HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-12-18 PACKET 08.A.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL AGENDA
MEETING ITEM # � �
DATE 12/18/13 .
.
REPARED BY Community Development Jennifer Levitt
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR
***********************�*************�******�***
COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
1. Adopt an ordinance that effectively consolidates a variety of existing noise regulations in
the City Code and adding new regulations into a new chapter titled as Title 4, Chapter 9;
Noise.
2. Adopt a resolution authorizing the publication of this ordinance amendment by title and
summary.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the ordinance amendment regarding noise regulations.
Adopt the resolution authorizing publication of the ordinance amendment by title and summary.
ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE REVIEWED APPROVED DENIED
� PLANNING 10/28/1 & 11/25 ❑ � ❑
� PUBLIC SAFETY 10/15/13 ❑ � ❑
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
� MEMO/LETTER: Memo from Pete Koerner, Deputy Public Safety Director dated 11/21/13
Memo from John McCool, Senior Planner dated 12/12/13
❑ RESOLUTION:
� ORDINANCE: Draft
� ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: Draft
� LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: Approval
� OTHER: 1) Excerpt from the approved Planning Commission minutes dated 10/28/13
2) Excerpt from the unapproved Planning Commission minutes dated 11/25/13
3) Excerpt from the unapproved Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission
minutes dated 10/15/13
ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ,
i
,
r
— City Administrator ate
*******************�***�******�**********�******
COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER
Cottage
/ Grove
� Pride and Prosperity Meet
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator
FROM: John McCool, Senior Planner
DATE: December 12, 2013
RE: Proposed City Code Amendments — Noise Regulations
Proposal
The Planning Commission and Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission recommend
certain amendments to the City Codes relating to noise regulations. The proposed ordinance
amendments will consolidate most noise regulations in the City Code into one section of the City
Code.
Advisory Commission Review and Recommendations
Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission
The Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission discussed the proposed Noise Ordinance at
their meetings on October 15 and November 19, 2013. At the October 15 meeting, the
Commission asked how officers decide when a noise citation is warranted and how the
proposed ordinance amendment will help enforce obnoxious behaviors by motorists. The
Commission generally supported the proposed amendments to noise regulations. An excerpt
from the Public Safety's Commission's unapproved minutes for October 15 is attached.
At the November 19 Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission meeting, the Commission
did not have a quorum and therefore was unable to make a formal recommendation to the City
Council. The proposed ordinance amendments were still presented to the members in
attendance. Of those members present, they supported the proposed amendments and
believed the proposed regulations are easier to understand and consistent with the procedures
currently used by Public Safety.
Attached is a memorandum from Pete Koerner, Deputy Director of Public Safety, dated
November 21, 2013 stating the Department of Public Safety's support for the proposed noise
ordinance amendments.
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission discussed the proposed noise ordinance amendments at their Octo-
ber 28, 2013 meeting. At this meeting, the Commission commented on homeowner's ability to
work inside their home any day and time. Some members expressed concerns for the subjectiv-
ity in determining if a noise is too loud. Staff reported to Commission members that mechanical,
power equipment, or tools operated by fuel, electric, or battery power are allowed any time of
the day only if the work is performed inside an enclosed building or if approved by the City
Council. In regards to the reasonable person standard, most Commission members believed
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Planning Case No. TA2013-037 - Noise Regulations
December 12, 2013
Page 2 of 4
trained professionals and law enforcement personnel will continue to be successful in resolving
noise complaints and that the proposed new regulations better conform with the procedures cur-
rently used by enforcement personnel. Some Commission members thought regulating noise by
decibel levels may not be the most effective way in resolving noise complaints because in some
situations, noise slightly below the allowed decibel level may still be a nuisance. In those situa-
tions, the proposed regulations will provide a better opportunity to appropriately address the
situation. An excerpt from the Planning Commission's approved minutes for this meeting is
attached.
At the November 25, 2013, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held. The
Commission discussed how the proposed ordinance applies to refueling construction equipment
early in the morning and loading/unloading materials early in the morning or late evening. No
written or oral testimony was received. The Planning Commission unanimously (5-to-0 vote)
recommended approval of the proposed ordinance amendments. An excerpt from the Planning
Commission's unapproved minutes is attached.
Background
Noise regulations are presently found in the following sections of the City Code:
• Title 3, Business and License Regulations; Chapter 10, Section 8, PerFormance Stan-
dards pertaining to the Mining Sand and Gravel Operations of the Business and License
section of the City Codes.
• Title 5, Police Regulations; Chapter 1, Section 2(B), Noisy Assemblies - This section will
be removed and the regulations for noisy gatherings are proposed to be in Title 4, Chap-
ter 9, Section 4.
• Title 5, Police Regulations; Chapter 1, Section 2(C), Use of Radios, Paging Systems, Etc.
- This section will be removed and regulations for amplified sound are proposed to be in
Title 4, Chapter 9, Section 5.
• Title 6, Motor Vehicles and Traffic; Chapter 1, Section 2, Unnecessary Acceleration -
This section will be removed and regulations for motor vehicles noise are proposed to be
in Title 4, Chapter 9, Section 6.
• Title 6, Motor Vehicles and Traffic; Chapter 6, Section 7, Noise Levels - This section will
be removed and regulations for noise by motor vehicles are proposed to be in Title 4,
Chapter 9, Section 6.
• Title 11, Zoning Ordinance; Chapter 3, General Zoning Provisions; Section 9(G)(6), Noise
- Repealed
• Title 11, Zoning Ordinance; Chapter 6, General Zoning Provisions; Section 17, Noise
Control - This section will be removed and regulations for noise are proposed to be in
Title 4, Chapter 9.
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Planning Case No. TA2013-037 — Noise Regulations
December 12, 2013
Page 3 of 4
Discussion
The proposed amendments are intended to combine city ordinance regulations that pertain to
noise issues City departments and City employees must enforce. The proposed revisions to
noise ordinance regulations were initiated because of vehicle noises (particularly loud motor-
cycles) and construction activities that adversely affected the peace and quiet for some resi-
dents. The proposed Noise Ordinance will create a new chapter in the Public Health and Safety
section of the City Code and will be divided into the following sections:
4-9-1: Intent
4-9-2: Definitions
4-9-3: Exceptions
4-9-4: Noisy Gatherings
4-9-5: Amplified Sound
4-9-6: Motor Vehicles
4-9-7: Loading and Unloading
4-9-8: Construction, Excavation, Repair and Demolition Activities
4-9-9: Animal Noise
The problem with using "decibels" as a means to determine if City regulations are violated is that
the City has only one decibel meter and decibel limitations do not always prohibit acts that may be
loud and annoying to reasonable persons with ordinary sensibilities. To accurately obtain a decibel
measurement, the decibel meter must be calibrated each time. Consideration of wind direction,
wind velocity, humidity, air temperature, etc. that could affect noise levels are typically not docu-
mented. Occasionally, locating and retrieving the decibel meter took time and the offending noise
may have ceased before a reading could be obtained. In some cases, the decibel level might not
have exceeded noise limitations as established by City ordinance, but the noise was disturbing to
somebody.
One of the objectives in preparing a noise ordinance was to help City staff to better understand and
enforce noise regulations in a timely manner. After reviewing current noise regulations, staff pre-
sented various ideas based on ordinances in other communities. It was suggested that all the
noise regulations be combined into one section of the City Code. In general, the proposed ordin-
ance is structured to make it unlawful for any person to make an unreasonable or excessive noise
that is found to annoy, disturb, injure, or endanger the comfort, health, peace, or safety of a
reasonable person with reasonable sensibilities.
The draft ordinance is an attempt to prohibit offensive noises that may be created by motor ve-
hicles, gatherings, construction, demolition, and excavation activities. Sounds caused by public
safety and public works vehicles, snow removal activity, public events and parades, public im-
provement projects, and other similar events or activities are exempt from the ordinance. The use
of power equipment/tools or mechanical machinery is generally allowed between the hours of 7:00
a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Satur-
day, and prohibited on Sundays and legal holidays. A residential property owner or tenant of resi-
dential property is allowed to conduct construction activities and operate power equipment on their
property on weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and weekends and legal holidays from
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Planning Case No. TA2013-037 — Noise Regulations
December 12, 2013
Page 4 of 4
8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Legal holidays are not inclusive of all federal legal holidays, but the six
common holidays as defined in the proposed ordinance.
Recommendation
The Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission and Planning Commission have both
reviewed the proposed noise ordinance amendments at two of their regular Commission meet-
ings. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment and her comments
were incorporated in the draft ordinance amendment.
Based on the recommendations by the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission, Planning
Commission and the Department of Public Safety, it is recommended that the City Council:
1. Adopt an ordinance that effectively consolidates a variety of existing noise regulations in
the City Code and adding new regulations into a new chapter titled as Title 4, Chapter 9;
Noise. A draft copy of the proposed ordinance amendments is attached for your consid-
eration.
2. Adopt a resolution authorizing the publication of this ordinance amendment by title and
summary.
Cottage
.,/ Grove
�he�e Prida and.P�OSPerity Meet
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
City of Cottage Grove
Public Safety
Senior Planner John McCool
Deputy Director of Public Safety Peter Koerner
November 21, 2013
PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW - NOISE ORDINANCE
Memo
As you are aware, the police division has been involved in the process of the noise
ordinance revision. The issue of vehicle noise was brought to the Public Safety Health
and Welfare Commission when a citizen had pointed out traffic concerns and more
specifically loud mufflers. Another citizen left a letter at open forum of the May 15, 2013
City Council meeting. The purpose of the letter was to request an ordinance that clearly
outlines motorcycle muffler noises and the manner in which an individual operates a
motorcycle.
The Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission did review the draft ordinance at
their October 15, 2013 meeting. The Commission did provide some comments which
were incorporated into the draft revision.
The Public Safety, Health, Welfare Commission met again on November 19, 2013, but
did not have a quorum. The draft ordinance was presented to Public Safety
Commission members in attendance. They believed the proposed ordinance was
easier to understand and will be easier for implementing enforcement.
One Public Safety Commission member did express concerns for the exception
provision for snow removal. His personal experience is a pickup with a snow blade on
the front of the vehicle plowing snow on an elementary school parking lot. The problem
is that the vehicle does not have a muffler. His interpretation of the exception section of
the ordinance would mean that the City cannot cite the owner of that vehicle for loud
motor sounds because he's plowing snow. While he is correct that police would not
issue a citation for the noise ordinance, MN State Statute 169.69 (Muffler) requires that
every motor vehicle shall at all times be equipped with a muffler in good working order.
Public Safety does agree with the Commission in that the proposed ordinance is easier
to understand and will be easier for implementing enforcement. Public Safety does
support the revision to various sections of the City Codes relating to noise regulations
and consolidating most noise regulations in the City Code into one section of the City
Code.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
ORDINANCE NO. XXX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLES 3, 4, 6 AND 11 OF THE CITY OF COTTAGE
GROVE, MINNESOTA CITY CODE BY AMENDING TITLE 3, CHAPTER 10; AMENDING
TITLE 4, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY BY ADDING CHAPTER 9, NOISE; AMENDING
TITLE 5, CHAPTER 1, GENERAL OFFENSES; AMENDING TITLE. 6, CHAPTERS 6-7;
AND REPEALING TITLE 11, CHAPTER 6, SECTION 1 CONTROL
9 The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washin
10 ordain as follows:
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
SECTION 1. AMENDING. Title 3, Chapter 10,
Vibrations and Section (H); Hours of Operation
follows: �:�
3-10-8(G)(1)
1. The operator shall maintain and ope���
noise and air pollution. Any emissi��i
vegetation or other forms of property;
point or any emission of an� solid or
Pollution Control Age�p���������t��ality rE
from the excavatio��s�all ex�ee�1 the
k k . 'k� x1
regulations or �°^+�^h '� ���� Ti�le 4
. �a
nesota, does hereby
�;8�G)(1); Noise and �ir Pollution;
�., k
reby amended and s�i;a�ll as
I equipmei� xi� x such a manner as to minimize
l�1'i1
� cause a�`� �amage to health, animals or
an cause � ny �xcessive soiling at any
C�;es�l�`�tM,�oncei�r�ations exceeding State
; s�all be�"����r�,��ohibited. No noise resulting
�nt State f'`ollution Agency noise control
9 of this Code, whichever is the more
incidental traffic or maintenance
restrictive. Thes�`e�r�gulations s;'all not app
operations. '��`�;�� ����`�.�� ���.x,_ ,,,._
27 3-10-8
28 H
29 1.
30
31
32
33
34
Hours of Operation:��"
;�.�,.:�.;, �<
.,u,;
� �.��.
Excav��on and proce
(6:00) A� 1V�,�;x xand ten o'
District or as��itherwis
approval. In
i�•nrn o nn
Code.
shall be as follows:
may be conducted only between the hours of six o'clock
(10:00) P.M. in areas zoned I-4, Commercial Excavation
:s, hours of operation shall be limited to "°+�^,°on �o„o� ^'^�^^U
1_1__t_ /A.�ll1\ 1"f �A T_il_ A !11__"'i_" n e�_ _i�_'_ n_rtt' _ ��i_ _
35 2. Loading of barges, maintenance and repair of plants and equipment may be conducted
36 twenty four (24) hours a day in areas zoned I-4, Commercial Excavation District. In all
37 other districts, such activities shall be limited to the hours-e�+�^���n �;� ^'^i^^� ia o nn
38 a+��se�ve� . .. „ ��'�°,� °mrI (1rr) Li`.�7 a � Q � aa� i11 Title 4.
39 Chaater 9, Section 8 of the Citv Code.
Page 1
40 3. Operation of trucks may be conducted only between the hours of seven o'clock (7:00)
41 A.M. and six o'clock (6:00) P.M. weekdays. No truck loading is permitted on Saturdays,
42 Sundays and legal holidays unless otherwise allowed bv the Citv Council of a license.
43 a plication or aermit approval.
44 4. Hauling by truck of excavation materials from mines located in the City may be conducted
45 only between the hours of seven o'clock (7:00) A.M. and six o'clock (6:00) P.M.
46 weekdays. No truck hauling on public roads within the City is p��r�itted on Saturdays,
47 Sundays or legal holidays unless otherwise allowed bv the Cit� Council of a license.
48 a plication or permit aaprovaL _ f"'
49
50
51
5. The foregoing hours and davs of operation may be m
case of public emergency upon request of the per,rnpit„
rator
ity Administrator in
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
SECTION 2. ENACTMENT. City of Cottage G
and Safety is hereby enacted as follow.�,s:
Title 4, Chapter 9
SECTION:
4-9-1: Intent
4-9-2: Definitions
in�iured'
ating to Title 4; Public Health
21 Endanaer a reasonable aerson's or reasonable persons' comfort. reaose, health.
eace, safetv or welfare; or
Page 2
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
(3) Preclude a reasonable person or reasonable aersons from the eniovment of their
aropertv.
4-9-2: Definitions. Words and phrases defined in this section have. when used in this
ordinance, the meanina aiven below. Anv other word or ahrase used in this ordinance. and
defined in reaulations of the Minnesota Pollution Control Aaencv Noise Pollution Control
Page 3
G. Outdoor shootina ranaes, aauatic and outdoor recreation facilities on aublic aropertv.
H. Trains. airalanes, aeneral road noises or baraes.
I. Sirens. whistles. or bells lawfullv used bv emeraencv vehicles. or other alarm svstems
used in case of fire. collision, civil defense. aublic safetv activitv. or imminent danaer. and
all sounds associated with Citv resaonses to emeraencv events.
127 J. Reasonable activities conducted on aublic plavarounds and aublic or arivate
128 school/universitv arounds. which are conducted in accordance with the manner in which
129 such saaces are aenerallv used, includina. but not limited to. school/universitv athletic
130 and school/universitv entertainment events.
131 K. Chimina of bells or other similar sounds aroduced bv a reliaious institution, school, or
132 clock or bell tower.
133 L. Anti-theft devices, buralar and fire alarms.
134 M. Government Sponsored Activities. Certain activities related to aublic entertainment.
135 includina but not limited to outdoor aatherinas, public dancesr shoVvs. Fourth of Julv
136 fiireworks. Citv saonsored concerts in �ublic aarks. licensed.��a���ivals and narades. and
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
approariate permittina authoritv.
N. Refriaeration units on deliverv vehicles.
O. Street sweepina.
P. Aaricultural eauipment and machinerv.
1) Refuelina machinerv and eauipment.
(4) Survevina.
(51 Construction stakina.
control the activities at the buildina or place and who knows or has reason to know of
the disturbance and fails to immediatelv take reasonable steas to abate such
disturbances is auiltv of violatina this section.
Page 4
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
21 Anv owner, tenant or resident of the buildina or place who knows or has been notified
4-9-5: Amalified Sound. No person shall use or operate. or permit the use or oaeration of
an electronic sound svstem. audio eauiament or anv other device desianed for the
4-9-8: Construction, Excavation, Repair and Demolition Activities.
Page 5
with the Citv. Licensed operators for refuse haulina and recvclina collection must comalv
- - - - __-�_
with Title 4. Chaater 2. Section 6(Hl of the Citv Code.
217 A. The use of anv mechanical or aower eauipment or tool operated bv fuel. batterv or
218 electric power in construction, repair or demolition is allowed between the hours 7:00
219 a.m. — 7:00 p.m.. Mondav throuah Fridav and between the hours 9:00 a.m. and 7:00
220 p.m., Saturdav.
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257 5-1-2: Disturbing the Peace:
258
259 A. Generally: It shall be unlawful for any person within the limits of the City to disturb the
260 peace and quiet of any street, neighborhood, family of persons, any meeting of persons
261 for a lawful purpose or any public place or commercial establishment, by singing,
262 shouting, screaming, obscene or profane language or conversation, by swearing,
'- . . - .
B. The use of anv mechanical or power eauiament or tool oaerated bv fuel or electric
ower between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m.. Mondav throuah Fridav and
263 quarreling, scolding, cursing, challenging, assaulting or offensive or indecent language, or
264 by any device or pretense whatever.
� - , • - -
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
� - - - - - - - - -
Page 7
� � r � � � � � � � �
. __ _ _ ,
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
SECTION 5. REPEALING. Citv of Cottaqe Grove Citv Code Title 6, Chapter 6 Section 7:
Noise Levels shall be repealed and renumbered accordinqly:
:! �-����� 1����!�!����v
. , - - - - - - - - -
-r�-�--�n*-
—�-�- e'
.. . „
� �� � ��
._
■
..
�,..:
�■ . „
._
�- -
_�iTi�� �.� i�
�� . ��
_ �
. �
�;,�.�.r
G�iT.i:l
ui��_�
�-0'- �-
_f�i��_
- 't�i�i'._�1
SECTION 6. REPEALING. Citv of Cottaqe Grove Citv Code Title 11; Chapter 3; Section
9(G)(6), Noise shall be repealed and said subsection renumbered accordingly:
� �_�.� �
.
-..- :
� • - � - ► - - - - - -
- - - - - - - �� ■ �� _
. - - - - - �� . ��
328 SECTION 7. REPEALING. Title 11, Chapter 6, Section 17; Noise Control shall read as
329 follows:
330
331
332
333
334
335
11 ninic� rn�rrQni ; RESERVED
����
�B�a-�ie�
. _
336
337
338
339
340
� ���x� ���
� �
�
,� �
�a�T�» ��� i�
��.��
. .
.
..
,�:._
'I 4 %�`�� I �
__ __ _
- ,
� �
;
_ __
;
- �--�-� _ -�-� �
,
_ .�
-
=.::
._:
- - .L'4�T'T1:�iL1I - - - - - - -
� - - - - - -
� - - - - - -
� - - - - - - •. _ _ . �
Page 9
i � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
� � �,:.�: �
346
347 SECTION 8. SUMMARY PUBLICATION. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.191,
348 in the case of a lengthy ordinance, a summary may be published. While a copy of the entire
349 ordinance is available without cost at the office of the City Clerk, ths��following summary is
350 approved by the City Council and shall be published in lieu of p�bl�s]iing the entire ordinance:
�k k
351 This noise ordinance establishes hours of any activities that migh�t��isturb residents. While
352 no one is allowed to cause loud noises that are likely to anr�oy�a��`e� person, there
353 are specific hours after which certain activity is prohibited��;: �I�oisy gattierings and amplified
354 sound, including the use of live music or speakers, must �lso be shut��:o�f turned down by
355 10 p.m., unless approved by a city permit. The use o� ptiwer tools and pow equipment is
356 limited during day and night times, days of the w�eek,.�Vveekends and legal h;o i ays unless
357 otherwise approved by a City permit. Some ac�����ies are exerr�pt from these�nQ se provisions
358 based on City Council or City Administrator approual ��:° ��'
� � ��<; ��.
359 � � .,. .,:��� , ��t.
360 SECTION 9. EFFECTNE DATE. Thi�s�o��kdi�ance shall b�e`�� force and effect from and
� ��
�� ���� 4 � � ��
361 after its passage and publication accor�,ing tp;;1��. �� ��:�,
362
363 Passed this day
364 Attest:
365
366
367
368
Bailey, Mayor
Page 10
EXCERPT FROM A�PROVED MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY,
HEALTH AND WELFARE COMMISSION M�EETING ON OCTOBER 15, 2013
5. New Business
09�.A Muffler�Noise ---�Captain �Pete�Koerner
Captain Ko�rrie'r did a shorfi presentation to the Commission which covered the
ordinance. He went on to say that due to concerns raised in the last year by citizens
regarding noise, unreasonable acceleration, but mostly the noise issue. He went on to
say that staff is recommending that the variaus noise regulations referenced throughoufi
the city code be combined into one section of fihe city code. He added that s#aff and the
City Attorney are proposing to use more of a"reasonable person standard" in the
assessment of a compliance standard or violafiion. This standard may help circumvent
unreasonable complainfs or expectations of enforcement. He showed them the many
ordinance titles that pertained ta nois� and then the amended ordinance that had all.
noise issues under one title.
He went on to say fhat stafF is requesfing input or feedback from the Commis5ion that
can be forwarded fior review, to the Planning Commission afi their Oataber 2, 2013
meeting. Once all the commenfs are received, the City Attorney will review the draft
ordinance amendrrient and the document will again be presented to the public Safety,
Health and Welfare Commission. .
After his presentation, he asked the Commission for any comments and/or discussion.
Mos# of the comm�nts were regarding how the officer �nakes a decision as #o whether
or not to issue a citation. Captain Koerner said most of the officers respond ta citizen
complaints on noise and have often fiollowed the practice of the "reasonable standard"
when responding. Most wiil advise thaf there has been a complaint -- mor� like
educating the public when enforcing the ordinance rather than issuing a citation.
Mike DeMars, 7032 90 Street Soufih, approached the Commission wifih background on
fihe noise matter/traffic volume. He approached the Commission last year with this issue
and met with the police Chief, Captain Koern�r and the City Engineer. Captain Ko�rner
added that the amended ardinance will help address the "behaviars" of drivers, ie.
obnoxious behavior where the drivers rev the engines when stopped. By changing th�
o�dinar.�ce, ifi will help with the enforcement of the ordinance.
RESOLUTION NO. 2012-XXX
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF
ORDINANCE NO. XXX BY TITLE AND SUMMARY
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove adopted Ordinance No. XXX,
which amends City Code by consolidating most noise regulations in the City Code and adding
new regulations into a new chapter titled as Title 4, Chapter 9; Noise; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.191, subd. 4 allows publication by title and
summary in the case of lengthy ordinances; and '
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the
public of the intent and effect of the ordinance.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove,
County of Washington, State of Minnesota, that the City Clerk shall cause the following
summary of Ordinance No. XXX to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire
ordinance:
Public Notice
The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove has adopted Ordinance No. XXX.
The ordinance amends the City Code by consolidating most noise regulations in
the City Code and adding new regulations into a new chapter titled as Title 4,
Chapter 9; Noise. The entire text of Ordinance No. XXX is available for inspection
at Cottage Grove City Hall during regular business hours and is posted at the
Washington County Park Grove Library.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a complete copy of the ordinance is kept in the City
Clerk's office at City Hall for public inspection and a copy of the ordinance will be posted on the
Public Notice Bulletin Board at City Hall, 12800 Ravine Parkway South.
Passed this 18th day of December 2013.
Myron Bailey, Mayor
Attest:
Caron M. Stransky, City Clerk
EXCERPT FROM APPROVED MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON OCTOBER 28, 2013
7.1 Noise Ordinance Amendment
McCool summarized the staff report and requested comments on the draft ordinance
amendment for purposes of finalizing the ordinance amendment and scheduling a public
hearing for a future Planning Commission meeting.
Brittain asked if homeowners could work inside their home any day and time if their doors and
windows were closed. McCool replied affirmatively. Brittain asked what section of the city code
this proposed ordinance covered. McCool responded that it would be 4-9-8(B) which states that
any mechanical or power equipment or tool operated by fuel or electric power are allowed only if
the work is performed inside an enclosed building. Brittain asked if this ordinance was referring
to outdoor homeowner noise only. McCool replied that it is primarily for outdoor activities and
provides some guidance to address outdoor roofing noise as well as site-grading activities, and
things like pouring concrete for driveways or commercial activities that take place. McCool
stated they would now be able to alter or identify what the construction limits were for a
commercial building. If commercial workers want to work extended hours, that could be
addressed in the CUP as a condition. The ordinance amendment would have the guidelines but
would also have the caveat "or otherwise approved by City Council." ,
Ventura questioned if there had been a CUP previously approved with a decibel level attached
to the CUP and if so, if that would be grandfathered in? Ventura also asked if somebody called
with a complaint and if the ordinance was more of a reasonable standard, how it would affect
previous CUPs. McCool said he'd question the City Attorney about that and then report the
answer at the next meeting.
Ventura questioned what other cities did regarding the exception list and if theirs were more
general or if it was as specific as drafted? McCool stated that noise ordinances from other cities
were reviewed and the proposed ordinance amendment includes various exception elements
from the other cities.
Johnson expressed concerns for a subjective determination if a noise violation exists from a
reasonable person. McCool stated that could be a challenge if there is a disagreement and
whether it's a valid complaint. Johnson asked if a reasonable person's subjective decision could
be a problem in court. McCool stated that the draft ordinance had been reviewed by the City
Attorney who has been involved with noise enforcement in other communities.
McCool stated air-conditioning units were identified as an exception in the proposed noise
ordinance amendment and reported that occasionally someone will call to complain about the
neighbor's A/C running. Generally, an A/C unit will be allowed to run.
Ventura agreed with the reasonable standard and thought it will work itself out. Ventura said the
proposed ordinance will allow enforcement of unnecessary and/or excessive noise when such
noise events might not exceed the current decibel limitations.
Excerpt from Approved Planning Commission Minutes
Noise Ordinance Amendment
October 28, 2013
Page 2 of 3
McCool reported that the Public Safety staff assisted in preparing the draft noise ordinance
amendment. The proposed ordinance amendment was presented to the Public Safety, Health
and Welfare Commission at their October meeting. The Public Safety Commission had
questions concerning barking dog type complaints. McCool stated that the enforcement Officer
will talk to the property owner about the dog's barking. Public Safety is confident that this type of
noise ordinance will be manageable for their Officers.
McCool explained that the Planning Commission is asked to provide comment and direction on
the proposed noise ordinance amendment. City staff will continue to work on the proposed
ordinance and will possibly schedule a public hearing for the Planning Commission meeting in
November.
Johnson felt the draft ordinance leaves it open for the Police Department to say, "I think you're
too noisy." Johnson expressed his concern that the proposed ordinance is too subjective.
Brittain said he initially had concerns about a subjective type of decision versus a quantitative
type of decision. However, a decibel reading and varying environmental conditions might not
achieve a solution in a timely manner. Brittain thought the proposed noise ordinance
amendment might be a reasonable compromise and believes the Public Safety Department
does a good job being fair. Brittain acknowledged Johnson's point and concerns, but did not
think a decibel reading as a quantitative measurement will resolve all noise complaints and saw
the proposed noise ordinance as a better solution.
Olsen said he has discussed this matter with the Public Safety Department regarding Johnson's
concerns for Officers' discretion, and their discretion is actually what is currently being used for
the majority of noise-related disputes because people tend to respect a uniformed officer. Olsen
stated that Judges, Courts and members of any law enforcement community are comfortable
with and familiar with the reasonable person standard.
Rostad agreed most of the noise issues are successfully resolved by a reasonable standard.
Ventura said "reasonable" is a term that's used all the time and is a standard that most people
are familiar with. She thought trained professionals and law enforcement understand its intent
and meaning.
Rediske asked if animal noise standards will be placed into this new section of the City Code.
McCool stated there's no change to the animal noise standards, but it will be moved to or
referenced in the proposed new section of the code.
Rediske asked if the car wash noise at the Holiday station at Hinton and 70th Street was
compliant with City ordinances. McCool responded that the conditional use permit for that
property does limit the car wash operations and notice will be mailed to the business owner
concerning late night car wash operations.
The Planning Commission was agreeable in scheduling a public hearing next month.
Excerpt from Approved Planning Commission Minutes
Noise Ordinance Amendment
October 28, 2013
Page 3 of 3
Reese asked if other cities had condensed their noise ordinance regulations into one area of
their city codes. McCool replied by saying that there were a variety of ordinance regulations and
formats by other cities. Reese asked if other cities were revising their noise ordinances. McCool
replied that he was unaware of other cities amending their noise ordinances and it was the
general consensus by city staff the combining all the noise regulation into one chapter will
benefit the public wanting to review the regulations.
The Planning Commission did not express any objection to proceed with scheduling a public
hearing for their meeting in November 2013.
EXCERPT FROM UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON NOVEMBER 25, 2013
6.2 Noise Ordinance Text Amendment — Case TA13-037
An ordinance text amendment amending Title 3, Chapter 10, Section 8(G)(1): Noise and
Air Pollution; adding Chapter 9, Noise to Title 4, Public Health and Safety; amending Title
5, Chapter 1, Section 2: Disturbing the Peace; amending Title 6, Chapter 1, Section 2: Un-
necessary Acceleration; repealing Title 6, Chapter 6, Section 7: Noise Levels; repealing
Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 9(G)(6): Noise; and repealing Title 11, Chapter 6, Section 17:
Noise Control of the City Code.
McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval of the ordinance amend-
ments as summarized in the planning staff report and as drafted.
Imdieke asked if refueling equipment required the equipment to be started and brought to
another location where the refueling tanker was located. McCool replied it would depend on
the location of the tanker and the location of the equipment; most often the back-up beeping
of the equipment might be more disturbing than moving the equipment.
Rostad asked if a retail company could only unload deliveries until 7:00 p.m. McCool stated
they could unload after that time but if it caused a problem with noise, the City would have to
investigate it. Rostad asked about the semi-driver being guilty of the violation. McCool stated
that the operator of the equipment causing the noise would be guilty, not the semi-driver.
McCool reported that the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission had reviewed the
noise ordinance regulations in the City Code and the proposed ordinance amendments at
their October 15 and November 19, 2013 meetings. McCool stated that the memorandum
from Pete Koerner, Deputy Director of Public Safety, dated November 21, 2013 summarizing
Public Safety Commission's discussion and support for the proposed noise ordinance
amendments was included in the Planning staff report.
Rostad opened the public hearing. No one spoke, Rostad closed the public hearing.
Imdieke made a motion to recommend the approval of the proposed ordinance
amendments relating to noise regulations in the City Code as drafted in the Planning
Staff Repori: Rediske seconded, Motion passed unanimously (5-to-0 vote).