Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

going to call to order the planning and zoning commission meeting on Monday, September 22nd, 2025 at 6 PM. We will have the invocation by Commissioner Yokum and the pledge of allegiance by Vice Chair Warz. Please stand if you're able to. Heavenly Father, we come to you today asking for your guidance, your wisdom, and your support as we begin this meeting. Help us to engage in meaningful discussion. Allow us to grow closer as a group and to mature the bonds of community. Fill us with your grace as we make decisions that will affect our fellow Marcopians and continue to remind us that all we do here today is to serve them. We ask that you bless this commission, our city leaders, our men and women in uniform, and all those who seek and hold you in their hearts. We ask these things in your name. Amen.

To the flag of the United States of America and to the stands nationy for all. Thank you, commissioners. That'll take us to roll call, please. Commissioner Brims here. Commissioner Robertson here. Commissioner Warren here. Commissioner Singleton here. Commissioner Yokum here. Commissioner Clo here. And Commissioner Thomas here. We have a quorum.

Thank you. That'll take us to the call to the public. If you wish to speak, please complete a speaker card and submit it to the chairman prior to the start of the meeting. The procedures to follow if you address the commission are commissioner requests that you express your ideas in three minutes or less and refrain from any personal attacks or derogatory statements about any city employee, a fellow citizen, or anyone else, whether in the audience or not. The chairman will limit discussion whenever he deems such an action appropriate to the proper conduct of the meeting. I do have two speaker cards. Do you guys want to come up now or for the actual agenda item? Okay. Would anybody else like to come forward for the call to the public? Seeing none, I will close the call to the public. That takes us to agenda item four, 4.1 minutes. The commission shall approve. Minutes. Commissioners, any questions, comments? Do I have a motion to approve?

Motion to approve. I have a motion by vice chair. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Yokum. All those in favor say I. I. All opposed. That motion passes. That takes us to the regular agenda 5.1 PA a25-06. This is a public hearing. The planning and zoning commission shall discuss and take action on a request for a zoning map amendment on approximately 9.33 acres effectively reszoning the site from the D3 Copper Sky planned area development zoning district to the Copper Sky medical campus planned area development zoning district. The site is generally located at the southeast corner of West Bullan Road and North John Parkway. This is for discussion and action. Derek, take it away.

Good evening commissioners. Uh Derek Sher with the planning division and development services department. Uh here to present the next item uh which is uh regular agenda item 5.1 P A25-06 for the Copper Sky Medical Facility Medical Campus uh under P A25-06. Uh the applicant for this project is uh Jesse Slim of the BR Companies uh for a reszone of approximately 9.33 acres plus or minus uh for a planned area development reszone for a medical campus at the uh southeast corner of North John Wayne Parkway and West Bolan Road. As you can see uh illustrated on the vicinity map on the screen. Uh the Copper Sky medical campus is highlighted in that uh northwest corner of the Copper Sky site. uh the this proposal uh we are taking the previous PA a for the uh S3 biotech um medical u p a rather large p a over a lot of property at the copper sky facility this is uh removing this portion this 9.33 acres from that p a creating its own new p a for the copper sky medical campus that's focusing on uh the construction of an ER hospital that'll range from one to two stories either being 60,000 square feet going up to a possibility of four stories with 100,000 square feet with a minimum uh 24 medical surgical uh inpatient beds so inpatient hospital uh with one operating procedural room an emergency department with 10 treatment bays diagnostic imaging including uh CAT scans MRIs X-rays and possibly other scanning uh it'll also include a helellipad and uh support services that will include uh on-site pharmacy, kath lab, laboratory and other ancillary services. Uh it should be noted that the

helellipad will only be for really uh egress of patients out of the facility, not into the facility. Um so be a limited uh er hospital. It's not going to be a level one trauma center. uh if they do get patients that uh exceed their capacity, they'll be uh evacuating them to another hospital location, probably in the valley. If it's a level one trauma scenario, they'll go to one of those hospitals or another hospital with other specialists uh depending on what the condition is. But generally, that helipad won't be used for uh taking patients in mostly having them leave to go to a um a different facility that could uh provide the care that they need. Uh as we see we have three possible buildout scenarios of this in this PA AD. On the left uh we see the medical office building one with up to three stories 50 foot maximum uh 30,000 to 80,000 square foot medical office building with outpatient services and an ambulatory surgery center. Uh so that means what the city would be gaining here is outpatient surgery centers that we don't have where everyone uh either goes to Cassag Grand or into uh the valley for those services. uh this facility here would be able to have some of those and be able to keep uh some of the citizens here for their uh their needs. Uh the medical the second part of the buildout possible is the medical office building 2 up to two stories 40,000 square feet uh medical office building with outpatient services and that ambulatory surgery center. And then third uh retail building uh component that is optional a one-story possible 15,000 square foot retail building. The retail building is really for support services, food and beverage, general commercial for the staff, patients, visitors. Uh it isn't going to be a retail facility like the Sprouts Market Center or something like that. It's mostly to serve the needs of everyone around and within the medical campus and

then also on the copper sky facility there. Uh proposed medical campus will have the emergency entrance off of West Bolan Road, uh primary entrance off North Greythornne Road, limited access from North John Wayne Parkway, and vehicular and pedestrian cross connections with the property directly to the south. Uh if we can go over a little further on the image that you see here on the north, you'll see that emergency entry only right in right out on Bowlolan Road. The main entrance into the hospital medical campus will be from that Greythorn Drive with a left in, left, right out, left in, and right out. So, full s uh full connection there for all turn movements. There'll be a cross connection uh to the neighboring property to the south. That'll be vehicular and pedestrian. And then off of John Wayne Parkway, it'll be a right in, right out, and then a left in only. So, uh, anyone coming from the north down John Wayne Parkway have the ability to either go along Bolan and come on through Greythorne at the main entrance or possibly through, uh, just a left in, but there'll be no left out onto John Wayne Parkway. Uh, because of the proximity of this the location of this site, proximity to this, uh, traffic light that's at Bowlolan and then also the traffic light down further south at Copper Sky, uh, this location uh, really is an a good location. having another uh traffic light there um because of the distances between the two. Uh the proposed development is consistent with the general plan future land use uh map designation for the area and uh staff has determined that the PA uh this this will be compliant with the city's development regulations for pads for the uh land use that's being proposed the vehicular and pedestrian connectivity parking requirements uh that are being proposed and the open space requirements. Uh notification letters were sent to property owners within 600 feet on August 15th. signs

were posted on the site on August 18th, August 30th, a newspaper legal notice was published. Um, and then uh September 22nd, 2025, uh, this commission, and my apologies, I failed to put up there uh when the uh, neighborhood meeting date was, and that was September 4th, and that was attended by about a half dozen uh, members of the public. um notes from that meeting. Uh the questions that were asked and answered are in the citizen participation report that uh is a part of the commissioner's packet. Uh I should note that the applicant is here. Uh they do have a presentation should the commission uh wish to see it. And uh with that staff recommends uh that the commission move for approval of P A2-06 Copper Sky Medical Campus subject to the conditions stated in the staff report or as amended by the planning and zoning commission. and I'm happy to answer any questions that the commission may have. And again, the uh applicant is here and uh if you should like, they have a presentation as well.

Thank you, Derek. Um before we open up the public hearing and go to commission, maybe we see their presentation just in case that does answer any questions that residents or commissioners might have. Good evening everybody. Can you hear me? Okay. Um, so we have a short presentation, just a couple of slides. We did present this to the neighborhood uh in the neighborhood meeting as well. Uh, Derek covered most of this, so um, I'll keep the parts that he's already covered short. Um, so a little bit on goals and vision for the project, the proposed zoning, and uh, the next steps. Um uh next slide please. Um so this medical campus uh as Derek mentioned it's it's really trying to scale back on uh past development efforts. Uh we really want to focus on the medical campus component uh and the health care uh for this property uh with some um additional uh uses that complement the healthcare. Uh so the retail component would be uh complimentary to the healthcare. The other big thing that we want to do for this project uh is just focus on staff attraction. A big part of bringing health care to the community is also making sure that we have uh you know the ability to attract staff uh and retain staff. So part of that is uh a kind of comprehensive uh campus approach that does offer the kind of mixed use. Uh and that's part of the reason also why we feel like Copper Sky is a great place for for this to happen. Uh and really part of the surrounding community. Uh, next slide, please. Uh, the other part of it is, uh, just being future ready. Um, and wanting to invest in the, uh, you know, long-term kind of, uh, benefit for the the local economy. So,

retaining all of the health care spending that's currently going out of the city, uh, being able to retain that in the city and being able to improve or um, benefit the local economy. Next slide please. Uh so this is uh summary. Derek already went over this um so I won't go into detail but this is the the minimum uh services that we would be providing in the the hospital um and and the medical office building. The next slide please uh talks about the the hospital operator. they're going to be able to um aid in conversations uh to further uh discuss the other services that will be provided. So um everything that you saw on the previous slide will be part of the minimum development, but the operator is also going to influence everything else that they're it's going to fit their business plan. Uh so summarizing a little bit of what Derek already mentioned about scaling back on the the previous PA a this PA would focus on the 9.33 acres that you see on the right in this image. Uh and then if you go to the next slide please we have a few other things that we are requesting in this updated P A. So we're actually uh looking to reduce the allowable height from 150 feet down to 65 feet. Um, so that would be no more than three stories. And then, uh, we also want to allow for a singlestory building for a portion of this development. Uh, and that will aid in the practicality of just a hospital staffing and flow. It's much more expensive to operate a multi multiple level hospital. And so we want to be able to have um the ability to do a single story. And then um being able to um maximize the health care that we can provide. We're uh

requesting um reduce open space requirement from 20% down to 10%. Uh as far as site development character and proposed architectural character, we're looking uh to maintain that with already approved zoning ordinance. So, we're not asking for any changes there. Next slide, please. Uh and then a few other things we wanted to point out um of costs that the development will absorb um are uh rightway improvements along John Wayne Parkway and that would include maintenance on the rightway. Uh the pedestrian path on the west side of the property. Um we would look to bury the overhead electrical lines that are along John Wayne Parkway. U street improvements along Bolan uh including uh curbs and gutters and sidewalks. restriping of Bolan uh along our property line, the site entrances and street lights. Next slide, please. Um so this just goes over next step. So we had the neighborhood meeting. Derek already covered this. Um and that's everything.

Awesome. Thank you. Um, this is a public hearing, so I will open the public hearing if there's anybody in the audience that would like to come forward and speak on this. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, questions, comments, concerns. Vice Chair. Okay. My question is for Derek. Derek, could we go to your presentation? Um the first page. Yes. Let's see. Let's pull it up. Is this the page you were wanting?

No. Let's keep scrolling forward on that. Uh right there. Okay. We talk about one or two story or four story and then I think understood from the gentleman for the project is that they don't want to go any higher than three stories. So which is it? So part of that The height the height would be limited to 65 ft. Um the number of stories uh we're not looking at going beyond uh three stories uh based on the use but part of that would be part of the development with the operator um to be presented at a later date but right now we're not looking to go beyond three stories.

Okay. And then my second question regarding this is I noticed that we're going to have like three separate buildings. Um, does the project fall apart or does it change if one of those portions of those buildings disappears or or how does it get reused? Say we have three buildings that are planned, two get built, but the third one doesn't, and the third one happens to be that light commercial that's going to serve not only the property, but part of Copper Sky. What happens to that property at that point?

Um, yeah. So, right now, um, our focus is on the hospital and medical office building, uh, and the third parcel. Um, like we said, we're kind of waiting for those other two to develop to see what makes sense for that property. Um, the uses are what we're focused on right now is that the uses are allowed. One of the scenarios that Derek outlined was a a second medical office building. So that would be uh possible as well, but that would possibly be separate from the hospital operator.

Okay. Okay. My next question, this one is for Derek. Um looking at the entrances to the um property, uh I'm kind of concerned about the one entrance where it's left in and right in off of John Wayne Parkway. Um is that going to be a controlled intersection now? Are we going to have signals or or h how do we prevent an accident? because you got a left in and John Wayne is pretty pretty busy in that area.

Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Wararez, uh, Chairman and Commissioner Wararez, uh, at this time. Uh, what the city staff, city engineering is looking at is that just open left turn in if the ultimate when it comes in for, uh, DRP, uh, looking at what that TIA says, uh, traffic impact analysis, whether that needs to be warranted for a light or maybe a Hawk or some other indicator, uh, for stopping any northbound traffic. uh that would be analyzed in that TIA and then recommended at the development review permit stage for moving forward to be developed at the uh building permit stage. But right now we're anticipating and looking at that just left turn in as being an unprotected at this point. But that could change absolutely.

Okay. And then my final question is there any chance for future expansion of this project into any other vacant property there in the Copper Sky area?

Chair Singleton. Uh, Commissioner Wararez, I am not aware of any uh proposals of that at at this time. The property uh two properties to the south here. One is I I don't want to say it's really called for, but I I there's a uh a senior center uh for long-term uh care that has been on the books for a while. I believe that's still in play. There's another parcel that we had a mixeduse development for. I don't know the standing of that. We have not heard back from them in quite a while, but it is city owned. Uh if that those other proposals do not come through and the operator of this site wishes to uh expand their uh their boundaries and uh you know create a larger facility, that'd be a discussion for the future. Absolutely.

Okay. Thank you very much, Commissioner Robertson. Thank you for the presentation, guys. Um couple things came up listening to you. Um the Derek, the original P A still stands for the property to the south. That's not changing with this action. Is that correct?

Correct. Uh it it it's the property to the south and then also uh part of that other PA was where our fieldhouse is going. And I I read in the in the U packet that the original traffic impact analysis which was for the larger complex still stands and is appropriate. Is that correct? Because this is actually going to be smaller and probably have less impact. I chair Singleton uh Commissioner Robinson uh I don't honestly know that would be a question for the city engineer and our uh traffic engineer uh whether the scope of that previous TIA appropriate for this if this can be folded into it as a part of it or if it needs to be uh a new TIA directly for this because of all the significant changes between the previous

I think what I read is that the current TIA would still be applied and there'll be no need for a new one because it's actually a smaller project coming online. I just was looking for clarification. The other thing I wasn't quite sure of and I got more confused just now is the uh the buildout phasing. It in the package it talks about 18 months and 36 months. Uh which is it which goes first? Um is it in 18 months something has to be happening? I can answer that. Um so the agreement with the city as part of the land sale is that 18 months is for the local office building to break ground. The 36 months applies to the hospital and it's 18 months to break ground on the MO or 36 months to break ground on the hospital.

That that's kind of the way I understood it. But there's also language in there that said that unless the developer decides to move forward with one of your options, maybe build both at the same time or reverse the order, that is totally up to you guys. Uh correct. Yeah, there are a couple of different situations. Um so yeah yeah yeah you can answer that. Thank you.

Good evening commissioners. Um my name is AJ Thomas. I'm the president for um BR company's healthcare development and to answer your question uh the 18 months is specifically for um the outpatient side of things and the 36 months is for the hospital. But to your point, we are we actually came we are we were in discussions with an operator who wanted to do both the outpatient and the inpatient together combined. And in that scenario we don't have to wait 36 months. It can be like you know sooner. So the schedule and the phasing is primarily driven by the operator. But this 18 and 36 is for outpatient and inpatient.

That that's the way I understood. I just want to make sure it was clear for the public also. um so Derek um giving him the P A designation it already has a P A designation is that correct that property correct? Yeah, we're just scaling the size of it down. Yes. Uh we are creating a new P A for this development. New size. It's basically separating out from the previous PA and creating a new one for this. Okay, that's what I thought. That's all I have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner, anything? No. Commissioner Yoken,

I share the same concern as to what is going to be built and when uh and the priority of the the development of v the various parcels. Um I think u our my fellow commissioner covered that uh questioning rather well. Um, do you anticipate any other roadblocks that just might delay it? Because we certainly were filled with them the last time that this was presented.

At this time, at this time, Commissioner, we do not anticipate uh any roadblocks because the way it is structured in our PSA, you saw the minimum requirements. We are not held to the minimum th those those will be like it says minimum. we would do that but most of the operators we talk want to do more so so and if if you're asking for a answer for a roadblock expansion could be one but that could be like 5 10 years from now but not nothing that we see right now. Thank you Commissioner Globe.

Thank you. We've got a few questions here. Um I know that I know what your answer is, but I'd be, you know, missed if I didn't ask the question. Do we are you going to be Can you tell us if you're going to be tied to any of the major healthcare providers? That's been a big discussion with our our community members um that have and I'm just going to throw a name out uh like, you know, banner or something like like their insurance won't cover some of some of these secondary uh hospitals and and locations. Thank you for that question, Commissioner Rob. Like, but unfortunately, we can't because of the NDAs that are in place, we can't mention the names, but I can give you some color to the type of operators we're talking to. Um, we do have in Maricopa a a micro hospital. One of the bigger concerns with the city was not to duplicate something that we have already in from a scale perspective. So we're talking to folks who will be bringing in a bigger hospital than what we have currently. That's the extent to which I can share. I figured as much but had to ask. Um can you talk to the need on you know doesn't sound like there's there's a lot of room here for expansion and you know on this size of site there for what you're proposing uh there really isn't room for expansion. Um yet you still want us to drop the uh the open space requirement from 20% down to 10%. So that is u again at at the pad level we are planning for the worst case scenarios you know um in Jesse's presentation you saw three different options you know or I I forget direct presentation where you have a one one option where the hospital is all

contained together hospital and the outpatient contained together that could that's not the option where this reduced um uh open space would be required. It's the third option where you have multiple things happening as multiple individual u buildings by themselves. If you have a hospital, an MO or retail or MO here that will be a little bit more of a dense configuration where we would need that uh request for the reduced open open space.

Okay. And I think that my a little bit of challenge that I have with this is, you know, this will be a very compressed site compared to a traditional hospital, uh, you know, development

and not having that secondary specialist sites uh, adjacent to or mixed within, you know, this project and only kind of having services that are offered by the hospital themselves. Um, and I think th some of those things are uh equally important. Um, and you know, granted, you haven't shown us any plans for anything, so you know, we can't discuss those in detail, but I think that I think having the the that those support services, um, you know, as someone that's me personally, you know, had some issues with skin cancer and, you know, having my dermatologist and my surgical center nearby is beneficial. Um, And you know, then there's so many other, you know, orthopedics and so on and so forth that having that that support nearby is something that our community needs. You know, we don't have anything like that here. We do recognize that and that's pro that's you know that's the reason why we have very distinct programming at least you'll see although we don't have plans you have you saw the program needs that that are specific for the inpatient and for the outpatient and the MOB side that's that's where the clinics will be for the different specialties one other thing I failed to mention is with all these things happening here and you recognize the limitation of the site from a size perspective to the scale at which typically medical uh facilities grow into. The city has also we're working with an overflow parking arrangement just for you know future side of things you know where where the parking might go. So that's one another relief valve for us from

and and you led me into my next question and that is parking you know with this you know we have this hight traffic and hopefully even higher traffic uh activity center that that we have with the new fieldhouse copper sky uh and the rest of the development that that's going to be occurring here. Um you know parking is parking is a challenge. Do you foresee a a parking garage or is this all going to be street parking?

It will we do not foresee right now at the scale. Again, this could change on the operator the because this is again a um we envisioning this as a medical campus all together like and there's we the the comfort of the patient, the comfort of the staff that those are all primary things. If the operator feels like, for example, I mentioned the overflow parking on an adjacent site, that's too far. Valet doesn't work. We would much rather benefit if that parking is on site. Uh the operator's call to have that garage um on site. That would be their decision. But it's not economical the way we have programmed it right now. So right now we are planning for all on surface parking. And I think 90% of the time that's probably will be fine.

It would be fine just from a code perspective too. An inpatient hospital requires actually very less parking compared to an outpatient mob. My concern is actually less for your use and more for um the city's use. You know, we have we have some big events that that occur at Copper Sky and you know, a lot of people come in and and hopefully, you know, we got we've had some concerts and things like that and and so I I actually see overflow parking from that coming onto your site

and you know, not having parking available. My, you know, my grandson breaks his arm and I got to bring him to the hospital and there's nowhere for me to park, you know, because there's a concert going on at Copper Sky. Those are those things that, you know, this has a ripple effect. Uh it can go both ways. I agree with you. less impact than than the the other use. But if that use is also there, it's going to happen on your site.

I don't have a definitive answer on a traffic solution because we are at the very early stage of that. We have civil engineers and a traffic engineer employed engaged for this task. We'll make sure that we work as a partner with the city uh to solve those and this was also brought during our neighborhood meeting as parking is a big issue when we have these seven or 12 events within a year like you know where huge traffic happens in the copper sky side of things. We are made aware of that. We will make sure that our traffic plans and our parking plans incorporate that into consideration.

That's all. Thank you. I I have one other question and that is I'm wondering if you have spoken to any doctors or other providers as to what rel the relative any relative interest or do you get a feel for who might be wanting to come in or not come in?

Sure. Uh uh Commissioner Yokum I come from a little bit of a biased background. My wife is a specialist neurologist so I can ask her like you know I'm just kidding. uh but to you asked a question if I've talen talked to physicians yes we have uh there is a if you look at uh from a real estate perspective uh an interest and a need there is zero vacancies there's for an MO medical office building right now where private physicians have their practices are in strip malls like which is not the right thing you know having a medical campus is very different where the envir environment the the um the benefit to the patients your community they go all to uh commissioner Klob's point like you know everything is all in one space versus going to multiple areas uh so we are trying to sell that to the existing physicians not just the trying to recruit somebody from Chandler or Gilbert or joining communities there is value in making this all just a medical campus there in interest in there. So my data back to you is right now there's 0% there's no such medical office building. So there will be interest.

Okay. And the next part of that have you reached out to any of the various associations or whatever the American cardiatric associated whatever to advise them that you're thinking of doing something like this and how could they help? uh not specifically to medical organizations but we have engaged a realtor services. Kushman and Wake is our realtor and with Kushman and Wake we have engaged their healthc care specialty focus not just a realtor. So that those are next steps but answer to your question specifically not specific health organizations like Okay. Thank you

Commissioner Thomas.

Um definitely enjoyed the presentation and being last almost last all the commissioners definitely cover a lot of areas. So mine is simply um to say that this is a blessing that we're getting another medical facility but in generally would you describe this as a small hospital a medium-siz hospital because it's definitely not a large one. It it's a very good question and it's a good point of clarification for everybody and point of education. What we call as a micro hospital to give you context is a nine bed hospital. The one that you have currently what what is written into our agreement with the city right now is a minimum 24 beds. So that puts you little bit in context of the size like nine bed versus a minimum of 24. If the hospital operator decides they want a 48, so be it. It's going to be a 48 bed hospital. So, hospitals are graded on the number of inpatient beds that they have. So, the other things are granted and as the beds bed capacity, bed number increases, so does the supporting um things, you know, ancillary support services also.

Thank you. Don't worry, Commissioner, you're not the last one to comment. Vice Chair. Okay. I had one more question regarding the uh size of the campus and the number of buildings. Uh if we're going to have multiple buildings and because this site appears to be very compressed, are we going to look at or are there plans for um pedestrian pathways between adjoining buildings?

Yes, 100 we that is our vision. In one of the slides you would see like that we want this to be where if you are if you get treated at the ER for example hospital and then you want and you're discharged but you're said like go to the imaging site and which is in the adjoining building hopefully that's a shaded covered like you know they don't have to go back to the car and do but it's a walkable small little campus you know with

sh my question was based on because it's so compressed and I don't know what vehicle traffic is going to be like um having this pedestrian bridge would eliminate a patient or patients having to navigate between that traffic that's flowing between the buildings. We don't anticipate a patient bridge per se at this point. It would be like pedestrian uh walkway connections. Okay. Thank you,

Commissioner Robertson. I think at um this point in the game um I feel compelled for the audience to understand for those citizens this is only a p a redesation portion of the process. This is not design review. We don't have the full scope of the project or what the final project's going to look like. That's not what we're deciding tonight. So if we approve or don't approve it has nothing to do with the final design or what it's going to look like. This is strictly changing uh in layman's terms the the the designation of those nine acres. That's what we're here for tonight.

And we did get a little deep in the weeds because we're curious. So, thanks for putting up with us. And uh Chair Singleton, uh Commissioner Robinson, if I may add, uh any building over 5,000 square feet uh is was consider considered a major development review permit and will be brought back in front of this commission on anformational basis and presented to the public at that time. Awesome. I don't I think everybody covered questions I had. Um commissioners, any last questions, comments, concerns? I I I would like to make a motion that we approve P A25-06. I have a motion second and a second. All in favor say I. I.

All opposed. That motion passes. That'll take us to agenda item 5.2 Z2-04. This is a public hearing. The planning and zoning commission shall discuss and take action on a request for a zoning map amendment on approximately 2.21 21 acres, effectively reszoning the site from the CB-2 general business zoning district to the GC general commercial zoning district. The site is generally located at the southwest corner of West Honeyut Road and North Porter Road. This is for discussion and action. Derek, take it away.

Thank you, Chairman Singleton. Uh again, Derek Sher with development services department uh planning division to present the next item. This is uh for a terrible sea store on honeyut and porter. This is a a city initiated reszone. Uh and then also wrapped up in this presentation is a planning and zoning commissionformational item for DRP2-14 which is the development of the site. Uh the applicant for this project is uh Tim Rasnake of Archicon Architecture and Interiors PC uh for the site location indicated on the vicinity map on the screen uh at the southwest corner of West Honeyut uh road and North Porter Road uh on a approximately 2.21 acre site. The proposal is to reszone the site from uh general business CB2 uh to general commercial GC uh and then also for a development review permitformational review for a gasoline service station with convenience store. This reszone is a like forlike reszone to pull the property out of the CB2 Panal County legacy zoning and into the city's uh current zoning ordinance for with a general commercial designation. Uh the uses allowed in uh both of these districts are essentially the same except for just a couple of minor uses. The proposed use on this site is uh permitted uh by right in the existing zoning and then also the proposed zoning. The city is initiating this reszone uh per our general plan directives where we look for properties that have this legacy panel county zoning and to reszone them into the current city of Maricopa zoning with a like forlike reszone meaning it's the same zoning district is just name different and there might be some slight different standards but the vast majority of uses and uh development standards are the same for development of the site uh the

applicant is proposing a uh seven pump uh uh gasoline uh service station with approximately 6,186 square foot convenience store parking for 43 vehicles uh with internal and external uh pedestrian connections to West Honeyut Road and North Porter Road. Uh site access as you can see on that site plan. Uh it's a right in right out access along uh West Honeyut Road and then also a right in right out access along North Porter Road. Uh the driveway that you see along uh North Porter Road lines up with the driveway to the Circle K east of the site. However, as part of this development, a uh median will be installed that'll prevent any left out traffic. Uh the proximity to that intersection is too close to allow for that uh kind of movement. So, we can't allow left in to the site and we can't allow left out of the site because that proximity. And where you can see where that driveway exits, you can see that left turn arrow right there. So, uh, for the turn lane to go westbound on Honeyut Road, if there were a left out there, you're going into that, uh, turn lane, you'd have to cross several lanes of traffic. It would create a very bad situation. So, as part of this project, uh, a median is being installed uh, with that uh, to eliminate any of that cross traffic for Honeyut. In the future, it is planned to put a median there. However, uh it's not a part of this project. The conditions on Honeyut right there that I'll require for that um have already been looked at and sort of uh in the plan with the city engineering with the capital uh projects program over at public works. Uh that that has been looked at for quite a while. So that isn't a part of this, but that will occur uh under a CIP program later on. Uh the applicant is proposing to develop this in a single phase uh with light landscaping provided all around the site with a heavy emphasis of the landscaping

uh on the southern part of the site where it's adjacent to a residential neighborhood. Uh the building is also set back 25 ft with that landscape setback that is required by the zoning code. Uh here we have some architectural renderings of the proposed terrible uh convenience store. Uh if these look uh pretty familiar uh it is very close to the other one uh that terrible proposed at the corner of uh uh Bolan and Porter uh just a mile down the street. Uh the architectural elevations as I said uh very similar. Uh the use of materials uh for planning and for the city are pretty good. This is still under review. has it's still moving through the development review uh process and we're here to take any input from the commission and from the public on uh maybe possible uh uh changes or ideas for changes uh for the site. Uh as we can see on these elevations, the luminires that they've chosen uh we need decorative uh and that comment has been made to the applicants and this application will meet all requirements of the uh zoning code prior to any uh approval. Uh with that conformance with the general plan, the proposal is uh consistent with the general plan future land use map for the area. Uh the proposed reszone is consistent with the directives of the general plan. As I mentioned, uh the proposal is appropriate for the function of the site and is integrated with the existing and future development of the area. The elevations and color combinations uh appear well integrated and uh complimentary and uh prior to any approval uh the proposal will meet all requirements outlined in the zoning ordinance. Uh for public outreach, August 6th, the sign was posted on the site and uh letters were mailed out to property owners within 600 ft. On August 21st, a neighborhood meeting was held. On September 2nd, a sign posting was updated. the newspaper notice had not been published. So there is a failure to

notice. So this was originally scheduled for the previous planning and zoning commission meeting. Um we the applicant reposted the site uh posted in the newspaper and also mailed out to uh property owners within 600 ft. Um however on the staff level we should have posted a note on the door saying that that item had was not on agendaized for that because there's a failure for the notification and could not be agendaized. uh that that was a a drop of the ball on our portion. Uh in the future, we will be doing that and do better with that. Um so then on September 2nd, the second notification letters went out to property owners within 600 ft. On September 4th, the newspaper published was uh uh published in the Cassagrand Dispatch and staff has received three letters of opposition to the reszone proposal. Um staff recommends approval of zone 25-04 terrible sea store honeyut subject to the conditions stated uh in the staff report or is amended by the planning and zoning commission and um happy to answer any questions that the commission may have. Also the applicant and his development team uh are here and can answer any questions that the commission may have as well.

Thank you Derek. This is a public hearing so I will open the public hearing. I do have two speaker cards. I will go in the order that I receive them. Uh, first up is Ron Anderami. How you doing? Thank you planning and zoning for the opportunity to speak tonight regarding the proposed the proposed terrible gas station in Honeyut and Porter. At a recent Glennwell HOA meeting, one of the main concerns raised about was the lack of wall along the southern boundary of the project. Other locations in Maricopa where commercial property directly borders on residential homes, there is a concrete wall to separate the two. This has become a standard for good reason. It provides a clear buffer between commercial activity and family neighborhoods. In reviewing the documents submitted by Terble, it appears there is no wall planned along the south side of the property where the site directly abuts the culdeac. Without the wall, residents who live just a few feet away would be left fully exposed to the activity of a 24-hour gas station. Bright lights, noise from vehicles, delivery trucks, trash, and the coming and going of customers at all hours of the day and night. Beyond comfort, this raises serious quality of life concerns. Homeowners expect the same level of protection and privacy that other neighborhoods enjoy when businesses move in nearby. A missing wall in this location not only disrupts the consistent look and feel across myopic developments, but also negatively impacts property values for the families living right next door. There are also safety considerations. A proper wall will help reduce cut through front uh cut through foot traffic from a commercial property into a residential culde-sac. It deters loitering, trespassing, and establish residents with an additional layer of security. So, this isn't just about aesthetics. It's about fairness, safety, and preserving the character of our

neighborhoods. If this project is going to move forward, we respectfully request that a condition of approval include a construction of a wall along the southern boundary, consistent with what has been required with other similar locations throughout the city. This would ensure the development is compatible with the neighborhood, maintains the integrity of our community, and upholds the standards that residents have come to expect. Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker card I have is Britney Pilola.

Good evening. Um, I also agree with the need for a wall, uh, but I would like to speak of the safety of pedestrians. I speak about this often, sorry, but it's a problem we have on Porter right there. There are like six schools on that stretch of road and there have been children hit in the area due to people not driving correctly, especially around that Circle K. This will the terribles will bring more traffic and I'm worried about them paying attention to those that are walking and riding their bikes to and from school and also those people that are going to copper not Copper Sky Pana Park especially because now it's getting nice. I see more and more kids after school and on the weekends walking to Pana Park. Um I know there's a median there which I'm grateful for because that'll definitely help a little bit. I'm worried about people doing U-turns farther down especially near that uh What is that called? The flashing lights, the crosswalk. Sorry, I'm a little tired. Um, I live right there. I have to make a left turn and it's very difficult any hour of the day almost except for like the middle of the day to turn left because of the amount of traffic. I I don't think the speed limit should be 45 through there. I think it should be 35. I don't understand why it's 35 in front of Walmart, but 45 in front of a preschool, an elementary school, a high school, another elementary school. It's dangerous. We've had problems there before. Um I think anywhere there's a school, it should be 35 and even I think it should be 35 around Copper Sky and the new hospital. There's going to be increased traffic there as well and people walk over there. I've heard many times from you and as well as from the uh city council. You want this to be a walkable city. It's not walkable. Parents are afraid to send their kids out there because people don't know how to drive here. They're doing wrong going in wrong ways to Circle K. They're not stopping for the flashing lights for people to cross. They're driving 55 65 on that Porter road. And uh hopefully with this terribles and the other terribles,

you'll think about decreasing the speed limit to 35 on Porter and even on Bolan where the other schools are at because we're also getting a heritage further down past Walmart and that's going to include even more traffic. So I I really think something needs to be done about the speed limit. Thank you. Thank you. That's all the speaker cards I have. Is there anybody else in the audience that would like to come forward to speak on this item? Yes, please come forward.

Hello, my name is Kathy. I live 600 feet from the proposed terribles. And uh my first question, which was already answered, was was it going to be a 24-hour uh business? 24 hours. Why do we need two 24-hour businesses right next to each other? Uh it's already the noise and the traffic is horrible. Uh especially they speed along, like she said, along Porter. And I just think I'm not against terribles. I just think it it should be in a different location that would better serve the community. You don't need two gas stations, two convenience stores right across the street from each other. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anybody else in the audience that would like to come forward? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, I started this way last time. I'm going this way.

I don't think they have a present. Derek, do they have a presentation for this or no? No, there is no presentation for me. Yeah. Commissioner Club Derek, can you speak a little bit about I know you said that the the the reasonzoning change is is like for like um but why you know I understand that going to the the the GC zoning but as small of a site as this is its neighborhood component why didn't we look at uh neighborhood uh commercial in lie of general commercial

because uh with the general plan we do with the city it's a like forlike uh resone the same. Basically, think of it as annexing a piece of property into the city. Uh you're you're not going to down zone or upzone it. It has to come in as the same. So, we're moving from the panile county zoning ordinance to the equivalent category in the current city of uh Maricopa zoning ordinance. So, there's no way to to drop it down into a neighborhood.

If the applicant had requested it, uh they they could have presented for a uh neighborhood commercial, but this was a city initiated. Uh we've done probably about a half dozen of these in the last 18 months or so. Um just following our typical standard of when the opportunity presents itself for a project to request from the property owner and the applicant if they would like to participate in a city initiative reszone to bring this property into the city zoning ordinance instead of the old Panal County.

Okay. Here's my concerns and that is by allowing this to zone and I and I understand that you know by right they're able to to do it now under the under the county zoning but um it allows this project to have all the things that are allowed under uh general commercial um should this project not go forward as terribles things sell things you know corporate plans change by reasonzoning this now we're allowing any of those items by right um under under our new zoning. Um it also allows you know things such as you know auto automotive vehicle repairs um you know sales and leasing you know washing services so on and so forth. Um that you know and the other terrible just down the street we had to reszone it because they wanted to add a a car wash. This would actually allow terribles to put in a car wash by right at any point in the future. Don't know how they'd fit it, but they could do it. Um, and that being so close to these homes, that really gives me a lot of concern. Um, you know, the other one is a little different situation, a little bit larger buffers. Um, this is literally sharing the same street, you know, on the on the south side as as as these residences. And so I I think by by allowing it to go go through as general commercial, it puts an undue burden on these on these homeowners. I'd like your two cents on that.

Uh Chair Singleton, Commissioner Clobe. Um yes, with the other one with the car wash in the CB2. Now, if the car wash were accessory to this gasoline service station, it would be allowed under the CB2. Uh there I I can't quote off the top of my head. Uh there's only few differences in uses between the two districts, between the CB2 and the GC. Uh very minimal. Um and it's more of in our zoning ordinance, the changing designation of uses or uses that weren't contemplated in the 1990s, uh when the first draft of that uh uh Panal County zoning ordinance and then the last update before we adopted it back in um Rudy, correct me if I'm wrong. was that 2008 or nine that that code is. Um, essentially they're 90 plus% of the exact same uses. Uh it's just what we are charged with doing uh as a planning department from the general plan uh which was adopted by the voters to say we're it's possible we have the city zoning rather than the legacy zoning from Panal County because we're the city of Maricopa now not um just a uh incor non-incorporated area of the city. Um, so there isn't much difference with the zone changes on that matter. Uh, it's really not going to open them up to a whole lot of other uh uses that would uh, you know, generally in in people's mind not fit being next to uh, the residential there. Um, it was CB2 for you know gosh almost 20 years at this point. Uh, I personally I do not understand why this corner wasn't developed. Uh I think it may be a cost thing with the drainage channel that's there on that east side of it, but I don't know. Uh I wasn't privy to any previous conversations, but this has

been a vacant site for quite a while and people have gotten quite used to it. And now that a uh a developer is coming in with a proposal. Um we tend to get very used to a site being vacant and open for 20 30 40 years. Uh then as the city grows and development occurs and uh the densities increase, those uh vacant sites tend to get developed with development that uh they're allowed to by the zoning.

Yeah. Um commissioners Rudy Lopez, home services director, just to also reiterate what Derek just mentioned again, it is a like forlike zoning. The CB2 equivalency to Maricopa zoning code is CB2 of Panel County, city of Maricopa um GC general commercial. The CB1 of Panel County is that neighborhood commercial concept which would be equivalent to our um our neighborhood commercial. Um with respect to the owners and their rights or property rights and again back to the intent of the general plan was to convert the existing zoning of Penel County to Mount America zoning code. So intent and request here today is just the the equivalency of the zone change from like to like um if this was not happening they still have the right to do so to have that higher zoning district. So um but again just to reiterate the same thing what Derek mentioned and to that to that point thank you for chiming in Rudy um having I think this would if this were taken as as a case all by itself as a reszoning case um you know 2.2 2 acres in this setting. I don't know that we would approve it as general commercial though. And that's kind of the because of the size of it, the use of it. Um I think this would be all by itself would be a difficult reszone approval in and of itself. the the panel county zoning that that that we're adopting from, you know, if we if we can pull up the the map there. I mean, it's it's a very large swath of uh uh of the uh uh of the CB2 zoning there. Um and it encompasses the Circle K, the church site, the you know, and so on and so forth. So, you know, usually historically when we reszone large commercial, it's it's it's a pretty good sized parcel. not, you know, we don't always do these little spot locations.

And I get why we're doing it and and I've been in this process before, you know, professionally. I just don't know that this is the right zoning for this parcel and and I think it it could create some problems for, you know, we have to look at these these neighbors that that have been here now for for many years. And uh just because something's always done that way doesn't necessarily mean it's the right thing to do. And that's that's what that's where my question is. I I just I feel bad for the impact that's going to to cause these neighbors. We going to talk about the the design itself or is that going to be on the the next me person? I had a point of clarification before we continued anything on the zoning. So it's like for like purely because the applicant is not coming forward and this is initiated by the city and not the applicant. Correct. That is correct. Okay. Um as far as the design it was presented so I am keen to say fair game.

Okay. Um so with that in mind, you know, should this go forward, um I share I do share the uh the neighbors concerns about uh the separation between, you know, this uh this facility and the the the neighborhood and the street to the south. Um, you know, most most jurisdictions require a six inch, you know, or six foot block wall separating commercial from residential. Uh, some areas actually even require an 8 foot tall block wall separating commercial from residential. Um, our zoning code says it can be a a wall, it can be a burm, it could be landscape. We do have some flexibility there. I have I have some challenges with that. I think it needs to be a wall. Um, however, there with everything there's a ripple effect and I see a, you know, potential challenge depending on where that wall, you know, occurs on that cult turnaround to ensure that we can get vehicles, emergency vehicles to to be able to turn there without hitting said wall. Um, it's a tight site and I think that there's there's outside influences here that are going to dictate um where that wall can go. And I think I would like to hear the applicant, you know, speak on that at at some point this evening. Um because I think there's from a safety standpoint, from a light standpoint, from a use standpoint, you know, so many different variables there that that I think there needs to be a a hard separation. Um the my where I deviate from that a little bit is for those people that are what we got, seven, seven, eight homes that are right there on that on that little culde-sac street. is that's going

to create a tunnel effect for your street and you're you're you're used to this nice open view. And so sometimes it's be careful what you wish for. Um and it's really going to enclose that that street. It's uh it's going to feel darker and and and more, you know, tighter than than it is. I'm not here to design that. That's the applicant's, you know, uh job. find something that that works. Um, but I see a lot of challenges with how how that goes forward and keeping that that symbiotic relationship with these neighbors and and with this business. So, the the other one uh that I uh want to make sure of, it didn't look like it on their elevations, but just want to make sure that again if this does go forward that there's no signing that is facing any of the residential properties. Um and and we're really careful on uh any sight lighting so it doesn't create again an undue burden on uh on these people's homes. So with that, thank you

commissioner. I I agree with uh what commissioner Globe is is telling us as far as the zoning is is change is concerned. One thing we have to keep in mind, the next item on the agenda is DRP 2513, which is terrible seas informational report to planning and zoning. So, we're not going to be voting on it. Uh, it'sformational only. And I think as far as whatever is going to be put on the property in the way of a a gas station is going to have to be discussed in concert with the zoning, I agree. But also, if we want to put the barrier wall up, I guess this is where we would do it. when when we get to making a decision on terrible

and and just to clarify, commissioners, the the DRP that's in submission is for discussion only. Yes.

And it's for input from staff, they have if they meet the letter of the law of the code, it's it's by right administrative. We're here to take suggestions, recommendations. And that's why I'm suggesting it now because it it kind of does dubtail with with what we're concerned about with the change of the zoning code. But I think yeah, but if we're talking about what is going to be on the property and what kind of buffers are we going to have so forth and so on, we're only at discussion level to begin with, let alone uh deciding on something. But I think it if it were to come down to that, I know that I would be s suggesting a buffer wall probably 10 foot Thank you, Commissioner Thomas. Anything from you?

No, Commissioner Robertson.

I I concur with uh Commissioner Clobe. U it was one of the first things I had listed. Um that the city has some flexibility on what they designate this where terribles can still go through with their project. I think um neighborhood commercial provides while you did say Derek, there's not much difference between the like for like that we're trying to accomplish tonight, there's not much difference, but it only takes one difference to upset the community. So, the neighborhood commercial seems more appropriate to me. I'll just I'll just leave that at that um for you guys to consider. the privacy wall there that there's there's no way I'm going to be in favor of this project without a privacy wall. If I I sat there the other night, I went over there and sat in that culde-sac

to to to get a feel for it. And I can just imagine, you know, the the traffic and the kids and the bicycles, they're going to come out of Glenn Wild and cross through that culde-sac to get to the store to buy their Coke. It's just going to happen. So some way somehow there needs even if it's just a view fence uh if you want some view if you don't like like commissioner club said you be careful what you ask for we put up a wall and all of a sudden we feel closed in well then why not a view fence that keeps the pedestrians out. So that's that's just a statement for consideration. The other thing I didn't see in the project narrative was any consideration or any statement made for storm water runoff retention. There's a major water flow system that runs down Porter and also down Honeyut that merges there, goes under the road and goes into the province community. Um, I did speak to Rick Williams about this a little bit and basically what he said, well, they're going to have to retain their own water on their own site which will take it out of the total mix of water converging there. But I don't see any mention of that. So is on-site retention. He even mentioned to me that it could be a retention pond if the if if the landscape allows for it or underground storage for storm water. So if what Rick told me is correct that there will be some storm water runoff retention from that property because right now it's dirt. Some of it does percolate down. the rest of it flushes into the the drainage there. Once we pave it, all of a sudden now we have high velocity water coming off into that drainage area. So, a considerable a consideration for stipulation that they

look at or at least engineer or come up with a plan for uh on-site water retention would be important uh for the edification of everybody listening to us or that are here. Derek, can you give us a brief refresher in understanding what by actually means?

Yes, thank you. U Commissioner Robinson uh chair Singleton Commissioner Robertson by right means that per zoning you are allowed to build a certain structure and also use your property in a certain manner. In a single family residential district single family residences are by right. It means that it doesn't go to a public hearing uh for a decision on it. You can go submit your building permits for a single family residential house to uh the uh department of uh building and safety. As long as those plans meet building code, uh you'll get your building permit issued and you can go build on your site and use that site as a single family residential. Uh say in this example where it is general commercial, we have a list of all different uses. So in that uh district uh it says medical offices. You can have a medical office. You can have a convenience store. You can have a gas station, but it excludes a a power generation facility, a coal powered plant or a nuclear plant or it doesn't allow for a a thousand foot skyscraper. It only allows for 50 ft. Uh so by right means that the proposed development um that's a subject of this question. They would be allowed to come in put in for their development review permit for planning of review of the site plan, landscape plan, phototrics. As long as they meet that by building code, then they can go get their building permits. As long as the building permits meet the building code, uh then they can get their permits and be off to construction.

Thank you. Um I get asked that question all the time by the public. When I use the term by right, they don't understand. So, I just want people to understand that there's certain restrictions that we have to work within also. And when we check the boxes, things happen. If the boxes don't get checked, they get handed back to you or the U applicant to fix it. Thank you for the explanation. Good.

Yeah. My question for Derek again. Um, and thank you for asking that question for the definition. um that helps me set the stage for what I'm going to say and then thank you Commissioner Clo for your insight on how you see the project. Um I understand they have the right to build what they want on this facility. I also understand that Terribles appears to be wanting to be a good neighbor in the community. They're willing to bend over backwards to accommodate us on certain things and I see that as a good thing for the community. Um, I would much rather see this developed as a gas station like they want rather than be looking at this empty dirt lot forever. Um, the other thing too is I also understand the the concerns with the community on having some type of barrier between the building of and the parking lots of terribles. And um I I would ask Turbles is what is it you can do to improve this site where it's not such a big impact on on the community? Uh I I don't see their building as being ugly, but I do see other things that come with that building being there, the trash, um possible unwanted traffic coming into the community or going out of the community. um people accidentally falling when they they walk through that current landscaping of Glenn Wild there. Um that may be something we have to speak with the HOA Glenn Wild. What is it you can do to make your homeowners safe also if we build this wall or excuse me, Terrible builds the wall. Now, we're going to force you, your residents go all the way around the block or they're going to cut across other parts of landscaping. Now, we have

a trouble for Glennwell where the landscaping gets trampled on. Uh there's no control of that traffic. You have no access now for ADA access. Somebody that goes across their falls is does that turn into a lawsuit? Um I don't know. I I think um if we can work with the terrible staff to make this a benefit for both terribles and the community, I think we have a good project going forward. I think uh what they proposed in their last project uh as they bent over backwards, they improved the landscaping. They did they repositioned their store and the pumps and all that because we asked as a community and I think they responded well and I think uh as a community we should stand behind them and they stand behind the community and I think we can all live together with what they can provide us and as a community we can tell them what will make this work for the community as well. And that's all. Thank you.

Thank you, vice chair. I think that would probably be good for the next agenda item to discuss on those items, but yeah, I I understand this is a like for like um I would have preferred to see the applicant come forward and suggest neighborhood commercial. Um but I understand it's city initiated. Um, so whether this commission approves this agenda item or not, they're free to build this uh regardless. So with that being said, do I have a motion to approve Z25-04? Commissioners, um, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion, but not to approve. I'd like to make a motion to continue this to give terribles an opportunity to digest everything they've heard tonight and bring maybe bring back some alternate ideas.

Okay, we have a motion to table. We have a second to table. Second. All in favor for tableabling say I. I.

All opposed. That motion passes. All right. That will take us to 5.3. This is DRP25-13. This is a planning commission update major development review permit case number DRP25-13. A request from Tim Raznik of Archicon Architecture and Interiors PC on behalf of Terrible's Gas Stations for review of site, landscape, rendering, and elevations and phototric plans for a proposed gas station with a convenience store on approximately 2.21 acres of land within Panal County parcel number 510-24-001G within the city of Maricopa, generally located at the southwest corner of West Honeyut Road and North Porter Road. This is for discussion and action or not action just discussion only. Sorry. Habit.

Thank you, Chairman Singleton. Uh members of the commission, Derek Sher again. Uh I have the same presentation uh that I just showed before with the zone 25-04. I can go over the presentation again or uh we can jump right into uh the discussion. I'll defer to the commission. I don't think we need it again, commissioners, but if any questions, who wants to start?

I would just like to reiterate that uh my primary concern is that barrier. It really is. If we're going to go along with this, I think that the applicant is going to have to address that issue because I don't see any way he's going to get around it. I think that's the way this commission is probably going to vote with with at least that that addition included. Otherwise, we as we did with the other uh terrible gas gas station situation, we did talk about noise and of course we don't have a car wash here, so I don't think noise would be that much of a factor. We talked about uh the light spillage and I don't think we have that either, especially if we build that wall. So that's all I have.

Thank you, Commissioner. I want clarification. We are not voting on this item tonight. Commissioner Globe

through the chair. Thank you. Um I think that we need to give if the if the wall is something that we all feel pretty passionate about and I think I think we all do. Um I think we need to give staff some direction on where does this wall begin? Where does it end? Does it start all the way at Honeyut Road on on the west side, travel down to the to Chamayo uh road there down and around horizontal and then end at the retention area uh adjacent to Porter? Is it just separating the uh the terribles from from that street? What what's the pleasure to I think we need to give staff some direction on and the applicant some direction on what we expect. And my my two cents is yes, wrap it all the way around. That

that was going to be my two cents as well is wrap it all the way around. Um

and not only for the like people walking back and forth and the noise, but I've seen gas station trash cans overflowing, blowing everywhere. Look at Circle K across the street. Not saying that Terribles isn't going to keep up with, you know, garbage, but monsoons happen here, right? And Glenn Wild is already faced with trash coming from adjacent empty properties next to Home Depot. Um, that they have to deal with trash blowing from there into their neighborhood. If we can mitigate another, you know, area from blowing trash into their neighborhood, I think we should. Um that's my two cents is to wrap it all the way around. Does anybody have any other two cents that is not wrapping it all the way around? Okay. So I think that would be the direction that we give staff and the applicant on that. Uh also I don't want to hug the mic. So if anybody has any other comments um yeah I just wanted question. Do we have a short presentation available from the builder at all?

We do not have presentation from the builder. Okay. Do we want to give them any time to talk about it?

Hi everybody. My name is Brett Griffin. I'm a development manager with Terables. Thank you for your feedback. We do understand the concern and need for a wall. Um we are open to building said wall. So, thank you for the guidance on what you guys want to see. We initially thought about doing a pony wall to at least block the headlights and then increase the the landscape buffer and uh more dense vegetation kind of like we did at Porter and Boland. But if the direction is to do a perimeter wall, we'll definitely take that under consideration. And if we agree to do that, is it possible to go back to the prior vote instead of continuing and maybe push this forward and then we can work with you guys offline to kind of shore up those details? It seems like we're all in agreement on the wall.

That's a possibility. I'll I'll defer to our legal counsel on that possibility. It's technically agendaized. uh there'd have to be a motion to reconsider, a second discussion on that motion to reconsider, and then you could bring back that item because it is still technically agendaized. The motion would have to be by someone in the prevailing side of the previous motion, which is everyone on the commission. Um but again, I I think nothing is stopping the DRP at this point from moving forward,

right? So the DRP can still move through the current city channels being reviewed by staff, being reviewed by engineering and the uh reszone can still come back at the next meeting. I don't think they're not necessary uh or sorry the reszone is not necessary for the DRP to move forward. Okay. The reason why we ask we're looking to close on this in November. So there's a chance, you know, if everything gets pushed back, we'll have to go get more time from CVS and kind of push that out. So, we're trying to avoid going down that road. Understand what you just said, though. Is it reasonable for you to come back with some answers in two weeks? We could have we could have a special meeting.

Okay. And then we can hold the I think we're slated for what is it? November. Of course, we have to meet the notification requirements and all that. Okay. Um with that, with that being said, I I don't think I'll reconsider my motion. Um, we we went back to the wall. Um, there's probably lots of different designs. I don't know. It has to be a solid wall. Maybe a three-foot pony wall with a view on top of it. I I'm not an engineer, so I don't know what to direction to give to them. Let them bring something forward, I think, is the way to go. Okay. But I'm also equally concerned about storm water runoff that that needs to be considered going forward.

Okay. Perfect. through the chair commission. Well, the applicant is here. Um, discussion was had about as it related to instead of changing the zoning um to to GC to actually bring it into uh neighborhood commercial. What What are your feelings on that? Uh, we would not want to move forward with that. We'd like to continue since this was a city initiated zoning to continue on for Lake for Lake. and I don't think the owner of CVS would want to downgrade their zoning. So, we'd like to continue on.

Okay. Thank you, Commissioners. Any other questions? Vice Chair. Uh Rudy, do we have time to get this on the agenda again in two weeks? Um our next schedule agenda date is October. So, second uh meeting in October October 13th that's our next schedule date of agenda. So um it can be scheduled but again just to clarify it just be for the reasonzoning requests the DRP will not come back as this is only it's not actionable itself but

be mindful that you're making a land use decision based off land use and not off of design considerations. So that's the tricky thing that you're dealing with, right? And I just made the request based on the request that came from the commission. Yep. Thank you. So I guess this is a question for commissioners. What is pushing this out a couple of weeks going to answer for us that we cannot get answered and I guess agreed upon tonight from the applicant? Like what are we looking for if we push this out two weeks?

An opportunity for the applicant to consider what they heard tonight and bring us back an alternative plan. I I understand the the complexity between the DRP. We're not in that yet. But also, Rudy, we don't get a say in the DRP anymore. This is the only opportunity we really get to vote. We do get our opinions during the DRP, but they're either listened to or or not. At this point in the game, we do have some leverage, and I'll call it as it is. Right now, we have a little bit of leverage. Terrible has been excellent in the the first project. Pushed back a little bit, came back with an alternate plan. They're sounding like good neighbors. I think this will be a successful project. So, that's what I'm asking for. Two weeks for them to come back and satisfy us at this point because this is the only point we really have any leverage. And just for a point of clarification, commissioners, the only thing I'm hearing from the commissioners is the perimeter wall. So, if the has already made notion that they're willing to work with staff with a permanent vault to as part of the DRP process. We're pretty much got some good direction for commissioners and good satisfaction from the applicant that they want to work consider that. So if we bring back back to you guys with understand that yeah they are going to be looking at installing a per part of this development and again we can resolve that tonight. the applicants standing here tonight shaking their head and saying we could probably do that. Is that binding?

Again, by code of the city, they're not required to do a wall. The applicant is more than willing to present that to us as a proposal. So, it's up to the applicant to decide whether they proceed or not, but it's not part of conditions. You can't Right. And uh Mr. Chair, Commissioner Robinson, that's correct. What Rudy says is correct. Our code does not require a six foot or like mandatory 6 foot 8 foot. We're now that's a staff administrative review and determination. We're now trying to add a stipulation on a discussion only item essentially. I understand that.

Yeah, I I understand that. Thank you. Um but I I guess I just want to make the point that not only has the applicant heard our concerns, so is staff. And now you get the DRP review and I would hope you would take what you heard tonight including storm water runoff. That's going to be my Bailey Wick. You all can have the wall. I'm sticking with storm water runoff. Okay. So

with some asurances, I will reconsider my motion, but I don't know what asurances look like or what they mean. I can give you an assurance that we will in fact build the wall, work with staff and find something that everybody can live with. I can give you my word on that. And at a minimum at least do some engineering look at storm water runoff. Yeah. And our civils are currently doing that. We're in for second metal and I believe they've addressed all those comments.

Well, I'd like to make a comment. I I think we we have to go by uh precedent that was set with with this commission by by terrible the last time around when we asked for the wall when they came back the second time we we had the wall. As a matter of fact, when we approve when we were going to approve it, we made it a stipulation that that wall could would exist. And I think we could we could do that with the DRP. Let's say it was not in their presentation when it came to us. We could try a special stipulation to make it part of it. I I I agree. Um but we also tabled the last project so they could bring it back in writing and make the presentation.

I agree. And that's what I'm asking for. Y but I I'm willing to reconsider and withdraw my motion. I don't know how to do that though. Uh Mr. Mr. Chair, Commissioner Robinson, it would just be a motion to reconsider uh zoning uh 254. It would need it would need a second and then a discuss whether or not Do I have to make it or can anybody make it? Anyone that was like to make that motion as presented by councel. Second. All in favor say I. I.

So I guess now we're back up to 5.2. I guess so. Okay. So, we're back to 5.2, which is the like forlike zoning with the notion of it being a like forl like zoning. Are there any questions or comments that we want to get out before we go for a motion through the chair? We can make the motion. Yes, Commissioner.

Additional discussion. I have I still hold the same challenges here and um having a hard time and I don't know that my my vote would have changed putting it out two weeks. I think this really needs to be neighborhood commercial. I I think keeping it like for like is doing this portion of our community a disservice and For that, for that reason, I'd like to make a motion to deny uh Z25-04.

Now, before I ask for a second, so you've already heard the applicant say that they are unwilling to go that route. Correct?

So, let's say we deny this. I'm just talking out loud for for my own sake. So we say we deny this. They come back in two weeks. They're going to present general commercial reszone again or maybe not even come back because by right they could technically build this as is right Derek if I'm understanding everything correctly. Like this technically does not have to come within city zoning per se. Like they could go ahead and build this as it stands. I a motion has been made and we should have a second and then discuss.

Okay. Do I have a second to deny ZLN 25-04? Seeing none, then that motion fails. Okay. We are still on Z 25-04, right? Okay. So I guess Derek, what is the is this just purely housekeeping then to bring this within city? Like why isn't the applicant just moving forward? Just here's a DRP that for discussion will accept feedback, make changes, maybe not make changes, work with staff and move forward that way. Why? Because I I feel like this reszone is the hiccup and we are trying to leverage as the commissioner has said this reszone to get what commissioners want. We have this assurance from the developer that we're going to get what we want. Great. So why do we need this reszone? Why can't the developer just take what we said in, you know, 5.3 DRP2-13 and go, "Cool." Like, I could care less about this reszone, right? Like, I can build it by right. I'm going to take what the commissioner has said, you know, to heart. I've assured them that we're going to do this and move forward. Uh, Chair Singleton, members of the commission, uh, you said it perfectly succinct uh, in your opening statement right there that this is housekeeping for the city and for uh, planning division where we try and take these legacy properties and reszone them into ours. Uh, with this state statute, we can't reszone uh, without changing the value of someone's property. Otherwise, uh, we open the city up to litigation

and uh, paying out the difference in the change in that value. Um, so that the applicant at the request of the city has uh moved forward with this reszone at our request. uh also at their expense with the posting of the site signage and the newspaper and the notification um because they've been pretty good to work with uh as uh Commissioner Robinson has noted uh with the previous project uh that when we approach them and say this is under our general plan we look to reszone like for like uh would you be willing to uh we will wave the uh application costs which is what we can do but we still need you to do the advertising you already have to advertise to a certain level with the DRP with the signposting and the mailing. Uh would you include the zone change? And they were more than willing to do so. Uh so we were pleased with that. But as you again noted that for this to move forward, it wouldn't need the resone. This is housekeeping to clean up our zoning map to make our zoning map completely our own with the city of Maricopa and not have legacy panel county zoning in the city.

Right. and um commissioners as well. Just want to reiterate again the general plan as a voter approved by the city. Objective B14.6 transition all property zoning designations from pre-existing districts to existing zoning districts in a manner that best achieves the goals of this general plan. Again, it's an objective vote approved housekeeping, but again, the intent to meet the general plan of transitioning all Penel County zoning and learning from previous cases of having properties live of two different standards, panel county zoning land use, but then development standards of the city zoning code. Administratively, it is somewhat of a tends to be issues with city when potential lawsuits and things like that. We had a great example like Apex that had panel county zoning but we had we had development standards under city mara zoning code. Easier for us to administer under Maricopa zoning code not have two zoning codes be on one property. Got that. Um Derek, can you go to the map that shows like the current zoning and what we're reszoning it to? That one. So, why doesn't the city come forward to reszone all of CB2 here to general commercial? Because I heard another hiccup is we're doing a small section of this entire CB2. So, why isn't the city because we we did this before south of the tracks, right? Where we came forward and go, hey, we're going to reszone all of this old zoning, Panal County zoning to our current city zoning. So why just this piece and not all of this? That includes the Circle K. It includes probably the the church and other, you know, parcels there. Why are we not going that route? Uh, Chair Singleton,

because we uh this is we're approaching this one because they're coming in for the development and we said, "Hey, would you like to reszone?" Uh, you already went through a reszone process. you're familiar with it. Uh a city initiated a reszone. Uh so we were getting a development proposal and at development proposal then we requested uh the circle K. Uh I can't speak to that. I wasn't staff then but it's been developed. It's a developed site. Um we could approach them and say would you like to reszone? Uh but they're already developed. Um there may not be interest for that. Uh then the city would also then incur all the costs for the reszone. uh posting of a site can that one sign ranges from $800 to $1,000 per post. So when there's two on the site that could be up to $2,000 plus the mailing which can run into about $500 worth of postage. So approaching them would be a cost factor for the city. Uh so what we've targeted are when applications come in when it's in a situation where it could be a like forlike reason to uphold the general plan, that's when we make the request. Commissioner Bram,

I'd like to just forward that based on this additional information that we have and really comparing it al like to like, I'd like to make a motion to approve. Okay, we have a motion to a to approve Z25-04. Do I have a second? Second. I have a second from the vice chair. All in favor say I. I. I. I. All those or those against say I I nay. Whatever. Nay. Can we have a recount on that James?

Commissioner Brims. Commissioner Robertson. Hi. Vice Chair Warren. Hi. Chair Singleton. Nay. Commissioner Yoga. Hi. Commissioner Clo. Nay. Commissioner Thomas. I That motion passes. All right. Guess that takes us back to DRP uh 25-13. Do any commissioners have any other comments that they would like to make about the DRP as it stands right now? No. Yes, Derek.

Uh Chair Singleton, Commissioner Robertson, uh my apologies. I was remissed not to discuss the drainage before, but if we're looking at the site plan right here right now, uh all onsite drainage will be kept on site subsurface. Uh if I know it's hard to train your neck, but the underground storage is sort of up here on that northern section. So everything that rainwise falls on the property is going to get channelized subsurface and then go into uh their dry wells and then also their storage facility. on the right hand side that you see that is the channel and they are will be building a box culvert uh bridge to go over that channel. It's a deep channel and as you see those lines and it cuts across Honeyut Road to the north that's a channel going underneath the road and also if you see those dotted lines coming in from the east side uh up by the intersection three dot dash lines that's the drainage coming from the Circle K side which is the road comes down underneath uh Porter Road goes into that channel goes northward across Honeyut and then gets spread out into uh the subdivision's uh green space and drainage area. So all of that drainage will be captured either channelized through the site and it's and there won't be co-mingling between the offsite and the on-site. We do not permit that. So the on-site will then go underground

and it'll be on-site storage with dry wells to empty them. Correct. Thank you. Also, just a point of clarification, Derek, that median on North Porter is going in at the same time or maybe before this. Correct. Yes. Cool. All right. Um, if we have no other questions for 5.3, uh, I will move us to item six. This is reports from commission andor staff. We'll go to staff first. any

um commissioners, I think the only thing I need to give you an update is um if Rick hasn't mentioned um the the city's stage coach days is going to be coming up, I want to say October 15th to the 26. Um, but one thing that we're going to utilize this this event uh to celebrate Maricopa's uh founding date is to really utilize this to get input on on long range projects such as our general plan 2026 um our trans transportation plan and there's a transit study as well being utilized. So, um I I open to any commissioners that's interested in um one, uh spread the word. Two, um help out. Um if you're interested to maybe stick with us in a booth and kind of continue to spread the information of what Maricopa's planning zoning division is entailed with, what is the general plan? Um to start looking at the general plan, um be open to to signups. Um and I'll I'll instruct Rick to kind of pass on information if you're interested in helping out to man the booth for us. Um during those three days, uh the three days that we're looking at is the 24th of October, 25th of October, and the 26th of October. Um which that's I'll be at Pakana Park. Um a lot of good events will be happening in those those main three days there. So that's all I have to report.

Thank you. Any reports or comments from staff or commission? Staff, I already heard from you. Yes, Commissioner Robertson. I promise this will be the last thing. Um Rudy, I sent a email to Rick, but I know he's on vacation. I didn't get a reply. Um the state legislature has a couple bills moving through that could drastically affect planning and zoning in communities. Um, I'd like to request to get on a future agenda, an update on those bills with a little bit of education factor for us on how it would or would not impact our obligation as a commission.

Sounds good. We'll take a consideration for that. Yes. Any other commissioners? No. I don't think we need an e session tonight. Um, do I have a motion to adjurnn? Do I have a second? Second. All right, we are