Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

e e e e call the January 2nd meeting of the cam Planning and Zoning commission to order please join me for the pledge I pledge allegiance to the flag the United States of America to The Republic stands Nation

all righty Erica would you show everyone is here old commission's here please and are there any changes to the agenda no changes Mr chair great all right Commissioners we have the one set of minutes before us make a motion Mr chair make a motion that uh we approve the minutes of the December 15th 2024 meeting uh December 5th meeting or December 5th I'm sorry 2024 okay I have a motion and a second all in favor say I I any opposed all right like it was wasn't that long ago when we did this time for elections for chair and vice chairman um what the commission like how would the commission like to do this I would like to make a motion yes sir that we retain the chair and the vice chair unless there is any objection from or do we have any other interest from rest of my fellow Commissioners okay yes sir to make a recommendation I would just nominate somebody for the chair and then have a second and then see if there's any other nominations and we'll go from there and then we'll do Vice chair okay okay just to make it cleaner and easier for the record thank you counselor I nominate Brett Benedict as chairman okay and I got a second um any other nominations okay can we have a uh do we need to do a roll call or very good

please call the yes r i member vanderhyden yes member hubard yes member Peters hi Vice chair Garza hi chairman Benedict I for myself I say no I should say no dang it I always miss the chance to do those good ones U okay looks like I'm at it again thank you all I appreciate the vote of confidence and Hope to continue to earn that um so next up is vice chair Mr chairman I'd like to nominate celest Garza as Vice chairman unless anybody on the commission objects or wishes to replace her very good um can we have a second second okay any other nominations hearing none please call the roll member Smith yes member aldret I member Vander Hayden yes member hubard yes member Peters hi me uh Vice chair Garza I chairman Benedict all okay you're stuck with us again guys okay next is our consent agenda so the items that you may see as with the G in front of them G1 two and three all three of those are on our consent agenda um this so that all of them uh will be considered in with one motion to one roll call vote we won't hear uh anything anything about those unless somebody from the commission or from the public would like to pull pull them from the consent

agenda and uh then then we will um have to take those out and hear them in order uh later anybody from the public um like to pull any of these those first three G1 G2 and G3 okay seeing none Commissioners Mr chair I understood that you had a question about G3 um I don't know if that's something you would like to I I do and I'll get right there thank you no problem anybody any of the others okay I I'd like to pull G3 just for for that one particular issue not not to hear the whole I don't need to hear the whole presentation but we've had some discussions and I'd like to carry on with that discussions for G3 so if we would pull please pull G3 anybody else okay seeing none I need a motion for the consent agenda chairman I'll make a motion thank you to approve consent items G1 and G2 as presented second very good have the first and the second um any discussion none should we call the role member Smith yes member aldr I member Vander Hayden yes member hubard yes member Peters I Vice chair Garza hi chairman Benedict yes okay let's go on then to um to H let's do that that's all right and this is for uh public comments uh General comments from anybody from the public

would like to address the commission um this would not be for the specific items that we're going to hear but anything else that you'd like to address the commission um so anybody have from the public like to address the commission please come forward seeing none I'll close the public comments section and if it's okay with the Commissioners um Jim would you like to address the questions that I had like to start with you you want to start or you want me to start it uh it's up to you I I did prepare a presid presentation and you know how you know how you love those but but if you just had a specific question I could go to a slide that that addresses it okay I think our director has a suggestion yes Mr chair why don't you go ahead and just Express uh the questions you have and then James can address those specifically I certainly certainly glad to do that um well because we because at least I understand um the way to build a strong Community is for home ownership TR builds a strong community and and because of that we have um fought hard I don't want to overstate it but we've always tried to keep certificates of assured water supply and be sure that those are filled filled I guess is a way to say it as I understand from reading through this one um this property had 280 281 I think yes certificates of assured water supply and in this

presentation preliminary plan they are planning to only build 251 that would use I guess be the way to say it the these certificates of ass shared water um so I was just hoping to hear about okay the reasoning for that and is it really important uh because for I think for all of us you know the reason we're here is to build a strong Community just hate to lose those right so um what you see on the screen Mr chair and members of the Planning Commission is the currently proposed preliminary plat layout for Marabella this is actually a renewal of a preliminary plat that was previously approved by Planning Commission in 20122 but it's since expired but as you point out as you look at this layout um they are only utilizing 251 certificates of assured water supply for the single family portion of the area the area colored in purple um to the left of henis is a 25 acre medium density multifam area that um although is identified for build for rent its zoning would allow it to potentially be developed for another type of medium density product whereby certificates of assured water supply could be utilized to condominium that area for Town Homes Etc So currently on the table they have um 30 leftover certificates of assured water supply because

ADW had issued them them being the developer um certificates allowing for up to 281 dwelling units um so there's there's technically 30 left over now if they were to propose that that 30 be applied to the multif family area they probably would have to do some sort of revision with adwr because there's probably a slightly different quantitative Factor uh multifam units consume or or in in the analysis that's done they consume a little bit less water per town home unit than uh a single family unit so they may they may be able to get a little bit more than 30 or entirely new analysis could be done um that might allow them even more than the 281 as a lot of the subdivisions are currently doing because adwr has revised their um standards to say that if the developer can demonstrate that no more groundwater is being utilized for a proposed increase then then what was shown on the original analysis and they will grant that increase so um my my thought is is that even though there's 30 on the table it's not necessarily lost because they do have the option to potentially um propose condos or town homes within that multif family area um I do want to point out though and I I won't make this a fullblown presentation but um can you hit next on

there oh here we go it's working now um this was the original preliminary plat um back in around 2008 era they had actually had a nearly 7 acre commercial area planned and and even back in 2008 yeah they were closer to the 281 they were they were proposing 278 Lots but since that time they they had made a revision to remove the commercial also henis I want to point out was a little bit wonky because as you can see it left the the subdivision and then went back in so um there there were some revisions done and uh where henis was realigned so that it stayed completely through the development this this is the 2016 version of the plat on this version you see they removed the commercial area but because they had to realign henis through the entire subdivision they also introduced arizola road on the west so that removed some lots and so then they were down to um 274 um so with this latest revision they're now down to 251 but like I said say there there is the potential for those leftover certificates to to be applied to that Medium density area Okay so there's probably one other piece of information that the commission needs to be aware of and James can correct me if I'm wrong James can put the lot the lot proposed lot pattern is these Lots uh are pretty much at the minimum size allowed under the pad zoning so it would

we be hard the applicant really can't introduce additional Lots uh in that single family area and we have zon the purple area for medium density residential but as James notes medium density residential can mean a lot of different things and it can mean smaller Lots uh for either single family or uh for attached product as well that can that might use cause great thank you it's got to be my next question commission's anything questions you'd have for for Jim is the applicant are there representative here this evening I don't believe they are chairman okay chairman I have a question yes please um so the plat this plot's been around for quite some time right since I don't know 2008 2006 is yes um as far as design guidelines or subdivision standards is there anything that they are going to be grandfathered in that that they would need to do now with the new you know where we're 20 years from then so I just wanted to know I mean they're going to follow current standards right when they do correct eventually build you know and and actually they've they've gone back through and submitted even more preliminary plats than what I showed you on the screen their their timeline has it almost seems like every two years we're back in front of um Planning Commission proposing some updates for Mirabella um but back in 2022 that

plat um followed a P Amendment where they introduced the uh medium density area and then they also modified their lot wids and lot area to match the latest peed residential design standards so they they took themselves out of whatever grandfather status that they would have been beholden to but on purpose because these new 2021 ped residential design standards were more liberal gave them some more flexibility so they they did that willingly um but the plat in front of you this evening is identical to the 2022 plat and there hasn't been any um revisions in our PE design standard since then great James let me ask you is you know we did modify our sidewalk construction standards for local streets increasing them from 4 to 5 ft width uh are they going to comply with the new 5-t sidewalk width do you know so the we would look for that at the time of public Improvement permits the middle and I'm not certain if they're made aware of that update but they they would have to meet the 5 foot local Street sidewalk if they don't already have their public Improv Improvement plans um approved they may already have them approved because they had a final plat in gotcha so there may be the possibility depending on what level of approval we've granted to the public Improvement permit for this plat which has not expired that they might be allowed to build a 4 foot sidewalk on

their local streets versus our current 5- foot standard uh that all depends on whether or not we've actually approved D the street construction documents if you will uh which don't expire right now so we but we'll look into that thank you appreciate it any other thoughts discussions here Commissioners so we don't have a public portion and I mean unless somebody from the public would like to address it not seeing anybody's hands go up so uh any other thoughts I agree with you Brett and I don't like seeing cause wasted especially in this in this community and especially in this environment with the amount of uh apartment complexes that are just jumping right in there you know so I don't know I think everybody should utilize the cause that they have for that purpose of single family residences yeah I again to to me the Home Ownership is an important you know an important goal for our community and and I just hate to lose them uh even though you know 30 out of tens of thousands is not a lot but maybe I don't know the other thing is we're saturated with the build built a rent right now yeah got quite a few you that it is already zoned that I mean that's not what we're voting on now I I know I'm just

commenting and and they had that's not part of this preliminary PL right only the single families is part of this plat corre Le somebody correct me if I'm wrong that's all I'm seeing it's all I recall okay but so the other the other will have to come before us again all right well I would see this again the final no that would just go to city council got uh the final PL has to be in substantial compliance with the preliminary but that's a council review for the final plan I was going to say though that um to your point with there being current saturation in multifam product uh you will have an opportunity to review the major site plan for the medium density area and I I we we don't know when a subid will come forward on that it it might come forward at a time in the future when we are more warmed to the idea of additional multifamily but if if we were to have that conversation currently I I think everyone um has everyone internally has that mindset of recommending and encouraging a developer to um provide a type of multif family product that is not in existence here or in abundance and that would be the for sale town home product or condo condo um so that would probably be what we'd be advocating for on a staff level and that might prompt them to seek more certificates of assured water supply which is an option for them through adwr so long as they're

not utilizing more groundwater than what their original studies showed I have a question please um on the bill to rent I know we're not talking about that but if they do the Builder rent just for example I'm hearing up in the valley that they're doing the Builder rent and then the builders after they finish they're selling they're changing the property to single families is that something that we would do too so to do that you would have to create a Subdivision plat so they could do that um in communities that have either pay enough cause to create those plats or that they don't have the cause limitation um so here right now we know they could do that for 30 of the bill to rent Lots at least right for sure and maybe more but yes you could do that uh but they have to have a cause certificate for each of those lots within a build to rent Community gotcha so there's no way around it even if there right now if it's a rental so they're getting around that situation there's no way of turning all the rentals into single family no um the the cause limits it because to do that you have to create a subdivision plant that's what I thought but I just wanted to make sure okay well I'll take a little bit of a different no that's of course of course you will that's that's you know as we've said we having having different points of view no I I agree with you I I do think cause are important and we should take advantage of those when we

can but I also don't think forcing a developer to build 30 more homes necessarily creates home ownership uh yes there's there are more homes but I think home ownership is something that is so far above what this commission even the city council could even achieve that's an economic climate that is at a much higher level as to what would allow people to buy homes so if we just force somebody to buy or create those homes doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to create more home ownership unless there are things in place in our community that can incentivize that home ownership uh and I believe there are some but just to just to go en Force somebody to develop those 30 extra because you have them in in a in a cause I don't think that necessarily creates better neighborhoods either because if we look at this right now it the the rendering of it looks really nice you have the gas line that comes through that kind of forces you to do more Recreation around there you have a lot of open space outside of that even though uh and and then you even have a a what looks like a landscape median and so uh which going through this whole neighborhood it's it's going to look like a really nice neighborhood with open space and everything like that if you had to go and force somebody to put 30 more Lots into this it's going to start filling up and it's not not going to look as nice in my opinion and that's where when we look at some of the the communities that we we maybe show off a lot in our community and say this is a great Community to live in we look at something like maybe Vago and you see the amount of open space that Vago provides their residents and and all of that kind of landscaping they provide and that creates a good neighborhood for somebody to live in and so that's where I see forcing somebody to do 30 more Lots uh I don't think that necessarily creates a better neighborhood I don't think that necessarily creates more home ownership for for the community um but I do see those 30 cause as important and I I do see that they have a way to to use

those uh through the medium density residential and so that's that's where I I take on this and I I don't think those 30 are like like I said I I think they're important but for this plat I don't think it is necessary uh to try to try to force those into there uh just because I think it'll create a better neighborhood without them well done well said anything else any other comments okay I guess we're time to ask you for a uh motion we need do we need a motion to put it back into the consent agenda or do we just make a motion to approve approve it on own yeah just to approve it on to approve yeah oh all right I'll make a motion just move to approve okay all right I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission approve the preliminary plat DSA d24 d207 I second do we have any conditions no okay thank you very much I got a motion in a second any discussion on the motion seeing none please call the role me member Smith yes member aldr I member vanderhyden yes member hubard yes member Hub uh Peters I Vice chair Garza I chairman Benedict um yes um thank you all for addressing my concerns I appreciate having the

discussion and uh sure hope they can um creatively use those 30 certificates they were uh they were very rare for a time I understand there's changes that may help with that issue but as of my understanding right now not that doesn't help very much they're still very important to all of us so thank you all I appreciate it all right enough of my carrying on on to new business um everybody here understands our process so we're going to hold a public hearing consider forwarding a recommendation to city council for his zone change from i1 garden light industrial to General industrial I2 for um casr Business Park unit 3 DSA 24194 um I would point out um I hope the Commissioners got the chart that uh Jacqueline was so kind to be able to send on so that we have a good understanding of what we're changing to um I think all three of these cons all the rest of them have that same that same kind of issue so Jacqueline please speak to us all right good evening Commission hold [Music] on why is it locked oh there we go okay so this request uh little background on this site it's approximately 18.8 Acres it's located at the southwest corner of Lawrence Street in thoron road just South of helan Highway and this is in within the city's

Industrial Corridor the request is to change the zoning from i1 garden light industrial to I2 General industrial here's the review criteria for zone changes I'll be going over these in the next couple slides and they're covered in detail in the staff report uh the first one is the action is consistent with the city's General plan including the goals policies and other applicable elements under uh manufacturing industry uh goal number one is to provide and expand the manufactured industry land uses areas to accommodate a variety of Industries and action step is to identify locations where it would be beneficial to increase the manufacturing industry areas within the city uh and other goals is to encourage appropriate and responsible Industrial Development in appropriate locations and promote types of industrial uses uh item number two a resoning you conforms to the general plan if it proposes land use densities or intensities within a range of identified uses of the general plan requested zoning of I2 is appropriate zoning in the manufacturing industry land use category per the 2030 General plan and third proposed zone changes necessary and proper at this time to meet the land use needs of the residents of the city the city's current demand for General industrial land is significant uh this re Zone would expand the available area um there is existing um I2 zoning that adjacent to the property to the South and West and uh the request should have no adverse impact tax on a budding property um there is the intent is to um build a similar building just to the west of this site which is a multi-tenant light industrial manufacturing and distribution site uh the reason for the I2 zone change is that I2 allows for a broader range of industrial uses and opportunities where i1 is limited um to that in that aspect and um again at the

major site plan um you know additional analysis can be can be done based on the use um to make sure that it is compatible uh regarding House Bill 2574 this zone change request is at the request of the property owner and is a zone change from industrial zoning District that does not allow residential development to a zoning District to similar industrial use so there's no impact there regarding notification efforts uh planning staff and the applicant me all the requirements and it did not receive any inquiries or cont comments regarding this request so regarding recommendation staff recommends forwarding a recommendation of approval to City Council on the zone change request DSA 24194 from garden and light industrial i1 to Jal industrial I2 the following condition of approval which is our typical RightWay request so have it answer any questions the commission may have okay thank you commissioner any questions for staff I have have one yes please um in regards to such zoning changes going from i1 to I2 are there any uh tax implications as far as it impacting the city does it increase the amount of property tax that the actual owner will have to pay does it reduce it commissioner Smith that the short answer is no uh property taxes are based on building valuation and you may have the same value building in i1 and I2 and you might have the zoning really doesn't relate to the value of the building so the short answer would be no okay anybody else um Jack what's the zoning to the

east it it is i1 so on the most of um on the east side of thoron is i1 yeah on the on the east side of Thor all of that cuz it I know it looks to be the same color as the I2 that's all that's all I was getting at and I was trying to figure out because isn't Walmart's distributions right there and a couple others I'm going wait that does ituring land use industry slide you just show yeah so so this one's the zoning that so this is the general plan color right and so I know it's kind of confusing it's the same colors but it is i1 on the you can see it's a little lighter purple on the east side of Thoren okay so almost completely surrounded by okay that's all anything else for staff okay would the applicant or their representative like to come forward and talk to us a few minutes hi I'm Don Andrews I'm representing Kentwood Ventures um can you give us your address for the record sure 21111 getar around Drive Maricopa 85138 great thank you Percy thanks okay so um I think we developed the property that you see on the screen to the West uh just last year and it's been very successful and we also rezone that property diet too and it was very helpful in the tenant mix that we have in there currently right now we have 245,000 of the 314,000 square foot building already leased and uh one tenant is already operational and two other tenants are under construction

right now we've seen really good demand in that 40 to 60 but even larger uh sizes and what we're actually also starting to see2 now uh our original plan was just build another building like that but we are also seeing a lot of build suits where a lot of corporate Ventures are coming in and looking to bring in exactly what the city's looking for True Manufacturing and in those instances we really can't put them in an i1 Zone um I2 is the appropriate zone for a lot of their uses whether it be uh some of the product that they work with or chemicals or things like that and and what we are probably going to do for this site we'll probably have a build to Sue and then we'll have what we have is like the other building was a SPEC Building it's a very successful SPEC Building it's probably actually the most successful spec of that size in the last year not just in cassid ground but probably even in Phoenix as well uh just to be able to lease up and get the type of quality tenants that we have in there and we still have a strong demand for that and so that was the real reason go to the I too is because that same type of tenant mix is having a really strong push in cagr there's not a lot of sites that are reely available right now and so by getting this di two it opens up a lot more potential opportunities for what I would call better users um not that it increases the tax but we all know if we have a higher quality better manufacturer user provides better jobs and employment than say a low-end warehousing project and so from that standpoint the I2 helps us bring those

type of users in okay any questions for him um couple things come to my mind what can you expound on what what what you use the term better what what can you expound on what that means to architect just so you no I hear you I'm always looking at good better best um but the reality is in when you look in industrial and Manufacturing we look at some of the users and so what we would call on the lower end of the user spectrum and Industrial would be just general storage and warehousing then they need a lot of area they put a lot of product in there but they're not really doing anything it's just being shipped in moved stored and shipped out your next mid is usually what we call light assembly manufacturing this is where um users or products are put together but they're not necessarily all the parts are made there uh it's more with assembly type facilities and things like that which is better has more jobs and then truly manufacturing you know then we're talking about things like we have here Abit Labs free delays PepsiCo all that kind of stuff and so that's the best best because those provide the better higher paying jobs um they usually have more employees uh within the Box creates more product uh brings a better service to the city and Community great that's that was helpful so um kind of a similar vein can can you tell us much about the other build the tenants that you have in or coming to the other buildings what kind of things are we are are they what kind of companies are they what are they

creating and well um ar ar is already open and um ARS is a a refrigeration supplier so they Supply AC units throughout the community they're supporting a lot of the Home Building commercial buildings things like that so they have package uh air conditioning units um Grand pack packaging which is under construction right now uh is more of a warehousing type product um the third user is a bigger user I'm not I can't say the name yet but that's right probably all know is they're here they're here but it's expansion for uh cold facility for them for their product that they make up the road okay great thank you any other questions for the applicant okay thank you appreciate that now I'll open the public portion of the meeting anybody from the public like to address this issue please come forward give us your name and address when you come up okay seeing none I'll close the public portion of the meeting and bring it to the commission chair i' like to make a motion thank you sir like to make a motion to forward a recommendation of approval to city council for zone change request DSA 24194 from garden and light industrial i1 to General industrial I2 with the following condition of approval okay a second have a motion I have a second any discussion on the motion okay seeing n please call a roll member Smith yes member alret I me member Vander Hayden yes member hubard yes member Peters I Vice chair Garza I

chairman Benedict yes thank you good luck for the project thank you okay next uh it on our agenda we'll have a public hearing and consider recommendation for to forward for col your engineering the southeast corner of biano Road and Illinois Road DSA 24206 130 and z a lot of them anyway several of them lost it my print out Jacqueline talk to us okay so yes as you were alluding to uh this presentation includes three requests that I will be covering a minor General plan for growth areas minor General plan for land use uh criteria and a zone change requests so a little overview on the site it's approximately 66 Acres it's located at the southeast corner of biano Road and Illinois Road um I will note that this is currently in the county however is part of an annexation request that will be heard by Council in conjunction with these requests um so the first request is a um change from uh phase two growth area to phase one which is a minor General plan again and the second request is a minor General plan amendment to change the land use category from um rule to manufactur and Industry on just a portion of the site which is um the 10 acres highlighted here and then the third request is a zone change from uh panal County general rule to I2 with conditions of records that I will be covering um in in additional slides so the first uh request again is

the minor General plan um growth area uh here is the re review criteria that is covered in the staff report uh staff finds that all criteria has been evaluated and covered and staff finds this criteria has been met the development of the site is proposed to be developed as industrial site uh regarding uh the general plan review criteria for the land use again um it's covered in the staff report in detail and all CA has been evaluated and um met uh regarding the zone changes again here are the three requests um review criteria that's covered in the St report I'll be going into additional detail on all of these uh the first one that the the action is consistent with the city's Jour plan including goals policies and other applicable elements uh again um under manufacturing Industries provide and expand the manufacturing industry land use areas to accommodate a variety of Industries and action step two is to identify locations where it would be beneficial to increase manufactured industry areas within the city and encouraged appropriate responsible industrial developments in appropriate locations and again um this area west of um on the west side with it with its um um near the railroad has been identified as a major manufacturing Corridor uh regarding resoning conforms to the general plan if it proposes land uses densities or intensities within the range identif ified uses of the general plan again this request is I2 is an appropriate zoning district for the manufacturing industry land use category per the 2030 General plan and third that this uh proposed zone changes necessary and proper at this time to meet the land use needs of the residents of the city uh the current zoning demand for General industrial is significant the re res Zone would expand that area uh the area does have existing I2 zoning to the

north and east however there is rural development to the South and undeveloped single family development to the West with desert Carmel um this is in the unincorporated um panel County however there is potential for this to be developed in the future so we do want to be sensitive to that um so we have included some conditions of record with this zone change that no um conditional uses for uses involving the storage utilization or manufacturing volatile or explosive materials or products shall be allowed and that all outdoor storage shall be screened by Miss uh block wall matching or completing the principal architecture of the site along yanca Road and again at the time of major site plan application additional compatibility analysis will be considered based on the use currently there's no uses proposed for this area and that's buer area um regarding conformance with House Bill 2574 uh this Zone request um is at the request of the property owner and is a zone change from r a rural zoning District um there is an abundant supply of low density zoning within the county and City and so this zone change to Industrial will not have an impact on housing for um low density regarding notification efforts um staff and the applicant met all the requirements I did not receive any comments or in inquiries and I should up I forgot to update this slide I did send out notifications within 500 feet not 300 so staff recommends um we the minor General plan amendment to for a recommendation of approval to city council for minor General plan amendment to change the growth areas from Phase 2 to phase 1 for 66 Acres the second request is to forward a recommendation to city council for minor General plan amendment to amend the land use categories from rural to manufacturing industry on 10 acres and the third recommendation is a zone change for the zone change is afford a recommendation

of approval to city council for the zone change from panal County general rule to I2 with the following conditions of approval and conditions of record again one of the conditions of approval is the zone is subject to the annexation approval by city council uh the second condition is our normal rightaway requirement and then the conditions of record that I mentioned earlier regarding uh no conditional uses involving storage utilization or manufacturing of volatile or explosive materials or products and the screenage for um outdoor storage happy to answer any questions the commission may have M yes I just one um you mentioned desert Carmel Jackie has there been any further I haven't visited that site in probably eight 10 years has there been any further development in there where is there more people that could be impacted by this commissioner Peters that you know it's an excellent question so maybe a little bit of background information for the rest of the Commissioners so desert Carmel which lies to the west of biano road is uh with lies within the unincorporated area of panau County uh however it is a very large platted subdivision uh and it was platted pre uh groundwater act which means uh it can be developed without cause and I think there's like over 6,000 Lots planted in it something like that um but it it poses some uh some challenges to development one of the primary ones is infrastructure road construction Water and Sewer uh and some fragmented ownership uh though there has been some attempts to various individuals to buy a lot of the vacant

Lots recently we have had conversations with owners of a substantial number of lots about annexing it and developing it residentially within the city so there already is is some interest uh the city is putting a sewer line right now in biano uh and water infrastructure is getting close so the infrastructure is getting very very much closer and so there is some interest we're planning staff is is working off the assumption that it will be a residential development at some point in the not so uh uh distant future okay thank you okay to the South what's that zoning so directly south um is is also in the county and they are general rule oh okay because there's quite a few quite a few houses there although not certainly not packed like the right where's the mobile home park mobile home park desert Carmel has a number of manufactured homes and individual Lots but they're individually owned that's not a par on in there so I don't I mean a couple but there's like a couple streets isn't there there is yes just a couple streets yes more interior off the off the graphic that you see on the screen yeah still live in the back chairman quick question the um what would be the require Reed um buffer space I guess what would be their you know once the site plan comes in what would you require their buffer be from those residential lots so today the minimum

requirement for our landscape code is 15 ft just 15t of landscaping along along biano but uh you know I would I would Envision that both staff and the Planning Commission would ask for some buffer that was more substantial than the standard because this is a an edge in in a land use transition between industrial and single family so we have to be very careful to make sure that it's compatible the the good news is we're doing it uh with an intervening major arterial street right that helps uh but we're going to have to think about you know good masonary walls good trees additional setbacks we're going to be sensitive to the building height all of those issues which can be considered at the time of the major site plan thank you any other questions for staff okay seeing none would the owner the applicant or their representative please come forward and talk to us good evening chair and Commissioners Cindy padak Ker's engineering and design 2141 East Highland Avenue in Phoenix Arizona 85016 thank you what can I help you with anything you'd like to add any questions no Jacqueline did a good job in summarizing the case she she did summarized very well for a whole lot of stuff okay all right that's okay thank you question okay I'd like to open the public portion of the meeting anybody from the public like to address this please come forward and uh give us your name and address for the record and you'll have you'll have three free

minutes to talk to us Bob Kennedy 1616 North lucky Horseshoe Lane and um we have a little Community right there on the corner of biano in Clayton which this property is right behind us and there's uh eight or nine houses there we're all subdivided either a acre and a quarter or 2 acre with horses and everybody's got kids and everything and and we had a meeting a little while ago right down the street at Barn's place and uh there was not a single person for this there was 15 or so people at this and and all everybody in the area was against this um making that um you know not rural anymore um right down the street they built the colar plant and I certainly would not want that right behind my house any questions for me or no no thank you thank you anybody else like to address this issue okay seeing none I'll close the public portion of the meeting and bring it back to the commission I think this is pretty early on in what exactly is going to develop here and I don't know if the applicant even knows what's going to develop here um and I think with the conditions that staff is has requested to put on this property that the rezoning when it gets further or once development gets further into it as far as site plan um some of those issues are going to be

able to be mitigated um so and I think those conditions help and so I I don't see much of an issue going forward with the zoning uh it's just because of that idea that to the West May develop as residential and that there are existing uh people to the South that that's going to have to be looked at a little bit more during the site planning but for right now for the zoning portion of of it I think those conditions uh definitely make it a a much more tolerable rezoning for this I2 request right to your point there there will be a time or two more that we and the public will see what is what is actually going to be planned there as of right now we don't really have a good idea of what actually is going to be built and and what it's going to look like like this this just um gets it set for to match some of the areas that's around it um any other Commissioners sorry I interrupted any other comments or discussion okay seeing none Commissioners we're at the point and Y number one we do do one at a time somebody I'll make I have a question is it 00124 or is it 0026 for the first one oh good that a typo yes it is typo it should be 206 there you set up two six good eye well Mark would have cut it

go ahead member band raen you got it all figured out over there I just got the number all right I'll do it then I'll do it all right I'll make a recommendation um uh I'd like to forward a recommendation of approval to city council for the minor General plan amendment to change growth phase area from phase two to phase one for DSA 24206 I'll second okay got a motion second any discussions on this motion seeing none please call the rooll member Smith yes member aldret I member vanderhyden yes member hubard yes member Peters I Vice chair Garza I chairman Benedict yes all right it's now the city has to work harder so continue I continue that'd be great board a recommendation to the council for a minor General plan amendment to amend the land use category from rural to manufacturing and Industry on the 10 acres for DSA 24130 now second did you get the second ER oh second yes sorry it's okay I got you all right so I got a motion in a second any discussion on the motion seeing none please call the roll member Smith yes member alret I member vanderhyden yes member hubard yes member Peters I Vice chair Garza I chairman [Music] Benedict um yes I'm sorry sorry okay next okay we'll finish it off yeah that'd be great uh Board of recommendation of approval of city council for the zone change

request DSA 24129 from pen County general rule to General industrial I2 with the following conditions of approval of record I'll second okay I was going to ask do I have any conditions on any of these two of them approve got that got a first and a second motion and second any discussion on the motion this last one see n please call the role member Smith yes member alret I member Vander Hayden yes member hubard yes member Peters I Vice chair Garza I chairman Benedict yes okay motion passes thank you and we'll see you next time all right so I two I3 okay next public hearing and consider foring recommendations to the city council for request from colar engineering on biano road and Clayton Road 283 Acres a minor General plan Amendment and a zone change from gr to I2 Jacqueline's still on still the Jacqueline show good evening Commissioners I again uh little overview regarding these request it's approximately 283 Acres located at the southeast corner of biano and Clayton and similar to the to the last request it is also part of an annexation request that will be heard by Council in conjunction with these requests again the first request is a minor General plan Amendment uh to change the phase two growth area to phase

one and a zone change from County general rule to I2 with conditions of record um regarding again the review criteria for the growth areas um it's covered in the staff report and um a has been evaluated and covered within the staff report and staff finds the criteria has been met again the development of the site is proposed to be developed as an industrial site uh regarding the zone changes again here is the review criteria the first one is that the action is consistent with the city's General plan including the goals policies and other applicable elements um manufacturing industry one is uh goal number one is provide and expand the manufacturing industry land uses areas to com accommodate a variety of Industries and action step to identify locations where it's been beneficial to increase the manufacturing industry areas within the city um goal number five is to encourage appropriate responsible Industrial Development in appropriate locations which has been met and uh regarding uh for resting conforms to the general plan if it proposes land uses densities and intensities within the range of identified uses of the general plan again the requested zoning of I2 is appropriate zoning district for the manufacturing industry land use category per the 2030 General plan and that the proposed zone is necessary and proper at this time to meet the land use needs of the residents of the city uh the current uh City's current demand for General industrial land is significant and this reone would expand that available area the area does about existing I2 zoning um to the South for a portion of it as well as to the north and um however again that there is R residential development to the north of this site that map up and um single family undeveloped single family zoning to the West in uh desert carmell and as

you can see here um this is where there are the smaller U more urban Lots in desert carel and so in similar to the last request we did staff did add conditions of record and that no conditional uses for uses involving the storage utilization or manufacturing of volatile or explosive materials or products shall be allowed and that all outdoor storage shall be screened by a Decor decorative masary block wall matching or um complementing the principal architecture of the site both along Clayton Road and biano and again at the time of major site plan digal analysis to address compatibility will be considered based on the uses uh according uh conformance with House Bill 2574 this uh Zone request is at the request of the property owner and is Zone Chang from a rural residential zoning District um and staff finds that there is abundant supply of low density zoning within the city and county uh this zone change to Industrial will not have an impact on this type of housing again all um notification efforts have been met by the applicant and staff and no common or inquiries have been received uh so um first recommendation is to forward recommendation of approval to city council for a minor General plan amendment to change the growth area from phase two to phase one and second request is to forward a recommendation of approval to city council for the zone change request from panau County rule to General industrial I2 with the following conditions of approval and conditions of record uh again the conditions of approval is that the propos zoning is subject to the annexation approval by city council and our second condition is our typical rightaway requirement uh conditions of record again are that no uses no conditional uses for uses involving the storage utilization or manufacturing of volatile explosive

materials or products shall be allowed and that all outdoor storage shall be screened by dtive missionary block wall matching or complimenting the principal architecture of the site along Clay Road and Bianco happy to answer any uh questions the commission may have all righty Commissioners questions for staff okay seeing none with the applicant of their representative please come up and address the commission good evening chair and commission Cindy padak kers engineering and design 2141 East Highland Avenue Phoenix Arizona 85016 um again jacqu did a good job the only thing I might not is just like the other uh case there is no planned development for this site it's it's in preparation for future activity but nothing is proposed at this point in time okay mr's any questions for the applicant nope all right thank you thank you all right next I'll open the public portion of the meeting anyone like to address this issue please come forward give us your name and address for the record Bob Kennedy 1616 North lucky Horseshoe Lane Kasa Grand there again this is directly across the street from our houses and um we had the meeting like I was saying a while ago of of the U residents in the area and not a single one was for this sure nobody wants to have this right across the street from their house or behind their house you know we're a nice little r Community like I said acre and a quarter two acre lots and this would be an isore for us okay can I ask you um no I can't ask you thank you for those comments appreciate

it anybody else from the public like to address this issue seeing none I'll close the public portion of the meeting and bring it back to the commission Mr chairman I'll make a motion yes sir consider for uh forwarding a positive recommendation to the city council for the following request by cers Engineers on property generally located at the southeast corner of Bianco Road and Clayton Road the first is for minor minor General plan amendment to change the growth area from phase two to phase one covered under ds-24 D 00182 okay second okay I have a Motion in a second uhhuh to forward a recommendation to approve 10 182 any discussion on the motion yeah Garrett had it no no he he did the second oh that's okay all right okay let's call the rooll member Smith yes member aldr I member Vander Hayden yes member hubard yes member Peters hi Vice chair Garza hi chairman Benedict yes okay and we have one more Mr chairman I'd like to make a motion to forward a recommendation to city council for a zone change from panal County General rural to City of CA Grande zoning General and industrial I2 covered under under ds-24 d131 with the with the record theuh

conditions yeah just to be clear you might have just said I moved to forward a recommendation um so I just to be clear it's a favorable favorable recommendation a recommendation of approval yes okay just want to be clear for the record yeah thank you okay so we have a motion to approve um we have a motion to forward the recommendation for city council to approve DSA 24131 and I have a second any discussion on the motion seeing none please call the rooll member Smith yes member aldr I member vanderhyden yes member hubard yes member Peters I Vice chair Garza hi chairman Benedict well yeah because we got lots of chance to see what what we're going to do there I'll vote Yes okay motion passes thank you okay next all right consideration of participating in ASU housing sustainability project um who's talking so as uh as our speaker comes to the podium I'll give the commission a little bit of background um if you recall at uh our November meeting I presented you with a proposal um from a um a team from ASU uh requesting that the commission participate in uh housing assist sustainability project uh that they're working on and they were looking for the Planning Commission to be sort of a

focus group uh for the project to provide some input uh to help them create this um this measuring tool that they're they're going to work on so this evening uh we have uh Miss Valeria Lano here with us and we have I believe uh Professor um Mark what's uh Mark Mark Mark rosand right Professor Mark Rosland on that's right on Zoom as well uh to present directly to the commission a little bit more information about their project and uh to actually um ask the commission to uh provide some um a decision on whether or not you're willing to part participate in the study because there is some time commit commitment involved uh which will be discussed a little bit here during this next presentation so with that I'm going to hand it over to uh to Valeria and uh Professor Mark uh Morlin good evening counselors thank you so much um for the opportunity to speak today so um as previously mentioned um I'm Valeria londono I'm currently a senior um at ASU and I'm studying urban planning and Spanish so this um research project is of special interest to me um so I have a short presentation today for you we having trouble tonight yeah okay so the intour project um basically we are examining housing in the context of sustainability and climate resilience in Hispanic communities um seeing that Kasa Grande has such a big um Hispanic population we thought that this would be a good City to focus on um we're going

to work with um the city from an integrated approach looking at um housing jobs and environment and we want to look um at each of these um areas in a way that we can um uh kind of combine them and see how we can combine housing transportation and see um how we can uh proceed with those things um we also want to create an affordable and practicable assessment tool smaller communities because we have seen these in larger cities such as Phoenix but we want to bring that to smaller communities such as Kasa Grande so our tool will help community members think through their integrated assets um such as housing Transportation environment um in a synergistic and efficient way uh we want to help um avoid false tradeoffs um such as um when people have to make decisions um between housing and transportation or environment and economy so we want to um identify how single initiatives can have multiple co- benefits in this um project and if desired we can create a Spanish version of the tool for Spanish speaking community members such as um the ones that are here in Kasa Grande so the involvement this is a three-year project on housing and sustainability so our goal for early 2025 is to create a prototype tool with um the cost Grande Planning Commission between January and April and I'm go more into detail um with the dates and um proposed meeting dates um during the summer of 2025 we want to refine the tool but this is something that we'll be doing on our own um the early researcher Dr Rosen and I and then in Fall 2025 we want to test the tool with Kosta Grande per the direction of the Planning Commission um and that's something that we can talk about later on so the involvement would um be for the next four um commission meetings um approximately 60 minutes each so for the

first one in February we want to do kind of a project overview workshop and have an initial discussion about key data and what we want to focus on um with our tool and then in March we want to have um a workshop on community data priorities and then in April we want to have um an initial uh working prototype to present to you and have um kind of the discussion of what you would like what we don't like and then we will come back in May with a revised prototype Ty and workshop next steps so all of these meetings will be approximately 60 minutes we have cut that down from 90 minutes previously um I understand that that is a large um time commitment for you but um we would really appreciate um you know your involvement in this project and this is our contact info for the leader researcher and me if you have any other questions I would be happy to answer them um if not thank you so much for the opportunity to speak [Music] okay and um I didn't check are these these are the same time as our meetings as our usual meeting the yes the proposal is to just add it to the agenda for your regular meeting so um we agendize it uh you know we take some minutes and uh you know it would be open to the public to sit and listen not a public hearing but the public is certainly uh observe and and listen to the discussion okay while we're here anyways are you are you are well I brings up two questions in my mind number one is for the commission are you ready to commit to sitting here another hour then my second question is somewhat factiously to the two of you you really want us after we've gone through some of the things that we get to go through

commission we're not we're not always happy campers so I I just wonder about all of that I just wonder about having it at the same the same time I you know adding it on to these meetings is is a good idea or not I certainly get that yes we're already here but I just want to pose that to you all you know get your and Mr chair I'll take some responsibility for that because after last meeting last month meeting you know I communicated back to uh Dr rosin and u m um um uh Lano that you know the commission was concerned about trying to find dates that would work with your schedules and that you know the most convenient um way to do this might be just to add it onto your agenda um and I know it makes your meetings long and uh the uh the a ASU team has has has pulled back the time commitment from the original proposal of 90 minutes to 60 minutes again at my suggestion to try to be sensitive to your time but uh my sense was it was going to be very difficult to get the commission together uh in another date uh per you know one day per month other than your regular meeting but that's certainly probably something that could be discussed uh and would be available if that's the route you want to go question and I I get that trade off ahead a question the plan is for then for us to be during our meeting and then you guys join in online at the point yeah I'm just think you're going to sit there for who knows how long so I get it now join in okay quick question if we do commit to this um if you have to miss one is that going to be an issue or it can be online only reason I'm asking is I'm

having a grandbaby the first week of March and so get your priority I know I just we could certainly allow for Zoom attendance by Commissioners if that if you needed that yes okay I just okay we're do the third so anyway just want to make sure okay Commissioners what your thoughts I think it's a good idea I'll do it yeah I can do it same night night that's I was trying to think about the add the extra night and this makes a lot more sense I think so with the proposal would we extend our meeting to be an hour later or could we start an hour earlier I would just have to push back on earlier just for the fact that I already have to travel an hour earlier from work to get here yeah I can't yeah I can't make it I don't get up till 5 so yeah good good idea so like tonight we'd be done by 8:30 or 8:00 I'm just saying it's not that it's not that long un not a b we've certainly had worse if the planning department keeps it keep some not heated stuff for us we'll be all right if jacine does all the presentations we'll be done in Jiffy yeah yeah just just give us soft balls from now from now for the next four months we'll take it the agendas have been light since October is so I think I think we can manage do we need to make a motion or do we need to act on this I'm going to ask my our attorney for some advice along that lines I mean it it's on here for a for a motion so if you guys want I mean it's probably not necessary we can just let them know but if you want to make a motion just to make sure everybody's on the same page

that's probably the best way to do it all right I'm fine we are we all right yeah we okay so we just we'll it'll be just be part of our agenda right so the public will be noticed and all that'll be ready so I'll make the motion if I can then that would be fine I make a motion that we participate in the ASU housing and sustainability project nice as a commission I have a motion I'll second so a second Voice vote is fine on this any more discussion I'm just wondering how much value you're going to get it get out of an old white guy here that's in a Hispanic community that doesn't speak a word of Spanish I speak a little Spanish but I'm still not sure how much I am I I would not I would never try to represent the culture I I hardly represent mine I'll do I'll do my research do the best I can we will do what we can for you that's for sure okay we have a motion to Second any more discussion all in favor please say I I any opposed please okay so it passes thank you got we're committed I hate being committed thank you so much we'll see you next month all right okay where we at now director thank you Mr chair so under reports uh there is no administrative approvals of minor site plans the uh Board of adjustment did uh uh make a couple decisions they approved a a variance for a side yard setback um they denied a variance for a 6- foot front yard setback in a manufactured home park but um they gave the applicant direction to come back with an an 8-foot request which is being

processed the board also tabled an appeal of a decision that I made rejecting an appeal of a of a similar use determination that was for the Buckthorn uh project that was going to house uh miners seeking Asylum but uh that project was not funded by the federal government so it's been the application the major site plan application has been formally withdrawn and will not be coming to the Planning Commission and so the appeals associated with that have also been withdrawn so that one's kind of a done deal at this point uh city council did make a number of uh decisions um implementing your recommendations adopted um some changes for the um General plan Amendment and uh actually some of which we just heard tonight is that right Jacqueline on one of those sites um and also approve the zoning uh the amendment to the zoning code for uh Corner side yard SE acts so that was uh that's what I have to report nice you did it good did did we see the development report uh no um looks like we uh we did not we didn't run those did we ER so we'll email those to you if you if it's okay we'll email you the uh the monthly uh building activity and planning application reports perfect Commissioners anything else see none we're at the end of our agenda but we are adjourned yay this is last early you'll ever get