PUBLICATION: Asbury Park Press
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: B, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Margaret F. Bonafide
DATELINE: Point Pleasant Beach, New Jersey
The Asbury Park Press reports that J.P. Bailey's, a Point Pleasant Beach bar and restaurant, has violated the borough noise ordinance dozens of times and has allowed sports pool gambling to take place. Two people have been arrested for the sports pool gambling.
The article states that the Borough Council of Point Pleasant will hold a hearing March 28 to review the violations and to decide on action needed. Mayor Jack Pasola reported that the prosecutor's offices of Ocean and Middlesex counties and the borough police department conducted an investigation that resulted in the two arrests. State laws allow a town to shut an establishment for fifteen days for illegal gambling.
According to the article, Detective Lt. Harry E. "Chip" DiCorcia reported that the state allows the borough to decide whether it wants to take away an establishment's mercantile license for noise violations. Mayor Pasola added,"We on the Borough Council are not anti-business, but we will not allow our residents to be disrupted until 2 in the morning by loud music." There have been both complaints about the excessive noise as well as summonses to the bar as a result of the complaints. The mayor stated that the complaints constitute a violation of the bar's retail food establishment license that was granted by the borough.
The article states that the police department and borough council officials attempted to work with the owner of the bar by visiting the establishment and explaining the violations. The owner continued to violate the ordinances and the borough council therefore decided to proceed with the hearing.
PUBLICATION: Aviation Week and Space Technology
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: Air Transport; Vol. 152, No. 12; Pg. 49
BYLINE: James T. Mckenna
DATELINE: Washington
Aviation Week and Space Technology reports that the United States is concerned that the European Union's ban of hushkitted transports is illegal. The U.S. hopes that the petition it filed with the ICAO on March 14 will help settle the dispute. Hushkits are devices that were developed to help powerplants and aviation companies comply with the ICAO's Chapter 3 noise-emissions standards. Most hushkitted aircraft have been built in the United States. The United States claims that by banning hushkitted aircraft, the EU is unfairly penalizing U.S. aircraft companies, while simultaneously favoring European manufacturers who do not install hushkits, particularly Airbus Industrie.
The article states that the treaty of the "Chicago Convention" of 1944 established the ICAO as the international organization whose task it is to set technical and operations standards of aviation worldwide. The United States petition, filed under Article 84 of the Chicago Convention, claims that the European Union has violated the treaty by attempting to set its own standards on aircraft noise emissions, thereby thwarting the ICAO's jurisdiction.
According to the article, the European Union's ban mandates that all hushkitted aircraft be registered by May 4. The EU is prohibiting additional hushkitted aircraft to be used after that date, and has legislated that hushkitted aircraft will not be permitted to be used within the EU at all after the year 2002.
The article states that the U.S. petition claims that by taking this action, the EU is legislating standards that are actually the responsibility of the ICAO. The petition also claims that, even though the ICAO standards deal only with technical performance and do not deal with design, the EU ban is legislating design issues.
The article states that the EU responded to the petition by stating that hushkits do not do enough to curtail aircraft noise. European airports are constantly under fire from environmental activists and people who live near the airports who claim that aircraft noise levels are still too high.
The article reports that the ICAO has been petitioned under Article 84 only three times since its inception. The U.S. hopes that the dispute will be settled before the ICAO finds it necessary to enforce its provision. That has been the case in each of the three disputes filed with the ICAO under Article 84 in the past. However, the EU feels that it will be difficult to reach an agreement with the United States now that the petition has been filed.
According to the article, one proposal had been for the EU to rescind the hushkit ban and the United States to cancel its petition, while jointly asking the ICAO to set a higher Chapter 4 noise-emissions standard. Some United States aviation industry officials stated that they would not approve of such a joint request. They stated that U.S. aviation companies have substantial investments in hushkit production, and may suffer substantial losses if higher standards are set. In addition, they argued that the ICAO needs to be seen as the international standards setter in the aviation industry, and that such a joint request by the U.S. and the EU would prohibit this from happening.
The article states that when EU transport commissioner Loyola de Palacio said that she would not recommend that the ban be suspended, the joint compromise was tabled. The ICAO now has until March 24 to officially inform the EU about the U.S. petition. The EU then has 90 days to respond to the petition. If the EU and U.S. cannot settle the dispute within the timeframe that the ICAO requests, then the ICAO Council will rule on the matter. They could rule that the Europeans may not legally ban hushkitted transports. They might also suspend ICAO voting rights of all EU member nations. If the EU responds by formally questioning the ICAO's jurisdiction over the entire matter, the International Court of Justice could be requested to rule on the matter.
PUBLICATION: Birmingham Evening Mail
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: Final; Pg. 11
BYLINE: Jim Guthrie
DATELINE: Birmingham, England
The Birmingham Evening Mail reports that Mr. Simon Farmer, a local resident and businessman, is concerned by the refusal of his local town councilors to allow him to build a helicopter pad on his property and use it to take off in and land his privately-owned helicopter. He has filed an appeal with Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, who is Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions. The government's Planning Inspectorate will handle the appeal.
The article states that Mr. Farmer claims that the council refused to accept his application to construct the helicopter pad, and he does not believe that it had grounds to do so. He argues that measured noise levels of his helicopter's take-off and landing were within an acceptable noise level range, and that the local head of planning, Mr. Ian Thompson, had recommended approval of his application pending a one-year trial. In order to help them make their decision, the councilors saw a video of a helicopter take-off and landing at the site. After having been informed about noise level details, they decided that the noise would be unacceptable to nearby residents. They also cautioned that they did not wish to set a precedent that would allow more and more private helicopter landings to be built in the community.
The article states that Mr. Farmer travels a lot on business, and feels that the home helicopter pad would greatly cut down on his traveling time.
PUBLICATION: Canada NewsWire
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: Financial News
DATELINE: Toledo, Ohio, March 20
Canada Newswire reports that Owens Corning has announced that Silentex (tm), its new noise control system, has been chosen by DaimlerChrysler for use in the manufacture of muffler systems on many of its European-built vehicles. The Silentex (tm) system will be used on the mufflers of several Mercedes-Benz models.
Owens Corning (NYSE: OWC) announced that DaimlerChrysler has specified its Silentex(TM) noise control system for the mufflers of several of its vehicles built in Europe. The vehicles using Silentex muffler-filling technology for the rear muffler include the Mercedes-Benz A-class (small), and the Mercedes-Benz C-class (mid-size). DaimlerChrysler also plans to specify Silentex technology for the rear muffler of E-class Mercedes-Benz (standard) and for the rear mufflers of all other new Mercedes-Benz models later in 2000. Silentex technology is a totally integrated system using high-temperature glass fiber insulating material, tailor-made muffler filling machinery and a cost-effective filling process. By working with customers like DaimlerChrysler, and parts suppliers Faurecia and Eberspacher, Owens Corning is meeting market needs for improved efficiency and performance in the automotive industry. Owens Corning collaborated with automotive engineers to develop a system using glass fiber material that withstands the heat and chemicals found in automotive exhaust. The filling material used in the Silentex noise control system is Owens Corning's proprietary Advantex(R) glass fiber. Advantex glass fiber provides an unmatched combination of durability, acoustic absorbency and cost in muffler and resonator applications. "The key to the durability of the Silentex system is that it consists of a single, continuous Advantex glass fiber roving," says Heinz Otto, president, Composites Systems Business, Owens Corning. "The glass fiber system remains in place, even under the harshest conditions, meeting manufacturers' extended warranty requirements. This has been proven at Toyota, Volvo, DaimlerChrysler and GM Opel." Otto says the glass fiber materials and the filling system used for the DaimlerChrysler models were tailored for the automobiles' needs through the teamwork of Owens Corning, DaimlerChrysler, Fourecia and Eberspacher. Owens Corning expects that 75 percent of all vehicle exhaust systems will use filled mufflers by 2005. Filled muffler systems have been in production for many years using a variety of materials including basalt wool or E glass needle felt preforms. The use of filled mufflers has spread in recent years as vehicle manufacturers face the twin needs of reducing weight and fitting mufflers into smaller spaces. More recently, environmental awareness and engine performance have changed, and some material systems have failed to meet newer, more-stringent original equipment manufacturer (OEM) demands. The use of the Silentex noise control system aligns with Owens Corning's and DaimlerChrysler's global environmental responsibility initiatives. Owens Corning is a world leader in building materials systems and composites systems. The company has sales of $5 billion and employs approximately 20,000 people worldwide. For more information, please visit Owens Corning's Web site at www.owenscorning.com . CONTACT: Investor Relations, Jules L. Vinnedge, 419-248-7377, or Media Relations, William K. Hamilton, 419-248-6190, both of Owens Corning
PUBLICATION: Charleston Daily Mail
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: Life; Pg. P2c
BYLINE: Tom and Ray Magliozzi
The Charleston Daily Mail reports a question posed by a reader to Tom and Ray Magliozzi, syndicated personalities of the "Car Talk" radio program on National Public Radio. The reader states that he has a problem with low oil pressure after stopping his car, which is a 1994 Pontiac Transport with a 3.8 liter V-6 engine and 29,000 miles. He wonders if the problem with his oil pressure could also be related to a "clattering noise" that he hears when he starts the car after it has not been driven for a week or more.
According to the column, the reader, Herman, reports that his oil-pressure gauge while he is driving reads 40-45 psi after the car is warmed up. When he stops, the oil pressure drops to 20 psi. The second problem with the car is that when he has not been driving it for at least a week, it makes a "horrible clattering noise for about 20 seconds" after he starts the motor. He wonders if the problems are related, and how serious the problems are. The car dealer informed him that the drop in oil pressure is normal, since oil becomes thinner as it is heated.
The column states that Tom reassures Herman that the "clattering noise" is probably nothing to worry about. He explains to Herman that, after the car has not been driven for as long as a week, the car's hydraulic lifters, which have become dried out, will make noise until they are re-filled with oil as the car is starting. Tom says that the noise is not a problem as long as it stops after the car has been started up.
According to the column, Ray then tells Herman that the low oil pressure readings he has been noticing may indicate a much larger problem. Tom adds that the oil pressure in Herman's Pontiac Transport should in fact read 60 psi at 1,850 rpm. The brothers then go on to explain to Herman that one reason for a low oil-pressure reading could be that the oil-pressure gauge is not working properly. They recommend that Herman have a mechanic check the oil pressure with a separate gauge. If the mechanic's gauge says that the oil pressure is normal, Herman could then remedy the situation himself by writing the number "60" over the gauge's inaccurate "40" marking.
The column reports that if the mechanic finds that Herman's gauge is fine, but the oil pressure actually is reading only 40 psi when it should be reading 60 psi, then the problem might be an internal engine problem or a bad oil pump. Tom and Ray recommend to Herman that the next thing that he should do in that case is to proceed with having the oil pump replaced. If the oil pressure then reads a normal 60 psi at 1,850 rpm, then the problem has been solved. If the pressure continues to read 40 psi, even with a new oil pump, then the problem is most likely the engine.
The column states that Ray then jokingly tells Herman that the engine problem can be fixed by either spending $2000 to rebuild or replace the engine, or by spending $20 to place an ad in the paper to sell the car.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Sun-Times
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: Car; Auto Q & A; Pg. 3; NC
BYLINE: by Dan Jedlicka
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Sun-Times automotive question and answer section reports that a reader has a problem with his 1999 Dodge Intrepid. When the reader puts on the brakes, he hears a grinding noise. A Dodge dealer told him that condensation had built up on the brakes and was causing the noise. The dealer wiped off the brakes, but indicated that the grinding noise will come back.
The column states that Elmwood Park's Caira Automotive answers that the cause of the grinding noise might indeed be coming from the brake lining material in certain weather conditions. A second possibility might be "rust on the edge of the brake rotor."
The column reports other questions posed by readers concerning engine valve cover gaskets, purchasing a new automobile, types of oil to use, and engine timing belts.
PUBLICATION: Chicago Daily Herald
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: Neighbor; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Amy Mclaughlin
DATELINE: Mount Prospect, Illinois
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Michael Collins, Concerned Citizens of Mount Prospect
The Chicago Daily Herald reports that the Concerned Citizens of Mount Prospect met recently to discuss airport noise with the Village of Mount Prospect. The group believes that the village should take the same measures to study and act upon airport noise as it has taken in dealing with train noise in the town.
The article states that some residents of the south end of Mount Prospect are bothered by the noise from nearby O'Hare International Airport, and they want the Village of Mount Prospect to do something about it.
The article reports that Michael Collins, President of the Concerned Citizens of Mount Prospect, is concerned that the Village has studied noise in the northern end of town generated by trains on the Wisconsin Central rail line, but has not undertaken a similar study on airport noise in the southern end of town. Ten residents attended a recent meeting of the Concerned Citizens of Mount Prospect to discuss the issue. All in attendance indicated that they were annoyed by the airplane noise.
According to the article, Collins agrees that the train noise is indeed a problem. He just wants to see the Village pay equal attention to the concerns of residents about airport noise. He stated, "We haven't gotten a nickel's worth of help." In addition to conducting the train noise study, the Village has also discussed with railroad authorities the possibility of installing a train siding so that freight trains and Metra commuter trains using the Wisconsin Central tracks can pass each other safely.
The article states that the trustees who attended the Concerned Citizens of Mount Prospect meeting reminded the group that Mount Prospect is a member of the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission, which is made up of several of the towns surrounding O'Hare.
The article reports that trustee Irvana Wilks stated that since the village has become a commission member, millions of dollars have been spent on needed soundproofing to the Mount Prospect schools. Wilks, who is also an alternate member of the O'Hare Commission, said that she would update the trustees on the commission's activities after she attends its next meeting. She also reported to Collins' group that the village already has installed devices that monitor the airplane noise from both O'Hare and nearby Palwaukee Municipal Airport.
According to the article, Collins reminded the group that the schools would only have been soundproofed if it had been found that students were being subjected to excessive noise. He indicated that it probably means that residents in private homes in the area are also being subjected to high levels of noise.
PUBLICATION: The Denver Post
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: Denver & The West; Pg. B-04
BYLINE: Coleman Cornelius
DATELINE: Fort Collins, Colorado
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Justin Mick, Colorado State University Mechanical Engineering Student; Bryan Willson, Colorado State University Mechanical Engineering Professor
The Denver Post reports that local university teams are competing in Jackson, Wyoming to design cleaner running snowmobiles. The competition is taking place during a time of intense debate over a possible snowmobile ban in Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks....
According to the article, the Clean Snowmobile Challenge 2000 begins today in Jackson, Wyoming. Sponsored by the Society of Automotive Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Park Service, the event challenges university teams to build a snowmobile that is friendlier to the environment than the noisy, polluting machines that are now available. Among the contestants are a group of thirteen mechanical engineering students from Colorado State University, whose team leader is Justin Mick, a mechanical engineering graduate student. Other competitors include a Colorado School of Mines team as well as teams from five other universities
According to the article, Mick, a snowmobile enthusiast from Gunnison, agrees that machine designs need to be improved. "Their emissions are heinous. They're terrible. They need to be cleaned up," he said.
The article states that the Challenge is taking place during a time when Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks are in the middle of a debate over the use of snowmobiles in their parks. Yellowstone and Grand Teton are the major snowmobile destinations in the western United States. Park Service officials announced last week that they will probably ban snowmobiles from the two parks beginning next winter because of their high air pollution and noise levels.
The article reports that the debate over the ban has become fiercer as the two sides have become more politicized. It pits environmentalists, who are concerned about the impact of snowmobiles on the environment, against both riders and local businesses. Riders believe their access to public lands should not be curtailed; businesses in the towns surrounding the parks, such as West Yellowstone, Montana, are afraid that the loss of snowmobilers will severely impact the winter economy of the area. Over 50,000 snowmobiles are used at Yellowstone National Park alone during one winter season.
According to the article, the Colorado State University team's adviser, mechanical engineering professor Bryan Willson, stated that there might be a different solution to the debate, which currently discusses only allowing snowmobiling in the parks vs. limiting or banning them. Willson feels that a third option would be to design cleaner snowmobiles. Willson stated, "There's no reason a snowmobile can't be cleaned up."
The article states that snowmobiles use two-stroke engines whose emissions are very hazardous to the environment. Thirty percent of the fuel is released in the air unburned. Hydrocarbon emissions from this unburned fuel, in addition to exhaust, create a visible haze in the air. Willson stated that the simple two-stroke engine releases into the air 100 times as much carbon monoxide as the average automobile. Snowmobile engines also create a high level of noise.
According to the article, the snowmobile industry continues to use inefficient two-stroke engines "because they are powerful, relatively lightweight, inexpensive and work well in cold weather."
The article reports that the CSU Challenge team has designed a new two-stroke engine that will reduce hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions by seventy-five percent. Changes include two noise-reducing mufflers, a fuel-injection system, a catalytic converter to oxidize escaping pollutants, and a supercharger to push out snowmobile exhaust. The new design will result in a safer, more comfortably riding snowmobile.
PUBLICATION: The Dominion (Wellington)
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: News; National; Pg. 1
BYLINE: Jonathan Milne
DATELINE: Wellington, New Zealand
The Dominion (Wellington) reports that rugby star Jonah Lomu attended the Car Audio New Zealand sound-off central regional finals. He plans to attempt to break the world record in six months. The sound-off is a competition to create the loudest sound-pressure level using a car stereo.
The Dominion reports that New Zealand's rugby superstar, Jonah Lomu, caused a stir yesterday at the Car Audio New Zealand sound-off central regional finals. While there, he turned the volume on the car stereo in his Nissan Patrol up so loudly that his windshield wipers were actually jumping off the windshield and it created intense vibrations that set off a car alarm nearby. He was not officially entered in the sound-off, preferring to wait another six months until attempting to break the sound-pressure level world record of 176 decibels.
According to the article, there were several complaints about noise volume during yesterday's competition.
The article stated that, in order to try to set the world record, Lomu's car would have to be pressurized like a jet plane in order to keep the car intact during the record-breaking attempt. Obviously, no one will be allowed to sit inside the car.
According to the article, Stan Rivett, director of Car Audio New Zealand, stated that it is the "sound quality" that counts in the competition, not the level of the noise. The New Zealand sound-off record is 154 decibels. Rivett said Lomu has a chance of beating the New Zealand record, but that the world record of 176 decibels will not likely be broken any time soon.
PUBLICATION: Engineering News-Record
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: Cover Story; Health; Vol. 244, No. 11; Pg. 36
BYLINE: by Richard Korman, Stephen H. Daniels, David Kohn
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Scott P. Schneider, Laborers' Health and Safety Fund of North America
The Engineering News-Record reports that an upcoming conference in Washington, D.C. will discuss noise levels and hearing protection in the construction industry. Several government agencies are working toward enacting new rules for new rules that employers must adhere to, but many in the industry believe that new rules are not the answer. Instead, they think that worker education is the key to preserving life-long hearing.
The article reports that John R.V. Dixon spent his career in construction, doing jobs such as drafting, inspecting railroad lines and heavy construction projects, engineering tunnel sites, negotiating contract changes, and as project manager for the WMATA, Washington D.C.'s transportation agency. In his years at these jobs, he was also subjected to the loud noises of submarine engines, front-end loaders, and pile drivers, as well as having worked in tunnels while boring machines were operating. By the time he was thirty-six years old, his hearing had diminished enough that he needed to wear a hearing aid. He believes that the construction industry needs to do something about workers' hearing losses, even though he doesn't necessarily blame the construction industry for his own hearing loss.
According to the article, the Laborers' Health and Safety Fund, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health will host a conference on March 30 and 31 in Washington, D.C. aimed at raising awareness about noise and hearing. At the conference, both government officials and occupational health experts will ask that construction hearing protection provisions be brought up to the same standard that general industry is working toward. They will cite studies that show that construction worker hearing loss is very common.
The article states that new general industry rules are not yet in place, but they may require that action be taken for noises that reach 85 decibels, instead of the current 90-decibel limit. Construction employers may be required to provide workers with hearing tests, noise measurement capabilities, and employee noise training.
The article reports that many construction employers are not pleased with the possibility of new U.S. Labor Department rules that will be difficult to comply with and to enforce. Carl Heinlein, the top safety and health official of the Associated General Contractors, stated, "People will fight tooth and nail." Construction employers realize that they need to take precautions for the hearing safety of their workers, but they feel that it is extremely difficult to comply with some of the recent OSHA standards.
The article states that one employer who is not pleased is Joe Spirito, director of loss control at EMCOR Group, a specialty contractor in Norwalk, Connecticut. He believes that worker hearing protection is needed, not new regulations. Since the construction work and work sites move constantly, he thinks it would be difficult to control noise levels with engineering controls. Mike Croyle of Stone Valley Construction, Inc. in Pine Grove Mills, Pennsylvania, also believe that OSHA should concentrate on worker education rather enforcing new rules.
According to the article, the laborers' union believes that, although worker education is important, the construction industry must go further. The quality of a worker's life in his/her retirement years may be greatly affected by hearing loss incurred during a career, according to Scott P. Schneider, safety and health director of the Laborers' Health and Safety Fund of North America. Schneider thinks that the government needs to have stricter, enforceable noise level standards for the construction industry. He also feels that employers who do not comply should penalized financially.
The article states that Schneider realizes that the government may take a long time to enact new rules, by which time many more workers' hearing will have been damaged. He would rather see a cooperative effort between employers and manufacturers take place. Schneider said, "We want contractors to rent and buy quieter equipment, to do the training and give guidance on what they can do now as opposed to waiting."
According to the article, workers' compensation insurance claims for hearing loss in Washington state rose from 653 in 1992 to 3,198 in 1996, totaling $40 million. John Stebbins, an industrial hygienist for the state's Department of Labor and Industries, states that hearing loss claims in all industries in the state could total $4 billion.
The article states that some people believe that regulators, consultants, and unions are not taking a realistic approach. They think that workers are also exposing themselves to high noise levels outside of work, and that the workers' resultant hearing losses should not necessarily be the employers' responsibility. Workers should be paying more attention to their noise-level exposure off the job, according to some health advocates.
According to the article, Eric Patton, training manager for hearing protection manufacturer Dalloz Safety of Reading, Pennsylvania, says that the industry fears that some hearing protection devices can actually put workers at greater risk of other workplace dangers that they may not be aware because of decreased sound. Patton states that, in actuality, workers are often outfitted with hearing protection devices that are overprotecting them. According to Alice H. Suter, a health consultant hired by OSHA to study hearing protection, stated, "The hearing protection needs to be suited to the environment." She believes that reducing the decibels only in high frequencies makes it "really hard to hear backup alarms."
The article states that delicate structures in the human ear convert sound to electrical impulses that are then sent to the brain. Hearing loss accumulates slowly over time, and people are often unaware that it is happening to them until it is too late. So it is sometimes difficult to convince workers that hearing protection is necessary. Some studies have concluded that loud noises and vibrations increase one's stress level and propensity to stress-related illnesses.
According to the article, OSHA standards are not the same for every industry. The Engineering News-Standard article states, "Under OSHA's hearing protection standard for general industry, employers must provide a hearing conservation program, hearing tests, training and hearing protection devices if the average noise exposure over an eight-hour day is 85 decibels. The standard for construction differs somewhat. Construction employers must provide protection against the effects of noise when sound levels exceed 90 decibels averaged over eight hours or 95 decibels over four hours. Another part of the construction noise standard says that hearing protection devices must be provided when it's not feasible to reduce noise levels or the duration of exposure. Devices must be chosen by a competent person. Plain cotton wads are not acceptable. Still another standard requires employers to provide a continuing effective hearing conservation program when sound levels exceed the thresholds."
The article reports that Scott Howes, an industrial hygienist, thinks that employers and workers should consider hearing protection to be as important as safety protection such as steel-toed boots and hardhats. Workers are uncomfortable wearing hearing protection in hotter weather, but he believes that this problem could be solved by designing protective equipment that combines head, ear, and eye protection in one unit.
According to the article, Joseph D. Barbeau, safety and health director for One is Earth Technology LLC of North Haven, Connecticut, is very strict about having his workers use hearing protection. Barbeau visited a company worksite, using a sound meter to monitor the crew's safety as it vacuumed home-heating oil from a storage tank. He found that the vacuuming equipment measured 120 decibels. His data has been the basis for the company's worker hearing conservation program, which includes yearly hearing tests, worker training, and company determination to make sure that hearing protection devices are always worn.
PUBLICATION: Omaha World Herald
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: News; Pg. 11
BYLINE: Jeffrey Robb
DATELINE: Papillion Iowa
The Omaha World Herald reports that the Papillion, Iowa City Council will hold a hearing on a proposed city noise ordinance.
The article reports on many issues coming up before the Sarpy County Board and the Papillion City Council. One of the issues is a public hearing that will be held on Tuesday at 7:00 PM by the Papillion City Council concerning a noise ordinance being recommended by Police Chief Dan Hoins.
The article states, "The ordinance declares it illegal to make a noise that 'either annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers' others in the city. People could be punished for making annoying hoots, whistles or songs on public streets or keeping a loud animal or bird, among other possibilities."
According to the article, the punishment for violation of the noise ordinance would be up to three months in jail plus a $500 fine. There would, however, be certain waivers to the ordinance. For example, Papillion Days would be granted a lifetime noise privilege.
The article states that the Chief Hoins' proposal will be voted on after the hearing.
PUBLICATION: The Register Guard
DATE: March 20, 2000
BYLINE: by Joe Harwood
DATELINE: Springfield, Oregon
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Springfield Citizens for Smart Growth
The Register Guard reports that residents of neighborhoods surrounding a proposed Wal-Mart site are concerned about the traffic and noise that will be generated by the retailer's operations. Some options have included requiring Wal-Mart to adequately address traffic congestion by possibly building additional interchanges along Highway 126. Springfield has no planned commercial center that would allow for development without adversely impacting residential neighborhoods.
The article reports that Springfield residents Marleen and Gary Brady are canceling building an addition onto their Centennial Boulevard home. Instead, they may move away because of the increased noise they will be hearing when Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. builds its 149,000 square foot superstore, with parking spaces for 1,692 vehicles, just behind the Brady's home. The company also plans to add on a 70,000 square foot grocery store and another addition of 105,000 feet for a home improvement center sometime in the future. Marleen Brady thinks that the noise from Wal-Mart's delivery trucks will be unacceptable. Wal-Mart's store design calls for the loading docks and truck circulation areas to be within 50 feet of some of the homes in Brady's neighborhood on Centennial Boulevard, and also on L Street. The store will be built in a 30-acre field. Brady wants to know why Wal-Mart can't put its "traffic-intensive operations" at the other end of its building site, where the truck noise would not be as disturbing.
The article states that city planner Jim Donovan believes the noise could be decreased if the city were to widen its "buffer zone between trucking areas and homes," and require Wal-Mart to install fencing and landscaping, and to limit truck deliveries to certain hours. However, he acknowledges that these efforts would still not eliminate the noise from Wal-Mart.
According to the article, residents are also concerned about a dangerous increase in traffic. They realize that the field where Wal-Mart will be building has been zoned by the city for commercial use since 1987, but they feel that such a huge development would have a detrimental impact on the neighborhood.
The article states that one resident, William Deskin, has written a letter to the city requesting them to re-zone the area as residential. An additional problem concerning this Wal-Mart development is that the site is not close to a major highway intersection, as is the case with many other area Wal-Mart stores, and is too close to a quiet, residential part of town. Springfield has not planned a commercial center with traffic flow in mind. The nearest access points to Highway 126 from the site are 3/4 of a mile away at the Mohawk Boulevard and 42nd Street interchanges. Wal-Mart has proposed improving the 42nd Street interchange by adding a traffic light and turn lanes.
The article reports that the city of Springfield will give a tentative decision on Wal-Mart's site plan in May. If approved, Donovan states that Wal-Mart may be required by the city to make even more traffic-flow improvements.
According to the article, the Springfield Citizens for Smart Growth has hired Eugene land use attorney William Sherlock. Sherlock accuses Wal-Mart of "trying to get away with performing only minimal road work." This will cost city taxpayers money if the city ends up having to fix the traffic problems itself.
The article states that Springfield planning commissioner Dave Ralston, would like to see the city join forces with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to research the possibility of constructing another interchange at Highway 126 and 28th Street. It is uncertain, however, whether the ODOT would allow the project, which would cost millions.
The article reports that, in addition to traffic and noise issues, residents have also expressed concern about wetland damage and stormwater drainage. Wal-Mart hired a wetland expert who determined that the site contains 1/3 acre of natural wetlands. The Oregon Division of State Lands will determine how much of that wetland may be filled in when Wal-Mart begins construction.
According to the article, L Street resident Cory Neu is concerned that if the wetland is filled in, his neighborhood might become the next wetland.
The Springfield Citizens for Smart Growth's attorney William Sherlock Sherlock stated that Wal-Mart's plans do not adequately address stormwater drainage or water quality.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: March 20, 2000
SECTION: West Post, Pg. 3
BYLINE: Laurie Sybert
DATELINE: Creve Coeur, Missouri
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that the Creve Coeur, Missouri City Council met recently to discuss the need for sound barrier construction along Interstate 270. Some members do not believe there is a need, and feel that the cost is too high. The Council discussed ways to request the state to change its funding formula in order to have the state pay more of the cost of the sound barrier construction.
According to the article, the Creve Coeur City Council is divided over whether or not traffic noise from Interstate 270 warrants the construction of sound barriers between the interstate and adjoining residential neighborhoods. Many of the council members are concerned about the cost to the city of constructing barriers. The city's five-year capital-improvements plan, which the City Council is currently working on, calls for $500,000 to be budgeted in the year 2005 for the sound barriers. The Missouri Department of Transportation (MODOT) recently studied the noise levels along the interstate, and found them to be between 68.8 and 80 decibels. The maximum acceptable level is 66 decibels. MODOT has estimated that it will cost the city of Creve Coeur approximately $5.6 million in total. The state would pay about $716,000 toward the cost of the sound barriers.
The article states that some council members have objections. Barry Glantz (First Ward), believes the plan is too expensive and is concerned because the Council has not formally voted to include sound barriers in the capital-improvements plan. Martin Barnholtz (Fourth Ward) doesn't believe that MODOT has enough information about whether sound barriers actually work or whether they are needed along the discussed corridor. He also believes that some residents do not want sound barriers installed. Eleanor Glovinsky (Third Ward) stated that perhaps berms might be needed instead of walls. Sue Kroeger (Second Ward) thought that the barriers "could be made of something other than concrete." Judy Pass (Second Ward) said that if the city wants to qualify for government funding matches for the project, Creve Coeur needs to put money into its budget to show the state that the city has made a commitment to the construction of barriers.
The article reports that Mark Perkins, City Administrator, said that representatives from Creve Coeur, Des Peres, and Maryland Heights were planning a meeting to discuss the possibility of lobbying their state representatives to request changes to the state of Missouri funding formula for interstate highway sound barrier construction. Mayor Annette Kolis Mandel agreed that the city should form a coalition with other communities who are dealing with Interstate 270 noise problems in order to try to change the state funding process.
The article states that the City Council will hold public hearings on the capital-improvements plan during its meetings on March 27 and April 10.
PUBLICATION: AP Worldstream
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: International News
BYLINE: Bill Kaczor
DATELINE: Niceville, Florida
AP Worldstream reports that many residents who live near Eglin Air Force Base are not opposed to the Navy's recent decision to move its live bombing test site from Puerto Rico to Eglin. Most are used to the noise and realize that the military is important to the Florida Panhandle area.
The article reports that the United States Navy has moved one of its military bombing test sites from the Puerto Rican island of Vieques to Eglin Air Force Base near Seminole, Florida, possibly permanently. After an errant bomb killed a civilian Puerto Rican security guard, thousands of demonstrators occupied a bombing range and protested the US Navy's presence on Vieques. As a result of the demonstrations, the Navy has discontinued live-fire exercises there and has moved its aircraft carrier exercises to Eglin in the Florida Panhandle. Jets originating from the aircraft carrier USS George Washington will be dropping live bombs over Eglin for about 10 days. Carrier exercises such as these are conducted once or twice a year.
According to the article, Eglin Air Force Base comprises 724 square miles near the communities of Seminole, Niceville, and Choctaw. Many residents in the area are current or retired armed services personnel, and there has not been much opposition thus far to the planned bombing exercises. Leonard L. Rich, Sr. is a retired teacher and a military veteran who helped to test weapons at Eglin forty years ago. He believes that, because of the importance of the military base to the nearby communities, residents will not be protesting the bombing or the noise. He believes residents are already used to hearing such noises on a daily basis.
According to the article, Eglin Air Force Base and Hurlburt Field, another Air Force installation that is adjacent to Eglin employ 20,676 military and civilian personnel. Its payroll totals $929 million.
The article states that the communities involved are as close as six miles away from the bombing site. Resident Ruby Cook agrees that she doesn't even hear the planes anymore most of the time because she is so used to the noise. Resident Chris Washeski, however, doesn't like the noise because it bothers her dog. Her husband, Vincent, is a retired Air Force senior master sergeant. She realizes that it is just something she will have to get used to. She stated, "...I guess they have to do it somewhere."
The article states that the bombing noises are also heard and felt in Choctaw Beach, a community five miles east of Seminole.
The article reports that Eglin officials are not allowing the Navy to use bombs larger than 500 pounds, and are attempting to limit them to daylight missions. The Air Force, however, will continue to do night missions, but will now conduct its testing in the morning. In addition, they will install weather sensors at Seminole, Choctaw Beach, and other nearby towns because sound can be affected by wind and temperature inversions.
According to the article, Gary Keyser of Choctaw Beach, an Air Force veteran, agrees with the Puerto Rican demonstrators. "I figure this is our business," Keyser said. "That's our planes and our noise and all. I feel it should be here in the United States anyway." Other residents, such as Rich, also sympathize with the demonstrators. "Maybe they were protesting against our country being there and bombing on their property," he said. "I'd feel the same way." The article states that Seminole resident Jim Burlow, a retired Air Force Master Sergeant, disagrees with the protestors, and believes that since the United States is supporting Puerto Rico through programs like welfare, the Puerto Ricans should not be protesting.
PUBLICATION: Dayton Daily News
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: Local, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Paul Reines
DATELINE: Dayton, Ohio
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Jim Dando, Tipp City Planning Director; Patty Mathews, Butler Township Zoning Inspector; Dan Brandewie, Miami County Planning Director
The Dayton Daily News reports that Dayton International Airport's new expansion plan has caused much controversy in surrounding communities such as Tipp City, Butler Township, Monroe Township, Vandalia, and others. Officials maintain that community growth was planned based on previous plans presented to them by the airport, and now the airport has changed those plans. Many homes will now be affected by the noise from new runways that will be built close by.
According to the article, Dayton International Airport has released a new plan for expansion that has generated objections from Dayton residents and city officials. The airport feels that residents have chosen to live near the airport, and should assume that the airport, first built in 1936, will continue to expand. Airport director Blair Conrad feels that the surrounding communities have allowed improper growth to take place. He said airport officials met with the communities in 1984 and in 1994, but the towns did not plan properly for growth as a result of hearing the airport's plans.
The article states that most local officials contend that residential development has for the most part been limited within a couple of miles of the airport. But the airport has now changed its plans for expansion, and residents who were unaware that they would be so close to the airport will now have to contend with noise from newly constructed runways that will be built close to their homes. Residents are concerned that the noise will increase enough to bother them and to affect their ability to sell their homes, but will not be loud enough to require the airport to buy their homes or pay for them to be insulated.
The article reports that officials from Miami County want the airport to stick to its 1984 and 1994 plans. However, Conrad maintains that the plans were not "approved" documents, and the communities should therefore not have relied on them so heavily when they created plans for residential and commercial development. Conrad also admitted that the airport has not planned well in the past, either.
According to the article, Tipp City planning director Jim Dando is annoyed because the airport, when it presented its plans in 1984 and 1994, led community officials to believe that those plans were reliable, and the communities then made planning decisions based on the accuracy of those plans.
The article states that the airport's previous plan was to build a runway on the western side that ran north-south. However, the new $1.3 billion plan calls for the airport to extend an existing southwest to northeast runway and to build a new one parallel to and north of it. The airport would re-route U.S. 40, as well as some other roads. They would also add a new exchange off Interstate 75. The plans would expand the airport from 4,400 to 8,200 acres over a period of 18 years.
According to the article, Butler Township zoning inspector Patty Mathews is concerned about the new plans. "I've taken the airport into consideration in every way," she said. "Who knew what the airport was going to do and when?" Some owners are unable to sell their homes, she says, and the airport also will not purchase their homes or property.
The article states that Emergy Worldwide's early morning cargo flights are extremely loud and were not foreseen in the past. In addition, new residential developments south and west of Tipp City are likely to be affected by the airport's new plans.
According to the article, Miami County planning director Dan Brandewie said that the construction of hundreds of homes in Monroe Township's Deercliff subdivision in the early 1970s is unfortunate, but there was not no way to foresee it at the time. He pointed out that there have been many housing proposals that the county commissioners rejected because of their vicinity to the airport, and added that between 1990 and 1998, only 22 homes were built in the southern part of Monroe.
The article reports that the 1,045 housing units that have been built in recent years within four miles of the airport in Tipp will be severely affected by the new expansion plan. On the other hand, Mathews thought there had only been approximately ten new homes built yearly in recent years in Butler Township in northern Montgomery County. New housing construction in both Butler Township and Vandalia has mostly taken place south of Interstate 70 and away from the airport.
According to the article, the airport will be undertaking a noise study that will determine how many homes the airport will be mandated to buy or insulate under federal law. Airport director Conrad stated that the airport has allocated tens of millions of dollars in the new expansion plan for purchasing land outright, which it would prefer to do. But under federal law, any home built after October 1998 is not eligible.
PUBLICATION: The Houston Chronicle
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: A; Pg. 37 Metfront
BYLINE: Tony Freemantle
DATELINE: Houston, Texas
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Roy Ruffin
The Houston Chronicle reports that Houston resident Roy Ruffin has resorted to drastic measures over the noise he hears from his neighbors' school for automotive machinists. He maintains that the noise is too loud, and that the business should not be allowed in a residential neighborhood. However, the property is now zoned commercial and city officials do not believe that the noise is loud enough to warrant action.
According to the article, Ruffins's neighbors, Judson and Linda Massingill, recently lodged a complaint against Ruffin for having shot at their windows with BB pellets. Ruffin contends that he was only trying to scare blackbirds away from his birdfeeders. Police were called to check out the complaint.
The article states that the Massingills first moved to the neighborhood ten years ago, and Ruffin claims he has been bothered by the noise of race car engines from their business ever since. The Massingills own a school that instructs people how to build and service racecar motors. When Ruffin purchased his home forty years ago at the corner of Long Point and Antoine, it was in a new, quiet residential neighborhood. But, since the area is now officially designated commercial, the Massingills feel that they have a right to conduct their business within the limits of existing laws. And a byproduct of their business is automotive engine noise.
The article states that the Massingills have tried to ameliorate the situation by installing large mufflers and building a soundproof room for bench testing the engines. They have also repaired walls in their building and built fences in an attempt to lessen the noise. And their efforts have made a big difference in the volume of noise that their business generates.
According to the article, City Councilman Bruce Tatro said,"We've come miles from where we were originally. They used to blow these engines without a muffler. It was insane. But now you hardly hear them."
The article states that the noise continues to bother Ruffin, who says that the students also make a lot of noise when they rev their engines as they arrive at and leave the school. The Massingills property surrounds Ruffin on three sides. Antoine Drive has become a busy thoroughfare over the years and runs right by the front of his house. There are very few residential left in the neighborhood.
According to the article, the Massingills believe that Ruffin continues to complain so that they will eventually give up and buy his property as a commercial lot, for which he could command a higher price than as a residential lot. Ruffin agrees that he has tried to sell his property in the past, and he even had an attorney call the Massingills recently to discuss a possible sale between them.
The article states that during the course of the dispute, police officer Doug Anders has been called out there many times. He has measured the noise with a noise meter, and says that the noise from the traffic on Antoine is actually louder than the noise coming from the school. He stated that the Massingills are not violating the city ordinance or any state laws.
The article reports that Ruffin and some other neighbors who also oppose the noise believe that the city ordinance needs to be stricter. Officials have told them, however, that there is nothing they can do. "There is no easy solution to what you do about noise in the big city," said Ronnie Beylotte, the city attorney's chief prosecutor. "Obviously, the easy answer is not to buy a residence in a commercial area. But in this case, the bottom line is they (the school and Ruffin) are just not compatible."
According to the article, Ruffin complains that he is suffering from stress and anxiety as a result of the noise. Last week, the Massingills indicated that they will indeed consider buying Ruffin out, because they are tired of his complaints.
The article states that Linda Massingill said, "It'll be worth it to us to pay his price and get on with our lives."
PUBLICATION: Knoxville News-Sentinel
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: Blount County; Pg. Bc5
BYLINE: Ken Garland
DATELINE: Blount County, Tennessee
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Gene Cook
The Knoxville News-Sentinel reports that Blount County, Tennessee commissioners held a meeting recently to discuss complaints about noise coming from the Smoky Mountain Raceway.
According to the article, raceway President Carson Branham attended the meeting and stated that the raceway has spent $40,000 cleaning the track since it was purchased, and they plan to spend $250,000 more during the next few years. Some of the money spent has been on noise control, such as the installation of new fencing. In addition, they intend to move the pits area to its previous location in order to further reduce noise. The area that he had moved the pits to after purchasing the racetrack had been too close to nearby homes and was contributing to the increase in noise heard by residents.
According to the article, Branham also stated that they will plant trees between the track and the residences to help lessen the noise. In addition, Branham has ordered drivers to practice on the track earlier in the day, and he will attempt to have the races finished by 11:00 P.M. on weekends. He stated, "We're fully committed. We hope this won't happen again. We really, really want you to be proud that the race track is here."
The article states that resident Gene Cook, representing eight neighbors who live near to the racetrack, complained about the noise at the meeting. He said, "The noise is so bad I can't turn the TV up to drown it. We do want the racetrack (there), we just want him to cooperate with us."
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 16
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: ROAR (Restore Our Airport Rights); Ted McConkey, Former Burbank City Councilman
The Los Angeles Times reports that the Burbank City Council recently rejected a petition filed by Restore Our Airport Rights (ROAR) asking the city to deny Burbank Airport the right to construct a new terminal. The FAA agreed that the petition should not stop the airport from adding the terminal.
According to the article, the group Restore Our Airport Rights (ROAR) filed a petition with the City of Burbank to add a ballot initiative calling for the Burbank City Council to disapprove a tentative agreement allowing the Burbank Airport to begin construction on a new terminal. However, the Burbank city clerk disqualified the petition on Wednesday on the grounds that the petition did not meet state requirements for ballot initiatives. He disqualified the petition on the advice of the Burbank city attorney, citing the fact that the petition failed to include the names of two of the initiative's main proponents. However, the Burbank City Council agreed on Thursday to consider adding the initiative to the ballot nonetheless.
The article states that Ted McConkey, a former Burbank City Councilman who did not win reelection last year, is one of the proponents whose name was missing from the petition. The paper reports that McConkey might be using the petition to garner publicity for himself and to put the remaining City Council members on the defensive.
The article reports that the petition "calls for a mandatory nighttime curfew and a cap on future flights and passengers." However, FAA spokesperson Mitch Barker said that the FAA would disregard the initiative, even if it passed. Federal Aviation Administrator Jane Garvey stated that the biggest challenge that the FAA faces is trying to accommodate the concerns of municipalities while also satisfying airline industry growth throughout the country. The Airport Noise and Capacity Act, passed by Congress in 1990, states that municipalities that wish to pass airline traffic noise restrictions must follow rigid criteria. In addition, the United States Supreme Court ruled in 1973 that "local governments could not interfere with airport safety or operations, a field reserved to the Federal Aviation Administration." Airport opponents believe that the FAA is not paying attention to legitimate complaints.
According to the article, Burbank residents living close to the airport are increasingly concerned with airport noise and traffic congestion. They wonder how much more airport development their heavily populated airport neighborhood can tolerate.
PUBLICATION: The Press-Enterprise (Riverside, California)
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: Local; Pg. B01
BYLINE: Scott Farwell
DATELINE: Temecula, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Eion "Scotty" McDowell
The Press-Enterprise of Riverside, California reports that the Temecula Speedway has had a complaint filed against it by nearby resident Eion "Scotty" McDowell, who states that the noise levels are too high and that the raceway is operating in violation of city noise ordinance and without proper permits. The city of Temecula is conducting tests to determine the sound levels at the speedway.
The article states that Mr. Eion "Scotty" McDowell filed a claim against the city of Temecula in December. In it, he complains that the Temecula Speedway, which holds races twice a month, is violating city noise ordinances. McDowell lives of Diaz Road, west of the race track. McDowell claims that the races generate too much noise, cars races later into the evening than permitted, and large and noisy stock cars are racing on the speedway without the city's permission.
According to the article, the city of Temecula conducted sound tests on Saturday night to decide whether the raceway was indeed violating the noise ordinance. In addition, the city has forbidden further racing by stock cars, which Assistant City Manager Jim O'Grady said had never received city permits. The sound tests will determine whether the other types of cars that race at the speedway, including midget and sprint cars, violate the city's noise ordinance, which forbids sound above 70 decibels.
The article states that sound readings were taken in three places by a company hired by the city. Sound levels were measured on Zevo Drive, near the Margarita Middle School, and at the intersection of Solana Way and Margarita Road.
The article reports that race promoters conducted their own sound tests at locations one hundred feet from the track, in the hills west of the track, and in the town. Motorcycle race promoter Bruce Sanford said that they also tested last year and were in compliance at that time.
According to the article, Bob Lee of C.J. Racing and John Sterling, general manager of the Temecula Town Association, claim that the city had given the raceway oral approval to use stock cars at the track at the time that the Fire Department conducted inspections of the track's pits and its emergency procedures.
The article states that Lee said, "I'm sure the city's contractor will come up with accurate readings. But I'm the kind of guy who likes to have backup. If they come up with something that doesn't sound right, we'll have our own numbers." They tested each car for noise levels before the races on Saturday. All but one car passed the test.
According to the article, Murrieta resident Gary ,who competes in the races, stated, "What you've got is a guy with money who's made some threats, and the city's afraid he's going to get a lawyer. But as I see it one guy, or even a few people, shouldn't be able to ruin it for everybody else."
PUBLICATION: The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: Local; Pg. B1
BYLINE: Jerry M. Gutlon
DATELINE: Stuart, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Witham Field/Martin County Airport Watch Committee
The Stuart News/Port St. Lucie News reports that Witham Field is holding ceremonies on Monday to celebrate the opening of a new control tower. The Witham Field/Martin County Airport Watch Committee has objections to the new tower because it will increase noise levels in the area.
According to the article, the Witham Field/Martin County Airport Watch Committee is concerned that a new 84-foot control tower scheduled to open this week at Witham Field will attract more air traffic, larger planes, and more noise. The new tower is equipped with the latest in aviation navigation technology and its size will allow for increased visibility by approaching and departing planes.
The article reports that the airport watch group is very concerned about the possibility of larger jets using the airport, particularly a Boeing 737 owned by attorney Willie Gary. At its March 7 meeting, the County Commission discussed whether to ban large jets from the airfield. Gary said that he will fight the Commission if he is not allowed to land his jet at Witham Field.
The article states that Airport Director Michael Moon, under orders from the County Commission, is putting together a report that addresses the noise complaints. One possible solution is to add more signs that inform pilots about voluntary noise reduction procedures. In addition, he will consider several solutions authorized by the FAA such as soundproofing nearby homes, buildings, and properties, buying homes that are adversely affected by the noise, extending the runway, and restricting air traffic late at night. Airport officials are also putting together information for the FAA that might allow the county to make changes to the airport.
The article reports that last year, the County Commission also ordered Moon to develop a plan for a Part-150 study, which is necessary to restrict airport uses. Moon stated that it will take at least eighteen months to complete the study.
The article states that the airport watch committee contends that Witham Field does not comply with the county's Comprehensive Plan, in which "property uses deemed inconsistent with residential neighborhoods" will not be allowed.
PUBLICATION: The Sunday Oklahoman
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: Oklahoma Now! Lifestyles - People - Culture - Fashion; Pg. 1
BYLINE: George Lang
DATELINE: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Amy Brooks, Ward 2 City Councilwoman
The Sunday Oklahoman reports that Oklahoma City Councilwoman Amy Brooks has drafted a proposed amendment to a city ordinance as a result of complaints from many of her Ward 2 constituents about late-night bar, nightclub, and restaurant noise in the Crown Heights neighborhood. Some other residents, and many business owners and concert promoters, strongly oppose the measure.
The article states that restaurants such as VZD's, which have hosted popular music bands for years, are concerned that a proposed amendment to Oklahoma City's Alcoholic Beverage Consumption ordinance will adversely affect their businesses and might even force some of the many small, character-filled neighborhood restaurants and clubs out of business. The amendment, which will be voted on by the city council in its meeting on Tuesday, was written by Ward 2 Councilwoman Amy Brooks, who says that many of her constituents have complained about the noise and unacceptable behavior of late-night patrons at some of these establishments.
According to the article, the amendment would affect "ABC-1 (serving beer) and ABC-2 (serving beer and distilled spirits) restaurants and clubs located within 300 feet of a residential area, church, school or day-care center." The amendment would restrict the playing of live, recorded, or radio broadcast music that can be heard more than 30 feet from a business's property line between the hours of 10 P.M. and 2 A.M. Establishments that have been in business since before the adoption of the city's original ordinance are currently granted "legal nonconforming" status, under which such establishments can operate for up to six months without selling alcohol before the nonconforming status is revoked. However, under a separate clause of the amendment, a business would now lose that status if it were to stop selling alcohol for two months.
According to the article, Brooks said, "What I'm trying to do is close a legal loophole. ABC-1 and ABC-2 have to have a certain number of food sales (50 percent or greater). ABC-3 is not allowed to be within 300 feet of a neighborhood, church, school or day-care center, but ABC-1 and ABC-2 are. What happens is, in some cases, you have restaurants that serve food during the day, and at 10 o'clock they turn into a club - they have loud music, stay open until 2 a.m. and primarily sell liquor. But their food sales during the day balance out the liquor sales at night."
The article states that Chad Bleakley, co-owner of VZD's and a resident of Crown Heights nearby, is worried that if he is not allowed to present live music and sell alcohol to his customers, he may go out of business. He maintains that there have been only three noise complaints filed against him during the past ten years. He also states that he routinely has the sound levels outside of his establishment measured by sound engineers whom he hires. This, he said, ensures that the noise level from his club does not exceed the city ordinance limit of 55 decibels.
According to the article, Brooks is concerned that the city is unable to enforce the city's present ordinances because the city's zoning regulators do not work in the evenings, and the police are left with the job of enforcing regulations. Often, she said, after the police have been called to a club and have asked the owners to lower the noise, the noise level lowers temporarily, but then increases soon after the police leave. In addition, she stated that the police do not carry noise monitors in their cars; only the city zoning officials own such equipment.
According to the article, Gary Wood, who is a resident of Crown Heights and president of its neighborhood association, said that he is not pleased with the proposed amendment. He commented, "I don't like the ordinance. It's too restrictive, and it will kill a lot of small businesses. It would ruin that aesthetic aspect of having neighborhood restaurants and bars in the inner city. Everything would have to be out on Northwest Highway somewhere. There's validity to the noise problem, but my attitude is that there is no inherent right for anybody not to be annoyed. There's nuisance noise, but the city does not enforce the noise ordinance."
The article states that, in addition to bars, restaurants, and clubs, local concert promoters could be very adversely affected by the amendment. David Fitzgerald, who works in the concert promoting business, said, "Bands are used to midnight curfews, but if you tell them that they can't play past 10 p.m., they will not play here."
The article reports that Oklahoma City resident Kevin McCoy, who frequently patronizes VZD's, agrees. He commented, "When you get rid of these little restaurants, all you'll have are these cookie-cutter national chains that don't have any character. You might as well be in Amarillo or Dallas or anywhere else in the county. People are already saying that America is losing its character. I understand people's complaints, but there have to be some other ways to help out the neighborhoods.
Meanwhile, according to the article, Brooks continues to defend the amendment that she drafted, stating that her intent is not to force businesses to close, but rather, to respond to residents of her ward who have lodged legitimate complaints.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 16
BYLINE: Tom Lucente (editorial)
DATELINE: Studio City, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Tom Lucente, Studio City Residents Association President
Los Angeles Times reports that Tom Lucente, President of the Studio City Residents Association, believes that southeast San Fernando Valley residents are unfairly burdened with noise from Burbank Airport. He wants other surrounding cities to share the noise burden. He opposes adoption of the settlement agreement offered last fall.
The article states that residents in the southeast San Fernando Valley are continually bothered by noise from Burbank Airport. They complain that jets begin flying just after 6:00 A.M., even though the airport voluntarily agreed to not begin until 7:00 A.M. Mr. Lucente believes that the noise has become more severe because the cities of Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena refuse to share the airport "noise burden." He is opposed to construction of the new airline terminal at the airport, and also disagrees with the Los Angeles Times recent editorial that stated "the settlement agreement Burbank officials offered last fall should be quickly adopted so that airport passengers can have more conveniences at a new airport terminal." ("An Endless Holding Pattern," Valley editorial, Feb. 27).
The article states that Lucente argues that residents affected by the airport noise must close their doors and windows, stay inside, lose sleep, and shorten telephone conversations because of the noise. He believes that the inconveniences that they suffer are not worth the conveniences offered by a new airport terminal, such as more seating and coffee shops. He says that "the settlement would mandate the same number of gates--but with its ban on eastbound departures and lack of meaningful noise mitigations, it would also mandate the same flight patterns, with at least 90% of flights and noise routed over southeast Valley communities like Studio City."
The article reports that Lucente's group would be in favor of the new terminal if the other surrounding cities would agree to share the noise burden with the residents of the southeast San Fernando Valley.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: March 19, 2000
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 16
BYLINE: Tom Lucente (editorial)
DATELINE: Studio City, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Tom Lucente, Studio City Residents Association President
Los Angeles Times reports that Tom Lucente, President of the Studio City Residents Association, believes that southeast San Fernando Valley residents are unfairly burdened with noise from Burbank Airport. He wants other surrounding cities to share the noise burden. He opposes adoption of the settlement agreement offered last fall.
The article states that residents in the southeast San Fernando Valley are continually bothered by noise from Burbank Airport. They complain that jets begin flying just after 6:00 A.M., even though the airport voluntarily agreed to not begin until 7:00 A.M. Mr. Lucente believes that the noise has become more severe because the cities of Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena refuse to share the airport "noise burden." He is opposed to construction of the new airline terminal at the airport, and also disagrees with the Los Angeles Times recent editorial that stated "the settlement agreement Burbank officials offered last fall should be quickly adopted so that airport passengers can have more conveniences at a new airport terminal." ("An Endless Holding Pattern," Valley editorial, Feb. 27).
The article states that Lucente argues that residents affected by the airport noise must close their doors and windows, stay inside, lose sleep, and shorten telephone conversations because of the noise. He believes that the inconveniences that they suffer are not worth the conveniences offered by a new airport terminal, such as more seating and coffee shops. He says that "the settlement would mandate the same number of gates--but with its ban on eastbound departures and lack of meaningful noise mitigations, it would also mandate the same flight patterns, with at least 90% of flights and noise routed over southeast Valley communities like Studio City."
The article reports that Lucente's group would be in favor of the new terminal if the other surrounding cities would agree to share the noise burden with the residents of the southeast San Fernando Valley.
PUBLICATION: Daily Telegraph
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 02
BYLINE: Lois Jones
DATELINE: London, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Richard Buxton, attorney for Heathrow Association for Control of Aircraft Noise
The Daily Telegraph reported that flying into Heathrow airport at night could be a violation of one's right to undisturbed sleep, and a test case on "unacceptable night noise" affecting a million people will heard in the European Court of Human Rights in April of 2000. Plaintiffs are asking the court to cut back night flights to before 1993 levels.
The article said that some English towns such as Manchester have a policy limiting the number of night flights, some airports in England have no controls, and on the continent, limits are not strict. Frankfurt allows up to 500 flights a night are allowed, and Amsterdam up to 34. DeGaulle Airport in France has no limits.
The article said that the Government is expected to argue that the flights are necessary, and that Heathrow is a major and an important factor in the national economy.
But Hacan spokesman John Stewart says defense and economics are weak arguments. While the number of people disturbed by the night flights might not have that same impact on the national economy, the impact has still caused people to move because of the noise, or have had their families adversely affected because of it. The article quotes a scientist's warning that jet noise can do more than just interrupt sleep: " Noise leads to annoyance, which leads to stress, which in turn affects performance, the immune system, the physiological system, cortisone levels and the heart.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Asheville, North Carolina
An article from the Associated Press reported that an anti-abortion protester was cited for violating a local noise ordinance because he was yelling.
A local group protesting a women's health clinic claims that he was not violating anything, but police ticketed the loud protester because he violated a noise ordinance. The citation, according to the report, reads that the man "created an 'unreasonable, loud, disturbing, unnecessary noise.'"
The case will be heard in night court.
PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Journal
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: Metro & New Mexico; Pg. E1
BYLINE: Michael Turnbell
DATELINE: Albuquerque, New Mexico
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: San Francisco environmental attorney Clem Shute; air traffic control expert Charles Aalfs; Airport Neighbor Alliance
The Albuquerque Journal reported that Airport Neighbors Alliance, a grassroots campaign against jet noise, received the help of two national noise experts to help them challenge jet noise from the Albuquerque International Sunport.
According to the article, San Francisco environmental attorney Clem Shute and air traffic control expert Charles Aalfs are working with the Airport Neighbors Alliance to get airport officials to adopt noise and safety standards similar to other airports in the country.
The article said that Shute is the lawyer for El Segundo, California, which is fighting the expansion plan at Los Angeles International Airport. In addition, the article said, he won a settlement against John Wayne Airport in Newport Beach, California, believed to be the most significant fine imposed on any airport in the nation.
The article said that Aalfs developed noise reduction measures at two Los Angeles-area airports.
The article went on to say that according to Shute, officials must have permanent noise monitors to determine whether noise is a problem so that victims can inform airport officials.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: International News
DATELINE: Eglin Air Force Base, Florida
An article from the Associated Press reported on a live bombing exercise on Eglin Air Force Base in the Florida Panhandle--that was moved from Puerto Rico because of complaints against the Navy's use of the island for the bombing.
According to the article, the Navy dropped 62 tons of bombs during war games that are expected to continue through the weekend, disturbing people and their pets as near as 6 miles from the range.
The article said that a bomb killed a civilian security guard, prompting the protest.
The article says the Navy claims that Puerto Rico has "ranges that cannot be duplicated anywhere else," so training exercises will continue there.
The Navy also claims that noise and safety restrictions compromise their ability to prepare people for combat.
PUBLICATION: Asheville Citizen-Times
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: Local; Pg. B1
BYLINE: Susan Dryman
DATELINE: Ashville, North Carolina
An article in the Asheville Citizen-Times that protesters who yelled at an employee of a women's health clinic were ticketed by police for "unreasonable, loud, disturbing, unnecessary noise."
According to the article, Meredith Hunt the executive director of Life Advocates of Asheville wants protestors to " project" in order to be heard.
The article said that after being yelled at by a protester, the employee called police, asking them to write a ticket for violating a noise ordinance.
Hunt called for an objective measuring of noise, but City Attorney Bob Oast responded that historically, such measures have not been necessary.
PUBLICATION: Courier-Journal
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: News Pg.01a
BYLINE: Gregory A. Hall
DATELINE: Utica, Kentucky
The Courier-Journal reported that a Louisville company wants to build a barge-unloading site in the Indiana bank of the Ohio River, but environmental group River Fields objects because noise from unloading barges threaten the historic district on the Kentucky side, which is on the National Register of Historic Places.
According to the article, Utica Town Council president thinks the project could be a source for future jobs for the small riverfront damaged by the 1997 flood, and the group's objection angers him.
The article went on to say that River Fields Executive Director Meme Sweets Runyon claims the group has concerns about the project and has a right to state them.
The article said that the Kentucky Heritage President, the state's historic preservation officer, agreed with River Fields, and called for more review of the impact citing the 500-foot-wide channel could cause the district to lose its listing in the National Register.
The article said the company wants to build the barge-unloading site because Indiana customers fight Interstate 65 traffic. The company would ship sand to Utica, where it would be loaded on a conveyer belt next to a sandpit filled with water.
The article said that River Fields asked the Army Corps of Engineers (who will do the work) to hold a public meeting so everyone's views can be heard.
The article added that the group voiced other concerns than noise, including the impact on boaters and unchecked growth.
PUBLICATION: Herald
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 11
DATELINE: Fife, Scotland
The Glasgow Herald reported that the British government promised to review soundproofing "arrangements" for residences around the UK's most northerly fighter base, Leuchars in Fife.
The article said that residents near the base are worried that three squadrons of the military plane Eurofighter would result in increased noise.
According to the article, Secretary of Defence Geoff Hoon said the government will review the soundproofing within six to 12 months before the Eurofighter is "fully deployed at RAF Leuchars."
The article went on to explain that Hoon promised the Ministry of Defense would compensate residents impacted the most by jet noise from military bases in the UK through the "Noise Insulation Grants Scheme (NIGS)."
PUBLICATION: London Free Press
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: Editorial/Opinion, Pg. F3, Letters To The Editor
BYLINE: Bruce Dunn
DATELINE: London, England
The London Free Press printed an op-ed challenging a recent column that criticized city officials for changing noise rules at outdoor concerts because of complaints.
The editorial commented that the noise from a recent concert was so loud indoors that musicians could not hear to tune their instruments. The editorial added that 90 dB (decibels) is the limit for an outdoor concert (measured 100 feet from the source), meaning that the noise is 130 dB coming from the speakers.
The editorial went on to say that people attending indoor concerts where sound is contained can decide for themselves whether or not to expose themselves to loud noise, but that residents adjacent to Harris Park (concert site) do not.
The editorial concluded with support of the City Council's decision to strike a "balance between the desires of the park users and the rights of the nearby residents."
PUBLICATION: The Press
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: News; National; Pg. 4; Regional News
BYLINE: John Keast
DATELINE: Fairlie, New Zealand
The Press reported on the success one Fairlee man experienced in his determination to regain the peace and quiet of his tranquil home. He complained to the right people and got results in one week.
The article went on to explain that Carl Olsson hand endured several days of noise from 7am to 7:30 pm and on a Thursday demanded the company, Road Metals, cease operations. When the company refused, Olsson took action.
The article said that on the following Monday Olsson, an older man with health problems, complained to top political officials, including a Mackenzie council member and mayor, stating the company Road Metals was uncooperative, saying they had consent from the Canterbury Regional Council.
The article said that the political officials contacted the regional council, but still no action was taken so Olsson called the officials back on Wednesday, this time asking for a visit from the "noise control officer." The article said the noise was so loud, the ground vibrated.
According to the article, a local council member contacted the company and warned company officials that the council would issue a noise abatement notice. On Thursday, the manager of Road Metals visited the Olssons and booked them into a motel so they could get some rest.
PUBLICATION: Press Association Newswire
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: Home News
BYLINE: Amanda Brown
DATELINE: Tower Hamlets, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Trees for London, Cory Environmental, Tower Hamlets Council
An article from the Press Association Newsfile reported on a local effort by residents and environmental group Trees for London to fight noise and fumes from a major highway, the A102(M).
The article said that Trees for London, a local town council, residents and schoolchildren will design and plant a thick "woodland belt" along the heavily-traveled highway.
The article, citing government statistics on the number of premature deaths due to pollution, explained how the trees would form a canopy to as a filter for fumes, which would be trapped on the leaves and absorbing carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide.
In addition, the article emphasizes that the canopy of trees would also reduce noise levels "as much as 8 decibels for every 30 metres' width of woodland belt."
The article went on to say that the project will include pathways, places to sit down and take in the beauty.
The article quoted Graham Simmonds of Trees for London: "We try to involve as many local people as possible, young and old, in our projects and we feel that it is the key to their success. Our past projects are living proof that our approach works."
The article said that the another environmental group, Cory Environmental, (concerned with transportation in London) is also collaborating on the effort.
PUBLICATION: San Diego Union Tribune
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: Opinion;Pg. B-9:7; B-15:1; B-11:2
DATELINE: San Diego area, California
The San Diego Union Tribune printed letters to the editor regarding Miramar military base as a choice for an international airport. The letters are printed in their entirety.
"Airport is: a) needed, b) not needed, c) not here
Re: "Nowhere to land in Southern California" (Opinion, March 20):
James Goldsborough's fine column made me wonder again how anyone can question that Miramar is the obvious and best choice for a major, international aviation facility.
Rep. Duncan Hunter's notion that converting the facility to civilian use would jeopardize military preparedness is laughable. More to the point, it raises the obvious question of joint military-civilian use, a question no one seems to want to address, the examples of Denver, St. Louis, and Albuquerque notwithstanding.
Even so, it strikes me that the major issue obstructing the "Miramar solution" is La Jolla, no? Flight patterns being what they are, the "town fathers and mothers" of La Jolla have set their faces against this. That being the case, we have a powerful political problem of the "haves" confronting the "have-nots" on a dramatic issue of local development. It gives NIMBYism a whole new meaning.
At any rate, it was refreshing to read some clear-minded thoughts on the airport issue." MICHAEL BERNSTEIN University Heights
"I live in Poway, not far from the arrival end of the main runways at Miramar. Most folks here don't want anything to do with a commercial airport nearby, but I don't think they've really thought the matter through.
The powers that be always have failed miserably in creating a PR campaign that would sway naysayers. And public support would more quickly force government action.
These issues should be addressed: [] Noise. New commercial jets are quieter than the F18s currently flying from Miramar. Moreover, the airport could adopt curfews and noise -abatement flight policies like John Wayne in Orange County. I rarely heard jet noise when the Navy was here, but I hear the F18s all the time. [] Frequency. Even in 20 years, I doubt that commercial traffic would match or exceed the 24-hour training traffic of the military. [] Safety. Far more military jets crash than commercial. Moreover, in an emergency pilots of commercial jets have a better opportunity to avoid something like a school or office building than do pilots in a military aircraft which fly like bricks after loss of power. [] Traffic. A commercial airport would require no more workers/commuters than Miramar does today. Moreover, a commercial airport could come with dedicated freeway ramps on I-805, state Route 52 and I-15, and therefore reduce traffic on those freeways. A commuter train could directly serve Miramar." MAURY WRIGHT Poway
"El Toro was the brainchild of George Argyros, Lido Island, Newport Beach. Before anyone had the time to think about it, Argyros had a pro-airport initiative on the ballot. It passed easily.
But it was evil. The motivation was not the future needs of the region, but to close John Wayne Airport so that Newport Beach could be spared the noise. Like most evil plots, the people caught on. And public support started to dwindle.
Now, Goldsborough is suggesting putting 24-hour-a-day commercial flights over people who successfully sued the Marines? Is he dreaming?
The easy solution is to convert a small parcel of land in Camp Pendleton at Las Pulgas Road into a new airport serving south Orange County and North County. It wouldn't disturb anyone, including the Marines. It's relatively flat, next to the freeway, and there's no housing to fly over.
The Marines won't cooperate? Just remember, they work for us. This is the bunch who recently built officers' housing on the beach just south of San Clemente. A full-sized airport would take up less than 3 percent of the base.
Finally, no one in North County can reach the gates of El Toro quicker than Lindbergh Field, even in morning rush hour traffic, which is equally bad in Orange County." RANDY LIEBER Carmel Valley
"Goldsborough will be doing a public service if he continues to remind the MARCH people and the others who keep moaning about Marine helicopters that within 10 to 15 years they will have succeeded in getting the military to leave Miramar.
They should drive to LAX and look around, because that's what Miramar will be like when the military turns the field over to civilian control. It will become the new master Southern California Gateway airport.
They will remember fondly the days when the military would sit down and talk, and agree to modify flight procedures, and they'll wish the civilian airlines and Federal Aviation Administration would do the same for the hundreds of jet aircraft that will be arriving and departing Miramar every day." W.G. MARTIN Coronado
"Goldsborough's discovery that Miramar is the only available space for a new civilian airport has long been obvious. But even if the Marines leave and a new airport is proposed, there still will be problems.
The Golden Triangle, for example, would become a good place for freight terminals and warehouses, and waterfront homes in La Jolla would sell for about $200,000. But maybe in a few years, some new form of government, with Goldsborough and his fellows in charge, will "relocate" the people to areas it deems more suitable." DICK LARSEN San Diego
"Goldsborough's idea that a new civilian airport be located at Miramar is based on the reasoning that voters of Orange County rejected El Toro as an airport site and that the proposed LAX expansion is stalled.
He ignores that not one major airline stated that there was a need for a larger airport. Most, if not all, have indicated even if they were given a larger airport, they would not increase the number of flights.
Goldsborough is unconcerned about placing the unneeded airport with its accompanying intolerable noise levels directly in the middle of a high-density area (people bought or built homes with the knowledge of occasional military flights, but never envisioned the hundreds of flights per day a commercial airport would generate). He ignores the likely total destruction of property values in Del Mar, La Jolla, Rancho Santa Fe, Scripps Ranch, Fairbanks Ranch and other communities.
What is important here is that a few politicians want a bigger airport for no other reason than to have one. The people of LA and Orange County have spoken. Goldsborough wants us to accept and absorb the problems they wisely rejected." NICK BERRY San Diego
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: News, Pg. 11
DATELINE: Cool Valley, Missouri
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported on a news conference where regional officials, clergy and neighbors of Lambert Field sharply criticized St. Louis city officials for dismissing their noise concerns regarding the construction of a new runway and other improvements.
According to the article, a Cool Valley Alderman accused St. Louis officials of breaking promises and continuing with the runway's expansion, expected to cost $2.6 billion.
The article says that Alderman Floyd Blackwell accused the city of not providing assistance to homeowners who are most vulnerable to airport noise--Cool Valley is under the flight path at Lambert Field.
The article said that residents want more "local control" of the airport, and bills to that effect are still in the state Legislature.
PUBLICATION: Washington Post
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: Real Estate; Pg. H01; Where We Live
BYLINE: Lois M. Baron
DATELINE: Arlington County, Virginia
The Washington Post reported on three neighborhoods in Arlington that were divided by Interstate 66 in 1982. Spokespeople from three civic associations in Bluemont, North Highlands and Arlington-East Falls Church commented on what the division has meant to their neighborhoods-an increase in noise and traffic as well as a determination to remain united.
The article explained that the associations are firm in their decision to collaborate as a "functioning unit" in order stave off the kind of growth that its neighbors in Fairfax county have experienced, and are opposing a proposal to widen the interstate.
According to the article, Arlington-East Falls Church is still active, and its members recently voted to oppose the widening of the interstate, with some people concerned about the drop in their property values.
The article explained that the interstate, at construction, was lower than the houses on either side of it [once built], so noise was directed up rather than toward neighborhoods. But other issues such as overflow traffic are emerging. The article said that what were once neighborhood streets are now "arterial" roads.
the article said that the Arlington County Civic Federation is an umbrella organization for the three civic associations, and members say they want the community united in any discussions or planning around widening the interstate, and its board has suggested using rail as a long-term solution instead of a "quick fix" like widening the interstate.
Most people agree, the article said, that whatever solution is proposed, it must balance the needs of both transportation and people.
PUBLICATION: Washington Post
DATE: March 25, 2000
SECTION: Metro; Pg. B02
BYLINE: Ann O'hanlon
DATELINE: Alexandria, Virginia
According to the Washington Post, the Alexandria City Council will vote to limit construction hours on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge, from 9am to 6pm on weekdays and 10am to 4pm on Saturdays. No construction is permitted on Sundays.
The article said the original construction hours were 7am-60pm on weekdays and 9am-6pm on Saturdays.
The article said that the restricted hours are only effective to the water's edge because Maryland and Washington D.C. also have jurisdiction over the river and have no noise restrictions.
The article explained that a spokesman for the bridge warns that a decrease in hours means an increase in the length of time it takes to complete the work, but Alexandria mayor Donley believes the impact will be minimal. Residents, however, are divided in their opinions about construction hours.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Farmington, Utah
Should swimming pools be closed on Sunday? An article from the Associated Press reported on such a dilemma in one town in Utah.
According to the article, Farmington City Council's vote to close a community pool on Sundays because of noise and traffic in deference to community values--church goers. The decision, the article said, prompted a protest from other community members and reminding officials that community values include all facets of the community, not a particular group.
The article said that 62 percent of the residents polled voted in favor of closing the pool on Sundays, not enough of a majority and leaving out a substantial number of taxpaying residents who were not in favor of closing the pool.
The article said that a few people who voted to close the pools gave noise and traffic as reasons, but most cited church services as the reason.
The article questioned the reasoning behind closing the pool for religious reasons without considering the views of people who had no conflict in "enjoying the afternoon at the pool with their families."
The article said one recommendation was to open the pool on Sunday with extended hours, which was done several years ago. At that time, the neighborhood experienced only three hours of noise and traffic, much less than its neighbors without extended hours on Sundays. The article posed this solution as a compromise between those who want quiet and those who want to enjoy the pool.
The article specifically praised one city councilman, Dave Connors, because he was the only council member to vote in favor of opening the pool on Sunday. According to the article, Connors is quoted as saying that a singularly religious-dominated community should "zealously guard the rights of those who might disagree with the majority," reminding us that while majority rules, Americans equally support equality for all people.
In an unrelated article, the Associated Press reported on the announcement from the National Park Service stating it prefers to listen to the thousands of comments in favor of preserving Yellowstone National Park rather than the continual roar of snowmobiles throughout the winter.
The article said that the NPS submitted a draft environmental impact statement last year stating that the preferred alternative would allow snowmobiling but opening up the most traveled route from West Yellowstone to Old Faithful to automobile traffic.
The article went on to say that after meeting with communities around Yellowstone, the NPS now wants to ban snowmobile use in Yellowstone entirely, an unpopular view for residents whose businesses rely on snowmobilers.
The article said the reason for the NPS's recent change is its own awareness of its mission to preserve the park, as well as a resounding response from about 35,000 people who opposed the earlier alternative. Those opposing the earlier alternative, the article said, included both environmentalists and snowmobilers--for snowmobilers, their favorite route would be closed and for environmentalists, noise and air pollution were left unresolved.
The article went on to explain that since they could not please either side, the NPS reverted to its mission to protect the park.
The article went on to explain that over a 30-year period, snowmobile traffic has increased to around 75,000 each winter--increasing pollution to levels above that of Los Angeles, and precluding any natural quiet and solitude because of the constant engine noise.
According to the article, park officials plan to allow snowcoaches, which are a kind of "oversnow mass transit motor vehicles," and reputed to decrease vehicle traffic by 90 percent.
The article said that park officials might consider the return of snowmobiles when "technology adequately addresses the air and noise -pollution problems they cause." The article added that park officials might not have allowed snowmobiles 30 years ago if they had known about the devastating impact they would have on the park's environment.
The article praised NPS officials for honoring their mission to preserve the park because they will soon be vilified by snowmobile advocates and political allies.
PUBLICATION: Albuquerque Tribune
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: Local News; Pg. A3
BYLINE: Kate Nash
DATELINE: Albuquerque, New Mexico
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Airport Neighbors Alliance; environmental attorney, E. Clement Shute; air-traffic-control specialist, Charles Aalfs
The Albuquerque Tribune reported that Jay Czar, head of the Albuquerque International Sunport is scheduled to interview four people for the newly created position of Noise Abatement Officer.
According to the article, the noise abatement officer will track and respond to noise complaints; head the Sunport Noise Committee, and supervise "a system of noise monitors expected to come online by the end of the year."
The article said that Albuquerque Mayor Jim Baca requested the position, paying for it by eliminating a different airport position.
The article went on to explain that noise from the airport is such a high-interest concern to neighbors of the airport that a community group, the Aiport Neighbors Alliance, hired environmental attorney, E. Clement Shute, and air-traffic-control specialist, Charles Aalfs, to work with them to fight airport noise.
PUBLICATION: Anchorage Daily News
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: Metro, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Elizabeth Manning; Daily News Reporter
DATELINE: Anchorage, Alaska
According to the Anchorage City News, four studies by Anchorage's international airport state that expanding the airport won't have much noise, air and traffic impact. {Editor's Note: One might conclude that a study sponsored by an airport might vastly differ from a study sponsored by advocates for noise abatement.]
The article said that the findings mean the airport will probably get a 10-year permit that will convert 265 acres of bog to multiple warehouse and cargo facilities, but the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will determine whether to issue the permit.
The article said that West Anchorage residents worry that expanding the airport will compromise the quality of life for its neighbors. In addition, the article said that some disagree with all of the studies, claiming that the increase in air traffic as a result of the expansion was "underestimated."
The article explained that the four studies all "assumed" the flow of air traffic is a steady 3 percent annual increase. The article went on to say that critics of the study wanted a variety of situations to analyze so people could make informed choices.
The article reported that the airport's noise manager, Maryellen Tuttell, called the four studies "conservative."
The article said that airport officials want a "blanket permit" so that they don't have to specify what they want to build each time.
The article said that the four studies discussed noise, traffic, air pollution and hydrology, the least controversial of the four. The hydrology study revealed that no homes would flood as a consequence of increased development on the wetlands.
The article explained how the noise issue was studied. Certain noises, such as the start of an airplane engine, would increase. To mitigate against that noise, the article suggested building a "buffer" on one side of the bog.
Tuttell said the airport is trying to be responsive to neighborhood concerns, but strife still exists.
PUBLICATION: Bangor Daily News
DATE: March 24, 2000
BYLINE: Tom Groening
DATELINE: Camden, Maine
According to the Bangor Daily News, residents in Camden, Maine will decide on whether to build a skateboard park for young people and where that site will be.
The article said that around 10 neighbors of the proposed site met to discuss the site of the proposed park, which they prefer is on the edge of town. However, MBNA New England (sponsors of the park) want the site to be close to downtown, on property it owns.
The article went on to say that the MBNA even offered to build a skate park and lease it to the town for $1 per year over five years. The motion passed the selectboard, but has not yet been signed.
MBNA officials researched both the design of the park and materials that would eliminate most noise. The article said that Masonite will cover jumps and ramps, with an insulated underside, resulting in a "deadening sound."
But Gross and other neighbors were still concerned about noise. The article said that other plans include a sound wall and shrubbery to absorb the sound.
The article said that skate parks produce noise associated with passing automobiles, but are quieter than the normal speaking voice in the home.
PUBLICATION: Derby Evening Telegraph
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: Transport: Motorways - M1, Pg.03
DATELINE: Long Eaton and Sandiacre, England
The Derby Evening Telegraph reported that in an announcement by transport minister Lord Macdonald, the British Parliament is poised to spend 1.5mƒ on noise mitigation for two English towns, Sawley and Sandiacre.
The article said that the Highways Agency is scheduled for a detailed analysis of existing noise levels, and officials plant o meet with Parliament and local officials for input.
The article went on to explain that the Highways Agency wants to involve citizens so they can be well-informed, express their concerns, and take part in deciding the kind of noise abatement measures to take. Among the considerations are natural sound barriers with trees and "low level noise road surfaces."
PUBLICATION: Evening Standard
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: Transport: Motorways - M1, Pg.01
DATELINE: Spondon, England
The London Evening Standard reported on a 760,000ƒ noise abatement grant from the Government to reduce road surface noise on a major highway, A52.
The article said that residents in the English town of Spondon have challenged road noise from thousands of trucks and automobiles that pass by their homes daily at levels of 72 - 80 decibels. Exposure to 90 decibels is dangerous. According to the article, grant monies will fund sound walls and road resurfacing, cutting the noise by half.
The article went on to explain that this funding is part of 20mƒ funding scheme for 80 noise mitigation projects throughout the country. The goals are to reduce noise pollution and air congestion as well as improve safety.
These projects, the article said, are part of an overall 280mƒ for transportation projects.
PUBLICATION: The Herald
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 4
DATELINE: Glasgow, Scotland
According to the Herald, a scientist studying Loch Ness in search of the lake's famous monster, Nessie, complained that jet noise was adversely affecting sensors beneath the water's surface and pilots were requested to avoid the lake while "the hunt is on."
PUBLICATION: Indianapolis Star
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: City State; Pg. D04
BYLINE: by Scott L. Miley
DATELINE: Indianapolis, Indiana
According to the Indianapolis Star, Indiana residents from Northeastside want the state highway department to build a noise barrier when they rebuild Interstate 465 this year, and sent a petition to the Indiana Department of Transportation.
The article said that a 1995 study showed 71,000 vehicles passed this neighborhood daily, and by 2020 nearly 86,000 vehicles are projected to pass through.
The article said the cost of the wall is around $1.6 million.
PUBLICATION: New York Times
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: Section B; Page 3; Column 2; Metropolitan Desk
BYLINE: Katherine E. Finkelstein
DATELINE: New York City
According to the New York Times, the incessant blaring of a State legislator's car alarm in TriBeCa angered residents because the police, in response to complaints, guarded the car rather than towed it. The noise lasted from morning until 7pm.
The article said that residents were more upset that the legislator received preferential treatment from the police, but did leave angry notes all over the vehicle. Evidently, three different shifts of police officers arrived to "watch the car" while the alarm continued.
PUBLICATION: Post and Courier
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: B, Pg. 3
BYLINE: Tony Bartelme
DATELINE: Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina
The Post and Courier reported that the State Ports Authority (SPA) plans to hire a noise expert to investigate ways to reduce noise during the expansion of the Wando Welch Terminal.
The article said that noise from engines and the stacking of containers are interfering with sleep, rattling windows in houses and frightening children. The article went on to explain that "the SPA added 17 acres of space to store empty containers at the terminal."
In response to repeated complaints from residents in nearby Hidden Cove, an agency spokesman stated that the now operating hours are restricted to 7am to 7pm, and officials have created a temporary noise barrier with containers stacked two high near the border of the terminal and the subdivision. The article added that residents complained only recently has the SPA responded to their concern, and it took playing a recording of the noise to a state legislative delegation to get results.
PUBLICATION: Tampa Tribune
DATE: March 24, 2000
SECTION: Nation/World, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Peter E. Howard
DATELINE: Tampa, Florida
The Tampa Tribune reported on construction noise beginning at 7am has prompted the City Council to propose a noise ordinance banning construction on both Saturday and Sunday morning until 10am, whether the work is professional or a "do it yourself" homeowner.
The article said that the proposed ordinance says that "avoidable and unreasonably loud, disturbing, or unnecessary noise caused by construction activities" is banned between 7 and 10am within 1,500 feet of any residence.
The article said the Tampa Homeowners, An Association of Neighborhoods, supports the proposed ordinance change.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: State And Regional
DATELINE: Bullhead City, Arizona
An article from the Associated Press reported that the Bullhead City Council recently passed a new noise ordinance that restricts people from playing loud radios, musical instruments, television sets or stereos in "a reckless manner." Emergency vehicles are responding to a call are exempt.
The article said that the defining factor in citing violations will be whether the noise is a public nuisance because it either annoys people, disrupts their sleep or "otherwise disturbing the peace."
Penalties carry fines of up to $2,500, a 180-day jail term, or a combination of both .
PUBLICATION: The Advocate
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: News; Pg. 2-B;S
BYLINE: Deann Smith
DATELINE: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
According to the Baton Rouge Advocate, the Metro City Council is enforcing an amended noise ordinance after much of it was declared unconstitutional in 1997.
The article said the amendments make illegal "any loud and raucous noise in the parish, which is offensive to the ordinary sensibilities of residents and interferes with residents' 'peace and comfort.'"
The article said the revised ordinance applies to a wide range of disturbances from shouting to horn honking. Work requiring heavy equipment, the article went on to say, is allowed from 7 a.m. to sunset in residential areas.
The article said that violators can expect to pay fines up to $500 or serve 30 days in jail.
The article said that the original ordinance used decibel levels at a specific distance to define violations, but was struck down as unconstitutional constitutional. Some city council members are uncertain about enforcement of the revised ordinance, but passed it anyway.
PUBLICATION: Birmingham Evening Mail
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: Pg. 35
BYLINE: Vicky Lissaman
DATELINE: Midland, England
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Simon Richmond of Save Elmdon Group
The Birmingham Evening Mail reported that a Midland city councilor asked for a public forum for residents to discuss Birmingham International Airport.
According to the article, council member Jim Ryan deferred a decision on plans to build a proposed maintenance hanger and office block at the airport's Elmdon site.
The article said that the council member did not believe residents had been apprised properly of expansion plans, nor were site surveys satisfactory.
The article went on to explain that around 150 residents living near Elmdon Terminal contacted the city council regarding the expansion.
The article said that residents are concerned about the level of noise at the cite, intended for up to 23 aircraft to be used 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
A spokesman for the neighborhood organization Save Elmdon Group supports the idea of a public forum, "We are very concerned about the impact of the airport on the environment so this would give us an opportunity to have on-going consultations, said Simon Richmond.
The article also said that officials for Birmingham International Airport are not warm to the idea of a public forum, but claim they are The article said that the council member did not believe residents had been apprised properly of expansion plans, nor were site surveys satisfactory. "interested to hear the views of local residents on the effectiveness of our consultative process and how it can be developed."
PUBLICATION: Nelson Mail
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: News; National; Pg. 3
BYLINE: Helen Murdoch
DATELINE: Nelson, New Zealand
The Nelson Mail reported that the New Zealand government says it won't monitor noise from the proposed widening of a bypass. It will, the article said, consider complaints on a case by case basis.
The article said that Transit New Zealand's application to widen a bypass near a residential area was deferred for a week after a two-day hearing. The delay, the article explained, gives all parties involved the opportunity to review the conditions of the agreement.
The article explained that Transit has existing noise levels in its guidelines, but residents are concerned that no monitoring process might make it difficult if future levels exceed Transit's own condition.
The article said that an acoustics researcher admitted that noise levels will increase around existing homes bordering the highway, but most will remain within Transit guidelines.
Plans do include noise reduction structures will be built around two homes and plans to buy another.
PUBLICATION: News Tribune
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: South King County; Pg. B1
BYLINE: Barbara Clements
DATELINE: Federal Way, Washington
According to the News Tribune reported that town officials in Washington state support a plan to reroute dozens of flights from Sea-Tac (Seattle-Tacoma) Airport, a plan which other cities do not support. flight paths.
The article said that the Port of Seattle and the Federal Aviation Administration briefed members of the Federal Way City Council on the Part 150 airport noise study and two alternative plans for flights leaving the airport, about 77 flights a day.
According to the article, the current plan, established in 1990, is that flights to Northern California, Pacific Ocean destinations, Asia and Alaska take off south from the airport turn right at South 320th Street in a narrow four-path pattern. This plan, the article said, was established in order not to scatter that many flights across King County.
The article said that one option is splitting some southbound flights to the east. The option the Federal Way officials like is routing the flights west immediately after takeoff, reducing the noise by about 50 percent in the city and missing Federal Way altogether.
The article said that a member of the citizens advisory council objected to the plan, claiming that it would increase the noise over Des Moines, Burien and Normandy Park, a change residents probably won't embrace no matter what the increase in noise is.
The article said that public hearings will begin in a month, and cities along the northern border are encouraged to work together before that time.
According to the article, the port is expected to make its recommendation on flight patterns to the FAA.
PUBLICATION: Ottawa Citizen
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: City; F5
BYLINE: Dyan Cross
DATELINE: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
The Ottawa Citizen printed this letter to the editor regarding jet noise over residential areas. The letter is printed in its entirety.
"Fed up with airplane noise? Call 248-2023
If you live in the west of Ottawa, you know about the barrage of airplanes roaring as they take off over your head at all hours of the night and day. There are noise limits for workplaces, but no decibel limits in Canada for aircraft noise over residential areas. There are concerns about air, soil and water pollution but not about noise pollution.
Planes can be as noisy as they want. And wind direction doesn't matter all that much. The primary Ottawa runway sends airplanes off over cow pasture. The supposedly secondary or "alternate" No. 32 North Runway sends planes off over west-end Ottawa. Planes using this runway are the most heavily loaded aircraft leaving the airport. They need the extra runway length to attain sufficient momentum to get airborne. Comforting thought, isn't it?
In addition, any pilot of any plane can request, and get, control tower permission to use this longer runway simply by saying it is needed for safety reasons. But certainly not for residents' safety. If the plane does go down, it will crash into the most densely populated area in the region. This will be called an accident.
Ottawa air traffic is projected to increase. Newer planes are quieter but they still create extreme noise over residential areas far from the airport. The Airport Authority is renovating the terminal building but not extending any runways away from the city. If you are fed-up with aircraft noise pollution, do not suffer in silence.
Every time a noisy plane takes off over your head, and the windows vibrate in your home, call 248-2023 to complain.
Every time you are outside, and a noisy plane brings conversation to a halt, call 248-2023 to complain.
The Airport Noise Information Line -- at 248-2023 -- is open 24-hours a day.
Your right to peace and quiet depends on using it. Let them know noisy planes are a pain in the (r)ear!"
Dyan Cross,
Ottawa
PUBLICATION: Post and Courier
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: Summerville, Pg. 5
BYLINE: Dora Ann Reaves
DATELINE: Summerville, South Carolina
The Post and Courier reported that a police officer, in pursuit of a vehicle with a loud stereo system, attempted to arrest the driver when he stopped his car, angering a crowd of people that had gathered.
The article said the driver was charged with noise violation and failure to stop and one man in the crowd was charged with interfering with a police officer.
PUBLICATION: Press
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: News; National; Pg. 2; In Brief
DATELINE: Taita, New Zealand
The Press reported that a New Zealand man sold his house and moved because the church next door was too noisy and adversely affecting his marriage.
PUBLICATION: South Wales Evening Post
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: Environment: Pollution, Pg.4
DATELINE: Swansea, South Wales
The South Wales Evening Post reported on plans by the Swansea Council to find a newer and faster noise complaint policy.
According to the article, the police will visit or call the person who made the complaint within the next work day in order to speed up the investigation process and reduce noise by 50 percent. A follow up visit is scheduled two weeks after the initial investigation in order to review progress.
PUBLICATION: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: West Post, Pg. 1
BYLINE: Sterling Levy
DATELINE: Creve Coeur, Missouri
According to the St. Louis Dispatch, residents of Creve Coeur want sound barriers around Interstate 270 among other requests to the city council as it reviews projects under the town's capital improvement plan.
The article said that approximately 50 officials and residents attended a public hearing on the projects under a five-year program the city council is expected to adopt.
The article said the public showed increasing interest in sound barriers grew in Creve Coeur since 1998.
The article said that the Missouri Department of Transportation revealed the results of a noise study in January, and while highway noise levels were above the acceptable level it was up to local governments to pay 80 percent of the cost.
Not all residents agree on the efficacy of sound barriers and one stated that potential home buyers would be warned off at the sight of a sound wall.
PUBLICATION: Virginian-Pilot
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: Local, Pg. B5, Road Warrior
BYLINE: Road Warrior
DATELINE: Virginia Beach, Virginia
The Virginian-Pilot printed this letter to the editor regarding noise walls around interstates. The letter and its response are both in their entirety.
"Hey, Road: Do you know if there are any plans to build more sound walls along 44/264? I am thinking in particular of the stretch adjacent to Mount Trashmore. It sure would make the park more pleasant and peaceful.
Gus Giesekoch
Virginia Beach
Dear Gus: The state has spoken on this issue. There's lots of development around the interstates - some that came before the big roads, and some that came after - and the State Transportation Board doesn't want to get into the business of building pricey noise walls.
The feds are more into sound walls. If a highway project involves federal money, the feds dictate certain noise levels that can't be exceeded. If the noise levels are too high, up go the walls.
Many I-264 projects over the past few years have been done with state money. Hence, no sound walls."
PUBLICATION: Washington Post
DATE: March 23, 2000
SECTION: Loudoun Extra; Pg. V07
BYLINE: Graeme Zielinski
DATELINE: Hume, Virginia
The Washington Post reported on a public hearing regarding the Oasis Winery, in Hume and its increased noise level.
The article said that many residents in the crowded meeting want a new special exception permit "that would impose 26 conditions on the winery, including a 60-decibel limit on noise and a ban on most amplified music."
The article said that the winery is currently in violation of its permit because the size and scope of its event have exceeded the limits of the permit.
The article said that some neighbors, though, fear the restrictions might doom the winery, established in 1970s, and sales have dropped 25 percent since noise and music restrictions were established in 1998.
The article said that actions were delayed until zoning officials and residents meet again with winery officials. Until that time, the winery can continue to operate.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: State And Regional
BYLINE: by Christy Chalmers
DATELINE: Gardnerville, Nevada
An article by the Associated Press reported that when the Minden-Tahoe Airport Advisory Board called for a review of the airport's weight limit for aircraft, the airport's neighbors became suspicious that the board planned to expand the airport and increase air traffic.
The article said that airport officials received instructions to "enhance the facility's self-sufficiency," so they agreed to collect fees and taxes for planes based at the airport or solicit more aviation-related business.
The article said that the current "voter-imposed" weight limit is 50,000 pounds for multi-wheeled planes, and lower for other types of aircraft. The article said the purpose of the weight limit was to reduce noise, pollution and other impacts associated with larger planes.
According to the article, members of the advisory board wanted to review the weight limits because "larger planes aren't necessarily the noisiest," but perhaps more importantly that aviation promoters claimed the airport was losing revenue from larger planes [which violate the reason the limits were set--to avoid those impacts].
The article explained that despite residents' vociferous opposition, the board decided it needed a long-term business plan.
The article said that some residents are concerned because bigger planes might mean more noise and increased danger for neighborhoods within the airport's flight paths.
According to the article, airport officials are holding meetings on "friendly flying," which means voluntary compliance, or asking pilots not to fly directly over neighborhoods.
The article said that residents also complained that airport officials were not taking their concerns seriously.
PUBLICATION: Daily Oklahoman
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: News;
BYLINE: Steve Lackmeyer
DATELINE: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
According to the Daily Oklahoman, an Oklahoma City councilwoman's fight against noise prompted other council members to delay any change in the city's noise ordinance because they are worried that inner-city development may suffer because of it.
The article said that residents in one area endure loud music at night from a bar because the current noise ordinance requires monitoring equipment to measure the decibel level. City Councilwoman Amy Brooks wants to modify the ordinance to permit the police to respond if the music is audible 30 feet outside the bar's entrance.
The ordinance is aimed at restaurants that double as live music clubs at night and that were established before zoning rules that don't allow clubs next to neighborhoods.
PUBLICATION: Des Moines Register
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: Metro Iowa Pg.2
BYLINE: Dana Boone
DATELINE: Des Moines, Iowa
The Des Moines Register reported that local residents want to impose a decrease in the number of motorcycle and classic car events at a local diner because of the noise activity.
According to the article, almost 35 neighbors of Porky's Diner signed a petition calling for the City Council to reduce noise from the events. The council asked that the diner's owner and concerned residents meet to work through their differences.
The article went on to say that one resident complained that his family is "overwhelmed" by loud music and the noise from "motorcycle night" and want the Diner's noise permit removed.
The owner of the diner is quoted as saying he had already decided to reduce the number of events, and promised the diner would no longer play loud music outside.
Still, the article said, residents complained that their only available solution is to barricade themselves in their own homes, turn on the air conditioner and turn up the television. Or leave.
One city councilman monitored the activities, and is quoted as saying that most of the noise happens after the bikers leave the diner and rev their engines farther down the road, and therefore the diner is not liable.
PUBLICATION: Jupiter Courier
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: A Section; Pg. A1
BYLINE: Kevin Hemstock
DATELINE: Jupiter Farms, Florida
According to the Jupiter Courier, around 150 local residents met as a group with representatives of Walgreens to discuss their concerns about a planned 650,000-square-foot distribution center at the Palm Beach Park of Commerce. The article said residents asked questions about noise, lighting and traffic.
The article said that Walgreens informed the group, Jupiter Farms Residents, that the company would not make any changes that would delay construction and that officials were meeting with the group as a courtesy.
The distribution center is a permitted use and was reviewed by the county Development Review Committee and certified by the county.
The article explained that the back of the facility is around 600 feet from residential homes. Residents are concerned because the center will operate 24 hours a day, receiving and transporting about 30-40 trucks daily.
The article said that light poles would be 30 feet tall with no light spillage. Truckers won't run their trucks while waiting unless they run their air conditioners. They won't, though, sound the reverse beep and there will be no outside pager system. In addition, most of the activity will be from 6 a.m. to 3 p.m. with a smaller night shift, with a potential weekend shift down the line.
According to the article, the increase in traffic will necessitate turn lanes in two intersections, and will have two gas of 6,000 and 4000 gas tanks above the ground (with no test well for monitoring the impact on the water table).
The article said a berm is planned for the Walgreens side of the building, but company officials might landscape more later, and county officials are willing to work with the company to determine the best natural buffer for noise reduction.
The article said residents are upset that the company won't consider changing the design of the construction in order to accommodate the people who lived there because they wanted to be away from noise.
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Zones Desk
BYLINE: Zanto Peabody
DATELINE: Hidden Hills, California
The Los Angeles Times reported on a construction project that is the source of problems for an elementary school because of gas fumes and excessive noise during school hours. Because the developer had a permit and was not in violation, local officials claim they cannot do anything.
The article said that a county district mediated an agreement between the school and the developer, but emphasized it was outside the county's authority to "clamp down" on the developer.
PUBLICATION: Omaha World-Herald
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: News; Pg. 15
BYLINE: Jeffrey Robb
DATELINE: Papillion, Nebraska
The Omaha World-Herald reported that to ensure the peace and tranquility of the town, the Papillion City Council will impose a new noise ordinance that will crack down on loud noises, boom cars in particular.
The article said the new noise ordinance applies to 11 categories of sonic boom sources including " horns, late night and early morning construction, animals and drums."
The article went on to explain that car stereos clearly audible from a distance of 50 feet are in violation, as are "public yelling, shouting, hooting, whistling or singing" so disruptive that it bothers people nearby. The fine? Up to three months jail time and a $500 fine.
The article said that the old ordinance had no enforcement power but that the new one makes it possible for the police to act.
PUBLICATION: San Jose Mercury News
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: State And Regional News
BYLINE: Alan Gathright
DATELINE: San Jose, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Neighbors Against San Carlos Airport Noise
The San Jose Mercury News reported that San Mateo County officials delayed a ban on night flights at San Carlos Airport because they could lose federal funding and anger pilots, but did ask pilots for voluntary compliance until November.
The article said the FAA objects because the "touch-and-go" landings are training exercises, and warned it could reclaim $3.6 million in grants and $8.2 million in the future for runway expansion and hangar construction.
The article said that neighbors of the airport have lodged noise complaints, prompting officials to propose a ban, but they were warned that that any action prior to an environmental review could lead to a lawsuit from pilots flight school operators.
A 1,500-member neighborhood association, Neighbors Against San Carlos Airport Noise, chided officials for backing down, adding that noise studies are done all the time without an environmental review first.
The article said that a spokesman for the pilots association informed the council members that some pilots have already agreed to noise but wouldn't comment on tougher restrictions until after a board meeting in April.
PUBLICATION: San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: MARCH 22, 2000
SECTION: News; Pg. A15
BYLINE: Pamela J. Podger
DATELINE: Sonoma County, California
The San Francisco Chronicle reported that Sonoma County officials unanimously approved the expansion of the Sears Point Raceway despite concerns of neighbors about traffic, noise and crowds.
The article said that the racetrack presents a popular NASCAR race that brings about 115,000 spectators that jam the areas winding roads almost to a standstill.
The article said proponents like the fame and extra revenue people spend on hotels, businesses and restaurants. Opponents, however, are considering lawsuits over the monitoring of attendance and noise levels, and are disappointed with the decision even though they played a recording of the noise level from the track.
The article said that a spokesman for the group Yellow Flag Alliance accuse county officials of bowing to political pressure and campaign contributions.
The article said Speedway Motorsports of North Carolina owns the racetrack.
PUBLICATION: Star Tribune
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: News; Pg. 3B
BYLINE: Mark Brunswick
DATELINE: Twin Cities area, Minnesota
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Preserve Our Environment
According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the grassroots group Preserve Our Environment will take its case against a local amphitheater to the state's Supreme Court.
The article said that the group lost its case in the Minnesota court of Appeals in its attempt to stop construction of an outdoor amphitheater in Brooklyn Park.
The article said the group finds fault with noise studies conducted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency findings. The article said the group claims that no evidence supports the findings, and the agency had no authority to grant the noise variance.
The article said that the Minnesota Orchestra plans to build an outdoor amphitheater that will hold 19,000 people. In addition to the noise variance, granted by the Court of Appeals, the Brooklyn Park City gave the orchestra one more year to build the amphitheater. An attorney for the environmental group said the group plans to appeal whether or not construction begins.
The article said that four sites are being considered for the site in the Twin Cities Area, with each site in a different phase of the permit process. North Brooklyn Park was granted a state noise variance in September and scheduled for opening in 2002; Ogden Entertainment and Q Prime are also undergoing environmental reviews; Burnsville has received the go ahead from the city but still has to address transportation and environmental concerns.
PUBLICATION: The Straits Times (Singapore)
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: Home; Pg. 54
BYLINE: Pauline Leong
DATELINE: Singapore
According to the Straits Times of Singapore, Tan Tock Seng Hospital has installed a machine that warns to be quieter when a certain decibel is reached.
The article said that warnings are in English and Mandarin, and so far it has a high success rate.
The article said that two biomedical engineers designed the machine, and the hospital has saved about $4,000 because it doesn't have to have a security guard monitor the noise anymore. Other state-of-the-art inventions at the hospital include an automated trolley cart that delivers linens and supplies and a smoke curtain that prevents the spread of smoke in case of fire.
PUBLICATION: Washington Times
DATE: March 22, 2000
SECTION: Part C; Metropolitan; Virginia; Pg. C1
BYLINE: Stephen Dinan
DATELINE: Alexandria, Virginia
The Washington Times reported that Alexandria residents will soon experience the inordinately loud sound of pile driving as work crews begin construction on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge.
According to the article, work crews will begin with a test project where workers will drive piles into the ground at Jones Point Park, a sound as loud as jets flying overhead and repeating 60 to 100 times a minute.
The article went on to say that the pile driving will continue over a nine-week period at Jones Point and two other sites in the Potomac River.
The article said that bridge officials promised "to address noise concerns" and respond to residents' concerns.
The article said that Old Town residents received pamphlets from project officials apprising them of the construction, and volunteering to meet with residents' associations. In addition, the noise levels will be monitored in order for officials to determine the best way to reduce the noise once the project is in full construction.
The article said that, the pile driving was scheduled for 7:00 am originally, but that means workers begin at 6:00 am. The city council must decide whether to accept that time or move the time to 9:00 am. Officials warned council members that by starting that late, the project will take about 20 percent longer to complete. So, while residents may not be disturbed early in the morning, they will endure the noise longer.
The article said that noise from a pile driver at 50 feet is approximately 104 decibels, or similar to an indoor rock concert; at 500 feet (or about a city block), the noise is 90 decibels, or similar to a food blender three feet away; at 1,500 feet, the noise is 70 decibels, or similar to a lawnmower at 100 feet.
The article said the city council will decide soon on the time of to begin construction.
PUBLICATION: Associated Press
DATE: March 21, 2000
SECTION: International News
BYLINE: Jessica Robertson
DATELINE: Freeport, Bahamas
According to an article by the Associated Press, the US Navy is under investigation because of the death of eight beached whales shortly after Navy sonar exercise in the northern Bahamas and an environmental group is calling for an end to the testing.
The article said that a Navy P-3 plane dropped buoys that emitted sonar signal each received by the other, while a submarine traveled between them. The controversial exercise involved low frequency active sonar, with sonar pulses as loud as the roar of a rocket launch.
The article said the Navy is denying any connection to the animals' deaths, but Ken Balcomb, a marine biologist and member of Earthwatch, stated that the beachings occurred the same day the tests began, and in two days 14 whales had grounded themselves. After eight died, both Bahamian and U.S. scientists and authorities called for an investigation. "A whale beaching in the Bahamas is a once-in-a-decade occurrence," said Balcomb.
The article went on to say that Naomi Rose of the Humane Society of the United States [based in D.C.] emphasized that sonar can damage marine life, stating that the whales left the area where the sonar was being transmitted.
The article said that a second marine biologist, Charles Potter of the Smithsonian Institute, commented that "the number of whales beached is extremely unusual."
According to the article, the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service, which oversees all U.S. actions that might impact the environment at home or abroad, approved the Navy's environmental review for the exercise, and has sent veterinarians and acoustic experts to investigate.
The article said that marine biologists have expressed increased concern over "man-made noises" on marine life that depends on hearing more than their sight.
PUBLICATION: Bath Chronicle
DATE: March 21, 2000
SECTION: News, Pg.5
BYLINE: Harriet Arkell
DATELINE: Bath, England
The Bath Chronicle reported that several senior citizens have complained to their local environmental health officers about loud early morning noises from trucks at the Gammon Plant. According to the article, they have made several attempts to speak with the plant's owner, to no avail.
The article said that trucks load trash and debris from the plant yard beginning at 7 am every day. When trucks began to load at 6am, residents organized and appointed a spokesperson, who contacted the environmental health officer, but not before the spokesperson, a 77-year-old-woman confronted a truck driver in her nightgown and demanded to speak with the plant's owner.
The article said that residents enjoy one day of peace and quiet--Sunday.
The article went on to explain that the environmental health officer cannot act until he is certain the noise is a "nuisance," but because the trucks are performing work critical to the plant's operation, residents probably have little chance of getting it stopped.
The article said that so far, the article said, the plant's owner has not responded to the environmental health officer's calls. Residents have been asked to keep a noise diary and if they wish, he will take further action.
Mr Hill says he has been unable to speak to Mr Gammon, but will take further action if Mrs Todd and the other residents want him to and can provide a diary of the noise offences.
The article said the plant's owner was unavailable for comment.
PUBLICATION: Business Wire
DATE: March 21, 2000
DATELINE: Washington, D.C.
An article by Business Wire printed commentary by the Personal Watercraft Industry Association (PWIA) regarding the National Park Service's decision to allow some personal watercraft (pwc) use in selected parks while banning the watercraft in other parks.
The article said that the National Park Service (NPS) has been working on rules for pwc since 1996, and today's ruling by the NPS disappointed the personal watercraft industry.
The executive director of the PWIA, Larry Lambrose, released a statement saying the organization was "disappointed" that NPS listened to the "unsubstantiated views of a few extremist groups" who only want to restrict all recreational activities form the national parks. Lambrose indicated, though, that the organization will work with the parks where PWC are allowed.
The article said that Lambrose framed the problems with PWC in national parks as "yesterday's problems," because new technology has reduced sound and emissions by 50 percent, which puts the PWIA in compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency requirement of a 75% reduction in emissions by 2006.
The article went on to explain that the PWIA, " an affiliate of the National Marine Manufacturers Association and represents the four major PWC manufacturers: Bombardier Recreational Products; Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.; Polaris Industries Inc.; and Yamaha Motor Corp. U.S.A."
The article listed the myths held about pwc, explaining the facts behind the myths. The myths addressed the impacts of emissions and pollution on rivers, lakes and animals but did not discuss noise impacts.
PUBLICATION: Courier-Journal
DATE: March 21, 2000
SECTION: News Pg.01a
BYLINE: Grace Schneider
DATELINE: Little York, Indiana
The Courier-Journal reported that a proposed $1 million stockyard deal in Little York is a source of contention between cattlemen and some town residents who project a positive economic impact and other residents who fear that it will hinder residential development from a neighboring county.
The article said that developers claim that no matter where they build the stockyard, they will encounter opposition.
According to the article, Indiana livestock producers asked the farm bureau to step in last spring when the Bourbon Stock Yard closed, leaving them with the added expense of hauling their cattle longer distances.
The article said one of the first sites was in a small, unincorporated town, but residents took quick legal action and even approached state and local officials regarding the impact of noise, traffic and water pollution. Developers took their search to other sites, the article said.
The article said that a group of residents lodged allegations United Producers Inc., a farm cooperative based in Columbus, Ohio and the farm bureau pulled a "sleight of hand" move by concentrating on other towns while simultaneously attempting to buy 50 acres west of Little York.
The article said that a farm bureau spokesman claimed the bureau was not aware of any concerns from residents and neighbors of the proposed stockyard.
The article went on to explain that the two concerns cited by opponents from a previous proposed site were noise and pollution, which are the same concerns for Little York residents.
The article said that when developers were told that roads at the site are too narrow for tractor-trailer trucks, county commissioners said they'd consider improving the road if the business couldn't find a site on a state road--keeping in mind cost.
The report said that while negotiations are continuing, residents opposing the proposed site are concerned the proposal will be "fast-tracked," leaving them without the opportunity to ask questions and learn what the impact on the community will be--and the site is less than half a mile from Little York's limits.
The article said that according to a spokesperson for United Producers Inc., once the finances are complete, they'll buy the property and begin construction.
The article said supporters of the proposed stockyard believe it will reduce property taxes and bring people into the town.
PUBLICATION: Leicester Mercury
DATE: March 21, 2000
SECTION: News: Housing, Pg.2
DATELINE: Coalville, England
The Leicester Mercury reported that residents in this small town oppose a new warehouse because the building is a huge, ugly structure towers over their homes. They also state they were not informed of its significant size.
The article said that residents expressed concern over noise from the warehouse and construction that would take place seven days a week.
The article said that the head of Planning at the district council would investigate their claims that the building was built closer to a residential area than the department's allowance.
No officials from the company, Hormann UK Ltd, cared to comment.
PUBLICATION: Newsday
DATE: March 21, 2000
SECTION: News; Page A31
BYLINE: by Sorah Shapiro
DATELINE: Forest Hills and Glendale, New York
According to an article from Newsday, the new 24-hour Home Depot bordering Forest Hills and Glendale attracts so much vehicular traffic that its neighbors can no longer open their windows or get a good night's sleep.
The article compared the 120,000-square-foot cavernous giant of a store to Shea Stadium field, which is smaller. The other stores are located in largely industrial areas.
The article said that around 100 concerned neighbors and opponents confronted store officials, informing them the superstore compromised their quality of life and had a negative impact on local infrastructure. Chief among their complaints are noise, traffic, air pollution and declining property values. The article went on to say that residents are also worried that the construction of this store means open season on their town for other giant stores.
The article said the store was open a month before officials sent a spokesperson to "field community grievances" at the invitation of Barbara Stuchinski, president of the Forest Hills Community and Civic Alliance.
The store's message is, according to the article, the store's manager said "we're open 24 hours, and you'll just have to accept it." The store's attorney said their mission was to make money.
The article said that Home Depot officials refused to negotiate on limiting the hours of operation, but promised to review traffic patterns and "make adjustments." Although Home Depot will not relent on the hours the store is open.
The article said one local official, Assemblyman Michael Cohen emphasized that the store was built in spite of residents' opposition.
The article went on to explain that Home Depot's construction is in a category that doesn't need governmental approval to build, based on 40-year-old zoning codes, which Cohen vows to change through legislation.
The article added that even if the legislation passes, it won't have any impact on this giant store, only future ones.
PUBLICATION: Post and Courier
DATE: March 21, 2000
SECTION: B, Pg. 1
DATELINE: Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina
According to the Post and Courier, residents in a subdivision of Mt. Pleasant are angry at the State Ports Authority (SPA) over noise from the Wando Welch Terminal and the SPA's plans to expand the port.
After cutting down trees that could have served as a natural noise barriers, the SPA used giant cranes to stack containers seven high, causing people to lose sleep and resign themselves to turning up the television to "drown out the noise."
One resident, Margaret Cohen, recorded the noisy activity at the site and played it to state legislators in the Town Council chambers. The article said the noise was loud and made its point.
The article said her testimony at the special legislative panel underscored opponents' concerns that it will only get worse.
The article said that four hours were reserved so that residents could present expert after expert, claiming that the SPA's studies about the impact of the project were inadequate and called for the terminal to be scaled back.
The article explained that residents do not oppose the port of Charleston, but rather the inordinate size and scope of the project's expansion--1,300 acres on the tip of Daniel Island.
According to the article, the SPA is undergoing a complicated permit process and must submit an environmental impact statement (EIS).
The article said that noise studies are of special concern, and when reviewed by a professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at NC State University, they were "fundamentally flawed." Why?
According to the article, the SPA's noise analysis didn't factor in the varying frequencies generated by a large cargo terminal and their consultant used a simple and ineffective method to measure noise more suited to measure highway noise than the distinct, sharp noises of a cargo terminal.
When the engineering professor measured decibel levels at three locations diesel engines, cranes and the clear, sharp sounds of containers hitting the ground combined to a hazardous level.
In addition, the professor warned that reducing the noise level would not be easy because sound walls and berms must be higher than noise source, a bit tricky with the height of cranes and other equipment.
A consultant for Resource Systems Inc. warned that the project will cause a 25 percent increase in major air pollution, and added that traffic statistics were also skewed because they didn't count trips after transferring cargo in North Carolina.
The article said that opponents concluded their presentation by asking that legislators recommend that the SPA reduce the size of the terminal plan and construct highways and other infrastructure before building the terminal.
Previous week: March 12, 2000
Next week: March 26, 2000
Aircraft Noise
Amplified Noise
Effects on Wildlife/Animals
Construction Noise
Firing Ranges
Health Effects
Home Equipment and Appliances
Industrial/Manufacturing
International News
Environmental Justice
Land Use and Noise
Lawsuits
Civil Liberty Issues
Miscellaneous Noise Stories
Noise Ordinances
Noise Organizations Mentioned
Outdoor Events
Noise in Our National Parks/Natural Areas
Regulation
Residential and Community Noise
Snowmobile and ATV Noise
Research and Studies
Technological Solutions to Noise
Transportation Related Noise
Violence and Noise
Watercraft Noise
Workplace Noise
Chronological Index
Geographical Index