autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: the subject of noise

To: autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: the subject of noise
From: Matt Murray <mattm@optonline.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:23:35 -0500
But the sound/noise might be annoying regardless of actual
levels. Even it a car or its tires are at 86 dB, the neighbors
could complain to the site owner. Fort Devens was getting
"complaints" from over two miles away. They finally "enforced"
the noise level requirements that had been in their contract
since '99. Aggravating neighbors will be the biggest problem to
Solo 2 (even MORE than having a Factory Service Manual) site
acquisition and retention (second term being important).

Matt Murray


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rocky Entriken" <rocky@tri.net>


> > This type of system might be good for Solo
> > II, also, although it seems more intuitive to simply put the
meter on
> > the edge of the property nearest the most likely complainer.
;^)
>
> When we acquired a new neighbor last year (a housing
development literally
> across the street from our playground), we took measurements.,
Used a
> Divisional event so we'd get a lot of cars. We measured from 50
feet from
> the edge of the course -- yep caught a few cars at 106 but the
huge majority
> was well under 100. Then for comparison, we went to the edge of
the
> property, which was about 400 feet from the edge of the course
and measured
> again (next runs). There was a tree overhead. The wind in the
leaves was
> louder than most of the cars (~80 dB). The 106 cars, you could
hear they
> were there, but the cB readings were minimal. Illustrating once
again that
> the mere presence of sound does not of itself constitute noise.
>
> So far we haven't had a squawk from our neighbors. And being on
concrete, we
> get less tire squeal.
>
> --Rocky






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>