Loading...
01-14-19 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2019 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, January 14, 2019. Chair Baker called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blum, Brookins, Johnson, Pockl, and Segelbaum. Also present was Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman. Commissioner Angell was absent. 1. Approval of Minutes December 10, 2018, Regular Planning Commission Meeting MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Brookins and motion carried unanimously to approve the December 10, 2018, minutes as submitted. 2. Discussion Item —Zoning Code Text Amendment— Firearm Sales —ZO00-117 Applicant: City of Golden Valley Purpose: To amend the Zoning Code to regulate the sale of firearms Zimmerman reminded the Commission that they discussed this item at their December 10 meeting. He stated that there are currently no regulations in the City Code regarding the sale of firearms other than prohibiting them as a home occupation in the R-1 Single Family and R-2 Zoning Districts. Zimmerman explained that staff researched several neighboring cities to see how they regulate firearm sales and the types of regulations seem to fall into three categories. The first is separation either from certain uses or zoning districts, or separation between firearm sales facilities. The second is security measures at firearm sales facilities, and third is site requirements such as what can be displayed in windows and other issues about the site itself. Zimmerman noted that at the December 10 Planning Commission meeting the discussion included how to buffer firearm sales from different types of uses the most important being where there is a gathering of people such as schools, religious facilities, libraries, community centers, etc. and the next important being residentially zoned areas. He said there was also discussion about whether there should be required distances befinreen firearm sales facilities and other types of uses like liquor stores and the consensus was not to focus on that. He added that another issue discussed was possibly not allowing firearm sales in the Commercial Zoning District but rather in the Light Industrial or Industrial Zoning Districts where there may be fewer people. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2019 Page 2 Zimmerman referred to the proposed Future Land Use Map that will be used in the updated Comp Plan and noted that is the map staff used when determining the proposed buffer areas. Zimmerman referred to a map that showed Commercial properties with a buffer of 500 feet around schools, religious facilities, schools, parks, and community centers and a second buffer of 250 feet around residential uses and mixed use properties. He noted that these are also the buffers that Minneapolis uses in their firearm sales requirements. He discussed the areas where firearm sales would be allowed under this scenario and said there would be approximately 22 properties where firearm sales would be fully allowed and 29 properties that would have some restrictions but would still have the opportunity to sell firearms. Zimmerman referred to a map showing Industrial properties that had the same buffers and said that 18 properties would be fully allowed and 63 properties would have some restrictions. Zimmerman referred to maps that showed a buffer of 350 feet buffer around Commercial properties and around Light Industrial and Industrial properties without distinguishing schools, religious facilities, schools, parks, and community centers, or residential areas similar to what St. Louis Park does. He stated that the results were similar to the other maps shown and stated that the question really is whether to allow firearm sales in Commercial or in Industrial. Segelbaum asked if the Light Industrial and Industrial sections of the Zoning Code would need to be revised to allow retail sales in general, not only firearm sales. Zimmerman explained that only accessory retail sales and temporary retail sales are currently allowed in the Light Industrial and Industrial Zoning Districts but the Code language could be amended to state that only retail sales of firearms and not general retail would be allowed in those districts. He added that language prohibiting firearm sales could also be added to the Commercial Zoning District. Pockl asked Zimmerman if he thought a map showing a 500 foot buffer around schools, religious facilities, etc. and a 350 foot buffer around other uses would look significantly different than the maps already shown. Zimmerman said he suspects a map like that would look very similar to the other scenarios shown and that the overall number of properties allowed to sell firearms wouldn't change very much. He reminded the Commission that the goal is to make a reasonable, non-arbitrary limit because the sale of firearms can't be completely restricted. Segelbaum asked if it would be an option to designate specific areas for firearm sales, without going so far as to say that area is a certain number of feet away from something else. Zimmerman said he hasn't seen any other Codes written that way because that could seem arbitrary. He stated that the maps they've been discussing have a rationale as to why the sale of firearms is restricted in certain areas and it would be easier to justify why these certain areas were selected. Segelbaum stated that ultimately there needs to be some areas available for the sale of firearms and questioned if there has been any guidance as to what has been deemed to be a reasonable number of areas or not. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2019 Page 3 . Zimmerman said it is hard to say because the issue hasn't been challenged yet so it is important that the City be able to rationalize and justify its regulations. Baker asked the Commission to discuss the differences between the maps showing firearms sales in the Commercial versus Industrial Zoning Districts. He said what strikes him is that there are several properties shown on the maps that are never going to allow firearm sales such as the Honeywell, and General Mills (James Ford Bell) properties. He noted that the two largest areas that could potentially sell firearms is the area west of Duluth Street and the area North of TH 55 and east of TH 169. He said there is something about a firearm sales facility buried deep in an industrial area that makes him nervous. Blum stated that regulations around site requirements are a greater avenue of protection than where the site is located. Baker said he would like to find a result that reduces as much as possible the eligible land , for firearm sales. He said he knows the City needs to provide for some firearm sales but he is not enthusiastic about having them in Golden Valley. Blum said he thinks site security is a very appropriate thing for the Commission to consider. He said his priority and focus is to protect areas that have vulnerable people like schools, etc. Segelbaum agreed and said he would like the buffers to focus on areas that protect more vulnerable people. He added that he liked the second map the best because it showed a larger buffer around areas of assembly. Baker asked how the size of the buffer areas was chosen. Zimmerman said the size of the buffer areas wasn't discussed at the last Commission meeting, the discussion focused more on showing a larger buffer around schools, religious facilities, etc. and a smaller buffer around other types of properties. He explained that he used buffer sizes similar to neighboring cities. He added that if the buffers are increased too much it might really limit the space available for firearm sales. He said he could try increasing the buffer areas to 500 feet or 1,000 feet to see if there are any areas left. Baker said he would be interested in seeing a map with 500 or 1,000 foot buffers. Johnson questioned regulating the square footage or the security of the firearm facility instead, or requiring firearm facilities to be in a single use building. Zimmerman stated that many of the cities staff researched have regulations regarding building construction and security measures that meet the State's standards so those could be incorporated into Golden Valley's Code as well. Blum asked Johnson if he was suggesting that no buffers be used and that just the security measures are used. Johnson said he is suggesting that in addition to the buffer a single purpose building be used because it's not just about limiting firearm sales, it's about making the safest environment possible and the more contained and secure the building is, the less risk there is. Brookins asked if they is an opportunity to separate firearm sales from ammunition sales. Zimmerman said didn't know but he hasn't seen any other codes split it up that way. Zimmerman summarized that the Commission would like to see the following: firearm sales focused in Light Industrial and Industrial properties, having two different tiers of Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2019 Page 4 buffers (one focused on schools, etc., and the other on residential areas), and seeing what an increased buffer size looks like. Baker said he would prefer allowing firearm sales in a commercial and not in industrial areas. Johnson said if they are trying to limit risk there is probably more density in a commercial area than in an industrial area. Blum said commercial facilities are generally more open to the public and less secure than industrial facilities. He referred to Minneapolis's requirements and said that it is much denser than Golden Valley so he thinks Golden Valley would be justified in having larger buffers. Baker asked if the appropriate next step would be to look at a 1,000 foot buffer around Light Industrial and Industrial properties. Segelbaum stated that if a 1,000 foot buffer leaves very little area for firearm sales to occur then it is not going to be very useful for them to consider. He said he would like to give staff some leeway and just note that the Commission would like to increase the buffers but still have a reasonable result. Zimmerman said he could bring different maps back to the Commission which show different buffer distances and if staff feels there is one that should be recommended they will and the Planning Commission can make their recommendation as well. Blum added that he likes Bloomington's and Richfield's required minimum distance of 1,000 feet between firearm sales facilities. Baker agreed. Pockl asked if there will be any discussion about firing ranges. Zimmerman said the Planning Commission can make recommendations about firing ranges but the City Council has just been talking about firearm sales. Baker said he would be supportive of prohibiting firing ranges. Segelbaum agreed that it would appropriate to restrict firing ranges. Johnson said he doesn't see why they should be restricted if they are located in an industrial area. He said he doesn't know what the rationale would be for excluding them and added that if they are recommending they be excluded they should come up with a good reason why. Segelbaum said it would be an additional concentration of firearms in the City and if the City is allowed to restrict firing ranges he would prefer to do so. Blum said federal law requires a background check to own a gun but a background check is not required to rent one and use it at a firing range so that is a public safety distinction that would justify the City's additional regulation of firing ranges. --Short Recess-- 3. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings No other reports were given. 4. Other Business • Council Liaison Report Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2019 Page 5 Council Member Schmidgall gave an update on items recently discussed by the City Council including the denial of a Conditional Use Permit for the Watermark residential facility, the appointment of inembers to the Rising TIDES Task Force, and the 2019 City Council strategic planning session on January 22. 5. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:49 pm. � Ron lum, Secretary Lis ittman, Administrative Assistant