here board member Montez here board member blakeman here board member Carpenter here all right thank you and as part of the agenda we're going to start with our consent agenda this will be read into the record and acted in one motion it's a very long and I'm kidding very short consent agenda today and we're going to have board member montessor read that for us today okay approve of minutes from the previous meeting minutes from the July 26 2023 study session and regular meeting that's it thank you you're welcome so I'll take a motion to approve the consent agenda a move to approve the consent agenda as read thank you in a second second all right thank you all in favor please vote all right looks like we're all good today except for uh Vice chair pitcher and uh board member Crockett who are not able to attend so thank you everybody with that I just want to make sure we don't have any other blue cards before I get going here we're good with what we got okay thank you so with that we'll uh the consent of agenda passes and we'll move on to assistant director Rachel Nettles to help us out with presentations here so uh chair board members the first item off of consent is item 3A and there's also a companion case to that which is item 5A but this is case 0123-00276 and Josh will be making that presentation for zon23-00276 also known as Higley 202. this is for a site plan review as well as polarity Platt to allow for a contractor's office as well as Associated contractor's yard it is located north of Thomas and east of Higley Road relatively north of the loop 202 it the current zoning on this site is light industrial uh where this use is permitted by right the overall General plan designation on this site is for employment which allows for a wide range of employment opportunities in high quality settings which this does meet uh here is the site photo looking East from Higley Road as you can tell there are some significant great challenges on this site overall here's the site plan uh just again to reiterate the comment that I provided earlier today is that the land ownership has changed through escrow at this time on my report as well as through the ownership information on the notice you'll see it was boil family LP but now has been purchased by Higley 202 else industrial LLC so and this is the site plan that they are currently proposing based off of the comments that were provided last or sorry three weeks ago the overall new contractors office and Associated yard for a 6 800 square foot office as well as 7 744 square foot Workshop as well as uh as on this slide here you can see the comparison between the previous site plan and the updated site plan to show those increased landscape areas as well as to incorporate the grading and overall slopes that would be required for the amount of grade and changes that are occurring on this site overall here's the proposed landscape plan that will be updated as part of the conditions we did mention in the study session overall here's the proposed rendering for the office as part of this uh project the applicant provided citizen participation for owners within 500 feet as well as HOAs and registered neighborhood we did receive comments from the property owners just to the north with concerns about the screening grading and drainage overall on this site as well as the uh 54th Street which again I'll just reiterate since this site has four Lots in between itself and 54th there's property owners that would have to be the rights to that and in order to develop that we'd need to see something come into that and improve 54th but at this time the project only faces and addresses Higley so that is not required at this time based off of that staff finds the 2040 General plan this proposal complies with that as well as the chapter 69 of the MCO for site plan review as well as section 9-6 for within the subdivision regulations for preliminary Platt uh in Stafford's approval conditions as updated uh based off our step or study session session thank you Josh any questions for Josh right now from the board I do know I have so I have some cards here yeah well I was going to just read these verses so the applicant could have a chance to respond to these potentially so I'll start with that and then if the applicant wants to come up and respond to those um I have three total uh one of them is asking to speak so I'll start with the two that are not I do have and and I apologize if I get these wrong so uh Tyson maybe I can't get the last name for an address of 4505 East Virginia Street 85215 is in favor of this item but does not wish to speak and then I have a mark Micah I believe who's also in favor of this item from 2223 East Virginia Street at 85213 here in Mesa and also does not wish to speak I also have one that is asked to speak at this time Steve Wright all right thank you Steve could you come up and just state your name and address and then you have three minutes uh yes sir my name is Steven Wright I live at 3845 North Higley Road and I own the properties just to the north of this project and I apologize for getting involved in this late uh my daughter was here last time and there was and I'm grateful I'm grateful for what he has given us as far as some additional uh at Saint wall but additional setback on the commercial Force the industrial portion of my property but the prob the entire problem on this whole project is we're going to butts my house and there's an enormous grade change from the maintenance yard the construction yard to my patio and pool and for whatever reason we have asked and ask and ask and we have not seen any details on how this is going to be handled we do see a picture he'd be sitting in a new detail of him standing in my shop with a line of sight going to the office portion of his uh project there's things that I can do to ease that that transition their Landscaping wise which will make the whole thing flow better but where it hits my house does not work will not work and they need to show me how it's going to work but for whatever reason anytime we ask they walk around the question we still do not know what the the maintenance building is going to be built out of I've asked four times and I guess the thing that bothers me the most is I sat in a neighborhood meeting with that man and I asked him not once but twice if this was being built in your backyard how would you feel about it and it was nice enough not to lie to my face because he wouldn't he wouldn't comment at all but in email we get a pack of Twisted lies and the problems can be solved there was an excellent project that would already been approved for this this particular property that same developer did just did a several years ago did a project on Thomas Road and 55th Place he's got excellent buildings in our excellent Lodge takes care of all the train all the train problems but the way this site looks to me is they're chopping the top of it off and they're dropping 30 feet down in my backyard and they refused to show me how they're going to put up set walls or retaining walls thank you very much for your time thank you Mr Wright okay and I think that's it for the cars that I have at this point so Josh I'm not sure if we want to bring the applicant up and get their presentation all right perfect good afternoon Mr chairman members of the board my name is Ralph Pugh my office is here in Mesa we're here on behalf of the property owner and the ultimate user of the property tyborum is the owner of Kincaid Construction so if you have questions about the neighborhood meeting and what was said and what was shared and that Mr David Bond who is our engineer hand was at that meeting and he can answer those questions but I think what we could do is just jump right to the question that Mr Wright asked and that has to do with the cross sections at the Western end of this property he's absolutely right there is significant grade change but we have proposed if I can figure out how to do this Josh what am I missing here it's really simple I know but it's just the arrow keys oh oh there you go all right so there's two actions on your agenda tonight one is the site plan approval for a use that's allowed by right in the zoning district and the second is the preliminary plat there has been a question about the materials and the building this case has been reviewed by the design review board the design reviewer board made a few suggestions and we're working with the staff to finalize the approval of that so we're happy to share elevations and design criteria and materials with our neighbor if they'd like to do that as Josh Indica as the staff indicated a minute ago this this is the property that is located on the west excuse me on the east side of Higley north of Thomas north of the freeway it that's admittedly an area that has combination of two uses the expectation of Mesa is the industrial uses that we're proposing here today that's what the land zoned for and that's what we're proposing there are however also many large lot residential uses in the area so this is one of those typical issues where you have to integrate incoming industrial projects with existing single-family residential and we've tried to address that issue as best we can this will give you a really good shot of what it looks like this is the property in question this includes more than what we're doing this is to the question that the staff mentioned that since this property in total is roughly nine and a half acres or so it goes clear over to 54th Street but it's only being developed halfway so all the issues about future growth in the East half of the property will come when development occurs on that portion of the property but you can see how it's in the middle of residential uses on both the North and the South you've seen the site plan and the staff has walked you through that carefully I'll jump on to this important exhibit to hopefully answer some of the questions that Mr Wright had we are certainly not ignoring his residential units to the his residential house to the north if you can see at the very West End of the property we have a 36 foot not set back we are literally moving the property wall 36 feet South from that Northern boundary and Mr Wright will enjoy that open space there it will be landscaped it will meet the zoning criteria for the landscaping materials and we are voluntarily moving that wall back and we'll show you a cross section in a minute that shows where the retaining walls are so at the very West End it's 36 feet goes down to 30 in the middle and 20 at the East End why because that's the slope of the land and it slopes down that way the other most important fact here is that the building that the Mr Wright was complaining about is literally a hundred and sixteen feet from the property line so it is meets every aspect of setbacks and many many times more and you can see that it's even 120 feet from the property line to the workshop that's just the Eastern Building there so this applicant and his Consultants have devoted significant attention to doing this correctly to being sensitive to the neighbors and to complying with the city code so here's a couple of questions that we're going to cover but first I want to go to the cross section of the property so this is the cross section that was provided to Mr Wright at the at the latest meeting and it shows where the retaining wall the red line as you can see is the property line as you go up the elevation you can see a green line that's where the retaining wall will be then you have the landscaping and then you have the workshop building so you have all that distance including Landscaping between the property line and the new wall this is the one in the front this is on the west side so here you have the wall again the property line is in red there will not be a wall there because why we're going to put that wall significantly up the slope and it's a retaining wall shown in green on this map all right so we've created the best we can for not only Open Space Landscape but view to our neighbor we're not encroaching this building into his space at all and we are exceeding all of the setback requirements significantly there was some comment about why don't we comply with the old site plan so this is the roughly nine or ten acres stretched all the way from Higley to 54th Street and all this was was a series of seven or eight lots that were in a linear fashion from Higley over to 54th and that was approved in 2007 16 years ago that site plan has expired doesn't exist anymore and so we're bringing this proposal under current development standards we've seen these elevations there was been for some reason there's been a continual question here about who owns the property I don't understand the nature of it I don't understand the Dynamics of it but this property has been owned by Mr borum's LLC for over a year it just happens to be that it wasn't accurately reflected in the county records and it shows up on your staff report as the prior owner but why that's important I have no idea but the truth is we've owned it for a year the other and last item has to do again with building elevations and materials if our neighbor would like to have us walk them through all of that we will this isn't the time or place for that that it's been taken care of with great comments from the design review board to the planning director for approval with a few changes um there's also been a question about septic um so let me address that quickly the city of Mesa and the developer are proposing to enter into a development agreement that development agreement is very typical about what happens in this area and that is that Mesa is indicating they intend to bring sewer to this area in the coming years in the meantime the property owner is allowed to do a septic system consistent with the rules and requirements of adeq and Maricopa County and we have a site plan that we can propose to the staff complying with all those details why is that important because that site plan will become an exhibit to the development agreement entered into between the city and Mesa on when this sewer will be connected and the septic can be used in the meantime so we will do that we're committed to do that and again that will be reflected on the final staff approved site plan so with that Mr chairman and board members thank you for Patiently listening here today we urge your support of this case it's been well designed well thought out and frankly brings a fabulous business to the city of Mesa thank you I'll be happy to answer any questions I actually have one question for myself um and I agree so the first time we heard this there was a lot of questions that we had about the site plan specifically with drainage some things just weren't adding up and so I think a lot of that has been remedied the one question I do have and it's both on the North and the South but the north is a little bit more problematic in my opinion I agree you know not necessarily you've met all of the setback requirements everything is good there but if you're looking from the site wall so if you go back to your to this uh both of them work this one's a good starting point okay so your green is your your retaining wall and you have a four to one slope from your green to your red how you're dealing with the shedding of water on your property that is getting down to the red property line and what is happening to that that Watershed that's hitting at the red line that's the question now Mr chairman you're asking a very technical question that I do not know the answer to and if I embarked on an answer it would be wrong I'm going to turn to David Bond to answer that question for us our civil engineer is that fair enough it's absolutely that's great yep uh Mr chairman members of the board my name is David Bond I'm with bfh group um so to answer your question there's there's several things that we could do we could grade this down so just uh just to give you guys an idea of how tall that retaining wall is at this point in our design it's roughly and and it varies there's a lot of undulation so it varies but our our Max height is roughly around six feet um what we can do is provide uh potentially a low Point uh before it reaches the property line like we typically do on on sites like this there may be other other ideas and Concepts that we could provide but it's something that uh yeah that's easily remedied in one way or another but I do appreciate what you're saying and yeah that's that's it I mean I see where you're doing and I again I don't have issues with the retaining wall I see how you're handling water on what you're grading on your side of that retaining wall all easily remedied but you've got 36 foot of four to one slope and as you know that that's a good amount of water that could come back down to the property line and so I'm just wondering how you're dealing with that and if that is the idea to grade that to get to a low point it still needs to go somewhere I'm curious is it going to be retained are you going to be adding in you know what there's different methods you know that there's different methods yeah we'll work that out with staff but yeah your point is definitely valid um but we could do a low point there we could again we could work out different things to to ensure that it's not in covering the properties to the to the north and that's both on North and South I have that I think it's a little bit more Troublesome because there's a lot more length on the north right you've got 36 30 20. so those are building up and going to that it happens on the south as well but it's a lot less and then it also looks like you've actually got your retention on the outside of the wall on that so it's a little bit different your underground retention is on this on the you know on the other side of the wall versus on the North that's on the inside does that make sense um I'm not sure which uh which uh you'll see what I'm saying so the point is I see it kind of you've got underground retention back behind basically the office using you're talking about the south side on this yeah okay well on both you have it on both okay and so you have underground retention it's that side that's on the where it jumps to the 36 feet okay there is no underground retention shown there and it shows your feeding to it so again inside the wall it's all makes sense okay it's basically from the wall to the property line I got you yeah okay you got something too oh on the south side yeah that was the one thing I was going to say yeah yeah good thank you okay so I think we're good to close the the public uh meeting portion of this one and I'll put you guys if anybody wants to make a motion I have any discussion that we'd like to on this one second um sorry we actually already had you on here for for the public comment we just closed it so completely understand it so as a Planning and Zoning Board we don't actually look at the materiality of the building so for it's a question for us that we we can't really in my backyard completely understand sir I well we've we've taken into your your your comments into account and we've have a lot of questions of our own okay appreciate it anybody would like to make a motion or have any other discussion that we'd like to have on this one chair and board members um before you make a motion um as mentioned in the study session we have some revised conditions of approval um if I could read those into the record real quick okay so um we are making revisions to conditions of approval number one and number two and then we're going to be adding in condition number 10. so revisions to number one will now read compliance with the final site plan submitted or if applicable the revised site plan submitted pursuant to condition number condition of approval number 10. um second condition is going to be revised to State compliance with the landscape plan which shall be revised and resubmitted prior to the issuance of any building permits and which shows the required Landscaping pursuant to all requirements of chapter 33 of the MCO and then additional condition number 10 will read prior to the issuance of any building permit provide confirmation from Maricopa County that the proposed septic system complies with all Maricopa County standards related to the installation of the septic system if the septic system as shown on the final site plan does not comply with all Maricopa County standards submit a revised site plan showing the revised location of the septic system that complies with all Maricopa County standards related to the installation of the septic system okay so go ahead Rachel for the the discussion on the the drainage on the North side is it is it a standard City technical site plan comments that the site will retain whatever its own storm water that it won't run off to the north okay so chair board member Peterson yes that is and and the final grading and drainage plan gets reviewed with the construction documents with the building permits thank you so I mean just just do some comments on the the site plan and um and the preliminary plaid that we have per view over the word that's in front of at this time the uh the the items done to address the the drainage and the landscaping and the adding additional uh landscape setbacks in excess of of what the zoning code has um the person I feel that that's that's met the criteria that we have purview over anybody else want to make a motion with that or did you have anything board member no sure um so I understand um the neighbors concerns um looking at the site plan first of all that was pointed out this is an allowed use this is a transitional area that does mix industrial and residential looking at this and working on projects like this that are pretty tough um I think the applicant has done a really great job of of pushing their property as far away as from their your property as they possibly can as you can see they pointed out over 100 feet to their building and then they're also moving their walls 36 30 20 much further past in reality they have the right to build so much closer I think that they've been as sent tried to be sensitive yet accomplishing what they're trying to do so those are just my comments the for just uh for Rachel that was uh conditions number 10 and what was it nine and ten or ten and eleven the the added ones chair board member Peterson so revised conditions number one and two and additional condition number ten and board member Peterson if you're going to make a motion could you include the you could include the Platt case with it always want motion thank you so propose a motion for a case 3A case number zon23-00276 Higley 202 industrial Commerce within the 3800 block of North Higley Road located east of Higley Road and North of Thomas Road site plan review this request to allow for an industrial development uh it's staff recommendation is approval with conditions and to add to that modified conditions number one and two and additional condition number 10 as read by staff and then add to that item 5A Premier Platt Higley 202 industrial Commerce within the 3800 block of North Higley Road located east of Higley Road and North of Thomas Road preliminary platform Industrial Development staff recommendation approval with conditions for both conditions so you're okay to move to move to approve correct thank you is there a second I'll second okay thank you everyone please vote okay there it is popping up there thank you with a vote of five eyes and two absent with a vice chair pitcher and board member Crockett absent item 3A in the associated 5A plat pass thank you everybody appreciate it next up we have 4A is that correct chair that is correct so next item is 4A which is case zon 22-00835 and Samantha will be making that presentation just a moment okay so hello again um this um this project is zo set z-o-n22-00835 this request is for a rezone from r343 to r343 pad in with a preliminary plot to allow for a single residence subdivision the low case is at Lehigh Road and inner corner of intersection East Lehigh's Rose in September sorry except North North staple Drive the regional plan is the neighborhood the zone is R3 rs-43 and it will be rs43 Paz site plan it is currently just one residence with access accessory structures and some agricultural use the intent is to subdivide that area into five single residence lots and then two tracks tracked a is for the pi the private street that will serve those and then the second track is for um open space but the price the main reason for it is a retention base that stays in that in that tract the Lehigh from Lehigh Road will be a new Private Road the private road is the only reason for that planned area development overlay the typical lore typical um public street is a minimum of 34 feet and in this one it's 40 feet since the uh the pad for it I had mentioned the public notice went to uh Property Owners within 1000 feet HOAs and those registered neighborhoods I so far received two comments in support one in opposition and one with questions about the use of track B that did come up with questions about development of track B potentially in the future while technically it is it is potentially doable in potentially but the big thing about that tract B is the fact that it contains that retention base and the family worked with an engineer actually he was here um significant work to make that fit in that tract and so if something were to happen with that track it would take the significant more infants infants to move that rotation benses so that's why we don't foresee anything else being developed on that anytime soon so all together staff finds that this project complains with the general plan the planned area development overlay and the preliminary plot set staff recommends approval with conditions thank you thank you Samantha so similar last one I think before we bring up the applicant I have several common cards for this um we have a few here that will be just read in and then several that would like to speak I'll start with those that are asking to not speak but I do have Kent Olson who is in favor of this but does not wish to speak and Mark Micah who was also in favor of the item but does not wish to speak and then let's go and start with um Mohammed Rafiq Islam would you like to come up at you you're asking to speak is that correct and then could you offer your name and address and then you have three minutes my name Islam and I leave at 2321 North and I'm in fact representing Pueblo Viejo HOA and I was very surprised to see that we did not get a notice and it has been happening for the last few years we don't get the notice so we need to rectify that but in any case when I got the notice and I took it upon myself as the president of the HOA to let everybody know and get their input because you want to be good citizens and give inputs to our neighbors and these people have been our neighbor for the last 25 years and I feel good with what they're doing you know the reason we came and want to live in Mesa is quite a few things which is like peace and quiet Family Values you know open landscape these are the things that we value them this neighbor has provided all of that for us for the last 25 years and we feel good about that so also it's also nice to see their families want to live in Mesa make room for their extended families rather than move out the cities so this is what family values is all about the one concern that some of the neighbors some of my 24 HOA members have raised is the noise anytime there's construction there's going to be noise and peace and quiet in our neighborhood is important and we are the 24 you know properties on the east side of the property along the canal so the buffer that they have put on the west side of that is appreciated but during the construction process our ha members are asking that keep the construction time to a minimum don't drag it out to one year two year five years so this is the thing that I'm asking for and with that I would like to say that I am on behalf of eight Pueblo vioa I had my support they have my support and thank you very much thank you Miss Islam I appreciate your coming up um next we have Teresa Carmichael same thing if you could state your name and address for us thank you chair Ayers board members my name is Teresa Carmichael and I live in Lehigh at 2451 North Terrace Circle our property is just to the north and slightly east of the subject property just a couple things I'd like to touch on first of all I do regret that we're here at the 11th hour but we're experiencing what the gentleman before me experienced we did not get the notice back in August of 2022 and I checked with a number of my neighbors six folks same same thing we would have preferred to hammer this out at a public meeting they were both canceled apparently because nobody commented but it was difficult to comment when we didn't know about it so that's that's an important piece that we'd like to see rectified board member carpenter has raised the issue about track B that's one of our primary concerns we think we're really supportive of what we're seeing but that concern is whether there would be additional development and deviating from the low density we like what we see right now and then the fact that there's no intent intent is kind of a squishy word I want to get a good feeling that this would have to come back to PNC and to neighborhood so that we would get notice and an opportunity if track B were to be further developed um I did talk with Samantha about Landscaping you'll note um I don't know if there's any way to put the the map up but the two houses that are being built to the east side they're back end and their side yard is going to be really the focal point as we drive down Lehigh Road and Samantha indicated that Landscaping requirements are a little lacks due to the Lehigh lifestyle I enjoy that lifestyle myself but it doesn't mean my yard's cluttered and I don't have all sorts of crazy things going on I try to keep my property attractive for my neighbors so if we're going to be looking at the backyard where people are allowed to store things and RVs and trailers and that sort of thing we'd like to see some appropriate landscape screening fencing whatever whatever would would fit rather than just having to look at what we're seeing now the last thing is that I think that the property should be currently compliant with the code and I brought to share with the board current pictures that we took yesterday um this has been a problematic property much before the current owners they have done made great strides in cleaning it up but it's not there yet there are commercial trailers that are parked on there there should be no commercial activity there is an RV parked on an unimproved lot significant outdoor storage I don't know if I can tender these to the board to look at or not but I do have a copy for for everyone we do in Lehigh expect to see horse trailers we expect to see stacks of hay in Alfalfa and a little Oddities here and there when we see commercial activity and that type of thing it it's not what we desire and we really hate to have to pick up the phone and call Code Compliance that's the last thing I want to do truly so those are our concerns and uh that's all I have to say thank you appreciate you coming out thank you very much and our last card is Tina Crow is it yeah okay I got it right foreign hi my name is Tina Crowe I also have the concern that we did not receive any notifications supposedly from August of 2022 I also spoke with all the neighbors who will be in line of sight and affected by this we did receive one letter last week from the potential developer for the property which was absolutely the first we've actually heard of anything going on over there so something I don't know if it was the city that was supposed to be notifying us of the change or Community Association but we definitely did not get word uh in principle I'm all for the development I like the fact that they've set up a private Street I like the fact that the houses go deep instead of all along Lehigh Road um I love where I live it's a great sense of community I also have the concern about we don't intend to develop Lot B because of the reservoir 10 years from now there could be a change of plan it could be sold to a developer boom now we've got another whole neighborhood or something commercial in there I'd really like those concerns addressed thank you thank you Miss girl all right I think that's it for those who would like to invite the applicant to come up welcome thank you my name is Deanna Mason we live at 1142 East Lehigh Road just across from this property and I appreciate the opportunity to hopefully remember all the different concerns and questions that were presented um first I heard multiple times about people not receiving notification and I'm pretty confident we've followed What We were supposed to do we're residents we saw an opportunity to purchase a property and you know hopefully have our family live there grow up there and we've kind of been guided through the process of notifications we sent email or the Letters Out based on lists that we have um so I guess we did the best that we could there I apologize if somebody wasn't notified we would much rather have had this conversation with homeowners you know privately than here so I do apologize about that as far as track to be I know that's one of the concerns and that would be my concern too if I was you know a neighbor neighbor to us there we do not plan to develop that what we were looking for when we purchased that is to have a place that we could build a home for ourselves and our three kids hence the four new properties the existing home there my sister-in-law and her husband live in and we are rural people we have horses and we are my husband's farming Alfalfa there right now on that and the goal is to continue to do the same towards the back of the property we will have some horse stalls I think currently we have six or seven horses we definitely do not plan to board those out this is area we bought for our family for ourselves so it's all you know private for us so as far as the development of that tract B we don't plan to do that but in 60 years when our kids see son I don't know what would come of that I would assume they would have to come and get further permission but as long as we're alive and on that which we intend to be forever we have a business in Chandler previously in Mesa we do all of our business out of there which leads into the discussion I guess the photos with some pictures there is a big a friend of ours asked if he could park something there for a couple of weeks it's turned into a month my husband's text him said he's got to come get it so that's probably this big I don't even know what it is big trailer we do have some farm equipment parked there and at one time we did I have a couple of our company box trucks parked there that were out of service I think we've since moved them back behind our current home we do not operate business out of our current home or plan to out of this we we have a Commercial location for our business I'm trying to think of any of the other concerns that I missed I don't know did I I think that's most of it oh Landscaping um we the my husband plans on doing a white fence that white PVC fence out front along Lehigh Road he's already purchased the fencing that's stacked in the back in one of those piles that you're probably looking at a picture of I hope it's not uh warped by now but there will be PVC pants fencing along there along the canal section we're going to do some on our side to separate that lower section there's going to be some fencing along there to keep hopefully some coyotes and things out from our chickens and the other livestock that we have there will be trees we we want this to be we love Lehigh that's why we bought this property we were fortunate with the economy to be able to sell some other things and hopefully make this our home for us our kids and our grandkids so we appreciate the support and that is our goal we don't want to be as nuisance neighbor we believe in you know we love Lehigh we've been here since 1998 and um so the landscape we're open to suggestions my husband's already planted some trees over across the canal because he wants to get some trees and some beautiful scape there oh as far as the time frame of construction um because I don't know that our kids we don't know the order of building right now this was like this has been a big step for us it's been a year and a half and we've been trying to get this divided so we can build I know my daughter and her husband won't build for seven years he's out of town in med school so that's just going to be a vacant lot we're going to use for pasture in the beginning as far as the other two boys and their families I guess is they can afford it homes will go up at different times not all at the same time the key thing was getting it divided so that we can do that currently we're the two boys in our family all live on Lehigh Road and again my daughter and her husband are out of state so hopefully that answers all the questions I mean I can assure you we want this to be awesome for everybody and I think I don't know that it'll be an improvement for the Orange Grove that used to be there but I think it'll be an improvement back when the other guy had all sorts of chaos there so is there any specific questions for her from the board no okay I think we're good thank you one thing I do well actually I'll kind of close uh the public meeting portion for this one and we can have discussion as a board a little bit but I have one question for staff that might help to alleviate some of the concerns can we talk through the process a little bit if that parcel B was ever to be replatted or it's going to have to go through the process again so maybe just talking through that will help a little bit Yeah chair and board members so to in order to develop that that tract and you know the potential for it to be split and developed into Lots in the future it would require a re-plat so that would have to come back to Planning and Zoning for that replay and then back to city council for a final plat with the platting process that does not require public notice for that public meeting but it would be open to the public like it is today and then from a zoning perspective there's never going to be a density in there that's anything different than what there is now at this point unless it goes through again another process through correct that is correct so it would have to hear to to the underlying zoning and it is within the Lehigh sub-area plan which you know stipulates that it should be one acre lots um lost my training thoughts so there there are other development standards that would have to adhere to um they would have to make sure that they have front edge on a road once again they have some uh some retention back there they would have to reconfigure so there's there's a lot that would have to go into it that would need to be reviewed by the city in order to develop that tract thank you Richard I just wanted to I thought a lot of the concerns that right there would kind of alleviate some of those that would go through a long process so anything that you guys have questions about development in the future and I'm sorry I can't take questions but it would go through another public process for the most part to have anything done there on the site so all right any other conversation as a board on this one where I'm completely open to have anybody with like a motion on this one as well nobody wants to make a motion all right I need a motion here we go motion to approve item 4A zon 22-0835 Mason Farms within the 1200 to 1400 blocks of East Lehigh Road located south of East Lehigh Road and East of North Stapley Drive reason from single residence 43 to single residents 43 with a planned area development overlay this will allow for a single residence subdivision recommendation staff recommendation approval with conditions combined with item 5B Mason Farms preliminary Platte within the 1200 to 1400 blocks of East Lehigh Road located south of East Lehigh Road and East of North Stapley Drive perlier for a single resident subdivision staff recommendation approval with conditions and your motion is to approve yes is there a second I'll second please vote thank you and again with a unanimous vote of five gays or wait yeah five and then the two absent with Vice chair pitcher and board member Crockett being absent at passes appreciate everybody's time on that one and I think we have 4B left correct chair board members that is correct so the last item off of consent tonight is item 4B which is case 0123-00222 and Emily will be making that presentation email because I hear thank you chair and board members this is kcon 23-0022 for the bright care daycare right path daycare the request is for rezone from ocbiz to OC as well as site plan review to allow for That Daycare the location is west of Val Vista Drive and north of Brown Road the general plan character area designation is neighborhood and it is also located within the Citrus sub area plan which is characterized primarily by large lot single residents the current zoning is office commercial with the bonus intensity Zone overlay the daycare center is a permitted use in that zoning District this shows the current site from North Brown Road and as as I said before they did go to the design review board on June 13th where the board and citizens expressed their concerns about the design of the building and its character overall within the neighborhood um they have since then worked with staff as well as other residents in order to redesign not only the building but also the site plan the new site plan is what you are seeing here currently showing the 14 000 square foot daycare facility with its playground and shade structures The Pedestrian links to Brown Road as well as Val Vista and there will be a cross access agreement that recorded with the Living Word Bible Church so there will be vehicular access off of brown and Val Vista as well the landscape plan is shown here and includes two rows of the citrus trees which are required per the Citrus sub area plan along Brown and Val Vista and again as per the design review board they did increase the size of those trees to 36 inches here are the proposed elevations for the site the one on the top right corner there is the West that will be the main entrance to the building um this is the rendering of that elevation and another view of the building from the southeast corner Property Owners within a thousand feet were notified of the project and a neighborhood meeting was held on January 31st of this year um during the drb meeting um they're like I said additional comments from staff or from citizens as well as the board regarding the design as well as some transportation and Landscaping concerns the applicants have been continued to work to update that that site plan as well as the elevations to better meet the character area of the Citrus sub area using more of the architectural cues from the neighborhood and there were additional concerns brought up today um about about the design of the playground area being on the corner of brown and Val Vista as well as concerns raised about traffic concerns at the intersection of brown and Val Vista staff does find that this complies with the 2040 Mesa General plan it complies with the review criteria for chapter 69 of the NCO for site plan review and staff does recommend approval with conditions thank you Emily is there any questions for Emily from the board seeing anything at this point okay and I know as you said there are several kind of comments that came in but there is one that has asked to speak here at the meeting and and that is Stephen Wagstaff Stephen here no Stephen nobody's on the phone right we don't have anybody okay so we don't do anything with that one I guess at this point okay um I can say that um Stephen was asking to speak but was not in favor of the project but we don't know what his concerns are at this point I guess so with that do you want to come on up Mr Lake and we'll hear a presentation from the applicant occasion I'm going to pull a Ralph Josh how do I or Emily I look at I look at Josh because he helped Ralph but just harassing Technologies Escape yeah that's gonna be on here Josh is always helping me it should be on that the mouse doesn't work okay so let's go minimize this on the USB did you send it in early it should be on this USB yeah that was the one I had this one I got from Vanessa did you did you put it on the desktop okay so is that right there uh that's probably it oh thank you do anything's on this desktop there we go all right and then arrow keys it's a good thing I asked um I'll try to cut my presentation down to about 30 minutes on this project um I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you and I'm just going to focus in this is a site that I think we're all well aware of I drive by this site uh twice a day at least for the last 15 years and long before that we've all purchased Citrus there when the gardeners were growing citrus when we did Citrus here those Citrus Groves are kind of Disappearing because we don't Harvest and men are package Citrus here in the back or in Mesa anymore so that's kind of disappeared which is sad since that time I think everybody's bought cherries there for Maury Tanner or the peaches that come in from Utah but the the gardeners we've all we've also we all are very familiar with the site we're all familiar with the church uh that this is the corner of I can't think of a better compatible use in the parking lot of a church than this daycare we have worked with extensively with the church we have a cross parking agreement and a cross access agreement so I'm going to get straight to the transportation issues that were raised in an email today this is a much better site plan than what is approved the zoning office restaurant daycare those are all permitted uses under the existing zoning we're removing the biz which we put on several years ago because we had deviations to the code back then we don't have those anymore and so that's why we're removing that Biz because we're following the code and complying with the code for this use we've also removed the curb cuts which is a traffic issue so the previous site plan had two one curb cut on brown one curb cut on Val Vista we're not doing that we have cross access with the church we have a signed agreement with them that will record that as soon as this moves forward that helps traffic I'm not going to point to anybody on the board but when you remove curb cuts foreign Troy when you remove curb cuts that helps traffic and so those curb Cuts were designed to accommodate a significant amount of traffic for the people who are coming to church on Sunday at that parking lot so we're utilizing those existing curb cuts which we think is a much improvement as far as the elevations of the site plan since the design review board wholesale changes to the site plan and orientation of the uh the daycare building as well as wholesale changes complete scrap and redo of the elevations and so we've tried to work with the neighbors to design the site plan design the location of the play area and design the actual elevations to meet or fit into the area and so that's what we've really done extensively with we don't have any neighbors here the last remaining issue that we were working with the neighbors as latest today was screening and so we had sent in a proposed condition of approval that we would work with staff on the wrought iron fence that is shown on the plan around the play area to change that to a vinyl fence and we had sent some examples into the staff of what that would look like but if we could we would like to to be you know uh honest and and straightforward with the neighbors that we committed to do this add a condition to us that we would work with staff uh to have a condition or approval to change the wrought iron fence which is see-through to an opaque vinyl fencing color to be determined and work with staff on that design so if if you're so inclined to approve this project we would ask you add that condition of approval I'm not going to go through anything else those were kind of the eye issues that were raised by our neighbors I would urge her support I think this is a good compatible use we've we've worked with people we've changed things made a lot of changes over this time and we think this is a good good project that will fit into the neighborhood and work well here on a permitted use and so we happy to answer any questions thank you appreciate that is there any questions nope I think okay okay I think with that we can close the public portion of this one and I'm going to entertain any questions comments or even emotion yeah so so just a comment I I fully agree on reducing the asphalt footprint of the schools and churches are the perfect complementary uses and it's uh makes a lot of sense to do that as far as defense material I mean I I don't know that uh conditions needed I think it'll work itself out through the process but whatever everybody else's thoughts are on that just some comments on that um first of all just seeing this case I I was really pleased with this use I couldn't agree more that it's a very appropriate use with a church in combination again like you said this is already zoned to have other uses that are not as complementary that said they would have to have or would want to have their own separate accesses to designate themselves from the church and separate them so certainly this land use is working hand in hand with the existing land use even in terms of peak traffic times it's complementary as well Church times I would think or tends to be on weekends maybe evenings but the daycare tends to be probably more of a Monday through Friday type of use so really it's complementary and even in terms of using the parking so it's really using common resources for multiple uses so I I think it's a phenomenal use of this site and I support this case Wheels no okay I completely agree all the comments so far I think it is a great use for this site I actually also want to applaud the the applicant as well on the reduction of curb cuts that is a huge thing I know one of the concerns about this intersection I lived near here not too long ago and uh I think a lot of those concerns with that intersection was because of people stopping to get to the Fruit Stand honestly that's probably what it was more than anything else so that reduction actually I think is also very very useful for this so I I also fully am support of this as well all right anybody would like to make a motion are you gonna do it again all right I'll keep my record gone since then since since there's no stand up here oh don't don't tempt me move to approve item 4B zon 23-0022 bright path Child Care within the 1200 block of North Val Vista Drive and within the 3500 block of East Brown Road located west above Vista Drive and north of Brown Road rezone from Office commercial with a bonus intensities on overlay to office commercial and major site plan modification this request will allow for the development of a daycare center recommendation is approval with conditions thank you Troy is there a second second all right everybody vote again with the unanimous uh five those are here with uh Vice chair pitcher and board member Crockett not being here it passes thank you everybody for coming so that concludes that and so Rachel is there any other items that we need to discuss as a board chair no nothing else on the agenda okay thank you with that I guess this concludes the meeting for today and so I will take a motion to adjourn you'd might as well just continue second one make them I have to make the most adjourn got it is there a second second all right everyone please will again unanimous thank you everybody appreciate everybody's time today Genesee I just realized you got me to read your whole