07-21-1999 PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission July 21, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 8 there is enough room on Mounds View Drive to accommodate some extra vehicles. He stated that staff believes the parking concerns can be satisfactorily addressed. Ericson stated that another concern raised at the previous meeting was in regard to delivery vehicles, specifically semi tractor-trailers, and whether or not they would be able to perform a safe entry and exit from the site. He explained that as currently proposed, there is only one way in and one way out of the parking lot, and no room is available for a large truck to turn around. He stated that although such a vehicle might only be servicing the location once a week, the vehicle would have to back out onto County Road I, one of the busiest streets in the City, and this would pose a serious safety concern. Ericson stated that staff had instructed the applicant to initiate discussions with SuperAmerica to see if it would be possible to tie into their rear access onto Mounds View Drive. He stated that another, possibly preferable option was available, which would be to provide an access onto Mounds View Drive, eliminating any concerns or safety issues in regard to the trucks going in and out of the property. He stated that this could also provide access for emergency vehicles, which might need to enter and exit the facility. Ericson added that the issue of through-traffic could be addressed in the site plan review, with a requirement that the access be posted "no exit," "emergency exit," or "truck exit only." Ericson stated that with regard to access another issue is the median located between the east and west lanes of County Road I which extends just beyond the proposed entrance to the property. He stated that staff had suggested the applicant contact the Ramsey County Traffic Engineer to determine if it would be possible to move the median back. He stated it is not yet known whether the county would permit the median to be cut back to allow safe access, but that staff would require that some alteration be made to make access more convenient. He explained that it might be premature to begin inquiring into this matter, and that these issues could be addressed in the future with the site plan review. Ericson stated that the question of taxes was brought forward at the Commission meeting, pertaining to the differences in tax generation between the proposed use and an unspecified commercial use. He stated that, in speaking with Ramsey County Tax Department, staff learned that a use such as the proposed assisted living facility would be taxed at the same rate as any other commercial use, 2.4 percent up to the first$150,000 in valuation. From that point on, commercial uses are taxed at the rate of 3.4 percent. He stated that there is a provision in the tax code that allows for "elderly living facilities"to maintain the 2.4 percent rate at valuations after$150,000 as well, thus the proposed use ..� . : •_ .: • _. . _ •- - . . • . •. • . - . -• ,, - . • - u - m.y be taxed at a higher rate after the initial $150,000, it would not be unrealistic to assume that the proposed use would be"valued" significantly higher than a retail or commercial use. He added that it is not currently known what assessed valuation the County Assessor would establish for this use, and there are no known similar facilities with which to compare. He stated that, as best as staff can determine with the information available, the proposed facility would likely generate an equal or greater amount of taxes than many, but not all, commercial uses. Ericson stated that another issue discussed at the prior Planning Commission meeting was the proposed rezoning of the property, and concerns expressed regarding the potential re-uses of the property should the assisted living facility fail or be sold to another developer. He noted the • conditional use permit provides that the assisted living facility is the only type of use allowed. He stated that there are other types of"group housing," however, after closer review of the City Code,