LTC 176-2006 90-Day Report on the Implementation & Enforcement of City's Noise Ordinance
~ MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
NO. LTC # 176-2006
LETTER TO COMMISSION
FROM:
Mayor David Dermer and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager t ~
July 3, 2006 0
90-Day Report on the Implementation and Enforcement of the City's Noise Ordinance
TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
This memorandum serves to provide you with a status report on the implementation of the new
noise ordinance.
BACKGROUND
As you are aware, the implementation of the provisions of the new noise ordinance began on March
18, 2006. In anticipation of the implementation of the ordinance, the following activities were
initiated by staff:
. Modifications were made to the "off hours/weekend" voice response message for the
Answer Center (305.604.CITY) to allow for the direct transfer of noise complaints during
those periods to PSCU (police non-emergency)
. The Neighborhood Services Department's Code Compliance Division inspectors received
over seven hours of training to ensure understanding of the elements of the ordinance and
uniform enforcement
. New forms were created in order to meet the new enforcement criteria
· The existing database used to input and track code violations was modified to permit the
entry of all complaints, and the resulting disposition (valid, not valid, verbal warning, written
warning, violation)
· In order to address tracking and appropriate enforcement, the Code Compliance Division
purchased software for their existing handheld computers that would interface with the
current database, provide real-time information and status on complaints and subsequent
enforcement action out on the field. The handhelds are fully functional
· Ensured code staffing every evening (7 days a week) to provide for continuity of
enforcement
. An informational workshop/training session was conducted in partnership with the Hotel
Association for its members (conducted before the start of Winter Music Conference)
· I nformation regarding the new noise ordinance was distributed through the CityPage (Miami
Herald Neighbors) and MB Magazine
In addition, subsequent to the implementation of the ordinance, staff also modified the existing
Permit Manager program available online (through miamibeachfl.gov), to allow electronic inquiries
on the status of all code compliance cases, including noise violations. An informational
workshop/training was also held with Special Master staff to advise on the revised appeals process.
CURRENT STATUS OF NOISE ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTATION
Enforcement History
For the reporting period of March 18, 2006, to June 18th, 2006, the department opened 857 noise
violation cases. It is important to note ttat a large majority of those cases were complaint driven,
with approximately only 4% (36) of the cases the direct result of a violation observed by a code
Page 2 of 3
90-day Noise Ordinance Report
compliance officer during a routine patrol. Likewise, it is also very important to clarify that a
significant percentage (68%) of the noise complaints made are deemed "not valid" (e.g. does not
meet the thresholds for noise, as defined in 21-28, now incorporated into our code).
More specifically, c:J the 857 noise cases opened:
. 580 were not valid cases
. Of the 277 valid cases
o 36 resulted in verbal warnings (no complaint; violation observed by code officer
while on patrol)
o 222 resulted in written warnings (complaint made; only 1 within a 24-hour period)
o 19 resulted in violations (continued noise after a waming issued in a 24-hour period,
or the use of all three available warnings, resulting in a violation)
The attached spreadsheet (Attachment A) provides a detailed breakdown of the noise cases
opened during this 90-day period, including the percentage the different types of cases represent of
the total number of cases opened. In addition, on the attached "B" please also find a breakdown of
cases opened by type (e.g. construction, hotel, crub/bar/restauranU, retail, residential). This
spreadsheet reflects that the largest percentage of all valid noise cases - verbal, written or
violations - were residential (59%). This was followed by 21 % of the valid noise cases originating at
hotels and 17% at clubs/restaurants/bars. Attachment B also provides a breakdown of the number
of multiple violations, by location type. As concerns with the impact of the noise ordinance on
businesses was expressed during the noise ordinance discussion, it is important to note that nine
businesses account for 14 of the 19 violations. As you can note, to date no business has met the
threshold for the license suspension/revocation process.
For purposes of comparison, as reported to the Commission last September, during the period of
October 2003 through September 2005, 4093 noise complaints were processed by Code
Compliance using the previous enforcement process, Of those noise complaints, only 12 percent
resulted in citations and were subject to the special master process or payment of fines. Under the
current provisions, only two percent (2%) of the cases have reached violation stage during this 90-
day period, thus subject to the SpeciallVaster's jurisdiction or payment of fines.
Major Event Periods
A review has been conducted of the impact of the implementation of the new noise ordinance
during major event periods, particularly those that tend to be noise producing. As previously
referenced, the new noise ordinance went into effect on March 18, 2006, the weekend prior to
Winter Music Conference (WMC). In the LTC issued on April 7, 2006 providing a recap ofthe 2006
Winter Music Conference MEP, we advised you that Code Compliance opened 209 noise cases
during the conference period (a much longer conference period this year, which extended from
Wednesday, March 22 - Tuesday, March 28, 2006). Fifty-four percent (54%) of the cases were
deemed "not valid," and of the valid cases, they broke down as follows: 27 verbal warnings, 60
written warnings and 10 violations. As WMC is primarily event-driven, unlike the overall percentage
of valid noise cases for the first 90-day period that reflects that the largest percentage of valid
cases are residential in nature, 77% of the valid noise cases during WMC were opened for'
business violations. By comparison, during WMC in 2005, 15 noise violations were issued by Code
Compliance.
Code Compliance reports that 22 valid noise cases were opened during Memorial Day Weekend
2006, representing one violation, one verbal warning and 20 written warnings. In 2005, a total of 2
violations were issued during the Memorial Day Weekend.
Appeals Process
As provided for in the new ordinance, an appeals process has been established that provides due
process for individuals and/or businesses that have received a noise violation. The Chief Special
Page 3 of 3
gO-day Noise Ordinance Report
Master has chosen to personally hear all cases. In the course of the few series of appeals to date,
staff has identified language in the ordinance that may be interpreted to be inconsistent with the
clear legislative intent of the City Commission. Minor adjustments have been recommended and
approved at first reading, and will be considered by the Commission for second reading on July
12lh.
More specifically, of the 19 violations issued, a total of 13 have been heard by the Special Master
on appeal. The outcome of the special master cases is as follows: three appeals were denied as
not timely, one appeal was withdrawn by the violator, the special master found in favor of the City in
seven cases and a finding in favor of the appellant was made in three cases. In those three cases,
the appeals were granted based on the Special Master's interpretation of the three warning limit
language. This clarification is being addressed in the noise ordinance amendment scheduled for
second reading. The current ordinance language, even though clear in intent, can be read to
require four written warnings.
Pending Issues
In addition to amendments to the noise ordinance to provide clarification on intent, as you are
aware, the administration has worked on other amendments to address issues relating to temporary
construction, Sunday/holiday construction noise and residential written warnings. Additionally,
legislation has been introduced to provide more severe penalties for valid noise violations that
occur as part of an illegal commercial use of a single family home, in response to the commercial
private party issue.
Lastly, the noise ordinance as adopted contains a provision regarding animal and bird noise. Staff
has traditionally handled animal and bird noise through Chapter 10 of the Code. Chapter 10
prohibits any unreasonably loud noise from an animal or bird whereas, Chapter 46 requires the
noise to be plainly audible from a distance of 100 feet from the building, structure or yard the animal
is located in. Our Legal Department has advised us that we can issue citations under both
provisions of the Code, induding concurrent citations, as applicable.
CONCLUSION
From a review of the first 90 days of activity, it would appear that the new noise ordinance is
trending as previous experience has indicated: the majority of noise complaints are deemed not
valid, and of valid complaints, most are residential in nature. The implementation of the ordinance
has also experienced expected trends during busier periods, such asa greater number of cases
opened during the first 30-day period that included Spring Break, as well as WMC (March 18-April
18), and half as many cases during the May-June reporting period that is less busy and has fewer
events.
The new noise ordinance provisions were intended to, among other things, assist in reducing the
incidence of excessive and unreasonably loud noises, while ensuring uniform and consistent
enforcement. While it may be too soon to tell whether the incidence of noise has decreased in the
City, we feel confident that the level of constant training and the clear parameters established in the
ordinance have resulted in an improvement in the objective enforcement of noise in our community.
Staff will continue to monitor the implementation of the noise ordinance.
Should you have any additional questions or concerns, please donot hesitate to contact me.
" I
'.." ~ _i
8 I :6 HtJ S'- --lflr 90
:3 1 :=:;~)
<(
...
c
Q)
E
.c
(,)
III
:i
~
o
-
t/)
.-
:I:
t/)CQ
Q)O
t/)oo
cu-
OCD
Q) I
oCQ
c:e
CUCO
c::!:
.- M
"'C
~
o
Q)
t/)
.-
o
z
~I
II
fD
~
Q..
o
fa
CI)
~
lJ..
o
ffi
~
:;)
~
."J
~
e
...
C
:JO
OCO
.~ ~ It)
t/)
~
o
C1)
t/)
'0
z
'#.
-co
SCQ
o
....
....
o
~
o
c
o
~
:2
ro ro
>..0
- I..
o Q)
z>
'#.'#.'#.'#.
"'ltCQNO
N 0
_
CQNO).....
MN_1t)
N CO
en en
c>g>
c: .-
'c E
I.. ro
~~~
c: 0
Q):+:;j
=~
'C: 0
~5
..
n;
-
o
I-
-
C
Gl
E
1::
III
Coc
Gl 0
C .-
Gl .!!!
u .~
.c .- C
u ~ Gl
III Gl U
Gl en c
r:a "0 III
.- 0 .-
Eoa.
.!!! of E
:E 0 0
....au
o.cGl
>- .g) "0
:t: Gl 0
UZU
m
-
e
CD
E
~
u
CI:S
~
~
o
-
.~
J:
s:::
o
.-
-
CU
-(Q
00
>co
T'"
,,-
.- (Q
-
CU(Q
>0
CD CO
(.)T'"
s:::-
CUM
s:::
.-
"
....
o
CD
.~
o
z
~ a;
o a
i I-
:2,...'0
>~~
:E ..
a; a;
>'Or..
I I- CD
- ,g
.! E
o :::J
I- Z
a;
-
o
I-
_e '0
ftj .2 Q) ~
.....'-r-O
o CI:S ..
1-:2a;
'I->'Or..
~ I-Z
C E
G) :::J
~ Z
G)
D.. !
J: C) 0
-.5 l-
.-.: ....
~ r.. N 0
- CI:S N 0
G)3:N<;=::
Q. ..
......ea;
,.CD_
I-~or..
.;: I- CD
c3: ,g
o E
- :::J
~ Z
o
-' a;
~ en 0
Ine I-
enE '0
CCl:SU)~
o3:Mo
':;j_.:.:
co CI:S CI:S
'O-e'Or..
.- CD I- CD
> > ,g
"C E
._ :::J
ftj Z
>
rF-rF-rF-rF-
I'-.....~o,)
.....C\I LO
~
000000<0
oo:;I"LO .....
rF-rF-rF-rF-
<0000<0
.....LO C\I
~~OLO
rF-rF-rF-rF-
oo:;I"<OC\loo
.......... <0
.....<Ooo:;I"U)
~~ .....
rF-rF-rF-rF-
0')..........0')
~~..........
00:;1".....00:;1"1'-
..... .....
.~
l-
e
o
i
u
o
..J
J!J
c
l!
j
CO
-
en
G)
et::
-
~ ftj
CO ':;j
In c
- en G)
! Ci) 'iij ~
.:!oG)G)
O:J:et::et::
~
o
o
o
T'"
,...
,...
N
~
o
o
o
T'"
0)
T'"
~
o
o
o
T'"
N
N
N
ffl.
o
o
T'"
(Q
M
en
ftj
-
o
I-
G)~
Q. .-
~>ooooo
1-+
c'O:t
o
':;j
CO
(,) II)
0.2
-'>ONOOO
~M
.c
-
en
c
o
':;j
CO
'0
:>
G)
Q.
':;j 0
j.>MMOMN
::IE.....
-
~
en
c
o
':;j
CO
(,)
o
-'
'I-
o
=It
c
~
o
"C
.:.::
CO
!
In
II)
o
.>o~ooo
N
~
CO
In
-
J!J
c ~
l! ~
j c .8
S -Ow
en CO ':;j .s::
G) ':;j (,) rJ)
et:: Cj~
- en G)"'-
en_ "C-ftj
.c G) 'iij en GI
.:!OG):5:E
O:J:et::et::Olr
-
c
CD
E
1::
III
Q.c
CD 0
C .-
m
~ :~
.c .- C
u ~ CD
III CD U
CD en c
lD'glll
.- 0.-
EoQ.
.!!! ~ E
:::e 0 0
.....au
o .c CD
>0 .21 'g
:!:: CD 0
uzu