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.