My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2003 Planning Commission Packets
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
2003 Planning Commission Packets
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2012 11:08:57 AM
Creation date
8/29/2018 5:48:59 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
707
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
ti � <br />'i t ;- 1.� � .? ���<1'1l�litil <br />_ r :.. . <br />FRO(Uttl Mary Tietjen <br />DAl'�: August 6, 2003 <br />RE: Mo�nds View Pawnshop Overlay District <br />This is i� response to Mr. Ericson's email regarding the creation of a pawnshop overlay <br />district. <br />Minn. Stat. � 325J, the sfiate statuie governing pawnbrokers, allows a city to regulate the <br />business fransactions of pawnbrokers. The only provision in the statute relating to the <br />location of pawnshops is Section 325J.10 which provides ihat a pawnshop may nat be <br />located within 10 mifes of a gambling casino and that any pawnshop lawfully operafiing as of <br />Apri! 2, 1996 c4oes nof have to relocate or close. <br />-- The zoning and regu�ation of pawnshops involves different issues than apply to adult uses. <br />There are no first amendment/free speech issues that woufd affect #he city's ability to create <br />an overlay district for pawnshops. f n other words, there is no requirement fihat a city provide <br />a"reasonable opportunify" for pawnshops in the same manner fihat it must do for aduft uses. <br />Moreover, I cannot find any authority thai either requires the City to set aside a minimum <br />amounfi of fand for a pawnshop overiay district, or prevenfis the Ci�y from limiting the number <br />of pawnshops or prohibiting �hem altogether. However, as with any zoning or land-use <br />decision, a decision to limit or ban pawnshops would neec� to be supported by reasons and <br />an adequafie factual basis. A ban or significant fimitation on pawnshops may be difficult to <br />justify unless the City could demonstrate a factua] basis (such as detrimentaf impact on the <br />community) to trea# pawnshops differently than other commercial enterprises, <br />Par�icularfy, the establishment of a pawnshop overlay district must have some rational basis. <br />See, e.�., Bilfy Graham Evangelistic Assoc. v. City of Minneapolis, 653 N.W.2d 638 (Minn. <br />C�. App. 2002) (city's designation of historic-disfiricfi designation wifl be overturned onlywhen <br />ii is unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious). It would nof be advisabie forthe Cityta set up an <br />overiay district containing only unavailable land in order to limit or effectively prahibit these <br />kinds of businesses. Such action cauld be deemed arbitrary and capricious. See id. (zoning <br />decision is arbitrary when it is based or� whim or is devoid of articulated reasons). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.