all right welcome everybody to the January 8 2025 uh city of Mesa planning and Zone zoning board public hearing GL all have you here and happy new year so we will begin with taking a roll call uh chair SS I am here Vice chair pitcher here board member Peterson here board member blakeman here board member Carpenter here board member Farnsworth here and we'll excuse board member Montes this week so uh as part of the agenda for today we do have a consent agenda this will be read into the record and acted on in one motion these items will not be discussed individually and uh board member Farnsworth has offered to read the consent agenda for us today right item 2A pz 2506 minutes from the December 11th 2024 planning and zoning board meeting item 3A pz 25001 case Z24 d784 SA Recycling one acre located approximately 215 ft north of the northwest corner of West Southern Avenue and South Center Street site plan R viiew and special use permit for a large collection facility SA Recycling LLC owner Alex Hayes Whitney Morris B PLC applicant District Four item 4 a case uh P for pardon uh just for the record uh item 3A is for Action by the board so you'll be taking a final action vote okay uh and staff recommendation is approval conditions thank you so would you like me to reread it separately or no thank you okay appreciate that thank you for the correction uh so item 4 a pz 25002 uh Z and pardon one more time go ahead please correct me I'm still my for the four items um if you could read the header that says discuss and recommend yep um that way it's clear in the record that this is just a recommendation to go to council so I'll back up to three just to make sure that we're all cool and then I'll take care for that okay all right awesome I'm with you start the meeting all right so um items three take action on the following zoning cases 3A pz 25001 Z24 00784 SA Recycling 1 acre uh located approximately 215 ft north of the northwest corner of West Southern Avenue and South Center Street site plan review and special use permit for a large collection facility SA Recycling LLC owner Alex hay Whitney Morris Spa PLC applicant District 4 items four discuss and make recommendations to the city council on the following Zing sorry what part of this if you could read the staff recommendation as well fair I told you I need the marked up version all right so you said don't read that part read part you don't have to read this part you just and then you you want to take it NOP no okay got it the only R this we will not be setting the record today as a public notice Air This is actually I think Karma right we call this as karma all right item three take action on the following zoning cases 3A pz 25001 Z24 00784 SA Recycling 1 acre located approximately 215 ft north of the northwest corner of West Southern Avenue and South Center Street site plan review and special use app permit for our large collection facility District 4 staff recommendation approval of conditions nailed it items four here we go let's see if we can keep going discuss and make recommendation to the city council on the following zoning cases 4 a pz 25002 z- z818 palm Gateway 36 Acres located approximately 3,300 ft east of the northeast corner of South San Road and East Pacos Road rezone from employment opportunity to General industrial LPC Mesa Gateway board member fernworth could you repeat the case number for this item please you bet Z24 D 818 okay so District do you want to reread the whole statement okay District Six staff Reclamation approval with conditions okay we're removing items 4 B and four C from the consent agenda um proceeding forward forward to items five discuss and take action on the following preliminary plats item 5 a pz 2500 case number z2400 855 the Craftsman on Elliot 21 Acres located at the northwest corner of South HW Road and East Elliot Road preliminary plat District Six staff recommendations approval of conditions and as we understand it we're also removing 5B from the consent agend as well all right thank you fourth time was a charm yeah there we go so it request a motion to approve the consent agenda as read sah first motion to approve is there a second second all right all in favor and I need a verbal vote from uh Vice chair pitcher yes and board member Peterson yes and with that unanimously the motion passes to for the consent agenda appreciate that thank you Chase um so now we will move into uh our cases the first up is item 4B pz 25003 uh which is Z1 24-0 0469 recer Gardens we'll turn that over to staff I don't know if we necessarily need to have um the presentation necessarily if we can just get up and talk I think we'd be okay unless anybody else wants to have the presentation no yep chair board that that's fine if if we just want to go to discussion yeah I think we go right into the discussion so uh as part of the study session we did discuss this uh as well there were some concerns with the parking and so I invite the applicant kind of I think you guys right here right okay and and we could kind of talk through some of those concerns that we have about about the parking we'd appreciate [Music] that and thank you Charlotte for bringing that out for us oops I've got to make sure I've got the right button and if you've got a presentation you guys could go through it if you like if that is preferred Lexi you might have to help me okay there we go thank you for your record my name is Taylor Earl at the law firm of Earl and Curley our address is 3101 North Central Avenue in Phoenix uh great to be with you understand there's questions regarding the parking um so we do have other slides but we'll just kind of we'll just drop down to kind of what relates to those related to parking so um we did have an analysis done on this um I think it's really important to emphasize one of the things that's that's different from a regular multif family obviously when it comes before you is like you're looking at just regular zoning uh zoning districts um but this is uh being pursued as a 4% LTE project so this isn't this is affordable housing not just in the sense of saying the word affordable and attainable and things like that this is actually being pursued as a government subsidized 4% LTE project project um we we we did this similar development for the same developer um over in in Phoenix um and so this is this is what they do um and so this is sort of setting let me just set aside the parking for one a moment this is the type of development that we desperately need in this in in the state of Arizona and in the city of Mesa when you you hear about policies being created and and we need to bring in affordability and we think about all the things that we need to do in the earth we need to move to make these things happen so there's often some degree of well let's figure it out and let's make it work here right um and you know for example when we went into the design review we said look we're trying to balance the notion of we want it to look nice but if we overburden it with too much gingerbread and guess what it's going to be too expensive and then it doesn't work right so we have to figure out and we were able to do that and so one of the things that we looked at here was related to to parking because obviously if we have to fill the the space um with just excess parking that's more that's necessary then then projects like that don't don't ultimately pencil and so I I put this here on the screen so not to hang all of everything we've done on the notion but we did have it an analysis done on the parking and the reality is that the rate of cars that are used in these types of developments is simply lower than would be used in a market rate development um and that's just a factual statement this is this is universally understood so when you look at the national averages um this is the case now keep in mind that we aren't I didn't we're not asking for 127 seven spaces right we're not asking for 128 or really trying to ride the razor's Edge um we are doing far more than that at 2115 right so so in on top of that something else that's important to note here is that um sorry not that that provided would be 127 but providing the the 215 is what proposed so um and and 132 would be covered which is required um I know there was some concern about the bus route not being close enough um I guess I would respectfully disagree that I think 500 ft is not terribly far for somebody who needs a bus um I've worked with individuals who who need to use buses and they need to have good but bu bus access um this is different than a situation where somebody might say well sheesh if I can't if it's not convenient I'll just get a car right this is for individuals who say that is my provide that is what I need to do and the question is whether I would simply not move here because I might have to walk the 500 feet and I don't think that's a sufficient distance to push somebody out of otherwise affordable unit that they really need access to right so I think there's a different sort of set of criteria in that regard um here's the other thing that's really important within the lease agreement um every unit will have one space only one space to get a second space you have to be in one of the two three or four bedroom units and have two adults and then you can apply for a second space and if there's availability you would be provided a second space so it's very different than the scenario where everybody's going to have two drivers the three drivers they're all going to come in and it's going to be this sort of nightmare scenario there's going to be a very tight control on the on the parking right um and because we know that there's such a need for this type uh of housing right we're not scared that somehow we would drive away all of our customers because of this sort of tight parking control uh in fact if that doesn't work for you if you're coming in and that simply doesn't work then it's an opportunity that you you wouldn't be able to you wouldn't want right but we think there's plenty of people who need the opportunity so we don't think this type of tight control is going to be a major problem the other thing I'll sort of mention too is related to what the the sort of area looks like so if you if you look at where we're we're situated sometimes when we we get a concern about access parking and we're almost externalizing our parking concern we're worried about oh my goodness we're going to just inundate a single family neighborhood everyone's going to be parking on the street um and so with somebody who comes in goes well I don't think I can fit in the LOB but no big deal I can just park you know a few feet down the street um that's just simply not the case here there isn't a good parking alternative close by or one that would at least uh I should say there is one but it's in the commercial lot but it's not in something that would be in some single family neighborhood where we would be you know dumping a bunch of cars right um and so I think that context matters a lot and again if this doesn't work for you as a renter for some reason that fills up and we don't have the available parking um that simply wouldn't be a place you would go the second line of defenses well it's not going to be pouring into a neighborhood or other sort of sensitive uses you have uh next to us the U-Haul parking lot which has a monster sea of parking that's not being utilized but again I'm not coming to you saying don't worry we got it next door because that could redevelop we don't we don't know what's happening there we've done our homework on the front end which is to say we're doing it with a lite project um we are well overp parked from what the it codes would require we have a lease provision that's been put in place and we aren't in an area that has a High sensitivity of anything that's next to us and so in the grand scheme of the policy and and when we try to bring in litech and when we so desperately need it I think that this type of accommodation that's been well researched and well documented in my mind is a very fair ask to bring something like this to Bear particularly with all the other stuff we haven't talked about which is the good design and the amenities and things like that which I think makes for a really nice project okay any questions from the board I think the only question I have is um I definitely respect the comments that you're that you're making and I agree this is a a need and that I think like Cher said downstairs you know we we applaud the development coming forward um the question I have is when you when you talk about the it codes and that kind of Baseline what is the local because again like this area is I would say not in the urban downtown of Mesa where the light rail is today and I understand there's future light rail plans but it's still quite a ways frankly to the East and so the alleviation thereof I I I won't say I don't think it's going to happen but it's probably a ways from happening maybe there a safer way to say that so can you just help us understand that a little bit more um because again I applaud the development and I would maybe ask if there's you know any clarification there sure and and what may be beneficial if I can just read from the parking study because I think that'll answer your question question so it says quote the it parking generation manual 6 Edition provides parking rates based on National data collection and is similar to trip generation manual it recommends an average rate of 99 parking spaces per dwelling unit for quote affordable housing income limits land use code 223 so what it isn't saying is um the code is a average of those low-income housing that are next to mass transit or that are next to a light rail that produces a 0 N9 ratio what it's saying is all affordable housing nationally is going to come under this ratio and so if you say well okay it's a little bit off it's a little different I think that adjust that adjustment you can make for well they aren't writing the line on what they could be asking for or actually in excess of what the it sort of Baseline is um and we're somewhere in between and the way the math sort of works out is that about half of the units would be able to have a second space um is the way that if you look at by the time we everybody gets their own uh and then you add on top of that the sort of visitor sort of spaces and then about half of the amount of units we would have like 669 spaces left um of our units would be able to have a a second space so again I think based on the fact that in these types of housing where you don't have as much car dependence um regardless of whether you have a close light because look it's possible light R could come in but it may never happen right right so we're definitely not building our case justification on the presence of a light rail that may or may not ever happen well to your point if you add the 66 to 69 or so you know second vehicle um accommodations then you're only left with about 14 15 I'll say guest spaces right and probably reasonable to anticipate that there will be more guests showing up in a given day and so think that's where some of the concern also is coming from the board of we understand the U-Haul parking lot to the I think that's the East right they're also just concerned about what's happening or people trying to park across the street to the north and Traverse Main Street and there's a couple other concerns that we just we're trying to understand better so sure yeah I I I don't think it's likely but you and I can speculate about about the same degree of whether somebody would choose that as it as an overflow rather than what's to the east but even if they did there's obviously convenient crosswalk it's not sort of position sort of mid block such that you would be like well nobody would ever use the signal I mean I think there are safe ways for people to Traverse across the street if it ever came to that anything else I have question have questions no I think good so thank you so much for the explanation by the way I really appreciate that and I think the context is very helpful in understanding this and I think in my opinion um the how I was evaluating this without the context of the affordable um I think it's very different versus kind of your demographics you're going after and it makes a lot of sense of um vehicle ownership kind of Falls in line um my question is with the second parking St so they can apply for it if they're in the two three or four unit is that a like do they have to pay additional rent for that or like does it get Ted tacked on as a fee or is that something just just the approval process yeah approval process like yeah I don't know if if Dave do you know the answer to that I I'm pretty sure that it would be added on but I don't know if Dave um honestly I don't have the oh David bond with the Matrix Design Group we're at 222 North uh stapely drive here in Mesa um I believe the developers on yeah we we the we have developers on if they want to ask that that one question we don't get into some of the structures but I think the answer is yes but we can have them confirm sure um I can check and see if there's anybody in the booth that can confirm if they're online I didn't know that we were going to have any participants virtually um anybody in the behind the glass hold on we're going to get somebody in there to and I can just elaborate on why I asked that question and I I think the I'm I'm seeing the purpose of this project and and it's it it really all kind of aligns with the story I think the question becomes if the second parking stall is like added on to their cost and of course right we're talking about folks who are are limited in funds and want to you know make sure we stretched their dollar to the best use that then makes me say like who who is going to pay for that second stall then now you lead to that overflow so I don't know is it included yeah yeah so I believe let's up on an assumption that there is on because I think that is what going to occur um I guess the the reality would be this if the what's the the alternative even so two things number one the rate that they would be paying would still be significantly less than market right so you're still going to be this is still going to be something people want even even if it's an extra $50 on top of what they would pay the second thing is that if we if the alternative is well you know we're just going to have to require the parking as the parking is then does the project happen in which case it's a far worse scario where right that's that's the sort of outshoot shoot of it so I think that even if there's a slight amount hey if you have a second vehicle great then you're probably in a slightly better position candidly to to pay that a little bit extra than than this person over here who doesn't want to have that person's parking be loaded onto them because now everybody's sharing in the cost of the additional parking demand spaces that had to be put in right so you're almost compartmentalizing the who has to pay for that second space makes sense all right I oh pardon me chair SS I have um received confirmation that the developer is online so if they want to just unmute themselves um they can answer any of those questions I'm not as concerned necessarily with the paying for that for me it's more about the overall you know the amount of parking required when you have by the way I I applaud the project I I do want the project it is absolutely a necessity to have these types of projects and actually overall from a design perspective everything's great the parking is a concern to me still um and I will admit I am not an expert with it I do know it I do know there's bands of basically the where where you can look at it on that curve that you've talked about and you can look at it high or low I don't necessarily always buy when you look at the national average we are Phoenix as car dri as drivers as owners of vehicles we are not in the national average we beat That by significant margin um however I I do want to support I really do I just I am worried about it and it's not about the cost I guess the approval process if they come in and youall of a sudden you're getting more and more cars where are those cars going to go that's the concern I have because this is a concern we get on almost every multif family project we have and I can say almost a significant portion of what we see comes in under parked because you know e muffs all my staff here in the room but you know Mesa does have a high requirement for parking I get that and I'm normally fine with it but this is a significantly number significant number less than what usually would see and that's my concern sure and so that's kind of where I'm landing on it I mean I mean again I really do want to support the I this is absolutely and it's a great place to put it so yeah so let me just provide two two comments to that number one is that we we are still um we are still in excess of of what Phoenix is providing and I know that looking at other jurisdictions isn't always the the F all right so it isn't as if we are sort of well off in The Boondocks of requests here right so we're still above that um the other thing to note is that devco is a long-term holder so so they will be far more negatively impacted by poorly calculating their parking than anybody in this room right now right they if they don't get it right they're going to be they're going to have real problems because really it doesn't matter how much you make a year nobody wants to be in a scenario where they can't park when they come home at night right so I can tell you that that looking at this is is not something that're well let's see if we can get it squeak through this is something that they've looked at carefully right and so so I think a lot of thought and care has gone into it um and again if we were writing the edge on that it code I think you'd have every right to say well hope the averages a right G given that we are fairly well in excess of that um I I think there again there is a buffer and I think the fact that it comes in on the lease up front gives a lot of notice to people coming in right there isn't a this is definitely a you're on notice that you've got one space and if you want two you're going to apply for it and if there isn't we're going to tell you hey nice that you have two cars but you don't have it right so it's it's very different than a scenario where you just assume you're coming in Market R of course they'll be parking paying this much a month right so you're told up from and I think as a response for you one let me just start this I'm going to I'm I'm in support of the project I think that we we will go through for me I'm I'm going to be in support of it however when you're talking about when you're looking at Phenix for example and I get that numbers as well but pH we're in East Mesa you have one bus line on that road one bus line This is not downtown Phoenix it's not even Central Phoenix where you have a lot more access to to Transit so for me when you're saying that like you know what I mean so it's very different when we're all the way out here sure right so however with all of these things because I do really think this is an important project I'm going to be in support but I just it is a concern and not necessarily for the people that are going to be living in the in the project it's what's going to happen when those cars start to bleed off and they're going around and being parked around this project is the concern so with that though I mean again I don't want to kind of just keep going sure um because I do it's an important project and and I do applaud everything else about it that's just the one concern I have so I don't know if anybody else on the board has anything else but no chairman NIS yeah please Troy go yeah yeah so in the the parking analysis report includes the the parking operational criteria that Taylor described of of how the the the complex Management's going to limit the one per per unit and then the the process to have the other two so question for staff is is inclusion in that parking analysis enforcement that that will be done or does that need to be added as a condition to the approval that that that that uh parking operational plan as described in the in the parking analysis will be implemented by the by the uh owner or the management company chair um members so the the city does not get into the specifics of how a development allocates its parking it just addresses the the requirement and the minimums be be met or that a deviation be sought for them so stipping to the parking study and the method of how they're going to allocate those doesn't seem necessarily appropriate in this instance so it's hard to do that and I mean unless we want to stipulate the addition of a parking uh you know some kind of entity that could go to do this for the City May right no it's hard to do that I I understand that right okay I get it thanks yeah unfortunately all right anything else Jamie you can okay so chair I I have a question shoot um I know that you know we've talked a lot about the surrounding Property Owners so you've got the the the neighborhood center across the street you've got U-Haul to to the east so you know my concern is how that's going to be you know the the determination on on if they get a second space how that's going to be determined is it determined based on what's you know available on the site my suggestion would be you know cross parking agreements or parking agreements with those neighbor neighborhood uh centers or or U-Haul so that that's allowed but um you know that that's how it would be done from a legal perspective but you know I I to am in favor of these kind of of developments especially this one um I I I represent a number of low-income housing developers and so I I know how much these these developments are needed this is this is just a net that's got to be cracked yeah okay I think we're good all right I think we're good thanks guys with that I'll uh close the public we don't have anyone else that needs to speak to this one I don't think correct no okay I'll go ahead and close the public comment and uh any board discussion or anyone would like to move uh for a motion on this one any other things we want to talk we kind of sort of did the discussion already what do you guys think anything I'll move all right go for it you got to read it I know the I know but not that one part that's right got it oh actually actually sorry you should uh remember we need to do um oh never mind that's the other one sorry bad can't out the new guy all right motion to approve item 4B case z in 24- 00469 recer gardens 42 Acres located approximately 630 ft east of Southeast corner of South Recker Road and East Main Street reson from multiple residences sorry multiple residence three with a u designation and a planned area development overlay to multiple residence four with planned area development overlay and sight plan review for multiple residence development District Two staff recommendation approval with conditions all right is there a second on that second second all right all in favor and verbally uh Vice chair pitcher we didn't hear you oh yes oh thank you board member Peterson yes all right that all right unanimous approval of that one thank you everybody for that one all right we will move down to item 4 c um again on this one I don't think necessarily we need to do the whole presentation yeah that's actually great idea let's bring up the site plan um for the uh applicant on this one the question did come up about um what was your oh about the the water pressure specifically on this one was a comment that was seen so I know that one but we also actually we do have a comment card on this one don't we we have a blue card on this one so let's go ahead any of you guys want to see the presentation no all right we'll go ahead and open up then that public and we'll go ahead and invite um let's see ree Anderson to come up to speak to this one I'm okay with this guys so far right you guys are good and Sir if you could state your name and address yeah Mr chairman members of the board I'm I'm pleased to stand here today as a citizen and as I humbly State the most affected neighbor by this project I rarely give my home address from this this uh Podium but today I'm I'm pleased to do so it's one5 north Alba um quickly just to State this I um I am just a neighbor of this project and I do find it funny that probably there's a lot in this room or watching on TV that think it's poetic justice that the guy that's always proposing cases has now one next to his house and for that very reason I want to stand here today and just say I'm in support I submitted to you a petition with a lot of my friends and Neighbors From the neighborhood who are also in support I I I'm not one to speak about water pressure and I think that's the reason it's pulled off so with that let me sit down just knowing that you have my full support of this project along with a lot of my neighbors um other than that I look forward to my water pressure remaining the same or increasing thank you very much appreciate it Mr ERS all right I do want to let everybody know here that we do have several comments that we've read through the board has been we've received uh the petition as also other comments we've read but is there anyone else that wants to speak to this that's here that didn't get a chance to okay so we're good we'll go ahead and close the public comment open this one up to actually we want to hear from staff about the water pressure is there someone from staff to speak to that he was trying to get away with not having to get up so Aron is here he us with civil group and he can't speak to for Water Resources specifically but he can speak to processes after one's permit start all right thank you board yeah I'm Aon AMT I'm the senior civil engineer for development services um very limited information I can give you at this point really um other than to say that the water pressure concerns that that that might be out there for this will all be addressed during the permitting of the project when they get past the zoning board uh and come in for permits um there'll be some analysis that'll have to be done as far as taking pressures of of uh existing hydrants in the area and they'll use that information to determine what this uh development will have as an impact on the existing systems in the area both for domestic water and for fire flows too so unfortunately that's really all the information I can give you at this time but um I see the the design engineer is here in the room too and he might be able to speak more to that if if they've already run those pressure tests that they're going to be required I think maybe nor one thing thank you for the additional information um I think the only followup question I would ask is um are you able to clarify procedurally should there be a differential and therefore a supplement required to either maintain or improve is that then become an incumbrance upon the developer and the development or is that something that then the city takes on through its um improvements process without speaking directly for Water Resources um I can give you the answer that we would give as far as development services we'd say we wouldn't be able to make the problem worse hopefully that's not too simple for you but uh yeah no it's it's not it's not that that would be an aim for us we would actually make make sure that the pressures either stay the same or were increased you good all right so thank you so much for getting up and providing more information do we want to hear from the design engineer we all think we're okay I think we're okay okay Jeff Troy you guys are both good on that one yeah I have no comments okay we'll go ahead and close public comment and open this one up to discussion or a motion as well on item 4C any discussion chair uh it's 4 C and also 5 yes thank you 5 and 5A so the old guy messes up too yeah oh yeah it's going to be for 5B if I may o we're all having issues [Laughter] today okay any motion anybody I'm sorry chair yes we we do need to correct that um you've already taken action on 5A so this would be for 4 C and 5 4 C and 5B did I say it wrong both times probably okay we're good so item 4 C 5 b you going to do it all right thank you sir all right I'll make a motion uh for item 4 C Z24 z891 encan by blanford Holmes 11 and A4 Acres located approximately 1,550 ft east of the southeast corner of North Lindsay Road and East can street reone from single residence 9 to single residence 7 with a planed area development overlay for single resident subdivision staff recommendation recommendation approval with conditions and also to take action on prary P plat 5B uh pz 25005 encan by blanford homes preliminary plot 11.25 Acres located approximately 1,550 ft east of the southeast corner of North Lindsay Road and East in Cano Street preliminary plat staff recommendation approval with conditions and what is your motion motion to approve all right is there a second to second second all right all in favor and verbal Vice chair pitcher yes board member Peterson yes all right with that it is all yeses on that one and so items 4 C 5B are recommendation to approval with that anything from staff chair no other updates other updates okay anyone like to make a motion to adjourn I'll make a motion to adjourn I'll second that a motion all in favor and right sh pitcher yes or member Peterson yes all right we are Jour thank you everybody for being here today