Planning Commission - July 23, 2025

Scottdale Planning Commission public
hearing. The city appreciates your
interest and participation in the public
hearing process. The planning commission
serves as an advisory board to the city
council on land use and zoning matters.
The hearing agenda items consist of
development applications that require
public hearings.
The planning commission considers the
item and makes a recommendation for
approval or denial to the city council.
The city council will make the final
decision for or against approval of the
application.
The agenda consists of the roll call and
administrative report by staff, public
comment for non-aggendaized items,
approval of minutes from the previous
hearing, continuences for items that
will not be heard tonight, withdrawals
for items that have been withdrawn from
any further consideration.
Consent agenda for items not likely to
require a presentation or discussion.
All items on the consent agenda may be
voted on together. Any commissioner may
move any item from the consent agenda to
the regular agenda.
Regular agenda is where each item
includes a presentation and
recommendation by staff, a presentation
by the applicant, and public comments.
The applicant will then have an
opportunity to respond to the public
comments. The planning commission will
deliberate on the case and cast their
votes. Non-action items are for
discussion only items. No vote will be
cast by the planning commission.
Citizens wishing to speak on the agenda
on any agenda item will fill will need
to fill out either a blue speaker card
or if not willing to speak may fill out
a yellow comment card and turn it in at
the staff table before the agenda item
is to be discussed. The chair will call
your name when it is your turn to speak.
When called, please come to the podium.
State your name and address and then
begin speaking. Groups wishing to speak
should elect a spokesperson to res
represent the views of the group. To
facilitate the meeting, your comment
will be limited to three minutes for
individual speakers. One additional
minute for each additional individual
who is present at the hearing and has
contributed their time to a
representative speaker up to a maximum
of 10 minutes. Please format your speech
to fit within the allotted time.
A light system is installed on the
podium for timing presentations. The
light will be green for two minutes,
yellow for one, and red when your time
is up. Please conclude your comments and
when the red light appears, sorry,
please conclude your comments when the
red light appears. Thank you for your
interest in time. Now, we'll begin with
the roll call.
>> Chair Scar Bro,
>> here.
>> Vice Chair Young.
Commissioner Gonzalez,
>> present. Commissioner Ertel
>> here.
>> Commissioner Joiner.
>> Commissioner Joiner.
Commissioner Drake
here. She was present earlier.
>> Commissioner Reid here.
All here.
Commissioner Joiner.
Roll call.
Mr. Chairman, we're checking to see if
we can if we lost her or if we're make
that connection. Thank you.
>> I'm sorry. I am back on.
Thank you. Six of President.
>> Thank you so much. Uh Mr. Curtis, do we
have any public comment for
non-aggendaized items?
>> Uh Mr. Chairman, no. No, no comments
submitted for non-aggendaized items, but
we do have comments submitted for some
of the agenda items.
>> Yes, thank you. I'm going through those
right now. Uh administrative report,
please, sir.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um just wanted
to give you an update with regarding to
tonight's agenda. Items
um two, three, and four. Those are um
related items on the agenda, Mr.
Chairman. And so uh as typically with
multiple items that are related um the
staff's planning on doing one
presentation for all three items and I
think the applicant team is also
planning on doing one presentation for
all three items. So, just to bring that
to your attention and also just to
remind the audience that um we have four
members of the commission here today,
but two of them are attending
telephonically.
And then um reminder for the commission
that um since the agenda was posted a
week ago, um there's been multiple uh
numerous uh com public comments that
have been submitted. Much of those
you've hopefully have been able to take
a look at over the last week. um
received through email. Um but they're
all in front of you tonight with some of
the more recent ones on top of this
stack because those are most likely the
ones that you may not have seen thus
far.
And then Mr. Chairman, members of the
commission, just want to let you know
that we do plan on meeting at our next
regular scheduled meeting on August
13th. We do have agendaized items for
that. So thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Curtis. Uh next uh
minutes. Are there any comments,
questions, or motions regarding the
minutes of July 9th?
If there are no comments or questions,
can I have a motion?
>> I I a motion that we go ahead on that.
Thank you.
>> Motion to approve.
>> Yes. Motion to approve. Thank you.
>> Thank you. All right. We have a a motion
to approve by Commissioner Gonzalez. Do
we have a second?
>> Second.
>> Perfect. Uh, roll call vote, please.
>> Chair Scarough,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Gonzalez,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Joiner,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Drake,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Reid,
>> yes.
>> Motion passes 6.
>> Thank you. Uh, we have nothing on the
consent agenda for this evening, so
we'll move right into the regular
agenda. Item number two, one, TA 2025 R4
text amendment. Mr. Barnes,
good evening, Chair Scarro, uh, members
of the planning commission. I'm Jeff
Barnes with the city's planning
department presenting 1TA 2025 for you.
So, the action uh before you tonight is
a recommendation to the city council uh
regarding an applicant uh submitted text
amendment to the R4 zoning district uh
to modify specific portions of the
property development standards found
within section 5.804
of the zoning ordinance.
some key items uh as we work into this
uh just for your consideration. Uh so I
mentioned this is uh submitted uh by uh
an applicant. Uh they do represent also
a uh a catalyst development that had uh
been the trigger for this proposal. But
wanted to remind you that this change
does affect all our four zoned
properties citywide. And so we've looked
at it with that in mind. Uh the proposed
modification
uh is intended to create conformance and
consistency amongst the multiple family
residential zoning districts in the
zoning ordinance. Uh staff has found the
proposal to be in conformance with the
general plan. Uh and there was some
limited public comment received that was
included in the attachments to the staff
report.
getting into the proposed changes. Uh
the first one uh to call your attention
to here is uh the proposal to strike uh
building setback regulation E4 uh which
currently reads that no more than 30% of
the frontage dwelling units shall have
living space above one story in height
that is located within 50 feet of any
dedicated street. Uh this specific
regulation uh appears to be uh not found
in other zoning districts, other similar
zoning districts and and the R4 district
is on its own in currently regulating to
that extent uh the allowable seconds
story area uh within 50 ft of dedicated
street. And so the applicant's proposal
uh is to strike that entirely. Um with
that though the the building
positioning, the configuration uh of new
projects in R4 uh revisions to projects
in R4 um still can regulate through the
other building setback provisions um of
section E listed there as well as the
building height standards uh that I'll
show on the next slide. And overall the
development or viewboard process is
still going to be applicable uh or going
to be in place where applicable
depending on the project that may be
coming forward. So we're not seeing uh a
big impactful change there in creating
this consistency uh by striking that
provision.
The second change proposed with this
text amendment is one that staff had
identified as part of the review and
suggested to the applicant team. They've
included in their proposal. Um this is
modifying the language within the
building height section uh to align it
with uh how that language appears in
other zoning districts. Uh the R4 still
reflects the uh original formatting of
the 1986 zoning ordinance. Uh other
districts have been updated over time to
simplify how this is stated in there.
And so this approach is just to bring
the wording of this section in line with
what other sections have been updated
to. Uh notably here uh this is not a
change to the uh the building height
parameter of 30 feet uh that currently
exists and will continue to exist. Uh
and it's not uh taking away uh the
development review board's ability to
implement story restrictions when
adjacent to single family residential
districts which is the second uh line on
the screen there.
So again, this is another consistency uh
item uh brought forward in this text
amendment.
This map uh is a little hard to see on
the screen showing the whole city, but
it was part of the attachments in the
report for your consideration is just
visually representing for you the R4
property or the R4 zoning district
locations scattered throughout the city
in the patchwork of blue uh areas that
you see on there.
This uh application I mentioned comes as
the result of a catalyst property just
uh for your uh context and understanding
of that that site itself is located a
little north of Oak Street uh along
Hayden Road uh in the southern portion
of Scottsdale. Um that site is currently
uh under development uh as a uh a 26 lot
residential subdivision with approvals
uh to expand that out to be a 38 lot
residential subdivision. Um it has then
in total 38 lots that all front onto
internal looped dedicated streets which
is what triggers that uh that
requirement that's requested to be
struck because all of these properties
are in with within 50 ft of those
dedicated streets. All of the homes
within this development would be
impacted uh by that uh by that
regulation. Um, and so that's the the
triggering site for this. Uh, but with
that, uh, I'll wrap up staff's
presentation. Um, unless you had any
immediate questions, the applicant team
is here with their own presentation and
some additional details for you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Barnes. Uh, do we have
any commissioners here that have any
questions specifically for staff at this
point?
How about online?
Commissioners Joiner or Drake, do you
have any questions specifically for
staff at this point?
>> I'm good. Thank you.
>> Um, I do have a question if you don't
mind. Uh, it would be more about the Mr.
Barnes, it would be about the uh the
text impact analysis, the land use
portion. When you say can uh you're I
just want to make sure just to clarify
that uh when you say can it's you're
saying that it can still be mitigated
through the planning process for each
different development.
>> Chair Scarboro, Commissioner Drake
>> would still be accomplished. Yeah. uh if
if I believe I heard that correctly and
I'm backing up to uh the slide that had
talked about um striking that E4 and and
the indication uh there uh I'll I'll
reiterate that uh eliminating number
four about the the 30% restriction uh
still leaves us with uh with the the
rest of the setbacks in the development
standards, the overall building height
parameter and the development review
board process in whole to uh dictate how
site design and configuration um are
appropriate uh and applicable as new
developments may come through. I I think
that's what you were asking.
>> Yes. Thank you so much.
Thank you, Mr. Barnes. If we have the
applicant come up,
okay, thank you.
Chairman Scarbor, members of the
commission, I'm Tom Galvin here on
behalf of the
>> Oh, sorry.
>> Yeah. Name and address and then they're
perfect.
>> Okay. How about that?
>> Perfect.
>> Chairman Scar Bro, members of the
commission, I'm Tom Galvin with Rose Law
Group, 7144 East Stson Drive. On behalf
of the applicant, first of all, we want
to express our sincere thanks and
gratitude for staff for providing that
very thorough presentation and also
giving you an overview of what the city
is grappling here with, but it's a very
simple solution regarding R4, just bring
it into alignment with R3 and R5.
However, what I'm going to do is provide
a perspective for you in a real world
example of how this outdated and um
problematic text amendment is necess is
text language is necessary for a text
amendment. And so as you can see here,
Arcadia Communities is a reputable local
homebuilder and as you saw earlier in
the staff presentation, this is the site
directly on Hayden Road near Oak Street.
Now, this is the former Nazarene church
property and as you can see back in 2019
during the preapp process, it was
submitted for a new single family
residential community with two-story
homes. However, once the process got
going and as you can see here, these are
beautiful product here that would be in
alignment with the local community and
definitely in deference and respect to
the surrounding communities that in 2020
the zoning was approved. In 2022, the
pre-plat was approved. The applicant
spent a considerable sum of money. But
as you can see there, there was some
excitement about this infill project.
However, then we ran into the issue that
we is before us today. uh we were
approached by staff regarding an issue
here at the northern side regarding
access issues and so the applicant in an
effort to be a good neighbor tried
solving that issues by granting a shared
access through our site and
unfortunately that's what triggered the
problem we have with the current R4
language by doing that that triggered
internal streets to change from private
to public via dedication and neither
staff nor applicant realized the
damaging ramifications and what we had
here was unintended consequences And so
what we're doing here today is to try to
solve and resolve those unintended
consequences.
As at this point, streets and sidewalks
are completed and the developer was
ready to pull permits and begin building
homes. But under review, staff
identified the two-story home
restriction triggered by dedicating the
streets for shared access. So what we
did is we worked closely with staff on a
resolution resulting in this text
amendment language to clean up the
language but not just clean up the
language but to do it in a fair way to
be aligned with the other zoning
districts R3 and R5. Uh you heard
earlier from staff in the presentation
that there were some proposed amendments
from the applicant and that is the case
as you can see here in the lower right
hand corner subsection 4. But also
during this process we have worked with
staff and staff has done a good job of
proposing their own language and as you
can see here on the lower leftand side
and then at the very top of page two. So
we appreciate staff for that and we
think staff did a really good job of
outlining the overall implications of
what our four is facing and we wanted to
provide to you a real world example of
what is happening right now. Much
appreciated. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much and I do apologize
for the noise behind us. It's hard to
present and hear.
>> Uh so I want to go ahead and apologize
uh on behalf of the city for that.
>> No worries. Thank you.
>> Uh perfect. Thank you for that. Uh
commissioners, do we have any comments
or questions for the applicant
online? Commissioners Drake or Joiner,
do you have any questions for the
applicant?
>> Commissioner Scarboro, I just want to
say I was I was on DRB when we
originally approved this. We never even
thought about it. So, thank you to staff
and to the applicant for clarifying
something um that needed to be fixed.
So, thank you very much.
>> Perfect.
No, no other comments from commissioners
right now. Perfect. Uh Mr. Curtis, it
does not look like we have any comments
to speak on this item. I don't believe
I'm misstating that. If Let me just
triple check here.
I do not see any request to speak on
this. If I have missed that, somebody's
here to speak on behalf of this project.
If you could please confirm.
Okay. Awesome. Chair.
>> Yes, Commissioner.
>> Actually, I have a question for you.
Since you were on the DR and uh this
puts more authority con u
perview, you know, puts more in the
purview of the development review. Is
there any reason for the for that that
that U4
was in there that um you know
restricting to 30% no more than 30%
frontage? Was there any
you know sort of development review uh
consideration for that? I mean was that
>> I I I would tell you that in my time on
the DR I don't recall a case
specifically having this challenge or or
this being an issue. Um so unfortunately
I apologize. I
>> Well, no, nothing to apologize for, but
can you imagine any reason for it to be
there?
>> Putting you on the spot. I understand,
but you're the only DR person we have
here. So,
>> former
>> uh No, I I I think this is a potentially
just a cleanup issue where it's just
getting old code to be updated to be a
little bit more up to date and
>> and consistent with the rest of the the
code.
>> Okay. Well, I thought that way too, but
I didn't know cuz, you know,
>> yeah,
>> I'm not a design person. Um, I do like
the changes at least the, you know,
getting rid of u the part of C1 because
you getting philosophical. It's more of
a rule of law as opposed to a rule by
individuals. Um,
you know, the uh the getting the change
to C2. Um, I think that's good, assuming
that the DR would restrict itself to
aesthetic purposes and not political
purposes, which I think is the intent
here. Um, and in, you know, getting rid
of E4 makes perfect sense to me.
>> Perfect.
>> Go ahead, Commissioner Gonzalez.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I
appreciate the frankness of this. A lot
of people don't understand what these
text amendments happen to do with
subjects.
Um the the the issue usually is is
sometimes it's a tube of broader stroke
that encompasses the total city and then
sometimes it's narrowed down to a pre
precise location to clean up something
that might have been done five 10 year
20 40 50 years ago. So what happens is
this is just kind of like putting back
conformance into the into the general
plan. And since uh I believe Mr. Barnes
the uh the you you uh you the staff
looked at this as far as how it impacted
the general the general plan and you you
felt that it was in conformance to the
overall message.
Chair Scarboro, Commissioner Gonzalez.
That's correct.
>> Real good. Then, uh, normally I'm not a
big advocate tax amendments, but because
this is so focused
and it it doesn't really impact a lot of
other properties as much, then I'm uh
for this. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Gonzalez. If
there are no more questions or comments
by the commission, I would entertain a
motion. I'll make a motion.
Uh I mo my motion is to recommend
approval to the city council for case
one TA2025
after finding that the proposed text
amendment is consistent and conforms
with the adopted general plan.
>> Second.
>> Perfect. We have a motion and a second.
Roll call vote, please.
>> Chair Scarough.
>> Yes. Commissioner Gonzalez,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Joiner,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Drake,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Reid,
>> yes.
>> Motion passes 6.
>> Thank you all.
>> Thank you. Uh, Mr. Curtis, I believe
we're going to be listening to items
three and five, all as one presentation.
So, I'll go ahead and ask Miss Tessier
to come up and give staff's
presentation for these three items.
>> Thank you, Chair Scarbo and
Commissioners. Mayor Tessier, senior
planner with the current planning
department. Case before you tonight is
the collector's garages at Westworld.
That's 4GP 2024, 5ZN 2024, and lastly
8AB 2022. This item is on the regular
agenda tonight as staff has received um
public comments both in opposition and
support and as previously noted the
additional correspondence um received
since the report's been posted is now on
your diet. So just wanted to bring that
to your attention. So the subject sites
located at the intersection of East
Mcdow Mountain Ranch Road and Thompson
Peak Parkway as highlighted in yellow.
Um to the north is single family
residential. Directly east of the site
is a vacant parcel. Beyond that is an
internalized storage facility as well as
a gas station. To the south we have the
recently developed Routa sports complex.
And then just to the west we have
Westworld.
So the applicants requesting to reszone
the site from single family residential
R1 135 PCD ESL to C4 PCD ESL. And I just
want to put out there today that um for
clarification that the C4 district does
not allow any form of live
entertainment, bars or restaurants
because I think there is some confusion
out there as far as what those allowed
uses are for C4.
In addition to this request, the
applicant's requesting for a minor
general plan amendment from employment
office to Employment Light Industrial
Office to accommodate a new storage
facility comprised of six units, excuse
me, six buildings and a 4,000 square
foot clubhouse and office. Access to the
site is provided with a new driveway
along Mcdow Mountain Parkway. And as
part of this development, the applicant
will be dedicating a series of
easements, including natural area open
space, a non-buildable area easement
over the Verde Canal to protect the
historical um meaning behind it, and
lastly, a um 30 foot wide desert buffer
setback scenic corridor easement along
the frontage of the street. So that
concludes staff's presentation. I'll
conclude that with the action slide
because there's three actions that are
going to be requested tonight. And then
Jordan Rose, the applicant has prepared
a full presentation with details and
then staff is available for any
questions subsequent to her
presentation. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Do we have any questions or
from the commission directly for staff
at this point?
All right. Hearing none, Miss Rose.
>> Thank you. And thank you, Meredith.
We've been working on this project for
quite some time and staff has been
great. We're so excited uh tonight to
come and present to you something that
is in keeping with Scottsdale's flavor
of collector car capital of the world.
Um and I'm here tonight on behalf of the
collector's garage. Jason Platkkey and
Kyle McGinness are here at McKinley are
here. Um Josh Rogers with LG. Paul
Basha, our traffic consultant, and
Jennifer Hall with my office, the
planner on the case. And I'll just um
say thank you to all the um folks in
live in Scottsdale who are here tonight
uh in support of this. We really
appreciate you coming out. Um so we
think that this is really good planning
for a point of pride which is Westworld
and this is an extension of Scottsdale
at its finest. It celebrates our
collector call culture and allows for
collectors to share their sh store their
treasures near to Barrett Jackson auto
auction. And I think it encourages
people to invest more in these cars and
all of our auctions um when they can
store their um their beautiful cars
somewhere uh if they don't have room in
their homes. Uh makes it easier for our
state to keep their assets in
Scottsdale, which is good. And then
Westworld is really one of our greatest
assets. Uh the voters have said so in
both 2019 and just last year with the
bond election to support Westworld and
the Scottsdale residents in they really
understand the importance of Westworld.
Uh 163 million point.6 million in annual
revenue and that was just uh the
previous year,813
jobs. Um 85.6 million in labor revenue.
So Westworld is enormously impactful and
we don't build homes near our airports
for a reason to protect that asset and
we don't need to build homes near our
biggest or one of our biggest economic
drivers, Westworld. And so this would
protect that and you can see the
elevations. I know those are in your
packet and some of the renderings. It's
a beautiful site. We've had um only good
comments about uh what it looks like and
appearance. Um it's low profile. It's 32
feet, which is 15 feet less than what
your prior application was for this use.
It's low traffic, similar trip
generation, uh, to just six homes. Um,
46 luxury car garages. It's privately
owned. Um, there is, as Meredith said,
there's no liquor license being applied
for, and frankly, we can't have a bar or
anything like that. It's not open to the
public. Um, gated, it's secure. And I
wanted to clarify a couple of things.
Um, I saw there were some things that
were put out uh today and I think early
last week that just were not accurate.
Restaurants are not permitted in C4.
Bars are not permitted in C4. Adult
entertainment, not in C4. Uh, game
centers, not here, not in C4. And car
washes would require a conditional use
permit, which would have to come back
into public hearings. And same with an
amusement park or a theme park, which is
nothing that we would ever conceive of
doing on this small 5acre site, but in
any case, it would need conditional use
permit approval. And then in addition to
that, your staff has we we have
stipulation number one, which ties this
development to our development and site
plan and narrative. So, we can't build
anything else without coming back to the
council to you and the city council to
amend the plan. And then I would also um
want to add that some of these car um uh
collector car uh garages are zoned
differently. They're zoned more
intensely. They're I2 I1. Um some of
them are C3, which is more permissive.
Um you can do bars and restaurants in
those. So, um the project's widely
supported. You can see that in the room
today. Um but city staff, thank you for
your support. Craig Jackson and um with
Barrett Jackson in support. uh the
Scottsdale Arabian Horse Show, the
Scottsdale Quarter Horse Show, Arizona
Bike Week, Cactus Raining Classic, the
Scottsdale Art Week, M Culinary, um
Notre Dame Prep High School, who I think
is here and may speak to you tonight.
Thank you for your support. And then we
have a series of absolute um uh rockstar
race car champions. Paul Tracy, um NBC
commentator and you probably know, Indie
Car Series champion. Casey Mirrors, a
former NASCAR driver. Ari Lindy, um,
twotime Indianapolis 500 champion. I
don't think they could make it today,
but they're connected to the Scottsdale
community, and we really appreciate
their support. And then there's GM of,
um, Scottsdale Ferrari, uh, the the, uh,
director of marketing for Scottsdale
Ferrari, the GM of MercedesBenz. Um,
they all see this as a real extension of
our car culture and what they're trying
to achieve here in Scottsdale, and
they're a big revenue source, of course,
for Scottsdale as well. Ross Brown
Commercial Real Estate and Mary Turner,
thank you for being here. She was the
chair of the manager of the Scottsdale
Bond Campaign. Um, and thank you for
winning that. Um, uh, some Gay Thorn
neighbors, um, are here, I believe, and
we thank them. Um, Jeanie and Marty and
Jeff. Um, we appreciate that. And then I
would read all of these Scottsdale
supporters off, but we would be here for
a long, long time. So, um, thank you
all, uh, for coming and for supporting
this. And those are letters that were uh
represented. So we appreciate u all the
comments and the support and we just ask
you to help protect Westworld tonight by
supporting this um and enhance our
sophisticated call c car culture which
is a a tongue tire. Um I would also ask
I know we have lots of supporters. I
believe they've all signed you know
maybe they they've all said they want to
speak. um you might consider maybe seven
of you speaking and um certainly the
folks from Notre Dame and um uh the HOA
group um can speak um but if you you
know if they call your name and you
don't feel compelled you might just say
you agree with the last speaker so we're
not taking up too much of your time. So
thank you chair and I'd save any time
for uh questions later.
>> Thank you Miss Rose. Before we go to
public comment, are there any questions
of the applicant
>> online? Commissioners Joiner or Drake,
do you have any questions for the
applicant prior to public comment?
>> Yes. Yes, Chairman, I do have just one
comment. Um, could I ask the uh
applicant to just uh clarify
the NAOS issue because the application I
mean I understand it but just for the
public the application shows a decrease
in uh allowable NAOS and how you are
really enhancing that uh benefit.
If you would just clarify that for the
public I think that would be very
helpful.
>> Chair and Commissioner Joiner I so
appreciate the comment. It's a great
point. Um, we are enhancing it. We meet
the NAOS standard and then we're also
preserving the old Verdie Canal which I
think is a great thing for historic uh
some sort of historic preservation.
>> Thank you.
>> Go ahead, Commissioner Tel.
>> Thank you, Chair. Um, you mentioned that
the um this project presents a low
profile. Um, what struck me was the
clubhouse is about double the height of
the condos across the street. Um, so I
wouldn't say that's low in comparison to
the neighbors. Um, but I do believe
there's um buffering
uh landscape buffering in between the
clubhouse and the neighbors across the
street. Can you talk about that? I mean,
is there any I It's a DR issue as to how
tall the trees are and how, you know,
big the box and the trunk and so forth,
but can you speak to that?
>> Chair and um Commissioner Ortal, I think
I'll ask Josh Rogers from LG to talk to
that and I would say um you know, we uh
we meet the the zoning ordinance for
height, so we're certainly not exceeding
that, but go ahead and Josh, maybe you
can talk about the design a little bit.
>> Thank you, George.
>> Thank you. Uh chair, members of the
commission, my name is Josh Rogers. I'm
with LG uh 4933 East Flower Street in
Phoenix. Um so very good question. So
we're actually at a finished floor level
on our site right now um of 1,533
feet. And I know that means nothing to
anybody in the room other than across
the street. So that's actually 9 ft
lower than the center of Mcdow Mountain
Ranch Road. So while it looks imposing,
it's really not when you're across the
street. And if you're looking over a 6
foot security wall, you're barely going
to be able to see the top of the
building. And the clubhouse only sits um
28 and a half feet high. So the
clubhouse itself is not it's not even at
the 32 foot height to top a parapit.
>> Thank you. No problem.
>> Thank you.
>> Please go ahead. I just have one comment
and that is I think it is very clear
that the residents of the city of
Scottsdale do not want to see
proliferation of high density spaces.
This is about as low density a space as
I think I've seen proposed in the city
of Scottsdale. So with respect to all of
the infrastructure requirements, the
traffic that this will not create, um I
think suggests that this is a this is
this meets that expectation for the
residents that we not have proliferation
of tall buildings, high density that
create all of the issues that I think we
heard in the last election. So thank you
>> chair and commissioner. Thank you for
that. That is well said. Appreciate it.
>> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner
Gonzalez.
>> Thank you, Chair. Um C,
Miss Rose, can you just basically tell
me although this is not a zoning
question, this is about practicality.
What is the business model for this?
Just briefly just sum it up. You know,
these rentals, are they selling condos?
You know, are they living there? just
kind of describe what really is the
activity.
>> Do you want to?
>> Yes. Chair and Commissioner Gonzalez. Um
Oh, do you want to take this? Okay.
Well, I'll have Jason Platkkey, who um
is the owner, uh talk to you about the
business?
>> Good evening, uh commissioners. Um so,
the project is designed to be a store.
It's a it's it's it's a glorious storage
unit uh that that that the owner can is
not it's not leasing. It's a luxury
unit. Um obviously with the
proliferation of all the vehicles that
are coming to Scottdale with, you know,
through Barrett Jackson and all the
dealerships that we have here, uh people
are running out of garage and storage
space. So this is just a uh an adjent to
their existing storage unit. And by the
by and large, they're not really they're
not occupied. They don't really uh
socialize in these areas. I mean, most
of the people that are pineing these
garages have have a home in Scottsdale
or or or
you know, stay in a nice hotel or
wherever. So, it's not necessarily a
hangout location as much as it's just a
storage location for their vehicles and
accessories that they may not have room
for.
>> Uh when when you said there's a
clubhouse, then what does that designate
to be then? That term is slightly
embellished. It's more like a members
lounge. It's really a congregation
center for people that you know there's
restrooms because it is a storage unit
in those in the in conventional sense.
So if someone wants to go meet somebody
there, have a coffee, get out of the
elements, um kind of have a collective
area to gather, that's really it.
There's no like as Jordan spoke of,
there's no restaurant, there's no club,
there's no liquor license. the the
conventional sense of that term is
probably not applicable in this regard,
but the the unit the clubhouse is really
just a gathering center with a
comfortable area to hang out.
>> Will they be uh working on vehicles or
is it any kind of a maintenance uh type
of situation or will these just be
static uh uh showcasing type things for
the clients? I mean, no, there's no
commercial opportunity to to work on a
vehicle. Certainly, if somebody wants to
tinker on their 67 Corvette on a
Saturday, we're not that that's
allowable. But by no, but most in most
cases and from the previous developments
I've done, these particular owners
usually have somebody a service provider
that's taking care of that third party,
right? They're not coming over there to
do that themselves.
So in other words, what let's say just
for example because um we've seen
several collection groups come through,
car collection groups come through and
have done different types of these type
of projects.
Is there if somebody is changing oil on
their car and that happens,
where do they dispose of the oil?
>> It would be no different than them doing
the same thing at their home. Right? So,
if they're changing the oil at their
home, where are they going to dispose of
their oil? There's a number of different
repositories around the city for that
those purposes. Um, I'd be surprised if
someone does that, but certainly that's
not a a non-permitted use. But, um,
based on my experience, uh, these these
these clientele are not changing their
own oil.
>> So, you're not going to have any
disposal area or anything for for those.
it, as I mentioned, it's if if there was
a demand for that, we certainly would
include that, but that there has been in
my previous experience, there has been
zero demand for that.
>> Very good. And then these are all going
to be rental units. They're not going to
be sold.
>> No, they're uh they actually are fee
simple sales, not rental.
>> Thank you very much.
>> Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Gonzalez. Uh
>> thank you.
>> So, we're going to go into public
comment first. Uh for the benefit of the
commissioners who are online, I just
wanted to let you know that there are 15
written comment cards in support of the
project that you don't get the benefit
of seeing because you're not on the
deis. And we have, I believe, 24
speakers
that wish to speak. So, uh, Miss Rose, I
appreciate your comment earlier. I would
also ask if anybody doesn't want to
speak, feel free to say you don't want
to. If you do, you have that right and
ability. We want to make sure you're
heard. Everybody does have three
minutes, but if you have a similar
comment to others um and you can keep it
briefer, we would just appreciate it.
But again, you do have that right to
that three minutes. So, we're going to
go ahead and start with public comment
right now. And number one, uh Mr. Hugh
Casiano. And again, I will apologize in
advance if I butcher names. It is not
intentional.
If you could come up to the mic, say
your name and your address, then go
ahead and we'll start your three
minutes.
Uh, my name is, can you hear me? Okay.
Uh, my name is Hugh Casiano. Uh, I live
at 10846 North Sundown Drive in
Scottsdale, 85260.
Uh, I own three commercial properties on
Franklidd Wright in the general facility
of this area. Uh, Franklidd Wright in
the 101. Uh, I also own seven
residential properties in the city of
Scottsdale. uh in addition to being a
30-year resident of uh of Scottsdale.
So, I've I've done uh pretty much a lot
of business in this town for a long
time. Uh I'm also an avid car collector.
And to answer your question, like you
had mentioned oil changes and things
like that, most of the clientele, which
I've catered to for the last 30 years,
um they're not only not changing their
own own oil, most of these cars in their
lifetime don't see 3,000 miles, right?
for the type of car that you store in
that facility. Um, I have 14 cars. I
don't think I've put a 100 miles on 12
of them. Right. So, uh, in the last
three years, right? Uh, anyway, that
being said, uh, I'm in big I'm a big
supporter of this project. I do business
in this area. This clientele that brings
it also brings dollars and revenues to
ancillary services like detailing
companies, car dealerships. Uh McLaren
is in Scottsdale. These are buyers. My
father-in-law is here. He's in the
bathroom. Um he's a McLaren owner, does
business in Scottsdale, uses all of the
facilities around in the air park. There
are hundreds of these places that cater
to this this clientele. So I think not
only is this a good project, it's an
important project and it does set the
pace for that level of clientele to
enjoy the experiences in that quadrant
which is already nationally lo known for
the same type of business. Um in any
case can't show more uh respect for it.
Uh and I've known Jason Pocky for over
30 years. I can tell you everything he
does he does perfectly. And I have
people that visit the place for years,
visit visit his Apex project and said
that it is the finest establishment
they've ever been to and they have
they're the type of people that
facilitate, you know, racetracks and car
culture and everything else. So that's
all I have. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you very much. Next speaker is Mr.
uh Norton. And then following Mr. Norton
is uh Mary Turner.
I appreciate the opportunity to speak.
Chairman Scarboro, commissioners. I also
enjoy seeing so many of my friends here,
including the people that are wearing
the yellow badges. I've been allies of
the people in this room far more often
than I've been an opponent.
I don't believe in fierce loyalty to a
human being as much as I believe in the
issues that drive the success of our
community. And that means that I have
been a great advocate for some of the
best things that have happened in
Scottsdale. I've also been the leading
opponent of the worst ideas that were
brought to Scottsdale. Things that
brought tore the city apart. I signed
the lawsuit that sued the city of
Scottsdale to stop the Desert Discovery
Center.
I collaborated with the protect our
preserve and node EDC groups to shut
down that project. That was an example
of a bad idea that would have hurt the
city instead of improving the city. I've
also been pro-development.
Unlike many of the people in this room,
I support the Axon project. I think
that's a much better idea than putting
industrial development near residential
property. I agree. I disagree with the
notion that you don't build houses near
airports. That used to be the truth, but
this is Scottdale. We do things
differently here. We're putting the Hovi
Optima project next to the airport. The
park is next to the airport. Some of the
greatest things happening in this city
are happening near the airport. I
developed 39 industrial projects during
my career.
I always kept my projects away from
residential communities because it was
the right thing to do. We were going to
have problems if we had shoved
industrial into a residential community.
This project will be the first time that
resident that residential communities on
the northeast side of the power lines
have had a commercial or industrial
project shoved into their neighborhood.
Do I support Westworld? Absolutely. I
also chaired the political action
committee that drove the bond to success
in 2019.
Sasha Weller stood up and said the bond
wouldn't have passed if I hadn't run
that campaign. I think that is a little
bit uh you know over overstating my
role, but I did drive that project and
I'm really proud that we built that park
that will be right next door to this
project.
This is an industrial and commercial
project. It's being wedged in between a
neighborhood park which I helped get
built
for Westworld, for Craig Jackson, for
the city in collaboration with them
under Mayor Lane's direction. I chaired
that political action committee and we
got that park built and I'm proud that
we got that done. I live across the
street in Horseman's Park. And my kids
walk around that that park every day
with their white dog, Lily, and and and
their mother.
You don't put an industrial project in
the center of a neighborhood park and a
single family residential community. We
have already taken huge chunks of
residential property out of the 85255260
zip codes. We set aside the preserve
property which was originally Toll
Brothers single family residential
property. We bought 80 acres of land
north of Bell Road on either side of 94
Street. Half of it became a park, half
of it's becoming residential. We also
allowed short-term rentals. The number
of of homes with families with children
in 85255
and 85260
has dropped by over 50% in the 30 years
that I've lived in those two zip codes.
Our schools are going without kids. The
neighborhoods are emptying out. And you
want to put an industrial project right
on top of what should be residential,
>> Mr.
>> and right in the middle of a neighbor.
>> Wrap up your comments. Go ahead and
finish up your comments, sir. I I
greatly oppose the project. I don't
think this matter is going to be
resolved here. I think it's going to end
up at the city council level and we are
organizing to stop it at city council.
Thank you.
>> Thank you, sir.
>> Next speaker is Mary Turner. Following
uh Miss Turner would be Chad Baker.
>> Thank you, commissioners. Uh, my name is
Mary Turner, 5131 North Granite Reef
Road, Scottsdale 85250.
In 2019, I had the honor of serving as
campaign manager in the Scottsdale bond
campaign, a major effort to invest in
our city's future. This bond included
enhancements to our parks, upgrades and
expansions of our fire and police
stations, and support for our local
economy and tourism efforts. A big part
of that investment focused on
significant improvements to Westworld.
Scottsdale voters strongly back these
improvements passing the bond by a 38%
margin. That's why it's so concerning to
see proposals for more residential
development near Westworld. It goes
directly against what voters approved
and undermines the significant
investment taxpayers have already made
in this key part of our city.
Adding more residential development near
Westworld brings a whole set of
challenges like more complaints about
noise, smells, heavier traffic, and
other headaches. The Collector's Garage
Pro project, on the other hand, avoids
those issues and fits with how the area
was always intended to be. It's a smart
way to protect the city's major
investment in Westworld without putting
more homes right next to it, which would
be counterproductive to the area. I
proudly stand in support of the
collector's garage project and urge you
to do the same. Thank you.
>> Thank you,
Mr. Baker. And then following Mr. Baker
is
Calvin Mack, if I hopefully I said that
correctly.
>> So, you don't want to speak.
>> Thank you. Then following Mr. Baker
would be Melissa uh Shalice.
Chair and commissioners, my name is Chad
Baker. I'm here speaking on behalf of
the Scottsdale Firefighters Association.
>> Name and address, please, sir. Sorry,
you got your name, but
>> copy. Um, PO Box 14935, Scottsdale,
Arizona 85267.
As you know, city tax revenue is the
largest source of funding for local
government, including for our parks,
public safety, and many other quality of
life issues.
There are few bigger generators of these
sales tax dollars than by all of the
events at Westworld. The city's own
economic impact reports show the annual
impact to be massive. We have
consistently supported projects and uses
that responsibly augment tax revenues.
The collector's garages at Westworld is
another such project.
More residential development near and
adjacent to Westworld makes no policy
sense as it will just add to complaints
and difficulties with operations. The
Collector's Project avoids this. You'll
also recall that Scottsdale voters
approved improvements to Westworld
during a bond campaign in 2019 and last
year via Prop 490. We helped lead those
efforts. More residential development
near Westworld infringes on these voter
approved measures that were approved by
substantial margins. There are many
housing projects in Scottsdale. There's
only one Westworld.
It sits uniquely in the heart of our
city to generate critical revenues that
help the entire community. We stand with
all the major users at Westworld in
support of the application and hope you
will too. Thank you for your time.
>> Thank you very much,
Miss Alice. And then following Michelle
is Kyle McInley.
>> Good evening. Thank you for having me,
chair and commissioners. My name is
Melissa Shalis. I'm with the Scottsdale
Arabian Horse Association. Address is
15455 North Greenway Hayden Loop,
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260.
Uh coming here before you, strongly
supporting the proposed resoning.
Um coming from the equestrian world,
Westworld is our home. We're partners
with Westworld. We've invested millions
of dollars into Westworld's growth,
everything with that.
Sorry, my notes.
Um,
the reason that we support this is
because of the fact that that entrance
off of Mcdow Mountain is an oppo
alternate entrance into Westworld for
equestrian events. We utilize it all the
time. We want to make sure that this
decreases the amount of traffic.
Excuse.
I'm sorry.
The more residential there is near
Westworld, the more complaints there are
about the noise, the traffic, and in the
case of the equestrian events, the odor.
And we have evidence of this with the
property on the north side of Westworld,
but I just wanted to say I strongly
support the proposed resoning.
>> Thank you, ma'am. Mr. McInley. And then
following Mr. McInley is Brandon
Ziggler.
>> I said
Thank you.
All right, Mr. Ziggler.
>> All right, then Kent
Cre. Hopefully I said that right.
Okay, for those that can't hear uh the u
the citizens
in the uh in the KA uh the names I'm
calling out say that they support what's
been said already and they don't wish to
speak. Uh
all right. So, looks like do we have a
second? Rick McInley.
Oh, Kyle. Uh Rick. So Rick McInley, did
you want to speak?
>> Sure.
>> Go ahead.
And then following Mr. McInley is Jenny
Perez,
Commissioner Scarro.
Members in attendance on the commission
and those online. My name is Rick
McInley, 7440 East Pinnacle Peak Road,
Scottsdale, Arizona 85255.
I came to Scottsdale in 1968 at the age
of 10 years old.
Scottsdale Road ended at Shea Boulevard.
There was no Osborne Road across the
Indian Ben Wash.
I attended Scottsdale High School right
across the street here. 1976 graduate
and is no longer there. Why? development
took over, pro-development, which
Scottsdale has been. Scottsdale went
from just a little most west western
town to an extravagant
enriched area north and east, stretches
all the way out to
D uh Dynamite Boulevard out almost out
to Carefree.
So, I've seen this comp, this city grow,
and it has been glorious. It's very
pro-development.
I was a uh student at Scottsdale High
School with Mayor Jenkins.
Uh had the opportunity to meet and work
with Mayor Drinkwater during his terms
and they were very pro-development.
This
development is
not industrial. As was stated earlier by
a opponent of this project, it is a high
class, first class,
worldclass development
that will only enhance that area out
there. It was mentioned by uh
Commissioner Gonzalez up there. I I'm
sorry, it was Commissioner Hortell.
Very low traffic.
It will not be a
unsightly
uh development in this neighborhood.
These units are going to sell probably
north of a million dollars each. That's
46 units.
That's a big number. I strongly support
this development. Would like to see it
move forward and I hope for your
support, commissioners. Thank you very
much.
>> Thank you. uh, Miss Perez. And then
after Miss Perez is Jared Freriedman.
>> Good evening, chair, commissioners. My
name is Jenny Perez. I live at 9850 East
McDow Mountain Ranch Road, which is
directly across from where this
community or this proposed development
will be coming in. Um although others
who live right behind us may oppose
this, this affects us more than anybody.
Um
thank you for allowing us to give you
our thoughts. I can't speak for the rest
of our community, but I can tell you
that myself and one other person have
provided our thoughts. They have also
offered to come and talk to our
community during our next board meeting,
which we will be taking advantage of. um
it does directly impact us greatly
um but not necessarily in a negative
way.
I am excited to see it come in. I've
seen us be preposed for um elderly care,
the toy box, which I'm not a fan of. Um
they're they are
far less superior to what I think is
going to be coming in based on what I've
seen from the plans from this team. Um,
I have high concerns over the traffic,
which I have voiced to them, and I feel
secure in knowing that the amount of
traffic that we see today, largely
because of the access to the park right
across the street from us with no
protection for our community today. Um,
is not something that they're going to
be contributing to in any way. Their
entrance is directly across from our
entrance and our only request to them
will be to make sure that our coming and
going doesn't impact with their coming
and going. Um, other than that, I have
nothing but complete support for the
team and their proposed project and I
really hope that everybody moves forward
with this so that we can get something
in there that will look nice and uh
bring about some better aesthetics for
the community. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
Mr. Freriedman
and then Mr. Nick Duckworth after Mr.
Friedman.
>> Perfect. Thank you, Mr. Freeman. Your
comments are in support and you wish not
to speak. Uh, Mr. Duckworth
and following Mr. Duckworth, Mr. Jar.
Uh, commissioners, thank you for having
me this evening. My name is Nick
Duckworth. I am speaking on behalf of
Notre Dame Prep. I am an alumni. Uh our
address is 9701 East Bell Road.
The leadership of our Notre Dame
Preparatory community was recently made
aware of a potential new construction
project adjacent to Westworld and our
NDP campus. In fact, one of our partners
of the firm, Ross Brown Partners,
spearheading this effort, is a 2014
graduate of Notre Dame. Our community is
rapidly growing. We're having over 450
applicants yearly and having to turn
away over 200. So, the safety of our
students is our top priority. We have
taken time to learn much about their
endeavor and fully support this project
and its impact on this neighborhood and
specifically NDP. Like all schools, the
safety of our students and their
families is our most important concern.
One of the primary drivers of how safe
we keep our community is traffic flow
and the purposes of new ventures
surrounding us. Any increase in
congestion in the early morning or
afternoon at our start and release times
causes great concern. The concept
presented to us for storage,
specifically luxury cars, is
exponentially safer than other
businesses, parking lots, or potentially
more multifamily housing. In addition,
we'd be thrilled to be in proximity with
owners of this space that would be that
would get to be exposed to Notre Dame
Prep. We believe the economic impact of
this plan will benefit not only
Westworld, but this neighborhood and
Scottsdale as a whole. We strongly feel
this project is consistent with the
growth plan of Scottsdale's future.
Thank you for your attention to this
matter. We are grateful for our
wonderful relationship with the city and
would happily answer any questions you
may have. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
Mr. Jar and then Mr. Graph after Mr.
Jar.
>> Thank you. Mr. Jar is in support but
wishes not to speak now. Mr. Graph.
>> Okay. Mr. Graph is also in support but
wishes not to speak. Mr. Collins.
>> Okay. Mr. Collins says he's in support
of the project but wishes not to speak.
Uh John Sumana, I hope I'm not
butchering that name. I do apologize.
>> Yes, sir.
>> Love the comments. Just need them.
>> John Summer, my address is 15938 North
114th Way, 85255.
I've been a resident of McDall Mountain
Ranch for 23 years and own uh multiple
properties in the in the community and
uh I think this is a good idea. I'm
supportive of it 100%. Think that
architecturally it will enhance our
community, our neighborhood. Um it is
not the first industrialish
property. There's a storage unit right
in front of it. I think this will
actually
help enhance and and make it look a lot
better. Um, also I have a lot of
experience with uh car suites, garage
suites, car barns, toy barns, Apex,
whatever you want to whatever brand it
is. And um, I hang out at those. I go to
friends that own them. And um, I would
say over 80% of the owners are out of
state. So they are more of a storage
facility than anything. They also um,
they they kind of deck these things out.
So I do believe there's a huge economic
economic benefit for the trades as well
as the the the entire area in in
general. So I think it's beneficial. Um
once again, there's no traffic coming in
and out of these things hardly at all.
Most most these cars don't run. They
don't drive them. They just they just
store them there. So I just wanted to
clarify that. And once again, I'm a
local resident. I'm right around the
corner and I'm hugely in support of
this.
>> Thank you, Mr. Sur. Mr. Mr. Schumacher.
>> Uh, Michael Schumacher.
>> Okay. Mr. Schumacher is in support of
the project, but wishes not to speak.
Peta.
>> Okay. Peta Schumacher also uh doesn't
wish to speak, but is in support of the
project.
>> Nico Saviote.
Thank you, Mr. Saviotti. He supports the
project but does not wish to speak.
>> Josh McInley.
>> All right. Mr. McInley does not wish to
speak but is in support of the project.
Trenton Gibson.
>> Okay. Trent Gibson supports project but
will not speak.
Maxmillian dlo.
>> Mr. Dlo does not wish to speak but is in
support of the project. And our last
speaking card, uh, Mr. uh, Blakeman.
>> Mr. Blakeman does not wish to speak, but
is in support of the project. So, we've
gone through all of our public comments.
I'd like to just make a statement and
just say thank you very much whether
you're in support or in opposition of
this project. Thank you for making your
thoughts known. Uh this kind of of
connection with the citizens and
providing their input on projects is
absolutely absolutely invaluable. So
thank you for the written and for the
spoken comments. U I'll have uh give the
applicant some time here to respond to
the comments.
Thank you, chair and members of the
commission. Thank you to all our
neighbors um and friends and um I would
take any questions that you may have. Um
but I think um we really appreciate your
time and your deliberation.
>> Thank you very much. Do we have any
comments or deliberation that we want to
any comments or questions for the
applicant?
Okay. Uh how about uh remotely? Uh,
Commissioner Joiner, do you have any
comments, questions?
>> Um, the only comments I have are um I
wanted to make a comment about one of
the one of the speakers talked about
traffic uh to a park and I'm looking at
the map and the ingress and egress to
the Riata Sports Complex is off of
Thompson Peak Parkway and I think the
ingress and egress for this application
will be off of Mcdell Mountain Ranch. So
I don't think those are in conflict and
I'm very happy with how they're handling
the NAOS and I think this is going to be
a beautiful addition to Westworld. So I
am in support of it. So thank you.
>> Thank you Commissioner Joiner.
Commissioner Drake, do you have any
comments or questions?
>> I have no additional questions. I just
say that I also am in agree and am
satisfied with the findings in the
report and I believe this will be a
great addition to the community.
>> Thank you.
>> Fantastic. Uh again, no more questions
or comments here. Okay, Commissioner
Gonzalez,
>> thank you very much. Um I appreciate all
everybody taking their time today to
come down and talk to us and explain
their concerns and voice their opinions.
you're you're not going to make
everybody 100% happy. That's just what
happens. That's why we have these
these meetings.
And the the biggest issue I have, of
course, is when it when you first see
it, you see, okay, th this is a
residential area and then you have a
different type of zoning coming forward.
the impact of this type of project that
hits here. We have plenty of these type
of projects coming into the city and
applications like this similar to this.
They have proven themselves, I think, if
you would. And I have talked to a lot of
these different from the toy barn to the
different developments of the of the
collector car segment to to Craig
Jackson to all these people. You see
what kind of impact these type of
facilities create and you can see them
even before even on the road to going by
the airport and things of that nature.
they're less impactful. The reality is
the business model is less impactful
than almost anything else you can have
in that area. And from something that I
I monitor, I see I'm I'm a car
collector. I look at these things. I go
to the toy barn. I go to all the car
shows. I go everywhere and I see what
the impact is. And they seem to be all
good neighbors. I've not heard any
complaints about the about all these
different types of condominium projects
that are developed in this way as far as
car storage or things of that nature.
The reason why I even brought up about
the oil changing and everything is
because there are some types of impacts
on properties that if you do mechanical
issues with like changing oil per se,
you you know it's it's not a real good
thing to happen. But usually in these
type of because of even the cost of
these facilities, you're not going to
see that type of usage going on there.
If if anything, hardly anybody really
puts a lot of miles on these cars. These
are not cars that you drive on a daily
basis. So, the maintenance factor
doesn't seem to impact everything. We've
we've done this board has done several
zonings for different car dealerships.
McLaren, somebody pointed out the
McLaren, we did we had to approve that.
We we've done a lot of these type of
issues and there seem to be you know
after we see these things happen two or
three years down the road
the comments from the residential side
of it has almost diminished. I don't you
just don't get a lot of these people
complaining about this type of facility
in there. So my basic feeling is since I
have seen a history go on with these
type of facilities, my tendency is to
vote favorably towards this project.
Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Gonzalez. Um,
Commissioner,
>> sorry about that. Thank you. When I look
at these projects, any of these
projects, I simplify it for myself. If I
look at the economics, the amenities and
the aesthetics and when I looked at this
and read through it, the only issue I
had was um part of the aesthetics and
that was the height of the clubhouse.
And thanks to the u explanations here,
that's not an issue for me anymore. That
makes perfect sense. Um,
and there's a plus to the aesthetics as
well. I mean, the u preservation of the
Verdie Canal, the 30-foot buffer uh on
the Mcdow Mountain Ranch Road, you know,
that is a contributor to the aesthetics
amenities. It adds 46 units uh for the
type of industry, if you will, that we
want to have. Uh it's not exactly a uh a
rendering plant. It's not exactly a
machine shop. Uh it's a machine shop,
but not that sort of machine shop. So,
that's a good thing. Plus, the 25 foot
wide path that's being added, you know,
that's a plus in terms of amenities.
Economics, though, of course, is the big
deal. Um
the uh uh I'll exaggerate, there's no
traffic. I'll exaggerate. There's no
water usage compared to other things.
There's no traffic. there's no water
usage. Um
in in terms of dollars, uh the um net
present value of the project um
substantially higher a million6 I think
was what the city came up with, city's
consultants came up with versus 200,000
is uh for the current zoning. This is
over a 20-year period. So, it's got all
the pluses and none of the minuses. So,
I support the project as well.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you, Commissioner Till.
If I have no other comments, I will also
say that I'm in support of the project.
I appreciate the design here. I uh I
don't see this as an industrial use, but
a commercial use that has a very low
intensity.
And to Commissioner Urttell's point and
the applicant has already explained the
the differential in elevation has really
brought that elevation height down quite
a bit when compared to the residential
across the street. I think this is a
well thoughtout plan and I think it's uh
absolutely not a detriment to the
surrounding community and I'm in favor
of it as well. If there are no other
comments uh I would ask for a motion.
>> I'll make that motion. Uh make a motion
for recommendation of approval to city
council for cases 4 GP 2024,
5ZN 2024 and 8AB 2024 per the staff
recommended stipulations after finding
that the plan community district
findings have been met and the proposed
zoning district map amendment and
abandonment are consistent and conform
with the adopted general plan.
>> I have a motion. Do I have a second?
>> I second a motion.
Okay, we have a first and a second. Have
a roll call vote, please.
>> Chair Scarro,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Gonzalez,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Ertel,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Joiner,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Drake,
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Reid,
>> yes.
>> Motion passes 6. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you,
>> Mr. Curtis. I don't see anything else on
the agenda if that's the
>> That's correct, Mr. Chairman.
>> Perfect. And I will ask for a motion for
adjournment.
>> I move to adjourn.
>> Do I have a second?
>> Second.
>> All in favor say I.
>> I.
>> I.
>> I.
>> Thank you everybody.