Bakeman >> here. >> Board member Carpenter >> here. We'll excuse board member Forensworth. So, as part of the meeting today, we do have a consent agenda and these items will be all read into the record and act on one motion. They will not be discussed individually and vice chair Peterson has agreed to read our consent agenda today. >> Thank you. The items on the consent agenda today are item 2 A, minutes from the July 23rd, 2025 planning and zoning board meeting. Item 3A 025-0000301 Mesa Paddle Club 0.4 acres located approximately 660 ft east of the southeast corner of main of West Main Street and South Country Club Drive. Site plan review for a 15,497 [Music] square foot smallcale recreational facility. And this is for um to take action on this case and the recommendation is approval with conditions. Item 4 C as in Charlie Z25-0000529 [Music] CV Germaine Industrial Park 38.8 acres located approximately 1300 ft east of the northeast corner of South Ellsworth Road and East German Road. site plan review for an approximately 663,992 square foot industrial park approve and that's for approval with conditions and for this item is a recommendation to the city council and then the last item on the consent is uh item 6A and this is uh make a recommendation to the city council regarding the following proposed amendment to the Mesa City Code proposed amendments to chapters 14 and 86 of title 11 of the Mesa City Code. The amendments include, but are not limited to rep repealing in its entirety chapter 14 employment opportunity district and adopting a new chapter 14 employment opportunity district and modifying section 11-86-1 purpose and applicability pertaining to the purpose and applicability of use types. and recommendation is adoption. >> Thank you, board member Peterson. With that, we'll look for a motion to approve the consent agenda. Right. >> Is there a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. All in favor? Looks like we're not working yet. >> Oh, there it goes. And with that, it's unanimously approved for the consent agenda. Thank you everybody for that. Thank you board member Peterson. So >> do I don't know. Uh sorry. We're talking about which one to hit it first. So uh we'll go right into the rest of our agenda. Let's begin with um item Oh, which one should we do first? 4 A. Let's do 4 A. this one. I just need a separate motion. >> Um I'm recusing myself from this one. >> And is staff here for this? We don't need staff actually. >> No. >> Yeah. >> So So then chairs, it's up to you if you want another presentation. >> Anybody want to hear anything from Cassidy? >> No. >> Okay. We'll go ahead and look for a motion on item 4 A. So then motion to make a recommendation to city council on the following case. Item 4 a 0122-0000890 Gateway Park 33.3 acres located on the northwest and southwest corners of East Ray Road and South Haw Road. Reszone 15.6 acres from limited commercial with the P A development overlay to limited commercial. resz on 17.7 acres from LCPAD to light industrial with the planned area development overlay and site plan review for an approximately 235,600T industrial development and future commercial development and that motion was approval with conditions. >> All right. Is there a second on that motion? >> I second that. >> All right. And with that unanimously I think we got it, didn't we? There it is. Okay. with the statement from board member Blake Bennett unanously passes. Thank you everyone on that one. So we'll move over now to item 4B. Where is >> chairs? Would you like a presentation on this? >> I don't. Anybody want to see item on 4B on the mane chair? We do we do have some public here who might not have seen the presentation downstairs. Would it >> help them? Maybe. >> Let's do that. >> So we'll invite Jen up. There you are. Okay. You almost got out of it, Jack. Good afternoon, chair, board members. This is case 025-0000304 price manner 2. The request is to reszone from RS9 P A to RSL4.5 with a new P A overlay. It's for approximately 6 and 12 acres and the request is to allow for a new 41 lot single residence development. The location is north of Mckelps Road on the east side of Center Street and the development stretches from Center Street on the west side all the way over to Pasadena on the east side. The general plan type is traditional residential which is primarily for detached single family homes on medium to large lots with densities of up to 7.26 dwelling units per acre. And the proposed project has a density of 6.7 dwelling units per acre. Single family residential is a principal land use in the traditional residential residential place type. The existing zoning is RS9 with a P A overlay and the proposed zoning is RSL4.5 with a new P A overlay. Here's a photo of the site looking east across Center Street. And here is one looking southeast towards the site again across Center Street. The site plan shows the proposed gated 41 lot subdivision accessed from Center Street. On the east end of the development, there is an exit only gate for uh residents and visitors and it is accessible for entrance just by city vehicles or emergency vehicles. The uh adjacent development to the south is Price Manor 1. It's under development by the same developer. Um the proposal involves uh sharing of amenity areas and a pedestrian connection point between Price Manor 1 and Price Manor 2. There's also an SRP well site located at the west end. Um it's not developed as a well site yet, but um through uh coordination with SRP, it is fully intended to be developed as a well site. The planned area development overlay allows for two modifications to the development standards. One of those modifications is to allow for a taller than standard screen wall to be allowed around the well site to provide some buffer between the homes and the well site. And so the maximum height of a screenwall would be 8 ft. And the PED also allows for the individual lots to front onto a private drive rather than a public ride ofway. In exchange for those modifications, the request involves highquality design as well as livable and well-connected communities, superior design product, and creative land planning. Uh that high quality involves residential lots that exceed the minimum lot width, depth, and area required in that uh RSL district. And the connected communities includes the shared amenities with the Price Manor one. This slide shows the proposed landscape plan and these slides show the proposed uh home product elevations. The applicant did complete a citizen participation process including notification of property owners within 1,000 ft HOAs and registered neighborhoods. And they held a neighborhood meeting at the public library on May 27th of this year. There were a number of of residents who attended that meeting and they voiced concerns regarding potential for increased traffic in the neighborhood to the east as well as a overall preference for a lower density of development on this project site. There was also discussion regarding the gate on the east edge of the site and whether or not that would be exit only or full access. and then some neighbors voiced some support for the proposal. In summary, uh the request complies with the Mesa 2050 general plan. It also complies with the criteria in chapters 22 and 69 for the PAD overlay and site plan review. Staff recommends approval with conditions. And I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jen. Any questions before we bring up the applicant for a presentation? I am seeing nothing. I think we're good. So, I'll go ahead and invite the applicant to come up. >> Sounds screaming. >> Chair, board members, my name is Sean Lake, 1744 South Val Vista Mesa here on behalf of Jiren Sweeney at Brighton Homes. Uh, it's a pleasure to be here this evening. Over the last couple of years, I've done a lot of multifamily. I've done a lot of apartments. I've done a lot of industrial. It's fun to be back doing a residential single family subdivision. And so, it's it's good to be here uh to talk about this uh piece of property and what's being proposed. Um let me just kind of walk through the site. I don't want to take you down memory lane, but I remember zoning this property in 2005 and we zoned it to an RS9. Back then it was R19, but uh and they graded the property and it's just been off and on. For those that have driven past this site over the last two decades, they've tried to make it go, didn't make it go. They graded the site, they they put in brought in some block and built some of the wall and didn't really build it, and it's just been on and on and really been uh struggled and passed through different property owners. It never really was able to make a go of it. And so when Mr. Sweeney um was able to zone the property directly to the south of this a similar shaped long rectangular for Price Manor that is RSL 3.0 little smaller lots than what we're proposing here today. uh he continued to work with this property owner to try to say, "Hey, why don't you sell me the property so that I can just have Price Manor 2 right next and I can develop them both at the same time and really put together a great dual project with both of them and then connect them with open space. The property ultimately uh did agree to sell the property and that's why we're here uh this afternoon to talk about price manner 2 which is directly adjacent to Price Manor one that's under development right here today. In that interim, as you can see on the photo, SRP has purchased kind of that carveout piece along center. So, we don't have that full visibility or frontage out to center, but we do have a window out to center so that we have access um out to center on the left side of that. But, it's a long rectangular site between Pasadena and Center Street. Um to the south, as I said, is is uh the Price Manor. To the north of this site is a 20acre ADOT retention basin. Um, so as long as the freeway is there, that AOT retention basin is going to be there. Uh, that will never be developed. To the west of this site is the new city of Mesa soccer complex. Uh, I think a lot of people are excited and as you drive down the freeway, you can see it. Uh, people out there playing. Um, we may have we may minimize the lights within the subdivision because that's being provided for illuminating our neighborhood by those lights by those soccer fields. Sorry, I just had to say that. And then to the to the east is a uh residential subdivision that has been there for for quite a few years. As was pointed out by um staff and Jennifer, we appreciate working with her. This area is not in the Lehi sub area and and that's important because Lehi sub area has different standards and so they had defined that in the general plan and they drew a line on the map. As you can see on the lower left hand corner, we are outside of the Lehi sub area as was Price Manor 1. And so we were not in the Lehigh sub area. Recently, uh I think it was just a couple of years ago, they created the Lehi heritage historic neighborhood district or whatever we're neighborhood ne heritage neighborhood. Sorry, I need to use the proper terminology here. But you will notice we're not included in that. But they did include the A dot retention basin in that. Okay, the A dot retention basin is in the historic district, but really there's not much difference between the Lehi sub area and the uh historic neighborhood area design uh I'm not going to use those specific terms, Lehi area. So on on both designations, whatever we want to call them, um we are not included. We are just outside right now. Now, the property is zoned R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R RS9 R19 and has been for 20 years. They've tried to make it go with it with those lot sizes but haven't been able to make it go. Multiple different property owners in multiple different stages of development and phasing. U but I think with this proposal, Mr. Sweeney can make this work. And so that's why we're here before you today to reszone it to a viable use where we can do a single family for sale residential subdivision. The general plan again is not Lehi um which is rural residential or conserve. This is in the traditional neighborhood or sustain area. So this is obviously in a different general plan category than the rest of Lehi. We are proposing to go from RS9 to RSL 4.5 PA AD. The PA AD as staff pointed out is for really two deviations. no development standards, just so that we can put an 8ft wall around the the well site and so that we can have private streets. That's it. That's why we have a P A. We're also asking for a pre a plary plat. And here's the the list of all the development standards. And you can see we only have two, the wall and the private streets. Again, that was raised. We don't like to see a whole lot of deviations. We don't have any. Here's a layout of of the property. The main ingress and egress to this community will be off of Center Street. And we envision most of the people and most of the traffic that comes into this neighborhood will come in and off of Center Street. That's the easiest, quickest access to get in and out of this community and to the nearest transportation corridor. It's a quick left out of here on a street that really has not a lot of traffic. You're a few feet down to Mckelps and then you're either over to Quenter Club and on a freeway or you're heading east west down McKelps to get to to Walmart Neighborhood Market or Fries or or other commercial retail services or school or further south on Center Street to go to church. So, we've looked at a lot of the areas um of and what would happen. It's it's going to be a gated community. We will allow and accommodate emergency ingress and egress for emergency city vehicles for solid waste so that solid waste can come in in and out of Pasadena. And we will all also allow an exit only, not an entrance on the east side off of Pasadena, but only the the exit only. Um, one of the uh issues or one of the things was brought up with the Lehigh sub area, we do have a also uh consistent with Price Manor 1, we'll have a 10-foot DG trail along uh Center Street for obvious for people who want to ride in and around that area there. There will be an area for that along center street that will be incorporated within this that we've also incorporated into part Price Matter 1. Here's some examples of the elevations uh for these homes. Two-car garage, traditional single family detached living uh within this community, which again is nice to be back doing subdivisions again. So, with that, we'd be happy to answer any questions and reserve some time if there's anybody anything else I need to clarify. Uh but we request your support. Uh recommendation for approval of the zoning and approval of the plary plat. Right. >> Thank you. Any questions for the applicant from the board? Mr. like for the will you clarify the deviation for the 8ft wall around the well site. So the the the the walls that uh you mentioned had been constructed previously that is the the west and the north side of the well site will those be raised eight feet or which ones >> we will be I appreciate the question uh board member Peterson. So around the well site, we will look to increase the heights of the walls and or install a new wall around that carveout along center for SRP to create a buffer to lot is that 21 >> one. >> Yeah. So So is it all four sides of the well site or just the the >> I believe it would just be the >> between the well site >> east site and I think the south side. I don't know about center street site. Whatever. I will work with city staff to figure out what they want. >> I don't know that we need one on the north side. >> Yeah, there's already the six foot there right? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> That's just an AOT retention basin. >> And then to confirm and from the landscape plan, the this subdivision will still even though the wellsight's been sold to SRP, um the subdivision development will still do the landscaping along center. >> Yes. Because we've retained a strip between the SRP well and center. Okay, thanks. >> Did I another question? >> You done? >> Just just one question. I know that uh in the study session we asked this as well. Uh can you uh one of the comments we got from um one of the neighborhood folks was about the step down in in zoning. Can you explain that how you know how that's going to work? >> Absolutely. And and in that letter, I think I I also need to clarify um my partner Ralph did not attend that neighborhood meeting. It was me. I know we look similar. >> Um I'm I'm going to leave it there. I'm not going to He He's a good guy. >> He is much more handsome and and way nicer than I am. >> Um so I handled the neighborhood meeting and I know as much as Mr. Sweeney with with Brighton Homes would like to be Blandford Homes. Um they're not. And so that it is Brighton Homes that is doing this project. As much as he'd like to be Jeff Blandford, I think we'd all would. Step down zoning. As you go from McKelp's Road and you work your way north on this property, and let me just kind of go back. You can see on the south side you've got RM4, residential multifamily 4, which is a very intense multifamily zoning district. And that RM4 goes all the way to McKelps on the south side. And pretty much everything along McKelps is that RM4, which is very dense, is a mobile home park and has been for a while, but could be developed uh for an even more dense type of housing. So pretty intense. On the south side, we're transitioning to the RSL 3.0, 0 which is smaller lots than we are proposing and so that's a good transition from a either a mobile home park or a multif family development to the south and then you get to this project um we're RSL 4.5 so we increase the the um lot size so we're bigger than what is below us and then you transition up to what is AG which is a a dot retention basin which will never be developed for anything we think that's a good transitional um density And and I'm going to get to the point in the email to the to our east are RSL6 or RS6 and I think RS9. We believe that RS RSL 3.0 and RSL 4.5 are very compatible uh with those density of of developments and very consistent. And then that transition from the RS6 and the RS9 on into the Lehi area because you start once you get past those neighborhoods, you get into the Lehigh area, which is the larger lots. And so between the acre lots in Lehi and this property, you would go through RS9, RS6 into this RSL 4.5, which we think is a good transition of density. Now, I think what what Otto, and I know Mr. shield. Very well. Um I think what he was referring to was 25 years ago. Um there was really everything was just acre lots. That was a standard holding zone of everything that happened out here. And the thought was well let's change this to RS9 and and see where this goes. And we did in 20 in 2005 because you still had the RM4 to the south and then you had the horse property which was acre lots and then you had AOT which had kind of worked its way. I'm trying to think if they had that property or had declared they were going to come through. Um so that that was kind of a transition area but a lot of dynamics have changed in that time over the last 20 years. A the property owners made a run at it. property owners have made a run at an RS9 and just couldn't make it work over two decades. Two, the freeway came through um and that ADA retention basin was established. Three, the property to the south of us converted from a horse boarding facility and large lot um development, the Price family, uh and then the mobile home park has stayed the same. So we think whether you're dealing with it 20 years ago with transitioning of of zoning and today we all we still meet that criteria and and have a good transition between us and Lehi. >> Thank you. One one other question. Uh I think there was some uh some questions about traffic. I know you answered the the traffic to the east. Is there was was there a need for a traffic study on the the north south on the west? >> Excellent excellent question. At the neighborhood meeting, the concern was raised and let me go back to another map. Maybe this one. The concern was raised. Actually, let me go forward just a bit. I think I blow it. Here we go. You can see the site. The concern was raised with this 40 lot subdivision that we would create a substantial amount of traffic of people that would go through the Lehi area. So effectively what you if you wanted to go anywhere, they we heard from neighbors that that you would exit out onto Center Street, go right towards the freeway and get on to Lehigh Road and then drive through Lehi to go wherever you're going. Um I I disagree with that. I think if you're going to go right on center and then go right on Lehi Road, the reason you're going into Lehi is to go visit a friend. So, is there going to be traffic from these 41 homes to Lehi? Probably to go visit your friends and neighbors in Lehi in in that area. Most traffic is going to go to Center Street, take a left on Center, which is a low traffic arterial, and you're What does that say? My eyes are bad. 1,700 feet with one left to McKelps. And once you get to McKelps, you're going to go either east or west depending if you're going to go to McDonald's and Quick Trip or if you're going to go east and go to neighborhood market and fries or you're going to go visit the neighbors or you're going to go south of McKelps to go to church. Other neighbors were concerned about exiting on Pasadena um as opposed to going to Center Street. Um, so what we did is we closed that down to have an no ingress into it. So the real route that people will get used to making will be off of Center Street, but we still had to maintain uh that emergency vehicle so that we have public safety in and then solid waste from the east. We don't think there'll be a lot of traffic going east out of the the development simply because it's a lot further and more turns to get to where you want to go, which is McKelps, to get anywhere. And so we think the routine at least the path of least res resistance is how people will get in the habit of going and that's why we think most people you're going to uh go to center street now traffic study 41 homes we are nowhere I'm not the expert here and and there's other people on this board that can speak to when a traffic study is needed but I can tell you we did work with the transportation department and we are nowhere near um close or or sufficient number of lots to require the developer to go spend money on a traffic study. So that's why we didn't done do that, but we did work with the transportation department. >> Thank you. >> Let me see. We're going to go over to open up the public comment session section part of this. So I do have some cards here. here. I'm going to see if there's anything new or if there's anyone online if we confirm. >> Cheer. Yes. Um I do believe Kim Van Riper is online and had requested to speak. >> All right, let's start with that. Okay. >> And then we'll go to the blue cards. >> Is it Kim? You said >> I I believe it is Kim. You should be able to unmute yourself. Kim, let us know if you're able to hear us. All right, we'll go ahead and hit the blue cards first. We'll come back. Kim, if you're still on at the end of these, we'll invite you back on. All right, so with this, I do have four cards. I'm going to invite you guys to come on up. If you could please come up, state your name and address for the record for us, and then each of you will get three minutes. Um, try to keep your your comments to three minutes as much as possible. It would be great since we have a few of these to listen to. So, uh, the first what we'd like to have invite up is Allison Hixon. And if I say your names wrong, I'm very sorry. I'm not the smart sharpest tool yet. >> That's okay. >> Did I do all right? Was it too far off? >> Hixon. Yeah. >> All right. Good stuff. >> Okay. Um, do I need to give my address? >> Address, please. >> Okay. 211 East Leland Street. I'm we're on the corner of Pasadena and Leland and we're looking right now directly into the dirt lot that's been like that for years. Um, we'd prefer no traffic coming onto Pasadena, but we agree with Jiren that this is the best fix where it's just egress where they can leave that way, but they're not likely to turn around and come back that way if you're not allowed to enter that. Again, we prefer no traffic on Pasadena, but we don't think it's realistic. And we think the tradeoff of having that land finally developed and to look out on a nice neighborhood instead of a horrible horrible dust bowl, we're all for it. And we really appreciate what Jiren's done. He's he's really gone above and beyond to try to help us and do the best he can to make it a profitable neighborhood for him, too. So, we also heard that um the Lehi Sports Complex was going to cause a lot of traffic in our area. We didn't see it at all. I've heard that some people on Lehigh Road have seen it, but we literally look out across it when the lights come on. We see the traffic coming and going. It all seems to go south on Center Street, and we haven't been affected by it. We're just looking forward to having the two those two new neighborhoods done finally. So, >> thank you, Miss. We appreciate your time. >> Um, next up, Marilyn Crosby. Good afternoon. I am Marilyn Crosby, 2560 North Horn in Lehi. Um it's a bit difficult because I have three minutes to rebut a lot of other minutes of statements that are pretty interesting if you're coming from the experiences that I've had. Um so let me start with um I'm going to reiterate the words of Otto um Shill that you all received in your letter. And I'm and mind you I'm not speaking from 20 years ago because Otto and I sat in these same meetings together when the promises of reducing density happened and that's been within the first three year the most recent three years. So this wasn't 20 years ago that these commitments were made by city staff by developers. So I wasn't part of the 20 year ago conversations. Um so let's go to Otto's letter. The change of density with respect to the subject property directly contravenes statements and commitments the city of Mesa made in connection with the approval of the original development of the subject parcel. City staff and then developer represented that while the Price Manor one property was already zoned for the density proposed and that no review of that zoning was required, lower density in the subject parcel would provide a step down buffer in the density to the Lehigh community residents. The representation that was presented that the represent the sorry the representation that the proposed density of the price manner one was consistent with higher density of the trailer parks immediately adjacent to the south um and the subject property would provide a decreased density to the north in difference to the need to protect the Lehigh community. Now, I just heard about can't make a go of it, and I have the most unique definition of the word greed I've ever heard or bankruptcy. So, I can't get into the histories of why other people didn't develop it because I don't have the time to do so. But that was a really interesting definition. support because I was in the community meeting I would uh more describe as fear because residents were afraid that if they didn't say yes to this they would end up with an apartment complex which it isn't zoned for either. Um I don't believe that fear is a good reason to make a decision. Um residents while we say that there will be no cut through traffic in Lehi. uh residents that were at the meeting that were coming from Lehigh Shadows, admitted that they cut through Lehi all the time on their way to Walmart, which is on McKelps, not in Lehi. So, I don't know how we can sit here and justifiably say that there's no cut through traffic and that we we shouldn't have concern about these things when we've actually already proved otherwise. Um, the sports complex, I would disagree on the statement of no additional traffic. the very first game that was held there, there were four horses almost hit by a car on the first game. You'll hear others reiterate that we've had multiple horses hit by cars. And I guess that human life should probably be put above horse life. I tend to disagree with that on often occasions because I love them. But let me tell you that it's not safe to hit a two to hit a,000b animal with your car and expect for your loved ones to survive that either. the deaths of horses and accidents that have happened does not include all the near misses that we've had either. So, I can't document all of those because we were fortunate enough to not have those fatalities. What I can tell you, and I'm out of time, I apologize, is that there are some misnomers that are happening, and I get that I need to stay for my time. I appreciate your leniency on it. um some of the statements just aren't accurate and there just isn't time to explain all of those. So, I take seriously the the letters that you've received. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Crosby. We appreciate your time. Uh next, I have Kim Warden. Look at >> Sorry, I'm overdressed. >> Thank you. >> Tim Warden, 424 East Lehigh Road. up on the corner of uh Lehi and Mesa Drive and they don't get the traffic from the soccer field. Nothing against y'all, but they're back in another neighborhood, so they don't get the traffic. Soccer field is a bad subject for us. We didn't want it there. But it is called Lehi um soccer field because it was that was always Lehi. And the prices when they lived there, when they would say where they lived, and I really like these guys, but when they said where they lived, they would say Lehi because they were part of Lehi. They didn't say they were part of Mesa. It was Lehi. For some reason, all of a sudden, things were changing. And when we were at the meeting, Mr. lawyer man standing there and his um person, the builder told me and Marilyn directly that they would have fences out there for horses, you know, gated areas so the horses could be safe. They told us that it would run through and in and out through to Pasadena, that there's no way that they would, you know, just have an exit. And that's what they both said to us. So, I don't know. I was raised not to lie, but they're they're flat out lying about it and there was a lot of object objection to it and and I don't blame blame these guys um for not wanting it to go through the Pasadena neighborhood, but we're we get stuck with all of it. We're like the stepchild and I don't you know we you know Lehi's always been you know with acreage and you know they have cut it down. Everybody keeps cutting it down. Keep cutting it down. And we shouldn't be, you know, mistreated over it because we are a unique neighborhood and we want to keep it that way. And we keep fighting for it, but every time we turn around, somebody in the city or another developer comes in and just keeps taking a little bit out of out of it each time. We're not going to have anything left. And it's not right. People have gated communities, so they can live in a gated community. They chose to live there. people chose to live in Lehi because of the horses. Having all these developments, it just keeps taking away from our horse privileges and the danger of the horses. Um, but they they didn't write down the facts of what happened at the meeting. They, you know, I just think that, you know, they should have an exit through all the way through to through Pasadena, let other people get the traffic instead of all Lehi. And Pasadena pe the people in that area do go walking through Lehi, then they do drive through Lehi. I don't blame them. It's a lovely neighborhood. But I think they need to, you know, you guys need to do the fair share and do what you promised you guys said you do. Run it through to Pasadena because that's what you told us at the meeting straight to our face. >> All the time it was open, not just exit. You told us, he told us that would stay for both ways. >> And that's not what you told us. And you said you have horse lanes out there for us. >> And so, and you need to have something in your HOA so if there is horse out there, they can't complain about the dust because of the horses. Like someone building out there by the Williams Air Force Base, all of a sudden they're moving. They're complaining about the planes coming in. I mean, wouldn't they need to put something in your HOA thing? So, we have it for horses and outer activities. Thanks, did all right on that one. >> I'm short, too. Hi, I'm Michelle McCrosski. I live at 3021 North Chestnut Circle in Mesa. Kind of considered Northeast Lehigh. But some other things you may not know is I'm a 4 leader. I'm the organizational leader for the Lehigh Ranch 4 club and I'm also a member of the Mesa Transportation Advisory Board and I've served on that board for several years. So, as you can probably guess, my biggest concerns are going to be with traffic and the safety of horses. Um, we have about 700 horses, believe it or not, in in Lehi. We have the highest concentration of horses in the square miles of probably any area in Arizona and certainly Maricopa County. Um the and as the as the area gets squeezed, we get more and more horse people, which we're happy to. Um but we have our kids riding up and down bearback sometimes up and down Lehigh Road. We have them exercising their goats, their sheep, and believe it or not, they're walking their pigs down Lehigh Road. So, this issue of more traffic on Lehigh Road, you should have done, you should have asked City Mesa about the traffic studies that they already have done because I know they've been done and and it would have been helpful had you seen that. We'll certainly be keeping track of those because we need to see if there's now even more traffic going down there, but we cannot handle that much more traffic. You're going from 18 homes to I think you said 41. That's like double. I mean, you can do the math. And now this lucky neighborhood has decided that their traffic through their neighborhood is going to be very limited. Now, I can appreciate he said that it makes an easy left turn. It's a really quick right turn out of their neighborhood and make another right turn on Lehigh Road. And if you're thinking to yourself, well, there's a number of things you can probably do with traffic and speed on Lehigh Road, there's not. It is extremely complicated because we don't have sidewalks. We have riding paths on both sides of that neighborhood. So, um, we've had three fatalities, ecoin fatalities, and every single one of them has involved Lehi Road. So, I applaud that that they're probably a great developer, probably going to be a really nice development, but when you create that much density, you cannot stop that traffic coming through Lehi. Now, in a perfect world, I would love for them to say, "Okay, we're going to put a stoplight right out front, left turn only, so that people wouldn't be encouraged to go down." Because I if you go down Center Street, there's no place for you to go. you have to make another right on Lehigh Road. So, I'm sorry, but I can't support this development. It should have been kept as RS9, and it should be keep it should be kept that way. We cannot afford any more traffic going down Lehi Road. So, we're asking you to please vote no. >> Thank you, Miss McCrosski. Appreciate your time. All right. With that, I think let's go ahead and try the call again. See if they're >> All right, Kim, if you're online, go ahead and unmute yourself. >> I am unmuted. >> All right, Kim, if you could state your name and address for us. >> My name is Kimberly Van Riper, 505 East Lehigh Road. >> All right, the time is yours. You have three minutes for us. >> Thank you for the opportunity to speak. Uh, I am a resident of Lehi. I'm also the chairperson for in the uh uh historic preservation committee of the Lehi Advisory Board. Uh and I'm I'm glad that they went ahead and clarified that the heritage neighborhood boundary shares that northern border of the property and abuts it right up next to it. Uh, one of the problems I'm having with this at this point, in addition to what everybody else has been speaking about, is the misrepresentation of the community participation meeting. The papers that were filed with the city omitted much of the conversations that were had, much of the issues that were discussed, and the questions that were asked, primarily the questions asked by Lehi residents. Okay. Uh in addition, question number three is is inaccurate and we went ahead and covered that. But uh I would not feel comfortable just at a baseline with this moving forward without having accurate representation of this community meeting. Uh I do have a voice recording of the meeting. If uh Mr. Lake would like it transcribed. I'm happy to give it to him so that he can correct uh you know the the issues with it and resubmit it formally. If you've ever seen a horse hit by a car, it is brutal. When you talk about the dangers of traffic in Lehi, you cannot speak about it as if it were any other neighborhood. and extra measures absolutely should be taken to ensure that you're not putting a burden on Lehi that becomes a liability for the developer, for the city. Uh that creates dangers that uh you should have known about because you did a study yet you opted not to do the study because we just don't need to. It's not a right thing to do uh to move forward uninformed when you're dealing with a subject as serious as uh livestock and uh motor vehicles. Okay. So, I absolutely support some further uh I believe it's warranted to look further into the traffic. In addition, at the meeting, um I was there at the community meeting and we spoke about disclosures attached either to the CCNRs or an affidavit of disclosure for the properties. so that there would not be conflict in land use uh primarily dust, odors, noises that come with a rural agricultural neighborhood. Uh Mr. Lake indicated very clearly that this was possible and probable yet the communication past that point uh just ceased to exist. One more thing as I come up to my last 10 seconds here. Uh the Lehi advisory board acts on behalf of the Lehi neighborhood and with that northern border abudding the Lehigh heritage neighborhood overlay. Uh we should have been treated as stakeholders yet did not receive communication for these meetings at all. We had to hear about it by way of uh other residents and I think it was poorly handled. I think it would be appropriate to go ahead and table this for now. Let's get the proper documentation submitted and readress it when we have some of these concerns addressed. Thank you very much. >> Thank you for your time. We really appreciate that. >> All right, with that, we're going to invite the applicant back up. Allow him to respond. Let me just uh clarify some things I I thought we had stated, but let me reinforce a couple of things that were raised um by the community. We appreciate their comments. The first is uh we talked about a horse putting DG a 10-ft path or area down center street for uh that's DG for the horses. We maintain. We're going to do that. We're doing that with Price Matter one. We're going to do that on Price Manor 2. Now, where they go to the south on Center Street and and and uh leave our property, I don't I mean, that's that's up to them and and they could probably ride onto the AOT retention basin uh once we go they go north of our property, but we committed to do that and we're still doing that. So, we will have that along Center Street. Um, there was discussion at the neighborhood meeting about the exit or not exit on Pasadena and you have the neighbors who live directly to the east who didn't want to have any access to the east because they're directly adjacent and didn't want to have any traffic. But if you close that access then the Lehi people the people who live further in in the Lehi area were concerned that closing that off would force people to go right on center and along Lehi Road. So then you have a compromise. you're trying to you're work with two different neighborhoods and and one of the solutions was to have an exit only and not an entrance only uh on the east side of Pasadena. We personally believe that most traffic coming in and out of this project is going to come in off of Center Street and Mckelps. That's the least path of resistance. If you want to go to your major commercial areas or get to the freeway at Country Club, you're going to go center street to McKelps. And so you're not going to go right into Lehi and Lehi Road um to go to work, to go to the grocery store, you're going to take the path of least resistance. So we thought that compromise is expressed by the neighbors of an exit only was a good compromise. One neighborhood's not happy, the other neighborhood, they're both half happy or half upset. But that's maybe the definition of compromise. Um disclosure, sure, we've agreed to it. We've acknowledged it here. We will provide disclosure that we have are in a horse area. We're not adjacent to horse property, but we have there are horses in the area. We're happy to provide that disclosure. That's not a condition, but we've said we'll do it up already voluntarily. So, we've agreed with that. The notices for this meeting, uh we we always get accused of of not notifying people. The nice thing is the city's taken that list over. So, no longer it's the applicant's responsibility. We provide notice as as given to us uh by the city of Mesa. We think it complies not only with state law but city ordinances and all the requirements of the city. So we the believe notice met uh the full requirements. So we think this is a great project. We've really tried to work with different neighborhood interests and groups and come up with a plan that we believe it fits into the area and complements what's in the area and will be a good project quite frankly for future homeowners for people who are looking to buy a new single family home at a attainable price. I won't say affordable because that doesn't exist anymore but at an attainable price. We are looking forward to having something in this area. It's a great location. So we would urge your support. >> All right. Thank you. Is there any Go ahead. You're jumping on me. >> All right. Uh Mr. Lake, you said that you're happy to provide the disclosure of the adjacent um agriculture animal uses. How how uh what in what format is the applicant uh planning or committing to provide that disclosure? >> Chairman, board member Pet and and clarify it's not adjacent. Yeah, >> there are not horse properties adjacent to this property unless you include AOT retention basin, which I don't think ADOT's putting horses on that anytime soon. Um, but we are in a horse area. Um, and we can disclose that in our public report. We can disclose that in our CCNRs. We can disclose that to potential buyers. All of those things voluntarily. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Nothing for you, Mr. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. Is there any questions for staff at all before I go ahead and close out comment? >> No. Looks >> so sorry if we we can bring up if you haven't already put in a card. I apologize with that. I will go ahead and close the public comment portion of this and we'll invite the board members for discussion on this one. Also, if there's anyone would like to make a motion, I'll I'll go ahead with just thoughts and reviewing this. So, with our our purview of as the board and essentially comparing the the previously approved layout and case to what is before us today, I I see some tradeoffs. I see um the there's that as was stated there's double the number of of units. It's still 40 which which is mentioned it's a it's a small piece of property so it's 40 it's not 400. Um and then on the the upside of the tradeoffs is the the the gated community both in how the restricting the flow with the gate and then the east side egress it uh in in reviewing that for the overall neighborhood flow will u I I do see that as as uh better than the previous layout. And then in looking at the existing condition of of horse path along center both south south of this south of this property and then to the north too that the the 10- foot DG trail that's been agreed to is is uh as good as or better than the than the existing condition. And um so those are just some some thoughts I've had on comparing the two cases. >> I see what you're saying. Any other thoughts? You >> got something? >> Yeah. One of one of the thoughts I had was and I appreciate the comments that were were made by the the neighbor that is actually going to look at this development and is um is in favor of it because it's an improvement to what what's there now. So, I'm I'm um encouraged that that that that there's been some some outreach to the neighborhood and and some some compromise as far as what the access and ingress egress would be. So, I'm I'm uh I'm happy to hear that. >> Did you hear something? >> No. >> Go ahead. >> No. >> No. Okay. >> I'm just watching your screen. >> Yeah. Yeah, I'm looking at the map. >> So, I mean, I would agree with everything kind of said here, you guys. I'm sorry, I was just looking again at a little um I think these types of developments are always interesting as far as especially when you're coming across something that's adjacent to the Lehigh District. We've had several different projects u over the last several years where we've looked at these types of properties. development is kind of coming in and we understand that and I'm uh empathetic to a lot of the neighbors that have been in there uh and have worries about this. I think for the most part this, you know, I I know there's concerns about traffic. Um I I know a lot of neighbors probably want to see a traffic study. The reality is is one, they're way below the threshold for a requirement to do so. Number one. Number two, even if a traffic study was done, it's not going to affect change on this site with the site plan that's currently shown. Um, it'll show counts. It'll show you kind of how people flow in there, but I can pretty confidently say working in this field that it's not going to be able to impact things differently than what we're seeing as far as the site plan. So, with that, um, the density, it's it's a little bit more dense, but again, it there's nothing for me with everything that's close by it. It's nothing drastically different. Um, it's actually meeting in the middle in a lot of ways. So, with that, I I think this is something that I would uh look at and support at this point in the way that we've got it and and to push this forward for as a recommendation. So, with that, I'll go ahead and just make a motion on that so we have something to vote on here. Um, and so with that, for item 4B, 0125-00304, Price Manor 2, 6.5 plus or minus acres located approximately 1,620 plus or minus feet north of the northeast corner of East Melops Road in North Center Street, reszone from single residence 9 with a planned area development overlay to small lot single residence 4.5 with a new PD overlay with a 41 lot single residence development. staffer recommendation is approval of conditions and I would move to approve this as read and look for a second. >> I'll second that >> and then have everybody vote on and with that with uh board member Blakeman abstaining on this one. It passes 5. >> No, she did not abstain. >> Oh, you did not abstain. Well, it shows you >> as absent. >> You should be. >> She is. Well, >> so verbally that is a yes vote. >> Yeah, I think we can just go through and re revote again. >> All right, go through and do a revote. >> All right, everyone. Let's try that again. With that, thank you everyone for coming. We do appreciate your input. With that, is there anything from a staff perspective we need to discuss before we close out the meeting? >> We need to go back. >> Oh, we chairs. We have one more. >> I thought we had >> It's been a day. All right, let's go ahead and look. Go to 5B. >> 5 a.m. 5 a.m. >> 5 A and 5B. My goodness. I do not believe that we need to see a presentation here unless anyone on the board would like to. Do there's no requirement to do so. Correct. Anything from the board? I know we're waiting a second for this to kind of quiet down maybe. >> Do you have to open the meeting? >> No, we're already in a public meeting. >> No. Do you have to open for this case? For this? >> No. >> For the general plan. >> No, because actually that's a good question. Do because of the general plan, we don't need to do another public. We do need to do public. Yes. Yeah. So, we'll go ahead and open public comment for item 5A for the uh general plan amendment. >> We can do both the same time for 5A and 5B. We will open the public comment. Is there anything here that anyone would like to speak to from the public perspective? I'm seeing a lot of head shakes. No. Anything from the board? No. With that, I'll go ahead and close public comment. With that one, I'll look for a motion on item 5A and 5B. Can we do them together? We have to do them separate. We can do them together. >> Yep. So, um move So, uh move to approve make a recommendation to the city council on the following general plan amendment and related zoning case. Item 5 a 0 and25-0000366 4062 East Main 3.7 acres located approximately 1600 ft west of the northwest corner of East Main Street and North Greenfield Road minor general plan amendment to change the place type from urban center excuse me with evolve growth strategy to urban residential with an evolved growth strategy. Recommendation is approval with conditions and item 5B 025-000025462 East Main 7 acres located approximately 1,600 ft west of the northwest corner of East Main Street in North Greenfield Road. Reszone 3.3 acres from multiple residents 4 to multiple residents 4 with a planned area development overlay and reszone 3.7 acres from RM4 PD to RM4 with a new PD overlay and site plan review for a 137 unit attached single residence development recommendation approval with conditions. >> All right, thank you for that motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> I second that. >> It's like a race between these two. All right, everybody. We'll try voting on this one. Let's see if Jamie gets through this time. Actually, never mind. This is the one that we're all right. Do we need to do that one? Didn't you need to Never mind. We This is unanimous. I'm getting confused over which one she is. >> We've already done it. >> We did that one. >> Well, you didn't talk today, so I'm just >> All right. With that, so that motion passed 6 and we appreciate everybody's time with that. Is there anything from staff? >> No updates this. Thanks, >> J. Look for a motion to adjurnn. A motion to adjurnn. >> Second. I'll second. All right. Wall vote >> and the announcement. We are ajourned. Thank you everybody.