08-18-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission June 16, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 6 • directors he had spoken with, all considered a staff of 14 to be somewhat light, depending upon the Alzheimer's factor and the degree of the care provided. Mr. Carroll stated he had determined some of his information regarding state licensing requirements from talking to the managers and executive directors of the facilities themselves. -le:stfed that there is a wide range of services offered by facilities that refer to themselves assistedsiving. He stated some facilities at the lower end of the assistance spectrum basically prose ` rtment in which to re;::...,m re abled and the live. He stated the other end of the spectrum involves peel��vho arsll 'iv�: is. s facilities provide all meals,housekeeping services, h sicalt`'"era on si.:e `":'=`w : ans ortat•. . counseling,and assistance with medications. He stated thee<facilitiesh ave staffing , at £l igher ratio. He stated that it would be useful to gain as much information infli....AqionAgitrossible, regarding cafe the proposed facility would provide, as this directly relates tri;:;..;„eing requirements Commissioner Berke stated this was his conclusion as wel '`H iliallat, in preparing his survey, he had attempted to eliminate the Detox Center type of faotl ties. F e employee to bed ratios were considerably higher,even for the lighter care,than::what,was originallyrt used by the applicant. dmiattVOW Commissioner Berke stated he had attempted to determine h u✓,many parking spaces the facilities actually had, and a large number of the faei>ties did:s o•' . '>a ded that some of those who indicated no problems with parking weree fared fa,`il ties at '`had access to overflow parking. Mr. Carroll stated that he also had difficulty identifying;< e parking;trough the institutions. He stated that 0 the site Commissioner Berke had co t cted waltinwas exampli4raexample continuous care, where the residents start out with independent living~”progress ` :assisted ,living and then nursing home care. He explained they provide theti ti range of `cs; `�:d share the same parking, which makes it difficult to.d Ale:nine the actual:v arking attributableto assisted living. He stated that he had found a facilityt ed arkin with a col1e a located across the street, and another with an adjacent grocerystore w' €`;:''.p..rkin `l 'they s ared. Commissioner :_. s :te hat the` "`<>o etermining the parking requirements was to determine the staff,as the.:: :.o 1i.„a > equire parking facilities, then adding an adequate percentage of visitors. Mr. Carroll ed the staffii �` t? ,a complicated analysis. He explained that the facilities had full- time d part-time emlWa different shifts, different staffing levels per shift, and outside co t l..,ti He stated that be used his determination upon the most people on site, during any shift. C.Vmissioner Berke staid' he had gained a general consensus of what most minimum health care �m� ct.:. ” isted living care! cilities require in regard to staffing, which is 17 support people, in addition the"-'>number of n ar e s or staff required per bed. Mr. Carroll inquired if this represented 17 people peri. .<;�:. :, r sinner Berke stated that these were categories,with a combination of people in each ca '�,t!, t` e tfie facilities. Mr. Carroll stated that he would not dispute that amount. He added that he ha• a so received some high staffing levels, until he began questioning what they were comprised of He stated some facilities indicated they had 40 employees, but actually had 6 or 7 on site at any given time. He stated, of the 40 employees, two-thirds might be full-time, one-third part-time, and of the full-time staff, not all are on site all of the time.. •