|
|
|
Articles
|
| Noise continues over noise bill |
VOICE writes, "By Arthur Delaney
The D.C. Council gave initial approval to anti-noise legislation following a lengthy and spirited debate on Tuesday, and the bill is set for a second reading in June.
Council members voted 8 to 5 in favor of the bill after a compromise amendment that raised the bill's noise-disturbance threshold from 70 to 80 decibels in downtown areas or 10 decibels above the ambient noise in an area, as measured from a distance of 50 feet. The noise must also be deemed "excessive" by a "reasonable person."
Ward 3 Council member Mary Cheh co-introduced the bill last year with Ward 6 Council member Tommy Wells, responding to complaints from residents about extremely loud street preachers on H Street NE, who for years have used amplifiers to blast hate-filled sermons on Saturday afternoons. Citing labor unions' free speech concerns, the council tabled the legislation by a surprise vote last February. "
|
Ward 2 Council member Jack Evans had been talking with labor groups since the tabling, and on Tuesday offered an amendment that would require a noise disturbance to be measured by Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs inspectors from inside a residence. The amendment failed 6 to 7.
Evans said his amendment would have solved the problem on H Street NE, which he said "no longer exists anyway" because the preachers haven't been using amplification, and that the bill without his amendment creates "a solution for a problem that doesn't exist."
He said all of the noise complaints that came to his office, such as complaints about loud parties or restaurant patrons on outdoor sidewalks, were covered by nuisance laws.
Other council members echoed Evans's viewpoint.
"We are here because there's some wing nuts on H Street who decided to come here every Saturday afternoon and say perfectly outrageous things," said Ward 1 council member Jim Graham. "We're here because of these screwballs on H Street!"
"Is it really noise, or the content of what people are saying that people object to?" asked Ward 4 council member Muriel Bowser in an unusually forceful tone. "This is an H Street Northeast problem and we all know it. To suggest otherwise is offensive."
Ward 8 Council member Marion Barry vigorously disagreed with Graham and Bowser's characterization of the situation, saying the bill had nothing to do with the content of any street preaching. He demanded a retraction from Graham.
"You got my adrenaline running," he said. "My dander's up, so stop it!"
There was confusion between council members over how loud certain decibel levels actually seem to a listener. Evans circulated a recent Washington Post article that detailed 84-decibel volumes at Evans' favorite restaurant, Café Milano. Evans said 84 decibels was loud, but not loud enough to ruin dinner.
Graham said he was "a little bit at sea here" because he believed the volume of a freight train is 80 decibels.
“We can’t differentiate between loud noise at Café Milano and a freight train!” he said.
Wells pointed out that the Environmental Protection Agency deems 80 decibels potentially hazardous to human health.
At-large council member Kwame Brown, who voted to table the original bill, introduced the amendment that won the day. Like Evans' failed amendment, it calls for District Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs inspectors to take noise measurements, instead of police, but does not require measurements to be taken from inside a home.
|
Posted on May 13, 2008 16:34pm.
(Return)
|
|
|
|
|
Categories
|
|
|
