The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC Work Session - Noise Ordinance Review O � P KIp H � U erl Memo � Date: December 17, 2012 To: Frank Boyles, City Manager From: Jane Kansier, Assistant City Manager Bill 0'Rourke, Police Chief Subject: Noise Ordinance Review INTRODUCTION In response to the November 12, 2012, e-mail from John Siskoff, you requested a report on the following: 1. The noise ordinance provisions in other communities, including what they are doing to enforce these ordinances and how effective their efforts are; and 2. How SJPA views enforcement efforts. NOISE ORDINANCE COMPARISON We have reviewed ordinances from 13 different cities, including Minneapolis, St. Paul, Edina, Burnsville, Lakeville, Eagan, Eden Prairie, and the 6 other Scott County cities. We specifically looked for information on how these ordinances addresses traffic noise. The matrix below identifies the ordinances we found in each city. City � Ordinance Minneapolis Includes similar standards to MPCA; prohibits vehicle noise above a certain level; does not include any m m Eagan � Ordinance applies specifically to noisy parties, gatherings, and electronic sound systems ----- -----------.. _.�...._ __.__._...___.._._.�.-------.�_..__--- .............._._......._..._....----.._......_........__...._._._.____...___,_.._..---�----..._......�....._...._......_................_....._ Edina Ordinance adopts MPCA rules; specifically excludes operation of motor vehicles on public �highways. --- -- -------._.._.._..__.._.._-------------------------�------..�----�----..___.__._........-----___.._._.,.�..------------___..�._._..._._.._.__..__._..._...._..-- St. Paul � Ordinance specifically references MPCA rules; states no person shall operate a motor � vehicle in violation of MPCA rules. Eden Prairi� Adopts MPCA standards; no specific reference to motor vehicles Savage Adopts MPCA rules by reference — - .-------_.___---- --------�------�--�---..._.._.__..._......._...__...__.__,....._...---------._...�._.__.._._.,�_..__.�_...__.....___ ._� Shakopee Adopts MPCA rules by reference; exempts activity from public streets and alleys from noise level standards. Phone 952.447.9800 ! Fax 952.447.4245 / w�vw.cityofpriorlake.com � City Ordinance lordan Adopts Minnesota statutes 169.69 and 169.693 and MPCA rules by reference. � Belle Plaine Adopts MPCA rules by reference. New Prague Adopts MPCA rules by reference. ---------------------._.�___.�..._..__._._....__-------------....--------------- ------------- Elko New General prohibition on noise; only references noise on streets adjacent to schools, churches Market and hospitals _------____------ --------------_._�__.------------------------- Lakeville ^ Ordinance applies to amplification devices (radios, musical instruments, etc.) and to equipment and construction activity. Burnsville Specific noise standard ordinance applies to recreational vehicles. We also polled a police department official in each of the cities to determine how they enforce noise issues. Typically, local agencies address vehicle noise as it pertains to the mandatory equipment on vehicles, such as mufflers. The Prior Lake Police Department does not measure vehicles to determine where they fall within the MPCA guidelines. We found that none of the 13 agencies we polled do such testing either. Therefore, this is not a case of "our local law enforcement agencies inability or unwillingness to strictly enforce the traffic and noise regulations" as stated in Mr. Siskoff's e-mail. Finally, we asked the State Highway Patrol about their practice in this area. Like most local departments, the Highway Patrol only addresses vehicle noise as it pertains to equipment. We were told the Highway Patrol does not even have the equipment needed to perform other noise tests. S�PA RESPONSE We asked the Scott Joint Prosecutor's office about how tickets for noise violations would be treated by the SJPA and the courts. Attached is the response we received. COUNTY ROAD 21 IMPROVEMENTS HISTORY: For reference purposes, we also did some research on the improvements to CR 21. Since 1984, there have been 6 improvement projects: Year � Road Segment I Improvement 1984-85 Main AV to Quincy CR 21 realigned from earlier location to railroad right-of-way (current _ _ _ alignment) _ ___ ___ _ 1989-90 Avh Point RD to Main Upgrade from 2-lane rural road section to 4-lane urban section ------ --------------- -----�- --�—�-------.._.__........._.........._..---_ ------------- -._._.___..-------- --- 1991 Quincy to CSAH 82 Upgrade from 2-lane rural road section to 4-lane urban section 2 Year Road Segment Jmprovement 1997 CSAH 82 to CSAH 42 I Upgrade from 2-lane rural road section to 4-lane urban section • -.-� ______._-------..._-_ .__ _____..--------.._..__--._____-__�__..---.-.---_._ _.._..__---.----------- 1998 99 Texas AV to Murphy Connect CSAH 21 from Murphy Lake Boulevard to Texas Avenue, Lake BLVD providing continuous connection to I-35 ------- ----------------..._..------------------.____-._---------�--�-----------------�------.�.._____._�.___----- Grainwood CI to CSAH 2006 82 I Upgrade from 4-lane undivided to 4-lane divided roadway _-------... ._�,.....-------....----------._....._.._...___.... ---------._.....-----._._._...______----------------......_-------.�__.._......----_.._�.--- 2010-11 CSAH 42 to TH 169 New 4-lane divided roadway connection to TH 169 2012 Arcadia Create full intersection at CSAH 21 and Arcadia (City project) In less than 20 years, CSAH 21 has grown from a 2-lane rural roadway to a 4-lane divided highway now connecting I-35 to TH 169. Scott County completed traffic counts on CSAH 21 in November, 2012, and provided traffic counts for previous years. The table below shows how traffic has grown since 1994. CH 21 Count � ; ' ' � � � �� z 2012 � 2010 � 2008 � 2007 ; 2006 � 2005 2004 � 2002 i 1997 ; 1994 Location i ; j , ; ` ! ; ' + West of Duluth 16,100 I 14,200 � 9,800 ' 15,100 13,800 14,800 12,900 � 10,800 ! 8,000 -i---------- ------------ --- -� - South of CH 82 14,600 I 13,800 12,500 16,200 13,600 � 14,800 13,800 � 9,000 � 8,000 ----�---- _,._-----:--- West of TH 13 12,500 10,700 � 9,900 � 9,100 � 11,700 � 11,200 14,400 11,700 � 9,900 j 8,500 East of TH 13 11,400 11,600 � 11,500 � 9,600 10,400 10,700 I 13,900 � 11,700 � 9,600 � 4,200 1 From the City of Prior Lake 2020 Comprehensive Plan Z From the City of Prior Lake 2010 Comprehensive Plan Based on this information, average daily traffic on CSAH 21 between TH 13 and CSAH 82 has increased between 47% and 100% since 1994: 3 Jane Kansier From: Strait, William <WStrait@co.scott.mn.us> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 6:54 PM To: Jane Kansier Subject: RE: Noise Violations Jane, I assume you are primarily interested in muffler noise —or noise from a lacl<of a proper muffler. M.S. 169.69 set forth below governs that issue. I have not found a Prior lake ordinance on this, but I expect there is one — our ordinance book here is not up to date and I have not found an on-line link. A citation under state statute is a payable offense. If a citation is issued, the defendant can pay a fine and surcharge totaling $135 and avoid coming to court. If the defendant wants to come to court to challenge the ticket, we would normally try to reach a plea agreement with that person or we would schedule the case for a court trial. I can't recall having a court trial on a loud muffler case so I really do not know what the judges would do. I suspect they would be no less or no more happy with the case than with a parking violation set for trial or any other minor offense they have to deal with. Under this statute we do not need a decibel reading. The judges that may have hated noise violation tickets in the past are for the most part gone and retired. If you are having issues with noise at a specific location or road, and the officer can testify consistently with the requirements of the statute, I'd say to go for it, try a few tickets, and we'll see how the judges feel about them. Concerning any PL ordinance that applies, most ordinance violations are misdemeanor violations unless they are specifically stated to be petty misdemeanors. If a noise violation set forth in ordinance is not a petty, then the driver is required to come to court and, in most instances, one of our prosecutors would try to reach a resolution of the citation. If it is a petty violation, then there would be a payable fine and the analysis for the state statute would apply. If you can send me a link to the relevant PL ordinance, I'll take a look at that specifically and will comment further. However, I will be out of the office now until Monday. Hope this helps at least some. Let me know what additional questions you might have. Bill 169.69. Muffler Every motor vehicle shall at all times be equipped with a muffler in good working order which blends the exhaust noise into the overall vehicle noise and is in constant operation to prevent excessive or unusual �noise, and no person shall use a muffler cutout, bypass, or similar device upon a motor vehicle on a street or highway. The exhaust system shall not emit or produce a sharp popping or crackling sound. Every motor vehicle shall at all times be equipped with such parts and equipment so arranged and kept in such state of repair as to prevent carbon monoxide gas from entering the interior of the vehicle. No person shall have for sale, sell or offer for sale or use on any motor vehicle any muffler that fails to comply with the specifications as required by the commissioner of public safety. CREDIT(S) 1 From: Jane Kansier [mailto:JKansierCa�Cit�fPRIORLAKE.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:08 AM To: Strait, William Cc: Bill 0'Rourke Subject: FW: Noise Violations Bill � I am wondering if you have given my questions below any thought. I would reaily appreciate �ny thoughts you might have. Thanl<s for the help. Jane I<ansier, AICP Assistant City Manager City of Prior Lake 95Z-447-9812 Sign up now for City of Prior Lake Email Updates. From: Jane Kansier Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 3:04 PM To: 'wstrait@co.scott.mn.us' Subject: Noise Violations Mr. Strait � Chief O'Rourke referred me to you. We have received some complaints about vehicle noise on County Road 21 in Prior Lake. We are trying to determine how we can best address this issue. One of our questions has to do with prosecution. If we were to issue tickets for vehicle noise violations, do you h�ve some idea how these would be treated by the Court? I appreciate any insight you might have. Thank you for your help. I hope you enjoy a happy Thanksgiving weekend. Jane I<ansier, AICP Assistant City Manager City of Prior Lal<e 952-447-981 Z Sign up now for City of Prior Lake Email Updates. _ _ _ . z