City Council revives noise ordinance
"This opens itself to abuse," Crenson noted. "It can become an instrument of neighborhood conflict."
Furthermore, Crenson feels that the very idea of a noise ordinance in a city environment is close to being ridiculous.
"People have to realize that cities are noisy and there are plenty of things that could disturb the peace," he said.
In April 2007, the original bill was revived during action against Hopkins's Phi Kappa Psi fraternity.
Following a lengthy hearing, involving testimony from neighbors and community members, Phi Psi lost a house on Canterbury Road in a primarily residential area, due to controversial zoning decisions.
The housing battle generated support for "nuisance free" residential sectors in Baltimore and for Rawlings-Blake's noise ordinance bill. However, while roughly two thirds of the city council supported the issue, the proposal ultimately failed to gain significant momentum.
In this law, residencies that had sound levels above 55 decibels could be subject to legal action. Her law, though, was an amendment to a pre-existing law and failed to see any sort of city council action.
The document stipulates that the eviction can only be maintained for a maximum of one year and that there are opportunities to either shorten or remove the punishment both before and after the initial accusation.
Furthermore, Crenson feels that the very idea of a noise ordinance in a city environment is close to being ridiculous.
"People have to realize that cities are noisy and there are plenty of things that could disturb the peace," he said.
In April 2007, the original bill was revived during action against Hopkins's Phi Kappa Psi fraternity.
Following a lengthy hearing, involving testimony from neighbors and community members, Phi Psi lost a house on Canterbury Road in a primarily residential area, due to controversial zoning decisions.
The housing battle generated support for "nuisance free" residential sectors in Baltimore and for Rawlings-Blake's noise ordinance bill. However, while roughly two thirds of the city council supported the issue, the proposal ultimately failed to gain significant momentum.
In this law, residencies that had sound levels above 55 decibels could be subject to legal action. Her law, though, was an amendment to a pre-existing law and failed to see any sort of city council action.
The document stipulates that the eviction can only be maintained for a maximum of one year and that there are opportunities to either shorten or remove the punishment both before and after the initial accusation.
Be the first to comment on this story