More Concerns About Noise Issue

Advertisement

Editor:

Re: Gordon Metcalf's letter of June 22: "Untrue statements will not solve problem" has assumptions, omissions, and seems to attempt to divide our town. We need unity, not divisiveness, in Payson.

In his rebuttal of Russ Hustead's letter of June 18 on noise pollution (re: Door Stop), Metcalf says nothing about the code which states "industrial activities conducted in a manner not to cause inconvenience or disturb neighboring properties." Hustead quotes this in his letter, but there was no comment from Metcalf about this town code. Why?

Further, Metcalf assumes that the anti-noise homeowners want to stop all industrial growth -- not true. This is a scare tactic.

I have heard their spokesman say that industrial businesses like The Door Stop are fine, but disturbing noise is not. If 30 or more homeowners are bothered by some kind of noise that should be a signal to rectify the problem.

Also, Metcalf states that economic development will create more tax revenue for street repair. Tax revenue for street repair has to be allocated and voted on by the town council. It is not automatic, as they could vote to spend the revenue on a library addition, or whatever.

Finally, two questions that need to be asked are: (1) Do we ignore the Payson Unified Building Code of 1996 that pertains to light industrial disturbances? and (2) Who decides, the homeowners or Bob Gould, on how this code is to be interpreted?

Bill Michaelis, Payson

Commenting has been disabled for this item.