Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.A.1. Concept review for Senior Housing in the R1C Zone, The Henderson Project General Business 11. A. 1. SHAKOPEE TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Kyle Sobota, Senior Planner DATE: 12/16/2014 SUBJECT: Concept Review for Senior Housing in the R1C Zone, The Henderson Project (A, D) Action Sought Scott County CDA has made application for a Concept Review for a 55-Unit senior housing facility called "The Henderson" on property adjacent to Saint Mary's Catholic Church, south of 5th Avenue East and west of Sommerville Street, on the site of the old St Mary's School. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the eastern 1.25 acres for the development of this project. The property is zoned R1C, Old Shakopee Residential. Proposed building elevations are attached. The design contemplates the building being 4 levels on the north side and 3 levels visible above grade on the south side, which follows the topography of the site. The proposed materials are face brick, fiber cement lap siding and panels, and rock face concrete masonry unit blocks, and an asphalt shingle pitched roof According to the elevations, the height of the structure at the highest point is 43' at the midpoint of the roof, which would require a conditional use permit for an over-height structure, unless special height limits were to be set for senior housing facilities in the R1C zone as part of a zoning text amendment regarding making the use a conditionally permitted use in this zone. The stated height on the cross-sections is noted as 39' south and 50' on the north side. The maximum height limit without a conditional use permit in the R1C zone is 35'. The existing church is approximately 60' in height and Central School is 33' in height, when measured along Lewis Street. Portions of the school building west of Lewis Street are greater in height than 33' according to the concept section drawing provided, the actual height is not noted. Project Comparison: As stated, there are 55 proposed units on a 1.25 acre site, for a total density of 44 units /acre. The number of units, lot size, and density of similar senior housing projects in Shakopee are as follows: 200 Levee Drive (66 units, 0.77 acres, 85 units /acre),Northridge Court(58 units, 1.25 acres, 46 units /acre), All Saints Senior Housing (80 units (many of which are not independent living apartment units), 3.18 acres, 25 units per acre), and River City Centre (52 units, 2.24 acres, 23 units /acre). 34 of the units at The Henderson are proposed as adult/few services, and 21 are proposed as "flex" assisted living units. As proposed this project is most similar in number of units and density to Northridge Court, 101 Fuller St N, roughly 6 blocks from this site. The developer believes that this project's proximity to a more walkable portion of downtown and St Mary's church would be attractive to potential residents of the facility. Parking: On site surface parking (8 spaces), and garage parking (54 spaces) for a total of 62 spaces is proposed, as well as angled parking on Sommerville Street (16 spaces) and both 5th Avenue (8 spaces) and 6th Avenue (8 spaces). The garage entrance is on the north side of the building off of Sommerville Street. The off-street parking requirement for senior housing is one space per unit. As proposed, this project meets the requirements in City Code for off-street parking for senior housing facilities. There are currently 7 angled parking spaces on 6th Avenue and 10 angled parking spaces on Sommerville Street. The total amount of parking proposed is a total of 94 spaces, counting on-street parking. The proposed on-street parking is an increase of 15 additional spaces from the existing numbers. The Engineering Department has commented that on street parking spaces near street intersections must be outside of sight triangles, which would result in a reduction of approximately 5 or 6 spaces with the current configuration. The site is currently used as parking for Saint Mary's church. As a result of development of the site, there would be a reduction of parking spaces for Saint Mary's Church. Prior to the school being razed there were 52 off-street parking spaces on the school site after reviewing an aerial photo from 2003. The school building footprint was roughly 15,700 square-feet, the footprint of the proposed building is 23,400 square-feet. At the Planning Commission public hearing, representatives of the Church indicating that they are looking at alternatives to provide additional off-street parking between the church building and rectory. The area of the proposed development is not currently striped parking, so an exact number of spaces is unknown. Staff believes the amount of existing parking in the area of the proposed building is approximately 87 spaces in the paved and gravel area, when measured using 90-degree spaces and 24' drive aisles, however the area likely accommodates fewer spaces, as vehicles tend to use up larger spaces without lot striping. The existing parking between the rectory and church is proposed to remain and is not included in the estimation of the 87 spaces above. The amount of required parking for churches in City Code is 1 space per 4 seats in the main worship area. There are currently 334 seats when using the standard for bench seating of 22" per seat in City Code. When staff measured the pews and counted other existing seating within the church, staff observed posted attendance figures for the month of November. For reference purposes, the range for number of attendees to different services for the month varied from 208-281. The amount of actual count parking generated for services is unknown at this time. At the Planning Commission Meeting, a representative of St Mary's Church mentioned creating additional off-street parking south of the church. A plan showing the additional parking has not been shared with staff. The amount of impervious surface on both the church site and the Henderson site would need to be considered in future reviews. Considerations: Currently, the R1C, Old Shakopee Residential District does not permit senior housing facilities. After discussions with the City Attorney it has been determined that a concept review for this application is an appropriate way for this project to get feedback from both the Planning Commission and City Council, even though there will not be a PUD request. In order for this project to move forward, the zoning code would need to be amended to include senior housing facilities as a listed use. Staff is suggesting that Senior Housing Facilities be added as a Conditional Use in the R1C zoning district. If the area were to develop under the current standards as single family houses, the site would support 8 single-family lots, with 6 lots fronting Sommerville Street and one lot mid block both fronting 5th Avenue and 6th Avenue. The site could also be developed as 4 duplexes or twin-homes under the current requirements, for a total of 8 units. The amount of on-street parking may be reduced in this scenario for driveway or alley accesses, depending on site configuration. The existing off-street parking for Saint Mary's Church would also be eliminated. If the City Council believes that the R1C zone is an appropriate zoning district for senior housing facilities, and is comfortable with the proposed use of the site, staff will initiate a text amendment for Senior Housing Facilities in the R1C zone. Staff would likely recommend a minimum lot size requirement of approximately 1 acre to limit the potential number of sites available in the R1C zone. The applicant has provided the executive summary of a market study conducted by Maxfield Research that states there is a need for senior housing in the Shakopee market area above the number of units that is proposed. According to the study, there is a need of 67 units in 2014, with the need increasing to 105 units in 2019 within the market area, at the time of the study in August, there were 7 vacant units out of the 578 units in the market area, for a vacancy rate of 1.2%. The setbacks of the proposed building do not meet the current regulations of the R1C zone. The required setbacks are 30' front and rear and a street side setback of 10'. According to City Code the front lot lines would be the north and south lot lines (5th and 6th Avenue), since they are the narrowest street frontages of the proposed lot. The setback to both 5th and 6th Avenue is proposed at 19'. The proposed building setback to Sommerville Street at 24' meets the required setback of 10'. A variance would be required for the current proposed setbacks, or a specific setback for senior housing facilities would need to be developed as part of the zoning text amendment, or the building width would need to be adjusted approximately 22'. There is a provision in the R1C setback language that allows for the reduction of a front setback when the setback of at least 3 existing structures on a block average less than 30'. In this case, there are only 2 other structures on the block. The front setbacks of surrounding houses, the church and school range from houses on 5th Avenue and the rectory each having a front setback of approximately 20', to houses on the east side of Sommerville Street and Central School having a setback of 10' or less. Comments: Parks and Recreation: The Parks and Recreation Director has noted that park dedication will be required for this project. The current rate for 55 units is $4,450 /unit, for a total of$244,750. Engineering: The Project Engineer has commented that drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated as part of the plat, a stormwater management plan will be required, on street parking is not permitted in sight triangles, and comments regarding utility connection sizes and materials. Planning staff believes that as proposed the more aesthetically appealing facade of the building faces the interior of the site. Planning staff would prefer the orientation of the building to be reversed, so that the varying wall depths and landscaped area face Sommerville Street and the adjacent residences. The building would be reversed to accommodate this change, which would relocate the access to the parking garage to the private driveway and surface parking area, which is preferred by staff. The applicant could still have the main entrance at the corner of Sommerville and 5th by reconfiguring the plan for the indoor parking. Planning staff believes the design of the building complies with the building materials regulations set forth by City Code. Although the site is proposed to be extensively landscaped, the number of overstory trees does not meet the City Code standard proposed due to the size of the site and the gross square footage of the building. In these cases it is possible for the applicant to provide trees or a cash contribution for off-site planting. 19 overstory trees and 7 ornamental trees are proposed for this site. Planning Commission Review: At the December 4th Planning Commission Meeting, the Commission reviewed the request and provided comments. The comments received were questions about the height of the structure when compared to surrounding uses, concerns about the overall density when compared to the surrounding single family houses, and whether the amount of concessions needed to allow construction were typical for a senior housing project, a concern was also raised about the vernacular architecture of the area. Neighborhood Meeting: On December 9th a neighborhood meeting was held at Northridge Court. The sign in sheet provided by the applicant noted that 15 residents attended the meeting. The applicant provided a mailed notice of the meeting to the property owners within 350' of the site, which matches the distance that staff provides public hearing notices of other applications. Staff Recommendation: The purpose of Concept Review is for both the Planning Commission and City Council to provide feedback to staff and the developer on the proposed design of the project, as well as the use on the site. Staff asks that the City Council provide comments on the project to staff and the developer and also give direction to staff on whether the City Council would like staff to bring forward a zoning text amendment request for review by both the Planning Commission and City Council. Future public hearings would be required for a zoning text amendment, variance, plat, or conditional use permit. Attachments: Location Map Site Plan Landscape Plan Building Elevations Floor Plans Maxfield Study Engineering Comments Neighborhood Meeting Attendance Sheet Scott County, MN impuipploom-- milis ssimak ww--- II s r r III TA o m Z 1 n� Nf y ti I 111111 JI ti {N s N i li Il il 1 \ 11 SAVE ill 10 IgE3 +2 al Si n •nia y' 1110 6A Vt- el 11111111141 le31113 10011111021 V3 YilD III °I° WI: III 03 02-1 ge ela 111 illi E0 V:49 1 ili li 6 033 BAVW cn _ _ 535 LEWIS ST S es 535 LEWIS ST S ST MARYS CHURCH 10 ST MARYS CHURCH Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate,but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a Map Scale legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal,survey,or for zoning 1 inch = 250 feet verification. 10/28/2014 Z • , ., ;a" F.W., cn - .sa. . w"$ ,t-- %., - r s � 600 som ,� , , .. a , 500 —'�—� .,< 4/ a. ' a �. , , , -t \-- \ 1;14'7.4\ - \ f ' ''''''', -: '`,4f;:::4,,,,t ',: ,:i‘,..:$,I \ .,/%6----- - ,-(---. r - .:,,.\ :-.. ' , . , ;:,.. :,-. ,t-ic.,, „..it"...,, ,,„ ...:,., N \:-- , . ..-?...--,, ' -,-- t -:-.--... iii..". '',,,',..,'L:::„.,-;-:-' ..- '----,„ , \ \ ,.. ., 'm ,..... , 7 _....._ .. , \r. , , ..„., ,___ / , , ,, ,.,, , \ , _..._______-' ________ , , 4,,,,„,, , 1 ,, ,_ ,,,,„,,,,L, .._ 0 61 _'c. 1 C Z61 _ i i te^` o 4. " '-'.°-.°1**.v '0-, —.,"-'''q ."' .i '''''::V.41`' ° ir*---c---- 'lb.. ,,, 4,,,,,, ,'„..,„;,-.1t—....1.„ --..:, , . ,,, , ,_, „4„„,.. .. _ .t„ .,.... ... . .. ... c ..s. ,k,, %.,,. - ,.,.., , V/ ° eq =St W d- W O• , r I- z w All- ,vh " i S.. ey gw�s S Q. -- • „ r • } t ___,.-.. , Q 01 o e SC �',1 _ - _Iii _i= _ - —, �_ Iii'{ . o III �1 1 v N U ! f ii y = v a y i!iI t�itu : �_ iiih i ` ' L — x. i�ilm����jl F I'+oe F lc ___j7„_____,\ , \ --,-7----7----7-\ --, \ \\ '\ ‘..\\ \ \ \.\\. \ \ \ '',' (.011,.\\I 0 ,, _„, . \ \ , „ , , \ .„.„, , „ ‘‘, \ \ „ , ,. , 1 MI ._,, „,-........1 1.10.206.. .......04,____L 72aimmumwmaregmegatk I , 1 I 1 I I I' °� ,, I I i' -I i t II1� I i 1 1 I.1 1 1 I I I,I I I I l j /I to C ° I I I I I'I 1 1 1 1 �I I I I I I I I l l l i 1 1 1 Il 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 i I 1 1 1 1 1 IF tit 1 1 1 I I I I; I I i I I I 1 1 1 1 1 11'1 i III`- 11 I f g SIC >.11111 I T11 11 II I s l I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I l l I I I 2s2i p� � ,XIp.Eiptlf„r� I I I I,III 1 ppCq :1 1 11 1�-1 1 11 r�Y�1 1 1�'\i 1 1 1 Tq� 1 1 •1 �l I III �a�' H � /,, I I O -Amu a4a000voo..�oodao�o 1 'y'�,o a � �1` O I ,I ...--�1 p0, 111 m ¢ 3€ m Iii o,; . , ':;I' o ,o>ES 7§ /� 77 O - y • L� 1 I iWi cE I p1 9L ` li•` l i I I to .. _ - I, J� © O 111 ,,a 5t l° . Y i I.1 1 OOf \\ z \. _ OII @$a a g F / 1I p '0001 � '�• L G E MI I « <� t /. 1 f I 111 I 11 1 'i O s Qq ,IiI .. O 1� i r 1, O ���r -/� ■-p11 I I �iZ �Cf r_, t' 1 I I _■���■�. Ti 1 1 1 2 ■ 10'• z 1 ra Pr i. BSI ` �tl & i f __" 11 i A tlowe`���o0'e 1 I. N� :.I al'�°�%w i, 4l 111 I �s 011 qw y 5-r,ip -! ilia 1e h_i iiir t j,l I I j I 1 L'I 1,II — --- ,,H,,,,,;,4-,,I,44_,,- ^^ -I I-1-'+--I ., 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I� 1.�jj`^f,,� 1 1 1:1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1'1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I .I I I, I.I,I.I \` r„.,1, I II I 1.141;1.1 II�I�I11 \95— 1 < �`€`@8 Sz E STi Y o �il 55£ g° o� ; € Ia- Via' ° h E 8 g ` s six "< € � W T $ l asaL °,i If ;I 31 g,m Q 1 g r =�'Qca �3 ill m i`:-a IFo 5;d `�1'4 €� Z5i '2Gd gn � $ge s .; � @g Ps Y ; 77 g m o i z g ° � g L v1 , pi s1s JO =4i aI 1 g gl Bg1 tr 111 l�,I` z� P II of 11 01.E 11� 00 g 14 i!i hI � iz 1 �� d a ✓g of 11 gi! fli oe i lima ::ga l ill 11 lit h 1���� �� l�� z tom Y "=o w gy r o= Wil: I� x �i @ d 05,4t,g. ile,,,1 s 0 _0 fia d; ggafl, idi; Oh I 4 111 , .,t. ,.:. , 0 . , Fc t 3 tom s S _�� J ,. _ 5 o Et sgih Ni''. Ao % -, , a gi ip., ] gEm gliOg i5 § o s Asia ga g' g l'g Eiga�=: :1;i P2a i I/ oS a1 d€ �� E 0 apli its fl. , gill o - rill o; Of e ZS 12024 60 4 �g r° Z S hi ii it 2 og_ `, .` 3LL gF a Z 3$ :F, O S 7 co C it 1$P1 It X55 ai. E g S z' W ,11g Iii 3 e S Y� -'m Y4 q £ d $1 ism '° n -W 55'7m E i - ztzz: 4' I- Si itt B e u tit! 5i 1 2R g_g; $`,,ili . 1... 5-°5 € %'i° a=g z i W° m a€ _8 s at 5c ' Ill :5 5 351 cgs �� 3" x It ' �& �< Pt; �� "-t � _ p tg alig i u aI ;; i 111° ER g W a 1m !o 3 a° s g ° P-ggi=$ 'E°o� Ax _ a 8 ii gi `tl '.'s a g - 4 o€ a =.606 ._2 i qp, t asps ,ygy, 7 gatog Rgg w. g2 a§ 8.s A l iii s 11 a 8 s W 'oa 7^ �Sm.3 ' 41.b � y ,�_��";, &soar o25 = g �3 g" s a-sE 3 €4 Ogg p ilme E_ ge6 �`h0 /aiw" ; 4 to _ 6 �� � lz, i e ; 'Ali ;944! Kg6 ih 3 eke! 15002 ?i3° 122 13' 1 En W,. 9§ ,q$ 140 ' e: Mai �8 ! i 4c 1.4 p ilm h `fl=`,° ;g' 21Ed V° Igg a1 E 4 g i! a i 1 g g$s fig kl glitlJL i a a �l �� � o . lire i;4 an a 51i ill _ i •nut......rseansorenvivoaarausstmonaA �0w1.Ox:al o1.0.00 „0-4C O N erg W r� LL7 . 0 w W i )f rj l . {I! ] g ' , i ii: +1•Ti—7':` 1°1.i .,ym m I,;,I, I- -I I ' , 11.1+ rr err 4 ivii.''L..0_41-- II ' ” 1 '''''''.i'''''' v4 lr a e ;�."Tir ', , I 1,, ,k 41. r ' d. 1 If11Lilll!(Ipilri 1 t pi,.,, ,l . , , ,= 1 I i I C N s I . : Q) 2 i I lam -§" : I . I W o' . u •1 1-i r ..-11 I �v4Y �4 } I v' -1 1 0 40 : :,,. . rr; - Q: all(4: ■- Z O Q w J W 2 Q O Z W U Z O U i` 'I' 2-,6''2-.0l^ i i-77---. ._„1,- ..--_-.7.:T;r::::1 ';:: r.,.,. /AI D. '/41,1111- I g � m ' ..%°..k1 -nom win M Y g 7 7 ' m g U I `'1 t A 4_1 i-2 . d F, 1'r Lii7 1... t(I ,�i f Lo co ' g O O iF I N tiff L' N csi i -o o— c z r• - Eie' w w O _C Q it z e t U w �C : ;a- 0' s- s: Z ' JI in an 11(41 m 0 c. <C: _ . t CO O.CO / w ` / �xoJdde .0££ / g / / , o / q g 14 ` 5 // .a % xmdde 09 , // , , / m / / / o �� r [V 05 0 / / O g E _O_ S E. , c g S m N m m N C 6 i t r m m ti i £ � ( � O CO CO Jm'J r L , , C^, m W C. i I O ^l O . W c p O e F- mJ poi Jo auiipiw oi_ 1 f xadde 66 is \I \I\I ilti loo 10 auipiw 01 to j Q' xodde,oS I w .. at r-' .2 0 z . m `-Ei■ m E 1 • N A A C as 0 ▪ Q 3- Ca co E E A a co e' — — - - i - - '— I ( j ;- 1- - I— 1- - IV _ 0 D lcl :;IlIii , O ': -7"•• I , v, G A L . g I nT 9 U a n\ N - I ❑° I IL' I Lno —> h ±! I o 1 1 111 ` , m WI ,nu n ❑ I- II-e I _ e I 9° I e e I 1s 1 1 ( ■ � 1 T 1 I % C u o 1 0 A A (1) -- I - I W A N 1 „ R ❑ . m ,I ❑ u I ..0 I I w' I,EEC U U E = m = EEL. 1 10E7 ❑` I I I _ 1 ■ I 0 Y 4 a 0 2 1 a a 2 z ilIllIllIulIll \ 8 _ . 0 -- \ , , I = a .-.: II 1 , 0 7,5 1 §. . .=. i -,-- i 11 5 I I al I , L----' I 1 L. _ ___. •.-. - _-_ 1 - -- I 1 - .. .r I 9- I Cr 1 -- "c3 E &lin E I , I [461410 _E, It ..,. . (7- E I cm C I .g. 1 0 SC/2 fa I o_. 22 IE r 0 E , I E - _ 0 i 16 - - , ,, a2 ,_ ,.•. • -... U 1 I I . = i 4 CC 7 a J W, I U I g Z m n ❑ I N p 1-- r, 0 ri I V" — 11.11111 ■ i--- 'q-- E if- 4- 2 -.:LI I I I1 I 1 . a - 1 ■■■■ I — ' �R u■ ■■ I I I ;oiaij m - _ I C `n O N — — I 1 4) .ca I J LL 5 I ,- - l� IL - 14 � dtk,1 I A I I 'Y. 6' c. IC 3 c. a J i r C W U _ 1 § Tr ---1 1 \ E n o c 1 + 11 a U I L r 1 I - _ i� I co { 1 1 I 2 I uI a II r set l _ 1 HI 1 U" 1 C — E n N _ I c 1 I I I CD 4 1 I ~�p 1 _c _ II I 4 I. 4, li, '—I CAI e 1 41( 2- 6` 2 A Market Feasibility Study for Senior Housing in the 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota Prepared for: Scott County Community Development Agency Shakopee, Minnesota August 2014 i i4 afield t. Re ireli hie. 1 1/4, i 1221 Nicollet Avenue j. Suite 218 Minneapolis, MN 55403 612.338.0012 www.maxfieldresearch.com 1 4 1( �r Xfjei t'eN IttC. 4, August 28,2014 Mr.William Jaffa Executive Director Scott County Community Development Agency 323 South Naumkeag Street Shakopee,MN 55379 Dear Mr.Jaffa: Attached is the analysis titled, "A Market Feasibility Study for Senior Housing in the City of Shakopee,Minnesota". This market analysis examines growth trends and demographic charac- teristics of the senior population in the Primary Market Area,analyzes the competitive situation for senior housing,and calculates demand for independent living with "flex"assisted living units. Based on these factors,the market study identifies demand to support a service-based senior housing development in the City of Shakopee and the PMA. An evaluation of the proposed de- velopment concept,as well as projected absorption and marketing considerations for a project on the Site are provided. Please contact us if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. Mary Bujold Rob Wilder President Research Analyst Attachment (main)612-338.0012 (fax)612-904-7979 1221 Nicollet Mall,Suite 218,Minneapolis,MN 55403 www.maxfleldresearch.com • TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Purpose and Scope 1 Site Evaluation 1 Demographic Review 1 Competitive Senior Housing Market Analysis 3 Senior Housing Demand Conclusions 3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY 4 SITE EVALUATION 5 Introduction 5 Regional Location 5 Site Location and Adjacent Land Uses 6 Access and Visibility 9 Proximity to Health Care,Retail and Other Community Services 9 Appropriateness of the Subject Site for Senior Housing 11 DEMOGRAPHIC REVIEW 12 Introduction 12 Market Area Definition 12 Population and Household Growth Trends 13 Older Adult(Age 55+)Population and Household Trends 14 Older Adult and Senior Household Incomes 16 Homeownership Rate 18 Home Sale Values 19 COMPETITIVE SENIOR HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS 21 Introduction 21 Senior Housing Defined 21 Supply of Senior Housing in the Market Area 23 Pending Senior Housing Developments in the PMA 30 DEMAND ANALYSIS 31 Introduction 31 Adult/Few Services Demand Estimate 31 Congregate Living Demand Estimate 33 Assisted Living Demand Estimate 35 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 39 Introduction 39 Senior Housing Demand Conclusions and Recommendations 39 Projected Absorption 42 Marketing Considerations 43 LIST OF TABLES Table Number and Title Page 1 Population Growth Trends and Projections, Primary Market Area 13 2 Older Adult(55+) Population and Household Age Distribution 15 3 Older Adult(55+) Income Distribution,Primary Market Area 17 4 Older Adult Household Tenure, Primary Market Area 19 5 Single-Family Sales Transactions,Scott County PMA,2000 through 2014 20 6 Market Rate Senior Housing Projects,Scott County PMA 25 7 Amenity Comparison, Market Rate Senior Housing Projects 26 8 Adult/Few Services Demand Estimate,Market Rate Senior Housing Projects 32 9 Congregate Living Demand, Primary Market Area 34 10 Assisted Living Demand Estimate, Primary Market Area 37 11 Demand Summary, Primary Market Area 39 12 Recommended Unit Size/Mix/Rents,Primary Market Area 40 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose and Scope of Study • Maxfield Research Inc.was engaged by the Scott County Community Development Agency "Client")to study the market feasibility for independent living and"flex"assisted living units on property located at Sommerville Street and 5th Avenue East in the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. Service levels evaluated in this study include adult/few services,congregate (independent living with services available),and assisted living. It is our understanding that the proposed development would consist of 55 housing units,34 of which will be adult/few services and 21 will be "flex"assisted living units. • The scope of this study includes: a site evaluation;an analysis of the demographic and eco- nomic characteristics of the Market Area;and,a senior housing supply and demand analy- sis, including adult/few services rental,congregate and assisted living housing. Based on our analysis,we provide an evaluation of the proposed development concept and project absorption for a possible development on the subject property. Site Evaluation • The property is well-located for a senior housing development. Adjacent and surrounding land uses are highly compatible with senior housing. In particular,the Site's close proximity to existing medical and retail services would increase the marketability of senior housing units on the Site. • The subject property is also located near many parks, religious institutions,and community services that serve the needs of seniors residing in the community. Additionally,the Site provides good visibility from Lewis St.S.and 5th Avenue East and convenient access to Highway 169. The location should be well-received by people seeking service-enhanced senior housing in the Shakopee area. Demographic Review • As of 2010,the PMA had 98,240 residents and 34,175 households. The population in- creased by 30,344 people(+44.7%)while the household base expanded by 10,853 house- holds(+46.5%)from 2000 to 2010. The number of new households was high relative to the number of new people suggesting a trend toward smaller household sizes due primarily to an aging population. Aging of baby boomers led to an increase of 4,631 people(+108.4%)in the 55 to 64 population between 2000 and 2010. As this group ages,all cohorts age 55 or greater are expected to see increases over the next five years,particularly the 55 to 64 and 65 to 69 age groups. The 85+age group is also expected to experience substantial growth. I I' MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • The primary market for service-enhanced housing is senior households age 75 and older. While individuals in their 50s and 60s typically do not comprise the market base for service- enhanced senior housing,they often have elderly parents to whom they provide support when they decide to relocate to senior housing. Since elderly parents typically prefer to be near their adult caregivers,growth in the older adult age cohort(age 55 to 64)generally re- sults in additional demand for senior housing products. • Active Adult living with limited services(Adult/Few Services) housing demand is driven by adult and senior households (55+)with incomes$30,000 or more, but most households in this category are age 70+if residing in apartment style buildings.We estimate that the number of age-and-income qualified households in the PMA to be 10,192 in 2014,increas- ing to 12,577, increasing by 2,385 (23.4%) householders in 2019. • Independent living with services(congregate)housing demand is driven by senior house- holds(age 75+)with incomes of$30,000 or more. We estimate the number of age-and in- come-qualified households in the PMA to be 4,488 householders in 2014, increasing to 5,638(+25.6%) householders in 2019. • The target market for assisted living housing is senior households age 75 and older with in- comes of at least$35,000(plus senior homeowners with lower incomes). We estimate that there are currently about 1,243 older senior households(age 75+) in the PMA with incomes of at least$35,000,accounting for about 74%of all older senior households. Including all households with incomes of$40,000 and over(adjusted for inflation),the number of older senior households projected to income-qualify for senior housing with services is expected to grow to 1,961 households in 2019(+37.5%). • With a homeownership rate of 78%for all households over the age of 65, many residents would be able to use proceeds from the sales of their homes toward senior housing alterna- tives. The resale of single-family homes would allow additional senior households to qualify for market rate housing products,since equity from the home sale could be used as sup- plemental income for alternative housing. • Based on the 2013 median sale price in the PMA($255,000),a senior household could gen- erate approximately$4,794 of additional income annually(about$400 per month), if they invested in an income-producing account. Should a senior utilize the home proceeds dollar for dollar to support living in senior housing with services,the proceeds of this home would last more than 20 years in an independent living unit(with monthly rent approximated at $1,100)ten years in congregate housing(monthly rent approximated at$2,000),over five years in assisted living(monthly rent approximated at$3,500). Seniors in service-intensive housing typically have lengths of stays between two and three years indicating that a large portion of PMA seniors will be financially prepared to privately pay for their housing and services. MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. 2 I � EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Competitive Senior Housing Market Analysis • We identified nine competitive senior housing facilities in the PMA. These facilities contain a total of 578 senior housing units,seven of which are vacant for a 1.2%vacancy rate. We identified nine adult/few services facilities,two facilities providing congregate living,and three properties with assisted living units. In total,these facilities contain 313 adult/few services units, 139 congregate living units,and 126 units of assisted living in the PMA. There is only one vacancy in the adult/few services developments. Both of the congregate facilities are fully-occupied,and there are currently six vacant assisted living units(4.8%va- cancy). Market equilibrium for senior housing ranges from 5.0%to 7.0%vacancy,which al- lows for an adequate supply of alternatives for prospective residents. Vacancy rates below equilibrium indicate that pent-up demand exists for additional service-enhanced senior housing units in the Market Area. • On average, assisted living units are 691 square feet and rent for roughly$3,396 per month. Monthly rents typically include all utilities,three meals per day,and weekly housekeeping. Senior Housing Demand Conclusions • Excess demand was identified for 334 adult/few services units in the PMA. Based on a cap- ture rate of 20%,we estimate that the subject property could support 67 independent living units in 2014,increasing to 105 units in 2019. There is currently demand for 200 units of congregate living in the PMA. Applying a capture rate of 20%we estimate that the site could support 40 units of congregate living in 2014,which would increase to 58 units by 2019. There is currently excess demand for 103 assisted living units in the PMA. Utilizing a 25%capture rate,we estimate that the Site could support 26 assisted living units in 2014. By 2019, we expect assisted living demand to grow to 41 units capturable on the subject property. • As proposed,the development will consist of 55 total units,34 of which will be adult/few services, and there will also be 21 "flex"assisted living units. The number of adult/few ser- vices units proposed does not exceed the number capturable in 2014(67 units). The"flex" assisted living units proposed does not exceed the number capturable in 2014(26 units). Additionally,the both independent and "flex"assisted living units can also capture a portion of congregate demand. As such,there appears to be sufficient market demand to support the proposed development now and in 2019. MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. 3 City of Shakopee Memorandum TO: Kyle Sobota,Senior Planner FROM: Joe Swentek, Project Engineer SUBJECT: Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Review — Scott County Community Development Agency PID#: 27-001568-0 CASE#: 14045 DATE: November 24, 2014 The application indicates a request for a PUD concept review for a property located between Lewis Street and Sommerville Street and between 5th Avenue and 6th Avenue. The property is currently zoned Old Shakopee Residential (R1-C). The engineering department has completed its review of the initial submittal and offers the following preliminary comments at this time to the applicant and to the planning department: 1. The applicant will dedicate drainage and utility easements per requirements set forth in the City Code and the City of Shakopee Design Criteria. 2. The applicant will provide a detailed storm water management plan. This plan will provide treatment, rate control and infiltration per requirements set forth in the City of Shakopee Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan (CWRMP). 3. It appears the property will be served by storm sewer near the intersection of 5th Avenue and Sommerville Street. 4. All storm sewer in the rights-of-way and drainage and utility easements will be reinforced concrete. 5. It appears the property will be served by sanitary sewer by a trunk system in 5th Avenue. A detailed analysis of the service pipe size will be required. 6. The applicant will work with City of Shakopee staff to remove some of the existing angle parking on 5th Avenue, Sommerville Street and 6th Avenue if they are in sight triangles. C:\Users\ksobota\Downloads\Case.Number.14045 PUD Concept Rev(Scott County CDA)112414(1).docx Page 1 of 1 Scott County CDA—The Henderson Senior Housing Neighborhood Meeting 12/9/14 Name Address 1• & A 33� N}e. . S\no�.Lo�pee. . 2 1�1-e\\ Yv vktl . Ie.nioeQ_ 3 1« 4 R))'J 3U s}h Ave. E �� 7,e-5a. 7 2 A-34 vvi,r, Wes. �j tvt p Ars b 8 e 511. i" Le-r41)t----ff-0-11 din I 17 epSt...4:*- 114%, •Vbrje--111-6€____ 7 t4t.L L)t es,41 52 3 7th I've 4 9' S1ve m oir 6ôf. cc-z,kvier,./`,k /362 6.77: gve% EA_s ,- ti ' : 1�--o e . � � SM <ore-�. (I :Lt.A. I.atOtLA. ' Jove e Sh