Acentech Incorporated

33 Moulton Street

Cambridge, MA 02138

Telephone: 617-499-8000

Facsimile: 617-499-8074

E-mail: postbox@acentech.com

Acoustics Audiovisual System Design Technology Planning Vibration Quiet Product Design

July 25, 2014

Catherine M. Conlow

City Manager

City of Bangor

73 Harlow St.

Bangor, ME 04401

Subject: Bangor Waterfront Concert Venue

Sound evaluation and SLODA exemption

Acentech Project No. 624574

Dear Ms. Conlow:

The City of Bangor has an outdoor venue on the waterfront for summertime concerts. Acentech

has continuously monitored sound levels in and around the facility, in Bangor and in Brewer, for

the duration of the 2014 concert season (to date). This report summarizes the results of our

monitoring program and includes our recommendations for reasonable sound level limits based

on the data we collected and our analysis of the log of complaints the City has received. With

the proposed sound level limits in place, it is our professional opinion that sound from the

facility will meet the requirements for exemption from regulation under the Maine Department

of Environmental Protection “No Adverse Environmental Effect Standard of the Site Location

Law” under the “occasional cultural” provision.

SOUND LEVEL MONITORING PROGRAM RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Sound level monitoring procedure

Acentech placed three continuous sound level monitors in and around the waterfront concert

venue on May 6, 2014. The system used to monitor the sound is Acentech’s Remote

Monitoring System which uses a Data Translation Signal Acquisition Board (Model DT9837)

and PCB Microphone (Model 378B02), and processes the data using time-domain filters which

meet the specifications of ANSI 1.11-2004 Class 1. A microphone windscreen was used in each

location. We calibrated each system in the field.

The sound level monitors were placed in the three locations indicated in Figure 1 below:

1. At the sound mix position within the venue – the “mix” location

2. On the roof of 10 Barker Street, Bangor, ME – the “Bangor” location

3. Outside the Brewer Public Library, 100 S. Main St., Brewer, ME – the “Brewer”

location

Sound level data from each monitoring location is wirelessly transmitted in real time to our

servers for analysis, and a summary of the data collected is posted in real time on a secured

website accessible to City officials.

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 2

Figure 1.

Generally speaking, the louder the sound

level (SPL) is measured in decibels (dB).

sounds (“bass”) to very high frequen

sounds differently depending on the frequency content. Some sounds (like rock mu

great deal of sound energy

may not.

sound we monitored

1.

2.

Sound levels (particularly durin

We have focused our analysis on two ways of accounting for this variability over time:

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

. Sound level monitor locations.

Generally speaking, the louder the sound

SPL) is measured in decibels (dB).

sounds (“bass”) to very high frequen

sounds differently depending on the frequency content. Some sounds (like rock mu

great deal of sound energy

may not. We have focused our analysis on two

sound we monitored

An overall or “broadband”

weights the frequency content following a standard procedure that roughly approximates

the frequency sensitivity of human hearing. This is the metric referenced and regulated

in Maine’s Site Location Law.

The unweighted sound pressure level in the 63 Hz octave band

sound spectrum at low frequencies

correlated with community response to outdoor rock music.

Sound levels (particularly durin

We have focused our analysis on two ways of accounting for this variability over time:

Sound level monitor locations.

Generally speaking, the louder the sound

SPL) is measured in decibels (dB).

sounds (“bass”) to very high frequen

sounds differently depending on the frequency content. Some sounds (like rock mu

great deal of sound energy at low frequencies, while other sounds

We have focused our analysis on two

sound we monitored:

or “broadband”

weights the frequency content following a standard procedure that roughly approximates

the frequency sensitivity of human hearing. This is the metric referenced and regulated

in Maine’s Site Location Law.

e unweighted sound pressure level in the 63 Hz octave band

sound spectrum at low frequencies

correlated with community response to outdoor rock music.

Sound levels (particularly during a rock concert)

We have focused our analysis on two ways of accounting for this variability over time:

Generally speaking, the louder the sound, the greater the sound pressure level

SPL) is measured in decibels (dB). Human hearing ranges from very low frequency

sounds (“bass”) to very high frequency sounds (roughly 20 Hz to 20,000

sounds differently depending on the frequency content. Some sounds (like rock mu

at low frequencies, while other sounds

We have focused our analysis on two

or “broadband” sound pressure level, A

weights the frequency content following a standard procedure that roughly approximates

the frequency sensitivity of human hearing. This is the metric referenced and regulated

in Maine’s Site Location Law.

e unweighted sound pressure level in the 63 Hz octave band

sound spectrum at low frequencies (bass sounds)

correlated with community response to outdoor rock music.

g a rock concert)

We have focused our analysis on two ways of accounting for this variability over time:

the greater the sound pressure level

Human hearing ranges from very low frequency

cy sounds (roughly 20 Hz to 20,000

sounds differently depending on the frequency content. Some sounds (like rock mu

at low frequencies, while other sounds

We have focused our analysis on two metrics that account for the frequency content of

pressure level, A

weights the frequency content following a standard procedure that roughly approximates

the frequency sensitivity of human hearing. This is the metric referenced and regulated

e unweighted sound pressure level in the 63 Hz octave band

(bass sounds), which we have found to be well

correlated with community response to outdoor rock music.

g a rock concert) also vary signif

We have focused our analysis on two ways of accounting for this variability over time:

the greater the sound pressure level

Human hearing ranges from very low frequency

cy sounds (roughly 20 Hz to 20,000

sounds differently depending on the frequency content. Some sounds (like rock mu

at low frequencies, while other sounds of nominally “equal loudness”

metrics that account for the frequency content of

pressure level, A-weighted decibels (dBA), that

weights the frequency content following a standard procedure that roughly approximates

the frequency sensitivity of human hearing. This is the metric referenced and regulated

e unweighted sound pressure level in the 63 Hz octave band

, which we have found to be well

correlated with community response to outdoor rock music.

vary significantly from instant to instant.

We have focused our analysis on two ways of accounting for this variability over time:

the greater the sound pressure level. Sound pressure

Human hearing ranges from very low frequency

cy sounds (roughly 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz), and we respond to

sounds differently depending on the frequency content. Some sounds (like rock mu

of nominally “equal loudness”

metrics that account for the frequency content of

weighted decibels (dBA), that

weights the frequency content following a standard procedure that roughly approximates

the frequency sensitivity of human hearing. This is the metric referenced and regulated

e unweighted sound pressure level in the 63 Hz octave band – a “slice” of the audible

, which we have found to be well

icantly from instant to instant.

We have focused our analysis on two ways of accounting for this variability over time:

Sound pressure

Human hearing ranges from very low frequency

Hz), and we respond to

sounds differently depending on the frequency content. Some sounds (like rock music) have a

of nominally “equal loudness”

metrics that account for the frequency content of

weighted decibels (dBA), that

weights the frequency content following a standard procedure that roughly approximates

the frequency sensitivity of human hearing. This is the metric referenced and regulated

a “slice” of the audible

, which we have found to be well

icantly from instant to instant.

We have focused our analysis on two ways of accounting for this variability over time:

Sound pressure

Hz), and we respond to

sic) have a

of nominally “equal loudness”

metrics that account for the frequency content of

weights the frequency content following a standard procedure that roughly approximates

the frequency sensitivity of human hearing. This is the metric referenced and regulated

a “slice” of the audible

icantly from instant to instant.

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 3

1.

2.

It is well established that community response to sound is not characterized merely by the

loudness of the sound, but by the increase in loudness of a particular sound over the prevailing

background or

sound levels can be disturbing; locations (near busy roadways, for example) that experience

higher levels of continuous sound are

signals that could be bothersome elsewhere. As such, in the analysis that follows we have also

drawn comparisons between sound levels during

events are not happening.

For the purpose of this report, we

2014.

Sound monitoring results

Sound levels during some concerts are significantly louder than others: by far the loudest event

was the “Rise Above Fest” o

2014) were not nearly as loud and not nearly as bass

provides a useful comparison.

The 1-minute sound levels at all three monitor locations during the Rise Above Fest are graphed

in Figures 2 (

correlated: when sound levels at the mix position in the venue go up (blue line), so too do the

levels in Bangor and Brewer.

The same

the changes in level within the venue do not result in as significant a change in the levels out in

the community.

Not surprisingly, the City received many more complaints about sound levels during Rise Above

Fest than i

analyze the complaint log in further detail in the following section.)

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

“Energy-average

over the course of

averaging referenced and regulated in Maine’s Site Location Law.

Energy-average sound levels over the cou

found this finer resolution

rock music.

It is well established that community response to sound is not characterized merely by the

loudness of the sound, but by the increase in loudness of a particular sound over the prevailing

background or “ambient” sound levels. In locations that are otherwise very quiet, even modest

sound levels can be disturbing; locations (near busy roadways, for example) that experience

higher levels of continuous sound are

signals that could be bothersome elsewhere. As such, in the analysis that follows we have also

drawn comparisons between sound levels during

are not happening.

For the purpose of this report, we

Sound monitoring results

Sound levels during some concerts are significantly louder than others: by far the loudest event

was the “Rise Above Fest” o

2014) were not nearly as loud and not nearly as bass

provides a useful comparison.

minute sound levels at all three monitor locations during the Rise Above Fest are graphed

in Figures 2 (broadband, dBA) and 3 (63 Hz). The levels at the three locations are well

correlated: when sound levels at the mix position in the venue go up (blue line), so too do the

levels in Bangor and Brewer.

The same types of graphs are shown for Celtic Women in F

the changes in level within the venue do not result in as significant a change in the levels out in

the community.

Not surprisingly, the City received many more complaints about sound levels during Rise Above

Fest than in any other concert; no complaints were logged during or after Celtic Women. (We

analyze the complaint log in further detail in the following section.)

verage” sound levels (sometimes called “equivalent sound levels” or Leq)

over the course of 1 hour (1

averaging referenced and regulated in Maine’s Site Location Law.

verage sound levels over the cou

this finer resolution

It is well established that community response to sound is not characterized merely by the

loudness of the sound, but by the increase in loudness of a particular sound over the prevailing

“ambient” sound levels. In locations that are otherwise very quiet, even modest

sound levels can be disturbing; locations (near busy roadways, for example) that experience

higher levels of continuous sound are

signals that could be bothersome elsewhere. As such, in the analysis that follows we have also

drawn comparisons between sound levels during

are not happening.

For the purpose of this report, we

Sound monitoring results

Sound levels during some concerts are significantly louder than others: by far the loudest event

was the “Rise Above Fest” on May 10, 2014; other concerts (e.g. “Celtic

2014) were not nearly as loud and not nearly as bass

provides a useful comparison.

minute sound levels at all three monitor locations during the Rise Above Fest are graphed

broadband, dBA) and 3 (63 Hz). The levels at the three locations are well

correlated: when sound levels at the mix position in the venue go up (blue line), so too do the

levels in Bangor and Brewer.

graphs are shown for Celtic Women in F

the changes in level within the venue do not result in as significant a change in the levels out in

Not surprisingly, the City received many more complaints about sound levels during Rise Above

n any other concert; no complaints were logged during or after Celtic Women. (We

analyze the complaint log in further detail in the following section.)

sound levels (sometimes called “equivalent sound levels” or Leq)

1 hour (1-hour Leq). This

averaging referenced and regulated in Maine’s Site Location Law.

verage sound levels over the cou

this finer resolution to be well corr

It is well established that community response to sound is not characterized merely by the

loudness of the sound, but by the increase in loudness of a particular sound over the prevailing

“ambient” sound levels. In locations that are otherwise very quiet, even modest

sound levels can be disturbing; locations (near busy roadways, for example) that experience

higher levels of continuous sound are more tolerant of

signals that could be bothersome elsewhere. As such, in the analysis that follows we have also

drawn comparisons between sound levels during

For the purpose of this report, we have analyzed sound monitored between May 6 and July

Sound levels during some concerts are significantly louder than others: by far the loudest event

n May 10, 2014; other concerts (e.g. “Celtic

2014) were not nearly as loud and not nearly as bass

minute sound levels at all three monitor locations during the Rise Above Fest are graphed

broadband, dBA) and 3 (63 Hz). The levels at the three locations are well

correlated: when sound levels at the mix position in the venue go up (blue line), so too do the

graphs are shown for Celtic Women in F

the changes in level within the venue do not result in as significant a change in the levels out in

Not surprisingly, the City received many more complaints about sound levels during Rise Above

n any other concert; no complaints were logged during or after Celtic Women. (We

analyze the complaint log in further detail in the following section.)

sound levels (sometimes called “equivalent sound levels” or Leq)

hour Leq). This relatively broad resolution

averaging referenced and regulated in Maine’s Site Location Law.

verage sound levels over the course of 1 minute (1

to be well correlated with community response to outdoor

It is well established that community response to sound is not characterized merely by the

loudness of the sound, but by the increase in loudness of a particular sound over the prevailing

“ambient” sound levels. In locations that are otherwise very quiet, even modest

sound levels can be disturbing; locations (near busy roadways, for example) that experience

more tolerant of and may not even notice mode

signals that could be bothersome elsewhere. As such, in the analysis that follows we have also

drawn comparisons between sound levels during concert events

have analyzed sound monitored between May 6 and July

Sound levels during some concerts are significantly louder than others: by far the loudest event

n May 10, 2014; other concerts (e.g. “Celtic

2014) were not nearly as loud and not nearly as bass-heavy. A closer look at those two concerts

minute sound levels at all three monitor locations during the Rise Above Fest are graphed

broadband, dBA) and 3 (63 Hz). The levels at the three locations are well

correlated: when sound levels at the mix position in the venue go up (blue line), so too do the

graphs are shown for Celtic Women in F

the changes in level within the venue do not result in as significant a change in the levels out in

Not surprisingly, the City received many more complaints about sound levels during Rise Above

n any other concert; no complaints were logged during or after Celtic Women. (We

analyze the complaint log in further detail in the following section.)

sound levels (sometimes called “equivalent sound levels” or Leq)

relatively broad resolution

averaging referenced and regulated in Maine’s Site Location Law.

rse of 1 minute (1-minute Leq). W

elated with community response to outdoor

It is well established that community response to sound is not characterized merely by the

loudness of the sound, but by the increase in loudness of a particular sound over the prevailing

“ambient” sound levels. In locations that are otherwise very quiet, even modest

sound levels can be disturbing; locations (near busy roadways, for example) that experience

and may not even notice mode

signals that could be bothersome elsewhere. As such, in the analysis that follows we have also

concert events to sound levels when

have analyzed sound monitored between May 6 and July

Sound levels during some concerts are significantly louder than others: by far the loudest event

n May 10, 2014; other concerts (e.g. “Celtic

heavy. A closer look at those two concerts

minute sound levels at all three monitor locations during the Rise Above Fest are graphed

broadband, dBA) and 3 (63 Hz). The levels at the three locations are well

correlated: when sound levels at the mix position in the venue go up (blue line), so too do the

graphs are shown for Celtic Women in Figures 4 and 5. During this event,

the changes in level within the venue do not result in as significant a change in the levels out in

Not surprisingly, the City received many more complaints about sound levels during Rise Above

n any other concert; no complaints were logged during or after Celtic Women. (We

analyze the complaint log in further detail in the following section.)

sound levels (sometimes called “equivalent sound levels” or Leq)

relatively broad resolution is the time

averaging referenced and regulated in Maine’s Site Location Law.

minute Leq). W

elated with community response to outdoor

It is well established that community response to sound is not characterized merely by the

loudness of the sound, but by the increase in loudness of a particular sound over the prevailing

“ambient” sound levels. In locations that are otherwise very quiet, even modest

sound levels can be disturbing; locations (near busy roadways, for example) that experience

and may not even notice mode

signals that could be bothersome elsewhere. As such, in the analysis that follows we have also

to sound levels when

have analyzed sound monitored between May 6 and July

Sound levels during some concerts are significantly louder than others: by far the loudest event

n May 10, 2014; other concerts (e.g. “Celtic Women” on May 30,

heavy. A closer look at those two concerts

minute sound levels at all three monitor locations during the Rise Above Fest are graphed

broadband, dBA) and 3 (63 Hz). The levels at the three locations are well

correlated: when sound levels at the mix position in the venue go up (blue line), so too do the

igures 4 and 5. During this event,

the changes in level within the venue do not result in as significant a change in the levels out in

Not surprisingly, the City received many more complaints about sound levels during Rise Above

n any other concert; no complaints were logged during or after Celtic Women. (We

sound levels (sometimes called “equivalent sound levels” or Leq)

is the time

minute Leq). We have

elated with community response to outdoor

It is well established that community response to sound is not characterized merely by the

loudness of the sound, but by the increase in loudness of a particular sound over the prevailing

“ambient” sound levels. In locations that are otherwise very quiet, even modest

sound levels can be disturbing; locations (near busy roadways, for example) that experience

and may not even notice modest sound

signals that could be bothersome elsewhere. As such, in the analysis that follows we have also

to sound levels when concert

have analyzed sound monitored between May 6 and July 6,

Sound levels during some concerts are significantly louder than others: by far the loudest event

Women” on May 30,

heavy. A closer look at those two concerts

minute sound levels at all three monitor locations during the Rise Above Fest are graphed

broadband, dBA) and 3 (63 Hz). The levels at the three locations are well

correlated: when sound levels at the mix position in the venue go up (blue line), so too do the

igures 4 and 5. During this event,

the changes in level within the venue do not result in as significant a change in the levels out in

Not surprisingly, the City received many more complaints about sound levels during Rise Above

n any other concert; no complaints were logged during or after Celtic Women. (We

loudness of the sound, but by the increase in loudness of a particular sound over the prevailing

“ambient” sound levels. In locations that are otherwise very quiet, even modest

signals that could be bothersome elsewhere. As such, in the analysis that follows we have also

Sound levels during some concerts are significantly louder than others: by far the loudest event

Women” on May 30,

heavy. A closer look at those two concerts

minute sound levels at all three monitor locations during the Rise Above Fest are graphed

the changes in level within the venue do not result in as significant a change in the levels out in

Not surprisingly, the City received many more complaints about sound levels during Rise Above

n any other concert; no complaints were logged during or after Celtic Women. (We

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 4

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

3:00 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

3:00 PM

So

un

d P

ress

ure

Le

ve

l a

t 6

3 H

z, d

B (

re:

20

µP

a)

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

. 1-minute A-weighted sound levels during Rise Above Fest, May 10,

. 1-minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Rise Above Fest, May 10, 2014.

3:00 PM 4:30 PM

Saturday, May 10, 2014 , 1

3:00 PM 4:30 PM

Saturday, May 10, 2014 , 1

weighted sound levels during Rise Above Fest, May 10,

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Rise Above Fest, May 10, 2014.

4:30 PM 6:00 PM

Saturday, May 10, 2014 , 1

4:30 PM 6:00 PM

Saturday, May 10, 2014 , 1

weighted sound levels during Rise Above Fest, May 10,

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Rise Above Fest, May 10, 2014.

6:00 PM

Rise Above Fest

Saturday, May 10, 2014 , 1-minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

6:00 PM

Rise Above Fest

Saturday, May 10, 2014 , 1-minute Sound Pressure Level at 63 Hz

weighted sound levels during Rise Above Fest, May 10,

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Rise Above Fest, May 10, 2014.

7:30 PM

Time of Day

Rise Above Fest

minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

7:30 PM

Time of Day

Rise Above Fest

minute Sound Pressure Level at 63 Hz

Mix

Bangor Neighborhood

Brewer Neighborhood

weighted sound levels during Rise Above Fest, May 10, 2014.

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Rise Above Fest, May 10, 2014.

9:00 PM

minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

Mix - 1 min dBA

Bangor Neighborhood

Brewer Neighborhood

9:00 PM

minute Sound Pressure Level at 63 Hz

Mix - 1 min 63 Hz

Bangor Neighborhood

Brewer Neighborhood

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Rise Above Fest, May 10, 2014.

10:30 PM

minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

1 min dBA

Bangor Neighborhood - 1 min dBA

Brewer Neighborhood - 1 min dBA

10:30 PM

minute Sound Pressure Level at 63 Hz

Bangor Neighborhood - 1 min 63 Hz

Brewer Neighborhood - 1 min 63 Hz

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Rise Above Fest, May 10, 2014.

12:00 AM

minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

1 min dBA

1 min dBA

12:00 AM

minute Sound Pressure Level at 63 Hz

1 min 63 Hz

1 min 63 Hz

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 5

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

18:00A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

18:00

So

un

d P

ress

ure

Le

ve

l a

t 6

3 H

z, d

B (

re:

20

µP

a)

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

. 1-minute A-weighted sound levels during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

. 1-minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

18:00

Friday, May 30, 2014 , 1

18:00

Friday, May 30, 2014 , 1

weighted sound levels during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

19:30

Friday, May 30, 2014 , 1

19:30

Friday, May 30, 2014 , 1

weighted sound levels during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

19:30

Celtic Women

Friday, May 30, 2014 , 1-minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

19:30

Celtic Women

Friday, May 30, 2014 , 1-minute Sound Pressure Level at 63 Hz

weighted sound levels during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

21:00

Time of Day

Celtic Women

minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

Mix

Bangor Neighborhood

Brewer Neighborhood

21:00

Time of Day

Celtic Women

minute Sound Pressure Level at 63 Hz

weighted sound levels during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

Time of Day

minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

Mix - 1 min dBA

Bangor Neighborhood

Brewer Neighborhood

22:30

Time of Day

minute Sound Pressure Level at 63 Hz

Mix - 1 min 63 Hz

Bangor Neighborhood

Brewer Neighborhood

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

22:30

minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

1 min dBA

Bangor Neighborhood - 1 min dBA

Brewer Neighborhood - 1 min dBA

22:30

minute Sound Pressure Level at 63 Hz

1 min 63 Hz

Bangor Neighborhood - 1 min 63 Hz

Brewer Neighborhood - 1 min 63 Hz

minute sound pressure levels at 63 Hz (low frequency) during Celtic Women, May 30, 2014.

0:00

minute, Broadband Sound Pressure Level

1 min dBA

1 min dBA

0:00

1 min 63 Hz

1 min 63 Hz

0:00

0:00

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 6

In the graphs above, one can compare sound levels during the concert to levels immediately

before and after the event, but it is not possib

the concert to what they “would have been” had no concert been happening.

comparison, we can analyze the sound levels in the community on a particular day of the week

(say, Wednesdays)

when a concert did occur

for example). The graphs in the attached Appendix (A.1 through A.5) show these comparisons,

in Bangor and in Brewer, for the five days of the week where at least one concert was performed

this season (Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays).

It is notable that in Brewer, 1

Site Location Law) on days

when no concerts occurred

It is also

analyzed th

during the course of concert events

with the number of complaints received by the City, as discussed in the following s

Figure 6.

dB to 120 dB (thresholds in 5

100 dB for a particular event includes those minutes that also exceeded higher thresholds of 105 dB, 110 dB, etc. in the

same event.

As shown in the histogram in Figure 6, the 1

115 dB at th

on May 10

mix position (except for once, during Brad Paisley), and some events (Celtic Women a

Nelson / Alison Krauss) never exceeded 100 dB by this metric.

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

In the graphs above, one can compare sound levels during the concert to levels immediately

before and after the event, but it is not possib

the concert to what they “would have been” had no concert been happening.

comparison, we can analyze the sound levels in the community on a particular day of the week

(say, Wednesdays) and c

when a concert did occur

for example). The graphs in the attached Appendix (A.1 through A.5) show these comparisons,

Bangor and in Brewer, for the five days of the week where at least one concert was performed

this season (Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays).

It is notable that in Brewer, 1

Site Location Law) on days

when no concerts occurred

It is also instructive to analyze how

analyzed the number of

during the course of concert events

with the number of complaints received by the City, as discussed in the following s

. The number of times that the 1

dB to 120 dB (thresholds in 5

100 dB for a particular event includes those minutes that also exceeded higher thresholds of 105 dB, 110 dB, etc. in the

same event.

As shown in the histogram in Figure 6, the 1

115 dB at the mix position in the venue more than 50 times during the Rise Above Fest concert

on May 10th. No other event generated enough low

mix position (except for once, during Brad Paisley), and some events (Celtic Women a

Nelson / Alison Krauss) never exceeded 100 dB by this metric.

In the graphs above, one can compare sound levels during the concert to levels immediately

before and after the event, but it is not possib

the concert to what they “would have been” had no concert been happening.

comparison, we can analyze the sound levels in the community on a particular day of the week

and compare the levels on days

when a concert did occur on that day of the week

for example). The graphs in the attached Appendix (A.1 through A.5) show these comparisons,

Bangor and in Brewer, for the five days of the week where at least one concert was performed

this season (Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays).

It is notable that in Brewer, 1-hour A

Site Location Law) on days during

when no concerts occurred (and often well within 10 dBA).

instructive to analyze how

e number of minutes the

during the course of concert events

with the number of complaints received by the City, as discussed in the following s

The number of times that the 1

dB to 120 dB (thresholds in 5-dB increments).

100 dB for a particular event includes those minutes that also exceeded higher thresholds of 105 dB, 110 dB, etc. in the

As shown in the histogram in Figure 6, the 1

e mix position in the venue more than 50 times during the Rise Above Fest concert

. No other event generated enough low

mix position (except for once, during Brad Paisley), and some events (Celtic Women a

Nelson / Alison Krauss) never exceeded 100 dB by this metric.

In the graphs above, one can compare sound levels during the concert to levels immediately

before and after the event, but it is not possib

the concert to what they “would have been” had no concert been happening.

comparison, we can analyze the sound levels in the community on a particular day of the week

ompare the levels on days

on that day of the week

for example). The graphs in the attached Appendix (A.1 through A.5) show these comparisons,

Bangor and in Brewer, for the five days of the week where at least one concert was performed

this season (Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays).

hour A-weighted sound levels (the levels regulated by the Main

during concerts are typically within 10 dBA of the levels on days

(and often well within 10 dBA).

instructive to analyze how often a concert event is “loud.” To do this, we have

minutes the low frequency sound levels exceed various thresholds

during the course of concert events. The number of these “exceedances”

with the number of complaints received by the City, as discussed in the following s

The number of times that the 1-minute average low

dB increments). The values are cumulative, not additive; e.g. the numbe

100 dB for a particular event includes those minutes that also exceeded higher thresholds of 105 dB, 110 dB, etc. in the

As shown in the histogram in Figure 6, the 1-

e mix position in the venue more than 50 times during the Rise Above Fest concert

. No other event generated enough low

mix position (except for once, during Brad Paisley), and some events (Celtic Women a

Nelson / Alison Krauss) never exceeded 100 dB by this metric.

In the graphs above, one can compare sound levels during the concert to levels immediately

before and after the event, but it is not possible in these graphs to compare sound levels during

the concert to what they “would have been” had no concert been happening.

comparison, we can analyze the sound levels in the community on a particular day of the week

ompare the levels on days when no concerts are happening to

on that day of the week (Wednesday, July 2, Boston and Cheap Trick,

for example). The graphs in the attached Appendix (A.1 through A.5) show these comparisons,

Bangor and in Brewer, for the five days of the week where at least one concert was performed

this season (Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays).

weighted sound levels (the levels regulated by the Main

concerts are typically within 10 dBA of the levels on days

(and often well within 10 dBA).

a concert event is “loud.” To do this, we have

low frequency sound levels exceed various thresholds

. The number of these “exceedances”

with the number of complaints received by the City, as discussed in the following s

average low-frequency (63 Hz) sound levels exceed thresholds from 100

The values are cumulative, not additive; e.g. the numbe

100 dB for a particular event includes those minutes that also exceeded higher thresholds of 105 dB, 110 dB, etc. in the

-minute average sound levels at 63 Hz exceeded

e mix position in the venue more than 50 times during the Rise Above Fest concert

. No other event generated enough low-frequency sound to exceed 115 dB at the

mix position (except for once, during Brad Paisley), and some events (Celtic Women a

Nelson / Alison Krauss) never exceeded 100 dB by this metric.

In the graphs above, one can compare sound levels during the concert to levels immediately

le in these graphs to compare sound levels during

the concert to what they “would have been” had no concert been happening.

comparison, we can analyze the sound levels in the community on a particular day of the week

when no concerts are happening to

(Wednesday, July 2, Boston and Cheap Trick,

for example). The graphs in the attached Appendix (A.1 through A.5) show these comparisons,

Bangor and in Brewer, for the five days of the week where at least one concert was performed

this season (Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays).

weighted sound levels (the levels regulated by the Main

concerts are typically within 10 dBA of the levels on days

(and often well within 10 dBA).

a concert event is “loud.” To do this, we have

low frequency sound levels exceed various thresholds

. The number of these “exceedances”

with the number of complaints received by the City, as discussed in the following s

frequency (63 Hz) sound levels exceed thresholds from 100

The values are cumulative, not additive; e.g. the numbe

100 dB for a particular event includes those minutes that also exceeded higher thresholds of 105 dB, 110 dB, etc. in the

minute average sound levels at 63 Hz exceeded

e mix position in the venue more than 50 times during the Rise Above Fest concert

frequency sound to exceed 115 dB at the

mix position (except for once, during Brad Paisley), and some events (Celtic Women a

Nelson / Alison Krauss) never exceeded 100 dB by this metric.

In the graphs above, one can compare sound levels during the concert to levels immediately

le in these graphs to compare sound levels during

the concert to what they “would have been” had no concert been happening. To make such a

comparison, we can analyze the sound levels in the community on a particular day of the week

when no concerts are happening to

(Wednesday, July 2, Boston and Cheap Trick,

for example). The graphs in the attached Appendix (A.1 through A.5) show these comparisons,

Bangor and in Brewer, for the five days of the week where at least one concert was performed

this season (Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays).

weighted sound levels (the levels regulated by the Main

concerts are typically within 10 dBA of the levels on days

a concert event is “loud.” To do this, we have

low frequency sound levels exceed various thresholds

. The number of these “exceedances” significantly

with the number of complaints received by the City, as discussed in the following s

frequency (63 Hz) sound levels exceed thresholds from 100

The values are cumulative, not additive; e.g. the number of exceedances of

100 dB for a particular event includes those minutes that also exceeded higher thresholds of 105 dB, 110 dB, etc. in the

minute average sound levels at 63 Hz exceeded

e mix position in the venue more than 50 times during the Rise Above Fest concert

frequency sound to exceed 115 dB at the

mix position (except for once, during Brad Paisley), and some events (Celtic Women a

In the graphs above, one can compare sound levels during the concert to levels immediately

le in these graphs to compare sound levels during

To make such a

comparison, we can analyze the sound levels in the community on a particular day of the week

when no concerts are happening to levels

(Wednesday, July 2, Boston and Cheap Trick,

for example). The graphs in the attached Appendix (A.1 through A.5) show these comparisons,

Bangor and in Brewer, for the five days of the week where at least one concert was performed

weighted sound levels (the levels regulated by the Maine

concerts are typically within 10 dBA of the levels on days

a concert event is “loud.” To do this, we have

low frequency sound levels exceed various thresholds

significantly correlate

with the number of complaints received by the City, as discussed in the following section.

frequency (63 Hz) sound levels exceed thresholds from 100

r of exceedances of

100 dB for a particular event includes those minutes that also exceeded higher thresholds of 105 dB, 110 dB, etc. in the

minute average sound levels at 63 Hz exceeded

e mix position in the venue more than 50 times during the Rise Above Fest concert

frequency sound to exceed 115 dB at the

mix position (except for once, during Brad Paisley), and some events (Celtic Women and Willie

le in these graphs to compare sound levels during

comparison, we can analyze the sound levels in the community on a particular day of the week

(Wednesday, July 2, Boston and Cheap Trick,

for example). The graphs in the attached Appendix (A.1 through A.5) show these comparisons,

Bangor and in Brewer, for the five days of the week where at least one concert was performed

e

correlate

frequency (63 Hz) sound levels exceed thresholds from 100

r of exceedances of

e mix position in the venue more than 50 times during the Rise Above Fest concert

nd Willie

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 7

Correlation of sound level data and complaints received

The exceedances charted in Figure 6 can be correlated to community response. Figure 7, below,

shows the

by the community where the complaint originated.

Figure 7.

Many factors may influence

levels within the venue

more importantly whether or not residential windows are open), other “local” sound sources that

influence the ambient noise conditions in the residential areas, personal musical taste or

preferences, whether or not residences become accustomed to the events over time, and other

factors. Even so, we have found a significant correlation between the numb

City received and the number of times that the 1

the mix position exceeded

information in Figures 6 and 7 above by graphing the

number of these low frequency sound level exceedances.

concert on 6/6/2014, during which there were no complaints, does not appear on Figure 8

because the sound monitor at the mix p

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Correlation of sound level data and complaints received

The exceedances charted in Figure 6 can be correlated to community response. Figure 7, below,

shows the number of complaints r

by the community where the complaint originated.

. Number of complaints received by the City during or following each concert event.

Many factors may influence

levels within the venue

more importantly whether or not residential windows are open), other “local” sound sources that

fluence the ambient noise conditions in the residential areas, personal musical taste or

preferences, whether or not residences become accustomed to the events over time, and other

factors. Even so, we have found a significant correlation between the numb

City received and the number of times that the 1

the mix position exceeded

information in Figures 6 and 7 above by graphing the

number of these low frequency sound level exceedances.

concert on 6/6/2014, during which there were no complaints, does not appear on Figure 8

because the sound monitor at the mix p

Correlation of sound level data and complaints received

The exceedances charted in Figure 6 can be correlated to community response. Figure 7, below,

number of complaints r

by the community where the complaint originated.

Number of complaints received by the City during or following each concert event.

Many factors may influence the number of complaints the City receives in addition to sound

levels within the venue – weather conditions (which can affect not only how sound travels but

more importantly whether or not residential windows are open), other “local” sound sources that

fluence the ambient noise conditions in the residential areas, personal musical taste or

preferences, whether or not residences become accustomed to the events over time, and other

factors. Even so, we have found a significant correlation between the numb

City received and the number of times that the 1

the mix position exceeded the thresholds indicated in Figure 6

information in Figures 6 and 7 above by graphing the

number of these low frequency sound level exceedances.

concert on 6/6/2014, during which there were no complaints, does not appear on Figure 8

because the sound monitor at the mix p

Correlation of sound level data and complaints received

The exceedances charted in Figure 6 can be correlated to community response. Figure 7, below,

number of complaints received by the City during or following each event, grouped

by the community where the complaint originated.

Number of complaints received by the City during or following each concert event.

the number of complaints the City receives in addition to sound

weather conditions (which can affect not only how sound travels but

more importantly whether or not residential windows are open), other “local” sound sources that

fluence the ambient noise conditions in the residential areas, personal musical taste or

preferences, whether or not residences become accustomed to the events over time, and other

factors. Even so, we have found a significant correlation between the numb

City received and the number of times that the 1

the thresholds indicated in Figure 6

information in Figures 6 and 7 above by graphing the

number of these low frequency sound level exceedances.

concert on 6/6/2014, during which there were no complaints, does not appear on Figure 8

because the sound monitor at the mix position was unplugged during that concert.)

Correlation of sound level data and complaints received

The exceedances charted in Figure 6 can be correlated to community response. Figure 7, below,

eceived by the City during or following each event, grouped

by the community where the complaint originated.

Number of complaints received by the City during or following each concert event.

the number of complaints the City receives in addition to sound

weather conditions (which can affect not only how sound travels but

more importantly whether or not residential windows are open), other “local” sound sources that

fluence the ambient noise conditions in the residential areas, personal musical taste or

preferences, whether or not residences become accustomed to the events over time, and other

factors. Even so, we have found a significant correlation between the numb

City received and the number of times that the 1-minute average low

the thresholds indicated in Figure 6

information in Figures 6 and 7 above by graphing the total

number of these low frequency sound level exceedances.

concert on 6/6/2014, during which there were no complaints, does not appear on Figure 8

osition was unplugged during that concert.)

Correlation of sound level data and complaints received

The exceedances charted in Figure 6 can be correlated to community response. Figure 7, below,

eceived by the City during or following each event, grouped

Number of complaints received by the City during or following each concert event.

the number of complaints the City receives in addition to sound

weather conditions (which can affect not only how sound travels but

more importantly whether or not residential windows are open), other “local” sound sources that

fluence the ambient noise conditions in the residential areas, personal musical taste or

preferences, whether or not residences become accustomed to the events over time, and other

factors. Even so, we have found a significant correlation between the numb

minute average low-frequency sound levels at

the thresholds indicated in Figure 6. Figure 8 combines the

otal number of complaints alongside the

(Note that the Dave Matthews Band

concert on 6/6/2014, during which there were no complaints, does not appear on Figure 8

osition was unplugged during that concert.)

The exceedances charted in Figure 6 can be correlated to community response. Figure 7, below,

eceived by the City during or following each event, grouped

Number of complaints received by the City during or following each concert event.

the number of complaints the City receives in addition to sound

weather conditions (which can affect not only how sound travels but

more importantly whether or not residential windows are open), other “local” sound sources that

fluence the ambient noise conditions in the residential areas, personal musical taste or

preferences, whether or not residences become accustomed to the events over time, and other

factors. Even so, we have found a significant correlation between the number of complaints the

frequency sound levels at

. Figure 8 combines the

number of complaints alongside the

(Note that the Dave Matthews Band

concert on 6/6/2014, during which there were no complaints, does not appear on Figure 8

osition was unplugged during that concert.)

The exceedances charted in Figure 6 can be correlated to community response. Figure 7, below,

eceived by the City during or following each event, grouped

the number of complaints the City receives in addition to sound

weather conditions (which can affect not only how sound travels but

more importantly whether or not residential windows are open), other “local” sound sources that

fluence the ambient noise conditions in the residential areas, personal musical taste or

preferences, whether or not residences become accustomed to the events over time, and other

er of complaints the

frequency sound levels at

. Figure 8 combines the

number of complaints alongside the

(Note that the Dave Matthews Band

concert on 6/6/2014, during which there were no complaints, does not appear on Figure 8

osition was unplugged during that concert.)

The exceedances charted in Figure 6 can be correlated to community response. Figure 7, below,

eceived by the City during or following each event, grouped

weather conditions (which can affect not only how sound travels but

more importantly whether or not residential windows are open), other “local” sound sources that

er of complaints the

frequency sound levels at

number of complaints alongside the

(Note that the Dave Matthews Band

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 8

Figure 8.

Hz) sound levels exceeded various thresholds at the mix position in

In general, complaints are more prevalent when the number of exceedances is higher; in the

particular case of Brewer (where residences logged complaints during Rise Above Fest, Tim

McGraw, and Brad Paisley only),

We also noted that in the comments that accompanied many of the complaints, “bass” and other

references to low

At your request, we ha

controlling sound transmission to the surrounding community.

•

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

. The number of complaints (orange) compared with the number of times the 1

Hz) sound levels exceeded various thresholds at the mix position in

In general, complaints are more prevalent when the number of exceedances is higher; in the

particular case of Brewer (where residences logged complaints during Rise Above Fest, Tim

McGraw, and Brad Paisley only),

We also noted that in the comments that accompanied many of the complaints, “bass” and other

references to low-frequency sound were cited specifically.

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES TO CONTROL SOUND LEVELS

At your request, we ha

controlling sound transmission to the surrounding community.

Sound barriers

great cost, for several reasons:

1. Height.

typical line

surrounding properties overlook the concert venue from increased elevation. To

block line

than two stories tall in some places. Such a structure would preclude the use of

temporary screening (particularly if the barrier is to be massive enough to be

effective), and would likely b

2. Blocked views.

importance to the City. Any barrier

The number of complaints (orange) compared with the number of times the 1

Hz) sound levels exceeded various thresholds at the mix position in

In general, complaints are more prevalent when the number of exceedances is higher; in the

particular case of Brewer (where residences logged complaints during Rise Above Fest, Tim

McGraw, and Brad Paisley only),

We also noted that in the comments that accompanied many of the complaints, “bass” and other

frequency sound were cited specifically.

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES TO CONTROL SOUND LEVELS

At your request, we have summarized below our assessment of available technologies capable of

controlling sound transmission to the surrounding community.

Sound barriers: Sound barriers will be of limited value acoustically, and would come at

great cost, for several reasons:

eight. To be effective, barriers would need to be tall. The top loudspeaker in a

typical line-array rig may be 30 feet or higher above the stage. Many of the

surrounding properties overlook the concert venue from increased elevation. To

block line-of-sight to the highest loudspeakers, a barrier would need to be more

than two stories tall in some places. Such a structure would preclude the use of

temporary screening (particularly if the barrier is to be massive enough to be

effective), and would likely b

Blocked views. Views from downtown Bangor to the waterfront are of great

importance to the City. Any barrier

The number of complaints (orange) compared with the number of times the 1

Hz) sound levels exceeded various thresholds at the mix position in

In general, complaints are more prevalent when the number of exceedances is higher; in the

particular case of Brewer (where residences logged complaints during Rise Above Fest, Tim

McGraw, and Brad Paisley only), the correlation is even more significant.

We also noted that in the comments that accompanied many of the complaints, “bass” and other

frequency sound were cited specifically.

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES TO CONTROL SOUND LEVELS

ve summarized below our assessment of available technologies capable of

controlling sound transmission to the surrounding community.

: Sound barriers will be of limited value acoustically, and would come at

great cost, for several reasons:

To be effective, barriers would need to be tall. The top loudspeaker in a

array rig may be 30 feet or higher above the stage. Many of the

surrounding properties overlook the concert venue from increased elevation. To

ght to the highest loudspeakers, a barrier would need to be more

than two stories tall in some places. Such a structure would preclude the use of

temporary screening (particularly if the barrier is to be massive enough to be

effective), and would likely b

Views from downtown Bangor to the waterfront are of great

importance to the City. Any barrier

The number of complaints (orange) compared with the number of times the 1

Hz) sound levels exceeded various thresholds at the mix position inside the waterfront concert venue.

In general, complaints are more prevalent when the number of exceedances is higher; in the

particular case of Brewer (where residences logged complaints during Rise Above Fest, Tim

elation is even more significant.

We also noted that in the comments that accompanied many of the complaints, “bass” and other

frequency sound were cited specifically.

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES TO CONTROL SOUND LEVELS

ve summarized below our assessment of available technologies capable of

controlling sound transmission to the surrounding community.

: Sound barriers will be of limited value acoustically, and would come at

To be effective, barriers would need to be tall. The top loudspeaker in a

array rig may be 30 feet or higher above the stage. Many of the

surrounding properties overlook the concert venue from increased elevation. To

ght to the highest loudspeakers, a barrier would need to be more

than two stories tall in some places. Such a structure would preclude the use of

temporary screening (particularly if the barrier is to be massive enough to be

effective), and would likely be prohibitively expensive.

Views from downtown Bangor to the waterfront are of great

importance to the City. Any barrier – even one perpendicular to the water’s

The number of complaints (orange) compared with the number of times the 1-minute average low

side the waterfront concert venue.

In general, complaints are more prevalent when the number of exceedances is higher; in the

particular case of Brewer (where residences logged complaints during Rise Above Fest, Tim

elation is even more significant.

We also noted that in the comments that accompanied many of the complaints, “bass” and other

frequency sound were cited specifically.

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES TO CONTROL SOUND LEVELS

ve summarized below our assessment of available technologies capable of

controlling sound transmission to the surrounding community.

: Sound barriers will be of limited value acoustically, and would come at

To be effective, barriers would need to be tall. The top loudspeaker in a

array rig may be 30 feet or higher above the stage. Many of the

surrounding properties overlook the concert venue from increased elevation. To

ght to the highest loudspeakers, a barrier would need to be more

than two stories tall in some places. Such a structure would preclude the use of

temporary screening (particularly if the barrier is to be massive enough to be

e prohibitively expensive.

Views from downtown Bangor to the waterfront are of great

even one perpendicular to the water’s

minute average low

side the waterfront concert venue.

In general, complaints are more prevalent when the number of exceedances is higher; in the

particular case of Brewer (where residences logged complaints during Rise Above Fest, Tim

elation is even more significant.

We also noted that in the comments that accompanied many of the complaints, “bass” and other

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES TO CONTROL SOUND LEVELS

ve summarized below our assessment of available technologies capable of

: Sound barriers will be of limited value acoustically, and would come at

To be effective, barriers would need to be tall. The top loudspeaker in a

array rig may be 30 feet or higher above the stage. Many of the

surrounding properties overlook the concert venue from increased elevation. To

ght to the highest loudspeakers, a barrier would need to be more

than two stories tall in some places. Such a structure would preclude the use of

temporary screening (particularly if the barrier is to be massive enough to be

e prohibitively expensive.

Views from downtown Bangor to the waterfront are of great

even one perpendicular to the water’s

minute average low-frequency (63

In general, complaints are more prevalent when the number of exceedances is higher; in the

particular case of Brewer (where residences logged complaints during Rise Above Fest, Tim

We also noted that in the comments that accompanied many of the complaints, “bass” and other

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES TO CONTROL SOUND LEVELS

ve summarized below our assessment of available technologies capable of

: Sound barriers will be of limited value acoustically, and would come at

To be effective, barriers would need to be tall. The top loudspeaker in a

array rig may be 30 feet or higher above the stage. Many of the

surrounding properties overlook the concert venue from increased elevation. To

ght to the highest loudspeakers, a barrier would need to be more

than two stories tall in some places. Such a structure would preclude the use of

temporary screening (particularly if the barrier is to be massive enough to be

Views from downtown Bangor to the waterfront are of great

even one perpendicular to the water’s

frequency (63

We also noted that in the comments that accompanied many of the complaints, “bass” and other

ve summarized below our assessment of available technologies capable of

: Sound barriers will be of limited value acoustically, and would come at

To be effective, barriers would need to be tall. The top loudspeaker in a

surrounding properties overlook the concert venue from increased elevation. To

ght to the highest loudspeakers, a barrier would need to be more

than two stories tall in some places. Such a structure would preclude the use of

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 9

•

•

•

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

edge, but particularly one that was angled so as to block sound from Brewer

would significantly block views to the water (and vice versa) in many locations.

3. Marginal benefit.

at low (bass) frequencies.

are ineff

band

sound.

Permanent roof structure:

potentially have several benefits, but at considerable cost. An overhead roof could help

to mitigate the transmission of sound to the community, and could also reduce levels at

the source by allowing a more distributed set of loudspeakers closer to the audience area

In this way, the loudness within the venue could remain high, but the loudness

particular loudspeaker c

sound that are transmitted to the community would be correspondingly lower

This arrangement, however, has many of the drawbacks of the sound barriers described

above: it could block views to and from the river, it would significantly alter the

appearance and character of the waterfront area (year

expensive to build.

Directive sound amplification technologies:

number of technologies have emerged in recent years that work well to control the

dispersion of sound by carefully controlling loudspeaker dire

line-array technology, cardioid subwoofer systems, and other approaches allow sound

engineers to “aim” sound in the audience area, while limiting the “spill” of sound outside

the venue. However, t

and high-frequency sound energy than they are at low frequencies.

Most of the waterfront concert venue’s performers already employ such technologies.

Line array systems were utilized during most the concerts that we mo

this study. Some performers take advantage of cardioid subwoofer systems which can

be somewhat

various performers vary significantly, and the technologies are

we do not know of a practical way to mandate the venue’s further use of such

technology beyond current practice unless the facility were to invest significantly in a

permanent sound system and require performers to use it, which may

performers willing to perform at the venue.

Sound level limits:

front-of-house mix position inside the venue. Sound engineers have the ability to

control the level of s

could limit the number of performers willing to use the venue, and excessive restrictions

will undermine the experience of attending a rock concert.

are the most effective, most reliable, and least costly means of controlling levels to the

community, and many venues (e.g. Chastain Park) operate successfully with targeted

sound levels in place.

institute and enforce

edge, but particularly one that was angled so as to block sound from Brewer

would significantly block views to the water (and vice versa) in many locations.

Marginal benefit.

at low (bass) frequencies.

are ineffective at low frequencies.

band (low frequency)

sound.

Permanent roof structure:

have several benefits, but at considerable cost. An overhead roof could help

to mitigate the transmission of sound to the community, and could also reduce levels at

the source by allowing a more distributed set of loudspeakers closer to the audience area

In this way, the loudness within the venue could remain high, but the loudness

particular loudspeaker could be

sound that are transmitted to the community would be correspondingly lower

This arrangement, however, has many of the drawbacks of the sound barriers described

above: it could block views to and from the river, it would significantly alter the

appearance and character of the waterfront area (year

expensive to build.

Directive sound amplification technologies:

number of technologies have emerged in recent years that work well to control the

dispersion of sound by carefully controlling loudspeaker dire

array technology, cardioid subwoofer systems, and other approaches allow sound

engineers to “aim” sound in the audience area, while limiting the “spill” of sound outside

However, today’s technologies are typic

frequency sound energy than they are at low frequencies.

ost of the waterfront concert venue’s performers already employ such technologies.

Line array systems were utilized during most the concerts that we mo

this study. Some performers take advantage of cardioid subwoofer systems which can

somewhat directional at low frequencies; others do not. The specific systems used by

various performers vary significantly, and the technologies are

we do not know of a practical way to mandate the venue’s further use of such

technology beyond current practice unless the facility were to invest significantly in a

permanent sound system and require performers to use it, which may

performers willing to perform at the venue.

Sound level limits: Sound levels of concerts are controlled by sound engineers at the

house mix position inside the venue. Sound engineers have the ability to

rol the level of sound produced

limit the number of performers willing to use the venue, and excessive restrictions

will undermine the experience of attending a rock concert.

most effective, most reliable, and least costly means of controlling levels to the

community, and many venues (e.g. Chastain Park) operate successfully with targeted

sound levels in place. With these factors in mind, we

and enforce certain limits on the sound levels created at the venue.

edge, but particularly one that was angled so as to block sound from Brewer

would significantly block views to the water (and vice versa) in many locations.

Marginal benefit. A barrier would be of limited acoustical benefit, particularly

at low (bass) frequencies. Barriers are effective at mid and high frequencies, but

ective at low frequencies.

(low frequency) is well correlated to community response to co

Permanent roof structure: The erection of a permanent roof over the audience area could

have several benefits, but at considerable cost. An overhead roof could help

to mitigate the transmission of sound to the community, and could also reduce levels at

the source by allowing a more distributed set of loudspeakers closer to the audience area

In this way, the loudness within the venue could remain high, but the loudness

ould be less than the current arrangement; as such the levels of

sound that are transmitted to the community would be correspondingly lower

This arrangement, however, has many of the drawbacks of the sound barriers described

above: it could block views to and from the river, it would significantly alter the

appearance and character of the waterfront area (year

Directive sound amplification technologies:

number of technologies have emerged in recent years that work well to control the

dispersion of sound by carefully controlling loudspeaker dire

array technology, cardioid subwoofer systems, and other approaches allow sound

engineers to “aim” sound in the audience area, while limiting the “spill” of sound outside

oday’s technologies are typic

frequency sound energy than they are at low frequencies.

ost of the waterfront concert venue’s performers already employ such technologies.

Line array systems were utilized during most the concerts that we mo

this study. Some performers take advantage of cardioid subwoofer systems which can

directional at low frequencies; others do not. The specific systems used by

various performers vary significantly, and the technologies are

we do not know of a practical way to mandate the venue’s further use of such

technology beyond current practice unless the facility were to invest significantly in a

permanent sound system and require performers to use it, which may

performers willing to perform at the venue.

Sound levels of concerts are controlled by sound engineers at the

house mix position inside the venue. Sound engineers have the ability to

ound produced within practical limits. Restrictions on sound levels

limit the number of performers willing to use the venue, and excessive restrictions

will undermine the experience of attending a rock concert.

most effective, most reliable, and least costly means of controlling levels to the

community, and many venues (e.g. Chastain Park) operate successfully with targeted

With these factors in mind, we

certain limits on the sound levels created at the venue.

edge, but particularly one that was angled so as to block sound from Brewer

would significantly block views to the water (and vice versa) in many locations.

A barrier would be of limited acoustical benefit, particularly

Barriers are effective at mid and high frequencies, but

ective at low frequencies. As noted above, sound in the 63

is well correlated to community response to co

The erection of a permanent roof over the audience area could

have several benefits, but at considerable cost. An overhead roof could help

to mitigate the transmission of sound to the community, and could also reduce levels at

the source by allowing a more distributed set of loudspeakers closer to the audience area

In this way, the loudness within the venue could remain high, but the loudness

than the current arrangement; as such the levels of

sound that are transmitted to the community would be correspondingly lower

This arrangement, however, has many of the drawbacks of the sound barriers described

above: it could block views to and from the river, it would significantly alter the

appearance and character of the waterfront area (year

Directive sound amplification technologies: As the audio industry continues to evolve, a

number of technologies have emerged in recent years that work well to control the

dispersion of sound by carefully controlling loudspeaker dire

array technology, cardioid subwoofer systems, and other approaches allow sound

engineers to “aim” sound in the audience area, while limiting the “spill” of sound outside

oday’s technologies are typic

frequency sound energy than they are at low frequencies.

ost of the waterfront concert venue’s performers already employ such technologies.

Line array systems were utilized during most the concerts that we mo

this study. Some performers take advantage of cardioid subwoofer systems which can

directional at low frequencies; others do not. The specific systems used by

various performers vary significantly, and the technologies are

we do not know of a practical way to mandate the venue’s further use of such

technology beyond current practice unless the facility were to invest significantly in a

permanent sound system and require performers to use it, which may

performers willing to perform at the venue.

Sound levels of concerts are controlled by sound engineers at the

house mix position inside the venue. Sound engineers have the ability to

within practical limits. Restrictions on sound levels

limit the number of performers willing to use the venue, and excessive restrictions

will undermine the experience of attending a rock concert.

most effective, most reliable, and least costly means of controlling levels to the

community, and many venues (e.g. Chastain Park) operate successfully with targeted

With these factors in mind, we

certain limits on the sound levels created at the venue.

edge, but particularly one that was angled so as to block sound from Brewer

would significantly block views to the water (and vice versa) in many locations.

A barrier would be of limited acoustical benefit, particularly

Barriers are effective at mid and high frequencies, but

As noted above, sound in the 63

is well correlated to community response to co

The erection of a permanent roof over the audience area could

have several benefits, but at considerable cost. An overhead roof could help

to mitigate the transmission of sound to the community, and could also reduce levels at

the source by allowing a more distributed set of loudspeakers closer to the audience area

In this way, the loudness within the venue could remain high, but the loudness

than the current arrangement; as such the levels of

sound that are transmitted to the community would be correspondingly lower

This arrangement, however, has many of the drawbacks of the sound barriers described

above: it could block views to and from the river, it would significantly alter the

appearance and character of the waterfront area (year-round), and it

As the audio industry continues to evolve, a

number of technologies have emerged in recent years that work well to control the

dispersion of sound by carefully controlling loudspeaker directivity. Digitally steerable

array technology, cardioid subwoofer systems, and other approaches allow sound

engineers to “aim” sound in the audience area, while limiting the “spill” of sound outside

oday’s technologies are typically more effective at directing mid

frequency sound energy than they are at low frequencies.

ost of the waterfront concert venue’s performers already employ such technologies.

Line array systems were utilized during most the concerts that we mo

this study. Some performers take advantage of cardioid subwoofer systems which can

directional at low frequencies; others do not. The specific systems used by

various performers vary significantly, and the technologies are

we do not know of a practical way to mandate the venue’s further use of such

technology beyond current practice unless the facility were to invest significantly in a

permanent sound system and require performers to use it, which may

Sound levels of concerts are controlled by sound engineers at the

house mix position inside the venue. Sound engineers have the ability to

within practical limits. Restrictions on sound levels

limit the number of performers willing to use the venue, and excessive restrictions

will undermine the experience of attending a rock concert. That said, reasonable limits

most effective, most reliable, and least costly means of controlling levels to the

community, and many venues (e.g. Chastain Park) operate successfully with targeted

With these factors in mind, we recommend below

certain limits on the sound levels created at the venue.

edge, but particularly one that was angled so as to block sound from Brewer

would significantly block views to the water (and vice versa) in many locations.

A barrier would be of limited acoustical benefit, particularly

Barriers are effective at mid and high frequencies, but

As noted above, sound in the 63

is well correlated to community response to co

The erection of a permanent roof over the audience area could

have several benefits, but at considerable cost. An overhead roof could help

to mitigate the transmission of sound to the community, and could also reduce levels at

the source by allowing a more distributed set of loudspeakers closer to the audience area

In this way, the loudness within the venue could remain high, but the loudness

than the current arrangement; as such the levels of

sound that are transmitted to the community would be correspondingly lower

This arrangement, however, has many of the drawbacks of the sound barriers described

above: it could block views to and from the river, it would significantly alter the

round), and it could be ve

As the audio industry continues to evolve, a

number of technologies have emerged in recent years that work well to control the

ctivity. Digitally steerable

array technology, cardioid subwoofer systems, and other approaches allow sound

engineers to “aim” sound in the audience area, while limiting the “spill” of sound outside

ally more effective at directing mid

frequency sound energy than they are at low frequencies.

ost of the waterfront concert venue’s performers already employ such technologies.

Line array systems were utilized during most the concerts that we monitored as part of

this study. Some performers take advantage of cardioid subwoofer systems which can

directional at low frequencies; others do not. The specific systems used by

various performers vary significantly, and the technologies are ever evolving; as such,

we do not know of a practical way to mandate the venue’s further use of such

technology beyond current practice unless the facility were to invest significantly in a

permanent sound system and require performers to use it, which may limit the range of

Sound levels of concerts are controlled by sound engineers at the

house mix position inside the venue. Sound engineers have the ability to

within practical limits. Restrictions on sound levels

limit the number of performers willing to use the venue, and excessive restrictions

That said, reasonable limits

most effective, most reliable, and least costly means of controlling levels to the

community, and many venues (e.g. Chastain Park) operate successfully with targeted

recommend below that the City

certain limits on the sound levels created at the venue.

edge, but particularly one that was angled so as to block sound from Brewer –

would significantly block views to the water (and vice versa) in many locations.

A barrier would be of limited acoustical benefit, particularly

Barriers are effective at mid and high frequencies, but

As noted above, sound in the 63-Hz octave

is well correlated to community response to concert venue

The erection of a permanent roof over the audience area could

have several benefits, but at considerable cost. An overhead roof could help

to mitigate the transmission of sound to the community, and could also reduce levels at

the source by allowing a more distributed set of loudspeakers closer to the audience area

In this way, the loudness within the venue could remain high, but the loudness of any

than the current arrangement; as such the levels of

sound that are transmitted to the community would be correspondingly lower as well.

This arrangement, however, has many of the drawbacks of the sound barriers described

above: it could block views to and from the river, it would significantly alter the

could be very

As the audio industry continues to evolve, a

number of technologies have emerged in recent years that work well to control the

ctivity. Digitally steerable

array technology, cardioid subwoofer systems, and other approaches allow sound

engineers to “aim” sound in the audience area, while limiting the “spill” of sound outside

ally more effective at directing mid

ost of the waterfront concert venue’s performers already employ such technologies.

nitored as part of

this study. Some performers take advantage of cardioid subwoofer systems which can

directional at low frequencies; others do not. The specific systems used by

ever evolving; as such,

we do not know of a practical way to mandate the venue’s further use of such

technology beyond current practice unless the facility were to invest significantly in a

limit the range of

Sound levels of concerts are controlled by sound engineers at the

house mix position inside the venue. Sound engineers have the ability to

within practical limits. Restrictions on sound levels

limit the number of performers willing to use the venue, and excessive restrictions

That said, reasonable limits

most effective, most reliable, and least costly means of controlling levels to the

community, and many venues (e.g. Chastain Park) operate successfully with targeted

that the City

certain limits on the sound levels created at the venue.

would significantly block views to the water (and vice versa) in many locations.

A barrier would be of limited acoustical benefit, particularly

Barriers are effective at mid and high frequencies, but

ncert venue

The erection of a permanent roof over the audience area could

have several benefits, but at considerable cost. An overhead roof could help

to mitigate the transmission of sound to the community, and could also reduce levels at

the source by allowing a more distributed set of loudspeakers closer to the audience area.

than the current arrangement; as such the levels of

This arrangement, however, has many of the drawbacks of the sound barriers described

As the audio industry continues to evolve, a

ctivity. Digitally steerable

engineers to “aim” sound in the audience area, while limiting the “spill” of sound outside

ally more effective at directing mid

ost of the waterfront concert venue’s performers already employ such technologies.

nitored as part of

this study. Some performers take advantage of cardioid subwoofer systems which can

directional at low frequencies; others do not. The specific systems used by

limit the range of

within practical limits. Restrictions on sound levels

limit the number of performers willing to use the venue, and excessive restrictions

That said, reasonable limits

most effective, most reliable, and least costly means of controlling levels to the

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 10

Based on the data we collected during our monitoring program (described above), our analysis

of sound level impacts to Brewer compared with prevailing ambient sound l

analysis of complaints received by the City concerning sound levels produced by the venue, we

propose that the City institute reas

venue so that the City can enforce such restric

Sound pressure levels in t

during events, from the mix position, and the 1

logged every minute. We recommend that

the new

115 dB at the mix position,

average (Leq)

The proposed restriction has several important features:

a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

f)

Two events during the 2014 season would be in violation of the proposed standard (both of

which received

Paisley.

We also recommend that the City continue to enforce its cutoff time of 10:30pm for events at the

Venue on Sunday through Thursday and 11:30pm for events on Friday

addition, we understand that you have asked the promoter to make best efforts to end by 10pm

Sundays through Thursdays and 11:00pm Fridays and Saturdays.

As additional concerts are monitored and complaints are logged, we recommend that t

applicability of the thresholds in the criteria proposed here be reevaluated and adjusted if

appropriate.

Finally, we recommend that the City put in place suitable penalties or other measures necessary

to enforce the proposed restriction.

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

10

Based on the data we collected during our monitoring program (described above), our analysis

of sound level impacts to Brewer compared with prevailing ambient sound l

analysis of complaints received by the City concerning sound levels produced by the venue, we

propose that the City institute reas

venue so that the City can enforce such restric

Sound pressure levels in t

during events, from the mix position, and the 1

logged every minute. We recommend that

the new sound level limits

dB at the mix position,

average (Leq) sound level at 63 Hz exceeds 11

The proposed restriction has several important features:

It is based on one

the temporal character of concert music and with associated typical community

response.

This 1-minute average

giving him or her the opportunity to make adjustments to the levels in real time if

necessary. 1

during concert events.

It focuses on low frequencies, which we have found to be most closely related to

neighborhood complaints at other venues.

It has precedence

including Chastain Park in Atla

It is straightforward to monitor and implement.

It will result in

Brewer and in Ban

Two events during the 2014 season would be in violation of the proposed standard (both of

hich received a significant

Paisley.

We also recommend that the City continue to enforce its cutoff time of 10:30pm for events at the

on Sunday through Thursday and 11:30pm for events on Friday

addition, we understand that you have asked the promoter to make best efforts to end by 10pm

Sundays through Thursdays and 11:00pm Fridays and Saturdays.

As additional concerts are monitored and complaints are logged, we recommend that t

applicability of the thresholds in the criteria proposed here be reevaluated and adjusted if

appropriate.

Finally, we recommend that the City put in place suitable penalties or other measures necessary

to enforce the proposed restriction.

Based on the data we collected during our monitoring program (described above), our analysis

of sound level impacts to Brewer compared with prevailing ambient sound l

analysis of complaints received by the City concerning sound levels produced by the venue, we

propose that the City institute reas

venue so that the City can enforce such restric

Sound pressure levels in the standard 63

during events, from the mix position, and the 1

logged every minute. We recommend that

sound level limits if (a) the 1

dB at the mix position, or (b) if there are more than 10 instances where the 1

sound level at 63 Hz exceeds 11

The proposed restriction has several important features:

It is based on one-minute, rather than one

the temporal character of concert music and with associated typical community

minute average would

giving him or her the opportunity to make adjustments to the levels in real time if

necessary. 1-hour long measurements would not allow for this kind of adjustment

concert events.

It focuses on low frequencies, which we have found to be most closely related to

neighborhood complaints at other venues.

It has precedence – it is structured similarly to standards employed at other venues,

including Chastain Park in Atla

It is straightforward to monitor and implement.

It will result in the elimination of the loudest concert events, p

and in Bangor.

Two events during the 2014 season would be in violation of the proposed standard (both of

significant number

We also recommend that the City continue to enforce its cutoff time of 10:30pm for events at the

on Sunday through Thursday and 11:30pm for events on Friday

addition, we understand that you have asked the promoter to make best efforts to end by 10pm

Sundays through Thursdays and 11:00pm Fridays and Saturdays.

As additional concerts are monitored and complaints are logged, we recommend that t

applicability of the thresholds in the criteria proposed here be reevaluated and adjusted if

Finally, we recommend that the City put in place suitable penalties or other measures necessary

to enforce the proposed restriction.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the data we collected during our monitoring program (described above), our analysis

of sound level impacts to Brewer compared with prevailing ambient sound l

analysis of complaints received by the City concerning sound levels produced by the venue, we

propose that the City institute reasonable sound level restrictions

venue so that the City can enforce such restric

he standard 63-Hz octave band

during events, from the mix position, and the 1

logged every minute. We recommend that an event at the venue be cons

if (a) the 1-minute average (Leq) sound level at 63 Hz

(b) if there are more than 10 instances where the 1

sound level at 63 Hz exceeds 11

The proposed restriction has several important features:

minute, rather than one

the temporal character of concert music and with associated typical community

would allow near

giving him or her the opportunity to make adjustments to the levels in real time if

hour long measurements would not allow for this kind of adjustment

It focuses on low frequencies, which we have found to be most closely related to

neighborhood complaints at other venues.

it is structured similarly to standards employed at other venues,

including Chastain Park in Atlanta.

It is straightforward to monitor and implement.

the elimination of the loudest concert events, p

Two events during the 2014 season would be in violation of the proposed standard (both of

number complaints from Brewer): Rise Above Fest and Brad

We also recommend that the City continue to enforce its cutoff time of 10:30pm for events at the

on Sunday through Thursday and 11:30pm for events on Friday

addition, we understand that you have asked the promoter to make best efforts to end by 10pm

Sundays through Thursdays and 11:00pm Fridays and Saturdays.

As additional concerts are monitored and complaints are logged, we recommend that t

applicability of the thresholds in the criteria proposed here be reevaluated and adjusted if

Finally, we recommend that the City put in place suitable penalties or other measures necessary

to enforce the proposed restriction.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the data we collected during our monitoring program (described above), our analysis

of sound level impacts to Brewer compared with prevailing ambient sound l

analysis of complaints received by the City concerning sound levels produced by the venue, we

onable sound level restrictions

venue so that the City can enforce such restrictions.

Hz octave band should

during events, from the mix position, and the 1-minute average (Leq) sound level

an event at the venue be cons

minute average (Leq) sound level at 63 Hz

(b) if there are more than 10 instances where the 1

sound level at 63 Hz exceeds 110 dB at the mix position.

The proposed restriction has several important features:

minute, rather than one-hour, averages, which is more consistent with

the temporal character of concert music and with associated typical community

allow near-immediate feedback to the concert

giving him or her the opportunity to make adjustments to the levels in real time if

hour long measurements would not allow for this kind of adjustment

It focuses on low frequencies, which we have found to be most closely related to

neighborhood complaints at other venues.

it is structured similarly to standards employed at other venues,

It is straightforward to monitor and implement.

the elimination of the loudest concert events, p

Two events during the 2014 season would be in violation of the proposed standard (both of

complaints from Brewer): Rise Above Fest and Brad

We also recommend that the City continue to enforce its cutoff time of 10:30pm for events at the

on Sunday through Thursday and 11:30pm for events on Friday

addition, we understand that you have asked the promoter to make best efforts to end by 10pm

Sundays through Thursdays and 11:00pm Fridays and Saturdays.

As additional concerts are monitored and complaints are logged, we recommend that t

applicability of the thresholds in the criteria proposed here be reevaluated and adjusted if

Finally, we recommend that the City put in place suitable penalties or other measures necessary

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the data we collected during our monitoring program (described above), our analysis

of sound level impacts to Brewer compared with prevailing ambient sound l

analysis of complaints received by the City concerning sound levels produced by the venue, we

onable sound level restrictions and monitor sound levels at the

should be continuously monitored

minute average (Leq) sound level

an event at the venue be cons

minute average (Leq) sound level at 63 Hz

(b) if there are more than 10 instances where the 1

dB at the mix position.

hour, averages, which is more consistent with

the temporal character of concert music and with associated typical community

immediate feedback to the concert

giving him or her the opportunity to make adjustments to the levels in real time if

hour long measurements would not allow for this kind of adjustment

It focuses on low frequencies, which we have found to be most closely related to

it is structured similarly to standards employed at other venues,

the elimination of the loudest concert events, p

Two events during the 2014 season would be in violation of the proposed standard (both of

complaints from Brewer): Rise Above Fest and Brad

We also recommend that the City continue to enforce its cutoff time of 10:30pm for events at the

on Sunday through Thursday and 11:30pm for events on Friday

addition, we understand that you have asked the promoter to make best efforts to end by 10pm

Sundays through Thursdays and 11:00pm Fridays and Saturdays.

As additional concerts are monitored and complaints are logged, we recommend that t

applicability of the thresholds in the criteria proposed here be reevaluated and adjusted if

Finally, we recommend that the City put in place suitable penalties or other measures necessary

Based on the data we collected during our monitoring program (described above), our analysis

of sound level impacts to Brewer compared with prevailing ambient sound levels, and our

analysis of complaints received by the City concerning sound levels produced by the venue, we

and monitor sound levels at the

be continuously monitored

minute average (Leq) sound level should

an event at the venue be considered to have exceeded

minute average (Leq) sound level at 63 Hz ever exceeds

(b) if there are more than 10 instances where the 1-minute

dB at the mix position.

hour, averages, which is more consistent with

the temporal character of concert music and with associated typical community

immediate feedback to the concert

giving him or her the opportunity to make adjustments to the levels in real time if

hour long measurements would not allow for this kind of adjustment

It focuses on low frequencies, which we have found to be most closely related to

it is structured similarly to standards employed at other venues,

the elimination of the loudest concert events, protecting residences in

Two events during the 2014 season would be in violation of the proposed standard (both of

complaints from Brewer): Rise Above Fest and Brad

We also recommend that the City continue to enforce its cutoff time of 10:30pm for events at the

on Sunday through Thursday and 11:30pm for events on Friday and Saturday

addition, we understand that you have asked the promoter to make best efforts to end by 10pm

As additional concerts are monitored and complaints are logged, we recommend that t

applicability of the thresholds in the criteria proposed here be reevaluated and adjusted if

Finally, we recommend that the City put in place suitable penalties or other measures necessary

Based on the data we collected during our monitoring program (described above), our analysis

evels, and our

analysis of complaints received by the City concerning sound levels produced by the venue, we

and monitor sound levels at the

be continuously monitored

should be

to have exceeded

ever exceeds

minute

hour, averages, which is more consistent with

the temporal character of concert music and with associated typical community

immediate feedback to the concert promoter,

giving him or her the opportunity to make adjustments to the levels in real time if

hour long measurements would not allow for this kind of adjustment

It focuses on low frequencies, which we have found to be most closely related to

it is structured similarly to standards employed at other venues,

rotecting residences in

Two events during the 2014 season would be in violation of the proposed standard (both of

complaints from Brewer): Rise Above Fest and Brad

We also recommend that the City continue to enforce its cutoff time of 10:30pm for events at the

and Saturday. In

addition, we understand that you have asked the promoter to make best efforts to end by 10pm

As additional concerts are monitored and complaints are logged, we recommend that the

applicability of the thresholds in the criteria proposed here be reevaluated and adjusted if

Finally, we recommend that the City put in place suitable penalties or other measures necessary

Based on the data we collected during our monitoring program (described above), our analysis

analysis of complaints received by the City concerning sound levels produced by the venue, we

and monitor sound levels at the

to have exceeded

ever exceeds

hour, averages, which is more consistent with

We also recommend that the City continue to enforce its cutoff time of 10:30pm for events at the

addition, we understand that you have asked the promoter to make best efforts to end by 10pm

Finally, we recommend that the City put in place suitable penalties or other measures necessary

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

Page 11

The site location law states that sound from certain sources are exempt from regulation. One

such exemption is for “occasional sporting, cultural, religious or public events allowed by the

local municipality where the only affected protected

municipality.” The concert venue in Bangor is used only

Our analysis has shown that concerts this summer have exceeded prevailing 1

ambient sound levels in Brewer typically by less than 10 dBA. In addition, we have proposed a

sound level restriction on low

than 1-hour averaging; with this restriction in place, e

that garnered the most complaints from Brewer would not be permitted. B

data we’ve collected and analyzed and with the proposed sound level limits in place,

opinion that

cultural” provision with respect to sound level regulation.

Please let me know if you have any questions about the information in this report; my direct

telephone number is 61

Sincerely,

ACENTECH INCORPORATED

Benjamin

Director, Architectural Acoustics

Encl.

J:\624xxx\6245xx

City of Bangor

July 25, 2014

11

The site location law states that sound from certain sources are exempt from regulation. One

such exemption is for “occasional sporting, cultural, religious or public events allowed by the

local municipality where the only affected protected

municipality.” The concert venue in Bangor is used only

Our analysis has shown that concerts this summer have exceeded prevailing 1

ambient sound levels in Brewer typically by less than 10 dBA. In addition, we have proposed a

sound level restriction on low

hour averaging; with this restriction in place, e

that garnered the most complaints from Brewer would not be permitted. B

data we’ve collected and analyzed and with the proposed sound level limits in place,

opinion that the waterfron

cultural” provision with respect to sound level regulation.

Please let me know if you have any questions about the information in this report; my direct

telephone number is 61

Sincerely,

ACENTECH INCORPORATED

jamin E. Markham

Director, Architectural Acoustics

Figures A.1 through A.5

6245xx\624574 - Bangor Waterfront Pavilion 2014 monitoring

EXEMPTION FRO

The site location law states that sound from certain sources are exempt from regulation. One

such exemption is for “occasional sporting, cultural, religious or public events allowed by the

local municipality where the only affected protected

municipality.” The concert venue in Bangor is used only

Our analysis has shown that concerts this summer have exceeded prevailing 1

ambient sound levels in Brewer typically by less than 10 dBA. In addition, we have proposed a

sound level restriction on low-frequency sound levels, analyzed on the basis of 1

hour averaging; with this restriction in place, e

that garnered the most complaints from Brewer would not be permitted. B

data we’ve collected and analyzed and with the proposed sound level limits in place,

waterfront concert

cultural” provision with respect to sound level regulation.

*

Please let me know if you have any questions about the information in this report; my direct

telephone number is 617.499.8086.

ACENTECH INCORPORATED

Markham

Director, Architectural Acoustics

Figures A.1 through A.5

Bangor Waterfront Pavilion 2014 monitoring

EXEMPTION FRO

The site location law states that sound from certain sources are exempt from regulation. One

such exemption is for “occasional sporting, cultural, religious or public events allowed by the

local municipality where the only affected protected

municipality.” The concert venue in Bangor is used only

Our analysis has shown that concerts this summer have exceeded prevailing 1

ambient sound levels in Brewer typically by less than 10 dBA. In addition, we have proposed a

frequency sound levels, analyzed on the basis of 1

hour averaging; with this restriction in place, e

that garnered the most complaints from Brewer would not be permitted. B

data we’ve collected and analyzed and with the proposed sound level limits in place,

t concert facility meets the requirements of the SLODA’s “occasional

cultural” provision with respect to sound level regulation.

* *

Please let me know if you have any questions about the information in this report; my direct

7.499.8086.

ACENTECH INCORPORATED

Director, Architectural Acoustics

Bangor Waterfront Pavilion 2014 monitoring\Report 7-25

EXEMPTION FROM REGULATION

The site location law states that sound from certain sources are exempt from regulation. One

such exemption is for “occasional sporting, cultural, religious or public events allowed by the

local municipality where the only affected protected locations are contained within that

municipality.” The concert venue in Bangor is used only

Our analysis has shown that concerts this summer have exceeded prevailing 1

ambient sound levels in Brewer typically by less than 10 dBA. In addition, we have proposed a

frequency sound levels, analyzed on the basis of 1

hour averaging; with this restriction in place, events

that garnered the most complaints from Brewer would not be permitted. B

data we’ve collected and analyzed and with the proposed sound level limits in place,

facility meets the requirements of the SLODA’s “occasional

cultural” provision with respect to sound level regulation.

* *

Please let me know if you have any questions about the information in this report; my direct

25-2014\2014-9-5 - Bangor Waterfront Venue Sound Report r1.docx

M REGULATION

The site location law states that sound from certain sources are exempt from regulation. One

such exemption is for “occasional sporting, cultural, religious or public events allowed by the

locations are contained within that

municipality.” The concert venue in Bangor is used only occasionally

Our analysis has shown that concerts this summer have exceeded prevailing 1

ambient sound levels in Brewer typically by less than 10 dBA. In addition, we have proposed a

frequency sound levels, analyzed on the basis of 1

vents with sound levels similar to those

that garnered the most complaints from Brewer would not be permitted. B

data we’ve collected and analyzed and with the proposed sound level limits in place,

facility meets the requirements of the SLODA’s “occasional

cultural” provision with respect to sound level regulation.

*

Please let me know if you have any questions about the information in this report; my direct

Bangor Waterfront Venue Sound Report r1.docx

M REGULATION

The site location law states that sound from certain sources are exempt from regulation. One

such exemption is for “occasional sporting, cultural, religious or public events allowed by the

locations are contained within that

occasionally – it is not in daily use

Our analysis has shown that concerts this summer have exceeded prevailing 1-hour

ambient sound levels in Brewer typically by less than 10 dBA. In addition, we have proposed a

frequency sound levels, analyzed on the basis of 1-minute rather

with sound levels similar to those

that garnered the most complaints from Brewer would not be permitted. Based on the extensive

data we’ve collected and analyzed and with the proposed sound level limits in place,

facility meets the requirements of the SLODA’s “occasional

Please let me know if you have any questions about the information in this report; my direct

Bangor Waterfront Venue Sound Report r1.docx

The site location law states that sound from certain sources are exempt from regulation. One

such exemption is for “occasional sporting, cultural, religious or public events allowed by the

locations are contained within that

it is not in daily use.

hour average

ambient sound levels in Brewer typically by less than 10 dBA. In addition, we have proposed a

minute rather

with sound levels similar to those

ased on the extensive

data we’ve collected and analyzed and with the proposed sound level limits in place, it is our

facility meets the requirements of the SLODA’s “occasional

Please let me know if you have any questions about the information in this report; my direct

ambient sound levels in Brewer typically by less than 10 dBA. In addition, we have proposed a

minute rather

ased on the extensive

facility meets the requirements of the SLODA’s “occasional

Wednesdays between May 14 and July 2, 2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

Bangor Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

5/14/2014

5/21/2014

5/28/2014

6/4/2014

6/11/2014

6/18/2014 N/A

6/25/2014 N/A

7/2/2014 Boston/Cheap Trick

Brewer Monitoring Position

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

Brewer Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

5/14/2014

5/21/2014

5/28/2014

6/4/2014

6/11/2014

6/18/2014

6/25/2014

7/2/2014 Boston/Cheap Trick

Thursdays between May 15 and July 3, 2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

Bangor Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

5/15/2014

5/22/2014

5/29/2014 Tim McGraw

6/5/2014

6/12/2014

6/19/2014 Willie Nelson/Allison Krause (N/A)

6/26/2014 N/A

7/3/2014

Brewer Monitoring Position

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

Brewer Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

5/15/2014

5/22/2014

5/29/2014 Tim McGraw

6/5/2014

6/12/2014

6/19/2014 Willie Nelson/Allison Krause

6/26/2014

7/3/2014

Fridays between May 16 and July 4, 2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

Bangor Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

5/16/2014

5/23/2014

5/30/2014 Celtic Women

6/6/2014 Dave Matthews

6/13/2014

6/20/2014 N/A

6/27/2014

7/4/2014 Fourth of July

Brewer Monitoring Position

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

Brewer Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

5/16/2014

5/23/2014

5/30/2014 Celtic Women

6/6/2014 Dave Matthews

6/13/2014

6/20/2014

6/27/2014

7/4/2014 Fourth of July

Saturdays between May 10 and July 5, 2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

Bangor Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

5/10/2014 Rise Above Fest

5/17/2014

5/24/2014

5/31/2014

6/7/2014

6/14/2014

6/21/2014 N/A

6/28/2014

7/5/2014 Styx/Foreigner

Brewer Monitoring Position

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

Brewer Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

5/10/2014 Rise Above Fest

5/17/2014

5/24/2014

5/31/2014

6/7/2014

6/14/2014

6/21/2014

6/28/2014

7/5/2014 Styx/Foreigner

Sundays between May 11 and July 6, 2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

Bangor Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

5/11/2014

5/18/2014

5/25/2014

6/1/2014

6/8/2014

6/15/2014 Brad Paisley

6/22/2014 N/A

6/29/2014

7/6/2014

90

Brewer Monitoring Position

1-Hour, A-weighted Sound Pressure Levels (Leq)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:30 PM 8:00 PM 8:30 PM 9:00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 10:30 PM 11:00 PM 11:30 PM

A-W

eig

hte

d S

ou

nd

Pre

ssu

re L

ev

el,

dB

A (

re:

20

µP

a)

Time of Day

5/11/2014

5/18/2014

5/25/2014

6/1/2014

6/8/2014

6/15/2014 Brad Paisley

6/22/2014

6/29/2014

7/6/2014