Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 09-03 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 3, 1987 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Mike Nelson, Wallace Bernards, Lowell Ainas and Ann Wallerstedt. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier and Recording Secretary Mary Lou Larsen. Chairman Lucht stated Commissioner Carl Sandstrom was unable to attend this evening's meeting and was excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 13, 1987 Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Nelson to approve the minutes of the August 13, 1987 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Wallerstedt and Bernards. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Ainas as he did not attend that meeting. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - August 27, 1987 Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve the minutes of the August 27, 1987 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Ainas, Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 87012 (Bill Kelly House) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for special use permit approval to operate a residential treatment facility for 23 mentally ill and chemically dependent adults. This application was first considered by the Commission on July 16, 1987 and again on August 13, 1987. The Secretary reviewed the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 87012 attached) . During the report the Secretary noted that condition No. 5 of the recommended conditions should be modified to make it clear that the Bill Kelly house will be subject to the maintenance provisions of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance as well as the occupancy standards. The Secretary also reported that Mr. Dick Miller of the neighborhood committee had informed him that his committee had inadvertly not blocked out names contained in the Golden Valley and Fridley police reports they submitted to the Planning Commission. This information is considered private information. The Secretary then noted that he has provided the Commission with police calls to 4408 69th Avenue North, the Northwest Residence facility, for the period May, 1985 through August, 1987. He explained that there have been statements made that the City does not consider this facility to be a police problem although no statistical information had been provided to the Commission. He reported that there were eight police calls to that address in approximately 28 months since the facility opened. . 9-3-87 _1_ Commissioner Wallerstedt asked if Condition No. 11, which stipulates review of the special use permit in one year, could provide for citizen input or is it for review by the City Council only. The Secretary stated that this condition is similar to one imposed on Northwest Residence. He explained that the situation was reviewed administratively and a report given to the City Council. He added that there was no public hearing for that review, therefore, neighboring property owners were not notified. Chairman Lucht then inquired if the applicant had any additional information he wished to add. The Chairman noted that the Commission has received a great amount of material and has had the opportunity to review these matters. He requested any additional comments be related primarily to new material. He then recognized Mr. Felix Phillips, an attorney representing Bill Kelly House. Mr. Phillips stated that he was impressed with the effort put forth by the City staff in compiling the information presented to the Planning Commission. He stated that he believed the Planning Commission's process to be fair and thorough and also noted that it seems that all interested parties have had an opportunity to be heard. He added that he believed the neighborhood commitee had done a good job in gathering and presenting information to the Commission. Mr. Phillips reported that his client, Henry Norton, has purchased and is now the owner of the property at 5240 Drew Avenue North. He noted that Mr. Norton would like very much to proceed with his plans for the Kelly House facility as soon as possible. Mr. Phillips next commented on the University of Maryland study which had been submitted to the Commission and referred to an August 14, 1987 letter from M. Susan Ridgely, Project Manager for that study, and noted her comment that she believed there was nothing in her research that would support a claim that a residential facility would pose a threat to the community. He noted Ms. Ridgely had examined four facilities treating mentally ill and chemically dependent people in the country and that one of the four was the Bill Kelly House. He noted that the Bill Kelly House is an excellent example of a facility providing appropriate treatment to its clients. He added that the Bill Kelly House is organized to address the drug and alcohol complications of mentally ill persons. He added that he believed the Bill Kelly House was doing a fine and proper job and that their performance has been excellent. Mr. Phillips next referred to the August 13, 1987 Planning Commission meeting wherein Sgt. Dave Niebur of the Minneapolis Police Department had commented on the 14 police calls that were made to the Bill Kelly House at 2544 Pillsbury Avenue South. He next referred to a September 1, 1987 letter sent to the Planning Commission from the Minneapolis Police Chief stating that the number of calls to this facility did not seem excessive and that the Bill Kelly staff was properly summoning the police when needed. Mr. Phillips then cited various police calls to 5240 Drew Avenue North over the past three years. He noted that there had been 55 such calls to this address during that time and that he believed a properly run residential treatment facility may lead to fewer calls at that location. Mr. Phillips then stated that although the neighborhood committee had submitted much information to the Planning Commission, he did not believe that the committee had borne the burden of proof showing that the location of the facility at 5240 Drew Avenue North would either cause a diminution in property values or an unacceptable risk to public safety. He stated that fears are not credible evidence and the basis to deny this special use permit and added his belief that all of the credible evidence supports approval of his client's application. 9-3-87 -2- Chairman Lucht asked the applicant's position on the staff's recommendation that extra staffing at the Bill Kelly House be provided on weeknights and weekends. Mr. Phillips responded that the State, County, and the Bill Kelly House will go along with the extra staffing if it is a requirement. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and again requested that information and comments be limited to new material that has not yet been brought to the Commission's attention. The Chairman recognized Mr. Phil Roche, 5301 Brooklyn Boulevard, who gave a summary of information collected by the neighborhood committee. He stated that the committee has found that a facility such as the one being proposed treating mentally ill persons with substance abuse problems does not belong in a residential neighborhood because these people have behavioral problems that will adversely affect the neighborhood. He referred to the letter submitted by M. Susan Ridgely and noted that her comments were merely opinions and there was no evidence submitted to dispute the neighborhood committee's evidence that this facility will cause neighborhood problems. Mr. Roche stated that Howard Goldman, one of the other authors of the study, had been contacted by the neighborhood committee and that Mr. Goldman believes the study to be a comprehensive study that should stand on its own merits. Mr. Roche stated again that he believed there was no clinical evidence that refutes the evidence supplied by the neighborhood committee. Mr. Roche then stated that there have been various misrepresentations made regarding the Bill Kelly House and its treatment program. He stated that the statement that chemical abuse is a minor problem is absolutely incorrect. He cited the Golden Valley police calls to the Oasis House and noted that there were 42 calls in two and one-half years to that facility and that one was for a narcotics felony. He noted that in the committee's review of the present Bill Kelly House building, it was found that maintenance was poor, the house was unkept, there was torn carpeting and pornography on the walls. He added that management of this type would have an adverse affect on the neighborhood. He pointed out that this was either a matter of deceit or ignorance of what is going on at the facility. He also cited the Bill Kelly House's lack of compliance with State and local codes and added that so substantial evidence has been submitted by the applicant that would indicate their method of management would change. Mr. Roche went on to explain that the neighbors are most concerned with the safety issue. He stated that the proposed location of the Bill Kelly House along 53rd Avenue North is where children attending Northport Elementary School walk on their way to school, is also a location for the City bus stop, and junior and senior high bus stops as well. He added that there are over 700 children attending Northport School and that 53rd Avenue North is a prime access to Brooklyn Boulevard and this is an area of much traffic. He added that emergency vehicles that may come to this facility are required to travel along major thoroughfares and to shut their lights and sirens off within two blocks of the facility. He pointed out that this would cause a hazard to children living in the area. Mr. Roche requested the Commission to consider all of these concerns in deliberating their recommendation. He stated his belief that the information submitted would support a recommendation of denial of this application or possibly the need to establish a moratorium so that the safety issues can be more appopriately studied. 9-3-87 -3- Chairman Lucht then recognized Mr. William Birch, 3512 53rd Avenue North, who stated that it was his understanding that legislation will be proposed in February to change the law governing residential treatment facilities. He requested the Commission to delay its decision for at least six months so that this bill could be introduced and taken up by the legislature. He noted that this action may well change how cities have to look at such facilities. Chairman Lucht then recognized Mr. Ron Christensen, Vice President of the Citizens for Better Government. Mr. Christensen stated that he does not .live in the immediate area, but is a concerned resident of Brooklyn Center. He presented the Commission with a September 3, 1987 memo from the Board of Directors of the Citizens for Better Government regarding the Bill Kelly House application. Mr. Christensen reported that the Board of Directors of the Citizens for Better Government (CBG) had been requested by residents in the neighborhood to become involved regarding the proposed location of the Bill Kelly House at 5240 Drew Avenue North. He pointed out that the group has reviewed various Planning Commission briefings and minutes of the Planning Commission meetings. He added that the CBG had also held a public informational meeting on Monday, August 31, 1987. Mr. Christensen pointed out that the CBG fully supports the concept that group home facilities should be allowed to locate in communities to provide a residential type of setting to meet the needs of its residents, however, he believed that mentally ill and chemically dependent persons can be dangerous to themselves as well as others. He stated that the City of Brooklyn Center was in full accord when legislation was first proposed in the mid 1970's to provide residential treatment facilities in communities. He added that this community was one of the first to permit a group home in the City. He stated that conditions of today are much different than they were in the mid 70's. He stated further that the institutionalization of people with a great number of problems needs to be looked at further and that he believed legislation was needed to give communities some reasonable involvement in the regulatory and siting processes for these facilities. Mr. Christensen further reported that the Citizens for Better Government were proposing to the Planning Commission and also to the City Council that a number of issues be carefully examined prior to any approval of the pending application. One of the issues was a housing equity issue. Mr. Christensen 'stated that the relocation of group homes from central cities to suburban areas has the affect of evicting current residents of apartment buildings without consideration for their rights. The result of the State law is to achieve one public policy at the expense of other groups of citizens. He added that this could cause the loss of affordable housing and no consideration has been given to future housing needs of the displaced residents. He also stated there are no real guidelines regarding what constitutes a high or overconcentration of residential facilities in a community. There is reference to one half of one percent of the population in an area being overconcentrated, but representatives of Hennepin County were not clear regarding what this actually meant. He stated that if the City of Brooklyn Center was required to have a maximum of 150, then additional small apartment buildings would have to be acquired for group home purposes. He stated that this would translate into a corresponding loss of rental units for existing residents without provision for replacement of these units to the affordable housing stock of the City. He believed these issues needed further attention. Regarding facility issues, Mr. Christensen stated that at the recent meeting a representative of Hennepin County stated that they cannot staff the facilities at of level they feel appropriate due to funding constraints. He noted that the proper level of staffing to meet the needs of residents, not what Hennepin County feels it can afford to pay, should also be considered. He believed that standards for 9-3-87 -4- necessary recreation requirements, both indoor and outdoor, for residents also needed to be reviewed. Another facility issue noted was the lack of standards regarding the maximum number of residents appropriate for a single facility. Safety issues were also a concern raised by Mr. Christensen such as facility requirements regarding emergency vehicles not using sirens within a certain distance of the facility and traffic problems in the neighborhood due to the requirements of such emergency vehicles are issues that also need to be addressed. In summary, Mr. Christensen stated that it is the Citizens for Better Government Position that these issues have not been fully addressed with respect to the pending application. He noted that there may be a role for the Metropolitan Council to Provide in the siting of these facilities. This would relate to the displacement of apartment residents, loss of affordable housing and the fair share distribution of residential treatment facilities within the Metropolitan area. that he believed the City's responsibility was to insure that these facilit es are Properly staffed to meet their needs, that the City does not lose housing stock and that the public safety of all concerned is protected. He recommended that all of these issues be carefully studied prior to the City taking final action on the pending application. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Malecki regarding the type of legislation that might be needed, Mr. Christensen stated that he did not believe there were proper guidelines established for these facilities. He pointed out that different types of facilities have different types of problems and there is a need to better understand the type of persons that reside in such facilities. He noted that the original intent of the State legislation was for communities to share the siting of these facilities. Due to overconcentration in certain areas, this intent has changed. He pointed out that the one half of one unclear and must be better defined. Another area which tMirU1Christensen efelt further clarification was needed was in the recreational needs of facility residents and whether or not such facilities are better located in the middle of residential areas or along the edge of residential areas. He stated that the issue is unclear at this point. Chairman Lucht commented that a change in State law could take years to accomplish. Mr. Christensen responded that he believed it would be better to take time now rather than to create a problem. He also added that he believed the intent of the legislation was to mainstream persons no longer required to be institutionalized in a State institution and cautioned that we should be careful that it is not just a shifting from State institutions to private institutions. Mr. Christensen noted that a study of these issues could take some time and that the City may feel an obligation to expedite the pending application, but he added, the City also has an obligation to its citizens to answer the various questions raised and to address the issues. Chairman Lucht next recognized Jill Sherritt 5237 , who stated that the Commission should keep in mind that the Bill Kelly ou eois a for profit organization. She stated that she has recently been contacted by Bob Fink of the Department of Human Services Licensing Division who, she claimed, was very concerned about what is happening with the relocation of this facility. She stated that he is aghast at some of the things he has heard about and will be looking into this matter. She stated that Mr. Fink was surprised that the Bill Kelly House would want to locate in this residential neighborhood due to all of the turmoil. Mrs. 9-3-87 -5- Sherritt stated that she also could not understand why the Bill Kelly House would want to locate in a neighborhood where the attitude toward the facility is so negative. She added that she believes this facility is too large and that the City should look at this question as well. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Wallerstedt, Mrs. Sherritt stated that she believed it was important to look at and realize that this facility is being operated as a business. She also pointed out that she believed the applicant had made misrepresentations to the neighborhood regarding the type of facility it is and the type of persons who will reside in it. She further commented that she did not believe that enough factual information on the facility has been provided. Chairman Lucht then recognized Alice Kulek, 5348 Sailor Lane, who expressed her concerns regarding the safety of children attending Northport Elementary School when residents of the Bill Kelly House would be allowed to walk through the school facilities and park facilities. She asked what the City plans to do to create barriers so this would not happen and wondered if the doors to the school remained unlocked and if anyone had access to the school. She again stated her concerns for the safety of the children in the neighborhood, at the park and in the school. Chairman Lucht recognized the resident of 5142 France Avenue North who questioned the information regarding police calls which has been submitted to the Commission. He noted that the calls listed in the Brooklyn Center police report were calls that were made to the facility, not from the facility and, therefore, could not be compared with the information submitted by the neighborhood committee. He stated that he did not believe the applicants have supplied the Commission with any proof that would dispute what the neighborhood committee is saying constitutes a safety concern for the neighborhood. He added that no information has been supplied which is convincing enough to grant approval for the facility. The Chairman again recognized Phil Roche, who stated that he believed the neighborhood had submitted excellent information and documentation regarding the safety issues concerning mentally ill and chemically dependent persons. He added that he did not believe the applicant had supplied any documentary evidence which would refute that submitted by the committee. He stated that the Bill Kelly House should furnish the neighborhood with material to educate the people in order that they would really know what the residents of the facility are like. He concluded by stating that he did not believe the Planning Commission had any other choice but to recommend denial of the application based on the information and evidence presented. Commissioner Malecki inquired of Mr. Roche if the committee believed, based on the information they have supplied in the 89 page report, that the applicant was not admitting the extent of the problem with mentally ill and chemically dependent people. Mr. Roche responded that the applicant is saying that chemical abuse is only a secondary, or minor problem, with residents of the facility. He added that he believes it is a big problem and that the report submitted substantiates the extent of the problem. He further stated that the applicants have not been truthful regarding this matter and have only tried to show it in its best light where the report accurately shows the problems associated with residents of these facilities. In response to an inquiry by Chairman Lucht, Mr. Roche stated that he believed the neighborhood committee, through the submission of the report given to the Planning Commission, has shown that these facilities are truly dangerous and do indeed affect the safety of the neighborhood. 9-3-87 -6 CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING o Cowin'-g fur t ei'�r discussion Chairman Lucht inquired if anyone else wished to be heard. Hearing none, the Chairman called for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Nelson to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Ainas, Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Commissioner Ainas commended the neighborhood committee for their work and efforts at providing the Planning Commission with information to consider regarding this application. He explained that this application is for a special use permit and the Commission is charged with the responsibility of making its recommendations on the basis of the Standards for Special Use Permits. He noted that the Commission should make its recommendations on the basis that substantial and credible evidence supports either approval or denial of the application. He stated that his review of all of the information submitted and the testimony given, leads him to believe that the location of this facility would not cause a decrease in property values in the neighborhood nor would the location of the facility be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community. Therefore, he would recommend approval of this application. At this point there was a disruption in the meeting with some people in the audience voicing displeasure at Commissioner Ainas's comment and walking out of the Council Chambers. Chairman Lucht restored order and the meeting continued. Commissioner Nelson stated that he agreed with Commissioner Ainas's logic that there was no conclusive evidence submitted that would indicate that property values would be diminished if this facility were located in the neighborhood. He further stated, however, that the safety issue is of major concern to him. He pointed out that he believes residents of such facilities are more dangerous to the general community than are people typically found living in an apartment complex. He added that there is a safety issue involved with this application and further commented that he believed this facility was located too close to a school. He concluded by stating that he believed the Planning Commission should recommend denial of this application. Commissioner Wallerstedt stated that she agrees that property values will probably not be decreased in the neighborhood if this facility is approved. She added, however, she also agreed with Commissioner Nelson's concerns about the safety issues. She noted that she did not believe there has been conclusive information submitted that would show this facility to be safe for the surrounding neighborhood. She pointed out that the safety issues deserve a much more closer look. She offered the observation that there is much mistrust between the neighborhood and the applicant and that she has concerns about this as well. She pointed out that there is a need for education in this area to alleviate the concerns expressed. Commissioner Bernards stated that he is torn between making a recommendation with his head or his heart on this issue. He stated that his heart tells him that the safety issues are a major concern for the neighborhood, while his head tells him that the State is saying we have to approve the location of these facilities in any case. In any respect, he added, local control over this situation has been diminished. He further stated that his recommendation is based on a safety concern for the children in the nearby school with an enrollment of some 700 children. He believed the close proximity of this residential facility to the school raised a significant safety question and, therefore, he recommended denial of the special use permit. 9-3-87 -7- Commissioner Malecki commented that she believed the applicant has not provided enough honest information about the people living at this facility. She stated that the location of this facility close to the Northport School is an issue and that she is not convinced by the information provided that this safety problem can be addressed. She stated that she believed it was the responsibility of the applicant to alleviate any fears by providing clear information to the neighborhood regarding the type of persons residing in the facility and what problems may be experienced. Chairman Lucht commented that he did not believe there was evidence submitted that would show that property values in the area would be devalued, but that there is a real safety concern with the school located so close to the facility. He referred to the Standards for a Special Use Permit and noted that Standard (a) states that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. He stated that he believes this application has already adversely affected the comfort and actual safety of the neighborhood. He pointed out that his biggest concern is, as was pointed out by Mr. Christensen, at what point does the number of residents in such a facility go from being a residential treatment facility to an institution. He added that these concerns are not answered. He further stated that he is convinced, based on the information supplied and testimony given, that the comfort and safety of the general public will be adversely affected by the location of this facility at the proposed location. Therefore, he too, recommended denial of the application. Further discussion ensued amongst the members of the Planning Commission regarding the proposed application and the information which had been submitted and reviewed. ACTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF APPLICATION NO. 87012 (Bill Kelly House) Following the discussion, there was a motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Bernards to recommend denial of Application No. 87012 on the basis of a finding by the Planning Commission that the facts and information submitted clearly support that this proposal represents a substantial and unacceptable threat to the public safety and comfort of the community. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Nelson, Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: Commissioner Ainas. The motion passed. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Wallerstedt seconded by Commissioner Nelson to adjourn the meeting. Vesting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Ainas, Nelson, Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:32 p.m Chairman t 9-3-87 -8-