-
-
Re: War on Racetracks: Social Circle, Georgia, Citizens Group Gearing Up To Kill a Drag Strip
To quote Alice Cooper:
"My Mom's been thrown out of (the) Social Circle.
My Dad has to hide" (probably from the torch-bearing locals?).
Good luck to the developer. We NEED more tracks.
Dan -
Re: War on Racetracks: Social Circle, Georgia, Citizens Group Gearing Up To Kill a Drag Strip
A $5,000 a month retainer is a polite way of telling these biddies to buzz off . . . .
Their website (http://www.ccosc.com/ is a hoot. They've linked to a blog (http://terselubung.blogspot.com/2009...st-noises.html) of Top Ten loudest noises, which shows an NHRA top fuel dragster as the example for drag racing noise. Perhaps someone should explain to the Concerned Goofballs of Social Circle that TOP FUELERS DON'T RACE ON 1/8th MILE TRACKS (OR IN NOWHERESVILLE, GEORGIA for that matter!)
They've also linked to some trackside videos on YouTube (which might be relevant if anyone had a house located 30 feet from the starting line of the strip.
The comments I made on the New England drag strip controversy would be equally applicable here:
A Colorado interstate/transit noise study contains these interesting comments about interstate highway noise:[1. Distance alone will quell the much of the noise]
"Sound pressure level decreases by (−)6 dB per doubling of distance from the source to 1/2 (50 %) of the sound pressure initial value.""Sound pressure decreases inversely as thedistance increases with 1/r from the sound source." However, according to the U.S. DOT " experimental evidence has shown that where sound from a highway propagates close to "soft" ground (e.g., plowed farmland,grass, crops, etc.), the most suitable dropoff rate to use is not 3 dBA but rather 4.5 dBA per distance doubling. This 4.5 dBA dropoff rate is usually used in traffic noise analyses."
* * * *
3. "Peace and quiet" is an unreasonable baseline which could be used to stop any sort of progress. Every form of transportation affects "peace and quiet." The needs of a few hyper-sensitive "guardians" for virtual absolute silence imposes the tyranny of a tiny minority of adjacent land users. Should we ban railroads because of the noise of locomotives? Should air travel be restricted because we occassionally hear jet engines? Need we close our system of interstates to shield the ears of the sensitive?
Land use should not be dictated by those "naturalists" who require everything to remain in the primitive state. The standard should be whether the proposed use deprives the adjacent land owners of the substantial use of their properties.
4. There are 168 hours in a week. A drag strip would produce noise for only a tiny fraction of them.
Noise abatement strategies could minimize any impact. (e.g. "A noise barrier [dirt berm or wall] can achieve a 5 dB noise level reduction when it is tall enough to break the line-of-sight from the highway to the receiver and it can achieve an approximate 1.5 dB additional noise level reduction for each meter of height after it breaks the line-of-sight (with a maximum theoretical total reduction of 20 dBA) . . . Vegetation, if it is high enough, wide enough, and dense enough that it cannot be seen through, can decrease highway traffic noise. A 61-meter width of dense vegetation can reduce noise by 10 decibels, which cuts in half the loudness of traffic noise.")
Thus, it seems highly unreasonable and unfair to suggest that the nebulous right to "peace and quiet," if any, extends to all 168 hours, absent a compelling showing of actual damages.
Noise, often defined as unwanted sound or annoyance, is most commonly described on the decibel scale, which ranges from 0 decibels (dB) (threshold of audibility) to 140 dB (threshold of pain).
In addition to level or loudness, sound has a frequency component (pitch). The human ear is more
sensitive to high-frequency sounds than to low-frequency sounds. Because of this, the A-weighting
network was developed and is applied to measured or predicted noise levels to simulate the relative
response of the human ear to frequency. Resulting noise levels are expressed as dB(A). Table 3.12-1
shows the A-weighted noise levels of some common sources. All noise levels discussed in this
document are A-weighted decibels.
Table 3.12-1. Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels
Noise Source Noise Level (dB(A))
Amplified rock band 120
Commercial jet takeoff at 200 feet 110
Community warning siren at 100 feet 100
Busy urban street 90
Construction equipment at 50 feet 80
Freeway traffic at 50 feet 70
Normal conversation at 6 feet 60
Typical office interior 50
Soft radio music 40
Typical residential interior 30
Typical whisper at 6 feet 20
Human breathing 10
[H]ighway noise, being a stronger and more continuous noise source, will dominate in areas where a highway and a transit component are in close proximity.
Measurements conducted in Vail in August revealed that a tractor-trailer with a functioning muffler registered about 85 dB(A) with the engine brake on. The sound of the engine brake was indistinguishable. A similar truck with the muffler disconnected registered almost 100 dB(A) with the engine brake on, and the brake was distinctly noticeable.
"Generally, noise is not a nuisance per se, but it may be of such character as to constitute a nuisance in fact, even though it arises from the operation of a factory, industrial plant, or other lawful business or occupation. To render a noise a nuisance, it must be of such a character as to be of actual physical discomfort to persons of ordinary sensibilities. . . . But noises which constitute a mere inconvenience or trivial annoyance do not warrant the abating of a useful business." 37, Am. Jur., p. 330, sec. 47
In the case of Warren Co. v. Dickson, 185 Ga. 481, 195 S.E. 568, the Supreme Court of Georgia said:
"Where noise accompanies an otherwise lawful business or pursuit, whether such noise is a 'nuisance' depends on nature of locality, on degree of intensity and disagreeableness of the sounds, on their times and frequency, and on their effect, not on peculiar and unusual individuals, but on ordinary, normal, reasonable persons of the locality."
The preliminary site plan (http://www.ccosc.com/preliminary.pdf) shows the site is packed with noise-absorbing trees and is next to I-20 at a highway intersection. Engine compression (Jake brakes) would already be heard in that area.
The NIMBYS also admit that the proposed strip is in the area of a "technology park," not a residential area. Unless they're whispering conversations there, the activities will likely generate commercial or industrial levels of traffic and noise.
As for their crime claim, the Biddies have seen a few too many hysterical movies like "Hot Rods to Hell." They obviously have no knowledge about modern-day drag racers. The city limits of the town have obviously been gerrymandered out to include an undeveloped area near I-20. The Google maps of the area show nothing remotely like high density residential uses anywhere near the proposed drag strip site. So what additional crimes would be occurring and who would be around to suffer them?
The NIMBYS hysterical arguments crumble like forty-year-old newsprint when exposed to the light of day.
Comment
Tweet
Comment