e e e e e e non chair yeah geopal yeah that's that's right Vice chair discussing International effects all right well thank you all for coming to a another lovely evening here at the town of Gilbert Civic Center and I'd like to call to order the study session first item on the agenda here is up 24-50 T-Mobile pan Middle School WCF broadleaf tree and for that we're going to bring up Miss Erica Prader thank you good evening okay good evening chair uh members of the commission uh the request before you tonight is for the uh T-mobile um pain middle school WCF broadleaf tree um the STA uh staff and applicant are seeking feedback from the commission this evening um on the stealth design of the proposed structure we're looking for input on the proposed structure ideas for improving the design and uh potential alternative design options the uh project site is located at the southeast corner of Higley Road in Coldwater Boulevard the applicant is proposing to construct a category 3 75 ft High stealth structure and a 900t enclosure on5 Acres of the larger 27 acre parcel the parcel is Zone public facility and institutional and is surrounded by single family residential zoning on all four sides the proposed site at Payne Junior High School was selected by the applicant to fill a coverage Gap that exists within the area the requested input um tonight we are seeking tonight um is we are looking for feedback on the proposed design ideas for improving the proposed design and proposals for alternative stealth design options Category 3 um Wireless Communications facilities or wcfs1 right uh stealth and concealment um are defined in the LDC as the application of design standards to ensure Wireless pH facilities blend in with the surrounding area to the maximum extent feasible a stealth structure may include but is not limited to freestanding structures such as artificial Cactus artificial tree or sculptures some evaluation criteria that um staff considers when um looking at stealth structures um to make sure that they will blend in with the surrounding area to the maximum extent feasible are the level of visibility from nearby properties and the roadway uh the surrounding developments and the zoning districts uh will the proposed design change the context of the site and then for um faux tree designs we are also looking if um at criteria are there existing mature trees of a similar height size color texture or shape in the vicinity um these are this is the broadleaf design that's been proposed by the applicant um at the center is the elevations um to your left is a view a mockup view um to the southeast no I'm sorry my apologies to the Southwest in the lower right corner is to looking towards the southeast the applicant has also proposed um a eucalypt um style tree um and you can see that here and as we can see there's the view to the southeast at the top and a view to the Southwest at the bottom and that concludes my presentation um any questions all right thank you very much Erica thank you anyone have any questions they'd like to kick off with Mr Simon please um thank you for the presentation the only question I have is they're proposing the broad leaf but are giving the eucalyptus as a alternative or saying we're going to do one or the other yes so they um they provided the eucalyptus option today so included I I I was just going to say I throw two cents for the area and the types of other vehic other vehicles other vehicles that are around there maybe I need a nap I don't know um the other the other types of trees are on there I kind of like that the look of the eucalyptus better than the broadleaf great so thank you anyone else yeah yeah thanks for the Pres presentation U I'm kind of familiar with that area and that's a pretty open area and somewhat undeveloped and I don't think there's any Perfect Design that would fit beautifully in there um so why did the applicant choose that those two trees because it does stand out I mean it's it does stand out it's pretty loud commissioner deina thank you um that was what the um stealth designs they provided I I did not um seek clarification as to why they went with those designs but I can I can ask and follow up with you if you'd like yeah yeah I I think when that area is more built out it probably would fit a little bit better because you'd have more homes and more trees and that type of thing and maybe that's what they're looking at towards the future that area is more developed so thank you thank you commissioner Wayne so uh try to clarify we can if approve we can choose one of the other it's not up to them is that correct the eucalypticola perview over is the design for these structures and so yeah they would um what we're trying to get tonight is either feedback on are you guys okay with either one of these tree designs or is there something else um other stealth designs that you would be interested in in considering for the site or if um a tree is something that you would prefer to see is this are there any suggestions for improving it okay Mr Anderson uh thank you for the present is so this is going on school property correct is the school a public or is it a private school um commissioner Anderson it is Gilbert Unified School District all so it's Town Town School how how they end up with this site how do they land on this area to to put this Tower my understanding is there's a gap coverage within that area of um 5G or Wireless uh capabilities okay so the town's leasing them that little piece of land for them to put this tower on the school will be leasing the school will be okay all right thank you okay all right well I I don't have a major issues design wise I think eucalyptus looks a little bit better and makes you think of panda bears that are although very violent are very cute so I think it would be good okay is that everything you needed then Erica yes thank you all right thank you very much for the presentation okay next up item number two Dr 25-06 NWC Higley and Warner and Kristen divine right good evening commission uh the case I have for study session for you tonight is going to be for a master site plan for the northwest corner of Higley and Warner you can see it here outlined in the black and teal area uh this site is part of the morison ranch character area the feedback that we're looking for from you tonight are going to be regarding the elevations the sight layout and any general feedback that you would like to provide all right and the site is approximately 5.4 Acres it's currently proposed to be developed in multiple phases with phase one being the central two buildings called shops A and B uh those two buildings are approximately 15,000 sare ft just under uh with 1900 ft of patio space attached to them as well the two buildings together are total approximately 7,000 square feet of restaurant space and almost 8,000 ft of retail space between the two buildings you can see that there's a pedestrian connection that also follows through down to the bottom right corner um of an already established landscape tract that is um required of the Morrison Ranch character area so the the site is is focused around that corner with pedestrian connectivity throughout it and also out to the West into the adjacent neighborhood right and staff does not have too many concerns with the site plan as proposed one standout concern that we do have though is going to be regarding the refug enclosures um as of right now they they kind of just look like they were placed in wherever they could find room for them and we would like to see those Refuge enclosures maybe integrated into the design a little bit more so they're less of a focal point to the site itself um as you can see if you're entering in on Warner you're coming in and smack you're hitting a refuge enclosure um same with a couple the other entrance points as well so we would just like to see those maybe moved around a little bit all right parking for the site is um there are 108 spaces required the applicant is currently proposing 197 total spaces which once the site is built out would accommodate for almost all of the required parking spaces at that time um with the estimated uses of what the four additional pads are going to be um it does leave a 12 space deficit and that would need to be accommodated on those pad sites in the future when they come in because of the way that the site plan was submitted to us it's called a bubble plan um each pad site would need to come back forward for a full design review with you so you would see those again um they wouldn't be able to come through an administrative approval just because of the the vagueness of what's proposed currently right and this is just a a snapshot of the landscape plan one thing to mention on this is that the street trees will be modified slightly because we do have Street themed trees for this area 50% of the trees need to be either peon or chinesee pistache and they are not currently called out that way all right that brings us to the elevations um we don't have a ton of concerns with the elevations but we would like to see more of a farmhouse style that's reminiscent of the Morrison Ranch character area um right now the materials that are proposed are modular brick wood composite siding stucco and the standing seam metal roofing um the canopies that are on the buildings are all flat canopies suspended with cables and we would like to see maybe those canopies be a mix of of pitched awnings um just something to to mix up the flat canopies that are presenting in more of a modern fashion at the moment and then this is just a closer shot of it's a 3D rendering of the proposed shops A and B building with the colors and materials below and then below I just included um a nearby development on Power and Elliot that is currently being constructed and probably actually is open now um this is kind of the the style that we're we're hoping that this development can kind of um complement a little more right and with that um again we're just looking for feedback on elevation site layout and any other General feedback that you would like to provide all right thank you Kristen anyone have any feedback they'd like to start off with Vice chair thank you Kristen um usually I try to stay away from aesthetic decisions and tonight's no different um but uh and overall if this was coming tonight it would probably be pretty close to an easy yes there there are two kind of cautions to to file away from from my perspective uh the first is phasing when you when you've got civil improvements that are associated with out with with improvements that aren't coming at the same the Civil improvements you kind of need to come upfront particularly drainage basins but even parking and stuff so so be be careful that there's a with the old uh from papey I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today and no no no you're going to pay for the hamburger if you want it right now um so so phasing and and civil improvements are particularly with those uh it's not a huge deal it's easy to manage those parking spaces that that they need to come before the Improvement opens the other but the other question I've got is this out parcel usually an out parcel is either out or it's either out or in and it's it's got out in the name but this one seems to be kind of tailored to the site it's Landscaping can you explain a little bit more about the out is it completely just an out parcel and we ignore it or is that the drainage basin and if so is it restricted what's going on with that sure so chairman uh Vice chair Fay it is an already constructed and required Landscaping tra is roughly 1.5 is Acres that is required of the Morrison r character area for the arterial Corners um it's it's got The Pedestrian track that goes through the middle it's got your palm tree Circle that if you look at an aerial down all four corners should have the palm trees to where it looks like a circle um so it's it's not part of this proposal but they did design the the site to cater around that pedestrian of the tract it's not catering to our tract it's our tract is catering to the out parcel essentially yes yeah okay no that okay that makes sense I did not understand that for reading things and it it stood out as something that seemed a little bit not quite out parcel but out parcel esque okay thank you two separate Parcels but trying to coexist okay thank you Vice chair anyone else commission Anderson uh thank you for the presentation what's how is staff's what's staff's opinion on the amount of the um that wood material that they're putting on on the building and the Darkness of it do you have any thoughts on it we don't love the darkness of it um I I would love to see it more reminiscent of a a neutral desert style tone um similar to The Power and Elliot Center here um the colors are very contemporary and modern but they're trying to blend it with the kind of like an agricultural style architecture and it it's just it's it's missing something yeah I kind of agree with you um I mean I like the play with the material of it I think it would look kind of interesting having that rustic look compared to like you know a smooth stucco or you know even but I would agree with the the color of it I think it's it's really kind of dark and it's making the whole building look dark especially once you get on the slap roof where you have the um the standing seam Roofing and that's dark too so I would suggest to the applicant you'll maybe look at a lighter color for that wood material that they putting up okay great thank you thank you I would agree with that too my myself anything else okay well other than that I I agree with the pardon me I agree with the material that it does seem to be a little inordinately dark but um not terribly so so if there's a way to acquest to somewhat of a lightning tone on that that would be nice but other than that I like the layout and the build seems to be very much in line with what is in that fries area so all right well thank you very much Kristen may I ask one follow-up question yes please do how do we feel about the refuse enclosures I I'll actually comment on that that was one thing I noted but you had brought it up that you've already had conversation with the applicant I don't I don't like the the a couple of them right in the front that you literally Drive in off off of either um Warner or Higley and run into it but there also in the back I'm kind of looking at that thinking okay how's that traffic flow going to work to hit those Refuge enclosures so I kind of I do feel like there needs to be work done on that um I just didn't say anything because you had brought it up so but I would agree with you they it's a little tricky because in the prea they did have the refuges enclosures adjacent to the residential and that was one of the comments we asked them to remove them from adjacent to the residential so it's not as much of a nuisance um and that was accommodated so there's just a little bit of tweaking that we feel like should be worked out thank you for your feedback yeah thank you very much okay next up item up item number three Z24 D21 Tuscany at Gabriela point and Keith Newman uh CH can I jump in I need to recuse myself from this one we have a recusal commissioner Anderson thank you sir good evening chairm members of the commission um my only project before you tonight is for Tuscany at Gabriel point for the some their extended yards they're proposing the Tuscany Gabriella Point apartment complex is is highlighted there on the screen in front of you there the whole entire area of the project is 39 acres and that includes the whole thing outlined in red and it's obviously at the Higley um east of the north the southeast corner of Higley and Warner Road this parment complex is part of the um of this Gabriella Point kind of this Morrison Ranch uh uh type of area in this uh near Morrison ranch right in here in the Gateway character area to the west of the project is the Gabriella Point Commerce Center um which is zoned Regional commercial to the south of the project is um zoned uh Business Park and that's also part of Gabriel Point Commerce Center and then of course you can see to the to the east is Morrison Ranch and to the north is more Morrison Ranch uh development as well so the subject site that we're going to talk about today is is actually the blue part that's on the west side of the development and that is approximately 19 acres in size of an overall 36 acre apartment complex uh that it has about 760 units in three and four story buildings and as if you drive by today you can see that it is under construction they're moving pretty quickly the request before you tonight is for uh oh that is the wrong information on the slide I apologize um it's not for that it's for uh extended extended yard areas adjacent to the pat covered patios so I apologize for the typos um I'll move I'll move into the request here so um like I said 39 Acres 19 and 1 12 acres on the west side and you can see on the site plan in front of you that um the portion that's in white and you can see all the little blue lines on the site plan that is where they're proposing to add the extended yards the part on the east side um which is also about 19 about about the same size as this apart half of the apartment complex um that side received actually they received administrative approval in October of this past year for extended yards that are very similar to what the applicant is proposing today um and I'll go into that in just a few minutes in a little more detail but really quick just I talked about the units how many units there were already 760 and the request is for for the applicant to reduce uh common open space in the MFM portion of development so this the site has two different zoning districts the west side is zoned MFM the east side is zoned MFL so on the MFM side which is the West Side that's where they're proposing these extended patios and the MFL side on the W on the east side they already have the extended patios that were approved um so they're proposing to take the open space on that West Side the MFM piece and decrease the open space from 43% to 40% for these extended ground floor yard areas so I'll just go into a little bit more detail um on this now so here's kind of an diagram or an exhibit that will show the extended yards the top one and and the what what the current condition is today the top picture shows the current condition so you can see the apartment building and um to the far left on the ground floor there you can see the ground floor covered patio and you can see kind of people sitting on the porch right there hopefully you can see that and then to the right of that you'll see this area you can see in between the column or the pillar of the apartment unit there's a tree and a bunch of landscaping and then you can see a sidewalk within that space today they're they're proposing landscaping or that was what was originally approved through through the original design review case so the bottom picture shows what the applicant is proposing to do the applicant is proposing to fill in that space from the column of the of the patio all the almost to the sidewalk not quite to the sidewalk probably about an area of about s to to 8 feet or so from the patio existing patio and fence it in with about a 4 foot tall um view type fence and um use that area as an extended outdoor yard space for residents on the ground floor um I'm still trying to gather from the applicant whether or not the Landscaping is going to remain I don't believe it will I think the Landscaping is all going to be removed and so that space will be converted from a common open space area to private open space the the so that is reducing the amount of common open space in the development now as far as that is concerned currently they were they were approved for 43% open space which was approved by the Town Council as a tradeoff for deviations that they had received approval for or they requested for that MFM portion of the development the deviations that were requested and approved by the Town Council were for additional Building height in that MFM portion only not the MFL portion just the MFM portion and that was an Town staff negotiated with the applicant for open space at 43% above and beyond the code requirement of 40% and the applicant agreed to that so by reducing that from 43 to 40% they're taking away the tradeoff for the deviations that town staff negotiated with the applicant and that the Town Council approved so town staff we're I'm going to be honest were not in support of taking proposing to remove something that was agreed upon and approved by the Town Council um in in exchange for deviations so that is our our major concern with this project today with what the applicant is proposing now let's talk about the MFL portion on the east side Town staff approved an administrative design review for that and approved those extended yards and the reason we did that that is because that area that whole MFL portion of the development had 48% open space where 45% is required when they proposed those extended yards in the MFL piece they reduced the open space down to 45% which is still the which is the minimum that is required per the code but the difference is is they receive no deviations on in the MFL portion of the development so Town staff is okay with the reduction there because it wasn't a trade-off for deviations I hope that all makes sense so um that is basically my presentation in a nutshell I'm available to answer any questions you have but I would like to get your uh comments and feedback on this proposal by the applicant uh thank you very much thank you Keith who's going to start us off there commissioner Simon please Keith thank you for the presentation I'm I'm gonna I actually have no problem with this whatsoever um and I think we've had these conversations in the past where we look at um open space and and these included yards um with the open space whether or not we actually count that as open space or not and my brain gets confused on that quite frequently if we were looking at extending the balconies and the patios and moving that whole wall out I would have issue with that but I think what what is being given up is basically gravel and bushes for usability in the bottom floor so I look at this as something where you're going to have somebody more than likely these are going to be pet friendly apartments and they could have maybe a small dog or something and that would be a good space for them rather than needing um a a dog park so to speak although I would probably still encourage that but I I look at this and I I I don't see any problem with it because I don't feel like visually it's going to take away and I really believe that that space that is going to be used is actually going to be functional space Now versus just space that's there because we have uh 45% required open space I understand the the staff's stance on the concessions that were already made but I look at this and I don't I don't think that I have issue with it thank thank you commissioner Simon commissioner Gage thank you chair um I have to agree this is not actually usable Community open space no one is going to play right next to someone's patio um so it makes sense to enclose it and allow those residents to actually use it commissioner deina I was just going to add one more thing Keith that that also gives young families a chance to have have their kids play in in a kind of a protective area so just kind of my two cents on that kind of an agreement Vice chair thanks Keith I'm slightly different perspective I'm nominally anti or slightly anti I don't find that that's that that which is enclosed gets maintained nearly as well as the community and it'll change the aesthetic I would if you're going to we go to a private standard there's higher numbers for a reason I would want some offsetting Community open space um to to incre to keep that green aesthetic assuming that some of what's inside the fence might get lost because it's not getting maintained as well or it's it's based on different factors versus the entire community so it's not it's not crazy it's not a hard no but it's to me it's kind of a disfavored something along those lines thank you Vice chair commissioner Wang so I'm kind of in between so I like the enros area for the family that can use a a space that you know compony but they since they're no ground for but also I I'm concerned with each individual unit will have their own landscape it's kind of become chaos uh you know versus if it's not enclosed it be landscaped uniformly so that's that's what I'm kind of struggling the other thing is you know kind of like you already negotiated for the deviations and now you know you get the you get the ice cream but you didn't do the tour so that doesn't you know sit right with me so I'm kind of still little bit struggling on this thank you uh yeah so Keith I I have a question as it relates to this what do we look at enclosed personal space as open space um chairmont um members of the commission if it's in closed open space we look at it as private open space right so in this situation they're proposing to add more private open space even though it's a view fence um but they're reducing the amount of common open space um that was approved by the Town Council so that's our our biggest concern and it was a uh negotiated tradeoff for deviations and so that is our our our biggest concern right so there was already some acquiescence of other terms as it relates to the the open space as it is and now we're hearing now we want more reduction that chair that's that is correct so now they're just going to be meeting the minimum whereas they were going above and beyond and and giving the town something that for us to approve those deviations that was like Hey we're going to give you this we'll allow you to have this if you give us this now they're removing that and and I want to also note that when we approved the um administrative design review for the MFL portion we specifically told the applicant that staff would not support this request if they tried it on the east on the West Side excuse me and and of course now we see this before us so we have we have clearly made made that clear to them that we would not support it if they tried this on the west on the west side of the development because we value that additional 3% of open space I know it's only 3% but it was a trade-off for deviations or else we may not have supported the deviations to allow a great greater height increases in the building yeah and so for that Express purpose I don't I don't agree with it I really don't like when we spend spend time going through a project and then it comes back and this is goes to uh Vice chair phase point of phasing it's the same thing where if you say okay we'll do it for this reason but then later on them or somebody else an applicant would come back and do something well this this doesn't seem fair but there was a reason that that was set um so for that reason I I I don't agree with this and I don't I don't I don't see the use outside of being able to possibly um charge more for rents by telling them they have a yard and uh I also find that to be if it's positioned as this is still good because everybody can see it um it's it's not something I'm comfortable with going against agreements that were made in Council vote so that's my opinion but you've heard from the rest of the staff as well so is that good for what you needed Keith um chairman members of the commission I I think that's all the the feedback I need to hear here so I have I have a quick question I'm sorry will this come back before us as an agenda item outside of um our study session um chair M commissioner Simon yes it will come back before you um as a public hearing item I just I don't know exactly when yet we just issued first review comments a few weeks ago so I'm not exactly sure when it will come back but yes it will come back to you all right I got one more quick oh yeah Keith as we're discussing this up here kind of something that came to mind is that since that's fenced who has control how those yards look if they kind of get a little out of hand the the apartment complex can they find is like an HOA says you can't be doing that so the aesthetic so it looks appropriate and uh so that kind of came up while we're discussing this is that it could get a little crazy A little sloppy uh chairmont commissioner uh deina that is a question we have asked uh during first review comments we don't have answers to that yet we too are very concerned about the Aesthetics and um of of people putting couches and furniture and all kinds of things in those areas that are unsightly and be and and don't provide a good appearance especially Landscaping would provide a good appearance and we're just we're very concerned about that as well but we don't have those answers yet um I'm hoping to provide more information on that when we bring it back to the public Hearing in in the future I think when I initially said I was sort of in favor but now I'm kind of 50/50 after thinking it through a little bit more and here in the comments up here thank you very much commissioner okay thanks so much Keith appreciate the presentation thank you very much okay with that that's the last agenda on the study session bring us to our fourth item which is a discussion of the regular meeting agenda and today we currently have consent agenda has item8 Tustin Ranch item nine holidan Express and item 10 oh wait I'm sorry public consent has nothing non-consent has items eight nine and then 10 an LDC text Amendment um and then we also have a uh consideration as it relates to the F Sun Valley um did did we want to have any discussion of if anything could be moved to consent or I I would like to propose that we move item number nine to consent unless somebody wants to hear that I I I want to hear that one you want to hear that one then I have nothing else okay um I would propose actually eight eight and maybe 10 we we had some discussion with the city attorney's office about whether LDC can ever go on consent but this is such a non-controversial one if it's possible I'd be cool with it yeah and I would be too um okay anyone she nodding I think you're nodding right anyone opposed to the nod more dramatically so I could all right um and then I just wanted to also touch on that uh we were planning an executive session and I wanted to have I don't know if it's a discussion or if it was completely decided as to exactly when we would do that and I wanted to know do we think we should do the executive session first and then come into the meeting it will take as long as the attorney wants me to and that's the only answer I can give you I think it we we might have a I imagine there's going to be some discussion could and there's actually some training too is that in the executive session yes so so we could do it after just leave it in the administrative items but put it I I I would like to move it before we discuss item 11 I think that would be prudent since so do the regular meeting up to up to administrative items then call the executive session and come back okay okay ex session you'll see it's special called by the chair it's not a surprise it's on the agenda okay very good thank you all then with that uh we will adjourn the work session and be back here at 6 for the regular meeting thank you e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e okay well if everybody here is ready to get started we will get started then thank you all for your patience I would like to call to order the regular meeting and the first order of business will be the Pledge of Allegiance please stand with me and join okay thank you very much if we could please get a roll call commissioner hung here commissioner lion commissioner D gravina here commissioner Gage here commissioner Davis commissioner Simon here commissioner Anderson here Vice chairman Fay here chairman Mt here we have a quorum thank you very much okay we'll move on to approval of the agenda agenda and we had some heated discussion in the study session about the agenda and if I remember correctly we discussed that we could move 8 and 10 into the consent is anyone here in the crowd here to speak on either items eight or 10 scanning the crowd I do not see any so we could move those and then I believe whether or not this has to be said since it'll likely be after most uh that we could do the executive session um prior to item 11 if that's possible so I will entertain a motion in encompassing those changes if possible chairman Mt I would make a motion to move items 8 and 10 onto consent and leave everything else as written thank you very much Vice chair we have a motion do I have a second second second from chair or well I gave him back his chairmanship take no no from commissioner Simon thank you okay please cast your vote motion carries unanimous okay now we will move on to the next Communications Communications from citizens this time members of the public May comment on matters within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission the commission may not discuss items that are not specific specifically identified on the agenda therefore pursuant the state law action taken as a result of public comment will be limited to directing staff study the matter responding to any criticism or scheduling the matter for further consideration are there any individuals here who wish to speak in items not currently on the agenda I do not have any cards seeing nobody we will move on then and we will have the report from the council aison uh council member Monty lines Is With Us online and we have a special announcement so Monty if you are able take it away all right thank you very much um good evening and I wanted to take a minute to thank Ava cro for her service to the town since she'll be retiring April 1st this will be her last Planning Commission meeting with Gilbert Ava began her career as a senior planner with the mammoth County Park system I believe in New Jersey and from there I was told she moved to Arizona and served as a senior planner and promoted uh uh the community development director in Paradise Valley AA served Paradise Valley for 21 years and then came over to Gilbert where she has served us for the past six years and has been instrumental in the general plan approval by the voters countless planning cases and most importantly providing support and building the best planning team in the valley she has tirelessly supported the Planning Commission and Council and and we've been lucky to have her as part of the town team uh thank you AA and and good luck and we wish you the very best and on behalf of maring Council we would like you to have these flowers as uh that are there uh as a token of our appreciation and forgive me I i' I've got covid so my V voice is a little weak and I would have lik to have been there for this but thank you very much thank you and it's been a pleasure [Applause] all right well thank you very much councilman and please get some rest and drink lots of fluids um then I would also like to then say that I really appreciate all the time that Ava has done working with us and in those six years she's been here I believe I don't were you here when I first started on the council I don't remember how many years I've been here I know I know chair commissioner Anderson was the chairman he might remember but he's probably been here for a hundred years so he may not remember either but you've been here the entire time that I can remember so if I worked with anyone else that should say something um I do have some fun facts that I'd like to share about Ava um you know and as the councilman mentioned she started in June 2019 so she started this nice new job right before covid so that had to be fun like hey look we're going to get started let's walk around the office see what it's like boom you're out go sit home uh but of that the number of Planning Commission hearings attended is 69 and that's not meant to be a crude teenage joke these numbers were sent to me by Veronica so unless I'm I am not privy to set joke but it was 69 meetings um and number of planning cases submitted 2,880 um and you know as uh council member lies said that she was instrumental in updating the LDC uh and anyways she's been great and I didn't I didn't know any different so I'm very sad to see go she's been a lot of fun and I actually personally got to go spend time with the planners at the planning conference this year and needless to say they actually are a very fun group of people which most people may not know based on all of their experien of being in public meetings they might think the same about me but I might be it might be more obvious that I'm fun because I'm kind of insane but nonetheless from us we'd like to also present you some flowers um they're slightly smaller than the commission or the council but that's by Design because our budget is much smaller like our little mini fridge that doesn't even have water but that's okay because you know you helped to scrap us together so thank you so much and uh we will miss you greatly and we look forward to uh you joining us up here much like the new mayor uh has done so thank you AA thank you all I really appreciate it um Ava the last six years have been fantastic um we wanted to take the opportunity to say thank you as well in a public setting so um you've built an incredible team they love you enormously so thank you for everything we've got the smallest flowers thank you once again can I make a yeah commissioner Anders so I just want to point out that Ava Eva is the third planning commissioner that I've seen that is retired yet Kyle is still here we we won't make any inferences to what that means we will let the general public and the many people who view these meetings make that for themselves okay thank you all very much and uh moving on now to public hearing ing consent all items listed below are considered public hearing consent calendar the commission may by a single motion approve any number of items where after opening the public hearing no person requests the item to be removed from the consent calendar if such a request is made the commission shall then withdraw the item from the public hearing consent calendar for the purpose of public discussion and separate action other items on the agenda may be added to the consent calendar and approved under that same single motion so seeing that uh more people may have come in are cons ENT calendar is item number 8 s244 Tustin Ranch and item 10 z25 LDC text Amendment are there any individuals in the crowd that wish to speak on either of those two items okay very good I will then entertain a motion as it relates to the consent agenda of 8 and 10 chairman Mt i' like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda Vice chair with a motion do I have a second I'll second it second from commissioner deina please cast your Vote or not David you're not retired yet I think they may have taken her keys away maybe the flowers have M with the dashboard here let me try it again I thought Noah was doing this all the whole time it's it's probably my fault it's fine okay try it now okay there we go thank you and the motion carries consent agenda passed moving on to the non-consent non-consent public hearing items will be heard at an individual public hearing and will be acted upon by the commission by a separate motion during the public hearing anyone wishing to comment in support or in opposition to a public hearing item may do so if you wish to comment on a public hearing item you must fill out a public comment form indicating the item number on which you wish to be heard once the hearing is closed there will be no further public comment unless requested by a member of the commission moving into our public hearing non-consent we now have the solitary number nine Z24 d18 holiday and express and Miss Nicole Russell thank you chair members of the commission Nicole Russell senior planner the application before the commission this evening is the 2418 for the holiday in express here is the aerial photo showing the subject parcel and the surrounding zoning to the north and west is PF and I for the Santan uh freeway and to the South is also pfn for public facility and institutional and it's the Mercy Gilbert Medical complex to the east of the subject site is also pfn for the Discovery Park and to the east is go for the Albright Senior Living facility the request before the commission is a an amendment to an existing pad to reduce the landscape setback on the southern side of the site and in order to accommodate the design of a five-story 98 room Hotel on approximately the 2. acre 2.6 Acre Site which is zoned General commercial a little bit of history on this site in December of 2008 the council approved an ordinance and a zone change for 56 Acres from General office Community commercial to the public facilities and in institutional district for the Celebration Center campus we know as the Mercy Gilbert Campus in January of 20122 the Town Council approved a general plan Amendment and a zone change rezoning the subject property 2.6 Acres from the pfn public facilities and institutional zoning District to The General commercial with the pad and on March 22nd of 22 the Planning Commission approved Dr 2131 for a four-story 84 room Hotel on the subject site as previously stated the applicant is proposing to amend the existing development plan and add a new deviation for the landscape setback adjacent to the multi-use PA path on the southern side of the site here is a another aerial photo uh without the zoning showing the Sou Southern portion of the site and you can see some of the equestrian trail that is to the south of the site previously the pad had deviations for height increase and reduced Landscaping on the Santan freeway side of the site and reduced building setbacks the applicant is requesting a 10t reduction in the non streets side Landscaping set back to 10 ft from the 20 ft that is required here is the development plan showing the proposed uh five-story hotel with the parking on all sides of the building and amenities located close to posos Road staff supports the request based on the justification provided by the applicant that when the equestrian trail to the of the property is developed the Landscaping will meet code and here's a chart showing the approved deviations for the request and the proposed 10- foot reduction to the Landscaping on the southern side for the reason set forth in the staff report staff requests that the commission move to recommend approval to the Town Council for Z24 18 as requested subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report I am available for questions as is the applicant and the applicant also has a presentation okay thank you very much does anybody want to ask any questions prior to the applicant's presentation I I'll ask one there the original the prior hotel that was talked about that had also had underground parking too didn't it chair Mt commiss Vice chair Fay uh as I understand it the previous design did have parking underneath the building and when the applicant came forward with a different brand of Hotel staff found that it was not in substantial conformance with what was previously approved and that's why they are here today for deviations but yes you are correct that the parking was Lo part of the parking was located underneath the building do you know how many spots were under the building before I do not okay okay well uh if we would want then I guess we could ask the applicant which is none other than Mr Ralph Pew one of my favorite orders ever here at the Planning Commission to come on up so thank you the button sir there it makes it go and I'll give you that simple right yes Mr chairman and members of the commission thank you again for the opportunity to be here my name is Ralph Pew I'm here on behalf of kuber development and my partner ree Anderson who is not in town today and so I'm filling in for him this evening uh the holiday in express and sweets uh is an important addition to this part of the town we have looked for and searched for hotels in this area this is a very very good use here um really the issue tonight uh Commissioners relates to the um setback on the south side and before we get too far into that I want to say thanks to Ava thank you very much and to look around the room the funny thing is if we talk about time in Gilbert we need to find out who in the room worked in Gilbert or handled any zoning case when the city count the Town Council met in the Chamber of Commerce building on Gilbert Road okay my guess is nobody right Kyle so sorry sorry to say AA some of us were here in those days and so it was really fun that was the late 70s early ' 80s so um wow here we are great community so the issue tonight Commissioners really in our opinion unless you have other question boils down to the setback deviation we're looking for on the South Side that's the only proposed deviation the height the additional rooms the parking everything else satisfies the prior zoning conditions so here's the exhibit that I think can demonstrate why we're requesting this deviation typically you have a 20 foot setback on the south side of the property at at this spot and here again we are in the Gilbert Medical Campus area where the we have non-residential uses and expectation for offices and other business type uses so there's a 30 foot Trail and EAS that exists that's outlined in Pink as you can see on your screen and and that uh easement and those uses were designated years ago so what we thought was we would add a 10t setback on the Northern side of that and then when and if that easement uh ever ceases to be used or is distinguished in any way there would be Landscaping there and it would end up being a 40 foot uh in essence setback but it we it didn't make much sense to us today to come in and do 20 more feet on top of the 30 fet that's already over open has a trail through it doesn't get used regularly I don't think for much equestrian usage my guess is that easement came years ago when this area was more residential in nature and agrarian um but it's there and so that's the reason we're here uh we figured along with the staff that would be better to approach this from a pad deviation based on the quality of the project the need for the project in the area as opposed to uh going through an adjustment through a variance uh process so to us it makes perfectly good sense to do that the the separation will be there and we can still meet all the parking and Landscaping criteria so if I could answer any other questions you might have about it that to us is really the issue tonight this single deviation we're looking for thank you very much Mr PW does anyone have any questions for the applicant once again I don't know if a question for the applicant or for staff who owns the or who is responsible for putting the horse trail on the eement who who owns or controls the ement who's the beneficiary uh and and what will trigger the construction there chair Mt Vice chair Fay I believe that is owned by the Mercy Gilbert Medical complex so as I understand it they the Mercy Gilbert complex intends to expand at some point in the future and when that expands that's when the trail will be completed that that's in some deed restriction or some agreement already or what we hope is going to happen from what I understand that's what was been stated in previous approvals on the property okay okay I got one I just I'm a little bit confused you got the 30 feet plus the 10 feet is that going to look like all 40 feet or is that 10 feet separate and going to be landscaped differently so there's a separation between the 10 and the 30 uh Mr chairman commissioner I think the answer to that is that the 10-ft landscape area will be landscaped to meet the town's criteria so many PL so many sizes such and such containers Etc the trail easement the horse trail easement will remain as it is um and it's open so there will be that distinction what we did not want to do really was put a wall there which we think is completely unnecessary I agree yeah so okay that makes sense thank you okay anyone else all right thank you very much and then I'll just check one more time throughout the crowd here if there's anyone who did wish to have any public comment not seeing any uh I will then close the public comments and bring it up to the Das for a discussion and or a motion so chair I'm I'm the one who uh I mean I'm maybe not the only one but I I wanted to hear this one out and I think that I I been trying to Grapple with why I was uncomfortable with this one and and I think it it comes down to that that the statement of the problem is all the deviation is only the setback is is not quite the way I see it I think if if the original plan with the original underground parking was left in place I don't think this deviation is necessary at all and I think that um so I think really what this is about is is eliminating the underground parking um which all right I I mean I understand it but you've already got deviations for setback reductions and Landscaping on other sides of the property and I don't have a strong or a good feeling about when this horse easement is going to get built if it's going to I think we're all kind of assuming it's going to be a landscape Corridor but I don't I don't know that I the hospitals are profit centers themselves um so I I was not altogether comfortable as I guess as as I kind of tried to work my way around this over the last few days fundamentally I think this this this item in front of us comes down to requesting a deviation to push more of the aesthetic onto the adjacent land owner in order to eliminate the underground parking and given the eliminations that have already happened I wasn't comfortable with that so that's what that's what kind of triggered my swirling thoughts now and and I completely understand that and that goes kind of to my statement earlier but I the one thing that I will say is with this I'm I'm quite confused myself on how there's an equestrian Trail that's suddenly going to be made like as if they're going to one day put a bunch of really pretty trees so then people ride their horses there I and it's right by the highway I I don't know I yeah I you know we live in Gilbert so it's pretty cool you can just be driving and suddenly you'll just see some guy or gal Galloping down the road and you're like oh that's right that's cool but I just don't know that they're on their way to the 202 so they can really give it and see if they can catch the car but uh but the fact of the location of this gives me less reason to uh berate the poor applicant on some of the things that I normally would have because I think right by the highway and there is nowhere else if you have more people staying there and the parking wise you know they're not going to park out on the road so I don't have a major problem anyone else have anything yeah I've got one more question for Nicole I'm again a little bit confused technically we closed the it's like we can't go back to asking her you can discuss it here is it is that a deeded equestrian Trail because if it is then it has to stay that way are they just using it as an equestrian trail that at some point in time they could landscape or do whatever they want with it this is something that yeah again because it's these yeah during the discussion these things are coming up and if it's deeded then it has to stay that way well it might stay as an equestrian Trail but they might put trees on it I guess well and someone's going to probably fight that because they want to ride their horses I I can say that for myself because I'm a total geek I'm likely going to go and search what in the world is this equestrian Trail and maybe go look at it but um it's I I don't think for me at least it's not the hugest issue because if if it was like an easement of somebody else's property and then there was going to be development but because of the nature of where it is right between the freeway I mean it would be in the interest of anyone that wants to make your hotel look nice to not just have a dump right behind you by the highway but I know what you're saying like at some point the question of that easement will come up but I don't I don't think that what they're doing here uh is that will have a major impact on anything that that easement would do yeah um I I can understand where commissioner Fay uh Vice chair Fay I'm sorry uh is um drawing his conclusion with removing the underground parking but with all due respect I feel that uh that 10 feet sorry that was a joke that was aggressive no no I just I feel like with with regards to where this sits and and the commercial property to the south of that I don't I don't have an issue with this I think that if it was residential or another property I think with pedestrian connection or something along that lines you could you could work that through but I don't I don't have an issue with the 10 ft on here and and with regards to the horse trail um I obviously it's no longer existent I would say it probably doesn't even ever get used at this point because of where it sits so to me it's a non-issue at some point that's probably going to be swallowed up in the property to the South and we'll be dealing with what does that setback look like there so yeah I I looked it up on Google Earth it doesn't look to me like the equestrian Trail connects to anything I so it's like Schrodinger's cat once you get your horse on there you can never leave they just walking they're walking in circles they're stuck Comm Anderson uh for me my my two sens is we're talking about a landscape setback it's it's not a building setback I mean if you looking at this thing he's blinking um I mean this once that pavment gets into place I mean that's where it's that's where it's going to go there going to be 40 ft from the pavement to the property line well to you know whatever's going there and you know for me it's it's landscape I mean if it was a building setback and they're requesting it so they could push the building further south yeah I I would have some complaint about that but I mean putting some trees as some land you know landscape there and you know I'm sure you maybe if you even average out that whole area on the South Side maybe maybe it would average out to about you know close to 20 ft of setback because there's a lot of ins and outs and kind of movement along that so uh I I have no issue for with the request for the deviation thank you commissioner Okay then if there's any other discussion or a motion please shair if there's no other discussion I'll make a motion I'd like to make a motion to approve recommend approval of Z24 -8 uh holiday and express for the reason set forth in the packet second we have a motion by commissioner Simon and a second by commissioner Wang if no other discussion please cast your vote and motion carries 70 thank you all very much thank you sir okay now we will move on to the next item and because we have the administrative items I believe at this point we are going to do the executive session and under executive session the public body May convene into an executive session at one or more times during a meeting as needed to confer with the town attorney for legal advice regarding any items listed on the agenda as authorized by ARs 38-43 1.03 a.3 and do I make a motion to do that yes chairman okay uh chairman Mt I'd like to make a motion to move to Executive session at this time thank you Vice chair we have a motion to move to Executive session do we have a second I'll second commissioner Simon comes through with the second all those in favor of executive session please cast your vote motion carries 70 commence executive sessioning Commissioners will be meeting in room 202 upstairs e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e chair I think that we may have to have a motion to reconvene the regular meeting okay well we're back so I'd like to open it up to a motion to reconvene if one is available the chair I would like to make a motion to reconvene the regular meeting thank you Vice chair we have a motion by the Vice chair to reconvene the meeting and do I have a second I'll second it second by commissioner diina please cast your vote if you'd like to reconvene you should vote now motion carries 61 okay welcoming us back we're going to move into the administrative items administrative items are for the commission discussion and action it is to the discretion of the majority of the commission board regarding public input requests on any administrative item persons wishing to speak on an administrative item should complete a public comment card form indicating the item number on which you wish to address the commission may or may not accept public comment our item up here we have item number 11 UP24 D60 F Sun Valley consider the following uh the reconsideration a is reconsideration of the Gilbert planning commission's action on February 5th 2025 the denial request for use permit up 24-6 fosun Valley B the motion reconsideration passed to the Commission in reconsidering the application may take one of the following motions a a motion to overturn the decision of denial of up 24-6 b a motion to overturn Planning Commission denial of up 24-6 with an additional modifications Andor conditions c a motion to affirm the planning commission's denial of up2 4-60 or finally d a motion to continue up 24-6 to April 2nd 2025 our next Planning Commission meeting with that in mind I'd like to open up the floor if there were any motions on this item chair if I may sir I'd like to move to reconsider this body's actions whereby it denied up 2460 fos Sun Valley vertical Bridge uh on February 5th 2025 all right we have a motion on the table from commissioner Simon do I have a second second second from commissioner Anderson please cast your vote okay we have a motion carrying 61 if anyone has any motions additionally into the handling of this chair if I may sir chair I'd like to make a motion to continue to April 2nd 2025 for the reconsideration of up 24-6 F Sun Valley thank you we have a motion from commissioner Simon do I have a second clarification sir on on the motion would that also include a notification requirements oh yes I'm sorry and uh to include notification to Residents yes thank you sir do we have a second second second from commissioner or vice chairman Fay please cast your vote motion carries 70 okay moving on in the administrative items we have the Planning Commission minutes consider the approval of the minutes of the study session and regular meeting on January 8th I'm assuming we've all reviewed them in our packet does anyone have anything to discuss or to make a motion to approve January 8th's minutes did youde I wasn't here well no she could recuse herself on this vote if she wanted to I I recuse myself on an item that doesn't mean I I'm still going to vote on the minutes okay I just to keep the meeting um I would say use your personal discretion in any of those matters okay CH I'll make a motion to approve the um meeting minutes from April 8th 2025 is January what did I say April 20 January 8 2025 all right we have a motion from commissioner Simon to approve the amendes from January 8 I'll second it second from commissioner derer Vina please cast your vote vote carries 61 next item up on the agenda is item number 13 Planning Commission meeting minutes consider the approval of the minutes from the work session and regular meeting from February 5th do I have a motion or any discussion chair I'll make a motion to approve the meeting minutes from February 5th 2025 as written have a motion from commissioner Simon to approve the meeting minutes from February 5th do have a second second second from Vice chair Fay please cast your vote approved 70 Communications we've done our executive session so now moving on to the report from chairman and members of the commission on current events who's got anything to report well I just want to take a moment to once again say thank you to AA for being such a a fun planning manager and to keeping all of our jobs as Commissioners in line by telling us nearly everything we need to know all the time so thank you once again and uh you will be missed and we can't wait to see you uh in come in as just random resident to to talk and fill out yellow comment cards and it's also spring so watch your allergies be safe okay next up we have the final report from planning service manager Ava cutro please take it away thank you chair I would just like to thank everybody for making my last meeting so special wasn't necessary but very appreciated I truly had a fun time with you guys at these meetings even the long ones and I appreciate all of your service to the town and I as a resident may visit you and speak to you for three minutes every once in a while thank you again all right next up I will entertain a motion to adjourn so moved second this reminds me have a book on civil disobedience I love it thorough all right we have a motion from commissioner Simon and a second even if we didn't need it from Vice chairman Fay everybody cast your vote on the ending of this wonderful meeting it's only 8:15 it's not that bad motion carries 70 meeting adjourned you know you