PUBLICATION: The Des Moines Register
DATE: June 9, 1997
SECTION: Sports Pg.1
BYLINE: Associated Press
DATELINE: Salt Lake City, Utah
The Des Moines Register reports that the National Basketball Association has ordered Utah to turn down the volume on the PA system at the Delta Center, but the basketball team the Utah Jazz are arguing against the restrictions, saying the players can't hear their introductions and the dancers can't hear their music.
According to the article, an NBA official recently sat among the stat crew during a game and measured the noise levels with a decibel meter. Jazz officials said the NBA official repeatedly asked them to turn down the volume on the PA system and threatened to send a security man to forcefully turn it down if they wouldn't.
The article goes on to report that guidelines of the league stipulate that music and public address announcements cannot exceed 95 decibels. (A jet at takeoff is 100 decibels.) But Jazz officials say that the crowd at the Delta Center often roared to the 110-120 decibel level, and drowned out the announcements. Jazz officials said with the restrictions, players couldn't hear their names being announced in pre-game introductions, and the Jazz Dancers could barely hear the music they were dancing to during time-outs.
Jazz officials complain they're being picked on, the article reports. Grant Harrison, the official in charge of promotions and game operations, said, "In big cities like New York and Chicago, they let the teams get away with anything they want. But when it comes to little Utah, they think they can push us around."
As a result of the controversy, a meeting was held Saturday between Jazz officials and NBA officials. Jazz officials say they are particularly upset because they believe the Delta Center is being singled out for extra enforcement. Harrison said that at recent games at the United Center, he got "blown out of my seat from their (public address) and music."
PUBLICATION: The Reuter European Community Report
DATE: June 10, 1997
DATELINE: Europe
The Reuter European Community Report released a press release which states that some members of the European Parlaiment are critical that the Commission has not been sufficiently diligent in tackling the noise problem in Europe.
According to the press release, the Parlaiment's environment committee has received a high level of complaints about noise problems, and noise has become the fifth greatest concern among European Union citizens. The press release says 70% of the population of European Union states suffer from noise levels at higher levels than those recommended by the World Health Organization, with the principal culprit being road traffic.
The press release says that Carmen Diez de Rivera Icaza (E, PES), a member of the environment committee, responded to a Commission Green Paper on the problem of noise by saying the Commission had not been sufficiently diligent in tackling the problem. Diez de Rivera Icaza said that the Fifth Action Programme in 1992 had set a series of target dates for noise reduction, but that programme had gone nowhere, and the Commission work programme in 1996 promised a set of actions which had been replaced by a "pathetic little Green Paper" which proposed a series of inadequate and non-binding measures. Diez de Rivera Icaza called on the Commission to "keep its word" and table legislation this year on ambient noise. Other speakers agreed with the comments, including Stylianos Argyros (Gr, EPP), a member of the Economic Affairs Committee, who said that at least ten years of programming and implementation was necessary. Anita Pollack (London South West, PES) also was concerned with noise issues, saying poor people and those living in run-down areas were the ones who suffer most from noise pollution. Pollack also endorsed a call for a ban on night flights, which, she said, would be welcome to the residents living near London's Heathrow Airport.
The press release goes on to say that Franz Fischler replied for the Commission (in the absence of Ritt Bjerregaard). He said that there has been some 175 responses to the Commission's communication, which shows there is widespread interest in taking action. Fischler said he believes it is important to formulate a policy that will have support at all levels of government, but said he was not in a position to indicate the kind of legislative action the Commission would be proposing.
PUBLICATION: Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.; FDCH Political Transcripts
DATE: June 12, 1997
DATELINE: Washington, D.C.
The Federal Document Clearing House Political Transcripts reports that the Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies, a subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, will hold a hearing on June 12, 1997 on air traffic controller staffing and other aviation issues. Members include U.S. Senators Richard Shelby (R-AL, Chair), Pete Domenici (R-NM), Arlen Specter (R-PA), Christopher Bond (R-MO), Slade Gorton (R-WA), Robert Bennett (R-UT), Lauch Faircloth (R-NC), R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), Robert Byrd (D-WV), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), and Harry Reid (D-NV).
PUBLICATION: The Palm Beach Post
DATE: June 12, 1997
SECTION: Local, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Eliot Kleinberg
DATELINE: Boca Raton, Florida
The Palm Beach Post reports that the Boca Raton (Florida) Airport Authority will vote today on whether to pay a developer several hundred thousand dollars to prevent future homeowners on a 78-acre parcel of land near the airport from suing about noise. The authority is considering purchasing the "avigation rights" for the land north of the Boca Raton Municipal Airport.
According to the article, the airport authority had earlier filed a condemnation suit on the land in an attempt to prevent homes from being built there. The authority had appraised the property at $4 million, but the owner appraised it at up to $10.9 million. After mediation talks stalled, the "avigation easement" option came up, according to Wiley Hicks, the attorney representing the property owner.
Under the proposed agreement, each deed for property in the land parcel would contain a stipulation that the airport has the right to generate noise by flying planes over the property. Both airport officials and the property owner Orchard View Development said the deal would be for several hundred thousand dollars. Airport director Nelson Rhodes said the airport has never purchased avigation rights before, but according to Spencer Dickerson, executive vice president of the American Association of Airport Executives, several municipal and large airports have used the option.
The article reports that the land parcel was previously purchased in 1986 by developer Anthony Pugliese and his partners, Yamato Associates. But the developers' Canadian lenders foreclosed after they stopped paying mortgage and property taxes. The article says that in June 1996, a jury awarded the lenders the 78 acres north of Spanish River Boulevard, but awarded Yamato Associates the 23 acres south of the road. Subsequently, the airport started the condemnation against the lenders, now called Orchard View Development.
PUBLICATION: Sarasota Herald-Tribune
DATE: June 11, 1997
SECTION: Local/State, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Gordon Russell
DATELINE: Sarasota, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Chuck Stender, president, Dolphin Towers Condominium Association
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports that the Sarasota (Florida) City Commission agreed Tuesday to leave a recently passed noise ordinance as it is for now, but to investigate whether it needs to be changed by first undertaking more noise tests. A controversy arose after two restaurant owners recently were fined for noise from outdoor music, and noise readings of the police differed from noise readings of the restaurant owners.
According to the article, Commissioners David Merrill and Nora Patterson said they believed the ordinance, which bans noise above 70 decibels, may be too broadly written. They noted that natural "ambient" noise downtown often is above that level. Commissioner Merrill made a motion to temporarily raise the permissible noise level to 76 decibels, but the motion failed on a 3-2 vote. However, commissioners did vote to re-hire noise consultant Ian Caddie to conduct more noise tests. After the new tests, commissioners said they will re-examine the ordinance, the article reports. Possible changes could include raising the permissible decibel level slightly, targeting outdoor music specifically, or coming up with an ordinance that addresses the city as a whole, not just downtown.
The article goes on to say that Sarasota police recently issued seven noise citations, four of them to two restaurants the Main Street Depot and three to Lemon Coast Grill. The restaurant's owners conducted their own noise tests and disputed the validity of the police's noise tests. Lemon Coast owner David Venafro told the commissioners Tuesday, "I think you should get more scientific data before you start messing with my livelihood. I am the only establishment in Sarasota County that has to turn my music off." And an attorney for the group Save Downtown Outdoor Music, Gina Terbrugge, said the new ordinance is "the most stringent noise ordinance anywhere in the country." She urged the commission to suspend the ordinance until the bugs are worked out, noting that repeat violators could face criminal charges. She said, "I'd hate to see musicians, business owners and patrons -- all residents and taxpayers -- be hurt when it's obvious we have more work to do."
However, the article says, some audience members and commissioners believed the ordinance should not be relaxed. Chuck Stender, president of the nearby Dolphin Towers Condominium Association, said, "Music that's got to be that loud and long and into the night ought to be indoors." After debate, commissioners Mollie Cardamone and Jerome Dupree and Mayor Gene Pillot said they were reluctant to change the ordinance that just went into effect.
PUBLICATION: London Times
DATE: June 10, 1997
SECTION: Home news
DATELINE: Great Britain
The London Times reports that a British company, Cambridge Concept, has produced an anti-noise device, nicknamed the jetoblaster, that is designed to cancel noise from jet engines. The device will undergo ground trials at London's Heathrow Airport, run jointly by Heathrow airport operator BAA, British Airways, and the Department of Trade. If the ground trials are successful, plans are to design a smaller unit to install on jets.
According to the article, the device works by cancelling out the sound waves created by a jet engine. Although the anti-noise theory on which the jetoblaster works has been known for some time, the article says, this is the first time the technology will be used to reduce noise within the engine itself. Anti-noise systems are already used to reduce cabin noise in airplanes. Mike Birchall, Heathrow's head of noise policy, said of the new technology: "We are constantly looking at new ways to minimize the impact of aircraft noise. If successful, this technology has some exciting possibilities and we are pleased to invest in the research."
PUBLICATION: The San Francisco Examiner
DATE: June 8, 1997
SECTION: Metro; Pg. D-4
BYLINE: Eve Mitchell
DATELINE: Atherton, California area
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Bob Huber, Atherton City Councillor; Nathaly Walker, Atherton resident
The San Francisco Examiner reports that residents in Atherton, California and other southern San Mateo County communities have started to complain more and more about noise from planes heading for the San Francisco International Airport. The article says that noise has intensified in the area because larger planes are now being used to serve more travelers, and because new FAA rules have required more airspace between flights, which has limited the number of approaches over San Francisco Bay to the airport.
According to the article, up to 40 jets a day use the route over Atherton. Typically, about three low-flying planes from Hawaii pass over Atherton, Portola Valley, and Woodside between 5 and 6 a.m. Another 16 flights, mostly from Hawaii and some from the South Pacific, fly over the same area between 8 and 10 p.m, according to Chuck Weinum, assistant manager for operations for the Federal Aviation Administration's Bay TRACON in Oakland, which directs Bay Area air traffic. The article says these flights represent just a few of the 900 major commercial jet flights that arrive and take off from the airport each day. The airport ranks seventh in the world in passenger volume and fifth in the United States.
The article goes on to say that north county cities have long experienced most of the noise from takeoffs at the airport. Residents on the mid-Peninsula tend to complain about noise associated with landing approaches, the article reports.
At a meeting a few weeks ago, more than 150 residents, mostly from Atherton, voiced their frustration over airport noise to airport officials. The noise is "changing the quality of life around here," according to Atherton City Councillor Bob Huber.
Nathaly Walker, an Atherton resident, said her family experiences noise from roaring jets several times each day. She said, "Lately, it becomes so loud my babies are wakened by the airplanes." She added that the noise makes it difficult to have a conversation inside, and impossible to have one outside.
Airport officials hope to provide noise insulation for homes, the article reports. About 2,500 north county residences have been insulated and another 2,000 are scheduled for the work, according to airport spokesperson Ron Wilson. But Atherton City Councillor Huber doesn't think that strategy will work for Atherton. "The people down here are not concerned about having the airport insulate our homes," said Huber. "We spend a lot of time outdoors."
The article goes on to say that Atherton residents led San Mateo County in airport noise complaints in February, with 220 complaints registered by 15 residents. The city of Pacifica ranked next, with 161 complaints from 28 people. Huber said Atherton residents would like to see incoming flights between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. go over the Bay as they have in the past. But Chuck Weinum of the FAA said the Bay flight path is already crowded with planes from the East Coast, the Pacific Northwest, Oakland, Europe, and Asia.
Meanwhile, the article reports, some Pacifica officials are worried that Atherton's protest over jet noise could be bad for their city. Pacifica City Councillor Barbara Carr said that the last time Atherton complained, the airport launched a 30-day test in 1995 to reroute early-morning Hawaii arrivals directly over Pacifica. The test was abandoned after two weeks because of complaints from angry Pacifica residents. According to airport spokesperson Ron Wilson, the test failed partly because pilots flew too low. Now, however, Pacifica Councillor Carr worries that a push by Atherton and other south county towns for voting positions on the advisory Airport / Community Roundtable will again result in increased flights over her city, the article says. The advisory roundtable makes recommendations on noise-reduction to the airport, which evaluates them and forwards them to the FAA for consideration. The panel includes representatives from nine northern San Mateo County cities, San Francisco, the Airports Commission, and San Mateo County, the article reports. Cities seeking inclusion on the panel are Atherton, Belmont, Half Moon Bay, Menlo Park, Portola Valley, Redwood City, San Mateo, and Woodside. The article says the roundtable will consider the matter July 2.
The article also says that the FAA, acting on a roundtable recommendation, will conduct a 60-day test that will raise the required altitude of planes arriving over Woodside from 6,000 to 7,000 feet.
PUBLICATION: The Florida Times-Union
DATE: June 11, 1997
SECTION: National/International; Pg. A-1
BYLINE: Dana Treen
DATELINE: St. Augustine, Florida
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Alan Parlapiano, resident
The Florida Times-Union reports that St. Johns County (Florida) Commissioners are considering a new beach code that would charge jet-skiers a $125 annual fee. The first of two public hearings on the proposed beach code was held last night, with both jet-skiers and opponents vocal in their views.
The article reports that Dave Williams, director of beach safety for the county, said jet-skiers are a growing safety issue. In 1993, he said, 21 warnings were issued to unsafe operators who violated regulations in areas of St. Johns County where the skis are allowed. In 1995, 398 warnings were issued, and that number has already been surpassed this year, he said. Alan Parlapiano, a resident in Crescent Beach, said, "It's noise pollution, it's air pollution, and it's dangerous. You're dealing with the front edge of an epidemic nationally."
The article goes on to say that St. Johns County modeled the new code after a similar one in Volusia County. Volusia County undertook a similar revision of its code in 1988 and is still dealing with the jet-ski problems. Kevin Sweat, operations chief of the Volusia County Beach Patrol, said, "It's a political nightmare. Residents hate them." The article says that in Volusia County, as in the proposed St. Johns code, there are stretches of beach designated as zones where jet-skis can be launched and used. This is successful in separating the skiers from the swimmers, surfers, and anglers, but it concentrates the noise on the residents who live inside the zones.
The article reports that county commissioners last night asked Recreation Director Leon Shimer to come back June 24 with two alternatives. One alternative would eliminate jet-ski zones but would require that all watercraft travel at an idle speed within 600 feet of shore. Commissioner Marc Jacalone, who proposed this alternative, said it would address safety issues and spread the jet-ski noise along the beach. Another alternative, the article explains, would be to work with the state and federal government to allow launch zones at Anastasia State Recreation Area and Fort Matanzas National Monument. Commissioner James Bryant said that under this alternative, jet-skiers would still have to operate 600 feet off St. Johns County shores, but the $125 registration fee could be eliminated because the county would not have to pay for personnel to deal with enforcement issues, inspections, and issue permits. Shimer responded that the fee, which is similar to Volusia County's $100 fee, was proposed partly to pay for administrative costs but also to discourage jet-skiers outside St. Johns to use the county's beaches. Shimer said, "We don't want them to get up here to get away from that fee."
PUBLICATION: The Denver Post
DATE: June 14, 1997
SECTION: Denver & The West; Pg. B-02
BYLINE: Angela Cortez
DATELINE: Arapahoe County, Colorado
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Joseph Ryan, president, United Citizens of Arapahoe Neighborhoods
The Denver Post reports that the president of a neighborhood organization in Arapahoe County, Colorado is fighting the expansion plans of the Centennial Airport. Joseph Ryan, president of United Citizens of Arapahoe Neighborhoods, said he has 5,000 signed petitions opposing expanding operations and expanding jet sizes at the airport. Ryan said, "We demand a noise study be done. We are mad as hell and we won't take it anymore. We want county commissioners to honor their campaign promises and stand by us."
According to the article, Ryan and Greenwood Village Councillor Clark Upton said some Arapahoe County commissioners now on the airport authority board had vowed opposition to any attempts allowing larger jets that could bring scheduled passenger service, large cargo service, and more noise to the airport.
Centennial Airport is a general aviation airport, which is not certified for aircraft that have more than 30 seats. Ryan said that the Centennial Airport Authority is considering the following proposals:
-- An increase in the weight limit for jets from 70,000 pounds to 75,000 pounds.
-- A change in the definition of the airport's weight limit from the amount an aircraft is legally certified to carry to the amount an aircraft is actually carrying.
-- Accommodations for a public charter to operate a charter broker service out of the airport.
-- An application by Ports of Call to base a modified Fokker F-28 jet at Centennial Airport.
In addition, residents and Greenwood Village officials are worried that UPS may build a warehouse that would border airport property. UPS officials have denied that they are thinking of running an air cargo operation at the airport, but some residents don't believe it, the article reports.
For now, Ryan's neighborhood group has little recourse aside from lobbying elected officials, the article says. A public hearing on the proposed changes at the airport will he held at 4 p.m. Thursday at the Holiday Inn, 7770 S. Peoria St.
PUBLICATION: The Mirror
DATE: June 12, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. 17
BYLINE: Mark Dowdney
DATELINE: Warendorf, Germany
The Mirror reports that a magistrate in Warendorf, Germany has asked a couple to make love so that officials can check how noisy they are, after complaints from neighbors about the noise levels. The article says the magistrate first asked the couple if they would move, but when they said they wouldn't, they agreed to have their noise levels monitored.
The article says that the complaints were issued by Kerstin Hoch and Ralf Aretz. They said their neighbors, Hannelore Richter and Klaus Conradi, "make as much noise as an express train." They went on to say, "We live above their flat and their screams and moans disturb us at all hours. Sometimes they play loud music as they have sex and shout obscene words."
PUBLICATION: The Buffalo News
DATE: June 11, 1997
SECTION: Local, Pg. 5B
BYLINE: Tom Ernst
DATELINE: Buffalo, New York
The Buffalo News reports that police in Buffalo, New York today announced a new system for ticketing noise violators that is expected to get quicker results. Starting Monday, police officers will write summonses for a variety of ordinance violations, including noise violations, and the cases will be handled in the Adjudication Bureau of City Hall. Previously, policy had to make arrests, and the cases went to City Court, the article says.
The article reports that according to Rocco Diina, first deputy police commissioner, "We're giving officers another tool, and it should be better for both the officers and citizens. This is something both the officers and residents have asked for." Diina added that noise violations will continue to receive a low priority when more serious calls are coming in, but police will keep a record of calls and will be able to make follow-up calls to addresses that have frequent complaints. Officers also will be able to issue summonses knowing that they won't be tied up for a long period, he said.
The article concludes by saying an initial noise violations carries a fine of $52.50, while a second offense is $75.
PUBLICATION: The Seattle Times
DATE: June 9, 1997
SECTION: South; Pg. B3; Sound Off
BYLINE: Laura Anderson, a Normandy Park resident
DATELINE: Seattle, Washington area
The Seattle Times printed the following letter-to-the-editor from Laura Anderson, a Normandy Park resident, about the noise from the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport that affects students in the Highline School District:
The Highline School District has 18,184 pupils in its learning facilities. Each school in the district is blanketed with jet noise from Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. These schools were built before the huge increase in air traffic that followed deregulation. Most were built before the second Sea-Tac runway. Few of the jobs generated by the airport are held by people in the community, and most travelers through the airport are from other communities. In fact, 90 percent of the benefits go to people outside the area. Should the schoolchildren, teachers and taxpayers of Highline bear the burdens of Sea-Tac's noise? Or should the traveling public and others who gain from the airport pay, through the Port of Seattle?
That is the question raised by the Port's negative comments about Highline School District's proposal for serious, independent studies of noise impacts in the schools, to be paid for from already available Port noise-remedy funds.
PUBLICATION: The San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: June 11, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. A17
BYLINE: Maria Alicia Gaura
DATELINE: San Jose, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: David Pandori, City Councillor; Rhawn Joseph, resident
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the San Jose (California) City Council voted 9-to-1 to approve an airport expansion plan last night that could more than double airline and cargo traffic by 2010, despite fierce opposition from downtown residents.
The article says that City Councillor David Pandori was the only councillor opposed to the plan, which he said did not offer enough protection for residents. In addition, Pandori claimed that key calculations in the plan's environmental impact report about noise levels and passenger capacity at the airport were inaccurate.
The article reports that the new airport master plan was the most ambitious of three alternatives presented to the council. However, before it was improved, Mayor Susan Hammer modified the plan in an attempt to soften the blow to angry residents. Hammer's amendments will reduce the cap on the maximum number of passenger gates from 49 to 40, compared to the current 31 gates; reduce the cap on the maximum additional terminal space from 650,000 square feet to 370,000 square feet; require homes most affected by aircraft noise to be soundproofed; require Highway 87 to be widened before contracts to build a new terminal, parking garage, or cargo facility are approved; and remove much of the older, noisier aircraft before construction contracts are let. Plans that were not changed by the mayor's amendments would allow the airport's air-cargo area to grow from 300,000 square feet to about 1.9 million square feet, and expand both runways to 11,000 feet.
The article says that hundreds of downtown residents protested the approval of the master plan, saying the extra air traffic would ruin their quality of life, lower their property values, and make them unhealthy with tons of extra pollution. Resident Rhawn Joseph said, "Instead of improving San Jose, this is going to create a huge ghetto. Because anyone who can afford to move will do so." The airport is less than three miles from downtown San Jose, and airplanes fly over many urban neighborhoods, the article says.
Meanwhile, the supporters of the expansion plan believe a larger airport will boost the economy and give an economic edge to high-technology companies in the Silicon Valley. City Manager Regina Williams, airport executives, airline workers, construction workers, and labor unions all supported the adoption of the biggest expansion plan, the article says. City Councillor Frank Fiscalini said, "The benefits of this project outweigh the significant, unavoidable impacts" of noise, pollution, and traffic congestion.
PUBLICATION: The Courier-Journal
DATE: June 10, 1997
SECTION: News Pg.02B
BYLINE: Bill Pike
DATELINE: Louisville, Kentucky
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Mary Rose Evans, president, Airport Neighbors' Alliance
The Courier-Journal reports that an airport noise consultant has been hired to work on ways to reduce the impact of aircraft noise from the Louisville (Kentucky) International Airport, and residents got a chance to meet him yesterday.
According to the article, the noise consultant is Walter Gillfillan, from Kensington, California. Gilfillan described himself as a "one-man consulting company," whose clients have included airports, community groups, and developers. He said, "I do interpretive work, not advocacy." Gilfillan also said he will re-examine, among other things, studies that based conclusions on an average noise level, instead of "single-event" occurrences affecting more homes. He also wants to determine whether more help is available for residents who have to live with the noise until the Regional Airport Authority buys their homes, which could be as long as 10 years.
Under Gilfillan's agreement with the city, he will receive $35,000 in an open-ended contract with the Board of Aldermen that could be extended for several years. Greg Handy, chair of an aldermanic airport analysis committee, said hiring the consultant is "just the first step," and that the committee does not know what Gilfillan will recommend..
The hiring of a noise consultant met with the approval of many citizens. Mary Rose Evans, president of Airport Neighbors' Alliance, a group of small cities and neighborhood groups around the airport, said, "It's good news. It's not the answer, but a way to get started."
PUBLICATION: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
DATE: June 11, 1997
SECTION: News Pg. 3
BYLINE: Jo Sandin
DATELINE: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that the St. Stephen's Catholic Church, on Howell Avenue in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is surrounded by runways and constant noise from Mitchell Airport, but will nevertheless hold a seminar on silence tonight from 6:30 to 8:30. However, the article says, a quiet room will not be available for the seminar.
The article reports that the noise from jet landings and arrivals, around 100 decibels or the level of a heavy metal concert, is a continual part of the church's daily existence. However, the congregation and staff have made the best of the situation, the article says. The congregation has named the part of the Sunday Mass liturgy when the priest must stop talking until the noise passes "the pause that refreshes." The congregation even has a prayer that that hopes everyone will straighten up and fly right. In the words of their former priest, Father Adrian Race, they pray: "Oh Lord, may they go zig and not zag."
According to the article, Anita Kowalsi, the pastoral associate and leader of tonight's seminar, said, "Silence is a way for us to listen. In this day and age, it is the only way we take the time to put ourselves in the presence of a higher power." She said when people learn how to create their own inner quiet, "then the outside noises whether they are birds or planes become ordinary. They don't interfere. They become a part of meditation." The article concludes that St. Stephen's parishioners even have a phrase for silence that is not quiet: "a beautiful noise."
PUBLICATION: Engineering News-Record
DATE: June 9, 1997
SECTION: News Site; Vol. 238, No. 23; Pg. 18
BYLINE: William Angelo
DATELINE: Worcester, Massachusetts
The Engineering News-Record reports that a project is underway to build $232-million, 730,000-sq-ft medical center in Worcester, Massachusetts on top of rail tracks. The article reports that engineers have coped with the problem by designing ways for the noise and vibrations to be absorbed, so that patients, operations, and sensitive equipment are protected. The article goes on to outline the engineering details of the project.
According to the article, the project involves building a 1,000-ft-long tunnel over the track, using pressure-injected footings to control vibration and abutting the tunnel to the hospital atrium, which contains a massive earth berm garden to dampen sound. The tunnel will divide the seven-story hospital and its five-story parking garage, and will run below the drive to the main entrance. The tunnel will be used as a bridge between the two structures on shared foundations, the article reports. In addition, the atrium roof of the hospital will enclose a garden containing 8,000 cu yds of loam fill, which will serve as a buffer between tunnel and the hospital.
According to John O'Sullivan, group manager of Vibration Engineering Consultants, the trains travel at speeds of 25 mph or slower, but they vibrate at a high frequency that couldn't be addressed only by stiffening the medical center's floors. As a result, the consultants are requiring pressure-injected footings to anchor the building to lower level stratum to reduce vibration transmission. O'Sullivan also said that the bolted rail will be replaced by continuous welded rail, reducing vibrations by 50%. Another option the consultants are considering is neoprene pads between the rail and ties.
The article reports that because the site has a bearing strata of sand and gravel about 30 ft down, geotechnical engineers selected 30-ft-long 160-ton pressure-injected footings (PIFs), which reduce the number of footings needed. The tunnel base and hospital columns will use 160-ton compressed-cased PIFs, and the structural slab wll use 60-ton cased PIFs, the article says. Both plumb-cased and battered-uncased PIFs will support continuous, poured-in-place, 7 1/2-ft-wide reinforced concrete pile caps for the tunnel walls. John Crilly, project manager for New England Foundation, said, "The unusual aspect of this job is the uncased battered PIFs with tension capacity. Compression PIFs transfer the load from the wall to the bearing soil whereas the tensioned ones mobilize the soil against uplift."
The article also says that the section of rail line on the site will have to be moved twice to keep the railroad operational during the project. The tunnel will be 29 ft tall, and will have 49-ft-tall, 3-ft-thick poured-in-place concrete walls that will be connected at their base by 30-ft-long reinforced concrete tie beams every 6 ft. The article explains that the tie beams will sit over 8 ft of fill and will be topped with another 9 ft of fill to support the 2-ft-deep reinforced concrete pad that will hold the tracks. To minimize stress, the tunnel will be divided into three equal segments aligned with expansion joints in the garage, the article says. On top of the tunnel, a roadway will lead to the hospital entrance. The article also notes that hospital operations have been located as far away from the tunnel as possible.
The principal architect on the project is Joseph Hoskins, of Hoskins Scott & Partners, Inc. of Boston.
PUBLICATION: The San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: June 12, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. A20
BYLINE: Maria Alicia Gaura
DATELINE: San Jose, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Lenora Porcella, spokesperson, Citizens Against Airport Pollution; David Pandori, City Councillor
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the San Jose (California) City Council voted 9-to-1 Tuesday to approve an ambitious expansion plan for the San Jose International Airport. Meanwhile, a citizens group opposed to the plan said they will continue the fight and may file a lawsuit.
The article reports that the airport's new master plan, approved by the City Council, includes the most aggressive expansion plan of three alternatives presented to the city. Before the council approved the plan, Mayor Susan Hammer proposed amendments designed to soften the blow to residents who argued that additional airport noise, pollution, and traffic would ruin their quality of life. Hammer's amendments include stipulations that cap the maximum number of passenger gates from 49 to 40, which is still nine more gates than the airport's current 31 gates; cap the maximum additional terminal space from 650,000 square feet to 370,000 square feet; require soundproofing on homes most affected by airport noise; widen Highway 87 before contracts to build a new terminal, parking garage, or cargo facility are approved; and strengthen the loosely defined "curfew" that discourages flights from arriving or taking off between 11:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. City Councillor David Pandori was the only councillor to vote against the proposal and amendments.
In response to Hammer's amendments, residents complained that the amendments can be overturned by a future council. In addition, Hammer did not propose amendments that would restrict the airport's air-cargo area to grow from 300,000 square feet to about 1.9 million square feet, and to lengthen both runways to 11,000 feet, the article reports. In fact, the council advised that the runways be lengthened and the fuel depot constructed as soon as possible to improve safety. Airport spokesperson Cathy Gaskell said, "If all goes well, construction of the new fuel farm and the runway should begin in early 1998. But with the conditions . . . it should be 2000 or 2005 before passengers flying through the airport will notice anything different."
Meanwhile, the Citizens Against Airport Pollution, an organization of residents living near the airport's flight path, is considering there next steps. Lenora Porcella, spokesperson for the group, said, "We need a few weeks to discuss what options are available to us. A lawsuit is certainly an option. I don't think this is over."
The article concludes by noting that supporters of the expansion include airline workers, construction workers, and labor unions, who say a larger airport will boost the economy and provide an economic edge to high-technology companies throughout Silicon Valley.
PUBLICATION: Occupational Health and Safety Letter
DATE: June 9, 1997
SECTION: No. 12, Vol. 27; ISSN: 0196-058X
DATELINE: U.S.
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Coalition to Protect Workers' Hearing; American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
The Occupational Health & Safety Letter reports that the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) has proposed new standards for occupational noise exposure in mines, but a coalition of prominent hearing-conservation organizations have said that the standards do not go far enough to protect miners' hearing.
According to the article, the MSHA's proposal would not change the existing permissible exposure level (PEL). That level is an eight-hour time-weighted average of 90 A-weighted decibels (dBA). However, the proposal would set a new "action level" of 85 dBA, the level at which employers must take certain actions. The proposal would, for the first time, impose specific requirements if a mine operator could not feasibly reduce noise exposures to the PEL through the use of all feasible engineering and administrative controls, the article reports.
In response to the proposed changes, the Coalition to Protect Workers' Hearing praised MSHA for proposing a uniform standard, but it urged the agency to imitate the noise and hearing conservation standards developed by OSHA. Specifically, the coalition criticized the fact that MSHA wants to retain the 90-dBA PEL, noting that MSHA writes in the preamble of the proposed rule that a 90-dBA PEL "does not protect at least 15 percent of the mining population, who will develop material hearing impairment if exposed over a working lifetime of 85- 90 dBA." The coalition pointed out that the MSHA's rationale behind not tightening the PEL focuses on the costs and the fact that most operators would be forced to use engineering and administrative controls to reduce noise. The coalition said, "The implication is that it would be too much trouble. This is not a convincing argument, considering that the intent of MSHA's proposed rule is to preserve the hearing health of miners." As an alternative, the coalition advocated for setting an 85-dBA PEL, phased in over 10 years to soften the blow to the mining industry. Finally, if the proposed rule takes effect, the coalition urged the MSHA to phase in all aspects of it within one year, except the provision to use new test data for determining hearing protector device effectiveness, which should be phased in over two years.
For more information, contact Maureen Thompson of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 301-897-5700; or Pat Silveyof the MSHA, 703-235-1910.
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: June 11, 1997
SECTION: News, Pg. N4
BYLINE: Rick Orlov
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Don Schultz, president, Van Nuys Homeowners Association
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports that after passing an ordinance earlier this year outlawing noisy, gasoline-powered leaf blowers, the Los Angeles City Council Tuesday approved an exemption for gas-powered leaf vacuums, which have similar noise levels as leaf blowers.
The article reports that in a 14-0 vote, the City Council exempted the vacuum-style devices from a 45-decibel sound limit and called for a study into the possibility of a $100 tax credit and a lower tax rate for gardeners to encourage them to switch over to the new machines. City Councillor Mike Hernandez, who proposed the exemption, said he believes it is a "way to bring fairness for the gardeners." Councillor Marvin Braude, who proposed the original ordinance banning leaf blowers because of their noise and dust, said he approved of the new proposal and that it is "constructive fine-tuning." However, the article reports, the gas-powered vacuums emit a noise level similar to the blowers, about 65 decibels.
Councillor Hernandez said he introduced the proposal instead of seeking a delay in starting the ban on leaf blowers. That ban prohibits the use of gas-powered leaf blowers within 500 feet of a residential area and includes a fine of up to $500 to be assessed against the gardener and his or her employer after two warnings. Hernandez said, "I still don't believe we're ready to enforce this new law, but with it coming into effect, we should do something to help gardeners right away."
The article says that Don Schultz, president of the Van Nuys Homeowners Association, a group that supported the leaf-blower ban, said Tuesday that the use of gas-powered leaf vacuums won't reduce the noise, but it will improve air quality and won't "throw a lot of people out of work."
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
DATE: June 13, 1997
SECTION: Local, Pg. 3B
BYLINE: Karla Schuster
DATELINE: Boca Raton, Florida
The Sun-Sentinel reports that the Boca Raton (Florida) Airport Authority Thursday approved a $1 million deal that makes it illegal for future residents on a 78-acre parcel of undeveloped land next to the airport's runway to sue the airport due to problems associated with planes flying overhead. The deal, called "avigation" easement, stipulates that future homeowners cannot sue the airport for problems such as noise, vibrations, odors, or vapors. In addition, the airport will have the right to use the airspace over the land parcel without restriction, and this will be written into the deeds.
According to the article, the airport authority had tried to purchase the land, and then acquire it by eminent domain, over the course of the past three years for the purpose of using the land as a buffer against residential development. The property is east of the airport runway and north of Spanish River Boulevard, the article says. The airport offered $4 million for the land, but appraisers hired by Canadian owner William Lamson valued the property at about $11 million. The authority "purchased" the easement for $1 million, and will also pay about $300,000 to cover Lamson's legal fees and other fees. The deal must still be approved by the state Department of Transportation, which will pay for 90 percent of the cost of the easement, the article reports. Adams Weaver, an attorney representing the authority, said, "This easement essentially accomplishes the same goals we had set out to achieve for much less." Airport Authority Chair Phil Modder added, "This has not been an easy task, and we've had to change direction many times. We hope this will be settled quickly now."
The article goes on to say that Wiley Hicks, an attorney representing Lamson, said his client will probably sell the property instead of developing it. He said the land may be proposed for commercial development, even though it's zoned for single-family homes. The easement would still be in effect if a commercial developer acquired the land. Hicks said, "We think there are people out there willing to develop the property residentially and people who are willing to put up with the inconvenience of living near an airport to be centrally located. But my client's position is that residential isn't the only way to go for this property."
The article reports that the former owner of the land Anthony Pugliese, had proposed a mall for the parcel, but nearby residents didn't approve. Lamson, doing business as Orchard View Development, took over the property after foreclosure proceedings against Pugliese, who defaulted on its mortgage and property taxes, the article says.
PUBLICATION: Sun-Sentinel
DATE: June 8, 1997
SECTION: Local, Pg. 3B, Digest
DATELINE: Fort Lauderdale, Florida
The Sun-Sentinel reports that the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport will temporarily redirect some air traffic on Monday and Tuesday nights, and residents living in Dania neighborhoods south and west of the airport may hear unexpected aircraft noise.
The article says that work crews will be replacing lights at the intersection of the airport's two air carrier runways between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. on Monday and Tuesday. As a result, smaller general-aviation planes will be directed to land on the south runway. The south runway is normally closed between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. to mitigate noise, the article reports.
PUBLICATION: The Hartford Courant
DATE: June 14, 1997
SECTION: Town News; Pg. B3
BYLINE: Eric Danton
DATELINE: Suffield, Connecticut
The Hartford Courant reports that the Suffield, Connecticut Economic Development Commission is requesting a different lot for a proposed day-care center in the town's Mach I Industrial Park due to aircraft noise from Bradley International Airport.
According to the article, Commission Chair Howard Orr said Friday that the commission wants a day-care center to operate in the industrial park, but wants to move the site of the proposed center from a lot bordering Route 75 to the lot in the park farthest from the airport, on the corner of Spencer Street and Kenny Roberts Memorial Drive. The day-care center owner, Cathy BelGrecio, said the new proposed location is better for the center, because the lot is bigger, flatter, less busy, and will provide more outside play room for the kids. Orr said the commission wants to locate a day-care center at the industrial park because it believes it will help attract other businesses.
Others agreed that the town needs a day-care center, the article reports. First Selectman Roland Dowd said, "There's something about being able to have your kids in day care in Suffield, and I think Suffield should offer it." Resident Robert Eccles said he thinks a day-care center in the industrial park is a good idea because many residents who work must find a day-care center for their children in another town. He said he and other parents want their kids to go to school in Suffield, but it is difficult to do that with no day-care in town.
Orr also said that the Mach I Industrial Park is the town's fourth and largest industrial area, and is meant for small, clean businesses. The article concludes that the proposal of the Economic Development Commission to relocate the proposed day-care center will be considered at a zoning and planning commission public hearing in July.
PUBLICATION: The Richmond Times Dispatch
DATE: June 10, 1997
SECTION: Area/State, Pg. B-3
DATELINE: New Kent County, Virginia
The Richmond Times Dispatch reports that the New Kent County (Virginia) Board of Supervisors last night deferred a decision on a proposed noise ordinance, after the board heard from gun owners and others who said the ordinanc would take away personal rights.
According to the article, the proposed ordinance would prohibit loud noises between 11 p.m. and 5 p.m. One speaker complained, "This is a noise ordinance, not a gun ordinance," saying that gun owners were not targeted by the noise ordinance any more than others who produce loud noises.
PUBLICATION: The Seattle Times
DATE: June 9, 1997
SECTION: South; Pg. B3; Sound Off
BYLINE: Wallace Meyers Burien, resident
DATELINE: Seattle, Washington area
The Seattle Times printed the following letter-to-the-editor from resident Wallace Meyers Burien regarding the effects of noise from the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport on Highline Schools:
We've heard a lot recently about airplane-noise problems in the Highline schools. Do people wonder whether anything actually will be done to reduce airplane noise levels in the classrooms? Certainly something must be done in schools surrounding Sea-Tac Airport. Quite a while ago, the Highline School District had to sue the Port of Seattle over the noise problems (that's before it got as bad now). The district recovered about $3.5 million, which was used for noise reduction. This made the schools a somewhat more reasonable learning environment, except when doors and windows must be opened to offset heat in the building. This suggests that a lot more must still be done, such as adding ventilation or air-conditioning or whatever is necessary. Likewise, the same must be done in the many untreated schools in the district to reduce noise to acceptable levels.
Will the Port allow this to be done? Not likely, when the Port controls all the noise-remedy money!
Does the Port really care about protecting the learning capabilities of our children? It must come to work cooperatively with the school district in defining the problems and remedies. Our children's learning is most important to all.
PUBLICATION: Calgary Herald
DATE: June 8, 1997
SECTION: Opinion; Pg. A10
BYLINE: Thuy Nguyen, Calgary resident
DATELINE: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
The Calgary Herald printed the following letter-to-the-editor from Calgary, Alberta resident Thuy Nguyen regarding noise from motorcycles:
Summer is a great time for walking, riding and playing outside. It is not a great time for hearing noisy motorcycles and smelling their exhaust.
I see and hear many noisy motorcycles being driven at high speeds on our streets. Their noise makes everyone around tense and angry. The noise and dirty exhausts are destructive forms of pollution, too The high speeds are dangerous.
The city should enforce the speed and noise laws on our streets so everyone can have a great summer.
PUBLICATION: Daily News
DATE: June 13, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. 38
BYLINE: Salvatore Arena
DATELINE: New York, New York
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Joy Held, president, Helicopter Noise Coalition; Jack Lester, attorney for the coalition
The Daily News reports that the Helicopter Noise Coalition of New York City filed papers in the Manhatten Supreme Court yesterday seeking to shut down Manhatten's E. 34th St. heliport, run by National Helicopter Corp., charging that the city has allowed it to operate illegally for years.
According to the article, the coalition says the National Helicopter Corp. ran the heliport for two decades without a proper permit. Last month, the Giuliani administration tried to evict the carrier for an alleged failure to pay $700,000 in back rent, but the company blocked the eviction after filing for federal bankruptcy protection. City officials have said that their attempted eviction was part of a plan to eliminate tourist helicopter service over Manhattan and cut helicopter flights by 40%. Officials also plan to close a heliport at E. 60th St., and want to turn the E. 34th St. heliport over to a company that does not operate tourist flights. But Jack Lester, an attorney for the coalition, said the group wants the E. 34th St. heliport closed for good.
The article says that East Side residents and businesses have complained about the noise and air pollution from the heliport for years. The heliport opened in 1971, and National operates more than 50,000 flights annually. Joy Held, president of the coalition said the heliport "constitutes a nuisance that people cannot live with." In addition, there is a safety issue because several high-rise apartment buildings have been constructed near the heliport, the article reports.
PUBLICATION: Sarasota Herald-Tribune
DATE: June 10, 1997
SECTION: Local/State, Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Yolanda Rodriguez
DATELINE: Sarasota, Florida
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports that last month, the Sarasota, Florida City Commission passed two ordinances designed to control outdoor amplified music, and over the past weekend, police officers issued violations to owners of the Lemon Coast Grill and Groove, and the Main Street Depot. Business owners are saying they were targeted to receive violations and that the city's decibel readings are much higher than their own readings.
According to the article, the new ordinance requires outdoor amplified music to stop at midnight on Fridays and Saturdays, and at 10 p.m. the rest of the week. In addition, the ordinance allows a maximum of 70 decibels downtown.
The article reports that Michael Venafro, one of the owners of Lemon Coast, believes his business was unfairly targeted by police officers, who spent several hours in and around the club over the weekend. Police claim they were responding to complaints of loud noise coming from the Main Street and Lemon Avenue intersection. Lemon Coast was issued a violation on Thursday, even though no decibel reading was taken. Venafro said that Lt. James Schultz would not take a decibel reading when he was asked to do so, because there was no meter available. According to Deputy Chief Russ Pillifant, Lt. Schultz used another section of the city code that prohibits "excessive noise," but does not require a particular noise level, in order to issue a citation. Schultz said music from the bar could be heard several blocks away. Lemon Coast was also issued a violation on Saturday, when its stereo was playing just after midnight.
The article goes on to say that Ernie Ritz, who owns the Main Street Depot, says the city's decibel readings vary widely from readings he took himself. Police took readings at the restaurant that ranged from 81.5 to 89.6 decibels, but readings taken by Ritz at the same time ranged from 70 to 72. Deputy Chief Pillifant said, "We calibrate our meters everytime we use them. If Ernie Ritz believes the decibel readings are off, I would say ask him how often he calibrates his meter. These are brand-new meters and they are calibrated before and after use . . . There are no problems with our meters." Ritz said that before the noise ordinance passed the Sarasota commission, he and City Commissioner Nora Patterson took readings at the restaurant and found them to be in the low 70s. Ritz said he bought a decibel meter so he could comply with the ordinance.
Patterson said that she would like to read the police report on this weekend's incidents before she suggests what the city should do next. She said she will bring up the issue during a meeting today at 4 p.m., the article reports.
PUBLICATION: The Baltimore Sun
DATE: June 9, 1997
SECTION: Local (News), Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Elaine Tassy
DATELINE: Baltimore, Maryland area
The Baltimore Sun reports that a shift in educational philosophy is prompting schools in the Baltimore, Maryland area to remodel open classrooms into conventional classrooms with walls. Many teachers and parents believe open classrooms cause too much noise and distraction for effective learning, the article reports.
According to the article, open classrooms became popular in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The philosophy behind open classrooms was that mixing 100 students and their three or four teachers in an open area would allow them to learn together and share ideas and lesson plans. While many teachers placed barriers between open classrooms made of bookcases, coat racks, blackboards, and vertical files, many students still ended up being distracted by teachers covering other material only a few feet away, the article reports. Some teachers and students can't cope with, much less take advantage of, the amorphous open space design, the article says. According to Allen Abend, chief of school facilities for the Maryland State Department of Education, "One of the concepts of open space was that it would provide extremely flexible and adaptable space for any grouping. In fact, I think it was learned that more specificity in school architecture led to more specificity and adaptability [in classrooms]. You want some fixed elements in the architecture that commit to certain types of [use]." In addition, the article reports, some parents dislike open space designs. Sydney Cousin, Howard County schools' associate superintendent of finance and operations, said some parents complained about noise and distractions when the schools were completely open space designs.
The article says one-third of the schools in Anne Arundel County, as well as some schools in Howard and Carroll counties and at least one in Baltimore, are looking at whether they can afford to close up the open classrooms. According to Kenneth Lawson, associate superintendent of instruction and student services in Anne Arundel County public schools, many communities believe "a closed classroom environment is more conducive to effective teaching and learning." Lawson went on to say that he believes most schools and communities prefer the old-style closed classrooms.
The Anne Arundel County Council has approved $150,000 to investigate how much it would cost and how long it would take to retrofit about 40 of the county's 120 schools constructed with open-space classrooms, the article reports. Converting a classroom is no easy task, according to Rodell Phaire, director of facilities planning and construction for Anne Arundel schools. He said each classroom needs its own windows or natural light sources, storage area, water fountains or sinks, safety exit signs, and ventilation. Phaire said it is estimated that it could cost as much as $750,000 per school to make the changes.
One Anne Arundel county school, Oak Hill Elementary, has already been changed. The PTA recently raised about $10,000 to put in 8-foot-high fixed partitions to subdivide some classrooms, the article says. In addition, Jessup Elementary, North Glen Elementary in Glen Burnie, and Folger McKinsley Elementary in Severna Park have been retrofitted with hallways and individual classrooms, the article reports. Jessup Elementary, for example, had desks arranged in class groups, but walls did not separate the halls from classrooms. Now, walled hallways and self-contained classrooms have replaced the old layout. Jessup teacher Linda Trebes said before the changes, "A lot of children had a very difficult time focusing. As a teacher, I had a difficult time focusing." She said she felt like she had to apologize to her colleagues when she would do hands-on projects with her students. Fifth-grader Jessica Geinzer, said when a student "acted out" or an administrator came into the pod to look for one teacher or student, all the students took notice, the article reports. "[With] open space it was kind of hard to learn," she said. "The only thing I really miss is being able to wave to my friends in other classes."
Schools in Howard County have been designed with modified open-space architecture since the mid-1980s, the article reports. Four learning areas are constructed in a cluster that can be divided with movable partitions. In addition, there are two additional rooms for each four learning areas that can accommodate group projects, science experiments, or speakers.
The article goes on to say that there is at least one elementary school in Baltimore being converted to separate classrooms. In addition, several schools in Carroll County are subdividing open classrooms as well. Between 1969 and 1976, the article reports, four elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school were built with some open space were. In the mid-1980s, Westminster High School and Northwest Middle School installed partitions, and now Robert Moton Elementary is going through a partial retrofitting, the article says. Vernon Smith, chief engineer with the facilities department for Carroll County schools, said "We are designing classroom space that has flexible, movable walls. We want the buildings to withstand any changes in educational philosophy and strategy for the next 40 years."
Meanwhile, some educators still like the benefits of open-space classrooms. For example, Pasadena's Bodkin Elementary School Principal Rocco Ferretti says the open-space design cultivates team teaching and keeps teachers from being abusive with discipline, the article reports. Bodkin Elementary School teacher Carolyn Kobasko agrees, saying she likes to see the other teachers during her day and to see what they are doing in their classrooms. Sydney Cousin, associate superintendent of finance and operations for Howard County schools, said: "You don't have a chance to go into a cocoon by closing the door to your room and isolating yourself in the building." Teacher Linda Trebes said she appreciated the chance to watch other teachers when she was just starting out. And Vernon Smith, Carroll County schools facility engineer and former teacher, said that students can tap into the instructional expertise of more than one teacher with open classrooms, the article concludes.
PUBLICATION: The Idaho Statesman
DATE: June 10, 1997
SECTION: Local; Pg. 3b
BYLINE: Candice Chung
DATELINE: Ada County, Idaho
The Idaho Statesman reports that the Ada County (Idaho) Commission has approved a noise ordinance that bans "loud or offensive" noise that is audible 100 feet or more from the source between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. The ordinance covers Boise, Idaho and all other locations in the county.
The article reports that the new noise ordinance includes exemptions for emergency vehicles, trains, airplanes, and authorized fireworks displays.
According to the article, Ada County Commissioner Roger Simmons said he the commission gets regular complaints about noise, especially complaints about concerts at Hawks Memorial Stadium. According to the Ada County Sheriff's Department, noise complaints rise during the summer as people spend more time outdoors and with their windows open. Officials at the sheriff's department believe the new ordinance will be an effective tool for enforcement. Lt. Dale Woodcook said, "What I like about this ordinance is it puts parameters on when we're talking about. For some people late is 2 a.m. when the beer runs out." The article goes on to say that violations of the new ordinance can lead to a misdemeanor citation, although sheriff's officials say they usually try to take care of complaints without citations first.
Meanwhile, Joseph Sipiora, who lives near the stadium, said he approves of the new rules. He said there is constant noise from the ball park from lawn mowing, concerts, and baseball games. He added that the baseball games are a worse noise problem than the concerts because the announcer "hollers like crazy."
PUBLICATION: The Plain Dealer
DATE: June 13, 1997
SECTION: Metro; Pg. 1B
BYLINE: Tom Breckenridge
DATELINE: Parma, Ohio
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Marline Longava, Christina Cika, Jerry Gucanac, residents; Dean DePiero, City Councillor; Susan Straub, City Councillor
The Plain Dealer reports that residents in northern Parma, Ohio are increasingly angry about noise from the Cleveland Hopkins International Airport. Last night, about 70 residents brought their complaints before Cleveland officials and Federal Aviation Administration officials.
The article reports that aiport officials agree air traffic over Parma is increasing, mainly because air traffic is growing. The airport had more than 300,000 landings and takeoffs last year. Northern Parma is beneath a flight path from the airport's east-west runway that is used in bad weather, the article says. William Cunningham, director of Cleveland's Department of Port Control, said the runway handles only 4 to 6 percent of the airport's traffic, and is used only three days a month on average. This comment drew hoots from the crowd of residents, many of whom said the noise lately has been occurring daily.
According to resident Christina Cika, "If I'm on the phone, I have to plug my ear to hear the conversation." Resident Jerry Gucanac gave the council a videotape that shows continuous planes roaring over the neighborhood in a five-minute span on May 6. He said he also is afraid that the planes are flying too low. He said, "It's a joke going around the neighborhood that we can read the tires, whether they're Firestone or Goodyear."
Airport planner Steve Nagy responded to the residents by saying a portable noise monitor could be used to gauge the problem, but the airport's is being repaired right now, the article reports. Barbara Williams of the FAA said the east-west runway has been used more often in the past month because of bad weather, but air traffic is back to normal now. Both Williams and Cunninghap said residents' concerns will be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, City Councillor Dean DePiero said he fears the noise could harm property values. And City Councillor Susan Straub said residents in her ward want flights routed elsewhere and if that doesn't happen, she wants the suburb to consider legal action.
PUBLICATION: Press Association Newsfile
DATE: June 13, 1997
SECTION: Home News
BYLINE: Mike Taylor
DATELINE: Bristol, England area
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Campaign Against Filton Commercial Airport
The Press Association Newsfile reports that the British High Court ruled today that British Aerospace cannot resurrect its plan for a commercial airport at historic Filton aerodrome near Bristol, England. The court upheld the joint decision by the former Transport and Environment Secretaries that refused planning permission to develop the 400-acre site after a public inquiry.
According to the article, the commercial airport proposal was criticized by the 13,500 members of the Campaign Against Filton Commercial Airport, who said the noise impact and other environmental impacts would be too great with the project. Opponents also maintained that British Aerospace's existing Concorde pleasure flights that depart from the airfield are already noisy enough.
British Aerospace, however, stressed that its plans were limited to 23,000 aircraft movements per year, using only quiet jets, and with no charter flights. Night-time movements would be limited, and the proposal was subject to detailed discussions with the local authority, South Gloucestershire Council, the article reports.
The article goes on to say that the existing aerodrome is already used for public transport flights, flying instruction, and maintenance visits by aircraft such as Concorde and military jets. The costs of running the operation, about 1.5 million pounds per year, are paid by the plane overhaul company British Aerospace Aviation Services. British Aerospace maintained that the purpose of the expansion scheme was to allow that company to reduce its costs and be more competitive in the world market. British Aerospace asserted in court arguments that the Secretaries of State had failed to deal properly with the commercial case for the airport, including job opportunities and economic development of the area; had misunderstood the scale of the proposal; and had failed to assess noise impact in accordance with rational criteria. The Secretaries of State had decided that because there are 27,000 homes within a mile of the runway, the site was not appropriate for a commercial airport unless there was overriding justification in need and benefits. The ministers concluded that the disadvantages outweighed the advantages.
Justice Carnwath of the High Court ruled that the ministers' decision was not unreasonable, the article says. Carnwath rejected the argument that the ministers wrongly took into account potential further expansion which was not contemplated in the plan. The judge wrote, "As a matter of common sense, once a commercial airport is established and becomes successful there is likely to be pressure for expansion. Although planning permission may be required, the case for such permission may be difficult to resist, given the general policy that existing facilities should be used to best advantage." The judge concluded that some of British Aerospace's arguments had valid points, but that this did not undermine the overall reasoning behind the original decision.
The article also reports that the Filton aerodrome, built in 1910, has a history of aircraft research, development, and technology since. The aerodrome was the site of the creation of the Blenheim bomber, the Bristol Britannia, and the giant Brabazon. In the 1960s, it became the U.K. production center for the Anglo-French Concorde, the article concludes.
PUBLICATION: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
DATE: June 12, 1997
SECTION: Local, Pg. D-3, West
DATELINE: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania area
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that nearly 100 residents complained to the Moon (Pennsylvania) township supervisors last night about excessive noise from the new flight patterns at Pittsburgh International Airport.
According to the article, concrete resurfacing at the airport has shut down Runway 14-32 since early June, which has left three other runways operating. The out-of-commission runway, in combination with unusual eastern winds last week, forced jets to use Runway 10-Left for departures, causing unusual amounts of jet noise over the Amherst Acres and Sharon Hill neighborhoods. According to Richard Holmes, a spokesperson for the Allegheny County Aviation Department, the jets stopped using the runway two days ago when the winds shifted, but residents were not satisfied. Holmes and other Aviation Department officials said they would investigate alternative flight plans, the article concludes.
PUBLICATION: The Dallas Morning News
DATE: June 13, 1997
SECTION: Northeast Tarrant County; Pg. 1N
BYLINE: Lizabeth Cardenas
DATELINE: Keller, Texas
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Dave Phillips, City Councillor; Pat McGrail, City Councillor; Chris Hooper, Grapevine assistant city manager
The Dallas Morning News reports that when the Texas Motor Speedway in Keller, Texas opened last April, some residents and city councillors were worried about potential noise from the racetrack. While noise from the track has not been a problem, residents and officials from Keller, Southlake, and Grapevine complained about excessive helicopter noise after inaugural races in April and again last weekend during the Indy Racing League events. Officials with the Federal Aviation Administration said they will look into the complaints, but maintain they have no legal authority over the helicopter routes.
According to the article, the helicopters were being used to convey dozens of VIPs to the racetrack, while most people fought through the ground traffic to get to the event. Residents in Glen Forest, Brentwood Estates, and Melody Hills were in the flight path of the helicopters, and had to endure the noise for the two weekends. Keller City Councillor Pat McGrail said, "During the initial race weekend, there was a steady stream of helicopters going overhead. It was very disturbing, and I was not happy. It was really terrible, and I had between six and eight people contact me because they were so upset by it, too. Other councillors were also contacted." City Councillor Dave Phillips said, "Helicopters were flying to and from the racetrack, one every 10 or 15 minutes. They were very loud, and they were flying very low. It was like being in Vietnam. The chop-chop-chop sound of the rotors and the roar of the engines was almost so loud you couldn't talk. You'd have to stop your conversation and wait until they flew past." Phillips added that residents initially were worried that noise from the races might be a problem, but instead, the problem has been only with the helicopter noise.
The article reports that FAA officials met with helicopter businesses before the racetrack opened to help designate routes. Fred Dryden, acting manager of the air carrier and general aviation division of the flight standards district office in Fort Worth, said "We're in the process of looking into these complaints to see if we can set up some flight routes that do not travel directly overhead in these areas. We may not be able to, and even if we do, we can't enforce the helicopters to fly those routes. We can't order them." He added that helicopters have no altitude restrictions, and all the helicopters being used are within the prescribed noise levels, the article says. John Clabes, FAA public affairs director for the region, said people may just have to accept the noise. He said, "It's a part of life these days. That airspace belongs to everybody, so helicopters can fly over anyone."
However, the article says, many city officials are not satisfied with the FAA's response. Chris Hooper, Grapevine assistant city manager, said, "It seems to me they should have some degree of enforcement. The FAA regulates air traffic, and helicopters are considered air traffic. I encourage them to find a way to handle this problem."
Meanwhile, Connie Pyatt, vice president of Sky Helicopter, a charter service that flies people to the speedway, said she is not aware of any complaints, the article reports. She said, "All the flight patterns were prearranged weeks ago to determine the safest and best way to go -- everything was predetermined at a meeting with the operators, the FAA and tower control." Pyatt added that if the company receives complaints, it would try to change its routes to the track.
PUBLICATION: The Daily News of Los Angeles
DATE: June 13, 1997
SECTION: News, Pg. N6
BYLINE: Yvette Cabrera
DATELINE: Burbank, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: Bob Kramer, Burbank Mayor; Ted McConkey, City Councillor
The Daily News of Los Angeles reports that Burbank, California Mayor Bob Kramer will begin talks today with Burbank Airport in the hope of reaching a compromise in a long-running feud over airport expansion. But some critics, including one City Councillor, have accused the mayor of trying to compromise just when the city has a chance of winning its legal battle.
According to the article, the city of Burbank has so far spent $3.5 million fighting plans by the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority to expand the air terminal from 14 to 19 gates. Mayor Kramer now thinks it's time to negotiate. He said, "If I'm forced to I will support spending the money for legal fees, but if I can solve some of these problems with negotiations, it's advantageous to our city to come to an agreement. If this mediation fails, I can see we'll be in the courts for a long, long time." But City Councillor Ted McConkey said, "We could have done this three years ago and saved millions of dollars, but you don't quit in the middle of the fight, especially when you're winning. That's a complete betrayal of the promises made to the voters."
Meanwhile, Burbank City Manager Robert "Bud" Ovrom said he is doubtful the two sides can hammer out a compromise. Ovrom said he has serious questions about whether the airport authority will meet the city halfway. But, he said the mayor wants to use his position to try and find a solution.
The article goes on to say that the negotiations will begin with a meeting today between the mayor, Ovrom, Brian Bowman, a former Burbank representative on the airport authority, Joyce Streator, airport authority President, Carl Raggio, Glendale Commissioner, and Thomas Greer, Burbank Airport Executive Director.
The article reports that the Burbank Airport expansion plan includes the construction of a $335 million air terminal. Federal officials have said the current terminal is too close to the runway for safety guidelines. The federal government already has approved a new terminal that could have 19 to 27 gates, compared to 14 currently. Burbank has opposed airport expansion because its residents already complain constantly about jet noise and traffic, the article says, while the cities of Glendale and Pasadena favor expansion, citing safety and the economic benefit to the region. Recently, the city of Burbank won a round in Los Angeles Superior Court when a judged ruled that a provision of the California Public Utilities Code requires the airport to get the city's permission for its expansion. The article reports the airport is appealing the decision, and both sides believe they will win in court.
Meanwhile, one outgoing Airport Authority Commissioner, Robert Garcin, says he believes the negotiations won't come to anything because the city of Burbank won't budge on its requests. The city has supported the Burbank Airport 21st Century Plan, which calls for a larger replacement terminal, but limits the number of gates to 16, seeks for a mandatory curfew on nighttime and early morning flights, and allows for no more than a 10% increase in aircraft operations.
Brian Bowman, who was called in by the mayor to assist in negotiations, was seen as a moderate on the authority and supported the expansion plans as a commissioner. Bowman said he believes the parties are not that far apart, and will find a common ground.
The article concludes by saying that Paul Sago, executive director of the Burbank Chamber of Commerce, said he believes most Burbank citizens respect the mayor him for launching the talks. "We feel millions of dollars in legal fees and continued wrangling is not good for either side," he said. "People know that the airport needs some improvement and expansion and they are willing to have that done."
PUBLICATION: Los Angeles Times
DATE: June 13, 1997
SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 2; Zones Desk
BYLINE: Kimberly Brower and Debra Cano
DATELINE: Los Angeles, California
The Los Angeles Times reports that the Los Angeles City Council will study noise levels at the Capistrano Garden Homes housing complex in Las Brisas. The study will cost $15,000. Residents have complained for at least six months, after sound walls built as part of an Interstate 5 widening project did not help lower noise.
The article notes that residents want a wall -- 14-feet high -- to be built between the road and the complex. Officials say the $200,000-300,000 price tag would be too high, and that the noise levels in the area are permitted by federal law.
PUBLICATION: Daily Mail
DATE: June 11, 1997
SECTION: Pg. 15
BYLINE: Roger Scott
DATELINE: Manchester, England
The Daily Mail reports that a dispute between neighbors over noise may have led to an arson attack in which a mother and two of her children were killed yesterday in Manchester, England.
The article reports that Linda Howell, her son Otis, five, and her daughter Victoria, two, died after a blaze swept through their home at about 3:30 a.m. Another daughter, Saisha, three, was hospitalized in poor condition. The article says that about three hours before the fire, police were called to a neighbor's house where complaints were lodged about the Howell family's alleged noisiness. Detectives were told that after the complaint was lodged, people were seen at a nearby garage buying petrol which was poured into a container. The article says the fire is thought to have been started when petrol was poured through the letterbox and splashed on the front door of the Howell's house. Firefighters noticed a strong smell of petrol around the house. The article concludes that two men were arrested soon afterward, and an inquiry is proceeding.
PUBLICATION: The San Francisco Chronicle
DATE: June 9, 1997
SECTION: News; Pg. A15
BYLINE: Michael McCabe
DATELINE: Half Moon Bay, California
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: David Angelovich, Laslo Vespremi, Moss Beach residents and members of the MidCoast Community Council's airport subcommittee
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that a draft of the Half Moon Bay Airport master plan in Half Moon Bay, California was made public in recent weeks, and proposes a long list of improvements, including the use of the entire length of the 5,000 foot runway, and the installation of equipment to enable planes to land in bad weather. The plan has raised the concern of some residents who believe the airport development could encourage more flights by bigger planes, opening the door to more noise, people, and development in the area. The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors will consider the master plan on July 22.
According to the article, the small and quiet airport is only about eight miles as the crow flies from San Francisco International Airport, but it feels like a million miles away. The article says only 66 small airplanes are based at Half Moon Bay, and flights are impossible much of the time because of fog or bad weather. In addition, the airport is surrounded by some of the most beautiful scenery in the Bay Area, the article says. The airport was built in 1942 for the U.S. Army Air Corps, according to the article, and was designed to be part of the coastal protection network during World War II. In 1950, the airport was deeded to San Mateo County.
The article reports that the airport's newly released master plan calls for a list of improvements over the next 20 years, when flights are expected to increase by 42 percent. The projects would cost a total of $8.7 million, the article says.
Opponents believe the airport improvements would mean more flights by bigger planes, changing the character of the communities surrounding the airport and paving the way for more development, the article reports. David Angelovich, a Moss Beach resident, a member of the MidCoast Community Council's airport subcommittee, and one of the most vocal opponents, said the plan raises the possibility of commuter jets flying in at all hours and all times of the year to the quiet community. Angelovich added, "How can you justify spending $8.7 million for 66 airplanes? That breaks down to more than $130,000 an airplane, a substantial subsidy that makes no sense -- unless there is an ulterior motive to bring in commuter jets."
The article reports that airport manager Gary Petersen counters that the master plan's purpose is to make the airport safer, not to draw commuter jets. He said the airport plans to keep its 12,500-pound weight limit for airplanes, which excludes about 95 percent of all jet traffic. Petersen added that a primary aim of the changes proposed in the master plan are to make the airport profitable. Last year, the airport lost about $20,000, he said, although this year it is expected to break even, the article reports. The master plan recommends building 56 new hangars and demolishing 26 old hangars, which Petersen said will add thousands of dollars to airport revenues.
The most controversial aspect of the master plan, the article reports, is the recommendation to open both ends of an existing runway, which would extend the usable part of the runway from 3,400 feet to 5,000 feet. Peterson said a longer runway will help reduce noise because pilots can land more quietly and take off without gunning the engine for steeper climbs.
Pilots in the area also support the proposals in the master plan, the article says. Nancy Auld, general manager for the California Coast Airfair, an annual air show held at the airport, said, "These improvements will make aviation for the pilots and surrounding neighborhoods safer -- just like improving roads makes them safer for everybody."
But some airport neighbors insist that a longer runway means more and bigger airplanes, the article reports. In addition, opponents say that more sophisticated equipment, such as a Global Positioning Satellite System, encourage more planes to use the airport because they can make landings in bad weather. Laslo Vespremi, a Moss Beach resident and member of the MidCoast Community Council's airport subcommittee, said, "The biggest problem with this plan is that if the airport expansion takes place, it changes the nature of the airport."
PUBLICATION: National Public Radio; Morning Edition
DATE: June 12, 1997
SECTION: News; Domestic
BYLINE: Rick Karr, reporter, Chicago; Alex Chadwick, host, Washington, DC
DATELINE: Chicago, Illinois area
ACTIVISTS, INDIVIDUALS, AND GROUPS MENTIONED: John Geils, mayor of Bensenville and chair of the Suburban O'Hare Commission
National Public Radio reports that the city of Chicago and the suburbs that surround O'Hare International Airport have both unveiled high-tech equipment to determine how loud the airport really is. Although both parties, which have been fighting about airport noise for years, originally agreed to share their independent noise data, that agreement has broken down.
The radio report says that O'Hare is surrounded on all sides by suburbia. Tens of thousands of homes lie under the approaches to O'Hare's seven runways, and residents of some of those neighborhoods have been fighting for years against the aircraft noise. Now, the Suburban O'Hare Commission, the group of 11 suburban municipalities that's fought with the city for two decades, has become the proud owner of 6 white cargo vans that have the capability of testing aircraft noise. The vans can sit parked at locations where there have been noise complaints, while the technology inside records the decibel levels, the report explains. David Larson, whose firm S and V Solutions designed the system, said the vans contain an aluminum microphone mask that can be raised about 23 feet into the air, a noise level analyzer, and a cellular telephone with a modem and auto-answer capability. After data is collected, the report says, it is merged with output from a radar system attached to the Bensenville firehouse that can determine which flights and which airlines are the noisiest.
The radio report goes on to say that only about two miles away, the city of Chicago, which owns O'Hare, operates its own noise monitoring system at the airport. The city's system consists of 23 monitors attached to utility poles and municipal buildings around the field, and a few portable units. According to Bill Allen, manager of the city's monitoring system, the equipment collects all the noise going on and then later correlates the data with FAA data to determine if the noise was caused by aircraft.
Both the Suburban O'Hare Commission and the city of Chicago use their noise data mainly to determine which homes and schools around O'Hare they believe should get city dollars earmarked for insulation against aircraft noise, the article says. Chicago already has spent $226 million on sound-proofing, but the Commission claims in a new lawsuit that Chicago is withholding that money from its members. The Commission also believes the city's $4 million noise monitoring system wastes money that could have been spent on noise insulation, and that the city can adjust noise levels downwards with its system, but the city says its noise measuring is accurate.
Chicago's commissioner of aviation, Mary Rose Loney, said the city's noise-monitoring system allows the city to exert pressure on airlines to use newer, quieter planes and to climb more quickly after taking off from the airport. Loney said, "As these airplanes have become more sophisticated, they're capable of better precision in terms of staying on flight tracks where we can redirect noise to less densely-populated areas."
The report concludes by saying that members of the Suburban O'Hare Commission believe the solution to the problem is a third airport for Chicago. But John Geils, mayor of Bensenville and chair of the Commission, said he doesn't expect the city to do what the Commission wants. He said, "Are the powers that be, the ones who really control this issue, the city of Chicago, the Department of Aviation, the Federal FAA, are they willing to give something back to the people who are impacted to protect their interest? Because, I'm going to tell you this, they can't run over us, because there will be people laying in runways if necessary in the end, because they feel that strongly about this issue." Hopefully, Geils added, the city will eventually realize that noise around the airport is a bigger problem than they think.
Previous week: June 1, 1997
Next week: June 15, 1997
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