Patrick, you are so pathetic when you are losing an argument. OK, you wanted a post on this topic. What's your opinion. I don't have one, therefore I won't be contributing further concerning a topic that I'm not only ignorant about, but don't consdier real important to me. Course, that apparently doesn't stop you.......

zowie

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), May 08, 2000

Answers

Hey, just like Craig, I posted it just because I thought maybe people in Seattle might want to know. And like Craig, I don't live near that area. But unlike Craig, I'm actually sincere about my comment that I'm not going to venture an opinion. I never said I didn't care about the Sound Transit issue.

And If you'd check today's Seattle Times, you'll find that I'm not the only one that doesn't believe that this a big deal. An expert at the UW agrees with me.

I see you still know exactly when to say the wrong thing at the wrong time zowie.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), May 09, 2000.

"Actually, I read that article. The two "experts" appear to disagree with each other, and the reporter disagrees with the EPA, HIOSH, OSHA, any YOU. But since you started this out by saying how unimportant it was and that nobody cared: "But if Craig wants to create a new thread on some laughably insignificant item, then I might as well too. " I find it amazing that we have had two articles in the Times, a public meeting, and trotted out two (mutually contradictory) experts for an issue that YOU described as "laughably insignificant. " It clearly isn't laughably insignificant to the people involved, and they clearly DID need some educating as to what a decibel was, as Craig suggested.

I guess that would make you WRONG AGAIN, as usual. zowie

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), May 09, 2000.

Here's another reporter wasting his column space on this "laughingly insignificant" issue of noise from Sound Transit. In the interim, I notice that you are taking Mikey's advice and just slinking off into the sunset on the other thread, Patrick. Probably one of your better moves.

Noise limits at issue in transit project Round-the-clock work could affect 'quality of life'

Wednesday, May 10, 2000

By GEORGE FOSTER SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

If Sound Transit hopes to finish the light rail tunnels by 2006, contractors will have to work round-the-clock -- and that could mean noisy nights for some city residents.

Such a prospect bothers Steve Gaines, who lives in a First Hill high- rise apartment building above one of the station construction sites.

"I think it is going to keep us awake at night," Gaines said yesterday. "It will be difficult to maintain any quality of life."

By the end of next month, Seattle's Department of Construction and Land Use will decide whether Sound Transit will be allowed to exceed nighttime noise limits.

Sound Transit says that the sounds from conveyors, auger drills, compressors and ventilators will be no louder than five decibels over current nighttime limits.

Noise limits vary around the city, depending on whether the area is residential, commercial or industrial. The limits range from 52 decibels to 70 decibels.

Sound Transit makes the case that the shorter the construction period, the lower the cost of the project. Without a nighttime variance, tunnel construction time could run into 2008 and cost well above the estimated $500 million.

Bids on the 3.5 miles of tunnel work, from Westlake Station downtown to Northeast 45th Street, are due July 14.

One prospective bidder, Obayashi of Japan, has already pulled out because of the ambitious deadline.

As for the noise, the loudest areas may be the Pacific Street and Convention Place sites, where a total of about 1.3 billion cubic yards of dirt must be removed from tunnel boring operations.

Actual tunnel mining will go on around the clock, seven days a week, for 3 1/2 years.

Paul Bay, light rail director, says the noise really won't be that loud. And he says citizen committees, armed with decibel meters, will be established along the route to monitor the noise.

Gaines and David Bricklin, an attorney representing residents of five high-rise buildings near the First Hill site, are suggesting that Sound Transit cover construction sites to further control noise and air pollution.

Construction areas for the project will be located at the following sites:

Convention Place: On both sides of Pine Street between Boren and Ninth avenues. Work begins in mid-2001 and continues into 2005.

First Hill Station: One on East Madison Street across from the Swedish Medical Center and another on Boylston Avenue East between Madison and East Spring streets. Excavation of shafts and the underground station begins in mid-2001 and continues until 2004, with the station's surface entrance completed in 2005.

Capitol Hill Station: The area between Broadway Avenue East, Harvard Avenue East, East Denny Way and Seattle Central Community College; also, on East Olive Way between Broadway and Harvard, and at the corner of East Thomas Street and Broadway. Site preparation begins in mid-2001 and construction lasts until station completion in 2005.

Ventilation facility: At state Route 520 on the north end of Capitol Hill, between Federal Avenue East and 10th Avenue East. Construction will run between mid-2002 and mid-2005.

Pacific Street Station: The area bounded by Brooklyn Avenue Northeast, Northeast Pacific Street, 15th Avenue Northeast and Northeast Boat Street; also, between 15th Avenue Northeast and University Way Northeast just south of present Gould Hall on the University of Washington campus. Work begins in early 2001, with excavation, tunnel spoils removal and station construction continuing into 2004 and completion of surface station entrances in 2005.

Northeast 45th Street Station: East side of 15th Avenue Northeast from about Northeast 42nd Street to Northeast 45th Street. Excavation begins in 2001 with surface station entrances completed in 2005. Public hearings Seattle's Department of Construction and Land Use will hold two public hearings on Sound Transit's request to exceed nighttime noise levels. The first meeting runs from 7 to 9 p.m. tomorrow at the University Lutheran Church, 1604 N.E. 50th St.

The agency meets again Monday at Seward Elementary School, 2500 Franklin Ave. E. That meeting also runs from 7 to 9 p.m.

The DCLU will receive written comments until May 19.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), May 10, 2000.

"Actually, I read that article. The two "experts" appear to disagree with each other"

Well that statement pretty much means that you're illiterate then zowie. The professor in mechanical engineering said that a change of 5 dBA would be like a car going from smooth to rough pavement, and the professor of environmental health said that people might notice it at first, but the worst that will happen is that people MIGHT be roused by the infrequent spikes in noise. Please feel free to point out where the two experts (and if you doubt that they're experts, also feel free to explain why you do and what makes you a good judge) disagree.

"and the reporter disagrees with the EPA, HIOSH, OSHA, any YOU."

I'll assume that's "and YOU" but the sentence still doesn't make much sense. So if I disagree with all those organization, and the reporter disagrees with both me AND those organizations, who exactly does the reporter agree with? NOBODY is saying the noises will cause hearing damage. Not the reporter, not the professors, not Sound Transit, not the residents, not the EPA, HIOSH, or OSHA. The issue at question is whether the noises will cause a disturbance. My neighbor vacuuming last night at 11:30 was a disturbance, but it certainly didn't cause me any hearing damage. The standards set down by the EPA, HIOSH, OSHA, and L&I are all GENERIC rules of thumb. NONE of them have stepped forward to say that THIS proposed construction could cause hearing damage to anyone. But by all means, if you REALLY believe that the construction could cause hearing damage, why don't you attend one of the public meetings and present your case?

"But since you started this out by saying how unimportant it was and that nobody cared"

I never said that nobody cared. I think it's quite refreshing that these citizens are interested and involved enough to attend the meetings. This is simply a matter of a public agency maintaining contact with the community, and keeping them informed. Craig posted a rather insignificant issue and tried to cause a scare by only halfway describing the background, and making sure that the half that was left out described how insignificant it really is. But again, if you'd like to provide ANY evidence that ANYONE is raising a red flag on this because of hearing damage concerns besides you and Craig, feel free.

The fact that there have been articles on this in the papers and that there are "concerned" people means nothing. There were several articles on how concerned some people were about the planet alignment last Friday causing earthquakes, floods, and the general end of mankind. Did THAT make it any more significant?

But you were right about one thing.

"I guess that would make you WRONG AGAIN, as usual zowie"

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), May 10, 2000.

Patrick, just to help you understand the issues with noise, I will give you the link for the League for the Hard of Hearing. Study it well.

http://www.lhh.org/noise/index.htm

You will notice loss of hearing is not the only problem associated with noise, which I am convinced you make too much of....

-- Marsha (acorn-nut@hotmail.com), May 10, 2000.

{"Actually, I read that article. The two "experts" appear to disagree with each other" Well that statement pretty much means that you're illiterate then zowie. The professor in mechanical engineering said that a change of 5 dBA would be like a car going from smooth to rough pavement, and the professor of environmental health said that people might notice it at first, but the worst that will happen is that people MIGHT be roused by the infrequent spikes in noise. Please feel free to point out where the two experts (and if you doubt that they're experts, also feel free to explain why you do and what makes you a good judge) disagree. ]

FROM YOUR POSTING: Chalupnik said he doubts a 10-decibel jump would startle people out of their sleep. However, Morgan said, "My guess is half the people would be roused by a 10-decibel change."  Now you may not consider that a disagreement, but apparently the reporter did. Thats why he used the word however. Did you not read this, or simply not understand what you read?

["and the reporter disagrees with the EPA, HIOSH, OSHA, any YOU." I'll assume that's "and YOU" but the sentence still doesn't make much sense.]

You got my typo right, but apparently not much else. Lets see, YOU posted a 5 dB change for a doubling of noise. Craig indicated it was really a 10dB ten-fold increase but that the NIOSH convention was a 3dB doubling giving three and a third doublings being roughly equivalent to a ten-fold increase (use your calculator Patrick, youll get a headache).

FROM YOUR POSTING: Sound Transit said there also could be brief periods when noise increases up to 10 decibels. That could happen up to four times an hour, although officials said they expect it to be a rare occurrence. A 10-decibel change is considered a doubling in noise levels. I would assume this means that you dont know the difference between a four-fold increase (your doubling rate), a ten fold increase (the real rate), and a doubling. The alternative is that you either didnt read one of your own postings, or simply cant understand the concept.

[But by all means, if you REALLY believe that the construction could cause hearing damage, why don't you attend one of the public meetings and present your case? ] Actually, this is YOUR strawman. Craig didnt indicate that these levels were likely to cause hearing damage, although the EPA data certainly indicates that this would be a possibility at the higher levels mentioned. YOU are the one who implied that 80 dB was nothing to worry about. FROM YOUR POSTING: Another example at 80 dBA (over the expected noise level of construction) is "high urban ambient sound." So these people living in these areas (and these are rather high density zones) probably experience this range of loudness at this time of night ALL THE TIME! 

[But since you started this out by saying how unimportant it was and that nobody cared" I never said that nobody cared.]

FROM YOUR POSTING: For more information on how insignificant this little nugget that Craig brought us is, here's some more background factoids on some real world noises around the expected 55 to 77 decibel range: But if Craig wants to create a new thread on some laughably insignificant item, 

Insignificant laughably insignificant Are you now denying that this is unimportant, or denying that nobody cares?

[Little tip for next time: when presenting information that attempts to prove how knowledgeable you are on a subject, try to make sure that it DOESN'T conflict with the information you've already presented. ] Which certainly applies to you, Patrick, in your own words.

For those who want to see how badly Patrick got creamed on this debate, go see the original thread. Patrick has created strawmen, pooh-poohed national standards, and character assassinated, and still managed to end up looking like the unadulterated fool he is. Finally someone suggested he slink quietly away and stop embarrassing himself. Good advice, except he came here to embarrass himself further.

zowie

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), May 10, 2000.

The thread appears to have changed from one of storm water, grading and drainage to one of relative sound. For a pirmer on sound and it's relative intensity, check out the following site:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/sound/soucon.html#soucon

-- C. George (---@---.---), May 10, 2000.

Curious-

A better reference for area noise and community tolerance to it is http://www.fican.org./download/nai-8-92.pdf

-- (craigcar@crosswinds.net), May 10, 2000.

Oh Patrick- Could you please educate the reporters and the people involved about how "laughably insignificant" this is. It seems to be taking up an awful lot of reporters' time some how.

Public sounds off about light-rail noise variance

Thursday, May 11, 2000

By ALIYA SAPERSTEIN SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

Cathy Dampier and Pam Bruton calmly stepped to the microphone, quickly said their piece and then sat back down on the gray metal chairs in the University Lutheran Church auditorium.

The two, who both live at the Malloy Apartments on 15th Avenue Northeast, are used to public hearings when it comes to Sound Transit's light-rail project.

First, the transit agency proposed tearing down the apartment building to make room for a station. Sound Transit abandoned that plan last month but now wants to exceed the city's nighttime noise standards during construction.

"We didn't save our homes just so we could be driven out of them by a noise variance," Dampier, the manager of the 123-unit building, said during a public hearing last night.

The hearing was the second of three. The last is from 7 to 9 Monday night at Seward Elementary School, 2500 Franklin Ave. E.

Construction on the 22-mile twin transit tunnels could begin as early as next year and is scheduled to be completed by 2006.

Nighttime noise standards vary around the city. They range from 55 decibels to 70 decibels, depending on whether the area is zoned residential, commercial or industrial.

Sound Transit surveyed nighttime noise levels along the tunnel route and found that in many locations the average number of decibels exceeded the legal limit. So the agency has asked that it be allowed to go beyond that average loudness level by as much as 5 decibels.

This, says Sound Transit light-rail director Paul Bay, "would not be perceptible to the average person."

He said workers would try to limit work between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. to tunnel boring.

But some loud noise would be unavoidable, Bay said. For that reason, the agency is asking for a maximum level of 10 decibels above average for brief periods every hour.

"They're going to do a lot (to keep things quiet), but it's still not going to be liveable," Bruton said. She has lived in the Malloy apartments for nine years and said she would move out of her fifth- floor apartment before construction starts -- unless Sound Transit supplies triple-pane windows and air conditioning for the building.

Matt Fox, president of the University District Community Council, said his group was concerned that Sound Transit seemed to waffle on how loud the noise would be.

"Will it or will it not be noticeable?" Fox asked. "And if they're allowed to exceed the maximum level four times an hour, then you'll hear a crash, you'll fall back asleep and then be woken up again 15 minutes later."

The city is expected to make a decision by the end of June.

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), May 11, 2000.