2016-06-01_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes –Wednesday, May 4, 2016 Page 12 noticeable impact from the proposed development.Ms. Kappes opined that as an 554 affordable housing advocacy group working in the region since 1986, MICAH strongly 555 supported this project. 556 Gary Kwong, 1700 Fry Street, Falcon Heights, MN 557 Mr. Kwong reviewed his residencies near the Midway Park area for some time, and his 558 father’s history of nursing home living on this site, noting the changes he’d observed in 559 Roseville over the years.Mr. Kwong noted the changes in the schools, more diversity in 560 the population, and new transportation available soon along Snelling Avenue, as well as 561 the proximity of this proposed development close to the Ramsey County Library – 562 Roseville Branch.Ms. Kwong opined that there were a lot of amenities for potential 563 residents, with the proximity to shopping, and other walkable areas for seniors in the 564 community, and allowing them to remain Roseville residents to retain their sense of 565 community versus relocating elsewhere.At this time, Mr. Kwong noted the limited 566 housing available from independent to full assisted living, with this development providing 567 a good option to maintain that independent living as an alternative housing option for 568 those unable to afford a more expensive location or housing options.Mr. Kwong spoke in 569 support of this requested rezoning and the proposed project; opining it allowed the City to 570 meet Metropolitan Council suggested guidelines, while allowing residents to retain their 571 sense of community, and was far beyond meeting legal requirements. 572 Member Daireasked staff how this proposed project would compare in character to Rose 573 Pointeas an example. 574 Mr. Paschke advised he could not address the type of housing units involved in Rose 575 Pointeas far as market rate or subsidized; but design-wise, was not sure they weremuch 576 different in their massing, with 3-4 stories.Mr. Paschke noted that most senior projects 577 were at least 3 stories, partly due to economics and making them work based on a 578 certain number of units.Regarding how the building itself was situated, Mr. Paschke 579 noted that topography between the parcels notwithstanding, a number of past projects 580 were also built under a different city code and ordinances, with different design standards 581 than those applicable today, including setback requirements and proximity to other uses. 582 Mr. Paschke advised that, if staff felt it was appropriate when this particular development 583 came forward in the application process, staff and/or the developer could suggest 584 increasing the setback on Albert Street or County Road B if appropriate to the project. 585 However, Mr. Paschke questioned whether or not their proposal, when presented, would 586 actually suggested that, since today’s code had built-ins for protecting adjacent lower 587 density uses. 588 Member Kimble noted the unknowns and risks in acting on rezoning without looking at an 589 actual project, especially when a proposedproject such as this one isn’t fully funded and 590 that funding could be months away.Member Kimble opined that ideally, action would be 591 taken on rezoning when there was a better comfort level for a project fully funded and 592 ready to go. 593 Mr. Paschke recognized the risks involved; however, he noted that part of a 594 development’s ability to proceed was predicated on having things in place (e.g. rezoning) 595 to help them get through that financial process with lenders looking to ensure proper 596 zoning was in place for aproposed development seeking funding, and impacting their 597 project’s funding score.From staff’s perspective, Mr. Paschke stated that the intent was 598 to be somewhat accommodating to this proposal, thus staff’s recommendation to the 599 Commission and City Council for their determination based on staff’s analysis to-date. 600 Mr. Paschke recognized the concerns expressed by Member Kimble and other 601 commissioners, but clarified that zoning drives funding as well and was part of the 602 process.While it wasn’t the city’s task to help that funding along, Mr. Paschke advised it 603 was part of staff’s analysis to accept the proposal before them and, in consideration of 604 the traffic study completed, to base their decision on the information currently before 605 them.Under that scenario, Mr. Paschke stated that staff believed that the proposed 606