HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2003/10/06
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION AGENDA
Monday, October 6, 2003
7:00 p.m.
*THE CITY COUNCIL MAY CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER*
REVISED AS OF 315PM ON 10/6/03
ROLL CALL: Linke, Quick, Marty, Stigney, Gunn
PUBLIC COMMENT
Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full
name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes.
Agenda Items Discussed by Consensus
_______ 1. Reconsideration of Awarding Contract and Scope of Project for the CR H
Sidewalk Construction Project (Requested by Council Member Quick)
* The City Council may call to order to take action on this item.
_______ 2. Manufactured Home Park Second Access Neighborhood Meeting Summary
- MV Manufactured Home Community
- Towns Edge Terrace
_______ 3. a. Impact of Future increases to Tax Levy
b. Revision to the City Street Assessment Policy
_______ 4. Pawnshop Overlay Discussion, Set Public Hearing Dates
_______ 5. Assistant to the City Clerk/City Administrator Position
________ 6. Update on Community Center Catering Contract Compliance
_______ 7. Review 2004 Budget Item – Appreciation Expenditures (Requested by Council
Members Stigney and Marty)
_______ 8. Review Police Referendum Document for City News Letter
**Executive Session Immediately After the Work Session**
Next Council Worksession: Monday, November 3, 2003
Next City Council Meeting: Monday, October 13, 2003
Item No: 4
Meeting Date: October 6, 2003
Type of Business: Discussion
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Modifications to Proposed Ordinance 711, an
Ordinance Relating to the Zoning of Pawnshops
Introduction:
The City Council adopted an Interim ordinance on February 27, 2003, which directed the
Planning Commission to review the licensing and zoning implications related to pawnshops
and to recommend applicable provisions. The Planning Commission discussed this issue at
meetings in March, April and May of this year, reviewing State statues, ordinances from
adjoining communities and ordinances from communities where pawnshops currently operate.
The Commission also heard testimony from representatives of the Mounds View Police
Department who did research on their own, discussing the potential impacts of a pawnshop
with other police departments. After significant discussion and input from interested parties
including residents and tenants from Moundsview Square, the Commission adopted a
resolution forwarding two ordinances on to the City Council for their consideration.
The City Council deliberated on the pawnshop zoning and licensing matters before sending
the zoning component back to the Commission for additional study to consider (1) an overlay
district and (2) potential additional uses to include within the overlay.
Discussion:
At their meeting on July 16, the Planning Commission discussed the two issues at length and
from that discussion, many questions were raised concerning the legalities of an overlay
district. The questions were generally as follows:
1. Is there a minimum amount of land that the City can identify as an overlay district without
being unreasonably restrictive?
2. Would the City be at "risk" if the overlay district encompassed ONLY unavailable property?
(The golf course, for example)
3. Which other cities (if any) currently have a pawn overlay?
4. Some cities explicitly limit the number of pawnshops that can be sited in the City while
other communities ban them outright. Is either practice legally permissible?
5. What are the legal ramifications (outside of t he scope of strict land use considerations) of
identifying multiple “unwanted” land uses within one overlay?
6. While there is some element of legal risk in everything a city does, is the City at greater risk
if it creates a "red light” district, especially if opposed by the property owners?
Pawnshop Discussion
October 6, 2003
Page 2
On August 6, 2003, we received a legal opinion from the City Attorney in response to the
questions asked by the Planning Commission. (The opinion is attached as Exhibit 1.) The
responses are as follows:
Legal Responses:
1. Is there a minimum amount to set aside? No, however the City must be reasonable.
2. Can overlay contain only unavailable land? No. “It would not be advisable for the City to
set up an overlay district containing only unavailable land in order to limit or effectively prohibit
these kinds of businesses. Such action could be deemed arbitrary and capricious. “
3. Which other cities have an overlay? Brooklyn Center and Robbinsdale are two such cities.
4. Can a city limit or ban pawnshops altogether? Probably not. Absent specific supporting
facts and reasons, pawnshops should be treated in a manner similar to other commercial
uses. “An outright ban on pawnshops would not survive a [legal] challenge.”
5. What are the ramifications of creating an overlay with multiple “unwanted” land uses?
Landowners would probably argue that the creation of a “red light” overlay is simply irrational--
that is, that such a district does not promote the public welfare and is a bad idea.
6. Is the City at greater risk if it creates a "red light” district ? The creation of such a district
would likely be met with opposition from landowners in and around such district. Obviously,
City action that generates real opposition is more likely to result in litigation than less
controversial action. Therefore, yes, creating such a district would likely increase the risk of
litigation.
Location:
Two locations were identified by the City Council as potential overlay districts. The first
proposed district was that area north of Highway 10, encompassing Sysco, the golf course and
the office buildings on Coral Sea Street. The second proposed overlay was in the area south
of County Road H, south of the Townsedge Terrace manufactured home community. These
two areas are shown on the attached Exhibit 2.
The Planning Commission determined that if separation from residential areas was a primary
factor in establishing an overlay zone, the area south of County Road H would be unsuitable
location given the density of housing at the adjacent Townsedge T errace community. (There
are approximately 240 homes in Townsedge.) Focusing their attention on the proposed
overlay north of Highway 10, the Planning Commission then considered the size of the
proposed overlay, indicating that the overlay as presented in Exhibit B was too large and would
allow for multiple pawnshops. The Commission removed Sysco and the Golf Course from the
proposed overlay, agreeing on a scaled back overlay as shown on Exhibit 3. A scaled back
overlay was also created on Mustang Drive but again that was rejected due to the proximity of
the housing.
Pawnshop Discussion
October 6, 2003
Page 3
The Planning Commission concluded their review on September 3, 2003 by adopting
Resolution 737-03, a resolution recommending a pawn overlay district at the southwest corner
of Coral Sea Street and County Road J. This area north of Highway 10 was chosen as being
the more appropriate of the two overlays proposed, limited however to just the three parcels at
the southwest corner of that intersection. Additionally, the Commission by unanimous
consent felt it would not be in the City’s best interest to include other uses within the proposed
overlay.
Recommendation:
Review the Planning Commission’s recommendation and if Council concurs, set a date to hold
a public hearing concerning the proposed overlay district. (The earliest date would be
October 27th.) In terms of City C ode logistics, we would anticipate that the text amendment to
create the overlay district would be inserted as new Chapter 1118, taking the place of the
recently stricken chapter referencing the PF zoning district. Staff will work with Kennedy &
Graven to ensure the enacting ordinance would be legally correct and defensible if challenged.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Exhibits:
1. Legal Opinion from Kennedy & Graven
2. Original Proposed Overlay Districts
3. Revised Proposed Overlay Districts
4. Planning Commission Resolution 737-03
Reviewed by City Administrator: ________
EXHIBIT 1.
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Bob Vose
FROM: Mary Tietjen
DATE: August 6, 2003
RE: Mounds View Pawnshop Overlay District
This is in response to Mr. Ericson’s email regarding the creation of a pawnshop overlay
district.
Minn. Stat. § 325J, the state statute governing pawnbrokers, allows a city to regulate the
business transactions of pawnbrokers. The only provision in the statute relating to the
location of pawnshops is Section 325J.10 which provides that a pawnshop may not be
located within 10 miles of a gambling casino and that any pawnshop lawfully operating as of
April 2, 1996 does not have to relocate or close.
The zoning and regulation of pawnshops involves different issues than apply to adult uses.
There are no first amendment/free speech issues that would affect the city’s ability to create
an overlay district for pawnshops. In other words, there is no requirement that a city provide
a “reasonable opportunity” for pawnshops in the same manner that it must do for adult uses.
Moreover, I cannot find any authority that either requires the City to set aside a minimum
amount of land for a pawnshop overlay district, or prevents the City from limiting the number
of pawnshops or prohibiting them altogether. However, as with any zoning or land-use
decision, a decision to limit or ban pawnshops would need to be supported by reasons and
an adequate factual basis. A ban or significant limitation on pawnshops may be difficult to
justify unless the City could demonstrate a factual basis (such as detrimental impact on the
community) to treat pawnshops differently than other commercial enterprises.
Particularly, the establishment of a pawnshop overlay district must have some rational basis.
See, e.g., Billy Graham Evangelistic Assoc. v. City of Minneapolis, 653 N.W.2d 638 (Minn.
Ct. App. 2002) (city’s designation of historic-district designation will be overturned only when
it is unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious). It would not be advisable for the City to set up an
overlay district containing only unavailable land in order to limit or effectively prohibit these
kinds of businesses. Such action could be deemed arbitrary and capricious. See id. (zoning
decision is arbitrary when it is based on whim or is devoid of articulated reasons).
Memo to Bob Vose
August 6, 2003
Page 2
I reviewed several other city codes. Robbinsdale has a “B4p overlay district” that includes
this type of use. I looked at the Hopkins code-- which was mentioned by Mr. Ericson -- and
note that no license can be issued at a location that is less than 1,000 feet from any adult
business, or a location that is less than 350 feet from any off-sale liquor businesses. I could
not pull up Hopkins’ zoning ordinance on-line, so I do not know whether they have a special
overlay district. Brooklyn Center also has an overlay district.
Conclusion
I believe that the City can regulate pawnshop locations, but any regulations should be
reasonable and, absent specific supporting facts and reasons, should treat pawnshops in a
manner similar to other commercial uses. More restrictive pawnshop requirements must
have a rational basis and be supported with adequate factual findings.
EXHIBIT 2.
Proposed Overlay Districts (Original)
Overlay 1: North of Highway 10
Overlay 2
Overlay 1
OOverlay 2: Mustang Drive / Mustang Circle
EXHIBIT 3.
Proposed Overlay Districts (Revised)
Overlay 1: North of Highway 10
Overlay 2: Mustang Drive / Mustang Circle
Overlay Dist. #1:
Parcels: 3
Total Area: 9.2 acres
Overlay Dist. #2:
Parcels: 3
Total Area: 16.3 acres
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 737-03
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE CREATING A
PAWN OVERLAY DISTRICT NORTH OF HIGHWAY 10;
SPECIAL PLANNING CASE SP-114-03
WHEREAS, The City of Mounds View has no zoning regulations or requirements
pertaining to Pawnshops; and,
WHEREAS, The City Council has directed the Planning Commission to review the
issue of overlay zoning as it would pertain to Pawnshops; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the potential geographical areas
potentially suitable for an overlay district with the intent of maintaining adequate separation
from residential and educational facilities as well as other potentially sensitive land uses;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the possibility of including other
land uses, such as “adult “ uses, tattoo and piercing shops, massage parlors, etc., within the
proposed overlay zoning district.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission
hereby recommends adoption of an ordinance establishing a Pawn Overlay District north of
Highway 10 at the southwest corner of Coral Sea Street and County Road J as identified in
Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends that no other uses be included within the Pawn Overlay District.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Mounds View Planning
Commission directs Staff to forward this Resolution to the City Council prior to the approval
of the minutes.
Adopted this 3rd day of September, 2003
______________________________________
Jean Miller, Acting Chairperson
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Jim Ericson, Community Development Director
(SEAL)
EXHIBIT A.
Pawn Overlay District
Overlay District
Parcels: 3
Total Area: 9.2 acres
Underlying Zoning:
Industrial
Item No: 7
Meeting Date: 10-06-03
Type of Business: Discussion
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Review 2004 Budget Item – Appreciation Expenditures
Council Members Marty and Stigney requested that this item be reviewed at the work
session.
Annual budget information relative to the discussion:
YR 2000 - $5,383
YR 2001 - $2,960
YR 2002 - $610
YR 2003 - $3,000 Bdgt
YR 2004 - $3,000 Budget Proposed
- including:
$1,000 Boards and commissions
appreciation dinner
$1,000 Employee appreciation dinner
$1,000 Plaques and gift certificates for employee appreciation
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Reviewed by City Administrator: ________