Piano Saga Reviewed

    As the end of September draws near, I've begun counting the days until the removal of the damnable piano which, on top of the ever-present, ambient street noises one expects in a city, has been a source of vexatious intrusion of unwanted sounds from morning until night and, at times, into the wee hours of the morning.

    After numerous police calls which yielded no results, I learned the police are under strict instructions to NOT enforce the noise ordinance because the mayor finds the street corner pianos throughout the city to be elevating the city's culture quotient and that they bring much-needed money to the city.

    Failing that solution, I sought out the principals responsible for the placement of the piano and pleaded with them to remove the offending instrument. I received, after several back and forth, good faith communications an assurance that the piano would be removed by the end of September. A separate email from one of those principals [copy included, with my comments] dated August 8, said 50 days or less which places the removal date on or before September 26.

        Aug. 8, 2013

        I am sorry they were playing late last night when you returned home at 2:30. Man, you keep late hours! [True but not pertinent and not anybody else's business.]

        I have been really struggling with what to do with the piano. Finding the proper, balanced response has not been easy.

        I have discussed the issue with at least 30 people, including the MFE [Music For Everyone] board. And to be quite frank, not a single one of them advised me to move the piano. I know that is easy for them to say as they do not hear the piano at late hours. [Hear, hear.]

               But they also said that thousands of people enjoy that piano where it is. 
[Thousands? I'd like to see that list and know where they live and what time of the day or night they enjoyed this piano and how much money they brought to the city solely because of the pianos, specifically the piano at the Prince street parking garage which has troubled me all summer long.]

        Here are the reasons they provided:

        We have placed a note on the piano, urging people not to play after 10:00.
        [The noise ordinance states 9:00 PM as the time limit.]

        While that certainly has not eliminated all of the “knuckleheads” who can’t or refuse to be courteous, it surely has cut it down a good deal.
        [For a little while until one of the aforementioned knuckleheads ripped it off and discarded it.]

        Also, this exhibit will not be there forever. It will be removed in less than 50 days. [August 8 plus 50 days is September 26. That's tomorrow.]

        Most significant, every person I asked, felt that this is a case of balancing the interests of the vast majority versus one individual. In some cases, when it comes to such “community events", sometimes the individual has to cede his or her individual comfort for the good of the whole community.

        [I did not cede my individual comfort. It was unceremoniously robbed from me, however, I did cede my individual comfort for the good of the nation by serving four years honorably in the United  States Navy but that doesn't count. I'm only one person against the vast majority. Vast majority? Much more than 50%? I doubt it.]

        Also, many felt that such “disturbances” are simply a part of living on the city. And that most citizens,at some point, have to endure certain “discomforts” of  city living, as that is simply a part of the deal.

[You are referring to the sounds of your pianos as "disturbances"? Disturbances are the reason cities have noise ordinances. Disturbances are NOT simply a part of living in the city.  Horns honking, tires screeching, stereos blasting, loud one-sided cell phone conversations and loud face-to-face conversations between pedestrians as they walk past are street noises which though objectionable are ambient. But are they NOT "discomforts" I've endured on a daily basis? They go away. Street corner pianos are anything but ambient. I have lived in Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Boston, Minneapolis and San Francisco. I resent being talked down to as though I am some country bumpkin just in from the farm. To date, Lancaster with its perpetual construction projects with jack-hammers and concrete saws and gas-powered generators to light warning signs and pianos is, by far, the noisiest city I have ever lived in. Have any of the members of the board ever endured "certain discomforts" for the good of the whole community? Have any of the members of the board ever suffered ANY discomforts? Their specious reasoning sounds well-grounded in the elitism which is pandemic among the moneyed class.]

        While I want to do what we can to meet your need, we’re going to have to ask you to be patient and understanding. We’ll move the piano at the end of September, as scheduled.

        Again, I am terribly sorry. I assure you that your complaint was not taken lightly. [Words are cheap.]

        I truly struggled with what to do, but believe that, on balance, this is the correct course of action. [Which has been no action at all. Maintain the status quo. Dismiss the old vet as an irrelevant piece of chaff. After all, he's only one person, one voice crying out in the wilderness.]

        Best,

Signed by one of the MFE (Music For Everyone) principals


It's been said many times over the years that "It's an ill wind that blows no good". In this case the good is that I have learned more about pianos and their usual three pedals. The left pedal played with the left foot is called the Una Corda (One cord or piano string instead of all three) and has acquired the label "Soft" pedal.

The middle pedal, if installed, played with the right foot is called the Sostenuto and is referred to as the "tone sustaining" pedal.

The right pedal also played with the right foot is the Damper pedal. When it is depressed, it lifts the dampers on all the strings and has thusly become known as the "Loud" pedal.

The players of this piano seemed always to find only the "Loud" pedal.

#  #  #

The Music, The Mayor And The Monarchy

    The music in this case is generally not music. It is the aimless, repetitive banging away on a piano keyboard, a piano provided by the non-profit charitable organization Music For Everyone as part of the Keys for the City exhibit. Even if the person at the keyboard were playing a concerto by Beethoven or Prokofiev, the fact that it is unwanted by me in my space renders it an unwarranted intrusion. I want to choose what I listen to and be able to turn it off when I wish.

    From the Music For Everyone website:

             The objective of Keys for the City is to provide access to musical opportunity,
             foster creativity and build a sense of community among the public and, in the process,
             raise awareness for local music and visual arts education initiatives.

    How can disturbing the peace pounding away aimlessly on a piano keyboard at 3 o'clock in the morning on a city corner foster anything but animosity?

    This banging away often begins early in the day and continues well into the night past the legal limit on certain sounds. Therein lies the rub. Even though the city has a noise ordinance, the mayor himself has directed the Lancaster City Police to

    IGNORE ANY AND ALL NOISE COMPLAINTS REGARDING THE PIANOS.

                            (That information came to me from an impeccable source.)

From the Lancaster City Code:

                Chapter 198 Noise

                    198-1 Purpose

            The Council, finding that excessive levels of sound are detrimental
            to the physical, mental and social well-being of the residents
            as well as to their comfort, living conditions, general welfare and safety,
            and being therefore a public health and welfare hazard,
            hereby declares it to be necessary to provide for the greater control and
            more effective regulation of excessive sound and the sources of
            excessive sound within the City.
       
                    198-4 Prohibited Acts; Violations

            B. Specific prohibitions. The following acts and the causing thereof
            are declared to be noise disturbances and therefore in violation of this chapter:
            (1) Radios, television sets, musical instruments and similar devices.
            Operating, playing or permitting the operation or playing of any radio,
            television, phonograph, drum, musical instrument, sound amplifier, automobile radio,                         automobile stereo, high-fidelity equipment or similar device which produces,
            reproduces or amplifies sound: (a) At any time in such a manner as to cause a
            noise disturbance across a property line (boundary),
            or between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. so as to be plainly audible
            across a property line (boundary); [emphasis added by this writer]

Definitions:

    NOISE
        Any sound which annoys or disturbs humans or which causes or tends to cause
        an adverse psychological or physiological effect on humans.
    NOISE DISTURBANCE
        In addition to the sounds specified in §198-4B hereof, any sound which ...
        B. Annoys or disturbs a reasonable person of normal sensitivities...

   From the Lancaster City Code:

                Part I,
                Chapter 55,
                Part V (Mayor),
                 §55-18 Powers and Duties,
                sub-paragraph I,
        It is the duty of the mayor to:

         "Cause the enforcement of all city laws, codes and ordinances."

    Nothing I was able to find in the city ordinances or the statutes of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania allows a mayor to violate his own city ordinances.

    Reputedly, the mayor has said the pianos elevate the cultural status of the city and bring much needed money to the city. What suburbanites will drive to the center of Lancaster at three in the morning to hear some drunk pounding on a keyboard when the only place open at that hour to spend money would be an over-priced convenience store.

    The unanswered questions are: Can the mayor of a third class city ignore existing ordinances with impunity? Is the mayor pretending to be the king of a not-so-benevolent monarchy? Who decides which ordinances are to be enforced and which will be ignored and of those there are many — lined parking spaces; one vehicle per space; pedestrian crossing protections; speed limits; other violations of the noise ordinances.

    Are we a nation of laws, a city of laws or are we an anarchy?

#  #  #

Back Up Beepers and Barking Beagles

    Sitting at my console this morning preparing to write about yesterday’s revisit to the Penguin (later) my ears were assaulted with the loud, whining sound of a city vacuum truck cleaning debris from the storm drain on the corner. Yesterday it was the loud, whining sound of a commercial sump cleaner vacuuming something from a nearby restaurant.

    Once today’s city truck finished, the relative quiet allowed the invasion of yet another annoyance — the almost continuous beep-beep-beep of the back-up warning on a construction vehicle working on a street project.  It was this beeping that led me to wonder why this safety device had to be so loud it can be heard far beyond the safety area it was intended to warn about.

    On further thought it brought to mind the dog living on a property close to a laundromat I use. The dog lunges fiercely and barks loudly  when I walk past his fence — a solid fence - he can’t see me — even though I pose absolutely no threat to him or his property.

    These situations seem to confirm how neurotic our society has become. Neurosis, though no longer a favored term by the American Psychiatric Association in their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), is a significant over-reaction to a stimulus such as the construction vehicle owner’s need to warn far beyond the danger zone and the dog’s need to warn when not endangered. In essence, Neurosis is an over-reaction to reality. [Continuing with such over-simplification, Psychosis could be considered an under-reaction to reality.]

    It reminded me of my studies in Psychology. I am neither a psychologist nor a psychiatrist but I have read works by specialists in those fields and one of the most highly regarded practitioners in that field was the late Dr. Karen Horney who founded the American Institute for Psychoanalysis in New York City in 1941.

    Neurosis and Human Growth and Our Inner Conflicts are two of the books Doctor Horney wrote. Her theories propose that inner conflicts between one’s real self and one’s idealized self create anxiety and efforts to cope with that anxiety can become “neurotic” when they become intrusive or obstruct social interaction.

    Some signs and symptoms of the disorders formerly considered among the neuroses are obsessive-compulsive disorder; anxiety attacks; hysteria; phobias; depression; irritability; low sense of self-worth; lethargy and others.

    Most people exhibit these signs at one time or another during their lifetime. It does not become a problem unless the means by which a person copes becomes their raison d’etre. If that occurs, the person has become their own worst enemy. It’s a matter of degree rather than substance.

    According to Horney, the needs a neurotic personality has in coping with their inner conflicts can be grouped into three categories:

        Needs that move you toward others — clingy, seeking affirmation and approval.
        Needs that move you away from others — cold, aloof, indifferent, anti-social.
        Needs that move you against others — being difficult, domineering, or unkind.
             [I believe there should be a fourth category. Needs that move you
             against self. This I have witnessed on more than one occasion
             with potential suicides. This would be at the extreme end of
             the neurotic spectrum — Impoverishment of Personality.]

    Karen Horney’s prescriptions for freedom from overwhelming coping mechanisms she referred to as “self-realization”. Doctor Horney was acquainted with doctor Abraham Maslow and her thoughts closely paralleled Maslow’s thoughts on “self-actualization”.

    He theorized that self-actualized people:

            — Have realistic perceptions of themselves, others and
                  the world around them.
            — Are responsible and ethical.
            — Are spontaneous and open.
            — Need independence and privacy
                 though still enjoying the company of others.
            — View the world with a continual sense of appreciation,
                 wonder and awe.

    I think I’ve achieved self-realization and I think I am self-actualized. 

Nonetheless I don’t like back up beepers at breakfast or barking beagles anytime.

#  #  #

Flash Mobs, Tea Dances and Noise Violations

    On the evening of Sunday, September 30, Don Blyler, event planner extraordinaire, foisted upon Lancaster’s downtown residents a Provincetown-like “Tea Dance” called Sunset Sundance from the top level of the Prince street parking garage.

    The featured music was presented by one of Washington D.C.’s finest DJ’s, David Merrill. A check of his Facebook page reveals that his specialty genre is Fire Island-inspired cutting edge beats as in “House, Progressive, Tribal, Trance and Electro-House” sounds.

    Unbelievably, as a practitioner of “cutting edge sounds”, David Merrill is cheeky enough to credit Nietzsche with the comment, “Without music life would be a mistake“. I seriously doubt that Nietzsche would have included the insistent, persistent, throbbing gay disco beat as required listening for a music lover.

    This “Happening” (as used to occur during the Beat generation years ago) was engineered like a Flash Mob occurrence of this generation -- the location was Secret until it was announced via Tweet or Facebook or eMail the morning of the event.

    Even if hobnobbing elbow to elbow with a dance floor full of men is your thing (this was a gay-ish event for the benefit of the LGBT community,) you had to be prepared with money. General admission was $55. VIP admission was available for $110. And for that Special VIP, “Priority” VIP admission could be had for $1100.

    Have you ever tried to listen to quiet music in the privacy of your own home? Have unwanted, unwarranted sounds invaded your home for more than a minute or two? Or ten minutes? Or FOUR hours?

    Well, thanks to our city officials, Lancaster has a noise ordinance designed to prevent invasive sounds from penetrating into your private, quiet space. Like the sounds emanating from the roof of the Prince street parking garage for the entire downtown neighborhood.

Yeah, sure.

    A police officer ticketing cars parked in a No Parking space nearby said when asked if the sounds crossed property lines, “I think they’re crossing half the city”. The officer called in and asked for information about the LOUD event and learned that a “variance” had been authorized for this event. With a variance you can make any noise you want to without fear of prosecution.

    A variance, when sought, has to be applied for and a notice of application must be published far enough in advance for affected people to express their feelings about the request. However, with a one-time event, a variance can be granted by a police officer appointed by the Chief of Police.  What seems to be missing here is that even a streamlined “express” variance MUST COMPLY with the stipulations set forth in the basic noise ordinance.



        Chapter 198 Noise Subsection 198-7 A(5) (pertaining to Variances)

        “In determining whether to grant or deny the application,                        
        the Board (Noise Control Review Board) shall balance
        the hardship to the applicant versus the adverse impact to the public health, safety and welfare
        and shall consider at a minimum the following conditions:

            (a)  The physical characteristics of the emitted sound;
            (b)  The times and duration of the emitted sound;
            (c)  The geography, zone and population density of the affected area;
            (d)  Whether the public health and safety is endangered;
            (e)  Whether the sound source predates the receivers; and
            (f)  Whether compliance with the standards from which the variance is sought would
                  produce hardship without equal or greater benefit to the public.



        “The Chief of the Bureau of Police or his designee may, upon application and guided by the
        standards for use as set forth in Subsection A(5) hereof, grant special variances
        for infrequent events or activities, including but not limited to band concerts,
        block parties, church carnivals or other performances or similar activities,
        publicly or privately sponsored and presented at any public or private space outdoors.”


    It seems in the case of this event, the Hardship requirement was never even addressed. The burden of proving hardship is on the applicant. The applicant has to prove that denial of the request would create a hardship on him.

    “Hardship” is defined as privation or suffering.

    “Privation” is lack of what is needed for existence.

    “Suffering” is enduring death, pain, or distress.

    I don’t understand how being denied the authority to make music loud enough to permeate an entire neighborhood disturbing the peace of all who wish to hear their own music in their own home could be considered a hardship.