LTC 031-2008 Noise Enforcement Report for 3/19/06 to 9/29/07~~~~~~
m M I ~l~/1 I B EAC ~ 2008 JAf~ 30 Ah f4~ s3
CITY Ci~Er~E('S OAF ICE
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
No. LTC # o3i-Zoos LETTER TO COMMISSION
TO: Mayor Matti H. Bower and Members f the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~~,~
DATE: January 30, 2008
SUBJECT: Noise Enforcement Report for the Period of March 19, 2006 to September 29,
2007
This Letter to Commission provides a status report on the enforcement and implementation
of the noise ordinance that was adopted by commission action on March 8, 2006 and was
implemented on March 18, 2006. The ordinance was subsequently amended in June and
July, 2006 to provide further clarification, and to further address construction noise and
residential noise.
BACKGROUND:
As you may recall, among other things, the Noise Ordinance:
• Incorporated section 21-28 of the County Code relating to noise. In essence, any
noise that is "unnecessary and excessive is prohibited". Subsequent to the adoption
of our ordinance, the County Code's (and now City's) threshold for what is noise, as
well as the City's ability to use that threshold for enforcement, were both upheld by
the United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
• Established a warning system prior to violations being issued. Verbal warnings may
now only be issued if the violation is not the result of a complaint but, rather, is
observed during a Code Compliance Officer's patrol. While the Commission initially
approved a process that allowed three written warnings prior to the issuance of a
violation that carries a fine, the Commission subsequently amended the ordinance to
reduce (from three to one) this requirement for single family home districts;
• Clarified and established parameters for construction noise;
• Established a fine and penalty system that addresses habitual offenders and
violations of the noise ordinance when the noise emanates from an illegal,
commercial use of a single family home;
• Provided fora "rolling" period for warnings to be reset (12 months) and for the fine
schedule to be reset after (18 months); and
• Provided due process for violators through an established appeals process.
IMPLEMENTATION:
During the course of the last eighteen months, the Neighborhood Services Department
Code Compliance Division has been primarily responsible for responding to noise
complaints. Code Compliance staff received initial and refresher training during this time to
ensure consistency in the application of the ordinance requirements (four formal training
sessions on 3/14/06, 3/22/06, 4/11/07 and 5/30/07, and an additional refresher course
combined with other training). This training includes the approaches to be taken in
evaluating whether the noise meets the threshold for a violation.
In addition, the Code Compliance Division adapted existing computer software to assist
them in tracking noise complaints, and provide them with immediate access to historical
information. This is essential as our administrative process requires that all complaints,
Page 2 of 5
Noise Ordinance Implementation Update
whether valid or not, be documented. Immediately after the approval of the ordinance, an
additional query function was added to our on-line services tools on our web site, permitting
residents and businesses to research any code complaints at an address, including noise
complaints. As a result, residents are able to track the outcome of any noise complaint (e.g.
whether valid or not) and, if valid, the violation issued (e.g. written warning, violation).
Noise cases are opened by Code Compliance officers during their patrols or in response to
complaints received. These complaints may be called directly to the Code Compliance
Division officers, or are routed through the non-emergency operators at Police. The
dispatcher contacts the on-duty Code Administrator, who then assigns the call to an
available Code Officer. Code Compliance Division staff provides coverage until 6:30 a.m.
from Thursdays to Sundays, typically the busiest nights in the City. Night coverage extends
to 1:00 a.m. Monday to Wednesday to monitor specific problem locations, or on extended
hours, as needed. Police respond to calls on those days/hours when Code staff is not
available. Schedules are enhanced to address specific needs that may include problem
areas and special events.
A Code Compliance officer will, upon arriving to a location that has been the subject of a
complaint, assess the level of noise from the point of origin of the complaint. In other words,
if a complaint has been called in from a specific location, then the Code Compliance officer
will go to that location to assess the level of noise and determine if there is a violation. If the
complaint was anonymous, then the Code Compliance officer will assess noise from various
locations surrounding the area for which the noise complaint was called in. There are
occasions when a complaint is called in about a specific location and the Code Compliance
officer arrives and determines that the excessive noise is actually emanating from an
adjacent or other location.
It should be noted that the majority of noise violation cases are opened by our teams that
work the evening hours. The Code Compliance officers that work our night schedule are
experienced staff well-versed in the noise ordinance; three of the four have an average of 12
years as Code officers and two have been Acting Code Administrators.
COMPLAINT/VIOLATION HISTORY:
For the reporting period of March 18, 2006, to September 29, 2007, the Division opened a
total of 4,091 noise violation cases. All but 79 of these cases were opened as a result of a
complaint. These 79 cases were the product of noise cases that were opened as a result of
a Code Compliance officer witnessing a violation while on patrol.
A total of 75% of all noise complaints received (3,060) were deemed "not valid." This means
that the noise level witnessed by the Code Compliance officer when they responded to the
complaint did not meet the threshold for a noise violation as defined in Chapter 46 of the
Miami Beach City Code. This does not mean, necessarily, that a valid noise violation was
occurring when the complaint was called; however, since the violation must be witnessed by
the Code Compliance officer, it is possible that on some of these occasions the offending
noise may have been reduced or stopped by the time that Code Compliance officers arrived.
Of the valid cases 1031 ,the break down as follows:
T e of Valid Case Number
Verbal Warnin issued no com taint received; roactive atrol b code 79
Written Warnin issued 834
Violation issued 118
Attachments A - F provide a detailed breakdown of the noise cases opened each quarter for
the first eighteen months of implementation of the noise ordinance. This includes a
breakdown of cases opened by location type (e.g. hotels, clubs, retail establishments and
Page 3 of 5
Noise Ordinance Implementation Update
residential properties). Attachment G is a cumulative total of the violations during this
eighteen month period; also broken down by type. Of note:
• 81 % of all valid noise cases resulted in a written warning being issued; only 11
resulted in a violation with a fine;
• The largest percentage of valid noise cases opened (69.1 %) was for noise violations
in residential properties. The next highest percentage of valid noise cases was for
clubs, bars and/or restaurants (19.2%), followed by Hotels (8.6%).
Attachments A - F also provide a breakdown of the number of locations that have received
multiple violations. Only one commercial location reached the threshold of violations based
on this ordinance during the first year of implementation. Officials from the Code Compliance
Division of the Neighborhood Services Department met and worked closely with the
management of this business to assist them in developing a plan to reduce noise issues at
their location. Several suggestions have been implemented and our Code Compliance staff
continues to work together with the business in monitoring events for noise issues.
Attachment Hprovides aside-by-side breakdown of violations by quarter, by type. As you
will note, with the exception of the second quarter after implementation when the number of
noise cases decreased significantly, the total number of noise cases opened has reduced
steadily.
NOISE VIOLATIONS DURING MAJOR EVENT PERIODS:
During the discussions on the noise ordinance, the issue of noise during major event periods
was frequently mentioned. As you know, the City is the location for more than a half dozen
"regular" major event periods each year, with almost a dozen on busier years. Many major
event periods, such as the Miami International Boat Show, are typically not noise producing
major event periods, while other major event periods (i.e. New Year's Eve, Winter Music
Conference, etc.), typically are. (It is also important to note the difference between a major
event period and a special event permit. Special Event Permits are issued for purposes of
permitting time-limited, special uses at non-residential locations. Examples include a live
concert on the beach, Volleypalloza at Lummus Park, or a marathon that runs through the
City. The issuance of a Special Event Permit does not waive the provisions of the City's
noise ordinance; the requirement for compliance with the noise ordinance is specifically
listed on each Special Event Permit. Special Event Permits may or may not be issued during
a Major Event Period).
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
events. During the period covered for this report there were eleven major event periods. The
following details the enforcement history during these times:
Winter Music Conference 2006
The Code Compliance Division opened a total of 209 noise cases between 3/22/06 and
3/28/06. Of the 209 cases, 119 (or 57%) were found to be invalid (no warning or violation
issued). The valid cases (90) are broken down as follows: 25 verbal warnings issued (25
commercial); 54 written warnings issued (40 commercial, 14 residential); and 11 violations
issued (1 residential, 10 commercial).
Memorial Day 2006
The Code Compliance Division received a total of 84 complaints between 5/25/06 and
5/29/06. Of the 84 complaints received, 62 (or 74%) were found to be invalid. The valid
cases (22) are broken down as follows: one verbal warning (commercial); 20 written
warnings (8 commercial, 12 residential); and 1 violation (commercial).
Page 4 of 5
Noise Ordinance Implementation Update
Fourth of July 2006
The Code Compliance Division received a total of 24 complaints, of which 16 or 66% were
found invalid. The remaining eight complaints (residential) were valid and resulted in written
warnings. There were no violations issued during this major event weekend.
Labor Day 2006
The Code Compliance Division received a total of 29 complaints, of which 21 or (72%) were
invalid. The remaining 8 complaints (residential) were valid and required written warnings.
There were no violations issued during this major event weekend.
Veterans Day 2006
The Code Compliance Division received a total of 28 complaints, of which 19 or (68%) were
found to be invalid. The remaining nine valid complaints resulted in seven written warnings
(residential) and two violations (residential).
New Year's Eve 2006107
The Code Compliance Division received a total of 53 complaints between 12/31/06 and
1/1/07.Of the 53 complaints received, 40 (or 75%) were found to be invalid. The remaining
13 valid complaints resulted in 11 written warning notices (5 commercial, 6 residential), and
2 violations (1 commercial, 1 residential).
Super Bowl 2007
The Code Compliance Division received a total of 53 complaints between 1/31/07 and
2/4/07. Of the 53 complaints received, 40 (or 75%) were found to be invalid. The remaining
13 valid complaints resulted in 10 written warnings (2 commercial, 8 residential), and 3
violations (3 commercial).
Winter Music Conference 2007
The Code Compliance Division opened a total of 151 cases between 3/20/07 and 3/25/07.
Of the 151 cases opened,.119 (or 79%) were invalid (not a violation). The remaining 32 valid
cases were broken downs as follows: 16 verbal warnings issued (13 commercial, 3
residential); 14 written warnings issued (1 commercial, 13 residential); and 2 violations
issued (commercial).
Memorial Day Weekend 2007
The Code Compliance Division received a total of 62 complaints and issued three verbal
warnings while on patrol between 5/24/07 and 5/29/07.Of the 62 complaints received, 49 (or
79%) were found to be invalid. The valid cases (16) are broken down as follows: verbal
warning (3 commercial); written warnings (7 commercial, 6 residential).
Fourth of July 2007
The Code Compliance Division received a total of 8 complaints, of which 5 or 63% were
found invalid. The remaining three complaints (1 residential, 2 commercial) were valid and
resulted in written warnings.
Labor Day 2007
The Code Compliance Division received a total of 28 complaints, of which 26 or (93%) were
invalid. The remaining two complaints (1 residential, 1 commercial) were valid and required
written warnings.
It is important to note that the majority of noise complaints were deemed invalid, even during
major event periods.
Page 5 of 5
Noise Ordinance Implementation Update
APPEALS PROCESS:
The ordinance provides for an appeals process if a violation is issued. Initially, the Chief
Special Master chose to personalty hear all, or the majority of, noise cases. Of the 118
violations issued during the first eighteen months of implementation, 78 cases were
appealed, of which 71 have been heard by the Special Master on appeal. The outcome of
the appeals is as follows:
• 58 cases in favor of the City (82%)
• 13 cases in favor of the applicant
It should be noted that the level of successful adjudication was possible based on the
strength of the evidence presented by staff (Code and Legal). Several of the initial cases
found in favor of the appellant were the product of language in the original ordinance; that
language was corrected with the amendments to the ordinance.
CONCLUSION:
The information gathered through this period reflects that the majority of complaints received
were invalid at the time of inspection. As previously explained, this may occur because the
Code Compliance officer must witness the violation in order to take any enforcement action;
the noise level at the time the officers arrive may not be sufficient to meet the threshold of
noise, per our ordinance. It is important to note that, in those circumstances, Code
Compliance officers will typically advise the residence/business that, while no violation will
be issued, a complaint was received for that location and that they should monitor their noise
levels accordingly. Our Code staff reports that most businesses/residences are cooperative
when approached in these circumstances.
As reflected above and on the attachments, the majority of valid noise cases are for
excessive noise in residential areas. This is consistent with the experience prior to amending
the noise ordinance. However, it should be noted that Code staff has received complaints
from residents regarding the limited number of written warnings afforded to them, as
compared to businesses.
The attachments also reflect a consistent reduction in the number of noise cases opened as
the enforcement of the ordinance has continued.
The noise ordinance provisions were intended to, among other things; assist in reducing the
incidences of excessive and unreasonably loud noises, while ensuring uniform and
consistent enforcement of the ordinance. The Administration is confident that, with
consistent training and the utilization of clear parameters, the ordinance has, in fact, resulted
in the objective enforcement of the noise ordinance.
Should you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my
office.
Attachments
Q
H
Z
W
2
U
Q
H
H
a
0
T~_
i
/~
V
^V
Y
~_
L
A~
W
.~
Z
t0
O
00
0
1
r
M
O
m
..
.
o
H
o o ~o
O
~ N ~
~ ~"°'
~
°
N o
t6 0
O
H
.a
.
~
>
~
.n
E ~.n
~ N O ~ rn
7 N
Z
N
o
f-
o o ~ o ~
~ ~ N O ~
r- ~ M O
.--
N
C
O
.
~
O
_
N
E M S O~ N
7
Z
m
0
F-
o o ~ o
0
m ~
C ~ ~ N O ~
•` C
C
.`
S
~ ~
~
N
E M~ ~
7 M N
Z
f6
O
F-
o o
o
o
U1 w
QI~
C _
~
O O
M M.-.- O
O
_
C o
>
ro
~
`
a~
~ Q
~ ~ ~ ^
r M
7
Z
y
C
N
7
~6
Q ~
~ ~ ft7
O m c
'a+ ~ N N N
V d N f6 y
J U=~~ f~-
~Iloooo
C
O
~ _o
J ~ O N O
M
N
C
O
.~
_O
~ _O
~ ~ O .- O N
. ~- N
3
c
0
U ~
~~ M M O M
J .-
w
0
c
3 ~
O ~
C6
Y
N ~
~ Y
m O. N
~ ~ Rf
C m C
R \ ~ ~
V ~ N f6 N
~ ~-. ++
J U S ~ ~
m
H
Z
W
2
U
Q
a
0
~+
N
.~
V
\\~
A/
W
O
N
.O
Z
~O
O
1
r
1
r
~a
o
~
~ o
o
w.. N e- O ~ O
~ O N ~ r.
ro
O °
.
~
> L
Q
E
~ O
~
CO
N
z
o ~ ~ o
,~ o000 0
O ~-' cfl °
c
0
0
a~
~ vooco
Z
ro
0
F-
o ~ o 0
N w-
~ ~ r ~ O 00
N I~ O
~
~~
C
~
.
`
~ ~ O ~ ~
7
Z
c0
~ o 0
~
~ ~ 0 0 0 0 O
m O .- e-
0
'
o
`
~u
.Q
> .n
0 0 0 M M
7
z
Y
i.
w,
W N
~~
= N
0 ~
m
V Q ~
7
J U 2
(~
.~
N N
~ N (B
~ ~ ~
~Iloooo
C
O
O_
J~ 0 0 0 ~
M
c
0
co
o_
~ o
N ~
.Q N
3
c
0
U ~
O ~
J ~
O
c
3
0
Y
ML w,
W W
C
V
O
J
~ O O O
N O O M
Y
C
L
(D
C
N ~
~ ~
_ ~ ~
U
!-
Z
W
U
Q
F~-
Q
TN O
i ~
O
w~! v
y
~ a
V o s
.a ~ w
.~ ~ 3
. .
~ N y
CO E"
~ ~ O
V o ~.
_ ~
~ ~ O
~ J
N
L ~
O ~'
U
~ ~
N ~
Z
0
H
o 0 0
0
o
~ ~ v ~~ o
N o
O
F-
U
m
~ M
N O ~ O ~
r
~ ~- N
Z
O
H
o o ~ o
0
v-
Q I~ M °O O
r r ~ ~
~
N c
C
O
N
O
_
N
.fl _
M d' O
M
N
Z
0
H
o 0 0 0
o
°~O ~M(O~ o
'c
c
>~
~
h
~ N N ~ ~ ~
~ ~
Z
ro
o
~-
~~o o
~ O O O~ N O
.--
C c
~C o
>(6
a~
> .n
O O M .- ~
7
Z .~
a
>'
~
w
c
Q.
C L
O m
V ~ ~ y N ~
3 +-~ ...
J U2~~ F~-
~Ilooo~
c
0
O_
J~ 0 0 0 0
M
c
0
0
> o
fl- N
7
3
c
0
~~ o_
~~ M N O ~
J ~
4-
0
c
3 v,
o ~
c~
m a ~
~ ~
L
O W C
~ N N 'd
~ N f6
~ ~ O N N
J U 2 ~ ~
L
O
r
O
'~
N
7
N
O
I--
Z
W
~L
2
U
Q
H
Q
~ R
C
2 ~
C
C
~ a
(~ ti a
o s
'a ~ }
.~ ~ 3
~ ~
~ M a'
~ ~?
~ ~ c
V o ~.
~ N ~
~ ~ s
4
L ~
L
~ ~
N R
.~ ~
Z
~o
o
F-
o 0 0 °
o
O ~ r M~ O
r
N
f6 0
O
H
.
~
>
~
M ~ tf) t1 O
~ r N
Z
fC
.-.
O
~
° 0 0 ° o
O
O M O M~ O
r
N o
C
O
w
f6
O
N
~ M M r ~ ~
M
r r
Z
:°.
O
H
o ~ ~ 0 o
0
p~ "'
O ~ CO N ~ O
~
•` o
c
~
~ ~
~
~ ~ M N
r
C~
~ r r
Z
I-
(n v-
O ~
C 0 0 0 0
O O O O
~ N N N
O
~
o
C o
(0
ro
.n
> s
N r r N CO
7
Z
c
m
3
:°
T ~
~.
~ y
O m C
~_
w ~ ~
J U 2 ~ ~ H
~ IIN O O O
c
0
0
o> o r o r
J ~,,.~
c
0
_m
O_
~ O_
N~ r O O M
.Q- N
3
c
0
U ~
O ~ M O r OO
J r
0
c
3 v>
o ~
c~
Y
N
~ w
m a. ~
~~
L
O m
~~
_~
J U 2 ~ ~
w
H
Z
W
S
U
Q
F
Q
2
W
V
~_
`.
V
L
N
.O
Z
ti
O
P
ti
0
0
N
M
0
m
Y
~
~ o o ~
o
v o ~ o 0
O M N O~ O
~
t6 0
O
H
.
~
>
~
E ~ d' `~ Opp M
-
7 <
Z
f0
~ ~ o o N
O O O
,~ ~ O O ~ ~
N a
C
O
_
:
~
f11
O
_
N
f~ O O C4 M
7
Z
~a
w
~
° o o °
~
O
o
w W O O
O
` o
>
C
.
`
N N ~ ~ O
7
Z
m
.
..
°
~ o 0 0
'~ `~
~O ° ~n o v~
~ O OOi O
o
~--
C o
f13
~a
.o
a~
> ~
A N O N N
7
Z
c
m
p. N
r ~
~ ~ ~
O m c
~ ~
w Y
J U2~~ F~-
O_
~ O O O O
t
,a.
N
Q
C
0
r.+ O
o> o 0 0 0
M
T
~_
w
c
0
.~
0
o
~ > 0 0 0 0
.fl- N
3
c
0
~~ o_
O ~
J ~
0
c
3
0
m
m m
O O f0
~ N is
O m c
r.+ ~ N - ;~
V .fl N f0 N
~1+ Y
J U = ~ ~
LL
F-
Z
W
U
Q
H
Q
0
N O
2 ~
O
r+
N C
d
L
ti a
V
~ ~ 3
d
1
C
V O r
= N_ ~
~ (p J
N
L d
O ~'
U
~ ~
~_ j
.O
Z
~ ~~
v-
0
NN~„~~
O
w
f6 0
O
F-
'~
.
~
>
~
1r N M `7 ~ ~
7 ~
Z
f6
~ ° o o °
O O O O o
O
w
O M O O~ O
~ o
C
O
.
~
O
_
.Q
M O O f~
O
Z
~a
w
~
~
N o o N
M M
o
O
fn ~s
-
O O N ~.,-~ ~ ~ O
` o
c
~
'
>C
~
E _
r M ~
~
7 ~
Z
~ O o 0 0 0
tp ,~.., X 0 0 0 O
O
~ O O O O O r
C o
>
~ rn o 0 o rn
Z
c
Q. ai
_ ~ m
O m .~
r N N _ ~ (A
V ~ « ..m.. N yam,
J U2~~ F~-
+Iloooo
c
0
w
O_
J~ 0 0 0 0
M
c
0
.~
o_
~ O_
~ ~ O O O O
. ~- N
3
c
0
o
o > Moog.
J ~
w
0
c
3 u,
o ~
v
m
a~i ~
m a_>II~?
= N m
O m c
~+ ~ N N
~p Vl - - 'O
v ~ N (II '~
~ ... .._.
J U = ~ ~
V
r
Z
W
Z
U
Q
H
Q
.~
2
W
N
U
.a
``~
'/
V
/~/~
`v
L
~_
.O
Z
ti
0
as
N
0
1
M~
W
~~
M
0
~ N o o ° o
~«. Cfl •_ O
fC o
Q
.
~
>
~
0
~ 0
0 M ~ O
Z
f6
w
~
o o ~ o
0
f~ M ~ N p
_
O 0 ~ O ~ ~
N •- ~
N o
C
O
w
flf
O
_
N
E M ~ r ~ 00
~
7
Z
w
~
~ o o ~
o
w ,~ ao ao O
m ~ ~ ~ N ^ O
C \°
` O
C.
.
`
'~
~ M M
d'
to N
N
.
-
O 00
Z
.
~
~ o 0 0 0
_
N N t~ O
M I~ O 0 °
O
O
O
p~
~ In r r r r
C o
m
~
~ ~ v ~ ~ ~
7
Z
c
7
f0
d N
O. ~
~ ~ f6
~ m C
rr ~ y 0) V)
3 .-' ..+
J U 2 ~ ~ H
t
(~O
N
'd'
_O
N
N
N
C
O
.~
0
.~
o
~ Noon N
'7
C
~ _
O
J~ O M O N
M
c
0
0
N
Q
7
3
c
0
0
J
w
0
*k
c
3
0
Y
t6
0)
NIIM N O CD
~IIN ~ `~ M
c
7
CO
_ ~ fli
~ m .C
~ N N -_
V ~ N f0 N
~ .-. .-.
J U 2 ~ ~
F
Z
W
S
U
Q
H
a
W
Q
O ~~
}+ ~
.y V
= J
«t m
U ^~+w
^,~
W
^~
i.~ ~/
A•
.~ ~W
^O V
W a
~_ .=
Z~
L~
r
0 N
N ~
~°
Q7
O Q. ~
~ ~ ~
O c
~ ~ m c
a+
~
. ~
~ ~
M ~ ~ w '6 N m
O J U2~~ f°-
~ ~ M O
0 ~
r
H
0
m
N
~ N M d' ~ ~
n
0
0
N
~O
n
0
m
O ~ ~ ~ ~ M
n
0
'
o
N
M
0
r
0
a~
C M A N d' O
~ N
t0
O
O
N
N
<O
O
01
r
r N O) ~ (Mp ~
~ N
O
O
N
01
O
!O
O
r
~ O e- O O O
t0 N (O 6i
0
to
to
0
r
O O ~
tO
~ r7 ~
~ N
r
M
O