Waterfront ruling may have leaks

Lacking testimony from sound experts or any concrete demonstration of what the decibel levels specified in the measure actually sound like, the City Council voted 5-4 on June 8 for loose standards that the rule’s chief proponent said would be useless for enforcement.

The legislation, which is still being amended, would limit noise to 75 decibels during the day and 65 at night. Seeking to shield Marina Bay residents from loud music that keeps them awake at night, Councilor Brian McNamee had proposed limits of 65 decibels during the day and 55 decibels at night.

“The mayor is taking the changes very seriously,’’ said mayoral spokesman Chris Walker. “The folks at Marina Bay do deserve some sort of ordinance.’’

But the council’s vote for the less-stringent noise limits may have resulted from a lack of clear knowledge of what the numbers mean, some councilors acknowledged.

“I’m not sure anyone has a visceral sense of what the numbers translate to,’’ said City Councilor Kevin Coughlin Wednesday. Hearing testimony from a sound engineer would have helped before the council took action, said Coughlin, who voted for McNamee’s numbers. “That was the first thing we talked about, bringing in an expert.’’

Coughlin said he’s still puzzled over why that didn’t happen.

City Council president Jay Davis, who voted for the looser limits, said the council needed more technical information in order to go along with the stringent limits proposed by McNamee.

“I don’t feel comfortable with the lower level until I know exactly what it is,’’ Davis said. “I haven’t seen the testimony there so [that] I can understand what is and what isn’t in those decibels.’’

Davis also said the rule’s backers failed to produce any demonstrations - such as a horn - of what the numbers meant.

If the council had heard examples of noise levels in their chamber, said Marina Bay resident Edward Thomas, they would have understood that 65 decibels - the nighttime standard the majority voted for - is too loud when you’re trying to fall asleep in your bedroom.

Councilors were told that 65 decibels is comparable to discussions in a public setting, said Thomas, copresident of the Marina Bay Civic Association. But “if you’re sleeping and somebody appears in your bedroom having a loud discussion in a noisy restaurant,’’ he said, “your sleep is going to be disturbed.’’

Ten decibels - the difference between the number he proposed and what the council approved - may not seem like much to laymen, but their ears would hear a crashing difference.

“It’s not a linear scale [consisting of units of equal measure],’’ McNamee said of the decibel measurement system. “It’s more like a difference in magnitude.’’

Experts say that an increase of three units on the decibel scale means twice as much sound. Federal agencies that regulate sound, such as the Environmental Protection Agency and Housing and Urban Development, have concluded that 55 decibels is a reasonable regulatory standard for background noise. EPA studies also show that chronic night noise leaves people tired, irritable, unable to concentrate or make compromises during the daytime, and stressed even while asleep.

Another source of confusion involves “where the sound would be measured,’’ Thomas said. Based on ordinances adopted by other cities, the Quincy rule called for sound to be measured at the point of complaint rather than at its source.

“It was very clear in the discussion [at the council] that some people were not understanding and confusing source and receptor,’’ he said.

It makes a big difference. Music generated by a club after dark may be considerably louder than 55 decibels - the standard McNamee sought - and still be in compliance with the rule by the time it reaches the nearest neighbor. Monitoring sound from the point of reception means that if you can close the door or shut the windows and solve the problem, there is no basis for a noise complaint, Thomas said.

“People are confused about how it’s applied,’’ said Coughlin.

But in the absence of more solid evidence, councilors worried that McNamee’s rule would drive away business.

“Marina Bay is a vital commercial area,’’ Davis said.

He also said that Marina Bay residents knew they were moving into an area with nightclubs.

The neighborhood’s nightclub owners argued that McNamee’s standard was so low that normal conversation in a restaurant would violate the ordinance - a claim that may have added to the confusion over where the noise would be measured, Thomas said.

According to McNamee, peculiar sound conditions at Marina Bay, an upscale beachside community of 2,000, aggravate the noise problem for certain residents. Sound carries long distances over the bay’s still water, and the shape of two large Marina Point condo towers funnels sound into sections of those buildings, where most of the complaints come from.

Responding to concerns over the numbers, the still-divided council backed an amendment last week that would create a three-tired noise limit system - 65 decibels during the day, 60 in the evening between 5 and 10 p.m., and 55 between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.

After making these changes, the council decided to hold another public hearing on the noise ordinance within the next two weeks. Once it approves a new version, the mayor will have 14 days to sign or veto it. If he signs it, the law would take effect right away.

Robert Knox can be reached at rc.knox2@gmail.com.