HomeMy WebLinkAboutReg 2022-08-15 Item 8 - Update - Noise OrdinanceITEM INFORMATION
STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 8/15/22
AGENDA ITEM TITLE Noise Ordinance History
CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 8/15/22 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
SPONSOR Council Mayor Admin Svcs DCD Finance Fire P&R Police PW
SPONSOR’S
SUMMARY Staff is providing history and context for the City’s noise ordinance and developing options
for clarification of the Code for Council discussion and feedback to staff.
REVIEWED BY Trans&Infrastructure Svcs Community Svcs/Safety Finance & Governance Planning & Community Dev.
LTAC Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DATE: COMMITTEE CHAIR:
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR/ADMIN.
COMMITTEE Direct to full Council
COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$ $ $
Fund Source:
Comments:
MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
8/15/22
MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS
8/15/22 Informational Memorandum dated 8/8/22 with Attachments
COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
----------------------------------Initials --------------------------------- ITEM NO.
Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor’s review Council review
8/15/22 NG
113
8
114
City of Tukwila
Allan Ekberg, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO:Council Committee of the Whole
FROM: Nora Gierloff, DCD Director
CC: Mayor Ekberg
DATE: August 8, 2022
SUBJECT: Noise Ordinance History
ISSUE
The intent is to provide history and context for the City’s noise regulations and develop
options for clarification of the code for Council discussion and feedback to staff.
BACKGROUND
In 2010, the Department of Community Development and the Police Department jointly
developed a new noise ordinance, TMC 8.22. One of the motivations was to provide the Police
with an avenue to address noise disturbances without the use of a decibel meter, something not
generally available to patrol officers.
The new code language provided two enforcement approaches, see TMC 8.22.030 in
Attachment A. One approach continued the prior use of a decibel level table, which requires the
use of sound measuring devices, and was intended for ongoing commercial operations and
noise created by equipment such as HVAC units, generators, and trash compactors. These
routine, recurring noise sources would be required to install permanent noise mitigation
measures that would bring the noise below the allowed levels in the table.
The maximum permissible environmental noise levels allowed in the table are based on State
regulations at WAC 173-60-040. Jurisdictions may not impose stricter maximum dBA (decibel)
noise levels without prior approval from Ecology and a finding that special circumstances exist
locally that warrant unique regulations per RCW 70A.20.060.
The second approach was to include a new “plainly audible” standard that would use the
hearing and judgement of a code enforcement or police officer and was intended to allow
enforcement of episodic noise created by activities such as loud parties, auto repair, or car
audio systems. These types of noises would be mitigated by stopping the activity or turning
down the amplification.
An excerpt of the April 26, 2010 Info Memo presented to the Council during review of the
ordinance describes the legislative intent of the two approaches.
115
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/mayorsoffice/cc/Council Agenda Items/DCD/Noise Info Memo Update.docx
DISCUSSION
Despite the legislative intent for two different approaches to be applied to distinctly different
types of noise, the Noise Code language makes no clear distinction for the different types of
noise and allows either enforcement approach to be used, see Attachment A. There is no
limitation in the Code about which approach is appropriate for which circumstance.
A current noise complaint case is an example of the conflict between the two different
enforcement approaches. The Council has heard about noise issues multiple times over the
past few years from Mr. Greg Sherlock who is a resident of Tukwila who lives near the Sabey
Data Center located at 3355 S. 120th Place. Both structures are located in industrial zones.
As part of the investigation of the complaints, City staff contacted Sabey Data Center to ask
whether Sabey was aware of any noise problems regarding their facilities or equipment. After
reviewing their facilities, Sabey representatives reported that none of their facilities were
malfunctioning or causing excessive noise.
In the absence of an identified cause of the complained of noise, the proposed solution was to
conduct a noise study to identify the characteristics of the noise to enable the design of specific
mitigation measures if the study confirms the noise exceeds maximum permissible levels. Mr.
Sherlock has repeatedly refused to allow access to his property for a noise study, and Sabey
116
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/mayorsoffice/cc/Council Agenda Items/DCD/Noise Info Memo Update.docx
has been reluctant to invest in mitigation measures such as a noise wall or equipment shrouding
without knowing whether the noise is excessive and if mitigation measures would be effective in
solving the problem.
The Council has heard from Mr. Sherlock that he believes that the plainly audible standard,
rather than the decibel level table, should be applied to his complaint of intermittent noise he
identifies as emanating from the HVAC equipment on the roof of the Sabey Data Center site. He
has cited this as a reason for not allowing the City to facilitate a noise study by a third-party
consultant aimed at developing a solution to the noise issue. In this case, the lack of clarity
around the use of the plainly audible approach is hampering a resolution to the complaint.
It is important to note that City staff is not initiating this discussion as a way to close the ongoing
dispute between Mr. Sherlock and the Sabey Data Center. Rather, this discussion is about
ensuring clarity within the code regarding noise issues moving forward. Staff acknowledges that
additional work needs to be done on this specific issue. Staff spoke with the King County
Dispute Resolution Center on August 11, 2022 regarding whether they can assist in this dispute.
Futher, staff continues to work with Sabey who is looking to identify any anomalies in the HVAC
system or other potential mitigation efforts. Staff continues to try and work with Mr. Sherlock to
conduct the necessary noise study on his property.
Questions for the Council to consider are whether we should retain the plainly audible standard
in the Noise Code, and if so, whether we should provide additional guidance in the Code as to
when it is appropriate to use that enforcement mechanism rather than a decibel level standard.
Codifying the legislative intent that the plainly audible standard is to be used for “in the moment”
enforcement of short term events while the decibel level table is appropriate for ongoing or
reoccurring noise generation by equipment or commercial activity would provide clarity for Code
Enforcement, Police Officers and the community at large.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
Information Only. Staff is seeking direction from Council on whether to add an update to the
Noise Ordinance, TMC 8.22, to the future DCD workplan.
ATTACHMENT
A. TMC 8.22.0250 Maximum Permissible Sound Levels
117
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 4
https://tukwilawa.sharepoint.com/sites/mayorsoffice/cc/Council Agenda Items/DCD/Noise Info Memo Update.docx
Attachment A
TMC 8.22.050 Maximum Permissible Sound Levels
It is a violation to produce sound in excess of the permissible sound levels established by this
chapter.
1. No person may produce or permit to be produced sound that exceeds the following maximum
permissible sound levels when measured at or within the boundary of a receiving property:
2. At any hour of the day or night, the applicable noise limitations above may be exceeded for
any receiving property by no more than:
a. 5 dB(A) for a total of 15 minutes in any one-hour period;
b. 10 dB(A) for a total of 5 minutes in any one-hour period; or
c. 15dB(A) for a total of 1.5 minutes in any one-hour period.
3. The following also exceeds the maximum permissible sound levels:
a. In all districts of the City, no sound from a sound producing source is permitted that is:
1) plainly audible from a motor vehicle sound system at a distance of at least 50
feet from the vehicle itself; or
2) plainly audible commercial music at a distance of at least 50 feet from the
property line of the commercial establishment; or
3) plainly audible during nighttime hours from within a noise-sensitive unit of the
receiving property; and
b. When the receiving property is in a residential district, no sound from a sound-
producing source is permitted that is plainly audible at a distance of at least 50 feet from
the exterior of a sound-producing source, including sounds created by any motor vehicle
operated off public highways.
118