Laserfiche WebLink
Pawn Ordinances Report <br />May 12, 2003 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />Ordinance 711. <br /> <br />This is a public hearing. <br /> <br />This ordinance amends the Zoning Code by identifying which zoning district a Pawnshop can <br />locate. The district proposed by the Commission is the B -4, Regional Business District. The <br />B-4 district is the City’s most intense business district. Because there is only one parcel so <br />zoned in the City, the number of locations where such a use could locate is also just the <br />one—Moundsview Square. The licensing provisions drafted by the Commission require a <br />1,000 foot separation between such uses, which in effect limits the number of Pawnshops <br />that could locate in Mounds View to just one. <br /> <br />Traditionally speaking, the options are to pick an appropriate district and then determine if <br />the use should be permitted by right or if the use would need a conditional use permit (CUP). <br />Because of the public hearing requirements built into the licensing provisions, staff and the <br />Commission felt it was not necessary to identify a pawnshop as a conditional use. <br /> <br />At the Commission’s meeting on April 16, 2003, a resident proposed a non-traditional <br />response to the zoning question. Instead of identifying a single zoning district, the City could <br />establish an “overlay” zoning district within which Pawnshops could be located. The resident <br />further suggested that a good place for the Pawn overlay district would be north of new State <br />Highway 10. This is predominantly an industrial and office area and is also where the City’s <br />golf course is located. The rationale behind this suggestion is that there are no churches, no <br />daycares and no residential uses north of Highway 10 that would be impacted by such a use. <br /> <br />The decision of the Planning Commission was not however unanimous. The dissenting <br />opinions were that Moundsview Square, being a family mall with family uses, would be an <br />inappropriate location to site a Pawnshop and that if such a use were to locate in the mall, it <br />would put the existing businesses and the public at risk and would expose families and <br />children to the type of people who frequent Pawnshops. Other dissenting opinions <br />expressed concern with the City’s efforts to revitalize the County Highway 10 corridor and <br />how such a use at that location would not be detrimental to the City’s corridor redevelopment <br />plans. The majority of the Commission supported the B-4 district if such a district were to <br />locate in the City, instead of creating an overlay zone north of Highway 10. <br /> <br />The Commission recommends adoption of Ordinance 711. Staff supports the decision of the <br />Planning Commission however we would not be opposed to the concept of an overlay district <br />alternative. <br /> <br />Action: Approve, table or deny the introduction and first reading of Ordinance 711. <br /> <br />The Council may decide to continue the public hearing through to the May 27th meeting to <br />allow for the greatest public input possible on this subject. The Pioneer Press and the <br />Bulletin will be printing articles about the Pawnshop ordinances so the May 27th meeting <br />may generate a fairly large public attendance.