SR-400-007 (3)
CP:SF:JT:AS:JL:BR:f\plan\share\council\strpt\2003\CC Noise Rpt.doc
City Council Mtg: July 22, 2003 Santa Monica, California
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Planning Staff
SUBJECT: Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica
Municipal Code Chapter 4.12 Regarding Noise Regulations.
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends the City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance
amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 4.12 regarding noise regulations.
On June 18, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed and commented upon the
proposed ordinance amendments. This report summarizes and analyzes the proposed
ordinance amendments and incorporates the Planning Commission’s comments. The
proposed Noise Ordinance is contained in Attachment A.
BACKGROUND
The City Council directed staff to research amendments to the City’s existing Noise
Ordinance so as to afford greater protection to residents living in proximity to industrial
and commercial uses due to a growing concern about the more diverse nature of
community noise sources.
1
The City hired the consulting firm of Mestre Greve Associates to assist staff with the
noise ordinance update process. The consultant aided staff with the conduct of four
outreach meetings, completed research and analysis of the existing ordinance, and
advised staff about proposed recommendations.
Community meetings with both residents and businesses, including the Chamber of
Commerce and representatives from the business improvement districts, helped staff
and the consultant better understand the range of noise concerns. A number of
comments were received during these meetings as well as by letter or email throughout
the process (Attachment C).
In response to community comments, case studies were prepared (Attachment D), the
findings of which reinforced the community’s input. These case studies included an
analysis of noise issues and impacts associated with car wash facilities, nightclubs, auto
repair businesses, and light industrial/commercial uses adjacent to residential uses.
Through the noise ordinance update process, staff and consultant learned of various
problems with the existing noise ordinance. For example, the current ordinance does
not fairly account for noise level measurements particularly when residential uses are
located in close proximity to commercial or industrial uses. Related to this is the
ordinance’s methodology, which assumes that noise levels terminate at the boundary of
a noise district rather than dissipating over a distance. The ordinance also does not
2
contain express provisions regulating on-site activities that occur outside of a principal
building and which may include parking lot loitering, truck deliveries, site cleaning, and
other types of business support operations.
With an understanding of these issues and intent to provide a balanced approach to
noise regulation, staff and the consultant drafted the recommendations set forth in the
attached proposed noise ordinance. The ordinance was presented to the Planning
Commission for its review and comment on June 18, 2003.
3
PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
In addition to a number of modifications intended to clarify the ordinance, the proposed
Noise Ordinance amendments will improve the City’s ability to enforce the ordinance.
These changes include clearer definitions, the creation of a noise transition zone,
guidelines for the measurement of noise, and new standards for business support
activities and patron education/information. The ordinance allows for an adjustment
process for businesses with unique circumstances where these standards would create
a special hardship. Such a process would enable community input and the imposition
of appropriate conditions of approval to help ensure that a business could operate
successfully while protecting the quality of life for nearby residents. Additionally, the
staff report includes a code enforcement discussion about the practical issues
associated with implementing the Noise Ordinance and establishes a timeframe within
which these standards will apply. Each of these is discussed in more detail below.
Improved Definitions
The definitions in the City’s existing Noise Ordinance require modification to clarify
terms and to reflect current standard industry terminology. Some key changes
recommended by staff include adding a definition for construction activity and modifying
the duration of noise measurements. The current ordinance provides that noise
measurements can be taken in a series of cumulative time periods. Stated another
way, the noise measurement period could be interrupted and therefore not fairly
represent the actual noise generated from a property. The proposed change requires an
4
uninterrupted period to achieve a true reading of a noise impact. These changes will
improve the City’s ability to enforce the ordinance and obtain compliance.
Noise Measurement Methodology
Noise measurement methodology is the basis for evaluating noise complaints. The
current ordinance and the proposed changes retain certain discretion on the part of the
Community Noise Officer in determining where to take noise measurements. However,
as proposed, the ordinance will establish guidelines for taking these measurements,
which direct that the noise measurement location be at or near the noise receptor. In
selecting the measurement location, the Community Noise Officer should make every
effort to measure noise at locations where the receptor use is most noise sensitive.
Another area where the methodology warrants revision relates to using an appropriate
noise standard when conducting investigations and following up on complaints.
Currently, the code requires that a complaint from a residential district about noise on a
commercial property be evaluated according to the allowable dBA of the noise zone
where the noise source originates – the commercial property. This methodology results
in the allowable noise level in a residential district to be 10 decibels higher than the
residential standard, or 15 decibels higher if the noise source is located in an industrial
district, depending on the time of the day when noise levels are measured. As noted
earlier in this staff report, this methodology is unique when compared to noise
regulations in other communities. Staff and consultant recommend that the appropriate
5
residential noise standard be used as the basis for evaluating noise levels on
residentially zoned properties. Additionally, to address noise issues in areas where land
uses transition from one noise district to another noise district, a new noise
measurement methodology is recommended.
Transition Zone
The Noise Ordinance’s established noise zones successfully manage noise in areas
where land uses are homogenous, but become problematic at the boundaries of noise
zones when land uses shift from commercial and industrial to residential. Accordingly, a
noise transition zone is recommended to recognize that noise is transient and does not
stop at boundary lines between commercial and residential districts. Given the physical
layout of the City, where commercial corridors run parallel to residential neighborhoods,
staff and consultant believe a transition zone that changes the measurement
methodology at the boundary is the best approach for effectively managing noise in
these sensitive locations. The transition zone would achieve a balance between the
needs of commercial/industrial and residential uses. A transition zone would
acknowledge the inherent differences between these uses, yet provide further
protections for residents in these areas. The idea of the transition zone is also based
on the principle that residential areas closest to commercial areas will experience
somewhat higher noise levels than residential areas that are much farther away. The
transition zones will, together with the other proposed changes to the ordinance, provide
greater protection to residential areas located closest to commercial or industrial areas.
6
As proposed, a new transition zone would extend a distance of 100-feet from a noise
district boundary into another, more restrictive noise district. Any portion of a property
located within the 100-foot distance would result in the entire parcel being subject to the
transition zone standard. The transition zone decibel level would be derived by
determining the average of the two adjoining noise zones. For instance, a commercial
property located on Lincoln Boulevard has an evening decibel level of 60 dBA. An
adjoining residential district has an evening decibel level of 50 dBA. For a depth of 100
feet into the lower, residential noise district, the decibel level would be 55 dBA for the
entire affected parcel. While it may appear that the transition zone increases the
decibel level of the lower noise district, in actuality it provides greater parity between the
two noise zones and decreases the decibel level of the lower noise zone when
compared to the existing ordinance. Using the example above, under the current
ordinance, a complaint originating from a transition zone property regarding a noise
violation on a commercial property would be evaluated against the commercial noise
standard, 60 dBA. Under the transition zone model the same complaint would be
measured against the average of the two noise zones, 55 dBA. Staff believes the
transition zone will better protect residential properties without unduly burdening
businesses.
7
Business Support Operations
Business support operations are those incidental activities that occur before, during and
after business hours, but which are not part of the core business function. Examples of
business support operations include: deliveries; refuse and recycling; steam cleaning of
equipment, mats or flooring; power-vacuuming; and, cleaning of parking areas. These
activities typically take place adjacent to commercial businesses, often outdoors, and
frequently adjacent to residential uses.
It became clear during the community outreach meetings that business support
operations can and do pose significant impacts when conducted in close proximity to
residential areas, particularly late in the evening. Staff believes limiting the hours of
business support activities would help to protect residents from noise related
disturbances without significantly restricting the needs of businesses. While this
provision would apply throughout the City, staff does not believe it is necessary to
restrict these operations where there is no residential district within 100 feet of a
commercial/industrial establishment. Further, due to the unique character of the
Downtown environment as a destination for local residents and visitors, and because it
is the City’s focus of activity during daytime and evening hours, staff does not believe
such restrictions should apply in this area. More specifically, properties bounded by the
centerlines of Colorado Avenue, Wilshire Boulevard, Ocean Avenue and Seventh Court
would be exempted from this standard. The C3 zoned properties located on the north
8
side of Wilshire Boulevard, though commonly included in the Downtown Frame, would
not be exempted due to the close proximity to multifamily dwelling units.
In all other areas the recommended ordinance provides that business support
operations conducted within 100 feet of any residential district be prohibited between
11:00 PM and 6:00 AM. These late night and early morning hours are times when most
people are home, typically sleeping, and when the ambient noise environment is
quieter. This will require some businesses to modify the manner in which support
operations occur, though staff does not believe these restrictions will significantly impact
the overall business community. Many activities that are being restricted could be
accommodated during the remaining hours of the day. However, to address cases
where these restrictions would be an unreasonable burden or hardship upon an
individual business, the proposed ordinance contains a noise adjustment process to
consider unique circumstances and, based on certain findings of fact, provide relief from
these restrictions. This process would allow for community input if a hearing was
requested and the imposition of appropriate conditions of approval.
As indicated earlier, part of the public outreach involved soliciting feedback from the
business community about restrictions related to delivery hours and refuse/recycling
disposal. Some who commented were concerned that it might be difficult to adjust third
party delivery schedules and stated that the Los Angeles County Health Department
standards may require refuse disposal at the end of a business day when a food serving
9
business closes. While these are legitimate concerns, the problem does not appear to
be universal. Most businesses appear to receive deliveries during normal day and early
evening hours. Further, after contacting the Los Angeles County Health Department,
staff learned that there would be opportunities for businesses to adjust their schedules
to have refuse disposal before 11:00 PM. The remaining debris could remain in an
internal staging area for removal the next day. Collection of refuse in residential,
commercial and industrial districts by private services would be subject to this
requirement. The City’s collection services presently comply with such a standard.
Similarly, staff believes delivery schedules for those businesses that do rely on late
night deliveries could also be adjusted as appropriate to comply with these provisions,
as is often required in the approval of a discretionary permit.
Nightclub and Bar Operation
Another area of noise problems relates to noise from business patrons. Some of these
complaints involve noisy patrons leaving restaurants, bars, and clubs, patrons
congregating in parking lots and speaking loudly, and noise from vehicles such as car
alarms and door slamming. Unfortunately, the noise ordinance cannot specifically
address some of these issues due to legal constraints and the practical problems that
would be associated with asking business operators to control the behavior of patrons
before they arrive or after they leave the business location. Nevertheless, staff has
recommended that the noise ordinance contain language to require businesses to help
educate patrons and make them aware of sensitive noise situations.
10
Again, while it would be difficult to regulate all patron activity, staff believes that
businesses can assist within the area of noise complaints. The proposed ordinance
would require site posting within the building and in cases where valet parking is
provided, encourage patrons to wait in the building until their vehicle is delivered. Due to
the late night operations associated with bars and nightclubs, it is recommended that for
the one-hour period commencing one-half hour prior to and one-half hour after the close
of business, that patrons be reminded by business staff to be quiet as they leave the
establishment and walk through adjacent residential neighborhoods. As with the
business support operations, it is envisioned that these standards would also apply to
businesses within 100 feet of residentially zoned properties.
Noise Adjustment
To address cases where a business or property owner is unable to comply with the
proposed ordinance regulations due to unique circumstances, the proposed ordinance
provides for an exemption process – a noise adjustment. This provision recognizes that
there may exist unique circumstances under which a business would be severely
impacted and for which an exemption may be appropriate. As proposed, the
Community Noise Officer would conduct the discretionary process, which may include a
public hearing if requested by a member of the public, to review a noise adjustment
application. The application process would be similar to the city’s Adjustment
application process, which provides for a radius notification of 100 feet and allows any
11
member of the public to request a public hearing within 14 days from the date of the
notice. Determinations of the Community Noise Officer are appealable to the Planning
Commission. This process is not intended to exempt an applicant from the noise
ordinance provisions, but rather to recognize unique circumstances, hardships and to
provide an opportunity to explore other avenues to achieve a balance between the
interests of businesses and nearby residents.
Enforcement
The effectiveness of the noise ordinance in terms of enforcement, particularly during
late night hours, was a prominent concern expressed in community workshops and at
the Planning Commission hearings. Clearly, changes to the enforcement approach will
be required to effectively implement the noise regulations. Aspects of the enforcement
approach may also require fine-tuning based on the final regulations enacted by the City
Council. For these reasons, staff recommends that the Council separate the
discussions regarding the technical regulations and enforcement, focusing first on the
regulations. After the Council has enacted the technical regulations, staff proposes to
refine and schedule a full discussion of the enforcement strategy. Staff envisions
scheduling this strategy, which would identify responsibilities, processes and potential
resource implications, for follow up discussion by the City Council within 60 days.
Compliance Timeframe
12
The updated noise ordinance becomes effective 30-days after second reading by the
City Council, except for the business support operations requirements. These
regulations may require some businesses to alter the manner in which they operate,
therefore, a 12-month compliance timeframe to provide ample opportunity for
businesses to adjust to the new regulations is recommended. This period will also be
used to coordinate administrative functions and amend internal code enforcement
procedures to effectively enforce the noise ordinance.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
The proposed noise ordinance amendments were presented to the Planning
Commission at its June 18, 2003 and July 2, 2003 meetings. Both of these hearings
were continued due to the late hour. However, at each meeting, the Commission
listened to staff’s recommendation and accepted public testimony. A number of public
speakers offered comments at each meeting addressing various topics, including 1) late
night/early morning deliveries; 2) proposed business support operation standards; 3)
enforcement; 4) athletics, schools, and park exemptions; and 5) vehicle-related noise.
The Planning Commission continued the Noise Ordinance discussion to its July 16,
2003 meeting. Since comments were not available at the time this report was released,
staff will prepare a supplemental report for the Council’s information following this
meeting.
13
CEQA STATUS
The proposed ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Implementation
Guidelines in that CEQA applies only to projects having the potential to cause a
significant effect on the environment. This ordinance does not have this potential. The
proposed ordinance modifies regulation for community noise generated and received by
existing and future projects and improves enforcement of such regulations. The
ordinance itself will not create a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical
change in the existing environment. Rather, the proposed modifications serve to further
protect the environment. Subsequent development application and new uses will be
monitored for compliance with the new regulations to ensure compliance.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65090 and 65091, notice of the public hearing
for the text amendment was published as a display advertisement in the “California”
section of the Los Angeles Times newspaper since more than 1,000 property owners
would have received mailed or delivered notice of the meeting. This notice was
published at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing. In addition,
mailed notices were delivered to those persons expressing an interest in the Noise
Ordinance Update process, to all neighborhood organizations, the Chamber of
Commerce, the Planning Commission, the City Council, and posted on the City’s
14
website. Consistent with State law, notice of the hearing was posted in the following
three public locations: City Clerks Office, the Police Department, and at the Santa
Monica Library – Temporary Facility. A copy of the notice is included in Attachment G.
BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT
The recommendation presented in this report has no budget or fiscal impact.
RECOMMENDATON
Staff recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading of an ordinance
amending Section 4.12 of the Municipal Code relative to noise.
Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director
Jay Trevino, AICP, Planning Manager
Amanda Schachter, Principal Planner
Jonathan Lait, AICP, Senior Planner
Bill Rodrigues, AICP, Associate Planner
City Planning Division
Planning and Community Development Department
Attachments are not available electronically. Available for review at the City Clerk’s
Office:
A. Proposed Noise Ordinance
B. Map Illustrating Noise Complaints 01/2001 to 07/2002
C. Community Comments Regarding Noise
D. Case Studies
E. Existing Decibel Levels Standards by Zone & Construction Activity
F. Noise Ordinance Decibel Comparison Table
G. Notice of Public Hearing
H. Public Comments
15
F:\PLAN\SHARE\PC\STRPT\03\PC Noise Rpt.doc
16