BOOOOOM  BOOOOM    BOOOOM

BANG   BANG   BANG

WOOOF  WOOOF WOOOF

Please!  Crackdown on “unnecessary, disturbing, stressful & unhealthy noise” – now!!!

 

Noise is being caused by “thoughtless, inconsiderate & irresponsible people” – so, why are Municipal Councils condoning this abuse upon the vast majority of responsible, law abiding and responsible resident/business/taxpayers?????

Boooom Booom Booom is literally shaking vehicles or building walls near offending sound on our roadways and in our homes or business; denying people sleep, to think or enjoy association with friends, or peace and quiet of their homes, business or while dining.  It is causing “neighbourhood alienation”, has caused at least “one incessantly barking Dog to be shot; a youth killed over an altercation about his noisy Booom box; a youth killed in an accident believed to not hear approaching emergency siren due to too loud Booom Box Stereo (a potential for increased Car Insurance premium if repeated); a nervous breakdown & job loss of one father so disturbed by noisy stereo; flared tempers throughout communities at hearing the incessant and relentless Booooom Boooooom Booooom, day & night; a potential major health care cost of future generations of people with hearing loss or deafness; a contributing factor with speeding and the adrenalin rush such associations foster; Irresponsible Vehicle & Entertainment Manufacturers manufacturing too loud watt output and horsepower, not ‘soundproofing’ and too low Federal standards – the example abound and will increase; creating unnecessary suffering by too many so a minority can abuse with impunity – morally wrong!

Bang Bang Bang, the sound from “irresponsible berry farms”, where a “make money at any cost” mentality persists, where “unfriendly bad neighbours” reside and make this incessant noise under the guise of “right to do so”, due to a “thoughtless & irresponsible” Provincial Government whom wrongfully and ill-conceived permits, under “Right to Farm” law, the use of outdated and relatively useless PROPANE CANNONS.

Wooof Wooof Woof, Whine, Whine, Whine are the incessantly noisy and uncontrolled Dogs, Companion Animals to a similar “thoughtless, inconsiderate, irresponsible” Companion Animal Guardian whom cares less about disturbing neighbours, day or night.

WE ASK AGAIN – “WHY ARE MUNICIPAL COUNCILS NEGLIGENT, WHY AREN’T POLICE & AUTHORITIES DILIGENT IN ENFORCING NOISE ABUSE”?

WE OFFER THE SOLUTION & ENCOURAGE ALL RESIDENTS TO DEMAND MUNICIPAL COUNCILS ADOPT THE ANTI-NOISE POLLUTION BYLAW – NOW!!!!!

NOISE POLLUTION

A GROWING PROBLEM

IN NORTH AMERICA

A GROWING CONCERN IS BEING

ATTACKED BY GROWING NUMBERS OF FED-UP PEOPLE

“DISTURBING AND UNNECESSARY NOISE IS STRESSFUL AND THUS UNHEALTHY”

Disturbing noise is defined as, “any noise that is offensive or disturbs or tends to disturb the quiet, peace, rest, enjoyment, comfort, or convenience of an individual, and/or that is believed to be objectionable or liable to disturb an individual or the ‘public”, for any duration of a non-continuous or continuous nature, at any hour of the day or night, if such noise can be heard emanating outside a vehicle, real property, residence or business; and/or secondly, that can be heard beyond a distance of twenty (20) feet and/or thirdly, that exceeds measurement on a sound measuring device, except:

a).     “Quiet Activity Zones” are to be ‘noise free’, twenty-four (24) hours, with a ‘no tolerance’ enforcement policy, a minimum two (2) block radius around such designated ‘quiet zones’, including but not limited to, Hospitals, Long-Term Care Facilities/Elderly Care Homes, Schools.

b).     “Intermediate Activity Zones” include other residential and business districts, during daytime hours and/or ‘open hours’ of a business, noise must not exceed sixty (60) decibles and during nighttime hours, not exceed forty-five (45) decibles.

c).     “High Activity Zones” include Industrial areas, business districts, wherein businesses are closed during nighttime hours, includes highways and other thoroughfares, at least two (2) blocks from any inhabitated structure, decibel levels are not to exceed 60 decibles.

d).     Other exceptions will include but not be limited to, designated times and/or approved decibel levels currently contained within Municipal Bylaws, that would apply to such “Activity Zones” as a Construction site.

PREAMBLE

The dilemma being faced by responsible residents is the failure of elected people and Municipal authorities to recognize noise as the serious component of community living that it is and continues to increase posing health risks for not only the resident being disturbed but as well, many of the perpetrators of unnecessary noise are placing themselves in harms way, that could find increased hearing losses continue to increase.  The situation needs to be addressed in a more informed manner, in a more diligent approach with the recognition, failure to combat the unnecessary noise by authorities is in essence granting permission to a small and noisy “thoughtless/inconsiderate/irresponsible” group to make whatever noise they deem desirable, with no due concern or respect for another persons rights and thus the so-called ‘victim’ is again persecuted by perpetrators, whom by negligent behavior of authorities, are granted favor and thus, the ‘responsible’ resident/taxpayer  continues to be discriminated against.  To effectively combat the unnecessary noise dilemma that is growing around us, a ‘no tolerance’ approach needs to be exercised, the offensive noise must be branded “unpopular’ by society, effective and workable legislation needs to be enacted and meaningful fines & penalties must be imposed but first and foremost, the responsible/resident/taxpayer “Individual” rights must be recognized and be deemed paramount at law.  Legislation must be cognizant of ‘individual rights and freedoms’ and such legislation written in “individual people friendly” manner, the mandate of authorities is to “stop the unnecessary noise”, to cease treating “unnecessary noise” as a “nuisance” incident and thus become aware of more serious complications.  In essence, we seek to alter the mindset of those authorities that wrongfully convey the unaware belief that “noise” is not important, by remarks, such as, “Noisy vehicles generally don’t cause death, injury or a lot of damage; It’s not our highest priority when it comes to patrolling; Police try to focus on those things that put the public at risk”.  However, Public opinion differs drastically and indeed, up to 80.00% of complaints to Police concern noise, thus more effective legislation, supported by education and “no-tolerance” enforcement, will drastically reduce the need for complaints and thus afford more time to Police to attend to other matters.

RECOMMENDATIONS TO PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT

 

1. Amendments to Section 724 (or corresponding section to the revised Local Government Act/Vancouver Charter or new “Community Charter”) have been recommended, to recognize “individual rights”, to move away from current section 724.(1) (a) by replacing “neighbourhood” (deemed to be two (2) or more people) with “Individual”, thus restoring individual rights.
2. Recommendations have been made to the Attorney General, Minister Municipal Affairs, Union of BC Municipalities and corresponding titles in other Provinces, to ensure the respective Legislation accredits proposed fines & penalties and/or is amended accordingly, to do so; to create more “Regional Bylaw Courts” to facilitate ease of prosecution of Bylaw infractions; to permit ease of collection of fines, by permitting, for example, uncollected fines to be added to Property Taxes, among other anticipated solutions.

 

FINES AND PENALTIES

When “unnecessary, disturbing, stressful and unhealthy” noise, per “Noise definitions” aforementioned and/or within defined “Activity Zones” is observed, heard or reported to authorities a prompt investigation is to be undertaken and/or in response to any individual resident complaint:

1. First (1^st) Offence – Written Warning or “Quiet Activity Zone” $100.00 fine
2. Second (2^nd) Offence – $ 100.00 fine or “Quiet Activity Zone” $ 200.00 fine
3. Third (3^rd) and any subsequent Offence – $ 300.00 fine up to $ 2000.00 and/or
4. Thirty (30) days incarceration, by “electronic monitoring” and/or
5. Thirty (30) days “Community Service” and/or
6. Commencing with the third (3^rd) offence, authorities have the discretion to

a).  Issue a twenty-four (24) hour up to one (1) week roadside suspension, including towing of vehicle to an authorized impound yard.

b).  Temporarily confiscate the ‘offending source of noise’ or in more flagrant abuse, severity, or non-remorseful situations to

i).         Confiscate the “offending source of noise” permanently (ie; boom-box stereo, home entertainment device,) or

b).  Deactivate the “offending source of noise”, if applicable (ie; vehicle or building alarm, propane cannon,)

c).  Impound an incessantly barking Dog for 24 Hours up to one (1) week, including daily pound fees

d).  Arrest a Human perpetrator of noise (ie; unruly behavior, yelling, failing to respond to a warning to reduce noise level to an acceptable level).

 

PROHIBITION OF OBJECTIONABLE NOISES.

1.   A person shall not make nor cause to be made, any objectionable noise as set forth by this Bylaw.

2.   A person causing or causing to be made any objectionable noise, as defined by this Bylaw, is deemed to be causing an offence.

3.   Each day that a violation continues to exist and/or each occurrence, during any one day that a violation persists beyond a first warning, shall constitute a separate offence.

 

OBJECTIONABLE NOISE PREAMBLE

Legislation is to include a section that defines “Objectionable Noise”.  This noise is as aforementioned but simply, noise that is disturbing, that causes distress and stress which emanates into unhealthy conditions among people exposed, such as, mental anxiety, nervous breakdown, lack of rest and other unhealthy conditions; noise that contributes to ‘hearing loss’; noise that contributes to “community rage” or on our roadways “road rage”, with people becoming so incensed at having their senses bombarded from any and all sources described, some feel the need to “explode their emotions”, display “aggressive behavior” and otherwise display violent behavior.

 

OBJECTIONABLE NOISE DEFINED

The following noise but not limited to examples, constitutes “Objectionable Noise” and ‘unnecessary’ noise is deemed to be a violation of this Bylaw and thus an offence:

1. Boom-Box Stereo
2. Home Entertainment  amplified devices (ie; Boom Box Stereo, Stereo, Radio, Television, CD Player, Video Player, DVD Player, Computer)
3. Loud motorcycle or vehicle mufflers, non-factory specifications
4. Squeeling tires
5. Unattended alarms (exceeding one (1) minute and/or more than three (3) times in a twenty-four (24) hour period, from a business

a). Audible alarms are to be prohibited from vehicles and all real property

b). Silent alarms may be installed that transmit a message to “owners” via a pager and/or alarms that are “silent” but monitored by a service that will contact owners via pager or other registered means, such as telephone.

NOTE: Many alternative devices are available to protect vehicles, such as “Global positioning satellites; vehicle alarm pagers, vehicle immobilizers, vehicle brake locks and other devices” that render ineffective audible alarms redundant.

1. Loud voices, above ordinary/normal conversation tones, such as yelling, screams, loud profanity
2. Propane Cannons. Bird scaring devices, other than “noise” are to be used, except, nets should not be able to trap Birds and nets should be checked frequently to release any Birds that may become caught.  Propane Cannons or other “noise” devices are to be removed from the Farm Practices Act and included within Municipal Bylaws governing noise pollution.
3. Incessantly barking, howling, yelping, whining Dogs (repeated sounds, three (3) or more times between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. or twice (2) between 8:01 p.m. and 7:59 a.m.
4. Leaf Blowers (*) are recommended to be prohibited, until a silent product is developed.  As an interim step, leaf blowers reading up to 45 decibles may be used until January 1, 2005.
5. A loud, roaring or explosive sound, such as a backfire, from a motor vehicle.
6. The sound of a diesel engine or “noisy gas engine” of a Truck, Tractor, Bus or other vehicle, that has been idling or otherwise running continuously or intermittently, for a period exceeding three (3) minutes, at the same location
7. The sound of a horn or other warning device on a motor vehicle used for any purpose other than as an audible warning incidental to the safe operation of the motor vehicle.
8. Fireworks explosions, at any time, other than on a designated day of observance and/or when a Municipal Permit is granted (ie; Halloween) and such fireworks use is confined to between 7:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m.

a).  Noise caused by exploding fireworks is disturbing to Animals, causing distress; repeated bang, bang, bang, during the course of a day or nighttime, is of no value and only disturbs all, except, presumably some ilk that get pleasure from setting off noisy fireworks.

 

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

We are cognizant of the needs to preserve “safety and health” when requesting Municipal Councils to undertake a careful review of “Emergency Vehicle Sirens and Train Whistles”, so, from the perspective of assessing the “unnecessary noise” implications we request that safety and need for noise remain in context and Municipal Councils should hear from residents, to gain a measure of inconvenience, from Emergency Personnel to assess the need for using sirens and Train personnel to assess the need for  train whistles.  In either event, results should demonstrate:

1. Do “emergency vehicle” sirens need to be used in all circumstances or is the vehicle operator permitted to use judgement, particularly in:

a).              low traffic and/or no traffic congestion circumstances?

b).              during late night hours, when “lights” may suffice, between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.?

c).              Other considerations or rationale?

1. Do “Train whistles” need to be sounded, at every “controlled” crossing, where flashing lights and booms are operational?

a).        during late night hours, where train lights may suffice, particularly between the hours 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.

b).        If, in the judgement of Municipal Councils the need for late night train whistles is not needed, at any or all crossings, we encourage Municipal Councils to adopt a “motion” to contact Train Companies to request trains cease using whistles during agreed times, at specified crossings.

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATION, MISSION, B.C.

1. Mission Raceway Park, excessive noise from Dragsters, can be heard for great distances and as population & business development is increasing in the immediate vicinity and nearby, increased numbers of people will become disenchanted, at the noise, on race days, during the racing season.  In hindsight, Municipal Council, of the day, lacked forsight and wisdom and possibly other circumstances surrounding attainment of the “old track” for Scott paper, whom has since left town and the site is now, in part, The Junction Shopping Centre, possibly clouded judgement but in fact, the current site is a bad one for residents.  We encourage Municipal Council to consider the following options and discuss with the BC Custom Car Club, Owners, Mission Raceway Park, to see if any mutually beneficial plans can commence (Raceway property could become part of an exciting new waterfront development):

a).        Is there a more appropriate site, within District of Mission boundaries, that the Raceway could be relocated, by “switching” land and possibly the Mission Raceway might gain by disposing of current expensive land for less expensive, thus, minimizing inconvenience to growing numbers of Mission residents?

i).        the new roadway configuration is not too good, for vehicles towing trailers and patrons to access the track, posing an obstacle course. A new site may provide more easy access/exit

b).        Would the Mission Raceway Park undertake to develop a closed over facility, providing covered seating, concessions & showroom area but equally important, a covered starting and partial staging area, including cover over the track, the length of grandstands or longer, which may be considered halfway down the track, or more?  In essence, such a facility would:

i).        provide patrons with a covered seating area, thus, contribute to more use of the facility, by patrons, and similarly, protect vehicles on the track and starting/staging area with cover, thus permitting more racing, during possibly inclement weather and thus contribute to increased gross receipts, and more assurance that a race may be held.

aa).      Such a covered facility would be “soundproofed” so as to eliminate/reduce noise levels heard by nearby residents/business.

ii).       Seek to undertake to have vehicles install a “modified, light weight muffler” to reduce/eliminate most offensive sound, at the very least, reduce decibel levels that may still give the “feeling” that a “loud muffler” emanates, thus preserving the exciting environment?

 

c).        Investigate what other North American tracks may have done to “effectively” alleviate the excessive noise, thus reach a ‘compromise’ with Mission residents, being responsive to their concerns at being disturbed at and/or in their homes.

 

Updated and effective January 1, 2011