THE DREADED RIDING ORDINANCE PASSES IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY: GOES INTO EFFECT IN MAY

According to San Diego?s North County Times:

A wide-ranging pair of ordinances designed to regulate off-road vehicle riding on private property and limit noise that spills onto neighboring land were both approved by Riverside County, California, supervisors amid contentious hearings Tuesday. The off-road measure requires landowners in unincorporated areas to obtain permits and pay fees before riding dirt bikes and other motorized off-road vehicles on their property. It forbids any riding on plots of less than five acres and limits the number of people who can ride at a time on larger parcels. It also creates a set of relatively uncontroversial standards for establishing sites for off-road riding, including how much dirt a landowner can move without seeking a special permit.

A second measure, which grew out of the first, is designed to limit noise from off-road vehicles, music concerts and a range of other activities in unincorporated areas. The Board of Supervisors voted 5-0 to approve the noise ordinance after a sparsely attended hearing Tuesday morning. The ordinance had gathered broad support from residents of unincorporated areas in the county, despite opposition from a business group and fretting from several residents that it might be less useful to pass new regulations than to enforce existing laws against public nuisances.

Both ordinances are the product of 18 months of debate and dialogue among the county’s planning staff and its rural residents, landowners and business owners. Supervisors and a land-use advisory board have also held a series of public hearings that led to a half-dozen revisions since late 2004. Supervisors voted 4-1 to approve the new regulations on “off-highway” vehicles Tuesday evening after a three-hour hearing that drew about 150 people, including several dozen who spoke for or against the ordinance. Off-road enthusiasts, who made up about two-thirds of those who spoke, condemned the measure; in explaining their votes for the measure, at least two supervisors drew boos and moans.

First District Supervisor Bob Buster, who voted for the measure, said plots in most rural residential areas are simply too small, even if riders are required to stay back from their property lines. “I don’t see how you can have this responsibly —- even with setbacks —- on pieces of property less than, say, five acres without disturbing your neighbors,” he said.

The off-road ordinance would:

(1) limit the number of riders on a plot to one per five acres;

(2) allow one or two additional riders on plots, with neighbors’

consent;

(3) limit riding to the period from noon to 5 p.m., seven days a week;

(4) require special permission for riding on private property within certain environmentally sensitive areas listed in the region’s Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.

The ordinance doesn’t specifically address commercial sites for off-road riding. Several supervisors called for county support in establishing large-scale riding sites that would be open to all riders, many of whom are now prevented from riding on their own land. The noise ordinance creates a system of determining acceptable levels of noise as measured at the plot’s boundaries, depending on the zoning of a plot and time of day. Some skeptics wondered in recent weeks whether the resulting grid of 60 acceptable noise levels would make sense to anyone other than code-enforcement specialists. Sheriff’s deputies will be responsible for enforcing the ordinance.

The noise ordinance will likely go into effect in late May, according to the supervisors. The off-road ordinance will probably take effect in the fall as part of a broader overhaul of the county’s general land-use plan, county officials said. Both measures still face final votes in four or five weeks, though it’s unlikely Tuesday’s votes would be overturned, now that public debate is concluded, county spokesman Ray Smith said.

Third district Supervisor Jeff Stone was the lone dissent in the vote on the off-road measure. He said he agreed with most of its provisions, but worried that it would penalize riders who make honest efforts to accommodate neighbors. And though the ordinance allows more flexibility to riders whose neighbors sign on, he said, that process will probably be time-consuming and frustrating. “I think we’re creating a large, bureaucratic debacle that’s going to be difficult to enforce,” Stone said.

Among speakers on both sides of the debate, the hyperbole was thick. One man who spoke in favor of the ordinance called off-road riding on private property no more legitimate than the privately-owned opium dens he had encountered in Bangkok, Thailand, in the 1960s. One off-road enthusiast suggested the ordinance might embolden supervisors to regulate a machine as harmless as a hair dryer. And there was no lack of passion over the issue, which speakers said reached deep into their homes and lives. Several opponents of the ordinance suggested motocross riding was the main activity keeping their children from becoming couch potatoes or even drug users. More than 20 children and teenagers turned out, several in racing attire. From every corner, there were pleas for the respect of property rights. Off-road riders, mostly young adults, said they had moved to rural areas of Riverside County for the chance to ride on their own land without disturbing neighbors.

Anthony Migliore, who attended with two of his three sons, said he bought five acres in Wine Country after spending seven of the previous 13 years as a naval aviator in combat theaters of the Middle Eastern desert. He and the boys ride dirt bikes on the land; a third son, who suffers from cerebral palsy, rides a four-wheeler, he said. The new regulations will allow only one vehicle at a time on the plot. Even that will require the signed, notarized consent from the owners of all neighboring parcels. “I promised the boys I wasn’t going back to the desert,” Migliore said, with tears welling up. “I promised my boys we were going to have five acres to ride on.”

Supporters of the measure, who were mostly over the age of 50, said they bought rural land to finally live in peace and quiet. Jerry Clem, of the Winchester area, said off-highway vehicles are simply too loud for residential areas: Noise levels of up to 95 decibels at the tailpipe are virtually guaranteed to disturb neighbors, Clem said. “OHV use is like no other residential activity,” Clem said. “No matter how polite and how considerate a rider is, there’s no getting around the fact that he or she is exceeding the acceptable noise level,” Clem said.