10-21-97 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Johnson commented that the general population in the facilities like Brightondale has gotten younger in the past few years. People in their early 60's want freedom from single family living. Zisla said he was confused and that he was hearing two different messages about the coop units. Mr. Johnson is talking about a different ownership form for people who want a certain lifestyle. Mr. Gould is talking about a transition through an aging process for the need for congregate services and care. Zisla stated he is trying to get a feel for which kind of project is proposed. Gould said the coop units would be appeal to seniors who want freedom from home ownership and seniors looking for congregate services. Therefore, the answer may be a little bit of both. The coop residents can age in place and move to the assisted living units or the Alzheimer’s unit. Lifestyles between and independent congregate facility and a senior coop would be similar. Schiferl asked about Harrison’s remarks about the possible pedestrian bridge over the pond. Who would pay for this bridge? Gould said the bridge had not been discussed it, but Gould assumed G & P would pay for the bridge. Schiferl asked, if the pond would be five or six feet deep, what precautions would be taken to protect young children. Gould said the question had been posed in the neighborhood meeting. Gould said G & P would put in fencing or find another solution to address that problem. Any solution to the safety issue would have to be amenable to the Planning Commission and the City Council. Mattila said that, in his conversations with the Fire Department on ponding areas, the New Brighton Fire Department is against fencing around ponding areas. For example, there is an open ponding area here at City Hall next to a park and playground. The Fire Department has found fenced in pond areas still attract children. The fencing only adds more labor time to the rescue effort. The Fire Department preferred to see ponding areas kept open and built more safely, such as the pond Chandler described. Schiferl asked whether the City or the developer would pay for cleaning out the storm sewers that serve Brightondale, both initially and for ongoing maintenance. Mattila responded it may be the City’s responsibility, but a definite answer could only come from the City Engineer. Baker stated he was the only present Planning Commissioner who was on the Commission when Brightondale was originally approved. Baker commented the Brightondale facility was not the result of the first proposal. The homes on 28th Avenue were a part of a PRD so the lots are undersized. The undersized lots were a big concern when Brightondale was proposed. Because of the visual considerations caused by the lots, a compromise was reached and Brightondale was located on the east portion of their site and was approved as a PRD. Baker said he was very concerned that, if the Commission recommends approval of the proposed Alzheimer’s wing, it would be violating that agreement. Baker said the Brightondale PRD was proposed, approved, and built. Any PRD on that existing site only has 2.2 acres. Only 2.2 acres can be used for density calculations and that comes to far less than the existing units. To add 29 units to the existing units, you have to include this unit with the 2.2 acres and the R-2 density calls for 32 units. Baker said that, under the R-2 zoning, taking the 2.3 acres of the Brightondale site comes to 32. Brightondale currently has 72 units. Mattila said he was not the City Planner when Brightondale was approved. Mattila said his comments are based on reading the reports and the minutes of that period. When the PRD-27 was considered, the applicant was allowed to use the 5 acres of Meadowwood Park in addition to the 2.3 acres of the Brightondale site, making 7.3 acres, for density calculations for Brightondale. Those density calculations came out to 101 units to be allowed on the site. The applicant then built only 72 units of the possible 101 units. Baker agreed with Mattila’s statement, but the original applicant proposed only 72 units with no additional phases. The PRD was based on 72 units and approved for 72 units. Mattila said the City Attorney’s first I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\MINUTES\1997\10-21-97.WPD 5