Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
 
PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY

JOSEPH ARTMANN, PH.D., BIOLOGIST

Black Dog Amphitheater Metropolitan Significance Review 
Public Hearing

November 20, 2001

Oak Grove Middle School
Bloomington, Minnesota

As a resident of Burnsville, I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the impacts of noise on humans. My academic background includes a Masters and PhD in wildlife ecology and 30+ years as a professional wildlife manager and researcher. Information contained in this testimony comes from a review of published literature but I will relate it to the proposed Black Dog amphitheater. Literature sources are referenced.

Noise is often defined as "unwanted or undesired sound". The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has defined noise as a "pollutant" (MPCA, 1999 – "A Guide to Noise Control in Minnesota"). Pollutants are generally considered to be harmful to humans.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has determined that NOISE is a health problem. As early as 1971, a work group for WHO stated that "noise must be recognized as a major threat to human well-being (Suess, 1973). The effects of noise are seldom catastrophic, and often are transitory. However, adverse effects can be cumulative with prolonged or repeated exposure. Although noise can cause discomfort and sometimes pain, it normally doesn’t cause the ears to bleed. While noise induced hearing loss normally takes years to develop, it does result in impaired quality of life since one is not able to hear important sounds and to communicate with family and friends. 

Long lasting, high level sounds are the most damaging to the hearing and generally among the most annoying. A shrill, high pitched sound will cause us to cover and protect our ears. Intermittent sounds appear to be less damaging to hearing than continuous sounds because of the ear’s ability to regenerate during quiet periods. However, intermittent and impulsive sounds tend to be the most annoying to humans because of their unpredictability. 

Other effects of noise include sleep disruption, the drowning out of speech or television, the inability to enjoy one’s property or leisure time, or the impairment of one’s quality of life. In addition, noise can interfere with the teaching and learning process, disrupt the performance of certain tasks, or increase the incidence of anti-social behavior. Noise has been shown to increase stress levels (Suter, 1991).

EPA research indicates that noise levels in communities are directly related to population density (EPA, 1974b). An amphitheater would not even be considered in a rural area since it would be uneconomic. Furthermore, EPA notes that noise sources appear to be multiplying at a faster pace than population growth. Hence, metro growth, noise, and noise issues are interrelated problems. According to the US Public Health Service, about 50% of those people with hearing impairments owe those losses to noise exposure (Carney, 1991).

Are music venues a noise problem? Most definitely. One researcher (Clark, 1991) summarized the results of 16 studies of discotheques and rock concerts and found the geometric mean of the measured sound levels to be 103.4 dB with the trend in noise levels to be upward. The Burnsville Planned Unit Development (2001) allows the amphitheater to operate at 105 dBA. Loud music in particular appears to be the cause of hearing impairment and tinnitus in rock musicians. Luminaries, such as Pete Townsend and Ted Nugent, have sustained permanent hearing loss (Murphy, 1989). According to Nugent, who has worn an earplug in his right ear since 1967: "My left ear is there just to balance my face, because it doesn’t work at all." 

Similarly, there is evidence that the hearing of some young people is being affected by noisy leisure time activities (Axelsson et. al., 1987). ). Some studies point to a hearing hazard for concert attendees (Clark, 1991; Clarl and Bohne, 1986; Danenburg et al. 1987). From this, it appears likely that some amphitheater patrons will experience at least some temporary hearing loss. The World Health Organization is very concerned that loud noise effects are cumulative over time.

As residents of communities where a proposed amphitheater will impact our environment, we can expect some disruption to our lives. Face-to-face and telephone communications, and the enjoyment of radio and TV in our homes may be disrupted. Interference with communications has proved to be one of the most important components of noise related annoyance (EPA, 1974a).

Sleep disturbance is another common disruption. Many years of sleep research on the effects of noise make it clear that intermittent and impulsive noise are more disturbing than continuous noise. Older people are more likely to have sleep disturbed by sound than younger people. The average age of Bloomington and Burnsville residents is increasing as the population’s ages. Children, on the other hand, appear to be 10dB less sensitive to noise induced sleep disruption than adults (Eberhardt, 1990). In a review of sleep research, Griefahn (1990) recommends that the nighttime average sound level be kept below 45 dB in the sleeper’s quarters. The sound projections from the Black Dog amphitheater are projected to be above these levels in many neighborhoods. On concert nights, Bloomington or Burnsville residents will have to sleep with their windows closed to avoid these high levels of noise.

The after-effects of noise are many including increased annoyance, reduced tolerance, increased anxiety, decreased incidence of "helping" behavior, increased hostile behavior, increased heart rate and blood pressure. It is clear that community annoyance is positively correlated with the noise exposure level (Fields, 1990). In this study examining community noise annoyance, the researcher found that the only variables strongly correlated with noise annoyance were:

  • fear that the noise source might be a danger to the neighborhood,
  • belief that noise was preventable,
  • awareness that non-noise problems are associated with the noise source,
  • stated sensitivity to noise, and
  • belief that the economic activity represented by the source is not important to the community.
The evidence is fairly clear that as long as the stimulus remains the same, noise annoyance does not subside over time (Fields, 1990). Griffiths (1983) cites studies showing no habituation or loose of annoyance to noise 4 months to 2 years after the inception of the noise event. DeLong (1990) found that annoyance in a previously surveyed community increased by 10% even with no change in noise levels. The Polaris amphitheater has been the center of inter community controversy for years and has been the subject of community lawsuits. It seems obvious that an adversial situation will likely continue between Burnsville and Bloomington.

CONCLUSION

Noise can have a significant impact on the quality of life. Noise pollution will impact both amphitheater patrons and community residents. There is no evidence that noise impacts have diminished over time; rather it has increased due to population growth and the proliferation of noise sources. Noise causes health problems and health problems cost the individual and society either directly or indirectly.

I ask that the Met Council not take the easy political way out by declaring no metro significance exists with the proposed amphitheater. There is widespread concern and frustration. It will keep rearing it’s head until the citizens concerns are recognized and delt with in a reasonable manner. Our country was founded on the principle; "Government of the people, by the people, and FOR the people". 

Thank you.