Study Session
Agenda Report

Erika Ramirez, Community Development Director

Stephen Peterson, Senior Planner
Andrew Rodriguez, Lead Code Enforcement Officer

Chapter 19A of the South Pasadena Municipal Code was adopted in 1970 and has been amended periodically to address specific noise sources and activities. The chapter currently applies different standards depending on the source of the noise and frequently relies on ambient noise levels without establishing a consistent method for determining those levels. These provisions require multiple measurements and can make enforcement outcomes difficult to explain and apply consistently.

A preliminary draft presented to the City Council on May 20, 2026, proposed objective noise limits by geographic noise zone, separate daytime and nighttime standards, measurement criteria for equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) and maximum sound level (Lmax), updated exemptions, and replacement of the Amplified Sound Permit with a Temporary Noise Permit. Following that meeting, in response to Council’s direction, staff conducted field measurements at representative locations and developed an alternative noise-zone map.

This report presents the existing enforcement process, field measurement results, two map alternatives, and a staff recommendation for Council direction. Council direction will guide preparation of the next draft. The draft ordinance is attached as information only and is not to be considered for adoption with this item.

• On October 21, 1970, City Council adopted Ordinance No 1582 amending the South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC) to add Chapter 19A (Noise Regulations).
• On April 17, 1991, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1996 amending SPMC Chapter 19A (Noise Regulations) to address power yard maintenance equipment.
• On September 27, 2023, the Council adopted the General Plan, including the Noise section within Part B, Chapter 6 (Our Healthy Community). Chapter 19A (Noise Regulations) was not amended as part of that action.
• On September 3, 2025, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2402 amending SPMC Chapter 19A (Noise Regulations) to address unruly gatherings.
• On February 10, 2026, the City entered into a contract with Rincon Consultants to assist with a comprehensive update to SPMC Chapter 19A (Noise Regulations).
• On May 20, 2026, the Council conducted a public hearing on a preliminary draft of the updated regulations, received public comment and directed staff to conduct additional analysis and prepare revisions.

The purpose of this item is to obtain Council direction on the geographic application and numerical limits of the proposed noise standards before staff prepares the next draft ordinance. The proposed update would replace source-specific and ambient-based provisions with standards intended to be measurable and consistently applied across comparable land-use settings.

At its May 20, 2026, meeting, the City Council requested the additional information listed below. A response is provided for each request.

1. Would personal use of generators during a power outage be exempt from the Noise Regulations?

Yes, use of personal generators during a power outage would be exempt as per Article 3 Exemptions § 19A.9(b) Emergencies. Any mechanical device, apparatus or equipment (including generators) used, related to or connected with emergency machinery, vehicles, or work are exempt from this chapter; and Article 3 Exemptions § 19A.9(c) Emergency work. “Emergency work” means work made necessary to restore property to a safe condition following a public calamity, work required to protect persons or property from an imminent exposure to danger, or work by private or public utilities to restore or provide temporary utility service.

2. Provide real world examples of noises at the 50 dBA, 60 dBA, 70 dBA, 80 dBA sound levels and provide examples of the measured noise level of typical streets in South Pasadena.

Sound level is measured in decibels (dB). Because the human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies, environmental noise is commonly measured using the A-weighted decibel scale (dBA). The decibel scale is logarithmic: an increase of approximately 10 dBA is generally perceived as twice as loud, while a 3 dBA change is typically just perceptible under controlled conditions. Everyday sounds normally range from 30 dB (very quiet) to 100 dB (very loud). Examples of various sound levels are shown in Table 1.

Table 1 - Examples of Common Sound Levels

For a point source in an unobstructed setting, sound typically decreases by approximately 6 dBA each time the distance from the source doubles. Buildings, walls, terrain, and absorptive or reflective surfaces can change how sound travels.

For these reasons, measurement location and surrounding conditions are important to repeatable, objective enforcement.

3. Better define the exemption for school activities. Would fundraising activities be exempted? Would non-profit organization events supporting schools be exempted?

School activities, including fundraising activities, when occurring on school grounds or at school-owned facilities would be exempt as per Article 3 Exemptions § 19A.9(a) School activities. School activities, held on school campuses or at school owned facilities, such as bands, athletics, entertainment and fundraising events, are exempt from this chapter.

Fundraising events to benefit the school and not held on school grounds or at school-owned facilities would not be exempt. A Temporary Noise Permit could be obtained for off campus events.

4. Could the noise regulations be weaponized? What safeguards exist to prevent that from happening?

Code Enforcement generally addresses noise violations through education and voluntary compliance. Staff typically contacts the responsible party or property owner, explains the applicable regulations, and identifies measures to reduce noise such as closing a door or turning the volume down. If the responsible party takes immediate measures to reduce the noise, a Notice of Violation is typically not issued and the correction is documented. If staff are unable to contact the responsible party a Notice of Violation may be issued, providing an opportunity for voluntary correction. Continued noncompliance may result in an administrative citation. The following examples illustrate how this process may be applied under the proposed ordinance.

Commercial noise affecting a residential property. A resident living in a residential zone reports that a local restaurant in a commercial zone is hosting a "noisy" event with a live band. In response, a Code Enforcement Officer would measure the sound at an authorized location (the public-right-of-way in front of the restaurant) and at the receiving property. Measurements would be compared to the allowed noise limit for each zone.

Residential mechanical equipment. A resident reports a “noisy” air conditioning unit on a nearby residential property. With access authorization, a Code Enforcement Officer would measure from the affected property at the location nearest the source and at least 4 feet away from reflective surfaces, then compare the results with the applicable residential limit.

Recurring vehicle noise. An anonymous resident reports that a motorcycle is repeatedly warmed up early in the morning on their block. A Code Enforcement Officer would measure from the public right-of-way in front of the generating property. The measurement would then be compared against the applicable exterior standard for the residential zone for the time at which the noise is occurring.

Adoption of these objective standards establishes clear noise limits that don’t rely on subjective perceptions and can more accurately and consistently be enforced. In addition, a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is currently being drafted to ensure consistency.

5. What is the percentage of noise complaints compared to other complaints? What is the typical closure time for a noise violation case? What is the average response time for a noise complaint?

Noise complaints are received through GoGov, telephone, email, mail or in-person reports. Noise cases represent approximately 5% of Code Enforcement cases. Based on staff data, noise cases take approximately 25% longer to close than other cases, excluding unpermitted construction (139 days compared with 114 days). Staff attributes part of this difference to the additional observations and measurements needed to establish an ambient baseline under the current regulations.

When staff receive notice of excess noise that is actively occurring, all efforts are made to respond to the location immediately to observe and measure the reported noise. When a complaint concerns noise which is not actively occurring, staff gathers information about the source, timing, duration, and affected location before scheduling an inspection. Staff would contact the party responsible for the noise and provide information regarding the noise regulations to encourage voluntary compliance in the future. Staff then follows up with the reporting party with inspection findings and information about the noise regulations and enforcement actions taken.

The current regulations present a challenge because there are separate provisions for moving vehicles, mechanical equipment, animals and fowl, hawkers and peddlers, radios/television sets, amplified sound and other sources. Some provisions use qualitative criteria, while others prohibit a source from exceeding the ambient level by a stated number of decibels. Further, the current regulations do not establish a uniform procedure for identifying the ambient noise level, including the equipment, location, time, or duration of measurement.

When noise is actively occurring, an officer can measure the reported noise and compare the result with the proposed objective limits for the location and time of day. Enforcement efforts emphasize education and encourage voluntary compliance and only proceed through the City’s established notice and administrative citation process when voluntary compliance cannot be achieved.

6. How are complaints handled when they are made after a noise event is already finished?

When a complaint concerns noise which is not actively occurring, staff gathers information about the source, timing, duration, and affected location before scheduling an inspection. Staff would contact the party responsible for the noise and provide information regarding the noise regulations to encourage voluntary compliance in the future. Staff then follows up with the reporting party with inspection findings and information about the noise regulations and enforcement actions taken.

7. What happens if a noise complaint is received about a pool pump that is suddenly acting up and needs repair or replacement?

If a resident reports a “noisy” pool pump on a nearby residential property. With access authorization, a Code Enforcement Officer would measure from the affected property at the location nearest the source and at least 4 feet away from reflective surfaces, then compare the results with the applicable residential limit.

8. How would noise complaints be tracked?

Noise complaints would continue to be tracked through the GoGov platform.

9. Provide an alternative Noise Zone Map that requires quieter noise levels for commercially zoned properties on secondary (local) streets (different from commercially zoned properties on higher street classification).

Staff prepared two Noise Zone Map options for the City Council’s consideration. Both options establish three noise zones, with Zone 1 applying the most restrictive noise limits, Zone 2 applying intermediate noise limits, and Zone 3 applying the least restrictive noise limits.

Option 1 reflects the originally proposed assignment of land-use zones to the three noise zones. In response to the City Council’s direction, Option 2 differentiates commercially zoned properties based on the classification of the street on which they are located. Under Option 2, commercially zoned properties on Access streets—including El Centro Street, Mound Avenue, and Prospect Avenue—are assigned to Zone 2 and would be subject to quieter noise limits. Open Space- and Community Facilities-zoned properties are also assigned to Zone 2. Commercially zoned properties on Thoroughfare, Main, and Connector streets remain in Zone 3.

See Attachment No. 1 - General Plan Road Classifications; Attachment No. 2 - Option 1 Noise Zone Map; and Attachment No. 3 - Option 2 Noise Zone Map.

Table 2 - Noise Zone Option Comparison Table

Option 2 would move 126 commercially zoned parcels located on Access streets into Noise Zone 2 (medium level). The commercial areas changing from Noise Zone 3 (loudest) to Noise Zone 2 (medium) would include some well- known commercial locations along El Centro and Mound such as the School Hall building and Kaldi Coffee.

10. Conduct measurements to ensure the proposed noise standards are reasonable, ensuring that common everyday activities would not be violations and that noisy nuisance activities would be.

Staff conducted field measurements to evaluate the preliminary proposed standards under existing conditions. These field measurements were conducted at multiple times and locations in residential, commercial, and open-space areas using a calibrated ANSI S1.4- 2014 Type 2 integrating sound level meter (Soft dB Piccolo-II). Consistent with the preliminary measurement criteria, the meter was mounted on a tripod, at least four feet above ground and at least four feet away from a reflective surface (wall/window). The measurements were used to assess how the proposed standards would apply to typical ambient conditions and common activities, as well as to noise sources that may warrant further evaluation or enforcement.

Table 3 - Selected Field Measurements

Four of the nine above measurements exceeded the applicable preliminary standards identified in Table 3. The results indicate that certain routine or permitted activities could exceed the preliminary limits and potentially constitute violations of the Noise Ordinance.

Comparison to Neighboring Jurisdiction 
Staff reviewed the noise ordinances adopted by the cities of San Gabriel (SGMC § 98.02(T)), Pasadena (PMC Chapter 9.36), Alhambra (AMC Chapter 18.02), and San Marino (SMCC Chapter 14.04) to evaluate how South Pasadena’s recommended standards compare with those of neighboring jurisdictions. Direct comparison is difficult because the jurisdictions use different regulatory approaches, measurement locations, and enforcement criteria.

San Gabriel evaluates potential violations by comparing the measured noise level with the localized ambient noise level rather than applying fixed numerical limits. Pasadena uses a similar ambient-noise approach but establishes numerical limits for noise measured within multifamily residential units. Alhambra also establishes interior noise limits. Because these standards are measured within an occupied structure on the affected property, enforcement generally requires the cooperation of the affected property owner or occupant.

Of the jurisdictions reviewed, San Marino’s ordinance is most comparable to South Pasadena’s proposed ordinance. San Marino establishes exterior numerical limits for three noise zones and distinguishes between daytime and nighttime hours. Its zones are based primarily on residential and commercial zoning, with a separate R-1 Residential Corridor zone for properties near commercial zones or Huntington Drive.

Table 4: Neighborhood Jurisdiction Standards

Staff recommendation

The preliminary May 20 draft established procedures for measurement equipment, calibration, meter settings, measurement location, and duration. It uses Leq to represent the average sound level over a specific period and Lmax to identify the highest sound level measured during the period. The draft also establishes lower nighttime limits, applicable from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., and allows measurements to be taken at either the source property or the affected property, as appropriate.

Staff recommends Noise Map Option 2, which classifies commercially zoned properties according to the classification of the street on which they are located. This approach recognizes the varying noise environments within commercial areas, provides appropriate standards for the transition between downtown commercial areas and surrounding neighborhoods, and establishes reasonable noise limits based on location.

Based on field measurements, staff also recommends increasing the preliminary proposed limits by 5 to 10 decibels to better distinguish typical community noise from noise levels that may cause a disturbance. Table 5 compares the preliminary May 20 standards with the revised standards recommended by staff.

Table 5: Proposed Exterior Noise Standards Comparison

There is no fiscal impact associated with receiving this report and providing direction to staff. Any future ordinance amendments would be prepared using existing budgeted resources.

The noise standards utilized in the updated Chapter 19A Noise Regulations are within a range established in the General Plan (Table B6.5, City of South Pasadena Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix) and were analyzed previously in the General Plan EIR.

Further, the proposed amendment is routine, clarifies existing City regulations, does not include any development proposal, and can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, the amendments qualify for the common sense exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as found in CEQA Section 15061(b)(3).