good evening everybody and welcome to the mesa city council meeting for may 2nd 2022 as you can see the mayor is absent as well as council member spillsbury they're unable to attend tonight and they are excused and all the other members of our council are present we will begin our meeting with an invocation by dr reverend dr rula colvin with red mountain united methodist church followed by the pledge of allegiance please stem hear this prayer loving god we are grateful for our time together this evening and we ask your blessing on those who have been called to lead the community in which we live and work and play remind them that they are not only leaders but also servants and that it is their responsibility to serve the common good of all remind them too that throughout the ages leaders of the people have been called to respect and protect the least of those among us our children the elderly the poor those who are hungry those who have no homes those who are ill in body mind or spirit the strangers and immigrants in our midst and those who live on the margins those who are alone and those who are forgotten so we ask that you grant them the wisdom to speak out when it is time to speak out and the wisdom to listen patiently and receptively when it is time to listen keep them healthy safe and rested so they may be able to be effective in their work we ask that you place in them a spirit of unity so that they may work toward a shared vision rather than working as individuals promoting their own agendas let disagreements be on content and not on personality conflicts or power plays and we ask that they might be able to resolve their disputes gracefully give them the courage to follow noble aspirations the strength to support worthy causes the integrity to seek justice and in all their civic duties we ask oh god that you be their inspiration and guide this we pray in the name of all that we hold sacred and holy of the united amen of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all the first item on our agenda is the consent agenda we have some blue cards for item 6a a zoning case um zero eight one zeron21-00940 mr christopher you could read everything else on the agenda for consent and then we'll address 6a thank you good evening vice mayor and council members these are the items on the consent agenda all items listed with an asterisk will be considered as a group by the city council and will be enacted with one motion there will be no separate discussion unless a council member or citizen request in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered as a separate item item two approval of minutes of previous meetings is written item 3a act on liquor license application for operation restoring veteran hope won the event may 21st 922 south country club drive item 4a act on dollar limit increase to the term contract for contractor building maintenance services as requested by the parks recreation and community facilities department item 4b act on three year term contract with two years renewal options for aquatic maintenance parts for the parks recreation and community facilities department item 4c act on contract approaches new employee onboarding software for the human resources department as requested by the office of erp management item 4-d act on four-month contract extension and dollar limit increase to the term contract for centrifuge parts and services for the water resources department item 4e icon three-year term contract with two years renewal options for mechanical fittings for the materials and supply warehouse for the energy resources department item for effect on contract for monterey park expansion construction manager at risk guaranteed maximum price number one this project's funded by 2018 general obligation bonds and capital general funds item 5a act on resolution extinguishing a drainage easement and drainage covenant located at 3745 south power road item 5b act on resolution extinguishing a portion of a 20-foot public utility easement and public utilities and facilities easement located at 1506 south signal butte road item 5c acted on resolution extinguishing a portion of a 20-foot public utility easement and public utilities and facilities easement the temporary drainage easement and a portion of a 10-foot drainage easement all located at 1458 south signal butte road item 5d acting resolution extinguishing a portion of a 20-foot public utility easement and public utilities and facilities easement located at 1558 south signal butte road item 5e act on resolution approving and authorizing the city manager to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with maricopa county for deployment of traffic signal devices along power road and sussman road between the loop 202 santan freeway and asu polytechnic campus innovation way item 5f act on resolution endorsing creation of fillmore place irrigation water delivery district generally bound by east keno drive in the north east 7th place in the south north mesa drive in the west and north horn in the east final designation of the district is determined by the maricopa county board of supervisors item 6a has been removed from the consent agenda item 6b introduction of ordnance regarding xeon 21-01126 property located north of elliott road on the west side of sigma butte road rezone with plan area development overlay and site plan of view to allow for an industrial development item 6b excuse me 6c introduction of ordnance amending article 6 section 609 of the mesa city charter relating to certain requirements for city procurements subject to the approval of the amendment of the qualified electors of the city of mesa item 6d introduction of ordnance amending article 2 section 205 d of the mesa city charter to allow a meet and confer process and memorandum of understanding with sworn public safety employee organizations subject to the approval of the amendment by the qualified electors of the city of mesa item 7a act an ordinance regarding zon 21-00435 for property located east of greenfield road on the north side of baseline road site plan modification for a multi-tenant retail building of the drive-through item 7b act on an ordinance regarding zln21-00921 for property located north of southern avenue and east of crisman road re-zone with a planned area development overlay inside planet view to allow for multiple residents development at item 7c act on ordinance regarding xeon 21-01024 for property located south of pecos road on the east side of the haas road alignment rezoned with a planned area development overlay and site plan review to allow for an industrial development vice mayor and council members these are the items on the consent agenda thank you mr christopher um we have a motion by council member freeman and a second by council member thompson please vote and that passes unanimously with the mayor and council members feels very absent so um the item off of the consent agenda is an item 6a which is for zon21-00940 within the 3100 block of east southern avenue and the 1200 block of south 32nd street and it's a rezone from the single residence nine to the multiple residence three with a planned area development overlay and slight plan review this is the introduction only it is not the final vote which will be on may 16th we do have some blue cards and the first blue card i have is for mr robert jarvis if you'd like to come forward and welcome mr jarvis is it afternoon good afternoon or good evening afternoon but it is the cross is over thank you it is amazing we appreciate your uh your time council and uh vice mayor as well uh this is an issue where the neighborhood has really come together on this we have 396 signatures that were on the petition uh there was a committee formed i'm part of that committee that represent the majority of well probably much more of a majority of the neighborhood because we found out about this with this uh process in a very unusual way and it has gone through a very unusual process i'm not here necessarily discuss that process or we do believe that needs to be addressed and fixed because of the way that it was happening we'd love to discuss that with the council at some point or individually however that may be what we'd like to do is address the information that has been provided we have been in uh contact with the developers uh we have been negotiating and and doing all we can regarding that uh and they have been open to it and there have been a number of changes regarding it there we we listened or i watched the um study session there were a few things that we want to clarify regarding that uh and speaking with one of the the members of the developers uh the garage the f-150 issue right i mean it was uh kind of interesting that's how it came it's become the f-150 250 well that's even bigger so anyway uh as you as the council knows from the materials that has been provided we do want this this area developed it's been an eyesore for a long time and we do want development we want the development to meet the neighborhood and to be integrated into the neighborhood part of that was the density issue uh it was 40 it's been down to 36. initially we said okay that's as a compromise but when you look at it we would like the density to be lower if you go up the street on 32nd street and broadway a newer development that was just finished recently the density is actually 12 units per acre the proposed 36 on this acreage is 18 per acre which is a much higher density than than it needs to be although again we we uh address and when we spoke with the developers we initially thought okay 36 would be well it's better than 40. but that is a concern that we have part of that then was the garage or the let me start with the setbacks from the from the edges the problem really the problem was the pad that was placed on this that was approved because that pad just took every inch it could it moved the the it moved the distance between buildings uh from i think what was it 10 it moved it the distance between buildings to from 30 feet to 24 and it just tightened everything out and just kind of ballooned everything out as much as possible that was one of the biggest concerns the developers and when working with them one of the best things they've done is put went from four spaces parking spaces now to 36 and we appreciate that we recognize that as a big big deal one of the problem one of the misconceptions with the um the parking though was it will be needed as far as the good neighbor policy one of the things that needs to be in the ccnr's and we propose that a private agreement be made between the neighborhood and the and the hoa developments that be put in place as well regarding the good neighbor policing the issues there the main one being the garage speaking with one of the developers they've indicated that the garage will be bigger that will fit a truck now it was it went from 22 feet as the minimum requirement to 20 feet on the pad uh and there's just no way that any vehicle except for a little you know sedan will fit in there and the problem with that is overflow and so part of this good neighbor policy we're asking for is that the whoever is leasing the property or renting that that property that part of that lease is that they have to park in the garage there's not and that was one of the things that was in the study session that was misunderstood i think is that they can't park that extra vehicle out on those 36 that is for visitor parking and the reason is is because it's right on that corner we don't want any vehicles parked on the street right there because of safety issues with with the corner with other things as well and there is definitely no overflow parking into the adjacent church parking lot as well as indicated in the first narrative in addition um mr jarvis i'm allowing a little extra time beyond the three minutes i know because you're speaking on behalf for the neighborhood group um but um if we can start wrapping it up i appreciate that i will thank you very much i appreciate the extra time so the the density is automatically addressed with the parking uh the setbacks are there the architecture we've been informed that it has been changed it has more of a ranch out outline we're still waiting for additional information on what it's going to look like we hope it's not just black and white it needs to again fit the neighborhood and so we're working with them we'll work with the developers on that we know that it's set for the march 16th for vote we'd ask that that we would be would be pushed out at least a couple weeks so we can get those plans and work with the development uh to address the actual architecture i'm going to end there there'll be maybe some other comments of that we do appreciate the concern that the city council has shown in this regard because each one of you represent an area of this wonderful city that we live in and we all want to keep it proper there's one thing about modernization and there's another thing it's just going willy-nilly all over the place and so we need to keep a handle on that so thank you very much for your time thank you yeah that's it okay thank you mr jarvis uh the next blue card i have is from charlotte bunger and has that you're opposed to the project and wish to speak is that correct [Music] so vice mayor council members i appreciate being given the opportunity to speak i'm not officially part of the neighborhood committee but i've been a member of this neighborhood for 18 years i've been a native of arizona i've lived in many communities but i chose mesa as my home and i chose my house as the only house that i intend to reside in i've invested a lot of money into improvements of my own property so i understand that we want to keep levels of neighborhoods up we don't want blight we want progress we've had kb homes built beautiful homes in the former albert ranch where mr mrs dana's former property was we have brianna estates but this particular project has bothered me because there's been a lot of misinformation and what i feel has been deceitful deceitful behavior there's still a strong sentiment of deceit from the neighborhood regarding this project and we have a lot of concerns mr jarvis mentioned a similar project at 32nd street and broadway and that it's reduced number of units another thing that i want to draw out about that particular project is that the driveways to enter and exit the apartment complex there's no neighboring houses with driveways there this particular project the driveway where those 36 residents are supposed to enter and exit that driveway faces two driveways of homeowners imagine if you will trying to back out to get to your job to get wherever and you're having to compete with 30 to 60 cars coming in and out of there it's going to be very dangerous it's not safe at all so i know that you're not voting today but i'm asking you to vote no on this project it's not the right project for the neighborhood there's it's just it's just not the right project and i appreciate your time i'm gonna cut it short now so that everybody else can have an opportunity to speak to you but thank you very much thank you very much ms bunger our next blue card is from joshua new and he opposes the project and wishes to speak if you can come forward and state your name and address i forgot to ask that before on the other speakers and then you have three minutes thank you all right awesome thank you for uh listening to me but my name is josh new and my address is 3419 east hopi i also have another house that's on 32nd it's 3153 east inverness that's what i'll be moving into i'm currently remodeling but i'm part of both communities because the hoa i live in is part of this you know some of the issues so i sent out an email um i sent it to each one of your boxes it's in regards to my issue that i have is more about the the way that everything was handled as far as how it was presented how everything was brought to us you know how the hoas weren't notified um if you look at actual the actual market report that uh tim tim boyle design actually presented to everybody the the uh there's a couple things one is the actual area that he shows within that he that he showed that he actually uh covered was only a thousand feet it didn't show the half mile of the hoas it didn't show the mile of the uh registered communities and so i've actually found eight uh each ways that were not notified at all and still aren't i mean there's there's uh each ways that are notified but i don't even know if they've been notified today so that's one of the things that i know that right now because i'm part of the you know harmony park area and you know the marlboro at dana ranch we've been notified um you know but as far as the hoas are concerned they haven't they still haven't been notified so i have a huge problem with that um the second thing that i have an issue with is when you start breaking down unit size square footage everything there's about 50 uh well it's about 13 exceptions that were done by the board in order to get this project to even go through these 13 exceptions increases the lot ability by 10 000 square feet which basically means that the total density should have been if it would have just done it based on the normal you know regulations and the code that we currently have or the ordinances that are here um the whole entire unit would be 25 units not 40 because they would have lost at least 10 000 units or i mean 10 000 square feet of the the lot um some of the things that they did were like um i mean for example uh the front they gave um instead of it being 30 feet offset they went to 20 20 foot offset no sorry 10 foot offsets i've got everything outlined i'll send out emails to everybody so you guys can all have you can all review it the challenge i have is is tim is a member of the board um which is kind of a problem for me because he should know the differences between what the ordnance calls things like that i'm not don't get me wrong i'm not like i'm not i mean i got a high school diploma i'm not my kid that has a you know a ton of knowledge i'm just i'm just one of those guys that went through research and everything started looking through the information and realized that there are some huge concerns that i have for safety the front of those properties are going to be sitting about there's they said there's going to be about 10 feet plus another uh 15 feet to the sidewalk so we're talking on a 50 mile an hour road um their front doors are right there so i mean you know 45 miles an hour which is southern most there's 12 homes that are right on that front side um that could potentially if you've got a kid they said that they're working professionals i'm assuming that i'm a working professional i mean i had my first kid when i was you know while i was a working professional and then we kind of changed homes afterwards so i don't think it's gonna be uncommon to see kids that are one two three in these homes and i don't think it's uncommon for us to see how close those homes are to the street and how scary it is for me as a parent to see what could potentially happen to those kids so mr new yes you can just wrap up your comments your three minutes are upset oh well thank you for uh giving me my time but anyways that's that's basically it the main thing is is the the zoning issues i have found other projects he has hoa issues um besides this one there are of tim's um where he did not actually list any hoas in regards to him i've got them listed and i actually have them sent to my email so i will send uh another document to you guys to show you everything that i've compiled in regards to it but i'm sure that there's this isn't first time offended so that's why i'm kind of trying to get everybody uh so you guys can see what we're talking about and why we have issues with us not being communicate or people communicating with us but i appreciate your time thank you thank you um the next blue card is monty hogue hogel i'm sorry that and you wish to speak i do um if you could please state your name and three minutes address monty hogle i reside at 1421 south creston circle just across the street from the harmony park good evening vice mayor and council members appreciate your time i'll make my remarks very short i am the one that probably could take responsibility for lighting the fire on this project and we've already had rob speak in behalf but there's a couple things that i would just like to add so that we we make it perfectly clear that we had several issues when this project first hit one was parking density setbacks and design and we expressed our concerns and we've had multiple multiple meetings with uh with the neighborhood and also with the developers and with city staff and i just i think it's fair to say so that there's not any misunderstanding that the developers have been fairly good to work with we've resolved the parking issues we're not exactly totally happy with the density but we've accepted it for what it is at this point they have met our setback requirements that we wanted them to bring the setbacks within uh the zoning which they are applying for um and to my knowledge that that has been done and then the design and i met with uh excuse me i had a conversation with mr jarmon regarding that they did not want and they did not agree and would not agree to uh to change the architecture of the of the building of the project however in a study session it was quite clear that you as council members saw what we as neighbors saw in the fact that this design just did not fit our neighborhood and i i'm standing here today mainly just just to say thank you for your support we continue we to my knowledge during that uh that session um the study session that came out about the good neighborhood um which is still um is is a uh an area that we are going to continue to work with with the developers on but we are really close um we appreciate the the developers in them working with us and that's all i have to say thank you very much for your time thank you mr hoggle and the last blue card i have for this item is for john jarvis and do you want to speak okay please come forward good evening my name is john jarvis i live at 3144 east hampton i've been part of the committee and this whole process with money and my brother rob and i just simply want to again thank you for taking your time and the study session was quite interesting we support many things that you said um we're here representing the majority i've received numerous texts today of people that didn't want to weren't able to come and we'll be reporting back to them the main thing is we're just excited to see what is going to be introduced we've been told things we've been said these changes are coming we're just anxious to see what those changes are and if they're all in in favor we'll we can start working and going forward but i would ask that you uh postpone a vote from two weeks to give us time to work with the developers which we've been doing i don't know if this is going to be able to be resolved in two weeks it could but just plant that seed that we may need to get an extra two weeks to get this all working out because we do want to have a project there and we do want to work with the developers of that process great i appreciate your comments um we are voting tonight to start the public process and then as you work forward then you know it's scheduled for may 16th but it's it's possible so get home vice mayor can i can i ask staff if it's okay to i think we need to clarify a few things on what the uh people talked about here representing the neighborhood so architectural renderings the zoning the notification things that we've covered in the past nana and i don't know if you want to cover it but then i wrote down the zoning issues is it zoned for the amount of units that has been requested by the applicant and is the developer to speak here or the architect that would be my last question okay vice mayor council the the request before you is rezoning from single residents nine to multiple residents three so basically they are absorbing it to a higher zoning designation and one of the major discussions that we've had was the initial proposal that went before planning zoning board within the residential medium three there were certain setbacks that they were using the planaria development to basically get higher setbacks and most of it now through the conversation with the neighbors have actually been reduced to meet the required setback within the rm3 zone in district so that's what i think the neighbors were talking about that they've been able to through the conversation and discussions that now the setback has actually been changed to mimic to really be in line with the residential medium three zoning industry requirement in terms of the neighborhood participation report i want to put this into the record if you look at our zoning ordinance the requirement for informing hoas the court specifically says that they as part of the citizen participation reporter project will notify affected hos that's the only requirement it doesn't specify the length or the radius and it also says specifically a method it doesn't specify that a letter will be sent to all the hoas it says a method and so the method the intent is to really find another effective way of notifying that that's the generic the only specific requirement is a 500 feet notification to property owners that's what is legally mandatory for them to do that so that's the second thing in terms of the elevations as i said to the council they are so working with the neighbors my understanding is they're still working on the final renderings and they'll be going back to the neighbors to really discuss with them so those are the three things unless i miss something vice mayor also there's been and i don't know what council wants to do but i just want to suggest if we are going to set a new date for the public hearing and that's really what council is doing right you're setting the hearing date right now the action before you says may 16th has been brought up that would be in in two weeks from today if the council wants if it's the council's desire to set that out further may suggest we avoid june 6 one because we're going to have two council members out and set it for june 20th if we're if that's the pleasure of the council to reschedule that this could be we could either do it now we could do but with there at some point there has to be a posting and a notification but tonight you that's actually what you're doing you're taking action to set the public hearing date for may 16th if you think there needs to be more time all i'm saying is don't choose june 6 you to go to the next meeting which would be june 20th thank you council discussion on this as far as setting the date for the boat i have a question vice mayor so i don't have a problem moving forward with the introduction my question to staff is can we do a continuance uh at may 16th well we could or you could do tonight you could set the public hearing date instead may 16th you could set it for june 20th or we could um when do we how late can we modify the data all the way up till thursday before or to change the date on the public hearing or continue it so mayor in council if we set it for may 16th tonight if you set it for that you know we'll it'll show up on that agenda now what we've done sometimes is is if we know it's a continuance and the applicant is okay with it we'll actually put on the agenda that it is for continuance so that the public doesn't have to show up for a vote that's just going to be a continuance vote if we know a couple days ahead of time that it's it's a hard continuance and so we have done that before um so you could we could always do that but you're always trying to balance the the desire to sort of put pressure on the developer to make changes but also the demands on the neighborhood to have to show up and come to meetings that may just end up being continuance i think that's the concern is what it does for the public to try to create manage that anticipation of when the meeting will be because obviously people come down and spend their time here so so on our may 12th study session with that you could do it tonight you could specifically amend it to be tonight for june 20th or we could do it at a later time in another meeting if it was on may 12th which is a study session date on the thursday is that enough notice to change for the marketers continuance so on may 12th what we could do is if you wanted if you knew it was going to be continued we would just simply change the we'd keep it on the agenda but we would put on it for continuance only to the whatever date we would put and then you know staff could notify the neighborhood so that they don't come down for something that's is on the agenda only for a continuance is the deadline to make notification for continuance if we wanted to go that route you that usually we would pick that thursday that we would just the 12th yeah because that's when the council's meeting and reviewing that agenda and you could continue it beyond that again it's just dealing with the public anticipation and figuring out because it will be on the agenda it'll just say to be continued oh i have a question is the developer here for comments i mean would they like to speak on their behalf because we're kind of discussing that their zoning case is that okay vice mayor hello my name is aaron little i'm one of the developers and i appreciate you guys time on this um we've been working with the committee we've met with the neighborhood we feel like we've made a lot of progress with the um with with what we're trying to put together our understanding based upon the the study session is that we'll continue to work with the neighborhood committee and then by monday we should have consensus on whether something's acceptable we can move forward to the vote on may 16th otherwise we'd have to do a continuance at that point and that's kind of where we pushed this off several months now and we're hoping that we can come to conclusion with it and have a vote on may 16th that's what our desire is any other discussion regarding that uh my preference is that we go ahead and um go with the introduction and then let's see what happens from there and then just as uh jim suggested that we can do that if we need to do a continuance and we would just encourage the neighbors and developers state communication with nana and the council member so we can know council we can get a feedback on the 12th and know where where things stand well councilmember spillsberry since she represents this district will she be present on the 12th yes okay i think that has you know i would like to hear from her she's made a statement and i'll read that in just a second but i certainly depend on her advice so she's been more closely involved with this than any of us councilmember thompson yeah i agree with councilmember lenon moving forward i think that allows the neighborhood and the developer more time to work together to find resolution and because ultimately that's what we want right as we want a win-win for everyone and if if we can get there then great if we can't then as we approach the 16th then we can ask for a continuance prior to the meeting once we know whether or not the the community is coming together councilmember idiot okay um i agree i think keeping the momentum and the conversation moving forward with a sense of urgency to get things resolved i i think could have benefit and certainly we can reevaluate uh next week at study session council member spillsberry will be returning then i'd like to share a statement that she wrote before she had left on her trip and she says in regards to item 6a over the last couple of months the neighbors surrounding the proposed countryside manner project have worked with the developer and have offered suggestions and recommendations for what would what would best serve the community feedback from the residents has already resulted in revisions to the project i support the introduction of the zoning case with understanding both parties will continue to work together and reach a compromise that works for the developer and the community so unless there's further discussion i'll take a motion uh council member freeman has made a motion to approve item 6a as introduction on our agenda and seconded by councilmember luna please vote that passes unanimously with the mayor and council members feels very absent all right um i think that is about it for our consent agenda and i think we're ready for adjournment so moved and all in favor i we are adjourned thank you [Music]