Unintended consequences of some jurisdictional noise ordinances

Abstract

Since the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency published the Noise Control Act of 1972, many jurisdictions have enacted noise ordinances in various forms to protect the public health and welfare. Over time, research and technology have improved both the understanding of noise effects and the capabilities of noise measurement equipment. It follows then that modifications to noise ordinances would incorporate these improvements. However, in seeking to update noise ordinances, it is important to carefully examine the actual ramifications of the wording, practices and limitations being proposed. Words and wording matter a great deal in municipal noise codes. For example, the use of the word “maximum” is often used differently in noise codes than it is understood in acoustical instrumentation terminology. Another example is the difference between the phrases “shall not exceed” the code noise limit and “shall not cause the noise to exceed” the code noise limit. And finally, some ordinances provide additional adjustments to the noise code whenever the ambient noise is greater than the standard limits of the noise code. These examples, and others, can introduce certain unintended consequences in attempts to achieve project noise code compliance. This paper examines these code compliance challenges and possible remedies.