PUBLICATION: The Associated Press State & Local Wire
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Bath, Maine
The Associated Press State & Local Wire reports that Bath, Maine's Board of Environmental Protection Ruled that Bath Iron Works (BIW) can continue constructing its $218 million shipbuilding facility around the clock. BIW must keep quiet at night and monitor its own noise. Residents were hoping for a ban on night construction, but they concede that BIW has taken positive steps towards reducing noise. Driving piles into the riverbed will be the loudest process, but BIW will be allowed to do even that at night if noise limits are observed.
The article reports that Bath, Maine's Board of Environmental Protection Ruled that Bath Iron Works (BIW) can continue constructing its $218 million shipbuilding facility around the clock. BIW will be required to keep noise under night-limits between 10 PM and 6 AM. They will also be required to monitor its noise, submitting data weekly and reporting any violations within one day.
The article continues, noting that neighbors have been continually disturbed by noise from the construction site over the last six months. While residents were hoping for a ban on night construction, they concede that BIW "seems to have been converted to being noise -friendly." The company has already mufflered their construction equipment and agreed to minimize noise at night, but claim that 24-hour construction is required to stay on schedule and remain competitive as a contractor.
The article notes that the loudest work will be the driving of 1485 80-foot-long piles into the riverbed; each pile weighs several tons. A spokesman for the company says that forty piles have already been driven, proving that the work is not so loud that residents will notice. The additional piles will be driven over the course of several months.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 12
BYLINE: by Carlos Sadovi
DATELINE: Cicero, Illinois
Chicago Sun-Times reports that Cicero, Illinois' Chicago Motor Speedway will not be fined the requisite $1000/event for noise violations while it hires a consultant and begins a dialogue with residents. Races and their 70,000 fans can generate noise up to 93.5 decibels -- far above the 58 decibel limit. The final race of the year will be monitored by county officials to determine the areas most affected by noise.
The article reports that Cicero, Illinois' Chicago Motor Speedway will not be fined for noise violations while it begins work on the issue. The Cook County Department of Environmental Control has said that although Speedway auto races reach up to 93.5 decibels -- far over the 58 decibel limit -- the requisite $1000 fines will not be levied while the track hires a consultant and begins a dialogue with residents.
The article notes that complaints about the track -- which holds 70,000 fans -- were noticed during last month's inaugural race. The track will hold one more race this year, and three more in future years. County officials will be monitoring the final race of the year to determine which areas are affected. Residential neighborhoods abut the track on several sides.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 24
BYLINE: by Becky Beaupre
DATELINE: Wilmette, Illinois
The Chicago Sun-Times reports that the noise consultant for Wilmette, Illinois recommends a combination of soundwalls and shrubbery to block highway noise after a year-long $100,000 study. The project -- designed to reduce the 79 decibels that those nearest Edens Expressway currently experience -- would cost $1.5 million, and the village hopes to get half of the funding from the state.
The article reports that Huff and Huff, the noise consultant for Wilmette, Illinois and two nearby suburbs, recommend a combination of soundwalls and shrubbery to block highway noise after a year-long $100,000 study. Noise from the nearby Edens Expressway reaches 79 decibels as the closest homes, and residents can't open their windows.
The article goes on to note that the study was funded by the three communities together with the state Department of Transportation. The recommended measures would cost $1.5 million for Wilmette, and the village plans to seek half of the funding from the state.
PUBLICATION: The Deseret News
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: Local; Pg. B03
BYLINE: by Donna M. Kemp
DATELINE: Taylorsville, Utah
The Deseret News reports that 35 residents of Taylorsville, Utah attended a meeting with Salt Lake City International Airport officials to voice their concerns over increasing jet noise. They claim that jets are flying as low as 1750 feet over their neighborhoods. Airport officials say that jets are at least 2000 feet high.
The article reports that 35 residents of Taylorsville, Utah attended a meeting with Salt Lake City International Airport officials to voice their concerns over increasing jet noise. The lead planner from the airport was met with loud outbursts when he claimed that flights passing over the neighborhood are 2000-3000 feet high; residents say that planes fly as low as 1750 feet. The mayor attended the meeting, saying that she doesn't see noise reduction as a priority in the community.
The article continues, noting that about 335 planes pass over the neighborhood each day. Residents are concerned that the number will increase if the airport is permitted to expand. Residents want noise monitoring in their neighborhoods, and want airport officials to confirm that the estimated altitudes -- which are several years old -- still hold true.
PUBLICATION: The Morning Call
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: Local/Region, Pg. B5
BYLINE: The Morning Call
DATELINE: Northampton, Pennsylvania
The Morning Call reports that a local couple asked the Northampton borough for help in fighting noise from Northampton Generating Company. They pointed to a noise study done last year, and the council agreed to look into the study to see whether the borough's noise ordinance is indeed being violated. Residents and council members present remembered the couple's opposition last year to smells and noise from another local business that has since been shut down; the council questioned whether they are trying to drive business from the area.
The article reports on several community issues, the last of which being noise-related. A local couple asked the Northampton borough for help in fighting noise from Northampton Generating Company. The couple claimed the noise ordinance is being violated, and pointed to a noise study from several months ago.
The article goes on to note that the couple was 'jeered' by other residents and even council members suggested that the couple is trying to drive business away. They remembered the couple's opposition last year to smells and noise from another local business that has since been shut down. The council nevertheless agreed to look into the study to determine if there is indeed a noise violation.
PUBLICATION: Newsday
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: News; Page A37
BYLINE: by Erik Holm
DATELINE: Sayville, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jeanne Kovacs, concerned resident
Newsday reports that 40 people gathered at Sayville, New York's Long Island Railroad (LIRR) station yesterday to protest a loud train whistle which has gotten louder since the introduction of double-decker trains. LIRR officials defend the whistles importance in assuring safety, citing federal guidelines that require a MINIMUM of 96 decibels at 100 feet in front of the train; still, they are performing a study on the whistles. Loud sounds such as train whistles can cause hearing loss, and a temporary increase in blood pressure and weakened immune system.
The article reports that 40 residents and politicians gathered at Sayville, New York's Long Island Railroad (LIRR) station yesterday to protest the disruption that the train whistle causes to their lives. Residents have perceived an increase in volume since LIRR introduced new double-decker trains; they guess that whistles are now mounted on the side instead of on the front of the train.
The article continues, noting that federal guidelines require a MINIMUM of 96 decibels at 100 feet in front of the train. Two local politicians who wrote to LIRR received similar form letters that cited these guidelines and said the whistle volumes are a critical part of safety. The politicians called the protest, and demanded that LIRR address their concerns by September 30. LIRR is performing a study on the whistles, and will release it publicly when it is finished.
The article goes on to note the medical consequences of loud sounds. Besides hearing loss, loud noises increase blood pressure and lower the immune system for hours. Despite these facts, a former LIRR engineer said "I've seen what happens when you don't blow the whistle long enough, or if people ignore the whistle. If you hit a car like I have, you'll know why we blow it so much."
PUBLICATION: Newsday
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: Part Ii/ Weekend; Page B02
BYLINE: Linda Winer
DATELINE: New York City
Newsday prints a column on the increasing use of amplification in theatrical performance, noting the New York City Opera will be using amplification for the first time this season. She compares the technological progression with the increasing volume of movies -- up to an average of 110 decibels in some dramatic climaxes -- when the Royal Institute for the Deaf advises that people exposed to more than 90 decibels in the workplace wear ear protection. She also notes that TV advertisers crank the volume on their commercials. She finally returns to the business of theater, saying that amplification may encourage the growth of theater size and destroy intimate traditionally-sized venues.
The column is on the increasing use of amplification in musicals, plays, and operas. The New York City Opera will be the first classical music institution in Manhattan to use amplification: newly installed at the New York State Theater at Lincoln Center.
The columnist goes on to address the noise at movies and on TV advertisements. She notes that the British Standards Institute has taken sides against moviemakers who ignore the film industry's suggested maximum noise levels -- 82 decibels in Britain, 87 in America -- and risk the hearing of movie-goers with rapid-fire trailers and movies like Armageddon that reach an average of 110 decibels in the climax. To bring meaning to that number, note that the Royal National Institute for the Deaf recommends that people who are exposed to more than 90 decibels in the workplace should wear ear protection. Auditory hair cells can be shaken loose by sudden loud sounds or damaged by consistently loud noise.
The author also notes that advertisers on TV turn up their volume relative to the programs themselves. Advertisers sometimes boost the volume of weak parts of speech to boost the average perceived sound while keeping the peak measured sound low.
Returning to the subject at hand, the author notes that secret amplification systems have existed at some opera houses for years. She notes, however, that performers will no longer need to posses the talent of projection, and microphones will allow bigger theaters that destroy the intimacy of traditional-sized venues.
PUBLICATION: Portland Press Herald
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: Front, Pg. 1A
BYLINE: Dennis Hoey
DATELINE: Augusta, Maine
The Portland Press Herald reports that Bath, Maine's Board of Environmental Protection voted 8-0 that Bath Iron Works (BIW) can continue constructing its $218 million shipbuilding facility around the clock. BIW must keep quiet at night and monitor its own noise. Residents were hoping for a ban on night construction, but they concede that BIW has taken positive steps towards reducing noise. Driving piles into the riverbed will be the loudest process -- which BIW likened to inserting beach umbrellas into the sand -- but BIW will be allowed to do even that at night if noise limits are observed.
The article reports that Bath, Maine's Board of Environmental Protection Ruled that Bath Iron Works (BIW) can continue constructing its $218 million shipbuilding facility around the clock. BIW will be required to keep noise under night-limits between 10 PM and 6 AM. They will also be required to monitor its noise, submitting data weekly and reporting any violations within one day.
The article continues, noting that neighbors have been continually disturbed by noise from the construction site over the last six months. While residents were hoping for a ban on night construction, they concede that BIW "seems to have been converted to being noise -friendly." The company has already mufflered their construction equipment and agreed to minimize noise at night.
The article notes that the loudest work will be the driving of 1485 80-foot-long piles into the riverbed; each pile weighs several tons. A spokesman for the company says that forty piles have already been driven, proving that the work is not so loud that residents will notice. The additional piles will be driven over the course of several months. BIW officials liken the process to inserting a beach umbrella into the sand, and 'tapping' them in.
PUBLICATION: Press Association Newsfile
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: Home News
BYLINE: Chris Court
DATELINE: Devon, U.K.
The Press Association Newsfile reports that after a man in East Budleigh, Devon was issued a noise abatement order to quiet his rooster, over 100 of his neighbors signed a petition in support of the bird. The bird's father provoked similar complaints and was gotten rid of, but neighbors didn't want to see any further "erosion of country life." The man has darkened the rooster's cage in the early morning in response to the order, and the crowing has lessened, but he says that he will fight any further actions in court.
The article reports that after a man in East Budleigh, Devon was issued a noise abatement order to quiet his rooster, over 100 of his neighbors signed a petition in support of the bird. Several years ago a lone neighbor complained about the bird's father, and the man got rid of him. His neighbors were appalled that he should have to do such a thing, and memory of this previous situation prompted their support. One neighbor said they like hearing the rooster, saying that its part of country living.
The article goes on to note that the village council asked him to take simple measures like darkening the bird's cage until later in the day. The man has complied, but said he would fight any additional requirements in court in light of his neighbors' support; he said "My neighbors do not want to see the further erosion of country life" when they feel there is not a real problem. The council said the measures seem to be working, and additional steps should not be needed. #
PUBLICATION: South China Morning Post
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 7
BYLINE: Felix Chan
DATELINE: Sha Tin, Hong Kong
The South China Morning Post reports that the Sha Tin Provisional District Board's Health and Environment Committee is considering a proposal for steeper aircraft descents -- already used in Britain -- at Hong Kong's Check Lap Kok airport. A committee member said that hills in the area would make it harder to correct flight path deviations inherent in steeper approaches. Since the airport opened a second runway and began round-the-clock operation, noise complaints have increased. Since then, the most disruptive northeast approach has seen less use but has not been eliminated as the committee has demanded.
The article reports that the Sha Tin Provisional District Board's Health and Environment Committee is considering a proposal for steeper aircraft descents at Hong Kong's Check Lap Kok airport. The Civil Aviation Department -- which introduced the proposal -- said that the so-called "Continuous Descend Approach" is the last plausible option for noise reduction of aircraft landings. The approach is already used at airports in Britain, and requires planes to descend steeply in order to receive navigational signals from the ground.
The article notes that steeper descents could be more risky than traditional ones. Also, a member of the committee said that the number of hills in Hong Kong would make it harder to correct flight path deviations inherent in steeper approaches. Nevertheless, the committee will send specialists to two British airports to observe the technique in action.
The article continues, noting that since the airport opened a second runway and began round-the-clock operation, noise complaints have increased. In the last week, flights have landed from the southwest and taken off over the West Lamma Channel, reducing noise. The committee welcomed proposed restrictions on the use of noisy aircraft between 11 PM and 7 AM, but was disappointed that the Aviation Department again rejected their demand that the northeast approach -- which is most disruptive to residents -- be removed as an option for landing aircraft.
PUBLICATION: The Tampa Tribune
DATE: September 3, 1999
SECTION: Florida/Metro, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Aissatou Sidime
DATELINE: Tampa, Florida
The Tampa Tribune reports that Tampa International Airport Authority held a public meeting to discuss its long-term plans: including a $4 million budget to reduce noise. The budget will go to building a three-walled jet-engine-testing structure, and a $100,000 landing-monitor system that will identify airlines who use inappropriate runways. Expansion plans -- which is estimated to increase passenger volume from 14 million to 25 million by 2020 -- include another runway, more parking lots, renovations to a terminal, the addition of cargo facilities and widening the road leading into the airport.
The article reports that Tampa International Airport Authority held a public meeting to discuss its long-term plans: including a $4 million budget to reduce noise. Plans for noise-reduction before 2002 include soundproofing several homes, constructing a three-walled jet-engine-testing structure, routing some flights farther south for their turns in preparation for landing, and cracking down on airlines who inappropriately use the runway closest to nearby communities by installing a $100,000 landing-monitor system.
The article goes on, quoting Louis Miller, the authority's executive director, as saying "We want to be the best neighbors we can be by maximizing the impacts on the community, while also running an airport." Despite this misspoken or misquoted statement, residents knew what was meant and were happy with the apparent concern that the airport has about noise reduction.
The article notes that the changes may only offset the additional noise caused by an increase in passenger counts from the current 14 million to 25 million in 2020. Expansion plans include another runway, more parking lots, renovations to a terminal, the addition of cargo facilities and widening the road leading into the airport.
PUBLICATION: The Advocate
DATE: September 2, 1999
SECTION: News; Pg. 13-C
DATELINE: Gulfport, Mississippi
The Advocate reports that neighbors of a Gulfport, Mississippi are bothered by dust and noise from a nearby limestone distribution center. Vulcan Materials, owned by a Florida distribution company, receives bulk material by rail and sends almost 80 loaded dump trucks over local roads on their way to the Interstate each day. The Commission has said it will look into solutions, but insists that residences have "encroached on the plant", instead of the other way around, since the business predates many of the homes. Residents insist that the plant never should have been located there to begin with.
The article reports that neighbors of a Gulfport, Mississippi are bothered by dust and noise from a nearby limestone distribution center. The County Development Commission recruited the business, and residents say that was a mistake. Residents want something done about the problems, and also want the plant blocked from their view. The Commission has said that it will look into possible solutions.
The article notes that Vulcan Materials, owned by a Florida distribution company, receives bulk material by rail and sends almost 80 loaded dump trucks over local roads on their way to the Interstate each day.
The article concludes, noting that the Commission insists that residences have "encroached on the plant" instead of the other way around, since the business predates many of the homes. Residents insist that the plant never should have been located there to begin with.
PUBLICATION: Asbury Park Press
DATE: September 2, 1999
SECTION: B, Pg. 2
BYLINE: James a. Broderick
DATELINE: Middletown, New Jersey
The Asbury Park Press reports that Middletown, New Jersey's Planning Board Approved an ordinance that will limit night construction. The one dissenting vote was from a member who wanted stricter limits. Under the ordinance, residents will call the police to report disturbances and the police will decide whether the noise was serious enough to follow up on.
The article reports that Middletown, New Jersey's Planning Board Approved an ordinance proposed by the Town Committee that will forbid construction before 7 AM and after 7 PM on weekdays, and before 9 AM and after 6 PM on weekends and holidays. The vote was 8 to 1; the one opposing vote was cast because the Board member thought more restrictive limits would be better.
The article notes that residences will have to report noise violations to police. The police will then determine -- using the nuisance ordinance -- if the noise is serious enough to justify further action.
PUBLICATION: The Associated Press State & Local Wire
DATE: September 2, 1999
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Fayetteville, Arkansas
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Tom Rosteck, concerned Fayetteville resident and organizer
The Associated Press State & Local Wire reports that residents of Fayetteville, Arkansas say that an ordinance that regulates the construction of cellular towers is weaker than the original draft. City officials claim that the ordinance limits the number of cell towers, and will encourage the use of existing towers. Residents complained that maximum heights and notification distances were increased, and the permissible noise limit was raised from no off-site noise to 50 decibels.
The article reports that residents of Fayetteville, Arkansas say that an ordinance that regulates the construction of cellular towers is weaker than the original draft. City officials claim that the ordinance limits the number of cell towers, and will encourage the use of existing towers. Tom Rosteck, concerned Fayetteville resident and organizer says that several items were weakened from the original draft written by a special committee.
The article goes on to note those changes. A maximum height for the towers was increased from 80 feet to 150 feet. The notification distance was increased from 500 feet to 2,000 feet -- the maximum notification distance under state law. The prohibition of all "off-site noise" now only limits sound over 50 decibels; this would permit the typical and substantial hum that can emanate from cell towers.
PUBLICATION: The Daily Telegraph
DATE: September 4, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 15
BYLINE: by Jonny Beardsall
DATELINE: London, England
The Daily Telegraph reports that there are two sides to the story about noisy, low-flying military jets. Despite 6,000 complaints each year relating to noise from low-flying planes, pilots say the skill requires practice and is invaluable. Though in the past designated flyways were used, pilots may now fly anywhere in the country as long as they avoid certain special areas such as hospitals or civil airports; they only fly low only thinly populated areas. Planes must be at least 250 feet above the ground in most areas, but some opposition groups say this is still too dangerous to civilians. Pilots may be monitored at any time by mobile radar that allows police to determine speed and altitude. Even at legal altitudes, complaints roll in and several public relations officers are employed to answer these complaints.
The article reports that there are two sides to the story about noisy, low-flying military jets. 30 to 36 new British pilots are trained for low-altitude flight each year, and all active low-altitude pilots practice for at least 250 hours each year; pilots say the skill is 'perishable' and claim that the practice -- which includes instrument flying, flying in formation, weapons systems practice, and air-to-air combat simulations -- is invaluable. Because of this low flying, the Ministry of Defense receives about 6,000 complaints about noise from low flying every year.
The article notes that the entire country is subject to low-flying military jets these days. Before 1979, there were designated flyways, but that process subjected the same areas to noise impacts day after day. Pilots must avoid a wide range of areas marked on the so-called "notice to air board" when planning their flights: civil airports, glider sites, royal flights, riding centers for the disabled, mental institutions, nuclear power stations, and microsurgery clinics. Areas like osprey nesting sites or ski areas may be off-limits during certain seasons.
The article goes on, noting that planes may not fly closer than 250 feet to any object or the ground in most areas, although three designated areas allow altitudes of 100 feet. Low-flights are planned to pass over thinly populated areas, though "it's impossible to miss every house." Pilots want to maintain good public relations, and very few would intentionally break rules; a further incentive to follow the rules is a mobile radar that police can use to "sneak up unannounced to record aircraft speed and height." Disciplinary action follows any confirmed violations.
The article notes that even when pilots are within the rules, people complain. In light of that, three regional public relations staff have been stationed in different regions around the country. One such staff member, who fields up to 600 complaints each year, may call or visit those who complain as an alternative to a cold written response. He says he can do little about the noise, but dispels common myths about the planes and explains the reasons for the low flying.
The article concludes, noting that safety is another concern of many citizens. An organization known as the Celtic League campaigns against low flying because of safety concerns; the military notes that no one has been killed on the ground by a crash in 19 years.
PUBLICATION: Daily Press
DATE: September 4, 1999
SECTION: Local, Pg. C1
BYLINE: Fred Tannenbaum
DATELINE: Hampton, Virginia
The Daily Press reports that residents of a subdivision in Hampton, Virginia that sits only a few blocks from Interstate 64 is itching to have soundwalls installed. Residents believe that newer subdivisions are getting quicker attention, but Virginia's Department of Transportation insists that it is interested in soundwalls for the neighborhood.
The article reports that residents of a subdivision in Hampton, Virginia that sits only a few blocks from Interstate 64 is itching to have soundwalls installed. Recent non-residential developments -- including a mall and an assembly plant -- have increased traffic in the area. Some residents of the 160 homes on the 35-acre subdivision have installed double-pane windows but wish they could open their windows in the summer.
The article continues, noting that one resident interviewed believes that newer subdivisions are getting attention first, but the transportation department says that some soundwalls near the neighborhood will go in this fall, and soundwalls at the subdivision are in the works. Neighbors respond that soundwalls are in place nearby where there isn't even any pavement on the road. The state senator's office hasn't responded to residents' concerns partly because the transportation commissioner abruptly resigned, throwing immediate plans into disarray.
PUBLICATION: The Santa Fe New Mexican
DATE: September 4, 1999
SECTION: Opine; Pg. A-7
BYLINE: Mary Dykton
DATELINE: Santa Fe, New Mexico
The Santa Fe New Mexican prints a series of letters to the editor, one of which centers on noise. The author says noise should be addressed in the city, and notes that the Noise Pollution Clearinghouse has a "very comprehensive website of hundreds of city noise ordinances." She credits her knowledge of the website to an article written last year about vibrations at a Pumice plant in Santa Fe.
"Noise abatement
Many of us agree with your recent editorial on noise in this city.
A year ago in July the ACSyL Pumice Committee (which has been working on eliminating the machinery-caused noise -vibration of the C.R. Minerals Pumice Plant in Santa Fe) gave city officials an excellent resource contact to the Noise Pollution. Clearinghouse which includes a very comprehensive web site of hundreds of city noise ordinances. Other neighborhoods, which include professionals in the field of noise pollution, also have given the city valuable resources and have offered their professional services to the city for free.
The city needs to get off the dime on this ever-growing public nuisance and pollution problem!
Mary Dykton
ACSyL Pumice Committee
Santa Fe"
PUBLICATION: The Vancouver Sun
DATE: September 4, 1999
SECTION: Editorial; A23
BYLINE: Pauline Buck
DATELINE: Vancouver
The Vancouver Sun prints an editorial by a Vancouver resident who believes that the Molson Indy road race should be moved from the residential area where it is now held. The city gains substantial revenue and publicity from the race. Noise reaches up to 130 decibels at peak intensity, and residents want accommodations during the race; in the long term, they want the race relocated and are pursuing a lawsuit that claims their charter rights are being violated.
The editorial is by a Vancouver resident who believes that the Molson Indy road race should be moved from the residential area where it is now held. Some residents have homes less than 25 meters from the road-turned-racetrack, and experience noise that is commonly at 110 decibels and may peak up to 130. Residents want the race moved, and in the meantime they want accommodations as an alternative to their unlivable homes.
The article goes on to note that the race is in its tenth year in Vancouver, and revenues were likely to be higher than ever; the city also gets free TV coverage that people all over the world see. A public relations firm has been hired to make it seem as though residents love having the race in their neighborhood; a few people invited dozens onto their balconies for a photo opportunity that showed thousands crowded enthusiastically to watch the race. In reality, most residents feel their charter rights have been violated by the mayor who allowed the race to take place in a residential area; a lawsuit is pending that asserts just that.
The article notes that the sound levels that residents must bear are similar to living at the end of an airport runway. "The Vancouver Richmond Health Board noted that such sound levels can affect a person's health." A residents' committee successfully campaigned to have Molson Indy offer hotel day rooms during the race, although they are only offered to "residents with medical problems, night shift workers and people with home offices." In the end, all of the few people who applied for the rooms received overnight accommodations, since hotels do not offer day rooms.
PUBLICATION: India Today
DATE: August 30, 1999
SECTION: Environment; Pg.66
BYLINE: Stephen David and Subhadra Menon
DATELINE: India
India Today reports that India has a noise pollution problems that take many residential areas above the acceptable 55-decibel level. Loud motorists do what they want and get away with it because of a lack of police time. In addition to hearing loss, noise can cause irritability, cardiac problems, insomnia, and less proficient sexual performance. Noise may exacerbate learning disabilities in children, and damage the immature ear in fetuses. One important obstacle to better regulation is public apathy. Soon, manufacturers of household appliances will have to note how loud their equipment is.
The article reports that India has a noise pollution problems that take many residential areas above the acceptable 55-decibel level. Traffic police are often exposed to levels as high as 121 decibels. Despite the existence of laws that require mufflers and only specific types of horns, motorists do what they want and get away with it because of a lack of police time.
The article notes that health problems such as irritability and hypertension can be caused by excessive noise; a recent survey in Calcutta showed that 28% were affected. Noise can also cause cardiac problems, insomnia, and less proficient sexual performance. Noise may exacerbate learning disabilities in children, and noise can damage the immature ear in fetuses as early as the second trimester.
The article notes that one important obstacle to better regulation is public apathy; air and water pollution are more recognized as health risks and thus receive more attention.
The article goes on to say that manufacturers of household appliances will have to note how loud their equipment is, so consumers can buy quieter items.
PUBLICATION: Korea Times
DATE: August 30, 1999
DATELINE: Korea
The Korea Times reports that Major Research and Development has produced an anti-noise system for computers that reduces a typical noise level of 30 decibels to a nearly undetectable 20.
The article reports that Major Research and Development has produced an anti-noise system for computers. The system, which is marketed as reducing the noise from computer cooling from 30 decibels to an undetectable 20 decibels, is being mass-produced and heavily marketed in 50 countries around the world.
The article goes on to note the way the noise reduction is achieved, but the author is difficult ot understand because he seems to have problems with English. To quote the author, the technology is "based on HDD cooling box and flower typed hard sink to cool the system and curtail the noise. Most PCs is contained with pan cooler which generates noise amounting to around 30 dB in order to cool the inner part of computer."
PUBLICATION: The London Free Press
DATE: August 30, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. A1
BYLINE: Debora Van Brenk
DATELINE: London, England
The London Free Press reports that residents near a London, England incinerator are upset over increasing air-pollution "exceedances" and noise from the facility. No details were given about the noise problems. Air pollution exceedances increased from 61 hours in 1996 to 191 hours in just the first half of 1999. Activists are asking for a public meeting to be scheduled to discuss concerns over the plant.
The article reports that residents near a London, England incinerator are upset over increasing air-pollution "exceedances" and noise from the facility. Air pollution exceedances -- for example when waste is burned below 10 degrees Celsius, or when bulky items throw off the emissions-filtering process -- increased from 61 hours in 1996 to 191 hours in just the first half of 1999. Noise complaints are also a concern of residents, though no details were given.
The article notes that activists are asking for a public meeting to be scheduled to discuss concerns over the plant. A liaison committee that was intended to facilitate discussion between its members -- citizens, the owner/operator and the city -- has become "dysfunctional"; residents feel that the facility operator is untrustworthy and misses too many meetings, while the operator and city feels attacked by residents. The city in particular is frustrated because residents don't understand that the facility is in provincial, not city, jurisdiction, even though the waste being burned is from the city.
The article goes on to say that the operator was adamant that the facility is running under the province's guidelines. Residents wonder how "exceedances" can be acceptable under the guidelines.
PUBLICATION: Miami Daily Business Review
DATE: August 30, 1999
SECTION: Good Morning; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Tony Doris
DATELINE: Miami, Florida
The Miami Daily Business Review reports that residents and officials in Miami, Florida are still waiting on the FAA's opinion regarding proposed flight paths From Miami International Airport. A task force of "residents, American Airlines pilots and county officials" has developed flight path proposals, but the FAA has put off its judgement of the proposals for some time. The FAA originally postponed its decision until an environmental review of a proposed fourth runway at the airport was available. After that came through, the FAA said it wanted more information on potential environmental justice issues: notably, if steeper takeoffs would cause more noise for modest-income homes nearest the airport.
The article reports that residents and officials in Miami, Florida are still waiting on the FAA's opinion regarding proposed flight paths From Miami International Airport. Community members say that the current arrangement has planes "flying all over the place, at all different altitudes." A task force of "residents, American Airlines pilots and county officials" has developed flight path proposals, but the FAA has put off its judgement of the proposals for some time.
The article mentions several of the proposals, including one that would send planes west over commercial districts, with a turn over the Everglades. Eastbound planes would pass over Miami Beach's least populated point. Southbound planes would follow the Miami river as long as possible, before crossing downtown. Another proposal would send eastbound departures over highways until reaching the ocean. Yet another proposal would include steeper takeoffs.
The article notes that the FAA originally postponed its decision until an environmental review of a proposed fourth runway at the airport was available. After that came through, the FAA said it wanted more information on potential environmental justice issues: notably, if steeper takeoffs would cause more noise for modest-income homes nearest the airport. For the FAA to approve flight paths, they must be "safe, efficient and not hurt the environment, in addition to making sure they wouldn't just take noise from the rich and dump it on the poor."
The article concludes, noting that the FAA plans to test westbound flight paths in a month or two, while tests of eastbound paths must wait for more environmental data.
PUBLICATION: New Jersey Lawyer
DATE: August 30, 1999
SECTION: Decisions; Administrative Agencies; Pg. 40
DATELINE: New Jersey
The New Jersey Lawyer reports that a New Jersey couple won an appeal against the builder who designed their house. The decision requires the builder to correct problems in workmanship that have led to noise from heating ducts under the floors of four rooms.
The article reports that a New Jersey couple won an appeal against the builder who designed their house. The decision requires the builder to correct problems in workmanship that have led to noise from heating ducts under the floors of four rooms.
The article notes that the couple submitted a list of 118 problems to the Bureau of Homeowner protection, and the Bureau's decision was appealed by the couple. The case then went to a judge at the Office of Administrative Law (ALJ) as a "contested case." Six of the 118 problems were still being disputed at the time of the hearing, including the noise problems. While the ALJ said the builders must secure ducts at least every two feet to prevent noise, the Commissioner of the Department of Community Affairs altered the decision so the builders are only required to correct the problem.
PUBLICATION: The Baltimore Sun
DATE: August 29, 1999
SECTION: Local ,14B
BYLINE: Mike Farabaugh
DATELINE: Westminster, Maryland
The Baltimore Sun reports that a resident of Westminster, Maryland has brought a legal complaint against the Deep Run Rifle and Revolver Club. Evidence from another lawsuit has revealed that the gun club generates 90 decibels, while 45 decibels is the usual sound level in the area. Lawyers for the gun club also note that there is no evidence that there have been safety problems or damaged property values, and say that the club is exempt from noise laws because it opened before their institution.
The article reports that a resident of Westminster, Maryland has brought a legal complaint against the Deep Run Rifle and Revolver Club. The resident claims the club"has and continues to disturb the peace and quality of life on our property and on our neighbors'" property. Disturbing the peace carries a possible 60-day jail term together with a $500 fine.
The article notes that a state attorney, who has worked with a police officer who may be a witness in the case, has asked to be excused from duty as prosecutor because of conflict of interest. The police officer has had the attorney -- who is also an NRA member -- teach at public workshops regarding legal and safety issues important to gun owners.
The article notes that a judge has not returned a decision in a separate lawsuit against the gun club. Evidence in that lawsuit has revealed that the gun club began to advertise online in 1995, drawing more firearm fans to help generate the 90 decibels that regularly registers from target competitions at the club; 45 decibels is the usual amount.
The article notes that the gun club may be exempt from noise laws since it was in operation before the laws were passed in 1983. Lawyers for the gun club also note that there is no evidence that there have been safety problems or damaged property values.
PUBLICATION: The Boston Globe
DATE: August 29, 1999
SECTION: South Weekly; Pg. 4
BYLINE: Alan Lupo
DATELINE: Boston, Massachusetts
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Kay Gibbs and Bernice Mader, Communities Against Runway Expansion
The Boston Globe reports that since a scandal forced a key official to resign, the status of a fight over a new runway at Boston's Logan Airport is unclear. Runway opponents believe that the governor -- who supports the runway -- is now more likely to put politics aside and consider more regional solutions, including a new airport.
The article reports that since a scandal -- a pleasure cruise, featuring alcohol and at least one bare-breasted woman, sponsored by the Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport) -- forced a key official to resign, the status of a fight over a new runway at Boston's Logan Airport is unclear. The official was a key 'point person' who was particularly effective in forming pro-runway partnerships with his amenable "demeanor and personality."
The article notes that Massport claims the 5,000-foot runway will reduce delays and spread aircraft noise more evenly over the Boston area. State officials tend to agree, but have asked Massport to rewrite their proposals to give more consideration to the environment. A local group, Communities Against Runway Expansion, says that delays will likely not be reduced and noise will still be a problem.
The article goes on to say that some state officials believe that Massport's will now be slower in approaching the issue of the runway. The controversy has removed an effective deal-maker, and reinforced the perception that Massport can not be trusted.
The article notes that runway opponents believe that the governor -- who supports the runway -- is now more likely to put politics aside. He had been against a regional commission, saying that officials are already considering "regional solutions, such as the increased use of airports including Worcester's; plans to increase use at that airport include a road through existing neighborhoods that is already creating much public outcry. A local group, Communities Against Runway Expansion (CARE), says that the answer is a new airport, although they acknowledge the difficulty in finding the necessary 9,000 acre tract in heavily-developed Massachusetts.
PUBLICATION: Express & Echo
DATE: August 29, 1999
SECTION: Pg.2
DATELINE: Exeter, United Kingdom
The Express & Echo reports that 250 residents attended the first in a series of planned protests over a noisy Exeter, U.K. highway. Concrete was selected because it lasts long but, it is much noisier than asphalt. Residents want the road resurfaced now, and say that if officials do nothing, they will step up their campaign.
The article reports that at the first in a series of planned protests over a noisy Exeter, U.K. highway, 250 residents attended. The seven mile section of the A30 was constructed of concrete and is extremely noisy. 700 residents have already signed a petition to have the road resurfaced, which will be presented to officials in October. If officials still do nothing, citizens promise to step up their campaign.
The article notes that concrete was selected because it lasts long. Unfortunately, it is much noisier than asphalt. Residents want the road resurfaced now, instead of in twenty years as scheduled. They say that citizens who live far away have written to express their support.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: August 29, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 15; Zones Desk
BYLINE: Ted Mcconkey
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Ted Mcconkey, Longtime Activist on Airport Affairs
The Los Angeles Times prints a piece alleging that Burbank, California's city council has given up the fight against noise by allowing the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority to construct a new terminal without immediate night-curfews and passenger-count caps. The council had the power to refuse the construction of a new terminal if the airport authority failed to implement noise control measures, but chose to require the curfew and caps only if the airport adds gates. The writer concludes, noting an upcoming "mandatory initiative" or referendum on the subject.
The piece is by an anti-noise activist and former city council member in Burbank, California. The writer alleges that the city council has given up the fight against noise by allowing the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority to construct a new terminal without immediate night-curfews and passenger-count caps.
The article notes that after several successful court decisions the council had the power to refuse the construction of a new terminal if the airport authority failed to implement a night-curfew and passenger-count caps. The council chose to require the curfew and caps only if the airport adds more gates beyond the existing 14.
The article notes that the airport authority has in the past flouted state laws flagrantly. In the words of the attorney general, "rarely has the state seen such open and avowed defiance of the law by a public entity. No one, especially not a public agency, is above the law or may ignore it with impunity." The writer warns other communities to watch their own airport authorities.
The article concludes by noting an upcoming "mandatory initiative" or referendum. He cautions that "advisory votes" which have been violated in the past by the airport mean nothing. For those who like the current agreement as advanced by the city council, he says "Whether or not you agree with our position on airport expansion, few can deny the public's right to have a voice in such a crucial matter."
PUBLICATION: Scotland on Sunday
DATE: August 29, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 21
BYLINE: Giles Tremlett
DATELINE: Madrid, Spain
Scotland on Sunday reports that officials in Madrid, Spain are torn between those who enjoy late-night revelry and those who want sleep. In a particularly loud district, officials have passed a law that requires bars to close by 2 a.m., but bar owners say they should be allowed to stay open late since their real business only begins at midnight. 80% of those living in Madrid are exposed to noise levels above the 65 decibel average that is acceptable according to the World Health Organization. A a noise law that was promised in 1993 is still undrafted.
The article reports that officials in Madrid, Spain -- known officially as Europe's loudest city -- are torn between those who enjoy late-night revelry and those who want sleep. In the hot summer, many residents open windows at night in hopes of a cooler sleep; at the same time, those that like to party go out later when the city has cooled off from the over 100 degree temperatures.
The article notes that in a particularly loud district called the Neighborhood of the Arts, officials have passed a law that requires bars to close by 2 a.m. Bar owners, supported by a petition from fifty intellectuals, say they are as important as national monuments, and should be allowed to stay open late since their real business only begins at midnight.
The article goes on to say that 80% of those living in Madrid are exposed to noise levels above the 65 decibel average that is acceptable according to the World Health Organization. Many experience average noise levels up to 80 decibels. Many residents are experiencing hearing problems by their 30s or 40s. Noise is due in part to nightlife, but is also made worse by recycling collectors that break glass at 2 a.m.
The article concludes, noting that a noise law that was promised in 1993 is still undrafted.
PUBLICATION: The Columbian
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: Front Page; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Kathie Durbin
DATELINE: Vancouver, Washington
The Columbian reports that the Portland International Airport in Portland, Oregon plans to build a 'hush house' to quiet late-night engine testing, but jumbo jets that won't fit will be tested at the edge of the airport near Vancouver, Washington. Airport officials say a 'hush house' large enough for jumbo jets would have raised the price, which is not justified since less than 2% of the engine tests would involve jumbo jets. Others worry that Vancouver will be inundated with noise, and may see a drop in property values; they also note that the percentage of jumbo jets will rise as international traffic becomes more common A particularly vocal Portland resident is responsible for pressuring the airport -- with FAA assistance -- to build the hush-house. Before the hush-house is built, airlines may only test engines at night if departure times necessitate it.
The article reports that the Portland International Airport in Portland, Oregon plans to build a 'hush house' to quiet noise from late-night engine testing. Although most jets will be able to use the building to quiet their engine-testing noise, jumbo jets won't fit and will be tested at the north edge of the airport: just across the river from Vancouver, Washington.
The article notes that building a 'hush house' large enough for jumbo jets would have raised the $7.3-million price tag to $12 million. Critics say that the increase would have been small when compared with the $3-billion earmarked for airport expansion, and would take care of the problem of engine-testing noise permanently. Officials at the airport say the airlines rejected the more expensive plan, since they must foot much of the bill in the form of landing fees; they also said that jumbo jets were responsible for less than two percent of engine-tests last year, though critics say that that percentage will increase as international traffic at the airport grows. The FAA is kicking in $3.4 million for the project.
The article goes on to say that the building, scheduled for completion early in 2001, was originally opposed by the airport. A particularly vocal resident -- who was a former environmental specialist -- gained FAA support in forcing the airport to build a hush house, after he proved that -- despite comments to the contrary by the airport -- the airport is not exempt from complying with state noise guidelines for planes when they are not in the air. Since tests -- conducted in 1995 by a citizens committee on noise -- showed spikes up to 85 decibels and average noise levels above state standards, the airport was required to do something. They say that no noise standards will be violated after the 'hush-house' is built, even if it is the smaller version.
The article noted that before the hush-house is built, airlines may only test engines at night if departure times allow no other time for testing. Any engine testing at night can only be done between 4 a.m. and 7 a.m.
The article goes on to say that Vancouver might see a decline in property values if jumbo jet noise were to be moved so near to them. Airport officials say they have never measured any identifiable engine-test noise with their permanent noise monitors in the Vancouver area.
PUBLICATION: The Columbian
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: World/Nation; Pg. A7
BYLINE: Kathie Durbin
DATELINE: Vancouver, Washington
The Columbian reports that the first 'hush-house' -- a three-walled enclosure designed to reduce noise from engine testing at airports -- was built at Chicago O'Hare Airport in 1997. Noise is reduced by three-quarters, and complaints about engine-testing noise stopped. Maintenance crews love the structure, since it is in an area where no runway crossings are required, and since it is lit particularly well. Although using the $3.2-million structure is voluntary, over 80% used it last year.
The article reports that the first 'hush-house' -- a three-walled enclosure designed to reduce noise from engine testing at airports -- was built at Chicago O'Hare Airport in 1997. Noise from the loudest jets was reduced by three-quarters, and complaints about engine-testing noise essentially stopped. The building is large enough for all aircraft, and is modeled after similar structures in Europe.
The article notes that airplane-maintenance crews love the structure, since it is in an area where no runway crossings are required, and since safety is maximized with substantial lighting. Although using the structure is voluntary, over 80% used it last year.
The article goes on to describe the $3.2 million structure in detail. "To avoid damage to jet engines, the structure was designed to let air flow from the nose of the aircraft, which faces outward, toward the rear of the enclosure, where the acoustical panels direct the jet blast up and out toward the center of the airport. Cutouts in the walls let air flow over the wings. Curved contours at the front and top of the end wall insure that air sucked into the engines flows smoothly."
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: News, Pg. N3
BYLINE: Lee Condon
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Ann Hoyt, member of a citizens advisory committee
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports that a public hearing held by Burbank Airport officials in Burbank, California was held in a strangely private manner, "where residents were each given three minutes in private to voice their opinions to an airport representative...." Residents were upset that they couldn't hear what others had to say. Airport officials explained the nature of the hearing by saying that they were trying to make residents more comfortable. Residents were expecting to air their concerns over a recent noise study which designates an official 'noise impact area', outside of which residents will get no financial assistance to be used toward insulating their homes against noise.
The article reports that a public hearing held by Burbank Airport officials in Burbank, California was held in a strangely private manner, with "two small rooms where residents were each given three minutes in private to voice their opinions to an airport representative...." Residents were upset that they couldn't hear what others had to say, and called the proceedings a 'sham'. Airport officials explained the nature of the hearing by saying that they were trying to make residents more comfortable, and that the comments were being collected for the FAA, not for airport officials.
The article notes that residents were expecting to be able to air their problems with a recent noise study. Many residents are upset because those outside of the official 'noise impact area' will get no financial assistance to be used toward insulating their homes. Officials also noted that similar studies are conducted every ten years, and that the study is not due to a recent deal made by the Burbank City Council to allow a new, larger terminal to be constructed at the airport. The deal has drawn proposals for a public referendum, challenging the council's deal.
PUBLICATION: The Deseret News
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: Local; Pg. A01
BYLINE: Zack Van Eyckdeseret
DATELINE: Taylorsville, Utah
The Deseret News reports that residents of Taylorsville, Utah want planes landing at Salt Lake City International Airport to use other flight paths. Since winds often come from the north -- and planes must fly into the wind when it is present -- landings often pass directly over Taylorsville residences. The group will hold a public meeting this week to air concerns; FAA and airport officials have been invited.
The article reports that residents of Taylorsville, Utah are sick of hearing so much noise from Salt Lake City International Airport. They want the airport to use other flight paths, but airport officials say that planes must fly into the wind when it is present; since winds often come from the north, landings -- which keep planes lower, longer than on takeoff -- often pass directly over Taylorsville residences.
The article notes that the group of residents has allied itself with U.S. Citizens Aviation Watch. The group will hold a public meeting this week to air concerns; FAA and airport officials have been invited.
The article notes some things that have been done in the past to reduce noise impacts. Homes near the airport were purchased recently to provide residents with a way to relocate affordably. Coupled with federal regulations that have been reducing the number of noisier commercial jets around the country, efforts like those have reduced noise levels over the years at the airport.
PUBLICATION: Evening Chronicle
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: Local News, Pg. 29
BYLINE: Gemma Blears
DATELINE: Killingworth, United Kingdom
The Evening Chronicle reports that a U.S. electronics manufacturer -- Viasystems -- is being taken to court by the local council in Killingworth, U.K. over constant noise from its plant. Plant officials did install mufflers on the noisiest outdoor equipment, but the noise continues to be a problem.
The article reports that a U.S. electronics manufacturer -- Viasystems -- is being taken to court by the local council in Killingworth, U.K. over constant noise from its plant. The council claims that the plant has breached the 1990 Environmental Protection Act "by failing to comply with a notice requiring it to cut the noise level."
The article notes that plant officials did install mufflers on the noisiest outdoor equipment, but the noise continues to be a problem. Residents gathered 500 signatures from residents frustrated with the noise and presented it to the Trade and Industry Secretary.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Metro Desk
BYLINE: Jean O. Pasco
DATELINE: Orange County, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Meg Waters, spokeswoman for the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority, a coalition of eight South County cities opposed to El Toro
The Los Angeles Times reports that while residents near the proposed airport at El Toro in Orange County, California are worried that noise will irritate them, residents around the nearby John Wayne Airport say they don't want the noise they already deal with to get worse: a situation that could happen if El Toro isn't built. Critics of the airport have pushed for a referendum that could require two-thirds majority support for the construction of the airport. They also note that noise will likely be worse at El Toro since El toro will have two long runways to John Wayne's one short runway. One neighborhood, already within 1,500 feet of a runway at John Wayne, worries that the community would be "demolished" if John Wayne expanded.
The article reports that residents near the proposed airport at El Toro in Orange County, California are worried that noise will irritate them and will negatively impact schools. They want nighttime curfews and passenger-count caps at the future airport. Residents living around the nearby John Wayne Airport say that they already deal with more noise than El Toro would create, and say that El Toro critics should support the airport proposal and help relieve noise around John Wayne.
The article notes that some question data taken at recent noise tests at El Toro, saying that the county's highest measurements were lower than data recorded independently. Critics of the airport have pushed for a referendum that could require two-thirds majority support for the construction of the airport. They also note that noise will likely be worse at El Toro than at John Wayne since El toro will have two long runways on 2,000 acres to John Wayne's one short runway on 500 acres.
The article goes on to say that those living around John Wayne worry that if El Toro is not constructed, their airport will expand and become noisier; current size limits at John Wayne will expire in 2005. One neighborhood, already within 1,500 feet of a runway, worries that it would be "demolished" if John Wayne expanded. They note that El Toro should not have any homes or schools in the official 'high-noise' zone.
The article notes that airport supporters want a nighttime curfew at El Toro, and an extension of existing curfews at John Wayne.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Zones Desk
BYLINE: Andrew Blankstein
DATELINE: Burbank, California
The Los Angeles Times reports that an airline industry group opposes a plan to close California's Burbank Airport terminal at night. The plan was designed to quell citizens' desire for a nighttime curfew without violating federal law that forbids localities from interfering with airport operations. Obtaining an outright, legal curfew would be a lengthy, costly, process involving FAA approval. The FAA has yet to comment on the legality of a terminal closure. Some residents oppose the plan because the city doesn't go far enough towards forcing a curfew, and those residents are seeking a voter initiative to curb airport growth.
The article reports that the Air Transport Association (ATA), an airline industry group, opposes a plan to close California's Burbank Airport terminal at night. The plan was put forward by the city of Burbank as part of the approval for a new terminal, and was accepted by the airport authority; it was designed to help with citizens' desire for a nighttime curfew without violating federal law that forbids localities from interfering with airport operations.
The article notes that a nighttime curfew may be obtained by the airport -- and indeed if the airport wishes to add gates it must obtain a curfew -- but that would be a lengthy, costly, process involving FAA approval. The terminal closure was intended as a quick fix, but the ATA calls it an "end run around federal law." The FAA has yet to comment on the legality of a terminal closure.
The article goes on to say that airport officials are concerned with ATA opposition, since it is key to have airline support since the airlines will fund much of the terminal construction through landing fees.
The article notes that many residents oppose the plan for opposite reasons: the city doesn't go far enough towards forcing a curfew. A former Councilman is collecting signatures to force a voter initiative that would "bar expansion of the terminal beyond 14 gates, place caps on the number of flights and institute a mandatory curfew."
PUBLICATION: Newsday
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: News; Page A22
BYLINE: Steven Kreytak
DATELINE: New York City
Newsday reports that legislators in New York City are upset that an expanded railroad maintenance yard has gone into operation without a noise wall. Legislators are threatening to withhold funding for other railroad projects if the noise goes unmitigated. They plan to meet with railroad officials to discuss funding sources for the wall, while residents are calling a news conference to express their frustrations over the noise.
The article reports that two legislators in New York City are upset that Long Island Rail Road's expanded maintenance yard has gone into operation without a sound wall to mitigate noise. The railroad wanted to wait until the 9-track yard -- up from 2-tracks -- was operational before determining if a noise wall was necessary, but informal judgments by residents already demand a wall.
The article notes that the yard was expanded to allow non-electric trains from the suburbs to travel without a transfer into Manhattan. The electric sidings were kept in part to allow some of the trains to be the quieter electric trains that don't need to idle for long periods -- sometimes throughout the night -- as the other locomotives do.
The article goes on to say that the legislators are threatening to withhold funding for other railroad projects if the noise goes unmitigated. They plan to meet with railroad officials to discuss possible funding sources for the $1-million wall. Meanwhile, residents are calling a news conference to express their frustrations over the noise.
PUBLICATION: Press Association Newsfile
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: Home News
BYLINE: Adam Jankiewicz
DATELINE: Oxon, United Kingdom
The Press Association Newsfile reports that a party in Oxon, U.K. held for all Virgin employees around the country drew many noise complaints. A spokesman for Virgin said that when one environmental health officer showed up to note the excessive noise, the volume from music was turned down immediately. The spokesman apologized for any nuisance that was caused to residents.
The article reports that the head of the corporate "Virgin Empire" hosted a party in Oxon, U.K. for all of his employees around the country. The three-day party -- attended by about 60,000 -- caused numerous complaints, which police noted but did not log.
The article notes that no police were sent to the party. A spokesman for Virgin said that when one environmental health officer showed up to note the excessive noise, the volume from music was turned down immediately. The spokesman apologized for any nuisance that was caused to residents.
PUBLICATION: The San Diego Union-Tribune
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: Local Pg. B-1
BYLINE: James W. Crawley
DATELINE: Del Mar, California
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that a noise study was recently performed along the coastline of Del Mar, California to determine the impact of noise from military helicopters. The noise study will last four days, and is part of a 1997 agreement in which the Marine Corps settled with a local anti-noise group -- Move Against Relocating Choppers Here -- in part by promising a noise study. Much resident outcry has been from residents along the already noisy Interstate 15, but shoreline residents receive two-thirds of the noise impact.
The article reports that a noise study was recently performed along the coastline of Del Mar, California to determine the impact of noise from military helicopters. The helicopters pass by an average of fifteen times each weekday. Six microphones, manned by civilian technicians, picked up noise from the helicopters as they flew "back and forth three times a day -- 10:30 a.m., 2:30 p.m. and 7 p.m. -- along the Del Mar shoreline from distances ranging from a half-mile to five miles offshore, at various altitudes from 500 feet to 2,000 feet."
The article notes that the noise study will last four days, and is part of a 1997 agreement in which the Marine Corps settled with a local anti-noise group -- Move Against Relocating Choppers Here -- in part by promising a noise study. The group was upset over an increased number of helicopters in the area as they were moved from other closing bases, saying that environmental standards were violated.
The article goes on to say that the Marines have recently altered a flight path to send more noisy flights over a golf course and away from residents. Much resident outcry has been from residents along the already noisy Interstate 15, but shoreline residents receive two-thirds of the noise impact.
PUBLICATION: The Santa Fe New Mexica
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: Opine; Pg. A-7
BYLINE: H.L. Daneman
DATELINE: Santa Fe, New Mexico
The Santa Fe New Mexica prints several letters to the editor, one of which relates to noise. The writer asks Santa Fe officials to work on an integrated set of noise rules that -- as opposed to the current, weak ordinance -- will be effective in reducing noise from numerous sources.
"Council, manager must act to muffle noise
The Santa Fe City Council needs to come to grips with the deterioration in our quality of life due to noise and other public nuisances.
They have received complaints about noisy night clubs, low-flying airplanes, a car wash, a pumice mill, truck traffic, and high-powered car radios played at maximum volume. It must be frustrating that these complaints cannot be addressed by them due to lack of effective ordinances.
Santa Fe had a pretty good noise ordinance until 1987 when it was watered down to clear the way for widening West Alameda, then under an injunction unless adequate noise mitigation was included in the road construction program. The Court would have none of that declaring that the original ordinance still applied. We are left with a practically unenforceable ordinance.
St. Francis Drive is already in violation of state and federal noise limits due to excessive truck traffic. Some years ago, then-Councilor Delgado was successful in prohibiting the use of "jake brakes," but diesel-powered 18-wheelers carrying lumber, hay and other large loads still generate excessive noise (and fumes) while accelerating and decelerating at stop lights along St. Francis Drive and Cerrillos Road. Our Transportation Advisory Board recently shied away from recommending restricting through truck traffic to the newly opened route 599 truck by-pass.
Neighbors of the Santa Fe Municipal Airport will once again depend on pilots' "good-will" to conform to a new voluntary noise reductionprogram.An old voluntary program was abandoned several years ago due to lack of a workable complaint procedure there was usually no one on the other end of the phone and appeals to the FAA or the airport manager fell on deaf ears. Other cities of our size found that an ordinance with penalties was essential to reinforce compliance to their noise abatement programs. Our airport officials are reluctant to request a procedure leading to an effective airport noise ordinance.
What is needed, in my opinion, is for our City Manager to prioritize the development of a set of integrated noise and public nuisance ordinances patterned after successful laws in use by other cities. Only then, will our legal department be able to allocate the time needed to prepare acceptable drafts suitable for the City Council's attention. And, maybe then, residents will be heard over the much reduced noise of trucks, airplanes, car washes, pumice mills, late night rock bands and assorted high-intensity boom boxes."
PUBLICATION: The Times
DATE: August 31, 1999
SECTION: Features
BYLINE: Penny Lewis
DATELINE: London, England
The Times prints a piece by a London columnist discussing the citizen's recourse against noise offenders. While relying on local bylaws can result in buck-passing between understaffed police and the local council, the Crime and Disorder Act of 1998 provides a national law for citizens to use. In addition, the 1997 Harassment Act protects the public from nuisance behavior, and the two laws together can be used to levy fines and jail terms to noise offenders.
The piece is by a London columnist discussing the citizen's recourse against noise offenders. She notes that while relying on local bylaws can result in buck-passing between understaffed police and the local council, the Crime and Disorder Act of 1998 provides a national law for citizens to use.
The article notes that the law "allows 'antisocial behaviour' orders to be made against anybody over the age of ten who "has acted... in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress". The orders can result in fines or prison terms. In addition, the 1997 Harassment Act protects the public from nuisance behavior; the two laws can be used in conjunction to prosecute noise offenders.
The article goes on to encourage citizens to use the law, noting that at least one city council has failed to use it by ignoring particularly problematic travelers who have set up camp on council property.
PUBLICATION: Austin American-Statesman
DATE: August 30, 1999
SECTION: Metro/State; Pg. B1
BYLINE: Peyton D. Woodson
DATELINE: Austin, Texas
The Austin American-Statesman reports that a noise mitigation plan for Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (ABIA) in Texas will be considered in September by the city council after a delay of several months. The plan would call for buyouts, soundproofing, and money in exchange for overflight easements. Some residents are upset that the plan has been delayed, and say that a program that requires planes to turn over residential areas above a certain altitude is not being enforced. Officials say enforcement is strict.
The article reports that a noise mitigation plan for Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (ABIA) in Texas -- originally scheduled for June consideration -- will be considered in September by the city council. Three months after the airport's completion, residents are already tired of the noise impacts.
The article notes that ABIA replaced the older airport, which had about 30 times more residents in the official 'noise impact zone.' The current airport has 1,119 people in its noise impact zone; that number drops to 937 under the 'Fly Quiet' program which dictates particularly flight paths, which dictate that departures many only turn over residential areas after they've reached 3,000 feet during the day or 4,000 at night. In the noisiest areas, 260 planes pass over each day.
The article notes that residents believe the "Fly Quiet" program is not being heeded. Officials say that the program is strictly enforced, and point out that louder Stage 2 planes -- which will be phased out by the end of this year -- may give the illusion that some planes are flying lower than others.
The article goes on to say that the noise mitigation plan -- if approved -- will offer home buyouts to those closest to the airport, and will offer voluntary buyouts, soundproofing treatments, and monetary compensation in exchange for overflight easements. The city, together with the FAA, has already spent $45.7 million moving two schools that would have been impacted by noise from the new airport.
The article concludes, saying that 140 noise complaints have been logged since the airport opened; an official said that complaints were coming every day at first, but now come only about once a week.
PUBLICATION: Fort Worth Star-Telegram
DATE: August 30, 1999
BYLINE: Mede Nix
DATELINE: Dallas, Texas
The Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports that several neighborhood organizations have joined in a court battle to keep Love Field in Dallas, Texas from adding flights. Officials want to take advantage of the 1997 relaxation of federal restrictions to increase the number of flights at the airport. Neighborhood organizations are opposing the flight increases "mostly on environmental grounds, including noise, air pollution, air safety and traffic congestion," and expect the fight to go all the way to the Supreme Court.
The article reports that several neighborhood organizations have joined in a court battle to keep Love Field in Dallas, Texas from adding flights. Most residents around the airport say that they have grown to think of the airport as a good neighbor, but also say that they do not want an increase in the number of flights at the airport.
The article notes that residents are upset that officials want to take advantage of the 1997 relaxation of federal restrictions to increase the number of flights at the airport. Residents say officials didn't plan to hold any public hearings on the matter.
The article goes on to say that the neighborhood organizations are opposing the flight increases "mostly on environmental grounds, including noise, air pollution, air safety and traffic congestion." The airport counters that noise has decreased since 1992 and will continue to do so through 2001, despite increases in takeoffs. Residents expect the case to go all the way to the Supreme Court.
Previous week: August 22, 1999
Next week: September 5, 1999
Aircraft Noise
Amplified Noise
Effects on Wildlife/Animals
Construction Noise
Firing Ranges
Health Effects
Home Equipment and Appliances
Industrial/Manufacturing
International News
Environmental Justice
Land Use and Noise
Lawsuits
Civil Liberty Issues
Miscellaneous Noise Stories
Noise Ordinances
Noise Organizations Mentioned
Outdoor Events
Noise in Our National Parks/Natural Areas
Regulation
Residential and Community Noise
Snowmobile and ATV Noise
Research and Studies
Technological Solutions to Noise
Transportation Related Noise
Violence and Noise
Watercraft Noise
Workplace Noise
Chronological Index
Geographical Index