Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/18/1994, 1 - TA 125-94: AMENDMENTS TO NOISE REGULATIONS, TO ALLOW OPERATION OF POWER BLOWERS FROM 7 A.M. TO 6 P.M. IN NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONES. city of san luis o6ispo MEETING DATE: MM Naga COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT NUMBEA: / FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Develo ment Director e BY: Judith Lautner, Associate Plannet,E SUBJECT: TA 125-94: Amendments to noise regulations, to allow operation of power blowers from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. in non-residential zones. CAO RECOMMENDATION Pass to print an ordinance amending the noise regulations to allow power blower operation in non-residential zones from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily. DISCUSSION Background At its September 20 meeting, the City Council directed staff to return with an amendment to the noise regulations to allow power blowers to be operated from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. in commercial zones. Staff has developed language to respond to this request. EVALUATION 1. Amendments affect all non-residential zones. The Council wanted the regulations changed to allow maintenance crews to be able to complete blowing operations before businesses opened and large numbers of pedestrians and vehicles are on the streets. Some of the areas needing early clean-up are parks and public buildings (including City Hall), which are in Public Facilities zones. These zones are not commercial. Therefore, the amendments use the term "non-residential" rather than "commercial". 2. Impacts on residential areas. In some parts of the city, residential and non-residential zones are immediately adjacent to each other. A power blower operating at 7 a.m. at the edge of a non-residential zone may disturb nearby residences. Some other cities have prohibited blowing within 200' (Cypress and Sacramento) or 250' (Santa Barbara) of a residential zone during those hours when blowers would not be allowed to operate within residential zones. Staff is recommending a similar provision. Parks Division staff suggests a 100' prohibition. CONCURRENCES The Public Works Department supports the changes. Other departments were not consulted. No other public hearings have been held on this particular amendment. ALTERNATIVES The Council may 1) make changes to the draft ordinance amendments before passing them to print; 2) continue action with direction to staff; 3) take no action at this time. P/ 41►1i1111111 x$101U�II city of San LUIS OBISPO 2RQUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Power blower noise amendments Page 2 FISCAL EMPACT Implementation of proposed amendments to the noise ordinance are not expected to create a significant impact on City operations or budget. The amendments will allow City contractors to complete blowing of downtown areas early,.while there is little interruption, which may result in some cost savings for the City. Attached: Draft.ordinance amending noise regulations ORDINANCE NO. (1994 SERIES) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE NOISE REGULATIONS TEXT TO CHANGE THE HOURS WHEN POWER BLOWERS MAY BE OPERATED (TA 125-94) WHEREAS, the City Council has held a hearing to consider the noise regulations amendment request TA 125-94 , amending Section 9 . 12 . 050 of the Municipal 'Code as shown on Exhibit A, attached; and WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings; Findings: 1. The proposed amendment conforms to the general plan. 2. The Community Development Director has reviewed the text change and determined that it is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it consists of a regulatory action taken by the City Council to make a minor amendment to regulations intended to assure the protection of the environment (section 15308, class 8) . The Director concludes that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and the City Council hereby affirms the categorical exemption and finds that it reflects the independent judgement of the City Council. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental determination. The City council finds and determines that the project's Categorical Exemption adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed Municipal Code change, and reflects the independent judgement of the City Council. The Council hereby affirms said categorical exemption. SECTION 2. The municipal code amendment TA 125-94 , as shown on Exhibit A, attached, amending section section 9. 12. 050B. 10, is hereby approved. SECTION 3 . A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of councilmembers voting for and against, shall be published once, at least (3) days prior -to its final passage, in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this city. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of Ordinance no. (1994 Series) TA 125-94 : Citywide Page 2 thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo at its meeting held on the day of 1994, on motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: A or �'7 Noise Ordinance Amendment 9 .12. 050 Prohibited acts. B. Specific Prohibitions. The acts, as set forth in this section, and the causing or permitting thereof, are declared to be in violation of this chapter: 10. Domestic Power Tools, Machinery. a. Operating or permitting the operation of any mechanically powered saw, sander, drill, grinder, lawn or garden tool or similar tool between ten p.m. and seven a.m. , so as to create a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial real property line. b. Operating a power blower �n a '.resdential zone or 'within 1Oti' af::a residenial zone between 6 pini. and 8 a.m. ; so as to create` a`"noise disturbance across a residential real property line. c;; Operating. a Bower blower in any nonresidential< zone e'b�xeen. 5 pt end; 7 a,m soas to create a nalse distuxbar�ce across real property Gine ... . end` € Any motor, machinery, pump, such as swimming pool equipment, etc. , shall be sufficiently enclosed or muffled and maintained so as not to create a noise disturbance in accordance with section 9 . 12 . 060 of this section. EXHIBIT A (TA 125-94) 71NG -1 FM AGENDA LHfE.��ITEM cityO S�►l luiS OBISPO 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 October 17, 1994 i. r1T t 1994 Mr. Alan Friedman P.O. Box 3655 ;irr c�eaK 17G1 f`r' San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Dear Alan: After checking with Jim Gardiner on your inquiry, he provided me with the department's current method of responding to noise complaints. That memo is attached for your information. As we move forward to further work on leaf blowers and noise complaints it is quite. possible that the department will develop a modified means of taking the complaints and responding to them. The department will continue to work with the Community Development Department to deliver information in a usable form about noise complaints, including leaf blowers. Hope this information is helpful. Sincerely, (Z=nn nn City Administrative Officer JD:mc Attachments C. Jim Gardiner Arnold Jonas Cc_�r,c1L CDD DIR CAO C FIN DiR City Council ACAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF .. �rOU..-E C =: r�'�.V.I i'-i•�CI ❑ FE.3 Df Fi MEMORANDUM TO: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer FROM: James M. Gardiner, Chief of Policed DATE: October 14, 1994 SUBJECT: Power Blower Enforcement After verifying the status of current municipal code regulations with City Attorney Jeff Jorgensen, the Department's enforcement of the Noise Ordinance concerning power blowers remains as follows: 1. Complaints outside prohibited times are covered by Section 9.12.050 B 10. If a complaint is received, an available police officer will be dispatched to the location and appropriate enforcement action taken. This call is documented in the Department's computer records in the category covering violations of the noise ordinance. While not separated from the annual average of over 2,500 noise complaints, a specific call can be called up relatively quickly if the address of the violation or the person calling can be identified. If this information is not available, a "batch" listing of all noise complaints can be run. Thereafter, a manual search of individual records would have to be done on each call to determine the type of violation. 2. If a complaint about a blower is received during the times permitted by the ordinance, the caller is advised that the use of the blower is not a violation. Since there is no violation, no officer would be dispatched and no record would be kept. 'r I understand that staff is currently completing research regarding the possible establishment of "db" requirements for these blowers. At such time that an ordinance is proposed, serious consideration will have to be given as to the best way to regulate and enforce the requirements of any such law. MEMORANDUM October 13, 1994 To: Jim Gardiner From: John D n Subject: Discussion with and request of Allen Friedman At 5:00 p.m. last evening, Air. Allen Friedman called me to make a request. He prefaced his request by saying that Arnold had told him on several occasions there was little or no record of people complaining about the noise, etc. of leaf blowers. He didn't see how this was possible inasmuch as he is constantly receiving phone calls and other contacts from people who are wanting to join with him in the anti-leaf-blower crusade. He thought that the problem was that people who were alarmed by the noise of leaf blowers didn't call the Community Development Department, but rather called the Police Dispatcher who, to his knowledge, were not keeping records of these complaints, and the Police Officers were not citing, with the result there is no record of complaints to the City. His request is that the Police Dispatchers make a notation for the permanent record when these complaints are received by the Police Department, and that these complaints be forwarded to Arnold so that he would have a permanent record of those complaining to the City about this problem. He told me that if I didn't cause this to happen administratively, then he would take his request to the City Council. I told him, that, subject to talking to the Police Chief about it, I didn't particularly see any problem with his request and that, in some appropriate form, we would follow-up on it. Jim and Arnold, let me know your thoughts and, more particularly, the follow-up to his request, by next Tuesday at the latest. In fairness to him, I have an obligation to tell him what we are doing/not doing so he can either relax/take his complaint to Council. Thank you. C. Arnold Jonas Jeff Jorgensen JD:mc