My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/10/1996 P&Z Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Minutes
>
1996
>
01/10/1996 P&Z Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2014 10:56:55 AM
Creation date
7/16/2014 10:24:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Minutes
Meeting Date
01/10/1996
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br />PLANNING & ZONING BOARD <br />JANUARY 10, 1996 <br />on two levels. Due to security issues, the cells have to <br />be located on the side so as not to look at the rest of <br />the Juvenile Center. The size of the facility is <br />mandated by the State Correction Department and has been <br />reduced to the minimum allowed size. The property line <br />goes at an angle. The site is so restrictive that it <br />seems reasonable to allow a five foot variance. <br />Mr. Dunwell noted there is a considerable amount of open <br />space. He stated Anoka County does intend to actively <br />pursue the purchase of the necessary land but does not <br />feel the opening of the facility should be tied to <br />whether the County is successful or not. He reported <br />this project involves 11 other counties. The State of <br />Minnesota is helping to fund the project. The involved <br />counties worked together to determine the location that <br />would accommodate the largest at risk population. This <br />project was required to go through a pre- design admission <br />to justify the cost of the facility. The project saves <br />$1 million by locating here due to the road and gym being <br />in place. The funds for the project have now been <br />allocated. He stated he felt the five foot variance was <br />very necessary and should not affect the ability to go <br />ahead with this project. <br />• Mr. Mesich asked at what point the architect became aware <br />of the five foot setback problem. <br />Mr. Dunwell stated when the project was first initiated, <br />they were intending to request a zero lot line. Now the <br />project has been fully designed on CAD and the project is <br />able to attain a five foot setback. <br />Mr. Mesich asked if the building could be flipped the <br />other direction. <br />Mr. Dunwell noted it could not due to the location of the <br />front main entrance and the need to face the cells away <br />from the adult facility. <br />Mr. Gelbmann asked how many of the 36 beds would be <br />allocated to Anoka County. <br />Mr. Ceynowa stated 33 beds total have been allocated. <br />Five of the beds have been allocated to Anoka County and <br />three beds have not been firmly contracted by other <br />counties. <br />Mr. Gelbmann asked what the average stay of an inmate <br />would be in this facility. <br />• Mr. Ceynowa stated the facility had two purposes. One <br />was detention. This could require a two hour to a thirty <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.