here okay you welcome to the planning commission meeting of february 24th 2022. apologize for being a couple of minutes late we were all in another meeting my name is vern crow and i am the chairperson of the commission the planning commission is a citizen body appointed by the city council the commission is empowered to make final decisions on certain matters with those being appealable to city council on other matters the commission acts an advisory role to the council with the council making the final decision you will have an opportunity to address the commission during the public hearing portion of the meeting your testimony is appreciated and encouraged the commission acts from a written agenda you will need to fill out a yellow speaker card and give it to the staff clerk which is up here on my left and your right if you wish to speak on an item copies of the agenda and the speaker cards are located on a table just inside the main door to these chambers at this time please be sure to silence your cell phones thank you there are seven members appointed to the planning commission and at this time i will ask commissioners to introduce themselves and state the district they are representing starting from my far right john crow mayor at large tom cole barrel district good evening gary hirsch cactus excuse me at choya district martin nowakowski yucca district john gears let the records show that all members of the planning commission are present with the exception of the vacant saguaro district seat and before we go any further i i would like to welcome one of our new commissioners mr john gear and also mr gary hirsch who is the vice chair taking over temporarily for vice chair ed nyberg mr nyberg exactly one month ago tonight was struck and critically injured while crossing the 67th avenue in a crosswalk he is been clinging to life and is making some improvement and we certainly all wish him wish him well the planning commission received staff assistance and guidance from the planning division and the city attorney's office ms perry would you please introduce the city staff who are present this evening thank you chairperson crowe good evening um commissioners to my left is jim gruber deputy city attorney across the diocese is lisa wilson the recording secretary this evening making presentations this evening on the agenda will be two of the city's planners christina leville and alex lamar lermer and i am tabitha perry and trump city manager and trump planning manager wow i promoted myself i totally apologize wow okay all right uh is there anyone in the audience this evening that wishes to speak on an item that for whatever reason is not on tonight's agenda because these items were not on tonight's agenda the commission cannot take action this evening however items may be added to a future agenda is there anybody in the audience that came tonight to speak on an item that was either taken off the agenda or isn't on there tonight okay now on to the approval of the minutes [Applause] we we've got january 13th december i believe december [Music] 2nd and october 21st is there any discussion jiren commissioner gear on the minutes for january 13th yes on page two between commissioner crowe inquiry and terry tabitha perry's comments there was a request for the luke air force base letter to be submitted and that request is not in the minutes is there any reason for that there's about a 10 minute space of discussion and all that information is on the minutes chairperson commissioners in that discussion if i remember correctly when the item was presented staff needed to give clarification on whether or not the item should be part of our packets at that particular time the senior planner acknowledged that the letter was not part of the packet that the commissioners received and that moving forward that staff would make sure that if there's an item on the agenda that is in that loop 303 corridor area that warrants a letter from luke air force base that we will ensure that that letter is part of the application so my takeaway from that meeting was that staff will ensure that we include the letter from luke like we normally would do with applications that's presented before planning commission thank you but my question is shouldn't at least the question been in the minutes to show and maybe even a short answer because on the last page in your comments you assured the commission committed to excellence and you would address the planner's issues so i'm just questioning why the question wasn't in the minutes because if you don't watch the video you wouldn't know that happened and i would just like that question and a few of the comments added if i could hey why don't we just amend the minutes is that possible sure yes so chairperson commissioners we can amend the meeting the minutes and then bring it back before you at the next meeting to be perfect in the discussion if you if you want it's between 19 and 28 minutes on the video if you have to watch it i appreciate that thank you thank you commissioners any other questions comments changes additions okay hearing none do i hear a motion to approve the minutes of december 2nd and wait a minute let me get this right so we can approve the minutes for october 21st and december 2nd and we will ask for january 13th to be amended and brought back is that correct person crow that's correct okay do i hear a motion i make mochi approve october 2nd and whatever you said october 21st december 2nd first yes and we are going to ask for the january 13th to be amended and brought back at a future meeting that's correct okay i have a motion do i have a second i have a motion in a second to approve the minutes of october 21st and december 2nd as written all those in favor say aye aye aye opposed motion carries miss perry are there any withdrawals or continuances this evening chair commissioners there are none okay as there are none let's move on to the public hearing the purpose of the public hearing is to provide interested parties an opportunity to present testimony for the commission's consideration we will follow the same procedures for each item i will call for the application number and the name of the applicant staff will present their report and answer questions from the commission the applicant will be given the opportunity to make a presentation and answer questions for the commission other persons who wish to testify will be asked to do so and answer questions from the commission the applicant will have an opportunity to close comments based on the the presentation and any questions from the audience staff will be asked for final comments on the application and procedural guidance and i will then close the public hearing and ask for a motion prior to any just further discussion from the commissioners if you're here to speak on an item you will need to state your name and address for the record when you approach the podium please be brief and to the point and avoid repetition i reserve the right to limit the time of your testimony and under normal circumstances which i would consider this evening we limit it to five minutes all exhibits shown to the commission become part of the permanent record and must be submitted and kept in our file okay if you're part of a large group which i don't think we have tonight uh large groups should designate a spokesperson any applause or other disruptions which delay the hearing will not be tolerated we have five public hearing items this evening so the first agenda item is case number cup 21-12 and i see that ms lavelle will present the case this evening welcome good evening good evening chairman crowe and commissioners my name is christina lavelle and i'm a planner with the city of glendale tonight i will be presenting peace fish and chips conditional use permit cup 2112. this is a request for a conditional use permit to permit a drive-through expansion and a white a water ice kiosk in the c2 zoning district the applicant is michael prefling who is representing the owner who is steve garde this is a vicinity map um the property is located at the northeast corner of glendale avenue and 55th drive and this is the property in relation to city hall this is the zoning map that shows you the property and how it is zoned and what the surrounding zoning is pretty much completely the property is surrounded by c2 properties with the exception to the north there are some residences okay so here is an aerial map just kind of showing you the location as you can see this property actually just underwent um this last year this last year they just underwent a minor land division to consolidate the southern uh lot with the northern lot and as you can see the southern portion of the lot is completely developed with a existing drive-through that's been there since the 1960s it's kind of a historical landmark for glendale and to the north of that they there it's totally unimproved so some of the project details um both of these lots were consolidated into one lot through a minor land division and the [Music] they are required to obtain a new conditional use permit because they are expanding the use to the newly consolidated portion they will be having access will be almost completely off of 55th drive the access on glendale avenue is going to be gated and that will only open to delivery vehicles and to emergency vehicles part of this is they will be bringing the parking and their landscaping into compliance with the city code they also will be bringing the drive-through portion of this in compliance with engineering standards so that they have enough queuing for cars and they will be adding a water ice kiosk this will not be a drive-through kiosk it's going to be a standalone it'll be one that you will drive up at park and and get your water and ice so here's the conceptual site plan you can kind of see the aerial underneath and you can see where the new development is going to occur as you can see the drive-through access is uh one-way at the northern portion of the property it'll come in and wrap around there will be a a they will exit out the southern access on 55th drive that also that access also provides for for people to be able to come into the site there and then that middle access provides for access to the new parking and also a kind of an escape route for if you get trapped in the drive-through lane here's some site photos this is just kind of this is off of 55th drive this shows the unimproved portion of the lot this is at the corner of glendale avenue and 55th drive as you can see this is the existing drive-through and this uh allows for you to kind of see kind of the project where the uh entrance and exit points are going to be so the applicant has met all of the public noticing requirements we had a virtual meeting on december 13th there was no one in attendance other than staff and the applicant and no comments have been received prior to the virtual meeting to today so the staff finding and analysis is that this is consistent with the general plan and the zoning ordinance this application actually helps bring this site into compliance with the zoning ordinance and with the landscape ordinance it also is consistent with the general plan designation this is not detrimental to the health safety or welfare of those in the neighborhood or in the general vicinity in fact it actually um rerouting the traffic off of glendale avenue onto 55th drive and providing a much longer queuing for the drive-through actually that remedies a pretty hazard hazardous situation at this moment in time traffic tends to back up on that road and it's not super safe so um the site is definitely adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use they've had this use ongoing since the 1960s with about half of the size that they have so this just gives them more opportunity to have parking and to have good drive-through access and this project definitely has adequate access to the public streets and on-site circulation all the circulation is um they are expecting all of the circulation to actually occur within the site and not on the road which is great and they are going to be providing new parking should the planning commission recommend approval of cep 21-12 it should be subject to the following stipulation the project shall be in substantial conformance with the project narrative and site plan date stamped october 25th 2021 that concludes my presentation i will be happy to answer any questions you may have commissioners any questions for ms labelle i have no questions about a comment thank you very much i will be able to drive down glendale on a friday night again which has been it's been a traffic jam for years wow great job thank you thank you very much will the applicant or applicant's representative please come forward state your name for the record and make your presentation if you have anything you'd like to add we're good any additional questions from the commissioners any final comments miss lavell no no thank you okay the public hearing for case number cup 21-12 is now closed do i hear a motion jerry motion that we should pass cup 21-12 with stipulations okay any further comments or discussion regarding cup 21-12 from the commissioners i second the motion i have a motion and a second to approve case number cup 21-12 subject to the stipulation as outlined by the staff i will now conduct a roll call vote commissioner crowe aye commissioner cole aye vice chair hersh aye commissioner nowakowski aye commissioner gears aye chair votes i the motion is is carried case number cup 21-12 has been recommended for approval subject to the stipulations outlined by the staff mr gruber what are the next steps in the process chair and commission your action with respect to cup 21-12 is final subject to a written appeal received within 15 days thank you sir our next agenda item is case number cup 21-14 miss lavell you have a spotlight again [Applause] tonight i'll be presenting uh 51st avenue beer and wine this is a conditional use permit application number cup 21-14 this request is to allow a convenience store in the c2 zoning district which is required to have a conditional use permit for city code the applicant is teresa morris and she's representing kazim saleh sika okay so this project is located at the northwest corner of thunderbird road and 51st avenue and this is a kind of a depiction of where it's located in relation to city hall and i apologize i think that the star on this moved over a little bit so i think it's not quite in the right like location here's a zoning map that just shows you the property and the zoning emulation relation to the site this is so the entire site is zone c2 across the 51st avenue is the city of phoenix to the south is c2 and to the west and the north is r16 here's an ariel kind of showing you the site the applicant is actually proposing to occupy one tenant space within the action the existing shopping center okay so the project details are that they're asking for a conditional use permit to occupy an existing tenant space for convenience use there are two access points off the 51st avenue three off of thunderbird road is kind of a site plan that was provided back in the day this was back in 1981 and this is the site plan for the existing shopping center the site photos this is this is looking north from thunderbird and this is looking west from 51st the applicant has met all of the public noticing requirements they had a virtual meeting on january 24th um the only ones in attendance were staff and were the applicant no comments have been received on this project prior to the neighborhood meeting today the staff finds that this project is consistent with the general plan designation of planned commercial this it is not anticipated that this use will have a detrimental effect on the health safety or welfare of the citizens of of the neighborhood or in glendale in general this is a fully developed site it was when it was developed back in the 1980s it was developed uh with uh all sorts of commercial uses in mind and this convenience store does not have a drive-through so it literally and they have um they have a shared parking agreement with the shopping center as well as parking out front of their tenant space and this site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use again they are not going to be expanding a building or anything like that they are just literally going into a tenant space they have and they have adequate access to public streets and adequate on-site circulation driveways and parking the city of glendale transportation department reviewed this project and they ascertained that that this use would not have any impact to the roads or on-site circulation or the driveways or the parking should the planning commission recommend approval of cup 21-14 it should be subject to the following the project shall be in substantial conformance with the project narrative date stamp january 8th 2022 and the site plan date stamped december 13 2021 this concludes my presentation i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have thank you commissioners anything lavell wow you're batting a thousand with the applicant or applicant's representative please come forward state your name for the record and make any presentation or any add anything that it was not covered okay i've received no speaker cards commissioners anything else okay the public hearing for case number cup 21-14 is now closed do i hear a motion mr chair commissioner cole move to approve cup 21-14 for the findings and subject to the stipulation contained in the staff report second second are there any further comments or discussions regarding case number cup 21-14 by the commissioners i have a motion in a second to approve case number cup 21-4-14 subject to the stipulation as outlined by the staff i will now conduct a roll call vote commissioner crow aye commissioner cole aye vice chair hersh aye commissioner nawakowski aye commissioner gears aye chair votes eye case number cup 21-14 has been approved subject stipulations as outlined by the staff mr gruber what are the next steps in the process chair and members of the commission your action with respect to cup 21-14 is final subject to a written appeal received within 15 days thank you sir our next agenda item is case number zon 21-17 and again ms lavelle will present the case up tonight i'll be presenting the take five pad which actually is a uh planned area development amendment to the 83rd avenue and camelback retail pad that the application number for that was zon 1911. the request is to amend the 83rd and camelback retail planned area development con 1911 to include one car wash as a permitted use the project size is 11.3 acres and the applicant is jesse macias representing matthew gilbert durbin brands here is a vicinity map that kind of shows the project location in relation to city hall it's at the northwest corner of 83rd avenue and camelback road and it's actually um it's actually one lot over um so there is a parcel in between campbell back and this property okay so this is just showing the uh the proposed car wash location the actual uh planned area development encompasses the uh lot to the west um the lot to the north and those two lots that you can see that are budding 83rd avenue so it's more of kind of like an l-shaped property and you can see it a little bit better here on the aerial map the eos fitness and the dunkin donuts are actually part of this overall pad and the two um the two properties to the uh east of the eos fitness those are included in it as well so here's a preliminary site plan for the take five car wash as you can see that they gain their main access is off of camelback road their entrance is located interior to the site a ways up from that and that it's oriented uh it's oriented kind of east west so the um so the actual tunnel where you go into the car wash you um enter um at the west and then you i think i'm trying to orient it here but anyway and then you exit out you exit out the east and you go that way so you circulate you come in from the north you come wrap around and then you go through so the only proposed change to the existing pad is to add one car wash as a permitted use this was excluded in the original pad whether it was by design or it was through some sort of error but we are proposing a one car wash as a permitted use there was an initial neighborhood meeting that was noticed and held on july 28 2021 that was an in-person meeting and there were some concerns brought up at that meeting and through some emails and there were some concerns um on the original site plan the access was much closer to camelback the the car wash was oriented north south instead of east west it was also they had some concerns about the color palette and they did originally have a auto kind of an auto body shop as part of their original submittal and so they removed that component as well so the applicant worked with the citizens and with those involved and they worked with them and they worked on all of those concerns and they brought back a new site plan and new elevations with new colors and um we had a follow-up neighborhood meeting and that was on january 5th 2022. the concerned party attended that meeting and was happy with the changes and stated that they were in support of the project for the public hearing the applicant has met all of their notification requirements so the findings for this project are that um i'm sorry excuse me that the proposed pad needs the objective of encouraging effective and land use that is required of a planned area development and this is in section 5 5.900 of the city of glendale ordnance this amendment of the proposed pad provides interior circulation within the site parking within their site and they allow for the internal circulation of the overall pad to continue as is effectively without impeding that there are no residential components to this request this request is only to change one use within the pad and that is for that one car wash alone this amendment provides for a greater variety and intensity of uses as required of section 5.900 currently there is a fitness center that has been i believe it's built it's done there's a dunkin donuts there are lots of commercial activities and this should be a use that will be compatible with those uses but also be provide for that variety of uses that is required of a pad the urban design and scale of the project they're complementary and cohesive to the characteristics of the site one of the things that the applicant did was they modify their colors that they typically would use with their car wash to be um consistent with what is going on with the overall pad and with the objectives of that cohesiveness and and being complementary to each other all of the utilities transportation drainage and common open spaces those were all approved under the previously approved pad but they also were addressed in the site improvements the infrastructure improvements but in addition the car wash use itself what they per the applicant provided a uh trafficked impact analysis and that was a reviewed and approved by the city of glendale transportation department we have added conditions to ensure that there that any adverse impacts may be mitigated the applicant was asked to perform an acoustical analysis to determine uh whether or not the noise from the car wash would be difficult for other uh owners on site or in the vicinity and it was found that that it was good and then finally this amendment is consistent with the policies and objectives of the general plan designation of general commercial should the planning commission recommend the approval of z01 21-17 it should be subject to the following development shall be in substantial conformance with the development plan outlined in the p.a.d booklet entitled 83rd and camelback retail dated january 21st 2022 that is the amended date number two development shall be in substantial conformance with the applicant's narrative date stamp january 21st 2022 number three the development shall be in substantial conformance with the applicant's site plan and architectural documents dated january 12 2022 and at design review all site plans will be revised to include the city of glendale detail g934 and will be revised to show that the trash enclosure has 55 feet of unobstructed backing that concludes my presentation i will be happy to answer any questions you may have thank you i have one on the uh item number four under stipulations you said 55 feet my document says 54. oh i it's 54. i said 55 un unfortunately but it is 54. that's all right commissioners any questions for ms lavelle commissioner cole just to clarify the stipulations should we move forward with this there's some conflicting dates based on your presentation and what's in the packet are all the stipulation dates excuse me not all but one two and three all intended to be january 12th you said 21st on a couple of them i just want to make sure if we move to approve that we get the dates right i you know i may have you know i may have been talking and said the wrong thing um this should be consistent with what is in your pack at the dates that's right yeah i think maybe i got speaking too thank you apologize sir commissioners anything else sure commissioner crow you mentioned that there was an acoustic analysis i think i saw in the packet that there was a citizen concern about noise was there something specific that was done to mitigate sound or was the study done and said it won't be a problem so this was not in response to a citizen concern this is actually um something that the city of glendale has been doing for car washes just to ensure that there isn't any issues with you know this noise and neighbors we know that sometimes car washes can be a little noisy and so it's something that the applicant was asked to do by staff not by a citizen concern and so they did and it did come out that they're at the i believe at the street the ambient noise level is no more than what is there typically okay i think i saw one other question from st from citizens that were concerned about the water use but i i'm not aware of any major issues with water use with car washes yeah again i'm um i'm i i would be happy to have the applicant talk to you about that um that wasn't something that staff was you know um that's not something that we typically have as part of our review but i will be happy to defer to the application thank you commissioners anything else miss lavell presentation was good i don't have any questions i have a question on our packet okay information that was in the packet we received 12 emails but they're dated from august 1st and all of them are no no no no no no no and half of them don't have an address i don't know where they came from but you said there was a meeting january 5th so so there was so there was there was a subsequent meeting we had a meeting in july and then there was and we sent out the notifications to all of the neighbors and to interested parties and to staff there was a pretty big response on the car wash and the um the auto repair uh component of that and so the applicant worked very hard to address all of the concerns and brought those back to staff and so we had a second meeting so we've had two neighborhood meetings and the same individuals that were contacted the first time around were contacted again and at the second meeting after the packet was sent out and all the revisions had happened we only received we only had one person attend the meeting and that person was satisfied with the changes okay because i compared these emails with all the addresses and we don't know where they came from or what so you're saying that as far as you're concerned all the issues that these people were complaining about in july have been addressed by the applicant right we have not received any other comments or cons any other comments or any concerns from any of the applicants and that includes the public hearing as well thank you very much thank you ms lobel you oh commissioner nowakowski miss lavell i i live in the area so i'm very familiar with 83rd and camelback this this area has a very strong growth potential with stonehaven and the the multi-family units being developed on 95th avenue and you know i understand the i counted 13. 13 negative emails coming in saying you know this isn't kind of use we expected for that for that area because you know when stonehaven went in we were talking like it's going to attract retail and you know stuff the neighborhood needs but with 4 000 units or more being developed between 91st and the 101 there's a lot of cars multi-family don't have a lot of places to go to wash the car in the apartment units so i understand that i understand it but i just want to make sure that you understand that the neighborhood concerns on expectations but i believe that the car wash on 95th next to the popeyes it's very crowded i mean you have to pick your time to go down down there that's where i go this might ease that but and i just wanted to mention that and i i can see how they really worked to make improvements i've never heard of such you know positioning the building the bays entrances and that so i'm glad they they worked that and lastly first time i heard dunkin donuts so you know and that's kind of significant because a car wash will attract there's a lot of traffic on camelback so it will attract a lot into that space and with the dignity health facility it doesn't attract too many at one time the dunkin donuts isn't going to be like like that but like a starbucks if a starbucks was right next to it the traffic concerns would be alarming to me but good job thank you commissioners anything else thank you miss lavell will the applicant or apple's representative like to come forward state your name for the record and make a presentation to add any information good evening commissioners thank you again for the opportunity jesse macias m3 design 2645 north seventh avenue phoenix arizona eight five zero zero seven and first and foremost i want to thank uh miss lavelle because she's been excellent um i've really enjoyed working with her so as um as ms lavell mentioned the reason why we're in front of you is the original pad for whatever reason an oversight or what have you usually i'm used to a pad that itemizes you know approved uses within c1 c2 and they also indicate if there's a use that would normally fall under a cup and and that would have given us an opportunity to handle a cup early on and and even though the pad specifically itemized automotive uses it had language for automotive uses the previous planner that our previous case planner felt that that probably wasn't appropriate so we had the pid and then we had the original neighborhood meeting council member miss joyce clark was there and over the span of probably three months after that neighborhood meeting we worked diligently with with ms clark several meetings face-to-face our original proposal did have the development what we call the take five had the take five car wash take five oil it wasn't auto repair it was just oil it was just that five minute where you don't get out of your vehicle and um and we was pretty cohesive and it worked well miss clark had um concerns about the oil change and and at the time we were proposing different color palette you know kind of the brand um so after discussions with mr clark we felt you know what we understand we want to be part of the community so we removed the oil part of it she wanted to highlight the car wash which we have no problem we went ahead and did that adjacent to camelback and then we changed completely our color palette um we mimicked a little bit of the eos fitness and so forth um and again so um i think we've fulfilled all of that um as far as the request from ms clark and then the second neighborhood meeting we had received the list of of neighbors on the that you mentioned i can't remember commissioner who mentioned that so our second notification we sent out notifications to the original list and then we sent out an uh mass email to the 13 emails that we had received because all we had was email addresses and then we copied ms lavell and ms clark and and then we had that meeting and no nobody nobody showed up um and and again ms clark was on there and she was very very happy with with with our revised proposal um and again we're very excited we've to be here um we want to we really want to get into under construction as soon as possible because i think we've we've missed a few months in there during the process but again i'd be happy to answer any questions that you only have okay commissioners anything for mr macias thank you sir i don't have any speaker cards are there any members of the audience that would like to speak and address this project miss lavell any final comments thank you okay the public hearing for case number zeon 21-17 is now closed do i hear a motion i'll make a motion to approve the zone 2117 and move it forward including the stipulations excuse me including the stipulations in the establishment stipulations in okay i have a motion do i hear a second second are there any further comments or discussions on zon 21-17 okay i have a motion in a second subject to the stipulations outlined by the staff i will now conduct a roll call vote commissioner crow aye commissioner cole aye vice chair hirsch aye commissioner nawakowski aye commissioner gear aye chair votes eye case number zeon 21-17 has been recommended for approval subject to the stipulations as outlined in the staff report mr gruber what are the next steps in the process chair members of the commission your action with respect to zon 21-17 is not final your recommendation will be forwarded to the city council thank you sir our next agenda item is case number zon 21-29 [Music] mr lerma welcome good evening mr chair members of the commission the item before you as a request by uh cindy cindy paddock their request is to amend the existing wolf crossing pad specific to parcel klmm to amend the development standards within the some of the development standards within the pad development standards will be specific to building setbacks building heights fluoro ratio and parking standards here's a relation a map showing the relation between city hall and then the project site the project site is approximately 12.5 miles west of city hall the project is located east of all of avenue and loop 303 here's a site plan showing the or sorry the zoning map showing the parcel klnm of the pad highlighted in yellow the project site is identified with a pad classification properties surrounding the surrounding the project site are going to be pad and a1 those within the county that are further north are going to be ru 43. here's an ariel again showing the overall site highlighted within the yellow trimming the the portion which is in the crosshatch area is identified as uh parsley's k allen m of the pad here is a the ld the luke air force base lda and ldn the most of the the pad is outside of the 65 ldn area the the area within the pad that is being amended or is proposed to be amended is within the 65 ldn um the topic about luke air force base and and the letter that they submit for properties that are within the ldns touching based on that the look air force is based they provide a letter and the the letters attached as it were is included within the packet they determine based on the the proposal that uh the project wouldn't have a negative impact on their flight area and they'll be bringing up the discussion about local air force base later on within the presentation here's a uh the development plan that was included within the original pad that was approved back in 2006 or an amended version of it originally the pad allowed for commercial uses residential uses compatible land uses and and parks there was a last year there was amendment to the pad specific to the area that's in the middle that's identified with that lighter pink color is identified as parcel c through j the amendment was a city-initiated action to remove the residential uh the parks and the elementary school uses within that area and allow for the compatible land uses within that area so again the the item before you is now to amend the the area that's closer to the east um and is to uh have that same consistency and then amend those same the development standards to allow that consistency with those amendments before those amended amendments that were done last year and also transition over to the pad site further east uh identified as wolf logistics so again the project details uh uh to address again the the amendment is going to be specific to parcel k allen m as just addressed within the development plan that was shown in the last slide the amendments will allow again compel more competitive compatibility with the lan loop land uses and consistency with those amendments that were done last year for the development standards and the amendments will meet the needs of the industrial uses that are being proposed for this area the next slides are going to be showing the the comparison between the existing development standards and the proposed development standards again we're identifying development standards that are specific to the building setbacks building heights floor area ratio and building heights to make a note the the the the one that has the most uh change would be the maximum maximum structure heights we're going from 30 feet to 100 feet with an additional five feet to allow for um um roof mounted equipment and things of that nature and parking standards as well going back to um maximum structure heights i think this is a topic that's been addressed before properties that are within the the ldn will need to go through a separate review process through the ffa they will need to submit an ffa 7460 form to the regional office for further review and prior to improvements on site the applicant has completed their citizens outrage the the assistance participation final report is included within the council packet or sorry the commission packet the neighborhood was completed there was no any type of comments that the applicant received or that staff received again the amendment to the pid will be consistent with the compatible land uses and the original mix uses that are identified within the general plan and are identified as the land use designation within the property the amendments are going to be specific to parsons klm the amendments will allow for different range of industrial uses and commercial users on site and again the amended development standards will allow more consistency with the amendments that were done last year and to the project site to the east uh known as wolf logistics which has similar development standards again uh addressing the the building height uh the developer will need to go and submit the ffa form and further review will be done uh prior to development of the site no traffic impact statement was required of the of this project or this amendment or the request amendment based on the fact that we're talking about strictly development standards that are being amended um as of right now we're not talking about specific uses or placements of buildings or access points or things of that nature all departments have reviewed the application and have the recommended approval and proper stipulations have been added to the request amendment in conclusion should the planning commission motion make a motion of recommendation for project 21-29 it should be with following stipulations stipulation number one developers shall be in substantial conformance to the pad booklet entitled wolf crossing pd amendment narrative date stamp december 22nd 2021 uh stipulation number two prior to issuance of a permit for vertical construction of or other improvements the developers will submit the ffa form 7460 to the ffa regional office next stipulations have to do with their right-of-way improvements stipulation number three dedication additional right-of-way for north northern avenue to provide for a total half width of 55 feet except within 250 feet of the major intersection where the right-of-way dedication should be increased to 65 feet except for the area between cerebral avenue and loop 303 the half street right of way in this area she'll be 65 feet and increase 75 feet within 250 feet of the major intersection such dedication should be made at the time of the development of adjacent parcels stipulation number four the dedication of additional right-of-way for cerebral avenue to provide for the total house street improvement of 65 feet except within 250 feet of the major intersection where the right-of-way dedication should be increased to 75 feet such dedication should be made at the time of development of adjacent parcels stipulation number five dedication of additional right-of-way for road south of north parkway to provide for a total house street improvement of 55 feet except within 250 feet of the major intersection where the right-of-way dedication should be increased to 65 feet such indication should be made at the time of development of adjacent parcels stipulation number six is dedication of additional right-of-way for all collector streets to provide for a total width of 70 feet 90 feet with medians such dedication should be made at the time of development of adjacent parcels stipulation number seven dedication of all additional riders for a local street to provide for a total width of 50 feet shall be made be before issuance of any building permit for any part of the project stipulation of no parallel utilities will be located in the northern parkway right of way stipulation number nine all half street improvements on northern avenue reems cherylville avenue which are adjacent to the parcel to be developed shall be completed prior to the certificate of occupancy for said development required improvement standards are determined by the city of glendale engineering design construction standards two more stipulations stipulation number 10 maricopa county department of transportation or mcdonald operates and controls olive avenue adjacent to the development the development should be coordinated or the developers should coordinate with mcdonnell on the right-of-way and road section requirements as well as the timing and required to have street improvements for all of that venue also the developers shall be required to coordinate with mcdonald all items related to access to and from the proposed developments onto olive avenue and the last stipulation stipulation number 11 however all irrigation ditches located on the property shall be tiled and abandoned mr chair members of the commission this concludes my presentation thank you mr lerma are there any questions for mr lerma from the commissioners commissioner nowakowski yes the development standards page just want to go over a few things the street side setback from 60 feet to 30 feet arterial street 20 feet all other streets i know we passed some large um industrial between glendale and and northern there is that consistent from what we did in the past did we approve that kind of um smaller setback do you know at this time give me just a second give me just a minute i'm sorry so if you look at your packet or i might have it here as well i don't but the original development standard states 60 feet with a full node of number two which indicates 60 feet for residential uses 15 feet for non-residential uses it's the same consistency you know keep in mind that look uh compatible land uses are going to be more industrial in nature so it's going to fall into that fundamental number two where it's going to be 15 feet anyways because there is no residential uses within that area also adjacent to the site are other pads that are have similar uses and similar development standards i think i get that thank you maximum structure height this is one i highlighted and underlined a few times through 30 feet to 100 feet along with the uh amendments only being applicable to km and l so we might have 100 feet tall you mentioned there might be things on top of the roof type top that goes to 100 feet can you explain that to me so there's a an additional five feet for any architectural features or any uh roof mounting equipment we'll give them that additional five feet um again the the the height requirement or the height amendment was already made to parcel cnj last year and the the development standards for the json site uh wolf logistics has the same development standards there's similar development standards so uh this amendment or request amendment is just keeping that same consistency across the board and it'll be additional 10 feet not five correct that's correct mr chair eighty feet before we approved eighty feet not a hundred feet mr chair i know he has the floor but clarification on the packet you mentioned 105 feet i think we've had a clarification in the staff packet that it's up to 110 feet the wolf crossing presentation or packet says permissible up to 120 feet with architectural embellishments and mechanical screening as part of the as part of the uh permissible reasons for up to 120 feet so the the packets the the presentation from the applicant and the staff packet don't match and sir i have other concerns when it's my turn i just want to point out the discrepancy between the two submittals thank you sir my my last one's really a comment and more of an ask parcel m right across the street is the world wildlife zoo and i know that that's a treasure for city of glendale in the west valley and just i know that construction could be very um loud noisy you know if there's any way to make construction entrances as far north as possible that would be very much appreciated especially for the tourists and visitors and for the wildlife there appreciate it thank you commissioner cole mr chair mr lerma just a note on that if you look at the if you look at the aerial this is a last minute that the last minute change going back to uh commissioner noakowski's comment if you look at the slide i know there was a this is a internal area that was done on the map where you guys pack here it shows that as the wildlife zoo it's actually a golf course thank you for the clarification the staff report identifies it as the golf course too it was just within the aerial map that was wrong me yeah it was that's a golf course yeah thank you commissioner cole thank you mr lerman i believe commissioner noelkowski pointed out 80 to 85 feet we've seen and approved i'm not aware of triple digits for building heights in my experience on the commission over the last year so um you know i have to talk about my roots a little bit here you know as a as a structural firefighter all these years you know we just don't have equipment that has the capacity to reach that high our ladder trucks are a hundred feet tall and there's a climbing angle factor that lowers that extension getting up to that the be able to see that roof line and and the adjacent wall structures the integrity of those under structural fire conditions is essential it's a basic safety factor of structural fire fighting that makes to me this building inherently unsafe at that height 80 to 85 feet might be something we could mitigate based on the proximity to the building with that truck with a ladder truck i have to also mention the city of glendale's not going to be responding to this there are other jurisdictions that are going to have to respond to this area and i'm confident their equipment isn't adequate to something of this of this height and so i know i'm kind of comment commenting here but i'm wondering if we can make an amendment to the stipulations at this juncture i i would not recommend anything over 85 feet and even that is is you know a bit of a stretch but we've gone there before but this to me is is just not it's not safe so thank you for listening commissioners mr lerma comments uh i think we've we've had this in conversation before that has to do with uh that's not only the city department or city staff reviewing them but there's other outside agencies involved right we have a developer that that's capping it off at 100 feet with that additional height based on administrative review um but who's to say that these buildings are going to be lower right and who's to say that once they they submit the fa form at that point they determined that these buildings are being a risk or a high risk so at that point the fa faa is going to determine or make the recommendation to lower the building heights so there's other departments that are or other outside agencies that also have are going to have an influence on the development that goes within this area as well but it seems like that's oranges and apples whether the luke air force base wants to approve 100 feet has nothing to do with the ability to keep the firefighters safe and be able to respond to a fire at 100 feet he's been a firefighter for his entire career and he's saying that he they can't do it that makes me very concerned did you want to recommend approval based on an amendment to the stipulations mr gruber chair can we do that chairperson crow commissioners um if it's okay with the commission would we allow the applicant an opportunity to address the commission with their presentation and then answer the questions from commissioner cole and additional questions or concerns coming from the commission prior to making a motion on the item well we're not ready to make a motion i'm asking him to consider what he's going to do okay mr lerma anything else no commissioners anything else mr gruber and to answer your question yes you have the ability to do that i was going to make a similar recommendation to what ms perry uh stated though that let's see what the applicant has to say before before moving to that thanks mr lerma okay with the applicant or applicant representative step forward state your name and address for the record and make your presentation please good evening commissioner chairman and members i'm cindy paddock hill grout wilson 2141 east highland avenue phoenix arizona representing wolf enterprises this evening again we didn't have any particular objections the staff has been great to work with on this project um it's an important project for the property owner this is again as alex stated this is kind of a follow-on to the city-initiated amendment that was done property to the west of here last year and we're just kind of doing a little bit of a cleanup on a couple of the development standards to maintain consistency between the rest of the pad and as alex stated the wolf logistics park pad which is adjacent on the east across reams road and north and south of northern parkway the comments in regards to appreciate commissioners cole's comments in regards to the firefighting equipment i think alex made a good point we don't know exactly what the height will end up being on this property at the time it's constructed there isn't there isn't a developer on this property at the present time but again the point of this pad was to make it consistent with the existing standards on the wolf crossing pad to the west and to the wolf logistics pad on the east which are all approved for similar industrial type uses which you're seeing all up and down 303 and the 101 in this area 100 feet is again consistent with both the the wolf crossing pad amendment done last year and the wolf logistics pad done previously and so we're just asking for again to maintain the consistency of standards again as has been noted there will be required faa approval excuse me prior to any buildings being constructed the faa may have some issues in regards to the building height there's certainly other agencies would have to view it as well so i would ask that we continue with the stipulation or with the development standards as presented again to maintain the consistency with the adjusting projects one of within the same pid one of them with an adjacent pad and again you can certainly address that um you know down the road if you have certainly when it goes to the building review i would think at that point there could be conversations at the building review time in regards to height concerns and fire access fire safety and i'd be happy to answer the questions commissioners anything from hispanic what's your call for staff i just don't remember 100 foot tall for those the the center part that was residential of of wolf creek um is there a way to research if we actually approved a hundred foot tall buildings so we can have that knowledge going forward i mean if if so that's a miss on my part uh as a commissioner be honest with you uh and i feel guilty at this point if if i voted i to approve something that of that of that uh height but i would personally like to know if indeed we approved a hundred foot again greater heights in the previous action in wolf creek thank you sorry miss paddy that's fine commissioners anything else um i have a question for ms perry vice chair hirsch thank you um miss perry would before issuing billing permits wouldn't there be a final building safety review by fire and traffic and so forth person crow commissioner commissioner hirsch you are correct just to answer both of the comments in the previous case that was initiated by the city i recall that the maximum height was roughly around 100 feet also that would be for the amended with crossing pad that we did on last year as well as with the with logistics that is to the east but just to remind the commissioners that that is the maximum height it does not mean that an end user will come in and truly develop at 100 feet in height but with the approval of pad with development standards indicating maximum height of 100 feet the next step would be is that the end user would come in and go through the design review um application process doing with the planning department when the planning department reviews that formal application it re sends out the application to the development team which includes the building safety division as well as the fire department and they have the opportunity to participate in the teen pre-application meeting as well as the formal design review application at that time the fire department is heavily engaged in looking at the materials that's being utilized for the building the type of use that they're proposing for the site as well as the height during that time if they foresee any concerns that will make the development unsafe then our fire department will provide those comments and we'll evaluate that on whether or not a design review application can be approved so it does indeed go through a thorough design review process with the city development team thank you thank you miss berry thank you miss batter thank you very much okay i don't have any speaker cards are there any members of the audience that would like to speak okay mr lerma any final comments mr chair no more comments thank you sir okay the public hearing for case number zon 21-29 is now closed do i hear a motion chair commissioner crow emotion approves you win 21-29 with tips do i hear a second sorry chairman i'll second it thank you mr gear are there any further discussions regarding zon 21-29 [Music] mr chairman by sir hirsch yeah i i appreciate commissioner cole's catch on that building height he certainly is qualified to uh on that topic i guess my vote relies on the assurance of staff that there would be just because the zoning would allow for 100 or 110 with some embellishment that that doesn't necessarily mean that building permits could be issued for that height and with that assurance then i feel a little better about voting in the affirmative on it thank you commissioners anything else okay i have a motion and a second to approve case number zeon 21-29 subject to the stipulations that's outlined by the staff i will now conduct a roll call vote commissioner crow aye commissioner cole i'd like to explain my answer mr chair certainly i'm i'm sensitive to the fact there's a zoning action and that it's not you know it's not the building design process and likely not even a customer yet for to build on this site but the fact that matter is that once it goes through the design review process if we approve this action it will be permissible if you know at the risk of being a hypocrite if i miss that action on a previous uh commission action uh in wolf creek or anywhere else uh shame on me i really feel like uh i trust the staff i trust the process but you know the fact of the matter is that the glendale fire department isn't the closest fire department to this development and so it affects other departments that won't have a say in the design review process with all those facts and my conscience i must vote no vice hirsch hi commissioner nowakowski explain my vote i wholeheartedly agree with commissioner cole and i don't recall ever voting on a 100 foot height i recall debates on 80 foot with that said i do trust staff and i wish there was a stipulation for 80 foot put in place so that council would have to deal with that matter when it came to them but it wasn't made and i'm not going to make that one i i vote i commissioner gears never would i okay chairperson i reflect the comments that's already been made i trust staff and again i also do not ever remember shame on me voting eye on a hundred foot height so uh but i i am i am very concerned about that height and and i'm not so sure that the um air force base will be happy about it either but uh nonetheless um i'll vote i so case number zeon 21-29 has been recommended for approval subject to stipulations outlined by the staff mr gruber what are the next steps in the process chair members of the commission your action with respect to zon 21-29 is not final your recommendation will be forwarded to the city council thank you sir our next agenda item is case number gpa 2108 and zon 21-23 mr lerma mr chair members of the commission before you you have a request with derek cayden for a project site of 19 acres 19.15 acres to amend the general plan designation for medium density residential up to five acres and dual units per acres to high density residential up to 30 dollar units per acre and to rezone or to change the zoning classification from agriculture to planned area development here's the map showing the relation between city hall and and the subject site the property is approximately 3.8 miles east sorry west of city hall the project is located on the northeast corner of ocotillo road and 91st avenue this is a general plan map and currently the science land use designation is medium density residential here is the zoning map again this is one of the very few remaining agriculture properties within the area to the north you have a glendale knight glendale 91 which is a pad project that's currently being developed also there's a little area there in between the project site and the ped which is uh zoned commercial uh across the way on 91st avenue is westgate pad and to the east is also pad to the south it's a single-family residential subdivision r18 again the project site is currently vacant it's historically been used for agriculture purposes to the north you have glendale 1991 which is not only apartments but it's it's a mixed-use development uh keep in mind the the the development standards for the site because it's going to come up when we come to building heights so keep in mind that again the project to the north glendale 91 which is allowing for building 60 feet for their multi-family residential area and for their mixed use area which is accompanying commercial uses which is identified as partial a within the within their pd uh site plan uh would allow for up to 120 feet uh to the east you have a candace at westgate which is a mix of single-family residential lots and assisted living to the north of bunning lindell avenue and again we have apartments uh a quarter condos at westgate and uh other commercial or retail uses within the westgate project site i wanted to bring up the development standards up front as part of the project these are development standards that have been customized for a mix of residential uses keep in mind uh maximum density uh general plan designation would allow for up to 30 units per acre the developer is capping it off at 24.1 units per acre here's the conceptual site plan um just to indicate here that there's another one that's coming your way just to identify some of the uses within this this uh site plan if you if you look to the south portion of the of the project or the or the southern area of the project you'll see a cross hatch in yellow that is what is what is identified as their condominium or the condo use they'll be proposing 16 uh single-story condos with uh each with a backyard private area these are areas that you see that look kind of like circles kind of like donuts or cul-de-sacs in order to access the units um the areas that you see or the buildings that you see within the the hatched blue area are identified as uh two-story buildings um building number four all the way to the west and building number 25 all the way to the east are what we call step buildings where they transition from a two-story to to a three-story and then the other buildings that are identified within just the white are going to be three-story buildings again this is a mixed-use development that is uh proposing 16 residential or sorry condominium units and 368 multi-family residential units all in one site here you get a little bit more definition on the uses and the building layout the properties directly to the south that are a part of the subdivision uh those properties that are abutting the project's site some of them are going to be single story some of them will be two-story so as you see with the project the way that it's been designed they're showing a transition between the subdivision to the south which is uh allowing for one story and two-story buildings to the one-story condominiums and then transitioning over from from the two-story buildings that are a part of the multifamily residential and to three stories and then as you go further north to glendale avenue as a previously addressed you're getting a higher building within that project site on glendale 91. as you see here uh the developer has a is proposing multi-access primary access is going to be along 91st avenue and uh secondary access will be along 89th avenue that is showing as uh with a roundabout and then we have had uh padres pedestrian access along ocotillo where it's identifying as the the dog park so you see here um also some of the green spaces that that are that are indicated as well as previously indicated the condominiums are going to have the each unit is going to be uh proposing for or allowing for two bedrooms and each one will have a private backyard area within the multifamily project you will have units that are ranging from studio to three store to three bedrooms sorry and the units to the the ground floor units will have their own private backyards as well and the upper level units will have private areas as uh as decks uh a few things to keep in mind as well as uh the amenities that they're proposing they're proposing up to uh 260 000 uh square feet of open space uh among that is uh a 221 120 square feet of uh private uh open space uh among the amenities that they're proposing uh just to go back these are just conceptual renderings or elevations of what the buildings might look like and the the applicant still hasn't submitted for design review so we haven't gotten into those details yet but here you'll see kind of examples of the the condominiums which are all going to be one story buildings you'll see the the one in the middle would be the step building where it transitions from two-story to three-story three-story building and then the three-story building which is on the top left-hand side uh here are the red colored renderings of the amenities that might be located within the project site which have also been identified within the pd narrative they're proposing a clubhouse internally we'll have several options for the residents you'll have lounging areas uh and active areas as pickleball and and green spaces and lounge areas and and dog parks as well the applicant has completed their citizens outreach process they had an open house which was ran for about four days the applicant only received comment back the the property owner wanted to know more about the building heights and how high they were going on the buildings for the development standard table again the maximum building height is going to be 45 feet part of the the citizen participation packet as well included signatures from property owners to the south uh with their signatures in support of the project the the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan we have a project here that that's located within one of the transportation systems along glendale avenue 91st avenue the the the project is proposing uh different types of housing options and is located within an employment area as well the the the project meets the the goals and the objectives of the of the pad which is proposing uh mixed use development and in this case it's a mix of residential with the condominiums and multifamily residential again the the multi-family portion of the project is proposing for 368 multi-family units ranging from studios to three three bedroom units uh distributed among 19 uh buildings uh two to three story buildings and then again the condominiums which are located to the south serving as a transition between the single family residents and the higher density that's going further up north is proposing for 16 two bedroom units on the 19.15 acre site as discussed before the the project will be proposing or it will be distributing 200 260 000 square feet of open space again that would include uh private open space and active open space and just general open space green areas uh within that square footage so again the app that staff has worked uh diligently with the applicant in order to provide a good product here which is gonna try to have as much less impact as possible to the single family residents to the both to the south and to the east of the project site onsite traffic is adequate and is adequate for the for the site transportation department has approved their the ti's that they had submitted the executive summary is included within uh the commission packet there are adequate school facilities within the area and all city departments have reviewed the the request and have a recommended approval and proper stipulations have been added as well to the project should the planning commission uh motion to recommend approval of gpa 21-08 it should be as written that's the general plan amendment portion of the request and should the planning commission motion to recommend approval of z01 2123 it should be subject it should be to the subject stipulations before i go ahead and read the stipulations um i want to make note of stipulation number two and stipulation number five so these have been previously amended so if you could um compare to what you have on your packet to what's displayed as part of the the powerpoint and again i'll address it as the way that it's been amended stipulation number one is going to be the development should be in subcentric performance to the ped booklet entitled district at westgate date stamp december 22nd 2021. stimulation number two is one of the ones that have been modified the sec the second portion of the the language in there is what's been modified so the stipulation should read a turn lane on 91st avenue northbound shall be required such design shall be approved by traffic engineering stipulation number three is as written in your staff report the developer shall be required to provide 65 feet of half street right away measured from center line for the length of the development along 91st avenue stipulation number four has not been amended it's as as it states in your packet the development will be required to provide 30 ft half street and right-of-way measured from center line on 90 i'm sorry on 89th avenue stipulation number five has slightly been modified only on the required right-of-way the developers should be required to provide 30 feet not 35 feet 30 feet half street right of way measure from center line a length should be developed along ocotillo road number six the undeveloped space to the south between the development and the existing neighborhood shall be maintained by the property owner there's a usa easement in between the single-family residents and the development that is a part of the development that has the design event leaves it open and the reason why is because uh even though it's within the property that the property owner really doesn't have control of it because of that usa easement so it needs to be maintained open of of any type of design stipulation number seven physical barriers in addition to the appropriate signage eg landscaping boulders ballards or walls shall be installed at the terminus at 91st avenue cul-de-sac to prevent access on 90 on 89th avenue south alignment mr chair members of the commission this concludes my presentation any questions for mr lerma mr chair commissioner nowakowski on page eight of your presentation the conceptual site plan it shows a neighborhood dog park and a dog park so um can you explain that thanks for bringing that up i i i lost that within my notes so the applicant is uh when they are when they first approached the city uh the city directed them that they wanted uh not only a dog park for the development itself but a dog park that would be open to all public and that's what you see here you have a rendition of a public dog park which is the way that it's identified within their site plan which is identified as a neighborhood dock which is identified as the neighborhood dog park and then you have the dog park which is i believe it's more exclusive to the to the residents within the development so if i'm living to the neighborhood to the south and i want to take my dog over to the dog park i can do so i don't have to be a resident of the development so that so that area is going to be open for access to the public got that and then the turning lane being added to ocotillo to 91st so that expands ocotillo i think that was my number one concern when when this item came up so that's alleviated and neighbors are happy with the additional right-of-way right so the the stipulation for ocotillo is strictly for the additional right-of-way and the city is requiring an additional 30 feet of right-of-way not eternally the turn lane is it will be specific to 91st avenue based on the fact that again yeah going northbound based on the fact that there's going to be the their main access point and it's determined that most of the traffic will be flowing through 91st avenue that's the reason why the turn name is needed and that's addressed in the tis just to clarify ocotillo will be widened or not just it will be widened okay right that additional 30 feet of right-of-way will it will be the winding and then my last question for now along alcatel you said it's going to be kind of staggered so one story two-story three-story higher go at coming from south to north in any of the stipulations or any where is it worded that that will occur that that has to occur with the one story adjacent to the existing neighborhood i'm saying that because as the conceptual site plan looks it's very well done but i don't know if this is will stick give me just a second so if if you look at the development standard table that's included with your staff report and i can bring it up on the presentation as well it's a just identifying the usage itself over the multi-family residential it's requiring 45 feet max and then it goes with the condominium which is the five the five uh the fifth row down maximum building height for the condominiums is going to be 21 feet typically that's that's the height for a one-story building within the language within the pid they're also addressing it as a one-story building so when they come to design review we'll be expecting those uh condominiums to be one story thank you commissioner is anything else for mr larma thank you mr lerma will the applicant or applicant's representative like to add anything if so please come forward state your name for the record and make your presentation hey thank you commissioners chair john barry on behalf of the applicant the wolf companies which is a different wolf than the wolf you heard we are only requesting a maximum of 45 feet not a hundred feet so uh we would agree to 85 feet though if you'd like to give it to us i'm just saying and all kidding aside staff has done a nice job i do have a pretty lengthy presentation but i made only because i get paid by the hour but i may if you don't mind i may just flash through to a couple of graphics to maybe address commission nowakowski's thoughts but let me just say for the record that while this may say conceptual this is a very detailed engineered site plan we want to move as quickly as possible not that you can trust a lawyer but as a lawyer i will tell you on behalf of my client that this is the site plan that they intend to develop and we expect and hope staff will hold us to the one story two-story three-story transition that the commissioner identified um if you'll bear with me i'm not going to do the whole thing here staff's already talked about what this is composed of i think commissioner chair this is really what you were referring to and our client develops all over the valley um and uh in the northeast and they were very attuned to this site um and some folks approached the city about doing uh some different developments on this site and we got feedback that those other folks that approached the city about doing something with this property that included the multi-family component we're not very sensitive to those neighbors both to the south and to the east and you can see to the south there's one in two-story homes and this is a neighborhood that's been there a long time and it's a beautiful neighborhood and it's a great neighborhood and we got very direction from the councilwoman that we needed to ensure that this neighborhood was happy with this proposal and we spent a lot of time and our outreach was extensive they knocked on 250 doors in the area before the virtual open house meeting you'll see the results of that with 39 petitions and letters in support of this project from that single-family neighborhood we did some things with the site plan that were again very attuned and very sensitive to our neighbors and we want to be a good neighbor so you can see this is kind of planning 101 you have the four stories to the north there and as you move south we we said on the on the east we have two stories across the street from us we're doing two stories on that edge and then as you move further south we kept the two stories before you ever got to the three stories and then immediately adjacent to our neighbors to the south we have one-story condominiums and the reason we put that one story and then two story going north because the question was asked why didn't you go from one story to three story as you went north why did you put that two-story in there and i'll tell you why and the reason was because the way we oriented those buildings on the those condo buildings there are view corridors between those condo buildings that allow those homeowners on the south that will be able to look through that area and we didn't want their view to be three stories going from one story to three story we wanted a stair step and transition from one story and then they would view two stories and then finally much further back they would see three story elements so i'm going to kind of expand on that a little bit so this is in fact that edge you can see the dog parks staff had that up uh as their presentation this is just a little vignette of the dog park so you'll see this is looking north so that sidewalk on the bottom of the image actually as the sidewalk into the neighborhood to the south so that would be okatio off to the left there widened and safer and much better the neighborhood was thrilled with that so this is the dog park if you go to the left that would be the community residential neighborhood park and then there's a separate one to the right for the residents and tenants of the of the residential project i here's a couple things that staff did talk about but when we listened to the community we added something really important that first bullet point uh sounds kind of unusual but again the council person for the district said you know we don't have a gathering place when we hold neighborhood meetings or community meetings or quarterly meetings we really don't have a meeting place because the library i guess isn't built or isn't under construction whatever it was i apologize for not remembering and she said we'd love to be able to use your amenity that big community clubhouse and have an area set aside where we can use those for our community meetings so we've agreed to that it'll accommodate up to 60 people on the east edge we did the same thing north typically would be up but this is north is to the right adjacent to those two-story homes we did the same thing and you should note that on that edge there are two-story carriage units there and 75 of that edge 75 percent of that edge is open space there's no building there that cross hatch blue thing is covered parking so typically you'll see development that will have buildings that are parallel to the street not perpendicular to the street or lots of parallel and not a lot of open space and that blocks that view for those for those folks to the south or to this case the east so that's not what we did we had huge amounts of open space along that edge this is the one this is the edge to the south and north is up so here's some really interesting design things that we did very sensitive and attentive to those neighbors to the south the dog park along ocotillo as you can see is open space and then beyond that are the covered parking and then more parking and then beyond that are two-story elements of these buildings these condos are actually placed perpendicular to those single-family homes not parallel to them so what that means is all they're seeing is the end of the buildings they're not seeing the backyard whole backyard of the building or the whole front yard of the building all they're seeing is the edge of that side of that building so what that means is it opens up that whole area in between them and there's that cul-de-sac in there that's a view corridor so those people can see through it to the two-story units beyond not three-story but two-story beyond what does that mean from a practical perspective you see that last bullet point along that long edge between 91st over to 87th that whole edge along there 76 of it does not have a building on it 76 percent of that has no building on it the building that is there is one story and perpendicular to the building we also agreed to put more mature plant more mature trees adjacent to those buildings that do face the neighbors we that we've agreed to do that so we're very attentive to that edge and i think again that's reflected in the neighborhood support for this project oh i would note speaking of support or opposition we do have extensive number of hose bibs and we have car wash materials in the clubhouse so people could wash their cars on site if they want to and not have to get on the streets and add to the traffic on camelback again this is the south edge again i talked about those building setbacks from those single-family homes to the two-story elements 192 feet 260 feet 142 feet before you ever get into a two-story building and by the way some of those homes on the south there are two stories again we talk to you about the support the amenity area is crazy good i mean um really nice we do appropriately you'll see the last bullet point have a dog washing and pet care given the fact we've got dog parks uh in there we have an amazon delivery station um this is the latest and greatest staff showed you these uh amenities or these uh renderings but again the outdoor areas are in this weather most of the year is obviously very important and they've really thrived on that i will note that they are providing electric vehicle charging stations as well and another image of the record of the amenity area this is again another image of the amenity areas i'm flashing through these i can go slower if you'd like or i can go faster if you'd like you've seen these elevations but these are the two story elements transitioning to the three notice the garages these are the two-story residences and then the carriage units with the garages underneath them these are the one-story condominiums but keep in mind this is not what the neighbors are seeing to the south they don't see this these face each other all these would see is at the far left is just the width of the building not the length of the building in summary just some partial list of the community benefits it's about 110 million dollar investment in glendale we've got the neighborhood dog parks we have the yucca community room supports the area businesses generate more sales tax for the city we've been very diligent about pedestrian connectivity obviously this helps our schools with increased property taxes and we really put the neighbors first on this we went out and we're very serious early on and talked to the community got their input and our site plan reflects it i apologize for going on so long but you can tell that my client is very proud of this planning effort and i hope that you will embrace it as much as they have and the neighbors have happy to answer any any questions thank you commissioners any questions you're off the hook thank you sir listen i've got more time really i've got i've got two kids in college so [Laughter] thank you sir thank you appreciate it okay i don't have any speaker cards are there any members of the audience that would like to speak okay i don't see any mr lerma are there any final comments sir mr chair no no no more comments okay the public hearing for case number gpa 2108 and zon 21-23 is now closed and i would like to take these separately please so do i hear a motion for gpa 21-08 mr chair commissioner nowakowski i move to recommend approval of gpa 21-08 as written do i have a second second are there any comments or further discussion regarding gp 2108 yes chair i'd just like to say that you took extraordinary steps to make this a great project and it is thank you mr chair i'd like to add to that i i think the district at westgate sets a new standard of what what can be achieved and what is expected in development especially in the westgate area so your work with the neighborhoods is recognized and appreciated by by myself and i'm sure the commissioners here it's it's unique and you know i'll be looking forward to more projects like this any further comments on gpa 21-08 i will now conduct a roll call vote commissioner crowe aye commissioner cole aye vice chair hirsch aye commissioner nawakowski aye commissioner gears aye chairperson votes i and i too would like to extend my appreciation for such a fine project okay case number gpa 21-08 has been recommended for approval subject to stipulations outlined by the staff mr gruber what are the next steps members of the commission your recommendation with respect to gpa 21-08 is not final it will be sent to the city council for further consideration thank you mr gruber okay i will now entertain a motion for zon 21-23 mr chair commissioner nowakowski would like to move to recommend approval of zon 21-23 subject to the stipulations contained in the staff report don't hear a second second are there any further comments or discussion regarding z o n 21-23 mr chair just a point of order i get these things mixed up but are those amended stipulations in the packet or are they as written two and five would be should be amended as i guess instead of saying as written we should say as stipulated during the presentation because there was there were two items that were changed that yeah mr lerma described those chair members of the commission commissioner call yes i think uh well make sure that the motion maker confirms that the motion is for the amended stipulations as described during the presentation commissioner nawakowski mr chair mr chair i moved to recommend approval of 0121-23 subject to the amended stipulations contained in the standard do i hear a second second okay i have a motion and a second to approve zon 21-23 with the amended stipulations as outlined by the staff i will now conduct a roll call vote commissioner crowe aye commissioner cole aye vice chair hirsch aye commissioner nowakowski aye commissioner gears aye chair votes eye case number zon 21-23 has been recommended for approval subject to the stipulations and amended by the staff as outlined by the staff mr gruber what are the next steps chair and commission like the companion general plan amendment zon 21-23 is a recommendation that will be forwarded to the city council for further consideration thank you miss perry is there any other business this evening chairperson crow commissioners um on the agenda under other business there's an item for goal setting and topics of discussion for the upcoming year um what we're looking for is to for the commission to either make a motion or vote on continuing what the goal was established from last year which was to facilitate the rewrite of the zoning ordinance if the commission is comfortable with that one um goal or the commission may opt to um initiate another goal or an additional goal for this upcoming year commissioners mr chairman vice chair hirsch my my only thought would be that i think it might be helpful over the long term to introduce a series of educational training sessions for commissioners i've mentioned this in the past and we all have very different backgrounds some are directly related to construction development real estate building safety so forth we all have something but you know there's we've had discussions in the past about a preliminary plat versus the final plat and we've had discussion about drainage we've had discussion about traffic and traffic control plans and traffic studies and uh i think it might be helpful to initiate a series of topics that could be discussed in workshops and have a quick course for all the commissioners and just general topics related to planning development and construction how about if we submit maybe a list to you ms perry for consideration and and maybe some planning and come up with some training chairperson commissioners that is acceptable great idea and how would the commission like to volunteer vice chair hirsch to do that welcome back okay okay all right we'll do that miss perry thank you anything further chairperson commissioner no okay i would just like to make a final comment here about mr ed nyberg the vice chair that sat on the commission with us for a good long period of time he is touch and go he is showing some improvement and i would just ask that maybe you could just keep him in your thoughts and prayers please he's struggling for his life thank you [Music] are there any planning staff reports miss perry chairperson commissioners there's none okay the next regular meeting of the position i apologize i promise i under commissioned comments may i certainly so first of all i'd just like to say to staff that i'm very supportive of all their hard work and if i come ever come across as abrasive on the topic of fire safety i apologize for the way i come across not for my passion i did look back through the june packet and 100 feet is in those is in those wolf creek sections that we approved and and i missed it and i wish i hadn't i wish we'd had that dialogue back in june i've got a year under my belt here and i'm learning every time so i just want to make sure staff understands i appreciate their hard work and if i come across forcefully on something i care a lot about it's not directed at them it's directed at the issue and thank you for your indulgence on that well we are very appreciative of your expertise on the commission commissioner cole and we welcome we welcome your expertise and your input at any time may i add something commissioner i don't think there was ever anyone that had more one to five one to six votes then my first six months on the commission going back several years and um it was like turning a battleship but eventually you'll bring us around so you know keep swinging i would like to make one fast quick comment here i really appreciate miss lisa collins's efforts to help me with my script and other things that she's done for the the commission and we do appreciate you lisa okay if there's no further business i will now entertain a motion to adjourn so moved second i have a motion in a second to adjourn all those in favor say aye aye aye we are adjourned you