HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-10-02 P & Z Packet CITY OF CENTERVILLE
...
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, October 2, 20118
L CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
IV. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPEARANCES
1. None
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. None
VI. OLD BUSINESS
1. Alex's Lawn and Turf, LLC— Conditional Use Permit Amendment Application
2. Bay View Villas —Review of Dock Requirements
3. Review Comp Plan Comments/Revisions related to Medium Density
VII. NEW BUSINESS
1. Concept Plan Review—Downtown Block 7 Townhomes
2. Code Amendment Discussion
a. Chapter XX—Drone Ordinance
VIII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Minutes not available at this time.
IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES
1. Council Member Liaison
2. Watermark Development(Lino Lakes)
X. ADJOURNMENT
*REMINDERS**
Cky Cote c-6c Cc;c;tang We(1nc s(fiiy, 0c tobc r p gyp, yip p 6-30 p,ccc, ("qty p p„cpp
Cky Cote c-6c Cc;c;tang We(1nc s(fiiy, 0c tobc r 4, 01 6-30 p,ccc, ("qty p 1,ffl
N inn ng & /:ccnng ("cccccccca,r,�on . Tt�c s(1,iy, Novc inbc r p 3, 01 6-30 p,ccc, ("qty p pcffl = = =°Sp ec kip p(cctc;
(ha e to ('rc nc niµ 0c;c;taon 1”" '
p c;c;yc;pang S',1tUrcpicys— 9:00 ,,i,in, 12:00 p ,in, ((rrc;en Lagfits � c;c;y6ng, 1525 99"" L,,ine N,E,, �,,fl nuc)
October 13, Noveniber 10 "" p(c c;c;inber 8, 2018
CITY OF CENTERVILLE REQUEST
FOR COMMISSION ACTION ,
, a
4erviffe
Agenda Item# Department: Requested Meeting Date:
Planning & Zoning 10/2/2018
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Alex's Lawn and Turf, LLC - Request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
At last month's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held on the amendment of a
CUP for Alex's Lawn and Turf. The item was tabled for more negotiation between the business and neighbors
with concerns over noise.
The attached memo lays out staffs recommended changes to the CUP, for discussion by the commission. After
the discussion, the commission may add, delete or modify staff s recommendations. Then, it may be
appropriate for the commission to direct staff to prepare a formal, final draft of the CUP for consideration at the
next meeting.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Direction for staff on clauses to be included in a revised Conditional Use Permit.
For Clerk's Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By:
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By:
Vote Record: Ave Nay
� ] Mosher other(specify) Staff memo, aerial map, letter from applicant
Haiden
Twohy
Ganzel
Broussard Vickers
Refer to:
Consent Tabled Until:
Regular Other:
e re
da wXS�Aum�r`td.3Nrcr°d,d"rararrrrf�s
...�rr,M ,�i.!Cli�r lia's 01 ,120,86-19
September 28, 2018
Planning and Zoning Commission
1880 Main Street
Centerville, MN 55038
Dear Chair and Commissioners:
Alex's Lawn and Turf, LLC has submitted an application for a revision to their
Conditional Use Permit(CUP). A public hearing was held before the Planning and
Zoning Commission and testimony was heard from local residents, Alex Shuda, the
owner of the business, and his representation. After hearing all testimony, the
commission discussed the matter and eventually directed staff to meet with both sides to
see if there was some common ground that could be reached. The goal would be a
revised CUP for the business, which balances the needs of the business and the concerns
of the neighborhood.
City staff has now met with both the neighborhood and business to brainstorm ideas for
revisions to the CUP that might be palatable to both sides.
Below are staff's recommendations for CUP revisions. The suggested revisions reflect
ideas from both sides. It should be noted that both sides have not agreed to all of these
revisions and it is likely that each side will take exception to some of them. What is
presented, represents staff's best attempt at a middle ground.
Staff-Proposed Revisions to the Conditional Use Permit
1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be issued and recorded in favor of the property,
not the owner of the property or an individual business. It shall allow the
operation of a Landscaping Business. Any subsidiaries, DBA's, or similar entities
at this site shall only be allowed to the extent that they are operating a
Landscaping Business. A Landscaping Business shall be defined as a business
which performs landscaping, lawn mowing, snow plowing and other such
property maintenance tasks for commercial and residential customers at their
respective sites. It may also take delivery of, store, and load landscaping
materials such as wood mulch, various sizes of washed rock products, rip rap,
plant materials and the like. A landscaping business may also make retail sale of
said products to customers at the site. A landscaping business may not process or
rock materials,
2. Permitee to construct and maintain berm and wooden privacy fence along the
entire length of the west and south edges of city's water tower property, with a
total height of 12 feet(berm +fence) off the existing ground in that area.
3. Permitee ceases to lease or otherwise use city's water tower property as of
January 1, 2019 and may not reengage the use said property without revision to
this permit.
4. Permitee shall purchase fountain(s)with a total value not to exceed $2,500.
Fountain(s) shall be selected the collective discretion of homeowners at the
addresses of 7048, 7054, 7060, 7068, 7072 and 7084 Cottonwood Court on or
before December 1, 2018. Electricity, installation, and other maintenance and
replacement costs are not the responsibility of the permitee.
5. Item "f)" of the permit shall be revised to allow 24 bins, instead of 10. Language
should be added to state that all landscaping materials (rock, mulch, etc.) must be
stored in individual bins. Different materials may not be comingled or stored in a
stockpile outside of a bin.
6. Exhibit A shall be redrawn to show 24 bins.
7. Permitee shall not begin operations until 8 AM on Saturdays and may not operate
on Sundays. Up to 6 daily waivers (each day counts as one waiver), annually, to
this requirement may be granted by the city administrator or his/her designee if
requested by 3 PM on the preceding Thursday.
8. Permittee shall not utilize steel roll-off containers on site.
9. All other clauses of the CUP shall remain in effect.
City staff will be on hand at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to answer
questions.
Sincerely,
Marls R. Statz, PE
City Administrator/City Engineer
Attachments: Letter from Alex's representation
Aerial Photo with marls-ups
Cc: Alex Shuda—Applicant
Kurt Glaser— City Attorney
Various Cottonwood Court Residents
mHK �M
0=82=11
Septernber 2 7, 2018
St. Payl
VIA EMAIL
Kurt (`laser-, Esq, Mark Statz, City Adirninmstrator
Sirnith & Glaser City of Centervflle
333 lq Washington Ave #405, 1880 Main Street
MinneapoHs, MN 55401 Centerville, NfN 55038
kurtglaser@glaserlaw,net rnstatz@cerpt eirvillemn corn
Re, Alex's L awn and rurf
Our IFile No.- 71255
Dear Messrs. Glaser- and Statz
Thank YOU for your, time yesterday morning meeting with our group
As we expressed during the meeting, we believe that Alex's IL..awr i & Tuirf ("Alex's") is
being operated in coryipfiance with the Conditional Use Permit ("CUP") issued in 2014,
with the excepfion of the 14 bins that were installed wlth the approval of the prior City
Adrriintrator. We agree that the CUP on its -face does not allow those '14 birls, and
Alex's has therefore applied for an amendment to the CUP to specrfically allow them.
These Ibins are a benefit to Alex's operationally, but also benefit the City and the public
by allowing the property to be operated arid rnaintalned efficienfly, which reduces
activity levels and noise,
We have reviewed the staff ire cornmendations in the materials YOU submitted to the
Planning and ZoningCommission, As we expressed du drug the meefing, n1any of the
proposed covidiftions would dramatically lryipact the business, to the point of forcing
Alex's out of the City. However, after dlscussing the options with you and discussing
them further with our client, we agree that there is room for common grOUnd regarding
additional condifions,
'I-he conditions that we can accept are as follows.
1. We would agree to change the business structure of Yard arid Quarry and roll it
under the umbrella of Alex's Lawn and Turf„
p Ft I I I,7, Z3 0 E 5 7 S I J'L:I , S I t^': R 2 i 10 S A Y N F RA t YL,, 1 2,2 7 9-1 1 1 6 22
14 r j�r i i i IIA K11 A 0 FF I C C,' Fljtx '(7?„5 PC, S r� 1 1 8 1 i 1,1 AI,1.1 1110 E9 s,.3.9f 1 Z I CV 4' P 70:7 1 '7''91 6,;JUU 1 6,5 1 2. 3 1 9
W
1.591 j N,;'j I N EJ r r I r-,1 0 CRIES r Vliw 11;;1Iplvi7 ;',SLIT'iZE3 W1 54CJ'1 6 R '7 1 5 2 4 t, 3 Y s C� 6",1 22 3 5 l 919
c"unn Al-�'kui/,i Ljid
WpWmter Z7 2U18
Page 2
2 VVe agiec to consbum a newanj a faint Hi divenswim to W,,,�
dee,nn"4ued, ajury rne C41s Puss! of % lHape"ty "'he so�IV'fvvest colneal
Ww pfopc�tyt and to no Jongot raq of use N; Wy� :3 c'Hf the priopeirly We
beHeve thaL crt:aradons 0 dis wea of theprope�ty, and provAng
a6iihona9 sc�eennq v0th a benn and fence AH sigNicanVy educe mise levWs
at the homes to the vvest. We eshmote 4 wHI take a We We to mmove
(' atenals frorr, that ccn"nei, an(i vve woWd reymst we nat,d,e ,,,,ntd Ncivernber 30
2()18 to lvacate N hat parce
3 We woWd agme W parchase fountawis ft)f �Aacernent nn the �ake betweE`,91 01')i�ex 5,
propeqy and Me nes ghbors' -omses. pavided the WON do not cost more
thmi S2000 MET (See endused scmerishot � f an tmemp�ai fouintain) /Mex's
*KhOd puchase the fountabs, but because the fountains would be �ocated on the
neQhbws—pmperty,, the City vvm,,A acqu�ie aH ne',essary easernents to instaq
and run pawer to the BMWs, and the Cly' vvout t)e re" ponsibt, irlstalatx)n,
upkeep, mamtenance and aflectri6ty to nin the fountauns
We took for Wrard to hearing fioln YOU and MH P tO S�le r'OU at the UPCOrning Pfannng
and Zoning Cvi'irnission rneetir�g,
Ary Ady yours,
AN K Beck
Attomey at Law
pet er@peterbeckJaw cory�
J0,Mf rWeds
Attorney at Law
jWehjpWUNaWgMUpxOM
IZJVV/nidb
M:c Nx MY
JiM ShLICIa
fNJ i
tJ')
u - 1
i }
i
jp w�wn .V"i a
� ,uf
IJ
P
i
1 .
a,Mxtwu d' IlY IPr
41
IN n. I a• I
n ( 1f
kk
r no i� a
k i r:4
d N �
� r
a". tp
vri'a ria rr.� �i. �Nf
a u
�? a
arucl .
�
r' 1
) LO04
,ry
a t
a� »pmt am"7 u k Irks s I C Yi
IIA n C 2
13
f1 P
r „
mei
aII
C _._..�.. ,...,.�.... �//
'bi ! 1
u�
bio
I,
1jN ua'a
Si 0
�� Il a:�
all 1
IIr� in
u�pLO re'wb
IIkCA '
liu
a aI OP
r AID
co
®R lon ��
„
� to ,.. ✓i..... / ,....r %%/.... ...,.. r % ,
f
/
Y"N
110
N1
I
Al I.
m
Oil
c II
„ % f
cul
Y
/ 1
�I N�
I�
, y
I
i
II
i
1
� 1
ca
CL
u �
tow
i � W trip
ens0 c
�
,
LL
X
dLu uid
CITY OF CENTERVILLE REQUEST
FOR COMMISSION ACTION ,
, a
4erviffe
Agenda Item# Department: Requested Meeting Date:
Planning & Zoning 10/2/2018
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Bay View Villas - Discussion of Home Owner's Association Document Outline
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
The developer of Bay View Villas (former Waterworks site) has submitted an outline of the content of the
Home Owners' Association (HOA) Documents. The commission should review this outline and give feedback
to staff and the developer as to whether it meets the intent of their Preliminary Plat recommendation.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Direction for staff on content of the HOA documents.
For Clerk's Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By:
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By:
Vote Record: Ave Nay
� ] Mosher Other(specify) Memo from Developer
Haiden
Twohy
Ganzel
Broussard Vickers
Refer to:
Consent Tabled Until:
Regular Other:
MEMORANDUM
TO: City of Centerville
FROM: Jill Presseller, Gries Lenhardt Allen, PLLP
RE: Proposed Residential Planned Community: Bayview Villas
DATE: September 18, 2018
TJB Homes, Inc., as builder, and Richard Defoe, as developer, seek approval to create a
residential community as set forth on the preliminary plat of Bay View Villas. This would
consist of eighteen (18) detached single family homes.
There would be a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Declaration")
recorded against the property and a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the"HOA") established
with the powers and duties to enforce the Declaration, hold title to certain common elements
(described below), maintain the common elements and provide limited maintenance (snow
removal and lawn care, including irrigation and mowing) over the private lots, and to collect
assessments from the owners of the lots to pay for the cost of maintenance and administrative
costs of the HOA. The Declaration would include certain architectural requirements, including
the right of the HOA to establish an architectural control committee. The developer and builder
would initially retain full control of the HOA, including the architectural control committee.
The Declaration would also include certain restrictions on the use of the property and grant to the
Board the authority to establish rules and regulations applicable to the Property.
Nine of the lots would be adjacent to Centerville Lake, and each of those lots would have the
authority to install a private dock. These homeowners would be solely responsible for
maintenance, repair and replacement of their private docks, but they would be subject to rules
and regulations established by the HOA, through its Board
The common elements and improvements installed by the developer and maintained by the HOA
would include:
- Outlot A, which would include an entrance monument and landscaping;
- Lot 10, Block 2, which would include stormwater ponding;
- Outlot B, which includes access to Centerville Lake and "Upland Docks", as further
described below;
- Walking path located within an easement along the North boundary of Lot 1, Block 1.
- Retaining wall located along North boundary of Lot 10, Block 2 and Outlot A.
The Upland Docks will be a unique aspect of this community. The developer would like to
install up to three (3) docks, that may include up to four(4)boat slips on Outlot B, for the
exclusive use and enjoyment of the owners of Lots 1 — 9, Block 2 (the "Upland Lots"), and their
guests. These docks and boat slips would be owned by the HOA and considered a common
element. The HOA would be responsible for maintenance, repair and replacement of the docks.
Cost of maintenance, including replacement reserves, to the extent not covered by usage or
license fees, would be incorporated in the common expense assessments. The Board would have
exclusive authority to control usage of these docks and slips through rules and regulations. The
Board would have the right to assign one or more of the boat slips to individual owners of the
Upland Lots, through the issuance of licenses, subject to terms and conditions, including fees, to
be determined by the Board. In no event would a license be issued by the Board to a person or
entity that is not an owner of an Upland Lot. The Board would maintain records of all licenses
issued. The Board would have the right to keep one or more (including, all) of the boat slips for
general use by the Upland Lots, and would have the right to issue permits for daily use, subject
to terms and conditions, including fees, to be determined by the Board.
Lastly, the developer and builder would like this to be a"flexible"planned community, reserving
the option to add future phases. They anticipate that authority to use the docks and slips on
Outlot B would continue to be reserved exclusively for the owners of the Upland Lots, and their
guests, and would not be extended to additional lots.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE REQUEST
FOR COMMISSION ACTION ,
, a
4erviffe
Agenda Item# Department: Requested Meeting Date:
Planning & Zoning 10/2/2018
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Comprehensive Plan - Adjacent Jurisdiction Comments
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
The City's Comprehensive Plan was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council for
distribution to surrounding and affected jurisdictions, including a preliminary submittal to the Metropolitan
Council. We have not received all of those comments and are working with our consultant to address them.
City staff would like to review the plan's Medium Density parameters in lieu of these comments and the
implications for the city's fee structure.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Review the medium density definition within the comprehensive plan and provide guidance to staff on any
revisions for re-submittal.
For Clerk's Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By:
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By:
Vote Record: Ave Nay
� ] Mosher Other(specify) Memo from Consultant
Haiden
Twohy
Ganzel
Broussard Vickers
Refer to:
Consent Tabled Until:
Regular Other:
WVLra►
Infrastructure■ Engineering■ Planning■Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South
c /Issrrc:iales,lase, Suite#300
Minneapolis,MN 55416
Tel: 763 541-4800
Fax: 763 541-1700
Memorandum
To: Centerville City Council
Centerville Planning Commission
From: Eric Maass,AICP, Project Manager
Date: September 24,2018
Re: Centerville 2040 Comprehensive Plan
The Cities draft 2040 Comprehensive Flare was distributed to adjacent and affected jurisdictions on
Friday,June 15th. Since that time, we have received feedback from the following agencies:
1. Metropolitan Council
2. MnDOT
3. Lincs Lakes
4. Rice Creek Watershed District
5. Anoka County Parks/Transportation
The City of Lincs Lakes provided comment specifically can the medium density residential district and the
proposed densities in Centerville's plan. Centerville's draft plan indicated the medium density
residential district would allow for densities at 3 to 15 dwelling units/acre. Lincs Lakes indicated that this
land abouts land guided in Lincs Lakes as mixed use (8-15) units per acre, Modicum Density(4.0 to 5.9)
units per acre and low density(1.6 to 3.9) units per acre. See Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Excerpt from Lino Lakes 2040 Land Use Plan
i'�0 ... i /,�I%//fri"erre✓rgfa1r41/R"ly/i��i�1✓/� Legend
Permanent kurall PrirveteAmfield
� /✓/r, � � �r p/�
Law Density Res&indal Open Wader
Medium Den €esifdeinhal I /� Right-of-Way
Hu IM Densily Resdernt�all Munici all Boundary
Mixed
Cam nercie , ,,,,,,,, Parcels
Streams
Business Campus
CMG and insMutionall
AWN, Parks and Open Space
����!%�� �f// �/j�lllll(1�.,. r i➢1 i.../ W.
The two areas guided as modicum density residential in Centerville included the farmer Waterworks site
and the vacant agricultural land in the southern portion of the community. The district was proposed to
allow a density of cup to 15 units per acre due to the potential opportunity that the Waterworks site
presented to allow for an apartment building. That site now has an approved Preliminary Flat for a
detached single-family development. As result,the City can focus mnthe vacant agricultural property
with the Medium Density Residential and if it wishes, could revise the proposed allowed density.
For context,the Watermark development has a net density of 3.40 units/acre. VVealso surveyed I840
Comprehensive Plans of neighboring communities and found the following proposed ranges for medium
density residential:
* H«0»
o Medium 3'6 units per net acre (up tnO units per net acre with a PUD)
* Lino Lakes
o Medium 4.0tn5.9 units per acre
* Forest Lake
o Low-Medium: 3 to 6 units per acre
o Medium 6 t 10 units per acre
* Blaine
o Low-Medium: 2.5 to 12 units per acre
o Medium: 6-12 units per acre
* Shoreview
o Medium:4tnO units per acre
* VadnaisHei0hts
o Medium: Stn9 units per acre
Recommendation
Currently, Staff iarecommending that the Planning Commission and City Council have a discussion
regarding the medium density residential district and its allowed density range. Staff has provided
proposed revised densities and iasupportive mfareduction inthe allowed density based mnthe
following:
l. Development mfthe Waterworks site.
2. Based on the forecast provided by the Metropolitan Council the City is not under any additional
pressure tmallow added density.
S. Comment provided from the City mfLino Lakes regarding adjacent land uses.
4. UmpDcatimnfor Park Dedication Fees, SAC/WAC, etc.
5. Review of actual densities for Low Density developments in process in Centerville and Lino
Lakes.
G. Review mfneighboring cities "medium density" ranges.
7. Centervi||e'a PUD ordinance a||mwa flexibility to permit higher densities than would otherwise be
permitted.
Staff would recommend a revised allowed density ranges aafollows:
a
Future Land Use Net Density Range Yield % Units
Designation Acres Min Mid Max Minimum Midpoint
Low Density 24.50 3.... 4 5.. 100% 74 98
Residential
Medium Density 66.89 3 9 15 100% 201 602
Residential
High Density 8.06 12 18.5 25 100% 97 149
Residential
Central Business 13.75 12 21 30 25% 41 72
District (CBD)/ (3.43
Mixed Use Res)
Total 102.8 413 921
100% Net Density 4.02 8.96
Future Land Use Net -----------------Density Range Yield % Units
Designation Acres Min Mid Max Minimum Midpoint
Low Density 24.50 2.... 3 4.. 100% 49 74
Residential
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Medium Density 66.89 3 5.5 8 100% 201 368
Residential
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
High Density 8.06 8 16.5 25 100% 64 133
Residential
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Central Business 13.75 12 21 30 25% 41 72
District (CBD)/ (3.43
Mixed Use Res)
......................................Total
..................................................1.0.2..g.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................3.55.............................................647.....................
100% Net Density 3.45 6.29
CITY OF CENTERVILLE REQUEST
FOR COMMISSION ACTIONA n'll",,
, a
4erviffe
Agenda Item# Department: Requested Meeting Date:
Planning & Zoning 10/2/2018
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Downtown Block 7 - Concept Plan from Nathan Gunn - Distinctive Living Rentals
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
A Concept Plan has been submitted for the development of the city-owned property on Block 7, in Downtown.
This is the vacant land west of Centerville Road, and between Heritage St. and Sorel St. The site is zoned M-1
(Mixed Use). The concept plan is further explained in the potential applicant's letter, but includes two options,
21 and 30 attached row-style townhomes, respectively.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Review the concept plan and give informal direction to staff and the developer as to how a proposal such as this
would be viewed by the commission.
For Clerk's Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By:
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By:
Vote Record: Ave Nay
� ] Mosher Other(specify) Memo from Developer
Haiden
Twohy
Ganzel
Broussard Vickers
Refer to:
Consent Tabled Until:
Regular Other:
tive Wing
s., .�,
September 28, 2018
N tlh irn Gunn
Disfinctive 11 iving IRentalls
337 '1 t" Ave IIS
Andover, I 14 55304
IMarlk Blau., Members of the Planning Commission and City Council
City of Centerville
'18801Main St.
Centerville, I II1I 55038
Dear IMarlk Statz, Members of the Planning Commission, and City Council,
Residenflall it ll estate Ihas basun my passion and businessfor the Asst '15 years. II Ilh v
Ihad the iriiviill of working with hundreds of it ll estate clients, built town Ihomes in two
separate associationsand II am currently irntlly la n lor of 24 units in a Ramsey tow nllhom
community.
II iiroject Goals
Currently,irntlly, ou4uir company's vision, its to provide modern t1hree bedroom, t1hree batlh, two
carr garage, town1homes to families airn individuals seeIk ii irn to own their ca irn Ihome. '1 u4u it
marIk t demographic its a mix between you4uirn families, move up renters from
apartments, and singleit irnt families. . h m ii irn ii m u4u rn Ihouselholld income wii ll ll be in the
$70,000 range, with many of our tenants having Ihouselholld incomes more than
100,000. Providing iriiv t interior living spaces, serni private patioswith green space,
and ttached garages malke our town1homes more iiir bll to our residents than
tradifionall apartment building. h as t of our residents stay with us Each about two years
before they move on to purchase their own home, and many irn up t yiiirn in the area.
In the future, we want to Ihave the flexibility to sell the single units to iiirn iivii u4u ll buyers.
Fo accomplish thi , each unit needs to be recorded tow nllhom , w1hich will increase
the community's overall vallue andultimately the city's tax Daae.
IIIl iirojjposed ""1111""'owiinllhome IIIl iiroduct fair Develollpmeiint
Replicating a higher end town1home product lilke our Ramsey townlhornes, will be
cheated. Th Il you4ut of the proposed lla n (Figure '1 ) its functional, yet modern. High
end me niifion the interior will include:
• Stainless t 11 appliances
• Upgraded flooring
• IModern II ii h ii irn
Glass• 1irn dills surrounds on the master shower
• Graniteor q u4u Iz counters
• 11 t panell doors
• IModern f uc t throughout
Outside, Fii u4ur 'I shows a s1keleton base of the exterior. Addifionall improvements wiillll
include:
• Carriage ty11 itdoor panel1s with windows on the top panel1
• Slhalke styl1eii iiirn in sel1ect gabl1es
• irn to duslk carriage lighfing on the it fronts irn by the front door
• Multiple ii ii irn colors on the different buildings
• Stone cce nt near the front door and on the face of the it
• Patios off the family room
11.....andscaping will allso be an important addifion to the development. om of these
improvements wiill include the following
• Sidewalks required by the City ii irn and aroundthe community
• limn me nt 11 wrought iron -fence allongCenterville IRoad
• Sorest lights to coordinate wiith the town1home community allong Centerville IRoad
• A landscaping plla n that will include lle n of flowering braes, shrubs, and
evergreens
Flhese improvements wiill provide a tir irn iifiio n ll modernfeel1 that can be a model1 for
future redevelopment in the City of Centerville.
I ii u ire 1 Front IFacade
err, .90,
QPA
„t �
e/ /r
I/n
j/ r
r �
// %// �t� ?,'3G.,,, �� !1111 rJJ1l"wrr»urr.riur,// ar,//lJt r i;) , , N. �? %/ ✓��/^'IrilaY,a�G� ��/i✓(%i;
rri/ a
VN��N
�,v�„i<�, ,�„ 1,��illi��y�firNi, _,I ', »,' „�r ��Il/1�xakl�n�(r/�JI��ff�✓fJ�'i/ !✓ /:,
a,y ✓, f >�, u r rU ,rnr,,; "rrwrirrrar c�lr, I f,,,,� J', %'%///r/�ir��t�%�� / � 1',
�' � fir/ u(✓ n / r
f!�/ � � .(frN�i rr Thr u �a.��x,,,.r i/����ra �„”,�,�r��,rr✓i r y, rlr r4g�i�%//��,J%//��lei/��11f���N�i T��/��� � ���,:.
�,^r,.' r. rr r ✓ rr r ,,., �rivrn,7l�,i>"�/�'%',J�rr %pi rrr �/
.y ✓ //////iii%%%%%rd�ii` //%////%/r%/�/r�ii/arJ rvr»,,/io//fo0ii/%�i%rte%////r%r/; �rorrii r �i IN�(u�wiFiv�r�ra✓rsair Nati
a J ✓� /i���/�%r//ii // r%//l�rr'✓ / jr rii r/ ji/%//r / i//ir„r;r,��O'°,,,,
Figure 2 Upper level layout
FB,,r.,2 Br'.3 Br.2 Br.3 �Br.2 ....... B,r,.3
� 10 KIP
r,
IIRN'II 4im� Ary
�.MJIYIAAI INUI1I glupoa � IIN NI�NN �YW'7I1 INKA
L �� L Loft
' 'W .......
wo DI w
to'x GI
e. e
P pear t
row 0eb
'r. b r.
12x' 7°� I VIIIN" I 12%17" N NVINN "_ �i �K1 " III" N N III
OP-Om �i ing �-O" offing � W� O"Ceding .
NI I 'I IN N N IN VIIIIA
Ij::::jgurle 3 1Iower III,,,,, � I1Ilayout
�V�� pl�,�i� ��ll pp���NNoo��� 1 f !� h�1 ��h� ��I�I
I I � LI +ary I��d IPS Y I 11 I 1 1 All q(�� oa — l �il 111 Iu V"l1 1A`A �Iw'a ori
�II11111
ON L � y
10
, � ,� x D � W.
e
elow
, ,n t
�� �,t
M 'rte Mr.
12"m 17' 1 1 1TH 12%17" 1 1I �1 1 �i " � IIf IPA�'m�" �
� �� it1 1j 1 jH II 1
Ill iirojjposed III at IIII ayout ............1 011pbloin
Fot ll units 1
Extra parking '10 '1
Per unit ireirnt $1800 000 per m as irn t llh
Per unit approximate vallue $250,000.
Fot ll completed piroject v llu e- $5,250,000
CERTIFICATE
SOP EL STREET
234,86
ANOKA 0
1. 'The
s`?" pm
F—
p
3. Per
k &9.
I� L 4. FAY
Nd,
Mair
4 5347
" � (A).
< AFF
w 1?q 1-
__
Z
ch Lu
o�muf uea{F
a a
F.. a
BE.
223.74
........�.�.-.. z BAA
N89-59'12"wl U g'�S' Tot Awe
��.'�
HERITAGE 57REE� w npay QAM
ka
Flhe concept pllan currently shows 21 town Ihomes on the exisfing hot. 1I am proposing a
purchase price of $349,000 and will be asking the City to improve the road and provide
water and sewer connections off Soren Street. Thi s woulld give me a per unit cost of
approximately $16,600. 1I woulld then be responsible for all the utilifies and
improvements withn the hot.
I iirojjposed IIll at IIll ayout ............1 011ptiloin 2
Fotall units 30 33 (30 unit pllan shown)
Extra parking '12 15 spaces
Per unit rent $1800 $2000
Per unit approximate vallue- $250,000
Fotall completed vallue- $7,500,000 to $8,250,000
As an added option, 1I woulld consider purchasing the adjoining Ihouses on Goiffon Load
f the owners are willing to selIlI. Estimated acquisifion cost of each Ilhome woulld be
around $200,000 for a tact ll cost of $400,000. If the owners are willing to selIlI, acquiring
both Ilhomes woulld allllow another nine units allong Goiffon. The t1hree fow pllex units, in
the middle of the development may possibly be converted into five pllex buildings,
adding an addifionall t1hree units (not shown on the concept) for a tact ll of '12 units. If the
City woulld be willing to reduce the purchase price of the City owned hot by
approximately $200,000, 1I coulld lilkely walks the numbers worlk to add the addifionall
units, assuming 1I coulld acquire the addifionall Ilhomes for $400,000. (11 ot purchase price
$150,000 + Ilhome acquisifion $400,000 + derno of Ilhomes $40,000 :::::::: $590,000/ 33
uNts :::::::: approximately $17,900 per unit hot cost.) If the council/planning commission
finds ths opflon favorable, 1I woulld Il an ask the city to improve Goiffon Load and
provide sewer and water stubs for the proposed town Ilhomes on Goiffon.
Il y per hot cost is a liittll Ihiigher, but my overall all utility cost woulld be a little lower with
the city improving Goiffon. In addifion, there woulld be added vallue to the enfire
community iii the enfire block was redeveloped.
CERTIF
f
SOREL STREET
S89QS9'12'E
< --7------ 234�86
v
7=7 "'I-
Uf I
...........
r7
7
c
Ln
i6 C-)7-C-4
fl
r-,L
rj
a(j 6,164 "j
U;.4
.1
1t�� IF
Q L
� �
z
...............
Pvc
014 61
N8959' TV
0
< <
<
H-
TA6STFRE
-
Flhanlks for your consideration. 1I lloolk forward to working with the City of Centerville on
ths project.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE REQUEST
FOR COMMISSION ACTION ,
, a
4erviffe
Agenda Item# Department: Requested Meeting Date:
Planning & Zoning 10/2/2018
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Drone Ordinance
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
North Metro TV, at the direction of its board, had its attorney draft a sample ordinance regarding the use of
drones in cities. This was done to eliminate having the need for each city draft their own. A memo from North
Metro staff gives more detail on the purpose and intent of the ordinance.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Motion to recommend that the City Council adopt the model Drone Ordinance as presented.
For Clerk's Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By:
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By:
X
Vote Record: Ave Nay
� ] Mosher Other(specify) NMTV Staff Memo
Haiden
Twohy
Ganzel
Broussard Vickers
Refer to:
Consent Tabled Until:
Regular Other:
STAFF MEMO
Drone Ordinance
INTRODUCTION
The City is one of seven member cities of the North Metro Telecommunications Commission ("NMTC").
In March 2018, NMTC engaged the law firm of Bradley Berkland Hagen & Herbst LLC to draft a policy
governing municipal drone use and a drone ordinance for NMTC's member cities.The ordinance is now
before the City Council for consideration.
DISCUSSION
NMTC's outside attorney, Mike Bradley, Bradley Berkland Hagen & Herbst LLC, in consultation with
NMTC's Executive Director, Heidi Arnson, drafted a Drone Ordinance and Municipal Drone Policy
governing NMTC's drone operations. Both documents are attached to this Staff Memo for consideration.
Drone Policy
Under current federal law, most, if not all,government drone operations are exempt from federal
regulation.The Drone Ordinance fills this void by setting forth the procedures and operating principles
that NMTC must follow to ensure safe and reliable drone operations.
The Drone Policy requires that all NMTC drone operations, whether performed by a NMTC employee or
an independent contractor retained by NMTC, must comply with applicable state and federal law.This
includes obtaining any necessary authorizations or exemptions from the Federal Aviation
Administration.The Drone Policy also requires that drone operators must record certain operational
information, such as a preflight inspection or a flight report, with NMTC's Executive Director.The Drone
Policy requires that this information be stored in accordance with NMTC's data retention policy. Under
this policy,this information may be publicly available by request. The purpose of making this
information publicly available is to provide transparency to the public and to ensure them that NMTC
and the City are operating drones for the public's benefit and in a safe and ethical manner.
Drone Ordinance
The Drone Ordinance has two primary aspects: (1) it requires a permit for operating a drone above City-
owned or managed lands and waters, and (2) it criminalizes certain drone uses, such as invasion of
privacy.
As is indicated in the ordinance,there is an existing body of federal law that regulates the use of drones
in federal airspace. Because the City does not have jurisdiction in federal airspace,this ordinance seeks
only to manage drone use over City-owned or managed lands and waters. While this ordinance sets
forth certain limitations on the operation of a drone in these areas,this ordinance further authorizes the
City Manager to promulgate additional rules governing drone use over these City-owned or managed
lands and waters (i.e., drone operations in certain parks may be banned by the City Manager).
Prior to operating a drone over City-owned or managed lands or waters,this ordinance requires a drone
user to obtain a permit from the City.These permits are intended to be required for each individual
drone operation subject to this ordinance.To obtain a permit, a drone user must provide information
relating to a drone operation such as time, location, duration, and purpose of the operation. In this way,
the user is also providing notice to the City of the user's drone operation. The ordinance also requires
that the user submit a Drone Permit Fee to the City. The amount of this fee may be determined by the
City Manager.
While operating a drone,the ordinance makes it unlawful to operate a drone so as to interfere with law
enforcement,firefighting, or any other government emergency operations.The ordinance also makes it
unlawful for a user to operate a drone in a reckless manner that creates a risk of serious physical injury
to another or damage to property of another.
This ordinance also protects the City's resident's privacy by making it a criminal offense to operate a
drone in any manner constituting a nuisance, an invasion of privacy, or trespass. For example,the
ordinance makes it a criminal act to use a drone to record a video of an individual where they have a
reasonable expectation of privacy, such as inside their home.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City: (1) hold a public hearing on the Drone Ordinance, (2) at a following City Council Meeting,
take action on the Drone Ordinance, and (3) adopt written findings of fact to support the action taken.
Model Drone Ordinance
Last Updated:August 21,2018
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING PROVISIONS FOR DRONE; ADDING A NEW CHAPTER TO THE
MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ;AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of ("the City") recognizes that current law enforcement options
against operators of Small Unmanned Aircraft, commonly referred to as "drones," are limited under
current state and local laws;
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that drones raise legitimate concerns regarding safety, privacy,
nuisance, and trespass;
WHEREAS,the difficulty of identifying drone operators raises concerns regarding enforcement of
existing laws and connecting drone operators to their devices;
WHEREAS, drone use has greatly increased within the City in recent years;
WHEREAS,the City has exclusive authority over land use and zoning decisions within the City;
WHEREAS,this Ordinance is designed to allow local law enforcement to charge persons violating
federally mandated UAS standards with a misdemeanor crime pursuant to [INSERT CITATION TO
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION IDENTIFYING MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT POWERS]; and
WHEREAS,this Ordinance is written so as not to conflict with existing federal and state law; and
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY the City Council of the City of
Minnesota:
Section 1. Purpose
The City encourages the safe and responsible use of Drones. This Ordinance is designed to empower
innovation while protecting and promoting the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens.
Section 2. Definitions
A. "Aircraft" shall mean any contrivance now known or hereafter invented, used, or designed for
navigation of or flight in the air, but excluding parachutes.
[Source: Minn. Stat. §360.013, subd. 37.]
B. "Applicable Law" shall mean any law, rule, regulation, or ordinance promulgated by the Federal
Aviation Association,the State,the City, or any other body having competent jurisdiction.
C. "City" shall mean the City of Minnesota.
D. "Commercial Operation" shall mean the Operation of any Small Unmanned Aircraft for
compensation or hire, or any services performed incidental to the operation of any Unmanned
Aircraft for which a fee is charged or compensation received including, but not limited to, the
servicing, maintaining, and repairing of aircraft;the rental or charter of aircraft; the operation of
flight or ground school; the operation of aircraft for the application or distribution of chemicals
or other substances; aerial photography and surveys; air shows or expositions; and the operation
1
Model Drone Ordinance
Last Updated:August 21,2018
of aircraft for fishing. "Commercial Operation" shall also mean the brokering or selling of any of
these services but does not include any operations of aircraft as common carriers certificated
(certified) by the federal government or the services incidental to certificated operations.
[Source: Minn. R. 8800.3100.]
E. "Drone" or"Small Unmanned Aircraft" shall mean an Aircraft Operating without the possibility of
direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft and weighing less than fifty-five (55)
pounds on takeoff, including everything that is onboard or otherwise attached to the aircraft.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.3.]
F. "FAA" shall mean the Federal Aviation Administration.
G. "Operate" or "Operation" shall mean the use, cause to use, or authorize to use Aircraft, for the
lawful purpose of air navigation, including the piloting of Aircraft,with or without the right of legal
control (as owner, lessee, or otherwise). An Operation may be a Recreational Operation or a
Commercial Operation.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 1.1.]
H. "Operator" shall mean any Person that engages as a pilot or person in command in the Operation
of a Drone.
I. "Person" shall mean an individual, firm, partnership, corporation, company, association, joint-
stock association, or governmental entity. It includes any trustee, receiver, assignee, agent, or
similar representative thereof.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 1.1 and Minn. Stat. §360.013, subd. 53.]
J. "Recreational Operation" shall mean any Operation of a Drone that is not consistent with
Commercial Operation of the Drone and is for hobby or personal purposes only.
K. "State" shall mean the State of Minnesota.
L. "Visual Observer" shall have the same meaning and limitations as are found in 14 C.F.R. § 107.3.
Section 3. Development of Rules
The City Manager or his/her designee shall administer and enforce Sections 1 through 7 of this
Ordinance. In addition to the specific requirements set forth herein,the City directs and delegates to its
City Manager the authority to develop rules for the operation of Drones within the City, consistent with
this Ordinance.The City Manager must publish such rules on the City's website, or through other
equivalent internet accessible systems, and must periodically report to the Council on the
implementation of such rules, including information regarding enforcement actions and the costs
associated with implementing and enforcing such rules.The rules developed by the City Manager must
be consistent with the following:
A. The City Manager may adopt reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and manner in which a
person may land, launch, or otherwise operate a Drone so as not to interfere with the health,
safety, and welfare of City residents. Such restrictions may not place an undue burden on a
2
Model Drone Ordinance
Last Updated:August 21,2018
Drone's Recreational Operation or Commercial Operation.To ensure that restrictions are easily
accessible by Operators, such restrictions should be published on the City's website or through
other equivalent internet accessible systems.
B. The City Manager may require certain conditions be fulfilled prior to the take-off, landing, or
operation of a Drone from certain designated lands within the boundaries of the City.
Section 4. Permit and Notice Required
A. In addition to the other requirements set forth in this Ordinance, no Person may Operate a
Drone on or above any land or water owned or controlled by the City without first obtaining a
permit from the City.
B. To ensure Operators are accountable, all Permittees must submit a permit application
identifying the intended operation through an internet accessible system to be provided by the
City Manager.The electronically filed application may contain any or all of the following
information as required by the City Manager:
1. the name, address, and telephone number of the Person filing the applicable and the
telephone number at which the operator can be contacted during the Operation;
2. the take-off and landing location of the Operation;
3. the expected start and end time of the Operation (if the Operator intends to take-off
and land multiple times in the same location, one notice for multiple operations may
suffice, so long as the duration of the combined operations does not exceed 4 hours,
after which a new permit application must be filed);
4. the purpose of the Operation;
5. a statement affirming that the Operator has consulted relevant City rules and intends to
abide by them;
6. such other information as the City Manager shall deem reasonably necessary to inform
the City whether the takeoff, landing, or operation will endanger the health, safety, or
welfare of persons located within the City, and if such use is inconsistent with this
Ordinance; and
7. a Drone Permit Fee.
C. Once a permit application has been electronically filed consistent with this Section 4, a permit
shall issue, and an Operation may commence so long as such Operation is consistent with this
Ordinance and any City rules promulgated pursuant to Section 3.
D. The City Manager will provide a paper-based procedure as an alternative to the electronic
system specified in this Section 4, such system will collect information identical to that specified
in this Section 4 (13)(1-6).
Section S. Requirements for Operating a Drone
A. Compliance with Applicable Law
3
Model Drone Ordinance
Last Updated:August 21,2018
In addition to the limitations set forth in this Chapter, any Operation of a Drone within the City
shall comply with any and all Applicable Law, including, but not limited to,Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 360, and Minnesota Administrative Rules
Chapter 8800.
B. Authorization Required
No Person may Operate a Drone within the City without first becoming duly authorized to do so.
Such required authorizations include, but are not limited to,the FAA's Part 107 authorization,the
FAA's Section 336 authorization, and the FAA's Remote Pilot Certificate. Furthermore, no Person
may Operate a Drone in a manner that is in violation of any Applicable Law unless an applicable
waiver or exemption has been obtained.
C. Requirements for Operation Generally
In addition to the limitations set forth in federal and state law, the following are requirements
applicable to any Person Operating a Drone within the City.
1. It shall be unlawful to Operate any Drone in a manner that interferes with law enforcement,
firefighting, or any government emergency operations.
2. No person may operate a Drone in a reckless manner so as to create (a) a substantial risk of
serious physical injury to another or (b) a substantial risk of damage to the property of
another.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.23.]
[START OPTIONAL CONTENT]
[The following are optional requirements that a City may include in this Ordinance, but it should be
Sourced that all of these requirements are contained in current federal law.The reason for including
any of the below optional requirements would be if your City has a particular concern that is
addressed by one of these optional requirements.]
1. No Person may Operate a Small Unmanned Aircraft unless the Small Unmanned Aircraft is in
a condition for safe Operation. Prior to each flight, the Operator must check the Small
Unmanned Aircraft to determine whether it is in such a condition. No Person may continue
Operation of a Small Unmanned Aircraft when the Person knows or has reason to know that
the Small Unmanned Aircraft is no longer in a condition for Operation.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.15.]
2. No Person may Operate a Small Unmanned Aircraft or act as a Visual Observer if the Person
knows or has reason to know that they have a physical or mental condition that would
interfere with the safe Operation of the Small Unmanned Aircraft.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.17.]
3. No Person may Operate a Small Unmanned Aircraft from a moving aircraft.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.25.]
4
Model Drone Ordinance
Last Updated:August 21,2018
4. No Person may Operate a Small Unmanned Aircraft from a moving land or water-borne
vehicle unless the Small Unmanned Aircraft is flown over a sparsely populated area and is
not transporting another Person's property for compensation or hire.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.25.]
5. No Person may Operate a Small Unmanned Aircraft within eight(8)hours after the
consumption of any alcoholic beverage, while under the influence of alcohol, while using any
drug that affect the Person's faculties in any way contrary to safety, or while have an alcohol
concentration of 0.04 grams of alcohol per deciliter of blood or greater in a blood or breath
specimen.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. §§91.17& 107.27.]
6. During the Operation of a Small Unmanned Aircraft, the Operator or a Visual Observer, if
any, must maintain Visual Line-of-Sight in order to:
a) know the geographic location of the Small Unmanned Aircraft;
b) determine the Small Unmanned Aircraft's attitude, altitude, and direction of flight;
c) observe the airspace for other air traffic or hazards;and
d) determine that the Small Unmanned Aircraft does not endanger the life or property of
another.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.31.]
7. Neither an Operator nor a Visual Observer may use an assistive device, such as binoculars or
a telescope, to maintain or initiate Visual Line-of-Sight.
8. No Person may Operate a Small Unmanned Aircraft, without obtaining prior authorization
pursuant to Applicable Law:
a) directly over a human being unless that human being is the Operator oris located under
a covered structure or inside a stationary vehicle that can provide reasonable protection
from a falling Small Unmanned Aircraft;
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.39.]
b) simultaneously or contemporaneously with any other Small Unmanned Aircraft;
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.35.]
c) during the periods of civil twilight;
[Source: 14 C.F.R. § 107.29.]
d) within three(3)miles of avenue of any public event, including, but not limited to,
sporting events, parades, and music events, at least one(1)hour prior to the scheduled
start time of the public event and at least one(1)hour after the scheduled end time of
the public event;
5
Model Drone Ordinance
Last Updated:August 21,2018
e) in any security sensitive airspace, restricted airspace, special use airspace, or airspace
over any public emergency without prior authorization;or
[Source: 14 C.F.R. §§ 107.41& 107.45.]
f) within five(5)miles of an airport without providing prior notice to the airport operator
and, if the airport has a tower, the air traffic controller.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. §§ 107.37& 107.43.]
D. Preflight Restriction Required
1. Prior to the Operation of any Small Unmanned Aircraft, an Operator must:
a) assess the operating environment, considering risks to persons and property in the
immediate vicinity both on the surface and in the air. This assessment must include:
(i) local weather conditions;
(ii) local airspace and any flight restrictions;
(iii) the location of persons and property on the surface;and
(iv) other ground hazards;
b) ensure that all persons directly participating in the Small Unmanned Aircraft Operation
are informed about the operating conditions, emergency procedures, contingency
procedures, roles and responsibilities, and potential hazards;
c) ensure that all control links between ground control station and the small unmanned
aircraft are working properly;
d) if the small unmanned aircraft is powered, ensure that there is enough available power
for the small unmanned aircraft system to operated for the intended operational time;
and
e) ensure that any object attached or carried by the small unmanned aircraft is secure and
does not adversely affect the flight characteristics or controllability of the aircraft.
[END OPTIONAL CONTENT]
Section 6. City Operation of Drones
This Ordinance shall not apply to any Operation conducted by the City or any other public agency so
long as the Operation is conducted for a government purpose and in compliance with all federal and
state laws and regulations and any applicable City policies.
Section 7. Civil Penalties
A. Any Person who Operates a Drone without first obtaining a permit where such a permit is required
may be punished by a fine, not to exceed [INSERT PENALTY AMOUNT].
6
Model Drone Ordinance
Last Updated:August 21,2018
B. Any Person who Operates a Drone in violation of an issued permit may be punished by a fine, not
to exceed [INSERT PENALTY AMOUNT].
C. Any Person who Operates a Drone in violation of this Ordinance, including, but not limited to,
reckless Operation of a Drone, may be punished by a fine, not to exceed [INSERT PENALTY
AMOUNT].
D. Any Person who Operates a Drone in violation of any rules promulgated by the City Manager may
be punished by a fine, not to exceed [INSERT PENALTY AMOUNT].
E. These penalties are not exclusive of one another.
Section 8. Criminal Operation of Drones; Penalties
A. It shall be unlawful to Operate a Drone in any manner constituting a nuisance, an invasion of
privacy, or trespass in violation of City Code.
B. It shall be unlawful to Operate a Drone with the intent to photograph, record, or otherwise
observe another individual in a place or location where the individual has a reasonable
expectation of privacy.
C. It shall be unlawful to Operate or attempt or intend to Operate a Drone to transport, deliver, or
facilitate the transport or delivery of any controlled substance, simulated controlled substance,
any precursor thereof, or Hazardous Material as defined in 49 C.F.R. § 171.8.
[Source: 14 C.F.R. §§91.19, 107.27, and 107.36; Minn. Stat. Ch. 152.]
D. It shall be unlawful for a Person to Operate or be in physical control of any Drone while under the
Person is under the influence of alcohol, a controlled substance, a hazardous substance that
affects the nervous system, brain, or muscles of the person so as to substantially impair the
Person's ability to Operate the Drone, or any combination thereof.
E. It shall be unlawful to modify a Drone such that the Drone is capable of operating, using, or
transporting a Dangerous Weapon as defined in Minn. Stat. § 609.02, subd. 6 and its
interpretation thereof.
F. The Chief of Police or his/her designee shall administer and enforce the provisions of this Section
8 and may exercise any enforcement powers as provided in [INSERT CITATION TO MUNICIPAL
CODE SECTION IDENTIFYING MUNICIPAL ENFORCEMENT POWERS].
G. Violations of this Section 8 may be prosecuted as misdemeanors subject to the fines and custody
provided in [INSERT CITATION TO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION IDENTIFYING PENALTIES].
Prepared by:
Michael R. Bradley
Vincent W. Rotty
Bradley Berkland Hagen & Herbst LLC
2145 Woodlane Drive Suite 106
Woodbury, MN 55125
7
Model Drone Ordinance
Last Updated:August 21,2018
rm ii lk e.&�;..t[.g l 11 rm it : irm
Y ii ir).�:.e.. .Irap."
(651) 379-0900
8
I�
/l
pra W
i------------
� i x
IL-I a--
z
_ a
20T
I I
I
�_
I a-
, II
l w zv
y
- z
a�
, — W
i
rr
J F
,
r
III � E
I �m 17
alb I
I
W
7 �0 E-
N�=
a
r
pa
a o=
0
I
I z
I
I
LU
LU
I
LU
i
U,
&a o
I I
> � I
/
ilii/ 'v A
/ v�
I /
ce
, 6
V
J
U) ��