Fwd: Ruth Street Property

[District 1 Council]

See below. I have a message in to Mike to see exactly what this would change in terms of operations and neighborhood impact. Let me know if you have immediate objections or want to wait to hear more.

Betsy

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Michael Mugaas <mi...@transitions.pro>
Date: Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:48 AM
Subject: Ruth Street Property
To: district...@aol.com
Cc: district...@gmail.com

Betsy,

Thanks again for all your help!  I am still working on the Ruth Street property.  These projects can be overwhelming.

After meeting with the architect and going over build renovation costs, the Group Residential Housing option is probably not going to work due to construction cost.  instead of abandoning the project we could look at Residential Treatment.  It wouldn't be all that different accept the counciling services would happen on site, instead of down the road at an outpatient clinic.  I won't pursue this as an option if you think we shouldn't.  Please let me know.  Thanks again!

Best,

Mike

 

   Michael Mugaas 

    Direct (612) 819-7207
    Transitions Outpatient
    366 Prior Avenue North, Suite #205
    St. Paul, MN 55104

--

Betsy Leach

Executive Director/Cmty Organizer

District 1 Community Council
2105 1/2 Old Hudson Rd.
Saint Paul, MN 55119
651.578.7600 (office); 651.578.7404 (fax)
www.district1council.org (website)

www.district1council.blogspot.com (blog)

[District 1 Council]

Here is Mike's response to my questions.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Michael Mugaas <mi...@transitions.pro>

Date: Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: Ruth Street Property
To: District 1 Council <district...@gmail.com>

There would be 24 hour staff.  There would also be more staff with the addition of a Treatment Director and counselors.

Earlier in recovery is possible although relapses can occur at any time.  

Parking should not change.  Actually with the addition of group rooms and offices, we would have to reduce the number of residents.

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 15, 2015, at 9:37 AM, District 1 Council <district...@gmail.com> wrote:

Let me pass this info on to the Land Use group and see if they have any objections. It essentially means that people are earlier in their recovery and that there is more intensive oversight at the location, correct? The clinicians on site?

Or does it also mean there will be more people coming and going as well? Does it change anything in terms of parking and traffic needs?

Thanks Mike.

Betsy

[Paul Sawyer]

Thanks, Betsy.

So if I understand this correctly, it's the same type of patient (similar backgrounds, similar treatment plans) just at a different point in the treatment process?  With fewer patients and a different type of use, will this minimize or eliminate the construction needs?  Finally, does this change anything from a zoning code perspective (i.e. is this a different type of use that requires a different variance/CUP)?

Thanks,
Paul

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "D1LandUse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to d1landuse+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to d1la...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/d1landuse.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[District 1 Council]

I will check on the variance question. Yes, same profile of patient just at a different point. I suspect that the fee they receive per patient increases because intensity of treatment increases so construction costs can be covered, but I will check.