Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/09/2014

Home

regulate the duration and amplitude of sounds emitted from a location. In an effort to protect shooting ranges from nuisance actions and clo- sure, many states have enacted statutes com- pletely barring noise -related nuisance causes of action against shooting ranges. Other states have exempted outdoor shooting ranges from local noise -control laws (Cotter 1999). A minority of states do not provide ab- solute immunity from legal action based on noise. For example, the Minnesota Shooting Range Protection Act (MSRPA) requires shoot- ing ranges to comply with state -established Firing Line Cover. but do not address the actual siting of such facilities. The attorney general's plain -meaning interpretation of the statute enables munici- palities to exert some control over zoning and land -use regulation of a proposed shooting range (McCollum 2008). The state of Ohio brought an action against shooting range operators to prevent them from using a portion of their land as a shooting range because of noise and stray bullets. The state alleged that the range ob- structed the reasonable use and enjoyment of neighboring properties. Despite overwhelming Escape Angle 90° or Greater oriented so that shooting is away from sound - sensitive areas and residential neighborhoods (NRA 201z). For indoor ranges, there are various acoustical methods available to control and reduce the sound produced by gunfire. Ex- posed walls, overhead baffles, safety ceilings, and range floors can be treated with special noise -abatement materials and panels so that they absorb the reverberation of gunfire. By de- creasing noise levels within the gun range, the overall safety of the range is improved because members and employees are protected from Design "A" 11L1111� 111� 15mto183m (50 ftto 200 yd) 45° Escape Angle rfl Design "B" ® Evenly spaced overhead baffles prevent direct fire from exiting a shooting range. performance and safety standards in order to qualify for protection; however, local govern- ments can only close a range if it constitutes a "clear and immediate safety hazard." The MSRPA establishes a noise standard of 63 decibels (natural background noise is about 35 decibels) measured on the A -weighted fast response mode scale. This statute also creates a 750-foot "mitigation area" from the perimeter of a shooting range's property onto adjoining lands. The mitigation area is highly restricted and no changes or improvements can be made within the area without approval of the govern- ing body. Range operators are also required to pay for any mitigation devices required to keep the range in compliance with local ordinances and statutory performance standards (Remakel 2008). Where state and municipal regulations co- exist, preemption may become an issue. Such an issue was raised in Florida, when the attor- ney general released an advisory legal opinion stating that counties may impose existing zon- ing and land -use regulations upon the siting of proposed sports shooting ranges but not any newly created or amended regulations. The provisions of the Florida statute are specific to the regulation of the use of firearms and am- munition at sport shooting and training ranges witness testimony regarding noise and bullets landing on or lodging in nearby properties, the court held that so long as the range substan- tially complied with shooting range rules, the operators had statutory immunity from legal action (State ex rel. Fischer v. Hall, Court ofAp- peals of Ohio, 6th Dist., Aug. 6, 2oo4). Site Planning and Operational Considerations Planners and local officials should refer to NRA guidelines when considering new regulations for shooting ranges. The NRA recommends a reasonable hours -of -operation schedule to minimize disruption of the surrounding com- munity. Specific suggestions include delaying opening on weekend mornings, offering dis- counted rates during the least disruptive hours, limiting the use of louder firearms to predeter- mined times or by appointment, and holding special high -use events during cooler times of the year when fewer people are outdoors and less likely to be disturbed (NRA 2012). Planners and local officials should also consider natural topography when evaluating appropriate locations for new ranges. For ex- ample, valleys and forested hillsides are better at containing sound than hilltops and grassy or bare rocky hillsides, and sound tends to carry tong distances over water. Ranges should be Berm U.S. partment of Energy hearing loss. Moreover, these soundproofing measures improve community relations be- cause less sound leaks from the building (NRA 2o1z). Safety concerns are the most publicized and most serious concerns regarding shooting ranges. Stray bullets that end up near homes present an obvious and major problem for gun ranges. These types of incidents receive a lot of media attention and result in severe limitations or closures for gun ranges. Aside from deaths caused by suicides or intentional killings, deaths caused by stray bullets from shooting ranges are extremely rare (though not unprecedented). In 2010, a stray bullet from an unpermitted backyard range in Burlington, Vermont, hit and killed a St. Michael's College professor. The shooter was convicted ofvolun- tary manslaughter and sentenced to two years in prison (Curran zo12). Home owners have successfully litigated against shooting ranges where they can show that the range's safety conditions are inad- equate. Home owners who lived about a half - mile from a rifle and pistol range in Scituate, Massachusetts, were able to close down and receive damages from the range after proving that four bullets that struck their homes in a five-year period came from the club. The court ZONINGPRACTICE 12.13 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION I page