Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB 2 NOISE COMPLAINT 10-16-89To: FROM: SUBJECT: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANGER COI~UNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STATUS OF NOISE COMPLAINT AT 621 W. SIXTH STREET; #A RECOMMENDATION Receive and file. BACKGROUND In response to a Council inquiry, the following is a summary of complaints registered and follow-up actions taken to date on the above property which is located within a Planned Industrial Zoning District. · ~ 1. June 2, 1989, Community Development r~cef~ed a copy of a letter written to Mayor Kennedy from Mrs. C. W. Anderson, a resident across the street, regarding the above address. Her concern was over noise from the above address during early morning hourS. · 2. On June 15, 1989, an inter-office memo WaS sent to the Tustin Police Department asking for their assistance to investigate at the above address due to the unusual hours of the noise activity. 3. June 23, 1989, an inter-office memo from the Police Department was received and confirmed that the source of the noise activity was a distribution center for the L. A. Times delivery. The officers indicated that Mr. Moe Millard, business operator at the subject property, was cooperative. 4.-~ June 23, 1989, a letter was issued to Mrs. C. W. Anderson from the Tustin Police Department in response to her complaint and their investigation of the premises. Lt. Crane explained that Mr. Millard would make every possible correction to alleviate the extent of the noise problem. At this point staff believed that the noise problem had been resolved as we received no further contact from Mrs. C. W. Anderson. A month passed before staff again received a complaint. Staff again took steps to abate the problem. 5. August 3, 1989, staff issued a courtesy notice describing the nuisance to Mr. Moe Millard. Staff informed him to again cease excess noise during distribution operations of the L. A. Times. City Council Report October 16, 1989 Page two e ® ® August 7, 1989, staff received correspondence from Mr. Millard in response to our courtesy notice. He informed our department that he had again issued warnings to his distributors at the location. He also had problem equipment maintained. He expressed that he hoped both of these measures would reduce the impacts of the noise during operating hours. Once again, staff had assumed that the issue of noise at this location had been resolved, as our department received no further complaints. Almost a month later our department began receiving complain.ts again. September 27, 1989, Mrs. C. W. Anderson called our department and requested action be taken again. She also inquired about the possibility of a noise test being performed. October 3, 1989, Mr. Millard was_once again given Suggestions by staff to alleviate noise at the location. Staff al so notified the County of Orange Environmental Management Agency's (EMA) Noise Control Department. Staff made contact with Agent Ellwyn Brickson to conduct a noise',test for 621 W. Sixth Street, unit A. As of October 6, 1989, the offices of the EMA are moving and could not schedule appointments or make contact with complaintants until after October 9, 1989. Mr. Brickson has indicated that he will give this case priority and will be contacting Mrs. Anderson directly to receive all pertinent information (standard EMA policy) and to place noise testing equipment. · Planning Technician AB:pef Christine Shingleton~- Director of Community Development Community Development Department