Planning board recommends approval of Cajun Beach outdoor-entertainment permit with conditions after noise dispute

The Flagler Beach Planning and Architectural Review Board on March 11 recommended approval to the City Commission of an annual outdoor-entertainment permit (OE250301) for Cajun Beach at 1112 South Ocean Shore Boulevard, but attached conditions requiring the stage soundproofing be completed before any outdoor entertainment and limiting live music times and certain performance types.

The board’s recommendation came after an extended public comment period in which residents and hotel operators said prior uses at the site generated repeated noise complaints and police calls, and that the applicant’s new soundproofing plans were unproven. The applicant and several board members said the applicant provided additional construction plans and agreed to permit restrictions.

The board voted to recommend approval with the conditions that the work on the performance stage be finished before any outdoor entertainment is held, that the permit include the applicant’s agreed restrictions (no live music after 9:30 p.m., no drums, and no karaoke), and that the city’s existing citation process remain in effect should noise violations occur.

Applicant Patrick McKinney told the board his renovations include a five-foot stage extension, new interior and exterior paneling, and three inches of soundproofing material; he said the contractor and a local architect prepared the submitted plans. “We don’t have, like, major rock bands or rap or anything like that. It’s just music for our customers,” McKinney said, describing typical performances as small, acoustic shows with no drums.

Several neighbors countered that the proposed sound treatments — including acoustic foam and so-called “sand and sound” insulation referenced in the applicant’s packet — are intended for interior use and would not reliably block amplified outdoor sound. Tom Wotherspoon, a resident who said he has professional audio experience, told the board he contacted manufacturers and acoustical firms who said the products in the applicant’s packet are designed for enclosed rooms and would not, in typical outdoor installation, prevent sound from reaching nearby hotel rooms and residences. “There are no facts. There are no test results. There’s nothing to prove the soundproofing works,” Wotherspoon said, and urged the board to deny the permit.

Brenda Montgomery, a 75-year-old resident who said she lives catty-corner to Cajun Beach, said prior attempts to run live music at the site produced numerous noise complaints and police reports. “The property is too small, too close to businesses and surrounding residents to operate a music venue,” Montgomery said, asking the board to deny the permit.

City staff answered technical questions about enforcement and the code. Staff said the city enforces decibel limits and that the noise ordinance allows for citation; the code provides that three citations can lead to revocation of an outdoor entertainment permit. Staff also noted the code specifies decibel thresholds (staff referenced daytime and nighttime thresholds during the hearing), and that complaints must be called in to code enforcement or the police to be investigated.

Board members who supported the recommendation said the applicant had supplied the additional materials requested by the board and commission in prior hearings, and that the recommendation should be conditioned on completion of the stage work and verification before any outdoor entertainment occurs. Chair Susie Johnson said she wanted the stage and soundproofing work finished before approving any use of the outdoor stage.

The board’s roll call recorded unanimous support among members present; the board’s recommendation is advisory and the City Commission will make the final decision on the annual permit.

The board also discussed enforcement mechanics: staff reiterated that citations are issued by code enforcement or police based on documented noise measurements, and that three violations can trigger revocation of a permit. The board did not adopt a trial or probationary permit; the application under consideration was for an annual permit and the board processed the request as submitted.

The matter now moves to the City Commission with the board’s recommendation to approve subject to the stated conditions.