Public Hearing Item
|
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT SUMMARY |
ITEM NO. 7: USE PERMITTED UPON REVIEW FOR EXPANSION OF PRINCETON CHILDREN’S CENTER; 3340 PETERSON ROAD (SLD)
UPR-02-01-05: Use Permitted upon Review request for expansion of Princeton Children’s Center. The property is located at 3340 Peterson Road and contains 7.34 acres. The proposed expansion will increase the center size by 3,942 square feet. The proposal will utilize part of the existing building, and will allow the center to accommodate approximately 58 additional children. Submitted by Knight and Remmele Architects for Michelle Kueser, applicant. Cheer Pole Ltd. is the property owner of record.
|
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends approval of the Use Permitted upon Review and forwarding it to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval, based upon the findings of fact presented in the body of the Staff Report and subject to the following conditions:
|
|
Reason for Request: |
Expansion of program to allow for after school care and school age children. |
|
KEY POINT Existing childcare facility. Solid fencing around exterior play yard. |
|
GOLDEN FACTORS TO CONSIDER
II. CHARACTER OF THE AREA · Proposed use is located in near proximity to existing residential development. III. SUITABILITY OF SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THE USES TO WHICH IT HAS BEEN RESTRICTED · Subject property is currently used for preschool/childcare facility.
|
|
ASSOCIATED CASES/OTHER ACTION REQUIRED 1. SP-05-32-00; site plan for original office building development; Approved by CC 7/25/00. 2. UPR-03-01-04; Approved by CC 5/18/04. |
|
PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED PRIOR TO PRINTING 1. Michelle Kueser, letter summarizing application 2. John and Judy Jewell email communication in support 3. Greg Cromer, letter of support 4. Sara Dawson – email communication in support |
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM:
ITEM NO. 5 : USE PERMITTED UPON REVIEW FOR EXPANSION OF PRINCETON CHILDREN’S CENTER; 3340 PETERSON ROAD (SLD)
UPR-02-01-05: Use Permitted upon Review for request expansion of Princeton Children’s Center. The property is located at 3340 Peterson Road and contains 7.34 acres. The proposed expansion will increase the center size by 3,942 square feet. The proposal will utilize part of the existing building, and will allow the center to accommodate approximately 58 additional children. Submitted by Knight and Remmele Architects for Michelle Kueser, applicant. Cheer Pole Ltd. is the property owner of record.
|
GENERAL INFORMATION | |
|
Current Zoning and Land Use:
|
O-1 (Office) District; developing office center. |
|
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: |
PRD-2 (Planned Residential District) to the west; developing residential project.
RO-2 (Residential-Office District) to the southwest; undeveloped
RS-2 (Single-Family Residential District) to the north and northwest, RS-2 (Single-Family Residence) District to the south with a PUD overlay; developed residentially.
RM-1 (Multiple-Family Residence District) to the east; developed nursing care facility
|
|
Site Summary from (SP-05-32-00): | |
|
Total Area: |
1 Lot (319,720 SF/9.68 Acres Gross Area) |
|
Existing Building: |
16,400 SF 6,900 SF (existing daycare) 4,740 SF (additional space) |
|
Maximum Capacity: |
82 Students current per current Health Department Permit to be revised |
|
|
63 students currently enrolled 58 students proposed additional enrollment/school age program |
|
Maximum Staff: |
18 Staff current 4 additional staff |
|
Off Street Parking: Off Street Parking Provided: |
1 space per 1.5 employees (14 required) 108 spaces provided including space for office building to the south |
I. ZONING AND USES OF PROPERTY NEARBY
Staff Finding – The surrounding area is zoned for residential uses. The proposed use will be located within an existing building currently used for a daycare facility.
II. CHARACTER OF THE AREA
Staff Finding –The subject property is located at the intersection of several existing and developing residential neighborhoods. The subject property is site planned for office development. The surrounding area is characterized by a variety of housing types.
III. SUITABILITY OF SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THE USES TO WHICH IT HAS BEEN RESTRICTED
Staff Finding – The proposed use will not alter the base zoning district. The proposed use is permitted in the office district subject to approval of a Use Permitted upon Review. The use will not alter the existing building footprint, but will increase the use of the rear green space as an outdoor play yard.
IV. LENGTH OF TIME SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS REMAINED VACANT AS ZONED
The property was originally zoned RO-1 in 1988. The initial plat for the development proposed C-2 (Neighborhood Shopping District). The general intent was to provide a location for “neighborhood commercial” uses that would serve the surrounding 150-acre development. To address concerns about development intensity the property was rezoned from RO-1 to PCD-1 in July 1989. A development plan was never filed for the subject property. The property was later rezoned from PCD-1 to O-1 in 2000 in anticipation of the office development (SP-05-32-00). A UPR for a daycare facility was approved in 2004.
Staff Finding – The subject property was rezoned for office development in 2000. The existing daycare facility was approved in 2004. The property is developed with two office buildings that represent the first phase of the development site plan in 2000. Two additional office buildings are planned for phase 2 along Kasold Drive.
V. EXTENT TO WHICH REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIONS WILL DETRIMENTALLY AFFECT NEARBY PROPERTY
Staff Finding – The proposed use will not alter the base zoning district. The proposed use is located within an existing non-residential development, but in close proximity to several existing residential neighborhoods.
VI. RELATIVE GAIN TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE BY THE DESTRUCTION OF THE VALUE OF THE PETITIONER’S PROPERTY AS COMPARED TO THE HARDSHIP IMPOSED UPON THE INDIVIDUAL LANDOWNERS
Staff Finding – Approval of the request will expand childcare options within the existing and developing nearby neighborhoods, specifically for school age children.
VII. CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The comprehensive plan does not address UPR’s but does state: “Public and semi-public land uses include municipal facilities, schools, universities, parks, recreation and open space and a range of institutions.” The plan also states the need for such land uses is difficult to project partially due to the fact that such facilities are “controlled by jurisdictions over which the City and or/or County has limited (or no) control.” “The plan therefore considers areas shown for the various residential categories as appropriate for many public and semi-public uses, provided access and buffering are considered in their location.”
The plan reiterates the importance of schools in a predominantly residential community and such facilities provide an important cultural, recreational and social role in that community. The plan encourages a cooperative effort among jurisdictions in the decision making process that affects the community but which generally focuses on the location or expansion of new facilities. This theory can also be attributed to other community type facilities such as daycare and nursing home type facilities which provide both an anchor within a residential neighborhood and appropriate community services within a neighborhood area.
The following goals and policies related to the proposed request are as follows:
|
Goal 1: Provide Facilities and Services to Meet the Needs of the Community: Provide quality public and semi-public facilities equitably distributed throughout the community. Policy 1.1: Maintain Existing Facilities a. Encourage the adaptive reuse or redevelopment of excess community facilities and sites. b. Maintain or upgrade existing facilities and services where necessary to serve existing development. Policy 1.3” Coordinate the Delivery of Services a. Plan cooperative use of facilities, services and land to optimize use of resources and avoid duplication. b. Encourage the coordination of services and facilities among this municipal service providers engaged in similar services in the community. Policy 1.4 Combine Facilities a. Encourage multiple uses of educational facilities for recreation and/or other service programs. b. Promote combined public facilities such as school/community centers, policy/fire stations, or library/community centers in several locations throughout the community to improve accessibility and promote efficient delivery of services.
|
· Staff Finding – The proposed request utilizes existing building space and builds on an existing service provided for non-school age children. The proposed request is consistent with the general principals of Horizon 2020 outlined above.
STAFF REVIEW
Section 20-1608 of the City Code requires that a UPR application be accompanied with a site plan meeting the contents of the Site Plan provision of the Code (Section 20-1431). Section 20-1611 states: "It is necessary to give special consideration to certain uses because they are unique in nature, require large land areas, require greater density, are potentially incompatible with existing development or because effects of such uses cannot definitely be foreseen, or more intensely dominate the area in which they are located than do other uses permitted in the district..."
The Code provides two general guidelines in considering the application:
(a) The proposed use and site plan conform to the purpose and intent of the ordinance.
(b) The proposed use and site plan will not under the circumstances of the particular case regarding setback, height, density, and similar aspects be objectionable or be detrimental to the general welfare of the community and neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located.
The proposed use and site plan conform to the purpose and intent as approved in 2004. The proposed request will allow for the expansion of service provided to the community and increase the outdoor play area as shown on the site plan. The plan does not seek to vary from the required setback, height, density or similar aspects, and specifically does not propose any building modifications to the existing footprint of the building.
Access to the site
An access drive is provided within the interior of the office development. No changes are proposed.
Program
The proposed program is a preschool/childcare facility. The proposed request will add a school age program and will operate year round (including summer care).
Exterior Yard
As a childcare facility an outdoor play yard will be required. The applicant intends to expand the play yard consistent with the existing play yard provided for the younger students.
Summary
Section 20-1432 provides the conditions of approval that are required for a site plan. There are no exterior improvements proposed for this site other than the addition of the fencing. Interior finish for the classrooms will be evaluated as part of a building permit.
The original approval did not allow for administrative modifications to the daycare facility to increase the population or services offered because of the public concern for the exterior fence.
PROFESSIONAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends approval of the Use Permitted upon Review and forwarding it to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval, based upon the findings of fact presented in the body of the Staff Report and subject to the following conditions: