Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 100
100 Aircraft Noise: A Toolkit for Managing Community Expectations Table 6-1. (Continued). Authorities and Responsibilities of Parties Noise Abatement FAA - All divisions Opportunity United States Congress except Air Traffic FAA - Air Traffic Control State Government Acquire noise/overflight None May fund part of the easement None Typically, none easements cost if included in an approved Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program or as mitigation in an approved EIS Land Use Management Actions Institute development None None None Typically, none rights transfer program Institute purchase None May fund part of the acquisition None Typically, none assurance program assurance cost if included in an approved Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program or as mitigation in an approved EIS, and ultimately purchased by the airport Review development None None None Typically, none proposals for noise compatibility Airport Authority established a ban on Stage 2 business jets after fulfilling the requirements of a 14 CFR Part 161 process. The measure was twice challenged in court by the FAA and user groups, and ultimately won by the city after several years delay. Conversely, several airports have estab- lished thresholds of significance for land management that restrict the development of residen- tial development and noise-sensitive uses within lesser noise contours than 65 DNL, thus providing a greater envelope of protection against the risks of future conflicts between the airport and neighbors, through increased operations or upgrades of service. The specific noise levels of local thresholds are best defined through a thorough evaluation of local need. Difference Between Noise Impact and Noise Effect In simple terms, noise impact is limited to an area within a defined threshold of significance. For example, persons residing within the 65 DNL contour typically are considered to be adversely impacted by aircraft noise, if the 65 DNL contour has been determined to be the threshold of significant noise exposure. Conversely, persons residing beyond the 65 DNL con- tour are not considered to be adversely impacted by noise to a significant degree, but rather may be affected by aircraft noise. Persons may be affected by aircraft noise at any level or under a vari- ety of different measurement techniques, but are not considered to be impacted by aircraft noise unless they are exposed to noise greater than the threshold of significance. See also"Differences within the FAA Divisions Regarding Thresholds of Noise Level Evaluation (60/65 DNL in Air- ports vs. 45/60/65 DNL in Air Traffic)"on the next page for additional clarification. Difference Between Compatible and Incompatible (Noise-Sensitive) Land Uses In practice, compatible land uses are those activities which may coexist with aircraft noise with- out being adversely impacted by them. Incompatible land uses are more specifically described as