|
|
|||
|
Navigation User login Who's online There are currently 6 users and 50 guests online.
Online users
OlyBlog is powered by:
 |
Submitted by Michael_C on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 5:28pm.
Ever had a "night from hell" because the hotel room you stayed in had an ice machine just a few feet down the hall? If you have, then welcome to my world. No, I don't live in a cheep hotel. I'm speaking of the conditions at my home in the Carlyon-North neighborhood. The noise making culprit is a heat pump installed in a code-violating sideyard setback location, conveniently one foot from the property line between my house and my code-violating neighbor. 18 months is a hell of a long time to have a heat pump spewing noise into your home and property, but that's how long it's been. We can't have a family discussion around the dinner table without having to talk over the monotonous machine rumble. Outdoor barbecues are no longer palatable. Reading C. McCarthy (or OMC) in the living room takes a hell of a lot more focus and breathing control than it used to. Then there's the bedroom. My wife is ready to move. I'm ready for months of counseling. But hey, from City of Olympia's standpoint, that's probably a good thing, stimulating the economy and such. Sorry, couldn't resist one cheap shot. Is there anybody else out there who put in a noise complaint to the City, then the City respond that noise level was within compliance? If so, they were probably pulling your leg the same way they were pulling mine. How about set backs - anyone challenged something in the set back and had the City respond nonsensically? I'd like to hear from anyone with these types of experience. The good news/bad news is that my stirring things up at the City is getting a little attention. Maybe they will follow the Olympia Municipal Code which, paraphrased, says that the purpose of the residential districts code is "To maintain or improve the character, appearance and livability of established neighborhoods by protecting them from incompatible uses, excessive noise, illumination..." However, I fear that, instead, they are in the process of weakening the current noise ordinance. This issue is coming to the Planning Commission Feb. 25, and is tenatively scheduled for review by the Land Use and Environmental Committee on March 17. Don't get me wrong, I think heat pumps are a great technology in terms of efficiency. But they come with a steep environmental noise cost! Please, please consider communicating with City Council or the Planning Commission that you don't want to see (or hear) neighborhood noise protection fade away. Even cities like Tacoma are opting for tighter noise control than Olympia now requires. Don't we deserve the same?
|
OlyBlog.net OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you. If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here. Support OlyBlog OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation: Now playing at: 
Latest Classified Ads Upcoming events
 
|
|
|
More Flickr photos tagged with "olympia" and "washington" OlyBlog is a site for news and discussion about Olympia, Washington. |
|||
I'd Throw Your Neighbor Up On
Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 5:36pm.Rotten Neighbor!
Everybody is doing it! Even one of the local news channels did a story on it and went to the neighbors home's who'd been listed as rotten neighbors and interviewed them!
"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown
CP&D is putting together a
Submitted by Katherine on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 5:47pm.Downtown only?
Submitted by Michael_C on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 10:41pm.CP&D?
Submitted by CIAGuy on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 5:58pm.Community Planning & Development
Submitted by Rob Richards on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 6:22pm.Reducing the Noise
Submitted by Ehver Green on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 12:59am.You may have explored these options but would any of them help? Spliting the cost could turn things around and is much cheaper than moving!
I have a vibration absorbing base for a guitar amplifier and they also make these for noise. Sizes vary but I'm sure they make one big enough for a heat pump. I don't remember who 'they' are. I bought it at Guitar Center.
This downloadable pdf1 suggests you can build (or buy?) a noise attenuation device to enclose the heat pump for a not so modest $400-$600. A great read, by the way.
1. Study of the Noise Generated by Heat Pumps in Residential Areas, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, March 29th, 2007, p. 1-3
Minimal Reduction achieved
Submitted by Michael_C on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 12:59pm.That's a great study, thanks, I hadn't read that but am aware that many Canadian, New Zealand, and Australian cities are very tight on noise (daytime 50 dBA). Tighter even than Tacoma's proposed standard (daytime = ambient + 10 dBA).
I have offered to share the cost of moving the heat pump to the neighbors rear yard, but there seems to be a NIMBY attitude in the way.
There's a fine line between participation and mockery -Dilbert. That quote sort of sums up the neighbors attempts to reduce the noise. When I first had them tested and proved that the City's methods were bogus, they had already put quiet fan blades on and a blanket. At that point they were down to 67 dBA measured at the property line, which is more than 2x over day limits and more than 4x over night limits (going with the rule that a change of 10 dBA is a perceived doubling in loudness).
Since then the City issued a violation, so the neighbor took 10 weeks to think about it and installed a second blanket. Result - 66 dBA. Was there any legitimate belief that the 2nd blanket was going to meet compliance? No way. The city gave the neighbor more time and the neighbor installed a sound fence. Result - 63 dBA. This is a hell of a long way from the daytime 55 dBA standard.
Now the City is giving a 120 day extension so that the neighbor can "explore moving the heat pump to the rear yard and the City time to gather additional information regarding installation and impact of heat pumps ..." That ought to really encourage the neighbor to not do anything.
As far as putting some kind of enclosure around the pump, there's a couple problems with that. First maintaining enough air flow so that the unit can operate efficeintly - and your article addresses this. Second, that an enclosure is a "structure" that, in the sideyard setback, is a further violation of code.
Have you thought about...
Submitted by toothiron on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 12:50pm.toothiron, I appreciate your
Submitted by Michael_C on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 10:07pm.toothiron, I appreciate your note.
I know a little about municipal code. I know a little about sound and physics. What I don't know about is the legal system. I've done just about everything I can to resolve this problem from the inside - but there's so much ignorance, arrogance and appathy that it's not progressing. I have council members saying things like: "The dilemma apparently relates to the difficulty in the conflicts of the current technology (the heat pumps make some level of noise) and the placement of them and the close placement of houses." Which sound like a position that the heat pump manufacturing companies might take instead of the political body charged with maintaining our quality of neighborhoods. It completely misses the direction of the existing municipal code.
Regardless, If you can recommend someone to help with this, I'm all ears. Private message or broadcast.
There's a fine line between participation and mockery -Dilbert
Ahhh
Submitted by DJW on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 11:07pm.A subject near and dear to my heart. Sorry for the sarcasm.
A few years ago I had to go to the city (constantly/many times) due to a noisy neighbor. One of my tenants was threatening to leave due to the guy next door. Wasn't a heat pump but it was a 'garage band'. (Sorry EG) The neighbor thought he sound-proofed his garage and basement but it was pretty loud.
Many calls, letters and a meeting with the Mayor finally forced code enforcement to do something. Sadly it took over 2 years. My tenant was (and still is) great that I lowered the rent until the problem was taken care of. The only thing I can say is to document, document, document as much as you can. That would be every conversation with the neighbor, city, police or whoever else you talk to.
Setbacks. Another story. Only one experience and that was when I had a garage built. Seemed like the city was out there every day making sure I was X amount of feet from the property line. I remember they were really concerned about the propane tank (heat/hot water) being too close to the property lines and I ended up having to move it.
Good luck in your fight.
Thanks for the words of
Submitted by Michael_C on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 11:16pm.Not really
Submitted by DJW on Mon, 02/18/2008 - 9:08am.I don't think they will soften noise requirements as they would be bombarded with reports/complaints or whatnot from police, city council etc. I think the problem is that the rules for noise is so ambiguious(sp) that you and I can both read the same document and come up with a different meaning. I also believe that Olympia is a victim of being a touchy-feely everyone be happy with each other attitude that they don't want to rock the boat. Sounds harsh I know.
I'm not against having people enjoy there home or laughing kids playing. I am against a continual nuisance that affects the way other people can enjoy a home.
I hope you are right...
Submitted by Michael_C on Mon, 02/18/2008 - 5:03pm.As far as the rules for noise being ambiguous, I dissagree. They are a little confusing at first glance - consider how CP&D spun the WAC 173-60 "at any point" criteria 180 degrees, reversing its meaning. But that had to be strictly intentional.
The more problematic part of the WAC 173-60 is how it makes allowances for louder sound levels for portions of the hour. This would be an enforcement nightmare. Its also why Tacoma and other Cities are opting for a flat day time/night time criteria. Tacoma also doesn't allow mechanical equipment in the sideyard setback, unless a variance is granted. They are currently looking at eliminating the possiblilty for that type of variance.
There's a fine line between participation and mockery -Dilbert