I have a very diferent take on this. I am the lead environmental noise coordinator at a federal agency. I would actually oppose a standard based upon a specifed distance measurement. Instead base the standard on measurement at receptors, ie. homes, churches, schools, or other noise sensitive areas. While a distance or property line limit works well for industrial or commercial point source noise, this could have unintended consequences. This could have the effect of strangling legitimate protests in areas of DC (parks, downtown, etc) where 70 dBA Leq is simply not a reasonable standard and there are no homes. This is citywide, and could be used by federal police agencies to squash protests.
Councilmember Mary Cheh has committed to holding a hearing on the proposal, so we hope to hear comments and feedback (and suggested amendments) at that time. This is intended as the first step. To pick up on Anon at 10:26 concerns, the intent is definitely not "to squash protest" and that's why we invited Labor leaders to the table for every meeting. The Attorney General reviewed the proposal closely to ensure that wouldn't be the case and Council will welcome to hear from individuals with their concerns or suggested improvements at the hearing.
4 comments:
it's a step.
it's a small step, but still a step.
i'm actually kind of dissapointed.
I have a very diferent take on this. I am the lead environmental noise coordinator at a federal agency. I would actually oppose a standard based upon a specifed distance measurement. Instead base the standard on measurement at receptors, ie. homes, churches, schools, or other noise sensitive areas. While a distance or property line limit works well for industrial or commercial point source noise, this could have unintended consequences. This could have the effect of strangling legitimate protests in areas of DC (parks, downtown, etc) where 70 dBA Leq is simply not a reasonable standard and there are no homes. This is citywide, and could be used by federal police agencies to squash protests.
Anon at 10:26's thoughts seem reasonable. Also seems that homes and businesses within the 50 foot radius would have better protection from noise.
Councilmember Mary Cheh has committed to holding a hearing on the proposal, so we hope to hear comments and feedback (and suggested amendments) at that time. This is intended as the first step. To pick up on Anon at 10:26 concerns, the intent is definitely not "to squash protest" and that's why we invited Labor leaders to the table for every meeting. The Attorney General reviewed the proposal closely to ensure that wouldn't be the case and Council will welcome to hear from individuals with their concerns or suggested improvements at the hearing.
Post a Comment