Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. I'm gonna, I like to call this meeting to order. So I hereby call to order for 12/03/2025, the meeting of the town of Paradise Valley Board of Adjustment, and welcome you all. My name is Eric Liebson. I'm the chair of the board. I'm gonna request everybody probably knows this every but I'm just gonna request that all phones are silenced, and I'm gonna ask Charice to call the roll.

Board member Williams?

Here.

Board Member Petsis?

Here.

Board Member Ozer? Here. Board Member Contadino? Here. Board Member Barnes?

Here.

Chair Liebsen?

Here.

Thank you. I'd like to note that board member Kuykendall is absent this evening, but we do have a quorum.

Very good. Thank you. Alright. The board of adjustment is a quasi judicial body that rules on variances to the Paradise Valley zoning ordinance. We are governed by Arizona state statute defined defining under what circumstances.

We are empowered to provide those variances from the provisions of the zoning ordinance. Rulings and previous rulings of the board do not set precedents. Each request is reviewed on its own merits and each decision of the board is based on the specifics of the property and the requested variance. For the benefit of those in attendance, here is an overview of how we will proceed. When the case is called, town staff will make a presentation with questions from the board.

Next, you as the applicant or your representative will present with questions from the board. I will open the public hearing and ask for those who wish to speak in favor of the application, followed by those who wish to speak in opposition to the application. If there's anybody that would like to speak that's not the applicant, please fill out a speaker card and hand it to Charisse. Will then close the public hearing. The board will deliberate, proceed to a motion and vote.

When you approach the podium, please speak into the microphone and state your name and municipality of residence. Board decisions may be appealed to the superior court of the state of Arizona within thirty days of a decision made by the board. You are free to remain in the chambers after the ruling, if you wish. We will by no means be insulted if you choose to leave. We will then move on to the next order of business.

So with that being said, we do have a quorum. I believe we have one case tonight, and I'm going to ask George to make the presentation.

Thank you. Good evening, chair and board members. Again, just one item this evening. It's a variance request for the property located at 5712 East Glen Drive. So today's goal is to reunite action on the variance request, which there are actually four variances.

The applicant is asking for height encroachment and setback encroachment to accommodate a new home, retaining wall setback and height encroachments and also to maintain and existing nonconforming spill slope as this is a hillside lot. So the agenda for this evening is to go over the background, the scope of the request, staff's analysis and recommendation, and then the action for this evening. On the left hand side is a vicinity map showing location of the property and on the right hand side is aerial photo of the lot. And again the property is on our 43 House side just slightly over an acre in size. It's triangular in shape.

It's a shallow lot. It has an average depth of about 100 feet deep. It has dual frontage. It is steep with about a 36% building pad slope. And the City Of Phoenix water tank of notches out the center of the property.

It's the club States 2 subdivision, which was plied in 1960 during the county's jurisdiction and then annexed in the county or later. There are permits on file to develop the property from the nineteen seventies, but no structures were built. According to the county aerial photos, it looks like that pad was cut in the late seventies, early nineteen eighties. And this is the third variance request for this property, so this may look familiar. On 05/03/2017, the board approved the variance allowed the house to encroach in the rear yard setback.

And then 11/03/2021, another variance was approved expanding upon that previous variance to allow for additional encroachments for retaining walls, house height, and setbacks, and also modify the existing nonconforming spill slope. And the application you'll see tonight is almost a kind of a repurposing or repackaging of both of those various applications. So the variance request, again, there's four requests to allow part of the house homes covered patio to exceed the 24 foot height limit, allow portions of the home to encroach in the 20 foot side yard setback and the 40 foot rear yard setback, allow retaining walls over three feet in height to encroach in the 40 foot front yard setback, and allow portions of those retaining walls to extend more than six inches above the material retain. And lastly is to modify and maintain an existing nonconforming spill slope. So I'm just gonna go individually by the four grants requests.

So the first one is the height and collection for the new home. Since it's a health side lot, the house is limited to 24 feet from natural or predevelopment grade. So a portion of the upper level covered patio roof will penetrate that. About 40 square feet of it will penetrate that 24 foot height limit. So have a height of 27 feet two inches tall, again, from natural grade.

And this is the plan that was included in the packet and just showing that little portion of the roof that penetrates that 24 foot height limit. Next is setback encroachments for the home, both in the rear and the side. So the applicant is requesting a two foot side yard setback encroachment to accommodate a bedroom and an overhang for a total encroachment of 59 square feet. And then at the rear of the property, instead of a 40 foot setback, they're requesting a 20 foot setback to accommodate both upper and lower levels with about 2,100 square feet of total encroachment in the rear and that's going to be placed up against the cut of the hillside. This is just a table identifying the requirements for the main house.

You have a setback of 40 feet from the front rear, 20 on the sides. For this request, if approved, it would allow them to do a 20 foot setback in the rear and an 18 foot side yard setback in accordance with the plans that are submitted. And this is the plan showing the side yard setback, showing the overhang that's encroaching, and then the red area showing the portion of building of the footprint that will encroach two feet into the setback. And then this is another plan included in the packet showing the rear yard encroachments, the lower level, and then the upper level, again at a 20 foot setback from the rear, adjoining the existing cut or the slope of that hillside. The third variance request is for retaining wall setback and height encroachments.

So any retaining walls located between the 10 foot and 40 foot front yard setback shall be three feet tall. And the code also states that any retaining walls cannot extend more than six inches above the material that they retain. So they have three retaining walls that exceed that three foot height limit and portions of them will also exceed that six inches limit and they'll extend anywhere between two to five feet above the material they retain. And this is needed due to drainage and site stability. And a portion of those retaining walls will be a total of five foot six inches tall instead of the required three foot tall.

So again, just another chart comparing what code allows versus what they're proposing. Again, a three foot height at a 10 foot setback. Some of the walls in three areas are about five foot six inches tall at a 32 front yard setback. And again, 38 lineal feet of those retaining walls will exceed that six foot high limit. They'll extend another two to five feet above the material they retain.

And this is a plan showing the portions of the retaining wall that will exceed the height limits, those areas in red and then the area in blue. So those are just those three affected areas that will exceed those height limits. And the last variance request is to maintain and modify an existing nonconforming spill slope. When that pad was cut, the spill was just left on the side of the hillside and it exceeds that 45 degree limit per our code. So the majority of it is already exceeding.

The applicant wants to remove about 20%, 25% of it. They want to re vegetate it and help it blend in. And once they get all done, they'll have an average slope of about thirty-thirty four degrees, but there are going be still portions that exceed that 45 degree limit. And then because of that, it is included in the variance request. Okay, and again this is just identifying they have to be at 45 degrees or less and they will make the overall improvement better but still exceed it in areas.

And this is what's included in the packet, just identifying the other portion that's going to be removed since they will be lowering the pad to accommodate the new home. And then the teal color just showing the area that's going to be revegetated to help blend into the hillside. The next couple of slides are just photos that are included in the packet. So, aerial photos showing the footprint of the home. Site plan showing the house.

Exterior building elevations showing what the house is going to look like. And, the renderings as well showing what the final product should look like. So, next couple of sites are aerial photos. These are just from the two first from the county with that existing pad and spill slope and city Phoenix water tank notching out the center of the lot. And then these are just a couple of photographs on the property showing that existing pad and that existing spill slope area.

So I'm just going to go briefly through staff's analysis. First is a single family residence height encroachment. Staff believes this is a difficult lot to build on and the applicant is trying to utilize that existing pad. It has a steep slope of about 36% and only a small portion of the house will encroach in the height limit, 40 square feet. And again, it's a covered patio so it's going to have very limited amount of mass that's encroaching beyond that height limit.

Next is the setback encroachments. Again, this is an odd shaped lot, triangular, has a very steep slope. The hillside encompasses approximately half of the building envelope and which limits the buildable area to about a third of the lot. The average home in town is about 8,000 square feet and they're a little bit undersized, they're about 7,000 square feet. And if you're looking to plot a lot today for Hillside based upon that slope, it would have to be 4.5 acres in size, would have to be rectilinear square in shape, It has to be two zero five feet deep instead of the 100 to 120 feet deep it is today.

Next is retaining walls. Again, a lot of this is again necessitated because of the slope of the property. They're trying to mitigate some of the drainage and site stability. So those three areas are going to exceed the three foot height limit and also exceed the six inches above the material it retains to help direct the water where it needs to go. And then lastly is the spill slope.

They are taking about 24% of it out and trying to make it blend in to look better on the hillside. And again, they're reducing the nonconformity which does meet the intent of the hillside code. So staff notified all the neighbors within a 1,500 foot radius in accordance with our policies. Staff did receive one letter of opposition or email this afternoon. I forwarded it to staff or to the board, excuse me.

And because of the aforementioned property hardships, staff believes the variance request is warranted and we are recommending approval. So there's three possible actions this evening. You can approve the variance with the stipulations that everything shall be in compliance with the submitted plans and documents. The applicant has to get Hillside Committee approval and obtain all building permit inspections. And also if this case is approved, we would stipulate that this case supersedes and the previous two variances. And the other two options are deny the request or continue for further review. And I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Now we open up for questions from the board to address to George or any questions? Ken?

I always have

a question. Yeah. No problem.

So George, how is the owner dealing with storm water management? I mean, if there's a the existing pad there now, there's gonna be, you know, impervious surface added. And so how is that being handled on

I'm not too certain. From the rains perspective, we don't really look at it. Hillside committee will and our town engineer will I know the steeper the lot, the less on-site retention they have. I'll let the architects speak to it, but I don't know if they're doing any retention basins or dry walls due to the slope of the lot. Lot. Okay.

George, the I I just was looking at the email, and I'm sorry that I hadn't seen it earlier. The objection that one of the neighbors has indicates that there is an adjacent lot that is available for sale and references the potential purchase of that by the owner of this spot. Can you just show us what he's talking about, please?

Let me go to that aerial photo. Let's see. Here we go. So it's the owner of this property here.

So that's the house that has the gate and then that real long driveway?

Yeah. This one's under

that house?

Yeah. So the the subject property here, and then this is the neighboring property where the objection letter came from. So even if they were to combine this property with theirs, they still need the same variance request because Yep. Those recurrence are based upon where the house is gonna be situated, and we'll mitigate the

the variance request. Okay. Thank you. That's almost gone. Yep.

Joe, any other questions before we invite the applicant? Seeing none, all right. I'm gonna ask the applicant to approach and make their presentation.

I'm Brent Kendall with Kendall Design Collaborative. Our office is in Scottsdale, Arizona. This is Richard Van Horn.

Hi. Nice to meet you.

Let me go ahead.

Sure. I mean, it's, I guess we're kind of taking the tack. George seemed to have done a pretty good job of explaining. I don't wanna take all of your time reiterating, all the reasons for it. I guess I could start with we had, you know, helped the client, when they looked at this lot and considered to buy it.

The very first thing we did was come to the town and talk to the hillside and find out the variances that existed on the lot. And then we did our very best to design a new home for this client they purchased the lot, that would conform to those those variances. So I know that we have a slightly different home in design than what was granted. I think that there's quite a few elements where we actually, where the previous variants for the previous design, allowed for greater area of, say, above the 24 foot height limit and so forth than we're proposing. So I think that our design is probably closer to being in conformance than the original variances that were granted.

The reason that we're here, is simply because we've got a revised design for this lot. And so we're trying to get the same variances that were previously granted granted to this design and and and so that, you know, this design will conform with those.

And, Ken, in your remark regarding the the civil engineering, we're working with Nick Pradhanov of Land Development Group who's very familiar with Perry's Valley and their hillside regulations. There is plan for underground retention tanks in the driveway and then kind of routing any water that comes down around into those or trying to maintain existing drainage ways where possible. As far as the presentation, we do have a presentation prepared. But we want to be respectful of everyone's time. We know George did a great job explaining it to you. I believe you all have documents previously. So, if you have any additional comments or questions, we'd be happy to answer those.

I believe that if memory serves, and I believe George mentioned, the the previous times that we approved variances, that was one owner that came to us twice. Now this is a new owner

Yes.

Of the property. And so is this person, planning to live in the house

Yes. Yes.

To your knowledge? Yep. This is her primary residence.

Pardon me?

This is her primary residence. Yes.

Okay. Great. Thank you. That's the only question I had.

I have one further question. So the just as out of curiosity, the drive it's a tough it's a tough site, tough driveway. So is there an area for turnaround up there, or does someone have to back down the driveway?

So, yes, there is an area for turnaround. As designed, you come up where the existing yeah. Thank you for going to this. Right now, where you come up on the lot, you approach from where the existing drive is, and we have designed a guest parking space up in front. Let me find the right slide. Sorry. Am I able to point or no? Yeah. A mouse would be helpful. So right now, the existing drive comes right next to the water tank where the existing one is cut in.

Right here is identified guest parking. We also have overflow guest parking or this is more of a service guest parking area where the retention tanks are. But as you approach underneath the house right here, we have room for turnaround and three guest parking spaces that exist down in here. This is really for kind of daily maintenance and UPS trucks and things like that that come up to the property. Thank

you.

I do have another question. Sure. I know that there were in Hillside, when you appeared before Hillside, and and I just looked in there a minute, was a concern about jackhammering the amount of noise and disruption to those who live at that part of the mountain, because sometimes that can take an inordinate amount of time and disturb everyone's life. Where are you on that as far as what you expect the disturbance to be?

So let me I'll pull up another we have some site data in here. I'll first comment on the disturbance of the site. The existing site is 58% disturbed. We're reducing that to 34 with restoration. As far as the site, there is a cliff face that's currently cut in to the west. We are limiting that cut in almost a 100%. Maybe we're cutting in in the top northwest corner a little bit and then sliding the house over. We are lowering the building pad to gain more buildable space. We have done a geology report to kind of look at that and study what that would be. But what's existing there, much of it is that spill slope that we are reducing.

As far as understanding what what the cut is, I don't know what we could exactly comment on without digging at starting to dig.

Well, I'm probably about

Nick to address that, or you could ask the builder who's

sitting right here. That's sort of important to

know. Yeah.

I can speak to it. Look. Please.

From what we saw up on the pad, it's it's already built up. It's sitting on three to five feet of fill already that that we're gonna take down.

So Can

you state can you state state your name, please?

Tim McCormack, TMAC Development, general contractor for the the client. It didn't look like it was that hard of a pad to build on. Nothing like what the neighbors are are watching the the top of the mountain get knocked off right over to the side. I I think the hillside hard dig on this one would would typically be the utilities coming up the road and then just the footings around the base of it and then the retaining sections of it. So from a hammering perspective, I think that we would only be up there thirty to sixty days on the hard dig part of it.

That's also based on the type of equipment we use too. We don't use hammers a lot. We use the our excavation equipment that that our trades use is we basically put a d nine ripper. If you've seen a big deck d nine bulldozer, has that huge spike off of it. So we we peel a lot of it apart, which minimizes a lot of the hammering.

My seniors and and mentors of mine love to use that hammer here in Paradise Valley at $500 an hour. So we've we've kinda come up with a newer school way to be a little bit quieter and less impact and a little more new school. But I don't think the hard dig would be very long from that. But sorry, the path that's built up there and and stepping back in like what you were just talking about. Any questions?

Is there anything you want to add or is that conclude your presentation or

I I think that concludes it unless there's any questions from

Alright. So I, at this point, I'll open the public hearing portion, but it doesn't look like there's anybody here to speak in favor or opposition. So therefore, I'm going to open in and close if there's no objection to that. And then I'm going to open the floor again to the board to deliberate and proceed with a motion. So is there any further comments, questions, concerns?

The only thing that I would like to and this may be something, Jose, that Hillside focuses on if we were to grant the variance is there's a big difference between thirty days and sixty days, which becomes ninety days and a hundred and twenty days. It's admittedly an incredible property to build on. And with the disturbance to the neighbors in the prepping it and then the building of it is my only real concern. I don't know if other neighbors just are fine with it or they didn't pay attention. But otherwise, I I mean, I'm inclined to see this property developed.

I just wanna make sure that we don't impinge any more than we need to on the people that live up at that end of the road. Is there a way to build into the variance, the limitation on how long the time would be?

I don't think we can because that's more of a construction process and not a zoning process.

Okay.

Just would say, I'm not sure that's in our purview. Okay. Because we're we're we're approving a variance to the zoning code, not the building Right. Permits or anything else.

Okay.

George, let me let me just ask for clarification. The the letter of opposition that we received, can you explain that? And what what I I I didn't if it came over this afternoon, I maybe I missed it.

Alright. I can read it for you. It says, hello, mister Burt. My name is Jerry Lynch. I'm writing on behalf of the Lynch Brothers development concerning a meeting for consideration of the variance for the lot of 5712 East Glen Drive Paradise Valley. We own the lot directly adjacent to 5712 and are opposed to granting the variance requested variance. All current ordinances and regulations were in effect prior to the current owner's purchase, and so presents no burden. While the variance would serve as an expedient solution to the applicant's wishes, it is our position that this variance would have an adverse effect on the value of our lot. In addition, the building envelope to conform with their plan with present setback requirements. Oh, excuse me.

Sorry. In addition, the building envelope to conform with their plan my apologies. I'm skipping that. I think I've skipped that sentence. Okay. In addition, the applicant has made no attempt to add to to add the adjoining lot to theirs in order to increase the size of their lot building envelope to conform with the plans and present setback requirements. Thank you for your consideration of our points of view on this matter.

Yeah.

So and I I did misspeak. If they did combine it with that lot, the only variance that we get rid of is the rear yard setback encroachment, but the other three would still be in effect. Thanks. Alright.

I'm I'm gonna I'm gonna just add a couple comments on my own and unless somebody else wants to speak first, I'll open the floor. But I think my my opinion, I'm I'm leaning towards approval with the stipulations because I feel like there are many hardships with this lot that are not self imposed. And I believe this in order to develop this lot, I think you've done a great design job, and I'd like to see it go forward with the proposed stipulation. So I'll probably be voting in favor of granting the variance. That's just my comments.

But anybody else want to speak to that point? Joe?

This is clearly one of the of the more difficult sites to develop, and it's it's it's admirable that you're undertaking it.

But I

it I hope that you see it through because there's always issues that come up that nobody ever thought about. And this one would be prime to present those to you. So hopefully, you'll be able to get it done.

Thank you, Joe. If there's no further comments, I'm gonna ask if there's a motion of

oh, yeah. I'll I'll move on. And just as a preamble, may the lord be with you. And I'm not real religious, but woah. Okay.

That's not part of the motion, but I would, move to approve the subject lot and the application according to the stipulations as indicated on the staff's presentation, which includes the, that this variance will supersede and void previous variance case numbers b a 16 dash six and b A21Dash11. Otherwise, all of the other, indications that were outlined in staff's report is included in the motion. Is that sufficient? Okay. So It's

subject to obtaining health side committee. Well, it all is. Right. That's one of the stipulations on the the motion. So with all with all of those stipulations, we have a is there a second?

Second.

Motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I'm gonna call for the question if you wanna call a roll call vote. Board

member Williams?

I vote.

That's an I vote. Board Member Petsis?

Aye.

An I vote. Board Member Ozer? Aye. An I vote. Board Member Contadino? And I vote. Board member Barnes? Aye. And I vote. Chair Liebsen?

Aye.

And I vote. The motion passes, six zero.

Alright. Congratulations. Thank you. Wish you best of luck. Yeah. A lot of luck. Thank you. All right. So that completes our action item here. George, is there anything on the consent agenda?

There is approval of the November 5 board of adjustment meeting minutes.

Alright. Do we have a motion to approve the minutes from the previous meeting?

Chair, before we allow a motion, board member Ozer did point out an error. Thank you for that. On page one, under call to order, it says that chair Liebsen called the meeting to order. However, you were absent that meeting, so I changed it to acting chair Ozer, and that will be published.

I was I was absent. That was my first absence in twelve years.

Was it? Wow. Do I

get a free pass for

that one?

We'll allow it this time. Yes. No?

Okay. Sorry about that.

That's okay.

So as amended, can we just call for a voice vote on this? All those in favor of approving the minutes? Aye. Opposed? None. Okay. The motion passes. We're we're approved.

Thank you. I think do we have a first and a second?

Do we need

a first

and a second? We do. Yes. Okay. Did someone first and second the motion?

Sorry. Did No. That's okay. Do we have to back up and make an official?

Yes. Sorry. Just we need the first and the second, and then you can vote.

Somebody do it. So moved. There

was a motion. Thought there was.

There was? Who moved? Nobody moved it. Alright. Go

ahead.

I'll cancel. I move

that the

approval of the November 5 meeting minutes be approved subject to Hoeposer's modification.

Okay.

Have official motion and second. And do we need to do another voice vote to make it official? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? None? Alright. Motion passes. Thank you.

Good job. Alright.

So are do we have staff reports?

There are no staff reports.

K. I'm I'm gonna say a couple months ago, I was asked to make a presentation to the town council, and the mayor and council members asked me to extend gratitude towards the board for all of your efforts and there seems to be very positive feedback from from the town council. So thank you all for participating and your efforts and we appreciate that and the council appreciates us as well. So thank you for that. Let's see.

Is there any before we adjourn, let's see. Is there future agenda items? George?

Yes. So we will have one item next month for setback variance request for Trellis. And then I also wanted to just remind the board this Friday will be the town holiday party at, I believe, at Charles Lodge.

Great. Alright. Well, we're looking forward to that. I think everybody should be. So, yeah, the holiday parties are always a great event, and it's a sign of appreciation for everybody's volunteer efforts. So, we'll all we'll see you there. So with that, I think are we prepared to adjourn? Is there a motion for adjournment? Alright. Who would like to Quinn, you wanna make I'll move. Okay. Quinn makes a motion to adjourn. Is there a second?

Come on. Jump in there.

Bill? I'll second. Bill seconds. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? None? I don't see it. So we are officially adjourned. Thank you very much.

Thank you, everybody.

Second only in time

to And have a happy holiday.