Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Welcome everyone. I'd like to call this meeting to order. Will you stand with me and join me in the pledge of allegiance? Thank you. Madam Secretary, will you please call the roll?

Chair Burton?

Present.

Commissioner Puppy? Here. Commissioner Ragsdale?

Here.

Commissioner Kupcyk?

Here.

Vice Chair Damasio? Commissioner Bassler?

Here.

Commissioner Truppiano?

Here.

Alternate Hester? Here.

Alternate manual Yeah alternate Hester seated for district 4 Thank you next on the Next item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes from the April 14th 2026 planning and zoning Commission regular meeting and the minutes from May 12th 2026 planning and zoning Commission workshop may I have a motion to approve the minutes and the

I motion that we approve the minutes.

May I have a second?

I second it.

All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Minutes passed. Moving on, regular agenda item 3A, Copper Falls Community Master Plan Major Amendment, case number PLZZ-23-00011. It's a public hearing and request that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend the approval to the City Council of a major amendment of approximately 17.0 acres subject to conditions A through R. Ms. Mandy is here to present. Thank you.

Planner here with Development Services, and tonight I am presenting the Copper Falls CMP Major Amendment, case PLZZ23-00011. Just for a quick project overview, the applicant on this is Don Fortuna with Bowman Consultant on behalf of the property owner Jeff Bobby with Melcor Development Arizona. The location is the northwest corner of Miller Road and Southern Avenue in that particular APN on the screen. The request is to amend the Copper Falls CMP to allow multifamily residential within the commercial land use designation of parcel one. So this only affects just one parcel within the CMP. And I just want to preface the presentation. This may feel familiar to some of you because this was presented in 2024 and was recommended approval by PNZ to council at that time. I'll get into details later on in my presentation as to why we are hearing it again tonight, but just go into it with that in mind. For some site context, the existing parcel is vacant. There's single family residential to the north, to the south and the east and the west, and then there's some vacant commercial parcels to the east and south as well. The general plan land use of the subject property is master plan community, which is a land use designation that is consistent with the fact that this is in a community master plan. And then the existing zoning of the property is planned community or PC with that Copper Falls CMP overlay. So for the existing CMP, Copper Falls is about 267 acres of single family, multifamily, commercial, education, and open space uses. This is just a composite map on the screen showing the existing CMP, including the most recent amendment to the north that I believe was approved in 2024. And then the subject request that we're talking about tonight only affects just that parcel one that is on the southeast corner of this CMP there. And I will zoom in a little bit on this next slide so you can see that we're talking just about parcel one there. It is a red color on the map and that designates that this is a commercial land use designation within the Copper Falls CMP. The proposed CMPA tonight, they are adding multifamily residential as an allowed use within that commercial land use designation just for parcel one. Multifamily would become an option. The commercial uses would still remain. It would be a development option as well. So the request is really about flexibility, not a guarantee that the site is going to develop with multifamily residential. And I wanted to note that there is a density cap for parcel one at either 24 dwelling units per acre or up to 468 units if it were to develop with multifamily. And then the kind of second half of this proposed CMPA is development standards that help transition between this parcel and the existing single family. which I will show on this next slide here. So that chart up top, the commercial option roughly is the existing standards in the Copper Falls CMP and or the development code standards that apply to the property. And then the multifamily column was added because this is a new use that's going to be added for parcel one. The main thing to highlight here is the chart at the bottom which is the step back provisions that would be in place to protect the single-family residential from taller multifamily residential building Heights and That is better illustrated on this next slide and this lovely section view so the first 20 feet is just the setback the standard setback and then basically once you get into that 30 foot range and setback range 25 building feet 25 feet of building height is allowed between 30 and 40 feet then you're looking at up to 35 feet in building height and then buildings could reach their full height if they're 45 or 40 foot or greater from that single family residential property line so it just translates to greater building heights require greater setbacks just to help with buffering and compatibility of uses For the public participation, this project was a little unique and had a few more neighborhood meetings than average. The initial neighborhood meeting was held all the way back in 2023, and this proceeded to Planning and Zoning Commission in 2024, a couple hearings. and got to the stage where it was recommended for approval to council. There was a pause as the applicant was gathering up everything for the development agreement and when we were getting ready to get ready for council again, staff asked that they conduct another neighborhood meeting just to have a courtesy to the neighborhood residents since it had been about 18 months since they had heard about the application. So that's the reason for the second neighborhood meeting. And then it was at that time that staff realized that the previous neighborhood meetings, as well as the previous planning and zoning commission hearing, were notified using the 300 foot radius. And so we realized the development code requires for all CMPs and major CMP amendments 500 feet of radius. to ensure that this is meeting development code provisions and all of our procedures. We required that they hold another neighborhood meeting, which is the most recent one that was held in June. And then that is why we are back tonight. So it comes full circle as to why that happened. There were no members of the public that attended any of the three neighborhood meetings in spite of the increased radius on the last one. And there were no speakers from the public during any of the prior planning and zoning commission hearings as well. And then the notification for tonight, of course, used the 500 foot radius and legal noticing and site postings were all in accordance with our development code requirements. JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SINCE IT HAS BEEN ABOUT TWO YEARS JUST THE FEW DIFFERENCES THAT ARE BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN IT WAS LAST BEFORE THIS GROUP. THERE WERE JUST THE ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AS I'VE ALREADY HIGHLIGHTED. SOME VERY MINOR NONSUBSTANTIVE UPDATES TO THE PROJECT NARRATIVE, UPDATED DATES, THE INCLUSION OF THE MOST RECENT CMPA IN COPPER FALLS TO THE NORTH JUST BECAUSE THAT WAS APPROVED IN THE MEANTIME SO THAT WAY IT'S A MORE COMPLETE PROJECT HISTORY WITHIN THE NARRATIVE. AND THEN SOME UPDATED WATER AND WASTE WATER DEMAND CALCS THAT WAS TO REFLECT CURRENT CITY STANDARDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH COORDINATION WITH WATER RESOURCES. SO MINOR THINGS THAT OTHERWISE THE CONTENT OF THE NARRATIVE STAYED THE SAME AND THE CONTENT OF THE REQUEST IS THE SAME. AND THEN CONDITION A IS JUST UPDATED TO REFLECT THAT REVISED NARRATIVE DATE. OTHERWISE EVERYTHING HAS STAYED THE SAME. And I wanted to note that adequate school facilities coordination also has recently occurred with both of the school districts. And there's a draft donation agreement provided. With that, the final analysis here, staff does believe this furthers goals of the Buckeye General Plan. It does conform to our development code provisions or proposes alternate standards that would result in high quality development and there are no outstanding issues from reviewing departments. And so the recommendation is to conduct a public hearing and then recommend approval of this case to city council subject to conditions A through R. I wanted to note that the applicant team is present tonight, and they do have slides, if that is your pleasure, if they feel the need to go over any items that I didn't touch on enough. And I'm available to answer questions, of course. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Woods. Would the applicants like to make their presentation?

Thank you, Chairman and Commissioners. Ed Bohl, 1850 North Central. I'm here with Don Fortuna. Don's officially the applicant. I'm hitchhitting with Don and for others tonight. We appreciate staff's recommendation for approval. We have a PowerPoint, which we can get into if you want us to. But we appreciate staff's analysis. We agree with stipulations A through R. I agree with everything that Mandy just said. If you want us to go through our PowerPoint or provide additional detail, we can. But the essence of it, as she explained, is adding a use that can be provided if appropriate or when appropriate under this CMP. We agree that it furthers some goals of the general plan. Some of you may recall this being here a couple years ago. Others may not. Be that as it may, if you want a presentation, please tell me. But if you're good, we're good, and I'll go sit down.

You know, normally I would say something funny right through there, but I'm not. I'm going to refrain.

Okay.

You can make your presentation if you'd like. I can only speak for myself. I'm good with Mandy's presentation if you are, sir.

I'm perfectly good with Mandy's presentation.

Thank you, but don't go far just in case my colleagues may have questions, all right?

I'll stay right here.

All right, cool. All right. Commission, starting with you, Sebastian.

This would make me put on my memory cap here going back to 2024. But at the time, it was, I think it was proposed this was going to be a mixture of residential, like apartments, and commercial. The way I'm reading it today is this is going to be either the option of commercial or the option of multifamily, or is it still possible that it can be a mixture of both?

Chairman, Commissioner, it could be either all commercial, all multifamily, or a mixed use of both.

Because it is on a prominent corner in Buckeye here. So there was talk, again, this is putting my memory cap on, of having commercial up front and maybe the stuff in back. But if that's still part of what they allowed from this plan, I'm OK with that.

It is allowed under, if this amendment is approved, it could be all of one or the other or a mix of the two.

I know we got the site plan and whatever when it comes to that point, but as long as it's allowed to be a mixture, I'm good with that. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Mr. Bassler.

Is it my understanding that before anything can be done on this piece of property, if we approve tonight, it will need to come back before this committee? Because you're talking about all residential or all commercial. You can go either way. And I don't know that I'm ready to approve something that can go all commercial or all residential on this piece of property without seeing it again.

Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, I don't know if that's a question for me or for staff. I know how I'd answer it, but I'll defer to Mandy if she wants to answer it, and I'll probably agree with what she says.

Sure, you can supplement. So this would be the zoning approval that, well, not tonight, but this would be the recommendation for zoning approval that would then go to council for final consideration. After this, a site plan could be submitted that would have to be in conformance with the zoning for the property, and that is something that would be approved by staff rather than this body.

Okay, so if we approve this tonight, it can go 100% commercial or 100% residential, and it doesn't come back to us?

Multi-family. Correct.

I also did not find in the documentation anything from the school district. I look for it, I did not find it. I'm not saying it's not there, but I didn't find it. And I don't know how the school approves something when you don't know how many residential units are gonna be there. So I have some concern with that. As you know, I am concerned about residential apartments being built and our inadequate school system and our inability to provide housing for students. And I'm not seeing anything in this documentation from the school district that says there's adequate schooling. So if it's there, fine, but I did not find it.

Commissioner, it was not included in the citizen participation report because it's a separate procedural process, but it is in the case file, the efforts that the applicant team took to reach out to both school districts and the correspondence that they received back.

OK. Thank you.

And just really quickly to elaborate on how the district could evaluate this without knowing exactly what's proposed, the way I understand it is there's a draft donation agreement in progress that is based on the number of units, a certain per unit fee would be paid to the district. So whether it's 100 or 400, The amount would increase between between those two allowing for the district then to to utilize the additional money for for enhanced facilities. So that's the understanding that I have of how that would work.

Thank you. Mr. Esther.

No questions.

Thank you, sir. Ms. Kopsak.

I understand it could be all. Multifamily, all commercial or a little of both. I still would prefer that hard corner to be something retail or some kind of, you know, if it's all surrounded by apartments, that's fine, multifamily. But I still think our hard corners on those major intersections need to be retail. But that's just my opinion. Thank you.

Thank you. Ms. Racketale.

No questions.

Thank you. Ms. Puppy, I'm sorry.

No questions, thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Do you want me to respond to any of that or sit down?

If you have a response, certainly, please.

Yeah, we need to switch over to your slides.

I don't seem to be advancing Yes if we can wait a moment So

Here we go.

I'm going to skip through most of these, but a particular slide that I'd like to show you is this one, which talks about some of the site challenges, because I hear everything you're saying, and I understand the desire to have a commercial pad on the corner, and I'm not saying that can't or won't happen. because importantly, multifamily is being added as a potential use, but it's not required to be the exclusive use or a use at all. Part of the challenges that are on this particular corner of the intersection, and Melcor, by the way, owns another corner right across the street, but with the future drainage channel, with medians, with access limitation, this to me is reminiscent of some other corners in the valley where you can see it, but it's not easy to get there if you're a potential shopper. For example, there, as this indicates, there are no left turns out onto either Miller or Southern. That can be very challenging. It's deja vu to me of a corner Not in Buckeye, but in Phoenix at the northwest corner of Tatum and Shea. It has been challenged forever because of access difficulties at that corner. You can see it. But you can't get there from here. Now, site planning can deal with some of that. There's a TIA requirement that comes along with it as well. But because of the medians, the limited access, the future drainage channel, which would push buildings back off the corner, there are challenges here. Doesn't mean some of those challenges don't apply to multifamily as well. but it's easier to deal with when you have residents and they know how to get to and from their home. I hear loud and clear that some would like to see some retail occur on at least a portion of this site. I'm not saying that won't happen. I'm just saying that's not going to be easy. And this change doesn't preclude retail from occurring. It simply allows multifamily to occur. The rest of the slides I can go through, but I think Mandy's covered it.

Thank you, sir. Thank you. And you can take your seat now.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, sir. All right, following this time, I will open it up for a public hearing. Madam Secretary, do we have any requests to speak?

We do not, Chair.

I will close it. Before I close it, is there anyone from the audience that would like to speak on this?

Now I close it.

All right. Commissioners. What is your pleasure? I like... May I have a motion to recommend the approval to counsel of case number PLZZ-23-00011 subject to conditions A through R.

I'll move to recommend approval for PLZZ-23-00011 to City Council with conditions A through R. Do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you. It's been moved and seconded. Motion passes. Oh, I'm sorry.

You need to have more meetings. I do, I do.

I'd like to call.

For a vote. For a vote. All those in favor?

Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Motion passes. Thank you.

Thank you.

We do need to have more meetings, Ken. A little rusty. All right, item agenda, 3B, West Park Minor General Plan Amendment, case number PLZU-25-0005. Public hearing and request. that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of a Minor General Platt Amendment from Business Commerce to Master Plan Community. Mr. King-Galicka.

Yes, Chair. Good evening. Good to see you again, yes. We've had a couple cancellations, but we'll try to keep you more busy and well-practiced. I think you're doing great, though. So yes, the first item that you referenced, the Minor General Plan Amendment, is just one of three items I'm going to be touching on in this presentation. This presentation actually covers the remainder of tonight's agenda. So the first being the Minor General Plan Amendment, second being a major amendment to the West Park Community Master Plan, and the third being a major amendment to the Silver Rock Community Master Plan. I'll tell you what all that means in just a second. The applicant tonight, he's here, Rob Goopser, Collier's Engineering and Design, former manager of mine, so we go well back at the city of Avondale. So the first request tonight, minor general plan amendment for approximately 125.4 non-contiguous acres. I'll show you what that looks like. to Master Pine Community. The second request, a major amendment for West Park, applicable to about 1,950, a little less, acres. And then lastly, an amendment to Silver Rock removing 741 acres. The location, I'll show you in just a second, south of I-10, west of State Route 85, down to Palo Verde with the Roosevelt Canal on the south. uh... so this map shows you the boundaries of everything that we're doing tonight i'll kind of walk you through it uh... so the first request i mentioned is is the general plan amendment uh... that's applicable to these dashed areas uh... on the screen with the yellow dashing uh... so currently uh... both of those areas are designated in the general plan as business commerce which is a commercial category the request tonight would change the land use designation to master plan community and all that means is it allows for the CMP the West Park CMP in this case to control the development of the property with terms of uses and development standards The second request is to amend the West Park CMP, and the portions that are affected are shown in this blue color. So you can see a segment over here, some land up against SR 85 here, and then a whole lot of land, including this dashed area, and I'll explain why it's dashed in just a second, and the property going north all the way up to I-10. This yellow area is the current Silver Rock community master plan. This dashed portion is proposed to be removed from the Silver Rock CMP and added to this new enlarged West Park CMP. So that's why it's kind of got the two colors on it. The reason for that is all the blue area, or what would be the blue area if this is approved, is under common ownership by Garrett Development Corporation. uh... lastly couple last things on the side the green areas those are part of west park cnp uh... but those areas uh... are not impacted at all uh... by this proposal nothing uh... nothing that's currently approved for these parcels would be subject to any change as a part of this that's all of the developed residential as well as some portions currently under development or planned for development. And then the last thing I want to point out is this red kind of hole in the donut. This is APS owned. APS is planning on building a regional substation to provide power to not just this property, but basically this region, because currently there is a huge power demand before development can occur on most of these agricultural properties. I'm not going to spend too much time on this map, but this shows the boundaries again. You can see the general plan. Currently the entire site is Master Plan Community, which is this brown color with the exception of those two areas that we'll propose tonight to convert to the brown color so everything is that same color. The zoning is a mix of residential in this property currently, but most of the surrounding properties, particularly to the south, have converted to industrial zoning over the last few years as part of the city's push in this area for employment-generating uses. Okay, now that the overview is done, I'll dive into each of the components a little bit more detail. The first, again, the minor general plan amendment applicable to those 125.4 acres total, two separate properties, one 76 acres, up north of Lower Buckeye and Wilson Avenue. So future freeway off-ramp here, just if you were curious. On an off-ramp, I should say. The second property being what we call the Power Oz property, because that was the previous ownership, about 49.4, just under 50 acres. off of south of Lower Buckeye and 269th Avenue. The proposed designation of master planning community does not establish any permissions for any types of uses. It simply allows the next step in the process, which is the zoning, or in this case the CMP, to have 100% precedence as far as guiding what can develop here. The second request, which is by far the most impactful or has the most to it, so I'll spend the most time on this one, is the major CMPA for West Park. The yellow boundary here, uh... just highlights the areas that would be impacted uh... it doesn't impact or it doesn't highlight the existing portions of west park those would stay in west park but they wouldn't have any uh... anything modified as far as what people could do with their properties uh... this proposal expands the cmp by about just under seventeen hundred acres sixteen hundred seventy three acres uh... by Adding in what is currently called the Silver Rock CMP, which is most of this area right here. Adding in almost all of the West Wind CMP, which is kind of the northern portion here. I say almost all because technically the APS substation is within that still, but they're sort of exempt from zoning, so we're kind of letting the hole in the donut remain there. And then lastly, the 125 acres subject to the general plan amendment up to the north here in this little corner here, this little triangular shaped piece. This also changes or amends the requirements for 275-ish acres within West Park CMP. Again, that's these areas. Oops. as these couple areas east of SR-85 and then this portion between Turner and SR-85. So you're asking, okay, well, we're consolidating all this in the West Park CMPA. What's the purpose of that? Let me show you first what is currently permitted. So this is an amalgamation of the various different CMPs that currently exist and their land use plans. Generally speaking, in planning terms, yellow, orange, brown type of colors are residential. Usually the lighter the yellow, the lower density, going up to orange and brown being higher density residential. You can see the majority of property west of Turner. In fact, even east of Turner being yellow color. So these were CMPs that were approved back in the early 2000s. The vision was pretty traditional master plan communities along the lines of Blue Horizons or Sundance or any of the various master plan communities we have primarily residential with some some outline kind of commercial parcels on the fringes school sites parks and those types of things. West Park. was amended back in two thousand twenty two uh... for the portion west of the freeway uh... and you can see barely see these little purple circles and this purple rectangle uh... it was amended in twenty twenty two to allow for industrial development on these properties or residential or commercial. So it was an either-or type of situation. So this portion already has that entitlement, which is why if you've driven by there recently, you might have seen the first stages of a nearly two million square foot warehouse for Burlington under construction. But the rest of this property from Turner West. So from from this point West is currently entitled only for for residential, some some supported commercial uses and parks and schools. uh... this is a a huge vision shift uh... what is proposed tonight the map on your screen now is is what is actually proposed and and the purple color uh... which is the predominant color obviously on this map uh... would shift this property to light industrial uh... west of s are eighty five uh... that uh... there are a few exceptions to that and i'll highlight those The frontage along Palo Verde Road, because the city's airport is to the west, and we want to present a very high quality image to the airport, to anybody visiting in the future. We expect it to grow and really be more of a regional airport than its little kind of sleepy airport status today. That's a business park category that would limit building size to 200,000 square feet. It would also prohibit cross-docs. So the frontage, the forward-facing portion of the project up against the airport would present like an office type of development, essentially. Similarly, at the corner of Lower Buckeye, this is Lower Buckeye, Palaverde we do reserve a commercial corner not only to accommodate the needs of anybody working within all the purple area here but also visitors to the airport employees at the airport anybody else within the vicinity of this site up against i-10 uh... or or at least as close as the project yes there's actually property within uh... this triangle here that's not on both this developer uh... but this would preserve some flexibility either to do regional commercial meaning a shopping center along the lines of what you see with the costco uh... home depot regional commercial uh... types of uses big box retail uh... or uh... business park so it's that's what i just described that blue where the building size are limited and it appears to be more of an office type of development. The reason that that's provided up top is really because that's the project's primary point of visibility from the freeway. We want to really have a really nice front door for people driving down the 10. There's a lot of traffic on that roadway, and we'd prefer not to have sea of semi-parking be the first thing that somebody sees. And then there's very little being done east of SR 85. The most significant change are these two parcels right here that are currently identified for, I believe, low and medium density residential that the applicant is proposing to shift to a higher density, which would allow for things like apartments. Typically that is a pretty normal transition between single-family lots uh... then you shift to multi-family uh... before having commercial up against the freeway uh... it's it's kind of your normal transect as you get closer to the noise light uh... sound uh... i guess noise and sound are the same but uh... associated with the freeway and in the future when when i eleven likely comes through here uh... that'll become an even even more intense There are also some elements of this request that don't change the uses but impact kind of what development will look like. The biggest one I want to point attention to and very thankful to the developer, GDC, and his team for providing this. They're accounting for enhanced landscape buffers along Lower Buckeye and Palo Verde. So again, you're probably sick of me using this, but Lower Buckeye is this east-west street, Palo Verde here. Also Wilson, right here, since this will be a future freeway interchange. Our normal requirement is a 25-foot landscape buffer, which is a fairly significant, nice-looking landscape buffer. They've agreed to provide 50 feet, so a double that normal landscape buffer to really create a very thoughtfully designed project. It won't be the storage of semis and whatnot right up against the street. There will be pretty significant landscaping, screening, and space for other types of elements. There's a thought to provide enhanced gateway features like monument signage entering the development as well to really create that overall feel of a master plan type of development. This plan does provide for a parks and rec master plan compliant trail network. That's something that the current CMP doesn't do. So this gets us a step further toward implementing the recently approved PRMP. And, in my opinion, provides for high quality design standards. You see some just examples of the types of buildings that would be expected within this project. Request number three is super simple. This is Silver Rock Major CMPA. The only point of this is to remove this area in blue. So it can be included in what we were just looking at. So that area in blue currently in Silver Rock is right over here. uh... and because we're adding it to this west park cmp uh... equal and opposite reaction is we need to remove it from from what it's currently in which is the silver oxy mp uh... the red portion essentially five hundred acres south of the rd canal that is under separate ownership uh... and that would remain part of the silver oxy mp so the silver oxy mp would not go away it would just get downsized pretty significantly over half uh... but make no other changes to what was previously approved back in honestly twenty oh five uh... the maximum dwelling units would be reduced correspondingly to the acreage so that density stays the same originally there was just under fifty four hundred dwelling units approved for the entirety this because we're cutting the acreage down the same percentage that we're cutting the acreage down the total number of dwelling units also drops so that's that's how we get to the 2817 units in the future this is very possible conceivable due to the proximity of the airport and all those types of things that we might see something back in for this site to do other uses but that's not today All the typical requirements for the developer to complete, street improvements, internal to the project, half streets on the perimeter, as well as any, obviously, utility infrastructure needed for development of this site will be the developer's responsibility. The city, of course, will provide police and fire service, and this would, it's a big project, would certainly allow for phasing. There was a neighborhood meeting that was held just under two weeks ago, June 11th. Only one attendee outside of the applicant, an adjacent property owner, who did not have any concerns, or at least didn't share any concerns with this request. to boil down the analysis uh... we believe that this uh... this type of requests on this property in proximity to the airport proximity dot com and that's already five kind of in that uh... surrounded by all three of those major uh... transportation elements if you will is the best solution to reduce potential incompatibilities uses as the city looks to grow its airport You see all the time neighborhoods near airports are not a good mix. Most of the time they end up going away entirely. They get scraped to the ground. But in the case where they do kind of exist, it's nothing but neighbor complaints about noise. So this does give us a step forward in that regard as far as reducing those incompatibilities. We also think this is a great site because it gives us a lot of contiguous land uh... in proximity to that airport to make it more of a logistics of a cargo airport in the future uh... so this is this is a great project for that uh... the design elements that i talked about the landscape setbacks the the entry features uh... will certainly enhance the visual character uh... we believe this also provides for good transitions between different plant uses uh... in the area and uh... multiple general plan goals especially those talking about job creation, employment development is supported by these requests. One second. I'm so there are again the three items tonight all of these items require separate public hearings separate motions separate votes of the Commission the West Park minor GPA we do recommend approval subject to no conditions on that one the West Park major CMPA subject to conditions a through GG but and this is a big but I would you want to highlight that we're still working through the final stipulation language with the project owner, developer, applicant. So we do plan on continuing to refine that language before council. We're trying to get to council on July 7th because council's going on break for a couple months, and time is of the essence. And then lastly, Silver Rock, major CMPA, subject to conditions A through J. We recommend approval of that. So with that, Chair, I'm available for questions. I know Rob and his team have a PowerPoint presentation of their own.

That'd be fine. Just take that, put that clicker down. I'm dizzy. Applicants, if you would like to come up, please.

Can I pick it up?

As long as you don't do that circle.

Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the Commission, Rob Gupster with Collier's Engineering and Design, 4742 North 24th Street. I'm pleased to be here on behalf of my client, Jeff Garrett, with Garrett Development Corporation here for the West Park project. It's going to be difficult for me to follow up Ken's presentation. presentations always because he does such a thorough and detailed analysis and presentation I'm gonna run through a few try not to waive this too much but it's gonna be a little bit of a repeat of what he's already said but then I'd like to invite Jeff up and he'll give a little bit more of a detailed kind of presentation on the support for and why we need this these changes out in this area so with that I will do All right. As Ken already alluded to, we're here for a larger change to the West Park CMP. As mentioned, it was about 2,000 acres south of the I-10, east and west of SR 85. We have multiple requests this evening. We have the minor general plan amendment on about 125 acres. We have a major CMP amendment for both the Silver Rock CMP as well as the West Park CMP. And also we have an annexation that's moving forward. Not a request this evening, but it did go to council last week for the first of two public hearings. And so that's on the 50 acre power Oz piece. You saw this exhibit already, but I just want to reiterate some of the changes that we're looking at doing. The first is the West Park CMP. Very colorful on this one. I am going to press the button here again and see where our outline is. The project outline that we're working on is in the dark blue. The West Park CMP that was approved initially in 2000 is highlighted in red. I don't even know how to move this thing around, so I'm not going to make you dizzy. So it's highlighted in red. We did come back and do a revision and amendment to West Park in 2022, which was primarily on the west side of 85, where we introduced industrial zoning categories. And as you can see, that's already coming to fruition with the construction of the Burlington warehouse there. In addition to that, the Westwind CMP, which is up on the northern side of the project area, was approved in 2005. We're looking at taking in the majority of that site outside of that area where APS has purchased about a 160-acre site. Not the hole in the donut, because he already used that term. I'll say the hole in the inner tube. I was going to say Donnett, Ken, so thank you. Also, the Silver Rocks CMP, we're going to be taking the north, kind of the north two-thirds of that project, the area north of the RID Canal, and incorporating that into the overall West Park CMP now. We have the two additional various out parcels, both one up on the north that starred and then the Power Oz piece, which is, I mentioned the 50 acre annexation we're moving forward with. And also the dashed area is the new project boundary. This is what we're getting, a revised CMP. It's now a cohesive overall master plan that allows and supports for primarily more of a, I would say, an industrial employment generating types of uses, primarily west of 85, and kind of playing within the needs and the desires of what the city is seeing for the airport. kind of expansion. So we're taking those three CMPs, creating one overall cohesive CMP. We're creating an abundance of employment generating land uses. We're factoring in that area where APS is located just west of Turner and then also the Burlington site as well. We're kind of pulling in from that changing vernacular for this area. We're looking at realigning the roadways in this area primarily west of 85 because if you looked at the, I'll go back real quick because I like that colorful map. A lot of the roadways in this were very kind of curvilinear. That doesn't fit within kind of the desire of an industrial or employment type uses. They want more of the straight roadway network in there. And so that's what we're proposing is a realignment of the project roadways. And then we're also looking at incorporating the commercial and the business park land uses both at the entrance coming off of the traffic interchange on Wilson off of I-10 and then also along Palo Verde, so protecting that frontage adjacent to the airport. And as Ken mentioned too, we're also looking at incorporating an enhanced landscaping buffer along Palo Verde, along Lower Buckeye, and along Wilson north of Lower Buckeye. Again, trying to create more of an inviting environment when you're coming into this master plan. East of 85, we've introduced some high density residential land uses that are along the east connector there. And then also looking at changing some of the low density residential land uses. And I see it on parcel 23, 24, and 25, kind of up in that northeast portion of that, the lighter area, the lighter beige area. We're incorporating some changing, I would say, incorporating some flexibility in the development, adding some different development standards to allow for a continuation of what's occurring right now in West Park, which is more of a for lease type of subdivision, not a subdivision by term. It looks like, acts like, feels like, but it's a leased community. I think it looks really good. I'm really pleased with the way that turned out. So we're looking at having the opportunity to create that flexibility with those parcels as well. Not saying we're going to, but it does allow that flexibility to continue. So with that, I'm going to invite Jeff to come up and just give a little bit more of an overview of why the support for this project and what we're changing.

Hi there, I'm Jeff Garrett. I'm with GDC, Garrett Development Corporation. 6900 East Camelback, Suite 240, Scottsdale, Arizona. I appreciate the time. I've been doing this for 33 years. Some of you knew me when I was 30 and then started doing this, 20-something. So I really appreciate it. I really like doing the Pledge of Allegiance, and this is what the United States is all about. So thank you for your time, that you guys volunteered to do this. I really appreciate it. It makes a difference. It's good to be involved in the community and everything. We bought this out of the Great Recession, all these pieces of property. I started buying them when I was 38, I'm 55 now. So it's been some time. But we really liked the location between SR 85 and Palo Verde Road, south of I-10. You know, I-10 is an asset that you guys have that could never be duplicated again. It takes the federal government to build something so nice and so good for all of us. And it runs from California all the way to the East Coast, goes through Houston area. It's a really, really great piece of infrastructure for you guys. So really, our play was let's buy that because we like that. We underwrote it as residential communities, but we always thought that those were not the highest and best uses for that because you have SR-85, you have Palo Verde with its on-off ramp, you have the future Wilson on-off ramp.

and then Interstate 11's supposed to come up, and then you have your airport.

So this has kind of been a project in the works for a long time. As you guys know, Buckeye has had water problems and stuff like that, so we've really spent the past 10 years working on those water problems and solving them, and we've spent $30 million doing that. We're up at Verrado Way. drill the well and we're adding on to that water campus and we put a big pipe in from the Ford dealership on Yuma all the way down into West Park so we could serve all of this property. So we're really committed to the community. We've already spent the money before we have the zoning in place and we've worked on assembling probably about I bet there's 10 different owners in there that we've assembled over the past 15 years. So that's kind of that slide. It shows the different ports and everything that it goes to. All right, I didn't know how that was going to work. This just shows where Interstate 11 is going to work and how that works through town. talks about the interchange, the interchanges that we're gonna have access to right now are at SR 85 and Broadway. And you know, that's right now, those will be your future frontage roads. And then down the middle will be the state route. But right now, ADOT and the city are working on signalizing that, starting construction next summer and finishing the following summer. It's under design right now. And then another big, so that's kind of the regional infrastructure. You can see the airport up on there. And then we have this nice RID canal that kind of buffers the land too from the rest of the community and can isolate like a nice big industrial business park and stuff. Then the other project that we worked on and we have done with Ken and Adam and the city worked really closely with us on where to place 120 acre substation. Because this part of Buckeye and up at the airport really does not have a substation and power is a problem. And so that substation's 120 acres. It'll be the largest substation in APS's portfolio. It'll have a 500 kV substation in it and seven lines coming into it. It'll have a 230 kV substation and 11 lines coming in and out of it. And it'll have a 69 kV substation with another 11 lines. and then it'll have a 12 kV substation in it too for underground power and serving the more local community. So this is a very important part of infrastructure for APS and for Buckeye. And there's been a lot of mayor conversations with the ceo of aps and us involved in trying to locate this and where it would go and we worked hard with uh finding out like kind of the best place you know the city wasn't excited about having it up on the view corridor on i-10 and we took us about a year right ken to get aps and everybody kind of find a spot for it to go So that piece of infrastructure is going to be a piece of infrastructure that can help you attract large power users for manufacturing, tech. If I had this zone 10 years ago with you guys and we had that substation in planning, maybe a TSMC would land here. But big, big regional type of jobs, big regional type of infrastructure here. And so what we're trying to do is put the zoning in place now to take advantage of this infrastructure. It's obviously with the substation and the airport and some other things, it's really no longer conducive to doing a master plan residential community. And so that's really the strategy and what we've been working on with the city. Just kind of to go fast, I'll just, skip through part of this, but we've invested about 240 million. Our next project will be, like the next sale we have in there, we probably have another 50 million in infrastructure to put in. Our first project was the Burlington that you see under construction. That'll be a $650 million facility. It's two million square feet, single story. So I've never seen a pad that big. We just finished moving 650,000 yards of dirt probably a month ago. And the pads right now, you'll see it's cut. It's about four feet in the air because there's bays on all four sides. And it's 50 acres of pad up in the air. So there's big investments coming. That project will have 270 trucks a day coming in and out of it, and it'll have three shifts of the max employee count of 850 per shift. So lots of infrastructure coming in with that, two signals. We've worked really well with the traffic group doing our traffic impact analysis on that, and we have that all teed up in this program, too, and approved. And then we did have Elliot Pollack do a conservative analysis on how much this would generate in annual taxes, be it property taxes, personal taxes, and stuff to the community of Buckeye. And he's at 62.8 million. But that's back in the day when we were talking about maybe putting some apartments in there and doing some more retail in there and stuff. It'll shoot up from that. So that's a conservative number. We do, you know, the other projects, we won't need certificates of assured water supply. You've heard about those. But really because we're doing bigger buildings and bigger kind of regional type of projects and stuff. know and i i put this on i asked my friends at jll the brokerage firm that specializes in in industrial development and representations and this is a existing under construction and vacancy and you can see the blue is the existing you can see the grays under construction and then you'll notice the smaller buildings It's pretty competitive right in there on that slide. You can see there's a lot of under construction and there's a lot of vacant buildings, existing buildings. As you move across to the right, you can see the building sizes increase. This is a really good, good opportunity for Buckeye to grab the big users, those big anchors, and land them in the community. And what you'll see really is as you land those big people, you'll start to get the smaller companies that serve those industries. Like we've done four Amazon deals. We've probably done 5 million square feet of Amazon deals in Albuquerque and have a friend that owns a bunch of smaller 150,000 square foot buildings. And he's like, every time you land one, I love it because we landed a Tempur-Pedic mattress manufacturer. And then he has the phone, the guy that makes the phone for Tempur-Pedic right down in his facility. So it'll start to backfill too with those other projects that you guys see that come across with those 200,000 foot users and stuff. so this will help anchor that community and help and we need these big people to help kind of build this infrastructure too and get it up out of the project but you'll see there's a big hole here in the marketplace that for the 750 000 square foot buildings up um right now we probably have i probably could get 10 people offers tomorrow to build spec build a million square footer so um we're really excited about it this gets back into that supply chain and stuff like that This is from our TIA, just kind of shows traffic and how the traffic moves through the community. I didn't know if there was going to be community questions about any of that, but that's why it's in there. This is the sheet that shows where the 62.8 million is coming from, from Elliot Pollack's economic benefits study. And then back to this one's basically the same plan that Ken's presented to you and Rob shared with you, but showing kind of Burlington a little better and then showing where the APS substation is. I guess that's really it. I'm standing here. If you guys have questions, I'm always happy to answer. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. At this time, commissioners, any questions? Sebastian.

Yes. Yes, I got a question regarding the State Route 85 corridor. Right now, throughout the area, it's kind of narrow, and they're going to be going out. Has ADOT already taken the easements away? Because I'd hate to see someone build something, and then ADOT come in and tear it down.

No, no, you're you're you're no good question that when it was Oglesby that that they condemned it in two thousand eight and they took the full right away. So what you see now, road wise, those will be frontage roads. And then you'll notice when you come off the sweep of I-10 and you're going south on SR 85, you'll notice the road. kind of goes and curves out a little bit and you'll see some concrete paving going down the middle that will be the state route and eventually what we're driving on today will be the frontage roads okay but yes they've taken all the way yeah and i'm glad you showed that last the tia slide because at first it looked like uh on the earlier slides it looked like uh there was going to be a crossing that warner i was like

I'm coming out of those apartments.

No, no. Yeah, no crossings. There was, the original plan was that during that condemnation case, we built the city. The money was taken that ADOT paid for the right of way and was given to the city. And the city built Broadway Road and then those two collector roads that go up alongside SR 85 when you drive by. And then the state was supposed to build a bridge at Warner Road to connect the residential communities on both sides. But when we're now with this project, we decided, hey, with industrial over here, we do not want to connect the industrial part to the residential. So we isolated it by not having that bridge.

There are question I have about Wilson Avenue. You said there's going to be a future interchange there with I-10?

That's what's on ADOT's plan.

It's on ADOT's plan? And ADOT and MAG are going to do the funding and all that stuff there? Correct. Not the city? Correct. Okay. Okay, if the city's doing it, we need a Dean Road intersection because that's going to be my second point because I right now live in Siena Hills and we're basically blocked in because there's no way out other than Broadway. So I just want to make sure that we're looking forward to the future, not blocking, even though this is industrial compared to residential. I just hate the idea of doing where limited access is because not only is it bad for the fire department, it's bad for people working there, residents in adjacent areas. We just gotta make sure we're not making a large cul-de-sac or anything like that.

Yeah, yeah, I agree. With our first project with Burlington, we're building... We're building, we're doing some improvements on Broadway West. We're going up 269th and we're gonna build from the RID Canal up 269th to Warner the full right-of-way. And then we're gonna put a signal there with dual lefts and then we're gonna build the full right-of-way on Warner all the way over to Turner. And then we're going to build two lanes on Turner on the east side up to lower Buckeye. And then we're building two miles of lower Buckeye, the two south lanes out to Palo Verde Road. And those construction drawings are in like the third round of reviews. And I'm financially committed to Burlington to build that. So we agree with you. We want two points of access. And that on-off ramp at Palo Verde is a great access point. And it's not at full capacity here.

yeah and i'm glad to hear that we're gonna be putting the lights up the stoplights up along in sr 85 because again if i was in that residential area coming out on this sr 85 it was dangerous very dangerous we agree with you so thank you yeah thank you sir yeah commissioner if i could just just for the record um

None of the interchanges, well, I guess there's only one. The Wilson Avenue interchange is not currently funded by the state, so funding will need to be found for that. Usually that's a combination of ADOT state funding and city funding, but we're not nearly to that point yet.

And to get it funded, you usually need to start making progress in the area.

Thank you, Mr. Bassler.

This looks like an excellent use of land. I'm happy to see that you're moving away from the residential and into commercial. Makes a lot more sense to have that by the airport. So it'll ease problems down the road from people complaining about the airport. So it's a good move. Looks like a great plan. Thanks. Thank you, sir.

Mr. Hester. No questions this time.

Thank you.

Ms. Cupsack.

Thank you, Jeff. Looks like a great project, and as a resident of West Park, I do have to say that that leasing community is beautiful, and I can see why you would want to extend that, because it's really, I didn't, I've lived there since 09, and they built it and did all that, and I had no idea it was a leasing community, so it's very cool. Thank you.

He did a very nice job. Those albums are first class.

yeah they are they're very nice so good project thank you thank you looks good thank you miss puppy i'm just going to reiterate um i think it has the potential to be a great economic base for the city of becky so i think this is a great use of that land thank you yeah we're very excited we're very excited

And we've worked well with the city staff. They've been great. They're really helping with the Burlington project and all that. So it's very good. It's a very good relationship. Thank you.

Thank you. And thank you for your time, sir.

Thank you.

All right. At this time, I'd like to open up a public hearing. Madam Secretary?

And Chair, if I may, if we can clarify for the record, this public hearing is on item 3B, the minor general plan amendment. We will need to hold three separate public hearings and have a vote after each one.

Don't need to say that again? Thank you. It's open for public hearing. Are there, there's no request? Anyone from the audience like to speak? I will close the hearing. At this time I'd like to call for a motion to recommend approval to council of case number PLZU-25-0005.

I make a motion that we recommend to the board West Park Minor GPA PLZU-25-0005. Second.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next, I'd like to open up another public hearing for case number PLZZ-25-0010. And request that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval to the City Council

Chair, we do need to open the public hearing and then ask if there are any speaker comment cards. Any comments?

At this time, I'd like to open up the public hearing. Are there any speaker requests? We do not have any, Chair. Thank you. I'd like to close the hearing. And now I ask for the motion, correct? All right.

I move that we approve the community master plan amendment PLZZ-25-0010.

I'll second that. Conditions.

Oh, with conditions? Sorry. A through GG.

Now I'll second that.

Move to second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Passes. I'd like to open it up for public hearing. Are there any speaker requests?

We have none, Chair.

Closing the public hearing. May I have a motion?

I make the motion to recommend For approval, Silver Rock Major, CMPA, PLZZ-25-0011, subject to conditions A through J. I second that.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor? Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion passes.

Good job. OK.

At this time?

Yep.

I'm lost.

And Chair, at this time, the next item on the agenda is item four, comments from the public.

Thank you. Any comments from the public?

Good. All right.

king planning manager please thank you good evening good evening chair um again great to see you all again this evening um i want to wish you all a happy fourth it's coming up our nation's 250th birthday so that's awesome um we will have a meeting on july 14th so count on that as of now it's i believe a five o'clock uh workshop um I'll work with Carrie to finalize the details on that. But I think we'll be doing the workshop. It's a workshop on the arts and culture master plan that our community services department is working on. So I think we'll do it most likely at 5. We'll probably have some food for you, too. But until then, enjoy the 4th. Be safe out there. That's all I have.

Thank you, Ken.

Any of my colleagues have anything about current events? On current events.

Yeah, the other day I attended the Buckeye Open House, City of Buckeye Open House over at the Landings. It was good to see all the people over there. My kids had fun looking at the public utilities trucks and everything. So it was good. And I want to also take this time to say something personal. As some of you guys may know, I've been out on video calls and doing this for a couple months now. Reason is because I had to get a double lung transplant. And I want to publicly thank my donors, families, for allowing that to happen. I was told I had two weeks to live. And if it wasn't for the donor, I wouldn't be sitting here today being able to talk to you guys. So I encourage everyone to check out DonateLifeAZ.com and, if possible, become an organ donor because, again, I wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for an organ donor. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Bassler.

Mr. Bassler. Mr. Hester?

I get my granddaughters this weekend, that's all I care about.

Ms. Kupczak?

We're happy for you, Sebastian. Thank you. Congratulations. And Buckeye has a very good 4th of July celebration planned out for the airport. So if you're in town and want to go out there, then do that. And happy birthday, USA.

Thank you. Ms. Ragsdale?

And the Daughters of the American Revolution Volunteer to put up our flags on Main Street for all the major national holidays. However, because of all the construction for Flag Day, we were unable to put them up. But we will be flying them all the way down both sides of the street for 4th of July. 60 flags.

Looks very nice.

Thank you. Ms. Puppy.

Happy birthday, America.

Mr. Burton says good night.

Now get out of here.

Thank you.