Loading...
Snowmobile Committee Minutes January 25, 2001Otsego Snowmobile Ordinance Meeting - January 25 • Vern handed out a map of the platted areas, minutes of the 1/18 meeting, and a one page handout of rules to follow when snowmobiling. • Mike - had a discussion with the City attorney -anything the DNR writes is overridden by the state statutes. In any county, a snowmobile may ride on a the shoulder of a county road. • Vern -the city council members discussed finding a place to park snowmobile trailers. They will ask the snowmobile club to work on that this summer. • Vern - in regards to platted -the map that was passed out contains areas of platted areas. We should draw our own lines, rather than try to follow platted map. • Jay - we need law enforcement, education -ordinances aren't in layman's terms. Jay re -wrote the ordinance in a language he felt people could understand. The draft was passed out to the committee. He stated part of the education plan will be a one page flyer. The snowmobilers will be more likely to read one page. A one page handout, if we decide to mail something out (every year), something with pictures of snowmobiles would catch their attention and they will read it - it is a condensed version of the formally written one. • The suggestion was made to take time to read Jay's version of a revision to the snowmobile ordinance. • Vern -The terminology of the platted areas needs to be redifined. We are going to have to define specc areas drawn on the map -the same as we did the "no discharge" areas. • Jay used the term designated areas in his sample of a revision to the ordinance. For now, this is the term that will be used. • City attorney will probably reword anyway. • Question (Paul) -let's take a look at 8-1-5, A (page 2) -language doesn't reflect where the snowmobiles can actually drive. • Jay explained current wording is unclear of where a snowmobile can drive. Language is unclear if he is "allowed to" or "prohibited from" snowmobiling. • Paul -. The way this ordinance is worded, 46you may operate a snowmobile" reflects they have the right to ride in certain areas. Instead of you may operate" I would rather see the ordinance reflecting restrictions • Sharon - We aren't here to just take what is currently written as the ordinance and re -write piece by piece. We need to take a look at each piece and determine if it still pertains. Numerous meeting attendees agreed. • Mike - someone needed to take a stab in the dark, there are parts of the ordinance that clearly need to be re -written. Getting into the philosophical discussion of privilege & rights is not a function of this ordinance. Those exist per state law and aren't something we can take away or grant. From my perceptive "cleaning up the ordinance is something the council is looking for". • Question (Chip) -other revised portions reflect you may not operate a snowmobile - language should be changed to "you may not operate a motorized vehicle. • Response (Vern) -there is a separate part of the ordinance for that. Currently, you may not ride in the right of ways at all. Snowmobilies are the only motorized vehicle allowed to operate in the right of way. • Comment (?) -Although they are not allowed, ATVs are riding the ditches. • Ordinance has 10 sections. • Sections 3 - 6 deal with snowmobiles. • Others deal with recreational vehicles. The suggestion was made to og through each section of Jay's version of the re -write. 8-1-3 (Al Paul -the only change is a few words - "or so close to an intersection" changed to "in such close proximity ". Question (Vern) -above the heading in the original ordinance there is an original paragraph in the ordinance -does it need to stay? All city traffic ordinances will apply to snowmobiles except for those relating to (required equipment?). We will work on that and come up with something. Question (Joanne) -When coming out of a driveway, does a car have the right of way. Response -yes, the car has the right of way. Any suggestions for making (A) more clear. No response. Sharon - I would like to preface that while we are discussing the revisions, they will apply only to the areas where snowmobiling will be allowed. We haven't discussed that yet. Everyone needs to have this in their head - the "revisions" apply where the council decides snowmobiling will be allowed (based on our recommendations). Vern m without a doubt. Section 8-1 (Bl Jay - Changes in "revision" reflect changes in the law. Question (Sharon) -State statutes appear clear that there are fines up to $300. Should we include the fines in the ordinance as a deterrent to snowmobilers who break the law, similar to the Elk River ordinance 0 Vern -our city attorney doesn't like this, the entire ordinance book would need to be re- written. We would spend thousand of dollars to re -write the entire ordinance book. The ordinance does indicate violations are misdemeanors. Tom Carter- if we assume Elk River got the fines right, we could list them on a separate sheet. Tom provided a copy of Elk River ordnance/fines. Vern -these are based on 84.82. Vern -the fines reflected with the Elk River City Ordinance maybe have been developed by Sherburne County judges. Suggestion (Tom Carter) -then we should go the Wright County judges and see what they say. Response -instead of publishing fines with ordinance, (city would need to revise their entire ordinance book), all they can do is indicate if it is a misdemeanor. A separate attachment listing fines could go out when they mail the ordinance. 8-1-3 (B) Discussion as to whether minors must be accompanied by an adult: Suggestions/questions? Question (Paul) - is (the revision) this stating a minor can't cross a city street? Response (Jay) - if you are under 14 without a state certificate you can't cross. Over l4 and with a safety certificate, you can. Suggestion -there needs to be a definition of "accompanied by." (84.872) -Jay - has a problem with what this means. He believes this means on the same machine. Per the DNR, accompanied by means can take over immediate control. Suggestion - in Otsego we can make this what we want. Tom Carter - State Statute as 84.90, subdivision 6 - reflects the city can impose additional restrictions. This is repeated in the DNR book. Vern - 84.90 refers to recreational motor vehicles, not snowmobiles. Tom Carter - 84.90 definitions -defines recreational vehicles as including snowmobiles. Only the City Ordinance defines it differently. Mike will ask City Attorney what our authority is to make the laws stronger under state law., specifically can we require all riders under 14 to have an adult with them. Action - section B will be separated into the various age groups and appropriate restrictions. (Mike indicated he is taking notes of any suggestions to the "revision" and will have it updated). 8-1-5 (Al The ordinance encourages people to ride on the inside slope. They want to keep the snowmobiles away from the road. Tom Carter- on the bigger roads. On the township roads it is the opposite. Suggestion (Ron L) - on Page, if they have to ride in ditch, they have to go into people's yards to get beyond the drainage ditch. Elk River ordinance states to ride on the street. In residential areas, the ordinance should state to ride on the street. They would then only ride when there is snow and go to the trail. Chad - it would eliminate the "back and forth" riding. l -5 - it is kind of what they are saying. On the city streets, ride in a single file. Statement (?) Are we saying we want people to drive on streets, rather than ditches? Response (?) - yes, on city streets. Comment (?) -The ditches aren't clean because of the "stuffl' people have in it. They want snowmobilers to abide by the law, but the owners must keep there ditches clean. Comment (?) Enin residential area isn't it a belligerent snowmobiler that is breaking these laws, it goes back to education. Question -where are the complaints coming from, county or city? Response (Mikes -Parrish, Page Avenue, 96th Street, residential areas�rovide the most calls. Some on Nashua. Question to Vern(Tom Carter) - Page 13 of the DNR book has a description of township roads. Jay -the ordinance as it was written, made an effort to make a distinction: A) it about state and county highways B) is about city streets Comment (?) -Rules were written 30 years ago when snowmobiling weren't a problem. Discussion regarding where should the snowmobiles ride - Some homeowners have a deep ditch -there is a problem because snowmobilers must go up into the yards. Question (Jay) -what we are talking about, people would like to see the snowmobiles on the street? Comment (?) -Driving on the street will cause damage to the streets. Comment (Sharon) -Currently, there is damage done to our property and driveway. If damage is done to the street, snowmobilers and non-snowmobilers will end up sharing the expense to repair a street. Comment (Chip) -then restrict them out of the area. Comment (?) -they have a right to drive in the ditch, keep them in the ditch. Give up the end of your driveway. Comment (Chad) -then they will cut corners and go farther into yards. Comment (Ron T) - it is dangerous to ride a snowmobile in a ditch with culverts and deep ditches. Mike -City engineer said snowmobiles do not damage the underlying surface of the roads. • Suggestion to this section : heading such as "state and county highway" and the information that goes with it. Heading such as "city streets" and the information that goes with it. Question: Can Jay get no snowmobiling signs. No - so Mike will get some signs to have at City Hall. Question: Bike path -cars, vehicles are riding on path. Can the city provide concrete barriers? Currently, the signs are take. Mike - he will get no "snowmobiling signs" and snowmobile club will put up on bike path. Jay - path should be plowed. Mike- they are checking into this -within two years they will have spines to a bike path (connecting, going to school, etc.) - they will need to keep path clear. Question -What is the definition of boulevard? Response - an example is along Parrish. Between the sidewalk and street. Comment -Hwy 101 bridge will have a significantly wider bridge. Snowmobiles will be crossing the new bridge for trail 8A.. • For this section, the word boulevard will be defined. 8-1-5-E • Is OK • Add you may not ride a snowmobile in any city park or public place 8-1-5- H • Is OK 8-1-5-I • designated areas will be defined/working on • Mike- suggestion - there will be signs designating speed limits • Suggestion - keep a copy of the ordinance in glass in front of city hall. 8-1-5- J • work in progress Vern - we have to be careful about the time frame we put in ordinance. This could go against people's rights. Constitutional issue. 'Phis could fall under the Nuisance Ordinance -Vern - 6-24.R. No person between 10 to 7 shall congregate or gather. Additional information provided: Mike - Sheriff has quadrupled officers. 4 new sleds -up LOU. ? trained officers. Possibly having city pay for enforcement. A discussion has also occurred regarding hiring a couple of part time officers parked in various locations. Vern -Shouldn't affect budget too much. Mike -they will be patrolling on weekends. • Meeting adj ourned at 9:1 � • Me,�t in tvyo �rapre weeks -