Side Benefits of Boom Car Noise Enforcement
Police who stop vehicles for loud stereos often find more than powerful audio equipment. They find drugs, firearms and people who are wanted for committing crimes. They also find people driving without a license, safety check or registration.
Enforcement of noise laws has also led to the recovery of stolen goods. Stopping of Boom Cars by police has not only served to bring peace and quiet back to neighborhoods and streets, but has decreased the crime rate as well.
Talk to your local police captain to see what they can do about enforcing existing laws.
Friday, December 15, 2006
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Boom Cars on the Big Island
You are in your home enjoying your dinner when suddenly a strange THUMP! THUMP! KA-THUMP! invades your space. It is felt as much as heard. A deep vibration that is annoying and unsettling. How about this: You are in your car, diving along or perhaps at a traffic stop when BOOMP, BOOMP, KA-BOOMP invades your vehicle to the extent you can't hear your own music or converse with your passengers. There's no escape. it is assault by noise.
You are a victim of the ever growing "Boom Car" syndrome. People purchase powerful amplifiers, connected to drivers that occupy much of the space in their vehicle, to create bass that will travel a very long distance. These sounds are in the double digit Hertz range and have the power to actually move move objects. The technology has actually been considered for military purposes to disable and disrupt opposing forces.
With the advent of superb headphones, why would anyone need to have something in their car powerful enough to be heard a block away? The answer lies in psychology 101. The "look at me" condition. The lack of any social responsibility means the owner of the equipment believe they can do whatever they want without any consideration for the effect on others.
Many local governments have enacted tough laws to deal with the problem. Here is a public service TV announcement from Gulfport:
Gulfport TV spot
We do have noise laws on the Big Island to address the problem:
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Section 14-18. Use of sound reproducing devices in public areas.
(a) It shall be a violation of law for any person or persons to play, use, operate, or permit to be played, used, or operated, any radio, tape recorder, cassette player, or other machine or device for reproducing sound, if:
(1) Such machine or device is located in or on:
(A) Any public property, including any public street, highway, building, sidewalk, park, or thoroughfare; or
(B) Any motor vehicle on a public street, highway, or public space; and
(2) The sound generated by such machine or device is audible at a distance of fifty feet from the machine or device producing the sound.
(b) Possession by a person or persons of any of the machines or devices enumerated in subsection (a) shall be prima facie evidence that that person, or those persons, operated the machine or device at the time in question, in violation of this section.
(1975 C.C., c. 6, art. 11, sec. 11; Am. 1990, Ord. No. 90-65, sec. 2.)
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Obviously, we need to encourage our local police to enforce the existing law. We must petition the legislature to reduce the existing pollution distance of 50 feet to 20 feet now used for most codes.
You are in your home enjoying your dinner when suddenly a strange THUMP! THUMP! KA-THUMP! invades your space. It is felt as much as heard. A deep vibration that is annoying and unsettling. How about this: You are in your car, diving along or perhaps at a traffic stop when BOOMP, BOOMP, KA-BOOMP invades your vehicle to the extent you can't hear your own music or converse with your passengers. There's no escape. it is assault by noise.
You are a victim of the ever growing "Boom Car" syndrome. People purchase powerful amplifiers, connected to drivers that occupy much of the space in their vehicle, to create bass that will travel a very long distance. These sounds are in the double digit Hertz range and have the power to actually move move objects. The technology has actually been considered for military purposes to disable and disrupt opposing forces.
With the advent of superb headphones, why would anyone need to have something in their car powerful enough to be heard a block away? The answer lies in psychology 101. The "look at me" condition. The lack of any social responsibility means the owner of the equipment believe they can do whatever they want without any consideration for the effect on others.
Many local governments have enacted tough laws to deal with the problem. Here is a public service TV announcement from Gulfport:
Gulfport TV spot
We do have noise laws on the Big Island to address the problem:
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Section 14-18. Use of sound reproducing devices in public areas.
(a) It shall be a violation of law for any person or persons to play, use, operate, or permit to be played, used, or operated, any radio, tape recorder, cassette player, or other machine or device for reproducing sound, if:
(1) Such machine or device is located in or on:
(A) Any public property, including any public street, highway, building, sidewalk, park, or thoroughfare; or
(B) Any motor vehicle on a public street, highway, or public space; and
(2) The sound generated by such machine or device is audible at a distance of fifty feet from the machine or device producing the sound.
(b) Possession by a person or persons of any of the machines or devices enumerated in subsection (a) shall be prima facie evidence that that person, or those persons, operated the machine or device at the time in question, in violation of this section.
(1975 C.C., c. 6, art. 11, sec. 11; Am. 1990, Ord. No. 90-65, sec. 2.)
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Obviously, we need to encourage our local police to enforce the existing law. We must petition the legislature to reduce the existing pollution distance of 50 feet to 20 feet now used for most codes.
Monday, November 13, 2006
Hawaii County Council Dirt Tack Resolution
On November 14, 2006 the Council will hear a resolution to support a joint county/private development of a track for off highway vehicles (OHVs) in the Hamakua District. The idea is to offer a safe and environmentally friendly alternative to the current outlaw riding on private and public lands. In general we support such initiatives. However, careful consideration must be given to the effect on surrounding properties. Environmental aspects including noise, soil erosion, and the destruction of plant life and animal habitats must be factored into the location and site preparation. Track noise footprint is paramount. Noise measured at the boundary of adjacent receiving properties should not exceed the recognized rural standard of 49 dbA.
Vehicle safety and noise criteria, as well as operator safety rules, must be established. There is ample boilerplate for this work. Many states, including California, have had public tracks for some time and have developed vehicle and operator safety directives. The requirement to register OHVs will go along way toward insuring that these vehicles are safer and friendly to the environment.
There is a significant caveat to the creation of legal riding areas. There must be concomitant OHV legislation to deter those who choose not to use approved tracks but continue outlaw operation on public and private land. OHV use should be restricted to approved public and private areas. Approval for private tracks would require the same criteria as imposed upon the public facilities. Operation of an OHV in a non-approved areas should be subject to vehicle confiscation by local law enforcement. Without such changes in the County Code there is no incentive for those that terrorize rural neighborhoods with noise to switch to an approved track.
While public tracks are a step in the right direction the County must be careful that it doesn't unintentionally create a nightmare for the surrounding area.
On November 14, 2006 the Council will hear a resolution to support a joint county/private development of a track for off highway vehicles (OHVs) in the Hamakua District. The idea is to offer a safe and environmentally friendly alternative to the current outlaw riding on private and public lands. In general we support such initiatives. However, careful consideration must be given to the effect on surrounding properties. Environmental aspects including noise, soil erosion, and the destruction of plant life and animal habitats must be factored into the location and site preparation. Track noise footprint is paramount. Noise measured at the boundary of adjacent receiving properties should not exceed the recognized rural standard of 49 dbA.
Vehicle safety and noise criteria, as well as operator safety rules, must be established. There is ample boilerplate for this work. Many states, including California, have had public tracks for some time and have developed vehicle and operator safety directives. The requirement to register OHVs will go along way toward insuring that these vehicles are safer and friendly to the environment.
There is a significant caveat to the creation of legal riding areas. There must be concomitant OHV legislation to deter those who choose not to use approved tracks but continue outlaw operation on public and private land. OHV use should be restricted to approved public and private areas. Approval for private tracks would require the same criteria as imposed upon the public facilities. Operation of an OHV in a non-approved areas should be subject to vehicle confiscation by local law enforcement. Without such changes in the County Code there is no incentive for those that terrorize rural neighborhoods with noise to switch to an approved track.
While public tracks are a step in the right direction the County must be careful that it doesn't unintentionally create a nightmare for the surrounding area.
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Hawaii needs comprehensive anti-noise legislation
Noise pollution must be an integral part of a comprehensive environmental protection program. Local police must be given enforcement power to cite violators.
The rapid growth of recreational noise generating devices that adversely affect the quality of life indicates a need for quick action.
Examples include off road recreational vehicles, after market exhaust systems on street vehicles and mega amplified bass from vehicles and residences. Increasingly there is no escape from the onslaught of noise. Scenic spots where one might go to enjoy the natural environment are becoming rare. Even in one's own residence there is no escape.
States and municipalities are increasingly addressing noise pollution and it is time to do so in Hawaii. As a worldwide tourist destination it is important that Hawaii maintain the image of a tropical paradise. Visitors and residents alike should be able to enjoy a quality experience, free from the effects of noise.
Today we have a hodgepodge of rules and statutes that address noise as an adjunct to other activities such as land use laws, Health Department rules, animal nuisance ordinances, noise control in public places and vehicle codes. As written they assign enforcement to government entities that are ill equipped to do so.
It is time to contact your legislators and begin to confront this major quality of life issue.
Noise pollution must be an integral part of a comprehensive environmental protection program. Local police must be given enforcement power to cite violators.
The rapid growth of recreational noise generating devices that adversely affect the quality of life indicates a need for quick action.
Examples include off road recreational vehicles, after market exhaust systems on street vehicles and mega amplified bass from vehicles and residences. Increasingly there is no escape from the onslaught of noise. Scenic spots where one might go to enjoy the natural environment are becoming rare. Even in one's own residence there is no escape.
States and municipalities are increasingly addressing noise pollution and it is time to do so in Hawaii. As a worldwide tourist destination it is important that Hawaii maintain the image of a tropical paradise. Visitors and residents alike should be able to enjoy a quality experience, free from the effects of noise.
Today we have a hodgepodge of rules and statutes that address noise as an adjunct to other activities such as land use laws, Health Department rules, animal nuisance ordinances, noise control in public places and vehicle codes. As written they assign enforcement to government entities that are ill equipped to do so.
It is time to contact your legislators and begin to confront this major quality of life issue.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Noise Pollution Related to Lack of Manners
From "The Scotsman"
Experts say the death of chivalry is leading to increasing hostility in
society.
Poll finds manners no longer maketh the man
STEPHEN McGINTY
* 80% of online poll respondents say public losing good manners
* 70% believe people have lost art of speaking correctly
* Manners first became fashionable in medieval Florence
Key quote "We value manners, not only because they promote good behaviour,
but, most importantly, they curb bad behaviour. They are the oil that
smoothes our path. People feel that society is more hostile and so may act
in a more hostile manner. When someone asks a group to stop making such a
noise, he gets stabbed or beaten" - Dr Colin Gill, chartered psychologist
Story in full THE door, once held open for a lady, has been slammed shut.
The tipped hat has been knocked askew and the punctual arrival is late. The
British public is mourning the loss of good manners, according to a new
survey.
Good manners, described as the noise you don't make when you're eating soup,
came top of a poll of life skills which the British public believes are
dying out. While other lost skills include the art of the letter- writing,
needlework and car maintenance, the greatest concern of 5,200 people, polled
by the website Videojug
public etiquette.
The rise of antisocial behaviour and the fall in polite conversation meant
80 per cent of those polled said good manners, built up over hundreds of
years, had been replaced by today's yobbish behaviour.
Last night Thomas Blaikie, the author of Blaikie's Guide to Good Manners
said: "I'm not surprised by the results. I think a lot of people do get hot
and bothered about what we think of as poor manners. Today when you go out
to the supermarket people don't smile at each other, it's as if you don't
exist. When you go out with your friends they spend half the time talking on
their mobile phones to friends who aren't even there."
Punctuality, which came 12th in the list of lost skills, and good
conversation which came 13th, are two of Mr Blaikie's major issues.
As he explained: "People turn up 40 minutes late and if you complain they
look at you as if you are mad. While even in a relaxed conversation people
find it difficult to talk to each other without asking crass or intrusive
questions."
There is evidence that the British public has had quite enough of bad
manners. This year 1,671 people complained to the Advertising Standards
Agency about an advert for Kentucky Fried Chicken which showed call centre
workers singing with their mouths full of food.
While China issues instructions on the correct way for a tourist to behave
in Britain, for example, if lost for words he or she should discuss dogs or
inquire if a person has seen the film Bridget Jones's Diary, Britain has
abandoned the strict rules that previously governed social behaviour.
Andrew Roberts, the historian and author of A History of the
English-Speaking Peoples since 1900, said last night it was refreshing that
people wished to see a return to good manners. "In the 1960s it was deemed
to be the right thing to do to ditch the old Victorian values and examples
of proper behaviour," he said.
"But today we can see that it was a precursor to crime, yobbishness and the
ASBO. In 1900 the average working man would be expected to comport himself
as a gentleman.
"The aristocracy of the working classes prided themselves on behaving better
than the genuine aristocracy, many of whom were frequently drunk in public."
The poll revealed many people believe that basic courtesies are now lacking
such as neighbourliness - rated fourth - as working family patterns result
in fewer people knowing their near neighbours.
The art of speaking correctly came in at fifth place, with nearly seven in
ten of those polled believing current generations have lost the ability to
communicate in a grammatically correct manner.
Manners first developed in Florence during the Renaissance as a method of
setting a person apart as a gentleman, and the fashion was later adopted in
Britain. It was manners, according to Dr Colin Gill, a chartered
psychologist, that allowed society to slowly begin to move away from
behaving, on pure instinct, violently.
He said: "We value manners, not only because they promote good behaviour,
but, most importantly, they curb bad behaviour. They are the oil that
smoothes our path. People feel that society is more hostile and so may act
in a more hostile manner. When someone asks a group to stop making such a
noise, he gets stabbed or beaten."
The poll also found 76 per cent of adults believe there is an "urgent need"
to preserve the basic skills which are dying out, from politeness to the
more practical art of DIY. There were even 12 per cent who believe it is
worth preserving political correctness as a British skill, although this
only managed to squeeze in at number 20 in the table.
The reason for the decline was put down by three in four people as laziness,
while 56 per cent believe people today rely on others too much to learn such
talents themselves. However it is also a common belief that parents are not
passing on traditions to their youngsters, with received wisdom named in the
top 20 of dying skills.
From "The Scotsman"
Experts say the death of chivalry is leading to increasing hostility in
society.
Poll finds manners no longer maketh the man
STEPHEN McGINTY
* 80% of online poll respondents say public losing good manners
* 70% believe people have lost art of speaking correctly
* Manners first became fashionable in medieval Florence
Key quote "We value manners, not only because they promote good behaviour,
but, most importantly, they curb bad behaviour. They are the oil that
smoothes our path. People feel that society is more hostile and so may act
in a more hostile manner. When someone asks a group to stop making such a
noise, he gets stabbed or beaten" - Dr Colin Gill, chartered psychologist
Story in full THE door, once held open for a lady, has been slammed shut.
The tipped hat has been knocked askew and the punctual arrival is late. The
British public is mourning the loss of good manners, according to a new
survey.
Good manners, described as the noise you don't make when you're eating soup,
came top of a poll of life skills which the British public believes are
dying out. While other lost skills include the art of the letter- writing,
needlework and car maintenance, the greatest concern of 5,200 people, polled
by the website Videojug
public etiquette.
The rise of antisocial behaviour and the fall in polite conversation meant
80 per cent of those polled said good manners, built up over hundreds of
years, had been replaced by today's yobbish behaviour.
Last night Thomas Blaikie, the author of Blaikie's Guide to Good Manners
said: "I'm not surprised by the results. I think a lot of people do get hot
and bothered about what we think of as poor manners. Today when you go out
to the supermarket people don't smile at each other, it's as if you don't
exist. When you go out with your friends they spend half the time talking on
their mobile phones to friends who aren't even there."
Punctuality, which came 12th in the list of lost skills, and good
conversation which came 13th, are two of Mr Blaikie's major issues.
As he explained: "People turn up 40 minutes late and if you complain they
look at you as if you are mad. While even in a relaxed conversation people
find it difficult to talk to each other without asking crass or intrusive
questions."
There is evidence that the British public has had quite enough of bad
manners. This year 1,671 people complained to the Advertising Standards
Agency about an advert for Kentucky Fried Chicken which showed call centre
workers singing with their mouths full of food.
While China issues instructions on the correct way for a tourist to behave
in Britain, for example, if lost for words he or she should discuss dogs or
inquire if a person has seen the film Bridget Jones's Diary, Britain has
abandoned the strict rules that previously governed social behaviour.
Andrew Roberts, the historian and author of A History of the
English-Speaking Peoples since 1900, said last night it was refreshing that
people wished to see a return to good manners. "In the 1960s it was deemed
to be the right thing to do to ditch the old Victorian values and examples
of proper behaviour," he said.
"But today we can see that it was a precursor to crime, yobbishness and the
ASBO. In 1900 the average working man would be expected to comport himself
as a gentleman.
"The aristocracy of the working classes prided themselves on behaving better
than the genuine aristocracy, many of whom were frequently drunk in public."
The poll revealed many people believe that basic courtesies are now lacking
such as neighbourliness - rated fourth - as working family patterns result
in fewer people knowing their near neighbours.
The art of speaking correctly came in at fifth place, with nearly seven in
ten of those polled believing current generations have lost the ability to
communicate in a grammatically correct manner.
Manners first developed in Florence during the Renaissance as a method of
setting a person apart as a gentleman, and the fashion was later adopted in
Britain. It was manners, according to Dr Colin Gill, a chartered
psychologist, that allowed society to slowly begin to move away from
behaving, on pure instinct, violently.
He said: "We value manners, not only because they promote good behaviour,
but, most importantly, they curb bad behaviour. They are the oil that
smoothes our path. People feel that society is more hostile and so may act
in a more hostile manner. When someone asks a group to stop making such a
noise, he gets stabbed or beaten."
The poll also found 76 per cent of adults believe there is an "urgent need"
to preserve the basic skills which are dying out, from politeness to the
more practical art of DIY. There were even 12 per cent who believe it is
worth preserving political correctness as a British skill, although this
only managed to squeeze in at number 20 in the table.
The reason for the decline was put down by three in four people as laziness,
while 56 per cent believe people today rely on others too much to learn such
talents themselves. However it is also a common belief that parents are not
passing on traditions to their youngsters, with received wisdom named in the
top 20 of dying skills.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Saturday, September 09, 2006
Council may sharpen bite of loud dog law
Owners of barking dogs whose canines are found in violation of a noise ordinance could be hit with a $1,000 fine and might have to surrender their animals if a bill introduced yesterday passes the City Council.
The ordinance, proposed by Honolulu Councilwoman Rene Mansho, would stiffen current penalties -- a first time offense will increase to $50 from $25; a second offense within two years of the first will come with a $100 fine.
Subsequent offenses will run between $500 and $1,000, up from the previous $100 limit.
The bill also proposes that a court can require as part of the sentence for any offense, to "train an animal ... to stop the nuisance which caused the offense."
(Now, if only we can raise the level of awareness of other types of noise pollution to that of the barking dog we would be making significant progress.)
Owners of barking dogs whose canines are found in violation of a noise ordinance could be hit with a $1,000 fine and might have to surrender their animals if a bill introduced yesterday passes the City Council.
The ordinance, proposed by Honolulu Councilwoman Rene Mansho, would stiffen current penalties -- a first time offense will increase to $50 from $25; a second offense within two years of the first will come with a $100 fine.
Subsequent offenses will run between $500 and $1,000, up from the previous $100 limit.
The bill also proposes that a court can require as part of the sentence for any offense, to "train an animal ... to stop the nuisance which caused the offense."
(Now, if only we can raise the level of awareness of other types of noise pollution to that of the barking dog we would be making significant progress.)
Monday, August 28, 2006
Honolulu Advertiser story on ATVs in Hawaii 8/28/06
ATVs stuggle to find niche amid concerns
This well written piece addresses the concerns of many in Hawaii about the effects of these vehicles on the environment. It points out that they cause erosion and run off and some riders have marked up ancient volcanic cinder cones. The piece did not touch on the noise pollution aspect. I emailed the writer the following:
Aloha Mike,
Mahalo for the article on ATVs in Hawaii. Their effects on the landscape and the environment are well outlined in your article.
However, there is another environmental concern: noise pollution. Here on the Big Island we are plagued by indiscriminate use of ATVs and dirt bikes on private property and the noise they produce. Some riders remove the mufflers completely or install loud aftermarket exhausts. The Hawaii County administration does not respond to legitimate, documented complaints.
Clearly the state needs to look at regulating these vehicles with regard to their compliance with safety and noise specifications and also must restrict locations where they may be used.
The issue is addressed on our web site and blog: http://www.noisefreehawaii.org/
ATVs stuggle to find niche amid concerns
This well written piece addresses the concerns of many in Hawaii about the effects of these vehicles on the environment. It points out that they cause erosion and run off and some riders have marked up ancient volcanic cinder cones. The piece did not touch on the noise pollution aspect. I emailed the writer the following:
Aloha Mike,
Mahalo for the article on ATVs in Hawaii. Their effects on the landscape and the environment are well outlined in your article.
However, there is another environmental concern: noise pollution. Here on the Big Island we are plagued by indiscriminate use of ATVs and dirt bikes on private property and the noise they produce. Some riders remove the mufflers completely or install loud aftermarket exhausts. The Hawaii County administration does not respond to legitimate, documented complaints.
Clearly the state needs to look at regulating these vehicles with regard to their compliance with safety and noise specifications and also must restrict locations where they may be used.
The issue is addressed on our web site and blog: http://www.noisefreehawaii.org/
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Hawaii Dept. of Health Noise Control Excerpt
Comment:It seems unusual that Class C levels are higher than A or B when the ambient sound levels in the rural areas are very low, often below the threshold of measurement of 35 dbA. Class C also includes industrial areas. Perhaps the regulation was formulated to address the sugar plantations and their use of heavy agricultural equipment. The plantations are long gone and a revision to these regulations is required.
Excerpt:
§11-46-3 Classification of zoning districts. This section shall describe the zoning districts as specified in Table I, maximum permissible sound levels in dBA, found in section 11-46-4, and as provided in section 11-46-4:
(1) Class A zoning districts include all areas equivalent to lands zoned residential, conservation, preservation, public space, Open space, or similar type.
(2) Class B zoning districts include all areas equivalent to lands zoned for multi-family dwellings, apartment, business, commercial, hotel, resort, or similar type.
(3) Class C zoning districts include all areas equivalent to lands zoned agriculture, country, industrial, or similar type.
§11-46-4 Maximum permissible sound levels in dBA
(a) The maximum permissible sound levels specified in Table I, as provided in this subsection and in section 11-46-3, shall apply to the following excessive noise sources: stationary noise sources; and equipment related to agricultural, construction, and industrial activities.
Table I. Maximum permissible sounds levels in dBA.
Zoning Districts
Daytime
Nighttime
Class A
55
45
Class B
60
50
Class C
70
70
(b) The maximum permissible sound levels in Table I, as provided in subsection (a), shall apply to any excessive noise source emanating within the specified zoning district, and at any point at or beyond (past) the property line of the premises in a manner deemed appropriate by the director.
(c) Noise levels shall not exceed the maximum permissible sound levels for more than ten per cent of the time within any twenty minute period, except by permit or variance' issued under sections 11-46-7 and 11-46-8.
(d) For mixed zoning districts, the primary land use designation shall be used to determine the applicable zoning district class and the maximum permissible sound level.
(e) The maximum permissible sound level for impulsive noise shall be ten dBA above the maximum permissible sound levels specified in Table 1 of subsection (a). "Fast" meter response shall be used to measure these types of noise.
Comment:It seems unusual that Class C levels are higher than A or B when the ambient sound levels in the rural areas are very low, often below the threshold of measurement of 35 dbA. Class C also includes industrial areas. Perhaps the regulation was formulated to address the sugar plantations and their use of heavy agricultural equipment. The plantations are long gone and a revision to these regulations is required.
Excerpt:
§11-46-3 Classification of zoning districts. This section shall describe the zoning districts as specified in Table I, maximum permissible sound levels in dBA, found in section 11-46-4, and as provided in section 11-46-4:
(1) Class A zoning districts include all areas equivalent to lands zoned residential, conservation, preservation, public space, Open space, or similar type.
(2) Class B zoning districts include all areas equivalent to lands zoned for multi-family dwellings, apartment, business, commercial, hotel, resort, or similar type.
(3) Class C zoning districts include all areas equivalent to lands zoned agriculture, country, industrial, or similar type.
§11-46-4 Maximum permissible sound levels in dBA
(a) The maximum permissible sound levels specified in Table I, as provided in this subsection and in section 11-46-3, shall apply to the following excessive noise sources: stationary noise sources; and equipment related to agricultural, construction, and industrial activities.
Table I. Maximum permissible sounds levels in dBA.
Zoning Districts
Daytime
Nighttime
Class A
55
45
Class B
60
50
Class C
70
70
(b) The maximum permissible sound levels in Table I, as provided in subsection (a), shall apply to any excessive noise source emanating within the specified zoning district, and at any point at or beyond (past) the property line of the premises in a manner deemed appropriate by the director.
(c) Noise levels shall not exceed the maximum permissible sound levels for more than ten per cent of the time within any twenty minute period, except by permit or variance' issued under sections 11-46-7 and 11-46-8.
(d) For mixed zoning districts, the primary land use designation shall be used to determine the applicable zoning district class and the maximum permissible sound level.
(e) The maximum permissible sound level for impulsive noise shall be ten dBA above the maximum permissible sound levels specified in Table 1 of subsection (a). "Fast" meter response shall be used to measure these types of noise.
Monday, August 21, 2006
Hawaii is beginning to wake up to the music (noise).
Today's morning newspaper had an article on the resurgence of an anti-noise group in Hawaii. Made my day!
Read it here:
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060821/NEWS11/608210326/1001/
Today's morning newspaper had an article on the resurgence of an anti-noise group in Hawaii. Made my day!
Read it here:
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060821/NEWS11/608210326/1001/
Sunday, August 20, 2006
Big Island Police refuse to address noise complaints.
Police on the Big Island will not investigate a noise complaint on private property. Example: A police dispatcher on August 2, 2006 began to lecture a complainant and said "it's not that we don't want to investigate; we can only do what the county council tells us to do."
It is ironic that a dog barking continuously for twenty minutes can get a response, but ATVs and dirt bikes making more noise than all the hounds of hades and going on for three to six hours results in no action.
Police on the Big Island will not investigate a noise complaint on private property. Example: A police dispatcher on August 2, 2006 began to lecture a complainant and said "it's not that we don't want to investigate; we can only do what the county council tells us to do."
It is ironic that a dog barking continuously for twenty minutes can get a response, but ATVs and dirt bikes making more noise than all the hounds of hades and going on for three to six hours results in no action.
Friday, August 11, 2006
Hawaii-Paradise Lost Due to Noise?
Those who envision a trip to beautiful Hawaii can imagine the soft cooling trade winds, the lush green foliage, the cobalt blue ocean and the the intense colors of the flowers. Lush mountains rise in the distance below clear blue skies.
It's easy to sit back, close your eyes and see these wonders. But what if, at the same time, you heard the loud, booming staccato rasp of ATVs or the high pitched brrraaaap of dirt motorcycles? Then the entire experience would be lost.
Add the penetrating bass of boom cars and boom residences and you have an environment that few would want to spend money to experience.
Hawaii has not adequately addressed the increasing noise pollution and its effect on the vital tourism industry.
It may be time to start.
Those who envision a trip to beautiful Hawaii can imagine the soft cooling trade winds, the lush green foliage, the cobalt blue ocean and the the intense colors of the flowers. Lush mountains rise in the distance below clear blue skies.
It's easy to sit back, close your eyes and see these wonders. But what if, at the same time, you heard the loud, booming staccato rasp of ATVs or the high pitched brrraaaap of dirt motorcycles? Then the entire experience would be lost.
Add the penetrating bass of boom cars and boom residences and you have an environment that few would want to spend money to experience.
Hawaii has not adequately addressed the increasing noise pollution and its effect on the vital tourism industry.
It may be time to start.
Sunday, August 06, 2006
ATV/dirt bike noise emanating from private property.
ATV/dirt bike noise from vehicles on private property is no less destructive than if coming from public lands. Enforcement of noise laws is weak due to reluctance of police to enter private property to investigate a complaint.
National and local environmental groups have had little focus on noise pollution even though it is the fastest growing segment of pollutants. Their emphasis is on pollution on public lands or from industrial activity. Pollution from recreational activity has not received the attention it deserves.
Hawaii State Noise laws are administered by the Department of Health. Outer island enforcement is essentially zero. Vehicular noise on public streets does get some attention.
State land use laws which indirectly address noise pollution, are administered by the Hawaii County Planning Department. These folks just wish the complaints would go away and are not motivated to enforce. In fact, the County Planning Department does not respond to letters or voicemail messages. In spite of eleven months of more or less steady correspondence with state and county agencies, the Planning Department has done nothing.
ATV/dirt bike noise from vehicles on private property is no less destructive than if coming from public lands. Enforcement of noise laws is weak due to reluctance of police to enter private property to investigate a complaint.
National and local environmental groups have had little focus on noise pollution even though it is the fastest growing segment of pollutants. Their emphasis is on pollution on public lands or from industrial activity. Pollution from recreational activity has not received the attention it deserves.
Hawaii State Noise laws are administered by the Department of Health. Outer island enforcement is essentially zero. Vehicular noise on public streets does get some attention.
State land use laws which indirectly address noise pollution, are administered by the Hawaii County Planning Department. These folks just wish the complaints would go away and are not motivated to enforce. In fact, the County Planning Department does not respond to letters or voicemail messages. In spite of eleven months of more or less steady correspondence with state and county agencies, the Planning Department has done nothing.
Friday, July 28, 2006
Qualitative and quantitative characteristics of noise.
The qualitative aspect of noise determines what is annoying, punishing or downright maddening. The quantitative is simply the sound pressure, measured in decibels. An example of a fairly low sound level with a particularly irritating quality would be the venerable fingernails on the blackboard. This is a sound that many people will simply try to flee from. If unable to control it the adverse physical and psychological effects begin.
The sound from ATVs and dirt bikes have similar effects. The characteristics are abrupt and random changes in sound levels and pitch. The tone may vary from raspy to a roar to a screech.The unpredictability of the sound is what keeps the unwilling listener on edge.
The unwilling listener often has no escape. They may be in their own home or outdoors on their own property, but are unable to escape. Frustration, anger and even rage are the byproducts of this exposure.
The qualitative aspect of noise determines what is annoying, punishing or downright maddening. The quantitative is simply the sound pressure, measured in decibels. An example of a fairly low sound level with a particularly irritating quality would be the venerable fingernails on the blackboard. This is a sound that many people will simply try to flee from. If unable to control it the adverse physical and psychological effects begin.
The sound from ATVs and dirt bikes have similar effects. The characteristics are abrupt and random changes in sound levels and pitch. The tone may vary from raspy to a roar to a screech.The unpredictability of the sound is what keeps the unwilling listener on edge.
The unwilling listener often has no escape. They may be in their own home or outdoors on their own property, but are unable to escape. Frustration, anger and even rage are the byproducts of this exposure.
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
A responsible ATV rider speaks out.
Today I was introduced to an interesting fellow by a mutual friend. Local born and raised, he had some interesting things to say about ATV problems. He is a mature man and really enjoys the freedom his ATV gives him to explore beautiful areas on the Big Island that would otherwise be inaccessible. Once a month or so he gets permission from a friend that has a large area of ranch land and takes his grandchildren on ATVs to explore.
Before they ride he gives them the rules: Stay in one gear, no unnecessary revving of the engine, no racing or other foolishness. The first violation results in instant termination of the ride. He has asked for, and received permission many times to enter the property. The reason he is allowed to ride there is because he a responsible citizen trying to protect the environment and the rights of others.
He also told me of the joys of riding in pristine areas of Mauna Kea. Then one day he looked up and saw ATV tracks on a pristine volcanic cinder cone that had been untouched for a long time. Shortly thereafter riding was banned in the area, thereby taking away this responsible citizen's right to enjoy the lovely spot.
He lives in a rural area as I do and he told me of the distant roar of ATVs in the night that get louder and louder until they rocket past his home disturbing his family and his animals. He has called the police but the riders are gone before the police arrive. He also mentioned that he observed a vehicle towing a trailer with three or four ATVs pulling over to the side of a road by a wooded area near his home. The folks in the vehicle obviously were parents. They dropped their kids off to "have a good time" and would pick them some hours later. The kids tore up the area and made a lot of noise Someone called the police so now there is no riding in that area.
These people, in their selfish pursuit of their own enjoyment, have no idea that they are eroding the ability of their fellow riders to enjoy their activity. This gentleman is justifiably angry that the actions of a few uncaring individuals are affecting the enjoyment of his outdoor recreation.
Today I was introduced to an interesting fellow by a mutual friend. Local born and raised, he had some interesting things to say about ATV problems. He is a mature man and really enjoys the freedom his ATV gives him to explore beautiful areas on the Big Island that would otherwise be inaccessible. Once a month or so he gets permission from a friend that has a large area of ranch land and takes his grandchildren on ATVs to explore.
Before they ride he gives them the rules: Stay in one gear, no unnecessary revving of the engine, no racing or other foolishness. The first violation results in instant termination of the ride. He has asked for, and received permission many times to enter the property. The reason he is allowed to ride there is because he a responsible citizen trying to protect the environment and the rights of others.
He also told me of the joys of riding in pristine areas of Mauna Kea. Then one day he looked up and saw ATV tracks on a pristine volcanic cinder cone that had been untouched for a long time. Shortly thereafter riding was banned in the area, thereby taking away this responsible citizen's right to enjoy the lovely spot.
He lives in a rural area as I do and he told me of the distant roar of ATVs in the night that get louder and louder until they rocket past his home disturbing his family and his animals. He has called the police but the riders are gone before the police arrive. He also mentioned that he observed a vehicle towing a trailer with three or four ATVs pulling over to the side of a road by a wooded area near his home. The folks in the vehicle obviously were parents. They dropped their kids off to "have a good time" and would pick them some hours later. The kids tore up the area and made a lot of noise Someone called the police so now there is no riding in that area.
These people, in their selfish pursuit of their own enjoyment, have no idea that they are eroding the ability of their fellow riders to enjoy their activity. This gentleman is justifiably angry that the actions of a few uncaring individuals are affecting the enjoyment of his outdoor recreation.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Second hand smoke and second hand noise.
Society has finally realized the hazards of second hand cigarette smoke. Many areas of the country have laws restricting smoking in areas where the by-products may affect others.
In the area of noise pollution we have a long way to go. Quiet areas are increasingly hard to come by. We are adversely affected on our own property and even inside our homes. Public awareness needs to be raised by various media campaigns. Cigarette manufacturers air anti-smoking ads as a result of lawsuit settlements. ATV, motorcycle and boom sound manufacturers would do the same if motivated by class action suits.
Society has finally realized the hazards of second hand cigarette smoke. Many areas of the country have laws restricting smoking in areas where the by-products may affect others.
In the area of noise pollution we have a long way to go. Quiet areas are increasingly hard to come by. We are adversely affected on our own property and even inside our homes. Public awareness needs to be raised by various media campaigns. Cigarette manufacturers air anti-smoking ads as a result of lawsuit settlements. ATV, motorcycle and boom sound manufacturers would do the same if motivated by class action suits.
Sunday, July 23, 2006
Friday, July 21, 2006
Coqui frog noise = $4.9 million, ATV/dirt bike noise =$00.00.
The coqui frog is an invasive species that produces an incredible amount of noise. In some areas of the island people cannot sleep at night because of the racket. Funds allocated to eliminate these creatures are well spent.
The question arises: why has the coqui frog problem attracted public and administration attention and concomitant funding? Simple. The little frogs inhabit rural and suburban areas. Lots of people are annoyed by the sound and their public outcry has justifiably been heard.
In the case of noise from ATVs and dirt bikes, the effects are great but they only affect a small number of people due to the large land areas involved. Thus, the outcry is at a relatively low volume and the administration and legislator responses are indicative of the volume of complaints. What if someone rented a powerful boom box and played actual recorded sound from an affected property for the Mayor and Planning Department Director to enjoy during their work day. There is absolutely no doubt that it would get a prompt response.
I suspect they would be on the phone to security or the police in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, the police do not respond to noise complaints emitting from private property, so that option is not available to residents. We will be working hard to make it available.
The coqui frog is an invasive species that produces an incredible amount of noise. In some areas of the island people cannot sleep at night because of the racket. Funds allocated to eliminate these creatures are well spent.
The question arises: why has the coqui frog problem attracted public and administration attention and concomitant funding? Simple. The little frogs inhabit rural and suburban areas. Lots of people are annoyed by the sound and their public outcry has justifiably been heard.
In the case of noise from ATVs and dirt bikes, the effects are great but they only affect a small number of people due to the large land areas involved. Thus, the outcry is at a relatively low volume and the administration and legislator responses are indicative of the volume of complaints. What if someone rented a powerful boom box and played actual recorded sound from an affected property for the Mayor and Planning Department Director to enjoy during their work day. There is absolutely no doubt that it would get a prompt response.
I suspect they would be on the phone to security or the police in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, the police do not respond to noise complaints emitting from private property, so that option is not available to residents. We will be working hard to make it available.
How long does it take for action? Here on the Big Island, it takes a while. For example, the ATV/dirt bike track began operating in in our neighborhood in early October 2005. The operator does not own the property but lives with the lady that does. Three letters were sent to the property owner in December 2005 attempting to arrive at some sort of compromise. These were ignored. Letters were then sent to the State of Hawaii Land Use Commission and the Hawaii County Planning department mid January 2006.
After numerous requests of the Planning Department to investigate they finally conducted an inspection of the property on March 7, 2006 and found (what else) a full blown dirt bike/ATV track replete with jumps. The Planning Department then sent a certified letter to the property owner advising them that such land use is not permitted and that a special permit is required. But, in the same letter they say: "if the property is used intermittently for dirt bike riding only by people residing on the property we are considering this to be below the threshold of activity that we will enforce, but it it exceeds this level, we consider it an activity that requires a special permit."
Either the property owner considered the letter a wink or she does not respect the county's authority. In any event, the use of the track by multiple machines from four to six hours every weekend, and sometimes on weekdays, continues.
This obviously means that the Hawaii County Planning Department does not want to bother with this issue. Our position is that arbitrary and selective enforcement is inappropriate and this has been forwarded to the Mayor and Corporation Council offices. The most recent letter, dated July 8,2006 from the Mayor's office says: "follow up will be done as soon as possible."
Stay tuned.
After numerous requests of the Planning Department to investigate they finally conducted an inspection of the property on March 7, 2006 and found (what else) a full blown dirt bike/ATV track replete with jumps. The Planning Department then sent a certified letter to the property owner advising them that such land use is not permitted and that a special permit is required. But, in the same letter they say: "if the property is used intermittently for dirt bike riding only by people residing on the property we are considering this to be below the threshold of activity that we will enforce, but it it exceeds this level, we consider it an activity that requires a special permit."
Either the property owner considered the letter a wink or she does not respect the county's authority. In any event, the use of the track by multiple machines from four to six hours every weekend, and sometimes on weekdays, continues.
This obviously means that the Hawaii County Planning Department does not want to bother with this issue. Our position is that arbitrary and selective enforcement is inappropriate and this has been forwarded to the Mayor and Corporation Council offices. The most recent letter, dated July 8,2006 from the Mayor's office says: "follow up will be done as soon as possible."
Stay tuned.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Thank you for visiting www.noisefreehawaii.org. From time to time I will post information on the progress of the mission of reducing noise pollution on the Big Island of Hawaii.
Currently there is no pending legislation in Hawaii to address the noise from recreational off highway vehicles. California provides us with a model of workable and fair legislation which provides riders an opportunity to continue their sport while mitigating the noise effect on residents.
Due to the wide open rural areas on the Big Island it would appear that we have the most potential for noise problems and may have to work hard to get statewide support for legislation. Therefore, we need to work at both the state and county levels.
In terms of county legislator response I must say that my particular district councilman is incommunicado. He does not return phone calls or respond to letters and emails. Some county departments are in the same boat. For example, the Planning Department also does not respond to any sort of communication. One might ask how difficult it is to reply with a form letter. It is incomprehensible that in this information age our representatives and agencies refuse to communicate.
We will continue efforts to stimulate response. We can also act with our vote.
Currently there is no pending legislation in Hawaii to address the noise from recreational off highway vehicles. California provides us with a model of workable and fair legislation which provides riders an opportunity to continue their sport while mitigating the noise effect on residents.
Due to the wide open rural areas on the Big Island it would appear that we have the most potential for noise problems and may have to work hard to get statewide support for legislation. Therefore, we need to work at both the state and county levels.
In terms of county legislator response I must say that my particular district councilman is incommunicado. He does not return phone calls or respond to letters and emails. Some county departments are in the same boat. For example, the Planning Department also does not respond to any sort of communication. One might ask how difficult it is to reply with a form letter. It is incomprehensible that in this information age our representatives and agencies refuse to communicate.
We will continue efforts to stimulate response. We can also act with our vote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)