PC Minutes 8/23/06 - DRAFT

 

ITEM NO. 8:              USE PERMITTED UPON REVIEW             RETIREMENT

                             COMMUNITY; 24TH PLACE; SOUTHWEST CORNER CLINTON PARKWAY & CROSSGATE DRIVE (LAP)

 

UPR-05-07-06:  Use Permitted upon Review request for a retirement community, located at 24th Place between Crossgate Drive and Inverness Drive. Submitted by Landplan Engineering, PA, applicant for Inverness Park Limited Partnership, property owner of record.

 

STAFF PRESENTATION

Ms. Pool introduced the item, Use Permitted upon Review (UPR) for a retirement community. She outlined the general details of the proposal:

 

  • A 22-acre retirement community, which will include independent living apartments, assisted living/dementia units, villas, commons area, and a skilled nursing facility.
  • The City Commission approved a UPR application for the subject site (the Fountains Retirement Center) in 2004. As the conditions of approval were not met within one year of approval, the approval was deemed invalid. While the previous plan comprised a retirement facility, it included underground parking and a revised layout.
  • Two variances were granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals on August 3, 2006 -- the first variance allows the independent living buildings to reach a maximum height of 45 feet, and the second variance allows a decrease in the number of parking spaces required for the assisted living/dementia buildings from 78 to 46 spaces.

 

Planning staff recommended approval of the Use Permitted upon Review for the Four Seasons Retirement Community and forwarding it to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval, subject to the following conditions:

1.      Submittal of a Site Plan Performance Agreement.

2.      Recordation at the Register of Deeds Office of a final plat.

3.      Revision of the site plan to include the following:

a.)The addition of the native grasses to be planted along the west bank of the drainage channel to the “Plant Schedule”.

 

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

Tim Herndon, Landplan Engineering, spoke on behalf of the applicant.  He compared the earlier plan that was approved a year and a half ago by the Commission to the current plan. In the revised plan the commons area is more centrally located. The previous underground parking required 18 acres of fill dirt, which would cost a few million dollars due to floodplain. He stated that this is one reason why it took awhile for the plan to get reworked.

 

Erickson asked if there were sidewalks on only one side of the street in garden villas. Herndon replied that yes, only one side of the street would have sidewalks as required by code and sidewalks on both sides would require more impervious surface area and cost.

 

Burress asked the following questions to Mr. Herndon:

  • How would someone walk out of the development? Is there only one way out?
  • How far of a walk it would be from the far west building to the entry?
  • Are there any benches to stop and rest while on a walk?
  • Where will pedestrians walk beyond the entry?

 

Herndon responded to questions:

  • The sidewalk connection is to the South and is the only one for pedestrian traffic. The clientele are interested in a high level of security.
  • It is approximately a quarter of a mile walk, over 1000 feet from the far west building to the entry.
  • The central building would be the only place to stop and rest, but they are willing to add some benches to the layout of the plan.
  • There will be public sidewalks beyond the site plan.

 

Commissioner Harkins inquired if the sidewalk along 24th Place runs the entire length of the street. Herndon replied that there will be a sidewalk put in by the developer along the length of the subject project, but that it will not continue the entire length of the street until other properties are built.

 

PUBLIC HEARING

No public comment.

 

APPLICANT CLOSING COMMENTS

Mr. Herndon stated that the plan was previously approved and that he understood why they can’t do underground parking. He didn’t have a problem with adding benches to the site and didn’t see any reason why it shouldn’t be approved again.

 

STAFF CLOSING COMMENTS

Staff had no closing comments.

 

COMMISSION DISCUSSION

Commissioner Jennings stated that the plan hasn’t changed much since it was previously approved and that he understood why the developers didn’t want to go North with the project.

 

ACTION TAKEN

Motion by Commissioner Burress, seconded by Commissioner Harris, for amendment to add benches to the corners of the project outside of the exterior fencing.

                  

Motion failed 5-5, with Commissioners Burress, Erickson, Haase, Harris and Krebs voting in favor.  Commissioners Eichhorn, Finkeldei, Harkins, Jennings and Lawson voted in opposition.

 

Motion by Commissioner Eichhorn, seconded by Commissioner Jennings, to recommend approval of the UPR and forwarding it to City Commission based on the findings of fact presented in the body of the Staff Report and subject to the following conditions:

 

1.      Submittal of a Site Plan Performance Agreement.

2.      Recordation at the Register of Deeds Office of a final plat.

3.      Revision of the site plan to include the following:

a.)The addition of the native grasses to be planted along the west bank of the drainage channel to the “Plant Schedule”.

 

          Motion carried 9-1, with Commissioner Burress in opposition.