Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Cannon Falls council approves amended ordinance for Cannon Valley Fair after debate over noise studies and motorsports
Loading...
Summary
After nearly two hours of public comment and council debate, Cannon Falls approved first reading of Ordinance 414 as amended — removing a proactive noise-study requirement and a restriction on council discretion over motorsports while retaining a limit on West Gate use during the fair.
The Cannon Falls City Council on March 17 approved the first reading of Ordinance 414, which amends the city code relating to the Cannon Valley Fair, after a contentious public-comment period and council debate over noise monitoring and motorsports events.
Erin McMahon, speaking for a coalition of adjacent property owners, urged the council to table the ordinance until it included "independent continuous real time noise monitoring" and "automatic nondiscretionary cease and desist orders" if state noise limits are exceeded. McMahon told the council the draft would create "a custom hyper permissive zoning district" and warned the city would assume legal liability if it deleted proactive safeguards; she also said the city packet estimated proactive noise models could cost the fair as much as $15,000.
Supporters of the fair pressed a different case. Nancy Hovalk, a Cannon Valley Fair Board director, noted the fair’s 111-year history and described its economic impact on the town and nearby counties. "We want to utilize the grounds," she said, and added that some fair activities require amplification but should not be treated as excessively loud. Steven Heitman, promoter for Impact Motorsports, said events in recent years filled local restaurants and hotels.
An adjacent-property owner and neighbor, Kurt Beisel, presented noise-modeling calculations and argued motorsports races would not meet the state's residential noise standards at nearby property lines. "If 4 bikes are racing, this would create a sound of 105 decibels at its source," Beisel said, concluding that "it would take a distance of 840 feet for the venue to be compliant for any races after 7PM," while the closest property line is roughly 450 feet.
City staff described three planning-commission amendments: (1) require professional noise studies and define relevant terms; (2) remove the city council’s ability to approve additional motorsports events beyond a set cap; and (3) limit use of the West Gate to the fair’s duration and emergency access as determined by city staff. The council debated whether to retain or strike each amendment.
On the floor, a motion and subsequent amendment removed planning-commission amendments 1 and 2 — striking the proactive noise-model requirement and the council-discretion restriction — while retaining amendment 3 (the West Gate limitation). The motion, as amended, passed on a council voice vote.
Council members who supported the amendment said they wanted a workable compromise to begin this summer and return to tweak the ordinance if needed. One council member said: "If we pass this tonight, then let's look at it and say, okay. How do we all work together to make this work as best we can for all parties concerned." Opponents had urged stronger codified enforcement mechanisms before adoption.
The ordinance will return for further action required by ordinance-adoption procedures (it was presented as an introduction and first reading). Staff noted that additional legal and implementation steps — including lot-split and recording or any required studies — remain part of the process.
What happens next: the council approved Ordinance 414 as amended at first reading; the city indicated the ordinance and its enforcement approach can be revisited and amended in future council sessions if necessary.
