Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutA001 - Council Action Form dated August 20, 1985 ITEM # � DATE: AUGUSTX, 1985 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF REVISIONS TO NOISE ORDINANCE BACKGROUND: One of the City Council's targets for 1984-85 was for staff to examine all existing ordinances and recommend changes which would help staff to enforce these laws. The staff has determined that the present noise ordinance has some limitations that create difficulty in enforcement. In particular, noise emanating fran back yards is disturbing the peace of next door neighbors, but taking a meter reading fran the nearest street or alley often does not indi- cate a violation. An option of taking a reading from the complaining party's property line would aid in these situations. In fact, this is the language that was included in the original noise ordinance. The addition of this option along with the present language for reading at the nearest street or alley would no doubt increase our enforcement capabilities. The current noise ordinance allows a motor vehicle to emit noise up to 84 decibels when measured at a distance of 25 feet. A study by the Police Department of vehicle noise enforcement was done on July 7, 1985, and the results showed that a motorcycle with no mufflers registered only 82 decibels when read from 25 feet. Therefore, reducing the maximum decibel limit to approximately 70 decibels may be more effective and serve to satisfy some of the cottplaints we are getting from our residents. Section 16.7 of the noise ordinance states that the reading for situations when a permit has been issued must be taken 50 feet from the source. This measuring distance seems to be in conflict with other sections of the ordi- nance. Therefore, in order to eliminate confusion, it may be advisable to ensure that the reading be taken under the same guidelines for those in- stances when a permit was not issued. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Take no action at this time. 2. Direct the City Attorney to revise the noise ordinance to include the three changes mentioned above. 3. Refer these proposed changes to the University/Student/City Committee as well as other groups to ensure adequate publicity and discussion regarding the changes have been accomplished before the ordinance is referred to the City Attorney for drafting. MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The staff believes that the three changes stated above would significantly improve the noise ordinance and assist the Police Department in enforcement. However, the staff also realizes that the current ordinance was developed after extensive review by various groups within our community, including the GSB, University/Student/City Committee, and Neighborhood Association repre- sentatives. Therefore, it is believe that before these changes are incor- porated into the Code, these same groups must have an opportunity to review and comment on the proposed changes. Hopefully this review could take place in the coming months and that the matter could be brought back to the City Council sometime after January 1st for final action. Final passage during the winter months would allow staff adequate time to publicize any changes in the noise ordinance prior to the beginning of outdoor parties which commonly take place in the spring. Therefore, it is the reconmendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative #3 and refer the staff's proposed noise ordinance changes to the University/Student/City Committee, the GSB, and the Neighborhood Associations for their review and ccmnent prior to City Council taking any final action. COUNCIL ACTION: MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The staff believes that the three changes stated above would significantly improve the noise ordinance and assist the Police Department in enforcement. However, the staff also realizes that the current ordinance was developed after extensive review by various groups within our community, including the GSB, University/Student/City Ccxnnittee, and Neighborhood Association repre- sentatives. Therefore, it is believe that before these changes are incor- porated into the Code, these same groups must have an opportunity to review and comment on the proposed changes. Hopefully this review could take place in the coming months and that the matter could be brought back to the City Council sometime after January lst for final action. Final passage during the winter months would allow staff adequate time to publicize any changes in the noise ordinance prior to the beginning of outdoor parties which commonly take place in the spring. Therefore, it is the reccmmendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative #3 and refer the staff's proposed noise ordinance changes to the University/Student/City Committee, the GSB, and the Neighborhood Associations for their review and comment prior to City Council taking any final action. COUNCIL ACTION: