Strategic noise maps are produced using computer software (such as CADNA-A) that calculates the noise levels from information on traffic flows (annual AADT figures), rail movements, aircraft movements and industrial noise (yet not considered in Ireland). It also takes account of topography (ground levels and building heights) of an area. Computer modelling is used as noise measurement would be prohibitively expensive and could not, over the course of a year, practically cover the large areas and numbers of buildings to comply with the Environmental Noise Directive. It would also be technically difficult to isolate the different noise sources i.e. road traffic, aircraft traffic and rail traffic. The noise maps are contour maps showing areas of differing levels of noise at a height of 4m above ground, for an average day in the year for individual sources i.e road traffic railway traffic, aircraft in flight of industry (had it been plotted in Ireland). For urban areas these can be combined into one map to give an overall picture of the noise climate.
Repeat objectors responsible for an almost-tenfold increase in such complaints
A number of repeat objectors are responsible for an almost-tenfold increase in complaints about noise from aircraft using Dublin Airport in the first half of 2019.
Figures published by the DAA, the airport’s operator, show one individual has filed over 3,100 complaints over the six months.
The individual, who lives in Ongar, West Dublin, had made 3,147 complaints about noise from aircraft between January and June – approximately 82 per cent of all complaints recorded over the period – and an average of more than 17 complaints per day.
The same person was also single-handedly responsible for a 22 per cent increase in overall noise complaints to the DAA in 2018 when they registered 628 incidents.
Two other individuals – one from The Ward and another Ongar resident – have each filed more than 100 complaints in the first half of this year.
Overall, a total of 3,817 noise complaints have been lodged with the DAA from just over 100 individuals over the period compared to 396 complaints over the corresponding timeframe last year.
The DAA claims the figures are skewed by a significant number of complaints from a few individuals. If such repeat objectors are excluded, the DAA estimates the number of complaints in the first half of 2019 is around 330.
The vast majority of cases relate to complaints about noise from aircraft taking off from the main 10/28 runway during daylight hours.
Most complaints are made by people living on Dublin’s northside in areas located on or close to flights paths including The Ward, Portmarnock and St Margaret’s, but some have been received from residents as far away as Celbridge and Maynooth, Co Kildare, Newcastle, Co Wicklow and Tallaghtand Sallynoggin on the city’s southside.
A DAA spokeswoman said more than 99 per cent of commercial flights adhere to the dedicated flight path on take-off and approach at Dublin Airport.
The spokeswoman said the DAA had contacted the Irish Aviation Authority(IAA) to ascertain if anything had changed regarding flight paths to explain the increase in complaints.
“We are both puzzled as to what has changed over Ongar since the first complaint came in July 2018, as the current flight procedures/path have remained the same for at least the past 15 years,” she said. “Aircraft are typically between 5,000 and 10,000 feet when they are given direction by the IAA to turn south over Ongar.”
Ongar lies a considerable distance outside a zone where householders can avail of a free noise insulation scheme for their homes.
However, the DAA acknowledged that the number of flights had increased over the period.
Most aircraft, which depart from the main runway in a westerly direction, must maintain a straight course for five nautical miles before commencing a turn.
The DAA said all aircraft taking off and landing in Dublin were compliant with current standards set down by the International Civil Aviation Organisationon aircraft noise, noise abatement measures and operating restrictions.
It claimed that modern subsonic jets were around 30 decibels quieter than their first-generation counterparts, which represents a 90 per cent reduction in perceived noise.
And over 90 per cent of aircraft using Dublin last year were the quietest types compared to 83 per cent in 2008 and 46 per cent in 2003.
The DAA said it worked closely with the IAA and airlines to constantly heighten awareness of noise abatement procedures in force at Dublin Airport.
The DAA operates a €1m noise and flight track monitoring system to ensure minimum disruption to local communities which includes eight fixed noise monitors and one mobile noise monitor around north Dublin.
Construction work is currently under way on the new €320 million North Runway at Dublin Airport, which is scheduled to come into operation in 2022.
The DAA is seeking to amend the existing planning permissions for the runway, which will prohibit its use for landings and take-offs between 11pm and 7am.
Fingal County Council has recently been appointed as the competent authority for independently assessing noise controls and restrictions at Dublin Airport.
A very progressive move by the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health in the UK.
The survey will be open until 31 July 2019
This year the survey is being supported by RH Environmental (RHE).
Why is CIEH noise survey important?
This noise survey provides the only source of regular national information on the important contribution made by environmental health professionals working to resolve noise and noise nuisance complaints.
Some of the data from CIEH’s survey has also been adopted into the Public Health Outcomes Framework which is administered by Public Health England (PHE). This provides an important link between noise and health outcomes. As the department responsible for setting national policy on noise, Department for the Environment, Food, Rural Affairs, also draw on CIEH data on noise. The data was also referenced in the Chief Medical Officer annual report of 2017 to emphasise the importance of noise as a public health issue.
We will also be using the data to engage with Welsh Government, to try and establish a stronger understanding of the links between noise and public health.
How will we use this data?
We will be sharing the data received with colleagues at DEFRA and PHE. CIEH will also use it to inform media press releases to highlight the work of EHPs.
What has changed?
CIEH has been running its noise survey since 2000 and collecting noise data from local authorities for much longer than that. However, with the response rates slowly dropping over recent years, we took a break last year in order to improve the survey and make it easier and simpler to submit.
How you can help
By providing us with information on the number of noise complaints received in a 12 month period and your work to resolve these in your local area. We are interested in as much or as little data you can provide – everything is useful.
Who would we like data from?
We are only collecting data from England and Wales. This is because Northern Ireland and Scotland have their own data collections systems in place, led by central Government. No such collections exist in England and Wales.
What data do I have to provide?
We will ask you some basic questions about which LA you’re submitting data for and the timeframe the data is for (financial year or other).
Minimum required information:
Total number of noise complaints received
Total number of notices served
Staffing levels for noise related work
Additional (optional) information:
Total number of prosecutions
The size of the population served by the LA
Breakdowns of noise complaints by sector
If you have any difficulties completing this survey or need to contact us for any reason, please email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Noise complaints fall in Burlington – but Hill Area is still the loudest
Houses in Burlington’s Hill Section. Seen here on March 18, 2019.
JESS ALOE/FREE PRESS
Burlington is getting quieter.
Between 2012 and 2018, the number of noise complaints the Burlington police responded to fell by more than half.
Burlington Police Department data shows 775 incidents flagged as “noise” last year, just about 1,000 fewer calls than in 2012.
Incidents responded to by the Burlington Police Department flagged as “noise” types. Data from the Burlington Police Department.
JESS ALOE/FREE PRESS
The biggest reduction came from the city’s noisiest neighborhood — the University/Hill Section. In 2012, the University of Vermont partnered with the city’s Code Enforcement Office and police to quiet the neighborhood through increased police patrols and outreach to landlords of “problem properties.”
The university also pays for the police to step up patrols in the area during typically problematic times.
Restorative Noise program
Rachel Jolly runs Burlington’s Restorative Noise program, which allows residents who receive noise tickets for parties — called “social noise” — to reduce the amount of the fine by participating in a two-hour session and doing community service.
More: Quiet UVM students make good neighbors
The session, she said, gives offenders the chance to build a deeper sense of connection with their neighborhoods.
Materials for UVM’s “Have a Heart campaign, which uses a child’s drawing and chocolates to encourage students to keep noise down
JESS ALOE/FREE PRESS
“So often, the ticket receivers are college students who came from other communities,” she said.
Non-“social noise” offenders can also reduce their fines by doing community service, but Jolly said the majority of the cases she sees stem from parties.
More: Police tout foot patrol success in student areas
They’ve seen a dramatic decrease in the past few years. From 2010 to 2015, the program averaged 88 noise cases per year. Last year, they handled 8.
Noise by the numbers – 2012 to 2018
Noisiest neighborhood: The University/Hill Section. Nearly half of all noise complaints — 47 percent — came from the student-heavy area around the University of Vermont.
Quietest neighborhood: The New North End. Just under 6 percent of all noise issues originated in the Queen City’s northern reaches.
Noisiest months: August and September. Noise incidents tend to peak in the early fall, as students return to school and some move off-campus for the first time.
Noisiest day of the week: Saturday, though Friday and Sunday also generated high numbers of complaints.
More: Burlington’s student-dense Ward 8 works get out the vote on Town Meeting Day
Tips for a respectful party
The Burlington Community Justice Center offers several tips for “respectful parties.”
Tell your neighbors you’ll be hosting a party, and give them your phone number so they can call you if it gets too loud.
Invite only a manageable number of guests. Turn away people you don’t know.
Minimize gatherings on front porches and yards after 10 p.m.
Keep windows closed.
Walk around outside to check the noise level.
Contact Jess Aloe at 802-660-1874 or email@example.com. Follow her on Twitter @jess_aloe
Noise from parties a constant problem in Maynooth estates – Kildare court told.
Noise from house parties is a constant problem in estates in Maynooth, gardai told Kilcock District Court on March 5 during a hearing into a noise related incident in the town.
Garda Sergeant Jim Kelly told Judge Desmond Zaidan that noise from houses is an environmental issue and should be reported to the county council.
Asked by the judge what the gardai did when they were called out, Sgt Kelly said they asked people politely to turn the music down.
“It is a constant problem in Maynooth,” he said.
Sgt Kelly was commenting just before Judge Zaidan applied the Probation Act in the case of a 46-year-old Maynooth man, who was prosecuted following threats over noise levels at a house next door.
Justin O’Keefe, 23 Greenfield Drive, Maynooth, had been charged with threatening to damage property at 22 Greenfield Drive on the Sunday evening of November 26 2017.
Last October, the court heard that Mr O’Keefe, who has young children, sought to have noise reduced at a rented house next door to him and lost his temper with the tenants, threatening to do damage.
However, he did not follow through on his threat.
Mr O’Keefe had called the gardai previously in relation to the noise. The court heard Mr O’Keefe could bring a case in the District Court under Section 108 of the Environment Protection Act but that gardai could not force people to turn down music at 1am in the morning.
Judge Zaidan said Mr O’Keefe was “pushed to extremes.”
On March 5, David Powderly, solicitor for Mr O’Keefe said neither the landlord nor the tenants wanted to get involved in a restorative justice process.
The judge applied the Probation
Source: Leinster Leader, to read the article, click here.
New legislation being proposed could change the complaints process for people who deal with noisy neighbours.
Fianna Fáil TD for Dublin Mid-West, John Curran, wants to protect the identity of a complainant.
At present, people have to lodge complaints with the Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) if their neighbours are renters.
However they have to provide their own name, which Mr Curran has said is making people fearful to raise issues.
He had called on Housing Minister Eoghan Murphy to amend existing legislation to allow for complaints of a neighbours anti-social behaviour to be lodged to the RTB by a third party.
Deputy Curran raised the issue in Dáil last week.
He said: “Existing legislation regarding residential disputes linked to anti-social behaviour states that only a person who is directly and adversely affected by such behaviour can lodge a complaint to the Residential Tenancies Board.
“What’s more, their identity as the complainant will be made known.
“That makes an already perverse situation even more difficult to manage or contain particularly for those that are genuinely afraid to submit a complaint in the first place.
“We cannot operate a system for complaints on the basis that all neighbours are considerate of other residents, obliging or pleasant”.
He said he has dealt with “a number of serious cases” on behalf of constituents who have been “too fearful” to make a complaint, knowing that they will be identifiable.
“Yet they are all too aware that in the absence of a complaint, nothing can be done to address the ongoing anti-social behaviour.”
He has asked that Minister Murphy consider amending this element of the bill, so that a person other than the individual affected can make it on his or her behalf.
“The fear of backlash or being targeted for reporting their neighbour’s disruptive behaviour is deterring tenants from trying to rectify the situation because often times it’s safer to try endure the hassle caused.
“By amending legislation to allow for a third party to make the complaint on their behalf, it acts as a kind of middle ground”, he added.
A Nuisance homeowner, who has been keeping her neighbours awake at night by slamming doors and windows and throwing objects against a wall, has been warned she faces a month in prison if the noise continues.
Ewa Walsh claimed it was a draught that caused the doors to slam, and said the noises were “normal living” sounds and not excessive.
Walsh, of Dun Saithne Green, Balbriggan, denied she was making excessive noise at her terraced house after her neighbour Liam Coyle brought a civil case of noise pollution against her.
Mr Coyle told the court that he had been living beside the defendant since 2011 and never experienced any issues until last year.
“At all hours of the night – 2am, 3am, 4am and 5am – it’s like she is running through her house, slamming doors and windows and throwing heavy objects against a wall,” said Mr Coyle.
He claimed that during the summer months, when the defendant was leaving her home, she would excessively rev her SUV.
He said the noise stopped and she was “quiet as a mouse” after their last court date but then in early December the noise started again.
“I have kept a log and sound recordings of it,” he said, adding that he has a partner and a young child who are kept awake by the excessive noise.
“I would like to get a night’s sleep.”
However, Ms Walsh claimed that the building quality of the terraced houses was very bad.
“If you close a door, everyone hears it. I don’t do this on purpose,” she said.
“His wife bangs on my door as well. Sometimes the draught between doors causes them to slam.”
She also asked: “What does it mean by excessive noise?”
Judge Dermot Dempsey found her guilty of making excessive noise and warned her that if it continued at its current volume, she will end up in prison.
“Monitor the situation for one month and there better be no repetition of noise – otherwise I am dealing with it,” said Judge Dempsey.
The family of a Kerry farmer killed by his neighbour in a dispute over the use of a loud crow banger on his land say they don’t feel justice has been served.
Michael Ferris from Rattoo in Ballyduff was jailed for five years today for the manslaughter of Anthony O’Mahony in April 2017.
Anthony O’Mahony’s niece Ann O’Carroll believes the jury got it wrong when they cleared Michael Ferris of murder.
The 63-year-old admitted killing his neighbour by ramming his teleporter into his car while he was trying to pass on a narrow country road, but he denied murder claiming he “just snapped” after over 30 years of provocation.
The trial heard they lived and farmed together in the small rural community and Mr. O’Mahony had a crow banger on his land that would go off every four and a half minutes.
Ferris told Gardaí it was so loud it would “wake the dead” and he felt he had to do something about it.
He was convicted of manslaughter and jailed for five years today – afterwards, Ms. O’Carroll said she didn’t feel justice had been served and she described the trial process as “distressing”.