No uproar over proposed noise ordinance

By: NICOLE SACK - Staff Writer | Wednesday, September 5, 2007 11:40 PM PDT

TEMECULA -- It's not a perfect noise ordinance, but the version that received the green light from the Planning Commission on Wednesday included the suggestions of residents and other community members -- a stark difference from the proposal initially considered.

"If we can please most of the people, that's the best we can do," said Commissioner John Telesio. "I think this is probably as good as we're going to get it."

The commission rejected the original proposal in June, citing several concerns over the need for the ordinance and how it would be enforced. The proposal has been tweaked at least two times as a result of subcommittee meetings consisting of council members, planning staff, the police department, code enforcement officers and members of the public.

It is scheduled to go to the City Council for final consideration Sept. 25.

There are five categories targeted for noise limits: audio equipment, power tools, live music, construction and animals.

As he had in earlier meetings, Commissioner Stan Harter took issue with the provisions that regulated animal noises and questioned the formulas of "30 minutes of incessant noise" versus "60 minutes of intermittent noise" that would constitute a violation. He said the provisions to observe such behavior would be unrealistic.

Assistant City Attorney Candice Lee said the provision was directed toward repeat offenders.

"I don't imagine we'd have code enforcement officers going around the city everyday looking for barking dogs," she said.

Harter said if that was the case, then the ordinance should be geared toward repeat offenders.

"Barking dogs is one of the reasons we pursued this (noise ordinance). It just seems like this is going to be unenforceable," he said. "I'm very much in favor of a noise ordinance. I can support it, but I didn't like the first version."

No time limits were added for the playing of live music, something that had been requested at previous subcommittee meetings. Emery Papp, senior city planner, said as long as the sounds didn't reverberate past property lines, there would be no violation. He said that including time limits would actually be more restrictive for musicians.

"In theory, if someone is practicing in their garage, they could install sound absorbing materials or they could turn it down so not to disturb other property owners," Papp said.

The city itself will remain exempt from the noise ordinance so it can continue to hold more than 50 annual city sponsored events -- such as Fourth of July fireworks -- that would not be able to be conducted without the exemption or applying for a permit, which Emery said would be too cumbersome and time consuming.

"I just have to question the equity of that," Telesio said. "I understand the concept of the greater good and that you can't have fireworks without noise. But one man's public event is another man's garage band."

City Councilwoman Maryann Edwards asked the staff to prepare a noise ordinance after she and other council members received a number of nuisance noise complaints and reports of threats and vandalism against citizens who have asked their neighbors to keep the noise down.

The penalty for violating the noise ordinance would begin at $50 for the first violation and jump to $150 for the second violation. For those who remained incompliant, a civil penalty could be issued that could cost up to $2,500 per day.

Next
Bookmark and Share

Advertisement

Pre-Registration Comments[-]Go to Top

Tired of wrote on Sep 6, 2007 5:03 AM:loud motorcycles: What about motorcycles? This ordinance doesn't mention the annoyance they cause everyday in virtually every neiborhood! The fact is loud motorcysles are much more prominent the loud audio systems on cars! When will that be added to stop the owners from putting on overly loud exhaust just so they sound bitchin!

It's Sad------ wrote on Sep 6, 2007 6:26 AM:that people today have so little respect for their neighbors right to some peace and quiet.

Ann wrote on Sep 6, 2007 6:39 AM:What about enforcing the rude disrespectfull straightpipe motorcycles that roar around the county looking for attention? Why aren't our police isssueing them tickets? Its illegal to run straightpipes and run any exhaust over 95DBs. Wake up City. The straightpipe problem stiffles any of the other minor offenses you mentioned in the above article. What are you going to do about the real problem?

LKF wrote on Sep 6, 2007 7:24 AM:The residents of Temecula should be proud. Soon it will be illegal to have a smoke while listening to the radio and washing the family car. Heaven forbid your dog starts barking because your kid is playing his drums in the garage. The next thing will be for the City Council to declare a Red Flag as the City's symbol and then endorse Hillary for President. Social engineering at its worst...

Concerned-1 wrote on Sep 6, 2007 8:33 AM:I don't see any reference to motorcycles. They are the most obnoxious noise abusers in my book.

VLS wrote on Sep 6, 2007 10:50 AM:LKF must be a dog owner who believes that it is his or her right to impose the sound of their barking dog on neighbors. Try being awakened in the morning at 4:30 by that sound. And yes, I am a dog owner. Only difference is; I have consideration for my neighbors and have trained my dog not to bark. Most people have no objection to the dog but object to their inconsiderate owners.

Not sure but wrote on Sep 6, 2007 11:19 AM:I don't think that a city has the authority to write a noise ordinance that covers motorcycles. Motorcycles fall under the authority of the DMV which already has regulations with regard to acceptible noise levels. If you see a motorcycle that is excessively loud, write down the license number and report it to the DMV. They should require the owner to bring it in to be checked. Of course, nothing stops the owner from making the motorcycle compliant before they take it in...

Silence is golden wrote on Sep 6, 2007 11:21 AM:We moved here from a town in Northern California which had a very good noise ordinance. We never had the problem with the non-stop barking dog that our neighborhood has here. This dog barks 24/7. We almost wonder if the poor animal every gets any sleep because we aren't! I'm glad to see the city is taking action and fining people who are clueless as to the fact there are other people living in the community who need some relief from their unthoughfulness.

Spinal Tap wrote on Sep 6, 2007 11:47 AM:I don't care what they say. We're keeping our amps turned up to eleven.

LKF wrote on Sep 6, 2007 11:54 AM:VLS must be a liberal. She has confused the fact that life has its inconveniences and holds to the false belief that a Government can make things better by simply raising taxes, imposing fines and stifling ones daily choices. She is overlooking the obvious: trading freedoms for security. In the end she'll have neither.

I agree with VLS wrote on Sep 6, 2007 11:57 AM:I too am a dog owner. There is no excuse for being kept awake by a neighbor's dog. None whatsoever.

Bob wrote on Sep 6, 2007 11:58 AM:I've got a dog in my neighborhood that wakes me up every weekday morning at the same time, most likely when its owners leave for work. It barks constantly for hours! Thank you city leaders for taking a step in the right direction! Who do I call to report this nuisance?

Murrieta Mom wrote on Sep 6, 2007 12:09 PM:30 minutes of incessant barking???? That is a LONG time! I am a dog owner - luckily, mine does not bark and if she does, she gets her shock collar on for a day or so. I have neighbors that have barkers, though, and 30 minutes is an eternity when it's 11:00 at night and you are trying to get to sleep! Should be modified to 15 minutes of incessant barking! I'll invite the City Council over to my place so they can see how long 15 minutes of barking can be! ;)

John wrote on Sep 6, 2007 12:21 PM:Now we have opened the door for a "nose" ordinance for all those smelly diesel trucks all over town.Maybe an ordinance for passing gas in publc or maybe a dress code ... humm the box is open.

too Spinal Tap wrote on Sep 6, 2007 1:01 PM:In case you did not read, "...a civil penalty could be issued that could cost up to $2,500 per day" You can keep it at 20 for all I care, but if the sound leaves your property and enforcement action is required more than twice, you get to pay fines. Can't pay? Still refuse to comply? You get to enjoy the cross bar hotel. Is it really worth it?

FirstWakingBreath wrote on Sep 6, 2007 2:41 PM:Musicans are getting shut down more than anything. WEEZ Keep ROCKIN'! Drive your motorcycles, bump your stereos. let the dogs bark!

vee wrote on Sep 6, 2007 3:32 PM:I think that the noise issue stems from an over populated area. The heat seem to be making everyone out there upset.

Spinal Tap wrote on Sep 6, 2007 3:54 PM:I see you're not a fan of Spinal Tap. Rent the movie and you'll understand the facetiousness of the blog. Hint - it's funny.

Karl wrote on Sep 6, 2007 4:31 PM:I have been fortunate enough to live close to an excessively barking dog only once in my life. It is extremely annoying during the day much less during sleeping hours. What I don't get is that it has to be just as annoying to the owner. Let's hear from an owner of one of these dogs on this blog to hear how they handle the annoyance. A barking dog can be a good thing to alert neighbors to strangers but dogs barking all the time will lead to the "chicken little" syndrome.

To Murrieta Mom wrote on Sep 6, 2007 7:43 PM:The fact that you would use a shock collar tells me that you may be a dog owner, but you'll more than likely never be a dog lover. While I agree barking is annoying and can be trained ... anyone who would consider (let alone actually use) a shock collar should be penalized for animal cruelty!

What About Coyotes? wrote on Sep 6, 2007 7:44 PM:I have a dog who stays inside and only barks when something is going on outside to get her attention. My neighbors dogs are actually typically very quiet as well. My question is what do we do about the coyotes and the horrible sounds they make when they make their latest kill!?!?!?!

FREEDOM AT ITS BEST wrote on Sep 7, 2007 12:24 AM:We are free to make as much noise as we want as long as we don't disturb anyone in the process. This is a great ordinance. Thanks council member Edwards and all who helped to create this.

Too tired in Temecula wrote on Sep 16, 2007 6:23 AM:What about Roosters? Our neighbor has one with no checkens and it crows at all hours.

joe wrote on Jun 4, 2008 8:41 AM:An article like this is the only evidence I can find in a local search for anyone out there who agrees with the notion that imposing pet noise on another human is unsavory behavior. Motorcycles, tools, vehicles, audio equipment, all seem to have "natural" limitations based on the noise level "normal" humnans can be expected to tolerate. But animal noise, particularly incessant dog barking that begins for no apparent reason and continues unabated, especially when people LEAVE the dog unattended for hours on end, seem to have no reasonable limitation, aa if it is to be expected that dogs bark and everyone should learn to live with it. I wish I could find a dog ordinance that was really enforced or was able to reprint this article and deliver it to the abodes around which I must suffer. Thank you.

Mike wrote on Aug 14, 2008 10:46 AM:Given some people do put "excessively loud" pipes on their bike because they sound ... however, loud pipes save lives. Cliche I know, but it is true. You hear a motorcycle you know it is there and you aren't going to just make your lane switch while your doing your make up and talking on the phone becuase you know that the rider is there. I can understand if someone is sitting outside just revving and revving there bike for a 1/2 an hour but seriously, a loud bike riding by is not a nuisance at all. It is a rider protecting himself. It would be upsurd to get a sound ordinance for that issue.

Luke wrote on Oct 9, 2008 4:57 PM:I like dogs but do to the lake of noise control i find my self geting very angery when I havent gotten more then an hour of sleep at a time. for me it's becomeing a real helth problem. I have a 45 minute drive to work and back. lately i have been having truble staying awake on my way home. I cant consintrate at work I don't injoy my waking hours at home do to the noise I have moved 6 times do to noise. I am bying the house im in now so i realy dont wont to move again. And the worst thing is two of my nabores just got more dogs.

Registered Comments[-]Go to Top

Advertisement

Videos