Community Noise Ordinance Research Articles

Establishing the appropriate maximum sound pressure levels in absence of a noise ordinance for a residential community near an indoor firing range.

Environmental noise surveys assess the ambient noise levels of a specific area, as well as any noise sources deemed inappropriate for the noise environment. Recently, an environmental noise survey was completed to understand the impact of an indoor firing range on adjacent residential properties. Because of the transient nature of the gunfire, day-night equivalent sound pressure level (Ldn), a standard found often in community noise ordinances, was deemed an inappropriate metric to truly determine the intrusiveness of the noise on the surrounding environment. Rather, fast-response maximum sound pressure levels (Lmax) were captured and analyzed in their relation to ambient background noise levels for their effectiveness in translating the impact of the gunfire on adjacent residential properties. Furthermore, multiple frequency-weighting filters were applied to these measurements to fully understand the characteristics of this broadband, high-impact noise. This paper discusses the appropriateness of Lmax when focusing on transient environmental noise levels caused by an indoor firing range as well as how these metrics should be characterized in community noise ordinances.

Review of Sixty U.S. Environmental Community Noise Ordinances.

Review of Sixty U.S. Environmental Community Noise Ordinances.

The reinstatement of Working Group 41 (ANSI S12.66) guidelines for developing a community noise ordinance or regulation: First steps

The reinstatement of Working Group 41 (ANSI S12.66) guidelines for developing a community noise ordinance or regulation: First steps

Traffic-Noise Assessment at Rush Hours in Quetta City

Noise is an environmental stressor, which leads to various ailments due to the physiological and psychological stresses it creates. It is essential to understand and evaluate the contributing factors of environmental noise, especially in densely polluted areas near major roads, railways and airports, for public health policy and planning. Noise level measurement permits precise and scientific analysis of noise annoyance, and therefore, this study aimed to determine the average noise levels of Quetta city. Seventy-three (73) location’s equivalent noise levels (Leq) were measured at peak rush hours for three consecutive days. Selected areas for measurement included health care centres, educational centres, government offices, public places, residential and commercial areas. All the selected sites were located near to main roads, where the traffic noise was the most prominent noise source. Noise was measured through calibrated microprocessor sound level meter. The results were computed by taking the mean of the three readings. The results showed 74 dBA as average noise level of Quetta city. It has been found that 90% of the selected locations in Quetta city exceeded the 65dBA, while 10 % of the total locations ranged between 55 to 65 dBA. The average noise exposure of the Quetta city was greater than the permissible international noise standard. This study identified the main traffic hubs of Quetta city, which requires mitigation strategies by the policy makers specifically for Health care and Educational sectors. It also requires adequate updated plans for community noise survey and ordinance.

Traffic-Noise Assessment at Rush Hours in Quetta City

Noise is an environmental stressor, which leads to various ailments due to the physiological and psychological stresses it creates. It is essential to understand and evaluate the contributing factors of environmental noise, especially in densely polluted areas near major roads, railways and airports, for public health policy and planning. Noise level measurement permits precise and scientific analysis of noise annoyance, and therefore, this study aimed to determine the average noise levels of Quetta city. Seventy-three (73) location’s equivalent noise levels (L eq ) were measured at peak rush hours for three consecutive days. Selected areas for measurement included health care centres, educational centres, government offices, public places, residential and commercial areas. All the selected sites were located near to main roads, where the traffic noise was the most prominent noise source. Noise was measured through calibrated microprocessor sound level meter. The results were computed by taking the mean of the three readings. The results showed 74 dBA as average noise level of Quetta city. It has been found that 90% of the selected locations in Quetta city exceeded the 65dBA, while 10 % of the total locations ranged between 55 to 65 dBA. The average noise exposure of the Quetta city was greater than the permissible international noise standard. This study identified the main traffic hubs of Quetta city, which requires mitigation strategies by the policy makers specifically for Health care and Educational sectors. It also requires adequate updated plans for community noise survey and ordinance.

Traffic-Noise Assessment at Rush Hours in Quetta City

Noise is an environmental stressor, which leads to various ailments due to the physiological and psychological stresses it creates. It is essential to understand and evaluate the contributing factors of environmental noise, especially in densely polluted areas near major roads, railways and airports, for public health policy and planning. Noise level measurement permits precise and scientific analysis of noise annoyance, and therefore, this study aimed to determine the average noise levels of Quetta city. Seventy-three (73) location’s equivalent noise levels (L eq ) were measured at peak rush hours for three consecutive days. Selected areas for measurement included health care centres, educational centres, government offices, public places, residential and commercial areas. All the selected sites were located near to main roads, where the traffic noise was the most prominent noise source. Noise was measured through calibrated microprocessor sound level meter. The results were computed by taking the mean of the three readings. The results showed 74 dBA as average noise level of Quetta city. It has been found that 90% of the selected locations in Quetta city exceeded the 65dBA, while 10 % of the total locations ranged between 55 to 65 dBA. The average noise exposure of the Quetta city was greater than the permissible international noise standard. This study identified the main traffic hubs of Quetta city, which requires mitigation strategies by the policy makers specifically for Health care and Educational sectors. It also requires adequate updated plans for community noise survey and ordinance.

Community-based infrasound investigation

Infrasound is not only associated with wind turbines and volcanoes. Low levels of disturbing infrasound that can have long term adverse impact on residents are also associated with sources such as bridges, transportation, barges, mechanical equipment and entertainment sound systems. This paper describes measurements to identify potential infrasound sources impacting a residence in a Mississippi River town in Minnesota. Initial monitoring was performed in a second floor room over a 24 h period with five samples up to 30 min using an Apollo sound analyzer. Supplemented with sound level meter readings, an average peak at 12.5 Hz appears to be associated with a nearby river crossing bridge. Peaks at this frequency peaks can not be attributed to room dimensions. Subsequent readings were taken in several rooms and outside with a micro-barometer system. These data supported earlier readings but showed differences between rooms and indoor and outdoor spectra. Unfortunately there are no standards or guidelines for indoor infrasound levels and only limited solutions for addressing these community infrasound sources. Whether or how infrasound could be incorporated into community noise ordinances that could possibly prevent adverse residential exposure to infrasound will be discussed.

A draft model community noise ordinance

Once upon a time, it was hoped that the sound level meter would solve all noise pollution problems for communities with clear objective criteria for acceptable and unacceptable noise. That hope failed to be realized because the volume of noise complaints is overwhelming. In the real world, the police cannot respond with a sound level meter to each of the millions of noise calls they receive each year. Yet clearly, decibel levels and sound level meters are critical to noise regulation. This dilemma has stumped the ANSI Model Community Noise Ordinance Working Group for more than 20 years. To avoid this dilemma, this paper proposes a model noise ordinance developed so that police departments can respond to millions of calls each year due to noise, using not just one, but a number of regulatory tools, including (1) nuisance laws, (2) decibel based regulations, (3) operational restrictions (such as setbacks, time of day restrictions, or restrictions based on zoning district), (4) prohibitions (such as no non-emergency honking, no jake brakes, no radios on buses or beaches), (5) equipment requirements (such as muffers or the EPA stamp on motorcycle mufflers), and (6) the plainly audible standard at a specific distance.

Types of regulatory tools and their advantages, limitations, and disadvantages in a Model Noise Ordinance Standard

The American National Standards Institute is developing a model community noise ordinance. There are seven types of regulatory tools available to communities to regulate noise that can be used in a model noise ordinance. These include (1) nuisance based regulations, (2) disturbing the peace regulations, (3) decibel based regulations, (4) plainly audible regulations, (5) operational restrictions and prohibitions, (6) equipment requirements, and (7) quiet zones. In this paper, each is described, as well as the advantages, limitations, and disadvantages of each tool. A Matrix of Advantages of Regulatory Tools Used in Community Noise Regulation is presented and provides easy comparison between the regulatory tools. This matrix can provide the basis for a proposed Model Noise Ordinance standard.

Enforcement of local community noise ordinances in the United States

This paper is a follow-up of The Analysis of 500 Noise Ordinances, presented at the 171 Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America. In the first paper, the noise ordinances from the 500 largest communities in the United States were analyzed with respect to the regulatory tools, metrics and criteria communities use to regulate noise. The prevalence of various techniques employed in noise regulations were presented and discussed. The regulatory tools and techniques analyzed included pressure level limits, as well as nuisance, disturbing the peace, plainly audible, minimum distance, and time of day based regulations. In this paper, a random sample of the 500 noise ordinances were chosen, and the police departments in those cities were contacted, to determine how the ordinances were enforced, what regulatory tools were relied upon in enforcement, and why those tools and not others in the noise ordinance were used. Particular attention is given the role of decibel based regulatory tools including A-weighted, C-weighted, and octave band metrics in police enforcement of noise ordinances.

Evolving community noise ordinances in central Florida

This paper describes recent occurrences of noise ordinance overhauls in central Florida for the City of Winter Springs and Hillsborough County, Florida. In each case, the existing Lmax based ordinances had proven over the years to be ineffective and were not serving their communities. These noise ordinances were similar to many found across the U.S. but were not reliable methods of determining community noise violators that warranted action. This paper explains the methodology used to produce a “performance based” noise ordinance that meets the needs of both the community and local personnel responsible for enforcement.

Progress report—American National Standards Institute Community Noise Standard

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Accredited Standards Committee S12 (Noise) Working Group (WG) 41 has been developing a draft community noise standard document for over 13 years. The purpose of the document is to provide guidance to government officials, acoustical consultants, and other interested persons on how to develop a community noise ordinance or regulation, which is appropriate for the existing local circumstances. The current version of the document embodies significant revisions, based on the inputs of many stakeholders in the community noise arena, including industry, government, consulting, and the public. The document addresses issues such as public and government priorities and values, and available resources, and also provides the technical basis to manage the local sound environment. The keys to the effectiveness of the document are that it provides a menu of options for the user, discusses the trade-offs involved for decisions that must be made by government officials, and emphasizes that enforcement of a community noise ordinance is crucial to its success. Recent progress made by the Working Group in drafting this standard is reported.

Proposed standard—Guidance for developing state noise regulations and local noise ordinances

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Accredited Standards Committee S12 (Noise) Working Group (WG) 41 has been developing a draft standards document for over 12 years. The current document is in Draft #9, now under development. This document represents the consensus of many stakeholders in the community noise arena, including industry, government, consulting, and the public. The purpose of the document is to provide guidance to government officials, acoustical consultants, and other interested persons on how to develop a community noise ordinance or regulation, which is appropriate for the existing local circumstances. The document addresses issues such as public and government priorities and values, and available resources, and also provides the technical basis to manage the local sound environment. The keys to the effectiveness of the document are that it provides a menu of options for the user, discusses the trade-offs involved for decisions that must be made by government officials, and emphasizes that enforcement of a community noise ordinance is crucial to its success. A description of the current draft is presented.

Proposed standard‐Guidance for Developing State Noise Regulations and Local Noise Ordinances.

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Accredited Standards Committee S12 (Noise) Working Group (WG) 41 has been developing a draft standards document for over 12 years. The current document is in Draft #9, now under development. This document represents the consensus of many stakeholders in the community noise arena, including industry, government, consulting, and the public. The purpose of the document is to provide guidance to government officials, acoustical consultants, and other interested persons on how to develop a community noise ordinance or regulation, which is appropriate for the existing local circumstances. The document addresses issues such as public and government priorities and values, and available resources, and also provides the technical basis to manage the local sound environment. The keys to the effectiveness of the document are that it provides a menu of options for the user, discusses the trade-offs involved for decisions that must be made by government officials, and emphasizes that enforcement of a community noise ordinance is crucial to its success. A description of the current draft is presented.

Model community noise ordinance—A new approach to community based policy

This paper describes the progress of work ongoing to develop a model community noise ordinance as a U.S. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) national Standard. The Standard expected to result from the efforts of ANSI S12 (Noise) Working Group 41 will provide guidance to governmental officials, acoustical consultants, and other interested persons on how to develop a community noise ordinance which is appropriate for the existing local circumstances, including issues such as public and government priorities and values, available resources, etc. It will give local communities a technical basis for being able to manage their local sound environment and will be sufficiently flexible to be tailored to the needs of a variety of urban, suburban, and rural communities. The key to the usefulness and effectiveness of this new Standard is that it will provide a ‘‘menu’’ of options and will also provide brief discussions of the tradeoffs involved for decisions that must be made by government officials. It will also emphasize that enforcement of a community noise ordinance is crucial to its success and will provide a means to accomplish this important function.

Progress on a Model Community Noise Ordinance Standard

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Accredited Standards Committee S12, Noise, has charged its Working Group (WG) 41 to develop a model community noise ordinance standard. This ordinance, or group of ordinances, should be suitable for various urban, suburban, and rural communities. This new standard will include, at a minimum, metrics, criteria, and an enforcement methodology. The model ordinance(s) could be used by local authorities around the United States as a basis for their own ordinances or zoning performance regulations. To date, WG 41 has developed a draft ordinance with three sets of criteria. The first set includes familiar A-weighted sound pressure level (SPL) limits for noise emissions at a receiver’s property line. The other criteria sets include additional limits on low frequency noise emitters, such as industrial plants, musical entertainment at night clubs, and noise from automobiles. One criteria set uses C-weighted SPL noise limits. The other places limits on the allowable noise levels in specific octave bands, including the low frequency (bass) octave bands. The relative advantages of each criteria set are discussed and guidance is provided to assist local government officials in selecting the most appropriate approach for their community.

Noise ordinances: The good, the bad, and the ugly; An overview of more than 200 existing noise ordinances

The Noise Pollution Clearinghouse (NPC) has collected more than 200 community noise ordinances and state noise regulations and is in the process of putting them in the NPC Online Law Library. This paper provides an overview of existing noise ordinances, examining what’s covered and what’s missing, as well as what’s enforceable and what’s unenforceable. In addition, the paper will include a summary of how communities are handling various noise problems such as impulsive noise, boom cars, lawn equipment, air conditioners, etc. Finally, new and emerging issues in community noise control and enforcement are discussed.

Hot new topics in ASA/ANSI standardization

The ASA Committee on Standards has many new work efforts underway. As chairman of the ANSI S12 committee (noise), this author is primarily versed in the hot new noise standards being developed. Hence, this paper will concentrate on noise standards. (The S12 committee can be considered the counterpart to ISO TC 43/SC 1 and concentrates on noise.) Several new efforts are underway in S-12, including (1) classroom acoustics, (2) room noise criteria, (3) model community noise ordinances, (4) community noise assessment, (5) consumer product noise labeling, and (6) in situ hearing protector measurements. In addition, there is a new effort in the S-3 committee (bioacoustics) dealing with warning signal definitions. Clearly, these new topics depart from many of the traditional standards topics such as measurement of workplace machinery noise or office and business equipment noise. Rather, these new work efforts concentrate on criteria development, measures to assess response to noise in various settings, or various human interactions with sound, etc. Several of these topics, such as community noise assessment, noise labeling, or hearing protector measurement, relate to ongoing international efforts. This paper will briefly describe the goals, progress, key contacts, and schedules for these work efforts.

Enforcement of a quantitative noise ordinance

Quantitative community noise ordinances are currently implemented in only a few municipal jurisdictions around the world. Comparative studies conducted by the Ontario Ministry of Environment show that significant differences exist in philosophy, law and measurement procedures between these jurisdictions, leading to varying interpretations of the allowable background (baseline) noise level for a given place and time of day. For legal purposes, the degree and quality of the offending noise excess above the allowable background (baseline) level must be determined quantitatively if this type of local community ordinance is to be enforced. Techniques for quantitative investigation of nuisance complaints due to common noise sources in the local community are discussed. Measurements, using some of the latest types of sound level measuring devices, are analyzed to suggest a rational solution to the problem.

Community noise ordinance drafting by a city ad‐hoc noise committee

Through motivation by a city councilman, Charles Petree, an ad‐hoc committee was formed to review existing city noise‐related codes. Representation included city council staff, the health, zoning, and police departments, an acoustical consultant, the industrial commission and building association, the society of professional engineers, the electric company, and a private citizen. This body met many times over one year to review codes and ordinances. Recommendations included consolidating all noise related codes and ordinances into one addendum to the City Code. Additions against squealing tires, limits on motorboat noise, and the replacement of octave‐band limits for manufacturing districts with Leq limits along common residential/institutional/commercial/manufacturing property lines were made. The police department concluded that the existing muffler ordinance requiring “a muffler in good working condition with baffle plates …” was satisfactory for enforcement. These recommendations—to be detailed in the presentation—are being submitted to the City Council for action. Airport noise, as it affects land use and zoning actions, will be treated during calender year 1980.