Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983 05-12 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 MAY 12, 1983 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki , 11ary Simmons, Lowell Ainas, Carl Sandstrom and Donald Versteeg. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Marren, Assistant City Engineer James Grube and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross. Chairman Lucht noted- that Commissioner Manson was excused from the meeting. 'APPROVAL OF MINUTES - April 28, 1933 Commissioner Malecki noted that the minutes did not record the vote on the motion for 69th Avenue North to become a major thoroughfare on- page 2. Commissioner Simmons stated that she didn't think she made the motion to approve the minutes of the March 31, 1983 Planning Commission meeting inasmuchas she had not attended that meeting. Chairman Lucht stated that they could check that matter out. Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Plalecki to approve the minutes of the April 28, 1983 Planning Commission meeting .as corrected. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Secretary then announced two changes in the agenda: one, that Fir. Art Kvamme would speak on a proposed townhouse development at the Madsen Floral property and two, that there would be no discussion of the Manufactured Housing Ordinance. APPLICATION NO. 83019 (Charles Brooks) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for an amendment to the special use permit to allow the sale of propane at the Q Petroleum station, 1505-69th Avenue North. The Secretary re- viewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 83019 attached). Commissioner Simmons asked what standards there were for protection from cars that might crash into it. The Secretary answered that posts could be buried in concrete around the inside of the enclosure. The Secretary also pointed out that the en- closure is outside of the site triangle at the southwest quadrant of the inter- section at 69th Avenue North and Humboldt Avenue North. Chairman Lucht asked what was meant by "safety curb" adjacent to the propane enclosure. The Secretary stated that that probably referred to the normal curb around the outside of the parking lot. In answer to a question from Commissioner Nalecki , the Secretary reiterated that the facility is not a self-service tank, but would be operated by the Q Petroleum personnel . In answer to a question from Commissioner Sandstrom, the Secretary explained that many of the customers would have small tanks for barbeque grills, that they would drop these off to be filled up by the station personnel and would pick them up later. Chairman Lucht then asked whether the applicant had anything to add. Mr. Brooks stated he had nothing to add to the Secretary's presentation. Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether he would put in the posts recommended to protect the tank. Mr. Brooks stated that that would be fine. 5-12-83 -1- PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 83019 and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION .NO. 83019 (Charles Brooks) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Simmons to recommend approval of Application No. 83019, subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances , and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 4. The provision ventilation around the tank as well as safety procedures to be taken shall be reviewed by the Fire Marshal prior to the issuance of permits. 5. The enclosure is for the purpose of screening the fuel tank and shall not have any signs affixed to it other than directional or warning signs specifically approved by the Building Official . 6. The propane fuel tank shall be adequately protected by concrete filled posts around the screening device. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 83020 (U D Contracting) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for amended site and building plan approval to build one-storey townhouses in 72nd Circle North rather than the split level units approved in the original Application No. 79031. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No.. 83020 attached). Following the Secretary's presentation, the Chairman asked whether the applicant had anything to add. Mr. Uhde said he had nothing to add. Commissioner Simmons asked whether the units would be for sale. Mr. Uhde responded in the affirmative. There followed a brief discussion in which Commissioners Sandstrom and Simmons wished to know whether all of the units on 72nd Circle would be the one-storey variety. Mr. Uhde explained that it would depend on sales, that he would build what people were willing to buy, and that he could not predict at this time whether all of the units on 72nd Circle would be one-storey or not. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83020 (U D Contracting) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 83020, subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. The new building plan is limited to lots abutting 72nd Circle. 3. Plan approval is subject to all conditions pertaining to the original plan approval for Plat 5 under Application No. 79031. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 83021 (Diane Wright) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for a special use permit to operate a board and care facility for up to 18 mentally ill adults in the four-plex at 4408-69th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 83021 attached) . The Secretary pointed out that the parking lot at the four- plex is in poor shape and needs resurfacing. He recommended changes. in the con- ditions to limit the occupancy to that allowed under the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance, to require resurfacing of the parking lot, and to limit the number of cars at the facility owned by clients . Commissioner Malecki referred to Condition No. 4 and noted that the clients would have no past history of violence and yet would be allowed if they had attempted suicide more than six months previously. She asked for clarification. The Secretary stated that he understood the condition to preclude those with a history of violence or suicide attempts within the last six months. Commissioner Simmons stated that violence towards self and others more than six months previous to placement in the facility was not good enough. Commissioner Sandstrom asked how the staff would calculate whether the parking provided on the site was adequate. The Secretary stated that there was no similar use in the Zoning Ordinance to use as a parking formula. He did point out that visitors would probably come to the site when staff were not there. Chairman Lucht then called on the applicant to speak. Mrs. Diane Wright explained that the program would exclude persons who had attempted suicide within the last six months. She explained that people with a history of violence prior to six months previous would also not be considered- She stated that the program day at the facility would be from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. with 2.5 staff persons on duty during that time. She stated that there would be one staff person at the facility from 3,;00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. and that that person would be awake. In answer to a question from Commissioner Simmons, Mrs. Wright stated that there would be an . extra person on the premises to do cooking and clerical work. Commissioner Simmons asked for the minimum qualifications of the people working at the facility. Mrs. Wright stated that the minimum qualifications would be a BA degree in behavioral science and one year of experience in a mental health facility. The Secretary asked for a clarification on the past history of violence of the clientele. Mrs. Wright answered that the clients would have no past history of violence toward themselves or others. She stated that no one who had attempted suicide within the past six months would be admitted to the program. Commissioner Malecki asked for an explanation of the difference between aggression towards self and suicide. Mrs. Wright stated that aggression towards self would consist of actions to harm oneself, but not with the intention of. killing oneself. Commissioner Ainas aksed what was the average age of program participants. Mrs. Wright answered that it was about 26 to 28 years. She explained that the average length of stay in such a facility would be 112 to 2 years with a minimum of six months. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether one staff person after 8:00 p.m. was enough. Mrs. Wright stated that, at this level of care, it was adequate. Commissioner 5-12-83 -3- Sandstrom asked what would be done if there was a disturbance after 8:00 P.M. Mrs. Wright answered that there was a back up person to help with any emergencies. Commissioner Malecki asked what the qualifications of the night person would be. Mrs. Wright stated that the person would have to have a BA degree and at least 2 years of experience as a mental health worker. Commissioner Malecki asked where clients who had been in the program would go after their stay at this facility. Mrs. Wright answered that they would go into a more independent living situation most likely. Commissioner Malecki asked where the clients generally would come from. Mrs. Wright answered that they would be from a number of places including similar facilities in Minneapolis , the VA Hospital at Fort Snelling and occasionally Anoka. Commissioner Simmons asked what a typical day would be like for a client and how clients would move toward more independence. Mrs. Wright answered that the program would begin with an individual assessment of the person's problems , needs and goals. A program plan would then be developed and implemented on a day to day basis . In answer to another question from Commissioner Simmons, Mrs. Wright stated there are vocational outlets for the clients working in volunteer activities. Commissioner Simmons asked whether they would need to be supervised off the premises. Mrs. Wright answered that the clientele would have access to the community without supervision. In response to Commissioner Simmons, Mrs. Wright explained that one of the kitchens would be remodeled to a sleeping room. Commissioner Simmons asked whether Mrs. Wright felt the residents would be too crowded at two to a bedroom, Mrs. Wright answered in the negative. Chairman Lucht asked whether some of the clients would be driving. Mrs. Wright explained that most of the clients live on $35 to $45 per month and cannot afford a car. She added, however, that there are some Veterans in the program with a greater stipend who can afford a car. Commissioner Simmons asked whether people in the programs would not get jobs. Mrs. Wright answered that there is hope that some could maintain a job, but that the program tends to be prevocational . Chairman Lucht asked whether some of the clients would go back to live with their families. Mrs . Wright responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether there would be group therapy sessions where people would help each other with their problems. Mrs. Wright answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Malecki asked whether the program would make use of sheltered workshops to help clients move toward a vocation. Mrs: ,•fright responded in the affirmative, but added that there is a limited number of such workshops in the Twin Cities area and that only a few of the clients could be placed in those facilities. Chairman Lucht asked Mrs. Wright what her past experience was as a mental health worker. Mrs. .,!right answered that she had spent seven years working in the mental health field and that she has most recently been administering the Park Manor in Minneapolis. Commissioner Malecki asked whether it was the same type of program in Park Manor. Mrs. .!right answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether the service providing agency would be incorpor- ated. Mrs. Wright answered in the affirmative, but that she would be the sole person in the corporation. In response to a question from Commissioner Malecki , Mrs. Wright explained that there were 13 such facilities in Minneapolis. Chairman Lucht asked what was the history of these facilities in other neighborhoods. Mrs. Wright stated that the facility that she is familiar with has no problems with the neighborhood. Commissioner Malecki asked whether there had been any contacts with people in the neighborhood in question adjacent to 69th Avenue North. Mrs. ,!right answered that she had only spoken with one of the tenants in the building and that she had sent letters to people within the neighborhood explaining the facility. -4- Commissioner Versteeg asked what was the average length of stay of one of the clients. firs. !•fright answered that it was about llz years with a. of about six months. Chairman Lucht asked Mrs. 'Wright how it was decided when someone was ready to leave. Mrs. !!right answered that a person would be ready to leave when they have completed the program plan established at the beginning of their stay. She stated that the decision is made with the client, the family of the client and other mental health professionals that are treating the client. She also stated that the client is con- sidered an adult and is free to leave at any time. She stated that they are not bound to stay in the facility, but are there voluntarily. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether a doctor or psychiatrist isn't required to decide whether someone is ready to leave the facility. Mrs. Wright answered that those professionals are in- volved in the decision, but that other people are also involved. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether the clients go to another facility for more intensive care or less intensive care. Mrs. Wright answered that she would hope that they would go to a place for less intensive care. Commissioner Simmons asked where clients usually go when they leave. Mrs . !!right answered that they usually go to another facility with a more independent living situation. Commissioner Malecki asked for an explanation of the Vulnerable Adults Act. firs. Uright stated that it is a State law requiring people who work with mentally ill or mentally handicapped people to report incidents where they know such persons have been abused by others. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing. fis. Jean Boutang, 4408 68th Avenue North, read a lengthy statement to the Planning Commission opposing the proposed boarding care facility. She pointed out that she was a graduate student of social. work herself and that she was not ignorant as to the clientele or the facilities that are used to house mentally ill . She urged the Planning Commission to be intelligent consumers and objected to the haste with which the application seemed to be pursued. She stated that the people in the program often suffer from severe psychosis and that these people are not at all the same population as mentally retarded and troubled youth. She stressed that she has experienced dealing with mentally ill adults. Ms. Boutang stated that people who are in programs where they are supposed to self medicate often do not keep self medicating with harmful results. She pointed out that anyone can act aggresively from time to time. She pointed out that John Hinckley was considered a sell functioning individual by his psychiatrist before the assassi- nation attempt. She also related a story of a young person she had met who felt that his actions were constantly led by the devil and that he occasionally felt the need to kill . Pis. Boutang stated that the tenants of the apartment building helped pay taxes in the community and patronize local businesses. She asserted that property values would be affected by the proposed facility. She also questioned the location of the property, noting that it was close to a major intersection. Ms. Boutang also asserted that it was impossible to house two adults in each of the bedrooms in the four-plex building. She concluded her remarks by registering a complaint that she had not been notified until two days before the public hearing and recommended that the Planning Commission proceed slowly and table the matter seeking more in- formation. She also noted a 1980 study of mentally ill group care facilities across the country that contained useful information for the Commission to consider. Commissioner Sandstrom asked Ms. Boutang whether she felt that services for the mentally ill should be in the same area as they are from. Ms. Boutang answered that the reason the facilities are in fiInneapolis is because of the Hennepin County Medical Center which provides most of the treatment in the area for mentally ill . She stated that she did not know of any facility to treat mentally ill persons in northwest Hennepin County. Commissioner Simmons suggested that there was perhaps a 5-12-83 -5- need for more boarding care homes because the State had cut the budget for mental hospitals and had forced a number of the patients out into less intense treatment facilities. Ms. Boutang stated that she did not know if the individuals in question needed to be hospitalized, but stated that the DPW Rule 36 facilities are better than board and care homes. She again urged the Planning Commission to slow down in its consideration of the special use permit. Commissioner Sandstrom expressed the concern for equal housing opportunity for minority groups and people of low and moderate income and also mentally ill patients in suburban locations as well as the central city. Ms. Boutang stated that she agreed with this philosophy, but that the building in question is too small for the purpose proposed. Chairman Lucht stated that the County would require a minimal amount of space per person before they would license the facility. He also pointed out that a private owner could buy the building and convert it to condominiums. and move the existing tenants out just as easily as in the present case. Chairman Lucht then recognized Ms. Marge Wherley from the Hennepin County Human Services Division. She explained that she would be one of the people to regulate the proposed facility. She also recited for the Planning Commission the history of the funding for board and care facilities and the reason why the County had so little time to enter into a contract for this facility if it was to obtain funding for it. Ms. Wherley stated that Diane Wright was considered a leader in the mental health field and a very capable administrator. She explained that most mentally ill people are fearful and have a poor self concept, but are not necessarily dangerous. She also stated that the people would be closely supvervised in the proposed facility. Finally, Ms. Wherley stated that there was a substantial need in the community for this kind of facility so that not everyone would have, to be cared for in Minneapolis, but could be closer to home. Commissioner Simmons asked Ms. Wherley whether people left on their own can be relied upon to self medicate. Ms. Wherley answered that they generally can. She added that a professional mental health worker can tell fairly easily when medications are not being taken. Commissioner Simmons noted the poor bus service to downtown Minneapolis. Ms. Wherley answered that the facility would have a van and staff cars available to take persons to downtown Minneapolis for medical appointments. In response to a question from Commissioner Simmons regarding family visits, MS. Wherley stated that clients were more likely to have visits from their families if the facility is located in the community. She also stated that the clients would feel more comfortable about going out to see their families. Commissioner Simmons asked whether Ms. Wherley thought that six stalls on the property were adequate. Ms. Wherley answered that the County has a facility with only three parking stalls and they are usually not all filled. She stated that she did not expect a problem with parking. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether there were doctors in the northwest area who could treat the patients. Ms. Wherley answered in the affirmative. In response to a question from Commissioner Malecki , Ms. Wherley stated that the 1980 study referred to earlier, showed that there was no evidence of a decline in property values in neighborhoods adjacent to such facilities. She also stated that surveys of neighbors of regulated facilities showed that there were no problems caused by such facilities. Commissioner Simmons cited the fact that there have been extensive budget cuts in government generally. She asked Ms. Wherley if the County was short of staff to supervise these facilities. Ms. Wherley answered that there was actually more money available now for such supervision than there had been in the past. Commis- sioner Simmons asked whether this was because patients were being pushed out of State hospitals. Ms. Wherley explained that the State had established the legal obligation to license group care facilities, but had not provided any funding to implement the licensing procedure. She stated that, when this was discovered, 5-12-83 -6- more funding was actually made available to properly license board and care facilities. Mr. Traxel of Apartment 2, 4408-69th Avenue North, stated that he was very much against the proposed board and care facility. He stated that he had lived in Brooklyn Center- for 14 years. Mr. Traxel asserted that the building was too small for 18 people. He stated that there is parking in the lot for no more than five cars. He stated that he presently had one child and one on the. way and that it would be difficult to move out. He suggested that the people who want to put the facility in his building look for a four-plex that is vacant. He concluded by asking whether the people who would use the facility come from Brooklyn Center. Commis- sioner Simmons stated that it was her understanding that patients from Brooklyn Center would have priority in being placed in the facility. Mr. Traxel stated that the bedrooms were too small . He asked the Planning Commissioners whether they could live in a room that was 8' x 12' . He also pointed out that Mrs . Wright's first five years of experience as a mental health worker were with children rather than adults. Chairman Lucht pointed out that the County seems to have a lot of faith in Mrs. Uright. Commissioner Sandstrom pointed out that the current owner of the building could convert the building to condominiums and the tenants would still have to move out. . Mr. John Lazinski of Families and Friends for Mental Health Action in the northwest area explained to the Commission that he had fathered a* mentally handicapped daughter. He stated that he favored the facility because it was difficult to find a residential facility within the community. He stated that the environment in which mentally ill persons live is very important. He pointed out that the objective of the program is to help return mentally ill people to the mainstream of society. Mr. Don Lowry of 6914 Lee Avenue North stated that people on the average move every five years, but that the people on that block have lived there for an average of 25 to 30 years . He told the Commission that the neighborhood had long ago fought a battle to keep a commercial use out of the property in question and were able to get an apartment instead. He presented a petition to the Planning Commission signed by a number of local residents who were opposed to the proposed use. Chairman Lucht asked Mr. Lowry why he was opposed to the proposed facility. Mr. Lowry stated that he simply did not want it to be there. He stated that the neighbors were in the neighborhood first and had fought the location of a body shop at 4408-69th Avenue North in order to get the four-plex. He stated that there would be more people residing within the building than at present and that 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard is a bad corner for all these people to be living near. Commissioner Simmons noted that Mr. Lowry was concerned about what was happening outside the building. She suggested that Mr. Lowry was afraid of something and wanted to know what. She stated that she herself was concerned regarding the adequacy of the treatment at the facility. Mr. Lowry stated that there were too many people that would be living in the building that would have no interest in the property. Chairman Lucht stated that Mrs. Wright . would own the property and would have an interest. Commissioner Malecki asked Mr. Lowry if he would object if there were only 10 residents in the building. Mr. Lowry stated that he still would not want the use in that particular building. He stated that it should be kept residential . Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the petition is not specific regarding its objection to the facility. He pointed out that Mrs. Wright would own the building and would have an interest in maintaining it. He stated that Mr. Lowry was assuming that the building would not be kept up. There was a complaint by Mr. Traxel that there had not. been enough time to respond to the proposal by the neighborhood. Commissioner Malecki agreed stating that time was needed to work the proposal out. She also stated that the objections voiced by the residents had been heard before in- other public hearings, but she sympathized with their need to get together to discuss the matter. Chairman Lucht also appreciated 5-12-83 -7- the concern about timing, but added that he felt that many of the comments re- flected a desire simply not to have the facility in their neighborhood. Mr. Furman, another resident at 4408-69th Avenue North, stated that the proposal has come on too fast. He stated that he has spent 10 years counseling people with mental health problems. He stated that he had worked for Neon and Summit House and added that he knew a great deal about the human services field. He pointed out that the property at 69th Avenue North has no sidewalk or curb and that clients will be walking a lot. He stated that the clients could walk to Willow Lane Park and that they have an impact on other people using the park and would create tension. He stated that this was not a safe location for the facility in light of the traffic. He also stated that the parking lot could not accommodate more than five vehicles. He pointed out that the high traffic volumes in the area caused a lot of carbon monoxide and this was not healthy for the residents either. He pointed out that the average stay in these facilities is five years rather than a year and a half to two years. He stated that he felt that the occupancy for this building was too high. He admitted that no one in the neighborhood particularly wanted the facility in their backyard and stated that this was a natural reaction. He also pointed out that there had recently been a problem with the boiler and that people could not sleep because of the noise. He complained of the poor soundproofing and stated that this would be quite a problem with 18 people in the building. Mrs. Marsha Lovejoy of 6331 Bryant Avenue North stated that she had been in a hospital for 10 years and that she had also lived in a home similar to the one proposed. She stated that it is .like living in a big family. She stated that this kind of facility helped her more than staying in a facility. She pointed out that she now has a job as a means to support her family. She concluded by saying 'that this type of facility means a lot to her and that there are others in the community that have a need for a board and care facility. Commissioner Sandstrom asked about the history of the board and care home that Mrs. Lovejoy had lived in. Mrs. Lovejoy answered that she recalled a meeting with people in the neighborhood to go over problems caused by the facility. She stated that those who lived furthest away and did not even come to the meeting were those who complained most about the facility. She stated that some people thought that the facility was a "drug house." ' She explained that the drugs that people take that live in these facilities are not the kind that make a person feel euphoric, but are needed to cope with day to day living. In response to a question from Commissioner Simmons regarding the size of the rooms, Mrs. Lovejoy stated that the rooms in State institutions are even smaller. She pointed out that it is good to share a room since it keeps one from sinking too deeply into one's thoughts. Mr, Cliff Houde, of 4416-69th Avenue North, pointed out that the traffic on 69th Avenue is getting worse all the time. He also stated that walking in the neigh- borhood is dangerous because there are no sidewalks. He stated he thought that money was the bottom line of the _proposed use. Ms. Eileen Moran, of the Northwest Human Services Council , stated that she wished to substantiate the need for the facility. She stated that it was a priority of Northwest Human Services Council to find a vendor to provide care for mentally ill adults in this area. She stated that there was need for at least 18 beds based on the population of the northwest area. She stated that there was a lack of organized advocacy within the northwest Hennepin area for mentally ill adults. She also stated that many persons within the northwest area migrate to facilities in other parts of the Metro area because there are no facilities available here. Miss Kathy Prieve, also of Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council , stated that the people presently go to Minneapolis or St. Paul for treatment because of a lack of facilities in the northwest area. She acknowledged that many people fear the 5-12-83 -8- . mentally ill . She stated that people often consider them crazy or violent; but, she pointed out, the arrest rate for mentally ill persons is 1112 that of the general population. Mr. George Olson of Brooklyn Center stated that he had a son who was mentally ill and who does take his own medications. He stated that he has lived in Brooklyn Center for 26 years and ,has had a need for this type of facility for a long time. He stated that he was not concerned regarding the small bedroom in the facility, since most of the time the patients are not in their rooms, but are involved in activities. An unidentified resident of 4408-69th Avenue North, stated that she was concerned regarding the potential residents of the building. She stated that she lived with two small children. She noted that there is no place on the property for recreation and that she must go to the park with her children and that there are a number of other small children in the park down the street. She pointed out that the area is close to a busy intersection and stated that there are better locations in the City than this one that are less busy and have a larger plot of land. She suggested that the City and other concerned persons look for other places to locate this facility. Pair. Olson stated that one of the benefits of being close to a busy inter- section is that it also allows residents the chance to use the bus. Mr. Furman pointed out, however, that bus service is unreliable in the winter time and that he has had to wait two to four hours for a bus at this I ocation. Miss Dee Christine from "The House" stated that there would be a van available for the residents if bus service was not adequate. She also stated that they could be transported to an area where they could have recreational outlets. Another woman who lived in Brooklyn Park expressed support for the proposed facility. She stated that "The House" has changed her son greatly. Mr. Dave Kapert, a social worker for Hennepin County, explained that he works with the mentally ill and stated that there is a critical need for the proposed facility. He stated that it is important for each community to care for its own mentally ill persons and not to force them into a mental health ghetto. He stated that he knew the families within the area are crying out for this kind of facility. Mr. Don Lowry, 6914 Lee Avenue North, pointed out that the applicant had definitely brought her "ammunition" by bringing a number of people to speak on their behalf. He expressed concern that the Commission would listen to these people and yet would not pay any attention to the petition that he had presented to the surrounding neighborhood. Chairman Lucht stated that he did not mean to imply that the petition was unimportant, Mrs. Kiersten Langsetmo, an architect in this field, stated that she had developed other group homes. She stated that the proposed location is fairly good, although not ideal . She stated that it was a positive factor that it was near a bus line and that the location was easy to get to. She also stated that it was good that the area was close to a residential area and not completely surrounded by commercial uses. Ms. Jean Boutang, of 4408=69th Avenue North, asked the Commission for more time to consider the proposed application. She urged them not to act quickly. r1r. Traxel , also a resident at 4408-69th Avenue North, stated that he also had a mentally handi- capped brother and did not mean to suggest that he was .against the facility locating someplace in the community. He only felt that the proposed location was not a good one and would create hardships for himself. Mrs. Helen Lazinski stated that those who support the facility had also found out about it only a couple days earlier. She stated that people who would benefit from the proposed facility just ,rant to show that it is needed. 5-12-83 -9- Chairman Lucht observed that'the'neighborhood obviously feels rushed by the pro- posed facility. He stated that he felt that the Planning Commission should table the application, leave the public hearing open, and help to set up a meeting in the neighborhood. He stated that after this meeting the application could, be brought back later. Mrs. Diane Wright asked whether she could have the meeting with the neighborhood between the Planning Commission and the City Council meeting. She explained that funding for the facility is only available if a contract is secured by June 1. She explained that she cannot get the contract unless she has purchased the property by June 1. She also noted that her purchase agreement to buy the property will expire June 1 and is contingent upon her obtaining the special use permit. Commissioner Simmons stated that if the application were acted on this evening, it would ensure the ill will of the neighborhood toward the facility. Com- missioner Sandstrom asked whether the applicant could not meet with the neighborhood between now and the City Council meeting. The Secretary stated that the applicant's purchase agreement is not a deciding factor for the Planning Commission. He stated that the Planning Commission must decide whether they are ready to make a recommendation at this evening's meeting based on the Standards for Special Use Permits. Commissioner Ainas stated that he felt he was ready to decide on the application. Commissioner Versteeg pointed out that this is a brand new venture in Brooklyn Center and should perhaps be pursued more slowly. He stated that if it is a good thing, it will no doubt be approved in time and there will be money available for it. Commissioner Simmons also stated that she supported the idea of the board and care facility, but felt that the appli- cation had come on too fast for the neighborhood. Ms. Marge Wherley, of Hennepin County, stated that she has sought special use permits in other communities and has attended numerous meeings with other neigh- borhood groups. She stated that until the facility is in operation, people generally will not change their minds. Commissioner Simmons complained that the applicant was putting the Commission on the spot by asking for a recommendation at the first meeting Ms. Wherley stated that she had no advance notice of the narrow window of availability of the funding and that if more time had been available to work the problem out, she was certain that they would have met with the neighborhood previously. There followed a brief discussion regarding the timing of the application and whether it should be acted on at this evening's meeting. Mrs. Bornholdt, of 6939 Lee Avenue North, asked whether 69th Avenue North was going to be widened. The Assistant City Engineer stated that there was no likelihood that 69th Avenue North would be widened west of Brooklyn Boulevard in the relatively near future. He explained that the County still has jurisdiction over 69th Avenue North west of Brooklyn Boulevard, but that the City now controls 69th, east of Brooklyn Boulevard. He stated that there are plans by the City to widen 69th, east of Brooklyn Boulevard some years from now. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Ainas stated that he felt the Planning Commission had received sub- stantial testimony and that it could make a recommendation to the City Council . Commissioner Sandstrom also stated that he felt qualified to vote on the matter. He stated that the Planning Commission did not create the pressure to make a timely decision and should not be blamed for it. He stated that the Planning Commission should respond to the applicant's request. Commissioner Malecki stated that the Planning Commission needs to decide whether the Standards for a Special Use Permit are met. She stated that this was not a matter of personal opinion, but that the Planning Commission is charged to make a determination as to whether those standards are met. She stated that she favored the special use permit because she felt those 5-12-83 -10- standards were met in this case. Commissioner Versteeg stated that he felt the applicant. should have looked at a different location. Commissioner Simmons stated that she would favor the operation, but that the people planning this operation have been less than frank with the neighborhood. She stated that she felt the applicant was creating ill will with the neighborhood. She also stated that she did not believe that money would not be available after June 1. She stated that she would vote to table the application, but not to approve it at tonight's meeting. Commissioner Versteeg also stated that he would vote to table the application. Chairman Lucht stated that he agreed with Commissioner Malecki , that the question was whether the Standards fo*r a Special Use Permit are met. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83021 (Diane Wright) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 83021, subject to the following conditions: 1. The permit is issued to the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable state and local codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. Existing tenants shall receive a minimum of 60 days notice prior to the date they are expected to vacate the premises. 4. 'The permit authorizes the boarding of not more than 18 mentally ill adults with no past history of violence, toward themselves or others and/or chemical dependency. Any change to increase the clientele residing in the facility or to include previously violent or chemically dependent individuals will require amendment of the special use permit by the City Council and the occupancy of the facility shall be governed by the standards set forth in the Housing Maintenance Ordinance. 5. Unless accompanying the entire clientele in an excursion off premises , there shall be at least one qualified mental health worker on the premises at all times. 6. A copy of the current State Board and Lodge License shall be kept on file with the City. 7. Any structural , plumbing or mechanical modifications to the existing building shall be subject to review and approval by the Building Official (and the City Sanitarian where appropriate) with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 8. The special use permit shall be reviewed within one year from the date of Council approval to examine the history, if any, of complaints or police actions relating to the facility. 9. The applicant shall resurface the parking lot to meet the standards of the Housing Maintenance and the Zoning Ordinance prior to the issuance of the special use permit. 10. Parking for client vehicles shall be limited to two spaces. on the premises. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Ainas and Sandstrom. 5-12-83 -11- Voting against: Commissioners Simmons and Versteeg. The motion passed. Com- missioners Simmons and Versteeg explained that they would prefer to table the application. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 11:01 p.m. and resumed at 11:15 p.m. APPLICATION NOS. 83010 and 83017 (Rod Bernu) Commissioner Ainas excused himself from consideration of these applications because of a possible conflict of interest. The Secretary then introduced Application Nos. 83010 and 83017, site and building plan and preliminary plat approval for 21 addi- tional townhouse units at the Earle Brown Farm Townhouses at York Place and 69th Avenue North. He reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheets for Application No. 83010 and 83017 attached). He also recommended that the Planning Commission consider some landscaping adjacent to some visitor parking stalls in order to prevent glare from the cars shining into the existing southerly units. Chairman Lucht then called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Rod Bernu stated that he agreed with the Secretary's recommendations regarding eliminating the tennis court and the additional landscaping. Commissioner Simmons recommended that Evergreens be used to shield the headlights of the guest parking stalls since they would do the best job in the winter time. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 83017) Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. M" . Al Seran, Attorney for the eight existing townhouse owners at the Earle Brown Farm Townhouses, stated that, since the last meeting, he has confirmed his theory regarding the disposition of replatting a plat of torrens property. He stated that he had checked this out with the Registrar of Titles at Hennepin County and that such a replat would have to be decided in District Court. Mr. Seran stated that the proposed layout is a rehash of earlier proposals and that the residents were still opposed. He noted that the units are not as large as those built in 1973. He also stated that there has been no showing by Mr. Sheehy that he could not build the original concept that was platted ten years ago. He asked who is the real property owner: Mr. Sheehy or Mr. Bernu. He stated that the existing owners wanted no more than 14 units to be built and that these units should be built along the lines of the original units. Chairman Lucht stated that the Planning Commission must look at the proposal based on City Ordinances and could not be concerned with the economic feasibility of one type of unit or another. Commissioner Simmons stated that the Planning Commission has done about as much as it can to reduce the number of units at the site. She stated that the plan has changed since the original proposal , putting fewer units into smaller blocks of units. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he sympathized with the existing homeowners as to their concern for quality. He concluded, however, that the Planning Commission is not in a position to recommend denial of the appli- cation if it meets ordinance standards. Commissioner Malecki stated that it would be nice if the original plan was built, but the Planning Commission could not require this. Commissioner Simmons stated that she still thought the plans were boring. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83017 (Rod Bernu) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Simmons to recommend approval of Application No. 83017, subject to the following conditions: 5-12-83 -12- 1. The final plat is subject to rdview and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The final plat shall be filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits.. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83010 (Rod Bernu) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Versteeg to recommend approval of Application No. 83010, subject to- the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect-to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Egnineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits- to assure completion of approved site improvements in the area of new construction. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 6.' B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 7. The building plans shall be certified by a registered Minnesota architect prior to the issuance of building permits. 8. The landscape plan shall be revised to provide landscape screening to the west of the guest parking stalls, north of the five unit building. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki , Simmons, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Ainas. The motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS (f1adsen Floral Townhouses) The Secretary then introduced Mr. Art Kvamme who wished to address the Commission regarding a density credit for up to 32 townhouse units at the Madsen Floral site at 55th and Aldrich Avenues North. Commissioner Simmons stepped down during con- sideration of this matter and acted as the President of the Bellvue Park Neighbor- hood Association. Mr. Art Kvamme then briefly addressed the Planning Commission. He explained that the total land area of this site was about 145,000 sq. ft. and that this worked out to 27.08 units at the normal permitted density. He explained that the developer wants to obtain a density credit for up to 32 units. He noted that the full credit 5-12-83 -13- would allow up to 33. 15 units. He stated that the units would sell between $65,000.00 and $70,000.00 and showed the Planning Commission the type of unit that would be built. Mr. Kvamme stated that Mr. Reynolds , the builder for his project, was also building townhouses on 77th Avenue North in Brooklyn Park that are over 1,350 sq. ft. He stated that the units are 22' x 44' and that they have double tuckunder garages. He stated that the units would be over 1,350 sq. ft. as required by an agreement with the Bellvue Park Neighborhood Association. Mary Simmons then addressed the Commission as President of the Bellvue Park Neighborhood Association. She pointed out that Mr. Kvamme had gotten the re- zoning of his property four years ago from R1 to R3, but had not yet built on it. She noted that the rezoning had taken place after Mr. Kvamme had entered into an agreement with the Bellvue Park Neighborhood Association. She read portions of the agreement with that Association. She pointed out that the neighbort are supposed to be notified whenever the townhouse development is before the Planning Commission. She pointed out that the. neighbors had not been notified of the con- sideration given to the development at this evening's meeting. She stated that Mr. Kvamme was not acting in accordance with this agreement. Ms. Simmons stated that the agreement calls for units that are 1,350 sq. ft. of living space, not counting garages and unfinished storage space. She also noted that the agreement calls for brick trim and brick or cedar siding and that it calls for the townhouses to be owner-occupied (that is , no one can own more than one unit). She related a conversation in which Mr. Kvamme had told her that he would buy two of the units and that was the reason he was concerned about the way they look. Ms. Simmons further recited other incidents between Mr. Kvamme and the City and between Mr. Kvamme and the Neighborhood Association. She stated that Mr. Kvamme had not shown the agreement to other builders and had generally not taken the agreement seriously. Mrs. Kvamme then addressed the Planning Commission. She pointed out that her husband had called a meeting with the neighbors last week at Harron Methodist Church. She stated that Ms. Simmons had basically run the meeting. She asserted that she and her husband had shown potential developers the agreement and asked how Ms. Simmons would know whether or. not the agreement had been shown to the developers. She stated that Ms. Simmons was the cause of the conflict. Ms. Simmons stated that the Secretary had informed her that prospective builders of the project had confessed no knowledge of the agreement in conversations with him. Ms. Simmons also stated that, after she had left the neighborhood meeting last week, other neighbors asked challenging questions and were threatened with cheap units if Mr. Kvamme did not get the density credit for 32 units. Mrs. Kvamme asserted that she and her husband were only getting one unit. She also stated that other people were invited to. this evening's meeting when they came to the neighborhood meeting and they are not present. She stated that they must not be opposed to the project. Chairman Lucht stated that the agreement between the Bellvue Park Neighborhood Association and the Kvammes was not up to the City to enforce. He stated that the purpose of the present consideration was to get a feel for whether the Planning Commission would approve a density credit. Mr. . Kvamme stated that he would live up to the agreement with the Neighborhood Association, but agreed that it was not up to the City to enforce the agreement. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he was reluctant to give an opinion on a density credit without comment from the neighbors. Mr. Ed Trombley, of 803-56th Avenue' North, pointed out that he would be living in the neighborhood and that he did not mind the development one bit. He stated that the other neighbors did not mind either. Ms. Simmons pointed out that Mr. Trombley had an interest in the development 5-12-83 -14- since he was one of the landowners who would sell land for .the development. Chair- man Lucht explained to Mr. Trombley that developers are not automatically entitled to density credits, but they are granted where the Planning Commission and City Council feel they are necessary and worthwhile. Commissioner Malecki stated that she did not see why Mr. Kvamme had any more right to the density credit than Mr. Bernu had. She stated that she would allow 28 units, but not 32. She also noted that density credits had been used in the past to make development more feasible, but not to just grant more units. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he was not in favor of the density credit per se. Commissioner Minas stated that he saw no problems with 32 units and that 32 units would be alright with him. Commissioner Versteeg stated that he favored the 28 units. Chairman Lucht stated that 28 units is probably what the Planning Commission prefers to see. He briefly explained the history of the Bernu application. He stated that Mr. Kvamme could go ahead and develop plans for 32 units , but that he would be taking a risk. He explained that Mr. Bernu had twice sought a density credit from the Planning Commission and was eventually turned down. Mr. Kvamme suggested that the City rewrite its ordinance so that the density credit would be automatic. He explained that he was .not aware of the density credit at first until the Secretary had informed him of that possibility in the ordinance. He stated that the additional units had. been added because of the purchase agree- ments with the other property owners in the development. Chairman Lucht explained that the credit has been used to make developments more feasible, but not for a whole additional building. Mr. Les Reynolds , the prospective builder of the project, stated that the ordinance says that the credit may be used to add additional units. He asked why the credit was being denied. The Secretary answered that the word "may" is a permissive word and does not mean a provision is automatically put into effect. He explained that the word "shall " is mandatory and would require that the density credit be given. He explained that in this case the ordinance uses the word "may" and not "shall ". That, he said, is why the Commission is free not to grant the density credit. The consensus of the Commission was to not grant density credits for 32 units in the proposed development. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission. adjourned at 12:23 4I.m. i" Ch an 5-12-83 -15-