Item 4: Ordinance Concerning Noise Disturbances

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman agreed \vitb Ms. Ortiz that there \vere many sources of noise pollution and they \vere not all created by leaf and mulch blowers. She would not support a ban but \vould consider expansion of Ee 4.083(h), which listed pile drivers, hammers and lawn mowers, to include leafblo\;vers and mulch blowers in order to limit operations to a reasonable timeframe. She did not ,vant to drastically impact landscaping businesses, gardeners and people's ability to care for their property. Mr. Kelly observed that city d"veUers should expect some noise although that did not mean residents should have to tolerate unlimited noise. He said there \vas a balance point in government regulation and he hoped that most noise problems \vere resolved through neighbor-to...neighbor conversation and courtesy. He ackno\vledged that was not always the case. He received complaints from constituents about loud nlusic from parties or car stereos and, in partie-ular, leafblo\vers. He asked how other communities enforced decibel...based codes. City Manager Taylor replied that the c,ode was primarily decibel-based in the three communities he lived in prior to Eugene and it required that enforcement officers responding to a complaint use a device to measure the decibel level. He said it \\las easier to enforce time limits. Mr. Kelly agreed with Ms. Bettman's suggestion for expanding the number and type of devices restricted to specific times. He said an issue \vith respect to leaf and mulch blowers was frequency; leafblo\vers might be used once a \veek and mulch blowers once or nvice a season. He was not interested in imposing restrictions on mulch blo\vers beyond prohibiting use bet\veen lOp .m. and 7 a.m. He ,vas interested in considering leafblo,vers in greater detail both in terms of noise and the pollution from the fuel consumed by inefficient engines. He asked for more details about the Davis, California ordinance. Mr. Pape c-oncurred with Ms. Ortiz, Ms. Bettman and Mr. Kelly. He noted that noise concerns "vere greater in the sumn1cr ,vhen people had their windo\vs open and la\Vll equipment ,vas used and as the City densified, those problems ,vould be exacerbated. He would.support adding leafblo\vers to the code as \vell as Mr. Kelly's suggestion to expand the current list, but \vould not support a ban. Mr. Poling stated he would not support banning nlldch and leafblo\vers. He said there \vere standards in place that seemed to be \vorking.He questioned the need for more regulations when the City had difficulty enforcing.those it no\v had. He \vas in favor of perhaps expanding the current ordinance to include devices such as leafblo\vers and.po\ver \vashers .in restricted times. He \vould not. support a ban because some people \vere unable to perform nlanual labor on their own property and the cost to hire someone \vould be prohibitive. He said mulch blo\vers actually did the community a service by distributing mulch efficiently and reducing "vaste and runoff. Ms. Piercy said shc\vas in favor of expanding the list instead of banning. She encouraged businesses that used those devices to find \vays to lo\ver the noise level. Mr. Pryor declared that he O\Vlled an electric leafblo\ver and a power washer. He ackno"vledged the devices nlade noise and operators "vore hearing protection, although noise dissipated quickly over distance. He agreed that the level of noise that was acceptable was an extremely subjective issue; ho\vever, a limitation on hours of operation \vas not subjective. He agreed \vith previous speakers that there should not be a ban but would favor a public hearing to detemune \\That could be done to mitigate or control noise pollution. Ms. Taylor said a ban on operation of leaf and mulch blowers from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. was ridiculous as people \-vere not mo\ving their la\vns or using leaf blo\vers at II o'clock at night. She said there was more to quality of life than sleeping. She said she \vas less bothered by noise \vhen sleeping than \vhen she ,vas having a cookout on the deck. She agreed that noise in an urban environment "vas unavoidable but reiterated that leaf blowers did not seem to serve an obvious purpose as the leaves just\ventelsewhere. MINUTES-City.Council \V ork Session August 16, 2006 Page 2