Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutG5-00 • Ordinance No. G5-00 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR A SENIOR CITIZEN INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY (785 Fletcher Drive) WHEREAS, written application has been made for an AB Area Business District conditional use for a planned development for a senior citizen independent living facility at 785 Fletcher Drive; and WHEREAS, the Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board conducted a public hearing after due notice by publication and has submitted its findings of fact and recommended approval ; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Elgin concurs in the findings and recommendation of the Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ELGIN, ILLINOIS : Section 1 . That the City Council of the City of Elgin hereby adopts the findings of fact made by the Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference as Exhibit A. Section 2 . That a conditional use for a planned development for a senior citizen independent living facility at 785 Fletcher Drive and legally described as follows : LOT 452 AND THE NORTH FIFTEEN (15) FEET OF LOT 453 OF VALLEY CREEK, UNIT NO. 11, IN THE CITY OF ELGIN, KANE COUNTY ILLINOIS . be and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions : 1 . Substantial conformance to the Memo, encompassing the Second Amended Development Application submitted by Peter Bazos, Esquire; dated November 30, 1999 . 2 . Substantial conformance to the Site Plan dated 11-19-99, encompassing building elevations dated 10-11-99, a landscape plan dated 11-29-99, and floor plans dated 5-26-99; prepared by the Alden Design Group, Inc . emk 3 . In addition to the proposed landscaping depicted on the landscape plan dated 11-29-99, all landscaping shall comply with Section 19 . 12 . 700 (C . ) Vehicle Use Area Landscape Yard, of the Elgin Zoning Ordinance . 4 . A further requirement and condition of this conditional use is that the property and the housing thereon is intended for, and shall be solely occupied by, persons 62 years of age or older. An exception to this requirement and condition shall be allowed for one apartment unit on the property which may be occupied by an employee of the facility and such employee ' s family as hereinafter described who are under 62 years of age provided such employee performs substantial duties directly related to the management and/or maintenance of the property. Persons authorized to occupy such employee management and/or maintenance apartment shall be limited to the management and/or maintenance employee, such employee ' s spouse and children. 5 . Compliance with all other applicable codes and ordinances . Section 3 . That the conditional use granted herein shall expire if not established within one year from the date of passage of this ordinance . Section 4 . That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately after its passage in the manner provided by law. j f T'I Robet Gilliam, Mayor Pro Tem Presented: January 26, 2000 Passed: January 26 , 2000 Omnibus Vote : Yeas 4 Nays 0 Recorded: January 27, 2000 Published: Attest : 4-1-(Ark-1^-(2_ Dolonna Mecum, City Clerk December 15, 1999 FINDINGS OF FACT Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board City of Elgin, Illinois SUBJECT Consideration of Petition 57-99 Requesting a Conditional Use for a Planned Development in the AB Area Business District for a Senior Citizen Independent Living Facility;Property Located at 785 Fletcher Drive by Alden Realty Services, as Applicant, and Valley Creek of Elgin, as Owner. GENERAL INFORMATION Requested Action: Conditional Use Approval Current Zoning: AB Area Business District Intended Use: Senior Citizen Independent Living Facility Property Location: 785 Fletcher Drive eibk Applicant: Alden Realty Services Owner: Valley Creek of Elgin Staff Coordinator: L uren Kieck LIST OF EXHIBITS A. Location Map .(see attached) B. Zoning Map (see attached) C. Parcel Map (see attached) D. Aerial Photo (see attached) E. Memo, Encompassing the Second Amended (see enclosed) Development Application and the Rider; submitted by Peter C. Bazos, Esquire, and dated November 30, 1999. rbk Exhibit A • Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board Petition 57-99 December 15, 1999 tomb. F. Site Plan, encompassing a floor plan,building elevations, (see enclosed) and a landscape plan;by Alden Design Group, Inc., and dated November 19, 1999. BACKGROUND An application has been filed by Alden Realty Services requesting a conditional use for a planned development in the AB Area Business District for a senior citizen independent living facility. The subject property is located at 785 Fletcher Drive (reference Exhibits A,B. nd C). The applicant proposes to develop the subject property with a three story building intended to provide affordable independent living for seniors. The proposed structure will contain 43 dwelling units, each equipped with its own kitchen. The facility will be limited to those persons 62 years of age or older, and will have several meeting rooms and organized activities for residents. The dwelling units range in size from 676 square feet to 971 square feet in floor area(reference Exhibits C and D). FINDINGS After due notice, as required by law, the Zo:,ing and Subdivision Hearing Board held a public hearing in consideration of Petition 57-99 on November 3, 1999. At that time,the public hearing was continued to the December 1, 1999 regular meeting to allow the applicant to revise their application. A second continuance was granted to the December 15, 199 regular meeting. The applicant and the applicant's attorney both testified at the public hearing and presented documentary evidence in support of the application. Neighbors appeared at the hearing and objected to the applicant's proposal. No written correspondence has been submitted. The Community Development Group submitted a Conditional Use Review dated November 4, 1999. The Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board has made the following findings concerning the standards for planned developments: A. Site Characteristics Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended conditional use with respect to its size; shape; significant natural features including topography, watercourses, and vegetation; and existing improvements. Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use with respect to the site characteristics standard. The subject property is a regularly shaped parcel containing approximately 1.949 acres of land. The subject property is undeveloped and has relatively level topography. There are -2- Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board Petition 57-99 December 15, 1999 no significant natural features, watercourses or vegetation present on the subject property. B. Sewer and Water Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended conditional use with respect to the availability of adequate municipal water, wastewater treatment, and storm water control facilities. Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use with respect to the sewer and water standard. The subject property will be served by municipal water and sanitary sewer service. Stormwater detention will be provided on site. C. Traffic and Parking Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended conditional use with respect to the provision of safe and efficient on-site and off-site vehicular circulation designed to minimize traffic congestion. Findings. The subject property may be suitable for the intended conditional use with respect to the traffic and parking standard. The subject property is located on Fletcher Drive. Fletcher Drive is a local street, serving r- the adjoining properties and the Valley Creek Shopping Center. Two points of access along Fletcher Drive are being proposed for the development. The off-street parking ordinance requires 86 parking stalls for a standard multiple family structure containing 43 dwelling units. For elderly public housing, the off street parking ordinance requires one stall per two dwelling units, or 22 stalls for 43 dwelling units. Based on the use of the subject property for a senior citizen independent living facility,the applicant estimates that less than one half of the residents will have cars. The applicant is proposing 40 parking stalls with an additional 8 stalls to be land banked for future use. D. Zoning History Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended conditional use with respect to the length of time the property has remained undeveloped or unused in its current zoning district. Findings. The subject property may be suitable for the conditional use with respect to the length of time the property has remained undeveloped or unused in its current zoning district. The subject property was zoned as follows for the years listed: 1927 Out of City 1950 Out of City 1962 Out of City -3- Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board Petition 57-99 December 15, 1999 1992 B-1 Retail Business District Present AB Area Business District The subject property was annexed and zoned B-1 Retail Business District as part of a larger parcel in 1978, and has remained undeveloped. • E. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended conditional use with respect to consistency and compatibility with surrounding land use and zoning. Findings. The subject property may be suitable for the intended conditional use with respect to consistency and compatibility with surrounding land use and zoning. The subject property is located at the eastern boundary of a community retail business center, zoned AB Area Business District. This business district is developed with various retail and service related businesses. Several undeveloped parcels also within the AB District are located directly south of the subject property, and west across Fletcher Drive. Located to the north of the subject property are the Mill Creek Townhomes, zoned PRC Planned Residence Conservation District. To the east of the subject property is a TFR Two Family Residence District,developed with duplexes. Further east of the subject property is an RC1 Residence Conservation District, which is developed with single family residences. F. Trend of Development Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended conditional use with respect to consistency with an existing pattern of development or an identifiable trend of development in the area. Findings. The subject property may be unsuitable for the intended conditional use with respect to consistency with an existing pattern of development or an identifiable trend within the area. The subject property is located within the Valley Creek Subdivision which was annexed and zoned in 1978. Valley Creek is the largest single annexation in Elgin's history, encompassing residential, community facility, and business components. The subdivision is now largely completed with the exception of some planned residential developments located north of Tyler Creek and the completion of the business area which is centered in the area of Randall Road,Royal Boulevard, and Fletcher Drive. -4- Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board Petition 57-99 December 15, 1999 G. Zoning District Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended conditional use with respect to conformance to the provisions for the purpose and intent,and the location and size of a zoning district. Findings. The subject property may be unsuitable for the intended conditional use with respect to conformance to the provisions for the purpose and intent,and the location and size of a zoning district. The purpose of the AB Area Business District is to provide commodities and services to several neighborhoods, and in some instances to a community wide or regional supporting population. The proposed residential land use is inconsistent with the underlying AB Area Business District zoning. The applicant is requesting a conditional use for a planned development with the intent of introducing a use within the AB District that would otherwise not be permitted. The development of the subject property in a commercial manner would make a welcomed contribution to the tax base. H. Conditional Use for a Planned Development. The suitability of the subject property for the intended conditional use for a planned development with respect to the provisions for the purpose and intent of planned developments. No conditional use for a planned development shall be granted for the sole purpose of introducing a land use not otherwise permitted on the subject property. The purpose and intent of the provisions for planned developments is to accommodate unique development situations. For planned developments as a conditional use,the planned development should demonstrate the following characteristics: 1. An opportunity to realize a development of demonstrated need with respect to the types of environment available to the public, that would not be possible under the strict application of the other chapters of this title. 2. The public benefit realized by the establishment of the planned development is greater than if the property were to remain subject to the standard requirements of the zoning district in which it is located. 3. Extraordinary conditions or limitations governing site design, function, operation, and traffic are imposed on the planned development. Findings. The subject property may be suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned development with respect to conformance to the provision for the purpose and intent of planned developments. It has been found that the proposed senior living facility at the proposed location could result in less impact to the surrounding residential neighborhoods than a typical multiple family residential development or any other use allowable within the underlying AB Area Business e`' District zoning. -5- Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board Petition 57-99 December 15, 1999 Comprehensive Plan Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended conditional use with respect to conformance to the goals, objectives, and policies of the official comprehensive plan. Findings. The subject property is unsuitable for the intended conditional use with respect to comprehensive plan. The subject property is designated as "business" by the Official Comprehensive Plan of Elgin(1983). J. Natural Preservation Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended planned development with respect to the preservation of all significant planned development with respect to the preservation of all significant natural features including topography, watercourses,wetlands, and vegetation. Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended planned development with respect to the natural preservation There are no significant natural features present at the subject property worthy of preservation. C, K. Internal Land Use Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended planned development with respect to the land uses permitted within the development being located, designed, and operated so as to exercise no undue detrimental influence on each other or on surrounding property. Finding. The subject property is may be suitable for the intended conditional use with respect to the internal land use standard. The proposed planned development is designed at a greater density than would otherwise be permitted under the standard requirements of both the MFR Multiple Family Residence District and the AB Area Business District. The applicant is proposing one dwelling unit per 1,974 square feet of lot area. The maximum floor area allowed within the MFR District and under the planned development regulations is one dwelling unit per 5,000 square feet of lot area, and one dwelling unit per 3,000 square feet of lot area, respectively. The proposed planned development is designed with a greater floor area than would otherwise be permitted under the standard requirements of both the MFR Multiple Family Residence District and the AB Area Business District. The maximum allowable floor area in the MFR District is 26,678 square feet. The maximum allowable floor area in the AB District is 44,348 square feet. The applicant is proposing 48,660 square feet of floor area. -6- Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board Petition 57-99 December 15, 1999 With respect to traffic, it has been found that the proposed senior living facility could be less intense than the standard multiple family residential development,or any other use that could occur within the underlying AB Area Business District zoning. The proposed senior living facility within the AB Area Business District sufficiently mitigates the impact of the requested departures to the allowable floor area and density. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DEPARTURES AND EXCEPTIONS A planned development may be granted certain departures from the normal standards,regulations, requirements,and procedures of the zoning ordinance. The applicant is requesting departures from the standard requirements of the AB Area Business District as follow: 1. Section 1935.435 (H., 1.) - Transition Landscape Yards. In the AB Area Business District,the minimum required transition landscape yard is 26 feet. The applicant proposes the vehicle use area with a setback of 10 feet from the northerly property line. 2. Section 19.35.435 (I.) - Floor Area. The maximum allowable floor area in the AB Area Business District is 44,348 square feet. The applicant is proposing 48,660 square feet of floor area, or a 110% departure. For purposes of comparison, the proposal is most similar in character to the MFR Multiple Family Residence District. The following represents departures from the standard requirements of the MFR Multiple Family Residence District: 1. Section 19.25.735 (B.) - Lot Area. In the MFR Multiple Family Residence District, the minimum allowable lot area per dwelling unit is 5,000 square feet. Under the planned development regulations,the maximum allowable lot area per dwelling unit is 3,000 square feet. The applicant is proposing 1,974 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit. 2. Section 19.25.735(H.) -Residential Floor Area. In the MFR Multiple Family Residence District, the maximum allowable residential floor area is 26,678 square feet. The applicant is proposing 48,660 square feet of floor area, or a 182% departure. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, UNRESOLVED ISSUES, AND ALTERNATIVES A majority of the Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board has developed or identified the following findings,unresolved issues, and alternatives: -7- • Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board Petition 57-99 December 15, 1999 A. Summary of Findings. 1. Zoning Districts. The subject property may be unsuitable for the intended conditional use with respect to consistency with an existing pattern of development • or an identifiable trend within the area. The purpose of the AB Area Business District is to provide commodities and services to several neighborhoods, and in some instances to a community wide or regional supporting population. The proposed residential land use is inconsistent with the underlying AB Area Business District zoning. The applicant is requesting a conditional use for a planned development with the intent of introducing a use within the AB District that would otherwise not be permitted. Development of the subject property in a commercial manner would make a welcomed contribution to the tax base. 2. Internal Land. Use. The subject property may be suitable for the intended conditional use with respect to the internal land use standard. It has been found that the intended land use at the proposed location is less of an issue than the proposed departures in density and floor area. Site Design -Density. The proposed planned development is designed at a greater density than would otherwise be permitted under the standard requirements of the >. MFR Multiple Family Residence District and the Planned Development Ordinance. The applicant is proposing one dwelling unit per 1,974 square feet of lot area. The maximum floor area allowed within the MFR District and under the planned development regulations is one dwelling unit per 5,000 square feet of lot area, and one dwelling unit per 3,000 square feet of lot area,respectively. Site Design - Floor Area. The proposed planned development is designed with a greater floor area than would otherwise be permitted under the standard requirements of both the MFR Multiple Family Residence District and the AB Area Business District. The maximum allowable floor area in the MFR District is 26,678 square feet. The maximum allowable floor area in the AB District is 44,348 square feet. The applicant is proposing 48,660 square feet of floor area. Land Use. With respect to traffic, it has been found that the proposed senior living facility could be less intense than the standard multiple family residential development, or any other use that could occur within the underlying AB Area Business District zoning. The proposed senior living facility within the AB Area Business District sufficiently mitigates the impact of the requested departures to the allowable floor area and density. elk -8- Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board Petition 57-99 December 15, 1999 . r B. Summa ry of Unresolved Issues. There are no unresolved issues. C. Summary of AIternatives. ' Other than an approval, a denial,or an approval with some combination of conditions,there are no substantive alternatives. RECOMMENDATION The Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board hereby recommends approval of Petition 57-99. On a motion to recommend approval of Petition 57-99,subject to the following conditions,the vote was four(4)yes and two (2)no: 1. Substantial conformance to the Memo, encompassing the Second Amended Development Application submitted by Peter Bazos, Esquire; dated November 30, 1999. 2. Substantial conformance to the Site Plan, encompassing building elevations and a landscape plan; prepared by Alden Design Group, Inc., dated November 19, 1999. 3. Revisions to the proposed Site Plan incorporating the required vehicle use area landscaping. 4. Compliance with all other applicable codes and ordinances. Therefore, the motion to recommend approval of Petition 57-99 was adopted. Ralph i�I'iberi,P Chairman Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board 449 4tOr e 'eck, Secretary •ning and Subdivision Hearing Board e -9-