4.1. DRAFT MINUTES 04-23-2019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Page 3 March 26, 2019 ----------------------------- a home occupation located in a residential district and didn’t feel the neighboring residents should be burdened with policing potential noise issues. Commissioner Jordan stated he spoke to Mr. Carlton before the meeting to express his concerns regarding this item. He indicated he was livid as he read the noise mitigation paragraph and felt it was written too broadly. He commented the way it’s written, it would affect his wife, who works from home once a month for an insurance company, thereby preventing her from having her window open to enjoy a spring day. He stated their neighbor, who also works from home, prefers to have his window open but can’t with the way this ordinance was written. He stated it’s their constitutional right to allow windows to be open and said if someone wants to work from home and type and make phone calls, the city doesn’t have the right to regulate that. He stated if a next-door neighbor has a buzz saw in the garage and operates it all day, then there’s a problem. He stated his conversation with Mr. Carlton discussed disallowing mechanical devices and would require a CUP. He asked that staff look at ordinance language from similar cities like Anoka and Andover, or other cities similar to Elk River, and contact the League of Minnesota Cities, for their ordinance language and to prevent Elk River from going too extreme in our language and go against the intent of the ordinance. Commissioner Rydberg concurred and says the way the ordinance is currently written, it’s too broad by trying to cover every type of scenario and creates more problems than solves. He suggested narrowing down the language to more of a noise type of business in a small residential lot setting and asked staff to look at taking a narrower focus of this ordinance. Commissioner Thiel asked for the definition of home occupation and wondered if a person working from home one day a week or full time from home would require a home occupation permit. He stated he didn’t feel teleworkers shouldn’t fall under the definition and requirements of home occupation. Co-Chair Larson-Vito asked why the ordinance has to specify windows. She stated any home occupation that would create a nuisance noise is already listed in the ordinance under prohibited activities. Commissioner Beise stated with his previous law enforcement experience, sometimes it’s easier to put safeguards in place in order to mitigate a problem, noting that trying to determine if something is loud or making a vibration is difficult for city officials to determine. Commissioner Jordan stated government shouldn’t have a role in telling residents they need to have all windows and doors closed, which is why he would like wisdom from other cities for input. He questioned defining business noise versus general noise. He stated he wouldn’t support this as it stands. Mr. Leeseberg read the definition of home occupation. He provided an example stating a residence is a home first with a secondary use of incidental and secondary use as an office.