Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. O'Malley noted that departmental reports showed that the submittal was insufficient and <br />encouraged the commission to review the plans preliminarily, and request the additional required <br />information. <br />Mr. Hartt said their submittal was based on the parcels zoning which was in place in 2006 when <br />the plans were submitted to the city. They were unaware any information was missing. Mr. <br />Lasko advised that the commission would review what had been submitted and define what is <br />needed so the applicant could submit a more comprehensive development plan. <br />Mr. Hartt said that the density calculations are in compliance with city codes based upon the <br />portion of the site which is zoned multi family district at the time of submittal. Truck <br />maneuverability through the site is shown through the site and is based upon the largest size fire <br />truck. The facility is a 60 unit independent living facility and each unit will be owner occupied. <br />The facility will have a community room, a health suite with examining rooms for contracted <br />doctors and a fitness room. There will be 1 or 2 full time employees and at most 2 or 3 <br />contracted people working with the employees; therefore there will never be more than 5 <br />employees on site. There is one parking space for every unit and 14 additional spaces for guests <br />and einployees. The layout of open parking and garages more than complies with code <br />requirements. The tree discrepancies will be corrected. They will loolc at the suggestion of using <br />more than a single row of spruce trees for buffering by looking at possibly adding more variety <br />and mounding to the landscape plan within reason. <br />Mr. Hartt said the proposal meets all of the statistical requirements of the zoning code. The <br />setback of the garages have a 20 foot setback which they believe is reasonable based on Chapter <br />1138 which does not specify garage setbacks and the fact they satisfy the requirements for <br />storage garage setback under Chapter 1137 which is the umbrella district for which the senior <br />housing requirements were established. Chapter 1137 only requires a 10 foot sideyard and rear <br />yard setback and they provided 20 feet for both. Regarding the driveway setback from the rear <br />of the homes along Barton Road, the code states there is only one front lot line and one rear lot <br />line which is parallel to, opp.osite from and farthest from the front lot line which is the line left on <br />the their drawing. Therefore the sideyard lines are all other lines connecting the front to the rear <br />property lines. Therefore the 20 foot side yard and rear yard setback lines established meets city <br />codes. In the facility, they have a community room, a health suite which includes an exercise <br />and examining room on the second floor and the use will be independent living. The size of the <br />building and ancillary facilities are appropriate and in proportion to the needs of the community. <br />Mr. Lasko asked Ms. Wenger asked which zoning district was the applicable district since the <br />rezoning. She reviewed the history of the rezoning and indicated that the application was made <br />before the rezoning went into effect. Mr. Lasko asked if there would be assisted living or <br />nursing facilities on the site of if the site would be more of a condominium. Mr. Hartt said there <br />would be no assisted living or nursing facilities, it is a condominium restricted to senior <br />residents. Mrs. Meredith questioned if in fact the applicants/owners had received or had <br />knowledge of the proposed zoning prior to their application being submitted. Ms. Wenger said <br />the applicant was involved in the amendments to the senior residence district.