G12-11 Ordinance No. G12-11
AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER G31-06 IN THE PMFR PLANNED MULTIPLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT AND ARC ARTERIAL ROAD
CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT
(508 - 522 North McLean Blvd.)
WHEREAS, the territory herein described has previously been classified in the PMFR
Planned Multiple Family Residence District pursuant to Ordinance No. G31-06; and
WHEREAS,written application has been made to amend certain provisions within Ordinance
No. G31-06; and
WHEREAS, after due notice in the manner provided by law the Planning and Development
Commission conducted public hearings concerning said application and has submitted its written
findings and recommendations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Elgin concurs in the Findings and
Recommendation of the Planning and Development Commission.
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, dated February 21, 2011, made by the Planning and Development Commission, a copy of
which is attached hereto and made apart hereof by reference as Exhibit A. Ordinance G31-06 be
and is hereby amended in its entirety as hereinafter set forth in this ordinance.
Section 2. That Chapter 19.08, Section 19.08.020 entitled Zoning District map of the
Elgin Municipal Code, as amended,be and the same is hereby further amended by adding thereto the
following paragraph:
The boundaries hereinafter laid out in the Zoning District Map, as amended, be and
are hereby altered by including in the PMFR Planned Multiple Family Residence
District the following described property:
PMFR (EAST) PARCEL:
THAT PART OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 8 EAST OF THE THIRD
PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A
POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST HALF; 30 RODS; 1 FOOT 6
•
3. l
• INCHES NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER SECTION;
THENCE CONTINUING NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 20 RODS, 1
FOOT; THENCE EAST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
QUARTER SECTION, 632 FEET TO THE POINT PF BEGINNING; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, 672.75 FEET TO THE WEST
LINE OF PUBLIC HIGHWAY: THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF
SAID HIGHWAY,20 RODS, 1 FOOT;THENCE WESTERLY AT AN ANGLE OF
91 DEGREES, 25 MINUTES 30 SECONDS TO THE LEFT FROM SAID LAST
COURSE, 664.52 FEET TO A LINE DRAWN AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE
FIRST COURSE FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH
ALONG SAID LINE, 330.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
TOGETHER WITH THAT PART OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF SECTION 10, AFORESAID, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NEST LINE OF MCLEAN BOULEVARD
887.5 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 10; THENCE
WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION, 150 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF MCLEAN
BOULEVARD,60 FEET;THENCE EAST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE
OF SECTION 10, AFORESAID, 150 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF MCLEAN
BOULEVARD; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE 60 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 5.29 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR
LESS, IN THE CITY OF ELGIN,
• Section 3. That the City Council of the City of Elgin hereby grants the PMFR
Planned Multiple Family Residence District for the property commonly known as 508 - 522 North
McLean Boulevard, and legally described above, which shall be designed, developed; and operated
subject to the following provisions:
A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the PMFR District is to provide a planned urban
residential environment for multiple family dwellings, subject to the provisions of
Chapter 19.60, Planned Developments. A PMFR zoning district is most similar to,
but departs from the standard requirements of the MFR zoning district.
B. Supplementary Regulations. Any word or phrase contained within this ordinance
followed by the symbol "[SR]" shall be subject to the definitions and the additional
interpretive requirements provided in Chapter 19.90, Supplementary Regulations,of
the EMC. The exclusion of such symbol shall not exempt such word or phrase from
the applicable supplementary regulation.
C. General Provisions. In this PMFR District, the use and development of land and
structures shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.05, General Provisions, of
the EMC, as may be amended from time to time.
• - 2 -
• D. Zoning Districts Generally. In this PMFR District,the use and development of land
and structures shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.07,Zoning Districts of
the EMC, as may be amended from time to time.
E. Location and Size of Districts. Planned residential districts should be located in
substantial conformance to the official comprehensive plan. The amount of land
necessary to constitute a separate planned residential district exclusive of rights of
way,but including adjoining land or land directly opposite a right of way shall not be
less than two acres. No departure from the required minimum size of a planned
residential district shall be granted by the City Council.
F. Land Use. In this PMFR District, the only land use allowed shall be a senior living
facility (including such optional ancillary services as the provision of meals,
housekeeping services, on-site activities (such as computers, art & crafts, cards and
games, etc.) and fitness facilities), developed and operated in substantial
conformance to the following:
1. Substantial conformance to the petitioner's Statement of Purpose and
Conformance submitted with the original development application cover
letter by Jerrold H. Frumm, Executive Vice-President, Senior Lifestyle
Corporation, dated September 7, 2005, as amended by the new Statement of
Purpose and Conformance submitted with the new development application
• which is stamped"RECEIVED"on December 13, 2010. In the event of any
conflict between said original Statement of Purpose and Conformance and
said new Statement of Purpose and Conformance, the new Statement of
Purpose and Conformance shall supersede and control. For additional
reference, said new Statement of Purpose and Conformance is titled
"RIDER" and carries the footer "W:\Work\34373\2010 Amendments\2010
Development Applications-Sear Lifestyle-v1doc" on each of its four (4)
pages. In the event of any conflict between such documents and the
provisions of this ordinance,the provisions of this ordinance shall supersede
and control.
2. All residents in the age-restricted apartment building referenced in said
original development application as"The Residence of Autumn Green",now
specifically identified within said new development application as the "4
STORY RESIDENCE BUILDING"on Site Plan Sheet A1.0 prepared by DM
Design Group and dated February 1, 2011, and hereinafter referred to as the
"Subject Age 62 Building" must be age sixty two (62)or older and no person
under sixty two (62) years of age shall occupy or reside within a residential
unit in the Subject Age 62 Building.
3. To the extent permitted by law; and except as provided below, the rents or
other costs imposed as a condition of residency at the subject property
(whether those residents be tenants or owners)shall not be subsidized by any
governmental or quasi-governmental or charitable entity. The foregoing
provision shall not prohibit (a) offering affordable rents as a condition of a
financing subsidy obtained through tax credits; or(b) accepting tenants who
receive rental assistance from a govermmental rental assistance program
where refusing to select such a tenant because the tenant is receiving
governmental rental assistance is(i)prohibited by regulations relating to the
financing subsidy obtained through tax credits,or(ii)otherwise prohibited by
law.
4. Except as provided in the following Section 3175, each occupied
condominium in the building referenced in said original development
application as "The Condominiums of Autumn Green", now specifically
identified within said new development application as the "4 STORY
CONDOMINIUM BUILDING" on Site Plan Sheet A1.0 prepared by DM
Design Group and dated February 1, 2011, and hereinafter referred to as the
"Subject Age Restricted Condominiums" shall at all times have as a
permanent occupant as least one(1)person who is fifty five(55)years of age
or older. For the purposes of this ordinance, an occupant shall not be
considered a "permanent occupant" in the Subject Age Restricted
• Condominiums unless such occupant considers the condominium unit to be
his or her legal residence and actually resides in the condominium unit for at
least six (6) months during every calendar year or such shorter period as the
condominium unit is actually occupied by any person. No condominium unit
in the Subject Age Restricted Condominiums shall be occupied by any person
under the age of twenty two (22). For the purposes of this ordinance, a
condominium unit in the Subject Age Restricted Condominiums shall be
deemed to be "occupied" by any person who stays overnight in the
condominium unit more than ninety (90) days in any twelve (12) month
period.
5. Each occupied condominium unit in the Subject Age Restricted
Condominiums shall at all times have as a permanent occupant at least one
(1) person who is fifty five (55) years of age or older (the "Qualifying
Occupant"),except that in the event of the death of a person who was the sole
Qualifying Occupant of a condominium unit,persons age twenty two(22)or
older who were occupying the condominium unit with such Qualifying
Occupant at the time of the death or relocation to a long-term health care
facility for medical reasons of the Qualifying Occupant may continue to
occupy the condominium unit provided that the provisions of the United
States and State of Illinois Fair Housing Acts and the terms and conditions of
• - 4 -
• this Agreement are not otherwise violated by such occupancy.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, at all times, at least eighty percent (80%) of
the condominium units in the Subject Age Restricted Condominiums shall at
all times have as a permanent occupant at least one person who is fifty five
(55) years of age or older.
G. Site Design. In this PMFR District,the site design regulations shall be as required in
the MFR Multiple Family Residence District; pursuant to Chapter 19.25.735 Site
Design, of the EMC, as may be amended from time to time. Additionally, the
development of land and structures shall be in substantial conformance with the
following:
1. Substantial conformance to the Project Data Comparison worksheet dated,
February 7, 2011.
2. Substantial conformance to the Site Plan Sheet A1.0 dated February 1, 2011
and Building Elevations Sheet A3.0 dated November 11,2010,each prepared
by DM Design Group.
3. For the Subject Age 62 Building, substantial conformance to the Unit Plans
Sheet A5.1 dated February 14, 2011 prepared by DM Design Group.
• 4. For the Subject Age 62 Building, substantial conformance to Ground Floor
Plan Sheet A2.1 dated February 14,2011 and to the Typical Floor Plan dated
February 16, 2010, each prepared by DM Design Group, The number of
studio apartments in the Subject Age 62 Building shall not exceed thirteen
(13). The development administrator shall have the authority to approve a
reduction in the number of studio apartments and revisions to the number of
one-bedroom and two-bedroom units (even though such action may reduce
the total units to below one hundred and twelve (112)) as long as the total
number of units in the Subject Age 62 Building does not exceed one hundred
thirty-six (136).
5. For the Subject Age Restricted Condominiums, substantial conformance to
the Senior Condominiums Ground and Typical Floor Plans Sheet A2.3 dated
September 26, 2005 and revised Building Elevation Plan Sheet A3.1 dated
January 18, 2006, each prepared by Mann Gin Dubin and Frazier, Ltd.
6. Substantial conformance to the landscape plans (L 1 and L2) and tree
preservation plans (TP 1 and TP2) dated September 26, 2005, each prepared
by Hitchcock Design Group.
7. Compliance with all other applicable codes and ordinances. For purposes of
clarification,applicant's requests within Section 2.4 of said new Statement of
• - 5 -
• Purpose and Conformance—for a departure from the revocation requirements
of§ 19.60.2 10 of the Elgin Zoning Ordinance, among other things—are not
granted.
H. Off-Street Parking. In this PMFR District, off street parking shall be subject to the
provisions of Chapter 19.45, Off Street Parking, of the EMC, as amended.
I. Off-Street Loading. In this PMFR District,off street loading shall be subject to the
provisions of Chapter 19.47, Off Street Loading, of the EMC, as amended.
J. Signs. In this PMFR District, signs shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter
19.50, Signs of the Elgin Municipal Code, 1976; as amended.
K. Amendments. In this PMFR District;application for text and map amendments shall
be subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.55, Amendments. A text and map
amendment may be requested by an individual lot or property owner for a zoning lot
without necessitating that all other property owners in this PMFR zoning district
authorize such an application.
L. Planned Developments. . In this PMFR zoning district,the use and development of
the land and structures shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.60, Planned
Developments of the Elgin Municipal Code, 1976, as amended. A conditional use
• for a planned development may be requested by an individual lot or property owner
for a zoning lot without requiring an amendment to this PMFR zoning district and
without necessitating that all other property owners in this PMFR zoning district
authorize such an application.
M. Conditional Uses. In this PMFR zoning district, the use and development of the
land and structures shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.65 Conditional
Uses of the Elgin Municipal Code, 1976, as amended. A conditional use may be
requested by an individual lot or property owner for a zoning lot without requiring an
amendment to this PMFR zoning district and without necessitating that all other
property owners in this PMFR zoning district authorize such an application.
N. Variations. In this PMFR District; the use and development of the land and
structures shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.70,Variations of the Elgin
Municipal Code, 1976, as amended. A variation may be requested by an individual
lot or property owner for a zoning lot without requiring an amendment to this PMFR
zoning district and without necessitating that all other property owners in this PMFR
zoning district authorize such an application.
• - 6 -
O. Subdivisions—Generally. The subdivision of the subject property and development
thereof shall comply with the subdivision regulations of the city,as amended;and the
Plat Act of the State of Illinois.
P. Appeals. Any requirement, determination, or interpretation associated with the
administration and enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance may be appealed
subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.75, Appeals of the Elgin Municipal Code,
1976, as amended.
Section 4. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the
provisions of this ordinance be and are hereby repealed.
Section 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately
after its passage in the manner provided by law.
Ed Schock, Mayor
Presented: April 13, 2011
Passed: April 13, 2011 r
Vote: Yeas: 7 Nays: 0
• Recorded: April 14, 2011 0�sw�rn�¢
Published: April 15, 2011
r� =
Attest:
Diane Robertson, City Cle k
• - 7 -
February 21, 2011
FINDINGS OF FACT
Planning and Development Commission City of Elgin, Illinois
SUBJECT
BACKGROUND
Requested Action: Amendment to Ordinance No. G31-06
Current Zoning: PMFR Planned Multiple Family Residence District
Proposed Zoning PMFR Planned Multiple Family Residence District
Existing Use: Vacant Property
Proposed Use: Senior Living Facility and Open Space
• Property Location: 508-522 North McLean Boulevard
Applicant: Senior Lifestvle Corporation
Owner: Senior Lifestyle Corporation
Staff Coordinator: Dave Waden. Senior Planner
LIST OF EXHIBITS
A. Location Map (see attached)
B. Zoning Map (see attached)
C. Parcel Map (see attached)
D. Aerial Map (see attached)
E. Environmental Map (see attached)
F. Site Photos (see attached)
• G. Statement of Purposed and Conformance & Exhibits (see attached)
Exhibit A
l
Findings of Fact Planning and Development Commission
Petition 01-1 February 21, 2011
• H. Draft Planned Development Ordinance (see attached)
I. Related Correspondence (see attached)
BACKGROUND
An application has been filed by Senior Lifestyle Corporation, requesting an amendment to
PMFR Planned Multiple Family Residence District Ordinance No. G31-06. The subject property
is located at 508 N. McLean Boulevard. (reference Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F).
The applicant received approval for a planned development on the property in April of 2006.
The planned development proposed the construction of two new buildings for independent senior
living — one building containing rental units and one building containing owner occupied
residences. The rental unit building would contain 136 apartments and would be an aged
restricted community for seniors age 62 and older. The condominium building containing 24
owner occupied units would be age restricted for people aged 55 and older with a requirement
that no less than one member of the household be age 55 or older. Each of the two buildings was
proposed to be constructed using at least 75% masonry materials, and be made available only to
seniors at market rate.
• The westerly 5.53 acre portion of the property is zoned PCF Planned Community Facility
District and is proposed to be left vacant since it is primarily located in the floodplain of Tyler
Creek. No changes are proposed to this portion of the property at this time.
The applicant is proposing to reduce the square footage of the four story age-restricted residence
building from 37,040 square feet to approximately 27,448 square feet and, a reduction in the
number of apartment units from 136 to approximately 112 units. The proposed mix of dwelling
units within the 4-story age-restricted residence building will be made up of studio apartments
and 1-bedroom and/or 2-bedroom apartments. The potential building height will be reduced
from fifty-five (55) feet to approximately fifty-two (52) feet. No changes are proposed to the
architectural design and building materials, or the landscape materials associated with age
restricted rental apartment building
Approximately 90 percent of the units within the rental apartment building will be subject to
maximum allowable rents based upon the area median income and will be made available to
renters qualifying with household incomes no greater than 60 percent of the area median income.
In addition, market rate rental is open to households of any income will be included in the unit
mix.
No changes are being proposed to the 4-story owner occupied condominium building that is
proposed to be located to the north of the age-restricted residence building. (reference Exhibits
G, Hand I).
- 2 -
Findings of Fact Planning and Development Commission
Petition 01-1 February 21, 2011
GENERAL FINDINGS
After due notice, as required by law, the Planning and Development Commission held a public
hearing in consideration of Petition 0 1-11 on February 21, 2011. The applicant testified at the
public hearing. No objectors spoke at the public hearing, and written correspondence was
submitted. The Community Development Group submitted a Map Amendment Review, dated
February 16, 2011.
The Planning and Development Commission has made the following general findings:
A. Site Characteristics Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended
zoning district with respect to its size, shape, significant natural features (including
topography, watercourse and vegetation), and existing improvements.
Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended zoning district with respect to
the site characteristics standard.
The subject property is rectangular shaped and approximately 10.41 acres in size. It
currently is vacant property and has road frontage on McLean Boulevard, and Eagle
Road.
B. Sewer and Water Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended
zoning district 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 zoning district with respect to
the sewer and water standard.
The subject property is served with municipal water and sanitary sewer systems. The
stormwater detention volume will be detained onsite and will be in full conformance with
the standards and regulations of the City of Elgin and Kane County Stormwater
Management Ordinances.
C. Traffic and Parking Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended
zoning district 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 is suitable for the intended zoning district with respect to
the traffic and parking standard.
The subject property is located at the southeast corner of McLean Boulevard and Eagle
Road. McLean Boulevard is an arterial road which serve the west side of Elgin. Eagle
Road is a local street serving the surrounding neighborhood. Two access points are
available from McLean Boulevard
Off street parking is provided in conformance with the Off Street Parking Ordinance.
- 3 -
Findings of Fact Planning and Development Commission
Petition 0 1-1 February 21, 2011
•
D. Zoning History Standard. Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended
zoning district 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 Limits
1950: Out of City Limits
1960: Out of City Limits
1961: Out of City Limits
1962: Out of City Limits
1992: B-3 Service Business District
Present: PMFR Planned Multiple Family Residence District
The property was annexed to the City of Elgin in 1973 as part of the Schock's property
annexation and was zoned B-3 Service Business District. The property was reclassified
in 1992 to AB Area Business District and SFR1 Single Family Residential as part of a
comprehensive amendment to the zoning ordinance.
E. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Standard. The suitability of the subject property
for the intended zoning district with respect to consistency and compatibility with
surrounding land use and zoning.
Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended zoning district with respect to
consistency and compatibility with surrounding land use and zoning.
East of the subject property are zoned RB Residence Business District and CF
Community Facility District and is developed with single family residences and a church.
To the north of the property are zoned AB Area Business District and RC2 Residence
Conservation District, and is developed with single family residences and a commercial
building.
To the west of the subject property is zoned PCF Planned Community Facility and is
undeveloped.
To the south of the subject property is zoned MFR Multiple Family Residence District
and RB Residence Business District, and is developed with a commercial building and
condominium building.
F. Trend of Development Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the
intended zoning district with respect to consistency with an existing pattern of
development or an identifiable trend of development in the area.
•
- 4 -
Findings of Fact Planning and Development Commission
Petition 01-1 February 21, 2011
• Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended zoning district with respect to
consistency with an existing pattern of development or an identifiable trend within the
area.
The subject property is located in an area developed with a mix of commercial, office and
residential uses.
G. Planned Development District Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the
intended zoning district with respect to conformance to the provisions for the purpose and
intent, and the location and size of a zoning district.
The applicant is requesting PMFR Planned Multiple Family Residence District zoning. The
intent of the provisions for planned developments is to accommodate unique
development situations. For planned development districts, 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. A creative approach to the use of land and related improvements resulting in
better design and construction of aesthetic amenities.
3. The preservation of significant natural features including topography,
watercourses, wetlands, and vegetation.
Planned multiple family districts should be located in substantial conformance to the
official comprehensive plan. The amount necessary to constitute a separate planned
industrial district exclusive of right of way, but including adjoining land or land directly
opposite a right of way shall be less than two acres. No departure from the required
minimum size of planned development district shall be granted from the city council.
Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended zoning district with respect to
conformance to the provision for the purpose and intent, and the location and size of a
PMFR Planned Multiple Family Residence District.
The proposed map amendment is in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of the planne
No changes are proposed to the previously approved landscape plan.
The applicant is requesting the following changes to the four story age-restricted residence building:
1. Reduction of ground floor area square footage from 37,040 square feet to
approximately 27,448 square feet.
2. Reduction in the number of apartment units from 136 to approximately 112
resulting in a reduction of net density from approximately one dwelling unit per
982 square feet of land area to approximately one dwelling unit per 1,366 square
• feet of land area.
3. Mix of dwelling units within the rental building will be made up of studio
apartments and 1-bedroom and/or 2-bedroom apartments.
Findings of Fact Planning and Development Commission
Petition 0 1-1 February 21, 2011
• 4. The proposed studio apartment consists of 480 square feet and includes a balcony.
This unit size has been proven to be consistent with other senior center
developments within the Chicagoland area. This studio apartment represents
approximately 40% of the total number of units that Senior Lifestyle Corporation
has in its current project portfolio.
5. Building height reduced from fifty-five (55) feet to approximately fifty-two (52)
feet.
No changes are proposed to the 4-story condominium building that is proposed to be
located to the north of the age-restricted residence building.
The city considers this land use a hybrid use similar to both apartments and a nursing home.
The proposed net density of approximately one dwelling unit per 1,366 square feet of land area is
substantially higher than other similar senior independent living facilities the city has approved.
Village Green of Elgin, located at 801 North McLean Boulevard, was approved at a net density of
one dwelling unit per 2,871 square feet of land area. Alden Senior Living, located at 765 Fletcher
Drive, was approved at a net density of one dwelling unit per 1,864 square feet of land area.
It should be noted that the density allowed within the MFR Multiple Family Residence District is
one dwelling unit per 5,000 square feet of land area and the density permitted by the planned
development provisions is one dwelling unit per 3,000 square feet of land area.
As mitigation of the concerns regarding the higher density of the project, the property owner is
proposing no reduction in the amount of masonry on the building currently approved at no less
than 75% of the total elevation.
The existing shopping center and proposed development are consistent with the
surrounding uses.
H. Comprehensive Plan Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended
zoning district with respect to conformance to the goals, objectives, and policies of the
official comprehensive plan.
Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended zoning district with respect to
the Comprehensive Plan Standard.
The subject property is designated "Low Density Residential" in the City's
Comprehensive Plan and Design Guidelines dated 2005. Areas designated Low Density
Residential provides for the development of conventional single family detached houses.
Appropriate locations offer neighborhood access to collector roads, access to water and
sanitary sewer systems, and proximity to public safety services. The provision of park
and open space is encouraged to provide opportunities for recreation and access to
pedestrian and bicycle trail systems. Other uses allowed in this category may include
neighborhood commercial centers, churches and schools in locations deemed appropriate
by the City.
• I. Natural Preservation Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the intended
planned development with respect to the preservation of all significant natural features
- 6 -
Findings of Fact Planning and Development Commission
Petition 01-1 February 21, 2011
• including topography, watercourses, wetlands, and vegetation.
Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended planned development with
respect to the Natural Preservation Standard.
The westerly 5.53 acre portion of the property and is proposed to be left vacant since it is
primarily located in the floodplain of Tyler Creek and contains mature trees.
J. 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.
Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended planned development with
respect to the internal land use standard.
No evidence has been submitted or found that the proposed planned development will be
located, designed, or operated in a manner that will exercise undue detrimental influence
on itself or surrounding property.
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. For the purposes of this
section, the most similar zoning district is the PMFR Planned Multiple Family Residence
District. The applicant is requesting the following departure from the standard requirements of
the PMFR Planned Multiple Family Residence District.
Section 19.25.735 (B.), Lot Area. In the MFR Multiple Family Residence District, the
maximum allowable density is one dwelling unit per 5,000 square feet of land area. The
applicant is proposing a density of one dwelling unit per 1,366 square feet of land area (a
72% departure). The proposed reduction in density from what was approved in 2006
results in a change in the departure from 80% to 72%.
Section 19.25.735 (E.), Setbacks By Lot Lines. In the MFR Multiple Family Residence
District, a 50 foot setback is required from McLean Boulevard and the north property
line. The applicant is proposing a 35 foot setback from McLean Boulevard and a 40 foot
setback from the north property line (a 30% and a 20% departure, respectively).
Section 19.25.735 (H.), Residential Floor Area. In the MFR Multiple Family
Residence District, the maximum allowable residential floor area is 49,332 square feet.
The proposed total floor area is 150,171 square feet, representing a difference of 100;839
square feet (a 204% departure). The proposed reduction in floor area from what was
• approved in 2006 results in a change in the departure from 270%to 204%.
- 7 -
Findings of Fact Planning and Development Commission
Petition 01-1 February 21, 2011
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, UNRESOLVED ISSUES AND ALTERNATIVES
The Planning and Development Commission has developed or identified the following findings,
unresolved issues and alternatives:
A. Summary of Findings
Positive Attributes: Due to the changed market conditions and in order to help ensure the
ultimate build-out and success of the age-restricted residence building and condominium,
the applicant has requested changes that are reductions to overall density, building mass,
and height.
B. Summary of Unresolved Issues.
There are no unresolved issues.
C. Summary of Alternatives.
Other than an approval, a denial, or an approval with some combination of conditions,
there are no substantive alternatives.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Development Commission recommends the approval of Petition 01-11. On a
motion to recommend approval, subject to the following conditions, the vote was four (4) yes,
and zero (0) no.
1. Substantial conformance with the Statement of Purpose and Conformance dated,
December 13. 2010.
2. Substantial conformance to the project data comparison worksheet dated, February 7,
2011.
3. Substantial conformance to the site plan dated February 1, 2011 and building elevations
dated,November 11, 2010, prepared by DM Design Group.
4. Substantial conformance to the typical floor plan, floors two through four, dated,
February 16, 2010, prepared by DM Design Group.
5. Substantial conformance to the Unit Plans sheet A5.1 dated; February 14, 2011, prepared
by DM Design Group.
6. Substantial conformance to Ground Floor Plan sheet A2.1 dated, February 14, 2011,
prepared by DM Design Group.
- 8 -
Findings of Fact Planning and Development Commission
Petition 0 1 A February 21, 2011
s
7. No more than 13 studio apartments are approved to be established within the age-
restricted residence building.
8. The total number of apartment units within the age-restricted residence building cannot
exceed the previously approved unit count of 136.
9. A reduction in the number of studio apartments may be granted by approval of the
Development Administrator.
10. An altered ratio of the total number of one and two bedroom apartments may be granted
by approval of the Development Administrator.
11. Compliance with all applicable codes and ordinances.
Therefore, the motion to recommend approval of Petition 01-11 was adopted.
Respectfully Submitted,
s/_ Bob Siljestrom
Bob Siljestrom, Chairman
Planning and Development Commission
s/ Dave Waden
Dave Waden, Secretary
Planning and Development Commission
- 9 -