06-10-96 PC Agenda
.
AGENDA
GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
June 10, 1996
7pm
I.
Approval of Minutes - May 13, 1996
II.
Informal Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit
Applicant: Minneapolis Crisis Nursery
Address: 5400 Glenwood Avenue, Golden Valley, MN
Purpose: To consider a request for a conditional use permit which
would allow the use of a crisis nursery, ages newborn to
eight years old, in the 1-3 Institutional District
.
III. Informal Public Hearing: Amendment to the Housing Element of the
Golden Valley Comprehensive Plan along with a Livable Communities
Action Plan and Related Background Documentation.
IV. Informal Public Hearing: Amendment to the City Code, Section 11.55.
Planned Unit Development
- Short Recess -
V. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, and Board of Zoning Appeals
VI. Other Business
A. Discussion regarding location of tower and other facilities
for cellular and Personal Communication Services
B. Review of Oasis Mental Health Program - Annual Report
C. Clarification of Representative to the Board of Zoning Appeals
VII. Adjournment
.
PLANNING COMMISSION GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC INPUT
.
The Planning Commission is an advisory body, created to advise the City Council on land use.
The Commission will recommend Council approval or denial of a land use proposal based
upon the Commission's determination of whether the proposed use is permitted under the
Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and whether the proposed use will, or will not,
adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood.
The Commission holds informal public hearings on land use proposals to enable you to leam,
first-hand, what such proposals are, and to permit you to ask questions and offer comments.
Your questions and comments become part of the record and will be used by the Council,
along with the Commission's recommendation, in reaching its decision.
With the completion of the informal public hearing(s) there will be a short recess before the
commission continues with the remainder of the agenda.
To aid in your understanding and to facilitate your comments and questions, the Commission
will utilize the following procedure:
1. The Commission Chair will introduce the proposal and the recommendation from staff.
Staff will give a brief summary of the applicant's request. Commission members may ask
questions of staff.
2. The applicant will describe the proposal and answer any questions from the
Commission.
.
3. The Chair will open the public hearing, asking first for those who wish to speak to so
indicate by raising their hands. The Chair may set a time limit for individual
questions/comments if a large number of persons have indicated a desire to speak.
Spokespersons for groups will have a longer period of time for questions/comments.
4. Please give your full name and address clearly when recognized by the Chair.
Remember, your questions/comments are for the record.
5. Direct your questions/comments to the Chair. the Chair will determine who will
answer your questions.
6. No one will be given the opportunity to speak a second time until everyone has had
the opportunity to speak initially. Please limit your second presentation to new
information, not rebuttal.
7. At the close of the public hearing, the Commission will discuss the proposal and take
appropriate action.
.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley
Planning Commission
May 13,1996
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council
Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. The meeting was called
to order by Chair Prazak at 7pm.
Those present were Commissioners Groger, Johnson, Kapsner, McAleese, Pentel and Prazak;
absent was Lewis. Also present were Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and
Elizabeth Knoblauch, City Planner.
1. Approval of Minutes - April 29. 1996
MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Pentel and motion carried unanimously to approve the April 29,
1996 minutes with the following changes:
.Page One, second paragraph under Workshop Sessions; changed sentence to read: She
recommended using the six principles of the Livable Communities program rather than the four
goal areas identified ~ ~ Golden Valley housing plan.
Page Three, Item B under "Other Business"; change heading to read" Second Planning
Commission Meeting in ApFU ~
II.
Continued - Workshop Session: Discussion of Livable Communities Action Plan
Requirements and General Housing Plan Update
City Planner Beth Knoblauch recommended that the discussion begin with her re-interpretation of
existing housing goals, policies, and objectives. Several suggested changes had been included in
the Technical Background report, but in doing the actual drafting additional changes were made for
a variety of reasons. Three of the four goals remain basically as suggested in the Technical
Background; the "quality" goal has been expanded to better express the scope of the City's
quality-related policies and objectives. Several policy and objective statements have been
combined, divided, or moved from one list to another for purposes of clarity, and some have been
more substantially amended to better reflect current circumstances. The commissioners reviewed
each rewritten policy and objective statement, noting those that also seem appropriate for tagging
as Livable Communities action plan items.
Use of the HUD Section 8 housing quality standards was questioned, as neither staff nor the
Commission was familiar with the version currently in use by HUD. Since other policy and
objective statements assume an ability to evaluate housing condition, it was eventually agreed that
some set of standards should be specified. Mark Grimes will obtain a copy of the current HUD
standards for review before this particular policy is re-adopted.
Staff noted that the Human Rights Commission's involvement in guarding against housing
discrimination has historically had three components: working with developers/property managers
on specific proposals as well as existing developments, providing general public education, and
providing a no-fault grievance process through which discrimination complaints can be resolved.
Emphasis has shifted among those components over the years. Commissioners discussed the
three components. Working with developers before a project was built did not appear to be a
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
May 13, 1996
Page Two
.
critical enough component to continue requiring it as a matter of policy. Staff was instructed to
reword the policy in question so that it addresses education and the grievance process but does
not require automatic involvement in housing development proposals.
Involvement in a "city beautification" program was questioned. That objective had been in the
housing plan since 1982, and staff proposed no significant changes in wording. Since nothing had
been done toward meeting the objective in almost fifteen years, the main question was whether it
should be left in the plan at all. The recent Community Standards Task Force indicated an interest
in creating some sort of program to promote civic pride, so the general idea appears to be still
current. The decision was to leave it in the plan.
Establishing a deferred assessment program for home improvements was dropped from the plan
by the Commission. Staff noted that the State of Minnesota offers a program for improvements to
homes over 35 years old and under $150,000 in value. After discussing the merits of trying to add
a city program as a complement to the state program, it was determined that the state program is
sufficient at this time.
Requiring "point of sale" home inspections was another existing objective that the Commission felt
to be unnecessary at the present time and potentially problematic. Staff indicated that a Housing
Task Force had looked at the matter in 1990 and decided that other avenues exist for pursuing
inspection and correction of home deficiencies, thus eliminating the need for a specific City
requirement. Commissioners discussed some of those avenues. Staff was instructed to shift this .
item to a policy statement that promotes education, rather than an objective of creating a specific
City requirement.
The existing housing objective of reviewing the afford ability impact of the City's housing
regulations and standards was largely completed several years ago. Staff indicated that the two
remaining exceptions were parking requirements for multiple dwelling and two-family zoning
districts, and general PUD provisions. The Commission discussed those two code areas. Given
today's car oriented society, there was concern about reducing multi-unit parking requirements;
staff noted that this can be done on a case by case basis in multi-unit PUD's, so there is some
flexibility in the code already. The Commission saw more potential benefit in reviewing the general
PUD provisions to ensure that they accommodate a broad enough range of variety and
affordability options. Commissioners were also concerned about the potential impact of new
regulations that may be proposed in the future. Staff recommended that a policy statement be
added to the housing plan to provide for consideration of affordability issues when new housing-
related regulations are proposed.
Discussion then moved on to the "short Iisf of suggested additions to the existing housing policies
and objectives. Staff explained that the list included any suggestion from the summary section of
the Technical Background report that had gotten an average rating of 3.7 or higher when the
Commissioner's individual evaluations were collated. In the course of discussion, three of the five
policy suggestions were recommended for addition to the housing plan with such final wording as
staff considered appropriate. A fourth policy suggestion, relating to appropriate locations for
construction of scattered two-family homes, was finally dropped after considerable debate. The .
fifth policy suggestion, relating to protecting neighborhoods against the undesirable impacts of
aging and isolated adjacent nonresidential uses was recommended for addition after
Commissioners struggled with how broadly it should be worded, a particular concern of staff.
.
.
.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
May 13,1996
Page Three
"
Several of the twelve suggested objectives were determined by the Commission to duplicate or
closely parallel other statements, and were combined accordingly. Suggestions calling for criteria
to guide the higher density residential site selection process, a self-review of the housing role of
affected City boards and Commissions, and comprehensive plan map amendments involving
isolated and aging nonresidential uses were dropped. Remaining items were recommended for
addition to the plan with whatever final wording staff considered to be appropriate. Mark Grimes
will select items for tagging as parts of the Livable Communities action plan as appropriate.
The final topic of discussion was the draft housing plan itself. Commissioners responded favorably
to staff's attempts at a reader-friendly tone but made changes to some passages where the
language was found to be overly casual. There was debate about whether the explanatory Livable
Communities material was too negative in its approach, and some additional changes were made
in that section. A proposed section entitled "Focus on the Future" was deleted. Commissioners.
liked the parallel drawn by staff between "building" the plan and building a house.
At the end of the workshop session, staff were instructed to revise and complete the draft housing
plan per the night's discussion and schedule it for an informal public hearing by the Planning
Commission on June 10. The Livable Communities action plan will be finalized as an overlay on
the regular housing plan and will be considered by the Commission at the same time. Staff
explained that the Metro Council is requiring the City to consider the housing plan update as a new
comprehensive plan submittal, which means a mandatory six month review period between
Planning Commission recommendation and City Council approval rather than the shorter interval
allowed for plan amendments. Therefore, the City Council will be introduced to the draft plan in
June so that the Livable Communities action plan can be seen in the larger context of the overall
housing plan, but City Council approval at that time will be limited to just the Livable Communities
action plan, which must be completed before the end of June if the City is to participate in the
Livable Communities program.
III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council. and
Board of Zoning Appeals
No City reports given. Commissioner Pentel reported on a Design Center invitational meeting for
Minneapolis and selected NW Hennepin suburbs to explore a variety of common planning issues.
IV. Other Business
Director Mark Grimes informed the Commission of the upcoming informational meeting with
Golden Valley residents and businesses who may be affected by the Hwy. 100 project. MnDOT
sponsored the meeting.
V. ArQoumment
The meeting was adjourned at 9: 12pm by consent.
Jean Lewis, Secretary
.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
Date:
June 4, 1996
To:
Golden Valley Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to Allow the Building at 5400
Glenwood Avenue to be used for a crisis nursery - Minneapolis
Crisis Nursery, Applicant
The Minneapolis Crisis Nursery (MCN) has entered into an agreement to purchase the
two-story clinic building at 5400 Glenwood Avenue. The building is proposed to be
used as a crisis nursery to care for 18 children, ages 0-8 years, for up to 72 hours
during a family crisis. MCN currently operates a crisis nursery at 4255-3rd Avenue
South in Minneapolis where care is given for up to 18 children a day.
The property at 5400 Glenwood Avenue is currently zoned'I-3 Institutional. It is also
designated on the Comprehensive Plan map as 1-3 Institutional. It is my understanding
that this property was rezoned to 1-3 from 1-1 in the early 1980's after the building was
sold for a medical clinic. The property was previously owned by the Hopkins School
District and it was sold by the district after it was determined that the space was no
longer needed. (The building has previously been the district headquarters for the old
Golden Valley school district.) The proposed use of the property as a crisis nursery is
not specifically outlined in the 1-3 zoning district. However, the use seems generally
consistent with the types of uses that are permitted or conditionally permitted within the
district. For example, within the 1-3 district, rest homes, clinics and nursing homes are
permitted uses. Day care and residential facilities are conditional uses.
The 1-3 district states in Subd. 4, H:
H. Such other uses which, in the opinion of the Council, are
reasonably compatible with the uses specifically described in
Subdivision 3, above, may be permitted as a Conditional Use in
any of the four Institutional Zoning Sub-Districts set forth above.
Staff believes that the crisis nursery would best be treated as a use that is "reasonably
compatible" with the other uses permitted in the 1-3 Zoning District. Therefore, staff is
recommending that a conditional use permit be issued prior to the building's use as a
nursery.
1
As stated above, the building has most recently been used as a physical therapy clinic. .
The building is two levels with about 3,800 sq.ft. of floor space. The site is about 1.2
acres. There are currently 48 parking spaces available on the site.
Several years ago there was a proposal to expand the building. These plans never
came to fruition. However, the site plan that is part of this submittal includes the
proposed addition. Please ignore the references to the new addition and added
parking.
The plan indicates 48 spaces on the site. I have verified that amount. This parking
should be more than adequate based on the staffing of the nursery. I estimate that the
maximum number of employees on the site during the peak shift would be 15-20,
including volunteers. With an occasional counseling session, drop off of a child, or a
board meeting, this may increase the parking demand to 25-30 cars. There is no
specific parking requirement found in the Zoning Code for a crisis nursery.
Traffic that would be generated from this type of use would be less than would be
created by many other uses permitted in the 1-3 District. Since the number of
employees will be relatively low (about 15), the number of trips generated by
employees is small. There may be a few trips per day by those admitting a .child or by
volunteers; however, this should be minimal. The child care staff works shifts that do
~ot create traffic at the normal peak hours.
Connie Skillingstad, Executive Director of the MCN, has submitted a narrative of the
MCN and how this building would be altered. Staff will not repeat her narrative in this
report. The only outside change planned for the building is a fenced playground area.
Staff would suggest that this be allowed on-site to better serve the children. The most
logical location for the playground is at the northeast comer of the building next to the
small gym on the ground level. Other changes to the building would be internal as
shown on the attached floor plan.
.
Analysis of Ten Factors required by PC for any Conditional Use Permit
The Planning Commission is required to make findings and recommendations to the
Council on the following factors. Staff comments are as follows:
1. Demonstrated need for the proposed use. MCN has stated that there
is a need in suburban Hennepin County for such a nursery. Last year,
more than 2,500 children were turned away because there was
inadequate space.
2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. This type of crisis nursery
is consistent with the other uses found in the 1-3 (Institutional) designation. .
2
.
.
.
3. Effect on property values in the neighborhood. The use of the building
for a crisis nursery should have no effect on property values. The building
will remain virtually the same and less traffic will be generated from it than
a clinic.
4. Effect of any anticipated traffic generation upon the current traffic
flow and congestion in the area. The use of the building for a crisis
nursery will not increase traffic from this site. Based on the number of
employees planned at the nursery, the trips generated should be much
less than a standard clinic.
5. Effect of any increases in population and density upon surrounding
land uses. The nursery will have up to 18 children and five adults living at
the site. These children will stay for no longer than three (3) days. The
children will be restricted to the building and playground on the site.
6 Increase in noise levels to be caused by the proposed use. The
nursery will not increase noise levels in the area. The small playground
will be at least 180 feet from the nearest residence. Also, the playground
noise would be masked by the noise from TH 100 and the playground at
Meadowbrook School.
7. Any odor, dust, smoke, gas, vibration to be caused by the proposed
use. The use is not anticipated to cause any of these problems.
8. Any increase in flies, rats, or other animals in the area to be caused
by the proposed use. The use is not anticipated to cause any of these
animal problems.
9. Visual appearance of any proposed structure or use. With the excep-
tion of the outside playground, there are no changes to the outside of the
building.
10. Other effects upon the general public health, safety, and welfare of
the City and its residents. Staff does not believe there are any other
negative effects of this proposed use on the general public health, safety
and welfare.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends approval of a conditional use permit that would allow the MCN to
operate at 5400 Glenwood Avenue. Based on .the proposed narrative and staff
discussions with Connie Skillingstad, Executive Director, the use appears to be
consistent and compatible with other uses permitted in the 1-3 District.
3
Ms. Skillingstad has met with the City Inspection staff and reviewed the changes that .
will be necessary to the building to meet current code requirements. These changes
will be expensive but are required in order to house children and get all the necessary
licensing from the State.
The conditional use permit should cover the following items:
1. Limit the capacity of the nursery to 20 children ages 0-8 years. This is two more
than requested but it would give some flexibility.
2. Allow the construction of a playground area on the site. This playground area
has not yet been chosen. The most logical location is at the northeast comer of
the building.
3. Require that all state and local permits be obtained prior to the opening of the
clinic.
4. An amended conditional use permit would have to be issued if the building were
to be expanded. The MeN does not have plans for expansion.
MWG:mkd
Attachments:
Location Map
Narrative
Floor Plan
Site Plan (attached)
.
.
4
..
5
-...
eoQ
0'"
ni
--.
'"
-
>;.::"~~I~AG=- DITCH. Ae
-,,-
. -:'> .~.'
41 ..,':
.5
'"
-0
tc:
...
:r
1
:, :
.....
...:-;:
'; "
)\~':"
I
2,
~
~
~
.~Cb~
c.," 00
~~
~flj ,Cb
~~
~O~
<:J:.~
-/
,/
/
-
MEADOWBROOK
SCHOOL
.
~
~ .
AOO'i'C
312.~8
.....
'"
III
Qj
~
.
...
~
to
2 0- m
~
..
l>' 14 "
C 0 z
-
0 "' r-,.
i " .:.
-
A '" .
1> l{-: ..
i 4 d
"'"" ez,. ".
S,)r- r- .
el' S'- :.e Q Z
.''\0 - '>(...
. 10'.6 . __ L~.
. , - :::
. ~ t. . e2% ,'~.A-.,--_
::: . ... ~-=.- E
;;;.' ;::r- - 4'-.'~ ,....~~ :l ~
..-..~ -.- i1 - .. 1.,
.. . -~ :: "'~
,
MINNEAPOLIS CRISIS NURSERY
Conditional Use Application
NARRATIVE
.
The Minneapolis Crisis Nursery was started in 1983 to provide emergency, voluntary,
parent- initiated, short term care for young children (0-6) when their parents were under
extreme stress or in crisis and when there was a possibility of neglect or abuse. During the
past 13 years, we have provided this service on a continuing basis. Our first location was
in the convent of Holy Rosary Catholic Church and we cared for up to 8 children. In 1989,
we moved to our current location, adjacent to Headstart at 4255-3rd Ave. S. where we
are able to care for up to 18 children daily.
During 1995, we cared for 1,999 children. We also turned away nearly 2,500 children
because we had no room at the time their parents called. Our Board of Directors voted to
expand and based on numerous conversations with social service agencies, the Northwest
Hennepin Human Services Council and Success by Six Northwest, as well as from our
own statistics, it became clear that the north/northwest Hennepin area would be the site of
a second location so we could meet some of the unmet need.
Our goal was to locate a facility that could house 15-18 children each day and that would .
have adequate space for indoor and outdoor living as well as appropriate office space for
support and direct care staff. We also needed space that had ample offstreet parking and
was on or close to a bus line. Through the pro bono work of the Keewaydin Group, we
exhausted all existing buildings in our target area and determined that the facility at 5400
Glenwood most closely met our needs,
Usage of the BuDding:
The building would have the following uses:
a. day and overnight care for children ages 0-8. This would mean outdoor play and
the creation of fenced playground space.
b. intake and discharge meetings with parents (day time usually, night occasionally)
c. occasional parent, board, and other meetings
The entire building with the exception of staff office and break space would be devoted to
the care of children.
Employees:
The Nursery will employ a program manager and assistant manager, child care statI:
housekeeping, maintenance and custodial staft: and family counselors. We will involve a
large number of volunteers in a variety of tasks at the center.
.
.
.
.
At any given time during the day, there would be 6 child care staff for 18 children (state
licensing requirement), 1 to 6 volunteers assisting with child care, program supervisors, a
family counselor and other management or clerical staff or volunteers. At night (10-6)
there would be 3-4 child care staff caring for the children. Generally the last staff would
arrive and leave around 10:00pm and earliest would leave/arrive about 6:00am. except in
the case of an emergency need in the middle of the night (this occurs very seldom at our
current site).
Potential customen:
Our customers are the parents who bring their children. They will arrive by taxi or be
transported by volunteers or in their own vehicles. Most parents bring their children in
during the day. In an extreme situation, there may be an intake during the night. They will
often use the bus after leaving their children as that is a less expensive mode of
transportation and the Nursery pays for transportation if needed. There are no fees
charged to parents who use the Nursery. Customers will come from throughout Hennepin
County.
Generally there are 2-8 intakes during the day. Since children can be cared for on a day
only basis for up to three days, the number of intakes vary. Currently, most children stay
overnight and often for three days. Parents may occasionally come to the Nursery for
group meetings.
Boun of Operation:
The Nursery is in operation 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Our crisis calls are taken
by counselors and will generally continue to be taken at our south Minneapolis site. A
family counselor will be on-site between 8:00am and 7:00pm and then take calls from their
home during offhours.
Most intakes occur between 9:00am and 6:00pm. Child care staff work shifts of 6:00am-
2:00pm, 2:00pm to 10:00pm and 10:00pm to 6:00am. in the numbers identified above.
Acceptance at other locations:
The Minneapolis Crisis Nursery has earned a very positive reputation in this community.
The fact that use of the Nursery by parents is voluntary means that we have very few
problems with our customers. We have a conditional use permit at our current site since
1989 and have had no citations and few neighbor complaints. We keep our facility up
very well. Our most recent conditional use permit application in 1995 was unanimously
approved and the only concern raised had to do with a garbage can left on the curb over a
weekend.
We have about 300 regular volunteers assisting in the work of the Nursery. We look
forward to involving volunteers from the community at our second site as well. The
presence of volunteers helps assure that the community is involved in and supports
Nursery operation..
.
What the site will look like:
There will be little change in the exterior of the building with the exception of fenced
playground facilities and a plan for donor bricks used in the walkway. It is possible that we
will need to install an elevator and that would have some affect on outside appearance.
Internally, most of the clinic offices will be converted to bedrooms (generally three-bed
rooms), bathrooms will be redone for child use, and the lower level will be remodeled to
include a larger kitchen and dining area, gym, quiet play and infant areas, artIcraft activity
area and staff lounge and laundry space. The upper floor office/conference section will be
left as is for offices. A staff office and clothing storage room will be created behind the
current reception area. The reception area will remain the same.
A security system will be installed since there are children throughout the day and night.
Wmdows and doors will be altered to assure adequate egress and safety in case of fire and
the building will be sprinkled as well as any other changes needed to meet code
requirements. .
While there may be an expansion in the future, there is adequate space for our current
needs and there is adequate off street parking for the number of people who will use the
facility.
Summary:
We truly believe that this location will provide an important service to the north/northwest
area of Hennepin County. The work of the Crisis Nursery is critical to the safety and well
being of our children and the need for expansion of our services has been well
documented. We are good neighbors where we are currently and would do our best to be
good neighbors in this Glenwood location.
Connie Skillingstad
Executive Director
.
.'""\__'C\~ :':o<,!:-,,~<>, "C,."
; _ . .~.. :. -: ::. - ..4
'. . .
"
"'~-
.\
'~;~'~~i'
;
,
n
! F "Ff,lrl,,'
j:T'- ~i! "IId.u,
" l !i, b- r 'II( ~.-
'; iL..., l--, I lJ~
Ii' .'\ I, ~,
I' ," ,
i ~ii: !
'n: .;\"i1'l~L
! \r'~' .-: ~'.'
~.~,~. '. .~' i 0' ,
I :,= L--1 '
w
r~
~'
n---- ~ -
~
\ ~. . ..~
n ~~;j,-,i};
....".. .,.:':1
, , '
",l:::~i:&;,',~: ,. );' ,~~~: :',,':);~i :'~~: ,~" ': ' .
.. ....
.-. '.' ".
lJ ' ,.------
'I
II
Il
r-::+l: L
1-8"- ~
'-..- - I I
I~ l-C+~-'~' .il~''\? "r'~ ']1
I ~-=~ l. ~.... L-; .J
i~ ~fl l~ .'
i 1"\ .
Ift_.. ,'\ ~ \-\
l ,I .!:;'~ ~ ~
I ,[ J\.. ~
I -l-j i" l.a:.
tr'=~:+' ' . r,
'i ~\ _.:tJ
i"l.... ., '.~ .__' 11
Ii....... 'T" ___--"'===::dl
~,. ",_ll
r-
,'~ '-
r~'
,J
~
,)
Ib::
1
\
,:
a::
W
...
Z
W
o
:J:
...
.J
4
We
XI-
wfi
~I
4>=
~~
113>
~~
Wo
a:: <:I
. It
GT ,~
II'f'~' ,i
"I I '
I " . '
~:....." l' ' i
I\i ~~
I
- ~~~,
~
t ~
II I
. t !
~ i ~ i
Ii ;
Iii;
I ;
Iii ;
:11
I '
IIi
,: ! I
.1 I I
ii
~;,
",I
'of'
I.,'
'\:..
.,-
'f
':'j
--
~
II! If
, ill~
I !I
I II
II
.
.
.
Date:
June 4, 1996
To:
Golden Valley Planning Commission
From:
Elizabeth Knoblauch, City Planner
Subject:
Updated Housing Element of the Golden Valley Comprehensive
Plan and Livable Communities Overlay Element of the Housing
Plan
REASON FOR THE UPDATE
Cities are granted the power to regulate growth and development by the state. To
help ensure that local regulatory powers are not misused, the state requires cities to
prepare and maintain comprehensive plans that guide long term land use and
development activities. Golden Valley's first plan dates back to 1959. The current
plan was adopted in 1982. Sections of the plan relating to transportation and
sewers were updated in 1991, and the land use plan map has undergone several
site-specific amendments, but other elements of the plan have remained unchanged
since the time of adoption. Last year, the state passed a law requiring Golden
Valley and other Twin City Metro Area communities to undertake complete
comprehensive plan updates by the end of 1998.
This proposed update of Golden Valley's housing plan (attached) launches the
City's overall plan update process. Housing was put at the top of the. update list
because it dovetails neatly with Golden Valley's involvement in a new state initiative
for promoting housing diversity. Established in 1995, that initiative is known by the
catch-phrase of "Livable Communities".
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES AND THE HOUSING PLAN
Livable Communities seeks to foster a broader range of housing opportunities to
serve all segments of society. It does this by offering financial incentives to
participating cities. Participation is not required under state law, but cities are bound
by certain program requirements once they sign on. One of those requirements is
the formulation and adoption of a Livable Communities action plan that identifies
specific housing activities through which a city's ongoing diversification efforts can
be measured. Action plans must be turned in to the Metropolitan Council, the .
agency overseeing the Livable Communities program, by June 30.
1
The function of the Technical Background is to air potential housing issues or
opportunities and provide a springboard for problem-solving debate. It contains
ideas that range from conservative to controversial in approach, cost, and scope;
some of them will undoubtedly never be put to use. The Technical Background will
be adopted as part of the official planning record to satisfy Metro Council guidelines,
but will remain distinct and separate from the plan itself. The housing plan update
will incorporate only those ideas that the Planning Commission and City Council
determine to be appropriate to maintaining Golden Valley's distinctive identity as a
desirable place to live.
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PROPOSED UPDATE
To some extent, state law dictates the content of any housing plan. Golden Valley's
updated plan is required to contain provisions that promote the availability of
housing affordable to low and moderate income households. It must include a
commitment to safeguarding solar access for energy conservation purposes. It
must identify goals, policies, objectives, programs and standards as appropriate.
Agencies and tools for implementing the plan also have to be identified. All of these
requirements have been built into the proposed housing plan update.
This time around, the updated plan will also include specific definitions for such
legally mandated terms as "goal" and "policy", which are not defined in state law or
in any part of the current comprehensive plan. Established definitions will help the
City to craft provisions that meet state requirements. It is hoped that they will also
make the plan more understandable to Golden Valley's citizens.
Orientation material other than the new definitions has been kept to a minimum.
There is a short discussion of the City's long-standing commitment to housing
diversity along with a few summary statistics pertaining to housing in Golden Valley;
readers who want more information on housing in the City are directed to the
Technical Background report. There is also a short discussion of the Livable
Communities program and an accompanying reference to where readers may go to
find more information about it. The brevity of these orienting discussions is another
attempt to make the plan itself more understandable and accessible to the public.
Many readers just want to know how the City intends to address future housing
decisions, and would prefer not to read through a long research paper before getting
to the heart of the matter: the plan's goals, policies, and objectives.
.
.
The proposed plan update includes four goal statements, centering on quality,
variety, affordability, and nondiscrimination in housing. There has been some
rewording, but otherwise the goals are unchanged from the 1982 housing plan.
Seventeen proposed policies and fourteen proposed objectives are intended to keep .
the City on the right path toward goal fulfillment. They include a mix of old and new
ideas. Some are taken from the current plan with rewording as needed to bring
them up to date. Others are new to the plan but reflect activities in which the City is
3
.
.
.
changes that the Council may find necessary. That means all policies and
objectives identified as Livable Communities items in the proposed housing plan
update will be adopted as is, adopted with amendments, or deleted from Livable
Communities consideration on that date.
The procedure for the rest of the housing plan update and for the supporting
background documentation will be a little different. State law requires that each
Metro Area city must allow a suitable period for comment by the Metro Council and
by neighboring cities after initial consideration but before final approval of any
comprehensive plan update. If the City Council determines on June 18 that the
proposed update is appropriate for Golden Valley and that the supporting
background research is substantially complete, then both documents can be
recommended for outside comment after any minor amendment the Council sees fit
to make; the public hearing will either be continued or adjourned until the comment
period is over, and then will be reopened or recalled as necessary. If the City
Council determines that more detailed work is needed on either document, then
both documents may be sent back to the Planning Commission or held for additional
consideration by the Council. From now until final adoption by the City Council, the
proposed housing plan update, the supporting research documentation, and related
materials will remain available for public review at the Golden Valley library.
Attachments: - Proposed housing plan update, Housing Golden Valley
- Background documentation, Technical Background
5
The function of the Technical Background is to air potential housing issues or .
opportunities and provide a springboard for problem-solving debate. It contains
ideas that range from conservative to controversial in approach, cost, and scope;
some of them will undoubtedly never be put to use. The Technical Background will
be adopted as part of the official planning record to satisfy Metro Council guidelines,
but will remain distinct and separate from the plan itself. The housing plan update
will incorporate only those ideas that the Planning Commission and City Council
determine to be appropriate to maintaining Golden Valley's distinctive identity as a
desirable place to live.
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PROPOSED UPDATE
To some extent, state law dictates the content of any housing plan. Golden Valley's
updated plan is required to contain provisions that promote the availability of
housing affordable to low and moderate income households. It must include a
commitment to safeguarding solar access for energy conservation purposes. It
must identify goals, policies, objectives, programs and standards as appropriate.
Agencies and tools for implementing the plan also have to be identified. All of these
requirements have been built into the proposed housing plan update.
This time around, the updated plan will also include specific definitions for such
legally mandated terms as "goaln and "policyn, which are not defined in state law or
in any part of the current comprehensive plan. Established definitions will help the
City to craft provisions that meet state requirements. It is hoped that they will also
make the plan more understandable to Golden Valley's citizens.
.
Orientation material other than the new definitions has been kept to a minimum.
There is a short discussion of the City's long-standing commitment to housing
diversity along with a few summary statistics pertaining to housing in Golden Valley;
readers who want more information on housing in the City are directed to the
Technical Background report. There is also a short discussion of the Livable
Communities program and an accompanying reference to where readers may go to
find more information about it. The brevity of these orienting discussions is another
attempt to make the plan itself more understandable and accessible to the public.
Many readers just want to know how the City intends to address Mure housing
decisions, and would prefer not to read through a long research paper before getting
to the heart of the matter: the plan's goals, policies, and objectives.
The proposed plan update includes four goal statements, centering on quality,
variety, afford ability, and nondiscrimination in housing. There has been some
rewording, but otherwise the goals are unchanged from the 1982 housing plan.
Seventeen proposed policies and fourteen proposed objectives are intended to keep .
the City on the right path toward goal fulfillment. They include a mix of old and new
ideas. Some are taken from the current plan with rewording as needed to bring
them up to date. Others are new to the plan but reflect activities in which the City is
3
.
.
.
changes that the Council may find necessary. That means all policies and
objectives identified as Livable Communities items in the proposed housing plan
update will be adopted as is, adopted with amendments, or deleted from Livable
Communities consideration on that date.
The procedure for the rest of the housing plan update and for the supporting
background documentation will be a little different. State law requires that each
Metro Area city must allow a suitable period for comment by the Metro Council and
by neighboring cities after initial consideration but before final approval of any
comprehensive plan update. If the City Council determines on June 18 that the
proposed update is appropriate for Golden Valley and that the supporting
background research is substantially complete, then both documents can be
recommended for outside comment after any minor amendment the Council sees fit
to make; the public hearing will either be continued or adjourned until the comment
period is over, and then will be reopened or recalled as necessary. If the City
Council determines that more detailed work is needed on either document, then
both documents may be sent back to the Planning Commission or held for additional
consideration by the Council. From now until final adoption by the City Council, the
proposed housing plan update, the supporting research documentation, and related
materials will remain available for public review at the Golden Valley library.
Attachments: - Proposed housing plan update, Housing Golden Valley
- Background documentation, Technical Background
5
"'
.
MEMORANDUM
Date:
May 30,1996
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Amendment to PUD Chapter of the Zoning Code Adding Special
Provisions for PUDs involving Multiple Parcels.
Staff is proposing an amendment to the PUD section of the Zoning Code in order
to resolve an issue that has come up several times with some of the existing
PUDs. At the present time, there is a single PUD permit for each PUD. The
PUD may include more than one lot and, therefore, more than one owner. In
order for a PUD to be changed or amended, the process requires that each of
the owners of lots within the PUD approve of any changes to the PUD. This
would allow anyone owner in the PUD to have veto power over any amendment.
.
The proposed amendment would change the way PUD permits are written for
PUDs with multiple lots. The change would require that there be at least two
permits for PUDs with multiple ownership. The first permit or main body permit
would cover the entire, multiple lot PUD and be signed by all lot owners. This
permit would cover the shared elements of the development including streets,
driveways, parking, landscaping, maintenance, utilities, signage, and building
appearance. This type of permit could only be amended if all lot owners within
the PUD agreed to the change.
A second permit would be attached to each individual lot within a PUD. The
permit would cover issues of concern only to that lot. These items may include
specific building envelopes, the specific use of the lot, and other matters that
would not have an effect on adjoining lots within the PUD. This permit could be
amended with only the approval of the owner of the one lot in the PUD if
approved by the City Council. However, the City Council would notify all lot
owners within the PUD of such a change. This would give the other lot owners
an opportunity to be heard on the amendment.
.
The City Council may decide that the second type of permit is not needed for a
particular PUD. An example may be a PUD that has many single family or
town home lots. It would be very burdensome to have individual permits for each
of these lots. In the case of a residential PUD that would have many owners, it
would be best to have a clearly written main PUD permit that would specify the
..
types of changes that could be made without amending the main PUD permit.
This may include defining a building area on each of the lots where the houses
may be expanded.
.
This proposed ordinance does allow for the change of existing PUDs with
multiple lots if, in the opinion of the City Council, the change to one of the lots
would not have an effect on other lots within the PUD. If the City Council makes
that determination, the application for change could only be made by the owner
of the one lot.
The staff and City Attorney believe that this proposed amendment is an
approach that will help eliminate future conflicts in multiple ownership PUDs
while still maintaining the overall coordination of the development. With quickly
changing real estate markets, there is a need to remain as flexible as possible to
new types of developments that may not have been discussed as part of the
original PUD proposal. This approach will allow this flexibility and still maintain
the intent of permitting PUDs coordinated design.
Staff knows that this type of change will require more work on the part of the
developers and the City. Instead of one overall permit there may be two, three,
four or more individual permits. But the overall benefit to both the property
owner and City far outweighs the added time it will take to write the additional .
permits.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
the adoption of the attached changes to the PUD chapter of the Zoning Code.
These changes will provide for an overall main permit in a multiple lot PUD along
with individual permits for each lot within the PUD. The staff believes that this
type of permit system will provide more flexibility without compromising
coordination and design quality. This change will also give those owners of lots
in existing PUDs the opportunity to amend the PUD permit without obtaining the
approval of all lot owners within a. PUD if it is demonstrated to the City Council
that such a change would effect that one parcel.
MWG:mkd
Attachment: Ordinance
.
#
..
.
.
.
Ordinance No. ,Second Series
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
CHAPTER 11, LAND USE REGULATION (ZONING),
ADDING SPECIAL PROVISION FOR PUDS INVOLVING MULTIPLE PARCELS
The City Council for the City of Golden Valley does hereby ordain as follows:
Section 1. City Code Section 11.55 is hereby amended by renumbering
subdivisions 10,11,12,13, and 14 as subdivisions 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15.
Section 2. City Code Section 11.55 is here by amended by adding the
following as Subdivision 10 thereof:
Subd. 10. Multiple Parcels. A PUD shall be regulated by a single
permit, together with attachments, regardless of whether it consists of
more than one lot. If a PUD consists of more than one lot the following
regulations shall apply regardless of the number of owners.
A. The main body of the PUD permit shall consist of the
regulations or sections required by this Section 11.55 of the City Code.
Unless modified by the City Council, most of such main body of the permit
shall contain all provisions relating to shared or interdependent facilities
including shared driveways, parking, landscaping, maintenance or other
shared items or responsibilities between the lots. It may also include
building footprints, building facades, signage style, and outdoor
appearance.
B. At the discretion of the City Council, the PUD permit may
include an individual attachment for each lot within the PUD. The
individual attachment shall contain regulations that are of sole concern to
the owner of that lot, although the City Council may again in its sole
discretion, include other items in the attachment that ordinarily would be in
the main body of the permit.
C. All owners shall sign the main body of the permit at the
time it is approved or amended.
D. Only the owners of a particular lot will sign the individual
attachment pertaining to such lot.
E. Amendments to the main body of the permit must have
agreement of all property owners within the PUD, unless paragraph G
below applies.
..
..
Ordinance No.
,2nd Series (continued)
.
F. If an amendment pertains only to the attachment for an
individual lot, consent or agreement of all owners is not necessary;
however, the City Council will consider any concerns or objections from
other owners within the PUD before making a final decision.
G. If a PUD contains multiple parcels owned by different
persons, the owners of one of the parcels may apply for an amendment to
the PUD terms concerning solely his or her parcel. The City Council shall
make the final determination as to which terms concern solely one parcel.
If the application provides for change in any of the terms concerning
parcels not owned by the applicant, the owners of such nonowned parcels
must join in the application.
Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 10.99
entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference,
as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect from and .after its passage and .
publication as required by law.
Passed by the Golden Valley City Council this _ day of
,1996.
Mary E. Anderson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Shirley J. Nelson, City Clerk
Published in the New Hope-Golden Valley Sun Post on
.
.
MEMORANDUM
Date:
May 30, 1996
To:
Golden Valley Planning Commission
From:
Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development
Subject:
Discussion regarding location of tower and other facilities
for cellular and pes (personal communication services)
Over the past couple months, I have met with the two future providers of
personal communication services (PCS ) to discuss location of additional towers
and antennas. I have also had meetings with providers of cellular services that
are looking for additional tower locations in Golden Valley. It is the opinion of the
providers that there is an inadequate supply of land zoned for tower and
antenna locations in Golden Valley. The reason for meeting with the Planning
Commission is to discuss potential changes in the Zoning Code to provide
additional locations.
. I am enclosing some information that has been provided by the TEA Group. The
TEA Group is the consultant for American Portable Telecom (APT). APT is one
of the two future providers of PCS to the Twin Cities area. It is hoped that PCS
services will begin early in 1997. As stated in this information, PCS is a new
form of digital wireless communication that was authorized by the Federal
Communications Commission last year. In order for PCS to operate, it must also
have towers and antenna similar to existing cellular systems. It is my under-
standing that their antenna may be placed on towers or on buildings. As the
PCS system gets more users, the number of antenna will increase but they will
not have to be as high. The effect on cities is that there will have to be more
locations available for antennas and towers if the service is to operate effectively.
The new Telecommunications Act of 1996, approved by Congress and the
President, states that cities may regulate the locations of towers and antenna but
the regulations may not have the effect of precluding a wireless telecommuni-
cations provider's ability to offer service. I will be attending a conference on the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 that will help provide the City with information
regarding its zoning obligations.
.
At this time, the City does permit cellular towers and other telecommunication
antennas that are less than 120 feet in height in several zoning districts. This
was a change to the zoning code that was made several years ago in reaction to
the growth of cellular towers. Cell towers are now considered "essential
1
services" and permitted by right as an accessory use in the Light Industrial and .
Industrial zoning districts. Antennas may be placed on top of buildings in the
Business and Professional Office District. Towers are also permitted in the
Radio District. The argument that is being made by the providers of PCS and
cellular services is that there is inadequate coverage within Golden Valley due to
the limited areas of these Zoning Districts.
My recommendation is that the Planning Commission listen to the spokes-
persons from APT to learn more about the situation. The Commission then
could direct staff to look into the issue in more detail and discuss the matter with
other cities who are looking at the same issue.
MWG:mkd
attachments:
.
.
2
.
.
.
..-
..
.
April 22, 1996
Mark W. Grimes, Director
Planning and Development
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427
Representing
American Portable Telecom (APT)
In the Twin Cities Area
Re: Zoning Issue Alternatives for
Wireless Communications
Antenna and Tower Placements
Dear Mr. Grimes:
My colleague, Percy Bernard, and I have both spoken with you on several
occasions regarding the placement of antennas and towers in Golden Valley.
Needless to say, we are not the only ones and there are going to be many more
such inquiries in the future. Currently, Golden Valley permits towers and
antennas to be placed in areas zoned Industrial. These limitations will not allow
APT to design a system that will provide complete coverage to the Golden Valley
market.
"Good" coverage (no dropped calls and no'busy signals) for any wireless
communications system has to take into account such factors as terrain, tall
buildings, and capacity. This means that location, location, location is of the
utmost importance. In an urban setting for example, a shift of one site 1/2-mile
means it probably leaves an area with no coverage at all and possibly cause a
shift in a number of other sites to accommodate the original move. You can
imagine the time and money involved every time a shift in design happens during
the development of the system.
May I suggest some ways that a community can accommodate our requests and
add no negative visual impact to their skyline. We both have serving your
community as our goal. Please consider the following examples which would
require a text change to your ordinances:
1040 prown Pointe Parkway. Suite 800. AUanta, Georgia 30338. (nO) 481-2100. F~ (no) 481-2150
Mark Grimes
April 22, 1996
Page 2 of 3
.
.
(1) APT is dealing with a number of neighboring communities whose
zoning ordinances permit us to place antennas on the rooftops of
high-rise buildings regardless of zoning. This includes (a) multi-
family residences, (b) commercial office buildings, (c) hospitals, (d)
church steeples, (e) schools
(2) Some other communities encourage us to use their water towers
as a means of generating income for the city.
(3) Fire and police departments welcome us as a chance to replace
existing antenna towers with ours. This can mean that these
departments need more height to improve their coverage and they
get it at no cost to the city or department. At times, these
replacements are done as a courtesy to accommodate the industry
to avoid adding another tower to the community's skyline.
(4) Still some communities require co-location capabilities built into the
tower so that more than one wireless communications company
can share a location (this includes planning additional height to
accommodate minimum separation of antennas and ground space
for the equipment).
.
(5) As some highway patrol departments are moving to develop their
new 800 MHz systems, we have been able to work with them to
build a tower to the height that accommodates both our needs, give
the tower to the state, who in turn leases space back to us for as
long as we want it for $1.00/year.
(6) Our technology allows us to also place antennas on the towers of
the high-tension power lines that run along the utility corridor.
However, since the towers are located on easements, we will need
zoning approval to place the equipment at the base.
(7) Locating antennas on billboards would be another possible option
for us. Again, zoning approval for the equipment to be placed at
the base will be needed as well.
.
.
.
.
Mark Grimes
April 22, 1996
Page 2 of 3
-.
.
(8) Another exciting example of how we have worked with communities
is in the placement of lights in ball fields, parks and parking lots
with APT's antennas located on the same pole as the lighting.
Again, a community service or safety improvement at no cost to the
community.
I have example photos of most everything I have mentioned here and have
personally been associated with. If you and/or anyone in your offices at Golden
Valley would be interested, I am always willing to bring the photos around and
discuss them.
The above suggestions can be a way for your community to deal with the
onslaught of the wireless communications industry in a manner that serves the
community and can often diredly benefit its budget. Additionally, each of these
suggestions ads to minimize the visual impact that adding towers and antennas
have in the appearance of the community.
The boom in the wireless communications industry can also be a boom for each
community when the technology is embraced by governing bodies as a
community service and financial OPPORTUNITY rather than pigeon-holed as a
problem.
Yours truly,
TEA Group Incorporated
R~tty~
Property Specialist
-
. ON TECHNOLOGY
By LEONARD WIENER
It's mobile, but it isn't cellular
I 'm hooked on cellular, but for the past
few weeks I've been frying out a way to
communicate I like even more. It's
called PCS, for personal communications
services. Outwardly similar to cellular, it of-
fers clearer'signals than most cell services.
PCS-which uses frequencies the Feder-
al Communications Commission auctioned
off last year specifically for use by PCS pro-
viders - so far is available onlv in the Wash-
ington-Baltimore region. But you'll hear
more about it later this vear and in 1997 as
Sprint, AT&T and other" mobile carriers be~
gin to offer PCS across the country.
The biggest technological difference be-
tween PCS and cellular is
that all PCS communica-
tion is digital That means
no static, and voices ren-
dered crisply and faithful-
ly. Most cellular ca1ls rely
on lesser-quality analog
transmission. Others are
transmitted digitally, but
the technology'often is old
and may actually degrade
voice quality. In my llI"'.;a,
moreover, PCS-market-
ed by American Personal
Communications under
the Sprint Spectrum
name - is being sold with
bundled features and use-
ful innovations.
Caller 10, a limited form
of paging and an automat-
ed message-taking service
are all included in the basic
package. The first minute
of a received call is free, grvmg me a
chance to disconnect before running up
charges mobile-phone users otherwise
have to pay on all incoming calis. And
there's no requirement to sign a one- or
two-year contract in order to get the best
deals. PCS here also is generally cheaper
than cellular. Light users may welcome an
entry-level package at $15 a month that in-
cludes 15 minutes of calIs. A comparably
priced basic cellular package generally
costs extra for each minute of calls. '
More than cooL What's attracted the most
attention from colleagues and friends is the
diminutive PCS phone rm using - "cute" is
the almost unanimous reaction. Made by
Ericsson, a giant Swedish manufacturer, the
phone slides into a shirt pocket with room to
~are, has an uncluttered keypad that makes
It easy to use and sounds great. But a cool
U5.NEWS & WORlD REPOKr.JANUARI' 22. J996 _
{
phone is not what makes PCS'distinctive;
sexy cellular phones also are available.
Many people identify cellular with the low-
end one-cent or $9.99 phones frequently
used to draw customers into long-term con-
tracts. Don't count on seeing such deals for
PCS phones. American Personal Communi-
cations may well set the pattern for others.
Like cellular carriers, it is picking up part of
the cost of a phone to stimulate sales, but it
seems determined to stick with relatively
pricey, higher-end models. My Ericsson cost
$100 after a since-expired $SO rebate; mod-
els from Nokia and Motorola cost more. I
am happier with the Ericsson than with a
larger cell phone that cost
me less, but the appeal of a
phone that is almost free is
perfectly understandable.
Does PCS sound like
\. } the right choice for you?
"/ You still may want to
hold off before embracing
it; the service won't ap-
proach the saturation cov-
erage of cellular for some
time. So PCS may not be
useful if you want to use a
mobile phone while trav-
eling - even, in some
cases, to outlying suburbs.
I felt a lot more comfort-
able on a recent winter
drive to Cleveland having
a cell phone on hand for
any emergency. But I'm
torn, since I've rarely
used my cell phone out of
town, and generally I'm
.satisfied with PCS's coverage in my local
area. People considering PCS later in the
game won't feel as isolated. And PCS us-
ers can call cellular users and vice versa.
The PCS-vs.-cellular decision may gradu-
ally fade as each catches up with the other.
Cellular firms, for example, are upgrading
and expanding their digital service. Compe-
tition also is likely to push cellular carriers to
match the conveniences offered by PCS.
There are even plans afoot for a phone that
can be switched between PCS and cellular to
get the best coverage. Analyst Herschel
Shosteck, who monitors mobile-phone
trends, sees lower prices and more choices
for users of both ceDlilar and PCS as both
technologies grow., That's fine by me.
,
Leonard ~.Uener can be reached via E-mail
at 7S300.3~i4@compuserve.com
)
~"";,-';-'" ;','ONLlNE ", ,.:'..-~..
~ The Narrative Corpse
(http://WWN.voyagerco.com.
$3 for unlimited access). Six-
ty-nine acclaimed cartoonists,
from Pulitzer Prize winner Art
Spiegelman to "Simpson's"
creator Matt Groening, wrote
and drew this chain story
about the bizarre, occasionally
shocking adventures of a stick
figure. ,The tale unfolds daily
on the World Wide Web start-
ing January 17.
- '... VIDEOS '. . "-",
~ Safe (Columbia Tristar, rat-
ed R). This darkly comic dra-
ma follows affluent suburban
. housewife Julianne Moore as
she develops "environmental
iIIness"-an intolerance for
everyday chemicals like
household cleaners. Director
Todd Haynes's pointed social
commentary is joined with
first-rate performances.
\.
."' SNOW REMOVAl(. .', ',:, ~
You may be dug out from the
blizzard of '96, but winter is
still young. Andrew Marcotte,
an ergonomist with the Joyce
Institute/A. D. UttJe consult-
ants, suggests the following
shovels and scrapers to reduce
fatigue. Prices range from $7
to $23; the items are sold at
hardware and discount stores:
/
t.
. ,.".;
~ Ames SnowBlazer
Uft-Rite. Bent shovel .
handle easier on the back.
~ Structron Power Scoop.
Ught fiberglass shovel.
~ Detailed Designs Ice
Scraper/Snow Brush. loop
handle improves grip.
~ Gary Precision Products
Snowbroom. Extendable
handle increases reach,
reducing strain when
cleaning cars.
.j
SNOWBROOM
COUPllSlBY _ PClUACK
-
1WlSIIl.mDN...____
67
, -..-
.
generatIon.
bile pho~es
Demand for the phones:wi h digital-quality sOWld surpassed all estim~~ by the
company that introduce~ em in Washington and Baltimore four months ago.
D)' jeii l.esmia.
WASHNCi1"ON 8tJREAU
/.~:>I",~ !
,i@,'~ ','
I !::iIr~ '
~ ,. I;
), 1
- ,,,!~i'. I
~.~: -:i--; ~~'JI
. .. ~. - ~. :./
'_ . r 1
- ,- ..'-).
. J'" .. ~..
,-
... ....;, .'
. -'
WashIncton -A DeW pn-
eration 0( ceJlular teJephonea
that offers cr:tap dlgitallOUDd
hu foaud ID IIlJttmwladic fal.
JowiD8lD !ts 8rst IDIlket, the
WasbiqtaD-R..1tt~re nsion.
AmericaD Pencmal Coamm.
nlcadoal, the company that
maaaaea the new ",rem. hu
signed up 60,000 IUbecriben iD
little more tbaD four moatbI
The company bad DOt apected
to reach the 6O.000-.ubacriber
mark \1Dt1l the ead 01 tbII)'ear. " ."
Mobile telepboae mduatry
represeatatiVeI .., dJIItal....
'rice :epreaeIlta the da1na or I
'" day h:l mobile t.l~.
mmunlcal:loaa. 'I'he pbooee,
pan ot. DIW geaeratiDll of~.
aODal commw:dcatiDas aerncea,
o1J'er greater MCUrity and f'ea.
tuia .ach II PacIDI ADd caBer
ID. I'.
Two developmeatllpanecl . ~ tomwa examIne"phDnes In a Sprint $pecavm score. The digital service Is available
their crowth: _ . around WashlftItOn and ~ and In ~~ . .
.1be"-f-IODbytbeFedenl' \ -.~.,..- --.... I'. :. ..ifw- .'
CoInmuaicaIioaI ~Ift4.. . ka1 IJItIIDI WiU be opent. . In tbe.Wuhl"'-'~14"101'8 . 'Iban Ja vlnuID, DO ataUc 011
to auct101l off aallMlMttfat par. .: ~ dt1a ~!be . . area ad lD HanJI. the DOW. cIIgital Ptnles. ad vaIcea come
tJon of tho racUo .pectnMu for -. ' , tr)' \rlIbJa . year, II Sp~ . ~ ~ecbnolou".1eCOad market. tbroutb criJpl,. JJa IdcUtJoa,
PC3 ~b. :. ~ '., . . f' ATl:T ad otber. '1 ~': Altbousb AmedcIa PenoDIl . tbey are mare MCWL AaJDDe
, . e&rritn bqIa~. j I n.nmtJaJcadoaI alIIcJaII bav. with. radio _II" CIa Uatea
.tbedeYeIopmeataf~ . . Rl'V1ceI. ';-:.i: ':.. J ,~~lOIIIbttDcUttb9""'Ihe:~.:' Jooa~"""ceD*teJe..
racUo tpJumlul-. wbich - . . : baed BeI1So111h .'.~ CGDIpaIIJ'. W~ '. pboDe coavenaUoDs, but aU tile
movea wlce IIId data comma- :; p! to otfetlhe aenlce III i . RA1rfmore umce &om ceJlu. . . ~II-r bean ala dJaitaI COD-
nlcatloo AI pacbtl of ~Jtfr ',~ CarolfDl. SoutIa CIroIlDa : lar, Ebe CODCeptl are tuDda:- · venatlDD Ja altram ofbJtea.
dati. ~ with repIar. . iDeS TtDDe811t by JaIr. ':. ~~I.I" the.... ' . . . . 'l'bo8e IUIII byt. CIa be
lWOo1!&1 radiO ~"on. .. are prablb1ted from ". . Mobile teJtpbooea broadeut used to trIDImIt'dau, u WIll u
. ;, . . '. d18kaI pbaae... '. caavenII1oDlto Idcb1ac . . wlce. _"'11, tbal tile ~ ,
Produce of · partMlllllp , they have ceDularpboae : . lIIt10u caUed celJlaet up ill" . pbont CID ...,. u a numeric I
American Pwaoaal Cclmrnu. .. ~ MobWtJ .,!'mioaI....Tbe Idcb1ac '.: PlllDlIIIICbJDe whea!r.m 1118
nleal'-t is the W~. MIla eemoe. the nil: :'. auoa. tit till mabIIa.... or is DOt tumid on. a... II
B-1tlmore-mrJat.,atSpdat.. . Of Jh~r.lucI'Iff'.. .: ..=1atotbe~..~.dtllepbaae . c:Gl2lwiIIlalndk-1D1IJIWIdIII I
Spectrum !..P..l~ at' A .. weIlaaa IDUIIIber " aeI.~ .'. ,~~:. ma,.Jae tad CIIJer ID. .
$prim, ~tnI~ . 4f dl!el,acb. 8oIIItoa..::. 0:. i" .~~. . ", pes.,.... opeaill
_= Corp. ~ CaE - Loa .ad MllwaaIrA i .. ~ JOU!II' . .' otber cWellDd .'(....
. nnt. Om: ~g. . , dI8ltaI teJepbou _.. : -. 'Ibe cfI8ItaI pbaoea look fcfeD. lea aervice prcwiden caamt
afcaUonl fl. pUbic ~,-~, ~ leaerau, a1'lilab1e, IUb- .' deal to. replUceDuIar teJe. . flam aaJai to dfPt.II ~
4 c:aatroUed by Cox Fml~d-"i ~ be _laID tIke ad':' pbaae. TbtdUl'erlace II ba Ibe pes, coaaumera will bne.
IDe.. w!ddI 0WDI1Dd operata ..... IJIrII dl8llaI pbo.. u - dI8UallecbaaloD', wbldl wu wider IIDII 01 ~~eeI with
'!be A1IaaLa lOUEDll. they Cram dtvtD c:itF. DOt &vIDabIe III tile urJ, 151801 - more compeddaa amoq IerIo
CooIUtudoa. .' Q dlea,tblDlWbreedOt'.. ....aiIUDeJllDldleldephoao. 'ftcepmtden.iDdu1tr7 ,
I11c11IItq apog-'lIRf cUa.. ~ IIlIpboaa \tarb _; Qa.ema.... bca. . . ~..... laY.' __ .
. ... ".. .. -. ~
t
/ .
::~}~ .
.i~~~.
:. :''-':' . ::::-;~~ ;'::i"~~;'; ;:::.,~~...~ " .,::~; .~~:". :.. ;~ :: 0";. ~.;:~.... .....~'~;
. .
,. -~. DVI":'~'~'Ul:"jj6 1l:7:i-1~1
w. ~ L' .I. ~ .,. :" I:'~;.: ~:. ~ l'. ':.: _ .~?~~ . !
,: ...........................................-..... I
. .... - :;"',.. . ....~. . ,'" J(.'~".I"'"
: .::....By~ 'by8;'oow i~;"j~':, I
1. . '. After sp,ending more th8n ~ . ~
" .' $1 million to install 92 -i.;..... .
1 . J '.. .
i . . punch-buttoncallbo~"..:.;..;",
f. .r,:' along Interstate Hwy. 39V .: ,: "
'. in 1989, the Depanment!of. ..
. TransportationMonday~
I . rip them out. Thereasonf...~
I The yellow call boxes -22". "
f . of them in the 22 miles b~~: .
. ".,' ." .."''''"..,,:....::;; '~~I' tweenMinneapoUsandf9chr':
. ~.': ., .~.. '.!~ "''<-~'''':. 'I est Lake, costing $7,330 ea
! '-didnotprovetobev31u....
able in getting help to ;.t: :'. .
. stranded motorists and~:'. .
. _ ducing traffic congestioIl'
caused by breakdowns; Re- ,
ports from drivers with car .,
phones, the Highway Helper
and traffic monitoring ~ .
camera from the downtown
Traffic Management Center
have all sllIpassed the call
boxes in getting help to mo-
torists in trouble. . : .~:. ,.
- Laurie Blake, J ,::..
Staff Writer l .
..
..
.~ .r....~w..
.:
':.
.. ;!t.........
.
.. ...,,,:;:~;7-':;~~',;\, ."'..... ;~(.:~~:..:':.~'t:: :', .~:,;".;J?.:
\
. j
.
..-~
.....
. OASIS MEN'l'AL HEALTH PROGRAH
.
.
ANNUAL REPORT
APRIL 22, 1996
I. Summary of Significant Trends, Deve1o~ents, P01icies
Durinq Previous Year.
During 1995 Oasis Program celebrated its 10th year of
operations in Golden Valley. An open house was held in July
and attended by over seventy-five people including Advisory.
Board members, program staff and residents, County and State
officials, and others. The Program served 280 clients from
1985 through 1995. In november of 1995, David Morin,
Program Director and President of Kelly-Norton Programs,
Inc., was 'elected President of the Minnesota Association of
Mental Health Residential Facilities [MAMHRF], a trade
organization representing some 45 mental health programs
around the State. Oasis staff, Hugh Aylward and Suzanne
Reedy completed lengthy requirements to be certified as
Licensed Psychologists and both are also Qualified Mental
Health Professionals at the MasterJs level. In addition,
Hugh Aylward served on a Hennepin County task force
developing outcome measures for mental health program~ ~n
the county. Oasis Program aftercare staff were actively
involved in researching and developing variou~ housing
options for clients graduating from the Program.
II. Proqram Services.
A. Individual Case ~anaqement. Each program client is
assigned a primary counselor/case manager who is responsible
for coordinating all treatment activities for each client.
This individual works closely wieh the County Case Manager
in treatment planning as well as ,planning for discharge to
more independent settings., ' .
B. General Group Therapy. This group meets four mornings a
week and is facilitated by two Mental Health Counselors.
The group employs a psycho-educational approach and assists
clients in better,understanding their mental illness. In
addition, clients have an opportunity to practice
inter-personal skills in a small group setting.
C. Chemical Health Group. Mee.ts.once a week' for one hour.
This group provides practical information regarding common
chemicals of abuse and their possible interaction with major
mental illness. The group ia facilitated by a Mental Health
Counselor.
D. Mental Health Education Group. Meets once a week for
..
, /
/
,I
i
!
Ie
e
e
one hQur to provide information on mental illnesses and
common treatment approaches.' ,
E ~ Men's and Women' s Groups. Meets once a week for one
hour and emphasizes topics best suited for same-sex
discussion. Social and recreation, activities are also
conducted during this group.
F. Eveninq Goal Group. This group meets fo~ one-half hour
five evenings a week, and allows clients an opportunity to
discuss specific 'goals they have worked on during the day.
G. General House Meetinq. Meets Monday evenings for
one-half hour. Purpose is to make general program
announcements, introduce new clients into the program, and
to conduct the resident advisory council.
H. Independent Livinq Skills Classes. Classes offered
include cooking, budgeting skills, job skills, nutrition and
exercise, conversation/social skills, and. leisure time
planning. These classes are offered on a rotating basis and
are designed to help clients learn how to live more
successfully on their own.
I. Social/Recreation Activities. Program staff' conduct
organized recreational activities five evenings a week as
well as Saturday and Sunday afternoons. Clients meet at the
beginning of the month to. plan a monthly recreation
calendar. Typical activities include bowling, picnics,
swimming, movies, sporting events, and concerts. Clients
also make use of activities sponsored by Hennepin County
Community Support Programs.
J. Vocational Involvement and Planninq. The Oasis Program
is designed to get clients involved in vocational planning
shortly after admission, if the client desires. Typical
vocational programming includes: part-time competitive
employment; State Division of Rehabilitation [DRS] services,
, Hennepin County Vocational Services Program, and various
volunteer opportunities.
K. Aftercare Services and Planninq. Oasis program' shares
two full-time Transitional Services Counselors with Bill
Kelly House'. . These counselors assist clients in moving to
independent living situations and follow clients for
counseling and assistance when living on their own.
III. Oasis PrOQraB Staffinq. Current staffing levels and
their FTE.' sare as follows~ Administrator, .10; Program
Director, 1.0; Mental Health Therapist, 1.0; Mental Health
Counselors, 2.0r Nurse, 1.0; Mental Health Worker,
full-time, 6.0; Mental Health Worker, part-time, 2.9;
Maintenancer .5'; Secretary/Bookkeeper, 1.0; ,Transitional
Services Counselor, 2.0. Staff turnover during 19.95 was
minimal for full-time, professional' staff and more than
average for part-time, entry level staff.
IV. Staff Trainina and Deve1ovment. Oasis program staff
are required to have at least fifteen hours Of inservice
training each year. Much of this training is provided
through the Minnesota Association of Residential Mental
.". -,:.;;'-;~.~,;;. -,
--/
,"
,
fe
Health Facilities [MAMHRF], of which Oasis Program is a
member. Training is provided through in-person conferences
'and workshops as well as a series of video tapes" Some of
the. topics include: Crisis interVention and prevention;
stress management; medications; first-aid; cultural
. sensitivity training; vulnerable adults laws and procedures.
Additional staff training is. provided for one hour bi-weekly
by a Licensed PsychOlogist who meets with treatment staff to
discuss individual client t~eatment issues.
V.Administrative P01iey and Procedures Chanqes. The
Minnesota State Legislature rewrote the State's Vulnerable
Adults Act in 1995, and Oasis Program revised its internal
policies and procedures accordingly. All program staff were
trained in the details .of the new law.
VI Proqram LicensinCl. The Oasis Program Is licensed by the
Minnesota Department of Human Services as a Category I Rule
36 treatment program. The License for 1996-1997 will be
~anted on July 1, 1996. The program is also licensed as a
Supervised Living Facility by the State Department of
Health. Current licensing was granted on January 1, 1996.
VII. C1ients Served. The program served a total of 37
clients during 1995. There were 21.admissions and 21
discharges. Average length of stay was 289 days, with an
, overall occupancy rate of 98%. All clients admitted were
4It Hennepin County residents.
VIII. Resident Comaunitv Invo1vement. During 199'5 Oasis
Program residents were actively involved in a number of
community activities, including regular participation in the
Crystal Commqnity Support Program and the Oasis Advisory
Board. .
.
IX. Commmitv Invo1vement Into PrQCJram. The Oasis Program
Advisory Board met a total of three times during 1995 and
was recognized for its excellent contributions to the
program at the lO-year anniversary open house in July. The
Advisory Board consists of a cross section of community
representatives as well as a program client. Oasis Program
administrators present progress reports at the meetings and
solic~t feedback and advice from Board members.
x. Eva1uation of PrQCJram.Services. Currently, a wide range
of data is reported to the County which provides the program
with quarterly summaries. Oasis program staff continually
review the data to assure that outcome results are
satiSfactory and the c~rrect target population is being
served. [see attached data analysis].
XI. Como1aints Received and Prob1em Areas. It is the
continuing policy of the Oasis Program's administrator and
Program Director to be open and accessible to neighborhood
,--. ",--,c_li".
,.
,
../
.
.
.
and community complaints and concerns. Feedback in this
regard is solicited from Advisory.Board members and other
community sources. .
XII. Conc1usions. 1995 proved a successful year overal~
'.for the Oasis Progra~. Occupancy was high at 98%,. and an
even greater number of clients moved to independent living
upon finishing the program~ Potential prob~em areas and
challenges in 1996 might include: the advent of some kind
of managed care system to fund menta~ health services in the
State; expected funding cutbacks at the Federal ~eve~;
financing much needed capital improvements to the Oasis
facility and grounds; and, recruitment of qualified program
staff in a climate of local low unemployment.
/r
,', ./
. .
i:: '
".;
I
I
1L
...
_,-....rl ..
,./'
f.~ \..... \...;a.... - ",..;, \J.\J '\".&1.. . ~l.':; ~ /,J"\'tJ';
z:.~Gr'::'~:'~~J~'l : a-
\,
...4.....'...___ l-'-..,<:.&,"i';"..,..". ';
.,~(:'~~':: -- "
.!,....;.-_.. . '..----...--------.- ~ __...._______~-----:---~-a..~--I",- ,...___..__-...__ ........___........._.___~r_'
t :::1;'iL~ -. Y~!;r. T~C - ~+i.H Ti;:;. '. "
: '.C ;; M.::.I: -. MENTAL. HEALl1i~ R.ESlDENTIAL REPORT . ;
~ ,:--.., "~~WI~f ........: ".:"~..','l-~~ r:'ta"4liU ' '~..."'! .f.~!"'\;~ "
. PROGRAM, NAME: OAsis. '" ,,- .. ~ :,- CURRENT QUARTER:. 10/01/95. -, 12/31/95
(PROGRAM YEAR IS JULY - JUNE)
A: CLIENT FLOW SUMMARY ; '~:l <}A
e
+---------------------~--------------------------------------------~-----+
CURRENT, JAN - DEC JULY - JUNE I
QUARTER YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE I
. DATA'ITEM NUMBER SINCE 1/1/95 SINCE 7/1/95
+-----------------------------~-----------------~--------------------------P
e
,
1. NUMBER SERVED
2. ADMISSIONS
3. DISCHARGES .
~. AVERAGE LENGTH 'OF '
STAY - DISCHARGES
WITH STAFF AGREEMENT
NUMBER .
PERCENTAGE .
AVERAGE STAY
W/O STAFF AGREEMENT
NUMBER
PERCENTAGE
AVERAGE STAY
5. REPEAT ADMISSIONS
6. CLIENT DAYS
7. UTILIZATION PERCENT
.' DAYS IN PERIOD.
.~ 'r:
PROGRAM CAPACiTY IS 16
,..
23 37 27
7 21 11
,7 21 . 11-
264.1 288.9 297.3 .
5'
71.4
306.2
16
76.2
314.8
8
72.7,
349.1
2 5 3
28.6 23.8 ~i.3
159.0 205.8 159.0
XXXXX 0- .,\'r'~!Ii '.!., a
1,442 5,722 2',,898
98.0 98.0 98.4-
, '". :~r
92 365. 184
:.~~
.' .;'f:.,.t
... - . ~ ..., .
UTILIZATION RATE IS CALCULATED AS' FOllOWS:
CLIENT DAYS DIVIDED BY THE PRODUCT OF
DAYS IN PERIOD MUL TIPlED BY
THE CAPACITY OF THE PROGRAM
.... ,;(
.. ".
".. - ,"
.. .! . ~.-:='
- ~
::-
fl. ..::.
., ',..
:...,. . ~ ~"
e
"'J. jl
..
., .lY ~ n#-"
....,. t
~. ,'. ,._ J ...,
. ~ J.',~;..
',' ~.';'.;JJC' }~?
~ f..:J ~Q.;...__.
:...':t'.. .;~ 'tl'~:-' ~~.;.
." lJWO'"i" .'
"\ ". ~. ~
. ~'~;,3""'_~-: .. .... "'1'~
~.;,,!, ~";_.--........ .
" ''''''~'.~
"l
.
e
.
, - '-~~:~'~0':~~:'7<:;~::~::T~:.--i;"
.. .- _ _....... . .,....~'_w.. .
::-:f;:: _i..~~,-.:~ ~ .:.-. ~"'..._.-~ ~., .:.'.
'. .' '.' '... ." . ~ . . ..
~ ------ -. ....~Ilo..-.Ll _ r _ +-
'1- " - ..--.-- ---- ..------;3,. ~~!JO'-- T;S3CORRENT~:--~ JAtf:=-DEC-----jTIL'i':..~~~E:-.,.I,
, ,____ _________.._". _ ______ QUARIEIt_'M___YEAR: TO, DATE._..JEAR' T TE
I DATA' ITEM , - . NUMBER. PCT - NUMBER PCTf-4UMBER PCT
':I--____.-....;r-.-.IIII.L_____---:--_~_ -----<1__-__ '" -.;vv- 17"1 ______________,. -v+
~.o ?ht?~, "';.J\..:';:~,.a ",j~:. ~ .
':'1..? trvING ARRANGEMENT.-
AT ~,ISCHARGE'"' '
TRANSIENT
OTHER REL HOME
OWN HOMEI APT'
PARENTIS HOME
ADULT FOSTER- HOME
RULE 35 FACILITY
NON - 36 B&C-
NON - 36 B&L
OTHER CAT I PGM
OTHER CAT II PGM
NURSING HOME
SUPERVISED APT LIV
STATE HOSPITAL
JAIL/CORRECTIONAL
RULE 36 RESPITE -
FROM HOSP
RULE 36 RESPITE -
FROM NON-HOSP
FAIRWEATHER OR '
. TASKS LODGE
OTHER HOSP PSYCH
OTHER
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
i;~O~3~
ni~: 2 :::f~J.A.
~~o~..~ l3r1~~A":::.~~.] -JC
- ~Ar'ir.!l'-,i..j;::;:.- '"\ ::~;l
1 - 14.3'
1 14.3
1 14.3
1 14.3
"';...- ~ --..,. .,.."..,...
2: - 9.5>~; :." - - 1
- \ '~"'i.r-.:. -
9 42.9',' 2
'1 4.8 ' 1
t - 9.S : 2
2 9-.5 1
Z. 97.5- 2
1- 4-.& 1
1 14.3
1 14.3
-'
9.1
-
18 . Z'
9.1
18.2
- .
9.1
18.2
9.1
..' \,
-
I 4.8'
1. . 14.3 1 4.,8 1 9.1
--
7 100.0 21 100'. O- Il 100.0
, '-
.
. ~ .- .
. -
;.....;.#~~t:;...
. .. .-...... .""" -<:"-.: -
. . .