Zoning Amendment/Churches June 21, 1993 y 5 Planning Report ZN93 -2
0
P K
ZONING AMENDMENT CHURCHES
S Proposed Action.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move continue the public
hearing regarding religious institutions and direct staff to
draft an ordinance allowing religious institutions as a
conditional use permit in the B -2 and B -3 zoning districts.
If the Planning Commission determines that religious institutions
should not be permitted in the B -2 and B -3 zoning districts the
appropriate action is the following: Move to approve Resolution
RZ93 -10 recommending approval of Ordinance 93 -725 prohibiting
churches in the B -2 and B -3 zoning districts. Staff is not
recommending this action without a study being completed to
support this action.
Overview.
In 1991 a moratorium was placed on permitting churches in the B -2
and B -3 zoning districts. Last October the City Council extended
the moratorium until October 1993. At the March Zoning and
Planning meeting the Commission reviewed the information provided
by the staff and asked the staff to draft an ordinance
prohibiting churches in the B -2 and B -3 zoning districts.
The staff requested the City Attorney's opinion regarding the
elimination of religious institutions in the B -2 and B -3 zoning
district. Mr. Miller's opinion is attached. He has recommended
that if the City wants to eliminate religious institutions from
the business districts, a study should be completed to support
this decision.
Staff is now recommending that rather than specifically prohibit
religious institutions from the B -2/B -3 zoning districts, that
they are regulated by a conditional use permit.
Primary Issues to Consider.
o Why was the moratorium proposed?
o Where are religious institutions currently allowed in
the City?
o What is the City Attorneys regarding prohibiting
churches in the business districts?
o Where will religious institutions be allowed if the
attached ordinance is adopted?
o Why not prohibit religious institutions in the B -1
zoning district?
o What was the conclusion in the Hastings case?
o What is the basis of the staff recommendation?
Supporting Documents.
o Analysis of Issues
o City Attorney's opinion
o Resolution RZ93 -10
III 0 Ordinance 93 -725
o Hastings case
Thrin 2r Clictoiroi
Nancy S. Anderson, AICP
Plann r
ZN93 -2
Page 2
Primary Issues to consider.
o Why was the moratorium proposed?
The moratorium was proposed because there was interest in putting
a church in several locations in the City that were considered
prime retail areas.
o Where are religious institutions currently allowed in the
City?
The Zoning Ordinance currently allows religious institutions as a
permitted use in the residential districts and the business
districts.
o What is the City Attorney's regarding prohibiting churches
in the business districts?
If the Commission wishes to prohibit religious institutions
within the B -2 and B -3 zoning districts, the City Attorney has
recommended that a study be completed to support the elimination
of churches in these zoning districts. The study would need to
justify the reasons for eliminating religious institutions in
commercial area by detailing the negative impacts they would have
in such areas.
This opinion is also the same as the courts found in the recent
court case in Hastings. The City of Hastings did not have any
factual basis for denying a church use in the downtown area.
The staff checked with the American Planning Association
regarding if there have been any studies completed regarding the
permitting of religious use in business districts. The
information that was sent to the staff from the American Planning
Association regarding churches was dealing with excluding
churches from residential areas. It appears that including
churches in the business districts is an acceptable zoning
practice.
If the City adopts the attached ordinance without doing a study
to support the elimination of religious uses in the business
district, it could open up the City for future legal action.
o Where will churches be allowed if the attached ordinance is
adopted?
Religious institutions will be allowed in residential
districts and the B -1 business district.
4111
ZN93 -2
Page 3
4 11 1
o What was the conclusion in the Hastings case?
There was a recent case in Hastings that is similar to the
situation in Hopkins. The facts of the case are as follows:
o Cornerstone Bible Church located its church in a
commercial zone (C -3) in downtown Hastings.
o Churches are not allowed in the C -3 zoning district.
o The church requested that the property be rezoned, this
rezoning was denied by the City.
The Church challenged the City's policy of excluding churches
from the central business district as violative of its rights to
free speech, freedom of association, free exercise of religion,
equal protection and due process.
The court found for the church, and stated the following: "The
City has not provided factual support for the assumptions that
underlies its exclusion of churches, and the alleged secondary
effects of churches on commercial activity remain a disputed
factual issue.
The court also stated the following regarding the basis for the
City denying the churches from the C -3 district. "The City
410 presented affidavits from two city planners containing little
more than conclusory statements that excluding churches from the
C -3 zone is consistent with the City's planning process and
historical land use
Attached is the Hastings case.
o What is the basis of the staff recommendation?
The staff is recommending that religious institutions are allowed
by conditional use permit. By undertaking this action the City
would not be required to expend time and funds necessary to
complete a study to justify this action. Religious uses would
remain permitted in the B -2 and B -3 zoning districts with a
conditional use permit and therefore there would be no basis for
legal action. If religious institutions are excluded from the
business districts without a study completed to support this
decision the City could be subject to future legal action and the
subsequent legal costs from the group bringing the legal action
if the City looses the case.
Alternatives
1. Recommend approval to continue the public hearing and direct
staff to draft an ordinance to permit religious institutions
as a conditional use permit.
411/ 2. By recommending approval of the Ordinance 93 -727, the City
Council will consider a recommendation of approval to
prohibit religious institutions in the B -2 and B -3 zoning
district.
ZN93 -2
Page 4
4 11 1
3. Continue for further information. If the Commission
indicates that a study should be conducted to determine that
religious institutions should be eliminated from the B -2 and
B -3 zoning districts this item should be continued.
td2
I e
11111 1-4111
C I T Y O F H O P K I N S
February 12, 1993
Nancy Anderson
City of Hopkins
Dear Ms. Anderson:
I have finally been able to plow through the file you
gave me on the City of Hastings lawsuit with the Cornerstone
Bible Church. The issue in this case was whether Hastings
could exclude churches from its C -3 District which was
intended to be a zoning classification for a revitalized
central business district.
Although a complete analysis of all the issues raised
in the appeal by the church to the Eighth Circuit Court would
be quite lengthy I thinks it suffices to say at this point
the city can exclude churches from the commercial business
districts if similar uses referred to in the Courts decision
such as Alcoholics Anonymous, counseling centers, Masonic
lodges, other non commercial activities are similarly
excluded. The exclusions pertaining to churches should be
supported by a study that establishes such uses displace
potential commercial uses. To support a finding in favor of
the City, there must be facts to show the City is justified
to disallow churches because such organizations displace
economic activity to a greater extent than other
non commercial uses that may be allowed in a business zoned
area.
It is of particular importance the exclusion be based
on a thorough and logically detailed analysis or study upon
which the City can rely in excluding churches or any other
non commercial activities wherever it intends to encourage or
promote economic vitality consonant with the use of a central
business district.
ince�rely,
'e A Miller
JAM /lz
1010 First Street South, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 612/935 -8474
An Equal Opportunity Employer
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: RZ93 -10
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, an application for an Ordinance Amendment ZN 93 -2
made by the City of Hopkins is recommended for approval.
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as
follows:
1. That an application for an ordinance amendment ZN 93 -2 was
filed with the City of Hopkins on April 23, 1993.
2. That the Hopkins Planning Commission reviewed such
application on June 29, 1993.
3. That the Hopkins Planning Commission, pursuant to published
notice, held a public hearing on the application on June 29,
1993: all persons present at the hearing were given an
opportunity to be heard.
4. That the written comments and analysis of the City staff and
the Planning Commission were considered.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application for
ZN 93 -2 is hereby recommended for approval based on the following
Findings of Fact:
1. The standards for the B -2 and B -3 zones which regulate
density, setbacks, etc., promote a highly intensive
commercial development pattern. Based on these
standards churches do not constitute the highest and
best use of land which is zoned B -2 and B -3.
2. The nature and timing of general church activities is
in contrast to the business environment and to the
business hours of the downtown. Therefore, no business
or retail contribution or activity is generated which
is contrary to the intent of the B -2 and B -3 zones and
the goals and objectives of the Hopkins Comprehensive
Plan and the Strategic Plan for Economic Development.
3. The basic purpose of the zoning ordinance is to ensure
41/1 the public health, safety and general welfare in
accordance with the official comprehensive plan of the
RESOLUTION NO: RZ93 -10
Page 2
4 11 1
City of Hopkins, and with adopted development goals,
policies and proposals contained therein. Toward this
end, the ordinance has divided the City of Hopkins into
zoning districts. These districts contain standards
which are intended to retain the integrity of
residential, commercial and industrial areas.
Religious institutions in the B -2 and B -3 zoning
districts are not consistent with the intent of the B -2
and B -3 zoning districts.
Adopted this 29th day of June, 1993.
John T. Hutchison, Chairman
11111 CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
ORDINANCE NO. 93 -725
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE PROHIBITING
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS IN THE B -2 AND B -3 ZONING DISTRICTS
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of
Hopkins as follows:
That the Hopkins Zoning Ordinance No 535 be and the
same is hereby amended by amending the following section:
535.01 subd. 3. B -1 B -2 B -3
109. Religious institutions, etc. X
First Reading: July 6, 1993
Second Reading: July 20, 1993
Date of Publication: July 23, 1993
Date Ordinance Takes Effect: August 17, 1993
Charles D. Redepenning, Mayor
ATTEST:
James A. Genellie, City Clerk
4111