Free Motion in Limine - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:01-cv-00201-VJW

Document 203-3

Filed 09/20/2006

Page 1 of 2

EXHIBIT B

Case 1:01-cv-00201-VJW

Document 203-3

Filed 09/20/2006

Page 2 of 2

19 this estimate is -0.67 ~: 1.96 (0.20) = -0.28 to -1.06. Among the estimates reported in Table 3, the 95% confidence interval includes all NDI values with the exception of four values (Baltimore, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and Winnipeg). The large negative estimates for JFK and La Guardia Airports are not included in the regression analysis due to lack of standard errors.

rsis Table 4. Summary of the Meta-Anal, of Airport Noise and Property Values Statistical Measure Simple mean NDI (unwt.) Median NDI (unwt.) Fixed-effect mean NDI (weighted) Random-effect mean NDI (weighted) Meta-regression coefficient. (unwt.) Meta-regression coefficient (wt.) NDI value (std.dev.) Comments on Measure

-0.75 (0.30)* Ignores precision; includes JFK and La Guardia -0.67 Ignores precision; includes JFK and La Guardia

-0.58 (0.04)* Uses inverse variance weights; sampling error only -0.59 (0.04)* Uses inVerse variance weights adjusted for between-study variability of estimates "-0.83 (0.31)* White's correction for heteroskedasticity -0.51 (0.14)* Wt. regr. with inverse variance weights

Meta-regression coefficient (wt.) -0.67 (0.20)* Wt. regr. with optimal inverse standard error weights Source: Nelson (2004); attached. Asterisks indicate statistically significant at the 95% level.

47. An NDI of-0.67% per dB is consistent with my earlier review of the empirical literature. For example, in Nelson (1980), I found that the simple mean NDI for a sample of twelve airports was -0;62% (Nelson, 1980 at 43). In a pooled statistical analysis for six airports, I reported a mean NDI of -0.55% (Nelson, 1979 at 327). Recent studies for other countries also agree with this result. For example, a recent study for Geneva, Switzerland used geographical information system (GIS) data and found a noise discount of-0.7% per dB (Baranzini and Ramirez 2005). Lastly, studies of airport expansions and closures also have found property value effects from anticipated changes in noise exposure (Jud and Winkler 2005; Konda 2002). While these studies do not estimate an NDI, they do serve to demonstrate that market dynamics do not greatly alter the negative effects. In summary, 27 Of 31 estimates of the NDI are negative and statistically significant at the 95% level or better. This is convincing evidence that aircraft noise is negatively capitalized into residential property values. A synthesis of this evidence using meta-analysis yields an NDI of about 0.7% per additional dB (above background noise levels).

i