HomeMy WebLinkAboutMORNINGSTAR ASSISTED LIVING & MEMORY CARE - PDP - PDP130024 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSPlanning
fcgov.com
STA
PROJEC
APPLIC
OWNER
PROJEC
This is
Morning
the north
The proj
total of
Institutio
Neighbo
subject
modifica
allowanc
RECOM
Project
4.25(E)(
EXECUT
The ap
requirem
Services
m/developm
AFF REP
CT:
CANT:
R:
CT DESCR
a reques
gstar Assiste
hwest corne
ject propos
78 living sp
onal, Long
orhood Dist
to review
ation of sta
ce for each
MMENDATI
Developm
(2)(e).
TIVE SUMM
pproval of
ments of the
The P.D
Developm
Administ
entreview/
PORT
Mornings
Developm
Section 4
Cathy Ma
TB Group
444 Moun
Berthoud
MVG-MS
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 2
The Modification of Standard to Section 4.25(E)(2)(e) that is proposed with
this P.D.P. meets the applicable requirements of Section 2.8.2(H), and the
granting of this Modification would not be detrimental to the public good.
The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Article 3 – General
Development Standards.
The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Division 4.5, Low
Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (L.M.N.) of Article 4 – Districts,
provided that the Modification of Standard to Section 4.25(E)(2)(e) is
approved.
COMMENTS:
1. Background:
The subject property was annexed into the City in April 1973. Formal planning of the
surrounding area began in the mid ‘70’s. The proposed Morningstar site remains a
vacant unplatted parcel. The parcel is surrounded by single-family detached homes
and multi-family condominiums that were planned and built in the 1980’s.
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
Direction Zone District Existing Land Uses
North L.M.N.
Collindale 2 P.U.D. Condos (multi-
family)
South P.O.L.
Collindale Golf Course
East L.M.N.
Collindale P.U.D. ’87 – Convenience
Store, Retail, Office, Day Care (vacant)
West L.M.N.
Collindale P.U.D. Condos (multi-family)
and Collindale 3rd Filing (single-family
detached)
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 3
2. Compliance with Article 4 of the Land Use Code – Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood District (L.M.N.):
The project complies with all applicable Article 4 standards with the following comments:
A. Section 4.5(A) – Purpose
The P.D.P. is consistent with the stated purpose of the zone district as the
project proposes a land use and architectural design that is
complementary and supportive of the surrounding neighborhood, while
reinforcing variety in housing choices and strengthening existing
connections to surrounding neighborhoods.
The purpose of the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is
described in the L.U.C. as follows:
The Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is intended to be a
setting for a predominance of low density housing combined with
complementary and supporting land uses that serve a neighborhood and
are developed and operated in harmony with the residential characteristics
of a neighborhood. The main purpose of the District is to meet a wide
range of needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that include a variety
of housing choices, that invite walking to gathering places, services and
conveniences, and that are fully integrated into the larger community by
the pattern of streets, blocks, and other linkages. A neighborhood center
provides a focal point, and attractive walking and biking paths invite
residents to enjoy the center as well as the small neighborhood parks. Any
new development in this District shall be arranged to form part of an
individual neighborhood.
B. Section 4.5(A) and (B) – Permitted Uses
The proposed land use is classified as an Institutional, Long Term Care
Facility which is permitted in the district as a “Type 2” use subject to
Planning and Zoning Board approval.
Based on the L.U.C., the 78 living spaces provided are subdivided into two
long term care use classifications:
The 23 memory care living spaces are classified as a Nursing Care
Facility because the residents are provided twenty-four hour
nursing care and supervision.
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 4
The 55 assisted living spaces are classified as an Intermediate
Health Care Facility because the residents receive supportive care
due to a physical and/or mental condition and require care in an
institutional environment.
A note has been added to the site plan which describes the use categories
that are tied to the approval of this P.D.P. This is necessary in order to
ensure that the project is not operated as an Independent Living Facility
(also a subcategory of Long Term Care), due to the fact that this use
would require additional parking and is restricted to 25% of the total gross
floor area of a long term care development.
C. Section 4.5(E) – Development Standards
1) 4.5(E)(2)(b) Maximum Size. No building footprint shall exceed a total of
twenty thousand (20,000) square feet, with the exception of schools
and places of worship or assembly.
Request for Modification. The applicant requests a modification to allow
a building footprint of approximately 43,000 square feet.
Land Use Code Modification Criteria:
“The decision maker may grant a modification of standards only if it finds
that the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public
good, and that:
(1) the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard
for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a
plan which complies with the standard for which a modification is
requested; or
(2) the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard
would, without impairing the intent and purpose of this Land Use Code,
substantially alleviate an existing, defined and described problem of city-
wide concern or would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason
of the fact that the proposed project would substantially address an
important community need specifically and expressly defined and
described in the city's Comprehensive Plan or in an adopted policy,
ordinance or resolution of the City Council, and the strict application of
such a standard would render the project practically infeasible; or
(3) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and
exceptional situations, unique to such property, including, but not limited
to, physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 5
topography, or physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to
install a solar energy system, the strict application of the standard sought
to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties,
or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such property,
provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or
omission of the applicant; or
(4) the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land
Use Code that are authorized by this Division to be modified except in a
nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of
the entire development plan, and will continue to advance the purposes of
the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2.
Any finding made under subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4) above shall be
supported by specific findings showing how the plan, as submitted, meets
the requirements and criteria of said subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4).
Applicant’s Justification:
Summary of the applicant’s written justification:
The applicant states that the plan as submitted will promote the general
purpose of the standard for which the modification is requested equally
well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard for
which a modification is requested for the following reasons:
“The core issue of this modification revolves around whether or not it
would be more desirable to have one building footprint at 42,423 sq. ft. or
two – 20,000 square foot building footprints that meet the strict application
of the Code. The difference between the proposed alternative plan and a
plan that meets the code is that this type of facility could not exist and
function in two separate buildings for the following reasons:
a. The operation and license of the facility from the State of Colorado
Department of Health would be difficult to obtain if facilities were
operating in two separate buildings. The license would require central
operational facilities, dining and food preparation and staffing which
would add an undue operational expense making the facility financially
infeasible.
b. In addition to operational costs, the facilities would require duplicate
common spaces in each building to support the needs of the residents.
• The proposed alternative plan continues to improve the design,
quality and character of new development by exceeding the building
standards set forth in Section 3.5. The use of high quality residential
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 6
building materials, building articulation, projections and recesses, along
with pitched roof elements ensures sensitivity to and compatibility with the
surrounding neighborhood.
• The proposed alternative plan continues to encourage innovations
in land development by allowing a creative way to mitigate the larger
footprint by stepping the retaining wall along the west side. The stepped
wall, in combination with additional landscape and a 6’ high solid fence,
results in reducing the effect of the building.
• The current footprint of the building is 42,423 sq. ft., which
represents 19.8% of the site coverage. The remaining 80% of the site is
parking, storm water detention area and landscape. The building is
placed at the south end of the site, at the street intersection and shaped to
fit the angles of the site, thus allowing for over 50% of the site to be
landscaped.
• The proposed alternative plan continues to encourage the
development of vacant properties within established areas. The site is
surrounded by existing development - a golf course, a restaurant, pool,
daycare, neighborhood center, and multi-family development. A larger
footprint is appropriate in this setting, especially if the building is designed
to provide a suitable transition between the street activity and the adjacent
residential development.
• The proposed use of the site to provide assisted living and memory
care benefits the community as a whole with limited impact on the
adjoining properties. A plan that complies with the standard could be
developed with much greater intensity. For example, a multiple office
building complex could be constructed, with a total of 37,500 sq. ft. At a
parking ratio of 3 cars per 1,000 sq. ft., there could potentially be 113
parking spaces on the site. This would amount to greater impacts to the
neighborhood in addition to generating a substantial amount of traffic in
the area.
• As previously stated, at the neighborhood meeting conducted with
City representatives on September 23, 2013, neighbors commented that
they liked the new plan, appreciated the Developers listening to their input
from a previous neighborhood meeting, and were supportive of the
updated site plan, building plan and exterior elevations. No opposition to
the proposed use was heard from the neighbors.
Further, the proposed alternative plan seeks to provide a substantial
benefit to the City by addressing an important community need specifically
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 7
and expressly defined and described in the policies of City Plan. More
specifically the following:
Policy LIV 7.5 – Address Special Needs Housing
Plan for and meet the housing needs of special populations within the
community. Disperse residential care facilities, shelters, group homes, and
senior housing throughout the Growth Management Area.
Policy LIV 7.6 – Basic Access
Support the construction of housing units with practical features that
provide basic access and functionality for people of all ages and widely
varying mobility and ambulatory–related abilities.”
Staff Finding
Staff finds that the request for a Modification of Standard to Section 4.5(E)(2)(b)
is justified by the applicable standards in 2.8.2(H). This is because:
A. The granting of the Modification would not be detrimental to the public
good.
B. The project design satisfies Criteria 4 (2.8.2(H)(1): The plan as submitted
will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the
modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which
complies with the standard for which a modification is requested. This is
because:
The intent of this standard is to reduce the visual impact of inappropriate
building mass that may result from large building footprints. An alternative
plan could propose the same or more overall building coverage in multiple
buildings on the site that are 20,000 square feet per building and be in
compliance with the standard. The fact that the proposed building is
configured in a massing that is larger than 20,000 square feet does not by
itself make the building form less desirable than two or more separate
buildings that are situated in close proximity in accordance with the
standard. In order to ensure that the building mass is equal to or better
than a site design that meets the standard, the applicant has provided
multiple recesses and projections ranging from 30 to 85 feet in depth that
exceed the minimum requirement of 30 feet. The building footprint is
deeply recessed so that three distinct masses are formed, which work to
obscure the view of the overall building footprint from vantage points
around the building. The rotated angle of the northern portion of the
building also helps to obscure views of the overall mass. A significant
portion of the building is one-story which further reduces the overall mass
of the building footprint.
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 8
Section 4.5(E) – Development Standards (continued)
2) 4.5(E)(2)(c) Height. In order to encourage roof forms, dormers, windows,
balconies and similar features associated with occupied space, to the
extent reasonably feasible, buildings or parts of buildings shall be at least
one and one-half (1.5) stories in height (with functional and occupied
space under the roof). The maximum height shall be two and one-half
(2.5) stories.
The building design has multiple elements to satisfy this standard with
the extensive use of dormer, hip and shed roof elements. The
applicant has responded to staff’s request to keep the 2nd story roof
eave low, just above the 2nd story window, so that the overall building
height is reduced.
3) 4.5(E)(2)(d) Roof Form. Buildings shall have either: 1) sloped roofs; 2)
combined flat and sloped roofs, provided that the sloped portion(s) forms a
substantial part of the building and is related to the integral structure,
entries and activity areas; or 3) flat roofs with building massing stepped or
terraced back to form usable roof terrace area(s). The minimum pitch of
any sloped roof shall be 6:12. Buildings containing more than four
thousand (4,000) square feet of gross floor area shall have at least three
(3) roof planes that are directly related to building facade articulations.
The building design complies with this standard by providing varied
roof planes and sloping roof pitches that are at least 6:12.
4) 4.5(E)(2)(e) Building Massing. No building permitted by this Section shall
have a single undifferentiated mass with a footprint over ten thousand
(10,000) square feet. No building footprint shall exceed a total of twenty
thousand (20,000) square feet.
1. For any building with a footprint in excess of ten thousand (10,000)
square feet, walls that are greater than seventy-five (75) feet in length
shall incorporate recesses or projections created by wall plane returns
of at least thirty (30) feet; any such building shall be differentiated into
multiple sections of mass in order to achieve proportions that are
compatible in scale with adjacent residential neighborhoods.
2. Minimum front yard setback of all buildings shall be fifteen (15) feet
in order to provide a landscaped front yard consistent with the
residential character of the L-M-N zone district.
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 9
Provided that the modification is approved allowing a building footprint
greater than 20,000 square feet, the proposed building design exceeds
the minimum standard by providing at least 9 recesses that exceed 30
feet, with 4 of the recesses greatly exceeding the minimum standard.
The building is divided into three main sections and is further divided
with smaller recesses and projections, with an overall effect of
articulation and scale that is compatible with the massing of the
adjacent residential neighborhood. The project also provides building
setbacks that meet or exceed the 15 foot front setback and 8 foot rear
setback.
5) 4.5(E)(2)(h) Hours of Operation. The decision maker may limit hours of
operation, hours when trucking and deliveries may occur, and other
characteristics of the nonresidential uses in order to enhance the
compatibility with residential uses.
In order to address concerns expressed by neighbors, staff is
recommending that the hours of operation for trash pick-up and service
area deliveries be limited to the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday –
Friday and Saturdays 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. A note is included on the site
plan with the restricted hours.
City Ordinance 15-421 requires that hours of solid waste or recyclable
materials on any street designated a “local residential” or “residential
collector” street must be made between the hours of 7:00 am and 7:00
pm. There is no specific ordinance regarding deliveries.
3. Compliance with Article 3 of the Land Use Code – General
Development Standards
The project complies with all applicable General Development Standards; with the
following relevant comments provided:
A. Division 3.2 – Site Planning and Design Standards
1) 3.2.1 Landscaping and Tree Protection:
There are no existing trees on the site. Two 34” caliper cottonwood
trees are adjacent to the site along the north property line, and are in
fair to poor condition. The applicant has conferred with the City
Forester concerning these trees and has designed a grading plan for
the area around the trees with a very minimal change to the existing
grade. The curb along the portion of the parking lot drive isle near
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 10
these trees has been raised to 8 inches to provide a grade transition as
far away from the trees as possible, allowing minimal disturbance of
the root zone;
Per the request of planning staff and neighbors, the applicant added
additional landscaping along the west retaining wall and surrounding
the storm water detention areas. Additional landscaping was also
added along the existing internal sidewalk to soften views into the
proposed parking area from the adjacent condo unit north of the site;
“Full Tree Stocking” is provided along all high use and high visibility
areas of the development, with generous quantities of trees located
along building faces;
Trees are planted in the parking lot interior and perimeter in excess of
the minimum requirements;
Ground cover areas in parking lots and at building foundations are also
planted in excess of the minimum requirements, with deciduous and
evergreen shrubs, perennials and ornamental grasses used
extensively. The use of irrigated lawn has been kept to a minimum.
2) 3.2.2 Access, Circulation and Parking:
The existing neighborhood sidewalk along the north of the property will
remain and will be placed in a public access easement with the platting
of the property. No easement currently exists for this internal sidewalk.
Sidewalk connections are planned between buildings and through
parking areas in accordance with the standards. Bicycle parking meets
the minimum quantity required and is placed appropriately near the
building entrance.
A new Transfort bus stop along Horsetooth Road has been provided
with the project.
The parking and circulation of the development is well designed with
regard to safety, efficiency and convenience for vehicles, bicycles,
pedestrians and transit, both within the development and to and from
surrounding areas. Sidewalk connections are direct and contribute to
the attractiveness of the development.
Parking requirements in terms of quantity and dimensions of parking
stalls are provided in accordance with the standards.
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 11
3) 3.2.4 Site Lighting:
A photometric plan was submitted for the project. As proposed, the
project complies with the lighting design standards in Section 3.2.4.
Parking lot and drive lighting is provided by down-directional and sharp
cut-off fixtures.
B. Division 3.5 – Building Standards
1) 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility
The project is designed to be compatible with the existing residential
neighborhoods. Portions of the building have been reduced to one-
story. The mass of the building has been significantly subdivided into
smaller façade elements with a consistent level of detail provided
around all faces. The use of secondary elements in the facades
includes a variety of roof styles, window sizes and bracket details to
enhance the building’s residential character and human scale.
Variations in materials and color are used to further emphasize the
residential scale and character of the building. The overall effect of the
massing, articulation and material placement gives the building an
appearance that is similar to a series of attached residential dwellings
and lessens the feel of an institutional use.
The applicant has also provided enhanced detailing of site elements to
respond to staff and neighbor suggestions. The retaining wall located
to the west of the building is terraced into two levels and an ashlar
fieldstone masonry pattern is specified to give the wall an enhanced
architectural appearance that is consistent with the quality of the stone
proposed with the building façade. Landscaping is included along the
top, bottom and middle section of the wall, with shrub material layered
from top to bottom, so that the wall pattern is not completely hidden but
softened and enhanced. A wood privacy fence is provided along the
top of the wall to screen the service / fire lane, and the applicant has
provided an enhanced fence design per the request of staff. The
applicant has also provided a cedar trellis detail over the top of the
trash enclosure to ensure that the top view of the enclosure is
screened from the third story of neighboring windows.
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 12
2) 3.5.3 Building Standards
The architectural design and overall shape of the building footprint has
gone through extensive revisions throughout the development review
process in order to respond to neighbor concerns and to comply with
the Character and Image requirements of Section 3.5.3(E). In
accordance with the Site Specific Design requirement of 3.5.3(E)(1),
the standard building prototype which Morningstar previously used in
other communities was redesigned to better fit the shape of the site, as
well as provide a better architectural style that is unique to this
location. The redesign of the building footprint has allowed the building
to be shifted further east away from the Collindale residences to the
west.
The overall design satisfies the institutional building requirements of
Section 3.5.3. All building elevations provide a recognizable base and
top treatment in accordance with Section 3.5.3(D)(6). The variation in
massing requirement is satisfied by breaking up the building mass into
a series of intersecting wall planes in a module format. The variations
in massing, juxtaposed materials and forms, and repeated patterns of
recesses and projections provide vertical and horizontal interest,
breaking down the overall scale of the building.
Attention is given to providing a residential appearance with variation
material patterns and textures. The use of materials and patterns is
balanced, with colors and textures helping to emphasize and articulate
overall building forms.
C. Division 3.6 – Transportation and Circulation
1) 3.6.4 Transportation Level of Service Requirements:
The Traffic Operations and Engineering Departments have reviewed
the Transportation Impact Study (T.I.S.) that was submitted to the City
for review and have determined that the vehicular, pedestrian and
bicycle facilities proposed with this P.D.P. are consistent with the
standards contained in Part II of the City of Fort Collins Multi-modal
Transportation Level of Service Manual. Street improvements to be
constructed meet the Level of Service requirements. Additionally, an
acceptable level of service is achieved for pedestrian, bicycle, and
transit modes based upon the measures in the City multi-modal
transportation guidelines.
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 13
A new detached sidewalk will be constructed along the Lochwood
frontage as part of the project. The existing sidewalk internal to the
site along the north will remain. As previously mentioned, this sidewalk
is not currently within an easement and be placed in a public access
easement as a requirement of development approval.
A westbound right-turn lane on East Horsetooth Road was outlined as
a potential requirement with the T.I.S. Due to the fact that the
installation of the right-turn lane will require the removal of five mature
cottonwood trees, the City Engineering Department has discussed and
accepted a variance requesting that the right-turn lane not be
constructed. While it is acknowledged that the addition of the right-turn
lane will improve the overall operation of the intersection by a small
amount, it will not change the required level of service.
4. Neighborhood Meeting
Two neighborhood meetings were held for the proposed project, on February 25, 2013
and September 23, 2013. A staff summary of the neighbor’s concerns and the
applicant’s responses is included below. Detailed meeting minutes and letters from the
neighbors are attached with this staff report.
Neighborhood Meeting Concerns & Response Summary
Concern: Existing traffic issues at Horsetooth and Lochwood. Neighbors have
expressed concerns about the difficulty of turning left from Lochwood to East
Horsetooth, particularly at rush hour.
Applicant’s Response: A traffic study was submitted with the project proposal and it
finds little to no impact to the existing conditions at the intersection, due to the low
volume of traffic that this type of use traditionally generates. It is also helpful that the
employee shift changes do not coincide with a.m. and p.m. rush hours. There will be
approximately 20 employees. Shift changes will be at 7:45 a.m., 2:45 p.m., and 10:45
p.m. Because of the number of employees, not a lot of traffic is expected during shift
changes.
Concern: Increased risk of flooding of the drainage ditch and Collindale residences to
the west.
Applicant’s Response: Drainage from the site currently goes into the ditch. With this
project, water will fill on-site storm water detention ponds and be temporarily detained
rather than going into the ditch immediately. Storm water detention ponds have been
designed so that water is released at a slow rate into the ditch from the east, without
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 14
any more frequency than with what is happening in current conditions with the grass
field.
Concern: Close proximity of building to Collindale neighborhood to west.
Applicant’s Response: The site plan and building were reconfigured and the building
has been shifted further east, portions of the west side of the building facing the
neighbors were made one-story.
Concern: Ambulances and Siren noise and frequency
Applicant’s Response: Applicant explained that with their other similar facilities, they
have about 1-2 emergency calls per month. They will contract for ambulance services
and request that sirens not be used. They will enter the area from Horsetooth Rd., and
will use the north entrance. Ambulances are typically required to use arterial streets
such as East Horsetooth Road unless responding directly to an emergency within a
neighborhood on a local residential street.
Concern: Views and privacy from the adjacent residences
Applicant’s Response: Applicant has provided additional landscape screening along
the west and northwest of the site. Applicant has also provided an enhanced wood
fence with framed trim panel insets and a wood trellis over the trash enclosure. Delivery
and service hours have been restricted to the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday – Friday
and Saturdays 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Concern: Height of retaining wall and building; cumulative height of both
Applicant’s Response: Applicant has stepped the building height so that portions of
the building along the west are one-story in height. The retaining wall has been stepped
with two terrace levels and an enhanced masonry pattern is proposed which has a
random cobblestone appearance. The wall has also received landscaping of various
heights to provide more transition and filtered views. The building has also been shifted
east away from the ditch with the closest massings of the building 67 to 87 feet away
from the property line.
5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion
In evaluating the request for the Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care Project
Development Plan Staff makes the following findings of fact:
A. The Modification of Standard to Section 4.5(E)(2)(e) regarding
Height/Mass that is proposed with this P.D.P. would not be detrimental to
the public good and the Modification meets the applicable requirements of
Section 2.8.2(H)(1). This is because the plan reduces the visual impact of
Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care PDP #130024
(Planning & Zoning Hearing November, 14, 2013
Page 15
the larger footprint by providing multiple recesses and projections ranging
from 30 to 85 feet in depth that exceed the minimum requirement of 30
feet, and a significant portion of the building is one-story which further
reduces the overall mass of the building footprint.
B. The P.D.P. complies with process located in Division 2.2 – Common
Development Review Procedures for Development Applications of Article
2 – Administration.
C. The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Article 3 – General
Development Standards.
D. The P.D.P. complies with the relevant standards located in Division 4.5,
Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN) of Article 4 –
Districts, provided that the Modification of Standard to Section
4.25(E)(2)(e) is approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Morningstar Assisted Living and Memory Care
Project Development Plan, P.D.P. #130024.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Statement of Planning Objectives and Modification Request
2. Site Plan
3. Landscape Plan
4. Building Elevations
5. Plat
6. Utility Plans
7. Engineering variance letter
8. Transportation Impact Study Summary
9. Neighborhood Meetings 1 and 2, minutes comments and responses
10. Letters from Neighbors
1509 Yor
Denver, C
RIPTION:
t for appr
ed Living a
er of East H
ses 23 mem
paces. Th
Term Car
trict (L.M.N
by the P
andard req
building fo
ON: Appr
ment Plan
MARY:
this Proj
e City of Fo
D.P. compl
ment Revie
tration.
281 N Col
tar Assisted
ment Plan, P
4.5(E)(2)(e)
athis
p
ntain Ave.
, CO 80513
, a Colorad
k Street
CO 80206
roval of a
nd Memory
Horsetooth
mory care liv
e Land Us
re Facility.
.), and the
Planning a
uests an i
ootprint in th
roval of M
#130024
ect Devel
ort Collins L
lies with p
ew Procedu
P
llege Ave – P
d Living an
PDP #1300
3
do Limited L
Project D
y Care facil
Road and
ving spaces
se Code (L
The site
proposed
nd Zoning
increase in
he L.M.N. z
Morningstar
and Mod
opment P
Land Use C
process lo
ures for Dev
MEET
PLANNIN
PO Box 580 –
d Memory
024 and Mo
Liability Com
Developme
ity on a 5 a
Lochwood
s and 55 as
.U.C.) defin
e is in the
use is per
g Board (T
n the 20,00
zone.
Assisted
dification o
Plan comp
ode, more
ocated in
velopment
ITEM NO
TING DATE
STAFF
NG & ZON
– Fort Collins
Care Proje
odification o
mpany
nt Plan (P
acre undeve
Drive.
ssisted livin
nes the pro
Low Den
rmitted in th
Type 2).
00 square
Living and
of Standa
lies with
specifically
Division 2
Application
O ________
E Nov. 14,
F HOLLAN
NING BOA
s, CO 80522-
970.221
ct
of Standard
P.D.P.) for
eloped parc
ng spaces,
oject use a
sity Mixed
his zone di
The prop
foot maxim
Memory
ard to Se
the applic
y:
.2 – Com
ns of Article
____
2013
D
ARD
-0580
.6750
d to
r the
cel at
for a
as an
-Use
strict
osed
mum
Care
ction
cable
mmon
e 2 –