good evening and welcome to the Planning Commission meeting of May 7th 2020 my name is Gary Hirsch and I'm the chairperson of the Commission the Planning Commission is a citizen body appointed by City Council the Commission is empowered to make final decisions on certain matters with those being appealable to City Council on other matters the Commission acts in an advisory role to the council with the council making the final decision citizens will have an opportunity to address the Commission during a public hearing portion of the meeting your testimony is appreciated and encouraged the Commission acts from a written agenda and this evening due to the coronavirus of formats a little different as I understand public comments have been submitted in advance and will be read into the record at this time make sure we've all silenced our phones and electronic devices there are seven members appointed to the Planning Commission at this time I'll ask commissioners to introduce themselves state the district they're representing starting at my very far right commissioner Nyberg I'm ed Nyberg representing the Choya district I'm Vern Crowe representing cactus district good evening now lenox representing the barrel district I'm Rick Harper representing this world district Warren well-hung I could tell district good evening my thing now at Kowski yet the district Thank You commissioners let the record show that all members of the Planning Commission are present this evening and I am Gary Hirsch a mayoral appointee representing the city at large the Planning Commission received staff assistance and guidance from the Planning Division and the City Attorney's Office miss Collins would you introduce city staff that are present here this evening yes Thank You mr. chairman my name is Lisa Collins and I'm the in development services director George Gellert is here our senior planner will be presenting the cases this evening James Gruber from our legal department our assistant city attorney and Diana Figueroa is our planning assistant Thank You great thank you very much miss Collins do we have any citizen comments on non-agenda items this evening no mr. chairman we do not thank you hearing on none we'll move on to approval the minutes we have several sets of minutes this evening the first being the Planning Commission meeting minutes of regular meeting dated February 6 2020 is there a motion I'll make a motion we approve the minutes for February 6 February 6 2020 second we have a motion and second for approval of Planning Commission meeting minutes regular meeting February 6 2020 all in favor say aye any opposed the meeting minutes are approved is there a motion for the Planning Commission minutes from the March 5th 2020 workshop I make a motion to approve the meetings for March 5th 2020 second we have a motion and a second for Planning Commission meeting minutes from the March 5th 2020 workshop all in favor say aye aye any opposed the meeting minutes are approved for March 5th 2020 workshop do we have a motion for approval of the Planning Commission minutes of regular meeting dated March 5th 2020 so moved second we have a motion and a second for approval of the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting March 5th 2020 all in favor say aye aye can you posed the minutes are approved do we have a motion for the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of March 18th 2020 so move we have a motion for approval of Commission meetings of the regular meeting minutes of the regular meeting March 18 2020 all in favor say aye aye any opposed the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting March 18 2020 are approved as written and finally Planning Commission meeting minutes of the regular meeting for April 2nd 2020 so moved second we have a motion and a second for approval Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting dated April 2nd 2020 all in favor say aye any opposed the meeting minutes of the regular meeting April 2nd 2020 are approved as written miss Collins do we have any withdrawals or continuance is this evening yes mr. chairman we have four cases that have been continued case number the first case number 1zo in 20 - oh one is continued to June 4th 2020 doning case number zom 20 - 1 0 continued to June for 2020 case Co in 1905 continued to June for 2020 and case number 0m 17-15 continued to June for 2020 thank you Mr Gruber do we need motions or votes on any of these continuances chairmembers the commission no you do not need to make em oh thank you well now move on to the public hearing items the purpose of a public hearing is to provide interested parties an opportunity to present testimony for the Commission's consideration we'll follow the same procedure for each item the chair will call the application number in the name of the applicant staff will present the report and answer questions from the Commission the applicant will be given the opportunity to make a presentation and answer questions from the Commission other persons who wish to have their testimony entered into the record those those statements will be read into the record by a recording secretary Diana Figueroa the applicant will then have opportunity for closing comments staff will be asked for any final comments on the application and procedural guidance the chair will then close the public hearing and ask for a motion prior to discussion we have three public hearing items for this evening the first is Stonehaven preliminary plat pp19 0-3 presenting Thank You mr. chairman good evening members the Commission George Gaylord Glendale City Planning staff the first item this evening is pp 1 9-0 3 which is a request for approval of a preliminary plat for subdivision to be known as Stonehaven this is parcel 12 of the larger Stonehaven community the applicant is hill guard wilson LLC the request again is preliminary plat approval for a 112 lot single-family residential subdivision on approximately 21.85 acres this is the location of the property depicted on the slide along the east side of 91st avenue somewhat south of Cardinal Way I believe that's Montebello Drive at the corner of the southeast corner this is the again the location of the property it's part of a larger p ad known as Stonehaven it's surrounded by a number of other Stonehaven units phase one to the north and phases two and three to the south across the street is unincorporated property within Maricopa County again this is a response to a planned area development zoning that was approved by the City Council within the last two years I believe 2017 which enabled the development of the the Stonehaven community this is parcel 12 depicted with the heavy outline on the screen a number of plat concepts were identified as part of the zoning action for that planetary development and the one before you this evening depicted here is a reflection of that it's basically a separate subdivision with a single access an interior looping design a series of perimeter open space tracts in response to retention and landscaping associated with the project this is a depiction of the landscaping on this slide the development standards adopted in the zoning at 2017 for this particular parcel this particular phase depicted Lots about 4,500 square feet and size and a coverage allowance of about 60% the public notification process for this project it was initiated with the zoning in 2017 more recently the pre plat application associated with parcel 12 was posted on February 19th and advertised in the Glendale star on March 12th we've also more recently distributed hearing notification cards regarding the the Commission's hearing review of this item this appeared initially on your agenda on March if the there was a an error in the advertisement it was realized for April the second and was postponed by the Commission once again in response to requests for additional information on the zoning there proceeded the review of the pre plat as well as to just talk a little bit more about the function of the pre plat and how it relates to the zoning at this point staff is again recommending approval of the preliminary plat subject to the following stipulations number one the development shall be in substantial conformity with the development plan and narrative for Stonehaven phase 2a dated December 19th of 2019 mr. chairman that concludes my presentation Thank You commissioners do we have any questions from mr. getheard any question okay thank you would the applicant or applicants representative light to come forward please state your name and address for the record and make your presentation good evening Susan dim it with gamma Jay Burnham on behalf of the applicant I will we gave a fairly broad overview of the project last month make sure I've got this right here there we go and so I thought I would sort of short cut my comments this time to address some of the remarks or the questions that were raised at the meeting last month in April and then I'm happy to entertain any additional questions that you have so up on the screen right now this is a this is a map of the overall Stonehaven project this shows the phasing for the project overall phase 1 which has been plaited already has 565 lots on it parcel 12 which is before you today is the first parcel within phase 2 of the project first so parcel 12 has 112 Lots that are 45 by a110 is the minimum size of those lots as far as the prior approvals I did want to touch on this a little bit this is not the first preliminary plat that the Planning Commission has seen there were nine preliminary plots for phase one of Stonehaven that were reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission in December of 2018 those final plats were then final Platts in response to the approved pre plat were then moved through to the City Council at various points in time last year throughout 2019 the city council did unanimously approve each of those final plats as they move forward to council of the phase 1 Platts that have been approved already that again it's a total of 565 lots with five different lot sizes various home product types and sizes the main community park was included in the approval phase one and the start of the overall pedestrian sidewalk open space and connectivity system for the project I did want to point out just as a point of comparison you've got parcel 12 which is the one that you're reviewing tonight is highlighted in green on the exhibit so that's 45 by 110 Lots 112 Lots total that is as contemplated in the p80 zoning that was approved for the project so what's being requested is consistent with the zoning there are three other parcels that were approved as part of phase one that I've highlighted on this exhibit which include parcels 2 5 and 14 that are of similar lot sizes to what you're looking at tonight so parcel 2 is the smallest Lots that you will have in all of Stonehaven those are 45 by 95 foot Lots those are approved and final plaited and then parcels 5 and 14 utilize a 45 by 110 and a 45 by 120 lot again those were previously approved and those final plots have been recorded and so phase phase 2a which is what you have before you today parcel 12 is the continuation as they begin to work through the project you know one of the other points that was raised last month that we not have an opportunity to dress very fully was the comprehensive kind of open space trail network common area network throughout the community and so I actually pulled this as a slide from when the zoning was approved back in 2017 but overall Stonehaven is committed to provide over 60 acres of open space in various forms throughout the community that is about 3/4 of the size of Hiro's Park which is kind of you know to the northeast of this property but just as a you know sort of a general reference to enforce that open space has been a has been a primary objective I mean that's one of the main amenities that there is within this community overall and there's a lot of it being provided this is an overall map of the again at Stonehaven project where we've kind of outlined generally for you the main community park is highlighted with the green star that's about a 10 acre park site which I'll talk about that in a little more detail in a second but that's centrally located and sort of the heart of the open space system for Stonehaven the first phase of final plots which have been previously approved include the two pink stars that are in the northern edge of the project those are secondary community parks that have been provided for the residents within Stonehaven some of the Amanda's are associated with parcels two and six so you can see one of those secondary community parks is immediately adjacent to parcel 12 those secondary community parks include features like rock climbing wall play structures turf areas for open play ramadas seating and a barbecue for the residents there will be additional secondary parks in the locations and those are conceptual locations now but as the project is plotted you will have additional secondary community parks throughout the southern portion of the Stonehaven community and so then beyond that there's a very significant sort of open space and linear trail system that's being developed throughout the community there was a strong emphasis in creating a linear trail system one of those linear trail systems runs along the edge of parcel 12 and that helps provide connectivity to the larger community pathway network to get residents from you know then that's a no there's an off street trail system as well as you know sidewalks throughout the community so that residents and their kids have multiple avenues to get to the various community parks there are intentional connections from the Stonehaven community to the Grand Canal on the other side of Cardinals way and so parcel 12 is situated at kind of a heart of a lot of those trail and connectivity networks and so there's easy access from parcel 12 to the community the main community Park which is about 600 feet away a short walk or bike ride and it is immediately adjacent to one of the secondary community parks parcel 12 itself does have almost three a little over three and a half acres of open space within that parcel there is not a separate amenity or play you know play structure or park within parcel 12 because those have been provided in the larger community parks both adjacent to and and nearby this is also a rendering that was included in the zoning document that was submitted to the city and this just gives you sort of a reference point of some of the design concepts for the various amenities and park facilities which include off-street trails playground structures and passive and active open space areas for the residents and I'll move on this is a detailed rendering of the main community park which again is to being developed in parcel 15 construction my understanding is slated to start later this year this 10-acre Park has a multitude of different recreational opportunities for residents including a community pool a pool house and cabanas there are shade structures with ramadas barbecues there are various event lawns within this space kind of multi you know multi-use event lawns several large areas for fields that are sufficiently sized for soccer you know baseball t-ball various activities flag football for kids there's playground in the community park as well as a sport court is being developed in that community park and again this is at the heart of the community where it's being connected via the overall trail and pedestrian pathway system and then these are a few 3d renderings of both the community pool that's being planned within that community park in one of the larger shade structures in ramadas and with that I'm not going to go back through I won't I will not go back through the details of the project for you again but you know overall the parcel 12 as planned the preliminary platform Arsenal 12 meets the city's codes and requirements it's in compliance with and consistent with the intent of the original PA D first stonehaven you know we think it's the it is a natural extension of the project and we look forward to moving on to the you know following phases and with that I'm happy to answer any other specific questions that you have but we would seek your approval tonight to move this forward I have one I'm sorry I know when we last time we were here and we talked about this we had a bunch of people here expressing their dislike for everything there was do we not has that all been taken care of those people or there's no more comments to it or we're just kind of thinking they're going back to the people over here then well you know from the public input standpoint I think from the residents that have been involved is this you know recently as this preliminary plat has moved forward a number of those residents were involved in 2017 when we pursued the zoning and many of you were here and you'll remember it was a fairly contentious zoning case there was a lot of concern in opposition to that case some of that has lived on and I think you have some residents that continue to not be supportive of the project but at this point the project has been approved by your City Council we're following the rules and guidelines that were established in that approval and so I don't know necessarily that we have a way to address the concerns that have been raised by those residents because what they really asked for is different density and lot sizes for the project but that's not what was approved by the City Council I just have that staffer was there been any more comments recorded on this or yes mr. chairman and Commissioner Harper we did have a public comment that Diana Figueroa will be reading into the record okay thank you yes Diana Figueroa will read the email that we received regarding this case plotting Commission for the questions at the April 2nd restricted public hearing meeting mr. Nowakowski you stood strong on questions and did not allow miss Collins to overshadow you with her general statement of this being an engineering document the previous meeting indicated a workshop would be held to include the Stonehaven P ad on how zoning has applied to plat reviews when processed by staff for approval there were no workshop I'm sorry there was no workshop prior to tonight's hearing Commissioner Wachowskis questions were appropriate to understanding what was being requested for approval for the Stonehaven preliminary plat planning staff is not providing adequate information as an engineer preliminary Platts our planning document and final Platts our engineering documents that record easements this is contrary to miss Collins statement in April the PA D provides minimum area lot sizes and open space the preliminary plat needs to provide specifications for landscape sidewalk and open space among other things Commissioner Commission does not have I'm sorry Commission does have a choice to approving a preliminary plat as frankly you are making the final decision on subdivision design it is a final plat that cannot be changed planning staff is not providing assurance for quality of development when reviewing projects staff can and should desire more than the minimum requirements and know what documents state when presenting the applicant should be frustrated citizens should be outraged in the city manager Commission and council should hold this staff accountable miss informing and blowing off questions are not acceptable if we cannot trust the in term development services director or senior planners with information then we need someone we can depend on for transparency professional is and timely responses to citizens concerns several years ago glendale citizens lost trust in the city and clearly we are starting to repeat history we can only overcome this by Commission and council asking questions and not accepting everything staff states there are a few hearings with cases where planning staff did not provide correct information or strive for quality citizens are watching and planning staff is not delivering I asked the Commission to postpone this case until staff demonstrates efforts for quality development staff does not have to accept the minimum lot size nor does the Commission have to approve it preliminary plats are in the hands of the Commission for approval this request is not conducive to the best design the city can gain from one of the last largest residential developments in the city require better respectfully Jonathon start thank you are there any additional public comments to be read into the record deceiving it on this item no thank you hearing none commissioners Commissioner crow it's the email state says blowing off questions what does anybody have any knowledge of what question that might be mr. chairman commissioner crow I think they were referring to the hearing that we had the virtual hearing in April that they apparently didn't feel that the questions were answered adequately I will say too that once we're in a better situation I have spoken with the chair and we will be holding a workshop just on development processes in general so we we do still plan to do that and answer any questions that the Commission has the best that we can so the answer that I think I'm getting is that there is no really specific question that was just ignored I don't believe so but we we I don't know the answer to that question thank you thank you come and show crow any additional questions yeah one more question commissioner Harper I don't know what Reville Reville and stones this has on this but there's no address here on where this gentleman lives do we know what that is that dress at least none the one we have up here commissioners there was no address provided only than email address so does even live in the City of Glendale beings across the street to the west is the County Island commissioners that's unknown essentially anybody can have a statement read into the public sure I understand that I was just kind of curious it is what it is and Commissioner now Kowski just real quick preliminary plant it was mentioned in the letter a final plat what's processed between preliminary to get into the final plan and does that come back to Planning Commission no thank you mr. chairman and commissioners Kowski the preliminary plat is a it's a preliminary engineering document that's required to follow our subdivision ordinance so there's very specific standards that need to be followed that have been followed in this case after the Commission hears this and the Commission has the option to approve or deny preliminary plats but the ordinance does say that you must do one of those approve or deny and after that a final plat is drawn up that is the the recorded engineering document so it adds more detail to the document with infrastructure and things of that nature so it is it is a final engineering document so this I would call a preliminary engineering document is initially put in place to respond to the zoning to make sure that all the zoning requirements are met in this case there was a P ad for Stonehaven so there were very specific requirements that needed to be reflected in that preliminary plat and once that is assured then they move on to the final class stage and that is the document that's recorded Thank You mr. chair mr. chair miss Collins I want to thank staff for following up since the last meeting since April meeting I had requested some additional information and just kind of like learning a little bit more about about the plenary preliminary plat process and that was very helpful to my education one question the staff is this in compliance with city legal requirements yes it is all right Thank You commissioners any additional questions ok the chair will now close the public hearing on Stonehaven pulminary plat pp19 - 0-3 is there a motion sure needs a motion gentlemen I'll make a motion that we approve pp19 - 0-3 subjected stipulations contained in the staff report thank you we have a motion is there a second I'll second it we have a motion and a second for Stonehaven preliminary plat pp19 - 0-3 is there any additional discussion commissioners well only add for myself that I am grateful to staff for putting a little meat on the bones on this thing and following up with us I am convinced that this preliminary plot is in fact in compliance with the zoning that was approved by City Council and with that I'll conduct a roll call vote beginning on my far right with Commissioner Nyberg I excuse me Commissioner crow i vice-chair Linux High Commissioner now a Kowski explain my vote can I absolutely yes sir yeah don't Haven the just I appreciate the applicant coming forward and showing the larger design and with the trail systems and that Sun I had asked and couldn't really visualize from a home environment and so seeing the total picture helps with that said at the last meeting it just felt like this is one of the largest communities that is going to be built in Glendale and the biggest in the last 10 10 years last decade and it felt like an infill project stating that but understanding that pull T's involved and they're the creme of the creme of builders for this type of development but at the same time the votes are there to pass it but at the same time I I'm gonna vote no but I do have trust in the developers and I do have trust and the city staff and I really appreciate the follow up they they provided me so thank you Thank You commissioner now Cassy Commissioner Wilfong I like to explain my vote to please please I agree I like the layout of the whole design I'm just struggling why we keep going to smaller Lots I think that is going in the wrong direction for the City of Glendale there are plenty of people here or in this city that likes larger Lots it just seems to me we're trying to cram as many houses in one general area as we can for you know basically money so I liked the layout I don't like the lot size I'm gonna vote no Commissioner Harper I and the chair votes aye the motion is passed Mr Gruber what are the next steps in the process chair members of the Commission your action with respect to case number PP 1903 is final subject to a written appeal received within 15 days thank you move on to our public hearing second public hearing conditional use permit application Cu P 2 0 1 - excuse me - 0 - 0 3 and I hope I didn't put your that name Thank You mr. chairman members the Commission once again this is a request for a conditional use permit for a auto service facility to be located in the 51 Campania PA d site the northwest corner of 51st and Bell specifically to allow an automotive service the facility and the 51 Campania planned area development which supports the general commercial uses that is to say the planetary development itself basically supports c2 type uses identified by the Glendale zoning ordinance section 5.75 4 of V the applicant is Benjamin Graf Quarles and Brady LLC this is the location of the subject property it's about 6 miles north of City Hall at the eastern boundary of the city again 51st Avenue and Bell Road the subject property is designated by the Glendale general plan as a planned commercial area the current zoning once again it's planned area development it is again alongside the East boundary of the city depicted there with the yellow rectangle on the north side of bill Road part of a larger P ad they're surrounded basically by commercial and kind of quasi industrial uses this is an aerial photo of the site and what I've detailed here are the existing projects that have been approved on site so far beginning with an emergency care facility at the southeast corner of that block there's also a self storage facility which has been approved I believe for the northwest corner of the block the red DS are intended to designate a series of drive-through facilities approved an association with commercial or convenience related uses fast-food establishments neighboring the site this is a little bit of a better picture of the the adjacent properties the site itself you can see the construction underway on either side of the property to the east and to the west there's a couple of access roads being developed north and south from Bell Road to like a rear alley access to the rear of the facility this is a ground level depiction of the site photograph of the front access adjacent to two other sites east there's the existing Burger King facility the site immediately to the east I'd I guess is being developed as a currently as a Krispy Kreme the you can see the far background there the intersection was the the emergency care facility which has been completed at this time this is the site plan forwarded as part of the semental this evening depicts a 5510 square foot building on 0.92 acres automotive service facility with 10 service bays primary accesses from Bell Road also from the rear alley location but to the to the north of the site these are the elevations that have been submitted this application is still subject to design review at this time once again the notification regarding the request has been the site has been posted we've notified neighbors within 300 feet we've advertised the site the notices regarding the hearing this evening were mailed on April the 21st I spent three weeks we have not received any comments on the request staff finds the proposal is consistent with the development objectives of the general plan proposed uses in site development are compatible with the adjacent uses staff is therefore recommending approval of cop20 - 0-3 subject to the following one that development should be in substantial conformity I plan dated November 25th of 2019 the project narrative dated January 17th of 2020 subject to the design review approval process number 2 development shall comply per that should say IFC 2018 with local amendments and design and construction standards third to keep the project in an aesthetically pleasing manner and safe condition the owner shall be responsible to maintain all landscaping material landscaping areas in accordance with a design review approved landscape plan further such landscape areas shall be kept free of trash debris weeds and dead plant material and shall in all respect be maintained in a neat clean fashion for the city landscape ordinance mr. chairman that concludes my presentation thank you any questions very good thank you sir would the applicant or applicants representative like to come forward state your name and address for the record and make your presentation good evening good evening chairman members of the Commission my name is benjamin graph with the law firm of corals and brady to north central avenue phoenix arizona representing Griggs automotive tonight in the requested conditional use permit I believe I have a presentation that will pop up I did want to start while that's coming up just by stating that this is a perfect example of an application that started pre covered 19 with personal meetings with staff and it moved through to the virtual world and I just want to thank George and Lisa Collins and staff in the city for making this such a seamless transition we were always able to get in touch with staff get our questions answered the process is working so I did want to note that since I've been doing this a while and it makes a difference to see cities that are handling this in a really great way George did a great way a great job going over some of the basic information here but this is the 51 campaña P ad one of the first things we analyzed with city staff of course was the permitted uses expected uses within the P ad and the campaña P ad did in fact anticipate underlying general commercial situ uses which includes this minor auto repair use with the approval of the conditional use permit us before you tonight the area is really a budding commercial area as you saw a lot of drive-thru uses compatible uses with this service uses and again an expected addition to this area as a service use that would provide this level service without being an intense use that would be harmful to the area some of the surrounding uses our direct neighbor is going to be a Krispy Kreme just so you know we have been in touch with that owner and developer to make sure that our private drive is developed appropriately we have Burger Kings we have the medical facility and we have the storage facility to the north that has also recently been approved I think another key observation for this site that's important is I think any kind of a service auto repair needs to have some type of a buffer from the neighborhood so if you do abut a neighborhood you need to have some extra sound mitigation in this case as I'll show in future slides we are well buffered from the closest residential neighborhood an area and we do not abut any single-family homes which I think adds to the compatibility of the use itself obviously you're aware of the zoning the PA D this is some language just from the 51 campaña PA D which of course was approved by this Commission and it does again anticipate general commercial uses including minor auto repair through the CEP process we are absolutely in conformance with the plan commercial general plan this is a type of use anticipated for that and compatible with it being part of the Choya district we just wanted to know we have been in touch with councilman stumble Jeff's office from the beginning of even before we file this application keeping her office aware and obviously checking in to make sure that she hadn't received any comments I will mirror that our office and neither our office nor the councilman's office has received any comments or concerns regarding this application as of today so this is a single tenant its crew looks automotive I want you to learn a little bit about the applicant themselves they are not a new business they've been in Arizona family owned business since 1977 I think it's always good for a commission like yourself to know whether you're the guinea pigs or whether you're inheriting a very beneficial and well well-rounded well founded operation and that's what we have here so began in 1977 high quality auto mono services but yet not heavy more industrial-sized services we do not include auto repair sorry we do not include body repair for example which is a much more intense use we have locations in motoki Avondale Queen Creek Chandler found Hills Mesa Peoria Phoenix Queen Creek Scottsdale surprised and Tempe and hopefully coming soon in Glendale we have well well trained technicians all tested and we have just outrageously good comments from our customers and we hope those customers will soon be Glendale customers hours of operation which I do think it's germane to a conditional use permit Monday through Friday 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 Saturday 8:00 to 4:00 we are closed on Sundays this does include ten service bays and part of the site plan design was to specifically and intentionally tuck those in away from Bell Road so those ten service bays are not visible from Bell Road only from the private internal drive that was very intentional and had we not done that I guarantee you your staff would have required it as part of the conditional use permit this is just some examples of what and minor auto repair includes but basically preventative maintenance oil tires engine tune-up this does not include major engine overhaul or again body repair services those are prohibited for minor auto repair again I wanted you to just have a vision of who they are today some other examples of locations and you'll notice that you're not dealing with somebody that insists just on their specific design or whatever maybe because of a corporate issue we do try to blend into the local architecture and materials make sure that we are compatible and so these are Queen Creek Avondale and Scottsdale Arizona sites George did a great job going over the site plan I just did want to note again that private drive doubled private drives and the fact that our bays are facing toward the east which prevents that site directly from Belle Road one correction in this presentation actually noted in the staff report this the staff report and this state's 30 parking spaces we actually have 28 parking spaces but we were only required to have 24 but the site plan stipulation and the site plan before you does show 28 sites so it's just a small type of there again the 10 service base I have slightly updated elevations here with more of the materials and colors again we are subject to an administrative design review but I thought it would be good for the Commission to see the direction that we're heading in in terms of building materials colors and we do have the the purple signage their internal floor plan really the main point of harbor in here is that we do not have any outdoor repair or services whatsoever all repairs auto work will be done inside of the building and we've gone around the suit you says this is just an important slide again I mentioned I think anytime you have a use like this you want to be sensitive to the neighborhood we here just showing that we are 351 feet from the closest single-family home we don't anticipate any negative impact whatsoever and to that just quickly to go over the the tests themselves we do need to be consistent with the policies inject ale as a general plan as we've worked with staff we are we're in anticipated use not only within the general plan but the PA D designation itself and we are utilizing an infill vacant lot we do not find any reason and I agree with staffs conclusions that we will not provide any type of detriment to the health or where from where fell in this surrounding area or neighbors we clearly have a use that will provide a good service and we have a good'n of a buffer from any residential uses to prevent any type of issue we have no issue about crowding this into a site that's too small or not being compatible with our neighbors we do have absolutely adequate access to our public streets directly off of Bell Road and yet we're able to encompass a lot of that traffic within our own private drives and not interfere with any exterior traffic and we do not have any objection or issues with these stipulations projected by staff we're in full agreement with the staff report I won't go over this because George did a perfect job letting you know about our citizen outreach but again that resulted in no concerns and I believe I'll end with this slide as some of this stuff may get a bit repetitive from the presentations all and here and I'll be happy to answer any questions that you may have Thank You commissioners any questions hearing none thank you thank you very much the chair will now open the public hearing for seeyou p20 0/3 do we have any public comment to read into the record on this item no mr. chairman we received no public comments thank you hearing none the chair will now close the public hearing for CU p03 commissioners do we have a motion mr. Chairman I move to approve see you Pete - 0 - 3 0 further findings and subject to the stipulations contained in the staff report second we have a motion for approval [Music] with the three stipulations and a second the chair will now conduct the roll call vote beginning on our far right Commissioner Nyberg by Commissioner crow by vice-chair Linux aye Commissioner now a Kowski High Commissioner Wilfong aye Commissioner Harper aye the chair votes aye the motion is passed Mr Gruber what are the next steps in the process chair members of the Commission your action tonight with respect to case number c ub 2003 is final subject to a written appeal received within 15 days thank you Mr Gruber that brings us to our final public hearing item the northern 107 PA D general plan amendment s 0 8 and rezoning application 0n 1 9 - 1 8 now I assume we'll hear this contiguously but have two separate motions is that correct yes that's right okay very good proceed Thank You mr. chairman again the application is GPA one 9-0 eight and zero on 19 - 18 having to do with a mixed use proposal for a project to be known as northern 107 planetary development site is located along the south side of northern northern Avenue adjacent to 107th Avenue the two-part request includes the general plan amendment for approval to change the land use designation from MD r5 for medium density residential to up to five units per acre to high density residential that would enable a density of 20 units to the acre as well as two GC or general commercial designation for the hard corner of the site the zoning request accompanying the general plan amendment zo 119 - 18 would rezone the existing site from a planned shopping center or css zoning designation to plan area development or PA D to include commercial uses in a multi-family residential component property is currently awaiting annexation from Maricopa County by the City of Glendale the applicant is Ron Harris Norris design excuse-me LLC once again this is the location of the site it's about six miles west of city hall along the south side of northern Ave at 107th Avenue this is the depiction the general plan the way the plan general plan addresses the site just as a medium density residential and again this is the corner of that block is currently subject to annexation by the City of Glendale everything to the west and south of the site is part of Maricopa County across northern Avenue to the north that's the City of Peoria and everything to the east is part of the City of Glendale you can see the the zoning detailed in green the zoning out to the east is m1 in association with the Cologne Harbor Business Park and pretty much that's it all the way to the east and to the south again the West areas to the west is part of Maricopa County this is a little better look at the site you can see the the level of development that occurs just outside the city to the south and to the west and to the north again the areas to the east across 107 as part of Glenn and just a little bit better depiction of the site this JIT about excuse me just about ten acres again the the southwest corner of northern 107 this is a photograph of the street front looking somewhat south from again northern Avenue the angles a little bit distorted by the camera but you can see that the site is completely vacant at this time there are two billboard locations as part of the site those would disappear with the development of the property this is the site plan actually landscaping plan forward by the applicant as part of the planned area development what you see depicted there is a convenience convenience market located at the hard core of the site in tandem with gas station basically in a car wash and immediately west of that would be a fast-food location the remainder of the site would be all residential to the west and to the south the site planned depiction that we have depicts 91 units the the orange colored units to the center of the square are two-story units and everything to the perimeter along the west and south boundary are one-story units just to kind of go back over that again again the the perimeter units are all one-story the interior units are two-story there was a 15 foot setback along the west boundary of the property and the south boundary would result in about 48 feet of setback from those residential areas most of that is a unbuildable easement just quickly some some of the facades that architectural designs that have been proposed in support of the the requests looking at the retail or excuse me the convenience store basically at the corner as well as a fast-food establishment nearby this is a depiction of the the basic conceptual elevations for the one story and the two-story residential units as always the the notice was mailed to property owners within 300 feet the zoning notice and the general plan amendment site was advertised the proposal was advertised at Glendale star site has been posted since April 16th there was a neighborhood meeting on March 11th citizen participation plan outlines that it was attended by myself the applicants councilman councilmember Joyce Clark and I think three members three names three of the neighbors we did receive one comment from one of the neighbors to who lives in the condominium complex to the west basically in opposition to the to the request out of concern for traffic privacy and noise issues staff however finds the request is consistent with the general plan farthest of public health safety general welfare of the citizens of Glendale the proposed change would include any conditions necessary to mitigate any adverse impacts on businesses persons their properties adjacent to the road of course the development it encourages a mixture of housing types and designs supportable by the general plan encourages innovative development infill development for land use types and greater variety intensity abuses provides a process which relates the urban design and scale of the project to the unique characteristics of the site staff is recommending approval of GPA 1908 and the zone change 19 - 18 subject to the following one development and substantial conformance with the development plan dated April 9th of 2022 with the developer owner the shopping plazas shall be responsible for providing and constructing a CMU wall with a minimum of six feet in height along all property lines that are but residential zoning districts minimum six foot wide sidewalk will be required along pretty frontage street lighting will be acquired along property frontage that a turnaround area she'll be provided for the gated driveways and a total of 91 residential units be allowed mr. chairman Thank You commissioners do we have any questions for mr. Gaylord Commissioner now Kowski and stipulation number three it's written a minimum six foot sidewalk and your statement you said six foot wide I want to clarify that yes okay so if we can have the record reflect that it's part it's a six foot wide not a six foot sidewalk and then also this is let me try to find some of my notes here now it's a 6 foot wall for the property adjacent to the residential yes it's pretty standard and it's an 8 foot wall buffering the commercial to the this development to the multi-family housing here yes that's what the applicant is proposing okay just want to get that straight and then the northern Parkway how does that play into this the construction is there gonna be any right away taken away from this parcel or property believe there was a slight roadway take along northern Park were you is there a timing for the parkway to staff no I don't have an answer to that okie-dokie I might have some more reserved for staff later okay thank you mr. Schurr any additional questions commissioners okay thank you mr. Gaylord with the applicant or applicants representative they're here this evening I'd come forward state your name and address for the record make your presentation evening mr. chairman members of the Commission my name is Ron Harris with Norris design 901 East Madison Street Phoenix Arizona here this evening representing 107 and Northern LLC in their pursuit of the development of this property which they currently own we've been looking at this property for probably the last couple of years in terms of users and in configuration in use and respect to to our neighbors and ultimately decided that a mixed-use plan here while an opportunity may have existed to come in with something more commercial the size of the site and the other factors that I indicated really were supporting a mixed-use plan here as well as the interested parties out there who would like to develop in the City of Glendale so the plan before you in terms of the development pattern and I'll try not to repeat too much of what George stated and I do apologize to to the chair and the commissioners I didn't prepare an additional a digital presentation tonight but we are looking as you saw from the elevations at Circle K they've taken a very hard interest in the corner and their team has been working on elevations and design elements as they're starting to think about what a design review package may look like there is not a designated user for the fast-food pad but we have put our foot forward to define the architectural characteristics that we want to take through the entire pa D both commercial and residential that which obviously they'll be held to the residential piece of this is envisioned as what is being termed now the luxury rental home development which is primarily single-story either detached duplex or triplex units in a rental regime so that's that's the vision here and I would like to also make comment to the comment received from our neighbor to the west we had interaction with some of those neighbors related to their privacy concerns and other existing elements some of their buildings are up to nine feet off of the property line they've been there since the 80s and they were developed in the county to lesser standards at the time so in working with those neighbors and and what we heard at the neighborhood meeting that's when we agreed to knock down two single-story along the south and west sides to alleviate the privacy concern and work with them on the tree types and tree spacing along those property lines so they had concerns about trees that might be providing extra litter or things in the future so our landscape architect's have been focusing in on that as well finally I'd like to talk real quickly about Commissioner Nowakowski question about northern Parkway so for two years the team here we've been working very closely with MCDOT Peoria as well as Glendale we've had a traffic impact analysis for this project go through all three jurisdictions and have been met with approval and I guess I would just quickly point out on the depiction the the dark line that goes up it's kind of squared showed up in the middle of northern Parkway that's the current net boundary of the property the curb work the future right away take in that sliver area you see was provided to us by MCDOT during this past year as their design development of the plans has continued I think they have just finished kind of their second round of public meeting and stakeholder outreach and as I understand they're in the process of completing final design plans right now what they wanted to provide us was what they saw as a worst case scenario in terms of take there is a possibility that through this segment in northern Parkway could be one lane narrower which would mean in our development scenario if we're ahead of northern Parkway say Circle K is the first to go here and northern Parkway ends up being narrower Circle K will have more landscape frontage along the site that will be the end result so I can't give you an exact time status right now commissioner but we have been working closely with those groups and so we weren't just coming in here showing something arbitrary and I am happy to answer any other specific questions you might have Thank You commissioners any questions mission how costly just a few questions of course just a few so I understand it's gonna be Glendale providing the water peoria handling the sewers sewage how's that billing I wonder about the billing on that you know as I understand we will be utilizing Glendale Water and Sewer for this okay in the in the report it says Glendale water Peoria sewer so just to clarify that I probably just need to clarify that then with city engineering I guess I have been under the impression city provided Peoria and in kind of an awkward fashion provides services to the County residents that point us to the south and west and that comes from an easement that comes across the street from the north and goes down into that community Peoria has stated that you know for annexing into Glendale obviously we should be pursuing Glendale the services and we had no anticipation of utilizing Peoria for that all right in the in the in the picture for the circle-k you show 8 Bay's is that correct is that the plan or is there could be less could be more that is the plan that they desire to move forward with its eight gas pumps eight gas pumps is it just a single pump it is not double its in what they call a starter gate configuration where it's just single pumps lined up side by side instead of double deep pump base and you can kind of see that represented on the site plan you see kind of two series of eight dots there one of them's a pump one of them's a column for the canopy I got you the column for the canopy is pushed to the street side to screen the pump as much as possible yeah I wouldn't mind I have more gas pumps to tell you the truth because when you start a lot of people think it's it's better to have less you know but how many of us want to get in and out of a guess you know you know just wait in the Costco line you wish there was more pumps but just add that comment and here's my big one we have a what's shown there is trying to find the page the conceptual plan and I believe I can't find it here but I believe the drawing we have in our book was dated to 20 and near the back we have another design here that's a little bit different in configuration and it gets dated 4:16 and I still can't find it but the big difference is in the number of units that's dated staff has stated that there's 91 but I read that in one of your reports 120 and then another place in the report 124 and in this plan the one in the the back of the report it says 74 I would love 74 as commissioner of Wilfong mentioned that you know the high density seems to be the way everyone's going but on a 10-acre lot it seems like that 70 four would be very acceptable well and mr. chair mr. pincher that's only 6 point something acres of that that's residential of the 10 is our total PA d area so thank you for pointing that out mister no Klaus Keith the the plan has been evolving some the one that's in the back of your book is an iteration right now that is being worked on by an interested builder so the idea is you know the plan that appears in this book that we're requesting approval of tonight there there will be substantial compliance with that plan we accept the approval stipulation of a maximum of 91 units but you are correct that I think in reality what we're looking at is a plan between 70 and 80 units and I entered desire frankly to provide more amenity space very likely as a plan comes forward into the design review process the developer have any problem with us lowering that mark to 75 since you already listed 74 and is related to a number of units a maximum number of units maximum number of units given that we the reduction from the two-story to the single-story around our two perimeters mr. Commissioner that would be acceptable all right so I would like I don't also how would you categorize I know it's H high density residential it allows it says here townhouses condominiums and apartments how would you categorize these units well it's the proposal is for rental the new segment of kind of this rental industry's referring to them as luxury rental homes so apartments is probably the closest category you could put them in because it is a rental regime okay luxury apartments estimated luxury all right I think the area is is could use some luxury apartments and if you ever drive down northern there's not very many stops for gas stations even or a convenience store just in that neighborhood they have to they have to travel just you know to get a nice seat for the kids or something like that so and a fast food would be would be helpful in the area to staff how do I go about in the recommendations changing the total from ninety one lowering it to seventy-five what I need to make a motion mr. chairman and commissioners on Kowski yeah that can be added as a stipulation of a condition of approval do I need to make a motion or just during the the time it if you make a motion that yeah you could include that in your motion if you're the person making the motion or you can amend the motion okay thank you mister thank you I need additional questions we're good well appreciate your flexibility on a unit count there that sounds like that's gonna gonna help and I would agree with Commissioner now Kowski that error is a little barren for for services and goods among their so that it'll have to say mister chair members of the Commission to see the the growing employment that's happening right to our east and it's going to continue to happen there hopefully pretty rapidly is pretty exciting well it'd be nice to have a fuel station off of the 101 to await backed off of that there that's pretty jammed up over there so thank you and any other questions and commissioners okay with that the chair will now open the public here for northern 107 general plan amendment GPA won 9-0 8 and the rezoning application seal win 1 9 - 1 8 do we have any public comment to read into the record this evening no mr. chairman okay hearing none the chair will now close the public hearing on northern 107 GPA won 9-0 ate and the rezoning application 0 & 1 9 - 1 8 commissioners do we have a motion I'll make a motion that we approved GPA 19-0 8 support we have a motion and a second for approval of GPA 1 9 - 0 8 the chair will conduct a roll call vote Commissioner Nyberg like Commissioner Pro I we got excuse me Commissioner now Casca we got two separate motions and the stipulations pertain to the zoning apps okay thank you we can accomplish what you want to do no problem okay Commissioner Crow was in AI and vice chair Linux eye Commissioner now a Kowski eye Commissioner Wilfong eye Commissioner Harper aye and the chair votes aye the motion is passed Mr Gruber next steps chair moves the Commission in your action with respect to case number GPA 19-0 8 is not final your recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for further consideration thank you okay will now entertain a motion on zo in 1 9 - 1 8 mr. chair sure mr. chairman commissioners Kowski if you'd like to make a motion and in your motion you could request amendment of the stipulation containing the unit count go from ninety one I believe to 74 you said and if you wanted to add that verbage about six foot wide on the sidewalk stipulation three why I've just rolled it all into one motion all right mr. chair I moved to recommend approval of zeo and 19 - 18 subject of stipulations contained in the staff report with stipulation number three a minimum six-foot why did the wide be added six-foot wide sidewalk and stipulation number six be changed to a total of 74 residential units we have a motion support and we have a second we have a motion and second for approval with amendment the stipulation number three to include the verbage minimum six foot wide sidewalk and stipulation number six a total of 74 residential units is allowed the chair will now conduct a roll call vote Commissioner Nyberg aye Commissioner crow aye vice-chair Lenox aye Commissioner now a Kowski aye Commissioner Wilfong by Commissioner Harper by and the chair votes aye the motion is passed Mr Gruber what are the next steps in this process chair members of the Commission your action with respect to case number zero and 19 - 18 is not final your recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for further consideration thank you that concludes our public hearing items for this evening miss Collins do we have other business this evening you know mr. chairman do we have a staff report no mr. chairman very good commissioner comments suggestions okay I'd only like to interject that if you have pets it's warming up outside please provide your pets shade and ample fresh water it's a deadly gonna be a deadly time of year for the our little friends the next meeting is scheduled for June 4th is 6:00 p.m. here in Council Chambers and with that the chair will entertain a motion to adjourn we have a motion to adjourn a second second motion and a second all in favor say aye aye any opposed we are adjourned [Music]