We received an email the other day from a resident complaining about the noise of the construction at the Padua Ave. Park worksite. As you may recall, the city, in the face of a $3.5 million budget deficit, has gone forward with spending $2.4 million from its General Fund on the park.
Here's the reader's note:
DATE: Monday, February 16, 2009 7:51 AM
SUBJECT: construction noise
TO: Claremont Buzz
Dear Insider,
I live near Padua Ave. and have been watching the construction of the new park. The noise from the bulldozers clearing the ground is deafening! They push the boulders they collect as they dig up the ground, and then they dump them into trucks to haul the boulders away. They boulders create a huge racket as they get dropped into the metal sided trucks. It's like marbles rolling around in a tin can except the marbles weigh hundreds of pounds.
Do you know if there is anything we can do about the construction noise?
To tell you the truth, we're not sure. The City has all sorts of rules for construction noise with specific decibel levels for property lines. If you can hear the boulder sounds loudly inside your house with the windows closed, the noise probably exceeds the limits set by Claremont's municipal code. As we've seen in the past, mixing Claremont and bulldozers is a guarantee for trouble.
The Environmental Impact Report for Padua Park made a number of representations that the City would abide by the noise restrictions and would implement mitigations to limit the noise. These included the construction of a wall on the park's south border at Chaminade Ct. In addition, if the rock noise exceeds the City's noise limits, there are things the construction company can do to mitigate the sound. This includes things like putting dirt in the loaders to muffle the sound as the rocks are dropped in.
Here a couple pages from the EIR that describe the specific mitigations the city and its contractor were supposed to do during the construction phase:
As far as we know, the City has failed to do several of the mitigations outlined above. They certainly have failed to construct the wall that the EIR said would be done before any grading commenced. And the contractor has apparently failed to use any sound dampening mitigations.
Because of the City's money problems, they may be trying to skirt the mitigations they promised in the EIR. This would be no surprise. The EIR process is mostly there to get projects passed and to create a cash cow for EIR consultants. As environmental protection, EIRs at least in the hands of cities like Claremont, fail miserably. Once construction begins, if the City chooses to not observe the rules in the EIR, then it is up to residents to get a court order stopping construction until the promised mitigations are enforced.
There's also a punitive aspect to the City's behavior here since residents around the park site had opposed the City's original plans for the project. Don't put it past Claremont Mayor Ellen Taylor (pictured, left) and Claremont City Manager Jeff Parker to take a "Stick it to them!" approach to the construction phase of the project.
We suggest you do three things. First, check the city's EIR for the project mitigations (they are in Appendix C). You can find it here. Second, check Title 16 of the City's municipal code for the applicable city law (16.154.020). Third, spend a little money to hire someone with a calibrated sound meter (the calibration part is important) to measure the construction sound levels at various property lines throughout the neighborhood.
As near as we can gather from the municipal code, the maximum decibel level allowed anywhere in Claremont at anytime is 85 dB. This is the maximum limit because anything above that can cause permanent hearing damage and is considered dangerous. If you are hearing the sound of the rocks in the trucks with your house windows closed, the exterior sound levels outside are likely maxing out at above 85 dB.
If the sound levels exceed Claremont's municipal code restrictions, and if they have failed to institute any of the other EIR mitigations they promised when they approved the EIR, then contact an attorney to get the construction halted. We're not in the habit of endorsing anyone for these sorts of things, but you might contact Ray Johnson in Temecula. He's the attorney the local Protect Our Neighborhoods group has used, and he's had some success against the City and its City Attorney, Sonia Carvalho of Best, Best & Krieger.
Incidentally, if you prevail, the court will generally grant you your attorney fees. You can find Johnson's contact information here.
One other point. All of this should serve to underscore the fact that the city of Claremont has consistently failed to keep its promises and has taken an attitude that says, "So sue us." It really was this attitude that led to the Wilderness Park bulldozing last year, and it is an attitude that continues to manifest itself from time to time in the City's actions. In our view, it should not take litigation to force the city to keep its word to its citizens, but that is what is happening here.
The Padua Park construction also perfectly illustrates how useless things like EIRs are. The City spent $125,000, plus about the same amount for their attorney fees, for the Padua Park EIR, yet the City has failed to implement most of the EIR provisions for the construction phase of the park. You don't see any of the local environmental groups out monitoring this, and the city's youth sports parents could not possibly care less about the impacts their projects cause.
It's a shame a takes a lawsuit to make them and the City care.