Laserfiche WebLink
<br />There would be 120 to 150 trips per day at off-peak hours. The architecture of the building was described. Mr. Concilla <br />explained the decision to locate along Snelling was purposely made to provide a site close to families and activities in an <br />established community. A video was shown of the recently (December 1999) opened Sunrise Home in Edina. <br /> <br />Mr. Concilla noted that the proposed project is similar to the Edina site, adjacent to the residential area and a commercial <br />area on the other site. <br /> <br />Member Egli asked what the cost of living in these units would be ($55 to $155/day). Member Rhody asked for <br />clarification - is it a senior market rate rental (yes). <br /> <br />Craig Christenson, 2585 Wheeler, Chair of the James Addition Task Force, stated he generally supported the project as <br />cost effective and was consistent with the Task Force recommendations. He recommended one way roads, joint parking <br />for the park, and a pathway continuation from the current end of the path, down to the Oakcrest area. <br /> <br />Craig Christenson also recommended berming and landscaping to deaden the sound. He also recommended rounding off <br />the intersection of the frontage road with Oakcrest. <br /> <br />Member Rhody asked if there was concern about building mass. Craig Christenson noted the building will be along the <br />east side of the site and should not be a problem. <br /> <br />Diane Harris, 2550 Snelling, expressed concern regarding traffic, height of building, and lighting. Mr. Concilla explained <br />that the building is to be 41 feet in height, with residential lighting, meant to look like a house. <br /> <br />There being no further comments from the public, Chair Klausing closed the hearing. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing explained the past decisions of the Commission and expressed support, noting this project will be set as <br />far from the neighborhood as possible and expressed the need to pay attention to lighting and building mass. <br /> <br />Member Rhody explained he supported this concept and noted that this process has been solid, but has taken a lot of <br />hard work. (The neighborhood planning process works.) <br /> <br />Member Egli said she was impressed with the proposal; there are other unique buildings. It will be a landmark. <br /> <br />Member Wilke liked the project, but expressed concern with the traffic - can this issue be resolved? <br /> <br />Motion: Member Cunningham moved, seconded by Member Rhody, to offer a resolution to amend the Comprehensive <br />Plan from LB (Limited Business) to HR (High Density Residential) [resolution attached]. <br /> <br />Ayes: 5 <br /> <br />Nays: 0 Motion carried. <br /> <br />Motion: Member Cunningham moved, seconded by Member Rhody, to recommend approval of the Concept development <br />plan for a residential planned unit development (RPUD) that allows the construction of a 79 unit, three story senior <br />housing assisted care facility at 2555 Snelling Avenue, based on the findings as outlined in the staff report of January 12, <br />2000: <br />1. The City's Comprehensive Plan map designates this area for LB (Limited Business). The zoning of the site is B1 B <br />(Limited Retail District) and B2 (Retail Business District). A Comprehensive land Use Plan amendment to HR (High <br />Density Residential) and rezoning to R-3 (General Residence District) is necessary. The property to the west and <br />east is zoned R-1 (Single Family Residential District) and includes existing residences; Rosebrook Park, also <br />zoned R-1, lies to the north; and business uses zoned B1 (General Business District) and SC (Shopping Center <br />District) lie to the south (see attached map). <br />2. The City's Comprehensive Plan text and the James Addition Neighborhood Task Force Report (1998) specifically <br />indicates the southeast area of the James Addition neighborhood, should it redevelop, should be done in a more <br />residentially compatible use. <br />3. In conjunction with the application for concept development plan approval, the following documents have been <br />submitted and reviewed by staff in preparation of this report: <br />a. Concept site and landscaping plan (01/04/00) <br />b. Building elevation plans (12/28/99) <br />c. Building floor plans (12/28/99) <br /> <br />A complete utility, lighting, paving, grading, site, landscape, signage, and drainage plan must be submitted to and <br />