Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD-33-94 • THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REPORT Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File # 'C'fi 1 �= 1• �%C) Date: Monday, July 18, 1994 Res. # ClVA°�� CD-33-94 By-Law# Report#: File#: Subject: MARKSMAN CLUB OF OSHAWA NOISE EXEMPTION Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1 THAT Report CD-33-94 be received; 2 THAT the Marksman Club of Oshawa be given a one time grant of $5, 000. 00, such money to be used to obtain a Noise Assessment Study from an Engineer; 3 THAT the necessary funds for the grant be drawn from the Reserve Account # 7007-X-298; 4 THAT all interested parties be advised of Council's decision. BACKGROUND At its regular meeting on November 15, 1993 the General Purpose and Administration Committee passed Resolution GPA-646-93 . This Resolution involved a request from Mr. Steve Jansma to rescind the Marksman Club's exemption to the Noise By-law # 89-184. The Club has operated from its property at 5070 Holt Road, Hampton since 1965. This is a 17. 5 acre parcel of land. Until 1992 the Club operated an indoor handgun range only. In the summer of 1992 the Club constructed an outdoor shotgun range. 61 '2 RECYCLED aP ER PPE EC. E TH61 MWOM RECYCLED PAPER REPORT CD-33-94 2 JULY 18, 1994 The range was inspected by the Ontario Provincial Police and complies with their requirements. In August 1992 staff began to receive complaints about the noise from the range from some of the surrounding neighbours. The range is used by Club members on Saturdays and by the Durham Regional Police during the week as part of their in-service training. By-law 89-184, section 5 established a night time noise curfew for the Marksman Club as well as the Orono Fish and Hunt Club and the Union Rod and Gun Club. The section goes on to state: "It is noted that noises emanating from such operations shall not be considered a violation when said operations are carried on outside the time periods set by a curfew. " It is this exemption which Mr. Jansma wishes to see removed. His contention is that the exemption was given on the basis of an indoor range, not an outdoor one. It should be noted that the By-law does not refer to the type of range and both the Orono and the Union clubs are exclusively outdoor ranges. In attempting to resolve this situation, staff have spokeN to the complainant, Mr. Gerry Neely (Club President) , the Ontario Provincial Police and the Ministry of the Environment. As previously stated the range complies with the O.P.P. requirements. The facility does, however require a Certificate of Approval under section 9 of the Environmental Protection Act. The range must be able to meet a sound level of 50 dBAI (LLM) . Although the Ministry requires a Certificate of Approval, it does not respond to complaints of possible violations; this is left to the local municipality to enforce. At the November 15, 1993 meeting Mr. Neely indicated his club's willingness to pay for a sound study if an expert could be found. Since that time staff have found several companies which could provide the required services. Staff have spoken to one of the companies and received a quote on the proposed costs. 6 f5 REPORT CD-33-94 3 JULY 18, 1994 Senes Consultants Limited have estimated their costs at approximately $4, 800. 00. The Marksman Club was advised of this estimate and staff repeated their request for a noise study. At that time Mr. Neely contacted the By-law Division to advise that his Club is a non-profit organization and cannot afford to pay for an Engineer to conduct the study. On July 4, 1994 Mr. John Baker contacted the By-law Division on behalf of the Club. He had conducted a noise study for the Club. Mr. Baker had tried to comply with the staff request. (See Attachment # 1) Staff have reviewed his study and spoken with the Ministry of the Environment with regards to it. While staff do not doubt Mr. Baker's sincerity and willingness to help, the fact remains that he is not an Engineer. He does not have the necessary expertise to properly evaluate and interpret the data he collected. This situation has been an ongoing problem for some time. The complaints that staff and Council have received are strictly subjective as are the claims from the Marksman Club that there is no noise problem. Without a proper Noise Study done by an Engineer who is qualified to interpret the data obtained, staff are left with no firm basis for deciding the fate of the Club's exemption. The Study, as required under the Environmental Protection Act, would provide concrete, verifiable evidence. If the noise level does, in fact, exceed the permitted limits, the Engineer could be in a position to make recommendations to resolve the problem that may not involve closing down the outdoor range. CONCLUSION It is not staff's intention to establish a precedent for all clubs and private organizations, however staff believe it would best serve the public interest for Council to consider a one time grant to the Marksman Club to cover the costs of a Noise Assessment Study. 614 REPORT CD-33-94 4 JULY 18, 1994 Using the one quote staff have received as a benchmark, the grant could be set at $5, 000. 00. The necessary funds could be drawn from the Reserve Account #7007-X-298. Staff would request that the Club be required to have the Study done as quickly as possible. Once the study is completed, a copy would have to be supplied to staff. The Marksman Club would be responsible for implementing any required corrections or alterations to their operations in order to ensure compliance. Failure to do so would result in the revocation of the exemption and be treated as a violation of the By-law. Respectfully submitted Reviewed by Pa i L. arri .M.C.T. W.H. Stockwell Town Clerk Chief Administrative Officer PLB*LC*KM �I i i � IJ i I ATTACHMENT + .1 John Baker Marksman Club Rep. Holt Rd. Clarington, Ontario Town of Clarington July 4-94 Leonard Creamer, B.A. Senior Municipal Law Enforcement Officer Provincial Officer Clerk's Department In responce of the Town of Clarington request of a sound study to be done at the Marksman Club at our expense to maintain the noise by-law exemption so graciously granted to us. The cost of said study will be app. $5,000.00. Money that we don't have the ability to spend during these hard times we all face teday,as we are a nonprofit organization. Please allow me to explain who, ,what, where, when and by whom the outside range is used. I am sure once you and the Town Counsel of Clarington are aware of these facts you will have a more realalistic view of the supposed problem with noise levels at our property. I have conducted a noise study on July 2-94 with results enclosed in this letter. Before I continue we would be pleased to have yourself or any member of the Town Counsel come out to our club for a tour and or to be present when the range is in use. This would give you first hand information and perhaps introduce you to the recreational use of firearms as you may or may not be Progun or have an opinion on the topic. First who uses the range? The range is used by club members under strict supervision at organized events that we put on for their pleasure. These events are put on the first Saturday of each month. The range is also used by our fine Durham Regional Police Service for their training usage. As the Police have no range of their own to use. The Marksman Club allows them to use the indoor, outdoor and classroom for training in the interest of public safety and for Police officer safety in our sometimes very dangerour streets with crime and criminals on the rise. This training is done Monday to Friday Minimum two days, sometime three days. Next what is done on the outside range? We use only shotguns on the range in accordance with the Ontario Provincial Police regulation as they approved it's design and the fact no projectiles will leave our property. The events organized for club members pleasure will usually consist of five to twenty targets (round steel plates on top of a post) These targets are engaged from various positions on the range in order from first to last target. When Durham Regional Police Service uses the outside range they use the same shotguns as in their patrol cars. The police engage five targets of their own design from a small area of the range. Where is the outside range? It is located on the east side of our property running parallel to Holt road. I would say that seventy-five percent of it is in a heavy wooded area that runs on our north property line toward the west. Please review diagram, 616 (2) although not to scale you should realize it must make a natural noise barrier. The hours of operation of the outside range is strictly controled by the Marksman Club. It may be used for a short time Thursday evening till dusk and on the first Saturday of the month for matches. The Thursday is used for practice.Sometimes it's used but mostly not. The Saturday events are mid day 12pm to 3pm would be usual. The only exception would be once in the spring and once in the fall. This is time that we host an international event and may start at loam till possibly 5pm. We don't use the range on Sundays as we respect the day of rest for all. The Durham Reginal Police Service use the range as nessesary for their training before and close to after noon. Please feel free to contact Srgt. Paul Wasel at his office at Durham College Oshawa Campas as he is in charge of their training. Again as to whom uses the range, the Marksman Club members are law abiding hard working people as yourself and happen to enjoy recreatinal use of firearms and of course we all know the Durham Regional Police Service and protect us in this day and age. I emplore you to work with myself to resolve this problum and deal with this as quickly as possible. As Club members we wish to continue our recreation as long as we wish and also I believe that Durham Regional Police is app. two years away from their own range if it is even built. On July 2-94 myself and many assistants (names of file. ) preform our own noise study at the Marksman club. I did this for two reasons, first to find if we meet your specs of 50 decibel (dB) at our property line and also to report to our Executive committe on July 6-94. Although this study is not claimed to be totaly accurate as the equipment we borrowed was expensive it can't be as totaly accurate as the company you suqqusted. I Believe it shows a good comparison to other sounds that we all can relate to in our every day lives. In this respect we can relate to sound even if we don't know the differance between 60dB and 90dB. The equipment used in this test is a Radio Shack sound level meter model 33-2050, a tripod for mounting, also used were two hand radios for coordinating the tests where nessesary. I started my study llam. Saturday July 2-94 at King and Temperance St. in down town Bownamville. I stood the meter in front of Family Real Estate facing the intersection of the two streets. On a red light for east bound King St. I got a reading of 78 to 82dBls and on a green light from 86 to 92 dBls. Next I moved to Bownmanville Plaza. The meter was app 20 meters from the road. I recorded readings from 82 to 95 dBls. At 210 King St. again app. 20 meters from the road I recorded 76 to 80 dBls. My final reading were across from the Bowmanville Zoo in an open area readings of 74 to 86 dBls were recorded. I then moved to the hi way scale west of Bennett Road on the 401 west bound at a distance of app. 30 meters readings of 74 to 90 dBl were recorded. As a comparison of distance I also recorded reading of 86 to 102 at the side of the hi way. bfI (3) The balance of the study was performed at the Marksman Club property with a light breeze from the north west. Please review test data reports. Actual firing and readings were coordinated by two way radio. As you must see from test data the noise levels can be accuratly compared to sounds that we all know. Concluding in the fact that we produce no more noise that Tauntion Road traffic. As our hi of 87dB in only / test is less than a traffic hi of 96 dB. I already stated the readings are not certified but they are surely relative to other sounds. It may be very difficult to accept but I ran these tests with my best honesty and integrity for the benfit of all. So please accept them for their intended value of comparison to the other sounds we know well. Due to the very acceptable levels I found during my tests, we respectfully request that this matter be brought to a close in our favor. We simply cannot as a nonprofit club to spend this money on a study that I believe would also show results in our favor. Please feel free to contact myself John Baker 319 Killarney Crt. Oshawa Ontario L1J 6C6 Home- 905-728-7831 Day- 905-433-4180 For any information. Or contact any one you feel is nessesary. We all await your consideration of this material John Baker Marksman Club 618 Test #1 Data Recorded Base background level 55-58 dB Pasenger car passing by 72-75 dB Ast. motorcycles 82-94 dB Pick up truck 85 Motorhome 78 Dump truck 96 Results of data A base level low of 55 hi of 96 for dump truck passing by our property. This allows 41 dBs of sound above the background noice to come onto our property this falls with in the level of 50 dBs that we are asked to comform to. 1.15 PM July 2-94 John Baker Test #2 Data Recorded Background 66-68 dB Test Firing of 5 slow shots 69-71 dB Results of data A base low of 66 dBs and afiring hi of 71 dBs for 5 dBs above base background noise well with in a 50 dBl limit. b2O Test #3 Data Recorded Background 60 dB Firing 5 shots 76-78 Results of data Above of 60 dB and a hi of 78 dB while firing. Again well within a 50 db limit Test #4 Data Recorded Background 61 dB Firing Position #1 74 Firing Position #2 76 Results of Data A base of 61 dB and a hi of 76 dB when firing from position "2 near the north east corner of our property. Clearly within a 50 dB limit and also showing the trees and wood provide a very effective sound barrier. 7 I 6 !� 2 Test #5 Data Recorded Base 80 dB Firing 87 Results of Data A background level of 80 dB and a firing hi of 87 dB well within the 50 level. Also a background level of 80 is much higher than in test 1 thru 4. I also noted this with my bare ear before set up the meter. The area to the west, of the meter is open field with hydro towers also on it. The origin of this extra baseline noise was not visualy found. b2 Test #6 Data Recorded Background 78 dB Firing 84 Data Results Background noise 78 dB firing hi of 84 dB again within 50 dB limit. Again as in test 5 background noise is high with no visival reason found beyond open field to the west. i Test #7 Data Recorded Base noise 62 dB Position #1 74 Position #2 78 Data Results A base of 62 a hi of 78 when firing from Position #2 again well within the 50 dB limit. Background noise dropped for no reason seen from the hi of 80 in test #5. Test #8 Recap of test given by myself to group and discussion of same on the range at position #1 app in a 4 meter area Data recorded including base noise hi o 80 dB and a low of 70 dB during normal conversation. Results of test #8 gives a person some insight as to what 70 to 80dB realy is. Test #9 Check noise level of riding lawnmore at 30 meters. Results of 77dB at 30 meters. a good example of the reduction of noise by distance when based on the results of test #8. 6 6 MARKSMAN CLUB SOUND LEVEL TEST JULY 2 1994 i r, 'Y' I �'PRKIfJG Per,/ sr /-oT //v'DOUrc .4� Rif \ J �� tai-}-�•�. 'z� �'' PRoP�R�;•Y --bsfTroN s..� 4-1 RP w a" ,.'Jt^�{10-.:•Nf?.�''.'-�,. .�=J�� _ w�a Housf IVOT TO .;cf1 E xAx�sruN CLUB SOUND LEVEL TEST f 1 1, 15 Pm JULY 2 1994 DCGI 6E L mFTEr� i' '� T ,wT?I`-•i a'4"�2Yi� -�Mi. i'��d•;3; ;' ., ..�J:,,�h,,•,�,�,•�,,, . .v.. +75,i^•iL'"�.r£r9H-�'',+ 4 t:!„r ��1 k•! t T � 4•• T,a'1'ti � � t PARKIN& OPEN �,--� �� . � �� _� ��2:• Inlpooa. FK /7(! ! , ``tt .r . r ;� �: RAIJC,� PL I9 t • 1' 7bWt PRoPC-RTY r, f E ARC" 7R6r� K R sF NOT To 51(,A445 a .., MARIAN .G[,Ir$ END LEVEL TEST t a. ,TITLY x.11994 Y: o C-,q-r arJ t. _... .. _��,_ �l• - �ti.'JYi»!'�"t:Via.. ....''t ` .,;4�:.,� Y.. a PEN �Y� h, ;�'`� �` Lo r JN�R ' FIEc p f�Xr RANGE . PLAl Floc ,�+ •� � 'tom' ���� t � � y4 W5mon1 PROP69TY t (- V I J{ate. 9 HOL" A107 To ScA.c E ;` ,•,. ,WKSMAN CLUB SOUN'U lZM TEST 1 :1= JULY 2 1994 rE'• " ". ;` PAP K,Nk6 �o 7 /NDOOQ r. y 5: RANGE , PL +;5. � , A FtEi A �I j �1T101j pE(,,t BEL- Tb(A)C i me-rE 0 _ ` PROPER 1 Y h irmv c f, f n' LED A R Elr� NouSE /� 'ivoY To 5cAl 5 ".i� MARK MAN CLUB SOUND LEYEL TEST # JULY 2 1994 (111T-ow u r ;'N -:.l.r;!;:ti��""�r:YW`y�6t";;1wr i•:4--.tom.'.. _ ;i.rt��•^r:�' +!� 'j. ;ire., a- n"�+j�'•�^+r+.•K <.> .. �, i.i. "\ .`[;J�.� :.':...tvWf��ia' "t�::..i�i� .. - `1i•. .t'iY {�. J+.l ry a PEN Lo T INDOOQ ,.. FIELp h2KT * vjj RANGE PLA RD �;Y ;.3i' �-- Flf-l Povriwi 7bWt r' PRoPCRTY r !, POSiMN ,R r• J� J��JJJ��JJ.r Y cn FAA rnco PPonc::-PTy 'FO c AN KOowN FIR" FINA1E N� YRs E-Tc .► .. / E �s�,r; f/AI�O AREA •r'--�.• / ARC NoR sE l V NOT TO SCAB E r .MARKSW a= SOUND LEVEL TEST JMY 2 1994 TAU/✓ro,%l lei � ':;vi�+.qn -:e:o:Y,_�:.••'-'r`yl w��A��'�.'.ri•-•c�!.�•; +a' iyn tY. I plc��•tF, PEN ► {5. {oT /NDO02 EL p .. .r?` 1 •` RANGE F PLA FILL 6: PWrlwj HM Tbwt I S UE 1- r f/Af,�D AREA; RR 7REe.15 N sE lV ivor TO ScA�E MARKSMAN CLUB SOUND LEVEL. TEST / J` •, JULY 2 1994 •— — — — — -— — — — — —`TH U/✓TON (Z b .__... _._. _.. -..._ _ .�. at '' :'R ;;�-r:�v;�``- it 1 I ��, r-.�rr,?,.c;�• `• _ ��,, r + Y Y T >, PAR K N& A OPEN tit, r, 't ,`x DoT h�DooR N. t RANGE p �- s R D, .t`•,. It!t. F E L it• . � ? x .' ft751T1oN 4 HYa TbU)t PROPERTY f�rs/TroN bc c G6 t_. i dw • r .r 'she !ti`�� f �m�:!�� Her D q RC,4,� E ARc TpEp-=, .l l V NOT TD S'CA.4 6 r h9km a MARKSMAN CLUB SOUND LEVEL TEST # ' JULY 2 1994 A k4 •- — — — — � ,. _ _ TAU/✓To l✓ �p, r. _._.. -..`. .� .,.._ ... r �� VP o ; .`,; 1. tf `• PARKING x � s f� r oR FIEL //bCT # • t `' wa ' RANGE PLfi Am tk' i 7yyt� HYo r r PRoPc-RTY ©wi .t. /1-C< AT(010 P Par- � N �jj 634 � > No�tSE 'Nor To srAz5