My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2007 10 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2007 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2007 10 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/15/2021 2:30:05 PM
Creation date
1/3/2008 1:52:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
7B6
Quality Check
1/3/2008
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2007 10 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />October 16, 2007 <br />Page 10 of 15 <br />Michael Menaker, 1827 W. Choke Cherry Drive, Louisville, CO noted the City of <br />Denver noise ordinance is being challenged. He explained the differences <br />between new motorcycles wii:h factory equipped exhaust systems and older <br />motorcycles and motorcycles with after market exhaust systems. He noted even <br />the motorcycles used by the City of Denver and the Colorado State Patrol would <br />not comply with the restrictivE; decibel levels. He urged Council to create <br />enforcement based standards and objective based performance standards. <br />COUNCIL QUESTIONS <br />Council member Muckle askE;d for the origin of the additional language regarding <br />motorcycles. City Manager Fleming explained the City Attorney added the <br />language based on the City of Denver's noise ordinance. <br />City Attorney Light stated he received an email from the Denver City Attorney <br />who noted their ordinance is under review. Light explained the language <br />addressed applying decibel IE:vels to moving vehicles and equipment. <br />Council member Muckle explained the ordinance was drafted based on other <br />communities' noise ordinances and proposes a more objective standard for <br />gauging noise and a simplified version of ordinances enforced by other <br />communities. He suggested removing the language pertaining to motorcycles. <br />Council member Marsella addressed the current ordinance and asked if <br />residents have a right to sue for injunctive relief. City Attorney Light stated the <br />state statute provides for a private civil right of action. <br />Council member Marsella asked Mr. Clements if he filed a civil suit against his <br />neighbor. Mr. Clements statE;d he had no other recourse. <br />Council member Marsella voiced her concern the ordinance would not <br />necessarily stop a violator, and the complainant would be required to go to court. <br />She was also concerned over the enforcement. <br />Chief Goodman stated the Ciity's current ordinance governs noise in general, but <br />it does not measure noise in decibels. He noted only nine noise complaints were <br />filed last year. He spoke specifically to Mr. Clements complaint and stated a <br />motorcycle idling for 20 minutes is a nuisance, but it is not louder than the <br />general limits for motorcycle;. <br />Council member Muckle askE~d if enforcement would be more difficult. Chief <br />Goodman stated it would not be more difficult, only more expensive. He <br />explained the officers would have to be certified and sound measuring equipment <br />would have to be purchased. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.