08-04-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MSP Assisted Living Proposal Planning Case 559-99 July 21, 1999 Page 4 • use, which might have 75 percent of its space open for display or sales, and the balance for storage. 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. Similarly, there are no new commercial uses in the area that would be appropriate to use as a commercial comparison in terms of tax generation. As best as staff can determine with the information it has, the proposed facility would be likely to generate an equal or greater amount of taxes than many, but not all, commercial uses. Rezoning: Some members of the community who were in attendance at the Planning Commissions's last meeting expressed concern over the potential re-uses of the property should the assisted living facility fail or be sold to another developer. The permitted uses in an R-4 district are multiple family residential, townhomes, boarding home or day care home (both of which are restricted to a family dwelling). Nursing homes and similar group housing is permitted conditionally within this district. Because of the configuration of the building and the rooms, none of which would have private kitchens, utilities, or entrances; this building could not be reused for multiple family housing--not only would it not meet housing and building code requirements, the lot could not accommodate the required parking of 2.5 stalls per unit. From a practical standpoint, this building could only be reused for what is being proposed--assisted living. If a developer at some point in the future intended to raze the structure and start from scratch, this would be allowed yet would probably not be economical feasible given the expected value of the facility. But even if this were a • realistic consideration, the re-uses without a CUP would be limited to multi family housing. Because of the size of the lot and the parking requirements, probably no more than 12 units could be built. The other possible use that was of some concern was"group housing," which is allowed only if the use is in a family dwelling and be limited to no more than 12 children. The Code in Section 1109.04, Subd 2 is somewhat unclear in its definition of what would be considered a similar group housing use. Because the subdivision heading is.Nursing Homes, staff would contend that similar types of group housing would pertain only to elderly group housing. But because this '- - e - e ' • ' 6, - e• : cam me_a tha`if it is the Commission's desire to limit the type of group he - -ing~to tl—ie elderly;....ti at the code should be amended to reflect that. The amendment would •e simple, changing the first'line of Subdivision 1109.04 (2)to read, "Nursing homes and 'ether elderly congregate housi ...." This would effectively eliminate any possible reuse of the 'rope to anything of an a multi-family structure of a limited size. Recommendation: Staff is recommending that the Commission discuss this request in the context of whether or not it would be an appropriate use for this location given the information that has been presented and direct staff to prepare a resolution for action at your next meeting on August 4, 1999. tt/Yv+.,k James Ericson, Planning Associate • , N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV6EVCASES1559-99\MSP.PC2