G5-00 •
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-