pc-agenda-aug-09-21
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Planning Commission meetings are being conducted in a hybrid format with in‐person and remote
options for attending, participating, and commenting. The public can make statements in this meeting
during the planned public comment sections.
Remote Attendance/Comment Options: Members of the public may attend this meeting by watching
on cable channel 16, streaming on CCXmedia.org, or via Webex by calling 1‐415‐655‐0001 and entering
access code 177 276 4566. Members of the public wishing to address the Planning Commission during
public comment sections should call 763‐593‐8060.
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes
July 26, 2021, Planning Commission Meeting
4. Public Hearing – Pawn Shops, Precious Metal Dealers, and Payday Lenders
Applicant: The City of Golden Valley
– End of Televised Portion of Meeting –
To listen to this portion, please call 1‐415‐655‐0001 and enter meeting access code 177 276 4566.
5. Council Liaison Report
6. Other Business
a. Reports on Board of Zoning Appeals and Other Meetings
b. PC members to APAMN Virtual Conference
7. Adjournment
August 9, 2021 – 7 pm
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
This meeting was held via Webex in accordance with the local emergency declaration made by
the City under Minn. Stat. § 12.37. In accordance with that declaration, beginning on March 16,
2020, all Planning Commission meetings held during the emergency were conducted
electronically. The City used Webex to conduct this meeting and members of the public were
able to monitor the meetings by watching it on Comcast cable channel 16, by streaming it on
CCXmedia.org, or by dialing in to the public call‐in line.
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 by Chair Pockl.
Roll Call
Commissioners in person: Ron Blum, Adam Brookins, Andy Johnson, Lauren Pockl
Commissioners virtual: Rich Baker
Commissioners absent: Noah Orloff, Chuck Segelbaum, Ryan Sadeghi
Staff present: Jason Zimmerman – Planning Manager, Myles Campbell – Planner
Council Liaison present: Gillian Rosenquist
2. Approval of Agenda
Chair Pockl asked for a motion to approve the agenda.
MOTION made by Vice‐Chair Brookins, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve the agenda
of July 26, 2021. Staff took a roll call vote. Motion carried.
3. Approval of Minutes
Chair Pockl asked for a motion to approve the minutes from July 12, 2021.
Commissioner Johnson asked about page 3 and RLUIPA reclassification comments. He added the
City Attorney decided the use was permitted and if the Commission missed a step before it was
voted on. Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, clarified that the item hasn’t been voted on and
the discussion is still in process. The Planning Commission will vote when all the use tables are
complete. No amendment to the minutes is necessary after the staff clarification.
MOTION made by Vice‐Chair Brookins, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve minutes,
with additions. Staff took a roll call vote. Motion carried.
4. Update and Discussion – Major Amendment to PUD 90
Applicant: ISD #270 ‐ Hopkins School District
Address: 5430 and 5300 Glenwood Ave, Golden Valley, MN 55422
July 26, 2021 – 7 pm
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
July 26, 2021, 2021 – 7 pm
2
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, this item initially had three pieces to vote on, the
Planning Commission sent all three to City Council but the amendment was returned for more
work. The applicant has since withdrawn all three items and will re‐apply at a later date.
No action is required.
5. Discussion – Pawn Shops, Precious Metal Dealers, and Payday Lenders
Myles Campbell, Planner, reviewed the purpose and objectives of this item. August 2020 a
moratorium on new pawnshops, precious metal dealers and payday lenders put in place. Staff was
directed by City Council to review this item as it relates to the zoning code.
Current zoning code does not define pawnshops and precious metal dealers outside of the current
licensing code. There is not a current zoning definition for these uses but staff interprets it as falling
under general retail, currently permitted in Commercial and in Mixed‐Use: neighborhood,
community, employment. Firearm sales are separately restricted as a land use and prohibited in the
districts that allow “general retail”.
Payday Lenders are in a similar gap and staff would consider these a financial institution, permitted
in Commercial, Office, Light Industrial, and Mixed‐Use: neighborhood, community, employment.
Campbell reviewed the discussion from March 2021 and answered the following Commissioner
questions, presented at that time.
More research/info on why these restrictions were being recommended
o Discussed direct and runoff impacts
Mapping of suggested restrictions
o Buffer restrictions were discussed
Police opinion on new code
Equity and Inclusion Manager opinion
Modifying the suggested definitions
Conclusion
Given their potential impacts, staff feels treating these uses as being permitted with
restrictions strikes a good balance.
The restrictions are reasonable in scope and are tailored to the common concerns for these
uses: public safety, consumer health, and impact on adjacent businesses
The restrictions do not outright prohibit the users, and still allow adequate space for such
retailers to locate in the City
With the expiration of the interim ordinance imminent, City Manager has directed staff to
bring this topic back to the Planning Commission for a public hearing on its August 9th meeting.
Commissioner Segelbaum asked if classifying pay day lenders as financial institution would allow
them to be located in all districts that allows a financial institution. Campbell responded that staff
recommends this particular use only be allowed in Commercial districts. The conversation continued
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
July 26, 2021, 2021 – 7 pm
3
to discuss districts, buffers, and licensing requirements. Commissioner Johnson asked clarifying
questions regarding statute requirements for loan amounts and loan definitions, then asked about
research done to show repercussions if these institutions were removed after existing for a while.
Campbell stated that his research didn’t show studies of impacts to neighborhoods when payday
lenders are removed. The conversation continued around if payday lenders need to be treated
similarly to standard banking institutions and what would happen if payday lenders were called
something else in the code. Staff will discuss the use of state language with the City’s finance team.
Commissioner Johnson added that he wants to make sure decisions are based on something
quantifiable. He went on to discuss the pros and cons of the conversation and added that he wants
to add something that will help people in the end. Commissioner Baker echoed Johnson’s
statements and added he wants to make sure the group isn’t eliminating something that the
community utilizes to succeed.
Chair Pockl mentioned perceptions of pay day lenders and predatory practices, she mentioned non‐
profits that act as alternatives to these resources. Keeping consumer protections in mind, Pockl
asked if there was a way to add education to access alternatives. Staff mentioned they can add that
information to Council and look into adding them in the definitions of these places.
Commissioner Segelbaum stated that based on information provided, it seems restrictions for
pawnshops and metal dealers should be less than those for payday lenders. Commissioners had a
discussion on level of restrictions and potential zoning districts. Vice‐Chair Brookins added that the
zoning district determination still feels important to him but the idea of a buffer seems less so.
Johnson echoed this statement.
Segelbaum stated the goal isn’t to shut these services out, but to focus their location in high traffic
areas. Pockl agreed that eliminating these uses would have a negative impact on some members of
the community.
6. Discussion – Accessory Dwelling Unit
Val Quarles, Community Development Intern, summarized the July 12th discussion and the
questions asked generally fell into two categories: potential impacts and measures of affordability.
The potential extent of ADUs throughout the city can be roughly estimated through a few measures;
lot size, housing age, and property value.
Parking
Quarles referenced a study done in Portland where it shows ADUs are responsible for one more car
per 6 city blocks. In response, a potential regulation for Golden Valley could include requiring new
parking areas only if the ADU displaced the primary dwelling’s parking.
ADUs as a rental
Rentals are already present through the city and ADU rentals would be subject to the same
requirements. There could be an owner occupancy requirement to prevent “double rentals” on a
property.
Visual
These impacts will be limited to neighbors, depending on form. Regulations on sizing, setbacks, and
minimum lot size may alleviate this impact.
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
July 26, 2021, 2021 – 7 pm
4
Affordability
The definition of affordability varies, the previously mentioned study found that long‐term ADU
rentals generally rent for about the same or lower than similarly sized apartments. Regulations could
be made in the way of licensing for short‐term rentals. The most recent Comp Plan states that 55%
of rental units in the City are affordable to a family making 80% AMIE or less, without subsidy. Most
ADUs would be new construction, the equivalent percentage will likely be lower.
The conversation on affordability expanded to financing, material availability, and the potential
rental income to the homeowner.
Quarles went on to discuss geographic extent for potential ADUs in R‐1 and R‐2 based on lot sizes.
Housing age, size, and potential ADU building envelopes were discussed.
Commissioner Segelbaum asked how an Airbnb fits in to the ADU discussion, Quarles responded
that it’s a short‐term rental, 30 days or less. Staff is unaware of Golden Valley having licensing for
short term rentals, they don’t prohibit them however.
The conversation continued on to attached/detached ADUs and potential incentives for one or the
other from cities. It moved on to affordability, AMI, and Met Council’s definitions for rental prices.
Restrictions on ADUs are complicated and staff went in depth on the differences between lodgers
with separate bedrooms, a kitchenette but not a second full kitchen, and there may not be a totally
independent unit from the main home.
Commissioner Johnson added that folks shouldn’t look at ADUs as a way to encourage homeowners
to build additions, if a homeowner is allowed to do it, they should be. He added he’s sympathetic to
folks buying homes with housing other family members in mind. Johnson referenced the study staff
mentioned and suggested starting with a quota and expanding later based on activity.
Commissioners and staff continued a discussion on rental definitions.
Televised portion of the meeting concluded at 8:08 pm
7. Council Liaison Report
Council Member Rosenquist noted that July was Park and Recreation month and that the City
Council has approved a proclamation in that regard, that they approved Home Energy Squad audits
and hosting a Green Corps member, and previewed the upcoming Council/Manager meeting where
the Police Commission, Section 8 non‐discrimination, and the STAR program would be discussed.
8. Other Business
None.
9. Adjournment
MOTION by Commissioner Blum to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, and approved
unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:15 pm.
________________________________
Andy Johnson, Secretary
________________________________
Amie Kolesar, Planning Assistant
1
Date: August 9, 2021
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Myles Campbell, Planner
Subject: Informal Public Hearing ‐ Zoning Text Amendment ‐ Pawnshops, Precious Metal
Dealers, and Consumer Small Loan Lenders
Summary
In August 2020, the City Council enacted an interim ordinance (moratorium) on any new
pawnshops, precious metal dealers, or payday lenders from locating within the City for a 12‐
month period. The Council indicated this was to study the potential adverse impacts on the
health and welfare of community members by these types of businesses. This interim ordinance
would allow time for the Council and Planning Commission to review the City code licensing
requirements and zoning code allowances respectively. A preliminary discussion on the topic of
these uses with Planning Commission was held in March of this year.
Following the Planning Commission’s discussion of these uses, the City Council indicated they
would like to take additional time to explore how new licensing requirements for payday lenders
could be put in place to strengthen consumer protections. While staff had been planning to table
the zoning discussion on these items until such licensing requirements were further developed,
review of the state statute requirements for interim ordinances has indicated that an extension
to this moratorium is not possible. As such, the City Manager has directed staff and the Planning
Commission to proceed with adopting reasonable zoning regulations that will be in place shortly
after the expiration of the interim ordinance.
Planning Commission Discussion 7/26
At its last meeting the Planning Commission had the opportunity to review staff’s research into
the topic of pawnshops and payday lenders as well as to discuss the proposed zoning ordinance
language by staff.
Generally, Planning Commissioners recognized that these uses had some capacity to function as
crime attractors, but this potential was also subject to other variables that could increase or
decrease the prevalence of crime in the area. As described in Charis Kubrin’s land use study
around fringe banks, the local context of the fringe bank’s location ended up having a significant
2
impact on the degree of crime attraction. Notably for the Planning Commission’s discussion, the
population density or level of activity in the immediate area had a correlation with lowered crime
activities, suggesting that with some planning these negative impacts could be mitigated.
Both Staff and Commissioners also noted that at least in the case of the land use study, the
research was done in Los Angeles and Seattle, which as larger urban communities would likely
already have higher levels of crime than a suburban community such as Golden Valley. Discussion
amongst commissioners generally settled on permitting these types of uses, with some
restrictions to mitigate their potential impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
In discussing payday lenders specifically, Commissioners also expressed a desire for any
restrictions on the use to be reasonable. Commissioners agreed that while these uses can be
harmful to their users, whether in terms of material debt or health impacts, these fringe banks
also can be a necessity for those without traditional banking services. Commissioners felt that
restrictions on the use were warranted, but that those restrictions should not outright or
effectively prohibit the use. Commissioners were overall not supportive of significant buffer
requirements from other zoning districts.
Commissioners also had some questions for staff to follow up on:
Could the City choose to fully prohibit these uses, is this legal?
Land use law has well established City’s abilities to regulate land uses based on zoning
classification as part of its municipal police powers. That said there have been cases where City’s
prohibitions of certain uses have been challenged successfully. Some of the most notable cases in
this area of law have been related to adult‐use establishments, and their protections under the
First Amendment. An article from Hamline Professor David Schultz has been included with this
memo to provide an overview of the topic.
Typically, the court has deferred to municipality’s ability to utilize its police powers to determine
its own ordinances, and even to limit some individual property rights such as by placing
restrictions on certain uses. In these cases, the municipality in question has been able to show
that the restrictions are not arbitrary and that their actions were in service of the city’s welfare.
So while the option to prohibit these uses completely from the city is possible, staff’s opinion is
that if we were to completely prohibit such uses, we would need to have much more concrete
research and evidence showing a direct impact between these uses and crime. Staff is more
comfortable allowing the use, but placing reasonable restrictions on it, such as requiring window
visibility for pawnshops and
Would regulations on Consumer Small Loan Lenders impact positive/community‐based alternative
banking organizations?
In review of alternative banking options in the twin cities or organization’s seeking to improve
financial well‐being amongst communities, staff found that the majority were either part of a
larger, traditional bank or credit union, or they involved credit counseling services rather than
3
lending/check cashing services. With the current proposed definition of Consumer Small Loan
Lenders, such uses would not be impacted.
It is possible that a licensed small loan lender might have more consumer‐friendly business
practices than another, however in this case zoning code is not the best tool, as it regulates the
broader land uses rather than the specific business. Given that the City’s definition would largely
mirror the state licensing statute, any business licensed as a Consumer Small Loan Lender would
be subject to these zoning regulations. In theory, City‐level licensing restrictions could
supplement the zoning code by encouraging more equitable business practices.
Proposed Ordinance
Included with this memo is a copy of staff’s suggested ordinance language regarding pawnshops,
precious metal dealers, and consumer small loan lenders. Based on the feedback from
commissioners at the last meeting of the Planning Commission the following adjustments have
been made:
Staff has removed the buffer requirement from other uses such as schools, places of
assembly, and low density zoning districts
o Commissioners believed the restriction of the uses to certain zoning districts
effectively managed their potential impact on non‐commercial uses.
Staff has removed the loudspeaker and outdoor sales restrictions on pawnshops and
precious metal dealers
o Commissioners again did not want to place undue restriction on these uses.
Nuisance related to noise and outdoor storage can still be addressed via other
code sections already in place.
Two other areas of discussion by commissioners were buffers between like uses, and the
allowance of these uses in districts other than commercial. Staff is open to modifying the
proposed language to support these options, however feels that maintaining some level of buffer
between like uses and keeping them restricted to the commercial district will have significant
impact on mitigating any potential for negative externalities.
A buffer between individual pawnshops, lenders and metal dealers limits co‐location of
such uses or that a particular commercial area becomes overly concentrated with such
uses.
o Part of the risk associated with these uses is that they use cash‐based economies
and serve vulnerable populations, making them potential targets for criminal
activity such as robberies. Limiting the density of these uses in a particular area
reduces the amount of people traveling to a specific area and overall risk.
The Kubrin study called specific attention to the impact population density and activity
had on the overall capacity for criminal activity. The Commercial zoning district includes a
number of high‐traffic areas of the city, and generally includes a wide array of businesses
that attract customers on a daily basis. Locating these uses in a less active district such as
4
light industrial or office does provide additional location options, but these districts also
have less “eyes on the street” comparatively.
Again staff’s preference is to leave these as is, but with the understanding that there is room to
modify them depending on the Commission’s preference. In the case of the density buffer this is
easily modified by changing the required minimum distance between like uses. In its review of
peer communities in the Twin Cities metro, density buffers ranged from 500‐1,000 ft., staff had
selected the median here of 750 ft. from one another. This obviously could be modified to be
more or less restrictive and staff has included an attachment to this effect. For the allowed
zoning districts, these uses could be introduced to a district like Light Industrial if Planning
Commission feels that this would allow for a greater variety of location options. Staff would
prefer to not introduce either use to the office zoning district, as this district serves a fairly
narrowly defined purpose to provide office space. Office properties generally has less foot traffic
and activity than Commercial or Light Industrial as well.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends amending the text of Section 113‐1: Definitions and Section 113‐92:
Commercial (C) Zoning District, in order to better regulate pawnshops, precious metal dealers,
consumer small loan lenders and currency exchanges.
Attachments
Draft Code Changes (2 pages)
Density Buffer Comparison (1 page)
Zoning Laws – First Amendment Encyclopedia (3 pages)
Section 1. Section 113-1 of the City Code Chapter 113, Article I, entitled
“Definitions” is amended by adding the following Subdivisions:
Consumer Small Loan Lender: Any person or business that has as its primary activity
the providing of consumer small loans for the borrower’s own personal, family, or
household purpose. A consumer small loan is a short-term, unsecured loan to be repaid
in a single installment. Consumer small loan lenders do not include banks.
…
Currency Exchange: Any person, except a bank, trust company, savings bank, savings
association, credit union, or industrial loan and thrift company, engaged in the business
of cashing checks, drafts, money orders, or travelers' checks for a fee. The term does
not include a person who provides these services incidental to the person's primary
business if the charge for cashing a check or draft does not exceed $1.00 or one
percent of the value of the check or draft, whichever is greater.
Section 2. Section 113-92 of the City Code Chapter 113, Article III, Division 2,
entitled “Commercial Zoning District” is amended by adding the following Subdivision
and re-lettering accordingly:
(e) Restricted Uses. The following restricted uses shall be permitted within the
Commercial Zoning District:
….
(2) Pawnshops and Precious Metal Dealers, as defined in City Code, Section
16-389, provided the following restrictions are observed:
a. The use shall be located not less than 750 feet from a pawnshop,
precious metal dealer, consumer small loan lender or currency
exchange, as measured at the lot line. In the case of a multi-use
building, distances from the use shall be measured from the portion
of the structure occupied by the pawnshop or precious metal dealer.
b. Visibility into the store shall be maintained by utilizing clear,
transparent glass on all windows and doors, and by keeping all
windows free of obstructions for at least three feet into the store.
Product may be displayed for sale in the window as long as the
display, including signage, does not occupy more than 30 percent of
the window area.
c. All entrances to the business, with the exception of emergency fire
exits which are not usable by patrons, must be visible from the public
right-of-way. When such businesses are located within an enclosed
commercial complex, all patron entrances must open onto the
common concourse.
(3) Consumer Small Loan Lenders and Currency Exchanges, provided the
following restrictions are observed:
a. The use shall be located not less than 750 feet from a pawnshop,
precious metal dealer, consumer small loan lender or currency
exchange, as measured at the lot line. In the case of a multi-use
building, distances from the use shall be measured from the portion
of the structure occupied by the pawnshop or precious metal dealer.
b. All entrances to the business, with the exception of emergency fire
exits which are not usable by patrons, must be visible from the
public right-of-way. When such businesses are located within an
enclosed commercial complex, all patron entrances must open onto
the common concourse.