Planning Commission - October 9, 2024

e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e e
good
evening welcome to the Scottdale
Planning Commission public hearing the
city encourages your interest and
participation in the public hearing
process the Planning Commission is an
Advisory Board to the city council on
land use and Zoning matters the meeting
agenda items are development
applications that require public
hearings the Planning Commission
considers the request and makes
recommendation for approval or denial to
the city council the city council makes
the final decision for or against
approval of the
application the agenda consists of the
Roll Call minutes approval of the prior
meeting continuances are for items that
will not be heard tonight withdrawals
are for items that have been withdrawn
from any further consideration consent
agenda is for items most items not
likely to require 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
testimony after the applicant will have
the opportunity to respond to public
testimony
the Planning Commission then discusses
the case and votes non-action is for
items for discussion and no vote will be
made by the Planning Commission citizens
wishing to speak on any agenda item may
fill out a blue speaker card or if not
willing to speak may fill out a yellow
comment card and turn it in to the staff
table at the staff table before the
agenda item is to be discussed the chair
will call you by name excuse me the
chair will call you by name it is your
turn to speak when called come to the
podium state your name and address and
then begin speaking groups wishing to
speak should elect a spokesperson to
represent the views of the group to
facilitate the meeting your comment will
be limited to 3 minutes for individual
speakers one additional minute for each
additional individual present at the
meeting who has contributed their time
to representative speaker up to 10
minutes please form out your speech to
be accommodated with within the
applicable time frame given for
convenience and timing presentations a
light system is installed on the podium
the light will be green for 2 minutes
and yellow for 1 minute please conclude
your comments when the red light appears
thank you for your time and interest and
we'll now begin the meeting with a roll
call chair higs present Vice chair young
here commissioner Gonzalez present
commissioner Kaminsky here commissioner
ell here commissioner Joiner here
commissioner Scaro here all here thank
you very good thank you moving on to
General Public comment for non-agenda
items um I don't believe we have any
cards for that or requests so then we
will move on to the administrative
report report Mr
Curtis thank you chair member of the
Planning Commission
um I think you uh received additional
correspondence on
[Music]
item item number two might be in front
of
you did we not do that Jason was there
additional correspondence or is just a
speaker card
okay so there's a request to speak on
item number two okay didn't know if
there was a any correspondence in
addition to
that oh a written comment was that
provided to the chair for number
two okay there it is yeah thank
you or we just receive that with the
request to to speak
card so um so that's an update for you
that's the only update I have for you um
and we do plan on meeting with the full
agenda at our next regular scheduled
meeting on October
23rd that's all I have for you thank you
thank you Mr Curtis with the one request
to speak well we need to move that
consent agenda item to the regular
agenda in order for the person to
speak uh chair higs man of the plan
commission it's entirely up to you if
it's just just a a speaker or if there
was a desire for a presentation you may
want to um hear from the speaker first
before we decide on uh how further to
proceed I don't know if there was any
request specifically on that speaker
card whether for a presentation for it
to be pulled or just for a comment to be
entered into the
record um okay it doesn't indicate but
it's it's from the same person that sent
submitted the letter that was here um
okay we'll get to that in just a moment
let's first get through the approval of
the regular meeting minutes can we
combine them or do we have to vote on
them
separately for the regular meeting
minutes and the executive session
meeting
minutes yeah you can vote them on on
them together okay so if I could ask for
uh approval of the regular meeting
minutes from September 25th as well as
executive session meeting minutes chair
higs I'll uh move for approval of the
September 25th 2024 regular meeting
minutes and the approval of the
September 25th 2024 executive session
meeting minutes okay as I second it we
have a motion from Vice chair young and
a second question on that sorry have we
seen the minutes for the executive
session I mean I find it difficult to
approve something I've not seen I'm sure
the city is honest but
just waiting
for Mr
Pia Mr Curtis
to
consult so generally uh on Executive
session minutes my understanding is for
the clerk those minutes are reviewed by
uh uh City staff and they uh will uh
make sure that they're correct and then
they bring them to you for uh additional
uh
approval and so if there was any
irregularities or something different
that would have been taken care of prior
to them being brought to
you and so executive session minutes are
treated differently than regular
minutes so I I hope that answers your
question as to whether you U I think the
question is did we receive them in some
way yeah and I don't think you did uh
because they're not part of the public
packet right right so we would request
them separately so at this point should
we just vote on the regular meeting
minutes you can do that okay and
continue the other one okay TR again
I'll modify my recommendation um to
remove the executive session meeting
minutes from my
motion thank you okay we have a motion
from Vice chair young and I'll second
that and a second from Comm commissioner
Gonzalez roll call vote please oh
question if I've been absent do I
abstain from minutes uh no you can still
obtain or you can still review the
minutes if you're not there so yes I
don't know if you can does that figure
that out she wasn't
there is there a
clarification um let's let us look into
that uh you're you're you're asking if
you did not attend the you still review
those minutes and we'll get back to you
on
that I reviewed them I just didn't know
if I could vote on them oh okay did you
I didn't know that you did all right uh
it sounds like everything's uh moving
along just fine thank you so I guess
you're voting on it no we're not
including the executive meeting okay so
can we get a roll call vote for the
approval of regular meeting minutes for
September 25th um we got the motion from
Vice chair young and a second from
commissioner
Gonzalez chair higs yes Vice chair young
yes commissioner Gonzalez yes
commissioner Kaminsky yes commissioner
ell yes commissioner Joiner yes
commissioner Scarboro yes motion passes
thank you thank you so we have a few uh
items on the agenda tonight
under uh okay so I make a motion to
continue yeah jerck can I make a motion
to continue approval the September 25th
2024 executive session meeting minutes
looking at staff sure so we have a
motion from uh commissioner Scarboro and
a second from commissioner ell uh a
motion to continue executive session
meeting minutes um for approval for
September
25th we did a roll call vote for
that chair
higs yes Vice chair young yes
commissioner
Gonzalez I'm confused I'm sorry
are we voting right now for the continu
the continuance oh okay that's fine
yes commissioner Kaminsky yes and that's
to October 25th correct 23rd I believe
23rd okay yeah commissioner Orel yes
commissioner Joiner yes commissioner
Scarrow yes motion passes thank you
thank you okay now we will move on to
our consent agenda items um we have two
on our consent agenda uh for as action
items this evening uh Vice chair young
will need to recuse himself from both
yeah I'll need to recuse from consent
agenda items two and
three okay um for consent agenda item
number two we do have a request to speak
so per the suggestion from staff if um
Jude now would like to come up to the
podium
and and if you could say your name and
address
and um you have three minutes to speak
with the the timer countdown there and
then we'll determine if additional
presentations are needed thank
you chair higs and Planning Commission
my name is Jude now I own the Best
Western Plus
Sundi located at 7320 East cback
Road and in 2023 the ploma restaurant
bar uh was coming through and we had
given its support and now the
cup it could be just semantics and the
wording and quite
frankly if this city had established an
effective noise ordinance by this time I
wouldn't even be standing here today
however that's a separate
issue the ploma bar is what it seems to
have changed too and the owner gave me
all sorts of assurances you can go look
at my support letter that it was going
to be indeed a
restaurant and at that time I in my my
letter I said you know we look forward
to a restaurant that serves food in our
neighborhood and hope to frequent it
ourselves and so
today with um at that time I also
mentioned that I was concerned about a
series six license for their liquor
license and I knew that was coming along
but I had these assurances so today this
application is is coming through just
strictly for the ploma
bar so
that's
that was enough concerning enough to me
that I felt I had to reach out and then
Ryan Yos contacted me today and
so I'm going to read from the note I
left to you guys there I appreciated his
reassurance of maintaining the plan to
operate a restaurant and that he Ryan
has implemented noise mitigations he
feels that we'll be satisfied with this
is something is new to me and I'm really
glad to hear about this and I've only
met Ryan once and it was a over a year
ago I believe him and I believe all the
other bar owners in the
area however the entertainment club's
DJs turn it up while the owners are home
away from the
scene and so I do believe this should be
pulled from the consent agenda and my
request is for stipulations that protect
the residential area that is part of the
mixed use plan for this
neighborhood um my property is office
residential where semiu semi- private
I've got people sleeping there there's a
residence
only 200 feet that I can tell from the
Paloma who lives there year round and
continue from them North into the
neighborhood so you know and this could
just be an oversight by the people that
put together the presentation but that
was inaccurate and so I think the
stipulation should be considered and
implemented on the case
please thank you Mr
now um given the uh questions and
concerns that the Mr now just addressed
um I think we want to have a chance for
the applicant to respond and to hear a
full presentation so with that um is it
okay that we even though we just heard
from a speaker and the audience um move
the consent agenda item number two to
the regular
agenda certainly we can do that okay and
then with that then um can I ask for a
motion for the approval of consent agena
item number three to ZN 2010 number
two uh chair higs I like to make that
motion uh make a motion for
recommendation of approval to city
council for case 2zn 2010 number two for
the staff recommended stipulations after
finding that the the planned Community
District criteria have been met and that
the proposed zoning District map
amendment is consistent and conforms
with the adopted General plan I'll
second
it okay we have a motion from
commissioner Scarboro and a second from
commissioner Joiner can we please have a
roll call vote chair higs yes
commissioner Gonzalez yes yes
commissioner Kaminsky yes commissioner
erto yes commissioner Joiner yes
commissioner Scaro yes motion passes
than thank you with that we will move on
to the regular agenda beginning with
consent agenda item was consent agenda
item number two 7Up 2023 Paloma with a
presentation for Mr Greg Bloomberg
thank you chair higs uh Commissioners
Greg
Bloomberg uh principal planner uh here
to give you an overview presentation for
7 Up
2023 uh the Paloma bar
cup uh the site is located just south of
Camelback Road along saddlebag uh drive
here uh this is the designated
Entertainment District here so this site
is part of that entertainment district
and the residential that Mr now is I
believe speaking to is is this area up
here uh closer view of the site uh this
area is actually a little bit outdated
uh this building has been demolished
right now the building uh is being
constructed that will eventually if if
this is approved uh will house the uh
the
bar so just a very brief summary for you
again it's a bar cup for a building
under
construction uh there is noise
mitigation provided which I will will
show you in just a moment and there are
17 remote parking spaces and staff has
verified their
availability this is the floor plan
there's actually two levels the first
floor is is primarily I believe indoor
public space and then on the second
level there is a large balcony space in
this area here and there's actually a
kitchen uh and other uh utility type
uses on that second level
so just so I because parking is always
an ISS something that we want to discuss
I wanted to put together this graphic
just to show you that where the remote
parking is located for this particular
establishment uh the forgive my lack of
Technology I'm not really good with
technology so this is kind of a
makeshift graphic but the uh the uh
parcel in question is the one in pink
right here and the areas in red indicate
where the rbo parking is
located uh again this is been verified
to be available and uh I put the
criteria on here just so you're aware of
it uh remote parking needs to be within
600 ft of the establishment and there
needs to be a direct safe and continuous
pedestrian connection uh from The
Establishment to the parking and vice
versa and staff has verified that as
well so in terms of noise mitigation
this is actually from the development
review board case uh there was a lot of
discussion about noise mitigation during
the dwell review board process and the
uh the applicant has has worked to uh
address that situation the lower left
graphic kind of shows you the mitigation
measures that they got approved as part
of the design of the building and they
can probably explain it better than I
can but there's some solid walls here
that will uh hopefully deflect most of
the noise that's generated from that
second floor balcony back into the
Entertainment
District uh another thing to point out
is on that lower right graphic that
shaded area just north of the uh
establishment location is part of the
Scottdale collection uh plan block
development which received approval for
96 ft of Building height at this
location now that may not happen and we
don't know when it'll happen but if if
there is a taller building built on that
site that would provide some additional
buffering of
noise uh and then I also wanted to point
out that in discussions with the uh with
the
proprietor uh there is presently uh a
rod iron railing on that second level
balcony uh the proprietor has agreed to
change that rod iron railing to
Plexiglass to provide an additional
measure of noise mitigation that's not
shown on here but we had that
conversation and they've agreed to that
so uh and I don't think that's in the
stipulation they didn't didn't get a
chance to put that in the stipulation so
if there's a a motion to approve and
it's the commission's desire to do so
you can stipulate that
that um plexiglass replaced the rod iron
railing in the second floor
balcony and that concludes my
presentation applicant team is here to
answer questions and I'm happy to answer
any questions for
staff commission
Gonzalez yes yes sir Mr blomberg U does
the
um the agreement uh that you had about
the
plexiglass uh is it going to be formed
into a stipulation or it just something
that you guys agreed upon or and what's
the height on it have any chance chair
higs and commissioner Gonzalez I think
we need I'd probably like to defer to
either the architect or the owner in
terms of the height of that rod iron I
think it's 24 to 36 inches something
like that but the idea would be as I
mentioned in my presentation if it's the
commission's desire to stipulate that
add that as a
stipulation that the rod iron replace
the rod or the uh plexiglass replace the
rod iron uh as a sound mitigation
measure and in your motion to approve if
there is a motion to approve but do we
know what size it will be I mean is it
going to replace is it going to be uh
taller than the railing or was it going
to be over over the heights that's what
basically what I'm getting
to if you could um please state your
name and address first thank you
absolutely and thank you for that
question Ashley Marsh from grage and
Burnham 40 North Central for your record
I am the L use attorney working with jot
Concepts on this proposal uh to answer
your question through the chair 42
inches would be the pig glass height
that would that
be from the heights of the
floor through the chair I believe that
would be on the not on the floor but on
the top of the second floor if that
makes sense it would be a 42 inch at
that juncture okay so I guess basically
what I'm trying to do is to see how far
it blocks up the the noise level is the
plexiglass from the floor of the second
level the elevation from the second
level is it going to be 42 in then or is
it going to be higher than that and if
you don't mind uh through the chair I'd
like to bring up Ry vigil our architect
so he can address that I believe it's 20
feet from the floor and then additional
42 in from that 20 feet but i' I'd have
already corrected me if I'm wrong yeah I
mean if it's going to be noise
mitigation it wouldn't do if it was only
12 in that's why I'm driving at uh Rd
vill with ab3 design uh my address is
2026 north1 Street Phoenix Arizona I'm
the architect uh the second floor is 14
feet above the street level and then the
railing is 42 in High um I don't know if
that answers the question okay that
that's that's what it is right now as
far as your drawing is Right correct it
is it is it the plexiglass is it in the
drawing or just the railing in the
drawing right now it's just the the
railing um if you were to look at the
design intent the railing is uh there's
a couple layers to the railing there's a
series of pots we also have booths that
back up to the railing so there's about
a TW foot space so there's a lot of
layers that are are are helping to
filter the sound on the upper level well
when you say pots what do you were
talking about pot plants correct and how
big are the pottered plants then uh
they're about 24 in to 36 in they range
in height and size uh the plants will uh
we do have a few olive trees on the
second floor along with other shrubs
that kind of give an undulating height
um one of my concerns with the
plexiglass is it's going to be a
challenge to clean and maintain so
although we may be mitigating maybe some
noise but we might be creating some
other problems where it becomes a visual
blight um this is facing west so having
this plexiglass could be a challenge to
uh maintain and
clean I would just add through the chair
so we do have a heavily vegetated
landscape that's what um Arty was
communicating if it is the planning
commission's election to have that pexy
glass as an additional layer um we're
happy to do that but we do have it
heavily vegetated as you can kind of see
on um on this screen here to allow some
of that noise mitigation and as well as
boost so there's boost on each of those
uh uh planes as
well did you explain did you explain
this or have a conversation with the the
owner of the Best Western across the
street as far as this solution yeah
actually one of the things that we did
since we met with um this is about two
years ago we were approved in 2022 if
you look at the elevation to the lower
left you'll notice that there's some
openings in the building uh since that
time during instruction drawings those
openings have been entirely filled with
glass block so those openings do not
exist where sound can go through
additionally on the first floor
originally that wall was only 4 feet um
that now that wall is now currently 10
ft tall um another measure we did is on
the upper level the um the trell it was
more of a trellis in the design review
we have since made that a solid roof
structure
so that solid roof structure also
expanded by about 2 feet in all
directions uh further helping to
mitigate the noise so that it covers the
patio entirely um so we've done a lot of
measures since the design review that
was approved to additionally mitigate
the noise to create Solid
Surfaces okay thank you very
much I think we have a question or a
comment from Comm um commissioner Joiner
thank you um I believe I was on
development review board when you came
through the first time SE several years
ago and we discussed that at length not
since I left have you gone back to drb
and they waved that condition because I
know that plexiglass was part of
the drb approval that we issued and I
think you might be confusing this
project with the project across the
street which we did add the plexiglass
which is about a year later so there's
two projects Side by by side and this
one did not have the plexiglass
stipulation but the same um gentleman
from
the hotel came up and made the same
comments I remember that vividly correct
you're absolutely right and that was for
the project across the street which we
did add the plexiglass to that location
okay um question of Staff um I've
attended there there were quite a few
meetings about noise for downtown
Scottdale
mitigation um
has that come to fruition or what's the
status of because the the DJ noise at
night after the owners leave whatever
continues to come up or at least it did
a lot when I was on drb what is the uh
status of the rules being made yeah
thank you chair and uh commissioner
Joiner assistant city manager Brent
Stockwell is here and he could answer
that question okay thank you hi chair
members of the commission commissioner
Joiner um yes we are uh continuing to be
actively working on that project uh we
got
Direction uh from the council earlier
this year on drafting an ordinance and
coming back uh going through additional
public Outreach and coming back um at
this point in time we've also hired an
acoustical engineer to advise on
Solutions and advise on that ordinance
we're waiting for that and then once we
have that uh we'll do additional
Outreach talk to the council about what
they want to have in that final
ordinance and then get it adopted so I'm
anticipating um that sometime early next
calendar year we'll have that in place
and of course that would apply
um as currently contemplated that would
apply to any business um with a sound
amplification System including um a bar
or restaurant or live entertainment
thank you thank
you commissioner ell please next please
thank you uh could you point out where
the Best Western is on that uh
map through the chair so uh commissioner
atel it is this building with uh the
turquoise roof for La a better
description
okay all right so it's on the South Side
uh North Side North Side the north side
correct of camel back and this outline
in pink is uh the massing for the
proposed Poma right uh the gray outline
here is where 996t tall building is
entitled and then uh accordingly a third
story level restaurant patio and this
commission may be familiar as well the
saddle is proposed over saddle bag which
is an addition over a a Saddleback
Trail now did uh the gentleman from Best
Western did I understand that this
stipulation uh at Le the stipulation as
revised perhaps with the plexiglass were
you comfortable with
that yeah we would need him to come up
to the
mic uh thank you for the question
Planning
Commission the stipulation for a
plexiglass wall sounds to me like a easy
way to throw a stipulation and there was
something they already came up and said
they were going to do um the floor to
the height I if I'm understanding right
is 42 in from the
floor so that would be less than four
feet from the
floor and so I don't I I don't see the
effectiveness in that I appreciate
working towards it you know Ryan came by
today and I thought that was awesome but
I I I believe a stipulation that would
be effective would be similar to what I
wrote and I'm not an attorney Mr Barry
could probably do much better but
something that
restricted
electrical devices from emitting voice
Music Television whatever it may be
video games it's something that you know
if that was indoors inside of a
restaurant or inside of a club and if
that was uniform across the city like I
said I wouldn't even be taking up
anybody's time today because I think
it's a beautiful building and I want
them to be
successful and so uh
hopefully what they do if there were
stipulations those would line up with
any new rules that came down the pipe
for everybody else and make it equal for
the rest of the clubs as well does that
answer your question it does thank you
thank you uh commissioner Kaminsky has
been waiting to ask a question or make a
comment go ahead yes I have several now
they've been building sorry and some of
them may be for staff um first I guess
for the applicant we're talking about
this I guess this was originally a
restaurant now it's proposed for a bar
through the chair thank you for that
question I would appreciate an
opportunity to clarify so um the
operator is Jo Concepts and uh jock Ryan
jock in in the audience tonight um he
owns several restaurants in town so hot
chick Diego pops mon talk he was um part
of The Chop Shop founding party Hotel
Adeline so it is very much a restaurant
food food forward concept series series
12 Series 6 and let me explain that
because at a certain time of evening the
ratio of food sales and alcohol sales
changes right in this District so
although the kitchen is open till two 2
am um the ratio of food to exactly
shifts and that's why we're seeking you
know that have a series six and seeking
the cup for bar although food will be
served all night long that ratio does
change later in evening okay and is
there live entertainment or um Amplified
music proposed for the outdoor area
through the chair thank you for that
question so in our cup proposal there
are several stipulations stipulation
number two is no live music St
stipulation number five is noise
generated from this use including any
speakers or amplification shall not
exceed ambient noises stipulation number
six precludes external uh speakers um uh
as well and um you know we have a number
of stipulations in place to address that
noise that was actually a question I had
for staff is whether we could show the
conditions that are related to the cup
on the screen so that um the gentleman
who was asking about this could see
those um I I do have concerns with the
idea of it being no greater than ambient
noise when you're in an Entertainment
District because it reminds me of the
Pixar video where you have the competing
um musicians you know from different
locations so but the other conditions
May address some of these if I don't
know if we have a screen that would show
those and through the chair if I could
introduce Tony Sola we actually engaged
a a sound engineer uh to provide some
more feedback on that point uh
commissioner Kaminsky and I I did have
some other questions um if this cup did
not go through then if it's already
under construction how would it
operate through the chair thank you
commissioner Kaminsky uh it would be
difficult uh we only have that series 12
restaurant um I could ask ran for some
more color on that but it it is a change
in operations quite drastically
especially in the upper entertainment
area where a lot of patrons are ordering
you know cocktails um in terms of the
sound and what is going on in the
background the operations don't change
it's the introduction of what the
patronage is ordering at 11:30 at night
versus 10 PM okay thank you
um would it be possible and I know this
is not design review board but would it
be possible to add sound baffling on the
underside of the canopy roof to allow
the sound to be absorbed as opposed to
reflected
out through the chair commissioner
Kaminsky perhaps Ry or Tony would be
better suited to answer that question on
on sound absorption get all my questions
out and then we can decide decide who's
the best answer okay um I didn't know if
you had any photos of the building under
construction I had similar concerns
about the plexiglass concept and
wondered if there was consideration
actually hearing the discussion and the
design of using um glass block to a
higher level like maybe a five foot
level on that Upper Floor that would tie
into the design solution that you have
on the lower floor as another option to
Plexiglass and plants um something to
consider and I think that was and then
the stipulations that I wanted on see
can and for staff could there be a
stipulation added that the cup could be
revoked if there were found to be
complaints uh verified at this
location so those are questions
I chair members of the commission there
is a revocation of a cup process in the
zoning ordinance and you can't just put
a stipulation that says if there's a
complaint you get to revoke
it also um chair higs and commissioner
Comm don't have the exhibit above
regarding the stipulation but it's
pretty simple in terms of the uh live
entertainment um the stipulation is more
of a clarifying stipulation um with this
bar use permit application uh it just
points out that the conditional use
permit is for a bar use only uh no live
entertain entainment is approved as part
of this request but as you know they
could come in with a separate request um
for live entertainment um but that would
go through again in the Planning
Commission city council approval process
but um I think that's what the applicant
was speaking to was that um this is not
for live
entertainment good evening Tony Sola 708
North Alma School Road Mesa
um I'm an acoustical engineer I've
worked on over 5,000 projects I work for
neighborhoods for uses uh direct for
municipalities including a number of
times for Scottdale a number of years
ago um in addition to that I have taught
architectural Acoustics at Arizona State
University for 30 years um was asked to
take a look at this project the focus of
my study was the outdoor area
controlling the noise from that there's
really no issue with that I can go
further into discussion of it but what
they are doing what staff has already um
recommended and they are implementing
will implemented will help with all of
that outdoor noise uh as far as the DJ
is concerned the after hours DJ I've
been informed that that equipment will
be inside not on the outside deck and
that the owner is willing to do and does
on all of their restaurants put what's
called a compressor limiter on that
system so that no matter how loud the DJ
turns that up to it will not go above a
certain predetermined level so we can
make sure that the the neighbors are
protected from the DJ noise in addition
to the outdoor dining
noise I ask a followup to that please is
a DJ considered live
entertainment uh chair higs and
commissioner Kaminsky uh it depends I
guess that's a attorney answer but um
there's um DJs that aren't operating
live entertainment if they're simply
pushing the play button so to speak of
pre-recorded music uh however if they
are uh Amplified in terms of miked up
and they're entertaining the crowd then
that turns into live entertainment so um
that would be something that a lot of
bars and restaurants end up dealing with
and code enforcement ends up dealing
with if if they start doing live
entertainment without a live
entertainment use permit uh that would
be considered violation and handled
accordingly um but there are a lot of
establishments that do have a DJ that
doesn't again speak and entertain the
crowd they're just simply playing the
music so somebody has to determine if
they're entertaining DJs or not okay um
thank you is there a stipulation that
the DJ will be
inside again um chair and commissioner
Kaminsky there hasn't been a lot of
discussion about live entertainment
because um they weren't planning on
doing live entertainment they haven't
proposed live entertainment use permit
um the DJ and the activity um wouldn't
necessarily be something from a an
operational characteristic that would be
be stipulating unless they were
performing live entertainment so we
could not stipulate that the DJ
non-entertainment DJ would be indoors
only based on their plan that they have
I think uh Madam chair and commissioner
kiny I think you'd probably be more
focused on where the SP speakers are
located as opposed to where the DJ is um
located so speakers indoors
only that is something um chair and
commissioner kincy that you could talk
to the applicant team about okay thank
you um I want to make sure I know that
we have your pretty much your whole team
of applicants up there uh and you've
been there answering our questions do
you feel you have had sufficient time to
address the concerns and the questions
of the public speaker as well
chair thank you very much we uh did have
a openhouse um we have a letter of
support for application in your packets
um I know there's been ongoing
conversations um with our operations
we're a little different because we are
a restaurant so we do feel um that we
have addressed those concerns we've had
our sound engineer look at those and
hopefully we've satisfied the concerns
of the Planning Commission as well for
this restaurant use in the Entertainment
District with a bar component um but
happy to entertain any other questions
we feel the stipulations have been
vetted we've gone through a drb process
where additional stipulations and noise
mitigation was thoroughly vetted um and
again it's just because of that that
later crowd we fall into what um what
looks like a bar but acts like a
restaurant so thank you very much for an
opportunity to address happy to have any
follow-up questions okay
um now we have everyone commissioner
Gonzalez as a rem remember as I remember
your the other application that you did
for the other uh restaurant uh I believe
there was a stipulation on the way the
speaker system was was uh pointed so
that it was on a downward positioning
rather than outward is that going to be
part is that stipulation going to be as
part as this application or not through
the chair stipulation number six reads
for external speaker shall be oriented
toward the establishment and directed
downward to minimize the potential for
noise trespass a residential
neighborhood or to the north so to
answer your question uh yes there's
already a stipulation number six that
embodies that thank you for that
question thank you very much
commissioner Scaro thank you Jer eggs uh
Mr Bloomberg uh what is the ambient
noise level in this area we have a
stipulation based on ambient noise
levels in the area so what specifically
is that
so Comm uh chair higs and commissioner
scarr so the ambient noise level
obviously changes it's not a static
ambient noise level so that's a
stipulation uh that helps the
enforcement uh at the time that uh there
are complaints in terms of uh making a
determination whether or not they are
exceeding that ambient noise
level let me re askk it maybe it's to
the acoustical because he had to do a
report and he had to have some baseline
from which to do the report uh during
the hours of operation of 9900 p.m.
until 2 am what's the ambient noise
level I've had the opportunity to take
numerous measurements in the downtown
area of a number of different uses and
ambient measurements I've even stayed at
the hotel taken ambient measurements at
the hotel uh not recently but it I
believe about a year ago maybe a little
bit more um the average ambient noise
level at the outside the hotel is 65 DB
the minimum never drops below 55 for
even a
second okay that's 24hour period it
never drops below 55 pardon me you said
for the entire time frame so for for
that time Peri for all the times I
tested okay after 9 o' before 2 o'clock
uh the ambient the minimum ambient never
dropped below 55 for for even a split
for even a second full second okay and
what's the ambient noise level at the at
this location not not the Best Western
but actually at the Paloma I hardly ever
do measurements at the ambient
measurements at the the use my my
concern is the noise impact to the
neighbors so I have not done ambient
measurements there but I've done ambient
measure Source measurements nearby there
um and I didn't come prepared for this
uh but outside of many of these bars
it's 10
DB
okay have there been any complaints uh
from the bar across the street this is
the second application uh from the same
owner the same design team uh the other
bar that was across the street that
introduced the plexiglass as a mitigate
mitigator have there been any complaints
at that location just out of
curiosity commissioner uh through the
chair um thank you for that question
that is not uh operational at this time
uh but Ryan's track r r Concepts uh
track record is impeccable in the city
of Scottdale so the specific location
across the street hasn't been built yet
um but I would I would say and i' ask
staff to you know comment on joot
concept's record in town it's it's
Immaculate okay great and my last
question for this plexiglass is 42
inches high uh I mean I I think
commissioner Kaminsky is kind of a good
point I I'm trying to understand what 42
Ines is going to do for a sound
mitigating Factor so if if maybe the uh
acoustical engineer could speak to that
a little bit more how a 42 inch three
and a half foot plexiglass is going to
make a difference I'd love to hear that
I haven't calculated it um because I
wasn't even considering that as part of
the noise attenuation I didn't realize
that it was even uh a stipulation um and
my calculations didn't assume that
barrier uh as was said there's some
lower large plotted potted plants that
the the plants won't much but the actual
pots could uh the back of the bankets uh
can certainly help uh but to your
question of 42 in it's it's a barrier
height that's 42 in on top of what's
already 14 fet so yes that barrier
height is high and can help um but if
somebody was standing right next to that
bar that parit um it it wouldn't help
much it wouldn't help at all so but as
you get further away from it where the
DG where the the music is inside the
building um then yes that becomes more
effective again I haven't calculated it
but but it would be effective raising it
um a little bit isn't going to make much
of a difference
and okay so I guess I want to make sure
I understand the floor plates correctly
I don't know if we could go back to the
slide that have the floor plates I'm
just trying to understand I thought
there was a walking surface and that
this plexiglass and rail was 42 in is
above the walking surface of the second
floor so I I hear that it's 14 feet
above ground level but is it it's only
42 inches above the second floor right
correct yeah so I'm just trying to
understand the the value of 42inch
plexiglass as a a sound attenuating or
mitigation for this
use again it can't help and particularly
for the noise that's further away from
that barrier uh because it will start to
block the line of sight but if it
doesn't block the line of sight it's
it's not going to provide any in that
direction uh fortunately to the
Residential Properties it's not even an
issue uh they are protected by the solid
walls on the uh North Side um required
by staff
already I think we're speaking and and
and actually focused on the north side
of this property uh so just added
curiosity I mean from what I can see in
the arrows North would be down if I'm
reading that correctly but it's hard to
see from here correct the north up or
down on that North is to the up to the
top of the page to the top okay correct
in the rendering that you had seen
previously it would be this there you go
yeah so this uh 3D view to the lower
left would be the north
elevation yeah lower left perfect so I
see three what appears to be shrubs on
that Upper Deck correct correct yes so
if you go back to the floor plate can
you point out that location on on the
floor plate so those three would be
right here um I don't know if you see
this cursor there's a table uh next to
the stairs and then there's three pots
additionally there's a wall that's there
that is already 48 in tall uh that's
required by building code so it's taller
than the railing and then we have potted
plants where we have FAS that grow up to
8 feet tall so if I'm understanding
correctly I'm standing on that second
floor correct I've got a 48 in wall
you're saying a 42 in plexiglass on top
of the 48 in wall no the 42inch
plexiglass is something that was just
brought up today I wasn't aware of it
until today so in the inial design you
have a block wall with a rail on top no
so there's
a there there's a block wall on the
north side of the building there is no
translucent Railing at all the only
place where the the railing exist is
towards the west and you'll notice that
the second story balcony does an
undulation um and it's just towards the
west where there is a railing that's 42
in everything to the north is
solid okay I I'm I'm gonna Ponder this a
little bit more I think other people
have questions thank you hold on I think
commissioner ell do you still have
something yeah if you could go back to
that uh drawing again I am becoming
increasingly confused uh yes so the um
looking at the right side which would be
the Second
Story um it is a building that is
narrower
on each
end but so it's a solid wall that covers
the um the bulk of those tables there
correct so essentially think of it as a
horseshoe where the north the East and
the South are solid walls the only
exposed open space is towards the street
to the West uh it's got an undulating
floor plate so it it kind of has a part
that sticks out like a peninsula I'm I'm
sorry um so it's it's open where that
okay where that tree is drawn on the uh
I guess that would be the West on the
left side correct um that is um there's
no floor there correct it's a courtyard
and the where the tree is that's a solid
wall you know just just below the tree
that's a solid wall that goes all the
way to the
ceiling yeah okay and the only place
that it's open is up at the top where
you've got the three circles
representing the three pots I believe
and so it's a solid wall the 48 in and
then at the peninsula of the Second
Story it's
open um facing to the
West I know it sounds I wish we had our
3D model to show
you yeah Diana is shaking her head so I
don't feel so dumb so through through
the chair it's completely enclosed on
the North side here north east south and
then on the west where this is saddle
bag this is the the opening um and then
this the the bottom floor if you will um
same thing so completely enclosed
there's are parking spots on that floor
completely enclosed and then open on
that front floor so just on that west
elevation is where the opening is the
rest of the building the other four size
are completely enclosed and then there's
a canopy on the top floor so where you
have the the uh cursor now correct that
is open that isn't no that isn't closed
that is a canopy um that you talked
about a canopy so so so a roof closure
like a roof lid think of like your
pergola you know where it has a a roof
lid that's the enclosure so as Arty was
explaining this floor plate is somewhat
like a
horseshoe and then on top of the shoe
you know on top of the U that there's a
canopy that encloses the the top area
there canopy so the wall goes all the
way to the canopy or it it does not go
all the way to the canopy it is exposed
Expos underneath the canopy correct so
it's that's where the
42 in comes into play correct so we've
got if it's that's three and A2 ft and
it's an 11 foot um ceiling so we've got
11 minus three and a half open correct
correct sureel and
there's and so what is there to buffer
the sound other than the or to to
mitigate the sound other than and the uh
42 in of
plexiglass uh we have they mentioned the
compressor or whatever on two words I
all I can remember is one I can have
Tony explained that commissioner just
just to remind um this body to this is
very there we go very much a restaurant
uh thank you for whoever who put that SL
up but this is very much a restaurant
right so it's not a nightclub but you'd
see in the Entertainment District
there's not um you know bottle service
it's not the same level of noise that
you might experience with other
establishments but this will give you a
better perspective so thank you for
staff for bringing this
out
right so the outdoor area which you can
see under that looks yellow canopy
that's outdoor dining if there were to
be speakers out there they'd all be
Under The Canopy pointing down pointed
down pointing back towards the
establishment not uh pointing at the
neighbors or the hotel at all um so that
vined um parit around around the second
floor is the only place that if you
stipulated the plexiglass that would go
that's really only helping to protect
the patron noise on that outdoor deck
the DJ equipment would be
inside
um the the block if you go back past
those three um trees on the left hand
side and go further back that's where
that sound system would be is inside
pardon me if I'm interrupting
that's where the the DJ's equipment
would be but the speakers would still be
outside
underneath that uh that
canopy pointing
down are the will the DJ play over the
entire house system or just
speakers house system
okay so you are correct the the this
music the DJ music would also play on
those
um Can speakers Under The Canopy they're
all aimed down at the deck and back
towards the
establishment could you refresh me on
you I like I said I could remember half
of the term compression something or
other uh compressor limiter com um it's
it's it's a common stipulation um
particularly if there's a specifically
specified noise limit uh that they can
have equipment that can never go above a
certain level um and we we would have to
predetermine what that level is at what
distance and could make sure the
compressor limiter is set to that so
that it wouldn't go above that
level okay so that is a mitigant and you
know we can say that the 42 Ines of
plexiglass is a minor mitigant correct
and you're saying that the the
um well the the there aren't the trees
are over there in one small part you
know the the trees that are on in the
pots but you're saying that the the
foliage doesn't do much to absorb or
reflect sound it really
doesn't okay all right that's thank you
okay I know commissioner kaminsky's uh
dying to ask a question but I'm going to
jump in real fast here do my Double
Dutch jump in since you have this screen
up um where the canopy is and the yellow
umbrellas are um that's the outdoor
dining will in the later hours will
those tables remain or will they be
moved to side okay so they'll remain as
places to sit chair thank you for that
question they remain in uh their
configuration they're not uh rearranged
the Furnitures pretty heavy set there
for the evening good to know thank you
okay commissioner
Kaminsky I guess some of my concerns is
when we talk about a future building
that will block sound on one side and an
existing building on the other side that
blocks sound those two taller buildings
are not on the side of concern which I
think is the north
side so we have open structure as this
image shows on the North Side in two
locations where you have the wall and
the three plants and then that recessed
area with the seating so when we talk
about operational things like the
speaker suppression system and the
movement of chairs that's all stuff that
can change over time whether it's a new
owner or different operator
operationally things aren't fixed but
the design is so if there is a way that
we can mitigate the potential concerns
to single family residents in a hotel
that are already there before this is
finished in construction then it could
be a win-win for getting the business
open
um I'm concerned about outdoor speakers
if it was possible that we could
stipulate no outdoor speakers that would
make me more
comfortable um if there was a
possibility of adding sound baffling to
the underside of that canopy so it's not
reflective because we do have an open
condition where the sound goes up and
then it carries out um even without
music people who drink get louder by
natur nature and their voices carry um
the last thing I think might be a little
more difficult and that would be rather
than the plexiglass to do a five foot
glass block wall on that North Face to
provide a similar buffer to what we're
getting on the other sides by buildings
in this case we don't have any buildings
we have one or twostory buildings or the
whatever the height of the hotel is and
those windows especially in older homes
or an old older hotel are not going to
mitigate the sound that would carry
across the street so those would be
three stipulations that would make me
more comfortable with the
cup through the chair if I may address
those comments briefly um with this
slide so um on this building context
just to reiterate our building is 375 ft
from any residential district and across
Camel Back Road as well um the building
as it is now was previously an office
building that set vacant for about 10
years we are right next to Riot house uh
which is a a nightclub this is not a
nightclub this is a restaurant so um I
think that the the best use is another
restaurant and again we do have this bar
component because uh the the ratio of
sales Chang but it's truly a restaurant
um to your and and again I mentioned the
saddle is in uh is being proposed as
well which is a three-story um bar that
is proposed over Saddleback Trail just
to show you there in relation to Paloma
and what saddle looks like in the Divi
design review application um the next
point that you raised was some of those
um openings on the North side and as it
shown here on the the 4D elevation um
those are opened but what happened
during the construction process and and
NY will kill me cuz I butchered his
drawing here um but these red boxes with
the gray are where additional blocking
was put on that Northern perimeter which
is the perimeter that faces the mint
when the 96 foot entitled building so to
your good observation and your point
there has been additional measures
already um in place that are already
constructed and these gray blocks are
the block wall and closing off the um
opportunity for any you know sound
penetration on that north wall as you
you'll see here so in the the
perspective you see it so that you can
see the inside the design but since then
if if you'll follow me with me with the
cursor that's been blocked in there's
been an additional um blockage on this
North perimeter and then that canopy
that you see in the rendering um is is
not as porous that's been blocked in as
well to your good point of well after
you get going what's it going to look
like constructed and again already I
apologize I butchered your imagery here
but these are already improvements that
have put into the to the site to this
day they're already
constructed I guess um thank you um 65
DNL is the ambient noise level and
that's kind of like living under a
flight path so I guess as long as we're
not
increasing uh what's
already a flight path condition that um
that's going to be hard for any to
measure for revocation but thank
you and commissioner
arel I I was curious about what
commissioner Kaminsky was saying about
glass block was your intent to take it
all the way to the uh canopy
level no I was proposing 5 feet just to
provide a more sound buffer than than
the idea of 42inch plexiglass yeah you
know I want to be sensitive to the U
concerns of the neighbors I o want to be
sensitive to the um you know to the
nature of the property um you know I was
concerned apparently unjustly that you
were going to block off the view and so
forth but you're even five feet is U is
up there a bit but okay thank
you okay with that um I think we have
asked every question possible pretty
close to it uh is there anyone that
would like to make a
motion and thank you all for
responding to our question I will make a
motion if somebody will help me with the
stipulation do
we we don't have the
stipulation the stipulation that the
plexiglass replace the the rot iron
right and was was the U I've already
forgotten compressor emitter was that
does that something that needs to be in
the stipulation the attorneys are
looking around I think it does Joe
you can add that uh I don't believe it's
currently in one of the stipulations so
if you want to make your motion and add
that they were are to install one of
those
devices um
and measure the sound and set it so that
it does not uh go above the ambient
noise I think that would be
appropriate all right think I can
remember that fat chance um we have the
we have the 42 in in there already
that's in the stipulation now I
believe I think you have to add it we
need to add that okay all right well
here we go and amend me as you see fit
um which one are we on we're on number
two
right uh make a motion for a
recommendation of approval to city
council for case 7 Up
2023 for the staff recommended
stipulation
which shall include a 42in
plexiglass
barrier um a compressor emitter that is
set to not
exceed help me
Joe that it be set not so that the noise
level does not exceed the ambient noise
in the surrounding area what he said you
got that buddy okay uh
am I missing anything I don't want to do
the glass block but you can do that
later if you want um okay after finding
so comma in comma uh after finding that
the conditional use permit criteria have
been
met okay he may want to read that back
it was fantastic we have a motion for
commissioner artell and a
second okay I'll second it
okay and a second from commissioner
Joiner a roll call vote please chair
higs yes commissioner Gonzalez no
commissioner
Kaminsky yes commissioner erel yes
commissioner Joiner yes commissioner
Scaro yes motion passes thank you thank
you thank you everyone for your time did
we lose Vice chair young did is he at
home on couch watching
baseball
welcome okay so now we will move on to
our regular agenda item number four 15
Zen uh is that what is the number 20 25
Number Four we had too many zeros in
there um 2005 number four Aria
Silverstone Mr Greg Bloomberg for staff
again uh thank you commissioner higs or
I'm sorry chair higs and Commissioners
uh Greg Bloomberg uh principal planner
here to give you an overview
presentation for ARA Silverstone 15 ZN
2005 number
four it shows you where the site is
located it's at the it's at the
northeast corner of Scottdale Road and
Williams Drive uh this whole area here
where my cursor is tracing is called the
Silverstone Community it's a planed
Community District this site is part of
that and you can get a closer view
there's apartments to the north and
there's uh automotive and uh repair uh
business to the South as well as a pet
hospital or a pet um Veterinary and uh
facility and a post
office this doesn't show it my apologies
for that but the site is currently zoned
uh
p-c uh commercial office plan Community
District commercial office
Co if this request is successful the
zoning will change to plan Community
District p-c multifam residential
r-5 and the General plan uh future land
use map designates this site since it is
part of the Silverstone uh PCD as mixed
use
neighborhoods so a little uh request
summary and some background again as I
mentioned this site is part of the 160
acre Silverstone plan Community District
which was approved in 2005 under case 15
zn5 this is a rezone uh from PC uh Co to
PCR R5 five uh one of the things that
was included in the stipulations and the
development plan of the original zoning
case was a land use budget uh which I'll
show you in just a moment uh an
amendment to that land use budget is
required to allow for residential on
this site and the request is for 100 100
attached single family residences on fee
title lots and there is I believe one
public comment in your report that's
towards the
end so here's a land use budget that I
was referring to and all the parcels
that make up Silverstone have parcel
identifications this one is parcel D and
uh when it you can see here that when it
was originally approved it was approved
for Co and office with um potential for
165,000 Square ft of commercial office
this request would eliminate that
portion of the land use table replace it
with R5 the Avail the availability for
residential 100 units uh so that's
that's the uh the amendment to the land
use budget that would need to be
done here's a basic site plan of the
property again 100 uh residential lots
uh 100 foot scena Corridor along
Scottdale Road uh main entrance off of a
gated entrance off of Williams Drive
Central amenity area uh the internal
streets of course would be private but
they will be designed to City standards
so they are 46 foot minimum and they
will be contained within tracks
oh and then one of the things I wanted
to U sort of highlight was originally
there used to be lots over here uh there
was I think almost 115 Lots or so 123
123 lots and there was a row of lots
over here those lots were eliminated uh
so we only have 100 now so it's been
reduced from 123 units down to 100 and
there's a pedestrian connection here
that was added uh as a result of that as
well as some guest parking so that's a
pretty significant change from the
original site plan that I wanted to uh
point
out this is an overall circulation plan
for the Silverstone PCD and I wanted to
put this in here just to show you what's
around this site there's the commercial
center at the southeast corner of
Scottsdale and Pinnacle Peak that
includes a Sprouts uh grocery store uh
residential and residential here
residential here this is a Residential
healthc Care Community uh facility uh
there's a City Public Library here uh
this is uh Apartments here and then this
is the parcel site and you can see where
pedestrian connectivity is provided
throughout that uh PCD and this is going
to enhance that and here's a closeup of
that uh circulation plan for the
property which includes a 10- foot um
multi-use path in the scena corridor as
well as I think it's an 8 foot Trail in
the scena corridor and those
improvements will basically complete the
uh pedestrian connectivity from Williams
to Scottsdale Road in the scena corridor
so that's a that's a that's a bonus for
this particular
project and then these are just some
conceptual elevations these obviously
could change going to drb but it gives
you an idea of uh what these buildings
could look
like so that concludes my presentation
the applicant also has a presentation
but I'm happy to answer any questions
you might have for me immediately okay
before we have uh Mr Barry step up uh to
speak do we have any questions for staff
nope oh yeah Comm be disappointed if I
didn't uh the the um decision to reduce
the number of lots from whatever it was
123 to 100 uh was that something the
city requested was that something that
the uh uh
developer suggested how did that come
about uh chair higs Commissioners
commissioner ell that was probably in
response and I can let Mr Barry clarify
if I speak incorrectly but it was
probably in response to the comments we
initiated through the first review uh
with some additional requests for
connectivity here and there uh and they
voluntarily reduced the number of lots
which is not something we
requested I'm sorry this was done for
the purpose of connectivity well we got
rid of
it can did we not I can let Mr Barry do
some clarification on that but uh
in order to provide that pedestrian
connection 74 Street oh I see okay you
know there was some changes that need to
be made and one of them was to eliminate
an entire row of lots at that location
okay well it's just you know at least
for me personally you know um being the
resident family friendly commissioner
that I am and I just like to see more
opportunities for more residents uh you
know especially in housing like this and
you know so we've gotten rid of what um
uh whatever it be 20% almost 20% of the
housing that's you know fewer residents
um it is what it is I mean if you need
the conect connectivity that you
obtained I guess that's life but still
it's disappointing that we would lose
those residences anyway thank
you okay Mr Barry
chair members of the commission for your
record John Barry 6750 he Camelback Road
in
Scottdale and this is a case and a
request for Less now this is a shocker
for a zoning attorney to stand up here
and ask for Less do not remind me of
this the next time I appear in front of
you um but this is a request for a
project that will have less traffic it
will consume less water it will have uh
impact on heat uh uh Island and it will
generate and will have less height so
this is a request for less and it's
actually a down zoning from commercial
office to residential now those of you
that have been around for a while will
recall that um this area is actually
this parcel is part of 160 Acres it used
to be rawh hide Western theme park now
back in the day after Rawhide had
already decided to move not because of
what we did back then but we actually I
was involved with resoning that property
some 20 years ago uh to the current uh
configuration that you see today now
interestingly this is the last parcel
left in that 160 acres and it's located
down at the corner of Scottsdale Road in
Williams everything else is developed
around
it now I want to help you understand why
kov or kavanian likes this parcel so
much this 160 Acres what this shows
here's our current site and our current
request is these other four Parcels up
here that had ABCD whatever they were in
the in the land use budget all of that
residential component which has the same
zoning as we're requesting today all of
that residential was developed by kov
without a rezoning so that was all done
as part of the rezoning that occurred
back uh some 20 years ago so there were
no up zonings that occurred on this
piece of property over the last almost
two decades so kav is really interested
likes this area um but very importantly
these other four projects if you compare
the density of this proposal to what kav
has already developed in the area this
is the least dense of those four other
neighborhoods so um again this is
request for Less I will assure you that
my hourly rate is not less but um the
existing commercial zoning on the site
is this is what was approved back in the
day was uh this isn't the site plan that
was approved but a three-story office
with 165,000 square fet of office was
approved on this
corner what are we
proposing we're proposing single family
for sale residential twostory not the
three-story office that's been proposed
to just kind of juxtapose or compare and
contrast on the top is what is approved
and could be built today uh commercial
office at three stories what's proposed
below is the single family for sale
residential at two stories again with
the lowest density of residential in
this uh planed Community what about open
space we have 52% more open space than
required by the zoning
category what about
traffic again as you as you all well
know residential will generate less
traffic than office so what does that
mean based on the traffic report that
was submitted and accepted by the city
staff that the uh vehicles per day
comparison goes down by 60%
the morning uh rush time is a 82%
reduction in traffic and the PM peak
hours is a 78% reduction so when I said
it's less traffic this is a case about
less it's less traffic as well now in
terms of
sustainability it's still well over 100
and it's first week or almost second
week of October and we're still above a
100 um I want you to know that this
should have read 48 in plexiglass
um so I apologize for that that was an
error on my part this was a last minute
change um but this is we we all of our
trees will be 48 in box trees we talked
about more open space than required and
the impact on the urban heat island is a
reduction in the amount of asphalt on
this site it's a
76% reduction in Asphalt associated with
this site now I'm I'm a visual uh
learner so for me this is a really fun
graphic now what this shows in red is
the footprint of the parking field of a
potential office on this site and what
you have uh underneath in the in the
bottom layer is our proposal in terms of
our single family residential and you
can see how we get to that 76% less
assall so a dramatic difference in terms
of uh potential impacts on Urban heat
island what about water uh certainly
that's something that's top of mind for
all of us these days um this will result
in a reduction a reduction in Daily
water use of
62% versus that approved 165,000 square
feet of office now we'll do all the
typical things that you would expect us
to do these days in terms of water smart
and one of the advantages to in HOA is
we we can monitor and ensure that we can
conserve that water and fix leaks
quickly um so to talk about uh chair
higs and and commissioner ell your
question commercial commissioner ell why
did we reduce the density and it's
because we listened um we listened to
staff who had some comments about
changes to the layout that would
facilitate connectivity um and that
would result in buildings be set being
set further back from the streets um all
of which we thought were good ideas the
net result was we lost some uh units
some some residences the other way we
listened was not only to City staff but
we also listened to the residents in the
area so when we had our openhouse
meeting uh nearby um the there were some
residents of the area who said we'd like
some uh improvements to this we like
this we're supportive but there's some
things you could do to make it even
better um and that was one of which was
enhancing The Pedestrian connectivity
they like the idea of people being able
to walk ride bikes to the Sprouts into
the other retail in the area and get to
the Appaloosa Library um they wanted us
to eliminate vehicular access to 74
Street which is that street to the east
of us that's on our boundary that's
between us and the V senior living
across the street to the east um so they
asked that we eliminate that there was
no traffic need for that so we agreed to
eliminate that um they also wanted us to
eliminate these homes and staff
referenced this in their presentation
they wanted us to eliminate some homes
that backed up to 74 street so the
residents at V said you know we'd really
appreciate it if you could move those
buildings back and have a larger set
back from 74 street so we did that um
and the net result of that was we lost
units um so uh it was voluntary we think
it's a better project we lawed the the
goal that commissioner ell has
identified um but we wanted to ensure
that we were putting you know less than
10 pounds in the 10 pound bag um and
it's by listening I think we responded
to those stakeholders uh that were
immediately impacted but we certainly
understand commissioner hertel's desire
um we by listening we reduced the water
consumption even more for the site and
we implemented additional sustain
ability
measures now to conclude as you know um
like to identify some of the uh
Community benefits associated with this
uh with this
proposal um it's a down zoning from
commercial office to residential once a
decade come before you and ask for a
down zoning so this this is this is it
uh eliminate a 19-year uh dirt lot at
this very conspicuous Corner this zoning
was approved 19 years ago for office it
does revitalize this long vacant lot and
that is good to the long-term economic
sustainability of the city and I think
it's something the neighbors have told
us they very much want they're tired of
the dirt lot there and if you drive by
that intersection you wonder why isn't
there something there you see a big dirt
lot um it certainly implements the
city's approved uh General plan um this
is there is no General plan Amendment uh
request with this uh proposal it does
support area small businesses we have
uh a few few dozen emails and support
from small businesses in the area not
only the commercial up at the corner
within the Silverstone Community but
there's some smaller U areas around it
that have commercial as well and in the
age of Amazon more rooftops are very
good for these small businesses which as
we all know is the backbone of our of
our community's economic Vitality we
have focused on sustainability and Water
Conservation we talked about reducing
traffic um we've invested over we will
in if this is approved over $75 million
to transform this this ugly uh dirt lot
at the
corner there will be no live Turf we
talked about the water consumption we've
reduced the urban heat island impacts by
eliminating over six acres of asphalt
six acres of asphalt um we do have the
48 inch box trees throughout the
community we've increased open space by
52% we have our Scottdale Road Scenic
Corridor which is 100 ft now that's a
requirement along Scottsdale Road is
that you have that now you may ask why
would I call that out if it's a
requirement and I wanted you to
understand that part of what we did by
losing some of these units that I know
were important uh to commissioner ell
and and some others is it allowed us to
take the average Scottdale Road setback
for these homes to 147 feet along
Scottdale Road almost 50% more than that
Scenic Corridor so most people are going
to experience this project driving by or
or uh rid riding their bike or walking
or whatever and it's going to be a very
different perspective than if we hadn't
given up those those units so we thought
that was a community benefit uh we did
listen to the community we've enhanced
connectivities as we've talked about and
we're very pleased that we've earned uh
City staff's recommendation for approval
by listening to them as well um chair
higs uh members of the commission uh
includes my comments I'm happy to answer
any questions thank you I have a
question question from uh commissioner
Joiner
Mr Barry I love your project it's very
nice but I do have one question about
Ingress and egress it appeared to me
that there's only one way in and one way
out did I miss another exit or
something shair higs commissioner Joiner
uh no you did not miss it um but there
is one access point only out to Williams
Drive and given the volumes associated
with this project um and the fire and
public safety requirements of the city
um this complies with all of those
requirements uh it's been approved and
vetted by Transportation staff fire and
uh Public Safety so it complies with the
requirements um and interestingly the
office project had a lot more access
points out but that was to accommodate a
much larger increase in well I was happy
to see that there was no Ingress and
egress off Scottdale road because I
drive that area twice a day so thank you
beautiful project thank you anyone else
wow I guess you've answered all the
questions if we don't have any other
comments or questions um would anybody
like to make a motion I'll make the
motion
okay if I can find
it I think I gave you notes thank
you I'd like to make a motion for
recommendation of approval to city
council for case 15 ZN
20005 number four per staff
recommendation stipulations after
finding that the planned Community
planned Community District criteria have
been met and that the proposed zoning
District map amendment is consistent and
confirms conforms with the adopted
General plan okay second a mo go ahead
sorry we have a motion from commissioner
Joiner and a second from commissioner
ell r call vote vote please chair higs
yes Vice chair young yes commissioner
Gonzalez yes commissioner Kaminsky yes
commissioner erel yes commissioner
Joiner yes commissioner Scaro yes motion
passes thank you thank you thank you all
thank you Mr Barry and team uh we still
have two non-action items um as a
reminder there uh for discussion only no
vote will be made by the Planning
Commission although I would like to
request a quick recess to use facilities
if needed and we'll resume again in just
a few minutes thank
you
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e e
sh Gonzalez I believe is um had another
previous commitment so he wanted to stay
until we had gotten through the agenda
where um items need to be voted on and
then he needed to leave so I think we
have everybody present um aside from Mr
Brad Carr who I have on the agenda was
going to speak looks like we have Mr
Adam yarn instead yep welcome thank you
chair hegs members of the commission um
I'm standing in for Brad Carr this
evening uh presenting our two text
amendments that we'll be reviewing as a
non-action item the first relating to
3ta 2024 which is known as the Adaptive
reuse and development application
determination zoning code
Amendment uh the purpose of tonight's uh
item is to provide information on the
city's approach as Prov provided within
3 ta to meet the requirements of the
stud the new state laws the first being
adaptive reuse which was HB
2297 the second being the development
application determination which was
sb162 now the purpose of this meeting
again is to allow for public input as
well as to outline uh the timeline and
next steps associated with this
process State of Arizona grants cities
and towns with the authority and ability
to set zoning land use regulation
subject to state
law HB 2297 was introduced and passed by
the state legislature this last spring
to allow for the Adaptive reuse of
existing commercial office and mixed use
buildings to be repurposed as multif
family
housing um with the passage of the bill
Scott sill must now update the zoning
code to remain in compliance with the
new state
law uh this new state law enables the
Adaptive reuse of existing commercial
office and mix use buildings that are
situated on land between 1 and 20 acres
in size uh it talks about um qualifying
those buildings so long as they're in a
state of disrepair or having at least
50% vacancy that qualifies as being
economic or functionally Obsolete and
that the total allowed adaptive reuse
may not exceed 10% of the existing
building floor area of the
city now within the state law uh there
are some requirements in which the city
can do certain provisions and then
cannot do it in others and what we
cannot do is we cannot
require uh typical public Outreach
rezoning conditional use permits or
development review hearings that would
the city would normally require with
such a change in buildings and land use
from commercial and office to multif
family residential the city further
cannot require parking that exceeds
existing code for multif family housing
uh in such areas however the city can
require administrative site plan review
and approval compliance with building
and fire codes adequate public Sewer and
Water Service public utility review and
uh designate 10% of total multif family
housing units as uh either moderate or
low income housing over a minimum of 20e
period now there are some exclusions
provided within the uh state law one of
which being uh the airport exclusion
that uh talks about building that are
excluded in the vicinity of an
airport um we can also designate up to
10% of those existing buildings by
designating them as commercial and
employment hubs such that again this
legislation would not allow for those
redevelopments to occur as a result of
these
designations and the state law requires
that we designate not more than 10% of
the city's commercial office or
mixed-use buildings to be eligible for
multif family adaptive reuse now the
city's approach uh to uh this text
amendment is to establish a new multif
family conversion um land use
designation within the city's zoning
code uh accounting for those exclusions
that are permitted by state law uh which
includes the ones we just covered uh
identify the eligibility and determine
the percentage of existing buildings
that are
eligible uh location is that they must
have existing buildings
uh that are developed prior to 1231 of
24 uh and the the location uh is that
they must be between 1 and 20 acres in
size uh these uh Redevelopment proposals
for multif family conversion must must
demonstrate adequate water and sewer and
again um demonstrate that that they are
economically or functionally obsolete by
1231 of 24 and then again that they
provide a minimum of 10% for moderate or
low income
housing additionally associated with 3ta
2024 uh was the passage of
sb162 which relates um to the processing
of zoning map Amendment cases uh and
requires now that the city must adopt an
ordinance to determine whether or not a
zoning application is administratively
complete within 30 days after receiving
the application and then more
importantly or more not notably rather
is that uh the city must approve or deny
a zoning application within 180 days
after the application has been
determined to be administratively
complete the city can however in its
efforts Grant one-time extensions of not
more than 30 days for extenuating
circumstances and finally Grant 30-day
extensions uh for each applicant
initiated extension request so as to
conform with this state law
requirement um our approach to this
section of our text amendment is to set
the administ ative review process to 30
days for first review per new state law
and uh any subsequent review uh to be 15
days again in conformance with the new
state law we'll be updating uh
parameters of incomplete applications as
a cleanup item Associated uh with this
text Amendment as we do with with most
text Amendment processes we try to
encourage and look for those
opportunities to make things clearer in
the code as well as define specific time
frames for those zoning District
District map amendments which again
qualify that 180 days all other review
time frames will remain uh the same as
published by the city again this is only
Associated to zoning map amendments now
associated with uh this zoning code uh
proposal text Amendment we've had two
public Outreach and openhouse
opportunities that were provided on
September 19th and 20th um tonight's uh
item is a non-action uh item so as to
allow for the public uh to make comment
on the item as well as uh for you as the
commission to discuss and ask questions
of Staff um staff will be bringing back
um on your recommendation Hearing in
October in two weeks rather um uh
greater insight into the implementation
of the code but again wanted to focus
tonight's discussion on just uh the code
itself so uh with that stated uh we do
have requirements Within These statutes
that this be adopted uh by January 1st
of
2025 and so as such we'll be looking for
U possible recommendation from you all
in two weeks and then city council will
be hearing this item in November of
2024 that concludes staff's presentation
on this item happy to answer any
questions at this
point any questions commissioner
artel if you could clarify two things
one um the a building um needs to be
considered U obsolete prior to the end
of the year if it becomes obsolete five
years from now it's not covered is that
correct or incorrect thank you
commissioner ell we'll cover more of
that in detail at our next hearing but
as it was proposed in the in the first
draft that you may have read is that uh
a property owner would have had to
demonstrate economic
obsolescence um occurring prior to the
date in which this will be codified um
it's not to say that they couldn't prove
it a year from now but they would have
to demonstrate that they had some level
of economic obsolescence before uh
before this time
period okay thank you and up to a 10% of
the um eligible buildings um are covered
so I forget exactly how you say that but
it was up to
10% is that how it's being written now
thank you commissioner ell uh chair higs
members of the Comm Mission um there's a
lot of percentages associated with this
spill so I'll do my best to try and um
articulate them as well as I can the the
state law allows for the city to
designate commercial um or employment
hubs as part of ensuring that we don't
lose critical elements to the city's um
economic landscape so to speak and um
that allows for the city to protect 10%
% of these areas from being effectively
forcibly vacated or run down so as to
allow for the Redevelopment of multif
family development now um we're working
currently with our Economic Development
Department to again further refine and
designate those areas but we will be
certainly looking to um fully maximize
uh what the state's allowed us to to do
in terms of protecting those areas that
we would designate as commercial or
economic
hubs right so I would look at those
buildings within that those two areas as
being ineligible for this but then the
the remainder with the exception of a
few uh essential ones are eligible and
you can I believe it said that you could
designate up to
10% of those for this U coverage yes uh
chair higs uh commissioner ell thank you
for the question again the the
legislation says and you're you're
correct in stating that the legislation
says we cannot designate or we we have
we can designate not more than 10% to be
eligible for um this multif family
conversion land use uh proposal and um
at this our preliminary approach to this
is that we would be allowing 1% um so is
to not bring an imbalance to the
community's general plan in areas where
multif family conversions could
occur but the spirit of the legislation
seems to
be you know around 10%
is that a good understanding the the way
the state legislation was written
commissioner ell and members of the
commission is that it says not more than
10% all right thank
you any other comments questions
commissioner Kaminsky I'll get it out
thank you um I was wondering if we have
a date for the city council hearing it
says November but doesn't have a date I
I believe we have November 25th fifth uh
is what we've currently targeted okay
thank you and if you could go back to
the slide that talks about the
economically or functionally obsolete um
I know that's kind of like the cutof
time so you have
some boundary to set but I think I've
read there was something about CFO bu or
did you guys take that out thank you
commissioner Kaminsky members of the
commission uh in in the in the
preliminary draft of what we've got um
presented to you all in your agenda
packets for this evening um buildings
would have to exist uh within the
2024 up to the 2024 calendar period so
we couldn't allow uh buildings that may
be built in the future or don't have a
SE of or or currently being built not
vacate not not occupy them at all and
then um qualify them as being
economically obsolete uh and then
qualify them under a different land use
so okay um we want them to in our
proposal
uh to exist um by
2024 okay and I guess I one concern and
I know you're still working on this with
economic development would be um you
know obviously a building that's built
in January of 24 received occupancy in
October of 24 could possibly meet the
criteria of not being fully leased out
it could be 50% vacant um so I would
hope that whatever you guys come up with
the threshold is not to
2024 but that we're looking at buildings
that are legitimately in a state of
disrepair and functionally in
economically obsolete by some CFO at an
earlier time I understand thank you very
much for the com thank
you okay I believe that
uh concludes our our questions for that
particular uh agenda item um so next is
number 6 4ta 2024 access dwelling
unit thank you again uh chair higs
members of the commission uh this uh
text amendment is relating to 4ta
2024 or what's known um and title as the
accessory dwelling unit text
Amendment again the purpose of this item
is to provide information on the city's
approach as provided in 4ta to meet the
requirements of the new state laws um
spe specifically focusing on uh a couple
bills that were passed during the last
legislative session the first being HB
2720 which relates to accessory dwelling
units and then in order to to be
efficient with our text Amendment
processes um also respond to HB 2325
which relates to Backyard foul again the
purpose of tonight's um item is to allow
for uh public input and outline uh the
timeline and next steps for this uh text
Amendment uh uh now again uh to provide
some background State of Arizona grants
cities and towns with the local
Authority uh uh with the ability to set
zoning and land use regulation subject
to state law uh HB 2720 was passed by
the legis legislature um this last
spring um to allow for the development
of accessory dwelling units on single
family properties and so as a result of
um this new state law we have to amend
our zoning code
uh to do so to to be in compliance with
state law and the city intends to
minimize the negative impacts of this
law on the community uh with the
provisions that we will be covering on
the next series of slides now uh there
is uh a silver bullet so to speak uh
with this legislation and that uh the
legislation states that if the city does
not comply by January 1st
2025 HB 2720 outlines that accessory
dwelling units will be allowed on all
Lots or Parcels zoned for residential
use in the municipality without limit um
and so we're working diligently to
respond to the state
law by again um now designating uh an
Adu in our zoning code what is an
accessory dwelling unit an Adu is a
subordinate self-contained dwelling unit
that is on the same lot as the main
single family residential dwelling it's
designated for living purposes includes
its own sleeping facilities and kitchen
facilities as well as uh sanitary uh
Provisions it can be attached or
detached uh from the single family
dwelling and adus come in many shapes
and styles most commonly is a
self-contained living unit built as a
detach structure uh separate from the
main single family home but again it can
be um a can self contained living unit
built as an attached extension off of a
single family home either on the ground
floor or a second level addition as well
and so again uh the state law dictates
uh
couple um significant columns to what we
can and can't do what we have to do is
that we have to allow for one attached
and one detached accessory dwelling unit
per single family property um and as
well as allow a third detached Adu for
Parcels that are one acre in size or
greater if at least one of the adus is
an affordable housing unit further uh it
states that we must allow that the size
of an Adu to be 75% of the gross floor
area of a single family home or up to a
maximum of a th000 square feet which
ever is
less uh the city cannot however prohibit
the short or long-term lease of an Adu
require familial relationship between
the owner of the main uh home and Adu
occupants require on-site parking for an
Adu or fees in lie of parking require an
Adu to have an exterior design like that
of the single family home require more
than five foot distance from the rear
side of the Adu to the property line
require improvements of the public
Street as a condition of allowing the
Adu uh uh and we cannot require permits
licenses or conditions between private
parties uh for the use of an Adu um most
typically associated with ccnr or an HOA
and we can't require these adus to
contain a fire sprinkler system
so does Scott still currently allow adus
uh we don't we currently only allow for
guest houses on single family properties
and again the biggest distinction is
that uh a guest house is an accessory
building used to accommodate guests of
the occupants of the main building or
house um in which these cannot these
facilities cannot be rented um
separately from the main building or
house so again here's an example uh the
guest house in Scottdale the maximum
size can be a half size of the main
house if you have a 3,000 foot home you
can have a 1500 foot guest home but it
cannot be rented
separately in our draft um proposed text
Amendment an Adu in Scot seal can be 75%
of the size of the main house or 1,000
square feet whichever is less so if you
have an 1800 foot home um you can have
um 1350 Square foot I'm sorry thqu foot
maximum size Adu but it can be rented
separately from the main
house we'll talk about what the city's
approach is and our proposal is that
we're going to be excluding um the areas
as permitted by state law again in those
areas that are in the vicinity of an
airport uh will require an owner of an
Adu that is using um the Adu as a
vacation or short-term manal to reside
on the property um so as to create
greater ownership between the the
effective landlord of the primary
structure to be accountable for
operations and activities of of any strs
that result in these adus will restrict
the size of multiple adus ensure
sufficient water supply and Sewer
capacity establish specific property
development standards for
adus and um still allow for HOA
neighborhood Hood to privately restrict
adus as per their
cc&rs so again our approach is to
establish those qualif qualifications
for new land uses of an accessory
dwelling unit the location is that an
Adu must be located on a single family
residential lot utilities must be
separately metered ownership cannot be
sold separately from the main residents
renting of an Adu cannot be short-term
rental unless the owner resides on the
site and subdivision relating to
subdivision of of a Adu from a primary
property is that a property cannot be
subdivided to create a fee simple lot
for an
Adu um in terms of those objective
development standards our approach is
that density uh is to allow one attached
Adu and one detached Adu uh for all
single family Residential Properties and
then for those that are over an acre in
size to allow for one additional
restricted affordable detached accessory
dwelling unit uh the size for adus
cannot be again greater than that 75% of
the of the main residents or 1,00 square
feet whichever is less all other adus uh
on lot are limited to 500 square feet or
less in size the occupancy uh to uh
these development standards is that they
be limited to the total occupancy of the
main residents and any adus cannot
exceed six adults and their dependent
children if any Building height relates
to uh the maximum is the same as the
underlying zoning district and finally
building setbacks is generally the same
as the underlying zoning District except
in such that an Adu and a rear yard can
be located up to 5 feet from property
lines we're creating additional uh
object objective development standards
in that
um we are requiring private outdoor
living space such that each Adu must
provide a private outdoor living space
of at least 50 square ft in size parking
must maintain code minimum required
parking for the main residents at all
times and access for each Adu shall
provide a separate exterior entrance for
that serving the main residence and a
path of travel to a public Street uh
also addressing for each Adu will be
that they provide a unique address and
display in a way that is visible to the
Main Street
Frontage um moving on to HB 2325
associated with
4ta uh the legislation now requires that
foul be kept to an enclosure fowl or
chickens as they're more commonly known
uh is that they be kept to an enclosure
located in a rear or side yard uh of the
property that is at least 20 feet from a
neighboring property and restrict the
size of the enclosure to a maximum of
200 square feet with a maximum height of
8 feet this is very specific but this um
state law now requires that we be this
specific uh in this section of our code
and so um we are incorporating it as uh
provided on screen or as proposed on
screen as it relates to the operations
or nuisances rather of of um any type of
use relating to the keeping of backyard
foul uh that's all covered in different
sections of our scottsvale Revised Code
U but just wanted to bring that to your
attention so again our uh approach with
this bill is to establish those
enclosure requirements including
setbacks and Heights and then uh the
existing parameters of keeping domestic
animals uh will continue to apply uh
similar to the last item you heard we
had um two public Outreach and openhouse
opportunities in the 19th and 20th
tonight's item was really to get an
understanding of the code side of what's
proposed with this text Amendment and um
we'll be bringing forward um some
expanded discussion on um implementation
at our planned and hopeful
recommendation hearing uh in two weeks
and then we'll be looking for city
council to take action uh consideration
review and possible action in November
again November 25th uh again these um
State statutes require that we have to
have these um amendments incorporated
into our code no later than January 1st
of 25 and so again that's uh the purpose
of tonight's item completes my
presentation happy to answer any
questions at this
time I have a um I'm going to jump in
with a quick question first if you don't
mind thank you um for the uh for the Adu
um the part where you mentioned the U
owner must reside on the property and
that primary residence that um do they
need to be present during the time that
a vacation or short-term rental is being
occupied or just have that as their
primary uh residents
address thank you chair hegs I'm not
sure that I have a response to that
question this evening but I'm I'll be
happy to discuss it further with my
counterparts and bring back an answer uh
at our next uh Hearing in two weeks if
that's okay okay just curious okay thank
you uh commissioner
Joiner just for clarification first of
all you guys have done an amazing job on
a very difficult situation on two bills
that I act actually hate
that being
said um clarification on the fire um uh
sprinklers on an attached Adu because
the current dwelling would require fire
sprinklers
right if the house is built in Scottdale
it has to have sprinklers right
commissioner uh Joiner chair higs
members of the commission um assuming uh
the house was constructed um after the
adoption of the fire sprinkler code it
would have to have fire fire suppression
correct but an Adu could be built and
attached and not have sprinklers is that
right uh based on State Statute that's
correct okay second question has to do
with the chickens yes can they have
roosters uh thank you for the question
uh commissioner Joiner um chair think I
want to be woke up with the roosters in
the morning
yeah yeah chair higs and U commissioner
Joiner this doesn't uh do anything with
regard to the Animal Control Ordinance
or the nuisance ordinance that we have
that uh prohibits the maale rooster okay
in in Residential Properties okay thank
you that's all I
have um actually we have commissioner
Scarboro
next Mr yur uh going back to the Adu uh
and occupancy uh can you just clarify
for me six adults and their children so
in one Adu that's 1500 square feet there
could be six adults and how many
children I just just if you go back to
that slide and talk me through
occupancy so yeah chair commissioner
Scaro so as a matter of course in terms
of the family definition just in a
regular single family home it doesn't
include um the children and so the same
thing would apply to the adus for the
entire site six
adults so when we talk about occupancy
children are not included so if these
six adults had 18 children all I just
want to make sure I understand that all
24 people are allowed in a 1500 foot
building so yeah again to be treating
them the same as the other the other
dwelling units we're not the city's not
counting the children
um so and then the law specifically
prohibits the city from um making a
determination on adus about
relationships uh among the individuals
on the property yeah apologize I'm not
worried about the relationship I'm just
worried about occupancy uh in in rooms
and and just occupancies in general for
a given living living space I'm just
trying to better understand that so in
my scenario where we have six adults and
18 kids
you could have 24 people living in a
1500 foot
space similar to um what we would um be
monitoring or not so monitoring with
regard to a regular single family house
currently we we don't have any uh thing
in code or we don't have code that that
clarifies a maximum number of
occupancies per room or occupants per
room so um chair higs and commissioner
scarbo in terms of this zoning code no
but um there's building code and fire
code requirements um that would um
pertain but not in terms of the zoning
code Provisions um that we are updating
today thank
you commissioner
ell uh on the first bullet point the
restricted affordable affordable is a
defined
term U thank you uh commissioner tell
chair hegs members of the commission
it's a defined term in the statute it
relates to uh percentage of the area
meeting
income and it's it's a percentage of
median uh median I I believe it's 80% of
the area median income as being
affordable didn't it include um middle
income as well yeah it talks about uh
bear with me I'll pull it up one second
uh commissioner or tell members of the
committee Mission the restricted
affordable dwelling unit uh pursuant to
HB
2720 means that a dwelling unit that
either through a deed restriction or
development agreement with the
municipality should be rented to
households earning up to 80% of the area
median
income all right I thought I had heard
sometime that it
was um 100 plus% to cover a middle
income but you're saying this is
strictly restricted did to uh 80% of
median
correct and if I recall correctly or if
I understand correctly um it's not one
median income for all of Scottdale but
it's based on household
size that's correct commissioner tell so
if
um as commissioner scarber was pointing
out you can have six adults plus
children um in a residents then you
would set the median income based on um
what it would be for a six adult
household it it's commissioner tell it's
it's based on the household size so it's
not necessarily predicated on the number
of adults it's on the number of the
people in the household
unit I'm sorry so a household is not so
you were describing uh you were
describing commissioner Orel uh six
adults or characterizing six adults if
there's two adults and four children
it's cumulatively six people in the
household units uh it's not necessarily
predicated on uh number of adults uh
that are in the the housing unit if it's
one adult and five kids it's still six a
Sixers household size right but that
occupancy says six adults and their
dependent children so I just assume you
meant six adults not counting the
kids um so I'm just trying to figure out
what how you would base what the median
income is um you know I assume it would
have to relate to household
size
um you know whether it's one two or
six thank you for the question
commissioner ell again the the HUD table
uh that identifies those area median
incomes I I want to say caps out at six
if it doesn't it goes a little bit more
than six maybe eight people as a
household size uh but with respect to
how we would calculate it it would be
based on the
occupancy uh of those that are going to
be OCC if if the if you to to to to
respond to your question if you have a
threers household size that later
becomes a six person household size uh
the calculating uh uh 80% would be based
on on the household unit size so it's
not a fixed number it would be based on
the occupants occupying that
Adu so I build an
Adu and
initially
I rent it to one
individual
then I have a
um I'm not sure how to formulate the
question but I would if I was going to
if it would qualify for low income that
would be 80% of the median income for a
oneperson
household but two years later I rent it
to
somebody with there's three in the in
the household uh then the number changes
I you go back and you're going to keep
track of that not saying you can't I'm
just saying that'd be a lot of work I
would say yes and sure it was my
response to your answer to your question
uh or to your statement not your
question uh in terms of implementation
we'll be bringing back a a greater um
depiction of what that might look like
uh again in a couple weeks but we're
still vetting uh those processes out
clearly this is a an impact that's
greater operationally to the city Beyond
just the zoning code requirement
update commissioner artel I want to let
um commissioner Kaminsky jump in it
seems she may have something to add to
what you were asking yes it actually
goes back to what commissioner scarbro
was asking I think before and maybe a
point of clarification for staff on the
third bullet where we're talking about
occupancy this is in reference to the
number of adults in all units living on
the property so this is the main
residents and any adus so you'd have a
primary house a detached and attached
and if it's over an acre potentially one
additional unit that would be an
affordable unit so the only one that
would be attributed to the affordable
calculation would be that one unit
if it was a property over an acre um but
I wanted to point out that the adult
occupancy is for the whole
property thank you thank you
commissioner Kaminsky thank
you understand uh were there other
questions or comments and I didn't mean
to interrupt but I know that she wanted
to yeah sure commer Kaminsky um let's
see for the
adu1 um can you go back to the slide
that talks about what is and is not
allowed by the state
law
okay so bullet one two three four five
six where it says it require
improvements to the public Street oh
that's talking about we can't require
them to make improvements to the street
street but the idea that they have to
have a path of travel to the street is
okay correct okay thank you um and then
with regard to the fowl I noticed you
had a setback of 20 feet from the
property is that a state requirement for
the fowl or is that your
code for the a structure enclosure for
chickens uh commissioner Kaminsky
members of the commission let me just uh
reference Tim unless you know it off
hand yeah chair higs and commissioner
Kaminsky everything that's on the slide
is was
required um by the new state law for us
to implement for the foul we're talking
about the foul one right on the foul
side this is relating to Adu
commissioner kaminsky's question was um
was was a 20 foot
requirement for the foul maybe there's a
I know there's a slide that referred to
there number three yes so the 20 ft is a
state requirement yes everything on here
we did simply to comply with the state
law okay does that include alleys for
the purpose of separation between
properties it would not because it's
from the property line
commissioner so that would be rear and
side right 20 feet okay thank you
uh I don't know that there are any
additional questions or comments thank
you so much for your time wonderful
thank you again yeah thank you chair
higs members of the commission we'll see
you all in a in a couple weeks on these
items and again appreciate uh your time
and attention to the matter thank you
thank you okay with that um that
concludes the meeting this evening um
may I get a motion for adjournment so
move motion and uh second second all in
favor very good that concludes our
meeting thank you good evening
for for