Noise law will return to council in eight months
Maybe now Santa Monicans will get a little peace and quiet.
That’s the hope of local politicians, who after a thorny exchange between themselves, residents and businesses passed a new law on Tuesday that governs how much noise can be made in Santa Monica.
Resident activists lauded the changes, which they expect will limit the noise created by local businesses. Business groups called the new law bad policy and said it was passed despite a dearth of data.
Fifteen members of the public spoke on the topic before the City Council narrowly approved the law. The council had failed to reach a consensus on the issue in November, sending it back for more research.
Under the new law, a 100-foot transition area will be established between residential and business zones. In that area, the allowable decibel level for the two zones will be averaged. If a resident complains that a business is too loud, a code enforcement officer will be sent to the residence to measure the noise level. The noise then will be judged against the allowable standard for the residence and not the adjacent business, as is done now.
Businesses also will be prohibited from dumping trash and recyclables after 11 p.m., among other things. City staff plans to study the new ordinance’s effects and return to the City Council with a report in eight months.
Kathy Dodson, president and CEO of the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce, and Gary Gordon, executive director of the Main Street Merchants Association, asked the council to wait to pass the law. They accused council members of acting too quickly, without gathering enough data as to how the proposed changes would affect businesses, many of which abut residential areas.
City Councilman Ken Genser replied by twice challenging Dodson to supply her home phone number so residents could take their complaints directly to her. Both Genser and City Councilman Kevin McKeown compared excessive noise to dog waste on the sidewalks, saying there needn’t be repeated violations before the need for an ordinance becomes apparent.
In the end, the council voted 4-3 to pass the noise ordinance. Shortly after the vote, City Councilman Mike Feinstein, who had voted against the law, switched his vote, saying he would put his energy and spirit behind the law even though it was “sloppy thinking based on insufficient information.”
Earlier Tuesday, a group of activists had threatened to mount a campaign to unseat Feinstein and City Councilman Herb Katz, who both voted against the law in November, if they didn’t work towards a resolution. Both councilmen are up for reelection this fall. Katz on Wednesday said he realized he was the swing vote in support of the law.
“I went into it saying I really don’t like the transition zone — and I don’t, I’m still not thrilled with it,” he said, adding he was later convinced by the staff recommendation, which was backed by an outside consultant. “I said, ‘Well, these are pretty independent (opinions), and we’re really not playing politics here.’”
Katz said the key activists who have long pushed for a stricter noise ordinance are few in number but vocal in their argument. He added that the most important part of any noise ordinance is that it be enforced.
To address that, the City Council also authorized City Hall to hire another code compliance officer — currently there is only one. The council also passed new noise violation fees — first time offenders will be charged $75 and that amount will be raised for violators who break the law within 36 months.
Residents on Wednesday said they were mostly pleased with the new law.
“The result is that the maximum allowable noise for people that live very close to businesses will be reduced by one-third, and everybody else will be reduced by one-half, which is certainly an improvement,” said Dan Stuart, 39, an attorney who lives in an apartment near Main Street in Ocean Park.
But local merchants saw the ordinance differently. They argued that the bulk of noise complaints to the Santa Monica Police Department haven’t been because of local businesses — they’ve been because of garbage trucks, music in passing automobiles or loud motorcycles. Those few instances when businesses violate the law should be addressed individually, they added.
“Our concern has always been if you impose an additional regulation on a business — at anyone’s request — and you don’t know what that will mean to the operation of the business, then you’re making an uninformed decision,” Gordon said. “When I’m talking about outdoor dining, for example, I’m talking about one of the jewels of Southern California... and if you start making rules that may end up requiring the enclosure of outdoor dining areas, that’s a big thing.”
“Santa Monica is not Agoura Hills or somewhere else where there’s square miles of tract homes away from the freeways,” said Holbrook, pointing out local attractions that generate a lot of noise, like the airport, Santa Monica Pier and the Third Street Promenade. “Fair play is fair play, frankly. I don’t get it.”
“Santa Monica is not Agoura Hills or somewhere else where there’s square miles of tract homes away from the freeways.” — — BOB HOLBROOK City Councilman
But Stuart, who was a leader in the effort for a stricter noise law, said he didn’t buy the argument that residents should adapt to businesses.
“I think the opposite is really true,” he said. “I think that businesses that choose to operate so close to residences benefit from that and it should be incumbent upon them to take the necessary measures to make sure they don’t generate late-night noise that would keep people awake.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on February 12, 2004. Read the original PDF.