HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUPPLT INFOMichelson, Wilma
From: Homeimps@aol.com
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 3:51 PM
To: CityhallMail
Subject: Proposal to Amend Chapter 9.24 Noise Ordinance
Attachments: PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL Letter 2[1].doc
To Palm Desert City Council:
I am attaching a letter regarding a noise issue at my residence. Thank you in advance for your
consideration.
Maggie Tasseron
74382 Parosella Street
Palm Desert
(760) 568-3277
Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving
certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how
attachments are handled.
w
1
November 17, 2008
I am writing with regard to your intention to amend Chapter 9.24 of the Civil Code
governing noise.
I reside at 74382 Parosella Street and my neighbor to the west at 74368 Parosella has an
extremely noisy pool pump installed close to my side wall. Since my first complaint to
Code Compliance on November 17, 2005, the following has occurred: At first, when the
Code Compliance Officer heard the pump from inside my house, with all doors and
windows closed, he informed me that he did not even have to meter it to know it was too
loud; he then wrote my neighbor a warning letter stating that her pump "is in violation".
She did not take any action to correct the problem and from November/05 until
December/07 I complained many times to Code Enforcement. In December/07 I was
informed that the Department would need to meter the pump after all; this was done and
it was found to be in violation by an average of 10.2 Decibels over the nighttime limit of
45 Db. My neighbor was again written a warning letter and on Jan. 9/08 she did cover the
pump with a piece of carpet, which adequately muffled the sound. Since that time,
however, she has run the pump many times without the cover over it, sometimes for as
long as 18 hours at a time. I continued to file complaints and was then informed in
October/08 that the first reading was by now "too old" and that it would need to be
redone. The same Officer came to my home and took the new readings, which were
found to be close to the daytime limit but as much as 13.5 Decibels over the nighttime
limit. He informed my neighbor that she would need to keep the pump covered, however,
as of this date, she still refuses to comply and three years later I am still impacted every
day by this annoyance.
I was informed that a Court Citation is the typical recourse in cases involving noise, and
found that the Code Compliance Officer I dealt with throughout this matter was reluctant
to bring such a "small infraction" to court, fearing the reaction of the judge. Also, there
does not appear to be a reasonable standard for the way in which noise of this type is
measured with a meter and that has resulted in Code Compliance now informing me that
"there is no violation for our office to investigate any further" and that I "have the option
to pursue civil remedies" instead, even though their own measurements found the pump
to be excessively noisy.
It seems that there needs to be a better way to determine what constitutes excessive noise
between properties, and that if found to be so, there should be a simpler recourse by way
of fining violators rather than bringing them into an already overloaded court system; I
am informed that the proposed Amendment would use a simple measurement in feet
from the source of the noise to determine its existence and I feel that would be a definite
improvement over the current method used.
I look forward to hearing the outcome of this proposal and thank you for your attention.
Maggie Tasseron