good afternoon and welcome to the October 26 2022 public hearing of the city of Mesa Planning and Zoning Board I'm Jeff Crockett the chair of the board let's begin with a roll call um again I'm chair Crockett president vice chair Ayers here board member Allen here board member sarkissian here board member Peterson here board member pitcher here board member Montez here okay wonderful we have a quorum if you would bear with me for just a moment here we I was just handed A Fistful of blue cards and we're trying to get organized for purposes of our consent agenda foreign [Music] thank you for bearing with us we have a number of the items on the consent agenda that have been pulled off so we will go ahead and and move forward with the consent agenda we only have uh a few items that are left on that the other items will will be discussed in turn uh board member Peterson has volunteered to read our consent agenda so I'll turn it over to him items for the consent agenda item 2A minutes from the October 12 2022 study session and regular meeting [Applause] item 4D zon 22-00773 district 6 within the 10 900 to 11 000 block of East Elliott Road and within the 3500 block of South signal beat Road located north of L.A and east of Signal Butte Road 84 uh site plan review this request will allow for the expansion of an existing water treatment facility recommendation is approval with conditions item four e zon 22-00779 district 6 within the 4900 to 5000 blocks of South Power Road located north of Ray Road and on the east side of Power Road Council use permit this request will allow for freeway Landmark signage recommendation is continuation to the November 16 2022 planning and Zone and board meeting item 6 am is the is there a need to read the whole thing or how is she recommends okay all right I knew I wasn't getting off scot-free here item 6A amending chapters 4 5 6 7 8 10 15 24 30 31 58 69 70 86 and 87 pertaining to Temporary uses outdoor display site plans and special events the Amendments include but are not limited to repelling in its entirety section 11-31-20 outdoor retail sales and replacing it with a new section 11-31-20 outdoor display repelling in its entirety section 11-31-30 temporary uses swap meets and farmer markets and replacing it with a new section 11-31-30 temporary uses repelling in its entirety section 11-70-4 temporary use permit and replacing it with a new section 11-70-4 temporary use permit modifying land use tables pertaining to schools temporary uses accessory uses outdoor display outdoor storage portable storage warehousing and storage recycling facilities and manufactured home parks and subdivisions modifying the definition for special events adding new definitions for temporary outdoor entertainment temporary outdoor cells temporary use permit and outdoor display and making minor clerical Corrections recommendation is adoption item 6B amending chapters 6 7 8 31 58 and 86 pertaining to outdoor eating areas the Amendments included are the the Amendments include but are not limited to repealing in its entirety section 11-31-19 outdoor eating areas and replacing it with a new section 11-31-19 outdoor eating areas modifying land use tables pertaining to outdoor eating areas and modifying the definition for outdoor eating areas recommendation is adoption and that concludes the consent agent thank you board member Peterson can I have a motion to approve our consent agenda I moved to approve the consent agenda as read is there a second I second that second by board member Allen would you please vote okay it looks like by your vote of seven eyes No No's the consent agenda has passed I'll turn the time over now to assistant director pre-log for presentations of the remainder of the agenda all right thank you chair board members so the first item item 3A which is the omen 22-00732 and Evan bomber is going to be making the presentation foreign all right thank you for your patience board all right chair board members this is case zon 2200732 it's a request for site plan review and a special use permit to allow a drive-through car wash within the Hampton Square pad the site is located on the west side of Chrisman Road South of Hampton Avenue between the Hampton and the US-60 the subject properties cross hatch on the image here the general plan designation for the property is mixed-use activity District per chapter 7 of the general plan the the goals of the mixed use activity District to create strong and viable centers of commercial activity and attract people to Unique shopping and entertainment experience the proposed car wash that we're discussing today is not consistent with the goals of the specifically the mixed use activity District of the general plan further the general outlines some other areas for consideration when we get these applications in how staff reviews them specifically chapter 7 outlines primary uses that are expected in the mixed use activity District those include retail restaurants offices personal services movie theaters hotels additionally chapter 16 is the implementation chapter of the general plan that's specifically how we we put the plan into action and we look through that to when we're reviewing cases to see how how the how everything fits so it's mixed-use activity districts are specifically addressed in chapter 16 and it says mixed-use activity District development will be reviewed for the opportunity to enhance the Vitality of these districts by providing the right mix of uses to meet the community needs as I mentioned previously the the car wash is is not contemplated as a primary use within the mixed use activity district and therefore doesn't further enhance the Vitality of this District chapter 4 of the general plan which is building strong neighborhoods gets into over concentration of uses and it says anytime that there's a conditional use permit which is special use permit falls under that umbrella we need to look at those a little bit closer to make sure we're not over concentrating these in any one specific area um here you can see we we put together an image the proposed Car Wash location is is located in in burgundy here the two rings on the map there's a one mile radius in a two mile radius within the one mile radius there are three existing Car Wash facilities if we expand that out to two miles there's five additional Car Wash facilities for a total of eight some of these are the smaller variety that are located behind a gas station a single Bay single car at a time while smaller in scope those are still car washes under under the the definition I wanted to bring the board's attention to three of these in particular that are highlighted in red circles on this map the first is a Superstar Car Wash which was approved in 2016. it's located about a thousand feet north of the subject site it's on the other side of Chrisman so east side of Chrisman north of Hampton again that one's a thousand feet from the subject property the second one that I wanted to mention that's also within a mile is the Quick Quack Car Wash that was approved in 2018 it's located on Signal Butte in Hampton so almost exactly a mile from the subject property those two are are full-scale car washes similar to the Cobblestone that we're discussing today so the the drive through the vacuum canopies the whole the whole nine yards with that one also the third one that I've highlighted here is actually an existing Cobblestone Car Wash which is just out of that mile radius it's on Signal Butte located between the 60 and Baseline the zoning on the property is is planned employment part development overlay so p-e-pad the intent of that pep district is to allow areas for office Parks research and development manufacturing as well as ancillary uses like retail restaurants other supportive uses there are zoning districts where a car wash is allowed by right the pep is not one of those that requires a special use permit as I mentioned with a special use permit there's a specific section of the code section 1175 where we get into criteria for reviewing special use permits the two that I wanted to bring the board's attention to are criteria one and criteria two so criteria one says approval of the project will advance the goals and objectives and is consistent with the policies of the general plan in any other City plan so as I mentioned previously the goal of the mixed-use activity district is provide really unique retail experiences for for people in the area a car wash is not consistent with that it also as a on the previous slide we talked about over concentration of uses which is also inconsistent with the criteria with the general plan which is a special use permit review criteria the second is the location size design operating characteristics of the project are consistent with the purpose of the district for where it's it's located as I mentioned previously it's zoned pep and the intent of that is really office parks with some ancillary uses again A Car Wash is not consistent with that criteria as I mentioned there is a pad on the site that's the Hampton Square pad it was approved in 2018 and it's kind of a two-step process so 2018 rezone the property with a pad and approved a conceptual site plan for uses on that property the second step in that is specific site plan review so when users come in they go through a specific site plan which is why we're here today I think it's important to note that this conceptual site plan shows a hotel office is located along Hampton as well as ancillary restaurant and retail uses on chrismid so the conceptualist type plan that that was approved in the development that was contemplated with it all meets the criteria of the mixed use activity district and the pep zoning District so everything that you see here would be in conformance with the general plan that pad was modified in 2019 it made a few tweaks one was to remove the maximum height to allow Pad but I think the changes of note were moving the offices closer to Hampton and also refined the design guidelines we'll talk about those in a second as well as really enhancing The Pedestrian Network within the the overall pad speaking of the design guidelines those were revised in 2019 and there's a few things in there that I think are are of note the first one is basic compliance with the conceptual plan submitted so the conceptual plan we're talking about lot two on this plan which is a a restaurant with a drive-through approximately I think it's 4 200 square feet so again not consistent there it also has some building design guidelines that were were included so expansive avoid expansive building masses entries should be recessed and defined with special architectural features one that I think is very important is buildings integrated within the overall development and designed with pedestrian environment in mind so the car wash and especially the site plan that we're about to see doesn't really align itself with that there's no pedestrian connection there's no interaction with Chrisman so it's really not in conformance with the design guidelines outlined in the Hampton Square pad I also wanted to touch on our quality development design guidelines these were adopted a few years ago and really kind of guide staff's review for for development in different districts so I've got some screenshots here from our commercial quality development design guidelines and they really get into site and building design specifically with site design what we're really looking for is buildings along the street with parking to the side in the rear of those buildings pedestrians should provide I see the pad buildings should provide pedestrian friendly facade design along streets and lined her up for a second I can't hear you anymore things wasn't good no we're back kind of watch what I say now okay so backing up just a little bit the quality development design guidelines really focus on on site design and the emphasis is getting the buildings up to the street with the parking to the side and the rear of those buildings and really engaging you know the the primary arterial road with the building for pedestrian engagement um and and visual interest along Chrisman so here's the site plan it shows approximately 6 000 square foot Car Wash three payment kiosk 23 vacuum stalls six undercovered parking I wanted to touch on that really quick one of the requests is a parking reduction we park car washes at one space per 375 square feet which would work out to about 16 spaces the applicant is requesting a reduction to six parking spaces for employees those parking spaces are located along Chrisman Road as well so again the building is not on Crismon the the exit of the car wash tunnels is what faces Chrisman what is along Chrisman is is parking and also the a vacuum canopy so we're going to have the the 10 foot vacuum canopies along Chrisman and that really kind of dovetails into the concerns that staff has with with the site plan again I keep harping on it but I think it's an important point that the building doesn't really engage Chrisman there's no pedestrian connections there's nothing that really invites pedestrians into the site here you can see the landscape plan the building elevations this case has not yet gone to drb where we'll schedule that at the conclusion of the PNC meeting but there were a few things that I wanted to point out so the North and the South elevations here you can see the East and the West elevations the pad design guidelines that were approved with the Hampton Square pad have some specific criteria for building and building masses and that's avoiding expand expansive building masses integrate the buildings within the overall development and include variable recessed facades again pedestrian scale in nature I keep coming back to that but I think it's an important part here you can see the the buildings do have some materials and some colors to them they're really flat they lack articulation as far as a wall movement again though they'll go to drb where we'll they'll do a little more review on that citizen participation we did complete the citizen participation process proper letters went out to Property Owners within a thousand feet of the site HOAs and registered neighborhoods within a mile the applicant did conduct a virtual neighborhood meeting in August August 18th we received one call and one email in opposition the findings so as I as I discussed it doesn't the request doesn't meet the criteria for a special use permit that is outlined in 1175 of the zoning ordinance doesn't comply with the intent or the goals of this the general plan and it does not comply with the quality development design guidelines staff is recommending denial of this request and I'm happy to answer any questions thank you questions for Evan on this item not seeing any thank you let me invite the applicant to come to the podium now and make a presentation get your filibuster thank you good afternoon my name is Paul Gilbert 701 North 44th Street Phoenix I'm very pleased to be here to represent the Cobblestone Car Wash company with me is tuck Benton who's the president CEO of the company I've got all kinds of backup here nobody trusts me to handle this alone so they're all here to give me some support um I would like to just preface my comments by observing that Cobblestone is one of the finest Car Wash companies in the valley they have some 36 Car Wash sites and they are basically considered the I used to say the Cadillac now maybe I have to switch to the Lexus of the group but they are a very very fine company they're very known for Quality all throughout the State of Arizona with all 36 car washes um basically uh we're at Crimson Road just off the U.S Highway 60 as indicated by uh Evan in his presentation and can who is doing the uh oh okay okay I can't do chew gum and do this too so maybe you better stand up here work that machine for me Kurt okay so basically we're going to discuss four things with you today and let me go now to the site context um as I indicated we're located at Crimson just off the U.S 60. now you can't imagine in my opinion a better location for a car wash it's on a major arterial street it's right off the freeway and there are no car washes in the immediate vicinity this is an ideal location for a car wash I'm going to develop that theme with a lot of backup later on in the presentation our special use permit request is for a proposed 5897 square foot automatic car wash facility this development is the staff noted in their staff report the proposed development is meeting the development standards per the mzo keep that in mind as we reason together we meet the development standards that's a specific finding contained in your staff report importantly the car wash facility is strategically oriented East-West with the exit facing Crimson road we've done that for several reasons now we've we've encouraged a barrage of criticism from the staff because of the way we've oriented the building you're going to see in just a moment that the Hampton pad design guidelines that Evan talked about basically also require that and the other express car washes in the immediate area also cited by Heaven also have an East-West orientation and yet we are criticized to some degree of severity for heaviness East-West designation so I preface and begin my presentation by pointing out why we've done the East-West orientation first to minimize the sound volume impacting the adjacent properties and particularly the Dutch Bros to the South which has some outdoor seating the higher sound volume occurs at the tunnel exit so the East-West orientation benefits our neighbors to the north south and west secondly to allow vehicles to exit the car wash facility and you can see this on the site plan on the screen there to an internal drive aisle on site rather than a common shared drive north or south of the site vehicles exiting the tunnel onto one of the common driveways off the property could cause traffic conflicts with other vehicles turning in from crimson we spend a lot of time debating whether to adjust the East-West orientation as requested by the staff gave it a lot of thought and concluded it wasn't a good decision and so we maintained the East-West orientation and I think I have articulated some very cogent arguments of indicating that assessment staff also notes in the staff report that the eight additional sup criteria for automotive vehicle washing facilities in the ordinance section 11-317g we submit and will I think empirically establish before you today that we meet every single one of those criteria we strongly disagree with staff at their assessment on the sup Criterion um they there's a quote in the staff report we agree with the quote but we don't agree with how the staff is interpreting it the important quote dealing with the general plan is um the uh quote the use is found to be in compliance with the general plan applicable sub-areas and other recognized development plans or policies and will be compatible with surrounding uses we meet every one of those criteria for the general plan you will see that as I develop this thesis as we go along let's now go to the elevations I was really surprised that we got criticized on the elevations our elevations for a car wash are terrific we don't apologize for them because we think they're some of the best in the valley and I think you see a Vindication of that from the elevations that we have up on the screen our design incorporates aesthetic enhancements to create a virtual interest through vertical elements we're avoiding the large blank and expansive walls typical of car washes and other buildings as well as architectural embellishments with stucco metal finishes to break up the South and North facades all as recommended by the staff we also designed this building to be cohesive and with complementary to adjacent development in the Hampton Square pad and we'll go into that in more detail later but we've Incorporated the brick veneer spec from the adjacent Dutch Bros building and the mental access accidents from EGS the building includes color and material changes very much consistent with the design guidelines the proposed Cobblestone will include architectural enhancements for consistency with the Hampton Square pad we're required to do that and Evan pointed out to you correctly that requirement we comply fully and let's analyze in detail why as you can see from the um whoops we got are we on the right um I know give me a you've got to have the wrong one there give me a previous version yeah sorry are bad there all right um but proposed Cobblestone will include architectural enhancements for consistency with the Hampton Square pad we have screened the car washing tunnel from Crimson Road you can see that from the illustrations up there I'm not going to go into more detail unless you have questions we've added visual interest with articulation and material and color changes we've provided Design Elements for consistency with the adjacent developments staff claims that we are not consistent with the design guidelines but they don't say where we aren't consistent and we're pointing out places to you where we are we follow the sole design and Architectural guidelines which call for and I'm quoting now quote pad retail is expected to consist of uses that depend heavily on their visibility from Crimson Road it's exactly what we're doing and will therefore continuing the quote likely need to have a very strong aesthetic tie to its standard brand appearance to ensure instant recognition from motorists elevations again the quote should include architectural elements that complement the building Aesthetics and should use such features as overhangs awnings pop-outs um and shade above entrances and walkways I don't know how the staff can conclude that we don't comply with these things every one of those things these aren't Bland flat buildings all of these things the pop outs that overhangs the awnings they're all there and also the signage I'm not going to spend a lot of time on that that was one of the few things the staff didn't give us raspberries for so additional renderings you got my next one here you know Okay so we've got additional renderings that show the architectural and design following the design and Architectural guidelines we'll talk about that more when we get to Hampton Square demand that's an important element here do we need another car wash staff suggest that there are eight car washes in a three mile radius I give the staff presenters some credit because those eight car washes that they talk about in the staff report there's only three express car washes the rest are car washes that are part of a service station or small car wash that aren't the type of express car washes that we're providing so we basically have three other express car washes within the three mile radius so there are only three car washes that are comparable to each other and comparable to what we're proposing bringing in those other car washes at service stations they don't do what we do they're not the same thing and often people don't even stay in their car for some of those car washes so that's comparing apples and oranges so there are only three within the three mile radius is that an overabundance of car washes I submit not and I will make that point clear as I go along gas station car washes do not contain the same technology that an Express Car Wash does and smaller car washes have shorter tunnels can only wash one car at a time 10 cars per hour gas station washes don't offer free vacuums and the list could go on so it should be noted that one of the three car washes in this mile three mile radius is ours would we bring another car wash into this area if we didn't have complete unmitigated confidence that this car wash would work but it would be economically viable we have 36 car washes throughout the state I think you would have to give us some credit for knowing when a car wash is needed and what a good location for a car wash is and we're bringing one more into this area the demand for express car washes is growing the population within this three mile radius is over 100 000 people is three car washes too many car washes to have for that many people now these are express car washes we submit there is a resounding no to answer that question many of these individuals own small residential lots or live in a multi-family community that is very popular now that doesn't have facilities where cart can be washed so this also is proximate to the freeway so the freeway is a natural barrier for customers so Cobblestone and the gas station South of the freeway shouldn't be considered in the analysis like to talk a little bit about the general plan contrary to what the staff has submitted to you I submit that we meet the requirement of the general plan and we do it rather effectively and completely our basic premises this project is consistent with the mixed use activity District as the overall goal of the mixed-use activity district is to attract people to create strong and viable centers of commercial activity that attract people to Unique shopping and entertainment experiences car washes clearly fits within the category of shopping and express automatic drive-through car wash will provide a complementary shopping experience to customers of the greater commercial Activity Center that includes Home Depot Dutch Bros EG's Jack in the Box Christ Church of the Valley we're providing basically a shopping experience and a use that all of these facilities need contrary to what the staff claimed the mixed-use activity District in the general plan calls for and I quote Auto domination development that is quote usually more Suburban in design and form with auto dominant characteristics which is consistent absolutely with this proposed drive-through I'm going to read that again which um auto-dominated development that is usually more Suburban in design and form with auto dominant characteristics that's the specific quote it's allowed in the mixed use activity we meet that this is an auto-dominated use additionally as we have just discussed on the previous slide an Express drive-through car wash is consistent with the needs of today's con consumer has stated in the primary goal of the mixed-use activity District people want to stay in their cars and they appreciate the drive-through facility customers appreciate the quick and easy access to the freeway that this site will afford next still staying with the general plan we vigorously disagree with the staff when they tell you that car washes are over concentrated in the area there are three within this uh three mile area of a hundred thousand people if they were over concentrated Cobblestone would not find this location suitable for their bottom line not only is the general plan and this is an important thing not a regulatory document but the general plan does not define over concentration doesn't doesn't Define it anywhere in the plan so where do you look for the definition what is over concentration where do you go the goals and policies of the general plan are intended to be implemented in regulatory goals and policies like the zoning ordinance so we will dissect over concentration for automobile washing facilities in the implemented in the city zoning ordinance very shortly but first we would like to further review the staff's previous interpretation we all remember I think with a certain modicum of fondness John Wesley a former planning director here he gave this planning board and his colleagues on the staff some guidance as to the purpose of a special permit for automobile car washes and he says quote and by the way we were given this by the staff and we thought it was very instructive and so we're sharing it with you Automotive washing facilities require approval of an sup in order to ensure that they are not causing a negative impact on adjacent residential uses including noise they can generate that's what John Wesley says is the purpose of a use permit well how do we stack up let's use that criteria as he defined as the primary purpose for a special use permit its impact on residential uses the closest residential lot to this site is over 550 feet away according to a sound level study we conducted the highest off-site sound volume caused by this car wash facility will be 80 decibels in the area closest to the car wash expert exit that's our most volume that is less than the ambient noise of crimson road which is at 90. we're at 80. Crimson road is at 90. the Western Edge will only generate 73 decibels the southern Edge 41. the bottom line is that's the sound study exemplifies there will be no negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood or adjacent businesses none whatsoever the purpose of the special use permit is to protect the surrounding uses Allah John Wesley we do that and we do not have any important or whatsoever effect on the surrounding residential neighborhood or the surrounding uses most of the surrounding uses that we visited with indicated full support for this car wash I'm going on a little longer than I should Mr chairman thank you for your patience I'll try to speed it up a bit um let's now talk about the zoning and the pep zoning District as I mentioned before the zoning ordinance is one of the regulatory measures that can be used to implement the goals and policies of the general plan the pep zoning District discussed by your staff member is consistent with the mixed-use activity district and is intended for ancillary supporting retail uses which is exactly what we're proposing here this Express drive-through car wash will provide ancillary Support Services to customers of the surrounding commercial uses the surrounding character is described in the general plan is auto-oriented with drive-throughs and Quick Service retail uses such as Dutch Bros right next door and this proposed automatic car wash is no different over concentration of automobile washing facilities is implemented as I indicated before by the zoning ordinance overabundance isn't defined in your general plan so you go to the zoning ordinance to get the criteria you use to decide if there's an overabundance what does that say section 1131 7-g States and I quote the number of automobile related activities within 600 feet of an intersection of arterial streets shall not exceed to shall not exceed to that's the standard that's the only place that it's defined in the ordinance there is only one other automobile related use within 600 feet of this intersection and that is a Firestone Auto Care and incidentally and I think importantly it's not a car wash so this proposed Car Wash and this is the summary of the whole section here this proposed Car Wash is in is compliant with this standard regulation of the concentration of special use permits and consistent with the implementation of the general plan the last major theme I think we need to talk about and I'll try to to speed up this presentation I noticed that Ralph Pugh was very happy here he's billing by the hour as I go on with this lengthy presentation but the uh we have to comply with the Hampton Square pad okay Evan said that we agree with it a hundred percent so let's look do we do it do we comply with the Hampton Square pad we submit a resounding yes there is nothing in the Hampton Square pad that restricts car washes or the design of the proposed car wash the property we were discussing today is outlined in blue up there on the screen okay that's the Hampton Square pad plan for our property the property uh shows an approved plan with one a drive-through use yes a wide 64-foot setback from Crimson Road East-West Orient oriented building and parking in front setback between the building and Crimson Road we meet every single one of those criteria not any exceptions to say we don't comply with the Hampton Square pad is a misstatement and inaccurate the proposed Cobblestone Express Car Wash is almost exactly what is shown on the Hampton Square pad the proposed building has a similar setback as the approved Hampton Square pad the prop Post building is skewed to the side of the site with the drive-through perpendicular to Crimson Road just like the approved Hampton Square pad the proposed Car Wash has virtually the same parking schematic as the approved Hampton Square pad the proposed Car Wash is oriented East-West exactly as shown on the Hampton plan then we get criticized for not having pedestrian access we have two pedestrian paths that are indicated in red on the graphic on your screen there and the Hampton pad only shows one so we're providing more pedestrian access than the Hampton pad Square so we basically completely and without equivocation comply with this design for the staff to say that's one of the reasons you shouldn't approve this I think is Mrs the mark furthermore remember the staff wanted us to orient the facility North and South I explain to you the reasons why we wouldn't do that why it didn't work but look at what's up there it's East-West orientation exactly what we're doing so what the staff has actually asked us to do is not compliant with the Hampton Square pad um lastly the design orientation and setback of the proposed Cobblestone Car Wash is consistent with the adjacent developments that have already been approved let's look at what they are our neighbors are Dutch Bros EG's and Sherwin-Williams all of these are uses that fit within the same type of use we're proposing all of them have the same basic outline and site plan as what we're proposing so the bottom line is I've gone to a great extent to demonstrate this but I hope you will agree with me that we fit seamlessly within the adjacent development of the Hampton pad quickly neighborhood Outreach we had a neighborhood meeting no one showed up so we decided to go out and talk to our neighbors and listed on the chart there are our neighbors we talked to virtually every one of them not one single neighbor indicated in the opposition to this car wash so we're here with strong neighborhood support so the bottom line is this um we feel that the three main objections to this case are not well taken one that were inconsistent with the general plan the general plan talks about an overabundance of car washes there are currently three express car washes in a three mile area of a hundred thousand people that in my opinion is not an overabundance but the general plan is the non-regulatory plan so you have to look for the implementation of the plan to the zoning ordinance and the zoning ordinance says that you can't have more than two Automotive uses within 600 feet we meet that criteria it cannot be said that we do not comply with the general plan second major objection is that we don't comply with the zoning ordinance but we've already pointed out to you we are in the pep Zone but the pep Zone allows the type of uses we have and the type of uses we're providing are already there so we're providing the same type of use that's already been approved so that argument doesn't stand and the last argument is that we don't comply with the Hampton pad guidelines we have gone through that perhaps in excruciating detail but I think we have cogently demonstrated that we meet every one of those guidelines so there are no good reasons to oppose this case and lastly I submit in closing finally you'll be happy to see that I finally see a smile from chairman Crockett um you'll be happy to know that we end with this comment can you think of a more appropriate place for a car wash facility that doesn't have any car wash facilities around it than Crimson Road arterial Street just off the freeway no neighborhood opposition no effect on residential so everything that people allegedly claim are bad about car washes don't exist here we're free of all that so this is a fantastic place for a car wash we hope you would agree be happy to answer any other questions thank you thank you Mr Gilbert are there any questions on this from the applicant I'm not seeing any at the moment all right I'm afraid I wore you out standby all right I'm standing thank you okay uh would staff like to respond or should we have public comment first I'll say um I think there are a lot of points risen that staff does not agree with interpretation of those and so I'll let the board ask for clarification on any of those points but it's up to your discretion if you want to open it up now or ask questions and staff okay are there are there questions that anyone has of staff on this we have one we have one public commenter you want to have that first and then we'll come back okay so I have a comment card from Robert Warnick warnicky okay Mr warnicki please come to the podium and state your your name and business address and you will have three minutes yeah I heard about that good news for you guys my name is Robert warnicky my address is 2929 North 2nd Street Phoenix Arizona yes I'm an attorney my client is Superstar Car Wash the address of Superstar Car Wash that's relevant is 1245 East South I'm sorry 1245 South crisman Road and I'm up here today taking a little bit of your time um really to counter the false narrative I heard this is uh from uh my client's logo the three Car Wash three-minute Express Car Wash and this is me standing at the property yesterday looking North on Crismon Road you can just see that logo on that building right there and Mr Gilbert just got up here and told you there's no car washes in the vicinity this sign is the sign for this hearing and this sign is uh I guess the for sale sign that will go away when either they get their entitlements or they don't get their entitlements and they don't close but for him to come up here and say that there is no car wash within you know the immediate area is simply not true my client is within the media area and does not think that another car wash literally across the street is in the interest of the neighborhood or the city of Mesa um you have discretion on a use permit we're asking you to exercise that discretion to find that they did not meet their burden to make the four findings that were necessary to get a use permit the city talked about the first two I'm going to talk about the third one the third one is uh the proposed project will not be injurious or detrimental to the adjacent or surrounding properties in the area nor will the proposed project or improvements be injurious or detrimental to the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the city well right now we have Raceway car washes clean free car washes Cobblestone Car Washes Superstar Car Washes rinse and ride car washes and Jack start Jackson car washes that all have multiple locations the last time something like this happened in my memory was in the early 2000s when we had eckerd's CVS Walgreens save on uh Osco and Rite Aid and as a result of that we got on almost every corn almost every Major Street Corner we got a single use building that has now either been hopefully repurposed some 20 years later or been torn down and turned into something else what I suggest to you today is that what the city has been telling you is that there are over concentration of car washes within a two mile radius not the three mile radius he put up on the board the staff report says two mile radius and that you should not green light another car wash right across the street from my client's car wash in these circumstances you are going to be green lighting a white elephant because if there's consolidation in this industry there's going to be something that's not useful for anything else finally um yeah Mr Warnick I know three minutes crap it up it goes quick I know as quick as I can um and now you made me forget what I was going to say uh I'm sorry the um finally yeah I I had I had something I had something that was on the tip of my tongue um oh I know what it was I'm not standing up here just casting stones at them uh my client made a proposal to put a car wash in at a different location that you guys can look up at 1820 East McKellips Road uh the the case number was PRS 22-00121 the city told my client the there are three existing automobile washing facilities on McKellips Road and another at the southwest corner of brown and Gilbert's Road within a mile and a quarter to a mile and a half at this location they told my city not to my client not to go forward my client did the responsible thing my client dropped that case these people should drop their case thank you thank you Mr warning can you appreciate your appreciate your comments that's the only uh comment card I had and so with that with that we'll close the public comment session Mr Gilbert let me let me just go quickly to staff and I did have a question for Evan uh on so Evan will you clarify that that Mr Gilbert was talking about three mile radius and and I know the staff report talks about two mile can you clarify or are we talking two or three uh thank you chair uh board members so the the two mile radius was was a graphic that staff put together to demonstrate within and we feel that one mile and two miles a reasonable distance to look at an over concentration of uses that was the basis for that that image was we looked at the one mile and the two mile um to demonstrate where the existing car washes were Mr Gilbert's presentation went out a little bit further to three miles there isn't a specific standard we just looked at one mile and two miles those seemed the most reasonable okay thank you I've measured that if you want to know okay board member heirs you do you have a comment on that so the Superstar is .2 miles away and the third one which is the Quick Quack is about a mile just a little over a mile okay thank you all right any other questions for Evan a board member pitcher could could you explain the uh the Hampton uh Square design guidelines I know Mr Gilbert talked about that and and uh it seems like the at least the the slide that you had explain more on the primary pedestrian Gathering and the use of the parcels more connecting to a to facilitate pedestrian connectivity and and activity oh absolutely thank you chair board member preacher so picture excuse me so the Hampton Square pad was as I mentioned it was established let me put this plan here in in 2018 and it's really kind of a two-step process so step one was a the zoning and an overall conceptual plan that identified some anticipated uses and gave kind of a general layout step two is is a specific site plan approval so in the the pad design guidelines it gives a fair amount of time and attention to really developing the the center with an overall pedestrian connectivity Network to that end when they updated it in 2019 those Office Buildings moved closer to Hampton to really engage that street Frontage and and draw pedestrians in what we look for when when we get a specific site plan Mr Gilbert referenced the Dutch Bros and the eegs is is ways for them to better incorporate pedestrians from from Chrisman so those two specific uses have outdoor dining they have pedestrian connections directly from Chrisman to to their location to really um Engage The the connectivity there so hopefully that answers your question but I can elaborate and board member sarkissian can you go over the use permit slide area again this is the one you're okay so these are the great criteria correct that we that they have to meet for the at thank you chair board member sorry Casey and so there are two two criteria there's the overall special use permit criteria which is what we're looking at here 1175 of the zoning ordinance there is a separate subset of of categories for car wash specific uses um and what we have here is just an overall special use permit and that's compliance with the general plan um looking at the location size design operating characteristics make sure it's consistent with the zoning ordinance any other questions oh board member Peterson Evan on the going back to the The Pedestrian Centric uh uses for this right now on the empty pad there are existing sidewalks on all four sides and I can't quite tell from the site plan with the site plan do the sidewalks on the North and South remain or are they impacted by the site plan it's some of the drawings I thank you chair board member Peterson maybe a better slide to look at would be the landscape well in aerial so there was a first phase of development as part of that first phase of development they the developer included the Landscaping along Chrisman as well as the internal pedestrian Network those those sidewalks that you see here are are existing today which kind of outline this would be pad two of the development so then do all four of those stay with the with the site plan and looking at it it's the ones on North and South I can't really tell from the site plan if those remain or not yes thank you chair board member Pierce and they would remain see the one on the south from this landscape plan is okay the one on the south is existing and it leads further into the development thank you okay anything else for Evan not seeing anything thank you thank you Mr Gilbert we'll have you come back up I think you wanted to respond briefly I do I I emphasize on the briefly I get it Mr chairman first of all I think it's very interesting that we had the representative from the Star Car Wash saying that we're too close well we announced our plans and were underway at a car wash at Ellsworth and Pecos Road knowing that starwash Star Car Wash came in and put in another car wash within 200 to 300 feet of our site and that they're complaining that we're a thousand feet away from them we find that to be somewhat disingenuous next I want to talk about pedestrian that seems to be a big factor here I just remind you that in this graphic The Pedestrian the Hampton Square pad is on the left there's The Pedestrian that's our parcel there there's the pedestrian indicated in the red marks there we're providing two pedestrian walkways double what is shown on the approved plan so we meet that pedestrian criteria several times over also I want to talk about I keep talk about the general plan talks about over concentration over abundance it's not defined we submit that what we're proposing which would be another car wash in an area that only has three express car washes to serve a hundred thousand people can hardly be considered an overabundance but then more importantly the ordinance General I'm sorry the general plan doesn't Define over abundance so you got to go to the ordinance and the ordinance says this is what you can have for automotive uses you can't have more than two within 600 feet so that's the that's the regulatory definition that is not found in the general plan and we meet that criteria in fact they're not even two car washes within the 600 feet so we meet the requirements for the general plan and I I'm now repeating myself you've heard more of than you wanted to of me but I just wanted to make that point in closure thank you thank you for that any questions more for Mr Gilbert okay well thank you thank you well if I didn't do it earlier we'll close the public hearing portion of this and then have any discussion that the board wants to have on this item or any there are any comments before we before I ask for a motion good board member please chair my my opinion is um I I'm leaning toward I agree with staff with this one um I agree with the overabundance I you know I I guess I'm I'm going back to when there's four corners at Southern and uh Greenfield and three of the Four Corners had um uh like a CVS Walgreens and Eckert's and inevitably I knew that all three of them weren't going to make it and and one of them did leave and I think we'll run into that same uh that same type of a situation out here when we have so many car washes together so uh just my opinion I'm leaning towards uh I agree with the staff's recommendation all right thank you any oh board member sarkissian please [Music] talking about the overabundance I believe it has to do more with what a reasonable person would consider as over abundance and then also the definition of the within 600 feet when they talk about automobile related uses I don't think the intent was to just to pick two car washes it was more of a checker and a car wash or some other type of Automotive use so I don't believe that was the intent was that they would allow two car washes within 600 feet so based on the fact that we can discuss we can discuss and decide if we feel this is an appropriate location for another car wash at this location um I don't I don't have a problem with the design as much it's I mean that's kind of their logo thing that they do you see everywhere I don't but um it's more of the fact that I don't feel like this is the this isn't I do feel no more abundance in the area for this like you can visually see it I've driven by it you see it's there so all right any other discussion is there anyone that uh wants to offer a motion on this item I'll go ahead and try but I would recommend that a recommend approval or excuse me start over again I would recommend that we recommend City or we deny the zon 22-00732 District 5 within the 1400 block of South Chrisman Road located west of South Chrisman Road and south of East Hampton Avenue site plan review and special use permit this request will allow for a car wash and at staff recommendation is denial okay so just just to clarify on we don't how do we say that do we say approve I recommend we approve the denial or recommend that we deny the denial I mean I guess share it would be approved the denial right chair and board members since this case is on for Action the motion would be to deny the case or to improve the case okay that would be my motion then so just to clarify your motion would be to deny this zoning application which is the status do I need do I need to read it again or are we good with that no I think we're good with that okay uh is there a second to this motion hey we have a motion and a second let's go ahead and vote Mr chairman dimi system isn't letting me do a manual motion for board member Allen so it looks he's on his way to assist okay well I get the vote now it's working I think okay Maybe okay and then board member Alan how are you voting on this I'm I'm voting which whether it be I would vote to deny this application which is a yes vote I believe yes yes okay so by your vote of six eyes and one no the application has been denied foreign board members the next item off of the consent is item 4A which is zon22-00263 and I just want to note um Michelle did you pass out the letters um oh I'm sorry I'm missing sorry I'm skipping one item three B zon 22-00829 thank you all right thank you uh members of the board this is for Zeon 22-00829 uh this specifically is for site plan review for a uh Public Storage or self self storage facility located at the intersection of Broadway and Morse uh it is located just east of Country Club Drive uh available off the access road for Country Club the current General plan designation on the site is three different types you have neighborhood as well as employment and transit station uh this specifically would fall more under the employment use which does allow for a variety of places to work including warehouse and storage uses as part of that uh the existing zoning on this site is three different zones it is majority db2 which is where the site where the development is located on uh that specifically is where Self Storage is allowed by right within downtown business too and then uh the parking and retention for the associated uses is located in the GI and Li portions of the site this is the overall review of the site looking south from Broadway overall here's the site plan uh you as you can see uh Broadway is located on the west side of this orientation of this site but is located on the North side overall as well as you have the fire access located off the Country Club Drive that is for fire access only in the need of an emergency hopefully that would never be utilized during operational uses as part of this they've also located a number of screening elements as well as a larger uh more welcoming pedestrian area for Landscaping on the northeast corner so that is more consistent with that downtown look as well uh overall as you can see a little more clearly on the down on the landscape plan you can see where the screening has been located as well as along the neighboring property there is a screen wall due to the existing residential use and then you have additional screening provided by that Landscaping located on just the west side of the wall which is going to be uh on this site plan it might has some classical days things of that nature but they have been replaced with an Elm that will grow more straight and out in order to provide additional type of screening uh overview of the design review it was presented before design review on October 11th uh there's minor comments that included addressing those uh trees and changing out a type that would be more significant screening for that residential use that is legal non-conforming use on the site just to the east uh that is tucked within this portion uh and overall here's the participation excuse me citizen participation map that shows that uh the applicant did provide notices to the neighboring Property Owners within 500 feet of the proposed design review as well as site plan review I do know that there is a concern from the neighboring residential use just to the East and they would like to have a little further discussion on that and I believe they do have a common card in related to that uh but overall based off of the uh General plan designation as well as the zoning on site staff finds that the overall site plan complies with the 2040 General plan as well as site plan criteria within section 11-695 of the mc0 so therefore staff is recommending approval conditions are there questions for Josh I am not seeing any so uh thank you Josh let me invite the applicant up Mr chairman members of the board good afternoon my name is Ralph Pugh our address is at 1744 South Val Vista Drive Suite 217 here today on behalf of DxD Capital Mr Cam pakanet and Gary Delaney are here with me um Mr chairman for the sake of time this case is on your consent agenda for approval it is a site plan review case this is not a zoning case the use is allowed and permitted I think there's folks that may want to speak Mr chairman could they go ahead and speak and then there's could I respond to that that might be more efficient absolutely thank you very much thank you so I have two comment cards uh first is Christopher I think is it fernwall yeah that's correct all right Christopher come on up and state your name and address and you'll have three minutes my name is Christopher fernlow 410 South Morris Mesa um I would be opposed to the storage field facility being built next to my family's home uh we already have issues with homeless making campsites on property uh vandalizing property um building a large storage facility would only have more problems with this [Music] um with building a large wall between our home and the storage facility would give the homeless more of a shelter with hiding and they already have they already have areas right now that they have been making shelters so with having this would be even more problem um I don't think we'd have the Privacy that we do now I feel that if we the storage facility was built there would be no you know more there would be more problems with the homeless vandalizing breaking into the facility the house has been there more than 80 years and stayed in the Thompson's Family since family and I are in the process of fixing up the home and would like to make it look more updated and with having this facility it would make our house feel like the up house so I'd be again I'd be against it okay uh thank you Mr fernwall I just have a quick question for you have you had discussions with the applicant about your concerns in terms of security and homeless on the property no I haven't they they just put up the sign about two weeks ago so I mean we haven't had any kind of notice at all okay thank you board member sarkissian has a question for you oh no you don't well no I was like so you didn't I believe so you are you because I was trying to look up the history on the site in terms so it looks like the you're not the owner of the property right or no I rent I rent it there you you what I rent okay so that's why the letter because that usually letters go up much further in advance did do you know if the owner got a letter yes they did okay okay you know if they've been discussing anything or if they're here they are here also okay okay all right thank you uh so the other comment card I have is Tina Dunford Danford and it says you are opposed to this item and you do not wish to speak okay and the owner of the property is here you did okay I don't I don't have a card but okay well please yeah sure I believe you have some that are on the the spreadsheet that was sent earlier today gotcha okay all right and I don't have the spreadsheet I should have brought a copy along but anyway come on up and uh and give us your name for the record and your address there's there were um there were um oh wow and I you know apologize I'm not an attorney um and I did do my best to present to put together a PowerPoint presentation um because I do feel like Chris like the guy in up that has you know the balloons and the you know the big developers are kicking us out but hopefully I have some real substantial um um legal comments and some grounds besides please don't take away our home you know but hopefully we have some real substantial um arguments but I just won't be able to do them in three minutes well try do your best I'll do my best I guess my biggest one would have been time you asked you know have you been in discussions with the applicant well we've we've we served the first if you look at the participation you know agenda the first knows they sent out was on September 26th I got that on October 1st I immediately called the city of Mason said city of May said what's going on talked with Josh He said here took talk to the applicant I talked to them they were you know they were courteous but you know I had to go through this learning process I did learn to submit a card for that is a design and review board but that was all I've been able to do since then I've tried to reach out to the applicant many times um I actually reached out to Mr Pew here because I know him and he said sorry I can't I have a conflict of interest well here he is today on the other side so I definitely feel like the up guy I have not had time I I get that my house is older and I kind of feel like I'm the non-conforming you know thing that's only been there 87 years almost a century I just think that we should have the right as a same rights I'm not there to take away their rights but we have rights too and we need to have the time to participate properly in this process the citizen participation plan specifically states that if there is the potential impact that they need to hold a neighborhood meeting well this is not if there's ever a potential in fact it's a three-story building right where you can touch it outside your window I think that's a potential impact and they didn't they did they disregarded that in my opinion I feel very disregarded um and we would like the opportunity to participate if not you know at least have a full discussion on what we can do one of my biggest biggest concerns is right now they have a straight wall that's a three you know a three-story wall and this is probably a design review and I've probably missed the boat but this shouldn't be a straight wall there should be a staggered you know a setback there should be first story then the second story like they talked about with the car wash give it some beautiful design don't have it looming down on my backyard you know I don't I heard about those sight lines but if you show a sight line like they're looking at my bathroom you know like it's just absolutely crazy in some sense so I think that we should at least have the opportunity to have a dialogue with with the applicants you know as a very impacted neighbor my petition would be that we that we have a continuance that we have an opportunity um to have dialogue with the applicant that you give us a couple weeks or a month or two months or something so that we can have that dialogue and and have that further discussion I want to articulate some important legal points the first of all is contrary to what the council says this is not zoned properly as the staff mentioned there are three separate zonings here the third zoning that they kind of glanced over is GC storage units is not an acceptable use in GC per the city of Mesa ordinances they have parking as they put up on his first flight if you pull up his first slide from the staff they specifically said that they're going to park they're using that for parkage parking and drainage and I have um and I really appreciate uh just the the extra time and I apologize but um the property is three zoning districts two of them allow for self stories but one of them does not the current site plan is laid upon top of the zoning in this exhibit which I wish I could show you but it's very similar to the site plan that the staff member brought up as it shows the applicant is relying on GC zone for emergency access and a portion of the parking lot correct uh circulation that is a violation of zoning because GC does not allow for Self Storage it's not an allowed use again the applicant would need to exclude that portion of the site from the plan or add a cup and the board does not have the authority to approve a site plan that does not meet the complete zoning requirements so some ballot you know but more than just begging please I think there's some valid arguments that need to be addressed the step back from the property is a very important one the zoning is an important one in addition the proper notice we are potentially impact and we never had the chance for a a neighborhood hearing to express ourselves adequately more than three minutes okay so that would be my request is that we deny this we continue and give us a two months or something to have a conversation with the applicants all right thank you for that can I request after he speaks to well we don't really do that um let's let's see how let's see how this goes I'm going to have Mr Pugh come up and respond to some of the things that you talked about and then we'll probably have staff come up after as well and and respond so um thank you thank you and now is there any other have I missed any other public commenters that are here we have several they're going to be red can you read the cards the ones you don't are allowed please okay okay so this is um all right so board member Ayers do you want to read these thank you actually do have a job all right so we have two comments that I'll read into for this so the first comes from Carlene Conover I hope we got that right um and she's opposed to this uh she says the proposed project will crush our home and we'll destroy our families living standards it would hugely impact our property we have not been able to properly participate in the process which impacts us greatly we respectfully requested two-month continuance on the hearing to allow our rights to be represented this home has been part of mesa's history for 87 years nearly a century the applicant submitted less than three months ago and we were not notified until just recently there was no neighborhood meeting or any Outreach to us please at least Grant a two-month continuance second comment from John Conover looking at the same address at 410 South Morris and is also opposed says we represent the family living in the home immediately adjacent to the proposed project we feel that there has not been adequate consideration given to the potential huge impact on this property uh that this project will cause on our property and our lives we have not had adequate time to work with the developer we respectfully ask for continuance on this hearing to allow citizen participation we understand that all property owners in the city of Rights and we are not here to try to take away the developers rights but please respect our rights as well we asked for a two-month continuance to be able to participate and and chair we did receive the one comment card past our cutoff time from John Conover as well and it seemed to indicate that he would be on the phone to comment so I'm not sure if he's on the line wanting to speak okay thank you but there was another that wasn't before the cutout from Gene Gene's grandfather Bill the property okay do we have a card from Gene Thomas anywhere or a comment we don't we don't have that at the moment but we'll uh so well let me let me uh I think yeah I think all those are okay well let's go ahead um Mr Pugh let's have you come back up and address some of those comments and and specifically I'd like to have you address what kind of Outreach there's been to the homeowner there and about what what the status of those discussions are and and some of the concerns they've raised be happy to do that Mr chairman uh first of all personally my involvement in this case has been very recent so I'm going to call Cam to come up and explain what happened over the last few months on citizen Outreach my involvement has been here and Consulting on this meeting today and the status of the objections and that type of thing so I was not personally involved in the in the Outreach which we would typically do but we didn't do that in this case okay and let me just ask you a question about uh Mr I think Mr Conover mentioned that there was a potential conflict is there is there a conflict that we need to be aware of no he I think Mr chairman members of the board what what he was saying is that he called our office and left a message for me to talk about this issue I had my secretary respond and say we can't visit with you about that we've been hired by you know we've consulted with the applicant so that's what he I think that's what he meant we don't have a conflict today I haven't met with him okay yeah thank you yeah thank you so just briefly uh Mr chairman this and board members this really boils down to an issue of what's called conforming and non-conforming uses so what you have here is db2 zoning which is the downtown business district 2 in which Self Storage is a permitted use that zoning District in one form or another it's been called several things over the decades I've been involved in so many cases in Mesa but it's been in place for business uses for a long time the use that is non-conforming today is the single-family residence it is known as a non-conforming use it can continue forever and nothing can interrupt that residential use but I think we should be very careful on how non-conforming uses intervene or have impact upon a site plan case for a permitted use in an adjoining allowed zoning District we're not here asking that this property be zoned right to allow this use rather we're simply saying we've prepared a site plan presented it to the staff now it's presented to you the question for you is does the site plan conform to the requirements of the city of Mesa zoning code for this use on this property setbacks distances turning radiuses Traffic Safety trash collection all that so you're then here today with a staff report that recommends approval because we do conform to all those things and that's really the point here and so while there is a non-conforming use adjacent to us unfortunately whatever happened between owners it didn't occur and the use is still there and can continue but it should not in our opinion impede the owner of this property and the applicant to develop it as the staff is indicated in their staff report to clarify the db2 area is most of the property and it's where the self storage is located the other two uses or zoning districts Li I believe and um the GC are not at least this site is you know the use is not on those Parcels so we've taken care of that issue and dealt with that so anyway I'd like to turn the time if I can to cam and ask him to answer I think your question about neighborhood Outreach is an important one even though it's a site plan case you still reach out to neighbors so cam are you around somewhere could you please cover that thank you thank you thank you thank you board my name is Cameron pactanat I work with DXE capital of the applicant and this process we were told that the Outreach would be a posting of the application as well as a ladder Outreach which we've done all of we also did go and speak with our neighbors who are two of the commercial user users excuse me Orange Street mechanical and Sunkist to you know discuss the project with them because they were available and they provide their verbal support for the project we also did receive a call from a residential neighbor as well I mean it did speak with them those discussions uh were part of a discussion to see if we would be open to purchasing the property and at that point we just weren't in a in a position to be able to make those decisions or have that discussion um so we had said that you know we would uh we would have to go through the application and then further discuss if that's something that we could do but that was the extent of our conversation um with the with the opposing party um other than that we we followed staff's recommendation and went ahead with the what's in the code as far as the Outreach and and did you have any discussions with the homeowner regarding the concerns he raised about security and maybe places where homeless could congregate we uh I do believe we've had those specific conversations what I can say regarding the development itself is that this is all going to be interior climate control there's going to be no exterior units we've actually been on site multiple times and we agree every time we're there we do see that there is there seems to be encampments or someone on on the property you know a development uh would allow for that to go away because now there will be cameras we have 24-hour security both interior exterior of the property it's only allowed for during business hour hours if you're a new customer an existing customer has specific timelines they can access it with a code to go inside so we know exactly who's going in and coming out of the property and there are safety measures that we're going to have as far as proper lighting so that there aren't areas that people can just you know could be able to sit and hide and different things so you know we're under the belief that you know this property here with a new development would be able to remove that issue and actually make it a safer area for the residents thank you are there are there questions board member Peterson Camry are you agreeable to uh continuance to have discussions with the adjacent property owner to work out some of their concerns that they have well the the plan that we have set forth we have been working on um for quite some time and I can the owner of the current property has had discussions with them in the past has has discussions of the past as well we've done everything we've can we've worked with staff to be able to design something that fits within the parameters of what the city is looking for plus add-on additional aesthetic pieces such as you know different paneling different coloring different things to be able to provide the aesthetic look that would be um you know accepting to the overall neighborhood we are always open to having discussions but you know this has been something that's been posted and something that has been open for discussion for exactly what this city requires and there's been no real discussion as far as or ideas or requests on things to change those are just those are new to us today for what we could do it is what's your answer to my question then yes or no no okay um any other questions for the applicant no okay thank you thank you very much appreciate it thank you then um let me Josh would you mind coming back up I have a couple of questions um one question is on the GC zoning designation uh you heard the comment by Mr Conover that there's parking or something on that part of the property that's got the GC zoning is is that a relevant concern or is it is it that the building itself is located on the appropriate zoning and the parking can be on the the GC uh chairman so it'd be more of the latter situation where uh because the use itself is located on db2 uh it is allowed by right within that zone the parking and retention are allowed uses within those specifics GC and Ally and their accessory uses to that so based off of the understanding staff has that they would be consistent with the MCO because the Str the use itself the self storage is located all within that db2 okay but so but the parking and the retention is not included as part of the use that we're talking about the self storage because you couldn't have the Self Storage without the parking or the retention correct sure so so when we look at sites that have split zoning it's a matter of what the use is that's being shown on Those portions of the site so if they're allowed and that portion of the site that zone GC it's it's really retention area and there's a portion of the trash enclosure that's included in that zoning District so that would be a permissible use within that zoning District within the GC zoning that's correct okay and then the other question I had is either for Josh or for Rachel in terms of the site plan review my understanding is that this is a a fairly ministerial process and so long as the site plan conforms to the applicable requirements we don't have a lot of discretion in terms of of not approving that but my question is here do where you've got a neighbor like this does the site plan review take into account impact on an adjoining property like this or is it or are you simply only allowed to look within the boundaries of the property itself chair so so this is not a review of the use so it is not as discretionary as some of our our zonings or conditional use permits so we are strictly looking at the criteria laid out in the zoning ordinance and that is the quality development design guidelines to see if it's complying with those and this is so we really don't have a justification to deny the use on the site okay that's what I was getting at thank you for that questions for for Josh board member circusian so I I agree with you on the on the issues with um regarding with what we can do with site plan I actually have a concern about the landscape plan um regarding that and because sometimes if you're when you're especially in this area being so close to the railroad and stuff like that with the homeless situation um you've the sometimes the screen that you're trying to do from the house and the thing actually encourages the homelessness issue um between the two and stuff like that so I don't know if there's a way that they can put in you know maybe uh wrought iron where they have a key to it between the house in there or actually um you know making sure the retention area there's no surfaces where people can lie they're like Jagged rocks or maybe even reducing the trees in the back that are shade trees to discourage people to to stay back there or something are are really the things that I would just say because I would I would agree that this putting so much trying to buffer might actually encourage um them to be closer to their house so yes thank you chair and board member ice and so uh that was addressed uh as part of the design review submittal the landscape plan that you see uh was the what was submitted as part of site plan review um and they addressed that I believe uh two days ago uh so I did not have the time to swap those out prior to pack it going out um so as part of our design review discussion we did discuss septed and the concerns about that separation so we did try to address the lights uh wrought iron was a part of that new wall as well as changing those trees to reduce the shade canopies in order to create that elm look route that has the base that is more could be seen as well as changing the material within the retention days okay perfect was there any discussion about lighting and the cameras because you know the worst thing that could happen is they have cameras and lights you know on their on their house and in the backyard right so uh thank you uh chair and uh Board of pictures so I know specifically I don't believe the discussion at design review mentioned cameras specifically but we did go in depth about lighting itself so most majority of the lighting uh Along The Pedestrian level is located about I believe nine to ten feet in height so with the screen wall that is allowed within the LI or within the db2 zone that would be about eight foot high so as part of that through the light assign uh studies that we did realize that the like flooding area would be uh underneath that screening or would not be were to be blocked by that screening so it wouldn't impact and did meet the lighting standards for uh the photometrics thank you any other questions for Josh on this one I'm not oh is that can I ask one question chair um Josh and you probably already said this once before but on a storage unit there's not any windows on that side or there's not any openings that somebody could have the visibility right directly into their backyard isn't that correct yes chair at uh board member Allen that is correct uh they would be based off of the current site plan there isn't any kind of access reviews from that Eastern side all the glazing is located on the North side in order to meet our quality of design standards or guidelines that's what I thought thank you okay uh we'll close the the Herring portion uh and have discussion from the board on this item is there any any discussion board member Peterson yeah so some some thoughts on this the um were first off the uh the non-conforming zoning clearly that the house would that that the non-conformance is because the the code came in afterwards because the house was there before the before the zoning unless Mr Killian can correct us maybe but no I mean the uh the the yeah the house was there first and so for it to be non-conforming is because the code came in around the house and and the rules weren't made for that situation and I get that those things happen uh we're we're about to talk about a couple of cases where there's uh separation of 50 100 100 plus feet between structures and and where there's been a lot of a lot of work and discussions on those and and uh it just seems reasonable to me to give some time to for the the property owner and and the the case developer to just have a discussion talk about I mean because there's people have valid legal rights to maintain the the perimeter of their house and from the looks of it it doesn't even look like there's a will they be off property and and how will that be enforced or what type of is it solid fencing wrought iron fencing where's Landscaping things like that to to just it seems like subtle things that can be worked out and if there's common willingness to work it out and in this case it it just seems like the reasonable thing to do so is there a motion or a request in that board member Peterson I would say if I'm the only one who thinks that I'll I won't make a motion but if there's some consensus that other people think that's reasonable then I would make a motion to continue but I'd like to hear more board member Ayers so uh yeah with reviewing this uh unfortunately I think we have to remember I'm gonna kind of be a previous board member and remember what our purview is which is what we're reviewing a site plan and um it is a right that is allowed I completely agree with what you're saying and I I um also want you know Mr Conover I appreciate what he has to deal with however the board has this purview that we're working within and with that I would move actually that we do approve the site plan with this however I would encourage the developer to actually work with them as well and it sounds like that's already started to happen from hearing what Josh said so because I do agree with some of the concerns but again the purview that we have is is pretty clear on this one it's fairly straightforward all right so I think you're about to make a motion before you do that let me go back to board member Peterson are you you uh I'm not sure I'm not sure I'm seeing support for a continuance among the board go ahead yeah okay all right so board member oh I well I just would comment back on I mean while I agree with board member Peterson they are perfectly within their right right now of what the code is and so they can take suggestions but technically they do not have to change their site plan in any way and so that's where I'm stuck with why would a continuance on something that um they may not change and don't have to okay well thank you for that uh and board member Peterson I doesn't look like you're you have a motion coming forward so let me uh turn to board member Ayers and ask you to make a motion absolutely so I would move to uh approved case uh or three which is uh zon22-00829 within District Four within the 400 block of South Morris and within the 300 block of West Broadway Broadway Road located east of Country Club Drive on the south side of Broadway Road site plan review and this request will allow for a self storage facility staff recommendation is approval conditions and I would move to approve thank you do I have a second for the motion I would second that okay board member Alan thank you um can we can we suggest that the board amends that motion to approve with conditions as staff had recommended so yes um do you want me to read the whole thing again Rachel no okay so we would move to also um discussed by staff today thank you all right and I would second that thank you board member Allen okay let's vote okay so by your vote of six eyes and one no this item has passed thank you okay let's see there it's working now all right so chair board members now we are we have item 4A which is the on 22-00263 and Michelle is going to be passing out a letter from A.T still in the agenda packet we had included an earlier letter and there was also a version with responses from the applicant but this is an official stance from A.T still that they would like is distributed to the board can we also hear this with the 5A yes you may all right foreign thank you good afternoon chair members of the board this is kcon 22-00263 and this is a request to rezone a property from p-e-p-p-a-d-c-u-p to p-e-p-p-a-d and lipad and site plan review to allow for an industrial development so the site is located north of Baseline Road and south of the US-60 on the west side of Sunview Road and East of Higley Road the general plan character area designation is specialty with a Medical Campus subtype which is intended for large areas around a single use in this instance it's around a Medical Campus use both planned employment Park and light industrial are identified as primary zoning districts in the the specialty Medical Campus General plan character area the requested zoning on the property is both light industrial and planned employment Park so the northern side of the site will be zoned to light industrial and the southern side of the site will be zoned to planned employment Park here you can see an existing photo of the site it is currently vacant as a part of the rezone the applicant is requesting a planned area development overlay which includes deviations to certain development standards those include deviations to the maximum Building height the required parking ratio and the setback of Cross Drive aisles so the site plan is for eight industrial buildings uh totaling approximately 650 000 square feet there are buildings one a through one C which will be located in the light industrial portion that are approximately 150 000 per building and then buildings 2A through 2E uh in the planned employment part portion that are approximately 50 to 55 000 square feet per building the subject request also includes an Associated preliminary plant for eight lots that lines up with the proposed site plan the applicant attended design review on July 12th the the design review board was overall very complementary of the proposed elevations and only had minor comments the applicant conducted a citizen participation process which included notification to Property Owners within a thousand feet as well as HOAs and registered neighborhoods they held one neighborhood meeting that had four attendees staff received two letters of opposition for the proposed development one from the adjacent at still University and another from a surrounding property owner in response to the concerns raised by the surrounding Property Owners the applicant did submit a revised site plan which included a increased landscape setback on the east side of building 1C and then some proposed separation and reworks of the alignment for Sunview to reroute traffic to the West in summary we we find that the proposed development complies with the 2040 Mesa General plan and meets the criteria for a p80 and site plan review and staff is recommending approval with conditions thank you the questions for Cassidy on this item not seeing any right now so thank you we'll invite the applicant to come forward Mr Lake good evening chairman board members my name is Sean Lake 1744 South Val Vista here on behalf of Heinz it's a pleasure really to be here Hines is very well known in the development community and and they operate a number of first-class projects throughout the country they are an excellent developer and they're bringing forward to the city of Mesa this project for a business park and Industrial Development that will provide an opportunity for excellent jobs and employment and the type of things that I think we're trying to encourage in the city of Mesa this is not one of those big industrial parks that we're seeing go up out by Eastmark as many of us drive around the freeway and we see those large buildings that are going up just north of the airport that's not this project these buildings are significantly smaller and we'll walk through and talk about this but we think there's a real need for this type of use specifically in this location and so it's a pleasure really to be here on behalf of Heinz there's also a representative I think from tenet the property owner here who may wish to speak as well the project Cassidy always does an excellent job we appreciate working with staff but the Project's approximately 54 Acres located I'll call it wrecker and Baseline but kind of tuck back in the middle of that site you've many of us have attended youth events there at the YMCA to watch our kids play basketball or whatever our children this is directly east of where we would park for when we go see our children at that YMCA or directly west of where we would park for that YMCA and then South and a little west or south and a little east of that area is the at steel property or at steel campus that you see on the lower right hand corner as Cassidy pointed out the property is currently zoned pep and we are requesting to Zone it to pep and Li for the proposed uh development that we're we have before you now let's look at the development plan and what we are looking at on the North side we have three buildings approximately 130 000 square feet and on this those buildings have been designed with big setbacks along Sun view if you look at the plan you can see large landscape and setbacks to push those back from that sun View Street as well as incorporating a large landscape sect back along the east side and that was done and we'll talk a little bit about that in in a little bit as direct responsive working with at steel to soften up the buffer along our Eastern side of the property um we have a condition of approval that talks about no access for trucks to go East towards at steel and force all traffic and we'll talk about that in a little bit for the particularly those buildings on the North side on the South Side well on the North side let me just kind of get that in perspective because when I practice these presentations and and I give them to my wife she looks at me like 130 000 square feet what does that mean that's about half the size of a super center so everybody's been into a Walmart Supercenter those are about 230 000 square feet this is 130 000 square feet so that's kind of the perspective the size of those buildings the buildings on the south our five business park type buildings they're smaller they're much smaller in design they're oriented internal so that the the loading areas or the business area is internal to the site to be screened from the perimeter we work particularly with staff to design landscaping and open space around the perimeter of the site along Sun View and Inverness and paid close attention to the southeast corner of this site kind of the little where it comes to a point on the right hand side of the site plan to really enhance that area with landscaping and Monument signage and open space areas you'll notice we even have a basketball court in this business park for the employees to recreate and and to go and sit and enjoy there might even be some at steel students that sneak over and shoot hoops occasionally so we've designed something that is very nice that will fit within the area and we think will very very attractive in this location in working with the neighbors in at steel specifically we did make changes to our plan to try to address some of those their concerns as I pointed out earlier one of those was along the east side of the three buildings on the North they wanted to make sure that Landscaping setback along our east side which would be directly east of building 1C was softened up and so what we did is we increased that landscape set back to 50 feet and then we doubled the amount of landscaping and trees that will go in that area now to put that into perspective of 50 feet on our West Side we have the UPS facility for those that receive daily shipments from UPS that's where it comes from and so that UPS facility is located on our West Side they have a 10-foot landscape strip along our border that we share with UPS where five times what UPS has there and so with that 50 feet of landscaping along the east side we think we'll soften that up we've also worked with a design review board to have the design of that building to be attractive as well the traffic was another question or concern of the neighbors and as you see on this site if you can picture going to the YMC at CA it kind of ends in a cul-de-sac Sun view ends in a cul-de-sac before you get in there we our plan right now is to continue that cul-de-sac and and continue it all through the center of this site and connect it to Sunview on our West boundary there was concerned expressed initially by at steel that we don't want the trucks leaving the north side of the site the big trucks and going east past at steel and co-mingling if you will with more of the passenger traffic we agree we Concur and so what we submitted was a plan a conceptual plan that had two cul-de-sacs backing up to each other so that the trucks physically couldn't go we talked with staff the traffic engineer and said for the city of Mesa said maybe there's a better way to do that we talked with at steel and they said well we don't know but we like that the trucks can't go but maybe there's a better way but maybe we want to have our people in at steel use Sun view to get out to Higley to the west and so we added a condition of approval and I believe that is condition number two in your zoning case that will allow us the flexibility to work with the city's traffic engineer to design restrictions on on sun view for our truck driveways that access Sunview to force all truck traffic to go to the west to go straight out to Higley we believe that's the natural course anyway the path of least resistance if you will that's where all of UPS trucks go now but we'll design it with a I'm not an engineer and I'm not going to pretend to be one I think they've call I've heard them call it pork chop or some type of raised medium type design at those driveway entrances to force those trucks to go to the east but we have a condition to work with the city's traffic engineer to design that to do that and you'll notice that driveway off of 1C on our far right hand corner that's a narrower driveway and that's really only for passenger vehicles now that's not designed wide enough to accept large truck traffic and they're already and so we'll work with the city on that one of the other concerns was uses the city certainly doesn't want this to be one large building with two employees um and so they the at steel did not want this whole thing to be a big Distribution Center or a Ups 2 or or FedEx and so we'll work with the city on developing a development agreement to restrict certain amount of uses both in the Li and the pep and that is condition number eight of the staff recommendation conditions of approval again we worked with Cassidy and staff they were very particular on that corner what we'll call to the right of building 2E kind of where the teardrop is on the far right side to dress that area up to put a monument entry in that location and so the extensive landscaping and really make that pretty of that business Park area so we did that as well we will be completing The Pedestrian connections and the bike lanes and the sidewalks as part of this development version for Sunview Inverness to kind of finish off that area but this will be providing employment opportunities for a lot of office and warehouse and Business Park type uses that we think there is a strong demand for this size of development one of the other issues of concern was traffic and the volume of traffic we were request requested to prepare a traffic study and so the traffic study we prepared compared the existing plan that you discussed last month if you remember with the multi-family case directly south of here about an older plan I believe it was 05 or 08 somewhere in there that was approved for a hospital so we did a traffic study to analyze that traffic compared to our proposed traffic and I believe we're at about 10 percent of what that traffic that would be generated by that previously approved use that sits on the site so we will have significantly less traffic and we've worked with the city's transportation department that there is capacity of the roadways to handle our proposed uses here's a landscape plan kind of showing that teardrop area how we've enhanced kind of that corner that would be closest to the YMCA and the at steel locations and again you can see the basketball court and the the business park type of amenities that would be associated with this building again that building these five smaller buildings are about 50 000 square feet in a back to my example that's about the size of a Walmart grocery store or a Safeway or a Bashas so they're not huge buildings they're they're very small and we think there's a need for those smaller type buildings for employment type uses because there's big ones being built out by the airport here's a a rendering of what that teardrop area would be as you kind of enter in at Sun View and Inverness intersections here's an example of the elevations that were submitted to the desire review board and as Cassie pointed out that we're very well received by the design review board this project We Believe will provide employment opportunities we think between these eight buildings there will be substantial opportunities for a significant number of employees to move in and work here the salary ranges we think are very high in this area for these type of users we think there's substantial demand both for office and warehouse and Manufacturing and those type of uses in this area high demand in this area we think this Market a little bit smaller is in need we think there will be users in here that we're currently talking and people who are looking in the market for this type of thing this type of project that could also provide medical type uses which would become complementary to the at steel project to the east here's some of the people who are currently in the industry looking for space that we we feel that we could provide space for them to come in and move here and so we think there's an excellent opportunity to provide that on this site so with that we we think we have put forth a great plan that's worked our very best to try to address concerns of at steel they've been very good to work with they've met with us multiple times we've done everything we possibly can to try to address their concerns and work with them they've been good to work with so we think it's a great plan staff is recommending approval staff has conditions of approval that address many of those issues as well and so with that we would ask your support of this project with the staff's recommended conditions of approval and with that I'd be happy to answer any questions right any questions for Mr Lake I just so um on the the five smaller ones so those would be similar the ones you see that have like the offices in the front and then like a warehouse kind of thing is that what that is kind of first they could be a myriad of different different type users in there it could be a striker uh person who has medical parts and they have offices and employees in there and then they also have inventory and they're of spine parts or knee joints or or whatever there's lots of different uses Heinz will be building out the building and then the tenants will be you know building off and finishing their space and then the back is like uh the door the larger doors in the back is that what that is the back would be larger the these are not crosstalks right right right but like as so each unit would have their own like availability yeah okay and that's really what the docs they do have quite a few docks here that that at still was concerned about but that's done so that there is flexibility for the person that moves in you don't want to restrict a tenant because you have a dock in the wrong location there'll be docks that they just flat out won't use because their internal configuration of the building when they build it out will need a dock in this location and if we put the dock in this location we're out of luck they'll go somewhere else and now so that's why you have a lot of docs and they'll have a lot of docs or doors that they just flat out don't use because their internal configuration the building doesn't require they need it at that location so that's why we design it the way we did and so this um zone change will allow for like the build the manufacturing and production of yes so medical or whatever else it is absolutely okay thank you thank you other questions not seeing any thank you thank you let's go to our public comment now I've got three cards and let's start with Lauren King so Ms King if you'd come to the podium and give your name and business address and then you'll have three minutes Mr chairman members of the board Lauren King for the record 6737 North 12th way um here today in support of the Heinz project on behalf of the current owner tenant Healthcare or brazo locally the hospital plan that was conceived many years ago it will not happen and so throughout this process I've been very involved with Heinz appreciate heinz's collaborative approach I do want to make a point to acknowledge A.T still is a long time neighbor of this property and a fellow supporter of the Healthcare Community we appreciate them providing feedback we believe that Heinz has made meaningful accommodations to address their concerns including significant buffers to the ET still campus so we feel this is a great plan that it will generate jobs it'll be good use of the property and with that thank you for the opportunity to reflect our support on the record great thank you next I have Gary cloud I will defer to council Council okay thank you Mr cloud and so then next up I've got Joel sanus sanus yes okay and I and Mr sanus we also have a letter uh from your firm that she was distributed to each of the board members we got that yeah I did have a question about that we're having uh Ms delkin are texting back and forth we'd agree that that would be provided to the board before your planning session I don't know if you've had a chance to review that before the prompt planning session this is a 50-acre zoning change uh so it is a substantial zoning change I don't know if the board has seen the substantial the zoning change in some time so um either would like the board to take more time to consider our letter or if possible I could have a few extra minutes to give our presentation um well how let's let's push ahead and see how far we get in three minutes I want to make four points on behalf of ATL still University first approving this rezoning would be a drastic change to the Mesa 2040 General plan for this area of our city we do appreciate what Heinz has done to accommodate the concerns that at still has but it's number one overarching concern is this is inconsistent with the general plan and inconsistent with commitments that the city of Mesa made when at still located its campus in this location that this area would be developed in a way that would have synergistic benefits to AC Stills University's educational and public service mission second approval means taking a short-term view compared to the long-term view of the 2040 General plan third as I mentioned this is about the city's commitment to atsu that this area will be developed in a manner that creates synergies for the University's educational Public Service missions and fourth approval of this zoning change threatens A.T steel universities continued viability in this location I want to go through a PowerPoint if I may first is on the PowerPoint let me pull this slide up I'll just go um it's showing the on the right side of the screen this is from the Mesa 2040 General plan taken directly from the plan this entire area you can see the word specialty District now this is a specialty District that was created specifically for at steel University and at the time tenant Healthcare which owned the property but now that it doesn't own doesn't wish to build a hospital anymore they want to sell that property and that's why Hines is here applying for the rezoning so that it can buy the property from tenant the second is this is from the city of mesa's resolution adopting the general plan section four the general plan serves as a statement of community-wide vision to help guide the city and the community as a whole into the future with a long-range perspective distinct from short-term Market condition market conditions or development trends when the city council approved this this is from the city council from from the city's own website the Mesa 2040 General plan was adopted by the council and voters of the city of Mesa in 2014. so this is not simply a zoning code this is a plan that went through a year years of development and then was presented to the voters for approval in 2014. atsu is an integral part of the 2040 General plan this is from the general plan it says that in 2020 the city of Mesa developed a strategic Vision to attract additional higher education institutions the city was successful in attracting six new colleges and universities to Mesa and to add to the already vibrant educational landscape which includes A.T steel University which among those listed was the first A.T steel was the Pioneer for higher education in the city of Mesa districts are special the specialty districts are areas for large single uses large single uses specialty districts are large areas with a single use such as an educational campus airport or medical facility I'm not positive that this was designed just as a medical facility I think it was designed as an educational high technology and medical specialty District this is what an educational campus should have the education campus tub type is typically for high school and college campuses again this is in that specialty District the Medical Campus subtype is for hospitals and Associated Office Buildings are typically located on sites of at least 20 acres the the the reason that we take issue with staffs comment that this is consistent with the 2040 General plan it's not it is taking what should have been an educational campus or Medical Campus and locating 50 acres of Industrial Development right next to at steel University if I I'm going to scroll down to the this is the photo the A.T Steels university is in the middle that that's its main campus is in the middle the YMCA is at the top it will directly abut the YMCA they have agreed to a setback but it directly abuts the YMCA the YMCA is located on land owned by at steel University which at steel University donates for the YMCA to operate there if you look at the corner of the development where the cul-de-sac ends that is one football field away from at Steele's main campus that is where this is located they're going to locate they um Mr Lake says this is like a a Walmart this is like eight Walmarts it's not one it's eight located here uh let me ask you to kind of truck yes up here sure really quickly uh um this is border to border concrete it is tilt up concrete it's a beautiful building it would be great in another location but this is border to border concrete that is the entire development I also want to make this is the um I do not think that it complies with the the plant employment Park designation I take it we take issue with staff saying that look that it complies with the plant employment Park designation as well a planned employment Park is supposed to have multiple uses it should have ansler uses like retail it doesn't have any of that this is a warehouse district warehouse proposal the last point we want to make oh this is the plan and point from from the zoning code a planned employment Park should have multiple uses medical office Parks research and development facilities light industrial manufacturing integrating a campus setting with ancillary restaurants retail and other supportive publishments this doesn't have any of that so it doesn't comply with the pep zoning even if you were to say that you're going to approve the pep zoning the last point I want to make is if you build it they will come there are 220 dogs four shipments from this facility There are 16 drive-through dogs 236 truck docks this is completely inconsistent with what the city of Mesa made a commitment to at steel University that if it locates its campus here this area will be developed to support at steel University you will have wall-to-wall concrete 50 acres worth right next to a world-class University that provides Public Service in the form of uh that has a dental clinic it has a doctor it educates doctors of osteopathy so it's a medical school it's a dental school it's an audio it also has uh it has other colleges associated with higher education and the last point I want to make is that every other use that is in this area is consistent with the plan the businesses that are in this area are a Brazil Health formally owned the Mountain View Mountain Vista Medical Center it sold it in 2022 so you have an emergency hospital that operates in this area encompass Health rehabilitation services operates a physical rehabil rehabilitation facility in the area Sante of Mesa operates a short-term skilled nursing and rehabilitation facility within the special district so the uses that are nearby are consistent with the general plan this is a violation of the general plan so for those reasons we urge the board to deny the application okay thank you Mr sanus thank you for the extra time let me have Mr Lake come back up and maybe address some of the points that you just heard chair I appreciated working with Joel um he's an excellent attorney a great person but I wish to point out he did leave out the UPS facility directly adjacent to our property there's an apartment on the Ruiz development that is uh directly just south of that and so there are a lot of different uses in this site that aren't all consistent with that I think I wish I wanted to point out he says this is a huge change this property is currently Zone pep we are asking it to go from Pep to pep nli I would argue that the uses of Pep to pep and Li are much similar and closer than the case that they supported last month which was to take pep and change it to multi-family for property that fronted on Baseline Road they would like to have retail and restaurants and bars and nightclubs and those type of things as presented in their letter those are great ideas for arterial frontages for commercial corners but this property is currently zoned pep and we are requesting a change to pep and Li and we think that is very consistent I also wish to point out and concur with staff's position on this it is consistent with the general plan if you look at the general plan and identify the primary zoning categories that are to go into this property both pep and Li are in those primary zoning categories as the uses the land use zoning categories that they want to see developed or the general plan designates to develop on this property multi-family which was discussed last month is a secondary use which they supported the multi-family we think this land is most appropriate for business park employment type uses we think this is land has been set aside for jobs and creation I know they want to have a hospital and medical facility or a school locate here but to narrow the zoning down to a medical or a hospital for this property or nothing when we have a hospital seller saying it's never going to happen Banner went it's done and then narrow it down even further to say we're only going to allow educational opportunities here really I think is so narrowly constricting this property owner that they'll never be able to develop this property so given that we think it is very appropriate to allow a very similar use as what is what is existing there today with the UPS facility that's there and then force all that traffic that will come from this business park in the pep and the LI area to the West we think it will be attractive it will be a great area and a great asset to the city of Mesa both in terms of job and employees and and places for people to go and work we think this is a very attractive project let me I think I touched on everything we concur with staff's opinion this is consistent with the general plan these zoning districts that we are requesting are primary zoning districts within this zoning category and to support the at still position to so narrowly constrain this property you're going to choke it to the point where it will never develop and so we would ask your support of this property or this proposed of element thank you any any questions for Mr Lake no anything more from staff on this Cheryl I'll add to staff's evaluation of compliance with the general plan that as we discussed earlier in the study session we are reviewing the rezone request and an Associated site plan however the building shown on the site plan are speculative we don't know what the proposed uses are for those buildings so as far as information that we have as staff to evaluate that it is correct that the LI in the planned employment Park zoning District are primary zoning districts to be used in the Medical Campus subtype so in that sense it does comply when those buildings are officially occupied if they require any sort of special use at that time we can further evaluate those for compliance with the general plan but as it stands now with the proposal it is in compliance status um interpretation recommendation okay thank you I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and we'll have some discussion on the board is there any any comment on this I'll I'll take comments or uh emotion either one if I could jump in then um I would just go straight to uh making a motion on this if nobody has any uh objection to that and I would recommend that we approve zon22-00263 District 2 within the 5600 to 5800 blocks of East Inverness Avenue and within the 5600 to 5800 blocks of its South Sunview located east of Higley Road and North of Baseline Road rezone from planned employment park with a planned area development overlay and a council use permit to planned employment part with a planned area development overlay light industrial with a planned area development overlay and site plan review this request will allow for an industrial development and along with staff recommendation approval with conditions and we also move the preliminary plant at the same time oh right separately separate okay okay you can do it at the same time board member Allen if you want to come back with the association preliminary class sure and also that recommendation combined with Baseline Logics part District 2 within the 5600 to 5800 blocks of East Inverness Avenue and within the 5600 5800 blocks of South Sunview located east of Higley Road and North of Baseline Road a preliminary Platte staff recommendation is approval with conditions okay you've heard the motion is there a second second thank you board member Peterson okay let's go ahead and vote and board member Allen how are you voting on this yes okay so by your vote of seven eyes no knows this these two items have passed because all right chair and board member our members our next item to discuss is did it show up as a no vote no no it did not it says voted here results they put my glasses on oh the results just went away so board member Ayers voted no on that one why don't you do a roll call vote on the motion but okay board member Allen made to approve cases for a and 5A okay so this is a roll call vote on the motion on items four a and five a to approve with conditions to approve both with conditions um I'll begin with with myself I vote I Vice chair heirs no uh board member Allen I board member sarkissian yes board member Peterson yes board member pitcher yes and board member Montez yes okay so by your vote of six eyes one no items four a and five b have passed don't know what happened with the technology on that but uh thanks thanks for paying attention board member heirs okay so board um next up we have item 4B which is the on 22-00265 and Josh will be making that presentation hey Josh before you before you start I I have to recuse myself from this one okay thank you and uh board member pitcher uh needs to recuse himself would you just for the record would you state the reason you're recusing the reason is we've got uh family relations that are the applicant and the uh the development is nearby okay thank you so board member uh pitcher will be recused on this item Josh take it away this is for Zeon 22-00265 this is specifically for a rezoning and site plan review for the uh to allow for the development of an age-restricted multiple residence the site is located east of Greenfield south of Southern Avenue and is just directly west of South 48th Street the overall General plan designation for this site is neighborhood so as part of that clean safe and healthy areas as well as a sense of place is the intent of this area as well as a wide variety of housing which this would be consistent with overall the existing zoning on this site is rs-43 and rs15 the proposed zoning on this case is for an rm4 pad uh this is the existing site photo looking South into the existing Killian farm from 48th uh here's the overall site plan it's showing main access from Southern Avenue on the northwest side a portion of the site as well as secondary access from 48th for members of the community as well overall they're providing 208 units with a overall density of 23.3 units per acre as well as part of this request there is a parking reduction that has been conditioned based off of the age restricted nature of this development as part of that uh due to the senior use of this development there is a reduction that is permitted through alternative compliance which is what the applicant is requesting as part of this overall there's a multitude of pad modifications for the site I will say the specific setback ones are just purely for parking garages as well as parking canopies located along the property lines as well as a reduction in the just two bedroom units for the private open space for a minimum of 62 square feet but staff feels with the additional amenities in the community spaces as well as the community engagement rooms and things of that nature that has been mitigated into a manner that is more a higher level than is typically seen consistent with the pad requests and as part of that again just to reiterate these setbacks are just for the parking garages as well as parking canopies they have also addressed they've spoken with the neighboring Property Owners as well as concerns that the neighbors have on this site as part of that the portions adjacent to this single residences uses on the west side of Sunny Mesa they have had a conversation with them where they've increased the Wall height so as part of these pad modifications they are asking that increase from the standard six feet that is allowed within RM districts to eight feet which is consistent with more of our industrial areas but at least this way will provide for additional screening for those Neighbors in general this was presented to design review on September 13th most of the comments were about the Vitality of the and longevity of the Citrus Grove located on the west side of the site that is being utilized as a buffer for that single resonance uses so as part of that we have a better understanding of how the irrigation will work and kind of best practices in terms of bubblers for the trees themselves in order to make sure that that screening maintains in place as well as making sure the longevity of those trees as well as some general comments on the elevations as well as articulations also the design review board had on this case uh as part of the citizen participation process this was one of the more extensive uh cases that did do uh you know quite a number of neighborhood meetings uh based off of the uh applicants materials as well as various uh beatings that staff has attended uh there has been well over 20 meetings with specific Property Owners as well as groups and HOAs as a whole um as the project initially came in as a four-story about another I believe 30 to 40 units on top of what they are proposing today as part of those discussions with the citizens they have reduced the overall structure to three stories on a majority of the portion that fronts 48th and Southern while they've reduced it to two stories adjacent to the single resonances and they all the uh patios and accessory Windows of the units have been oriented not to look into the backyards or properties of those single rest is surrounding property So based off of that staff finds the overall site plan and rezone complies to the 2040 Journal plan complies with the review criteria for plant area development per chapter 22 as well as a review criteria for a site plan within 1169.5 therefore staff recommends approval conditions thank you Josh do we have questions from board members board member Peterson you mentioned the agreement for a section of eight foot wall will you clarify where that is is it just the far on the dog leg the Far West Side there okay yes thank you chair and uh board member Peterson so yes it's essentially along this Western on the dog leg essentially adjacent to the Citrus Orchard and the single residence is located on the west side okay do we have other questions for Josh not seeing any right now thank you so Mr Lake why don't you come up you're going to be on the hot seat again thank you Josh first let me start my name is Sean Lake 1744 South Val Vista uh here on behalf of sparrow development and I'd like to also think the the Killian family I first want to point out I'm really proud of the citizen participation report so much so that I reached out to Deanna just to talk with her about it because we need somebody to kind of carry the that mantle or that torch forward so this was an extensive Outreach effort that worked on this project so I just had to do that secondly I wanted well we did have the grandfather of zoning with us here on the first application the great grandfather of zoning is the property owner of this site Max Killian and so Mr Killian acquired this site some time ago and over many many many decades has been developing this property and so I'm going to go through my presentation and walk through some of the things that have occurred so well as I said I'm here on behalf of sparrow partners and who is Sparrow partners because I think there's been some misunderstanding about who Sparrow is and Sparrow is not a speculative developer I think that misinformation is that they're just here to build flip and go make their profit and run that is not Sparrow's model that is not what they do they design build and manage their projects all in-house they've retained on all of their project they retain management and ownership along with Equity partnership in all of their communities so they are not a build flip and run project they are here they are here to design they're here to build they're here to manage and retain Equity ownership along with their other Equity Partners in this project so we're proud to represent Sparrow in this project let's let's talk a little bit about where we started on this project uh when Sparrow first started working with the Killian family for the development of this property and and looking to locate a 55 plus community in this area we thought this was a great location there is already 55 plus that was located and developed on the Killian Farm directly north of here with the sunny Sunland village property uh to the north and that contains not only single-family homes but multi-family four-story Apartments those who have driven by four or three four-story uh uh buildings in the sunny Sunland Village Development directly north of here but if you look at the Killian Farm or Killian Ranch an adjacent you know ranches and what Max has been involved with over the many many decades of development this property is really everything from Broadway down to baseline from Greenfield over to Higley and in that area there's been a lot of different things and I'm really proud of of what has happened on that ranch area with adjacent property owners and it's got a myriad of a lot of different uses you have these Sunland village project to the north you have a huge employment Hub to the South with the banner facility there you've got retail out on the corner the intersections of Southern and Greenfield and Southern and Higley you have multiple story buildings all around here on this slide you'll see the red stars indicate three-story multi-family type projects the blue store on the top blue star on the top is a four-story multi-family project and there's other multi-story buildings in the area identified in blue so there's a lot of different mixed uses that occurred on this site so when we originally worked with Sparrow to develop this plan um we Sparrow decided to go on the North side and the Killians decided to carve out what we'll call I I call Max's home but it is now David Killian's home and that's I don't know if you can see the the arrow or the cursor they carved out David Killian's home which is about a three and a half acre site intentionally to provide a buffer to this development so you can see along the western edge of this property about two-thirds or more is buffered by the sellers home the seller's land and then the rest of it and then obviously on the south half is the LMC property that you guys looked at and evaluated and recommended recommended approval I believe it was last month and we'll go to city council that LMC project is a multi-family development of two and three-story buildings as well the first plan that was presented by Sparrow in our first neighborhood meeting was a four-story Structure a 55 plus all internal Corridor Community that's what Sparrow does so if you're in unit 231 and you want to go see your friend in unit 131 you can do it in an internal hallway taking an elevator and and you're never having to walk down two flights of stairs walk across the parking lot and then walk up two flights of stairs to see your neighbor you can do it all in an internal self air conditioned environment you can do it with elevators and it's really designed for that purpose for this type of community who need to have that and then pull in all the recreational amenities internal to the site so they designed a building with four stories but they wanted to pay special attention to Sunny Mesa to the west and so the original plan was to have a landscape strip and let me put my cursor along the two neighbors that are directly adjacent to us along the west side they would meet code with that landscaping and then have a portion of one-story Casitas along that West Side that wasn't received well there wasn't enough buffer uh and so we moved on to plan two in this plan they reduced the the size of the building from four stories down to three which was more consistent with what LMC was doing to the South and the apartment project stay over at Southern and Higley and elsewhere in this area and then they wrapped it around and then put a two-story element along the western boundary which you can see outlined or in red here that way you would have a landscape buffer you would have a single story Casita graduating up to a two-story portion of the building that would then graduate up to a three-story building they were this plan wasn't received well again through all this plan we're still maintaining the Killian three and a half acre property here that would retain and maintain with those existing citrus trees so Sparrow then went back to the drawing board again to come up with another plan in this plan they wanted to pay special attention to the two neighbors here very friendly wonderful people I am the first one and I will speak they're great people I've been with them in their homes and they're great and I I speak very highly of of the two neighbors that are directly to our West but given that that they're great people Sparrow wanted to do something that I've never yet seen before in any development they put together a buffer along that western side for these these neighbors here of a hundred foot wide Orchard where they would go in and maintain citrus trees if those of you have been out to see the site those these are mature existing tall big great citrus trees navals a lot of them in that area where they would keep that Orchard along that west side and then pull the building back that two-story element that we talked about 185 feet from the property line to create a buffer to the neighbors to the West and then they would put parking in and around it all the amenities were then pulled internal and Center to the to the project with with pools and pickleball and all the the typical common amenities that you see outside as well as the amenities inside as many of you know with 55 plus communities amenities are important and so they have a substantial amount of amenities sometimes twice the amount of amenities that you would see in a all age type community that was uh discussed last month with the LMC project here's the slide talking about the different type of amenities I'm not going to go through them it's been a long night so I'm sure you can read faster than I can read them off to you but needless to say between the Orchard and the amenities there is a substantial amount of activities for people who will live within this community I wanted to also highlight the number of neighborhood meetings this is why I reached out to Deanna to say hey I put together a i I say that like my dad said let's go mow the lawn um DJ in my office we work together along with our client to put together a great citizen participation Report with a substantial amount of meetings with the neighbors so let's talk about some of the things that we did to address those neighbors we talked about the 100 foot Citrus Orchard and at the drb was talked about how will that be maintained well we're working with and in talking with neighbors we're working with not only Mark Killian but David Killian to irrigate those Citrus that is our preferred method as those of us that know in the city of Mesa irrigation is significantly cheaper than potable water for citrus and so we'll be working with David for head walls to have that this Orchard irrigated that's our preferred method right now and so as long as that's available or practical or feasible we would that's what we're working with them and we'll work in a contract to try to make that happen we eliminated the Cottages along that lower area which is now just an orchard just an orchard it's an orchard four rows of trees deep and so there won't be Cottages anymore with the big setback of 182 feet the three-story portion is set by back 220 feet Josh talked about the balconies and so the balconies look north south there was some concern that people on these two-story balconies might look into the yards and I've got some pictures later on that we'll talk about that into the backyards and destroy the Privacy so what we did is we oriented all those balconies North and South so they can only look north and south and then put a screen on that West Side so that they they literally would have to climb out of the balcony and around to kind of Veer and to see West the trees would block their visibility but I don't think at a 55 plus Community we're going to have too many people doing that we have agreed to put up a eight-foot wall along that boundary that Josh talked about but that's only if the neighbors agreed to it at some point they want it at some point they maybe they don't want it because when you have a six foot wall and you have the morning Breeze from the East coming through that Orchard of trees that cools it down and so they're trying to weigh that we've told them if you wanted a six foot wall we'll keep it if you want a eight foot wall we'll do that if you want to graduated wall from eight feet that Lennar is going to build down to seven down to six we'll do that we'll do whatever you want us to do so we'll continue to work with the neighbors on that and as staff pointed out we increased our parking from the original proposal up to 1.4 which is well above the ite standard of 0.85 for this type of a community we put together some line of sights to establish that and show people that people your privacy won't be impacted by this project they will be screened not only by the the distance that were away but also the existing mature Landscaping that exists along the west side we also put together some line of sites going north to Southern to Sunland village we wanted to make sure that we wouldn't be looking into people's backyards across Southern Avenue from the front or the main entrance of this Development Across to the north so at the end of the day they put together really the biggest buffer that I've ever seen for a project you have the three and a half acre Killian property that is full of trees you have the hundred foot uh Orchard of of trees in that area and then the buildings pushed back 185 feet and then the building along Southerns pushed back 100 feet back there so they've really kind of pushed everything back into the center of the site and over to the east as well now let's compare this project to the project that was reviewed and recommended for approval last month by uh by LMC this is a few less units than what LMC did our landscape buffer is a minimum of a hundred feet there theirs ranged from 25 to 100 feet we have a minimum of four rows four to six rows of trees they had two to five rows are set back to the nearest two-story structure is 182 feet LMC had a hundred foot setback the setback to the nearest third three-story building on our project is 220 230 feet on the LMC project that was approved last month it was 214 feet to the nearest three-story structure and again we're agreeing to that fence that they want if they should they show choose this project also has the advantage of having access out to Southern as well as 48th Street whereas LMC would only be off of 48th Street the main access into this community would be off of directly off of Southern and it is a gated community so I'm just going to flip through those the neighbors also wanted to see so we hired a drone operator to come out and take photos of what they would see and what we did is we flew the drone at the height of the building so that we could give a perspective of what you would see so you see the blue star on the right this is a this is at the uh in that building looking North across Southern to uh Sunny mace or Sunland village which is about 350 feet away and so you can see the Privacy is maintained across that arterial at 350 feet away this is the next one this is kind of central to the site directly east of David Killian's home this is what they would see if they looked directly west at the three-story and you can see that it would screen be screened not only by Mr Killian's David Killian's home but also the existing landscaping and you can see in the distance those homes west of Mr Killian's property behind him and so that would be the viewer perspective again the drone's flying at the height of those buildings this would be another point just a little bit south of that previous slide again looking West at that location you can see a that 0.4 you can see a little red balloon I say little it's not little it's a balloon a red star that would be the height of a like a what the two-story structure would be just to kind of get some perspective of what that would be but this is internal to the site this would be a view at the closest two-story structure looking North because you remember we talked about having the screens so nobody can look West this would be the view looking North across the the seller's land this would be a view looking West you're not going to be able to from the south buildings but we thought let's give a perspective of the anyway even though there's a screen blocking the view looking West we would we took a picture of that and you can see that the existing mature citrus trees provide a substantial amount of screening there today with permission we took a picture from the backyard of one of the home owners in that area to see what they would see and we floated those balloons at the height of the buildings and as you can see the Drone is flying about six feet and you can see what they will see they will see dense mature Landscaping you have that large existing mature tree that will screen much of the building we floated the balloons you just can't see the balloons in this picture we also took the Drone up to the Second Story window of a home and flew it at that level and then viewed looking East you can see the balloon under 0.2 that would be the building at about I think that's about 300 feet away is is where you would see that one again these aren't little balloons these are big balloons this would be a picture uh we didn't go in somebody's backyard in the north because we didn't have permission but right at the wall looking South towards the main entrance of the project and you can see we will maintain a A or we'll have a substantial amount of open space and so let's now shift from the West Side to Southern and so we wanted to dress up Southern we will have the most dense Landscaping of any project along Southern if you as you go up east and west of this project with three rows of citrus trees and a substantial setback a main entrance into this community will be off of Southern and so we've really heavily landscaped that will be kind of our selling pitch welcome to this beautiful wonderful Community um this project or this labels the setbacks from those homes north of southern on the other side of Southern and how that will be and you can see the setbacks labeled and how far away it will be this is really a first class project and I can't stress that enough Barrow does high-end this is not affordable housing this is not section eight this is not low income this is high-end premium 55 plus Community people live here because they want to they live here because they choose to a lot of people they find are in existing homes you might have a couple that empty nesters that live in their existing home and a spouse dies and they don't want to be alone and so they have a lot of residents who come move into this community they'll sell their home they'll secure that that equity in their home and then they'll come and move into this community to be in a community to be with other people to choose to live in this environment this is very very nice with a substantial amount of amenities and services and activities things going on this is a choice that people make because they want to be here this is high-end this is extremely nice and will be very nice Sparrow not only builds they design they hold they manage and they want to do something first class because they will be with it for the long term so with that I think I've taken enough of your time I think this is going to be an excellent project we've met or exceeded all of the city code requirements for bus first and standards and design we took it to the design review board they like the elevations we've we've gone well above and beyond I think the Call of Duty and putting buffers together that I've never seen that big of a buffer and their buffers have not just distance but existing mature Landscaping that you rarely get to have and so that will do a lot to buffer this community and and make it compatible with what's going on so with that I'd be happy to answer any questions thank you Mr Lake are there any questions for Mr Lake right now okay let's go to public comment and uh I know it's been a long meeting tonight so thank you to those from the public that are here to speak um let's start with Elaine botnan Elaine I think you probably figured out by now come to the podium and give your name and address and you'll have three minutes to speak oh it shouldn't take that long oh can I pull this down yes you sure can okay my name is Elaine botman and I want to thank you for letting me speak this evening I've written it down because off the top of my head I'd be here longer than three minutes um a year ago I purchased a home in Sunland village on Flossmoor Circle which unfortunately backs on to East Southern Avenue now those of us who live on Flossmoor Circle have found that there is to be a three-story 55 plus apartment building constructed on the property across the road from us in the Citrus Grove when we understand that the only thing constant is change we feel a bit like the people in the Middle Ages when the Warlords and Barons would build a 45 Castle on the hill behind the village and then hope the folk living in the village would not notice this three-story apartment building known as Sparrow Greenfield will have quite an impact on the whole area there are only one and two-story single-family homes in this area and that is what the Zoning for this area currently is listed as it will spoil the landscape the area and stand out like a sore thumb if there is no way we can stop the construction of this building and thus the rezoning thereof please bring it down to two stories there's going to be a dangerous influx of traffic with the entrance plan for Southern Avenue also three-story buildings will require more parking spaces than is currently planned we just feel this project has not been thought through from all angles and especially how it will affect the existing homes and the vicinity this area would be perfect for single family Custom Homes since there is a school so close by honestly this area does not need another 55 plus Community there are more than enough right now thank you thank you for your comments next I have Janice Luke hi I'm Janice Luke and I'm live at 1350 South Greenfield um I I want to know how many multi-story apartment buildings or homes are in the middle of neighborhoods in Mesa and there's not the one that you're referring to Mr Lake um the fourth story is on Greenfield and Broadway and it's on a corner it's not in the middle of a neighborhood um why is this going to be allowed to be any different you know why are we sticking in the middle of a neighborhood I understand that getting taxes from these properties is most likely very beneficial to the city but I think families who want to bring their families in I mean have their families put down roots and raise them here is a much greater better investment for our community building multi-story apartments rather than single-family homes is pushing families to Gilbert Santan Queen Creek there's there's not houses here for them to buy I understand the Killian's desire to get the most money out of their property totally understand it and good for them I understand the developers wanted to get the most money out of their Investments it makes total sense however the homeowners surrounding the farm have invested time effort and money in their properties their homes were purchased knowing that there was a farm in their neighborhood and that if it left it would be it was zone for Zangle family family homes this should not change for somebody else's gain there the developers gain the landowner's gain should not supersede the rest of the homeowners their property values and their lifestyle because it will um that doesn't even take into effect the saturation of people cars and pollution that's going to be added with the thing the ones you've already approved and then these um the citizens the neighbors were citizens of Mesa we pay taxes and our our our rights and our homes should be valued just as much as developers interests and the homeowner's interests so I think that the changing of the zoning would be a big disservice to the neighbors in the neighborhood thank you very much and thanks for your service thank you for your comments um looks like Colleen Olsen I'm Colleen nolson and I live just across the fence from the Killians and this does affect us and I spoke last month and I am for single family homes and stable neighborhoods and if you look at our area there there's four parts one two three are all homes that came from Killian property and all this left is the fourth one of the Circadian farm and I still would like to see single family homes I am not for apartments and I would like to say I have a beautiful grapefruit tree on my property that was part of the Killian farm and if you're going to take that irrigation from David's would you please send it down to my house because my bill is five hundred dollars a month for my Citrus thank you thank you we'll let Mr Lake respond to that okay Carolyn Hubbard is next I didn't know that there were two come come to the microphone I thought there was only one either too wet Outlets to go in and out of sparrow yes there's there's a out there's an exit onto Southern and then there's an exit onto 48th Street where is it on Southern it's just east of Mr Killian's driveway okay well nobody told us that we didn't see all these neighborhood of him coming and talking to our neighborhoods we didn't have that let me have you start with you I'm sorry I'm 48 35. okay I'm Carolyn Hubbard I'm 46-35 East Florian Avenue it's just I was really surprised when they talked because it wasn't what we had heard we heard that they didn't have and enough parking places and they were going to use the church to have whether over for the parking overflow I don't know if they've asked the church and I really I thought of the first there was only one Outlet which is only on home 48th Street and they were going to have the churches on Sunday there's three congregations that go there they have activities on the week during the week and then all those people coming out there so I'm glad you got another one but we need to have a um light there because in the morning and in the afternoon the school's there and the parents it's a charter school so they don't have a bus and they have people down the street all the way to 48th Street and they'll like I just can see an accident happening they're so bad having older people we just don't see them as well and to try and look over past them and when people come to the school they have to go slow and then they speed up there's going to be an accident there I'm I I guarantee you and then it could be it could be a really bad one and it could go right into a mother and her children waiting for school I think there's a lot of blood there that I don't want to be part of it and that's why I'm here and we would really like to have it zoned for what it is now because when the people in Sunny Mesa went there they said it's going to be sunny Mesa too and now they changed it and that's a big change from high rise and everybody says they want two stories they don't want three and it's gonna and uh it and they sent out the notices during lunch election time when you come my husband comes in I said don't give me the mail there's so much everybody wants money people are throwing away and they also did it before the winter visitors came so they haven't had an opportunity to know what's going on and I feel like this has been rushed too fast because we only had on 12 and on the uh I see there was a 12th to 18th and now and I don't I think the 18th one is canceled because the school was out I don't know but I haven't had any I haven't seen any neighborhood uh get-togethers over there and I'm afraid it might affect our property values by more really really concerned about the safety of all those people coming out of Southern and by the school and the church thank you for your comments chair and board members um so this petition was was passed to staff and I'm going to pass this over to the board but if we could receive this back it looks like they may be wanting to pursue a legal petition so staff and our city attorneys willing to look into this further and get with us okay and um we we had a petition there was a petition submitted earlier when I think the project was a four-story project at that time is this a different petition I had eight seconds I forgot can I just give my eight seconds when you have time okay I heard that Shelly Allen has has made arrangements with uh one of the Carol Killian that she's going to pass this for her and if that's the case she should recuse herself like uh okay sure we'll uh let will address that issue a little bit later let's finish with our public comment um Lana Dalton my name is Lana Dalton I live at 4661 East Garnet Circle and I'm one of the two houses just on the other side of the fence on the west I was born and raised in Mesa Arizona I love this city I've lived in my home in Sunny Mesa just south of Southern between greenfield and Higley for the past 32 years it is a wonderful place to live Sunland village is across the street on the north side of Southern another great community with five 55 plus Neighbors I've seen the development of the Killian land over 30 years and they have made a tremendous contribution to the city of Mesa the problems I have with this Sparrow Greenfield project are that there are already way too many apartments in this area there's a huge 55 plus community on the north side of Southern Sunland village there are only one in two-story buildings on Southern between greenfield and Higley a three-story building would be completely out of place architecture is too modern compared to the surrounding suburban area it looks like a hospital in in a suburban area Custom Homes would be ideal for this Gem of a property which has been the Killian Farm there would be no need to change the zoning no need to add a stoplight at 48th Street on Southern the traffic and parking would be manageable and homes would be owned by Mesa voters whose children could walk to school that being said if the zoning changes I would be okay with a proposed Sparrow Greenfield project if it were only two stories high and the architecture was more in harmony with the surrounding area thank you thank you for your comments okay so I have a comment card from David tantalian it looks like uh who says he's opposed to this item but doesn't indicate on here whether he wants to speak or not would you want to speak please come on up my name is David tantalian I live at 4721 East Harmony circle on Sunny Mesa I forward an email to the board and to staff on October 12th I never received an answer if you guys received it or not stating my position on this I find it very hard that I put the time and effort into something and it's never even acknowledged you know I purchased the land from Max Killian in 1990. and I spoke with him of what's his intention were for signing Mesa 2. which was the property that we're discussing now so even though you're saying that is in his interest that this was set up that way I'm sorry he stated from the beginning that it was going to be custom homes when I bought the land he made it very clear not like we've been hearing from all our neighbors you know so we opposed that this basically not only because of the changing of the zoning but also because of the traffic issues when I spoke on the previous apartment complex that was approved by you guys Mr Peterson you asked to staff to give you an indication that they have done a study in the area they danced around they never answer you directly if a study had been done in the last five years we had many accidents on homes and Hampton I'm a civil engineer I'm familiar with what it takes to do study it would be nice that that would be done because of all the kids that walked to school I don't have any kids all my kids are old but I want to make it very clear to the staff are you willing to live with one accident that a kid dies because the study is not done and you're you're going to push for approval without doing a study now you're talking you're going to have traffic coming in for Saturn or all those apartments and from 48 8th Street for the other apartments plus the church you know and no studies being done come on you know we need to look at everything more completely when I send you the email I show you all the apartments on the surrounding areas all the units that each apartment had you know you're looking only at this little area where the apartments behind us and the apartments in front of that they're proposing you're not looking at each Corner in the one mile square mile around it we need to look at everything more globally as an engineer I look at it that way all the time so that's why I'm opposing thank you for your time thank you for your comments okay so I've uh we've got two more comment cards uh from folks who state that they don't want to speak but we'll go ahead and ask Vice chair Ayers to read those into the record okay our first is from Linda vassler and her comments are keep our zoning R35 did I give you the wrong ones oh we've got the wrong number on them 265. they're on so yeah so okay next case and then this one's good is that one good okay attack at family we strive right strive for Perfection but sometimes we fall short so I was directed the wrong way all right so this is from the Tackett family so we are opposed to the project we live adjacent to the proposed project the project does not add value to our community we are saturated with apartments and retirement living please vote no to this proposal please hear the voice of the people who live in the community so that's all of the speaker cards that we have so uh we'll go ahead and ask Mr Lake to come back up and then I think board member Peterson is going to want to hear a little bit from our about our traffic engineer for Mesa on this so Mr Lake certainly first off I I've appreciated hearing from from all of the neighbors and I want to compliment all of them on on being very polite cordial and friendly this is not the typical zoning case where it gets adversarial this has been very polite and nice and kind and they've been very good people so I wanted to say that first and foremost I'm trying to recall from my recollection some of the buildings that are in this general area you've got Sunland village to the north and I know they they reference those three four-story apartment buildings there for there on us on on the corner but my recollection you got a Burger King on the corner on the south east corner and then you have residential that is I think single story residential and then east of the Burger King East of the residential then you have those three four-story structures so to say it's out on the corner it's different no that is in the middle because then then directly east of that you also I think have patio homes or Townhomes at so it is within that community uh my other recollection of Southern and Higley I represented Stone Canyon uh it's at Southern and Higley that has a commercial shopping center on the corner with Stone Canyon wrapping the shopping center and then single-family homes wrapping those three-story uh Apartments there so to say that there isn't anything I guess if you if you constrain the circle small enough yes there isn't anything but but if you look in the general area less than a mile of this site and you draw a circle there are quite a few structures This Tall so this is very consistent not to mention the project directly to the South which is three stories as well that was approved or recommended for approval last month um as far as the traffic issue goes we have had several discussions and meetings this has been routed several times to the transportation department there is more than enough capacity on Southern that was addressed at the last month with the emblem project and I think that still stands because that included this project as well as far as that so I think the traffic issue has been addressed our benefit is that we do have access both onto Southern and 48th Street as well so that traffic can be dispersed other than that we think we've done a great job with this project this property is not zoned sf-15 like Sunny Mesa I don't believe there were representations of that matter the emblem piece to the South had a portion that was sf15 this is all acre lots and has been that way since I think the beginning of zoning um in the county so we think this is a great project we've buffered it we've done as much as we can the bigger buffer than I've ever seen before I'd hate to be have this set the precedent for all future multi-family cases because I don't think it can other projects can meet this type of Buffs buffer but for this project Sparrow is willing to do it because they want to try to work with the neighbors and have a be a good neighbor and so with that we would request your support of the project thank you let me let me just ask you to address the comment on parking and the adequacy of parking they're absolutely I I think that's a a misunderstanding we have never thought or in needed parking from the church we haven't talked to the church we are not going to be parking in the church parking lot we have have more parking than we have in any Sparrow has seven communities they have many communities around the nation it's pretty consistent they have more parking at this project than any other community that they have typically they're about 1.3 parking spaces we're at 1.4 here we went through and added more parking the ite manual for those that are familiar with it recommends .85 we're typically for these type of projects around 1.2 to 1.3 to make sure that we have sufficient parking for the project all right are there questions for Mr Lake not seeing any thank you thank you so Rachel can we hear from our uh our uh streets yeah sure representative Ryan is heading up to the podium here Ryan welcome back um if you wouldn't mind addressing the comments about the age of the traffic studies that have been done and uh and your current perspective on the traffic situation on Southern sure chair and board members for studies that have been done in the area we collect data on Southern Avenue on a regular basis it's a arterial Street in our Network and we continually collect average daily traffic volumes along that Corridor on a biannual basis so we do have data and we we do monitor our whole entire Street Network system now a study particularly for that intersection now I can't speak to any studies that have been done because really all that's been on the south side of the intersection on 48th Street is a church and it's a dead end you know Street Network that doesn't go anywhere um into the north it feeds into Southern some in Springs Village and um nothing recent has been you know requested or studied for anything applicable to a traffic signal hopefully that at least starts the conversation and starts to answer some questions but I'd be happy to answer anymore board member Peterson do you have any questions for Ryan yeah I think you adjusted with just the timing of the of the whether or not it's called a formal study or the the track traffic information and then to the the um last month we talked about the the capacities and and the analysis and just wanted to confirm that your your analysis and determination that the 48th Street and Southern does not warrant a traffic signal right now included both the the Lennar community and and this one as part of a overall analysis in doing that sure Mr chair board member Peterson yes I would I would agree with with that still uh with that statement um with what's projected to be generated from the two sites that will be off of 48th Street given the fact that 48th Street's you know not connecting to Pierpont which ultimately goes over the bridge over the U.S 60 given that it's really just serving these these two communities and and the church and the anticipated trips that will be generated to and from these sites the patterns associated with the particular sites traffic signals not anticipated to be warranted at this time I think any other questions from members of the board you know we've we've closed the public comment so I think I think we're going to move on to our discussion as a board on this item okay um all right so staff anything that you'd like to address that we haven't covered on this item chair no not unless you have any other questions for staff I I have a question for the City attorney if that's okay go ahead board member Allen and my question to the City attorney is I evidently it was uh insinuated that I made some type of an agreement um about this project and I I never made any type of an agreement with anybody um but I do know the Killian family I've known him for years but if I if I ever I mean I voted for and against projects where I knew people and so I don't know that there's any controversy whether because I know them um do I need to recuse myself for something just knowing the people board member Alan the statute is um says that if you or a relative have an interest in a decision that you should refrain from making um you should refrain from participation in that decision and we also advise that you refrain from making participating in any decision if it gives the appearance of a conflict so that would be my advice to you the just knowing the Killian family based on that information I'm not sure that you would need to declare conflict on this case all right so board member Alan you're you're comfortable moving forward is that correct yes okay okay and I am as well based on on those comments okay is there any further discussion on this item I'm not seeing any are we just doing internal now yes okay um well I you know you we've heard about the previous case and went through that whole discussion and now we're hearing um at the northern site um you know I think this especially seeing those drone photos was really helpful in seeing the view sheds and how that you know Works um I don't I know we had discussions also about what happens if it ever decides a change from us from uh 55 plus and there's it's going to have to go through a bunch of other reviews on that and review if it ever happened but right now it is for 55 plus and parked accordingly um I think they've done a great job accommodating the buffers and setbacks and stepping back I think everybody seems to want the um single family residential but I do feel we need to diversify and have have availability I mean some of the people who are moving out of the single family are likely to move into these as they age so it's just going to be a natural Trend it's I don't feel like people are you're going to get I think you need a lot of people from Mesa who have lived here and have their Roots here and their family here are going to be moving here so I don't think I think that this is an appropriate and they're doing a great transition and um with regards to the traffic I mean that's a constant thing I mean we've said it again and again and again over lots of meetings so I feel like the city is going to be under constant scrutiny with that and looking at Future studies as these develop and get occupied so I'm fine with it okay thank you any other comments from board members I think just to add a little bit to that I agree with pretty much everything you just said and um the the a good example is this is the parking needs would need to practically double if this moved out of a 55 plus Community which will not fit on that site so that's very unrealistic however I will say I still am somewhat concerned about the traffic having been in that area having been there going to pipe beef in that area during school is it's there's this is something that's I think um going to Warrant the city to look at a little bit more specifically so um I'm in support of it because I agree with everything that you said but I do think that the the traffic is going to be something that needs to be paid attention to moving forward yeah I think there's some concerns uh board member Peterson anything Montez okay all right well I will entertain a motion if there is one on this item I'll move to approve item 4B zon 22-00265 District 2. within the 1200 to 1300 blocks of South 48th Street the 4700 240 100 blocks of East Southern Avenue and within the 4800 to 4 900 blocks of East Hampton Avenue located east of Greenfield Road and south of Southern Avenue rezone from single residents 43 and single residents 15 to multiple residents four with the planned area development overlay and site plan review this request will allow for multiple residence development recommendation is for approval with conditions yeah I have a motion is there a second on the motion second a have a motion in a second let's go ahead and vote and board board member Alan how are you voting on this yes Okay so with board member pitcher uh recused on this item it passes with six eyes and No No's and one recused so thank you hey chair board members the last item on the agenda for tonight is item 4C which is zon22-0006 seven one and Sean will be making that presentation okay and oh yeah chair for this next item it looks like we're having some issues with the the voting machine so if we could do a roll call vote because it's not showing okay showing up on on these screens do we need to do that for the one we just voted on or yes if you could do a roll call vote for the last one you don't need to reread everything um the public who's watching can't see what the vote is unless it shows up on the screen okay so this is item 4B on the agenda and so I will call the roll chair Crockett votes I Vice chair airs aye board member Allen hi board member circusian aye board member Peterson yes board member pitch oh board member pitcher is recused board member Montez hi okay so again by a vote of six eyes no nose and board member pitcher recuse this item is passed all right thank you foreign thank you chair good evening members of the board this is kcon 22-00671 this request is a rezone and site plan review for multiple residence development the location is um on the north of Brown Road on the east side of Power Road it's also on the south side of Hobart Street and then on the North and South sides of Halifax Drive as shown on the vicinity map the surrounding zoning to the east is rs35 there's also a parcel that's zoned RS 15 South and then rs9 to the west across Power Road the general plan character area designation for the site is neighborhood neighborhood is intended to provide safe places for people to live per the general plan it also calls for diversity of housing types including multiple residents rm2 which is the requested zoning is listed as a primary zoning district and the character in the neighborhood character area and multiple residents is also listed as a primary land use some form um foreign all right let me call the call the meeting back to order here I think we've addressed her technical difficulties so apologies for the the delay but go ahead Sean thank you chair uh so as I think I was I think I was saying um the request also adheres to the required building form standards and the general plan for the neighborhood character area it talks about having billing Heist between one and two stories with three stories along arterial streets and then having a density between 2 and 12 dwelling units per acre and as I'll discuss in a few minutes the proposed density is just over 10 dwelling units per acre and most of the buildings are either one or two story the three-story buildings are either along Power Road Frontage or a portion of a Hobart Street Frontage so the existing zoning on the site is rs35 single residence and then a commercial office and the proposed zoning district is multiple residents too with a planned area development overlay and this is a photo looking into the property from Power Road and then this is a photo looking into the site from Halifax Drive so the site plan 61 units are proposed again just over 12 dwelling units per acre one to three story buildings I've outlined the one-story buildings for you in green the two-story in blue and then the three-story in Gray there's a centralized amenity space as well with the clubhouse covered seating and pool primary access is from Hobart Street there's an exit only gate onto Halifax Drive and then an exit only gate onto Power Road uh I do want to make a correction for the record I know in the in this presentation in the staff report I mentioned 145 parking spaces provided um that number was based on a previous iteration of the site plan uh the the true number and this was just confirmed actually uh is 138 spaces and that still exceeds the mesa's owning ordinance requirement um so the actual ratio right now is 2.25 spaces per unit and the code requirement is 2.1 spaces per unit so this is an image of the landscape Planet I know it's hard to see on the presentation but there's a 25 foot landscape buffer provided along the east property line there's Landscaping along all Street Front edges as well and the plant pellet is consistent with what we see in the desert Southwest so the PID request is for setbacks landscape yards building separation and parking setbacks so there's a reduction along Power Road the requirement is 30 feet proposed a building setback is 20 feet that's measured from property line with for the required landscape yard width there's a reduction on the the South Side for units one one through three and that's a reduction from 25 feet to 23 feet 9 inches and then the street side along Power Road 30 feet to 14 feet and then for minimum building separation the request is 10 feet for all buildings and the parking setback is uh 11 feet so there was no design review required for Section 1172 one of the mesa's owning ordinance but staff reviewed the elevations and found they comply with the design standards for residential and section 1155 of the Mesa zoning ordinance including massing building entrances material percentages and access and circulation the property owner of the excuse me the applicant notified all property property owners within one thousand feet in HOAs and registered neighborhoods two in-person meetings were held and some of the concerns raised by The Neighborhood adjacent neighborhood include a proposed density being too high a traffic congestion on the surrounding streets three-story buildings adjacent to single residential zoning not enough on-site parking and overflow parking on the Jason streets and then visibility into the surrounding properties and staff was also contacted by 11 adjacent Property Owners as well and that that was included in the exhibit in the packet exhibit 4.1 so overall staff finds the request complies with a general plan and the criteria for a planned Dairy development overlay in chapter 22 and meets the review criteria for site plan in 1169.5 and our recommendation is approval with conditions and I'm happy to answer any questions I also have Ryan here to answer any traffic related questions great thank you any questions for Sean on this one uh board member Peterson please Sean on on the site there's uh there's there's uh power lines that crisscross the site um so I'm not not counting the ones on power which are bigger but the the other ones do you know if those if those power poles get do those stay there do they get undergrounded or what the situation is with those with the development chair board member Peterson I know we have a requirement to underground utility lines I'm not familiar with the ones that run north to south I do know that there's no impact to the power lines along the Power Road Frontage but perhaps strong may be able to answer that question okay gotcha okay and yeah sorry one more question oh yeah please yeah so on the in the staff report on the justification for the pad it's uh Community open space and uh higher end recreational uh facilities if so the and for the the larger part of the project I I see that that the little part that's south of Halifax is um it is isolated a little bit are there any amenities per se for that part or do they I get they probably have rights to get to the other one but is there anything um for specific to to those uh units there that's other than going across the street chair board member Peterson good question uh that was something that we looked at with the applicant early on is making sure that an amenity space was provided in that southern portion due to the size and the number of units proposed it was hard to get something that Mets our setback requirements and we also wanted to be considerate to the Jason single residence Property Owners but I believe there is um perhaps Ramada covered seating area with some decorative Paving in that South east corner southwest corner Southeast corner okay gotcha thank you okay any other questions all right let's hear from the applicant Mr Lake nope push play we have the same name so this works all right my name is Sean Lake 1744 South Val Vista here on behalf of the property owner with this property I would say this is probably the longest running project I have worked on in my career in in working with these Property Owners to try to get something to work on this property we think we have a great proposal before the the board this evening and that's what I'm here to present and so we appreciate the opportunity to be here um first off uh Mr Peterson before I get into my presentation we're happy to work with the staff to incorporate some more amenities on that South property there would be an area that we've identified there's units that back up to the fire station and just east of those units there's an open space area where we have some Turf and benches and other areas that we can work to try to incorporate some more amenities in that area as well so we can certainly work on doing that and we'd be willing to do that as well so we have some open space in there to put some amenities in that that area but let me kind of get started as many of you are familiar with this site it is located along Power Road between Halifax and Hobart it is directly south of I believe it's the love of Christ Lutheran Church where we held two neighborhood meetings at that church we've appreciated uh their willingness to work with us to hold neighborhood meetings at their Community Center of beautiful Church a great facility the project before you this evening is a town home project and we've brought forward several different types of uses on this land over the many years we think this is a good compatible land use we think this works on on this location we think it's something that will benefit the community and people will like to see it's very it's a really challenging difficult site as you drive up and down Power Road and I've been driving down power Road for going on probably 50 years my father worked out in this area and so I when it was Bush Highway as Power Road has developed over the years you have some of these Remnant leftover sites that just haven't developed for decades and decades and decades and you've seen things built and Decline and rebuilt and declined and this property has remained vacant for a long time and really hasn't developed these Property Owners now are trying to do something that is a good we believe is a good land use of the property that's compatible with the adjacent neighborhood it's it's similar to what we've seen type of density next to other single-family residential developments and we'll walk through and and talk about this the proposal is for a Town Home Project called the Jackson that has a substantial amount of amenities its proposal for 61 Town Homes as the board pointed out that it has a large amount of amenities on that north side with it you know with a clubhouse and a pool and barbecue areas and they would have town homes that range in size um from about 1400 to 2500 square feet parking was brought up on the by the neighbors as a concern and Sean also brought up we do exceed the code on the parking these units have garages they have driveways and then we do have vet guest visitor parking as well as resident parking on the site so we do exceed the code at 2.25 um spaces with a total amount of open space of about 47 percent of the project now let's here's kind of a closer up version of the amenities we tried to put the amenities in key locations to act on not only as a buffer but an open space area centralized to the residents who live within this community let me go back a space so you can see where that is the common area amenities would be here and I'm going to walk through the different units in just a second but the common area amenities is really centralized and the South property that Mr board member Peterson pointed out will have access to all of those amenities walking across but we do understand that position of hey can you add something more to that South as amenities and we certainly will work with staff to do that we've provided some elevations these are these are Town Homes they're both one two and three-story Town Homes strategically located on the site to address really the proximity we're really sandwiched between large Lots on the east and Power Road to the West which is the busiest Road in the city of Mesa a church on the North and the future fire station on the south so it's a unique site that has a lot of different uses going on around this infill piece of property as the property around it has developed and has been developed many many many years ago here's an internal look at what those uh internal Townhomes would look like these would be the two-story ones that we're going to talk about in just a second and where they're located we think very attractive a very good design project these would be the three-story units that would be located along Power Road internal to the site where we buffer with with other open space amenities and other buildings as well but these would be a long Power Road Again a very busy arterial in the city of Mesa so in meeting with the neighbors we had multiple neighborhood meetings and and meeting in their homes and and in the church we identified a lot of different concerns but I wanted to focus and narrow down on some of the main concerns that we heard from the neighborhood they were the buildings were too tall next to the neighbors the parking wasn't enough there just wasn't enough parking provided it's just too dense it's just too dense Sean if you do some large Lots or single-family homes we could support it but it's just too dense and that really is a difficult ask for this type of an infill piece of property uh and then there was some discussion about Street access and just a general opposition for the project and and the rezoning of the property so what we did is we we wanted to address the compatibility issue first and this really is just going on the city zoning map and driving in and around the area and we looked up and down power Road from lucindus down to Superstition Springs and found 13 examples of rm2 zoned townhome Patio Home properties that have been built next to RS zoning districts along Power Road now that's not the whole city that's just kind of this East Power Road Corridor and we found them next to R35 our ru-43 a county development rs-15 rs9 RS7 and RS6 so there have been rm2 projects developed next to single-family homes we think it is a good compatible use when I go into what we've done in the design to make it more compatible so it's not inconsistent with what we've done in the city of Mesa as development has occurred over the many many decades so let's talk about the plan in the first neighborhood meeting we had taller buildings and so what we did is along that East Side area outlined in red we made these units single story these will be little Cottages or single-story Bungalows along that north side we also increased the landscape setback along that North Side next little single family to 25 feet exceeding the code to try to buffer the residential directly to the east or directly to the east now keep in mind to the left here is is uh Hobart and the church so this property kind of aligns with the property ownership of the word of Grace or the love of Christ Lutheran Church um and so that's the depth along Hobart that really aligns with it we designed a project where the main access is off of Hobart we've also take and I'll point it here with my arrow right here this would be the main axis in and out of this gated community that driveway alignment was aligned with the church main access Ingress and egress point so that we wouldn't have a a driveway across from somebody else's home or neighborhood that would cause a conflict we tried to create something else where we wouldn't have an inconsistent traffic pattern or something that would be detrimental to adjacent property owners here's a view of what that North would look again we would have that landscape set back with single story homes and working on what that neighbor on our East Side would be looking towards in addition to that the north single story homes we worked to take these units here and side them onto the the homes that back up to this property the back of those homes so we have units that side onto it we have a 25 foot landscape strip there and then those units would all be two-story town homes in that location with the open space common area and amenities so that we could minimize the units that would side onto adjacent homes and so really you're going to have one unit side on three units sighting onto two lots there the rest would be Open Space Landscape common area and amenity in that location we also along this area here we made these things our two-story as well even though they're backing up onto Power Road or fronting onto Power Road we put these units as two-story because it was adjacent to a home at this location here we didn't want to put three-story where there might be some privacy issues or looking so we put two-story units along that area and then again along here made these all two-story units with landscape and open space that Sean we're going to get confused with Sean here I'm not going to refer to myself in the third person the other Sean but we have the Landscaping along the Eastern side of this building the along here along here all of which is a minimum of 25 feet of landscaping and working to put oversized Landscaping in that area you'll notice that we've designed it so that no patios or balconies will be overlooking any of the neighbors now the patios these won't have they'll have single story patios so you walk out ground floor but you'll have a wall that will build so there's really no privacy issues here but there's really no patios or balconies on these units that would that they would look to the North or to the East and to the West there's no patios or balconies that would be looking to the South into anybody's backyard at that location likewise these would be the garages of these units and so there would be no patios or balconies where people can uh interfere on somebody's privacy privacy as part of the project we'll be also be incorporating uh a six foot wall around the perimeter you can see that on this exhibit that would be along the east the South the east east and again south side adjacent to the fire station as you kind of work your way around the site as well as other view fences and and other privacy walls that will be internal the project but primarily we'll be building a new wall along the property line where the residential is that's kind of a quick overview of the project we've tried to design it to buffer the neighbors to be compatible with the neighbors to protect their privacy the height of these structures will not exceed 30 to 30 feet and so if you think about a single family residential neighborhood in my the home that I live in in my lot I can build up to 30 feet in a single family residential neighborhood so we try to keep the height of these buildings down to be the same thing to be under 30 feet as well so we're not asking for any height elevation or higher than what you could already do in a single family residential district to begin with and so we've tried to keep that height down and then the third story we pushed up against Power Road we don't think people driving up and down power Road will have concerns with with those structures along Power Road so we think this is a well-designed project we think this is I can't remember what attempt this is but we think this is something that can work on this property this difficult and challenging piece of property to develop that hasn't developed for many many many many decades and will work we think it will be an asset and we'll be beneficial to this area so with that we'd be happy to answer any questions and request your support we agree with all of Staff conditions of approval as well as adding amenities on that South lot thank you Mr Lake do we have questions of the applicant board member Peterson I'd ask Sean planner Sean the uh as far as the power lines go the the go cut through the middle of the larger piece do those get removed or undergrounded or anything under 69 KV has to be undergrounded or removed we can interrupt power of existing residential that's there but we may have to underground or reroute those those lines and then they're undergrounded if they're 69 I'm thinking the ones the ones you're thinking about I think are under 69 KV because the 69s are out on power but the ones that run through the site I believe are less than that so as part of construction those would have to be put underground okay other questions uh board member pitcher this is a question to to Sean the attorney um what are these going to be for rent or these going to be for ownership or has the decision been made yet right now uh the owners are are evaluating bothly uh many months ago we were definitely thinking ownership interest rates I mean we we started this uh several months ago in designing this project interest rates have gone to seven percent but we still think these are within the realm of attainable these are not affordable housing don't don't take what I said these are attainable housing and people could buy these but because it's such a small project we have that flexibility to to both this is not a project that's owned by a Heinz or a sparrow or a Lennar it's just too small there's not enough units for the big players to get involved this is a small local developer who would do this and so right now we like the idea of for sale but they we might do for rent based upon how the economy plays out over the next couple of years Sean are you planning and metering these we will be plotting but we haven't submitted Playbook because we couldn't get it in in time but we will be working on a plat all right any other questions all right that's good for now thank you we'll be back to you after a public comment let's go ahead and and uh do have our public comment now I've got a handful of blue cards so we'll start making our way through the first one I have is Craig vossler so Craig at uh state your name and address for the record and then you'll have three minutes you bet I'm glad I got to go first because I've been working on these properties longer than Mr Lake ah when they rezoned an 07 okay I was in favor of commercial Office Buildings so this is zoning this is a case all about zoning duh in fact we were here one year ago today October the 26th Eric's 27th excuse me for a rezoning of the same property so a permanent Food Truck Park could be built under neighborhood commercial prior to that it was a rezoning attempt at infill development 1 or id1 for a multi-story self-storage buildings on the two original Acres on both sides of Halifax and prior to that it was the office commercial and then the greatest recession came along and we're probably headed into another one now and I've already heard that uh residential is uh already in the res um recession so now the applicant wants another rezoning of rm2 pad to force 20 buildings 20 buildings onto about six acres the neighborhood wants just a little better transition and fit to the already 37 homes all of which stand on one acre or more and in some cases have been there for as many as 50 years building 20 structures the majority of which are two and three stories tall doesn't work at the entrance to this horseshoe-shaped community we are not against new housing but we do bark at the size and density of this proposal as well as the feeling of it being forced upon us this is not a 270 acre dairy farm where they're going to clear out the muck and build commercial Office Buildings this is our neighborhood and just because the city's zoning District standards allow for a project like this to doesn't mean it has to be approved you the board have the authority to say no try it again it doesn't fit there's nothing less than rs9 in this area and those that are rs9 right across the street if you look at the county assessor they have about 34 000 square feet Lots how did that happen so we'd be real happy with rs9 RS 15 something like that so additionally we feel the rm2 zoning allows for the possibility of multiple uses other than multiple residents housing and I think that's under chapter 5 table 11-5-2 this only makes it easier for the project to cram these buildings together to a tree to achieve 47 percent open space think about it half the space of six acres open space what does that mean there means they're cramming 20 buildings onto four acres three acres that doesn't benefit us it's funny I just watched a 40-minute Zoom type meeting from July 26 involving the same applicant Mr John Gillespie with Pew and Lake the same plan city planner Sean tasek pessic and an architect who previously served on this board and I would recommend you all watch it it has to do with uh pre-submittal 22-00734 and it was a similar Pro promo proposal only in the pre-submittal stage and that's at the northwest corner of Meridian and Southern Avenue right where it turns into Pinal County so in that video conversation here's the concerns I heard that were surfaced how are the neighbors who live to the north how are they going to respond to three-story buildings garage sizes 20 by 20. is that right parking of large F-250 pickup trucks right of ways that corner of Meridian we all know meridian's not an improved North South Street setbacks garbage sites I don't know I don't know where it ends but I do know that in our general area there are no three-story town homes Mr vosler can I ask you to I'm wrapping it up on my last page here and I will repeat a sentence from a year ago when our opposition to the food truck zoning case was defeated on a 4-3 vote four to three by this board when do the little guys win one okay Mr Lake's what three for three tonight not yet we ask that you don't approve this proposal thank you thank you okay uh Patricia Vin venisnick to Kevin okay all right Kevin come on up and state your name and address for the record Kevin batistick 6903 East Hobart Street um so neighbors are complaining about density but this is not really about density per se but what they need to do to get that density into that to demonstrate that I'm going to refer to some of the documents that Sean the lawyers submitted on behalf of this case which demonstrates that they're basically giving the appearance of working to accommodate the neighbors while not really trying to do so because it can compromise their density too much um I'll start with the first meeting uh neighborhood meeting and the summary they have for that where they talk about opposition to multi-story buildings uh in the summary but then they have all these bulleted items that they address well that's not addressed in the bolted items they did make the accommodation next to my mom's property to go down to one story but I think that's just because I've been the squeakiest wheel about that and they think by addressing and accommodating me they can just squeak this by the board uh then you go on and uh afterwards for item 15 they talk about dumps there's a concern about dumpsters next to neighbors again they moved it away from my mom's property but they didn't move it away from the other property that has a dumpster right next adjacent to it and on top of that to kind of just show how they're trying to cram this through many of the previous submittals repeatedly did not address the solid waste concerns about backing up and turning so that just shows that those were kind of trial balloons to see what they sneak through um on page three there's concerns and this is in the first meeting that are brought up uh item 20 about stacked parking um basically they have the garage parking and then they have the driveway in there and if you factor that in they don't really have at the time they were claiming 2.46 parking spaces per unit you don't really have that if you consider that not everybody's going to use the stack Park and they're going to try to find parking elsewhere so that when the wife wants to leave and the con the husband's car is in the way they don't have to shuffle the cars in the morning when everybody's in a rush already uh moving on to page uh for item 30. uh they talk about uh there's there's a concern brought up are you asking for 63 just so you get 50 well at the time they say no 63 is required they can't make this work with 63 with any less than 63. well they're already down to 60 and previously as you know last year they were going to put a food park there and that was going to be financially viable and now they need 63 units or 61 units or whatever it is that doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me that they need that density to make it economically feasible to develop and we move on to the second meeting and one of the concerns brought up is sight lines and specifically sight lines to one of the properties to the southeast I think they call it and they come up with a nice sight lines that they send out that show nice mature trees but then just conveniently obscure that the two-story buildings can look right into the property there my mom's 79 years old I don't know that she's going to ever see mature trees like this you know and it's in the previous uh the last one Sean made much of a point about mature already established trees well that's not the case here they're going to be spindly things for many years um moving on stacked parking again comes up as a concern now they're down to 2.25 part spots per unit but it's only 1.68 if you take out the stack parking which you know some people will stack but it does definitely drop the parking down and how do they address this concern they talk about putting something in the ccnr's required parking in the garages well one how is that even enforceable is somebody going to go and check everybody's garage and make sure there's a car parked there and then two that doesn't even address the question of stacked parking doesn't really give you the full parking that you think it does because a lot of people aren't going to do the stack parking they're going to find somewhere else to park and the only reason they're doing that stack parking they can't fit everything in otherwise then another concern that was brought up in that second meeting was hey can you just enter off a Power Road it would reduce a lot of the traffic concerns the neighborhood has and that's never been followed up on the response was basically along well the city wouldn't allow that and then later on and I'm jumping to the next item here is item 30 in that summary from the second meeting is we requested a third meeting and the response to that is I'll send out another letter that you know addresses these concerns and it specifically mentions that they're going to address the concern about can you just enter on an inner and off of Power well that letter came out and there's no mention of anything about Power Road so it's the best that I can tell nothing was done to actually see if it's feasible to enter in off a Power Road to eliminate the entrance off of Hobart then another bombshell that was kind of dropped today is oh it was previously pitched in all the meetings is these are going to be for sale units well now boom they're going to be rental units that's a last minute change too and that's something that I don't think anybody's heard about until just now tonight when Sean presented that so uh I'm gonna wrap up here as soon as you can I'm almost done okay thank you for bearing with me it's been six it's been so uh then there's a citizen participation report that was sent out one they talk about one of the first thing he talks about is individual Outreach to neighboring Property Owners there was no individual Outreach to my mom who literally lives next door wait a minute actually there was when the police were summoned to come sight uh to threaten her with trespassing when she dared to come over and see what was going on with power Food Park that doesn't sound like a owner that's really trying to work with the neighborhood to me they had two in-person meetings they don't make any reference to a request for a third meeting in their summary they take credit for notifying people within a 500 feet versus a thousand feet well that was something that the city staff specifically requested and required of them because they knew that neighborhood Outreach was important for this then they summarized all the results in three neat bullets with sub bullets but there's all kinds of typos and errors in that where it's kind of hard to follow what they addressed and what they didn't address and one items actually never addressed in the responses so in conclusion previous efforts by this property owner have resulted in a mixed resulted in a mixed approval from the board the last time around with at least one yes vote a reluctant one based on primarily the property owner's attitude but they said they couldn't vote no just because of that how much compliance are we going to get from this property owner with the pad overlay during permitting building and closeout and how much of that is going to fall in the neighborhood to be Hawks watching them to do that don't reward the charade that is the that they have of neighborhood engagement and compromise with more density than the site really truly supports and this doesn't have to be a vote against the owner because of his demonstrated animosity towards the neighborhood it's a no vote because they have not truly tried to address the neighborhood concerns but instead put lipstick on a pig and tried to sell it as a beauty queen tell them to go back to the neighborhood truly work with them to try to address these concerns or at the very least continue this next board meeting so staff can research some of these concerns that we're raising thank you thank you for your comments okay we've got Jeff Wickstrom Jeff Wickstrom on Hobart Street I'm not a public speaker imagine actually I'm rough as a Cobb so uh bear with me uh I'm gonna go after three points right now trust common sense and responsible decision I don't envy your job every one of you has an incredibly difficult job you represent us and you also have to represent them I couldn't do this I couldn't do this night after night after night thank you for coming in and doing this but when you cast those votes remember trust common sense and responsible decisions whatever decision you make here is going to affect us tomorrow the next day the next day I've been in that neighborhood for almost 30 years now and it what's happening is out is out of control two minutes um trust let's start with trust can we trust these people no based on their track record absolutely not um we went from residential to office commercial to many storage to a beach park or to to the Food Truck Park come on did you guys see that what a mess I mean they basically were thumbing their nose at the city for over a year and the local population we all we did everything we tried we could with these people and they're dumping their sewage on the street we got video of this they're they're calling us perverts because we're taking pictures of what's going on over there that's not right how do you work with a neighborhood like that so trust can they be trusted absolutely not Dr apaya wherever he's at he is a smart guy they try to discredit him said he could not make the decision he can't make of course he can make the decision he was the right decision on the Food Truck Park and they tried to discredit him that doesn't bother any of you guys it should it would really irritate me if they tried to do that to a co-worker of mine um uh bait and switch plain and simple this is bait and switch if it wasn't bait and switch they wouldn't have gone through seven or eight different iterations they just want to get this changed zoning and wash their hands and sell the property I'm sure they already have something already lined up do we have that in writing no but that's what's going to happen your decision here tonight is going to affect that you'll be done you'll be back here again when the next guy is trying to number eight number nine whatever I'm stuck with it I'm stuck in the neighborhood you know it it's not going to change for me I still have to go in and out sorry Common Sense Common Sense look at the traffic for crying out loud we got the most busy road on on the planet right there Power Road up and down and up and down you want to put 61 more families in there you got a a hospital or not Hospital you got police and fire right next to it you're going to have to have that Ingress and egress you're going to have to have some kind of emergency light right there then you're going to take this neighborhood that isn't a through neighborhood it's a U-shaped Street okay you can't get out anywhere else you got to get out Power Road you're going to run all these people people out there and and now we're talking rental properties what the hell is that that's the what ninth bake and switch how many times are we going to keep doing this we're wasting your time they're wasting everybody's time he says uh difficult to put something on this property not at all it's easy you got two and a half acres that's zoned office commercial come up with a plan we're done you got four acres that the last owner was going to lay out six homes and that got approved you know before this one sorry one last thing uh two last things uh is uh I didn't see anywhere where the drainage is supposed to go what do they call it water retention and drainage you know where's that going to go and uh really the bottom the bottom line is everything going on to Hobart and in traffic that church if you ever go by that church on a Sunday when all the snowbirds are back I mean they have a traffic cop up there okay so now you got this church right there in another church across the way and you got 61 more units that rentals come on man we want to work with them don't get me wrong we want to work with these people we have been trying Craig over there 14 years 12 years it's not going anywhere anyways all I'm asking is when it's time to vote vote with your heart vote with what's right trust Common Sense responsible decisions for tomorrow that's what we need from you guys don't let us down thank you okay oh goodness is it art Jordan is that ringing a bell AIA is that help with my reading thank you right Jordan yeah art Jordan art at 4018 North pinnacle Hills okay well we'll set this for side for the moment okay Roger Jenkins that one I can read Mr chairman and uh the board my name is Roger Jenkins I live in 6834 East Halifax um what can I say someday that we might come down here and approve one of the projects that Mr lake is presenting to us but it's not going to be today on this project uh these are Custom Homes on one acre Plus Lots and 61 town homes that are now going to be rented because the same excuse with the OC the office heard the same thing then it's just not going to work with the neighborhood it's too dense too much traffic parking on the streets please don't please don't approve it thank you thank you what else can I say these guys are set it off okay David Sloan foreign I think I remember you from last year I'm getting comfortable here at this little kiosk yeah um David Sloan 6822 East Halifax Drive uh live in the you know the inner Notch um you know of of the project so I share a property line with it on two sides I lived there for about 10 years um I want to I want to add one thing the the idea that these Parcels are difficult to develop you know or have been that there's something really weird or hard about them I think is uh is a fallacy um Craig mentioned or somebody mentioned it the the parcels the two Parcels that are originally you know that are currently zoned as OC number one is conditional upon a four single story uh you know site plan for single story medical office site plan it's part of the conditions for that that condition was never met so fair enough you know it's OC in a sense but it needs to go through zoning to get to whatever is going to eventually be built on there right um the other four acres that were added you know that that were added to this just recently they weren't available they were land banked by the church for you know 30 40 years so that Dirt has sat empty because the church kept it to be overflow parking so they only put it for sale just a handful of years ago and the the most recent uh owner of that had every intention of developing it for his own use you know and a few other properties so you know four or six properties on those Acres um I had a conversation with him about it and I asked him you know ultimately well you know why did you decide not to move forward with that and sell and his answer you know funnily enough was well I don't want to live enough to live next to a food Park so um I I think that that explains that a bit uh the the four single-story offices you know those the neighborhood has no issue with that that's a reasonable use of that land totally fits however the issue that we're talking about here is to take land that's currently zoned for six homes right that's what would fit on there right now that's what it's platted out for and we want to increase that by an order of magnitude to more than 60. so that's a big change I don't see how that change is in line with you know in line with the the usage of the neighborhood um when I keep this tight for you we're all we're all here it's late uh let's see so the land has usefulness and value you know without requiring this it's not that the land needs to be we've got to figure out some so like come on let's all band together we've got to save this land no the land is value on its own right let's just let it actually let it be what it is um rs15 totally reasonable uh you know that is a blend between the rs-35 and the rs9 you know that completely encircles uh you know this land um that'd get them 17 homes right rs9 maybe a bit of a stretch but it matches what's on the other side of power it matches what is within you know miles of that almost exclusively that'd get them 29. this proposal is for more than twice that it's it is too much so my My Hope and you know my pleading is recommend no they can come back with something that's more reasonable the land can still be developed it doesn't shut everything down forever doesn't mean they're bad people just means let's put them let's put something together that fits have a good night all right thank you um I've got a card here from Karen Jenkins who says she's opposed but it doesn't indicate if she wants to speak okay well we've noted your comment here and then I've got a card from Mike Meyer I can stand back here and you can still hear me my name is Mike Meyer I actually live at 6342 East Adobe the property that I put on the card is 6802 East Indigo because that is where my daughter and son-in-law are currently residing I bought that property and built the house in 1980. at the time almost all the houses in that area 72 Acres total were two and a half acre lots obviously a lot of them have been split since then I have an issue with it uh what you're proposing I don't think 62 houses on that property is appropriate I don't think the three stories are appropriate I agree with what has been said here that if we're looking at an R15 RS 15 even the nine I think most of us would go along with that more than adequately and be perfectly acceptable to it but what you're proposed what Mr lake is proposing right now is not acceptable um he says he's tried to work with us the second meeting I made some statement to him and he basically lifted his shoulders and go in indicating that he has no intention of changing what he has right now if he takes out all the stupid amenities that he has and puts in houses single units he can still make money on that property I have no problem with people making money I just think that you need to be responsible whenever you're looking at it and deciding how much money do I really need to make on this and still be satisf satisfactory to all the surrounding areas in the surrounding people so as people have said I certainly hope you guys will be responsible that you'll take an approach that is a good decision that is taking into consideration what the people in the area currently desire I'd also make a statement that I was here years ago when we proposed or whenever the city proposed the planners proposed basically promised to me that they were going to dead end Indigo and they never did that ended and now it gets tremendous traffic for the students going up and down that street to get to Red Mountain High School all the time so you are now looking at an additional problem whenever these people try to get out on Hobart or from Hobart onto power they're going to cut through the church parking lot onto Indigo in order to be able to get out I don't appreciate that hope you make a good decision thank you for your comments Okay so we've got several comment cards from folks that made a comment but didn't want to speak so I'm going to ask Vice chair Ayers if he'll go through those right now what's your name [Music] okay let me have Vice chair Ayers read these comments and then when he's done I'll have you come up okay Scott medrero uh is opposed to this item and does not wish to speak that's the first one there's a few of these that do not wish to speak Ray Leo if their address is you want addresses uh so Scott Pedro at 6952 East Hobart is opposed and does not wish to speak Ray Leo at 6951 East Hobart is opposed and does not wish to speak as well Laura and osara at 6951 East Hobart as opposed and does not wish to speak and Philip Rodriguez at 7035 East Hobart is also opposed and does not wish to speak and the last one is Linda vassler at 1451 North 71st Street as opposed and does not wish to speak but has a comment keep our zoning R35 this area is all single-family homes what is being proposed does not fit the immediate neighborhood or the surrounding neighborhoods if you have not come out to this area I strongly suggest you do and you will see that this proposed site does not match the area at all multifamily does not belong in this neighborhood okay and then last call for art Jordan 4018 North pinnacle something Circle anyway it doesn't it says I wish to speak but it doesn't indicate opposed or not opposed so all right come on up and and I think that I think that's the end of is there anyone else that had filled out a speaker slip tonight for this item okay and please remember to state your name and uh my name is Russell burnson my wife and I live at 6908 East Hobart Street which is just across the street and we're just east of the church across the street from this project a little Northeast you know you've heard from a lot of people and I I was going to say I couldn't cover everything but Kevin did a great job of of trying to cover all the facts in three minutes all the things that have come up and and Sean's going to come back and you know try and shoot all those down but you know we you heard some emotion tonight right well this is our home so I do some training from time to time and one of the things that I seem to get through to people that I'm trying to teach and train is if I put it in context of a story so here's a here's a true story a couple moved to Arizona been married for 29 years moved to Arizona 20 years ago they had a lifelong dream of living someplace warm well we got that this couple had a goal also of living in a open space a home with lots of space a big yard and so forth and after 10 years look looking around Arizona found this wonderful area um right along the u-shape they talk about around Hobart and Halifax it's just a wonderful area developed in the 70s all of the homes were an acre or more as you've heard this home had some issues it was run down it was infested with termites but it had potential so the couple acquired the home spent their life savings over the next three years remodeling it and making it their dream home well as you can probably figure out by now that I'm half of that couple not the better half by the main enemies but I am half um the point I'm trying to make here is that the people that you've heard from today and there's a lot more that you haven't heard from today have a similar story this is an area that is unique to a lot of the higher development more dense development areas in Mesa Mesa is a big area we have a huge area here in Arizona why do we have to take six acres and a cookie cutter and figure out how to get 61 units in 68 6 Acres um you know it's it's kind of mind-boggling but I'm already out of time and I'd like to quickly go through um the handout so I wanted to give you the perspective so in that first handout you know you can see this is submitted this is a one of the submittals by the owners to the city that the staff has gone through in blue that's the area well there's 61 area 61 units proposed in that blue area you can kind of see the 924 kind of how they're spread out in multi-level houses well look all around every one of those ones is a single family home all those areas in over 10 times the land only total 41 homes how can you let 61 units go into this area that trying to move right along so the other issue one of the the big safety issues I feel is if you're driving down you can see the arrow driving down Hobart Street and you're looking down Power Road and I've had communication with Sean about this and he says okay well we we're meeting the city requirements well if you go to one of the Amendments they're looking for they want to reduce the city requirement from 30 feet to 20 feet and if you look at some of their renderings you're going to see that they're in addition to reducing that 30 feet to 20 feet there's also Landscaping along that area I've driven that area for over 10 years it's difficult to see oncoming traffic now it's going to be even more difficult difficult again moving along if you can go to the second page I just wanted to point out another it's a great drainage preliminary grading and drainage plan but in order to get one of the things they have to do in order to get 61 units in and talk about keeping limiting that 30 foot height restriction well they've got to put these houses units town homes rentals whatever they're going to be they have to put them as low as they possibly can if you look at those blue areas that 1494 that is at the same elevation as Power Road down this down a little further south 1493 1493 I just blew up what is already on this plan I'm not making it up that means that that elevation of those homes as at the same elevation of Power Road that storm drain that is long existing and the one that they've proposed the one there's a storm during along Hobart it's plugged all the time I don't think I've ever seen it unplugged we get a two just a two inch imagine what would happen if we got four inches in a few hours of rain two inches of rain along that area power road is flooded the water is just going down there I feel sorry for the people that buy those homes along that area because they're going to be flooded my last my last comment is the pad request of required versus proposed and it says it all you're going from 30 feet to 20 feet minimum setback of Cross Drive aisles 50 feet to 11 feet they have to do it to get 61 units in six acres I hope as you've heard from people you guys do have the ability to request that they go back to the drawing board you've heard from several neighbors I'm right there with them I would love to have more neighbors you know but have it conform to what we have in our neighborhood and the surrounding homes so please consider that and don't just pass it thank you thank you for your comments okay so let me uh that's that's going to do it for our public comment period let me uh ask the applicant's lawyer to come back up and uh if you'd like to respond to some of the things you've heard that would be great chairman board member Sean Lake I just wanted to touch base on a few things it's been a really long night so I'm not going to take a whole lot of time here um this is a difficult piece of property it's it hasn't developed in a lot of years it's irregular shaped if it were a nice rectangular 10 Acre Site that you could plan and design out it'd be a lot easier but it's a very challenging site to develop with Frontage along Power Road and so the type of land use is that you can develop with Frontage along power rotor are significantly Limited there aren't a whole lot of people that want a half acre lot siding or backing up to Power Road and then go invest you know for a half acre lot a significant amount of money and and so you start to have to decide what is a good land use for this piece of property and we have brought forward to the city as the neighbors have pointed out quite a few land uses for this property over the many years to try to come to something that we think is a reasonable land use to the property because at the end of the day you've got property owners that have right to develop their property and you have neighbors that have interest in that and so we're trying to come up with a land use that is reasonable that allows the property owner to utilize their property given the constraints of what happens around there we think this is a good land use it will provide diversity of housing in the area we think this is a good alternative good diverse housing product that will be beneficial whether the people pay their mortgage to a mortgage company or they pay it to a rental company they're still people they're good people I'm tired of hearing people say that people that live in rental homes because I have somebody renting a home on both sides of my house where I live now are there implied to be negative that is I'm maybe I'm a little it's long I apologize people are people and they're good people whether they pay their mortgage to a mortgage company or pay them to a rental company these are good quality nice homes as far as the bait and switch comment that's the reason why we have a pad this project is tied to this plan we're not going to be able to have this plan get the zoning approved then all of a sudden come and bring some other use for the property this has a PID that ties this development plan that you've seen has been on the board that's the project they're they're building if they want to do something else we can come back and do this whole process all over again and do something else but for right now this is we're not baiting and switched we think this is a good reasonable land use the 30 and 20 foot setback the reason we have that deviation is because we push the whole site as close to power as we possibly could so that's a setback deviation for Power Road that's actually something that that is I guess more detrimental to us so that we could have a larger setback adjacent to the neighbors we have worked with the city and will continue to work with City on site visibility triangles the city won't let us build anything that has uh site visibility issues that would be traffic hazards so we think this is a good project we think this is a good reasonable land use we think this is good diversity of housing for this area and we would request your support thank you thank you any questions for Mr Lake uh board member Peterson Sean one of the comments was uh was having the access off of Power Road what is the uh the the the reason or response for that we didn't want to or the the city didn't want us to have an access off a Power Road you have access at Hobart you have access at Halifax you have access with the church having having another access point you're gonna have another access point with the fire station typically the city likes to see residential or other developments to go from a neighborhood to a to a collector then to an arterial and so that's the way we've designed it and the location that we put that main access point is directly across from the church the church's main entrance into their project so that we could play off of of the same they're going to be really really busy on Sunday we're going to have traffic come and go the rest of the week so we thought that was a good location to have access and then people will exit out onto Hobart or Halifax and then straight to power so that was based on city transportation requirements what uh on the the pad deviations minimum setback of Cross Drive aisles from 50 feet to 11. what is uh in my head I'm looking at the plan and I'm not sure what that means what where's that what does that apply to I'm gonna have to see if I can find my engineer on that one give me a second thank you let me see if I can pull this up and I can talk you through I don't see the cursor coming up on the south parcel a small piece of property you enter off of uh Halifax and then we created kind of a loop system with an access out to Power Road that gated access point is not for residents but for solid waste only so that we didn't put have to put in a cul-de-sac there for a turnaround for solid waste and so that gated access is for solid waste and emergency access only and that that setback is because that gate is within 11 feet of that parking space right there as opposed to the standard which is typically 50 feet okay so it's from the right away on Power Road to where the that parking space would be gate is yes okay and that gate is only for solid waste and emergency uses okay is that an automated gate then it would be a the city's again automated gate that only the city could function the residents would not be able to exit out that gate they would only be able to come and go off of Halifax okay and that was again a transportation driven great that was a transportation driven and actually we started with having that in exit only but the issue was raised at a neighborhood meeting to not do that and working with the transportation department because as you're traveling north on power if you can get into that area there might be some confusion the people thinking you're going to turn on Halifax and then you stop short and turn into that entrance it was just too close to Halifax and so that's why we just cut that one off for any residents at all okay thanks all right anything else um okay thank you Sean and I I would like to hear from Ryan again on this um Ryan while you're making your way to the podium just two things I kind of want to hear your reaction if you agree with uh with uh Mr Lake on the access on Power Road and then also on the um the visibility off of Hobart uh looking either way down or I guess looking South down power sure uh chair I'll start with the first question and access on the Power Road so just to build off of what Mr Lake had just described about the the southern portion of the neighborhood um yeah we did not support a driveway onto Power Road there just given the proximity to Halifax safety concerns with you know full access movements coming out of that driveway Transportation stance on that subject was not to have a driveway in that location and I think it was an emergency services and solid waste driven kind of recommendation for the the gate that he's describing that could only be accessed by emergency services and solid waste now to move to the north which is kind of the secondary portion of the property uh in a driveway on Power Road uh it's not necessarily true that Transportation would not support a driveway on Power Road in between Hobart and Halifax yet that drive it would have to be right and right out access it would have to keep proper distances from Hobart and Halifax and again it would be right and right out given that the Power Road cross section does have raised median from from a traffic safety perspective and entering this type of land use and again this is purely from a traffic safety standpoint we would certainly urge just like other developments along this Corridor for access points to be pulled off of the main arterial and onto the local collector street so that you're having a course of access management you're reducing the amount of access conflicts onto a main arterial so we certainly do support the the driveways coming off of the the local streets lower volume lower speed you can kind of get the picture of consolidating access points on a major arterial is a safety goal and will those will those collectors Halifax and Hobart will those accommodate the traffic from this proposed development yeah and those those both of those roads you would really dub as as the local streets I mean they feed a very you know isolated Community back there um with what the traffic they see today is is not surprisingly very very low right it's the traffic volumes on those local streets are extremely low today as we sit today introducing 61 units and the traffic projections that the trip Generations that would come out of that site you know that that would be easily handled by a typical local Street throughout the city so from a capacity perspective of a local Street you know there wouldn't be concerns with that additional traffic and then on the visibility question visibility thank you yes um we just like Mr Lake said we we have very stringent standards that that apply to both the driveways and intersections since they'll be kind of um interacting with both with this site they will have to maintain standards for what he he described as site visibility triangles or sight lines and that's based upon how that access the oncoming traffic that you need to be able to see based upon the speed of the facility and we will certainly hold the standards true on this site to make sure that those sight lines are maintained I understand when do you do that do you do you take a look at the site plan that's proposed and make the determination that it complies or that's that determination come later it's it's always a very uh you know fronting and foremost comment that's made you know up front on these sites as we see these kind of preliminary landscape plans come through it is a comment that we carry through as actual construction plans are generated we actually um you know make the designers put the site visibility lines on the drawings and show that they will not be putting any sort of obstruction whether that be vegetation walls anything that could could obstruct that site visibility line okay thank you are there any other questions for Ryan no okay thank you for sticking around so late tonight okay well uh board we've been at this a long time and thanks to the those those that have come out from the public to be here tonight it's been a long night for you and you were the last ones on the agenda so thanks for sticking it out um is there discussion on this item I'm not seeing any discussion is there a motion uh that on on the table on this item or does someone want to make a motion guys are all chickens okay um this site is as we know a very contentious site we've seen several years again and again and again um I don't think that um I mean this site is is a little is difficult because of the shape and the dimensions and all the requirements from the city is going to require access is an issue um I do feel I know the neighbors are upset and frustrated that they have not seen all their comments and concerns addressed I do feel though that it um unfortunately you don't I mean sometimes you just can't address all the concerns um I do feel that they have stepped back and there is the two stories and the one story um and then the three stories are further away um as so I feel that there's on this one they have made good effort it is a lot of units compared to what they're used to in the area but it is Power Road and I do agree that and I've seen other sites that are adjacent to larger properties a major arterial it would be nice to have you know half acre acre lots against them but those kind of properties do not for the cost that you're going to pay for those just for the land they don't want to be next to Power Road especially you know with the I mean it's what six Lanes you're gonna have media all that stuff and now you've got a and also you've got the police station substation all that stuff going in there those properties just I mean I kept hearing that they might like rs9 I mean that's I would think you would have to do an rs9 or even lower even if you wanted single family detached so I think this site um for what they're proposing and what they have tied to the land use meets um what is appropriate in this area and will fit that we have been told in with past board members that we do not have enough apartments and or not Apartments but higher density housing in this area it's a deficiency in the northeast Mesa area and I think this helps alleviate some of those issues and helps will help serve I know you guys don't agree with me but um help serve some of the residents and the uh schools and the teachers and everything else that we are so needing in this area you want to make a motion on this one anyone I mean I can speak for the schools I know that um we are losing a lot of school children in the district because we do not have enough housing and it is very expensive and hard younger families so that makes it really difficult I know the school in the neighborhood is down enrollment by quite a bit about a hundred kids so it and they're looking at this I don't see any other there's not a lot of choice for different type of housing in this neighborhood they're all there's so many homes that there's not a lot of choice for a variety of families to move in thank you if you're ready for a motion a recommendation I'm uh is there any other thank you board member Alan is there any other discussion or okay why don't you go ahead and make your motion I I recommend that we approve zon22-00671 District Five within the 1300 to 1500 blocks to North Power Road within the 6800 blocks of East Hawaii Street and within the 6800 blocks of East Halifax Drive located north of Brown Road on the east side of Power Road rezone from single residence 35 and Commercial office commercial excuse me two Pub multiple residents too with a planetary development overlay and a site plan review this request will allow for a multiple residents development and staff recommendation is approval with conditions thank you board member Alan I have a motion do I have a second I'll second okay thank you board member circusian okay so I'm not sure technology is working well so I'll go ahead and do a roll call vote on this okay uh chair Crockett votes I Vice chair Ayers hi board member Allen board member sarkissian aye board member Peterson no board member pitcher no uh board member Montez aye all right so by your vote of five eyes and two no's you have passed item 4C on the agenda okay uh uh Rachel is there anything else on the agenda for us to cover tonight board members no there's not just like to say I know it's been a really late night and thank you for your service and okay then I will ask for a motion to adjourn ing a second board member pitcher has moved that we adjourn it's been seconded by Vice chair Ayers uh let me go ahead and call the roll chair Crockett votes I Vice chair Ayers aye board member Allen I board member sarkissian aye board member Peterson yes board member pitcher board member Montez yes okay we are adjourned thank you everybody [Music] [Music] foreign