HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.C. Senior Housing Development Discussion 4 RosEmouNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Work Session: September 12, 2012
AGENDA ITEM: Senior Housing Development Discussion AGENDA SECTION:
Discussion
PREPARED BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development AGENDA NO. Z e.
Director
ATTACHMENTS: Revised Concept Plan APPROVED BY:
DU
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion Item
ISSUE
In July the Council discussed moving forward with Doran Companies to partner on the Steeple Center
Senior housing and Senior Center project. In August,Mr. Stoddard and Mr. Doran came to the Council
worksession to discuss ideas they had regarding additional amenities to the project and the idea of shared
pool and health facilities.The Council discussed the proposal and indicated that these additional features
could be included on the site,but that the City continues to be interested in some type of public
senior/multi-generational center.
More recently staff received a concept plan which Doran indicates an approximate 90 unit senior housing
facility.The orientation has changed so there is more of a"front" to Hwy 3 and the senior center has been
more encapsulated into the senior housing. The amount of surface parking has been decreased from that
shown on the initial plan,approximately 41 are shown.Additionally,Mr Stoddard indicated that additional
underground parking would be needed for the project and therefore it is assumed parking would be
located under more of the housing building footprint.
Staff also met with Mr. Stoddard and discussed the layout of the senior center area and its relationship
with the Steeple Center. Staff explained that some of the public spaces needed to function on their own
and have restricted access so that evenings and weekends patrons would not need to go through portions
of the senior housing.Additionally, there are deficiencies in the Steeple Center which the new construction
should address such as number of restrooms, storage, and some type of kitchen/handling food area. These
spaces should be in close proximity to the Steeple Center so they can function seamlessly. Staff is hoping
to have a concept layout of the public spaces for the Council prior to the meeting.
In summary there were several items that were discussed regarding the public activity areas and the new
concept plan. Many of those staff expects to be reflected in the new concept layout of public spaces. The
more substantive issues are those below:
• The public plaza was not depicted on the new concept site plan. It is assumed the public plaza will
be located next to the Steeple Center.
• Parking continues to be a concern.The increase in site activity has the duel effect of decreasing
space to install parking and also brings more parking needs to the site. Mr. Stoddard indicated that I
additional parking will occur under the senior housing building. Staff is interested in the amount of
parking provided in that manner and a projection of parking needs for the senior housing
I
residents, staff, and additional uses.
• One of the layout concepts indicated all the public senior center space on the second floor. Staff
has indicated (which was borne out when visiting Apple Valley senior center) that vertical access
may inhibit use and desirability. Staff has requested that the public spaces be available on the main
level.This is also more beneficial when tying the uses to activities in the Steeple Center, security,
and maintenance.
• Some of the desired public spaces were incorporated into the general senior housing spaces. While
staff is not opposed to shared use of space, care must be taken that public and private spaces are
not intertwined to the extent that access and security are compromised. For example, staff is
interested in a public access to the senior center which does not require going through a portion of
the senior housing project. Envisioned activities that could occur in the Senior Center and Steeple
Center means that both buildings must be set discreetly apart from the senior housing to ensure
independent functionality.
One final item discussed is the financing package for the project. Right now there are three items for
discussion;the cost of the land, the allocation of the grants, and an outright payment for construction of
the public senior center.At this time it is difficult to negotiate the outline of an agreement until there is
more agreement amount the pubic/private spaces,what activities those spaces are geared for and what the
potential cost for those spaces might be.
2
I ew
r' '
' P i 04.
•
;,1
Li . . .
4 Q
I . ' -\--,. z:::::Q4 . '
,,
*, �•0 .
. . .i .
4
.,,,,, •
1 ���" �,
ri 1 -,i..1 •_;,,\ . ', ) iii)
1 4illor
% so,
' ' 1 r.."
1 :. ,.,,,„ , : ,t,, . .... v 141 I i
. . .- 10 •', ,, , AID
. .4 to-4 t. 0 Cle,
ri
LIIIIIPZIROS • . . - . _..-f-------1---$1 ,
NOM
\--3 7
. , .
.. ,
, :
1 ....... ..7"... Ili ) , . .
rr : P !d
. ' — i'
Ad t... ,‘ ,,),_. >"°".—k 0 . it, f)
° • . &,' ,..,---'''-_-,---='''''''..---'
II. '''''...- „---
. ,p .. ,
......
________________.,„
70 N V)
m
I, z
g ° D
o r, n
Cm T
z z
,, _, c
K To V1
z = m
0
c p
0-
D
o D
W
D M o2 ,
i
I
3 c A o o I To
.. m. 3 n z 3 s
I 1 f i
t 0 g .16 IA, 1 I
I
1,L1111j '
`#
i z
0
s z A
+s N -r c' m A o
1
ro RI-s in 0 17 A ,T1 G
et N
2 n
y ct
A
=+
0
g
n
O
z
C7
7:3 g >
D
z 4iiiiiiiiiiiiso)•=
n
O D N
Z n0q
N ,-1
m
N j c
N N V1 rp
70 Cr, Lan
N Z
r ° m
O m
z r
m D
Z 2 Z
° 0
K
z v
-, G1
o CAMEO AVENUE
1 •. r„ , ,Th3 . ). _
• 1,,. .. . . „ ,
D _
. ,... ,
...„,„
0
, • - • ,--- ----- e,„>,Qa • . -5.).
i..• .
Q ... . „
rl #2 - )\pc sN,
m
. / ,I , I 4g-"is Nt.41,if ITTI -I
rn
1 .: ' ...'1 0 CCP lii.1
I t 1 ,.- _.
r'''' '. ----j.LP '="iixil tr....J.°
s.. \ 1•:• 4
law it
,-'1 �t -
iii) 0 '
0
g
n
O
z
0 c
D ...
z
n
O
K D
n-) - D 2.S.
Z rD
7"f
m
N N V1 R.