Loading...
06-10-96 PC Minutes1~7 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 10, 1996 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall,.. Council Chambers, 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, Lewis, McAleese, Pentel and Prazak. Also present were Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development; Elizabeth Knoblauch, City Planner, and Mary Dold, Secretary. I. Approval of Minutes -May 13. 1996 MOVED by Pentel, seconded by McAleese and motion carried unanimously to approve the May 13, 1996 minutes as submitted. Informal Public Hearing -Conditional Use Permit (CUPS Applicant: Minneapolis Crisis Nursery Address: 5400 Glenwood Avenue North, Golden Valley, Minnesota Purpose: 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 I-3 Institutional District Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development gave a brief summary of the request by the Minneapolis Crisis Nursery for a conditional use permit which would allow the facility at 5400 Glenwood Avenue to be used as a crisis nursery. Director Grimes told the Commission that the nursery falls somewhere between schools and nursing homes and felt that a conditional use permit (CUP) in the I-3 Institutional District would fit this proposed use; the I-3 Institutional district does not specifically address 24-hour nursery care. Staff reviewed this proposal with the City Attorney and determined the best way to proceed was through a CUP. Director Grimes reviewed the site plan with the Commission and commented he had visited the site several times and had determined that there is ample parking on the site with 48 spaces. The applicant told staff the number of people on-site would be approximately 15; children would arrive via car, bus, and taxi. Director Grimes stated that the amount of traffic generated by this use would be much less than other uses permitted in the I-3 district occupying the building. Director Grimes reviewed the ten factors of findings and made the following two recommendations: 1) the capacity of the crisis nursery be no more than 18 children, and 2) the construction of an outdoor playground be allowed. Commissioner Lewis asked about the playground area. Director Grimes showed the Commission on the site plan where the playground would be approximately placed, that it would be fenced-in, and be under strict supervision. 1 ~_' Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 10, 1996 Page Two The representative for the Minneapolis Crisis Nursery, Executive Director Connie Skillingstad, reviewed for the Commission what the nursery is all about, commenting that it is a safe place for children when parents are under stress. Their goal is to prevent child abuse. She continued by explaining how the nursery works and who usually uses the facility. Commissioner Johnson asked how the organization advertised. Ms. Skillingstad commented that word is spread through organizations like "First Response" and word of mouth. The nursery has not done any TV advertising because of the lack of capacity at the nursery. Commissioner Pentel asked how the center was managed. Ms. Skillingstad said that the ratio at the nursery is 1 adult to 3 children. and their are supervisors on each shift; she talked about the services offered to the families. Ms. Skillingstad said that funding comes from Hennepin County, United Way, corporate, individual, and civic donations. Commissioner Lewis asked about outdoor signage. Ms. Skillingstad commented that there would only be an identification sign, similar to other office buildings and clinics. They do not give out information on who is in the building but the building location is not withheld. Commissioner Groger asked how the nursery handles a school aged child so they don't miss school and how often have the police been called to handle a problem at the nursery. Ms. Skillingstad stated that their organization tries to get the child to school those days when they are at the center. She continued by commenting that the police have only been called once in a 2-1/2 year period and that child protection has been called several times. Ms. Skillingstad commented. that children are brought to the center on a voluntary basis which makes a big difference. Chair Prazak opened the informal public hearing. Elizabeth Gardner, representative from the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council, commented that the council had recommended the location of a crisis nursery for this area and would like to see the conditional use permit granted. Chair Prazak closed the informal public hearing. Commissioner Pentel commented that she has children at Meadowbrook School, which borders the 5400 Glenwood Avenue building, and said that many people are excited about the program. Commissioner McAleese said that this would be a wonderful ,use for the site and that it meets the requirements of the conditional uses allowed. MOVED by Kapsner, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to recommend to the City Council approval of the request by the Minneapolis Crisis Nursery for a conditional use permit for the building located at 5400 Glenwood Avenue. The motion included the conditions in the permit for the construction of an outdoor playground and the maximum amount of children allowed at the nursery be 18. 1 ~i 159 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 10, 1996 Page Three 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 City Planner Beth Knoblauch reviewed the staff report on the updated housing plan and the Livable Communities action plan. She explained that the State of Minnesota passed a law that the communities in the metropolitan area would have to update their comprehensive plan, in its entirety, by the year 1998. The housing plan update is the first step in the. overall update process. Ms. Knoblauch also summarized another state initiative, which is the Livable Communities program. This program requires communities, if they choose to participate, to present an action plan to the Metro Council no later than June 30, 1996. The action plan pinpoints areas of housing opportunities that will serve all segments of society. City Planner Knoblauch talked about how the livable communities action plan was made part of the housing plan and how these two plans work together. She found that the Livable Communities action plan items fit in to what the City is already doing concerning housing. Chair Prazak asked staff, concerning the technical background, if they found any different features of the housing situation. City Planner Knoblauch commented not really. Staff expanded the investigation on what had been done in the past. The focus on the statistical analysis was narrowed down because much of this information can be found in other sources elsewhere. Staff wanted to look at other areas of investigation and spend more time on state requirements that contribute to housing issues. Commissioner Kapsner asked staff if the City of Golden Valley was ahead of other communities concerning amending their housing plan. Ms. Knoblauch commented that the City is much farther ahead than other communities with regards to completing the housing component of the plan but all communities are in the same boat with regards to the Livable Communities Action Plan requirements. Chair Prazak opened the informal public hearing; seeing and hearing no one, he closed the informal public hearing. Chair Prazak and the Director Grimes thanked City Planner Knoblauch for her effort to gathering and organizing the materials. Commissioner Lewis commented that the materials submitted were very readable and found it to be a good piece of literature. MOVED by Pentel, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to recommend to the City Council approval of the Housing Plan Update, Supporting Background and the Livable Communities Update. IV. Informal Public Hearing -Amendment to the City Code, Section 11.55.- Planned Unit Development Mark Grimes gave a brief summary of the request by staff to amend that section of City Code which pertains to Planned Unit Developments. He commented that there has always been an issue of PUDs with multiple lots with multiple ownership and having only one permit. Staff is suggesting that each PUD have an overall main permit which affects such areas as shared elements of the 160 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 10, 1996 Page Four development including streets, driveways, parking, landscaping, maintenance, utilities, signage, and building appearance. Each lot owner, in the PUD, would have to sign this permit. There would be a second permit which would cover each individual lot and would cover issues of concern only to that lot. Director Grimes explained that if an individual lot owner wanted to change something specific to his lot, he would only need to amend the permit pertaining to that specific lot. Notice for an amendment would be sent to the other owners in the PUD as is the process for any PUD or public hearing. Commissioner Groger asked if any other communities were using this kind of procedure. Director Grimes said he was unaware of any other communities using this process. He also commented that the City Attorney has looked at this amendment and has recommended it. Commissioner Pentel and McAleese asked for clarification of Item G in the staff report, on how the amendment would affect existing PUDs. Staff explained how Item G would work, particularly with existing PUDs. Commissioner Lewis asked if having more than one permit in a PUD might precipitate the City in becoming a mediator between property owners and staff answered yes. Director Grimes commented that having more than one permit, would be somewhat. different and difficult for staff to work with. However, staff believes there are benefits to having the multiple permit system. Chair Prazak opened the informal public hearing; seeing and hearing no one, he closed the informal public hearing. Chair Prazak commented that the requested amendment seemed appropriate for those PUDs with multi-property owners. Commissioner McAleese thought it would be a good change but had some reservations because there are not problems in all PUDs. He questioned staff on how this amendment would simplify the process since the entire PUD ordinance is not being amended. Commissioner McAleese feels that the formal process will still be as long and costly as the original PUD and doesn't see the economical benefits from the amendment. City Planner Knoblauch commented that the amendment deals more with the issue of fairness where there are internal disputes. Commissioner McAleese again said that he had reservations about making changes to existing PUDs referring to item G in the staff report. He believes PUD owners need to agree together to be covered by a PUD instead of having the City become an arbitrator on future decisions. City Planner Knoblauch said that there are not problems in all PUDs. Staff believes that in situations where an individual wants to amend something on his property, the first alternative would be for the property owner to work with all other property owners in the PUD, in order to come to an agreement. MOVED by Groger, seconded by Pentel and motion carried unanimously to recommend to the City Council approval of an amendment to that section of 11.55. which would establish a main permit for the entire PUD and separate PUD permits for each individual lot. Staff noted that Commissioner McAleese's concerns be passed along (as stated above) to the Council. Chair moved for a short recess. 1~1 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 10, 1996 Page Five Chair Prazak suggested moving the "Reports" to the end of the agenda and proceed with "Other Business" so those representatives from Personal Communication Services could be heard. (Commissioner Pentel briefly discussed her attendance as representative to the Board of Zoning Appeals and departed for the evening.) VI. Other Business A. Discussion regarding location of tower and other facilities for Cellular and Personal Communication Services Mark Grimes gave a brief summary of the request by providers of Personal Communication Services (PCS) to allow more locations for antennas. Rachel Beatty, representative from APT, a PCS provider, showed the commission a seven minute VCR tape on wireless technology. She showed the commission a couple dozen photos which showed various poles, water towers and buildings where antennas can be located. In some cases the antennas could not be seen at all. Ms. Beatty commented that there are many ways to add antennas to the community without putting them on towers. Commissioner Lewis asked how providers of PCS and cellular services proceed in reaching agreements .with cities regarding tower locations. She said she works with the city to address concerns regarding antennas and their locations. She commented that by putting antennas on police buildings or water towers, their company pays for this privilege which can benefit the city's budget. PCS would like to be able to place antennas in more than the industrial zoning district. Commissioner Lewis asked Ms. Beatty if their company has talked with MnDOT. Ms. Beatty said they have talked with MnDOT. Because MnDOT is a nonprofit organization, they cannot rent or lease space for towers. Commissioner McAleese commented that he was concerned with changing City Code and wording which would allow antenna use in various districts. MOVED by Johnson, seconded by McAleese and motion carried unanimously to recommend that staff look into the possibility of antenna use in other districts. B. Review of Oasis Mental Health Program --Annual Report The Commission reviewed the Oasis Mental Health Program Annual Report. C. Clarification of Representative to the Board of Zoning Appeals As mentioned earlier, Commissioner Pentel commented that she would be the representative to the BZA unless she had a conflict. D. Clarification of Quote in the Sri Post made by Commissioner Pentel Minutes of the Golden. Valley Planning Commission June 10, 1996 Page Six Commissioner Johnson said that she had read an article in the n Po about the Schaper Property. Commissioner Pentel was at this meeting and commented on the proposed playing fields. The paper made it sound as those Commissioner Pentel was representing the Planning Commission, instead of acting as a resident, and would like staff to contact the paper so this won't happen .again. in the future. V. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Au#horitv,~ Council, an Board of Zoning ARpeals No reports were given VII. Adjournment Chair Prazak adjourned the meeting at 9:15pm. Lewis, Secretary 1 1