2015-11-04_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Special Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes –Wednesday, September 17, 2015 Page 13 Residential Group Living 588 Mr. Lloyd advised that assisted living facilities, nursing homes, and other state-licensed facilities 589 were all based on state requirements, thus their status as CU on the Table, since they could not 590 be treated the same or put within the same category based on state statute and depending on the 591 number of units involved. 592 Student Housing 593 At the request of Chair Boguszewski, Mr. Bilotta defined student housing as built by an institution 594 and the differentials of college offices off the campus setting 595 Civic and Institutional Uses 596 Elementary/Secondary School 597 At the request of Chair Boguszewski, Mr. Lloyd clarified that charter schools would be in the 598 same category versus a private art or music school defined under the category of Commercial 599 Uses and defined accordingly, with the intent in the CMU for lower intensities, and minimum 600 acreage allowed for a larger school at 15 acres. 601 Places of Assembly 602 Member Murphy noted that these were P uses under all categories, yet there were not typically 603 on the tax rolls.Member Murphy stated his understandingin the effort to maximize this area was 604 the intent to keep properties on the tax rolls and thus not allowing larger schools, but questioned 605 what was accomplished in allowing places of assembling under current recognitions. 606 Mr. Billota clarified that was not how they were distinguished; and noted that in the past these 607 facilities were defined as churches, but the Supreme Court had ruled that they couldn’t be treated 608 any differently than any other gathering place (e.g. V.F.W. Hall) as had been addressed using the 609 Village of St. Anthony case law with a union hall or golf course moving to use as a temple. 610 Mr. Lloyd advised that in discussions in 2008 or before, there had been a request to change 611 zoning from RB to allow for church use –or places of assembly; with the Planning Commission 612 and City Council determining at that time to allow that use in any CMU district, whether productive 613 or not; and thus it was shown in the Table of Uses accordingly. 614 To be transparent, Mr. Paschke noted that you could have uses in Twin Lakes similar to any 615 business district that can be removed from the tax rolls; and this allows any place of assembly not 616 matter where and across the board in all districts; and did not take into consideration whether 617 they were taxable uses or tax exempt uses that would involve getting into federal issues as well. 618 Chair Boguszewski stated he understood the dynamics and was fine with the designation; and 619 personally did not want to seem or be interpreted as promoting any back door discrimination as to 620 anentity’s tax status. 621 Member Bull questioned if allowing it as a CU in CMU-1 would address foot or vehicular traffic. 622 Mr. Bilotta advised that great care would be needed with conditioning any such approvals. 623 By consensus, the body chose to change CMU-1 to CU approval. 624 Theater/Performing Arts Center 625 By consensus, the body shared the same thoughts for this use as with the previous use, 626 changing it to CU for CMU-1 designated areas. 627 Accessory Uses, Buildings, and Structures 628 Bed & Breakfast Establishment 629 Chair Boguszewski questioned this definition, and how it could be deemeda seasonal use. 630 Mr. Lloyd addressed the potentials, including a roomer or boarder (e.g. during the Minnesota 631 State Fair) that may not need regulatory approval; with Mr. Bilotta noting that traditional bed and 632 breakfast facilities are typically old homes converted as such; and in this case would not be 633 applicable but would involve new construction only. 634