Loading...
09-22-97 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 1997 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, September 22, 1997. The meeting was called to order by Chair Pentel at 7pm. Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Groger, Johnson, Kapsner, Martens, McAleese and Prazak. Also present were Mark. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, Beth Knoblauch, City Planner and Mary Dold, .Recording Secretary. Approval of Minutes -August 25. 1997 MOVED by Groger, seconded by McAleese and motion carried unanimously to approve the September 8, 1997 minutes with one spelling correction. II. Informal Public Hearing -- Amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 71 Applicant: Hennepin County Property Services Address: 7151 Madison Avenue West (Formerly Known as 7155 Madison Avenue West) Purpose: Amendment to the Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) dated June 3, 1997, which would allow for the proposed residential facility to be approximately 800 sq.ft. larger than permitted by the original C.U.P. Planning Director Mark Grimes reviewed his staff report. He told the Commission that they and the City Council had approved a smaller building at previous meetings. He noted that the plan before them was approximately 800 sq.ft. larger. Grimes told the commission that the proposed enlargement is due to thicker walls and the encasement of the utility room. He said that Hennepin County will appear before the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) on Tuesday night, September 23 and would be requesting different variances for the larger building. Commissioner Martens asked if it is a City requirement to enclose trash areas. Grimes said that trash containers are to be enclosed and the applicant prefers to have its trash enclosed within the main building rather than a separate enclosure. ~a Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 1997 Page 2 Commissioner Groger asked for clarification of why the building was moved five feet closer to Nevada Avenue and if the whole building was shifted or if this is part of the enlargement. Grimes noted that the building is a bit longer but not any wider. He said that when- Hennepin County first designed the lot, it calculated 18 foot long parking stalls instead of the required 20 feet. The plan also showed a three foot greenspace on the east side instead of the five feet which was on a plan that staff reviewed and BZA approved. By moving the building five feet closer to Nevada Avenue, the larger parking spaces and greenspace can be accommodated. Grimes told the Commission that Inspections and the Planning staff suggested that the building be moved over five feet closer to Nevada Avenue to accommodate the required parking space length and 5 feet of greenspace. Richard Strong, Representative for Hennepin County apologized for having to come back for review of a similar plan. He said that when the plan was worked out originally not a great deal of detail was worked on not knowing if the plan would be approved. Strong said that this time it was decided to do it right with the intent that the site would be used for 20-25 years. He told the commission that the room and activity areas have remained unchanged with the exception of one of the cells being made handicap accessible. He reviewed new plans which noted the changes to the site. Chair Pentel asked who uses the front entrance door on the east side. Strong commented police, lawyers and employees. Strong talked about the interior of the building noting specifically the two entrances to the yard area, one larger cell to accommodate the handicapped, and a vestibule. He said the biggest increase was the mechanical area which needed more room. Hennepin County also said there is now an electrical room which houses an emergency generator and the dumpster area was enclosed for security reasons. Strong said the walls would be 14" wide instead of the original 10". Chair Pentel asked about the intercom and camera on the east side of the building. Strong commented that there are a couple of cameras outside for security. He said the intercom is used for incoming vans to identify themselves which will then allow the garage door to open. Chair Pentel asked who would be picking up refuse. Strong commented a commercial company. Pentel asked if the dumpster area would be locked and Strong commented that an employee at the facility would unlock the area, roll out the dumpster and then move it back in after dumping and secure the area again. Commissioner Groger asked what the square footage would be on the final plan. Strong commented that it would only be 800 sq.ft. larger. Y ^ 3 Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 1997 Page 3 City Planner Knoblauch briefly talked about the covenant agreement noting the increase in the square footage and this document would have to be amended noting the now proposed footage. Director Grimes said that he is going to recommend to the City Council that an amended covenant be attached to the Conditional Use Permit noting the footage as found on the current site plan. Chair Pentel opened the informal public hearing. Duane Devereaux, 2455 Louisiana Avenue, commented that the proposal is in an industrial park and had always believed that the area would remain industrial. He talked about the number of variances required for this facility and believes that it does not fit on the lot. He asked if there was any possibility of a future increase in size of the building and Strong said no. Devereaux talked about a concern of increased crime in the area and number of employees on the site. He does not believe that it is economically feasible to build this proposed building on this lot and believes that a site at the correction facility property in Plymouth would be more ideal. Strong commented that Hennepin County rejected a Plymouth site because of setback requirements. He gave the Chair a petition signed by the businesses in the area. Dan Nelson, 2325 Louisiana Avenue, reiterated what Mr. Devereaux had to say. He said that he does not believe that this is a good site for a juvenile detention center. He asked if anything had been discussed about security. Nelson questioned the procedure to obtain a permit for when the girls group home went in. He believes that a detention facility does not fit into the industrial area and there may be possible life endangerment to the people in the area because of the facility. Terry Barber, 2520 Nevada Avenue North, is against the proposed detention facility which will be located 500 feet from where she works. She doesn't believe that the safety of the school children in the area has been considered and is worried that this facility will turn into an adult facility down the road. Barber said there are no guarantees that someone won't escape. Gary Barren, 2320 Louisiana Avenue North, asked how a facility of this type could be allowed within a three or four block area of a school. He noted that approximately 85% of his work force are females, that one opens at Gam and two work until midnight -- he's not sure if people will continue to work for him with a detention facility in the area. Steven Svendsen, 7135 Madison Avenue West, talked about the building issues of size and the changes made. He agrees that this facility is a better use than the girls group home. Svendsen believes the problems that could come into the area are external to the facility and is not sure how anyone could handle these problem. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 1997 Page 4 Strong commented on procedures for abreak-out noting that the Golden Valley Police Department and Hennepin County Sheriff's Department would be notified for response. He said that there has been only one escape from the facility downtown and explained to the commission and audience how that happened. Strong talked about the two ways that employees and visitors can enter the building . He talked about the facility and control room and how the outside speaker system and garage door would work to allow entrance into the building. Chair Pentel asked if smoking would be allowed in the building. Strong answered no. Pentel asked where staff would go to smoke and Strong commented that at this time he did not know. Commissioner Kapsner asked Mr. Strong to comment on the outdoor lighting and height of the wall. Strong commented that the wall height is the same as the building to the south. Strong noted where the four cameras will be located and talked about the lighting attached to the outside walls of the facility, noting that there would be lighting approximately every 15 feet. Commissioner Martens asked Strong about the type of infraction of offenders that would be housed at this facility. Strong said that this facility is set up as a minimum security facility for juveniles who have committed minor violations and who would remain at the facility for approximately a seven day stay. Strong said that a violent offender would not be located at this site. Chair Pentel asked staff about the covenants. Grimes commented that the covenant states that this facility-would be a 16-bed juvenile facility. The residents of the facility would be waiting for a court appearance because they may have committed a parole violation. Commissioner Martens asked if a violent offender could be sent to this facility. Grimes commented that Chief of Police Dean Mooney believes that this will be a much more secure facility than the existing building. Chair Pentel asked who would be considered a visitor to the site. Strong answered that there would. only be two types of visitors, either parents or legal counsel. Commissioner Martens asked Grimes about the rezoning of the property to Institutional. (Note: Commissioner Martens was not on the Commission when the rezoning was visited at a meeting of the Planning Commission.) Grimes commented that it was the City Attorney's opinion that Hennepin County could remodel the existing facility if it were rebuilt from the inside out, using the same foundation, in which case a rezoning would not need to occur because the footprint of the building would not change.. Grimes continued to say that Hennepin County felt that this Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 1997 Page 5 facility did not meet its needs and in order to do it right they requested an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map and a rezoning of the property. Strong added that Hennepin County officials met with surrounding business people and it was decided by both parties that a new facility would provide for a better site. Gary Barren commented that a girl's group home is a different entity than a maximum security facility and believes problems from a detention facility are different than a group home. Dan Nelson believes the facility would become something more than a "holding tank". He questioned if school personnel had been contacted. Nelson believes this facility belongs in Plymouth, near the work -house. He believes this is a done deal and doesn't believe that this type of facility belongs in the Industrial Zoning District. Duane Devereaux questioned how control of who visits will be handled. He talked about the commission representing the people and believes this is not being done. Terry Barber briefly talked about those employers who lease and can walk about from the area and if this facility goes in it will take away from the area, value of businesses and those who lease properties. Steve Svendsen talked about the businesses who attended the meeting September 17 and noted Chief Mooney's commitment to answer calls about problems of the site promptly. Svendsen said that the County said that people who are loitering outside the building would be questioned and the situation handled immediately. He believes the facility would be secure and does not want to see another girl's group home on this lot. Richard Strong commented that there would be outside cameras on all four sides of the building. He said that the Hennepin County Sheriff's Department would be notified first and then the Golden Valley Police. Because of the location of the Golden Valley police, these officers may respond more quickly. Dan Nelson asked if the City is willing to hire more police officers to handle any problems. Chair Pentel told Mr. Nelson that this was an issue that could not be addressed at this meeting. Grimes commented that the girl's group home initiated approximately 100 calls a year and does not believe the detention facility will come any where close to this figure. Commissioner Martens asked if there was a commitment to house only non-violent offenders at this facility. Strong said that he was not sure and then asked the commission and staff to define non-violent. Strong told the commission that offenders would be screened before being sent to the Golden Valley facility and that ~l 4~ Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22; 1997 Page 6 the most violent offenders would remain at the downtown facility. He noted that Hennepin County is committed to take the least violent of the juvenile offenders to this site. Director Grimes suggested to Mr. Strong that Barb Karns, Director of Juvenile Detention for Hennepin County, be present at the City Council meeting to answer questions concerning what type of offender would be at this facility. Commissioner McAleese said that a number of ways that the facility would be operated had been discussed but none of this discussion is found in the covenant. He suggested to staff that the City may want to ask Hennepin County to include language in the covenant addressing issues like having only minimum security juveniles housed at this facility. Grimes said that the City could discuss this with the County. Commissioner Kapsner questioned on how to define someone violent or non-violent. McAleese commented that Hennepin County must have a point system or some other way to determine this and then select these types of boys. Commissioner Martens questioned on how to define violent and non-violent. Terry Barber asked whether there was a clause in the covenant which states that this facility cannot be turned into an adult facility. Pentel told her there was such a clause. Duane Devereoux asked Strong why Hennepin County rejected the Plymouth site. Strong said that the setbacks were so severe that they could not do it. Chair Pentel closed the informal public hearing. Commissioner Groger asked staff whether the County would revert to the previously approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Grimes noted that the BZA approved the variances and the City Council approved a CUP. Hennepin County can go back to its original CUP. Commissioner Martens asked if the businesses in the area had attended previous meetings and Prazak answered yes. Grimes told the commission and audience that staff notifies, in writing, properties within 500 feet of a proposal and that it is up to the owner of a building to inform his/her renters. He said that the School District is aware of the request. McAleese noted that there has been an article in the SunPost regarding this issue. Commissioners Martens believes that it is the business owners view that they didn't like what the site was being used before and this may be better but there are still ~: ~. . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 1997 Page 7 safety issues. Martens said that he would like to make a recommendation that the covenants to note that only non-violent offenders at this facility. Grimes said that by the time this item goes to the City Council he can discuss this issue with the County. Commissioner Johnson noted that the commission did recommend approval, in May of this year, for rezoning of this lot from Industrial to I-3 Institutional. She noted that the CUP had been approved before and that the only change at this time is the size of the facility. Johnson said the issue tonight is whether the reasons presented for the additional 800 sq.ft. is appropriate. She outlined the changes being the entryway change for use of metal detectors which adds to security, enclosure of the dumpster area, second entrance to the outdoor recreational area, expanded cell area and the increased size to the mechanical room. Johnson said that it was too bad that this was not set forth in the original plans but would rather see it this way and supports the amended proposal. Commissioner Prazak agrees that the changes in the footprint are minor and reasonable. Commissioner Groger commented that he understands what the County is trying to do. He said that he voted against the original plan which he believes was stretching the limits of what could comfortably be acceptable on the lot. Groger agrees with Johnson that it is an appropriate use of the site but believes that they are requesting substantial changes with substantial variances and will vote against the request. Commissioner Kapsner said that listening to the concerns of the neighbors he agrees about the expense per bed. He does not agree that hiring on more Golden Valley police officers is needed as the 16-bed facility will not put an extra burden on the police force. He said that the employees working at the site are from the Hennepin County Sheriffs Department. Kapsner agrees with Johnson that this is a better designed building. He talked about the question of whether this is an appropriate area for this type of facility and believes it is rather than in a residential area. Kapsner said that there is a need to address this type of structure and believes this is a good area in the county for this facility. He supports the amendment to the CUP. Commissioner McAleese said that he supported the request for a CUP in May of this year and still believes that it is appropriate. He said that he would not support the request this time taking into consideration the comments by Commissioner Groger that this was a large expansion. McAleese does not believe that the lot is large enough for what Hennepin County is now proposing. He believes making it larger would be better, but not for this lot. Chair Pentel said that she doesn't believe the expansion is adding that much more to Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 1997 Page 8 the site. She commented that the commission was aware that the building would present a solid wall around the recreational space. She said she was more concerned with the covenant in that it doesn't address the restriction of violent offenders from this site. Pentel said she was appreciative of hearing from the neighbors, but doesn't believe that the residents of the facility will be a problem. Pentel said the new building will be an improvement. She said she supports the amended CUP with the condition that the covenant reflect that the level of an offender at this site would be anon-violent juvenile. Commissioner Martens said that he would vote in favor of the request per Chair Pentel's comments. He believes that this is an improvement to the building which had been approved in May. MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Kapsner and motion carried with the following conditions: 1. The attached site plan prepared by Symees Maini and McKee Associates and Winsor Faricy and dated August 29, 1997 be made a part of the amended CUP. 2. The "Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions" be filed with this property. No building permits will be issued until proof of recording is given to the City. 3. A landscape plan be submitted during the building permit process and be approved by the Building Board of Review. 4. Any outdoor lighting be approved by the Chief Building Inspector to insure that the lights do not adversely affect neighboring properties. 5. The detention facility be limited to 16 beds. 6. All necessary permits for construction are obtained from the City, County and State. 7. There shall be no outdoor storage of goods, supplies or equipment unless screened so it is not visible from the street or adjacent properties. 8. Only non-violent offenders shall be housed at this site 9. The uses on the site shall meet all applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 22, 1997 Page 9 10. Failure to comply with one or more of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the CUP. A roll call vote was taken. GROCER -- NO JOHNSON -- YES KAPSNER -- YES MARTENS --YES MCALEESE -- NO PENTEL --YES PRAZAK --YES Commissioner McAleese wanted to clarify that it is required by the ordinance that the commission look at certain factors regarding CUP's and one of those is the consistency of the Comprehensive Plan of the City, and that we have recommended a change and that change as gone through; and therefore, there is consistency. III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council and Board of Zoning Appeals Commissioner McAleese briefly related what had happened at a City Council meeting. IV. Other Business A. Workshop Session on Technical Background for the Land Use Plan Staff and the Commission discussed this agenda item and requested staff to assemble a draft plan document that incorporates some of the recommendations from the draft Technical Background. V. Adjournment The Chair adjourned the meetin 1