping the noise down, the article says.
According to the article, the amphitheater's complaint line registered the highest number of complaints for the Metallica concert on June 30, and registered several more complaints for the Jimmy Page and Robert Plant show on Wednesday, according to C. Oral Lambert Jr., chief of staff for the city. Cellar Door officials could not be reached for comment.
According to the article, the concerts disturbed residents in the Salem Lakes and Landstown neighborhoods. Daniel and Claudia Robinson, who live about 1 1/2 miles from the amphitheater, said they heard the Plant and Page concert through closed doors. Daniel Robinson said, "We couldn't go to sleep. It really is aggravating." Toni Green, who lives in Salem Lakes, was awakened by the Metallica concert. The article notes that concerts are not allowed to continue past 11 p.m., but Green tried to go to bed by 10 p.m. to wake up for her 5 a.m. job. Metallica "was very, very loud," she said. Green added that she didn't call the complaint hotline because "it doesn't do any good."
The article explains that in June, residents from Salem Lakes met with City Council members Nancy Parker and Barbara Henley and representatives from Cellar Door. Dennis Borgerding, president of the Salem Lakes Civic League, said people were sympathetic, but the noise goes on. He said, "What we'd really like them to do is turn down the sound. We have reasonable expectations. We have a right to peaceful enjoyment of our property." Councilor Henley said she doesn't want to hurt the amphitheater's business, but agrees that noise is a problem. She said, "People should be able to enjoy the inside of their homes without that noise."
Lambert of the city said different solutions will be considered to help mitigate the noise, the article reports. Possible solutions could include re-configuring the speaker system or imposing stricter rules on volume. Lambert added that many musicians are not willing to turn down the volume at their shows.
PUBLICATION: The Arizona Republic
DATE: July 10, 1998
SECTION: Front; Pg. A16
BYLINE: Jeff Barker
DATELINE: Washington, DC and Tempe, Arizona
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Don MacGlashan, spokesperson, Citizens for the Abatement of Aircraft Noise (in DC area)
The Arizona Republic reports that Arizona Senator John McCain was praised by many on Thursday for a bill to reduce aircraft noise over national parks, but was then criticized by citizen groups opposed to a provision in the bill which would increase flights at such airports as Chicago's O'Hare and Washington's Reagan National. McCain also was accused of pushing the bill in order to benefit America West Airlines, based in Tempe, Arizona. The bill would allow America West to fly non-stop from Phoenix to Washington's Reagan National Airport. The article notes that the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, which McCain heads, gave preliminary approval to the bill, and will return next week to consider some minor amendments.
According to the article, McCain said in a statement when the bill was introduced, "Some have impugned my motives, suggesting that my secret purpose is to convenience my own travel between Washington and Arizona. I find this charge wearisome and offensive. Even so, to allay these concerns, I have pledged not to take a nonstop flight from (Reagan National) to Arizona should such an opportunity ever result from this legislation."
But, the article says, several groups are angry at McCain for ignoring local plans to limit the expansion of Reagan National and to direct more flights to a suburban airport, Dulles International. Don MacGlashan, spokesperson for Citizens for the Abatement of Aircraft Noise, said, "He is trying to just run roughshod over the local population" in the District of Columbia area. MacGlashan also said it was "interesting" that America West would benefit from the bill, adding that it would "open up a lot of things for them."
The article reports that the bill would lift the flight-mileage rule that forbids airlines from flying into Reagan National from a distance greater than 1,250 miles. The rule is designed partly to steer traffic toward the Dulles airport, the article notes. Nancy Ives, a spokesperson for McCain, said that relaxing the flight-mileage rule would benefit travelers across the nation. The Transportation Department still would need to certify that exemptions to the flight-mileage rule are in the consumer interest. McCain said earlier that adding more flights at various airports and allowing them to fly a longer distance at Reagan National would increase airline competition, resulting in lower fares and better service.
Meanwhile, the article says, McCain was praised for the provision in the bill regarding national park overflights. That provision would require air tour companies to apply to the federal government to conduct air tours over national parks, but the provision wouldn't apply to Grand Canyon National Park.
PUBLICATION: The Mirror
DATE: July 10, 1998
SECTION: Leader; Pg. 6
DATELINE: Ireland
The Mirror reports that an Irish man, Mr. Masterson, took his neighbor, Mrs. Gallagher, to court to stop her rooster from crowing every morning at 4:30 a.m. in the summer. Now, the article says, Mrs. Gallagher has started to blare her radio and television at all hours of the day.
PUBLICATION: The San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: July 10, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. A26
BYLINE: Pamela Podger
DATELINE: Santa Rosa, California
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that about 50 people attended a meeting yesterday before the Sonoma County (California) Board of Zoning Adjustments to debate the draft environmental impact report of the expansion of the Sears Point Raceway in the Santa Rosa area. The article says residents in Sonoma Valley are opposed to the expansion, saying it will bring more noise, traffic, and visual blight. The article notes that public comments will be taken through July 27, and then will be incorporated into the final environmental study. Meanwhile, Sonoma Valley Citizens Advisory Commission unanimously passed a resolution recommending the zoning board reject the current environmental impact report and redraft it with adequate mitigation plans.
According to the article, the raceway, located at the southern end of Sonoma Valley, has proposed a $30 million expansion which could quadruple the grandstand, and would add new gates, roads, a Go-Kart track, and industrial space. Nick Chase, a Sonoma County staffer, said the attendance for the raceway's six major events could increase from 250,000 spectators to 400,000 by 2007.
The article says the Sonoma Valley Citizens Advisory Commission wants the board to redraft the environmental impact report with mitigation plans, such as limits on attendance and the number of races. Cathy Wade Shepard, a member of the commission, said, "We don't want to give the raceway carte blanche. Maybe what we really need to do is work with the raceway. It is there and will be there. The question is how can we make it work for everyone." Shepard added that the raceway could move the parking lot to the west side of Highway 121, eliminating the need for a pedestrian bridge that is inconsistent with the highway's designation as a scenic corridor.
Meanwhile, consultants from EIP Associates, which prepared the environmental report, said at least two signal lights would be needed to ease traffic congestion. But, they found, there was no fix for the limited highway capacity along the two-lane Highways 37 and 121, and Lakeville Highway.
Residents who attended the meeting were concerned about the additional noise, traffic, and visual blight that would come from the expansion. The area's image of fine wines and a rural ambiance would suffer, they said. They also complained about the massive traffic jams that already occur on the big race days.
Steve Page, the manager of Sears Point Raceway, said there were traffic problems, but only at a handful of races, the article says. Most races attract crowds of fewer than 1,000 people, while just a few attract large crowds, such as the 110,000-member-crowd at the recent NASCAR event. Page said the raceway expansion would ease the traffic congestion, because the track recently acquired about 900 acres of adjoining property that will route people to an exit gate on Lakeville Highway. The raceway also is redesigning its proposed grandstand, which would have reached 110 feet in the initial proposal. The article notes that the company that owns the raceway, Speedway Motor Sports Inc. in North Carolina, has spent about $9 million on the expansion project so far, including land acquisition.
PUBLICATION: The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA)
DATE: July 10, 1998
SECTION: Local, Pg. B2
BYLINE: Louis Hansen
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: John Shick, leader, Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise; Jack Ferrebee, attorney
The Virginian-Pilot reports that the group Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise has announced it will bring a lawsuit against the U.S. Navy over plans to bring 10 squadrons of Hornet jets to Oceana Naval Air Station in Virginia Beach, Virginia. The article says about 100 residents attended a meeting Thursday to lend their support to the group. The group has until Thursday to file their lawsuit.
According to the article, the group was formed seven months ago to oppose the Navy plan to move 180 jets from Cecil Field, Florida to Oceana and to the Marine Corps air base in Beaufort, South Carolina. John Shick, a retired Navy captain and a leader of the group, said, "We're still going to need additional support. This is not a Girl Scout cookie thing."
Jack Ferrebee, a lawyer representing the group, confirmed that it is difficult for a grassroots organization to challenge the U.S. Navy. But, Ferrebee said the suit would focus on the inadequacies of the Navy's environmental impact statement. According to Ferrebee, the Navy should reconsider the costs of mitigating noise for property in the high-noise zones surrounding the base. He added that the Navy didn't consider other federal laws concerning environmental effects when making their decision. The article notes that the group could seek an injunction against the Navy to prohibit planes from being immediately transferred to Virginia Beach.
PUBLICATION: The Washington Times
DATE: July 10, 1998
SECTION: Part A; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Peter Kaplan
DATELINE: Washington, DC
The Washington Times reports that the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee yesterday approved new rules that would allow 24 more planes per day to fly into Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and lift restrictions on how far away the flights could come from. Senator John McCain (R-Arizona), the chair of the committee, is the chief sponsor of the bill, and says that the provisions would allow more competition in the Washington market. But local officials said McCain was meddling in their affairs for the benefit of Congress members who want more convenient flights to Washington. The committee still must take up the bill on Tuesday to approve final amendments, the article notes. If approved by the full Senate, the bill would have to be reconciled with a similar bill in the House. That bill would add only six flights at Reagan National, and would eliminate the restriction on long-haul flights.
According to the article, McCain said his plan will give smaller U.S. airlines more access to the nation's biggest airports. The bill also would cut back flight restrictions at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport and New York's LaGuardia and John F. Kennedy International airports. The General Accounting Office has said that restrictions at the four airports have been one reason that start-up airlines have trouble competing with larger carriers.
But, the article says, opponents of McCain's plan say that the added flights would worsen noise problems around the airport and would take millions of passengers away from neighboring Washington Dulles International and Baltimore-Washington International airports. Betty Ann Krahnke, a member of the Montgomery County Council who chairs a regional panel on airport noise, said, "We really are outraged. [Mr. McCain] has no right whatsoever to look at a piece of a regional system and ... wreak havoc on our local plans." The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority also opposes McCain's plan, the article says.
The article goes on to explain that local officials have long planned to limit growth at Reagan National and promote growth at Dulles and Baltimore-Washington. Currently, Reagan National handles about 16 million passengers a year, while the other two airports handle about 14 million each. One of the key ways officials had been relying on limiting flights at Reagan National was the so-called perimeter rule, which prohibits flights from more than 1,250 miles away. McCain's plan would lift the cap on the number of flights at the airport, and would add 12 daily flights from smaller airports within the 1,250-mile perimeter, as well as 12 more for service beyond the perimeter.
The article says that local officials also warned that changing the flight restrictions will provoke an angry response from residents living under Reagan National's flight path. James McIntyre, a spokesperson for Representative James Moran (D-Virginia), said, "We've heard from a number of constituents, all of them concerned about the noise that added flights would cause. It might make [senators'] flights a little more convenient, but for people living in the flight path, this is a real quality-of-life concern."
Krahnke of the Montgomery County Council said that McCain's plan also could have devastating impacts on the region's economy. A study completed earlier this year by George Mason University researchers found that abolishing the perimeter rule could add as many as 1.5 million passengers at Reagan National, while causing Dulles to lose as many as 3 million passengers a year and six to nine international destinations. Mark Looney, a spokesperson for the Fairfax County Chamber of Commerce, said, "We've built our economy in Fairfax County over the last 25 years around a healthy and vibrant Dulles Airport. Our fear is that ... a lot of the air service that has been going to Dulles will go to National." Local officials have set aside hundreds of millions of dollars to expand Dulles and Baltimore-Washington, but according to Krahnke, "if you don't have restrictions at National, you're not going to get growth at those two that are farther out."
PUBLICATION: The Bulletin (Bend, OR)
DATE: July 9, 1998
SECTION: Editorial; Pg. A6
DATELINE: Bend, Oregon
The Bulletin printed the following letter-to-the-editor from Frances Collins, a Bend, Oregon resident, regarding traffic noise on Eighth Street:
The people in Portland who are so upset about a parking garage for the Providence offices because it would cause traffic noise and be dangerous for neighborhood children, should live on Eighth Street in Bend. Then they would know what traffic noise really is.
Unfortunately, I bought my house in the winter on a Sunday night on a hurry-up purchase because we lost our home on the coast due to a landslide. Here on Eighth Street you can't leave house-front windows open due to the traffic noise, and that's really bad in summer when it's hot. You must keep them closed if you want to sleep.
I counted 149 cars and trucks, two motorcycles and two police cars today from 3 p.m. to 3:12 p.m. I don't have little children, but I feel sorry for those on Eighth Street who do. With the boom boxes and traffic noise, Eighth Street noise is horrific. All day, all night.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: July 9, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 10
BYLINE: Robert Herguth and Jim Allen
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois area
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jack Saporito, leader, Alliance of Residents Concerning O'Hare; Joe Karaganis, attorney for Suburban O'Hare Commission
The Chicago Daily Herald reports that activists in the Chicago, Illinois area are angry about a bill in the Senate that would add 100 daily flights at O'Hare International Airport. The bill is scheduled for a vote in a Senate committee today, the article notes. It would still need the approval of the full Senate, and then would need to be reconciled with a House bill.
According to the article, the bill would convert 100 unused military flight slots at O'Hare to commercial use during the next three years. The article says the bill was drafted without the knowledge of local senators or Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, officials said. Daley said, "We didn't know anything about this. Eventually they [the military slots will [be used for commercial flights], but we knew nothing about this proposal."
The article reports that Jack Saporito, head of the anti-noise group, Alliance of Residents Concerning O'Hare, said, "If they're going to do this, they need an extensive environmental study. The effect on pollution, the [nearby] people, will be incredible." Joe Karaganis, the attorney for the Suburban O'Hare Commission, said, "We refer to it as capacity creep, where they keep trying to stuff more flights into an airport which causes more noise and more pollution."
Meanwhile, Mike Briggs, a spokesperson for Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (D-Illinois), said the senator isn't opposed to the measure, but believes the Republicans who created the bill should have consulted with local senators and other individuals.
The proposal has once again sparked discussion about the possibility of building a third regional airport, a plan backed by many Republicans and opposed by many Democrats. Governor Jim Edgar, who supports a third regional airport, said that even if the bill passes, there still would be enough demand to build a third airport. Edgar added that he wanted to withhold judgment until he knows how the new air slots would be used.
PUBLICATION: Austin American-Statesman
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Metro/State; Pg. B2
DATELINE: Washington, DC
The Austin American-Statesman reports that the National Park Service has proposed banning personal watercraft such as Jet Skis from all national parks because of noise, safety, and environmental concerns. The article notes that the Park Service expects to publish the proposed rules this summer, and then take public comments for 90 days, after which the rules could be revised. The new regulations could take effect next year.
According to the article, the ban would affect nine national parks where Jet Skis are now allowed, including Big Bend in Texas, Mount Rainier in Washington, and Voyageurs in Minnesota. Personal watercraft still would be allowed at 13 other national recreation areas and national seashores administered by the Park Service, but the local superintendent of each area would have the power to ban them. In addition, the ban would be delayed for two years at 12 other sites, mostly national seashores and lake shores, to allow for further study.
The article explains that personal watercraft currently are allowed at more than 30 of the 87 areas that the Park Service administers, including Biscayne, Isle Royale, Mammoth, North Cascades, and Olympic. Recently, park superintendents were told not to allow additional use of Jet Skis while the ban is under consideration. Park Service officials said they proposed the ban because personal watercraft are "often operated in an aggressive manner" and have "a significant potential to conflict with other visitors' enjoyment of park values." They added, that visitors frequently complain about the noise and unsafe operation of the machines.
Meanwhile, manufacturers of personal-watercraft say the ban is unfair and unnecessary, arguing that new models are quieter and cleaner, and drivers are becoming more courteous and safer. The article notes that about 200,000 personal watercraft are sold per year, and Americans own 1.2 million. The machines account for 35 percent of the accidents involving watercraft, but account for only 11 percent of all registered watercraft.
PUBLICATION: The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA)
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Local, Pg. B2
BYLINE: Louis Hansen
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Hal Levenson, founding member, Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise
The Virginian-Pilot reports that Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise in Virginia Beach, Virginia plans to file a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Navy's decision to move 10 squadrons of Hornet jets to the Oceana Naval Air Station in Virginia Beach. The group has hired an attorney and will meet Thursday to discuss the issue and solicit donations. The group has until July 16 to file the suit, the article notes.
The article reports that Navy officials decided in May to move 156 of its 180 F/A-18 Hornets from Cecil Field in Florida to Oceana. The remaining aircraft will be moved to the Marine Corps base in Beaufort, South Carolina. The decision lauded by many local officials, but many residents living near the base said the jets would make their lives noisier and would decrease their property values. The article notes that the number flights over Oceana will double, and flights over Fentress air base in Chesapeake will increase 37 percent, according to a Navy report.
According to the article, Jack Ferrebee, the group's attorney, said the group believes the Navy's Environmental Impact Statement doesn't accurately gauge the impacts of jet noise on Virginia Beach and Chesapeake neighborhoods. Hal Levenson, a founding member of the group and a member of its steering committee, said, "The fundamental issues that this organization raised in January have not been addressed." The group wants the Navy to supplement its Environmental Impact Statement with additional information including the impact of jet noise on elementary school learning; the cost of noise abatement for private homes and businesses; and a risk assessment for a jet crash at the air station. Ferrebee said additional issues would be presented if a lawsuit is filed. He added that officials in North Carolina will not be joining the group in filing a lawsuit. North Carolina had earlier worked with the group to oppose the move to Oceana in order to secure some of the jets for their Marine Corps base at Cherry Point.
Meanwhile, Robert Matthias, assistant to the Virginia Beach city manager, said officials with the city and Navy have met several times with members of Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise, and have come to some agreements. The Navy has agreed to change some training flight patterns, and is trying to win approval to build a "hush-house," a building that would muffle the sound of jet engine testing.
PUBLICATION: U.S. Newswire
DATE: July 9, 1998
SECTION: National Desk, Environment Writer
DATELINE: Washington, DC
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Tom Kiernan., president of the National Parks and Conservation Association (NPCA)
U.S. Newswire issued the following press release concerning regulation of air tours over national parks:
The National Parks and Conservation Association (NPCA) today praised action by the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee to regulate commercial air tours over national parks. The panel today approved legislation to address the problem of excessive noise in the parks from airplane and helicopter tours. The noise problem originated in the Grand Canyon, where more than 100,000 air tours are flown each year, and is an emerging concern throughout the National Park System.
The National Parks Overflights Act (S. 268) would require the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to cooperate with the National Park Service (NPS) in developing air tour management plans in all parks where the air tour industry has expressed an interest in operating. The bill, sponsored by U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), is also incorporated as a part of the FAA Reauthorization Bill. "This dual-track greatly improves the chances that Congress will take action this year on the growing problem of air tour overflights in our national parks," said NPCA President Tom Kiernan. "It's an encouraging sign that the committee is dealing with this issue before it gets out of hand all across the parks." S. 268 would allow the FAA and NPS to consider the use of flight bans, flight-free zones, and altitude restrictions in order to preserve quiet in the parks. The bill also calls for incentives for the use of quiet aircraft technology.
An NPCA/Colorado State University survey conducted earlier this year found that 70 percent of the American public believes that air tours should be limited over national parks. An additional 17 percent said such flights over parks should be banned altogether. NPCA surveys of park managers have identified 56 parks where commercial tour overflights are a recognized problem and a number of additional parks where managers expressed concerns that commercial air tour operations were imminent. "A great value of many national parks is the opportunity for a visitor to get away to a place where you can actually hear a bird call, or a stream rush by, or even just the wind through the trees," Kiernan said. "Air tours, if unregulated, can rob us all of that experience."
The National Parks and Conservation Association is America's only private nonprofit citizen organization dedicated solely to protecting, preserving, and enhancing the U.S. National Park System. An association of " Citizens Protecting America's Parks," NPCA was founded in 1919 and today has nearly 500,000 members. A library of national park information, including fact sheets, congressional testimony, position statements, press releases and media alerts, can be found on NPCA's World Wide Web site at http://www.npca. org. CONTACT: Jerome Uher of the National Parks and Conservation Association,202-223-6722, ext. 122
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: July 9, 1998
SECTION: Nws; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Becky Beaupre and Lynn Sweet
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Sun-Times reports Chicago area residents reacted with outrage to a U.S. Senate proposal to add 100 daily flights at O'Hare Airport.
According to the article, suburban residents and village leaders Wednesday responded with what one mayor called "hysterical outrage" to the proposal to add 100 daily flights at O'Hare Airport. Park Ridge City Hall was flooded with calls from residents upset about the idea, Mayor Ron Wietecha said. "[A] couple of these calls were simply out of control. They are as emotional as you possibly can get," he said. "Even one more flight is not acceptable to the residents of Park Ridge." The proposal, a late addition to an aviation bill before the Senate Transportation Committee, calls for converting 100 unused military takeoff and landing slots at O'Hare to commercial use over a three-year period. Despite objections from the suburbs and Illinois' senators, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said he will move ahead with the proposal when it comes up for a vote today before his committee. McCain added that he has been trying for 12 years to relax landing and takeoff restrictions at several airports to foster competition and lower fares. "I am intent on providing every citizen, both in Chicago neighborhoods and around the country, with the lowest possible airfares," McCain said. McCain said the additional flights would not be allowed until the Transportation Department certifies that noise and environmental problems would not be created. Also, new flights would be reserved for only the quietest aircraft, he said. "I don't believe (O'Hare area residents) will . . . notice it, to tell you the truth," McCain said.
The article reports many residents near the world's busiest airport don't put much stock in McCain's opinion. "I can't imagine there being more noise than there already is," said Jennifer Clark of Elk Grove Village. The roar of jet engines already wakes Clark's baby and drowns out her husband's voice. Sometimes, the noise makes windows and dishes rattle. "At night, I dream about planes crashing, because that's what it sounds like," said Clark, whose home is about five miles from the airport. Illinois politicians either oppose McCain's proposal or are undecided and cautious. Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun (D-Ill.) said she would oppose the McCain-backed provision. "It's not going to happen," she said. "I don't believe enough consideration was taken for our entire state." Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) also has concerns about the added flights. Mayor Daley does not want to antagonize the anti- noise Suburban O'Hare Commission. "Congress makes these types of proposals all the time," Daley said. "The bill has not even come out of committee. . . ." Asked whether he would support the additional flights, Daley said, "I really don't know." Daley has been advocating construction of new runways at O'Hare. Illinois Gov. Edgar spoke cautiously about the legislation, saying supporters must show that more flights would be safe, lead to lower airfares and not worsen jet noise over the suburbs.
PUBLICATION: The Columbian (Vancouver, WA)
DATE: July 9, 1998
SECTION: Clark County/Region; Pg. B1
DATELINE: Portland, Oregon
The Columbian reports work on Portland International Airport's south runway will shift aircraft flight patterns and bring more noise to areas north of the airport.
According to the article, pavement work on Portland International Airport's south runway will shift aircraft flight patterns on both sides of the river. During the hours or repair work, all aircraft operations will be shifted to the north and crosswind runways. Flights to and from the crosswind runway are particularly noticeable to residents just north of the airport in Clark County because planes, primarily light turboprop and propeller aircraft, fly at relatively low altitudes during their approaches. Normally the crosswind runway is used only when winds from the south make use of the east-west runway difficult. Port of Portland spokesman Doug Roberts said areas north and south of the airport might see increased aircraft traffic between 3 p.m. and 10 p.m.
The article reports because the south runway is the airport's longest and must remain open a portion of each day for large jets, the south runway project work has been spread over each summer and fall for the past four years. The runway will be closed from 3 p.m. to 5 a.m. daily until Sept. 1. More information on the runway work or other aircraft noise concerns can be obtained by calling the port's Noise Abatement Office, (800) 938-6647.
PUBLICATION: The New York Times
DATE: July 9, 1998
SECTION: Section B; Page 11; Column 4; Metropolitan Desk
BYLINE: Amy Waldman
DATELINE: New York, NY
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Rep.Carolyn B. Maloney (D-Manhattan); Joy Held, founder of the Helicopter Noise Coalition
The New York Times reports a study of New York City's heliports and helicopter flights supported a current ban on tours from one heliport in the city, but failed to endorse new regulations for helicopter flights. The results of the study produced mixed reactions from activists, politicians, and industry representatives.
According to the article, a draft of the city's first comprehensive analysis of its heliport infrastructure and helicopter activity has concluded that the city should continue its year-old ban on sightseeing flights from the 34th Street Heliport, but it does not call for new regulations on corporate or commercial traffic. The Heliport and Helicopter Master Plan, which was presented to community board members this week, immediately drew objections from critics who have lobbied the city to place further restrictions on helicopter flights, which they say are too noisy and potentially unsafe. The plan, critics said, broke little new policy ground and did not address issues including when helicopters should be allowed to operate and the altitudes at which they should be allowed to fly.
The article reports Charles Millard, the president of the Economic Development Corporation, which controls the 34th Street Heliport and commissioned the study, highlighted what will be done to address some of the issues. He said the city was "in discussion" with the State Department of Transportation about a similar ban on sightseeing flights at the heliport the state owns, at West 30th Street and the Hudson River. Millard also said the city would carry out a recommendation in the plan to construct fuel tanks at the East 34th Street Heliport to reduce the thousands of helicopter trips across the city to the only existing refueling site, at the West 30th Street Heliport on the Hudson River. The city will also build a noise barrier around the landside perimeter of the East 34th Street Heliport, he said, and it will consider offering financial incentives to helicopter operators that fly quieter new technology. A third heliport, at Pier 6 and the Battery, is owned by the Port Authority, which cannot ban sightseeing flights because of Federal restrictions. Those restrictions end in 2005, and at that point, the plan says, the city will ban sightseeing flights from there. Deputy Mayor Randy Levine said yesterday that the plan tries to balance quality-of-life and economic interests. "We should not have tourist helicopters flying all over New York," he said, "but New York needs flights for commerce."
The article states the plan quickly brought criticism from advocates of greater restrictions on helicopter traffic. Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, a Manhattan Democrat and a proponent of stricter Federal aviation regulation for helicopters, criticized the plan for not addressing "overflights, minimum heights and curfews." Joy Held, the founder of the Helicopter Noise Coalition, which represents 18,000 people, said the plan did nothing to reduce sightseeing flights from privately owned heliports, nor did it curb the number of corporate or media flights. "The sum total of this plan is that nothing is changing while the Mayor is claiming victory over the issue," she said. Millard pointed out that the city had closed a heliport at East 60th Street at the end of February, and that traffic from the East 34th Street Heliport has been cut by 65 percent since the city ended sightseeing flights from there last August. There have been 41,875 flights so far this year from the three heliports, according to the Economic Development Corporation. In 1996, the latest year for which figures were available, there were 138,104 flights.
The article goes on to report Matthew S. Zuccaro, a spokesman for the Eastern Region Helicopter Council, a trade association representing 86 companies, called the plan a "good foundation" for the city's helicopter and heliport operating system. Zuccaro criticized the city's ban on sightseeing flights and its effort to get the state to do the same. "It seems," he said, "to be politically correct and expedient at this point, based on concerns about noise, to say, 'Okay, we'll just eliminate that segment of the industry.' " The industry, he said, had made a substantial effort to regulate itself. Sightseeing companies have changed their routes to avoid flying over residential neighborhoods, he said, in addition to increasing the altitudes at which they fly, and stopped flying over Manhattan completely, instead following along the Hudson River. Zuccaro said he was also working on an operations manual for the city's eight news-gathering helicopters. The plan does not address media helicopters because none take off from heliports in the city. Zuccaro praised the city for not carrying out more of the activists' demands. "The Helicopter Noise Coalition," he said, "has indicated that their ultimate and only goal is to close all heliports and eliminate all helicopter traffic in the city, except for emergency flights." Ms. Held responded, "That is definitely our goal."
PUBLICATION: Newsday (New York, NY)
DATE: July 9, 1998
SECTION: News; Page A03
BYLINE: Rose Kim and Liz Willen
DATELINE: New York, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Rose Marie Poveromo, president of the United Community Civic Association; Claire Shulman, Borough president
Newsday reports a federal appeals court has upheld the U.S. Department of Transportation's plan to add 21 daily flights into New York's LaGuardia Airport.
According to the article, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals accepted the government's argument that the 21 additional daily flights would serve the public's interest by increasing competition. "In granting the applications at issue here, the Secretary found exceptional circumstances that there was a 'need for competitive service . . . especially low fare competitive service' in the market," the decision read. Borough President Claire Shulman, who along with Mayor Rudolph Giuliani had challenged the Department of Transportation's plans, reacted angrily to the court's decision, calling it "a tragedy for the people living around LaGuardia Airport." Shulman said, "Apparently the federal government is more concerned about the airline industry than the people living around two of the world's busiest airports." Mayor Giuliani said the city would attempt to appeal the decision with the U.S. Supreme Court. "A city and a state should have some role in being able to assess the environmental impact of flights that go over our air space so long as we aren't acting unreasonably and arbitrarily," Giuliani said.
The article states in its appeal, the city argued that the federal government should have conducted an environmental impact study on the noise that would be generated by the new flights. But the court said an analysis had indicated "only marginal increases in the noise level." Rose Marie Poveromo, president of the United Community Civic Association, who lives just a block from the airport, was outraged by the decision. "It's a disgraceful decision, and these people who make decisions for us living around the airport have to come stay with us. They have to see how we suffer," Poveromo said.
According to the article, since 1969, the number of flights at airports in highly congested areas has been restricted. But in 1994, the U.S. Congress passed a law, allowing the Secretary of Transportation to grant exemptions under exceptional circumstances and when it served the public's interest. Since October, 1997, the Department of Transportation has added 30 new flights at LaGuardia. Twenty-one slots were given to three airlines. In February, 1998, as the city's appeal to the first decision was pending, the government granted nine more slots to two different airlines. Those additions are also being challenged by the city.
PUBLICATION: South China Morning Post
DATE: July 9, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 2
BYLINE: Anne Stewart
DATELINE: South China
The South China Morning Post reports airport noise has shifted from Kowloon to Lantau and Sha Tin despite promises that Chek Lap Kok would solve the problem, green groups said yesterday.
According to the article, Friends of the Earth demanded residents of Sha Tin and Tsing Yi be compensated for their misery by the Airport Authority. "The Airport Authority has an allocation, and all affected areas should receive some compensation," said a spokesman. There is not a decibel noise limit set around the airport, but sound within the " noise contour" is not supposed to exceed international-accepted standards. But according to an Airport Authority spokesman, at Sha Lo Wan tests showed villagers were exposed to about 86 decibels every time a plane flew overhead, which is about 31 times an hour. The limit for traffic and construction noise is 70 decibels.
The article reports a planned review of Chek Lap Kok's environmental impact to be done in August would show "problems, without a doubt", said Advisory Committee on the Environment chairman Peter Wong Hong-chuen. "The question is have the Airport Authority and Civil Aviation Department dealt with them sufficiently. We can't guarantee that the people who make the predictions will get it absolutely right," he said. "It's not surprising there are complaints. If you live in tranquil northern Lantau then suddenly you've got the noise of a full working airport, it's something you're not used to." Citizens Party members will meet with Sha Lo Wan villagers next week, said environmental spokesman Lisa Hopkinson. Better Environment Hong Kong director Steve Choi Sau-yim, who lives in Sha Tin, said he did not see how the problem could be solved. "I don't know what the Government can really do - the flights are well within the regulations, but they are still very annoying," he said.
PUBLICATION: AAP Newsfeed
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Nationwide General News; Australian General News
DATELINE: Sydney, Australia
AAP Newsfeed reports the New South Wales government is considering night curfews on some roads to cut traffic noise, the Daily Telegraph reported today.
According to the article, the proposal is part of a draft noise pollution policy formulated by the Environmental Protection Authority. Other guidelines include 24-hour "quiet zones" around areas such as schools and hospitals, truck and bus bans on certain roads, and dedicated truck routes. The new policy would give local governments the power to impose the new conditions, while the Roads and Traffic Authority would be responsible for noise on major roads. Violations of the new restrictions would be dealt with in the same way as other traffic violations.
PUBLICATION: Greenwire
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Spotlight Story
DATELINE: United States
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Russell Long, member of the Earth Island Institute's Bluewater Network
Greenwire published the following press release saying the National Park Service has proposed banning jet- propulsion personal watercraft (PWCs) from many of the waterways it oversees because of pollution, noise and safety concerns:
The ban would affect many areas where PWCs are now allowed, including Mount Rainier National Park in Washington, Voyageurs National Park in Minnesota, Lake Mead on the Arizona-Nevada border, and Lake Powell on the Arizona-Utah border. But the watercraft would continue to be permitted at the discretion of park managers at 11 national recreation areas and the Gulf Island and Padre Island national seashore areas. And the ban would be delayed for two years at a dozen other sites, such as Assateague National Seashore in Maryland, to allow for more study. Americans already own 1.2 million PWCs, and sales are running at about 200,000 a year. NPS officials said that PWCs are "often operated in an aggressive manner" and have "a significant potential to conflict with other visitors' enjoyment of park values and purposes" (Philip Brasher, AP/Phoenix Arizona Republic/others, 7/8).
Powered by in-board motors, PWCs discharge as much as 25% of their oil and gas emissions directly into waterways (Greenwire, 1/6). They also can disrupt wildlife and aquatic vegetation in shallow areas, according to the NPS (Tom Meersman, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, 7/7).
Point, Counterpoint: Environmentalists were divided over the proposal. Kevin Collins of the National Parks and Conservation Assn. said the plan sounded "good" and was "a long time in coming." But Russell Long of the Earth Island Institute's Bluewater Network said his group would "be forced to litigate" if the proposal is not made stricter (San Francisco Chronicle, 7/8). But watercraft manufacturers oppose the growing number of restrictions on their products, such as new air-emissions limits proposed by California air officials. They say they have reduced the amount of emissions and noise produced by PWCs (Greenwire, 7/6). The proposal will be published in the Federal Register within a few weeks and could take effect as early as next year (Meersman, Minneapolis Star-Tribune).
PUBLICATION: The Morning Call (Allentown, PA)
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Local/Region, Pg. B3
BYLINE: A. Kelly Gaylor
DATELINE: Silverdale, Pennsylvania
The Morning Call reports neighbors of a Silverdale, Pennsylvania, racing track complained Monday to the city council about excessive noise and dust. They were advised to report their complaints to police in an effort to get the noise ordinance enforced.
According to the article, Councilwoman Joyce Patton, who lives close to the W. Main Street location, agreed the noise level was high. "It's very loud," she said. "I can only imagine what it's like living next to it." One resident, who did not identify himself, said, "It started out with just one or two bikes. It's big racing bikes now, and these are men, not kids. There is next to nothing regarding a muffler." The resident added, "They can sometimes go for three hours at a stretch. I don't think it belongs in the borough where it's residential." The track has been there nearly a year, and neighbors said the dust is getting worse now that the grass is gone. Residents said the dust invades their homes and clings to clothes hanging outdoors.
The article reports the Council said the problem should be covered under the noise ordinance. The ordinance addresses operating vehicles in a manner that causes disturbance across property boundary lines. When residents asked how best to handle the situation, Council urged residents to call the police. "People who live there know when it's actually happening," said President Lowell Musselman. Mayor Al Reese said, "It might carry more weight if council contacts the Police Department and talks to them ourselves." Borough solicitor Lawrence Grim suggested sending the police a copy of the ordinance. The Council also plans to send a copy to the owners of the racetrack property and the adjacent business.
PUBLICATION: The New York Times
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Section A; Page 19; Column 1; National Desk
BYLINE: AP
DATELINE: Washington, DC
The New York Times reports personal watercraft such as Jet Skis could be banned from all national parks because of safety, noise and environmental concerns under rules proposed by the National Park Service.
According to the article, the ban would affect nine parks where personal watercraft are now permitted. The personal watercraft would still be allowed at 13 other units administered by the Park Service, 11 national recreation areas and two national seashores, Gulf Island and Padre Island, at the discretion of the local superintendent. The ban would be delayed for two years at a dozen other units, mostly national seashores and lake shores, to allow for further study. The rules are not expected to take effect for up to a year.
PUBLICATION: The New York Times
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Section B; Page 4; Column 5; Metropolitan Desk
DATELINE: New York, New York
The New York Times reports a Federal appeals court ruled yesterday in favor of allowing increased flights into and out of New York City's La Guardia Airport.
According to the article, a Federal appeals court ruled yesterday that the United States Department of Transportation could allow more flights into and out of La Guardia Airport, rejecting a suit by the city charging that the additional flights would substantially increase noise and automobile traffic in Queens. Since October, the Transportation Department has created 30 additional landing and takeoff slots at La Guardia to allow smaller regional airlines to provide increased service to Atlanta, Denver, Chicago, Knoxville, Tenn., and Melbourne, Fla. The Transportation Department created the new slots in an attempt to increase competition and reduce air fares in certain regions. Almost all of La Guardia's slots had been controlled by large airlines.
The article states Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani and Claire Shulman, the Queens Borough President, filed suit to prevent the additional flights, arguing that the Federal Government first should have conducted an environmental impact study. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected that argument. William Walker, assistant corporation counsel for the city, said the city was considering an appeal.
PUBLICATION: News & Record (Greensboro, NC)
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Triad/State, Pg. B2b
BYLINE: John A. Nagy
DATELINE: Greensboro, North Carolina
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Joe Glover, resident; Diane Warren, resident
The News & Record reports FedEx and Piedmont Triad International Airport officials on Tuesday rejected an alternative site for the company's new hub and declined to change their plans to build a third runway. Officials still plan to meet with residents about noise and safety concerns.
According to the article, FedEx and Piedmont Triad International Airport officials rejected the residents' alternative site for the new hub, saying it would take too long to build, cost too much and not meet FedEx's needs. Airport and FedEx officials pledged to continue meeting with residents to discuss other concerns, such as noise and safety. But they remain committed to a package-handling hub on the north side of the airport and constructing the third runway parallel to the existing main runway. The residents' proposed moving the hub to the airport's south side and eliminating the planned third runway. Residents, many of whom live in surrounding neighborhoods north of the airport, were disappointed with the airport's decision. "Our proposal would meet their needs," said Joe Glover, one of about 10 residents who met with airport and FedEx officials. Tuesday's meeting was the culmination of more than two months of discussions between the airport and residents.
The article states airport officials hired a Pittsburgh-based transportation consultant to analyze the residents' proposal. The consultant determined the airport would need to purchase 111 properties on the south end of the airport. Relocating those displaced property owners could take four or five years. A segment of the Norfolk-Southern Railroad line would have to be relocated, which could take seven to 10 years. Portions of West Market Street would have to be moved, as well as two fire stations, a BellSouth switching station, and a cemetery. Completing these requirements would exceed the cost of the original plan by about $74 million, the consultant concluded. FedEx spokesman Jesse Bunn told residents their plan would not meet the company's needs. "From FedEx's standpoint, there would be excessive delays," Bunn said. "We require a precise operation where minutes matter. A hub situated in the middle of parallel runways is the optimal model for speed and efficiency."
The article reports after Tuesday's meeting, residents accused FedEx and Piedmont Airport of not even considering the elimination of a third runway from their plans. "The airport authority is unwilling to look at a proposal that does not include a third runway," said Diane Warren, a spokeswoman for the group of residents. "For some reason, that's a major thing for them," said Glover. "We're disappointed they didn't take our proposal and give it thorough study." Ted Johnson, executive director of the PTI Airport Authority, said his staff and the consultant spent more than 500 hours studying the residents' proposal. "We respectfully disagree with the (residents) that we didn't consider their plan," he said. Homeowners said they still hope they can get some concessions from the airport and FedEx without filing a lawsuit. The airport is expected in the next month to begin a comprehensive study required by the Federal Aviation Administration of all impacts the hub and third runway would have on the surrounding area. Residents will most likely present their proposal again at that time. "We want to make sure the FAA understands the implications of our alternative proposal," Warren said.
PUBLICATION: Newsday (New York, NY)
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: News; Page A31
BYLINE: Sid Cassese
DATELINE: Long Beach, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Irene Ficke, resident
Newsday reports the city council of Long Beach, New York, is considering rescinding its ban on leafblowers within the city. Critics say the ban was never enforced in the first place, charging even city workers violated the ban.
According to the article, the Long Beach City Council last night voted to get public input on a plan to rescind its ban on the use of gasoline-powered leafblowers within the city. The city council voted 5-0 to hold a public hearing July 21. City Council President Michael Zapson said yesterday that the ban was being lifted because it is no longer useful. "We enacted the ban to try and control some of the noise and the dirt just being moved around . . .," he said. "But what we learned was that a lot of homeowners found these blowers indispensable to maintenance of their lawns and gardens. And the gardeners, who we wanted to crack down on, have in fact been using the equipment more reasonably . . ."
The article reports that since the ban went into effect in 1994 complaints have been heard that not only was the law not enforced, but also that city workers themselves violated the law. Last summer, some city officials told Newsday the city is exempt from the ban. Irene Ficke, a major complainant of leafblower noise, especially the city's use of them, said: "If the city council removes this law from the books without even having tried to enforce it, this city will be the laughing stock of Long Island, where many communities are beginning to restrict or ban their use." Several towns on Long Island, including Oyster Bay and Huntington, have restrictions on the use of these blowers, and other communities, including the Town of North Hempstead, are researching the idea of a total ban during the warmer months of the year. Andrew Hanlon, a North Merrick landscaper and a board member of the Nassau-Suffolk Landscapers and Gardeners Association, said he thinks it is great that Long Beach is lifting the ban. "Companies have come up with quieter blowers . . . Our association is negotiating with several towns, including North Hempstead, to create laws around decibel levels instead of outright bans," he added.
According to the article, Matt Dwyer, a regular critic of the city council, said, "It's obvious that the council is not interested in the quality of life in Long Beach." Dwyer said, "The city council should stop wasting its time and mine with laws that they do not enforce, even when there are complaints. He (Zapson) virtually acknowledges the law was not enforced, so by removing the ban the council won't have to deal with outraged residents complaining about the blowers."
PUBLICATION: The San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. A3
DATELINE: San Francisco, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Kevin Collins, spokesman for the National Parks and Conservation Association; Russell Long, of the Earth Island Institute's Bluewater Network
The San Francisco Chronicle reports personal watercraft would be banned from all national parks as early as next year because of safety, noise and environmental concerns under rules proposed by the National Park Service. In California, personal watercraft could still be operated at the discretion of the local superintendent at units administered by the Park Service.
According to the article, the Park Service's announcement of the proposed rule did not quell the controversy that surrounds Jet Skis. In proposing its ban, the Park Service said personal watercraft are "often operated in an aggressive manner" and are the subject of frequent complaints about noise and unsafe operation. Their use "has a significant potential to conflict with other visitors' enjoyment of park values and purposes," the agency said. Personal watercraft-makers have opposed the ban as being unfair and unnecessary, arguing that new models are quieter and cleaner, and that their users are becoming more courteous and safe. Even environmentalists don't agree when it comes to personal watercraft. "It's a long time in coming, but they've finally gotten out a good rule," said Kevin Collins, a spokesman for the National Parks and Conservation Association. But Russell Long, of the Earth Island Institute's Bluewater Network, said if the proposed rules are not made more stringent, his group will "be forced to litigate to protect our pristine lands." Representatives for the personal watercraft industry were not available for comment yesterday.
The article reports the watercraft would still be allowed at 13 units administered by the Park Service, including 11 national recreation areas at the discretion of the local superintendents. The ban would be delayed for two years at a dozen other units, mostly national seashores and lake shores, to allow for further study. The Park Service plans to publish the rules this summer and then take public comment for 90 days, after which time the rules may be revised. The rules are not expected to take effect for up to a year.
According to the article, in California, personal watercraft could still be operated at the discretion of the local superintendent in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area and the Whiskeytown-Shasta-Trinity National Recreation Area. Currently, the only place along the Golden Gate National Recreation Area's 28 miles of coastline where the watercraft is permitted is at Fort Baker on the Marin side of the bay. Rangers at the Whiskeytown-Shasta-Trinity National Recreation Area said they think the ban at three small spots on the vast reservoir will continue. In another development affecting personal watercraft yesterday, the Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department and the Santa Clara Valley Water District temporarily banned two-stroke engines, which include Jet Skis, from operating on Calero Reservoir, one of the main sources of water for the county. Authorities put the ban in effect after finding what they termed "unacceptably high" levels of MTBE -- a chemical additive found in high levels in fuel -- in the reservoir. Some research has linked the additive to cancer.
PUBLICATION: Telegram & Gazette (Worcester, MA)
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Local News; Pg. B3
BYLINE: Jim Bodor
DATELINE: Grafton, Massachusetts
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: John D. Mullen, resident; Donna Onacki, resident
The Telegram & Gazette reports the Grafton, Massachusetts, Board of Selectmen last night held a hearing last night to discuss complaints from neighbors of a firing range who claim noise have dramatically increased in recent years.
According to the article, John D. Mullen lives near a firing range off Stowe Road run by the North Grafton Fish, Rod & Gun Club. He says he could live with the noise coming from the range until about five years ago, when, he says, the intensity of the shooting at the range dramatically increased. "It has risen to almost like a war zone coming out of the gun club," he said. "It can go as much as 12 hours a day, seven days a week. Now I can't listen to any firing without recoiling or getting upset about it. " The Board of Selectmen last night held a hearing to discuss Mullen's concerns, and to examine ways to reduce noise at the range. No solutions were offered, but the session opened a dialogue between Mullen and the club, and may lead to the club voluntarily taking steps to reduce noise at the range.
The article reports the Stowe Road firing range is run by the North Grafton Fish, Rod & Gun Club. The club has about 200 members, who may use the range between 8 a.m. and dusk every day but Sunday. On Sunday, the range does not open until after 1 p.m. The range also is used by three police departments: the Grafton Police Department, the Upton Police Department, and the Grafton barracks of the Massachusetts State Police. The departments use the range three times each year for about one hour for firearms training that is required under state police training regulations. Mullen complains that use of the range is up, but nothing has been done to reduce the excess noise created. "At some point in the early 1990s, they made a change there, and now it seems like you can't even live with it anymore," he said. "But I don't have any recourse to get them to reduce the noise." Retired Grafton Police Chief Russell Messier said noise from the range may have increased as officers have changed to larger and larger weapons. "They do have clips of 17 bullets, and they are louder," he said. "And sometimes we do use shotguns, but we're mandated to by the Massachusetts State Police Training Courses."
The article states gun club secretary Brian Turcotte said he reviewed the club's log of daily visitors for the past six months and found no increase in the number of club members visiting the range. He did not say how many people use the club daily on average. The club also has reduced the number of target shooting events at the range, which should have lowered noise levels there, he argued. The club reaches out to area residents to try to correct any noise concerns, he said. Each summer the club sponsors a barbecue and invites non-club members from the area to attend and learn more about the range and club. "I'm sure there are individuals who may swing away from the way things should be, but I do believe we have a well-behaved membership. We go out of our way to be good neighbors," Turcotte said.
According to the article, Grafton Police Chief Peter R. Paulding said that records show the department has received no complaints about noise at the range since December 1996. He said any complaints made with the police will be investigated. "It's unfortunate it's disturbing, but the facts I have so far indicate that it is not an overwhelming disturbance to the people in the neighborhood," he said. One other area couple attended last night's hearing to complain about the noise. Donna Onacki of Merriam Road, which borders the range, said that she and her husband have noticed an increase in the use of the range. "At 8 a.m., when I take my son to the bus, you can hear the semiautomatics, or what sound like semiautomatics, going off," she said.
PUBLICATION: The Lawyer (United Kingdom)
DATE: July 7, 1998
SECTION: Litigation:Forthcoming Cases; Pg. 18
BYLINE: Roger Pearson
DATELINE: Gosport, England
The Lawyer reports a Gosport, England, pub is at the center of a pending test case over procedures to be followed by courts dealing with complaints of noise nuisance.
According to the article, the Court of Appeal has given Surrey Free Inns permission to challenge a High Court decision confirming a noise abatement notice for one of their pubs, Oliver's Bar. The notice came after local residents complained when music was played while doors of the bar were left open. After hearing residents' complaints, Gosport Borough Council served a noise abatement notice on Surrey Free Inns. Surrey Inns appealed to Fareham magistrates' court, but its appeal was dismissed on grounds that the noise had still not abated. However, a further appeal was allowed by Portsmouth Crown Court after it was told that steps had been taken to sound-proof the bar.
The article reports a third appeal was then brought to the High Court, this time by the local authority. The High Court ruled that the magistrates had been right in the first place. It concluded that any appeal against a noise abatement notice had to be considered on the facts as they were at the time when the notice was served, not as they were at the time of the appeal. However, now the Court of Appeal has determined that view can be challenged. Timothy Straker QC, counsel for Surrey Free Inns, in arguing for leave to appeal, said that over the years there had been conflicting decisions and opinions in the High Court on this point. He said the case raised important matters in respect of the weight to be given by courts to sound-proofing carried out after the initial complaint, and that it was a matter which affected all those who came into contact with or were likely to come into contact with the statutory nuisance provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. In particular it affected the licensed trade which, by virtue of the nature of its activities, is likely from time to time to be concerned with such provision. The appeal is expected to take place this autumn.
PUBLICATION: The Lawyer (United Kingdom)
DATE: July 7, 1998
SECTION: Litigation; Pg. 18
DATELINE: London, England
The Lawyer reports judgment is pending in a London case which will determine landlords' liability in respect to noise nuisance.
According to the article, Lord Justices Peter Gibson, Schiemann and Mantell have reserved judgment in an appeal in which London Borough of Southwark is challenging a ruling by Mr. Justice Laddie, upholding an arbitrator's decision that the council was in breach of an express covenant not to disturb tenants' quiet occupation of their homes.
PUBLICATION: The Patriot Ledger (Quincy, MA)
DATE: July 7, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. 01S
BYLINE: Gary Susswein
DATELINE: Boston, Massachusetts
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Holly Merry, resident
The Patriot Ledger reports the MBTA has agreed to study the noise impact of the trains on Boston's Old Colony lines, including the whistles that engineers blow four times at each street crossing.
According to the article, engineers have never examined the whistle noise on the Old Colony lines, on which trains began running last September. Residents who are annoyed by the whistles between 6:30 a.m. and 11:30 p.m. consider the study as the first step toward noise mitigation. They say it should prove that something must be done near their homes. "Put some trees up. Put a nice wall up -- whatever they want to do to reduce the noise," said Holly Merry of Halifax, whose house abuts the tracks. "You have to go to sleep at 11:30 p.m. because the train wakes you up if you go to sleep before that." State and federal officials stop short of saying the study will lead to better noise controls along the line.
The article reports the study, which will be finished by September, comes two weeks after an Old Colony train struck and killed a 15-year-old girl who was crossing the tracks in Abington. But the study will not focus on safety concerns. "It doesn't deal with the safety issue," said Mary Beth Mello, deputy regional administrator of the Federal Transit Administration, which first asked the T to do the study last September. "There are other things going on with that. This is just about noise." In her letter to the MBTA in September, Mello discussed such mitigation options as improved sound insulation, stationary whistles and improved grade crossing design. But yesterday she said that no money has been allocated for those measures. "We have to take a look at the analysis first," she said. "You have to look at the cost of things and if it's feasible."
The article states the MBTA first conducted a noise analysis for the Plymouth and Middleboro Old Colony branches as part of a 1995 environmental impact statement. But engineers were not required to include the whistles in the study, even though there are 45 crossings on the tracks and many residents who can hear the whistles, which are louder than a jet plane at takeoff. Improved technology for measuring noise has since prompted the federal government to require all noise studies to include the noise of whistles. Federal officials have asked the T to comply with those new rules. "It's bigger and broader and more geared to community protection," MBTA environmental manager Andrew Brennan said of the new guidelines. "Before, it was very debatable what standard was to be used in what place."
According to the article, Kevin Dasey, co-chairman of Braintree's Old Colony mitigation committee, wishes the T had done this study when the federal government first requested it. But he still welcomes the new effort and hopes it will lead to increased mitigation measures, such as sound-resistant walls. The MBTA installed a wall between the Old Colony tracks and a row of homes in Abington before service was restored. "This restudy should prove there's clearly a need to do some noise mitigation," Dasey said. "We want to see the problems with Middleboro and Plymouth branches squared away before we make any major commitments with Greenbush." The study will not affect the proposed third Old Colony branch, the Greenbush branch, where the T already is required to study the impact of train whistles.
The article reports as they discussed the recent accident in Abington, some abutters insisted that the T can mitigate noise impact without compromising safety. They suggested moving the whistles from the trains to the crossings to limit how far the noise will travel. Dasey suggested that engineers install better safety measures at crossings that would render the whistles unnecessary. Those could include concrete medians on streets leading to the tracks. The medians would prevent cars from switching lanes to get past a closed gate. The T is looking at those options for Greenbush but officials said it may be too expensive to retrofit the other branches.
PUBLICATION: The Providence Journal-Bulletin
DATE: July 7, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. 1C
BYLINE: Jillian Safer
DATELINE: West Greenwich, Rhode Island
The Providence Journal-Bulletin reports the West Greenwich, Rhode Island, Planning Board voted last night to recommend that the Zoning Board of Review approve an area gun club's relocation. The recommendation came despite two dissenting votes and a number of residents expressing noise concerns.
According to the article, the Planning Board voted 3-2 to approve the Wincheck Gun Club's move from Exeter, to a 43-acre parcel off the New London Turnpike. The zoning board will meet next Tuesday to review the club's application for a special-use permit. Dissenting opinions from board members Carol Healy and David Berry were forwarded to the zoning board, along with a memo in support of the club by Vice Chairman John J. Deary Jr., who abstained from voting because he was unable to attend all of the meetings. Despite neighbors' concerns about noise, Chairman Gerhard H. Graf said testing conducted in May by an acoustics specialist showed that the decibel counts would not exceed limits set by the town's zoning ordinance. Graf also cited an assessment performed by an engineer hired by the club which determined that the club's relocation would not substantially increase traffic. Further, Graf argued the gun club's acquisition of the land would keep the property from becoming another housing development, thus preserving open space.
The article states Healy argued that the noise tests were inadequate. While testing was done at the southern edge of the site, closest to existing neighbors, Healy said the shooters were closer to the northern and eastern boundaries, which adjoin undeveloped land. She argued that excess noise would harm the development potential of that property. Healy pointed out that the zoning ordinance requires boards to ensure that special-use activities "will not adversely affect the surrounding neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property." Regardless of the decibel measurements recorded in the tests, she said neighbors testified they could hear the shots fired from inside their homes with doors and windows closed. Council member Berry stated, "The noise factor will continue to become more and more of an issue as the adjacent land becomes developed."
The article reports Deary, supporting Wincheck's application, argued that gun clubs are a traditional activity in rural towns like West Greenwich. As the town sees more residential development, he said, "the potential for conflict with some of these activities naturally increases." He urged the zoning board to base their decision on the gun club on the test results and expert testimony. "I fully understand the concerns and fears expressed by the residents in the area," Deary wrote, "but the facts need to be sorted out from the anecdotal evidence and personal biases that have sometimes been a by-product of a very emotional issue."
PUBLICATION: The Record (Bergen County, NJ)
DATE: July 7, 1998
SECTION: News; Pg. L01
BYLINE: Richard Cowen
DATELINE: Teaneck, New Jersey
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Delores Nethersole, resident; Cynthia Jackson, resident
The Record reports although police issued a ticket to the hostess of a noisy Fourth of July reggae party on Saturday night, angry neighbors say the officers acted too late to save their holiday from being ruined by loud music and crowds of people overflowing onto the street.
According to the article, under the township's new noise ordinance, police charged Denise Baker with disturbing the peace in connection with the "Big Bar-b-Que Bashment," a twice-a-year event that attracts hundreds of people to a narrow alley behind a string of row houses on East Forest Avenue. The ordinance, which took effect in March, was written in response to neighbors complaints about the reggae parties, which have been held each Fourth of July and Labor Day since 1991. Baker said Monday that she will plead not guilty Wednesday in Teaneck Municipal Court. She faces up to $500 in fines and 90 days in jail on each of three summonses if she is found guilty. "Guilty of what? The police told us to turn the music down and we turned the music down," Baker said. "This party has been going on for years. It's a once-a-year thing."
The article reports that as the party crowd grew, neighbors called police, who drove by a few times. When three neighbors signed complaints at police headquarters, patrol units crashed the party shortly after 9 p.m. Neighbors said that wasn't good enough. "This is not a small gathering in a back yard," said Delores Nethersole. "This is a crowd that can become very unruly. What about our rights?" Another neighbor, Cynthia Jackson, led the petition drive earlier this year that got the noise ordinance changed. But she said it's had little effect. "Every year the party just keeps getting bigger and bigger," she said. "I understand their rights. Nobody is saying they don't have a right to have a party. But what about our rights? Come Labor Day, it will be the same situation." The previous noise ordinance carried a 10 p.m. curfew. Residents said it was understood to mean that loud backyard parties were tolerated until that hour. The new law removed the curfew, allowing police to issue summonses for noisy gatherings at any time. In this case, Police Lt. Robert Wilson said authorities tried to accommodate everyone. They even took preventive measures, he said. Anticipating a huge turnout, police met with Baker last week and warned that she risked a summons if the party got out of hand. "She tried to be cooperative," Wilson said, "but it didn't work out."
The article goes on to say neighbors say these parties are profit-making ventures. They said Baker, who advertised the event, charges admission and serves food and alcohol. "They have a right to have a party, but they don't have a right to operate a commercial business in a residential neighborhood," Nethersole said. Baker countered that the party was simply a gathering of friends and family. "We have a right to celebrate the Fourth of July," she said.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
DATE: July 7, 1998
SECTION: Local, Pg. 3B
BYLINE: Diego Buquel
DATELINE: Weston, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jeannette Foreman, resident; Ed Jacobson , city commissioner
The Sun-Sentinel reports several residents of Weston, Florida, urged the City Commission to approve a code limiting "loud and raucous noise." The noise code was unanimously approved.
According to the article, the code would allow police and code enforcement officers to write citations for noise without using decibel meters, which are mandatory under Broward County ordinances that currently regulate Weston. "Under the county ordinances, only a person trained with decibel meters could enforce the noise code," said John Flint, Weston city manager. "But to be realistic most infractions occur in the evening and we can't have someone with a decibel meter making sure it's a violation of the code."
The article reports Jeannette Foreman was one of several residents who complained about noise at Monday night's City Commission meeting. Foreman was concerned about the clanging of idling building equipment from a nearby construction site. Other residents complained about the loud barking of a neighbor's dog and one characterized his neighbor's stereo system as sounding like a "mini rock concert." The new code would apply to construction equipment, radios, TVs, car horns and noisy appliances, among others. Restaurants and bars will not be allowed to play loud music from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. except in a soundproofed room.
The article states City Commissioner Ed Jacobson received a round of applause when he called for the commission to strictly enforce the noise ordinance. "We have to make it very, very clear to our code enforcers and deputies that we mean business," he said. "We are not making a joke about this." Residents who wish to complain about noise in Weston are required to sign a sworn statement in order for an officer to investigate, and cite an alleged offender. The ordinance will come up for final approval on July 20.
PUBLICATION: The Buffalo News (Buffalo, NY)
DATE: July 6, 1998
SECTION: News, Pg. 1A
BYLINE: Lou Michel
DATELINE: Erie County, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Ronald Wilson, resident;
The Buffalo News reports New York's Erie County Sheriff's Department and other area police agencies are trying to crackdown on drivers who blast high-powered car stereos.
According to the article, in Cheektowaga, town officials are drafting a new noise ordinance that will make it easier for police to charge drivers who play music excessively loud. "We're looking at the drive-by, boom-box cars and using a decimeter to determine their noise levels," said Cheektowaga Councilman Tom Johnson, who expects the updated ordinance to be presented to the Town Board in a month. Cheektowaga Police Chief Bruce D. Chamberlin said cars blasting music is "something that makes people feel their neighborhood is going down the tubes." He said his department has succeeded in pulling the plug on several young motorists in the area. "They would hang out at a French Road restaurant and then parade around in their booming cars. What we did was talk to their parents, issue tickets for creating unreasonable noise levels and give them traffic tickets," Chamberlin said. In Buffalo, police plan to pay closer attention to calls about loud music with a new unit of 12 additional officers. Buffalo Deputy Police Commissioner John R. Battle said "Loud music is one of the issues we will be heavily looking into. There are a lot of complaints and the music not only comes from cars, but houses. Our Flex Unit will be able to make return visits to make sure the problem is quelled." And state police have agreed to work cooperatively with sheriff's deputies in quieting noisy motorists in outlying areas of the county. The new police effort to quiet area roads is being applauded by Grand Island resident Ronald Wilson, who hit wits' end about a year ago and chased down a stereo-blaring motorist. "The young man drove back and forth past my home in the middle of the night until I finally chased him and had a confrontation with him. He told me his family would not allow him to drive around his own neighborhood. "His red pickup was complete with twin eighteen-inch woofers pounding in the back. His stereo just shook the neighborhood. And, oh yes, the kid was wearing earplugs to protect his own ears," said Wilson.
The article reports Erie County Sheriff Patrick M. Gallivan and Grand Island Supervisor Peter A. McMahon last week announced stepped-up enforcement against motorists who blast their automotive megastereos. They say it's a violation of common courtesy and the law. "It's common sense or it's the courts," Gallivan said in warning offending drivers that they will be charged with disorderly conduct. "People have the right to be safe and secure in their homes without being disturbed." Drivers who are convicted could face a $300 fine and 15 days in jail. Grand Island was selected as the site to announce the crackdown because of numerous noise complaints residents have filed with town officials.
The article reports resident Josephine Grisanti of Bedell Road, Grand Island said, "We live 100 feet back from the road, and the music from the cars still vibrates our house." Houses aren't the only places invaded by the unwelcome sounds. "I was stopped at an intersection the other day, and this car pulled up beside me. The music coming from it was so loud my chest vibrated," Mrs. Grisanti said. One West Side woman said she has been forced to put her house on the market because she can no longer stand the loud music coming from cars that park in front of her home. "Nobody in my neighborhood sleeps anymore because you have these drivers parking their cars and leaving the radios on while they run into the nearby corner store on Niagara Street at all hours of the night," the woman said. "My mother has lived in our home for 78 years, but we can no longer take it with the loud music. We've asked the shopkeeper to control his customers and he refuses, and when we call police, they either don't come or arrive after the cars have left," she said.
According to the article, police say loud music is more than an annoyance, it's a hazard. "If an emergency vehicle is coming along with its sirens on, the drivers of these vehicles are unaware because they can't hear anything but the music," Town of Tonawanda Police Chief Samuel M. Palmiere said. There are other dangers too. "Because of the high noise level and close proximity to the speakers in the confined space of a car, there's a definite chance of damage to the ears," said Karen M. Martin, an audiologist in Buffalo. It doesn't take long to experience a hearing loss, Martin said, if a person frequently drives around with loud music. She estimated that the noise level can reach well above 100 decibels. "Anything at 85 decibels and above is considered dangerous. A normal conversation is about 60 decibels," Martin said. So why are so many drivers apparently bent on driving themselves deaf? "It's a problem that usually involves young people. They think they are immune to hearing difficulties," said Anna Croy, an executive with Finetone Hearing Instruments, a national producer of hearing aids in Scarborough, Maine.
The article reports Robert J. Frank, 17, of the Town of Tonawanda said listening to loud music in cars is a form of relaxation for him and his friends. "It's a thrill. You can't believe a car stereo system can put out that much sound," he said. "I've driven in cars with music that was 160 decibels." Frank said he and a friend were recently stopped by Town of Tonawanda police for noise pollution. "The officer pulled my buddy over at 9 o'clock at night and warned us to turn the stereo down. He said we were in a neighborhood and that it was distracting and very rude. I thanked him for not giving us a ticket, and I agree that kids shouldn't blast their car stereos after a certain time at night. It's not proper," Frank said.
PUBLICATION: The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, OH)
DATE: July 6, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Alan Achkar
DATELINE: Olmsted Falls, Ohio
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Marv Hirschberg, member of Olmsted Falls City Airport Committee; Matt Melis, member of Olmsted Falls City Airport Committee
The Plain Dealer reports residents and public officials in Olmsted Falls, Ohio, have been working together to prevent more aircraft noise from the planned expansion at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport.
According to the article, Olmsted Falls Mayor Tom Jones and a group of residents and public officials have spent the last two years sifting through documents, books and manuals to try to make a case for their standpoint: Cleveland's planned expansion of Hopkins will bring much more jet noise over already noisy Olmsted Falls, and Cleveland officials should do something about it. Olmsted Falls sits in the path of planes taking off and landing at Hopkins. "It's a David and Goliath story," Jones said . "The difference is we're not trying to slay the giant. What we're trying to do is have the giant work with us." Forming the Olmsted Falls City Airport Committee, the group has presented its arguments before Hopkins administrators, Cleveland Mayor Michael R. White, and the Federal Aviation Administration. Although FAA administrators have seemed willing to listen, Cleveland officials have not been so willing, according to the Olmsted Falls committee members. "It's like their own private airport," said Marv Hirschberg, one of the committee members. "They don't want anyone to know what's going on."
The article reports the committee's main concern is a 9,000-foot runway that Cleveland wants to extend to 11,250 feet to accommodate bigger, transoceanic jetliners. The added length would put the strip's southwest end half a mile closer to Olmsted Falls - meaning that planes taking off and landing on it would be lower and noisier. Members of Olmsted Falls' committee were not satisfied when Cleveland officials announced in May that they would reduce the runway's originally planned length of 12,000 to 11,250. The committee used their research to argue that a 10,000-foot runway would suffice. The committee members also argue that the point at which planes land on the runway can be moved farther away from Olmsted Falls, which would allow approaching aircraft to fly higher over the city and descend later. They have based their arguments on facts and figures, supported by the diverse mix of professional skills members bring to the group. The committee includes an airline pilot, a NASA engineer with a background in airport design, a retired NASA researcher, and a lawyer. "It's an interesting mix of people," said Matt Melis, the NASA engineer. "We've been able to accomplish something because of that mix." Hirschberg, a retired NASA engineer and researcher, has done much of the data collection for the fight, gathering manuals, documents and videotapes from the airlines, the FAA and airplane manufacturers. He has searched the Internet for help, digging out information on airplane designs, airport layouts and aircraft noise. He also designed a page on the World Wide Web about the Olmsted Falls airport committee. The work has made Hirschberg an expert on airports, and he has not hesitated to approach Hopkins officials or reporters to press his points. "In a very short time, we realized we could get information, ask meaningful questions," he said. Indeed, by arming themselves with information, the committee members have ensured that they will not be "confused by any technical data," according to Melis. "The jury is still out on how this will end," he said. "But if you can put together an organization and keep it focused, you can invoke dialogue. And once you invoke dialogue, you can effect change. And that's been the most rewarding thing about this experience. People are actually listening to us now."
According to the article, the work has not been easy for the small community that has only a fraction of the financial resources and political clout of Cleveland, but it's getting some serious attention now. The committee's preparation persuaded the congressman representing Olmsted Falls, Democrat Dennis Kucinich of Cleveland, to join the fight, and Kucinich helped get the attention of the FAA. Kucinich recalled last week, "The thing that impressed me was their work was solid and well-researched. They did their homework." Last fall, Kucinich set up a meeting in Washington, DC, between the committee and FAA administrators. Next he persuaded the FAA to hear residents' concerns at a public meeting in Olmsted Falls. The FAA is conducting a yearlong study to assess the environmental impact of the proposed Hopkins expansion. Its conclusions could alter the expansion, including changes to address concerns about noise.
The article reports Cleveland officials and their airport consultants are also now paying attention to the committee. A representative from the city's airport consulting firm, Landrum & Brown, has agreed to come to Olmsted Falls in the next two weeks and meet with the committee. LaVonne Sheffield-McClain, Cleveland's acting port-control director, commended the Olmsted Falls committee members for educating themselves. "We're open to talk with them. I respect their points, and we're going to work at it," she said. But Sheffield-McClain added that Cleveland would ultimately rely on its consultants' expertise, not the Olmsted Falls committee. The Olmsted Falls group has not dealt with the same range of FAA and airport administrators as the consultants and may not have examined all the relevant technical and scientific details, she said.
PUBLICATION: Portland Press Herald (Portland, ME)
DATE: July 6, 1998
SECTION: Local & State, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Glenn Adams
DATELINE: Augusta, Maine
The Portland Press Herald reported Maine's new watercraft regulations take effect on Thursday. Years of complaints about noise and safety issues concerning the personal watercraft led to the most comprehensive law of its kind yet passed in Maine.
According to the article, Thursday is when a new state law setting a minimum age of 16 for operating personal watercraft takes effect. The current age is 12. The new watercraft law also prohibits wake-jumping behind other boats and speeding around in circles in the small jet-driven craft, better known by the trade names Jet Skis and SkiDoos. And new limits on noise also take effect. Fines can be assessed for exceeding noise limits.
The article reports complaints about the noise from personal watercraft on the state's lakes and ponds - and concerns over dangers when operated by the untrained - led to the most comprehensive law of its kind yet passed in Maine. As part of the law, municipalities will be given input in setting rules for operating personal watercraft on local waterways. Wardens will try to emphasize education this summer rather than ticket every violator in sight, Chief Warden Timothy Peabody said. "Everyone's going to go through a learning curve," Peabody said. The new law is also designed to identify more than 240 lakes on which personal watercraft will be banned. Nearly all of the lakes are in unorganized territory.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: July 5, 1998
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 6; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Martha L. Willman
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Louis Bell, resident; Larry Myers, resident; Jane Randall, resident
The Los Angeles Times reports that neighbors of ranch land that is being used for "bird shoots" by a hunting club are upset at the noise and have appealed a decision to allow the activities to continue. They promised to file lawsuits if necessary.
According to the article, 35 fields on an 8,000 acre section of a 432-square-mile ranch are being used for 'shoots' where hunters pay for the chance to shoot at farm-raised game birds like pheasants. After almost two years of arguments with the planning commission, a permanent permit for such use was approved for eight months out of the year. Part of the agreement included establishing buffer zones between the range and homes and posting warning signs at a nearby recreation trail. Neighbors claim that shotgun noise from the site is butchering their formerly tranquil properties. One resident, who owns an 1,100 acre ranch nearby, says "We come here for the peace and serenity, to listen to the birds and the sound of wind in the pines. But that spell is broken by the sound of gunfire." Many of the residents are hunters, but say that the noise is too frequent and excessive.
The article notes that the hunt club is one of four such areas in the southern part of the state. The portion of the larger ranch used for the hunt is in the southern part. Operators of the club say the gunfire is"far enough from residences that the sounds are barely noticeable, if audible at all." Neighbors also fear that wildfires could break out on the land because of the hunt club; this would be especially likely because the area hasn't burned for at least 70 years. They also worry about safety of hikers on the nearby recreation trail, and the spooking of horses. The club operator says "We feel like we bent over backward. . . . We have tried to negotiate with the neighbors. But they just are not willing to negotiate."
The article states that neighbors say the club could relocate to a more isolated part of the ranch where it's not as close to residents, but club operators say that the southern area is the most beautiful, and most suited for their uses. Letters and petitions have been about evenly split on the issue: 77 letters each supporting and opposing the club, and 123-signature and 141-signature petitions supporting and opposing the club, respectively. Interestingly, many recreation and environmental groups support the hunt club -- including the Sierra Club -- noting that the club is one good way to assure the land is kept in its natural state instead of developed for residences or commercial uses. In addition, $125,000 go to the county each year for property taxes, and club operators ask "What would they like [the ranch owners] to do, pay the taxes every year and not use the property? It's not going to happen."
According to the article, the club hopes to grow to become much more popular, but residents fear that result. They feel that they are being ignored.
PUBLICATION: Newsday (New York, NY)
DATE: July 5, 1998
SECTION: LI Life; Page G11
BYLINE: Stephanie Mccrummen
DATELINE: Babylon, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Sandy Flaim, resident; Helen Norjen, resident; Richard Schaffer, Babylon Town Supervisor
Newsday reports Babylon, New York, residents oppose expansion of Republic Airport, saying more runways mean larger planes and more noise, along with more pollution, property devaluation and the higher probability of accidents.
According to the article the warning sign near Republic Airport is an understatement, say nearby residents: "Low Flying Planes," it reads. "I sit here on this porch and I swear they're going to hit the house," said Sandy Flaim, who lives in West Babylon. "The house rocks, the windows shake . . . . Those jets are giant." Flaim and other residents abhor the prospect of construction at Republic Airport in East Farmingdale. To them, improvements and expansion mean bigger planes. They fear Republic could wind up another LaGuardia or Kennedy. These residents worry about noise, pollution, property values and, at worst, an accident.
The article reports airport planners and state officials say the residents' concerns are unfounded. With a lawsuit against the state filed last year by Babylon Town Supervisor Richard Schaffer dismissed, the state is proceeding with plans to expand runways and improve Republic, saying the changes will make the airport safer and more accommodating to the next generation of corporate jets. The improvements, they say, will result in more business for Long Island and less noise for surrounding neighborhoods since the newer jets are quieter. "The state has no intention of changing the nature of that airport," said Michael Fleisher, spokesman for the state Department of Transportation. "It is simply designed to look at future needs of the airport."
The article states some residents remain unconvinced. Their latest concern came last week when a consultant for the Republic Airport Commission recommended that the airport's redesign plans accommodate C-3 airplanes, a bigger class of airplanes than is currently allowed at Republic. The C-3 category includes corporate jets like the Gulf Stream 5, along with bigger commercial jets such as 727s, 737s and DC-9s. "Given the fact that our role in life is to accommodate general aviation - everything other than commercial airlines - the consultant was telling us we need to size accordingly," said Hugh Jones, director of Republic Airport. Larger jets including 727s and 737s already land at the airport about 60 times per year, but are only able to use one of the two runways. Planned improvements would upgrade the second runway, which Jones said receives far fewer noise complaints than the one used by larger planes. Robert Gordon, president of Republic Airport Pilots Association, said that although the Gulf Stream 5 and other corporate jets are larger, technological advances make them quieter than their smaller predecessors. "We are trying to reduce the noise impact on anybody living around the airport," he said. "People suspect that some insidious plan is afoot, and they resist anything we put forth."
According to the article, citing safety and environmental concerns, some residents and town officials continue to oppose the redesignation or any upgrade of the airport. "I'm fearful that eventually the airport is going to have two LaGuardia-length runways," said Helen Norjen, a nearby resident and airport critic. "I'm afraid of the cargo planes, I'm afraid of the noise, I'm afraid of the fuel in the event of an accident." Schaffer has also argued that the airport improvements could devalue neighboring properties, causing reduced assessments and a loss of tax dollars for the town. Spurred by these concerns, Schaffer filed a lawsuit last year - part of which is still pending - that would have blocked any new construction as well as the purchase of air rights by the state, which owns Republic. The lawsuit charged that the state Department of Transportation had violated its 1989 master plan for the airport, which is under revision, and that it needed to conduct an environmental impact review before starting new construction. A state Supreme Court judge ruled last month, however, that the DOT could go ahead with construction, though Jones said it would not begin until the revised master plan and environmental impact statement were completed, which could take months. A $5 million plan to build a new terminal and corporate jet hangar by Million-Air, which operates Republic's terminal and hangars, is on hold until a decision on that portion of Schaffer's lawsuit is rendered.
PUBLICATION: The San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: July 5, 1998
SECTION: Local Pg. B-6
BYLINE: Angel Flores
DATELINE: Solana Beach, California
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports a drumming circle group in Solana Beach, California, will be allowed to continue to meet at a county park after they worked work out a solution to stay within the noise laws.
According to the article, the Solana Beach Drum Circle will be able to keep its meeting spot of five years at a county park. "We'll let them come back next month," said Park Ranger Frank Armijo. "They just have to continue to monitor themselves." About 150 people gathered yesterday at San Dieguito County Park. The group meets at noon the first Saturday of each month and draws crowds of up to 300. Three months ago, park rangers told them that if they didn't lower the noise by yesterday they wouldn't be able to play there anymore. Rangers had received complaints and had to do something, said Supervising Park Ranger John DeWitt.
The article reports other park visitors and nearby residents had complained about the noise and its duration, he said. According to a county ordinance, noise cannot exceed 50 decibels at park boundaries or 90 decibels 50 feet from the source. Since April, park rangers said, the noise level has dropped from about 80 decibels to as low as 55 decibels. "We're happy with them," DeWitt said. "They've become very conscientious." Lisa Tansey of San Marcos bought her own decibel meter and five half-inch- thick plexiglass walls to filter out some of the noise. Yesterday was the first time the group used them. "Those sound borders really helped a lot," Armijo said. "The noise level near the residences dropped about 10 decibels and kept close to a tolerable level."
PUBLICATION: Birmingham Evening Mail
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 21
BYLINE: Deborah Luck
DATELINE: Walsall, England
The Birmingham Evening Mail reports a dispute has been resolved between residents and a Walsall, England, steel firm over alleged late night noise.
According to the article, home owners who live near BSD Steel Service Centre, in Brockhurst Crescent, first complained in 1996 that they could hear metal cutting equipment during the night shift. Councilors at a special environmental services meeting today were to a proposal for a liaison committee to help resolve the problems. But a report before the meeting said the committee may no longer be necessary because complaints have dramatically dropped. This follows modifications at the factory to stop noise and the abolition of the night shift. Councilors were told an investigation by pollution control officers also failed to find any nuisance.
The article states Bob Hook, environmental health and consumer services general manager, said meetings had gone ahead between residents and BSD managers as well as a factory tour. "The company has also confirmed its intentions to take all reasonable steps to reduce general noise disturbance by ensuring doors are kept shut, radios are controlled, and forklift truck movements are minimized," he said. Hook added officers would continue to monitor the situation and deal with any complaints which may arise.
PUBLICATION: The Deseret News
DATE: July 8, 1998
SECTION: Local; Pg. B01
BYLINE: Josh Loftin
DATELINE: North Salt Lake, Utah
The Deseret News reports a North Salt Lake gravel pit operator has been granted an extension on a noise variance. City officials say the extension is the gravel company's reward for its cooperation in response to residents' noise complaints.
According to the article, Tuesday night, the City Council approved a 60-day extension of the 24-hour noise variance for the Concrete Products Co. gravel pit. This is the longest variance granted to CPC since the summer construction season began. On previous occasions, variances lasted 30 days. In addition, a representative of the pit will no longer be required to regularly appear in front of the council to defend the company. Future variances can be granted by the mayor, without council approval, unless the mayor feels the need to consult with the council.
The article states relaxing restrictions comes after more than a year of tensions between residents who oppose 24-hour operations and CPC, which needs the late-night work for the I-15 reconstruction. These days, the complaints from residents have practically ceased, said Mayor Jim Child. "Some have even questioned whether CPC is working at night," he said. If the residents' vocal opposition to the late-night pit work doesn't resurface, the mayor will likely continue to grant the 60-day variance indefinitely. CPC has made a number of concessions in response to residents' complaints, including halting any job that requires reverse warning alarms, as well as ceasing any dumping that bangs the tailgates of dump trucks. "Those are all jobs that can be completed during the day," said CPC's gravel pit manager John Burggraf. However, CPC failed to submit a decibel measure of the pit's activity, Burggraf said. That failure did not affect the Council's decision since they agreed with Burggraf's claim that the heavy June rains prevented any useful measurements. "They've complied, and we haven't had any complaints," said Councilman Kay Briggs.
Previous week: June 28, 1998
Next week: July 12, 1998
Aircraft Noise
Amplified Noise
Effects on Wildlife/Animals
Construction Noise
Firing Ranges
Health Effects
Home Equipment and Appliances
Industrial/Manufacturing
International News
Environmental Justice
Land Use and Noise
Lawsuits
Civil Liberty Issues
Miscellaneous Noise Stories
Noise Ordinances
Noise Organizations Mentioned
Outdoor Events
Noise in Our National Parks/Natural Areas
Regulation
Residential and Community Noise
Snowmobile and ATV Noise
Research and Studies
Technological Solutions to Noise
Transportation Related Noise
Violence and Noise
Watercraft Noise
Workplace Noise
Chronological Index
Geographical Index