HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAP 2009-12-14 Item 2B - Update - Noise OrdinanceTO:
City of Tukwila
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Community Affairs and Jack Pace Irks Committee
FROM: DCD Directo irecto� ,l—fir 1
Dave Haynes, Police Ch
DATE: November 23, 2009
SUBJECT: Noise Ordinance Briefing
ISSUE
Should the City update its noise ordinance?
BACKGROUND
The current noise ordinance was amended in 2002. There are two distinct sections of the noise
ordinance, with two different designated administrators. The DCD Director is the administrator
of the variance process and the Chief of Police is the administrator for nuisance, public
disturbance and vehicle noises. In 2006, the Director of DCD wrote rules for processing noise
variance requests as allowed by the Noise code. The City's current noise ordinance is
confusing and difficult to enforce. The variance process is lengthy and frequently unnecessary.
The rules for processing variance requests need to be revised and codified. There is no record
of Department of Ecology approval for the existing noise code. Enforcement of noise
regulations for public disturbance noises is difficult or impractical if the use of a noise measuring
device is required.
DISCUSSION
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
When considering revisions to the existing code, the first thing staff considered is separate the
two sections of the code. By separating the sections, confusion is minimized, and processes
and enforcement action are more clearly stated and understood.
Variances (administered by DCD Director)
There are three issues to be changed regarding variances:
1. The first has to do with how we provide public notice. Currently, every property owner and
tenant within 1000' of a noise source receives notice. Properties that are not affected
receive notice, (mall tenants for nighttime noise when the stores are closed, for instance).
The variance process and notice is required for sounds that we must allow, such as freeway
repair performed by WSDOT. In the new code, variances will be available for noise that
exceeds permissible levels based on criteria evaluating the impacts and the means of
managing the noise. The new code will allow staff to ask for mitigation measures: The
new code permits the Director to Director to determine public notice and /or a public
meetings are required.
5
6
Community Affairs and Parks Committee
Noise Ordinance briefing
November 23, 2009
Page 2
2. The second issue involves codifying the procedures for processing variances that were
written by the Director in 2006. These procedures, described above, are a supplemental
document to the code and have not been codified.
3. The final issue cleans up an error in how our code was written. In our current code, we
intended to outright exempt some sounds but a phrasing error only exempts these sounds
from being public disturbances, not from exceeding noise levels. For example, construction
noises at night were not exempt, including WSDOT repair work on the freeways. The new
code exempts construction during the day and, with the simplified variance process, allows
staff to ask for mitigation measures prior to approving nighttime construction, including repair
or construction on the freeway.
Public Disturbances /Nuisances (administered by Chief of Police)
Under the current noise code, verifying nuisance or public disturbance noises requires
standards that are impractical or difficult to use in the field.
1. Use of a noise meter to measure the decibel levels requires training, meter calibration and
calculations to exclude "ambient" noise from the violation noise. Use of a noise meter is
impractical and rarely used for public disturbance or nuisance noises. Hiring an outside
consultant to conduct the measurements is expensive.
2. If a noise meter is not used, the current code relies on subjective language to prove a
violation. interferes with the peace, comfort and repose of owners or possessors of real
property without regard to sound level measurement." This standard proves difficult for
police officers to enforce, as they are used to dealing with concrete or measurable
violations.
The proposed changes would establish a standard that is measurable and verifiable in the field
without requiring anything more than a tape measure and the ability to hear.
The proposed standard defines "plainly audible" as "sound made by a sound producing
source that can be heard."
"Public disturbance noises" then include "any sound...that is plainly audible 50 feet from
the source of the sound..." and also any sound that is "plainly audible inside a dwelling
unit" between the hours of 10:00 pm 7:00 am (nighttime).
This change should give officers a more concrete measure of when a violation is occurring and
reduce of the ambiguity of the current code.
RECOMMENDATION
Next Step: Draft ordinance will be presented to CAP in February 2010.
W;\Code EnforcelCode Enforcement DocumentslKathyWoise OrdinanceWoise cap 2.doc