HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-06-2008
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
August 6, 2008 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
A. July 9, 2008
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not Already on
the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes.)
5. Planning Cases
A. DE2008-001, MA2008-002, ZC2008-001, CU2008-001, VR2008-005
Consideration of a Development Review, Major Subdivision, Rezoning, Conditional
Use Permit and Variances for a Senior Housing Development
Applicant: Select Senior Living
Address: 12415 – 55th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Review proposed code amendments pertaining to senior housing
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. August 20, 2008
B. September 3, 2008
8. Adjourn to Agenda Session
Agenda Session
1. Review Minutes:
a. July 23, 2008
2. Staff Reports
a. Upcoming Planning Cases
3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners’ Reports
4. Meeting Conclusion
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
July 23, 2008
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
______________________________________________________________________________
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. July 23, 2008.
______________________________________________________________________________
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Chair Stevenson; Commissioners, Cramblit, Lang, Meehlhause, Miller,
and Walsh-Kaczmarek
Absent and Excused: Commissioner Gunn
Also Present: Community Development Director Roberts and Planning Associate Heller
______________________________________________________________________________
Index to Minutes Page
MI2008-001 Consideration of a Minor Subdivision at 5056 Greenwood
and the adjoining lots to the south 2
Review proposed code amendments pertaining to senior housing 2
_____________________________________________________________________________
3. Approval of Minutes
June 18, 2008.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Meehlhause. To approve the
Minutes of the June 18, 2008 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Mounds View Planning Commission July 23, 2008
Regular Meeting Page 2
________________________________________________________________________
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
______________________________________________________________________________
5. Planning Cases
A. MI2008-001 Consideration of a Minor Subdivision at 5056 Greenwood and
the two adjoining lots to the south, Steve Ordahl – Ordahl Family Trust
Planning Associate Heller reported the applicant, Ordahl Family Trust, represented by Steve
Ordahl, has requested consideration of a minor subdivision at 5056 Greenwood and the two adjoining
lots to the south. She explained the applicant recently sold the property at 5056 Greenwood with the
promise that they would move the lot line to give the property an additional 20 feet on the south side.
This would allow the buyer to add an additional garage stall. In addition to moving the south lot line
for 5056 Greenwood, the applicant will combine the other two lots into one and sell this vacant lot.
She stated that both amended properties would meet the minimum lot size and dimension
requirements. She stated that letters were sent to neighboring properties, and staff received one call
regarding the issue. She stated there have been some amendments to the resolution that was included
in the staff report. One was removing the park dedication fees. Staff thought the 5% fee amount was
excessive so staff will leave the amount up to the city council to determine. The other amendment
was to condition number one. This has been removed because the applicant has met this condition.
Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek questioned the property at 5056 Greenwood being under the
minimum lot size requirements.
Planning Commissioner Heller confirmed that this property is currently under the minimum lot size
requirement, but with the additional twenty feet it would come into compliance.
Chair Stevenson suggested adding to the second whereas after “adjoining lots,” the dimension of
a 95 foot lot.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Meehlhause/Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek. To
approve Resolution 889-08, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision (lot
line adjustments) between 5056 Greenwood Drive and the Two Adjoining Lots to the South,
Requested by the Ordahl Family Trust as amended; Planning Case No MI2008-001.
Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
______________________________________________________________________________
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Review proposed code amendments pertaining to senior housing
Mounds View Planning Commission July 23, 2008
Regular Meeting Page 3
________________________________________________________________________
Planning Associate Heller presented the PUD zoning code amendment that was discussed at the
July 9th Planning Commission meeting. She asked if the Commissioners had any additional
changes.
Commissioner Meehlhause questioned the second whereas, number 6 regarding the age of 55
years and wondered if it was possible for someone under the age of 55 to live at this complex.
Chair Stevenson indicated this was a good point because with assisted living or memory care
there could be situations with individuals under the age of 55.
Planning Associate Heller stated that these types of developments have an age limit themselves
but we could add language such as the “majority of persons who are 55 and older.”
Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek questioned the age for independent living.
Chair Stevenson suggested the primary focus could be for keeping independent living to age 55
and over, and leaving assisted living and memory care open to under the age of 55.
Planning Associate Heller stated the majority of persons actually
living in this type of housing were 55 years or older.
Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek questioned if assisted living or memory care housing would
apply to the Metropolitan Councils’ request for city’s to increase their senior housing.
Planning Associate Heller stated the Met Council does not distinguish between the different
types of senior housing, and that this new development would satisfy the senior housing
requirement.
Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek wondered if increasing the age of 55 for independent living
and the majority of residents in assisted living and memory care would meet the goals.
Community Development Director Roberts stated this would make it worse because you are
limiting the number of units that could count towards the senior housing goals.
Chair Stevenson stated these types of requirements are too complicated for a code amendment.
He stated the amendment doesn’t need to address memory care and assisted living age limits, it
should only address senior housing, which is the age of 55 and up.
Director Roberts stated there are other facilities and services available for individuals who are
under age 55 and need assistance rather than this type of housing, so he believed the amendment
would have trouble with under age 55 due to the state definition for seniors.
Planning Associate Heller suggested amending number six to read “permanent residents residing
in independent living designated units shall be limited to persons who are 55 years of age and
up.”
Mounds View Planning Commission July 23, 2008
Regular Meeting Page 4
________________________________________________________________________
Chair Stevenson stated number five on the resolution should be clarified. He recited the
proposed amendment.
Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek stated this is establishing a city code not just for one
development.
Commissioner Meehlhause suggested having number 5 read as follows:
(5) The parking recommendations are as follows, unless the City Council determines
more or less parking stalls would serve a better purpose:
A) Parking spaces require for independent living = 1 space per unit with half the
spaces enclosed;
B) Parking for assisted living = 0.5 spaces per unit
C) Parking for nursing homes/memory care = 1 space for every 4 beds
D) Parking for assisted living/memory care facility staff = 1 space for every
employee working on the largest shift.
Commissioner Lang questioned the rear yard restrictions being the same as the R-4 district when
last meeting we talked about the R-4 district being doubled.
Planning Associate Heller stated the development would fall under the new PUD ordinance
unless it is less than two acres where then it must be rezoned to R-4. The double side yard
setback is specific to R-4 zoning and senior housing and wouldn’t apply if the applicant were
using a PUD zoning.
Commissioner Lang stated in the heading it states Senior Housing and R-4 so we are sending
applicants to R-4 Senior Housing.
Planning Associate Heller indicated applicants would not be looking in the R-4 zoning section.
Chair Stevenson suggested incorporating the setback requirements into the PUD section.
Planning Associate Heller stated she would make the amendments to the code and bring it back
to the Planning Commission at the next meeting.
Commissioner Meehlhause asked if this would delay the proposed project.
Planning Associate Heller stated the applicant has already made application and didn’t want to
wait for this code amendment to take effect since it would delay them by at least a month. Their
goal is to break ground yet this year if they can get city approval in time.
___________________________________________________________________________
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
Mounds View Planning Commission July 23, 2008
Regular Meeting Page 5
________________________________________________________________________
A. August 6, 2008
B. August 20, 2008
______________________________________________________________________________
8. Adjournment to Agenda Session
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:42 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________________
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
Ken Roberts
Community Development Director
Transcribed by:
Barbara Suciu
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
Item No:5A
Meeting Date: August 6, 2008
Type of Business: Action
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Review and Consideration of a Rezoning, Development Review,
Major Subdivision, Conditional Use Permit and Variances for the
proposed “Select Senior Living” Senior Housing Development;
Planning Cases DE2008-005, MA2008-003, ZC2008-001,
CU2008-001, VR2008-005
Introduction:
Select Senior Living, represented by Joel Larson, has submitted a planning application for a 96-
unit senior housing development on three lots at the northwest corner of County Highway 10 and
Groveland Road. The building would have 32 independent living units, 19 memory care units and
45 assisted living units. The developer/applicant has purchase agreements to buy the properties.
This proposal involves five planning actions including:
1. Rezone three properties from R-1 Single Family and R-O Residential/Office to R-4 High
Density Residential
2. Major Subdivision to combine three lots into one parcel (Preliminary Plat and Final Plat)
3. Conditional Use Permit to allow senior congregate living in an R-4 zoning district
4. Variances for higher density, smaller unit sizes, reduced parking requirements and a roof
overhang setback encroachment and reduced building setback.
5. Development Review of the overall site plan
Background:
The project area is made up of three parcels that equal about 2.38 acres with street frontage and
access both onto County Highway 10 and Groveland Road. The area is mostly single family
residential homes, although the properties adjacent to the west and north are currently vacant and
Steve’s Appliance is across Groveland Road to the east.
REZONING DISCUSSION:
The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the properties located at 2865 County Highway 10 and
7980 and 8020 Groveland Road to R-4, High Density Residential, to allow for a 96 unit senior
housing development. The development site is presently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
and R-O, Residential/Office. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map indicates that this
site is within a mixed use planned unit development area. Such a designation is intended to allow
for some flexibility in redevelopment however with an anticipation that there be a component of
both housing and commercial on the site and be master planned for a comprehensive, integrated
development looking beyond the project boundaries. Since this proposal would not be on a three-
acre site, the applicant could not use the PUD designation.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 2
The city rezones properties by ordinance. This means that the City Council will need to have two
readings of the ordinance to approve the zoning change. After Council approval, the ordinance
goes into effect 30 days after the City publishes the ordinance in the newspaper.
Presently:
The development site has an area of 2.38 acres, is located on County Road 10 and Groveland
Road and currently has mixed zoning designations. The property at 2865 County Highway 10 is
zoned R-O, Residential/Office and is currently being used as a single family home. 7980 and 8020
Groveland Road are both currently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential with a house on each lot.
Select Senior Living is requesting a rezoning of the identified parcels to an R-4, High Density
Residential designation. The R-4 zoning designation would permit Single family dwellings,
twinhomes and townhomes up to 8 units. Senior congregate housing, schools, churches, day care
centers and other multiple family developments require City Council approval of a conditional use
permit (CUP) in an R-4 district.
Rezoning Criteria:
Chapter 1125 of the Mounds View Zoning Code addresses rezoning requests. The procedure and
conditions of approval are the same as for conditional use permits, which means the Planning
Commission is to consider possible and potential adverse effects of the requested rezoning. The
Planning Commission shall make a finding of fact and make a recommendation to the City Council
based upon the review of potential adverse effects and the findings of fact.
Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan
According to the Comprehensive Plan, the city has designated the site as a mixed-use planned
unit development. This is defined as land containing a building or buildings with significant
amounts of residential uses in combination with commercial and/or office uses. Sites with this
designation could be developed as planned unit developments (PUDs) to allow flexibility, but not all
development areas will meet the minimum size criteria. As I noted above, this is the case with this
proposal. One of the key components of the Comprehensive Plan, the Housing Element, is geared
toward maintaining and improving the quality and diversity of the existing housing stock and
providing infill housing opportunities where both possible and practical. The proposed rezoning
would help promote a greater diversity of housing choices in the city, as it would help allow the
applicant’s requested senior housing development proposal.
Geographical Area
The subject area proposed for redevelopment currently consists of three single family homes, (one
formerly also operated a trailer hitch business on the property). Adjacent to the west and north are
two vacant parcels zoned B-3 and R-1, which are also expected to be redeveloped. The properties
to the northeast of the subject parcels are zoned R-1, single family residential, and are developed
as such. Properties on County Highway 10 tend to be developed to a greater intensity, whether
commercial or residential, than in other parts of the city. Directly east of the project area across
Groveland Road is Steve’s Appliance, zoned B-3, and south of the project area across County
Highway 10 are two townhome developments.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 3
Depreciation
The question of depreciation is a difficult one to answer with any quantifiable certainty. Most
studies that examine property value impacts of development generally find little correlation
between a well designed and constructed project and subsequent property values. While property
values may not depreciate as a result of the development, one can argue that quality of life for the
existing residents that would be adjacent to the project could be negatively impacted. From the
perspective of tax base and market values, the rezoning would promote a substantial increase in
market value at the site, increasing from the present approximate valuation of $321,000 to an
estimated $12,000,000.
Demonstrated Need for Such a Use
The applicant desires to rezone the property to allow for senior housing. This type of housing is
under-represented in the City’s housing demographic, and is becoming in high demand state-wide.
The primary housing option now in the City is single family detached with higher-density rental
housing and manufactured homes second and third respectively. There are currently three senior
housing buildings in Mounds View, but none offer assisted living or memory care units.
The requested rezoning to R-4, high density residential, would not be out of character for the
County Road 10 corridor and would not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The city
has anticipated a mix of housing and commercial / office development in this area. The proposed
development that would be permitted via the requested rezoning would increase the market value
of the subject area from $321,000 to over $12,000,000. While enhanced market value is desirable,
the Commission needs to determine if the potential density allowed by the proposed change would
be too intensive for the subject area. It is the belief of the applicant that this type of housing is in
demand and that it would be a positive addition to the City’s housing stock.
MAJOR SUBDIVISON DISCUSSION (Preliminary Plat Review):
Select Senior Living has submitted an application for a major subdivision of three parcels on the
northwest corner of County Highway 10 and Groveland Road. The proposed 2.38 acre subdivision
would replat the three lots into one parcel.
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the block on the north side of County
Road 10, between Spring Lake Road and Groveland Road as Mixed Use Planned Unit
Development, intending for a combination of housing and commercial uses.
Park Dedication Requirements:
The Subdivision Code indicates that any subdivision of land is subject to a park dedication fee. The
dedication imposed is intended to mitigate public costs to the parks system associated with land
development. The fee shall be reasonable and based on the extent of the development. Due to the
increased intensity of the new development by adding 96 new residential units (although the actual
increase in park usage by these residents would more than likely be minimal), the recommended fee
amount would be equal to 10% of the market value of the land. To establish the market value, staff
uses Ramsey County determined land values as the basis for dedication computation.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 4
The development area comprises 110,206 square feet (2.38 acres) with an average per square foot
value of $2.92, making the 2008 total land value $321,500. A 10% dedication amount would then be
$32,150. The City Council will make the final determination on the fee amounts. Section 1204.02,
Subd. 6 of the Mounds View City Code allows the applicant the right to appeal the dedication fee.
Easements:
The standard city required easements along the property lines are included on the site plans and
will be dedicated by plat.
Major Subdivision Summary:
The preliminary plat and title commitments are going through a legal review by the City Attorney.
The park dedication fees and trail contribution amount will be required before the City signs the
final plat for recording with Ramsey County. This major subdivision request meets City Code
requirements.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DISCUSSION:
A CUP is required in order for a nursing home or other senior congregate housing to be allowed in
an R-4 zoning district. Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code requires that the Planning Commission
review and address any potential adverse effects of such a request including, but not limited to,
relationship with the Comprehensive Plan, geographical area involved, the character of the
surrounding area, potential depreciation, and the demonstrated need for such a use. Each of
these potential adverse effects is listed below.
Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the block on the north side of County
Road 10, between Spring Lake Road and Groveland Road as Mixed Use Planned Unit
Development, intending for a combination of housing and commercial uses. The proposed
development would be consistent with that designation and also with the residential goals and
policies as articulated in the Land Use element of the Comprehensive Plan.
The Geographical Area Involved
The project area is located on County Road 10, the City’s primary commercial corridor. Within two
blocks of the site, one can find a variety of commercial and residential uses. The residential uses
include single family residential, owner-occupied townhomes and multi-family rental dwellings.
There are three adjacent lots to the north and west of the site that are also anticipated to be
redeveloped.
Character of the Surrounding Area
The project area is located on County Road 10, the City’s primary commercial corridor. Within
two blocks of the site, one can find a variety of commercial and residential uses. The residential
uses include single family residential, owner-occupied townhomes and multi-family rental
dwellings. There are three adjacent lots to the site that are also anticipated to be redeveloped.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 5
Depreciation
This new development would substantially increase the value of the subject property. The
question of depreciation will be more about the quality of life for the existing residents that would
be adjacent to the project.
The Demonstrated Need for Such a Use
The applicant feels this type of housing is in demand in Mounds View and would be a positive
addition to the City’s housing stock.
VARIANCE DISCUSSION:
The applicant is requesting four variances for this project; increased site density, reduced minimum
unit size, reduced parking, and to allow an additional 2 foot encroachment of the roof overhang
and a 4-6 foot structure encroachment into the building setback.
Needing to apply for multiple variances for any project is not desirable. Staff would prefer to have
this type of development be zoned as a planned unit development to allow the flexibility needed to
accommodate the proposal. The current city code does not address many of the characteristics
unique to senior housing, and thus the developer needed to apply for four variances.
Increased Site Density – the city code requires an R-4 zoned site to have 2,500 square feet for
each housing unit. This requirement would allow the 2.38-acre project site to have 44 units,
whereas the applicant is proposing 96 units. This senior housing development is not typical multi-
family housing. Many of the units are much smaller than regular apartments because most of the
assisted living and memory care residents live alone and do not need full kitchen facilities or a
large amount of living space. Having smaller apartments allows more units in the same sized
building.
Reduced minimum unit size – the city code requires a one bedroom unit to have a minimum of
630 square feet and a two bedroom unit to have 750 square feet. As proposed, 17 of the 19
memory care units are under the minimum square footage size, as would be 37 of the 45 assisted
living units and 2 of the 32 independent living units. As stated above, most of the assisted living
and memory care residents do not need the amount of space in a living unit that a family or typical
tenant would need. The idea behind these senior housing buildings is for the residents to
congregate together and not stay in their apartments. Meals are provided in a separate dining
room eliminating the need for much kitchen area in the individual units, and community activity
spaces are provided for the residents to come out of their units and socialize together, or to use if
they have guests visiting.
Reduced Parking - Parking requirements are addressed in Section 1121.13 of the Zoning Code.
The Code requires that multiple-family dwellings (the independent living) provide one and one half
uncovered parking spaces and one covered space per unit; and the assisted living and memory
care dwellings must provide one space for every three beds, plus one stall for every staff member
on the largest shift. This proposal has a total of 85 units. The applicant is requesting to be allowed
to provide a reduced total number of parking spaces. The table below shows the proposed
number of parking stalls, as well as the code requirements.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 6
Code Requirement Proposed Parking
Covered Parking 32 47
Uncovered Parking 80 38
Total 112 85
The proposed parking would provide 27 fewer spaces than the total number required, however it
would provide 15 spaces more than the requirement for covered parking.
The applicant states that the required amount of parking is unnecessary for their type of housing
since many of the residents do not have vehicles. Select Senior Living owns other senior housing
facilities in the area and told staff that from their experience, much of the parking that is built is not
used.
2 Foot Roof Overhang Encroachment and 4-6 foot Reduced Building Setback – the city code
allows up to a two foot encroachment into the setback for things like bay windows, fire escapes,
front stoop and roof overhangs. Due to the residential hipped roof design on the proposal, in order
for the scale of the roof lines to be in line with the size of the building, the roof overhang on the
east and west sides of the north wing of the building would encroach an additional two feet into the
required building setback. The overhang will be on all sides of the building, but it will only go
beyond the setbacks on these two sides. A 40 foot section of the building on the west side of the
north wing also encroaches four and six feet into the building setback.
Variance Considerations:
For the city to approve a variance, the applicant must demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty
associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or
restrictive. Minnesota statutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission, in this
case) review a set of specified criteria for each application and make its decision in accordance
with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code.
The Code states that a hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The criteria are as follows:
a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally
to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or
other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have
had no control.
The exceptional circumstances for this proposal are the unique lot size and shape and the
type of housing. The city code does not clearly accommodate the proposed housing. The
city recognizes these issues and is proposing additions to the code that will deal with density,
unit size and parking requirements for these types of senior housing developments. Had the
city code addressed these issues, the applicant would not have needed to apply for as many
variances.
The additional two foot overhang encroachment is unique in that most buildings of this size
are not designed with hipped roofs and overhangs. The applicant wants the building to have
a residential look, having the four foot overhang fits the scale of the building and helps give
the building the characteristics to better fit into a residential neighborhood.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 7
The small section of the building that is encroaching into the side yard setback is where a
stairwell and a corner unit are located within the building. The city code requires that senior
housing in an R-4 district have a 40 foot side yard setback versus all other R-4 multiple family
housing is only required to have a 20 foot side yard setback. The encroachment is four feet
and six feet, which still gives this section of the building 36 and 34 foot setbacks.
b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights
commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title.
The literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would not necessarily deprive
the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone. Denying the requests for
increased density, reduced unit sizes and reduced parking, however would limit their ability to
proceed with this project.
Granting the variance to allow the additional two feet of roof overhang would not confer upon
the applicant a special privilege in that other property owners are able to apply for a variance
in order to improve the function or appearance of their property.
c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.
This type of senior housing is new to Mounds View, but is the commonly built type in the area.
The city has not yet addressed in the city code some of the unique characteristics of assisted
living and memory care housing. The applicant and the city would have preferred this project
to be zoned PUD, but per city code, more land is required in order to use this designation.
Most of the lots in Mounds View are small and the applicant would need to buy one or more
lots (that are not for sale) in order to have at least 3 acres needed for a PUD.
d. That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is
denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district.
Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a special privilege in that every
property owner has the right to apply for a variance to improve the function and viability of their
development proposal.
e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship.
Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship.
The applicant believes this is the minimum variance to alleviate the hardships, as it allows for a
well designed project with new housing options for Mounds View residents, and fits the
architectural characteristics of a residential neighborhood.
f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property
in the same zone.
Granting these four variances would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of the Code,
especially since the city is in the process of amending the code to address most of the issues
requiring variances.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 8
g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or
substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger
the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
The requested variances would not result in any of the above-cited adverse effects.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DISCUSSION:
Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View City Code requires that any new development project larger
than one or two family dwelling units must obtain approval of a development review. The purpose
of a development review is to allow the Planning Commission to evaluate proposed development in
terms of its consistency with City Codes and other requirements and to ascertain and mitigate any
potential impacts to the adjoining properties and the community as a whole. The Planning
Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council, which then acts upon the request.
Parking:
The parking requirements for this project are twofold: the independent living units will follow the
multiple-family requirement of 2 ½ stalls per unit, with 1 stall being covered parking; and the
assisted living and memory care units will require 1 stall for every 3 beds, plus 1 staff for every
staff member on the largest shift. The applicant has applied for a variance to allow for 27 less
parking spaces than the codes requires. The applicant is confident that the proposed parking is an
amount that they feel is more than adequate for the needs of their residents, staff and visitors.
Setbacks:
The proposed development meets the required building setbacks of 30 feet for the front yard, 40
feet for side yards, and 50 feet for the rear. All parking areas meet the required five foot setbacks.
A variance was applied for to allow a two foot roof overhang encroachment into the setback.
Access and fire prevention:
There is access in and out of the development both onto County Highway 10 and Groveland Road,
although the primary access will be onto County Highway 10. There are no public or private roads
in this development. The rear parking area has an extension from the parking towards the building
in order to meet fire access requirements. This 20 foot access drive width is acceptable to the Fire
Marshall, and there is one existing fire hydrant located on the site. Sprinkler systems are required
for the entire building per state code.
Building Design and Materials:
The plans indicate that the building will be three-story with an underground garage. The building
elevations show a mix of siding styles with stone and/or brick accents on the exterior of the
buildings. The main front entrance which faces County Highway 10 has a circular drive and a
dramatic design with curving stone turrets on either side of the front door. The applicant noted the
Planning Commission’s comments about the look of the building and took care to design the
building with a strong residential feel. It features design elements such as balconies and varying
roof lines that break up the large building so it would appear so imposing.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 9
Snow Storage:
All snow plowed during the winter must either be removed or stored onsite, and in such a way as
to not effect adjoining property owners. If the plowed snow reduces parking on the site, or detracts
from the general appearance of the site, the property owner will be responsible for off-site snow
removal.
Landscaping Plan:
This site has quite a bit of tree coverage, but the majority of the area will be cleared for grading
and construction. The applicant plans to save several larger trees along Groveland Road and in
the northwest corner. The proposed plan includes vegetation around the entire site, and walking
trails, along with a six-foot wood fence along the three northeast sides in order to offer some
additional screening for the three neighboring homes. The entire site will be sodded and
landscaped after construction is completed. The city will require that an irrigation system be
installed. The Forester is currently reviewing the landscape plan.
Signage:
According to Chapter 1008 of the City Code, this development is permitted a maximum 32 square
feet of ground monument signage (excluding the sign base) plus an additional 64 square feet of
building mounted signage. Staff will review all signage permits to ensure consistency with the City
Code relating to signage.
Lighting:
The lighting plan submitted meets the city code requirements regarding glare, light spillage and
foot-candle readings.
Local Water Management Plan:
This planning document guides the City in regards to drainage and storm water management. The
development area is located in two watersheds; AA-5 and SL-1 (primarily). The minimum
recommended building elevation for the AA-5 sub-watershed is 904.0 feet, while the SL-1 sub-
watershed does not have a recommended building elevation. The basement/underground garage
floor elevation will be at 906.4, well above the minimum. Public Works and the city’s engineering
consultant, Bonestroo, are currently reviewing the plans.
Stormwater Drainage Plan:
The grading plan illustrates the proposed grading, drainage and erosion control for the
development. The parking areas will have curb and gutter, and the developer is opting to use
underground stormwater storage rather than adding ponds. This will allow more of the existing
trees to be saved. All of the runoff generated from the development will be contained within the
site. The applicant will be responsible for receiving approval from RCWD for this development.
Wetlands:
There are no wetlands for this development area.
Utilities:
All utilities on the site would need to be installed underground, per Section 1203.10. Water and
sanitary sewer lines are already present in the right of way. The plans show the storm sewer piping
that would be constructed on the site, along with one existing fire hydrant. The utilities would be
installed and paid for by the developer.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 10
Trails:
For all new development along County Road 10, the City requires the property owner/developer to
contribute funds for the future trail system. This development area has 402 feet of County Road
10 frontage with a contribution amount for the future trail to be determined.
Development Review Summary:
With the zoning change, the proposed high density residential use on these parcels would be
consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and would bring new development and tax base to the
site. The traffic impact to the area should not be overly excessive even with the high number of
residential units since many of the residents do not drive. The majority of the new additional traffic
will only be onto County Highway 10. The city will need to execute a development agreement with
the applicant to ensure all of the specific requirements and conditions of development are satisfied
and adhered to.
PLANNING REQUEST SUMMARY
Public Notice:
The Planning Commission meeting is not a published public hearing, but staff did send a letter
about the project with site plans and information about the August 6th meeting to all property
owners within 350 feet of the property.
Deadline for Action:
This application was accepted on July 17, 2008 and in accordance with MN Statute 15.99, a
decision shall be made within 60 days of application acceptance. The deadline for action for this
request is September 15, 2008 unless the city exercises its option to extend the timeline for
another 60 days.
Recommendation:
Staff has prepared three resolutions due to the amount of actions that are being requested. After
taking testimony from staff and the applicant, and any public comments, the Commission may take
the following actions related to the request:
1. Approve the two resolutions for Rezoning, Variances, and CUP, Preliminary Plat, and
Development Review as requested. Resolutions 891-08 (Rezoning), and 893-08 (CUP,
Preliminary Plat and Development Review) are attached for action if the Commission so
chooses. Any of these resolutions may be amended. The variance resolution is included in
this report, but will have to wait until the August 20th meeting for action since a public hearing
notice was not published in the newspaper in time for tonight’s meeting.
2. Deny any of the requested actions for rezoning, preliminary plat, conditional use permit,
variances and development review. The Commission should direct staff to draft a resolution
of denial with findings appropriate to support the denial.
3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered or if
more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move to table the request until such
information has been provided.
Select Senior Living Staff Report
August 6, 2008
Page 11
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map
4. Narrative from the applicant
5. Preliminary Plat
6. Site Plans
7. Resolutions
a. 891-08 Rezoning
b. 892-08 Variances
c. 893-08 CUP, Preliminary Plat and Development Review
Zoning Map
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
Aerial View
Comp Plan Future Land Use Map
Project area is designated as “Mixed Use PUD”
Narrative from applicant
SELECT SENIOR LIVING 7/18/2008
Mounds View, Minnesota
Select Senior Living in Mounds View is a three story 96 unit senior living campus with
independent living units, assisted living units, and memory care units. The residents will be senior citizens
age 55 years and older with an average age of 82 years old whom will enjoy scheduled daily activities, and
scheduled bus service to local shopping, attractions, and activities.
The building consists of 32 independent living units, 19 memory care units, 45 assisted living units,
a parking garage located beneath the building, two elevators, central trash chute, and many amenities.
Visible from Highway 10, the building’s inviting grand entrance porch and circle drive drop-off are
designed to draw residents and guests into the building with its’ comfortable apartments and many
amenities. The porch’s brilliant colonnade is flanked by two curving architectural forms that welcome the
residences and guests entrance into the grand two story lobby. The building’s architecture with its hipped
roofs, and exterior finish materials, such as brick veneer, lap siding, trim, dramatic overhangs, balconies,
and bay windows sharpens the building’s residential flare in respect to the surrounding neighborhood and
community.
The 2.38 acre site offers two parking areas, large green areas with new landscaping and many
existing mature trees, and paved walking trails. There are a total of 85 parking spaces provided, which
consists of 38 open spaces on the surface and 47 spaces in the heated garage. In an effort to preserve
as many of the mature trees as possible, an underground storage/treatment facility for rate and volume
control of storm water is proposed. The underground system will allow more of the existing mature
trees to be saved which would otherwise need to be removed to accommodate required areas for
ponding. The soils on the site are classified as well draining silty sands, which have good infiltration
rates and the ability for the designed system to exceed the standards of the watershed. The additional
cost of the underground system is offset by the preservation of the mature tress, which in turn requires
less to be spent on new landscaping.
The shared amenities are located in the central core area, which is located in the middle of the
building between the independent living units and the memory care/assisted living units. On the main
floor, residents and guests are greeted by a luxurious two-story lobby, a stone fireplace, a grand stair
case, an intimate café, and sitting areas with the comfortable cozy atmosphere of a living room. The
mail room, management office, nurses’ office, and public restrooms are centrally located off of the
lobby as are the central dining room and kitchen. Other shared amenities include an activity room with
a small kitchen area and a public restroom, a media center, the activity director’s office, overnight
guest rooms, and a craft room on the second floor; and a sports pub on the third floor. In addition to
the heated parking, the parking level features a fitness center, an employee break room, and support
spaces for the building.
The two wings offer different levels of care for the residents. The 19 memory care apartments
are located on the secured main floor of the north wing, and have their own private living/dining area
and kitchenette as well as a private bathing room, a community laundry and a private fenced yard.
There are 13 studio and 6 one bedroom apartments within the secure memory care portion of the
Narrative from applicant – Page 2
building. The second and third floors in the north wing contain 27 studio and 18 one bedroom assisted
living apartments. Each floor of the assisted living area is also provided with a private bathing room
and a laundry room. The south wing contains 1 studio, 19 one bedroom, 6 one bedroom with den, and
6 two bedroom independent living apartments. In addition to the shared laundry rooms provided on
each floor of the independent living wing, each unit will have its’ own laundry.
To construct the project as it has been designed, four variances are required.
First, a variance for the number of units (density) on the site is requested. The slightly smaller
apartments, the number of studio units, the reduced overall number of parking spaces, and the number
of parking spaces in the garage permits more units to be built on the site, and when there are more
units, it more cost effective to provide more amenities.
Second, a variance for a reduction in the number of parking spaces required is requested. The
design provides 85 parking spaces broken down as follows: 38 surface parking spaces and 47 garage
parking spaces. This number of parking spaces required was calculated by allowing one space for each
of the independent living residents for a total of 33 spaces, one space for every two assisted living
residents for a total of 22 spaces, no parking spaces for the memory care residents, 15 spaces for
employees, and 15 spaces for guests. The number of parking spaces provided was determined based
on the number of spaces provided at existing facilities, where parking areas are lightly used. A large
number of seniors in these buildings do not or cannot drive; therefore the number of parking spaces
required by the ordinance is unnecessary. In addition, the reduced number of parking spaces allows
for more open green space, which is superior to large parking areas which go unused.
Third, a variance for the minimum size of some of the units is requested. There are one
bedroom units, which are slightly smaller in the assisted living and memory care wing of the building.
The units are smaller because the residents are down sizing as they move into a building with many
amenities, social activities, and central dining with meals and snacks provided. Other conveniences
include house keeping services, an open kitchen and drink fountain, a weekly change of bedding, and
laundry services.
Fourth, for a portion of the buildings, a variance for a four foot encroachment of the roof
overhang into the building setback, which is two feet more than what is allowed by the ordinance is
requested. The overhang has been designed to be four feet, which enhances the aesthetic quality of the
architecture, and offers a more linear and grand feel to the design.
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 891-08
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REZONING REQUEST TO
R-4, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AT 2865 COUNTY HIGHWAY 10 AND 7980 & 8020
GROVELAND ROAD; PLANNING CASE ZC2008-001
WHEREAS, the applicant, Select Senior Living, has applied for a rezoning request for the
properties at 2865 County Highway 10 from R-O and 7980 & 8020 Groveland Road from R-1 to
R-4, High Density residential to construct a 96 unit senior housing building. The properties are
legally described as:
Lot 49, Auditor’s Subdivision Number 89, Subject to a 5 foot strip easement along the rear line
for public utility use, Ramsey County , Minnesota (PIN 06-30-23-31-0030)
And,
That part of Lot 48, Auditors Subdivision Number 89 lying South of the North 300
feet front and rear thereof, except that portion taken for the highway right of way
purposes. Subject to restrictions contained in Document Number 238161,
Ramsey County, Minnesota (PIN 06-30-23-31-0029)
And,
The South 150 feet of the North 300 feet, front and rear of Lot 48, Auditors
Subdivision Number 89, including any portion of any street of alley adjacent
thereto, vacated or to be vacated, together with all road privileges, easements
and appurtenances thereto attached,
Ramsey County, Minnesota (PIN 06-30-23-31-0028)
WHEREAS, 2865 County Highway 10 is currently zoned at R-O, Residential/Office,
and 7980 and 8020 Groveland Road are currently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents about
this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Narrative from Applicant
4. Proposed Site Plan
5. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed Chapters 1108 and
1125 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to the R-4 zoning district and rezoning
process, respectively; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the future land use
component of the Comprehensive Plan relative to this request; and,
Resolution 891-08
Page 2
WHEREAS, The Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the site plans
associated with this request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission makes
the following findings about the possible adverse effects of this proposed rezoning request as
required by the Mounds View Zoning Code:
1. The current zoning of the lots is R-1, Single Family Residential and R-O,
Residential/Office. The requested zoning of the lots is R-4, High Density Residential.
2. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the parcels proposed to be included in the
rezoning are designated Mixed-Use PUD on the Future Land Use map. The proposed
rezoning would be consistent with the anticipated future land use for this area.
3. The rezoning and the proposed development plan for senior housing should not
adversely affect adjacent property owners and would not be out of place on the
County Highway 10 corridor, the City’s most intensely developed thoroughfare.
4. The proposed rezoning to allow for an independent living, assisted living and memory
care senior housing development would help satisfy an under-represented housing
choice in the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, based upon the above findings, the
information and documents about the proposed rezoning, the report drafted by staff and the
testimony of the applicant, and in consideration of any public testimony, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend APPROVAL of the rezoning request made by Select
Senior Living.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this
resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes.
Adopted this 6th day of August, 2008.
_________________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
Attest:
_________________________________________
Kenneth Roberts, Community Development Director
(Seal)
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 893-08
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
THE “SELECT SENIOR LIVING” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW,
AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE PROPERTIES AT 2865 COUNTY HIGHWAY 10,
AND 7980 & 8020 GROVELAND ROAD,
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NUMBERS:
DE2008-001, MA2008-001 AND CU2008-001
WHEREAS, Select Senior Living has requested approval of a conditional use permit,
development review, and preliminary plat for the “Select Senior Living” 96 unit senior housing
development on land located north of County Highway 10 legally-described as follows:
Lot 49, Auditor’s Subdivision Number 89, Subject to a 5 foot strip easement along the rear line
for public utility use, Ramsey County , Minnesota (PIN 06-30-23-31-0030)
And,
That part of Lot 48, Auditors Subdivision Number 89 lying South of the North 300
feet front and rear thereof, except that portion taken for the highway right of way
purposes. Subject to restrictions contained in Document Number 238161,
Ramsey County, Minnesota (PIN 06-30-23-31-0029)
And,
The South 150 feet of the North 300 feet, front and rear of Lot 48, Auditors
Subdivision Number 89, including any portion of any street of alley adjacent
thereto, vacated or to be vacated, together with all road privileges, easements
and appurtenances thereto attached,
Ramsey County, Minnesota (PIN 06-30-23-31-0028)
WHEREAS, The applicant has requested to rezone the above described lands to R-4,
High Density Residential and are designated as Mixed-Use on the Comprehensive Plan; and,
WHEREAS, Select Senior Living has requested approval of a conditional use permit to
allow a 96-unit senior congregate living facility in an R-4 zoning district; and,
WHEREAS, Select Senior Living has submitted site plans for a development review for
a 96-unit senior housing development that includes independent living, assisted living and
memory care; and,
Resolution 893-08
Page 2
WHEREAS, Select Senior Living has submitted a preliminary plat for the major subdivision
that would combine the existing three lots into one parcel; and,
WHEREAS, the community development staff have reviewed the preliminary plat and
finds that it satisfies the minimum subdivision requirements as articulated in Titles 1100 and 1200
of the Mounds View Municipal Code and meets the county platting requirements; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to a
park dedication fee, the amount for which has not yet been determined; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to a
County Highway 10 Trailway contribution based on the 402 feet of road frontage in the project
area, the amount for which the city has not yet determined; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision is NOT within a Wetland District; and,
WHEREAS, the development review and preliminary plat have been reviewed by the City,
and is subject to the applicant or developer receiving permits from Rice Creek Watershed
District, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, MN Department of Health, MN Pollution
Control Agency, and Ramsey County; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents about this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Site Plans – including grading, landscaping and lighting
4. Preliminary Plat
5. Staff Report
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit request:
1. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the
Comprehensive Plan encourages a variety of housing choices for Mounds View.
2. The senior housing should not be out of place given that it will be on County Highway
10 where higher intensity uses are guided to, and the character of the surrounding
area involved is a mixture of housing and commercial uses.
3. The senior housing development should not depreciate the surrounding area.
4. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the proposed senior
housing development.
Resolution 893-08
Page 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
recommends approval of the Development Review submitted by Select Senior Living 96-unit
facility subject to the following conditions:
1. Select Senior Living shall enter into various agreements with the City including (but not
limited to) the Developers Agreement.
2. Select Senior Living shall obtain permits from Rice Creek Watershed District, Metropolitan
Council Environmental Services, MN Department of Health, MN Pollution Control Agency,
Ramsey County, and the City before starting construction.
3. All utilities within the development area shall be located underground.
4. No snow storage shall be allowed on site that would reduce the number of parking stalls or
drive aisle widths, or extend beyond the property lines.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat submitted by Select Senior Living subject to the
following conditions:
1. Select Senior Living shall pay a park dedication fee and a County Highway 10 Trailway
contribution in amountsthat the city will determine.
2. Select Senior Living shall submit a Final Plat no later than 6 months after the date of City
Council approval or the Preliminary Plat approval will become null and void.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the
minutes.
Adopted this 6th day of August, 2008.
__________________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Kenneth Roberts
Community Development Director
(SEAL)
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 892-08
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIANCES TO ALLOW FOR INCREASED SITE DENSITY,
REDUCED UNIT SIZES, REDUCED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AND TO ALLOW
ROOF OVERHANG AND BUILDING SETBACK ENCROACHMENTS AT THE SELECT
SENIOR LIVING DEVELOPMENT TO BE LOCATED AT 2865 COUNTY HIGHWAY 10 AND
7980 & 8020 GROVELAND ROAD;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE VR2008-005
WHEREAS, the applicant, Select Senior Living, has applied for the following variances for
a new 96-unit senior housing development to be located at 2865 County Highway 10 and 7980 &
8020 Groveland Road:
1. Increased Site Density,
2. Reduced minimum unit sizes,
3. Reduced number of parking spaces,
4. To allow a two foot roof overhang encroachment and a 4-6 foot structure
encroachment into the building setback,
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested to rezone 2865 County Highway 10 and 7980 &
8020 Groveland Road to R-4, High Density Residential, and are legally described as:
Lot 49, Auditor’s Subdivision Number 89, Subject to a 5 foot strip easement along the rear line
for public utility use, Ramsey County , Minnesota (PIN 06-30-23-31-0030)
And,
That part of Lot 48, Auditors Subdivision Number 89 lying South of the North 300
feet front and rear thereof, except that portion taken for the highway right of way
purposes. Subject to restrictions contained in Document Number 238161,
Ramsey County, Minnesota
(PIN 06-30-23-31-0029)
And,
The South 150 feet of the North 300 feet, front and rear of Lot 48, Auditors
Subdivision Number 89, including any portion of any street of alley adjacent
thereto, vacated or to be vacated, together with all road privileges, easements
and appurtenances thereto attached, Ramsey County, Minnesota (PIN 06-30-
23-31-0028)
WHEREAS, Section 1104.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code requires multiple family
developments to have a minimum lot area per dwelling unit of 2,500 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a senior housing development proposal with a lot
area per dwelling unit of 1,148 square feet, due to the smaller unit sizes; and,
Resolution 892-08
Page 2
WHEREAS, Section 1104.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code requires one bedroom
multiple family units have a minimum floor area of 630 square feet and two bedroom units to
have a minimum of 750 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting approval for studio and one bedroom units that
have floor areas of 432 to 716 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, Section 1121.13 of the Mounds View Zoning Code requires multiple family
properties (independent living units) to provide 2 ½ parking spaces per unit and the assisted
living and memory care provide 1 space for every 3 beds plus 1 space for every staff member on
the largest shift; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code would require this development to provide
112 total parking stalls and the applicant is requesting a variance to provide 85 total parking
stalls, 27 fewer stalls than required by the zoning code; and,
WHEREAS, Section 1104.01 of the Mounds View Zoning Code allows for up to a two foot
encroachment for roof overhangs, and Section 1109.04 states that the side yard building setback
for R-4 zoned senior congregate living is 40 feet, which is double the normal R-4 minimum side
setback requirement; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant has designed a three story residential style senior housing
building with hipped roofs that have a four foot overhang that would encroach two feet into the
building setback on the west and east sides of the north wing, and a small section of the building
footprint that would extend four and six feet into the large building setback; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents about this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Narrative from the Applicant
4. Proposed Site Plans
5. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to
property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a
hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought
about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property
owner’s control; and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held Wednesday, August 20, 2008, about this variance
request; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal
Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, all of which must be
satisfied, in order for the city to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
Resolution 892-08
Page 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings of fact related to this request:
1. The property is proposed to be zoned R-4, High Density Residential.
2. The extraordinary circumstances surrounding this property are the unique lot size
and shape and the type of housing. The city code does not clearly accommodate
the proposed housing. The side yard building setback for senior housing is double
what is required of any other multiple family housing development.
3. Granting the variances would not confer upon the applicant a special privilege in
that all property owners are able to apply for a variance to improve the function or
appearance of their property. Denying the requests would limit the applicant’s
ability to redevelop the property.
4. The special conditions or circumstances necessitating the variance request do not
result from the actions of the applicant. The city has not yet addressed in the city
code some of the unique characteristics of assisted living and memory care
housing, that made it difficult for the applicant to avoid needing variances.
5. The applicant believes that permitting the property to have the requested increased
density, reduced unit sizes, reduced parking and encroach into the building
setbacks is the minimum variance, as it allows for a well designed project with new
housing options for Mounds View residents and fits the architectural characteristics
of a residential neighborhood.
6. Granting these variances would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of the
Code since the city is in the process of amending the code to address most of
these issues.
7. The proposed variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or
increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish
or impair property values within the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above identified finding of facts, does hereby approve the
variances request to increase the site density, reduce the minimum unit sizes, reduce the total
number of parking spaces to 85 from the required 112 spaces, and allow a two foot roof
overhang to encroach and a four to six foot structure encroachment into the building setbacks for
the proposed 96-unit Select Senior Living development located at 2865 County Highway 10 and
7980 & 8020 Groveland Road.
Resolution 892-08
Page 4
Adopted this 20th day of August, 2008.
_____________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Kenneth Roberts
Community Development Director
(SEAL)
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: August 6, 2008
Type of Business: Action
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Review Amendments to Zoning Code Relating to PUD
and Senior Housing
Introduction:
At the July 9, 2008 Planning Commission meeting, staff discussed with the Commission a
proposal to make amendments to the zoning code about senior housing. The City Council
also agreed with staff’s recommendation to make changes to the code for senior housing.
Discussion:
Based on the Planning Commission’s direction at the July 23, 2008 meeting, Staff has made
a few more changes to the new section for senior housing which amends the Zoning Code to
add a section addressing senior housing developments.
g. Senior Housing:
(1) The building must have at least 60 percent of its units designated for
assisted living or memory or Alzheimer’s care for the city to consider the project or
building as a planned unit development.
(2) The tract of land for which a planned unit development, senior housing
project is proposed and permit requested shall contain not less than two (2) acres of
land.
(3) The senior housing building shall not have more than three (3) stories above
grade.
(4) The front, side and rear yard restrictions at the periphery of the planned unit
development site, at a minimum, shall be:
(a) Front = 30 feet
(b) Side = 20 feet
(c) Rear = 30 feet, or 50 feet if abutting residential
PUD/Senior Housing Code Amendment
Page 2
August 6, 2008
(5) The parking recommendations are as follows, unless the City Council
determines more or less parking stalls would serve a better purpose: Parking spaces
required are:
(a) Independent living = 1 space per unit with half of the spaces
enclosed
(b) Assisted living = 0.5 spaces per unit
(c) Nursing homes and memory care = 1 space for every 4 beds
(d) Facility staff = 1 space for every employee on the largest shift
(6) The permanent residents residing in independent living units shall be limited
to persons who are 55 years of age or over except that one other person may reside in
any senior or elderly housing unit including his or her spouse, parent, foster parent, or
legal guardian.
(6) The permanent residents shall be limited to persons who are 55 years of age
or over except that one other person may reside in any senior or elderly housing unit
including his or her spouse, parent, foster parent, or legal guardian.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission should review the proposed ordinance as it does with all
amendments to the Zoning Code. Resolution 890-08 is attached for your consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 890-08
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
R ESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 1120 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE TO ADD A SECTION
FOR SENIOR HOUSING
WHEREAS, the City Council has directed that a definition be added to the Zoning
Code to address senior housing and Planned Unit Developments; and,
WHEREAS, City staff has prepared a section to be added to Chapter 1120 of the
Mounds View Zoning Code, to read as follows:
g. Senior Housing:
(1) The building must have at least 60 percent of its units designated for
assisted living or memory or Alzheimer’s care for the city to consider the project or
building as a planned unit development.
(2) The tract of land for which a planned unit development, senior housing
project is proposed and permit requested shall contain not less than two (2) acres of
land.
(3) The senior housing building shall not have more than three (3) stories above
grade.
(4) The front, side and rear yard restrictions at the periphery of the planned unit
development site, at a minimum, shall be:
(a) Front = 30 feet
(b) Side = 20 feet
(c) Rear = 30 feet, or 50 feet if abutting residential
(5) The parking recommendations are as follows, unless the City Council
determines more or less parking stalls would serve a better purpose: Parking spaces
required are:
(a) Independent living = 1 space per unit with half of the spaces
enclosed
(b) Assisted living = 0.5 spaces per unit
(c) Nursing homes and memory care = 1 space for every 4 beds
(d) Facility staff = 1 space for every employee on the largest shift
Resolution 890-08
Page 2
(6) The permanent residents residing in independent living units shall be limited
to persons who are 55 years of age or over except that one other person may reside in
any senior or elderly housing unit including his or her spouse, parent, foster parent, or
legal guardian.
WHEREAS, amending the Zoning Code to incorporate senior housing in Planned
Unit Developments will serve to clarify the zoning requirements; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission concurs that an amendment to
the City Code is warranted and justified.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends approval of an amendment to Chapter 1120 of the Mounds View
Zoning Code by incorporating senior housing into the Planned Unit Development section as
defined herein.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs
staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes.
Adopted this 6th day of August, 2008.
_____________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Kenneth Roberts, Community Development Director
(SEAL)