Planning board backs recommendation to rezone 40 North 300 East for small elderly/disabled apartment complex

The Beaver City Planning and Zoning Board on Jan. 6 voted to recommend that City Council consider rezoning a parcel at 40 North 300 East from R‑1 to MF‑2 to allow a small, single‑level apartment complex aimed at elderly and disabled residents.

Jason Shire, executive director of Beaver Housing, presented the request and said the nonprofit is seeking to build “a single‑level [apartment complex] for elderly and disabled” on land it already owns and expects to fit “6 to 10 apartments, varying on just what our engineers and architects will be able to do” while meeting parking and setback requirements. Shire said the project would be privately financed through Beaver Housing’s property and would not be part of a public‑housing program.

Board staff told members that all property owners within 300 feet were notified by letter and that no phone complaints or public objections had been received. A staff member reported: “We had no public comment. Nobody called saying that they had concerns, and everybody within 300 feet of the property just sent letters and notified about it so we didn't have any complaints.”

During discussion, several board members and residents noted adjacent parcels and an existing Beaver Housing site were zoned inconsistently with current use; they said the rezoning request presented an opportunity to correct zoning across that block. Board members and the presenter discussed parcel boundaries and site constraints, including trees and whether adjacent land might be used for future expansion if design and setbacks allowed.

Taylor Gillens, the planning and zoning administrator, advised the board on code implications if the applicant frames the project as housing for the “disabled.” Gillens said that while a “residential facility for the elderly” is a permitted multifamily use, using the term “disabled” could trigger additional rules: “If you use the word disabled, then there has to be somebody in house, like a caretaker on the facility. It's 24 hours is what our code reflects,” she said, noting that in some circumstances the applicant might need a conditional‑use permit.

After closing public comment, a board member moved and another seconded a motion to accept the rezoning recommendation and forward it to City Council; staff said they would present the request to council for final action. The planning board’s recommendation is advisory to City Council, which must take the final vote and could require additional review or a conditional‑use permit depending on the applicants’ chosen use and the code criteria.

Next steps: staff will present the board’s recommendation to Beaver City Council; if the applicant pursues the project under a definition that triggers conditional‑use criteria (for example, an operator‑supervised facility described as housing for the disabled), the proposal may return to planning and zoning for additional review before a final council decision.