Dan's Papers - June 29, 2007 - A New Noise Ordinance? Can't Hear You

On June 1, the Town of East Hampton Board met with restaurateurs, musicians, East Hampton residents and chamber of commerce members to address some proposed changes to the ordinance code regarding the definition of "noise," "dance halls" and "zoning." On June 19, the board reconvened to announce that they were making those changes.

Town Supervisor William McGintee pacified concerned restaurant and hotel owners on June 1, saying the codes redefining noise pollution will serve as a give-and-take for both businesses and residents. "The intention," McGintee said, "is not to be adversarial to businesses." The old section says that music "plainly audible" from 100 feet of the property line is in violation of the noise ordinance, however, punishable only after three summonses issued by a code enforcement officer. Complaints can be filed many times, but a summons will be issued only after an officer assesses the situation and determines it violates the code. McGintee cites this as deterring finicky residents from affecting businesses, which are not, in fact, encroaching on civilian quality of life, and in turn asks businesses to cooperate with a fair policy on noise control. On Tuesday's meeting, Ms. Molinari suggested "plainly audible" be reworded to "excessive or unreasonable noise" because of feedback from the police department. This was agreed to.

In addition to the noise level, a second amendment requires all establishments intending to play music after nine p.m. to obtain a music entertainment permit (it is automatically renewed each year unless revoked/suspended) before providing such entertainment. A third amendment asks that restaurants that remove tables to permit dancing are subject to the provisions nightclubs must adhere to, the intention being to dissuade this morph from restaurant to club from happening.

Alfred Borat, self-described band member and musician, asked there to be a fair balance between the proposed law and musicians. Because the high season is so short -- three months out of the whole year -- the prospect of musicians being edged out of the market because of this ordinance is unfair and must be re-evaluated, he said. Borat was not complaining, however. He was asking for cooperation, which seems to be essential for the proposed ordinance to effectively please everyone.

John McClaughlin asked for more immediate changes to the code, which would allow a business to know exactly what volume they can play music before receiving a summons. McClaughlin also took issue with Chapter 117, which demands all businesses intending to play music to obtain a music entertainment permit. Restaurants have been playing music for a long time without this permit, he said, and are therefore disturbed by what seems to be a hassle, especially because the permit can be revoked after three summonses. McClaughlin suggested upping the fines on restaurants and taverns if they violate the noise ordinance instead of creating this permit system, but Town Councilman Pete Hammerle said this method fails because fines are not a deterrent -- the business simply breaks the code to make greater profits so they can cover the fees. McClaughlin expressed further concerns with the permit because, effectively, if three neighbors get together and decide to file three complaints and three summons are issued in three days, then a $60,000 wedding may have to be canceled with no notice.

On Tuesday's meeting, the board agreed that any outdoor live music would only be permitted until 9 p.m., except for mass or catered gatherings. No changes to the proposed permit laws were suggested.

A concern of a very different nature came from Sands Motel owner Lorraine Mena on June 1 speaking for her brother, who did not appear at the hearing, with respect to debauchery and rowdiness. "It's not the music, its everything that goes along with the music," Mena began. "It's the urinating on our lawn, the person on all fours vomiting on our lawn and the loud, foul language which demands we lock our windows after nine p.m. every night, which is out of control." Mena attributes the obnoxious crowds gathering in and outside nightclubs neighboring her family-oriented business. McGintee said the issue would be addressed, but Mena repeatedly expressed the ongoing nature of the problem and seemed disillusioned with the effectiveness of East Hampton enforcement in Montauk specifically.