Corrales work study on noise rules spotlights clash between residents and patio music venues

Corrales Village officials convened a work study to review possible changes to the village noise ordinance, focusing on amplified outdoor music and how to measure and enforce limits.

Tessa Davidson, speaking for the Corrales resident noise committee, told the governing body the village’s new comprehensive plan shows widespread concern about noise and that many complaints are clustered near Corrales Road. Davidson urged that any rewrite be sensitive to mixed‑use development and noted residents living on streets such as Old Church Road, Dixon Road and Bison Loop had reported amplified sound from nearby businesses. She recommended the village consult a professional sound engineer before settling technical decibel standards and to build enforceable mitigation requirements into site‑plan approvals.

Davidson said the municipal code already requires new commercial development to be “compatible with the existing character of the surrounding area,” citing Section 1832 and the site‑plan review requirements in Section 1845 that list noise, glare and odor among issues to be addressed. “We are all neighbors in the village,” she told the council, urging solutions that protect long‑term residents while allowing businesses to operate.

Business owners who spoke described narrower practices. Dan O’Brien, owner of Kasa Vieja, said outdoor music is “good for business,” described a small round bandstand and speaker layout intended to minimize spill, and said his venue typically hosts bands from about 7 to 9:30 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays — roughly five hours a week. O’Brien and Joel of Exnovo argued the village should adopt objective, calibrated standards (for example, decibel limits or ambient‑based rules) rather than subjective language that could permit inconsistent enforcement.

Former Albuquerque noise abatement officer Marty Haber described how jurisdictions structure sound limits and measurements, including historical daytime/nighttime thresholds and the use of calibrated, type‑1 meters. Haber and other technical discussants stressed the importance of measuring ambient sound at the same location, accounting for weather and wind, and choosing an averaging window (for example, a 15‑minute average) so enforcement calculations are defensible in court.

Planning staff member Lori explained that site‑plan review already raises noise, parking and occupancy issues; she warned that added tables or new uses can trigger the requirement for an amended site plan. Councilors pressed staff and the presenters on practical enforcement questions — who would take readings, whether readings should be peak or averaged, where ambient should be measured, and how to provide on‑call enforcement after hours.

Across the discussion, a few themes gained consensus: both residents and business owners favored objective, measurable standards rather than purely subjective language; ambient measurement will be important where Corrales Road traffic raises background levels; and technical drafting will require expert assistance. Several councilors explicitly supported hiring or consulting a sound engineer and clarifying which offices or contractors would perform calibrated readings and be available for evening enforcement.

No ordinance changes were adopted at the work study. The meeting ended with the council agreeing further technical guidance and clearer enforcement options are needed before drafting enforceable amendments. The session was adjourned without a vote on any revision to the noise ordinance.