Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Noise Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts new city noise ordinance with carve-out for golf-course maintenance
Summary
The council replaced the city's existing noise rules with a new property-maintenance noise ordinance, clarifying enforceability and adding a specific exemption allowing golf-course maintenance earlier hours (6 a.m. to dusk).
The Lago Vista City Council adopted a new noise ordinance intended to make the city's noise rules more enforceable and clearer for residents and staff.
City staff and councilors said the prior noise ordinances had proven difficult to use in municipal court, leading the city prosecutor and staff to draft a new, more prescriptive regulation. The new ordinance largely rewrites Chapter 6, Article 6.300 (Noise) of the city code to include a clarified definition section, enumerated prohibited noise sources, affirmative defenses, permitting or variance procedures, and penalty language (maximum fine noted in the ordinance text).
Council and staff discussed specific provisions before the vote, including: (1) clarifying territorial application for nuisance enforcement within 5,000 feet outside municipal limits under state law; (2) a power-model device clause that covers unmanned aircraft or model vehicles; and (3) enforceable time windows for construction and powered equipment. Council amended the draft to remove "golf courses" from a list of general permitted construction activities and instead add a specific sentence allowing golf-course maintenance activities to begin at 6 a.m. and continue until dusk to reflect operational realities on the course.
The city manager said the ordinance is meant to be enforceable in court and to make it easier for staff to issue and defend citations while protecting residents' quiet hours. City attorney Bullock confirmed the territorial and statutory citations used to extend nuisance enforcement to properties within 5,000 feet of city limits.
Council voted to adopt the ordinance with the amendments as presented; the measure passed on a unanimous vote. Staff were directed to correct an internal cross-reference in the ordinance text (a minor numbering typo) and to publish the revised ordinance text and any implementing guidance on the city website.
The adoption followed advice from municipal-court staff and the city prosecutor that a clearer, more detailed code would reduce the number of cases that could not be sustained because of vague language in the old rule.
