e what be able e e e e all right I'm going to call the study session to order as we alternate commissioner de graina sit down and uh uh thing we have two items on and we'll start with number one GP 22-16 Lumberyard and z-6 Lumberyard and Kristen all right good evening commission the case I have for discussion tonight is for and a minor General plan Amendment for the lumber yard maybe thank you the site is located west of the Heritage District Northeast of nean culumber is proposing to reone the property to develop a multi family community it's going real great tonight Veronica you have a very concentrated face are you trying to fix it yeah seem all right sorry about that um I'm bringing this tonight to receive your input on the proposed request we are specifically looking for feedback on the proposed General and rezoning as well as the proposed deviations that are being requested there it goes okay the site is approximately 8.5 acres in is currently class industrial the applicant is proposing a general plan amendment to change the site from industrial to 25 to 50 dwelling units per acre that is requesting a rezoning of the 8.5 Acres from General industrial to multif family high right the site is located within the long range planning area with its District Redevelopment plan in that plan the preferred land use at The LumberYard site is multi parks reten and Transit the proposed lumber yard development Falls in Lely in use and will be beneficial to the Heritage District by providing a density of housing with around the Heritage District which promotes an 18-hour downtown increases the ability attct retail users and generally supports the Vitality of the district creating a moral and self-supporting downtown the proposed density of 35.3 dwelling units per acre with a total of 300 the units will be located within three separate buildings one building will face Neely and will be three stories tall another building will be placed at the rear of the site and will be four stories tall and the final building will be placed in the center of the site it's the largest and will also be tall n uh the access points to the site both off of neie parking is found throughout the site but most importantly is located northern and southern borders of the site providing an additional buffer from the adjacent industrial zonings currently the site is shown as being underp parked and we have been working with the applicant that to park the entire site on site uh see conceptual renderings that the applicant has shared with us the renderings are not part of the review is supplemental at this point with the applicant is requesting a pad with two deviations the first deviation is for a parking reduction per our Land Development code a pad is not an eligible Avenue to request parking deviations so that the applicant remove any reference to that in their future future document submittal uh the second deviation that the applicant is requesting is for a reduction in open space the open space require 40% and the applicant is currently requesting 36% multiple neighborhood meetings for this site have been held over the past year question concerns from the public regarding the project have included it proximity to adjacent industrial parking traffic concerns the project was also taken to a study session with the Redevelopment commission onth due to its proximity to the Heritage District some of the feedback provided by those Commissioners work at the site being underp parked support for the street front building only being three stories instead of and that perhaps rooftop amenities could be a way to bring the total open space closer to the rec perc uh since the RDC study session what meeting with applicant where they propos two potential options that would allow them to meet the required parking on uh both options do require a reduction in density the requesting in open space and a slight increase to the acreage of the site um we're Contin with them to figure out the best path forward but currently this is uh the direction that we're headed right and then again I'm just hoping for feedback tonight on the proposed General plan Amendment and well as the requested deviation on the open space reduction a for any questions if you have them thank you Kristen is anyone questions I'd like to start off with oh that was an eye for me I apologize commissioner please thank you chair um Kristen for you is it my understanding that that we're looking at allowing rooftop top space to be incorporated as open space considering rooftop space is open space is that my understanding in that I guess I kind of have a a question in general and I see this kind of coming up maybe more often as we start looking at some of these areas where density is going to be more prevalent um with regards to our requirement for the 40% op although I appreciate that I feel with some of this density that something that we need to really consider reducing in order to get our parking be kind of my position I don't know I mean it'd be amenities on the rooftop but I mean then then are we going to get somebody coming and build out the entire packed with roof rooftop and say hey we got 40% on top of the roof so I don't know I mean I just it I would I would have some issue with that but I with regards to the parking I would be willing to bend on the open space iation in order to maintain parking I don't have an issue with what's being requested or proposed the height is fine I don't have an issue there that's all I have thank you thank you commissioner Simon vicey thank you chair hi Kristen um so the question you you talked about working and you're working on that um you talked about the parcels to the North and South so this is kind of in consistent with what the long-term goal is um with as you're parking I know it's early in the process is this is this proposal scheduled to be or be gated do we know uh chairman Vice chair be have an answer to that my applicant is here though and they might be able yeah I mean that's that's far I'm just wondering as you're working was that going to be an issue if it was gated so it sounds like you guys can still guess that through the through the process um you also talked about a reduction in units and density I'm imagining it's the same classification they're just reducing the number of units okay um the other curiosity I had is what's the easiest access for them to the Heritage District amenities that's something I don't need to know now but I'm just kind of curious how you to that Heritage District connection um and then I also agree with commissioner Simon it's understand the reduction in the open space it's not a huge ask but I want I would want to setting a precedent of using open space versus amenities and trying to so that just may something I want to keep an eye on if it's just a complex amenity counting that as open space if we're going to start seeing that more and more but other than that I think it's a fair proposal thank you thank you thank you Vice chair any other comments or questions yeah commissioner Anderson uh thank you for the presentation regarding the open space uh deviation I'm okay with that the reason being is is in that downtown heres district I mean the whole purpose of that downtown area is to create environment so if we're deviating from that open space a little bit and we're making up for it with amenity space that's on the roof and that's something that I've done on projects before here in Gilbert where we are allowed to use a rooftop amenity towards the open spacement um and these types of projects I mean they provide so much internal amenity areas uh so I I'm I'm fine with with the request of deviation uh I refresh my memory was it last month or two months ago when staff presented Us the land devel regarding parking requirements and the deviations was that Ling or has that gone to council yet it'll be going January 9th so next week okay so the um the proposed word changes that we we had at planning commit regarding residential where we were not going to allow any deviations for that is that in it to council or is it sticking with the original document chairman and Council uh commission me uh we took planning commission's recommendation forward um and what that recommendation was that um any requests for reduction to residential regardless of the number would be a use permit that would before Planning Commission so that's the recommendation that was forwarded onto count okay so if the applicant is requesting you know parking deviation that's the route in my mind that just they're just going to have to go it's through the use permit I I wouldn't support it through the pad um especially multif family multif family projects are just and um especially in an area like this so I think to find a way to meet the current LDC with the parking requirement if not and I mind they need to go through the use permit process for that requested deviation thank you thank you commissioner Anderson commission Davis thank you chair thank you Kristen um I see this as a little more isolated and not quite as accessible to the D as I would like it to be um I was out there yesterday and it looks like there's a bridge kind of north of the the lumber site on that north side that takes you over there but walk and kind of you're kind of isolated walking over there um but that eased my comfort level a little bit to see that there is that pedestrian access to um but I do think that that still leads me to feel like they need parking on their site um I also would be supportive of rooftop um open space area but I also think that the open space is still important especially because it is somewhat isolated it's not quite as accessible to some multif family like the one that's to the east of this um I'm still con with the industrial I I can kind of see more where the north is eventually to something like this I could see where that could happen to the South those are individually owned Lots so it seems less likely that that's going to change over from and it looks pretty intense out there with cranes and all kinds of stuff so that something to definitely look at in how you buffer the views of these from because they're pretty tall you're looking I mean some people might get a kick out of looking at that industrial out it's not necessarily going to be the best living environment and you're kind of stand with between the two so again I can see where this is M Direction but I don't see that little industrial park going away and I do have a concern with the and how that that's how that's handled so I guess that's where I'm at thank you commissioner Davis um and then just for context you mentioned what was going to happen to the north of this site so we at75 on there um that's a future 10 acre retention Basin that the town is going to be conure okay just for context I didn't catch that thank you thank you Comm Davis anyone else okay um so given the parking I think parking is more important than the small de in the Green Space uh you know it is tied into an urban and there is that walkway it may be a bit away but I think that is something that in the theory of the way that the forward walk is going to go through the hair all the way to the north there in the eventual future um would consider it tied in somewhat and I I agree I'm not a big fan of Green Space however in a small variation for a is kind of isolated and then you also have that that retention be up there given most of the time that'll be wide open and green um you know I guess that that works for me but I would say just keep working on my is to make sure we get the parking filled up and um and that I don't think we have a with a small deviation in that open space Oh I'm sorry commissioner no I just I just had a thought that kind of popped into my head so you had mentioned that the base or the the retention Basin to the north of this is the town woring this lot right now or in a sales agreement where we at with that and can you share and then secondly if if that is the case we had the engineers then looked at this and decided that that retention Basin is the actual size we ability to deviate on that lot to to supply the developer space for their parking and green green space or open space sure so chairman uh commission everything is still kind of early we don't have any designs for the retention Basin or anything as of yet Economic Development has been the department that's mostly involved in it so they'll have more details if you wanted to touch base with them um I do know that it has I believe gone to council and been okay just the 10 acres and then potentially an additional 8 Acres but it is still very early we don't know what the design is going to look like yet the 10 acre needed 4 100 Years of retention I believe um so will that then be a part and this may be outside this conversation but will that then be part of shed conversation and obviously run off at that point is that an answer okay we can address that later just a thought thank you commissioner Simon Okay CH I think so thank you everybody thank you number two on the agenda this evening is z23 d8 and let's take it to the north for Heritage North Ashley uh thank you chairman and um so Heritage North you have seen before this is located at the uh southwest corner of Juniper Avenue and Gilbert Gilbert Road uh at the north entrance to the Heritage District so this is um road is the northern boundary uh and this is what we call our North anchor site background this is an 2 um with the design review and use perming after in February of 2022 uh what the applicant is at this point is an amendment to that pad so that they can continue forward with development of this specifically they're looking to amend the development plan in order to allow for phasing of the development um something which wasn't considered as part of the original approval as well as modification of condition of approval that I'll talk about in a moment so just to reorient Commission since it's of years um since some of you have seen the site and um I know we've got some new commissioner so the site includes nine total buildings it's a mixed use development that includes um Mally a hotel office um retail parking garage Commons op uh water towerway which is the Poo that connects the North End of the Heritage District all the end of the Heritage District as well as improvements along the western Power Line Trail which is at the South the southern boundary of the site uh so this project proposes to uh improve some spaces as I mentioned um the common open space water towerway and the Western Power Line Trail uh when this project originally came through through it was anticipated to be built in a um however given changes in market conditions uh the applicant is now proposing to phase the development um what they are looking at doing as part of phase one is family building which is located at the northwest corner of the site um the large building is surrounded by a parking garage or that surrounds the parking garage they're also looking at developing three which is a twostory building um that includes a retail uh um they would include the common open space development of water towerway offsite improvements um and then I I didn't mention buildings five and six also would be built the first phase they're looking to defer uh development of the hotel and um it could it could come in as part of phase one it may be part of phase two and finding a hotel user and then they're also looking at deferring in of the South garage as well as the office building uh deferral of that parking structure on the south end of the site would require them to build parking lot in lie of that for the time being and so uh the new development plan would include pH one development that includes the surface parking lot and then those temporary um fenes that would be around the portions that aren't yet developed phase two would include the remainder of the site so the hotel which as I mentioned may be constructed as part one building four which is a small retail building off of the garage it would include building seven a um multi-story office building and then the south parking garage in addition I mentioned that the applicant is looking to modify one of the condition uh this was the original condition that was approved uh with the original develop uh that includes that the applicant shall not be permitted to charge impose or any fee toll or cost for the use of any parking spaces on the property the applicant is that they would like to be able to uh charge a fee for residents uh as part of the residential garage potentially to be able to reserve um parking spaces in the South garage for of the office building or the retail uses and so the applicant has language um in blue that in phase one no more than 500 spaces may be reserved for guests of the multif family residents and there shall be a minimum of 200 public parking spaces provided free of upon completion of phase two is depicted in the development plan the entirety of the project shall have no more than 0 spaces reserved for office employees Hotel guests or multif family residents and there shall be a minimum of 300 parking spaces provided free of charge staff is still applicant on this condition and and this will this will likely not be the final language that that um to Planning Commission we do need some additional information from the applicant that will be um part of their due application um that that should be submitted uh shortly we can verify some of these numbers uh staff is also looking at opportunity to add language that would uh potentially uh limit the reservation of parking to certain days of the week hours um so that on the weekend we're not holding spaces um you know office employees when they're not parking there so those are some of the changes as we move forward um with that language so as I mentioned we're continuing to work through that language um we are also continuing to evaluate what new condition need to be added relative to the phasing um so on the site plan you saw that there was some construction fencing around those uh pieces of land that aren't going to be developed um if this may add some conditions that that be enhanced construction fencing instead of chain link as an example um so from here the pad Amendment does have to go to Redevelopment commission since it's its district for a recommendation then it'll come to Planning Commission for recommendation and then to Town Council uh I mentioned that there is a design review that was previously approved that'll be amended as part of um the process as well to incorporate the different site plans for the various uh that will just go to Redevelopment commission um but that'll follow the pad if approved and then there were two use permits approved um by Planning Commission obiously one for a hotel in the Heritage um Heritage and the other was for ground floor residential those will likely expire before is completed and so you will see those applications again just to kind of reaffirm those so that they don't expire uh with that I'm happy to answer the commission has take any feedback that you have um relative to the phasing plan um or the condition modifications okay thank you Ashley want want to open up with some questions no I do have one yeah one question in reference being a new member on the commission it seemed we have a lot of multif family developments coming uh up and Liv been here for 33 years there's a huge uh apartment complex on the northwest corner of ill in McQueen my my question or my concern would be are they doing are you guys doing any studies and on are we having the right proportion of multif family in comparison to single family town homes and condos make sure that we have the right mix so we could have the right type of people living here so our cops and our and everybody that we need to live here can afford to live here and we have the right home uh commissioner um we do uh keep track of person percentage um makeup is of the town of multif family versus single family residential we checked it was 11 12% um residential is multif family um and the other number I don't remember off the top of my head but we do keep track of that um we did have some information presented to council um one point in time uh but we do work closely with our Economic Development Department as well when properties are rezoned to to make sure that we're still meeting the needs of of town yeah and as and just to follow that up I believe that the surrounding areas Chan Mesa Scottdale and others of the like are in the High Teens for for just for reference so the 12% is actually quite low for urban area so we have a need for multif family in comparison to other community ities that is correct we uh commissioner um mtis we are we are low compared to our surrounding cities good anyone else ah Vice chairman bian thank you chair um so Ashley I just want so the development agreement already provides for phasing correct so this is just getting it through through zoning correct chairman and uh Vice chair that is correct in October of um the uh staff took forward an amendment to the development to Town Council um in order to amend the um phasing or the line for development the development schedule is what it's called um and it uh Nows uh kind of offset starts and completion dates which will allow for them whereas previously it did not include that okay and the hotel could possibly be B one if certain amenities amenities are met provided it could yes the developer is to um find a a hotel operator for the site and so depending on how that moves forward we may see development of the hotel as part of phase one okay thanks and feedback is I I definitely understand the request especially with parking I do have a concern I think staff had mentioned about the parking deficit when that garage gets built if those surface Lots go away because that's one of my concerns with the possible phasing I don't want this to kind of develop as a disjointed development where we've got phas we've got portions of Gilbert Road with just kind of open space and I don't want to have I don't want to be just jointed development especially if we're just getting the multif family development the surface parking lot overflow parking so that would be my one concern with the phasing I understand the request but um that's my one concern when we do it this way but hopefully the phasing makes long run thank you thank you Vice chair commissioner Simon I just have one question with with and not doing the um second parking garage or or we going to be meeting the need in that area uh chairman and commission member uh when the was submitted we will verify all parking numbers um and make sure that the the design the parking the surface parking lots do meet the requirements um so I can't really answer that this plan meets those requirements but um that is something that staff is evaluation or bian mentioned um during construction of the garage that surface parking obiously um no longer be available and so uh during construction there may be a part it and so we're continuing to work through that and how that might be handled um with the so that's another item that I don't have a kind of a definitive answer whether or not building um is kind of staggered construction and and they Park temporarily on that site and operated a partial deficit um we'll continue to to work through that an update um as we move along commissioner Anderson Ashley can you um explain to me again how they were planning on uh for the parking diving that up in how that actually all works again uh so the north uh North garage that is surrounded by the multifam parks the multif family component some excess spaces in that garage that originally were um to be allocated for um the hotel as part of this new proposal they're contemplating that the ex excess spaces would be for the hotel um and Retail and then the South garage would make up um the bulk of of what's left to to meet the requirement the approval of this project in 2022 did include an AUP that allowed a reduction and parking based on um a captive adjustment so people that are on site visiting for multiple reasons um and some some offset Peak usage was also factored into that original study um there are surface parking spaces along the streets as well we just like I mentioned before need some more information from that design review application before we uh really answer questions on how parking will be handled through the the phasing of it but we'll be looking at that very closely okay I guess I what I'm curious about I mean they're talking about assigning what was it 900 spaces or something like that or that won't be used public and I don't like when I go to downtown area like on a Friday gone sometimes where I would go into either garage and there wasn't a space open um as you're looking at the parking for this area are you including I look at parking for that whole air outside of what's being proposed here so the two garages and I you know there's a big surface parking lot um in that area you take in account areas to make sure like this whole area is getting properly parked great question so our Economic Development Group did do a Heritage District parking study that evaluated within the district this site and the parking spaces on this site are really only intent the requirements of this site that was one of the items in their development agreement that it Parks um what we do for the rest of the Heritage District so the the G that the town owns um is if a applicant wants to be able to those spaces towards their required parking we keep track of that to make sure all parking requirements are met throughout the district um this site doesn't didn't explore what happens outside of it because the requirement was that they all of their parking requireed on site okay right who owns the land right now um okay so you guys have already sold it to correct okay all right thank you thank you commissioner anyone else okay well I I think that very nice to see this project get started recognized that when we originally had it come through a little thing plowed through the world and caused a bit of a disruption so I understand some deviations um the parking thing you know this is where I get land rights issue of okay there's a blit Park on it right now but does that mean that they're obligated to continue to put free parking when it's technically now their land and I I don't know I lean towards I like the idea of that what they do on their site they have to sustain it when it comes directly to the phasing I think this sounds very reasonable uh encourages as we've said that as we do the construction phasing that uh it's that does allow at least a tapering of that parking and not just block it all off um and I recognize there'll be safety issues um but it it it will still be used by some people and especially at night so just be careful okay thank you very much J it thank you very well then uh this will take us directly into number three on the agenda a discussion of the agenda I know does anybody reason that the on the consent we have the Gilmore d-3 38 is there any reason that would have to come off any public members out there no I didn't see okay and then on the non-consent we have GP 2215 z225 uh the SEC Lindsay Road and Street and I believe um there were some issues brought up so they need to stay that so we will be hearing a presentation from sou so that means there's no changes well I guess with luring the study session and reconvene here in about 15 minutes forward meeting thank you e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e okay is everybody ready to uh get the regular meeting started it's kind of an ironic question because everybody that's here can say yes but whoever isn't here can't really speak but we're going to kick it off I'm going to call the uh regular meeting to order and the first order on the agenda will be the Pledge of Allegiance please join me I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice okay can we get a roll call alternate effort present commissioner deina pres commissioner Simon here commissioner Gage here commissioner Fay commissioner Davis here commissioner Anderson here Vice chairman biani present chairman Mt here we have a quarum very good okay well I'd like to get the uh approval of the agenda and I believe we had a discussion that uh there will not be any changes so I would entertain a motion chair if you're ready I move to approve the agenda as presented tonight thank you got to move from the vice chair is there a second a second second from commissioner Simon Okay please vote on your machine maybe yeah 70 okay Communications going to move on to some Communications from citizens at this time members of the public May comment on matters within the jurisdiction of the town the commissioner board may not discuss the items that are not specifically intended on the agenda therefore pursuant state law action taken as a result of the public comment will be limited to directing staff to study the matter responding to any criticism or scheduling the matter for further consideration are there any members of the public that would like to speak okay not seeing any we'll move on to a report from the Council of aison who also is not here council member Anderson is unwell so I doubt there's any report and we will move directly then into the public hearing consent all items listed below are considered to the public hearing consent calendar the commission may by a single motion approve any number of items where after opening it to the public hearing no person requests the item to be removed from consent calendar such a request is made the commissioner board shall then withdraw the item from the public hearing consent calendar for the purpose of public discussion and separate action is there anyone in the public that wishes to speak on number 7 dr22 d38 The Gilmore I don't have any cards and I don't see anyone so I will then entertain a motion currently the consent agenda is of one item number 7 Dr 23-38 the Gilmore do I have a motion chair I'll make a motion to approve the agenda as stated with no changes consent the consent yeah oh consent sorry yeah yeah consent item we have a motion from commissioner Simon do I have a second second Vice chair bian comes through with the second any discussion no everyone vote please very well unanimous 70 that moves us right along into the next public hearing non-consent non-consent public hearing items will be heard at an individual public hearing and will be acted upon by the commission by a separate motion during the public hearings anyone wishing to comment in support or in opposition to a public hearing item may do so if you wish to comment on a public hearing item you must fill out a public public comment card indicating the item number with which you wish to be heard once the hearing is closed there will be no further public comment unless requested by a member of the commission we have are these items going to be in one presentation do I they will okay yes so we have two items on the non-consent for which we will see a presentation from s and that's number eight GP 22-15 SEC Lindy Road and Lexington Street and z22 D15 of the same name for number nine cell please take it away excuse me all right good evening chair Commissioners glad to see you in the new year uh so for tonight we have General plan case GP 22-15 and Zoning case z 22-15 the southeast corner of Lindsay Road and Lexington Street the subject site outlined in blue is an approximately 2.7 Acre Site located at the southeast corner of Lindsay Road in Lexington Street which is just east of rivulon the subject site is also being reviewed with a concurrent application which is an annexation which is to be heard uh later on in the month at town counil on the 23rd for a final decision but the request we have for you tonight is at first a minor General plan Amendment on the 2.7 Acres from the current general office or I'm sorry uh yep the current general office to the proposed General commercial and the rezoning request is for the current Ru 43 in Maricopa County which would then be SF 43 through the annexation and is proposed to rezone to General commercial here we have the general plan exhibit which lines the boundaries of the property as well as laying out the proposed um General plan uh designation from the previous general office to the proposed General commercial and staff considers this an appropriate land use change as The General commercial is expected to develop commercial uses that'll assist to the surrounding residential and Business Park as we move on to the zoning exhibit we can see the outline of the property here which is currently zoned Maricopa County Ro r43 which will become SF 43 through the annexation process and the proposal is to rezone to General commercial and similar to the general plan Amendment the intention is to provide um neighboring employment in residences with some new commercial opportunities as for the development standards uh this is a conventional rezoning and general plan request uh without a proposed pad so anything developed on the site would follow the development regulation set forth in the LDC for The General commercial zoning district for public participation a neighborhood meeting was held back on March 25th of 2022 for surrounding community members attended uh General input was from just you know curiosity of potential development as well as potential impacts uh revolving around noise odor and potential lighting uh we do have an updated condition for you all tonight uh in your report you there was previously a condition C uh but after staff review um has been determined that we would like to remove condition c um from your proposed uh staff report and with that uh staff's recommendation to you all to recommend uh approval to the Town Council for both GP 22-15 and Z 22-15 subject to the conditions in the staff report and the of condition C and with that I can open the floor up to any questions thank you very good s thank you does anyone have any questions they'd like to start off for sale ah Vice chair bian please I'll help you fill the void so just curious so on a less than three Acre Site if we rezone a GC what kind of uses could be envisioned on this parcel yeah uh Vice chair uh bian chairm uh with The General commercial uh zoning uh there's the opportunity for various commercial uses such as you know gas station um potential quick service restaurant uh regular restaurant it's just an opportunity to provide some of the um you know residences to the east as well as that major Business Park to the West with some uh commercial alleviation than what's there currently okay thanks and as that Canal kind of works its way South it kind of cuts those Parcels along Lindsay so I guess that's that's my one concern is does it negatively impact the parcels to the South as far as um development or would there potentially be the opportunity for shared access off of Lexington into those properties for future development um the shared a oh I'm sorry uh Vice chair bian chairmont uh there's definitely a conversation to be had about the shared access from Lindsay to the property to the south in regards to potentially hindering the Avail uh ability to develop uh we believe that The General commercial proposal um has the ability to develop just fine and with the business park zoning to the South there is still the ability to develop some small scale office or you know down the road the potential to a reson or general plan as well okay so it doesn't it's not limited by this this request okay thanks and just a followup is the owner of the Southern parcel the same as this one or are these two separate I or I'm sorry chairmont it's changed since the last time I spoke to you uh I believe the property owner to the South is different but I can go ahead and verify for you okay I it was just more of a question of whether they would but if they didn't come out to a meeting um I guess okay anyone else ah commissioner Simon yeah have a question um so this aerial map that you have up for us right now was not in the staff report it appears to me that rivulon Boulevard is not aligned with what used to be Lexington is that going to pose an issue down the road chair Simon are that's okay back to the old way commissioner Simon chairm apologies um with the current alignment of rivulon and Lexington it is a bit um off-centered so with the proposed condition of the 40 foot uh rightaway Dedication that would help align both rivulon and Lexington as traffic flows east to west so is that condition C that you are removing is that at the staff's or is St is that staff's request or is that the applicant's request and and does that tie into this because that that condition C looked to me like it was the ability to purchase that Land from the developer or potential down the road yes commissioner Simon uh chairmont it was a uh Mutual decision after staff um conversation with the applicant side uh condition a is where the 40 foot RightWay dedication is mentioned in condition C is where we had the or had the town's potential to purchase an extra 22 ft uh but given the condition a with the 40 ft uh the alignment of rivulon and Lexington could be possible thank you well done anyone else or okay well would the uh developer I I think think there's a representative here he's been here all night on every case so we might as well let him speak okay Mr ball thank you members of commission Adam B 2525 East Arizona bore Circle um with me is Gina and and Hannah and frankly they're the brains of this operation and I just get to put on the suit and look smart um this will be a quick presentation where we we're at in the beginning of day versus where we're at at the end of the day it's evolving process but I appreciate staff's help and and guidance as we work through some issues related to most important the Lexington Avenue alignment this puts some context of where we are relative to the surrounding area and I think this property has a different consideration today likely because of the freeway off-ramp and on-ramp at um Lindsey road that didn't exist previously and because that freeway off-ramp onramp um will now bring a lot more opportunities for the office users inside rivon into the North some type of commercial amenities to serve them albeit small is a added benefit and value to that area um you know it's in the county presently right now to be Annex into the town subject to this resoning as well but this gives you a little bit of perspective and we think new commercial opportunities will both benefit rivon the commercial offices to the north and any of that pass by traffic that works its way up and down the arterial Street to those freeway onramps and off ramps um some things though that I think are important to help put the proper perspective and framing into this is there's some existing RightWay that was dedicated by by the office buildings to the North and then there's some a parcel that Gina owns Which has some Town improvements in there and for some weird circumstances um has was not conveyed to the town so that's a a conversation that we're having with the town to affect that conveyance going forward then you can see between that blue outlined area and the red parel boundary is right away that was acquired by the town and improved in 2021 and then you have our parcel right here you'll notice um the comment from one of the Commissioners regarding the uh disalignment of Lexington Avenue on one side of the road versus the other and I think this is an opportunity for the town to create a a more linear alignment um one of the things that helps you understand the purpose of that though is the background the area in green was acquired by the town through a purchase and then that RightWay was installed in 2019 2020 is and then under that stipulation a you can see that the town is looking for an additional 40t of rideway and in stipulation C was an extra 22 feet that they desired to be reserved for them but thankfully I think it's been stricken but as you start to kind of layer in the site and I think coun um I almost I almost promoted you Tony to a council member um commissioner bian you know noted it is a small so what can you do with this small area and as you start to think through like the setbacks um this will help you get a little bit of I'll jump to this exhibit a a minute but this is really your developable area you you layer in your drainage and your Canal easements the drainage ement can probably be relocated you'd have to likely go underground and you start to add in some of your setbacks so along the street lindsy road you have a 20ft setback Lexington's considered a front yard I believe based on the address of the property so that's another 25 foot setep back and then because they have residential to the East and residential to the South you have to have a 75 foot step back so this is effectively your building envelope area which isn't much but because um staff has agreed to remove that stipulation C that'll that orange area goes away and allows our setback to go a little um closer to the street gives us a little bit more of an expanded envelope and I suspect that based on our conversations with staff um their willingness to help us uh guide through potential p in the future to reduce some of those setbacks um or potential variances could be another way to expand that envelope as needed but the types of uses that you'd see there and what we've entertained in the past have been convenience users gas station users uh Quick Serve and it wouldn't surprise me at all to see even after all the the commercial zoning maybe somebody just puts an office back in here all things said and done but there is sufficient space to do it and I think there's a little bit of nimbleness to adjust the drainage easements and some of these setbacks on once a future user identified that can get us back to a spot that's a developable parcel one of the concerns that we've had all along is is it reasonable for this property to absorb this much right away for such a small piece of property when it seems that the purpose is mostly to align with the RightWay across the street as you can see it looks like that existing rideway on the west side of the road I call it the Lexington swoop it's not a legal term it's just something easily identified looks like it came down about 30 ft when you look at the right of way on the opposite side of the road which is 30 ft wide and is no longer align and I don't think will ever be used by the town um which is next to the office so it seems to me that the desire for the additional RightWay and what was considered 22 foot 22t reservation was to better align those so they're more parallel or or with each other um our contention has been all along that perhaps um there was another way to look at this so not one property had absorbed so much of that RightWay and I think I'm great F that staff has come come to the conclusion and and we appreciate that assistance to remove that reservation requirement and I believe some ongoing conversations between now and the next council meeting about also reimagining that 40 foot um RightWay dedication to if it could be a mix of dedication and easement instead of just pure dedication so with that kind of commitment and spirit of compromise and working together I think we're pretty comfortable moving forward with the case as it is today and in the next two weeks um getting a better definition and working with staff on what is the ultimate need for that future RightWay so that way we can dial it in more tightly before now and the next Council action and with that being said I think um I appreciate the willingness to get us to this point and um and entertaining any questions that you might have thank you Mr ball anyone have any questions for the applicant commissioner Davis thank you chair um Mr B um on the south side of the property you mentioned there was a 75t setback requirement residential yeah it it looks like it's is it business park or is it residential to the South I'm will that's a great question um I'm assuming it was residential but I willing to be wrong on that one okay one of the maps I have here indicates business in my honest opinion though my suspicion is that we have a desire to provide a cross access eement between the two parcels and hopefully there'll be an assemblage where there could be more of commercial opportunity extending further south and I think you're you're leading where I was going with this and that I think in the future when you come in for a site plan I think it would be nice to see that cross access because that makes that parcel that parcel is going to be more successful if it can get that access through this site so it'd be nice to see if your um property owner was open to something like that when they ni that's all I had thank you commissioner Davis commissioner Anderson Adam thank you for the presentation um looking at the I mean this is a good exhibit I like this exhibit a lot the developable area how come you're not requesting any deviations to setbacks to increase that developable area that's a great question when this application was started like five years ago Chevron was the applicant and they were taking this application through for themselves and for reasons that we can't understand they they backed out of it and then several other applicants have tied up the property only to back out and so we decided we didn't want to continue to lose out on the opportunity so we took for the application even though we don't have a user anymore so if we had a specific user I would probably have a different nature of an application with more specific pad deviations but we're we're early for that but we also needed to put the property in the position to attract more committed users instead of taking a six-month free tour of the property and then not committing to it so you're just rezoning the property to something that's more usable to sell it to somebody else yeah I think it's more appropriate for that area um at the end day a user going to come the plan yeah and they'll either have to apply for some variances which this might be one of those rare circumstances where the topography in shape of the property actually qualify for it or they'll come in and file a p yeah okay thank you commissioner Anderson yep commissioner Gage thank you chair um so Adam you're good with the application right now I just want to make sure with striking that condition C you're good to move forward yeah we are I think um I think there's a good working relationship to massage stipulation a a little bit further and if needed we have the opportunities for continuances at that level but I I like the way it's progressed in the last few hours okay great thank you and thank you to staff for um working with them on this appreciate it very well any other comments or questions okay very good thank you Mr Paul all right I don't don't have any uh comment cards so I don't see anyone else in the public that wishes to speak so I will close the public hearing and bring it up to the dis for discussion or a motion commissioner Gage I'll make a motion um to approve item GP 22-15 and one at a time right so Southeast corner of Lindsay Road and Lexington Street we have a motion from commissioner Gage do have a second second commissioner Simon with the second any discussion seeing none please vote all votes are in unanimous passing I'll entertain a motion for item nine if there is one I'll make a motion for approval of Z 22-15 Southeast Corner Lindsay Road and Lexington Street we have a motion from commissioner Gage do I have a second I'll second that commissioner Simon with the second no discussion seen please cast your vote motion passes 70 very would very well thank you all move on to some administrative items and we have none so we'll go to the communications into the executive session which we don't have and I'll ask if there's any reports from the chairman or members of the commission on current events anybody have anything they'd like to add okay well I will just say say happy New Year it's great to be back right away um I did I almost forgot this meeting existed until I got back but I made it so glad to see you all uh any reports from the planning services manager thank you chair Happy New Year I just wanted to report that next week we'll be conducting interviews for our vacant planner position since Noah Schumer departed uh wish us luck if we find a higher for this position it'll be the first time we're at full staff in the 5 years I've been here very go yeah all right thank you Eva all right now because I'm not a dictator I will ask if there's a motion to adjourn the meeting I'll make a motion to adjourn we have a motion from commissioner Simon to adjourn the meeting do have a second I'll second Vice chairman biani with the second please cast your vote we have one exstension and six yeses vote passes 601 we're having fun now we're now we're having fun