Nov 08 2019

Listen to your body

When noise becomes a health hazard

Sure, noise can irritate even the most serene among us. But to label it an actual health hazard, like air pollution? That’s pretty hyperbolic, isn’t it? It’s only noise, after all; it’s not like it’ll kill us or something. Is it? Well, yes and no…

Oh wait, when someone deems noise to be a health hazard, they must be referring to the kind of high-decibel din found in some industrial workplaces, right? Jack hammers, chainsaws, welders… industrial machinery makes industrial noise; that’s why workers wear protective gear. Doesn’t adherence to OHS regulations ensure safety? Again, yes and no.

Growing evidence, such as that gathered in the pivotal 2011 World Health Organization (WHO) study Burden of disease from environmental noise, suggests that surprisingly low noise levels can wreak all kinds of havoc with both our physical and mental wellbeing, especially when we’re exposed to them for extended periods of time. Excessive and/or prolonged noise exposure can disturb sleep, raise blood pressure, impair cognitive function, and increase risk of psychiatric disorders.

Excessive and/or prolonged noise exposure can disturb sleep, raise blood pressure, impair cognitive function, and increase risk of psychiatric disorders.

Since deleterious consequences of noise exposure happen at lower (seemingly innocuous) levels than those causing hearing damage, people may not even realize they’re at risk. Moreover, hearing loss itself can result from less extreme conditions than one might imagine. A 2013 study titled Environmental noise pollution in the United States: developing an effective public health response provides detailed findings and analyses.

The insidious, little-known effects of noise on sleep

Obvious sources of nighttime noise wake up and bring out the inner Grandpa Simpson in most of us. Who doesn’t want to shake a metaphoric cane at those drunk people arguing loudly mere feet from their bedroom window, punctuating extra-important points with thrown bottles? Or let’s talk about sanitation trucks that rumble on up curbside at hours this blogger defines as still, unequivocally, nighttime. On second thought, let’s not.

Sleep deprivation:
We don’t like it. Our hearts don’t like it.

Possibly the most surprising and frequently corroborated information my research for this post has yielded is that inaudible sounds can damage our hearing, and we’re especially vulnerable to a variety of noises at night, even if they don’t wake us up. Industrial hygienist Richard L. Neitzel, PhD defines microarousals as periods during which noise arouses the nervous system, but not quite enough to cause a person to wake up or remember the event and highlights their link to heart disease. “The normal restorative drop in blood pressure at night fails to occur when sleep is fragmented,” Neitzel explains.

Suppose you’re attempting to nod off. Even if you think you’ve blocked out the rumbles of downshifting trucks outside, your body hasn’t. Those adrenal glands are spewing pressure hormones. Your heart rate and blood pressure are increasing while your digestion is calling it a night. Your perpetually busy brain keeps on processing sounds while you slumber. As if sleep deprivation weren’t bad enough… Turns out we need to evaluate sleep both in terms of quantity and quality.

The effects of noise on cognitive function

Mounting evidence suggests that multitasking and interruptions (such as noise) compromise academic and work performance. Excessive noise has been shown to detrimentally affect cognitive function and communication, and thereby generate errors. This phenomenon is especially prevalent in urban environments, including schools and hospitals. The Center for Cognitive Studies in Medicine and Public Health, in collaboration with Columbia University, is collecting preliminary data to assess noise levels in the patient care environment during care team transitions, using sound measurement and simulation technology.

Children are at particular risk not only for noise-impaired cognitive development—but a host of other serious health issues—even before they’re born. In the 2016 study Noise as a health hazard for children: Time to make a noise about it, researchers from the University of New Delhi and the Hind Institute of Medical Sciences concluded:

Noise, a modern day curse of advancing infrastructure and technology, has emerged as an important public health problem. Exposure to noise during pregnancy may result in high-frequency hearing loss in newborns, growth retardation, cochlear damage, prematurity and birth defects. Newborns exposed to sound above 45 decibels may experience increase in blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate; decreased oxygen saturation; and increased caloric consumption. Noise exposure in older children may result in learning disabilities, attention difficulties, insulin resistance, hypertension, stress ulcers and cardiovascular diseases. Sudden exposure to loud noise can lead to rupture of eardrum. The damaging effects of noise pollution are more noticeable in large metropolitan cities, the hubs of urban settlements and industrial growth. Another concern is noise pollution inside the hospitals (particularly intensive care areas) that can lead to serious health consequences both for caregivers and for children. The issue needs to be addressed by both researchers and policy makers on an urgent basis. (Emphasis mine.)

Noise Annoyance and mental health

Also known as sound annoyance, noise annoyance can indeed be annoying enough to drive you mad, and it can certainly play a role in depression and anxiety. Wikipedia defines sound annoyance as “a feeling of displeasure associated with any agent or condition […] that is believed to affect adversely an individual or a group.”

While little research on how noise affects mental health have been conducted, a rigorous 2016 study based on 15,000 German residents concluded that noise annoyance is directly correlated with depression and anxiety in the general population. Though the residents lived under a flight path and aircraft noise emerged as the biggest culprit, road traffic, aircraft, railways, industrial, and neighborhood noise were also contributors.

A few studies have also addressed the effects of noise in hospitals and other healthcare environments, bringing to light, among other findings, the disturbing occurrence of ICU psychosis, a disorder in which intensive care patients experience a cluster of serious psychiatric symptoms. While medication (or lack thereof) can also play a role, the frequent distressing sounds that occur in such environments factor significantly.

Closing thoughts

Prior to the WHO’s ground-breaking 2011 study, very little was known about the multi-faceted extent to which excessive and/or prolonged noise can affect human health, and that of other species. The volume (no pun intended) of scientific evidence now available to us makes clear the importance of continued awareness raising and public education. Most urgently, the message that we need to mitigate harmful noise should reach the ears of policy makers everywhere.

Oct 03 2019

When common property use results in common noise complaints: Part II

A few afternoons ago, gunshots woke me from an intentionally meditative state. Only they weren’t gunshots, as it took me a nanosecond to realize, but the sound of someone’s vehicle entering our building garage, driving over a tube-encased door control mechanism as it did so. I’ve lived here for several years now and the noise seldom bothers me, but it would if I lived over, below, or next to the garage. Fortunately, our building was designed and constructed such that no one does, and as a noise both air- and structure-borne, that unsettling bang-bang would be truly nightmarish if anyone did.

*What the retro-startled heck was that?*

In the last instalment of our continuous observations on noise issues in multi-family dwellings, I noted that strata corporations are legally bound, in accordance with Standard provincial Strata Bylaws, to address and mitigate unreasonable noise when it originates from common property.

Other key takeaways included the facts that:

These Standard Bylaws, however, fail to define what constitutes unreasonable.
Strata corporations are encouraged to customize, clarify, and enforce these Bylaws. But too often they don’t.
Nuisance law presents an avenue to explore when Bylaws prove inapplicable. I’ll explore it further here.

Much of what can read as homeowner and strata group complacency may stem from a (perhaps sometimes unwarranted) trust in building codes.

Many developers do not address structure-borne noise issues quite simply because there is no regulative requirement to do so.

The Canadian Building Code, as well as the provincial and municipal codes based on it, relate only to the control of airborne sound transmission. However, noise disturbance can also be experienced through the transmission of “structure-borne” noise, which occurs when building fabric is excited by impacts such as items dropped on or dragged across hardwood flooring. In addition, mechanical or electrical equipment (pumps, air-handling equipment, transformers or elevators) can impart continuous vibration into the structure.

As noted in an earlier post, the Building Code contains no provision for controlling structure-borne noise, so it’s hardly surprising that many developers do not address these issues quite simply because there is no regulative requirement to do so.

From *A Guide to Airborne, Impact, & Structure Borne Noise Control in Multifamily Dwellings*, published in 1967 by the US Dept. of Housing & Urban Development. Available as a free e-book, this work offers an interesting historical perspective. Spot the common property.

In the dated but still woefully relevant US government publication A Guide to Airborne, Impact, & Structure Borne Noise Control in Multifamily Dwellings, writers state:

Surprisingly, the frequency of complaints appears to be independent of income bracket in virtually all types of apartment buildings, including high-rise as well as low-story garden-type apartments. Luxury, middle- and low-income apartments register approximately the same number of complaints because most of the buildings utilize the same type of wall and floor assemblies. This fact clearly demonstrates that builders and architects do not consider privacy and quiet surroundings as necessities, much less luxuries.

The causes of most noise problems in multifamily dwellings originate in the early design stages of the buildings because of […] lack of concern about noise problems and […] failure to foresee where and under what circumstances noise might be a problem. (Emphasis mine.)

Most people will agree that what pleases one’s senses enhances one’s comfort. Oddly enough, a peaceful and relaxing environment apparently is not recognized as essential to comfort, judging from the fact that it is lacking in a high percentage of buildings. Obviously, we are approaching the time when [the building industry] must pay adequate attention to acoustical problems.

Before buying an apartment, consider asking your realtor or developer about the acoustic design standards of the building and confirm that they go beyond minimum Code requirements. With any luck, you’ll never have to deal with nuisance of the noisy variety.

The process of researching nuisance law took me down a rabbit hole that looks something like this:

Nuisance law: It’s a piece of tort.

Practiced in the UK, Australia, Canada, and many other parts of the world, common law (aka case law) is a body of unwritten laws based on court-established legal precedents set via individual cases. It comes into play when existing laws fail to provide an adequate foundation for judicial decision making. In contrast, civil law is, by definition, official legislation stemming from established civil codes.

So, where and how does nuisance law fit in? Although it sounds like a tasty baked treat, tort plays a role across legal categories. A cornerstone of the Canadian legal system, tort law provides compensation for people who have been injured or whose property has been damaged by the wrongdoing of others. When someone’s misactions result in, for instance, serious bodily harm, the criminal justice system may employ tort law in seeking a fair ruling. A lesser offence may be seen as more nuisance than crime; hence, nuisance law. I know more about it now than I did a week ago, and in future articles will rely on the mnemonic device “Nuisance law: It’s a piece of tort.” to help me remember it.

When strata corporations fail to mitigate unreasonable noise situations, affected unit owners can, as alluded to in Part I, apply to the Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) for dispute resolution. As applicants make their way through the five-part CRT Process, they may consider engaging an acoustical consultant at any stage, ideally early on.

With the help of BAP Acoustics consultants, two Vancouver-based apartment owners recently won a dispute with their strata council, which had failed to maintain and repair elevator equipment. The elevator, and related mechanical room machinery, had caused what was ultimately deemed an unreasonable level of noise and vibration in their master bedroom. The owners’ claim, that the noise interfered with “quiet enjoyment of their strata lot”, was agreed valid by a senior-level Tribunal member, who ordered the respondents (i.e. strata corporation) to compensate the applicants in numerous ways.

In a lengthy document detailing how decisions were reached, the overseeing CRT member states “I find the BAP report persuasive, and I rely on it.” Summarized here as per the CRT document, the BAP Acoustics report included the conclusions that:

The maximum elevator noise levels measured in the two bedrooms exceeded the recommended criteria in both sets of guidelines*.
Noise levels experienced in the unit […] are subjectively approximately twice as loud as the recommended maximum when the ensuite door is closed, and three times as loud when the door is open.
The maximum noise criterion level from elevator noise was over 30 in the unit […] bedroom, 30 in the living room, and 35 in other areas. The CMHC’s guidelines set a maximum elevator noise criterion objective of 20 in bedrooms and living rooms.
It is reasonable to expect noise complaints may arise from the occupants of unit […], and that remedial measures can be implemented to reduce noise levels by using the best available techniques (i.e. vibration isolation of structure-borne noise sources).
While it may be that the noise levels are typical of the [the manufacturer’s] elevator, comparing [previous] noise readings [to our test results] indicates that industry noise standards are exceeded.
BAP agreed with [a previous engineer’s] findings are elevator motor and the brake contactors are the source of the noise transmitted into unit […], and that while the control room wall maybe acoustically week, the main issue results from structure-borne noise transmission.
BAP agreed with [a previous engineer] that the controllers should be isolated from the concrete slab. BAP also said that the control room fan should be resiliently mounted if supported within the structural slab, to reduce fan noise transfer.
While acoustic weaknesses in the control room wall identified by [a previous engineer] should be addressed to increase sound insulation, the wall weaknesses were not responsible for the elevator noise transmission, [and that] the elevator noise can only be remedied by decoupling the elevator controller from the supporting floor slab and walls.

BAP Acoustics has been called upon to provide expertise in numerous similar cases, and once again, it turns out that structure-borne noise—for which the Building Code makes no provisions—is the sleep-robbing culprit that needs remedial attention. Wherever and however unacceptable noises originates, we can help you win back peace and quiet.

Sep 03 2019

When common property use results in common noise complaints: Part I

British Colombia is known nationally and beyond not only for its abundant natural beauty, but the real estate prices—the highest in Canada—that beauty inspires and enables. This holds particularly true for large urban centres such as Vancouver and Victoria, where owning a detached house remains out of reach for most middle class people. So it’s easy to understand how condominium (or strata) living presents a more accessible alternative. My husband and I live in the second Vancouver condo we’ve owned in the many years we’ve lived here and can attest to numerous advantages strata living offers, which, aside from relative affordability, include shared property maintenance costs and freedom from responsibilities like shovelling what little snow falls here.

But—and you knew this was coming—there’s a dark side. Or, to address my topic more precisely, there’s a potentially noisy side, in both the metaphoric and literal senses of the word. It took us two years of searching to find our current home, and that was because, as any good realtor will tell you, expecting to find a property that meets all the criteria on your wish list will lead to either disappointment or compromise. Make that wish list, by all means, but prioritize the wishes because they won’t all be granted.

Be aware that federal, provincial, and municipal governments regulate condominium properties as strata corporations that must have bylaws. While guided by a default list called The Standard Bylaws, individual stratas enjoy considerable latitude in amending and customizing this default. It might be hyperbolic to say each strata is unique as a snowflake, but it wouldn’t be out of line to characterize some of them as such, precious and persnickety as they can be. Having been pet owners for all our years together, we were astonished at the number of buildings out there in which our fur family wouldn’t be welcomed.

My husband and I are neither silence-obsessed seniors or kegger-throwing frat boys, but we do enjoy listening to music and entertaining occasionally, so it was important to us to find a place with good “soundproofing”, which I’ve since learned isn’t even a word. Unless we were fortunate enough to get a top floor corner unit (we weren’t), we’d have to pay close attention to room layouts as well as shared flanking walls and ceilings. We found a place we liked enough to consider making an offer, but when I asked the seller’s realtor about how well soundproofed the unit was, he looked at me as though I’d asked him how many Martians lived next door. Not a clue about anything to do with what I now know is called airborne sound insulation. We could have gambled on the hope of reasonable neighbours, but a suspicious discrepancy on square footage set off our trust sensors and we lost interest. Not long afterwards, we found and purchased our current home in an older but well-maintained strata building where neighbours are considerate and canine companions are welcome.

When the offending noise transmits to a residential unit from common property—to use the parlance of strata living—unexpected layers of complexity can develop.
From BAP Acoustics blog post I don’t like the sound of your strata investigation: How to make noise about noise

What’s that sound?

And where’s it coming from?

Resolving complaints about disruptive owners unwilling to comply with their strata corporation bylaws can prove very difficult and may require the strata to apply to Court for an injunction. In a Condominium Home Owners’ Association (CHOA) article titled The Case of the Partying Penthouse Owner, contributor Adrienne Murray writes about The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 4255 v. Newell, an interesting case in that the owner caused significant disruption with the hot tub and loudspeakers he installed on his deck, as well as with the frequent parties he hosted there into the wee hours. (A fun and informative read, Murray’s article left me concluding that while I’d probably enjoy being Mr. Newell’s guest, I wouldn’t want to be his neighbour.) What many people unfamiliar with strata living don’t realize is that decks, even those attached to private units, fall under the category of common property.

Most common property, however, is easily identifiable as such (e.g. a shared hot tub room), and it’s important to realize that not all annoying sounds or vibrations originate from noisy neighbours.

When dealing with noise complaints, strata councils are well-advised to avoid making assumptions and take the time to investigate. Strata corporations bear legal responsibility to enforce bylaws, make reasonable decisions and provide owners with fair adjudication processes.

While late-night soirées or barking dogs are obvious problems, many persistent noise issues prove structural in nature. Strata corporations are responsible for the repair and maintenance of common property between residences, and when common property is a contributing factor in noise transmission between units, the strata corporation may be obligated to repair or minimize the transmission of sound.

Based on these Ontario statistics, it appears that significantly more noise complaints arise from common property emissions than residential ones. The Usual Suspects include pumps, HVAC equipment, elevators, fitness facilities, and party rooms. BAP Acoustics continues to work with a condo owner and her strata council on a case that started with a noise complaint several years ago. An earlier blog post details measures taken to subdue the Hot Tub from Hell.

Fixing the problem:
Whose responsibility is it?

If you’ve read this far, you’ve already gleaned that strata corporations are nearly always liable for common property noise emissions. And once a strata meets legal obligations, individual owners generally bear any further costs.

So, what do we do about it?

To be clear, the pertinent (or more to the point, liable) “we” here seldom includes the property developer, who is only required to meet minimum building code standards. Even if that weren’t the case, indoor common property (at least in Canada) remains cheerfully uncomplicated by regulations or bylaws of any kind.

While these realities render dealing with bothersome noise from common property quite difficult, taking the following measures (based on condoinformation.ca recommendations) may get results:

Document the timing, frequency and nature of noise disturbances.
Wait at least a day, then phone the management office. Document the time and details of your call.
Your property manager should inspect the situation within a few days.
If you’ve received no response within a week, follow up with a letter and a copy of your noise disturbance log.
Still nothing? After another week, write a letter to your strata council, and attach copies of your letter to the manager and the log.
Remember that there’s power in numbers. Talk to other residents to see if the noise disturbance has affected them, and encourage their participation in addressing the problem.
If the situation is serious, you may wish to engage a lawyer to help you seek a court order, under Section 163 of the Strata Property Act of BC, that would require your strata council to comply and do something about the noise source.
If the situation is serious enough to require legal counsel and/or adjudication, consider hiring an acoustical consultant, who can measure airborne as well as impact sound insulation and compare results to requirements found in typical standards or lease agreements.

Strata bylaws:
The proverbial ounce of prevention

In the absence of relevant strata bylaws or adherence to existing ones, unacceptable noise disturbance situations can be addressed through nuisance laws (explained here by the BC Law Institute) and taken before a court. In BC, these laws fall under the jurisdiction of the Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT).

Putting literal structures in place to address sound insulation in the design and construction stage of a building will go a long way towards preventing troublesome noise issues. Drafting and enforcing fair—as well as specific—strata bylaws can achieve the same goal.

The above-noted litigious approach, however, strikes me as pretty last-resortish. While it may feel good to know “taking it to court” is an option, wouldn’t something more proactive feel better?

Noisy Newell’s strata council may not have needed to seek a court injunction if its bylaws included, for instance, “No amplified music in common areas between the hours of 11 pm and 8 am,” or “Don’t be putting a damn hot tub on your deck (which isn’t actually yours anyway), even if it can be deemed temporary, because yeah, we’re wise to that.”

But if a persistent noise issue is regularly causing you to lose sleep, rest (as best you can) assured that BAP Acoustics has, on numerous occasions, acted in expert witness and advisory capacities for condo owners and stratas. We encourage you to contact us with these and any other acoustic concerns.

Aug 06 2019

Summertime & the listening is breezy

5 natural amphitheatres
to blow minds, not eardrums

True story: I’m not an acoustical engineer, nor do I play one on TV. But as a blogger for BAP Acoustics, I believe it’s safe to say that this former English major has learned more about sound and the sciences thereof than most former English majors do. Coupled with the fact that I’m an eclectic (she understated) music lover who enjoys the outdoors, my summery inspiration to write this article will make perfect sense.

The internationally known Burning Man event that takes place in the Black Rock Desert of Nevada has, in its 31-year existence as a “temporary metropolis”, spawned “Regionals” all over the world, as far afield as South Africa, and as close to my Vancouver home as a natural amphitheatre near Princeton, British Colombia.

As longtime participants in Burn in The Forest (BiTF), our local “Burner” community, my partner and I recently came home buoyed not only by those endorphins borne of participation, camaraderie, big art, great music, and dancing, but also a renewed sense of awe at just how sublime even cacophony can sound in a natural amphitheatre. I’ll just mention that Burning Man and the Regionals it’s inspired are completely volunteer-run. A BiTF ticket pays for the space we temporarily inhabit (and leave cleaner than we found it) and onsite medics. Pretty cool, no? Maybe we’ll see you next summer! Okay, now I’ll stop pitching and oh-so-gracefully transition to information I hope will tantalize and inspire further research on natural amphitheatres and the properties behind their sonic excellence.

In Nathan Mattise’s WIRED article Sound Science: World’s Best Outdoor Music Venues, Live-Sound Reinforcer (his actual title) Gary Ford explains “Outdoors there’s nothing for sound to bounce off of. Ninety-eight percent of what you hear is the true source without any delay.” His company, Ford Audio Service, co-manages sound for the famed (currently on hiatus) Sasquatch Music Festival held each May in Washington State at a riverside natural amphitheatre called the Gorge.

“Ninety-eight percent of what you hear is the true source without any delay,” Ford says. “When they’re inside arenas and stadiums, sound waves hit various surfaces—roofs, bleachers, concrete floors, and so on—and get deflected or absorbed. If audio engineers calculate all those variables correctly, the listening experience can be immersive. If they get it wrong, you’ll hear bass and drums banging at you from all angles at incremental intervals. That’s not true in the open.”

“Sound-wise, it’s easier,” adds Mark Carlson, Carlson Audio Systems CEO and Ford’s co-manager of sound at Sasquatch. “The PA won’t ever sound better than it does outside. The clarity of sound is a breath of fresh air.”

So break out your camping gear and read on to learn more about the Gorge and four other acoustic—not to mention visual—wonders of nature.

The Gorge Amphitheater in George, Washington, overlooking the Columbia River during the 2006 Sasquatch Music Festival. Credit: Daniel Alberta. Licensed.

The Gorge, Washington

A Seattle couple who’d initially planned on using the land as a vineyard opened the Gorge Amphitheatre, with a capacity of 20,000, in 1985. It’s since become one of the most visited attractions in the Pacific Northwest. Attendees and performers alike rave (no pun intended) about the incredible views. In a Rolling Stone article, Pearl Jam’s Mike McCready calls the Gorge his “all-time favorite venue,” adding “The stage overlooking the cliff of the Columbia River as the sun goes down – it’s very spiritual.”‘

Snug Lake, BC

A relatively new kid on the outdoor festival block, Snug Lake Amphitheatre encompasses 157 acres of pristine wilderness nestled 40 km north of Princeton, BC, in the Okanagan-Similkameen highlands on the northernmost tip of the Cascade Mountain Range. Property owner Keith Duggan and his partners opened its vistas to the public with the 2016 inaugural Element Music Festival. This year’s event just wrapped up at the end of August long weekend, so you’ve got less than a year to read reviews and plan that road trip.

Fortunate enough to have experienced both locations, I’d concur with Duggan’s apt comparison of Snug Lake to the world-famous Gorge in Washington State. “It’s a little bit smaller, but you can paint that picture,” he says to The Georgia Straight’s Mike Usinger, who interviewed Duggan for a July 10th, 2017 article. “There’s a lake on-site and tons of camping,” the music industry veteran adds. “So we did it—we cashed out of Vancouver, we bought this property, and for the last two years we’ve been developing.” This 1-minute aerial video does far greater justice to the site than my photo above.

Shoreline, Mountain Lake, California

Located near the San Francisco Bay area and roughly the size of two football fields, the Shoreline site was a landfill before the city of Mountain View, collaborating with local promoter Bill Graham, built an amphitheatre there in 1985-1986. Fun fact: Graham designed the amphitheatre to resemble The Grateful Dead’s “Steal Your Face” logo. Past performers include the Dave Matthews Band, the Bee Gees, and former members of the prog rock group Yes.

Shoreline Park & Amphitheater, Mountain View, California. Credit: Runner1928. Licensed.

Red Rocks, Morrison, Colorado

This dramatic natural venue just outside Denver, according to Rolling Stone journalist Steve Knopper, can elevate a good show into a totally unforgettable night. Named after its monumental framing boulders, Red Rocks is second in pedigree only to Madison Square Garden as a US venue hosting internationally renowned performers. The Beatles played there in 1964, Jimi Hendrix in 1968, Bruce Springsteen in 1978, and so many more. “Pearl Jam played Red Rocks exactly once, in 1995,” Knopper adds, “and they still haven’t stopped talking about it.” Enamoured of the spectacular venue, Pearl Jam guitarist Mike McCready describes Red Rocks as “just stunning,” and laments “We were never able to get there [again]. I don’t know why. I want to go back.”

Red Rocks Amphitheatre, Morrison, Colorado. Credit: Kathy Stocker. Licensed.

The Greek, Berkley, California

Formally named the William Randolph Hearst Greek Theatre after its financier, this 8,500-seat amphitheatre is known locally as “the Greek“. The University of California, Berkeley owns and operates the theatre which was designed to replicate the ancient Greek theatre of Epidaurus. In her article titled The ‘Athens of the West’, UC Berkeley alum Cathy Cockrell details the Greek’s fascinating history from its 1894 origins to present day. The stage from which Teddy Roosevelt once delivered speeches has since that time showcased a diversity of acts, from Tom Petty and the Pixies to Yo-Yo Ma.

Yo-Yo Ma at the Greek Theater, UC Berkeley. Credit: Jun Seita. Licensed.

With all due respect to Mother Earth…

Savvy engineers do apply their specialized knowledge to work with her and enhance her gifts. It’s widely known that the Mother of All Amphitheatres, the ancient Epidaurus in Greece, boasts a structure in which visitors can hear un-amplified speech right up to the very back row.

Epidaurus Theatre, in the Argolis region of Greece. Credit: Ronny Siegel. Licensed.

You may assume, as I did until researching for this article, that all the sonic perfection characteristic of amphitheatres comes from natural environment: surrounding slopes, prevailing winds, perhaps even a touch of magic. And for the most part, we’d be right! But not entirely accurate. Not when it comes to the original, the grandest, the best.

It turns out, based on Georgia Institute of Technology research, that many have tried since the 4th century BC to duplicate Epidaurus acoustics, but never quite succeeded. Well, I hope you’re sitting on something more comfortable than the corrugated limestone pictured above, because… Eureka! It’s the seats!

Georgia Tech prof, acoustician, and ultrasonics expert Nico Declercq led the research ultimately proving that “the rows of limestone seats at Epidaurus form an efficient acoustics filter that hushes low-frequency background noises like the murmur of a crowd and reflects the high-frequency noises of the performers on stage off the seats and back toward the seated audience member, carrying an actor’s voice all the way to the back rows of the theater.” So now we both know! I’d love to go to Epidaurus someday. But I suspect it’s not a campground.

Fancy building your own amphitheatre? Or maybe a house? We invite you to contact us with any and all your acoustic queries.

Jul 04 2019

GREEN ACOUSTICS: Because Noise Pollution Stinks

I once had a kitten that used to sit in the bedroom windowsill and growl with all her 2-pound might whenever city sanitation trucks pulled up outside to empty our building’s dumpster. With much due appreciation and respect for the workers conducting that essential service, I empathized with the wee feline, convinced that her sounds of displeasure paralleled the expletives occurring in my own rudely-awoken brain at those times.

Noise: While it may not poison water, air, or wildlife, it is, in many places, considered an environmental pollutant.

When we hear the term Environmental Protection Act (EPA), we’re far likelier to think of contaminated land and water than noise. These Acts exist in numerous countries at federal as well as state or provincial levels, but unlike municipal bylaws, they seldom address noise as an environmental hazard. And maybe that needs to change.

Environmental Protection Acts

A perusal of Environmental Protection Acts across four countries reveals that the UK, Australia, and (to a lesser extent) the US all identify noise as a pollutant, while Canada only does so with reference to motor vehicles, aviation, and pipelines in Alberta and BC. In all four countries, noise pollution (and the regulation thereof) is addressed somewhat more at provincial/state levels than federal, but is deemed, for the most part, a municipal responsibility.

The UK addresses noise under Section (79) Statutory nuisances and inspections therefore, and defines related offences as:

noise emitted from premises so as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance;
noise that is prejudicial to health or a nuisance and is emitted from or caused by a vehicle, machinery or equipment in a street.

Regulation enforcement in the UK and parts of the EU has given rise to delightfully memorable acronyms including BATNEEC (Best Available Technique Not Entailing Excessive Cost) and CATNIP (Cheapest Available Technique Not Inviting Prosecution) … the latter triggered my memory of a certain kitten who growled at garbage trucks.

Driven to drink by the stress of her activist role.
Misha, chair of KALE (Kittens Against Loud Emissions).

The US introduced a comprehensive Noise Control Act in 1972, but that Act, although never officially rescinded, lost its funding amidst “a shift in federal noise control policy to transfer the primary responsibility of regulating noise to state and local governments.” Noise pollution is currently addressed by the Clean Air Act.

Although the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) of Australia is broad in scope, many environmental issues are legislated regionally. Air pollution, for example, is dealt with “under numerous regulations including the Clean Air (Determination of air impurities in gases discharged into the atmosphere) Regulations 1983 (Western Australia) and, as noise pollution is considered air pollution for the purposes of the Western Australian EP Act, the Environmental Protection (Noise Regulations) 1997 (Western Australia).

Similarly, while Canada addresses noise only in terms of motor vehicles, aviation, and pipelines at the federal EPA level, provinces such as Ontario feature numerous laws pertaining to noise pollution. BC, on the other hand, has an Environmental Management Act, but it doesn’t address noise as a pollutant.

LEED by example?

As we’ve seen, environmental protection legislation can vary dramatically, even amongst regions of the same country, so other motivators for green construction do become pertinent.

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is, as defined by Boston University, “an internationally recognized green building certification system, providing third-party verification that a building or community was designed and built using strategies aimed at improving performance across all the metrics that matter most: energy savings, water efficiency, CO2 emissions reduction, improved indoor environmental quality, and stewardship of resources and sensitivity to their impacts.”

Sounds great, right?

Of course it does! And it is. But like so many Great Things, LEED certification proves problematic in some respects, and its implementation vulnerable to throwing out that proverbial baby with the bathwater. In his illuminating article Acoustics: The Biggest Complaint in LEED-Certified Office Buildings, Buildings editor Chris Curtland writes:

Green initiatives and good acoustic design frequently find themselves at odds, but that doesn’t have to be the case. With a little creativity and consideration, you can integrate these two goals and have a facility that is both sustainable and functional.

Workplaces are doing a poor job of providing acoustical comfort in green facilities, according to the January 2012 white paper Sound Matters by the General Services Administration (GSA). Compared to building conditions such as lighting, air quality, and even thermal comfort—which is notoriously dissatisfying—problems with acoustics are the leading source of complaints, the report reads.

Going back to 2005, poor acoustics have caused the greatest dissatisfaction in renovated LEED-certified offices, according to an occupant indoor environmental quality (IEQ) survey of 23,450 respondents from 142 buildings. Conducted by the Center for the Built Environment (CBE) at the University of California, Berkeley, results appear in the report Acoustic Quality in Office Workstations, as Assessed by Occupant Surveys.

The article goes on to explain that while LEED initiatives such as passive cooling systems (including radiant flooring and chilled beams) can degrade acoustical performance by interfering with sound-absorbing finishes and removing the masking qualities of traditional HVAC systems, educational and healthcare sectors were the first to award points for acoustical design, paving the way for other building types to follow suit.

Quoting The Sextant Group acoustical consultant Gregory A. Coudriet, the article addresses mistakes and misconceptions around LEED practices and their effect on acoustics, concluding that perhaps the greatest myth is that green initiatives and acoustical design are opposed at all. “It’s easy to say green building and acoustics are at odds or incompatible, but I don’t think that’s the case,” Coudriet says. ‘They’re intertwined. Look for opportunities to develop solutions that satisfy both. If the building doesn’t work for its occupants—if it isn’t functional—then is it really sustainable? Green building is all about compromise across systems. Don’t pursue one goal in spite of another.”

So, what does green acoustical design look like?

Perhaps this question renders itself easily answerable when we swap out “green” for the more precise “sustainable”, and sustainable design arises from consideration of environmental impact, as well as health, safety, and profitability. Acoustical treatment can be applied to almost any design project to optimize the comfort level of a space. According to Acoustics.com, an alliance of educators, experts and design professionals dedicated to promoting the importance of acoustics in architecture, design, and construction, sustainable design encompasses far more than use of recycled materials. A design professional must consider:

Efficiency. Both energy and human efficiency factor into sustainable design. As a company’s most valuable resource, employees necessitate creating a space in which they can thrive. Many studies convincingly document that noise is by far the greatest impediment to workplace productivity.
Health & Safety. Hearing loss (from noise exposure) is one of the leading occupational hazards—and it’s 100% preventable. Employees that suffer from hearing loss are 55% more likely to have a workplace accident. Other noise-related health issues include headaches, tinnitus, high blood pressure, heart problems, respiratory ailments, and even negative fetal development.
Comfort. “Few people have ever experienced real comfort—thermal, visual, or acoustic—but once they do, they tend to want more of it.” (Hawken, Lovin & Lovins. Natural Capitalism) Occupants in a noisy space can feel irritable, distracted, anxious, hostile and annoyed, sometimes without consciously making the connection to noise.
Functionality/Building Longevity. For a space to be successful, it must function, and if it doesn’t, how can one hope for longevity? An acoustically correct environment is paramount to the functionality of most spaces. You must consider acoustics in any space where:
- speech intelligibility is critical (classroom, courtroom, boardroom, etc.).
- there is a PA system (airport, gymnasium, public building, etc.).
- speech privacy is necessary (open office, call centers, etc.).
- confidentiality is imperative (doctor’s/counselor’s office, HR, attorney’s office, police facility, etc.).
- music is (no pun intended) key (performance space, concert hall, recording studio, etc.).
- both speech and music are important (worship center, ballroom, theater, multi-purpose room, etc.).
- a quiet atmosphere is essential (library, museum, healthcare facility, etc.).
- noise build-up can be problematic (restaurant, lobby, mall, etc.).
How the Building Impacts the Environment. Facility operation shouldn’t harm (pollute) the environment. Although LEED certification takes into account water, air, land and light pollution, it surprisingly doesn’t include noise pollution. While controlling/limiting light pollution is very important, noise pollution can prove far more annoying, harmful, and difficult to limit.
Recycled (Sustainable) Materials. Many recycled/sustainable acoustic products work as well as (or better than) non-recycled alternatives. Acoustic products can account for a significant percentage of the materials in a space. Often, most (or all) ceiling, flooring, and wall surfaces serve an acoustical purpose.

At the end of the noisy day, we know that certain levels and frequencies of sound negatively affect human as well as animal health and well-being. In addition to obvious problems such as hearing loss or tinnitus, prolonged exposure to excessive noise can cause stress, high blood pressure, sleep loss, and diminished productivity.

Consider too that, regardless of legislation, the air we breathe—and hear—is really a “commons”, a public good. When we (as individuals and organizations) ignore our obligation to maintain that commons in a way that ensures public comfort, we’re behaving a bit like schoolyard bullies. And who wants to be a bully? No one likes them, and people eventually rat them out.